Loading...
051998 CC Emergency Mtg AgP . . . " CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL EMERGENCY MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 19, 1998 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 6:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Dahlberg called the meeting to order at 6: 10 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Dahlberg; Councilmembers O'Neill and Champa; Administrator Jim Hurm; Engineer Larry Brown; Larry Nickum, Public Works Councilmembers Stover and Garfunkel Absent: B. Review Agenda 2. COUNCIL UPDATE RELATIVE TO STORM DAMAGE Administrator Hurm presented a draft policy relative to the May 15, 1998 storm damage. He related Councilmember Stover felt strongly the City should not dictate how residents treat stumps and logs on their own property. Mayor Dahlberg noted his agreement. Hurm explained Councilmember O'Neill had requested a rewording of the policy. Staff has reviewed the policy and Hurm distributed the revised draft policy. Councilmember Champa asked for an update of the activities which had taken place today. Mayor Dahlberg inquired whether water had been delivered to the islands. Engineer Brown explained this had been attempted unsuccessfully. Councilmember O'Neill commented when he spoke with people on the islands, obtaining water was not an issue since they were able to purchase it at the store. Brown stated at this point, the City will not pursue delivery of water to the islands. Brown explained the crews have been working on Enchanted Island. Hennepin County has volunteered the use of five dump trucks which were used in this area. Brown spoke with the Hennepin County Manager and he has offered the use of three trucks again tomorrow. With respect to NSP, they are continuing to work on the islands, however, most of the homes are without electricity at this time. It is anticipated all power will be restored by Friday. Councilmember Champa questioned whether there have been any communications with the State or the County relative to emergency funding. Brown stated while the storm damage is considered a disaster, it was not to a degree where emergency funds will be made available. Hurm pointed out the City will, however, attempt to pursue any funds which could be available. Councilmember O'Neill asked whether it would create a problem for homeowners to place items larger than 6 inches in diameter at the Freeman Park dump site. Brown explained he has been in contact with Series Environmental of Maple Grove to inquire about the services they would provide. He further explained a tub grinder would be brought to the site. This equipment is very noisy, however, it will accommodate 350 cubic yards per hour. Upon viewing the site, the company felt the materials presently at the Freeman Park dump site could be ground up in approximately two hours. . . . " CITY COUNCIL EMERGENCY MEETING MINUTES MAY 19, 1998 - PAGE 2 Brown stated there would be a $500 mobilization fee to bring the equipment to the site as well as a charge of $400 per hour. This would include the machine. a wheel loader. and two operators. Brown felt this to be a very fair price. He did express concern relative to the $500 mobilization fee since it would be necessary for the equipment to leave the site and then return again. A company representative stated they are reviewing the situation in an attempt to accommodate all of the cities and possibly reduce the mobilization fee to half price for return visits. Councilrnember Champa asked for an estimate to complete this project. Brown estimated approximately $30.000 for the clean up with $10.000 to $15.000 in Public Works time with an additional $10.000 in pumping costs for the lift stations. Mayor Dahlberg questioned whether this storm damage would be taken into consideration in obtaining emergency funds if another damaging storm were to occur. Brown explained the State would take into consideration the type of damage which occurs. If 25 percent of the homes in the City were damaged. this would be considered a disaster. Councilrnember Champa commented he would like to meet with area legislators to discuss this situation and how it could be handled in the future. Mayor Dahlberg expressed concern this storm occurred very early in the year and could potentially happen again. Hurm suggested the City work with state legislators in the next session and in the event there would be a second occurrence of this nature, perhaps there could be legislation in place relative to State aid. Mayor Dahlberg stated his belief the Council needs to proceed aggressively to develop a plan which addresses emergency situations such as this. O'Neill moved, Champa seconded adopting the revised policy as follows: (1) The City asks residents to be responsible for removal of tree trunks and stumps on their own property. Commercial tree removal firms are responsible for disposal on their own. (2) Only brushlbranches (less than 6" by 8' long) may be placed off the road, in the boulevard area until May 26 for City pickup. After that date, no further material may be placed on the boulevard. (3) Shorewood residents are encouraged to haul brush and limbs (6 inches or less in diameter) to a designated area in Freeman Park through Monday, June 1. Commercial haulers may not haul to Freeman Park. Enchanted and Shady Island residents 0 f Shorewood are encouraged to haul brush and limbs (6 inches or less in diameter) to designated areas to be determined through June 8. Commercial haulers may not haul to these sites. Motion passed 3/0. 3. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Dahlberg adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.rn. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED. Cheryl WalIat, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. ATTEST: , '. ," T~ DAHLBERG, r ! v5\.i.- i U,\ C ~~ l/VVy1 JAMES-:-;C. HURM, CITY ADlVnNISTRATOR / . "01 ~ CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY , MAY 18, 1998 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 p.M. AGENDA 1. CONVENE WORK SESSION . A. Roll Call Review Agenda B. 2. DISCUSSION ON LAND USE ISSUES 3. DISCUSSION ON ASSESSING CONTRACT 4. ADJOURN . No official action is taken at Work Sessions. . . . , , COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 18, 1998 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor Dahlberg called the meeting to order at 10:02 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Dahlberg; Councilmembers O'Neill, Garfunkel and Champa; Administrator Hurm; Planning Director Brad Nielsen. Absent: Councilmember Stover B. Review Agenda 2. DISCUSSION ON LAND USE ISSUES Nielsen distributed a draft document containing the revisions as recommended by the Planning Commission. He reviewed those revisions for the Council's consideration. In addition, the revisions provided by Councilmember O'Neill have also been incorporated into this draft document. With respect to LU-5, Mayor Dahlberg suggested the following language. "The attached land use plan and existing zoning map express the Council's consistent view of land use in the city of Shorewood." With this plan, the Council is adopting the zoning depicted on the attached zoning map. Nielsen will rework the language for Council's consideration. Consensus of the Council was for Item No. 15 to be stricken from LU-8. Mayor Dahlberg addressed Item No. 19 and suggested adding, "when consistent with Shorewood's adopted goals. " LU-l, Item No.3, Mayor Dahlberg suggested deleting the sentence, "Few new housing units are available to young singles, newly married couples or the elderly" because we don't know whether or not this is true. Councilmember Champa questioned the term "life cycle housing." He stated he would prefer "variety of housing." It was the consensus of the Council to change "high" density to "medium" density in Item Nos. 15, 16 and 17 on LU-9. Mayor Dahlberg suggested deleting Item No. 18. Councilmember O'Neill noted his agreement. LU-17, Paragraph 4, last sentence, change to read, ". . . the reason it may be suitable for Shorewood . . ." LU-32, Item No. 13, change the last sentence to read, "Change the Land Use Plan to minimum density residential." LU-38, Item No. 10, Councilmembers O'Neill and Champa suggested deleting "ranges of affordability and opportunities for seniors." Mayor Dahlberg noted his agreement and stated he would not be willing to protect housing for any income range, age, race or gender. . . . CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES MAY 18, 1998-PAGE2 3. DISCUSSION ON ASSESSING CONTRACT Councilmember O'Neill expressed concern relative to the quality of work produced by the current assessor. He felt the Council should explore other options. Mayor Dahlberg noted his disappointment in the manner in which this work has been performed as well as the way in which the assessor interacts with the residents. Councilmember Champa felt in fairness to Mr. Erickson, he should be made aware of the situation and given an opportunity to respond. Mayor Dahlberg stated he is sympathetic to this point of view, however, the assessor serves at the pleasure of the Board of Review and is not a city employee. Councilmember Garfunkel felt this work should be opened up for bid and Mr. Erickson will have an equal opportunity to bid this position. Councilmember O'Neill noted his agreement. Hurm asked what qualities the Council would be looking for in an assessor. It was agreed the Council would be looking for an assessor who is accurate, objective, consistent and interacts well with the public. 4. ADJOURNMENT Champa moved, Garfunkel seconded adjourning the work session at 11:13 p.m. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED. Cheryl WalIat, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. ATTEST: 11 ! , ! U. ,L-i--Y!\YJ.- L. (/ (M0 JA. S C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR I' J , .I . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL EMERGENCY MEETING MONDAY, MAY 18, 1998 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Dahlberg called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Dahlberg; Councilmembers Stover, O'Neill, Garfunkel and Champa; Administrator Jim Hurm; Engineer Larry Brown; Finance Director AI Rolek; Police Chief Young; Sgt. Bryan Litsey. Review Agenda B. 2. COUNCIL UPDATE RELATIVE TO STORM DAMAGE Mayor Dahlberg explained on Saturday and Sunday, three members of the Council viewed the city to assess the storm damage. He suggested the following areas be addressed: dump areas, Hennepin County aid, police patrol, electricity/NSP hook-ups, fresh water, roadside clean up, generators and pumping stations. Engineer Brown reported some difficulties in obtaining accurate information from NSP. He noted portions of Edgewood to be the toughest corridor. He also pointed out the islands were hit the hardest. Sgt. Bryan Litsey reported an officer has been stationed on the islands given concerns which were raised by residents relative to excessive traffic in the area. Brown reported the lift stations continue to be powered by generators at this time. Mayor Dahlberg has been in contact with Commissioner Penny Steele relative to obtaining some assistance for the City. Brown reportedVern Genslinger, Director.ofHennepin County Public Works, has offered to send a fleet of trucks to assist in clean up. Excelsior and Tonka Bay have offered generators as well as a loader and operator which Brown intends to take advantage of. Brown stated the Shorewood Tree Service has been very helpful in assisting in clean up, has provided excellent service to the City and has always been helpful to the City on past occasions. Councilmember Champa inquired where the trees will be unloaded. Brown explained the trees will be taken to Freeman Park which has been designated as a drop site. With the assistance of South Lake Police Department, this drop site is being limited to Shorewood home owners. Mayor Dahlberg questioned whether commercial haulers could be charged for utilizing this dump site which would offset the price of disposing of this material. Chief Young expressed concern there is insufficient space to permit commercial haulers to utilize this drop site. Mayor Dahlberg suggested turning this material into wood chips and firewood for sale. Brown noted this is a messy, shredded wood chip product and not the commercial type wood chips. He noted there would also be a cost involved. . . . CITY COUNCIL EMERGENCY MEETING MINUTES MAY 18, 1998 - PAGE 2 Councilmember Stover inquired whether a special burning permit would be obtained. Brown has considered this option it is being further investigated. He noted there would need to be a location identified for this type of fire. Mayor Dahlberg felt commercial firewood companies should be contacted to determine their interest in obtaining this wood for resale. Brown expressed concern relative to people going into this drop site area and creating a larger mess as well as any liability which might be associated with this. Brown raised the following questions: Does the City of Shorewood have a responsibility to help remove trees on private property? Councilmember O'Neill noted most insurance companies will not cover removing trees from a particular property unless the tree is on the house. Councilmember Garfunkel did not feel the City has a responsibility to assist in removing the trees from individual properties and Mayor Dahlberg noted his agreement. however the City will offer to assist the residents. Councilmember Champa stated the residents were told to bring the brush and trees out to the street for pick up. Councilmember Garfunkel did not feel comments should be made by an individual councilmember relative to an issue which has not been considered by the full Council. Councilmember O'Neill noted the residents had been told this by contractors as well. He explained he had informed the residents the Council would be meeting Monday night to discuss the situation. Brown stated the trees and brush which were put in the right-of-way will be picked up by the City, however, he felt there should be a limit placed on the length of time in which items can be placed in the right-of-way to be hauled away by the City. Councilmember Stover felt the power outage should also be taken into consideration since a number of residents leave their homes during a power outage. Does the City want to help private property owners in cleaning np their land? What time frame are we going to give people to clean np their land? Mayor Dahlberg felt there should be a plan to encourage property owners to haul the brush to the drop site, however, the drop sites may need to be more localized. Councilmember Garfunkel inquired whether the City could undertake a joint effort with another community who is addressing the same situation. Brown noted this is currently being considered. Mayor Dahlberg adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.m. and reconvened at 7:57 p.m. Councilmember Stover left the meeting at this time. Evaluation of costs/options to be considered. Mayor Dahlberg felt it to be the consensus of the Council to assist the residents, however, he commented there needs to be a plan and a budget established. Brown noted the Council has expressed concern in getting fresh water out to the residents on the islands. He inquired whether the City wants to contract this service with a private company. . . . CITY COUNCIL ElVIERGENCY MEETING MINUTES MAY 18, 1998 - PAGE 3 He also noted the fire hydrant could be opened for use by the residents as well. Brown stated staff will review costs and need and report back to CounciL Councilmember O'Neill suggested establishing a time table in which the City will pick up brush and limbs from the road sides. Mayor Dahlberg felt there would be more incentive for home owners to haul brush if the drop sites are more localized. Councilmember Garfunkel felt the issue of fresh water on the island should be addressed first. Brown noted the island is probably two days away from re-establishing their electrical power. Sgt. Litsey suggested other communities have provided containers of fresh water on curb sides. Councilmember O'Neill suggested staff contact a water company and make arrangements for fresh water to be supplied to the islands. Councilmember Garfunkel did not feel home owners should be allowed to dump in the right-of- way. He felt it would be better to identify more localized sites to be used. Councilmember O'Neill noted his agreement. Brown felt Freeman Park to be an appropriate site since it would provide sufficient areaJo maneuver vehicles and trailers safely. Mayor Dahlberg felt with the massive amount of brush to be disposed of, it would create a health and safety issue to deposit this type of material in the right-of-way area. It was the consensus of the Council to allow no further dumping in the right-of-way. Everything must be taken to a drop site. Staff will attempt to identify a drop site for the island home owners. This information will be communicated via flyers as well as notices which will appear in The Laker and The Sun Sailor. Residents will be permitted to utilize the drop sites until May 26th. Councilmember Champa did not feel this would be a sufficient amount of time. Brown questioned whether commercial vendors will be permitted to utilize the drop site at Freeman Park. Councilmember O'Neill stated he would discourage allowing private haulers to utilize the drop sites. He also felt there must be someone on site to assure Shore wood residents are the only people utilizing the drop site. Councilmember Champa felt the City should go as far as possible in assisting the residents. Councilmember Garfunkel noted his disagreement and felt the Council is taking sufficient steps to assist the residents, however, budget constraints must be taken into consideration. Councilmember Champa did not feel the City is going far enough in assisting the residents. Councilmember Champa did not feel the Council could determine what is going to be done without knowing all of the particulars. Hunn pointed out it would be impossible to estimate the costs ' involved. Councilmember Champa felt a best estimate could be made. Councilmember Garfunkel felt the City's responsibility lies in safety and health issues rather than a convenience issue. Mayor Dahlberg expressed concem relative to the public health aspect in that the brush or downed trees could harbor standing water which would attract mosquitoes creating a health concern. Mayor Dahlberg suggested allowing commercial haulers to utilize the drop site as long as the hauler is able to produce an authorization letter from the home owner for whom he is hauling. The City will ask the residents to be responsible for tree removal on their own property. There is to be no further placement of materials in the right-of-way. The materials which are currently in the right-of-way will be hauled away by the City. Residents may haul brush and limbs, less than 6 inches in diameter, to the drop site at Freeman Park through Tuesday, May 26, 1998. Residents with special needs should call the City Hall through June 1. 