The URL can be used to link to this page

042495 CC Reg AgP . ... .. RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING CITY OF SHOREWOOD MONQ&X, APRIL 24, 1995 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board of Review Minutes - AprilS, 1995 (Att.-#l Minutes) 2 . RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW FROM APRIL 5, 1995 MEETING (Att.-#2 Assessor's Report) 3 . ADJOURN TO REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING BOARD OF REVIEW 1 . CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call Malam McCarty Mayor Bean Stover Benson B. Review Agenda 2 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Minutes - April 10, 1995 (Att.-#2A Minutes) B. City Council Work Session Minutes - April 12, 1995 (Att.- #2B Minutes) 3. CONSENT AGENDA - Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda &: Adopt Resolutions Therein: A. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approvipg a Preliminary Plat - Birchbluff Lakeview Addition and Setback Variance (Att.-#3A Proposed Resolution) Applicant: Brian Fredrickson Location: 26115 Birch Bluff Road B. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Denying a C.U.P./P.U.D. for Shared Driveway Accesses and Hardcover Ratios (Att.- #3B Proposed Resolution) Applicant: Corky Elsen Location: 5290 & 5300 Howards Point Road C. A Motion to Approve a Sign Permit for City of Shorewoodl Silverwood Park (Att.-#3C Proposed Sign) D. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Making Appointments to the Watermain Assessment Advisory Group (Att.-#3D Proposed Resolution) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 24, 1995 Page 2 4 . MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (Presentations are linli ted to 3 minutes. No Council action will be taken.) 5 . PLANNING Report by Representative A. PUBLIC HEARING 7 :30 p.m. - Consideration of vacation of Part of Summit Avenue (Att.-#5A Planner's Memorandum) B. A Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact Regarding a Setback Variance (Att.-#5B Planner's Memorandum) Applicant: John Grable Location: 4720 Bayswater Rd C. A Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact Regarding a Preliminary Plat and Variance to Allow a Lot with no Frontage on a Public Street - Zachary Woods (Att.-#5C Planner's Memorandum) Applicant: Brent Sinn Location: 6035 Galpin Lake Road D. A Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact Regarding a Setback Variance and Variance to Expand a Non-conforming Structure (Att.-#5D Planner's Memorandum) Applicant: Jack Kimball Location: 4445 Highland Circle E. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Denying an Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Att.-#5E Planner's Memorandum) Applicant: Lundgren Bros. Inc. Location: 76.5 Acres North of Smithtown Rd West of Minnewashta School F. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plat - Manitou Woods (Att.-#5F Proposed Resolution) Applicant: Abingdon Development Corporation Location: 5580 Manitou Road (County Road 19) G. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plat - Smithtown Meadows (Revised) (Att.-#5G Proposed Resolution) Applicant: Abingdon Development Corporation Location: 25655 Smithtown Road (Outlot A) H. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plat - Smithtown Woods (Att.-#5H Proposed Resolution) Applicant: Clint Carlson and Brian Ohland Location: 25895 and 25865 Smithtown Road I. A Motion to Approve a Modification of a Conditional Use Permit for Steve Simon, 26710 Edgewood Road (Att.-#5I Planner's Memorandum) .. . .. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 24, 1995 Page 3 6. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR LIEUTENANT JOHN HODGDEN (Att. -#6 Proposed Resolution) 7 . CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION REVISING PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS FOR 1995 CDBG PROGRAM FUNDS (Att.-#7 Proposed Resolution) 8 . ADMINISTRATOR &: STAFF REPORTS A. Status Report - 1995 Issues/Objectives B. Attorney's Report on Proposed Agreements for Southshore Senior Community Center Project - 2nd Draft (Att.-#8B Proposed Agreements) C. Report on SLMPDS 1994 Financial Report 9 . MAYOR &: CITY COUNCIL REPORTS 1 o. ADJOURN SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF CLAIMS ( At t . - # 10 ) ,.. L MAYOR Robert Bean COUNCIL Kristi Stover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 24, 1995 ~.. . .' The reconvened Board of Review will be at 7:00 p.m. The regular City Council meeting will convene immediately following the Board of Review. .. One additional letter requesting re-evaluation of property. was received via fax on April 7, after the initial Board of Review meeting. A copy of this letter is enclosed in your packet and was forwarded on to the Assessor upon receipt. You may address her concerns at this time, or send her to the County. J w. Enclosed in the packet you will find the Assessor's recommendation for properties that were reviewed. The Council may" approve the Assessor's recommendations in entirety with one motion, or may act upon individual property recommendations, including changing the recommended valuation. Aaenda Item #3A:. Brian Fredrickson proposes to subdivide his property at 26115 Birch Bluff Road into two lots. Since the existing house will be less than 35 feet from the right-of- way of Third Street (an undeveloped r.o.w.) a setback variance is necessary. The Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to recommendations contained in the Planner's and Engineer'S reports. Approval requires a four-fifths vote. Aaenda Item #3B: Mr. Corky Elsen constructed additional driveway and hardcover surfaces on his property at 5290 A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore ,,'- -<' . . City Page Council 2 Agenda April 24, 1995 Howard's Point, contrary to his approved building permit and in violation of Shorewood zoning requirements. Despite having signed an escrow agreement ensuring that the violations would be corrected, Mr. Elsen requests approval to leave the driveway as built. Since the situation does not warrant a variance, the Planning Director suggested a minor P.U.D. as one means to resolve the problem. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny the concept and recommends that the violation be corrected. At the its last meeting the Council directed staff to prepare a findings of fact denying the C.U.P. Aoenda Item #3C: A sign permit is necessary to install a "Silverwood Park" sign at its entrance. The motion is to approve the sign permit for the sign to be installed by Tonka Sign Crafters of Excelsior. The sign will be installed for $440 plus tax. It will be similar to the other park signs and the Public Works garage sign. Aoenda Item #3D: Additional names and addresses can be added to this resolution to complete the Watermain Advisory Group. Aoenda Item #5A: Mr. Theodore Rix requests that the City vacate 15 feet of Summit Avenue abutting the front of his property at 23040 Summit Avenue. The City approved a similar request on the opposite side of the street in 1990, at which time it was anticipated that additional right-of-way would be vacated. The staff recommends approval of the vacation subject to the City retaining a 10-foot drainage and utility easement in place of the vacated r.o.w. Approval requires a simple majority of the Council. Aoenda Item #5B: John Grable's request for a variance was referred back to the Planning Commission for review of additional material submitted at the Council level. After lengthy discussion regarding a variance to the 50-foot perimeter setback requirement, the applicant agreed to withdraw his request for a variance. He still wishes to appeal the Planning Director's interpretation regarding encroachments into the common area. The Planning Commission voted 4-2 (Kolstad abstained) to support the staff's interpretation to not allow decks into the common area, despite a number of preexisting encroachments in the Amesbury and Amesbury West projects. Mr. Grable's appeal requires a four-fifths vote of the City Council for approval. Aoenda Item #5C: Brent Sinn has modified his plans to subdivide his property (Zachary Woods) so that construction of a new road will not be required. The plat results in one less lot and substantially less site alteration than the previous plans, but requires variance to create a lot without frontage on a public street. Despite the variance staff . . '. feels that the new plan is superior to previous ones. The Galpin Lane homeowners are in agreement to grant Mr. Sinn use of Galpin Lane (a private road) subject to certain conditions. The Planning Commission voted unanimous (just kidding!) unanimously to approve the preliminary plat and variance subject to staff recommendations. 'The motion is to direct staff to prepare a findings of fact. Approval requires a four-fifths vote, due to the variance. Aaenda Item #5D: Jack Kimball has requested a 20-foot front yard variance in order to convert his existing garage into a main level bedroom and build a new attached garage at 4445 Highland Circle. Due to the size and configuration of the property, the Planner recommends approval of the variance. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the request. The motion is to direct staff to prepare a findings of fact. Approval requires a four-fifths vote by the Council. Aaenda Item #5E: Although Lundgren Bros. comprehensive plan amendment was effectively resolved in the adoption of the Comp Plan Update (no increase in density), this resolution formally denies the application. The Planning Commission recommended the denial unanimously. Aaenda Item #5F: The staff and Planning Commission have recommended approval of a preliminary plat for two twin homes at 5580 Manitou Road. The feasibility study for water main extensions has been extended to examine the possibility of providing water to this project. Approval requires a simple majority of the Council. Aaenda Item #5G: The Planning Commission and staff have recommended approval of a preliminary plat, subject to conditions, for Abingdon Development Corp. The five-lot Smithtown Meadows project is located south of Smithtown Road at Eureka Road. Drainage issues and crossing the H.C.R.R.A. r.o.w. have been addressed and will be addressed as part of the final plat. Approval requires a simple majority vote by the Council. Aaenda Item #5H: The Planning Commission and staff have recommended approval of a six-lot (including two existing homesites) preliminary plat called Smithtown Woods. Tree preservation has been addressed, as well as municipal water extension to the site. As with the Smithtown Meadows plat, the City has agreed to expand the feasibility study for water main extensions to these two projects. Approval requires a simple majority vote. Aaenda Item #5I: Steve Simon proposes to relocate slightly (15 feet) the poolhouse for which he received a conditional use permit in February. Although it does not warrant a new ., .. . . public hearing, staff feels that the Council should approve the modification. While staff recommends approval of the relocation, no increase in the height of the building should be allowed. Aaenda Item #6: This is a resolution of commendation for John Hodgden for 24 years of exemplary service on the Shorewood and South Lake Police Departments. Aaenda Item #8: A public hearing is not necessary to reallocate Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. As you are aware, Hennepin County had informed us that we could not designate more than $3,598 to the Southshore Senior Center. Staff's proposed revised resolution is enclosed. I have asked Ben Withhart from Senior Community Services to prepare for the packet a memorandum explaining how they will absorb the loss in CDBG funds. Aaenda Item #8A: Enclosed is the first quarter status report on issues as prioritized by the City Council and on objectives identified in our 1995 budget. please feel free to ask any questions on the report either before the meeting . or following the report at the meeting. Aaenda Item #8B: The second draft of the Cooperative Agreement and Lease Agreement relating to the Southshore Senior Community Center is enclosed in the packet. The Friends of the Southshore Senior Community Center comments will be available by meeting time. If the Council is comfortable with this draft of the agreements, the next step would be a meeting with representatives from the other municipalities to review the agreements in detail. Aaenda Item #8C: The Police Department financial report is enclosed in the packet and has been reviewed and accepted by the Police Coordinating Committee at its meeting on April 19. - .- TEL: Apr 07 95 16:05 No.014 P.Ol April 7. 