1963 pl mn
.
.
MI}~JTES OF t~[TING
OF TFm:
SHOHEYTCOD PLA!'1.JIHG. COMMISSTf,J:J
The Shorewood Planning Commission met on Wednesday evening, Feb.
27, 196a at the Minnewasl1ta. school. Those present were Mr. Jessup,
Bliss, Ma.cDouga.1 and Mr . Petterson. Also presen.t were Mr. Janvrin
of the Village Council and Mr. Kelly, our Village Att,orney.
The first order of busineEis Wc'\'S a, request by }'Ir. Elton Hess for
approval of a Registered Land Survey. A motion wp.s made by Mr. MacDougal
that the Plat.ming Corilli1ission recoilliuend to tb.e Village Council approval
of the request by liU'. Hess. Mr. Jef.:~sup seconded the motion. The vote
was lmanimOlls.
Mr. Janvrin reported tha.t the courts haNe recently 11me some decisions
thF',t li'l.ght have fax reaching e'fect on our 7:onlng so fax as the villa.ge
is concerned.
lIT. Kelly then talked B.L"lCt suggest e:i it Wc1.B t illle for us to take culOther
loolc a.t our zon ng regula.tions wi tJ:: the pos;:;ibili ty of rezoning some
areas for multiple dwelling use.
Mr. Bliss ;$~gested that the Plalli"1ing Comrnission a,sk Mr. Sherman
Housbrouck to meet with the Planning Commission on the current problems
of the Village concerning special permits, apartments, laJreshore use
regulations and whether it would be desirable to increase our cOII1.D.ereiaJ. '"
use areas. Mr. Jessup agreed to contact Mr. Ha.sbrouck.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submHted
see'y
Shorewood Planning COill!"Lission
MINUTES OF 1IE:F:rrING
(.;:F T}JE
.
SI-JD::cEWC\_D PLIJn~rTG GCM1TIESICN
1'118 Shorswood Placling COrllili1ssion m.et on Wec1.nesday everling, March 19,
1963 at
7 : 2)0 P. 11.
'l':o s e
:Y.;."ec-e,.'t ;iTs'''e C'h::'!~ ~~O'1an Jec,sul\
.1;."'- t..) .'_.L. ',,' ~'... _~...t.:.";,.J_.L..i.' ",-. '1:',
JobnEon, ClYDmme,
M[;cDougal, Blies 2/1d Mrs. PettcT2on. Also ;)rese]t ':c1er8 Mr. Jemvrin of
the Village C01J:Qcil, :.nd Mr. Kelly, ViI lege Attorney.
Mr. Jessup spolce of J,iossitlle needs in nl8Jcing changes in our 'present
ordin2D.CeS ,....;art i eulaxly El,rfect ing li11l1 t 11>le dv'ellings, lakesl:.ol'e needs
and possible cOl!l:lercia.l 3.1'(;8.,8.
111'. Kelly sta.ted nnother problem is
r-<' .f l".Trec",o' ri.11ts or
-J1.1e ,) c.", ",', I e 6-" ,
re,pari811 ric,hts.
Mr. Jessup introduced Mr. KniL,ht and :Mr. lnlerma).l, Professional Planners,
whom the Ple.rmin.g COilL:nission h;~d e.ikecl to ;:nr:,et wi tll us, wi tll the
.
thOlE:l1t of .... oin~: over SOiJ.1e of our J:jr obleerns.
~ L..i "-'
Mr. Kni,c,ht suggested tl1:t
t::.ey give us some ideas a.fter reviewing the in.formation which v!e 1:lcrve
g.iven them and. after loolcing over the Vil12.ge. Mr. ~esslp s81d tLat he
i.JOuld be glad to dirv€ the PlaJl:lerr over our terTi tory.
Mr. Jc.nvrin read c; letter from Sclloell 8JlCt
son, Enb ineer s 8Ild Surveyor s
Sub; ect: Proposa::l Par]{ in E.B. Hennon Property.
ltrr. 8: ltr s. E. B. Herman a;'ppeared before tile Pln:nning Corm.:,iaaion, 'lith a
;)ropos81 for the subdivislol1 of t:neir land. NJI'. Bliss L.1nde a motion
tjl8.t t:,e lot size be 8:pproved as s:!.ovm on Mt. Herlllrm's survey and d?ted
EtS of Ma,rnl1 16, 1967:,. :Mr. Clyborne seconded. tiw mot ion. Vot e WP..B
'm8.Ll.illlc>uS in approval.
There bEing no furtb.::.r business
".' E. ect . ,~ g" "'T'"' C ~r; -1 0" try) eel
Hi .. '.,. 1".1.' ,', C'M;;) c.,.,. J '., . .
r:.espectf1)ly s'iiY,"i tted
.
f3ec'6
8hore~v)oa. PlarlTling Cornji,ission
-
.
MINUTES OF l1D1'InG
OF TF.lE
SHOREVVOOD PLA'tT:rI1JG COlvl1TISSICN
A special meeting of the Shorewood Planning Conuuission was
held on We:inesday evening, April 3, 1963, a.t the MiImewashta School.
Members present were Jessup,t Blisf~, Jolm.son, :MacDougall, Petterson.
Mr. Janvrin of the Villa,ge IJOli.D.ci 1 am Mr. KellY, Village Attorney
were also present.
The first order of business was the request of Mrs. :Eva Hirschy
for a special-use permit to build a 12-fBmily lmit a.Pc1Xtment on her
property.
Mr. Ha.rlan Perbix, representing Mrs. Hirschy, s1>Oke in her behalf.
He explained that the old W:li t s were in nero of repair-that her
present operation would not long be suitable, due to proposed changes
in the highway, etc. Mr. Perbix presented. the request to build a 12-
uni t a:partment on her property., and stated. that tl. permission to
bUild the J;&pa.rtment unit were gTanted., the motel would be removed..
