The URL can be used to link to this page

100785 CC Reg AgP '4 w,~ " CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. AGE N D A CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance and prayer B. Roll Call Haugen Shaw Stover Gagne Rascop ~ ,.." Mayor ~ =Z 1. APPROVAL OF.MINUTES A. Regular Council Meeting - September 23, 1985 (Attachment la. - Minutes) B. Budget Review - September 18, 1985 (Attachment lb. - Minutes) C. Budget Review - September 25, 1985 (Attachment lc. - Minutes) 2. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR A. B. 3. CONSENT AGENDA A. Appointment of new Park Commission Member - Carolyn Squires (Refer to Park Commission Minutes 9/30/85) B. Project No. 85-2 - Payment Voucher #1 and Final - Allied Blacktop Company. (Attachment 3b. - payment voucher, C. Video Update-Commercial Remodel Permit Applicant: Video Update Location: 19465 State Highway 7 (Attachment 3c. - Staff Memo) " COUNCIL AGENDA - 2 - OCTOBER 7, 1985 CONSENT AGENDA (CONTINUED) D. Sign permit Appl~eant: Dale and Peggy Sheldon Location: 6000 Chaska 3d. - Staff Memo) Motion moved by 4. 5. Seconded by Vote . ~ ~ PUBLIC HEARING - ACCEPTANCE OF DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITIES ROLL PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT A. B. 6. PARK COMMISSION REPORT A. B. ~~ 7. irfJ \J ~) PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT - PREAPPLICATION Applicant: E.G. Rosenthal Location: 5405 St. Alban's Bay Road (Attachment 7a. - Staff Report) /' 8. SIMPLE SUBDIVISON AND VARIANCE REQUEST Applicant: ShenehonjGoodlund Location: 5285 Shady Island Road (Attachment 8a. - Staff Report) (Attachment 8b. - Hansen Letter) (Attachment 8e. - Petitions) 9. BUDGET APPROVAL - 1986 10. MURFIN PROPERTY PURCHASE 11. WATERFORD - ASSESSMENTS ROLLS ~ v . ~ u " . COUNCIL AGENDA - 3 - OCTOBER 7, 1985 12. ATTORNEY'S REPORT A. Update - Blood Violation B. Update - Naegele Litigation C. 13. ENGINEER'S REPORT A. B. PLANNER'S REPORT A. Status Report - Koehnen - Plumbing Violation Adoption of P.U.D. Zoning - Robert S.C. Peterson Addition (Attachment 14b. - Draft Ordinance) 15. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT A. Bookkeeper Appointment - Kathleen Schwankl B . If\.-lt,lL~ ~~v.-/' 16. MAYOR'S REPORT A. B. 17. COUNCIL REPORTS 18. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND ADJOURNMENT .., \ (.:;, .. C j......f "'~7'. .,. '" I~ f J./-J ,~t.. ~. ,t CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, SPETEMBER 23, 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, Septemb~r 23, 1985 in the City Hall 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, Councilmembers Haugen, Shaw, Stover, and Gagne. Staff: Atttorney Froberg, Engineer Norton, Planner Nielsen, Administrator Vogt, and Clerk Kennelly. ~ , APPROVAL OF MINUTES ,~ ~ Gagne moved, seco~ded by Stover, to approve the minutes of the bUdg~t review and Council meeting of September 9, 1985 with correction in the budget review of the police department. Motion carried - 5 ayes. CONSENT AGENDA PAYMENT VOUCHER APPROVALS Engineer Norton recommended payment of Voucher #7 - Project #84-5- to Kenko, Inc. in the amount of $119,899,84 and Voucher #5 - Project #84-2 to Valley Paving in the amount of $3837.05. Haugen moved, seconded by Shaw, to approve the request as submitted on the Consent Agenda. Motion carried - 5 ayes. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Stover reported on the public hearing held on the proposed lake access on Christmas Lake to be donated to the City by the Christmas Lake Association. The Committee also discussed the issue of boat storage on residential lots. ,<// #' " ,I (y",~i/U v) -Y1 \ ,v , v ,j J/'/ . ;1 t'/ ", 1/ de ljLlyd /ff . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 2 - SEPTEMBER 23. 1985 PARK COMMISSION REPORT Gagne indicated that an applicant for the vacancy on the Committee has been interviewed. The Committee will make an appointment recommendation to the Council at a later date. They are currently reviewing park expenditures, and working on monies expended to date on Freeman Park separately. CHRISTMAS LAKE ACCESS DONATION DISCUSSION LAKE ACCESS CONCEPT APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 77-85 Frank Fallon, President of the Christmas Lake Association, and members Steve Bruce and Heidi Larson were present to request a Resolution supporting the concept of their proposal to donate an improved lake access on Christmas Lake to the City. They would like that Resolution passed onto the DNR. Mr. Fallon reviewed the DNR efforts to obtain an access on the Brook's property by means of condemnation. The Association has modified their original plan byaqding a boat ramp and donating the area to the City for it's control. They do feel that the proposed plan of 3 car/boat trailer parking spaces does comply with the state regulations requiring parking facilities equal to daily usage. The average daily boat usage is 2.7 by it's lake residents. They do understand the Planning Commission's concerns on road width access, and design. They will be returning with a final plan and understand that a continuation of the public hearing will be held for further public input. Council discussed the agreement that contains a "reverter clause" if another access is placed on Christmas Lake. Attorney Froberg did feel this agreement should have some time limits to protect the City from lose of maintenance expense. Bruce felt there would be very minimal expense to the Cit~ as the access site would be given to the City completely improved by the Association and at their expense. Gagne moved, seconded by Shaw, to approve the Resolution as recommended by the Planning Commission and submit that Resolution to the DNR. Resolution was adopted by roll call vote - 5 ayes. PLUMBING CODE VIOLATION - 23690 GILLETTE CURVE Harlan Koehnen, owner of a house located at 23690 Gillette Curve was present to answer a plumbing code violation complaint. The violation is for allowing occupancy of a home that has no water supply. This home is currently occupied and rented by Mr. Koehnen to Beryl Niccum. ' Mr. Koehnen explained that after he received the notification of violation, he went to Attorney Froberg's office for explanation. Mr. Froberg was unavailable at that time. Council felt that he should have responded to the CityPlanner Nielsen, the originator of the letter and that he has had time to respond. Haugen stated . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 3 - SEPTEMBER 23, 1985 PLUMBING CODE VIOLATION ~ 23690 GILLETTE CURVE ~(CONTINUED) that it is the City's job to make sure that water is available to its residents. Koehnen stated that he can not and does not receive enough money from this tenant to make necessary improvements. Council felt that was between his tenant and himself to determine. Council directed that the home be supplied water by October 7, 1985. Mr. Koehnen did agree. There is a municipal water system available for hook-up to that home. SIGN PERMIT-MINNETONKA BANK -23780StateHighway7 Planner Nielsen requested a sign permit be Bank. The request will not alter the size it will only alter the copy on that sign. under the Ordinance presently in effect. issued to the Minnetonka of the existing sign, The sign is non-conforming Gagne moved, seconded by Stover, to approve the sign permit subject to no increase in size or height, just change in copy.. Motion carried- 5 ayes. POLICE COMMITTEE UPDATE REPORT Haugen reported on the Committee meeting held to discuss a new Police fOTITlllla This will determine the basis on each cities contribution to the support ot the police department, and to the length"of the contract period. Council then discussed various methods of determining each cities contribution; road mileage, population, assessed valuation, set mills, demand, tickets issued, in City time, variations and/or combination of these. Shaw moved, seconded by Rascop, to base formula on 100% of demand, by means of a 5 year phasing program by adding 10% demand each year onto the 50% demand rate that currently exists, phasing out mileage first and then population. The 100% demand would thenh~ve5 years experience to be based upon. Motion carried - 4 ayes, 1 nay (Stover) and will be returned to the Committee as a recommendation. The Council then discussed the length of the police contract. Stover was in favor of a long term contract as long as the department continues to operate at the present efficient level or improves further. Concerns that cost caps may have to be included in case levy limitations are imposed when Shorewood reaches 5000 population, causing limited revenues. Froberg d~d~ feel that therp ~re ~ number1L.tL~~ of ways contracts can be ~n ~f a real problem occurs. =~ Contract years were discussed in relationship to the issuance of bonds for the newly proposed police department building. The question of the status of the condemnation of the site in Excelsior for the proposal in police department, was brought up. . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 4 - SEPTEMBER 23, 1985 POLICE COMMITTEE UPDATE REPORT (CONTINUED) Will Excelsior have control within the 180 days limit, as agreed upon? Froberg indicated that "control" may be achieved within that period of time. The Council again offered to build a new police department building on the Shorewood site, and would agree to changing the original conditions suggested by the Park Commission. Stover offered a motion to be sent back to the Police Committee; Shorewood would guarantee that a police department would exist for the joint powers cities for 25 years if the police building was built by Shorewood or Excelsior would be expected to supply the same guarantee if built by Excelsior. Rascop suggested that Shorewood should have 1 additional represent- ative on the police board because of the portion of the contribution made by the City. Haugen and Shaw will return to the Police Gommittee with all the suggestions made by the Council. TONKA BAY WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT Council reviewed the new agreement and felt that the connection fees are too excessive for water connections. Haugen moved, seconded by Gagne to reject the new agreement as sub- mitted. Motion carried - 5 ayes. Shaw instructed the Administrator to notify Tonka Bay of the areas of the Agreement that the City did not support. ENGINEER'S REPORT WATERFORD SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS Engineer Norton informed the Council that. October 7th .is the deadline to approve the assessment rolls on the Waterford - Project No. 84-5 to be certified to the County in order to be placed on next years tax statements. Norton has obtained waivers from the affected owners to eliminate the need foran assessment hearings. ATTORNEY'S REPORT BLOOD JUNK COMPLAINT Attorney Froberg stated that Mr. Blood has called the courts and has said he is willing to voluntarily surrender. To date, he has not. Gagne moved, seconded by Stover, to authorize the Attorney to send notification listing all items to be removed within 10 days . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 5 - SEPTEMBER 23, 1985 ATTORNEY'S REPORT ~ (CONTINUED) BLOOD JUNK COMPLAINT (CONTINUED) or the City will proceed to remove and charge back the expense to the property. Motion carried - 4 ayes, 1 nay (Shaw). NAEGELE SIGN LITIGATION No response has been received on the Naegele Agreement. directed the Attorney to continue to try to correspond. would like the report at the next meeting. Council Rascop ADMINISTRATOR REPORT WATER REQUEST - 5810 CLUB ROAD Council directed to respond to Mrs. Pike and inform her that there isn't muncipal water available at that site, nor plans to extend water to that area~ STREET LIGHT PETITION - GALPIN LANE Haugen moved, seconded by Stover, to authorize the installation of a street light at the corner of Galpin Lane and Galpin Lake Road as requested by a petition. Motion carried - 5 ayes. DNR MEETING The DNR is in the process of trying to obtain an access on Lake Minnetonka at the Kings Point area in Minnetrjsta again. WEDGEWOOD ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Vogt and Dutcher looked at the condition of Wedgewood Road. Mr. Dutcher has decided to dig out and replace some areas of that road and leave until spring. The condition of the road in the spring will determine how he will proceed with additional repairs. AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE POST HOLE DIGGER A request to purchase a post hole digger for $825.00 has been made by Public Works. This equipment would be installed on the City tractor. Gagne moved, seconded by Shaw, to approve the request. Motion carried - 5 ayes. . . REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - 6 - SEPTEMBER 23, 1985 MAYOR'S REPORT MURFIN PROPERTY DISCUSSION Mayor Rascop reported on a meeting with Mr. Murfin to discuss the purchase price offer submitted by the City. Murfin has not agreed to reduce his price, and has asked that we remove our water connect- ion that services the City garage and office buildings. There was only a verbal agreement to connect to that line, no easement was acquired. Attorney Froberg will return with information on "easement by prescription". The Council wants the water connection to be made to the Badger Well. Haugen moved, seconded by Stover, to direct the Attorney to research this matter and return with a report at the next meeting. Motion carried - 5 ayes. COUNCIL REPORTS FEUERSTEIN REQUEST Shaw submitted a request by Mr. & Mrs. Feuerstein to rework their sewer use to reflect a single family use, not two family as is currently billed. They are willing to remove a stove from the second kitchen and will submit a letter agreeing to relinquish any further rights to rent a second unit in their home. Shaw moved, seconded by Rascop, to forgive past due balance, if any, for the pa~;t: year on any second unit charged. Motion carried - 5 ayes. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND ADJOURNMENT Haugen moved, seconded by Gagne, to adjourn the Regular Council meeting of September 23, 1985 subject to approval of Claims for Payment at 10!20 P.M. Motion carried unanimously - 5 ayes. General Fund - Acct. #00166-02 Checks 31046-31112=$170,985.72 Liquor Fund - Acct. #00174 Checks 3868- 3014=$ 35,839.98 Respectfully submitted, Sandra L. Kennelly City Clerk Mayor Rascop . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD BUDGET REVIEW MEETING WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER The Budget Review meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Rascop, on Wednesday, September 18, 1985 in the Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Rascop, Council members, Gagne, Haugen, and Shaw (Stover absent). Staff: Administrator Vogt, Planner/Building Inspector Nielsen, Finance Director Beck, Public Works Director Zdrazil, and Clerk Kennelly. BUDGET REVIEW These areas of the Budget were reviewed by departments, one at at time. Some areas within these departments have been previously addressed at prior budget review meetings: Administrator - Department #52 - Salaries within this department include 100% or the Administrator salary and 25% of the Planning Assistant/Administrative Secretary position based on $1500.00 a month. The budget will also reflect a lump sum figure of $192.00 to have the Administrator's insurance coverage under his wife's hospitalization policy. General Government Services - Department #53 - Resident Beal questioned the need for the position of City Clerk. He felt this job could be incorporated with the Administrator's position. The clerk reviewed some of the duties required by state statute, and assured him that there were far too many responsibilities presently being handled by that position to be incorporated with the Administrator's job. Beal did not agree. Finance Committee member Malooly questioned the job responsibility of the Deputy Clerk and wondered if the salary was based upon the title. Vogt felt the salary was based upon the job duties with various "Stanton" job titles used to determine salary range. The Council discussed each of the other line items in that department. 16 . . BUDGET REVIEW MEETING - 2 - WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1985 Finance - Department #54 - Salaries were discussed along with the issue of a new employee to be hired for bookkeeping duties. Shaw moved, seconded by Gagne, to set sal~ry for new book- keeper at $1300. a month and 200 hours of overtime in that area. Motion carried - 4 ayes (Stover absent). Rascop suggested that financial statements could be submitted to Council and Finance Committee on a quarterly basis only, with cash flow statements to be received on a monthly basis. Council and Finance Committee did agree. Audit expense is projected to increase 9%. Fonte suggested to offer a 4% increase or go out for bids. Computer training expenses were questioned. Gagne felt that possibly supervisory should be trained and then do "in house" training to alleviate additional training costs. Professional Services - Department #55 - Staff feel ifiat~ngineer- ing expenses are being kept down by proper distribution to project areas, that are then being paid for by the developers, etc. Attorney expenses are also being allocated out where it applies and the use of an assistant for prosecutions, helps to keep the cost down. Haugen questioned whether bidding would save the City money. Brad felt Cl1rrent costs were reasonable. Assessor contract is set at $18,950., this includes a very minor increase. Finance Committee Fonte asked for total dollars received by O.S.M. (City's Engineering firm), this figure was not presently available. The Finance Committee will be looking into various ways to reduce costs in that area. Suggest- ion to "bid out", or "in house Engineer" will be looked into. Planning and Zoning - Department #56 - Salary percentages were corrected to show 70% Planner/Building Inspector and 40% of Planner Assistant. Printing and Rublishing costs will include map updates" zoning ordinance publication. i Munici al Bulldln - Cit Hall - De artment #57 - Council suggeste t at a consi erat~on e ma e in t e purchase of a new copier. Item #23 ($300.00) was deleted. Telephone equipment purchase may be made this year and may cause some differences in allocation. Council would like to see specific breakdown on item #39 - Utilities. Insurance costs have increased from $17,485. to $45,000. This $45,000. figure is not firm because no policy has been obtained as yet, present company has notified us of cancellation. Fonte asked if a long term contract would prohibit cancellations and high rate increase. Shaw indicated that long term insurance contracts were not available. Beck directed to check on item #52 to determine reasons for variation in yearly expenses on special assessments. . . BUDGET REVIEW MEETING - 3 - WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1985 Police - Department #58 - Ha~gen does not agree with Chief Young on the hiring of a juvenile officer. She is concerned that any grants obtained to subsidize this officer will soon be lost and the total cost will then have to be covered by the cities. She feels the cities should allocate funds to the police instead of the police requesting what they want. Young stated that in the past 5 years there has only been a $30,000.00 increase in expenses. Gagne asked Young what would have to be done if the Council approved only $285,000 for their budget. Young indicated that the budget work would have to be redone. Ma1001y felt the budget should stay the same as 1985. Council discussed whether the new siren should be considered. Fire Protection - De~artment #59 - Excelsior fire contract has increased 5.6%, Moun contract reduced by 9%. Council would like to see a yearly financial statement. Protective Inspection - Dehartment #60 - Item #37 for car expenses is a new item listed for t e Building inspections. Bea1 would like to see an estimate costs of service for animal patrol from additional companies. These costs should be in the form of a contract. Council discussed the purchase of equipment to add onto the present computer system. This area will be researched in depth to best determine the type of service needed for this area. Public Works Service- De~artment #61 - Council would like a break down of salaries an over-time pay and on-call pay. Item #22 - small tools was reduced from $1000 to $500. A new dump truck is projected for purchase. An addition of $3000 was replaced in #62 for pressure water for washing vehicles. City Garage Public Works - Department #62 - Council would like to see Item #35 - laundry service bid out to see if a lower price can be obtained. Streets and Roadways - Department #63 - Hauler costs are included for sand and salt deliveries. Sea1coating and road repairs costs is a yearly attempt to maintain existing streets. Ma1001y asked if a referendum could be held to do a City wide street replace- ment. This could be done, but hope it is not necessary. CABLE BUDGET APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 78-85 Gagne submitted the Cable Commission budget for approval. Haugen moved, seconded by Gagne, to approve the budget as submitted. Motion carried by roll call vote - 4 ayes, (Stover absent) . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD BUDGET REVIEW MEETING WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO-ORDER The Budget Review Meeting was called to order by Mayor Rascop at 7:30 P.M. on Wednesday, September 25, 1985, in the Council Chambers. ROLL. CALL Present: Mayor Rascop, Councilmembers, Stover, Gagne, Haugen, and Shaw. Staff: Administrator Vogt, Finance Director Beck, Public Works Director Zdrazil~ Planner/Building Inspector Nielsen, and Clerk Kennelly. BUDGET.REVIEW The Budget review began with the continuation of individual depart- mental budget beginning with Department #64. SNOW AND ICE REMOVAL -DEPARTMENT 64 Vogt indicated that past history use was the only way; this cost could be estimated. The Budget does reflect a small increase in the cost of salt and sand and salaries. TRAFFIC CONTROL ~ DEPARTMENT 65 Increases in this department were reflected in additional electrical cost and traffic light maintenance. Gagne would like all charges of maintenance verified prior to payment. Haugen would like contract changes made with Greenwood and Deephaven to reflect a more equitable sharing of expenses on the traffic lights at Vine Hill Road and Christmas Lake Road. STREET LIGHTING.- DEPARTMENT 66 Additional expense has been added in this area due to rate increases and the addition of more street lights over last years service. Shaw requested that a street light survey be done by Public Works and submitted to the Council upon completion. SANITATION/WASTE REMOVAL/WEEDS - DEPARTMENT 67 ,The area of City clean-up was previously reduced from~6000 and ~5000, Zdrazil feels that this will not be enough to clean-up City /C/ . . BUDGET REVIEW MEETING - 2 - SEPTEMBER 25, 1985 SANITATION/WASTE REMOVAL/WEEDS- DEPARTMENT 67 (CONTINUED) property as previously directed by Council. This area will be reviewed later. TREEMAINTENACE - DEPARTMENT 68 Expenses in this area have been primarily subsidized through allocated CDBG Funds. Stover wants to make sure that the budget amendment does not create the appearance that the money has not already been expended. PARKS AND RECREATION/BEACHES ~.DEPARTMENT 69 Gagne questioned whether the proposed improvements for Freeman Park would cause additional expense over the allocated figures. Cost of total chemical toilets used and if the BMX track supplies their own~ were questioned. SALARY.REVIEW Finance Director Beck did a comparison of 1984 actual, versus 1986 proposed salaries. Additional salaries were added to the Park budget to compensate for the possible loss of funding for Tree Trust employees. Beck stated that all salaries should be pooled together for more accurate comparisons and distributed after final approval has been made. Shaw would also like to see line item totals. Overtime has been place in Finance area; this would cover the compliance with the new requirement by the State Labor Standards Act. WELL. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Beal wanted the Council to set another budget meeting for September 26 or 27 to get ~he Well Committee recommendations. He stated that the Committee expected to have their recommendations completed soon. They felt that those recommendations may have a bearing on the budget. Council set the next Budget Review meeting for 7:30 - September 30, 1985. PROFESSIONAL-SERVICES.~.DEPARTMENT55 Engineer John Badalich of O.S.M. was present to explain their billing procedures. They charge $40.00 for the attendance, of the Engineer at two Council meetings a month, charging extra for projects as directed by Council. Their bills are itemized by project and by the various Engineers working on the project. This enables the City to charge expenses back to the individual projects. . . BUDGET REVIEW MEETING - 3 - SEPTEMBER 25, 1985 PROFESSIO~AL.SERVICES- DEPARTMENT 55. (CONTINUED) Shaw questioned the possibility of asked for bids on Engineering services in 1986. Council reviewed the cost of legal services; the present budgeted costs is $46,700. Lt. Hodgdon stated the Attorney writes up 10~15 formal complaints monthly, and is required to be at Court at 9:00 in the morning on Court days, even if he is not called until afternoon. He suggested an in-house Attorney for the police department that would service the 4 joint powers cities. This would also free an officer from running information, copies, and misc other duties, back and forth to the various City Attorneys' offices. FINANCE~ DEPARTMENT 54 Reduction in financial statement cost and a reduction of 5% in audit expense have been made. POLICE.- DEPARTMENT. 58. The installation of a siren for $ 15,000 was put back into the budget, this will follow the proposed plan to siren the south lake area. Council discussed the 7% increase over last years budget. The addition of a juvenile officer was discussed again. Stover informed them that we could not guarantee additional support of this position next year, if a grant cannot be obtained to help subsidize this position. Rascop, Gagne, and Stover were in support of allocating $291,971., as requested, to the 1986 Budget for police protection. FIRE PROTECTION - DEPARTMENT 59. Additional cost of $2240. is for added services of a new fire marshall. We are being charged according to use. PROTECTIVE INSPECTION - DEPARTMENT 60 Nielsen's list of equipment purchases has changed, but the new equipment costs have remained approximately the same. Haugen moved, seconded by Gagne, to remove the equipment purchase of $6,860.00, after much discussion. Motion carried - 5 ayes. CONCERNED CITIZENS LETTER -. (9~14-85) Beal feels the City does not have an over all plan established to follow in the best interest of the residents. He would like to see a road survey done and followed. Rascop indicated that this has been done for the past two years. Each year, streets are listed for repairs alP sealcoating. Zdrazil has set up a five year program for road repairs~ If the current or future budgets . . BUDGET REVIEW MEETING - 4 - SEPTEMBER 25, 1985 CONCERNED CITIZENS LETTER (9~14~85) (CONTINUED) are cut, this will prolong the program. Frazier feels that other areas should have a program like this established. Nielsen referred to. the C.I.P. plan of 20 years done for the Metro Council. COUNCIL BREAK - 11:00 - 11:08 SALARY DISCUSSION Stover would like to see the individual employees listed with their salaries. Beal thinks that the job titles are not being met and that these positions are over paid. Council would like salaries at the '84 and '85 levels and proposed 1986 salaries listed for the next budget review. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, seconded by Haugen, to adjourn the Budget Review Meeting of September 25, 1985, at 11:34 P.M. Motion carried - unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Sandra L. Kennelly City Clerk Mayor Rascop ~ ',< . . ORR.SCHELEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INt Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors October 2, 1985 City of Shore~ood 5755 Country Club Road Shore~ood, Hn~ 55331 Re : Seal Coating and Appurtenant York Project No. 85-2 Gent1ellen : Enclosed are four (4) copies of Construction PaYBent Voucher No.1 and Final on the referenced project in the amount of S 45,400.72. Pursuant to our field observation) as perforlled in accordance ~ith our contract, ~e hereby certify that the raaterials are satisfactory and the work properly perforraed in accordance ~ith the plans and specifications. Upon receipt of affidavit, State of Hinnesota Forra 134, and also Receipt and Yaiver of lien Rights frOll Allied Blacktop Co., please lIake paYBent to Allied Blacktop Co., 10503-89th Ave. No., Haple Srove, Minnesota 55369 at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours, . I . ORR-SCHELEN-HAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. r f 1h~ Janes P. Norton,P.E. Project Engineer JPN:RSO Enclosures: Allied Blacktop Co. 2021 East Hennepin Avenue . Suite 238 . Minneapolis,Minnesota55413. 612/331-8660 3B \., E5ti~ate Voucher No. . ClJiSTRUCTllJi PAYliEN'T VOUCHER . 1 & Final Dah Oct ober 2, 19B5 For Period Ending Septe~ber 18, 19B5 Project Number 85-2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Class of Work Seal Coating and Appurtenant Work ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For To : Allied Blacktop Co. ______________________________________________________ 10503-89th Ave. No. Street in Shor~ood Maple Grove, Mn. 55369 ------------------------------------------------------ Ph. (612)-425-0575 City of Shore~ood, Hennepin County, Minnesota locat i on A.Original Contract ;nount $ 51298.50 B. Total Additions $ 0.00 C. Total Deductions $ 0.00 D. Total Funds Encumbered $ 51298.50 E. Total Value of Work Certified to Date f 45400.72 F. less Retained Percentage Yo $ 0.00 G. less Total Previous Pa~ents $ H. Approved for Pament, This Report f 45400.72 I. Total Pa~ents Including This Voucher $ 45400.72 J. Balance Carried Fo~ard f 5897.78 APPR(PJAlS ORR-SCHELEN-HAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Pursuant to our field observation, as perfo~ed in accordance ~ith our contract, ~e hereby certify that the materials are satisfactory and the ~ork properly performed in accordance ~ith the plans and specifications and that the total ~ork is 100 Yo calpleted as of September 18, 1985 . We hereby rec~end paynent of this voucher. Signed: -------------------------------S. d r~ ..o}l-L- Igne : - f ,~ y.~ ~_4:o..~ I L .......{...'" ~ ---------------------------------------- ---~---)i---------------i ---------------- Construction Observer _/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This i~ to certify that to the best of my kn~ledge, information, and belief, the quantities and values of work certified herein is a fair approxinate estimate for the period covered by this voucher. . Contractor Allied Blacktop Co. Signed By ------------------------------------------------- Oat! : Tith ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- City of Shor~ood Approved for Paynent Voucher ------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------- Checked By : Authorized Representative Date Date ------------------------------------------------- Page J of 2 033-3655 . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCIL Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 1 OCTOBER 1985 RE: VIDEO UPDATE - COMMERCIAL BUILDING PERMIT FILE NO. 404 (GENERAL) Young Construction and Remodeling has requested a building permit to remodel the interior of the Video Update store located at 19465 State Highway 7. In addition to general interior redecorating they propose to build a small office and a storage room. They also plan to rearrange and install new counter space. All remodeling will be done within the confines of the existing first floor. As a commercial building permit, it requires approval by the City Council. cc: Dan Vogt A Rp~irlpnti;+' rnmmlfnitv nn lakp. Minnptnnka~<: Snuth .<>hnrP. " I . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad S,haw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt . 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 1 OCTOBER 1985 RE: SHELDON, PEGGY - SIGN PERMIT FILE NO. 404 (GENERAL) Dale and Peggy Sheldon, owners of the office building located at 6000 Chaska Road, have requested a sign permit for their property. They propose a free- standing, 3' x 6' sign to be located on the Highway 7 side of their building, 10 feet back from the right-of-way. The sign will contain panels identifying various tennants of the building. The proposed sign complies with the requirements of the R-C zoning district in which the property is located. Section 200.03 Subd. 11 F. (1) requires Council approval of sign permits. cc: Dan Vogt A Rp~irlpntial Cnmml/nitv on I.akp Minnp.tonka~~ South Shore '3D ~ . . 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 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 26 SEPTEMBER 1985 RE: ROSENTHAL, E.G. - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (PREAPPLICATION STAGE) FILE NO: 405 (85.30) BACKGROUND Mr. E.G. (Gene) Rosenthal has requested preapplication review of a comprehensive plan amendment to develop an office complex on property located at 5405 St. Alban's Bay Road and 20095 Excelsior Boulevard (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). The applicant proposes to construct two, two-story buildings containing a total of 44,800 square feet of area. As shown on Exhibit B, the property in question consists of two parcels of land containing approx- imately 5.2 acres and occupied by two single family residences. The two houses will be removed from their current locations and possibly relocated on two lots to be created on the Excelsior Boulevard side of the property. The property is currently zoned R-2A, Single and Two Family Residential. Surrounding land use and zoning as follows: North and West: East: South: Single family residential, zoned R-2A Church, zoned R-2A State Highway 7 then park property, zoned R-1A and fruit and vegetable stand (proposed commercial portion of the Trivesco P.U.D.) The property is currently designated as low to medium density residential (2.3 units per acre) in the comprehensive plan. The applicant proposes A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore 7 . . PLANNER'S MEMO ROSENTHAL - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (PREAPPLICATION STAGE) 26 SEPTEMBER 1985 page two that the land use designation be changed to commercial. Upon favorable review of the preapplication stage of the amendment process, the applicant would make formal application to amend the plan and simultaneously request a rezoning from R-2A to R-C, Residential Commercial. A cond- itional use permit would also be required for offices in an R-C district. ISSUES AND ANALYSIS As you are aware, the comprehensive plan amendment process is divided into two stages. Preapplication stage gives an applicant the opportunity to present his ideas to the Planning Commission and City Council on a rather informal basis and without spending a great deal of money on detailed plans. Yet, sufficient information is provided for the City to concept- ually evaluate the proposal and provide further direction to the applicant. Presumably then the applicant can better gear his formal application to addressing questions and concerns of the community. ' The basis for evaluation of the proposal is the Policy Plan ~hapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development should be compared to goals and policies contained therein. Following are the major elements to be considered: A. Land Use. There appear to be two primary issues relative to land use - marketability and potential impact on the surrounding neighor- hood. The market for office space has, in the past, been ident- ified as being somewhat "soft". This has been verified ~o some degree by the continued vacancy of nearly half of the Shorewood Professional Building. If the proposal goes to the formal appli- cation stage, the City should insist upon a land use marketability study demonstrating the current demand for office space in our area. While the R-C zoning district is intended to be used as a transit- ional zone between high and low intensity land uses, the proposed development represents a rather significant change from what h'as been proposed for the area. The land use designation and zoning for the subject property would allow a maximum of 14-15 residential dwelling units. The most significant impact will be the result of traffic generated by the commercial activity.' This will be dis- cussed in greater detail further on in this report. There will undoubtedly be considerable neighborhood ~ppositLon ,~o the proposed commercial development of the site. Residents north of Highway 7 were extremely vocal about the proposed commercial south of the highway. One of their greatest concerns at that time was that commercia,l development would be allowed to "f:reep" across ' the highway. The City will n6 doubt be reminded that residents were assured that commercial development need not and would not be allowed to spread into their neighborhood. . . PLANNER'S MEMO ROSENTHAL - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (PREAPPLICATION STAGE) 26 SEPTEMBER 1985 page three B. Transportation (Traffic). This is probably the greatest area of concern relative to this proposal. One of the first problems identified to the developer was that access to the site is consid- ered inadequate for the proposed use. Traffic leaving the site going west and coming to the site from the east will have direct access to the highway. Traffic leaving the site to the east or coming to the site from the west will have to find its way from the Vine Hill Road intersection along Excelsior Boulevard or from the Christmas Lake Road intersection along the service road and St. Alban's Bay Road. Additional traffic along both of these routes will impact residents north of Highway 7. It should be noted that the City considered the possibility of creating a full intersection for Old Market Road (proposed for the Trivesco P.U.D. to the south). This alternative was dismissed due to the result it would have on traffic patterns to the north. Furthermore, the Department of Transportation has yet to approve even the proposed half intersection for Old Market Road. As you are aware, the decision on that proposal has been delayed pending a corridor study of Highway 7. Until some decision has been reached relative to the corridor study, it is felt to be premature, at very best, to consider increasing the intensity of land use north of the highway. C. Community Facilities/Public Utilities. City water is not currently available to the site and will not be for quite some time, if ever. In this regard, the primary concern is fire protection for the development. Even if water could be acquired from the Trivesco development to the south, it will likely be at least 4-5 years before it would even be available. In the past, sanitary sewer service has not posed a problem in Shorewood. The design of the sewer system is considered more than adequate to accommodate future saturation development. Recently, however, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has been increasingly concerned with the timing of development in the area due to the delayed construction of the Lake Ann interceptor. Since they are concerned with development which has already been proposed in the Comprehensive Plan, they m~y have a problem with increasing land use intensity at this time. This issue will be resolved upon construction of the Lake Ann interceptor project. The proposed development will increase the amount of impervious surface coverage on the subject property over the proposed resident- ial use of the area. Since drainage has been raised as an issue in the past, any further review of the proposaL should include plans for addressing drainage. . . PLANNER'S MEMO ROSENTHAL - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (PREAPPLICATION STAGE) 26 SEPTEMBER 1985 page four Potential impact on the Shorewood parks system is considered insignificant. Based upon the current fee structure, residential development would generate as much as $6000 in dedication fees. The proposed commercial development would generate approximately $4650. D. Proposed Zoning/Site Design. While the preapplication stage of the amendment process is not intended for detailed site plan review, it is worthwhile to compare the proposed plan to the proposed zoning. In this regard, the site plan shown on Exhibit D complies with all lot size and setback requirements of the R-C district. It is worth noting that the site is characterized by a rather severe change in topography. Contours drop from 1000 feet in the western- most portion of the site to 976 feet in the northeast portion. It is assumed that major site alteration in the form of filling and grading will be necessary to accommodate development. Future plans should demonstrate the extent of such alteration. If the proposal goes on to formal application, it would be advisable for the developer to prepare cross-section drawings showing the relationships between adjoining residential property and the proposed buildings. RECOMMENDATION The Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines require that the applicant prepare a written description of how the proposed amendment relates to the Comprehen- ive Plan and demonstrating why the Plan should be changed. As of this writ- ing this has not been done. Presumably the applicant will have such inform- ation available for the Planning Commission on 1 October. The concern relative to site access and traffic impact make it impossible to favor the proposed amendment, particularly at this time. Even the Trivesco commercial area' is subject to MnDOT's approval of access to Highway 7. If, however, the developer feels that a formal application is worth pursuing, it is recommended that the City require the following: 1. Preparation of a land use marketability study demonstrating the market for office space in our area. 2. A traffic study describing the nature and amount of traffic which would be generated by the proposed development and outlining proposed solutions to the problem noted herein. . . PLANNER'S MEMO ROSENTHAL - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (PREAPPLICATION STAGE) 26 SEPTEMBER 1985 page five 3. The developer should contact the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission relative to current sewer capacity and whether the proposed development will have any impact on Shorewood's current development plans. 