The URL can be used to link to this page

012306 CC Reg AgP CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2006 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call Mayor Love _ Lizee Turgeon _ Callies Wellens B. Review Agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, January 9, 2006 (Att.- Minutes) 3. CONSENT AGENDA - Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions Therein: NOTE: Give the public an opportunity to request an item be removed from the Consent Agenda. Comments can be taken or questions asked following removal from Consent Agenda. A. Approval ofthe Verified Claims List (Att.- Claims List) B. Staffing - No action required C. Approval of the Stormwater Report (Att. - Director of Public Works' memorandum) D. Approval of Request from Lake Minnetonka Wells Fargo Half Marathon to traverse the City on Sunday, May 7, 2006 (Att.- Deputy Clerk's memorandum) E. Designating Apple Road as a MSA roadway (Att. - Director of Public Works' memorandum, Resolution) F. Accept proposal for professional services for the Christmas Lake Point Lift Station 12 and Enchanted Lane Lift Station 16 Rehabilitation Projects (Att. - Director of Public Work's memorandum) G. Rejecting Proposals for Relocation of Dry Hydrant at 4550 Enchanted Point (Att.- Public Works Director's memorandum, Resolution) 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken.) 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - JANUARY 23, 2006 PAGE 2 OF 3 6. PUBLIC HEARING 7 . PARKS - Report by Representative A. Report on Park Commission Meeting Held January 10,2006 (Att.- Draft Minutes) 8. PLANNING - Report by Representative A. Zoning Text Amendment and Conditional Use Permit (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum) Applicant: Frostad Development Co. Location: 23505 Smithtown Road B. Zoning Text Amendment to Sign Regulations (Att. - Draft Ordinance) C. Setback Variance (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum, Draft Resolution) Applicants: Scott Williams and Linda Hakon Location: 5955 Country Club Road D. Minor Subdivision/Combination - Lot Line Rearrangement (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum, Draft Resolution) Applicant: Michael McDonald Location: 4695 and 4725 Lagoon Drive E. Minor Subdivision (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum) Applicant: George Danser Location: 5840 Christmas Lake Road 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Making MCES, LMCC, and LMCD Board Representative Appointments (Att.- 3 Draft Resolutions) B. Appeal Deadline - Notice to Remove (Att.-Planning Director's memorandum) Applicant: Peter Hofius Location: 6080 Chaska Road 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Set Date for Public Information Meeting - Amesbury SE Area Water Connection (Att.- Director of Public Works' memorandum) B. Discussion on County Road 19 Cost Projections CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - JANUARY 23, 2006 PAGE 3 OF 3 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff B. Mayor & City Council 12. RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION - ATTORNEY DISCUSSION RE: SLMPD ARBITRATION STRATEGY 13. ADJOURN CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 . Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday, 23 January 2006 . A Special Meeting will be held beginning at 6:00 P.M. for the purpase afinterviewing candidates far the LMCD, LMCC and MCE Baard representatives . A Wark Sessian will immediately fallaw the Regular Council Meeting Agenda Item #3A: Agenda Item #3B: EnClased is the Verified Claims List far Caunci1 appraval. There are no. staffing items far cansideratian. Agenda Item #3C: At the January 9th, 2006 City Caunci1 meeting, 'staff presented a draft drainage repart autlining drainage issues within the City. Prab1ems were identified after the starm events that accurred in September and Octab~r af 2005. The camp1eted repart is naw being presented far the City Cauncil's cansideratian. The repart cantains . preliminary cast apinians. These figures are cancept in nature, and are there to. assist the City Co~nci1 in evaluating arders afmagnitude af casts. Survey, design, ar feasibility studies have nat been ardered ar camp1eted far this repart. Staff recammends that the City'Ca"ijnci1 accept the final repart by simple matian. If appraved, staff will begin with sending letters to. residents, and with design investigatian afthe priarity projects. Agenda Item#3D: The annual Wells Fargo. Half Marathan is scheduled far Sunday, May 7, 2006. The marathan route will be the same as past years. The race begins at 8 a.m., and the last af the runners are expected in Exce1siar araund 11 a.m. The SLMPD has been infarmed af the race. Caunci1 matian is to. allaw the mflIathan to. traverse the City an Sunday, May 7, 2006. Agenda Item#3E: This is a request to. designate Apple Raad aS,an MSA raadway. Sharewaad's Apple Raad changes to. Y asemite Raad in Chanhassen. The City af Chanhassen is also. cansidering designatian afYasemite Raad as an MSA raadway. Far a raadway to. be designated as a M~A raadway, it must intersect ar meet anather MSA route, cauntyar state highway. In this instance, ifbath cities designate Apple Raad/Y asemite Raad as MSA, the cannectian wauld be made between Lake Lucy Road (MSA Raute) in Chanhassen, and Mill Street (Caunty State Aid Highway 81) in Sharewoad. The City currently has 0.9 mile that "is in the bank" that is undesignated. By adding designated mileage, the amaunt af funding accredited to. the City af Sharewaad's MSA accaunt each year increases. If this designatian is made, an additiana1 0.3 mile afMSA designatian wau1d be accredited to. Sharewaad's raute n '.J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of 23 January 2006 Page 2 of3 designation. Staff recommends approval of the resolution that designates Apple Road as a Municipal State Aid Roadway between Mill Street and the Shorewood - Chanhassen Corporate boundary. Agenda Item #3F: WSB and Associates has prepared a proposal for engineering services to assist with the design, bidding, and reconstruction of Sanitary Lift Stations No. 12 (Christmas Lake Point) and No. 16 (Enchanted Lane). Both lift stations are identified in the CIP for rehabilitation. Staff recommends approval and acceptance of the proposal from WSB and Associates for professional design services for the Christmas Lake Point Lift Station No. 12 and Enchanted Lane Lift Station No. 16. Agenda Item #3G: The City Council may recall the acceptance of a petition filed by Mr. Mike Catain, property owner of 4550 Enchanted Point, for the relocation of a dry hydrant. The City Council awarded the contract, contingent upon Mr. Catain agreeing to move forward with the project, and pay the cost ofthe award. Since that time, Mr. Catain declined the project and has had the system installed with his own contractor in accordance with the City's construction documents and standards. This work was just completed on January 11,2006. As a housekeeping item, the award of the project was never completed, due to Mr. Catain's objection. Therefore, for the record, bids for the project need to be rejected. Staff is recommending approval of a resolution that rejects the bids for the Dry Hydrant Relocation Proj ect. Agenda Item #7A: A report of the January 10, 2006, Park Commission meeting will be provided. Agenda Item #8A: Frostad Development Company proposes to redevelop the Shorewood Nursery property on County Road 19 for use as an office building site. The request includes a proposed zoning text amendment that would allow additional impervious surface (up to 75 percent) for commercial uses in the Shoreland District. The draft amendment recommended by the Planning Commission includes specific thresholds for sediment and phosphorous removal based on Watershed District standards. The Commission also recommended approval of a conditional use permit for the office building, subject to the recommendation of the Planning Director and consulting engineer. Staff should be directed to prepare a formal text amendment and a resolution approving the c.u.P. for the next meeting of the City Council. Agenda Item #8B: After several study sessions the Planning has recommended changes to update Shorewood's sign regulations. Staff will highlight the proposed changes at the meeting on Monday night. Agenda Item #8C: The Planning Commission recommends approval of a setback variance for Scott Williams and Linda Halcon. They propose to finish a small addition at the rear of their home that was made nonconforming when Mary Lake Trail was platted. A draft resolution is included in the packet for the Council's consideration. Agenda Item #8D: Michael McDonald and Thomas Countryman proposed to swap small pieces of their properties on Lagoon Drive on Enchanted Island. The Planning Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of 23 January 2006 Page 3 of3 Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the minor subdivision/combination. A draft resolution is included in the packet for Council consideration. Agenda Item #8E: George Danser applied for a minor subdivision of his mother's property on Christmas Lake Road. Although his surveyor submitted a survey that complied with City requirements, Mr. Danser requested that the matter be continued. After two additional continuations and not hearing from Mr. Danser, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny the request. Agenda Item #9A: Appointments of Representatives to the Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) Board, the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission (LMCC), and the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) are typically done in January. The City has advertised these volunteer board opportunities to residents. Earlier this evening, Council interviewed candidates for each of these positions. Draft resolutions making appointments are provided for Council action. Agenda Item #9B: Peter Rofius has requested additional time to clean up his property at 6080 Chaska Road. Ordinarily, these request are placed on the consent agenda with a recommendation to extend the deadline 30 days, assuming the applicant is making a good-faith effort to comply. In this case, Mr. Rofius is making progress but asks for more time to remove items that are frozen in. Staff recommends that the deadline be extended for 30 days. Items that are frozen in should be removed by 15 April. Agenda Item #10A: WSB and Associates is nearing completion of the plans for the watermain to be installed along St. Albans Bay Road, Manor Road, and along portions of Suburban Drive. Council may recall that this segment is to serve as an interconnection between the SE Area Water System and the Amesbury Water System. In addition, this utility is to serve the new subdivision of Park view Crossings. Staff is recommending that February 9th, 2006, be set as the date ofthe public information meeting for the SE Area- Amesbury Water Connection. The time of the meeting is suggested at 6:30 p.m. Agenda Item # 1 OB: This item is a discussion on the County Road 19 cost proj ections. Agenda Item #12: The City Council will recess to Executive Session with the City Attorney to discuss strategies related to the arbitration for funding allocation among the SLMPD member cities. CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, JANUARY 9, 2006 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Present. Mayor Love, Councilmembers Callies, Lizee, Dawson; Associate Attorney Mayeron; Works Brown Wellens; Administrator Director of Public A. Roll Call Absent: Attorney Keane; Planning Director B. Review Agenda Mayor Love reviewed the Agenda for the meeting. Amendment of C-3 Zoning District, be con~ued to a future :hee m::~:::::ec::;:prOTIn\:~~=:.& '-((((<<<-I/o!','.:,'., W:::::::::::::::::::::::"!.::W,:,:::"',:,:':,:,:,:,:"','. "-'-'-'''-' .", mw,' >'~>"::::"""""'""'!~"""'~":::::::::::::/;'":::>:':'> , =:^'~,\;,;:::w N'<W City Co~gcil W()l:"~i:~~ssion Minu~~.:..I.... Decembef~12, 2005 h:;~~~"~ ' '''''''''''''' \<, Wellens moved, Turg;;~~onded3ipproving the~i!y;"Council Work Session Minutes, December 12, 2005, as presented. MO~!:~~~~;;;:::;;;:,"~; "",,::" ,-,:-_ u, :~~;;;;:::,;,:::,:,:::::, _ : __', """::;:::::::::;::::i;i;i;i~i~;~:~;\,:;", - , .;' '~~~w "',: (!0;;~:~::~;::i:;::;:::::;~~- B:z;::::::::::el~:~~~~ Reg~~~:}\1eeting"Mtnutes, December 12, 2005 ;:::~:;;:? ~ ":;;;:;;;~~>-, Turg~Q~:i:0i!oved, Callies - nded, ."JlOving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of Decembe'~~}005, as Am::::d, onJige 7, Item 9A1, Paragraph 1, Sentence 5, remove item 2, "... 2) he dilfiiQJ understand"~i9w the "Proposal" would benefit the Shorewood residents - Police service would':etllalr be basedii the outcome of the arbitration or property values, rather than on a per call basis; ~~~.:~~ .=' umbers 3-6 consecutively as numbers 2-5. Motion passed 5/0. 3. CONSENT AO:g,oA passed 5/0. A. Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein: A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Staffing - No action required C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-001, "A Resolution Approving Licenses for Tree Trimmers." #2A SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 9, 2006 Page 2 of7 D. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-002, "A Resolution Setting the 2006 Regular City Council Regular Meeting Schedule." E. Approval of the Recording Secretary Services Agreement F. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-003, "A Resolution Approving Supplemental Agreement 5 for the County Road 19 Intersection Reconstruction Project, S.A.P. 216-101-02; S.A.P. 27-619-18." 8. H. Establishing May 20, 2006, as Spring G. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-004, "A Resolution of-State Travel by Members of the City Council." a Policy for Out- 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS None. 6. PUBLIC HEARING None. 7. PARKS Director Brown Regular City Council Park Park Commission since the most recent report on at this time. The next meeting of the 2006, at City Hall at 7:00 P.M. and actions taken at the January 3, 2006, Planning the minutes of that meeting). A. of C-3 Zoning District Lynne Fisher 24285 Smithtown Road The applicant, Lynne Fisher, requested this request be postponed until the Planning Commission had completed its study of allowable uses in the C-3 District. Councilmember Wellens stated at the January 3, 2006, Planning Commission meeting, he had suggested to the Commission that it consider rezoning the C-3 District, in which 24825 Smithtown Road was located, to a C-4 District. SHORE WOOD CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 9, 2006 Page 3 of 7 In response to a comment by Councilmember Callies, Commissioner White explained the Planning Commission had not completed its study of allowable uses in the C-3 District, and the C-2 District had been eliminated. She also stated over time the Planning Commission envisioned the possibility of eliminating the existing C-4 District. Councilmember Turgeon stated she did a site review of 24825 Smithtown Road at the request of the applicants. She stated there were a number of allowable uses in a C-4 District that she would want to discourage in that C-3 District. She noted she was appreciative of both the applicant's and the City's Issues. ,- Mayor Love stated the applicants had proposed a plan that would be y;!:)jcomp~tible with the site, but not with C-3 zoning regulations. He then stated he agreed \Yi~uncilmember Turgeon, the consequences of the zoning change needed to be considered. H~onclti:a~J:he Planning Commission should assess the consequences of changing the zoning from a,C-~istrict ~-4 District prior to this item coming before the Council again. ~d:<~ -~, ..........~~ 9. GENERALINEW BUSINESS ~.. ::" .. · ~ -L:.~~ A. Wellens moved, Lizee seconded, Adojit1lg.::::;ftSt:)LUTION Na 06-005, "A Resolution Making Appointments to Certa~~!fices and Positions within the City of Shorewood for the Y;~2006, subjecttij'~lu~ following amendments: Park Commission Liaison for J~~~:: June 2006 wiiiftlbe c:hristine Lizee; Planning Commission Liaison for Jan~!fy:~~~'!tl!~..2006 woul~ula Callies; Liquor Stores Committee - Martin Wellen'ij:~oufa::::~illll.ce Laur~Turgeon; Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Liaison wd!~d ~~:::::piii~s:~~lieS; Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed~~!~ Liaison woub:l::Jie Paulai:lillies; and Lake Minnetonka Cable Commis~iijiiw(}u(d~ Martin We~ns." Motioh passed 5/0. >,:;~~: """""'''''- ';;~, .<<<~'"W""'::, ' "" __ _ _ ~'::;:;;:;:;;;:;:;:::~ ";,~:;:;:;::~ B. AutIiOrliiifin for B~Defits Consultan~:~ervices ~~f~~J~;:~i~\"", ",,:L:,:7~'-:!'~,::;:;:::;::::::::~:::::::;::>::,,:":::::':~:"""""""" jji:>' Administrato~~g~:~tated tBi~iii~~~11.ra::tjJij~n9~ued from a December 12,2005, Council meeting. Council ~~~::reqtrestiij~~ificatf~ft::~~t the sefvi~es to be rendered by Stanton Group Services, the reco~a~d firm, wolir~elude te~~~ of penefits communication and the open enrollment process, and ~g'~~hat improve~~~i~hOUld~~~Ohsidered. ~_W,' ""'::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:\ "'w Dawson exPlii~ Stanton GiQiii> ServIces had revised its December 1, 2005, proposal to clarify the scope of work ~~e, and ~:e was no increase in cost resulting from the change. Callies moved, Turl~~:i.~~~ij'hded, authorizing the services of Stanton Group Services to perform an independent reviewilnd analysis of the City's employee benefits program, per its proposal of December 1,2005, as r~ised, subject to the cost not to exceed $5,800. Councilmember Wellens stated the deliverable expectation seemed vague, in particular the assessment of the benefits communication. He questioned what the communication problems were and whether or not a consultant was required to address the problems. In response, Administrator Dawson stated the Employee Benefits Committee had recommended improvements to communication timeliness, the communication effectiveness of benefits changes, and in conducting the open enrollment process. Motion passed 4/1 with Wellens dissenting. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 9, 2006 Page 4 of 7 C. City Hall Space Needs Administrator Dawson stated Council spent the fall of 2005 reviewing options for improvements to City Hall. At a December 12,2005, work session, Council reviewed the space needs plan and sketches which showed additions totaling approximately 3,500 square feet to the upper level for approximately $2.0 million. At that meeting many on the Council indicated an interest in a remodeling/addition to City Hall rather than a replacement of City Hall. Council directed this item be placed on the January 9, 2006, City Council meeting agenda for further discussion. Councilmember Callies stated the original 2003 space needs study estimat~.iil~~d for an approximately 13,000 square-foot building, and the most recent space needs proposal~for arl: approximately 12,000 square-foot building. She then stated the square footage for the aver~Hall for communities in the area was similar. Callies explained the cost for a 3,500 squaFfoot~~~Q~eling/addition approach (resulting approximately in a 12,000 square-foot building) w:1~J(),hly $2:GiiUion and the cost for a 12,000 square-foot new building was about $400,000 morsn~,J:xpressed hej'~~~~~ern with spending $2.0 million for a remodeling/additions improvement aBf'lroach when $2.4 millioti~~~Quld build a new building, and she thought it more fiscally prudent to ~~;:~,ew builg,ing. Councilmember Lizee stated she agreed with Councilmerii' qU:j~'~:2tmstruction of~i~ew City Hall was the better approach. She stated when the age of the exis Hall and the needs for decades to come were considered, Council needed to fulfill their stewardshl~mlliPonsibilities in the management of the City finances and the City Hall investmeli:~~~g~~ed the Excelst~igrary planned retrofit project as an example of a significant capital expenditur~'tora::!litlest improvemet1t;:: "".----:-:---:-::.:--::--_:--- - ' -=====. Councilmembers Wellens and Turgeon expres~~:fl tl}.~ir:su~~1" the change in direction from a remodeling/additions approa~:a:::new building a.ach since1'liiiDecember 12,2005, work session. i;~0Y~=:::::::::::,::; . ::;;~ ...: Councilmember Turg~~:::!-!gain stat~q~::~he has not D~n convinced there was a need for an additional 3,500 square feet of spacihalIdthe resting $2.0 milliO'f!::i~ense. She stated she agreed there was a need for building improvements,3::~~~ f<ii$cSevel of t:~modeling, and a need for some required building maintenance t<>-~e:dQ~,~. q"q. O%-:;~;~:~:p':;;:;:~:;::,,:,:::,::::,::;:~_~_~;;;:_~_~:~__ '~~ Counc~!~mber Wellens~ci#eJmed ~~~uns;ilmember Turgeon's comments. He expressed concern for a pot~t1!i~substantial 20~ incre11e:i~e City were to assume more funding responsibility for the EFD bud~~nd if the Citi~:;~~ancia~tesponsibility to the SLMPD was increased significantly. He expressed C()t(G~n for the possLii cost 'Of a new or improved City Hall. Councilmember Turgeon added the possibility cr~million ~r:- for storm water management improvements. Mayor Love stated ';c~~~~~~g had been reached on the need for improvement, and the amount of additional space requirei::::lo satisfy the need had been an area of contention. He stated he shared the concern regarding retunfan investment for a remodeling/additions approach. He then stated there would be cost efficiencies lost with the remodeling approach, and there would be additional costs for temporary Staff relocation with the new building approach. Love noted any approval would be for continued planning, and not approval for the project. Callies moved, Lizee seconded, to authorize further planning for improvements to City Hall not to exceed a building of approximately 12,000 square feet of space. Motion passed 3/2, with Turgeon and Wellens dissenting. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 9, 2006 Page 5 of7 Councilmember Turgeon stated, for clarification, the motion did not mean approval for an increase of 3,500 square feet of space. D. SLMPD Arbitration Panel Administrator Dawson stated all four SLMPD member cities approved what had become known as the "Saunders Proposal". The "Proposal" contained a number of amendments to the JP A which would take place prior to entering into one-time binding arbitration regarding SLMPD funding. The JP A amendments were in progress and would be reviewed by the city attorneys o~,:,!he SLMPD member cities prior to being presented to the Council later in January. @:L: The city attorneys had reached a consensus recommendation of :t:~~iFe~~Qrmer judges/justices to the three-member arbitration panel regarding the funding allocationj~st.ie for:~~SLMPD. The arbitration panel would consist of James H. Gilbert, Marianne D. Short,,9,nd::~~ter J. f~~erg. The Excelsior and Greenwood city councils had approved the selections, and ~ay would cll_r them at a January 10,2006, Council meeting. Staff recommended Council aJ1#ove th; selections for t~bitration panel. ~j';: ~ .m":;~;;i;;i.:f; Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, approving the'Yar6it~lltion p~l as recommen~~a' by the city attorneys of the SLMPD member cities.:::t::;':"""L;~ In response to a question from CouncilmetmterW ellens, AdmifiB~~tor Dawson stated Council would have the opportunity to review and provide &~~~s~to the argum~iii~::~~ingpresented to the arbitration panel. Dawson stated there would be a close&1:~;~ssiQ1il..2:fthe Council (f~t~ary 23,2006, to discuss the arbitration strategy with Attorney Keane. He::i~eng~had spoliiii with another member city's attorney, who had spoken with Mr. Gilbert, and tij~ attQa:reye~&I.i:::~he arguments would tentatively be ready for consideration b~:~!!:~~!tration panel~:iil[te Marcn:;;~006. He stated the location for the arbitration had not been 9:~~efiniffi5d~i~'l:!d Council cotiP observe if they so choose. ~,~"" _,""'_ Motion passed 5/0. <<' -~ w= ':;~ -~, 10. ENGlBEBI~G/PUBEI~:~Si;;::ii:::::~~~~ .:..::ii~::i:i~;~iir.:iit:::::.,... .....::::.:: g Revie; ~ft St()rJftW ater Report ~E1:~:':::2~* :~~~-~~ :-:;;::::u~>~';':"?:;;'::~ Dire~tor:Bt.~~ explained th ty had/requested WSB & Associates, Inc., review the drainage issues received afte~i~heavy storms . September 4,2005, and October 4,2005. He stated Mr. Steve Gurney, Hydrologist f~~ and AssQ~tes who was present at the meeting, had reviewed all of the concerns received, analyzed:~em, an9:i~ade priority recommendations for responding to the issues. Gurney compiled the informa:t~~~Jlliaraft report which was presented to Council. Mayor Love complimented Mr. Gurney on the quality of his report. He appreciated that the process provided an opportunity for the resident's concerns to be expressed. Director Brown stated Staff would like Council to review the categories for prioritizing storm water drainage issues and advise on the appropriateness of the categories. He stated it was not the City's responsibility to resolve all drainage issues. The City was responsible for public rights-of-way and regional storm water management issues, and there are times where difficult decisions must be made regarding prioritization and resolving. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 9, 2006 Page 6 of7 Mr. Gurney explained he utilized a prioritization policy for evaluation of the storm water issues that was similar to what the City had used in the past. He then reviewed the prioritization categories used and a description of the categories (as detailed in the draft report). Gurney's draft report documented each issue and assigned a project number. Then each project overview identified the property, the problem, the priority classification, property hydrologic information, alternatives for correcting the problem, recommendations, and costs. Director Brown explained the cost identified for rectify each issue was a concept cost; no preliminary design had been done as of yet. The costs were assigned to aid Staff and CO~ldllci1 with the prioritization of the projects. ~;:::::~ .~ Director Brown stated one of the more difficult decisions Council:w:oiilO.J:1eed to make dealt with the outlet conditions of Mary Lake. He explained the project would bE!~ry c6~~i~~and specific project costs needed to be passed on to the benefiting property owners. He~~so';st~ted vaifijij~~eans for financing the project would need to be considered (e.g. financing throug2~estQrm water man!!c~~ent fund, a special tax district, etc.). He noted this was a high priority projeq!~and WSB had been woii~@i'r:a:n a concept plan for the Mary Lake area. "':~'~ "C::=:1!:S::F- ''':,:,:,:::::~~~~~:-- -_:==~'" ~"- Brown provided a bit of history regarding Mary Lake. He~~~-Yl:mrs back, the~ary Lake level bottom had been pierced during a utility installation. At that n~he City was required, via court order, to assist in augmenting the lake level thrd~~pumping water ~~!!2.~ Mary Lake well. The drainage hole was no longer causing a problem; Mary1l@~~~IlOW has a proble~~ith t~.~ lake level being too high. Brown explained the City becomes involved '\i{f~1!ake level sitJa:.::similar to this when houses are endangered. w~~":::1:::1E~jj1fJ.7 " ~~~;;,'t'''''''''''''''''''''''''''' "'c,<<<,,=' :? Councilmember Turgeon ng!~e:!:h~!:~ were a num~f'reside~is.i~iih storm water problems which are exacerbated by propertiej;:~wn:e'(r'6~:~~nnepin Co~, the Minnisota Department of Transportation, the City of Excelsior, etc'A;~~tated it w!.~~important the~.t.