The URL can be used to link to this page

061002 CC Reg AgP . ~ .. 41 /.." CITYOF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 10, 2002 S7SS COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call B. Review Agenda Mayor Love_ Garfunkel_ Liz6e _ Zerby _ Turgeon _ 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes May 28, 2002 (Att.-#2A 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.-#3A Claims List) B. Appeal Notice to Remove (Att.-#' 3B Planning Director's Memorandum) Appellant: Anna Williams Location: 5910 Galpin Lake Road C. Appeal Notice to Remove (Att,#3C Planning Director's Memorandum) Appellant: Michael Hoy Location: 25480 Smithtown Road D. Approving the Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program Joint Cooperation Agreement (Att.-#3D Administrator's memorandum, Resolution) E. Schedule Public Hearing Date for Disposition of Surplus Real Estate (Att.-#3E Planning Director's memorandum) 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken.) S. PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS A. Presentation of Service A ward to Former Park Commissioner Dan puzak .. 1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10,2002 .. PAGE20F3 B. Wetland Assessment Report by 5th graders at Minnewashta Elementary School C. Presentation of the 2001 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) by Steve McDonald, CPA (Att.-#5C Finance Director's memorandum) 6. PARKS 7. PLANNING - Report by Representative A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning District Amendment, Conditional Use Permits and Requestfor Vacation of Public Street Right-of-Way - Cub Foods (Att. #7 A Planning Commission Findings of Fact) Applicant: Location: John Uban(on behalf of Shorewood Village Shopping Center) 23680 State Highway 7 and 6095 Lake Linden Drive B. Setback Variance (Att.-#7B Planning Director's Memorandum) Applicant: Location: James Quandt 22425 Murray Street C. Setback Variance (Att.-#7C Planning Director's Memorandum) Applicant: Location: Mark and Kathy Simanek 25625 Wild Rose Lane 8. GENERAL A. Request from Mr. Dennis Jabs regarding Radisson Inn Road (Att.-#8A Public Works Director's memorandum) B. Ordinance Amendment Relating to Sale of Fireworks (Att.-#8B Administrator's memorandum, Draft Ordinances, Resolution) C. Request for No Parking Signs - Gideon's Woods Townhome Association (Att.-#8C Planning Director's memorandum) D. Approving Commitment to Financing for Public Safety Facilities (Att.-#8D Administrator's memorandum, Resolution) E. Commitment to Financing for Mound Fire Station (Att.-#8E Administrator's memorandum, Resolution) 9. ENGINEERINGIPUBLIC WORKS A. Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Advertisement for Bids for Freeman Park Parking Lot/South Access Closure (Att-#9A Public Works Director's memorandum) :. .' (f', \' i CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2002 PAGE 3 OF3 10. REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff 1. Gideon Glen 2. County Road 19 Intersection B. Mayor & City Council 11. ADJOURN ~. . E~. 11 J. . 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, 10 June 2002 Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval. Agenda Item #3B Anna Williams has requested an extension of the deadline to comply with a Notice to Remove. Since she has made good progress toward compliance, staff recommends that she be given to the end of June to correct violations. Approval requires a simple majority vote. Agenda Item #3C: Michael Hoy requests additional time to obtain recreational vehicle licensing for a bus he keeps on his property. Staff recommends that his deadline be extended to 25 June, after which the vehicle should be removed from the site if it can not be licensed as a recreational vehicle. Approval of the extension requires a simple majority vote by the Council. Agenda Item #3D: The City participates in a Joint Cooperation Agreement with "Urban" Hennepin County for the federal Community Development Block Grant program. This arrangement is used with Virtually all cities in Hennepin County. The current agreement will expire at the end of this fiscal year (September 30); consequently, a new agreement- for FY2003-2005 - is proposed. Hennepin County has placed some amendments in the new agreement. The federal government and Hennepin County control the purse strings. Staff recommends signing up for another three years. Agenda Item #3E: John Pastuck is interested in purchasing the remnant property from the Church Road cul-de-sac project: He proposes to combine it with the property to the east . of the cul-de-sac to create four residential lots. This has been approved for two other parties previously. What has been discussed in those cases is to sell the land for the amount of two of the original assessments for the Church Road project (approximately $11,000 to $13,000 per unit). Mr. Pastuck's lender would like to obtain a purchase agreement to formalize the transaction. The City Attorney recommends that a public hearing be scheduled for 8 July to consider the disposition of public property. By then we will have obtained a recommendation from the City Assessor as to whether the price being considered is adequate. ft ~., PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER \It Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of 10 June 2002 Page 2 of3 Agenda Item #5A: Former Park Commissioner Dan Pnzak will be present this evening to receive a plaque for his seven years of service on the Park Commission. His term of service was from January 1995 - March 2002. .~. . Agenda Item #5B: Minnewashta Elementary School representatives and 5th grade students will be present this evening to make a Wetland Assessment presentation to the Council. Agenda Item #5C: Steve McDonald, CPA, from !he audit linn of Abdo, Eick, & Meyers, will present the City of Shorewood's Certified Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for year 2001. The report is included with the agenda materials. After the presentation, the City Council is asked to accept the CAFR report with a simple motion. Agenda Item #6: As the Park Commission has not met since !he last Council meeting, !here will be no report from the Park Commission at this Council meeting. Agenda Item #7 A: CUB Foods application for a Comp Plan amendment, rezoning and . couditional use permits willlinaIly make it to !he Council Monday night. The Planning . Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the most recent plans. The Commission's Findings of Fact is enclosed for your review. Staff points out that several steps remain to be completed if the Council is in agreement with the Planning commission. The Council should direct staff to prepare a resolution adopting findings of fact and either approving or denying the requests. If the Council is willing to approve the request, it must be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for its determination as to whether the project has metropolitan area significance. A public hearing should be scheduled for 8 July to consider the requested right-of-way vacation. By then, staffwill also prepare a detailed development contract for the proj ect. The developer should also submit a final plat for approval at that meeting. Since this request involves a Comp Plan amendment and a rezoning from residential to commercial, a four-fifths vote of the Council is necessary for approval. Agenda Item #7B: The planning Commission has voted unanimously to recommend approval . of a setback variance for Jim Quandt. He proposes to add a second story to a nonconforming home at 22425 Murray Street. The recommendation is subject to the conditions suggested in the Planning Director's memorandum. Approval by the Council requires a simple majority vote. Agenda Item #7C: The Planning Commission vote unanimously to recommend approval of an after-the-fact setback variance for Mark and Kathy Simanek. The Simaneks built a covered porch approximately 1-2 feet from the right-of-way of Eureka Road without a building permit. Approval of the variance requires a simple majority vote by the Council. AgendaItem#8A: Mr. Dennis Jabs who resides at 20915 Radisson Road. Mr. Jabs has requested that this item be placed on the agenda., and that he be given an opportunity to address the City Council. Of particular concern to Mr. Jabs, is the volume of traffic that utilizes Radisson Road as a bypass, during lane closures or other disruptions on State Highway 7. .. ~' . Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of 10 June 2002 Page 3 of3 Agenda Item #8B: The Minnesota legislature enacted an amendment to Minn. Stat. ~624.20, subd. 1, removing a category of non-aerial, non-explosive fireworks from its definition of prohibited fireworks. This new legislation has made the Shorewood City Code 603.05, subd. 3 obsolete. The League of Minnesota Cities has endorsed two model ordinances, established by the City of Bloomington, relating to the sale and use of fireworks. In addition to the ordinances, a resolution adopting a license fee for fireworks dealers is also required. Staffhas also prepared a resolution approving publication of Ordinance No. 386 by title and summary. Approval of the two ordinances and the two resolutions requires simple majority vote. Agenda Item #8C: Representatives of the Gideon's Woods Townhome Association have requested that the Council revisit the issue of "no parking" signs at the comer of Glen Road and County Road 19. . Agenda Item #8D: The Boards of the Excelsior Fire District and South Lake Minnetonka Police Department are requesting that the city councils approve resolutions supporting the proposed public safety facilities and identifying the budget for them; The proposal is the same as the one presented to the Council by the Chiefs in May. A standard resolution has been prepared for consideration by the city councils. Staff suggests that any additional concerns or expectations be directed to the City's representative on the Boards, so that they can be discussed and acted upon by the Boards as the plans are further refined. A simple majority vote is required on the Resolution. . Agenda Item #8E: The Mound HRA plans to issue financing for a fire and police facility in July. It has requested its contract cities to adopt a resolution in which they would concur with the cost allocation for fmancing: that it would be added as a lease cost - an operating expense -in the Mound Fire Department budget, and that it would be allocated under the operating budget formula. The additional annual cost for Shorewood would be approximately $5,400. The proposed Resolution is not a binding commitment nor and extension ofthe duration of the agreement for services. A simple majority vote is required on the Resolution. Agenda Item #9A: City Staff has been working with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT) on a "Cooperative Agreement Project," for the access closure and parking lot improvements for the south end of Freemen Park. Plans have been prepared by WSB and Associates, Inc. and have been submitted to MN/DOT, and have been approved by MN/DOT for bidding. The City Council may recall that of particular concern is the issue of Mr. and Mrs. Osha's driveway. This driveway shares the entrance of Freeman Park from State Highway 7. During the information meeting, Mr. and Mrs. Osha were very concerned and upset about the final proposal to relocate their driveway from State Highway 7 to the proposed parking lot. Concerns centered on access for emergency vehicles and issues relating to address numbering. Attachment 4 is a letter, which the Oshas have provided in response to the proposed project. . . J( CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDA Y, MAY 28,2002 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. MINUTES DR fl 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Counci!member Garfunkel, acting as Mayor for this meeting, called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: Acting Mayor Garfunkel, Councilmembers Uzc!e, Turgeon, and Zerby; Administrator Dawson; Attorney Thomas Gnmp, of !..arkin, Hoffman, Daly, and Lindgren, Ltd., sitting in for Attorney Keane; Engineer Brown; Finance Director BUrton; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Mayor Love B. Review Agenda Zerby moved, Lizee seconded, approving the Agenda as presented, Motion passed 4/0, 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes May 13, 2002 Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, Approvlug Ibe City Council Regnlar Meeting Minntes of May 13, 2002, as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Acting Mayor Garfunkel reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Councibnember T\ugeon reqnested Item 3F be removed from the Coosent Agenda and moved to Item 6B for further consideration and discussion. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Approval of Contract for Recording Secretary Services C. Adopting REsOLUTION NO. 02.~ "A Resolntion APProving a SingIe, Temporary Gambling License for Ibe Storefront Group, at Ibe MiunetoDka Country Club, 24575 Smithtown Road." D. ApproVal of the RecYcIlng Grant Agreement wtlb Hennepin Connty Environmental Services E. Sign Permit - Waterford Plaza Applicant: Signart Co. Inc., (on bebaIf of Waterford Center, L.L.P.) #~IJ CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MAY 28,2002 Page 2 of6 Location: 19905 Highway 7 F. Sign Permit - Southshore Community Park Applicant: Tonka Signcrafters, (on behalf of Shorewood Park Foundation) Location: 5355 St. Alban's Bay Road (This item was removed from the Consent Agenda to be<Ome Item 6B for Cnrther disCussion and consideration.) G. Sign Permit - Shorewood Market Applicant: Ford Thatcher Location: 5680 County Road 19 H. Adopting ORDINANCE NO. 385, "An OrdiDBnce Amending the Curb Side Pick-uP Start Time for Spring Clean-Up" 1. Setting the Date for a Budget Work-Session Motion passed 4/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS A. Mound Fire Department Aunual Report for the Year 2001 Administrator Dawson introduced Mound Fire Department (MFD) Chief Greg pederson. noting it had been a pleasure to know and work with him for the past year. Administrator Dawson also explained Mound provided fire services to the Shorewood residents living on Encbanted and Shady Islands. Cbief Pederson provided an overview of the MFD Annual Report for the Year 2001. He stated the Mound P'ne Department covered only a small portion of the City of Shorewood. bnt was happy to do so. In addition. he explaincd the Year 2001 bad been successfol for the Department as it bad a full complement of 37 firefighters. He uoted the activity level to be quite bigh, responding to 614 calls in the past year (approximately 2 per day). He cited additioual accomplishments for the year including establishing a Fire Commission comprised of representatives of the six cities the MFD served. maintaining staffing levels. approval of a full-time fire cbief. purchase of a neW engine. initiation of a police and Fire Facility project. and snccessfol completion of the 50& Annnal Fish Fry with the largest crowd in the history of this event. He explained cballenges for the upcoming years to include maintaining ]'llCIIlherS. meeting training mandateS and standards. continuing to provide cost-effective quality custoroer service. provide adeqoate financial resuurces to successfully support the DepartmCllt. provide an adequate facility. continue to focus on environJOCntaI issues, and implementation of a new communications system He explained 97% of the 2001 Budget bad been expended. and he noted the anticipated cost to the neW police and Fire facility to be approximately $6,855.000. He then delailed financial plans for the '. . . . . CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES · MAY 28, 2002 Page 3 of6 proposed Facility, stating Shorewood's portion would be approximately $5,361 with financing costs. He then thanked Council for the time to present this report, noting detailed annual reports regarding the budget and financing of the proposed Police and Fire Facility had been distributed previously. In response to Councilmember Turgeon and Zerby's questions, Chief Pederson explained the design for the facility included six bays for fire engines, as well as shared space for training, fitness, and locker rooms. The anticipated cost of approximately $6.9 million was the total cost for the building, not including cost of land, as the facility would be built on the existing site of the Fire Department. Councilmember Turgeon complimented the Chief on a wonderful summary of the project provided in a newsletter format to residents and interested parties. Chief Pederson thanked Council, stating it was a pleasure to be able to serve the City of Shorewood. 6. PARKS A. Report on Park Commission Regular and Work Session Meetings Held May 14, 2002 Commissioner Meyer reported on matters considered and actions taken at the Park Commission Meetings of May 14, 2002 (as detailed in the minutes of the meetings). B. Sign Permit - Southshore Community Park Applicant: Tonka Signcrafters, (on behalf of Shorewood Park Foundation) Location: 5355 St. Alban's Bay Road Councilmember Turgeon stated she had requested this item be removed from the Consent Agenda, as she was concerned about "support" of the proposed wording on the sign. Engineer Brown explained the Park Commission had approved the proposed wording for the signage. Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, Approving a Sign Permit for a sign to be erected at the Southshore Community Park for Tonka Signcrafters, (on behalf of the Shorewood Park Foundation), 5355 St. Alban's Bay Road. Motion passed 4/0. 7. PLANNING- COmmissioner Woodruff reported on matters considered and actions taken at the Planning Commission Meetings of May 21, and My 23,2002, (as detailed in the minutes of those meetings). A. C.U.P. and Setback Variance - Little League Dugouts _ Freeman Park Applicant: South Tonka Little League Association Location: Freeman Park, 25800 Highway 7 Director Nielsen explained last year the City granted South Tonka Baseball a Conditional Use Permit to construct dugout shelters in three locations on Fields 1 and 2 at Freeman Park. The structures built did not conform to the approved plans and were required to be removed. Representatives of South Tonka had now requested approval for seasonal awnings in place of the permanent structures. The seasonal awnings were to be comprised of dark green canvas awnings that would be stretched and laced between a framework of fence pipe rails, similar in appearance and installation to boat dock canopies found CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2002 Page 4 of 6 commonly in the Lake Minnetonka area. Director Nielsen also explained a foorth location that reqnired a setback variance (third base side of Field 2) had not been approved as part of last year's reqnest; however. the seasonal natare of the shelters shed a different light on this variance. Since fencing was allowed to be six feet high along the property line. the awning could be stretched from the fence to some taller poles at the front of the dngont. He also noted the Park and Planning Commissions had recommended approval of this case. LizOe moved, Zerhy seconded, Adopting RESOLUf10N NO. 02.045 "A Resolntion Granting A Conditional Use Permit and Variance Reqnest for Little League Dugonts for Sonth Tonka Little League Association, at Freeman Park, 25800 Highway 7." Motion passed 4/0. B. C.U.P. for Accessory Space over 1200 Square Feet Applicant: Dick and Arnette Lindeen Location: 28005 Boulder Bridge Drive Director Nielsen explained the applicants had applied for a Cooditional Use Permit to construct a tbree . car attaChed garage on their property. located at 28005 Boulder Bridge Drive. He noted the floor area of tbe new garage. combined with an existing attached garage. brought the total area of accessory space on the property over 1200 square feet. He noted the property contained 68.970 sqnare feet of area, and the existing garage was end-loading from the north. while the proposed garage addition would be perpendicular facing east along with the honse. Director Nielsen then reviewed the necessary criteria for a Conditional Use Permit and found compliance with all necessary Zoning Code requirements. Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 02-046, "A Resolntion Granting a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space over 1200 Sqnare Feet for Dick and Arnette Lindeen, 28005 Boulder Bridge Drive." Motion passed 4/0. 8. GENERAL A. Xcel Energy Undergrounding Projects Administrator Dawson explained that in January of this year. the Council had adopted an ordjnance . requiring all nti1ity lines to be undergroanded. As a result. existing overhead Jines became nonconforming and must be placed underground when the lines were replaced. Under rulings by the State of Minnesota. Xcel would be required only to pay for the estimated cost to place facilities overhead. The incremental cost to place facilities underground must be paid by either the City as a corporate entity. or all of the Xcel ratepayers in the City requiring the tines to be ,buried. In the second sceoario, the ratepayers would pay a surcharge on their Xcel bill until costs to Xcel were recovered. However. the mJniunnn and max\mun1 surcharges were $J.OO per month and $4.50 per month respectively. Multiple projects could be pooled within the $4.50 per month cap and the miuimum surcharge for anyone project could then be less than $J.OO per month. Administrator Dawson also explained the maximum length of time for surcharge of any individual project would be five years. Witb regard to these requiremeots. Administrator Dawson further explained, Xcel had notified the City of its intent to add to its feeder line along Smithtown Road from Boulder Bridge south to the City limits. Staff then suggested the project inclnded undergrounding of facilities and requested an estimate of cost. He also explained a decision was imminently needed so that service could be upgraded to provide reliable electrical service to that part of the City prior to the high demand cooling season. In addition, the County Road 19 intersCCtioo project was scheduled for construCtion later this year. and there was also ... '" CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MA Y 28, 2002 Page 5 of6 opportunity to underground facilities as part of the Smithtown Road project from Country Club Road west to the municipal boundary. Administrator Dawson noted in discussions regarding the Smithtown Road project, many residents, especially those living east of Eureka Road, expressed preference to have Xcel facilities placed underground. Administrator Dawson then reviewed the preliminary cost estimates for the three possible projects, noting it appeared all projects could be accomplished without significantly restricting the ability to have additional undergrounding projects subject to the $4.50 per month cap. . Administrator Dawson further explained the implications to private property owners. He stated when electricity was provided to a property directly from a feeder line, it may be necessary for a new service line to be provided to the buildings on site. Furthermore, that service needed to comply with current requirements of the electrical code. Xcel would not pay for this cost, and options had been explored by the City to pay for this cost, however, no suitable solutions for bearing this cost were appropriate at this time. He noted the potential cost to a homeowner for burying the facilities underground would be approximately $500 to $1,200. Administrator Dawson then introduced Pat Cline of Xcel Energy. Mr. Cline, Community Government Relations Manager for Xcel, reviewed the proposed information presented by Administrator Dawson, and explained the eleven potential customers affected in the Smithtown Road project from Boulder Bridge to the City limits would have the option to keep electrical lines overhead at no additional cost. In response to Acting Mayor Garfunkel's questions, Mr. Cline explained there was economy in cost savings to working with the City to underground all facilities at the same time as roadway projects were being completed. Mr. Cline also explained additional information regarding estimates for these projects would be made available at a later time. Zerby moved, Lizee seconded, Approving the Xcel Energy Smith town Road project, including both new and existing lines, be placed underground, and authorized the minimum monthly surcharge to Xcel Energy ratepayers. . Councilmember Zerby stated this motion was consistent with residents' comments and long-term goals of the City. Mr. Cline stated there would be no additional cost to residents for the immediate project; however, the homeowners could choose to underground facilities. Motion passed 4/0. 9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Authorization for Engineering proposal for Smithtown Road Improvement Project Engineer Brown briefly reviewed the proposal for this project, noting a discussion of an off road pedestrian walkway was still pending. Lizee moved, Zerby seconded, Authorizing Acceptance of the Engineering Proposal for the Smith town Road Improvement Project. Motion passed 4/0. '1! CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2002 Page 6 of 6 .. " 10. REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff Administrator Dawson explained this project continued to be reviewed by consultants working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, and he anticipated a meeting to discuss findings in the uext rew weeks. 1. Gideon Glen 2. County Road 19 Intersection There was nothing further to report on this matter at this time. B. Mayor & City Council Councilmember Turgeon requested information and notification be provided to City residents regarding . the proposed Public Safety Facility in a timely manner. 11. ADJOURN Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, adjourning the Regular City Conncil Meeting of May 28, 2002, at 8:42 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Sally Keefe, Recording Secretary John Garfunkel, Acting Mayor . Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator PAYABLES APPROVALS For 6/10/02 Council Meeting . // '/. I~ Prepared by: (tttltfl/l1/ntJ / ~ Catherine ~Ike, ~r. Accountant Reviewed by: ~ ~ Bonnie Burton, Financ Director . Date: Date: &.--?-tJcJ. 6/6 /r; 2- son, City Administrator I)ate: ~~~~~~ .tt 34 11 Check Approval List for 6/1 0/02 Council Meeting Check # Vender Name Description Check Date Invoice # Amount 32920 AT&T WIRELESS SERV 5/30/02 2893733-051 $11.38 32920 AT&T WIRELESS SERV 5/30/02 4160966-051 $32.64 32920 AT&T WIRELESS SERV 5/30/02 4160966-051 $118.39 TOTAL FOR AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES $162.41 32921 ELKE, CATHERINE MAY MILEAGElSPRG 02 TUITION R 5/30/02 $505.68 TOTAL FOR ELKE, CATHERINE $505.68 32922 FASCHING. PATRICIA FEB-MAY MILEAGE EXP 5/30/02 $10.95 TOTAL FOR FASCHING, PATRICIA $10.95 32923 FORTIS BENEFITS INS STD JUNE 2002 5/30/02 $6.00 32923 FORTIS BENEFITS INS STD JUNE 2002 5/30/02 $10.50 32923 FORTIS BENEFITS INS STD JUNE 2002 5/30/02 $10.50 32923 FORTIS BENEFITS INS STD JUNE 2002 5/30/02 $76.50 TOTAL FOR FORTIS BENEFITS INS CO $103.50 32924 FRONTIER ELECTRIC REPL VOLT BREAKER 5/30/02 27874 $205.00 TOTAL FOR FRONTIER ELECTRIC $205.00 32925 GOPHER STATE ONE-C APRIL SVC 5/30/02 2040696 $22.47 . 32925 GOPHER STATE ONE-C APRIL SVC 5/30/02 2040696 $22.48 TOTAL FOR GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL, IN $44.95 32926 GOVERNMENT TRAIN I PLANNINGIZONING WORKSHOP 5/30/02 9932 $1,028.98 TOTAL FOR GOVERNMENT TRAINING SVC $1,028.98 32927 HANUS. TIMOTHY/AMB ESCROW REF-6065 GALPIN LK RD 5/30/02 $1,285.34 TOTAL FOR HANUS, TIMOTHY/AMBER $1,285.34 32928 HEAL THP ARTNERS JUNE DENTAL PREM 5/30/02 16643625 $32.06 32928 HEALTHPARTNERS JUNE DENTAL PREM 5/30/02 16643625 $56.09 32928 HEALTHPARTNERS JUNE DENTAL PREM 5/30/02 16643625 $56.09 32928 HEAL THP ARTNERS JUNE DENTAL PREM . 5/30/02 16643625 $445.40 TOTAL FOR HEALTHPARTNERS $589.64 32929 HENNEPIN COUNTY TR APRIL 2002 ROOM/BOARD 5/30/02 000539 $1,053.57 TOTAL FOR HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER $1,053.57 32930 HENNEPIN COUNTY TR PSTG REIMBURSEMENT 5/30/02 $9.00 TOTAL FOR HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER $9.00 . 32931 KEEFE, SALLY MAY CONTRACT SVCS 5/30/02 $325.00 32931 KEEFE, SALLY MAY CONTRACT SVCS 5/30/02 $300.00 TOTAL FOR KEEFE, SALLY $625.00 32932 LIGHTLY EPICUREAN MTG 5/21/02 5/30/02 2818 $145.79 TOTAL FOR LIGHTLY EPICUREAN $145.79 32933 LOCAL LINK USA BUSI WEB ACCESS/E-MAIL 5/30/02 952204663-0 $111.95 TOTAL FOR LOCAL LINK USA BUSINESS SERVIC $111.95 32934 MINN NCPERS GROUP JUNE 2002 PREM 5/30/02 $12.00 TOTAL FOR MINN NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS $12.00 32935 MN CONWAY AND FIRE ANNUAL FIRE EXTING SVCIINSP 5/30/02 311145 $107.00 32935 MN CONWAY AND FIRE ANNUAL FIRE EXTING SVC/INSP 5/30/02 311145 $160.48 TOTAL FOR MN CONWAY AND FIRE SAFETY $267.48 32936 MN SUN PUBLICATION ORDINANCE 382 5/30/02 505164 $42.90 32936 MN SUN PUBLICATION ORDINANCE 383 5/30/02 505165 $100.10 32936 MN SUN PUBLICATION SIMANEK SETBACK VARIANCE 5/30/02 509728 $42.90 32936 MN SUN PUBLICATION QUANDT SETBACK VARIANCE 5/30/02 509729 $42.90 TOTAL FOR MN SUN PUBLICATIONS $228.80 ~ Check # Vender Name Descriptioll Check Date IllVoice # Amoullt 32937 NATIONAL CAMERA EX DIGITAL CAMERA 5/30/02 $330.10 TOTAL FOR NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE $330.10 32938 NEXTEL COMMUNICATI 5/30/02 052502 $35.86 32938 NEXTEL COMMUNICATI 5/30/02 052502 $35.87 TOTAL FOR NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS $71.73 32939 NORTH STAR ICE 5/30/02 MB214011 $139.20 32939 NORTH STAR ICE 5/30/02 MB214018 $49.80 32939 NORTH STAR ICE 5/30/02 MB214020 $44.40 TOTAL FOR NORTH STAR ICE $233.40 32940 ORONO, CITY OF MAY ANIMAL CONTROL 5/30/02 2153 $1,533.09 TOTAL FOR ORONO, CITY OF $1,533.09 32941 PRUDENTIAL INS CO 0 JUNE LIFE INS PREM 5/30/02 $4.60 32941 PRUDENTIAL INS CO 0 JUNE LIFE INS PREM 5/30/02 $66.50 32941 PRUDENTIAL INS CO 0 JUNE LIFE INS PREM 5/30/02 $35.10 32941 PRUDENTIAL INS CO 0 JUNE LIFE INS PREM 5/30/02 $2.60 32941 PRUDENTIAL INS CO 0 JUNE LIFE INS PREM 5/30/02 $4.55 32941 PRUDENTIAL INS CO 0 JUNE LIFE INS PREM 5/30/02 $4.55 TOTAL FOR PRUDENTIAL INS CO OF AMERICA $117.90 . 32942 PURCHASE POWER METER REFILL 5/30/02 $1,019.00 TOTAL FOR PURCHASE POWER $1,019.00 32943 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 5/30/02 126310-00 ($55.95) 32943 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 5/30/02 126311-00 ($111.90) 32943 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 5/30/02 127674-00 $209.18 32943 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 5/30/02 127674-00 $846.17 32943 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 5/30/02 127675-00 $97.50 32943 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 5/30/02 127676-00 $125.51 32943 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 5/30/02 127676-00 $1,103.72 32943 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 5/30/02 1276n-00 $320,06 32943 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 5/30/02 1276n -00 $1,965.52 TOTAL FOR QUALITY WINE' & SPIRITS CO $4,499.81 32944 QWEST DEX 5/30/02 01126933800 $79.30 TOTAL FOR QWEST DEX $79.30 32945 RANDALL, DANIEL SEC 125 REIMBURSEMENT 5/30/02 $131.00 . 32945 RANDALL, DANIEL SEWER L1C FEE 5/30/02 $23.00 TOTAL FOR RANDALL, DANIEL $154.00 32946 SUN PATRIOT NEWSP SIMANEK SETBACK VARIANCE 5/30/02 170 $29.85 32946 . SUNPATRIOT NEWSP QUANDT SETBACK VARIANCE .5/30/02171 $29.85 TOTAL FOR SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS lNC $59.70 32947 TONKA PRINTING CO. PURCHASE ORDER FORMS 5/30/02 2516 $390.86 TOTAL FOR TONKA PRINl1NG CO. $390.86 32948 US POSTMASTER PSTG FOR JUNE NEWSLETTER 5/30/02 $744.51 TOTAL FOR US POSTMASTER $744.51 32949 WATERFORD CENTER JUNE RENT 5/30/02 $4,806.94 TOTAL FOR WATERFORD CENTER $4,806.94 32950 AFSCME COUNCIL 14 JUNE UNION DUES 6/6/02 $189.35 TOTAL FOR AFSCME COUNCIL 14 $189.35 32951 ANCHOR PAPER COMP 6/6/02 138n6901 $181.46 TOTAL FOR ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY $181.46 32952 BERRY COFFEE CO 6/6/02 287381 $44.00 32952 BERRY COFFEE CO 6/6/02 287382 $24.50 TOTAL FOR BERRY COFFEE CO $68.50 ";.::;i:.,:"^"".....,,,^,u.......__.. :_~'.., ,:_lr;:.;.:.\:.~:e;.~:::<:;,,::E..:..:::_~',<..:..:.;::~:;:":i1_:::.~.:..:~:,;:,;~2:J;'::'>",:,,,:::-:;,:';':-::',,,~~:,;~:~'"::;,;~:':::;'~':,.i2':'::~~ ~'.:d'.E~~:;:t:.::L:,?~"} Thursday, JUlie 06, 2002 .. '." .. ^.' '... .:.:,--: ""-~..,). Z::. ';::"::''-,''::,~:,..;.~.L: .,.> ::.i....~::::.:.:;;:.J..z.;:,"E,.~l,"':l. -:.r'::':',.:_:~:.i.::,-: :.~;;,;;:.~;...;~:,,,::::,,,~, :':~"~:':.::,^i".c.:;: :::.':.:. .:~',;:',;.~. .L.~:~~:.:... ',; r,:,:;~ Page 2018 Check # Vender Name Description Check Date Invoice # Amount 32953 BIFFS. INC. 6/6/02 W158420-42 $742.60 TOTAL FOR BIFFS, INC. $742.60 32954 CHAMPION AMERICA I SIGNS FOR SR CENTER 6/6/02 R104399-01 $106.55 32954 CHAMPION AMERICA I EDDY STATION SIGNS-REPL VAND 6/6/02 R104402-01 $120.75 TOTAL FOR CHAMPION AMERICA INC $227.30 32955 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 6/6/02 240764 $585.30 32955 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 6/6/02 240764 $9.80 32955 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 6/6/02 240765 $339.65 TOTAL FOR EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPAN $934.75 32956 EDINA COURIERS LLC PKG TO HENN CTY COMM HEALTH 6/6/02 49461 $16.90 TOTAL FOR EDINA COURIERS LLC $16.90 32957 GOODIN COMPANY PARKS SUPPLIES 6/6/02 1696577-00 $132.44 TOTAL FOR GOODIN COMPANY $132.44 32958 GRAPE BEGINNINGS. I 6/6/02 46694 $478.00 32958 GRAPE BEGINNINGS. I 6/6/02 46695 $356.00 . 32958 GRAPE BEGINNINGS. I 6/6/02 46696 $299.00 TOTAL FOR GRAPE BEGINNINGS, INC $1,133.00 32959 HERMEL WHOLESALE 6/6/02 355291 $626.24 . 32959 HERMEL WHOLESALE 6/6/02 355291 $16.92 32959 HERMEL WHOLESALE 6/6/02 355292 $494.40 32959 HERMEL WHOLESALE 6/6/02 355293 $889.92 TOTAL FOR HERMEL WHOLESALE $2,027.48 32960 ICMA RETIREMENT TR PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS 6/4/02 6/6/02 302131-0604 $1,040.28 TOTAL FOR ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST.457 $1,040.28 32961 MARRON, RUSSELL MILEAGE 5/20 - 5/31 6/6/02 $3.33 32961 MARRON, RUSSELL MILEAGE 5/20 - 5/31 6/6/02 $3.33 32961 MARRON. RUSSELL MILEAGE 5/20 - 5/31 6/6/02 $3.34 TOTAL FOR MARRON, RUSSELL $10.00 32962 METRO SALES. INC. ROLLS OF MASTERS FOR PRIPORT 6/6/02 42489A $435.72 TOTAL FOR METRO SALES, INC. $435.72 32963 MIDWEST COCA-COLA 6/6/02 63292079 $212.40 32963 MIDWEST COCA-COLA 6/6/02 63292129 $200.58 32963 MIDWEST COCA-COLA 6/6/02 63292137 ($6.02) 32963 MIDWEST COCA-COLA 6/6/02 63292145 $107.00 . TOTAL FOR MIDWEST COCA-COLA BOTTLIN $513.96 32964 MN CHILD SUPPORT P C SCHMID - CHILD SUPPORT 6/6/02 $173.51 ..' . TOTAL FOR MN CHIW SUPPORT PMT CTR $173.51 32965 MN SUN PUBLICATION BIT SEAL COAT BIDS 6/6/02 510921 $117.97 32965 MN SUN PUBLICATION CONCESSION WORKERS ADS 6/6/02 511288 $252.65 TOTAL FOR MN SUN PUBLICATIONS $370.62 32966 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO MISC SHOP SUPPLIES 6/6/02 128154-00 $80.56 TOTAL FOR MTI DISTRIBUTING COMPANY $80.56 32967 NIELSEN, BRADLEY APA CONFER/SPRG TRNG EXPENS 6/6/02 $277.28 TOTAL FOR NIELSEN, BRADLEY $277.28 32968 NORTH STAR ICE 6/6/02 MB214511 $63.60 32968 NORTH STAR ICE 6/6/02 MB214513 $20.40 TOTAL FOR NORtH STAR ICE $84.00 32969 NORTHERN TOOL & EO LIGHT BAR/DISCHARGE HOSES 6/6/02 6294742 $111.82 32969 NORTHERN TOOL & EO LIGHT BAR/DISCHARGE HOSES 6/6102 6294742 $149.07 TOTAL FOR NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIP CO $260.89 Check # Vender Name Description Check Date Invoice # Amount 32970 PANCHYSHYN, JEAN MISC EXP/MILEAGE 6/6/02 $46.94 TOTAL FOR PANCHYSHYN, JEAN $46.94 32971 PAZANDAK, JOSEPH MILEAGE 5/20 - 5/31 6/6/02 $92.35 32971 PAZANDAK, JOSEPH SEC 125 REIMBURSEMENT 6/6/02 $178.65 TOTAL FOR PAZANDAK, JOSEPH $271.00 32972 PERA PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS 6/4/02 6/6/02 $2,218.74 32972 PERA PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS 6/4/02 6/6/02 $2,405.78 TOTAL FOR PERA $4,624.52 32973 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 6/6/02 130608-00 $158.35 32973 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 6/6/02 130609-00 $158.30 32973 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 6/6/02 130676-00 $670.75 32973 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 6/6/02 130676-00 $239.76 32973 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 6/6/02 1306n -00 $29.87 32973 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI . 6/6/02 130721-00 $723.42 32973 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 6/6/02 130721-00 $n8.03 32973 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 6/6/02 130723-00 $964.48 32973 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 6/6/02 130723-00 $2,189.05 TOTAL FOR QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO $5,912.01 . 32974 SHOREWOOD TRUE V BULBS 6/6/02 48157 $10.63 32974 SHOREWOOD TRUE V VACUUM BELT 6/6/02 482n $8.50 32974 SHOREWOOD TRUE V CONTRUCTION ADHESIVE 6/6/02 48384 $6.39 32974 SHOREWOOD TRUE V KEY 6/6/02 48396 $4.76 TOTAL FOR SHORE WOOD TRUE VALUE $30.28 32975 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/6/02 260899 $60.20 32975 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/6/02 260899 $633.35 32975 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/6/02 261090 $23.00 32975 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/6/02 261090 $1,454.95 TOTAL FOR THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPA $2,171.50 32976 TONKA PRINTING CO. SELF-INKING STAMPS 6/6/02 032702 $88.18 TOTAL FOR TONKA PRIN11NG CO. $88.18 329n US FILTER DISTRIBUTI WATER METER/SUPPLIES 6/6/02 8360882 $252.05 TOTAL FOR US FILTER DISTRIBUTION GROUP $252.05 32978 VERIZON WIRELESS. B 6/6/02 $44.73 . TOTAL FOR VERIZON WIRELESS, BELLEVUE $44.73 32979 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 6/11/02 35597800 ($1.55) 32979 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 6/11/02 35598000 $69.51 32979 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 6/11/02 35598100 $72.33 TOTAL FOR BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY $140.29 32980 BELLBOY CORPORATI 6/11/02 23798600 $150.00 32980 BELLBOY CORPORA TI 6/11/02 23798600 $497.60 32980 BELLBOY CORPORATI 6/11/02 23798700 $300.00 32980 BELLBOY CORPORA TI 6/11/02 23798700 $458.40 32980 BELLBOY CORPORATI 6/11/02 23798800 $154.00 32980 BELLBOY CORPORATI 6/11/02 23798800 $196.00 32980 BELLBOY CORPORATI 6/11/02 23809100 ($133.00) 32980 BELLBOY CORPORA TI 6/11/02 23826200 ($18.33) 32980 BELLBOY CORPORA TI 6/11/02 23855000 $150.35 32980 BELLBOY CORPORATI 6/11/02 23855100 $855.15 32980 BELLBOY CORPORATI 6/11/02 23855200 $252.35 TOTAL FOR BELLBOY CORPORATION $2,862.52 32981 BRAUN PUMP & CONT EMERGENCY LIFT STATION REPRS 6/11/02 4709 $1.941.88 TOTAL FOR BRAUN PUMP & CONTROLS $1,941.88 Check # Vender Name Description Check Date Invoice # Amount 32982 DAY DISTRIBUTING 6/11/02 177298 $909.15 32982 DAY DISTRIBUTING 6/11/02 1n299 $751.55 32982 DAY DISTRIBUTING 6/11/02 178208 $457.70 32982 DAY DISTRIBUTING 6/11/02 178210 $1,251.80 32982 DAY DISTRIBUTING 6/11/02 178210 $19.20 32982 DAY DISTRIBUTING 6/11/02 178211 $659.95 TOTAL FOR DAY DISTRIBUTING $4,049.35 32983 E-Z RECYCLING INC. MAY RECYCLING SVC 6/11/02 3800 $5,973.00 TOTAL FOR E-Z RECYCUNG INC. $5,973.00 32984 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 6/11/02 243473 $1,492.20 32984 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 6/11/02 243725 $9.80 32984 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 6/11/02 243725 $676.20 32984 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 6/11/02 243726 $996.85 32984 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 6/11/02 246001 $2,453.85 TOTAL FOR EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPAN $5,628.90 32985 ESS BROTHERS & SON WATER VALVE RISERS 6/11/02 EE2023 $1,263.09 TOTAL FOR ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC $1,263.09 32986 EXCELSIOR ACE HARD BATTERIES 6/11/02 515591 $17.52 32986 EXCELSIOR ACE HARD FUSE 6/11/02 515601 $1.05 . 32986 EXCELSIOR ACE HARD ROPES/CLlPS,ETC 6/11/02 519050 $15.98 TOTAL FOR EXCELSIOR ACE HARDWARE $34.55 32987 EXTREME BEVERAGE 6/11/02 58944 $64.00 TOTAL FOR EXTREME BEVERAGE $64.00 32988 GEEK SaUAD JULY SVC CONTRACT 6/11/02 $500.00 TOTAL FOR GEEK SQUAD $500.00 32989 GREENTOUCH IRRIGATION ELBOW 6/11/02 10166 $117.70 TOTAL FOR GREENTOUCH $117.70 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544276 $0.95 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544437 $291.19 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544438 $93.85 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544438 $621.86 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544442 $64.70 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544443 $25.95 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544443 $1,477.47 . 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544449 $20.85 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544450 $42.95 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 544450 $343.03 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 547389 $398.61 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 547392 $578.93 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 547397 $181.60 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 547398 $123.65 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 547668 $1,915.39 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 547670 $948.72 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 547679 $1,560.48 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 586947 ($4.96) 32990 GRIGGS, COOPER & C 6/11/02 587279 ($16.74) TOTAL FOR GRIGGS, COOPER & COMPANY $8,668.48 32991 J.R'S APPLIANCE DISP SPRING CLEANUP APPLIANCE REC 6/11/02 31677 $1,230.00 TOTAL FOR J.R'S APPLIANCE DISPOSAL $1,230.00 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1au 6/11/02 1404755 $452.75 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1au 6/11/02 1404756 $1,598.50 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1au 6/11/02 1404757 $1,278.45 Check # Vender Name Description Check Date Invoice # Amount 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1404758 $39.00 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1404758 $2,443.94 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1404763 $552.05 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1404764 $1,405.68 32993 JOHNSON BROS LIQU 6/11/02 1407811 $64.70 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407811 $256.50 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407812 $143.70 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407812 $446.75 32993 JOHNSON BROS LIQU 6/11/02 1407813 $64.70 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407813 $188.50 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407814 $12.00 32993 JOHNSON BROS LIQU 6/11/02 1407814 $146.05 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407814 $16.95 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407815 $16.95 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407815 $384.85 32993 JOHNSON BROS LIQU 6/11/02 1407815 $870.27 32993 JOHNSON BROS LIQU 6/11/02 1407822 $16.95 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407822 $20.75 32993 JOHNSON BROS L1QU 6/11/02 1407822 $398.69 . TOTAL FOR JOHNSON BROS LIQUOR CO. $10,818.68 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 121 $2.00 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 152 ($6.40) 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 411918 $24.89 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 411920 $1,031.75 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 411921 $58.80 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 411928 $596.60 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 411929 $15.20 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 414471 $138.80 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 414472 $21.95 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 414485 $2,766.05 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 414486 $15.20 32994 MARK VII 6/11/02 414488 $1,587.55 TOTAL FOR MARK VII $6,252.39 32995 MCLEOD USA 6/11/02 3312225 $90.54 32995 MCLEOD USA 6/11/02 3312225 $90.70 . 32995 MCLEOD USA 6/11/02 3312225 $97.37 32995 MCLEOD USA 6/11/02 3312225 $99.03 32995 MCLEOD USA 6/11/02 3312225 $100.09 32995 MCLEOD USA 6/11/02 3312225 $156.04 32995 MCLEOD USA 6/11/02 3312225 $475.54 32995 MCLEOD USA 6/11/02 3312225 $45.27 TOTAL FOR MCLEOD USA $1,154.58 32996 MINNCOMM PAGING 6/11/02 52006806021 $8.63 TOTAL FOR MINNCOMM PAGING $8.63 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $119.14 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $117.48 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $115.16 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $69.75 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $43.37 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $33.75 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $25.90 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $13.21 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $141.41 32997 MINNEGASCO 6/11/02 $20.81 Check # Vender Name Description Check Date lnvoice # Amount TOTAL FOR MINNEGASCO $699.98 32998 NORTH STAR ICE 6/11/02 MA215111 $103.56 32998 NORTH STAR ICE 6/11/02 MA215112 $67.80 32998 NORTH STAR ICE 6/11/02 MB215116 $112.80 32998 NORTH STAR ICE 6/11/02 MB215209 $5.40 TOTAL FOR NORTH STAR ICE $289.56 32999 OLSEN COMPANIES LINK COIL CHAIN 6/11/02 159386 $109.75 TOTAL FOR OLSEN COMPANIES $109.75 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 3260872 ($5.51) 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SP1RI 6/11/02 3260915 ($6.20) 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 834490 $128.25 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 834490 $199.50 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 834490 $116.00 33001 PHILLIPS WINE& SPIRI 6/11/02 834491 $442.70 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 834491 $578.90 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 834491 $213.00 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 834494 $58.00 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 834494 $106.70 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 834494 $129.02 . 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 836778 $3,490.45 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 836779 $580.55 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 836779 $202.20 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 836780 $653.50 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 836781 $574.45 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRl 6/11/02 836781 $752.45 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 836787 $164.00 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 836788 $66.15 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 836788 $516.76 33001 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRI 6/11/02 836965 $34.25 TOTAL FOR PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS $8,995.12 33002 POTTS, KENNETH N. MAY PROSECUTIONS 6/11/02 $1,608.33 TOTAL FOR POTTS, KENNETH N. $1,608.33 33003 QWEST 6/11/02 $42.73 33003 QWEST 6/11/02 $42.73 33003 QWEST 6/11/02 $89.30 . TOTAL FOR QWEST $174.76 33004 SENIOR COMMUNITY S MAY CLEANING SVCS 6/11/02 $179.15 33004 SENIOR COMMUNITY S MAY CLEANING SVCS 6/11/02 $266.25 TOTAL FOR SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES $445.40 33005 SPEEDWAY SUPERAM 6/11/02 $1,037.39 TOTAL FOR SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA $1,037.39 33006 TALLEN & BAERTSCHI MAY SVCS-LIQ NON-COMPLIANCE I 6/11/02 $191.88 TOTAL FOR TALLEN & BAERTSCHI $191.88 33007 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/11/02 261581 $349.95 33007 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/11/02 261582 $23.00 33007 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/11/02 261582 $2,329.30 33007 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/11/02 261585 $1,367,70 33007 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/11/02 261781 $4,953.10 33007 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/11/02 261781 $50.05 33007 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/11/02 262272 $3,747.75 33007 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/11/02 262273 $48.70 33007 THORPE DISTRIBUTIN 6/11/02 262273 $1,047.20 33007 THORPE D1STRIBUTIN 6/11/02 262277 $65.00 Check # Vender Name Description Check Date Invoice # Amount TOTAL FOR THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPA $13,981.75 33008 TIMBERWALL LANDSC ADHESIVE FOR MANHOLE RINGS 6/11/02 0127528 $155.09 TOTAL FOR TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC $155.09 33009 TRI COUNTY BEVERAG 6/11/02 117742 $185.00 33009 TRI COUNTY BEVERAG 6/11/02 117743 $185.00 TOTAL FOR TRI COUNTY BEVERAGE & SUPPLY $370.00 33010 US FILTER DISTRIBUTI HYDRANT GREASE 6/11/02 8385251 $71.60 33010 US FILTER DISTRIBUTI 6/11/02 8413519 $23.05 TOTAL FOR US FILTER DISTRIBUTION GROUP $94.65 33011 WASTE MANAGEMENT JUNE SVC 6/11/02 0298413-159 $106.39 33011 WASTE MANAGEMENT JUNE SVC 6/11/02 0298414-159 $229.74 TOTAL FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT $336.13 33012 WASTE TECHNOLOGY, SPRG CLEANUP SVC 6/11/02 59345 $23,640.87 TOTAL FOR WASTE TECHNOLOGY, INC. $23,640.87 33013 WINE MERCHANTS 6/11/02 57170 $401.00 33013 WINE MERCHANTS 6/11/02 57171 $807.50 33013 WINE MERCHANTS 6/11/02 57173 $584.00 . TOTAL FOR WINE MERCHANTS $1,792.50 33014 WORLD CLASS WINES, 6/11/02 120092 $1,238.00 TOTAL FOR WORW CLASS WINES,INC $1,238.00 33015 WSB AND ASSOCIATE FREEMAN PK DRIVEWAY CLOSURE 6/11/02 01074-483-1 $5,496.55 33015 WSB AND ASSOCIATE SMITHTOWN RD OVERLAY 6/11/02 01074-583-1 $2,152.00 33015 WSB AND ASSOCIATE CUB FOODS SITE REVIEW 6/11/02 01074-591-0 $2,244.50 33015 WSB AND ASSOCIATE 2001 STREET REHAB-RECON PROG 6/11/02 01074-602-0 $54.00 33015 WSB AND ASSOCIATE GLEN RD STORMWATER PLAN 6/11/02 01074-632-0 $108.00 33015 WSB AND ASSOCIATE GENERAL SVCS 6/11/02 01074-990-1 $308.00 TOTAL FOR WSB AND ASSOCIATES $10,363.05 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02' 0031-505-16 $7.38 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 0114-707-26 $14.76 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 0198-208-36 $396.57 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 0356-200-16 $20.98 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 0727-302-66 $209.27 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 1300-208-10 $60.98 . 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 1477-205-46 $325.89 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 1692-607-26 $539.49 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 1765-206-46 $28.67 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 1966-609-83 $128.07 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 2164-107-16 $9.84 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 2270-109-36 $243.00 33016 XCEL ENERGY 6/11/02 2486-903-26 $50.56 TOTAL FOR XCELENERGY $2,035.46 33017 ZARNOTH BRUSH WOR GUTTER BROOMS 6/11/02 85198 $372.75 TOTAL FOR ZARNOTHBRUSH WORKS, INC $372.75 33018 ZEP MANUFACTURING HORNET SPRAY 6/11/02 57953913 $121.50 TOTAL FOR ZEP MANUFACTURING $121.50 TOTAL CHECKS $161,534.15 'T;i;'~da:v~':iul;; '06;'2002'ic;CC.."~;;;".,,,,,,,, ..~ '.;::.t:i~:;;:,: ~_~; :,;~'.: ';",:':i ~:;',:" ',.:~~;, ';: :.~.~;: f':.,'~.:;.: " . '_'.i',::,';:.'2.'::;:,:'":...::'..:._.L:::.,;:~..~:..~_::.;:~:'_ ~L:";:..:~'::'';.::::~:,<,:~'~~',:;,:;::.:-;,::::,',;"",~;~,,, :~:_ : "";~',:::';;,'::.~',~;':':::";",:.:::',:::::,:~:~;;";..;::l' :::,:,:~:.:;:.;; ,~iii,,'"'J~;:!:~:::::._;,:.::.:::.~..:..'.::, '-:' ';:':~~:;::::,;: ,\~ Page 80f8 PAYROLL APPROVALS For 6/10/02 Council Meeting Prepared by: Catherine Elke, Sr Accountant (!~~ ~ Date: &~-G ..~O~ . Date: ~//)2- nce Director Date: ()p.~b.tJ~ awson, City Administrator . IJ Payroll Register . Check # Last Name First Name MI Check Amt Check Date 1571 BAILEY BOYD C 1,110.07 6/4/02 1572 BURTON BONNIE M 1,690.41 6/4/02 1573 DA VIS CHARLES S 1,097.22 6/4/02 1574 EISCHENS JAMES E 801.17 6/4/02 1575 ELKE CATHERINE M 752.10 6/4/02 1576 FASCHING PATRICIA L 770.40 6/4/02 1577 GROUT TWILA R 766.12 6/4/02 1578 HELLING PAMELA J 745.50 6/4/02 1579 HIRSCH DANA M 153.76 6/4/02 1580 JOHNSON DENNIS D 1,083.56 6/4/02 1581 LUGOWSKI JOSEPH P 1,081.92 6/4/02 1582 MASON BRADLEY J 1,Q70.o3 6/4/02 1583 MOORE JULIE K 421.31 6/4/02 . 1584 MOTTER BROOKE A 549.48 6/4/02 1585 NIELSEN BRADLEY J 933.56 6/4/02 1586 P ANCHYSHY JEAN M 1,078.13 6/4/02 1587 PAZANDAK JOSEPH E 1,416.91 6/4/02 1588 RANDALL DANIEL J 1,144.19 6/4/02 1589 SCHMID CHRISTOPHER E 645.69 6/4/02 1590 SCHNEEWIN JACQUELYN K 1,082.93 6/4/02 1591 STARK BRUCE H 985.62 6/4/02 1592 SWANDBY DONALD R. 1,456.87 6/4/02 1593 TOWER TERR Y R 908.33 6/4/02 1594 ZAVADA MITCHELL C 1,382.96 6/4/02 217306 BAKER RICHARD M 79.45 6/4/02 217307 BROWN LAWRENCE A 1,864.12 6/4/02 . 217308 CARLSON ERIK M 595.06 6/4/02 217309 CURTIS JOHN N 27.05 6/4/02 217310 DAWSON CRAIG W 1,649.14 6/4/02 217311 DUFFY DA VID C 158.78 6/4/02 217312 FIELD DALE F 220.11 6/4/02 217313 HELGESEN PATRICIA R 697.84 6/4/02 217314 KIRCHENWIT GARRETT S 23.68 6/4/02 217315 LATTERNER SUSAN M 329.06 6/4/02 217316 MARRON RUSSELL R 40.10 6/4/02 217317 MASON MICHELLE L 135.23 6/4/02 217318 MELCHER THOMAS J 47.33 6/4/02 217319 OLIVEIRA CHRISTOPHER L 143.96 6/4/02 217320 PLATHE CRAIG V 203.19 6/4/02 217321 THURSTON DOROTHY M 127.38 6/4/02 Total of Checks $29,469.72 ThurSday, June 06, 2002 Page 1 of 1 -. . "~''''. .. ,', '" '" - -- ' '-, -, - ' C Inrespcinsero a,Notice to Remove which was sent to the above-referericed Property'(see' ' , Exhibit A):Ms.Anna Williams.has as!red for an extensi<in to comply with the.notice. Iii <,- , '" her reguesfJetter (EXhibit B) She bas also requested that the City tell her where,her . _ .Jlioperry line is: .In this regain it is "P.to, the oWnerr<i know the locatiOn of the lot line;, __ We'can only .~e that it coincides with the felice on the property. .. .......-.... .. . ~ CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRy CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD; MINNESOTA 55331-8927 . (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 " wWW.ci.shorewood.mn.us'. Cityhall@Ci.ShoreWOOd.mn.us - MEMORANDUM -: TO: . . Mayor and City Council FROM:- '. . Brad Nielsen " DATE:. '." _. RE:' . 8 Ianuary 1998 '. " ,-!\ppeal N~tice t?Remove - Anna W~1liams Propertx (5910 Gaipin ~e Road) ~ .. . "-,.... '.~ .~':::FILE NO_" ..0:.......::.- · . Silic';M.;. williams has made ;gOOdf.tiri:. atlempt to cOlnply 81ready. iris recommended -ec" that she be given additi~ tUne to coinpJy; It is'suggested,thatthe Pmpert}' be .c " 0, . - reinspOcledon I July 2002.aftCr which the matter will be tuiDed oVer to _ the!'iosecuting' 'a~9mei if the appellaIithas failed to comply. '_',. '_. "- --'. "..' ", . ...} . . '" . ..' .' --'-- -....- ~ .-- 4 .- '-"" ._. ". r" . _ cc: . . _CraIg Dawson . . TimKe~e Ioe Pazandak Anna Williams --- .. . ft t.J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ;t 3.fJ. '- ..J :....... r .'.' <I. CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 F!