The URL can be used to link to this page

072285 CC Reg AgP .+ ~ . ~. . if" r CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, JULY 22, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB 7 : 30 P. M) / AGE N D A CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance and Prayer B. Roll Call Stover J Gagne -V- RascopJ. Haugen -7'-/ Shaw J' Mayor 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Council Meeting - July 8, 1985 (Attachment la. - Minutes) 2. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR A. 3. B. CONSENT AGENDA ,/ v'> , l)~/ ~/ M- y A. Recommendation of Candidacy - Jan Haugen 'Regional Transit Board \t(~Yc ~ (Attachment 3a. - Draft Resolution) B. Public Works Appointment (Attachment 3b. - Recommendation) .. C. Change Otdef #5 - Project 84-5 Waterford (Attachment 3c. - Change Order) D. Payment Voucher #4 - Street Project - 84-2 (Attachment 3d. - Payment Voucher) E. Payment Voucher #5 - Waterford Project 84-5 (Attachment 3e. - Payment Voucher) Motion moved by Seconded by Vote ~~ 6~1f f .. I REGULAR COUNCIL AGENDA - 2 - JULY 2~ 1985 7:45 4. PUBLIC HEARING - LOT WIDTH AND AREA VARIANCE Applicant: Location: Larry Samuelson 5865 G1encoe Road (Attachment #4a. - Legal (Attachment #4b. - Staff Report 5. PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUATION - LOT AREA VARIANCE Applicant: Location: 6. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION ~ Applicant: Location: Daryl Trones 26200 Wild Rose Lane (Attachment #5a. 5b. 5c. Refer - 7/8/85 Council Packet) John Petron 4865 Suburban Drive 7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (Attachment #6a - Staff Report) Applicant: Location: Bernard vJhetson 5835 Eureka Road (Attachment 7a. - Staff Report) (Attachment 7b. - Letter) 8. DEVELOPMENT STAGE APPROVAL - GIDEON'S ORCHARD P.U.D. Applicant: Location: Kristen Spencer - Barney for Welles1y Homes Inc. 5620 County Road #19 (Attachment 8a. - Staff Report) (Attachment 8b. - Engineer's Report) 9. WEDGEWOOD DRIVE STREET REPAIRS (Attachment 9a. - Staff Memo) 10. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT f A. B. , ~ REGULAR COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 2.2.8 1985 - 3 - 11. PARK COMMISSION REPORT A. B. 12. ENGINEER'S REPORT A. Time Schedule: Cathcart Area - Street Replacement Project No. 85-1 (Attachment #12a-l Staff Memo) (Attachment #12a-2 Timetable) B. Time Schedule - S. E. Area Water System (Attachment #12b-l (Attachment #12b-2 Staff Memo) Timetable) C. Shorewood Oaks Proposed Drainage (Attachment #12c - Engineer's Report) D. Waterford - Vine Hill Road Turn Lane Alteration E. Sealcoating - Project 85-2 Approval and authorization to advertise for bids. F. 13. ATTORNEY'S REPORT A. B. 14. PLANNING REPORTS A. Crepeau Status Report (Attachment #14a. Staff Report) B. Petition Opposing Shady Island Heliport (Attachment #14b. Petition) C. Lot 11 - Radisson Inn Addition Status Report D. Kiser Variance Request fof Extension E. Blood Complaint - Status (Attachment l4~. Complaint) Jl ('r~ . j.) .; I" U'" ,.'-' '. v ( ./ ~)f / ' <'/0 ~.. # 1 REGULAR COUNCIL AGENDA - 4 - PLANNING REPORT (Continued) F. Tingewood P.U.D. - Status 15. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT A. Assessor Contract Renewal ,/ Ie; ( --/~ (Attachment l5a~1 (Attachment l5a-2 (Attachment l5a-3 ~ # JULY 22, 1985 Staff Memo) Assessor's Memo) Contract) B. Status Report on Water Service Agreement - Minnetonka C. Cathcart Road Repair Recommendation (Attachment l5c - Staff Report) D. Murfin Property Appraisal (Attachment l5d - Appraisal) E. Finance Committee Analysis (Attachment l5e - Staff Report) F. 16. MAYOR'S REPORT A. B. 17. COUNCIL REPORT A. B. 18. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND ADJOURNMENT /, .. - ' .- , _,~~-.... .' J-' ~....._I_I."~.kJ..<l'1' c" ....... t ~-", t; . CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, JULY 8, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Shorewood City Council was called to order by Mayor Rascop at 7:30 P.M., Monday, July 8, 1985 in the Council Chambers. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND PRAYER Mayor Rascop opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance and a prayer. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Rascop and Councilmembers Shaw, Stover, Gagne, and Haugen. Staff: Attorney Froberg, Engineer Frigaard, Planner Nielsen, Administrator Vogt, and Deputy Clerk Niccum. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Shaw moved, seconded by Stover, to approve the Regular Council Minutes of the meeting held June 24, 1985 with corrections in spelling. Motion carried - 5 Ayes. AGENDA AMENDMENT Mayor Rascop amended the Agenda by adding the Planning Commission Report and Park Commission Report to be followed by Matters from the Floor. Motion accepted. PARK COMMISSION REPORT Martey Jakel informed the Council that they will try to obtain up to twenty (20) used picnic tables, at no cost to the City, from the Hennepin County Park Board. Geoff Martin, representing Shorewood Oaks, attended the Park Commission's last meeting and presented their park plan. He explained their plans for drainage of their project and it's effect on Freeman Park. The Park Commission recommended accep- tance of their plan contingent upon Engineering and Planning approvals. Carol Butterfield submitted her resignation, 1, 1985; she will be moving from Shorewood. her for her contribution to the City and the and accepted her resignation. Mayor Rascop will be hosting a party at his home on July 17 to thank the volunteers that gave their time to paint the Cathcart warming house and equipment. effective August Council thanked Park Commission j .;. . . ( i REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 2 - JULY 8, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Stover reported that the last meeting of the Planning Commission was not held, due to lack of a quorum. Mayor Rascop asked the Administrator if he has received any appli- cations for the vacancy on the Planning Commission. At this time, only one application has been received. Stover and Shaw expressed their concern that the members should represent the various regions of the City. The present applicant does not live in the area that the vacancy is in. Gagne felt that we should accept those that are willing to work regardless of what area of the City they live in. Council tabled decision until the next meeting. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR CATHCART DRIVE COMPLAINT Craig Miller, 6075 Cathcart Drive, had a complaint on the dust problems being created by the temporary gravel repair on that road. Mrs. Miller complained of dust, causing damage to her shrubs, furniture and carpeting. She stated she has not been able to open her windows because of the dust. She also feels this is unhealthy to elderly neighbors and the Miller's asth- matic daughter. Bonnie Shoutz, 6130 Cathcart Drive, questioned the use of cal- cium chloride to settle the dust. Engineer Frigaard felt that it 'was too corrosive to automobiles to use and oil would be more effective. Council discussed methods of repairing or temporarily handling the dust problem. Costs of overlaying, versus oiling, were re- viewed. After discussion with the Public Works Director and the Engineer, Haugen moved to direct that the road be oiled twice and that the Public Works Director return with a report on the condition of the road. Seconded by Gagne. Motion carried. REQUEST FOR STREET SIGN Bob Reutiman requested that a new sign Lake Road; sign is presently missing. to handle the replacement of the sign. be installed on Galpin Council directed staff WEST HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICE BOARD Haugen moved, seconded by Gagne, to appoint Martey Jakel to the board. Henry Carson was unable to accept the appointment. Motion carried - 5 Ayes. PUBLIC HEARING - MICHAEL McDONALD Mayor Rascop announced the withdrawal of this" application "for a Public Hearing by th~, applicant, Michael McDonald. ... ; .~- . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 3 - JULY 8, 1985 SIGN PERMIT REQUEST - I.C.O. A request was submitted by Tom Wilharm of the I.C.O. at 5680 County Road 19, to erect a new sign 17' x 3' that is in compliance with the new Sign Ordinance. Gagne moved, seconded by Stover, as requested, subject to removal ners, as recommended by Planner. to grant the permit for the new sign of portable cigarette sign and ban- Motion carried - 5 Ayes. COUNTRY KITCHEN SIGN PERMIT A request has been submitted by Country Kitchen to alter their exist- ing sign. Planner Nielsen stated that their request is well within the restrictions of the ordinance. Haugen moved, seconded by Stover, to approve the sign permit for the Country Kitchen as requested. Motion carried - 5 Ayes. PUBLIC HEARING - SIMPLE SUBDIVISION LOT AREA VARIANCE - DARYL TRONES Mayor Rascop opened the Public Hearing at 8:00 P.M. to hear a request from Daryl Trones of 26220 Wild Rose Lane. Planner Nielsen recommend- ed that the hearing be continued to the July 22 Council meetingr~e G~lH:iie =f tll~ lael( sf a ~UOl: MfR.. The Planning Commission is scheduled to handle this matter on July 16th. Nielsen reviewed the request for the Council. A division request was originally made in 1979 by the present owner, William Carrothers, and not filed at the County. Despite the reduction in square footage re- quired by the Zoning Ordinance the new lot is buildable, the setbacks can be met. Mrs. Edith Jenks of 26175 Wild Rose Lane was present" to state her disapproval of the reduced lot size and the possibility that an inex- pensive home may be built on the site. Haugen moved, seconded by Shaw, to continue the public hearing on July 22, 1985. SWIMMING POOL PERMIT - ROBERT NELSON Mr. Nelson was present to request a permit to install swimming pool, deck, and fence. Planner Nielsen felt the necessary setbacks and no problem exists. Shaw moved, seconded by Gagn~ to approve the issuance as requested with the option for a 5 foot high fence. 5 Ayes. an above ground he met all of of the permit M"Qtion carried SOLICITATION ORDINANCE REVIEW Chief. Richard Young reviewed various types of Ordinances: by refer.;..' ringto Solicitation Ordinances in the surrounding cities. He also indicated that Hennepin County issues licenses to solicity in the County. Haugen spoke in favor of the Ordinance so that the City would know who and where these people are-that are working in the City. She supports the sample Ordinance that regulates a setback distance from roads that the solicitor can work in or set up signes, etc. . . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 4 - JULY 8, 1985 SOLICITATION ORDINANCE REVIEW (Continued) Joe Gorecki questioned whether high school students selling school projects would be prohibited by this ordinance. Attorney Froberg stated it would include them unless they were specifically listed as allowable. Robert Reutiman felt the City is just creating another ordinance that is difficult to regulate and enforce. Haugen has a great concern for the traffic problems that are caused by selling close to the road or signs causing problems of site dis- tance. Gagne's concerns are protecting the residents against vandalism. Resident Beal felt the city already has ordinances that are on the books and not enforced; why add additional ordinances that will not be enforced. Council took no action for the continuation of discus- sion on this ordinance. Mayor Rascop then questioned the progress on the junk complaint again- st the Blood property. Attorney Froberg up-dated the Council on what has already been done and what legal steps are taking place prior to a court hearing. ATTORNEY'S REPORT , NAEGELE SIGN ISSUE PROGRESS Attorney Froberg has been working with Naegele's attorney, Peter Quail, to obtain a settlement of the lawsuit. The current agree- ment contains the right of Naegele Sign Company to retain their sign at Christmas Lake Road and Highway 7 for ten years from the date of installation and the City would receive a $5,000 donation to the Park Fund. Attorney Quail has not received a response on this agreement from the Sign Company as to date. Reutiman questions the 10 year allowance of the sign. He thought the City had not agreed to 10 years previously. Mayor Rascop stated that the City had requested five years and lately seven years but Naegele had never agreed to either. ENGINEER'S REPORT CATHCART AREA IMPROVEMENTS STATUS REPORT Engineer Frigaard stated that Norton, Vogt, and Kennelly have met to gather information on the storm sewer and street project im- provements. This information will be submitted at a later Council meeting. Rascop urged the staff to set a time schedule for this project to take advantage of the best bid time early next spring if the pro- ject goes through. .' ., . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 5 - JULY 8, 1985 ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT BACHE LETTER OF COMPLAINT Mayor Rascop has submitted a copy of Mr. Bache's letter to Chief Young so that he can respond to the enforcement issues in that letter. RESIGNATION OF MYRTLE PAULSON A letter has been received from Mrs. Paulson resigning from the Well Study Committee, due to other obligations. Rascop asked Mr. Beal of the committee if they will be able to continue with four members or if they will be needing an additional member. Mr. Beal stated that they will discuss that at their next meet- ing and will let the Council know what they determined. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Rascop referred to letters he has received in reference to: 1. Refuse Collection 2. New name for W.T.C.N. 3. Bob Lower - Complaint against the R.V. Ordinance 4. L.M.C.D. - Boat Trip 5. A.M.M. 6. Opposing heliport within the City. 7. Metro Council request for a Regional Transit Board Member 8. Christmas Lake Access - Shaw would like a letter sent to Joe Alexander stating that the City's position is not opposition but is "cautious optomism" because the state will not be pay- ing for the problems that come to the City, the cost is passed on to the City; such as maintenance and enforce- ment. 9. N.W. Bell rate charge Public Hearing 10. John Luce - Complaint on receiving a citation on his dog that was ticketed for no license when he had only lived in the City a week. Rascop recommended amending the ordinance to allow 30 days to obtain a dog license after moving into the City. COUNCIL REPORT MURFIN PROPERTY PURCHASE The offer from Mr. Murfin was discussed at a rate of $5.00 per square foot (85 x 330) for a total of $140,000 for the land adjoin- ing the public works garage. The issue of the oil storage tanks has not been determined as yet. Gagne would like an appraisal done by a real estate firm. , / .. . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 6 - JULY 8, 1985 MURFIN PROPERTY (Continued) Haugen moved, to instruct the Administrator to obtain an appraisal on the property, seconded by Gagne. Motion carried. WATER SERVICE - TRIVESCO Mayor Rascop reviewed staff memos received from the City of Minnetonka and the meeting at Minnetonka that he attended on July 1, 1985. The first memo received referred to the possibility of Minnetonka refusing to supply interim water service as requested by Trivesco and then asking them to file for annexation under a 1985 law. The second memo stated four alternatives that Minnetonka may choose to take; l. 2. 3. 4. Agree to provide temporary water on the condition that the annexation go through. After receiving this memo Rasop contacted by phone the members of the Council to obtain their views on the memos, prior to his meet- ing at Minnetonka. He asked the City of Minnetonka to approve the water connection for Trivesco and allow Shorewood 30 days to come up with a new position on water. Minnetonka felt that the City has the responsibility to provide water and that alone was a good reason to annex this land. Minnetonka approved the 30 day exten- sion for a new water policy but did not grant approval of the con- nection for Trivesco. Do nothing Grant the request Defer consideration until annexation Gagne asked for clarification of the new annexation law that now provides for a property owner to request annexation and by-pass the City. Attorney Froberg answered various questions of the Council on the procedures of annexation. Mayor Rascop stated that he felt a Municipal Water System for this area of the City is in the best interest of the City. He feels with the cooperation of interim water service from Minnetonka the water system can be economically feasible and a profit making system. Stover is in opposition to the water system and feels that the City is assuming too many factors, primarily that all the pro- posed development planned for that area, actually occurs. Rascop felt the interim water service will allow the 90 home connections and then insure that the system will not have to be financially subsidized. Rascop does not feel that the current policy has to be changed at this time because the policy does provide for water connections to other cities. . .. . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 7 - JULY 8, 1985 WATER SERVICE TRIVESCO (Continued) Haugen stated her dissatisfaction with Minnetonka telling Shore- wood what their policy on water should be. She suggested that Shorewood go back to Minnetonka with a request for 90 connections on a first-come first-serve basis for the developers. All the agreements would stay primarily the same with the exclusion of references to the granting of a franchise to operate the water system. Gagne did not feel that we were forcing the water on any citizens that did not request it, with the exclusion of one existing resi- dent in that area. Stover questions the rate at which Shorewood will charge other properties outside the project if they get water service in the future. Council felt that issue would have to be addressed at the time that it may occur. Resident Beal asked if an exchange of land through annexation might be a solution. The mayor felt that this area is a valuable asset to the City and should be kept. Resident Bergslein felt that the developer should pay for the system immediately and not deal with Minnetonka at all. Rascop explained the time involved in the installation of a system and that water is needed now for the houses that are already being constructed. The 90 home connection is needed to cover operating expenses. Resident Towne referred to last fall's meeting on the water issue when the Council stated that Trivesco had the water issue taken care of. Rascop stated that legislative laws have caused changes, this will only eliminate the franchise agreement but the cost will remain totally the developers responsibility. Resident Beal felt the residents of this city did not want any- thing that resembles a municipal water system. He also felt the developers were "taking" the city and the well maintenance cost will be charged back to the city residents again. Attorney Froberg will report back to the Council on the establish- ment of a water district for assessing the cost of the water sys- tem. Haugen requested again that Mayor Rascop request Minnetonka for the 90 connections as in the previo~sly submitted development agreement. Mr. Mason stated that a formal resolution from Shore- wood, stating their position, is what Minnetonka is expecting. Rascop read aloud a prepared resolution submitted by Gagne and hLmself, drafted by City Attorney Froberg. Council discussed portions of the resolution. MUNICIPAL WATER POLICY RESOLUTION NO. 48-85 Gagne moved, seconded by Shaw, to adopt the resolution as submitted and to transmit to the City of Minnetonka by the Administrator. Motion carried by roll call vote - 4 Ayes - 1 Naye (Stover) .. ,41 . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 8 - JULY 8, 1985 MINNEHAHA WATERSHED DISTRICT LETTER Gagne received a letter from the Watershed District informing him of an application from Snug Harbor to dig out 1700 cubic yards of sludge from their lake area. Council directed Nielsen to find out where the sludge will be deposited. CABLE REIMBURSEMENT A check has been received from Dow-Sat Company reimbursing the cities for expenses. The check is $2,000 short due to a disagreement with Minnetonka Beach and Orono. The check will be returned for full pay- ment and Dow-Sat should deal with the two cities individually to come to an agreement. TRIVESCO PLAT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Mr. Mason would like to obtain a signed plat for filing and a signed development agreement as soon as possible. Council will direct the Staff to expedite this matter. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND ADJOURNMENT Haugen moved, seconded by Rascop, to adjourn the Regular Council meeting of July 8, 1985 at 10:40 P.M. subject to approval of claims for payment. Motion carried - 5 Ayes. General Fund - Account #00166-02 Liquor Fund "#00174 . Checks 30698-30757 =$28,761.36 " 3576- 3637 50,511.09 Respectfully submitted, Sandra L. Kennelly, City Clerk Mayor Rascop .. " CHECK NO. 30698 30699 30700 30701 30702 30703 30704 30705 30706 30707 30708 30709 30710 30711 30712 30713 30714 30715 30716 30717 30718 30719 30720 30761 30722 30723 30724 30725 30726 30727 30728 30729 30730 30731 30732 30733 30734 30735 30736 30737 30738 30739 30740 30741 30742 30743 30744 30745 30746 30747 30748 30749 . . GENERAL FUND - BILLS PAID SINCE - JlHIE ~, 1985 .:T LL~ ~ TO WHOM PAID Voided Evelyn Beck Roberta Dybvik Dennis Johnson Sandra Kennelly Susan Niccum Bradley Nielsen Dan Randall Patricia Ray Howard Stark Dan Vogt Ralph Wehle Don Zdrazi1 Wendy Moldenhauer Robert Rascop Jan Haugen Bob Gagne Kristi Stover Tad Shaw State Treasurer Mtka State Bank Comm of Revenue State Treasurer City-Cty Cr. Union ASCME Local #224 Acro-Mn Inc. AmeriData Systems Inc. Earl F. Andersen Associated Asphalt Budget Paper Inc. Chaska Parts Service Mary Dalton Froberg & penberthy Govt Finance Assoc. Hance Hardware IdentiGraphics Doug Keller Const. League of Mn Cities Leef Bros Inc. Lyman Lumber Co. H.C. Mayer & Sons Midwest Asphalt Minnegasco State of Mn DOT Navarre Hdwe NSP Orr-Schelen-Mayeron Redwing Mobile Satellite Industries Mp1s Star & Tribune Tonka Auto Vessco Inc. PURPOSE: Salary .. Mayor's Salary Council .. 