The URL can be used to link to this page

092704 CC Reg AgP I. CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 27,2004 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call Mayor Love _ Garfunkel Lizee Zerby _ Turgeon _ B. Review Agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, September 13, 2004 (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 of the Verified Claims List (Att.- Claims List) B. Staffing - No action required C. Establishing an Absentee Ballot Board for the 2004 General Election (Att.- Deputy Clerk's memorandum, Resolution) D. Authorize Expenditure of Funds - Park Utility Vehicle (Att. - Public Works Director's memorandum) E. Authorize Expenditure of Funds - Mower (Att. - Public Works Director's memorandum) F. Accept Smithtown Road Improvement Project(Public Works Director's memorandum, Resolution) G. Sylvia Development (Shorewood Ponds Development) Release of Escrow (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 - September 27, 2004 PAGE 2 OF3 6. PUBLIC HEARING 7. PARKS 8. PLANNING - Report by Representative A. Sign Permit Request (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum) Applicant: Fitness 19 Location: 23730 Highway 7 (Shorewood Village Center) B. Variances to Setback and Expansion ofa Nonconforming Structure (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum, Draft Resolution) Applicant: Todd Meixner Location: 25625 Birch Bluff Road C. Variances to Setback and Expansion of a Nonconforming Structure (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum) Applicants: R.J. and Melanie Rogney Location: 5950 Grant Street D. C.U.P. for Accessory Space Over 1200 Sq. Ft. (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum, Draft Resolution) Applicants: Tom Kelsey and Ingrid Schaff Location: 5705 Smithtown Way E. Minor Subdivision/Combination (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum, Draft Resolution) Applicant: David Blume Location: 5240/5250 Vine Hill Road F. Minor Subdivision (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum, Draft Resolution) Applicants: Andrew and Dorothy Meldahl Location: 6180 Cathcart Drive 9. GENERALlNEW BUSINESS A. Resolution regarding Legislation Affecting Six-Mile Creek, LMCD (Att. _ Administrator's memorandum, Resolution) B. Amending Selection of Park and Planning Commission Chairs (Att. - Administrator's memorandum, Ordinance) C. Excelsior Branch Library Discussion (Att. - City Administrator's memorandum) 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS .( 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 Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday, 27 September 2004 . A 6:00 PM Work Session will be held regarding the Stormwater System An EDA meeting will immediately follow the Regular Council meeting Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval. . Agenda Item #3C: This resolution establishes an Absentee Ballot Board for the 2004 General Election. State StatUte 203B.13, Subd. 1 provides that an Absentee Ballot Board consisting of at least two election judges of different political parties may be appointed to perform a number of duties prior to Election Day. It is anticipated there will be over 400 absentee ballots to process. To facilitate the absentee ballot process, it would be beneficial to have an Absentee Ballot Board perform the duty of "accepting" or "rejecting" absentee ballots prior to Election Day. The Accepted ballots would be delivered to the polls on Election Day, at which time they would be opened, recorded and counted. Agenda Item #3D: Public Works utilizes a park utility vehicle to haul spray equipment, tools and equipment over turf areas. Currently, the city owns a 1990 John Deere AMT 622 that is in need of replacement. Quotes were received to replace this vehicle. Staffis recommending that the proposal from Waconia Farm Supply be accepted for an amount of$7,881.00, including taxes. Agenda Item #3E: The Public Works Department has scheduled the replacement of Unit 67, a 1998 Groundsmaster 325 D riding mower. These machines are utilized for mowing, snow blowing, brooming of hockey rinks, and clearing walkways. This item is a scheduled replacement, as part of the 2004 Equipment Replacement Fund Agenda Item #3F: Staff is recommending approval of the resolution that accepts the Smithtown Road Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 01-12, and authorizes final payment to Midwest Asphalt in the amount of $27,044.29. n ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of 27 Sept~mber 2004 Page 2 of3 Agenda Item #3G: Included in the packet is a letter from Sylvia Development, L.P., requesting return of the escrow amount of$29,445.10. The Finance Department has prepared a Statement of Account for the escrow amount. This statement shows the original letter of credit wire transfer, previously released amounts, and outstanding invoices due, for a total amount to be released of$25,292.80. This is a difference of $4,152.30 from what the developer has requested. la Staff is recommending that the escrow amount of $25,292.80 be released to Sylvia Development for the Shorewood Ponds Development. Agenda Item #8A: Howard Humbyrd has requested a temporary sign permit for his new Fitness 19 business opening in the Shorewood Village Center. You will recall that a permanent sign permit was approved at the last Council meeting. Staffhas recommended against the permit because the applicant has already displayed a temporary sign for approximately three weeks, having been told in advance that Council approval is necessary, and having been cited for a Code violation. It is also worth noting that Fitness . 19 was allowed to place a business sign on the freestanding sign in front of the center. The manager of the Center has been informed that there is a process for amending both the existing conditional use permit for the property as well as the Zoning Code itself. If you have questions on this item, please do not hesitate to contact the Planning Director prior to the meeting Monday night. Agenda Item #8B: Todd Meixner is remodeling the home at 25625 Birch Bluff Road. Since the existing building is entirely outside ofthe buildable area of the lot, he has requested a variance to connect the house to a new garage that complies with setback requirements. The portion of the addition that requires a variance is one story in height and contains 61 square feet of floor area. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the variance. A draft resolution to that effect is included in your packet for your consideration. Agenda Item #8C: Ronald and Melanie Rogney have requested a setback variance to add a . second story on the back side of their home at 5950 Grant Street. The original house was built in 1915 and lies entirely outside of the buildable area of the lot. The part ofthe home over which they wish to add a second level was the subject of a variance approved in 1983. That variance was one that set the stage for some of our current zoning provisions. The request was clouded somewhat by the fact that an above-ground pool, deck and patio have been built without a permit and within the front setback area of the property. The Planning Commission recommended 5/1 that the variance be approved, subject to removal of the illegal pool and patio. This correction would also bring the lot into compliance with current hardcover requirements. Since the Planning Commission vote was not unanimous, staff has not prepared a resolution in advance of the Council meeting. Staff should be directed to prepare a resolution for the next meeting. Agenda Item #8D: Ingrid Schaff and Tom Kelsey wish to build a new detached garage on their property at 5705 Smithtown Way, the area of which, when combined with other accessory space on the property, exceeds 1200 square feet of area. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval ofthe conditional use permit that is necessary for this project. A resolution has been prepared for your consideration. if Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of 27 September 2004 Page 3 of3 Agenda Item #8E: David Blume and his neighbor, Kelly Dixon, have agreed to rearrange the line between their properties at 5240 and 5250 Vine Hill Road by four feet. The Planning Commission recommended unanimously to approve the minor subdivision and combination. A draft resolution has been prepared for your consideration. Agenda Item #8F: Ann Meldahl (Dorothy?) has requested approval of a minor subdivision of her property at 6180 Cathcart Drive. This property had been subdivided previously, but combined, presumably for financing reasons. The Planning Commission agreed with staff to recommend approval subject to the applicant paying the difference between the original park dedication fee and the current rate ($750). A resolution has been prepared for your consideration. . Agenda Item #9A: At the September 13 meeting, Council discussed with its LMCD representative, Tom Skramstad, the matter of 2004 legislation affecting the LMCD's jurisdiction over Six Mile Creek. Council directed that a resolution be prepared regarding its concerns with the legislative process; as well as its concerns with LMCD action regarding historic access to the Lake for four properties at the mouth of the Creek. A resolution has been prepared for Council's adoption. Agenda Item #9B: As directed by Council on September 13, an ordinance has been prepared to have the Chairs and Vice-Chairs of the Park and Planning Commissions selected by their respective members, rather than appointed by Council. A simple majority vote is needed to adopt the ordinance. . Agenda Item #9C: Staff has provided a background memorandum on the work of various committees regarding the future of the Excelsior Branch of the Hennepin County Library. Council's representative to the Library Committee, Councilmember Lizee, will provide additional information and perspectives at the Council meeting. The Council may wish to discuss how and whether to continue its representation in the library process. CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2004 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT Mayor Love called the meeting to order at7:00 P.M. A. Present: . B. Roll Call Mayor Love; Councilmembers Garfunkel, Lizee, Turgeon, and Zerby; Administrator Dawson; Attorney Keane (arrived 7:02 P.M.); Engineer Brown; Finance Director Burton; and Planning Director Nielsen Review Agenda Garfunkel moved, Lizee seconded, Approving the Agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, August 23, 2004 (Att.- Minutes) Zerby moved, Garfunkel seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of August 23, 2004, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. Attorney Keane arrived at 7:02 P.M. 3. CONSENT AGENDA . Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein: A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-071, "A Resolution Making Appointment of Light Equipment Operator-Utility Operator" C. City Clerk's License Approvals 1) Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-072, "A Resolution Approving a Temporary Gambling License for Friends of the Southshore Center" 2) Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-073, "A Resolution Granting a Temporary Gambling License for Edina Care Residence" D. Accept Consultant Services Proposal for Woodhaven Well E. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-074, "A Resolution Approving Amendments to Sections 4.06 to 15.01 ofthe By-Laws of the Shorewood Parks Foundation." F. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-075, "A Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for 2004 Bituminous Overlay Project." ;1J.f:\ CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 13, 2004 Page 2 of 10 G. Authorizing Expenditure of Funds for City Hall Roof Replacement H. Authorizing Expenditure of Funds for 2004 Pavement Marking I. Approving a Sign Permit Request for Fitness 19, 23730 State Hwy. 7 (Shorewood Village Shopping Center) J. Approving a Sign Permit Request for South Tonka Little League, 25800 Hwy. 7 at Freeman Park K. Approving a Permit to Move a House for Ron Moore, 20585 Minnetonka Blvd. Motion passed 5/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. . 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Request for Comments from LMCD Resolutions regarding Six-Mile Creek (Att. - Administrator's memorandum) Tom Skramstad, Shorewood's representative to and Chair of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, stated he was present this evening to hear comments from Council regarding the legislative impacts to the LMCD's jurisdiction over Six-Mile Creek. He explained that at the end of the 2004 session, the State Legislature approved an act that superseded the LMCD's prohibition of motorboats on Six-Mile Creek. He stated the LMCD was requesting comments from the 14 member cities on a model resolution for the cities as well as a proposed LMCD Board resolution on this issue. Mr. Skramstad then explained the history of the issues regarding Six-Mile Creek, as he noted some issues . had been lost in the media coverage of the matter. He stated there were four property owners on Six- Mile Creek with concerns about their riparian rights to historic use of docks and boats on the Creek. He noted riparian rights were not a guarantee to dock and boat access to Lake Minnetonka simply because of historic use. Nevertheless, he stated, the LMCD had worked with these owners regarding these rights, as well as working with many agencies and water quality authorities to allow electric trolling motors on the Creek. This legislation passed in 2002. At the end of the 2004 State Legislative session, legislation was passed to reverse the jurisdiction of the LMCD due to concerns that these property owners' riparian rights were being restricted by the LMCD. Mr. Skramstad stated the LMCD had expressed great disappointment and anger regarding the LMCD Board's beliefs that the issues on Six-Mile Creek were clearly within jurisdictional rights of the LMCD. He went on to state he believed the LMCD had done a good job of regulating use of the lake over the years and he requested feedback from Council on this issue. In response to Councilmember Zerby's question, Mr. Skramstad stated the developer of Upland Farms had not yet begun construction as the City of Minnetrista had placed a moratorium for one year to restrict development that would grant additional access to the Creek prior to sorting out the issues at hand. In response to Mayor Love's question, Mr. Skramstad stated the City of Minnetrista had been working very closely with the LMCD to bring clarification and resolution to these issues, and the City had CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 13, 2004 Page 3 of 10 supported restricted development on the Creek. The City of Minnetrista remained committed to working out how best to plan the development process near and on the Creek. Councilmember Turgeon stated she did not like to see inconsistencies granted for a small number of property owners, and she questioned when the LMCD would assume jurisdiction over properties near and around Lake Minnetonka and its tributaries. Mr. Skramstad explained riparian rights did not guarantee docks and boats to property owners simply due to historic use in this case. He stated riparian rights granted a property owner access to the lake only. Councilmember Zerby stated he appreciated the efforts of the LMCD to act as guardians of the lake, both in and around it in the past years. He stated the LMCD had its focus on the bigger picture in this case, specifically the impacts to the water quality of the lake, as well as sediment run off issues. He stated he would be in favor of supporting the resolution presented by the LMCD wholeheartedly. . Councilmember Turgeon stated she thought it helpful to have consistency found within one agency, such as the LMCD, for jurisdictional issues. She questioned why this development project was allowed to operate under different guidelines than other development projects that would also impact Lake Minnetonka. She stated she would also be in favor of supporting the resolution presented by the LMCD on this issue, and she would look to the City of Minnetrista to implement stricter ordinances than what the State would direct in this case. . Mayor Love stated he would also support the model resolution, and stated the issue in dispute was a question of property owner rights. He stated in 1967 the Legislature was petitioned for special legislation to form the LMCD, which was only 1 of 2 in the entire state. He also stated uniformity of rules were important to this matter. Furthermore, he stated it seemed the most disappointing aspect was that it seemed a fair process had been followed in this case. He stated he would be in favor of supporting the resolution from the City endorsing the LMCD in this case. He went on to state he did have some concerns with the existing rights of property owners, however, in this case he thought it a travesty to allow further development up the Creek and allowing it to connect to Lake Minnetonka. Councilmember Garfunkel agreed, noting he thought it important to allow "grandparenting" of lake access through historic use. Councilmember Lizee stated she thought it important for the LMCD to consider the historic use versus the anticipated use of Lake Minnetonka when moving into the future. She stated the LMCD had been a great steward of the lake for many years, and she was afraid of the impacts from the removal of the LMCD's jurisdiction over the Creek in this case. Mayor Love stated it seemed as though Council would support a resolution promoting legislation to establish the LMCD jurisdiction be protected in this matter. He stated he did not think the resolution needed to include conditions, but if there were questionable areas, it seemed as though it would be related to the removal of riparian rights for property owners. B. Request for comments from LMCD Regarding Alcohol Licenses Mr. Skramstad explained that while the LMCD had a statutory maximum of 14 full-service liquor licenses, all but a few of the 29 charter boats on Lake Minnetonka serve some type of alcoholic beverage. The LMCD had been asked to begin the process that would result in more, and for the proponents, all boats having full service liquor licenses. He stated he was present to ask for comment from member cities regarding raising the number of charter boat liquor licenses before the LMCD would consider any action on this issue. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 13, 2004 Page 4 of 10 He went on to explain the Charter Boat Association (CBA) requested the LMCD consider this action because the CBA stated it wanted to have better control over its clientele versus allowing the current situation involving "setups" to continue on charters. Mr. Skramstad stated the CBA was a good organization and he believed it was trying to work with the LMCD in good faith on this issue. Furthermore, he stated the CBA had charters as their business and had not presented any trouble in the past. Councilmember Zerby questioned the cost of a full service liquor license from the LMCD. Mr. Skramstad explained the three licensing classes and noted the pricing ranged from $200 annually to $1150 annually for a full-service license. Councilmember Zerby stated he thought with the possible expansion of the full-service licensing, the LMCD could potentially add $10,000 to its yearly budget. Councilmember Zerby also questioned whether the money from the licenses was put into a fund for the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department and other police jurisdictions for enforcement issues related to alcohol use on the charter boats. Mr. Skramstad stated the money currently went into a General Fund for the LMCD for all programming, since State statutes dictated the fees collected could not exceed the cost incurred to regulate the licensed activity. Councilmember Garfunkel stated the cost to administer a beer license and the cost to administer a full service license would have to be about the same in this matter. He went on to state the CBA gained profits from this proposed action and he would like to know whether enforcement issues were related to charter boat activity. If so, it would also be interesting to note the history of the cases involving full licensed use by the charters to determine if there was any relationship between the type of licensing of the charter boat and the enforcement issues needed as a result of alcohol use. . Councilmember Zerby stated he thought the fees charged by the LMCD for these licenses were quite low, and discussions should be held regarding funding by the LMCD for enforcement on and off the water. He stated he would like to know the outcome of that discussion prior to supporting expansion of the number of full liquor licenses for the charter boats. Mayor Love stated many good points had been raised by the Council this evening for further consideration in this matter. He stated most complaints he was aware related to charter boats involved noise issues, and he requested the LMCD hold discussions regarding those issues as well. Further, he . stated the Council had indicated a direction toward potentially issuing more liquor licenses, however, additional patrol costs were directly related and the Council had indicated it would like additional funding costs explored for the enforcement. He thanked Mr. Skramstad for his time spent in conversation with the Council this evening and for his efforts on behalf of the LMCD. Mr. Skramstad thanked the Council for its time on these issues this evening, and noted he would bring these comments back to the LMCD for further discussion. 