1995 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 Delivered via Fax# 474-0128 RE: 23730 Mclain Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Property 10 # 34-117-23 23 0030 Dear Mayor and Council Members: The purpose of this letter Is to request a re-evaluatlon of the Market Value For Taxation for my home at the above address. . I was out of town for the Board of Review this past week, but understand from my neighbors that a Board of Review Advisor will be reviewing home values in my neighborhood, and I wish to add my property to that list. The value of my property increased by over $10,000 from the previous years. This increase Is even more contentious due to the fact that my home has serious water damage In the basement because of the inadequate drainage in the neighborhood. It is doubtful I would be able to find a buyer, let alone sell the home for the value that the Assessor has placed on this property. I have very serious damage to the floor, sheetrock, and fixtures in the basement of my home due to ground water seepage. You are welcome to view the problem if you wish, or even drive through the neighborhood to see the standing water, particularly just north of the intersection of Mlnnetonka Drive and McLain Road. . Thank you for relaying this information to the your Board of Review Advisor for a re- evaluation of the inappropriate value. Also, I would appreciate jf the City's Engineer could review the serious drainage problem in this neighborhood. With the market values, and, therefore, property taxes, skyrocketing, It would be nice to have the option of placing my home up for sale, If it becomes necessary. Let me know if you would like any additional information. ~~'-Y () (' ~rton'~ ~ Work: 939-8213 Home: 474-8634 c. . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING WEDNESDAY, APRIL 5, 1995 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING Mayor Bean convened the Board of Review meeting at 7:08 p.m. A. ROLL CALL Mayor Bean, Councilmembers Benson, Malam, McCarty, and Stover; City Assessors Rolf Erickson and Lisa Mott, and Deputy City Clerk Teri Naab. 2. BOARD OF REVIEW Present: Mayor Bean stated the purpose of the meeting is to take public testimony relative to the assessed value of homes in Shorewood. He outlined the parameters of the testimony and stated that no action will be taken at this meeting. The Board of Review will reconvene at 7:00 p.m., April 24, 1995, at City Hall, to consider and take action on the Assessor's valuation recommendations with respect to the individual appeals. City Assessor Erickson referred the audience to informational material available: "Board of Review Information-Definitions and Explanations, Most Asked Questions." He explained the valuation method, the appeal process, and the role of the Board of Review, and requested each resident appealing the valuation to make an appointment for an assessor to view the home. Mayor Bean opened the meeting for public testimony. John Moore, 23340 Bracketts Road, PID#35-117-23-32-oo37, requested that the $11,000 increase in valuation of his property be rolled back because adjacent property sold in January for $15,000 less than its sale price when new 5 years ago. He believed the 1994 valuation of his property to be accurate. Amy White, 22355 Bracketts Road, PID#35-117-23-33-0033, reiterated comments made by Mr. Moore, and requested the $10,000 increase in valuation of her home be reduced to its 1994 valuation. John Bridge, 25810 Birch Bluff Road, PID#29-117-23-44-ooo7, stated that over the past 15 years, increases in the assessed value of his home built in 1950 reflected the rate of inflation. However, he stated it now increased 17% or $40,000, and that while the assessor re-affumed the valuation, it is difficult to understand the substantial increase in valuation. L.A. Kramer, 4475 Enchanted Lane, PID#30-117-23-33-oo02, stated he owns a 50' lake access empty lot of which he has sold 2 10' easements, leaving him with 30'. He expected his tax to be lowered based on the sales, however, it has not been reduced. Kramer requested investigation of this. David Schaus, 6020 Whitney Circle, PID#36-117-23-41-oo55, stated the value of his home in the Near Mountain area has increased $45,000 over the past 2 years to $260,000. No home in his subdivision has sold for more than $210,000 during that time, thus he believes his home is being =IF/ 1>----' BOARD OF REVIEW April 5, 1995 - PAGE 2 compared with those in the Sweetwater-Waterford district. Based on his calculations, his home should be valued in the $200,000 range and requested a review. Elden Beckman, 6125 Apple Road, PID#35-117-23-34-0019, objected to the $5,000 mcrease in valuation to $94,000 of his property in 1 year because his home is 80-90 years old and no great improvements have been made. Dave Littlefield, 24775 Glen Road, PID#33-117-23-12-0023, stated the value of his home increased 18% to $235,000 which is $43,000 more than others on his street. He reviewed the valuations of 2 homes comparable to his which are valued 15%-20% below his home. He enumerated aged components of his home and noted that while the assessor stood by the valuation, a review is justified. Irene Chanin, 5310 Shady Hills Circle, PID#25-227-23-44-0034, stated the valuation of her home has increased $9,000/year for the past 4 years. The house is on the market and the asking price is less than the assessed value by several thousand dollars. She requested a review of the assessor's valuation. Doug Anderson, 6125 McKinley Circle, PID#36-117-23-44-0071, stated that without any capital improvements, valuation of his home increased $31,000 over the past 2 years. A comparable home in the area with more square footage is valued $16,000 less than his home. . Jim Wilson, 24140 Yellowstone Trail, PID#33-117-23-41-0024, described a failed sales transaction of a vacant lot which has been deemed a wetland. Because the lot is not buildable or saleable, he requested a reduction in its valuation. Bob Rau, 23980 Yellowstone Trail, PID#34-117-23-32-0020, related his experience dealing with the assessor's office and complained that increased valuations make it difficult to buy/selllkeep a home in Shorewood. He stated all taxpayers are resisting higher taxation and alleged that complaining taxpayers receive punitive treatment from the assessor. Don Kronberg, 5760 Eureka Road, PID#33-117-23-23-0029, stated his home is 95 years old and inquired how he can find out how his home was evaluated, particularly the 4-season porch. MknarylPdlatzebr, 19765 Muirfield Circle, PID#36-117-23-12-OO35, stated she is a l$icensed realtor and ..... owe gea Ie about market values. She stated the valuation of her home is 85,000 more than . the purchase price. She claimed her situation is unique because homes in the area are purchased at prices exceeding the asking price by transferred/re-Iocated individuals with below market financing made available by corporations. Therefore, she concluded that comparisons are. unrealistic and unfair. Marc Gordon, 19335 McKinley Court, PID#36-117-23-44-0062, questioned the $18,000 increase in the valuation of his home, which has increased 26% over the past 3 years. This rate is double the rate of inflation and is excessive. Laura Berghoff, 26760 Edgewood Road, PID#29-117 - 23- 34-0005, stated her home was built last year. She protested the valuation of $560,000 which is $132,000 more than the purchase price of the home and land. Dave Peterka, 5540 Covington Road, PID#36-117-23-21-0012, presented a document outlining the reasons the assessed market value of his property is not equitable as compared to that of other similar homes. He requested a review of the valuation. ..-. ... BOARD OF REVIEW April 5, 1995 - PAGE 3 Darlene Dallmann, 4815 Ferncroft Drive, PID#26-117 - 23-14-0029, protested the $11,000 increase in valuation of her home because it does not compare with other updated homes in the area which is a neighborhood of mixed homes. Two homes in her area were sold to transferred employees. J 0 Cunningham, 28170 Woodside Road, PID#31-117 - 23- 24-00 10, protested her valuation increase of $27,000. Other homes in the area have been updated/restored extensively, however her home is in need of repairs. She expressed concern that should she make any repairs, the valuation would further increase driving her out of her home because of the higher taxes. Beverly Ginther, 5790 Brentridge Drive, PID#31-117-23-41-oo23, described successive valuations of her 2 year old home. Inquiries she made of the assessments of other homes in the area support her claim that the valuation of her home is not fair and equitable,. therefore she requested a review and roll-back to the 1994 valuation. Dick Logelin, 5735 Minnetonka Drive, PID#34-117-23-23-0012, stated his home was built in 1968 at a cost of $18,000 and is now valued at $115,000. He could not understand how an old home with flooding in the front yard and the street can increase in value from year to year without any improvements to it. He requested a review of the valuation. . Phobe Harrington, 23870 Elder Turn, PID#34-117-23-23-0038, reiterated Mr. Logelin's concerns with respect to water problems. She described her personal status, the deteriorating nature of her small home, and protested the $9,000 increase in its valuation. Bingham Brokken, 23770 McLain Road, PID#34-117-23-23-0029, reiterated Mr. Logelin's concerns with respect to water problems. He described successive annual valuation increases of his home purchased in 1960. He protested his valuation on the basis that no improvements have been made, sale prices of homes in the area are not comparable to his valuation, and other [mandal activity in the economy does not justify an increase for 1996. . Jim Eddy, 5830 Minnetonka Drive, PID#34-117-23-32-OO14. Did not appear when name called. Dave Grove, 5375 Howards Point Road, PID#30-117-23-44-0014, requested his neighbor to speak before him. Jeff Fox asked the assessor to clarify the effect on valuation of homes purchased under distress sales, golden parachutes, for re-Iocated/transferred employees, or by corporations with unlimited funds. Assessor Erickson explained that the sales studies used do not include sales of homes that are HUD related, relocation sales, sales of new homes, sales from contractors, sales to or from a corporation, and sales between relatives. Dave Grove stated his valuation increased by $20,000. He contacted the assessor before some improvements were made to his 70-year old home, and understood that the valuation would not increase for 10 years due to laws pertaining to older homes. He requested clarification of the "this old house" deferment. He objected to the higher valuation because the higher taxes will drive him out of the home and requested a review. Robert Manders, 6105 Rampart Court, PID#33-117-23-44-0040, explained his home was completed in November 1993, assessed at 98% of its value in Spring 1994, and this year the assessed value increased $11,000 without any added improvements. He requested a review. Mike Becker, 19260 McKinley Court, PID#36-117-23-44-0049, asked why his valuation has increased 25% over the past 3 years-11.2% this year. Homes sold in his area have been significantly improved, while he has made no improvement to his. In defense of the appeal process, he noted that 6 years ago he went through the process and succeeded in a lowered valuation. ... ~ ')0 BOARD OF REVIEW April 5, 1995 - PAGE 4 Bill Vogel, 21000 Ivy Lane, PID#26-117-23-14-0025, indicated his valuation has increased by $12,000 over the past 2 years, doubted his home is actually worth $97,000, and expressed concern about the ever-rising rate of increase. Dave Froehling, 23665 Gillette Curve, PID#34-117-23-23-oo52, stated his property value has increased 10% over the past 2 years, even after a reduction of 30' of the lot. Betty Pflog, 4965 Suburban Drive, PID#25-117-23-23-oo14. Diana Pahl, 4985 Suburban Drive, PID#25-117-2323-oo13. Did not respond when called. Allan Vanderlinde, 5625 Star Lane, PID#33-117-23-24-0031, had an increase of $15,000 this year. A physical review by the assessor resulted in a correction regarding completion of the basement, however, not knowing what the change in valuation may be or if a change has been made, he wishes to preserve his right to appeal to the County Board. Although an appointment for the review was made, the assessor did not identify himself. It was suggested that assessors wear an ID badge and/or present an identification card. S.B. Sparber, 5840 Ridge Road, PID#36-117-23-31-0020, stated though he is not requesting a reduction at this time, he expressed concern over increasing valuations on Ridge Road. . Carrie Tietz, 22680 Galpin Lane, PID#34-117-23-44-0003, stated she has lived in her 55 year old home for 21 years. This is her fIrst occasion to complain about valuation, An increase of $12,000 in 1994 and $33,000 in 1995, with minimal improvements. She requests a review noting that a home sold in the neighborhood for $70,000 less than the current value of