7/7 Payroll F.I.C.A. 7/7 F.W.H. 7/7 S.W.H. 7/7 P.E.R.A. Deposit - Howard Stark Union Dues - July Office Supplies Computer Training Signs Road Mix Coffee Shop Supplies Clean City Hall Attorney Fees Annual Membership Supplies Decals - City Trucks Repairs Annual Membership Dues Laundry & Uniform Servo Repairs Fuel Purchases Road Mix Utilities Relamping Supplies Utilities Engineer Fees Repair Tire Satellites Ad Shop Supplies Water System Supplies $ AMOUNT -0- 750.95 296.57 558.34 578.87 388.16 702.55 546.59 440.93 536.71 802.13 515.59 749.23 363.38 150.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 1,411.04 1,289.00 715.00 825.62 10.00 54.96 7.52 375.00 32.66 146.56 44.00 98.52 31.50 3,442.00 70.00 11.48 71.80 100.50 2,074.00 171.71 24.00 1,605.95 1,551.91 6.91 125.56 36.18 917.00 2 ,)7 1 . 00 i4.48 260.00 115.00 22.83 1,192.44 GENERAL FUND CHECK NO. 30750 30751 30752 30753 30754 30755 30756 30757 - TO WHOM PAID Water Products Weekly News Inc. White Bear Animal Ziegler Tire Brad Nielsen Dan Vogt Shorewood Liquor Mn Plan Assoc. . - 2 - PURPOSE Water Meter Purchases Legal Notice Pub. Animal Patrol Equip Maint. Mileage 6/24-7/7 Mileage 6/20-7/11 PERA Membership Total JUNE 24, 1985 AMOUNT 413.33 103.12 319.38 801.13 44.88 35.09 18.30 20.00 $28,761.36 . . RESOLUTION NO. - 85 1ST DRAFT RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING JAN HAUGEN FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD REPRESENTING DISTRICT G WHEREAS, the the to Minnesota Legislature has passed a membership of the Regional Transit 8 members. bill reducing Board from 14 WHEREAS, the new Board will consist of 8 members from the Metropolitan area appointed by the Metropolitan Council; and WHEREAS, the Board Chair will be appointed by the Governor; and WHEREAS, Shorewood City Councilmember Jan Haugen is desirous of being appointed to the Regional Transit Board to repre- sent District G. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the name of Jan Haugen be placed in nomination as a candidate to serve on the Regional Transit Board to represent District G. 2. That said candidate is hereby recommended for appointment to the Board. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Hennepin~ County, Minnesota this day of , 1985. 3CL . MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: . . 'MAYOR "'obert ReIcap COUNCIL ., Heugen Ted SNIw Krilti Stover AobertGegne ADMINISTRATOR Deniel J. Vogt .. . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 6755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS DAN VOGT JULY 22, 1985 PUBLIC WORKS APPOINTMENT Per your motion, I was directed to interview and appoint a person to fill the light equipment operator/laborer position in the Public Works Depart- ment. At this time, I recommend that you ratify the appointment of Charles Davis to' this position. Mr. Davis is from Excelsior and was interviewed by Public Works Director Zdrazil and myself. After consultation with Council- member Shaw, the appointment was made and merely requires a simple motion for ratification. DJV : rd A Residentia' Community on LBlce Minnetonka's South Shore 3!J .. . . ORR-SCHaEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2021 E. HENNEPIN AVE. · SUITE 238 MINNEAPOLIS. MINN. 55413 CHANGE ORDER NO. ......~......... $.. '?.'h~9........... RE: .~\l9~.~'f99A .Q~:-.~ . .Kenko. . hc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Contractor . .1694.~. 9l.at .Avenue. NE . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;B.1,~t17-~,. ~. . .~~4~~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dear Sir (5) Under your contract dated ... S.~pt:f!JQQeJ'. .19. . . .. . . . .. .... .... .. ........... 18. .6(J with . .+1t~. .C;~~Y. .C?~. .S.~C?~~~~C?~.. .. . ..... .. . .. . . . .. .. .. . ... .. . .. . .. .. Owner for .~~~;L.t.~~y... . .Sew.er.. StortD. .sew-ex.. St.J:~et. C.anstr.uction..& .App.urtenant. Work.. .Et'oje.c.t .8A.~5.. . we are authorized by the owner to hereby direct you to .f:q~~;i..~q.~~4 .1-J1.~1;,;L)' .lHltl.i.t;4;Y... . . sewer . services. be.tween .M.H.. A",:,1A. .and..M.R. .4~3A .as. .per. attached . list . of. ..... . .quantities.............................................................................. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ................................................................................................................................................................................ .. ...................................................................................................................... ................................................... ad to Idd to (~ the eoatract, In accordance with contract and .pedftcatloa, the I1UIl 01 .Nine.Hundr~d.Fifty.F.our.And.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~80/100 Dol~ There wUI be an extension of ..... O. . . . . . .. days for compledoa. The date of compledoa of contract was . 7/ ~.. 19 as. and now wID be .. .811. . .. 18 ..85.. $582,647.65 Tota' Additions C.O. #1, 2, & 3 $101,839.78 C.O. 114 $954.80 Total Deductions C.O. 11 $4,710.50 C.O. #3 $36.243.60 Contract to Dat. Amount of orltlna' contract $644,488.13 Approved .......................... 18.... RespectluUy SubJaltted, Owner ORR-SCHELEN-MA YERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ro. ....~...e.)'l~..... ~';~-~orton 7/2/85 Approved .......................... .1.... ...... ........ ............ ... ... ........... Contractor 3C- " . . SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN, STORM SEWER, STREET CONSTRUCTION & APPURTENANT WORK PROJECT NO. 84-5 WATERFORD CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 LIST OF QUANTITIES ADD Between M.H. 4-1A and 4-3A (1) Furnish and Install 2 - 8" x 4" D.I.P. tees @ *$151.00 ea. = $302.00 (2) Furnish and Install 30 L.F. 4" D.I.P. Sewer Service @ *$ 21.76 L.F.= $652.80 Total Change Order No. 5 = $954.80 * Negotiated Prices . . ORR .SCHELEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. .-'cr ~ ."f.,' !(;,. ~ ~l Er~!j'j !7el-},"S L.jf1(l 5:;[,'(:. ;:}/Cl S JJl~ 12, 1985 Cit~ ot,Shorewood 57SS COt~tr~ Club Road Shorewood, tr.. 55331 RE: Street Cor.stnlCtion and ApPlrrtenant Worlr. Project No. 81-2 Gentlel\eO : Erclosed are tour (1) copies ot COI".stwction Pa';1'leflt Voucher No. .. a~.~t ot S 52,080.11. 01". the referenced project in the Please "ake P~t in the a~Jnt ot $ 52,080.11 to Valle~ Paving, Inc., 8050-0 ~.. 101, SheW,epee, Minnesota 55379 at ~our ear liest convenience. Ver~ trul~ ~S, QRR-SCI-fi.DHIA YEF:CW l ASSOCIATES, OC. \ ,-, ./ ..b.- \ ,-~ 0.0-... r" ) (1..~..:v " -. ,,- ) Jat.Ies P. Nor ton ,P .E. Project Er~irEer ..F'N: RGD Erclosures cc: Valle~ Paving, Inc. 3d .". M" s ta 55413 · 612/331-8660 2021 East Hennepin Avenue . Suite 238 . Mmneapo IS, mne 0 .. . aHmU:TI1It PAMNT UWHR . I tstiAiW VauchIr MD. ON : 1 ~1'J 12, 1985 Far Period Ending : ~ 31, 1985 81-2 Class of Nark : Street Construction .s Appwtlnant. Mark Far : CU'J ofSharewaad, Hlmlpin Cca.m'J, "inl'llSOt.i To : YlUP.I PlYing, !ne. 8851-0 fVJ. 1111 Shlkapll, ..... 55379 A. Dritinll Cant.nct. Mau'lt. . . . 215211.11 8. Toul Addit.ions 30691.65 C. TotII Decl.ct.ians 31115.25 D. TotII ftnls EnNIbered . 2'5881.11 E. TotII UalUl of Work Certified to ON . 171796.87 F. LISS Retained Percent.ate 5 z . 8589 .81 G. Less TotII Previous P~ts . 111126.92 52.88.11 H. Approved for P~, This Repart. . I. TotII P..,.m,s Including This IJaucher . 1632.7..3 J. Balance Carried forward . 1268'.31 AflffUNl.S ~'tEJOf & ASSOCIATES, OCt Pwsuant. to lIUI' field observation, as perforl'll!d in accordance with 1M' contract., WI hereboJ cert.if'J t.hirt the ",teri,ls art sat.isfactor'J .s the work properl'J perforRld in accordance with the plans .s sPtCifie,t.ians .s t.hirt t.hI total work is 83 Z CCIfIPlet.ld as of ~ 30, 1985 . I hIrIblJ rlC1JfulInd p..,.m. of this wudwr. ~ -P 1~ C This is to cert.if'J t.hirt to t.hI best. of ftlJ knowl., inforMtion, and t.lie', the ll'JiIIrt,Uin .s values of work c:ert.ified herein is a f,ir approxiMt.e lSt.iRatl far the period COYeI'ed b-J this Wlodwr. SiCJWCI : Contractor : Valll'j PlYing, !ne. Si9lld 8!1 DatI : Tit.le Cit.'J 01 lJauI:hIr Dwc:ked 8!1 : DIte : SharNlad Appr..... . f. P..,.m. AuthoriDd RlprlSlnt.at.i. ON : hill 012 ..3518 . . ORR.SCHELEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. C' _i'.7Si~..'t:':,~i E/;;7!".'),;-ers U!IiU)U1 ileVQ{S Ju I y 12, 1985 City o. Shore~ood 5755 Country Club Road Shore~ood, Hn. 55331 Re : Sanitary S~er, Storn S~er, Street Construction and Appurtenant Work Watrr.ord - Projrct No. 84-5 Grn t1 flun : Enclosrd arr four (4) copirs of Construction Paymrnt Vouchrr No.5 on thr rrfrrrncr projrct in thr ~ount of t 68443.06. Plrasr lakr parmrnt in ~ount of t 55434 at your rarli.st convrnirnc.. 68443.06 to Krnko, Jnc., 1694 - 91st Ave. N. E., Blainr, Hinnrsota Vrry truly yours, ORR-SCHElEN-HAYERON It ASSOCIATES, lNt. \ '} '/' , ,_}~-' r', f l.-r..-C-~" J~'5 P. Norton,P.E. Projtet Enginur JPN:RGO Encl05urrs : cc : K.nko, Inc. 2021 East Hennepin Avenue. Suite 238. Minneaoolis. Minnesota 55413 · 6121331-8660~e- .' Elti..t. "",~... No. s . CHTKJICIt MMHf WUCIII . .. a lit. "'1, 12, 1915 F. Ptriod E.dill I ..... _, 1915 PtoJlCt ...... 14-5 v ....__.._........____________________________________________..........__....................._______ Clnlof ...... I Salib..'...... It... SNIt. Ittllt Callt1'Icti. .....-----........----------........ ...--------------------....................------ .d ~t.IUt ...... TI I 1'''0. IIC. I 694-91 It AM. N.E. 11aiH. 1tI. 55434 . a__ ..... . .............----------------- Lacatill Mat.rf..d _v ,. .. ..__________________~__ F.. Cit, of ....MOd. ",nl.,i. ea..t,. "ill."ta ------------------------------------------------------ A. ~ili.al Calttl,t -..t t 582647.65 ----------------_....,.. I. Total Addi tilll t 111839.78 C. Total DtdKttiOlI t 41954.11 D. Total Fit. b,"r.d t 643533 .31 E. Total Vall' of Work Ctrtifi.d to Oat. t 418197.97 F. lIIl R.tai..d P.rc.ntlge 6. L.II Total Pr'ViOll Pl7llltl 5 X t 21"9.11 ------------------- t 328845.91 H. _rov.d f.. Pa7ll.t. TIIil .....t. I. Totll Pl7llltll.cllding nil VOId"r t 48443.16 t 397288.97 .J. Baluct CIrri.d FClNltd t 246244.36 ilPRM.S ORR-saEl.EN-MYE.... . ASSOCIATES. INC. Plrllut to _ fi.ld abstr"ti., II ,.rfentd il ace..duct wi" IIr co.ttlct. .. ~tf.b1 etftiff t~at '"~ ..t.rill, art utilfaet.., ud t~. ...k prCIII.rl, '.rf....d i. lce..duc. wi" t~. ,I.. lid IplCificatiGl' lid "at tH total ...k i. 64 X ,..l.t.d II of ..... _. 1985 . WI ~.r.b1 flc_.d ,&7IIlt of t.i. 'Ole..... -II,," I ~ ~ 1/~ Si..d I CaI.trletill ObItr..r ~_______............._______.....L...._______________________ r .......... . A.&h..~......... ~ ...il il to Clrtif, tnt to tu belt of 111 k..l... i.f....tiGl. .d blli.f. tH ,..titill ud ..lit' of ... c...tifi.d ur.i. i'a fair IpprOli..t. llti..t. f.. '"~ ,triod e".r.d b1 t~i, 'IIC..... COItract.. I It.... IIC. 8iglld 11 Tin. da T_. &.~.&..... .w It. I Cit, of VIKHt ka.. 11 I lit. . ......... ~td f.. ,.,..t _t_iIM .........tati.. lit. . ~! ,.lof4 ID-33M . . LEGAL NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING CITY OFSHOREWOOD NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Shorewood o j will hold a Public Hearing in the Council Chambers of the Shorewood ~. ~Hall, ',5",755 Country Club Road, Shorewood, Minnesota, on Monday, ~ fij;<2~lY, _,1~8~ 7:45 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible. The ~lJ purpose of the Hearing is to consider a request by Larry Samuelson for a simple subdivision and lot width variance for property located at 5865 Glencoe Road, said property described as: Lots 3, 5, 6, and 7, Block 1, Ball's Addition to Excelsior, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. P.I.D. #34-117-23-31-0033 Oral and written comments will be considered at that time. City of Shorewood SANDRA KENNELLY, City Clerk To be Published 1 July, 1985. 4.?--- . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw K risti Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 26 JUNE 1985 RE: WHITE/SAMUELSON - SIMPLE SUBDIVISION AND LOT WIDTH VARIANCE FILE NO. 405 (85.20) BACKGROUND On behalf of Mrs. William White, Mr. Larry Samuelson has requested a simple subdivision of her property located at 5865 Glencoe Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). The proposed division is shown on Exhibit B. As you recall, the applicant previously requested that the City extend the R-ID zoning proposed for the area east of the White property to allow the property to be divided as it was when it was originally platted (see Ex- hibit C). Although the Planning Commission recommended the zoning bound- ary change, the City council tabled it, pending further study. Consequently, the applicant requests a variance to allow the lot width to be 80 feet instead of the 100 feet required in the R-IC district. The lot will also be approxi- mately 1000 square feet smaller than the 20,000 square foot area required by the R-IC district. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION The R-ID zoning district was established primarily to recognize existing small lots in various areas of the community. When the boundaries were drawn on the new zoning map, they were based on a lot size analysis of the affected areas. In this case, the White property and the property to the south were kept in the R-IC district because the previously platted lots had been combined at some time in the past. When the new Zoning Ordinance was being reviewed, Mr. Samuelson and the owner of the property south of Academy Avenue, requested that their properties be zoned similarly to lots east of them. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore ~ PLANNER'S RECOMMENDA~N WHITE/SAMUELSON SIMPLE SUBDIVISION AND LOT WIDTH VARIANCE 26 JUNE 1985 page two '. Upon review of the area in question it is considered more logical to make Glencoe Road the boundary between the R-IC and the R-ID districts than to divide Academy Avenue between the two districts. With the exception of the White and Robin properties, lots along Academy Avenue are generally 11,000 square feet in area. Lot widths average 80 feet and range from 55 feet to 110 feet. It should be noted that the two lots east of the White property are only 55 feet in width. It should be realized that due to the location of the existing White residence, the property can only yield three lots even if zoned R-ID. Given the reasonableness of the applicant's request, it is suggested that the variance be granted until such time as the interim Zoning Ordinance and map can be changed to include the property in the R-ID district. cc: Dan Vogt Glenn Froberg Sue Niccum Larry Samuelson James Robin -." ~> ~~ @ ,0 o - - ., ., - ., -i,b, "'~...':;""" . '.'N_.....'....~'"" ~~' ..... ;,...~.~.:.......... - . -1.. ~. ~i:, ~ ~ '.., . " -I, ,'I h \ I '" ~ !f, '" ", ,.. ~ ,~ , - " . " l. , ~ "" .... I; ~ -. 'C ~ ,~.;i- ,...... , l&.loZ' ..s" . ,." ~ .........~; .: ,.s" .0 .~I on N i~ ON o N A ", r';'::'-' .~ ~ I 1 1- , 1~.~1 I I{:N I I b- I '\1'> :.:; . '-Z :. " o .J .~ ~ ':i' .~ J~ 'ai;j-; _ ~7 !.. I 'N : ,.. I I ~t ~ --tJ,(JI'}$ ...L o C' :'- ~ ..j; '\ Sf, '''/Z' , \ \ <i' co \,'.:!'YJ ~r , \ . _____~L____.:.: ~, .e ,~ It) \ o , o .; '~,~ " ~ ~ ~ 10' ~ I' . . I. ~ ..::J -4 jl I ,'(l width variance af(.IS1])X3 ~O 39 lll^ .,I. v_'" W)U.IAt.1 , D. SCHOELL IlEOI.-rERE~ CIVIL. EHOIHEEIt . 54/8 75.4/ ~RL.ISL.E MADSON RE.,eTERaD LAND SURVEYOIl M'NN. NO. .87. _. DAIl. "I W'.. NO. a..7. IOWA NO. 870. _. DAIl. "" ~. _. .7_ I I 1 I I / I I I~" I ! \J I I ~ / I c) J I~ J I I~ I q I J ~ I I~ I 4J IJJ~ ! IctJ 1 < \9 I' 1 4J ~. J~ I....; ~ j/ J\:J ~ I -I; , I J I 1 1 J I I I I M'NN, NO. .... aD. DAK 7.. W'.. NO. ...'7. "~O'UDA NO. ..71 NO. 'DAK. ... MONT. NO. ..,... ~ SCHOBLL Est MADSON, INC. ENGINEERS II SURVEYORS eo NINTH AVaNUa.OUTH HO~KIN.. MINNa.OTA ~HONa: .S..7.'. CERTIFICATE OF ~oR:Mf<. WILL/AM G. ~2 SURVEY WI-I/TE f --"11) ..... ~ p~ DN~t\ o~ ,,0 ......7;"\ 1!:1 ;:::A~' '~JS ...... A?e-;tf s .... "- ..../7 9. 7-... ../~ 12... ...~ I ~~ ~ ~~ CY)qJ "t\') ~'t (\Jo{'j, I , , .?15 j tfA2 "~1.5 T ...... l..J l,,- r:r' .. r" ,..., ....i C)" j ---- I __ I :---~ ~ .t...5 . ~"""'A <;G' 5. U. ~ 2'%:1" ' 6 J /1 'y' 71 IS I I-IOl./SE .' A. t .., r'.. ....j I I I 16' I I \ \ \"'l ~ ~ ~ . ~ ...-,/1.2.' ~ r L.J .."', ~-. L./ ... 8~ eo .' - "~l '-.- -"-2~ 3.35 MEA S'''- 'L _ _ _ _ _ _ _(2~ ,~ ~'-;I9r) _ ~ ~ L24' I3LACKTOP7 -- ~- - - - A C A 0 E /VI -Y- - - ~A V E. - - - -- o -DENOTeS IRON MONUNtcNT Exhibit B PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ..:/ . ..~. City of Shorewood City Council 5755 Country Club Rd. Shorewood, Mn. 24 April 1985 This letter is to request the extension of the R-1D zoning to include the William G. White property, 5865 Glencoe Rd., Shrwd. Dear Sir Madam; I am writting in behest of Mr. and Mrs. White to request the inclusion of their four (4) lots into the R-1D zone. The proposed zoning ordinance has thier lots zoned R-1C rendering all four lots in noncompliance and therefore of less value. The-four lots as they are divided for public utility assesments, range from 78 ft. - 81ft. lot width. This would be in compliance with the R-1D zone which abutts the White property on its east border. Enclosed is some graphics to better show the situation and the ease of which the problem can be remidied at this point. The problem for the Whites is that for years they have kept these extra lots as a buffer as their children grew up. Now that the children have moved on, the lots are now considered as part of their retirement plans. It was just last week that they found out that under current and proposed zoning their property is not marketable as buildable lots but has been assesed for utility puposes as such. This gr-eatly reduces its value to them as retirement assets. We hope you can see to extend the R-1D zone to include these four lots, and again make them an asset to the Whites and a future asset to the City of Shorewood. Th~nk you ~ ~. nsideration, ~~~ ~ Larry Sa~el~ / /. /1 /- /1 7r~. tt/dl<.'. ,z: ~r:- Exhibit C APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR ZONING CHANGE Dated 24 April 1985 . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 27 JUNE 1985 RE: PETRON, JACK - SIMPLE SUBDIVISION FILE NO. 405 (85.23) BACKGROUND Mr. and Mrs. John Petron have requested on behalf of Mrs. Petron's mother, Eileen Saleme, approval of a simple subdivision of Mrs. Saleme's property located at 4865 Suburban Drive (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). The property contains approximately 4.76 acres. The Petron's propose to split off approximately one acre on the east side of the site to build a single-family residence (see Exhibit B, attached). The property is currently zoned R-1C and is occupied by Mrs. Saleme's home. Surrounding development and zoning are as follows: south and west: Amesbury and Amesbury West, zoned P.U.D. single-family residential, zoned R-1C north and east: The property is bounded on the north by the rignt-of-way of Sunset Lane and on the south by the right-of-way of Orchard Lane. Neither r.o.w. has been improved as a public street. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION The applicant's propose to divide the 4.8 acre site into two lots. Lot 1 will be the new lot on which they would like to build. Lot2 will contain the existing Saleme residence. Since Lot 2 has potential for further de- velopment, it has been requested that the applicants provide a resubdivision sketch showing how the proposed division allows for future development of the site. Resubdivision of Lot 2 is illustrated on Exhibit C. A Ref>idential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore o . . PLANNER'S RECOMMENDATION PETRON, JACK SIMPLE SUBDIVISION 27 JUNE 1985 page two Lot 1 This is the lot on which the Petron's propose to build their house. Although it is twice as large as the R-1C district requires, it does not comply with the width requirement for that district. The lot is only 83 feet wide at the building line. One hundred feet is required. Given the size of the site, there is no reason why it can not comply with zoning standards. As shown on Exhibit B the lot line should be moved eastward to comply with the Ordinance. Although Orchard Lane extends across the south side of the site, the appli- cant's propose to share the existing driveway serving the Saleme residence. This is not viewed as a problem. It is unclear as to how the new lot will be served by sanitary sewer. If the applicant proposes to tap into the existing sewer service for the Saleme residence, approval should be subject to the City Engineer's review and recommendation. Lot 2 The applicant's have stated that neither they nor Mrs. Saleme have any intention of developing the easterly 3.8 acres for many years. Never- theless the City must assure itself that by approving a piecemeal type of subdivision, the remaining property can still be developed. For this reason, the resubdivision sketch should be evaluated similar to a preliminary plat. The resubdivision plan proposes six lots including the one with the Saleme residence on it. The plan is viewed as being somewhat inefficient in terms of future streets and utility service. Four of the lots require access form Sunset Lane. The lot labeled "0", together with the Saleme residence and the Petron's lot will require the use of Orchard Lane. Also, Lot B does not comply with the width requirements of the R-1C district. Lot E, due to shallowness and the existing wetland on the site, is not buildable. At such time as the property develops, it would be advisable to consider a single access from Orchard Lane (see Exhibit D). While it would require a longer cul-de-sac street, street and utility costs would be less than if access is provided form two different directions. For purposes of this report it is sufficient to know that the creation of the new lot will not interfere with the future development of the property. As in past similar requests the City should specify that any further division of the site must be for the entire site. Individual lots should not be allowed to be broken off on a piecemeal basis. Based on the preceding analysis, it is recommended that the simple sub- division be approved subject to the following: 1. Lot 1 should comply with the 100 foot lot width requirement of the R-1C district. . PLANNER'S RECOMMENDATION PETRON, JACK SIMPLE SUBDIVISION 27 JUNE 1985 page three . 