6. PUBLIC HEARING None. 7. PARKS A. Report on the Special Park Commission meeting of August 30, 2004 Commissioner Westerlund reported on matters considered and actions taken at the August 30, 2004, Special Meeting of the Park Commission (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 13, 2004 Page 5 of 10 B. Donor Recognition Policy Engineer Brown stated the Park Commission had worked diligently and had put forth great effort to create a Donor Recognition Policy for the City whereby substantial gifts could be donated to the City for memorial or recognition purposes within the City parks. He stated this policy provided the Commission with a challenge to begin to set regulations in place without over-defining the policy issue. He stated the proposed policy had laid out a process for donation and noted "naming" issues proved to be the biggest challenge overall for the Commission. Councilmember Turgeon questioned the progress being made regarding a "Gift Book" concept discussed previously in the donor policy process that allowed people to make financial contributions for specific physical items for park use. Engineer Brown stated more information on the book concept would be forthcoming. . Mayor Love thanked the Commission for its efforts and time spent on this issue. He stated he thought the document to be very well written and demonstrated the time and effort spent in working through a policy process. He stated the donor family's often appreciated the efforts behind the policy and noted the policy reflected numerous opportunities and options for working with individuals and families for recognition or memorial purposes. Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the Donor Recognition Policy as presented. Motion passed 5/0. C. Freeman Park Plaza Project . Administrator Dawson explained the Shorewood Parks Foundation was proposing the installation and conveyance of a picnic plaza, located to the west of Eddy Station and to the south of the play structure. He then reviewed the history of the project and progress of the proposed project to this point in time, noting that earlier this summer, the Council, Parks Foundation, and Park Commission heard from donors interested in fully funding the Foundation's proposed Freeman Park Plaza project. Plans had been submitted and reviewed with approval given by the Park Commission to proceed through the planning process for Council consideration. Administrator Dawson also stated the project was believed to be consistent with the Donor Policy approved earlier this evening, and the Foundation would be responsible for the construction of the plaza. Ken Dallman, President of the Parks Foundation, stated the Foundation had worked hard for almost a year to raise funds for this project, and it was the intent and desire of the Foundation to have the project constructed before year-end. He stated the donor group had funded the majority of the project, and a plaque would be placed to recognize a recently deceased individual within the community. He stated the project was rather costly, nearly all funds had been raised, and all parties involved did not wish to see the momentum behind the project lost. In response to Councilmember Turgeon's question, Engineer Brown stated an escrow account or letter of credit would be established to handle the financial responsibility issues associated with the project. Also, in response to Councilmember Zerby's question, Engineer Brown stated he believed the plaza project to be consistent with the Parks Master Plan. Councilmember Turgeon stated she thought the project a nice complement to Eddy Station and would allow additional passive use in the park as well as enhancing the atmosphere associated with the concession stand and the Music in the Park series. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 13, 2004 Page 6 ofl 0 Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, Approving the Freeman Park plaza Project proposed by the Shorewood Park Foundations, subject to the recommendations of the Park Commission and City Staff. Motion passed 5/0. Mayor Love requested Mr. Dallman share the thanks of the Council with the Foundation and Park Commission for all the effort required to bring such a project forward in such a short time. He stated the efforts of all parties involved were greatly appreciated in this case. 8. PLANNING A. Flood Plain Ordinance Amendment Director Nielsen explained the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had advised cities that they must update their existing floodplain regulations for residents to remain eligible for flood insurance. He stated the proposed ordinance amendment would replace Chapter 1101 of the City Code, and due to its great length would be adopted by summary ordinance procedures. He went on to explain the details . of the changes proposed, noting significant changes to the Code including specific activities allowed to take place in the redefined flood plain, floodway, and flood fringe. Councilmember Turgeon questioned whether residents were notified of these changes as it related to flood insurance rates for residents. Director Nielsen stated there would be no attempt personally to notify residents living within the defined flood areas, however, any persons requesting information on these areas were welcome to come to City Hall for a determination as to whether their residence was part of the flood areas designated within the proposed ordinance. Zerby moved, Garfunkel seconded, Adopting ORDINANCE NO. 405, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1101 of the Shorewood City Code Relating to Flood Plain Management Regulations." Motion passed 5/0. Zerby moved, Garfunkel seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-077, "A Resolution Approving Publication of Ordinance No. 405 by Title and Summary." Motion passed 5/0. 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS . A. Approval of the 2005-2009 Capital Improvement Program Administrator Dawson explained the 2005-2009 Capital Improvement Program had been prepared for Council consideration. He noted the program included the changes indicated by Council at its work session meetings this summer on the topic. Garfunkel moved, Lizee seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-078 "A Resolution Adopting a Capital Improvement Program for the Years 2005-2009." Motion passed 5/0. B. Approval of the 2005 Proposed Budget Finance Director Burton presented the 2005 General Fund Operating Budget for Council consideration. She noted the time line for certification with Hennepin County and noted the general approach to the proposed budget had been to restore funding to traditional levels, to address matters deferred, and to make additions that would enhance the productivity and effectiveness. She then reviewed the highlights to the budget, noting the City was not subject to levy limits for the Year 2005. However, the Council had requested the 2005 levy be limited to a 12% increase from the 2004 amount and the budget reflected that request. She also noted Shorewood's debt service payment made annually to fund the new public safety CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 13, 2004 Page 7 oft 0 building was estimated to be $496,000. She next reviewed the budget expenditure highlights in the areas related to police and fire, parks and recreation, public works and engineering, employee pay plans and benefits, information technology, document retrieval systems, and training costs to the City Council next year. Finance Director Burton also explained the truth-in-taxation process and noted the timetable and procedures necessary for that process. Garfunkel moved, Zerby seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-079, "A Resolution Setting the 2005 Proposed General Fund Budget and Approving the Proposed 2004 Property Tax Levy, Collectible in 2005." Motion passed 5/0. Garfunkel moved, Zerby seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-080. "A Resolution Setting the Truth-in- Taxation Public Hearings on the Proposed 2005 Budgets and the 2004 Property Tax Levy Collectible in 2005." Motion passed 5/0. . Administrator Dawson commended all Staff for bringing the budget together this year, and noted they had all done a great job in doing so. C. Amending Dates of Terms for Park and Planning Commission Members Administrator Dawson explained the Council had held work session discussion regarding the terms of members of its advisory commissions. He stated the discussions had concluded with a general agreement that the end-date for the terms of commissioners should be later than January 31, due to the timeline associated with having new council members taking office without enough time to prepare for appointments. He went on to explain an ordinance had been prepared to that end, noting the terms of the commissions had been drafted to begin on March 1 and extend to the last day of February of each three-year term. . Turgeon moved, Garfunkel seconded, Adopting ORDINANCE NO. 406, "An Ordinance Amending Chapters 201 and 202 of the Shorewood City Code Relating to the Planning and Park Commission. " Councilmember Zerby encouraged the Commissions to rotate the chair position as he thought it was good practice, and he had noticed any change in those positions in quite some time. He noted the issues were not at all personal but were related to having new leadership in place every so often as he believed it sparked fresh dialogue and interaction between commissioners. D. Excelsior Proposal regarding South Lake Minnetonka Police Department Joint Powers Agreement Administrator Dawson explained that on September 7, 2004, the Excelsior City Council had revised its proposal for a review of the SLMPD joint powers agreement. It put forward additional funding for the SLMPD in 2004 and 2005, subject to conditions related to formation of a Blue Ribbon Panel and implementation of the Panel's recommendations. It also would require an analysis of the Joint Powers Agreement by a neutral third party, such as a consulting firm, whose cost would be shared equally between the four member cities. He noted the revised proposal was less prescriptive than the original version, in that the Panel would be reduced in size from one representative from each city. Excelsior was asking that Shorewood and Greenwood name representatives and schedule the meeting with the other representatives from Excelsior and Tonka Bay to take place on September 22, 2004. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 13, 2004 Page 8 of 10 Administrator Dawson also explained he had met with City of Greenwood Attorney Mark Kelly, and Tonka Bay City Administrator Irvine as well as with City Attorney Keane to discuss the proposal. He then noted a brief memo from Greenwood City Attorney Kelly summarizing the outcome of the meeting and the staff s position on this issue. Staff concluded that the most recent proposal by the City of Excelsior was burdened with too many conditions to allow any city to recommend it for endorsement to the Coordinating Committee. In particular, the September 8th proposal attempted to dictate the outcome of the proposed negotiations, and thus, should be rejected. However, provided Excelsior unconditionally pay its share of the fourth quarter 2004 SLMPD budget and approve and agree to fund Excelsior's share of the 2005 SLMPD budget, the Councils should then consider supporting the implementation of the Blue Ribbon Panel to operate as Excelsior had described in the September 8th proposal. Also, the Panel should be advisory to the cities and would be used to identify and discuss issues any city might wish to address. Councilmember Garfunkel stated he found it ironic that the City Council of Excelsior was noting a lack of money as a reason for not paying the full funding amount requested by the SLMPD in past years, however, it appeared the real issue was that the City Council was not willing to apply the funding to the . SLMPD budget. He stated he found the contingencies stated in the proposals to be blackmail and ludicrous at best. Councilmember Lizee stated she was tired of the offers made by the City Council of Excelsior to make a deal but its lack of effort utilized to uphold the Joint Powers Agreement. She noted the member cities entered into the Joint Powers Agreement in good faith and she thought the issues related to the SLMPD budget and concerns with the Joint Powers Agreement were separate. She stated it was imperative the City Council of Excelsior agree to pay the requested amount of the SLMPD budget for the remainder of this year and for 2005, and then work on the Joint Powers Agreement issues needing resolution. Councilmember Zerby stated he believed the City Council of Excelsior had cited economics as the basis to avoid paying its portion of the SLMPD budget; however, the issues of concern were not related to economics at all. Councilmember Turgeon stated hardship criteria for payment issues had been suggested to be written into . the Joint Powers Agreement; however, the City Council of Excelsior had not agreed to include that criterion. She questioned what other options were available for an "out clause" within the Joint Powers Agreement. Attorney Keane responded there were none until the Public Safety facilities were paid in full. He went on to state the Joint Powers Agreement had been affirmed by all member cities in funding the public safety buildings and all member cities committed to live with the agreement at that time. Councilmember Turgeon stated she thought the antics of the City Council of Excelsior were tiresome, and they had had plenty of opportunity to work through budget issues. She stated there were several issues needing review and remedy within the Joint Powers Agreement, but the City Council of Excelsior needed to show good faith in providing the full amount of funding for the SLMPD that had been demanded by City of Excelsior residents. Mayor Love agreed with comments presented this evening. He stated he had not heard a constructive approach to budget cuts in the process, nor was the issue related to denial of service. He stated he shared the same concerns as the Council regarding the Blue Ribbon Panel, and while he thought talking to work through disagreements was always the best avenue, he thought the "door should be left open" to discuss issues further. Councilmember Zerby offered to work with Mayor Love, on behalf of the City of Shorewood, as representative in any future discussion. , CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 13, 2004 Page 9 of 10 Mayor Love also stated it was difficult and courageous to walk away from the past issues related to the budget; however, he appreciated the effort being made by all member cities to work through the remaining issues of concern related to the budget and Joint Powers Agreement. He thanked the City Staffs and Attorneys for all efforts related to moving these issues forward toward positive resolution. Administrator Dawson stated there would be a Special Meeting of the SLMPD Coordinating Committee related to the proposal. This meeting would be held on September 16, 2004, at 6:30 P.M. at the Shorewood City Hall. 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Approve Revised Plans and Specifications and Authorize Advertisement for Bids - County Road 19 Project . Engineer Brown stated on August 23,2004, the City Council as the lead agency for the County Road 19 Intersection project rejected the bids received for the project. This action was taken by the Council based upon recommendations from Hennepin County representatives. These representatives had also directed WSB and Associates, the City's consulting firm, to revise the plans to include various cost-cutting measures. Plans had been revised and resubmitted for re-bid purposes. To that end, Staff was recommending Council approve a resolution this evening directing this action. Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-081, "A Resolution Approving Revised Plans and Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Re-bidding for the County State Aid Highway 19/5mithtown Road Intersection Reconstruction Project; S.A.P. 27-619-18, S.A.P.216-020-02." Motion passed 5/0. 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff . 1. CR 19 Construction Update Engineer Brown explained that in addition to the action of the Council this evening related to the resolution for rebidding the County Road 19 project, temporary traffic signals had been installed utilizing split phasing for entrance to the intersection. The signals would detect the presence of vehicles and would respond to emergency vehicle activity. These signals would be in place until completion of the construction project anticipated sometime in late 2005. Motorists were advised to be alert to the changes and plan accordingly for time constraints caused by the different circulation patterns through the intersection in upcoming months. 2. Cty Rd. 19 LRT Crossing Engineer Brown stated the pedestrian crossing signs had been brought back to the original signage posted by the Trail. Discussions ensued between the City and County Staffs to work out a reasonable solution to manage public safety in that area. He stated these discussions would include an extensive public process of task groups to help with the resolution. B. Mayor & City Council Mayor Love stated there was a meeting of the Excelsior Fire District Governing Board on September 22, 2004. All Councilmembers were invited to attend as there would be a great deal of dialogue that evening CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 13, 2004 Page 10 of 10 ~ in working with the firefighters to resolve issues of concern. He also stated he had the pleasure of hearing a presentation on the Excelsior Firefighter Relief Association recently and he believed it would be beneficial for Council to hear the presentation at an upcoming Regular City Council meeting as well. Mayor Love then stated it was with great sadness and respect that he had attended funeral of Wayne Stern earlier in the day. Mr. Stern had been a firefighter for the Excelsior Fire District for many years, and his family had over 75 years of combined fire fighting service with the District. He also noted Mr. Stern had been a great asset to the department through his committed service and he would be missed by all who knew him. 12. ADJOURN Zerby moved, Garfunkel seconded, Adjourning the Regular City Council Meeting of September 13,2004, at 8:58 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Sally Keefe, Recording Secretary . Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator . " PAYABLES APPROVALS For 9/27/04 Council Meeting . Prepared by: Catherine Elke, Sr, Accountant Reviewed by: {)~ c1jWJ:I:w ~ Bonnie Burton, F' nce Director ~~ elk Date: 9-;)3-()'/ Date: ~-d3-0tf Approved by: Date: (}:J 73.& Cr' awson, City Administrator . ./FdA , PAYROLL APPROVALS For 9/27/04 Council Meeting . ~ep~edby: ~~ ~ Catherine EIke, Sr. Accountant Reviewed by: &4J~ &dhi7/~ Bonnie Burton, Fi aRGe nector Date: 9' ~d ]-()'f Date: q-J3-0'l Approved by: Cr~ Date:tJl23.o1 . "' ~. l' .f . . 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 DATE: September 21,2004 TO: Mayor and City Council Jean Panchyshyn, Executive Secretary/Deputy Clerk ~ Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk e!