>:X (952) 474-0128. WWw.Ci.ShOreWoOd.mn.us.Cityhall@Ci.ShOreWObd.mn.US .J' "DATE: 16 May 2002 TO: Anna Williams 5910 Galpin Lake Road Shorewood, MN 55331 . PROPERTY LOCATION: 5910 Galpin Lake Road PROPERTY 1DENtIFICAT10~ NO.: 34-1i7-23-42-0017 NOTICE TO REMOVE Offensive and Unhealthy Substances NancE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there exist$ a condition on the above referenced propertY , which is in violarlon of Chapter SOl, sec$>n 501.01 of the Shorewood City Code. a copy of which section is enclosed. The offensive matt:Or to be temOved from the propertY includes. but is not limited to the following: . . , eo;ce, appr.mmatel ~leYards ~~. ~ ran .. gu e ,old~YWo~" etin, ip ," ed heSdboar, " .!. pll p1asllc", twoJqterlor chairs. and similar JDlgce1J.ane<ius ,(approxlmat tcJrty C1l Ie vards total). ~ ' 8f!..;. - Tr-. ~~' f;:AG,lN.b - ftRS - ~S ."'&W}~\:.l) ~ 6"$ ~ , . Yon are berehy requited to xemove the above-cJesci:l.Ded iI!atter and any other offensive ~ located on me. propertY and in violalion of Chapter, SOl. Section 501.01 within ten: ~10) day. from " the date hereOf. . In me alteinalive, ymimay file a Wrltlfm nOtice of appeal at the Shorewood City:" · Hall within ten (10) days, in wbicli case your: appeal will. be set for hearing at me next regularlY scheduled meeting of the City Council. If you do not respond to this Notice within ten (10) days, the City &hall take whatever action as mEJ be necessary to have the offenSive m!tter removed. The costs incurred by the City for &1lCh remo'(8l shall be charged to me ptoP.eIlY oWner and becOII\lI a lien against the propertY, '!:!. PLEASE GlYE TlIIS MA'l."I:ER YOUR JMMEDIA'1'E A TIENTION ... BY ORDER OF THE SBOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL no ~~ PRINTED ON RECYCl.ED PAPER E.~,b,+ ~ ~ City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Rd Shorewood,MN 55331 ,-:-:--.---. ... ',f ., ',j :Vi /.:.. j ? 'J _ v .....~ ..' - .> F\ "l?~ ill}' iI. I ~....;J,- I d I ." I..:::,' I . , Notice of Appeal /u ~ ""'---~.- 'This letter should serve as an appeal fdr the 'Notice I have received May 221le!. from the City of Shorewood to remove allthe.new.and.ald..fir.ewo.odftomthe...baclqtardof591 0 GalpinLake Rd. . The old firewood in the backyard has been there for over 8 years; the previous owner left it and did not bother anyone. One of the tree-service owner had commented on it as it cannot be chipped, and should be left where it is. My neighbor has a bigger pile of the similar kind of old wood piled up on his yard. There is a wire fence dividing the two properties, I suppose is the border between us, but l' like the City to detP.l'mine and clarify whose iuvhat as I do not want to be responsible for someone else's trash. I agree although with removing all the other items, would you mind itemize them? I will need more time to take care of the cleanup, at least another 3 weeks, as Doone is working on Memorial Day, and the estimates have to be on the right area. Therefore before I can get the bids I need your help to determine the border. Please Let me know if the wire fence is the right divider. . Sincerely ~LCL~. Anna Williams ".t .2.?> I 0 2. ~h~b,t e, '" CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 . (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 · www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhaU@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council . FROM: Brad Nielsen DA TE: 6 June 2002 RE: Appeal Notice to Remove FILE NO. Property - 25480 Smithtown Road . Based upon a resident complaint, Mr. Michael Hoy was sent a Notice to Remove regarding a school bus parked in his front yard at 25480 Smithtown Road. In his appeal letter (Exhibit A, attached) he asks for additional time to properly license the vehicle and clarification of what type of license to get. . Shorewood'sZoning Code allows the parking of passenger vehicles and no more than one tru~kwith a gross weight of 12,000 pounds or less, within the buildable area of the lot (compliance ~ith setbacks) or within an approved driveway. Similarly, a recreational v.ehicle must be kept in the buildable area of the lot, unless there is no "practical way" for it to comply with setbacks (Le. topography, trees, wetlands, etc.), in which case it may be kept in a driveway. In no case may vehicles be parked or stored within 15 feet of the paved swface of the street.. . It is not uncommon for people to convert old buses into campers, however to get them licensed as recreational vehicles they must meet certain criteria established by the . state. .Mr. Hoy's bus does not qualify and at present is licensed as a truck with a gross weight of 18,000 pounds. Consequently, it can not be kept on the site without the R V licensing. It is recommended that Mr. Hoy be given an additional 15 days to remove the bus from the property. If and when it qualifies for an RV license, it must be kept within the buildable area of the property as shown on Exhibit B, attached. ft ~.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER :/I a.c. Memorandum Re: Hoy Appeal 6 June 2002 J. If you have any questions relative to this matter. please do not hesitate to call me prior to Monday night's meeting. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Michael Hoy . . -2- . ~~.t~ . .)-- r .~ (\. ...... 0f\,1 ~ .~' ~ . . ~ O. ,... .' , r- ....~ -s 0 c..~ 1S... ~ -<.. . '.' .~ .If- . r5' .~~~. ~t' S' ""'" o "-'~ J .0\ ~ I ~. )( ::r -- . 0- .... -- -r >- . . . l'1$>f4 L.;.l~. ~ ,\ a. ~ . ~;:r ~ f:'. . C-'~ ~.S( , "-- y 6 '1>.' ?: ) .~ 'j ~ ~" ,0, ~ s ~ ,~. J,-t) _ .;.....ol . '" J. .~ ~ ~ ~ j ~. . r. '1l ~ <. . '. .,~..", !J ~ . 1\. . (\....... ~ ~ j ~.~. .... .,;.....,. ~. .?; . '-+' o <: ......... ~ r Iv\ , s:: \" . (' -. . " (\ ~ 'll1 '~ ~ ;tl " . ~. ~ ~ \...'i i . .... '" ~ D ~ ~~ ~-1~~ ~ L ~ :~':""~"?1,.. ~ +~.j..,);J:)\ ___ - < s... (._ --rr- _ . ".,-",_" a., ...... __ ~\,....--.., _~~ ~ ' '-"-- -- ., - /--r a '" II-. = ~ \\. ) I ~ I I a Ia U-' " a QI;l r A} J ~ - ~\ :\.\l'~ 1 ~\~'~ '" I~,~ I:;i:'~ ::'1.""- =- .. - .,':;' ",a \ I ~ :\ . ~ ::t._....-...-~ ',~ \ .... ~,~ ,"~ ,Q -~~ i~. -'. ,,,~.!:!.. ~~J'~~~""~~~I J( - k'~__~Q/~~ '\i::~ ~ ~~"J~ ~\,~ ~'\"~~~~\'~I\~~~~b-~~ C \.w1.-r~:; ~~ i .f ~ ~)\\" . r _ .--~~~._~ _ "l '" 'i\I, a · \\'\\,\\,........... ~.... . _ 'f'" ~ \ ...'- ~ . """\'-",,:<:::'~ -;'\.~ ~/ So " ,'- : :~~~~~_>: ~~ . '0-.'--.: /-...-.~ "'" "" l\. " ~~~'~-;.. :\.::1 \\~~D"~ ~~J ~ ~...... " I. '--. - ~ ~" -..... "1<:,...;:.... Q' .1.;. 0- ~ ~~~ ~~".~.~ ~~~., ~ tHf-.r-.~ n~~~ff~~:~ ~ ~~~'~.,.~ '61.. ~~ o' '\.~ ,~~~ y ~ ~ ~:::- ~i- ~ -.-l~" ~. . '!!'~ ~~ ~ ~ \\. F:::1.~ _____ ' _ I ~ ;:.;: .." ~ . _ ~ ""----~ ---.. .. . . '""- .!:..- ~ - ~-~ :~~ ~ '. ~. .~~ .-,,\ ~~ ~ ~~\\ =..,; ~..,,- . \,' r- ., ~~~z "nil r~ ......~ '\~'1 ~ =:-S .. ". . ~:;..~ a o! r-!),r:~ .......Q~;:.:~;/~ ~ 0, ~ ~ - "'-=-- ". ... I LJ lo~ '"). --- a a /./,,~s ~~~~.. ." "". ,-,. ~~~ j l.::1~;1I1 . Qa a, j ~ f'--.... ~ ~"" ,... ,"'!l'..a~ ./ I 0 I; /'?v --~~~~ ~ -.cs; ~ ~__'_ _.' 1 ~ ~ . ~ -r, ""... "'~f'--~ ....... ~ .:.. ~ If b<--.L _ _ _,... a , ! -V1~".;-.~~~ -, \- .~,. . ...L IV_. -~- h.- . &; - '.... '~~............... _--r_ - '.:; 4 a)-=- /~/r ' ~ ')..! '......, ~ --\-. '" I. ~-., r-_~ /Q\-I 'r ~-r-?~': "'" .~ . ~ ..,., ~~--...;,;.. '" ~ ,,\ , I Y ~ ~!:.L- ! / .- - _ ~'~ \l.J< _,-,,, m-.311..-~ . I I r>>~: "" . . ~ ..~ CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD e SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927e (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. wWW.cLshorewood.mn.us e cityhall@CLshoreWOOd.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator f\t\ June 6, 2002 \l) Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement for Fiscal 2003-2005 CDBG The City of Shore wood has Participated for many years in the Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Program (sometimes referred to as the "Consolidated Pool'') for the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Nearly all communities in Hennepin County cities, except for the largest ones, Participate in the Urban Hennepin County program. Participation with Hennepin County provides for a more efficient use of funds, rather than having small sums accwnulate in accounts fur individual cities. Urban Hennepin County communities may compete within the Consolidated Pool for larger grant amounts. The focus of the CDBG program has changed over the years, with more attention being paid to hOusing. The program remains focused on serving persons with low and moderate incomes. A limited amount may be designated for social services, rather than bricks-and-mortar activities, so some funds are going to things like senior services and day care assistance. In essence, for the City to be able to avail itself of these funds, it will need to enter into a new agreement. The current agreement expires at the end of the fiscal year, September 30, 2002. Hennepin County is requiring that approved and executed agreements be received by June 30. The 2003-2005 agreement has some amendments to the current agreement in order to ensure more timely performance by grantees, and to recover more administrative costs for the County. (A "gray-line" version of the proposed agreement is attached.) While the City may seldom use the Consolidated Pool funds, it is prudent to have this revenue source available. The City may more likely compete well for these funds in applications with other cities. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Conncil adopt the Resolntion approving the 2003-2005 Joint Cooperation Agreement and authorizing its execution. n t.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER =#3D CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 02-_ RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD AND HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM IN FISCAL YEARS 2003.2005 WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood and the County of Hennepin have currently in effect a Joint cooperation Agreement for purposes of qualifying as an Urban County under the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (!IUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Programs; and . WHEREAS, the City and County wish to execute a new Joint Cooperation Agreement in order to continue to qualify as an Urban County for purposes of the CDBG and HOME Programs. NOW, THEEREFOR, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Shorewood that a new Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and County be approved and executed effective October 1, 2002, and that the Mayor and City Administrator be authorized and directed to sign the Agreement on behalf of the City. ADoPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY SHOREWOOD this lOth day of June 2002. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR . ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR ~ Hennepin County Department of Transit & Community Works 417 North Fifth Street, Suite 320 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1362 612-348-9260, Phone 612-348-9710, Fax www.co.hennepin.mn.us . Mr. Craig Dawson City Administrator City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 ru'--"""-" ...., ~. r~ ((7;;:.." ':.: r:: :' ,,,_:~'~-; rr~ .1" L~;) ~:::'"''':;~':::? >: " c..,..., ._~ r~' \\\ 'C",.\ I Inll U UL~ 23 2002 l~ May 22, 2002 Subject: Fiscal Year 2003-2005 Joint Cooperation Agreement Dear Mr. Dawson: Accompanying for your review and execution is the Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement for FY 2003 - 2005. The agreement sets forth broad shared powers for carrying out housing and community development activities. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires the agreement in order for Hennepin County to qualify as an urban county and receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) entitlement funds. . A draft gray-line copy ofthe agreement is enclosed, which details all revisions to the current agreement. There are several significant changes. The first deals with the need for "timely" expenditure of funds. This relates to the HUD requirement that unexpended CDBG funds cannot total more than 1.5 times the last grant allocation. The hard work of municipal and county staff to meet this expenditure goal has proven successful, but it was felt advisable to provide additional flexibility to address this problem and to avoid financial penalty in the future. One of these changes reduces the time for implementing activities from 24 months to 18 months. Another change is to increase the county administrative fee from 10 to 13 percent of the grant total to offset increasing county property tax expenditures for this purpose. Additionally, this administrative fee will include a set aside for countywide fair housing efforts. As a community participating in the Urban Hennepin County Program, your city would not be eligible in FY 2003 - 2005 to apply for grants under the small cities or state CDBG programs. Your community will automatically participate in the Hennepin County HOME Program and will not be eligible to receive HOME funds through the state or other consortiums. An Equal Opportunity Employer Recycled Paper ~ May 22, 2002 Mr. Craig Dawson Page 2 Please execute the city signature page of the agreement to indicate your continued participation in the Urban County Program. Return only an original copy of the city signature page with the city seal and a copy of the authorizing resolution. These documents must be returned to this office no later than June 30,2002. A sample council resolution is enclosed. A copy of the county signature page will be provided after execution by the county. Please contact Jim Ford at 612/348-6013 if you have any questions about the agreement or process. I look forward to continuing our cooperative efforts in addressing suburban Hennepin County ousing and community development needs. . Enclosures: Cooperation Agreement Draft gray line agreement Sample Resolution . Contract No. JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as II COUNTY, II A-2400 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55487, and the cities executing this Master Agreement, each hereinafter respectively referred to as "COOPERATING UNIT, II said parties to this Agreement each being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, and made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59: WITNESSETH: . COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree that it is 'desirable and in the interests of their citizens that COOPERATING UNIT shares its authority to carry out essential community development and housing activities with COUNTY in order to permit COUNTY to secure and administer Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership funds as an Urban County within the provisions of the Act as herein defined and, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terms and conditions. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that by the execution of this Agreement that it understands that it: 1. May not also apply for gran~s under the State CDBG Program from appropriations for fiscal years during which it is participating in the Urban County Program; and 2. May not participate in a HOME Consortium except through the Urban County. I. DEFINITIONS . The definitions contained in 42 USC 5302 of the Act and 24 CFR ~570.3 of the Regulations are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof, and the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them: A. "Act" means Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). B. "Regulations" means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act, including but not limited to 24 CFR Part 570. . C. "HOD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. D. "Cooperating Unit" means any city or town in Hennepin County that has entered into a cooperation agreement that is identical to this Agreement, as well as Hennepin County, which is a party to each Agreement. 1 E. "Consolidated Plan II means the document bearing that title or similarly required statements or documents submitted to HOD for authorization to expend the annual grant amount and which is developed by the COUNTY in conjunction with COOPERATING UNITS as part of the Community Development Block Grant Program. . F. "Metropolitan City" means any city located in whole or in part in Hennepin County which is certified by HUD to have a population of 50,000 or more people. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize COUNTY and COOPERATING UNIT to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing and authorizes COUNTY to carry out these and other eligible activities for the benefit of eligible recipients who reside within the corporate limits of the COOPERATING UNIT which will be funded from annual Community Development Block Grant and HOME apptopriations for the Federal Fiscal Years :: IJ"j and from any program income generated from the expenditure of such funds. III. AGREEMENT . The term of this Agreement is for a period commencing on October 1, g[~ and terminating no sooner than the end of the program year covered by the Consolidated Plan for the basic grant amount for the Fiscal Year Bl~, as authorized by HUD, and for such additional time as may be required for the expenditure of funds granted to the County for such period. COUNTY may notify COOPERATING UNIT prior to the end of the Urban County qualification period that the Agreement will automatically be renewed unless it is terminated in writing by either party. Either COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT may exercise the option to terminate the Agreement at the end of the Urban County qualification period. If COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT fail to exercise that option, it will not have the opportunity to exercise that option until the end of a subsequent Urban County qualification period. COUNTY will notifY the COOPERA rING UNIT ui writiIlg of its rigJ:it to elect to be excluded by the date specified by HUn. This Agreement must be amended by written agreement of all parties to incorporate any changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in the Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for the year in which the next qualification of the County is scheduled. Failure by either party to adopt such an . amendment to the Agreement shall automatically terminate the Agreement following the expenditure of all CDBG and HOME funds allocated for use in COOPERATING UNIT's jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this Agreement may be terminated at the end of the program period during whichHUD withdraws its designation of COUNTY as an Urban County under the Act. This Agreement shall be executed by the appropriate officers of COOPERATIN"G UNIT and COUNTY pursuant to authority granted them by their respective governing bodies, and a copy of the authorizing resolution and executed Agreeme:r:t shall be filed prom~tly by ~e COOPERA TIN"G UNIT in the Hennepin Countx,~~_~~l of Housing, Commumty Works and TranSIt, and m no event shall the Agreement be filed later than t~~j.. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall take all actions necessary to assure compliance with the applicant's certifications required by Section 1 04(b) of the Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Fair Housing Act, Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; and other applicable laws. 2 - IV. ACTMTIES COOPERATING UNIT agrees that awarded grant funds will be used to undertake and carry out, within the terms of this Agreement, certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. COUNTY agrees and will assist COOPERATING UNIT in the undertaking of such essential activities by providing the services specified in this Agreement. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable requirements of the Act and the Regulations and other relevant Federal and/or Minnesota statutes or regulations in the use of basic grant amounts. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate COUNTY's responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Consolidated Plan, pursuant to 24 CFR Part 91. COOPERATING UNIT further specifically agrees as follows: A. COOPERATING UNIT will, in accord with a COUNTY -established schedule, prepare and provide to COUNTY, in a prescribed form, requests for the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds consistent with this Agreement, program regulations and the Urban Hennepin County Consolidated Plan. . B. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that, pursuantto 24 CFR 9570.501 (b). it is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including the requirement for a written Subrecipient Agreement set forth in 24 CFR 9570.503. The Subrecipient Agreement will cover the implementation requirements for each activity funded pursuant to this Agreement and shall be duly executed with and in a form prescribed by COUNTY. C. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that it is subject to the same subrecipient requirements stated in paragraph B above in instances where an agency other than itself is undertaking an activity pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. In such instances, a written Third Party Agreement shall be duly executed between the agency and COOPERATING UNIT in a form prescribed by COUNTY. D. COOPERATING UNIT shall implement all activities funded for each annual program pursuant to this . . ~''''~w.\;:i;511;1I'\'l~i~f:li)\'I1 . . Agreement WIthin Twenty Four (24) ~g'!il~m'L~\\ij,~ months of the authonzation by BUD to expend the basic grant amount. . 1. Funds for all activities not implemented within Twenty Four (24) . transferred to a separate account for reallocation on a competitive 2. fff.~~~~T~i!f~t~Ifj\~~tl~~1J implementation period extensions may be gr. anted upon request ~11~.'1 in ~~~I,..'r.GO'..:.o.....-tM.I.;;...or.;;:..;~~~>:........M-g . .~~ cases where the authorized activity has been initiated. and/or subject of a binding contract to proceed. 3. E. COOPERATING UNIT will take actions necessary to assist in accomplishing the community development program and housing goals, as contained in the Urban Hennepin County Consolidated Plan. 3 F. COOPERATING UNIT shall ensure that all programs and/or activities funded, in part or in full by grant funds. received pursuant to this Agreement, shall be undertaken affIrmatively with regard to fair housing, employment and business opportunities for minorities and women. It shall, in implementing all programs and/or activities funded by the basic grant amount, comply with all applicable Federal and Minnesota Laws, statutes, rules and regulations with regard to civil rights, affIrmative action and equal employment opportunities and Administrative Rule issued by the COUNTY. G. COOPERATING UNIT that does not affIrmatively further fair housing within its ownjurisdiction or that impedes action by COUNTY to comply with its fair housing certification shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG funding for any activities. H. COOPERATING UNIT shall participate in the citizen participation process, as established by COUNTY, in compliance with the requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. 1. COOPERATING UNIT shall reimburse COUNTY for any expenditure determined by HUD or COUNTY to be ineligible. . J. COOPERATING UNIT shall prepare, execute, and cause to be fIled all documents protecting the interests of the parties hereto or any other party of interest as may be designated by the COUNTY. K. COOPERATING UNIT has adopted and is enforcing: 1. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in nonviolent civil rights demonstrations; and 2. A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such nonviolent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction. COUNTY further specifically agrees as follows: A. COUNTY shall prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, on an annual basis, all plans, statements and program documents necessary for receipt of a basic grant amount under the Act. . B. COUNTY shall provide, to the maximum extent feasible, technical assistance and coordinating services to COO:pERA TING UNIT in the preparation and submission of a request for funding. C. COUNTY shall provide ongoing technical assistance to COOPERATING UNIT to aid COUNTY in fulfIlling its responsibility to HUD for accomplishment of the community development program and housing goals. D. COUNTY shall, upon offIcial request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer local housing rehabilitation grant programs funded pursuant to the Agreement, provided that COUNTY shall receive Twelve percent (12%) ofthe allocation by COOPERATING UNIT to the activity as reimbursement for costs associated with the administration of COOPERATING UNIT activity. 4 E. coUNTY may, at its discretion and upon official request by COOPERATlNG UNIT, agree to administer, for a possible fee, other programs andlor activities funded pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. F. coUNTY may, as necessary for clarification and coordination of program administration, develop and implement AdrninistrativeRules consistent with the Act, Regulations, HUD administrative directives, and administrative requirements of COUNTY. v. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS Basic grant amounts received by the coUNTY under Section 106 of the Act shall be allocated as follows: '''''':".-i'ii\1COUNTY h 11 . ~i\1\lI . s . a . retaln :feft. . The balance of the basic grant amount shall be made available by coUNTY to COOPERATlNG UNITS in accordance with the formula stated in part C and tbe procedure staled in part D oftlrls section for the purpose of allowing the COOPERATING UNITS to submit funding requests. The allocation is for planning purposes only and is not a guarantee of funding. B. C. The coUNTY will calculate, for each COOPERATlNG UNIT, an amount that bears the same ratio to the balance of the basic grant amount as the average ofthe ratios between: 1. The population of COOPERATING UNIT and tbe population of all COOPERATING UNITS, 2. The extent of poverty in COOPERATlNG UNIT and the extent of povertY in all COOPERATING UNITS. . 3. The extent of overcrowded housing by units in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of overcrowded housing by units in all COOPERATING UNITS. . In determining tbe average of the above ratios, the ratio involving the extent of poverty shall be counted twice. 4. D. Funds will be made aval\able to conununlties utilizing the formula specified in C of this Section in the following manner:' . \. COOPERATING UNIT qualifying as a Metropolitan City (having,popolations of at least 50,000) will receive annual funding allocations equal to the HUD formula entitlement or tbe coUNTY formula allocation, whichever is greater. 2. Otber COOPERATING UNITS with coUNTY formula allocations of$75 ,000 or more will receive funding allocations in accordance with the formula allocations. 3. COOPERATING UNITS with coUNTY formula allocations of less than $75,000 will bave their funds consolidated in a pool for award in a manner determined by coUNTY. Only the COOPERATING UNITS, wbose funding has been pooled, will he eligible to compete for these funds. 5 E. The COUNTY shall develop these ratios based upon data to be furnished by HUn. The COUNTy assumes no duty to gather such data independently and assumes no liability for any errors in the data furnished by HOD. F. In the event COOPERATING UNIT does not request. funding allocation, or a portion thereof, the amount not requested shall be made available to other Participating communities, in a manner determined by COUNTY. VI. METROPOLITAN CITIES Anylnetropolitan city executing this Agreement sbel! defer their entitlement stalus and become part of Urban Hennepin County. This agreement can be voided if the COOPERATING UNIT is advised by HUn, prior to the completion of the re- ~~~~~~c~rel~~~~ !!!!en~iS ;li~b: :'em~~~en:t ~o:~o~~ec~~:,,~:; . COOPERATING UNIT's eligibility as a metropolitan cityprior to the COOPERATING UNIT must remain a part of the COUNTY program for the entire three-year period of the COUNTy qualification. VII. OPINION OF COUNSEL The undersigned, on behalf of the Hennepin County Attorney, beving reviewed this Agreement, hereby opines that the terms and provisions of the Agreement are ful!y authorized under Stale and local law and that the COOPERATING UNIT bas ful! legal authority to und_ or assist in undertaking essential community development and housing assistance activities, specifically uroan renewal and publiCly-assisted housing. Assistant County Attorney . VIII. HENNEPIN COUNTY EXECUTION The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on ' ~ and pursuant to such approval and the proper County official having signed this Agreement, the COUNTY agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MlNNESOTA By: Chair of its County Board And: Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator Attest: Deputy/Clerk of the County Board . And: Assistant County Administrator, Public Works and County Engineer APPROVED AS TO FORM: RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Assistant County Attorney Director, Housing, Community Works and Transit Department Date: Date: . APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Assistant County Attorney Date: . IX. COOPERATING UNIT EXECUTION COOPERATING UNIT, having signed this Agreemen~ and the COOPERATING UNlT'S governing body having duly approved this Agreement on , ~g[~, and pursuant to such approval and the proper city official having signed this Agreement, COOPERATING UNIT agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Joint Cooperation Agreement, contract A CITY OF By: Its Mayor And: Its City Manager ATTEST: . CITY MUST CHECK ONE: The City is organized pursuant to: _ Plan A Plan B _ Charter . May 20, 2002 8 . . ~ CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOR EWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331.8927 . (952) 47 4.323ll FAX (952) 474-0128. WWw.cLshorewood.mn.us. c;tYhall@CLshoreWOOd.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 6 June 2002 RE: Pastuck, John - Request to Purchase City Property FILE NO. 405(Admin) Several years ago the City Purchased a triangle of land at the end of Church Road for PUlposes of building a cul-de-sac turn-around. The land was larger than what is needed for the cul-de-sac and it was determinad at the time that the excess land could be eventually sold to whoever might develop the property lying between Church Road and S1rawbeny Lane (see location map attached), Although nothing could be found in writing, staff recalls recommending that the property could be sold for the amount of two of the original assessments for the Church Road project Assessments Were reduced by that . amount to improve the feasibility of the project. On two occasions the Council has agreed to allow prospective developers to include the City owned property into plat proposals. Mr. John Pastuck has now purchased the property!o the east of Church Road and has requested that the City sell him the remnant . Church Road property. He appears to be serious about developing the land and his lender has recommended that the obtain a purchase agreement from the City, . Since the request involves disposing of public property, the City Attorney has recommended scheduling a public hearing to consider this matter on 8 July 2002. Prior to that meeting, staff will prepare a purchase Bgl'eement and obtain an opinion from the City Assessor as to the appropriate value of the City owned property. It is worth noting that the City's land is unbuildable by itself. . If you have any questions relative to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me prior to Monday night's meeting. Cc: Craig Dawson BOnnie Burton Tim Keane Larry Brown John Pastuck ft tJ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ~ #3e-- ~-1 ! ;'~; oJ t" \. ,..~ j~ ;: ~.~ i); .~..:". : j ;,.,:., i - :"';Ro-w-:::.": ;u . N ,'(:s --n"i""'" ,."" ."J:~" i~ N ..,.... Ib - z ,.. ::!: /' " :,D..~._ (385) $f!A':~2f;;HL.' <37}ST.'Tii (.;)) .gl ;!1 ~ '5.8\ ~t " " -"""'1 ,..., "" _L. a9'~.l3':'L..~~_ 25 ';,.:, . '. S89'46'09'W ~ ~512.;.,!, :""." "~ ~ '. .~) ~I <.', C'' ,'" ~II~ . '~"I;. 6,..: . ) ~ ;" 41ll1p ."o;j: (15) I::!: (0.. - I S\~.''i' t-~_.._-_.__.- ~r' it ~,~\, -. .--..-.--..... ---..,. 62~ '7 -':1: \" '" ".." .. >-1i!1"'~./' . , ....l~.. f~ . 1 ' 5':) k. "... ~t:.~.~ '\ . S'I~I\9Uj. r t I", . ~"~'" ,,'.. ...:.. ---=--- .-___ - ~W ~,-':. ;i;'- 624.35 '--.-- I ---. 624.35'.. ~.- ! ,'26) ., I . /. ,," r ,,,, V'.ll' t_ \ ~ , "... LoU eo 4/ I~ 3, .-' . ." ,,' Q:;~ ~ ( n, ). t; ( , ,~ :! ,- ,~. ~" , I ~ ~! i S89'49'.40'W &?4.~ ___'':~~'''''" j.. ;, ;, ~ r::tJ :-\ ':.:.. ' ~~'t- , .... /" ,~~~ ,.L.. 513.14 f' ~-l (39) .,Y ~I~ ,~~I ~ ~~~.... I /,..<<~> .~ I / .1, ~<<)....... ,~. 480. 14...J.... "t7 -1 ~&I.09.1. .lfll..09" .. '. ...~.::~~''T-. -/' ~\). /"" ;~"(!i":':' . L_.__. ." I 'J /........ . :,-'~ $l/rIl.'EmlY' 'ciiiciE /~~ ,.".,4>' i_ ll> :0 IR .~ . ~ "J" - "- -.''- 8 292.02 g 2 It> 3 0:> r::,; 4 '\....'~... 't.". (".' " ::"\ ~:'. :. - ~ ('8)' Ii . ,}:..tifJ p~ ~~. 4' 'l.WJO I. ...."', Q .. I I .~.:~..."". 1 ~~,. .., ,. "" '_____ ~.'" (411 I... ", ,':'\1" . ~ cr .) ':.:~. I. ~ 51) '35" C~ 1&..:1!...-.l..... 16. >:J .... i:1i. :: .- \" STkA'NE'E?RY ... <,:;':';:;';'-' OiJ~LCT t. '.":!iir:." 1&.4.. .. - -' QII~ "'1_""'" ___ ~. ,.'i: . _ ill...2.L -""-""rrr I':i;,:;- . ". ~I a:' .2) I , I ,. '.. '\, .J~. ..L.~::1 Y .; S 2? ~"''''''lf:IlI' ~T:~. :'l~I" 6 ~l'- ( 19) ';)! /.:~: ,; .; .,1 "7,';" ... ... ~ ~; :~. :..:.r "? .. ..~ 6~4~___ . 1'0' . .. ) (40) (:./ 292.02 ........ I ( ( 47) . r' ~ / '. ~ . e' ( 3) '. ,;,. . .~ .i ~_. " ",_ .._u 2640.69 RtS ' (~ ~ uh~ bit A 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: June 5, 2002 TO: CC: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Bonnie Burton, Finance DirectorlTreasurer ~ Craig Dawson, City Administrator ~ Presentation of the 2001 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) . FROM: SUBJECT: . Introduction The City of Shorewood Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the year 2001 is attached for your review. Steve McDonald, CPA, from the City's auditing firm of Abdo, Eick & Meyers, will be present at the June 10 City Council meeting to review the report and to answer questions. The CAFR document reports the financial activity for 2001 and the financial status of the City at year-end. It also contains the audited financial statements and includes the auditor's report relative to the statements. 2001 Financial Overview During 2001, the General Fund revenues were greater than budgeted, while expenditures were slightly less than budgeted. Therefore, the General Fund balance increased by approximately $273,900 to a balance of slightly over $2 million. This is good news. In addition, the Water and Sewer Funds performed positively, while the Liquor Fund experienced another positive year with net operating income of about $85,000. Additional detailed financial information is contained in the CAFR. Organization of the CAFR The CAFR is divided into three sections: the IntroduCtory Section, the Financial Section and the Statistical Section. The Introductory Section contains a listing of city officials, the organization chart of the City, and the transmittal letter. The transmittal letter contains sections describing the City and its operations for 2001. It also includes information regarding major initiatives being undertaken within the City, financial analyses of 2001 data, and descriptions of City procedures regarding budgeting, investing, debt and risk management. n ~.1 PRINTEO ON RECYCLED PAPER :# 5C!- Memo - 2001 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Page 2 The Financial Section includes the auditor's report, general-purpose financial statements, combining and individual fund statements, account group statements and schedules, and the notes to the financial statements. This section contains a vast amount of financial information relative to the City's operations during 2000. The notes explain the City's policies and contain detailed information regarding basis of accounting, budgeting, investing, legal compliance, debt service, fixed assets, pension plans, joint ventures, and segment information for the Enterprise funds. The Statistical Section consists of tables of financial information for a ten-year period. The tables include data regarding revenues, expenditures, property taxes, special assessments, debt, property values, construction, and other miscellaneous data. This section contains a wealth of historical information that may be used to recognize trends and other factors important to the financial management of the City. . Achievement A ward Received The City has again received the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting awarded by the Government Finance Officers Association for its CAFR. This award recognizes outstanding achievement in financial reporting and espouses the "spirit of full disclosure". It is felt that this report continues to meet the high standards of this program. Conclusion I hope you find the report to be comprehensive and easy to read. It is presented to give you and the citizens of Shorewood a full view of the financial condition and financial management of the City. If you have any questions as you read though the report, please feel free to call and discuss them with me. Likewise, feel free to ask any questions you may have of Steve at the June 10th presentation. . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 21,2002 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Pisula called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. Roll Call Present: Planning Commission Chair Bailey (arrived 7:25 P.M.); Commissioners Gagne, Packard, Pisula, White, and Woodruff (also acting as Liaison to the LCEC); Land Conservation and Environment Committee Members Callies, Downs, and Kircher; Mayor Love; and Planning Director Nielsen . Absent: Planning Commissioner Borkon; Land Conservation and Environment Committee members Pini, Ranallo, and Schmid; and Councilmembers Garfunkel, Lizee, Turgeon, and Zerby APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 7, 2002 Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the May 7, 2002, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as amended on Page 7, Paragraph 1, Sentence 1, change "Bearon" to "Beard." Motion passed 5/0. STUDY SESSION . 1. MR. PERRY FORSTER. RILEY-PURGATORY CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT _ INTRODUCTORY PRESENTATION Director Nielsen introduced Mr. Perry Forster, of the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD). Mr. Forster introduced Ms. Susan Scribner, Treasurer of the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District, noting they were present this evening to share information regarding the Watershed District. Mr. Forster explained the mission of the Watershed District was to conserve the natural resources of the state by land use planning, flood control, and other conservation projects by using sound scientific principles for the protection of the public health and welfare and the provident use of natural resources. He went on to explain the history, organizational structure, funding sources and uses, and future plans for the RPBCWD. He noted the drainage pond near Waterford Place, as well as the pond near Ashcroft Circle, were both nearing the end of the anticipated life cycle of usage. As a result, he explained, both ponds required maintenance work in the form of analyzing and cleaning out the sediment that had rendered each pond near water storage capacity. He also stated there were a number of headwaters for numerous creeks within the City, and the Watershed District would like to work with the City to continue to improve water quality in those waters. Mr. Forster thanked all parties present for questions, time and attention this evening. Mayor Love suggested the possibility of examining ponds and possible land for conservation as part of a comprehensive study of the area in an effort to benefit all communities in the RPBCWD. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 21, 2002 Page 2 of 3 Planning Chair Bailey arrived at 7:25 P.M. 2. JOINT MEETING OF PLANNING COMMISSION. CITY COUNCIL AND LAND fONSERV ATION AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE (LCEC) o County Road 19 Streetscape Land Conservation and Environment Committee members Callies, Downs, and Kirchner joined the meeting as part of a discussion regarding County Road 19 Streetscape plans. Mr. George Watson and Mr. Tim Wold, landscape architects of Brauer and Associates, then presented conceptual design plans and potential streetscapeideas.for the County Road 19 corridor for comment. Mr. Watson stated he had gathered information from the LCEC and Commission at the April 23, 2002, Joint Meeting as part of the planning process for this project. With the conceptual plans presented this evening, he stated he had attempted to incorporate suggestions gathered at previous meetings as well as provide consideration of six additional issues. He asked the groups present to consider burying power lines in the project area, provide native plantings where possible, include pedestrian circulation to the commercial areas as well as access to the southwestern portion of the LRT, provide access to Gideon Glen, and a more approachable viewing area for the Gideon monument, and provide a memorable, identifiable visual element at the City's entrances andlor near the intersection. Mr. Watson further stated the City had an opportunity to do something special in this intersection, and with cooperation between public and private residents, many enhancements could be made in the area. He then detailed proposed conceptual elements including a looping pedestrian walkway in Gideon Glen, as well as other pedestrian areas in the streetscape area. In addition, he stated it would be critical to manage the wooded lot areas demonstrated in the design plan. He then reviewed concepts for the Gideon Glen area, the Smithtown Road intersection, City entrance points, and the retaining wall that would be erected along County Road 19. . Committee member Kircher departed the meeting at 8:02 P.M. Director Nielsen commented this project was an opportunity to create something memorable in the "gateway entrance" area to the entire South Lake community, enduring over time, and setting a tone for . redevelopment projects along the County Road 19 corridor included in the proposed streetscape project. The Commission, Committee, and Council members present discussed various suggestions related to the streetscape project. Mr. Watson stated these suggestions would be taken into account, and a revised concept plan would be designed and shared with Staff in the near future. He noted the suggestions related to the Gideon Glen area included access to an overlook rather than a looping trail, and inclusion of a walkway to the LRT as well as a walkway linking the Public Safety Facility west to County Road 19. In addition he stated he had heard suggestions regarding providing pedestrian access to the LRT near Timber Lane, and a looped walkway to the civic buildings in the vicinity of the Public Safety Facility and City Hall. He suggested leaving the grade separated crossing at the northerly entrance to the City for future long-term planning. He also stated he would provide alternative ideas for lighting and vertical elements at the intersection as part of the revised design plans. Director Nielsen commented the proposed pedestrian circulation plan for the project was quite consistent with the trail concept plan in the Comprehensive Plan as established by the Park Commission. 3. JOINT MEETING OF PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL o Organized Refuse Collection , PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 21, 2002 Page 3 of3 o Planning Commission Work Program Chair Bailey summarized a discussion held with the refuse haulers at the April 23, 2002, Planning Commission meeting. He noted the Planning Commission had agreed refuse collection could and should be limited to one day of the week in order to coincide with recycling. Haulers would continue to offer yard waste collection services to customers. In addition, refuse trucks should be limited to carrying limited loads during the City's weight restriction period of March 1 to May 1 of each year. Chair Bailey also commented the refuse haulers were willing to work with the City to resolve issues raised. With regard to issues pertaining to weight restrictions on the roadways, Mayor Love suggested a review period of three years be established rather than try to regulate enforcement issues. In addition, he stated the Council was pleased with the direction of the findings indicated in the discussion with the refuse haulers. With regard to the 2002 Work Program for. the Planning Commission, Chair Bailey .explained the anticipated projects and issues for discussion could be completed in the remainder of the year, as the proposed schedule required a bit of revision. Mayor Love indicated support for the projects and topics proposed as part of the 2002 Work Program. . 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. S. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen explained the next meeting of the Planning Commission would be on May 23, 2002, at the Southshore Senior Community Center beginning at 7:00 P.M. He explained a continuation of a Public Hearing regarding a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Plat, Hardcover Variance and Site Plan Review for a Cub Foods Store proposal to be located at the Shorewood Village Shopping Center at 23680 Highway 7, was slated for the Agenda that evening. 6. REPORTS . There were no reports shared this evening. Liaison to Council Liaison to LCEC SLUC Other 7. ADJOURNMENT Pisula moved, Gagne seconded, adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of May 21, 2002, at 9:17 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLYSUBMUTTED, Sally Keefe, Recording Secretary " CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING THURSDAY, MAY 23, 2002 SOUTHSHORE SENIOR/COMMUNITY CENTER 5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:08 P.M. Roll Call Present: Chair Bailey, Commissioners Borkon, Gagne, Packard, White, and Woodruff Council Liaison Turgeon, Engineer Brown, and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Pisula . 1. PUBLIC HEARING - CUB FOODS STORE PROPOSAL - COMP PLAN AMENDMENTIREZONINGI PRELIMINARY &FINAL PLATIHARDCOVER V ARIANCE/SITE PLAN REVIEW (continued from March 19, 2002 Planning Commission meeting) AODlicant: Shorewood Village Shopping Center, Inc. Location: 23680 Highway 7 Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:09 P.M., noting this meeting was a continuation of a Public Hearing from March 19, 2002, on this matter. He reviewed the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing and encouraged the continued use of brevity, courtesy, and respect throughout the Hearing process. In addition, he noted, should the matter be approved, it would appear on the June 10, 2002, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for consideration. He further stated it was important to respect the process regarding this matter, as well as diligence, time, and effort of Staff expended in resolving this matter. . Director Nielsen reviewed changes made from past proposals, noting the traffic circulation pattern had changed as a result of Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) input. In addition, additional landscaping had been proposed, including the use of a bio-swale design for the land between the service road and the mainline. He also described a developer's agreement including items such as landscaping, snow removal, signage, and hours of operation that would be addressed in a very clear and stringent manner regarding specific remedies for any failure of compliance with the City's regulations. He explained Engineer Brown would describe drainage issues in detail. He noted the applicant had submitted a preliminary plat for the combination of the four subject parcels. Depending on the Planning Commission's recommendations and approval by Council, the proposal would be subject to review by the Metropolitan Council. He noted traffic and drainage concerns to be the most significant remaining issues from the last Public Hearing in this matter. Engineer Brown explained Chuck Rickart, of WSB and Associates, had stated at the March 19, 2002, Planning Commission Meeting that a full traffic analysis of all of the intersections operating simultaneously needed to be completed to demonstrate adequate traffic capacities for the proposal. He noted Mr. Rickart was not able to be in attendance this evening, due to a family emergency; however, the traffic analysis had been completed. The site operated at and would continue to operate with a level of service "C", and therefore, was considered adequate. Engineer Brown also went on to explain comments had been submitted from MnDOT with regard to perceived impacts of the development to the Highway 7 and 41 intersection. He further explained that under a site plan review application, MnDOT would not have jurisdiction to review this development. However, since a portion of the plan involved a Comprehensive Plan amendment, MNDoT gained the opportunity to review and comment on the plan. ~ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 23, 2002 Page 2 of 9 As part of the MnDOT review, significant changes were made to the traffic circulation pattern on the site. It was stipulated that the southeasterly entrance to the parking lot be revised as a "right in only", thus, semi-trailered vehicles would be forced to enter the site and travel in a counter-clockwise pattern to the truck docks on the north side of the site. Trucks would leave the site by making a left-hand turn from the westerly exit onto Lake Linden Drive. MnDOT had requested this reconfiguration to reduce the number of conflict points (points where traffic movements intersect) in close proximity to Highway 7. Any reduction in the number of conflict points would increase the allowable traffic capacity of the intersection, thereby minimizing potential impacts to the intersection. As a result of this reconfiguration, Staff noted it would be likely that minor congestion would occur within the interior of the parking lot during peak rush hours. Steve Gurney, ofWSB and Associates, explained rate control and treatment of water were considered the two main issues regarding any plan. He explained modifications had been made to the plan to increase the size of the pipes in the proposed underground pipe gallery thereby allowing the rate control requirements to be met. In addition, he explained the plans proposed the use of an alum treatment in the pipe gallery as well as a maintenance schedule that would remove sediment periodically in order to . provide water quality improvements for the site. Engineer Brown explained underground detention basins had been in use for several years. He noted the challenge in these types of systems had never been quantity storage, but finding a way to remove contaminants, such as phosphorus. Further, he explained the City required the entire site to be brought into compliance for water quality standards. He stated the developer had contracted with a leading engineering firm to aid in devising a solution to the removal of the particulate matter and phosphorus from the underground pipe gallery system. This engineering firm had proposed an alum injection system. This system was an automated, monitored system that would inject the chemical alum into the underground pipe gallery, as stormwater entered the system. Under this proposal, approximately 5,200 pounds of sediment would be removed per year. When compared with traditional removal of particulate material and phosphorus as part of a NURP. pond, the proposed system was considered to be far more efficient. With regard to long-term performance and maintenance of the system, a remote monitoring system would be installed into the gallery to monitor water rates and quality. In addition, a monthly, certified written record of performance and runoff characteristics would be made available to the City. Engineer Brown stated the alum injection system would provide treatment superior to conventional methods. Providing an independent consulting firm be hired to monitor and certify the system to the City each month, he stated, the proposed system would provide superior treatment for the . site. Director Nielsen explained the planning process for this matter, should the Commission approve the proposal, the Findings of Fact would need to be prepared for the June 4, 2002, Planning Commission Meeting. John Uban, planning consultant and landscape architect of Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, explained a great deal of work had been put forth to redesign the proposed plans through earnest efforts to provide enhancement to the Shorewood Village Shopping Center. He noted issues pertaining to traffic, fa~ade treatment, cart corrals, snow removal, stormwater treatments, landscaping, and traffic capacity studies of the intersection at Highway 7 and 41, had been adjusted as part of the most recent proposal. He then explained a traffic flow chart showing the amount of vehicles per day traversing Lake Linden Drive. He noted the current number of trips was expected to be reduced as a result of the improvements being made to Country Club Road at the Smithtown Road intersection. Next, he demonstrated the number of vehicles that would be added to the daily traffic with any development on site and then with the proposed CUB Foods Store. In spite of the additional traffic generated from a development including CUB Foods, he maintained there would be a reduction in traffic from the current amount as the intersection improvements at Smithtown Road were expected to decrease traffic substantially. With regard to landscaping, he noted enhancements had been planned for the right-of-way areas as well as plantings utilized for neighbors PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 23, 2002 Page 3 of 9 along Lake Linden Drive. Mr. Uban next explained the detailed impact of alum treatment in terms of pounds per year generated in sediment as well as phosphorus levels to be discharged from the site. He noted the entire site would be treated prior to discharging water into the MnDOT detention pond. He also noted the fayade of the building and architectural treatments provided to maintain visual interest. He concluded by noting the site had been extensively revised throughout the planning process to make something unique with regard to the future design and redevelopment of the Center. Chair Bailey opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:42 P.M. He explained questions would be noted and addressed after all residents wishing to speak had been heard. Austin Kraft, 6125 Rampart Court, stated he had heard plans for this project for over a year, and was impressed there continued to be good citizen turnout for the Hearings. However, he stated this was still a large development in a small community that would have far reaching implications for the future. He remained concerned about the traffic and the amount of development proposed for the site. . Henry Miles, 24035 Mary Lake Trail, wondered about numerous issues pertaining to the City's response, or lack of response, to citizens' requests that the proposed store not be allowed to build on the site. He also expressed concern for the amount of traffic near the site. Kay Marie Rau, 23980 Yellowstone Trail, stated she had moved to Shorewood for the quiet atmosphere and was concerned for the amount of traffic in her neighborhood. She suggested the use of one-way signs or a dead end to Yellowstone Trail or Lake Linden Drive as solutions. . Roger Leak, 5370 Minnetonka Drive, stated this was his fourth meeting regarding this matter, and he was happy to see many citizens interested in the project. He had traversed Yellowstone Trail since 1953, and had seen many changes in the character of the area. He was concerned the owner had not demonstrated hardship in this case, and he believed granting the variance would mean losing the character and convenience of the small business owner found currently in the Shopping Center. In addition, he was concerned about the rate capacity for the wells in the area. Also, he had conducted his own observations regarding traffic flow at the intersection of Highways 7 and 41 in the early morning hours, and found there was already a backup of cars and buses at that intersection. He believed the amount of traffic would only increase with additional semi-trailer vehicles with this proposal. He stated this proposal would change the character of the community by making a common ordinary area a large commercial area. He also stated he was concerned for the welfare of the community as a whole and for the amount of traffic generated along Yellowstone Trail and Lake Linden Drive. Peggy Wilson, 24140 Yellowstone Trail, expressed concern for traffic in the area. She stated she had spoken with MnDOT representatives regarding the turn lanes at the Highway 7 and 41 intersection near the site. She found a trigger system was implemented to spur the use of a turn arrow while in the left turn lane facing south at the intersection. She was concerned for the seeming incongruity of traffic signalization at that intersection when coupled with additional traffic streams. She also questioned the process as this case reappeared in spite of denials to the proposals. She also questioned why the City believed it must accommodate the proposal when residents were seemingly not in favor. She encouraged the Commission to deal with the issues regarding traffic in the area, and to think of the people in the area most impacted by the proposal. Maureen Bums, 5080 Meadville, Greenwood, Minnesota, stated her grandchildren lived on Lake Linden Drive, and she was concerned for the amount of traffic on that street. She stated the proposed grocer was not of issue, however, the traffic was of great concern to residents. Further, she noted a CUB Foods Store and large retail shopping center was located ten minutes from the area, and she believed people couId continue to shop at that location without need for further development at the proposed site. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 23, 2002 Page 4 of 9 Roger Nestande, 6085 Lake Linden Drive, stated he had lived in Shorewood since 1965. He stated he continued to hear traffic was a concern, and it did not seem the City was taking this matter seriously. He noted many vehicles traversing Lake Linden Drive where numerous small children lived. He stated he was concerned some small child would be hit. He suggested the proposal be placed on an election ballet in November of this year for final determination by all City residents. Kevin Bums, 6070 Lake Linden Drive, stated he had resided at this location for three weeks. He stated he was concerned for the water quality in his home, as filtration was required, and he was also concerned for the amount of traffic currently going past his house. He stated the traffic was worse than he had anticipated when he purchased the house, and he could not understand how this situation would be improved with the proposed CUB Foods Store on the site. He questioned how the Planning Commission could proceed and justify any decisions of approval based on community support. He stated he would rather drive to do shopping in the area, as he was quite concerned about his three small children with the current proposal. Mike Menth, 6180 Riviera Lane, expressed concern for the traffic as common sense dictated it could only increase. He also questioned the lighting on the site. He noted the decision to be difficult for the Commission, and he expressed concern for the size of the development, as it seemed out of place at the proposed location. . Ed Hasek, 24315 Yellowstone Trail, expressed concern for the amount of cut-through traffic on Yellowstone Trail and Lake Linden Drive. He noted the traffic had gotten worse over the past ten years, and he suggested the City purchase the roadway back from the stated in order to make it a local street. He questioned the anticipated peak hours of traffic according to the developer's graph of traffic volume. He stated the cut-through traffic must be remedied and suggested posting numerous stop signs along the streets in order to make it uncomfortable for those drivers cutting through the neighborhood. Mark Stratman, 24275 Yellowstone Trail, stated when Lake Linden Drive had been closed recently, the amount of traffic had substantially decreased. He referenced the possibility of having to drive children to and from school in winter should bussing not be available. He stated traffic could only get worse over time. In addition, he was concerned for the amount of water the proposed store would be drawing from the local aquifer, as he had noticed a large number of wells in the area requiring attention. Ed Sheridan, 6150 Club Valley Road, stated he was concerned about the traffic and safety for the people of Shorewood. He noted children live and play near all the roads of concern. He also stated people do not want such a big store in the area as it would create many problems. . Stan Taube, developer of the project and Shorewood resident, stated he had listened to resident comment over the past one and a half years, noting he had heard the residents' concerns for traffic and character of the proposed store. He noted the process had taken so long because of the complicated issues associated with the site. He explained the site itself possessed difficult issues. With regard to traffic, he stated the numbers demonstrated in various graphics had not been generated fictitiously, but were based on an imperfect science, noting it had never been stated the proposed CUB Foods Store would generate less traffic. He stated he understood the problems with the roadways to the site and alternatives had been examined to provide remedy. He asked those present to assume a CUB Foods Store was not approved for the site. He then explained CUB Foods had identified a number of sites where expansion could occur in the local vicinity. With whatever site was determined as suitable, he explained, the traffic would continue to increase along local roadways. He stated Driskill's would not be remaining, as it was not profitable. In addition, he explained if the current proposal was not approved, he could remove tenants and build a CUB Foods Store on the site without requesting any variances from the ordinances. He stated he had a choice as a developer to try to build a CUB Foods store on site, being able to attempt to mitigate traffic issues and work with the City and area residents, or allow the CUB Foods Store to be placed elsewhere and PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 23, 2002 Page 5of9 continue to deal with the same situations without being able to resolve any of them. He stated he had chosen to focus on traffic calming measures and try to work with the Commission, City Staff, and residents to do the right thing. He stated he did not have to spend the additional money required as part of the current proposal. He stated the location indicated the proposed development would be a benefit to the area. He stated he believed the best alternatives had been pursued for consideration in this case. Patricia Hauser, 5805 Minnetonka Drive, questioned the amount of water required as part of the proposal, in addition to consideration of a smaller store, such as a cooperative, for the site. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing and recessed the meeting at 8:33 P.M. Chair Bailey reconvened the meeting at 8:45 P.M. Commissioner Packard had compiled the list of questions and directed them to the appropriate individual for comment. . She asked Engineer Brown to clarify the issues regarding the MSA standards and Lake Linden Drive. Engineer Brown responded Lake Linden Drive was a Minnesota State Aid (MSA) roadway, which limited the City's abilities and options for providing a solution to traffic issues on that road. He stated the intent of the MSA designation was to be able to provide a "backbone" network of roadways. Further, he explained the City could have the roadway "undesignated" for a purchase price of approximately $1 million, and the City was not in position of being able to do that at this time. In addition, he noted, should Lake Linden Drive become a local roadway, stop signs could not be erected, as proposed by various residents, because speed limits and stop signs were governed by the State of Minnesota. Should the City decide .,10 erect stop signs anyway, liability would be assumed for any accidents as the result of unwarranted stop signs. Engineer Brown also commented if a stop sign was not warranted people had a tendency to ignore it. . Commissioner Packard asked Engineer Brown to comment on the statistics presented regarding proposed traffic issues. Engineer Brown responded all parties expect traffic to increase on these roadways as a result of some development on that site. He reminded all parties present that if a proposal met all the City's regulatory requirements, the proposal must be approved or all could face legal repercussions. In addition, he stated he had heightened awareness of the traffic problems in the area, and these issues had been scrutinized by a number of agencies for accuracy. As a result, he stated he was comfortable with the numbers generated regarding traffic volumes in the area. Director Nielsen reviewed the history of this case regarding variance requests, noting for audience members, there were no variance requests as part of this proposal presented this evening. Commissioner Packard questioned Mr. Uban about the potential impact on the neighboring wells, and water quality in the area surrounding the site. Mr. Uban responded the proposal did not include the need for a new well, however, there would be a new storage area on the site. He stated the water would be drawn at the same rate from the well as currently being drawn and would be stored in an on-site water tower. He stated the proposed development would not be drawing down the water profile any more than what was being done today. Engineer Brown also explained that although more water would be drawn, this was not of consequence, as the rate of draw would not be affected. He also explained the well would draw water at the same rate with a pump pumping longer because more water would be used. He commented the City was very familiar with this type of usage as City wells had to be continuously monitored with regard to draw rate. Commissioner Packard questioned the developer's team about anticipated peak hours of traffic to and from the site as well as lighting issues. Fred Dock reviewed graphs presented earlier in the meeting PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 23, 2002 Page 6 of9 demonstrating traffic volumes along Lake Linden Drive, noting peak traffic volumes began between 10:00 and 11:00 A.M. and continued to grow until 7:00 P.M. and then would diminish through the late evening hours. Director Nielsen reviewed the ordinances pertaining to hours of operation and lighting, noting the developer was bound to compliance of these issues. Commissioner Packard questioned Mr. Taube as to whether a cooperative grocery store had been considered for the site. Mr. Taube responded other options had been explored, such as a County Market, and no lenders would lend money to a grocer for that location, as there were larger stores in the area that would cause a smaller grocer to go out of business. Commissioner Gagne stated, with regard to comments made this evening by audience members, that if a person owned a piece of land, that person had the right to develop that piece of land to the extent regulations would allow. Commissioner Woodruff questioned the position of the trash and mechanicals on site. Bob Knutson, of the developer's team of consultants, explained trash would be compacted in an enclosed container near the loading docks behind screened walls, and the mechanicals would be located on the roof of the store. Commissioner Woodruff also stated throughout the entire process the developer and consultants had worked with the City to respond to issues of concern. She stated the community needed a grocery store and continued use of other stores in the Shopping Center. In addition, she questioned the applicant about issues regarding a nearby trail to enhance pedestrian circulation in the area. Mr. Uban stated the applicant was committed to working with the City to implement a trail along Lake Linden Drive and thought funding could be made available for the trail project. Commissioner Woodruff also asked questions regarding the noise at the site and the monuments for the Lake Linden Drive entrance. . Commissioner Borkon questioned whether the CUB Foods Store at Highways 7 and 101 was a franchise store. Mary McGlinch, of Supervalu, Inc., responded affirmatively, noting the proposed store was a corporate store in which the owner of the franchise store would also be participating in the ownership of the proposed store. She noted there was adequate market share for both stores in the area. She also stated, in response to Commissioner Borkon's question, that CUB Foods, Inc. was typically very involved in the community, and she anticipated the proposed store would want to tailor its community involvement to the needs of the area. . Commissioner Borkon then questioned Mr. Taube as to whether he would proceed with placing a CUB Foods Store on the proposed site should the request be denied this evening. He explained he would be pursuing two other options for placement of a CUB Foods Store on site. He noted one option to be a partial removal of the current Shopping Center in order to add a CUB Foods Store, and a second option included complete removal of the Shopping Center to build a CUB Foods Store that would meet all City standards without issue. With regard to placing the issue on a ballot in this election year, Director Nielsen explained Shorewood was a statutory city and as such, was not allowed to do so. Commissioner Borkon then questioned what other options existed for easing the traffic concerns on Lake Linden Drive. Engineer Brown stated it would be possible to build it into a larger roadway within MSA standards. He further explained it would not be possible to have CUB assist in the funding to remove the roadway from MSA designation, as the State would require the City to purchase the roadway. Commissioner Packard stated she appreciated the efforts made by the developer to resolve the drainage concerns for the site. She stated she was empathetic regarding the traffic concerns, but thought she PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 23, 2002 Page 70f9 needed to trust the expertise of the City Engineer and experts regarding these concerns. She questioned signage for this proposal, and suggested enclosing the walkway to other tenants for customers. Commissioner Gagne read into the record a letter from the Boulder Bridge Farm Homeowners Association, dated May 6 2002, indicating support for the proposal from approximately 44 homeowners. Commissioner Gagne also questioned what purpose would be served through implementation of a pedestrian trail along Lake Linden Drive and how the safety of residents utilizing the trail and roadway would be impacted. Engineer Brown stated he believed the roadway to be unsafe, and while the trail would not mitigate the traffic concerns on the roadway, it would adequately address pedestrian safety features for that area. In response to Commissioner Packard's question, Director Nielsen explained the feasibility report would stop the trail at Lake Linden Drive, and there were no current plans for a trail along Yellowstone Trail and Country Club Road. . Chair Bailey requested clarification regarding the use of the bio-swale design in the proposal and whether there were any concerns remaining from the City Engineer regarding the proposed gallery system of drainage and traffic. Engineer Brown state the underground pipe gallery system provided new expensive technology allowing the drainage from the site to exceed the City standards. He went on to explain he agreed with MnDOT regarding the use of right-in only lanes at the entrance, however, he was not necessarily in favor of the proposed traffic circulation pattern as there could be potential backups within the interior of the parking lot. He also explained with the "no right turn" exit onto Lake Linden Drive that it would be physically impossible for a semi-trailer to be able to navigate the proposed configuration in that manner. Mr. Uban reviewed the hourly traffic volumes with regard to the proposed development. Chair Bailey noted it appeared traffic would be reduced by approximately 100 cars daily after all local redevelopment of roadways was complete. . Commissioner Borkon stated she was unhappy with the traffic issues on the roadways and believed the developer had worked very hard in this proposal. She stated representatives of CUB Foods, Inc, had worked diligently with the neighbors and City Staff to find a workable solution to concerns of residents. She also state she believed the proposal met all legal criteria set forth in City guidelines and regulations. Borkon moved, Gagne seconded, recommending approval to accept the applicant's proposal to redevelop the Shorewood Village Shopping Center and to include a CUB supermarket as part of that redevelopment. As part of this recommendation, 1. The Shopping Center's owner and/or CUB Foods, Inc. must agreed to finance the construction of a trail along Lake Linden Drive running from Yellowstone Trail to the Shopping Center, with the details of the trail to be determined by City Staff and the Park Commission. 2. The Shopping Center's owner must agree to enter into a development contract as prepared by City Staff. The City Staff is hereby directed to prepare findings of fact showing the redevelopment proposal to be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. In particular, the proposal satisfies the following policies of the Comprehensive Plan: 1. Land Use General Policv #5: All development proposals shall be analyzed on an individual basis from a physical, economic, and social standpoint to determine the most appropriate PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 23, 2002 Page 8 of9 uses within the context of the Planning District in which it is located and within the community as a whole. 2. Land Use General Policy # 11: Transitions between distinctly differing types ofland uses shall be accomplished in an orderly fashion, which does not create a negative (economic, social, or physical) impact on adjoining developments. 3. Land Use Residential Policv #2: Low density residential neighborhoods shall be protected from encroachment or intmsion of high types and by adequate buffering and separation from other residential as well as non-residential use categories. 4. Land Use Commercial Policy #1: The City of Shorewood's commercial development shall be oriented toward "convenience" type of shopping geared toward neighborhood or community scale markets. 5. Land Use Commercial Policy #2: Commercial and service centers shall be developed as cohesive, highly interrelated units with adequate off-street parking. 6. Land Use Commercial Policy #3: Existing and proposed service and commercial uses shall be adequately and appropriately landscaped according to community requirements as amended. 7. Land Use Commercial Policy #4: All existing and proposed service and commercial uses shall be adequately screened or buffered from any adjacent residential development. 8. Land Use Commercial Policy #14: It shall be the responsibility of existing commercial developments to assume the burden of making necessary improvements to insure compatibility with surrounding residential uses. . Commissioner Borkon commented the role of the Planning Commission was to determine whether a project would fit or not fit the criteria legally set forth. Chair Bailey stated he supported the proposal as there were five key issues of concern at the beginning of the planning process, and the developer had gone out of his way to resolve those issues. He also noted something would be developed on the site, and the additional traffic generated by a CUB Foods Store was not a significant increase in volume to warrant concern at the intersection of Highways 7 and 41. Motion passed 6/0. 2. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR . There were no matters from the floor presented by audience members this evening. 3. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there would be two requests for setback variances as well as the Findings of Fact regarding the CUB Foods Store slated for the Agenda of the June 4, 2002, Planning Commission Meeting. 4. REPORTS Liaison to Council Commissioner Woodruff reported on matters considered and actions taken at the May 13,2002, Regular City Council Meeting as well as the May 21, 2002, Joint Work Session Meeting of the Planning Commission, Land Conservation and Environment Committee and Council (as detailed in the minutes of those meetings). . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MAY 23, 2002 Page 90f9 Liaison to LCEC There was nothing further to report. SLUC Director Nielsen explained the Sensible Land Use Coalition (SLUC) would present a discussion of the future of retail shopping on May 29,2002, from 11:30 A.M. to 2:00 P.M. at the Doubletree Park Place Hotel in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Other There was nothing additional to report at this time. 5. ADJOURNMENT . Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of May 23, 2002, at 10:15 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Sally Keefe, Recordine: Secretarv . . . 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 Since the developer has extended the statutory review period to the end of June, an additional extension (i.e. end of July) must be requested. . If you have any questions relative to any of the material you have received to date, please do not hesitate to contact me prior to Monday night's meeting. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Larry Brown Stan Taube John Uban MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DA TE: 6 June 2002 RE: CUB Foods II - Planning Commission Findings FILE NO. 405(02.01) At its 23 May meeting the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the most recent CUB Foods proposal. At its 4 June meeting it adopted the attached findings of fact for referral to the City Council. Also enclosed in your packet for Monday night's meeting are the May staff reports from the Planning and Engineering Departments. Since the proposal involves a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning of property from residential to commercial, it requires a four-fifths vote to be approved. If the Council is in agreement with the Planning Commission's recommendation and the project is to move forward, several steps remain prior to final approval. The Council should direct staff to prepare a resolution, incorporating findings of fact, and approving the Comp Plan amendment and conditional use permit~. The resolution will also include a development contract to be recorded against the property.. An ordinance must be drafted for the rezoning. Finally, the Council should set a public hearing for consideration of the street vacation. Staff recommends that these items b~ scheduled. for the 8 JulyCity Council meeting. In the meantime staff will refer the proposal to the Metropolitan Council for its determination as to whether it has metropolitan area . significance. n ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 17A SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING CUB FOODS PROPOSAL WHEREAS, Shorewood Village Shopping Center, Inc. (Applicant) has an interest in four parcels of land (Subject Property) located at 23680,23780, and 23800, State Highway 7 and 6095 Lake Linden Drive, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to demolish approximately 10,380 square feet of the existing grocery store in the shopping center located at 23680 State Highway 7, then build a new CUB Foods store extending from the west end of the shopping center onto the three parcels to the. west; and . WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied to the City for a Comprehensive Plan amendment, a rezoning of one of the subject parcels from R-IC to C-3, replatting of the four parcels into one parcel, conditional use permits, a variance and a vacation of a portion of Maple Street in order to build the CUB Foods store and related site improvements; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's application was reviewed by the Shorewood Planning Director, whose recommendations have been set forth in memoranda to the Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council, dated 14 February 2002, 13 March 2002, 14 March 2002 and 21 May 2002, all of which are on file at the Shorewood City Hall; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's application was reviewed by the Shorewood City Engineer, and the City's engineering consultant and their recommendations have been set forth in memoranda to the Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council, dated 15 February 2002, 15 March 2002, and 20 May 2002 all of which are on file at the Shorewood City Hall; and . WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and the Applicant's application was reviewed by the Planning Commission on 19 February 2002, the minutes of which meeting are on file at the Shorewood City Hall; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The lot area, zoning and existing use of the four parcels that constitute the Subject Property are as follows: 23800 S.T.H. 7: 6095 Lake Linden Drive 8.32 acres; zoned C-3, General Commercial; occupied by existing shopping center .24 acres; zoned C-3, occupied by an existing bank (to be demolished) 3.52 acres; zoned C-3 and R-IC; undeveloped .72 acres; zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential; occupied by a single-family residential dwelling 23680 S.T.H. 7: 23780 S.T.H. 7: 2. Zoning and land use surrounding the Subject Property is as follows: North: East: South: West: single-family homes and vacant land; zoned R -1 C vacant land; zoned R -1 C State Highway 7, then commercially zoned shopping center in Chanhassen single-family home, then two-family home and two offices zoned R-l C, R-3A, Multiple-Family Residential, and R-C, Residential/Commercial, respectively 3. The Subject Property is lower in elevation than land to the east and west, but somewhat higher than land to the northwest. 4. The Applicant's plans propose the addition.ofa 60,050 square foot grocery store to the west end of the shopping center, resulting in a total area for the shopping center of 129,203 square feet. . 5. The Applicant has requested that the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan be amended to change the land use classification of 6095 Lake Linden Drive from "Low to Medium Density Residential" to "Commercial". 6. The Applicant has requested that the Shorewood Zoning Map be amended to change the zoning classification of 6095 Lake Linden Drive from R-l C to C-3. 7. The Applicant has requested that the four parcels that constitute the Subject Property be replatted into one parcel. . 8. The Applicant has requested that a small triangle of right-of-way at the end of Maple Street be vacated by the City. At present there is no turn-around at the end of Maple Street. . 9. The Applicant proposes to replace the existing natural buffer on the west and north sides of the site with landscaping as illustrated on Exhibit B, attached. 10. The Applicant's plans include the construction of an underground stormwater storage and treatment facility, plans for which have been reviewed by the City's engineering consultants. 11. The Applicant's landscape plans include 240 new trees. Shorewood's Tree Preservation and Reforestation Policy requires a minimum of 103 replacement trees for the size of the subject property. 12. The Applicant has reduced the hardcover on the property to 75 percent of the total site area by eliminating unnecessary parking stalls to the east of the building. 13. The parking layout for the Subject Property contains 604 parking spaces. The common area for the shopping center has been deducted from the total area of the building for purposes of determining the required number of spaces. -2- 14. The Shorewood Zoning Code requires a 50-foot buffer between commercial and residential property. The Applicant has revised his original plans to comply with the required setback. 15. There is relatively little room for onsite storage of snow. The Applicant has agreed to haul away temporary piles of snow from the parking lot within 48 hours of the last snow fall. 16. The Applicant's traffic study indicates that daily traffic on Lake Linden DriveN ellowstone Trail/Country Club Road would be higher than if the vacant parcel of the Subj ect Property were developed to include an expansion of retail space at the existing shopping center. 17. The proposed. entry on the south side of the Subject Property has been redesigned to be consistent with the City's plans for the reconstruction of the intersection at State Highways 7 and 41. . 18. The circulation for the site has been reversed to a counter-clockwise direction pursuant to the recommendation of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The southeast entry into the site will be designated as a right-in only. The driveway on the west side of the site will be designated as a right-in/left out only. 19. To date the Applicant has not submitted plans for signage for the grocery store addition. Any additional signage on the property requires an amendment to the existing sign plan for the shopping center. CONCLUSIONS A. Based upon the findings contained herein, the Planning Commission determines that the Applicant's Plans are consistent with the following policies of the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan 2000 (hereinafter the "Plan") and recommends that the City Council approve the Applicant's request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment: . 1. Land Use General Policy #5: All development proposals shall be analyzed on an individual basis from a physical, economic, and social standpoint to determine the most appropriate uses within the context of the Planning District in which it is located and within the community as a whole. 2. Land Use General Policy # 11: Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses shall be accomplished in an orderly fashion, which does not create a negative (economic, social, or physical) impact on adjoining developments. 3. Land Use Residential Policy #2: Low density residential neighborhoods shall be protected from encroachment or intrusion of high types and by adequate buffering and separation from other residential as well as non-residential use categories. 4. Land Use Commercial Policy #1: The City of Shore wood's commercial development shall be oriented toward "convenience" type of shopping geared toward neighborhood or community scale markets. 5. Land Use Commercial Policy #2: Commercial and service centers shall be developed as cohesive, highly interrelated units with adequate off-street parking. -3- 6. Land Use Commercial Policy #3: Existing and proposed service and commercial uses shall be adequately and appropriately landscaped according to community requirements as amended. 7. Land Use Commercial Policy #4: All existing and proposed service and commercial uses shall be adequately screened or buffered from any adjacent residential development. 8. Land Use Commercial Policy #14: It shall be the responsibility of existing commercial developments to assume the burden of making necessary improvements to insure compatibility with surrounding residential uses. B. The Comprehensive Plan amendment is subject to the Metropolitan Council determining that the proposed amendment has no metropolitan significance. C. The Planning Commission recommends the Applicant's request for rezoning be approved, since it is consistent with the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan. . D. The Planning Commission recommends the Applicant's request for preliminary plat approval be approved, since it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as would be amended and with the location of Lake Linden Drive. 1. The preliminary plat includes the dedication of street right-of-way for Lake Linden as depicted on Exhibit C. 2. The Applicant agrees to enter into a stipulation of dismissal in Condemnation Case No. CD2618, to include release of the quick-take deposit, and acknowledgement of each party's responsibility for its own fees and costs. E. The Planning Commission recommends the Applicant's request for vacation of a portion of Maple Street be approved, subject to the Applicant constructing a turnaround at the east end of Maple Street, consistent with the recommendations of the City Engineer and the Excelsior Fire District Fire Marshal. . F. The Planning Commission recommends the Applicant's requests for conditional use permits be approved, since they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning, as would be amended, subject to the recommendations set forth in memoranda from the Planning Director, dated 14 February, 13 March, 14 March, and 21 March 2002. Approval is also subject to the recommendations set forth in the City Engineer's memoranda, dated 15 February, 15 March and 20 May 2002. These recommendations as well as provisions for maintenance of stormwater runoff facilities, landscaping and snow removal shall be set forth in a development contract between the developer and the City. The development contract shall be recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder and shall stipulate that the Applicant shall construct trail facilities abutting his property and extending north along the west side of Lake Linden Drive to Yellowstone Trail. G. This approval does not include a conditional use permit for multiple signage. Upon receipt of the Applicant's plans for signage the City will consider an amendment to the current conditional use permit for the Subject Property. H. Approval of the conditional use permits is subject to the review and recommendations of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. -4- ADOPTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 4th day of June, 2002. Respectfully submitted Jim Pisula, Vice Chair . . -5- .................. .......... ............ ... ...................... '@.ifos.................... . ........ 'oiJils'i2oif2" 12' :'52' 'FAx"a'i.233'is60T" ................ 'DAGHLGR' 'SHARDLOW &. UBAN . NO: 1347 ~12l3 B1/12l8/2002 11 : 42 If6I UU4 r; . i i I Ii I ii "EXJnJ.t:'1' A.n Cub Foods SHOREWOOD, MN iPer Certificate oflltl~ No. 850653) THe PARCEL I, The Parcells described iIS fQflows: Par 1: Lot 172, Thit p~rt 0' Lot 170 lying South af the We.steny extensIon af the North line of \.ot 172; That part of Lot 171 'ring Sauth of the North "ne of LDt 172 extencled West to the c:enterDne (If vaaated Waodrt,tff Avenue; . That part of La't li3 lying northerly of the Northarty r1gnt-ct'-wav line of state Highway NQ. 7 and lying West or the East SO feet of Aid tot 1 '73 ~$U"d at rfght Ingles from thes East'llne of said lot 173, AUOITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 135, HennepIn County, Minnesota; Pi:lr 2: That part of the Eilst 30 rest of "fated Woodtltff Avenue shawn on the plat at "UNDEN PARK, HeNNEPIN co., MINN.l'. lYIng North Of StittG HIghway No. 7 and lying South of the SOutf1$1ste.rfy extension Df the sI:n:lJght portlan or the Northeasterly line of Let 13, -LINDEN PARK, HeNNEPIN CO., MINN." SLlbJec;t to It slope restrfcUan and covenant as de5Crlbed In Instrument recorded as CR. Doc. No. 4D60802; (as to Pah; 1 and ;a eICCept' Elbove part of LQt 171 In pqr 1) Subject to a temporary !Snow fence eaSMlent as to the above described part at Lot 173, Auditor's SubdiVIsion Number 135, Hennepin ColJnty, MlnlleS()ta, In Per 1 end the above described pilrt: of the E~t 30 feat of VacalEd Woad"," Avenue shown on the plat of IIUnden Parte.. Hennepin co. Mrnn." recordett In CR 8Qolc 2414 Qf Deeds, page 293, Dae. No. 3439210, fn Par 2; Subject to a lImitation on tl'Jtt light of aa:ess to State HIghwaV No. 7 from the iillxwe descrrbed part of Lot 173, Auditors SubctMslon Number 135, HennepIn County, Mtnl'lGSata, except that part: or Hfd Lot 173, fyinq between two lInes drilwn parallel wIth and distant 345 feet and 1-ao teet Easterty or the West fine or Lot 13, "LInden Pa~ Hennepin co., Minn.", flilCClmed in CR. Book 2414 Df Deeds, page 293, Pac, No. 3439216, (as to Pars land 2) And (Per Trustee's Deed Under Power of-Sale, Doc. No. 3328558.) ~ot 11, UNOEN PARI<, except the f:astetfy 30 feet thereaf, ac:c:arding to the remrc.fed plat thereof on tile and or rec:;ord In the ames of the COUnty Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesola, 1Dgethet wIth that ~I't of vClcated Maple Street wh1d1 accrued thereto by rei:!son Qf its vacatfon thereof. AND (Per CartJ"aste of Tit~ No. 849432.) Lot 3.2, "UNOSN PARK, HENNEPlN CO., MINN." \. I . ~.A. ~S"'NS e NotITill1ltfJ far COmprehenslve PIlln Amendment, Reulnlng. ............ .. Prellmlnarv and Final fl(1lr, ilnd SIte Plan ~plJcatkIn TAA.~R'I'A'11gN DRC:I", I53IT gRK TUglC . PiIge-S9l';j(J .~C'"'I,''''Leuw.C'D.'''"lt1l11.'' . ____ ~~,__. Exhibit A 5 .. ........................ .tiB"Ai-r . .... ... .... .... ... ... .. ... . . . . . . . . . "14fiio 6'. .... . ... . .. . ... .. . .... .....oiiiis"i2()iilf.12.:.S2..Iiu..tif23S.t.s6of...................DAGHLGR SH~LOW & NO. !,4J.... ~04 01/08/2002 11:42 It I' Ii I' II . . Cub Foods SHOREWODD,MN Those p~rts of Lots 1., 13, 14 and 15, "UNOEN PARK. HRNNI:P.lN CO. MINN,- aM those pclrts Of vacated WOOdruff Avenue and \faCiilted Maple street.. dedlCilted In said pl~1: afl desa1bed as f"'JQws.: 8eg'.nn'ng at the Northwest.eliv corner of said lot 14; thence Euteliy to the Nottheasterly cotner ~f ~Id t.Qt 14; thena!l Northerlv tQ the Northwestlilrly cqnler'or SlId Lot 13; thanc::e Northwestertv along a Une whIch Intemects the SQuthwesterlV cerner of Lot U, Undem Park, "HennepIn Co. Minn. n to the center fine of safd Wlcated Mlitple street; tf1enca Southeast:ertv along SQJd center nn~ and Its -&Qnslon, saId extenSDn being paral." with the straIght POf1;l'OQ of the Northeasterly line Dr saId Let 13 to a line drawn parallel with and 3D.00 feet West, is measurad iQt il right angle, from the East Ifne or saId lot' 11 and the Southerfv extenSlon Of sttl'd . EIIst IfneithenQil North along saldparaUelllne to the Northsrlv line of saki Lot 11; thenOi lasterly along tf1e Northeriv Una of said Lot 11 and Its extension to the &st line d the west Half of Vilcated Woccfruff Avenue thence South along sard EqS't Une, alia being the West rine at' the East 3Q feet ar saId vaa.bild Avenue, 1x) the farma,. Northerlv rlght-or-w"y Ifne of state Hfghway No. 7 as described In CR aDak 2414 at Deeds, Page 293 (Doc.. No. 3439216); thence Westerly along said fanner Northerly right-of-way "ne to a poInt 100.00 feet easterlV along said rlQht-.of-WiW Une 'ram rts intel1i&ctron WIth the ScIutherly a)(tenslon of the Westerfy Ifne of Siilf~ l.Dt 13~ thenl:e Norther-I)' porctlleJ wIth sat" extension and the WesterlV line of Silkf Lot 13, q distance Of 100.00 ~t; thencE! Wuf,erlv ~ a pulnt on the Westerly lIne Of saId Lot 13 distant 19.24 fHt Northerlv (rom the most Southertv a>>mer of salel Lot 13; thence SoutnorJy along said Wsst.erfy fine ancC Its . extDnslO'l of saId former Ncrtflertv rlght.of-waV fine; thence WesterlY, detrec:.tfon to the light 100 degrees 54 minutes 25 seconds tot he Westerly line of said LQt 14; thellCe Nartherty' ~Iang the Westerly line of said ,"at 14 to the poInt of begInnIng. Sub.Ject to an easement In fiilvor or the CIty ot Shoft;!wood Int upon under and over tile abow. dcsr::ribe4 part qf vacated Miplo Street as shown by he Resolution reccrded as eft Doc. No. 146108D. Subject to I!lnc:t Eclsefllent Agreement enter8dinto between the Contract for Oet!d ve~ Everett J. Oriskal and hill wife i:IS grantors and Mlnnetanka State Dank, it Mfnnesota CXJl'pDl'ltron as grantee as to a part JJf Lot 1S And the West h,aff of vacated Woodruff Avenue, which ctgreement ,is recorded as CR Doc, No. 4790120; SUbject to an easement In tavar nt Northem Sta~s Power Compctny over the Wesbariv 10 'ee~ of Lots 12 Ind 14, Lirlden Park as Shown by the tilaeffient reaJrded as CR Poc. No. 4957825. Subject to a priVa'~ appurtenant ea$emant of vehicular ac:ess over and upon the SOuth 50 feet Of the above-dClSClfbed part af VClC2tted Woodruff Avenue as shawn by Instrument recorcl'ed CIS CR. Doc. No. "392519; Subject to l!In eilsetTlent In favor or the State of MlnnesotZl to ~rect temporary snow fences upon the land adjacent bJ the hlghwaV and a limitation on the rlgllt o( ec:cess to 'the hrg~y iJ5 shewn cartlRed copy of the Final Certificate filed for rer:ord in CR Book 241-. of Deeds, page 293. And All that part of Lots 13 antf 15, Uodan Pftl1c, HennepIn County, MlnnesDta, and that part or Woodruff Avenue vacated, descrIbed 8S Follows: COmmencIng at a paInt an thl! West line ot saId Lot 13, LInden Park, Hennepfn County, MlnnesDta, whIch point Is l<XlIted 19.24 feet North of the mast Southerfv CX2Mer of $al!:l Lot 13, mea51.1rec1 along l~ iara West line; thence South along said West line i!,"d tf1e Southerly extensIon thereof 100 fee~ more or less, to .the North rlght-of-wav fillS of State Highwity NO.7; thelQ ...... --li-NS ~~ . NamlM far Comprehonslve PlllnAmMdmen"- RacrlIll9, ........ .. . Pnillmlnlry tOO FlniC Plat. Ind SIte p,-", Apllll~ nuNliIIlalttA11QN ~ I.iiI for:: g R ....U DID. ,. .. Df 20 11--.. ~.......4.1lI11'. -If". . ~l 6 ",' t," 'oDiis'i200'f '12': '53' 'FAX' "aT233'is6of"""""'"""'"' "DACHLGR' 'SHARDLOW" &' 'UB'Ai.f'"""""""'"""""""""".""" ;:'~~~"'.'" ~~~"'""" 01/08/2002 11: 42 . ' ....I""!l""<="~.;-~ r.r '. "-. .."..~~ II . Ii Cub Foods SHOREWOOD, MN Eas~rly along said North rlght-af-wav fine a clr$~"Qi1 or 100 feet to a point; thence NQrthwastarlv alDng a line pa~11eI ta and 100 feet: di5mot from saId flm de5crlbed line, a ctlstanee of 100 feet to it point; thence Westerly to the point of begInnIng. And That part of thlJ i1itst, hi1~t or vacated Woodniff Avenue Mng southerfy of the ~ axtansfan af the north Irne of Lot 172,Audlt'Or'ssubdMslon No. :J,3Si tiennepln COLlnty, MInnesota and nartherty of tile easterly extensIon of the nocthSl1sr:env line of &.at 13, UIIden Park HennepJn County, Minnesota, sa.'Clrding to the recorded plat thereof.' . , ArId 1l1at part of Tract A dElSQ'ib~ below: Tnla A. Lot 1S, Unden Pcuk, and Lot 173, Audltar'$ subdIvision No. 135, all aQ:Ording to the plitt!; thereof on fire and of retXH'd In the office of the County Racorder In "nd for HennepIn Ccluntv, Minnesota. Wllrch lies southeasterlV of II line tun fR'","el with and distant 95 feet northwest&rfy at Une 1 descrIbed below and northe11y of Una 2 descrlbed befoWI . . Une 1. from the sDuthwest cerner of Section 34, T~Mhlp 117 North, ~ngct 23 West. nm northeasterly at an angle fit 9 degrees 51 minutes 4S SQa)nds from the south Ifne of qfd Section 34, being also the fiouth Hennepin COunty line, (measured frcm _1St I:D north) for .1620.0 feet; ~nce defleGt to the left at an angle of 31 degrees 07 minuets seconds for 757.1 feet; thence defied: tr:J th left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 mInutes 00 sE!Q)nds for 75 feet to the paint of begInning Line 1 to be described; thence deflect to the Iett at an angle of 90 dagreasOD mfnutes ao seconds for 100 feet to tangent spIra' point; thence denea to the right on spira' curve of ~Ing radius (spiral ang'i! of 3 degrees ..5 minutes 00 seconds) ror 2"5.1 teet to spirar curve pointi thence deflecting tQ the right 'On . 3 degree 07 minutes 21 second Circular curve (delta angle 23 degrees '37 minutes 00 seconds) for 756.3 feet to cLlrve spired point; thence defied: to the right an a spfral CUMJ or Increasing tldlus (spIral angle 3 degre~ 4f5 minutes ao seconr1s) for 24S.t feet to spiral tangent poInt; thence on tangent to Sitfd curve for 7.9 feet; thence deI'Iect to the left all . 1. degrees .30 mlnute$ 00 .second CUl'Ve (delta angle 6 degt'ce$ 45 minutes 00 seconcla) far 450 feet; thence on tangent to said CUM! for 100.1 feet; thenc:a detrect to the rfght 011 a 1 degree 45 minute 00 second CUNe (delta angift 10 degret!lS 5S minutes 00 seconds) for 2...",eet and thlire terminating; Una 2 From it poInt on LIne 1 described above, distant 460 feet easterfy of b point of tennlnatlol\ run nartherlV at right angle$ ~ said l.lne 1 for 9S r.et to the paint of beginning o( Una 2 to be descrfbed; thenas run $outhwesterly to a point distant 5S fa""t northerfv (measured at right angles) pf a point on saId Una 1, dIstant 390 feet asterlY at b 'poInt of b=nnln~ttDnl thence run sQuthwest:erfy t:c Q polnl: dIstant olf-S feat nort'hertv (measured at right angles) Of is point on Rid Une 1, dl~nt 325 feet eQsterly or Its poInt 0( terminatIOn; thence run waarlV parallel to saki Une 1 fQr 80 feet; thence run westerly to il pafnt distant eo feet northerly (m~ed .t right angles) of a point of said Une 1, distant 9Q feet e21sterly gf its pornt ot termination; d181'lt':a run ,.... ~SaNI!!!t ~ NarnatMt far OImprehlWllve PIIn Anlertdmcnt, IWcnlns. --....... IiiiiII Pn:IlI",lnaty and FIMI PlZlr, Mlf Site Plan ~ ~TA-naN G'!QU.. lilT tilt. BTLJDIC ~ -7Df20 - . ... -. ~. _. . I ".. ........ 7 . . . . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . ....... . . ..... ... .. . . . . .. . .... . . . .. ..... ... . ... . ... . ....... 'l~f 0'0 8' ....... .... ... . . .. . ................. ........................ ........... ..... 'DAGHLGR SHARD LOW & UBAN GJI2l6 "'~""'01lii8/200'2 12: 54 FAX 6123375601 NO.~~.., 01/08/2002 11:42 ~ ,. I. II I I; . Cub Foods SHOREWOOD,MN westerfy parallel to sa'" Lrne .1 for sa feat; thence dllflect to the right at an angle qf go. dril9rees 00 mInutes 00 sca:Jnds for 50 feet and there mnnrnatrna. together with a triangular piece 'n ~Jd lat 15, Qr.fjalnlng" Qnd narthWliiISt:erly Of Ihe above 4eseribed strip ~nd s~thwesbarlv of the following described line; Beginning it a paInt on the northwesterly baundary of the abo\le described str1p, dlsl2tnt 15 feel' Mftheast&rlV at b Intersection wfth th~ SOutheasterly line 0' Pleasant Avenue In sl!llcf subdlYisJan, as IQQted and estaJ311s1'1ea prier to AL(~ust 30, 1952; thence run northwesterlv to it point on the smrtheashlrfy line of fiilld Pleasant Avenue, distant 20 feet nQrt!1easterfy of said intersecttan and li1ere terminating. And lh~t part or Maple! Street as shown on the prat of Unden Park, Hennepin County, M'nne$Qfa, described as lying eastarlv of the southerly extanslo" of the west lIne at Lot 11, saId Ullden Park and westerly Dr Maple street vacated per Doc. No. CJ4610QO. "AFlSDNS ~,",AY'1QN GAAU.. ....1Ilo'o\.....11 . .. '-tw.5."", . _1II1..1Il ~ Narrative for C4mprehercslw Plln NnendI'lteI1~ fI.wonIng, ~ Ptellmllla/V and Final P1i~ ana SIt8 Plan ~n iii'T ORK ,"UC'C ~-8(JfHJ o . ~ 8 . . i! ~ ~ Q ~ (:! ::l ~ i s t I .., i ~ !;jl i ~ S,l II ,,~ -------~Il I.~ -:-~ \ ------'-' ._1 2 \ ..... .. 1J PARKING AREA 5.37 AC. LANOSCAPE AREAS \'!THIN PARKING 0.53 AC. (lOll) ";'-;;:'~'~~~:G:. : .~-~:~~:~;,j . . . . . . . . lll~'liAkE.; . ~/-~._-.. ...............y::.---...... ... ... . .-.~..~.!..........- 50' O' 50' ~nunununuri~ Cr(lj)hlc Scale 50" PLANT SCHEDULE GTY. PLANT TYPE HDNEYLOCUST GLE TSI TRlACANTH S 'SHA MA SWAMP WHITE OAK R 0 AMERICAN LINCEN n SIZE TYPE 3 IN BB 3 IN. BB 3 IN. BB N 25 AM R MAP 15 PR IRIFIR R A R T AUSTRIAN PINE PI I R AUSTRIAN PINE I BLACK HILLS SPRUCE 4-6' HT. BB . H. BB 12-14' H MM 6-8' HT. BB 4-6' HT. BB 2 FT. C.G. 3.5 O.C. 2 FT. C.G. 4.5 18 IN. C.G. 3 I 18 IN. C.G. 3 I 5 T A T[ SEED I BLACK HILLS SPRUCE PI DENAA I BLACK HILLS SPRUCE PI A CA OENSATA DOME ASTER R NOVAE-ANGUAE 'PURPLE DOME' DY SHASTA DAISY CHRYSANTHEMUM SUPERBUM 'SNOW LACy' 860 ZAGREB COREOPSIS COREOPSIS VERl1C1LLATA 'ZAGREB' POT 14 O.C. 3 IN. ~ ......... 36 GLOSSY BLACK CHOKEBERRY AR NIA ON CARPA 104 CARDINAL REO OSIER DOGWOOO RI" A IN 173 REO TWIGGED DOGWOOO CORNUS BAlLE\1 6 FRAGRANT SUMAC RHUS AROMA nCA POT 3 IN. 14 O.C. 3 IN. POT 14.0.C. PERENNIALS" 410 PU PLE ONEFUOWER 3 IN. POT 14 O.C. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ....: ....: '.~ ,~': '-,:\~:(:I- ,d,.,;f:.:-:,;: REMARKS ~ ~i J it r" .', oJ \ =\ = Y"~ ",j. \Ji" zh t' !, · tl .~1I~ z IS~ a~f- · ~ll IE II~ ld mlq! lmJ II ;~ I~~~ I "'~~z i~l~ ~~~~ Iil!;" . !Ii :l;I';S'" it;cna ~~~~ ~'lii~ ~~<'" lisd tl~-" ~~~~ ~!l!Qi5 _..:;,~ VI Z o Vi ~ '" JJ~~1 ~ iHl~&l L.u iil~~o ~ 100' I ,... ., 8 I ., III I .... '" ,... u w~ '" . <(~ -lW -li- 5~ oU 0", ~~ wa. ~a. 00 II (/)(/) ~ . o .... .!l ~ fil ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ !~ ~ :f~)e ~ ~ Ii ~!. ~ lD a. a. -Ri ~g ~ l~l I ~ ~ t:; 11 Exhibit B I I", 1 1 I I. PRELIMINARY PLAT OF: SHOREWOOD VILLAGE ADDITION -----, I I I I I I - ~.::. 0:: c: .::.:.-.r=:I:Ir:. -.:- -=: :.=: = 0;:::, ., ........... Same ""*9C11ftC1 ,,18., Iocol.... .. ..... . ..... ...... " ... ...., ....... ...... Iocolorl ~ to ..... c.- IRa.. Oftt CCIII. IIcIIet ftU........ 22712. 22724 OIICI 22m. ..................... 1ft till ~ .. 0ClCMt., .f =.:=.. :~t."':' =- of 1Ih1ch.. Ire UftOtIarel'ftI'.... v.." II Mn.,. .. _....... =~'" --.- .... I/W A'6III.t _It rt: Itfr. = 1111'''' _.."'_,...._ '5 H 40 ~ Sl:AU: .. . rat 40 .. =- CO iF ... .... or ... or ... - .. .. - ...... =.- .. i: ,,"I - "' ... = '" :':L ...... - - .- --- .. .. ...... ... ...... 0... _INII _ --- 55 a--::... -..- -..- -..- == ........... = r:.;;_ ......~ .... -...... --.. --- 55===--- == St.i- --- ~..... ===:1.:-......... --- o.n.u. .... .... ...... a..... ...... III ..... ... ...... ..... .. .. .... ... ......,.. =::r:.................... 55=r::...... ...... .. .. ..., ... ....... ::::: ~... ---- -.... ...... CIlItWit.... .... ... ~- -z--~- ~-i (IlIrc.--...._....... .... Lol.... .... ..,eI.... ."........... _....................... ....t.elIQ .::..:-- ....... ," .... ..... .. .. __ .. "\.Ill .,'........ ... .. .. ..... .. .. ..... ...... fie i.::~~ ': ;'-::'.:.:ra=:. ':':..~~~-=.n..-:.:.~ ..a n..I ... .. .. '-" . ..... II ...l1li ........ ....... ..... . lilt .... .. 'UClDI .... ....,.. co.. ....... ~==~~~.=:=.~........................... .... ...... .. . .. ....... ... ........ . --- .. ....... ....... aD-.... _ (_ Ie... .-.I.............LIIII .,...,. t. ~~I=:t::....-= ~-......::. -=....--=r :r'.....~ ;:\..~- ..;..-r- =.-;:.~ :~r II ~ .......... c:.. .... --.... ca.. 2414 ......... _ 1M. ...... ..................",- ............,... ,"-......~IIIII't...... "'\ ....... ................ .. .......... c...e,. ......... .... .... ... II ........ .n, ........... .. .. .....................,..... MIl...... ..........._.......... 1.& -.:a-..... ...... CI.. ....., r--. .. CII ... 141. .. ..... .... _ D-. ... .M.JI211, (eI Ie .... I .. 2) - ... ~ ......... ---........... ... ",... =~~~:-=-=.-=:..~~~r.:.:-.:.. - (IlIr~........1Iet4>>) tAlI IL \.IIIGDrI.... ....... ca.. ..... ............... II. IJ, I.... It. "'uIIoI,... ICMGW CD............................ r=S:":''-=::~I=-=n==t=c~:::-..~tC ===-=~:i::=:-= ::?-:~-:;:~':1~M.:..=.::-:z:.I~:: E~-=::~~~I":='i.~1:rA~:::t.~ -- ...... Ie.......... ~-::.-............ ....~.... t.......... CII...ItI......... ~~.::==:-=-=:r;.:::-r:*'-=-~~......~ =:-:m"'1:,.:~':''''~I~~''",, ...... =L:i:'::" -::..,-=. ...~: ?l.....~ -:"-=:-..11...:: .. -:::.~.... .. ==:.:: =-::.::--.,.. .:-.:::....-::: ro.. -:. =I=' ................... .. ..... Ie ... ~ ....-.. ...... .... ""- .... CIiIInd .... ..., ....... I..... .. ..... ... ... =~...:: =:::::: =:.=:r.. =- .-en::'': :-"'= ...... 15... .... =-.:...~....."':.::....-=--=:::..~........, ...........11... 'f. ...... ...".................. -1........._......,......IlMlIG......... ----...... .. -- ....,....... - .... ., ~ __. CII DI&. ... QIIII. E:~~:::.; =..~-=-=~I~-=..::.':: n..'&..--:.:=" - :.:::: r..= IS... It. "'- ,... ........., CIrullI' ...... .. .... ... .. ...... ..... ....... E?~~5-!~~~~"-::-:.c:e:-=.:~:: .. :rr...~.... " ...... ~'-'::. .... _.. .........,... ......., 1111 .... .."r.... -r.... ~............... I..... __ w............................IOO.... Ie. .... .........,.. .... .. .. .......... . - ~.:.e.~~..~t..S-ca~-,:S=':.. - ..............A-......... '_4 ~I...": =.,-:..~::::::::=-= ~e:....--::L:...""""""''' III...,.. :::.:..~ :::-........ .. ......... . ..... ...-....,.. Lhe f ............ ..., ....,. ::.:....r::::::..r.:.to ~ ~'~H.~..:;'i:=::::.::.:::r~ t: ~.,..,.r:.:=:.:It.'.:::...~:::=-=; ='::=::.r=.. =::::a1:'~:" -=--=..... .....:,;:: :. ........=:' ==:.:T.: ~.."--........1III__..,14I.1.... .............-.a ......~........ :::-.:.:::.:.:. '::::;:- :-:- =-.:. -:r::~ ~,....... 'f JIU ": .. ........ -- .. M.I .... Ie .... ....... ..... ....... ........ ......... -e ,..*r.::.... =-:.::::' "'~~IIIlI. == L'rC. -::J-.:..--: ~ -=- ~.-r:.;.:3:::t:; .... ..... (-..... " -- ....... . .... .. ,. .... ... .... .......... ,... . ~.::.u..~:'~:-= :r..~-::r.-:: cw..:::= = ~:t'. ... === =-~.. ~.-::l:.:..~::.-:.... &:::.~.... =r::- ,.........\h I........ - ....~........................::r.......,,:.......... I ~If. =-~= ==:.,":= ~ ::'L.C-:;:.:':.~~.,,,:,,:,:: _......... 1M......... ....... ..............._......................... ='=*....~:,~.:.==I~..-:::::--:.~~=..~~ .......... ~ II fill ~..~....~ ..,................. ~~~':-~MI~~ A.~= =:....-:;-.:-.::=:....:.:.-:.:.... - =~-=:."~':-t-::~~=~~~::;.. c...'a ....... :r=:I:I:T ~: :.~-:r Ut, land. ... ...... _II 01 tile Iacolbrof OIIIau.cnn...a..,......OI..IGIlI...... Dol.. ..... '2,. ... or ..... 2002 SUIDl: lMO __ u.c. &':_S-.I.L.S .............,_ -- !Io, '2. 2002 C... _'1 I I I I I I I L______ ~ ~=~Alt CINE CAll. at "'-414-_ ... _ __ __ .. ...,,,. 3.) lhlt .., ... ......... .......1 till ....nt of CIm8Iat lIUt..... to.n.l.. --"'-""-"_lo___ ''''_" =- to ,....... upon -"1 01 0 currtIIl PUt ___ce ~I .. au.."... PIIt ~ ...~~".:.:':.': =: ~-c:.::..~"':::"Jtor.; =,:-~"":.::, 2.'_ ~72. Aullllor'. IIolIKIhIIion _bjlcl to .... taltlclfoft IftCI ....... ,. CR Doc. 110. I.) Lot If3. AucfI.... ~ -IIeI to t..