her home. She reiterated the sentiment of previous speakers that values must become more sensible in order that residents may continue to reside in their Shorewood homes. Robert Walz, 5125 Suburban Drive, PID#25-117-23-32-0048, reiterated the views of others owning old homes with no improvements, yet values continue to increase for no apparent reason. He lives on a fIxed income, does not wish to sell his home, and any relief would be appreciated. Mike McDonald, 4695 Lagoon, PID#30-117-23-31-0004. Did not respond when called. Midge Lockovitch, 25620 Smithtown Road, PID#32-117-23-14-oo32, explained her valuation was lowered last year, however it is again increased this year by an unacceptable amount, therefore . a review is appropriate. ., . Steve Martin, 5750 Christmas Lake Road, PID#35-117-23-13-0019, inquired whether the assessor is paid on a commission basis. (The work is on a contract basis.) He appealed to the Board of Review to communicate to the State and County officials the constituents' distress, anger, and frustration over higher valuations and resulting higher taxation. Paul Kastor, 25535 Birch Bluff, PID#28-117-23-33-0024, explained the status of his small house/cabin and has experienced successive increases exceeding the appraised mortgage value of the home. He related the details of the assessor's visit that resulted in a $11,000 increase in valuation, therefore, he declined to request another review. Terrance McNally, 20390 Excelsior Blvd., PID#25-117-23-34-oo20, reiterated concerns of residents being taxed out of their homes. An appeal last year resulted in a roll-back, however, this year the valuation of his home/summer cottage increased from $95,200 to $102,500. He described the unimproved, rather poor condition of his home and driveway and requested a review of the valuation. Francis X. Fallon, Jr., 1050 Holly Lane, PID#35-117-23-44-0oo7. Did not respond when called. .... ... .. . . BOARD OF REVIEW April 5, 1995 - PAGE 5 Myrle Mackenzie, 5975 Glencoe Road, PID#34-117-23-31-0028, explained the market value of h~r home has increased from $121,000 to $136,000 over 2 years. The area has little resale appeal, WItness a home on the street unsold after 4 months on the market. She believes her home while modest is among the highest valued on the street. She requested a review of the current valuation. Don Bongaards, 25360 Birch Bluff, PID#28-117-23-33-0028, stated the valuation of his home increased $10,000 last year and $24,000 this year. He requested special consideration because of the location of his home near Crescent Beach where milfoil is disposed of which makes the home unsalable and should be considered in its valuation. Mark Kohls, 21035 Minnetonka Blvd., PID#26-117-23-11-0017. Did not respond when called. Stephen Tierney, 26200 WildRose, PID#32-117-23-12-0033, inquired about the rates of increase and how they are applied across the City. While his current increase of 6% is low compared to others, he doubted his home would sell at that valuation, and suggested that proof of increased value should be given. Dean Uglem, 23875 Elder Turn, PID #34-117-23 32 0012; Patty Tauscher, 19360 McKinley Court, PID#36-117-23-44-0054; Judy Sirota, 19675 Chartwell Hill, PID#36-117-23 13 0024; Jerry Brokaw, 27320 Blue Ridge Lane, PID#31-117-2344-0004 and Frank Fox, 27990 Smithtown Road, PID# 31-117-23 34 0006 all did not respond when called. Tony Studer, 5685 Minnetonka Drive, explained he is an observer. He expressed concern about the water problem at the Dick Logelin residence and suggested the City take some action to alleviate the problem. Bob Jochims, 4765 Bayswater Road, PID#25-117~23 220049, reiterated concerns expressed by others about steadily increasing taxes that individuals cannot afford, particularly those on fIxed incomes. Letters objecting to valuations were received from the following: Richard W. Dyer II, 6070 Brand Circle, PID#35-117-23-43-0007 Charles J. Fox, 5660 Vine Hill Road, PID#36-117-23-14-0059 James and Connie Volling, 6200 Sierra Circle, PID#36-117 -23-43-0029 Joanne and Russell Aldrich, 4770 Lakeway Terrace, PID# 26-117-23 110030 Stuart L. and Gail M. Finney, 19710 Chartwell Hill, PID#36-117-23-13-0026 Robert K. Nygaard, 4785 Lagoon Drive, PID# 30-117-23 31 0002 Naomi R. Carlson, 5955 Cathcart Drive, PID#32-117-23-31-0015 Mark McArthur, 6080 Whitney Circle, PID#36-117-23 410057 Ray Barton, 5915 Christmas Lake Road, PID#35-117-23 42 0020 Kenneth N. Stabeck, 20454 Knights Bridge Road, PID#25-117-23-32-0041 Peter A. Fisher, 6130 Sweetwater Court, PID#36-117-23-43-0040 Mangala Pai Panandiker, 19425 Vine Ridge Road, PID#36-117-23-14-0022 M.M.E. Wadsworth, 5460 Howards Point Road, PID#31-117 - 23-11-0005 Dick Larson, 5610 Vine Hill Road, PID#36-117-23 140064 During the course of public testimony, Assessor Erickson referred to the Assessors' Code of Ethics and to State and County rules prescribing valuation methods. He delineated the sections of the City physically inspected for the January 2, 1995 assessment, noting that all properties are recalculated each year. BOARD OF REVIEW April 5, 1995 . PAGE 6 Mayor Bean closed the public testimony. He reported that of each tax dollar, 14% comes to Shorewood, 26% goes to Hennepin County, 54% to school districts, and 6% to other taxing districts. 2. ADJOURNMENT Malam moved, Stover seconded to adjourn the Board of Review meeting at 10:00 p.m. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED, Arlene H. Bergfalk Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial ATTEST: ROBERT B. BEAN, MAYOR ------------------------------- TERI NAAB, DEPUTY CITY CLERK ... '.... . . , . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1995 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Bean called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Bean; Councilmembers Benson, Malam, McCarty', and Stover; Administrator Hurm, City Engineer Dresel, City Attorney Keane, and Planning Director Nielsen. B. Review Agenda Stover moved; Benson seconded to approve the agenda for April 10, 1995 amended by adding 2.A. Mayor's Statement and moving 3.A. from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda as a discussion item. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES City Council Regular and Work Session Minutes - March 27, 1995 Benson moved, McCarty seconded to approve the March 27, 1995 City Council Regular Meeting and Work Session Minutes amended by changing conforming to nonconformin~ on page 4, line 6, paragraph 2, under item F. and on page 7 deleting McCarty from the list of those present at the Executive Session (changes made refer to Council minutes). Motion passed 5/0. (Correction underlined.) A. Mayor's Statement Mayor Bean acknowledged the departure of Arlene Bergfalk after three years of service to the City Council and Planning Commission as Recording Secretary. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Bean read the Consent Agenda for April 10, 1995. Malam moved, McCarty seconded to approve the Motion on the Consent Agenda and to adopt the Resolutions therein: A. M-otion to Adopt a Resolution Approving Setback Variance and Variance to Expand a Nonconforming Structure. Richard Kowalsky. MOVED TO REGULAR AGENDA. B. RESOLUTION NO. 95-24, "A Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit for the South Shore Senior Community Center." Applicant: City of Shorewood. Location: 5745 Country Club Road. *.,2/1 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 10, 1995 - PAGE 2 , C. Motion to Approve Agreement with Lake Restoration, Inc., Hamel, MN, for 1995 Inspection of Eurasian Water Milfoil-Christmas Lake. D. RESOLUTION NO. 95-25, "A Resolution Rescinding Resolution No. 94- 94 and Approving a Revised Final Plat of Robert S.C. Peterson 2nd Addition. " E. RESOLUTION NO. 95-26, "A Resolution Making Appointments to the Shorewood Park Foundation Board of Directors." Jennifer McCarty added 4/95. Motion passed 5/0. 3.A. Motion to Adopt a Resolution approving a Setback Variance and a Variance to Expand a Nonconforming Structure. Applicant: Richard Kowalsky. Location: 5740 Christmas Lake Point. Nielsen explained this matter was moved from the Consent Agenda because the applicant requested changes to the Resolution be made as follows: delete Deborah wherever it appears in the . Resolution, and in paragraph 3. under CONCLUSIONS, change the completion date of approved work to June 15, 1996. The Councilmembers accepted the changes requested by the applicant. Stover moved, McCarty seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95-27, "A Resolution Granting a Setback Variance and Variance to Expand a Nonconforming Structure to Richard Kowalsky." Motion passed 5/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Mr. Peter Rowland, a new Shorewood resident building a home on Knoll Road, questioned the rationale for selection of the Minnewashta location for the proposed water tower. He acknowledged the property may be inexpensive and preferred from an engineering standpoint, but expressed concern that a tower would disturb and diminish the pristine nature of the wetland area. Rowland inquired whether a decision has been made as to the style of tower to be built, whether a tower more aesthetically pleasing would be considered, and whether the color blue has been . chosen over a less distracting color such as taupe. Mrs. Rowland pointed out that construction of homes in that location would provide a more advantageous tax base for the City and a commercial area would be a better site for a water tower. Dresel explained it is important to note that construction of a water tower is currently in the feasibility study stage. He briefly explained the technological merits of the Minnewashta location and suggested that other locations may be considered. Dresel indicated that style/color of a tower has not yet been addressed, but the Council will seek and consider public input. 5 . PARKS - Report by Representative Commissioner Dzurak referred to the minutes of the Park Commission's March 28, 1995 meeting and invited questions. The Councilmembers had no questions. 6. PLANNING - Report by Representative Commissioner Turgeon reviewed the actions taken and recommendations made at the Commission's April 4, 1995 meeting. , .. . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 10, 1995 - PAGE 3 A. Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact Regarding a Preliminary Plat-Birchbluff Lakeview Addition-and Setback Variance. Applicant: Brian Fredrickson. Location: 26115 Birch Bluff Road. Nielsen reviewed the applicant's request to divide his property into 2 lots (detailed in Nielsen's 03- 04-95 memorandum). The request for a front yard setback variance is due in part to the applicant's 12.5' right-of-way dedication for future widening of Third Street. Nielsen stated the City Engineer's study of drainage issues concluded that it is unlikely that a new dwelling would impact the rate of run-off to downstream properties and that an existing culvert will handle surface run-off (detailed in Engineer's 03-17-95 letter). A grading plan has been submitted, however, Nielsen explained that because of the flatness of the property, it may have little effect on drainage. The Planning Commission recommends approval of the application subject to the staff conditions and engineer's report. Bean inquired why the public perception of a major drainage problem and the engineer's conclusions differ. Dresel explained that the elevation of the surrounding low area is very close to the high water mark of Lake Minnetonka, therefore, wetland water levels may depend more on the level of the Lake than on surface runoff and drainage to and from the wetlands. . , The Councilmembers discussed the drainage concerns in the area and considered remedies. The staff responded to questions. Following discussion, the Council requested that the Engineer and Public Works examine. the affected culverts and outlets and take required corrective actions to improve drainage in the area. Benson moved, Stover seconded to direct the staff to prepare findings of fact regarding a preliminary plat-Birchbluff Lakeview Addition-and setback variance, subject to recommendations of the staff and Engineer, and subject to further study and resolution of the area drainage problems (within 30 days-prior to consideration of the final plat), for Brian Fredrickson, 26115 Birch Bluff Road. Motion passed 5/0. B. Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare a Findings of Fact Regarding a C.U.P.lP.U.D. for Shared Driveway Accesses and Hardcover Ratios. Applicant: Corky Elsen. Location: 5290 & 5300 Howards Point Road. Nielsen reviewed the background to the applicant's application for a c.U.P./P.U.D. Mr. Elsen completed construction of a home at 5290 Howards Point Road based on an approved site plan which conformed to the R-IA/S zoning requirements. During final inspection, it was found that additional patios were added and the driveway had been enlarged to loop back to Howards Point Road. Two zoning violations resulted: 1) too many driveways for the amount of street frontage; and 2) excess hardcover area-approximately 35% rather than 25%. Before occupancy was permitted, an escrow deposit was required to ensure the violations are corrected. (Details in Nielsen's 03-01-95 staff report.) The staff discouraged various alternatives including re-drawing of lot lines that required a non- qualifying variance. Rather than remove the excess driveway and hard cover, the owner subsequently proposed to limit the number of driveways and hard surface area on the vacant lot he owns south of the subject property through use of a limited planned unit development. A protective covenant would limit the southerly lot to 1 driveway and 7468 sq. ft. of hard cover area. Nielsen stated the Planning Commission unanimously recommends denial of this proposed transfer of development rights because, while technically acceptable, the Commission considered the proposal inappropriate use of the P.U.D. tool. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 10, 1995 - PAGE 4 , Thereafter, Nielsen discussed alternatives with an attorney representing Mr. Elsen and a proposed re-drawing of lot lines that requires a variance has been submitted for the Council's consideration. Mr. Greenstein, attorney representing the applicant, stated the applicant is unable to attend because of medical reasons. Greenstein described the proposed plan to plat a new lot line to add 4400 sq .ft to parcel A. The line would be parallel to other lot lines on the property and to others in the area. He explained that a scenic easement of the resulting triangle-shaped piece would adequately satisfy the hardcover requirement and street frontage for Lot A to qualify for two driveways. The Councilmembers discussed the proposal and unanimously rejected Mr. Greenstein's proposal and Mr. Corky Elsen's request for a conditional use permit. Reasons for denial are: 1) the Planning Commission's diligent recommendation, 2) Mr. Elsen's escrow agreement to correct the violations, 3) improper use of the P.D.D. concept, 4) City regulations must not be compromised, and 4) the violations resulted from the applicant's actions to disregard parameters of the originally approved site plan that conformed to the City's zoning requirements. Benson moved, McCarty seconded to deny the proposal to re-draw lot lines at 5290 & 5300 Howards Point Road, to deny the application of Mr. Corky Elsen for a C.U.P./P.U.D., and to enforce the applicant's agreement to correct the . violations at 5290 Howards Point Road. On a roll call vote the motion passed 5/0. C. Motion to Approve a Summary of Ordinance 298-Flood Plain Regulations. Nielsen explained it is customary to publish a Summary of an ordinance prior to its adoption and recommended approval of the Summary prepared by the staff for Ordinance #298-Flood. Plain Regulations implementing previously approved amendments. Stover moved, Malam seconded to approve for publication a Summary 0 f Ordinance #298-Flood Plain Regulations. Motion passed 5/0. D. Consideration of a Motion to Adopt a Resolution Authorizing Expansion of the Engineer's Report for Watermain Extension from Smithtown Road to Eureka Road and North along Manitou Road. Dresel explained the Planning Commission's recommendation that analysis of two other water system improvements be added to the current Boulder Bridge and Badger Field systems feasibility . study (Dresel's 04-06-95 letter). Additions include: a trunk main extension along Smithtown Road from Cathcart Drive to Eureka Road and a trunk main extension along County Road 19 between Smithtown Road and Glen Road. These improvements are related to proposed developments in those areas. Estimated cost of adding these sections to the feasibility report is $5,000. Nielsen and Dresel responded to Councilmembers' questions during Council discussion. Malam moved, McCarty seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95-28, "A Resolution Ordering Preparation of Report on Water System Improvements." Motion passed 5/0. E. Motion Regarding an Appeal to a Notice to Remove. Appellant: Daniel Luke. Location: 25040 Smithtown Road. Nielsen noted this extension request did not receive timely consideration at the March 27 Council meeting because it was misplaced (Nielsen's 04-06-95 memorandum and attachments). Assuming the appellant would have been given 30 days to comply with the notice, the property would have to be brought into compliance by April 27. Nielsen stated a recent inspection of the site revealed that good progress has been made toward compliance, therefore it is recommended that Mr. Luke be ~ . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 10, 1995 - PAGE 5 given until April 27, 1995 to correct all violations. Stover moved, Benson seconded to grant Daniel Luke an extension to April 27, 1995 to comply with a Notice to Remove to correct zoning violations at 25040 Smithtown Road. Motion passed 5/0. F. Motion Regarding an Appeal to a Notice to Remove. Appellant: Keelo Ohland. Location: 25070 Smithtown Road. Nielsen noted this extension request did not receive timely consideration at the March 27 Council meeting because it was misplaced. He reviewed the appellant's request for additional time to comply with a March 3 Notice to Remove (Nielsen's 04-06-95 memorandum and attachments). Recent inspection of this property reveals good progress toward compliance, therefore, Nielsen recommended that Mr. Keelo Ohland be given until April 27, 1995 to correct all violations, except removal of the large logs on the property should be completed by May 8, 1995, when road restrictions are lifted. Stover moved, McCarty seconded to grant Keelo Ohland, 25070 Smithtown Road, an extension to April 27, 1995 to comply with a Notice to Remove to correct zoning violations, except that the time for removal of the large logs is extended to May 8, 1995. Motion passed 5/0. 7. CONSIDERA TION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION SETTING PARAMETERS FOR A WATER SYSTEM ASSESSMENT POLICY PROJECT Mayor Bean explained that the Resolution before the Council reflects a revision of one previously considered. The significant change appears in the Committee Make-up section that makes the City Council a Committee of the Whole to work in conjunction with a citizen Advisory Group made up of 1 person appointed from each of the 4 areas of the City as defmed for the Comprehensive Plan neighborhood meetings, if wssible. The City Administnitor, Finance Director, and City Engineer shall be non-voting members and provide staff support. Mayor Bean reviewed the objectives of the 3-phased municipal water system expansion and the role of the advisory group in establishing watermain assessment policies. Benson moved, McCarty seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95-29, "A Resolution Setting Parameters for a Water System Assessment Policy Project. Motion passed 5/0. 8. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE WATERMAIN ASSESSMENT ADVISORY GROUP Mayor Bean stated that through the efforts of Councilmember Stover, 3 individuals have agreed to serve on the Watermain Assessment Advisory Group: Dave Peterka of 5540 Covington Road, Jan Haugen of 4780 Lakeway Terrace, and John Bridge of 25810 Birch Bluff Road. The Council agreed to amend the resolution to provide for the future appointment of a 4th representative and to delete the word-special. McCarty moved, Malam seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95-30, "A Resolution Making Appointments to the Watermain Assessment Advisory Group," with the corrections stated. Motion passed 5/0. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 10, 1995 - PAGE 6 9. REPORT ON FUNDING FOR SOUTHSHORE SENIOR CENTER OPERATIONS THROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM (CDBG) AND CONSIDERATION OF A RELATED PROPOSED RESOLUTION ~ Hurm explained that because of changes mandated by the Federal government to the Hennepin County CDBG program, it is necessary to decrease the funding previously allocated by the City to the Southshore Senior Center operation and to the Sojourn organization. A revised Resolution reflecting new amounts will be considered by the Council at its next meeting. Hurm directed the Council's attention to a resolution initiated by Senior Community Services that encourages elimination of the cap on CDBG funds that can be allocated to social services. The Council discussed the local ramifications of the program change and possible sources of funds to make up the shortfall in support of the affected programs. Stover moved, McCarty seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95-31, "A Resolution Requesting Increased Local Flexibility in the Use of CDBG Funds." Motion passed 5/0. 10. DISCUSSION OF POLICY ISSUES - None. . 11. LMCD - Report by Representative Bob Rascop Mr. Rascop reviewed the current re-organization of LMCD management. He reviewed current issues before the LMCD and the status of its programs. McCarty suggested that the LMCD report be placed at the beginning of the Council's agenda. Mayor Bean recessed the meeting at 8:52 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 p.m. 12. ADMINISTRATOR AND STAFF REPORTS A. Attorney's Report on Proposed Agreements for Southshore Senior Community Center Project Keane reviewed with the Council legal documents prepared in draft form on behalf of the Shorewood Senior Community Center (Keane's 04-07-95 memorandum and attachments). . Council discussed, asked questions, and made suggestions to the "Cooperative Agreement among the Cities," and Lease between the Cities and the Friends of the Southshore Senior Community Center." Additional comments from the Council should be received by Hurm or Keane by April 14 for inclusion in the final documents. The Agreement and Lease will be reviewed with the Friends of the Center and the participating cities in the near future. B. Engineer's Report on Local Drainage Maintenance Projects Dresel referred to his 04-06-95 letter and attachment listing pending and completed minor drainage maintenance projects. He requested Council review of the current criteria, approved by past Councils, for projects funded by the Stormwater Utility. During discussion, Dresel and Hurm responded to questions from the Councilmembers. The Council accepted the existing criteria as outlined. C. Engineer's Report on Minnetonka Drive Storm Sewer Feasibility Study Dresel referred to his 04-05-95 letter regarding investigation of a storm sewer drainage problem along Minnetonka Drive. The Council agreed with the Engineer's recommendation that the ~, . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 10, 1995 - PAGE 7 feasi?ilio/ study be suspended and that in view of the extent of the problem and associated cost to alleVIate It, a street/water/storm sewer project for the area be budgeted in the capital improvement program as funds permit. Dresel indicated a follow-up report will be made on the status of a old concrete pipe purported to exist when it is located. D. Engineer's Report on 1995 Manhole Sealing Project Dresel referred to his 03-27-95 memorandum to Mr. Zdrazil. This project is related to inflow/infiltration issue with the MCWS. Additional information on this budgeted project will be available in the future. Dresel responded to questions. E. Report on Position Taken Regarding Senate File #1570 Hurm referred to a 04-04-95 memorandum sent to legislative representatives from himself and Finance Director Rolek outlining the City's opposition to Senate File #1570. This Bill would among other things impose a tax levy freeze for tax year 1996 and would severely impact municipalities and citizens in the State. The Council concurred with the position described in the memorandum. . F. Report on COPS FAST Officer Hurm referred to Chief Young's 03-30-95 memorandum and attached resolution setting forth the understanding of all the cities relating to acceptance of the Justice Department's COP FAST grant to be used to hire an officer for Shorewood. These materials are provided for the Council's information. The Resolution will be acted upon by the SLMPSD Coordinating Committee at its April 19 meeting. Hurm reported on the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Urban Summit at which mutual concerns were discussed. Councilmembers are invited to attend a second session scheduled for April 13. 13. MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS Mayor Bean commented on.the upcoming retirement on Lt. John Hodgdon. . 14. ADJOURNMENT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF CLAIMS Benson moved, McCarty seconded to adjourn the City Council meeting at 10:32 p.m., subject to approval of claims. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Arlene H. Bergfalk Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial ATTEST: ROBERT B. BEAN, MAYOR JAMES C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL WORK SESSION WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12, 1995 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . 7:00 P.M. MINUTES WORK SESSION 1. Mayor Bean opened the meeting at 7:05 p.m. Present: Mayor Bean; Councilmembers Benson, Stover, McCarty and Malam; Administrator Hurm, Finance Director Rolek, Planning Director Nielsen, Engineer Dresel; Advisory Group Members: John Bridge and Jan Haugen. Member Dave Peterka had indicated he was not going to be able to make it to meetings on the dates selected and therefore could not be a member of the group. The Council will select several other members of the group to be appointed at the next City Council meeting. 2. DISCUSSION Administrator Hurm handed out and reviewed briefly the October 1991 newsletter to Shorewood residents concerning expansion of the municipal water system; the 1995 Comprehensive Plan update, municipal water section; a January 1995 memorandum listing potential sources of revenue which could be utilized in . building a water tower and expanding the system; and a chart of potential developments. Finance Director Rolek reviewed fmancial projections for the installation of a water and watermain given certain developments occur. Engineer Dresel reviewed certain technical aspects of the system and updated those present on the status of feasibility reports. Planning Director Nielsen reviewed proposed developments and raised certain policy questions regarding extension of municipal water. Specifically he recommended a policy for developments to which the City cannot provide water immediately: the City would charge a $5,000 trunk charge up front, the developer would install watermain and cap it, an additional $5,000 connection fee would be charged when the City provides water and hooks it up to the system. There was a consensus and agreement for this proposed policy. The Advisory Group members received a copy of the League of Minnesota Cities' handbook chapter on fmancing public improvements and the public improvement process for special assessment projects chart from the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP). . Finally a draft special assessment ordinance for municipal water was handed out. That document will be reviewed in detail at the next Work Session. 3. ADJOURN There being no further business, the work session was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. James C. Hurm, City Administrator ATTEST: ROBERT B. BEAN, MAYOR JAMES C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR #=;2.[) -: " RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GR.Al'\fTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR BIRCHBLUFF LAKEVIEW ADDmON At'ID A SETBACK VARIANCE TO BRIAN FREDRICKSON WHEREAS, Brian Fredrickson (Applicant) has an interest in certain land within the City of Shorewood and has applied to the Council for preliminary approval of a plat to be known as Birchbluff Lakeview Addition; and WHEREAS, an existing house on the property will be closer to the right-of-way of Third Street, due to additional right-of-way dedication required as part of the plat, necessitating a setback variance; and . WHEREAS, Applicant's request has been reviewed by the City Planner and his recommendations have been duly set forth in a Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated 4 March 1995, which Memorandum is on fIle at City Hall; and WHEREAS, Applicant's request has been reviewed by the City Engineer and his recommendations have been duly set forth in a Letter to the City Planner dated 17 March 1995, which Letter is on fIle at City Hall; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held by the Shorewood Planning Commission on 7 March 1995, for which notice was duly published and all adjacent property owners duly notified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT . 1. That the property proposed to be divided is zoned R-IC/S, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland and contains approximately 68,118 square feet of area. 2. That the existing house on the property is located approximately 42.7 feet from the right-of-way of Third Street, an undeveloped public street. 3. That Third Street does not have adequate right-of-way to comply with City standards and the City has requested the dedication of 12.5 feet of additional right-of-way, which dedication makes the existing house nonconforming. 4. That the five-foot variance requested by the Applicant is necessitated by the City's demand for additional right-of-way. CONCLUSION A. That the Applicant has satisfied the criteria for the grant of a variance under Section 1201.05 of the Shorewood City Code and has established an undue hardship as defined by Minnesota Statutes Section 462.375, Subd. 6(2). 3~A .. J . . B . That based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants the Applicant's request for a setback variance of five feet for the existing home on the property. C. That Applicant's request for preliminary plat approval of Birchbluff Lakeview Addition is hereby approved. D. That such approval is subject to the recommendations set forth in the City Planner's Memorandum dated 4 March 1995, the recommendations set forth in the City Engineer's letter, dated 17 March 1995, and the terms and conditions contained in the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of7 March 1995 on file at City Hall. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of April, 1995. Robert B. Bean, Mayor ArrEST: James C. Hurm, City Administrator/Clerk -2- . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION DENYING A CONDmONAL USE PERMIT FOR CONCEPT STAGE APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR CORKY ELSEN WHEREAS, Corky Elsen (Applicant) is the owner of property located at 5290 and 5300 Howard's Point Road, legally described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, in May 1994, a building permit was issued by the City for a new home to be built at 5290 Howard's Point Road, based upon an approved set of building plans; and WHEREAS, prior to completion of the new home, the Applicant's plans were revised without approval by the City and in violation of the Shorewood Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied to the City Council for a conditional use permit approving a Planned Unit Development for the property which would allow certain development rights of the lot at 5300 Howard's Point Road to be transferred to the lot at 5290 Howard's Point Road; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was received by the City Planner and his recommendations have been duly set forth in a Memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated 1 March 1995, which Memorandum is on fIle at City Hall; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held by the Planning Commission on 7 March 1995, for which notice was duly published and all adjacent property owners duly notified; and WHEREAS, the request was reviewed by the City Council at its 10 April 1995 meeting, at which time the recommendations of the Planning Commission were considered. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL YED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Applicant owns two lots at 5290 and 5300 Howard's Point Road, which lots are zoned R-1A/S, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland and contain 35,456 square feet and 45,080 square feet of area respectively. 2. That, based upon an approved set of building plans, the Applicant was granted a building permit for the property at 5290 Howard's Point Road in May 1994. 3 . That the Applicant's plans were subsequently altered to include a looped driveway with two street accesses. 4. That the City's Zoning Code allows only one driveway access per 120 feet of street frontage and the Applicant's property has only 170 feet of frontage. 3~~, . . 5. That the Applicant's original, approved plans did not exceed 25 percent impervious surface area on the lot, in compliance with Shorewood and state shoreland management requirements. 6. That the driveway alteration and additional patio areas have exceeded the 25 percent impervious surface requirements. 7. That the Applicant entered into an Escrow Agreement, dated 1 December 1994, agreeing to correct the driveway at 5290 Howard's Point Road to comply with approved building plans and Shorewood zoning requirements by 1 May 1995. 8. That the lot at 5300 Howard's Point Road has 244 feet of frontage and would be allowed two driveway accesses under current zoning requirements. 9. That the Applicant proposes to limit the number of driveways on the lot at 5300 Howard's Point Drive to one, in exchange for allowing two driveways on the lot at 5290. 10. That the Applicant proposes to limit impervious surface area on the lot at 5300 to as little as 7468 square feet in exchange for allowing as much as 12.666 square feet (approximately 35.7 percent) on the lot at 5290. 11. That in order to exchange development rights on the two lots. the Applicant applied for a conditional use permit approving a planned unit development of the site. 12. That, as part of his application, the Applicant submitted a proposed Declaration and Notice of Restrictions to implement 9. and 10. above CONCLUSIONS 1 . That the Applicant's request does not conform with the purpose of conditional use permits as set forth in Section 1201.04 Subd. 3. of the Zoning Code. 2. That the Applicant's request for a conditional use permit is not an appropriate use of planned unit development. 3 . That based upon the preceding the Applicant's request for a conditional use permit is hereby denied. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of April. 1995. ATfEST: Robert B. Bean, Mayor James C. Hurm. City Administrator/Clerk 2 ..- . . Le~al Description: 5290 Howard's Point Road: "That part of Lots 4,5,7 and 8, Howard Point, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the northeast comer of Lot 3 in said Howard's Point; thence on an assumed bearing of West along the North line of said Lot 3 a distance of 100.80 feet; thence on a bearing of South a distance of 43.70 feet; thence South 18 degrees 35 minutes East a distance of 202.80 feet; thence South 47 degrees 28 minutes East a distance of 133.30 feet to the point of beginning ofd the tract of land to be described; thence continuing South 47 degrees 28 minutes East a distance of 287.50 feet; thence South 13 degrees 47 minutes East a distance of 126.52 feet; thence North 71 degrees 45 minutes West a distance of 186.40 feet; thence South 65 degrees 49 minutes West a distance of 163.80 feet, more or less, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence northwesterly along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to a point in a line bearing South 60 degrees 42 minutes West from the point of beginning; thence North 60 degrees 42 minutes East a distance of 209 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning; which lies northerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast comer of Lot 3 in said Howard's Point; thence on an assumed bearing of West along the North line of said Lot 3 a distance of 100.80 feet; thence on a bearing of South a distance of 43.70 feet; thence South 18 degrees 35 minutes East a distance of 202.80 feet; thence South 47 degrees 28 minutes East a distance of 303.30 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 67 degrees 52 minutes 58 seconds West a distance of 282 feet, more or less, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and there terminating." PJ.N. 30-117-23-44-0021 5300 Howard's Point Road: "That part of Lots 4,5,7, and 8, Howard's Point, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the northeast comer of Lot 3 in said Howard's Point; thence on an assumed bearing of West along the North line of said Lot 3 a distance of 100.80 feet; thence on a bearing of South a distance of 43.70 feet; thence South 18 degrees 35 minutes East a distance of 202.80 feet; thence South 47 degrees 28 minutes East a distance of 133.30 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence continuing South 47 degrees 28 minutes East a distance of 287.50 feet; thence South 13 degrees 47 minutes East a distance of 126.52 feet; thence north 71 degrees 45 minutes West a distance of 186.40 feet; thence South 65 degrees 49 minutes West a distance of 163.80 feet, more or less, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence northwesterly along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to a point in a line bearing South 60 degrees 42 minutes West from the point of beginning; thence North 60 degrees 42 minutes East a distance of 209 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning; which lies southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast comer of Lot 3 in said Howard's Point; thence on an assumed bearing of West along the North line of said Lot 3 a distance of 100.80 feet; thence on a bearing of South a distance of 43.70 feet; thence South 18 degrees 35 minutes East a distance of 202.80 feet; thence South 47 degrees 28 minutes East a distance of 303.30 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 67 degrees 52 minutes 58 seconds West a distance of 282 feet, more or less, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and there terminating." P .LN. 30-117 - 23-44-0022 EXHIBIT A . . . . MAYOR Robert Bean CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL Kristi Stover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWO'OD. MINNESOTA 55331-8927 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO. Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 21 April 1995 Sign Pemrit - Silverwood Park 405 (Sign Pemrits) Public Works has obtained a bid for a new park identification sign for Silverwood Park (see Exhibit A). The proposed sign is consistent with Section 1201.03 Subd. e.(l)(c) of the Zoning Code which limits park signs to 20 square feet in area and eight feet in height. The proposed sign is approximately five high and contains 15 square feet of area. Approval of the pemrit is recommended. cc: Jim Hurm Don Zdrazil A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore :;.c . __ _.__ -------.- ___ ____T~k;.:.I!:::~...I~ ----- --..- --- .. -._____.__._ .-____._ _____..__Ih. ,...... __ IISII-- .:____ .-.------ ---- - .-- -- -- - -- --- -- -. . --- - __~ __CL.I_Y _ ~E_._-2H.~_t~ l:-J'~5lD ..___:__~l~~~_;l _._-:__~___ ___________________ __Y:.L-2:~~ --.---.---.---- --------.--- ----..--. -.-. ---.---.----.-..-..- --- .._..._--- -_. ----- ~---k -6, L_____. >1---- . .---.---. - ~. -...-......-- ----- , . , . --~- f--------.. ~ ; .- i! .._-~-_._--- · !--l.~._~__. II : I >> i ~- ""s;,,:tfJ.,: --~' " . ~ I . ~ . ' . . : . . . . . . . :---: t ,- . . :. . . ' I ! ' . .: I , .. .--.-. ----.---.---.-- --- = ; 1 . i, ~ Ii ii ~ Ii ,I ~_~ i! · j J crt ::\--; -cr6iu- · i 1 TI : II ~ -----,- .. ----.- . '-~. ,--;- ; .- T -! ! ' ~ -, -f-:-r i i -~ !: ; I . .-~~==~- :--'~ ;- :-=(,~ l--r t~ :=-r=_: --',--:rr,--4--, .-----. --------.--~--~-.------ -- -----'--.--- . i" iI ' '; t: : . ~ l." . ; Ii ~ ~ .' ~ I : : I I : I : i ' -U-i 1-' ----- · ~ IT- i-'-~-.~: : · I; ;- ~ 'J ~--;-I) <-/:':: . --:-~----- f . ii,' ' . ,I . ~~_L~~~__=:.=-:..._.___ .__~__ ! ----+- .__ _ I' " , ....., J/. I~ ' I ' Ii . i '- S,(..I)~..i.~.J~~c.!:.__ He.8k.....;__~ &:~~-~. R;tl : :,1 _~_~__ , _/" I" _.,,~ili -----a-, ' ,;,:.' .., ";' 1.:- ..../~~I-..;;'r:.tX)O''-' -.....;. ! . . . -=- ~~~----~ __~__ ~ l': h-T- :e ,10), . (;') e:) ) (4 ') (~) !A..lA;"",.,IlJA" . ....., n. ;L!'~ .tt-"Aa '(,)n''''' iL_:,('; APP'J/~-='Dl '''I ,lr;.fq' '-.~ lc...o/,J.::ft ~::c ~-lr~~tZ"~\JAiII:ue: .' ~.: i L€1-rG R-S K.,~--;-~ () i Pi-I ~tZ.A :+'~~1-G:b 8 ~j G-fJ /" Y€ iL.o:w i I . I - ,. L6 rrG/Lc f).. / ~ ~ / b,,; o ve " ~, 1 / t-,; ......- .' i_,." ,J <" t:.;.-' 1.:tJ ;:/-' Lt \.- · C:!!.c..-"-!---lrt_~~...::.:-~----.:-....i-~--.t-:-l2-!-..~: ~/ .-r: '1' --r; l;;,,,J5-:'" A i- ~_. . ' ~--- i-: --- - ...---.-'-.- .__.~--- _ _ ___QJ-kif..1lI1..9Jl_~__&fLQ -f:.JA_X_~ _____._._____~_.~_. ---.-------..---.-- _.__._-------~.- -------------.-----. ____________~_.__on._._ -.------------:;t;'"-: .1 :. t"'+ :( _. ------ -- .,~-.-------.- - -.-----~v!!!\j~.([-& #"3(" . & .. c r '. II . I I I I I I I I i' I I , : I I I I I , ,/ I / " J I :/ I! ,...: / I ) I' ;" / I / Y " " " / ---.,\ --- r~~r) , - \ '--v._.A<-'-/ !;. J . ~ i J " ,-\:' ! ~--~I OOll! ! ~ 1:--"./ " --Jr'" ,.;~C? tl~! ~ i ~ ',- ~ ~'~ oa l8~~()/ " "'-J ' :~~~ <::7 Ie.- ~ -' ~ ': 0 '~J -.i " ' ~ .x:';... 0 ~ ?t.~~~, .\k\"; 30 ..~- .: f i: ~ go : :1 ~', l" J i !.i. .""2, ; !. ii "--'~ - =- J,. 'r ----.;:: .... i ~ i -....; . .. . it ~ ; .. . . ~ " i 1 f r ; ; , , I................ i ! ; I I i I \ 1 ! --~-_._- ~ ::I o ~ o en m o ~ :> en ... ~^ ~ :> z t ; oj 3 CIty of Shot.woOd, MInnesota Hoisingloo Koegler Group lnc. ';00 ~ a........; I s.... !~~ lli.........is,ll~ 1~19 (611lill,9960 SllVERWOOO PARK . I I I I I . I I I I I 1= mm liD t..Mu.............. . ~.. ~ vk:h;~ f1 . . .. CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE WATERHAIN ASSESSMENT ADVISORY GROUP WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to solicit the advise of residents in each of the four neighborhoods as identified for the Comprehensive Plan neighborhood meeting process in establishing watermain assessment policies; and WHEREAS, Resolution #95-29 establishes said advisory group. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the initial appointing Resolution #95-30 is hereby rescinded and replaced by this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following individuals are appointed to said advisory group to work with the City Council in establishing watermain installation assessment policies: Name Jan Haugen John Bridge Address 4780 Lakeway Terrace 25810 Birch Bluff Road Reoresentinq Northeast West PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of April, 1995. Robert B. Bean, Mayor ATTEST: James C. Hurm, City Administrator/Clerk #3b , f',. MAYOR Robert Bean CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL Kristi Stover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOO. MINNESOTA 55331-8927 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM . TO: FROM: DA1E: RE: FILE NO.: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 19 April 1995 Summit Avenue - Request to Vacate a Portion of Street R.O.W. Streets - Summit Avenue Mr. Theodore Rix, 23040 Summit Avenue, has requested that the City vacate a portion of the street right-of-way in front of his property. In his letter (Exhibit A), dated 13 February 1995, Mr. Rix asks that 15 feet of the r.o.w. in front of his property be vacated. Exhibits Band C show Mr. Rix's property and the portion of r.o.w. to be vacated, respectively. In his letter, Mr. Rix cites a similar vacation on the opposite side of the street. He accurately conveys the recommendation contained in the 20 September 1990 staff report (Exhibit D) regarding the previous vacation. The 1990 staff report anticipated future vacation requests. Consistent with that earlier report, it is recommended that Mr. Rix's request be granted subject to a condition that the City will retain a lO-foot drainage and utility easement in place of the r.o.w. . cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Theodore Rix A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore :t- 5. A - " ~ __--:1 . . -,'-- Mr. Bradley Nielsen, Ci~y City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Rd. Shorewood, Mn 55331 , ....v- I .'':_~ ............ ~.... .~. tI ~ Planner/Building ,~':s: \ Feb. 13,1995 Re: Reques~ to vacate 15 feet of Summit AVe. Dear Mr. Nielsen: I request the city to vacate 15 Feet of Summit Ave.which adjoins my property at 23040 Summit Ave. ( See Site location map-3 originals attached).. I request the vacation in order to avoid any possibility or at least minimize any variance I made need in the future for improvements on my house or garage. I have no present plans to add to either the house or garage oath of which are close to Summit Ave right of way line. In 1990 Shorewood acted favorably on the request of my neighbor Larry Schmidt requesting this same partial vacation of 15 feet on his side of the street .( copies of Schmidt file attached Exhibit S.); Presently Summit Avenue is 65 feet wide, adjacent to my property in Shorewood.You characterized Summit Avenue correctly in describing it as follows in your letter to the Mayor an d Council of 9-20- 1990:"The eighty foot-right of way for Summit Avenue is SUbstantially wider than the City's fifty foot requirement for local streets. It is not known why the r.o.w. is as wide as it is. Most likely it was platted that wide to allow the street to meander in order to accommodate the severe grades in the vicinity.Despite those grades Summit Avenue is relatively straight with the r.o.w." In this same letter you stated that the city engineer determined that no pUblic purpose is served by maintaining more than 50 feet of r.o.W. for Summit Avenue.YOu also said that in fact an additional 15 feet could be vacated from the other side of the street at such time as the owner requests it. I now request vacating the 15 feet along my property as indicated on the enclosed survey and legal description.I am the owner of the property across the street from the Larry Schmidt property. Survey and legal description attached .( PLease note that the Survey and legal descriptions in the site location map also include that porton of my property lying in Carver County which is not the subject of this Petition. I understand and agree that you recommend to the Council that the city maintain an easement for drainage and utilities over the vacated r.o.w.. SincerelY,~ . ~~# (,~~ ~R~Rix.-' (474-7257) I ,. Exhibit A APPLICANT'S REQUEST LETTER Dated 13 February 1995 - -, , . :: ~: - [~}~~~ ; ~ .~,:~; . !; ~----_..~.. . . :D_ ~J . - \ - -- - --1-~--liti--:~ i , ,':"'\ I, I ~ , , . I I : ~ : '. ; ,: I" ,; :,.,.: va : ~ ~ r.J....:'l.) .~ :: -:::a2: -: U~J-1-1 ~ ! . ., , " : ' J 01' i [" S r--~~} :;t .:: Je- -~ ~~ "1- \~' :: I!s! ~ is ..~ ~ Z'osZ ~ '~ S! N ... - ": .u <. '1Il0l 001 III.al. ,'''11 ..~ \~. I ~l ;::I'. ! Sl"'ili S ::-, -,::-:- l-~-: ,.. 91 - :~~' ."':1). ~ .- ... N ~ ~ ,': ) i ... . - ~ t"). ..,p - 'q,~~ .Cl~. ~ .j ~~ l..j '. , S'ooe ,;, ! ~ ~ ~:~.-\:. '-." lea l2t '. - Q b 3",~ '~ ..~~=~ .,' -, :,!/;;y ,). \flj~n~,Sl. ...~.&l'" ,J.oI:.VI.OS .) _ _ ~ ..;.:Ii,. " '" :;:6. .,,~... ~:IIe ~ 1:If. ""'t"'}.~!" ;. !"#-~....::~ ~)Jf _ ...~'""J..:: ::~~. J ',1:" .....r _ _'~-~'~ _ ' IMI@@~ : . ,'. \;.,' -i . 9tLt9O!I .,., -- ON JOQ ~..< :e l'" i - · I OO~~31 ~~ -- ...- r 0 ~ e -----ndl-~.----. ~ y ;: - .... '" "... .~ :..:'? ~'" :;:. 5 "01 2 \ I \, ~ -". ~ , ~ ~ 1_____________~______ " \-. "!- ----..---------...------------ ; ". ~ ! --, ~ 'j :--- '-, .". '-i i~~~ " :1"',' :' 0:.. " ..... ~ .i ,'I." \ J \ ...- L :!~ ~ , I ~ j-.. 'I , ~ " J Exhibit B ..., lSg SITE LOCATION I.Z ~ ~ ~ Ol:l ~ ;;; . . , ' , , , , , . '. \ \ " " , '. \.. ~ . -...-------~----_:. \-________.l__ :e = N ~ on N ~~ .~~ "% 2 .. vi :l -----~-_.._.\ 1 . . . . , , , Ui '.. ~ \.~-.," l; 1 ..- :::;2 "' - I)- \) \,) ~ VI .... 0>: ; !::i <0 N @ ~:, ~i ~~ ~'" @ CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen . DATE: 20 September 1990 RE: Request for Partial Street Vacation - Summit Avenue FILE NO.: Streets - Summit Avenue Mr. Larry Schmidt requests that the City vacate 15 feet of Summit Avenue which adjoins his property at 23113 Summit Avenue (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). In his letter (Exhibit B), dated 5 September 1990, he explains that the street is unusually wide and that vacating the fifteen feet would allow him to avoid, or at least minimize, any variance he may need to add on to his home. . The eighty foot right-of-way for Summit Avenue is substantially wider than the City's fifty foot requirement for local streets. It is not known why the r.O. w. is as wide as it is. Most "likely it was platted that wide to allow the street to meander in order to accommodate the severe grades in the vicinity. Despite those grades, Summit Avenue is relatively straight within the r.O. w. The City Engineer and I have reviewed the request and have determined that no public purpose is served by maintaining more than 50 feet of r.O. w. for Summit Avenue. In fact an additional 15 feet could be vacated from the other side of the street at such time as those owners request it. ~~. , Procedurally, the City Council first needs to set a public hearing. Since the legal notice must be published twice, the earliest this can OCcur is 22 October. Unless the public hearing reveals a valid reason not to vacate the r.o. w. in question, it is recommended that the applicant's request be granted with a stipulation'" that the City maintain an easement for drainage and utilities over the vacated r.O. w. cc: Larry Whittaker Glenn Froberg Jim Norton Larry Schmidt Exhibit D 1990 STAFF REPORT A ResIdential Community qn Lake Minnetonka's South Shore . . MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO. MAYOR Robert Bean COUNCIL Kristi Stover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 17 April 1995 Grable, John - Setback Variance/Appeal 405 (94.27) Having received a .negative recommendation from the Planning Commission regarding his variance request to build a deck within the 50-foot perimeter setback of the Amesbury West P.U.D., Mr. Grable presented additional information to the City Council suggesting that other dwellings in Amesbury West and the original Amesbury P.U.R.D. have been allowed to encroach into the perimeter setback area and into the common area. Attachment 1 contains the new material which was provided to the City Council on 9 January 1995. At the Council meeting on 27 March, I asked for additional time to respond to the new material. The original staff report is enclosed as Attachment 2 (copied in yellow) to refresh your memory of this case. The applicant cites numerous examples of encroachments into the common areas and, in at least one instance, an encroachment into the 50-foot perimeter setback. In our research, it was discovered that the City did not apply the 50-foot setback around the entire project. It appears that the 50 feet was only imposed where the P.U.D. abutted single-family residential property in Shorewood. For example, a lesser setback was imposed where the project abutted property in Deephaven which would ultimately become part of the Amesbury development (Amesbury North). Similarly, the setback was not imposed where a road r.o.w. separated the P.U.D. from residential property. Presumably the road itself was considered a buffer. Following are responses to the applicant's examples: Amesbury 5th Addn. (Amesbury) - these units all abut Amesbufy North in Page 7 Deephaven Page 8 Amesbury 7th Addn. (Amesbury) - these units abut Amesbury 10th Addn. and Sunset Lane, and undeveloped street r.o.w.; the City did not impose the 50-foot setback here . A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore :f: 5 ..B . 