1998. . CITY COUNCIL ElVIERGENCY MEETING MINUTES MAY 18,1998 - PAGE 4 Councilmember O'Neill believed this to be a natural disaster and felt the City should step in and assist the residents in cleaning up. Mayor Dahlberg felt the Council should perhaps undertake some emergency planning and consider establishing an Emergency Clean Up Fund. Councilmember Garfunkel noted the City will have to determine what type of emergencies would qualify for use of the funds at which point he believed the City would be acting as an insurance company. Hurm reviewed his understanding of Council direction to be: Commercial haulers will not be permitted to utilize the drop site at Freeman Park and will be responsible for their disposal. Mayor Dahlberg noted the island residents should be allotted additional time. Councilmember Champa expressed concern relative to commercial haulers utilizing the drop site. . Sgt. Litsey suggested some residents may qualify for some sort of hardship. Mayor Dahlberg recessed the meeting at 8:40 p.m. and reconvened at 8:46 p.m. Councilmember Champa suggested allowing residents to utilize the right-of-way for branches and limbs through May 26th for pick up. Finance Director Rolek noted this will require utilizing the time of a City crew. Brown estimated manpower and equipment would cost approximately $7,000. Councilmember Champa did express concern relative to complaints which could arise if a City truck were to cause damage to a private driveway. Councilmember Garfunkel suggested obtaining a waiver from the resident. Steve Polston, Bolder Circle, was in attendance. Mr. Polston stated his lot was hit very hard. He explained he did not place the brush and trees out on the street because he did not want to create a safety hazard. He inquired whether he would still be allowed to haul the debris to the street for pick up by the City. Councilmember O'Neill felt this to be an example of a hardship and the City could assist in cases such as Mr. Polston's on an individual basis. Councilmember Champa felt the City should go back a second time to pick up brush and branches from the right-of-way. Hurm felt hardship would better apply to a senior citizen or financial hardship. Councilmember O'Neill felt situations such as Mr. Polston's would more appropriately be characterized as special cases rather than hardship. Brown expressed concern in determining what would qualify as a special need. He pointed out there are currently a considerable number of special needs. Rolek suggested setting a date for pick up by a City truck. After the City truck has picked up. anything remaining would be the responsibility of the home owner. . . . . ~ r. CITY COUNCn.. E.MERGENCY .MEETING MINUTES MAY 18, 1998 - PAGE 5 The Council was in agreement this situation is a natural disaster. Councilmember O'Neill felt special cases would be those in which there is not sufficient room in the right-of-way to place the brush and limbs. O'Neill moved, Champa seconded establishing the policy as follows: (1) The City asks residents to be responsible for tree removal on their own property. Commercial tree removal firms are responsible for disposal on their own. (2) We ask your cooperation in no further placement of material on the right-of-way. Material currently on the right-of-way will be picked up by the City. (3) Shorewood residents may haul brush and limbs (6 inches or less in diameter) to a designated area in Freeman Park through Tuesday, May 26. Commercial haulers may not haul to Freeman Park. (4) Residents with questions about special needs call City Hall (474-3236) by June 1, 1998. Enchanted and Shady Island residents of Shorewood may haul brush and limbs (6 inches or less in diameter) to designated areas (to be determined) through June 1. Commercial haulers may not haul to these sites. Motion passed 4/0. Councilmember O'Neill reported he has received a number of complaints relative to teenagers on the Shady Island bridge. He requested the police patrol this area and Sgt. Litsey commented he will notify the water patrol as well. Rolek informed the Council any additional costs associated with the storm damage clean up will be paid out of the balance from the General Fund. Once this amount had been determined, Rolek will return to the Council with a budget amendment. Council directed staff to pursue any county or state emergency funds which may be available to assist in the cost of the clean up. 3. ADJOURNMENT Dahlberg moved, Garfunkel seconded adjourning the emergency meeting to a work session at 9:49 p.m. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED, Cheryl Wall at, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. ATTEST: /j / / r 1/t ~-1'tz,4- L-. /;,/011 JAMES C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR / OR . . .' City Council Work Session May 18, 1998 Storm Damage Due to Storm on May 15, 1998 I, Does the City of Shorewood have a responsibility to help remove trees on private property 2. Does the City want to help private property owners in clearing their land? 3. What time frame are we going to give people to clean up their land? 4. Evaluation of costs/options to be considered? The ,urpose of tile ~.......te~"gty ,'~. OIl;:?, authorize .tIae'tspeDcIibIH';Ot~for e~ ..!~ '__Ie, to ""riIe"~,.""~___,,,,/, aDd to take~'~'''''''Qty,cC'''.;_'~ , , - j...? The City CeddI will.... fD.\wtIr'k ....~.ascpnty~,'. immediatel)';~f.wIa\I'the,.."_."'" .......'/., '/ ." :'J< ,"- '- '-' -~ - j " - " . cc:. . MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO.: . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (612) 474-3236 FAX (612) 474-0128. www.state.net/shorewood. cityhall@shorewood.state.net Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 15 May 1998 Land Use Chapter 405 (Comp Plan) For purposes of discussion regarding the Land Use Chapter, please bring along the Chapter and Planning Commission minutes which were provided in the last Council packet. BJN:ph . o PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER . To: From: Date: Re: Mayor and City Council James C. Hurm, City Administrator May 15, 1998 Assessing Contract , The intent of this item on the agenda is to have an open and frank discussion about the City's assessing services. There have been some frustrations. Council members should clearly vocalize any concerns that you have, or articulate the way that you would like to see things changed. The end product of the meeting then would be to determine the next step. Would we bring in Rolf Erickson to talk with the Council in work session format? Or would be begin to put together Requests for Proposal for assessing services to see if there are reasonable options available? . . . . . I' - . CONTRACT FOR ASSESSING SERVICES Tl'"li::, c.;)ntract i-~ made thi':, fir.;t day of S>?pt~mbo?r, 1997, by ....nd betwo?en the Ci ty I;)f Srll:,relJ./ood, Ho?rlno?p i n County, 1'"1inne-:;-ota (ho?reirlafter- called tho? "Municipali1:}.II) ao.n,j Rolf Er' i ': l( sCln En to? r p r- i -:;.e -:;. , I n I: ., db.:;. S.:,u thwo? s t A-:- se s -:;. i n 9 , 1 4520 12th. Avenue North, Plymouth, t'linne.;ota 55447 <ho?ro?inafter' 1:.;<.11 ed the "Corltr-:;'I:te,rH). The Corltractor r>?pre.:;-erlt.; that its presido?nt i,; .a, Li.:o?n.;o?d Minnesota Assessor as required in Chapter 273 of Minnesota Statutes and that he is a qual ified real estate appraiser. The Municipal ity represents that Di.;trict within the Count~.... of 1"1 i nnesota. it is a separate Assessment Hennep i n and the State of . ASSESSING SERtJICES: The t-tunicipal ity hereby contracts for and the Contractor hereby agrees to cooperate with officals of the Municipal ity and the County of Hennepin in performing 1'7'9:3 asse.:;.:;-ment servil:e'; a'; defined in Minrlesota Statutes. The Municipal ity agrees and acKnowledges that the manner and the method used in the performance of the assessment duties wi 1 1 be under the control and direction of said Contractor. VALUATION NOTICE HEARING: The Contractor agrees. to worK with the Shorewood City Administrator to set a date for the local board of review and to dedicate five days for answering calls and inquiries from Shorewood residents concurrent with valuation notice mailing. CONTRACT PRICE: In consideration of the -services r'Hldered by the Con trac tor, the Mun i c i pal i ty shall pay to the Con trac tor at the above -s ta ted address, the sum of $48,300 payable in twelve (12) irlstallments of $4,025.00 beginning by the I as t day of Sep tember-, 1997 and end i ng by the 1 as t day of August, 1998. The fall owi ng serv i ceos ar-e to be bi t leod separate I y on a one time bas is. NONE. FURNISHING OF EQUIPMENT: The contr-actor shall prov i de all transportation neces-sary for the per-formance of the services contracted for-. The t-lunicipality shall furnish all equ i pment and suppl i es necessary for- the perfor-mance, of the s~r'v ices con tr-ac ted for, i nc IIJd i ng a. curren t se t of aer i a 1 photogr-aphs. ATTENDANCE AT COUNCIL MEETINGS: Th~ Contractor shall attend the local boar-d of r-eview meeting on a date selected by the 1"1unicipality and the Contractor and not to exceed three other Municipal i ty counci 1 meetings during the term of the corl tra.ct. Page Two Shorewood 1998 Assessing Contract LEGAL STATUS: The parties agree that the contractor is not requir~d to maintain offic~ hours, shall not receIve r~tirement benefits, health insurance benefits, or any other fringe benefits offered to employees of the Municipal ity and shall, in all respects be deemed an independent contractor. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the Municipal ity have executed this Contract this 11th day of August, 1997. Ci ty of Shorewood (Municipal ity) by ~a Rolf E. A. President, Assessing (Contractor) ~; ~ . . . . . . . , DRAFT Land Use Plan - Chapter Outline I. Introduction II. Goals and Objectives III. Issues IV. Policies V. Concept Plan VI. Land Use Plan A. Land Use Classifications Note: This draft contains revisions as recommended by the Planning Commission. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Undeveloped Open Space Low Density Residential Low to Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Semipublic Public Commercial B. Land UselZoning Changes C. Land Subdivision D. Housing Variety/Mfordability :c. Senior I10tlsing F:G. Lake Access G:H. Population and Household Projections Based Upon Land Use Plan 5/98 . . . , Introduction Based upon the Existing Land Use-+994- 1998 map shown on page LU-23 of this Chapter nemly 15% approximately 10% of the land in the community is undeveloped at this time. This includes land that exists as residential estate property capable of further subdivision and development. There still remain limited large tracts of buildable land on which development can be expected to occur. The largest of these undeveloped areas exist in the westernmost third of the community. As this vacant land develops, the City must have a guide for how it will be used. The Land Use Plan is formulated to show logical relationships between a variety of major land use types, including residential, public, semipublic, commercial, and undeveloped open space. Location of various land uses is a result of applying the general planning concepts and the specific policies contained in the Policy Plan. For the most part, land use patterns have been well established, and it is the City's intention to use the existing Zoning Districts map as a guide for future development. In deciding the amount which is desired of each land use type, several factors ftl'e have been considered: 1. Community Function. The primary role of Shorewood in the metropolitan area has been identified as provision of housing. As such, planning must be geared toward providing a quality living environment with adequate supportive services (i.e. park and recreational facilities, neighborhood convenience commercial areas, etc.). 