~ ... lena ____I PI" Doc. No. ~,*II" c_... .... 001 -"'"l :~=-......... "jIcI to.....1 for MOIftIOl'lOftCe of u'..l'.....,. Doc. .... .. cor li'l:' - I I I I I ---__-.J Exhibit C II 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 lVIEMORANDUM . DATE: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator . Larry Brown, Director of Public Works >> May 20, 2002 TO: FROM: RE: Shorewood Village Shopping Center - Cub Foods Site Plan Engineering File 01-15 At the February 19, 2002 and March 19, 2002 Planning Commission meetings, the developer of the Shorewood Village Shopping Center was directed to revise the site plans for the proposed C.ub Foods addition to meet or exceed the City's requirements, for the application to proceed. Of specific concern were outstanding issues related to traffic and storm water engineering. Attachment 1 depicts a schematic layout for reference of this discussion. Traffic Eneineerine . At the March 19th, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Chuck Rickart of WSB and Associates, stated that a full traffic analysis of all of the intersections operating simultaneously needed to be completed to demonstrate adequate traffic capacities for the proposal. Mr. Rickart has completed his review of the study results and has found that the site operates with a level of service "C." Therefore, the site circulation is adequate. (Refer to Attachment 2). Staff also received review comni.ents from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT) with regard to perceived impacts of the development to the T .H. 7 & 41 intersection. MN/DOT chose to submit these comments late in the review process. It should be noted that under a site plan review application, MN/DOT would not have jurisdiction to review this development. However, since a portion of the plan involves a comprehensive plan amendment, MN/DOT gains the opportunity to review and comment. . In their review, MN/DOT mandated some significant changes to the traffic circulation. The first major change is the stipulation that the southeasterly entrance to the parking lot be revised as a "right in only." Attachment 3 demonstrates this traffic flow. Per this mandate, semi-trailered vehicles are . now forced to enter this site and travel in a counter-clockwise pattern to the truck docks n ~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .. Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Shorewood Village Shopping Center Site Plan Review May 20, 2002 Page 2 of 4 located on the north side of the site. Trucks would leave the site by making a left hand turn from the westerly exit onto Lake Linden Drive. MN/DOT required this reconfiguration to reduce the number of conflict points (points where traffic movements intersect) in close proximity to Trunk Highway 7. Any reduction in the number of conflict points will increase the allowable traffic capacity. of the . intersection, thereby minimizing potential impacts to the T.R. 7 & 41 intersection. City Staff was quick to point out that the configuration mandated by MN/DOT forces a motorist leaving the northeast quadrant of the customer parking area to utilize the center entrance opposite the Cub Foods Store. While this configuration does reduce the number of conflict points within the public right of way, it is likely that minor congestion will occur within the interior of the parking lot. during the peak rush hours. However, this congestion is minor, and will not affect the level of service on the frontage road or the Trunk Highway 7 intersection. As a consequence to the revision listed above, the westerly access from Lake Linden Drive has been revised from an "enter only" access to an access that permits entrance and exists, with the exception of no right hand turns leaving the site. Signs prohibiting right turns will be posted at this access. While these signs have proven to be effective in most areas, a small percentage of the users will choose.to ignore the prohibition. Drainae:e Analysis Water Quantity The Developer has revised the storm water management plan for the site to reduce the total runOff. rate below the pre-developed runoff rate. This is achieved by construction of an underground pipe gallery that would provide 70,000 cubic feet of storage underground (refer to Attachment 4). Mr. Steve Gurney of WSB and Associates, has reviewed the storm water capacity and found this proposal to be adequate. (Refer to Attachment 5). . Water Quality Underground detention basins have been in the market place for several years. As land prices escalate, balancing the costs associated with underground piping become more feasible. The challenge in these types of systems has never been quantity storage, but finding a way to remove contaminants, such as phosphorous. The City of Shorewood's regulations require that the entire site be brought into compliance for water quality standards. This includes the remainder of the shopping center site. This is contrary to what has been proposed previously which only treated the increase in volumes associated with the development. . . Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Shorewood Village Shopping Center Site Plan Review May 20, 2002 Page 3 of 4 Conventional means of treatment involve the construction of a NURP pond. As particulate matter and contaminants, such as phosphorus enter a pond, a portion of the material is settled out or trapped by surrounding .vegetation. Vegetation plays a key role in trapping sediment materials. fu the case of an underground storm water basin, the luxury of vegetation is nonexistent. . The Developer has contracted Barr Engineering to assist in. devising a solution to the removal of particulate matter and phosphorus. This firm is considered a leader in the field of storm water management. Representatives of Barr Engineering have proposed an alum injection system. This system is an automated and monitored system that injects the chemical alum into the underground pipe gallery, as storm water enters the pipe gallery. The alum precipitates out the sediment material and phosphorus that is tied to the sediment. Precipitate material settles to the bottom of the gallery where runoff is then filtered prior to discharge. Based upon the calculations, sediment is removed from the site on an annual basis, and will be hauled to a water treatment plant that routinely disposes of these types of materials. Under this proposal, approximately 5,200 pounds (one truckload) of sediment would be removed per year. Results of removal for particulate material and phosphorous of the alum injection system were compared to a conventional NURP pond. Attachments 6 and 7 are graphs that depict the results of the analysis. Under the City's regulations and a conventional NURP pond, approximately 811 pounds of suspended solids and 8 pounds of phosphorus per year would leave the site. Under the . alum injection system being proposed, these numbers are reduced to 412 pounds of sediment and 3 pounds of phosphorous per year. Therefore, the system proposed is far more efficient than a conventional NURP pond. The Developer has also addressed City Staff's concerns with regard to long term performance and maintenance of the system. Mr. William Randall, Vice President of Aeration Industries futernational, has proposed that a remote monitoring system be installed into the gallery to monitor water rates and quality. Aeration Industries will perform the remote monitoring of the site, and will certify in written form, on a monthly basis, the record of performance and runoff characteristics. The system proposed has remote dial in monitoring and an alarm monitoring system, should the alum injection system fail at any point in time. Again, while these types of systems are costly, they are also becoming more and more prevalent in the treatment of storm water. Attachment 8 is a report that was published by the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for such a project on Tanager Lake near downtown St. Paul, Minnesota. Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Shorewood Village Shopping Center Site Plan Review May 20, 2002 Page 4 of 4 Staff concurs that the alum injection system will provide treatment that is superior to a conventional NURP pond. Providing that there is an independent consulting firm monitoring and certifying the system to the City each month, this system will provide superior treatment for the site. Recommendations The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed site plan dated AprIl 12, 2002 and finds that the proposal meets or exceeds the engineering requirements for grading, drainage, traffic and erosion control standards, contingent upon the following conditions: . 1. The Oevelopment Agreement for the site shall require the Developer to enter into a contract with an independent firm capable of continuos monitoring of the alum injection system, in addition to annual sediment removal and maintenance of the system. Said firm shall send written certification by a registered professional engineer licensed within the State of Minnesota that the alum injection system continues to function under the' current design par~eters. . -- ..- ~ ~ft'I"":=-~"~'lIIll':"''== '&''IIi''Uol.'&'.u.a~'' MllINIWIlI.IDlll.....IdllWIIO...l:DIMillIlhfM .MaXn:lVHS ~ . 1Dlcura. WW Dl.1/lHl ~.IQlIIM' Nl\!ImI-rnI 3J.VG tIDO-IK-nl, -4 DIlllI-UC::-CU "'''d ltK; Nn IlO hi a:nc:m-o un .11"5 HI '-'l1JH In H' -.n= ':)NI 'H31N3:) llNlddOHS SNO"TII3lI A3AIIns 3ll\f111t\ OOOM3110HS HI'I'alXIM"1I spoo& q,D.Q - I :l : III . ..&-h I ... R ~ ~ III III n ~ " I '" :t z Attachment 1. Site Plan mlZ'II'IO ~lISO 'l:Ino.<rx......~ ~ WSB WSB & Associates, Inc. 4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55422 (763) 541-4800 (763) 541-1700 (fax) & Associates, Inc. Memorandum To: Larry Brown, P.E. Public Works Director City of Shorewood From: Charles T. Rickart, P.E., P.T.D.E. Date: May 17,2002 Re: . . Final Traffic Engineering Review Shorewood Village Shopping Center- Cub Foods Site Plan WSB Project No.1 074-59 The City of Shorewood Planning Commission at their February 19, 2002 meeting and March 19, 2002 . Planning Commission Meeting requested the developer of the Shorewood Village Shopping Center, including the proposed Cub Foods addition, to revise the site plan and traffic analysis based on comments from the Commission, Mn/DOT, staff .and public. Based on my review of the revised analysis and site plan, I offer the following comments: Site Plan/Geometries The proposed site plan has been revised based on comments from MnlDOT on circulation at the Lake Linden DriverrH 7 intersection. Their concern was the potential for traffic from the site, at the first access impacting TH 7. The plan has been revised to make this access a right-in only with truck circulation around the building in a counter clockwise manner, with trucks exiting the far westerly driveway. The far westerly driveway would be a right-in/left-out. The main access to the site will still be through the center access point approximately 350 feet west of the TH 7/Lake Linden Road intersection. These revised improvements will provide for the least number of conflicts at the Lake LindenfTH 7 intersection, as well as minimize the amount of potential backup to TH 7. . The truck circulation around the site was reviewed and will operate in a satisfactory manner. Traffic Analysis The traffic analysis was completed for different access scenarios at the first intersection adjacent to TH 7 and Lake Linden Drive. These included full access at that intersection and right-in only. The analysis results indicated that very little change would occur in the traffic patterns or operations through the intersection with either scenario. However, as mentioned previously, the number of conflict points would be reduced and the potential for backup to TH 7 would also be mi~mized with the right-in only scenario. Based on our review of the final plan revisions and traffic analyses, I find that the access as proposed by the development will provide the best traffic operation and safety on the City's street systems. If you have any questions on these comments or my review, please contact me at (763) 287-7183. nm C:\CC Reports\051702 Ib.doc Attachment 2 Chuck Rickart Traffic Review ~ ~ III .. .. .. " ,d d ~.. II II III ll\ l ill !l '" !i I .. .. " 1 - ;; . ( I ~~T ~\ ~, I mJl i i . Attachment 3 Entrance Shopping Center -m- ,;-;t~ , ! . .':'~ _.." ~ \ __ ! i{ l ,.. '. \. '.:/"5 i OSO'Og'.--- ..- Hi! / <- NOb.t-IOCl\f t:l31N3J ~Nlq~Q+-IS~~' \ i I:, .. .-~,-",~, ilq .- 11!11/ I.:, / l'iii LU e H3J.N3 AHEI"YO Eldld -.:fS rS.l'69 'U n,l \-I A 1"\1\11" ./ e. <o:t 1:c GJ C1) e:::: ..c ro yCj 0:: C1) .....0.. ..... .- <Pol ("dAl) 30N3:l 1115 .' H3J.N:I '.InaNOO 10H.lNOO aNY AJ.nlLn "my :lAd .8 .' " '., .==\ \. /\. ... A WSB & Associates, Inc. WSB & Associates, Inc. 4150 Olson Memorial Highway, #300 Minneapolis, MN 55422 (763) 541-4800 (763) 541-1700 (fax) Memorandum To: Mr. fArry Brown From: Pete Willenbring, P.E. Steve Gurney, P.E. Date: May 16, 2002 Re: Cub. Foods Site WSBProject No. 1074-59 . We have reviewed the latest information submitted by Parsons Transportation Group and Barr Engineering regarding the Cub Foods Site in Shorewood, Minnesota. This information included the preliminary site plans and Stormwater Management Plan dated April 12, 2002. In addition, correspondence from Scott Sobiech, dated May 2, 2002 and supplemental information, including a revised grading plan dated May 8, 2002, was reviewed. Based on this review, we offer the following comments: Water Quantity · The underground storm sewer pipe gallery has been increased in size to 70,000 cubic feet. This live pool will allow the site to temporarily pond excess runoff so that the rate of runoff conveyed to the downstream system will not increase under the proposed conditions. . · It should be noted that the storm sewer that conveys storm water from the east portion of the site (the existing shopping center) to the pipe gallery will only accommodate runoff from a storm event of approximately a 2-year return frequency. This is acceptable since this conveyance system is intended to divert runoff from smaller storm events to the pipe gallery and treatment system. During greater storm events the runoff will follow existing drainage patterns and discharge to the MnlDOT ditch. Water Quality · The figures provided by Barr Engineering show several different scenarios for the annual TP and TSS loading leaving the site boundary. The proposed development will increase the TP loading from 13 pounds to a total of 18 pounds annually. · As you are aware, the City's requirement regarding water quality is that pre- treatment of stormwater runoff must be provided to NURP recommendations Attachment 5 Steve Gurney Storm Water Review for all new development. The NURP program recommends that the dead pool volume below the normal outlet be greater than or equal to runoff from a 2.5" storm over the entire contributing drainage area assuming full development. A NURP pond for the entire site would remove 10 pounds of TP annually, or 56% removal efficiency. The proposed system with the Alum Injection will remove 15 pounds of TP annually, or 83%. This system will meet the City's requirement for water quality. Operation and Maintenance Plan · The draft operation and maintenance plan should be modified to include definitions of rainfall events that will require an inspection of the system. A specified rainfall amount, duration of storm, and recording location should be included. · It is recommended that the inspections be conducted with the owner's representative and the City's representative present. . · It is recommended that a clause be added to the agreement which states that should the maintenance work not be performed by the owner the City will reserve the right to perform the work itself and bill the owner for the work completed. In summary, it is our opinion that the preliminary plans dated April 12, 2002 and revised May 8, 2002 meet the City's requirements regarding stormwater management. The applicant will still need to receive the required permits from MnlDOT and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Should you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact us at (763) 541- 4800. Cc: Dave Hutton, WSB & Associates, Inc. . 20 18 ':16 "C". '>i. ~..,. :!.14 ~, . En c' =6::>12 c '. c .... .'!t10 C' o .c Co' 8 ~ .c c.;. 'ij 6 _. o ... 4 2 o t-I'"d> ~ ::r".... ~ ~ S" --'"0 n ::s ::r":r' (JQOS CIl"""nl ::;.-g = ~ tf) .... CI\ . . 1.Q R-e.presents,an. 5CJ%-re,duclioR'in . n.ewlP.'loadfng . ...; Ex,istina: P~~;dj~ii~~~M~~i:9~ OitY,'$'.Cti~~ri~f(Bfjrag . Mji1l1~h~h~ Qreek ." e~~~~~~:' Wata~~2ri~istf.Ct numbers reflectrunofffi'o.1Jl ~I!f~ j)hange,d:are,a~,' T~~,a~tu~l, ~mb,rs.~CM!ld.~e soroe,'II~fg(e~e-rtt)an tho~ listed .ab9\1ebe.causeQl inf:lrea~edflu~tlg.c.<l\.lSeod~t",e.tin9,runoff.. :'shore,V(t>.~d:'Qqb 'f~~<I$! ..Ah'tlual r'~~~:-.I~~6',.i,ho.ruf(tp}':L9~~i'rtj L.~iavJ"I~,tfle'Prc>po~ed$i~aiU:.r"~.ij' 1.~~ NVRPHQ'i1d":sjz~d. :~~~f~~tIt~. . (14:2/iC,.:: 3 0',' PfQP~:s,~'~,ta;~~~ffiing :Prg,p.~~~.~,la~surDiriJI, . l3MP~s:wli:fAJii"'; . BMP'S:WIAlum .,'.,". ..:"....,..A...,..'.,.,..m ',." ',""" ...... . . . 'Injtf6t.iHriJ . . . itijectidri) CQ.od,ithin ~.. -.. . ., ......~.. .... ~ ~ ."'. -. _.#;.ddifih.Hal TP::Runofftolid'cau.se.d,by,Oe~i:HiJ'pmel'lt:: DlEXlSifOifTP'Riirioff~li6:h;d :C" ~~: :~. CD CP' .....; 07. "V :cp.: ....:. :0' ':0.; :.0. .a- D. .... $ :m Ute c." ._ o .~: ,......'LL.O...:Gf. ~. )~'.1Jl /'0 ~S: :::.1_31 'l: g j; ;: ~. ~tJ): .. (I):', o LL.:: ..= .~ '0 :uI~; !!., ~. o. ~~. ~' I ::r; (fl' 1;;. :~: ~. ~: 'c :.s:; ~: c. ...0) ....-..c. cc:::c .i;:l~.~ 0').. .~.CI) :~~:I"-' :~cg"~ Q)..~..~ _. .. . UoO'. '.'~ ."~ ~ =.' f"w,,;', ~ N: ~Jrr\,:~~i~~m~'Jft~';'~~~~ II ~~ \j[(;I__jJJ;'.d~:y~\'i'if{!~@:j~~~W n.;l,\},~" "f.:'. '11>:;" ~~~...,,"./<<)" v,\..,~J~ ~ ,(;~\I )c~I",,_~\~~"i1 d\.l't\\ t, !m",i1t;' ~ I ,I" ""1~'~~~i1;;" o~1r~c> \~ "~~~t51 ["~ ~j ~J~ t}~Jlj\"''''~ "'" 1?141~"''\.';B!h''''li..~)<\'f0! , t~ ~ 'lS,lVj'^e'~/~'>'t,,\....~ i;>::t0?~ (~t~"igfl t t:j~I~~~~~'il~2~~~~~~~~~3,~ ;~ fa ,tii' 11,' ~I~~!~*~;~~~~i~~):2Y4'j~~lThiJ$~~j~~~?~~~~~i%~~~".Z'~ ~""l\.j;1 '.{ ~Ir~" ~..;\':;% :'?{?'L-J'/.r~....\t> \ c; [A?' . h'~ ';;;I::'4::.{.(~',J} :;l"~\",?~IJ J:~' '~l\f~~\ ~ 1~':OZ~~![); f'3}r,lj''1~-S1i!t1 t.~ ~~,:;;t:~~ [:~\',:;;/~~ri~~~'?' ~~:~~F~~~if} "'/~,~~ 1~ ~$;ft ~ '~:'f-~~;~ ~.1:~~j }~"'~ ~~~~ ~~~ftl1i.~~~~~~ f~ {~" l1,k. {r~ ~)~~Ii" t 'A'l~ lJ,~:rr-'i1~~'),>rQ~ f~ili'~~~,f,~t~ti. 2',,;x~\'~f{\ lJ)t': "If !g),~k," \\~}P!~'r:~jf!fi~t,~ .~;:{~ '/,'A'd"l' ~ 'Z ;,z.';t'" , _ ,'lo;-r;::,,":~ ,. ~~, '1..<, l. j "'i'-" ~ ,,~J /;"W'~;>4 ,-"~ ;&~~:~;~~~~J,~rZ~1t1!,1~\:;g1<R~'t;i~:~~li~tti~~~if:~~~~Lf %~m~,~~;g~,t$;^ffi~j:~{~?'~ %:r~ ;~~)'; I1~~~~~r~g;tE%~1t~t:~tik~~~0htl"~~ ~~"~;<, ';~J~t~~~~t~~~l~~ '8 0. .to 8 :88 ':8 qq Q. 0. I,.C) -.::t ro C'\l :(J~sql)6U!P2Dl'SP!lDspapuadsns 12lD.l .8 q, ..-- ~.:t):. (1)"- . ilji .- ,,:,m~ ~~:: 0'1 0)' ,.S:: :~}~:k to ..~...c:. ttl;~ fL" "'1:: :~:., '~; s: ,E. .,B: I!i CL. . i~ ~..::;!~~ :P":'.o' ::~;i.g'~ 0..' .0;-. Q:' ~~,: ill o. ;0;"": '15" c. 'if :0\ . .S- :.:tt .~;e CII .! :..""'. ,l!oI -:.... :,Q. cl /(1).. . '::1. ,E ~" :):& "gt' .,:0,)' ::=5.. '~':i :(;1:1 ....~ "~" :~ ... :'-P.l ';:'0):: ',';: ..(.0 . 0 :i: ...~. :CJI'~. ;~:.l '.,9 .~ ~.l 'C''2. ;:( "'" :o::'~ 'en 1 .~:.... ..(1:$\.;1; ~"C:' ... ~;' .!: :i: .1 .... .'4/ "E .~ ''II'~. 1 .~. '.g. ;:g;..i: :,ei ....~. ~:. ...l I, ~I ~.~~'}r :11)" .' r.. ';_' ',;C., ,x' .~: 'u.J~' iJ :1' ,"1" ;:: '. co' . 2, '1S" 4/'. ~. ... lA .lii ".c. E ::I. e . . Attachment 7 Total Suspended Solids ft~3~~~.'\N'Q~iJil.t~JJ'l}, M~,_I1~., ~ii~_,il~" PROJECT REPORT Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project . . Attachment 8 Alum Study Report PROJECT REPORT: Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project Therefore, a reduction of the algal population in the lake was considered a primary goal. The goals were based on water quality improvements necessary to make the lake suitable for all types of uses, including swimming. The morphometry of Tanner's Lake suggests that it has the potential to develop an internal phosphorus loading problem if further degradation of the lake's water quality is allowed to occur. Currently the lake's phosphorus loading problem is entirely external (i.e, runoff from the lake's watershed). However, the lake has a relatively large shallow region which could contribute a significant internal phosphorus load to the lake under certain conditions. This region of the lake currently remains oxic (i.e, contains oxygen) and phosphorus . recycling from sediments is minimized by the oxic conditions. Additional water quality degradation, . however, may cause this region of the lake to become anoxic (i.e, devoid of oxygen) during periods of the summer. During anoxic periods, phosphorus would be recycled from bottom sediments. lntermittent mixing of this region would increase the lake's phosphorus concentration. Internal phosphorus loading would not only exacerbate the lake's water quality problems, but accelerate its rate of degradation. According to the MPCA (1990), the current epilimnetic total phosphorus concentration of Tanner's Lake is considered average for Surface Runoff ['ercenlages Toto lie,,, I...ku W..I~r&hed GlAD (8.6"101 G4A (7.5%1 'Iotall' LOildit'8 Pcrcent,lges Tnllllcrs Lake Watetshed Gl AB (;;.9%) G3 Figure 2 Runoff and Phosphorus Percentages by Subwatershed 3 , dimictic lakes in this region (i.e, lakes that mix twice per · year and are without internal loading problems). However, the average epilimnetic total phosphorus concentration of intermittent mixing lakes (i.e, lakes that have internal loading problems) is approximately 50 percent higher than the current concentration of Tanner's Lake. These data suggest the degree of degradation which could occur if internal loading became a problem for the lake. This potential for additional degradation of the lake's water quality was considered in establishing the lake's goals. There is a great need to provide a high quality recreation water body in this area, because very few are found in this region of the state. Ah expedient implementation of remedial measures to improve the water quality of Tanner's Lake offers the rare opportunity to provide such a water body in the midst of a highly urbanized watershed within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area . (TCMA). Although the lake is currently eutrophic (i.e, highly productive), improvement of the lake's water quality to achieve a mesotrophic trophic status (i.e, a moderately productive lake) is feasible. There are very few mesotrophic lakes within this region of the state, and even fewer in the TCMA. Therefore, TCMA residents and people from this region have very limited opportunities to experience the recreational enjoyment of a mesotrophic lake. Many travel to northern Minnesota to seek out such opportunities. The ability to provide a high quality recreation water body in the midst of a highly urbanized watershed within the TCMA and to create recreational opportunities considered rare for this area was considei'ed in establishing the lake's goals. The water quality goals established for Tanner's Lake are as follows: _ · The immediate goal for the lake is nondegradation P the lake's water quality. · During the next two to three years, the in-lake epilimnetic phosphorus concentration will be reduced to 30 I-Lg/L (:!:5 I!g/L). · Within the next tive years, the in-lake epilimnetic total phosphorus concentration will be reduced to 20 I-Lg/L (:!:5 I!glL). · The long-term goal is to maintain the lake's water quality at 20 I-LglL (:!:5 ll/L), which is considered pre-impact conditions for the lake (i.e, lake conditions prior to urban impacts on its water quality per a model developed by Vighi and Chiadani, 1985). Analysis of Alternatives A variety of best management practices were investigated to determine which were the most efficient in terms of cost and the removal of nutrients and other pollutants from storm water. The District examined assumptions, effectiveness and costs of various options .. PROJECT REPORT: Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project 5 3. Improved Street Maintenance. The District is beginning to work with the Cities of Oakdale and Maplewood to expand their street sweeping program to include a fall sweeping and explore alternative street sweeping techniques or programs that may improve efficiency and effecti veness. The RWMWD is completing additional research to explore the latest technology and option available to improve the effectiveness of street maintenance practices. 4. Chemical Treatment of Storm water. The RWMWD, with the assistance of Barr Engineerina Company, designed and installed an alum treatment 0 facility at a strategic location to treat inflow from Subwatershed G3. The location is immediately upstream from the Seventh Street wetland treatment facility. The facility injects the phosphorus-binding chemical. alum, in flow proportional quantities to strip the lake inflow of approximately 90 percent of its phosphorus load. The treatment facility is an "off-line" system. All flows less than or equal to 5 cfs are diverted to the alum treatment system. and any flows greater than 5 cfs by-pass the diversion structure and flow directly to the seventh street wetland treatment system (see figure 4). The analysis of storm flow rates during the 1989 diagnostic study , patterns to watershed residents and businesses. The R WMWD completed a survey of area residents prior to project implementation. This pre-project survey indicated the area residents' knowledge of water quality issues at the start of the project. A post-project survey (to be completed in 2001) will indicate the effectiveness of the education program. Public education programs have focused on proper lawn care practices. such as fertilizer use and disposal of lawn debris, and landscaping to minimize phosphOrus export. The program includes distribution of fliers to all residents and businesses in the watershed and . placement of articles in the local newspapers. Information may also be disseminated through organizations such as local schools. Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts. and other local service clubs. Community volunteers have been involved in designing and distributing materials and making door-to-door contacts with the watershed's residents. . Alum Treatment Facility indicated that 85% of all the stream tlows from subwatershed G3 were less than 5 cfs. A settling basin below the injection point was constructed to provide additional remove all of the alum tloc generated by the treatment. The treatment facility design (Le. off-line and treating only flows less than or equ~1 to ? efs) ensures that treated water has adequate settlmg time to remove all the alum floc before leavina the basin. The design also prevents basin scouring 0 which could dislodge settled alum floc. Thus, non~ of the alum floc is allowed to enter the lake. Storm~~ter leaving the settling basin then flows through the eXlstmg wetland treatment facility located immediately downstream from the alu~1 treatment facility, before entering Tanner's Lake. The wetland .. PROJECT REPORT: Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project 7 alternative, a small ditch filtration system was installed in the road ditch to remove major sediant loads from the interstate freeway and interchange drainage area. Other alternatives are being explored for these small subwatersheds on the west side of the lake. The G4A pond (or currently known as the 5th Street Basin) is an impoundment with a permanent pool of water ("dead storage"). Thi.s basin also included modifying an existing degraded and partially filled wetland to provide a multi-cell treatment system for the stormwater. The basin was designed to remove approximately 60 percent of the phosphorus load before slowly releasing treated waters to Tanner's Lake. An extended dry pond W,lS also constructed for subwatetshed OS within Tanners Lake Park. The extended dry pond is dry most of the time, and only holds water for a period of time after each rainstorm (it does not have "dead storage). It is used because a permanent basin is not feasible at this location. The basin is expected to remove approximately 45 percent of the phosphorus load from the subwatershed. Additional detention basin construction opportunities will be explored as the area is redeveloped or in conjunction with changes in the public road network or storm water drainage system. In a recent development, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has committed to constructing several storm water treatment basins within a new proposed freeway interchange. This will treat the stormwater flows from subwatershed G lCD. 6. Water Quality Monitoring and Laboratory Analysis. RWMWD has been monitoring the lake bi-weekly throughout the project and will continue this program in future years to determine project effectiveness. The RWMWD has installed a l10w logger!automatic sampler unit and collects continuous samples to assess Ditch Infiltration/Filtration Structure inflow to the alum treatment facility. Samples are also , collected at the outlet of the Alum Treatment system pond to assess treatment efficiency and monitor total and dissolved aluminum levels. In the year 200 I, phosphorus loading to the lake will be assessed for a one year period to evaluate project effectiveness. Flow loggers and automatic samplers will be installed at sample locations G3, G4A, and G 1 AB. Samples will be collected and analyzed for total phosphorus during snowmelt, two spring, two summer, and two fall rainstorms. Samples will also be collected from \lowing intlow points during lake sample events and analyzed for phosphorus to determine baseflow conditions. The data will quantify water quality improvements to determine whether project goals have been met . Project Costs The original project budget totaled $1.984,000. The . Qroject elements and the corresponding budgets were' tollows: I. Development of project plans 2. Education 3. Improved Street maintenance 4. Alum Treatment facility 5. Detention basins! Extended dry pond 6. Water quality monitoring! lab analysis 7. Reports and STORET processing 8. Project/Fiscal Management 9. Final Report 10.Public Meetings . $3,000 30,000 0* 682,400 1,136,000 60,000 13,000 13,000 30,000 5,000 '" In-kind contributions from the Cities of Maplewood and Oakdale. Actual project costs have been substantially less than . estimated in several areas. The reduction in actual costs were attributable primarily to lower than estimated land acquisition and easement costs. Approximate costs for completed elements, including construction, easements, and engineering are as follows: Alum Treatment Facility Detention basi ns!Extended dry pond Education Project Management $663,000 $526,000 $11,000 $12,000 F9r In,Q~e'i!}~9~m~tipn~Ql!f:~~l:" ~tlm.~~Y;W~~JlJ9~6qJv[ettQ 190~ E~OQ~'.l{d~:a;;. , .. . "Mae{~WQQq;;M~$$,t.Q9." J?li9d~:(~~:l.);ZQ.4~~Q89'. . f~x:''c6Sir7Q~;~Q~~'" . Enlail: rwn1\Vd@~ltn.otg . . 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: 21 May 2002 RE: CUB Foods - Revised Plans FILE NO. 405(02.01) The CUB Foods proposal was continued from the 19 March Planning Commission to their 21 May meeting. Subsequently that date has been changed to Thursday, 23 May so that the City Engineer would be able to attend. Since then, representatives of CUB have submitted revised plans and their responses to issues raised by staff and the Planning Commission. . The following exhibits are attached for your review: A Revised Site/Landscape Plan B-1 Applicant's Response to Issues C-1 Revised Traffic Information D . Minnesota D,epartment of Transportation Letter, dated 9 May 2002 E-1 Revised Drainage Information F Preliminary Plat The most significant change in the revised plans is the circulation for delivery trucks. The previous plan included a right.,.in only access from Lake Linden Drive. Trucks would go around the center in a clockwiseJashion, exiting at the Hwy 7/41 intersection. Based upon comments from MNDOT, circulation has been reversed. The driveway coming out of the 7/41 intersection into the southeast comer of the site would be right-in only. Trucks would then go around the center in a counter- clockwise direction, exiting onto Lake Linden Drive. This exit would be marked "left turn only" to prevent trucks from going north on Lake Linden. The applicant has n ~: PRINTEO ON RECYCLED PAPER Memorandum Re: CUB Foods II - Revised Plans 21 May 2002 revised the site plan (see Exhibit A), reversing the loading docks to reflect the revised circulation. Traffic concerns have been addressed under separate cover by the City's consulting engineers. Landscaping has been revised as suggested in our previous staff reports. Evergreens have been added to the northeast comer of the site. Additionally, the developer now proposes to treat the MNDOT right-of-way between the service road and the mainline with a bio-swale design. Canopy trees have also been added to the south side of the service road. . Exhibit B includes the applicant's responses to several issues raised by the Planning Commission and staff. To the extent that these are acceptable, it is recommended that these items be addressed in a very clear and stringent development contract. Staff will attempt to have a draft of such an agreement for your review at the meeting on 23 May. In addition to expressing the City's requirements, the agreement will contain specific remedies for failure to comply. For example, the City Attorney advises us that the agreement can contain a provision allowing the City to summarily remove signs displayed in violation of the approved sign plan. A provision will also be included stating that the property owner will be responsible for the City's legal expenses in enforcing the agreement. One of the more significant issues raised in the previous meetings involved drainage. This is addressed by the City's consulting engineers under separate cover. . The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat for the combination of the four subject parcels. The plat is consistent with the City's right-of-way acquisition for the 7/41 intersection and Lake Linden improvements. The plat includes a vacation of a triangle of land at the end of Maple Street. A separate public hearing must be held by the City Council for this item. If approved, the development contract mentioned above should include a stipulation dismissing the taking claim for the right-of-way. Depending on the Planning Commission's recommendation, the proposal will be subject to review by the Metropolitan Council. Although the Comprehensive Plan amendment includes a relatively small land use change, the overall project will likely be of interest the Met Council, due to its relationship with the 7/41 intersection. The Planning Commission should direct staff to prepare findings of fact for the 4 June meeting. These will then be forwarded to the City Council for its 10 June meeting. Cc: Craig Dawson Larry Brown Tim Keane John Uban Stan Taube -2- . . DAHLGREN SHARDLOW AND.UBAN INCOR.PORATBD May 9, 2002 Brad Nielsen City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331-8926 Re: Shorewood Village Shopping Center Addition Dear Mr. Nielsen: Submitted to you separately are new storm water treatment plans from Parsons Engineering, and traffic model updates per MnDOT request from Meyers Mohaddes Associates. Please note that Cub Foods has agreed to reverse the truck flow through the site to comply with MnDOT's request for a right-in only at the southeast entrance to the shopping center. The western entrance is adjusted to accommodate the MnDOT request while restricting traffic to ingress and egress only to the south. The landscape plan has been adjusted to provide screening of parking along Lake Linden Drive with the addition of Linden trees between TH7 and Lake Linden Drive. Naturized plantings are proposed in the Hwy 7 right-of-way replicating some of the features ofthe proposed bio swale. Our intent is to help create an attractive entrance experience for everyone to enjoy. Additional evergreen trees have been added to the northeast comer of the Shorewood Village Shopping Center to provide more winter screening to the adjacent residents. Other issues have been raised conceming cart corrals, snow storage, and temporary signage. We have enclosed suggested language for inclusion in the Developers Agreement along with a sample snow plowing contract. We have addressed these remaining issues and can provide any clarification you may require. Thank YOll for YOllr time ~nd considerations. Sincerely, DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW AND UBAN, INC. C. John Uban Principal Exhibit B-1 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO ISSUES 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE210 MINNEAPOLlS,MN 55401 Letter from John Uban, dated 9 May 02 RESPONSE TO SITE OPERATION ISSUES Issue: Cub Food Cart Corrals A typical Cub Food store operates with approximately 350 carts to assure that there is a ready supply of carts for customers in the building. These carts are used by the customer to bring groceries to their automobiles and are than returned to a cart corral within the parking lot. These cart corrals are distributed throughout the parking lot to facilitate the collection of carts for return to the store. . Each of the cart corral areas within the parking lot is 5 feet wide and stores approximately 60 carts. There are five such areas within the parking area for a maximum storage capacity of 300 carts. These carts are returned to the store on a regular basis throughout the day and a full time cart retriever is employed during peak use hours. These retrievers are responsible for moving the carts out of the corrals and into the front of the store and picking up loose carts that may be left behind in the parking lot. The retrieval is based on maintaining a ready supply of carts within the store and is under the control of the store manager. Since 80% of the cart use falls within the parking stalls closest to the store, this is the area that is concentrated on throughout the day. The Cub Food store has every incentive to maintain a ready supply of carts within the store and has an ample number of corrals and corral capacity to facilitate a proper operation. Suggested Language for a Developers Agreement: Cub Food will maintain the cart corrals and retrieve carts from the corrals on a regular basis to minimize loose carts within the parking lot area. Cub Food will also retrieve carts that customers may take off site. Issue: Informal Used Automobile Sales on the Lot . Stan Taube has not been aware of the problem of used automobiles or recreational vehicles being displayed on the Shorewood Village Shopping Center's parking lot. The owner and management of the shopping center do not want this to take place and will regularly patrol for such use and instruct all employees that the parking of automobiles and other vehicles for sale is not allowed on the shopping center site. Signage will infonn violators that they will be towed. This policy will be rigorously enforced by the shopping center management. We also believe the new landscaping will help minimize this activity. Suggested Language for a Developers Agreement: The shopping center owners and management will not allow automobiles and other vehicles displayed for sale on the shopping center property. The shopping center management will convey this policy to all employees and respond to any complaints that may be received of such activity. Exhibit B-2 Issue: Snow Storage Cub Food will have a parking lot maintenance contract with the shopping center owners, and a typical contract has been included for city review. This will include the complete removal of snow from the entire parking lot, as often as necessary to maintain the parking lot with no more than a 2 inch cover of snow. The landlord also must remove any accumulation of snow and ice in excess of the 2 inches. This includes trucking large snowfall events off site. Cub Food will have the right to clear the area if the shopping center management does not perfOlm. . The parking lot will plowed in a fashion that temporarily collects snow at the ends of isles to be loaded into. dump trucks. The process of clearing the fairly large snow fall event takes several stages of plowing and snow removal to complete the process. Open areas to the rear of the shopping center available for long term snow storage but the predominant snow fall will be moved off the site by the firm contracted by the landowner. Suggested Language for a Developers Agreement: Snow and ice will be removed from the common areas (parking lots, driveways, and sidewalks), down to the pavement, as often as necessary to prevent any accumulation of more than 2 inches. No long term storage of snow is allowed on any parking surface. Temporary piles of snow on paved areas must be removed within 48 hours of the last snow fall. Issue: Temporary Signage Suggested Language for a Developers Agreement: . All tenants and Cub Foods must adhere to the city sign ordinance and obtain a city permit prior to displaying temporary signs. Any rental sign board will be stored in the equipment bay and not in the parking lot. Issue: Seasonal Outdoor Sales Suggested Language for a Developers Agreement: Unless otherwise permitted by the City, seasonal sales of flowers, bedding plants, and related items will only occur at the front of the building along the sidewalk. This activity may take place April through June. Exhibit B-3 trj ~ =- .... c:r -. .... = . 01::00 I N \0 I "0 t-4 l-t:I"O 00 [I:l t:r' ~ 0 r-c o ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ O. C1l a::s 0 zr.ia"'O '"1 g a ~ o' 5= ~ ::I' a g rn 0. a u~ ::s..,u OQ:=~O~I=So ~..o.~~B.~~~g.Cll ....~~C1lcr~g-I>>C"P'" g- ::+. C'" J>> ,<.-+ rn '< 0 [I:lP"'Cll g ~~[~~Cll ~ t:r' ~ t:;': .... g ~ ~. ~ rn...... ooOQ~~~gl>>iaoUJ '0 1:T!:r::s p -rn t:l S. """~ "C CllO.....rnrn-.....c::.: S' t:. 0. C1l ~ c-+ Cll n I>> ~,..,.. IJQ ~ C'" urn "t:I g rn CD P "'d (') 'a. '< n e. o..g s:l..p,. ):1' ~ gJi1.g~.~8.Q ~o E! ~ ~ ... cr P'" rn 1:1 rn I>> S' ..... ... ~ ~. g. g ~ ~ S' a r+ g ~ ~. p OQ 0.:= e. OQ a S' 0 ~ o IJQ ~ .... cr - .... e. (ll """ Cll "C!3 ::;..a,< C'"~ p o.e.~ C1l I>> 1='. CD ~ CD ...... - t"'" ::s ... 0' :;:!. ... rn C 0 ~ t:. .... ':,I)5:1I:1'"OCDn "C.....(Jq o I>> .... '"1 ia "'0 [I:l ~ IT r:r sr .., S. rn '"1 Ei Il) P'" ... n r+ .... . CTCll rn 0 _ I-t 0 ':,I)o_rn ~ 0. CD III I>> ~'O '"1 ClI pr. ~. ~ -g e- l:2 2."E. C'" ~ l:2 Z 1:1 r+ I-t 0.,-<: P ~ - 0. ~ ~ ; ~ g a ~ S' ~ 8. s .- C1l -< P'" .... ~ Cll CD g rn ~. _. Il) CD -. CD P r.o ~ - ~, crnt1 ):1'"1.....enPlOE:T (')oPCllOCDCDv ClI0r.o 8"1:1 ~ol:1'co.~ g'o.~pr 0. ~ CD 0. ,...... ....... CD ::s ,... ~ ~ "C (ll 0 ,., .... ::s 0. c... ::3 '< "C 0. '"1 - .... j:O; IJQ 0. S'.... . n ::s ;. 0 l:2 .... ~ 0 IJQ I=S 60 0 1:1 CD ):1 IJQ P"'CD (')_2"ornr+'-+ e;,.c t-4 Q ~ 5. ~ ClI ::+. [ ii' ...~~t:I O(Jq<CD "t:I go~ 0.; 0. CD ~ tjg:'o-t CD ::.. 0' u'"' (') 0 m :::. C1l '0 0 a ~ a. Q P'" 1:1 (31 ~ ~. g ~. ""'I CD v X ~ ~ '"1 en IJQ t;j .... ~_(')O(JqCDCD....t:lIl)O o ~ 0 E"(ll):1 CDP"'n~e CD 1:1'" a ~. ~ S Sl ~ ::1. CD 0 J'1 g a (ll .....:J '"t ::lo. .... i :. M) ClI _ 51 m . 1:1'" ..... .... rn \!S. g. n g, CD E3 ~ (ll I>> ~ g S: ~G-a ~-a ~ g-a-g. ~ "C ::s CD !3 Q 0 I'i\ O. rn 1:1 0. "'0 0. CIl e! < I>> t:J P'" _. ~ "t:I .g b' g s: ~ ~ e. ~ 5:1 I>> ~. R 0. P. CD 0 c: - iN CD C'" 0. '"' CD 0. "t:I 0 C" S' CD Cji a ~ 0 g 1:1'" CD g, .., ..,~H) ....I>>g t:!:. C" "'" So P'" g. c.: I: . '<~CD CDPI'Oi en IJQ m . ~ go 1:1 I>> ~ "t:I o ~ .... o .... ):1 UJ o iN ~o-. g~ ~ e. o a :g e. .... p J6~ Q[ 5:1~ n "" (31 ~. "'\ o e.. "t:I - (ll CD P ~ ~~ C'"o c:: CD rnJA rr 2. ~ s B. S. r+ g. o "'\ "" o ~ rn ~ ~ po. ~ en ~rn ~g- o:g l:!:I S' OOQ ~ n lfl CD _ S' '"1 UJ ~ ~ ~ C1l 0 UI fA 0 l7J ):1 ~ g e: a p. ::to < ~ g s: '"' 1:11 CD CD I-t 0 ~ .{8 ~ . en o ~ ~~ 0<'0 .., 0 .g ~. =11 o' CD ):1 .... 0 ):1 ...., g !:i ft~ ..... 0 o ~ ~. a ia "" e. g I=S 0 o ~ "" ~B. 0< ~. B.tr "t:I .... '"1 0 .g g- CD ""'I .... tI.l ~ -. ~ g 1:1'" ~n 3. 0. ~..g g ~ ~ ...."t:I 6' t!. .... ~ .... .-. 0 i ....~ :: 1:1 ... ..... r:rn~ en . ggo.~gq .... ..... l7J CD . (') CD 0' =1 P1..... o ~.g fQ l= UJ ~ v S' P1 ~ iN 0S-0Cl&~~ ..,CD.- l7J ClI a !....~u ?' ~ OP1r.o~ "i::I e..: i'+ e- e. g.a- CT ~ i':! ia enCDCD-CTI>> CD \:I '< 5' en """. ....I>>OCDP1P ogg.y!;::I.., o ClI .-+"t:J p,..g g-gwa~;- "" 0. - S. P. g "C 0 ~ 0. g P1 S g ~ p.."t:J ;::I .... r+ 0 5' 0. ~~~g-OClg P1 0 .... ~ v .., &~~~g~ ~1:I'"'"10p,.g ~_ClI,",~U .... ~ .J:l v a- 0. ~. So . g' gmCDaac r+ 0 a e Q. .... ~ CD l=il p' t:::. ~ S' a ~ "" dQ E'0Cl en,< n l::I'l ~. m ~.... "t:J S- . g E So ~ ~. ~ .... CD 5 ~ ~ I=S cr '"1 r+ 0. !:i' nnCD.... (Jq ~ 8'" ~.~. i v~ ~p,.a~* o 1:11 ~ r.a CD ::I. ~e.og~J6 (Jq J} ...., .... rio u n-......P 13 ~~[~~o ~ en g. ~. o ~ I:T . ~ 0 1>>0 0 fa l:T' S 0 ~ <; a~- U> ~Se~O::3.g~aa ....t1CD.... r:r - crt;i3eo~oog ~ 0 ~ ~ I>> C" e. < P1 P' t1.... S g (') 0 m g ~ g ~ -; 1:1 g ~ ~. ......p- C1l t: Q po.'< t:I 0'" o. e... 1:1 0 C CD '"1 ." I>> 1:1'" "'CD g ~ 0 .... .p.. ~ i" a P1 .... ... 0 CD ~ CD en o-ot:l't.lUJ ~. ~ g e ~. go ~ ~ iN m ~ ~ ~ g:~ a 0 ~ ~ ~ ;. a. i ~ g -g ~ ......OUJOO'<OO< ~ t:::. 0 \:I ::r s:- ...., < (II o P "t:I 0 0 P1 en ~ UJ '"1 g. !:t. H) c: .... 1:1 ..... ):1 o....otnl'Oit::J"O 0 e;:.f1.p 5 r.a 111 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ g -: ~ e! a .... P' ~ go.o Q. ~ firg. t"l. \:I C;' 2 ..... o So 0 ;.... c::r 0. 0 a g S' (II ~. o. (t 0 -. t::: ::t' ... r+ rn ~ CD .....~. I=S Pr 0 W.a ~ 8. ii ~ g. a n g '1:j 0 i'+ CD ):1 s- o 8 & i e. 3.. ~ 0 n B~(llo.gC"oa(') BIl'l'V _0'<1'1)00 g ~ -a.. g !:t. t""i i "" 8 "'d 00. 0 ~ 0 CD a ~ ~ ~ ~..o e:"'. [r+ g CD (') 1:11 1>>, ~ 0 ~ l>>2.gc:::CD'"1p'" ~ a,~ ~-g m ~v~ i: f: ..,o.~,<"" ~Orn ! g Q. g. a ~. g g' g- a' 0 .... CD ~ a. P1 ;::r"CD ~ ~ggou 1:1 a \:I ,.cenl:l'"gs>>OQ ~.... e ~ I>> i'+ ::. g ~ ...,.. 0 fl ~ ~. ~ fir Q. '< ~ s=- ir p,. OQ ~ .g l=il~. ~ .g E. It. g g.g.! tJ 5= ~ S' < o-t J:I go '"1 g OQ~ CD tn o.~ ~ 13 ~ tng '< ~ c: E!. _ II> f!?,. a F.ii' - ~ I".) N ~ .g g- n o i \:I ~ CD I>> en . (') ;- .P on c CD ~a. o CD .... ""'I >en -1:1'" dQ'~ St"cr .... 0 ~ 0 ~~ ~g.. g CD CD 0 rn ...., en"t:J [a ;;:~ CD S' ~(Jq 1:11 I>> [t'j ~ 1:. 1:1 e. .... s. \:I i:: s-i3 CD ~ ~g ..... I>> CDIJQ ~ctl ~o a : Il:I (31 !:to 0 o .-+ I=' 0 i - CD rn '0 CD -"'" en .g e; CD (31 o .-+ 8.. r.a W &. S' (Jq o o Po '"1 .g ~. J:cP0 9J~~ o ~, c1\~cP ""C)'- ,- y 3 ~.. ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ -tf) 7:l ;.r ~ rj ,.'t Hh:AL h:bTA'J.'~-::JUt'~K V I\1..U ... I1Ul'\J.U.L:.l'" ..........v.. c... \A. '0 'fY\..0JV"\ "0\..-\-0 w.e s '\: '(y\ 0...V"\ ~CLTO j',''0' N \ ';;:L 0 \) K\.j eA" ~ Of'\. 't ~'(" \ Ioi:!:J uuu --. Tenant's cost), the HVAC maintenance contractor shall determine whether the most reasonable course of action would be to replace or repair. . 18.3 Landlord's Common Area Opligations Landlord shall do all of the following at Landlord's 'sole expense (subject to reimbursement for any expense which is included in CAM Charges as provided in Section 14, entitled "CAM Charges"): 18.3.1 Maintenance. Operate, manage, maintain, repair. replace. equip and insure the Co'mmon Areas in a manner typically provided for in first class shopping centers and as required by this Lease, including maintaining, repairing and replacing (a) the surface and subsurface of the parking lots (including proper striping thereof), sidewalks, driveways and alleys situated on the Common Areas in a level, smooth and evenly covered manner; (b) Common Area pylon. entrance, exit and directional signs, markers and lights as will be reasonably required from time to time; (c) common storm drains, utility lines, sewers and other utility systems and" services located in the Common Areas (including any trunk line portion of utility lines, defined as any line with more than one user); and (d) all parking area lighting fixtures. 18.3.2 Clea'nliness. Keep the Common Areas clean, safe and in good repair, with aU trash and garbage for the Shopping, Center and for all tenants of the Shopping Center screened from view by customers of the Shopping Center. 18.3.3 Snow Removal. Remove snow and ice from the Common Areas down to the pavement at least once every 24 hours when there is snow and ice, and as often as is necessary to prevent any accumulation of two inches or more. Tenant, at its option, may remove any such accumulation of snow and ice which Landlord fails to remove, and Landlord shall pay the cost of such removal to TeMant. Tenant, at its option, at its own expense, may plow snow and'ice having an accumulation' of less than two inches'from the Supermarket Parking Lot and accesses and driveways to and from the Premises and store the, same in the Common Areas for subsequent hauling away by Landlord. 18.3.4 Landscaping. Maintain and care for, including fertilizing, watering, mowing and trimming, all grass, shrubs and landscaping, and maintain, repair and replace irrigation systems and water lines; provided, however, that if any tenant requires or installs "special" landscaping (i.e., beyond the landscaping requirements of the remainder of the Shopping Center), the maintenance and cost of such landscaping shall be borne solely by such tenant without cost to other parties and without inclusion in CAM Charges.' ' 18.3.5 Security. Maintain and light all parking lot lights and security lights (defined as lighting for all entrances, exits, Interior roads, pylon signs, and such other lighting as is necessary to maintain security in the Shopping Center) at all times when any portion of the Shopping Center is open for business. Landlord is responsible for security of the Common Areas. . Exhibit B-S C:lOalalMankaID\Laa..7,dOC: Page 42 of 54 '-..../ RETAIL FOOD COMPANIES Corporate Office Located At: 11840 Valley View RD., Eden Prairie, MN. 55344-3691 SNOWPLOWING SERVICE PROVIDER CONTRACT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN SUPERVALU INC. ('SUPERVALU") AND ("Contractor") ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP Contractor agrees that it will provide the snowplowing services described below to the following store location operated by .PERVALU or its affiliate: . ..f Store Trade Name: Store Address: EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED: (list each specific process and/or service) TYPE OF EQUIPMENT (Loader, Bobcat, Tandum Truck, etc.) RATE PER HOUR .LT AND SAND At temperature above 00 Fahrenheit salt is to be applied to parking lot where ice has developedlformed at time of plowing or requested by store management. A salt and sand mixture will be applied to the lot where temperatures are expected to remain below 00 Fahrenheit for one or more days and ice has developed or formed at time of plowing or as requested by store management. RESPONSE TIME Contractor has _ hours from the time it stops snowing to be on the property to open it up. Contractor has 24 hours to complete job unless snow fall exceeds ten inches in any 24 hour period. Contractor will respond automatically if two or more inches of snow accumulates or upon request of store management. TERM The term of this agreement begins on and ends on This contract may be terminated at any time by Contractor or SUPERVALU upon 30 days notice. . unless earlier terminated. ADDITIONAL DUTIES/PROCEDURES In addition to the obligations set forth above, Contractor agrees to perform the duties and procedures as described In the attached document(s) identified as Exhibits (if applicable; if none. write "none"). If applicable. such Exhibits are incorporated herein and made part of this agreement. -1- 11/22 Exhibit B-6 v GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS '....J The following General Terms and Conditions (the "General Terms and Conditions") are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Contract. The requirements of this contract and the General Terms and Conditions supersede any Inconsistent or additional terms or conditions contained in any invoice, work order or other document submitted by Contractor. In Ihls Agreem..nl, 'yOl.f and 'yeu" l'8f..r 10 Ihe conlrac;tor or servlcB provider Blgnlng Ihll el1l from dme \a Urne Bngeged In lite perform.nce of lhe services, with allD.11Its minimum Agreemenl, and 'we; "U&" and 'au" l'8fer \a SUPERVALU INC. and It. Relell Food COVIIl'llg.. required by laW; (Iv) Employe~s Uabillty Insurance wllh Ilmilll of at lallSl five hUndred Companies division. In ord8I' 10 Induce SUPERVALU INC. ReleV Food Camp.ni.... la put you lhoulll1ld dall8ni ($500,000.001: and (VI Employee Fldellly Bands of nolle.. Ihen lWo mlllon on its IIsl of authorized vendors and to dispatch lervlce cane to yOU, YOU AGREE AS dollers ($2,000,000.001. You will provide us with original certlflcale. of lhe aforemanlloned FOLLOWS: lnaurance policies ptiClr 10 oommenclng eny ..rvlcea. IlI1d lhereafter upon ellCh emlvarsery of \hB d81e of thfs egrBemen~ 81'ld upon our reque.l from lime 10 lime. Alleuch policies and certlflcalel shel provide lMlelle8a1 IhIrty (3D) deya prtor wrtllen nallce ahall be givan 10 us ptiClt 10 cancaPallan, lerm Inatlan, or ehange, or In lhe evant of a posllble lapse. 1. Pracadurn. You will provide .arvicaa in accordenca wkh th8 .chedula of servlc8l. if any, set forth In the conlract document. allached heralo, and oIherwill.1n accordance the procedUres da.Cflbed below. The.e proceduras may not be .upplemenled, modified or changed In any wey wllhautthe prtor wrtl\en consent of our 1>180 Malnlenence Maneger: a. You wll r..pond 10 calls dlspelched from our regional melnlanence offlces, or from the slora. b. Before IaavlnQ a locallon BItar makinQ e service c.., you will provide lhe .tol'll manager with a copy of the original wortc order. The maneger wiD sign hisJher neme on the work order upon the sellsfeclory completion of the wortc. (Only the signatl.ll'a of e slora maneger wll be IlCC8pled sa valid by us.) NO INVOICE WILL BE PROCESSEOFOR PAYMENT UNLESS IT HAS A SIGNED WORK ORDER ATTACHED TO IT. c. If e dlspelehad call will incur overtime or emergency elter-hour eharvlll, U mual be approved by the Store Maneg8l' prtor 10 Ihe parfarmance of IIts services. PtiClr 10 March 1 of .ach year. you win complela and retum lCl us Ihe Authorized Vendor Form with a new cartl/1cale of insurance showing compliance with Paragraph 6 hare of. . d. 1. Se",lclla: Safety and Compllence wlth Laws. You will fumlllh quaUflad parsomel who possesa lhe expertence. knowledge, .kUIa and abll\lias \a perform the sarvlcaa. specined in the conlracl documenls. You will perform the services in . professlonel, flrsl...1es1 fashion, In accordance wllh al appHcable local, stale and fe~rallews. ClOd..., regulallona. ordinances and govarnmenl8l requirements, including wllhoul t1mllatlon OSHA, EPA end EEOC requiremenla, sefety and environmenl.1 regulat!ons, ChIld Labor Lews, and Ihe requiremenl' of local sanllary Ireelment facilllies. Spec:lflcely. you egr.a to ClOmply with OSHA's Lock OLlvrag OoJt Slandard end nollly ClIJI' store manllllemenl and our employees In IIts ~k:inlty of Ihe aqulpmanlto be .erviced, of all eqLllpmentlltel will ba locked oulllegged out. You agree 10 ~pllY clean up. remove and property dlsposa of any end all hezsrdoUB subslances and hszardaua malerials you generate and/or releese while on our property. al yaur a.pena.. You will immedlalely report any release of hazardous sublllll\C8ll or melerlalll to a1M' slore managsmenL If propane pClWel1ld equipmenll. used, you agree not 10 slore propane cyllndars within the building. If you prefer nollo remove propene cylinders from the property, you agnes 10 provide. If not available al.tare, a lockable propane .Iorage cablnel con.lruc:tad of wire m....h. outside In area bohlnd store and awey from palllble demage by ~ehicle Iraffle for Ilorage of cylinders. Sud1 cabinate shan be loceled allee.t len f..1 away fram all windows lIlld doors. You win provlda weether re.lstanlslgns on the cabinel. Indicating 'Flammable. ND Smaking". 