> Resolution Establishing an Absentee Ballot Board FROM: cc: RE: In past elections, the City has experienced a high voter turnout rate at the General Election; therefore, the polling places are very busy during the Election Day. This leaves little time for election judges to process absentee ballots during the normal election hours. In the 2002 Election, an Absentee Ballot Board was appointed to perform pre-Election Day "accepting" and "rejecting" of absentee ballot envelopes. During the process of "accepting" and "rejecting" absentee ballots, election judges examine and compare the absentee ballot application to the absentee ballot return envelope. The envelope would be marked "Accepted" if the following requirements are met: 1. the voter's name and address on the return envelope are the same as the information provided on the absentee ballot application; 2. the voter's signature on the return envelope is the genuine signature of the individual who made the application for a ballot and the witness certificate has been completed as prescribed in the directions; 3. the voter is registered and eligible to vote in the. precinct or has included a properly completed voter registration application in the return envelope; and 4. the voter has not already voted at that election either in person or by absentee ballot. The election judges would mark the envelope "Rejected" if the absentee voter has failed to meet any of the above requirements. By following this procedure, the ballot envelopes are not opened, and the polling place rosters are not marked indicating that the voter has voted by absentee ballot, until Election Day when the absentee ballots in sealed envelopes are delivered to the polling place after the last mail delivery of the day. ft ~.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #3G r ; " " "' \;. September 21,2004 Re: Resolution Establishing an Absentee Ballot Board Page Two Establishing an Absentee Ballot Board Election judges have indicated that it is very helpful to have at the majority of the absentee ballot process completed prior to Election Day. State Statute has given municipalities the authority to establish an Absentee Ballot Board by resolution for this purpose. Attached is a draft resolution establishing an Absentee Ballot Board to "accept" and "reject" absentee ballot envelopes during the 30 days prior to the General Election. COUNCIL ACTION Motion to Adopt a Resolution establishing an Absentee Ballot Board for the 2004 General . Election on November 2, 2004, composed of at least two election judges of different political parties, appointed by the Deputy Clerk, with Absentee Ballot Board members compensated at the same rate as election judges. . '10 "l "'~ CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 04- A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ABSENTEE BALLOT BOARD FOR THE 2004 GENERAL ELECTION WHEREAS, the City Hall serves as an absentee ballot center for the residents of Shorewood; and WHEREAS, State Statute Section 203B.13, Subd 1 provides that an Absentee Ballot Board may be established by the City Council to facilitate the absentee process for an upcoming election; . WHEREAS, State Statue Section 203B.13, Subd. 2 provides that if an absentee ballot envelope has been rejected at least five days before the election, the ballots in the envelope must be considered spoiled ballots and the official in charge of the Absentee Ballot Board shall provide the voter with a replacement absentee ballot and return envelope in place of the spoiled ballot; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Shorewood City Council hereby establishes an Absentee Ballot Board to receive, examine, and validate absentee ballots. This process of examining the return envelopes and marking them "accepted" or rejected" may begin at any time during the 30 days before Election Day; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Shorewood City Council that: A. A Board of at least two election judges of different political parties shall be appointed by the Deputy Clerk. . B. Absentee Ballot Board members shall be compensated at the same rate as an election judge for their services. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 27th day of September, 2004. ATTEST: Woody Love, Mayor 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 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator . FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: September 22, 2004 RE: Authorize Expenditure of Funds - Equipment Replacement Fund Park Utility Vehic1e Public W orks ~tilizes a park utility vehicle to haul spray equipment, tools and equipment over turf areas. Currently, the city owns a 1990 John Deere AMT 622. As part of the equipment replacement fund, this vehicle was scheduled for replacement in the year 2000. Staff has been able to prolong the life of this unit beyond it predicted service life. However, this unit currently has a number of repair issues that indicate it has reached its depreciated value. Quotes were obtained for replacement of this type ofvehic1e from three vendors. Table 1 indicates the . results of the proposal received. Vendor Model Toro - Workman 2110 Toro - Workman 2110 Cub Cadet - Big Coun Quote ( Excluding Taxes) $ 7,658.00 $ 8,271.00 $ 7,400.00 Table 1 Staff is recommending that the proposal from Waconia Farm Supply be accepted. Attachment 1 is a sample picture of the unit to be obtained. Recommendation Staff is recommending that the proposal from Waconia Farm Supply be accepted for an amount of $7,881.00, including taxes. n \,.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 4F3D > l-3 ~ > n == ~ 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: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works . DATE: September 22, 2004 RE: Authorization for Expenditure of Funds - Equipment Replacement Fund Toro Groundsmaster 328 D The Public Works Department has scheduled the replacement of Unit 67, a 1998 Groundsmaster 325 D riding mower. These machines are utilized for mowing, snow blowing, brooming of hockey rinks, and clearing walkways. This item is a scheduled replacement as part of the 2004 Equipment Replacement Fund. The City of Shorewood is a member of the cooperative purchasing contracts through the State of Minnesota. This allows the City to take advantage of the competitive public bidding process jthat has already been performed by the State. In addition, the State receives a lower bid price due to economies of scale. . Attachment 1 is a proposal from MTl for the State contract for a Toro Groundsmaster with the trade-in of Unit 67. The proposal provided falls within the amount budgeted. Recommendation Staff is recommending approval of the motion that authorizes the expenditure of funds for the purchase ofa Toro Groundsmaster in the amount of $11,806.59, including sales tax, and authorizes trade-in of Unit 67. =tF3E n ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER nitl DISTRIBUTING Ul.lHUUiUi.lliUlUUUHUU August 9,2004 Quote Number T3-2004-105 Larry Brown Shorewood City of 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood,Mn 55331 952-474-6191 . Dear Larry: Weare pleased to quote you on the following equipment. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION QUOTE - New Toro Groundsmaster 328-D (28 hp Kubota diesel engine) 2 WD $16,154.00 rotary mower, 72" side discharge deck, deluxe seat, service manual and 2 post ROPS. Less Trade 1998 GM325-D $5,500.00 Balance $10,654.00 . Pricing does not include appropriate sales tax. This quote is valid for 30 days. This quote includes setup, service, and delivery. All new Toro units have a 2 year warranty. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this quote. If you have any questions, please call 763-592-5649 or 1-800-492-5649 and we will be happy to help you in any way possible. Sincerely, Jon Almquist, Rick Terway Sales Representatives, West Metro ATTACHMENT! . . 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: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works . DATE: . September 22, 2004 RE: Accept Final Improvements and Authorize Final Payment for the Smithtown Road Pavement Rehabilitation Proj ect, City Proj ect 01-12, S .A.P. 216-101-03 Attachment 1 is memorandum from Dave Hutton, Project Manager, for the Smithtown Road Pavement Rehabilitation Project, stating that the project has been completed in accordance to the plans and specifications. Included With this memorandum were the following items submitted by Midwest Asphalt, Inc.: . 1. Final Pay Voucher in the amount of $27,044.29 2~ IC-134 Withholding Certificates (Contractor and subcontractors) 3. Consent of Surety final payment 4. Contractors Affidavit of Payment of Debts and Claims 5. Contractors Lien Waiver 6. 2 year Warranty Bond Therefore, the improvements are ready to be accepted by the City of Shorewood for perpetual maintenance. Recommendation Staff is recommending approval of the attached resolution that accepts the Smithtown Road Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City Project 01-12, and authorizes final payment to Midwest Asphalt in the amount of $27,044.29. :f3F #9t \,.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF SHOREWOOD ., RESOLUTION NO 04-_ A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SMITHTOWN ROAD PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, CITY PROJECT 01-12, S.A.P. 216-101-03 WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has entered into a contract with Midwest Asphalt, Inc. for City Project No. 01-12, for the Smithtown Road Pavement Rehabilitation Project; and, . WHEREAS, the Contractor has petitioned for final acceptance of the project and final payment based on work performed to date; and, WHEREAS, the Project Manager has made a final inspection of the project and . recommends acceptance and final payment be made by the City. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The City hereby does accept the work completed pursuant to said contract and authorizes final payment to the Contractor, and the two-year guarantee shall commence as of the date ofthis resolution, subject to the following items: 1. The Contractor furnish the City a two-year maintenance bond pursuant to the contract. 2. The Contractor must make satisfactory showing that he has complied with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 290.92 requiring withholding of State Income Tax. 3. Evidence in the form of an affidavit that all claims against the Contractor by reasons of the contract have been fully paid or satisfactorily secured. . ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 27th day of September, 2004. Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk .. WSB & Associates. Inc. . . 4150 Olson Memorial Highway J S Suite 300 Minneapolis Minnesota 55422 763.541-4800 763.541.1700 FAX August 25, 2004 Mr. Larry Brown City Engineer City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood,~ 55331-8936 \j'"'- ? ~ ?jJ\J~ ~ \) M Re: Voucher No.7 (Final) Smithtown Road Rehabilitation WSB Project No. 1074-58 Dear Larry: Enclosed please find three copies of the final Pay Voucher No.7 for the above-referenced project in the amount of $27,044.29. Also enclosed are copies of all the required closeout paperwork. Everything has been submitted that is required to close out this project. We recommend that this project be closed and the final payment be submitted to Midwest Asphalt. It has been a pleasure working with you on this project. Sincerely, David E. Hutton, P.E. Vice President/Municipal Group Manager Enclosures cc: Midwest Asphalt Minneapolis. St. Cloud. Equal Opportunity Em{l6ljf/,WIMI074-58Ivo 7 jill/tr Cry.doc MEM"" lAPa .-'1l'Ph'-' _'W.-- NATIONAL AUMALT ".."...... ~ON P.O. BOX 5477 . HOPKINS, MINNESOTA. 55343 PHONE: (952) 937-8033 . FAX: (952) 937-6910 " SPHAL T. """ORPORA TION .~ >...", "':" 1" ;';,'.". "", .:..... ,,; -' . ".. ~~. .,~'.:::~L::::_-:.::::~:ri~"~;.:~:_-:::;7'~::-:::-:;-,~.'::,7".::-::: ::.::'.:::~:::~:,'Z;;::;:";..:',~:~,--::~:,:",,"~,',:-;.-:-:-:'T' August 16, 2004 AUG 1 8 2004 ....j..;~~~ ~_ \.J WSB 4150 Olson Memorial Highway Suite 300 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422 RE: Final paperwork for Smithtown Road MWAjob 23623 WSB 1074-58 Gentlemen: Enclosed you will find: 1. Pay voucher 7 and final (3) 2. IC-134 from ourselves, as well as our sub-contractors 3. Consent of Surety to final Payment (3) 4. Coy tractor's Affidavit of Payment of Debts and Claims 5. . Contractor's Affidavit of Release of Liens 6. 2-year maintenance bond (3) This should complete the paperwork end of the project. Thank you. We have enjoyed working with you and the City on this project. Very truly yours, MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORA nON $K t?dl~<J ShirleY"~~m Contract Administrator a- An Equal ()ppcolunlly Employer . . " .. 'WSB Owner: Citv of Shorewood Date: Julv 28 2004 For Period: 1/23/2004 to 5/19/2004 Request No: 7 and Final Contractor: Midwest Asohalt Corooration PAY VOUCHER SMITHTOWN ROAD REHABILITATION AND APPURTENANT WORK CITY OF SHOREWOOD PROJECT NO. 01-07 WSB PROJECT NO. 1074-58 SUMMARY 1 Original Contract Amount $ 1,528,759.50 2 Change Order - Addition $ 76,051.75 3 Change Order - Deduction $ -14,262.77 . 4 Revised Contract Amount $ 1,619,074.02 5 Value Completed to Date $ 1,581,143.79 6 Material on Hand $ 0.00 7 Amount Eamed $ 1,581,143.79 8 Less Retainage 0% $ 0.00 9 Subtotal $ 1,581,143.79 10 Less Amount Paid Previously $ 1,554,099.50 11 AMOUNT DUE THIS PAY VOUCHER NO. 7 and Final $ 27,044.29 . Recommended for Approval by: WSB & Assoclate','n~ c-n ~~ ~ Project Manager/ gineer Construction Observer Approved by Owner: CITY OF SHOREWOOD Specified Contract Completion Date: November 21, 2003 Date: 10f5 F:\WPWIN\1074-58\ExceI\1074-58 Pay Voucher No.7 and Final.xls Pay Voucher No. 7 Smlthtown Road Rehabilitation and Appurtenant Work City of Shorewood Project No. 01..Q7 WSB Project No. 1074-58 July 28, 2004 Contract Current Quantity Amount No. Material No. Item Unit Quantltv Quantltv to Date to Date BASE BID 1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 0 1 $40,000.00 2 2104.501 REMOVE PIPE CULVERTS L1N FT 536 0 646 $2,810.10 3 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) L1N FT 215 0 531 $3,478.05 4 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (SANITARY) LINFT 416 0 400 $6,980.00 5 2104.509 REMOVE MANHOLE EACH 2 0 1 $600.00 6 2104.501 REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER L1N FT 100 0 306 $1,269.90 7 2104.503 REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK SQFT 250 0 175.5 $122.85 8 2104.505 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQve 30 0 0 $0.00 9 2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQYD 870 0 1545.93 $3,091.86 10 2104.509 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 1 0 3 $1,638.00 11 2104.511 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) L1N FT 33 0 34 $102.00 12 2104.513 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) UN FT 1900 0 1200 $2,400.00 13 2104.523 SALVAGE CASTING EACH 76 0 70 $7,000.00 14 2104.523 SALVAGE SIGN EACH 73 7 69 $1,483.50 15 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION CUYD 1000 0 1083 $12,129.60 16 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR 40 0 53 $5,088.00 17 2211.501 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TON 3200 0 51.39 $688.63 18 2331.604 BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT RECLAMATION SQYD 40000 0 38587.33 $34,728.60 19 2331.607 HAUL BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT RECLAMATION (LV) CUYD 500 0 4761.76 $40,474.96 20 2340.508 TYPE 41 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON 5230 0 0 $0.00 21 2340.510 TYPE 31 BINDER COURSE MIXTURE TON 7850 0 0 $0.00 22 2340.514 TYPE 31 BASE COURSE MIXTURE TON 7850 0 8373.91 $250,379.91 23 2340.518 TYPE 41 BITUMINOUS MIXTURE FOR DRIVEWAY TON 210 0 441.38 $33,434.54 24 2357.502 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GALLON 4740 0 3495 $5,941.50 25 2501.515 12" RC PIPE APRON EACH 5 0 21 $8,022.00 26 2501.515 15" RC PIPE APRON EACH 12 0 17 $6,868.00 27 2501.515 . 18" RC PIPE APRON EACH 4 0 4 $1,744.00 28 2501.602 TRASH GUARD FOR 42" PIPE APRON EACH 5 0 5 $4,910.00 29 2501.602 TRASH GUARD FOR 12" PIPE APRON EACH 5 0 9 $2,205.00 30 2501.602 TRASH GUARD FOR 15" PIPE APRON EACH 12 0 19 $5,320.00 31 2501.602 TRASH GUARD FOR 18" PIPE APRON EACH 4 0 4 $1,320.00 32 2501.602 42" RC PIPE APRON WIPILlNG EACH 5 0 5 $19,100.00 33 2502.501 6" PRECAST CONCRETE HEADWALL EACH 8 0 12 $2,040.00 34 2502.501 8" PRECAST CONCRETE HEADWALL EACH 2 0 0 $0.00 35 2502.521 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN L1N FT 75 0 585 $6,376.50 36 2502.521 8" PVC PIPE DRAIN LINFT 30 0 0 $0.00 37 2502.521 10" PVC PIPE DRAIN UN FT 30 0 148 $3,226.40 38 2502.541 10" PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN L1N FT 862 0 1026 $22,388.80 39 2502.541 6" PERF PE PIPE DRAIN L1N FT 26700 0 16850 $114,580.00 40 2502.602 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT EACH 7 0 68 $7,072.00 41 2502.602 RODENT GUARD FOR 6" PIPE DRAIN EACH 37 0 0 $0.00 42 2502.602 RODENT GUARD FOR 8" PIPE DRAIN EACH 2 0 0 $0.00 43 2502.602 10" PVC YARD DRAIN EACH 3 0 9 $1,503.00 44 2503.541 12" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V L1N FT 95 0 354 $9,274.80 45 2503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V L1N FT 459 0 870 $24,708.00 46 2503.541 18" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS 111 L1N FT 155 0 190 $6,013.50 47 2503.541 36" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS III L1N FT 29 0 26 $1,674.40 48 2503.541 42" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS III UN FT 228 0 240 $19,632.00 49 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EACH 2 0 1 $710.00 50 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLES (SAN) EACH 2 0 4 $3,720.00 51 2503.603 10" PVC PIPE SewER SDR 35 L1N FT 416 0 400 $12,660.00 52 2504.602 ADJUST GATE VALVE & BOX EACH 20 0 29 $3,770.00 53 2504.602 ADJUST MANHOLE EACH 3 0 3 $945.00 54 2506.501 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 48-4020 L1N FT 28.8 0 43.7 $14,421.00 55 2506.501 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 96-4020 L1N FT 6.7 0 5.7 $5,301.00 56 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN H EACH 6 0 2 $764.00 20fS F:\WPWlM107U8lExcell1074-18 Pay Vouch... No. 7 and Rm.l.ltl. . . Pay Voucher No. 7 Smithtown Road Rehabilitation and Appurtenant Work City of Shorewood Project No. 01..Q7 WSB Project No. 1074-58 July 28, 2004 . Contract Current Quantity Amount No. Material No. Item Unit Quantity Quantity to Date to Date 57 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1 EACH 1 0 2 $4,200.00 58 2506.522 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING EACH 8 0 0 $0.00 59 2506.522 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING ( SANITARY) EACH 50 0 48 $15,024.00 60 2506.522 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING ( STORM) EACH 6 0 7 $2,191.00 61 2506.602 ADJUST CATCH BASIN EACH 16 8 22 $9,592.00 62 2506.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 1 0 4 $2,080.00 63 2506.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 32 0 46 $6,256.00 64 2506.602 CASTING ASSEMBLY (MANHOLE) EACH 60 0 48 $9,888.00 65 2506.602 CASTING ASSEMBLY (CA TCHBASIN) EACH 16 0 0 $0.00 66 2506.603 CONSTRUCT SANITARY MANHOLES UN FT 7.4 0 7.2 $2,376.00 67 2511.501 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS IV CUYO 184 0 135.67 $12,617.31 68 2511.515 GEOTEXTILE FILTER TYPE IV SOYD 278 0 157 $259.05 69 2521.501 4" CONCRETE WALK SOFT 1520 0 1464 $6,002.40 70 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L1N FT 430 0 722 $11,552.00 71 2531.507 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SOYD 30 0 3.5 $157.50 72 2531.602 PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP EACH 6 0 6 $1,650.00 73 2535.501 BITUMINOUS CURB L1N FT 3380 0 3997 $10,592.05 74 2540.602 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAIL BOX EACH 97 0 95 $15,580.00 75 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 0 1 $34,000.00 76 2563.610 FLAG PERSON HOUR 480 0 277.5 $13,875.00 77 2564.531 SIGN PANELS TYPE C SOFT 359 0 359 $8,813.45 78 2564.531 SIGN PANELS TYPE D SOFT 13 0 13 $390.00 79 2564.602 INSTALL SIGN PANEL TYPE C EACH 26 0 26 $2,704.00 80 2564.602 INSTALL SIGN PANEL TYPE D EACH 47 0 44 $4,576.00 81 2564.603 4" DOUBLE SOLID UNE YELLOW-PAINT TEMP L1N FT 13200 0 0 $0.00 82 2564.603 4" SOLID LINE WHITE-EPOXY . L1N FT 25300 . 0 25575 $5,115.00 83 2564.603 4" DOUBLE SOLID LINE YELLOW-EPOXY UN FT 13200 0 12279 $4,911.60 84 2564.618 7EBRArCROSSWALK.WHITE POLY PREFORM SOFT 360 36 396 $6,573.60 85 2565.616 PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK FLASHER SYSTEM SYSTEM 2 0 2 $13,800.00 86 2573.501 BALE CHECK EACH 600 0 50 $327.50 87 2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE HEAVY DUTY UN FT 4120 0 3380 $7,774.00 88 2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED UN FT 4120 0 1246 $2,492.00 89 2575.505 SODDING TYPE LAWN SOYD 12000 1449.3 19149.3 $62,235.23 90 2575.601 EROSION CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 0 0 $0.00 91 2575.605 TURF ESTABLISHMENT ACRE 3 0 3.35 $16,415.00 Total BASE BID $1,058,109.07 . CHANGE ORDER NO.1 92 NEW CLEARING AND GRUBBING TREES LUMP SUM 1 0 1 $1,500.00 93 NEW 6" DRAIN TILE CROSSINGS LUMP SUM 1 0 1 $9,250.83 94 NEW TIE STORM PIPE JOINTS EACH 102 0 110 $6,325.00 95 NEW 2' X 3' CATCH BASIN BOXES EACH 2 0 2 $4,500.00 96 NEW 24" RC PIPE SewER CLASS III L1N FT 100 0 100 $6,200.00 97 NEW 24"FES EACH 1 0 1 $805.00 98 New TRASH GUARD FOR 24" PIPE APRON EACH 1 0 1 $805.00 99 NEW DEDUCT CA TCHBASIN CASTING ASSEMBLY (700-4-720) EACH -15 0 0 $0.00 100 NEW ADD CATCHBASIN CASTING ASSEMBLY (301-4RCB) EACH 15 0 11 $2,643.96 101 NEW DIAMOND CUT BRICK PAVER DRIVEWAY LUMP SUM 1 0 1 $345.00 102 NEW DEDUCT TYPE 41A WEAR (PG58-34) TON .5230 0 0 $0.00 103 NEW DEDUCT TYPE 31A BINDER (PG58-34) TON -7850 0 0 $0.00 104 NEW ADD TYPE 41 WEAR (PG58-28) TON 5230 0 4560.35 $157,560.09 105 NEW ADD TYPE 31 BINDER (PG58-28) TON 7850 0 8133.19 $269,208.59 Total CHANGE ORDER NO.1 $459,143.47 301S F:\WPWlM107UBlExcell1074-18 Pay V_ No. 7 and Rnal.Jd. Pay Voucher No. 7 Smithtown Road Rehabilitation and Appurtenant Work City of Shorewood Project No. 01-07 WSB Project No. 1074-58 July 28. 