2. Community Character. Shorewood's current character is primarily single family residential. Shorewood will strive to maintain its character. 3. Dev.dopmcnt Costs. In the past, lm-gc lots wcre necessttry to aeeommodMc. on site se ~ er systems. V.7ith the insfttllation of sanitary sewer, the cost of large lot de v c10pment has increascd greatly. Development of sma:l.lcr lot sizes a:l.lows oc-v'dopmcnt costs to be spread 0 fcr 8: greater ntlnlber of lots, thtlS rcdtlcing the cost pcr tlnit. 3. Varlet) of IlotIsing Life Cycle Housing. Current residential development in Shorewood consists 5/98 LU-1. . mainly of single family units. Few new housing units are available to young singles, newly married couples or the elderly. As land becomes increasingly scarce, market . forces often conflict with what would be considered affordable housing by metropolitan area standards. Given Shorewood's desire to maintain its low density residential character, ::Pthe Land Use Plan attempts to establish 1I10l'C 'vMicty than etlIIcntly cxists in ShOIC..ood. preserve the community's present variety of housing stock. 4. Preservation of Greenspace. Past planning has tended to assume that any land that is not set aside for wetland protection or parks will ultimately be developed. This need not be the case. This section of the Comprehensive Plan will explore means of establishing permanent greenspace areas such as the use of zoning tools, assisting neighborhoods in purchasing land, obtaining conservation easements, or outright land acquisition by the City. 5/98 LU- ~ . . Land Use . Goals and Objectives . . 5/98 Land Use Goals The City shall establish a pattern of land uses which is consistent with the residential and recreational functions of the community. The land use plan shall promote harmonious relationships between various land uses (e.g. homes, commercial outlets, churches, parks, schools, etc.) through proper development and locational planning. Through land use planning discourage land uses which are inconsistent with the residential and natural character of the community. The City shall promote the development preservation of safe, healthy and affordable housing options. Land Use Objectives 1. A cohesive land use pattern that ensures compatibility and functional relationships among activities is to be formulated and implemented. 2. Community planning and development is to consider the surrounding neighbors, neighborhoods and cities. 3. Development that is not accompanied by a sufficient level of supportive services and facilities (utilities, parking, access, etc.) is to be prevented. 4. Land uses and environmental quality are to be maintained and where necessary upgraded. 5. Property values are to be preserved and protected. 6. Community development is to be compatible with features of the natural environment and is to be accommodated without destroying environmental features and natural amenities. LU-,? 7. Individual neighborhoods are to be maintained and where necessary, strengthened in character, while at the same time improving and reinforcing community identity. 8. A creative approach (as opposed to "tnlditiona1" stIbdivision design) to the use of land and related residential development is to be encouraged. 9. Commercial development shall be safe, convenient, attractive, and consistent compatible with the residential character of the community. 10. Establish and maintain a consistent approach to the development of fragmented land parcels (i.e. larger lots having the potential to be subdivided) which encourages cooperation between landowners and provides for access and utility service which complies with City standards. 11. Dc v clop a senior hOtIsing program v. hieh. a. AHo,lis seniors to remain in their single fmnily homes. b. Pro fides a range of hOtIsing types, inc1tIding step do ~ n hotIsing, senior apartments Md ~sisted Ii vmg hOtIsing, ~ ith initia1 emph~is being placed on step down hOtIsing. e. :CstM>lishes regtIhttions ~hkh pcnnit the eonstreet10n of affOldabIc seniOl housing vvrhiIc enstIring compMibilit) with existing residentia1 neighbOlhoods. d. Identifies stIitabIc sites for senior hotIsing. Co :CstM>lishes methods to enStIre control over stIitablc senior housing sites. f. Assists financia1l:y in scnior hOt:lsing projects to ensure affordabiE!, and enhance compatibility vvith. existing developments. g. Identifies Md partidpates in Stlpport senices for the clderl)", e.g. trMisportation, social and reercationa1 facilities, home maintenMce Mid repair. 11. Identify parcels of land with the potential to be set aside as permanent greenspace and explore means of obtaining conservation easements or financing the acquisition of such parcels. 5/98 LU-+ . . . . . . Land Use Issues UndevelopedlUnderdeveloped Land A limited number of vacant parcels remain to be developed in Shorewood. Despite land use patterns having been relatively well established, issues will undoubtedly arise concerning intensity, compatibility and environmental impact. It is not h-it necessary for all land to be developed-?-; More challenging than developing the remaining large parcels is coordinating con" olliftg coordinating the development of small parcels to avoid the adverse effects of piece-meal subdivision. Discrepancies Between Land Use Plan and Existing Zoning The Comprehensive Plan prepared in 1981 resulted in the rezoning of several areas within the community, primarily to make zoning consistent with existing development. There remain, however, discrepancies between the Land Use Plan and the existing zoning map. The City intends to resolve such discrepancies infavor of..~hid~ve' land 1:tJi! tool, tjtiUS in a /;(Jr~a 1 tsidtntial density. the current Zoning Districts map. Zoning which a:llo'Wcd higher dcnsitics of residentia:l de (elopmcnt or changes in land use to imp1cnlGnt the City's limd use plan h~ bccndonc on a e~e by case b~is in eonjtInction with. specific development tcqtlests. This approach to re.zoning should be reexamined to determine if the limd tlse plim ~ otlld be better implemented thrOtIgh Cit) initiated zoning for ecmtln properties. Housing V arietyl Affordability Shorewood has served, over a long period of time, as a residential community with the tradition of single-family homes. While some variety of cost and lot sizes has been achieved over the past several years, the limited amount of land remaining in the community, combined with high land values, presents little opportunity for the development of housing that is affordable by metropolitan area standards. the lack of M"fordable housing option~ presents im Mea. of 5/98 LU-? concern. As such, it is important that~the City needs to explore ways to encotllage development preserve its present stock of affordable housing. . Senior Housing ~~ ~1~ ~~~~~~~es Shol'Cv..ood is faced withM incfCasing elderly poptllation. A Sttldy of ~~:()f II:'u~.g t:CC;ds, plc.""cd b~ tho Ci" in 1991 indi<.Mc, , lad< of senior hOWling option, ~~!~ ~~~ ~ffordab1l1f)) for those vv ho ean not, 01 choose not to, stzry In slftglc fan lIly homes. ~:~ ~~~tl~ i~ ~~~~~~dcd by the limited amount of suitable land (i.e. size, zoning, a(ailability of ~~:7!~e~, c~.) l'Cmtlining for dCvdopftlGnt. What land docs remain is utpidly being absOIbed b, de v eiopmcnt. Lake Access As a result of the 1981 Comprehensive Plan, two lake access issues were addressed. The City conducted a study relative to the use of existing fire lanes, which concluded with a decision to keep, but regulate, fire lanes for neighborhood use. Secondly, the City adopted regulations pertaining to existing marinas. Recently the LMCD and the DNR have agreed upon a goal of locating 750 parking spaces associated with lake access to Lake Minnetonka. While Shorewood has provided a minimum number of parking spaces on Christmas Lake, some Lake Minnetonka communities have taken issue with the fact that Shorewood has no public access to Lake Minnetonka. 5/98 LU-fp . . Land Use . Policies General 1. The community shall be planned and developed in units as determined by either physical barriers and/or homogeneous land use characteristics. 2. Whenever possible, the impact of physical barriers shall be reduced in order to increase relationships between isolated areas and reinforce continuity and a sense of community. 3. Major streets are to border, not penetrate, neighborhoods. 4. Land use development shall be planned to prevent competition of a detrimental type. . 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. . 6. Land use development shall be related to and reflect transportation needs, desired development and community priorities. 7. Land use development shall be planned so as not to isolate or create landlocked parcels. 8. The use of easements for the purpose of access is to be discouraged. 9. "Back lot" development shall not be permitted. Adequate access must be established and provided to avoid creating nonconforming property. 10. Intensification of land use activity and development will only be allowed if accompanied by sufficient corresponding increases in related supportive and service facilities such as parks, off-street parking, fire and police protection, etc. . 5/98 LU- 1 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. 12. Wherever possible, changes in types of land use shall occur either at center, mid-block points so that similar uses front on the same street, or at borders of areas separated by major manmade or natural barriers. 13. The removal of land from the tax rolls shall be considered only when it can be clearly demonstrated that such removal is in the public interest (e.g. the preservation of greenspace ). 14. Programs and incentives for continuing privately initiated maintenance, improvements for energy conservation, and redevelopment of existing land use development shall be created and implemented. The City shall cOopCnltc with alrcllery established pri (MC grotlpS in tlndertaking dCvelopment and redevelopment efforts. 15. Renewal, replacement and redevelopment of substandard and grossly incompatible development shall be accomplished through public action and private means. 16. Where practical, problems with conflicting andnon-complementary uses shall be resolved through removal and relocation. 