4. Additional drawings should be prepared illustrating how the site will be changed and the proposed cross-sectional relationships between the new and existing development. Finally, although it can not be required, it is strongly suggested that the applicant meet and work with residents in the area surrounding the site prior to submitting a formal application. Presumably their concerns would be addressed in his formal application. cc: Dan Vogt Jim Norton Glenn Froberg E.G. Rosenthal I ~ : !- ~'l I I__t~~ ..~~~~.. I 11M ~((). J: ), fti u w Cl I 'j I ...... ).. i1 Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Rosenthal - Proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment ". ~ ~ ~ ~ '+- o ~ o .~ 't;: +:: ~ Q) l) ~ h. ~- 'Ih n '.. U~ - -1 Iii eq . . . ~ . . . ~ ::i !:; -& ~~ ~~ ... ii .;~ ;~ n .. .. .' -., _ " :'i:":":':..~.. "., .' ;iI'1b..~:1i .~!-t,,; ;....f.,,;'~ ;''.It: . I . .~ '.., I.... . '; .-;:'L J(! I ~,! ,.,..~.. ~-':t~ ': ~ "'<'. *:";....... ~ t o' r U .1 .. ,. t'_ . I .1 .. , .. €l :I .... .1::1 ~ Ii'.f ; ....~f-'.-;:.. -"'.,.t...~"~' .""..... . . III.!. ~r;If;;.~ :...1'; ~!....:\'"'~"a;' \.,"~~;'j:.~" ,/'a.~:. .... .....:1__.'2.. ""1..1-;.. Ii .J.... t. .' ~ ,.:h~:t.!;-:~::fl... ~&."~51.! . . ";!;;~J '.' ' "-'a'~u~ .1 t,..!~<pb" ~e.. :el' ,. '''''I: .._'8... ~ ,OC;I . I . tl c. ....... tJ.........J!g~ 15""';..' ..,.. ....... . t; 4U.::-t~ CI .. ~. J~ If' · ."::l"~ " !~H:!'a ;_!! ..j!tH;: .:H!.!: ~ . ~;:"~"\iJ"I'''I':'6\~a:tl.ll_t.l: " "1:.8"'03 . . . 0 C ..: .c _ :s 0 j" o. . i I( . S.. w... .: :"'. .~. "'1"'& 'J' ... ~ ''':!.' .." :5...,3l,.ii'i..; i }Ss:l I.: 'i;...:;;:'r::" ~N.:t: 5".. ...i:!l.,ll....".. i~lI-3" ,.1::::"1 ~;!.!i:.~;;I,~. i~':<4"g~..t~..~ i;~!l.. "'01-" 4 .~ ..._~~- 1.1;.... ,1Z....; :~~~~~~~;I ~~ l!t~J~1 ;i:~ 4' O~~ '!C f~. i ..1'a....~c.Y -:. ~~.......:t~.r: t-.t.!':lO.!~-J!~..:.....:.;~....-a ~. ..~.:a2l! -",~-....~A..:a.. !lC-I""" I Oill" , . ~ - cr . C j"!" i eo... c ~.. .. · is M :li !-;..~Jii "'jI01I~.1'5i '5-i-t.. .'.11 . -' . CI=f .s ~ -.... '/Jo:..........O~ .,.~~.::. leo ..~ ~ ...o:J!ll" "~r!..""'. --1'" - 'lI. ..-:s. ~~~!~,!M... ,,]..~.~, -~. :~~~w I 1;..' ~~. ~.. ."t-!" -~.. f{:a......j. .&l!lla~ i~gC ~5;i:!'::l&';~s..'ei: ::--~. 1~~IWi. . .::!;;':;::fel;-:~~~'_l!::.::L. p...~.11 1 . ~toi'i~Hl:'fr"';~:'oIi;:;j&'lti1 ;. l~.!l!l~p" r ..cr.... ~~~...-~'C:::..ftf..... . (......! c~....~ - (....~~~- :r.:'i~t. ...c= _. ~i ..c:-..o;: r_ :.. _1':_....~f=_........c.=::3~'e5:a~._-J .- - .c_....!jl..~ - ~'a4"o.-~I"OC!!li""OC:' "'I~" ,-.'- '-r..~...,...,.. ~'tt8~~: ~~~I~-!;-;~;&'."-c. ~.;. .::::-;;i3'a-: l ~~~11~"S:;'~;fi",!'t!"1.c,~,,J !~~..I..'cf.... ; -_~~l:~c~f~:~"~~;::~f~ ;ll:f~~~ ~ ::::~~.":~-!'e-~e-....-! I:. -.~~f1l ~ "c ~itc;i _", -<:J '" 8 co: 10.0 '1: w. ~ 5 ~ :r CI t. .s I .......;- 4.:IiI __ f: .... - >>'13 6 ~fO " ~ "- II) . "- :... & - :'.:-:4' LO ~;.. . ~ . :.c .... . l~i"'l~i 1I .. .. ~ t ... ... ~ c:o .. . ~ . ... ~ ~ o (I). -J' - ~' , , .' , III " .. ~ 0 ~:: .l~ - 0 'r \\ -n \ ~..\ \ . \ ~-.\ ' , \ \, ' '\. \~\ . \..- \- ~ a a~iJ ! .,'.~ II "~';.';..:.~:~'.'~::~'i . . ." . . .; - .. . .". 1 " '" \ ..... 0_ ~- -'" ... 0 . a", I .... - c . ~ - .. ... 0 0.. ... -::..c to~ :to ...- . hi! ~~% -I -J . -liI ',;';Q ",,' <: 1'" .laJ J-~ .~'- ~" ~. i:- ., , '" "/,..... 10111' ~... ,. ./,.~, ~~ Nfl ,Uj'_... '. - / ~,'.n / .. '. ! \. ... / I \ .. - \ \\l~ '. I ;:: ..c....,.\ r. . _~:-__ 1 . ~ : ; .../ oi.:l .. ':..:;~--:'!".i'.:':-J.' .;:-f,IA M -{'.~' ,. . t "~S '. :;- . ~ .. .', l' ..'- .. ,; ( ,I' " i ", ... .... ..- '. . . ~ l:4 ..> -:. '\ .~_p-o / ., \ . <;\\~ " \ ." \.., "'X · :; ,,:;.{:_~: . . "l~'~;- . .;-}.;~:.:.<;~(, ..~. \,,\ : :.~.;r~:,' . "'>Jj".. . ~ .~~- .'Y':.:.'- .: :ff'~';;':~"~' Q to, ... . ; ".. .. ~' . ~ '.. ',. . \ ,. - :1;' . .... . __\ \'i.:.' ,.~\ .. ~: . 'T'-- \ ~ ' /..... -,; \ . I . ',~ .-' . . ," }: a : - . a . . ~ ... .. .~..('\. . . .~\.)"'"O :% <t ~ .:; Exhibit B PROPERTY SURVEY .'" Co', " ;', ' . t ..~ ' ~ "", ~ ~~-~.... ~ ~ ...~. ~ 3 ~:lrt 9 \Jl~g .J) .... \i 2 ~ ~,,~~ ~ - "Z i ~ ~ii~~ ~ 'V ~~~ iN~~i ~Nr-<<l;' ~ - ~ ~ .( ~ ~" ~11 " ~ii!~~ ~~-i~~~ ~ ~ ':Jl ~~~~~~ V~...:~ E'2 ". ""F;t "'"' ~~ ,,~, - ~ '" \L. U: ~ u.: U: '" u.: \J\ . \l\ ~ '" \() ~ J\ \1' ~ ~"" ~ ~ m~ O~~~:::~~ b '" b! ~ ~- ,t i ...J ~ ...J - I . ~..,."" '~~ll. .. .~.Ii!III"'Il",~~...,.~;e"c"""""""'."-'1"'''''''''''''''''''''''''_''''"''''"'^/'~'''':''':t~~'~"Jli~~'~~', .).t'....~ .>.'. · 'f>: .. '. . ..... ...', ... '. ~/.\ . bl ~ - . '" ~ < \1\ '" " r Exhibit 0 I PROPOSED SITE PLAN I I I " W II~ I ANtN CLARK LARSEN ARCHITECTS WAYZATA BLVD. & HWY. 100 162 SOUTH PlAZA BLDG MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55416 (612) 541-9969 . . September 10, 1985 Attachment to Shorewood Application Form ~~ Applicant requests change in~Q ~ plan for subject property from curren R-1A zoning classification to R-C classification to allow or development of rental and condominium offices as shown on attached plan. Development will include landscaped buffers between office buildings and adjacent residential property as well as landscaped open areas, plazas and picnic area. The design of the buildings will be 2 story with pitched roofs, stone and wood siding, and possible 2nd story balconies to provide a residential character and scale. The following consultants have been involved: Architect & Land Planner Wirtanen Clark Larsen Architects 162 South Plaza Building Minneapolis, MN 55416 Attorney-Review of Title Sween, Salazar and Barry, Ltd. Attorneys & Counselors at Law National City Bank Bui1ding-Ridgeda1e 1809 Plymouth Rd. South Suite 300 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Surveyor of Original Property Otto Associates Land Surveyors P.O. Box 283 Buffalo, MN 55313 Exhibit E APPLICANT'S REQUEST LETTER . . . -':;7- 't-P A ..- "\ ~' ~ ~ ~.. -.......-- .~ ~.._~ ~ ' t+." '-.:,~~ -' ~ <// -~-. ---..- .- - ._:~,;.; "- -.. . ,,/ ~ ',,;;,<:~... ~ ~ "v: .r ( ~ ~ ~ __-L '\ ~ ~ - ~ ;7 ",-\. ~ ~. >], " .~ -& , .r ); A {,'r.o '\ -V ~A 1 ~ ~ ~ ,. . " '"", , .,.... . i'--"~~ -t-. --.... ! _....--_..'-...--~ ..._._l.........-;;~-....'...::;,A.;... ot"f'" :. ."~ ~..__.- --.~-.,- ."~-~...~,-_.,_._-~-~~.-:.--~- ~-~-,~:.~:..._-~:~~ 1ft.. . - . ....,".- .~< -:- :'"'_.....;......,....-:--~ --,-"" ~. {fl 11 ..d 'I 't J. I " Ii, . I~ i I. c ..... I~': UI 11 t I!~iill! ..~ If t' ;'..: ~'-i .. jl ~ . 'J "' ,.,.1 ... is,. .,:...-- . ..J::,. ',,,.,'.. ,-".. _,' ~ _..'_',~ -'.:._~_..c:,..:_._~..." .....,.....;...__.'0.' . '. .~:4...~. '-'-..' .. ".. .. '........ '- " ",' ..... ..~ ...\ ~.'4 ~-:- .., "1 -<:'-"i ::";~~4..;i -:..... Exhibit F PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS ,,,-. Z-7-"-' .......:: '~"" MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO. BACKGROUND . . 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 PLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL B'RAD NIELSEN 30 SEPTEMBER 1985 SHENEHON/GOODLUND - SIMPLE SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE REQUEST 405 (85.31) In October of 1983 Mr. Howard Shenehon and his sister, Mrs. Mary Goodlund, requested approval to divide their property located at 5285 Shady Island Road into three lots. A staff report (see Exhibit A, attached), dated 27 October 1983, analyzed the request and recommended that a two-lot division might be more appropriate. The request was subsequently denied by the City Council. After considerable thought the applicant s have now reapplied for a two-lot division (see Exhibit B, attached). Due to changes in Shorewood's zoning, the request not only involves approval of a simple subdivision, but also requires consideration of lot area and building setback variances. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION The analysis contained in the 1983 staff report is still considered valid. Since some of the rules have changed since that time, the following issues are presented for your review: A. Lot Area. Based upon a lot size analysis of Shady Island, it was recommended in 1983 that the zoning be changed from R-1 (40,000 square foot lots) to R-2 (20,000 square foot lots). When the City a?opted its interim Zoning OrdinanFe last July, Shady Island was zoned R-1B (30,000 square foot lots). Consequently, since the two lots are 27,600 square feet and 20,805 square feet in area, lot area variances are required. Consistent with the earlier analysis and recommendation, it is recommended that the variances be granted. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore gYi PLANNER'S MEMO~UM SHENEHON!GOODLUND 30 SEPTEMBER 1985 . B. Building Setback. The applicant s propose to maintain the existing building located on the westernmost of the two proposed lots. The proposed division would result in a side yard setback of 10 feet while 20 feet is required under Shorewood's new Zoning Ordinance. If the lot line is moved over 10 feet to comply with the setback requirement, the easterly lot will require both lot area and lot width variances as a result. As an alternative it is recommended that the setback variance be granted, but that stipulations be imposed restricting expansion of the structure. " C. Site Access. The lots are currently accessed by a very narrow (15') right-of-way. In recent similar situations, the City has consistently attempted to upgrade substandard streets by requiring the dedication of additional right-of-way. Based on that policy, it is recommended that the City require dedication of an additional 15 feet as a condition of approval of the subdivision and variances. While this will not achieve a standard 50 foot street, it would be unfair for the applicant to have to make up the total difference between the existing width and the standard width and not require any dedication from the pLoperty adjoin- ing the other side of the right-of-way. Despite still being substandard, the increased width is considered an improvement. The existing right-of-way also terminates in a dead end. While it may not be feasible to require a cul-de-sac turnaround designed to City standards, the City should consider requiring some means tor cars to get back to the main road without backing. Possibly a "T" of some sort would suffice. This should be subject to review and recommendation by the City Engineer. Based upon the preceding, it is recommended that the simple subdivision and setback variance be granted subject to the following: 1. The existing structure not be allowed to be expanded. This is not, however, intended to preclude moving or replacing the structure to comply with zoning requirements. 2. The City should require additional right-of-way and some means of vehicular turnaround on the street, subject to the recommendation of the City Engineer. 3. The applicant must pay the $500 park dedication fee (credit is given for the existing dwelling) prior to the City releasing the resolution approving the division. 4. Ten-foot drainage and utility easements should be provided at the sides and ~ 9-f the lot. 6,j~ .:s~ ,yjJ 5. The division must be recorded with Hennepin County within 30 days of the applicant's receipt of the resolution approving the division. cc: Dan Vogt Glenn Froberg Jim Norton Howard Shenehon -2- MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO.: BACKGROUND . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCIL Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Alexander Leonardo Kristi Stover ADMINISTRATOR Doug Uhrhammer 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 PLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL BRAD NIELSEN 27 OCTOBER 1983 SHENEHON/GOODLUND - LOT DIVISION AND AREA VARIANCE 405 (83.39) Mr. Howard Shenehon and Ms. Mary Goodlund have requested approval of a subdivision to divide their property located at 5285 Shady Island Road (see Exhibit A, attached) into three lots. According to the applicants the property contains 56,381 square feet of area and is currently occupied by a small seasonal cabin. The site is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, as is the rest of Shady Island. The proposal would resu~t in three lots with an average area of 18,783 square feet. Since the R-1 District requires 40,000 square feet a lot area variance has been requested. Lot width variances are also requested. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION The applicants have cited high taxes as the reason for wishing to divide their property. Based on statutory requirements and Shorewood's Zoning Ordinance, economic circumstances alone do not justify variances. However, a lot size analysis of Shady Island suggests that the existing zoning is inappropriate. Lot sizes on the island range from 14,000 to 70,000 square feet. The average lot size is approximately 27,972 square feet. Since unusually large or small lot sizes can skew an average we have also calculated the mean lot size. Three lots are 25,000 square feet in area, with 14 lots larger and 14 lots smaller. This is obviously much closer to R-2 zoning than to the existJng R-1~ The Comprehensive Plan recognized this and designated land use for the islands as one to two units per acre. ~.bit A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore A-I . MEM~NDUM FROM PLANNER SHENEHON/GOODLUND 27 OCTOBER 1983 page two The applicant's proposal would result in lot sizes 9189 square feet (33%) less than the average lot size and 6217 square feet (2510) ofthe.rnean lot size. This discrepancy would increase if additional right-of-way were required to widen Maple Lane which is currently only 15 feet wide. Although the applicants have stated that each of their three lots have 105 feet of lakeshore, the lots taper toward the street. At the building line two of the lots are 80 feet wide and one is 70 feet wide. This is at least 40 feet less than existing zoning would allow and 20 feet less than R-2 zoning would allow. All this suggests that even though existing zoning is inappropriate, the proposed three lot division would not be consistent even with R-2 zoning. Consequently, the City should consider allowing the property to be split in two instead of three lots. The resulting lots would be 28,190 square feet in size and 125 feet in width at the building line. This additional width would make up for the area taken by front and rear setbacks - 50 feet and 75* feet, respectively. *No'te: This is the watershed district requirement. The Ci,ty> :requires 50 feet. While a variance would still be required, it would be far more consistent with the way the island should be zoned. In fact if zoned R-2, .no variance would be required. Based on the preceding it is suggested that the applicant have a survey prepared showing two lots conforming to R-2 standards. BN: sn cc: Doug Uhrhammer Jim Norton Gary Larson Sue Niccum Howard Shenehon Mary Goodlund A-1 ... .' .' ..' .' .' .' .' .' .' .' . {. . .......... ."'.... .~ . -... . ~1! o o o ~ W II: o X CI'l II.. o -" _.~ E.."C.hi bi t A SIiI'E LOCArION Shenehon/Goodlund - Proposed lot division and area variance ... .. Q J...~ -... =1 ~;~ \ ~ ~r1 /.' 0 "" ,,\ll~ . " ,,/ '\/'" ,.. , O' "" f "1 /'h . "".. /j ~lU- ". :, "" ," . /--oJ';: , .' '" ll\" H . \ . ... - "- " " I ~ E ~I " ~ a '~i..J 4~~1 ~,~ ~ ~J ___ ~ t') ~_ ] :: ':9 _I, <D '"t. 0 u) - . +1 " I I - - ~ Ijl u.. 0 0' W ell 0. "T' ..J ~ E < lk - I- \.lJ .:;. G :> l- e;( t.. 0 ...J :t ,\.i < w 4 ~tt , , , , , ", " " '. " ", " " '. ,.... \ ---- ,"........'~\\\ --.._--/ ~'. "...., ';---- ~ ',' -~~~ \ \ ..--- _",*",,0." \ - \ \-------- ; " ", ", " .... "', " '... ", '. " " '. - ~ o H rl'} H :::- H n fCln +> r.1 ..... rtl po ..... ll-. 11. g f~, ~ ~( (,) <~ .... ~ C:J ..~ " 'lJ V'l '" ~ \,) !"'\-\... .-..... \ \ . J . .f' ....c:>.::: RJ....-77C) o )S.. .h. Qo ~ .'~,. /' t:Y '- '" .-.- " --'-' ~ / II / "- '- ~....... ~SO"/6 // bo 'C / ~(/ / 1 i " 0<,- ~ \ '1 \ ,Il, ~ 0.9 l', / .~. ~ ~~ ~~ ';::,. ~ a ..... , lli ~ ~ .. " " ~ " "- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \.;;: '" \I) ~ ~ ~ ~ to +- .... .0 ..... -r: ~ 1 1 I . ./ 00 D"/ \ I '.?(- // ~) ,J'// '/ ~ //(~ / 1/ /<e / 1 / I' / 6',.. . / "I "~/ Y/~ . / / . . September 30. 1985 TO: SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Jack and Arden Hansen 5165 Shady Island Road RE: Variance request from the Howard Shenehons and the Gerald Goodlunds to be considered at meeting Tuesday. October 1. 1985. We have been neighbors of these two families for over 12 years. We share a south facing from our lovely Shady Island. It is our opinion that the improvements they seek to make on their desired two lots will only serve to enhance the Island's shoreline appearance. We would also like to have them around more in their retirement years and hope that you will quickly approve their request. Sincerely. ~ fl. }bu,~ -- ~f).ItI~ Jack R. Hansen Arden D. Hansen c.: -, ctJ ,.. elf) ~ m ...... . ....... ~ ~ ~ ~ tt) ~ e~ 'n "- ~ ":) ~ ~ ,"" >r ~ ~ ~ ;: ~ ~ ~ Il.J h ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ;g lli ~ ~ .... ~ "Ill.... I::l \ij lI'J ~ ~ I:S ~ '" :<:. ~ ..... ~ ~ !:) l!! \1.t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::t \I) ~ '" $ ~ "J I/j ~ Q ~ .... ~ j.!) Ilj ~A ~. ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~ 'l:. ~ ~ ~~~/:?ii{~..... "'" ~<::: ....... 0 \\j' U) ~ 'S ).... "'-l \l) ~ ~ ~ c1 ~ II. ';1; ~ ...... Q~~ ~S:>~ " $ ~ tQ '( ~ ~ \.!) ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ :e ~ ~ \.. ~ '-J ~ '"< ~ ~~~~~'-J~ . ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I::l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & ~ :<t R !lJ !jj ~ ~ \Ii ':S ~ l(i ~ \i: ~ i;) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '\., ~ "i ...... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ " " -'J ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ 'U ~ q "t: ~ "< .... ~ ~ ~ l.::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. '\j ~ ~ ~ ~ \" "l:~ ~ tC::i~ ,~ ...... ~ .~ '.'" .~ ~ S/ ht ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " 1/'1 '"'<. ~ ....;.. ~~ ..... " vt ," ,,'\J c;; ~ ~ ""'t"::. ~ v:'I ~ .,. ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ "J .~ ~ ~ C'~ "- c..... ....... ,.. I'ol ~ Ii) ~ .... ....... . ? ~ ~ ~ If) ~ .~ ....l ,~ ~ ~ ~ ':J:- ~ '\l ~ ~ '~ \(\ ~ ~ r , .r- : ',)10: ~ - . ~ ,~. ~ '-r -o~~ ~ ~,1 ~ ~ ~< -sf\()/" :n ;t ~ 1J)f' "1 .... "J . ..i-I/ i"'''''- Ii ."'} ~ J iP', 0 so (....,. ...., IolO ""~ u-V>,.Itj '~ ~ +-~~ ..... -.l) " \~ Cl ~ ) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ .- ~ ~ -.:.. ~ ~ ,~ \\ "- 'v') .... .. - .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ " ::T ~ ~ ~~ Q ~ 0 ~ I ~~ ~ ,d. \, ~ ,..;.a VI ~ w:\ \J ~ \.... ~ '\ ~ ~ '\I' f"," "i 1'\ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~( :r I...) r; ~7 ~~ <1 v t1 ~ , ~ ~ 0~ lJ)~ .~ ~ ~ r \l ~ ~ ~ ~ r"J S. ~ ~ '1 o r-... 0 tt: A.-! S} ;:: .~ ~ . \ ~ \~ ~ ... ...... ~ ~~~~. ~.~. . )' \.Jof . ~ 'J ('- ~t~; ''', ~ ~ '\ c- VI .~ . ~ V .~ V r\.J~ .~ '\. VI;:) " r-") \,., ~ .,:~ ~ 3;l~..' ~ ~. ..' ~ ~a ~ '<. V)\.... .'~ . ~ cr~"t~.j';'-' 1 ~..~ ~ ~ I ~ I ~ ~~ ^' ~ (~.~ Z ~ ~~ ffl j .? ~ , < ~ "O:i "\ ~ t I ,,~ 1-'''' I l'.~ .\' ~ , .~ .~ := ~ ~ i' <; ~' ~ iJ ~ ~ 'v r.:rs t:R ~ ~ ~ . ~ .... . ~~ I.; ~ ~ \I ~ 'J) ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ \.I ~ 1J) ~ " ~ "1 I'A ~~ iJ' ...... .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \\ ~ ~ ~ () J \., "" ,..\ tf ~ ~~ ~~ - ~ .-J ~ ~ J'I~ <C- '- ~ '>: .... ~ ~. ~ ~ -\- ~ .~ ~ ~ 1: -t ~ c- \r' - ~ <::i ~ V .......s) ~ -( ~ '-' ~ 2 " 'i., -....,' l ~ l': ~ Q:, ~ ~ ~ . .:< ~ '0 ~ :> ~ . < ,0 '- d ....J ~ ~ \.\l ~ 't \,) Cl loi .", \r) ~ " .... .). '-- , ( ~ .=:j -.\ ~~ -J ~. ~ "',\ ~~\ ~ ~. ~~ ~ :t ~\: ' ~ ~ ~ .--:.2 ~ ~ ~ 'r :s~-~ ~ '^ ~ ~ -;= ~ ~' ~ ~ \ 'r. ~Y\ ~ '1_ ~ "- cP ~ -- -l.. . \~ __ ~ \.r boo , "~ .~ 'W I) 1:- ". ~ '" " ~ CO ~ ~ ~ .~ . ~ ':I) " ~ ~ "'t ,,_.i' . (....., ~ \; I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A '::r- -: , 9 ~ ,. \,,, r u:;- :t" ..." L, ~ i0 ~, ~ \ 0 tr ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ \ '-.f'. 10' l' s , ~l ') 1\ ".J , \ l. ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ (,)~ Q (J') (i) ~ ~ ~ '^ ~ \i' .~ --< --- /./" \0.,', ,~ .:f tQ, :~ J '\:f:> .'-0 ""Z \Q~ ~ \)' tJ) ~ I ~ (Q ~ lr (f "-- ~ ~.'. .~ ~. ~ , ...... "~~ -..... - ~ C) rv N"\ · \\l \ tIo -DO ~ ~ ~ ~:- ~ e . . Signature Printed name Street number Date J II (""'" /' d"'" 9-L8-8~ tA/1I11~ ~ L7""()~~ S"2YO oS Jr.'1 1..L..r.C/~ A?sEA/II'HtE i. /J71A.L~R t/9sS SIlAl)Y~~ R /<#.4A, ~, . LJ :/~ ? /28d1; @P#~ C~~( Q~LJ (\ !?J ~ V~#"'H'~ .:r/~J1 SA.,oIt J;/,_./ f'j.?rJ~J tjh,,~ C IMRt..., ,Z O",-r(.R"1 32.5 1-,vMMi> J..J fiJ1 a- t) ~~ ~d~ :jhj ~{ - , . Item 1. Item II Relative to the Shenehon/Goodlund division of their jointly owner 3~ lot parcel into 2 building sites. BLUE sheets 25 owner parcels or 81% not objecting. 32 total signatures. May I speak to the 5 conditions recommended by the stafF (1) No expansion of the present cottage - On objection (2) 15 foot right of way We feel that this is discriminatory and that we are not being treated like our neighbors. Nothing taken from Berg's 297 feet Nothing taken from Hokanson's 130 ft. Nothing taken from Benson's 70 feet. Maple Lane, if it was to be widened - should have been acquired when the public sewer was installed in 1:'139 .i473 ~~~. ~~fi~o.~m3.. ~~.Q~.p~~~. ~u~~. ~~e;:~Jr~/c .~ .in~ver a eXcjavr:ed.tnMaPlel~o/:~ 8,J'id t 'the 3 _ pl(tfe' ~' ro ts th{it s).de Jhe~ di~nd' expense rem ng thetrr; with t compensation. We were assessed for 52,500 square feet for a total of $7,480.50 We have paid $4,114.33 on this prinicpal (11 years ) plus 4,937.12 interest on the unpaid balances. $9,051.45 Total paid Remaining balance $3,366.17 plus interest. 15' taking = 3,052.5 sq.ft. or .0581 % of our land being acquired. $2.38 per sq. ft. Ass's Market Value for taxes. $7,264.95 Value of land subject to easement. 50% interest to the city as 50% owner $3,632.48 Value position of both the owners and city. Plus unpaid Specials $3,366.17 @ .0581% taking $ 195.57 @ 50% = $97.79 (3) $ 97.79 $3,730.27 Loss to owners. Applicant must pay $500.00 Park dedication fee, theoretically because this is a subdivision. This is not a subdivision in the accepted sense., nor can we find a definition in the new interim Ordinance. The lots will continue to be recorded in the Register of Deeds office at 50' of Lot 17 all of 18, 19 and 20 Shady Island. My sister and I have agreed as Joint owners (for 25 years and our parents for 10 years prior to that) to simply have her take title to the Wseterely 50 feet of Lot 17, all of 18 and the Easterly 10 feet of Lot 19. I will take title to the westerly 50 feet of Lot 19 and all of Lot 20. .j ~ . .. .'" (4) 10' drainage and utility easement along the lot lines. No problem how~ever the Planning Commission agreed to waive this 10' foot on the lakeside. (5) oNtf problem in recording the Deeds in 30 days "/If.fi.'Li!.K2];f 66 d~t~ We believe that we should have the same rights and treatment as our other neighbors on the island. Let me quote from Section 200.05 Sub'd 2 Sect. b (2) Conditions Governin Consideration of Variance Re uests iteral interpretation 0 the provisions 0 the Ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by properties in same district under the terms of this ordinance" To require a Park Dedication When the Association has already dedicated Lots 41 and 42 as open/recreational land for the benefit of the 31 properties on Shady Island seems ureasonable and unfair to us. The Old Ceder Point lane at the north end of the Island is also a 15' street. No dedication or turning area was required When a building permit was granted to the new owner of Lot 1, nor When a permit was taken out recently to inprove lot 4 and to build a swimming pool. If your policy is to apply to one property owner, we think it should apply to us all. I would like to speak to the Int~ Zoning Ordinance pa~}sed by the City Council on June 21, 1985. The final vote is to be in (, months. That Ord- inance showed Shady Island as having R-1C zoning the game as Enchanted Island. On about July 1st Richard Spellman presented you with a petition siigned by 18 islanders asking that the zoning be changed to a more restrictive R-1B zoning Which makes 54.8% of the properties non conforming. Many of us were not contacted nor asked to sign this petition. Also 1 of the signatures is not of a legal owner. OREEN I have a petition signed by 8 oLthose Who signed the Spellman petition asking that their signatures be rescinded because they were not explained the ramifications, and now believe that this change to R-1B is not in their best interest. .... I further have a petition signed by 13 property owners not approached to sign the Spellman petition asking that the R-1C (20,000 lot) be reinstated in the Interim Ordinance and be allowed to stand as originally written and passed by the Council. This constitutes 21 of the 31 owners or 67.7% of the property owners as approving the R-1C zoning. We ask that the Council so vote. . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 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 7:30 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioners Spellman, Watten, Benson, Schultz and Mason; Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen and Deputy Clerk Niccum Absent: Commissioner Reese (excused) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Spellman moved, Schultz seconded, to approve the minutes as amended. Motion carried unanimously. 