~ s~rve an advocacy role in helping the residents obtain support from tfiese:Q!~~!. goverii?g bodies in C011'~:gting the storm water problems. ~~:;':::::;:;::;~~>" """x~:;~:::::::::::::::::,;,;,;,;,;,;,:,;,~,,,,,,,,.',',"", _.~~(<' Director Br~~i~~~~~~WSB lililffiffi15.~eriin:;Gfont~~F.:WHh the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA)J:Il!gm'din:g:;.7 atetpib~~ms relatliIg to the Southwest LRT Regional Trail. Brown stated the HS:~ explained....:..:J~ng tlieffi~~~~.\Yater issues would result in significant tree loss along the trail,l:tn~idents are not in:1fay'Qr of t1i~~:~~~1::c::. ,"',' """""~ "",,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,~ ~, w"'"',',',.,',.,',',',.,,,,. :""":"'~ _:_~<::__ \;;<<, "";~=;~;::;, i:~~~ Mayor Lov~tled the draft Sort was a good tool for tracking issues and identifying where the culpability was.<~".... ; In response to a ques~~:Qy:@6imcilmember Wellens, Finance Director Burton explained there was need to conduct a storm wat2'i:iite analysis and stated the City's storm water rates needed to be able to fund the types of issues disc~~ed. In response to a second question from Wellens, Director Brown explained the storm water management fund would not sufficiently fund the identified issues, and the highest priority storm water projects were also the highest cost. Brown stated he could not identify, at this time, what portion of the projects identified in the draft report could be funded through the storm water management fund. Director Brown expressed his desire to adopt the draft report as a template for future management of storm water issues. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 9, 2006 Page 7 of7 In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, Director Brown stated category 4 implies the City bears some responsibility to fix the storm water problem, but category 5 does not. He explained the 2006 C.I.P. for storm water management had $30,000 allocated to help resolve private drainage issues. Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, accepting the draft report analyzing the drainage problem areas within the City of Shorewood. Motion passed 5/0. The final report will be presented for consideration of approval at the January 23,2006, Council meeting. 1. County Road 19 Intersection brings the 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff Director Brown stated Staff would present Supplemental~~~eement No. 6 the January 23,2006, Council meeting. "" Administrator Dawson stated the City of Maple Plain had Eijiii;ac~=ea1tlto the total number of cities in the LMCC to l7.,~;::;:m Mayor Love reported the next Coordinating"~~im1ai~:e meeting w~~'i[~huary18, 2006, at 5:00 P.M. and the next EFD Governing Board meeting wa~n~:!L 2006, at 7'~Nt. He stated he had heard, unofficially, Orono was not interested in reneWi~g its"Oi1tiiililJ.Jor services with the EFD. He stated the EFD Fire Chief DuCharme had tendered his resi~ati<?!!:i~ff~~i!:!5~~Etlfry 20, 2006, and there would be farewell open house for ~~g@:~~ January l1,'~b; from 4:~~;;;6:00 P.M. B. May~c:i~!:; Cori~~7! "">>,,",'W""<',,c,\ _ ~'@ Adn'iiij!~tra~':f~~~!~~~:",:/ Council e~~i5rr~~~~ 23:~~~~9<. as thefiriil date for providing Councilmember Turgeon with perfo11IliiOe feedback 'r~~ citYi~wini~trator. Turgeon stated it would take her three days to consglf@Jhe feedback anaTi~vide itt~:i50n~cil. 12. ~""""- AD.r~N Wellens moved, ~s secQ!!<ted, Adjourning the Regular City Council Meeting of January 9, 2006, at 8:40 P.M. ~~i~pissed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY su:afKnTTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk PAYABLES APPROVALS For 01/23/06 Council Meeting Prepared by. Michelle T. Nguy n, Date: ~1J(p r. Accounting Clerk - Date: ~~ Reviewed by: Bonnie Burton, Finance Director Approved by: ~&~ M Craig D wson, City Administrator Date: (% /;r jwtJp -fJg A PAYROLL APPROV ALS For 01/23/06 Council Meeting CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD,MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us . Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: January 17, 2006 RE: Accept Drainage Report, Dated January 23,2006 At the January 9th, 2006 City Council meeting, staff presented a draft drainage report outlining drainage issues within the City. Problems were identified after the storm events that occurred in September and October of2005. At the time of the presentation of the draft, there were still a Jew storm water issues to be finalized. Since that meeting, Mr. Steve Gurney of WSB and Associates has finalized these few remaining items. The completed report is now being presented for the City Council's consideration. As mentioned during the preseritation of the draft report, the report contains preliminary"cost opinions. These fig~res are concept in nature, and are there to assist the City Council in evaluating orders of magnitude of costs. Survey, design, or feasibility studies have not been ordered or completed for this report. ' Action Needed Staff is recommending that that the City Council accept the final report, by way of simple ~otion:. If' approved, staff will commence with letters to residents, and with design investigation of the priority projects. #=JG ,. ~J PRINTED ON REC'(CLED PAPER CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM DATE: January 18, 2006 TO: Mayor and Council Members Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk ~ FROM: CC: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk RE: A Motion Approving a Request to Allow the Wells Fargo Half Marathon to Traverse the City on Sunday, May 7, 2006 The annual Wells Fargo Half Marathon is scheduled for Sunday, May 7,2006. The attached correspondence from Loretta Docken, Race Director, states that there will be no change to the marathon route. A copy of the route map is attached. The runners will remain on Cty. Rd. 19 until they enter the LRT in Excelsior near Beehrle Street. The runners are on. the LRT for just a short time until they finish the race in Excelsior at the Wells Fargo Bank. The race begins at 8:00 a.m., the first runners finish around 9:15 a.m., and the last of the runners enter Excelsior around 11 :00 a.m. Staff recommends Council approve the request to allow the marathon to traverse the City on Sunday, May 7,2006. C: Police Chief Bryan Litsey ~ . ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER "#-3D . Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota Na Wayzata Office 900 East Wayzata Blvd Wayzata, MN 55391 January 4,2006 Mayor Woody Love City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Wells Fargo Lake Minnetonka Half Marathon Dear Mayor Love: The 26th annual Wells Fargo Lake Minnetonka Half Marathon between Wayzata and Excelsior is scheduled for Sunday, May 7,2006. We will begin the race at 8:00 a.m. in Wayzata. The race route will be the same as in past years. Once again, we will be contributing race proceeds to lake area community endeavors. Please send me any permit applications your ordinances may require. I will complete and return them immediately upon receipt. Should you have any questions, please call me at 612-316-1441. Sincerely, :4~;;(. ~~ Loretta L. Docken ,Race Director . CITY OF SHOREWOOD . 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: January 19,2006 1m: Designation of Apple R?ad as a Municipal State Aid Roadway , The intent of the Municipal State Aid (MSA) Roadway system is to provide means to allow communities to designate roadways that link communities together and provide a backbone of secondary roadways for travel betwe.en and through communities to collector routes. Attachment 1 is a request that has been received, from the City of Chanhassen. The request is for the City of Shorewood to designate Apple Road as an MSAroadway. Attachment 2 to this memorandum is a location map. Shorewood's Apple Road changes to Yosemite Road at the Chanhassen border. For a roadway to be designated as a MSA roadway, it required that the roadway intersects or meets another MSA route, county or state highway. In this instance, if both municipaliti~s designate Apple RoadN osemite Road as MSA, the connection would be made between Lake Lucy Road (MSA Route) in Chanhassen,and Mill Street (County State Aid Highway 81) in Shorewood. This request meets the requirements of the MSA system to be designated. More importantly, this roadway in both communities serves as a vital connection between two collector routes; Thus, it appears very logical to provide this designation. This request actually helps the City of Shorewood, as there'is currently 0.9 miles that "are in the bank" that is undesignated. By adding designated mileage, the amount of funding that is accredited to the City of Shorewood's MSA account each year increases. Certainly, any increases in MSA funding that can be attained for the City of Shorewood at this point is a positive event. . If this designation is made, and additional 0.3 mile of MSA designation would be accredited to Shorewood's route designation. Recommendation Staff is recommending approval 6f the resolution that designates Apple Road as a Municipal State Aid Roadway between Mill Street and the Shorewood - Chanhassen Corporate boundary. ,. '.J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER *3~ CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952227.1100 Fax: 952227.1110 Building Inspections Phone 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Englnearlng Phone: 952.227,1160 Fax: 952227.1170 Finance Phone: 952,227,1140 Fax: 952,227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227,1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Cenler 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227,1400 Fax: 952,227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227,1130 Fax: 952.227,1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227,1300 Fax: 952.227,1310 Senior Canter Phone: 952.227,1125 Fax: 952227,1110 Web Sile www.ci.chanhassen.mnus January 11,2006 RECE\"ED \ Mr. Larry Brown Dir. of Public Works City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 JAN 1 3 DC 3 cITY OFSHOREWOOD Re: MSA Designation - PW004 Dear Larry: The City of Chanhassen is respectfully requesting the City of Shorewood designate Apple Road from the Chanhassen City limits to Mill Road as a Municipal State Aid Route. The City of Chanhassen is proposing to reconstruct Yosemite Road that is on the City of Chanhassen side this year and would like to use Municipal State Aid Funds to help pay for a portion of the work. As you know, the Minnesota Department of Transportation requires that all municipal state aid routes intersect with other municipal state aid routes, county roads or state/federal highways. As we discussed, I have already put this issue on my City Council agenda for consideration on January 23, 2006. I have attached the resolution they will be considering. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this issue in more detail, please feel free to contact me at (952) 227-1169 or by email at poehme@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN /'?/~ Paul R. Oehme, P.E. City Engineer/Dir. of Public Works Attachment g:\englpubliclpw 004 -municipal slate aidlapple road designation.doc The City of Chanhassen . A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, Ihriving businesses, winding trails, and beautilul parks, A g~al place to live, work, and play I ATTACHMENT 1 ....., ~ ~ ~ ....., en "'C:) :< ~ ....., ~ ....., en "'C:) ~ ....., ~ t:l bJJ e1""'l rn ~ Q N I- Z w :!: ::I: (J <C I- ~ 'v/ --- -~l 3-- ~ ~ ~~--- ! r-~' )--1 ~, CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING APPLE ROAD AS A MUNICIPAL STATE AID ROAD WHEREAS, Apple Road is a roadway that extends between the Chanhassen Corporate Boundary and County State Aid Highway 81, also known as Mill Street; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that Apple Road should be designated as a Municipal State Aid Roadway under the provisions of Minnesota Law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shore wood that the roadway described as Apple Road from the south corporate boundary to County State Aid Highway 81, also known as Mill Street, be designated as a Municipal State Aid Roadway; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his consideration, and that upon his approval of the designation of said road or portion thereof, that same roadway be constructed, improved, and maintained as a Municipal State Aid Street of the City of Shorewood. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 23rd day of January, 2006. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 . (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us. cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator Larry Brown, Director of Public Works FROM: DATE: RE: , January 19, 2006 Accept Proposal for Professional Services for the Christmas Lake Point Lift Station 12 and Enchanted Lane Lift Station 16 Rehabilitation Project Attachment 1 is the proposal provided by WSB and Associat~, for the Christmas Lake Point Lift . Station 12 and Enchanted Lane Lift Station 16 Rehabilitation Project. Christmas Lake Point Lift Station 12 This lift station project has been moved up in priority within the Capital Improvement Program JClP), due to on-going issues, and the fact that this lift station only has one pump. Attachment 2 is a location map for this lift station. Industry standards, and for practical reasons, dictate that a secondary pump be added to the reconstruction of this lift station. The second pump serves not only as a backup, but as a lag pump that will kick on during high demand periods. Under the current scenario, if the single pump or an electronic control item fails, the clock starts ticking before homes are impacted. In addition to the issues above, the controls have reached their service life and are in need of replacement. Enchanted Lane Lift Station 16 This lift station is approximately 35 years old, and is experiencing many issues. Attachment 3 is the location map for this proj ect. Proposal Staff has reviewed the proposals and tasks outlined by WSB and Associates for the proposed projects. Staff finds the proPQsals to be in order and within anticipated costs. Recommendation Staff is/recommending approval of a motion that accepts the proposal for professional design services for tne Christmas Lake Point Lift Station 12 and Enchanted Lane Lift Station 16 Rehabilitation Project. \n '- . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ... :#=- 3 F ~ WSB & Associates, Inc. Infrastructure I Engineering I Planning I Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 January 3, 2006 Mr. Larry Brown, P.E. City EngineerlDirector of Public Works City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Proposal to Provide Design, Bidding, and Construction Phase Engineering Services for Reconstruction of Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16 City of Shorewood, MN WSB Proposal No. 1608-05 Dear Mr. Brown: WSB & Associates, Inc. is pleased to provide you with the attached proposal for engineering services to assist the City of Shorewood with the design, bidding, and reconstruction of Sanitary Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16. Kevin Newman, P.E., will serve as the Project Manager for this project. Mr. Newman has over 15 years of experience in the Water/Wastewater industry and has worked on many similar lift station projects. Mr. Newman will be directly responsible for completion of the project goals in conformance with your expectations and budget. Mr. Kevin Kawlewski, P.E., who has over 12 years of experience on municipal engineering projects, will provide quality control over the project. Dave Hutton will continue to serve as the overall Client Manager for the City of Shorewood. Mr. Hutton's role on this project will be to provide oversight and quality assurance. Mr. Hutton will remain involved to the level necessary to ensure that the project will be completed on time and within budget, and will be of the highest quality. We have supplemented these key members with the appropriate support staff of engineers who have experience in the planning and design of sanitary sewer lift stations in order to provide you with a team that can meet your goals for this project. We are proposing to complete the design, bidding, and construction phase engineering services for reconstruction of Lift Station No. 12 for $23,441 and reconstruction of Lift Station No. 16 for $23,162. If you are in agreement with the project understanding, scope of services, and fee outlined on the following pages, please have the City signature block of this letter signed and return one copy to WSB. Our receipt of an executed copy will be WSB's authorization to proceed. Should the City request additional services outside of the outlined scope of services, we will work with you to revise the scope and fee accordingly. Minneapolis I St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer K:\lJJ608-05\AdminVJocN...TR-l bruwn-O/0306.Desi,n Proposal. doc Mr. Larry Brown, P.E. January 3,2006 Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to assist you and your staff in the completion of this project. If you have any questions or comments, or require any additional information, please contact us at 763- 541-4800. Sincerely, ;~ David E. Hutton, P.E. Vice President 11~ r I/uvmrwv Kevin F. Newman, P.E. Project Manager Attachment srb ACCEPTED BY: City of Shorewood Name Title Date K:VJ/6OB-OS\A.dmifl\DocN..TR.-I brown.OJ0306.[)es;S" Proposal. doc Proposal to Provide Design, Bidding, and Construction Phase Engineering Services for Reconstruction of Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16 City of Shorewood, MN PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The City of Shore wood has identified the need to reconstruct several of their sanitary sewer lift stations over the next few years. Two of these lift stations, referred to as Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16, have been identified as the highest priority and are scheduled for reconstruction in 2006. These two sanitary lift stations are becoming increasingly unreliable and a maintenance problem for the City. Replacement of these lift stations is needed to provide more efficient, reliable, and serviceable lift stations at the sites. Evaluation of the existing service area and analysis of the current wastewater flows is needed to provide a basis for determining the appropriate design flow for the new lift stations. Results of the service area evaluation and recommended lift station configurations and design are to be incorporated into bidding documents for construction in 2006. SCOPE OF SERVICES Work Plan WSB's project scope and proposed work plan are based on conversation with City staff, and our extensive experience on similar projects. The following are the major tasks that will be performed in preparing the design, bidding, and construction phase services: Task 1 - Project Management and Coordination Project management is a key task included in each project undertaken by WSB. In each case, this task consists of management and administration, project coordination, and communication with the City of Shorewood on the project. An effective communication plan will ensure that all elements of the project are sufficiently reviewed and addressed by the City. Deliverables: Periodic progress reports, project meeting agendas, handouts, and meeting minutes. Task 2 - Preliminary Design Phase WSB will prepare a preliminary design including preliminary plans that will include the following subtasks: Task 2.1: Perform site survey for preparation of construction plans and to verify internal existing structure as-built drawings (inverts and depth with respect to top of structures). Task 2.2: Coordinate soil borings and geotechnical report (if necessary). Our proposal assumes that if a geotechnical report is necessary, the City will contract directly with a geotechnical firm to provide these services. K:VJI608-OSlAdmin\DocN..TR-1 brown-OlOJ06-lksiS" Proposol.doc Proposal to Provide Design, Bidding, and Construction Phase Engineering Services for Reconstruction of Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16 City of Shorewood, MN Page 2 Task 2.3: Establish current and future design flows for pump capacity analysis. An estimate of the current flows will be developed using existing pumping information, as-built drawings and specifications, service area maps, personal observations, and City staff input. Current flows in conjunction with estimated flows from proposed development will be used to determine the design pumping capacity of the renovated lift station. Task 2.4: Recommend modem methods and designs. Evaluate the size of the existing wet wells for the capacity to provide storage to meet the number of recommended pump starts and stops per hour and to provide City staff with sufficient time to respond to a power outage or high water alarm at the lift stations. We will work closely with the City to determine the optimum lift station design that will meet the City's needs and existing City lift station standards including control panel configuration, level sensors and alarms, flow metering, SCADA system interface, and standby power requirements. Task 2.5: Prepare preliminary plan view layouts and sections of the lift stations. Task 2.6: Evaluate site limitations and bypass pumping options. Task 2.7: Provide preliminary opinion of probable construction cost for replacement of the lift stations. Task 2.8: Coordinate with government agencies to identify permitting and approval requirements. Task 2.9: Develop a schedule for final design, bidding, and constructing the lift station. Task 2.10: Prepare preliminary plans and submit to the City for staff review. Up to five copies of the preliminary plans will be submitted to the City. Task 2.11: Following review and approval of the preliminary plans, WSB will begin detailed design. Deliverables: Preliminary plans and meeting minutes for the review meeting. Task 3 - Final Design Phase Final plans and specifications will be prepared based on review comments of the preliminary plans and any other specific criteria provide by the City. Final Design will include the following subtasks: Task 3.1: Develop final design details of the new lift stations including wet well structures, submersible pumps, discharge valves, and piping. Task 3.2: Develop details for demolition of portions of the existing lift stations that are to be removed or abandoned. K:VJJ608-OS\AJnUn\DocM.1X-' broWJI-OI0306-DuiS" Propo,al.doc Proposal to Provide Design, Bidding, and Construction Phase Engineering Services for Reconstruction of Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16 City of Shorewood, MN Page 3 Task 3.3: Develop details for sewage bypass pumping. Task 3.4: Coordinate electrical design including instrumentation and controls. WSB & Associates, Inc. will use Kaeding & Associates to provide the electrical design and construction services for this project. Kaeding & Associates has been in existence for over 15 years and has served as a subconsultant to WSB on numerous lift station projects. The subconsuItant's fee is included in the fees provided in a later section. SubconsuItant billings will pass through WSB without mark-up. Task 3.5: Site piping design. Task 3.6: Prepare 90% plans and specifications. Task 3.7: Meet with City staff to review 90% plans and specifications. Task 3.8: Finalize plans and specifications and submit to the City for approval to bid. Deliverables: 90% complete plans and specifications, finalized plans and specifications, meeting minutes of review meeting, and final plans and specifications. Task 4 - Bidding and Contract A ward Phase Services WSB's services during the bidding and contract award phase of the project will include the following subtasks: Task 4.1: Coordinate project advertisement. Task 4.2: Issue bidding documents. Task 4.3: Answer bidders' questions. Task 4.4: Issue addenda if required. Task 4.5: Attend the public bid opening. Task 4.6: Prepare tabulation of bids. Task 4.7: Provide recommendation for award. Deliverables: Addenda if required, bid tabulation, and letter recommending award of construction contract. K:VJJ608-CMdmin\Doc:il.LTR-' bruwn-O/OJ06-Duisn Proptnol.doc Proposal to Provide Design, Bidding, and Construction Phase Engineering Services for Reconstruction of Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16 City of Shorewood, MN Page 4 Task 5 - Construction Phase Services WSB will provide full-service construction administration services for this project, acting as the primary contact for the contractor. Our construction phase services will include the following subtasks: Task 5.1: Preparing contract documents. Task 5.2: Coordinate and attend the preconstruction meeting. Task 5.3: Construction staking. Task 5.4: Reviewing and processing of shop drawings and submittals. Task 5.5: Review contractor-submitted construction schedule and monitor contractor's progress. Task 5.6: Address contractor's questions during construction and prepare field change directives and change orders as required. Task 5.7: Process partial pay estimates. Task 5.8: Prepare a single substantial completion punch list for contractor and issue the certificate of substantial completion. Task 5.9: Perform periodic construction site visits, coordinate and attend progress meetings, and attend the start-up meeting for the lift station. Task 5.10: Preparing record drawings and final closeout paperwork. Deliverables: Preconstruction meeting minutes, contractor's monthly partial pay estimates with letter recommending payment, progress meeting minutes, record drawings, final project closeout documentation. .CITY OF SHOREWOOD TASKS In order to complete our tasks, we will need the City to provide the following: . Provide a designated project contact person. . Provide answers to project-specific questions. . Provide requested information and make decisions regarding project direction during the course of the project. . Provide record drawings of existing Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16. . Provide telemetry equipment and SCADA information. . Attend construction progress meetings when requested. K:VJ/~S\Admin\Doci\LTR../ brown-llJ0306-lhsi81l ProptJJIJI.dot: Proposal to Provide Design, Bidding, and Construction Phase Engineering Services for Reconstruction of Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16 City of Shorewood, MN Page 5 . Procure necessary testing services as defined in the contract documents (including soil borings if deemed necessary). . Provide necessary easements and easement information. . Provide communication with residents and property owners. ASSUMPTIONS WSB tasks and estimated fees are based on the following assumptions: . The existing forcemain and gravity sewer will have adequate capacity for the renovated lift stations. Peak flow from the lift stations may increase based on the results of the flow determination. . New lift stations construction will be of precast manhole sections. . Government review agencies will readily approve flows determined. Agencies will grant project approval and additional downstream capacity (if necessary) without requiring further study. . WSB will charge contractors for sets of bidding documents. WSB will retain this fee. . Construction staking will be provided by WSB. SCHEDULE It is our understanding that the City would like construction of the lift stations completed by the fall of 2006. WSB will complete our tasks in a timely manner to ensure that this time table is met. TOTAL ESTIMATED ENGINEERING FEES The cost to provide the scope of services outlined in this proposal will be billed on an hourly basis based on our current hourly rates. A current hourly rate schedule can be found at the end of this section. We are proposing to complete the requested engineering services at an estimated cost of $23,441 for reconstruction of Lift Station No. 12 and $23,162 for reconstruction of Lift Station No. 16. A proposed hourly breakdown of each task for each of the two lift stations, by employee class is located on the following page. A breakdown of our proposed fee is as follows: Maior Task Project~anagement Preliminary Design Phase Services Final Design Phase Services Bidding Phase Services Construction Phase Services Subconsultant Fee (Electrical Engineering) Total Estimate for Engineering Services Lift Station No. 12 $642 $6.270 $4,475 $1.063 $6.191 $4.800 $23,441 Lift Station No. 16 $642 $6.056 $4,475 $1063 $6.126 $4.800 $23,162 K:VJl608-OS\Admin\DocN...TR-l bN>>WI-OIOJ06.IH.Ji&" Propo.Jal.doc &A,u(tC;ute.f.lnt: ESTIMATE OF HOURS AND COST SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO COMPLETE DESIGN, BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES FOR SANITARY LIFT STATION NO. 12 RECONSTRUCTION 1/312006 A. WSB Labor Ca 1IG0rv and Estimated Hours per Task Description Project Project Engineer Three Person Construction OIIIce Tech Total Total Labor TlSk Principal Manaoer Enoln86' Tech IV Survev Crew Observer Hours Cost 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1.1 Pro'ect Manaoement 2 4 6 $ 642.00 Total estimated hours and fee for project mansoment 2 4 6 S 642.00 Z' PRllLlMlNARYDESlGN ,HASE 2.1 Perform site survey and orepare background drawinos 2 8 8 18 $ 1,956.00 2.2 Coordinate Geotechnical investiaation 2 2 $ 196.00 2.3 Establish current and future desian flows 1 2 3 $ 258.00 2.4 Recommend modern methods and desian of lift station 1 2 3 $ 258.00 2.5 preoare oreliminarv clan view lavouts and sections of the lift stations 4 8 12 $ 904.00 2.6 Evaluate site limitations and bypass pumping ootions 2 3 5 $ 436.00 2.7 Provide opinions of probable construction cost for replacement of lift station t 1 2 $ 178.00 2.8 Identifv nermittinn and aDDroval reauirements 1 1 $ 98.00 2.9 DeveloD schedule for desion, biddino and construction 1 1 $ 98.00 2.10 PreDare Dreliminarv plans and submillo the City for review 3 6 8 2 19 $ 1,404.00 2.11 Meet with City Staff to Review 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 5 $ 484.00 Total estimated hours and fee for prsliminary desion ohas. 1.5 19.5 15.5 24 8 2.5 71 S 6,270.00 i: . FINAL:DESlON PHASe 3.1 Perform final desian of the lift station 1 6 7 $ 578.00 3.2 DeveloD details for demolition and abandoment of existina lift station 0.5 4 4.5 $ 369.00 3.3 DeveloD details for sewaae bypass pumpino 1 4 5 $ 418.00 3.4 Coordinate electrical desian 1 1 2 $ 178.00 3.5 Site desion including site piping 1 3 4 $ 338.00 3.6 Pre Dare 90% comDlete Dlans and sDecificatians for Citv Staff review. 