The URL can be used to link to this page

121685 CC Reg AgP "'Y. ",_ . .. .. ( CITY OF SHOfiEWOOD REGUALR COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. AGE N D A CALL TO ORDER (Att #l-Minutes) ~ JJ4 5~.- j~ ~~ / V'/ A. Pledge of Allegiance and Prayer B. Roll Call 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Council Minutes of Novemger 25, 1985 2. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR A. B. 3. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT A. B. 4. PARK COMMISSION REPORT A. B. 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. Project #84-2 - Street Replacement Payment Voucher #6 & Final Valley Paving (Att. #5A-Payment Voucher) B. Permanent Appointment - Assistant Public Works Director - Howard Stark (Att. #5C-Memo) C. Pressure Washer Purchase Motion moved by Seconded by Vote (J~ ~~.~~. (Att. #5C-Memo) , COUNCIL.AGENDA MONDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1985 page two , 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT To exceed 1,000 square feet - accessory building. Applicant: Delbert Hennessey Location: 6035 Seamans Drive (Att. #6-Staff ~eport) ~ 7. REVISION OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - NEAR MOUNTAIN P.U.D. Applicant: Lundgren Bros. Construction Location: S.W. corner of Covington Road and Vine Hill Road (Att. #7A-Staff Report) (Att. #7B-Engineer's Report) 8. PRE-AFPLICATION FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT INFORMAL DISCUSSION - ELDERLY HOUSING FACILITY Applicant: Joe Gorecki Location: 6155 Riviera Lane (Att. #8-Staff Report) 9. PRESENTATION BY SUBURBAN HENNEPIN REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT 10. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Applicant: Roy Ahern Location: Lot 11- Radisson Inn Addition (Att. #10-AhernRequest Staff Correspondence) 11. REQUEST FOR BUILDING PERMIT FOR POLE BARN Applicant: Jane Kline Location: 5990 Strawberry Lane (Att. #11-Staff Report) 12. PLANNER'S REPORT A. Extend Interim Zoning Ordinance ~~..rp ~~-' ~l~ s i--r~ (J~ B. ~ COUNCIL. AGENDA MONDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1985 page three 13. ATTORNEY'S REPORT A. Garbage Ordinance - 2nd Reading (Att. #13A-3rd draft Ordinance) B. Weight Restriction Ordinance - Reading (refer to packet - 11/25/85) C. Updates: 1. Blood Litigation 2. Murfin Property Purchase 3. Naegele Sign Litigation D. 14. ENGINEER'S REPORT A. B. 15. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Engineering Proposals B. Enchanted Island Beaver Trapping C~ Animal Control Contract . (Refer to packet - 11/25/85) D. Discussion of Parking Ban for Snowplowing E. Water and Sewer Budget Approval F. Water and Sewer Rate Changes G. \ \ Jl~~_ "....._....~t If': .. .".' ...." ,.~ _~ SHOREWOODfoo"...... ~....,'v...~~ ....hr~ ................ II. OUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB NOVEMBER 25, 1985 7:30 P.M. ROAD CITY OF REGULAR MONDAY, 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, November 25, 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 Gagne, Shaw, Stover and Haugen (arrived at 7:35) Staff: Attorney Froberg, Engineer Norton, Administrator Vogt, Planner Nielsen and Clerk Kennelly APPROVAL OF MINUTES Stover moved, seconded by Gagne, to approve the minutes of the Council meeting of November 12, 1985 as written. Motion carried unanimously. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Tingewood Road Problem D'=nnis Clarke of 20880 Radisson Inn Road requested the City to snow- plow Tiffany Lane in order to gain access to his driveway. He does not feel that it is his responsibility to plow that road, he only has an easement over the road for access. The property is in a process of foreclosure and the owner responsible for that property is unclear. Engineer Norton indicated that the road was intended to be private and without design changes it should not be taken over by the City. Haugen moved, seconded by Gagne, to direct the Attorney or Admini- strator to find the current responsible property owner and instruct him to plow the road. Motion carried unanimously. Temporary Sign Request - Friends of Minnetonka Hockey Mr. Bob Naegele, a board member of the "Friends of Minnetonka Hockey", was present to request a temporary sign to be placed at 20095 State Highway 7. This sign would be for the purpose of obtaining funds to support the Senior High Hockey Association, and would be placed for approximately two weeks during the holiday season. i . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MINUTES MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1985 page two . Temporary Sign Request - Friends of Minnetonka Hockey-continued Shaw moved, seconded by Gagne, to approve a 4' x 8' Holiday sign for a two week period of time. Motion carried - 3 ayes - 2 ~ . (Rascop and Stover). d~ PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Stover referred to the November 19, 1985 "Summary of Motions" that covered the following items: 1. AubrechtjSiegel - Simple Subdivision and lot width variance. 2. Burger King - setback variance and variance to expand a non- conforming structure. 3. Michael Spear - Conditional Use Permit 4. Setback Varinace - 5900 Boulder Bridge Lane 5. Simple Subdivision - 6065 Lake Linden Drive 6. Informal Discussion - Near Mountain P.U.D. PARK COMMISSION REPORT Carolyn Squires reported on the Commission's study of the snowmobile Ordinance and the use of the vacated railroad bed. 7:45 PUBLIC HEARING LIQUOR STORE CONTINUED OFF-SALE OPERATIONS RESOLUTION NO. 85-85 The public hearing to hear the issue of whether or not to continue operations of the Off-Sale Municipal liquor stores was called to order by Mayor Rascop at 7:58 P.M. State statutes require that a hearing be held within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year where the stores have had operation losses in two out of the three year period. The public hearing was closed at 8:01 P.M. after calling for and receiv- ing no public comments. Stover indicated that the past 15 months of operation have become profitable and feels confident that this will continue. Haugen moved, Gagne seconded, to continue the Off-Sale operations in both of the municipal stores. Motion carried oy Roll 9all Vote - 5 ayes. - .- J ~ CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MINUTES MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1985 page three liitl SIMPLE SUBDIVISION AND LOT WIDTH VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 86-85 AUBRECHT/SIEGEL-20555 AND 20575 RADISSON INN ROAD This division is requested to allow increasing Siegel's small lot and to straighten out the lot line that currently is very close to their dwelling on the west lot line. The variance is needed because of the narrow frontage. Gagne moved, Shaw seconded, to approve the simple subdivision and the lot width variance subject to submittal and approval of the title opinion also the division to be filed within 30 days of receipt of the resolution. Motion carried by Roll Call Vote - 5 ayes. DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR VARIANCE BURGER KING RESOLUTION NO. 87-85 A request was submitted by Mr. Jim Winstead of Burger King - 19425 State Highway 7, for a setback variance and a variance to expand a nonconforming structure. His plans are to remodel interior and add an area for coolers and a garden house eating area. Rascop asked Mr. Winstead if he was going to address compliance with his parking spaces and signage as suggested by Planner Nielsen. Winstead would need corporate approval from Burger King to change the signage, and he has no more room to add additional parking spaces within his commercial property. Gagne expressed concerns that if a $110,000 remodeling project was approved, that it may cost the city additional funds if condemnation is needed to correct the traffic problems at the Highway 7/Vine Hill Road intersection. Mr. Winstead indicated that he would go ahead with the interior remodeling even if the variance were not approved, and that the cost of condemnation is in relationship to the business done. Haugen moved, seconded by Stover, to deny the to the noncompliance with the City Ordinance. to 2 nays (Shaw and Gi3.gl~~). CONDITIONAL USE PE~~ MICHAEL SPEAR-22570 MURRAY ST. variance request due Motion dgR~d - 3 ayes ~ RESOLUTION NO. 88-85 Mr. Spears request is to add additional garage space that will exceed 1000 square feet. He is asking for a total garage space of 1128 square feet pursuant to Shorewood Zoning Ordinance. Planner Nielsen reviewed the specifications of the Ordinance and indicated that Mr. Spear's request does comply with the requirements of the Ordinance. Stover moved, seconded by Gagne, to grant the C.U.P. to add the garage for residential use only, no "Home Occupational" use is being granted at this time. Motion carried by Roll Call Vote-5 ayes. CITY OF SHOREWOOD ~ COUNCIL MINUTES MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1985 page five ~ POLICE DEPARTMENT CONTRACT DISCUSSION - continued Rascop felt that some of Shorewood's requests will have to be addressed, or they will agree only to renew the present contract on a five (5) year term. Council thanked Mr. Albrecht for reviewing the progress of the com-, mittee. He indicated that he will bring back to the committee Shore- wood's concerns for review. Council Break.".....................................10:31 P.M. -- 10:37 P.M. SIGN REQUEST - NEAR MOUNTAIN P.U.D. Pete Pflaum of the Near Mountain Development has requested a develop- ment sign to advertise his homes to the south in Ghanhassen. He felt that the north side of the project needs to be advertised. He feels this will help to complete this phase of the project so he can then proceed into Shorewood with his development. The sign will be reworded to advertise his Shorewood development later. Shaw moved, seconded by Gagne, to approve the sign as requested for one (1) year with completion of P.U.D. zoning. Motion carried - 5 ayes. ENGINEER'S REPORT Status Report on Cost of Water Extension to Lake Linden Drive Project Engineer Norton indicated that updated cost estimates were being made and will be presented with the projects staff report. Rascop would also like cost estimates for spreading trunk costs only to affected properties along the water line extension. ATTORNEY'S REPORT Garbage Disposal Ordinance - 1st Reading Weight Restriction Ordinance Draft Council reviewed the Weight Restriction that may amend the current Ordinance. They then reviewed the draft Garbage Disposal Ordinance and made a number of changes to be drawn into a new draft and re- submitted for review. Haugen moved, seconded by Gagne, to accept the revised draft as the 1st reading of the Garbage Disposal Ordinance. Motion carried - 5 ayes. . e CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MINUTES MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1985 page six ATTORNEY'S REPORT - continued Murfin Property Discussion No response has been received from Murfin asking him to remove the oil tanks before the City will purchase the property. Shaw stated that Mr. Murfin feels that ICO is responsible for the removal of the tanks. When contacting ICO, they stated that the tanks are not theirs, but Mr. Murfins. Gagne moved, seconded by Stover, to not complete purchase of the Murfin property until the removal of the tanks and/or any polluted ground have been removed. Motion carried - 3 ayes --2 nays (Haugen and Shaw) Naegele Sign Issue Written response stating the Council position was sent to Naegele Sign dated November 13, 1985. To date no response has been com- municated from Naegele Sign. Blood Litigation The clean up on the Blood project has not been sufficently done. Attorney Froberg will send another letter informing him of that fact, and if not completed, the City will proceed with the clean up and charge back the cost to the Blood property. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Enchanted Island Beaver Complaint A letter has been received from resident Chester Yanik of 4245 Enchanted Lane complaining of the problems being caused by the overpopulation of beavers and the destruction of trees. Gagne moved, seconded by Rascop, to amend the current trapping Ordinance by allowing the temporary use of the steel leg trap in order to control the problem. Trapping on the islands only, with prior notification to all the residents. Permits would be required that include a time limit. Motion was denied - 2 ayes (Rascop and Gagne) 3 nays. Haugen moved, seconded by Gagne, to find a trapper that would obtaina permit and live trap and remove the beavers. Motion carried - 5 ayes. 'T CITY OF SHOREWOOD. COUNCIL MINUTES MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1985 page seven . ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS - continued Approval of Corridor Study Funding Resolution NO. 91-85 Correspondence form Ann Perry of the Met Council was received requesting Shorewood's support of $5000 to proceed with the corridor study. She did indicate that Shorewood should receive some form of credit for the portion of their study used in the new corridor study. The amount of credit or the possible responsibility of Minnetonka toward Shorewoodwas not determined. Gagne moved, seconded by Rascop, to allocate $5000 toward the Corridor Study as requested by the Met Council. Motion carried - 4 ayes - 1 nay (Haugen) by Roll Call Vote. Fire Protection Contract Gagne moved, seconded by Stover, to accept the 1986 Fire Contract and authorize the Mayor to sign the contract in the amount of $45,061 cost to Shorewood. Motion carried - 5 ayes. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Rascop informed the Council of the Fair Labor Standards Act being overt~rown. The Met Council Task Force on lake accesses have been very cooperative. Rascop indicated that they are trying to obtain additional parking spaces rather than trying to develop additional access. They are trying to obtain parking and accesses from existing marinas. COUNCIL REPORT Council directed staff to check possible violations on the following properties: Village Pump - possible junk cars Vine Hill Furniture - signage Skipperette - advertising sign APPROVAL OF CLAIMS Gagne moved, seconded by Haugen, to adjourn the Regular Council meeting of November 25, 1985 subject to approval of claims for payment at 12:13 P.M. Motion carried unanimously - 5 ayes. General Fund - Acct. #00166-02 Liquor Fund - Acct. #00174 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Checks 31338 - 31432 = $149,004.00 Checks 4111 - 4194 = $ 47,812.62 Sandra Kennelly City Clerk 1 . / / l CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:39 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie; Commissioners Mason, Schultz, Reese, Benson (arrived 7:51 PM); Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen; Plan. Asst. Helgesen. Absent: Commissioners Watten and Spellman. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Reese moved, seconded by Mason to approve the minutes of November 19, 1985 as written. Motion carried unanimously. 7:30 PM PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT E.G. Rosenthal - 20095 Excelsior Blvd. and 5405 & 5385 St. Alban's Bay Road Mr. Richard Larsen, Architect and Planner, of Wirtanen, Clark, Larsen Architects represented the applicant, Mr. E.G. Rosenthal. He is seeking approval of a land use change to allow for a two-story office building on the north side of Highway 7, just west of Excelsior Covenant Church property. Mr. Larsen explained that the plan has been expanded since the preapplication stage and now includes 5.5 acres total. The property is currently zoned R-2A which would allow single ~nd two-family residential. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to R-C, Residential-Commercial. Mr. Larsen feels that the proposed use would be quite compatible with the existing residential neighborhood for the following reasons: the main usage would consist of daytime only; weekday only; will create a noise barrier from the highway; all parking would be in front (south side); all lighting would be contained in front and low-level; traffic would access directly to Highway 7 via a proposed intersection. According to his sources, Mr. Larsen said it is estimated that an office building of this size would use about 4 - 5 thousand gallons of water per day. He said that an estimate of this amount could easily be provided by private wells. In response to the recommendation in the Planner's Report, Mr. Larsen said that they do not want to wait for the Corridor Study to be completed before the land use change. As a matter of fact, he feels they would have a better chance with the Highway Dept. approving an intersection if they already had che land use change approval, and the project would be contingent upon approval of the intersection. Chair Leslie invited the public to present their comments: Ken Vogel, 19795 Excelsior Blvd., said his main concern is increased traffic in front of his residence which is east of the project, and that the drainage may run off onto his lower-lying property. Mr. Larsen replied that since their project is contingent upon approval of a full-service intersection, all traffic would access directly on and off of the highway. As far as drainage is concerned, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requires that the project would not be allowed to increase the rate of run-off without being able to absorb it. Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 page two Penny Vogel, 19795 Excelsior Blvd., is also concerned about traffic. She said she believes the developer would like to pressure the Highway Dept. into granting the intersection by gaining approval of the project first. Also she is concerned about run-off from the parking lot polluting Footprint Lake. Mr. Larsen replied that as far as traffic goes, if this area were to be developed as residential, without an intersection, there would be almost as much traffic generated as opposed to traffic generated by an office building. In response to pollution of Footprint Lake, Mr. Larsen said the Watershed District requires that they build a holding pond with an outlet that traps any petroleum or other products floating in the water. Bob Reutiman, 5915 Galpin Lake Rd., doesn't like "spot zoning" in the middle of a residential area, and concerned about the drainage pattern. He doesn't believe an office building would generate the same or less traffic as residential. Walter Bean; 5285 St. Alban's Bay Rd., asked of the Commission: _ What is the Commission's posture in respect to "spot zoning"? Planner Nielsen replied that the Comprehensive Plan discourages uncoordinated Sp0t zoning, although, an R~C District to some degree is intended to be a spot zone. What criteria do the Commission and Council apply to consideration of the need for c.ommercial use in what is basically a single-family residential area? Chair Leslie explained that market studies' are done and submitted to the Commission in order to assess the needs of a community. Peter Boyer, 19685 Excelsior Blvd., reminded the Commission that his neighborhood was given assurance at the Trivesco public hearing that no commercial development would be allowed on the north side of Highway 7. He does not want more intense zoning than already exists. He feels the noise factor and parking congestion problems would worsen; the project would lower property values; and signage would become a nuisance. He feels this particular project would be a good idea if it were located in an appropriate commercial zoning. Vallace Wierson, 19765 Excelsior Blvd., reaffirmed the point made at the Trivesco public hearing that no commercial development would occur on the north of Highway 7. Dorothy Wellens, 19550 Excelsior Blvd., feels the developer should consider dividing this property for residential lot~. Mr. Larsen replied that is is doubtful anyone would pay a reasonable price ($25-35,000) for a lot in this location. Chuck Rosenberger, 19780 Excelsior Blvd., Deephaven, believes traffic pattern would result in increased traffic on Hooper Lake Road. Bonnie Workman, 19610 Excelsior Blvd., Deephaven, urges Shorewood to coordinate its planning more closely with Deephaven, which has maintained a high quality residential neighborhood with safe streets. David Thiede, 20145 Excelsior Blvd., wanted to know if this project would depreciate his property values and who will pay for the loss. Barbara Martin, 20185 Excelsior Blvd., feels the wayside rest is enough of a buffer from the highway noise. Afraid that a change in zoning toward commercial won't stop at R-C, and they will end up with something like MacDonald's next. Also believes the water usage and run-off estimates are not accurate according to what she claims the DNR will say. Dennis Martin, 20185 Excelsior Blvd., agrees that the wayside rest is enough of a buffer. He said two different real estate agents told him the project would cause a 25% loss in property value to his and his neighbor's property, with a 10% loss for the property across the street. Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 page three Larry Buesgens, 20090 Excelsior Blvd., concerned about increased traffic; run-off fromithe Trivesco project; the parking lot including landscaping chemicals will cause pollution; spot zoning is a critical issue with the neighborhood; the project would ruin the aesthetics of the neighborhood; he sees no advantage to viewing the project as a buffer. Carol Buesgens, 20090 Excelsior Blvd.,does not want to see the integrity or the quality of the residential neighborhood challenged. Todd Hendries, 20050 Excelsior Blvd., feels that this property is being proposed for zoning change not to meet the needs of the community, but the needs of one developer. Feels the property is viable and saleable as is. Concurred with all other objections raised above. Don Jakel, 5405 St. Alban's Bay Rd., approves of the project since it1iO.lldi.Iq>rovetaxbase. Dave Juliene, Excelsior Covenant Church, most concerned with potential traffic problems. Public portion of the public hearing closed at 9:05 P.M. Commissioner Schultz asked about the assurance which was given to the neighborhood at the Trivesco public hearing regarding no further development north of Highway 7. Liaison Stover explained that the assurance was given by the Council during discussion of a proposed intersection for Trivesco. Comm. Mason asked for the location of the south side of this intersection. Planner Nielsen pointed out Old Market Road in the Trivesco project. Liaison Stover also pointed out that the Traffic study done by the City Engineer indicated that we would need access south of Highway 7 to Highway 7 and that the Vine Hill intersection could not handle it. However, since then the Corridor Study, sponsored by six communities and Met Council, has not come back with their recommendation regarding this intersection yet. Chair Leslie asked for clarification on the drainage plan from Trivesco to the north. Planner Nielsen said there is an existing culvert which would allow some flow to the north side of Highway 7. Chair Leslie asked Mr. Larsen about the marketability of the proposal. He said they do not anticipate any problem in renting the office space considering the rate of growth in Shorewood. He said that if a market study were done he is sure it would affirm a need. Planner Nielsen added that there was a slight discrepancy in the staff report in that it omitted the fact that the subdivision of the Roddy property was never recorded and is therefore void. Mr. Rosenthal said he has an option on this lot and is considering including it in the project site for use as additional buffer to the west. Comm. Schultz commented that he gives substantial consideration to the fact that this neighborhood was given assurance of no further commercial development in this area, and on the basis of this assurance, moved to deny recommendation to Council, seconded by Reese. Motion to deny recommendation passed unanimously by Roll Call Vote - 5 ayes. 8:00 PM PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Delbert Hennessey - 6035 Seamans Drive Mr. Hennessey was present to request a C.U.P. to build a 22' x 22' detached garage for use as storage for garden/lawn equipment. He currently has a 24' x 26' attached garage, creating a total area of accessory buildings of 1,108 square feet. His proposal has been reduced in size from that of his initial application to build a storage space for his motor home. Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 . page four Public portion of the public hearing closed at 9:26 PM without comment. Comm. Schultz asked what he would do without this building. Mr. Hennessey replied that much of his garden equipment would have to be stored outside as it currently is. Schultz clarified with the applicant that none of this equipment is to be used in conjunction with his business. Reese moved, seconded by Benson to recommend to Council approval of the C.U.P. Chair Leslie suggested that the Zoning Ordinance in reference to home occupation regulation be considered. Reese amended his motion to recommend approval dependent upon inclusion of zoning regulations pertaining to home occupation. Benson seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8:30 PM PUBLIC HEARING - REVISION OF PRELIMINARY PLAT (NEAR MOUNTAIN) Lundgren Bros. Const. - So. of Covington Rd between Silver Lake and Vine Hill Rd. Peter Pflaum and Rick Sathre made a slide presentation of the project site, as well as an aerial view showing' 'the outlining boundaries _ ,,' Mr. Pflaum reported that he has met with Christmas Lake, Minnetonka, and Chanhassen neighbors over the last two weeks, and based upon these meetings have made some modifications in the plan. They have created additional buffer to Chanhassen boundary, and moved the traffic access point on Vine Hill Road to align with property line across the street. No changes in density were made. A Minnetonka neighbor on Vine Hill Road and Manchester wanted to know who is going to maintain the ponds across from his house. Mr. Pflaum explained that they, as the developer, plan to retain an easement in order to take care of the ponds in case the individual homeowner does not. In other areas of the project, such as the townhouse clusters, there will be a Homeowner's Association to take over property maintenance. Mr. Pflaum said there are no improvements planned to Vine'Hill Road as part of the development, this would be up to the City. In response to a question regarding run-off to the east of Vine Hill Road , Mr. Sathre explained that storm sewer plans have the drainage to the west and would regulate the level of the ponds along the east (Vine Hill Rd) border of the project. Public portion of the public hearing closed at 10:03 PM. Mr. Pflaum reviewed the Park Commission recommendations for parkland to contain lake access, allowing no motorized vehicles. One approach would be to trade some property with Bruce Construction Co. to provide parkland at the north end of Silver Lake, although they do not know to date if Mr. Bruce would approve of this. The other approach would be to acquire a small piece of land from the Bruce property more to the east, of which Mr. Bruce does approve. Planner Nielsen suggested that any recommendation for approval be subject to the following: That there be an understanding that Lots 1 - 4, Block 8 may be subject to change depending on the Bruce Bros. and their willingness to trade some land. Also some consideration should be given to the possibility of singular access for lots 1 - 3, perhaps in the form of a small cul-de-sac so as to eliminate the direct access onto Covington Road. Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 page five Recommendations, continued: - The platting of the northerly townhouses be subject to change depending on specific site plan approval. The south townhouses be platted as out lots since the design of these townhouses are not complete at this point. - Easements to the ponding areas be provided to the City because these ponding areas will take run-off from the streets. - Provide drainage and utility easements around all lots. - The preliminary plat be subject to Watershed District and DNR approval and any conditions they set forth. - As part of the development stage, the developer must submit a setback map. Adjustments may be made to the plat depending upon the resulting building pads. - The plat will be adjusted slightly on the south and west to address Minnetonka and Chanhassenconterns. - That any approval i&~tQrHtheprel-tminary plat only c1l,nd thee remainder oL:develop-, "..n ment stage approvalwiH be.discu5sed at the January meeting (architectural plans for townhouses, landscaping, grading plans, etc.). - Building setbacks will be subject to further discussion. Benson moved, seconded by Reese, to recommend to Council approval of the revised preliminary plat subject to the City Engineer's recommendations, and the recommenda- tions provided by the City Planner as outlined above. Motion passed unanimously. INFORMAL DISCUSSION - PREAPPLICATION FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Heritage Residence- 6155 Riviera Lane Mr. Gorecki, representing First American Care Facilities, Inc., presented the preapplication of a 73 unit elderly housing facility proposed to be built on approximately 4.8 acres of land located on the east side of Riviera Lane, just north of Highway 7. The proposed density of 14 units per acre exceeds the maximum density (six unit per acre) allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. Planner Nielsen described for the Commission how his recommendations would include relocating the access to the south, thereby maintaining buildability of the Reutiman lots. This access would also provide a better driveway site for the Sullivan Center and the Reutiman lots as well, instead of further access points on Lake Linden Dr. Jerry Mundt, of the architectural finn Jafvert, Mueller and Mundt, assured the Commission of the high quality, residential character of the building. He said one of their considerations was to have the access off of Riviera Lane. In regard to the density, Mr. Mundt said perhaps a P.U.D. would assure the particular use for the land. He said that studies show parking needs to be very minimcl for elderly housing. For financing reasons, the project would need municipal water, and the feasibility of providing water needs to be worked out. One possibility would be to extend water not only to the project site, but extend south to the Sullivan Center and Shorewood Shopping Center as well. Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 page six In response to a question by Comm. Schultz regarding on-site superv1.s1.on, Mr. Mundt said there would be one caretaker residing at the facility and an emergency call system would be provided in each dwelling for direct communication to the caretaker. Also, a high-standard security system installed. There will be kitchenettes in each dwelling, and a central community activity room. There has been no market study documented, although informal research shows a strong need for elderly housing. Mr. Gorecki said there is a long waiting list for occupancy at the Excelsior Senior Center which is a subsidized facility. This proposed facility would not be subsidized because this type of money is no longer available from the government, therefore, Heritage Residence would be private finance. Mr. Gorecki said he would appreciate any direction the Commission wished to provide. Commission members suggested maintaining access to the south and east toward the shopping area. Planner Nielsen said the City should recognize that the impact of allowing this density for elderly housing wouchl not. be"thesame asdensit:yoLother forms, of multiple housing. He 'also said that the'coflsiderationbf'extenrling water'be:you,eL the project site isworth'pursuing, although he isnpt sureatwhGse'expense.' Commission members said they thought the proposal was a good idea and encouraged the developer to workout the access and water issues. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR None REPORTS None ADJOURNMENT Benson moved, seconded by Schultz, to adjourn the meeting at 11:33 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Leslie announced that the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting is on Tuesday, January 7, 1986. Respectfully submitted, Patricia Helgesen e - ',/ \ \ l ORR.SCHELEN.MAYERON & ASSOCIATES. INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors :.':f: ~1z: ~... ~ ~- ! , :~,:,~ .. ..'......' ::~. G~ Shc~ewDod 5755 CD~j, try Club Ruad St;~.._;.~::c, Mn. c:~??~ ~.............. Re E:~'H: :.c,nsh;ctlon an: ':;pplJrtf'rliir,~ Wo,i: P~cJec: No, B4-2 * GentJeilH : ErC~OHC a~e four' (4) copies of CorI5tr'uctio~ Pa'''!!e!'I: ')OUC~IH Nc;, 6 and ~:na~ or: t~:e .~~~"~nced p1'O.!fCt I", the a.T:,cr: t Ot ! ~, 0:: I "75 I Pursuant to our ~i,ldobs,~vation, as per~or~eo In accordince With our contract I we hereOr certify that the materialS,are sat:sfacto"y and tne wO"K properly pe"formed ;~ accorda1ce with the plans arc spec:fications. Upon receIpt of affidavit, Stat, of Minnesota FOl'li 134, and also RHe:~-t ar,d Wai~er of Lien RigUs -hen \'."Ei Piving, Inc., ~lfiSE make na\'TllHt to Valle\' Pav;". ",.r ~r,:;r._" Lo", "!r,' ~h~.....~ "':""1'5.+' ,. _ y,-' >'.' ,.w,..<_.,~L'w\';"-rfM,.ft.i.l"fltJ'iGr-~Ij,.',;;~,ii.f:".~.. S::7C a~ yo;;r ear-] iest cOH'fnierlce. ~. ..- ('e'\" t~L'Y YOtlr~! DRR-SCHELa~-MAYERON . ~SCC1ATE:p~t'C'1~ ~.~" p, No"on:n'E' Project Engine,r J?N : RG~ En:losU~fS : va.if! ~ilinc. . lnc. ?n?1 FR~f I-I~nn~n;n AIIPnllP . .<;,,#p').":IR . MinnPlmnli.~. Minne.J;nta 55413 · 612/331- 8660 =5!f isti:at. Vouch.r Nc. t:. F ',..1 . Dah: DfCtllberlO, 1995 .. Strt.t Construct.c: ~:: ~~~~rtenint Work Projtct No. B4-2 Shorewood, Htnneplt tGU~t!, MlnntSota Contract Dah .ifor" Ccapltt,d Sept~btr 5, 1984 Novtlllber 30.,1.985 Itm No. ltllll ('ontrlc~M : "lille.;f..;, :;~c. B050-~J' 1131 SlukopH I ~1r,. t!!~:,q WorK Started Camp 11 t i Of, nat. Si~tembt!' 24: :9-;'; Ju',;~! :yBS Contract Unit Dauntit. Unit C~~t iola1 Co;~ "1'ou' :.: :at~ 2. 3r. to t. :~. to \ Cost -~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~--~~-----------------..-- I. Callon Exca~ation 2. 12341 Bituminous Wtarln~ C~Jrs. \ Incl. Bitwainous Hat.rial 1 3. .2341 Bituminous Ov.rlar { Incl. Bituminous Hat.rial ) 4 - .2331 BItUllinousBaH CJlir~~ " Incl. 8i tUIIlnous Matfrial . 5 - 12357 Tack Cti{:' " '.Aggrtga t. Bast C~;. 5;';'JOC~'Cr:ush:.fd Rock ) >,_ 7 - 42341 BitUlllI~,f~lb.'ie"..Q",K~ticme.nt '3- ~ru:ihed RotlC :ofril',~,,:,~~wo,; 9 - NaRhol. Adjustmtnts 10 - Erosion Control 11 - Sod < Incl. necessary Biick Dirt) 12 - Seeding { hcl. RHUilrl Bl.~k 1}lrt, Mulch & Ferttl izer 1 13 - Remoue 36" C.M.P. 14 - 30" R.C.P. Class V ( All De~t~ Zones) 15- IS" R.C.P. Class IV ( All Dfptt. Zones ) 16 - 12" R.C.P. Class IV PerfoNt,d ! All Depth ZontS ) 17 - 12" R.C.P. Clis~ IV : All Vfft~ Zon.s ) IB - 30" R.C. Flared End S~~t;on 19 - J5" R.C. Flared Efic S~et,0n 20 - 12" R.C. Flared End Sectlv~ 21 - 12" R.C. Surgt Baw, Mr.:E:ot ~~ta,l Plate 5200B 22 - Typ. III Rip Rap ( rnel. Fib;'lc I 23 - Typ. "A" Catch 8aslns 24 - Type "B" Catch BasIns 25 - Sub Drain 26 - Aggregat. Bas. Class j 27 - Granular Foundatior. Niter;.; 28 - Clur ud Grub t.t a I Oiiflge Ordtr Nt. I Total to Oat. c. '( . Ton Ton Ton Gal. Ton ,Ton Ton Ea. L.F. s..v. Ac. loF. l.F. LoF. L.F. loF. Ea. Ea. Ea. Ea. e.Y. Ea. Ea. loF. Ton Ton Ea. 4850 860 330 1850 650 3900 20 25 17 200 4700 37 IOS 2 1 2 o 5 3 SOD 4200 150 10 5.85 23.65 2'3.6~ 21.9.0 1.15 1",,~: 45.Q'O lLIIO lSO.O(t 4.ou 1.93 .3 50 40 75 3400.CG 4.25 IOS.ao 34.00 "?.: .CD 29.00 .:,75.00 355.Du 325 . (l!) ~50.00 45.60 3:5.00 930.60 lo.SD t: IjC .J....ti 9.c,O 200.00 ( OEDOCT (ADD) 2a372.