17. Sufficient setback requirements for new development along major streets shall be established to prevent future problems of street upgrading (e.g. widening). 18. To the maximum extent possible, development policies and regulations shall be applied consistently and uniformly. 19. Shorewood's land planning and development shall be on a cooperative basis with neighboring communities. 20. Shorewood's lakeshore shall be protected from overintensification of use and development. Residential 1. Residential neighborhoods shall be planned and developed according to established planning district boundaries. 2. Low density residential neighborhoods shall be protected from encroachment or intrusion of high use types and by adequate buffering and separation from other residential as well as non-residential use categories. 3. Residential neighborhoods shall be protected from penetration by through traffic. 4. Access to major streets shall be provided on the periphery of residential neighborhoods. 5. Owner occupied housing is to be encouraged. 5/98 Lu-8 . . . . . . 6. Residential development shall be protected from adverse environmental impacts, including noise, air and visual pollution. 7. A variety of housing is to be maintained. 8. Housing styles and development techniques which conserve land and increase energy efficiency are to be encouraged. 9. Lot sizes in the condlttlni~ shall take into aceOtlnt the cost of bmd and sen ice improvements, Jet be adcqtlMc to nlmntmn the stlbtlrbMi, nattlral characteristics ofthe eommtlnity . *9. Overall density shall be a primary consideration in planning for the community. H-:10. Density and lot size shall be the primary considerations in the review of development requests. +2:-11. All new housing shall adhere to the highest community design, planning and construction standards. +3-712. Innovation in subdivision design and housing development shall be considered through the use of devices such as the cluster and planned unit development concepts. +4:-13. Residential development shall be prohibited on flood plains and other natural features that perform important protection functions in their natural state. +5;14. New residential development shall maintain the natural environmental character of Shorewood. 16. Integration ofhotlsing ~pes or st,les v.ithin a development shall be allolh'ed when applicable liS long liS the tomi ntlmbcr .of tlnits conforms to the prcseribed density far the totll'l development. t9-:15. High density housing is to be concentrated and allowed in those portions of the community where adequate supportive facilities (high capacity streets, utilities, etc.) are existing, service needs are minimized, and activities in the form of work and leisure time are directly accessible. +&16. High density housing shall not be utilized specifically as a buffer or viewed as being capable of absorbing negative impacts. +9-:17. High density housing is to be developed only in relation to and support of major commercial and service centers. *18. The City shall attempt to respond to the housing needs of the entire community. 5/98 LU- q *19. Shorewood's housing planning and development shall be in cooperation with neighboring . south shore communities. Commercial 1. The City of Shorewood's commercial development shall be oriented towards "convenience" type of shopping geared toward neighborhood or community scale markets. 2. Commercial and service centers shall be developed as cohesive, highly interrelated units with adequate off-street parking. 3. Existing and proposed service and commercial uses shall be adequately and appropriately landscaped according to community requirements as may be amended. 4. All existing and proposed service and commercial uses shall be adequately screened or buffered from any adjacent residential development. 5. Orderly transitions between commercial and residential areas shall be established and maintained. 6. Uncoordinated linear commercial development shall be strongly discouraged in favor of a unified development pattern. 7. A commercial maintenance code shall be formulated. 8. Joint utilization of parking, access, and other related supportive services shall be promoted in service and commercial districts and individual developments. 9. Safe and convenient pedestrian movement shall be provided within service and commercial developments. 10. When possible or when opportunities arise, major street access for service and commercial development shall be at the periphery of the area. 11. Locate neighborhood convenience centers along minor arterial or major collector streets. 12. Commercial development at street intersections shall be limited and restricted. Development of one quadrant does not indicate or dictate commercial use of the remaining quadrants. 13. Ensure that neighborhood convenience centers are provided with safe and convenient accessibility for both motorists and pedestrians. 5/98 Lu-ltJ . . . . . 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. Commercial Service 1. The existing commercial service development in Shorewood shall be upgraded and improved to the highest possible standards of operation. 2. It shall be the responsibility of existing commercial service developments to assume the burden of making necessary improvements to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential uses. 5/98 Lu-LJ. . . . . . . Concept Plan These adopted principles therefore serve as an initial reference guiding community or neighborhood district planning and improvement. The.next reference point is the Concept Plan. The Concept Plan forms the basis from which categorical elements of the Comprehensive Plan are developed. In other words, the plans for environmental protection, land use, transportation and community facilities will grow out of the concepts set forth in this section of the document. The physical development and design concepts are derived from the established goals, objectives and policies and an assessment of the community's function within the context of the Metropolitan Area. The primary function of Shorewood is the provision of housing and a leisure time environment. Likewise, the function of most adjacent lakeshore communities is similar, making it somewhat difficult to differentiate between one community and another. In addition to the similarity in basic function, irregular boundaries and geographic configuration compound the difficulty of identifying each individual community. Shorewood's lack of a "traditional downtown" and Excelsior's strong identity in that regard further add to the problem. In recognition of these problems, Shorewood has adopted as one of its goals establishing an identity and sense of community. For the purpose of this report, a community is defined as an entity possessing a common likeness or character. Since the basic character of Shorewood is that of a residential community, it is essential that each residential neighborhood be maintained as a unit with a sense of continuity and focus. Moreover, as certain supportive services and facilities are required in order for a residential community to function properly and adequately, nonresidential uses should be likewise maintained. In other words, proper attention to each constituent part of the community is essential to the establishment of an identity or sense of community. Relative to the function and goals of the community, the overall plan concept for the City of Shorewood is the development of the community on a district or neighborhood basis. While a neighborhood can be considered as much a social entity as a physical area, for 5/98 LU- i ~ planning purposes these neighborhoods or planning districts have been determined based upon natural divisions and/or physical barriers. So, for the purpose of this report, neighborhood and .. planning district may be used interchangeably. The map on the following page shows Shorewood divided, for planning purposes, into twelve districts. In order to enhance or reinforce the sense of community identity in Shorewood, it is essential that constituent planning districts within the City are provided with a sense of continuity and focus. An internal continuity within each district is desirable as each neighborhood should relate well within itself as well as to adjoining neighborhoods and the entire community. Within residential districts, it is proposed that neighborhood parks ranging in size depending on the circumstance serve as the focus or unifying element. This concept is illustrated in Concept Sketch Number One in the following pages. Furthermore, in terms of overall circulation within each neighborhood district, it is essential that major traffic flow border, not penetrate, the district. This is necessary from the standpoint of increasing the safety to pedestrians and bicyclists as well as maintaining the environmental quality of the neighborhood. Within the concept of developing the entire community on a unit or district basis, it is important that individual districts not only have an internal continuity, but also that they relate to one another. In order to relate neighborhood districts on a community scale, it is recommended that community focal points be developed (see Concept Sketch Number Two). Typically, a community would have one central activity center to serve this purpose. However, given the elongated shape of Shorewood, a multiple nuclei concept is proposed. These focal points already exist to a certain extent, but planning for the community should recognize and attempt to enhance these activity centers. The primary commercial focus for the City will be the shopping center at Lake Linden and Highway 7. Future commercial development in Shorewood should be encouraged to locate in and around the existing shopping center to ensure its economic viability and stability and establish this area as the commercial "core" of the City. Further, residential development around the shopping center should be the highest density considered allowable by the City. The idea of higher density residential surrounding the commercial center serves several purposes: 1) it supports commercial activity; 2) it serves as a land use transition between the intensity of the commercial activity and lower intensity uses (see Concept Sketch Number Three); and 3) provides an area for alternative housing types not now existing in Shorewood. The commercial center should remain easily accessible to all residential districts. The center should also project a unified image with individual components of the center arranged so as to create functional and complementary use relationships. Circulation within the core should be, to the extent possible, largely pedestrian oriented. In order to increase the continuity of the center, while at the same time increasing pedestrian safety, major traffic flo~ should be routed around the periphery of the center, penetrating it as little as possible. Finally, commercial property maintenance should represent and reflect the vitality and stability of the entire community. The Vine HilI Road/Highway 7 commercial area should be considered, although to a lesser degree, as another commercial focal point. Neighborhood and/or convenience type commercial uses should be encouraged to fill in this area. 5/98 LU- t4 . . . BASE MAl' Lt:GE>O Planning Districts 4/94 ...