1 2 4 16 2 25 $ 1,783.00 3.8 Meet with City Staff to review 90% comDlete plans and specifications 1.5 1.5 3 $ 267.00 3.9 Finalize plans and speclficaliDns and submit to the City 1 2 4 0.5 7.5 $ 543.50 Totel estimated hours and fee for final design phase services 1 9 25.5 20 2.5 58 S 4,474.50 ,,:; liiil:i1mIo AND CONl'RACUw'ARD 4.1 Coordinate Droiect advertisement 0.5 0.5 1 $ 111.50 4.2 Issue biddino documents 0.5 0.5 2 3 $ 207.00 43 Answer bidder's ouestions 0.5 0.5 1 2 $ 191.50 4.4 issue adenda if renuired 0.5 1 1.5 $ 129.00 4.5 Attend the Dublic bid oDening 1 1 $ 125.00 4.6 Prenare tabulation of bids 0.5 1 0.5 2 $ 158.50 4.7 Provide recommendation for award 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 $ 141.00 Total estimeted hours and fee for bidding and contract award 2.5 3 3.5 3 12 S 1,063.50 I;: CONSfIWCTlONPHAsE 5.1 Prenare contract documents 0.5 0.5 3 1 5 $ 410.50 5.2 Coordinate and attend the ore-construction meetino 0.5 0.5 2 0.5 3.5 $ 307.00 5.3 Construction stakinn 1.5 8 9.5 $ 1,395.00 5.4 Review and Drocess shoo drawings and submittals 1 4 5 $ 418.00 5.5 Review contractor's schedule and monitor contractor's orocress 1 1 3 5 S 463.00 5.6 Address contractor's auestions 1 3 4 $ 338.00 5.7 Process oartial Dav estimates 0.5 2 0.5 3 $ 244.50 5.8 PreMre Dunchilst and substantial completion form 0.5 2 1 3.5 $ 280.00 5.9 Perform Deriodic site visits, attend eroores. meetino., and attend start-uD 1 6 18 25 $ 1,856.00 5.10 Preoare record drawinas and final closeout paperwork 0.5 2 2 2 6.5 $ 479.00 T atal ..timated hour. and fee for construction ahase seNlces 2 8 27 2 8 22 1 70 S 6,191.00 Total ..tlmated hours for d.sion, biddina and construction 9 43.5 71.5 46 16 22 9 217 Hourtv Billina Rate $ 125.00 $ 98.00 $ 80.00 $ 64.00 $ 156.00 $ 71.00 $ 59.00 T otsl cast bv labor classlfieatlon for design, bidding, and construction $ 1,125.00 $ 4,263.00 $ 5,720.00 $ 2,944.00 $ 2,496.00 $ 1,562.00 $ 531.00 S 18,641.00 Electrical M:\WalerWaslWlller\Shore'<liew\LS 12 Proj Budget Wksht - 010306_. ...~ ~ ~ IIII""IIl = ~ ~ ,:: ~ 00 ~ ...... = ~ \C = = M \.i oS ri \:J O\:j o .., ., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ""-l ""-l ""-l ~ ~ ~ ~ .s. .;: 'J 'J .:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ""-l ~ ""-l ""-l ~ ~ I.- ~ == ~ :: t ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ a.: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cci Q\ Q'\ =e ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ .... .lI') ..:::: .I::i ~ ~ ~ 't: ~ ~ .:: ~ ~ ~ Co t :: ~ ~ :: I::i ~ ~ ~ ~ .lI') ~ ~ ~ l.; ~ :: .... ~ ~ "t ~ ~ .lI') '::::-, "'.. 'W ~ ~ ~ ;:::: ~ .... .lI') ..:::: .;: 'J ~ ~ ~ .... I.- ~ ~ .:: ~ :: ~ t:l ~ :: ~ ~ ~ ~ =e ~ I.- ~ t ~ lI') ~ :: ~ .~ :: ~ lI') :: a a.: ~ .... .lI') ..:::: .I::i ~ ~ ~ .... I.- ~ ~ :: .... b() ~ ~ ~ ~ :: .~ ~ .... 'J ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I.- ~ ~ :: .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t:l t ~ lI') ~ :: ~ .... ~ :: ~ lI') :: a ~ :: I::i .... 'J .... :: ..::: 'J ~ ~ .... ~ ~ .:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'C ~ ;:::: ~ .... .~ ~ .... 'J ~ ~ "'-4 :: I::i .... .'J = ..::: 'J ~ ~ 't: ~ ~ .== ~ ~ ~ ~ cci ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r.,.; 'CS ~ ~ ~ ~ == .... .lI') .::: == .~ ~ ~ === == .;: .'J = ..::: 'J ~ b() .== t: ~ .== ~ "'-4 .... .~ == ~ .... ~ ~ "'-4 == == I::i I::i ..... .... .~ .~ :: == ..::: ..::: 'J 'J ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ .~ ~ ~ .== == ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q\ ~ ~ ~ == I::i .... .'J = ..::: 'J ~ ~ 'J !i;. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'CS ~ ~ ""-l ""-l ~ ~ "'-4 == .;: .~ == ..::: 'J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c c == == ~ ~ r: r: ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....... ....... Co Co t t ~ ~ :: ~ i: i: ~ 'J ~ == ~ ',::: 'J ~ ~ ~ I.- ~~ == .... ~ ~ ..::: Q..o ~ S 'J ~ ....::: ~ ~ ~6 ~oC:l .... I::i i: ~ ~iS .~ == ..::: . ... ~~ ;;... ~ ~] .5 'J t5 .5 ~ ~ 'J l.- i: I::i Q.b() ~:S ~ .... ~ ~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'J .;: ~ 'J~ ~ == ~ ~ I::i ~ .;a ~ lI') t: a 8 l: ~ ~ I.- ~ == I::i == ~ ',::: I::i 'J :s. ~ ~ ==.. .:: Q. is .~ l .;: ~ ~ ~ ~ I::i.,.:- .;a ~ lI') 'J 8 it> ~ ~ ,:::::: 'J~ .S ~ ~ ~~ ~ .~ ~E ~ ~ ~ c:: :cs ~ I::i ..... r: ~ .g~ i: i: .; 9. ~ ~ ~ ::::: I::i :: == == I::i ~ ~ lI') :: ~ I::i .~ ~ .; ~ ..::: ~ ~ I::i ~ )~II H~ S{f>.I~t\-N'(\W - r rf\m\\\0'lllllli\( V~I~A '~lf7j~Oj/""--l'[D.\. ~r\\ & ~ .. II ~V ., .... \\ .. ... J / ~ ..... ~ ,/ ~ / ~", ~~~ ...... .. .. C;H.,,'--, "\NI>.TER)... .. /1 ~\\..---- _~ , ~,r.... ~ ~ ~. .... It '\. . '1 \-s:ll I - ~ /' Dl.nj( Nj.;J lcr~l? ...... I-- ~U ~,~ \~ r- ~~ ~ \~~,rq < ~I.. .. .-u ~~\( \'( '>'F~ I~ - S ~ \' if!.--., , ( /' ~ t:ltOf>.\JE Jr7A ~~ ~J l //-~'Y .. ",~ .~ : r- r- II ~I~ ~ ~ 7 ~t-'z _ .. _ i3 ~ \~ NY ~ t:~ l'~ ~ = 9 ~ Ii / , " ~~ ~~ 1/!2/ 5 .~~,fj;\\ CHRISTMAS LAKE I, ~. · )):' p ~ /IP ... ... !J~ ~ ~ I !!j .. ..) 0 //J - ~~ ~ " I!i //1.. -I/II"ILVER ,; ~J:f /1> " ~...A\ I \\ ?JI/c~ ... C2 3" ~ \~ . J~~ ~\ Q:' ~"" ..~~... .1# )~~ Cl YJ ~\ ~< ~k..: 1.1~~1- f- ~ yO f---@ ~ AJ, · ~ -<'~ · '/J~ Hv~f-- II ,.. _'lN~ 1:.\' T_ ....\-- " ~ ~ ---= f--- II/;" (/.. T ~ ~ "9)- >--- /'-- \~ "~, J · .. 'l: ,;;~ :: Ii _ ~~ \ dA \ If ~TYOFSHOREW~ )J: .',': .~~~ HCUY LA CITY OF CHANHASSEN I ATIACHMENT2 1. OiESTNUT TER. 2 WHITNEY CIR. ~ ELBERT PT. 4. McKINlEY PL S. OiESTNUT cr, G. McKINlEY cr. 7. McKINlEY OR. ~ -, :-.." " CJ " " " " " L SHADY ISlAND PT PHELPS BAY Lift Sta 16 LAKE MINNETONKA o o 9 SPRAY ISlAND '.. ...... .... .......... ........ ........ .......... CITY OF ORONO ............ CITY OF SHOREWOOI LAKE MINNETONKA UPPER LAKE MINNETONKA ~ .. .. CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD' SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927' (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128' www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: January 19, 2006 RE: Resolution Rejecting bids for the Dry Hydrant Relocation at 4550 Enchanted Point. The City Council may recall a petition that had been accepted by the City Council that was filed by Mr. Mike Catain, property owner of 4550 EnchantedPoint. Attachment 1 is the resolution that declared adequacy of the petition. In response, the City prepared plans, and bid the project. On August 22, 2005, the City Council passed Resolution 05-076 that awarded the contract, contingent upon Mr. Catain agreeing to move forward with the project, and pay the cost ofthe award. This resolution is provided as Attachment 2. Since that time, Mr. Catain declined the project and has had the system installed with his own contractor in accordance with the City's construction documents and standards. This work was just completed on January 11, 2006. , As a housekeeping item, the award of the project was never completed, due to Mr. Catain's objection. Therefore, for the record, bids for the proj ect need to be rej ected. Recommendation Staff is recommending approval of the attached resolution that rejects the bids for the Dry Hydrant Relocation Project. #. f . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER , .", #- 3& CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 05 -013 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE ADEQUACY OF A PETITION FOR RELOCATION OF A DRY HYDRANT SYSTEM FOR 4550 ENCHANTED LANE WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood is in receipt of a petition (Petition) requesting that the City relocate a dry hydrant system from 4550 Enchanted Lane, to the public right of way of Enchanted Lane; and WHEREAS, the name of the petitioner and the associated property is as follows: 1. Michael Catain ... ........ .... ... ......... ..... .4550 Enchanted Lane WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the Petition and identified the owners of the real property named in the Petition and has determined that the Petition has been executed by 100 percent of the owners of real property affected by the Improvement; - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota: -- -- L The Petition is hereby declared to have been signed by 100 percent ()f the real propertie~_ - named intne petition as the location of the Improvement. 2. The Petition is hereby referred to the City Engineer for the preparation of a feasibility report. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL _of the City of Shorewood this 14th day of February, 2005. --. Woody Love, Mayor I Attachment 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 05-ill A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSALS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR RELOCATION OF DRY HYDRANT SYSTEM, 4550 ENCHANTED POINT WHEREAS, Michael and Joan Catain, owners ofreal property mown as 4550 Enchanted Point, have filed a petition with the City Clerk, under Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statute, for the relocation of a dry hydrant system on said property; and WHEREAS, on July 11, 2005, the Shorewood City Council adopted Resolution 05-063 for said Improvement Project, that approved plans, specifications and engineers estimate and authorized the solicitation of proposals; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the solicitation of proposals for local improvements designated as the Enchanted Island Dry Hydrant Relocation Project, proposals were received, and opened on, August 15,2005, and tabulated, and such tabulation is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that G.F. Jedlicki Inc., is the lowest responsible bidder in compliance with the specifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Mayor and City Administrator/Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with G.F. Jedlicki Inc., in the name of the City of Shore wood, Project No. 05-03, according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council on file in the office of the City Administrator/Clerk. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF~H. 0 WOOD this 22nd day of August, 2005. {1. Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: I Attachment 2 The Resolution for Item #3G, Resolution Rejecting Bids for the Dry Hydrant Relocation Project at 4550 Enchanted Lane, will be delivered under separate cover. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 10, 2006 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD SHOREWOOD CITY HALL 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING D FT.. Chair Davis called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. A. Roll Call Present Chair Davis; Commissioners Young, Westerlund, Moonen, late arrival Loheit, and Hensley; City Engineer Brown Absent: Commissioner Farniok and City C.ouncilliaison Lizee B. Review Agenda Brown added items 4C, Trail in City of Tonka Bay, and 4D, Concession Agreement. Westerlund moved, Moonen seconded, approving the Agenda as amended. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of October 11, Westerlund complimented recorder Anderson on a well written summary of her Manor Park Pond water quality presentation. Westerlund moved, Young seconded, approving the Minutes of the October 11, 2005, Park Commission Meeting as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were none. 4. REPORTS A. Report on City Council Meeting Brown reported that the Shorewood Spring Clean up Day was slated for May 20,2006. He went on to explain that a request for a zoning district amendment for the Williams Car Lot was under consideration by the Planning Commission as a contractor has proposed a more intense use of the C-4 site. As this is a key gateway location, the request is under debate. Brown continued, stating that a space needs study is underway for the current City Hall facilities and any future expansion potential. He noted that city engineers, along with WSB, have been compiling a stormwater report documenting 51 drainage issues throughout the City and putting together a blueprint of where the City is headed, which will be presented at a future City Council meeting. He pointed out that City Council packets will be posted on the website for public information. Loheit arrived at 7:12 p.m. ft 7A PARK COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 2006 PAGE 2 OF4 B. Report on Buckthorn Event Chair Davis asked whether anyone from the public had borrowed the weed wrenches since the buckthorn event and indicated that she would highlight the availability of the wrenches in the upcoming newsletter. She noted that 21 residents were present at the event and asked how the cit followed up the removals. Brown stated that the city put down chemicals on the stumps and sent over the buckthorn brush to be chipped. ..Chair pavis asked ifthecityw:ou1d bew:illing topick up thebuckthorn ifneighborhoods choose to host their own buckthorn busts. Loheit commented that the Freeman buckthorn event should become an annual event, as it is the goal of the city to clear Freeman of buckthorn. Brown stated that it is costly to pick up the buckthorn and have it chipped out west, but indicated that he would follow-up. C. Trail in City of Tonka Bay Brown reported that he had received word that the City of Tonka Bay may be considering a proposal to construct a trail along County Road 19 from West Point Road to the LR T. He noted that this might provide the opportunity to approach the County about completing the trail link from Tonka Bay to Shorewood. D. Concession Agreement. Brown stated that the current concessionaire Russ Withum was interested in pursuing the operations for 2006 and would be submitting a new agreement noting thatsa1es were up 20% from the previous year. 5. MUSIC IN THE PARK A. Discuss Fundraising Ideas Chair Davis urged Commissioners to review potential entertainers and music groups for 2006, pointing out that the groups should likely be booked within the next 30 days or they may not be available. She asked where the budget for the 2006 event stood. Young suggested they consider the magician he'd mentioned about to Davis for the children program or other interactive programs. B. Review Entertainment List 6. WINTER COMMUNITY SKATING PARK EVENT A. Discuss Ideas for a Winter Event in 2007 Chair Davis suggested that the City contact other surrounding communities about combining their efforts to create a South Lakes community wide winter event. She pointed out that representatives from the City of Deephaven had already voiced interest. Davis shared a list of P ARK COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 2006 PAGE 3 OF4 potential events for a winter festival such as, dog sledding, skating, broomball, snow sculpture, ice fishing, etc. Brown complimented Davis on the premise of enticing other lakes communities to join forces with Shorewood in hosting a winter wide event and suggested the City host a brainstorming session at the South shore Center. Chair Davis suggested the j oint meeting be slated for March 14, 2006, and volunteered to contact surrounding Commissions. B. Locations for Winter Event 7.DISCDSSRENEWALOF MN RECREATlONANDPARKS ASSOCIATION Brown asked the commission to consider whether they feel they are getting their worth out of the association membership. Chair Davis noted that the Commission had had little opportunity to ask the association for assistance in 2005 and with regard to the one item, fundraising, they provided no information. Young stated that, though he was supportive originally, he probably would not vote to renew as the City has not much need to approach the association for input. Although they have been enthusiastic in their response, Young felt renewing membership was not a priority at this time. Though likely costly, Chair Davis encouraged staff to investigate membership in the National Association of Park & Recreation, as they continually offer work shops, seminars, and resources. Young commented that the Commission has been most successful tapping resources in its own neighboring communities when in need of assistance. Brown summarized that it was the Commissions consensus to hold off renewing the membership for 2006. The Commission concurred. A. New Business Chair Davis reported that the regional dog park had begun construction as clearing can be seen from the highway. As a hockey coach, Loheit stated that he had been contacted by many other hockey coaches who asked the city to consider how ice quality could be improved, be it laying black top under the ice or ongoing maintenance. Brown pointed out that Shorewood was commended earlier in the season for having the first ice and best ice throughout the area. Since that time, weather has been detrimental to conditions, though public works staff continues to work on improving the situation. He stated that black top could be proposed, though it may speed up the deterioration of the ice in the early spring. Brown stated that he would put together a cost estimate and obtain feedback from other communities who have it currently in place. Brown stated that, though often used for summer soccer, both Badger and Cathcart are blacktoppable, perhaps even painted white. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, JANUARY 10,2006 PAGE40F4 Loheit stated that he was unaware whether the blacktop made the ice better or not but would be interested in finding out more. Chair Davis encouraged Brown to compile opinions from Minnetonka, Chanhassen, and CRR and put together estimates for a future discussion. Brown informed the Commission that the public should be encouraged not to shovel after a snow event, since it causes ridges to form around the outside edge of the rink. He pointed out that, unless colder weather resurfaces, Manor Park rink may be lost altogether for the season. 8. DETERMINE LIAISON FOR JANUARY 23rd CITY COUNCIL MEETING Hensley volunteered for liaison for January 23,2006. 9. ADJOURN Moonen moved, Westerlund seconded, adjourning the Park Commission Meeting of January 10,2006 at 8:10 p.m. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Kristi B. Anderson Recording Secretary CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 3 JANUARY 2006 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ,... \)~~~ .... CALL TO ORDER ROLLCALL Present: . Chair Bailey; . Commissioners Conley; Gagne, Gniffke; Meyer, White, and Woodruff; Planning Director Nielsen and Council Liaison Wellens Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 6 December 2005 Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Moving the Approval of the December 6, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes to the January 17, 2006, Agenda. Motion passed 7/0, 1. 7: 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - SETBACK VARIANCE Applicants: Scott Williams and Linda Halcon Location: 5955 Country Club Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He explained items recommended for approval that evening would be placed on a January 23, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for further review and consideration. Director Nielsen explained Scott Williams and Linda Hakon, who own the property at 5955 Country Club Road, have requested a setback variance. The subject property was zoned R-IA, Single-Family Residential and contained approximately 40,573 square feet of area (just shy of one acre). The applicants proposed building a small (10' x 12'), single-story room addition at the back of their home. The addition would be built on an existing foundation that was constructed with the original home in, the early 80' s. Nielsen then reviewed various illustrations of the existing home, planned addition and property views. He stated the subject propelty became nonconforming with the platting of Mary Lake Woods, a seven-lot subdivision located to the south of the subject property. Director Nielsen then explained with regard to the analysis of the case, Staff had researched the property file and found the original building permit included the foundation at the rear of the house. The building plans for the home clearly showed the future addition. At the time the home was originally constructed it was located somewhat back on the lot for two apparent reasons: 1) to establish some distance from a relatively Country Club Road, a busy street; and 2) to take advantage of a clearing in the otherwise wooded lot. Nielsen explained the proposed addition was consistent with the original plans for the home and would finish off the back side of the house. He noted the right-of-way for Mary Lake Trail was wider (75 feet) CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 January 2006 Page 2 of8 than the standard 50-foot street. That was done because of the relatively steep topography along the north side of the Mary Lake Woods project. The subject property would have substantially more green space on the north side of Mary Lake Trail, even with the proposed addition. The elevation change, existing vegetation, and the extraordinary right-of-way width mitigate any visual effect the addition would have on homes on the south side of Mary Lake Trail. Nielsen stated if the applicants were allowed to finish the home as originally planned and constructed they would be able to make reasonable use of their property. He again noted their hardship was due to the construction of the Mary Lake Trail and not of their own doing. He explained the proposed variance was considered to be the minimum necessary, considering the current extent of the existing foundation, and did not adversely affect neighboring prop~rties. ," . . . .' .,., . . . Nielsen stated the applicants' request- was consIdered to satisfy the cnteria.foraVariance. . Adequate. landscaping exists on the property to soften the view of the proposed addition; therefore no additional landscaping is suggested at this time. He stated Staff recommended the variance be approved. Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this topic, Chair Bailey opened and closed the public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7: 11 P.M. Commissioner Woodruff questioned if the granting of this variance request would set precedence for future variance requests. He stated he understood there were a number of interesting facts associated with this variance request. He also stated he was aware of other applicants who had requested variances and been denied. He wanted to ensure the Planning Commission was able to distinguish the elements of this variance request that would contribute to the Planning Commission recommending it for approval. Director Nielsen stated he was not aware of another similar variance request. In response to a comment from Commissioner Woodruff, Nielsen stated if a structure such asa deck or home was destroyed to more than 50% ofthe structures value it must conform to current code regulations when rebuilt. Discussion ensued regarding the uniqueness of this variance request and whether or not the granting of this variance would set precedence. Director Nielsen clarified only a portion of applicants home became nonconforming after Mary Lake Trail was built. He explained if a portion of the Mary Lake Trail right-of-way were vacated it had to be returned to the Mary Lake Woods Subdivision, the original owner, and it would not help the applicant. He also stated a variance is granted when there was an element of uniqueness with a property. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not the granting of this variance would establish precedence, and the need for the Commission to understand the elements that made this variance unique. Commissioner Woodruff stated a portion of the Mary Lake Trail could be vacated back to Mary Lake Woods Subdivision which in turn could be given to the applicants, although Mary Lake Woods would not have to give the property up. All of that activity would be a costly and timely endeavor. He summarized, granting the variance would be the most cost effective and expeditious approach. Woodward moved, White seconded, Recommending Approval of a Request for a Setback Variance for Scott Williams and Linda Halcon, 5955 Country Club Road. Motion passed 7/0. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 January 2006 Page 3 of 8 2. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING SHORELAND DISTRICT HARDCOVER REGULATIONS Applicant: Frostad Development Co. Location: 23505 Smithtown Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:28 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the Public Hearing for a C.u.P. for Commercial Building and Text Amendment Regarding Shoreland District Hardcover Regulations had been continued from the 6 December 2005 Planning Cornrnis~ion m~eting~ At that meeting, the Commission had agreed to consider an amendment to the impervious surface restrictions for commercial properties in the "S" ShorelaIid . zoning district, and. had. directed the developer to revise his development plans to address issues raised by . Staff. Nielsen stated the consensus of the Planning Commission had been to allow additional impervious surface for commercial properties, subject to specific storm water treatment standards being included in the regulations. He reviewed a draft amendment of Section 1201.03 Subd. 2. u. that incorporated the recommendations of the City's engineering consultant, which were based upon the requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Nielsen noted Shorewood was not bound by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District regulations. The significant text amendment was the addition of Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.uA.a and Subd. 2.uA.b. The amendment allowed for the C.D.P. for hardcover in excess of25 feet provided it complied with the requirements for stormwater runoff treatment measures, as specified, and the measures must be consistent with National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) Standards. He stated there was a1soaminor addition to Section 1201.2.6 Subd. 8.b.(1).. . . '. In response to a question from Commissioner Woodruff, Nielsen stated Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.u.4.c, code specifying the maximum ratio of impervious service to be 75%, was inadvertently omitted from the draft text amendment. Gagne moved, Woodward seconded, Recommending Approval of the Text Amendment Regarding Shoreland District Hardcover Regulations subject to the addition of Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.u.4.c "The maximum ratio of impervious surface to lot area ratio shall not exceed 75%." Motion passed 7/0. Director Nielsen went on to address the request for a conditional use permit for the redevelopment of Shorewood Nursery, 23505 Smithtown Road, as requested by Frostad Development Company, He stated the applicant had submitted revised plans. He then reviewed how the revised plans addressed the issues previously identified in a staff report, and what issues were still outstanding. 1. The parking lot design had been modified to comply with R-C district setback requirements. The building had been very slightly reduced in area. The number of spaces provided was 114, where 107 were required. The proposed hardcover was reduced to 64% of the site; therefore a reduction in parking spaces was not recommended. 2. The driveway in front of the property (County Road 19) had been moved, as recommended by Staff. The C.D.P. should reference approval of the driveway location by Hennepin County. Circulation aisles had been removed from the required setback areas. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 January 2006 Page 4 of8 3. The landscape plan had been redesigned and signed by a registered landscape architect. The plan now identified existing vegetation on the site; it designated what vegetation would be removed and what vegetation would be saved. The final grading plan for the project should illustrate tree protection measures. As mentioned previously, the proposed pond (which had now been enlarged) left minimal room for landscaping. A low-maintenance fence as previously described was still reconunended. The plan was considered to be consistent with the reconunendations of the County Road 19 Corridor Study. Irrigation for the landscaping should be addressed with the building permit for the property. Finally, the C.U.P. should reference the annual maintenance of the proposed .. perennial plantil;'lg beds. 4.. .. Loading and trash collection were .located.at the rear of the building on the east side of the parking lot. Elevations for the proposed dumpster area were consistent with the design of the building. 5. The revised lighting plan was consistent with the requirements of Shorewood's Zoning Code (no more than .4 foot-candles at the property line). Although the proposed fixtures compliment the street lighting being installed by the City along County Road 19, they were relatively tall (25 feet) and were likely to be visible from adjoining residential properties. The applicant's architect should address whether these fixtures can be shielded or lowered to minimize this concern. The c.u.P. should reference the hours during which the lighting must be reduced. 6. The applicant's revised grading plan had enlarged the pond at the rear of the site; it no longer appeared to depend upon underground piping for storage. This plan would be addressed under separate cover by the City's engineering consultant. Any approval of the C.U.P. should include the consultant's reconunendations. Nielsen stated the City Consulting Engineer stated the stormwater management plan submitted with the revised drawings did meet the NURP standards specified in the draft text amendment. Todd Frostad, the applicant, explained to have lights lower 25 feet high would require additional light polls thereby resulting in inconsistency with the requirements of Shorewood's Zoning Code (no more than .4 foot-candles at the property line). He stated additional shielding could be added if required. In response to Commissioner Gniffke, Frostad explained if the lights were reduced to 21 feet high more lights would be required. Commissioner Conley stated it appeared the 25-foot lights were approximately the same height as the building, to which Frostad concurred. Frostad explained some of the existing vegetation that would be retained was in excess of 25 feet, thereby providing screening for the neighbors. In response to a question from Conunissioner Gagne, Frostad explained why the storm water management system was designed to handle the "100 year" rainfall. He also stated the proposed storm water management system would significantly reduce the runoff from the property. In response to a question from Conunissioner Gagne, Frostad stated the current Shorewood Nursery would not be a tenant on the future property. He also stated Gary Minion, who owns Shorewood Nursery, would be a partial owner of the new development. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 January 2006 Page 5 of8 Discussion ensued regarding the depth of the runoff pond and the associated safety factors. Director Nielsen explained how NURP ponds are designed to work. Commissioner Woodruff supported the requirement for a 4-foot fence as a safety measure due to the dept of the pond. He suggested the landscape plan be modified to reflect the height of the black hill spruce trees. Frostad replied the height for the proposed trees was in the 6-12 foot range. Woodward stated he was concerned with the level of screen river birch would provide in the winter and suggested the trees be spruce. He questioned the ability of river birch to flourish in that environment. Director Nielsen responded river birch do well in that environment, and there were no windows on the side of the house the river birch would be planted. He sated part of the rationale for a 4-foot fence was for screening. . . '. '. Commissioner White stated she had concerns a 4-foot fence could negative1yunpact the newly planted .. trees.-the young trees could be deprived of sunlight. Nielsen did not agree a.4,.,foot fence wouldcllUse any harm to the trees. Nielsen then explained that a 4-foot fence can be solid but a 6-foot fence requires 25% of the fence be open. White preferred a fence not be installed, and stated when spruce mature there is open space on the bottom of the tree. Discussion ensued regarding the requirement for a 4-foot fence. Consensus from the Commission was to require the fence and the specified landscaping. In response to a question from Commissioner Conley, Director Nielsen stated there was a requirement for rooftop mechanical equipment to be hidden by parapet, which Frostad stated was planned. Conley then expressed concerns with the 7 excess parking spaces planned for Shoreland District. In response to a question by Conley, Nielsen stated the retaining wall on the east side as high as could be as high as 6-8 feet. In response, Frostad stated if a retaining wall was needed he would prefer a 3..foot retaining wall and manage a lighter slope. Conley stated a condition of the C.U.P. should be certification the size and capacity of the trash enclosure specified was sufficient to enclose the number, variety and size of trash containers required for trash management of a building the size planned (the state had formulas that would assist in determining the container sizes and frequency of pickup). Frostad explained the rationale for the number of spaces, indicating the overflow spaces were planned for those few times the on-site building occupants would be at its highest. He wanted to minimize the number of building occupants that would have to use residential parking in those situations. Commissioner Woodruff addressed two items in the City Consulting Engineer's memo (the 29 December 2005 memo from Steve Gurney with WSB & Associates). First, he expressed concern with a statement in the memo that stated there was a possibility standing water could freeze in the storm water management system's pipe and plug the line. After discussion, it was agreedthe developer address this concern subject to the City Consulting Engineer's satisfaction as a condition of approval for the C.U.P. Second, he stated he had concerns with the grading of the east side of the property, as identified in the memo, and this concern had already been addressed. In response to a request from Chair Bailey, Commissioner Gagne stated Commissioners present at the 6 December 2005 Planning Commission meeting discussed the parking spaces issue and respectfully agreed to disagree. He would prefer the site to have the extra spaces, and he stated the quality of water entering Lake Minnetonka would be improved with the proposed storm water management system. In response to a question by Commissioner White, Fostad stated the proposed building could easily house 85 occupants. He also stated the number would depend on the future lessees of the property. In response CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 January 2006 Page 6 of8 to another question by White, Director Nielsen stated a fence was required to be 6 inches off the property line. Discussion again ensued regarding the planned excess parking spaces. Director Nielsen stated the parking space requirement was a minimum, and the Commission did not want to encourage commercial parking on residential streets such as Wood Duck Circle. He also stated once parking on Wood Duck Circle became an issue it would be made no parking. The Commission reached consensus regarding the acceptance of the number of parking spaces planned. In response to a comment by Councilmemb~r Wellens regarding snow. storage and storage of associate equipment and products, Director Nielsen stated the setback area and the pond area would be sufficient to accommodate snow storage. . .. Director Nielsen clarified site lighting was part of site design which was part of the Planning Commissions responsibility. He stated the standard hours for lighting are 6:00 A.M. - 9:00 P.M. and recommended the lights be turned off by 9:30 P.M. In response to a question by Commissioner White, Frostad stated the site lights would be on consistently all week for security purposes and the lights would be managed with one master switch. In response to a question from a neighborhood resident regarding the potential 6-8 foot retaining wall, Frostad explained a 3-foot retaining wall may be required to maintain a 3:1 slope. He further explained how that landscaping would be designed. Meyer moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of the Conditional Use Permit for Commercial Building at 23505 Smithtown Road, subject to Staff Recommendations, certification the size for the trash enclosure was sufficient to comply with state stature, and the developer satisfactorily addressed concerns regarding storm water management should pipes freeze subject to the satisfaction of the City Consulting Engineer. Motion passed 7/0. 3. MINOR SUBDMSION (continued from 6 December 2005) Applicant: George Danser Location: 5840 Christmas Lake Road Director Nielson explained the request for minor subdivision for George Danser, 5840 Christmas Lake Road, was originally presented to the Planning Commission at the O_~tober 4, 2005 meeting. Because of the number of issues that needed to be resolved at that meeting, Nielsen recommended the application be continued to the November 1, 2005 meeting pending completion of the required items. At the November 1,2005 Planning Commission meeting, Danser stated a number of the issues had been resolved though he had not provided City Staff with updated plans. Since the October 2005 meeting the property owner to the south had disputed the common property boundary between his and the Danser property; the neighbor provided information indicating that the property line might be 12 feet further to the north than that shown by the Dansers' surveyor. The application was continued to the November 15, 2005 Planning Commission meeting to provide Danser time for the Danser family to determine how they wanted to move forward with resolving the outstanding issues, including the common property line dispute. This case was then continued to the December 6, 2005 Planning Commission meeting at the request of the applicant. Danser did not appear at the December 6, 2005 Planning Commission meeting to provide a response to areas of concern identified at previous meetings. The Commission agreed to continue this case to the January 3, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 January 2006 Page 7 of8 George Danser did not appear at the meeting nor had he submitted plans for resolution of the outstanding Issues. The Commission was no longer clear on what revision of the application they were considering for recommending for approval. The Commission reached consensus the application under consideration was the original application. Woodward moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Denial of the Original Request for Minor Subdivision for George Danser, 5840 Christmas Lake Road. Motion passed 7/0. 4. ... MINOR SUBDIVISION/COMBINATION (LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT) Applicant: Michael McDonald . "Location: 4695 and 4725 Lagoon Drive Director Nielsen explained Mike McDonald and Thomas Countryman who own the properties at 4695 and 4725 Lagoon Drive, respectively have requested a minor subdivision and combination. The subject properties in question are located in the R-lC/S, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland zoning district. The proposed division/combination cleans up these rather irregular parcels. He stated Staff recommended the minor subdivision be approved and the resolution approving the request should stipulate the division/combination must be recorded within 30 days of Council approval. Woodruff moved, Gniffke seconded, Recommending Approval of a Request for Minor Subdivision for Mike McDonald, at 4695 Lagoon Drive, and Thomas Countryman, at 4725 Lagoon Drive, subject to the division/combination being recorded within 30 days of Council approval. Motion passed 7/0. .. 5. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 6. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there were three items for discussion on the January 17, 2006, Planning Commission Agenda: 1) the 2006 Work Program review; the annual variance discussion; and 3) C-3 District Land Use. Nielsen explained the July 4, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting was on a holiday and November 7, 2006, Planning.Commission Meeting was on an election day. The Planning Commission decided the July 18, 2006, Planning Commission Study Session Meeting would be replaced with a Regular Planning Commission Meeting. They also decided the November 7, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting would be moved to November 14,2006, and the November 21, 2006, Planning Commission Study Session Meeting would stay as scheduled. 7. REPORTS . Liaison to Council Commissioner Gagne reported on matters considered and actions taken at the December 12, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 January 2006 Page 8 of8 . SLUC No report was given for the Sensible Land Use Coalition (SLUe) meeting. . Other None. 8. ADJO~NT Gniffke moved, Gagne seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of January 3, . 2006, at 8:30 P.M. Motion passed 7/0. . .. . .... RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Platming CommisSion, Mayor and City Council FROM:. Brad Nielsen DATE: 30 November 2005 RE: Frostad Development Company - Conditional Use Permit for Office Building and Code Amendment Raising the Amount of Impervious Surface for Commercial Properties . FILE NO. 405(05.31) BACKGROUND Frostad Development Company, LLC proposes to redevelop the Shorewood Nursery property at 23505 Smithtown Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached) as an office building site. In his letter (Exhibit B), dated 30 November 2005, Todd Frostad explains his proposal. He requests a conditional use permit for the office building and also a zoning text amendment that would anow greater impervious surface for commercial sites within the "S", Shoreland District. The property is zoned R-C/S, Residential Commercia1/Shoreland, contains 91,860 square feet of area (2.1 acres), and is currently occupied by the Shorewood Nursery, consisting of three permanent structures, a trellis area, storage bins for landscape materials and outdoor storage area. The nursery exists under a conditional use permit. The property slopes gently from south to north with varying vegetation on an but the north side of the site. Land uses and zoning surrounding the subject propert)' are as follows: . South and West: County Road 19, then wetland area (part of Shorewood Yacht Club property; zoned L-R, Lakeshore Recreational Storage facility and Garden Patch Nursery; zoned C-4, Service Commercial (also a drainage pond, located in Excelsior) Two-family residential; zoned R-2A, Single and Two-Family Residential . North: East: n tJ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #8A. . Memorandum Re: Frostad c.u.P./Text Amendment 30 November 2005 The Frostad proposal includes a 24,000 square-foot office building with associated parking to the north and south of the building and a drainage pond, located at the rear ofthe property (see Site Plan - Exhibit C, attached). The office building will be two stories in height, as illustrated on Exhibit D. Floor plans are illustrated on Exhibits E and F. Other exhibits attached are as follows: G) landscaping; H) grading and utilities; and I) lighting. You will note that the site plan shown on Exhibit C differs from Exhibits E through 1. The applicant has modified the site plan, based upon preliminary staff review. As of this writing, the . remaining revised exhibits have not been received. The applicant intends to submit these on Friday, and they will be forwarded upon receipt. ISSUES AND ANALYSIS A. Pro?osed Text Amendment. This issue is being addressed first, since the outcome of the decision drastically affects the development of the site. Section 1201.26, Subd. 5.a.(5) of the Shorewood Zoning Code limits hardc;over on properties within the Shoreland District . to 25 percent of the lot area. Although the City has adopted higher impervious percentages for nonresidential uses outside of the Shoreland District (66 percent allowable, up to 75 percent by conditional use permit with storm water treatment), this was not extended to the areas within 1000 feet of the lake. The applicant has requested that the City amend the Code to allow the same percentages for commercial sites within the Shoreland District, subject to management and treatment ofrunofftoward lakes. . Shorewood's regulations relative to hardcover on commercial sites are found in Section 1201.03 Subd. 3.u. (excerpted on Exhibit J, attached). While the preference for managing storm water runoff is always toward natural means (drainage swales and ponds), Shorewood's Code also recognizes mechanical means for control and treatment of runoff. Many of you will recall the rather extensive underground treatment system designed for the Shorewood Shopping Center property. This system was designed to meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District standards for phosphorous sediment removal (the primary purposes of treatment) and appears to be functioning as designed. . The applicant proposes to manage storm water using both natural and mechanical means. Although engineered plans have not yet been submitted, the plan on Exhibit H proposes to drain the south half of the site to a new NURP (National Urban Runoff Program) pond at the rear of the site. Drainage from the north half of the property would be conducted to a 72-inch diameter concrete pipe, buried along the east side of the property. This pipe would serve as a storage basin and would be pumped to the pond, presumably at rates that would allow for additional treatment in the pond. The pond then drains to the large pond, located to the east of the subject property (in Excelsior), which then drains under County Road 19 into a large wetland basin, before draining into Lake Minnetonka. The City's engineering consultant has been asked to provide preliminary comments on the proposed drainage system. His comments will be forwarded under separate cover. As with any zoning code amendment, one of the first things staff does is to check how other cities handle the issue at hand. Lake Minnetonka has at least four communities with -2- . . . Memorandum Re: Frostad C.U.P.lText Amendment 30 November 2005 rather extensive commercial development within the Shoreland District. Mound, Spring Park, Wayzata and Excelsior all have older downtown areas near the lake. Both Mound and Wayzata have relatively up-to-date regulations governing commercial development in shoreland areas. Their regulations are quite consistent with the language found in Shorewood's Code. Staff also met with Julie Ekman, the MNDNR hydrologist for our area. She indicate<;l that the DNR is open to added hardcover percentages for commercial development where storm water runoff is managed and treated. Shorewood has relatively little commercial development within the Shorelandzoning district. What exists predates the shoreland management regulations that were originally -adopted in the mid 80's. Since the Comprehensive Plan has not suggested the rezoning of these areas, it is reasonable to expect that these areas will be developed or, in this case, redeveloped as commercial uses. As such, it is also reasonable to expect that commercial development will entail more intense use of property. It is suggested that extending the hardcover regulations to include shoreland commercial development should be favorably considered. An amendment should provide that . anything in excess of 25 percent hardcover should require a conditional use permit, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit J. B. Conditional Use Permit - Office. Section 1201.19 of the City Code sets forth the zoning regulations for the R-C, Residential Commercial District. Following is how the applicant's plans comply with the Code (assuming an affirmative conclusion orA. above): 1. Land Use. Office buildings are conditional uses in the R-C district, subject to several conditions: a. Parking. The Code requires one parking space per 200 square feet of net floor area (total area minus 10 percent). Therefore, 108 spaces are required. The applicant's site plan shows 133 spaces. It appears that a number of spaces will end up being lost in order to comply with parking setback requirements. Parking lot circulation encroaches into the rear yard setback area and into the side yard setback abutting Wood Duck Circle. These areas should be landscaped and heavily landscaped to provide a buffer for adjacent residential uses. Given the 25 extra parking spaces, it may not be necessary to reduce the size of the building. b. Circulation. The property is served by two parking lots, one on the north side of the building, accessed by County Road 19, the other on the south side ofthe building, accessed from Wood Duck Circle. The driveway on County Road 19 is approximately 85 feet east of the Wood Duck Circle intersection. While this location is subject to review and approval by the -3- . . . Memorandum Re: Frostad C.U.P./Text Amendment 30 November 2005 Hennepin County Engineer, it is recommended that the driveway be placed as far east as possible, perhaps another 20-30 feet to maintain maximum distance from the intersection. The driveway servicing the southerly parking lot is approximately 235 feet south of the intersection of Wood Duck Circle and County Road 19. Presumably, this parking area will tend to be used by employees of the building, while the northerly lot will be used by building clientele. As mentioned in a. above, the circulation wilLuridoubtedly change somewhat in order to get the parking lot out of the required rear and side setback areas. These setback areas are critical to providing an adequate buffer for nearby residential properties. c. Access to arterial street. The site is served by County Road 19, which is classified as an arterial street in the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan. d. Landscaping and buffering: Proposed landscaping is shown on Exhibit G. The applicant has indicated that he will submit a revised plan, based on the revised building layout, and better illustrating the extent of existing vegetation that will be maintained on the site. Our site visit to the property revealed varying densities of vegetation on the west, south and east sides of the property. Landscaping on the west side of the existing buildings provide an effective buffer on the residential street and should be maintained as part of the redevelopment. Landscaping along the south boundary is not particularly high quality. An existing fence along that boundary and wrapping part way up the west side ofthe site is in poor repair. The applicant's landscape plan shows additional trees (six spruce and three river birch clumps) behind the proposed ponding area. Although the pOl1ding area may be located in the rear yard setback area, it minimizes the amount oflandscapinglbuffering that can occur there. The pond leaves only 20 feet of room for the spruce which can grow up to 30 feet in diameter. The applicant's landscape architect should address whether these trees can tolerate periodic wetness when the pond is full. It is suggested that strong consideration be given to augmenting landscaping on the south border and the southerly end of the west side of the site with a durable low-maintenance fence. Similarly, fencing (perhaps only four feet in height) should be considered along the east side of the property. The intent is to screen the parking lot from view of residential property to the east of the pond in Excelsior. Extension northward of such a fence would also benefit the applicant's property by helping to screen some of the outdoor storage that takes place on the property to the east. -4- . . . Memorandum Re: Frostad C.U.P.lText Amendment 30 November 2005 Landscaping of this site should reflect the recommendations of the County Road 19 Corridor Study. Specifically, large evergreens should be placed at the rear of the site to ultimately form a backdrop for the commercial site. Landscaping at the front of the site is less concerned with screening as much as framing and enhancing the front fa9ade of the building. Proposed landscaping on the front of the is considered quite adequate. A final note on landscaping'" the landscape plan must be signed by a registered landscape architect and must provide for long-term maintenance (i.e. irrigation). In addition to the office use, the applicant has referenced enhancing and preserving the current use. Staffis still unclearwhat this means. The applicant has suggested that the current occupier of the site would maintain some sort of presence. The greenhouse and outdoor sales area shown on the previous plans are not shown on the revised site plan. The applicant should elaborate on this issue. If the current landscapers wish to maintain some sort of design studio or sales office, that is acceptable. Anything with a retail character is not recommended. 