~C 2u239.DO 7804.50 40515.u~ 812.511 3{jSI3~01l: toe .~~ 2}~~OB 22,{~ .eG 920.0t1 3933 . eo ~026.vO 212.ei~: 4320.110 2550.0C 2<+58.9\1 3132.6C 1350.00 355.00 ~5,3. 00 ,S1) .0:3 2"'0.0'[1 4075.00 2490.00 1 '32Ot~ tD 22050.00 H4fI.OO WlG.flG .$ 28S211.!)D 3Gltt 5 .2S 30691.65 iii"""""Y I 205887.40 4875 848.91 1443 .t7f! .:"3$:i"-i;.;? 11.1 .. .j 1410 22.~: j ,3 lot9 ..8 1'43.} 3 2a51i.~ 2itl'.12 t.ot 3tdt.t ,,14 58:' .50 .:,r 30:'40 .23 13G5.~O 2.1),1' : -l3C .3.0 0.06 2t.79 . Oil .4 48 32 74 : 360.30 204.30 .l4~.OO 2516.30 .,0:; ,.0 2'51 .~o 8.00 a.ao 355.0u ~5a.C8 <, ~ i.e8 1020.J5 2445.00 249&.00 14648.50 231&4.20 1379.52 1an..fliI HtII No. Itlll Chingt Ordtr ~.. t Oat. O'c'~bfr 10, 1985 Str..t Construction and Appurt.nant Work ProJlct No. 84-2 SborfWood, Htllupin County, ~l)nllfSoh . . ". lilt ""-, :>> ContractVI' Ur,i t Cor, t:- iC t Gauntity Unit Cost lotil' COit 1 - .234J SitUlinOU5 W.ar,ng Course ( Incl. Bitl/ll;nOU5 Mat.rial ) 2 - .2331 Bituminous 8ise Course ( lACI. BitUlinOU5 Hateria] ) Ton 445 .56 25&.10 481 . ~3 Ton 890 .47 iI8.3D 7.22 ~,. 34 ------------ .,~-~~'.~""~... J ,)74.40 t PigI 10f 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCIL Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagna ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt / . . 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMO TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Dan Vogt DATE: December 12, 1985 SUBJECT: Permanent Appointment - Assistant Public Works Director - Howard Stark DJV:ph Per the Employee Relationship Policy for the City, Howard Stark has serviced his probationary period as Assistant Public Works Director. Public Works Director Zdrazil and myself met with Howard to discuss his performance. We both feel Howard is performing satisfactorily in this position and hereby recommend permanent appointment to the position of Assistant Public Works Director. A pay increase of 5% to $10.34 per hour is also recommended retroactive to his six-month anniversary date of November 7, 1985. (This increase in pay plus an anniversary increase on May 7, if warranted, has been built into the 1986 City Budget.) You may recall that this pay increase was discussed at the time of appointment back in May. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore 6LJ . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCil Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMIN ISTRA TOR Daniel J. Vogt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 DATE: Mayor and Councilmembers Don Zdrazil, D~t December 12, 1985 MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Pressure Washer Purchase Upon review of the General Fund Public Works Machinery and Equipment Budget (Code 6162), a balance of approximately $5,000 remaining exists. Public Works Director Zdrazil has had demonstrations from several vendors selling pressure washer equipment. As a result of these demonstrations, it is our recommendation to purchase said pressure washer equipment from Crad Mel Enterprises of Shorewood at a cost of $2,850. Funding for the purchase is recommended to be charged to Code 6162 as outlined above. Public Works Director Zdrazil has indicated that a great deal of time is consumed after snowplowing and sanding to wash and clean the equipment to ensure its continued efficient operation. The purchase of the pressure washer will cut these labor hours substantially. You may recall that a pressure washer was budgeted for in 1986. As Finance Director Beck's memo you recently received stated, the State may cut Local Government Aid in 1986. The amount budgeted for the pressure washer in 1986 would reduce other budgetary reductions in other departments by that amount. If State aids are not cut, another equipment purchase item scheduled to be bought in 1987 may be eligible for purchase in 1986 with these funds. Let us know if you have any questions relative to this recommendation. DJV:ph ,. . A Rpt':irltmti"I Cnmmun;tv on take M;nnetonks~<; South Shore s , ~, . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 30 NOVEMBER 1985 RE: HENNESSEY, DELBERT - C.U.P. FOR GARAGE SPACE EXCEEDING 1,000 SQUARE FEET FILE NO.: 405 (85.38) BACKGROUND Pursuant to Section 200.03 Subd. 2d. of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance, Mr. Delbert Hennessey has requested a conditional use permit allowing him to exceed 1,000 square feet of area for accessory buildings. The property in question is located at 6035 Seaman's Drive (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached), is zoned R-IA, Single-Family Residential, and contains approximately 4~,720 square feet of area. The applicant proposes to build a detached 22' x 22' garage (see Exhibit B, attached). Including his existing 24' x 26' attached garage the total area of accessory buildings comes to 1,108 square feet. The existing house has a "footprint" area of 1,120 square feet. Mr. Hennessey proposes to use the new building to store a motor home and yard equipment. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION Mr. Hennessey initially applied for a building permit for a much larger building with metal siding. It was explained to him that the size was limited by the size of his principal dwelling and the size of the lot. Furthermore, the Ordinance requires that accessory buildings larger than 150 square feet must be built with a design and materials compatible with the principal dwelling. A Rp~;r/pnti;l' Cnmmllnitv nn I.akp Minnpt()nka~~ Snllth Shore o . . Re: Delbert Hennessey C.U.P. 30 November 1985 page two Mr. Hennessey has now modified his plans to comply with the requirements of the Ordinance, specifically: A. Setback and building height requirements of the R-1A district have been met. (The minimum setback requirements are as follows: front-50 feet; rear-50 feet; and sides-l0 feet. Maximum height for accessory buildings is 15 feet.) B. The total area of accessory space will not exceed the 1,120 square foot "footprint" of the existing house. C. The area of accessory space is considerably less than 10 percent of the lot area. D. Instead of metal siding, the new building will have siding similar to the existing house and garage. In view of the above it is recommended that the C.U.P. be granted as proposed. As in a similar previous request it is recommended that the C.U.P. should specify that the new building is for residential use only, and that if the structure is intended to be occupied in the future by any type of home occupation, it must comply with the regulations of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance. BJN:ph cc: Dan Vogt Glenn Froberg Jim Norton Delbert Hennessey -- -.. 'I' ) rn1?: -w' -~ ...J ~ :) roT'" uuu__ tIJ'L \ -=- - , \ 1't11 '15 1 : \ 2 ~I \./:1\ nn ~(j ~~~ ~~~~~~~- 17/ I ~~ \~ - Um mU7; v. 1 :::- = '1r 0. 'llQ ()()OA'.3~3A'. llQ ~1~~::- .~ "~; ! m ;;~ f~~z>--~-- ~I'''~'.~~ ~~ ~ ~ I ,\\ 15'" L I~ W/////9 Z ~~ e \f ~ = ~ d~~ _ ~ .) __n__u_uu C';'\'-..~ _ ..- ~~-s' ~ ! uu. 'h_~ I _ ~+ nn l Ii ~ I .~ I 2N3l' I !H't~1 \ &F ~ uu_u__ . ._.JlI ~ -_n__h 8:,=,::::;1 ". .'. ", Y)l3ll13 \ I I.- I-- I-- Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Hennessey - conditional use permit ..- //~./- 'V/.~.;r 5> ~ 7 \j\ ~ ... - ..... ..., ftIC::I::I ~.- 0 0 ....:ElnV) --- ftI4>>O ~ ~ >- --ftI >-~'Q =f>>s: - 'Q. I t c ( ~ Exhibit B SITE PLAN ""\.. .T7: ..--- -.' ---="'-- ~... /L.~-:;''-=; ~-.:.:'=: --.::.- .. .---- . . -- . ,;I Exhibit C BUILDING ELEVATION - FRONT , I . ~ 7 //1 ~1- J 76-- / :J-c< ~~-'Y'Yl. -;e;: ~ ~' ...( . . :..r71 ~" (/~ --- C~~=:Y-LL /17;Z .P4~~;2~~~- r/}::;).-u../i, C.?\Pt./00#' ..t( J'~ ,c't..e'..t.s2.- ?';(. .c~.J..,~~T>""l), ~ .~ #'1 ~ ~ ~" ~L-~O ~ )~v_~ ~v,; ~V ~~... ~-aY-fjX~~\ c:::j;L-- cx-. C::..c!,\/Y,"-. /-62-e~"_>.'?~ ~/~ -c~ v............ - ._ .A~'~0____~-- ~v~~,-:~_~j~~~_~~~~-l-,~5Z-----_.-~ . .._____________~L ......_.~.... .')J. ~. r.z;:. ~_.;,~--_-,..:;:~~-~~~.(:JL... c::-"'l,.<~ - ------------1 ----~~~j{l ~,- ~'=~---~---I r~rZtj?I.) ~~.e~~" - -(1-'---- tc- 'J I 1\ q J.e ~yY\.pl,/]''l-~ . ..j t-; I / ~ ~,..,~~~V.1. .~~~~ ~ -4L~~,.~. /?/}1.,~, 1 L-' ") .J' I ~_t7 'J 3-L--l l__ I ~_c r-G-d 11-~?"'!J6 I / . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMIN ISTRA TOR Daniel J. Vagt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 12 DECEMBER 1985 RE: NEAR MOUNTAIN P.U.D. - REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT FILE NO.: 405 (85.37) BACKGROUND As you may be aware, the last extension of the approval for the Near Mountain project is nearing its deadline. When he received his extension, Mr. Peter Phlaum indicated that they would likely propose some modifications to the previously approved plan. Exhibits A and B contain the revised development plan and prelimi- nary plat, respectively. . ~ 0. tY. The primary changes are:~?A a. Thel9\fflhouse units have been eliminated. Density has been redistributed among the single-family and townhouse units (see tabulation on Exhibit A). b. Circulati'on has been revised creatirrganaccess north to'Covington Road and im~roving access locations on Vine Hill Road. c. . The phasing plan has been modified to take advantage of the availability of water from the north. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION Despite the proposed changes, the new plans are considered to be consistent with the original concept plan for the Near Mountain P.U.D. The revisions have, however, required some backtracking in the P.U.D. process. While the plans submitted to-date are sufficient for preliminary plat approval, more detailed plans must be submitted for complete development stage approval. The developer proposes to submit those plans for the January Planning Commission and Council meetings. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore 7CL.. I '...; , . g. lIilAON . NY1cI J.NiIlWO'lilAiIO .1INfl OiINNY"1cI CBONillIV -:';;;; U;;';;;'~.,~ :-;,;;;;;;- ,J 0; .1 ~, ........ . &.lD '::JNI NOU.::JfIIII~ .... NlMDGNm OOOMilllIOHS I NlYlNIlOII HYIN II ! '... I- i . j I I I I I , . , ! ! , . ...... ~------ 'j''t' - .. --'----- . . / g I' ft . r: .. . . II 0 I 2 . ~ I I $2 $2 I I , $2 18 t: 18 N 18 18 = 18 .. N N ~ 0 I IE III . 0 == I tIS .. . t- o ... t- =>> o ... --t-- _.......-........~- I - --...............--................. .. ---- ---- ., .... ----......... I' ,.. ----- '" -- f--:_-- --- :a= ~ P-t E-to :a=A ~d P-to OP-t ~ P:1S:: :>~ P:1aJ Q+> ~ s:: Q;j +>P:10 .....HI) ::E .00 .r! P-t M ..c::oaS ><: IX< Q) P:1P-t:a= ~ .. -;~'-"'''''--. I~-'''--'-''~' ~ ;lioliII I 1 I .. ""IW3AON J.Y'W .uIYNIN1i1Yd O8ONiIIWV I -:;;;;; '1.;;,;;;:,~ :-r.;;;;o~ .,) , ~- ~~ ". ,.". ......... .:IUD ,I. . ":)NI NC:IIJ.OnIWINC) 'SOII8 tGIHUC1Nm OOOMilHOHS I NlVJ.NtlOW YnN /''\. ~ ..... . ./,/, \;' / . J ~ I ;! .1; . '11. - II . i I i i . ni i i -- .... .... ...- I .. ------~ --.;. -----. ~ , " . ~ I H !~ ~, ---1-:-- r. I , -- --- -..-'- --- ------!:)~- i I .. i tn.-. ~I = . : I- . II .. .:. N ... cl _I ! Ii Ii I, ~ I Li L i I ,. I~.. .. . . .11. ! ! III : f. f... ; )! )!U ID ID ID N N -- - ,--, : ~' = ----..-"'. -'- .~ o ; , t -' 11) C ;.11)11) .. lit Ii i i_ 1 "'tl- Cl!! ... iii caN- N- · "'1. J ;J i I C1i II >oj it mi I~ i~ il i . i E-t ex: ....:I P-t >-e p:j ex: z H ~ H ....:I J:il p:j J:QP-t ~Q .,-lJ:il .or/) ..-tH ~&1 J:ilJX: . j . . ./ -, to ( t , I ORR.SCHElEN'MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors December 2. 