2. Sanitary sewer service for Lot 1 shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 3. The City should keep the alternate resubdivision sketch shown on Exhibit D as a guide for the future development of Lot 2. 4. Future platting of Lot 2 should include the entire site. Individual lots should not be split off one at a time. 5. The applicant's must pay one park dedication fee of $500 for the new lot. (Credit is given for the lot with the house on it). cc: Dan Vogt Jim Norton Glenn Froberg John Petron . 'e:) . .... .'11. ftlft ~ . ft1INf4fT6W(A .. ~: , \/Itoo) M~ :... J U-rt; ~ ({; ...... ..' ." "f'# . ~., .. - . 1 "II ... lS~1 _)1' '" ~ , . tnI'! .-'~." ,~. ..... 5i flm' . ~ ~'~ff,' i ~ . . ~~ '. '~9~" . - ". .. ";1t~ 'Ddl ... . I'. ......... ,'- I: ')<'.r ~_ " '" (,) rr~: .. f ~~ ~ '~,' I... 'l>~,.) ;. . ,t- 1l', '7' ~ .. f;. · co g : . ..I ; ~ ~ . 0 It .. 3 8) ::L' ~,)' .-.-;....1. ...... I I ., ~:, .. .- lID . \ .~"l ! , .1 , ~. t- .... ~J ~ ,-,-,' "" I. I <'.J I l-j I (/. . j ", ;.... , .. ~.~1 . ,..~ J'..."~ . ~~"",__-r J~ 'I" ~ .~ ol... -!,l I. \ ..o"'.:.._~~.). .......... ..,.t_ d utMI '" ... @. Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Petron - simple subdivision .. ~ u.. I-- CJ: ~ Ie .!!! I ___ ...... . ~ In !. J ...... ..... .. '2 ~":": ~ I =:= . .. .. .. I i "' I .. I :l II ~ .: .... ... !.s _ I ~ 1! !ii ~ . i f .: ! I .. . .. ~' ~ ~ . 'I ~ I " .... I! '. f,; ~ Exhibit BDIVISION PROPOSED -0_ (:3:: .i! .:.... ,.. ..I.. !i! =." t.. I~ ft" p. J-! ..I': ::1 .. I . ... i" I .. g I ~ !!! IS-. ...1 i iii.~ .i n: ! ~ 'E :::~ I ~ .: ~~~ : ~ .... . - -: .. ... .D I III I .... :: J ~ ~ ~.. .1 ; ! ~ii ~ ! I .... fill ...,.. I . .. I .. . . .5 ., .: i .... .BI ~ t .. .. ~ i .. )t'~ II .. ...... .lIii .... .. !... ..! .... . . ....0 . ..... ..! J..... "1!! ..... .. ;:1:; i:1 it.. ...~ J.C .. t: :i .. I . .. j J ... Exhibit C RESUBDIVISION SKETCH ~ fr I-- <J: ~ >- Qt <J: ""'- ~ lrl ~ j III ........ -Iii i .. 000 r:3= ...... i i III ! . OO! I o. 'Z ....... = 0 0 ....... . ..... .. -".. ,.. I .I ... 0 ..J ......... .. .. . .... J.... I .. - c i 'II i ..11 .. . r I C ... ..: .. :l i!!= .. C 0 .. .. i." .. I: I oS .. I J ! !ii ~ It.. .. .. .. Ii ..I=- JO! jO .. 1'': I ~ '" ~ .h , "' .. . i. Exhibit D ALTERNATE RESUBDIVISION SKETCH ,. . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Doug Uhrhammer 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 14 JULY 1985 RE: WHETSON, BERNARD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C.U.P.) FOR A SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION AND FOR EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE FILE NO. 405 (85.24) BACKGROUND Mr. Bernard Whetson has requested a building permit to add a single-story room addition to the rear of his house, located at 5835 Eureka Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). Since his house is closer to the road than allowed in the R-1A zoning district in which it is located, he needs a conditional use permit to expand it. Upon review of the building permit application it was brought to our attention that Mr. Whetson conducts a small landscape grading and snowplowing business on his property. Since the business constitutes a nonconforming use in the R-1A district, and the Zoning Ordinance does not allow any expansion of a non- conforming use, Mr. Whetson also requests a conditional use permit for a spec- ial home occupation. The proposed room addition would allow a bathroom and laundry room to be located on the same level as the kitchen, living room and bedroom. This is essential to the Whetsons, since Mrs. Whetson has recently been confined to a wheel chair. ISSUES AND ANALYSIS A. Expansion of a Nonconforming Structure. Based upon a site plan (Exhibit B, attached) submitted by Jim Graham, Hennepin County Grants Coordinator, the existing house is approximately 47 feet from the Eureka Road right-of-way. The proposed addition will be located at the rear (northeast corner) of the house, approximately 50 feet from the side lot line and 194 feet from the rear lot line. A Rp.~idential Communitv on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore 7c- . . PLANNER'S REPORT WHETSON, BERNARD C.U.P. - SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION/EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE 14 JULY 1985 page two Assuming the home occupation issue can be resolved, the expansion request is consistent with the provisions of Section 200.03 Subd. 1 k., the most significant of which is that the nonconformity will not be increased. B. Special Home Occupation Permit. Although Section 200.03 Subd. 12 of Shorewood's new Zoning Ordinance provides some flexibility relative to home occupations. it is extremely important that the City determine whether Mr. Whetson's business conform's with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. This is considered critical since the request is the first special home occupation to be processed under the new Ordinance, and, to some degree, will establish some precedence for future requests. While the Ordinance cites examples of allowable special home occupations, it would be difficult to list all of the various activities which might be proposed as a home occupation. Consequently the Ordinance relies on performance standards for the review and evaluation of home occupation requests. Subd 12 ~ (1) contains general provisions pertaining to both limited and special home occupations, and Subd 12 d. (3) contains specific requirements for special home occupations. Subd. 12 ~ (1). There are 10 provisions to this portion of the Ord- inance, of which the following are highlighted: (c) Mr. Whetson's business involves the use of equipment not typically found in residential areas. Specifically, he uses a tractor, a small dump truck, snow plows, and a large trailer for transporting the tractor. Despite the current outdoor storage of much of this equipment, the business could be considered secondary to the res- idential use of.the property. Aside from storage and occasional maintenance of equipment, Mr. Whetson's business is conducted away from the site. Two measures should be required to enhance the residential character of the site. First, all equipment used in the home occupation should be stored inside. This will be discussed in more detail further on in this report. Secondly, the large gravel parking area located in the front of the site should be relocated to the rear of the garage and screened from view of adjoining properties. The front of the site should be limited to parking of the applicant's personal vehicle(s) and a single driveway to serve both residential and bus- iness parking areas. (e) Mr. Whetson has previously expressed a desire to build a larger garage to store his equipment. Under Ordinance No. 77 he could not do so due to the nonconforming use of the property. If the special home occupation permit is granted he would be allowed to add on to his existing garage or build a different garage to house his equipment. In fact this should be a requirement of the approval. . . PLANNER'S REPORT WHETSON, BERNARD C.U.P. - SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION/EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE page three Given Mr. Whetson's current financial situation, the City may wish to allow some time for him to comply with this requirement. Since the initial permit is valid for one year and subsequent permits are valid for three years, one to four years would be a reasonable range for the City to consider. If time is allowed for Mr. Whetson to comply with the Ordinance, it should be contingent upon his equipment being stored in a confined area which can be screened from view of adjoining property. Exhibit C suggests how this might be done. (g) The applicant does not display any signage for his business. (h) Several weeks ago we received a neighborhood complaint that inoper- able cars and other items which would be regulated by Shorewood's Nuisance Ordinance were being stored on the applicant's property. At our request Mr. Whetson has done a commendable job at removing the items in question and generally cleaning up the site. (j) Given the size of the property in question (approximately 200' x 315' = 63,000 square feet, or 1.45 acres) parking does not appear to be a problem, particularly because Mr. Whetson works alone, away from the site and does not have clients come to his home. As mentioned in (c) above, the gravel parking area should be re- located to the rear of the existing garage. Subd. 12 d. (3). This section of the Ordinance contains specific requirements for a special home occupation permit: (a) Mr. Whetson works alone with the exception of occasional help from his son. (b) Special home occupations may be conducted in an accessory building. Refer to previous paragraph (e) (c) Although Mr. Whetson's business is not among the examples listed, it may be possible for him to comply with the performance standards contained in the Ordinance. (d) Upon inspection of the property in question, no construction materials are being kept outside. The applicant asked if the occasional storage of lumber, sewer pipe, etc. would violate the conditional use permit. If the permit is to be approved, all such storage should be totally enclosed. . . PLANNER'S REPORT WHETSON, BERNARD C.U.P. - SPECIAL page four HOME OCCUPATION/EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE RECOMMENDATION The conditional use permit for expanding a nonconforming structure is considered relatively simple compared to the special home occupation permit. Mr. Whetson's business is considered to be at the limit of what can reasonably be called a home occ~pation. In this regard the City must determine whether the business does or can be made to comply with the requirements of the Ordinance. To Mr. Whetson's credit, we have received a petition containing the signatures of 29 Shorewood residents stating that they do not object to him running his business on residential property. If the City is inclined to grant the conditional use permit for a special home occupation, the following should be required: /) 0/2/ ?~() .luiJ BJN: sn 1. All materials and equipment must be stored inside. If the City allows some time to build additional garage space, substantial screening (i.e. fencing and shrubbery) should be installed immediately. (Note: The Ordinance limits garage space for the property in question to a total of 1000 square feet.) The large gravel parking area in front of the existing garage should be relocated to the rear of the garage. Except for a driveway and residential parking area, the area should be planted with grass and/or landscaping. The parking area in the rear should be confined to the extent possible and screened from adjoining residential property. 4. The permit is subject to the general and specific requirements of Section 200.03 Subd 12. cc': Dan Vogt Glenn Froberg Jim Norton Sue Niccum Bernard Whetson '\ I - I ; .. I ~HASSEN I V 4.tVV fVVV PREflARED BY: NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CON ~ r- 6 ....--; . ~h : \ .. .. \ Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Whetson - conditional use permit proPC6EDb\T~ AT ~etb:A RCJ\~~ .~: 1.=~' I .N ~ t ~ ~~ fC6e or PAIAE.NJ!NT /I:' \ ',,- '~, \ / .51"" 4 "~\Je { PI1.t' k.i f'j 1-0 t a5' elQSTlNb ~N6 ~'- "'----- . J . ~: ~: . . . I .--------, ~ t ~ x ~ x LaA'TlON of: ~ c::urev11.O \N6S. ~t. ~ -.,~ a l(, I 'lC I I ac I ! '<. lC ~1~e' 'lC -x )( ~ " ~ IJ ~ P me,.. f'\ t -6 tot' ~j e.., Exhibit B EXISTING SITE PLAN ProPCCE.~DD\~ AT ~rthKA RO\~91O~ .CC,~; 1.=~' ~ t Z "' I 'l( I I ac ~ I-+N I06E oJ ~.., f!/.)R.El:A 2f:::Al) ~cr "'~T -DL+'\t"\L dri--Je''-'d.1 a.c.c.e"n - ~o"e. pA( \L.i r'\~ 1'"0 r f,W - f'lll.f\t ~ "A.~~ I f4.f\c!~~~ (~Of\t .51"" '1$.' ~ a5' ~ t elQSON6 ~N6 .=!)' ~: AC:t:mc:N : . I I ~~~'\~o.l"\t;" \ Pct.1' k;n~ ~Ii , .. - ___ __.1 ~OF~ 0ft'S,)11.O IN6> I I ~~ Pot.." f\ 0. \ ~4.'~~(, Add ~t~Of\ ,,~, l"tl,~CI ~ 5<<N;"e. 1C 001"'~ tc. r~tJ.(' ~. ) ;' / {2.e lo~t~ / ~O~-{\ '(\ ~ bv~,,...e':l~ P4.('k.\(\j ...,..,,'" / ~...~--,-_. ._~ ~1~O' 'l( 'l( " " " .~ ~c.r.u.1'\\~ /'A,.J~'\f'\j Exhibit C SUGGESTED SITE IMPROVEMENTS tIWi'To ~i . ~N"~ .r ~ ~WIeE -- -JDDL----., , , I p,,' "*""'" ""''''' UVlN6. ~ ~" 11',' I Sf~ 11+ 1016" eO'. t'_:, --t-+ t-4 C , ~I,,'l . ~ Al>>I1lON [ O " ,. " " , , , " IS' . o r r Exhibit D PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN . . July 15, 1985 'lO the City oC Shorewodl It appears 1bat the oti;J'ta Notio. oonoU!1i.na Be:raazct Whetsen haa brouglR sevual issue. into the limellgttt. As a neighbo~ with a direot across the street view oC Mr. Whetson I s property, we would like to see more conf'o:cmance with the cl1:7! s ordinances instead of exceptions and va.rl.anc... Instead of expanding on the nonconforming structure, we would like the effort to be placed on improving the aurrent situation. Thr instance, the roof on hi. ga.rase. should have beIID shingled wh_ h. redid the roof, instead of having just tarpaper and boards tacked down 110 it. Ibeen' t the city require a building pem! t for roofing and doea just tarpaper comply wi th the code? We aJ.se hesistate on giving approval for the' special home occupation permit. Al though in the past. several weeks we have noticed a neater appearance of Nr. 'Nbetson's property, our concern is what guarantees do we have in the future if we agree to it now. Such a special home occupation permit would certainly have to be condi tionaJ. and contingent. Jibr example, all equipment should be parked inside of the fence in back, out of sight. Garsa<<e doors should be placed on the rear of the g&raBe as I'fr. Whetsen has said himself. In this way welding and meohanica1. work can be perJlormeci ollt'of...*gh~,in.teA4-:of'~ hi. partially completed jobs on display in front for days or weeks. If the ci tJ' i. requeatin&" a ;ye8 or no answer troll U8 on the.. two permit. it would have to be !l!; tor both at thia time beeauae of our cone1'D. aa stated above. 2:!:SinoftelT' ~ ~".~.' Ola.Ya3_ti! \ . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt .. 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 11 JULY 19-85 RE: GIDEON'S ORCHARD P.U.D. - DEVELOPMENT STAGE FILE NO. 405 (85.19) BACKGROUND Ms. Kristin Sp~ncer-Barney, Wellesly Homes, Inc., has submitted plans for development stage approval of her proposed P.U.D. located at 5620 County Road 19. As you recall she was given concept stage approval for a 39-unit condominium project in June of this year. The following information is submitted for your review: Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Site Plan Landscape Plan Grading Plan Excerpts from Condominium Disclosure Statement ISSUES/ANALYSIS Based upon review of the applicant's plans relative to the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance, the following issues are presented: A. Commercial Site. As previously mentioned the applicant proposes to convert the existing house located in the southeast corner of the site into commercial space, which is consistent with its current C-3 zoning classification. Since joint use of the driveway and parking areas is proposed, it would be ideal to incorporate both the residential and commercial elements of the project into the P.U.D. process. However, since Shorewood's current P.U.D. provisions do not allow such a mixture of uses, the commercial site will retain its C-3 classification. In order to comply with C-3 standards, the following should be required: A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore c;j'~ / ~ . PLANNER'S RECOMMENDATION GIDEON'S ORCHARD P.U.D. - DEVELOPMENT STAGE 11 JULY 1985 page two . 1. The rear lot line must be moved to the west so that the building complies with the 30 foot setback requirement. 2. The new addition which will replace the garage on the north side must be moved back to maintain a 30 foot front setback. 3. Joint use of the driveway and parking areas will require cross- easements and maintenance agreements between the owners and future owners of the condominium and commercial properties. The legal documents should be drafted by the applicant's attorney and subject to the City Attorney's approval. Design and number of parking spaces will be discussed in more detail further on in this report. 4. The division of the commercial site should be prepared as a final plat. occur coincidentally with the final from the P.U.D. portion Final plat approval should plan approval of the P.U.D. 5. The applicant indicates that the tennant for the proposed commer- cial building will have some sort of neon sign, the design of which is not completed at this time. Plans for the signage should be consistent with the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance and will be subject to the review and approval of the City Council. B. Residential Site. 1. Since the zoning of the property to the north of the subject site has been changed to R-C, and the property is currently being converted for office use, the proposed site plan has been modified, moving the principal structure northward 25 feet. The proposed 25 foot setback is consistent with the previous recommendations of the staff and Planning Commission. 2. In addition to the underground parking within the building, the applicant shows a 10-car garage at the south end of the parking lot. The proposed two-foot setback conflicts with the 10 foot easement requirement along the property boundary. The parking should be rearranged to allow a 10 foot setback for the garage, or open parking spaces may be within five feet of the property line. 3. The Site Plan proposes 88 parking spaces including the 44 spaces within the principal structure. Based upon the zoning require- ments for the residential and commercial uses, the site should provide 98 spaces. The applicant proposes to modify the Site Plan to provide the necessary parking at the southwest corner of the building. . . PLANNER'S RECOMMENDATION GIDEON'S ORCHARD P.U.D. - DEVELOPMENT STAGE 11 JULY 1985 page three 4. It is reasonable to expect that owners of the residential units will want to keep boats and/or trailers on the site. Yet, this is not addressed on the site plan. Since it is important that such storage not take up required parking spaces, the applicant has agreed to modify the Site Plan to provide a designated area for boat/trailer storage at the rear of the building. 5. The common open space and walking trail are the only site amenities proposed at this time. The applicant suggests that future amenities (e.g. pool, tennis court, etc) may be provided once their market has been more precisely determined. The development agreement for the P.U.D. will include provisions for changes and additions to the approved final plan. 6. The Site Plan shows a project identification sign near the driveway entry. A specific sign plan should be submitted for review within the final plan stage of the P.U.D. process. Presumably, the sign will also identify the entry as the access to the commercial site. 7. Drainage has previously been identified as a primary for the area in which the project is proposed. This addressed by the City Engineer in a separate report. ment stage approval should be subject to his and the Creek Watershed District's recommendations. concern wi 11 be Develop- Minnehaha 8. The applicant has requested approval of a grading permit to begin work on the ponding area prior to final plan approval. The P.U.D. provisions of the Zoning Ordinance allow grading permits to be issued upon development stage approval. A per- formance bond or letter must be submitted to ensure that the work will be completed. For purposes of determining the amount of the security, the applicant will provide a bid for review by the City Engineer. 9. Utility service is available to the site from the east side of County Road 19. In addition to the City Engineer's approval, the Hennepin County Transportation Department must approve the connections. 10. The proposed of the site. and Hennepin driveway has been shifted to the northeast corner This location must be approved by the City Engineer County. 11. The proposed Landscape Plan is quite acceptable. The proposed apple orchard reflects the historical character of the area. Since the Site Plan will be modified to include additional parking and boat/trailer storage, it is expected that the Land- scape Plan will also be revised, providing screening for those areas. . . PLANNER's RECOMMENDATION GIDEON'S ORCHARD P.U.D. - DEVELOPMENT STAGE 11 JULY 1985 page four Prior to final plan stage approval a landscape bid must be pro- vided so that a letter of credit can be determined to ensure that the work will be completed and maintained for at least two growing seasons. 12, Based upon Ordinance 158 the park dedication requirement for multiple-family development is $500 per unit. The commercial development receives one unit of credit and therefore breaks even relative to park dedication fees. The total fees for the project come to $19,500. This is due prior to release of the final plat. RECOMMENDATION The applicant's plans are considered consistent with the P.U.D. provisions of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance and with the Concept Stage approval previously granted. The applicant should be directed to prepare a final plan incorporating the recommendations contained herein, and those of the City Engineer, Hennepin County, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The staff should be directed to prepare the necessary develop- ment agreement for final plan stage approval. cc: Dan Vogt Jim Norton Glenn Froberg Kristin Spencer-Barney Jack Bouquet Sue Niccum i, > ,~ ; > k(', . '" '< - ~'. ,':lr!: ~.." . . ( " \. ," ~~ ~_.J) f) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I " / / / ) II \ \ II II ~~______ / /1 }' ) I ~I j I \ t ~ .... ,/ // I I l! t fA j ___/ / / I;' / 1 1/ I 'i -''"' , ~i'2--_ -"7,,_ - , , "~--'~';- ,I. -~- / I ,g ~ \ \ \ "- \ '",- \ \r " ' ~! . - I : 1 '" J,' ."i~,l> <~:' . . r . . ." ~ / // I / / , . . ' . '*,~/':~:r:' " t';J' ~.' , I ~ "- "- .' ~.>-' ~ ~ ~.. ., j , 1 I I ~l \', If '. I! ~ II !lf~~ll ~ =' , ) .>~ , "-, <,; '~ " ~) ~ , \ ? "- , 1:'. \ , , ." / " " } . .~~~... -. . r ,. , j"" ,/ -. /' ,:~;,.-.,/ >,.~, , " (,' ,:>~ ,. '... ''':"\" " / . ","" "io. .'