2004 Contract Current Quantity Amount Unit Quanti to Date to Date 1,000 GAL 426 0 426 $12,780.00 SQFT 360 0 360 $1,746.00 $14,526.00 No. Material No. Item 106 107 NEW NEW CHANGE ORDER NO.2 WATER FOR DUST CONTROL TEMPORARY CROSSWALK STRIPING Total CHANGE ORDER NO.2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 - FREEMAN PARK 108 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 0 1 $3,500.00 109 2101.502 CLEARING TREE 2 0 2 $1,500.00 110 2101.507 GRUBBING TREE 2 0 2 $1,000.00 111 2104.501 REMOVE PIPE CULVERTS L1N FT 47 0 0 $0.00 112 2104.501 REMOVE CONCRETE PARKING STOPS L1N FT 50 0 56 $168.00 113 2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SaYD 350 0 630 $1,260.00 114 2104.507 REMOVE AGGREGATE CUYD 25 0 155 $1,736.00 115 2104.513 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) L1N FT 110 0 54 $108.00 116 2104.523 SALVAGE SIGN EACH 6 0 6 $129.00 117 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION CUYD 600 0 451 $5,051.20 118 2105.525 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CUYD 110 0 0 $0.00 119 2105.609 SALVAGED AGGREGATE FROM STOCKPILE TON 450 0 58 $435.00 120 2211.501 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TON 550 0 482.01 $6,458.93 121 2340.508 TYPE 41 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON 40 0 82.84 $3,176.91 122 2501.511 18" CS PIPE CULVERT L1N FT 43 0 42 $1,239.00 123 2501.515 18" GS PIPE APRON EACH 2 0 2 $990.00 124 2502.521 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN L1N FT 350 0 123.2 $2,956.80 125 2502.602 PIPE DRAIN RISER EACH 1 0 1 $167.00 126 2502.602 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT EACH 1 0 1 $104.00 127 2506.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 1 0 1 $136.00 128 2521.501 4" CONCRETE WALK SQFT 192 0 192 $787.20 129 2540.602 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAILBOX EACH 1 0 0 $0.00 130 2554.509 GUIDE POST TYPE A EACH 8 0 8 $1,560.00 131 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 0 1 $7,500.00 132 2564.531 F&I SIGN PANELS TYPE C SaFT 16 16 16 $392.80 133 2564.602 INSTALL SIGN EACH 2 0 0 $0.00 134 2564.603 4" SOLID LINE WHITE.EPOXY L1N FT 72 0 72 $14.40 135 2571.501 CONIFEROUS TREE 6' HT B&B TREE 10 6 6 $2,400.00 136 2573.501 BALE CHECK EACH 10 0 0 $0.00 137 2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE HEAVY DUTY L1N FT 700 0 0 $0.00 138 2575.505 SODDING TYPE LAWN SQYD 1250 0 1200 $3,900.00 139 2575.605 TURF ESTABLISHMENT ACRE 0.2 0 0.55 $2,695.00 Total CHANGE ORDER NO.3- FREEMAN PARK $49,365.25 GRAND TOTAL $1.581.143.791 4of5 F:\WPWlM107UB\EJtcell107U11 P'Y VoucheT No. 7 .nd Rnll.xl. . . -. PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS OWNER: CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY OF SHOREWOOD PROJECT NO. 01-07 WSB PROJECT NO. 1074-58 CONTRACTOR: MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION CHANGE ORDERS No. Date Description Amount 1 9/2/2003 Modified contract quantities. ($14,262.77) 2 1 0/8/2003 Modified contract quantities. $14,526.00 3 The quantities shown for Freeman Park are being added to the $61,525.75 contract for Smithtown Road as Chance Order No.3. Total Change Orders $61,788.98 . PAYMENT SUMMARY No. From To Payment Retainage Completed 1 07/02/2003 07/31/03 $199,932.51 $10,522.76 $210,455.27 2 08/01/2003 08/31/03 $611,921.95 $42,729.18 $854,583.64 3 09/01/2003 09/30/03 $497,192.98 $68,897.23 $1,377,944.67 4 10/01/2003 10/31/03 $159,975.25 $77,316.98 $1,546,339.67 5 11/01/2003 11/30/03 $22,284.91 $78,489.87 $1,569,797.47 6' 12/01/2003 01/22/04 $62,791.90 $15,697.97 $1,569,797.47 , 7 and Final 01/23/2004 05/19/04 $27,044.29 $0.00 $1,581,143.79 . Materlal on Hand Total Payment to Date . $1,581,143.79 Original Contract $1,528,759.50 Retainace Pav No. 7 and Final $0.00 Chance Orders $61,788.98 Total Amount Earned $1,581,143.79 Revised Contract $1,590,548.48 5 0f.'6'VPWIN\1 074-58\Excel\1 074-58 Pay Voucher NO.7 and Final.xls . 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: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works . DATE: September 22, 2004 RE: Release of Letter of Escrow - Sylvia Development (Shorewood Ponds Development) Thedeveloper for Shorewood Ponds has completed the last of the remaining public improvements for the Shorewood Ponds Development. The City Council may recall that the City drew upon the original letter of credit to perform many of the outstanding issues that were not being completed properly by the developer. This security amount was placed within an escrow account. In accordance with the development agreement, the security may be drawn upon by the City to complete those items that the City has an interest in. These funds may not be used for resolution of private issues, such as driveways or private drainage issues. . The last item to be completed for the release of the escrow account was regrading the south slope around the stormwater basin located near the westerly plat boundary of Shorewood Ponds. While the grading performed meets the specifications for a three to one slope, the grading does not meet the standards for a manicured area. However, since this area is part of the slope of the stormwater basin, it will meet the specifications for a three to one slope. Attachment 1 is a letter from Sylvia Development, L.P., requesting return of the escrow amount of $29,445.10. The Finance Department has prepared a Statement of Account for the escrow amount. This statement shows the original letter of credit wire transfer, previously released amounts, and outstanding invoices due, for a total amount to be released of $25,292.80. This is a difference of $4,152.30 from what the developer has requested. Recommendation Staff is recommending that the escrow amount of $25,292.80 be released to Sylvia Development for the Shorewood Ponds Development. tf 3& n \,J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER . SYLVIA DEVELOPMENT, L.P. 8525 EDINBROOK CROSSING STE 101 BROOKLYN PARK, MN 55443 PHONE 763-424-8525 FAX 763-424-8851 July 9, 2004 Mr. Larry Brown City Engineer City of Shorewood 5755 County Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331-8927 . RE: Shorewood Ponds Request for release of Letter of Credit and Cash Escrow for Landscaping Dear Mr. Brown, The landscaping work is finally complete in the Shorewood Ponds project. We respectfully request final acceptance of the project and release of Wells Fargo Letter of Credit NA5377968 and the refund of the cash escrow of $29,445.10. If you have any questions regarding this request, please call me. . Thank you for your considerations. Sincerely, ~/-"- . '(d /1 /~ (";;;y' /......./ ~-/~~. i/ obert W. Schmidt RWS:bm !:!~;;~~'>" . & 1. (.""d', ~;:-' '..". ., ':::',,~l ~:p{!e.;J""-'''''') # JUL I - / I.. 2 20a, l ,JQI,\., '4 I t.,~_," :'~'I"o" ! "~~"'''<2/2:'~0~~~:"CJ:J/ ...,../ :.. . . ~ City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Rd Shorewood, MN 55331 952-474-3236 fax 952-474-0128 STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT Customer Name Sylvia Development - Bill Gleason Address 8525 Edinbrook Crossing Ste 101 City Brooklyn Park State MN ZIP 55443 Attn Date Order No. Rep FOB 9/23/2004 Qty Description Unit Price TOTAL 1 Letter of Credit (wire transfer rec'd 6/21/01) (175,250.00) ($175,250.00) 1 Check #30827 dtd 7/24/01- refund partial LOC 147,000.00 $147,000.00 1 Outstanding Invoice #1935 $2,797.20 $2,797.20 1 Outstanding Invoice #2104 $160.00 $160.00 SubTotal ($25,292.80) TOTAL ($25,292.80) SHOREWOOD PONDS [OffiCe Use Only DUE UPON RECEIPT .. \.. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7,2004 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne (arrived 7:17 P.M.), Gniftke, White and Woodruff; Council Liaison Garfunkel; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner Packard APPROVAL OF MINUTES . · August 3, 2004 Woodruff moved, Conley seconded, approving the August 3, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 3/0/2, with Bailey and White abstaining due to absence at that meeting. · August 17,2004 Woodruff moved, Conley seconded, Approving the August 17, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 4/0/1, with White abstaining due to absence at that meeting. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING -VARIANCES TO SETBACK AND EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORN.ITNGSTRUCTURE Applicant: Todd Meixner Location: 25625 Birch Bluff Road . Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 P.M. He then explained the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing, noting cases heard this evening would be placed on the September 27, 2004 Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for further discussion and consideration. Director Nielsen explained the history of the case noting the applicant was in the process of renovating the home at 25625 Birch Bluff Road. Plans included converting a very small, attached garage to living space and building a new garage on the north side of the house. Director Nielsen explained the house was entirely outside of the buildable area of the lot. Although the garage itself complied with setbacks, a 12-foot wide portion of the addition that connected the garage to the house necessitated a variance of 5.5 feet. An eight-foot deck/entry connecting the house and garage also required a variance. With only 13,271 square feet of area, the property, the property was considered substandard for the R-IC zoning district in which it was located. The proposed garage and the living area above it measured 22' x 30' and contained 660 square feet on each level. If approved, the remodeling plan would result in the house having a total of 2980 square feet. Upon analysis of the case, Director Nielsen explained Shorewood's Zoning Code allowed the expansion of nonconforming single-family homes, provided the addition itself complied with zoning requirements. In this case, he explained, the garage addition complied with the setback requirements for the R-IC/S district, but the connection to the house (66 square feet) and approximately three-fourths of the deck (90 " PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 7, 2004 Page 2 of9 '" square feet) were outside the buildable area of the lot. Director Nielsen also stated it was worth noting that the configuration of the lot and the resulting limited buildable area were the result of past roadway encroachments from both Eureka Road and Birch Bluff Road. Based upon Staff research, the house actually existed before the right-of-way for Eureka was platted. The r.o.w. was platted through the house and then subsequently a portion of the r.o.w. was vacated back to the property. On the north side of the lot, public usage of Birch Bluff Road cut off the northeast corner of the lot, until several years ago, the owner of the property granted the City an easement for the encroachment. As planned, impervious surfaces on the site would amount to 24.8 percent of the lot area, which was considered to be consistent with R-l CIS requirements. Director Nielsen also stated the ratio of the floor area of all structures on this lot would be approximately 27 percent, well within the Zoning Code maximum of 30 percent for substandard properties. Director Nielsen recommended approval with two stipulations. The renovation and conversion of the existing garage must be done so as not exceed 50 percent of its value. That is, the frame portion of the garage must be able to simply be repaired and not reconstructed. The City's Building Official advised that the foundation under the garage must be replaced. Secondly, the floor plan for the proposed garage . must include a direct connection between the house and the living area above the garage. Without such a connection, the garage would exceed the 1200 square feet allowable floor area for accessory space. Todd Meixner, applicant, stated the survey of the property showed the deck as being proposed when in actuality it was already constructed. He stated it was a matter of keeping the deck at this point rather than constructing as the current deck shown on the survey despite the fact that it was poorly built. He also explained that the entry addition would not be able to be seen from the public vantage point. The variance requested included an addition of 5.5 feet on the westerly side of the house, and 2.6 feet on the easterly side of the house. He stated this was important because the space between the old and new structures, should the addition not be approved, would not receive any sunlight, and he was concerned for developing a damp area that would be difficult to keep dry. He also noted without approval of the addition, his family would be forced to enter and exit through two sets of doors not more than a few feet apart. Seeing no one present wishing to address the Commission on this case, Chair Bailey closed the Public . Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7: 15 P.M. Commissioner White stated this house was a difficult house to work with given its long history, and she appreciated the efforts toward refurbishment. She also stated she was concerned for the applicant's efforts toward rebuilding the garage and still remaining within the fifty percent demolition standards for replacement. Commissioner Gagne arrived at 7: 17 P.M. Commissioner Woodruff questioned if the same standards of replacement versus rebuilding would be applied to the existing deck as well. Director Nielsen responded affirmatively. Commissioner Conley stated he thought the proposed plans for refurbishment were great and he liked the investment in the house being made. Commissioner Gagne agreed. Chair Bailey stated he supported the variance in this case as it made progress with the site toward construction within the buildable areas of the lot. Commissioner Gagne agreed. . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 7, 2004 Page 3 of 9 Woodruff moved, Gniffke seconded, Recommending Approval of the Variances to Setback and Expansion of a Non-Conforming Structure, subject to Staff Recommendations for Todd Meixner, 25625 Birch Bluff Road. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:21 P.M. 2. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING -VARIANCES TO SETBACK AND EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE Applicants: R.J. and Melanie Rogney Location: 5950 Grant Street Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:22 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the applicants proposed adding a second story over the rear half of the home at 5950 Grant Street. The addition would be built over a single-story portion of the home for which a variance was granted in 1983. The property in question was zoned R-1D, Single-family Residential and contained 10,560 square feet of area. Besides the home, the lot was occupied by a detached garage and an above-ground swimming pool, neither of which complied with R-1D setback requirements. The garage appeared to have pre-dated current zoning requirements, while there was no record of a permit having been issued for the swimming pool, making it an unlawful nonconformity. In addition to nonconforming setbacks, existing hardcover on the lot was at 52 percent, where 33 percent was the maximum allowed. The existing home contained approximately 1425 square feet of floor area on two levels, not including the basement. As shown in the attached exhibits, the existing home had a living room, dining room, kitchen, bedroom and bathroom on the main level. There were two additional bedrooms on the existing second level. The proposed addition would add 464 square feet for a total of 1889 square feet for two additional bedrooms. Since the home was only 11.8 feet from the rear lot line, the applicants' plans necessitated a setback variance of 23.2 feet. Director Nielsen then reviewed the history of the previous variance, noting the 1983 variance was granted under slightly different conditions than the current request. At that time, before the current ordinance and zoning map were adopted, the subject property was inappropriately zoned in what was now the R-1C zoning district. This area in question was later changed to the current R-1D district, which resulted in the subject lot conforming to width and area standards and imposed smaller setback requirements than the R- 1 C district. Also, the ordinance at that time did not provide for the expansion of nonconforming structures at all. This was subsequently changed to allow for expansion of nonconforming single-family homes, provided the addition complied with current setback requirements. It should also be noted the City imposed a condition on the variance approval that made up for the discrepancy on the rear by imposing additional front yard setback. Under the R-1D zoning regulations, this would result in a 53-foot front yard setback. With regard to the analysis of the criteria for a variance, Director Nielsen also explained it was questionable how the application complied with the criteria. Specifically, there was nothing unique about the lot. The rezoning back in 1986 resulted in it conforming to current zoning requirements. There was ample room on the lot to construct a home and garage. The variance in 1983 was granted to allow reasonable use of the property. The addition at that time provided for reasonable use of the property by allowing for a bedroom, bathroom and dining room to be located on the main level of the home. The applicant stated that extending the building outward into the buildable area of the lot would increase the already nonconforming impervious surface to lot area ratio. In this regard it should be noted that there was a considerable ams>unt of impervious surface to be eliminated on the site, not the least of which was the swimming pool and patio built without a permit, and within the required setback. Elimination of PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 7, 2004 Page 4 of9 those areas and conversion of the landscape areas from plastic to landscape fabric would bring the property very close to compliance with hardcover requirements. He also stated, whether or not the variance was granted, the pool and patio were in violation of City Code requirements and should be eliminated. Director Nielsen noted Ronald and Melanie Rogney, applicants, were present this evening and wished to address the Commission. Mrs. Rogney stated the house on this site had been in her husband's family since the house was built in 1907. She noted the garage had been added to the site by a previous owner in 1967, an addition added in 1983, and present ownership was assumed in 1992. With the need to lift the house and replace the foundation, she and her husband had decided this would be an optimal time to move ahead with expanding the house as requested. With regard to the pool issue, she explained a salesman had promoted the pool and stated the contractor installing the pool would handle the permits for the project. She stated she and her husband were victims of the contractor's inaction and she pleaded sincere ignorance with regard to the pool. She further explained the pool had been on site for seven years and was the family's primary recreation in the summer. Mr. Rogney submitted pictures of the property and pool to the Commission for review. Director Nielsen . noted a letter in support of the project had been received from Jim and Katie Nelson, 5960 Grant Street. Mrs. Rogney further stated she had met with Director Nielsen several times beginning in January of this year in attempt to bring resolution to these issues. She also stated the survey submitted was insufficient since it did not accurately portray the hardcover on the site. She explained every place noted "rock on plastic" within the survey should correctly be shown as rock over landscape fabric, thus reducing the impervious surface on the site to 42%, rather than the 52% incorrectly identified. She stated she and her husband simply wanted to add a second story to the current structure as there was only a single bathroom upstairs. Mr. Rogney explained the proposed addition to the property would not change the footprint of the structure, nor would it increase the hardcover on the site. To expand the addition of the house into the buildable area would require removing the garage and driveway. He stated they wanted to preserve the character of the house, and were trying to make it work for all parties involved. He stated he did not think it made sense