'I.~" "... Grable V ariance/ Appeal Memo 17 April 1995 Page two . Page 9 Amesbury 10th Addn. (Amesbury) - this unit abuts single-family residential property which was shown on several development schemes as being a future expansion of the Amesbury project Page 10 (Amesbury West) - this unit abuts Amesbury property (North) in Deephaven; the 50-foot setback was not required Page 11 (Amesbury West) - this unit abuts Sunset Lane, an undeveloped r.o.w. which is 66 feet wide; the City apparently allowed the r.o.w. to be used as the buffer area; there appeared to be some expectation that the Petron property would eventually become and extension of Amesbury Page 12 4905 Regents Walk (Amesbury) - deck appears to encroach approximately five feet into common area, but is not shown on original survey with building permit (4- 79); fireplace is an allowable encroachment Page 13 4961 Kensington Gate (Amesbury) - fences are allowable encroachments . Page 14 4951 Kensington Gate (Amesbury) - fireplaces, retaining walls and landscaping are allowable encroachments; (built 3-78) Page 15 4940 Devonshire Circle (Amesbury) - no surveyor building plan in property fIle Page 16 4949 Devonshire Circle (Amesbury) - no surveyor building plan in property fIle Page 17 4979 Devonshire Circle (Amesbury) - fences are allowable encroachment; no other encroachments are shown on survey with building permit (8-77) Page 18 4661 Bayswater Road (Amesbury West) - frreplace, fence and retaining walls are allowable encroachments; survey with building permit (8-83) shows no evidence of patio encroachment 4971 Kensington Gate (Amesbury) - fence is allowable encroachment; survey with building penriit (11-78) shows no patio encroachment Page 19 4616 Bayswater Road (Amesbury West) - fence, sidewalk up to 4' wide, and bay window are allowable encroachments; survey with building permit (3-88) does not show encroachment; as-built survey is necessary to determine encroachment Page 20 4616 Bayswater Road (Amesbury West) - retaining walls can encroach; small balcony on west end may encroach; as-built survey is necessary to determine encroachment Page 21 4775 Bayswater Road (Amesbury West) - bay window is an allowable encroachment, although not shown on building permit survey (7-85) " . . ,-.If Grable Setback! Appeal 17 April 1995 Page three Page 22 4755 Bayswater Road (Amesbury West) - no survey in file (built 7-85); bay windows and retaining walls are allowable encroachments Page 23 4755 Bayswater Road (Amesbury West) - no survey in property file; porch appears to encroach according.to applicant's survey Page 24 4957 Kensington Gate (Amesbury) - fence is an allowable encroachment, no survey in fIle (4-78); no encroachment shown on building plans 4730 Bayswater Road (Amesbury West) - fireplace and bay window are allowable encroachments (12-87) Page 25 4845 Regents Walk (Amesbury West) - bay window is allowable encroachment; no encroachment shown on building plans (5-75) 4790 Regents Walk (Amesbury West) - deck does not encroach; stairs may, but not shown on building plans (10-76) Page 26 4610 Bayswater Road (Amesbury West) - fIreplace, fence and bay window are allowable encroachments; survey shows no encroachment of patio and deck (12-88) Time does not permit a written response to the remaining examples (pages 27 through 34). I will attempt to respond verbally to these at the meeting. There is some confusion on the builder's part regarding the need for a variance. In his letter, dated 16 January 1995, he questions the need for a variance. At the Council meeting, however, the builder suggested that the deck could be modified to avoid encroachment into the 50-foot setback area altogether. Despite some question on the property at 4616 Bayswater Road, the applicant has demonstrated no hardship. He can, as shown by his original plan make reasonable use of his property, even on the side in question, without encroaching into the setback area. With respect to building in the common area, I maintain that some limit must be imposed and that the position set forth in my 1991 letter to McNulty is reasonable. Since this issue was raised in 1991, no building permits have been issued allowing encroachment of decks in the common areas. Obviously, Mr. Grable and Mr. McNulty disagree. This part of their request may be more of an appeal than a variance request. They allege that my position on this matter is in error. The Planning Commission has been asked to make a recommendation on this matter. Subsequently, Council approval of the variance and appeal requires a four-fifths vote. If you have any questions relative to this matter, please call my office on Tuesday. cc: Jim Hurm Tim Keane John Grable Jim McNulty ~ , McNULTY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 400 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOUS, MINNESOTA 55401 612-339-0674 FAX 612.349-2904 January 16. 1995 Mayor and Members of the City Council Members of the Planning Commission City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood. MN 55331 . RE: John Grable's Request to Build a Deck 4720 Bayswater Road Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council and Planning Commission: I attended the City Council meeting on Monday, January 9, 1995. where the City Council reviewed the request of Mr. John C. Grable. Jr. to build a deck. and returned the matter to staff and the planning commission for further r~view. Several issues raised and comments made are of great concern to me. and I want to offer some information for the record. 1. Variance/Hardship. Several members continued to make reference to the need to show hardship in order to build the deck. This is not the case. The deck may be built without a variance and therefore a showing of hardship is not required. Mr. Grable applied for review of this matter under the variance procedure per city staff recommendation in order to achieve Council review. even though his position has always been that no variance is necessary to build the deck. . 2. "Sai t and Switch". Several members expressed concern that Mr. Grable had somehow deceived the city in changing his atrium door to a patio door. and changing the deck design. This is not the case. Mr. Grable was encouraged to apply for review of his request by city staff. He has always been completely above board with the city and has tried to follow proper procedures to have this properly reviewed. I suggest that any "bait and switch" has been on part of the city in view of its past pattern and practice for 21 years in regularly approving similar extensions into the common area with decks and other appurtenances. 3. Extensions into the 50' Setback to AdjoininR" Property. The fact tha t 50' has no t been uni formly required as a se tback in the Amesbury projects can be easily verified with the plat information provided. Also. extension into the common area and the 50' setback '~ 1 City of Shorewood January 16. 1995 Page 2 has been approved by the city in past. In fact. one of the units that was the subject of Brad Nielsen's 1990 letter was permitted by the city to extend into the common area and the 50' setback with a deck. patio. large brick pillars. and retaining walls as part of the original construction of the home. This is shown on page 20 of the materials submitted by Mr. Grable. Also. I believe that research will show that single family neighbors to the West on Garden Road have been allowed to place actual buildings inside the setback area. The portion of Mr. Grable's deck that actually extends into the 50' setback is only a few feet and as such permitted under Shorewood ordinance. 4. Attitude of City Officials. My firm has done building and development in Shorewood for the past 25 years and always worked well with the city. I was frankly shocked at the attitude of city officials regarding this matter. It seems that no one is looking out for the benefit of one of the city's newest citizens. John Grable. Whether it is from reliance on old neighborhood biases. or lack of willingness to look at what is fair within the overall big pitture. it appears to me. that too many city officials are allowing themselves to be confined to a myopic view of an issue that is wrongly interpreted by city staff to the detriment of what is fair and reasonable for the citizen. . I respectfully request that those who are reviewing this matter do so in the spirit of fairness in light of all the circumstances. which has long been a tradition in Shorewood. Sincerely. McNULTY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY \ u'-..... I. cc: John C. Grable. Jr. Robert L. Jochims, Amesbury West Homes Association [- r- r r [ f r /. I r I '. [ L ! L L ! .It "( REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO BUILD 6' X 10' BREAKFAST DECK 30HN C. GRABLE, 3R. 4720 Bayswater Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 A-H-_a.ch Me.A + J . . .# t REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO BUILD 61 X 10' BREAKFAST DECK Mr. John C. Grable. Jr. desires to build a 6' X 10' breakfast deck adjoining his courtyard home in Amesbury West located at 4720 Bayswater Road. A portion of the deck will be on the individual lot owned by Mr. Grable and a portion will be in the common area. No variancp. i~ np.p.dp.d to place the deck in the common area. ~ ~ ./ The City of Shorewood has approved the Amesbury (1973) and Amesbury West (1981) Planned Unit Residential Developments of attached townhomes. These developments have been low density and high quality, maximizing natural amenities and open space. The lot lines for" each living unit are set. for the most part. to the exact space occupied by the living unit itself. with the balance of the land owned as common area by all the residents. This planning method has been widely used. There are no lot line setbacks within the development as in normal single family zoning because the '.. ,. building lots and common areas are platted and approved as part of the PURD. The need and ability to extend into the common area with portions of the structure. such as a deck. is usually contemplated in these types of developments. The covenants of Amesbury and Amesbury West. which were approved by the City of Shorewood as part of the PURD 's. have contemplated this reality in granting easements. " over every other Lot to areas occupied by fireplaces. roof. overhangs, air conditioning compressors. decks. balconies, flower boxes. use of common utility installations and other appurtenances which are part of the original construction of any living unit on each Lot on which are added pursuant to provisions of Article VII hereof." (Article IX) Approval of such extensions into the common area are commonly reviewed and. approved or denied by the Amesbury and Amesbury West Homes Associations under the Architecture Control provisions of their covenants and deed restrictions. Individual lot setbacks as used elsewhere in the zoning regulations are not applicable in this PURD. This is reinforced by the City of Shorewood PUO ordinance which states ~ in ~1201.25 subd. 1: " . recognizing that traditional density, bulk. setbacks. use and subdivision regulations which may be useful in protecting the character of substantially developed areas. may not be appropriate to control development in less developed areas." and: ~1205.25 subd. 1 (j): "To allow variation from provisions of this ordinance. including setbacks. he ight. lot area. width and depth. yards etc.. internally wi thin the project." City staff I s interpretation of individual unit lot lines as setback lines in the present case is erroneous and without precedent. Lot lines by definition in the city ordinances are not the same and cannot be equated with setback lines. In the present .... case extension of a deck from the individual lot to the common area. is permitted ,., without a variance under the applicable ordinances. deed restrictions. PUO and PURO framework and past practice. Also. construction of the deck as proposed would cause a small portion of the deck to extend into the common area that is in the 50' setback to adjoining property outside the Amesbury West PURO. Please see the following sketch: - 3 - . '( . / /. ~ro1'd?