1985 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood. MN 55331 Re: Near Mountain P.U.D. Amended Pl ans City Offici al s: We have reviewed the proposed amended plans for the Near Mountain P.U.D. and have the following comments. 1. SANITARY SEWER The preliminary layout looks satisfactory. As shown. all of the Near Mountain P.U.D. in Shorewood would be serviced by the 3D" MWCC interceptor sewer in Covington Road. It will tie into the same manhole proposed to be constructed over the MWCC line by the Covington Vine Ridge plat. Coordination of that connection must be fully communicated to the parties involved prior to construction. An approved appl ication from the MWCC and the PCA will be requi red before any work can commence. 2. STORM SEWER The storm sewer shown on the Amended Preliminary Utility Plan is shown schematic- ally without any pipe sizes or inverts. However. the basic layout looks accept- able. When the design is more formalized. the detailed information and plans and specifications must be submitted for approval. In addition. they must receive approval from the Purgatory Creek Watershed District. 3. WATER Trunk water service will be supplied to the north line of the Near Mountain P.U.D. as part of the S.E. Area Trunk Water Systems. The connection to that line is shown on the Amended Preliminary Utility Plan. The internal layout of the watermain appears satisfactory, with looping of the lines shown where feasible. However. there will still be some long dead 1 i nes. In those areas where long dead end 1 i nes cannot be avoided. the mi nimum pi pe si ze shoul d be 8". The one long (700' ,~) cul-de-sac in the middle of the plat falls into this category. It should have an 8" pipe rather than the 611 that is shown. 7A . . ." Page Two Shorewood City Officials December 2, 1985 STREETS/RIGHT-OF-WAY R.O.W he w1dt of R.O.W s own 1n t e single family residential area is 50'. The width of R.O.W. in the multiple areas is 60' as shown on the Amended Preliminary Plat. No street section is shown on the plans we have received. The typical section for the two areas must be shown to properly discuss street width, on-street parking, and snow storage. Where on-street parking is anticipated, additional street width is required or some other areas for parking must be designated. Lots 1-4 on the south side of Covington should be reviewed to alleviate direct driveway access to Covington Road. As a potential collector street, individual driveway accesses to Covington should be avoided whenever possible. 5. GRADING PLAN The Amended Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan appears satisfactory; however, it only shows spot elevations and percents of street grades. To effectively analyze the impact of a grading plan proposed contours must be shown. This plan is sufficient only for discussion purposes. Before any action regarding a grading permit is initiated a finished grading plan must be submitted. An area of concern on thi s prel iminary pl an is those streets shown with a 7% grade. The current Subdivision Ordinance indicates that all center line gradients shall be at least 0.5 percent and shall not exceed the following 6 percent. This should be complied with wherever possible. Should you have any questions, we would be happy to discuss this letter with you in detail . Respect fully, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ -P )7~ James P. Norton, P.E. City Engineer JPN:mln cc: Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. /1&1 I ~ I ..J Cl I ~ << ....t ) I , '- . . ......".... ... ---.-. ~~ .........~.- . . .Io:.:1Q...tnW' I . ;..~ '".t ~- 1~'1 . .: " ( - m:r:1:lnfl\A' . . ..~~~':,J,~' r ," . y .~ ' ~" . ..~:..~~. ., , ")' . - ,., , :...." ~. ..' iiii ............ .... 1111 "a: :.~:: ---- ~~i~ ritt :Cc c 0.. .. .... ... .;. .- .....- - 0... ........... ~':-:."': ,....... ...~ -..- oO . It. . U ~... :t ....c.... ~~fl .......... iU UU .......... .... .... ~~:t~ 4( t- oe c:a o z is ..J :; . c:a \ \ ~ ii ~ \ .... ~.~ '... Jl.. \, ii;; .I! !: ( ~ \\ ~r-.....'\ /Ji \ \1. ~ \'.... '\. \". " "-.....---.--/(\ i \\\'. '\ .'. ~'.:.\. '. \~\ ' :., \'~ \\ . I \ '\ :\\' " \ 'i\ '\~ I \ \~:>, '\1\\\ \\\ :/; \ \ \" ;/ \ \...::::/ .;~ 6# ..... .. nil' g~ g .. .. . .. o .. .. .. . . '" "'", "-.... , , I:' I' I .. -.. '" *' ... II' -,- , i , / Cl ~ ---- ~ / ~ ,\. \- -.....-------- .. ............... . .-------... ~........ "'0;;. ~.--"""""": ,t ...~~,................ ; I ___ -. .~ ">;" ~. ~.~~ " ---.- 0"- I. L' -----.. -<: ;.to' "io^,"~',..""""'~. ',,- ~"-- 'o_'::--~...-=:::'-:::'::::" ~'.-:~,::> I ..J, -. ":J --- .-.-- . .- r \. '__ _. --'- - -' .-,- ./ I. ..-~\ -::.::- '0" ,." - .,-' _' ----...-.- . \ - --- ---- .... ~_.""'" ____.. -' LlOlH /__ _.. ,// L ).. "I tt.n / .",-' -,-~ , \ , ! / / / \ ) . . ..' .--. . .' .....--::.-. . / ~.'-~'-- .../ .-..... .,~'-- "--- ...... .-..- ;,.....' .....&: . ... .- ....~ .. , .. . =~;.= z <( .....:l Po. W E-i H CJ) ~. <')' f' :1 Ig J" If.. .... .... .: -0 i-= ..~ n ::1 ;1 .. - .. S !j j !!'" . Ii nft.l !... .- . . ., . .... . ..;...... - 3. . . )..... ::' .;;-; I iiii j UU j ...... w Uil ! tit I :::~ 8 ":.": ~. .... .. fit" ~.. .. . 'I \ j \ \ " \ "-../'.......... '\\.\ . I t '" '" ) I"~ I " '"" ____. ../ /.' " /'1' I' --------- j /'/./ --.- ,'./,/ ), ..;~ .,..... :::=~ :: . .. I- dB] 1;:-='" ~ .::11 t: .I....... l' Hi .... .. ....... I ~'\Z~ ..et.a... : ~ ~ ~ ~, --'\ I, \ \ , \ ~. '--- /'!' "" I I I --- :.-- - !Xl ..:' .; .. 4:*1 1 I ( . i .. . ;: 5 =* , (.:I ~w .... CJ) .00 .... Po. ...c:o XP=< WPo. .. . t, ~~ !' ... .-:I .. ... .t z ~lf ii // }I . . . " . CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Kristi Stover Robert Gagne ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION, Y~YOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 30 NOVEMBER 1985 RE: HERITAGE RESIDENCE - PREAPPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FILE NO.: 405 (85.39) BACKGROUND Mr. Joe Gorecki, representing First American Care Facilities, Inc., has submitted plans for a 73-unit elderly housing facility which they propose to build on approximately 4.8 acres of land located on the east side of Riviera Lane just north of State Highway 7 (see Site Location Map - Exhibit A, attached). Since the proposed density of 14 units per acre exceeds the maximum density (six units per acre) allowed by the Comprehensive Plan, they have requested that the Comprehensive Plan be amended to allow a higher density for elderly housing. Plans submitted to-date constitute the preapplication stage of the Comprehensive Plan amendment process. Exhibit B, attached, contains a proposed site plan and site area tabulation. Exhibits C-1 and C-2 explain the applicant's request. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION As you are aware, the preapplication stage of the Comprehensive Plan amendment process is intended to allow the developer an opportunity to present his ideas to the City on an informal basis. At the same time the Planning Commission and City Council may express their feelings about the proposal and provide the applicant with further direction. This report will not go into a great deal of detail relative to various elements of the proposal. However, in reviewing the applicant's request, the following should be considered: A Rp<;irlpntil1! f:nmmllnitv nn 1.11kp Minnptnnkl1"<; South Shore ? . . Re: Heritage Residence 30 November 1985 page two A. Land Use/Density. Many of you may recall an earlier request by First American Care Facilities, Inc. for an elderly housing project for the same location as the current proposal. That request was denied, due in part, to the inclusion of subsidized, low-to-moderate income townhouses within the project. The current proposal is limited to elderly housing only and is proposed for private sector financing. While financing is not necessarily an issue which needs to be considered at this stage of the review process, eventually the City will need to concern itself with the feasibility of a privately financed project. In considering any land use proposal, an issue which must be considered is need. The applicant has briefly addressed need on Exhibit C-1 (see "Marketability"). He uses the senior citizen housing in Excelsior to make his point. While this may be a valid example, it may be helpful to compare the Heritage Residence proposal with other nonsubsidized projects. Do those facilities have vacancies and long waiting lists? When Shorewood prepared its Comprehensive Plan, it was decided that the maximum density to be allowed anywhere within the community would be six units per acre. The applicant indicates that a higher density is required to make the project feasible. Intuitively it can be assumed that 73 senior citizen units do not have the same impact on city services (utilities, parks, transportation) as 73 apartments might have. However, the City should require that the applicant provide more information relative to occupancy character- istics if the request goes on to the formal application stage of the amendment process. This will better enable the City to determine what relationship exists between elderly housing and other multiple-family residential development. Once such a determination has been made, the City must consider how to amend the Comprehensive Plan to allow the higher density. Presumably, higher density would be limited to elderly housing and not apply to other housing types. B. Zoning. After deciding what density should be allowed for elderly housing, a decision must be made as to how the proposal might be implemented. From a zoning perspective there are two ways to implement the project. The first approach would be to rezone the site to R-3B, simultaneously amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow more than one unit per 3,500 square feet as currently required in that district. The proposed area per unit is 2,862 square feet. The problem with this approach is that once the property is rezoned there is no way to assure that elderly housing will be built. At some later date, a develmper could submit plans for standard apartments, the impact of which may differ greatly from elderly housing. For this reason, it is assumed that the City would prefer a second approach- planned unit development. By zoning the property P.U.D., assurances can be made which would guarantee that the project would be limited to senior citizens. If for some reason the project fell through, the property would revert back to its current R-1A zoning classification. . . Re: Heritage Residence 30 November 1985 page three C. Transportation/Site Access. While the property in question has frontage on Riviera Lane to the west and Highway 7 to the south, access is proposed via Lake Linden Drive to the east. According to Mr. Gorecki, the proposed access would be a public street extending through the parcel owned by R.W. Reutiman, located between the subject site and Lake Linden Drive. If the road is to be a public street, several issues must be considered. First, an adequate turnaround must be provided at the end. The right-of-way for a cul-de-sac would be deducted from the total site area, effectively increasing the density. Secondly, the building and parking areas will have to comply with setback requirements from the public right-of-way. For example, in the R-3B district the front yard setback is 30 feet. As a public street, the proposed access has serious implications for the Reutiman property through which it extends. As you may recall, a division for that parcel was approved earlier this year. (Since the division has never been recorded, the approval is now considered void.) While the street would effectuate a similar division, it reduces the buildable area of the two lots significantly. In addition to the 50 foot right-of-way, each site would have to maintain