-.......---- -= ..._f"IG't.__Y ...,......_-"0,.....'.1 -..... ..0.. ::::=:'::===--' _ :-..:.."''''' ,.. -- =-' --- -- fJ ~ -~--- ~IBI(Q)UW(Q)(O)])) ~~ ~_ Ml/ll€T0!IIK4 III1"'t1t,MCI . LU-15 . . . The City Hall and surrounding City property will be considered another community focal point and serve as the civic center for Shorewood. Development of this area should be representative of community attributes and set an example for private development in the community. Community parks should be developed within the community to serve the recreational needs of the City. Additionally, the proposed Shorewood Trail System will serve to unify or tie the community together. To the extent feasible, priority should be given to the development of this system. A design concept which is to be encouraged in the com:mttnU, is residential clustering. This concept recognizes o,'erall density rather than lot size and can be applied in some fashion to any of the zoning districts. The primary advanta~ of this concept, and the reason it is considcred so suitable for Shore',v66d, is that it encourages preservation of natural features, such as -Hooded art:as and -,vdhmds, whHe still allowing efficient and economically advMltage6tlS use of land. Sketch Numbu Four illustrat-es this concept as applied 16 wetlands. Planned unit development is a concept which has been incorporated into Shorewood's existing zoning ordinance and utilized to a certain extent in the past. Advantages of planned unit development are several: 1) the contractual agreement between the developer and the City gives the City more total control than traditional subdivision; 2) more efficient circulation patterns can be achieved for a large area than piecemeal development might allow; 3) land use transitions can occur within the site; and 4) natural features can be preserved by functional clustering of units and/or uses. Shml,Mod's 4n. U.D. Ilgttlati()J1J all ill nud of Ilvil,~, ttpdatt: and cia! iftcatioll. Cllm Cl itt:! ia mttst beutttblis,'ud aJ M ,~hm 4n.U.D. may be ttJed aJ a de'rlf;/(jpmmt Mol. Applicants for P. U.D. must provide clear and convincing evidence demonstrating that the use of P.U.D. meets the City's criteria, and that the use of P.U.D. would provide benefit to the City over traditional zoning requirements. The primary advantage of this zoning tool, and the reason it is considered so suitable for Shorewood, is that it encourages preservation of natural features, such as wooded areas and wetlands, while still allowing efficient and economically advantageous use of land. 5/98 Lu-j1 Concept 1 J l J L . Perk ~ .., Ji f ") r--"\ r- The Park...neighborhood focus Concept 2 o Low density residential ~\\;~'\d Medium density residential ~ Commercial ac::ivity c:snters V ..... roCO.1S point ~ Major lTafTic: c:::rriers ~ Community Focus Points Ll.:-18 . . . . . . Concept 3 . ......... . .-<~~~[!~:~~~[~I~;? . unnereial acrivi~ canfer ... ... ...... ........ -e- 0" .......... ....0..... . ...0 ....... .... ....... .. eo.. ..... 0..... .0_. . .0.. ..... '0..0. .... ... .... .... .. ......0. . .... .0- 0_0_ ...... .... ..... ...... ,.. o. .... ... .... ..... . ..... ... 0- .... ... Land use transition Concept 4 Cluster development LU-19 . . . -- The maps on the following pages show Existing Land Use in Shorewood and the Land Use Plan for the community. The Land Use Plan map shows the proposed juxtaposition of a variety of land use types and densities. These land uses are described in general below. More detailed information and justification are included in the Area Plans section which follows the Community Facilities/Services Plan. Land Use . Plan Land Use Classifications . Undeveloped Open Space. Based upon the assumption that all buildable land in Shorewood will eventually be developed in one fashion or another, this category consists primarily of wetlands. These areas are indicated on the Land Use Plan map as designated wetlands, and are taken from the official Shorewood wetlands map. These areas are scattered throughout the community and range in size from small potholes to the very large tracts of land found near Howard's Point Road and east of Christmas Lake. Protection of these natural areas is considered important, both in terms of Shorewood's natural drainage system and retention of community aesthetics. As undeveloped land in Shorewood becomes more scarce, there is increasing interest in preserving at least some of it as permanent open space. Metro Greenprint.. a publication sponsored by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, provides an overview of programs available to communities interested in the preservation of open space. With these and other programs in mind, the City should examine its inventory of remaining undeveloped land, establishing priorities for the acquisition of land (e.g. ecological preservation, scenic and recreational value, etc.), and identifying financing alternatives for such acquisition. Input from neighborhood groupS would be valuable in this effort. . Low Density Residential. While the City has recognized a need for providing areas which allow a somewhat higher density than one acre lots, there is still a market for large lots. The areas indicated on the Land Use Plan map consist of land where such development is already prevalent. Overall density is proposed at approximately 0 to 1 unit per Lu-~i 5/98 Existing Land Use - 1994 . (needs to be reduced and inserted here) . . . LU-23 - Land Use Plan . (needs to be reduced and inserted here) . . . . LU-25 Residential development at this density is viewed as serving two purposes: 1) proper location creates a transitional area between lower density residential uses and higher intensity uses such as commercial (see concept plan), and 2) applies the concept of locating a greater density of population nearer to activity centers and major traffic carriers. . acre. Most of the areas proposed as low density are adjacent to natural areas such as lakes or wetlands. In this regard, the City must ensure that any changes in density to surrounding areas have a minimum of impact on the lower intensity use. Low to Medium Density Residential. This land use basically consists of single family residential at a density of approximately 1 to 2 units per acre. Most of the area designated as low to medium density residential is already zoned for this type of development. IIO~e\eI, some expMision of this IMtd tlse category is proposed. Areas that ale proposed for a change in dens it, from ION density to 10\\ to meetltlm dcnsit, aTe jtlstificd b~ed tlpon the appaTent need for m'C~ in vv hich development costs can be lov.cred and Jet ..here the spadotls chM'actcr of the comnltlniry can be niaintmned. Medium Density Residential. This category of land use is provided to allow residential development at a density of 2 to 3 units per acre. This density begins to allow a greater variety of housing types. Small lot single family residential, double bungalows, and medium density townhouse development may be permitted in these areas. . High Density Residential. At 3 to 6 units per acre, this is the highest density residential use proposed for the City of Shorewood. Types of housing allowed in these areas would include higher density townhouse development and potentially small scale apartment or condominium units. The areas proposed for high density residential are relatively limited in area and number so as to have a minimum effect on the overall density of the community. These areas include primarily the properties immediately adjacent to the existing commercial uses. Once again the concepts of land use transition and higher density near activity centers have been applied. Semipublic. This land use type includes churches, cemeteries, the NSP property on County Road 19, and the largest area designated semipublic - the country club and golf course located near the center of the community. All areas so designated on the Land Use Plan map are already in existence. No new areas are proposed for semipublic use, nor are any existing semipublic uses proposed to be eliminated. Public. This classification includes all existing public buildings, schools, parks and recreational facilities in the community. It should be noted that the Chicago and Northwestern rail right-of- way has been acquired by the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority for possible extension of light rail transit. Since light rail is not anticipated in the foreseeable future, the right-of-way will continue to be used for trail purposes. . 