'propane' and a DOT placardwllh Ihe numbar '1D75' on I\. Furthermore. you agrea nol to slCll'll propane, acelylana, ar oxY9an cylinders wllltln tha building. Wh8ll!l any cuttfng or welding equlpmenlls 10 be used wllhln the slora or on slore equlpmenl, you wll nollfy store managemanl of the naed to perform such work end oblaln approval from alare m8nagam.nl befora parfcirming any cuUIng or welding. If you ara ewer. 01, or Cluse a spmed 'L1bstance on Ihe floar, Wemlng signs are 10 be posled althe .pllI end the spllllmmaellelaly cleaned up. AU work performed by yau shall be dona In .uch .. mannor .10 prevenl any palanlh.1 far conlamlnation at food products or foad aontael aurfBCa8 lhel u.ed to proce.u food. W\era s.rvice Is parformed on our pramll.s, you agrae \a provide . wllh a copy of your ....alylh.zsrd communicellons progrem. We wll m.ke aval"'ble 10 you a copy or our safelylh.zard communication program end ralaled Melarial Safaly Deta Shaels. 3. Methad of PavmanL InVO;C8lI wlU be due end payable by US within thll1y (3D) c1aya of receipt, provided the procedur.s heralnabove descrtbed hava been follow8d. 4. Ind.pendent Contractor. You wil pay all selerles. expllllSSS, lederel.ocIal security lexas, lederal and .tala employmanl Ia'es, end tha like relallng lCl personnel providing s8fVlces an your behalf. These persomel shall be deamed \a be your amployeas solely and shall noll1e deemed far any purpose whalsoever 10 be a1M' employ.a. or ag.nls, or 10 be acting for us Dr on our baheW. You will perform end causa 10 be perform"d .lIs8Nlce. es an independenl canlrac;tor and will dlscharg. all your liabilmes as luch. Neither acts performed nor oral or wrillen rapresenlallonl, stelements or lhe like mad. by you or any of your aganl5 or employees 10 lhird partlas shall be blndlng on L11. s. Pennlls. L1cens.., and Tues. You win al your own co.l and e.pan.e procura and kaap In e1feclall necessary permllll and leenses I'IIllIIired for your parformar1Q8 of IIts services In lICClIrdance with Ihll Agnsament. You wll pay when due all appicable Ia.as and assessments. 81'ld wid comply wllh the provisions of all applicable Iawe and regUlallanl of laxing aulhorillas, InclUding wllhoullmllallon all provisions relellng lCl workmen'. compensllllon, .mploy...... roablllly. .nd "lh.r r....r.l. olDie. county and munk:\pellews. onllnances, rules end regulalions requirad of an employer pertormlng .ervlces s\mller 10 lhase you wiU p"rform for us, and will m"ke all repol'1s and I1Imll all withhOlding. or other dadUctIona Irom Ihe ClOmpensalion paid your employea. as may be raqulred by any ~ch.ra~ sleta, counly, or municlpallew. ordinance, rule or regul.Uon. 6. Insurance. Yau wll al your own cosl and axpenae prDCUl'II and melnlaln In lull forca and affe~ wilh l'llputable Insurers, (II a comprehanSlve IllI-risk ganeralllabUlly polcy In which Iha Ilmlls of liability .hall nol ba I... than lWo million dollars (S2,00D,OOo.OOllor badly Injury and properly damage per oc:currence. ganerel aggragalo, wllh a par location endorsement, endorBlld so as 10 cover allilablllla. arising out of or In eny manner comlldad with the services provided by you under Ihls Agreemanl, and naming SUPERVAI.U INC. aa an addillonalln.ured; (HI contractual Uabl61y Insurance with Ilmils of allaasllwo million dollars (S2,000,00D.00l: (iil Workmen's Compensation ineurance covering all your employe.s who 7. Indenmlftcadon. You .helllndemnlfy and hold harmless SUPERVALU INC. and lis sub.ldlarlas, affilale. and dlvlslona, including wllhoul Umllallon SUPERVALU Holdings. loe. ancI SV Venturas. and their respectlva dlnrclors, olflcars, employees, aganlll and retailers from aU lablNty. claims, cosl., damaga.. .xpansea, 1U1l1, SBltlemenlB, judgmen\lr, injuries \a par.onl.l. damage ID prop.rty and altornay's fee. Brlalng out of your neglgencej yaur subccnlnlc\Clr' negllgsnca, and/or the negligence of YO1M' employees or yaur subcanlnlclors' employ... In complying with and/or parformlng Iha services to be provld..d. Privily of conlracl by the injured parson(s) or ownar of damagad property ahal nol be a praraqulslle 1cIlhe above Indamnllicallon ablig.lIons. . . B. Medlation/Arbltratlon. 'Any conlrov,,",y, claim. or dlsput. at whatever na\Unl arising betwean you and us (a 'DI.pula') shall be resolved by medlallon or, failing mediation, by blndlng arbllrallan. This agreement \a mllCllata or arbitral. shall conllnue In fuU force and decl desplle Ihe explrallan, rescission, or termlna\lon of lhis Agreement. Either per\y may begin the medlallon procass by giving a wrItlen nalles 10 Iha alher psrly salting forth the nalurB of the Dlspule. The partie. 8he1l allemplln good fellh 10 resolve lhe Dlsput. by medlallon within 60 days of racelpl olthel nolIc8. II the Dispute he. not been resol~ed by medll!Jlon as provided abOve. or it . partv flllla la partlc'9ale In a medlallon, Ihan Ihe DI.pule shaR be resolved by binding arbllrallon In Mlmll8polia, Mlnnesale. The arbllnlllon shaa be llndert8kBn pursuonllo lhe subslenllve law. of Ih. Slale of MlnnelClla and lhe Faders! ArbItrallon ArJ., and the daclsion at the arbllralor('l shall be anlorcaable In any court of compalenl jurladlcdon. The parllas knowingly end volunl.rlly welVIIlhelr rtghla 10 have IItsIr diapUI" hied and ~udlcelad by a ;sdga or Jury. Any partv may demand arbJlraUon as provided above by lending wrillan nota 10 IIts olher petty. Th.. arbllrallon and th. selaedon of lhe srbIlnllor(sl shell be conducled In accordance with BUch rules as mey b8 agraed upon by tha pertlBB, or, falPng agraemanl wllhln 30 clay. after lIJ'bllrallon Ie demanded, under \ha Commarclal Arbitration Rule. of the American Arbllrellan ASlaclallon. .. such rulae may ba modlned by this agreement. In any OispUla which Involva. mora then ana mill,," dollars in damagea, l/1I1Ia arbl1l'lllors shall be used. Unles.tha per\llls egree olherwlse, lItsy shall be NmlLed In their d\acavery to dlreclly relevanl document.. The erbltralor(.}8heU resellve any eIlscovery dlsput.... The erbllrelor(s}.hell heve the 8ulhorlly lCl awsrd eclual money c1ameges (wilh Inleresl on unpaid amounts from the dale due), .peclle partormance. and lemporary Injunctive r.W, bultha arbllralor(al shell not heva the eulhorlly 10 award axamplery or punlUve demages, end Ihe pertles a.cpresely waive any claimed righlto receive money damages in exc.... of lis aclual ClOmpensalllry damage.. The cosll of arb.ratlon, but nollhe co.ls and expense. of lhe parlin, shaP be ahsrad equany by the partie.. If a party falls 10 proceed wllh arbUrellon. UnBuccaufUlly eh.Ueng.e tha arbilration award, or faa.to comply with the arb"radon awlll'd, the other party Is .nlIIled lCl cosls, including reasonable atlorney's faes, lor having 10 compel Brbllrallon or defand or enlDrcetha award. Except BI otherwise raquirad by law, Ihe partl.. IIlIra. 10 malnlein as conIldBn\lloI allntormallon or documenla obleinad durtng lh~ arbltl'llllon proce.., lncludlnQ the resolUllon of the Dlspule. Nolwllhslendlng Ihe abOve, the perlle. recognize thai cerlain businasa relallonships could give rtse lolhe need for one or more of the p.rtle. \a ..ek emergency. provilllonBl. or summary reUs! 10 repo..... and lall or olherwisa dl.po.. of goads and/or nxtunls. 10 prevanllhe sal. or Iransfer of goods endIor fixture., or III prolecl r..1 or parsonal property from Injury. and for lemporsry Injunc\lva relel. Immedlalely following the issuance of any such raHaf, the parties agree to lh8 s18y of any Judlclal prllCIIadlngs pending mscflBllon or erbllratlon of all underlying Dispute.. This agreemenl \a IIrbllrala ehell conlinUe in full force and effacl dasplle the expi'allon, reeclsslon or termination of this Agreement. 9. CamcllCln of the Wark. You shal promplly correct all work Ihet falls 10 conform 10 tha conll'act documants. whether Incorporelad or no~ end shaa bear the expanse of making good ell wortc of olhar conlrac:lClr1 de.lroyed or dameg8d by such r&movallll' replaCsmanL 10, Enllra Agreemanl. This Agreem.nt and lhe conlracl dacumenla, II any, altaehed hereto correctly .'" forth your anli'e underslanding wllh re.pacltolhe subjlld mailer hereof. Thar" are no othar agl'8llll1enta or undlll'slandlngl belw..en yell and us wIIh respeel 10 lis subjecl maller, nor have !hare been any rapresentatlons. ..pr.....d or implied, BltO the subJecl melter herein .xcept as e.pressly set forth h8raln. This agrBament may be amended or modlned only by a wrtllen Instrument duly axac:uled by you end us pilar 10 or as of tha effective dala of any such amandmenl or mCldlflcallon. 11. Inle",,,,lallon,_ This Agreemanl.upereedes and eMUls any prior agraamenl entered Inlo balween you end us for 11\8 .ubJecI mallar hereof. You hereby oertlfy 10 u.lhel you have raad thill agreamanllll'ld complelaly undersland aIICh of II. provislona. You ag_ th_t nllllher lhIs egreemenl nlll' any provision hereof shell be Intarpreted or construed &galnst us by virtue of our having drafted the agreemant or any such provl.lon. 12. No A.algnmenL You .haIl nol aaslgn, transfer or delegata all or any part of your rights or obllgadonl under lhis Agreement or any other conlraCl documanls, voluntarily or involuntertly, by oparallon of 1ew or otharwlse, wllhoul our prior wrtUen conaent In eaeh Inltlltlca. which con.anl may be withheld In our lole dl.crallon. Ani purported ...Ignmanl. lransfer or delegallon made wlLhoul our prior written COOlant shaU be nul and void. 13. Tennlnallan. Either p8r1y may lelmlnale 1It1. Agreem.nt at any Urne. wlllt or wllhoul cause, by giving lhe olhar party II least IhIrty (30) dlYs' prior wrillen nodce of sueh lermlnallon. Such lamination shan be wllhoul penally. Following 'lld1lsrmlnallon, naUher party shan heve any furthar obUgallon \a lite other undar this Agreemanl. excaptthBl obilgallons arising or accruing ptiClr 10 the affacllve dala of .uch lel11" IllI'minallon. -2- 11/22/ Exhibit B-7 :'-../i \.....,;' EFFECTIVE DATE: ,20_" I . . CONTRACTOR: SUPERVALU: SUPERVALU INC. (Company Name) By: (Authorized Signature) By Its Authorized Representative Title: . ." . -3- 11/22/C Exhibit B.8 M Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, Inc. May 9, 2002 An Iteris Company r;:::..-:-"': -:.. _h. Mr. Brad Nielson City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Rd Shorewood, MN 55331-8926 (,' ',"I'" ;: ' .1 MAY 1 0 " ~ .. 'W\ \' I 2C02i~ . I.., ' , I'''; W L.~_.~_.=~"~, Re: Shorewood Village Shopping Center (Cub Foods) and Mn/DOT Review #S02-012 17-J01-0071 Dear Mr. Nielson: . Enclosed are copies of my emails to James McBroom at MnlDOT transmitting a revised set of future build analyses for the Shorewood Village Shopping Center street system of Lake Linden Drive and the approaches to the intersection of TH 7 and TH 41. This information was also copied to WSB for their review. The submitted information included the following three scenarios for the Future Build conditions, which included 20% overall traffic growth and the proposed new shopping center: . Full Access Stop Control-a network with the originally proposed access to the expanded shopping center (the file that I left with Linda Taylor at our joint meeting) that assumes two-way stop control at the eastern-most driveway (at the top of the tee at Lake LindenffH 7). . Restricted Free-the network modified to have right-in only at the eastern shopping center access, full access at the middle driveway, and ,left-out/right-in only access at the west driveway on Lake Linden. This analysis reassigns driveway volumes and removes traffic control at the tee of Lake Linden/fH 7 since there are no conflicting movements. . Restricted Yield-the same as the Restricted Free network, but modified to have yield control on the eastbound right at the Lake Linden tee with TH 7, which resolves an error message in the simulation, but adds some delay to this movement. . Copies of these networks are enclosed for your files. The network plots show the level of service at TH 7 fTH 41, which is LOS C in all cases, and show the volume changes with the restricted access condition. Our analyses of the three networks show similar overall operating conditions for the three networks and demonstrate the restricted access scenario reduces potential conflicts at the shopping center entrance. MnlDOT is currently reviewing our analyses, so we must reserve our conclusions pending their findings. Sincerely, JM~.-:O ~ Frederick C. Dock, P.E., AICp, PTOE Associate Principal Ene. Cc: J. Uban, DSU FCD:mma 1313 Fifth Street S.t=.. Suite 329, Minneapolis, MN 55414. Phone: (612) 379-3885' Fax: (6 Exhibit C-l REVISED TRAFFIC INFORMATION Letter from Fred Dock, dated 9 May 02 . Map - Shorewood Village Shopping Center Levels of Service ~ 0~ ~ !'-,.<J 0C:) ~ l.q.r, &/. <"'I.~~O'&I} ~ ~~ <.::I" ~ <9~ .~, ~~ ~ ~ TH7 F-S, ,~, 30 LJ 'Kl1~ 10~' JtL 437~ 7~ '<f' ~(\jt') t')(\jUl ~ 3: CD > "C Q c "(ij :E (\j ~x t . t;rj wood Village Shopping Center Future Build (includes Cub Foods)-Full Access-Stop Control So , Mohaddes .... C'" .... - (j . N ~~ 65 <2~ "'" 47~ ~158 ~1154 ~ ~!i62 Timing Plan: PM Peak ~ T~ . Map - Shorewood Village Shopping Center Levels of Service ~ # ~ ~<::> 0C:) ~ l.q.fi (} /. <../'l~ ~~~ !o.~ <8- ~ ~ .~ ~~ ~ ~ TH7 . ~ ~ Q) > ";:: o c "itj :?: ~~ It 237 .. ~ r-'" l!I- <<~"""' 50~Ul..I.~J Jtc I~ 10~ JtL 437~ 7~ (\I"" ~C\It') (')C\IIt) ~158 ~ 1154 ~562 tr1 S. ,wood Village Shopping Center Future Build (includes Cub Foods)-Restriced Access-No Stop Control (Free) s: r, Mohaddes -. - ("") . ~ Timing Plan: PM Peak ~ . Map - Shorewood Village Shopping Center Levels of Service l.q~ & /. ~/~I}O'&I} ~~~ --....'... ~ U'J t_.J;;... ~ ~ TH7 tfj So .... C" .... - (") . ..... rs\ 0~ .~ <::J~ q ~0 . >- <<S 3: (J) > ".:; o c: "(ij ~ 0> ~ )1 ~l 237 ,.,~35 ,.--.., 01' ID~ <<~"'" 50~o>tO 'I" C\I"""" Ie w~ 10~ JtL 437~ 7o-----.s.. C\I ..,. ~ M~fg ,wood Village Shopping Center Future Build (includes Cub Foods)-Restriced Access-Yield Control r, Mohaddes ~158 ~ 1154 ~562 Timing Plan: PM Peak ~ 05/21/2002 12:49 FAX 6123375601 DAGHLGR SHARDLOW & UBAN ~OOl 'ii 11..' \!~Qp-p Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 May 9. 2002 Brad Nielson City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Rd Shorewood,:MN 55331-8926 SUBJECT: . . .'. _..._~ - "._ __ . "__ 'M. __ Shorewood Cub Foods--MnlDOT Review #802-012 Follow Up Northeast Quadrant ofTnmk Highway 7 and Lake Linden Drive Shorewood, Hennepin County Control Section 1004 ----".- ..- ...... . Dear Mr. Nielson: As per our meeting today with representatives of the City, developer and Mn/DOT staff, we would like to take this opportunity to clarify MnlDOT's comments regarding the above-referenced development. MnlDOT recognizes that the proposed configuration of the intersection of Tnmk Highway 7 and Lake Linden Drive is favorable co~pared to the existing configuration. However, in addition to the proposed improvements at this location, Mn/DOT strongly recommends changes to the internal circulation of the development to alleviate negative impacts to the operation of Trunk Highway 7 and Lake Linden Drive. .- Mn/DOT suggests that the northbound movement into the development from Trunk Highway 7 be limited to a right-in only. This movement requires truck circulation to move counter-clockwise around the development and exit on the west end of the development. Additionally, the proposed stop sign on Lake Linden Drive for east-bound traffic at the intersection would no longer be required. MnlDOT believes that these changes to the site plan would improve operations to Trunk Highway 7. as well as conditions on Lake LindenDrive. To our knowledge, the .4~:velo~!"~.!U:e. in agre.ement wi~ .~P~ I!!~~ification to the plan. .-.... -.- . Please note that Linda Taylor (651-634-2126) will be fully reviewing the submitted modeling information . for this development and may contact you with additional comments in the future. As a reminder, a Mn/DOT drainage permit will be required for this development. Please contact Keith VanWagner (651-582-1443) ofMn/DOT's Permits section for more information. Please address all future correspondence for development activity such as plats, site plans, environmental reviews, and comprehensive plan amendments to: Paul Czech MnIDOT - Metro Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B~2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 An equal opportunity employer Exhibit D MNDOT REVIEW LETTER PARSDNS 1 1 1 THIRD AVENUE SOUTH. SUITE 350. MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55401 PHONE: (61 2) 332-0421 FAX: (61 2) 332-6180 SIT TUDIC To: CITYOFSHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD SHOREWOOD, MN 55331 DATE: MAY 8,2002 RE: CUB FOOD - SHOREWOOD ATTN: LARRVBROWN/ BRAD NIELSEN JOB No.: 644447 WEARE SENDING YOU [x] ENCLOSED VIA CbURIE~ THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: [ ] ORIGINALS [ ] REPORTS [ ] PROPOSAL [ ] BLUEPRINTS [ X ]COPIES [ ] INVOICES [ ] SPECIFICATIONS [ ] CHANGE ORDER [ ] COMMENTS . [ ] SHOP DRAWINGS [ ] PAYMENT CERTIFICATES [ ] COST ESTIMATE No. OF DRAWING ITEM/DRAWING TITLE REMARKS COPIES No. 17 REVISED GRADING PLAN DATED 05-08-02 17 SUPPLAMENTAL WATER QAULITY DATED 05-08-02 DATA AND DESIGN INFORMATION . [ ] FOR YOUR APPROVAL [x] FOR YOUR INFORMATION [ ] FOR YOUR REVIEW AND COMMENT [ ] As REQUESTED [ ] ApPROVED [ ] ApPROVED AS NOTED [ ] NOT APPROVED [ ] REVISE AND RESUBMIT [ ] RETURN _ CORRECTED PRINTS [ ] RESUBMIT _ COPIES FOR APPROVAL [ ] FOR YOUR REVIEW AND SELECTION Larry and Brad, Attached are supplemental documents for the proposed Cub Foods - Shorewood project. The documents reflect removing the Storm Filter System and adding an Alum Treatment System for additional storm water polishing to discharge levels of Phosphorus and Total Suspended Solids below City of Shorewood thresholds. Also, per comments from MnjDOT and City of Shorewood, modifications to the main and western entrances have been addressed. The project is scheduled to go before the City of Shorewood PC on May 23, 2002. If you need additional information do not hesitate to call. 612 .Qf2610. Ie ~ ; ~ .' ' [dr'" L',,/ , ,tl;' UAV ,- '-'1 John H. Payton, PE Principal Project Manager r Exhibit E-l REVISED DRAINAGE INFORMATION 20 18 16 1:- ~. J'14 co :en :r:: ....12 1 c .... 'f! 10 - .. o .c Do '8 '" c .c a. 16 6 ... o I- 4 2 o . . 10 Represents an 50%reduclkm in newTP'loadin M:il1~~'hatra.qre~k Wat~r~hed.l)jstrict criteria trj ~ S; mbers reflect runofFJ'()!TI ~Iythe(lh~nged are,a$i.. T~.eo,actll;ah\Umbers,wouldbe;S()rfle'W~t gre~f."ft~,an~hose listedabowbecause Qiincreasedflushlng,o,ausedbg theeHistingrunofF.. .... ..... trj . N ,Shor.~odC~bFood5i . ArirtU.I1"O~P;hOsphQrQ.:(tPjL.QadirUIL..vlrisrtt.e:PrQPo$edSi~e~...ri~.~ 13. 1. NURP Pcii1d:~sried tOlrE!'~ttuho1f'from , '.' . - ~- -~, - .' . ,-.... .'. .- , "'. .., . th. e.entire'slte.:a'rea' "---'.'-"-" . -, '. - ',-,. --.. (12~2:'a~) 3 E~_i$tjh'g Pr()~PP~~d:(~~;~Hf11.i1)g' nfJO~$itEraM,p'$}' ()it y'S.'._'CritQri~::{8tirfg ," -'.. _.....-." .-..-....' ..... . eritire~ite,:itito cornpli~ncer Prqa(j,~~d;(a~s,LJrning 'Pf'9pq~~~ . (assuriiinJJ aMP':~:~9AJW-n: l3N1pl~\Afl~ll!m . Injection') '. ...... ..... I rijecfion) qW1lflt;igp .Addrtloti~l TP'Runoff Loadcau.sedbyD~veiopm~nf IiIE)(iSttl'lgTP i~onoff1.J~~:d 6.000 '.' 5.000 "C" <" tit i.C Co m .5' 4,000 "Z:s II CI ..J .:I .- "S 3 000 (I) , 1 "Z:s s:: CD . ;- 2,000 . .. CI'J 16 .... ~ 1000 I o . . ,Shorewoo~I'CubFoods' Mn9.1T.9t-.l$;ij.p.nf.l~4;~;~Ii~.~::(TS$) L...c>.~il1gJ.~,ving ttt.PrO:p:OJs.d 'S;it~Bo...6~arv 5i594~. Representse.an . S5%n~ducti'6ni n neVoiTSSIQading Z~~lQ NURP P~nd,.si*etf to;)i~~ttM.nofffrQf11' the~titire,sit~f'area 02.2..~~):"-"" . .' EXisting Prgpq~~d'_{~:~~umil1g nO::Qh~~jt;'~"..~.t#1P'_~). ..'. .. ". - CitY~9rit~ri~.@ring s~.t...i....re.-.:$. ite.'lntc:r . ccimpliWM#e) . M.' ..i.n..n.......e.........h. ,..a.'. h.:.... a.......:.g....r~.. e.J.... W~t~rshed;P[s.triQt Crite'ri~ Ptilpq~~-q.l~$~*~ihg prpJ~w~~d .($s~tJrning aN1P,:~.:~tllAltdrf' 'SJylP's'w/Atum rhj~~ti.qh)"hjectiQn)" q4,.:.1itip,r. _:A,tfdifil;inal rSjSR-unof(l.lJad' c.all$~dbjD~veIQj:Jmi:lnf II Eki$ting:TS$.~qn6.ffL()~de ~ e: Q'Ober$ t~fIect runOfJFrl)rn.Pnlg~ct\.nge~:arto~,. rk~~*tlkll'1ijrri~w()Uld~e~Ome'+'h,atgre~terth~rrt~.~':jisted;aj:)Ol,le because ~F i~'a$f!d.fiOshihg c.~tJsedbg th~ eliiiti!:'ig runoff. 0" .... .... ~ . ~ "Q..~e~1~WEl_~_Qm~ M~_'Q ~ ~i~_Jfl~" PROJECT REPORT Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project Exhibit E.4 " PROJECT REPORT: Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project 2 . Lake Problems and Diagnostic Study Findings Tanner's Lake, located approximately 5 miles east of downtown St. Paul, suffers from the common problems associated with urbanization of a lake's watershed. Consequently, the quantity of snowmelt and storm water runoff to the lake has increased. In addition, the water entering the lake now carries nutri.ents an~ debris from storm sewers, highways, and parkmg lots tn the primarily residential and commercial watershed. Resident complaints include concern for the water . quality of the lake, algal blo?ms, a~~ the abund?-nce of aquatic vegetation: The lake s condlUo,ns ma~e It less aesthetically pleasmg and less usable for fishmg and swimming. R WMWD has attempted to address the water quality problems of Tanner's Lake through .District pol.ici~s to ensure judicious managel"!lent p!actlces. Th~ Dlstn~t .. 'sues development p~rmlts which are consIstent with . strict policies, and Inspect developments on a ontinuous basis to determine whether the development is consistent with permit provisions. Violations are dealt with by correspondence and on-site meetings with. District staff and the developer. Should noncompliance continue, additional legal action is pursued by the District attorney to ensure compliance. Previously, the District completed a wetland enhancement project immediately upstream from Tanner's Lake to treat runoff waters from the large northern subwatershed (1987). However, water quality problems persisted despite District efforts to solve them. In 1988 District applied for a Clean Lakes Program Phase I Diagnostic Study grant to compl.ete a st~dy to evaluate the lake',s problems and determine feasIble lake improvement measures. This grant was approved and ee study began in 1989. In 1989, a year-long water quality 1}10nitoring pr~gram of the lake and its inflows and outflows charactenzed current lake water quality, and determined the causes of the lake's water quality problems. Summer water quality parameters, such as total p.hosphorus a~d cl:lo~ophyll concentrations, ilnd Secchl transparencies, mdlcated that the lake was eutrophic. It was clear that efforts to improve the lake water quality must focus on reduci~g the phosphorus load to the lake. Analyses of the lake s . inflows and outflows showed that the greatest source of phosphorus for Tanner's Lake is its large northern subwatershed (G3). The watershed and the subwatershed areas are illustrated on figure I. The flow from subwatershed 03 enters Tanner's Lake via a small stream on the north end of the lake. Several other smaller subwatersheds contribute inflows with higher phosphorus concentratio.ns to the lake, but due to their smaller flo\.vs they contribute a much smaller aggregate phosphorus load (see Figure 2). .', ~ ~ ~~) ~ ..~ , ~_I ~ Figure 1 Tanners Lake Watershed, subwatersheds, and project locations. Project Goals and Objectives Prior to establishing water quality goals for Tanner's Lake, three factors were considered: . Water quality improvements needed to meet the local desires for improved water quality and management of the lake. . Potential degradation of the lake if remedial measures are delayed rather than implemented. · The need for a high quality recreation water body in this area, and the rare opportunity to provide such a water body in the midst of a highly urbanized watershed within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area (TCMA). Water quality goals for Tanner's Lake were established to meet the local desire for water quality improvement and to underscore the local desire for water quality management. The desire of lake users and area residents is to improve the water quality of Tanner's Lake so that it is consistently suitable for all types of uses (i.e, fishing, swimming, boating, and passive aesthetic viewing). Swimming in particular was the most sensitive recreational use of the lake. Complaints r "I I , and area residents regarding Tanners La" Exhibit E-5 the problem of algal proliferation, whid unsuitable for swimming in the mid to Ie PROJECT REPORT: Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project 3 Therefore, a reduction of the algal population in the lake was considered a primary goal. The goals were based on water quality improvements necessary to make the lake suitable for all types of uses, including swimming. The morphometry of Tanner's Lake suggests that it has the potential to develop an internal phosphorus loading problem if further degradation of the lake's water quality is allowed to occur. Currently the lake's phosphorus loading problem is entirely external (i.e, runoff from the lake's watershed). However, the lake has a relatively large shallow region which could contribute a significant internal phosphorus load to the lake under certain conditions. This region of the lake currently remains oxic (i.e, contains oxygen) and phosphorus recycling from sediments is minimized by the oxic conditions. Additional water quality degradation, however, may cause this region of the lake to become anoxic (i.e, devoid of oxygen) during periods of the summer. During anoxic periods. phosphorus would be . recycled from bottom sediments. Intermittent mixing of this region would increase the lake's phosphorus concentration. Internal phosphorus loading would not only exacerbate the lake's water quality problems, but accelerate its rate of degradation. According to the MPCA (1990), the current epilimnetic total phosphorus concentration of Tanner's Lake is considered average for Surfa.ce Runoff Percentages To\l'"el'llI.~"'"\1 W....c~ltud . ClAU (8.6%1 Total I' Ll)ading I'crcent.lges r.",,"\'$ LAke Walersl..'(! Gl AB (5.Cj".;,) Figure 2 Runoff and Phosphorus Percentages by Subwatershed dimictic lakes in this region (i.e, lakes that mix twice per year and are without internal loading problems). However, the average epilimnetic total phosphorus concentration of intermittent mixing lakes (i.e, lakes that have internal loading problems) is approximately 50 percent higher than the current concentration of Tanner's Lake. ! These data suggest the degree of degradation which could occur if internal loading became a problem for the lake. This potential for additional degradation of the lake's water quality was considered in establishing the lake's goals. There is a great need to provide a high quality recreation water body in this area, because very few are found in . this region of the state. An expedient implementation of remedial measures to improve the water quality of Tanner's Lake offers the rare opportunity to provide such a water body in the midst of a highly urbanized watershed within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area (TCMA). Although the lake is currently eutrophic (i.e, highly productive), improvement of the lake's water quality to achieve a mesotrophic trophic status (Le, a moderately productive lake) is feasible. There are very few mesotrophic lakes within this region of the state, and even fewer in the TCMA. Therefore, TCMA residents and people from this region have very limited opportunities to experience the recreational enjoyment of a mesotrophic lake. Many travel to northern Minnesota to seek out such opportunities. The ability to provide a high quality recreation water body in the midst of a highly urbanized watershed within the TCMA and to create recreational opportunities considered rare for this area was considei'ed in establishing the lake's goals. The water quality goals established for Tanner's Lake are as follows: · The immediate goal for the lake is nondegradation of the lake's water quality. · During the next two to three years, the in-lake epilimnetic phosphorus concentration will be reduced to 30 llg/L (::tS llg/L). · Within the next five years, the in-lake epilimnetic total phosphorus concentration will be reduced to 20 Ilg/L (::tS llg/L). · The long-term goal is to maintain the lake's water quality at 20 /lg/L (::t5 Il/L), which is considered pre-impact conditions for the lake (i.e, lake conditions prior to urban impacts on its water quality per a model developed by Vighi and Chiadani, 1985). Analysis of Alternatives A variety of best management practices were investigated to determine which were the most efficient in terms of cost and the removal of nut' ... pollutants from storm water. The Distri Exhibit E-6 assumptions, effectiveness and costs 0 PROJECT REPORT: Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project available to the District to reach the established water quality goals. .....~ES;;;;:i~NOr..o~i~NS.......................................................................................... I l1u'ee WeUands' ... I. l1u'ee WeU""cU 2 T8 Only' 2, n Only 3 All Delendon Ponds' ... 3. All DelenUon Ponds ................................................................. 4 T8.OS. 4 DeL Ponds' 4. 11.05.4 Del. Ponds 5 Alum Te,..onl' ... Sa Alum Tr=IlIIClIl ................................................................. 6 Alwn.01.AB.04-A.05' 6A Alum,QI.AB.04-A.05 7 Oood HolI$dteeplna ... g MOlollmnett. Aer.ldon ............................................. 9 1'I0ll1lnl , In.ludes gnod haloSokeeping 80 The goal of the Tanner's Lake Feasibility Study is to increase Secchi disc transparency from about 2.0 meters to 3.8 meters or more by decreasing the algae population in the lake. The study found that this goal can best be obtained by either reducing the annual mass of phosphorus entering the lake from stormwater or by developing a larger zooplankton refuge by metalimnetic aeration. Various methods were identified to help achieve or exceed this goal. These methods include: I Public Education I Street Sweeping ."" Wet Detention Ponds Extended Dry Ponds . Enhancement of Existing Wetlands . Chemical Treatment of Stormwater I Metalimnetic Aeration 70 ~ oS ~60 e o rj:j e so .g 71 > 40 ~ ~ e 30% ,g Q.. l320 f ~ 0'1'. 4 8 9 3a h 7 1a 2 4a 3 Oplion Number 4 Sa 5 611 6 Figure 3 Estimated Phosphorus Reduction by Alternative . Each of the optional methods and combinations of compatible methods were evaluated as to their effectiveness at achieving the goals of the project and the costs. Fifteen (15) separate options were identified. Figure 3 indicates the estimated phosphorus reduction achieved by implementing the option. Based upon the cost effectiveness analysis, the District Board of Managers selected option 6 which included the construction of the Alum Treatment Facility. two detention ponds in subwatersheds 0 I -AB and G4-A and the extended dry pond in subwatershed 05 (see figure I for subwatershed locations). After also evaluating implementation costs for each option. it was shown that option 6 would also be less expensive than the conventional wetland treatment proposed in options I through 4. Identitication and Summary of Program Elements The program adopted by the District and implemented in 1997 included six primary elements. Each of these elements are reviewed below. 1. Development of Project Plalls. The Work Plan, Monitoring Plan, and Quality Assurance Project Plan was developed by RWMWD and Barr Engineering Company with assistance from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Cities of Oakdale, Maplewood, and Landfall. ~ r\ ,,'- 2. Education. The RWMWD implemented an education program to create an awareness of water quality concerns among watershed residents and teach changes in behavioral ~"UWQwuih.'" OJ Figure 4 Alum Treatment Off-Line Syste: Exhibit E-7 5 PROJECT REPORT: Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project patterns to watershed residents and businesses. The RWMWD completed a survey of area residents prior to project implementation. This pre-project survey indicated the area residents' knowledge of water quality issues at the start of the project. A post-project survey (to be completed in 2001) will indicate the effectiveness of the education program. Public education programs have focused on proper lawn care practices, such as fertilizer use and disposal of lawn debris, and landscaping to minimize phosphorus export. The program includes distribution of fliers to all residents and businesses in the watershed and .placement of articles in the local newspapers. Information may also be disseminated through organizations such as local schools, Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts, and other local service clubs. Community volunteers have been involved in designing and . distributing materials and making door-to-door contacts with the watershed's residents. 3. Improved Street Maintenance. The District is beginning to work with the Cities of Oakdale and Maplewood to expand their street sweeping program to include a fall . sweeping and explore alternati ve street sweeping techniques or programs that may improve efficiency and effecti veness. The RWMWD is completing additional research to explore the latest techn?logy and option available to improve the effectiveness of street maintenance practices. 4. Chemical Treatment afStorm.water. The RWMWD, with the assistance of Barr Enaineerincr Company, designed and installed an alum treaonent 0 facility at a strategic location to treat intlow from Subwatershed G3. The location is immediately upstream ~ro~. th~ S,eventh Street wetland treatment facility. The !acll1ty 1I1Jects ~he phosphorus-binding chemical, alum, 111 flow proportIonal quantities to strip the lake inflow of approximately 90 percent of its phosphorus load. The treatment facility is an "off-line" system. All flows less than or equal to 5 cfs are diverted to the alum treatment s~ste~, and any flows greater than 5 cfs by-pass the dIverSIon structure and flow directly to the seventh street wetland treatment s~stem (see figure 4). The analysis of storm flow rates dUrIng the 1989 diagnostic study Alum Treatment Facility indicated that 85% of all the stream tlows from subwatershed G3 were less than 5 cfs. A settling basin below the injection point was constructed to provide additional remove all of the alum tloc generated by the treatment. The treatment facility design (i.e, off-line and treating only flows less than or equ~l to ? cfs) ensures that treated water has adequate settlIng tIme to remove all the alum floc before leaving the basin. The design also prevents basin scouring, which could dislodge settled alum floc. Thus, none of the alum floc is allowed to enter the lake. Stormwater leaving the settling basin . the existing wetland treatment facilit) Exhibit E.8 immediately downstream from the ah facility. before entering Tanner's Lakt PROJECT REPORT: Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project 6 treatment facility con.sists of a detention basin near the inflow point, a wetland area, and a second detention basin which again treats water just before it enters Tanner's Lake. The use of ferric chloride (instead of alum) was considered. Ferric chloride was rejected on the basis of ease-of-treatment . considerations. Alum was shown to have several advantages over ferric chloride as a phosphorus precipitant: . Alum dosage rates are independent of the soluble phosphorus concentrations of inflows. Proper alum floc . formation is dependent only on the alkalinity and pH of the waters to be treated. Ferric chloride dosage, however, must be made at a rate proportional to the soluble phosphorus concentrations of the inflows. Such soluble phosphorus concentrations in stormwater runoff vary greatly, whereas alkalinities do not. . . Alum forms a floc which "sweeps" other particulate matter out of suspension as it settles. Ferric chloride, on the other hand, forms a colloidal precipitate which does not have a similar sweeping action. Alum, therefore, is likely to remove particulate-bound phosphorus from runoff that ferric chloride will not. . Alum-inactivated phosphorus is not subject to subsequent release from anoxic sediments. Ferric chloride-precipitated phosphorus, however, may be released into the water column should the bottom . sediments (Le, within the detention pond immediately downstream of the alum treatment plant) become 5th Street Basin anoxic, and the oxidation-reduction potential of the sediment/water interface declines. Alum floc within the detention basin may actually reduce the rate of phosphorus release from anoxic sediments by forming a barrier through which phosphate ions cannot pass. Ferric chloride precipitate does not have any similar properties. The one advantage ferric chloride has over alum is its low level of toxicity to aquatic biota. In high doses and at a pH below 6.0, alum could potentially result in aluminum concentrations that are toxic to benthic organisms. At the recommended dosage rate and at pH levels at or above 6.0, alum is unlikely to be harmful to aquatic organisms. Laboratory tests prior to the design of the treatment facility identified the safe, yet effective, alum dosage for the treatment plant. The treatment plant design includes a safety feature, which will shut down the plant should the waters leaving the detention basin have a pH below 6.0. This nullifies the one possible advantage of ferric chloride over alum. 5. Design. and Construction of Wet Detention. Basins and an Extended Pone!. Wet detention basins were designed to treat runoff from Subwatersheds G lAB and G4A. After additional construction feasibility studies, the proposed pond for subwatershed G I AB was deleted from the p,.M,."'.... 'l'h... design phase for t indicated elevatio Exhibit E-9 excessive excaval Extended Dry Pond ~- PROJECT REPORT: Tanners Lake Water Quality Improvement Project 7 . alternative, a small ditch filtration system was installed in the road ditch to remove major sediant loads from the interstate freeway and interchange drainage area. Other alternatives are being explored for these small subwatersheds on the west side of the lake. The G4A pond (or currently known as the 5th Street Basin) is an impoundment with a permanent pool of water ("dead storage"). This basin also included modifying an existing degraded and partially filled wetland to provide a multi-cell treatment system for the stormwater. The basin was designed to remove approximately 60 percent of the phosphorus load before slowly releasing treated waters to Tanner's Lake. An extended dry pond was also constructed for subwatershed GS within Tanners Lake Park. The . extended dry pond is dry most of the time, and only holds water for a period of time after each rainstorm (it does not have "dead storage). It is used because a permanent basin is not feasible at this location. The .asin is expected to remove approximately 45 percent of he phosphorus load from the subwatershed. Additional detention basin construction opportunities will be explored as the area is redeveloped or in conjunction with changes in the public road network or stormwater drainage system. In a recent development. the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has committed to constructing several stormwater treatment basins within a new proposed freeway interchange. This will treat the storm water flows from subwatershed G I CD. 6. Water Quality Monitoring and Laboratory Analysis. RWMWD has been monitoring the lake bi-weekly throughout the project and will continue this program in future years to determine project effectiveness. efhe RWMWD has installed a now logger/automatic sampler unit and collects continuous samples to assess Ditch InfiltrationlFilti'ation Structure inflow to the alum treatment facility. Samples are also collected at the outlet of the Alum Treatment system pond to assess treatment efficiency and monitor total and dissolved aluminum levels. In the year 200 I, phosphorus loading to the lake will be assessed for a one year period to evaluate project effectiveness. Flow loggers and automatic samplers will be installed at sample locations G3, G4A, and GIAB. Samples will be collected and analyzed for total phosphorus during snowmelt, two spring, two summer, and two fall rainstorms. Samples will also be collected from 110wing intlow points during lake sample events and analyzed for phosphorus to determine baseflow conditions. The data will quantify water quality improvements to determine whether project goals have . been met. . . Project Costs The original project budget totaled $1,984,000. The. project elements and the corresponding budgets were as follows: I. Development of project plans 2. Education 3. Improved Street maintenance 4. Alum Treatment facility 5. Detention basins/ Extended dry pond 6. Water quality monitoringl lab analysis 7. Reports and STORET processing 8. Project/Fiscal Management 9. Final Report 10.Public Meetings . $3,000 30,000 0* 682,400. 1,136,000 60,000 13,000 13,000 30,000 5,000 * [n-kind contributions from the Cities of Maplewood and Oakdale. Actual project costs have been substantially less than estimated in several areas. The reduction in actual costs were attributable primarily to lower than estimated land acquisition and easement costs. Approximate costs for completed elements, including construction, easements, and engineering are as follows: Alum Treatment Facility Detention basins/Extended dry pond Education Project Management $663.000 $526,000 $11 ,000 $12,000 "-'" 'i "':: -:" '.<;~~:::;':;;';/".;'"0?~71:f:t"';>~t For lllQre information contact" , ',', ;:,:" . '. , "'"" ,. . ,. " : .. "'.'^ ~~m$~Y-~Y~$,~;ingt(")il.l\i(~tJ;q'"ij~~r~1'~9 . . lQ92E.q9..ll.4."~ ......... ... .. . .. .. Mil>~e.~QQtl:~~}\1~ss.io' ...... . rhP:Q:~:'{~~l)('[.Q~;,.~Qa~ .. fax: (6S1)704;;~O.~2 '.. ....... .... Eman: rwmwd.~jinitn.org . Exhibit E-I0 r------ I I I I I . . -. PfIELMNAAY PLAT OF: SHOREWOOD VILLAGE ADDmON -----, I I I I I I --...::- - ........ WItR:'!IIl= - _..fL...... N t h . . J 1oCtr:l ~e: t"'C~ ~ .. a=- ... ~~ z - > ~ - .. -- - -- IoC r:- t"'l ~ ............---. ... .... ..._".. ........_........,......"............ "- ==-..... ............--.......--...--..-.... ;=ti.;:.-=:.:-.;r::.tI.:..:~:."",,-:.-r.r-.=r=:.':. ... ==-....!r=il..-:::rs:R5.....=:.'ft=--=A-~ r:-'I=--:...~==:::",......__...._~...- =~~..:!-i:s--:ar:t==~~ =-~.::rL~~~.:..:ia=iia-:.=.~ __..........__................::11: ..................., ~ - ..........................-- =~s:=a...'=K-=~~-=.r.::=.:. .. ........."...--.. ..... ..........-..... ~l:=:1ik~-:iii:.:.==:-- -:L.. _ __ _ .. .-- .:e.._=... ..'IIi......~ e.-:a........ ====:==.r.:-.=::=:n..~=a"---" r-:.i:F-~1!=:==:.,;.a:mPt.""':-': =~"':.=:,-;...~-=--=;rz.~-"",.""-,,-,,, ~ .\..'1:\7::=:-..:...-:-...::==..==.-:-'4-.:.... ~~:::.;a:::-.:v==~.:.-=:r:.....-z.=. - :.=::=..-.......................--.---......-- -.::.:--.,.-.............-~!9--_.. -.... - -~._- - ---~ = - -- .... --. - .. =--=~L=r =iaH:.:.=:.-.U, .... =-==.:=:.............. - =..:..e-m.E:L-e:..~"$f~==-:.. - -................... -. =...'-=-=n::.==-=:::.=L....-:::.:............. ....-- =-~==-_..._......._............I--_- -, =:"=!.=r-..:':::..a==---X':;-==;==::=:u. __~_ =......_...__=._&;=:1:::='1':. ___ ...u.,........__............"'.___._. -.... . -............-.................-............... =1.-=.-..-- =:'T-=z,\:S::- =.::.=::, "':-.=.--ct."Z:'=- ::r_=!:: ~="'~J.:F.:::z:;.r=a: -. =.:=.-:.:::.-====~-:ftZ.,=::-..:..----==:=:..1:_ =r=ii'~.........lS:7:=-:a==e!:.., :.*t!!!,.T.:'=='.r.:!!! ~~~:;'.r.-,-='4= _;;;;;'......_...~ ............_.;"'Jr'....._-.. ---:II!fiIt.:.=I:.~....._-.r:.. :a:::..-t..r..:=eFL.;~~~~ - a:~.;::r':f...~~=~7$..~:::.. - :1.--=,-:=:,::",,:-., ~-=:=- -==-..... ~=::.::.., E~:;..::;..-e!i5::::.~.:s:._ ==:::.:=-:- =- If... ......--,..,............ :L c.:::. ~ G&'" << ........- ........ -- -- at... ~':.... .....= =---..,-:...-=-.::......-,:.::.:.~ ........- =..........--...................---.~- r=r-=-."'-=-===~..~~::.:-r:...n.:... t.t.=&J& ......................... ................. --,., ell.... ... ~':..::=:::::-.::c.""""'-""'-""''''''' ... :1.r...--.... ........ .. - - .......,....... .. ~~::.=: :..'C.:....-:- .......-..........- ..........- ...............-......... .............,-.....- __.... ---. uc. .........-.-u.& ........_.... ........I&_....-....J I S_de ......d Sarve LLC.: ..........,.,~a.:.rlll I I _____...1 .. .. CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD' SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927' (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128' www.ci.shorewood.mn.us' cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council . FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 30 May 2002 RE: Quandt, James - Setback Variance FILE NO.: 405 (02.15) BACKGROUND . Mr. James Quandt has requested a variance to build a second story addition on his home at 22425 Murray Street (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). As can be seen on Exhibit B, the existing house and garage encroach into the required rear yard setback area of the lot. The property is located in the R-1C, Single-Family Residential zoning district and contains 24,563 square feet of area. Besides the encroachment of the house and garage, the subject property fails to comply with several other requirements of the Shorewood Zoning Code: 1) inadequate lot width ("flag lot"); 2) an accessory building that straddles the west property line; 3) driveway access to the garage encroaches onto neighboring property; and 4) impervious surface in excess of 33 percent. As noted in the applicant's request letter (Exhibit C), the house is perched at the top of a prominent hill. Exhibit D illustrates how the site drops away in all directions. It is worth noting that the applicant also owns the property immediately west of the subject site. Plans for the proposed addition are not available as of this writing. The existing home contains approximately 1280 square feet of area. Mr. Quandt proposes to add a second story of equal area, necessitating a rear yard setback variance of nine feet. Building elevation drawings will be forwarded to you separately. #. \..1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #18. Memorandum Re: Quandt Setback Variance 30 May 2002 ANAL YSIS/RECOMMENDATION The Shorewood Zoning Code allows nonconforming residential structures to be expanded, provided the addition complies with the setback and height requirements of the zoning district. In this case the second floor addition as proposed will extend into the rear yard setback area. Although there is room to extend the house within the buildable area of the lot, hardcover restrictions prevent outward expansion. Despite the relatively modest size of the home, the lot is more than full with respect to impervious surface. Even though the driveway serving the property is substantially off of the site, hardcover still occupies 45 percent of the lot. From a lot coverage perspective, adding upward does not increase that element of the property's nonconformity. It is worth noting that this could be accomplished by simply limiting the expansion to the portion of the house that lies within the buildable area of the lot. . The existing nonconformities of this property have the effect of allowing the applicant to make greater use of his property than a conforming lot. Specifically, the "flag" configuration results hi less green space than that which is provided by a standard lot - one of the reasons our Zoning Code prohibits them. This green space is further reduced by the encroachment of structures into the setback areas. . In spite of the preceding there may be some merit to granting a variance in this case. The variance process allows the City to attach reasonable conditions to any approval. For example, the Code states that where setback deficiencies exist, the required setback may be made up on the other side. Since the existing buildings encroach 37 feet into the rear yard, a restriction could be established restricting construction in the northerly 37 feet of the wide portion of the lot. Thi~ is illustrated on Exhibit E. The applicant should be required to provide a recordable conservation easement over this portion of the lot, which is also where topography is an issue. Hardcover on this site should be reduced wherever possible. Two opportunities for such reduction are the gravel area north of the bituminous pad and the accessory building in the southwest comer of the site. It is not recommended that the bituminous pad be removed as it provides a turnaround at the top of the steep driveway to the property. If removing the building in question seems too drastic, the applicant could subdivide 30 feet from the rear of his vacant land to the west and combine it with his homestead property. By adding additional land to the site the percentage of hardcover is reduced and a problem for the future owner of the lot to the west is eliminated. Subject to these recommendations, the variance will not convey any additional right or privilege to the applicant than to other owners in the same district, and the nonconformity of the property is lessened. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Jim Quandt -2- CITY OF CHANHASSEN 400 I o 400 Feet I b,. N Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Quandt variance request EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS EXHIBIT SKETCH FOR: JAMES J. QUANDT ,oootr:l e~s. ~ ~_. o..<sr. -~- <<tl:l e1 ~. n o 63759-001 567/69 (117-34) SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. ENGINEERS · SURVEYORS · PLANNERS SOIL TESTING * ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 10580 WAYlATA BOULEVARD. SUrrE 1 MINNEfONKA. MN 55305 952-546-7601 fAX: 952-546-9065 www.schoellmadson.com " ~-------------- I~ ~d 1/'" ""'\ --------------~ . 2 Iron Pipe '" Fd. Nail------ I I I NI I"} I I -tt- I .,:. eo: -: . : . 010 .:\~ ;:.. (1)1") DESCRIPTION 00 . _000 ...... ::<.::< ."0 3~d-~_Jha~ part of Lot 90, Autditor's '::::,.: :....:...:: >;:~ ;<.:: -----~-- . -0:-' "0. .... . .0.. ...... .... 00 ....: ....:. ......: ....:..1'. . - .... .... eo. '0. ..... o ... ,0 "0..:......" '0 ..:".... '"0 . .0. .... '0 .o, .... ,0. o .... ., '0 ....._'" .0 "0; .,_., < . .WOODEN.. - :.:-:. ::RETA1NING ~ '.~ '..WALl::-':': '9 '.'> ~:><::~,.~.~.~~,,: :', .:_~.~:~ '::.~.i, ':-,~"'~~~:: :.. -,:~",::~,-,:",>:,~~' :.- .:/~.~\;::~~;:~:) . l' '. . " .~)~~::~ ~:2~:';" ...."..00 I hereby certify that this exhibit was prepared under my supervision and that I am a 'Licensed Land Surveyor under the la s 0 he{\ : tate 0 Minnesota. N I"l MURRAY STREET ~ -@)- III "L- o .... :0 ::l <( .,.' ':'\'2"n~'O"O' ______ .. 0.' v... \:J The nor:~i~e-o~~:~~-~--- :..:.... ~.:. ::":' Auditor's Subdivision No. 135 .-:: >~.~ :.~I" ..::< ::.....:: CONCRETE STEPS 0.74 --..----.. ....._--.- WOODEN -- FENCE FND MON / with the north line of Lot 90, ~ ; Subdivision No. 135 120.00 Fd. 1/2" Iron Pipe ADDRESS 22425 MURRAY STREET SHOREWOOD, MN. Concrete . - Building - Gravel - Pool - Dec~ng - Rock Ret. Walls - Wood' Ret. WaBs - Wooden Steps - Bituminous - Total Hardcover - Percent Hardcover = 254 Sq.. Ft. 2890 Sq. Ft. 4838 Sq. Ft. 653 Sq. Ft. 1835 Sq. Ft. 119 Sq. Ft. 99 Sq. Ft. 58 Sq. Ft. 325 Sq. Ft. 11071 Sq. Ft. 45% wing has been checked and this IP-rH day of y 20 OZ .-' ~ Date: lliams. Jr. License No. 19840 . . I1l >- ~~~~~ 11l00Cll'"O~ g..g.~~;l ~ '"0 Vl ........................................ 'TJ ..... 0... Er Vl 0:31- ~~ .6" ~ 0 ~ _ _'"0 '"1 '< .a I1l ~~~~I:;. .... I1l ..... I1l ~11l . I1l 0 I1l I1l .....11l I1l A 8 S I1l A c :::t ~. !!i. Ii- rf !!t e- s. g. g.. g.. ~ '"0 IT o ....~'"1 CIl ::1 ...... !n. 0... 0... p... F .a ..... .~ ~ '" e..: I1l I1l I1l ~ ~. 0 0-"'" I1l .0 0 ~ o 0 I1l N '"0 I1l :::s~~..Cl'Q Cl'Q --n.~ ~ !4 s...:::s :::s 0 0 0 ..... a :::s @ :::s ~ ~ ~ ""t . g.. 0 g~ I1l I1l I1l 0... ~'l a 8 S. 0 0 ~ g.. O'~ ~ ~ . ~ ..... ~ CIl CIl CIl 0 ~......... c~ ~ S. ~~~~~ g 0... ~ g. ;l.r I1l ;;I '< ~ ....N s.:::s :::s :::s 0 s:: Pl ~. ~ I1l 0 C ~ N . I1l 0 en n..... o 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ I1l 0 ..... ~ 1::1..", ~a' ~ ~ g.. CIl I1l ..... o:;:o~e.. ..... o...:::s . 0 .o:::so...o ..... . ~.S.S.s.S s ~~ N Cl'Q ~ ~ '"0 g 0... O'"1C1l '"0 I1l CIl 0 ITa g..oo e: H-;a ITI1l_I1lg.. I1l S 0 0 11lY' 000 '"0 ~ _Y' S. I1l ~ ~ it 0.0 e-:g..0' a.~O:~ -Vl ~@ @'"O~ ~""Vl CIl ;:s '" ~ 0 t:3S<{}I1l@~ ~ s:: o.~ ~ ~.~ 0... CIl IT s:: ~ ;:s ~ e- '"1 0 !!l. p .... I1l - g.. a. ~ p: 0... 0- .... s:: I1l 0- ;:s ~ g.. l1l ~o- . I1l '"O~ IT :::S11l11lR-S: IT oop.. I1l ~ ~~ 8~dff~ I1l 0 0...8 ~ p.. o 0... 0 ~ IT '"1 ~ ()Q I1l I1l '"OCIlP-O. --~ o...N _~O..cVl ~ ~ ~~ ~ g 0...'"0 g ~ ~ su -'"0 '"0 - 8 ~ e-l1l S. [~ !::,. Cl'Q ~ s:: I1l I1l a _o-.....~ o 0 I1l a.~ ~ @ ~ o s..~ ~. 0 p..11l~o ..... I1l I1l ~ A e-~ ~ ~o I1l () ~ .~ I1l '"1 P I1l o. 0 o ~ .g ~ ~...... o...~ ~~ a 0 .CIl:::S ~. :::s hl I1l s~ 0... !!l.g o ~IT o~.g _os:: ..... CIl I1l .... @~ ft-:::s ff:::S ~ ~ ~_:::s'"O..... S CIl ~ .... ~ V) :::s ~ I1l I1l ~~ ~oIT V) ~ IT 1:;.15.'"0 N .... I 0 CIl n ITS--11l g-~ rt 0 8 ~ 0...11l ......0 ~ E... ~ 0' c I1l ~ 19:~ 0 '"0 0 '"0 "< ~ ~ ;:s (f}~ o I1l :::s I1l ~ a. I1l ff.~ ~ '"0 0... <: '"1 g..~ .~ rrt s '"0 g..:::s 0- ~. 0... ff]. ~'"1s::oa 15.0 i. ~ ~~ I1ld11l1@.: IT ..Q. '"0 0-...... Y' 0 Cl'Q ~ ~. 1ii.11l 000 s:: I=": I=": Vl I1l () ~ ew :::s Cl'QO~~ ~.'"O _ ..... :::s ~ e:j :::s ~ ~ CIlo-OCj}s:: ~ ~.11l ~ ~. ~...... g.. :::s 0 I1l I1l 0 S. o CIl l1l e.. I1l .... I1l I=": ~ ..... 0- ~ S.~ g p....... _l1lsu.... g- oo@~o... I1l &ghl 0 8 a:! l1l I1l 11l.... I1l g..~~o :::s .g I1l () a. 0... I1l g- ~ ~ _CIl . su~~o...~ o ~~ ~N ffg.@ 0 I1l 0 0... "8 I1l ~ - c 8 ~ g.<s s: :::s CIl ~.11l 0 ~ ;: i~~ ~ .....I1l..... lq~ IT I1l CIlI1l'"O CIl . ~ 8 ~~ I1l o~ '"1:::s ~ I1l ;:s 'ES0... ~ S- ~ 0 ~ '"0 IT '"1 A o. ~~~-Rr I1l s:~ ~ o ~ ~ '"0 't) CIl I1l ~ ~.~ ~ ..... -.. . I1l e-: CIl ..... ~..... 0 ~ 0 d CIl ~~ . I1l :::s ea. ~ CIl o...~o ~ 8 6= I1l ~ e-: ft- '"0 ~ ....o-ITo...g.. ~~ .... ..... ~~~ . 0... I1l -11l0~11l ~ ..... ';<:: 0 CIl 0... '"0. 0... N 0 ~ 0 0- g S. S 0... @ o 0 ..... o $I) I1l ..... S.~ 0' 0 ~ - ~ ~.~ ~~ {la. I1l ..8-:0' IT ..... a- g.g ~'g.~ . ~ ~ I1l ~ .~'"1 0 ~trjl-1 '"0 0 CIl ~ ..... CIl i:t. lf8 I1l I1l a.g ~ V1 VJtrj I1l I1l 0 ~11l0 l:! 0' VJI-1 :::s -t:3hl~~@ 0 0 CIl '"0 I1l 0- ~ ~ f5-8-: ..... '"1 ::1. o I1l IT ...... ..... - Cl'Q d g.. i~[~~ l:! 0 ~ S' as-- ..... _....11l ~ -i:!. I1l .... 