a 30 foot setback from the r.o.w. For this reason, serious consideration should be given to relocating the access 105 feet to the south as shown on Exhibit D. The Reutiman property could be divided as illustrated. In addition, access to the Sullivan Center office building could be changed from Lake Linden Drive to the new road. (This was provided for in the conditional use permit for that site). This would limit direct access to Lake Linden Drive to one location. While private roads are typically not encouraged, ~ome consideration should be given to making the access road private. While adequate turnaround space must still be provided for trucks and emergency vehicles, it would not require public r.o.w. or setbacks from the r.o.w. This approach would, however, require coordination between the Sullivan Center, Reutiman, and Heritage Residence sites in terms of ownership and maintenance of the access drive. Regardless of whether the street is to be public or private, it is recommended by the City Engineer and myself that the road be designed to minimum city design standards. D. Parks. Although senior citizens have recreational needs, presumeably they are less than other segments of the population. While this need not be decided at this stage of the review process, at some point the City must decide what, if any, park dedication requirements will be imposed on the project. In this regard, it is suggested that any formal appiication be referred to the Park Commission for its recommendation. . . Re: Heritage Residence 30 November 1985 page four E. Utilities. Sanitary sewer service is available to the site. Capacity of the sewer service should be reviewed by the City Engineer in the formal application stage of the amendment process. One of the most significant issues relative to this request is how the site will be served with water. At the request of the applicant and the direction of the City Council, the City Engineer has prepared cost estimates for extending the existing water line from Gillette Curve down to the site. It is estimated that this cost will be approximately $250-260,000. Obviously this raises the question as to how such an extension will be paid for. Presumeably the project can not be built without City water service. F. Site Design - General. The preliminary site plan shown on Exhibit B attempts to keep the proposed building area to the east side of the site as much as possible, creating a 200 foot green space between the building and the west property line. While the concept is desireable, it is likely that, some rearrangement will have to be made, particularly if the street requires a cul-de-sac within the site. The site plan proposes 62 parking spaces - 22 inside and 40 outside spaces. The Zoning Ordinance provides for a reduced requirement for elderly housing (one space per dwelling unit, as opposed to two spaces per unit for multiple- family). The applicant proposes even fewer - 0.85 spac~s per unit. While some supportive information has been submitted relative to other elderly housing facilities (see Exhibit C-2), it is worth noting that bus service is not currently available to the subject site. Consequently, residents of the project may be more dependent on private transportation. In addition to the number of spaces proposed, the parking lot layout should be the subject of further discussion. As proposed, the layout does not provide adequate room for trucks to turn around on the site. While there are many issues to be resolved relative to the applicant's proposal, the most significant are considered to be water service, density, and site access, in that order. Presumeably decisions relative to water service will have to be made by both the developer and the City prior to a formal application for the Comprehensive Plan amendment. BJN:ph cc: Dan Vogt Jim Norton Glenn Froberg Joe Gorecki . ~ J 0 -; ~ \N~~"~ [] ~ ~ il S]\~ -~ ~~~ I ~ ~,~'- !1~ '. ~ ~~ I ,K, J ' ~ ~ ~~1\tM """"",,---- ~ ". ,~/Q \ ! 'J Q ~~- ~0t~"""""" l/"" :" I ,~l fit _.. . ~~ i '..t - : (1~-"~-.. ---i) >i ~'I-" ~.~ rf ~)~Jf . -' ~.. ~ ~ 0 tI i-- __ of.. \\ ~ _" :"~ \, ,,'- I ~ ,,,' ,\ :( ~ I I F--H ...'......; ~~ " ~ t--..""""'" I -= ~ I l-ft "i ""'. I \ ~ ' .~1-' P== TT l:-------- ~ ;. ~ i U~ ,'" . \~~l W I I II j' \ kl ~ ~ ononon..; , ~. " Vo"y\ u f-ll'\"\ ~ '(. ','. .. V' :' ~ I" ~ 0 :/.: 0:T ~~ ~i.1\ iL Ji; '::11 i', ,I -iZ '- ,~..... ~ t:1I~v, \ ' . ,Iv ~ .. <" <",_ ~h0L\----:r",-'~ i~ ....~<~%;3~.. I r;r : \ " l' ." ~ ...................'.. . : ... - Ii J =-. / /- "~I ~ ""'. ...m '\, "'/ N · \) ""=-/{! r ~)-, ~l ':~ I ' n ..n ~x~.~ ~ I · trfT------- ~ JI "" '. ~! ~ VL ~ J .._00 __..~Q fl: ~ /\ r I'd I I to/ >- ........ _ ........T~ "((I . 'b IT .tl ..........:~r '1/~'r If ""~ ~~:-tA -~ =:::::.. .. ." \" ~mi ..-..--..----->=*~I...~ JL.- SITE LOCATION Gorecki - preappl" . 1cat1on for comprehensive plan amendment- proposed elderly housing ~>~ .;j.y 1 . . COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT SEe 3A 1 .. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT We are requesting a planned unit development consisting of 73 units for a seniors' apartment building. Land Use Our request for this density is high for Shorewood's comprehensive plan but is low and in line with other communities for senior citizens housing. Considering the proposed location, we think this is the best use for the land. Location All of Shorewood's retired residents that cannot maintain their large homes have to move out of Shorewood away from their friends, children and grandchildren to find the type of accommodations that we propose. ,Marketability To support the marketability of a project such as this, we could look to Excelsior and their building of 67 senior citizen units built on two acres of land. At this time they have no vacancies. At the beginning, the project had over 300 applicants and after four years there is a long waiting list of applicants. Almost everything seniors would need is available at the Shorewood Shopping Center, east of the site proposed for this project. Automobiles Excelsior has 30 car parking spaces for 67 units. Most used for visitors and we are told there are ten automobiles owned by seniors. Investigation From South Shore Park in Excelsior as of November 5, 1985, of the 67 units there are three couples, three men, and the rest are women. This information was gathered from the Manager. COMPARISON OF TRAFFIC SEe 3A4E COMPARISON OF TRAFFIC Under the present R-1A Zoning there would be approximately five single family hom~s with perhaps two cars each for a total of ten cars. This traffic would all exit out Riviera Lane and thus travel through single family neighborhoods. For the proposed 73 unit seniors' apartment building there is shown 62 parking spaces. At the most, it is estimated less than half of these or 30 spaces would be "active". Since all of this traffic is directed east to Linden Drive, it would most likely go to Highway 7 and not through any re'sidential areas. Exhibit C-l APPLICANT'S REQUEST ......"..1.... . . PROPOSED CHANGE IN ZONING CLASSIFICATION SEe 3A 7 .. PROPOSAL CHANGE IN ZONING CLASSIFICATION The present zoning for the site proposed for a Seniors' Apartment Building is R-1A. We propose to have the zoning changed to permit a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) for this parce 1. Since the site is bordered on the south by Highway 7, on the west by primarily a pond and thick woods, on the north by a pond, woods and open space, and on the east by office buildings, a development planned specifically for a single building, three story seniors' apartment, would be an appropriate project for this site. This would be so as it is adequately screened by open space and trees from single family residents on the west and north and thus acts as a buffer between these single family homes and the office and commercial areas to the east. A seniors' apartment is also appropriate for this location as it is convenient to shopping and other community services, and fulfills a need for this type of housing in Shorewood. At 73 units, the site area per unit would only be 3,080 sq. ft. per unit, which would be less than the "Lot Area Per Unit" of 3,500 sq. ft. required under the previous zonipg requirements. The proposed density of 14 units per acre is not very great for this type of housing, as compared to zoning for multiple housing in other communities. The parking proposed for this type of housing (0.85 cars per unit) is found to be more than adequate for Seniors' Housing. Edendale Retirement Residence, Eden Prairie, MN, developed and managed by First American Care Facilities, has .48 cars per unit (29 spaces for 61 units) which has been found to be adequate. The 67 unit elderly housing project, South Shore Park in Excelsior, has 30 car spaces (.45 cars per unit). Of these 30 spaces, 10 are being used. Exhibit C-2 .s. ~. , ~.~i<~~<T . , '\ --- ~\ ~-1 ~\:J "'.I~ '.\ " '- -------. -.-. f -""'.' Exhibit D ALTERNATE ACCESS LOCATION n^.~--:-':' .~~...!'_.... . ---..... . . . ROY E. AHERN 15001 Industrial Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55345 November 26, 1985 City Council City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Council Members: I wish to resubmit my application for a conditional use permit to construct a house on Lot 11, Radisson Inn Addition. Please note the enclosed photocopy of a letter which I received from Mr. Bradley Nielsen regarding my request to reapply for the permit. Mr. Nielsen makes reference to Sections 200.04(1) (f) (4) and 200.05(3) (f) (3) of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance. These provisions require a six month waiting period following City Council denial of a conditional use permit before the same or similar application will be considered by the Planning Commission or City Council. I wish to draw your attention, however, to Section 200.04(1) (b) of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance. This provision states that a request for a conditional use permit shall be considered officially submitted when all informational requirements have been complied with. As you may recall, I submitted a request for a conditional use permit which was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission prior to first coming before the City Council on August 26, 1985. Based on prior conversations with Mr. Nielsen and relying on his advice that I could submit a qualifying Shore land Impact Plan after receipt of the conditional use permit, my request did not include a Shoreland Impact Plan. At the time of the City Council's denial of my conditional use permit on August 26, 1985, however, I was advised for the first time, much to my suprise, that pursuant to Section 200.26(6) (a), a Shoreland Impact Plan constitutes an informational requirement which must accompany an application for a conditional use permit. When I attempted to comply with this requirement by submitting a Shoreland Impact Plan at the next City Council meeting on September 9, 1985, the City Council refused to consider the Plan, or to reconsider its denial based thereon, and as one of the grounds for denial of my conditional use permit still cited my failure to submit a Shoreland Impact Plan. /() .