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING - SIMPLE SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE HOWARD SHENEHON/MARY GOODLUND -5285 SHADY ISLAND ROAD Howard Shenehon and Gerald and Mary Goodlund were present to request a two lot division. Mr. Goodlund said they are requesting a 10 foot side setback instead of the required 20 foot setback. He said this is because of the existing cabin which is old and will probably eventually be torn down to make way for a new home. At that time the 20 foot setback can be enforced. Public portion of the hearing was closed at 7:40 P.M. Planner Nielsen reviewed the original application where they asked for a three lot subdivision in 1983. He mentioned the change in the interim ordinance which changes the zoning from R-1 (40,000 sq. ft.), which it was in 1983, to R1-B (30,000 sq. ft.). Due to the R1-B and Shoreline District, a variance is required. Spellman moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council to grant the simple subdivision and variance contingent upon the Planner's recommendations. Mr. Goodlund mentioned that Planner Nielsen had told him the rear utility easement (referred to in 4.) is not necessary as it is lakeshore. Planner Nielsen confirmed this. Mr. Shenehon said that in reading over the report he strenuously objected to the 15' street dedication and the $500 park fee and felt he was being taken advantage of. Commissioner Benson explained that both these items are standard practice. The motion was amended to exclude "and rear" from Planning recommendation #4. Motion carried unanimously by roll call vote (Reese was not present). PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, page two . MINUTES 1985 . PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT - E.G. ROSENTHAL - 5405 ST. ALBANS BAY ROAD Mr. E.G. Rosenthal and his architect Mr. Dick Larson were present. Mr. Larson complimented Planner Nielsen on the thoroughness of his report. He said they are proposing a small condominium office project on two lots. They feel that the property is better suited to something like this because of the proximity of Highway 7. He said office buildings make excellent neighbors with 8:00-5:00 hours and very little, if any, business on weekends. He referred to the Comprehensive Plan regarding buffer zones. They share Planner Nielsen's concern about how to handle traffic and felt that the intersection proposed in connection with Waterford should become a full intersection. He suggested that they work with the Highway Department and the proposed commercial on the other side of Highway 7. They don't feel their proposal would have any affect on the area. He said Mr. Rosenthal is the owner, not a developer of the property. They would like input from the neighbors. Commissioner Watten said he feels this is better than straight commercial, it forms a good buffer and would recommend it. Chair Leslie asked if a market study had been done. Mr. Larson said not yet. They are proposing something that would be developed in a phased manner. They are not sure how much would be built at one time, it would depend on the market study and finances, possibly 1/2 to 1/3 at a time. David Theide, a neighbor located at 20145 Excelsior Boulevard asked about the size of the buildings. Mr. Larson said they will be two story wooden structures with berming and landscaping between them and the residential area. He also said due to the topography the proposed structures will be about 20' lower than the homes to the north~ Commissioner Schultz asked why this area is not zoned commercial in the present plan? Planner Nielsen said the City didn't want more commercial. He also mentioned the R-C zoning requires a C.U.P. and that there is a 2~ story limit. Chair Leslie asked about water. Mr. Larson said they wish Shorewood would provide them with water, but they will probably end up with a well. He said the units will be built so they don't require fire protection or a sprinkler system. Commissioner Spellman asked Planner Nielsen if it could be handled through a P.U.D. Planner Nielsen said commercial isn't covered under P.U.D. 's at this time. Barbara Martin, located at 20185 Excelsior Boulevard asked if there is any designated wetland on the property. Planner Nielsen said possibly a small area. He will look into it. . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1985 page three Commissioner Schultz asked about the "panhandle" to the north. Mr. Larson said they were considering dividing them into two lots, and possibly relocating the existing houses on them. They have to study this further. Pat Theide, David's wife, asked if there would be trash containers or blacktopping uehind the buildings. Mr. Larson said nothing would be there except berming and landscaping. Pat also said she would be really concerned if there is and Excelsior Boulevard eccess and no Highway 7 access. Mr. Larson said they do not plan an access onto Excelsior Boulevard, they want access/ egress to Highway 7. Dennis Martin, Barb's husband, said that during the Trivesco discussion, the neighbors had been told there would not be any commercial development north of Highway 7. Mr. Larson showed concern over how to work with the traffic problem. Planner Nielsen explained the Corridor Study and said it would probably be a year before they know anything regarding the intersection. Pat Theide said they have enough trouble with noise now and she definately does not want to see any kind of a traffic signal there. Spellman move, Benson seconded to recommend to Council that they make a change in the status of the property. Motion denied by roll call vote - Spellman-aye - Leslie, Benson, Watten, Schultz and Mason-nay. Chair Leslie said she didn't feel there was enough information to make a decision. Commissioner Benson said he would like to see Mr. Larson and Mr. Rosenthal meet and talk with the neighbors. Mr. Larson said they will set up meetings with the neighbors. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR none REPORTS Council Liaison Stover reported on the following: Budget Well committee's ten point recommendation Christmas Lake access ~ STATE OF [NJ[NJ[g~@iY~ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55146 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER DNR INFORMATION (612) 296-6157 September 26, 1985 The Honorable Robert Rascop Mayor of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Mayor Rascop: The notice of a public hearing regarding the donation of a site by the Christmas Lake Homeowners Association for public access on Christmas Lake is essentially the same proposal that was rejected by the Executive Council with the exception of a ramp. This proposal does not meet the criteria for a public access under state guidelines. We are proceeding with our acquisition of a lot at the motel site. However, we do not wish to completely discourage the donated site. It would make an excellent supplement to the state access in time of heavy use. Your truly, fit,. J--. seph N. Alexander Corrmissioner cc: Shorewood City Council Don Carlson Bruce Specktor AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ~@ ~ STATE OF lNllNl~$@jj& DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BOX , 500 LAFAVmE ROAD . ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA · 55146 DNR INFORMATION __ (612) 2961157 ..-----.. ......--- ....- September 26, 1985 The Honorable Gen Olson State Senator -District 43 132C State Office Building Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155-1679 Dear Senator Olson: As reques ted, please fi nd enc 1 osed a copy of my reques t for the Executive Council Meeting on October 2, 1985, regarding Lake Minnetonka. I do not intend to request specific eminent domain, thus the content of the request contains no recommendations. It does, however, answer some specific questions raised by the Executive Council at the last meeting and updates them on our actions over the past four months. YO"JJ t~ ~ Ji"tt"'(~ .~ JOSEPH N. ALEXANDER COfTIIlissioner JNA/DMC/jls EOnclosure cc Donald M. Carlson OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ';~ . , STATE OF MINNESOTA ,~ of Natural Resources .Office Memorandum OEPARTMENT TO: Sandra J. Hale, Commissioner OATE: September 25, 1985 Department of Administration FROM' Joseph N. Alexander, Commissioner ()7~HoNe, (612)/296-2549 Department of .Natura 1 Resources .,.,." . SUBJECT: Request for Executive Council Meeting At the Executive Council Meeting on June 5, 1985, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) provided a brief summary of public access on Lake Minnetonka. The Executive Council requested that at the October 2, 1985, meeting the DNR submit recommendations for sites requiring condemnation action. At this time, the DNR is still reviewing potential access sites and is not requesting specific eminent domain authority~ The DNR intends to continue attempting to acquire access sites from willing sellers in Zones 3 and 5 (see attached map) as identified by the Lake Minnetonka Task Force Report. Currently, the DNR has an option to purchase property on King's Point which will provide a launching facility with approximately 30 parking places. The attached map and report identify both potential public and private sites that have been reviewed in the past three months. Also attached are responses to questions raised at the June 5 Executive Council Meeting about Lake Minnetonka. The DNR has been in contact with all lakeshore communities by letter requesting their cooperation in providing reliable parking at existing access sites and es tab 1 ish i ng new sites in Zones 3 and 5. DNR Representatives have met in person with lakeshore community representatives and Lake Minnetonka Conservation District representatives to explain our goals for implementation of Task Force recommendations including public access and to seek local cooperation. The Council also requested a report on progress made regarding assisting the Cities of Shorewood and Chanhassen in establishing water surface use regulations for Christmas lake. The DNR offered assistance to both Chanhassen and Shorewood in developing a water surface use ordinance by letter on July 15, 1985 and has not received any response. JNA/MTM/jls Attachments .. ~, LAKE MINNETONKA. HENNEPIN AND CARVER COUNTIES DNR'S RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS RAISED AT THE JUNE 5. 1985. EXECUTIVE COUNCIL MEETING At the June 5. 1985. Executive Council Humphrey raised some specific questions. followed by our responses to them. Attorney General those questions meeting. Below are 1. What has DNR done to work with LMCD to develop the kinds of sites being talked about? DNR has worked with the LMCD by ~ncouraging the local municipalities to work towards the Lake Minnetonka Task Force goals. which were adopted by the LMCD. of providing 700 long-term reliable spaces for car-trailer parking in the vicinity of present and future access sites on Lake Minnetonka. The LMCD has been charged with the responsibility to monitor the program. l~ile the LMCD has the most extensive and comprehensive authority to regulate lake use on Lake Minnetonka as outlined on pages 1. 6. and 35 of the Report of the Lake Minnetonka Task Force. it does not have the authority to acquire and/or develop public boat access sites. DNR was given the charge to acquire access sites under Minnesota Statute ~97. 48, Subdivision 15. "2. Are the dotted lines designating areas on the Lake Minnetonka maps legally specific or a tool for determining general information as to water use? The zone lines were established by the Task Force as a tool to address the distribution of accesses for fishing craft and small recreation boats. 3. What are the costs involved in launching boats? DNR access sites are open to the public free of charge. involved with launching boats at a DNR facility would be initial acquisition and development of the site. The maintained on a regular basis with minimal expenditures. The only costs the cost of the sites are then The average charge for launching a bORt at a private commercial marina on Lake Minnetonka is currently $9.00 per lnunching. 4. ~~at" are costs for parking spaces? Again, at DNR access sites parking is free. The initial costs involved to acquire and develop a parking area varies from site to site and is depen- dent upon factors such as location and size of the parcel. type and magni- tude of the planned development and the award bid amount for the project. Funding for the ~ater access program comes from several sources including the LCMR, bonding monies and a portion of the unrefunded marine gasoline taxes. 5. What types of improvements will be made and what costs are involved? When DNR acquires property suitable for public access on Lake Minnetonka, . site development and improvements would include: an asphalted parking and turnaround area, a concrete plank ramp, site buffering and landscaping" identification signage and the posting of rules and regulations. Regular site maintenance would follow the site development. Again, costs vary depending upon size of site and the development. Recent developments in the metro area range in cost from $2,500 at Starring Lake in Hennepin County for the installation of a concrete plank ramp and gravelling a parking and turnaround area (the City of Eden Prairie supplied equipment and assistance) to $78,000 at the Boomsite on the St. Croix River in Washington County for a site development which included a 60' concrete plank ramp, 20 asphalted parking spaces, an asphalted road, turnaround area and launching stall, erosion control, fill, berming and landscaping. 6. What actions has DNR taken with regard to development of recommendations 'by the Task Force on municipal policies and surface use management policies developed by the LMCD? The Task Force noted in their report that the LMCD has special legislative authority to adopt surface use restrictions and has done so. The D~R contracted a survey of surface use on metro area lakes during 1984 to assist all governmental units in determining use patterns, safety issues and user data. In conjunction with the sheriffs and most major boating organizations the DNR is strongly supporting an "implied consent" bill in the legislature for boat operators. 