Mr. Perbix introduced Mr. Hailks of Midwest Planning, who showai
sketches of proposed building. Mr. Hawks stated there would be no
direct traffic on Highway 7, only on service road. He suggested. that
apartment would be better than motel. The :porposed. aJpa,rtment would be
a 12 unit, one-bed.room apartment of two stories, and. that sewage and
dra,inage would be adequate. Mr. Ha:wl-cs spoke of the fp,.,et that a.cross
the street in Greenwwod were other serni-coJ.llll1ercial areas. The
approximate cost would be $100,000.00.
There were several residents of the Village who expressed their
views and thoughts on this ma,tter. Mr. Russell Lindqu1stoof Christmas
Lake, spoke very favorably of Mrs. Hirschy but felt concerned that
in future years, someone other tl.tan Mrs. mrscby might be running the
business. Mr. Lindquist spol{e of his concern about tra.ffic on the
lake- Will it change nei@1borhood? Will the quiet be 10stT If
doors are opened to this kind of o1Jera.tion, Will it change tllOughts--
others may want the same- Mr. Lindqust spoke of availing ourselves
of the thoughts an(1. suggestions of our Planner on this Ciuestion.
Mr. Thomson of Christrna.s Lake stated. that b~l,sic rentals for apartments
are usua.lly lea.ses of one year dura:t lon, 300 that the proposro type
of unit woUld seem to be of more transient rental.
Mr. Smith of Chri stmas Lal{e also spoke of it being primarily a residential
area, and conoerned. thc'1t it would greatly increase boat traffic.
Mr. Jobn Olin of CbristmAs':llake stat ed that as a, taxpayer he feels tha.t
the premimum on lakeshore land , ll181{es the property more v81uable as
residential land.
Mr. Kelly, our Village Attorney, spoke of the fact th:1.:t there would still
....2-
.
be the cottages standing which vlould be non-conforming use. Mr. Kelly
also sta,ted that the sewage and drainage would not be the same a.s it
would on a. five or six months b~"si s.
Mr. Johnson made the motion that we la.y this matter over until
such time as the Planning Oommission ha.s an opportunity to review the
matter 'flith the Planners. Mr. MacDo ugall seconded the motion, and the
vot e wa.s l.manimous.
There being no further business, the meeting wawadjournEd.
Respectfully submitted
Secretary
Plmllling Co~nission
.
e
MINUTES OF lIrEETING
t
OF THE
SHOREYlOOD PLANNInG COMMISSION
The regular meet ing of the Shorewood Planning commi ssion was held
on Wednesday evening, M~ 29, 1963 a.t the Mirmewashta School. Members
present were Messrs. Jessup, Bliss, Clyborne, Johnson and Mrs. Petterson.
Mr. Kelly, the Village Attorney was also present.
Mr. Kelly, representing the real tors of a piece of propety located.
two blocks west of Lake street and. backing up to Highway 7, asl{ed.
permission to malce a three li.111 t apar~lllent out of what at present is a
two illli t dwelling. Mr. Kelly was aked about the sewage and drainage.
He reported th8t there were 3-800 gal. septiC tan.1(s, and 1-1000 gal.
septic tank and 780 square feet of drain field put in at the request
of Mr. Horace Aldri tti woo was building inspector for the Village at the
time. Also that the and area 1s about 20,000 square feet. Mr. Bliss
made a motion that the Plar."llling Commission defer action on this matter
until after discussion Wi th the PlaJ1.'1ers. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Clyborne, and the vote was unanimous.
1I.r. Jessup brought np the matter of a more satisfactory street and.
house address fo r tl1.e Vill:-;ge, and he reported. tha.t he had talkai With
a Mr. Don Boll, wno is wo rking on a new address system for Orono.
NiX. Boll sa.id that in a few weeks he would be finished with that one,
. and stated that he would be glad to meet with us and explain his ideas
to us.
Mr. Jessup presented a. request by Mrs. Muriel Reid, requesting
permiSSion for a. permit to build on eo feet. of gromld, adjoining her
present home which she now ovms. Mr. Bliss made a motion that permission
be grantai provided the lot mea is increased to '.,29,425 feet tln'ough
purchase of the adjacent triangular shaped lot, giving 92 feet frontage
on the roa.d.. Mr. Clyborne seconde:l the motion. Voting yes were-Mr.
Clyborn~l, Jessup, Bliss, Johnson, with Mrs. Petterson abstaining.
Mr. Jessup stated that Mr. Wehrman, the Planner, would be ready to
meet 'wi th us at our June meeting to discuss our laJce shore control
and. multiple dwellings.
There being no further business, the meeting was c1djOlU'ned..
Respectfully subrni tte:i
See'S;
Shorewood Pla:nning Commission
-
.
.-
.
MINUTES OF Ml4.:ETING
(\F 'PEE'
v ~e
SHOREi'VOOD PLA.,\TNING COMMISSION
The Sl1orewood Ple.nning Coran:d ssi on met on Wednesday evening,
July 31, 1963, at the Minnewashta School at 7:30P. lA. Members
present weT Messrs. Jessup, Clyborne, JoJ:1nson, Ma..cDougall, lviI's.
Petterson, a.nd Mrs. Hoger Goodman, N'ewest member o;t'the Pla.nning
Coy.amission. Mr . Kelly, the Village Attoriley, ancl Mr. Wehrman, Planner,
were also present.
TIle first order of business WaS a request ~J a Mr. Coulter for
platting of Registered L8m fl064. :M:r. Coulter was requested. to re-
vise the platting to COml)ly with Village Eegula,ti.ons and Ordinances
130. Mr. Coulter had asked an outlet to Smithtown B,e"y road on his
proposed pla,tting.