_ :';.,7~:.r-' ~.,',~-- ....-~1~ ;~H'; _.F"'" ~":'7.."'" '.":.)j.. , ~~~"h . 0::.[.,1,..... .,-"' .~. ~ ' <).~ [.' .::~-~ .," .~,~..- . -.,r.."I.' " ':-~.:~ ,/ . . ~ >,' , ,. ~< \; f: III ~ "a ,/ ,.. , ,/ !I i I ~ ":. -t_~., :r- fg~ '.. ""(...,.. .... ...., . ~. (~, ~ " " ',' ~ .; " ,,' ~ ....--_. ~ (!~ -. ,) ':!,. , , , ~ - , / ..>.it 1.'1 , ,,:." " f:l' '.., .... \ 1 i , . ! \ I 1 i ..A, -:\ J l .. 1 " , , , I . i ~::, U It. tl;:\~ "t tj.' ~. ~ c' t " . ;' r 7 ,/~ " ~~,G<C' :.:;"it.. '0 ,."I~f; rf' ) l "" ~ t., . .... " .,,":t7r~- ,.,,~~> ""....J:; .., '.'7;'~ .. ',~~.(.~ -. ",,"..i; '-;'..- ." ~:!'.~>~ .. ... .,i,"i ..,;,~2""" ...'" ')=t .-'~=<:;;: ~. ~..:;,;.." / r-::,~''':''''' .".r;..,-.-..?........ .. ~. ~.. 'tc '. {:,;,{ '-'\! ,'~ ~f ~.'.., ;!\i ;t .!c '.;' ;,i ~ r ,j' " -\ l \ /. :- .. I .. " - I , .. I , ft ~ '(-;,. ''t.{, .21' ~... .~ ~"". ',,' ~ "- iN\ i~ ,,' "'. :;~ '. h...~' -LJo "" " ~. . ", ..... -,,~., -- t~.JUFj -l>- II ~ ORCHARD ~ 0 ~ IIINNESOTA In MOUNo, MJNftE$OTA ~i..,...,. ..., ........ .~~~ ,,'-'< . . RULES AND REGULATIONS GIDEON'S ORCHARD CONDOMINIUM BACKGROUND It is the goal of these Rules and Regulations to provide reasonable guidelines relating to the operation and use of Gideon's Orchard Condominium, in order to provide high quality residential condominium living. These Rules and Regulations have been prepared and established for the benefit of all Owners, and the cooperation of all Owners is paramount to the smooth operation of the condominium. The following Rules and Regulations are designed to provide a basic framework. As time passes, the Owners will, through the Board of Directors, have the opportunity to approve new Rules and Regulations to accommodate their needs. In the meantime, each member of the Association is responsible for insuring that family, guests, visitors and lessees comply with the Rules and Regulations. GENERAL REGULATIONS 1. Each Owner or Occupant shall comply with all applicable laws, ordi- nances and regulations of any governmental authority, and shall indemnify and hold the Association and other Owners and Occupants harmless from all fines, penalties, costs, attorney's fees or prosecution for any violation thereof. 2. No noxious or offensive activity shall be conducted or allowed to exist on the Property; nor shall anything be done therein, either willfully or negligently, which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to the other Owners or Occupants. No Owner or Occupant shall make, or permit any disturbing noises to be made by family or guests, on the Property. 3. Unless authorized to do so by a member of the Board of Directors or an officer of the Association, no Owner or Occupant shall send any employee of the Association on any pesonal business, nor direct an employee with respect to any matter relating to the Association or the Property. 4. Walkways, stairways and other portions of the Common Elements used for access to and from Units and parking areas shall not be obstructed or used for any other purpose than for ingress and egress. 5. No clothes, sheets, blankets, laundry or any other kind of articles shall be hung out of the Buildings, hung or shaken from balconies or decks, or similarly exposed to view. No vehicles, equipment or other personal property shall be stored or otherwise left on the Common Elements, except in designated areas. -1- Gxhibit D EXCERPrs FRm.: COIJDOKnrrml DISCL03lJRE S'rA1r3T.'3IJT . . 6. The removal of refuse or litter left on the Common Elements by an Owner or Occupant, or a guest thereof, shall be responsibility of such Owner or Occupant. Owners or Occupants are urged to use their best efforts to prevent the Common Elements from becoming unsightly. 7. No garbage cans, trash containers or other unsightly personal property shall be placed on the Common Elements or Limited Common Elements. Balconies and decks shall not be used for storage of personal property. Seasonal furni- ture, holiday decorations and related personal property utilized on balconies and decks shall be removed and stored out of sight during the off season. 8. No accumulation of rubbish, debris or similar material shall be permitted on the Common Elements or Limited Common Elements, except in designated areas. Refuse shall be placed in properly tied, non-leaking garbage bags and disposed of in designated receptacles. Loose papers and boxes sahll be crushed in tight bundles. If the rubbish consists of objects or materials such as crates which cannot be readily disposed of in designated receptacles, the Owner or Occupant shall arrange for pick-up of such materials without cost to the Association. 9. Damage to the Property caused by the moving or carrying of articles thereon shall be paid for by the Owner or person in charge of such articles. Damage to the property of others, including the Common Elements, resulting from misuse of such facilities shall be paid for by the Owner or Occupant responsible. 10. All Owners and Occupants shall keep their Unit and all Limited Common Elements assigned to the Unit in good state of cleaniness and repair. 11. Toilets and other plumbing shall not be used for any purpose other than for which they were constructed, and no sweeping, rubbish, rags, papers, ashes or other foreign substances shall be placed therein. 12. Neither water nor any other utility provided by or paid for by the Association shall be wasted by an Owner, Occupant or guest. 13. No Owner or Occupant shall interfere in any manner with any portion of the common utility apparatus or other common equipment and systems in or about the Property. 14. No radio, CB, television or other antennae shall be installed by any Owner or Occupant on the Property without the prior written permission of the Board of Directors. 15. No identification or other signs shall be placed anywhere in the Buildings except in designated areas or on the mailbox provided for the use of the respective Units. -2- . . 16. No shades, awnings, window guards or other such appurtenances shall be used on balconies or decks except as shall be approved by the Board of Directors. 17. Owners, Occupants or their guests shall not enter upon the roof of any Building without authorization from the Board of Directors. 18. No Owner or Occupant shall permit anything to be done or kept in his Unit, Limited Common Elements or on the Common Elements which shall result in a cancellation or increase in the cost of insurance on the Property or contents thereof, or which would be in violation of any law or ordinance. 19. No "For Sale", "For Rent", or "For Lease" signs or other window displays or advertising shall be palced on any part of the Property by any person other than Declarant, except as authorized by the Board of Directors. 20. No Owner or Occupant shall damage, alter, impair, or remove any part of the Common Elements, nor paint, stain or otherwise change the color or appearance of any portion of the Common Elements or Limited Common Elements. 21. No additional building, tent, shelter or structure of any kind shall be placed, erected, kept or maintained on the Property without the prior written consent of the Board of Directors. 22. Unless the Board of Directors gives prior written consent in each instance, Owners and Occupants shall not install or operate any machinery, refrigerating or heating device or air conditioning, apparatus, except for common household appliances and existing equipment, in any Unit, or use or permit to be brought onto the Property any flammable liquids, explosives or other inherently dangerous articles. All mechanical or electrical equipment of any kind or nature installed or used in any Unit shall comply with all the rules, regulations, requirements or recommendations of the Board of Fire Underwriters and other public authorities having jurisdiction. 23. The agents of the Association and any contractor or workman authorized by the Association or its agent, bearing proper identification, may enter any Unit or Limited Common Elements, as authorized by the Declaration, for the purpose of correcting any condition which presents a danager of serious loss or damage to the Property or injury or death to any person. 24. The Association (through its authorized representatives) has the right to enter a Unit at any time in the event of emergency. No Owner shall alter any lock or install a new lock on any door leading into a Unit or without (i) providing a duplicate key to the Association for use in emergencies, or (ii) providing written authorization to the Assocation to forcibly enter the Unit in the event of emergency, without liability for damage thereto. 25. No animals, fish, fowl, reptiles or insects of any kind shall be permitted or retained on the Property, except small domestic birds, goldfish, or small domestic animals such as hamsters, which are kept in cages or other -3- . . appropriate enclosures and do not pose a health or safety problem or disturb other Owners or Occupants. 26. Owners or Occupants who have water beds in their Units shall provide insurance covering any damage resulting from their use, and shall provide evidence of such insurance to the Board of Directors prior to installation of such beds. 27. Owners and Occupants are responsible for the conduct of their guests, and shall apprise such guests of these Rules and Regulations. 28. The Association may impose such assessments, fines, denial of privileges or other appropriate sanctions against violators of these Rules and Regulations as may be allowed or not prohibited by the Governing Documents. MOTOR VEHICLES AND PARKING 1. Vehicles of any type shall be allowed to drive and park only on designated driveways, garage areas and parking areas. The term "vehicle" as used herein shall mean and include automobiles, trucks, airplanes, recrea- tional vehicles, vans, motorcyles, bicycles, watercraft, trailers and any other type of conveyance or device capable of transporting people, animals or objects, whether motorized or not. 2. Vehicles shall be parked in such a manner as not to impede or prevent ready access to any garage space or other parking spaces. Each Owner or Occupant, and their guests, shall obey all parking regulations posted by the Association in the garage and parking areas and any other traffic regula- tions promulgated by the Association for the safety, comfort and convenience of the Ownes and others using the Property. 3. No Owner or Occupant shall cause or permit the blowing of any horn or similar device on the Property in any vehicle which such Owner or Occupant controls and occupies, except as may be necessary for safe operation. 4. No vehicle shall be left standing anywhere on the Property in a non-operative condition. Vehicle repairs will be permitted on the Property only as authorized in writing by the Board of Directors. 5. The Association reserves the right to remove any vehicle parked in an unauthorized place or manner at the expense of the Owner. PARTY AND GUEST ROOM REGULATIONS -4- . . . ADMINISTRATION 1. Complaints regarding services provided by the Association or the operation of the Property shall be made in writing to the Board of Directors or its representative. 2. An Owner or Occupant may apply to the Board of Directors for a waiver of one or more of the Rules and Regulations. Such waiver may be granted by the Board of Directors for good cause shown, if, in the judgment of the Board of Directors, such waiver will not interfer with the rights of other Owners or Occupants. 3. The Board of Directors may make such other Rules and Regulations from time to time as may be deemed necessary for the use, safety, care and cleanliness of the Property and for securing the comfort and convenience of all of the Owners and Occupants. No such additional or modified Rule and Regulation shall take effect until thirty (30) days after it is communicated in writing to the Owners and Occupants. Any Rules and/or Regulations may be repealed or otherwise superseded by a vote of a majority of the Owners. 4. The terms used in these Rules and Regulations shall have the same meaning as those set forth in Article I of the Declaration. Any Refernces to the Association mean the Association acting through the Board of Directors. -5- . . It ORR'SCHELEN' MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Englf1eers Land SiJr.eyors July 12, 1985 Ci ty of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Attn: Planning Commission & Mr. Brad Nielsen, Planner Re: Gideon's Orchard 39 Unit Condominium Commission No. 033-174427 Dear Planning Commission Members: We have received the preliminary plans on Gideon's Orchard, a condominium project along C. R. 19. The fo 11 owi n9 COO1ments are from our review of those p1 ans and a meeting with the staff and developer. 1. UTILITIES A. Sanitary Sewer Sanitary sewer is avail able to the site along the east side of C. R. 19. How- ever, the existing sewer is not deep enough to pick up the lowest floor level of the building. A sewage lift pump must be installed to service the lower level. At a meeting with the developer, we discussed handling as much of the sewer flow as possible by gravity. A lift pump would still be required but it would pump into the gravity line. We encourage this to happen even though it may mean more of the building sewer pipe is exposed in the garage area. Any connection to the sewer line in C. R. 19 will require an approved construc- tion permit from Hennepin County. B. Water Water is currently not available to this sight from a Shorewood watermain. However, a Tonka Bay watennain runs along C. R. 19 and can provide service to this property. As of this writing, we understand the developer is negotiating with Tonka Bay for water service. Any connection to the watermain will require work in C. R. 19. Prior to any construction in the county right-of-way, an approved construction permit must be obtained from Hennepin County. "'f""l"""'" ." . ~ ,.... . . .. _ ._ ~ ,: __ ,." ,- _ ...... ..~_ _... .._ ,-,... A ~ "'" ,.....,.",..,""'4 f"Irrn C?b . ~. . . Page Two Shorewood Planning Commission July 12, 1985 2. STORM SEWER/DRAINAGE At our meeting with the developer Thursday, July 11, 1985, we discussed the method of handl i ng the stonn water runoff. We understand they will pick up the discharge from the existing culvert under C.R. 19 near their south property line. From a new manhole at that location, 24" R.C.P. will be installed on the Gideon Orchard property west to the bottom of the driveway leading to the garage. From that poi nt, a trapezoi dal fl ume wi 11 be constructed to the proposed pondi ng area west of the building. A detailed drawing showing the plan and profile of this pipe and flume should be prepared for our review. As part of the overall drainage system, a ponding area will be developed west of the building with a berm and outlet control device. The outlet control device should have a closed top with a manhol e access for mai ntenance purposes. Al so, the top of the berm should be wide enough to drive...a vehicle to the outlet control structure for maintenance purposes. A detailed plan showing these items should be prepared and presented to the city prior to construction. Approval from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Oistrict must also be obtained. 3. GRADING The grading plan as proposed is satisfactory. 4. STREET An access permit to C. R. 19 must be obtained from Hennepin County. Typical sections for the driveway, parking lot and curb and gutter must be shown on a detailed construction plan. Many of the items addressed in this review letter were discussed at the meeting on July 11. Oetailed drawings must be prepared showing these items before any construction permit is issued. Very truly yours, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Ja...... -P Jf~ ~ James P. -Norton, P.E. City Engineer JPN:nlb MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: . . MAYOR Robert Rucop COUNCI L .ten Haugen Ted Shaw Krilti Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474.3236 MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS DAN VOGT JULY 22, 1985 WEDGEWOOD DRIVE In the past week I have been in contact with Mr. Jim Dutcher who express- ed,concern regarding the condition of Wedgewood Drive. Mr. Dutcher ques- tioned when the street would be patched. I indicated that the City is considering major reconstruction of Wedgewood Drive in 1986 from Mallard Lane to t?e end of the Cul-de-sac at an estimated cost of $117,000. To date the Public Works Department has dug out the worst section of the street in the Cul-de-sac and replaced the material with rock and Class 5. This is a temporary repair until the Council decides how to proceed with the street replacement. The City Council has authorized the City Engineer to have a subsurface investigation performed on the street in order to make a recommendation on reconstruction. It is intended to have this completed in conjunction with the subsurface investigation necessary on Cathcart Drive due to the high cost of mobilization of the soil testing firm. (The city will save money by having the firm come out once rather than twice.) During initial conversations with Mr. Dutcher, he indicated that the dig- out and rebasing would suffice. This was the reasoning behind delaying the subsurface investigation. Now, it appears that Mr. Dutcher would like permanent patching immediately. I indicated to Mr. Dutcher that plans for reconstruction were being made for the 1986 construction season. I also stated that sufficient funds for the project are not available in the 1985 . budget. Mr. Dutcher then wanted a letter from me stating that the Wedge- wood Drive project will not be completed in 1985 due to lack of budgeted funds. Prior to my writing any letter to Mr. Dutch~r, I felt that the Council should discuss the repair of this street and give ae direction in dealing with the issue. I have invited Mr. Dutcher to the meeting of 22 July to discuss the issue. DJV : rd cc: Jim Dutcher Jim Norton A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore C;CL ~ CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 16, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7.40 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioner's Benson, Reese, Watten and Spellman; Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen; and Deputy Clerk Niccum Absent: Commissioner Schultz (excused) APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1985 Reese moved, Benson seconded, to table approval of the minutes until the meeting of August 5, 1985. Motion carried unanimously. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION - LOT AREA VARIANCE DARYL TRONES - 26220 WILD ROSE LANE Mr. Trones was present to request a lot line rearrangement. This same rearrangement was approved by Council in April of 1979, but was never recorded, therefore he is bringing it before the Planning Commission as a new request. He said both lots originally met the 40,000 square foot requirement for the R-1A District but were reduced when Wild Rose Lane came through. He said 2 lots with 2 P.I.D. numbers exist, and what he will be doing is trading square footage from one lot to the other. The reason being because it would make the Carrother's home become conforming as far as the 10' setback goes. (Another nonconfromity does exist) Mr. Carrothers said he knew it was approved in 1979, and until he decided to sell the lot, did not realize it had not been recorded. He said the City said they would do the recording and did not do so, as a result he has treated the land as his own since that time and done some improvements. Edith Jenks of 26175 Wild Rose Lane objected to the fact that the lots are under 40,000 square feet. She said she has three acres and if he can have smaller lots she can divide her lots up that way too. She objected to the possibility of a small single story home being built, saying it would not fit in with the neighbor- hood. She asked Mr. Trones the value of the house. He said it would not be a small house and he felt he had to talk to his client about her question about the price. If his client agrees, she can talk to him privately. Planner Nielsen said he had never been aware that the City did the filing of plats for anyone. Bob Reutiman told Mrs. Jenks that the area did not have all 40,000 square foot lots, an~ vou didn't have to go far to find small lots and small setbacks. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 16, 1985 page two Benson moved, Rees~ seconded, to recomment to Council to approve the lot area variance_ contingentupon the Planner's recommendations that the 5000 foot triangle be legally combined with lot 2, and that the applicant submit new legal descriptions of the two lots. Motion carried, 4 ayes, 1 nay (Watten). PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND REZONING FROM R-3B to C-4 Charles Crepeau of "Crepeau Docks" and Tom Lingo of "The Garden Patch" were present. Mr. Crepeau said that in 1982 he worked with the City to establish a new C-4 zoning district. It was up to the applicant to pursue the necessary rezoning and conditional use permits to become a C-4 district. Due to ill health and financial problems at the time he did not do so. He said he needs a new warehouse to protect his merchandise from theft and the weather, and to give him a work area. Right now he has 3 large canopies and wishes to replace them with a 30' x 60' addition. He and Gary Minion of Shorewood Nursery wish to extend a dirt berm into the parking lot facing County Road 19. This would be planted with some permanent plants and also leave an area where the plants can be changed seasonally for display purposes for Shore- wood Nursery. He proposes a screening of plantings running south from the berm to the drainage ditch, 'then east across the back of "Crepeau Docks" and "The Garden Patch". He said besides providing screening, it will provide shade and cut down wind, helping to lower heating cost in the winter. He discussed the property at length, saying the only really stable ground lies under his buildings, which are constructed on floating slabs. An old road bed ran under this area. He wishes to move his dock model located on the west side of the front of "Crepeau Docks" to the east side. He expressed concern over Planner Nielsen's request for planted screening saying they will present a problem with the power lines in that location. He discussed parking, saying that on the days he is busy, "The Garden Patch" is slow, and when they have their busiest days, his business is slow. Mr. Tom Lingo, who leases "The Garden Patch" , said he wishes to add on to the rear of "The Garden Patch" and he also wants to build a greenhouse down the east side. He presently has a 10' awning and a temporary 15' awning across the front of his store to provide cover for his customers and plants. The greenhouse would alleviate the need for the 15' temporary awning. He wishes to retain the 10' awning. The fence to the east of "The Garden Patch" will be moved and used for screening purposes. The access to the back area will be shared. There are some problems with the driveway. Planner Nielsen is working on it. He wants to meet with Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Planner Nielsen said if the driveway is not paved and striped, Mr. Crepeau will have to apply for a variance. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES , JULY 16, 1985 page three Planner Nielsen is not prepared to make a recommendation at this time. Bob Reutiman said he didn't see any reason why the whole area couldn't be commercial, it wouldn't bother anyone and there is already commercial right next door. Spellman moved, Watten seconded, to recommend to Council to extend their permit to keep "The Garden Patch" for 30 days. Motion carried unanimously. Reese moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council to table the Public Hearing on rezoning and the conditional use permit for not more than 30 days. Motion carried unanimously. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION 4865 SUBURBAN DRIVE - JOHN PETRON Mr. and Mrs. Petron, and Mrs. Petron's mother, Eileen Saleme were present. Mr. Petron, speaking in behalf of Eileen Saleme, asked for a simple subdivision. She would like to divide off about one acre on the east side. Commissioner Reese, referring to Planner Nie]~en's Report that the lot they were proposing to divide off did not meet the 100' width setback requirement, asked if there was any problem with moving the line to comply with the zoning standards. Mr. Petron said there is sewer in Orchard Lane right next to the house. Planner Nielsen said that earlier they had mentioned tapping into the other line and if they consider this, the approval of the City Engineer will be needed. Reese moved, Watten seconded, to recommend to Council to approve the simple subdiv- ision contingent upon the five recommendations of the Planner. 1. Lot 1 should comply with the 100' lot width requirement of the R-1C district. 2. Sanitary sewer service for Lot 1 shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 3. The City should keep the alternate resubdivision sketch shown on Exhibit D as a guide for the future development of Lot 2. 4. Future platting of Lot 2 should include the entire site. Individual lots should not be split off one at a time. 5. The applicant must pay one park dedication fee of $500 for the new lot. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION - LOT WIDTH AND AREA VARIANCE 5685 GLENCOE ROAD - LARRY SAMUELSON Mr. Samuelson was present. This property was considered at the Zoning Ordinance Hear- ing. The Planning Commission recommended to Council to change the zoning to R-1D. The Council chose to wait until the 6 month interim ordinance period is over before making a decision. Mr. Samuelson is buying Lot 3 and wants to build a house this summer upon the property. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 16, 1985 page four Planner Nielsen said the lot is nearly 20,000 square feet and if the R-1D zoning is approved the lot will be conforming. Benson moved, Watten seconded, to recommend to Council to approve the simple subdi- vision and lot width variance. Motion carried unanimously. 8:00 PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION AND FOR EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE 5085 EUREKA ROAD - BERNARD WHETSON Bernard Whetson and his daughter Gloria were present. Gloria said her mother is missing both legs and is legally blind. The bathroom is upstairs. They would like to add a bathroom and a laundry room on first floor to aid Mrs. Whetson. She mentioned the home occupation. She said her father has had a very small business since 1955, and that he makes very little money. Bob Reutiman asked what portion of the house is nonconforming. Planner Nielsen said the front setback from the road. Mr. Reutiman also asked what Ordinance says that if a person is in business and wants to add on to a nonconforming house that he can't keep on with his business. Planner Nielsen said yes, Ordinance 168 Section 200.03. Several neighbors were present to state they felt it imperative that a bathroom be provided for Mrs. Whetson's use due to her disability. Neil Mann of 25410 Mann Lane said he has no objection to the addition but is concerned about the business. His property adjoins Whetson's property in the back. He said he has looked at junk vehicles, boat trailers, a pontoon boat, etc. He would like to know what will be allowed. He also knows that the recommendation is to put all the vehicles in the back yard. Mr. Whetson's daughter said her father is 60 years old, does not business, and no one else in the family has any interest in it. it only made $500 last year. plan to expand his She pointed out that Planner Nielsen said no one else can just move in and take over the business. Mr. Whetson stated that he will not allow anyone to store anything in his yard any- more. In fact he said he is going to put up a gate. Mr. Whetson's son Dick said his father started cleaning up his yard he received the letter saying he was in violation of the Ordinance. said he did a commendable job and that the yard in not in violation the day alter Planner Nielsen at this time. Mr. Mann was upset about the water problem. There is a drainage ditch running between his property and Mr. Whetson's property. He said that several neighbors, including Mr. Whetson and Ron Kramer have put in fill, and the water problem in his back yard isgetting worse and worse. He cannot mow the grass. He said the water stands in his yard, whereas it drains out of Mr. Whetson's yard within 24 hours. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 16, 1985 page five Mr. Whetson's daughter produced pictures showing how bad the Whetson water problem is. There was a great deal of contraversy and discussion on this issue. Bob . Reutiman and George Latterner both said it has been a bad problem for many many years. Planner Nielsen suggested that he, the City Engineer and the two property owners look over the property and see how they can solve the problem. Public portion of the Hearing was closed at 9:53 PM. A letter from John andsJil1 Majestic of Eureka Road sent a letter to the City stating they were against granting the permits. Chair Leslie asked Mr. Whetson how many vehicles 1 trailer, 1 tractor and the tractor machinery; van that he is working on and may not keep. he has for his work. He said 2 trucks, and a handicap vehicle and and handicap Mr. Whetson said he wants to find out about a heated garage stall to help with the transportation of his wife in the winter. Chair Leslie asked Mr. Whetson if he read the Planner's report. He said he had and can't afford to put up another building, he has made $2,000 since the first of the year and asked what he is going to do. Moving the large gravel parking lot in the front yard was discussed. One thing Mr. Whetson mentioned is that Mr. Rogers (5815 Eureka) would be flooded out because the two of them had laid tile and worked out a drainage across Mr. Whetson's driveway. Mr. rogers informed the Commission that he had once applied for a dock permit for his yard as a joke, due to his previous water problems. Commission discussed the various issues. Watten moved, Reese seconded, to recommend to Council to grant the conditional use permit for a bathroom and laundry room addition. Motion carried unanimously. Spellman moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council to approve the conditional use permit for a special home occupation contingent upon the 4 recommendations of the Planner. Motion denied - 2 ayes - 3 nays. Watten suggested that if it is financially impossilbe to move the front parking lot, perhaps screening could be requested. Watten moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council that they approve the con- ditional use permit for a special home occupation contingent upon the following from the Planner's recommendation: 3. The parking area in the rear should be confined to the extent possible and screened form adjoining property owners. 4. The permit is subject to the general and specific requirements of Section 200.03 Subd. 12. plus: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 16, 1985 page six The front parking lot may be retained with the agreement that one driveway be provided at the north end of the lot and one driveway be provided at the south end of the lot; and that the area between the two driveways be planted to screen the rest of the park- ing area; that the garage doors be relocated to the back of the garage; and that these be accomplished within 1 year. Motion carried - 3 ayes - 2 nays. Mr. Whetson said he has some railroad ties that he can also use to help in the screen- ing of the parking area. DEVELOPMENT STAGE APPROVAL - GIDEONS ORCHARD P.U.D. 5620 COUNTY ROAD 19 - KRISTIN SPENCER-BARNEY FOR WELLS LEY HOMES INC. Kristin Spencer-Barney and Tom Barney were present. She pointed out that they are working to comply with the Planner's recommendations and have made some changes. The plans are being altered to move the setbacks on the commercial property; 24 park- ing spaces are being added at the suggested point; they are putting in a boat/trailer parking area screened with lombardi poplars; they have talked to Hennepin County and will set an appointment about the utilities when necessary. They plan to get water from Tonka Bay. Mr. Barney said he understands the City Engineers concern, but as he was given a choice in the matter, he prefers to go along with his architect's recommendation to have a pump station. Mr. Barney showed some concern over having a hard surface where the RV's and boats will be stored, he would rather see gravel with curbing. Watten moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to Council to approve the Development Stage contingent upon the recommendations of the Planner that the applicant should be directed to prepare a final plan incorporation the recommendations contained in the Planner's report of 11 July 1985, and those of the City Engineer, Hennepin County, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Motion carried unanimously. FIRE LANES Planner Nielsen said the following are still to be considered, or done: He still has to talk to the Mound Fire Marshall. Some of the concerns mentioned at the Public Hearing still have to be dealt with. He mentioned the fact that Commissioner Spellman had mentioned the problems that were brought up on Timber Lane (the platted street that is being used for public access), and the Shady Island bridge. Brad also mentioned Christmas Lake Road. The question is to possibly consider these as a 4th category under fire lanes, or put them in the street ordinance. More emphasis on the rules and regulations, de-emphasis on public access. Encourage neighborhood use. Planner Nielsen said the RV Ordinance and Expansion of Nonconfroming Structures will be discussed at the next study session. . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 16, 1985 page seven Commission worked on the Fire Lane Ordinance Draft and the following is what was done: Subd. 19 b. (1) remove swimming. (2) add after "Class I" except fishing and add swimming as a designated activity. (3) (a) change "person or group of persons to Shorewood resident(s) (b) add "The total length of the dock" New (e) LMC9 compliance New (f) The people that build the dock are responsible for the in- surance coverage, and this coverage must be approved by the City if the dock is allowed. d. (a) change to (1) (b) change to (2) and Ordinance 91 changed to Ordinance 140 and omit hours of use, use of motorized vehicles (c) change to (3) (d) change to (4) New ( 5) No motorized vehicles New (6) Daytime docking of boats between sunrise and sunset. Talk to Tonka Bay About snow mobile access at Crescent Beach - Brad MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR none REPORTS Liaison Stover gave the Council report. ADJOURNMENT Watten moved, Spellman seconded, to adjourn at 11:03. Motion carried unanimously. MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: . . MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS DAN VOGT JULY 22, 1985 CATHCART AREA PROJECT TIMETABLE Per Council direction at your 8 July meeting, Engineer Norton and myself met to formulate a timetable for the Cathcart Area Street Replacement/ Storm Sewer Project No. 85-1. The attached timetable is intended to guide the project through the necessary steps which will lead to the optimum month to bid the project for the lowest possible prices to the City. You will notice that in No. 4 of the timetable, we feel that February is the best month to take bids. A Retial Community on Lake Minnetonka's so.ore /dtJ.--1 . . , ( , 1 \ \, /, I, ORR .SCHELEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors July 17 t 1985 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Attn: Mr. Dan Vogt, Administrator Re: Street Replacement Project #85-1 Cathcart Area Comm. No. 364300 Dear Dan: This letter will discuss a potential timetable for proceeding with Project No. 85-1. I understand it would proceed along the guidelines discussed in the recently adopted assessment policy. As such, it must be handled according to the Minnesota State Statutes, Chapter 429 requirements for assessing all or part of a public project. Attached is the potential timetable. Very truly yours, ORR-SCHElEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. st:. :rt~7:: City Engineer JPN:nlb !d~- C) 2021 East Hennepin Avenue. Suite 238 . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 · 612/331- 8660 MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: . . MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCil Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MAtOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS DAN VOGT JULY 22, 1985 S . E. AREA WATER SYSTEM TIMETABLE Per Council direction at your 8 July meeting, a staff meeting was held between Engineer Norton and myself to formulate a "Generic" timetable for your deliberation at such time that it is decided to begin the pro- cess toward construction of the Water System to service the Southeast areas of Shorewood. II is presented to you at this time as a Planning tool since the length of time from start to finish of the project is approximately 18 months. .DJV : rd A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore Id b - I -. -' . ... . . ORR.SCHElEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers Land SUr\/eyors July 17, 1985 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Attn: Mr. Dan Vogt, Administrator Re: S.E. Water System Timetable Comm. No. 174439 Dear Dan: The timing for the S.E. Water System is very much dependent upon when we are authorized to start on the work. However, the blocks of time to accomplish the work would remain fairly constant. For this reason the attached timetable is a generic representation. Very truly yours, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ f. Y)~~ James P. Norton, P.E. City Engineer JPN:nlb Enclosure -..-''''''-.. ._--""'" Jdb-d ,.j y . S.E. WATER SYSTEM SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA COMMISSION NO. 174439 JULY 17, 1985 - TIMETABLE - 1. Council authorizes updating Feasibility Report 2. Update Feasibility Report 3. Review and approve Feasibility Report 4. Authorize preparation of Plans & Specifications 5. Prepare Plans and Specifications A. Deep Well B. Pumphouse & Reservoir 6. Review and approve Plans and Specifications Authorize Ad for Bids 7. Advertisement 8. Bid and Award 9. Construction A. Deep Well B. Pumphouse & Reservoir . 2 Weeks 8 Weeks 12 Weeks 5 Weeks 2 Weeks 12 Weeks 52 Weeks NOTE: Some items could be done Simultaneously, however, the basic total length of time from Feasibility Report to final construction is approximately 18 months. James P. Norton, P.E. City Engineer . . . ORR .SCHELEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors July 17. 1985 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood. MN 55331 Attn: Mr. Dan Vogt City Administrator Re: Shorewood Oaks Commission No. 1744.20 Dear Dan: We originally reviewed the Shorewood Oaks proposal in our letter dated June 7. 1984. This letter will further discuss the storm water design which includes the ponding area in Freeman Park. From the Park Commission meeting July 1. 1985 it was noted that the drainage area they allowed for 15 set up to cover a 24 hour ten year storm. Thi s cri teri a is significantly different than the Comprehensive Storm Water Study design criteria where ponding areas are designed to control runoff from a 100 year storm. What this effectively means is that if a 100 year storm (1~ return frequency) occurs and the pondi ng area 15s i zed to store just a 10 year storm the excess runoff will be routed directly downstream with no ponding. This could have a detrimental effect on the drainage channel and adjacent properties downstream. For this reason. we recommend the ponding area in Freeman Park be designed for a 100 year storm. By using a 100 year storm criteria for sizing the ponding area it must be under- stood that the High Water Level (H.W.L) for the pond would be higher than the H.W.L. of 962.5 stated by the developer at the July 1. 1985 Park Commission meeting. As shown in the Comprehensive Storm Water Study. the H.W.L. could reach 969.0. However. at this elevation none of the active park facilities (softball. football/soccer. archery. volleyball) would be affected. While more of the park land would be innundated at elevation 969.0. the water would not stay at this level long enough to cause any permanent damage and the downstream areas would be better protected. The main difference between the high water levels is the design of the outflow structure. To store more water the overflow weir elevation would be set at 969 instead of 962.5. Also. as part of the outflow structure design. an 18- equiva- lent pipe would be installed at the invert of the structure (pond bottom) to gradually relieve the pond during heavy storm water conditions. During other ?n?1 FRf:t /-/pnnpoin Av~nup. . .C;u;tp ?38 . Minneaoolis. Minnesota 55413 · 612/331- 866~;;( (! ~o TO : M~~or' 4.V\.~ G\Ti Go vne,\ \ .::FfZ-D""" '. 6ro.J. t-J\eJ~~ ~~ : 22 jl)\t ''1215 U : 5Y\ore""a::>d O~~ - nnAl 'P\o..t Flu::. NO: 4os(Mo3) FI Y\a.l pi a.+ o...pprovo.I ~ot" ~ho~"/d Oa..K.? 6hev l d be.. COf\t', ~h -t UfC> r'\ t he... -to no"",, \ f\~ : /. MJ(e.7? O\lJ~\-<'P at, o0tlot,"J - prefe(~ ded',c.~+e., To C,ti' eLJ ~~. ~n-4-0- 2.. Oeh\9Mte..- c\ro.'\~e "'~ ..,t"ht~ ~t'7 - " r\C..(~~~ \.'-l ~Jt h -to '0 J . 3. ~e-lope.r to pro-.llde.. e.'eJ;rYVJ..te-/b,.J +or ~+(ee.,t ~ tl.V\d ut',l, t \€J7 - ~ubM\-r \e,;tie.r"" of c.red;t (150o,.{). 0.- (1.~ & ~ ~ &.- O-~~ "". ~ d) WO~ ~ ~ +. 111(~ c1e.dico,-t\oV\.: 73" ~ SCO ::. ~~)"'5lX:) . O. MnD::rr -P'f'",,;t -fo~ n~....,,', f\-t~(~t.,oA . C!:>. l,t\€...- Of' V\ \O~ ~u 6'.)~ To ~'-J\~\." b~ GI\t-~ -A-rto~nei' ~o TO : t'-A~" o~ A.V\d. G\ti Gour",\\ ;P-rz.,Dt-A '. 6,.,o.J. ~.he,.,l~V\. ~~ : 22 j~'t lGle5 ~ : 5Y"Ore\"~ 00-.tL'6 - PinAl "Pto.t FI~ NO : 4os( M03) Fi Y\a.l pla.+ ~pp("o,,~l ~O~ ~'no("Q,,,,,,,,,/d Oa.k.? ~OvlJ b~ c.o(\t'l~t Uf=Or\ th~ +ono\."\f\~: /. ~(eh"" o~h:'f> 0+ O\)t\ot~ - pre~ef&ll'f ~~::%~~~~~i 2.. ?eh\9Mte.., .d.ra.'\~e <1.1 ..,t'I~~*~- 'f\C.<QA~e., \.'V ldt h -to \0. '5 I oy\- p'~ s.~ bzC/~ 3. Owe-loper to pro'"/ld€- e.~t\1V\A te.. /b\J -to I ~+(ee.t ~ ~o'\d ut'.lit ieh - :>ub~..t ~ of Cored \ t ( I 50"/0 j. tv M~ ~ r -J" ~ ce..J Li.Y~ '" ~ cl- 1 & if-' Jv..v tv.,.;; ~ (9.,.J +. 111,k c!e.dico,t\oV\. 13" ~ 5eD :;;. 4~J"500 . ~. r-4f'\1:C:rr f~2d."^;t -tot" ne",,', f'\-te(~t.,ov'" . V:>. lit\e... Of\V\\o"," "t>\Jb'.)~ t-o \Q.'-J\~"" b'f G'\t~ -ATtofnei' . 1. 9wb:f! cl ~o~hn~ M~~~/..- 10 c.tk,S W \ I}J . ~ . . Page Two Mr. Dan Vogt, Administrator July 17, 1985 time periods it would serve to keep the ponding area dry. This conforms to the Park Commission's decision to leave the pond as planned, so that it will drain within 24 hours. Regardless of how the outflow structure is ultimately designed the existing 48M pipe under the old R.R. tracks will be used. Another item mentioned at the July I, 1985 Park Commission meeting was the disposal of excavated material from the drainage pond. The Commission suggested the possibility of using the fill in the northeast corner of Freeman Park. Depending on the type of material this sounds satisfactory. However, if the Park Commission has decided not to have a permanent pond in Freeman Park, no sig- nificant excavation is required. The only construction needed would be the channelization of the existing drainage way to handle the discharge from the storm sewer pipe from the Shorewood Oaks plat and the construction of the outfall structure. By limiting the excavation to these areas more trees could be saved. While it was stated at the July I, 1985 Park COIIII1ission meeting that the engineer has a copy of the plan, it is not an all inclusive plan showing the overall storm water system and the pondi ngarea with the outfall structure. If as a result of the developer changing engineers or as a result of this letter the overall storm water plan has changed, new detailed drawings should be submitted for our review. Very truly yours, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. J--.. -P. r'/~ James P. Norton, P.E. City Engineer JPN:mln ORR .SCHElEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors July 19, 1985 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Attn: Mr. Dan Vogt, Administrator Re: Seal Coating Project No. 85-2 Dear Dan: Fo 11 owi ng is the proposed 1. Monday, 7/22/85 2. Tuesday, 7/23/85 3. Thursday. 