7. ~~at funding options are available for iaw and coding enforcement? The Task Force's subcommittee on enforcement explored five areas of possi- ble revenue. They are outlined on pages 37-39 of the report. Mr. Humphrey alsq stated his concern for fishing and other small boats safely crossing Lake Minnetonka because of congested highspeed boat traffic. The Department of Natural Resources is attempting to provide public access to Zones 3 and 5 to better distribute public access around the lake. This will reduce the need for small boats to cross the lake to reach certain bays for fishing or other reasons where currently no access exists. cw53 LAKE MINNETONKA LAKE ZONES N ~ o \ Miles 2 . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. ........ . . · · · · Analysis Zone Boundar\ LAKE MINNETONKA SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL ACCESS SITES CONSIDERED (POST TASK FORCE) IN ZONES 3 AND 5 ZONE 3 I.!!!!: Tonka Bay Park Location: West side of Echo Bay near West Point Road and Tonka Bay Road Comments: Property is owned by City of Tonka Bay. 7-acre park with swimming beach, {tennis courts, picnic area, playground and nature interpretation area. Primarily in residential area. Access developme~t may conflict with existing public uses of site. 2. Site: Landform, Inc. LOCation: ~orth shore of Gideon Bay off of Tonka Bay Road Comments: Property is in process of being sold and developed for 24-1! acre executive homesites. -Location was fairly good and property seemed suitable for public access development. Owner stated that about half of the lots have been sold and he would not be interested in selling to the DNR for public access purposes. 3. Site: Willow Wood Drive LOCation: West side of Gideon Bay just north of Tonka Bay City Hall Comments: Property is currently listed for sale and has a fairly large level lot with a single family residential home on it. At end of Willow Wood Drive and surrounded by fairly expensive homes. Listing. price: $215,000. Size of parcel would not be adequate for public access de~elopme~t and location at end of residential street is poor. 4. Site: Old Orchard Park I'O'Cation: West shore of Gideon Bay adjacent to County Road 19 in Tanka Bay. On a back channel. Comments: Property is owned by City of Tonka Bay. Site currently provides rental slip space for approximately 30 boats for Tanka Bay residents. Also has a gravel parking area, an open grassy area, several picnic tables and fishing piers. Level topography. Has potential for public access development, bowever, initial contacts with representatives of the City indicate opposition to any public access proposal. 5. Site: Timber Lane LOCation: South shore of Gideon Bay off of County Road 19 Comments: 2.8 acre parcel was listed for sale with lakeshore. Lakeshore consisted of i of a narrow peninsula. Not large enough for ramp and turnaround area. Remainder of property was bisected from lake frontage by Timber Lane, a strip of private property and the former railroad corridor owned by Hennepin County. Due to narrowness of lakeshore frontage and b~section of parcel, access development does not look . , feasible. Adjacent landowner informed us that owner would not sell to DNR for public access purposes. 6. Site: Snug Harbor (Shorewood Yacht Club) LOCation: South shore of Gideon Bay adjacent to County Road 19 in Shore- wood Comments: Willing seller "if the price is right". Has approval for 25 more slips but may not have space to install if access goes in. Access proposal also contingent on Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority approval. Proposal would entail filling in of a swampy area for access parking and channeling under railroad property. Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority Comments: Called to see if Hennepin County would be willing to work with us on proposal for Snug Harbor. Informed that staff might recommend approval to the County Board after reviewing the proposals. Several conceptual designs for the site were sent for county's review along wi~h a request for their support. Proposal is contingent upon acquisition and developability of Snug Harbor site. 7. Site: Minnetonka Portable Dredging Company Location: South share or Gidepn Bay adjacent to County Road 19 in Shore- wood Comments: Site has approximately 370' tion. Has good access potential. right." Asked him what price would of lakeshore and is in good loca- Owner will sell "if the price is be right. Response: $1 million. 8. Site: Excelsior Commons Location: In Excelsior on south shore between Gideon Bay and Excelsior Bay Comments: Property is owned by the City of Excelsior. Site is a IS-acre park with picnic area, swimming beach, playground, softball fields, tennis courts and bandstand. Municipal marina for wet storage of boats available to Excelsior residetits. Topography may lend itself to public access development. Conflicts with existing park uses and location on the lake in regard to existing boat traffic patterns may not. 9. Site: Old Railroad Right-of-Way Location: Between Excelsior Bay and St. Alban's Bay off of l-tinnetonka Boulevard Comments: Site has possibilities of improvements for shore fishing uses but is too small for public access development. Currently being used as a commercial facility. 10. Site: Excelsior Boat and Motor Mart Location: Southwest shore of St. Alban's Bay off of Highway 7 and Minnetonka Boulevard Comments: Owner was contacted and asked if he would be j,nterested in selling to the DNR for public access purposes. Answer: No. 11. Sit&l Green~ood Marina Location: Southwest shore of St. Minnetonka Boulevard Alban's Hay off of Highway 7 and ., Comments: Owner was contacted and asked if he would consider selling to the DNR for public access purposes. Again the response was "if the price is right". The property is approximately 1-1/3 acres in size. has a large house on it and provides about 100 dockage spaces. A loan appraisal done a year ago came in at three quarters of a million. Qo.;."T\er is interested in expanding. 12.~: Northeast Shore of St. Alban's Bay Location: Northeast shore of St. Alban's Bay off of St. Alban's Bay Road at the end of Weeks Road Comments: Property is a large undeveloped wooded parcel discovered in field investigation of area. Initial inspection indicates it may have potential for public access development if location on the lake is desirable. Plat map indicates 156' of lake shore frontage x 317' x 233' x 40' x 206'. Location at end of Weeks Road would be a drawback as street is fairly narrow and residential. Property not for sale. 13. Site: Old Location: Comments: fishing Railroad Right-of-Way In Greenwood on east side of Lower Lake South Site may provide opportunities for improvements area but is too small for public access development. as a shore 14. Site: Sandy Beach LOCation: At northern end of Northern Road in Deephaven Comments: Approximately ~ acre neighborhood swimming beach. Size of parcel and conflicts with existing public use make site unfeasible for public access development. 15.~: Rocky Beach Location: At northern end of Keewaydin Street in Deephaven Comments: Approximately t acre neighborhood swimming beach. Size of parcel and conflicts with existing public use make site unfeasible for public access development. 16. Site: Carson's Bay Marina LOCation: On south shore of Comments: Municipal marina residents. Carson's Bay in Deephaven for wet storage of boats by Deephaven 17. Site: Carson's Bay Access LOCation: On southeast shore of Carson's Bay in Deephaven Comments: Boat launch with concrete ramp. 27 car/trailer spaces on site that are free to Deephaven residents or require a $50' annual permit for non-city residents. 80 other car/trailer spaces combined at Deephaven City Hall (west of site) and elementary school (east of site) within 1.500 feet. 18. Site: Nocomo Beach LOCation: Northeast shore of Carson's Bay in Deephaven Comments: Small community swimming beach in residential area. Size and location make parcel unfeasible for public access development. 19. Site: Deephaven B~ach and Park LOCation: East side of St. Louis Bay off of Lake Avenue ~II'-=~ \"Vl'tvIUL.lll-lJ . ~. I . ~_..... -- .... - ..... -'. LAKE MINNETONKA ~'ZONE 3 . . - -- . _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~:i . . 1 KEY: D :' PUBLIC PROPERTY o = PRIVATE PROPERTY -- ." ~ . ..-.- . Comments: Property is, owned by City of Deephaven. 9-acre park with swil'lming beach, playground, tennis courts and hoat rental., Has develop- ~ent potential for a public access, however, may conflict with existing park uses and lake uses in the vicinity. ZONE 5 1. Site: Lost Lake Location: North shore of Cooks Bay in City of Mound Comments: City of Mound contacted, site is under consideration. 2. Site: Mound Bay Park Location: Northeast shore of Cooks Bay in City of Mound Comments: Owned by City of Mound., Approximately 2.6 acres in size with swimming beach, picnic area, pavillion and concrete boat ramp. No car-trailer parking allowed on site or adjacent street. 3. Site: Highland Park LOCation: In Mound on north shore of Priest's ~ay Comments: 1.5 acres with 184 feet of lake front on Priests bay. It is partially developed, being maintained by local residents as a clearly grassy area sloping gently down to the lake. It is presently used as a playground and for resident dockage. Potential, for shore fishing. Size, location and slope of parcel make access development unfeasible. 4. Site: Halsted's Bay LOCation: West side of Halsted's Bay off of Halsted Road Comments: House is currently for sale and lies just to the west of the existing Williams Street access. May have potential to be purchased for upgrading of existing access site, however, 'small vacant lot which is not for sale lies between access and house. Property has 150' of lakeshore but is somewhat narrow. Asking price: $134,500. 5. Site: Williams Property i:"OC"ation: West side of Halsted's Bay off of Halsted Road Comments: Owner is interested in selling a parcel of property which fronts on a channel to Halsted's Bay to the DNR for public access purposes. This access, if purchased and developed, would essentially replace the existing access at Williams Street, but would provide off-road parking. In return, the owner would like the Williams Street access vacated and is assuming ownership would revert to him. The property is in the process of heing appraised. Legal questions as to the ownership of the channel bed need to be looked into. 6. Site: Six Mile Creek Location: On west side of Kings Point Road off of Highway 7 on Six Mile Creek Comments: Property recommended as an alternative to the Kings Point Road property. Propc'rty has approximately 1200' on Six Nile Creek which enters into Holstad' li Bl\Y. Thera 1u a b6' casement off of Kings Point Road to the property which is 255' back from the road. Site contains 5-6 acres of high land (l acre wooded), the remainder 'is low lying. ., .' Field inspection indicates that the site would be suitable for public access development and the water depths of the creek are adequate. There are no structures on the si te , the asking price is $98,500. Currently a purchase agreement is in on the parcel. i. Site: St. Boni's Location: On north side of Six Mile Creek just off of Highway 7 outside of St. Bonifacius Comments: This parcel was suggested as another alternative to the Kings Point Road property. Map indicates parcel is approximately 2l miles up Six Mile Creek from entrance to Halsted's Bay. Property has a house and lot listed for sale. Field investigation indicated that while water depth is adequate for a small boat to travel up the channel, the dis- tance and length of time it takes makes this proposal undesirable. 8. Site: Kings Point Road LOCation: On west side of Halsted's Bay adjacent to Kings Point Road off of Highway 7 Comments: Site was considered for public access acquisition several years ago, however, strong local opposition put a stop to it. Owner is a willing seller. Property has been appraised and an option acquired. Location on lake and topography and size of site make it a good candi- date for public access development. 9. Site: Carlson Property .' Location: On Halsted's Bay off of Kings Point Road and Highway 7 Comments: Carlson has approximately 109 acres of property. A number of various options for acquisition and development of several acres could be feasible. Owner has been contacted to see if willing to consider selling a portion of the property to the DNR. To date, no response has been received. Property appears to be in a trust for the children which may prohibit any negotiations. 10. Site: Sotith Bay Drive LOCation: On south shore of Halsted Bay just east of Lotus Drive Comments: Property currently listed for sale. Undeveloped and heavtly wooded. Steep slope to the lake would make access development unfeasible. 11. Site: County Road 44 Location: On southeast shore of.Ha1sted's Bay off of County Road 44 Comments: Two adjacent parcels were considered for public access development several years ago. One parcel is triangular in shape and has a small white cabin on it. The other parcel is adjacent and to the south of the first one, is fairly wooded and has a seasonal home on it. The property owners of both sites were recently contacted to see if they had any interest in selling to the DNR for public access purposes. The owners of the first parcel, who have only recently bought the property, responded "if you offer \15 enough money". As both parcels would be needed, the other property owner was contacted also. Her response was an absolute "no". She stated that she would be very opposed to public aCCUS8 llt that locution and 1\3<1 no daslre to SQll to thQ DNR for such purposes-~either presently or in the future. ~ '~ . .. 