Mr. Wehrman, Planner, of the firm lifa.son, Law VFel-rrxua.n & Knight, Inc.
went over in det 1 with jilembers of the PIC:U:l'li:ng Com.dssion, his
findings and opinions regarding review alld revision of Existing
Zoning OrdiIl?.nces a,S it re1a.tes to Multiple :Residence. A copy of his
report is being sent alont::, with tIle minutes to the Village Council.
Mr. Kelly, reportEd. that Mr. Badger, the Mayor, statee th8,t he
receives many Calls a week, from ,iJeople regarding rights so far as
usuage of the public roads to the lake is concerned. The question
WaE ra.ised--should we have reg1118,tionsvn th regard to la,1(e usue.ge,
ri6hts, etc. and if so, \'d1a.t reg'lln,tions? A Motion \Va.s made by Mr.
MacDoligE:l1 tl1c1t the COlmcil take steps to post regulations as to
use of the Public Assesses to the lake in Shorewood. Mr. Johnson
seconded the motion. All members present 'voted in favor of the
~;lotion.
Next order of business Was a request by :Miss Roberta Kendrick to
sell ~er porperty, approximating 25,276 square feet, Auditor's Sub-
division #1'65. Mr. Clyborne made araotion tha..t this owner be allowed
to sell this piece of property. Mrs. Goodman secondei the motion.
The vote Was unanimous.
Next order of business was a request by Jor.l..'11. C. L8rnbin for
platting a 2nd Addition to Sl1orewood Acres. Motion WetS made by Yxs.
Petterson th~)"t tllis request be (":;:J.l;.,To'led. lEI'. Clyborne secondai the
motion. The vote Was 1JIl8.nimous.
lilr. MacDouga.ll re};iorted that he had att ended 8., meeting TJi th
Mr. BcxlbET of groups of people wi th Sehoul Dh,t. 4~276, in a UI'.i.i ted
meeting. VEI'iou.s l..;,uestions were cliscussed ?,t the meet ing, such f;,S
shuuld we combine our efforts together as to schools, taxes, etc.
GEmeral consensus WEtS that such meetings were constructive and tr...at
they would meet again.
There being no further business, the meeting was e.dj ourned.
Eespectfully submitted
SllOr 61/Vood Planning Cormni ssi aa
(t". ~),
e
e
--
July 31 F 1963
To: Shorewood Pkmning Commission
Shorc',Ncod, Minnesota
Regm"din~: Review l':md revision of Existing Zoning Ordinance as it relates to
Muhiple Residemce
Comments:
I Q
One of the fln~t steps in reviewing the Zoning Ordinance,wit"h respect
to the multiple residence category, is to date-imina t~'e'desireof the
Vii lage regcrding multiple residential development'. In other words,
are the t'esldenrs of Shorewood interested in ,acing mulHple residence
housing developed within the boundaries of the Village': \he note In
the planning report prepared by Mr. Hasbrouck, llWe believe it is
possiblecmd desirable to retain a lo'l{ population density. I! II' should
be pointed oot at this point that the deveiopmenl" or SmQ iI creQS of
multiple'residences wi!! probably not have a great effect on the overall
popu 10 ti on densi ty . "
Assuming that the Vi!lCige does desire development of multiple residence
housing within its boundaries, the next considerotion should be what type
of multiple resideilcedeve!opment. The most common type being
doveloped in the meh"opoli ran Clroo today is the 2 1/2 story twelve unit
Clpclrtment complex. Thess are generally bully in cO:T-plexes i)j7 from
two to perhaps a dozen bui Idings. Often times they are developed, so
thC1t the building is on Q seporote lot end can be sold separately.
Anoth~r type is the garden clparrment. This type of dev;;lopment generally
is c~iactel"ized by Q court aroo to th~ inferior side of the buildings, with
the service Clrea being toward the street side. A tbird type wouid b('~ the .
townhouse or row-house tyP€!o These are characterized by being two
stories above ground, with eoch unit having a common ?Urty ~JCU wUtl tha
next unit.. Usuaily the service side is against the fionfor sl'reet side,
ond the living ClI'OO is oriented in the r6!.U' of rhe building.. This type of
hcusing has the advonS'Cigc of rekltive!y higher density through elimination
or the side YCii'cl$. Another type of multiple developrnent is the high rise
Q~rtment building. These multi->story sITuchm::$ generally are located
ncm;r the centred business dis~rict an"" of ~he ceni-ral city, or in some cases,
they are located near 0 nClh.'rai physlcol rc-GIfUre, which is cm attraction,
such as a river or leke. an CUi}' ct2se, consl'i'Ud'lOfi of this type of structure
-j-
~
-~
e
generQily is relarecrto extremely high land volues.' Another special type
of multiple housing, which is becoming more and n10re in demand, is the
housing for th", elderly or retired.
All of these types of multiple residence housing have special requirements
as to site arrangements, parking and so forth. Each individual development
needs to be considel'ed cQrefully with respect 1"0 the effect it will hove upon
adjacent singla-f(:lntlyrusi'jentia' or oth",r types of kmd use.
2.
'fhe second very imporh:mt consideiOtion with respect to multiple residence
development in Qny communHy is the market for this type of development
within a given community. Shoiewood has some Fgvorable characteristics
for the developmen~ of multiple residences. First of all, when Highway 7
is updated to freeway standards, it will have good automobile access to the
core of the city, whel'e very likely a good portion of Shorewooclis working
population is employed. Other favorable characteristics are tile proximity
. of lake Minnetonko ane! the recreational facilities that it offen. Another
favorable characteristic would bs the p.'oximily of shopping Facilities of
E)(celsior, and perhClps, i"he facilities offered by the school district, although
this ~ould not be QS important as in the case of single-family residential
development. .
e
There are also some unfavorable characteristics. Even though the upgradirg
of Highway 7 will offer good Cluto acce$S to the central city for those who are
employed there, it is necessary to consider the large areas of multiple residence
zoning lying in the first and second ring suburbs between Shorewood and the
central city. Another unfavorable characteristic of the Shorewood ai'"ect is
the lack of good public transportation system. Also, and perhaps most important
of 011, the Community lacks a ceni-rol utilHy sysioem.