0 :::s g.. '"0 I1l ..... :A ..... I1l 0 ::1. IT'"O S ..... I1l ~ !n. 8 f2.. ..... :::s '"0 I1l ~ I1l t:J>tn 0 ~ . '"0 l'D~"'" ~ ~ S.~Iii.~ o CIl 11l'"O I1l '"1 Vl ~'"t1& g ~~ ~ -9. o 0 A. IT F '"1 ..... ::t.O 0- '"1'"0 o O' 0 If '"0 ~ Cl'Q ~~ ~ 0 ('l) '"t1..... @ :::s ~ '"0 ~':1~ . I1l @ p.~g: ~ o IT~ ~ I1l H I1l ~ ~ IT '"1 0 ~ NJooooC..... 0 ~ CIl ~ '"0 1:;. ~ 0 .....:Inn 8 ..... s.I1l'g.~ d ~&:g~ "g 0 o ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~~ ~ s S-- Cl'Q....~0<: l'Do!} .g S I1l I1l 0... ~. I1l I1l @ 0 I1l .... Iii. .... I1l IT"< I1l ~ . ~ ~ N !t s 0 0... IT ..... ::!. ~ @. ITol1l8 g- d 0... q g.~ ~ a 0 - '" g ~ o ~ :::s ~ CIl CIl I1l l1l ~ 0 ~. Noo g o O.CIl I1l CIl 0 S~ ~~ a- . 0' ~t:l ~.s. S. ~~ ~- Cl'Q 0 CIl ~ su t ~ ~11l.g '"1 I1l '"0 0... S--~ - Cl'Q ol1la- A ~ tr~ g.. .....a c- ~ e-: o ~ 0 I1l ~ 0-'<: @ ~ I1l 0 :::s '"0 8 CIl l'D S 8- ::to eL ~ g .... I1l I1l o S ..... !fA'"1 I1l ~ CIl 00 CIl -CIl l1l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Shorewood Planning Commission April 27, 2002 Page 2 It is logical, and evident, that to build upon the existing foundation is the only option that could work without moving the entire home, filling in the poo~ digging out the existing foundation and re-grading the lot. I believe that option is unreasonable and not within the "spirit and intent" of the ordinance. Any reasonable and prudent person would agree that to utilize the property for "best use" would be to add to the existing structure. . My situation is furthermore unique in that there are not structures on the south where the setback is non-conforming. This is a "rural" setting, which creates unique circumstances from a typical setting. It would be the least burdensome for neighbors to build on the existing foundation. As noted I have the support from the neighbors and in particular the property owner whom the set back adjoins. Section 1201.05 Subd 2. (b) 2. Literal interpretation of this ordinance would deprive me of rights, commonly enjoyed by properties in same district, by making the property unimprovable under reasonable standards. Additionally, building in any other direction would cause additional burden to neighbors. Subd 2. (b) 3. These circumstances are not the result of action of myself as I have not made any material changes to structure, hardcover, or land The property was built in 1941. Subd 2 (b) 4. . Granting of this will not confer any special privilege that other owners would not be eligible for. This property is unique and my circumstances uncommon. . Subd 2. (c) This application provides for the minimum variance necessary. Existing structure can be reconstructed as a non-conforming structure.. It is simply the second story that would need to be altered (which is 9 feet by 44 feet.) This is not a significant change from the existing structure now. In summary, this project is supported by community, is reasonable in nature, complies with the spirit and intent of ordinance, and is unique. I have a hardship in that the house was built and situated on the land some 40 years prior to the current set back ordinances. Moving in any other direction would also cause set back issues. Therefore, the least intrusive change is to build on the existing foundation. The variance requested is minor and it is evident that special circumstances prevent alternate courses of action. Thank you in advance for your support. Kindest regards, James J. Quandt {~....y ~l~ JIF~'.~ )~.. 'I(J})l'iJI l ~~t'~~.... ~'Z/ ~~~:~...- = ~ ~ ~\\\~__. ~ <~ III V~ ~ ~/P.r-~~El.~------.;: ~ "' \ \ \\~ '---- 'J IL II ~( ~---t"7J'qy- :4~f ~~ ~~~~~ ~/ ,_ . ,117 Ii I ~---.A.j['iH; ~H."". .~ ) ~./ j) ~. S~ll \~ - l~~"J .!-Y. ~~ \; .,. ~ 'J J T [ , I::"-~ I ( yl-l~;:;.... '. '/) '/ 99!J" I If ~ t'\ . . ';;j '/'. :-.::: . . /' ~ 'I .'liT!--:.II "r R\ <\/ ~ :;:.' '; V . '.:-": ....... 7::- ,'L. '" ~./ f" ~ ~ :\. . ) IVli;. .. 'f' tl~. . '/ ,- ...... '. .\'-~ iliiT. ~~ ~ r~ \.-V L'~r m~1 I r-' .. lI':V /~ -..r-,." ~ ~ '\ ~\ '1:::-- -,-~...: \ 'h in:' . -." ) M I ~ J \.::: ~h~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ,,"~ , I (\ r '(,.\..1 ~ ~/~>,,,,, ~.. ~ ~ ;: ~ 0/J~11~ ))~ . \~V~~e::, h I.-'7J} ~ '/ ~ ~ ~ '/j 'I '/)';J'/. '/~) ~ . / / /. ." :;r- -:.:;:::./"A ~ 'PT" v~~J II . 1. ~I . JtX- .',.1. ..- . . '1.../../ f: /1 . l. ~;..- .~ : .'. . 1056,5.' . . . . ~j/ ''- :/.......-.- . . . . V-- . . '. :. . ~. ') . '. '. '/.. ~~ r..; ~r t; .. . .. . . ..' ...... ri'l/ '~'- IlrIV/~~~ -, . n' ~~. . ,1,\" ~) . . '~~i1;-' ~ ~. 'I\~\' \~~~ ) h~"I~1 c~~~\ c/ ~ ill \~ \ f 11ff/1\\'" ~:.. ~ ~ '/ J ~"'\"'" q ~~ .. ~u'l.) \ . rl $'; ~ I/:-J ~ 1... c: "'.:1 I. . \ \\~l.\~~~ Irt;~ f/; ~) ~~- ~ () . )l\\~~~~ ~ ~ ~ " .4~ ~ ~ .... \ :~V/JJ 1 '\~d\\~~::3 JJI I05U M ~ / J J ~ \ \ '\ '\ ~ 1'" .,.1 ft; l t:il" , 'l: ~tJll 0 J t1 !/; //: 111"/ .// I' r (7;p3!i~ ~ l I \ ~'\:".: ~I//f(f, ( I I " :.1. 'f / v: I / J I II / I /'. (1\ '// --.. ".J ,r; '^' ~ /1 . . ~~ :--..'~ 111\ j ~ ., I I ~ ~ ^ Y) L,x j ~ ~ ~ ~, I ') 'PU!5 J ~ ~;V ~.. L ~ ~ ~ \.~ 'f/f!le I I -.;: ,Kl37.2 l( .~..-::- ....,.. _......... \... ~' ^-- c :~ ..r _ '7 _ / ,___ -;;=.... :---\ ~ . ~ Exhibit D .....__\ (____, r--- 'f -. AREA TOPOGRAPHY + + + ~ , t':!JO' , ~7 Lo~~tVA+'OV\ ~"~f^'t Parallel with tli north line of Lot 90. Auditor's Subdi' sion No. 135 CONCRETE STEPS ~ ~ EXISTING BUILDING ~ o v WO DEN FE E . - f ~ ~O' :1 ~i"D~ ",d j. lot . ...., .3 ....U1 0,.,., Ql- e . ::0 .....z rn c o 0 Ql .- 11l Ql '> ..c .- ...., "0 .0 ..c::l ;t:l/) ~ 11l - -... Q) 0 =..... 0'- ...."0 o ::I <( r- I' r- l"1 f") I . 0.74 - ...--..- WOODEN --- FENCE 120.00 Parallel with the north line of Lot 90, Auditor's Subdivision No. 135 I/) c o 0 w._ rn Ql '> ..c .- ....."0 .0 ..c ::I ;t:l/) :s: I/) - "L. Ql 0 =...., 0'- L."O o ::I ll..<( , . ," '..' . '", .... :~ ,', -; .: .; ";...~. ," ::: ., . L.VV. I f l~t::l lU parallel with the 90 a distance c south parallel Vv Lot 90 to the i drawn parallel t Lot 90 and 37' northeo!3t corne east' along said line of said Lot feet to the poil :.. 'oo ," '.t. . ,"I...~" .... '.' ., ,."~. . .' . .:'., .'.' , . ,":- .~. ..... ...0:.. '\ '.- " .~.: .....~. : ~...... .( o J.() NOTE This is not a t .... ...... 1Z-e~..t 4~ve EXISTING BUILDING ~ ::~':: ;~,~,iit~;~ . .:':.~: :.:: ..~::. ,,,: .::..~.:..,:.~.. . .... ':0. ',' ", ..... .:..... .. ::.. ":.: ~...~.~.:~...::..: :,~.: <<W06DEN'.~ - ;.;.:. ::REtAINING q .' . .WALL:'.' :., .1: :it~:'.~;;::j:: .. -,:~,,::~,,'::'>".~~' ::: :~. ~,:::,::.\ T~. ,(. :::". '~"'; '.:~:.. \. .... ".-...- . ':.:,(~:.:~ ::~.\:'; I. .... . . ".l.._ ." Parcel Area Concrete . Building Gravel Pool Decking Rock Ret. Wa Wood' Ret. W< Wooden Stepf Bituminous Total' HardcO\ Percent Hard, Fd. 1/2" Iron Pipe This drawing has been checked and reviewed this (PrH day of MAy . 20~. bY~ ~~t" "J.l"~""" "," ,,~I.','. ..!\""'I.......~l ~., _ .".'M.'...... ~..., .... ~.. . ~ ~.."_.__M r.p> " I hereby certify t prepared under r I am a Licensed .k .1.,_ _^ ....1._.1.. Exhibit E RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL April 23, 2002 Planning Commission City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 Murray Street . Dear Planning Commission: By way of this letter I wish to communicate my support and consent for the remodeling project Jim Quandt has requested for his home at 22425 Murray Street. We have lived in the neighborhood over 15 years and think his plans will add to the neighborhood. His project will not impair the supply of light or air to my property. Nor will it increase congestion or the danger of fire or public safety. His objective to improve the home on the property and save existing trees certainly fits the intent and purpose of the city plan. His lot on the topof that steep hill presents a challenge for improvement and we are thrilled Jim has taken on this challenge that others would not. . Please approve his application for a variance. /) ~1~v Iyn S. Hanzlik . April 29, 2002 To Shorewood City Council and City Planning Commission From John Streed 22520 Murray Street Shorewood, MN 55331 Subject: Variance request of James Quandt for property at 22425 Murray Street. . I write to support the request of my neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. James Quandt, for a variance to the requirement that prevents their present residence from being remodeled because it is nine feet too close to the lot line. . The Quandt request is entirely reasonable and practical. The Quandt argument is that remodeling is much more to the benefit of the neighborhood than rebuilding on a new foundation nine feet farther from the lot line. They are correct. Tearing down the existing structure and rebuilding on a new foundation with the accompanying disruption and destruction of soil and vegetation will provide no benefit to our neighborhood and ,will clearly have an adverse effect on the surroundings whereas remodeling on the present site will be to the advantage of the area because of the much lesser harm to shrub and tree. In my view, the Quandts are making a sensible and considerate request which has my full support, and I urge you to grant the variance. Sincerely, tzJ!I~~~ John Streed Copy to James Quandt TO: City of Shorewood City Council, Planning Council . Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 Murray Street Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval of the proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We welcome improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our environment, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quality ofliving in this area. Kindest regards, " !. .J.V' G ltffl)i!.; '3~ jVl...\ f'c:Jl-. . Mark and Barbara Capece 6175 Deer Ridge Shorewood, MN 55331 TO: City of Shorewood City Council, Planning Council . Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 Jtllurray Street Dear Planning COlmnission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval of the proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We welcome improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our environment, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quality of living in this area. _~..'~~estr~.. - .:.'. ....~\~ ;2 /~ . S~d Nancy Simmons 22410 Murray Street Shorewood, MN 55331 TO: City of Shorewood City Council, Planning Council . Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 JIIIurray Street Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval of the proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We welcome improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our environment, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quality ofliving in this area. . Kindest regards, i -.... .1" .f);."." (,i;.)C',/ ()';'(\ \)' l2LI'J.~k ,\ . l... "L( . ,. \.-. -:/'......'<.../(.. ::...r :- ...w:::- v l. 0 -") Debra Fogelson -FCf ;:;le .,/ 6180 Cardinal Dr. S Shorewood,MN 55331 TO: City of Shorewood City Council, Planning Council . Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 Murray Street Dear Planning COlrunission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval of the proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We welcome improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our environment, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quality ofliving in this area. Kindest regards, . "---~ ~---- .... ----........., -~-....::!.. . / .' /' .;// Ronald Backer 6170 Cardinal Dr Shorewood,~ 55331 TO: City of Shorewood City Council, Planning Council . Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 Murray Street Dear Planning COlllillission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval ofthe proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We welcome improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our environment, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quality of living in this area. K.indest regards, -<I r J I.j? ., V --- ~'..kL,HCLitL:~.' "NLa.tjde:fi~ ',/ . C,1.~,~, ~ Thomas and Pamela Langseth 22355 Bracketts Road Shorewood, MN 55331 TO: City of Shorewood City Council, Planning Council . Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 Murray Street Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval of the proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We welcome improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our enviromnent, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quality ofliving in this area. Kindest regards, . Charles and Christine Jones 6195 Deer Ridge Shorewood, MN 55331 j) 1., (, /' 0 c j/ ..' ,1. ' 'i/i.1 r\'A.;v~ . . . . ' / '" ,j cl(QO )trtc Oii..-+- YlCG~ ~1\t'\;J c.t (();] In V .. U I[iil /L)vefDY t . C!W~r . . TO: City of Shore wood City Council, Planning Council Re: Jim Ouandt's property at 22425 JYlurray Street Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval of the proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We we1co !f1e improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our en~ ronment, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quali of living in this area. Kindest r~aridS'" ,~Lt:> ' c,/;' 0 {Ii ~lores J!!/'9 son //~~55 Deer Ridge Shorewood, MN 55331 TO: City of Shorewood City Council, Planning Council . Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 Murray Street Dear Planning COlIDnission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval of the proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We welcome improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our environment, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quality ofliving in this area. . Kindest regards, (JMtUW~ Carin Nelson 22435 Murray Street Shorewood,~ 55331 TO: City of Shorewood City Council, Planning Council . Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 Murray Street Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval of the proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We welcome improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our environment, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quality of living in this area. Kindest regards, .... ,J" G~I ,.j., () .-jl).~ "OtA~e"'->~h'- / te/;. ,( '.1... (:U0~\' \'..L)) .J , ,"",-, , c:7 "'7 ,. 1/'.' j' t /(":t' i...;.,.. ......... ,~.... .... , \".^~.... -', / i t4/'v(j ./\j R.V. and E.S. Anderson 22430 Murray Street Shorewood,~ 55331 - .. TO: City of Shore wood City Council, Planning Council . Re: Jim Quandt's property at 22425 Murray Street Dear Planning COlmnission and City Council Members: Please accept this letter as approval of the proposed remodeling at 22425 Murray Street. The project, as proposed, does not adversely affect us or our property. In fact, the project will improve the neighborhood and cause the least amount of disruption to us as it is proposed. We welcome improvements to our neighborhood and support residents who will protect our enviromnent, increase the appeal and values of our neighborhood, and enhance the quality ofliving in this area. . ;F::OJ~~ Konrad Wurm, Sr. 6185 Cardinal Drive Excelsior, MN 55331 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: 29 May 2002 RE: Simanek, Mark and Kathy - Setback Variance FILE NO.: 405(02.14) BACKGROUND . Mark and Kathy Simanek have requested an after-the-fact setback variance for a covered porch they added to the northeast comer of their home at 25625 Wild Rose Lane (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). The porch was built without a building permit. As shown on Exhibit B, the existing house is only one foot from the right-of-way for Eureka Road. The property is a cOJ.:l1er lot, zonedR-IC, Single-Family Residential, and contains approximately 18,036 square feet of area. The existing home is nonconforming with respect to the side yard setback abutting Eureka Road. As mentioned, the house is only one foot from the public right-of-way, whereas 35 feet is required. Further, the house is only 16.5 feet from the traveled surface of the street. The existing house is one story in height and contains approximately 1320 square feet of area. The porch, shown on Exhibits C and D, measures 4' x 12', not including the stairway. The applicants explain their request in Exhibit E. ANAL YSIS/RECOMMENDATION Criteriafor the consideration of variance requests is set forth in Section 1201.05 Subd. 2.b. of the Shorewood Zoning Code. In summary, the Code states that the applicant must ft ~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #7C. Memorandum Re: Simanek Variance 29 May 2002 demonstrate "hardship" - something physically peculiar about the property or building that prevents the applicant from making reasonable use of the property. There is nothing unique about the gable valley that exists on the applicants' home. Technically this problem would come under the category of something that has been created by the property owner. There is some question as to whether the problem of roof drainage couldn't simply be corrected by rain gutters. . Shorewood's current zoning regulations allow the expansion of single-family residential dwellings, provided the addition complies with setback requirements for the district.in which the property is located. While there are any number of buildings in Shorewood that are nonconforming to some degree, few are so close to the right-of-way or the traveled surface of the roadway. It should be noted that there is ample buildable area on the property for expansion of the house to the west and to the south. As such any significant future investment in the subject property should be concentrated in that direction. Without a floor plan of the existing home it is difficult to determine if the front entry should simply be moved toward the center of the house, closer to compliance with the R-l C setback requirements. The applicants' request is less about expansion than trying to correct a roof drainage problem. Although the applicants state that the new stairs will be out from under the runoff from the roof, this will not be the case U1)1ess rain gutters are installed as mentioned above. . The request is complicated by the fact that the structure has already been built. This should not be a factor in approving or denying the request. The variance process should not be used to either penalize the applicants, nor to reward them for building without a permit. The Commission should review the request as ifthe structure were not there. If the Planning Commission finds some justification for a variance, it is recommended that the variance be kept to a minimum as provided in the Zoning Code. As such the entry should be limited to four feet by four feet in size, not including the stairs. This will involve removing approximately eight feet of the deck and moving the stairway over to line up with the door. The void should then be filled with some sort of shade tolerant shrub. Staff does not recommend removing the corresponding roof. Although the Zoning Code suggests making up for setback deficiencies on one side ofthe property by increased setbacks on the other side, this is not recommended in this case because the other side is where future expansions and improvements should occur. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Mark and Kathy Simanek -2- I r J .I. .I. .I. .I. .1..1. A .I. .I. .I. .1..1. \ .I. .A e'_ '" '" '" OU~ 7 l.k .1./ T@ p; ~ (~ ~ DJ~ \ --- y /' ~~ ) o / ~ J ~ / ~ 5 ~ ub el~l ~ / / ~ fr .v ~ ~ 0 ~ :::> 0 r--- ~~ N ~ 1-- / w ~- AVE <:; v::::.------- / /, r---, ~r___.~ ~f1Q 7i e----- ~ / i / I - --___ OW~ 'P VV ~ V , ------r------- - ~Fs: vf~w : - ~ i' /~f1rr~OWt0 d WAY V ~~c-~~ ~ ~ 1\JJB^\ ct r-- I ~ <:..-. V;C ~ 8 CI) ~~- v 1 ti; "lJJ ~ <~ '" "'II '" ___ \ 0 VAwI~t '" / - ~ I~ Ld r~ .I.:) W .I. : .I. /' ~ ~ SUNNY\'ALE1 ---- r U U.k~ r v <~ ~~ I I ~ ~b " I I ReSI A "M~N~ ~ - II I ~ 400 0 400 Feet I I N II 6)~ IbRCHA;d \J -\\x - ~ (~ ~ Q oc ~o I Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Simanek setback variance ,.-- ,~ ./_ B/fumil'1u.s S'urr,;;c<r ~ -.' ,", ------' W,LD ,ROSE LANE q1'" "- \l" r ), . .~---' t r ~. I " 1 \,'.' , ' '-!I . /,., ' , ~~' r " , ..".r . 1- Stor)' . H.,"S'e :II- 2)&.45 ......, .... ~\ ~ .,......j C.... ~ ~ \~ i G.30---1' [1 '\. ~\ ,~ \ .... ' ~ :i ' . -- _t1 Q11.11, ---1IO:IJIJ o 11 (~1 = .... l a II ct .. Q .~ .:. .... ..c: N.\c: ~M!,~.6 ~-~ I i <.",. 4 I ~ faf\.t.L 1'01 I ' 0 ~~...t\ . 1 a :!a M "1~O. 35" q1.... r.a. .. ~ N 'l'1&.\ \ t-~~ \.:l /\: . I \ .... .~ ~. \ ' .\ I I \ ..,11"" ~r:J ........-- ,0 SB9"2.7'08.W 82.36 (82.4 pl.d) I..,'~r .' Nouse ~.s-'40 \ ~y ~ . . lJo..fh ~O+ T. ,\1...4- I I I I I I I I I I ~ '" -J) I I I I I I I M3 . 416.3' ,..... ~:!i co a. Nt: ;=~ ~~ N op ~ '1(,.7 M I I I . / .' -"174.+ ..' f--- 1tot~,~ o ( '114.' '0 ~ ( ~, Ul a: .:) w , , \ I ~ ~ ~' 11\ :.I ,~ ~ iii \ \ " "" , ...... 4:~k I '7+-1 I --~ --~ \1\ \i ') ~,,~ , I \ I \ I \ I I I I I '. .. ,', '/ o ' , "',' . ':, f1/.1 ",-- Exhibit B SURVEY/SITE PLAN Simanek variance / ./ / ._ ~'_'__"'_"'._'__"'_'_'" h ,. -f ':f' "_'.'" ._~.~.._.,,_____._____.___.._...j._""_~R.~_'."_'_'.___'--------.-~.,- --~ ----------~=:::=iL-~~=:~~~--- ---------. --- -.--. ----...-1-.---------...--- .---- ~_=:__==_ ---~f=_===--=t-- --.--..--....---.-.-..---..--.- .. ----.------.-.-.- I . _.,..R___~_._~~_.__________ t ----------"\ - ~ -~--- .,~ 1- '-~ '\" I ~-====-=~~-~ ~.---.-~-------.-----..-....---- -------1:"-._- I I -..-........-.,..--.--....-.....-..--..-...-............-----.---.........--.---..-..--..-..........---..- "'--'-"'--"-' -'-j-'-'-" -.-.-.-..-...-.--.-..--..;. I I ('.' --~---_..__.._._--_._--_._---_._------ _.......R______._.__".._~_,._..__________.....______..__ -...---:t;?-- .------:--:,- ..'~-' ~._~-,...~-_._._..,.-._.._'-~"'..".....,-'--'--'-_......_----_._-~--_.__. ----~-+- I , A ~-'I;;;;; ~ ..-- --------.--------- ______ ....___R .._~___._.__ -----.:--.---.---.- ._._.__.._..._...__.___n__._...,._._..__...._..._._---,...__.....--..-.-.--,......,-----.- ......-......'- "..--,----.."...~......;."'t__.~..-. d::.: ....: -~--- - .~._..__..~-_:~~~-~~~:- ~=~..~-~~~-~~~~=~--====-~-~.~- ~ - '. I \- I-- I I ~:FJ f'''' ...--...-..-..----...-..:.:-....----.---- - .<:) - .,... .... _. Exhibit C PORCH - FRONT ELEVATION ______--~---.--w--.-...--.-...~ --- .----.---.--. - _.._-~.~_.__.._--_._--_..._...- f ___._._____w_.___.___....._..__....."....~..~_"'_......__..._ __.._____.______...--.......----..........--... '1 --...-" -......... i l --.----.------'......1 .. ------'- ---.----..1 -------------- --..---.-. ....-.-----....-..--.-..--.--'--.--....--..-.. ......................--,-.----....---.. . - .J i I ..__._..J \ ._---"..._.----:-----_.~.." ._-,..__._.._".__.,_.._----~-_..........,...._. ;"..-:;'"' _....._._..__..._..._._,-_.....~.... .-.-----....- -.-.-...--...--....-.. ........._~..-.. "'--.'.1 ____.._... ..._.._.._.....1.--:._. \.. ........... . .-._-_..._.._.....__._-~_....._.. \ I I .;;;;;~_._._............ .....-.,...".......-..-.. ...... l: ~=~~=-~~=-- \ .--..-... - .-.-------~-..- ----1 -=~~==j ""l ...,- ,. , . . J-.--..-- , '" ---.+--. . ('f\ - -_.~: , -.--------..-.. .-. 5--....1 ~:: tt:.. 1 _._._._.______..~...1- "~-- _...L"."-;;';;;;;' \ -'..-.~",,", ~J -.-.---. - ~';:::;J __111."..__--..-- __ ___',Jl____==~=~_-~ ..,_.,..._~.,._<-"..._.-._..."_._.~_._'."_'--'---'-'-'--"-'" ...--_. \ - o r--- t--- - . - ...,". . -...-..- .._-_.-...~..----_.__.".....-..-."._-_.._..... " -------.-..-....--...--...--- Exhibit D PORCH - PLAN VIEW ~. . . Mark and Kathy Simanek 25625 Wild Rose Lane Shorewood,~ 55331 952-470-6089 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, M:N" 55331 Dear City of Shorewood, We are requesting a variance for our residence at 25625 Wild Rose Lane in the city of Shorewood. This letter address's the criteria set forth in the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance Section 1201.05 We are applying for a variance because of the following special conditions and circumstances: 1. House was built to close to the lot line and is non-conforming to current building code. 2. Existing entry to house is nonconforming to current building code therefore cannot be upgraded without a variance. The variance is needed to make reasonable use of the land and building for the following reasons: 1. Existing roof valley emptied onto old porch steps, causing pooling during rainstorms and creating dangerous ice on the steps during the winter. New porch will move the stairs out from under the roof valley run off. 2. During inclement weather, the old porch is to small to accomodate a family of 5 or guests waiting to enter the house. 3. There is no where to set groceries or other items when opening the door. 4. New porch will not extend house any closer to EurekaRd 5. Because of the non-conformity of the existing house, it is not possible to add a garage or other addition to the house rendering the area useless. The new porch is a reasonable use of the land. 6. The new porch will add value and definition to the existing house thereby increasing property value. 7. The new porch will have no adverse effect on adjacent properties or public streets. 8. The neighbors like it! We have received many compliments from neighbors and residents of the area. The new porch will require a minimal variance and we believe it is a necessary addition to our house for the reasons stated above. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, (Y\~~1u4 S~ Mark and Kathy Simanek Exhibit E APPLICANTS' REQUEST CITY OF SHOREWOOD MEMORANDUM 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. Www.CLshorewood.mn.us.cityhal/@cLshorewood.mn.us TO: FROM: . DATE: RE: Radission Road Attachment 1 is a letter from Mr. Dennis Jabs who resides at 20915 Radission Road. Mr. Jabs has requested that this item be placed on the agenda., and that he be given an opportunity. to address the City Council. Attachment 2 is an excerpt from the Shorewood Base map that outlines the subject area. The remainder of the attachments are pictures along various locations of Radission Road. . Of particular concern to Mr. Jabs, is the volume of traffic that utilizes Radission Road as a bypass, during lanec10sures or other disruptions on State Highway 7. While one must agree that this roadway is very narrow, it is difficult to treat this roadway different from any other public roadway that is adjacent an arterial. It is fair to say that any local roadway that is adjacent a highway is subject to use (right wrong or indifferent) when disruptions occur on the main line. Having stated this, this does point to the issue that the roadway is severely .deficient in width, and needs to be improved. ft ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #8k Dennis Jabs 20915 Radisson Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Home phone: (952) 474-0151 Work Phone: (612) 333-2612 May 22, 2001 Brad Nielson City of Shorewood 5755 County Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Radisson Inn Road Dear Brad: As you know I've lived at 20915 Radisson Inn Road since 1985. Over the years we have briefly discussed how poorly Radisson Inn Road functions. However at this time I feel some action by the City of Shorewood is needed due to safety dangers arid property damages caused by this road. Prompting this letter is my observation of mounting danger to us created by increasing traffic volume and the poor construction of the road. In particular over this past vear I've observed the following: . Traffic from Highway 7 has frequently been diverted onto Radisson Inn Road for various reasons such as highway construction projects or accidents on Highway 7. . . There appears to be an increase in the number of teenager drivers racing through the area. . There appears to be an increase in traffic volume from outside the neighborhood. Also over this past vear the following has occurred: . There was a 13-year old dog run over and killed directly in front of my house by a hit-and-run driver. I reported this incident to the police. I'm concerned for the safety of pedestrians in this area. . A truck hit the retaining wall in front of my house. The driver paid for repairs (about $350). Six months after I fixed the wall a bus hit the retaining wall. This happened right in front of a South Shore police vehicle and the bus company has agreed to fix the wall. Numerous times cars have hit the retaining wall and fled. . Twowe~ks ago a semi-truck recently ran over my bushes along Radisson Inn Road and scraped a large()~1<. tree on my property. I happened to be home at the time and asked the driver to stop. l-IoV\l~YEll'the truck driver quickly took off when he heard me. I called South Shore Police and we stc()pp~.4the driver. The driver has agreed to pay damages, which are around $600. . There have been several near accidents while driving or walking onto Radisson Inn Road from my driveWaY and attached garage. . .'" -''':' Right now I'm particularly concerned about the potential for Highway 7 traffic to again be diverted down Radisson Inn Road due to more Highway 7 construction projects in the works. Please contact me to discuss what the City of Shorewood can do. ~'}1 i.~~-{ <;--;:;;~~ 1-D~I~O~_'~3 ~.... ThankS, 2. . ~-~ lV,G~ -:-:-.. "-.- .. .-" . Copy: Mayor Woody Love Attachment 1 .. ~ ':( - lL o o .!~ 5 4 !~ .-. A ~ ~ ~ m f 0: 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 DATE: June 6,2002 TO: . FROM: RE: The Minnesota legislature enacted an amendment to Minn. Stat. ~624.20, subd. 1, removing a category of nOh-aerial, non-explosive fireworks from its definition of prohibited fireworks. This new legislation has made the Shorewood City Code 603.05, subd. 3 obsolete, which reads as follows: . Chapter 603.05, Subd. 3. Fireworks: Every person who shall purchase, manufacture, use, sell or keep for sale within the City, any firecrackers, crackers and other explosive pyrotechnics, expect by special permit, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The City of Bloomington's legal division has thoroughly researched this topic and has developed two ordinances relating to the sale and use of fireworks. The Bloomington ordinances have been endorsed by the League of Minnesota Cities as model ordinances for cities to use in the regulation of fireworks. A copy of the City of Bloomington's memorandum addressing the sale and use of fireworks is attached as background information. City Attorney Tim Keane and Staff have reviewed the City of Bloomington's Ordinances, and have determined them to be a thorough model to incorporate into the Shorewood City Code. The Draft Ordinances are attached. Also attached is a Resolution approving publication of Ordinance No. 386 by Title and Summary. 1f~B o PRINTEO ON RECYCLED PAPER June 6, 2002 Page Two Staff has also reviewed the license fees established by the City of Bloomington and has modified them slightly to more accurately reflect the City's administrative costs for licensing, Fire inspections, and Police compliance checks. The fees have been reduced from $33/hour to $30/hour. The fees include 12 hours for site inspections by the Fire Marshal, one hour for an annual Police compliance check, and 1.5 hours for administrative costs in reviewing and issuing the license, for a total of 14.5 hours. A Resolution establishing appropriate licensing fees is also attached. Council Action 1) Approval of Ordinance No. 386 Amending Chapter 300 of the Shorewood City Code, Establishing Regulations for Fireworks dealer's License Fees and the Sale of Permitted Consumer Fireworks and 2) Approval of an Ordinance No. 387 Amending Chapter 603 of the Shorewood City Code Relating to Offenses Involving Public Health and Safety and 3) Approval of a Resolution Setting License, Permit and Service Charges and Miscellaneous Fees for Fireworks Dealer licenselPermit and 4) Approval of a Resolution Approving Publication of Ordinance No. 386 by Title and Summary . . .11 city of I bloomington, minnesota Memorandum DATE: June 3, 2002 TO: Mayor, and City Councilmembers cc: City Manager, City Attorney FROM: Sandra Johnson - Legal RE: Fireworks - Sale and Use . Baclmround: On April 30, 2002, the Minnesota legislature enacted an amendment to Minn. Stat. ~624.20, subd. 1, removing a category of non-aerial, non-explosive fireworks from its definition of prohibited fireworks. This legislation took many cities by surprise in that it became effective the day following enactment. Bloomington City Code Section 12.03 (6) provides only that fireworks must be used in accordance with state law and the City Code. Hence, as a result of this change in state law, the use and sale of this type of consumer fireworks became permitted without limitation, except that they cannot be sold to minors or used on public property. Issue: The concerns of City staff include: 1.) the increased fire hazard posed by these combustible pyrotechnic devices when they are stored in bulk for sale; 2.) the traffic interference, site security, public safety risk and negative impact on adjoining properties resulting from temporary sales structures; 3.) the safety and security risk posed to private property and the persons thereon resulting from unrestricted use of these fireworks, particularly where the property is used as a public accommodation. . Analvsis: The City is without legal authority to prohibit the items now permitted by state law. Unless the statute expressly gives local government that power, as in the case of drug paraphernalia, cities cannot prohibit what the state law allows. Altenbergv. Board of Supervisors of Pleasant Mound Township, 615 N.W.2d 874 (Minn.App. 2000), citing Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 143 N.W.2d 813,816-17 (Minn. 1966). However, local government has authority to impose time, place and manner restrictions on the sale, storage, use and location of these items. 1 By requiring a license to sell permitted consumer fireworks, the City can make certain that these combustible materials are stored, displayed and kept in a manner that protects the public safety. Cities may also impose certain area restrictions 1 Minn. Dept. of Public Safety, State Fire Marshal Division, Fireworks Fact Sheet, April 30, 2002, indicates that while the state has no permitting or licensing process by which to regulate these items, local government is allowed to regulate them through business licensing or zoning restrictions. on use that compliment the state statute. Finally, the Fire Marshal has authority to impose use, quantity and storage restrictions.2 The City Fire Marshal has indicated that: . These unregulated consumer fireworks pose a fire safety hazard that is compounded when accumulations of them are stored or displayed for sale. The State Fire Marshal agrees with this assessment in FAQfor Enforcers, supra, stating that the introduction of these unregulated hazards into retail setting is indeed a cause for concern. 41 Fire Prevention must monitor the manner in which these combustible, pyrotechnic chemical compounds are stored and displayed to minimize the fire safety hazard they present. . Sampling and testing of the merchandise offered for sale is. essential. to monitor these businesses for compliance with state law. Nationally, it is common for the retailer to offer for sale items exceeding legal limitations because it is difficult for the retailer to ascertain the chemical content of the merchandise. . It is also important for the City to have current, accurate information on the location of these accumulations of fireworks to be able to respond to fire emergencies in or around that location. . It is necessary for police to monitor these establishments for compliance with the age restriction on sales. . The Planning Division, Licensing Division and Police Department have indicated that sales from temporary roadside stands or from transient merchants pose the following problems: . Traffic flow is impeded by such non-permanent places of business. . Without adequate parking facilities, illegal parking on adjoining properties is likely to occur. . Temporary places of business lack the security features of permanent structures and are more susceptible to theft. These combustible materials taken in quantity can facilitate vandalism. . Temporary stands ofthis sort have inherent nuisance characteristics negatively impacting the quiet enjoYment of neighboring properties. . It is difficult to conduct compliance checks where the licensee has a mobile place of business. . At the close of the peak sales season, when temporary fireworks merchants pull up stakes, it is common for them to abandon their unsold or damaged merchandise at the site creating an environmental hazard. . The amendments proposed to Chapter 14, Business Licenses and Regulations are tailored to address the safety hazard posed by the sale of fireworks. The amendments to Chapter 12, Public Nuisances, address the safety hazard posed by improper use of these items. 2 The State Fire Marshal's FAQfor Enforcers, April 30, 2002, anticipates that cities will regulate use and possession, sales locations, quantities for sale, and impose their own fire safety measures for retail sales outlets. The Minnesota Uniform Fire Code does not currently address the hazard posed by these items. The State Fire Marshal states that local officials have authority to impose other standards to mitigate the hazard, including, but not limited to the NFPA 1124, the supplement to the UFC, & APA Standard 87-1. ,., . . Chapter 14 Amendments - Licensine: & Inspections A. License Requirements: The proposed amendments to Chapter 14 will require anyone keeping for sale, selling or otherwise furnishing as part of a commercial transaction any of these now permitted fireworks to obtain a City issued license. This will include established retailers where fireworks sales constitute but a small portion of their business.3 A separate license will be required for each separate, non-contiguous licensed premises, even where the same licensee operates several outlets. The information provided on the license application allows the City to enforce its regulations by both license sanctions and criminal prosecutions where appropriate. It also allows the City to develop appropriate emergency response protocols to these 10cations..The issuance of. the license would be administrative, requiring the approval of the Licensing Division and City Fire Prevention Division, but not City Council approval. In addition, the licensing process will: 1. Require the written approval of the City's Fire Prevention Division on the site plan for the proposed sales display and storage areas and any alterations thereto. 2. Require proof of liability insurance in the amount of $200,000 per claim and $500,000 per incident, as is required of other licensed activities posing a clear public safety risk. 4 3. Prohibit sales from a non-permanent place of business and transient merchant sales. 4. Prohibit transfer of the license to another person or location. 5. Require that where the applicant does not own the real property on which the business premises is located that there is a written lease of at least 6 months duration, as well as the written authorization of the property owner allowing use of the property for the sale of permitted consumer fireworks. B. Inspections: The ordinance provides for compliance checks relating to the following: 1. The prohibition on sales to minors, obviously drunk or chemically impaired persons. 2. The proper maintenance of the licensed premises in compliance with the approved manner of storage and display areas. 3. The limitations set out in state law as to the chemical content of the inventory. The ordinance allows Fire Prevention to obtain samples for testing where there is uncertainty. 4. The proper disposal of any unsold or unfit product at the cost of the licensee. 5. The prior licensee's duty to obtain the written approval of Fire Prevention for any deviation or alteration of the sales, display or storage areas during the term of the license. C. License Fee: The license fee is based upon a conservative estimate of the City's anticipated costs of administering this license. Because of the need to inspect and approve the initial site plan for the storage, display and sale of these highly combustible items and the need to inspect the sites on a 3 Currently the City requires a product specific license to sell for: tobacco products (14.438), lawn herbicides (14.252), precious metals (14.537), and 3.2 malt beverages (13.02). 4 Currently the City requires insurance or a bond for the following activities with identifiable safety risks: Heating contractors (14.202); Installers of gas (14.216); Installers of Petroleum Tanks (14.231); Temporary Massage Therapists (14.273); Tattoo establishments (14.388). " regular basis for compliance with the approved plan, as well as the limitations imposed by state law on permitted consumer fIreworks, staff estimated that the Fire Marshal would be required to invest approximately 12 hours per year monitoring the licensed establishment. In addition, the police department will have to conduct compliance checks to verify that the age restrictions on the sales of these items imposed by state law are being complied with. City staff estimated that 1 hour of police time would be invested in each licensee. Finally, the Licensing Division anticipates investing 1 % hours per licensee. This breaks down, as follows: Fire Marshall: Initial review, approval, sampling and testing 10 site inspections $396 Police: Compliance check $ 33 . Licensing: License staff: process, issue License Examiner: review submission $ 16 $ 33 Total: $478. City staff will continue to monitor its costs of administering this license. Should those costs prove to be less than what is currently estimated, staff will recommend amendment of the ordinance next year to appropriately reduce the fee. Chapter 12 - Use Restrictions State law only prohibits use on "public property". The state law does not defme what constitutes . 'public property'. These amendments fIll in the gaps left by the new state law, as follows: 1. Public property is defIned to include, without limitation, government owned recreational areas, roadways, streets, highways, bicycle lanes, pedestrian paths, sidewalks, rights of way, lakes, rivers, waterways and the area on, below, above, within or in close proximity thereto. 2. Use is restricted on private property posted to prohibit fIreworks discharge. Without this provision, the property owner could only trespass the fIreworks user. This change allows police to issue citations for fIreworks discharge in violation of the posted prohibition. 3. Use is prohibited within 300 feet of any consumer fIreworks retail sales or storage facility that is posted to prohibit fIreworks discharge. This is a particularly dangerous activity and licensees will be encouraged to post their property as part of their approved site plan. 4. Any other use in an area that because of its setting or physical condition presents an obvious fIre hazard or personal safety hazard is prohibited. 5. All other use must be conducted so as to minimize the risk of fIre or injury. A Potential Future Re2Ulations City staff will be studying the need to limit the areas where the sale of fireworks will be permitted. Currently any retail location can be licensed for this activity. Review will be of the compatibility of this use with other permitted adjacent uses, such as daycare centers and office buildings. . . &: CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. 386 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 300 OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE, ESTABLISmNG REGULATIONS FOR FIREWORKS DEALER'S LICENSE FEES AND THE SALE OF PERMITTED CONSUMER FIREWORKS Section 1. Title 300 of the Shorewood City Code is hereby amended to include: CHAPTER 311 FIREWORKS DEALER'S LICENSE REQillREMENTS AND THE SALE OF PERMITTED CONSUMER FIREWORKS 311.01 PURPOSE AND FINDINGS: The purpose of this Chapter is to regulate the sale . of permitted consumer fireworks in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the general public. The City Council makes the following findings regarding the need to license and regulate the sale, distribution, storage, and display of fireworks permitted under State law: (a) consumer fireworks contain pyrotechnic chemical compositions that are combustible; accordingly, the unregulated accumulation, storage, display and sale of these items present a fire safety hazard. (b) the improper disposal of consumer fireworks presents environmental hazards. (c) regular inspection, sampling and testing of the consumer fireworks being offered for sale is necessary to assure compliance with the limitations set forth in Minnesota Statutes ~624.20, subd. 1 (c), as to chemical content. (d) regular police inspections are necessary to prevent the sale of these materials to minors. (e) regular inspections by the Fire Marshal are necessary to prevent improper display, storage and disposal of consumer fireworks. . (f) accurate information concerning the addresses and locations of persons dealing in permitted consumer fireworks in the City is necessary to facilitate the inspection of the premises for compliance with necessary safety regulations and performance standards and to assist the City in responding to any emergency situation arising out of or adjacent to this business. 311.02 DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, when used in this Chapter, shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: Adult - a person 18 years of age or older. Business - refers to the business of selling, storing or displaying any form of permitted consumer fireworks. Issuing Authority - the City of Shorewood License Section. Licensed premises - the premises described in the approved license application and approved site plan for the sale, display and storage of permitted consumer fireworks. Licensee - the person to whom a license is issued under this Chapter, including any agents or employees of the person. . . Movable place of business - a business whose physical location is not permanent or is capable of readily being moved or changed, including without limitation commercial transactions conducted in whole or in part from motorized vehicles, non-permanent stands, mobile sales kiosks, trailers, tents or carts. Permitted consumer fireworks - those non-explosive, non-aerial pyrotechnic entertainment devices containing only the limited amounts of pyrotechnic chemical compositions permitted by Minnesota Statutes g 624.20, subd. l(c). Person - one (1) or more natural persons; a partnership, including a limited partnership; a corporation, including a foreign, domestic or nonprofit corporation; a trust; a political subdivision of the State; or any other business organization. Transient merchant - any person who engages in or transacts any temporary and transient business in the City, either in one locality or in traveling from place to place in the City selling merchandise and who, for the purpose .ofcarrying on such business, hires, leases, occupies or uses a building, stand, tent, trailer, cart, structure, vacant lot or motor vehicle for the exhibition and sale of such merchandise. 311.03 LICENSE REQUIRED: No person shall keep for retail sale or wholesale distribution, sell at retail or wholesale, or otherwise supply or furnish as part of a commercial transaction any permitted consumer fireworks without first having obtained a current license hereunder, paid the required license fee and conspicuously posted the license on the licensed premises. Issuance of a license under this Chapter shall not relieve the person from obtaining any other licenses required by City Code, state law or federal law to conduct this or other businesses at the same or any other location. 311.04 LICENSE FEE AND TERM OF LICENSE: (a) The annual license fee shall be as set forth in Section 1301.02 of this Code. The license fee shall cover the administrative and enforcement costs, including the conduct of unannounced compliance checks, inspections by the Fire Marshal, inspections by the Police Department, as well as sampling and testing of the merchandise to ascertain chemical content. Full payment of the required license fee shall accompany the application. (b) When the license is for premises not ready for occupancy, the time fixed for computation of the license fee for the initial license period shall be ninety (90) days after approval of the license or upon the date the building is ready for occupancy, whichever is sooner. (c) When a new license application is submitted as a result of incorporation by an existing licensee and the ownership, control, and interest in the license are unchanged, no additional fee shall be required. (d) A separate fee and license shall be required for each separate, non-contiguous licensed premises, even if owned and operated by the same licensee. The annual license shall be effective for one (1) year from the date of approval. An application for the renewal of an existing license shall be made prior to the expiration date of the license and shall be made in such form as the Issuing Authority requires. 311.05 MOBILE SALES OR SALES BY TRANSIENT MERCHANTS: No license shall be issued for the sale of permitted consumer fireworks at a movable place of business, including without limitation, mobile sales made from motorized vehicles, mobile sales kiosks, non-permanent stands or trailers. No license shall be issued hereunder to transient merchants or as a seasonal or temporary sale's license. 311.06 LICENSE APPLICATION:An application for a license under this Chapter shall be made on a form supplied by the Issuing Authority and shall contain the following information: (1) Whether the applicant is a natural person, corporation, partnership or any other business association or organization. (2) The applicant's full legal name, mailing address and telephone number. (3) The street address or legal description of the premises to be licensed. (4) Whether all real estate and personal property taxes that are due and payable for the premises to be licensed have been paid, and if not paid, the years and amounts that are unpaid. (5) Whenever the application is for premises either planned or under construction or undergoing substantial alteration, the application shall be accompanied by a set of preliminary plans showing the design of the proposed premises to be licensed. If the plans or design are on . file with the City of Shorewood Building and Inspection Department, no plans need be submitted with the Issuing Authority. (6) If the applicant does not own the business premises, a true and correct copy of the current, executed lease, as well as, the written authorization of the property owner for the applicant's use of the property for the sale of permitted consumer fireworks. (7) The applicant's hours of operation, on-site management and parking facilities. (8) A detailed site plan illustrating and describing the proposed sales and storage areas covered by the license. (9) The full name, mailing address, and telephone number of the person in charge of the licensed premises. (10) Such other information as the City Council or Issuing Authority may require. 311.07 INSURANCE REQUIRED: All licensees must have at all times a valid certificate of insurance issued by an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota evidencing that the applicant's use of the property is currently covered by a liability . insurance policy. The minimum limits of coverage for such insurance shall be: (a) each claim, at least $200,000; (b) each incident, at least $500,000. Such insurance shall be kept in force during the term of the license and the licensee must provide for prior notification to the City of Shorewood should the policy be terminated or canceled. A certificate of insurance must accompany all initial and renewal license applications. 311.08 LICENSE APPLICATION VERIFICATION AND CONSIDERATION (a) Verification. Applications for a license under this Chapter shall be submitted to the Issuing Authority who shall verify the information on the application form. The Issuing Authority is empowered to conduct any and all investigations to verify the information on the application, including ordering a computerized criminal history inquiry and/or a driver's license history inquiry on the applicant. (b) Consideration. After verifying the information contained on the license application, the Issuing Authority shall then route the application to the Fire Marshal who shall review the site plan and determine if the manner of storage, display or sales area of the licensed premises constitutes a fire or safety hazard. In assessing the potential hazard, reference shall be made to all applicable state and federal laws, rules and regulations, as well as the administrative standards for the storage, display and sales of permitted consumer fireworks established by the Fire Marshal. If the Fire Marshal finds no such hazard with the proposed site plan, the Issuing Authority shall grant the license in accordance with this Chapter. If an application is granted for a location where a building is under construction or not ready for occupancy, the license shall not be delivered to the licensee until a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the licensed premises. . (c) Denial of Application. If the application is denied, the Issuing Authority shall notify the applicant of that determination in writing. The notice shall be mailed by certified and regular mail to the applicant at the address provided in the application and it shall inform the applicant of the applicant's right, within twenty (20) days after the date of the notice to request an appeal of the denial to the City Council. If an appeal to the City Council is timely received by the Issuing Authority, the hearing before the City Council shall take place within a reasonable period thereafter. 