2. Site Design. a. BuildinglParking Setbacks. With the exception of the parking lot access aisles encroaching into the rear and side yard setback areas, the site plan complies with the setback requirements of the R-C District. The plan should be adjusted to eliminate those encroachments. b. . Building Height and Orientation. The proposed building is oriented so that the narrow side faces the residential street. At 80 feet of depth and two stories, this elevation is no larger than many homes in Shorewood. The bulk of the building is less than 28 feet high, well under the 35 feet allowable height. . c. Loading and Trash Collection. The previous plan (see Exhibit G) shows a trash enclosure area and loading dock at the southeast comer of the building. The revised plan does not include a trash enclosure and a loading area is now shown in the southwest comer ofthe site. The loading area should be nearer the building, at least 50 feetaway from any residential boundary and a trash enclosure (with elevations) should be included on the plan. d. Lighting. Exhibit I shows the lighting plan for the site. The plan must be adjusted to maintain no more than four-tenths footcandle illumination at any property line. Also, the lighting should be hooded so that the source of the light is not visible from adjoining residential property. Finally, the C.U.P. should stipulate that site lighting, with the exception of minimal security lights, be turned off by 9:30 P.M. -5- . . . Memorandum Re: Frostad C.U.P./Text Amendment 30 November 2005 e. Grading, drainage and utilities. As mentioned earlier, detailed plans for the proposed drainage system have yet to be submitted. The City's engineering consultant will provide preliminary comments under separate cover. RECOMMENDATION It is worth noting that the site is served with both sanitary sewer and city water. Issuance of a building permit for the property will require connection to the municipal water system and payment of water charges. Based on the size ofthe property, it will be charged four RED's (residential equivalent units). As indicated in the first section of this report, staff suggests it is reasonable to allow more intense use of commercial properties than residential. In this regard an amendment to increase hardcover is recommended, subject to the recommendations ofthe City engineering consultant and approval by the MNDNR. With respect to the applicant's request for a conditional use permit for office use, his plans have considerable merit. The issues raised herein, particularly landscaping, should be addressed in revised plans. This project can set the tone for future redevelopment on County Road 19, especially at the east entrance to Shorewood. It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider "conceptual" approval, advising the applicant to return with revised plans for the first meeting in January. Cc: Craig Dawson Larry Brown Steve Gurney Tim Keane Todd Frostad -6- c o o o. o ~ LL o o LO z.....c: o LO N '''_'l'rs:;r.,,~ ' ~", '\~~~~,,~ ~~ K"'~""~'''~: [ITTI r-7'~'"'''' &; ,,- W"E.::~l:-1~ f"'l'i ~I O"i-ii<mKi w ' > c ' i,x_ , ~ lV'<-.I;.:~~~.". ~ i \~ Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Frostad Office Building - c.u.P.rrext Amendment . . . F fl"~laill'tt:.Wh'r""."l'(',''''l''''n:I,l.l.i.' 111e redevelopment plan being presented by Frostad Development Company LLC is one where the current use is enhanced and preserved, CUl1:ent property ownership is partially maintained and the overall site is redeveloped and beautified. Frostad Development Company is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 24,000 square foot 2 story office building on the site. The building will be adorned with significant architectural details utilizing stone and metal accents to bring an old world look to the structure. As a result of the change in use the surrounding residents will no longer be hassled with d1e noise of trucks and loaders moving materials, dust and dirt from transport of equipment and materials and the generally unappealing look of equipment and bulk storage. The proposed site consists of the building area, associated parking and pervious landscaping areas. The existing use ofd1e site as a garden center creates a continually disturbed soil surface from which d1e water drains via natural grading and art earthen swale into an adjacent wedand. It is anticipated that d1e proposed development and treatment system will improve the quality of runoff from the site. To facilitate this Storm Water Management Plan a Text Amendment will need to be granted allowing up to 75% impervious surface in an RC Zoning District where total collection and treatment system is installed. The preliminary layout of d1e storm water treatment for the Shorewood Office building involves the use of a traditional storm water pond supplemented by an underground retention structure. The underground structure consists ofa horizontal 72-inch reinforced concrete pipe and treats d1e runoff from d1e northern one half of the property. All storm water from rainfall events up to and including a 2.5-inch 24 hr storm will be temporarily retained to promote particulate removal and d1en pumped into the storm water pond for additional treatment. The storm water pond has dead storage volume in excess of the NURP storm runoff from the southern one half of the site to increase treatment capabilities. Gary Minion who has owned the property for nearly 30 years will own a portion of d1e building in order to preserve himself a continued ownership presence in a property and community he has come to love. This also help Gary with his long term retirement plans as Frostad Development will manage the subleasing of Gary space within d1e building for at least d1e next ten years. The Frostad Development Company looks forward to bringing dus enhancement to the City of Shorewood. Sincerely, Todd Frostad President Frostad Development Company LLC RECEIVED No\f3Q 2005 C\lY OFSHOREWOOD Frostad Development Company, LLC . 561 Indian Hill Roa Phone: 612.280.0912 . Fax 952.470.8( Exhibit B APPLICANT'S REQUEST LETTER Dated 30 November 2005 . ~'-l2)'I 12'..111 68'-41 45'-"1 14501.". 13'.1-*A . DJR ~INC. . SI3'-11 333 W.shinglun Ave. N Suile #210 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Ph. (6J 2) 676-2700 Fa.. (612) 676-2796 ~ il ~ . --- LU o u: u. o o o Oz 3::) ~a. OLU ::c!:: (J)(J) --- --- --- --- --"" ----"" ---- - ----- --- --- IherebyCllrVlvlhlllhisplarl,&peCificab\ or...,nsplEpillldllVntell'tllllrrmylilld I~OIlandlhallamllUvlitensecl ~JIIlIIIr~_al..5mlt1ll1/rlr.lsala. DEAN J. oovous PRINT NALlIE ~ILOINa. SOlJ,4Fi!E ~TAl::.E I'!lT FLOOR . 12_ ~NO PLOOR . ~ TOTAl.. 2-4_ eF StGNA rURE REGISTRATION NUMBER DATE HISTORY: E'~ 2-4_ eF Cl'FICEI2<2><2> . 1202>.3. 123 RE;Q'O 133 ffiOYlOEO 8 ~I=T~,_~,LAN U'1PERYlOU5 SURFAcE 5ITE~= IHP;RVIOUll &lI'!FAc:E AFi!EA . PERCENT tHFERVIOUS . '1.&6<2> eF ..1.<2>51 eF '3'" PROJECT NO: SCALE; DA.TE: ,"", 40".0. Exhibit C PROPOSED SITE PLAN . . . $~.;fAIIII III I ! ~~;~=;:: 11111111111111111111111111111111",111111''''1111111111.' / ~ IfTITII 111111 1111111 I I II III I I ,,' ~ ~ RI?:1 ~ tr'-T-'-I .........,... 11 I) I I I 5 T ~ ~ :5: :I:;I;: f--- ~ ,.~- -... ~ ........ NOTC. ALl. MATCRIALll rrFlCAL FOR ALL ELEYATIONll, UNO. 8~~~;._~LEVATION r :6I'!EEN>-lOlJSE GLAZING SYll'TCM ~ TD ~~, RT i ~q IB'.'" *" n ~ Wlr\.. r ALUMINUM WINOOJi / /6RICK << - ~ ~ ~ ml trT'TI $1 ~ ~ g I... ~. L: ALUMINUM llTOREFIOONT " ~ ~ASTSTONE Fl'!ECAST elLL L FA6RIC AllNIN<S ~ WALL ecoNCE AIIIIII~ ,. ~ ,// "?lH ~ I V ~~ m I 11111 111111 I I ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 11 I ./ D 2 1/11&" . I'-~" EAST ELEvATION rm l2iSJ ~II~ I~I h tr'T'"TI I II 11 ~ 1m m I o ~;.:~;.~" ELEVATION I 11 ! II I << Ir ;== ~ I::r ~ ~ m ~ I'-r"-r'TI m I5i2h 1m 0~;,:~,~~, ELEVATION 1A'~ ... j' \L CAeT STONE . "~~CAST !lILL tmII IP:JII I:::r:rl IP:JII !::Cd la:::o:::Il ~ t:::C:r::Il IIr:::r::rII . DJR ~NC. 333 Washington Ave. N Suite #210 Minneapolis. MN 55~0l Ph. (612) 676-2700 Fax (612) 676-2796 g g I=r w o u: u.. o ClCll Oz 00 3:- WI- a:~ Ow J:--l CIlW l'*etJveerlilvihllllhl&~.SfllIcibIiDn llfIlll1l1l11P5peparEdl!vQCllUUmydillCl IllpervisDnlllllrhalJamirdulvticenHd ArdUItd",IhIiIMDllNISIaleGlUPlliN. DEAN I oovnLls PRINT ttAWE SIGNA 1 UHI:. REGISTRATION NUMBER DATE HISTORV; ?AOJECT NO' SC"LE: DATE: 1116..".0- Exhibit D BUILDING ELEVATIONS . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r r ~ DJR Ie".~. ~I<<:. Ill'.I~' 4-oI'.iJS' 24'."- .44 _€)n 2",'.4" 333 Wll5hingtun Ave.)I Suite ~210 )'\inne.polis, MN 5540 1 Ph. (612) 676-2700 Fax (612) 676-2796 I I 1 I I I I -1--- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -----~----i----~---~---~----~----I----~--- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ----t--- "'.lelII,' S~'.s*. I I I 1 I I I ----1- I I I I -1----1--- I I I I I 1----1--- .24'.". ~".6" 8~1~~,~:LOOR PLAN S.'."" ;1.4'.2" ------~ on Q .. ... .. ~ ~ UJ Qz tt~ 00. 00: 00 ~9 UJLL o:t;; 00: J:_ <nLL Ih_rC8lVl)'I1iI.1/U....~ Cl'1IJIfrI..~lIlItlrt'UlIl'u...lIIJ'drtd. IlJIIIIlllllclramlhaclllladulylJt8f1WC1 .-rnalllllwlhlllcrllH.$IIIl'g/\itwcIL ~MI+~r'" 5IGNATURl:; REGlSTRAnoN Nl.NBER DATE HISTORY: PROJECT NO: SCALE: lt1S".."-Q" D~TE: Exhibit E FIRST FLOOR PLAN . . . I I I I 1----1--- I I 6TAI~ ~' I I I I 1----1--- I I I I I -----~----~----~---+---~----~----i----~--- i i i i i i i i I I r r ~ la'.I~" ,"",'.\IS' I I . .. I I I I I --r--- -i-- I I I ----t--- eTAI~ 'A' ON .3'-I~' M'_&*-Il ~ 24'.121' ~ ~ r T I I I I I r ~"-~' 24'.121' ~".611 )6 .2" I I I I I I I -----1-- ClN !WI',.,,- 24'-2' 8~~:~~D FLOOR PLAN r DJR ~N::. 333 Washi.o.,,"""'Av..~ 5ui1.11210 J.1inneapoJis, MN 55401 Ph. (612) 676-2700 Fax (612) 676-2796 wZ Q:) u.c.. u.o: gg O...J Ou. 3:0 WZ 0:0 OU :::CW (lH/J 1.,.,cri)'I1IIU'8pllP.tpldblkln O""'_~Drru.lI'IdIrll'lJdrId IlIpllAl!llarloofllllUllduly1J:ansacl .tti.N...hlllcdh_ll.."... ~~m J,..;J?LQ ~1[j"ATUP\E REGI5'TRATJON IIIlMBER DAlE HISTORV; PROJECT NO: SCALE: 1ne,".,'o(J' DATE: .. Exhibit F SECOND FLOOR PLAN _ LANDSC.APE sc,HEDULE - TREES $ SHf<lJ6S _ TREES TO 6E ReMOVED COPE GlT'!" COMMON NAMElLATIN NAME SIZE ROOT REMARi':S TAli SPECies D6H (IN) REMARlG A IS MAASHAU-S ,ASl .2.5' ElIEl 401 ~ITE ~e b El of. RIVe< ElIRCH (GUM!") b' ElIEl o4<l2 ~Ire ~e 5 ElH 10 ElLAGl<: HILLS SPRUc;;E 4O!l ~TE SFRlJC.E 6 H lEI IMPERIAL HONEY L.OCUST .2.5' ,.lIe 404 AlIeiTRJAN PINE eo L q AMERI"AN LARCH .2.5' ElII!l 405 AUSTRIAN PINE b " & SF'RINtP ElNO\I'l "RAElAPI"LE 1.5" ElII!l 0406 AUSTRIAN PINE " 5 of. AU'11.MN ElRILLIANC.e 5eRVlC.EEleRJO.T' 1.5' ElIEl of.01 eox eLDeR I, AS 1& "'NT!lONT' I'lATl:I'O. ~~ 5""" ,.OT 40b !lOX ""-D!:I'O. 16 51" SO ISOL" FL.o.ME SPIReA El6A F'OT 40'1 ElOX eLDeR 16 HS 10 !lUSH HoNeT'SlJ(;1<l.J: 56'" POT 410 ElOX El.DefO. 20 TOT 121 TRa$ I SIftJeS F'ROVIDeCl 0111 ElOX El.DeR I, 0&12 AlIeiTRIAN I"lNE , 41S J;A.c:;K PiNe 12 414 COTTONIIOOCl 12 . . . LANDSCAFE NOTES ALL F'!.....T MATEI'!JAL5 5I-IALL c:oNFOI'!J"1 WITIoI TIoIE AMEl'!Jc.oN A55OCIATlON CE' NlJIo:&E~N 5TANClA!<D5 ANCl SHALL BE OF HA!<DY STOCK. FIOEE F!OCM DISEASE. DAMAGe AND ClI5FIOOI'!ATIGN. IF TIoIE~ 15 A Dlscl'!El'BoICY ~EN TI4E NUMeER CE' I"l.ANTb ON TIoIe LIST ANCl TIoIE NUMIlEII! 5HOWN ON TIoIE f'l.AN. TIoIE f'l.AN 5IoIALL GOvs;N. 2. ALL ~ AND r>E1OEN'lIAL !lE06 &IoIALL ee EClGECl WITIoI &1)( (6) IHNCN eLACK VINYL e=lNG (.....ACK DIAMOND OIl! A~VED EGIIJAL~ ). ALL TIOEE5 NOT I"LACE5 WITIoIIN A eH!'OJe I"l.ANTING eECl 5IoIALL IoIAvE A FOUR (4) FOOT DIAMETER SHREDDED IoIARDWOOO aAI<K MJLCH DiSH IN6T ALLeCl A~D TIoIE TIl!EE. NO VINYL EDGEING 16 REQUIIl!ED W1T101 TREES NOT LOCATECl IN 6I-RJ6 aeD AREA6 lI'lLE5S OTlolEFalII6E INDICATED. 4. MI.l.CIoI TO BE FO.JR (4) INCH 5IoIREOClE!O IoIAROWClOD 6AI<K MOLal IN ALL 6~6 eED AREA&. 6. P~ClI! LANDSCAI"E IOOCK . ALL IbLAND5 W1T101 TIllEEa. 6. CONTRACTOR 15 TO 600 ALL GI'!AOING . NeA6 6IoIC1WN ON LAN06CAF'E R.AN, ADJACENT TO SUILClI_ SEED ALL TU~ ClIST\l!OI!lED lOll' CON5TFaJCTlON lI'lLES6 INDICATED OTlolEI'Wl6E ON ~1N<>5. 610100 TYI"E6 ADJACENT TO WETLAND NeA5 A5 6HOJ.N. 1. PLANTING eolL FOR e4Ci<. FILLING F'!.ANTING F1T6 SHALL caN5lST OF TOPSOIL TO WHlallolA5 l>EEN ADDECl TIoIREE (3) FOUND5 CF COMMEIOl::IAL FERTILIZEIOl AND II!l YA/OD CF PEAT HUMUb I"E'" cuelC l' AII!D. Do CONTflOACTCJIlI! 19 TO FOLLCW ALL. I"l.ANTING 1N9T/lUC;TION AND 1!/l!091ON CONTII!OL MEAllUIl<EEl ""'" TIoIE 1!6TAaLI6"",eNT OF NATIVE 6EED M1)(TUII!E AS &PECIFIED IN J-NjOT 6EEDING MANlJAL 2t110). DJR ~IIIC. 333 W..hiJlgtunAve.:of Suite #210 )UnDeupoU., MN 55401 Ph. (6l2) 676-2700 Fax (612) 676.2796 3 e LU o U:z LL<( O..J 00. OLU 00. ~(j a:U) 00 :cZ U)~ IhIr9il1cllUlyhlltltslf;n.ipIdIIedo:n t1'IIIWriIll!IfIIUlI~IIII11'U*IIf_ l/JI*'IIIIcf'I.mNllllYlldul)'Ul:nIII .lrc"iJctllldlrh".I!~h:_lll~ ~Ma~~L1s tiIGI'fA1UR: REGISTAATJCIN Ni..NBER OATE H1STO~Y: .4e',,'" PAOJECT NO: SCALE: DATE; DRAWN BY: BP '"-40'00" LANDSCAPE PLAN I" .4tZl'.tZl" Exhibit G LANDSCAPE PLAN . \\. ..,.....\ \ \ , \ \ \ SAN t.IH 2 Rlt.I ELEV. 941.49 INV N. 934.5 INV N. I I CBt.tH 15 I Rlt.I ELEV. 940.00 INV. N. 72" RCP 930.00 I INV S. 934.00 24" FES INVERT ELEV. 935.00 \ NOTE: ESTIMATED WATERI SEWAGE USAGE; ASSUMING OFFICE USE, 240 OCCUPANTS@ 15 GPO. 3600 GAUDAY. FIRE DEMAND WILL DICTATE WATER LINE SIZING. ",..1::'1'~.'-'":.: __'" :~:'"' \ \ ~ \ \ "\ \\ \~ \\\\ \\~ \ \"\., \ "0. \ \ ~l> \'';\ \ \ \ \ . I I .' I . I /~ ~ .l~.{ i I I / '. ''', r- -' --, '0 /' lrr'-' '. - --I \ -'~::---:"~:/4- .41 - ....-... ',~.. \ J L__ \ -I ,. ~:;':::?91'5~') I \ \.., - I "', .' ~ S'i'::.C._ - - ""-, - - -1- - I... I - _ ~ B::-u:,::::CU5 :::)l~~'.'f. e- ;:'.:J', \ ,..c ",.-- ;,.:.:..9.",.0"..1 ~ " - -1- -r.-- t-J ..."..-.. :::.:.~....~ ., -- " -- -- "-"- - \ _ ~t.IN ~~ 942.1 ''\'- '. --~ - - - J_ :i.::,:"93S.J - l - L \, __ ~ ~_ -- __~~e~ ~':. \ __ -- 1:: ::--a;,~~. _ .=- --~ _ _ - '. .-- -=- - - ____ _ - 'JI~,,~,:!tcl33',llS" _ ;::::: - _, _ ~ _ \ -- - ~. ~ ;::: - - - -=- -..;::::- -::::-- ~ \~\\\.'\~,~"I -: =~.._.~..~~~.d-;;:.~:;:-_.- _ ::: ::: :. - - - __ -- \\ ", = ~-- ~ ~...__......._"".~".~--_.-.._....-... -- - --- ',\ ., \\, ' , ,.' = = -..-- "::i~:~\-~S~~:?l::/= =f: =t =_ ~ - _ _ -=:'.: - _ _ -:: ~ ~ ~ :::: :.:- ___ -- ';0'-'" \ " -'- r - '-...--- - ___ '-!~\"(~ \ <<', \~ -- ...., -- - - - =-~ ---- ..~. ~~, ....,.., ~~~ -- - - - - -= -~-- ----- '- A- ,s' .........- /. ._ - = _ ___ ~ :::;.-- ".,.J-...., --=: = ___ -c - = _____ / / - - ...J. z ..... _9~~ - EXISTING HAJ. CONTOUR EXISTING MIN. CONTOUR PROPOSED MAJ. CONTOUR PROPOSED MAJ. CONTOUR o 10 20 40 , , SCALE IN FEET . LEGEND . FOUND IRON t.IONUUENT o SET IRON UONlJIJENT wI CM' NO. 1M25 o HENNEP~ ClXJNTY CAST IRON UONUI.IENT ElaSTING H'lllRANT .. ElaSllNQ WATER VioLl/E ~] oasnNG SANITARY NANHDlE EXlSilNG CATOi BASIN :-: E)QSlIHG El.EClRIC BOX .:9: EXlSnNG UGiT 1,; EXIS11NG STORU UANHCU: o ElaS'nNQ lRE:E >t ElaS'nNQ lllEE .0- EXISTlNG PO'M:R POtL E'IGSTIHG WA'fER SERVICE ElQS1INQ QASUAlN ElQS1INQ SJoN1TAAY ~ ElaSllNQ S'TORU ~ ElaS'nNQ WATERUAlN ElaSTlHQ UNOERQROUNO ELEC1RJC EXISTlHQ UNOERQROUND TEl..EPHONE HG O~H Ie ~...~ -.....--- [><] ~ 'WATER VALVE IMI ..iIOI MTE lVOVOS FIRE HYDRANT PROPOSED 'WATER PROPOSED STORM SE'WER PROPOSED SANIT MY DA E BY DESCRI ON r lCICI'l' c:tRT1F'Y TNAT nas IIl..Nf V"flIiIDWED ft'~DllHllEJlKrIlKrl'~NCDTWt. ( 1M Ii JILT L..II:iHlDI AIFDmIW. DGlIGII lIGD: 1tE LAW rF nt: tfATE IF MDM:Sl:ITA. """'ME: """"- MTE_IEZi.N1 POI1.<x:rICL llOO6O PROPOSED GRADING & UTrUTY PLAN <::url'Rli'Wnnn nli'li'T("li' Exhibit H GRADING AND UTILITY PLAN .....R!.V DI<'I RLV ~~~~2.~2' t 2!2Y! __ICL C.U.P. APF 0 0 0 0.0 O.l 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 O.l 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.1 0.0 0 0 0.2 0.0 0 0 0.3 0.0 0 0 0.2 0.1 0 0 . 0.3 0.1 0.0 0 0 . 0.2 0.1 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 c 0.3 0.3 0.2 OJ 0.0 0.0 0 0 . 0 0 0 c 0.3 0,2 O.l Ool 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0,3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 . 0 0 . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 . . 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 O.l 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 . 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.1 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 . . 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 '0.0 '0,0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.1 O.l 0.2 '0.2 '0.2 '0.1 '0.1 0.0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 TR3I-25C!MH-SHII.['('.\'OLT sr.:U"2/Sfl!iLl' . [ N 33 Su Mi Ph Fa w c.:l LL LL o o o o ~ w a: o :c UJ '''''' ~III! - - 1m PRI A,.....a.n Me-n't BACK-BACK S[NGLE S[ GLE 8:,~,L2~~~~ATION FLAN m LUf"l.ina.ire Schedule P~o 'ec~' SHOREVOOD OF'FICE Qt Lobel S Mbol Desc~1 tlon 4 A Lul'IeC 250 H- TR20-SCB - 12 2 B Lu"ec 250 H-TR20-SCB3 -SNt2 16 V T S PR 0014- H70-F"xx-l20/277 (Coo~ed H to l Lu"...,s LLF FIl...,o".. 22000 0.700 SOL06012.IES 22000 0.700 S0106012.IES 4700 0.650 V-180F"0570 H.les Molntolned light I..vets uSln9' LUMec T~onslt 20 "ounted 28' high. 25' pclv, J' loose. F'ta.t glo,SSi lV'n~ VoU Mounted TNS PR'y/OO14-MH70 @8'3' A~cnlt..ct to odvlse stondo~d Flnlsl'1<>s. OlSCLAIMER This Ugh'tlng pion Sp~l:lrI95 lu~,.('s liuppll9d by ALo. Any o9vb;JOfl /=,,.01'1 thl3 plGr1 or' V5e' of lunirnw-es ather ~n ALD pradu~:t3 .11 req~ Fun wbnltto.l or l='lxtu,.. so.Mpl.e, dl"'o.'lngs, Gnd Ugh'\lng plQn to city. tmglnq.,. Gnd Lo.ndsco.tw orchit@c::t For lTior o.pproVGL SIGi Av I n 0.00 o.x/ n 0.00 ount Hel Pro ect. SHOREWOD OFFICE l' ..-E Merle l.lMl"IQr P~o ect: SHORE'IIOOO OF"FlCE Lobel ColeT .. All Ar~o. [UuMino.nc Units Av F"c 0.69 ox 15.0 In 0.0 Do t..,1013112005 meno"..' G,\Se~ve~l \AGI32\SCOTT\DJR\Sho.....wood OfFlce\ t~onsit.o32 .17<:-' 1 O !~ ------ I . J ~ rl These CCl.lculc.'ticrls are N:n vo.lId for o*ner Or city o.pproyo.l usll'lg any -r'lon-ALD I"pPrl5Wl'ted ",.oduc.... 01'" F'lxtut""t's no'\: shet" 0f1 tnl!. plon. F"lx1iures Must be provided by ALe. CalculAtIons 1-10\111' ~ pwForlllvd *Ith our bnt IntR'l"'pI"'eto'tlon of 'th", de'tGils glvE'I'I to us. SOf'Il' dlfFerllimCl2'S blit"'~n ReCLsured CLnd to.lc:ulCLt~ r-n:utts llIa.y otcur dUll' to it'ItotCPt"'QI1ces 11'1 co.lculotlon ...thods. tcpstlng procedures. cOf'lponent pfilrf'arrr.a.ncCi". I'lIli'Qsurlli'l'IE't1t tllchnlques o.nd f"1E'ld conditions 3UC:" o.:=J. yot-to.ge. teMpeoro.-tl.ll"'e vor-icd:ion5, lo.rtp t"lOI'I...Focia.....e-r- \'0.,..10. tlons. a.nd ottUft'" ya,,-lo.QlE'S, Calcl.llQ tlon. do not to.ke Into consldQtrQ tlo" obJect~ ~h 05, but not United to. tr-<<:s:. bullding3. ~Gve-nent. 3ide-;Glk. or tars. CcLlculCLtIon yo.lues rqpr.sent hortzon'tCLl (I... llght rltttlll'" FCLetng stl'"a.lght up) I1l1..."'lna.nce- Fe le-v('l., <unl~3 otht'r",l,eo noted). IF the rll:Gl mvlr-on"e-n't tClndltlons. do not l'4o.tch the r-tput do.ta.. dlFFpl"li!'I1CK WIll OCcur b.t,..n trleo.t;;ured yoilolK Ilnd colcula.tl'd votues. AlIJ Is not 1""e':SP'Cn3kle ror a.c:qulr-Ing Or" rnel"'P"'e-tll'1o on)' laC:G.t Ugh-tlng cadn. . ih~se lIghtino cG.lc:ula.tlons Ol"'@ r'Iot 0. substi-t...t:. F'bl'" ind~pl?r\d.-nt IIlnginHring o.no.lysis l:IY a. prClF~SSlQMl I!nglnHf'". LUMec Transit Parking lot 28' high HiS PRWOOl4 Wall Mount 8' 3' high to center of' Jloox Seq 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 L7 L8 19 20 21 22 LQb..1 A A A A B B 'vi V V 'II V V V V 'vi 'vi 'II V 'II V 'II 'vi Z 28 28 28 28 28 28 825 825 8.25 8.25 8.25 825 8.25 8.25 825 8.25 8.25 825 8.25. 8.25 1125. 8.25 PAC seA OAT ORA DESIGNS. INc. r.~' ALD.lnc. ARCHITECTURAL LIGHTING 2920 ANTHoNY LANE ST. ANTHONY. ~N 55. 612-252-4LOO, 612-2 CONT AcT' SCOTT HAIi Exhibit I LIGHTING PLAN . . . Page 1 of 1 u. Impel1Jious surface. The maximum ratio of impervious surface to lot area for all lots in the "S" Shoreland zoning district shall be 25%. The maximum ratio of impervious surface to lot area for all lots that are not subject to "S" district requirements shall be as follows: (1) Residential uses in the R-1A through R-3B zoning districts: 33%; (2) Governmental and public regulated utility buildings necessary for the health, safety and general welfare of the community; public or semi-public recreational buildings, neighborhood or community centers; public and private educational institutions; and religious institutions in the R-1A through R-3B zoning districts: 66%, provided that: ' (a) Improvements that will result in an increased rate of runoff directly entering a public water shall have all structures and practices in place for the collection and treatment of storm water runoff in compliance with the Shorewood Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, as may be amended; .. .. . (b) Measures for the treatment of storm water runoff and/or prevention of storm water from directly entering'a public water include the appurtenances as sediment basins (debris basins, desilting basins or silt traps), installation of debris guards and microsilt basins on storm water inlets, oil skimming devices and the like; (3) Commercial districts (R-C through C-4) and Lakeshore Recreational (L- R): 66%. A conditional use permit may be granted to exceed 66%, provided that: (a) The proposed development of the site complies with all setback requirements for the district in which it is proposed; (b) Improvements that will result in an increased rate of runoff directly entering a public water shall have all structures and practices in place for the collection and treatment of storm water runoff in compliance with the Shorewood Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, as may be amended; (c) Measures for the treatment of storm water runoff and/or prevention of storm water from directly entering a public water include the appurtenances as sediment basins (debris basins, desilting basins or silt traps), installation of debris guards and microsilt basins on storm water inlets, oil skimming devices and the like; (d) The maximum ratio of impervious surface to lot area ratio shall not exceed 75%. Exhibit J HARDCOVER PROVISIONS Shorewood City Code httn:/ /www.amlegal.com/nxt/gatewav .dlllMinnesotalshorewood mn/title 1. . . . ~ WSB & Associates, Inc. Memorandum To: Brad Nielsen, City of Sltorewood From: Steve Gurney, P.E., WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: December 1, 2005 Re: Shorewood Office (Shorewood Nursery Site) Concept Site Plan Review City of Shorewood, MN WSB Project No. 1459-10 We have reviewed the concept plan submittal for the Shorewood Office building on the site of the present-day Shorewood Nursery. Polaris Group prepared the site plan, dated November 1, 2005. Based on this review, we offer the following comments. 1. No design palculations for storm water treatment were provided. Based on our cursory review, it appears that the dead-pool storage (including the underground pipe) provided is less than the volume recommended by NURP guidelines. Future submittals will have to demonstrate that the storm water treatment system provides removal efficiencies of70 to 90% and 50 to 60% for Total Suspended Solids and Total Phosphorus, respectively. 2. The normal water level of proposed pond at the back ofthe lot is five feet lower than the adjacent ground elevation, with little separation. If this pond is enclosed by a retaining wall on all sides, it will be difficult to maintain the pond. 3. The proposed pond has a maximum depth of three feet, versus a recommended average depth of four feet. This minimal depth, along with the smaller pond size, will require more frequent removal of sediment from the pond. 4. Since this system is a private system, it is recommended that, as a condition of the C.U.P., the property owner be identified as the party responsible for sediment removal and maintenance of the pond. 5. It appears that by reconfiguring the parking lot (possibly removing the 6 stalls in the southwest corner) that the pond could be enlarged to provide additional volume. C:\Docllmel//s {II"! Seltingslbro(J\LocllJ SeUblgslTemporary IlIternet FileslOLKJ9DIMEMO - bll;elsell- /10/0S.doc . . . Brad Nielsen, City of Shorewood December 1, 2005 Page 2 6. It will be required that, during large storm events, discharge from the underground storage chamber be accomplished so that sediment will not be re-suspended during larger storm events and transported downstream. 7. As you may recall, there are some indications that the outlet pipe form the downstream receiving wetland may need to be replaced. Replacement ofthis pipe should be discussed as part of the redevelopment of this site. 8. It is recommended that the applicant contact the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to discuss theirrequirements for treatment and rate control. 9. It is recommended that the applicant contact Hennepin County to discuss the location of the driveway access onto County Road 19. This concludes our comments on the submitted concept plan. Please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached at 763287-7164. sg C:\Docwnellts alld Settj"gslbradlLoc(l1 Setti'lgslTemporary [II1emel Files\OLK/9D\MEMO - h,lie!sen ~ 120J05.doc CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 28 December 2005 RE: Frostad - c.u.P. and Text Amendment - Revised Plans FILE NO. 405(05.31) . The public hearing on the above~referenced matter was continued from the Planning Commission's 6 December meeting to 3 January 2006. The Commission agreed to consider an amendment to the impervious surface restrictions for commercial properties in the "S" Shoreland zoning district, and directed the developer to revise his development plans to address issues raised by staff. Draft Text Amendment. The consensus of the Planning Commission was to allow additional impervious surface for commercial properties, subject to specific storm water treatment standards being included in the Code. Exhibit A contains a draft amendment of Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.u. that incorporates the recommendation of the City's engineering consultant (see Steve Gurney's memorandum, dated 1 December 2005). His recommendation is based upon the requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Proposed additions are shown in red lettering, while deletions are shown with strikeouts. A minor addition to Section 1201.26 Subd. 8.b.