Although the above comments "fe not based on a detailed market ana lysis, .
it Is possible to mcike some aS$umptions regarding the market for multipie
r.;sidence development in the Shorewood area. fhere is likely to be some
demand ror mud'iple residence type of housing for locally employed people,
possiblY retired people, and in crkumstancesJ the portion of the population
who ar:.~ extremely interested in water recrection;
3. Another iu;pori'ont consideration is the effect' that muitip~e residence deveaop'"
ment wiii have on the co:nmunity's tax base. GenerCllly,it con be soid thot
mUltipl~ residence deveiopl1'letit within Cl cOj'nmunity, 'on an area basis, provides
a muchww~'wr assessed evaluation rhan does single-Tomi:y residentiai develop"
m ~nt./ respect to comparative costs \"0 the co,,1muni ty by both types of deveiop'
ment, mod studies indicate l+~t in, thiS f1aghasr cost area, which is
schools, anJ c:gain on em oroo b.:l$is mUltiple r~sid~nHCll development yields
fewer school age childr:al"l them-does sir-gle family residential
development. i:., study in West Hcm::l(ord,C~;1U!'i!'C;;(:tJf>mC!cle ini960 indicate:;;
e
-2-
e
e
~:' ~J
u
~, 'I, ~ t ~
J j \ Q)
110 i
, I
that developments in thoi' cQmrnunii"y coo~'ributed 2.8370 tax revenue and
drew'2.09% of Gxpel")ditures as C ;'I'll ared to single family reside. ..'
veiopmen~, which contributed 8.09''3' f tox revenue and dre 55. 38'};)
of expenditures. All of ,"hese figures or. C USlve, t'ley do seem to
indicgte that 0 multipie residente development would pay its way CIS far
as taxes are concerned.
#~' .
From the sh:mdpoint or the vi !lage ~hen, the basic prob lem is hoW' to not
only contrOl the development oi multiple residence but also how to
encouroge the typ':c of multiple re5id~nce development that you as a
Viiioge desire. .It Wou!ds~e{rf that there ore two likelY choices with
respect to tha contwI or muitiple resi&':lnce development. One mdhgd ~'
ouk! be to-create Q new multipie re~idence district. This could be
~c;oii1pHs e yo sfmpleamen mani' to tne presentd:.oning ordinance.
This new multiple residence district would allow any of the uses permitted
in the j'esidentiai district. It wOIJld'ollow multiple dwellings, apartment
buildings, and group or fQW hourses, provided that they were served by
sewer Clnd water systems Clcceptab Ie to i.he Vi I iage Clnd also th~ State
BOQrd of Heglth. Permitted aCC!iS$ory uses woulJ include lodges,
swirnming pools, and acc65soiY uses cUitomarily incidentiol to the uses
permitted in Saction+, 5ubdivision I, paragraphs 1-9 of your presenl"
zoning ordinance. The height regulations which should limit the heiaht
to four stories or;;:) feet provided that Clny building "exceeding three stories
in height would be set back from all your lines, as reguired below, an
ClqJitional distcUlce of one foot for every ana foot that the building exfeeds
tha heght of thirty feet. The front yead depth shou d be riot less rhon
35 feet, subject to sei'-bocks of existing adjacent buildi'1gs. The side
yard shoo lIi be perhaps 15 fef)t not exceeding three stories in height.
The rear yard shou id have adapi'h of not less then 20% of the depth of
th.a iot. aha minimum iot area requirements should be CIS fo:~w$:
Single-fgmiiy dwelling - 40,000 square feet
Two-family dwellings - ,;.0,000 5<.luare feet
Three-family dwellings, ormulHpie dweUings, - L,OOO squore feet per family.
Off-street parking facilities shall be re~uired on the,basis of one and one-
:l\.M parking spaces per dwsding unit.
in the
In addition to the above, Cl provisionlorclinal,ce shauid cHow planned unit deveiop.,.
merit or community unit development.s.
e
-3-
e
The Pl.ili:H:)se oi thi:; se,;tion of the odincm.:e,wouiJ be tQ mak~ provision for group
housing, mul~ipledwelling unit QpQrtm:;i1ts in the i~orm of town houses or row tn0...Sli..S,
under single or uni;'ied ownership. SUC'1 pi'Qjecl'S would be developed in accordance
with an overall design and gn Integmfeclgeneral plan to be consistent with the intent
and purposes or the multiple residence district ordinance and not adverse'1 e:\E:-::;t t
the property adiacent to the IQnJ included in the protect. fhe propont;i'i's of such
a project should submit a general development plan oiong with an application for
rezoning or conditionQI use permit and secure I"he approval of the Village Planning
CommissiOn and Vi liege Counci i. The general development plan would be drawn
to scale with topography a~ a contour in~erval not greater than two feet. The plan
wou ld be required to show:
The proposed sHe and existing deveiopments on adjacent ,properties,
proposed size, location and arrangement of bui ldings,
park i ng Cf&05 and sta II arrangement I
entrance and exit drives,
landscaping "
dimensions,
e
proposed sewer and WQter systems.