7/25/85 4. Friday. 7/26/85 5. Monday, 7/29/85 6. Thursday, 8/8/85 7. Monday, 8/12/85 8. Thursday, 8/15/85 9. Monday, 8/19/85 10. Friday, 9/13/85 11. Monday, 9/30/85 schedule for Seal Coating Project No. 85-2: - Approve Plans & Specifications and Authorize Advertisement for Bids - 3:00 p.m. Deadline for Ad for Bid to the Construction Bulletin - Noon Deadline for Ad for Bid to the South Shore Weekly News - Publication of Construction Bulletin - Publication of South Shore Weekly News - Bid Opening at 11:30 a.m. - Accept Bids and Award Contract - Pre-Construction Meeting - Start Seal Coating - Finish Seal Coating - Finish Sweeping This schedule should be discussed with Mr. Don Zdrazil, so the street department can make the patches necessary on these streets to be seal coated. Very truly yours, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ ~to1~ City Engi neer JPN: n1 b -- /;;:2 f:::, 2021 East Hennepin Avenue. Suite 238 . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 . 612/331- 8660 . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCIL Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMIN ISTRA TOR Daniel J. Vogt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 29 JUNE 1985 RE: CREPEAU DOCK MANUFACTURING/GARDEN PATCH - REQUEST FOR REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE NO. 405 (85.22) BACKGROUND Mr. Charles Crepeau has requested that the City change the zoning of his property located at 23425-45 Smithtown Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached) from R-3B (previously R-5), Multiple-family Residential, to C-4, Commercial Service District. His dock manufacturing facility and the Garden Patch store are currently nonconforming uses in the R-3B District. Based upon a request by Mr. Crepeau in 1982, the City went througk a rather lengthy study of the zoning of his property and the area in which it is loc- ated. A memorandum from Northwest Associated Consultants, dated 27 May 1985, provides a great deal of background relative to Mr. Crepeau's property. A copy of that report is enclosed for your review. The result of the study was that the City amended its Comprehensive Plan and established the C-4 zoning district to recognize existing businesses in the vicinity of the Crepeau property and establish standards to controlth€ir future-exist- ance. Subsequent to these actions by the City, Mr. Crepeau did not pursue the necessary rezoning and conditional use permits which would bring his pro- perty into conformity with the new zoning. Mr. Crepeau cites financial and health considerations as the reason he did not follow up on the matter. Based upon a complaint this Spring that the Garden Patch has expanded its operation beyond its originally appnoved permit, it was discovered that its lO-year permit expired this month. A letter to Mr. Crepeau, notifying A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore /<I~ . . STAFF REPORT CREPEAU MANUFACTURING 29 JUNE 1985 PAGE TWO him of the situation, has now prompted him to request the appropriate zoning for the property. The City Council has granted him a short exten- sion of his permit to operate the Garden Patch, pending receipt of his application. ISSUES AND ANALYSIS The Crepeau request is subject to the requirements of Shorewood's new Zoning Ordinance. Based upon review of the applicant's plans relative to the new Ordinance, it may be premature to make any decision on the request until further information has been submitted. However, in the interest of resolving the matter as quickly as possibly, a public hear- ing has been scheduled for 2 July 1985 to consider the information sub- mitted to-date. Following are issues to be considered in the review and evaluation of Mr. Crepeau's request: A. Rezoning. Given the City's previous study, and the current prov1S10ns of the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan, the C-4 District is considered generally acceptable for the Crepeau property. Approval of the rezon- ing should be based upon the property's compliance with the general provisions of the Ordinance and the specific requirements of the C-4 District (see Section 200.23 of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance). B. Land Use. Three distinct uses of the property currently exist on the Crepeau site. The Garden Patch, which was originally approved for re- tail sale of fruits and vegetables, has expanded (without the approval of the City) to include sale of plants and lawn ornaments. For the most part, these activities would fall in the categories of "conven- ience grocery" and "nursery", which are permitted uses in the C-4 District (see Section 200.23 Subd. 2). There may be some discussion as to whether the sale of lawn ornaments is typically incidental to a nursery. Since many of the Garden Patch's products are displayed outside, it requires a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) for open or outdoor sale and display subject to the conditions of Section 200.23 Subd.3c. These requirements will be reviewed in detail further on in this report. Besides the convenience grocery and nursery uses, the site contains a third use, the Crepeau dock manufacturing operation. This requires a conditional use permit under Section 200.23 Subd.3d for fabrication of wood or metal products, Subd.3b for open and outdoor storage and Subd.3c for outdoor display. . . STAFF REPORT CREPEAU MANUFACTURING 29 JUNE 1985 PAGE THREE C. Conditional Use Permits. Since many of the requirements for the various conditional use permits are reiterated for each activity they will be grouped together for purposes of this report. 1. Open and outdoor storage,dadd sales and display areas must be fenced and screened from view of neighboring residential uses. Although the property in question is fenced on three sides, the area of the poperty can be seen from residential areas to the south across the pond. While it is not considered necessary to fenGe along the pond, it should be required that landscaping be provided across the rearof the site to screen the view. Landscaping will be discussed in more detail further on in this report. 2. Outdoor storage areas must be screened from view of the public right-of-way. The storage area for the dock facility can be seen quite readily from County Road 19. Landscaping is considered a solution to this issue. 3. Outdoor storage and display areas must be grassed or surfaced to control dust. The applicant's site plan (Exhibit B) does not indicate how these areas are surfaced. Most of the areas appear to be covered with a crushed rock surface, which, if properly maintained, is acceptable. 4. Landscaping must be provided for outdoor storage, sales and display areas. The site is in considerable need of landscaping, primarily as mentioned for required screening, but also for aesthetics. This is considered a key element for the approval of the conditional use permit. As such, the applicant should be required to have a professional landscape plan prepared consistent with the require- ments of Section 200.03 Subd.2g. The plan should show the arrange- ment, size, spacing and species of proposed plant materials. The Gity's approval of the applicant's request should be subject to the acceptability of the landscape plan. Pursuant to Section 200.03 Subd.2g a bid from a certified nurseryman should be required, from which a performance bond or letter of credit should be provided for two growing seasons. 5. Lighting must be hooded and directed away from the public right-of-way and neighboring residents. The applicant's plan does not show sit~~ lighting if any. If it exists or is proposed, it should be indicated on his site plan. . . STAFF REPORT CREPEAU MANUFACTURING 29 JUNE 1985 PAGE FOUR 6. Storage, sales and display areas shall not take up required parking space. The applicant's plans suggest a certain number of parking spaces, but neither parking or outdoor use areas are clearly defined on the plans or on the site. The site plan should define these areas, and parking should be provided based upon the following requirements: a. The curb cut or driveway access should not exceed 25 feet in width except upon approval of the City Engineer. Currently the driveway extends across the entire front of the site. The access drive(s) should be defined and located based upon the recommendation of the County Engineer. b. The parking lot must be paved and striped. Perimeter curbing must be installed around the parking lot. c. The parking lot must conform to the following setbacks: front - 15 feet, side and rear - five feet. d. The number of spaces required for the existing activities is calculated as follows: manufacturing: 1 space/350 sq. ft. of floor area (3904 sq. ft.) retail sales: 1 space/200 sq. ft. of floor area (1760 sq. ft.) 3904 + 350 = 11.2 1760 + 200 = 8.8 20.0 spaces required * * This does not include the outdoor sales area. Additional parking based on 1 space/200 sq. ft. should be provided. The applicant has indicated that 30 spaces are available. The parking layout has not been shown on his site plan. The site plan should be modified to show the parking layout. D. Future Expansion. The applicant would like to take advantage of this application to address future expansion. He proposes to add on to the rear of the Garden Patch plus build a greenhouse on the east side of the existing building (see Exhibits C and D). Mr. Crepeau also indicated that he may add an additional storage building for his dock facility at some later date. . . STAFF REPORT CREPEAU MANUFACTURING 29 JUNE 1985 PAGE FIVE It is considered appropriate to address further expansion at this time. The proposed additions should be shown on the site plan and evaluated for their compliance with setback and building require- ments. Additional parking must also be shown. The manager of the Garden Patch has also indicated that they would like to change the signage on the property. This is also the appropriate time to evaluate signage. For this purpose, we will need front elevations of the buildings to determine how much signage is allowed. A sign plan showing the design, size and location of existing signs should also be submitted. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the preceding, it is recommended that no decision be made until the following information can be reviewed: 1. Fully dimensioned site plan clearly defining all use areas, including, outdoor storage, sales and display, and parking. 2. Professional landscape plan. 3. Sign plan and building elevations. Since Mr. Crepeau has now made a good faith attempt to apply for the appropriate zoning and permits, the City may wish to further extend his permit to keep the Garden Patch in operating pending submission of these items. cc: Dan Vogt Glenn Froberg Jim Norton Charles Crepeau -' t 1 1/2 MI. e I 264(Y REVI DATE: De SEPT. 1982 IATED CONSULTANTS INC. NORTH ~ ~ \ i ap I~ =-- \,..- ~':L :/;(G~8AY)--4 ~ ~: · '---.....,'-~. (r ~~ ,/~' I I \ ~c O~, ~.~~' r- . I, ~I--';;; " ~'-=~ ~r . U K~TM.. (I" \ ...\. : '-: f-::..::-l ~ .. ~~ ~ , i", (,~ ~- l' ...~ ''',. I I_I jTI8.... rt- ~'=~I-.-:::- ... ,,/ .>- _ EXCELSIOR: __- - ~ ~I t L~ ~e-i I ~ i fj G 'n~-~-s I n I_j = :.< ~ ' : ,~~./ 1- : ~" : :: _1 r.::- .....:.:. r\ J I~~ Rn'~ 1 " I ( ~ ~ ~o___' , ..~' - T\ ~ ~ ~ _! "-I~1 /I_r- ~~4Jlt~,~ .. :~.-~ 1-~~rJ .1 ~ :; ~ ___ ': TT : ~ ~ : _l...-. ..::.. J ~ '- .....~...- 0'" I ~ ~ L: . flY ~ /l i1 ~ :--. LAItE r1 ~! Y. 1/.: I \.----7" I --- ~:.-~ - : : J ~ __ .:: ., .J!.,. (j ""' i ~ ..I..J- : : ~ . ---=! 1 .'. ~.\ _: , : ~ . i" ~/ / ]I ~~h--LL__m u '7 ;r/.J!. Y I ..J-j : 3 ~ rt=>~?-f. ~'\. ::JLY- /~ML~.';::'';:~'" ~~rzvJ L.--i /~ ~~ '1.< --'("'1..~ ./ -J"/.;;"'5YA~. 00" 1 "'" , ~ ~ ~v.. ~JJ~ ..- Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Crepeau - Rezoning and Conditional .. Use Permit / \\. H Jf" , IIi ~ -.... ... "dt!:l ~>< O::r' "d t-'. 00" tIl t-'. t!:I,..,. t::l tJ:j tIl H I-i t!:I "d t"' )> Z .--.~ _0" ~.. .. .. (' ~ --&. 1 C. . .... tJ _.. -'-' -.--. -.-.-.--.- -_.._.~... .._-~ . .(' .7' \1" . . -., ,. .. .. ..... ............. ..l !':. " .~,. -. .. ........ ....,1 : -:" .... ".:: i .:: : :.;; ~:;-:=: T:-::' .... . -;- .......,-... .. -~: :.:.:: :::::':t::: ....... ........ .. .-- . .'... -.-- ..... ".--- ... . . .'. .... . .. ....... ........-.... ._.......t .~ ...0.._.... ........__.. , r . --~-::~- :~.-: ~- -:- ~-- , ; . . .. \ 0-.. ---y- . ':';\ -"".~~~l:' e]:::i~;C'::~:,;u . . .. \ . .....,.. . . .. . . -4i: .. .... -...... '.-:.):~>::.:: ....:. I'::::~ .:::;;:~i..~~~;:~~j: -----...-. t-" .,-.L.:7~'-' 'i .,.... (.. du ~:.~n:;j.< : l~_.;:~;"i-' "..:.. ...... --." . -... .t:7... ...._... .. .. ........-..... ___I .. ...;1 ~::~~-.:J..::. :.-:: . .:-~:._.~...:'.::-..!.. ..............4. :: ..: '1... ,p.L:;: ',: ~1~ :~H.:' .., :~~ . I . ...... ...... .... t _... ._ . .. ..... ---.. . .. ... ....::!.._~.~.:..-...~. .0" .i...~~::::::.:~::~ _--a.-._ .. . I . ... ..--.....- . t - _ ..... . .'. . -........ . .. .... ~. -- .-. . .;:-::': ~.::: .,-!~:': .:: +::7:;':.:; ;:-:i . ...... ..... .... -+", ....... j ::'.: r::.:~ . . .... . I, I' :: -~.:: ::.:~ .-:: ;.::..:..: : :. ::-:-.::~ j : :,:: ------.-.. . . .' .... _. . ..- ~.. ...... . . . .. ~ -. .. ' .. . .... f . ... ~ J . - .. ..... .. t. .-. . .. . . --- ----- - - ., . . - . ..... ...... . ... . .. .... . ...' . I .. ... ... .. . .. . .:.~:.':.:-::-~::I':. :-:..: :r.::.-:'~; .: ........-.........-. ... .,- . .,...-.. .., ........ .. .... _...t.. ..... ....~..~ ---'--- " . ~.. . ... . . . . ... .... ...... ....".... ......,...... . , -... .!: :.:~ .. ~ :- .. :': = :',::: ~:! :'.::~ .:: :. :....:_~::~ _' :.::.:~,:--...I:::.: .. r....-" .! J.:.____.________._..__ .' \XI -; I ~ -.... -.... '- . . ... ."., .. .. ___.___.._ -J.-__ . . > ..1: :h . . ~ ... ~. ..,.-.-. .. ..- J.I. ., . ,1 . . . .,. - - .. ... . ~:.- :-.~..:..2i-~::':'<: .; :~.;:::~ . .....; .. ... 0- r. . \.. .. ...... ';I.'.'" ..u_....__..~.. ~: ~~_.~_: ._~~~: .~~~~~.~~~. ~;i; :. :_~ ~~. ;~(~::~~ ~~f;: ;.t:~~~: :~-::: ': :... . .:.. . e"" -.. . r. _. ...... ..... ........ \ .:5_.. n..._'.. .....'-'. 'IP ~ ( . .: ':"Y ......:.:. ::..::' :: ::. ~ .. ..- ''f': ..., "1::-:::":-;: ... ....... ..:~. '~_.i....::J;_. :;:.. ::.:.:~.::L"":.:~~:":':":::>": . ......: . . .:\ . \ ;,.- :\ . 't .,. u_ - ._- -..-.---...- ..----:;..---:.--~:.- ---T~-~::~~~ .:',.:. ...... : .;~....- .. .:r'. ...... ---.--,----...-......,..- .. .. .. :.::: :::.: :::.,:;t:..:-..:...:.;:-:.,. :;:::.: . \:. ":".::ti..~ :':.:'~-".' . : : \ . -. .. . .... .. :~:.::::\. :.:;':.:-:::~;: '::r~';:'. ;.;1'-,,:.::;:;::'::;:::::: .-,...-----..---- ---:-;--_._;-- d~~:-:-:-.;.'. .... ... ...~._.. ...-.! ~~:_... --~.-.--.-t-.-.,~...~.-..-.- ~~..., . ..... -.: ..::~~~.'.: ...... .~:-;~~~~~tr,r~l~;!~;~~ti ~__~..._.._~ ..:.~..:-:.::.-:_.=._..:.__:..l...._",_...:.......:_~......:_~._:..:...._l._~_...:_~:. I . ., :...=1..::'.-'.'" ., : ~.. ..:.::...:::.::':.-: ..::::.....-. ......- .. . . ,... .. . ~. . ~ ~ : .. .. ~ ~. ... ".H .........:.. ;";._-:~_=:'i.~-::'~':':::.:. ;:.: :.:;:.:::::: ~ .;:;.: (:: :::: ;:.:::: :-::::::;~ ::. ._ ......_ ..:.._._................ of... ,-.' . .....-..... . .. ...... .. "r:... ~ ~ .;.J.. ,,--...--..- .. . , . . . .. - . ..--.--:--;- .-:---:-"-T---~ -::-..:-~~--._.._~..-- . ..:i. ...::1 ........ ~- -----. C.UStOMER PQRkiNj - '2 SpClCeS 30 5Fc.es ace Avo.ila.ble ,. ..,,- Prll'ieHT Fu.c:ai~ 'i't - )( liD' Em plo'jee Po.Y"kin~ - 5 spaces Exhibit C PROPOSED EXPANSION-PLAN VIEW ." n_ .1 d A' , a' " ,0' rrolt;ve ""..~ .. '\ .,. l." & ree nh use D D t c.ot1pressof'S Rec.eivi,. Holdi.-." Pott;~ AreA i' .: .';,.'q~.,~_.:i.;:~'~~ "':''''~;,.: '" . ,.}.J .. ' ~~:,j. '!.\;-<~.~:-J:: l' ~:'~# .. .-" .'. '.v '1 :. '" .. 4-~4 ~ . "' '. .....,- ~ it ~~ ~~ -- $i;-.); '. . .....f~. t";.. 't'>:::.:: '.' .,:.... :~;~..,~.. .... ~i,..h;\t.fl"~~.~::.i"~'.;;4~-,,:;~~:I' : i'~~~~~ASti~~~~~~ Exhibit D PROPOSED EXPANSION-ELEVATION ~.. ' ~ ; ~ <.I .. .. ,. . . June 27, 1985 PETITION REGARDING SHADY ISLAND ************************************************************** We, the undersigned, oppose the granting of a permit to allow a helicopter landing site to be installed at Shady Island Point in Shorewood. We oppose such a permit because we find that such a site is not compatible with the quiet residential area of Shady Island. We are all Shorewood residents. NAME 7JZ/7Vl B-~~ .~~~/ lf/~ Vt~,tvlcAt' ?1.v ~- ADDRESS ~99D~~.~ ~7;.--< f <1 ~ S k-d-Y #ct-.et ~a? ~711-~ ~tL '/'/5T ~ ~ /!//. Y~5S.vA~ uilfz-d Ail )c,t/S- SriM'r =r~I/I,vO tfP. .5 or" ~ 5' .Jill}) / -j s:" IMlD lJJ !)/ L )- fi">>v '/ :; ((A"I/9 If &:<:~ .s /.~ 6' ,4:"-..-ty -DI., '''1 e,I> 1-.1 ( r #vJy ~.J /&( 5'"325' ~W~J(?J. Si. 1- ,1 -1-1: \~,(( ~ r;1-h j/~o :JJ~,/iL , 52Y D S "^'l I5/*'Y''' CIVc./-e ).~ . p, ..I . ;rt::;j:{~ ! ~~ . ~~')~ ~u sz SI b)- X. ~. Lt:.d. _ .5I~o JIt,zcj; .$t .Z;J /' --r- ---- ...:5l'~ .#~r .....?..r~~7 ~/;. dUSu~~l~~r/~~ . fFf1j. ~dd ~~tCj{ ~'lgO ~2~ ~2~ (Y p6Ja ~~v ~t<j? 7RA~c:...... 51 #C ~1' diJ, ~ r9'(t?~~;7;k/ /-('12 . ~ 4...~~ ~ ~ ~ t. c-d ~...,. ~"'-J "qqo ,tA.~ ~ J4l~.....u~ k. ~ Mill S.s-~,t/ J . . c He 4382 (8/83) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA vs MUNICIPAL COURT 3d DIVISION COMPLAINT !.. StJMMONS WARRANT Plaintiff, Michael Blood Defendant Name CALENDAR DA 1 first, middle, last Da te of Birth 24590 Smithtown Road, Shorewood, Minnesota Defendant Address 55331 Zip Code Calendar Date COMPLAINT Bradley J. Nielsen ; Complainant, being duly sworn, makes complaint to the above-named Court and states that there is probable cause to believe that the Defendant committed the following Y offensel,,).. The complainant .slates thatfthe fpUowlnsz facJ.s establish PRORABLE CAUSEd:' h our CompIa~nant ~s a ou~ d~ng 0 f1c~a~ tar tHe C~ty of Shorewood an ~n t e course of his duties inspected property owned and occupied by the Defendant, Michael Blood, at 24590 Smithtown Road in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Your Complainant inspected the property on 12 and 24 June 1985. On these occasions Complainant informed Defendant that his proper1 was in violation of Shorewood Ordinances and stated that the following items in the exterior portions of the property should be removed: assorted car parts -- fenders, windshielcs, hoods, engine blocks, automobile chassis, etc.; a houseboa1 loaded with carpet~ug and other materials; an old wooden boat with a broken lawnmower sitting on it; scrap metal; rolls of old, wet carpeting; various household items, including a bathtub, stove, refrigerator, and furniture; rolls ~ fence; rubbish, including bottles, cans, old tires, etc. The assorted car parts are used in Defendant's car repair business which he operates on his property. During both of the inspections, Complainant noticed three vehicles in inoperable condition. Further investigation revealed that each of the three vehicles was owned by someone other than Defendant or a member of his family. Defendant was notified by a letter dated 28 June 1985 of the above violations. OFFENSES: Based on the foregoing, your Complainant states that on and between 1: June 1985 and 24 June 1985 the Defendant then and there being did: Count One: abandon a vehicle on public or private property, or fail, neglect, or refuse to remove or house an abandoned vehicle in violation of Shorewood City Ordinance Number 72, Section 4. Count Two: place upon his premises abandoned, discarded objects or equipment in violation of Shorewood City Ordinance Number 95, Section 3. Count Three: engage in an occupation or profession conducted in a dwelling, accessory building, or upon a parcel of land containing a dwelling unit, where there was exterior storage of equipment or materials used in a home occupation il violation of Shorewood City Zoning Ordinance Section 200.03, Subd. 12(d) (1) (e). WH~EFORE, COmPlain~nt rays that said offender may be arrested and dealt with according to law. L/;.~ I A~/;/' // ,. : ;" . ~ / " .'/.. .' / ,- !,,~ ~ _ -?" . ......~~.-/ '-""""- ,---- Prosecu tor's' Nam e.&--'Signa ture Sworn to and subscribed and complained of before me this ennepm County ~'untClp.l.1 RKommen~d Bad Section ,....- - - - - MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS DAN VOGT JULY 22, 1985 CITY ASSESSOR CONTRACT RENEWAL Attached you will find a short letter from City Assessor Rolf Erickson regarding his 1986 Assessing Contract. The only proposed change for 1986 is a $500 increase (2.7%) in the annual fee. Also attached you will find the existing contract for your review. In my opinion, Mr. Erickson and his associates have done an outstanding job of assessing for the City of Shorewood. The number of persons at the Board of Review should attest to that. Mr. Erickson has indicated that the information you requested at the Board of Review regarding sales will be furnished next year. It is my recommendation to renew the Assessing Contract with Rolf Erickson at the new rate of $18,800, for the period of September 1, 1985 through August 31, 1986. Rolf will be present at the 22 July meeting to answer any questions you may have. DJV : rd A Re~idential Communitv on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore ISO-~/ . TO: Dan Vogt City Administrator City of Sh,orewood FROM: Rolf Erickson City Assessor RE; 1986 Assessment Fee DATE: July 12,..1985 . Dan, The current contract language is ok. New term-September 1, 1985 through August 31, 1986 Contract amount $18,800.00 Payable in 12 installments of $1566.66 Starting on the last day of September, 1985 and ending on the last day of August, 1986. Please let me know if you have any questions. ~~~L. -_ ;:.,} 15CL-~' " . . CONTRACT FOR ASSESSING SERVICES This contract is made the 18 day of September, 1984, by and between the City of Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Rolf E. Erickson, 14520 12th Avenue N., Plymouth, Minnesota 55441, hereinafter referred to as "Erickson". WHEREAS, Erickson represents that he is a certified and licensed Minnesota Assessor, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 273 of Minnesota Statutes, and that he is a qualified real estate appraiser: and WHEREAS, the City represents that it is a separate assessment district within Hennepin County, State of Minnesota: NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties as follows: 1. The City hereby contracts for and Erickson agrees to provide all necessary assessment services for the assessment year 1985. Erickson shall be an independent contractor with assistance from Dave Wilde. The manner and method used in the performance of the assessment duties will be under the control and direction of Erickson, but in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 273. 