(1) is also included. C.U.P. - Revised Plans. The 30 November 2005 planning staffreport identified a number of issues relative to the proposed office building development. The applicant has submitted revised plans as shown on Exhibits B-H. Following is how the previous issues have been addressed: 1. The parking lot design has been modified to comply with R-C district setback requirements. In modifying the site plan (Exhibit B), the building has been very slightly reduced in area. The number of spaces provided is now 114, where 107 is required. Since proposed hardcover is now only 64% of the site, it is not recommended that parking spaces be reduced. . #" fg'" PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Memorandum Frostad Revised Plans 28 December 2005 . 2. The driveway in front of the property (County Road 19) has been moved, as recommended by staff. The conditional use permit should reference approval ofthe driveway location by Hennepin County. Circulation aisles have been removed from the required setback areas. 3. The revised landscape plan on Exhibit C has been redesigned and signed by a registered landscape architect. The plan now identifies existing vegetation on the site, that which will be removed and that which will be saved. The final grading plan for the project should illustrate tree protection measures. As mentioned previously, the proposed pond (which has now been enlarged) leaves minimal room for landscaping. As such the recommendation to provide a low-maintenance fence as previously described is still valid. The plan is considered to be consistent with the recommendations of the County Road 19 Corridor Study. Irrigation for the landscaping should be addressed with the building permit for the property. Finally, the C.D.P. should reference the annual maintenance of the proposed perennial planting beds. 4. Loading and trash collection are located at the rear of the building on the east side of the parking lot. Elevations for the proposed dumpster area are consistent with the design of the building. . 5. The revised lighting plan is consistent with the requirements of Shorewood' s Zoning Code (no more than .4 foot-candles at the property line). Although the proposed fixtures compliment the street lighting being installed by the City along County Road 19, they are relatively tall (25') and are likely to be visible from adjoining residential properties. The applicant's architect should address whether these fixtures can be shielded or lowered to minimize this concern. The C.D.P. should reference the hours during which the lighting must be reduced. 6. The applicant's revised grading plan (Exhibit H) has enlarged the pond at the rear ofthe site, and no longer appears to depend upon underground piping for storage. This plan will be addressed under separate cover by the City's engineering consultant. Any approval of the C.D.P. should include the consultant's recommendations. Subject to the recommendations included above, the c.u.P. is considered to be consistent with Shorewood's zoning requirements and Comprehensive Plan. This assumes, of course, that the revised plans comply with the draft text amendment and the engineering consultant's recommendations. Cc: Craig Dawson Larry Brown Steve Gurney Tim Keane Todd Frostad . -2 12/28/05 . Draft Amendment - Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.u.: u. Impervious surface. Except as provided in (4), below, the maximum ratio of impervious surface to lot area for all lots in the "S" Shoreland zoning district shall be 25%. The maximum ratio of impervious surface to lot area for all lots that are not subject to "S" district requirements shall be as follows: (1) Residential uses in the R-IA through R-3B zoning districts: 33%; (2) Governmental and public regulated utility buildings necessary for the health, safety and general welfare of the community; public or semi- public recreational buildings, neighborhood or community centers; public and private educational institutions; and religious institutions in the R-IA through R-3B zoning districts: 66%, provided that: (a) Improvements that will result in an increased rate of runoff directly entering a public water shall have all structures and practices in place for the collection and treatment of storm water runoff in compliance with the Shorewood Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, as may be amended; . (b) Measures for the treatment of storm water runoff and/or prevention of storm water from directly entering a public water include the such appurtenances as sediment basins (debris basins, desilting basins or silt traps), installation of debris guards and micro silt basins on storm water inlets, oil skimming devices and the like; (3) Commercial districts (R-C through C-3) and Lakcshore Recreational fb-Rj: 66%. A conditional use permit may be granted to exceed 66%, provided that: (a) The proposed development of the site complies with all setback requirements for the district in which it is proposed; (b) Improvements that will result in an increased rate of runoff directly entering a public water shall have all structures and practices in place for the collection and treatment of storm water runoff in compliance with the Shorewood Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, as may be amended; . Exhibit A DRAFT ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT CommercIal Imp ervlOU s surtace - Shore land 12/28/05 . (c) Measures for the treatment of storm water runoff and prevention of storm water from directly entering a public water include the such appurtenances as sediment basins (debris basins, desilting basins or silt traps), installation of debris guards and micro silt basins on storm water inlets, oil skimming devices and the like; (d) The maximum ratio of impervious surface to lot area ratio shall not exceed 75%. (4) Commercial districts (R-C through C-4) and Lakeshore Recreational (L-R): 25%. A conditional use permit may be granted to exceed 25%, provided that: (a) The proposed development complies with the requirements provided in (3)(a-d), above; (b) The treatment measures referenced in (3)(c), above, shall be consistent with the National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) guidelines, including, but not limited to, the removal of 90% of total suspended solids and the removal of 60% total phosphorous; . €4j(5)Planned Unit Development (PUD) districts shall be regulated based upon the various uses within the PUD. Residential portions of the PUD shall be subj ect to the provisions of (1), above. Commercial portions of the PUD shall be subject to the provisions of(3) and (4), above. Draft Amendment - Section 1201.26 Subd. S.b.n ): b. Specific Standards. (1) Impervious surface coverage oflots must not exceed 25% ofthe lot area, except as provided in Section120.03 Subd. 2.u. of this Code. (2) When constructed facilities are used for storm water management, documentation must be provided by a registered engineer, licensed in the State of Minnesota, that they are designed and installed consistent with the field office technical guide of the local soil and water conservation districts. . (3) New constructed storm water outfalls to public waters must provide for filtering or settling of suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before discharge. -2- S13'~P' ~!l'-21S" 3!l'.e>" '!l'.e>' i:l"-'~' IcZIe'-0' 1b8'-4" , \ - - ~~---~-l uummu ___m_u: i I I I i I I I I ~~~EET 3 I : I 1 I I I I , \ "0'.0' ~A", .,. A o ~ ~ ..J... 16 ~ -to I F;r I I I I ~ - ---- -- '\ , \ - --- CIRCL..E '\,--- - DUCK ARE F~T~ 6IJILDING &aU II~ eF I!OT FLOOI'l . ~ 2ND PLOOI'l . 23~e> GeF TOTAL. . '0' REQ'D ~ ClFO'ICE',=ne>0 . 114 PROVIDED IMF='ERvIOUB !JURFACE !OITE ARE~!O' !O\JI"PACE AREA . I~~ IMPC",VIOU& . !ll,eo;.e> !OF &e,'3& !OF &4". 8 ;~T2~,.~LAN zEB 9 ~ z o ......... I-- o :J 0: I- 00 Z o o a: o LL I-- o Z >- a: <( z ........ ~ - .....J UJ 0:: a.. ."~ M D ARCHr 333 Ww Suite #2 MinneaI Ph. {612 Fax {61: W o u: IJ.. o C 0. ~6! :> 1=( W<, 0: g~ 00.., 0.., "'I'" <, ..l.. 0.. ( ,'" :;). Vol 0: ~ fneparhGI ....- ; -.... ~ PRiNT '" SIGNAilJi iiEGiSfiC ~ CUF~ 11=2T"-c- CUF" ~ ~ ~ SCALE: ~~~~iD SITE PLAN Frostad CUP a:~ al ~ Si' .( ~8~ z...... 6 ~~c-;a ~ .,j~~ :E~8.~R ~~~~- ~ u g~'e. E~~f~ ;!; ~ Z 0 8 '" -< :il ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 2 .. ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ -< "' 0 U rJJ ~ Z -< ~ u~ :<;::: rJJ ...o~ .......> ~~ NVld 3dV8SaNVl iJU i~~! -hM .0-" "I ~~ ~A--j J!ll!" 1!t ~ -j BI&!! Hd ~ ! NW 'OOOM3HOHS 310HIO >Iono OOOM NOI1V0l1ddV dno 381::::1::::10000M3l:l0HS '" U) ill f- o Z ill (L <[ (j U) Q z <[ -' ~6 >-J: m~~ ~n wOz U~ &W~ (j~ot _Jii;; !;{a:i glllYl :!lot>- ot~6 ~01' ~~~ ffi~[ JiW& llI~oc ~xm !::o!i 3"2 li~'l'~ ~ ~~ffi~ ~ u~~~ ...,JUw.J ~ill~i :j~~ :;/otlr~ -~"' OCQ"W ~~~i! r.,O?l ~~:[ <e- [QIlI'l' -l%wt- ~:n~~ II 8 <e -' ~ 0'''' w- :u~ JiiU' ~ o8~ ~ o~~ a Ho ill ~5~ ~~!!I ~ tl .~ ~ ~~~ ~w~ otJ:., J:"W -,0,1 -'s" ~~~ o<elfl wo<e [(l~o 'i!:;/ill ;::::010 h~ [H lUoz ion ~-,j'! "tr"'t !it~ 1::<11- ~~~ ~~:z [~~ ~1~ .,00 mh ~Iltil :;/~ll' ..J -' <e <: J: u ~ it .. <e W ~ ~ o J: 3 !:: ~ ~ ~ i fa ~ o ..J o :;/ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ 12 i ill -' S ~ a '5 ~ ~ ~ 9 mY ~. ill~ ~~ ~ffi ZZ 'ill ~! Q'!l ~o ~~ .e ~!.i ~m d~ [~ 5l& ~~ E~ ~o &<e i@ ~~ ..Jot ~o i\~ u~ ~;;;:i -'oc ~:z(l ~l!J ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~U n tF :ltO~ ;j& <lOO lL.o ~~i U O"'U ~lI.. I-a~ ';i\ ., 0 ~ ~~: 2m ....J~ J: ~:;/~ ~~. 'ioo ~~~ s!Mm ~~;! 'i! " lil ..J >- <: > 8 <e -' to J: U Z ~ x ;;; i! :3 o g W W III .,-< O..J w<I Ill" (l :;/W ~~ ~~ 0<1 ~~ III U -,Ji <to ... '" .. .n .Q -odl4)cQ::;:!:~~~!:r-!::!!:!r-- Q ~ a x ll! UJ mlfl a!!! f-u IfIUJ Itllli ~\!l I~ www'l1'l1 'l1 00 ~UH~~B~~~~H ~~~B><><x><><m~n~ Hn'l22222~~33", CiNm:{.or-cQ~o=nm-.tOr- ..~~:;~~~:;'t"'t't't~n"! z "" ~m . . ioin "'''' =~~nNnNIf) ~I II II r-'lfd) ~1f'I-Nd)N"t"-tO-.t~~ "''''.. 1111.0 IfII11 "'''' "" .... .... 'l1 0 oo..!lIoc'l1!l1 'l1 OCW r1 OCOCOCr1'l1 0:: 0 ~'J: I p~j[~H~j[ ~~-( -(-(-(-(j[ ~~h ~ ~ ~ ~\'lU ~ \'l", ~ Iillillil~~ """ ~~O[~ifi~Z H~~~~U~p~~J:~ ~~~~~ ~~hn~m 33f ~ H -(~HH HH ~~;~~~~~ ~a~~~~~w~a~~~w~ "':1;0"'" !\'..H:J: ili Q Z 4: x UJ !tlfl a!!! f-u 1fI~ ttl\O ~\!l I~ IfI ~ 0( X UJ !t f- a ~ tOtO mm 1D101Ol:)5l:)t)l:) dimaiO-lLlLlL1L "' N N '" ~I~ il~ n m<<'llfl'rlf\ >- ~ III ~~ Ii) Uj~ ~ ~ "iL1U <1Il~< 5 0 ?;~]:~p~~~ II: ~~",;;!"-(p~:\l m -(J:"'~l:j-(~ill-(~ii1 "l;;!;!~2~l:-(~~>-ifi ~jjj]:u'" ~it~q- UH~Hclifi~~m Ir1Ill-(~'1-(",iil!j!;O:~ IfllU lOr::! fi11f1 ~~ ..0( IfIz lUZ ~~ ,<o! UJ~ --10( ~z UJZ Ia uL IfIL UJa ~u ~~ 2a o(UJ --1Q IS ~io ~u-~..oU\'<t!!!:n~~~~ -(1lli!i..J""'~SI'I!:::l:~ l? . z :( ~ ~ ~ ~ o M o '" z ~ X w e. =:,*.i~': ~ ~'~'1"~- '//,';.' .-' W i! 0' fll ~'" a!~ <eN y!:;/ ..J~ h. ~~ ~ :till ~ QIS) \.") ~o 5 w~ ~ ~<: 0 o .. ~ll! ~ ~u it ~~ f <:~ III h 0 H ~ ~f ~ ..JO 0 :;/W s: (lm ~ -'~ ~~ ill ~~ ~ !!l~ ~ ~1i [ ~~ ~ ~m i cd IP 2 :( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1: i:i III ~ ~ :!l j::: '" ~ NOIIOnl::llSNOO l::IO~ ION - Al::I'v' 1V\Jll3l::1d . EB N z <[ ~ lL w lL <[ o 0)- o~ z~ <[, -1,- \: . ..,.... ~"'t D $ T~ PARAPET a,'.,,- $ 1.0 F'ARAF'ET OS'.A- ARCHrT 333 Was! Suite #2] Minneap Ph. (612: Fax (612 ~-l!:)" NOTE. ALL MATEIl!IAL5 rrPlCAL FOil! ALL ELEVATION5. UN.O. \;: ALUMINUM 5TOI'!EFRONT cA5T 5TONE Fl'!ECA&T 51LL T z 0 .......... ....-. () :J a: I- (I) Z 0 w () () u:: a: L1. 0 0 0 0 u.... OiS I- ~i= W~ 0 0:..... 08: :I:~ Z CJ)5 lhe<ob\'c:ert >- Dr."', ~ -- a: ~ PRIIITW <( SIGNA"lU1 REGlSTR. Z 12-6-20 .- CUP AJ ~ 12.23<: ~ -- ....J W 0: 0- PRO.IEC' SCALE: 8~8?~~~ ELEVATION 0;8?~'~~' ELEVATION 0~;~~!LEVATION 0~8~~~",~LEVATION IA PT ( 5TONE CAP ) CEDAIl! &LAT5 I I I I I I PI '.'1, I .' .1 .1. ,.j- ( COLOI'!ED CMU ) . .r..,' ~ I I I I I I I 1 I I On 1 I ( C01-0I'!ED CMU ) I I I I ....,.. I I I I .I 1- ( ROCKFACE CMU I I .: 'j c' "1. .1..,' ",I' . ~ I' I' I. I I I I ~ 5TONE CAP I I t~ I I t~ I I .1.------1, L__~___J I t----------- ----------- Exhibit D REVISED BUILDING ELEVATIONS 0~:~,~~ ROOM ELEvATIONS '0.0 '0.0 0.3 '0.2 '0.1 '0.1 0.0 0.0 '0.0 '0.1) '0.1 a.! '0.0 ~j.o '0.1 0.1 a.! (1.2 '0.1 '0.2 0.1 0.0 '0.1 a.! 0.2 '0.3 .4 "n "n , 0.0 0.0 '0.0 0.0 0.0 '0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 '0.0 NUMeric SUr'\l"'lo.rv Pro ectl AU Pro ects Lobel ColeTvee Units Ave Max Hln Avg/MIn I Mox/Mln All Area I1\uMlno.nce Fe 1.02 11.1 0.0 0.00 10.00 ~ 2 t ---, LUMino.ire Schedule Pre 'ed: All Prejeds Qtv I Lobel Svl"lbell Descrletien A,..,..o.noeMen't Ll.Anens LLF Filenorle 4 IA (*J L....Mec 250MH-TR20-SCB3H-SNI2 BACK-BACK 22000 I 0.700 SOl06012.1ES 16 1'.1 -0 TMS PRWOOI4-MH70-Fxx-120/277 (Ceo tecl MH laMe) SINGLE 4700 10.650 V-I80F0570HH.ies l 113 J Do.te,12/21/2005 Filename' G,\Serverl\AGI32\SCOTT\DJR\Shereweecl OFFlce\tl'o.nslt 1.032 Mo.lnto.inE'd light levels ,usln9l LUl"lec Transit 20 f"'Iountecl 28' high. 25' pele, 3' bas.. Flat gloss lens. "'all Mo....ntecl TMS PRWOOI4-MH70 @8'3' Architect 'to advise standard finishes. I~e"'nt H.,riht Pro 'ec"'b All Pro' ec:ts SeqNe Lo.bel Z I A 23 2 A 23 3 A 23 4 A 23 5 V 8.25 6 '.I 8.25 7 '.I 8.25 8 V 8.25 9 V 8.25 10 IJ 8.25 11 '.I 8.25 12 V 8.25 13 IJ 8.25 14 '.I 8.25 15 '.I 8.25 16 '.I 8.25 17 V 8.25 18 V 8.25 19 V 8.25 ALD~Inc. ARCHITECTURAL LIGHTING DESIGNS.INC. 2920 ANTHONY LANE ST. ANTHONY, MN 55419 612-252-4100, 612-252-4J41 Fox CONTACT, SCOTT HARMES DISCLAIMER This lighting pion spec:ifll!s lul"llnalres Sllpplipd by ALD. Any deviQtion Fr"ol'l thIs plcn or US:l!' of lul"llnc.lres othll'r then ALD produc:ts wll require full Sl"IbMlttol of fixture sGp\ple, aro.wir"lQs, o..ncl lighting pIon to city, englnee-r end \ot"'losco.pe orc:hiteoc:t for prior o.pproyol. LUl"lec TrClnsit PClrking lot 23' high TMS PR\J0014-MH70-Fxx-120/277 <CoCl tee! MH lo.Mp) \JClll MOl..Int 8.25 high Thes~ co.lc:ula.tions o.re NOT ...olld for ow"'er or C.ity approval 1,,151"'9 tiny .l"Ion-ALD represented procluct' or fixtures not shown on this pLan. F"1:dures I'lus't be provldE'o by ALD. CalCl.rlotlons hov!? blll?n perforMed Kith OUi" best ;nte,.pl'"e'tatlon of the deta.ils given to us. Sor-ae cliFfel"er'lces bet~een MeosvI""ecl a.nc::l calculated results l"Ioy occur due to 1.,tolprQnces in cQlculo'tion I'll?thods. testing procedul"l!'s, Conj:loner'lt perfol'"no.nclt. neo.sul"e'l"Ie'nt techniques anol flelcl conditlo.,s SLlch os voltagE', teMperature vo.l"'lotlon5. lo..l'"Ip Monufo..c:tul"'el'" vQr'"Ia.tlon5. o.nd other- vo.rlo.bles. Co.lcula.tion5 do not "ta.ke into consideration ,...., llll.-T.'= o:.l.-h ftc;. h,,1: I"ln-t II",it...rI tn. +.......1'10;. hullrllnnc;. nnvP"'f!>Mt.. o;irl...wnlk. z o ......... ...... o .:::> c: r- OO z o ll,ll'lec TR~O~Z5DMH.SHJ.PC.tI: SN12-U......-cCl.-TX 0 >- a: <( z ......... ~ - ..J UJ rr: D~ ARCHfT 333 Wasl Suite #21 Minneap. Ph. (612; Fax (612 w (.) LL LL o C o o ~~ =s: ~i: W <. .....!:h u.. ...J- Oc..c !lee :Cc..C ,^ ::;)~ \JJ U~ 1~ce1i Of."" --, -... .cwLWl PRINT NAJ SIGWoTUF ~ ~ --9!l: Exhibit E REVISED LIGHTING PLAN ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I I I I I 0--I----r---~---I---I---I----l----I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I .1 ..1 . I I . I 0---t---- I I I 0--T' ~ ;:, I I 1 I I 12;'-8" -i- -j-- ---r- loa,..'-!" 8 ~e7~,~~D FLOOR FLAN zEB z o .......... 1- o ::) -EE- l- oo Z o ---0- cr.: o u. ---r----b I Z ! >- -t----~ I <( I ~ I ~ I ::i UJ 0: a... 1 ~ ;'4'-;" ~I ~ I I I I I . o ARCHn 333 Was' Suite #2] Minneap Ph. (612: Fax (612 W () u: LL o Cl o ~ S~ W<:. a: g~ O Goc Goc ::I: :: ~ '1'1 =>- "'J 0: .~ O'IIplld"', ~I -- .QWiil PRlNT NA: SIGNA'lUF REGISTR! ~ CUP~ ~ ~. PRO.,ECT SCALE: Exhibit F REVISED FIRST FLOOR PLAN z o """""'" I- () -~ a: I-- (f) Z o () ~ u: c: ~ o g __II ---t--LL ~5~ w f.i~ II: g~ O Oi' I :I:~~ I Z OOGi I I IlIIIIOycen '-- ",,,,,,,,...p -+-----r=-a: := I PRINT NA i ~:: I ~- ~~ I CUP ----;2-2 - ~ .....J W c: Q.,. 123'-e" &4'-3" T r T T T ? T ~ I I I I I I I I 0--i----r- --1---1---1----1-----\----1- I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I . I . I . . '.' I - 0----t---- I I I 0---+-..~ I ~ I I 9 T I I I . .1 I I II ... 't--- I ---.------,---- I I I I I I I I I I ELEvATOR LOBBY I I . I I I I I I I I I 1- - - T &TAIR'A' I I &TAIR'e' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I / I I I I I I I I I I --l----r-~-T---~----I----~---I---T---~- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i 1 I I 190'-1" 8 ~~~~~~,:LOOR PLAN zEe . D ARCHn 333W81i Soite #2' Minneap Ph. (6]2 Fax (61: PRCJECT - SCAlE: Exhibit G REVISED SECOND FLOOR PLAN \\ "'''\ ~ \ \\\ \\ \~ \\\\~ \\\ \ \ ~ \ ~ \ \\ ~ \\ ~ \\ ~ \\\ \ ~ ~ \ ~\ ~ \\ ~ \ ~ \\\ ~ \\ '\ \\\ ~~ \\'\\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ ~ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \.~\~ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ ~ \ ~ \ ,,~\ \ \\ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ ;' \ \ \ \ \ ),..~., " ... \~\ ~ ' ~ ~ \ \ '\ \ \ ~ \ \ ~ \\ t \k\ \ t '~f..\\ ~ \ '\\\\ ~ \ '!:. ~ \"' \\ ~~ \ \\ , \\ \ "'t:::c:l\: ~ ~ \1 "\'~' ~ \ \ ~- \ ~\" \ " ,) \ \-( \ '\ \ \ \ \{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , -~~--- \ ,\ \'\ ..... - .;{.f....- _ _ '\ ~ ~- - - - - - - \ \ / __ -. - - o.~;.'t:- - _ _ _ - _ \- --.:\-- .:..\\ '0;, - - ===f .- r::JIl#II- ====_= :: :: - - _ - - ~..~ - :: ::::: :::: - -:- -- a ,.... ==== === I -- __ _ ::::: -- __ \ ..~..~\'. \ ---~ r:r=:;#1. :=:=;: __ -- __ -- __ ~ __ ~ .~,~ \ '\ .' -- r - - - - - ~,;:::: - -- \ '~""". \ -. \~ - - - - _-::::- -- \,.,.... ~ ...- -- - - - ~---- -- \ "'- ~,~- Jt.J:..f..-..L - - - .-. ~ ~ - __ '~'.\ -.,- -" ==== === ==-= --- ----- ~::- '~==::::::=s =:=::; __-- \ \ ~..rrl;/~~~ - - _ -- \ _ - \ ,:). .;.;.," - - ::- - - -\ ~1\\ \r., / / \ \ \\ (\ / ,~ V, \, \ \ \ \ SAN lit 2 RIll ELEV. 141.41 tNV N. l34.a IHV N. CBIoIH P RIM ELEV. 1140.00 INY. N. 24. RCP 835.00 INY S. 24. RCP 935. 24. FES INIlERT ELEV. 1134.S8 ........ 24. FES '<'ERT ELEY. 837.00 , \ \ \~. \ .,. ,\ \ '(('. \ !., \ 't.. .~. rr ~4. FES IN'<'ERT ELEV. 833.5 , I I I I I I I -I- I I I I I I I Ie: I I i I I i I I~~ I 0.: I I -- I ---/ /~ ItJI / ~i;J /.> ~'- . ,,/ /-\;; r.o,< ---'" \d ,..:'''' ....- ~"--' .- - - --- -- 4-Z NOTE: ESTIMATED WATERI SEWAGE USAGE; ASSUMING OFFICE USE, 240 OCCUPANTS @ 15 GPO. 3600 GALlDAY. FIRE DEMAND WILL DICTATE WATER LINE SIZING. "- ~,,-a-- .... EXISTING MAJ. CONTOUR EXISTING MIll. CDNTlJl.R PROPOSED MAJ. CDNTlIlJR PROPOSED MAJ. CDNTlIlJR o 10 20 40 , , SCALE IN FEET ~ ----- "" .../~~1Il .,.-- ~~~~E'_ t ~Y! -IlLV I.: ElIISlINC El&11IC _ * EXIS1INC LIGHT ~~ EllIS1ING S1IIlIoI IINlHCU o EllIS1lNO 'IREE '* EXIS1INC 'IREE ",C EllIS1lNO _ POLE .... EXIS1INC WATEI\ SEIMCE ElGS1ING _ ElCIS1lNG SANITARY _ ElCIS1INC STlRI SEWER EXIS1INC WA'IEIlMAIl DlIS1INCl _ ELEC1RIC DlIS1INCl _ 1EI!PHONE 1><3 ~ -- LEGEND . FOUNllIRCN_ENT o SET IlON 11_ W/ eN' NO. 11425 :~: HDIlEPII COUNTY CAST IRCN _ENT 1:>- ElGS1ING IMlRNlT :: DIsnNG WA1ER VALVE. o DGIlING SANITARY _HOLE ,. .. EJOS'nMO CATCH 8AStI \lATER VALVE -.- F"IRE HYDRANT PROPOSED \lATER PROPOSED STORM SE\lER PROPOSED SANITARY _III. Exhibit H REVISED GRADING AND UTILITY PLAN . . . ~ WSB & Associates. Inc. Memorandum To: Brad Nielsen, City of SllOrewood From: Steve Gurney, P.E., WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: December 29, 2005 Re: Shorewood Office (Shorewood Nursery Site) Concept Site Plan Review City of Shorewood, MN WSB Project No. 1459-10 We have reviewed the concept plan submittal for the Shorewood Office building on the site of the present-day Shorewood Nursery. Polaris Group prepared the site plan, dated December 5, 2005, and a storm water management plan for the site, which we received December 27,2005. Based on this review, we offer the following comments. 1. The calculations for storm water treatment were provided. Based on our review, it appears that the dead-pool storag~ provided exceeds the volume recommended by NURP guidelines. The 72-inch RCP that was previously proposed has been eliminated, which will result in a system that should reduce the potential for sediment re-suspension. 2. The normal water level of proposed pond at the back of the lot is at elevation of 937. The invert of the storm sewer upstream of the pond is 935. This will result in standing water in the pipe which may freeze and plug the line. Consideration should be given as to how runoff from the spring snow melt will overflow to the pond if the storm sewer is not functional. 3. The proposed grading shows a fill height of up to eight feet above the existing ground surface at the east edge of the property. If the grading is not contained with in the site, the developer will have to obtain permission from the adjacent property owner to grade and maintain a slope on that property. 4. Since this system is a private system, it is recommended that, as a condition of the C.U.P., the property owner be identified as the party responsible for sediment removal and maintenance of the pond. c: \Documents and SetJings\bradLocal Seltings\Temporary Imemet Files\.OLK /9D'MFJv/O . bnie/sell - J22905.doc . . . Brad Nielsen, City of Shorewood December 29, 2005 Page 2 5. As you may recall, there are some indications that the outlet pipe form the downstream receiving wetland may need to be replaced. Replacement of this pipe should be discussed as part of the redevelopment of this site. 6. It is recommended that the applicant contact the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to discuss their requirements for treatment and rate control. 7. It is recommended that the applicant contact Hennepin County to discuss the location of the driveway access onto County Road 19, This concludes our comments on the submitted concept plan. Please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached at 763287-7164. sg C:IDocllme"ls and SetrillgslbradLocaJ Selli"gs\Temporary In/emet Files\OLK19D'J...fEMO - bllie/sell - J 22905.doc A WSB & Associates, Inc. Memorandum To: Brad Nielsen, City of Shorewood From: . Steve Gurney, P.E., WSB& Associates,lnc. Date: January 18,2006 Re: Shorewood Office (Shorewood Nursery Site) Concept Site Plan Review City of Shorewood, MN WSB Project No. 1459-10 We have reviewed the revised grading plan submittal for the Shorewood Office building on the site ofthe present-day Shorewood Nursery. Polaris Group prepared the revised site plan, dated January 16,2006. This plan is attached. A storm water management plan for the site, which we received December 27, 2005, was previously reviewed. Based on the review of this information, we believe the plan meets the City's requirements, provided the following items are addressed. Based on discussions with the developer's engineer, it appears that these items can be addressed. 1. Adequate cover over the 24-inch RCP that conveys runoff along the east lot line is required. 2. The developer will have to obtain permission from the adjacent property owners to grade and maintain a slope on those properties~ Aretaining wall is proposed for a portion of the site. The proposed wall is up to six feethigh at one point. The retaining wallplans must be prepared by a Registered Engineer. It is recommended that, as a condition of the building permit, the Engineer submit an as-built drawing certifying that the wall was constructed according to the construction plan. This concludes our comments on the submitted concept plan. Please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached at 763 287-7164. sg C:IDoCllmcms (lml Scttillgslbrm/ILocal ScaillgslTempormy IlIIenlet Filcr\OLKJ9D\MEMO - b"ielsc" - OJ 1606.doc -l)-Ft-i\-I'-ll- CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PROVISIONS OF THE SHOREWOOD ZONING CODE REGARDING SIGNS Section 1. llhe definition of "Sign i\rea" found in Section 1201.02 of the Shorewood City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "SIGN AREA. llhe total area of a sign measured at the perimeter of the surface on which the sign is inscribed. I'or signs consisting of letters, figures, or symbols applied directly onto a building or structure, the sign area shall be that area enclosed within the smallest rectangle that can be made to circumscribe the sign." Section 2. Section 1201.02 of the Shorewood City Code is hereby amended to include: "SIGN - MENU BOARD. }\ny sign that has a message related to the site's food service and the copy is manually or electronically changed and the lettering of which is less than three inches in height so as to not be readable from the adjoining street right-of-way or adjoining property." Section 3. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.b.(2)(g) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(g) No sign shall be illuminated with any flashing or intermittent lights, nor shall it be animated, except for time and temperature information. i\ll displays shall be shielded to prevent any light to be directed at on-coming traffic in the brilliance as to impair the vision of any driver. No device shall be illuminated in a manner as to interfere with or obscure an official traffic sign or signal. No light shall be directed onto a lake so as to interfere with navigation thereon;" Section 3. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.b.(2) is hereby amended to include: "(i) Window signs where the total area of such signs exceeds 10 percent of the total glass area of the window space as viewed from the street, to a maximum of 20 square feet." Section 4. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.c.(3) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(3) No portion of any sign shall be located within five feet of any property line. No signs other than governmental signs and political campaign signs as provided in b(1)(d) of this subdivision shall be erected or temporarily placed within any street right-of-way or upon public lands or easements or rights-of-way. }\ny unauthorized signs located in public right-of-way or on public property shall be considered abandoned and are subject to immediate removal and disposal without notice." 11gB Section 4. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.c.(4) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(4) The temporary use of signs, searchlights, banners, pennants and similar devices shall require a permit. The permit shall be valid for 1 0 consecutive days. The permit shall be prominently displayed during the period of validity. Only two temporary permits may be granted for any property within any 12 month period. Temporary signs shall not exceed 32 square feet in area. Section 5. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.c.(10) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(10) The regulations contained herein shall not apply to traffic signs or the flag, separate emblem, or insignia of a nation, political unit, school or religious group, or integral signs. There shall be no more than one United States flag and no more than three other non-commercial flags. Nor shall these regulations pertain to a sign inside a building, provided the sign is at least three feet in back of the inside of the exterior wall and is readable from inside the building. Section 6. Section 1201.03 Subd. l1.c.(ll) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(11) All signs requiring a permit from the city shall be subject to review and approval by the Zoning Administrator." Section 7. Section 1201.03Subd. 11.d.(2)(b) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(b) All other nonconforming signs: upon approval of a building permit, sign permit, or other zoning action." Section 8. Section 1201.03 Subd. l1.e.(l)(a) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(a) Area identification sighs (monument type only). One sign facing each bordering street shall be allowed for each development of 20 or more units. The sign shall not exceed 32 square feet of area, nor shall the sign structure exceed one -half of the allowable copy area. The signs shall be erected only at the dedicated street entrance - but not in the public right- of-way, may. be indirectly illuminated and shall not exceed a height of eight feet. above grade." Section 9. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.e.(3) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(3) C-3 and C-4 Commercial Districts. Subject to other conditions of this chapter, the following signs shall be allowed in the C-3 and C-4 Districts." Section 10. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.e.(3)(d) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(d) Freestanding signs shall not exceed 20 feet in height or 80 square feet in area. The total area of the sign structure shall not exceed one-half of the allowable copy area." Section 11. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.e.(3) is hereby amended to include: -2- "(e) Window signs. The total area of window signs shall not exceed 10 percent of the total area of windows as viewed from the street. Window signs with lettering exceeding 3.5 inches in height shall be debited against the total number and area of signs allowed for the property. (f) Menu boards. One menu board sign per restaurant use with a drive-up facility may be allowed in conjunction with a conditional use permit. The menu board shall not exceed 32 square feet in area, nor more than eight feet in height, and may be in addition to the freestanding sign on the property. Lettering size on the menu board shall not exceed two inches in height. " Section 12. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.e.(4)(b) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(b) For PUDs containing 20 acres or more of land, the city may allow larger construction signs than those allowed in b(l)(f) of this subdivision. In determining the size and allowable area of signs in a PUD, the city shall take into consideration the functional classification and designated speed limit of adjacent roads and potential impact on adjoining residential areas. In no case shall the total allowable area of construction signs exceed three square feet for each acre of land within the PUD. The total area of the signs shall not exceed 100 square feet and no individual sign shall exceed 80 square feet." Section 12. Section 1201.03 Subd. 11.f.(1) is hereby amended to read as follows: "(1) No sign shall be erected in the City of Shorewood until a permit to do so has been approved by the Zoning Administrator and issued by the office of the Building Official (signs stipulated in bel) above shall be exempt from this requirement). No permit shall be granted until the necessary fee has been paid and until the Building Official, or staff representative, has made a preliminary inspection of the sign before installation and has ascertained that the sign and method of installation comply with all requirements of this chapter. The Building Official may require that detailed plans and specifications be submitted with the application if necessary in his or her judgment. Following permit issuance and sign erection, the Building Official shall make a final inspection of the sign, and if it complies in every respect with the minimum standards set forth in this chapter, shall endorse on the permit his or her certificate of approval. Section 13. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the Official Newspaper of the City of Shorewood. -3- ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 23rd day of January 2006. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK -4- " CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: 'PlanningConlmission,Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 30 December 2005 RE: WilliamslHalcon - Setback Variance . FILE NO.: 405(05.33) BACKGROUND Scott Williams and Linda Halcon have requested a setback variance to build an addition to their home at 5955 Country Club Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). The property is zoned R-1A, Single-Family Residential and contains approximately 40,573 square feet of area. As shown on Exhibit B, the applicants ptopose to build a small (10' x 12'), single-story room addition at the back of their home. As explained in their request letter (Exhibit C), dated 5 December 2005, the subject property became nonconforming with the platting of Mary Lake Woods, a seven-lot subdivision located to the south of the subject property. The proposed addition would be built on an existing foundation that was constructed with the original home in the early 80's. The rear side of the home is illustrated in Exhibits D and E. Plans for the addition are shown on Exhibits F through 1. As illustrated on Exhibit B, the required setback cuts diagonally through the existing house and the proposed addition. ANAL YSIS/RECOMMENDATION . The applicants' case is well presented in their letter. Staff has researched the property file and found that the original building permit included the foundation at the rear of the n ~., PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER :/t8.t. . . . Memorandum Re: Williams/Ha1con Setback Variance 30 December 2005 house. Building plans for the home clearly show the future addition. At.the time the home was originally constructed, it was located somewhat back on the lot for two apparent reasons: 1) to establish some distance from a relatively busy street; and 2) to take advantage of a clearing in the otherwise wooded lot. It was only when Mary Lake Trail was platted a few years ago, that the subject home became nonconforming. ., .The proposed addition is consistent with the original plans for the home and will finish off the back side of tl1e house. It may be worth noting that the right-of-way for Mary. . Lake Trail is -wider (75 feet) than the standard 50-foot street. This was done because of . the relatively steep tapo.. gr. .aphyalo.n.gthenorthsideofthe Mary Lake Woods project. . Thi.s results insribstalltiallyrrioregreen space on the riorth side of Mary Lake Trail; even with the propo~ed addition. The elevation change, existing vegetation, and the . extraordinary right-of-way width mitigate any visual effect the addition may have on homes on the south side of Mary Lake Trail. Allowing the home to be finished as originally plaIllled and constructed allo_ws the applicants to luake reasonable use of their property. Their hardship is due to the construction of the new street, and not of their own doing. The proposed variance is considered to he the minimum necessary, considering the current extent of the existing foundation, and does not adversely effect neighboring properties. In light. of the preceding, the applicants' request is considered to satisfy the criteria for a variance. Since adequate landscaping exists on the property to soften the view of the proposed addition, no additional landscaping is suggested at this time. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Joe Pazandak Scott Williams and Linda Ha1con -2- ~~~..~\) ~,\~--oo;~l I ~~. '"'it- ~q ~ \Yl ~ -d \\ - __ .\ ~TJ:~ ~ ~ \-1--," ~~' 1\ L~,.J \\ -\ \ '~ I I -----" ;i\ ~ \ ~ f== ~ ( L-:-- ~ 'I); v/ .. ~ I ) ~~?JtlOl.3tltl\Vl ~ tiO ". Ii. ." \ .' ~, -lI ~. .' ~ -' .';t; 0\ \\~r l ~ 7 / \ ~\ \ }a'C / \ \ ~ ~ I \ LLl I \ I I ~ '~~ ., -1......-------- - 1 ~ aoOMB.ORt -lI -lI \i~ ~ \ .;y;.__-::lli{.t€"'......',.m!o!o!illlX,,-X<ll!J;o; ~ \ \ \ \ ~\ \ ~- ~, v \ l\ r-\ \ ~ \ L '\.. rl =\ d;.~') I--- _ Y': "do-. 'ij' , '-..., ;; 8~ 0. alii AllI.1.NnO:l tjT~ CI) CI) .~ Co .co ::I ... C/JCo I ..~~ atlll.B'1'i'A,n,O \ I \ \ I 1\ -- r! ow an,o AWJ.N!O~ i ;2: ....c: ~ - \ \ J ~\ v-f~'" I Tl \ ~ ,0 \ \ vT,.nl:l ~ \ -_ d \ ~ \\-- o '" N - i--- r-- --- - ~~~ U- I~ . Exhibit A SITE LOCATION WIlllams/Halcon variance 1I<2l-,<2lV = III 31V':J9 N\7'ld 31lS NW I c:loom~OHg 'c:I~ en1? )'~lNnO? '5'56'5 172: JO 2: 133HS %tz'll = 39\7'~3AO:J snOIA~3dWI J9@@@'@17 = \7'3~\7' 101d 1\7'101 J9L1~17 = '73~'7 snOIA~3dWI 1\7'101 '1.,\~A~\ .. TrJ;'I\ ~ J / '" ","'1 ",/ I '" I I ~-4-.). '" / -1:,l' /'" '" /"" ",'" /"" (/)O)~ '" / ,/ 1J\~/'" ~~o ",. '/ /......-4~ /"'''' ~......,~0 ",'" 4~ / ~~~ // -4''' *" ,. ,/ ,. . / / "," ~OI.L'V'CNno::l '>PQ1E1 / ,/ 3.L3<S:JNO:? 9N1.L9IX3 /" '" ( NO H~o.d N33<S:J9 m3N ,. < '" \ NOI.L'I11I19NIQ.. 1tE::lI~fil ~3AO 9'>!:J01E1 tE::lNI^'V'd-'3.L~:JNO:? II ~ J>lO Eln.L .LOH m3N .... .... ............... l / ..113ffi ~3.L'I1m C313CO!,..l~ .... .... "< .. s:JN1.L101X31 3E1 O.L 31Ol1OH 3~'I1tE::l "0~ ____ .::16 NOI.L'I1:J01 9N1.L9IX3 9N1.1.9IX3 i3', ........ .""" . =0 '11~'11 ....................... ~ - -aNl1 )oI:?'I19.L39 9N\Q11n9 '" / '" '" ,/ I I I I I I I I ijil ~I = I I '1 I I ~-.).-1 ~~(p I ~~ ~~6 I r:;() ':;;0'},.~ . ~...... )oI1'11m3C19 I 3.L~:?NO:::) . / 9)o1:J01E1 -'- ~~'"" 9NIA'I1d 3.L~:JNO:? ::10 901.L'I1d t 9)" 'I1m)ol1'11m I 39noH \ tE::lNI.1.9IX3 \ ,/ I a:l:lff\:19 )....a:l'V .l.\\,\'V9 '-.... ...l.1.1:?1~.1.:?313 I.. 9'11tE::l1~n.1.'I1N 1319'11:? NOI9IA:n3.L I .f J. "",,,^,,,,a """tl,",,"-IG 'ON" SIX; J /~, (~ 1'-\ ~/-bJJ JI ----------- - - - - - - - - - - -,,~ . . E ::j :c m r m -I ~ ~o - 0 li\2 lP-I -~ <P=-< mo mr ilIfj ....ilI <0 ()~ l>itJ tlI_ rli\ m:c c-l F~ =iE -<l> <P-< m ~ o m r Z m (p . z < ~....-:l .~~ aril ~E-c ~t;j . . . December 5, 2005 RECE\VED u\:.G 0 61005 C'1V Or SHORE-WOOD 1 -- Mr. Bradley J. Neilsen Planning Director City of Shorewood Shorewood City Hall 5775 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Sir. We are requesting consicieration forthe granting of a variance to complete an addition to ouf house at 5955 .' _Country Clu~ Road. _The addition is to be a ~creenedporch .arld is tel_be built 011. a.con~rete bl~ck foundation that was built as part of the original construction of the house. Photocopies'of the original constuction drawings- are included with the letter as sheets numbered 19-24. These drawings show a greenhouse was planned to be added over the foundation. The foundation is all that was built but a sliding glass patio door opens from our living room to the area surrounded by the foundation walls. The photos which accompany this letter show the top of the concrete block foundation walls and door to the living room. Note that we now use some concrete blocks as a step outside this door. The plans for the greenhouse were not executed by the original and subsequent owners of the house. When we purchased the house in the summer of 2003, we had immediate plans to build a wood deck over the foundation. When we contacted the city in this regard, we discovered that to build over the existing foundation would require a variance since that foundation and a portion of our house now were beyond the building setback. That building setback is 50' as required from the road, Mary Lake Trail, which runs along the south side of our property. The house and the foundation, of course, were. built before the platting and subsequent development of Mary Lake Trail and the construction of the homes along that road. At the timed construction and until the development of Mary Lake Trail our south property line was a side yard with a 10' setback. The new 50' setback leaves a portion of our house and the foundation of the greenhouse/screen porch about 14' over the new setback. The original design and construction of our house anticipated the completion of an enclosed room over the existing foundation. The advent of Mary Lake Trail and the changed setback that requires a variance to complete that design is not the result of any action on our part. We would like to enjoy and make safe the use of the asset that existing patio door could be for our living room. It is for these reasons that we trust you will grant us pennission to complete a room over the existing foundation. Construction plans for the screen porch as well as a site plan showing the building setbacks and location of the house and the existing foundation/screen porch are included with this letter. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments or require additional information. Sincerely. ~ Sco . r ms & Linda Halcon 5955 Country Club Road Shorewood 55331 952-470-4225 scottJinda79@msn.com Exhibit C APPLICANTS' RE~UEST LETTER Dated 5 December 2 5 ~t:d ~& >.... ~g: Mt) t"'4 M -< > 1-3 1-4 o Z I M ~ 1-4 V'J 1-3 1-4 Z C1 . NEW WINDOW OPENING5 TO !-lAve 3fi12"X8" !-lEADER ON 3fi12"XI&" CENTER POST 4 2fi12"XI&" JAMBS NEW INSULATING GLASS FixED WINDOW UNITS IN WOOD FRAME5 AT T!-IESE LOCATIONS EXI5TING "-tZ)" X 8'-tZ)" OVER!-IEAD DOOR TO BE REMOVED 4 OPENING MODIFIED FOR IN5TALLATION OF NEW 1&'-8" x 8'-tZ)1I I~~ULATING GLASS "10 DOOR UNIT 4 51DELITE5 AT ; LOCATION. ;:FL -EX I 6.I!NG TL-NEW FAM L .,.. PORTION TO eE REMODELED . . EXI5TING t-10U5E S D 51-1EET 11 of24 S'a&& COUNTRY cLUe RD. 5t-10RELUOOD, MN \UE5T ELEvATION SCALE ~"=I'-O" . . . Exhibit E EXISTING FOUNDATION ,,0-.1 =,,~ 31"1:J'3 NOIlV'A313 It;V'3 NW'C100m~OH'3 .~ an1:J ..l.C!:I.LNnO:J <:i<:iG<:i t'C: jO C:l 133Ht; -an.t lOH m3N :10 NOI1V'::::>01 >P3C1 C100m t:?N1.L9IX3 I I I , -.. I L.~ [][] C1313C10W3C!:I3a O.L NOI1C!:lOd 3'3nOH ~NI.L'3IX3 . . 911V'm NOI.LV'C1Nnc >P01-a 3.L3<!!I::::>NO ,,9 t::?N1191X3 NL H:::>C!:IOd N33<!!1:::>9 m3N . ~ ~ rfJ o ~ o ~ ~ Z o ~ ~ < ~ ~ O~ ]~ ......< ~~ 1I0-11=1I~ 31'V::::>'9 N011'VA313 Hl~ON NW 'aOOm~OH9 . ~ gn1:) J..c:::lJ.NnO:) t;;'5Gt;; 172: JO ~I l~ 9NOI1'11~1 393H11'11 11'11m ~1191Xa Nt ~INadO 1112'-,'; X IIS11hl m3N NI 9N;l~:::>9 H11m 9fTlOClNlm 1N3W39'11::> 99'111'D ~NI1'111n9NI m3N 11'1119NI ~ WOO~ J..1JH ~ 39nOH~119 X - ~::>3C ::IOO~ ~1191X3 NI 9~INadO maN NI 91H~I1J..')19 99'111~ C31 'I11n9NI 1112'-,Y XII~y-,1 maN ~'11~ NO 91nod9N1l0C C1N'I1 ~allro H::>l'11W 01 9:IA'I1a 393H1 I'll 91nod9N1lOC H11m ~allroNI~ 1'111a\.-.l gga1W'I139 m3N 11'1119N1 t 91nod9N1l0C t 9~311n'D NI~C ~N1191X3 :lAOW~ . ~IN3dO ~N1191xa NI N3~:J9 HJ.lm moCINlm ~IN1l'I1 99'111~ ~NJJ.'I11n9NI maN 11'11J.9NI t mOCINlm 'DN1191X3 3AOW~ "'::;l3C coom ~1J.91: 911'11m NOI.1.'I1CNrI< ",::;l01e 31~:JN<: liS ~1J.9IX3 t H~Od Na~:J9 m: H:J~Od N3~::>9 m3N ::10 ::IOO~ I'll 3~'I1'D::IO 931~IH9 H:J1'11W OJ. 931~1H9 maN 11'1119NI 9'11~'11 C3H:Jl'l1H I'll 3~'I1'D ::10 931~1H9 H:J1'11W 01 9a1~IH9 m3N 11'1119NI CN'It 9a1~IH9 11'11Hd9'l1 ~1191X3 3AOW~ . . ~ ~ rJJ. o ~ o ~ ~ Z o ~ ~ < :;> ~ ~ ::c~ +-'= ......~ :-9~ ~O ~Z 1I0-,1=1I~ 31'l1-:JS N011'VA313 Hln09 NW 'dOOm~OH9 . ~ canl':) ..l~lNnO':) <;<;1;<; 17Z; JO 171 133H9 911'<tm NOIJ..'V'QNI1Od :>/:::101g 3J..~:::lNO:::l ,,9 ~1J..9IX:l NO H~Od N3~:::l9 m3N . ..-- --- .,,00 0 0 '" ~ D OJ 39nOH lDNIl91X3 . . ~ ~ . rJJ o ~ o ~ ~ z o ~ E-! < ~ ~ ~ ~ ::= :.BE-! ......p ~O ~rJJ CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A SETBACK VARIANCE FOR SCOTT WILLIAMS AND LINDA HALCON WHEREAS, Scott Williams and Linda Ha1con (Applicants) are the owners of real property located at 5955 Country Club Road, City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have applied for a variance to construct an addition at the rear of their existing home; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was reviewed by the City Planner, whose recommendations are included in a memorandum, dated 30 December 2005, a copy of which is on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, after required notice a public hearing was held and the application reviewed by the Planning Commission at a regular meeting held on 3 January 2006, the minutes of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the application at its regular meeting on 23 January 2006, at which time the Planner's memorandum and the Planning Commission's recommendations were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the Applicants and from the City staff; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicants' property is located in an R-IA, Single-Family Residential zoning district, which requires a 50-foot setback from any public right-of-way. 2. The property contains 40,573 square feet of area and is occupied by the Applicants' existing home and a detached garage. 3. The subject property is bounded on its west side by Country Club Road and on the south side by Mary Lake Trail, a street that was platted after the home on the subject property was constructed. 4. The platting of Mary Lake Trail resulted in the home on the subject property becoming nonconforming with the required 50-foot setback for the side yard abutting the street. 5. The original building permit for the subject property included a foundation for a room addition at the rear of the house, which foundation extends into the new setback area adjoining Mary Lake Trail by approximately 12 feet. 6. Due to topographic conditions on the south side of the subject property, the right-of-way for Mary Lake Trail is 75 feet wide, whereas only 50 feet is required. Within that right-of-way the paved surface is offset to the south, resulting in a wider than normal boulevard abutting the subject property. CONCLUSIONS a. The Applicants have satisfied the criteria for the grant of a variance under the Shorewood City Code and have established an undue hardship as defined by Minnesota Statutes. b. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants to the Applicants a setback variance to construct a single-story room addition thirty-eight feet from the south boundary of the property. c. The City Administrator/Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a certified copy of this resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 23rd day of January 2006. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK -2- CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Platming Commission FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 30 December 2005 . RE: McDonald/Countryman - Minor Subdivision/Combination FILE NO. 405(05.34) Mike McDonald and Thomas Countryman own the properties at 4695 and 4725 Lagoon Drive, respectively (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). They have requested a minor subdivision and combination as shown on Exhibit B. The properties in question are located in the R-IC/S, Single-Family ResidentiaVShoreland zoning district. The proposed division/combination cleans up these rather irregular parcels, and approval is recommended. The resolution approving the request should stipulate that the division/combination must be recorded within 30 days of Council approval. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Mike McDonald . ... '...1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #8.D. laa::l' I ooo'~ om; osz 0 y 'I' N 'I' 'I' e)tUOl8UU!V\I 8)tel ~ ~ 'I' ~, i 'I' j ~ ~ 'I'~ ,~ ~: ~ ~ M 'I' :t 'I' 'I' 'I' 'I' :,',- i ". 'I' J ~ ~, ! '" 'I'~ ~ :t ~ ~ 'I'i ~ 'I'~ ... ~' ~~ :!;.; ~ ~ Q) ~"E I" ~ 'cu ..~ i~ ~~ it; i& --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- /--~ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / "IONS: . (... , " ;.354."" "'" \oj " , sion No. 354, described as fa!law~: sterly carner 01. said Sian of southerly easterly s northerly to the INS : -.- S if :5 sf 5 sq. ft. = 13.7770 550 sf 4-81 sf = 340 sf ,rder = 283 sf ~rop '" 250 sf les = .6.1 sf = 73 sf . lrivewoy '" 37 sf age '" 87 sf 10 sq. ft. '" 16.7470 -dcover location, 01 hardcover is IW cover. . I ~ o , 1 9 --,-- --- , -- , -- , , PROPOSED LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT AND CERTIFICA TE OF SURVEY FOR MICHAEL P. McDONALD ANDTHOMAS C. COUNTRYMAN IN LOTS 5,7,8 & 9, AUD. SUB. NO. 354 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA t Noft~ , r' ::4-0 929.4 CONTOUR UNE-..__.. -- -.tr" --.;:- -;;37 ."!J2. ----;" \ ..-- ~ ,~ _--- 'l:t:I' -.--;ii \0" t:. .....',.SURVEY ~__~ 11 LINE .,./ \\ :!>.,./ \ :.~;-J/ ~G d.;;lr"" '" "" - ,.." ,." ", ~o\ LOT I ~ . \ 11.....,./ ;..\ "f;)/Io.,./ 0",\ f;)~/ %\ ~./ I n' ::: \ / ~ '-.1 _ \ .,./ \ .,./ \ / /\ r ;;. \ W'LY LN / It Y"'" LOT 7 ~\ / ~/ il I 4J ~7 .'1:1-7;"/ ~ ~/ /4.-_..SURVEY , .~INE U' v'..>, ~"- /,...., \.I. .... \oj )- 't,., I (' A' '- h GoJ~tMv\ ~~i~, M ._ 5.14' 37"l?OV~("'" ~_75.50 , \ \ .\ v'..>, .(\ \. ~ ~ Ir.' \. 't,., .f-' \ 4- ()\ /.0- " "-. .-0\ c''''''\' .,,0' ). ..' . \ ~ ....) /\. n\. ~ - " 19..\ " .~ 1~ \. \ \. \. 146.42 - ~ i I - ---7.... ........--cSf".. -..-" ...... .,....'~ I .,...... ""I- III" '\ :V ,~f::J ~ J' .r!; .::; "co :/#/ ~ ..:;i t<\c.. {)oNl.IJ I ~~". /' ~q rot,) .#'...~ ~. J"C'.... /.... :? '// / / . /// ...... /' :,...A.6r)~"''''''' ..........::............. i.."- .~ ......... 13:61'~ ~~ ", ,.,~,o ", ~ ~~oS' " "f oS',,~1'e- " 7., '"fJli.r 011._ '''''0 XCEPT . c'~~O "',00 JUows: Beginning at the Southwest comer of said Lot 7; ~ae,. " I 89 degrees 17 minutes 40 seconds East along the southerly "I , ' ) feet; thence North 83 degrees 01 minutes 15 seconds West to oS' Ct.. '" 7 distant 16.93 feet northerly from said point of beginning; ....,~_ l to the point of be.ginning. ALSO that port of Lot g described os -~. :orner of said Lot 7; thence northerly along the extension of the ~" herly shoreline of the lagoon in Lot 9; thence easterly and southerly \ \.. --- s of aforesaid Lot 7; thence westerly to the point of beginning. L......' < "'"Sf 19. ........ ..,,------. 929.4 CONTOUR LJIIE............- LOT 4. LAGOON o <cept /' .../' ... ./" .... /... .g/ / /' .,.,/"'/ LSO that part of. Lot 5. said to the southeasterly line of said ;horeline of the 10900n. and between , and southwesterly lines of said Lot 8. xcept the northeasterly 20 feet thereof, and also except that port of said Lot 5 Jt 8. said Auditor's Subdivision No. 354, lying n~rtherly of. the northerly shoreline y extensions. of the easterly and southwesterly Imes of said, Lot 8. s Subdivision No. 354, described os follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of said ,f South 89 degrees 17 minutes 40 seconds East along the southerly line of said Lot 7 .th 83 degrees 01 minutes 15 seconds West to 0 point in the westerly line of said Lot 7 point of beginning; thence southerly oIong said westerly line to the point of beginning. .,./ 1: ~9 .,./ ,,0 .,./ /.("~ /f;)Q EXlSl1'lG COUNTRYMAN LOT AREA - 58,550 SQ. i!.'o =" /' $" g -------.2E.~35"-L__~.E.. t:::6Urm'1 WVA .,./ c:, -';'" ---- --. /. '\~ ---':.:..-..... ......, ~'-= ~...,SURVEY u ~ LINE .AU. . t:I ;:g C Z~::l Z_i5:'" <( ..u OJ...j . In ... oi'~_ 1,;1 ... a...J;!: IX I- ~g>" I.LI <(joSs - "I ED t:I1~ ~ Z 0-:;0 ell fa OaU~ IX OJ]'z l!I <(~; CJ I- U W ""'") o 0::: D- ~~~~ !Ii! IiI! ~!iill gb~ >-l!i~~ ~!l)oi )ol;a; I:s'" ~u i~i~ ! I~ I '" LAKE Exhibit B PROPOSED Di ViSiON/COMBINATION {A CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBDIVISION AND COMBINATION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR MICHAEL McDONALD AND THOMAS COUNTRYMAN WHEREAS, Michael McDonald and Thomas Countryman (Applicants) are the owners of certain real properties in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have applied to the City for a subdivision and combination of said real properties into two parcels legally described in Exhibit B, and as illustrated in Exhibit C, both attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the subdivision and combination requested by the Applicants complies with the Shorewood Zoning Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the real property legally described in Exhibit A be divided into two parcels, legally described in Exhibit B and illustrated in Exhibit C, both attached hereto and made a part hereof.. 2. That the City Clerk furnish the Applicants with a certified copy of this resolution for recording purposes. 3. That the Applicants record this resolution attached, with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within thirty (30) days of the date of the certification ofthis resolution. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 23rd day of January 2006. Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk =IF [5 D Existin2: Le2:al Description - McDonald Parcels (insert legal) Existin2: Le2:al Description - Countryman Parcel (insert legal) Exhibit A Proposed Le2al Description - McDonald Parcels (insert legal) Proposed Le2al Description - Countryman Parcel (insert legal) Exhibit B t CITY OF SHOREWOOD . 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 30 September 2005 RE: Danser, George - Minor Subdivision . FILE NO.: 405 (05.24) BACKGROUND Mr. George Danser, on behalf of his mother - Pamela Danser, proposes to subdivide the property located at 5840 Christmas Lake Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). Exhibit B illustrates the subdivision. The subject property is located in the R-1A/S, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland zoning district and contains 173,800 square feet of area (approximately four acres). The property is occupied by two single-family dwellings - the main house and a guest house. The site is occupied by a fairly large wetland area, from which the land rises to the south and to the west. As proposed the subdivision would result in one lot (with the house on it) containing 40,010 square feet of area, and a vacant lot with 133,790 square feet, approximately half of which is occupied by the wetland area. The property is subject to a private driveway easement that provides access to the home to the southwest. The owner also owns two small parcels on the other side of the street, abutting Christmas Lake. The request includes legally combining those parcels with the two new lots. ANAL YSIS/RECOMMENDATION . The R-IA/S zoning district requires lots to be at least 40,000 square feet in area, 120 feet wide at the building line, and at least 120 feet deep. Both lots will comply with the setbacks of the ~ '..1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER =#-8 E. . . . Memorandum Re: Danser Minor Subdivision 30 September 2005 R-IA1S district. Despite the existing wetland, the new lot has ample buildable area at the west end of the property. To minimize altering the wetland area to accommodate a driveway for the new property, the new lot will share a common driveway with the existing home. The new driveway will extend over to the south side of the property where it will extend west to the buildable portion of the property. There are several issues that need to be addressed in this request: 1. Christmas Lake Road is substandard in width (33 feet vs 50 feet required). Any approval ofthedivisionlcombination should require dedication of an additional 17 feet ofright-of- way. The applicant's sUrveyor should provide a legal description for the r.o.w. and his attorney should incorporate the description into a deed to the City. 2. The r.o.w. referenced above will necessitate moving the rear lot line of Parcel B 17 feet, in order to maintain 40,000 square feet of area. 3. The applicant's surveyor should provide legal descriptions for the wetland area and the required 35-footbuffer area. The applicant's attorney should incorporate the legal descriptions into drainage and conservation easement deeds to the City. The buffer must be staked with wetland monuments. Proposed staking should be shown on the survey. 4. The applicant's surveyor should provide legal descriptions for the drainage and utility easements (10 feet around each of the lots). From these descriptions the applicant's attorney should prepare easement deeds to the City. 5. The driveway easement across Parcel B, in favor of Parcel A, is incomplete and too narrow. Due to the distance from the street to the buildable portion of Parcel A, a fire access road is required, pursuant to the State Fire Code. This requires a 20-foot wide paved surface. Allowing a very minimal five feet on each side of the driveway for snow storage, the easement should be 30 feet wide. The applicant's attorney should also provide an easement and maintenance agreement for the shared portion ofthe driveway. 