If the pkm ;s approved it is attrQchecl qnd .is a part of the ordinance estob ishing
the change ~ ~he multiple residence zone. Any subtton~joi subs&guent change
to the plan would require a re-submission to an approval by the Planning Commission,
Counci I of the Vi Iioge. Other require ents imposed en such land deve lopment
cvuicl be a minimum length of time established between approval end' construcHon,
andalso other reg uirements of the ViUGlge reiating to lighting, noise abatement,
fro Hi.: con tro I, e t(; .
and the '
As an alternClte to the above zoning amendment / addition of the provision for
planned unit development or comm~t:nity unit development, way d be to provide an
amendment to ordinance allowing oniy tha tQtt~r:" That is, the- Pltmned unit develop-
-meny or community unit development provision., This ,unenclment cou ld apply to QlI
districts controilsdby the zonin~ ordin-cmce. One advantage of this soiurion
would be the eompiei'e review allowed by the Planning Commission, llncl Covn::il of
the Village for any proposed muHiple housing development. This type of provision
in the ordinance would not however, clllow G1 change in the kmd use as set forth
in the zoning ordinance. In many respects this provisin would function similary
to the special use permit now cHowing cparhmmts or flats in the residenticl district,
except for the somewhot stringentre~uir~:ments for the st.lbmi5Sion or a plan.
e
----10-
e
e
e
The above otfer$ two possible SOlutions to i'he multipi3 residence zoning prd,lem
in the Vii iase. Subsequent to thJi':)IJ.,:;h discussion wHIl the Plcmning Commission,
and after receipt of direction from the Planning Commis~ion, the proper zoning
amendmi;ots wil! be written and presented in datai I.
Respectfully wbmitted,
NASON, LAV\., WEHRMAN .& KNIGHT, INC.
~ith~ #~
-
July 15th 1963
Shorewood Planning Commission
Shorewood, 11iooe sota
Gentlemen:
At taehed is a rough drawing or lot 199 located
to the south of GalpinsLak_., bounded on the south by
Murray- street fJ on ~he east by private property owned.. in pan
by Mr. Phillips, on the north bY'a priv~te read, and on the west
by the Old Sbakoppee road also known as Galpins Lake Roado
The orilinallot was comprised of nearly seven acres. Lots Z, 3 and
4 to the south haveu been sold and have homes on them. The nortba-.
e
easterly lot is owned by John Bl'agg and has a home thereon",
We are amdous to sell the center lot on the easter17
side o! the preperty 0 This lotu is high on the west edge and slopes
to the south east ~h excellent draiJ!la.ge" and includea the ease.:
ment to Murray street. While this lot doans not meet the :require-
ment of the village as to area ~ it i.s more than adequate tor the
eonfJt1"1iction o~a homeo Mr Jessup bas looked at this property, but
. - I : . . . . , ~
we invite allo! you to v1e~it at your convem.ence. We have a.
buyer andnee~ an early answer. Thank you tor your consideration
lfW;~~ · 7'
W.D" and Roberta Kendrick
Route & Box 70
Excelsior Po 0.. Minnesota
Please note>> the attached is not a suM'eY9 but a rough drawing
and some of the measurement s may be orf slighU,.
.
OAt.. /J/~ L Ro~1
"*'t
t.u~J- 1.. IN!-
,
~
,..-
~
\\
.c--
~ )1$
//Ht'
0
~ r ,.. ""
, c
~ ~ -)
i":l V\ /'"
~ 5>
yo ?d ~
0
~ t
V') ~ 1\
-I ~ ~
~ ~ ~
fb "
1, ~
'\ 0
;v
,.
p
~ ~ ~
~
C
lOt
..
\It
~
\to
;:.'\
~:
~~.
~--
,
,
,
,
I
I
,
1
,
1
I.......
I,
I I;)
, .
, ~
,
.......
V-
I)
J:>
-:,e
x ~1
~
~
~
II'
7-
e
~
,.
AQ..{.l
{~ E'+SeMe~,
..., - -- - --
~
I
I
,
,
,
,
~-'" ..--
j,-{
~
"""
Flfrl
L I ~&e
r--
r-
--
~
)~
$t1
~.\, t
~ ~
"
v
~
<:,
?
-\
~
~
C'
~
,II
.
.
\M"..TTu'mrv'1 ;'F 'll11Mlln111I.'TG
.lVILX"l' .i. l:L;_,:",i \.j - - ~'.&r .l~
OF i2HfI:
PLPJ\DTI1'TG
l\ speci"l Elset ing of the Shorewood PlaJlning Commission Was
held on Wednesday evening, Sept. 4, 1963 at the Minnevfg.shta, SChool
at 7;30 P. Iv1. Members present were: Mrs. Goodman, Messrs. Clybonne
Jessu.:J:), Johnson, MacDougall, and Mrs. Petterson. Mr. Janvrin of
the VillagE; Cou...Tlci 1 ipa,S also present.
Mr. Caul tel' viho Lk1d previously a;ppeared before the PlaIh"ling
COlllillission with a request for platting of Regi.stered Land *1064:,
Was present, and Mr. Jessup, Chairman of the Planning Commission
read tl~:t portion of Shorewood's sub-division ordinaTlce as follows:
Lots along Thorofares
It In new sub-divisions, there 8..."YJ.all be no direct vehicular access
from residentia~ lots to a. l11a,jor thorofare.11
Mr. Dick Knudsen, of Schoell & M('3dson, Engineers, then reviewed the
Heport on Pre.liminaJ.'Y Pla.t of If Aiton Meadows" . After discussion,
1.1.t' . Coulter agreed that the proposed.. preliminary Plat would be
acceptable to his clia"lt bas€d on the Changes in the Village
Eni;ineers report. Mri3.Y&oDOugalmade a. rnotion that the Planning
Conmrission recommend. tha,t this request for pla,t ting be approvoo.,
basoo. on tIle changes in the engineers report. Mrs. Goodman seconded
the motion. All members voted in fa;vor of trJ.s recol1lll1endsJtion.
After di scussian, a.. motion Wa,s made by Mrs. Goodman ~hat a.
current legal opinion be obta,ined. regr3rding Section 6 of urdinal1ce
30. If tJ:ns opinion is fa;vorable, tb.e Planning Commission recommends
tha,t Section 6 be strictly adherred to now Bnd in the future. Mr.