- . . City Council Page Two November 26, 1985 I feel this situation is very unfair and that I should be allowed to resubmit my application for a conditional use permit without waiting for six months to expire. First, because my application for a conditional use permit did not contain this requisite informational requirement when it came before the Council, it should not be considered officially submitted pursuant to Section 200.04(1) (b). As my application was never officially submitted, the six month waiting period prescribed by Sections 200.04(1) (f) (4) and 200.05(3) (f) (3) does not apply to my situation. I am thus free to immediately resubmit my request for a conditional use permit for Lot 11. Second, since the City Council acknowledged that the real reason for its denial of my permit was their finding that I did not have a "buildable lot" and I was then and am now prepared to satisfy the procedural technicality of submission of a proper and acceptable Shoreland Impact Statement, the City Council should remove this procedural "Catch 22" to allow my application to be reviewed and its decision to be made on the real merits of this matter. Lastly, if for some reason, you believe that my request was officially submitted and that the six month waiting period applies, I request that you vote to waive this waiting period pursuant to the provisions of Sections 200.04(1) (f) (4) and 200.05 (3) (f) (3) . Please notify me in writing as soon as possible regarding your decision on this matter. Thank you. SinCerelY~ :?1 f2rn cc: Glen Froberg Bradley J. Nielsen ~""..~ ... .. -.,:"" < '" .' .":- 'J .~, u" "I"~::~J'" ..............-.,. ...'_..... -\.I' MAYOR Robert ~ COUNCI L .1M H.ugen TId 8hIw Krlttl Stover Robert a..,. ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. VOlt ,:~,,"CITY OF SHOREWO'OD 5766 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 56331 . (812) 474-3238 25 September 1985 Hr. R.oy'Ahern 15001 Industrial.Road Minoetonka, MH. ,55345':' ::",~',;' .. '. Re: 'Lot 11 - Reap'plication'for variance'and conditional 'use permit Dear,Mr.' Ahern: This is to document our telephone conversation yesterday regarding your reapplication for a conditional use permit and variance to build a house on Lot 11, Radisson Addition. Enclosed please find copies of Section 200.04 Sub. 1 f. (4) and Section 200.05 Subd. 3 f. (3) of the Shorewood Zoning 'Ordin~nce. 'These'provlsions require a sixmontn waitinl period after'a C.U.P.,' or variancE!:'have bee.u,:denied before the'same or similar application 'will be considered 'by'the Pl8.ririing Commission or City Council. You ~ill not~ that rec~nsideration is possible if approved by a~our-fifths . vote of the City C'ouncfL Given the Council's rejection of your attorney's attempt to submit a shore land impact plan at the 9 September meetina, I am doubtful that they would consider a reapplication prior to the six month period provided for in the Ordinance. If, however, you care to pursue such a reapplication, you should submit a letter explaining your request and detailing reasons why the City should consider th~, reap'plicB:tJ9.~', ,,!~...nC!e~ to have your letter by 1 October in order," ~or tp~, ~att,~r, t,9,:;~t!,'p1aced..on the. 7,~)ctp.be~, CHy C~uncil aaen.da. If :the Council does' 'dec;fde 'to: cpnsider your r~appncaHon" it' "fll have" to be submitted on 8 October .in order to be placed on the first, Piannina Commission agenda'Ih November. ,- If you have any ~u~stions relative to this m~tter, '~l~as~'do hot hesit~t. to contac t my 'off ice ~ cc: City Council Glenn Frobera Bill Hittler , O,/)~~~ ... , .'. 0--' " ' Bradley 'J. U'lsEm,. .,': . ,. . " City Planner/Building Official BJN/kgs' , enclosure A Residential Com'rriuriity on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore RESOLUTION NOS. 68-85 & 69-85 WHEREAS, Roy Ahern has applied for a shore line, setback variance and a conditional use permit to construct a single-family residence on property located at 5540 Shore Road, Shorewood, Minnesota, legally described as: Lot 11, Radisson Inn Addition; and WHEREAS, public hearings were held before the Planning Commission on August 6 and August 20, 1985, at which time the applicant submitted an alternative plan for a contemporary residence which could be constructed upon the property without a \'ar lance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after hearing the arguments of the applicant and the comments from the floor, voted to neither recommend nor deny the variance and voted to recommend approval of the conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, the matter was heard before the City Council at their regular meeting on August 26, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney was directed to draft a formal ~esolution denyins the variance and the conditional use permit. ~OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COU~CIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD ~s FOLLOWS: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the property described as Lot 11, Radisson Inn ~ddition, is located in a Shore land District of the Citv wherein thE mlnlffium setback from normal high water mark is75 feet. 2. That applicant has requested a variance from the setback requirement, claiming a hardship on the basls of his inability to construct a building within lakeshore setback requirements. 3. That applicant has submitted an alternative plan for the construction of a contemporary residence which, in fact, meets all of the setback requirements of the Shoreland District. 4. That applicant has not met his burden of establishing "undue hardship" to the extent that he has failed to show that the property in question could not be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the Shoreland setback requirements. )D - shoreland impact plan and provided: (1) The lot meets all standards of the applicable zoning use district. (2) The lot is in separate ownership from abutting lands. (3) Except for lot area, all other sanitary and dimensional requirements of the Shore land District ate complied with insofar as practical (seventy [70%] percent width and area requirements)." 8. That a "lot of record" as defined by said ordinance is a lot "occupied or intended for occupancy by one (1) principal building, or principal use together with any accessory buildings..." 9. That Subd. 6-a sets both the following requirements for development: "a. Landowner or developers desiring to develop land or construct any dwelling or any other artificial obstruction on land located within any Shoreland District within the City of Shorewood shall first submit a conditional use permit application as regulated by Section 200.04 of this Ordinance and a plan of development hereinafter referred to as "shoreland impact plan", which shall set forth proposed provisions for sediment control, water management, maintenance of landscaped features, and any additional matters intended to improve or maintain the quality of the environment. Such a plan shall set forth proposed changes requested by the applicant and affirmatively disclose what, if any, change will be made in the natural condition of the earth, including loss or change of earth ground cover, destruction of trees, grade courses and marshes. The plan shall minimize tree removal, ground cover change, loss of natural vegetation, and grade changes as much as possible, and shall affirmatively provide for the relocation or replanting of as many trees as possible which are proposed to be removed. The purpose of the shoreland impact plan shall be to eliminate as much as possible potential pollution, erosion and siltation." 10. That applicant has failed to submit a "Shoreland Impact Plan" as required by the Shore land Ordinance No. 168, Section 200.26, Subd. 6-a.. 11. That it appears from the language of the easement recorded against the property and the testimony of the adjacent landowners that the lot was originally intended as a lake access lot and not as a lot for the construction of a building. 12. That the lot does not qualify as a "lot of record" pursuant to the provisions of Ordinance #168, Section 200.26, Subd. 5-b, relating to construction on substandard lots. 13. That the applicant's proposed use of the property for the construction of a private residence is not a suitable use, taking into consideration the nature of the adjoining land and the effect such use would have upon the general welfare, public health and safety of the community. CONCLUSIONS That based on the foregoing, the City Council of the City of Shorewood hereby denies applicant's request for a variance and a conditional use permit for the construction of a private residence on Lot 11, Radisson Inn Addition. ADOPTED ~Y THE ~ITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this :),to Ii /day of {/~lL">()-i ' 1985. ~ . . 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: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN 6r DATE: 11 DECEMBER 1985 RE: KLINE, JANE - BUILDING PERMIT FOR A POLE BARN FILE NO. : 405 (gen) Ms. Jane Kline, 5990 Strawberry Lane, has requested a building permit to construct a 20' x 24' metal pole barn to shelter horses on her property. Pursuant to Section 200.03 Subd. 7b.(1), I informed Ms. Kline that I would not issue the permit unless the building is constructed of materials similar to the house (e.g. wood or masonite siding, shingled roof, etc.). After a lengthy discussion with Ms. Kline, I agreed to poll the Council by telephone to see if my interpretation of the Ordinance was unreasonable or overly restrictive. Four Council members agreed with my interpretation (and with the suggestion that the Ordinance be clarified). I then advised Ms. Kline that if she wished to discuss the matter further that she could talk to the Council in person at the 16 December meeting. She has now asked to be placed on the agenda (see attached letter dated 10 December). If there are any questions relative to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact my office. BJN:ph cc: Dan Vogt Glenn Froberg A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore I( 200.03 Subd. 6 . . ~ f. Size. Unless otherwise specified in this Ordinance, the first loading berth shall be not less than seventy (70) feet in length and additional berths required shall be not less than thirty (30) feet in length and all loading berths shall be not less than twelve (12) feet in width and fourteen (14) feet in height, ex- clusive of aisle and manuevering space. g. Number of Loading Berths Required. The number of required off- street loading berths shall be as follows: (1) Nonresidential Buildings and Uses. For each building one (1) loading berth and one (1) additional berth for each additional ten thousand (10,000) square feet. (2) Multiple-Family Dwellings. Where such building has ten (10) or more dwelling units, space shall be provided for unloading so as not to take up required off-street parking. (3) When determining the number of off-street loading spaces results in a fraction, each fraction of one-half (~) or more shall constitute another space. h. Off-Street Loading Required. Any structure erected or sub- stantially altered for a use which requires the receipt or distribution of materials or merchandise by trucks or similar vehicles, shall provide off-street loading space as required for a new structure. Subd. 7 Building Construction Requirements. a. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to insure that buildings in all zoning districts maintain a high standard of architectural and aesthetic compatibility with surrounding properties. To ensure that all new construction will not adversely impact the property values of the abutting properties or adversely impact the community's public health, safety, and general welfare, all buildings must be in compliance with this Ordinance and the State Building Code. b. Residential Districts. (1) All detached accessory buildings in excess of one hundred fifty (150) square feet in floor area that are accessory to residential dwelling units shall be constructed with materials and a design compatible with the general character of the principal structure on the lot. ~~,b.,t A. f4U(fi f~o"" I-50 ZD".t\J O(~~~4~ ~ . . Jane Kline 5990 strawberry Lane Shorewood, MN 55331 10 December, 1985 Dear Mayor and Members of the Council, This letter is to ask for determination that metal siding, on my horse barn, which is identically colored to the wood fiber siding on my house, is compatible within the meaning of the City of Shorewood zoning ordinance. The 20'x24' proposed barn is located in the middle of my 92,000+ square foot lot, and is not readily visible from any road or residence other than my own. It is set back 300' from the closest road, and is, even then, situated directly behind my house, and such, is further shielded from the road. As a matter of fact, there is no residence within at least 500' of my lot; the nearest lot (on the south) being separated from mine by at least 500' and dense forestation. No house is visible to mine on the ~orth, Hest, or East. In addition, metal siding allows several advantages over wood siding which include: better fireproof protection of metal siding over wood siding; metal siding has greater durability (as evidenced by lengthy warranties); metal siding is less suseptible to possible damage by horses than wood. I have already been issued a building permit for said building. This barn, in all ways, complies with the ordinances set forth by the City of Shorewood. It is being built by a highly recommended, experienced, and insured contractor. To replace metal siding with wood siding and a shingled roof would add several thousand dollars to the cost of the barn, ~k', b',t f> Awl.~t\t~ "~VU1t l.d{~(" . . pricing the barn out of reach. Horsemanship has been a lifelong pursuit of ml.ne. I care dearly about my horses, and strongly seek to maintain the integrity of my property. I would not purpose to build a barn for my horses which I did not consider to be absolutely safe and appropriate. Thank-you for your consideration. sincerely, ~.~. THIRD DRAFT .. ... ORDINANCE NO. \. AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE, RUBBISH, AND TRASH, AND ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS FOR LICENSING COLLECTORS OF SAME The City Council of the City of Shorewood does ordain: CHAPTER 406. REFUSE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL 406.01. DEFINITIONS. subd. 1. Words and Phrases. For the purposes of this ordinance, the following words and phrases have the meanings given them in this section. subd. 2. Garbage means organic waste resulting from the preparation of food and decayed and spoiled food from any source. subd. 3. Recyclables include paper, plastic, tin cans, aluminum, motor oil, glass, and other metal goods, each separated or otherwise prepared so as to be acceptable to the recycling center where they are to be deposited. subd. 4. Rubbish means inorganic solid waste such as tin cans, glass, paper, ashes, sweepings, etc. subd. 5. Refuse includes garbage and rubbish. 406.02. GENERAL REGULATIONS. subd. 1. Unauthorized Accumulation. Any unauthorized accumulation of refuse on any premises is a nuisance and prohibited. subd. 2. Refuse in Streets, etc. No person shall place any refuse in any street, alley, or public place or upon any private property except in proper containers for collection. No person shall throw or deposit refuse in any stream or other body of water. .. subd. 3. Scattering of Refuse; Composting. No person shall bury any refuse in the City except in an approved sanitary landfill, but leaves, grass clippings, and easily biodegradable, non-poisonous garbage may be composted on the premises where such refuse has been /_3CL-.. . . subd. 2. Application. Any person desiring to be licensed as a collector shall make application to the City Clerk on a prescribed form. The application shall set forth: a. the name and address of the applicant; b. a description of each piece of equipment proposed to be used in the collection; c. The proposed charges to be made of those who use the service; d. a description of the kind of service proposed to be rendered; e. the place to which the refuse is to be hauled; f. the manner in which the refuse is to be disposed of. "., subd. 3. Insurance. . No license shall be issued until the applicant files with the clerk a current policy of public liability insurance covering all vehicles to be used by the applicant in the licensed business. The limits of coverage of such insurance are: a. each person injured, at least $100,000; b. each accident, at least $500,000; c. property damage, at least $25,000. subd. 4. License Fees. Licenses shall be issued for a period of one year. The license fee shall be established by Council resolution from time to time. 406.06. REFUSE COLLECTION SCHEDULE. Each licensee shall collect refuse from premises for which he has a collection contract according to the following minimum schedule: daily from hotels, restaurants, and other premises, which in the judgment of the City require such collection, and weekly from residences and other premises. No refuse shall be collected before 6:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m. of any day. . . 406.07. COLLECTION VEHICLES. Every refuse collection vehicle shall be lettered on the outside so as to identify the licensee. Every vehicle used for hauling garbage shall be covered, leak-proof, durable, and of easily cleanable construction. Every vehicle used for hauling refuse shall be sufficiently airtight, and so used as to prevent unreasonable quantities of dust, paper, or other collected materials to escape. Every vehicle shall be kept clean to prevent nuisances, pollution, or insect-breeding, and shall be maintained in good repair. Enclosed refuse vehicles shall be confined to public streets, roadways, alleys and to commercial parking lots and shall not be driven upon residential property or driveways unless authorized by the owner. This provision shall not apply to 3/4 ton (or less) pickup trucks used as auxiliary vehicles engaged in picking up refuse and placing it in enclosed vehicles. Such pickup trucks shall not be filled to such height that refuse spills therefrom; any refuse spil'ledor dropped shallbeimmediate"ly'~picked lilp. 406.08. WEIGHT RESTRICTIONSPER'I'AINING TO COLLECTION VEHICLES. All collection vehicles shall be subject to the weight restrictions imposed by Shorewood Ordinance No. 406.09. PENALTY. Any person who shall violate any provision of this Ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 406.10. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this ____ day of , 1985. CITY OF SHOREWOOD Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk .i~---/ CHECK NO 31338 31339 31340 31341 31342 31343 31344 31345 31346 31347 31348 31349 31350 31351 31352 31353 31354 31355 31356 31357 31358 31359 31360 31361 31362 31363 31364 31365 31366 31367 31368 31369 31370 31371 31372 31373 31374 31375 31376 31377 31378 31379 31380 31381 31382 31383 31384 31385 31386 31387 31388 . .. GENERAL FUND - BILLS PAID SINCE NOVEMBER 25, 1985 TO WHOM PAID Daniel J. Vogt Leef Bros, Inc. National City Bank Norwest Bank Void Evelyn Beck Void Howard Stark Evelyn T. Beck Charles S. Davis Dennis D. Johnson Sandra L. Kennelly Susan A. Niccum Bradley J. Nielsen Daniel J. Randall patricia C. Ray Kathleen G. Schwankl Daniel J. Vogt Ralph A. Wehle Donald E. Zdrazil Kathleen G. Schwankl State Treas. Soc Sec Minnetonka State Bk MN Dept of Revenue State Treas. PERA United Way City-Cty Credut Union ICMA Retirement Corp Jarcho Ins. Agency City of Excelsior Village of Tonka Bay LMCIT Minn. Mutual Life Albinson Associated Asphalt AT&T Inform Sys. AVR, Inc. Bob's Personal Coffee Key Leasing, Inc. Lawson Products, Inc. Metropolitan Waste Minnegasco Munitech, Inc. NSP NWB Orr-Schelen-Mayeron Pommer Co. Inc. Henn. Cty Treas Judy Quaas Ranger Prod. Inc. SLMPSD PURPOSE Mileage Laundry Service Sewer Bond - 12/1/71 Sewer Imp. S-A 6-1-72 Void 80 hrs Void 82 hrs R - 15 hrs O.T. Mileage 80 hrs R - 2 hrs O.T. 80 hrs R - 2 hrs O.T. 80 hrs 80 hrs 80 hrs 80 hrs 80 hrs 80 hrs 80 hrs 80 hrs R - 10 hrs O.T. 80 hrs Mileage FICA - Nov 24 payroll FWH - Nov 24 payroll SWH - Nov 24 payroll PERA - Nov 24 payroll United Way - Nov 24 payroll Howard Stark,Brad Nielsen ICMA - Nov 24 payroll Blanket Bond/Forgery Ins. 3rd Qtr water purchase Lift #2/Crescent Beach Ex. Dec '85 Empl. Health Ins. Dec '85 Empl. Life Ins. Planning supplies Road mix Telephone Servo City Hall Storm Sewer Repair- Shady Coffee - City Hall Lease purchase - Copier Shop supplies/Hockey Rink Sewer Servo Charge Uti lites Water/Sewer/Elec. parts Uitilies Telephone Servo City Hall/G Engineering fees Placques/Park Comm. Ret. Board & Room Cleaning City Hall Shop supplies Dec '85 Budget Contract AMOUNT 76.90 251.15 29,347.50 25,052.30 0.0 758.95 0.0 684.59 51.16 549.47 589.47 664.87 390.16 715.55 569.33 480.91 466.28 852.07 625.01 727.23 12.60 1,623.18 1,340.00 614.00 949.74 30.00 42.00 140.00 386.00 1,662.76 474.54 1,993.92 169.39 3.00 619.14 141.41 Hs. 30.73 120.90 234.47 271.35 20,370.69 280.92 3,656.39 225.00 284.45 8,565.78 65.00 1,053.00 63.00 29.26 22,369.50 .. .. Continued on next page................ '. . LIQUOR FUND - BILLS PAID SINCE NOVEMBER 25, 1985 CHECK NO 4162 4163 4164 4165 4166 4167 4168 4169 4170 4171 4172 4173 4174 4175 4176 4177 4178 4179 4180 4181 4182 4183 4184 4185 4186 4187 4188 4189 4190 4191 4192 4193 4194 TO WHOM PAID Old Dutch Foods, Inc Pepsi-Cola Ed Phillips Pogreba Prior Wine Co. Quality Wine & Spirits Royal Crown Beverage Thorpe Distributing Tombstone Pizza Twin City Wine Co. Thorpe Distributing G & K Services Eagle Distributing Griggs, Cooper & Co Mn Sub Newspapers Ed Phillips & Sons Prior Wine Co. State Treas. Soc Sec Mtka State Bank Mn Dept of Revenue Russell R. Marron Todd H. Ogin Christopher Schmid Donald Tharalson Stephen H. Thies John Josephson William F. Josephson Susan M. Latterner Steven D. Maeger Christopher J. Meyer Stewart R. Peterson Dean H. Young State Treas - PERA PURPOSE Misc purchases Pop purchases Liquor/Wine purchases Beer purchases Wine purchases Liquor/Wine purchases Pop purchases Beer purchases Misc purchases Wine purchases Beer purchases Laundry Liquor/Wine purchases Liquor purchases Advertising Liquor/Wine purchases Wine purchases Dec 8 payroll - FICA Dee 8 payroll - FWH Dee 8 payroll - SWH 80 hrs 15 hrs 43 hrs 25.5 hrs 27 hrs 31 hrs 80 hrs 38 hrs 47 hrs 23 hrs 29.5 hrs 80 hrs Dec 8 payroll - PERA AMOUNT 33.76 248.15 645.55 1,787.10 698.79 2,752.62 53.20 2,493.85 7.75 123.49 3,581.00 25.20 1,018.33 1,822.54 210.11 493.46 101.33 249.68 242.00 91.00 439.70 63.75 170.75 119.40 119.85 127.36 504.80 145.79 198.58 103.65 134.23 429.70 146.09 47,812.62 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 MEMO TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Dan Vogt DATE: December 12, 1985 SUBJECT: Labor Unit Clarification Hearing - Assistant Public Works Director In the process of the City's intent to remove the position of Assistant Public Works Director from the Union, a petition has been filed by the Union with the Bureau of Mediation Services (BMS) for the State of Minnesota (copy of petition attached). After the petition is filed with the BMS, a Unit Clarification Hearing is called to hear testimony from the City and Union as to why the position should or should not be in the Union. Said Hearing has been called for Friday, January 10, 1986, at 10:30 A.M. in the office of the BMS (copy of Hearing Notice attached). The Notice of Hearing indicates who should attend and the information needed. Karen Olsen of Labor Relations Associates, a firm which helps management in these situations, has been assisting me in this process from the beginning. Since the City wishes to optimize its chances of removing this position from the Union, and Ms. Olsen has a great deal of experience in this area, I plan to have Ms. Olsen present the City's case at the Hearing. Howard, Don and I will also attend the Hearing. If you have any questions or concerns relative to this issue, please let me know. DJV:ph A Rp(;rlpnt;tI/ rnmmlJn;tv on I tllu' M;nnP.tnnktl',( Smith Shnm