2. In cons ideration of the services to be rendered by Erickson to the City, City shall pay to Erickson, at the above address, the sum of $18,300.00, payable in twelve (12) installments of $1,525.00, beginning on the last day of September, 1984, and ending on the last day of August, 1985. 3. Erickson agrees to maintain field records in their current form. 4. Erickson shall provide all transportation necessary for the performance of the services contracted for. 5. City shall furnish office space for the purpose of maintaining necessary City records and necessary meetings with residents. Additionally, City agrees to supply all equipment and supplies necessary for the performance of the services contracted for, including, stamps, accounting runs, maps, and other supplies. 6. Ericks6n shall attend the local Board of Review meetings on dates selected by City and other City Council meetings as necessary duri~g the term of the contract'f not to exceed three Council meetings. /Sa - 3 . . MAYOR Robe" Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogl CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMO TO: FRm1 : DATE: MAYOR AND COUNCI~ffiMBERS DAN VOGT, DON ZDRAZIL JULY 22, 1985 SUBJECT: CATHCART DRIVE Per your direction at the last Council meeting, a dust retardant material has been applied to the exposed areas of Cathcart Drive. This work was performed by the Shorewood Public Works Department. This was the case since the firm tnitia11y contacted to do the work raised its price from $700 per application to $~OOOper application and still indicated reluct- ance to do the work. Public Works Director Zdrazi1 then called several firms to discuss doing the work. When no other firm was found, the Public Works Department did the dust coating. Cost for the material alone came to over $1,300. When labor and equipment costs were added on to this figure, total for the application cost came to $2,000. The City is no longer receiving complaints regarding dust. The complaints now are being registered relative to the oil being tracked into homes. I feel that prior to expending an additional $~OOOfor another application of the oil, the Council should discuss the issue further. Public Works Director Zdrazi1 feels that the street will require 4 to 6 more applications to control the dust until winter. This would be an additional expenditure of $8,000to $12,000. Prior to proceeding with the oiling, Zdrazi1 obtained two (2) quotes to place a 3 inch bituminous overlay on the exposed areas. The low quote is in the amount of $10,777 and is good until July 26. Statutes do not require formal bidding by the City for projects under $15,000. If the Council chose to, it could go ahead and have the overlay applied at this time. This is ~he recommendation of Public Works Director Zdrazi1. In 1984, the Public Works Department ended the year with a $25,253 surplus. It is possible that 1985 could end with a surplus large enough to cover the $10,777. If the Council decides to go ahead with the overlay, it is recom- mended that staff maintains a close watch on the Public Works budget from now tbrough year end. If a transfer is necessary, it could be done in Decem- ber. Source of the transfer may be from the Contingency Fund. It is impossi- ble to say at this time whether or not a surplus will exist. Staff will be prepared to discuss the issue further at your 22 July meeting. DJV : rd A Rpsidential Communitv on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore /5Q- WJOww.lli@J July 18, 1985 Mr. Dan Vogt City Administrator City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 RE: Shorewood Water Request Dear Dan: Enclosed is a copy of the resolution adopted by Minnetonka regarding the Highway 7 corridor study. I suggest the last paragraph be modified as follows: 2.02 The City of Shorewood will review the Metropolitan Council's study and negotiate in good faith about the appropriate manner to fund, staff or otherwise support the corridor study and its recommendations. In addition, I suggest the following language be added to paragraph 10 of the Water Service Agreement: -To assure timely completiion of the Facility, Shorewood must award a contract for construction by April 1, 1989, with a completion date no later than the termination date of this agreement. Shorewood shall post a bond in the amount of $50,000 which shall be forfeited to Minnetonka if Shorewood's Facility is not completed and ready for operation at the termination of this agreement. If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, a~tl~~ Desyl L. Peterson City Attorney DL~ cc: James F. Miller, City Manager the city offices are located at 14600 minnetonka boulevard minnetonka, minnesota 55345 933-2511 MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: . . MAYOR Robert Rascop ~OUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMIN ISTRA TOR Daniel J. Vogt CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474.3236 MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS DAN VOGT T11f JULY 22, ~J~ MURFIN PROPERTY In accordance with your direction at the last Council meeting, I have contacted Don Streeter of Streeter/Andrus to discuss what he felt would be a fair price per square foot for a portion of the property located directly north of the Public Works garage and parking lot owned by Horace Murfin. During my discussion with Mr. Streeter, he indicated that the commercial property near the Highway 7/101 intersection has been selling in the $2 to $4 per square foot range. These figures are based on veri- fied and documented sales in this area. Since the comparison property is located on a high traffic intersection, it is felt that the Murfin property should be priced somewhat lower. Mr. Streeter did state that he has seen no property in the 7/101 area sell for $5 per square foot. This seems to indicate that Mr. Murfin's price of $5 per square foot is high. Mr. Streeter suggested an appraisal from a MAl Appraiser at a cost of approximately $500 to find a more accurate price to place on the property. Using the low end of the 7/101 property pric- ing of $2, the 28,000 square foot Murfin property would sell for $56,000. In my discussions with Mr. Murfin, it is extremely doubtful that he would accept an offer in the $50,000 range. A decision now must be made by the Council if you wish to make a counter offer to the asking price of $150,000. I would suggest that any offer made by the City includes the removal of the existing underground fuel tanks by the seller. Our local Fire Marshal in- dicated that state law requires that any fuel tank which has been abandoned for more than one year must be removed. Therefore, if we purchase the pro- perty and abandon the tanks, the City would be saddled with removal costs. DJV : rd A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore /5D \ . MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: . . MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Doug Uhrhammer CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS DAN VOGT, EV BECK JULY 22, 1985 STAFF ANALYSIS - FINANCE COl1MITTEE INTERIM REPORT In this memo I, along with input from Finance Director Beck, will review and comment on the Finance Committee Interim Report which was discussed at your meeting held on 24 June. Cover Page The first paragraph is very accurate in that it is extremely difficult to compare data between cities because of differing reporting methods used. The third paragraph deals with delinquent special assessments and taxes. The figures used were verified as accurate by the City Auditor. It is important to note however that the $52,000 represents the total accumu- lated back taxes due to the City. This is not the amount delinquent in a typical year. 1984 delinquent tax information is being compiled and will be available at the meeting. Page two - table 1 The delinquent taxes and special assessments information came directly from Hennepin County print-out and is accurate. The delinquent special assessments break-down information is also correct. It is important to note that the column showing the year represents the year that the project took place and was added onto the taxes. This does not indicate that these have been delinquent since 1969, for instance. Non- homestead property goes tax forfeit after four(4) years and homestead prop- erty after six (6) years. Page three At the top of the page, the Finance Committee Report states that Shorewood's delinquency rate is 20%. Further information regarding delinquency rate will be provided at your meeting. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore /s,C . ~ . . MEMO TO: SUBJECT: Page 2 MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS Staff Analysis - Finance Committee Interim Report J To comment on their recommendations, the Council has frequently discussed the delinquent tax situation with regards to new developments and took steps to try and alleviate this problem in the Waterford Development Agreement. Page four - Table 2 All mill rates listed are for 1985. The mill rate listed below the 1985 Shorewood mill rate in parens is for 1984 representing a decrease of slight- ly over 1 mill from '84 to '85. Staff had difficulty understanding and/or verifying the remainder of the in- formation on table 2 since we were unsure of where the figures came from. It is also difficult to compare with other cities as was mentioned above. It is interesting that Shorewood's overall per capita expenditures are the lowest of the cities surveyed. Page five - Table 3 The figures in this table were taken directly out of the budget. Page six - General Recommendations Below I will try to comment on each recommendation. 1. I would like to see the "General Data" used and discuss any specific ideas the Finance Committee may have relative to staffing. 2. Benefit and labor costs saved by part-time employees may be worth-while to discuss. However, I don't know how we would accomplish this at this time. It must be remembered that if a person works over 120 days in a year or earns over $325 in a month, the City must contribute its share to PERA and FICA. The City would also face paying unemployment benefits if 1ayed off. 3. I don't think that there is anyone connected with this City that wou1d'nt like to lower the mill rate. It might be that expenditures can be tight- ened up somewhat. However, $260,000 to $290,000 in cuts would invariably affect services. 4. The City has shared equipment and personnel with surrounding communities for quite some time. I'm not sure how sharing would reduce the cost of personnel without cutting back hours. (ie. half-time in each City) 5. Agreed. 6 . Agreed. 7. Council discretion and direction necessary. Worth discussing. 8. The County already charges interes on delinquent taxes. &1$+/66 _HOREWOOD F%NANCE COMM%TTEE %NTERM REORT TO: FROM: R.: Shor.wood City Council Finane. Committ.. D.linqu.nt T.x.. and Special A.......nt. R.f.r.nc. Citi.. Comp.ri.onon Taxe. and Servic.. R.co_.nd.tion. .",:.....'-' Thi. r.porti. to ..rv. a. an int_"'M r.port of the Fin.nc. Co.mitt.. to aid the City Council in planninc,:, for the 1986 Budc,:,.t and policy d.ci.ion. rel.tinc,:, to city 41ftanc... It i. difficult for .ny advi.ory co..itt.e to c,:,.tto the bottom line on co.p.r.tiv. data r.c,:,uardinc,:, finance. within the City of Shorewood or in tryinc,:, to do a'co..parativ.analy.i. with other .unicipal unit.. Th. difficulty .tem. fro. the availability of co.p.rabl. d.ta and the diff.rinc,:, reportinc,:, .nd co.tinc,:, methods ..ploy.d in diff.rinc,:, municipaliti... However, the Finance Committe. do.. f..l that th.re i. .nouc,:,h d.ta to w.rr.nt the City Council to .xplor. our recommend.tion. and to conduct furth.r investic,:,.tion where it d..... n.c....ry. Also, a. we pro.i.ed, we h.ve oper.ted .s independently as possible fro. de.and. on city .t.ff. The first portion of the Fin.nce Co...itt.es report de.l. with delinquent taxes .nd .pecial ...e....nts. The Finance Co..itte. appreciated theA_lldi~_o!,.. r.port to Counci I dated M.)' 28, 198~ and upon que.tioninc,:, indicated that there was .23~,OOO in delinque.t ...es.ment. .ndi~2,oOO in b.ck t.x... Our c,:,o.l this year has been to study Special A.s.s....nts and Taxes which are delinqu.lt; id.ntify the c.u... and M.ke reco...nd.tions to the Council on how to deal with the probl.... Tabl. 1 identifi.. the d.linquencie. in Special Asse..ments .nd tax... Kitty Framc.n will pre.ent this report .nd the Finance Co....itt...s recom.endation.. The second portion of the Finance Co..itt.... report as pre..nt.d b)' Maria Malool)' d..l. with prop.rty t.xes in Shorewood in r.lation to r.f.r.nc. citi.. h.vinc,:, the .... r.lative population and 5imilar probl..... Tabl. 2 .how. a compari.on of Shor.wood'. tax r.tes and financial .xp.nditur.. per capita with the r.ference citi.. of Deephav.n, Wayzata, Savac,:,e, and Minnetri.ta. Table 3 show. a three year co.pari.on of city co.ts. R.commendations dealinc,:, with city tax../spendinc,:, conclud. the report. The Financ. Co.mitt.. .tand. read)' to an.w.r que.tion. on their findinc,:,s and to conduct additional r.search by dir.ction of the Cit)' Council. 'HEFOLLOWING1fiE!LE REFl.:~CTS TOTAL >.tINQUENT;tfAXES~ifPECIAL ENTS DUE ASDFAPRIL3G,>.1985. . HOJf:VER SH08t;:UOOD'SSHARE IS PORTION OF THESE AMOUNTS-.ND ISI>ESCfUBEDBEtn&L I -- ---- -~ -- -- - -......-..------ ----....--- ----___.....___ - - --- ...'-"__'___ .. I , I ~ OF PROP YEARS AMOUNT OWNER I 20 -- ------- -- -.--.---.--______.............__ ______:......._._.._ _0_- ____...........__ _ . I BRIDGE : I 1 1 ") .:.. 82-84 81-84 82-84 81~84 81~a4 84 79-84 82-84 81-84 84 82-84 82-84 84 82-84 84 82-84 84 84 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 259,703.17 39,274.73 19,661.99 15,660.68 14,086.98 9,351.80 9,258.10 9,088.11 8,353.22 8,107.86 8,075.40 7,902.53 7,270.84 6,241.92 6,206.18 5,487.80 5, 254. 1 ~> 5, 103.44 I.lOULDER ~AKOSH (OREPEAU KOEHNEN >RUFFENACH >SA OAKS DEV. MCARDLE '.+lEAK INS PHIPPS 'CLAGUE MORGAN ANDERSON COLE WINTEF~S JOHNSON WILLIAMS BUTLER TINGEWOOI> INC. 44 ---------_.._--------~----~-------------------------- 444,088.90 (84%) 17 (32%) 64 DEBT LESS THAN $5,000 PER OWNER - ALL OTHERS 108 TOTALS 85,930.69 (16%) 40 (68:Y.) I . X C ... .. ..Z ZI IE .~. II ZI "I JI Ie A . .. I J . e .. THESE FIGURES REFLECT THAT 9:Y. OF THE DELINQUENT TAXPAYERS OWE 66% OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF TAXES & SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS DELINQUENT AS OF 4/30/85. ONE TAXPAYER (?) ALONE OWES 49% OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OUTSTANDING. OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE, $217,688.04 IS DUE TO THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD IN DELINQUENT SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. OF THE REMAINING $312,331.55, APPROX- IMATELY $56,219.68 (18%> IS DUE TO THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD. 530,019.59 57 THE DELINQUENT SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ARE SANITARY SEWER (MAIN SEWER) WATER IMPROVEMENT SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT DELINQUENT SEWER UTILITY DELINQUENT SEWER UTILITY DISEASED TREE REMOVAL DELINQUENT SEWER UTILITY DELINQUENT SEWER UTILITY DELINQUENT SEWER UTILITY BOULDER BRIDGE IMP. WATER/SEWER DELINQUENT SEWER UTILITY DELINQUENT SEWER UTILITY DFI TNf~IIFNT SEWEr! 11TH TTY 1969 1 97:~ 1972/1973 1 <fT? 19"78 1977 197<f 1 98~) 1981 1982 198', 1982 i98~ BROKEN INTO THESE CATEGORIES' - $ 38J700.06 -- 53 PI~OPERT I ES' $ 719.42 .- 1 PROPERTY $ 3,154.b4 -- "j pr~OPEra IES L $ 99.57 - 1 PF<OPEFny ~; 140 A 4:5 .... 1 PHDPEF<TY $ 88.66 .- 1 PI~OF'Er~TY i!; 140.43 - 1 PHOPERTY $ 91.08 - 1 PROPEray $ 515.13 - 4 PROPERTIES $ 167 , 43:~ . ~5:~ .- 14 F'I:;:OPERTIES i!; 8b2.43 ... -, PROPEra IES !~ 2,197.07 - 12 PROPEFnIES $ ~ , '54"}. '~9 ::j'l PRnPFRTTFS RDEN HILLS (1-2% ) -2%) LINQUENT UTlL'! TIFICATION FEE Y NOW REQUIRE HE DEVELnPERS YEARS..' ,':", " LAND stATED THA .. HE FEELS THEY Y APPLYING ormIN EPT UP - SIGNS, .:,~;,:;:':,,~'\,;Pi .,':." "::;",~'i": ' ",', ,,,;'<.i:> - MARK'.ERNHARDSEN SUGGES HAT AN 'dRDINANCE:f~ CAL- LED FUR THAT DESCRIBES HOW DEVELOPRENT IMPROVEMENTS SHOUL.D BE FUNDED. RONO (( 3%) ~.. c;),,/ ,y 0 EAGUE OF CITIE ':....., 484-3353 - GARY DIXON STATED THATSHOREVIEW DOESN'T HAVE THE PROBLEM BECAUSE DEVELOPERS ARE REQUIRED TOf'AY ALL COSTS UP FRONT. . THERE ARE NO ASSESSMENTS.. HESUG- GESTS WE CAN WITHHOLD LICENSES, PERMITS, ETC.. UNTIL TAXES/ASSESSMENT S Ar~E PAID UP. HOREVIEW (3-5%) PETER TraTZ WILL BE SENDING ME COP,IES OF ORDINANCES ~ AGREEMENTS WHICH REQUIRE IMPROVt::ttENTS TO teE THE PERSONAL. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER AS WELL. AS AGAINST THE LAND.. ONCE/THIS HAS BEEN DONE, THERE I SRECOUF;~SE ON COLLECTION YOU CAN!tJSE BONDSECUR- lNG, ESCI~:OW, PREPAYING, LETTER OFiCREDIT, ETC.. IF THERE IS SECURITY, DRAW, 'IF NOT, SOE. SHORT TERM RECOMMENDATIONS - 1) DETERMINE WHETHER THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH BOULDER BRIDGE FARMS INCL.UDES ANY DEVELOPER RESPONSIBILITY.. IF THERE IS, USE THE APPROPRIATE COL.LECTION PROCEDURE. IF NOT, 2) BRING INFORMAL, CITY COUNCIL PRESSURE TO BEAR, AND/OR 3) PUBLICIZE THE EFFECT ON THE TAX RATE TO THOSE TAXPAYERS WHO ARE PAYING THEIR OBL.IGATIONS ON TIME. L.ONG TERM RECOMMENDATIONS - 1) DRAFT AN ORDINANCE WHICH REQUIRES A DEVEL.OPMENT AGREEMENT SIMILAR TODNE OF THOSE FROM THE LEAGUE OF CITIES, 2) DRAFT AN ORDINANCE WHICH REQUIRES THAT ALL. APPLICATIONS For~ PERMITS, LICENSES, VARIANCES ETC. BE HELD UNTIL SOME ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN TO BRING DELINQUENT TAXES ~ SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS INTO ORDER, AND/OR 3) PUBLICIZE THE DELINQUENCIES. . TABLE :2: TAX RATES AND EXPENDZTURES SHORE WOOD DEEPHAVEN WAYZATA SAVAGE MINNETRISTA POP. 4646 3680 3540 5231 3290 MILLRATE 22.914 (::~) /ql;ll (24.08) 12.662 16.536 27.977 15.472 RANKING 69 13 40 80 35 ASSESSED RESI 49,109,357 42,683,404 51,441,633 30,846,489 35,000,106 COM TX BASE TX LEVY 1,125,292 540,457 850,639 836,838 541,522 EXPENDITURES PER CAPITA EXEC. , 59. 39 FINANCE, GOV SERVS, LEGAL Be PLN/ZON 23.92 50.36 55.02 29.32 PUBLIC WORKS 103.24 79.72 71.33 40.56 34.20 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE 59.92 54.78 75.27 51.57 56.85 FIRE 7.35 8.14 12.00 7.04 16.63 ~~.~ 73.32 99.79 100.40 77.89 ---------- ------------------------------------------------------ TABLE 3: SHORE WOOD BUDGET CoMPARZSoNS 1983 1984 1985 MAYOR/COUNCIL . . . . . . . . 22,160 22,923 23,613 ADMINISTRATOR . . . . . . . . 33,961 38,327 40,125 GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES . . 91,733 85,324 98,492 GENERAL SALARIES . 28,009 42,383 40,596 FINANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,318 37,054 65,235 LEGAL . . . . . . . 37,084 36,752 44,400 LITIGATION . . . . . . 10,000 PLANNING AND ZONING . . . . . . . 27,094 33,330 37,164 MUNICIPAL BUILDING. . . . . 207 16,510 17,260 POLICE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240,341 270,747 295,159 FIRE. . . . . . . . . . . . 34,713 41,572 46,303 PROTECTIVE INSPED . . . . . 19,593 24,566 25,570 PUBLIC WORKS. . . . . . . 89,747 97,944 98,519 EQUIPMENT. . 70,320 74,300 GARAGE . . . . . 7,712 11,850 16,250 STREETS . . . . . . . . . 49,164 71,906 74,006 STREET IMPROVEMENT 117 , 330 119,818 SEAL COATING . . . 14,880 10,000 STORM WATER PROJECTS 80,000 0 SNOW AND ICE REMOVAL. . . . . 17,858 17,061 19,061 TRAFFIC CONTROL . 7,415 10,003 9,003 STREET LIGHTING . . 6, 108 7,500 8,000 SANITATION, ETC. . . . . . . . . 5,394 10,013 10,213 TREE MAINTENANCE 5,022 6,463 8,513 PARKS AND RECREATION 34,219 44,008 45,198 GENERAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES. 265,350j10 275,910 170 319,029 PER CAPITA . . . . . . . . . 56.22 59.39 68.66 ----------------------------------------------------------------- GENERAL FUND TOTALS. . . . . . . 788,344 1,227,101 1,360,830 * ------------------------------------------------------------------ . . GENERAL RECOMMENDATZONS ~\:;> 1. General data indicate. that the administrative staff for a city of Shorewoo~s size may be too large. Consolidate personnel by combinin9 job responsibilities and reducin9 staff. 2. Use part time help to fill in clerical and non-salaried positions, thus reducin9 labor and benefit costs. 3. The mill rate needs to be brou9ht into line with surroundin9 communities. This could be achieved by reducin9 per capita spendin9. The average mill rate of the four reference cities in the study is 18.16 while Shorewood is at 24.08 which ranks us in the bottom third of Minnesota cities (between 69-73rd) with those on the top havin9 the lowest mill rates. Therefore, the budget needs to be trimmed $250,000 to 290,000. 4. Shared services and personnel should be considered with surroundin9 communities to reduce personnel and equipment costs. 5. Continue to explore all potential sources of funds from state grants to service fees. 6. When possible use liquor sales revenues to alleviate expenses. 7. The City Councilor its representative should meet with persons in the top three categories of delinquent taxes and assessments to discuss their' delinquencies and arrive at possible ways to payoff or reduce them. -U4J1tf-. 'j{!lmIF/~A.-no>>fr 8. Council should approach Senator Gen Olson and discuss possible legislation which would allow cities and other governmental units to charge current interest rates on unpaid taxes and/or assessments where applicable. CJ, Co AJ-rltJGJtfNC,y -SH ~ j...I> 8 G' (fI A)1!- II'J 10 D~/~ ';U1Jb ! O. t-Y PL r 17' , i....: '-- \, fUlI~ . f~\ leIii! /\./ '....,--r ,!