6. The applicant must submit a grading plan for the new driveway. While it is assumed that . the amount of fill necessary to accommodate the driveway will be minimal, it will require review and approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 7. The two parcels on the east side of the road should be split more evenly, in order to provide adequate room for a dock on Parcel C. It should be made large enough so that a dock can be located in front of Parcel A. The combination of Parcels C and D with Parcels A and B, respectively, is subjectto approval by Hennepin County. 8. It may be necessary for the applicant to obtain consent for the conservation easement that coincides with the existing driveway easement from the adjoining property owner. This issue has been referred to the City Attorney for his recommendation. -2- ...} . . . Memorandum Re: Danser Minor Subdivision 30 September 2005 9. The existing nonconforming guest house must be relocated (or removed) on the site and converted to accessory space. It should be noted that items 2. and 5., above, will necessitate a slightly different location for the structure. If this will not be resolved prior to recording a resolution for the division/combination, a letter of credit or cash escrow for one and one-halftimes the amountofthe work must be provided by the applicant. The applicant must provide bids for this work in order to determine the amount of the letter of credit. 10. The proposed subdivision does not require the removal of any trees. Any tree removal necessary for the construction of a house on the new lot can be addressed with the building permit for that lot. 11. The applicant must provide an up-to-date (within 30 days) title opinion or title commitment for review by the City Attorney. 12. Prior to release of the resolution approving the subdivision, the applicant must pay a park dedication fee ($2000), and a local sanitary sewer connection charge ($1200) for the new lot. Credit is given for the lot with the existing home on it. 13. Once the applicant has received the Council resolution approving the subdivision, he .ffiust record it with Hennepin County within 30 days or the approval is void. Often times it is recommended that a division/combination be approved subject to the attached conditions. In this instance, there are enough issues to be resolved that it is suggested that the application be continued, pending completion of the required items. Cc: Craig Dawson Larry Brown Tim Keane George Danser -3- allel sewJsPlI:l laa~' OOO'~ 009 09l I o y N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ V I 0 I / I -,---- ;- / I I /././ / / /1 / / , I I I I I I I ( I I I \ /y \ . " \ I \ l ~\\ ~ I: \ I \ \ I I 0 C! L() N W Co , r'" en M 0 ...... 0 Z I I I I I I I I I I EXlSTI I SHED I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 05-282 ! 50 ~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 160; The South 40 feet of Lot 164; That port of Lot 186 lying northerly of Registered Land Survey No, 471: All in Audilor' s Subdivision No. 120, Hennepin County, Minnesoto. PROPOSED MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR GEORGE DANSER & PAMELA DANSER IN LOTS 160, 164 & 186, AUD. SUB. NO. 120 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 35.8 " \ I I \ \ \ ) ,,~ .- ~+-S.F. ~n , "~ , d\ ( .~~. ~ --- '\ , , ~ ./ .95 EAS~ - r--- /" / '" '" ,- ~c !AN ![wtW /' :::r- / / ---- / / / / (' \ , \ L \ , \ \ \ \ I ~\ /. I \ ... () tl 133790+-~:- I I I \ PROPOSED DMDING. -- \ LINE " .. / f ~.// ... k I "'-.. ./ ( . """~ I ././ K'~- --+./ I _ ~~ '-./ \ " / .......;---, '- '~ , ,~. . ~,~. ','...... ~, ..J'j" " " ........___ , /i:~ ~ ~~ , ' ~ l ..:..__ ~--~~ ~;::-...... " :::"..:-~ ~ ~ ~I -; -r .' \ \ I \ ) '- '''4.tIA~ A I ,-, ( tj "i- I I '...- ,\ I,'; _I. , "I....~ . I I ( I \ \ \ I \ " ./ -_./~~ OPOSED ~./ q=x - .x 589029'50. W 681.64 " / ~ ............. ' X ~;..,.....~....cr-X7x ^J ~ U W o EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING HOUSE OWNERS PROPERTY ADDRESS 5840 CHRISTMAS LAKE ROAD SHOREWOOD MN (LOT 160 AND THE SOUTH 40 FEET OF LOT 164, AUD. SUB. NO. 120) PAMELA DANSER 250 S. ESTES OR # 114 CHAPEL HILL N C 27514 PROPERTY ADDRESS UNASSIGNED (THAT PART OF LOT 186, AUD SUB. NO. 120 LYING NORTH OF RLS NO. 471) GEORGE DANSER & JEAN ~ARY 2023 W CLUB BLVD DURHAM, NC 27705 C!lw ~C!l ~i PROPOSED NEWDESCRtPTIONS PARCEL A (TO BE COMBINED WITH PARCEL C) Lot 160, Auditor's Subdivision No. 120, EXCEPT the South 136.82 feet of lhe Eost 292.50 feel of said Lot 160. ALSO, lhe Soulh 40 feet of Lot 164, Auditor's Subdivision No. 120 PARCEL B (TO BE COMBINED WITH PARCEL D) The South 136.82 feet of the East 292.50 feet of Lot 160, Audilor' s Subdivision No. 120. ALSO. that port of Lot 186 lying northerly of Re<;listered Lond Survey No. 471, Auditor's Subdivision No. 120. l/) D::<D1l) .WIt)~ OZl') Zit) Z j It) l') -a..Z.... ~O:ii:.,. U) Z N W j W~:g .... - ~ .. <~.J~ - 0 (!) u.. Oi::iz O~O U):l.J U)l/)W'" .....0>", '"' Z - ... oaj~:t (!) gf ~ !t O:::W...I~ W...ICl'l W~:;:.. r:a(!):o.W Zffi .Z zO o :! !.2 :J: c::: ~ ~ 11. (!) . hm~ ~Ii!~ ~ ilil;i h~~ bldl!l il_?io~ Hh ~U~ ~~~! iht mn~b ~ ~u~1 0 z ~ ~ Q 0( U III ~ it' l5 (/Jill zl€ O~ Ui~ 5> 0::: Exhibit B PROPOSED DIVISION CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 26 October 2005 RE: Danser, George - Minor Subdivision Update FILE NO.: 405 (05.24) . George Danser's request to subdivide his mother's property was continued from the October Planning Commission meeting to 1 November 2005, pending Mr. Danser resolving numerous issues raised by staff. As of this writing, the applicant has not submitted revised plans or responded in any way. To complicate matters, the property owner to the south has disputed the common property boundary between his and the Danser property. In a letter (Exhibit A), dated 7 October, the neighbor provides information indicating that the property line may be 12 feet further to the north than that shown by the Dansers' surveyor. This simply adds to the list of items that must be resolved by the applicant. It is worth noting that if the line must be adjusted, the southerly lot on the Danser property can still be made to comply with zoning requirements. It would, however require the rear lot line to be moved further to the west in order to maintain 40,000 square feet of area. This was necessary anyway, due to the requirement of additional road right-of-way for Christmas Lake Road. There are procedures for settling property line disputes, starting with the applicant's surveyor talking to the neighbor's surveyor. If the surveyor's can not come to terms relative to the boundary, there are court proceedings established to resolve the discrepancy. It is recommended that this application be continued for one additional month. . Cc: Craig Dawson Larry Brown Tim Keane George Danser #. t.J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER . . . October 7, 2005 City of Shorewood Planning Commission Re: 5840 Christmas Lake Road To whom it may concern: I am writing this letter to protest the land survey at 5840 Christmas Lake Road in Shorewood, MN. This property is owned by Pamela Danser, and on her behalf her son George Danser who is assisting in the subdivision. I have no problem with the Danser's subdividing their property, but I do have a issue that their new surveyline.is approximately 12 feet to the south of the agreed upon survey by Mrs. Danser and the previous owner of my home at 5890 Christmas Lake Road. I have also enclosed an invoice from Sterling Fence Inc. stating that the chain link fence was moved to meet my property boundaries in 1996 by our previous owner. I understand that Shorewood is known for unclear property boundaries in our area for various reasons, but this is a drastic difference. I would ask that the planning commission review this as it will not only affect my property but the whole street of Christmas Lake Road. My wife and I have bought and sold numerous properties and have never experienced anything of this magnitude. I have also consulted our attorney's and they find this to be very strange and that the surveyor must have missed a key monument point for reference. I would also like for the record that I witnessed the surveyor sink his new post and I was amazed that he was using a tape measure at an angle thru the trees. I am not a surveyor so I will not draw conclusions, but it sure looked strange to me. I would ask that you delay this subdivision until appropriate boundaries are corrected. For the record I am taking my survey as final as Mrs. Danser and the previous owner agreed to this new survey. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you would like to discuss in more detail. I have also enclosed a copy of our survey at 5890 Christmas Lake Road and Mrs. Dansers survey of 1992 and a letter from Mrs. Danser agreeing to the Advance survey. I am sure you have all ofthese surveys but wanted to be complete. I can be reached at 952-984- 3189 if you have any questions. fC:l;-g~ Paul T. Huso 5890 Christmas Lake Road Shorewood, MN 55331 H:::t. BRADLEY NIELSEN SHO~~dOOD CITY HALL 5840 CHRISTJ1AS LAKE ~OAD SHO~g!IOOD, MN. 55~.___ NOVE!,~B C~ 16, 1995:! ~ :r"':~:~'?:::..- . '...i/ '-." ':-:7 :~. , \\< '.;; ';-I'''''.\,'~ . ....1 I /j i:i !'.';.t-j.~~ /1 /. . it.., , . !:~L:::::-_:. .:;: '. "::-~~'':':'':-:::''''''--',:- o. '. DEA~ MR. NIELSEN: THE FENCELINE DETERMINED BY DRAwING A LINE DIRECTLX BE'fw'EEN 'PHE LINES DE':r:c;aHINED BY LOTS SUrlVEY3 (/iY SU~VEYOR) AND ADVANCE SURVEY (FREI'10NTGRUSS') IS AGREEABLE TO fiLE. ADVANCE DREVi UP THE LINE AND IN OCTOBER 1qq~ SET POINTS AND STAKES TO ASSIST FREMONT GRUSS IN MOVING HIS d FOOT CfCLONE FENCE FROM MY PROPERTf . ~q. GRUSS AND I HAD AGREED VERBALLLY ON THIS LINE. . YOURS SINCER~LY, ,;:: f ~\. -'I ' ",,'L~ '/1.. .':.. , .' ,..:\_ L. " PAf-1ELA 'JANSER . " /" 0$11 \-1 uo J Q~5"~ 11117 !, Oh 85 avo CJ 3~Vl S'v'V\JlS I~HJ '"'0'1, &~r1>~~-^- -- . 3~..t}E.1t&..- oO'S _.-oo.,~~ .-.. _n9"S(,~ .-- ,... , I I I I OtIJ uJ ~~ :J~ co:;) ~(/) lilt- Wo wJ Z,... :::iff) ....- ( .- . , ...~... """ - - 1~. w :x: r o t- -' llJ- ..J -' <! ct' <:( 0- o Z <( u. or- Ft- !XO oJ ZI- t-" w> Wo LL" :R~ g~ ~:i w:t: Zr -:l ..Jo o(Ul \ \ ,~ l~, '\... ~~.. 01Or- ",.0 00 G)'tf'\ I' xl (: \ o o o ~ ~~ :iffi -U/ u. ;~~-~~ 'i."oU uJ c..I % ~ x \ i .I.! ~ . I I I -- Zi'J.'l' . - u_ U '9,,~ .-- ; ~ (3 '3..lE.S~oJ 'N s~ . 07..~ 'ON 'sns 'anv(l9~ ~~J .1.:1 ~~~ 1.S3N\ 3H.!.:tO 3Nn .LSV3"/ \ ~ \ L II . ~~, \ o tJ \'"" \ \. 0:: r!' ..... - ,. MEMORANDUM CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us DATE: January 18, 2006 TO: FROM: RE: Appointments of Representatives to the Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) Board, the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission (LMCC), and the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) are typically done in January. The City has advertised these volunteer board opportunities to residents, and Council interviewed the following candidates: MCE: LMCC: LMCD: LMCD: Tad Shaw, 5580 Shore Road Patrick Hodapp, 26195 Shorewood Oaks Drive Jeff Ramsey, 26870 Marsh Pointe Circle Tom Skramstad, 28020 Woodside Road " Council may consider adopting the Resolutions appointing a representative to each of the Boards. Draft resolutions are attached. Council Action A motion to adopt the following Resolutions: A) A Resolution making an appointment to the Minnetonka Community Education Board B) A Resolution making an appointment to the Lake Minnetonka Communications / . . Commission; and . C) A Resolution making an appointment to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District #91} n t~ PRINTED qN RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION MAKING AN APPOINTMENT TO THE MINNETONKA COMMUNITY EDUCATION (MCE) ADVISORY COUNCIL WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood annually appoints a Shorewood resident to serve as City Representative on the MCE Advisory Council; and WHEREAS, the City advertised this volunteer board opportunity for appointment to said Advisory Council; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shorewood hereby appoints as City Representative on the Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) Advisory Council for the year 2006. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 23rd day of January, 2006. Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION MAKING AN APPOINTMENT TO THE LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (LMCC) WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood annually appoints a Shorewood resident to serve as City Representative on the LMCC Board; and WHEREAS, the City advertised this volunteer board opportunity for appointment to said Board; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shorewood hereby appoints as City Representative to the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission (LMCC) Board for the year 2006. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 23rd day of January 2006. Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION MAKING AN APPOINTMENT TO THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood appoints a resident to represent the City on the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District; and WHEREAS, the City advertised this volunteer board opportunity for appointment to said Board; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood to hereby appoint to represent the City of Shorewood on the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District effective February 1, 2006 through January 31, 2007. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 23rd day of January, 2006. Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 . (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 19 January 2006 RE: Hofius, Peter - Appeal Notice to Remove FILE NO.: Property (6080 Chaska Road) . In response to a neighborhood complaint, our office sent a "Notice to Remove" to Mr. Peter Hofius at the above-referenced address (see Exhibit A, attached). Mr. Hofius has now appealed for additional time to correct the violations (see Exhibit B). In his letter he indicates his intentions to comply with City codes, but requests 30 additional days to address most of the items. His letter also requests until Spring to remove an old fence and some brush because they are frozen into the ground. Since the Council routinely grants an extension of 30 additional days for compliance, provided the property owner is making a good faith effort to comply with the Code, staff will reinspect the property prior to Monday night's meeting to check on progress. Assuming the owner is making progress as of Monday, staff recommends that the 30 additional days be granted and the deadline to remove the fence and brush be no later than 15 April 2006. Cc: Craig Dawson Joe pazandak Peter Hofius . ,. t , PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .... # 9.B. CITY OF SHOREWOOD . 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 Phone: (952) 474-3236 . FAX: (952) 474-0128 . Email: planning@cLshorewood.mn.us PLANNING AND PROTECTIVE INSPECTIONS DATE: 12 January 2006 TO: Peter E. Rofius 6080 Chaska Road Shorewood, MN 55331 PROPERTY LOCATION: 6080 Chaska Road PROPERTY IDENTIFIcATiON NO.: 34-117-23-43-0003 NOTICE TO REMOVE Public Nuisances NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there exists a condition on the above referenced property which is in.violation9fChapter501, Section 501.05, Subd. 9 of the Shorewood City Code, a .copy of which Section is enclosed. The nuisance to be removed from the property includes, but is not limited to.the following: . UNLICENSED AND/OR INOPERABLE VEmCLES OR EQUIPMENT: . Utility Trailer, Lic. No. Y3920 - expired; parked in side yard setback . Utility Trailer, License damaged; parked in side yard setback . Utility Trailer, No license . Boat Trailer, No license OTHER: . Dilapidated wire/picket fence; tires; wheel rim; brush; dilapidated ice house; , fence parts; barrels; vehicle axle; gutter parts; aluminum frames; metal bars/angles;cement blocks; gas tanks; cardboard; woodllumber; radiator; vehicle . . ..' . parts; similar miscellaneous. You are hereby required to remove the above-described matter and any other nuisance matter located on the property and in violation of Chapter 501,.Section50L05 within ten (10) days from the date hereof. In the alternative, you may file a written notice of appeal at the Shorewood City RaIl within ten (10) days, in which case your appeal will be set for hearing at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. . If you do not respond tothis Notice within ten (10) days, the City shall take whatever legal action as may be necessary to have the offensive matter removed. The costs incurred by the City for such removal shall be charged to the property owner and become a lien against the property. *** PLEASE GIVE THIS MATTER YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION *** BY ORDER OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL Exhibit A A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore . . . To: Brad Nielson Planning Director, City of Shorewood RECE'\JED J~N 1 8 2006 C'1V Of SHOREWOQO 17 January 2006 Regarding the Notice to Remove dated 12 January 2006 that I received I would like to request an extension on the 10 days to 30 days due to the snow and weather conditions making it difficult to work in the yard. I would also like to request an extension till spring! ground thawed on the removal of the wire fence and part of the brush. They are frozen into the ground making it almost iin.possible to rem.ove at this time. Thank you, Peter Hofius 6080 Chaska Road Shorewood, MN .,. """'s;t': --;;.", //.-...", "~'-,. w...." '.'/" , .1.""'--'/" ........<.~. ,,' c:,.(._.:,~~. .. 1: ( ./ -,,-7 /., .. /;c.~:':6.' '" ,...' t::-,,.,,, ,.. );0.'; //. Exhibit B CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us. cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council . FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 23 January 2006 RE: Tax Forfeited Land FILE NO. 405 (Land Conservation Open Space) . In 1994 the City adopted a resolution advising Hennepin County that two parcels of land, located on the south side of Smithtown Road - just north of what has recently been approved as Lake Virginia Woods, were of interest to the City for drainage and wetland conservation purposes. As you may be aware, the State gets first shot at such parcels, then the County, then the city, then the public. Since the two parcels, shown on Exhibit A, attached are wetland parcels, the Department of Natural Resources exercised its right to the parcels. Things have since changed and the City once again has an opportunity to gain control of the land. City controlof these wetland parcels is consistent with the Conservation Open Space Plan that was adopted in March of 2003. Since time is somewhat of the essence, staff has redrafted City Council Resolution 94-95 for readoption by the City Council (see Exhibit B), and will request an amendment to tonight's agenda to include this item.. I apologize fordoing this on short notice, but hopefully, bye-mailing the material to you in advance oftonighfs meeting, you will have an opportunity to review it prior to the meeting. If you have any questions relative to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me bye-mail or telephone. Thank you. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane ... \,~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. APPLICATION FOR CONVEYANCE OF TAX-FORFEITED LANDS FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES WHEREAS, properties located within the City of Shorewood bearing PID No. 31 - 117-2343-0001 amd PID No. 31 - 117-23-43-0004 are currently on the Hennepin County Property Tax Forfeited Land list; and WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood does find that there is a public need to use the properties bearing PID No. 31 - 117-23-43-0001 and PID No. 31 - 117-23-43-0004 for drainage and wetland conservation purposes, and such need requires that the property be transferred to the City of Shorewood to be used as and for such public purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners is requested to remove from the tax-forfeited land sale list, land bearing PID No. 31- 117-23-43-0001 and PID No. 31 - 117-23-43-0004, being parcels of approximately 8.9 acres and 3.4 acres, respectively, located within the borders of the City of Shorewood and described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City of Shorewood proposes to use the property for a public purpose, to wit: drainage and conservation purposes. 3. That a certified copy of this Resolution be transmitted forthwith to the Hennepin County Commissioners. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 23rd day of January, 2006. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK . . LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: P.I.N. 31-117-23-43-0001: "That part of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 31 Township 117 Range 23 described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the east line of said southwest quarter ofthe southeast quarter and the north line of the south 789.36 feet of said southwest of the southeast quarter thence west along said north line to the center line of Smithtown Road thence northerly and northeasterly along said center line to its intersection with the westerly extension of the south line of Lot 5, Auditor's Subdivision No. 247, Hennepin County, Minnesota thence easterly along said extension and along the south line of Lot 5 to the southeast comer of said Lot 5 thence south along the east line of said southwest quarter of the southeast quarter to the point of beginning, subject to road," P.I.N. 31-117-23-43-0004: "Lot 5, Auditor's Subdivision No. 247, Hennepin County, Minnesota. " Exhibit A HCPropertyMap . . Page 1 of2 Hennepin County Property Map '\ - - - -, -, - - . .' . - - ~ Itli, I!C SIlI!II ... a Print QjY~_Id$YQJ,JLf~~cJpc:l( Jj~nn?pjnCQqnty$lJ oct> I -.. The data contained on this page are derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can onl licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. Th purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and Is not responsible for any ml: derivatives. Please report any map discrepancies to the Hennepin County Survey Division via e-mail ats.\JJY~YQI,M9R$@<:;:Q,heno~pjJ The quality of the display may be influenced by your screen size and resolution setting and is best viewed at 1024x768 or highel Explorer 3.02 or Netscape 2.01 or later version for proper operation. Hom~ I Your CQ~nt~ Government I Licenses, C~rtifl~Ek~~istration Employr I F_n_0rQIJD:1~I1j:,.EfQQ~rtY,...~..Ir9.IJ.::iP9.r.t9.tJ.Qn Exhibit B http://www13.co.hennepin.mn.us/pub licparcelimage/hcpropertymap. asp},. CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years. 195(3 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: January 19, 2006 RE: Set Date for Public Information Meeting SE Area - Amesbury Water Connection / WSB and Associates is n~aring completion of the plans for the watermain to be installed along St. Albans Bay Road, Manor Road, and a.long portions of Suburban Drive. Council may recall that this segment is to serve as an interconnection between the SE Area Water System and the Amesbury Water System. In addition, this utility is to serv~ the new subdivision of Park view Crossings. Attachment 1 is a site location map for the proposed utility. During consideration of this itel11,the City Council directed that all of the homes along Suburban Drive be surveyed to determine the feasibility of the extension of water along the entire length of Suburban Drive. Recommendation Staff-is recommending that February 9t\ 2006 be set as the date of the public information meeting. The time of the meeting is suggested at 6:30 p.m. ,. " . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ... #/0/1 . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: January 19, 2006 RE: Discussion of County Road 19 Costs This item will be/delivered under separate cover. #loB ,. f: . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ... CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNE~OTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cltyhall@cl.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: City Council Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator 0t DATE: January 19,2006 FROM: SUBJECT: Executive Session - Consideration of Strategy re: SLMPD Arbitration The City Attorney will meet with the City Council to consider strategies related to the arbitration of funding allocation to the member cities of the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department. Attached is the Pre-Hearing Order of the arbitration. It covers the schedule and documents to be submitted for the process. #- /cl {) PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * In the Matter of The Arbitration of the Allocation of Operating Costs of Providing Police Services to the Member Cities of the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department PRE-HEARING ORDER * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, the cities of Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood, and Tonka Bay (collectively referred to as "the Member Cities") approved a Revised Binding Arbitration Proposal dated December 5, 2005; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Revised Binding Arbitration Proposal, the Member Cities have selected the undersigned to act as the Arbitration Panel; and WHEREAS, the Arbitration Panel met with the city attorneys for the Member Cities via telephone conference call on January 12,2006 to discuss various scheduling and protocol issues related to the conduct of the arbitration proceeding. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The hearing in this matter shall commence at 1 :30 pm on May 4, 2006 at the City Council Chambers of the City of Minnetonka, 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard, Minnetonka, Minnesota. Each city shall have 30 minutes to make a presentation to the panel and respond to questions from the panel. Each city shall also have five minutes to present rebuttal argument. The hearing shall not include testimony of witnesses or other evidentiary submissions and shall, instead, consist of argument based on the Factual Record described below. The hearing shall be open to the public. 2. Each city shall have the opportunity to present briefs, proposed findings, and a proposed order. Initial briefs, proposed findings, and proposed orders shall be served on the representatives for each of the other cities and filed with each member of the panel on or before April 17, 2006. The initial briefs shall be limited to 20 pages of double-spaced text. Reply briefs and responses to the proposed findings and proposed orders shall be served on each of the other cities and filed with each of the panel members by April 27, 2006. Reply briefs shall be limited to five pages of double-spaced text. 3. The Factual Record shall consist of a Statement of Stipulated Facts, documents or other exhibits and, to the extent necessary, affidavits presenting facts to which the Cities are not able or willing to stipulate. The Cities shall file the Factual Record with the three members of the panel on or before March 15,2006. 4. The briefs, proposed findings, proposed orders, and Factual Record shall be considered public data unless otherwise classified by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (Minn. Stat. ch. 13). IT IS SO ORDERED. James Gilbert Peter Lindberg Marianne Short 2