311.09 PERSONS AND LOCATIONS INELIGIBLE FOR A LICENSE. . (a) Persons Ineligible. No original or renewal license under this Chapter shall be issued to an applicant who if such applicant or any manager, proprietor, or agent in charge of the business to be licensed: (1) Is not eighteen (18) years of age or older on the date the license application is submitted to the Issuing Authority; (2) Has been convicted of any crime directly related to the occupation licensed as prescribed by Minnesota Statutes ~364.03, subd. 2, and has not shown competent evidence of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of a purveyor of permitted consumer fireworks as prescribed by Minnesota Statutes ~364.03, subd. 3; (3) Is not of good moral character or repute; (4) Has knowingly falsified or misrepresented information on the license application; (5) Is not the real party in interest in the business being licensed; or (6) Owes taxes or assessments to the State, County, School District, or City that are due and delinquent. (d) Locations Ineligible. The following locations shall be ineligible for a license under this Chapter: (1) Claims Due. No license shall be granted or renewed for operation on any property on which taxes, assessments, or other financial claims of the State, County, School District, or City are due, delinquent, or unpaid. In the event a suit has been commenced under Minnesota Statutes ~~278.01-278.13, questioning the amount or validity of taxes, the City Council may on application waive strict compliance with this provision; no waiver may be granted, however, for taxes or any portion thereof which remain unpaid for a period exceeding one (1) year after becoming due. (2) Improper Zoning. No license shall be granted if the property is not properly zoned for the activity being licensed under Chapter 19 of this Code, unless the business is a legal, nonconforming use. 311.10 LICENSE RESTRICTIONS. (a) License Display. A license issued under this Chapter must be posted in a conspicuous place in the premises for which it is used. The license issued is only effective for the compact and contiguous space specified in the approved license application. (b) Licensed Premises. A separate license is required for each place of business. (c) Change in Ownership. Any change, directly orbeneficiaUy, in the ownership of the licensed business shall require the application for a new license and the new owner must satisfy all current eligibility requirements. (d) Non-transferable.Each license under this Chapter shall be issued to the applicant only . and shall not be transferable to any other person. No licensee shall loan, sell, give or assign a license to another person. (e) Location restrictions. A license under this Chapter authorizes the licensee to carryon its business only at the permanent place of business designated on the license. However, upon written request, the City may approve an off-site locked and secured storage facility. Such a site must meet all City zoning requirements and must have the written approval of the Fire Marshal. The licensee shall permit inspection of the facility in accordance with this Chapter. Property shall be stored in compliance with all provisions of the City Code and in compliance with the standards established by the Fire Marshal. The licensee must either own the building in which the business is conducted, and any approved off-site storage facility, or have a lease on the business premises which extends for more than six (6) months. No retail business transactions shall be conducted at this off-site storage site. 311.11 RESTRICTIONS REGARDING OPERATION. . (a) Prohibited Transactions. No licensee, clerk, agent or employee thereof shall sell, distribute or furnish any permitted consumer fireworks to a person under the age of eighteen (18) years, any person who is obviously intoxicated, chemically impaired or incompetent, or any person who fails to present competent age identification in the form of a current, valid Minnesota driver's license, current, valid Minnesota identification card, or current, valid photo driver's license or photo identification issued by another state or a province of Canada. (b) Inspection of Items. The licensee must, at all times during the term of the license, allow the authorized agents of the City Police Department, the Fire Marshal or Issuing Authority to enter the premises where the licensed business is located, including all display areas, storage areas and all approved off-site storage facilities, during normal business hours, or beyond normal business hours where the inspector determines an emergency situation exists, for the purpose of inspecting such premises and inspecting the items, ware, and merchandise therein for the purpose of verifying compliance with the requirements of this Chapter, and any other applicable state and federal regulations. Upon request, the licensee must provide a test sample to the inspector for the purpose of verifying the chemical content of the merchandise. (c) Maintenance of Order. A licensee under this Chapter shall be responsible for the conduct of the business being operated and shall maintain conditions of order. (d) Smoking Prohibited. A licensee under this Chapter must strictly prohibit any cigarette, cigar, or pipe smoking in or around the licensed premises and conspicuously post and maintain appropriate "NO SMOKING" signage throughout. (e) Proper Disposal of Unsold Permitted Consumer Fireworks. It shall be the responsibility of the licensee to properly dispose of all unsold permitted consumer fireworks. Any consequential cost to the City for disposal of these goods shall be the ultimate responsibility of the licensee. . (f) Maintenance of Sales and Storage Areas. Any significant deviation, enlargement or alteration from the approved site plan for the sales display and storage areas covered by the license must be pre-approved in writing by Fire Marshal. . (g) Confiscation and Destruction of Illegal Fireworks. Any authorized agent of the police department or Fire Department may seize, take, remove or cause to be removed all stocks of fireworks or other combustibles offered or exposed for sale, stored or held in violation of this Chapter or applicable state or federal law. Any consequential cost to the City for disposal of these goods shall be the ultimate responsibility of the licensee. 311.12 SANCTIONS FOR LICENSE VIOLATIONS. (a) Suspension or Revocation. The City Council may suspend or revoke a license issued pursuant to this Chapter for a violation of: (1) Fraud, misrepresentation, or false statement contained in a license application or a renewal application. (2) Fraud, misrepresentation, or false statement made in the course of carrying on the licensed occupation or business. (3) Any violation of this Chapter or state law. (4) A licensee's criminal conviction that is directly related to the occupation or business licensed as defined by Minnesota Statutes ~364.03, subd. 2, provided that the licensee cannot show competent evidence of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of the licensed occupation or business as defined by Minnesota Statutes ~364.03, subd. 3. (5) Conducting the licensed business or occupation in an unlawful manner or in such a manner as to constitute a breach of the peace or to constitute a menace to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. (6) Any significant unauthorized deviation, enlargement or alteration of the approved site plan for the storage and sales display areas of the licensed premises shall, in and of itself, constitute a basis for license revocation. (b) Notice of Hearing. A revocation or suspension by the City Council shall be preceded by written notice to the licensee and a hearing. The notice shall give at least eight (8) days' notice of the time and place of the hearing and shall state the nature of the charges against the licensee. The notice shall be mailed by regular and certified mail to the licensee at the most recent address listed on the license application. 311.13 PENALTY: Minnesota law. A violation of this Chapter shall be a misdemeanor under 311.14 SEVERABILITY: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Chapter is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Chapter. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Chapter and each section, subsection, sentences, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid. Section 2. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the Official . Newspaper of the City of Shorewood. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 10th day of June 2002. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. 387 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 603 OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE RELATING TO OFFENSES INVOLVING PUBLIC HEALTH AN SAFETY Section 1. Section 603.05, Subd. 3 of the Shorewood City Code is hereby deleted and replaced with the following: 603.05: Offenses Involving Public Health and Safety Subd. 3: Restrictions on the Discharge of Fireworks: (a) The use, display, possession, discharge or sale of any fIreworks not expressly permitted by Minnesota Statutes ~624.20, subd. l(c) is strictly prohibited. (b) All use, display or discharge of those non-explosive, non-aerial pyrotechnic entertainment devices only containing the limited amounts of pyrotechnic chemical compositions described in and permitted by Minnesota Statutes ~624.20, subd. l(c), hereinafter "permitted consumer fireworks", is strictly prohibited in the area on, below, above or within or in close proximity to: (1) Recreational areas, roadways, streets, highways, bicycle lanes, pedestrian paths, sidewalks, rights of way, lakes, rivers, waterways and all other property owned or leased by the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota or federal government and located in whole or in part within the City limits. (2) Private property within the City limits that has conspicuously posted a written sign or notice that no fireworks discharge is allowed. (3) Within three hundred (300) feet of any consumer fireworks retail sales facility or storage area that has properly posted a written sign or notice that no fireworks discharge is allowed. (4) Any property, area, structure or material that by its physical condition or the physical conditions in which it is set would constitute a fIre or personal safety hazard. (b) All other use, display or discharge of permitted consumer fireworks must be conducted in a manner that minimizes the risk of fIre or injury to other persons or property. Section 2. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the OffIcial Newspaper of the City of Shorewood. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 10th day of June 2002. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK - - CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION SETTING LICENSE, PERMIT, SERVICE CHARGES AND MISCELLANEOUS FEES WHEREAS, the fees that residents shall pay to the city for the licenses, permits, services charges and miscellaneous fees shall be determined from time to time by the Shorewood City Council; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City. Council of the City of Shorewood that certain fees are set as follows: Description . New Fee Fireworks Dealer License/Permit (annually, per site) $435 ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 10th day of June 2002. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR . ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 02-_ A RESOLUTION APPROVING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 386 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, on 10 June 2002, the City Council of the City of Shorewood adopted Ordinance No. 386, entitled "An Ordinance Amending Title 300 of the Shorewood City Code, Establishing Regulations for Fireworks Dealer's License Fees and the Sale of Permitted Consumer Fireworks"; and WHEREAS, the City staff has prepared a summary of Ordinance No. 386 as follows: This Ordinance establishes certain rules and standards for the sale of permitted consumer fireworks in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the general public. Significant features of the Ordinance include: 1) License fee and term of license 2) License application 3) Persons and locations ineligible for a license 4) License restrictions 5) Restrictions regarding operation 6) Sanctions for license violations A COpy OF THE ENTIRE TEXT OF THE ORDINANCE IS AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD: 1. The City Council finds that the above title and summary of Ordinance No. 386 clearly informs the public of intent and effect of the ordinance. 2. The City Clerk is directed to publish this resolution, in lieu of publication of the entire text of Ordinance No. 386 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.191, subdivision 4. ADOPTED by the Shorewood City Council on this 10th day of June, 2002. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK .. Brad Nielsen From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Nancie Clegg [nancie.clegg@wcom.com] Monday, June 03, 2002 4:08 PM nancie.clegg@wcom.com; bnielsen@ci.shorewood.mn.us 'nc' RE: Gideon Wood Follow Up Hello Brad, Are we on the schedule for June 10th? Let me know so I can let the folks in the association know to attend the meeting please. Nancie 952-474.,.0059 -----Original Message----- From: Nancie Clegg [mailto:nancie.clegg@wcom.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 9:37 PM To: 'bnielsen@ci.shorewood.mn.us' .c: 'nc' ubject: Gideon Wood Follow Up Hello Brad, Thank you for meeting with me today. I realize that I had not scheduled an appointment with you today but you took the time to me with me regardless! I wanted to follow up on a couple of items we had addressed previously in fact I had sent a letter to the City which I have attached for your reference dated September 27, 2001. Beyond that I want to follow up on our discussions today involving the pond located at the corner of County Road 19 and Glen Road. I fully realize that the Gideon Town Home Association is responsible for the pond and I have been working to obtain some landscaping ideas for that corner. In speaking with you today we discussed that possibly we could incorporate the corner of Glen Road and County Road 19 into your landscaping plans for County Road 19 renovation. I believe you were going to contact the landscaping architect to discuss this option. ~The Gideon Woods Association would be more than willing to discuss and ~pprove such efforts by the City. I understand that you will be working in front of Xcel Energy to incorporate landscaping in that area and we sincerely would like to pursue the corner of Glen Road and County Road 19 with you. What a great starting point for the construction to begin and we would be pleased to cooperate with you. I am anxious to discuss with you how we might work together on this project! I have a couple of items regarding the letter I had sent on September 27, 2001. I understand that counsel had discussed the No Parking Signs to be located on Glen Road and in fact one of the counsel members acknowledged that indeed utility trucks were there on a regular basis. As noted in the notes from the Counsel Meeting dated November 26th a turn lane was a possible suggestion? I would like to request that we address this issue once again at the June 10th City Counsel Meeting. Can you put this on the agenda for me? I will plan on attending the meeting as well as the support of the Association. An additional item in my letter dated September 27th was a street light to be installed at the corner of Glen Road. The counsel had agreed that lighting would be done however no decisions had been made as to what lighting would be used for the renovation of County Road 19. Once that decision was made the same lighting would be used for the Glen Road corner. Wow what a pleasant surprise today to see how well the renovation project is going and indeed the plans set to improve the area. I am very impressed 1 :II Be. ~ with the landscaping and lighting that will be used for this project! While reviewing the plans for County Road 19 I had the opportunity to view one of the lighting options pictured on the plans. My vote goes for that particular light pictured on the plans!! Here I was expecting the standard street lighting and was pleasantly surprised and impressed with the lighting pictured on the plans! Thank you for effort to improve this community Thank you again Brad all of your help and I look forward to the June lOth meeting! Nancie Clegg 5525 Gideon Lane Shorewood, MN 952-474-0059 . . 2 (O en 01(;) Z en 01 ::r 01 -. m :i" ~o ~g-:::J 0 J:. @ 010 Q. CD ......:EG):::JCD @ ~Oc.: (') - g 8.~ ~ ,~. ':< 01~ :::J 0.... (0 s::: 0.. CO Z{;-I O1:::JO O1CD:E W :::J W ::r ~ 0 3 CD )> C/) C/) o o 05' _ Cr :::J @OJom:E~ "0 CD =I:: "0 0 CD iif'C5 :",-"Q * 3 @ :::J :::J g :5' w o..o..moco" _ 0.. ::r "0 -I 2" 0.. CD ""0 ::r .... -. 0.. CD ~g::r~ ~ CD~ ~-<@ =mCD. CD co::<_- ;r::rCD.....= ~ _..., .... co :5' C/) ;::;: CD ::r r-+- -- r+ _ -' <:. CD a3(3<a :::JCD..,CD- __7'_::r o ::T C/) ::r CD _ CD -. CD 0 01=:::J=0 O1CO =rco 3 OO~CD ~CD .... 0 _..., _.oJ C/) 0 C/) CD "0 m _ mCD"O -C/) 0.. 0 C/) G) O C/) C/) CD CD- -'0 O"OCDs:::::J s:: 0"' :::!.::o 3 CD =t;-< g ~ @ 'C5 cO' 0.. O"'9.S::::Tm m _ ::J s:: 0 m -. 0.. _ "O::J m ~ "0 _ G) ::J a::T -. o..mmmo.. ::JC/)O:::CD CD ;::;:::r-g CD _._.C/) o..C/)-::Tr C/)O"=rgm S"~CDc:~ 0" ~ cO' co (ii' CDo..~O::J oC/)oo s:: ::r::J _ r+S:::E -::T C/)CD ::J . O'O::J~~ .., :E 0 (0 CD C/)::J5:m3 o::r ::J ~ ::r 0 C/) 0.... o -. Q.~g-G)~ O"C/)O~CD s:: ~ _ oJ C/)-,...-n::r CD 0 \,11;\1 m C/)3CDoo.. . -.::J ~ 0.. 2, ::0' (ii' 30-0 N' m :E ~ CD 0.. 0 C/) _O"s::CD ::rCD-o.. ~~~=r OCD7'CD ;::;: CD CD -. CD ::J _ C/) :::!. 0-. ::J:::I: C/) co -. "0 C/) coas:: m ::T "0 CD ::J:Eoo 0..0lC/)_ CD'<CDO ::J ~ "0 ;::;: ::r(OOCD ~ Ol ~:::!. o ::J -.::J CD 0..::J co _co __ _m ::T oJ -- CDCDZ- C/)CDO~ Ol ::J "'U 0 <D'S-mo .....WoI-'.-, '< ::J ;:S:::J a@cS~ o _ = 0 ::T 0 ~.- = G)CO () 0.. -.::J 0 @ 0.. C/) s:: ::J~oa :E::J::J,< ~ ~ =r 0::0 -'0 CD ::J 0 Ol co 0.. 0.. C/) =o::r~ 7'-OlCD CD G)::J 3 _ -co o CD -. ~ .., ::J ::J .. CD co .c ::0 0.. ~ s:: 0 CD -. CDOlOlC/) C/) 0.. 0.. 0 _ s:: _O"~.., ::rCDCDs:: a~CD::J :E CD =0.. CDCD3CD ::J 0" @ 3-C/)- o ::T_0l <CD...,::J CD -. 0 0.. a 3 :5' 0' CD _ co ::::l@::r_ <:CDCD::T mo_Ol ..,-..,- 0.. -. CD _ <:.OCD::T c:::; ::J C/) CD ;::;:000 ::T _.... _' _ oJ .5t' ::TG)--'" -' - ::r :E C/) CD CD _. 0"::J0= CD ::0 -. .., 0'0-< CD .., Ol .., 3 CD 0.. cO' 0 :E m ::r < -'::J _ CD ::Jo..O- _ _::T CD:::I: CD :"" _.:E 0.. COOlCD ::r '< Ol :Eoo.. 0l::J_ '< _ .., ~::TCD (0 CD CD . ::J C/) -om <:. ;:+ ::J (3::r0.. s:: C/) c:c.: CD . ~S::"'U o::JS:: oo..@ o..~s:: C/) ~ m -m::J O::J- ~9:S" ::r::Jo o co s:: 30'" CD 0 3 C/)::JCD . 0 CD CD!:!; 3 ::J :5' co coo _::J ::Ten CD CD g-g. ,<CD C/)- 3 aO" _CD CD'" _.~ ::JO "0 - aOl "03 ~:E '< :::!. _ 3' :5' "0 co .., _ 00 < CD 0' ~3 ::J0l _ = a~ G)O _'s:: 0...., CD o ::J o CD Ol .., s::: :"" Z ~. C/) CD ::J enOl (')"'U s::: . ::r...... -' - .., O 01-< m . . ,... ::J .., ..,. 0 ::J OJ ~ (') - :5' Q1 o 0 enco 0.. 0550Z .?- _ .., -. CD -<CD@= ~(')o~ ~~ s:: .., 010"0.. 01:;:0 ~o.. ~_. .. en CD "0 _ CD 3 0" CD .., ~ ...... ~ o o ~ iff" 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: City Council Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator ~ June 6, 2002 TO: FROM: . SUBJECT: Resolution Supporting Construction of Public Safety Facilities On May 22, 2002, the Boards of the Excelsior Fire District and South Lake Minnetonka Police Department considered comments from the discussions of their city councils regarding new public safety facilities. They noted several suggestions had been made to identify potential cost reductions. Overall, the majority on each of the city councils concurred with the recommendation of the Boards: that the proposed facilities were acceptable as the maximum to be planned, and that all reasonable efforts be pursued to reduce their anticipated cost. . The city councils are now in the process of formally stating their commitment to the project. A standard resolution has been prepared for the city councils' consideration. The proposed resolution states that $5,245,000 is to be thenot-to-exceed cost for the SLMPD, and $7,120,000 is to be the not- to-exceed cost for the EFD stations (for a combined budget of $12,365,000). The proposed resolution also notes that, at least for SLMPD facilities, final approval by the city councils will still be necessary. . On June 3, 2002, the Deephaven City Council adopted a Resolution supporting the EFD facilities. It placed a condition on the EFD West station that the cost not exceed $4,825,000, with an additional $250,000 contingency which could be used with the express approval of the Deephaven City Council. The $5,075,000 total amount for the EFD West station is what has been recommended by the EFD Board. (On June 3, Deephaven also identified land it controls as the site it will offer as the EFD East station; the EFD Board will need to approve the site and work to secure the property.) Excelsior and Shorewood are scheduled to consider resolutions of support on JtlIle 10; T onka Bay, on June 11; and Greenwood on June 12. The EFD and SLMPD Boards have asked for action by June 14 in order that groundbreaking may occur this year. (A timeline of action dates requested by Council is attached.) Progress on this project has been going at a very deliberate pace due to the number of governmental bodies involved and, in fact, is more than three months behind the original schedule. Consultants' work and development of information has been held up throughout the process pending needed step-by-step approvals by the plentitude of governing boards. ft ~t1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER =#~D . . Resolution of Support for Public Safety Facilities June 10, 2002, City Council Meeting Page Two Under the lease-revenue financing planned for these facilities, the City's obligations would not be subject to State operating levy limit laws. They are considered to be payments toward an obligation of another unit of government (Le., the Shorewood EDA), and thus are exempt. The first phase of financing is anticipated to occur in late August, as available cash will be exhausted. Final fmancing would ocCur in 2003. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: A Resolution supporting the construction of facilities for the Excelsior Fire District and for the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department has been prepared. While Deephaven has added to the standardized resolution, the city manager/administrators of the other four cities, as well as the fire and police chiefs, recommend that the city councils of these four cities act on the standard resolution. Other conditions or concerns that the councils may have should be directed to their representatives on the fire and police boards. The boards may then discuss and take appropriate action. CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 02-_ A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES FOR THE EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT AND FOR THE SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood is a member city of both the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) and South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD); and WHEREAS, the EFD and the SLMPD member cities have taken actions to make possible the planning of two fire stations for the EFD and a new police station, integrated with the fire station at 24140 Smithtown Road, for the SLMPD; and . WHEREAS, the EFD and the SLMPD, as well as the Shorewood Economic Development Authority, have engaged the services of competent professionals to plan these facilities; and WHEREAS, the Board of the Excelsior Fire District and the Coordinating Committee of the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department considered a proposal for the facilities presented to them at a joint meeting on April 27, 2002; and WHEREAS, on April 27, 2002, these governing boards endorsed the proposal, with the proviso that planning continue with all efforts made to reduce the estimated project cost of $12,365,()()(), arid directed that the proposal be forwardedto the councils oithei! member cities for feedback and direction; and . WHEREAS, the councils of the member cities met jointly on May 1, 2002, to become more fully informed about the project; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Shorewood has since been briefed by appropriate staff regarding the planning and financing for the facilities, and has had further discussion about the need for the facilities and any concerns with the project; and WHEREAS, the joint powers agreement for the SLMPD, as amended in February 2002, requires that each member City Council". .. must approve the terms of the leasing arrangements and the construction contract having been fully advised of the financing and underlying costs of the project prior to the [Coordinating] Committee making any binding commitments related to financing or construction of the facility."; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that responsible and appropriate deliberations have been conducted regarding the project, and that it is in the interest of the South Lake Minnetonka community as well as the City of Shorewood that necessary action be taken to begin construction of the public safety facilities as soon as possible; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Shorewood, that: 1) We endorse the facilities as proposed for the Excelsior Fire District on April 27, 2002. 2) We expect that the cost of the facilities as proposed not exceed $7,120,000, and that costs in excess of this amount will require express approval of this Council. 3) We endorse the facilities as proposed for the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department on April 27, 2002. 4) We expect that the cost of the facilities as proposed not exceed $5,245,000, and that costs in excess of this amount will require express approval of this Council. Additionally, we reaffirm our understanding regarding this Council's rights under the SLMPD joint powers agreement as amended in February 2002. 5) We expect that, in any event, the combined cost of the facilities will not exceed $12,365,000, and that costs in excess of this amount will require express approval of this Council. . 6) We wholeheartedly agree with the direction by the Board of the Excelsior Fire District and the Coordinating Committee of the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department that all reasonable efforts be made to reduce the anticipated cost of the project during the continued development of plans. 7) We recognize the need for the member cities of the SLMPD to give their approval to proceed with the design and calling for bids to construct a police station based on information that is not available at the present time. At the present time, however, a firm commitment is needed from each of the member cities about the likelihood of their approval. The Council of the City of Shorewood hereby states that it is likely to approve the police facility based on the conditions endorsed above. 8) We underscore the need to serve the residents, businesses, and visitors of the South Lake Minnetonka Community and the City of Shorewood with high quality public safety services and facilities, and the importance of providing new facilities for our public safety organizations as promptly as possible. . ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY SHOREWOOD this 10th day of June 2002. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR Shorewood EDA Timeline for EFD and SLMPD Facilities June 3, 2000 May 22 June 3-12 June 3 EFD and SLMPD Boards affIrm scope of project City councils approve resolutions authorizing project to move forward and setting budget limit for it Deephaven City Council approves ordinance amending zoning regulations to permit public safety facilities Deephaven City Council makes fmal decision on site for EFD East station June 10 or 24 Shorewood EDA accepts recommendation and selects fIrm to provide construction servIces June 10 or 24 Shorewood EDA approves architectural services agreement . June 14 Architect fInishes schematic design for EFD West/SLMPD station June 18 Deephaven Planning & Zoning Committee reviews Development District Plan for (or in July) EFD East station, forwards comments to City Council July 3 CUP application made to Shorewood for EFD West/SLMPD station July 15 Deephaven City Council holds public hearing on Development District Plan for EFD (or in Aug.) East station; Council approves plan July 16 Deephaven Planning & Zoning Committee considers Special Permit (akin to CUP) for (or in Aug.) EFD East station, forwards fIndings and recommendation to City Council . July 22 Shorewood EDA adopts Resolution calling for bond sale July 23 or 30 EFD and SLMPD Boards review/recommend approval of all leases EFD and SLMPD Boards review/recommend terms or construction contract EFD and SLMPD Boards review/recommend fmancing and underlying costs August 5-13 City Councils approve leases, terms of construction contract, and fInancing August 5 or 19 Deephaven City Council approves Special Permit for EFD East station August 19 ( or sooner) August 6 Deephaven approves cooperative agreement with Shorewood EDA Shorewood Planning Commission holds public hearing for CUP for EFD West/ SLMPD station; forwards recommendation and findings to City Council August 26 Shorewood City Council approves CUP for EFD West/SLMPD station Shorewood EDA approves leases (or sooner) Shorewood EDA approves cooperative agreement with Deephaven . . Timeline for Actions on Public Safety Facilities June 3, 2002 Page 2 August 28 First Bond sale August 29 (?) Shorewood EDA awards fmancing October 11 Advertise for bids for Phase 1 (grading, excavation, foundation) October 31 Open bids for Phase 1 November 7 EFD andSLMPD Boards recommend award ofbid(s) November 12 EDA awards bides) for Phase 1 November 15 Building Permit applications November 22 Advertise for bids for Phase 2 (all other work) November 25 GROUNDBREAKING December 12 Open bids for Phase 2 December 19 EDA and SLMPD Boards recommend award ofbid(s) December 23 EDA awards bides) for Phase 2 2003 Second Bond sale Leases and Agreements Leases 1) EDA - City of Shorewood Lease for EFD West/SLMPD Station 2) City of Shorewood - EFD Sublease 3) City of Shore wood - SLMPD Sublease 4) EDA - City of Deephaven Lease for EFD East station 5) City of Deephaven - EFD Sublease Agreements 1) EDA - City of Deephaven Cooperative Agreement (Shorewood EDA to perform as Deephaven's EDA) 2) EFD - SLMPD "Condominium" Agreement Timeline for Actions on Public Safety Facilities June 3, 2002 Page 3 Re: SLMPD Station: Each city council "must approve the terms of the leasing arrangements and the construction contract having been fully advised of the financing and underlying costs of the project prior to the [Coordinating] Committee making any binding commitments related to financing or construction of the facility." Components: . Terms ofleases - need to have Leases 1-5 and Agreement 2 approved prior to bond sale . Terms of construction contract - need to provide outline of major terms/considerations that will be included in construction contracts . Financing and underlying costs - need to provide description of fmancing, and estimates as . firm as possible on total project costs . SHOREWOOD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331-8926 952.474.3236 FAX: 952.474.0128 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Bryan Litsey, Chief, SLMPD Craig W. Dawson, Executive Director June 3, 2002 Public Safety Facilities - Financing Obligations You spoke with me earlier today regarding information requested by the City of Excelsior on financing new facilities for the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department and the Excelsior Fire District. I hope that the following explanation briefly and sufficiently responds to your request. . Financing Terms: The likeliest scenario involves financing over a 20-year period. We have had discussions on a staff level of an interest-only payment in 2003, so that all of the cities could transition into the full obligation in their budgets over two years. It has also become apparent that two bond issues - one in 2002, the other in 2003 -- will be necessary. The annual obligations would be equal over the term of the financing, similar to a fixed-rate mortgage. The EDA's financial advisor has not prepared a run with a first-year interest-only payment; the latest run assumed a 20-year schedule with equal principal-and-interest payments annually. The numbers provided have been in summary form, and built on certain assumptions: . . The EFD costs would transition from the current, equally-weighted five-factor formula to a 100% ad valorem (aka net tax capacity) basis in 2010. Projections assume that each city's proportion of each of the factors would remain the same throughout the period. . The SLMPD costs are shown based on each city's proportion of the combined ad valorem tax base in effect for pay2002. Projections assume that each city's proportion of the total tax capacity of the four cities would remain unchanged into the future. It is not possible to estimate how (and when) one city's share of the total tax capacity would change. Accordingly, the following annual and total principal-and-interest costs (rounded) have been projected for each city and each JPO: EFD SLMPD 2003 2010 Total 2003 Total Deephaven $146,000 (25%) $169,000 (29%) $ 3,200,000 Excelsior $ 88,000 (15%) $ 59,000 (10%) $ 1,400,000 $ 61,000 (14%) $1,223,000 Greenwood $ 29,000 ( 5%) $ 38,000 (6.5%) $ 675,000 $ 40,000 ( 9%) $ 795,000 Shorewood $252,000 (43%) $245,000 (42%) $ 5,000,000 $254,000 (59%) $5,088,000 Tonka Bay $ 70.000 (12%) $ 74.000 (13%) $ 1.425.000 $ 77.000 (18%) $1.536.000 $585,000 $585,000 $11,700,000 $432,000 $8,642,000 Shorewood Economic Development Authority Public Safety Facilities - Cost Projections June 3, 2002 Page Two Under the interest-payment-only scenario for 2003, the following cost obligations would result (again, using the 2002 formula for EFD, and the 2002 proportions for ad valorem/net tax capacity would remain the same): EFD SLMPD $349,000 $258,000 Total 2003 Deephaven $ 87,000 $ 87,000 Excelsior $ 52,500 $ 36,250 $ 88,750 Greenwood $ 17,500 $ 23,250 $ 40,750 . Shorewood $150,000 $152,000 $302,000 Tonka Bay $ 42,000 $ 46,500 $ 88,500 The annual principal-and-interest costs for fire and police under 100% ad valorem, as planned for 2010, would be the following, assuming that the proportions of net tax capacity then would be the same as they are today: EFD SLMPD 2010 2003/10 Total Deephaven $169,000 (29%) $ 169,000 Excelsior $ 59,000 (10%) $ 61,000 (14%) $ 120,000 Greenwood $ 38,000 (6.5%) $ 40,000 ( 9%) $ 78,000 . Shorewood $245,000 (42%) $254,000 (59%) $ 499,000 Tonka Bay $ 74.000 (13%) $ 77.000 (18%) $ 151.000 $585,000 $432,000 $1,017,000 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 ^ ~ Craig W ~ Dawson, City Administrator (y May 7, 2002 ,. Discussion re: Public Safety Facilities . On April 27, 2002, the governing boards of the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) and South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) endorsed the proposed fire and police facilities, with the proviso that efforts continue to reduce the anticipated cost of the plans to be included in bidding documents. OnMay 1,2002, the EFD and SLMPD convened a joint work session of the councils of " their member cities in order to present the proposal recommended by the governing boards. The joint work session was designed to familiarize the councils with the proposal, see if any consensus was forming, and to give information that they could use in their discussions as individual city councils. Through May 14, the individual city councils are discussing the proposed project. The councils should give ditection to their representatives on the governing boards about any changes, parameters, or conditions they believe appropriate regarding the project. . The governing boards will meet and direct what revisions, if any, need to be made. The revisions, be they physical or budgetary or both, will be retuined to the city councils for fmal go-ahead approvals. . Please refer to the memorandum (attached) from Fire Chief Mark DuCharme. He notes that in order for construction to begin by November 1,2002, the cities must approve the building budget by June 14, 2002. The Project: Construction Cost Other Costs Project Cost (20-yr. financing) EFD West Station (6-bay) $3,952,000 SLMPD Station $4.063.000 Total, 24140 Smithtown Rd. $8,015,000 $1,108,000 $1.182.000 $2,290,000 $ 5,060,000 $ 5.245.000 $10,305,000 $ 2.000.000 EFD East Station (2-bay) Total, Public Safety $12,305,000 Total, EFD Total, SLMPD $ 7,060,000 $ 5,245,000 :ttgG n ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER . . Public Safety Facilities May 13,2002, City Council Meeting Page 2 Planning for the facilities has been based on identifying needs, rather than initially setting a budget and working within it. The governing boards believe that there has been sound rationale and sound processes in planning and testing the needs for all spaces in the buildings, based on a time horizon of several decades. They believe there are long-term savings, and thus better value from the beginning, to build out the facilities rather than to plan for future building additions. Financial Discussion: Financing for the project has been planned to be accomplished through the Shorewood Economic Development Authority (EDA), with the use oflease-revenue financing. This type of financing does not require a referendum. Payments by member cities on the annual appropriation leases are exempt from the State's local levy limit laws. The EDA's financial advisor has prepared preliminary cost allocation and tax impact tables for the facilities at the costs proposed. The project costs for fire facilities is based upon the current formula (2003) and upon 100% ad valorem in 2010, as called for in the joint powers agreement. The ad valorem data assume that each city's proportion of the total tax base would be the same in pay2010 as it is in pay2003. The project costs for police facilities are shown on an ad valorem basis beginning in 2003 per the recent amendment to the joint powers agreement. The summary page showing costs for each city for tire and police buildings with 20-year financing is attached. Procedural Matters: EFD: Approval for the fire facilities occurs and is binding when two-thirds of the EFD member cities have approved the Capital Improvement Budget/Finance Plan of the EFD. At this point, the member cities have approved the capital equipment portion of the plan; they have 110t addressed the facilities component. Absent action on the CIP /FP, a resolution of commitment from each of the city councils would effect approval of the facilities project. SLMPD: According to the amendment to the JP A earlier this year, "Each party's Council must approve the terms of the leasing arrangements and the construction contract having been fully advised of the financing and underlying costs of the project prior to the [Coordinating] Committee making any binding commitments related to financing or construction of the facility." General and key terms to be included in lease arrangements have been discussed. The specific construction contract will not be ready by June 14. With the establishment of a project financing limit, the four city councils can be "fully advised" of anticipated costs. Public Safety Facilities May 13,2002, City Council Meeting Page 3 City of Sborewood: The EFD/SLMPD will need to make application for a Conditional Use Permit for the site at 24140 Smithtown Road. The EFD/SLMPD will not direct preparation of detail documents needed for bidding until the CUP is approved. City of Deephaven: The EFD will need to make applications for any necessary land use approvals. The EFD will not direct preparation of detail documents needed for bidding until such approvals are made. The City of Deephaven and Shorewood EDA will need to develop a cooperative agreement so . that the EDA can actoD. Deephaven's behalf; this agreement needsto be signed prior to closing on financing. . Shorewood Economic Development Authority: The EDA will be the bidding entity and owner of the facilities. The role of the EDA is to finance and construct the facilities approved by the EFD and SLMPD; it is planned that ownership of the facilities will be transferred to the EFD and SLMPD upon retirement of financing. Staff is completing negotiations on the architectural services agreement. Staff has placed a request for proposals (RFP) for services related to construction on behalf of the owner; we expect to have a recommendation for the BDA at its meeting on May 28. Staff will also prepare the necessary leases. (The staff team includes general counsel, bond counsel, and public financial advisor.) CITY COUNCIL ACTION: . The Council should indicate the extent of its support for the fire as well as the police facilities. As mentioned at the beginning of this memorandum, the Council should give direction to its representative on the governing boards of EFD and SLMPD about any changes, parameters, or conditions they believe appropriate regarding the project. The Council may wish to consider whether the current proposal should be upper limit for size and cost of the project. The fire and police chiefs will be present for the Council's discussion. EXCELSIDR FIRE DISTRICT 339 3RC STREET EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 CHIEF MARK OUCHARME OFFICE 952.40 1.eeD 1 FAX 952.474.3144 Date: May 6, 2002 . RE: Excelsior Fire District Operating Committee: Deephaven City Administrator, Dana Young Excelsior City Manager, Myles Mc Grath . Greenwood City Clerk, Nancy Helm Shorewood City Administrator, Craig Dawson , Tonka Bay City Administrator, Rob Rys __ Fire Chief Mark DuCharme ~V~ ,/'....;::' ~/ Need to Decide /" To: From: Operating Committee Members, This past week I have studied the time line of construction of the West and East Fire Stations with Nick Ruel ofTSP One, Inc. Both Nick and myself have looked at estimating the amount time that will be needed for the future steps in complete approval of these projects. We have worked backwards from the last possible time to moving dirt and digging foundations to when the member Cities MUST approve the building budget. We have concluded that the latest date for construction to begin this year is November 1, 2002. . This means that ALL CITIES MUST APPROVE THE BUILDING BUDGET NO LATER THAN JUNE 14.2002. Any approval after this date will most likely mean the start of construction in the spring of2003 or the additional costs of winter conditions. Until full approval is given no other progress can be made on design, local approvals or preparations. Please past this information on to your Council. Page 1 . . . ' Project Costs for Combined EFD West Side StationlSLMPD Station 20 Year Bond Issue Less~ Construction ArcblEnv}& Contingency Bond Issuance · Const. Fund EDA F rnishings & Cost & Reimb. 4% of $8.8M Land Financing & Legal Earnirigs Costs ul ment Total Cost West Side Fire Statioll 47.8% of Square Footage 49.3% of Construction Cost $ 3,952.000 $ 385,000 $ 157,000 $ 290,000 $ 155,000 $ (41,000) $ 37,000 $ 125,000 $ 5,060,000 Police Station 52.2% of Square Foolilge 50.7% of Construction Cost $ 4,063,000 $ 401,000 $ 163,000 $ 290,000 $ 158,000 $ (43,000) $ 38,000 $ 175,000 $ 5,245,000 Sub Total $ 8,015,000 $ 786,000 $ 320,000 $ 580,000 $ 313.000 $ (84,000) $ 75,000 $ 300,000 $ 10,305,000 49% Fire 49% Fire 50% Fire 49% Fire 49% Fire 49% Fire 25K Fire 51% Police 51% PoUce 50% Police 51% Police 51% Police 51% Police 1 'SK Police East Side Fire Statioll $ 2,000.000 ine ine ine $ 66,000 $ (6,000) ine iDe $ 2,060,000 Grand Total $ 10,015,000 $ 786,000 $ 320,000 $ 580,000 $ 379.000 $ (90,000) $ 75,000 $ 300,000 $ 12,365,000 South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Facilities projectA Preliminary Project Cost and Debt Service Allocation S.-4Y SUMMARY - 20 Year Debt ".} ~ ::::?J:,;:f.2~~~-~:~:~1~~:;;~;. I City 2 Allocation Format West Fire 2003 2010 .. 3 ,';/tnrewood 4 Project Cost 5 Annual Debt Service 6 Tax Impact: 7 Target Value 8 Median Value ~_.~. C::~1~~;\~~t~~~1~~E~1~~~~ $2,175,800 $179,015 $2,119,155 $174,354 Host Fire 2003 2010 $885,800 $72,955 $862,739 $71,056 . ~~'?~~Q~~~~,i.~~:.:.t.l~);:}~~~#t~~":' Total Fire 2003 2010 $3,061,600 $251,970 $2,981,894 $245.410 Police 2003 2010 $3.087,842 $254.404 $3,087,842 $254.404 .;:itt~~q;t~jt;~~5~~f{~~- ! Grand Total 2003 201 0 $1.786.297 $147,095 $1,810,692 $149,086 $838.570 $69,057 $130 $246 $6,069,735 $499,813 $250,000 $270,000 $53 $57 i $149 $147 ! $160 $158 ! :~~i1(t;t:'~tBli~lH~H~L[i~jE I $1,780,000 $2,054,963 $146,494 $169,123 $1,460,409 $120,156 $639,551 $52,619 $509,702 $41,936 $331,183 $27,248 $39 $74 $51 $97 9 IHep/lallen 10 Project Cost II Annual Debt Service 12 Tax Impact 13 Target Value 14 Median Value :..:.;'~-':..iIR?i~~~~:::~~~~~i~!~~ $1,265,000 $104.078 $515,000 $42,416 $21 $23 $594,554 $48,968 $1,780,000 $146,494 $2,054,963 $169,123 $250,000 $315,000 $72 $91 _ fi~~::.:i~t~~r~~~~tt~~. IS Tonka Bay 16 Project Cost 17 Annual Debt SerVice 18 Tax Impact: $607,200 $49,958 $247,200 $20,360 $260.371 $21,444 $854,400 $70,317 $899.922 $74,064 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ~i~f~fJk~~}El~cf~r~ir~f I $62 $72 . $79 $91 ' $931,897 $76.778 $6,149,442 $506.373 $1,831,819 . $150,841 19 Target Value $250,000 20 Median Value $345,000 ~.:_;~.._~:~~_~~t:~~:~~~~~~:~'G.~~i~B~if $72 $75 $75 $143 $147 i $99 $103 $103 $197 $202 ; :r~5M1:}~~~:'$I'I,f&.M~l~tlf5~lf~t11;~ t1tfJt:-g~1~}~$JfJ~~!2i~gfJig. , 21 8~celsior 22 Project Cost 23 Annual Debt Service 24 Tax Impact: $759,000 $62.447 $309,000 $25.449 $207,507 $17,090 $1,068,000 $87,896 $717,209 $59,026 $742.692 $61,189 $931.897 $76.778 $742,692 $61,189 $1,459.901 $120.216 25 Target Value 26 Median Value $72 $75 $75 $182 $147 $63 $66 $66 $160 $129 ~~iStI{ff,~i*~~i;~{fJ.~~.~1.f~'ili ~Gt~~}~~!f1}.1~~i:~mi2iiJ" :~~ :.~;.::~~\ij~~~::i~[~~r~B1~(@~~~ 27 Greelllllood 28 Project Cost 29 Annual Debt Service 30 Tax Impact: $253.000 $20,816 31 Target Value 32 Median Value $250.000 1475,000 $103,000 $8.483 $134,829 $11,105 $16 $30 Page 8 $356,000 $29,299 $21 $40 $55 $105 $466,013 $38,353 $72 $137 $482,570 $39,758 $75 $142 $482,570 $39,758 $75 $142 $948,583 ! $78, \11 I $147 $279 Prepared 412V02 By: Juran and Moody . . E::x:.ce1sior Fire Dis-triC"t Opera.-ti.:n.g COTn.Tn.i:t-tee MEMORANDUM TO: Excelsior Fire District Board FROM: Operating Committee DATE: April 22, 2002 SUBJECT: Review of Planning for West Station; Review of Construction. Services The Board requested the Operating Committee to review, critique, and provide comments regarding the proposed west-side fire/police station. The Committee met with the Chiefs of the EFD and . SLMPD and the architect on Wednesday, April 17. The Committee also met on Thursday, April 18, with the chiefs, the chairs of the EFD and SLMPD boards, and the general counsel for the Shorewood EDA, in order to review approaches regarding services for construction of the facilities. West Station: Identification of space needs for a joint frre/p.olice facility was undertaken in late winter/spring 2001, and construction-only costs were extrapolated from the results. The space needs planning was preliminary, in the sense that a site had not been selected and .consequently no sketches of site- specific floor planning could be undertaken. . In September 2001, the EFD purchased the property at 24140 Smithtown Road. Late in 2001, the EFD and SLMPD governing boards formalized their intent to plan for a joint frre/police facility, and the scope of the architect's work then could proceed with certainty. By mid-February 2002, the councils of the member cities of the SLMPD had approved amendments to their joint powers agreement and the SLMPD/City of Excelsior police station lease, thus formalizing their commitment to a new police station. All of these city councils still must authorize construction of the facility, essentially after they have been sufficiently apprised of its cost. Planning Team. Direction: A project planning team was created. It included the public safety chiefs, frre and police staffs, members of the fire and police boards, and the architect's staff. They proceeded on the direction they understood from their governing boards: to develop a building plan with an eye to efficiency and reasonable value from the ground up, rather than to establish a cost limit at the beginning. They noted immediate experience with the SLMPD station, which was planned and built within a specified budget, and resulted in a building that became inadequate within 15 years. The team also understood the preference of governing board members to design a building for the long-term, and with the knowledge that the public cost is minimized when future building phases or additions can be avoided. . . Excelsior Fire District Operating Committee Report April 23, 2002, EFD Board Meeting Page 2 Site Considerations: The site is, relatively speaking, narrow and long. It also has a surprisingly significant change in elevation across it. If the most economical building is a one-story square box, then this economy has been compromised by the need to have long rectangular two-story building for fire and police in order to conform to the site. So there are trade-offs with the site: while the EFD's consultant recommended it as the optimal west-side location for effectiveness of response operations, it may now require additional capital investment. The site is residentially-zoned property, and public buildings are permitted by conditional use in order to relate appropriately to adjacent residential uses. The building has been planned, . appropriately, with pitched roofs in order to fit in with its neighbors. This construction is more expensive than flat roofs used more commonly on commercial or industrial buildings. Similar care will be necessary for the east station when it is designed and its construction is authorized. Comments: After reviewing the process and plans for the building as it is proposed, the Operating Committee ,believes that the process chosen was performed well, and that the efficiency of the floor- and site-planning is satisfactory. Generally, needs for individual spaces and facilities within the building were subject to a high standard of justification. The Operating Committee notes that the approach used to design the project was from the ground up without an explicit budget, rather than from the top down with a maximum budget into which the spaces and facilities must fit. This approach is preferable; however, given the resulting project cost estimate, Operating Committee members believed that their individual city councils would react to the DrOtect as being ~ore costly than their councils could support. . . The Board may wish to direct the staff and architect to develop alternatives based on a maximum budget. The Board would need to identify the level of affordability it wishes to achieve. This course of action would result in additional architectural fees and likely delay the project, and perhaps compromise the possibility to begin construction this year. . The Board may wish to review estimates of the costs to the "typical" homestead in the cities, and assess whether the project as proposed is sufficiently affordable. . . . The Operating Committee notes that timing for project is unusually favorable, given the very . competitive construction market this year and the historically low interest rates for public financing. Delays may increase expenses, and lessen the cost-saving benefits of down-sizing the project. . The Operating Committee also notes that the public discussion about the costs of these facilities has generally focused on the construction costs, rather than the total project costs. The estimate of the construction cost last year, before engaging architectural services, ~as $140 to $150 per square foot. The facility as now proposed falls within that range of construction cost. The "soft" costs of the project ...,land, fees, financing, furnishing, etc.- may not be reduced to the same degree as a building that is smaller than currently proposed. Excelsior Fire District Operating Committee Report April 23, 2002, EFD Board Meeting Page 3 Construction Services: As planned as a redevelopment project under Minnesota law, and thus eligible for lease-revenue fmancing, the public safety facility will be owned by the Shorewood Economic Development Authority (EDA) for the duration of fmancing. Bidding documents and construction contracts will be in the name of the EDA. . The EFD and SLMPD entered into agreement with the Shorewood EDA in which they were delegated authority to do many things, including engagement of a variety of professional services for the project. The EFD and SLMPD selected TSP One, Inc., to provide architectural services, and they will be the parties to the agreement for architectural services. In an "owners meeting", it was decided that the general counsel of the EDA should work with the architect's attorney to develop the agreement. On Friday, April 19, the draft of this agreement was forwarded to the chiefs for distribution to their respective gove~ng boards. Action by the boards is scheduled for April 23, 2002. The agreement with TSP One, Inc., is limited to architectural services. TSP One has proposed "total project management" ("TPM") services as well. Several discussions have taken place among city staffs, chiefs, and counsel about the scope, merits, and fees for this service. As understood by most of us, the TPM package as proposed is not as complete as we believe necessary. Consequently, the Operating Committee believes that the interests of the member cities and the EDA would be better served by either: (1) engaging general contracting professional services for the project, or (2) using a more standard approach of awarding the project to a general contracting firm. . Either of these options is appropriate. Option 1 is more flexible and would allow continuation of the designlbuild concept of sequencing development of the west station site. Staff would develop an RFP or RFQ (Request for Proposals/Qualifications), in which the comprehensive management, supervision, and administration services would be described. (An invitation to respond would be extended to TSP One, Inc.) Option 2 would ensure the traditional separation of roles between architect and general contractor. Additional Information re: Costs for Fire Facilities: A key strategy in the initial budget planning for the Excelsior Fire District was to increase gradually the level of funding by the cities to reflect the capital cost for new flIe facilities. At the time (Fall 2000), it was assumed that there would be one $3 million station, with construction to occur in 2004. Monies would be set aside in a capital facilities fund, with $60,000 in 2001, $100,000 in 2002, etc., until $500,000 would have been accumulated and used to reduce the amount of financing to $2.5 million. The increase in payments from the cities in 2005 and thereafter would need to be only to reflect inflation. . . Excelsior Fire District Operating Committee Report April 23, 2002, EFD Board Meeting Page 4 Obviously, this plan will not be able to happen, since the decision has been made to have a two- station system. At this time, the proposed project is $7 million, rather than the $3 million assumed in the initial budget plans. Two things, however, remain to consider from that initial fmancial plan: 1) The fees placed in the capital facilities fund will be $160,000 at the end of 2002. These funds may be used to reduce the amount needed to finance the project. (Alternatively, the Board may prefer to have this amount remain in the EFD'g undesignated fund balance,. which is relatively slim.) 2) One can look at what is the "effective" additional fmancing needed for the project by reducing the annual obligation by the $100,000 level that is being paid in 2002. Thus, under the various plans, . The IS-year annual obligation is reduced from $687,000 to $587,000, or a 14.6% reduction in the annual impact to the cities and homesteads illustrated in the Juran & Moody tables. . The 20-year annual obligation is reduced from $586,000 to $486,000, or a 17.0% reduction in the annual impacts shown in the Juran & Moody tables. . The 25-year annual obligation is reduced from $538,000 to $438,000, or a 18.6% reduction in the annual impacts shown in the Juran & Moody tables. Staffhas prepared a table showing these "effective" impacts on the median-value homesteads in each city; it is the last page of the attachments. c: SLMPD Coordinating Committee . ' II II II "2 'Z II '2 ~! 