Jessup secondoo. the Motion. Vote Wa,s unanimous in fa;vor of this motion.
Mr. Schoell, Villa,ge Engineer, re~ a. report on the proposed.
platting of the property of Miss Roberta. Kendrick. After discussion
a motion 1;'ftE);p made by .Mr. Johnson that this request for platting be
denied for the reasons set forth by the engineers, Schaell & Madson
report of August 15th. :Mr. MaCDougall seconded. the motion. '].1he
members voting in favor f the motion were: Mrs. Goodman Messrs.
Clyborne, Jessup, Johnson, MacDougall. Mrs. Petterson voted a.gainst
the motion.
A request for platting by Mr. Ernest Hall of all of tha.t part
of Lot 98, Auditor's Subdivision #133, Hennepin COlmty, lying West
of the East 32 rods tllereof: W"lS considered end referred. back to the
Pla.tter with the recommendation that he try to revise his plat in
accordance with tlle Village engineers report dated Sept. 4, 1963.
A motion WeS made by Mrs. Goodman that this recomn:lendation be a.ccepted..
Mr. Clyborne seconded tile motion. Vote Was unanimous in favor of
this recommenda.tion.
'J.1here beL.Lg no fu.rther business, t1Le meeting v,ras edj ouxned..
spectfully submitted
Sec'Y
~n()",p~"f)()0 'PJ.. ~nYl;T'lg "'01""1""1. ~~; O"'l
MI1\fUTES OF :ha4"EETIl\TG
OF THE
e
SHOREirOOD PLJ.lN'NING COMiISSION
The Shorewood P1arming COIillnisfion. met on Sedtedber 25, 1963, a.t
the Minnewa.shta, Sehoul i:1.,t 7 :~~O P. M. MessTs. Jessup, C1yborne,
Jolmson, ~iIacDoug~l..'.,. and Mrs. G0?<,JlB11 8r....d Mrs. Petter~:on were present.
Mr. Jan\ri'ln of tne vi11a.ge Cmillcl1 We.S 31so present.
The first order of business wa$ ~=l, report by Mr. Keith 11ehrman,
Planner, regaxding LaJeesllOre Deve1o...Jment and Control. Me. Wehrman
vrent over in det 8.i 1 with the COil1Lai ttee merill)erS all p~'3.ses of tIli s
T€)Ort, a CO)y of iiiDlicl'l. ts being :1ncludecl 11 these minutes.
The next matter "111 fOT di scusBion W~l,f. ti.18t of mul tiple dwelling
zonjng. After discussion, it W:'S a,greed by the P1e.rrnil.g Comrnission
th,.,-,t the melilbers should try to arri ,re E),t a decision as to vihether or
not to recoiililend multiple dwell zuning, a to as){ the Planners
to coue li,p vvitll. possibilities a.;::; 0 locations, etc.
Next Mr. MaCDougall su[,geste:l tl1pt the P1ay.L:r:ters loo1{ into the
lli2ttS( of w8,ter-front zuning, l1n th 'p8xticulex interest a.s to (B)
in },fi'. Weheman's reyort, th2t haVing to do wi t11 : Minimllnl side yard
between an: permanent or f1o<.:;,ting stTu0tnre and side property lme
of so many feet. (C): No bO,J,ts moored, docked or tied 'tJvi thin so
_ many feet of side property line of _ feet. (D): Any of the other
.. uses allowed under the present re:sidential district zone be allowed
only s...J8ci 8.1 use lJermi t . Mr. Ma.cDougpll SUggbsted. that the Plaxmers
report on this a.t 0'11' October meeting.
At the conclusion of our meet ing, Mr. Wehrman of the :Plarmers,
agTeed to look into the ma.,tter of logic 10cC1.tions for nmltip1e
dwellings, sewer loca.tions as to DPlltiple loca.,tions, and write up
.D.odel of SGw.e. Also to give considerc~tion as te, IBJee shore control
with regard to mu1tiple-e:wel-l-3:-:&ge., use of docks, etc.
There being no further business, the meeting ij\T3's adjourned.
Hes';'Jectful1Y SUb,.litted.
Sec'Y
Shorewood P1a..""l>~ling Com.ll.
.
., ._v_ !'