>7Dv f . AGREEMENT FOR WATER SERVICE tHIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of 1985, by and between the City of Shorewood, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota (ltShorewoodlt) and the City of Minnetonka, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota (ltMinnetonka"); , WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Shorewood and Minnetonka are municipal corporations located in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, having a common boundary line between the two cities along Vine Hill Road and instersecting with Trunk Highway 7; and WHEREAS, on 8 July, 1985, the City Council of the City of Shorewood adopted Resolution Number 48:85 authorizing staff to work on all necessary procedur~s incidental to the construction and installation of a Municipal Trunk Water Supply and Storage Facility to provide water to the southeast portion of the City of Shorewood consisting of an area bounded by Vine Hill Road on the east, Christmas Lake/Christmas Lake Point on the west, State Trunk Highway Number 7 on the north, and the City limits on the south (ltService Area"); and WHEREAS, Shorewood desires to provide a temporary water service to the Service Area by purchasing a water supply from the municipal water supply system of Minnetonka until such time as the said Municipal Trunk Water Supply and Storage Facility can be constructed by Shorewood; and WHEREAS, Minnetonka has installed certain water mains in Vine Hill Road; and WHEREAS, the Minnetonka water facilities have sufficient capacity to provide water services to the Service Area; and WHEREAS, Shorewood and Minnetonka deem it proper, for a public purpose, and within the scope of the municipal authority vested in them by charter and state statutes that an agreement for the sale of such supply of water by Minnetonka to Shorewood be consummated; and WHEREAS, in considering the totality of public services to be provided to the Service Area, Shorewood conducted a transportation/ traffic study of the Highway 7 and Vine Hill Road area; and WHEREAS, as a.. result, Shorewood proposed a relocation of the intersection in that area and submitted this plan to the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT); and - 2 - WHEREAS, Minnetonka and other affected municipalities opposed the plan and requested that the Metropolitan Council and MN/DOT conduct a Highway 7 corridor study; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agree- ments herein contained, and in consideration of the installation of certain water mains by Shorewood, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties as follows: 1. Minnetonka will furnish and supply potable water continuously (except for temporary interruptions for repairs and maintenance) from the Minnetonka municipal water system to Shorewood from the water main owned by the City of Minnetonka presently located in the right- of-way of Vine Hill Road in an amount required to service the needs of the Service Area and in compliance with applicable state and federal regulations. and maintain 2. Shorewood shall at its own expense construct^the necessary watermain in the City of Shorewood and make the connections to the Minnetonka water main for the purpose of securing such supply of water, such connections to be made in accordance with the plans and specifications prepared by the Shorewood City Engineer and supplied to Minnetonka and which have been approved by the Minnetonka City Council. Shorewood agrees that upon completion of the construction of its water main, it shall provide Minnetonka with as-built plans and the necessary measurements which accurately describe the location of those mains, all valves, and service connections. 3. Waterous hydrants, ductile iron, lateral pipe, and copper services to the properties shall be approved by the City of Minnetonka. Shorewoodwill comply with all reasonable requireme.nt.s:' of Minnetonka regarding system maintenance. The system shall be operated and maintained in accorqance with the City of Minnetonka ordinances, good public water system practices, and rules and regulations of the Minnesota Department of Health. 4. Permits for a Shorewood owner to connect to the system herein described shall be obtained from Shorewood. Shorewood shall inspect the connections and each service to make sure they conform to all applicable laws and ordinances. The Minnetonka Utility Division shall be contacted for a final inspection and turn-on of the curb service. Rockwell meters reading in 100 gallon increments with outside readers shall be used. Minnetonka will furnish the meters to Shorewood at Minnetonka's cost at the time furnished, if requested by Shorewood. 5. Minnetonka will read the meters and will supply to Shorewood at least quarterl:y,alisting of the readings and the dollar amount charged by Minnetonka for each user. Shorewood shall pay to Minnetonka the total amount of said water charges within 30 days. Water shall be billed to Shorewood at the rate of 125% of the rate - 3 - charged in Minnetonka for the same services. Shorewood shall receive no deductions for billing or other administrative functions performed by it. Shorewood shall require that properties served by Minnetonka water have street numbers on the building. Minnetonka shall have the authority to enter properties served by Minnetonka water to read and maintain the water service. 6. Unless an emergency situation arises, valves shall not be shut down or hydrants operated without first notifying the Minnetonka Utility Division. Hydrants shall not be used or operated by anyone except Shorewood Fire Department personnel or personnel of the Shorewood Public Works Department or the Minnetonka Utility Division. Hydrants shall only be operated for fire or water system maintenance purposes. Minnetonka will not be responsible for, and Shorewood indemnifies Minnetonka against, any costs, including attorneys' fees, arising out of failures, freeze-ups, or leaks, in that portion of the system located in Shorewood, unless caused by actions of Minnetonka within Minnetonka. If Minnetonka makes repairs to that portion of the system located in Shorewood, Minnetonka shall be reimbursed by Shorewood on a time and material basis for the work done. Minnetonka shall not be responsible for settlements in the road surface over the water main or services. 7. Shorewood will abide by and enforce in Shorewood all reasonable nondiscriminatory rules and regulations of Minnetonka imposed upon Minnetonka water users and users of the system covered by this agreement. Shorewood will adopt an ordinance providing for sprinkling bans during periods of water shortages and will enforce that ordinance upon notification from Minnetonka that the ban is necessary. Minnetonka reserves the right to require a sprinkling ban in Shorewood before imposing a similar requirement within Minnetonka boundaries. Minnetonka shall have the right to turn off the mains for reasonable lengths of time to repair or service its mains, and if practicable, will notify affected users of the shutoff. 8. For each user who connects to the Minnetonka water system, the City of Shorewood shall pay to the City of Minnetonka as and for trunk water charges the sum of $20.00 per quarter during the term of this agreement in addition to the regular quarterly water charges. 9. Minnetonka and Shorewood agree that by entering into this agreement, Minnetonka is in no way obligating itself to approve future extensions of water mains within Shorewood, which extensions would be connected to the Minnetonka water system, and that any water service provided by Minnetonka will be limited to a total of 90 residential connections. 10. It is understood by the parties that this agreement for water service shall continue only for such period of time as is reasonably required for the City of Shorewood to complete the construction and installation of its own Municipal Trunk Water Supply and Storage . . ': . - 4 - Facility. It is further understood that such construction and instal- lation will be completed by Shorewood after 90 residential connections have been made pursuant to this agreement, and that the term of this agreement shall in no event exceed a period of four years. To assure timely completion of the Facility, Shorewood must award a contract for construction by April 1, 1989 with a completion date no later than the termination date of this agreement. Shorewood shall post a bond or letter of credit in the amount of $50,000 which shall be for- feited to Minnetonka if Shorewood's Facility is not completed and ready for operation at the termination of this agreement. 11. Shorewood hereby indemnifies and holds harmless Minnetonka, its officers and employees, against all damages and costs, including attorneys' fees, resulting from any claims or litigation arising out of this agreement, except for da~ages and costs related to the acts or omissions of Minnetonka, its officers or employees, with respect to op- peration, maintenance, or administration of the Minnetonka water system within the municipal boundaries of Minnetonka. 12. Neither party shall subcontract or delegate its responsibili- ties or obligations pursuant to this agreement without prior approval of the other. 13. Shorewood and Minnetonka agree to participate in the Highway 7 corridor study presently being conducted by the Metropolitan Council. Both cities agree to negotiate in good faith about the appropriate manner to fund the study. Minnetonka agrees that Shorewood should receive credit for funding of the study to the extent that Shorewood'.s recent study of the Highway 7 and Vine Hill Road intersection is used in the corridor study. Shorewood agrees that it will withdraw its plan for the intersection from Metropolitan Council and Minnesota Dep.ar.tment of Transportation consideration if the plan is inconsistent with the findings and recommendations of the corridor study. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their respective officers through proper authorization by their respective councils. CITY OF MINNETONKA CITY OF SHOREWOOD By: Its By: Mayor Its Mayor By: Its City By: City Manager Manager Its ORR.SCHELEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES. INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors July 17, 1985 -' ~. /' ..1',.. City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 .-/ Attn: Mr. Dan Vogt, Administrator Re: S.E. Water System Timetable Comm. No. 174439 Dear Dan: The timing for the S.E. Water System is very much dependent upon when we are authorized to start on the work. However, the blocks of time to accomplish the work would remain fairly constant. For this reason the attached timetable is a generic representation. Very truly yours, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ f. Y)~ James P. Norton, P.E. City Engineer JPN:nlb Enclosure 2021 East Hennepin Avenue. Suite 238 . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 · 612/331- 8660 ')..et-Z S.E. WATER SYSTEM SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA COMMISSION NO. 174439 JULY 17, 1985 - TIMETABLE - 1. Council authorizes updating Feasibility Report 2. Update Feasibility Report 3. Review and approve Feasibility Report 4. Authorize preparation of Plans & Specifications 5. Prepare Plans and Specifications 2 Weeks A. Deep Well 8 Weeks B. Pumphouse & Reservoir 6. Review and approve Plans and Specifications 12 Weeks Authori ze Ad for Bids 7. Advertisement 5 Weeks 8. Bid and Award 2 Weeks 9. Construction A. Deep Well B. Pumphouse & Reservoir 12 Weeks 52 Weeks NOTE: Some items could be done simultaneously, however, the basic total length of time from Feasibility Report to final construction is approximately 18 months. James P. Norton, P.E. City Engineer \ ( \ 1 I / .) I II J ORR .SCHELEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors Ju 1 Y 17, 1985 ,-" City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Attn: Mr. Dan Vogt, Administrator Re: Street Replacement Project #85-1 Cathcart Area Comma No. 364300 Dear Dan: This letter will discuss a potential timetable for proceeding with Project No. 85-1. I understand it would proceed along the guidelines discussed in the recently adopted assessment policy. As such, it must be handled according to the Minnesota State Statutes, Chapter 429 requirements for assessing all or part of a public project. Attached is the potential timetable. Very truly yours, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. st:. =rt~~ City Engineer JPN:nlb 2021 East Hennepin Avenue. Suite 238 . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 . 612/331- 8660 STREET REPLACEMENT PROJECT NO. 85-1 CATHCART AREA SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA COMMISSION NO. 364300 JUL Y 17, 1985 - TIMETABLE - 1. Feasibility Report 2. Pub 1 i c Heari ng 3. Plans & Specifications 4. Bid Date 5. Award 6. Constructi on 7. Assessment Hearing August, 1985 September, 1985 January, 1986 February, 1986 March, 1986 April, 1986 - July, 1987 August, 1986 James P. Norton City Engi neer ORR.SCHELEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors July 17, 1985 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Attn: Mr. Dan Vogt City Administrator Re: Shorewood Oaks Commission No. 1744.20 Dear Dan: We originally reviewed the Shorewood Oaks proposal in our letter dated June 7, 1984. This letter will further discuss the storm water design which includes the ponding area in Freeman Park. From the Park Commission meeting July 1, 1985 it was noted that the drainage area they allowed for is set up to cover a 24 hour ten year storm. This criteria is significantly different than the Comprehensive Storm Water Study design criteria where ponding areas are designed to control runoff from a 100 year storm. What thi s effectively means is that if a 100 year storm (1% return frequency)occlU"S' and the pondi ng area is sized to store just a 10 year storm the excess runoff will be routed directly downstream with no ponding. This could have a detrimental effect on the drainage channel and adjacent properties downstream. For this reason, we recommend the ponding area in Freeman Park be designed for a 100 year storm. By using a 100 year storm criteria for sizing the ponding area it must be under- stood that the High Water Level (H.W.L) for the pond would be higher than the H.W.L. of 962.5 stated by the developer at the July 1, 1985 Park Commission meeting. As shown in the Comprehensive Storm Water Study, the H.W.L. could reach 969.0. However, at this elevation none of the active park facilities (softball, football/soccer, archery, volleyball) would be affected. While more of the park land would be innundated at elevation 969.0, the water would not stay at this level long enough to cause any permanent damage and the downstream areas would be better protected. The main difference between the high water levels is the design of the outflOW' structure. To store more water the overflow weir elevation would be set at 969 instead of 962.5. Also, as part of the outflow structure design, an 18- equiva- lent pipe would be installed at the invert of the structure (pond bottom) to gradua 11y re li eve the pond duri ng heavy storm water con4i t ions. Duri ng other 2021 East Hennepin Avenue . Suite 238 . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 · 612/331-8660 I 1-1 '-- Page Two Mr. Dan Vogt, Administrator July 17, 1985 time periods it would serve to keep the ponding area dry. This conforms to the Park Commission's decision to leave the pond as planned, so that it will drain within 24 hours. Regardless of how the outflow structure is ultimately designed the existing 48M pipe under the old R.R. tracks will be used. Another item mentioned at the July 1, 1985 Park Commission meeting was the disposal of excavated material from the drainage pond. The Commission suggested the possibility of using the fill in the northeast corner of Freeman Park. Depending on the type of material this sounds satisfactory. However, if the Park Commi ssion has decided not to have a permanent pond in Freeman Park, no sig- ni fi cant excavati on is requi red. The only constructi on needed waul d be the channelization of the existing drainage way to handle the discharge from the storm sewer pipe from the Shorewood Oaks plat and the construction of the outfall structure. By limiting the excavation to these areas more trees could be saved. While it was stated at the July 1, 1985 Park Commission meeting that the engineer has a copy of the plan, it is not an all inclusive plan showing the overall storm water system and the ponding area with the outfall structure. If as a result of the developer changing engineers or as a result of this letter the overall storm water plan has changed, new detailed drawings should be submitted for our review. Very truly yours, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ -P. Y/~ James P. Norton, P.E. City Engineer JPN:mln AI 10 " June 27, 1985 PETITION REGARDING SHADY ISLAND ************************************************************** We, the undersigned, oppose the granting of a permit to allow a helicopter landing site to be installed at Shady Island Point in Shorewood. We oppose such a permit because we find that such a site is not compatible with the quiet residential area of Shady Island. We are all Shorewood residents. NAME 7J1irl/l B:~ .~J-1-.- If-j~ - jM;1JUtvUJr ~v 9v~ /cy 1~IV.LbW/J?~ ,a(~4 ~-,'l'{ rJlth::;- ~" ! rn_~,~ (:tj~) {fa '/}~, " 04/E (i 7~ .;~!..bl[.J .... 'I~J / I / ~(/I /2 .14~~i~t0 " ;{\-,J2 v ttvfb. ~h~ .-- ~40 ,... ~/'(/~...,.~". ,.,., l:) - _ _ " ?: >". i j('. .'. '1.,. -,,-' , ; ;'1 - ,> ,Ce.,' c~ _i9'~ .-c JJej.....,/ j . /r.d~~ ---& _~_ ADDRESS ~99D ~ !r?b " d?t '~'ih..,f f'l).> k--!;r y~ M ~7b1~ ~ -#4~fL 'I7))-~~# ~C;5S.vJ~ td&4d,;() , 30 t/ ? $"I)/'I//'[ =r .5//7,.; 12 ~p, J 0(;; 5 S#/lj) !-t s: /, (h<l j) iD l,} _'... ~" J I k} )8.#,-, 'F J ((A'VI/ /2.eX,. ;: /) / S"~.) 6' _,-<1'4 Lly ~jd l1.F/ ezv ~'-J )- j-#vJy U~J N( n LS' :2-Lr. U~j 12'./ Si. L- ,1 Ji (~\a(~ ~ l~l~cjl.H()\lJ~"ctL . 52Y D .s; t..p-.7 Is. I-Y' J LIVt:./-e I L/ b . . :r~~" ..JhN~. -- V~b!C~ ~( <f~3~ ~ ~~ 5/~) )-- )4" ~." Lt:d '-- 5I~(} ~f(1J.j, g;;, ~ -A --- ......?ZJc:;t:'k. .,. V Ja-;vJ.c:7 ~/~ 5U60~~~d'~~ if:$) ~d-~ Ce,4~ 'i-'lg'O ~QU ~(v ?Z <!:JO ~,.e?V ~t<J:? 7RA!' c::..... FI b<J At1' ~ ~ t/9'r'o5~~Y;Itw/ 4:12 - ~~~~ ~ t. c-~ L/CfQo ~ ~ k. ~ Mill S.s-~bt/ J TO: Dan Vogt City Administrator City of Shorewood FROM: Rolf Erickson City Assessor RE; 1986 Assessment Fee DATE: July 12, 1985 Dan, The current contract language is ok. New term-September 1, 1985 through August 31, 1986 Contract amount $18,800.00 Payable in 12 installments of $1566.66 Starting on the last day of September, 1985 and ending on the last day of August, 1986. Please let me know if you have any questions. R~. ti.~. I L _ . UW~ko- - STEPHEN L. LARSON, M.D., P.A. e;~~g~ SUITE 600 SOUTH DALE MEDICAL BLDG. 6545 FRANCE AVE. SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435 July 1, 1985 RIDGES HEALTH CENTER 200 EAST NICOLLET BLVD. BURNSVILLE, MINNESOTA 55337 TEL. 920-2200 The City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Rd. Shorewood, MN 55331 To Whom It May Concern: We, the undersigned, live at the end of Shore Road, which is a small, dead- end street in Shorewood. There have been recent episodes of late night activities and noise by nonresidents in this area, to the point of being a nuisance to us. Therefore, we request that the City of Shorewood place a street light on the telephone pole which is almost at the easterly end of Shore Road. ~d~ Stephen L. Larson ~. ~ +-~~ ~ SLL:jh c He 4382 (8/83) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA vs MUNICIPAL COUR 3d DIVISION COMPLAINT X SOMMONS WARRANT CALENDAR 0, Plaintiff, Michael Blood Defendant Name first, middle, last Da te of Birth 24590 Smithtown Road, Shorewood, Minnesota Defendant Address 55331 Zip Code Calendar Da' COMPLAINT Bradley J. Nielsen ; Complainant, being duly sworn, makes complaint to the above-namE Court and states that there is probable cause to believe that the Defendant committed the followir Y offense(~).. The complainant .slates thatfthe fpllowin2 fachts establish PROBABLE CAUSEd: . th our CompIalnant lS a bUl clng 0 ficlal tor t e Clty of Shorewood an ln e course of his duties inspected property owned and occupied by the Defendant, Michael Blood, at 24590 Smithtown Road in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Your Complainant inspected the property on 12 an 24 June 1985. On these occasions Complainant informed Defendant that his prope was in violation of Shorewood Ordinances and stated that the following items in the exterior portions of the property should be removed: assorted car parts -- fenders, windshields, hoods, engine blocks, automobile chassis, etc.; a housebc loaded with carpet~rrg and other materials; an old wooden boat with a broken lawnmower sitting on it; scrap metal; rolls of old, wet carpeting; various household items, including a bathtub, stove, refrigerator, and furniture; rolls fence; rubbish, including bottles, cans, old tires, etc. The assorted car part are used in Defendant's car repair business which he operates on his property. During both of the inspections, Complainant noticed three vehicles in inoperabl condition. Further investigation revealed that each of the three vehicles was owned by someone other than Defendant or a member of his family. Defendant was notified by a letter dated 28 June 1985 of the above violations. OFFENSES: Based on the foregoing, your Complainant states that on and between June 1985 and 24 June 1985 the Defendant then and there being did: Count One: abandon a vehicle on public or private property, or fail, neglect, or refuse to remove or house an abandoned vehicle in violation of Shorewood City Ordinance Number 72, Section 4. Count Two: place upon his premises abandoned, discarded objects or equipment in violation of Shorewood City Ordinance Number 95, Sectic 3. Count Three: engage in an occupation or profession conducted in a dwelling accessory building, or upon a parcel of land containing a dwelling unit, where there was exterior storage of equipment or materials used in a home occupation violation of Shorewood City Zoning Ordinance Section 200.03, Subd. 12(d) (1) (e). WH. ER.. .,EF. OR.. E,. C..o. .mPla.in3?nt rays.. th.. at sai.d.. offender may be arrested and dealt with according to law. '~I //'/ , //.. /.::: //" "' ..-- ,. - - L/'''' . g';7 ./ / . I /7-' . ./"-, .,/.- " . .:... L.-~ :.- ~ /;/.. . ./'2- ~~ '- ----- ,---- Prosecutor's/ Name.&---5igna ture Section Sworn to and subscribed and complained of before me this "'1- _ _ _