9 0 \- II i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 0() 0 ~~ ::t ;3 - ~~ t~ .. 'V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1U $~ ~ < 2: ... .... mm BIll 1111 . . ~ ! ~~ ~ - . . ... \ . _ IV r : 7 . ~~~ ~,V0 V/- % .~ ~~/ ~ II 'I 'J II ~ /: '/il ~ '/~' 11'-/ '1;1t- ~ 'liff I'V~/IJ( flk! . I ( . . ~ '" ~\~ v . i I \~ \ . . ... . c- /U/ \ r"~~ ,-1 ~ ~' ~~ ~~~~~~ '" := =-==-=.sllt; le:.r ~ "- \ ~ ~~Mr~'!~ 1- ~" ~ I ~ lIII ~ - J ... ~~~ 'i If :::. ~ 'II!I/ ~... 1 __ ~~~ "\'" ,-n · ~ . "- r- --" awrJ II I ... ~ r ( ~ ~ rgrl / ~ \ ( . 6 - ::J -::=1 f\ 0 6 - ~~_ ~~I)' \~ t~ )AIA_~ AJ A -t r \" 'P' -1.lle. .. ~, \ \ ~~ 1;d1!l. ... II ,/"'1. I A ~ ~] M ~ ~ c II 1-1 jhmiir ~ 1/ N ~ lillllll ~ - -= _1!l1+16 \ \ I .-- 1/ y ~ I ~~~ ~~'\' \ tl... !JY \ r../ /V' ,// r- /E/~/ ~~ ~J- ~ ~~'a .., V V\ (~ . 1\ \ \\ . . ~ I~ . ----<'" I ~ ~ \ I P1 I.; '--~!I V"- '"\ \ \ v I///~ Ir \\/: - . ,-- ,-- - - " ..... SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY FACILlTES WEST SITE - SECOND LEVEL 3/12/02 @ '. . . -- lIIIIlIIIilI. , I - OJ IIIUIl.l IIIUIU OJ I C1l lIIlUIU I - I -- ! I. i ! ! ~ OJ ~ \ SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY FACILlTES WFRT SITE - FIRST LEVEL 3/12/02 - - .......- - - --- @ '. TSP One, Inc. 21 Water Street Excelsior. MN 55331 June 4, 2002 phone (952) 474-3291 fax (952) 474-3928 www.teamtsp.com Mr. Bryan Litsey, Police Chief South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety 810 Excelsior Boulevard Excelsior, MN 55331 Architecture Engineering Interior Design Mr. Mark DuCharme, Fire Chief Excelsior Fire District 339 Third Street Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Answers to various questions raised regarding the West Facility . Offices in Minneapolis and Rochester, MN Dear Bryan and Mark: Q: How were construction costs determined? How were tlte costs allocated? A: The committee requested early in the project that the cost estimate contain three elements - the costs attributable to the Fire District building area only, the costs attributable to the Police Department building area only, and the costs that would be considered "shared" - building area of the shared spaces (lobby, elevator, stairs, training, EOC, etc.) as well as the common site development costs (grading, fill, site drainage, retaining walls, shared parking area, signage, site lighting, etc.) Costs for specific site parking and circulation areas for the Fire and Police were separated into their respective categories. We developed detailed cost estimates for the site, architectural, structural and finish elements of building, using quantities and unit costs, and used "square foot" costs for the mechanical and electrical portions of the project, as those systems are not yet designed. . 50% of the "shared" costs were then added to the estimated cost of each of the Fire and Police building costs. The committee believes that using this process most accurately reflects the costs associated for both Fire and Police. Q: Wltat are tlte fIXed and variable costs? Minneapolis, MN Rochester, MN Denver, CO Fort Collins, CO Marshalltown.IA Rapid City, SD Sioux Falls, SD Sheridan, WY A: When trying to evaluate "cost savings" it is important to generally understand "fixed vs. variable" costs. . Variable costs are those that can be directly attached to a given cost redu,ction idea. For example, ifsome one wanted to "cut off five feet of the building," one would need to evaluate the specific affected areas. Are doors, hardware, lighting, mechanical zones, lighting, power, finishes eliminated? Is the exterior wall area reduced in any way? Or, does the affected area simply reduce some structure, floor area, and minor fmishes? If it is the former, more money can be saved. If it is the later, less. AFFILIATED OFFICES An Equal Opportunity, Affirmative Action Employer Architecture Engineering Interior Design . Fixed costs are those that will not be impacted, or impacted at a much less rate if a particular cost saving idea is considered. Fixed costs include General Conditions for the project (superintendent, temporary enclosures, temporary heat, field engineering, garbage removal, permits, etc.), Site work (grading, soils, storm drainage, curb/gutter, paving, walks, retaining walls, landscape, etc.), Core Facilities (public circulation, toilets, elevators, stairs, HV AC equipment, electrical service, technology, security system, etc.), and Key Equipment (emergency generator, kitchen equipment, special fire and police plumbing / emergency fixtures / equipment, concentrated filing system, etc.) . Thus, when considering a cost saving idea, the impact of both variable and fixed costs need to be applied. While our construction cost "averages" approximately $148/ SF., one cannot simply apply that cost when considering reducing building square footage. TSP One, Inc. . Q: What were the topographical or architectural considerations that necessitated increases in the space needs and costs? A: The key considerations of our project site relative to a flat, more "squarish" site are: . The sloped site required developing a two-story building. To meet appropriate codes, an elevator, stairs and additional circulation had to be added. . Extensive site work (retaining walls, grading, soils) is needed due to the sloped site. . Configuration of the Police parking garage increased in size, as 10 garage stalls, each with exterior garage door and circulation was not practical or cost- effective. . The site is very narrow and deep, necessitating a more linear building. The amount of perimeter wall is slightly increased over a more "squarish" plan, slightly increasing the cost / SF. . A: The architectural considerations that necessitated increases in the size of the project have being covered in previous "area reconciliation" documents presented by both Fire and Police. In December and January the committee refined the space program as needs were more thoroughly and thoughtfully discussed, and the program could be validated through concept design sketches using the actual site. Appropriate changes to the original area estimates were made. Q: What would the practicality be of using precast for the roof? What would the cost be? - A: As a cost reduction opportunity, the committee studied an option for making the roof flat, using typical steel trusses. By doing this, and also considered using exposed roof- top mechanical equipment, we estimated a savings of approximately $350,000. This option was not ultimately recommended, due to both maintenance/replacement issues of the roof, as well as the expressed aesthetic concerns of Shorewood. TSP One, Inc. Architecture Engineering Interior Design . . During the joint City Council presentation, the issue of roof-survivability in a stonn was raised. Of particular concern was the survivability of the Emergency Operations Center, since the EOC was on the upper level of the facility. The committee had considered the EOC and training facility to be a more public space, and initially desired the EOC to be on the upper level. The EOC was designed to be "encased" in masonry and precast. Subsequently, however, the committee has revised the plan and placed the EOC and training in the lower level, where the EOC has additional protection. A precast roof (including the moment connections) and supporting structure designed to survive a major event would save some cost from the current solution. Since we do not . have time to provide an accurate estimate by the time this memo is prepared, we offer that it may be in the range of$100,000 - $150,000. In both cases where a flat roofis considered, issues of parapets, roof-top mechanical screens, fayade treatment, etc. would affect the costs. We would need to do some additional design work and then prepare more accurate estimates based on an acceptable design. As well, the sloped vs. flat roof aesthetic issue would still remain. The committee believes that moving the EOC to the lower level provides the best balance of cost and security. Q: What does the Firearms Range cost? A: In a 5/17 memo (see attached) to Bryan Litsey, we estimated that the fIrearms range would cost approximately $93,000 to "rough-in," and to fully equip it to make it functional would cost an additional $112,000. The total would be approximately $205,000. Q: What does the Police Parking Garage cost? A: In the attached 5/17 memo, we note that the garage would cost approximately $65 / SF, or $383,000, given the current area of 5900 SF. Please do not hesitate to contact me for additional infonnation as needed. Very truly yours, ~~ J. Nicholas Ruehl, President / CEO Copy: Craig Dawson, EDA Director May 17,2002 CENTRAL FllE "P~'tNO. 0 (7~!t_ ' '.'~-~ptM.~~ TSP One; Inc. 21 Water Street Excelsior, MN 55331 Bryan Litsey, Chief of Police South Lake Minnetonka Police Department 810 Excelsior Boulevard Excelsior, Minnesota 55331-1913 phone (952) 474-3291 fax (952) 474-3928 www-leamtsp.com Re: South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Facilities - West Site TSP Project #01734A Architecture Engineering Interior Design Dear Bryan: . Per your recent request we are submitting the following breakout of the conceptual cost opinion for the referenced project to include in your upcoming newsletter. . otlices in Minneapolis and Rochester, MN 1. Cost of roughing in the firearms range = approximately $93,020 ($53.52/square foot.) 2. Cost of making the firearms range fully functional = $112,000 (approximately $28,000 per lane) 3. Square footage cost for the police garage = approximately $65 As you know, we are at the schematic design stage that is very conceptual in nature. During the design development phase we will fully program the needs of each space and define in detail all ofthe materials, systems and equipment for each space. The cost opinion is currently a mix of square foot costs, detailed line items and contingencies to cover undefined design needs. . The cost of roughing in the firearms range is predicated on the 'following assumptions: 1. The basic shell consists of the following: a. Walls: Cast-in-place concrete walls b. Floor: Cast-in-place concrete slab on grade c. Ceiling: Structural precast concrete slab with 2 inch concrete topping. 2. Portions of the shell are necessary for other building needs and that elimination of the firearms range would not result in a total savings stated in this estimate. Minneapolis. MN Rochester. MN Denver, CO Fort Collins, CO Marshalltown,lA Omaha, NE Rapid City, SO Sioux Falls, SO Sheridan, WY The cost of making the firearms fully functional has been estimated as a middle of the road system with some automation but not fully PC driven. The estimate as stated herein is predicated on four (4) lanes and includes the following components: 1. Bullet Trap 2. Ceiling System 3. Safety Baffles 4. Acoustical 2-inch AAF for baffles and 20-foot of side walls 5. Re-directive cove AFFILIATED OFFICES An Equal Oppor1unity. Affirmative Action Employer ~ Bryan Litsey May 17,2002 Page 2 6. Shooting stalls 7. Target Retrieval System 8. Individual (local) Controls 9. Master Control Console 10. Sight Lines II. Range Communication System 12. Local Talk-back Terminal 13. Firing Line Security System. 14. Clearing Trap 15. Ventilation System . Please note that our current conceptual estimate has included only one (1) lane of firing range equipment and that the remaining three (3) lanes would have to come out ofthe project design and estimating contingency fund. The shell has been designed/estimated for four (4) stalls. ~<Ld Thomas Schuelke, N.C.A.R.B. Architect . .. 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 ~ Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator June 6, 2002 Resolution Committing to Financing for Fire Facilities in Mound . At its May 28, 2002, meeting, the City Council heard a presentation regarding plans for a new fire station in the City of Mound. By contract, the Mound Fire Department provides fire and rescue services for Enchanted, Shady, and Spray Islands in Shorewood. The City of Shore wood has historically paid one to two percent of the Mound Fire Department budget. Lease-revenue financing through the Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority is planned for a new, combined fire and police facility. Costs for the fire and police portions of the facility will be separated. Estimates indicate that approximately 61 percent of the facility cost will be apportioned for Fire, resulting in an allocation of $3,430,000 for Fire. Mound proposes that the six cities served by the Mound Fire Department pay toward the cost of the facility in amounts equivalent to their portion of the Department's operating budget. . Mound plans to issue 20-year.financing by the end of July 2002. It is seeking fmancial commitment for this project by Resolution by each of the city councils by June 11,2002. Shorewood's estimated cost, given its share of the 2002 MFD budget, would be $5,400 annually. Mound has also offered an opportunity for Shorewood to make a single $53,165 pre-payment on the financing. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: A Resolution to commit to financing the Mound Fire Station has been prepared for Council consideration. This resolution is neither a binding commitment nor an extension of the duration of the Agreement. It is intended to clarify the terms under which the facility would be paid into the future. =IF~E n ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ~~~ Mcuuul V~ t/)/Iu!, ~~, 11<<}. 2415 Wilshire Blvd. Mound. Minnesota 55364 ~~~ -< May 23, 2002 Mr. Craig Dawson City Administrator City of Shorewood 5775 Country Club Rd. Excelsior, MN 55331 Dear Mr. Dawson The Mound City Council has authorized preliminary actions to permit the construction of a Public Safety Building. TIus building will include a Fire Station to replace our current building. The purpose of this letter is to revie\v the implications and options of this decision for our member communities. The information contained in this letter has been prepared based on discussions with your community' 5 representative to the Firc Board. Project Cost and Financing . The Mound City Council has established a ma..amum project budget of $5 .85 rillion. This includes the total building and related eosts for the Public Safcty building. In order to finance this project the City will be issuing bonds for the building and financing costs in an estimated amount of $6,855,000. The breakdO\vn of the bond financing is as follows: TABLE 1 Debt service reserve (one year's principal and interest). Interest on reserve will be credited to annual debt service and used to reduce payments. Last year's debt service will be paid by reserve. Rounding Cost $4,950,000 900,000 130,150 . 54,000 225,420 595,200 Item Building costs lndirect costs (soils, engineering, architectural, etc.) Underwriter discount 1.90% (Fee paid to underwriter to sell bonds. This is an estimate; actual cost may be less based on results of competitive bid.) Cost of issuance (legal, finance advisor, rating agency) Capitalized interest (interest accumulated on bonds prior to revenue collection). 230 Total $6,855,000 Attachment G The Mound BRA will be issuing Lease Revenue Bonds. This type offinancing is frequently used for building of this type. The bonds are backed by the revenue stream of the lease, unlike general obligation bonds that are backed by the City tax base. As a result, investors seek the security of a debt service reserve. The impact of this reserve on the debt payments is negligible since the debt will be repaid over a 21 year period and the reserve invested to offset interest expense. The Fire Department portion of the Public Safety Building is 61 %. Mound will pay the debt service cost for the balance of the building in addition to their share of the Fire Department space. In total Mound will pay an estimated 68% of total building costs. . The Mound Fire Department will pay a lease cost to the Mound BRA to cover just the portion. of the debt service attributable to the Fire Department space. The Mound Fire Department will include the lease costin the operating cost for the Department paid by member communities. The actual portion of the lease cost paid by each member city will vary depending on the annual allocation as established within our existing service agreement. An estimate of the annual cost based on 2002 allocations is shown below. Adding or dropping members from the service area will impact these estimated amounts. TABLE 2 City Allocation Amount Minnetonka Beach 6.87% $23,760 Minnetrista 15.89% 54,956 Mound 47.29% 163,553 Orono 20.04% 69,308 . Shorewood 1.55% 5,361 Spring Park 8.36% 28,913 TOTAL 100.00% $345,851.00 Cost Allocation The cost of the Fire Department portion of the building will be allocated on the basis of actual construction cost. That cost will not exceed the established project budget. The allocation will be established by determining the actual construction cost for the Fire Department portions of the building and equally dividing the cost of shared space. An estimate of the cost allocation based on 2002 is shown below. TABLE 3 City Allocation Amount Minnetonka Beach 6.87% $235,641.00 Minnetrista 15.89% 545,027.00 Mound 47.29% 1,622,047.00 Orono 20.04% 687,372.00 Shorewood 1.55% 53,165.00 Spring Park 8.36% 286,748.00 TOTAL 100.00% $3,430,000.00 . Prepay Option At the request of member communities, a prepay option is being offered. This option would permit a one-time payment for the allocated construction costs. Member communities electing to take this option would be exempted from the lease payment portion of operating costs. The . advantage to member communities is that they will not be paying finance related costs. Mound will reduce the size of the bond issue accordingly. In order to take advantage of this option, member cities will need to provide cash or other form of security acceptable by Mound not later than June 11,2002. The amount of the prepay will is shown in Table 2. . Acknowledgement The lease costs (or the prepayment) for the new fire station will add to the expected cost for services to be provided to your community. We want to make certain that you are fully informed of the expected impacts as well as the basis for these changes. The attached resolution has been prepared to document your commitment. The City of Mound and the Mound Fire Depamnent welcomes the opportunity to discuss this matter at your convenience. . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 02-_ RESOLUTION COMMITTING TO FINANCING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY IN MOUND, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has entered into a "Joint Cooperative Agreement and Contract for Fire Services" with the City of Mound, dated January 1, 2001, for the provision of fire protection services; and WHEREAS, Section 103 of the Agreement describes the "City of Mound Fire Budget"; and WHEREAS, the City of Mound, in consultation with communities receiving fire services, has determined there is a need to construct a replacement fire station to better serve the public; and WHEREAS, the City of Mound has agreed to finance the cost of a Public Safety Building to include a Fire Station; and WHEREAS. It is expected that the Fire Department portion of the building will be leased to the Mound Fire Department by the Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA); and WHEREAS, the lease amounts are equivalent to the debt service for the Mound Fire Department portion of the building; and WHEREAS, the City of Mound has provided an estimate of lease cost to cities receiving service by the Mound Fire Department, including an option to pre-pay lease amounts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Shorewood, that: 1. The lease cost for the Mound Fire Department shall be included as part of the "City of Mound Fire Budget" as described within the Joint and Cooperative Agreement and Contract for Fire Services (hereinafter referred to as "Agreement"). 2. The lease costs shall be determined as set forth in Section 7 of said Agreement. The payments shall be due not later than June 1 and January 1 annually, commencing June 1, 2003 and ending January 1,2023. 3. Cities contracting with the City of Mound Fire Department may elect to pre-pay lease amounts. The pre-payments will be used to reduce the amount of funds borrowed for building construction. The amount of pre-payments will be credited against lease cost. Pre-payments shall earn an interest rate equal to the True Interest Cost of bonds sold for the project. Resolution No. 02- Page Two 4. The purpose of this resolution is to clarify financial expectations relating to the Agreement. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 10th day of June 2002. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR '" . . 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: . RE: Freeman Park Access Closure and Parking Lot Improvements - Approve Plans Specifications and Estimate and Authorize Advertisement for Bids Engineering File No 00-04 City Staff has been working with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNIDOT) on a "Cooperative Agreement Project," for the access closure and parking lot improvements for the south end of Freemen Park. Attachment 1 is the location map for the proposed improvements. . Plans have been prepared by WSB and Associates, Inc. and have been submitted to MNlDot and have been approved by MNIDOT for bidding. Attachment 2 a reduced set of plans for the project. On April 29thh, 2002 City Staff conducted a public information meeting for the Freeman Park Access Closure to State Highway 7, in addition to parking lot improvements. Sixteen residents attended the meeting. Several of whom have been closely involved in the project, since inception. Refer to Attachment. 3). The City Council may recall that of particular concern is the issue of Mr. and Mrs. Osha's driveway. This driveway shares the entrance of Freeman Park from State Highway 7. During the information meeting, Mr. and Mrs. Osha were very concerned and upset about the final proposal to relocate their driveway from State Highway 7 to the proposed parking lot. Concerns centered on access for emergency vehicles and issues relating to address numbering. Attachment 4 is a letter, which the Oshas have provided in response to the proposed project. Staff has reviewed Mr. and Mrs. Osha's concerns, and have gone back to MN/DOT with an alternative. The latest proposal is to modify the existing entrance offTH 7 to serve Mr. and Mrs. Osha's property only. MNIDOT reluctantly signed off on the proposal. Certainly MN/DOT and City Staff would prefer if all of the accesses were removed from the Trunk Highway. ft ~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER IPCJA Mayor and City Council Freeman Park Access Closure June 6, 2002 Page 2 of2 Given Mr. and Mrs. Osha's strong dissention for the relocation of the driveway, MN/DOT and Staff are willing to modify the driveway to serve their residence. Since the approvals for this driveway concept have only recently been obtained, Staff has yet to meet with the Osha's to receive approval of leaving the driveway in place. Certainly, the Osha's can consider either of the proposed option for the project. Since timing of the project is critical, WSB and Associates has proposed that the project be let for bids. If the driveway is to be located other than what is in the plans, a change order will be processed to reflect the change. This will permit the project'l'o move forward versus going beyond the sunset date for the project. . It should also be mentioned that there will also several evergreen trees that will be provided between the proposed parking lot and the Osha property for screening. Project Costs Attachment 5 is the project estimate. Construction is estimated at $168,316.50. As discussed previously, MN/DOT has stated that they will compensate the City of Shorewood $50,000 for the access closure. Staff is currently under negotiation with .MN/DOT to increase that amount towards $70,000. The final amount remains to be determined. This amount is somewhat dependent upon the final decision of the Osha's driveway. Staff is proposing that this project be funded from the Local Roadway Fund, with any amounts received from MN/DOT for compensation for the access closure to be returned to the Local Roadway . Fund. It is anticipated that a Cooperative Agreement would appear before the City Council, prior to the bids being awarded. To insure that the project does not meet a sunset date, Staff is recommending that the plans be approved, and shipped out for bids. Recommendation Staff is recommending that the attached resolution that approves the plans specifications and estimate and authorizes advertisement of bids be approved. A resolution is attached for your consideration. . ~8 ;;oz: IlC".n -f'l ~~ r-:! ~ ~ pl c::J :J 5 }\) .gsQ ~ :::::: ~ g. ~ ~ := .... 1?0o" Lr.. !]: o ]3 (11 g o "lJ o z: <::I lit z- ./ . ~ G lJl o PLAN SYMBOLS stAlE LINE eGUNR' LIN( tOllGltIP OR __ LIIC Sl:tTlOlf&.JIC IIUMITP L,NE SlIftEHTH liNE 'UGltT-Gf'-W'Y I.'. SUft lASlICHT . PRtKNT .'GlfT4"-u.y CON11IIIL or ~S LINt flllGflUt'I LlJlU ClltCCPT ..AND L 1I1E1I .ACAKD rUTTED PIIarUTT CORfICllU,Tl GI CITY Llyns Jfh,Ia MleIN"AT CDITEI LINE .".INING _I. .....- RAILRIIAD IIGHT-aF-WAT 1I1.000'CAUl GII'''''' "AI",," OlfeN DRAIN 1IL1 CUL..... OR. nUT GUMlD PH. IAIIIEI WIRE ,(Net WO\'EtllI.M n:1ICt CHAUt I.'. filICE RAIl,.fIQAO $HDIf FEtCE st_"ALL,_ ~o.c:L ..... ItUIJOAD CRD$SINC S'GN hlLWD60 CJmSSING lEU ELECTIIIC' WlJlMINlIi SI" CUHING CArt tlEoUlDEI COlWIU 'PII,ICS ..... =} ....... C'lOt ..SIN rIRE.....INlIoNT CAnl.( CUdI 'IJVIIIlIASS ItI._U .11 IMUPASS .IICHIIAY UNlIDI. oa'DOE ""'811\10 fOlIE STDA" RWltI , - rRAilE C - CDNCAtTt S - STft T - TILE . - tRICE . ST- STUCCO . IROIf ACID GIll ~II'E IIIlNUMDft ISTGIIll. CGNCAEft. III <<TAL' ...... ... , GftAVEL,11 . 5__ PIT __PIT '-- -A.- ~ ~ ....- ~ =====_. o---QQ' -La--!-a-. .....-10.._ - . " II . e.... ..... ..-;-r;-> ~ -ce :"i:-I+- ~ =#= ~ .- . C iSl CIl lIP UTIUTY SYMBOLS ..... POLl LIIE. -+--+- lELIfIHOHE tit ltLEGltN'H PCU: LItE __ "'.M' ItUPHDfC MID PGllER UN POIlU ....E . ClIf tELEPMDIIl PGLU ....... snaUI;IIII' PElI(ST~ CTlt.EPHCM: CABLE lUMlHAU GAS ...IN IlATP *1" Cl:IIJlIlT TnlPtCltC CAILl'. COlrlDUIT ELECT.,C CAkE .11 CGNDUIl TlLEfIHDNt IWGIGLIF: EUClIIlC VNIMILE _IEO llLUNDIlIE CAIl.:l _IEOEL(eMlt CAlLE APtla TE\DtlIlME tAILt sr:wo 1$AHIlMY .. STOllln srllEll ......,.1: -- ---- 1-' o ..... -G- ..-r- --- CD []!] -T....- -.......- _T-M._ - -- SCALES INDEX HAP P1-- . ... PLAN 1"1 0 .. .. PROFILE HORIZ. I'll 0 .. .. YERT. 1'lI-- . . to ~ :::t: ~ f":I ;::r.. : S - ~'\ MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR TIIE CITY OF SHOREWOOD CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR HIGHWAY 7 ACCESS REMOVAL. PARKING LOT. STORM SEWER AND BITUMINOUS TRAIL lOCATED ON FREEMAN PARK (f; CIR. ~8(~ SHORE WOOD "l€1I' 7 ~ EXCAVATION NOTICE SYSTEM [?, PROJECT LOCA.TION CWNTY: HENNEP I N DISTRICT: METRO A CALL TO GOPHER STATE ONE 1&51 J454-oOO2' 15 REQUIRED A ..INI..... IF 48 HOURS PRIOR TO PERFORMING ANY (ItAYAT ION. CITY PROJECT SAP. . . GOVERNING SPECIACAllONS THE 2000 EDITIIII rr THE MIIH:SOTA DEPARTIEHT OF IIWlSP(lITATlON "STAIIIlAllll SPECifiCATIONS fill CONSTRUCTlON.- INDEX ~ DESCRIPTION TITLE SHEET GENERAl. LAYOUT 3 ESTIMATED OUANTITIES 4 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS 5 PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS 6 BITUMINOUS TRAIL TRUNK HIGHWAY NO.7 ACCESS REMOVAL THIS PLAN SET CONTAINS 7 SHEETS AL... AH\.lCAlt.i 'EDERAL. STAlE. AND LOCAL LAWS AND ORDINaNCES WIUBE CCN'LIED wIT" IN THE CONSTflUC110lf Of tHIS PROJEeT~ ..o.n .......Hw-F -"" -....... .... WSB .- .-... ...= I HCRUT IXATlFY -THAl TMIS "UN WAS ....EPARED BY lIE OR UNDtR III' DIRECT SI.I'ERYISIDN AICI THAT I AM A DUI.T IEGlstERED f'ROF'ESSIDtfAl, lNGlIEER UHUtII tHE LAWS f1I JttE STAft OF MINNESOTA. ENGR. OAT[ ..!!!!!!!L DAVID E. IllTlIII. PE REG. ND.~ , SIIIREIOIII em ENGINEER DATE REtlMElIIl(O FlIR _M. 2D....- "TRO DIVISION TAAlARTA111J1 EMi.'1Ei1 AECOIIUOEII fli! _DOM. 20_ ~TRO D'YISION IIATER'M.S ENGINEER _NDfD fOR _OVM. 20_ ~TIlO OIOISIOII .ATER R[SlllJlS[s ENGIHEfR RECOIIIlElIOEO fOR _M. 20_ ~TRD DIY'SION TRAffIC EMlINEER RECOIIIlEJClEO fill APPROVM. 20_ STATE PRE-lETTlNG ENGINEER IFFIC{ IF LAND -..- APPROVAL 20_ DIfl(CTIII. LAND IlAHAGEllENT _OVM. 21'_ STATE DESIGN EMlIIlEER APPROVED a- iElAo. .ssISTANT DIVISION EHGINEER- STATE AID: A!YJEIEO 'OR CC>>PLlAHCE WiTH STATE-AID IlUL.ESIPDLICY AI'f'IUIVEO 211- APPfKWiD FCII STATE AID FUNDING: STATl AID CHGINUR Prepllled for: "~.'.' . " . City of Shorewood S7SS Countty Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 (612) 474-3236 SHEET NO. -1-0F -:L- SHEETS , , I . ! I .........../\ t , (\ ( ~ 1~ . \......."...~i: \ L. l f~' ,.../" l. I 1 ~ ~....oyo..-'-I"I- -. LJ ~ 1. · "'~.~__...c \-.......--1 ,/ -~..,.,..-r.{ :\ ; 'd J"..\ ~{ } --..--J ~J ... ~ :' [ ~ ~ . I .~......_'-................_~. ~..,..,..,J-~._.....:t-~'"-~--"'-- '-.. ______-~--...,....;~.......,J-..~- -'I ... ,"' ......._..,.;-...r- i + 1,L-J '-" " .r .... ... / ....- "'-,.,.,- - 1 i ! + ! "'~\.,o., J r - ...___.~-,JJ"" v-"'"-oJ---~~~ _t-'_o,J.JJ_~--'-~-L.... ;/ (~ - < ~ I I i I I I I + ,I i " / / .-/ ..,.I"Y-.,-..rr-...."v- ~-r" -r.- . ;:::---'-' y' f\ /., ,'\ \ / . \ . \L I ,/ .i - \ ! \ \ i i \ I \ \ i \ \ ! to \ I i ~_/ -= t~ \ \ i , '- , ~ ../ .i" i I i + \ \ ..... (!)f -'---- ) ! L--.- -!- -----...------------- --,--.. \ "". I \'.. ~ .- ..\ ......, -"~"" I ">" ,\".. . '\ -."f!,"7..... ..- ... ~ ...., '. I ~ -.\---00.-- ii, ' " <., '.. 0 t q I.... '~~.. ~} /$ i BITUMINbl~h. r-~,l:;.J;.- ~e~ 10...0-_ i -:-.......,. UYc:MF"lo-onrl Q 0 50 ~.. ....,,"-... \. /.' ~ . + ""I + '. \. . ~> ~ 1 \ \) -. l .\if '. \1 i + 4. PERFDRA FROM CA reH "'COARSE A WRAP WITH CALL TD BE PER LINEAL DRAIN n,E, vc SDR 35 DRAIN TILE 50' Ns WHERE SHOIN ON PLAN. TE U.NooT 3149.2H) IMVDot 3733. TYPE 1. 1N pIllfD:r.}IDPP~gE sg~D35 "'TOI EXISTING 2 "23~O TYPE ~ 1 WEAR COURSE IIIX DESIGNATION ~IWEA50l155 IPG 58-281 2" 23~D TYPE 31 NlINWEAR COURSE MIX DESIGNATION 31BBB50000 IPG 58-281 8" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE IIOO~ CRUSHED 18" SELECT GRAHULAR BORRD" ISPEC.3U9.2821 ClIII'ACTED SUBGRADE "'TCH EXISTING 2"," 23~D TYPE ~I BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE MiX DESIGNATION ~lwEA50055 IPG 58-281 EX ISTlNG CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE SHAPE AND CDIIPACT AS REOUIRED PATHWAY TYPICAL SECTION PARKING LOT lYPlCAL SECTION , !i I " i~ . "'; I i ", . t" 'U fl- hli ~.!I Ijl: i.h ."ir sl.- Ei!! ish i i I :~ . f - i ~ ~I -'\ ~ "'0 ~~I ~ ... l:lllli 51 ~ g~ r::r ~~9 g ...~~.~ ~.O "';:r: CI.I ~ . .00 UI HI ~ai u ~ ~.1 u .), I' I- Ii! ~ w ~~Inl ..'1D7&.410,em'1074.Q... CITY PROJECT NUMBER GENERAL LAYOUT AND DETAILS PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS SHEET 2 OF 7 SHEETS UTlUTlES FOR THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD CiTY of Shorewood 5755 CounTry Club Rood Shorewood. MN 55331-8926 (6121.474-3236 MeTropoliton CouncilEnvironmentol Services Kyle Colvin 230 East 5th STreetSt. Paul. MN 55101 (651 I 602-1151 (651 I 602-1030 (faxl Re"' i ant Energy Rick Pi Ion I Cherie Monson P.O. Box 1165700 West Linden Avenue Minneapolis. MN 55372 (6121 321-5435 (6121 321-5573 (faxl Triax CablevlslOn Steve Haeg 2381 Wi 'shire Boulevord Mound. MN 55364 (6121 472-6416 (612 I 472-7153 (fox I Xce' Energy Cliff STahlke (NSP Designl 5505 County Rood 19 Shorewood. MN 55331 (6121479-3342 (Cliff Stahlkel (6121 470-3327 (Lorry Fortunl (6121 470-3310 (fax OwesT Cormunlcatlons Renee Peter-sen 6244 Cedar Ave. W. Richfield. MN 55423 (6121 861-8776 (6121 861-8173 (faxl nIl'~7.~.80~AO'\1074~..'-4IIO'I. .. r , i i ! 5.,\.,. Iii LINE SPEc. DESCRIPTION; 11111 :~ NO. NO. OTY "II . LlNl SUM '.00 Ilii 2 LIN T 41.00 3 50 TO &00.00 ~. i . I < P LJN FT 6.00. i 5 CUYO ,00.00 !iB~ . ;1 6 CUYO 2.500.00 JIU 1 CUYO 400.00 in: I TON 2,330.00 9 TON 547.00 it!! '0 TON 541.00 llh " GAllON 230.00 '2 F T AGG. l.IN FT 100.00 13 LIN FT 340.00 IS 1< E.... 5.00 15 EACH .00 16 SO F1 410.00 ~~ I 11 50 YO 530.00 11 LIN FT , .273.00 19 UN FT 18.00 20 50 YO 9.00 "~Cl~51 21 EACH '.00 I ~ - 22 EACH 1.00 W3~ 23 EACH <.00 2< LIN FT 2.710.00 !I~ 25 I ACRE 0.16 26 TON 1.52 ...0 !Xl fI.l Iii !U J i ~. ~ ~JJ .! . 1- I Il~ Ii . i. <411 CIlY PROJECT NUMBER ES11MATED QUANTITIES PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS _ 3 OF 1 SHEETS . . 1fI -I ):> -I rn :t: - Cl :t: =e: ):> -< Z o I :J. -I o o : ,/ { (\ I t ': \_\ .: \ :0'1 i I \ &( ! ~ &;\ : :' r: l-t I : ~i : STi I : I i ,!,,(,,~ l /J.::.a..~_ ...~ i -"j ',\ "- 1 ! i 'i,' '.10"\TREE : ! :1 or \~rRE~ 1 . I I , ~ 1 :. : '.. .. \ ! \ f i\ ....... "{ CONNECT TO EXISTING lit \ i i i ., !.. \\ \' i \... I . . .....---- . "-;i---- .. _....~ .. ~ ~-m~ "" \" \ -----------'"' ".i ' BENCH MARK ELEV 982.77 CP .3-500' NORTH a:' AEUTUIAN LN .. 13' NCRTNEST OF ELEC.BOX BENCH MARK ELEV 982.<10 CP \000-535'I[ST OF CL EuREKA RO a. 25' HlltTH. OF REUTIMAN LANE 890 885 880 870 8B5 860 .. .i-..... o"j. ...... "I..... -;". !..... '( . .:..... .,. 0-+00 1+00 2+00 ]+00 ....'1074-.8D\CID\1D74'..go2n... CllY PROJECT NUMBER STORM SEWER PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS SHEET . OF .. i . ': . i -Ii J in. :, lit!i . I ~'J ; Iii: I il;; ~ i. 1m jU! '.' rIb 890 Ii ~!~ i i~s g ~!~ ~ ~~ ...0 ~ 8B5 BBO 5 870 ~JI n I SJi e! ~ B65 I-I I ~i ~ 880 ~~~i I SHEElS . . !l.L!aHS. L ,IQ , .I.Blll I SJ.N3W3AOl:ldWI.LOl ElNDIl:lVd . l:l38WnN .1:larOl:ld A.l.I:> --Ulj~."LOl\Olt3'OIt-tLQl'$1 ~. \i \ il\ \~ i -1' i . \, \ \ I I \ \ i -_~~.. iiiiif{\ ny-" \ \ ! \ , \ \ ~ \ "/':'1\1\\ ' , 1 I '\ 1 \ ~ -\ . ,---, '. 6-:::-\'---i-~--~--- -". \ ---":j' .I i if ii ; I i 'II \ i -: \ \ j' -'_ "--:sr"\~-'-_.l--.L-..:-= "'k. T.... .. i i i i I : \ i II ; ~ : ' :G'~8C; 1!) ~.,,\ ~\lr. -..-\. ~.-.---. ..~.- ('""]--t-'-I-.-'""t-', .-.t.... n' ;";AI,;'..l "'". / i ill I \ i I; \ \ i! \ i 111\ ~-.v. \ \.. ---- -..._1 l ----.t --t.. ':."r~ 6 '-.".1 '.. ...... ' ':, I ~ I I ': \ Y]l1oo 0IfV 8Yf13 I: inl\ '::'J:t:: 1 ...r~.." SSe 1)-.:0- ""-_.. ....... I................ U .:ti <<;J \ ).... ......,I i:: \ 1 \ \ '\ ~ 1: \ '- 3.lmlmM'aIL~3mt: i qu I ~t tll\~.. \..... -'"1-.-- :- .........~ .....:;~'~ ....... "'\ if I i I \ i \\', \ i . ,/ /-- ..- . : : i :~' z % Ii... \ '\ - ~. =-~J- "\ \ , ...... : !: I ~ 1 \ ,\ \ ,: . t.i.:J1H3,..i I /,/ r-"'-- ---- .. ~p.oae. ./"t'l{:. I ! Q' , 0::'" 1. ~ I \.~ _..-----....... ,\ e" "\ "! i i i \ \ \ \ ~ ~ i O~.6Ltl.:~flH ;I//{ > 19'''SGdCl;:li~!\'\~~/rliiJII,/ ~"tJe6'~~ 0 ,...... ..__..........--H=l~ \ \ \. 1: Ii; \\\\ \, ~i \ rn 9J ~~;~~~e~~~ '\" = :!:. \_ '....--....._.._____:::...........---... g~;J'~,";.! . !'l '~%I Ul\ -tffA" g..!"tJoee. I r .....-..::__;;... ".._ '\ {~t1A~o~: I ! \ \ 'i.....~! \ ~ .... ! i \ \':'-'-:::-'::::'-:-~-66 -------.-.j I'i... : a~~ mn"""'rv { ;tJ'~3 \ \ .;'"'))~ -...._.._.::. ~~lJ!:..'.>'!!l,'fJ Tt~! I : I \ \ ~ ....--\ Ii " it' _' ..:::_.. .....-- ........-- ....------ _J: i. I I ~ f'! uu\ .. , " e , & . 5]:J EZ --.: .... i \.' J.....~....-~""Il...,.. \ \ \1 \, l to:J .. -..m:=::;;:"""n: .... ' '-.. -- ..-..-------..- -~ a):ft) ----..---- '!\. . I "fl"1.D j "~. ~ ' .' ~, " I, \ . .. r~...~ oot"! rn ..---- ~ 9L:~S&-"1D -:-----... n\ . .\- "-~~:;t:d9ff::~a:iCt ~w9&!'1~t~-- . ,... '" : . .1-". /~. '11'6~"...\ . \. '\ .....,~......-...I,... -r.~' ~-:!.J.ll : ~ t \ ! \ I:::::.::"" -c:: G:) d I .......... Z [.&-3.1 ~~<~-n:=.I. - ,. lo_ -..1: ...... - -, ~ \ II't"-iliS-' .... '" .._ IDS. -. ..,..., I : :. \ \ Os:: l'! --.....---~=.".__..n"~ "---- ..' ---... L.:::..------ QR<; --- -~:....ii-'-~~ !.!'"-> 0;':: V""" ~ "'.. :-~.~...... ~_, .~ .-y AI' "-l II. I \ \ \ o ~ I: \ _._u . .. -...-. --~.._- .. ..L. -.;;,... I.. ..... ... ":l::)p "'.. ..' -r '.. .}J '1= f ~ : \ \ I '\ ~ ~ ~ .~_.~..,. . t~n=~ t ~..-r '1: b J T ~ I r T flTT1:t -I-t:.:...----..-t- . t" -~~ d"_:-"j- t ~..- .' '~[~~--'~-'.J/fr1.~!>: Ji ~~ ..,)1 d ~. i \ \ \ '\ \ \. ~r::l ~ ~ ~ ~....~...~ \ /..~ I I"'J'~~ I I I I JJ..1-I71;. .' 1/. r7.: 0;: r: .... \ :: ....~~Ic/~- I 1/.1\d'1 ~.~j": ~l.~'i \~""1 i \ \ \ I Ie fil '.Mil ~'-~ ..... ...",. III "" ... ~.. .':~ItJl'......- "I~ ~U:51S-~"o!/.~ "'~~ :;" '._-i.:>3CJ~:li'~: ,t. /,,"6> \ J.....J f''.:,: \ ! Ii i I i ~,\ (i I\l.y. 301. .., ,'-... ...,.....,... ~ -:" .->'" OL '1 . A !I' ZL 51..)! .., .,N'l "f.>.' --.~J '.'- r -_r.,.~. d' \33lj< :m--'. \-\ i .1. . \ I \ I \ '2 ' \ fS 5 Lf1~~1m ~~dJ.a(l"ld~J"'! s~1 I=N.!l.'~f:fIfJ.":::~l s.. - az:~,s-,,~'~~""-:~..~,i ~'~~:ii"1'f---{..:~r: ~ - \~~/"'Z::.~ \ ~..~ <.:' ~ \... ... i \~\ Ullllllll.J ~ \ i \ ~ ICl'I(, '" "- f,.,~OL f1J" " ,5.." L I..! , f' "~. I: ,...... i s .....'l:._<.~~ '::i !<:it' .?l~ . '" ~! . li31)iidS'\ j::: ; 1 ' rc--: "I f~~~:=JII J. ..... ........, f 1 SeG I' ... II- \ ~ ~~.. ...t;: '__ ~ ..., ....I~ ~ .: .....'- ... ~ ........, ~ . "H~)lH ,te\ cD ~ : !'./ /'. ~.~" . ~"l ...;.. 'f..::-I , -1! ~.' ...lif~,~".. . ~:~~........ t, ~./ .~;g.~' ~\( .Q~) ~::;~ n \ \ I . \ ~ \ ! rU'lllljl-l; .riit.. ,~. \". r... . - -'iI... I"i.::.~ "}c .J .,: os- .. ~~.9 "'ii~I'l\:Qrl\ ~T-; : hli., , ,~~ ," ~.. ..~. -",,- ", II' 8 '1!)./' .I--L)llrl" .'.. ,,-.1. / t ~ . \.'., "'1 O-\~i I It" e (,.. :. ,~ ,--SNDIS dY~IONYH \ 81c":=J:~.1.i.! :1l._. ~~ ~L ~... 3H -: . ... , '" <s ... C" :Nr ":l :.I)t'rt ..f ~"lZ 1\! I ! ~ \ ~ ~ i i!..! l 'I' f~"-'r---- ~ ----------.. , .... I I ,S.EZ-U ~ ~..... ~...... "'-. ""'~I _ :-..... .. l ". _ I I~ \; 1 6" '~~ 1'f' ._...L . ":J}.lt..::~,-~.... -- ,--_w_. ~ ' '- ""'-- I'... I~..... ....--- ...... .. li~, _ lit' I. \uJ... E.II ~----_._; .:;; --"., .'. liB .~[.L~~..~.L2IS3:)YdS dY?'IONWH~i"""SIl1d-i&_._..s_~~~ it...... 7 ss- . . [..~tI ~c:&.Z86='D N 'N"" "-<t..':'"' . \ ....:~ ....,.. ~ ...~ .!1 IW:Ji1s. \ ~ b ;Sii .--.-...n.=€l1 /,'. ...! l~ 33H! {.. Z"i, -.:u --'!!lil~.., . -------'-'.. · ~ ~." " '\ "l"lo'us-)! ~ '!' s ~..... ~. I _~ .. .<~::' ~. ~~V \ T i /Z 'Iii' :itH <Jus , \\rlo:i"-r"'';~~c-~''~ (-") ;~~-':"6~:A;-'.U.-L'.- -.\ '-'-- ':'" 8 ~ _J::'~~ '~~"""p;f::~~:.;.~~-, '>~::. . ';t'l\\ \\ \!~ if! .!;f.~:~S--JL'3~~.;_~~"7~:n=~ _' -../1 I ,l\LLr:rI1l1 .'I~N::'~ .~$\ l.~. ~~ M, ill ,--- /. _." "'" ",';; JJ!Jl ...:~ ....- ,'- 0 I ! -LJ 1T r r",I~lst" - r'~ b:l:::.'~ ~~ ':" S\..~.. -...) \,i ( ~ ...... .-1,' "'--; "--~'- "-.;'~ _..... . Ilfo. \:.:; .... rtt..::- "'fi;!':::::':::t:~. \ f I: ...-._...--.... './I,.:-)U3H ?:-::'-:::, --...-_._:~.. y;;:rllfo~.~., ~\""Il"'LlS-'1!I..~ ~()IS l. ~w . " .f ,1I~:E!t:i'~'{~@ (~j~ "'--)1 '13lJf'-.. N'f?-'.{.'-~~:~.!-~-.;..: ",\ \\ \~. ! I ............. ..3lJi 1\''' l (-. ----.... I.... I oVVM3A}1Io Sf'CJN1~18 t ,/,:..,.. I , ':" ", hn \ .... i'd's n ~J.,;; T ~ I N"O~"'!J i ,I"" ~:'" I'. "'l'. B....,.''-. ~'":, -.. .::- ~f;~ j \ \ "\ ~ t \ -if j t: '--J'. L"..J ......, 1 ~\ \\ I 1..~" ~1~n.2 I ti: . . ,........... )....' \ \ I 0 \ . """ 'i--...r' ~ 33~! .z, \. I \. '.J I .... l!':) I . ..., l...~ ..~ I I \ i !i !~ \. 'Ji. ". N _:' ~----; ;-;/ { is:'i: \ I \ i i. , ". ., 14;, " '. '. I "\.::r, l)"l:i~ I 'L \l.ilJHS 339 l:: ~~, r.:. .. . \ . ...... '..' 1'"-"''':,::lI~\ I :1YAClSHSS3:):)Y ", ;;.ni~~\ \ i r1 ~.uI'3 1M .l.I03N11IH3.L3CI I.... "., I I;" .r'~]"'" I :'.J.-~ A.YaHOIH .> :";';'I~ \ \ i ; j ~ o~~ '1; sl~f ~='tlISaA~~d~~ ........: '1. =;;;1:~.. \1 :~-..: ~l\ \ ~J. ~ ~ i ~ ....--;. i\\ \\ , r '..-- ~~~ ~ "- I 'z.,. ~ uq~ I '~i ~ n ~fli hi I f 33~.L BnYG ON" 11"31:1 SNO ll"A313 .LOdS 03S0dOlld NOI.L~31110 1I01~ SNOll"^313 3NI1113Uno ONY BIIIl:I dOl 03S0dOlld SIIIlO.LNO~ 03S0dOlld SlIllOlNOO GNllSIX3 ~ ., 13~:~=t;n1 \ -L66- --~ --.. L 6 6 ---. :ON3G31 I ~ r: i ! 51-, . a i I . .{.-.... B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER PATH ENTRANCE <!i2 OfTlfTl z;5::O r-nn -<r-fTl fTlZ Vln -< B61 2 CONCRETE CURB ANO GUTTER ~'TRANSITION SURMOUNTABLE TYPE S CONRETE CURB AND GUTTER ~. TRANSIT ION . ! OF EACH POST, L______________ __:..~____________.::.~~~_____________~________::::.._, .... .............. ~~~~~~-=~:;;;~~~::::;,~ . -I- . . . . -I- . . . . . ; :j:. . : :!: : :. . . '" ::.:: i : : : : . :1: : : : . :1: : : : : : 1: : . . . - 1 . . . . . -. . . . . .;. . . . . ,1,' " " " " " 'i' " " ,"" .: :,i, ',' :, :, ' " ,',I,' , , ... .j. ....:..... -:-.... .... .,-.... ... ... ..... -... +00 3 t'E:~ '2~b BENCH MARK B.EV ll82AO CP.1000-53S'WEST Of Cl EUREKA RD & 25' NORTH OF REUTIMAN LANE 880 875 810 865 .... i..... 1+00 1ftI\1D74-.eo'C.-o\107...D03n. IRON 9&6 ----0..- ':.w;. 1..-- , o 20 'I' --- "I SAN TOP i t.1H t 983,r& . I - .,... -....... . , . . .r.. BENCHMARKB.EV 982.77 CP 3-500' NORTH OF REutUIAN IN & 13' NQRTHES T OF ElEe. BOX :i:::::: i::::: :::: :!:::::: I::::: ,",..:: :1:::.: :1: - ~~;_.~;~~.~~~t~~._-~-. .. ... , .., 885 -:-:-::t':-:-'::; i: :"::::- ~.~.~...l... ..i..... . .. 'i' - .,..... ....... 0"'" , , ' +00 BITUMINOUS PATH PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT NUMBER SHEET i .. ill , I , II~ i i ". . fli :~ ili i.li ~~ri ' i , !i!; . i"'. ' ~l r= f!' f! _rir 895 , Ig> g , CI.l "'" ~~o~ ~I~~ ig>s~ ~~.:I8 J;::OCl~ , t;; S ..~ 890 880 875 UI HI ~h ~h 810 lit' . -:I m Ii ! 865 ~i OF SHEE1S . . S133IlS L dO L .I33HS Sl.NiIW3IIO~dI'Il ~O' eNDlWd ~8I1InN .L03ro~ ..ur.> lY^OW3H SS300V L'ON AlfMHElIH >lNn& nl~ .. I ftl ~ Jir ~ ~i 1ft Hili fI) ~~ iia;l 01"'1I01:l oSP::l!: t:l2~'i ii~~ ~ illl ~, hi ,-If I!== '.'i ;lli ~ - II'~ I, jl! f: . .; d~ 1.1 I !. = ! . ri , 0 C I I I u_q r'""....- .....-....--- ---...---- .- ---00.. .. ---..---- -------- -----..,.... ~ .~ u__ IV III u", ..... > ..... ,.., ...... /~ ;0 ~m_ c: ..... '. -..----- I~ z ,. --- -------- ----....... sz '" IoYl:lD 3S0dO dJ uo_ V C) '" '" -c ............. z __.L ~-- Q ~ -------- -------- ..... UDO 0 OYl:lD 3S0dO dJ '--'" .-"",,, 1'...... I~ ---"" ...,..- . - -- ....------ 3 Yl:lD 0 SOdOI d.J ~ ..'.,......... ...............-.. ~ .......,....... ... ------ -- .....,... I '-......-/ l ......1.... \.. "j 3~.~.i.\. ". ..6~;;,~".. ,'" .... \..... ..... lIY~ ". ...... S'O'!i6 .... '.,\ '\1":1-.., ...'..... \ 3S~ \ ,~~~.. .. I './///^\\ SNO 11:13S SSOl:l:l NO NMOHS SY H:llIO NI 30Yl:lD 'SS3:1:1V SOONIWOllB DNllSIX3 3AOW3l:l SHKJ~..tOl \OV':I\OII'tr... LQI\lW \ \/).! \ \ ~~\Hld3~ :101U DNIAYd AYMHDIH , \:.:10 3ho3 DNO'Y 10:1 MYS \ \\11,' ilr- \1 ci 1. ::z; " . : t >- : i c::( , i 3= \6 i...... ' \:e , , i uJ i \ '4.: \ ......: \'1 \ ! i : \ : \ : t: U ~ : I' t .~ !I '.---) I '...... Olr 02 0 , -...-, ~~ c1N:J. B ~ o i ~ i,. 0\ I i i i i i " i i i i i i . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD FREEMAN PARK PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS AND ACCESS CLOSURE TO TRUNK HIGHWAY 7 OPEN HOUSE APRIL 29,2002 Si n In Sheet ADDRESS (.; 2 ' ,. 1\ '\. .... Attachment 3 ~ <"= ':_'__"'M~_:::_'::':"-:, rr\\ n '.C:. ::.'. fr........ ", :.: .::.., ;' .:'; ,r-" . p't,~':,:'.:,': ..",7 ',' ,,'," "~--"i~: '~ fU~~ 7 WOZ1il MARGARET J. AND ROBERT C. OSHA 25840 HIGHWAY SEVEN SHOREWOOD, MN 55331 May 2, 2002 City Council Members c/o Larry Brown City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood. MN 55331 Ladies and Gentlemen: . This letter is written regarding the "Improvement" project in Freeman Park, involving the paving of a parking lot for ballfields one and two and the closing of the Highway Seven access. As the Shorewood residents most immediately and heavily impacted by this project, we ask that you give attention to our very serious concerns: · With the closure of the Highway Seven access, we will be without a valid address. An address on HighwaySeven with no access to Highway Seven is meaningless. We are concerned that this will seriously impact our ability to receive essential services such as Emergency response in case of fire, crime, and/or health emergencies, garbage and recycling pick-up, mail delivery, newspaper delivery, UPS and other delivery services. · We are concerned that we will experience difficulty reaching our driveway during ball . games. I often arrive home from work about the time that the ball games are being completed and have, in the past, experienced difficulty reaching the driveway even with Reutiman Lane as an access. We own a 37' motorhome that we use many weekends during the summer, towing our boat to our property up north. We worry that we will not be able to get into our driveway with cars parked as closely as they will be without a road. · Is it necessary to cut down all the trees in and around the parking lot? It would seem that a municipality with a ''TREE CITY USA" designation should have more concern for cutting down healthy trees than this municipality seems to have. We have seen many parking lots with trees preserved and protected in them. These trees provide haven for birds and also shade for people parking in the parking lots. Please give consideration to trying to save the 10 trees that are currently in the proposed parking lot area. Attachment 4 With Global Warming as a very real issue internationally, is it even necessary to pave the parking area? Wouldn't it be possible to allow people to park on the grass as they have been, pave the road, and request that the athletic organizations police their members with regard to their treatment of the grassy areas? It is proven that asphalt is a major contributor to heat islands around cities, and that heat islands are factors in severe storms and draught conditions. We have noticed that the grass has been used by team members to practice before and during games. Why deprive them of this place? Just an environmental thought --- "Green Space"! Water runoff is another big concern. What steps will be taken to prevent flooding that has occured on other residents' properties? . We understand that the closing of the Highway Seven access has been finalized; so there's no point in bringing up the point that if there are 30 cars in the park that need to . use Highway Seven to get to and from, there will be 30 cars going back on to Highway Seven--just X mile east. Or the point that the heaviest traffic to the park is not at peak traffic times on the highway. We are asking for your help to make the most of this difficult situation. We have lived at this location since January of 1977. Margaret has been a Shorewood resident since 1969. We donated a part of our property to the city for park use. We feel that this should count for something. This is what we are asking of the City: CONSIDER PRESERVING REUTIMAN LANE AS A VIABLE THOROUGHFARE, ALBEIT DEAD END ROAD. CONSIDER RE-ADDRESSING OUR PROPERTY AS "ONE REUTIMAN LANE." CONSIDER PRESERVING THE TREES INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT. . CONSIDER ABANDONING THE IDEA OF PAVING THE ENTIRE AREA AND PRESERVING THE GRASS AS WELL, ALLOWING PARKING ON THE GRASS AS YOU HAVE FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS. PROVIDE US WITH WRITTEN GUARANTEE THAT WE WILL NOT BE DEPRIVED OF ESSENTIAL PUBLIC SERVICES AND DELIVERIES. FAILING YOUR ABILITY TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE ABOVE, PURCHASE OUR PROPERTY FOR THE AVERAGE VALUE OF HOMES IN THE AREA ($250,000.00) AND WE WILL FIND HOUSING ELSEWHERE. Thank you for your consideration of our communication. Freeman Park Driveway Closure, Parking Lot Improvements, and Appurtenant Work WSB Project No. 1074-48 Bidder: Address: Tele hone No. City, State; Zi : Fcix No. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE FREEMAN PARK DRNEW A Y CLOSURE, PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS, AND APPURTENANT WORK SHOREWOOD, MN CITY PROJECT NO. 00-04 WSB PROJECT NO. 1074-48 Opening Time: 10:00 AM Opening Date: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 . Dear Council Members: The undersigned, being familiar with your local conditions, having made the field inspection and investigations deemed necessary, having studied the drawings and specifications for the work including Addenda Nos. and being familia( with all factors and other conditions affecting the work and cost thereof, hereby proposes to furnish all labor, tools, materials, skills, equipment, and all else necessary to completely construct the project in accordance with the drawings and specifications on file as follows: No. Mat. No. Item Units Qty Unit Price Total Price . BASE BID 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM $3,200.00 $3,200.00 2 2101.502 CLEARING TREE 7 $300.00 $2,100.00 3 2101.507 GRUBBING TREE 7 $300.00 $2,100.00 4 2104.501 REMOVE METAL CULVERT . LIN FT 47 $1.00 $47.00 5 2104.501 REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER LIN FT 20 $3.50 $70.00 6 2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQYD 600 $4.00 $2,400.00 7 2104.509 REMOVE SIGN EACH 4 $50.00 $200.00 8 2104.513 SA WING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LIN FT 120 $3.00 . $360.00 (FULL DEPTH) 9 2104.523 SALVAGE SIGN EACH $60.00 $60.00 Engineer's Est;.natt Page. I Attachment 5 Freeman Park Driveway Closure, Parking Lot Improvements, and Appurtenant Work WSB Project No. 1074-48 No. Mat. No. Item Units Qty Unit Price Total Price 10 2105.501 COMMON EXCA V ATlON CUYD 4500 $5.00 $22,500.00 11 2105.522 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV) CUYD 2500 $7.00 $17,500.00 12 2105.525 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CUYD 270 $15.00 $4,050.00 13 2211.501 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TON 2360 $12.00 $28,320.00 14 2340.508 TYPE 41 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON 520 $32.00 $16,640.00 15 2340.514 TYPE 31 BASE COURSE MIXTURE TON 520 $30.50 $15,860.00 . 16 2340.518 TYPE 41 BITUMINOUS MIXTURE FOR TON 8 $30.00 $240.00 DRNEW A Y 17 2357.502 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK GALLON 230 $2.00 $460.00 . COAT 18 2502.541 4" PERF PE PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 165 $12.50 $2,062.50 19 2503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 LIN FT 209 $30.00 $6,270.00 CLASS V 20 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 2 $1,250.00 $2,500.00 DESIGN SPECIAL 1 21 2506.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING DRAINAGE EACH 2 $300.00 $600.00 STRUCTURE 22 2521.501 4" CONCRETE WALK SQFT 472 $6.00 $2,832.00 23 2521.511 2.5" BITUMINOUS WALK SQFT 5000 $1.50 $7,500.00 24 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB & GUTIER DESIGN LIN FT 1280 . $10.00 $12,800.00 B612 25 2531.507 6" CONCRETE DRNEWA Y SQYD 8 $50.00 $400.00 . PAVEMENT 26 2554.509 GUIDE POST TYPE A EACH 8 $50.00 $400.00 27 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 28 2564.531 F&I SIGN PANELS TYPE C SQFT 4 $100.00 $400.00 29 2564.602 INSTALL SIGN EACH $50.00 $50.00 30 2564.603 4" SOLID LINE WHITE-PAINT LIN FT 2780 $0.75 $2,085.00 31 2564.603 4" SOLID LINE WHITE-EPOXY LIN FT 80 $1.00 $80.00 32 2564.602 PAVEMENT MESSAGE EACH 2 $100.00 $200.00 (HANDICAPPED SYMBOL) PAINT 33 2571.501 CONIFEROUS TREE 4' HT B&B TREE 5 $250.00 $1,250.00 34 2573.501 BALE CHECK EACH 10 $8.00 . $80.00 35 2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE HEAVY DUTY . LIN FT 1000 $3.00 $3,000.00 Engine.~s Esrimale Page. 2 Freeman Park Driveway Closure, Parking Lot Improvements, and Appurtenant Work WSB Projact No. 1074-48 No. Mat. No. Item Units Qty Unit Price Total Price. 36 2573.603 SILT FENCE TYPE MACHINE SLICED LINFT 1000 $3.00 $3,000.00 37 2575.505 SODDING TYPE LAWN SQYD 1200 $3.50 $4,200.00 38 2575.605 TURF ESTABLISHMENT ACRE $1,500.00 $1,500.00 TOTAL BASE BID $168,316.50 . . Engillee~s Estimate Page.3 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 02-_ A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE FREEMAN PARK DRIVEWAY CLOSURE, PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT, AND APPURTENANCT WORK CITY PROJECT 00-04 WHEREAS, WSB and Associates, me. has prepared Plans, Specifications and Estimate dated April 22, 2002 for said improvement; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Plans, Specifications and Estimate are found to be in order. . NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota: 1. Plans, Specifications and Estimates were prepared by WSB & Associates, me. for such improvement. Said plans, specifications and estimates are hereby approved and shall be filed with the City Clerk. . 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids, attached hereto as Exhibit A, ad for bids, upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 3 weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be opened and considered by the Council at 10:00 a.m. on July 17, 2002 in the City Hall Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the Clerk for 5 percent of the amount of each bid. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 10th day of June 2002. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: ~raigW. Dawson, CITY ADMINISTRATOR ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS Freeman Park Driveway Closure, Parking Lot Improvements and Appurtenant Work For the City of Shorewood, Minnesota NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed proposals will be received at the City Clerk's Office in the City of Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota at the Shorewood City Hall, 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, until 10:00 a.m. on the 17th day of July, 2002 and will be publicly opened at said time and place by two or more designated officers or agents of the City of Shorewood. Said proposal to be for the furnishing of all labor and materials for the construction complete in place of the following; Common Excavation 4500 CY Select Granular Borrow 2700 CY. . 2.5" Bit Walk 5000 SF 4" Solid Line White Paint 2780 LF Concrete Walk 472 SF Bit type 41 wear course mixture 528 TN Bit type 31 base course mixture 520 TN B612 Concrete Curbe Gutter 1280 LF Sodding Lawn Type 1200 LF Proposals arriving after the designated time will be returned unopened. . The bids must be submitted on the proposal form provided in accordance with the contract documents, plans and specifications as prepared by the City of Shorewood, Department of Public Works, 24200 'Smithtown Road, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, which are on file with the City Clerk of the City of Shore wood. Copies of Proposal Form Specifications for use by contractors submitting a bid may be obtained from City Hall, City of Shore wood, 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, upon a deposit (non-refundable) of Fifty Dollars and No Cents ($50.00) per set. No bids will be considered unless sealed and endorsed upon the outside wrapper, "BID FOR FREEMAN P ARK DRIVEWAY CLOSURE, PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS, AND APPURTENANT WORK, and filed with the City Clerk of the City of Shorewood and accompanied by a cashier's check, bid bond or certified check, payable to the City of Shorewood for five percent (5.0%) of the amount bid to be forfeited as liquidated damages in the event the bid is accepted and the bidder should fail to enter promptly into a written contract and furnish the required bonds. . The Cities of Shorewood reserves the right to reject any and all bids. No bids may be withdrawn for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of opening the bids. Date: June 10,2002 BY: ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator PUBLISHED IN: The "Construction Bulletin" The "Sun -Sailor" June 21 st & 28th 2002. June 19th & 27th 2002. AFB Freeman Park Access & Parking Lot Improvements EXHffiIT A