5/98 LU- ~ 1 Commercial. It is recommended that commercial uses in Shorewood be confined to cohesive, compact activity centers. The only commercial uses shown in the western portion of the community ~ are an existing marina on Howards Point Road and an auto repair operation on Smithtown Road, near Eureka Road. The marina is a nonconforming use within a residential zoning district, and the auto repair property is quite substandard, evenfor its current C-2 zoning. While this represents a considerable amount of land without neighborhood facilities, from a planning perspective neither the existing nor the proposed density in western Shorewood is considered great enough to warrant designation of an area for commercial use. Most of the commercial land use in Shorewood is located near the center of the community and on the east end between Vine Hill Road and Old Market Road. The area near the intersection of Smithtown Road and County Road 19 is mainly auto-oriented commercial. The shopping center in that area is part of Tonka Bay, but serves as a general commercial area for Shorewood residents. Shorewood's primary shopping district is located on Highway 7 east of Lake Linden Drive. It is recommended that if commercial development is proposed, it should be located in the shopping center or its immediate vicinity. The area surrounding the shopping center has been designated for high densit, low to medium density residential use on the Land Use Plan map, however, the City should remain open to proposals for commercial expansion there as well. Less than one mile east of the shopping center is an existing restaurant. It should be noted that Excelsior surrounds this site on three sides and Highway 7 separates the property from the rest of Shorewood. As such, its orientation is more toward the highway and downtown Excelsior. Moving eastward on the Land Use Plan map, the commercially zoned property at the intersection of Christmas Lake Road and Highway 7 has been acquired for public use, primarily for correction of the Christmas Lake Road intersection and drainage. The area in the vicinity of the Vine Hill Road/Highway 7 intersection is primarily neighborhood and convenience type commercial. No change in use or expansion of the commercial zoning is proposed for this area. Land Use/Zoning Changes Subsequent to adoption of the 1981 Comprehensive Plan, the City adopted zoning regulations to implement the Land Use Plan. A variety of residential zoning districts were established, a commercial service district was created, regulations for existing nonconforming marinas were adopted, and planned unit development provisions were improved and expanded. The actual zoning of property was limited to changes which made the zoning consistent with existing land use patterns. For example the Shady Hills area had been zoned for one-acre lots despite having developed as half-acre lots. Undeveloped parcels planned for a higher use than their zoning were not rezoned at the time. Rather, the intent was to rezone property in conjunction with development requests, using the Land Use Plan as a guide. . . While this approach to IG:l:oning has plo.idcd the Cit) ~ith stlbstantial contlol over development, fi more assertive impkmentMion prognml is recommended for the ftIttIrc. Given recent changes in legislation, it is important that the Land Use Plan map and the City's Zoning Districts map be consistent. For the most part, the Land Use Plan map will be adjusted to reflect existing zoning patterns. The map on the following page illustrates recommended changes that are necessary to mftke eliminate discrepancies between Shorewood's Land use Plan and Zoning Districts map consistent. Following is a summary of proposed changes (numbers are keyed to the map on the following page): . 5/98 LU- J,.f; BASE MA~GEfw() =---= ~=.~=- :IIllIIISI:: :::;-.:::...-a ICEII'P I.IC' ~ ::I.ICI______ ~;,.,-:.._-==== ~~eI"'_~uoc;.~- __M . . ~o,z't . 6. This M'Ca is pbmned for 1 2 tlnits per acre., btlt zoned RIA. R lC i:oning cxists to the north, e.a:st MId sotlth. Chtlnge. the. Zoning Dist1icts rmtp to R 1 C and highlight as being rcconJ:mCndcd fur planned tlnit ek:.dopment dtIe to vvetland eonfigtlIations. 1. Despite being planned for 1-2 units per acre, larger lots have been developed consistent with its R-1A zoning, mostly because of existing drainage problems in the area. Change the Land Use Plan to low density residential, 0-1 unit per acre. . 2. The 2-3 units per acre development of this area is more consistent with its R-ID zoning than its 0-1 unit per acre land use designation. Change the Land Use Plan to medium density residential, 2-3 units per acre. 3. Planned for 0-1 unit per acre, the area has been developed at two units per acre. and zoned R-IC. Change the Land Use Plan to low to medium density residential, 1-2 units per acre. 4. Larger lots have been developed than the original 1-2 units per acre which was planned. The existing development and R-1A zoning are consistent. Change the Land Use Plan to low density residential, 0-1 unit per acre. 5. Originally planned for residential development to phase out this commercial "spot zone", the City agreed in the mid 80's to retain the existing C-2, commercial zoning of the property. The. existing eomme.Icittlloning of the. property is no longer eonside.rcd to be consistent 'with the, rcsidcntilll character of thc llIca. ChMigc the Zoning Districts map to R-t€:- Even though the existing use is consistent with its C-2 zoning, the site does not conform to C-2 zoning requirements. The City may wish to work with the property owner in the future regarding redevelopment of this site. 9-:6. Planned for 3-6 units per acre as a transitional area between commercial and lower density residential, the proposed R 2A existing R -1 C zoning WOttld accommodates development of only two units per acre. Change the Zoning Districts map to R 2A. land use designation to low to medium density residential. &7. The current 1-2 units per acre land use designation is not consistent with existing commercial development or R-IA zoning. Change the Land Use Plan to commercial, noting that the existing marina should ultimately be brought into conformity with the L-R Lakeshore Recreational district. 9-:8. Initially planned for redevelopment to medium density residential, this area has been zoned R-C and C-4 reflective of existing uses. Change the Land Use Plan to commercial. *9. Thc existing R lC loning docs not Ie.fleet tThe planned 3-6 unit per acre density designation does not reflect the existing R-1C zoning of the area. Change the Zoning Districts map to R 2B or higher land use designation to low to medium density residential. . 5/98 LU- ~ t -H:10. The current 1-2 units per acre land use designation is not consistent with the zoning of this area. The Land Use Plan should be changed to medium density residential, 2-3 units per acre. . 12.11. Although it was planned for 2-3 units per acre, lots in this area and the existing zoning suggest a lower density. Change the Land use Plan to low to medium density residential, 1-2 units per acre. +3:-12. Once planned for commercial development, this land has been acquired for the future upgrading of the Christmas Lake Road/Highway 7 intersection. Change the Land Use Plan to public and the Zoning Districts map to R-IA. 1:-4:-13. Planned for 2-3 units per acre to encourage redevelopment from commercial service to residential. Change existing R-IA zoning to R-2A. +5-:14. This area has been developed based upon its existing R-1A zoning, making the 2-3 units per acre land use designation inappropriate. Change the Land Use Plan to low density residential, 0-1 unit per acre. The Land Use Plan map on page LU-25 reflects the preceding recommendations. Shorewood's zoning regulations should be reviewed and updated periodically. One issue that has been raised in the Natural Resources chapter of this Plan that relates to the preservation of open space is land coverage. Shorewood currently restricts the amount of impervious surface on property in shore land areas to 25 percent. It is recommended that a similar requirement, for . example 30 percent, be imposed on land that is not located within the Shoreland zoning district. Land Subdivision Controlling the way land is subdivided goes hand in hand with zoning regulations in ensuring the quality of urban development. As Shorewood's larger tracts become developed, increasing pressure will occur to resubdivide smaller parcels and land once considered to be marginal. The City's subdivision regulations should be updated to better address these situations. Further, all subdivisions of land should be examined for opportunities to preserve open space. The current Subdivision Code provides for developers to extend streets and utilities as necessary to accommodate the development of adjacent properties. Also the Transportation Chapter of this Plan sets forth policies for the use of private streets. With these rules in mind the review of all subdivision requests should consider how nearby land might develop in the future. Area planning should be done to demonstrate how specific subdivision requests fit with existing and future development. More often than not when one landowner is ready to subdivide its property, the adjoining landowner is not. Timing then becomes an obstacle to avoiding detrimental piece-meal development. The City can, in certain instances, overcome such obstacles by carefully crafting development agreements and restrictive covenants that provide for future development. For example, public right-of-way can be required for future streets with provisions that further development will result in street and utility assessments. Planned unit development can be used . 5/98 Lu-3t St:nior IIoosing . as a tool to accommodate the different timing of various landowners' development requests. Where it is not possible to facilitate coordination between landowners, subdivision should be deemed premature. As smaller pieces of land are resubdivided, lot configurations become a problem. Backlot divisions, flag lots and gerrymandered property lines undermine the benefits of building setbacks and disrupt continuity of open spaces. All subdivisions, regardless of size, should adhere to good planning and design principles. To this end, the use of formal platting procedures will be encouraged, while metes and bounds subdivisions will be approved only in the very simplest of cases. Housing Varietyl AtTordability Affordable housing strategy is beyond the scope of this plan. It is recommended thttt the City prepMC The City is in the process of preparing a separate housing plan to address this issue. The plan should include an inventory of Shorewood's existing housing stock, including types and values, and explore measures to encourage the de'vdopment preservation of existing affordable housing. Affordltble hOtlsing options for senior citizens M'C eXin';mdJ limited in Shorcwood. Once seniors choose to or mtlst leave their single family homes, virtua:llJ no hotlsing is avmlllbIc to them. The City recognizes the importance of keeping these people in the eommtlnity and hll:8 set a goa:! to . promote the de.