to add onto the house in any other way other than what was proposed, and with the addition . as proposed, the house would make a nicer addition to the neighborhood. He stated they respectfully would want to work with the City to retain the pool if at all possible. Seeing no one present wishing to address this issue further, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion ofthe Public Hearing at 7:36 P.M. Commissioner Gagne stated he thought the house was a nice older house and it would look nice with the addition on it. He stated he thought the issue of the pool and patio was secondary and different from the variance issue itself. He stated he was uncertain on how best to proceed, as he hated to have the applicants remove the pool. He stated he would be in favor of the variance as requested. Commissioner Conley questioned whether any precedents for the pool and patio issue existed within City history. Director Nielsen explained he had never seen a variance requested for a pool, as it was almost impossible to demonstrate a hardship for a pool. Commissioner Conley stated he was finding it difficult to fmd a reason to deny the variance since the footprint and hardcover were the same despite the addition. However, he was also confused because he was not certain of the existing hardship for the case. He stated the remainder of the site posed problems due to inefficient utilization of space on the lot. Commissioner Woodruff stated she thought it important to follow the rules set forth by ordinance in this case as she was concerned for setting a precedent. She thought it important to hold firm lines with regard PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 7, 2004 Page Sof9 to the regulations applying to this matter. She stated she would logically love to see the addition to the house, but she thought it needed to be placed in the buildable area of the lot. Chair Bailey stated he thought this variance was quite difficult since logically it seemed as though the applicant should be allowed to build upward. He also noted it was quite difficult to find a hardship in the case to allow the variance to move forward, however in this situation he could be convinced to vote in favor ofthe variance. . In response to Chair Bailey's question regarding how other cities dealt with the issue of expanding a non- conformity upward while remaining in the footprint, Director Nielsen stated there were other cities that did allow for upward expansion on a non-conforming structure. The City of Shorewood, however, held the position that enlarging the structure upward was the same as increasing the non-conformity in any way, since the bulk of the building was greater than before. He stated it was the choice of the applicant to increase or decrease the proposed plans in order to meet the ordinance. He also noted the property had already been granted one variance in 1986 under relaxed conditions. Director Nielsen also stated any time a variance would be granted the City has the right and should impose suitable restrictions. He also stated the case should not be processed without removal of the pool as it was an illegal structure. Chair Bailey stated he did not see the issues as separate and he would not support a variance without removal of the pool. Commissioner Gniffke stated he would object to the variance increasing the hardcover on the site, as he was quite concerned for an increase in hardcover on the site. Conley moved, Gagne moved, Recommending Approval of a Variance to Construct a Second Story Addition, subject to the compliance with hardcover requirements and meeting the Setback Requirements as Approved in the 1983 Variance adjusted for current Zoning of the Property for R.J. and Melanie Rogney, 5950 Grant Street. Motion passed 5/1, with Woodruff dissenting. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:50 P.M. J. . 3. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC BEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SO. FT. Applicants: Tom Kelsey and Ingrid Schaff Location: 5705 Smithtown Way Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:52 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the applicant had applied for a conditional use permit to construct accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet on the property located at 5705 Smithtown Way. Ms. Schaff proposed building a new detached garage to the north and east of the house. Since the area of the new garage, combined with an existing small tuck-under garage, exceeded 1200 square feet, a C.U.P. was required. Director Nielsen went on to explain the property was zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential and contained 41.755 square feet in area. The new garage contained 1024 square feet. This accessory structure, combined with the existing garage, totaled 1539 square feet. As demonstrated on the plans, the proposed garage would be 50 feet from the front lot line and approximately 28 feet from the westerly side lot line. He also noted the existing home contained 2295 square feet of floor area in one and one half stories. Director Nielsen also explained the request met all necessary criteria for granting a Conditional Use Permit, and it was worth noting the garage was tucked into a side slope off the existing driveway. Also, considering the landscaping that exists on the property, no additional landscaping need be required. He PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 7, 2004 Page 6 of9 ,/ also stated the architectural character of the new building will be the same as the existing house, with the siding and roofmg will match the house. Based upon the preceding analysis, Director Nielsen recommended the request for a conditional use permit be granted, subject only to the standard warning that such structures were for residential use only, and any type of home occupation conducted within an accessory building must obtain a separate permit. The applicant was not present this evening. Hearing no one present wishing to address the Commission on this case, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:55 P.M. The Commission had no issues with the request. Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space over 1200 Square Feet, subject to Staff Recommendations, for Tom Kelsey and Ingrid Schaff, 5705 Smithtown Way. Motion passed 6/0. . Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:56 P.M. 4. MINOR SUBDIVISION/COMBINATION (LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT) Applicant: David Blume Location: 5240 / 5250 Vine Hill Road Director Nielsen explained the applicants, David Blume and Kelly Dixon, owned the properties at 5240 and 5250 Vine Hill Road, respectively. Due to historic landscaping patterns, they had requested a lot line rearrangement (minor subdivision and combination) to coincide with how they had used their properties. They proposed shifting the common lot line between their properties by four feet. Director Nielsen went on to explain this request was quite simple. Both lots would still comply with the requirements of the R-IC zoning district, and building setbacks would also still conform to zoning requirements. As such, approval of the division and combination was recommended. The applicants . should record the conveyance within 30 days of their receipt of the resolution approving the request. Director Nielsen stated it was pleasant to see neighbors amicably working out issues such as those presented in this case. Commissioner Gagne questioned why the lot line proposed was kinked at one end. Since the applicants were not present this evening, Director Nielsen stated he was uncertain. Woodruff moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision/Combination (Lot Line Rearrangement), subject to the condition of extending the new lot line straight back to the rear property line. A brief discussion ensued regarding the possible motivations had for the lack of straightness associated with the lot line. Commissioner Gagne called the question. Motion passed 6/0 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES , September 7, 2004 Page 7of9 5. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicants: Andrew and Dorothy Meldahl Location: 6180 Cathcart Drive Director Nielsen stated in 1991 the applicants split their property at 6180 Cathcart Drive into three lots. They subsequently sold the westerly lot and had since recombined the easterly two lots. They now wished to redivide the lots exactly as they were in 1991. He went on to state, with one exception, there are no issues to speak of relative to this request. The one item for consideration was the issue of park dedication fees that were required when new lots were created. Although these charges were paid in 1991, the rates were less ($750) than they were at this point in time($1500). Consequently, Staff recommended the difference be made up at this time. Subject to the applicant paying $750, and recording the division within 30 days of receipt of the Council Resolution approving the division, approval of the minor division was recommended. Director Nielsen noted the absence of the applicant this evening. . Commissioner Gagne stated he had no issues with the request, however, he thought the current park dedication fee should be in full, since the applicants chose to split their lots and this action was being repeated. Thus, he believed a second fee was in order. Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision, subject to payment of current park dedication fees in full for Andrew and Dorothy Meldahl, 6180 Cathcart Drive. Commissioner White stated she did not think it necessary to charge the applicant this fee in full since the request merely repeated a previous action. Commissioner Gagne stated he viewed the request as a whole new action. . Commissioner Conley questioned whether park dedication fees were a "standard transactional" type of fee or a "fair share" type of fee. Director Nielsen explained park dedication fees were premised on the rationale that a new lot created an increased demand for park space. That same statute allowed cities to take a portion of land for park usage. Since there was not a house on the site, he believed no increased demand had taken place. Chair Bailey likened this fee to sanitary sewer access charge where no additional monies were collected simply because the house had been sold. Council Liaison Garfunkel stated he would not support the idea of paying the fee in full for this request since there had been no additional homes or people residing on the lot since the last request. Motion failed 1/5, with Gagne dissenting. Conley moved, Gniffke seconded, Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision, subject to Staff Recommendations, for Andrew and Dorothy Meldahl, 6180 Cathcart Drive. Motion passed 6/0. 6. BUILDING MOVING PERMIT Applicant: Otting House Movers Location: 20585 Minnetonka Boulevard Director Nielsen explained the history of the request, noting the applicant owned the house at 20585 Minnetonka Boulevard. This house was to be removed as part of the Aldenwood development approved earlier this year. Mr. Miller proposed having the house moved outside the City of Shore wood. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 7, 2004 Page 8 of9 , Director Nielsen went on to explain that Chapter 1003 regulated the moving of buildings within the city limits. He further explained there were two significant issues for consideration and these were as followed: 1) Code compliance for structures being located within the city; and 2) suitability of the route over which the building will be moved. In this case, since the building was not being relocated in Shorewood, Code compliance was not an issue. With respect to the route, the house would be moved via Minnetonka Boulevard, east to Vine Hill Road and out to State Highway 7. The City Engineer had approved the portion of the route within Shorewood (all 400 feet of it). Thus, it was recommended that the moving permit be approved, subject to the Police Department determining the best time for the move. Also, the moving contractor must provide a copy of its State license and bond. Director Nielsen noted the presence of Bill Otting, applicant, who stated he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission may have had of him. The Commission had none. Woodruff moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of a Building Moving Permit for Otting House Movers, 20585 Minnetonka Boulevard. Motion passed 6/0. . 7. 7:45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 1101 OF THE CITY CODE- FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 8: 18 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the City had been directed to update its Flood Plain Management Regulations by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) so that residents could remain eligible for flood insurance. He stated the attached model ordinance was intended to replace Chapter 1101 of the current City Code. He also noted it would be advantageous to adopt this model as most other cities were also adopting the regulations, thereby allowing for consistency with builders and developers. Director Nielsen then briefly reviewed the draft revisions, noting the definitions of a floodplain, floodway, and flood fringe. Hearing no one present wishing to comment on this matter, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony . portion of the Public Hearing at 8:47 P.M. 8. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 9. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen explained the next meeting of the Planning Commission was slated for September 21, 2004 and would include a Work Session regarding Historic Preservation issues begun last month. 10. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner Conley reported on matters considered and actions taken at the August 23,2004, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). ., PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 7, 2004 Page 9 of9 · SLUC No report given. · Other None. 11. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of September 7, 2004, at 9:02 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. . RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2004 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 6:00 P.M. MINUTES \) \l,.f\ ~1 CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners, Gagne, Gniffke, Packard, White, and Woodruff; Council Liaison Garfunkel and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner Conley APPROVAL OF MUNUTES . · September 7, 2004 Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the September 7, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed 6/0. 1. DISCUSS mSTORlC PRESERV AnON . Tad Shaw - Excelsior Historical Society Director Nielsen introduced Tad Shaw of the Excelsior Historical Society to the Commission. . Mr. Shaw thanked the Commission for inviting him to speak to the Commission this evening on the subject of historical preservation issues. He noted he worked with the Excelsior Historical Society for quite some time. He then reviewed the process Excelsior utilized in defining how sites and buildings were considered historic. He stated while the Historical Society began its efforts to define historic sites and buildings primarily by age, it was important to remember that just because some site or building was old, did not necessarily mean it would be historic. He also cautioned the Commission against restricting too many changes to the historic structures as had been done in the City of Excelsior. He also stated he would recommend the use of incentives for homeowners with regard to historic preservation of sites and structures. After a brief discussion by the Commission, the Commission indicated consensus for avoiding restrictions, and also to pursue incentives for homeowners for preservation issues. The Commission also indicated consensus for identification of sites through a database would be good initial steps to take in defming this issue. Chair Bailey suggested classifying or prioritizing properties as well. Director Nielsen stated he would consult Staff member Julie Moore for additional information on the historic preservation topic. 2. DISCUSS EXPANSION OF NONCONFORMING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES Director Nielsen explained this discussion was part of an earlier discussion on expanding nonconforming residential structures upward without adding on to a footprint of a structure. At that time, the Commission had indicated favor toward granting the variance, and asked that additional discussion be had on the topic. To that end, Director Nielsen had prepared a number of slides demonstrating the current ordinance and how such upward expansion would impact that ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES\ September 21, 2004 Page 2 of2 The Commission indicated consensus for leaving the Code as currently stated with regard to nonconforming residential structures. Chair Bailey stated it would be prudent for the Commission to remember this discussion and ilTIplications when considering "reasonable use" of each variance. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters fi'om the .floor presented this evening. 4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen explained three items related to requests for Variance to Hardcover and a second variance request for Setback issues as well as a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space Over 1200 Square Feet were slated for the October 5, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. 5. REPORTS . Liaison to Council . Commissioner Gniffke reported on matters considered and actions taken at the September 13, 2004, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). · SLUC Director Nielsen explained the next meeting of the Sensible Land Use Coalition would be on September 29,2004, at the Doub1eTree Park Place Hotel in St. Louis Park, Minnesota, from 11:30 A.M. to 1:30 P.M. The topic was slated to be "Water, Water, Everywhere... but where can I build my house." . Other No other reports were given. 6. ADJOURNMENT . Woodruff moved, Packard seconded, Adjourning the September 21, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:45 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary 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 At its last meetmg, the City Council approved a sign permit for Fitness 19 at the Shorewood Village Shopping Center. Howard Humbyrd has now applied for a temporary sign permit to display a banner while his permanent sign is being made. . Ordinarily, temporary sign permit requests are quite simple. Under the City Code, each property is allowed two temporary sign permits per year for seven days at a time. Permits may be run back-to-back for a total of 14 days. The sign can not exceed 32 square feet in area and the permit must be approved by the City Council. In this case the applicant has already displayed a temporary banner for approximately three weeks, without any permit, having been advised in advance that signs require Council approval. The banner remained in place even after staff threatened to remove it. The authority for this comes from the signed development agreement for the Center, due to this specific type of past violation. The manager of the Center has complained that new businesses should be allowed to display temporary signs until their permanent ones have been made (in this case the estimated time would be approximately 4-6 weeks). Staff advised him that there is a process for amending not only the current conditional use permit for the Center, but also the Code itself. To date they have not made such an application. Given the violation of City Code, and the fact that a temporary sign has been displayed in excess of what is allowed, even with a permit, denial of the permit is recommended. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Howard Humbyrd David Schwebel ~glt #. ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER TURLEY MARTIN TUCKER One s.-n_~;ng 11095 VlIcina: on- Suite 160 Eden PI"&irIe. MN 55344 Tc:lc:phone '51-943-2385 l'ac:slmllc: 75200"'3-238') September 16,2004 City of Sbore'Wood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood,:MN 55331 . Re: Fitness 19 Temporary Signage Shorewood Vtllage Center Dear City of Shorewood Please accept our pennission for Fitness 19 MN 142 LLC to hang temporary signage/banners for two consecutive one week periods while their permanent sign is under construction. Fitness 19 is located at 23730 Highway 7 Shorewood, MN 55331. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (952) 943-2385. Sincerely, . Colliers Turley Martin Tucker, as agent -<J --7 / S~ David Schwebel General Manager Mion~lisISt. Paul . c:inMnl\'; . ~ .1nclIanapof1S . ICans:u ~ . Nas1m11c: . Sf. Louis Commerdall\sal ~ Scnices IO'd 68EGEv6G96 'ON Xij~ lW10 89:60 OHl vn-aT-)~~ 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: 2 September 2004 RE: Meixner, Todd - Setback Variance and Variance to Expand a Nonconforming Structure FILE NO.: 405 (04.24) BACKGROUND . Mr. Todd Meixner is in the process of renovating the home at 25625 Birch Bluff Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). His plans include converting a very small, attached garage to living space and building a new garage on the north side of the house. As can be seen on Exhibit B, attached, the home is entirely outside of the buildable area of the lot. Although the garage itself complies with setbacks, a 12-foot wide portion of the addition that connects the garage to the house necessitates a varianc of 5.5 feet. An eight-foot deck/entry connecting the house and garage also requires a variance. With only 13,27l square feet of area, the property, the property is substandard for the R- 1 C zoning district in which it is located. Required building setbacks are illustrated on Exhibit B. The proposed garage and the living area above it measures 22' x 30' and contains 660 square feet on each level. If approved, the remodeling plan will result in the house having a total of 2980 square feet. In Exhibit C the applicant explains how his request conforms to the Shorewood Zoning Code. Exhibits D and E provide elevations of the proposed addition as viewed from the front and west sides, respectively. n t.~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER :If: 9. B. Memorandum Re: Meixner Variance 2 September 2004 ANAL YSISIRECOMMENDATION Shorewood's Zoning Code allows the expansion of nonconforming single-family homes, provided that the addition itself complies with zoning requirements. In this case the garage addition complies with the setback requirements for the R-IC/S district, but the connection to the house (66 square feet) and approximately three-fourths of the deck (90 square feet) . are outside the buildable area of the lot. . It is worth noting that the configuration of the lot and the resulting limited buildable area is the result of past roadway encroachments from both Eureka Road and Birch Bluff Road. Based upon our research,. the hou.se actually existed before the right-of-way for Eureka was platted. . The r.o.w. was platted through the house and then subsequently a portion of the r.o.w. was vacated back to the property. On the north side of the lot, public usageof~irch Bluff Road cut off the northeast comer ofth~ lot, until several years ago, the owner of the property cleaned up the roadway issuyby granting the City an easement for the encroachment. Some precedent exists for approving the applicant's request. In other instances where nonconforming homes were expanded into the buildable area of the lot, variances have been granted to allow the connection of the nonconforming portion of the home to the conforming portion. In spite of the resulting floor area, the applicant's request complies with hardcover requirements. As planned, impervious surfaces on the site will amount to 24.8 percent of the lot area, consistent with R-IC/S requirements. It is should be mentioned that the ratio of the floor area of all structures on this lot will be approximately 27 percent. The Zoning Code provides a maximum of 30 percent for substandard properties. . . It is recommended that the applicant's request be favorably considered. Approval should be granted with two stipulations. The renovation and conversion of the existing garage must be able to be done so as not exceed 50 percent of its value. That is, the frame portion of the garage must be able to simply be repaired and not reconstructed. The Building Official advises that the foundation under the garage must be replaced. Secondly, the floor plan for the proposed garage must include a direct connection between the house and the living area above the garage. .. Without such a connection, the garage would exceed the 1200 square feet allowable floor area for accessory space. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Todd Meixner -2- ~ - - co ~ r:: o .! r:: .- :i Q) ~ CO ..J ~~ (' ) " "" H.... ~ ;z~ ..... ........ \ \ J--J Tl\ I :*- J I .. Vl I AI ~l I--- ~~ w I \ \-- :i1 - - ~j[:L / I ~ - Y1 nO.LJNlfW \ - ~ co m co ~ r:: o .... I) ~ \ \ 1\1 I ~ ~~" \", r- 17/ ~Q ~~~~ ~~ ~~.l !JAJ/ .., .., J ~ I / % ~ / : :. "\\\'.<,~ ~~ If-- .. .. ~--';i\-\. c:1/ : : . '. -.J1L--- ~,' ow lflI3wn3 "" \ j. ~/"" ~ --0 ~ j - ~~'--'l-- I! '\." \ o ~ \\ ~~ ~ _W. ~\ '\. '..~ I ~v __ ~ ~ I~ *\ '\ - I _lIili _<iTlll_~.Ml '\' ~)-- - ~ It 3 ~- -~ ~ - I V~ OWlfll3wn3 d .., .., --- I ..,.., j '\ .., ~ g \ :Q'!. ..,~ ~-e .., \ (I) Q.- 'I"'"" .., \~ - X\"' t ~ \\ \\\ .\ . ~~ "" \ \ \\ Y ~! \\ \ \ \\ - \\d\ ~ .., ~ \\=5.,\ I ~ .., ~ ~\ \ \\ \ \\ \ \\ I - ..... .., .., .., .., .., ~ ~ Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Meixner - Setback V arianceN ariance to Expand Nonconforming Structure ~ 8 ;r w o .PRIC SCALE 10 20 I I ( IN FEET ) -- . 3:1 : I l"")-.::t ,!I'll.{) -.::t' -.::t..... .N 0..... .1 9.B 1'";. ~:.~ -~ .~ !:r- oo. ,,\, " :~.r' -- - , .oh?c~'" . , _ EASEMENT FOR ) .oL:~ ~ _ ,. _ROAnwA'i..P~POSES- - Upp ---7 I '. I -T--l -- ~5' I I I ---- ----- - - 40 I ---- -~ \ \ \ \ \~ \ I R=284.99 L=36.79 Delta = 7"23'50" t. 2~ It) cx:i v .4'04LJ - - - -- - - - - ~ ii: Q · ., ~-----l t\ I .oJ ,!!;J rv '~Jo. "co " ~/ I , \ , ---------~----~---- -"---- 51.3 3: I _ I - co:rl .- - .-.::t .....v I.{). 10 10 z --99.00-- N --1 N 89"15'07" E: g __ t - V/////////~ . /./ / / ~ EXISTING DWELLING -'-- -"" t I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o g -- I -- \ \ ------10.24_ \ "f... N 76"55' - ....\ q,. 017" E .;.J.R' 'l.Jop- p~ \ .. Exhibit B PROPERTY SURVEY Todd & Tania Meixner 25625 Birch Bluff Road Shorewood, MN 55331 August 2, 2004 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 . To: Planning Commission and City Council Re: Variance Request This letter requests a variance for the property located at 25625 Birch Bluff Road, Shorewood, MN. Please take into consideration the special conditions that exist with this property. Some such conditions are the irregular shape of the lot and the location of the house on the lot. We will be building a new 3 car garage and the basis for this variance is to attach the new garage to the house. Having an attached garage in Minnesota is favorable due to adverse weather conditions. The existing single car garage is quite small with only a 6' door that does not accommodate modem vehicles, lawn equipment, patio furniture, kids bikes, et. al. . We have sited the planiled garage to comply with all lot setbacks. Due to the property limitations, the positioning of the garage is placed in the only viable area. To conform with current setback guidelines, the new garage must be 40' from the rear property line. The planned garage will attach on the north and west sides of the existing single car garage and the east comer of the existing house. Presently that area is 37'2" on the east side and 34' 6" on the west side, from the rear property line. Therefore we are requesting a variance to extend the existing structure out 34" on the east side and 66"on the west side, from its current location. This would allow the new garage to be 40' from the rear property line and still attach to the house. The width of the variance we are requesting is 12'2". The basis for this is that constructing the variance any narrower would cause an awkward pocket between the detached garage and the house. This area would be conducive to mold and dampness, collect yard debris and generate abnormal ice and snow conditions. Exhibit C APPLICANT'S REOUEST LETTERnDated 2 August 2004 The property has conditions that create an "undue hardship" for the following reasons: 1) The property is has pre-existing nonconforming issues, in no way caused by the owner, due to: a) Construction of the house in 1915, placing the house on the lot in an unusual area. b) Accumulative redirection of Birch Bluff Road cutting into the north side of the property. c) The installation of Eureka Road, and subsequent reduction of the lot size. 2) The portion of the property that the variance is being requested for cannot be put to reasonable use due to the existing house and planned garage being located within a few feet of each other. 3) The variance requested will not alter the character, style, or design of the existing structure. . The variance we are proposing would be discreet and almost incapable of being observed from any public vantage point. Our neighbors to the north and east woqld have no view of the variance and our neighbors to the south and west would have a limited view, from their backyards. This prOP((rty poses difficulties that other owners do not face owing to the multiple chang~s to the original property lines, which have created a limited area in which to located the planned garage. This variance would not set a precedent for other properties because neigl:lboring properties do not have the irregular conditions prevalent to the said property. In closing, approval of this variance allows for all of the above issues to be resolved, while requesting the minimum variance necessary. . - Todd Meixner 'M' ~~~~ ......M.:;...:." :-:7-:"'~'';''':~f'''. .. ..,- '."T-. . ""~''':''':'-'~"'''''''~~'''' .," ',i,-' . -.... . " .; . \, '.0 ., . Exhibit DELEV A TION FRONT t . . , ui <.9:" ~ <t P ;8 z' ~ c::!:.! 1 .. I , ' ! . .. . J. ~' ' '':) ~' , u. ::>, C( Jl \!r Z' , ~. ; t(l X ' 'lil ", " '. ' .' .. , ! j , i,' I 'h ". ,!j' I ' 1'\" " I , :" :::~J~ .. '.., . \ \ I I !, I I I I, !. : I \' , ; i \' \ \ I ;,\p: ; I z o I- '~ '::> W ..J W~ o I - l-- (/)1\ ,w:: ~ ~ Exhibit E WEST SIDE ELEVATION " CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A SETBACK VARIANCE TO TODD MEIXNER WHEREAS, Todd Meixner (Applicant) is the owner of real property located at 25625 Birch Bluff 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 Applicant has an existing single-family dwelling, which dwelling is located too close to the rear lot line and too close to the right-of-way for Eureka Road, making it anonconformingstrucnrre;and . WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied for a variances to construct an addition to connect a new garage to the existing home; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was reviewed by the City Planner, whose recommendations are included in a memorandum, dated 2 September 2004, 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 7 Septemger 2004, the minutes of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and . WHEREAS, the City Council considered the application at its regular meeting on 27 September 2004, at which time the Planner's memorandum and the Planning Commission's recommendations were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the Applicant and from the City staff; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject property is located in an R-IC/S, Single-Family Residential/Shoreland zoning district, which requires a 35-foot setback from the public right-of- way and a 40-foot rear yard setback. 2. The existing building on the property is located approximately 3.3 feet from the right-of-way of Eureka Road and 10.7 feet from the rear property line. 3. The subject property is substandard with respect to lot area, having only 13,271 square feet, where 20,000 square feet is the minimum lot size for the R-IC/S zoning district. 4. The existing east side lot line is jogged, resulting in an unusual lot configuration. 5. The existing home was built prior to City zoning regulations, and is entirely outside of the buildable area of the lot. 6. The existing home contains approximately 2253 square feet of floor area on the two main levels. 7. The proposed addition connecting the house to the new garage is one story in height and contains 67 square feet of area. CONCLUSIONS . 1. That the Applicant has 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. 2. That based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants to the Applicant a setback variance to construct the addition illustrated on Exhibits B and C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Approval is subject the stipulation that the remodeling of the existing attached garage will not result in demolition amounting to more than fifty percent of its current value. 3. That 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 27th day of September 2004. ATTEST: Woody Love, Mayor Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk -2- LEGAL DESCRIPTlON: Lot 13 and of the East half of Lot 12, Block 3,. Mann'g Addition to Birch Bluff, AND that part of the West 10.0 feet.of First Streellying North of the extension East ofthe most southerly line of Lol13, Block 3, Mann's Addition to Birch Bluff, am" StlUth llf a line drawn parallel with and 50.0 feet North of the most southerly line and the easterly extension thereof of Lot 13, Block 3, Mann's Addition La Birch Bluff, EXCEPT that part of Lot l3 and thatpar~ofthe East half of Lot 12, Blclck 3, Mann's Addition to Birch Bluff, lying South ofa line'drawn westerly at a right angle to the East line of Lot 14, in said block and addition, from a point therein distant 7.34 feel South of the Northeast comer of said Lot 14, ~D ALSO EXCEPT that part or LOlI3, Block 3, Mann's Add,ition to Birch Bluff, lying n<lrtheasterly of the ' wPrtheasterly line ofthc "blacktop road", and more particularly described as: Commencing at the Northeast comer of said Lot 13, thence South along the easterly line thereof 21.0 feet more or less to the northeasterly line of Birch Bluff Road as now traveled, thence northwesterly along said northeasterly line to its intersec~on with the northerly line of said Lot 13, thence nOI\heasterly to the poinl:ofbeginning~ according to the record'plat thereof, and situated in Hennepin C(lunty, Minne~ota. . . Exhibit A )HIC SCALE ." -- , 1 . $:1 = I I"")<r;j- ~LO ~. :-t'N <<I 9,6 " > .t -. .J -.....' ....,1 ----- ----- \ 40 ~ ----- - ~-----~ R=284.99 L=36.79 Delta = 7023'50" \ 2,1 \'\ 10055'01" t. 00.~4 I 99.00-- t ____ ~ N 89015'07u E: g ,_ t '- I , i 4'04.b I \ , I ------- - :5~_ ----l ~I.v .~~/ tory "'i' ~JJ .. .o~ ", _ 1::"/>- , ,-4.0 "fZ , _ _ ' _ JASEMElli fOR 'h . - - - y' _I \_ROAtl'H"'LJ'~POSE5-_' .d.L17,p,p , T--l - ; - ~S' \ \ \ ______---- 51.3 ------ ~-r(1 4JJi~iO \ Q \ ~ I ~ IS - - - - - - - PV"Of~ tl tl.~ K o FIRST ST. '\ I :\ ~I ~\ ,3= 7.4 - , - cerci .,..- .<r;j- ~~ ,0 ,0 z -- I ,....--\ \ ----10 \ ~ N 7 . .24- ....\ a 6055'07"- \0. \ E ~:a;...~ ~~ \ .. ,.,.-- I \ \ EXISTING DWELLING Exhibit B . ~ : i' , ' " . . ~, .. ~"O .':) " \-:' .' u. ,'. :l, et " J:;, 1lT, Z . ' ~ 0' '" . , . Jj ~ ,0 " . .,' ~ ",' . .,c:. : :. . " ' . . 0, ' :' '." . ".' .' . I , . . . . . t- O ' . , . ' uJ ~ <. F :8 J I I \ \ ! z o o~ '::> W ill: o \ - r:- (fl 1\ .w: ~ I \ I ~ i \' Exhibit C 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: 1 September 2004 RE: Rogney - Setback Variance and Variance to Expand a Nonconforming Structure FILE NO.: 405 (04,22) BACKGROUND . Ronald and Melanie Rogney propose to add a second story over the rear half of their home at 5950 Grant Street (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). The addition would be built over a single-story portion of the home for which a variance was granted in 1983 (see Exhibit B). The property in question is zoned R-ID, Single-family Residential and contains 10,560 square feet of area. Besides the home, the lot is occupied by a detached garage and an above-ground swimming pool, neither of which comply with R-ID setback requirements. The garage appears to have pre-dated current zoning requirements, while there is no record of a permit having been issued for the swimming pool, making it an unlawful nonconformity. In addition to nonconforming setbacks, existing hardcover on the lot is at 52 percent, where 33 percent is the maximum allowed. The existing home contains approximately 1425 square feet of floor area on two levels, not including the basement. As shown in the attached exhibits, the existing home has a living room, dining room, kitchen, bedroom and bathroom on the main level. There are two additional bedrooms on the existing second level. The proposed addition would add 464 square feet for a total of 1889 square feet for two additional bedrooms. Since the home is only 11.8 feet from the rear lot line, the applicants' plans require a setback variance of23,2 feet. ft ~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER -#? ~. Memorandum Re: Rogney Variance Request 1 September 2004 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS . A. Previous Variance. The 1983 variance was granted under slightly different conditions than the current request. At that time, before the current ordinance and zoning map were adopted, the subject property was inappropriately zoned in what is now the R-IC zoning district. This area in question was later changed to the current R-ID district, which resulted in the subject lot conforming to width and area standards and imposes smaller setback requirements than the R-IC district. Also, the ordinance at the time did not provide for 'the expansion of nonconforming structures at all. This was subsequently changed to allow for expansion of nonconforming single-family homes, provided the addition complies with current setback requirements. It should also be noted that the City imposed a condition on the variance approval that made up for the discrepancy on the rear by imposing additional front yard setback. Under the R-ID zoning this would result in a 53-foot front yard setback. . B. Criteria for Variances. Section 1201.05 Subd. 2.b. of the Shorewood Zomng Code sets forth criteria for the consideration of variances. The applicants' r(':quest letter (Exhibit C) explains how they feel their request complies with the Code. It is questionable how the application complies with the criteria. Specifically, there is nothing unique about the lot. The rezoning back in 1986 resulted in it conforming to current zoning requirements. There is ample room on the lot to construct a home and garage. The variance in 1983 was granted to allow reasonable use of the property. The addition at that time provided for reasonable use of the property by allowing for a bedroom, bathroom and dimng room to be located on the main level ofthe home. The applicant states that extending tile building outward into the buildable area of the lot would increase the already nonconforming impervious surface to lot area ratio. In this regard it should be noted that there isa considerable amount of impervious' surface that can be eliminated on the site, not the least of which is the swimming pool and patio that , was built without a permit, and within the required setback. Elimination of those areas and conversion of the landscape areas from plastic to landscape fabric would bring the property very close to compliance with hardcover requirements. RECOMMENDATION In light of the preceding analysis, it is difficult to recommend in favor of the variance request. Whether or not the variance is granted, the pool and patio are in violation of City Code requirements and should be eliminated. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Ronald and Melanie Rogney -2- ~ U'-i ~\~ \ \~\l ~~ t ~ 5 OL~ ({ ;- I ]i .) } J;, :1' ~ ~~~f ~=' . ~ ?fJ .. , !J; \\ _ _ ~l \ Nfci'~................................. ~ "'-~J -~ I _ ~ u~~ '\ ,,~je ~'l ~\ '~-~ """'-< ~ \; (-- '" ..\ ~ J _,L---- Y ~ . ~ \ \\'\. " ~ n lr:t1\r, .. ... ......._...~ I \ ~ ~ I ~ ~ --~ \ / \ / ~e n en Co ri~ .,/ ~-\ ~~IV- \ \ ., \~ ., r Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Rogney - Setback V ariance/V ariance to Expand Nonconforming Use I - ~l L- ''\,. i~1 - - ( ( w r--- ~ r-- ~ ... 1>-- ii1 i-g1i .. ..... a. .co ::::I "- tna. 'Z~ $ " I ~ 1"7 ~("r~' & ~ ~ - i\ - \\ %\ \ l\ \ \ \ -", I /~ ) i llf I:I~NN\Vl lIQ \~ \\r \ G \ :?: ~ itl I- ( ., ~ (018 ~AOHD .V.)l.~) 133H18. 1NVHO co co 0.,.. , 0< ,.' ~== ,....... uo~.-....... ~< .... o . a:: M ,,00 .6Z000 S E-t 0 r:iJ 0 c:i en r::LI l&J .0::: '" i .. 0 tr) I I .. E-t.. . ...... 10 ~ 0 ill 0) en fII en .~ 0::: < O-t -E# ~21 I I I I I I I I I I ~------------------------------------ I I I I _OO'Z~ ~ 3 ..00 ,6Z000 N ()~ ,~..., \,\_, ow f""'~'''~ . . .} ..}: \( '.~ ~. ..~ . ..... ~ o q t o ~ en... ~ ~ ~ 1..1.. o~ ~ tr) ...L. r_ .. .-~...... ...... -I- _. ._ 10 .- ~...., ~:Sl")1 en.,{'\l z .<'1 r cP~l (.1'". - 'Ow .~o ~~ -co: ~C) ,-- I . L.l_ ....,..., \,'-' -----.. -.. "'. . ' ~ ~ 00. ~ ~ ~~ :.s~ .....0 ~~ ~~ o ~~ ~~ \ . "0 Q) 0.. ::J 0 0 o. 0) O' . t') N. I " ,...,. J. t') c 0 .oJ. 0 Q)' Ul c. ... O. 00. .- ::J. 0) -"0- Q) Ql' 00) X o. (f) woO w Octl U'J - +J.- :::E w cc Ct: O~ a.. .- 0 +J .s: l.J.. .- 0) 0 "0 "00) Z <(0 0 - ~~ I- a. - "0"0 Ct: OC U 0::1 U'J <(0 w CD Cl . 2" R~C. 