e
e
e
NASON, LAW, V'VEHRMAN & KNIGHT, INCe
2101 Hennepin Avenue - Minneapolis 5, Minnesota
S :;l~ t;mb~r 24, 1963
To:
Shor~wood Planning Commission
Shor.~wood, Minn:Jsota
R~9adjng: lak~shor~ Dev~lo;:.m~nt and Control
Comm~nts :
i. Any discussion of lakeshore or wat.arfront controls should i- ..:::rhaFs b.J .. re-~ml-.L~d
by a bri~f discussion of some of tha sourCdS of to robbms which result in the n.;led
for such controls first, th..! reF-idly increasing demand for a"uatic.ori3nt~d
racrJational facilities is a"'Far~nt to naarly everyone. 'A.J ar03 in the midst of
a r~creation hoomo
The d;)mand for additional r~creational facilities con b.;: ffiet only by th.ol d~v3Iop-
ment of both ~ ublic and t-rivate facilities. V" ith reSj.-ect to daveloJ-ment of thasa
faciliti3s, th...: i9.5JJ annual re(.,ort of V\ashington, "R..!sourcas for tha Future,
astimatad that th~ demand for ~ublic and I-fivata recreational facilities in th~
year 1000 would be: (1) for' user-based" areas (clos.3 .enough to usars to be en-
joyed after school or work) may be four times great3r than at presentj (2) for
. int~rmediate" areas (Iocat~d within one or two hours travel tima) may be 16 times
greater than at presentj {3) for "resource-hosed' areas ('offering opportunities for
the finest outdoor anj oyment, but often not easily accessible to users except dur-
ing vocations") may be 40 times greater than at F-resent. Based upon thesa esti-
matas, the acreage of municipal parks would have to go from 3/4 million, at pres-
ent, to six mi llion by the year 2000, and state pork acreage from five mi II ion to
from 55 to 80 mi II ion .1 from thesa estimates, it seems clear that maior increasss
in the demand for recreational facilities is imminent, and that the more distant
areas will likely experience a relatively greater increase in future demand than
will the closer and more easily used areas:
Anothaf factor, perhaps more p~rtinent to the residants of Shorawood, is thea post-
V\orld War II booting boom. In 1947 there were 2,440,000 pleasure craft in use
in the United Statas.2 In 1960 the Outboard Booting Club of America reported
lFl'Om ASPO Information Report No. 118
2From ASPO Infonnation Report Noo 14i
- 1 -
that there were over 8,000,000 pleasure boots of 011 typas in use and that partici-
pation was estimated at more than 40,000,000 persons. 1 Recent trends indicate
a continuing rise in boat ownership and participation in the sport, although the
phenomenal rote of growth has eased off. 1 figure 1 shows the growth in tha num-
bers of recreational boats in usa from 1900 through 1960 and the estimated increase
through 1985:
FIGURE I millions
12
e
e
~ '
REC EA TIC NAL! OATS N USI If'
baSE d on fi ures f. pm the NatiOl lei I ,
Assc elation ofEng ne one BOQt I
. . - - , I
g~ rna ,
800 IngCh ~of Ai l'lerico "
/
/
,J1 "
J
/
I
/
~ .
/ /
L/ V
.
1909 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
rlbJd.
-2-
e
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
o
1985
e
2. As was pointed out in the "Planning Report" by Mr. Hasbrouk, practically all
the existing shoreline of lake Minnetonka is developed into privote use . Also
in that report I the importance of acquiring a portion of the shol'elina for p..blic
use was emphasized. One means of accomplishing this might be to create a
village owned and operated boat landing or marina, Perhaps on area presently
existing as a marsh could be ~tilized for the f'urpose with a dredging operation.
The Village ~uld likely benefit fl'9m obtaining revenue by charging for the use
of vi lIage owned marina facil ities and installations. Atlantic Highlands in
New Jersey has produced a surplus from operation of a municipal marina, as an
example,
A second approach might be to encOU"ag3 the development of a privataly owned
and operated marina. Whereas the owners are the most direct beneficiaries of a
successful facility, the Community can ~Iso b~fit economically from the pro-
vision of adequate boating facilities. (Merchants'5upplying the boat owners will
benefit. In some cases the developme~-of-Cfdesirabla marina facility will en-
hance the value of adjacent residential land and make it more desirable for de-
velopment. Boat owners, new residents and tourists all have a multiplier effect
on the economic activity of 0 community.
e
3. In the event new lakeshore development is contemplated, it is imperative that
it be well planned and compatible with the existing Community. A public fa-
cility such as a marina, for example, should have good vehicular access without
gena rating traffic volumes which are forced through residential. development.
The facility should have adequate off""'Stl:'eet paming accommodations.
Whether new development occurs or not, it becomes apparent that waterfront and
lakeshore controls are going to become increasingly important to the Community
in the future.
The control of lakeshore and water surface may be logically catGgotized as follows:
A. Control of the use of buildings and land -.. zoning.
-
B. Control of the construction of buildings on land and development of struc-
tures on or under the water surface (docks, piers, breakwaters, etc.) --
building code.
C. Use of docks and water areas (boating, swimming, etc.) -- special oi'dil"i'
nances,municipal, count)' and date.
Since the first category is perhaps the most pertinent to the existing residential
character of the lal<eshore development in Shorewood, the following discussion
will ba limited primarily to tha~' category, All tha lakeshore at the present time
is zoned residential and genel'CIlly it being used as 0 single-family residential
e
-3-
e
district. In ordaT to obtain a stricter control over davelopmitnt and use of lake-
shor~ property, it might be well to consider the addition of a residence-waterfront
district, which could be applied to 011 property abutting the lakeshore. Some
sfecial requirements for this district might be:
A. Minimum lot width fronting on the I(]ke of
. feat. }.'
1\
.1',
B. Minimum side yard between any permanent or floating structure and side
property line of feet.
c. No boats moored, docked or tied within
line of feet.
feet 06 side property
D. Any of the other uses allowed under the present residential district zone be
allowed only by special usa permit.
In addition to these controls, it would be advantageous to require buil:ling permits
for the construction of all docks, piers, ramps, breakwaters, etc. This would aid
in the enforcement of 8 and C immediately above.
e
Lastly, the VIllage may wish to consider an ordinance restricting the operation of
powered watercraft, other than at reduced speed or under closed throttle, withIn
certain limits of the shoreline of Shorewood. Such an ordinance should have the
support of the moiority of ths residents before being considered, however.
Respectfully submitted,
NASON, LAW, WEHRMAN & KNIGHT, aNC.
~t
~ . . -?..Iih..H !A!'f.",T'/
. Ke~ We rman
e
-4-
.
e
~
!Tov. 1, 1963
The Shorewuod Vi 11a.ge pla;n.ning cornrdssion hi! t on October 30, 1993,
at Minnewa,shta School. The meeting v/P....s c'-11led to order at 7:30 P. M.
r.d th IvlessTs. A. B. Jol'nson, H. Cly]Jorne, R. McDougall, Wellrllk1n, W. Jessup
'if. F. Kelly, J. B. Janvrin and M~ H. Goodman ~res6nt.