-elopmcnt of sM'e, hea-lthy and M'fordable hoosing options for seniors.. Ov'er the past severa:! ,eMS eommtlnity leaders ha~'e identified vM'ioos !G.-els at '~vhich the City can. participate in the de v'eloplilent of senior hotlsing. Initia:lly it vv ll:8 hoped thttt the pri v ate. sector vvemld recognize thttt a mM'kct exists for senior hoosing in the SOtlth La:kc Minnctonka Mea. This mM'kct was demonstrated in a hotlsing nee~ sma, prcpM'Cd bJ the Cit, in 1991. In eonjtlnetion with that sma, Shore. vv ood tlpdated its zoning rcgtllations to address senior hotlsing. It ~;as deocrmined that the impact of senior hoosing on streets, parks Mid tltility serv-ices was less than. that of other ry pes of residentia:l de v dopnlCnt. ConseqtlentlJ, senior hoosing is novv aUovved to be btlilt at somewhat higher densities than other wisc provided b:y existing zoning. The Ciry also rcdt1ecd the park dedication fees and SCvfcr connection charges WI senior hotlsing in order to minimil:e development costs. The City has acti"vel, sotlght de.dopers of senior hoosing to btiild in Shore.wood. Response hll:8 been limiocd, however, dtle to severa:l factors. 1) limiocd ftlnding resotll'Ces; 2) rdathel, h.igh land costs in the Mea; 3) tlnavmlltbility of citJ Vvaocr; Mld. 4) conflict .rvith many re.sidents' desire to retain a very low densiry ehM'fl.eocr throtlghotlt the City. . The City hll:8 tlnderta1<.en an ana:!ysis of tlndcvelopcd and tlnderac (eloped land within the eommtlnit, to identif, siocs Tvvhich Me most stlitab1c for senior hotlsing. There is some qtlestion, gi v'en land and de'v'elopment costs, as to the fell:8ibiliry of dev'Cloping senior hoosing on l~d l:oned for one acre. lots (R IA zoning district). "INhile higher dGnsities aHowed in the R lC an.d higher re.sidcntial districts may pro~ide opport'tlnitics for senior hotlsing, tOOse siocs Me limited duc to lack of cit, w lrtCr. 5/98 LU- ')~ The map on th pareels e' e follovying pa . of tho~ Igblllle evn,id",e gt dlu,nate, I.,d tt> ~ in h. (t til) "tdcr im~~o btsuitable, in ~ ecl, thru ""ItS otlM" ' water ~o th~:" ~"'m the Cil) :;~I) . <ailablt'to ,,~g d~gee', .. seni:: .. sm. OUl of 35 W,t<;1 A. .;I.hl 0110'" iag i, . brietl"",,sen 1111<1 1ft om SIt<; 20 and 21) p.OU'lOg ,ites. Only t.. e "",wary of the ~ q,uc.stionoble ~ith fJI1r SIte' mil) be .bl 0 1120 ,uIll!bllrty of th . oul "tendin . e A:ppl _ . e <lgbl ,ite, g eft) ~mMcI 5 . One of thc t J :71 acres of Ian.J f, ftO SIte, . h a zoned ,or SlGp do w 0 """-'in" ,t "atel immcdi.iarlly "",ideotin! Odd parlmcnts. Cunertl ;o,::,e to wellMOs lIft~~"aJlobIc, this ,j::l) commercial Zoned f<> . Ing ..ould olIo" up ~:;' Could .ork fot ": '~el1 ,,,itcd' _ rs((tgle lift" . onll.. 0I0t uercs ~T' h 0: LYVO flt '} . .IM gradi . mI J rcsid . townhousc., "l'llrl~; thIS property evu:llal, thi, ,ite contains , r proper!). Cunenl':'ts and possible eOlla""'-'Ommodatc twin ""approximotd) 6.85 "ate, Potentiall JOg "fJI1ld olIo' ge style unit, W,. mes, ,mgklt cI y A. ailablc " up 10 59 ""il,. . , ll'<< " "nilobk t' I 1117118 otle nq,'} n 1 e these two . ,.-ailoble, .ite I "te. combine for I Park and y 8 eOtlld be de el 2 acres to ma1<.e . ""quntc , · oped alo one of Ih } 'Iles, except for ' pllte to buffel f' ne with 7.4 lit\'(; e .llI'gtl sit<;, ~o~~~ if ;':~::~I~~. r~~~~%I; =c'd,;~~)~~ ~~maa .. p to 59 nnits on IlIl' ..lltet 'y'lem i, n to "/ltcr from ChnIther While tIlli .it or 99 units on bulb p~acIcd. CUllent "" . ..",n f_;mlit e ll1ll) Ix. Sltitabl SItes. n'ag zonin ) ~c.s!ionablc Th e for ",.ior hOl1 ' g. C'l) ~atcr n,"; b e 7.4 lItl'tS ",ppo~mg, the existing ""n' 1133 lIftd 34 Mentioned pi' e ,.-ailobk from Ch.:.n,:~Z9 "nits b~";~~~ bun,;og m. ((",,"I) for their sir n. .U1TC1It Up to 18 nO~1 not be fca.!iblc dne ~ and ]l"Oximity to Ch for'tep do": ~;~~ be bnilt on *~;n:;"nl R IA zoni:~ll8Stft willer, senior W.t<;r Un"ailoblc ng dne 10 Iw nin'o nnlts on *34. S;tc 3-4":: property <al_. y not be stlitltbl *19 e If dry WM ll:8 man er cotlld be made" . y ll:8 53 tlnits C a v aIlltbIc to th. 6 . ottage st I IS .1 acre . While ' y e d>o.c1opme "le, its _in . , I, k PIOXImi,., to Ih al eonld possibl b g wOl1ld allow e of ~81u n ~ e golf co.rs ' e de <<lop .,l e""ld . I '1~e f<:asibT <<.Ihrm= 111' I Cu, T ,Ie d np 1040 nnit II'" for ,enior h"". IS ncalion, its exi,'" , he mo't .ignifk '. Soli, and wain Irl!: lJUGstionoble TIllllg ,omug at1cI :o~"'ir of ,it<;, "'-:;:;I~U'ion ...hieb con Ix. d age mil)' pose "",bkIM,e 9.3 lit'" .ite p ace,l..gc p..etl ' 'CIllO! hotr,in' fit"n ftom lIle ' ,ho.e been ,,-qui~~'b~~~ry limitdC:~;hsite ana:!ysis is that ~h\ , "" . clop ~ Ol'Gftnocl E ~ c efS or single famil" h' ~en as the smdv J OtlSIng. J #21 #23 #22 5/98 LU- 34 . . . . . . Chen the rltte at which lfind is being ltbsorbed fol pliv"Mc dGvdopment, the City ffift)' wish to tMcC actions to sct ~ide lfind which is considclcd stlitabk for senior hotlsing. It ffift)' be neceSSfil)' to ptlrchfise options on stlch propcn, whieh wotlld gi.e the City ltn opporttlnit)i to ltCqtlirc the lfind ltt some tinle in the future. If fi tiGdsion .-.ele mltdc thltt the Cit, vV'otlld acttlfiIly develop senior hotlsing itself, sites for 3tlch ptlrpose cotlld be. prcsened throtlgh the "official mapping" process. If the Cit, determines thltt fi highCI Ie v el of public pMtidpation is necessary, folIo,;. ing ltfC additionfil steps which eotlld be considGred: Assist in plodding tltilitics to senior hOtlsing sites . PtIrchMe lltnd for resfik to senior hOtlsing dC'. doper . Write dO'v.n land eost or donMc Iltn6 to senior hotlsing dGvdoper . U ndGnv rite eonstr tletion finMtCing Aet as de {doper, then sell eompleted project to Ii pri v fite entity Aet fiS developer ltnd owner, bttt eontnlet for man~mcnt Lake Access In 1988, after considerable study, the City adopted zoning controls that addressed the use of old existing fire lanes within the community. Originally platted as public rights-of-way leading to Lake Minnetonka and Lake William, these lanes have been classified and regulated based upon their historic use. This effort concluded that the fire lanes should not be vacated, but should be preserved for public use. Access to Shorewood's lakes is also provided by three existing marinas and yacht clubs. It has been determined that the yacht club located on Enchanted Island should continue to function as it has in the past and not be expanded due to its residential location and poor access. Efforts should be made to bring the marina on Howard's Point Road and the yacht club north of County Road 19 into compliance with Shorewood's L-R, Lakeshore Recreational zoning district. In this regard the provisions of the L-R district should be reviewed to determine if they are overly restrictive. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the LMCD continue to search for lake access parking spaces adjacent to Lake Minnetonka. The City should cooperate with these agencies to provide small, scattered facilities compatible with nearby land uses. Population and Household Projections Based Upon Land Use Plan 5/98 LU- ~5 1. Establish planning districts based upon natural divisions and physical barriers. Chapter Summary . The Land Use Chapter sets forth goals, objectives and policies which serve as a guide for how land within the City is to be developed and used. Shorewood has established itself as a predominantly residential community. Any nonresidential activities which are allowed should be located and designed to support a quality living environment. The City's land use goals are as follows: The City shall establish a pattern of land uses which is consistent with the residential and recreational functions of the community. The land use plan shall promote harmonious relationships between various land uses (e.g. homes, commercial outlets, churches, parks, schools, etc.) through proper development and locational planning. Through land use planning discourage land uses which are inconsistent with the residential and natural character of the community. . The City shall promote the de,-elopment preservation of safe, healthy and affordable housing options. The following summary of recommendations is reflective of the City's goals, objectives and policies: 2. Create and enhance focal points within each planning district or neighborhood. 3. Commercial development should be consistent with the residential character of the community and concentrated to three primary locations: 1) Country Club Road/County Road 19; 2) Lake Linden! Highway 7; and 3) Vine Hill Road/Highway 7. 4. r:neOtlI~e rcsidentiM dtlstering to prcsen-e nanllM feattlrcs (e.g. wetlands and shorcland). . 5/98 LU- ?J 1 5...:4. Promote the use of sound planning and design principles. , pmtictllarl} planned tmit dctelopme.nt. . -6:5. Coordinate the development of small land parcels to ensure that access and utility service comply with City standards. 9-:6. Adopt a Land Use Plan to illustrate the relationship of various densities of residential development and nonresidential uses. &7. Update the City's land use controls (e.g. zoning and subdivision ordinances) to implement the Land Use Plan. 9-:8. Identify areas which are best suited for planned unit development. *9. Require formal platting procedures for the subdivision of land, allowing metes and bounds divisions only in the simplest of cases. ++:-10. Prepare a separate housing plan describing Shorewood's existing housing stock and identify measures to encourage the de. v dopme.nt preservation of affordable housing the existing diversity of housing types, ranges of affordability and opportunities for seniors. 12. Take action to sGt aside. land ~hich is considcn~d stlitablc for se.nim housing. 13. Dete.m1:ine. to ~hat level the. Ci~ is ~ilIing to pmtidptttc finandall} in the dCv.dopnlCnt of se.nim hOtlsing. . +4-:11. Seek ways to bring the Howard's Point Marina and the Shorewood Yacht Club into substantial compliance with the Lakeshore Recreational (L-R) zoning district. +5:12. Review and update the requirements of the Lakeshore Recreational zoning district. 16. Work "with thc LMCD to idcntiry stlitabk locations for ptlbIic access to Lake MinnGtonka. 13. Develop and implement programs for the preservation of open space. . 5/98 LU- ,t;