'Cia~i~r,* ,W;;':-dJg,\'D_~ ~w ~~J JUL 3 0 2004 CITY OF SHOREWOOD I - ._oJ July 23, 2004 Mr. Brad Neilsen Planning Director City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Brad and Members of the Planning Commission and City Council: . We request your consideration for a set-back variance to allow for the addition of a bathroom and two bedrooms on the 2nd level of our home. Our home is non-conforming because it was originally constructed in 1907. In 1983, the prior owners were granted a setback variance to add a bathroom, bedroom and dining area which expanded the nonconforming area. This also involved lifting the home to put in a new basement. The addition in 1983 provided about 500 additional square feet of living space and it is our intent to build up from that addition to allow us to make reasonable use of the property. . We believe our situation meets the undue hardship in light of the following: 1) We cannot make reasonable use of this property without a setback variance as we are currently unable to add a bathroom to our second level where two bedrooms are located without a setback variance. 2) We did not create this situation. Instead of optimizing on the reconstruction in 1983 by requiring the prior owners to relocate the structure to conform to current zoning regulations, the City opted to allow for an expansion of the nonconformity. Our request involves building up from the structure added in 1983. 3) The lot has less than 11,000 square feet. This attribute coupled with the fact that it is located on a comer lot imposes additional restrictions with regard to set backs, significantly limiting our ability to increase living space while conforming to current zoning regulations. 4) Expansion of the second level will significantly improve the aesthetic character of the home's original "farm-house" design. Whereas, building out not only precludes us from gaining an upstairs bathroom and additional bedrooms, it is inconsistent with the home's original design. 5) Building out would require us to obtain a variance to increase hard cover. 6) If granted, the variance will allow us to gain about 500 square feet of habitable living area, increasing our total living space to 2000 square feet. Not an unreasonable structure for the size of our lot. Exhibit C APPLICANT'S REOUEST LETTER Dated 23 July 2004 In closing, we believe the proposed plan accomplishes our need to make reasonable use of our property. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ~eROg attachments . . ~. - ~'fMO~ ~~\ST\~ ~\" :t~~'EC;'... -J t;~T'E -h'fF-IF:t' f"o'<<- Un-I_ TG 'r~:-:~-I~ ~"" f''-'''CE: '\ .. . .."'''-. . (11 ~J,(",""" v't. ~vl.. Or'1' ^" \ . .' hbtV\.e... -- lq,? .~ --, ~ r '~V\l'('" ....~ . :..., t " {. . ~ ."; . . , "'0-' ...~ . . (,cIS"T', \;}8 ~'t'"r:'e\..) -ee6.M.'~ ~ ~i I e..~ Dtz.OO~. ~ ..; t..'''''t..:l6 \ZooM .-., -- . . . .~ . . " .; ,..~~' " '. '&-f boIZ-l.....:: 0 to) ..... ~I.." ..... <:1" \!,(::~W\ . ~4.! ~l,t \,VL. . .'. 11..~)t"'l..~Y~ CP~' ~6. -..., ~,e,.."'n-\ .... ; . ~ ~.,. ; :tt.'1 11." 8" ;;,) : cQw.cti Fl1r4. ti "\ UII( nn'<4-_"V-2 \,.V!:i... . ~ ~ll'c..a.\ ~ r-tSor : ',:4)01.11, WO eo"", '6..'\ P.iI~'t". ! . I , o o o ~ :t ~ I . , I I I I I JOOI 'OO! ~ J f,l o :. ~ ~ ~ - :l q \- u;1 ~ v~ II \J f. 2~'1I ll3 - '1 lC ~JJ '" ~ ~b- J- "p MOl:',F"f E::-=,..-r. e..J'""'-\'\~ f~ : c.\..~~e ,,'-e:' -r. cPoE:. n . t/11U 'u ~ t2D~\v\ . ~No"'e. :' . ~ '0 I -~ .....<w..f= W/ft.U- "= .: 1 ~ .- I ; I. I: I . '. l ~ o ..., ~ : !.~. , _ : c.tsU"c.'lL. " .: ~t6".., .. ..- v . .-:" . - : ..._~.-:- - ~ ,._r ___~___:::::::::::.l. t21 "" .,. toe. C'.~ . e~TeR.. PN ~~ ~.,a. ~'-(," "\0'.0:' '. J ;.~ -..~:.- - -~............. 1 FIRST ~-F\:~.it:~~~~,-~G '- ., ~ .... " \l \r~ :,s~2 -.!)- - ., 4 \- .11 ~ ::I'" ~ i~ 1J~\l1 ~ ~~ ~ N - )I 'j ~~~ i . . I II ..0' c:::J ,!.il' I -w .~:t 0 ~"l i I I ~ \.JuOe.1It. ~.. ~9 h..~c.. a-.l$. ~U"";I . 1'-'lCS" ~ f'~~ \...l~C Exhibit D FIRST FLOOR PLAN '. I>O:T~UT' "-I. ...U;lCo,,"I~ . ": I 1. -:;;- <;" , ~-- ---.....~ - ~- ~ - ~ --- , _'HI "" _ -:: ~ I ~t-..3.;l.:. ....1 '. P("orl>~cl V ' \~t'\c..L < O'\~i~\ r.OwW\.A.. ..,.( ~SI"o1Q""Il!, c:: lCl~ - '--, 'WP'tol. ~ \Iool.f'....... .' c.. I 11 ~,-1' ~I. ~I . elS.\..,':;-~J '6>e.O~OOM ~Pt!'-~ -<>- : ' ) / :J l:'i CIil lI' )I f'" \'1' C!.e:\,-\to:l~ ~."- .....J' ~E'O~M tt~Move E'Il\~T; 'y./t:o.\.J... ~ Vetz, F'1 I,. '!>,.." P ut'" IS ~~ 'ilt €lC1~Tn,'c;. ('L) 'ticS \oIc;~ " , . .. yo ~ 'J g: )c ~ . . I , . . ~.o..'n", c..T. , VEe, F"( '--'I C?1"~ ~ \,,/M,.....6f'l..1 '. ~ ~i:'lC. W~nn.., pcz..,..",> t E\.e,c,T . f' ...ct.....>t-e.a.. \ s .,,~"'~~ . O{1:."{'..~ ~.. ~\oUf:.- ~ ~ c:.~~'r. so; "'(2.0.01 c: l-CoCoeT' -(C:f>M6vct E'lC'STi . ."."..,"". ~ '.....Fiu.. \ \ '.-4 ~J!:'r1.'rz.OOM .~. ~ . ~ i- t> I(] J\ It ~ " .'::@= ... ''Be: O(l..OoM '- ..0 '" \ z'- c," .. '_fRA.M.C!. c.e'\,-, N Go ~ ~.:~ Qo6.C'!AZ "'ft, ~'t%..'ft..,.~if~ .' . '.. .... :~':..- . ..... ~Io<.i ::',tz-.- ~? -.--=- ..:::. .:...:..:..:...:--.. :..#"" ::'~0 ::-:~:.~ j:-::-.=. ~ . ,. , I.. . i: "- ,.. f -. _!~:j~. j.. .'~--.:. ,.~~J ~~. _:'~~l I .~' z....+. fc/ ..o"-:t:. ".. ~ . .....~..:~............... 0e.C-6~_O'_~-rC~R~~:~,-~G. . :-, 1111I . . . .~. ,... --,..... ". ."",--.~ Exhibit E SECOND FLOOR PLAN . G,(\~-r. fZ-t= / D , o 'l......., ~\,.1 0, " '1' .;.,1:, ", ,'E:.'/CI$\". ';1"'1~~ ,;' y~ 1';1". F", . . ., .'. ~ f1'2-O~\ . SL.E...VA\\O~ Y'A"+ ~o\ . New .' " N~ ~f .-- . , . ~ ...:P.L ...c.._'liL..... . ~0d'L\\- \'!.'IIlm' ~ -. . . :;;~ 'fl~ tz:oc.f" -~--L'- ----- I~ --~ ~ 2;).l~ f'r... J I .~ . , . '. . '. , '.. D.'. .. D (",..:.c s''''~''~ . ..-.::......:: .'. , .. ':: t. .~...~." .. ~ tj io'" P~<..' ~Le..~p--rL~~~ .1 "~.'~d, .. .-- .......- -.....-- ...... '. -,~U""1oo: oS-=- L! ~'ti~ .....-.."'4".. ....,;.,. "'0 I I. I. I L I I l____~ ----!.t 1-.......---+-- --I I ~ c.. It ::. \ '- 0 '" . --- l:~"'~ ~IST. " i2'0"F, .C€I\..U.. Co t .. c.Etl1..u..,O '3t>\'S,., -r.. '(2:l!M,6.l~ \~ -~. l~: fi.,. ---....... '.. 31fC:, ,,~. ,'. 6 " --LIt Exhibit F ELEVATIONS-FRONT/REAR .--- C:>l\$1" C;11"\~ -.' o ~t:'\....c: ,Co M".:rc:.."" &'Isi. oz......., f~ V':'~1"""i ~ Coo P".-rC-1-l WI ~p A&DViE. ' ~-"-'.. AiUMovc'-~'t"1 ~fJ:l..W t-)&o/' P'.~. W,~~W --., - 11 _JI' I I _:L - JIll- /' ;f ~- ...... . --, e~ I S1: Sc" c ....~ 9 .----.., -'-:~-.-'-"'-' --___.__00. \ ~. l.,.r t=:'LI ...~ . ,', . .'..., .. .11 ..' . .... "':'" ,. . :>: .." "1 'i. , . '. .:' I 1 : I I ..c = ..:..r.:,_ -=-="= =.r :-----1--- -- - -=-= -f , 'fi# . . .' . I . ". f I... .. . . . . . ':lIV, ,., \' 0.' -rIG.." - \2.1 G H'\ S \ pIe:: ' "E..\...E..",6.." T l <:::) to...:) . . ......- (~IS-r_ ~/ ,'. ~- ? ',' ;'" ..... _..:-~.~- ~1E~-.... :':1 --. ...... "-'---'" ..,. .. _::::--: : . -.: --:~~ .. ~-:: -.. :~~!.IF.' '-I '31 PI ~c: .- - ..~ -:--:-:' ::::-:- -.. -=I '. D. o " :z IJQ If \..l ---..-.... , .. ...- ---.. ...... - --.. I - - ..-.. - - ....... --"'-1 -....i _ ~ - - ---. ~ o ~~T, '-;1 ~'~,;J .. o D . ..... '" \".:tr. r:\.. L~~\ StPr::. 'E..'-e..~A.~'~O~ . .........f.....-.. ..... . pf' . ~:. "'';--' " . ..... 14T "!!ll," 4'.. \ ~ <::).. Exhibit G ELEVATIONS. SIDES COPIES: J....i"'.' ' (! Ii (tJ 7. Jim & Katie Nelson 5960 Grant Street South Shorewood, MN 55331 Council Planning Co~ mission Planner Plan Li c:l.ison RecS~ ~'y Other Park Commis ~ ion Park Li ~ ison Park AE3sist. Administrator Engineer Attorney City Clerk DNR ~~- ,~, Applicant( s) ., I I I - September 2, 2004 I Mr. Bradley Nielson Shorewood Planning Commission 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 ."._-~,,,-, ( Dear Mr. Nielson: . This letter is in reference to Mel and R. J. Rogney's request for a vari story of their home. Our property at 5960 Grant Street is adjacent to I _ _. . _ be the only property owners affected by the addition. We have no objections to their request and would ens.ourage the planning commission to grant their request. We hadho'p'.~d to be able to attend the meeting Tuesday, September ih but unfortunately we are unablet6d6:so. We hope this letter will serve as support for their request. ) / Thank you for considering our comments. Sincerely, r <V ~ fl.J St/V'- . Jim & Katie Nelson Cc: Mel & R.J. Rogney ....................... \ 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: 2 September 2004 RE: Kelsey/Schaff - C.U.P. for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet FILE NO.: 405 (04.23) BACKGROUND . Ingrid Schaff has applied for a conditional use permit to construct accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet on the property located at 5705 Smithtown Way (see Site Location map- Exhibit A, attached). Ms. Schaff proposes to build a new detached garage to the north and east of the house. Since the area of the new garage, combined with an existing small tuck- under garage, exceeds 1200 square feet, a C.U.P. is required. The property is zoned R-1C, Single-Family Residential and contains 41.755 square feet in area. The new garage contains 1024 square feet. Combined with the existing garage, the amount of accessory space on the site will total 1539 square feet. As shown on Exhibit B, the proposed garage will be 50 feet from the front lot line and approximately 28 feet from the westerly side lot line. Exhibit C provides a rendering of how the garage relates to the existing home. The existing home contains 2295 square feet of floor area in one and one half stories. ANAL YSIS/RECOMMENDATION Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Zoning Code prescribes criteria for granting conditional use permits for accessory space over 1200 square feet. Following is how the applicant's plans comply with the Code: a. The total area of accessory buildings (1539 square feet) does not exceed the proposed #. ~.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER $8.D. , Memorandum Re: Kelsey Schaff CUP 2 September 2004 floor area (2295 square feet) above grade of the existing home. b. The total area of accessory buildings does not exceed 10 percent of the minimum lot size fotthe R-1C zoning district (.10 x 20,000 = 2000 square feet). c. The proposed garage complies with R-1C setback requirements. It is worth noting that the garage is tucked into a side slope off the existing driveway. Considering the landscaping that exists on the property, no additional landscaping need be required. d. The architectural character of the new building will be the same as the existing house. Siding and roofing will match the house. . Based upon the preceding analysis, it is recommended that the applicant's request for a conditional use permit be granted, subj ect only to the standard warning that such structures are . for residential use only, and that any type of home occupation conducted within an accessory building must obtain a separate permit. cc: Craig W. Dawson Tim Keane Joe pazandak Ingrid Schaff . -2- -;-' J -, f r-- - _! - I \ \ I I \ \ ,~ =u ~ II Y1 nO.LIN\f~ ~ j[ ~~ / / I o 0: d.1 =; L \ Ir \ ~~ \ 1 ~ \ ~ , _ ~'1-0'" '\ ~ llCl ---~ '- / ~ " '~~C\'1- ~;-\f1ElNIC"'>'H ,.. .. , ~ .. ~ffi '\. ~--:':" ~ \\\~'~ ~ ,', ~r--;,\'\ : : ,', i~ ~ fl~ " U~~ _ ~~" y 8 ~ 5 ~~ ~ I I "'~ \ ., \ ~ ~ ~- - ~~\ I "\ "\ .- ~~\)~ · . ., \\--1 <<. "- ~~o~_.~ S ~"" / I ~I/ m) \ -- I I I J.jJ ~~ / II ,~// i / / go~ 7/ : -it--- C"'lf>l3",n3 ~ J,1~" .. ~ ....J ~~ ..~ ~~ 'I ........> fL ~-11 '5 ill .. .. '~~ .\ \ ,\ ,\ '0\ ,,~\ \" \ y\ \\ \\ \ \\ \\ \\ ~~ = .. .. 1~ 01 4-1 ~/ 7 r C'" 2N3 OUN'dllEl -- Old t101 J.NWO a1 i c UJ ~ ~ ..~ 1 z......c: ~ il " .. .. .. .. .. .. .. I I l'\ ~ Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Kelsey-Schaff C.D.P. .............~ ~... /' , u.~ ... 'U , ~.... :-1, ;, ... OZ~g M"ll,lLOON I .,~ ,~ ~ ~ .L-......._....~~.\ ~ ... ',\ , '>.\.. " .......... i ..._ ...1 .J2\., .. ::'.. ~ j~ ,;.. Exhibit B PROPERTY SURVEY , "'\ :.. ..... - ..' .:;~ % . ~......: i i ..... - p. \I,~ 'T~~"'~'? pXtOJq~J z o ""'l E-4 ~ ~ ~ ~ E-4 00. ~ I ~ Z u; ......~ :s~ ~~ _/J . . . , ( . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ADDITIONAL ACCESSORY SPACE TO INGRID SCHAFF AND TOM KELSEY WHEREAS, Ingrid Schaff and Tom Kelsey (Applicants) are the owners of real property located at 5705 Smithtown Way, in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of accessory space exceeding 1200 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have applied to the City for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached garage which, when combined with existing accessory space on the property, will bring the total amount of accessory space on the property to approximately 1539 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated 2 September 2004, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their regular meeting 01;1 7 September 2004, the minutes of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was considered by the City Council at their regular meeting on 27 September 2004, at which time the Planner's memorandum and the minutes of the Planning Commission were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL YED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The total area of accessory space (1539 square feet) does not exceed the floor area above grade of the principal structure (2295 square feet). 2. The Applicants' lot contains approximately 41,755 square feet of area, and that the total area of accessory space on the property will not exceed 10% of the minimum lot area for the R-IC Zoning District in which it is located (2,000 square feet). 3. The design and materials of the garage are compatible with the architectural character of the existing home. 4. The proposed garage complies with all setback requirements for the R-l C District. -1- 4 . . CONCLUSION 1. The application of Ingrid Schaff and Tom Kelsey for a Conditional Use Permit as set forth herein above be and hereby is granted. 2. That the Applicants are hereby advised that the City Code provides specific regulations relative to home occupations and any future use of the garage for other than allowable residential purposes would have to comply with such regulations. 3. 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 27th day of September 2004. Woody Love, Mayor Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator -2- .... .$ ~ "\1 GJ oS i ~ lb .s l!! 0 01 3 ~ ~ Q) ~ Ii Q, \) l:I .! .s :S ~ 01 ~ 01 ~ 0 ... :S oS: t)o .... .! 0 .... () \:S .u- 0 ..: ti .... .... ... ~ lD lD ... 0 ... r.: lb '" I ~ lD 0 o! :::J E f:: lD b J! oS .s :S I:: ~ .o! : oS: 1) {> :! .!! ... .2 ~ .., 2' :iE .... " E 6 .... .s :::J .... .... ... I:i i. ~ - t ... -.:- .! e 0 g II) oS oCl lb 0 0 ~ OJ 0 - 0 is :S ..... ..., ~ ;: .... c::i ~ 0 ~ 01 .... E olI! ~ ~ N ~ ~ t ~ 41 !cl Cll .... 8 IS t co 0 ~ l.ij u 10. .!! 0 :5! .... r...; l.ij ... - ti :S ;t ~ 2 l.ij It u tJ 41 t'II g ~ :I .... () .... 'i .... "" ~ .... .... :S 0) ~ oS ~ "\1 U ... 0 t. (:S .41 .... 0 !I'i ~ .... 5 lD :::J olI! .!!2 :J 0 ... :::J ~ 0 o! .!!2 0) ~ ~ 'Q ~ ~ Qj Q, " 0 l.ij ~ .S " ~ 1) t c)1 ~ ... ~ :S 8 ~ J9 :g =;; .... E - :g 5 (fj ~ tI ti 2 l)) 41 .... Cll Q) ti ~ 0 .... 0 ... " ~ ~ 0 :.!! .!! = 01 Cll '. .... ~ tI ..... P>> rd .... ...: .... 0 ~ .! E ... .... o;S .... ..: .!!2 o! ~ Q, 8 0 :5! ~ co \) oS .... g ~ ::s ... ~ co .0 "6 .... 8 1) ~ ti ~ :J oS: ~ .... =E 0 tJ ~ .... 01 .9 ti 1) .... 01 .3 1:1 0 III I:: 'e tJ 6 .... :E rd :J E 0 6 0 15 ~ g .B ~ Q) .... co G. ~ iii .... :S!. .... .... ol'!. .!!2 411 ~ .... :5! oW' '" 0 ~ .!!2 \j 01 .!!2 .a ::s 'l;j .... - lb .!!2 2 fl) "'C II) 2 :5 .... ::s ~ - S ~ 2 ~ :2 'l;j .Q ~ "l;j c)1 ~ ~ oS: 'll "l;j .Q 8 .... 411 .... ~ l:I :1 :5 6 ~ \) E ... ... 5 Q - ~ .... ;Ii m Qj 1) ~ 0 ~ 8 lri ..: ~ ~ ::J Q ~ .... .... 01 i c)1 0) :;: .... Q) :S .!! ~ 8' 0 ~ Q) lS ..: 6 tii 0) ~ 0 0) !:J' 0 ~ II) IS "\1 1) 1Il ... :S ~ 15 ... ..... :!S :1l .... l.ij ! ... .... ..... s CD :s! u .... :5 0 = ::J lD .... Q,' :5! ~ ~ Cll i "\1 ;9 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1i .... c)1 0 olI! 0 ~ Q) ~ 6 b ~ .... ~ 8 .3 e ..... :s! ~ 2 .... ;9 ~ .;: ~ 15 III :J 6 18 'l: 6 2' :E g :!;! 2 :.!! (5 ~ ~ b 1:1 =E ... ::e 5 0 Q, ~ lI)' ... g "6 Q .... - '\). u 2 0 :J u 0 .... 11 .so 2 1::. ~ iii '" "\1 .s ~ a 41 . :l ~ 5. 'I) J! - Cll :5 ~ 1) 0 Q t'f .... I:: 'I) 'I) :S "0 ti' ~ .... "\1 6 ~ ~ ... :5 Q -S 1 s .... 0) .... ::s f! 0 t .... :::. II) lI) lD 0) 0 8 :S .S "t- o :5 6 lb II) ~ .S oQ 02! :5 :J 0 :::.. S 0 .u- 51 u :S ij 'i e ~ Q' A lI) ::r :S .... :5 i e .s ~ c:: 5 :.!! ~ lD .... 13 ~ :li " :S .S :::. :5 1Il lD ... .s 02! :5 ~ :::J :5 lO 0 c)1 :!! ~, .:!l e ... :::J {> l.ij ~ :!! ~ II) i ..... :::e :::. oi .S 1) :5 ta' r;; '" e oi .;: ~ 3! (5 u .u- ta lI) ~ i -:: D OJ "\1 Ql * oS ... 0) E ::s 5 ta .s .... lI) :I - ti- S ;0:. :5 0 ~ ~ ~ ol'! i :S 15 - ,! .S .... .... t:I e .... .... ~ 0 .... Ql 1i ~ 0 Q, e 'i 0 "- .... :S ~ 0 Q, f :S .... .... I:i 0 l:I 0 li Q Q 5 ..... t)o 0 ..... 0 lb ... ". ~ ts ..... 01 Q, ~ .s ~ ~ ~ ..: ~ - :s! :J ~ :S tI.:- .... 0 .e ~ oW' ~ .... 411 Q. III :5 3:! G 0 -.(. co 01 0 U ~ ~ .... g ~' :J ~ i:!) :S .... I:i :l ~ 1) m .S oS ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ & lD l:l .... :C'!:; ~ oS 0 ~ 01 6 .:!! i- 0 e ~ t)o u co 0 .S oW Q. "0 ~ .... -t :5 ~ o! co oS .... Q, .... ~ ~ ...: t2l 0 01 .... .... .... :S :J c:: 0 0 :S I:: f! c:: :S ~ ... I:: 41 e5 oW 0 oS a !:: cS .... i tI ~ 6 ::s co co ~ "- ~ ~ ,!I.! ~ .... 'i Q ~ ::J 15. .... Q) ol'! :i 8 :S :::. 2' ~ 0 :5 0 :t .... ~ ~ () "t- Q, "ti oS: .... e u II) III ..... tI ~ R ~ l5 ...-: 'i E .Q .... 0 ~ .Q ..: .! ... ~ 1Il ~ g ~ .... :5 l:I Q Q) 01 3 .... 01 tI 0 '" U lb fl) ,.: u .... ... t3 01 8 0 ~ 01 ~ .S "t- U ~ :::s E 41 .!!2 .... ! ;t 0 -5 ~ (5 t ... u .... 0 5i ~ J9 ~ ~ .... .s "6 0 .... i .... 6 ! :c: I .g i ... '2 .... ~ i :I oS ~ ~ * :5 ~ 8 :J .g 1Il :S ~ .... a Q, II) .... 8 ... Qj Q " iIt .:!! 0 .c: e :S .... u ! 6 6 :S 6 Q, r! Q, ..... ~ :5 Q. 6 ~ .... ~ ~ :::J .u- 6 :e 5 ~ ~ ...,. .... :::. .u- "tJ 0 ~ .s co ~ .... :J ~ .... "\1 2' II) Q :::s oS lD ta ~ IS E 02:! :S .!!! ~ :S J!! ~ I:i ,!I.! (5 :5 IS ~ c)1 E o! :S .... 6 :c: (;) "ti 'Q :c= .Q, 1) "6 Q ..... . . ~ ~ .~ ..0 ~ ~ ( 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: 1 September 2004 RE: Blume/Dixon - Lot Line Rearrangement FILE NO.: 405 (04.24) BACKGROUND . David Blume and Kelly Dixon own the properties at 5240 and 5250 Vine Hill Road, respectively (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). Due to historic landscaping patterns, they have requested a lot line rearrangement (minor subdivision and combination) to coincide with how they have used their properties. They propose to shift the common lot line between their properties by four feet (see Exhibit B). ANAL YSISIRECOMMENDATION This request is very simple. Both lots will still comply with the requirements of the R-IC zoning district. Building setbacks will also still conform to zoning requirements. As such, approval of the division and combination is recommended. The applicants should record the conveyance within 30 days of their receipt of the resolution approving the request. Cc: Craig Dawson Larry Brown Tim Keane David Blume n . '-.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER :It 8. E. . City of Minnetonka -lI -lI -lI -lI -lI -lI Q) JiI:: cu ..J U) cu E ..., U) ".: .s:: 0 Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Blume/Dixon - Minor Subdivision/Combination .' - "'N 80 .00 o' o "'CUI ::c !;a .---. )> "'C ~ C s:~ -< .:i51' . ....., ::c - ... ... en :a o )> c . {" :l.o~ r't.K I-'LA I) 112.66 (MEAS.) (JI -,IT - - c.- -oe: ~E ~~ 81Tl :::tI> 0(J) [TJ ", -03:: c ~ ~ \ c",,~ .." ~ -- "- - ......- ~ 0 51 ... UI i ~ - (f) (J) o " , 1] :b. , ::0 o rry r- '. tJJ 108.33 (112.33 PER PLAT) 112.33 (MEAS.) =E rr1 t- ....') (100.00 PER PLAT) 100.25 (MEAS.) - en:"" -A Con - CJ1 - CJ1 - ~t:,~~~J '\E:' ('.' ' I 01\" CJ1 UI . CJ1 . . 00 00 I I I ~.O~I\ , - -,IT - t- -oe: .1Tl :::I :::tIc ::o~ ~1Tl 0> :::tIt/) 01Tl -03:: s;:!2! -l-{ ...- t , , " t"'''1 "...~ ...A ...... .N' ~~ '0 , (:;lQ 'I -0 E'L y L1N~.~OF- - _... I ~!;a . rHE' W'L Y ~)>o -0 . 55'.00 FEET .... . s;: :z 5 Y' OF LOT 4 4,00)' "r~ d ~!i1~!i1. , ITl ITl ~ to~o . . "1'10'" 16.A.t-: - - ,.,' 111,4.4 20.0, " , 'C:~8~ _ _ ~8~~1 I ,..,. b !11 .Jf~( o ~ 14.5 ~1Tl r ~ ~ t: c "tJ .... o % -:::u .... "1'1 :t .:S: 0 .... r rrt f'I1!Q "tJ · ~ ~ ~:z 00 ~ ..,.. %(1) f'I1 C p ) ~ .\ (> ~ -0 G. .~ ^' .. ,!" f' , ," - q q . t C . . " ,.,0.. ,. 3: f'I ) ~ '- t)) ." (100.qO PER PLAT) I 100:25 (MEAS.) .. 1.04.25 --- t" ~ . .~ .,' " . ...... I. 'f . ~ .,' I r , \ VINEHILL ROAD I\.._ FOUND IRON 1 FT. 1""'",....'" ......,. "'''' I SET IRON AT GROUt Exhibit B I PROPERTY SURVEY -~----- 01 01 z. 11 . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBDIVISION AND COMBINATION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR DAVID BLUME AND KELLY DIXON WHEREAS, David Blume and Kelly Dixon (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 of this resolution. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 27th day of September 2004. ATTEST: Woody Love, Mayor Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk I 1 . . Existine: Lee:al Descriotion - Blume Parcel Lot 3, Block 1, SHADY HILLS, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota Existine: Lee:al Descriotion - Dixon Parcel Lot 4, Block 1, SHADY HILLS, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota Exhibit A . . . Proposed Lee:al Description - Blume Parcel All of Lot 3, and the north 4.00 feet of that part of Lot 4 which lies easterly of the westerly 55.00 feet thereof, all in Block 1, SHADY HILLS, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Proposed Lee:al Description - Dixon Parcel Lot 4, EXCEPT the north 4.00 feet which lies easterly of the westerly 55.00 feet thereof, all in Block 1, SHADY HILLS, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Exhibit B I I I I I . - 66 '-----1 I ,1 -=:; rs) I ~~.tJU \ ME;.I\.:J. J " '3 ( \ 'P :5"":- o..