Mr. Kendric}c of the Round-U,p-Drive In described a. proposed minia.ture
golf conrsB v/hicl1 they would lit.ce to build adj acent to tIle rear of
L.e drive-in. Tb.8 ...Jro,tiert7 i s')lreed\T Boned. cOlllmercial so th8,t .811 .
th".t is nceied if; ::'. s....J8cial 'per~;lit fOJ~ t s tyye of use. The l8nd is
being filled, "vi tilin their lot line vii 1 be terr2.ced~Jld lighted
lTI tl1 a. sh:llm! type lighting Wllich y,rO':lld nut gla..re on homes on the
op...Josi te Eide of thE; sW3Wy and 'ltoods. Mrs. Goodman LJ.ovEXi. that
Mr. Kendrick's 'plan for n, [ninia,t'n~e golf course be recomuended for
8o....J.f:.irO\.a.1 by the counCil for a.. s.JeciaJ. use permit subject to no
dis8.Jyroval by neigrJJots. Mr. Clyborne seconded and the motion carried
llilaniuJ1lsly.
Mr. 8ch06ll .i!resent ed tlle October 30tlle reV1Slon of the Ernest Hall
preliminary plat. Lot si zes anrl r08d r(:'Cdu.iretlent f, werE all in
accordance with ordinance reqllirementc: so Mr. McDougall moved th~.t
we acce.Jt Mr. Halls October revision. Mr. Clyborne seconded and
it \'I8:S lillanimo'.lsly approved.
Mr. Mehrman revievTed his reCOIT.ll:llended 8dditions And amendments to our
zoning ordinance ~'nd ~uided us in a, discusEion of a. defined R-3
F.esidentic31 Distri t ~a:.l:.l3,rtm€nts). no conclusions were made.
T?es...)ectfully submitted
Ma.rion K. Goodman
Acting Secretary
e
S choell
It and
~ Madson
ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS
October 30. 1963
Village of Shorewood
c/o Mrs. Elsa Wiltsey, Clerk
Route 6, Box 238
Excelsior, Minn.
Subject: Revised Preliminary Plat
Submitted by Mr. Ernest Hall
Gentlemen:
e
We have reviewed the revised preliminary plat submitted
by Mr. Hall, dated October, 1963~ along with proposed street
grades, and find them in conformance with the Village plat-
ting ordinance~ and with the recommendations included in our
previous review dated September 4th.
The plat needs an identifying name.
We recommend approval of this preliminary plat, subject
to detailed confonnance with your ordinance as to easements
along lot lines, detailed drainage planning, and other items
required.
Very truly yours,
WDSchoell:sd
SCHOELL AND MADSON
to~u~
e
CARLISLE MADSON
WILLIAM D. SCHOELL
PHONE 938-7614 . 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH, HOPKINS. MINNESOTA
e
e
e
MIlTI.J'l'EE '- F L}~,LT 111' G
i.~
v.:
S:I~J1
LII"IJ.I;WOOD lLL_~1'"nTG COMjiISSION
The Shorewood Plc:mning held its r eg1lIel' xneet iDg un V:e:3.neE'Cl;::y
, ~ , J::16~'" c:; Mirmewa,shta. School at 7:30 P. M.
Those .Jresent were: M.Bssrs, Jessup, Ma.cDougall, CIyborne, and Mrs.
Goodman and lifrs. Petterson. Mr. Janvrin of tlle Vil.lage Council Wa.S
alsoprese.nt.
The first order of business was a. request from lIT. R. J. Bolen
vIlla owns ...jro,perty vybere school 'buses are housoo, requesting ~ermission
to incrE:a,se size of g;:3rage so tl1R,t a.ll buses can be kept inside,
and either buy or rent adjacent space. A Illation was made by l..rrs.
G,)ocirrlan tha,t the Pl8Il:Lling CmlLlim'ion rej ect Mr. Bolen's request for
exp8nsi on of g2r.::-ge f8.oi1i ties. The mot ion waF, seconded by hili'.
Clyborne. Tlle vote i;'VrJ..,S JI1Bn.ILtDUS in f,'lyor of this motion.
The PlalmirL~ COLli lisF:)11 cU scussed Mr. V:ehrmc1:n's nnE",} dl'eJt of
}'Ili.)J:CJEed ~\. 1~lc_IiE 1.:E! t ::3ctliLng Ordinance for Sllorev/ood.
A Llotion YJ'E.E r':lP.de by 1,Ir. Ma.cDul€~E!.ll t],;.,t 'F.:e stTi]{e tb.e R-2 zoning
on, tl.J.e m~,p a,nd F\ll. ref~rence[) tJ:;.ereto li~;te(l j_~'1 tIle PTO...JO;:;;8Cl t1!::cU tiol1t
r:,:,c ~-,i(.r(',.iE:;:L.t f. 1.1' L ..';",OdL):L. ,-'::.. en. The vote was Wla.nlmous
in f?vor of the Llotion. It i e noted th::.t tlle:ce 'l)'Tol11d be no buJld:Lng
of c1L.l..Jlczcs (.F jrEE,C'fj,bed .-1 ('~ 0..;/05E( .i',.LC:r:.c"1.l,.ET.t.
~';,f PI Hi C-.i.....iE:: would like to 'poing out to the Village
Co~mci 1 thnt theTe J:liH,y l"mve 10:.f.:en a violet 1011 of' i tern 10, Sect ion 6
of Cl'oinanc€ {)~8 bv i~l1e construction 01' a. fence ~jfu.gller th:,n ~iix ff:(3t
by 1/1'. It. l. l'C'.ciEle.
~:::;,
...\.- ~~
'J..=-.
C~.~ E~~,~:J u
..~(J :....
'n" l'
f:;S,
..L .:
\.-" -,-,
" ,-.f.. "('
...l_ to ~.' I:: ),
~ _.-
i
.' .
L: 0 J ('1- ,(1-
.c'/" ,
~" ; \. "-)
-.-.---.---:=; . . .'
. 1 't j t.,'! "...~ ;: t: " .I.. U.;