12. Site: Former Bachman Greenhouses Location: On southeast s1.de of West Upper Lake off of County Road 44 and Shady Lane Comments: This is a 16! acre parcel that was formerly part of the Bachman estates. It was for sale several years ago and was offered to the DNR for one million dollars. Much of the property is heavily wooded and there are numerous buildings, greenhouses and a large residential house which is currently being renovated on it. Much of the shoreline is fairly steep but there is. an existing ramp with a level area adjacent to it. Due to the size and asking price for the parcel (and the status of the Lake Minnetonka Task Force), the site was never pursued. The current owners were recently contacted to see if they had any interest in selling a portion of their property for public access purposes or if they would be willing to meet to discuss it further. After numerous attempts to elicit a response, they remain non-committal. The site has some potential- but acquisition and development costs would'be expensive due to the nature of the parcel and the distance from existing public roads to the lake. 13. Site: Casamita Road LOCation: On south shore of West Upper Lake off of Highway 7 at the end of Casamita Road Comments: Large undeveloped wooded parcel of property identified by boat. Appeared to have potential for access development (level topography, good location on lake, not heavily developed area). Plat map indicates parcel is part of a large estate and any access proposal would entail a subdivision of the' parcel and a lengthy road development. 14. Site: Bayview LOCation: On southwest shore of Smithtown Bay on Bayview Comments: Property currently listed for sale. Over three acres in size with residential house. 150' of lakeshore but fairly steep slope makes access development unfeasible. Asking price: $379,000. 15. Site: Smithtown Bay LOCation: On southeast side of Smithtown Bay off of Smithtolnl Road Comments: Property is currently listed for sale. It sits adjacent to a new condo development and in the vicinity of the public access on Lake Virginia. The site is approximately 392' deep and 101' wide. It.has a house on it which is currently being rented and is in disrepair. The site has the potential for access development and may be even more desirable if additional near-by property could be acquired for overflow parking during peak access use time(i. Owner willing to sell for "the right price." 16. Site: Smithtown Bay - Overflow Parking Location: On west side of Smithtown Road just south of Smithtown Terrace Comments: Parcel currently listed for sale. Potential for overflow parking in conjunction with access development off of Smithtown Road. Surrounded by the backs of homes. Approximately i acre is size with 188' along the road. Asking price: $52,000. Owner hesitant to sell to DNR and location in residential area are drawbacks. 17.~: SmithtownBay - Overflow Parking , .. ,.,. LocC1tion: On Highwny 7 and Iris, just west of Smithtown Road Comments: Parcel may be a good site for access overflow parking in conjunction with an access on Smithtown Bay. Site has approximately 170' of road frontage on Highway 7 and 120' on Iris. Asking price is $35,000. 18. Site: Howards Point Marina Location: East side of South Upper Lake off of Howards Point Road Comments: Called owner to see it property was for sale or if Otnler would consider selling. Response was that he was not interested in selling. . -.':#- vi I Lv . "V.~uIIJLf"lLIJ I VII r UU.....v .t-\"'"....~u . . . LAKE MINNETONKA-ZONE 5 . . ------ -- ------ . -- . ~-~~ UJO~'~ . - - ~ :. :~~ ~ A '"( ~ KEY: D = PUBLIC PROPERTY o = PRIV A.!E PROPERTY A~ ~ .-....- South lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department 143 OAK STREET EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331.3095 RICHARD A. YOUNG Chief (612) 474.3261 1. I would reconmend that any monies needed corne from the revenue sources I identified in my letter to Mrs. Kristi Stover dated 09/11/85. 2. I would next recommend the monies come from cutting the civil defense siren budget to $7,500. This would still give the city of Shorewood a continuing plan for the purchase and installation of these units. It merely spreads the cost out over a two year period. 3. At last nights formula meeting, it was pointed out that if Shorewoodpaid for police services on a per capita basis, their share of the South Lake budget would be in excess of $327,000. They are getting more than their monies worth, even at the $291,791. 4. The South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department will have to put on a juvenile officer, full time, next year - even if the extra money from Shorewood is cut. This was 1/2 time last year and the work load, particularly the child and sexual abuse areas, have mandated this be full time. If the budget is not maintained at the level passed originally, the only alternative is to reduce the patrol force by one person. Since each patrol officer writes an average of more than $15,000 in traffic tickets, this revenue would be lost! Shorewoods share would be at least $5,000. Shorewood should then reduce the fine and forfeit revenue by that amount. Assuming Shorewood plans to cut to a level of ~287,250, the mathematics show that from a fiscal standpoint alone, Shorewood is better off to spend the $4,500 extra and maintain the $5,000 revenue. 5. The police department has reached the breaking point. The City of Shorewood currently has a problem with their streets because of a lack of funds to maintain them several years ago. Therefore, they have budgeted large amount of money to start bringing them back into reasonable shape. may even cost more now than it would have to maintain them several years Without the additional manpower, the police department will be like the streets; they will break, the morale will erode, the work ethic will disintegrate, and the finest police department in the country will crumble. Unlike the streets, however, no amount of money could restore the department. These are human beings not streets, once broken they can never be brought back to the same level of performance. It has taken almost 13 years to build the department to what it now is. I can not believe that Shorewood wants to lose what it has taken so long to build. a It back. Sf'fl'ina South Lake Minnetonka Communities of Excelsior, Greem','ood, Shorel"lood and Tonka Bay CITY OF SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Lindstrom called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Lindstrom, Commissioners Schmid, Jakel, Kooi and Vogel; Council Liaison Gagne; Public Works Director Zdrazil and Deputy Clerk Niccum Absent: Commissioner Carl (excused) Due to the fact that Council Liaison Gagne and Public Works Director Zdrazil had to be at a 7:30 Budget Review meeting, the following issues were discussed first. BADGER PARK FOOTBALL FIELD Public Works Director Zdrazil reported that the football field is in really bad shape. The damage was discovered Wednesday morning, September 25. The turf is torn up in spots due to playing on it while wet. He said it may be unplayable for the rest of the year. Commission discussed the issue and considered closing the field down. They questioned why the coaches would allow play when they could see the damage that was being done to the field. The Commission and Public Works Director reached the following decisions: 1. Public Works Director Zdrazil will let Sue know if the field is to be closed down. Sue will contact whoever is responsible. When the field is again playable he will let Sue know and she will re-contact the person responsible. 2. Sue will give the football schedule to Public Works Director Zdrazil and Commissioner Kooi. 3. Commissioner Kooi will write a letter to responsible person telling them the field is closed until further notice. FREEMAN PARK - PROGRESS Chairman Lindstrom reported that Stuart Schmidt, the contractor that was going to do the grading within 2", put in the road and parking lots, is no longer working for the company. George Adams of the company Stuart worked for said he had not been aware that the roads were part of the deal. He said he would meet with the City Engineer but did not feel he could put the roads in for nothing. He also stated that he did not have any agreement in writing from Shorewood Oaks and is not positive he will be the one doing the work. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 30, 1985 page two FREEMAN PARK CONTINUED Chairman Lindstrom also talked to Terry Klomps of the Tonka Men's Club and explained the situation, saying that the roads are not in and did not know when this would be done. Terry Klomps is going to call the VoTech teacher and see if it can be made a project for next year instead. MANOR PARK FENCE The posts are in the ground. The chain will be done soon. CATHCART PARK HOCKEY RINK Public Works Director Zdrazil said he would like to see a new rink at Cathcart. He said the crew could help build it. The Commission discussed what bad shapE the existing rink is in. Dr. James Woog of 27200 West 62nd Street was present with several hockey players who commented on the dangerous condition of the present rink. Jakel moved, Kooi seconded, to recommend to Council that the old rink at Cathcart ~~m~.~:.~ ~~'~~i~.~~~.~5.~~~;is~t~='~'~p!~k~i~.Pi~::i:~.~;~~.a~~;;<~~~~;j,::~:'t'~1.~~~~~""';~~2~.~tfk $5000: Motion carried unanimously. Dr. Woog offered to help with information on hockey rinks. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Schmid moved, Jakel seconded, to approve the minutes as written. Motion carried unanimously. PARK COMMISSION APPLICANT - CAROLYN SQUIRES - 5800 CHRISTMAS LAKE ROAD,' Schmid moved, Vogel seconded, to recommend to Council to appoint Carolyn Squit~s to the Park Commission. Motion carried - 5 ayes - 1 abstain (Commissioner Kooi abstained because she was not present at the last meeting during the interview. Commissioner Carl was not present but announced at the last meeting that he was in favor of the appointment. VGtLr/JC<Cl.'-' I () 3/- fr VANDALISM IN PARKS Commission discussed vandalism in City Parks. Staff reported that the door had been . ripped off the Satellite at Cathcart Park. Commission asked Staff to contact Police Chief Young to see if he would attend one of their meetings to give them advice on the proper way to handle the problem. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 30. 1985 page three MANOR PARK WARMING HOUSE':; Dr. Woog suggested the Park Commission check with Vo Tech to see if they would be interested in using a shelter for Manor Park as a project. Commission discussed the fact that the existing warming house is not repairable and is dangerous. They asked Staff to ask Public Works Director Zdrazil if the warming house is salvagable or if it should be burned down. Commissioner Jakel will check with the Excelsior Fire Department to see if they would be interested in using it for practice. Kooi moved, Jakel seconded, to. ~~c()rnmend to Council to have PupJi,.<;. ~prk:;>D:l-rec::t:()Jt Zdraz il ptlrchase an(>t:~er ",fJF~''',i~~f1~H4.,tl1~t:,~.~"pe .if,l~ ',' '~.#~~f ,"'.'a't",i~rk;:',,'$.'~\c Iii 'i:nit<i~f'~iJrtd.~~'~t~~~~rl~~~TItti a l1ds ufi6'tHIi1~:'by 'sA;i~na" 16 g'~?'~;~"p1':~ d around 'the'- ."rfre'rthg"'l' rorJ:'.'~'e'ai:.{ng. (Chairman Lindstrom wi 11 stake out the spot to place the "fire ring".) Motion carried unanimously. FINANCIAL REPORT These figures will be verified, and corrected if necessary, when the August and September Financial Reports corne back from the Auditor. Expenses Balance AUGUST 31, 1985 BALANCE $18,121.03 Expenses Fence-Manor Park (Jim Hatch Sales) $ 164.37 17,956.66 Lumber-Freeman Park Sign 12.16 17,944.45 City Engineer-Freeman Park Survey, etc. 1,525.64 16,418.86 TOTAL EXPENSES ............$1,702.17 PARK FEES RECEIVED ............ -0- OTHER INCOME RECEIVED ......... -0- SEPTEMBER 30, 1985 BALANCE ..................................... $16,418.86 . PARK COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 30, 1985 page four SNOWMOBILE ORDINANCE A memo to Sue from Dan Vogt, regarding the Snowmobile Ordinance, was distributed to the Park Commission. Mr. John Arnst of 5480 Teal Circle would like the Snowmobile Ordinance amended. His complaint indicated that snowmobiles are using the abandoned track as a raceway at all hours, night and day. They are also littering. He wishes to know if speed can be controlled, especially in areas with homes close to the track, The Commission deferred dis~ussion on this ~ssue until alater, meeting beca\l~e Com- missioner Cad, who deals with the Southwest Trails Association, was not present ~~ HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY LETTER Staff is requested to write a letter to the Railroad Authority asking what can be done to enhance the existing trail. WATTERBERG PROPERTY Vogel moved, Jakel seconded, to refuommend to CQuncil;~li.-,.".if',~~e Wa~U;~'t,per.Fn;:~rty at 20240 is offered to the City for park use, the Councihrefuse to accept it ror~ such use. Motion carried unanimously. CATHCART PARK - TREE TRANSPLANTING Mark Labaree will transplant the trees out of Cathcart Park and into the desired locations. He and Chairman Lindstrom will meet and inspect the parks to choose the sites. In return for his services, for every tree he transplants for the City, he will receive one tree. He is donating the trees he receives to the MInnewashta School for landscaping purposes. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Commissioner Kooi brought up the blacktop that had been dumped in Freeman Park. Commission is placing a request before the Council, asking that nothing be dumped in City Parks without Park Commission approval. REPORTS none ADJOURNMENT Kooi moved, Jakel seconded, to adjourn at 9:15 PM. Motion carried unanimously. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Sue Niccum Deputy Clerk