~ o::W w::::iiE It) 0..- .~. .0 ~ '" 0... . ../- . bl- ,0 0 CD 0..... .- ..... ....., ( 51 I K ." I .l UllUTY EASEMENT PER RECORD PLAT AJ .. '1 ~ "1:. -. ...... ,~ ," p" cC. ..JC/) 0.< ILl ~::E w~ 0- Il) ON o . 00 00 C..- S. UNE OF LOT 3 AND N. UNE OF LOT 4-- , , ' , , " _ (200.0e PER PLAl) I ~" .:- "199.73 (MEAS.) J "": - 55.00 - ~ .LF- 1- - - -55.00- - - ..:;_" -:,,28.16f'020.74~ 5 0 .' I 0 " cD o I q . ..... I ...,. .' l.. . ' '$~' ~ tL.. . ;', '-'o!::>-w.... I :~~" 3~~b :- ~,~-J I " :'.' . iLl F..o~ I P A- R I I k . 51 """..\ Ul1UTY EASEMENT PER RECORD PLAT c~ .' <. .,!...... -(" \ .' ".. .:.....-! ~ -.. .: zl- 0< e:;z 00 ze:; 51- b-W 1(fJ . --.' / '\. -:--~ \ ' , L- I , \.... co" \ \ ...~ II) - --4-"!- ---L :rrt-<~44.75 =- . I -'1 ~ I '""PROPOSED I : DIVISION , UNE \ '- - S. UNE OF lHE N. 4.00 FEET OF LOT 4 'n LaJ :::- ,....... c( · ..JC/) 1.< I.&J :t:::E .tJ "'-' ::L. "lCD r)CD ::.:it'i r- _ :J"- eEL ,( , (,\ ... .. "... 1;. .- .. ......~ .iolL 30 0 ~ .." .. .. .. ~.. 1: . I :.. .. .. , .. .. . ..... ..~.. ~ .. 200.05 (MEAS.) (200.00 PER PLA 1) . .HADY HILLS .ROAD. ".. 15 , ~ (SCALE IN FEET ) t:~ 0:: ....C) 30 u ~ .~ .,.D ~ ~ N E " s 6Q I . 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: 3 September 2004 RE: Meldahl, Ann - Minor Subdivision FILE NO. 405(04.25) In 1991 Ann Meldahl and her husband split their property at. 6180 Cathcart Drive (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached) into three lots (see Exhibit B). They subsequently sold the westerly lot and some time between then and now, recombined the easterly two lots. They now wish to redivide the lots exactly as they were in 1991. . With one exception, there are no issues to speak of relative to this request. The one thing that should be considered is park dedication fees that are required when new lots are created, Although these charges were paid in 1991, the rates were less ($750) than they currently are ($1500). Consequently, staff recommends that the difference be made up at this time. Subject to the applicant paying $750, and recording the division within 30 days of her receipfofthe Council Resolution approving the division, approval of the minor division is recommended. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Larry Brown Ann Meldahl ft ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER it 8 F. . . -~."",,"- ~ LY ~i~~I=I~~ ~f= 1 (.,.."., ......l"~ '\ "- \ _., ~La- ~ ~ ~_~<\ ~ ~ r---\:~ I ;<....c: ~ ., ~~~ ., '\~ r\: ~ V I. :. \\--1 ~ I \., Ib- ~ ~ -~ ~" 0 : -= --00 /\%11'\ ~ rn\ i I · · u_ I ;::.-- I-- _ ~VC -,~ ..- m · ~R--- ,I JL D \ · Y',( "" II r--.JL I--~"~ I H, =J ~ = \Xii ~ ~- j?- 11 1. .'. I~I of!': i--" 5 I-- . .. Cl' · · ~- '>-- tJ'~ ~ ~~ 1____ J:lo :J ... un:i.- ., I . . .-. · '. 0 .' '\ H ~- - ., .,., .,., l' ., ., ., .,., ., ~ . · - n\\t T /" :=\ \\\ ,~._. j ~ :::---- . hi ~~ \~~ ~ ~ J ~., "b1~ ~ \-\~W~, ~~ W~s=;:::::-- I ~'GtA ." ,Q"- ~ ~/ ~ 1- -11 L E )~ 1 ., ., ~~~ ~ / / I r---I\ \ I .. IT., .,. ~ j { i ~ -flY Exhibit A \~ i! _ ~ SITE LOCATION dr/E:WI~ 7 f"-. ~ Meldahl-MinorSubdivision !! : '8tB~~; ., ., teoJ' rn .," 83ffiill, ,83 ~/~ \ l-J ~r/nY;~ .~ C/> x...LJ~ ~ / I '~ ~!"~ l= r \LLL ~~ ~~~~ \ I-- I ~ '\1J HW-{:: ~ T~;:: .- ~l '-- '^~v ~"'" a :4~ ~ >>.. ,~w' ~: '1' .~); " .~$ , 'r N '0 0... C\ ~ /' ~ ~ .~ ~ 'IA~ -, ~O, .1), ~ ' .cJl' ,,,'" ~'\ ..'" .e',)L ffbs ~~(J'CJP ~ -~ , . ~. I'll i' i "', l~cI. +~J6 .~ " '\ \ ~)J ~, * --.~. ~ ~ J..- '.j '-~ ~, i ,. ~ :-J I'a .' ~ "U .. .. ~ . i "," .....V1I..,.'i " 1,,.,..l4r.t;:1, _ j' ~ .) ~ '..-,. ~ 0,."81/ 'J ~~'."~ fl:\('~~ f~JO.Ad . -auu6H . S6.J:O'l[ e'+4li!i/MaUU T."u . .JUd..Ld"l~ ~dd~ ~ tG ~"'''P1 ""i~ . uor:~d1' .J:osaQ 1 ... ... " .GMZ9 . /1 'oO€ ~ ...a,eLI ..ba N . . 13"l::IVd ClYCMt ~ " J ~ SI..'c;1Z1 '/ i" t"; ( ! I " ," · ! I ~/"V"" i - - - 'I''':'~:':':'::':':.:''':L:,,::-:.k I . ," 1 ~ ," . . . . '''''1/. - - - - - -/- " _ . _ _ . 0;;.....0... '- -I' e .,. .--.....-.-. ~' ~ .. ..J ~ ' \ \\ . ,>-' >- ~ 00 >- E-c ,:Q~ ....~ :E~ .- 0 ~~ ~~ .l3'.9tU.S .LS3M ;: '", ..., - \ .fI., I &E:.'I'ZI 'I/,b; l.'QO.OP S ~ ~~. , . . t : :: :$95f.: :.-:.-- ....-. h. - -'.. - .., - - - . - . .. ,..;",;' .. - - - .;-~ -'-56 . - .. . ... \ w'S. 'Z: o ..... '" I i I~~ Il ~ ...__..__..-.~... I .--.------.- - -/ S"hl"7'l1' 'ltJ.li""'M~I'f"'IW ~~,~;'~../ sv.nlf "'J,.fIs""'~1\1N1\01I ';I .1.0'1 :l 0 '../J g'E;t! .J.S9l"1 ~o '3rIl, .J.<;1i3 .IJ'+'lw-ac;.V;l _ ",~(lUn.. ""..............0 ,",0 .~ f'1, 8v , ." S cobS N ....:s". ...". .........::. . ..., , CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBDIVISION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR ANDREW AND DOROTHY MELDAHL WHEREAS, Andrew and Dorothy Meldahl (Applicants) are the owners of certain real property in the City of Shorewood, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have applied to the City for a subdivision of said real property into two parcels legally described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and . WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was reviewed by the City Planner in a memorandum, dated 3 September 2004, which report is on file at the Shorewood City Offices; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was considered by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting on 7 September 2004, the minutes of which meeting are on file at the Shorewood City Offices; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was considered by the City Council at its regular meeting on 27 September 2004, at which time the Planner's recommendations and the minutes of the Planning Commission were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the City staff. . WHEREAS, the subdivision requested by the Applicants complies in all respects 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 herein be divided into two parcels, legally described in Exhibit B. 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 with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within thirty (30) days of the date of the certification of this resolution. -1- Lel!al Description - Proposed Parcel A The east 121.16 feet of the west 475.69 feet of Lot 2, Minnewashta Acres, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying north ofthe south 17 feet thereof. Lel!al Description - Proposed Parcel B That part of Lot 2, Minnewashta Acres, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying east of the west 476.69 feet thereof and north of the south 17 feet thereof. . . Exhibit B -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: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council l\ l;) Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator \)Y September 23,2004 Resolution regarding Legislation Mfecting Six Mile Creek . At its September 13 meeting, the City Council reviewed issues regarding Six-Mile Creek with Tom Skramstad, Chair ofthe Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) and Shorewood's representative to the LMCD. The primary matter was legislation adopted at the end of the 2004 session which superseded the LMCD's authority to regulate boat access on Six Mile Creek. The LMCD had circulated a model resolution to its 14 member cities and its own proposed resolution regarding its opposition to the action taken by the Legislature. To date, no city has adopted adopted such a resolution. At the September 13 meeting, the Council indicated it would like to consider a resolution stating its disagreement with the legislative process on this matter, and stating its encouragement for the LMCD to work with owners of four properties whose historic use of access to Lake Minnetonka be restored. . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: A resolution, which has been modified from the LMCD's proposed resolution for its member cities, has been prepared for Council's consideration :It- 91} ft ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLE.D PAPER . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 04 -- A RESOLUTION RELATINGNG TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND MINNESOTA LAWS 2004, CHAPTER 255, SECTION 243, REGARDING TO SIX MILE CREEK WHEREAS, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) is a special purpose political subdivision of the State, created pursuant to Laws 1967, Chapter 907, and Laws 1969, Chapter 272, later codified as Minnesota Statutes, Sections 103B.601 through 103B.645; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, grant the LMCD the powers to undertake research to . determine the condition and development of Lake Minnetonka ("the Lake"), to develop a comprehensive program to eliminate pollution, to regulate the types of boats permitted to use the Lake and the use of various parts ofthe Lake, and to regulate the construction and maintenance of docks on the Lake; and WHEREAS, throughout its existence the LMCD has developed a comprehensive regulatory program governing the use and development of the Lake to protect and preserve the Lake as a vital environmental and recreational resource of the State; and WHEREAS, in 2002, the LMCD began a detailed review of the effect of the present and future use and development of Six Mile Creek, Painters Creek, and Long Lake Creek; and WHEREAS, this review was a well publicized, open, public legislative process; and WHEREAS, after careful consideration of evidence and testimony, and of the conflicting or . differing interests of the Lake's ecology and wildlife, riparian landowners, developers, and recreational users ofthe Lake, the LMCD adopted its Ordinance No. 178 in 2002; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Legislature adopted Laws of Minnesota 2004, Chapter 255, Section 43, which removed Six Mile Creek from the jurisdiction of the LMCD; and WHEREAS, this law was passed by the Legislature without consultation with the cities around the Lake, the LMCD, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, among others, and was passed without public hearings; and WHEREAS, the LMCD is a competent and appropriate local agency which can devote the necessary time to the unique issues presented by Lake Minnetonka, afford appropriate protection to the environment and the public health, safety and welfare, adopt and enforce regulations on a uniform Lake-wide basis, and mediate the conflicting interests of the many stakeholders in Lake Minnetonka; and . :.t . .' . 2 WHEREAS, the legislation cited above deprives certain areas of the Lake of the benefits and protection of the LMCD and its regulation of development and use of the Lake; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shore wood that: I) The Council believes that the process followed in the public consideration of Laws of Minnesota 2004, Chapter 255, Section 43, was not appropriate, as it did not afford full participation by key stakeholders, including the LMCD and the 14 member cities within it. 2) The Council believes that such legislation undermines the authority of the LMCD, and will encourage others to find ways to side-step well-established processes and procedures regarding its regulation of the Lake. 3) The Council urges the Legislature to reconsider its action to adopt the legislation cited above. 4) The Council urges the LMCD Board of Directors to take appropriate measures so that four properties along Six Mile Creek can have restored their historic use of access to Lake Minnetonka which was removed in LMCD Ordinance No. 178. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 27TH day of September, 2004. Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator , r CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHQREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council 1\ "- Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator L.,.Y September 23,2004 Amending Selection of Park and Planning Commission Chairs . Earlier this year, the City Council held work-session discussions regarding the terms of members of its advisory commissions. During these work sessions, Council identified changes in the starting date of a term and the selection of chairs of the commissions as ones worth considering further. At the September 13 meeting, the Council adopted an ordinance amending the terms of commissioners. While they will remain three-year terms, they will run from March 1 to the last day of February. Currently, the Code requires that the Council appoint the Planning Commission chair and vice-chair and the Park Commission chair. In practice for the past several years, the commissionsthemselves have selected these officers. At the September.13 meeting, Council directed staff to an ordinance to remove the appointment by Council and require that the respective commissions select their officers. . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council adopt the Ordinance amending the selection of the Chairs . and Vice-Chairs of the Park and Planning Commission, such that these positions are selected by the members of the respective Commissions. ft t.J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 4FqB , ..,,1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 201 AND 202 OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE RELATING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND PARK COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 201.03, Subd. 2, of the Shorewood City Code shall be amended to read as follows: Subd. 1. Term: The term of the chairperson and vice-chairperson shall be for one year. The . chairperson and vice-chair shall either be reappointed or replaced by the City Couneil at the first regular City Council meeting of each calendar year be selected annually bv the members of the Commission. Section 2. Section 202.03, Subd. 1, of the Shorewood City Code shall be amended to read as follows: Subd.1. Officers: The chairmafl or ehairwoffiafl, as the ease maybe, and vice-chair of the Park Commission shall be selected by the City Council members of the Commission, and that those person~ shall serve in that their respective position~ for a period of one year. The Park Commission may appoint a secretary who mayor may not be a mem.ber of the Commission from among its members. . Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect following its passage and publication. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 27th day of September, 2004. Woody Love, Mayor Attest: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk , t CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 201 AND 202 OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE RELATING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND PARK COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 201.03, Subd. 2, ofthe Shorewood City Code shall be amended to read as follows: . Subd. 1. Term: The term of the chair and vice-chair shall be for one year. The chair and vice- chair shall be selected annually by the members of the Commission. Section 2. Section 202.03, Subd. 1, of the Shorewood City Code shall be amended to read as follows: Subd. 1. Officers: The chair and vice-chair of the Park Commission shall be selected by the members of the Commission, and those persons shall serve in their respective positions for a period of one year. The Park Commission may appoint a secretary from among its members. Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect following its passage and publication. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 27th day of . September, 2004. 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 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council !\ 1\ Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator UJ.J September 23,2004 Status of Committees' Work on Excelsior Branch of Hennepin County Library I. Committees have been meeting for the last year or so regarding a larger facility for the Excelsior Branch of the Hennepin County Library. The information in this memorandum is based on a conversation between myself and CouncilmemberLizee, Shorewood's representative to one ofthe current committees. It will provide a framework for the discussion she will lead on this item during the September 27 Council meeting. The Issue: Hennepin County Library currently leases its space from the City of Excelsior. The library was built in the mid-1960s, and at that time the South Lake Minnetonka cities contributed funds toward its construction. The current library has about 3,500 square feet of space, and space planning analysis suggests that two to three times that amount of space is needed. Hennepin County Library would not build a new facility, but would seek to lease space for a larger library. . The Committees: In the latter part of2003, Hennepin County Library convened a committee of interested parties and residents in the Excelsior area. The Library Roles and Services Committee met from October through December 2003. It did the preliminary analysis of what services were available, services that were needed but unable to be provided, and what the Hennepin County Library should plan for as next- and longer-term steps. This committee underscored the importance that the Excelsior Branch would serve the larger South Lake Minnetonka community. The Library Roles and Services Committee was followed up by two committees that started at the same time. . Hennepin County Library convened the Library Committee to follow-up on the work of the Roles and Services Committee. It was hoped that a broad cross-section of residents would participate on this committee. Hennepin County Library asked the five city councils to . appoint representatives (and Shorewood named Chris Lizee as its representative and Laura Turgeon as alternate). The other city councils appointed councilmembers or staff; only non- government person was appointed among the cities. The City of Excelsior has provided staff support to the Library Committee. The Library Committee's work would be completed with a presentation of its recommendations to each of the five city councils. n ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #CjC" Discussion re: Excelsior Branch, Hennepin County Library September 27,2004, City Council Meeting Page Two . The City of Excelsior formed a Public Facilities Work Group. While its scope could be broad, it focused on building needs regarding the Library and the Excelsior City Hall. It invited the Library Committee to participate in its deliberations, and several joint meetings have been held. Interplav of the Committees: Councilmember Lizee reports that several members of the Library Committee have become frustrated with the direction of the Public Facilities Work Group. In June or so, the City of Excelsior engaged the services of Wold Architects to perform space planning, a structural analysis of the current City Hall/Library/former Fire Station building, and a location identification and analysis for several public facilities. The scope of alternatives seemed to narrow quickly to reuse and add to the existing facility, and ideas for potential uses in that one building expanded to include a Library, City Hall, Post Office, Licensing Center (to replace the one in Greenwood), and parking structure. Excluding the parking structure, the multi-use facility would grow from the current 12,000 square feet to 24,000 square feet. Recent discussions have limited the . defined users to include the Library and City Hall; other spaces would be available to "future tenants" and there would be a parking "area". Cost estimates suggest that a remodeled/enlarged Library at the current facility may be $300,000 less expensive than building a new one. The Library Committee believes that there should be a larger community consensus of how and where the new Library facility should be located. Several Library Committee members have felt, however, that the Work Group has been trying to convince them of its preferred alternative to retrofit the building, and to co-opt their consideration of alternative locations. They question whether such meetings should continue. Other Cities' Actions: On September 16, the cities of Deep haven and Greenwood sent letters to the City of Excelsior, informing the latter that they no longer would be participating in the work of the Library Committee. Both cities noted there would be little likelihood that they would be participating financially in a new library facility. . City Council Action: The City Council should have discussion about whether and how it wants to participate in planning for a facility for the Excelsior Branch of the Hennepin County Library.