~t Q.~~ / F-xhihit B . l~ ~~~.., ~.~.__.:....,..",. f7". .... il . .. ct~~.,p'p-. . .,leI "'., ,....... roO ... I. ;;.;/;'-;:.l.~; ,', - ! -~"C -....&. . OJ : ".: I J II I j I j ./1 .......TT?I ~.t 11;"-"4 I. ft. ... I Y1 . :A .- . ....- ... J :- .' '-:~I[' .... (~~ ~'.. ~j .. '~.' ,.~.~-~!' . :;-IoN-;;W , -- '. ;" .... '. . {,.,~- --... ~ ~'" ~ "'C;I""'~ i .....-' -- I I ....... .. \. ,- ;'1 _/fJ /G'L//') YJteffir:!f' /1616 J by McNulty . 400 2nd A Company 339 ve. So., M I -0674 or 474-523~ 5., MN 55401 p____~.~~ ~~~..f,'~..!. ~;" '.,~' ( - Jl'e-';' ~., k 'i;,/~ _~. ,.~ Par .,d.~" ~;..,r:. \' .,/,~ ito~ - "..1"'~. . ( i ":~ ,"'''''. - 2- '.. . , 'I'~" ~ .' ~ ;, .~ r"""~ M' ~ mnetonk ,.,' a Boulevard ., Grable ReSidence~ . , ~n~ j,,~~:"I, Jf:.:!1:.r. Ii7-. ' , 1f;.~ ~1j" ':"~' /.' -~." ~' Of} 3 ~ .~r ,\;~'"' ~...r~ ':!^ ,/ J.:.t:' . ~-A? !lS...t~W'~" }t:~ 1l:. ...1.'"::1':'. 'II,~ -.....~ "'~it". ..l~."l. A' rtlst's interpretation ' of site and land ' sea ping, - 5 - . . t .... The slight extension of the deck into the 50' perimeter to the adjoining property is permitted. without a variance. under the zoning regulations of the City of Shorewood. Yard requirements ~1201.03 subd. 3 states in (c): "The following shall not be considered encroachments on required yard setbacks for all lots. (3) Terraces. steps. stoops or similar features but not including porches or balconies in front or rear yards. provided thy do not extend above the entrance floor level of the building or more than four and one half feet (4~') into the required yard." The 50' building setback from perimeter property lines has not always been strictly followed in the Amesbury developments. Please see the attached copies. of the plats of the Amesbury 5th. 7th and 10th Additions and Amesbury West. Extensions into the building setback line from perimeter property have been regularly approved by the City of Shorewood over the years without the need for a variance (see attached photographs). - 6 - I. ~", '." .'. .,;' .'- ., ...~~,-....,.__...- - "- ...:.... ~_.._. ..... ---.;.-----...... '. ;...:...,.--:.:.....-......-.....~.Di'-. ':.' ," . ". . .:t: I;Q.' .... . . /. ~ ~ ~ ,- 'b ". . " ....: 1 t : ,.': ~ ~ (Ii, t.,. (; '. . .' 1(; ~",.s> /Ie 1)'1.' . :' ,,~::<:"';:::'., ...,. :~:~:J~~::';\~i;j.\ """ ," '.'.. ~l ' :iH)~~i.~f~f~~?~t/ . , "', . ' ,,:~::!; ,_., if ~::;, ';', '.~ i ::i" ..~i:,~:~..~.~:.,"i..\~~'1. ..;'.... ~.~'I ': t :' ;, :..;':. . .... '.:. ....::.. ; .....;: 'f: i;.i :;'. '\',,>(,,:~,~:;'."::: ~.... ";', ,,,.., <1";1~:r.c~,,;.}.;(t' .' rnJ.-.IlO'~/' '.. .... "7%V%V4lg') ,. po..;1ofl...... l~/...;..J'.....:,.: .," . " 01'~/-4' '.' .:, ".~ ;.: . !1!.!!.1.:,~ ~ ~~":'.';,: ;:'" c....; '.': y.;.- .~. :,:.i.','i.~.~.:.'~..;:il::,;i.:.~.~.3..~:...t~.t.t;'.~::....ij.:.:~~..;.:~..: ,,;;', . . .1. I .._ ~ 00.001. . ,-..".".....1 ~:;, N~ ..,.'.....~..::":r-I:~;.~~-<, :.: t '~'~. ._ ~_': . .~~u..%,..1..9 '.,~ ~..,'~..:..~.1 ~.o....~iil.".;..:'i)j;.::l,::..,....:..i:.... ;. :h~.....~~r..~l...;;q,.,,:;,,~,....;.. .-. ---%"oL~' ~ . . . ~ ,'. ,I, ~, ",...," '.:.'. .' '... .,' ~ f', ". ""\",'" II ~ ~.1."i {-::"I :, t~. '. ,'.;,;;: ~:.:::.i.' ~.~ I::~'t; ::.~.;~\ ~(':;r':':":i~' ..i.'.:}.~.::.;i.~,!.i.~_~.;..~.~.:.~.~.;.t.~.:.;.~.':.i;...;.: .'..;'.' t\J ~ ~ '.I~ ~ a l~.~f to (\J ...i.:...~. ~ ~>.:t\ ~;~~.i~::~;f:.:..rX:~J~j~;;D~V\ ' ~.,,'w '__'_"l__,r ... 'I"',..r., ~ .' 00.001 .. Ic:)~ i..'....~ ~,.:~.>.,::. 't:"rt,-~"';!'~"l';,;:';.,;, '. ~ I~. .1."'f~4'~<Ul~;~~1, f}t.~" j". q- : :.". t~./ ....... . '" ""'0'" I. j ~ ...":' ,~.... i:"~,f::~ ~~ ."I:~;.(i;';)~::'li;;":::"~.~~ ...~.4. : ;;' . '~"~'''17:.:...t: .\i1:"':'" ...\,' ,. 00'001 .," VV' l.'~' .... r.. __ .... ~ .. I'.' , ,. .~"~~~:~~r~~'.~:' .... ':f_%:~~~~L'~ ~'!:o' ~!::,\,:,~.! ~C\;.'1'.: oil:' '. .~~~V. '%".:..:~~_~I;,.";,':.':'....;~,:..:'. :.....~::...i.:.'i,,~~~~...:... ,~..~:......:~.,-:.:...:.,.~:.:.~~..:.... ..~.....;.::~~..:..,....'....~,..:~.:::.~:."~..~i~...:.....,.',:.1:.:~.~.;..:l;:..;:...:..:....'.,:)::;.....~..~......}:.....::~!::J.:."" :. .',:.,: ::..~...~.i.~..:~.;i.~;!,?i.;.'}' , : ~ - _ 'C .:-. . . .. - -"P - ... - ~ .' ....NI . ~ "'!.o\. . 'Z+-.~..../" '1 -IT.,. ,.-c.!.!: 1::" ,'1'. ";:.:: :" .:. .". . ., . :'.,,' :. i.......; ;"'~/I':- . .: I I .11..... - _.' . I''''' ..... ...~ .. . '.' ..... : ~. :~~~:] :'t~~f't.:.(f,( ~:... '7,ZMl<oL" ... ',-!~%io~-it-:. .... '.~ .~ gg'o.g: :;. :r kll);~t:~ ~ +-,.~'.,:., . .. .J.; /:."., O "~'.... J.",";,' .~., ~ . . 00'001', '0" I It::'" ~ . ." ~D.""'.~ ,'.. .. . '1.,' !' !:i1~..:':~i.;.;.;i~~~~~;:~:s:..: i ~., .~ l~"k s . J. '~:. ".i:. 1 ; :.: · .::.:...- ",..' '-:-."..:.":'" HI wl ..,....f;~.:-7......~ ror.. :' ~ ...::: ."..~ ," ~ ...." .... . <::> . ' ... ,....... " .01.. .'. -- '. ,. ,;::,....... . 1 .'. -.". .... '. . . .: "l ,,' . .8 ; : .~.::::~>}[~~:~.~.1;~t ~ ..~ . '. . 11..1 ./....: "0. ~. :. ;, ~ i" .... I: 66o~' o~~o~ :. J:-;-:'~..;'j .. ':. ." ,. : ~" . . . ~....:,:'~ "'I~..""..'\)'::.'- . ~ ::'i1' ....... ~ . -I'l..., . . '., ; . t . -.,,="- , "\ ~~ ',b'" "'11lQ' .....:.'..;,'. !I.....,....,.':;..'.....:_~..... H :" /,\,,'.'0,:',.\. ~... . .'.'" '" olD <:) I l::::i 11 . d'C'" _..... - uo ". :. \....~ 0.: _._ .' ,,~..r ..... ...,....;. . .~,;: '." J. ............~,./......I.,..I,. .~. I , ..-... I ~ . J'- \ , . " .... ..,., .'. : I . I' 0) ^I 'oioU :..:;:.~.:..~:..~... :. ; ,...,..,-"......... ..~. (. 't.Ul. . ..' . . . :.';.' .....:...... _ ,.: '",1. ;'.'.~r~~.'r'::..;; ~.'.~.~..,~~~.).:~~.:,.'..~'.t.:..;.:..:..'~ ...;.... i.... ;...00 ~ Ii: ... .. . I ~ '../....:." I \ ...... >;.;.:,~)..~ ~ ~ ...::~'. ) _ '. Q \~~" ;-'.., "'. .... .. ..... >;:,\'<:;U;':.~:. Al:..::.{....~.~'~.i7..~'6..~i~~;..~~;::..:.oo.00,;. '.,;,J 1:/ J~ ..~\..:. ..'\'.<' ;-'.<~:(.:.:.:{.:::..::. .'. .:' ...... "4f . 00'001 g ok';'~ I : ~~ \ :,.:..' .: .:, .i'~" ..:,.~<,;.. >: '.... .. ': ':;"Z?Zh'.::: .' ~ ~ ~(~ :,t~~' ~ ,-.:~~-... '. . :\"'.) :,: :;.;:.u.:;{{:f~:;~> '.~ _.' :j.: ';;. :r. " . ~: rO - . :, ":~.'\: .,t ~'r~o'>)~, .~:. .' ,; ':';'~_d'";,,,,: ,:.::.~;,<.:.;.:: '.:.~.'~'.:..'."'f-:~:::-:' .;. .~.i. ' "U.. '\;:;~:~',:~;.:; 't ;:' :~~~':... ..' :.;<).j.;,;~};:;ilii\:::,,);\:p.;~>; ::, 1111 J.1I~wUI!1 1.1 ~-............ -\; . >. . ...._.,. ;...,....... . "'0;' . ",..,,,:. ..,.. ..' :5'~ \ ~ ... . . t:t: ' ; " ',' a.'f.:}~. I'~"~.L::: ..: .... --.J .' '" 'i;:':i'i'~~r:::'; N ."..:: "~l':'- . ~;... ~ ,'\'!oi~.l.:il ;.11'. tt~.,.. '-,"':i . , '. .... m '. '.', ,.\ "~I'~ " ...._~...~~.g... ~~., ;.., " ....... . 'J.LI ,.. ." ~...~trr,..\.,...~(~ ;J .7 ~t.~ ~ \........ ." 'n..:.#:,..,~;.:t..,..l~t;,,-I.,:~r....:.'...... 00'001 -. ...,_ \ ' \ V~ (\1 wi . ~..... .1 0 .~. r ..~. . . r.J '.:~ ;r;:'": " ,. I." ". ~, .' . r.1. '1;~.~~.'.':.i~,:~..~It:'f,;i.I.,~j>J':':' co .. . - . ! . : : ~.'\~' " >::. ':. :': ...:'.L.:..:;~.~~::.i}~.:~.j.::.:~);.~;~./..~i~;Wt'~:.'..~.;,:.y<::: q.:I;' . . ~. i1..:! .C~'::.:.., "l;'\~i:. ..::.,1._ o. 11\:... '._' .'_ .'.:.~",:, II,. ..1.'..~~w__".J..,,,.. ........."'.1. '. ~,."..'JH~.,..~,.lt~.r..\ii:..: ,.;. ~ ;~~ ..._.... '" j' 1.7;. .,' .~~k.rb.'.~;..j;..:,\p .... . .... : :. S'C;;; .,- ~ ~: .:( il:j,t:;:;~:~.~~l;~:t;(..:..,..~'"~... :. '7.r;~'::;1 '-'j:~~. . .:-;;.... i F'.'.: .'i~\!';:~ q!)\:..: , /;?:~ . .... "" QZ gg.lIl ".... ~ . -' ~. i :.I!~f(,~::,;;l~iVtHr~:;.r~ :'::'" ~::j' ..'_ :_~~~~:.:~~:., ~I;~':: !E' 'j>'; :.;' i.. I . ~',,:1...,: d: .A """\lil.t>rt-:,l'o,:~.~ ".._~ 'O. , , I ~.:~ 1'i'li~HrJ~~..;", ~:........~..:'....\\:';o: . '.:: . . _I' ,~ : '. : ~ :. ,,: I. '~I' \L :.-:..l'-\Ii'\~"'l'(,'..., g.' ,~~ IOfA ~ '?' ..' ! . 11:': \ ',":..~:J t~.l:;\;Ir,I! ': ..,. _J # '!Ioo;; to: , : o~_o... ",. ..':' ' I..... .or,. ", ..' , .,....; '",", ~ 'II .; ;.:.:.".j/:!'l,~,':!:~iii:.~,.';.,.-:r ., I :' ~ . '~.'Zi".()zo~.t; ~...,,: '. . i.';"':'l.,'f;'f':::.;" ':".''''''':-~;;J '!~~ "'\l" . ' . ,ii;'1. I, 'I 'i.I.I':'rA;.,'( '!....~ I ~~ .-:n111 -~ '. 'i';:':.(,~)\I.}!t!;i''''ff~.;~; .' : ~::: : .1Ii ". 'h;"\"11,':'II.,~~....I.1 0" CO! ~ ,..:. ; Of' .... :' 'l:: ;;:\~!i!~t;~'! /'ti~~;~;.:" ? .z:.:,; .,~..~ '.-. ~~~. ~:::,';:, "',: 1\'(;~.:;I;~~,:~(::&~::J:.':' __.__,.:'ng ::~ H-'g~1 ~~~ :'~';.'.:'-::>.. 'tt::; i;:~.~;~I;:~' · ;~i"'~~/:.~fiffl~!/~,':~ij(._.~~-- ':~~. .~:::: ~(~"dt.j~k~r"'.lt~:,~.~~ ;'. I ~." (..:.....:..:::,.....,......_........... '. " ....... r".. , '. .,'..' .,t:,jlp. .....:.. ",. ,...... ..... 'ii' ~ :'F.":~~~'H;':r,. . ~:. .':. . .... !::.' .. .~~::;. ~:::: 1"\ t:~.;.f~~:;tKt~~~;:}~, .'.'" >{::~~..;;..:;~5::?:;:.:..:.~....:..;.. _\'a'~~\, .' t;,i' c::: :~.;'~ ,.~.!I~::.t:!i-!.\ ~.;~>.~';:: · . .....,...:.... .. .::r, '\....., ..:I:~~II~~'r~j~:.,;...' If _ 7 :... ". ..i~ . I .: ~# ,..; .':. :.. .. ~. . ..!. .; . ,.. .:~::'.. :! :. '. . \ . . '.. .-. .:~. .. 7 ~~~~1't\ll\:~/' "E' 'So ,'fti::e' .' .:.tJ.!..~ ~.... ~~:," ,,~':"':";'i7 ']"'H":: ':t;~~G~~:~:';'~~'~I:~ '~""'I!)~';i{(!)'7.il" ',... '. ", '_.o' : ..i:,:,' ,- . - , ;~"!..~l ,":t"~""; -,' . ,-,":'.: i..:tl~: " " '.#.. "~I .' ,.; . ,..' ,":' "',. ..">!:: '... ,j .:.. r ,,'J' ......1 .1.: . '. ~~. ' . '" '.' .::, ~::. ..~ ..' ,f':. ...;.....~~.~ ;::'j,"'.; ,'. ,,:': ;..~;~./. .n':'~i /::.'<i!::~ :"'':'''':'.:\',.'' .: ~Jo;t:~):/:t .(" :. . I. .~ ;, .. . . ,.:.,,"<0&1; ~~;!.t"l,:'.:;._ ',,' ;:,.;. ,",,;,;""'''''l:'a'~ l..: ;,1'.....:.. .- '...... . ,.;,1..,' ..". I . . . I . ;' t .....,. ;": ,.;..1~;~~1.\I"1"'" ., ".".' _,' ....._ ...~.,..:.. ., . "'. .....,.. L:' ..:. . '," "...,.........i.~~;..~:r'.\i'jIflr. ": -~\~G:sf~.\-\O"NN ,.:~E:~~A55u:'t;':EI?:.~.:?:>r::.jl:) i ;.,. . ",:\~==M.5e~, \(.5' . ; <t.:::~.>:..: ~>.-.:~.:rtlii-\~L.D fiJl--.\C 7;NO\.E:;-5 :.:' . ~ON . M.O~0M-.'=N:"l: i;."<'}::.: ':;,'1 ,.... I',., ':. . .',. ::.' .::: .:.~'I"~' ~~11~. li!i;!f" . '. .' ' . .,....~;....\.; ,. '. ".' :.. .,: '. 1.", . . : .,\'C'. 'f.1\' ,....;,........ u.,. ...=............-.r .: . ..'.. ;", I""~ .~.. .,' ; ...... :......IC...'. ::, - ,. ,.... -' '." 00 .'. . . . ~ ";jYJ~ . .,.til:7""""'''''''' =-- ',-,,", .'\;'~::"'F,.::;....~~;i~~;)~;;'" ,:: .:....... ~....~.;..,....~,\.'\'.~...:i...:. ~ ~.T, :,:~ ~ ,,~ .< ;;;ii;W~:I';: , .. '''".'. ,;.' ..;i'..~;f'.t ....,; I......... ".11: .:......1:1'..(.. " ._ . . ' .. ...-." :, . , 'o, ,_ _ . ..' ',.-.. .1'.'. "/'~.::.:. .. . . . . ""\ r." 'J ~. . /.1' ;4;. i" .. _ '.' .....,.,.,/.~.\..C--.,'-... -"".~Rr':'''',l,.:....... '.' . . . I .1 "....;1,.' HI>. ".' ;, --"t '. -,- -I !........,,-.. ',t",.t;"l '.. .~ . "'1 "ilf, '4, ...' ..tI I :...:.,;...'1':....;..: .....:Jm,.;'~~.i.~;.;:: . :-/)'. :,.> :. ',~ .'IIIC''':I'~~ UII~II'I:lj"I' . l' ....;qo,.~::,........ I.:'. . .t' ,!",.~\~t.~~1"""'."'" '::;-;'..;',; , " ".r '.' .... . .......,... I' '.. ","'i.l. ''jq'kI\i,,'',.:. ....~:<,,:,f:(<\~~~.;...: "~'jl"":'~<"'" ;.;::f~. L~~~,S. /'./C). ';'~l~~~I;~li;I..i,~4~ ~~);..:I,:::i./~~:~t... . . y ~I'i::': ;'.. ::' /...,-... '~'.i. " '~~:::J~':~!:.;... G. "-... . ..... ~_': '.__ _'~_:.:. ..,..:.;.;.. ...,_.__..... ._... '''Z.4'Z. 3~ .---- . .Llllo1ll~....J/l;.lI..~ ". I '. ,/ " \/ .:) C::~ ');.r:;-': ~..: ~ . .... '\8;\'1 .,' .;. ".f. '... . ~ l/ , !." .. ":...;",! -. " , I. ", . ~... ~ .~. .. . if:,'.::.;,. ~'?~:.~ .' : iii' /1 ,. 1\4 - "'.";' ",', - 11\,/01 ,':z ..,,,'9. I ., ....0 If> . . 1 /.... .' .'Z~..,\,- , ..1.-- ~-.' .,... .' .... e..........'''..e: .'.,''; ,- '% "'~'''17. -- ~7 ..' ;.","-t. ....... ....97.4-6 ' .-.... ,....... '!,,;,s'ro.,15'Z. \:><~~~ r ~";':' !.' ~. ~....\, '2.. dI ~o . 0 "0 011I0 "'- % . ",N. " ..,~..!.'~~....~- _-----;~,~'7 ....-... I -' I I "-I " - . . :;J. i .... . . . ~ . '. .:. .' .:;'"~f!~c.; '/:~2:/:,' .' '. t J : ",;) L.J.. , ", ..., """"" .":~ . ...... ..,., I . I... 7 . w~ :' -.. '_/., .' ./ Ooo.~~ / I!.'L. ,co .. ,01. 1"". . ,~. it': ~''{::; / ..' ;~. " ,'i-"i'~ .. ..~ {:..~..~,".... // ;) '..' ....- i"". .../ . /. .~ _0'- , , . J......... ./ \ , I. j"" \, .: . ... .!. I" ,:.t{~.t~..I.l&;:!I~ 'II~':'" I ~ fl,f." ,. I' .. I . ,'. l. ~':!~II i~W' :~~W~;: i ... .d~~'l~ j1t. ~.f:.lil ~!'!' . ". '., .&~~~l ....., "Ad , t':I\.t~.1. ~~'1...t"f~~'I' " t..h lril I' C' I :' IJ~' '."I~'r.'1 ",h. "~':l' It . ., . .. t ~ ,~..,.8" , "'7 fIZ.' :n; 112..... · ""1" liijJ III . \ :. I~:I'~:' 'A~~~ :;'; ~,\ " ~:,;fj\jr.: tll.til ;1i', '~~\f tf.~ 'iI' I:~' ')1;' t.:::t:,:,r ~,I I'~ It~"......., Af Ii '~"fl"l'd"".t. )~.: . "'l. (~1t'.f ,,;~,! \ "\~ ?~"f 0 pi;. ~~.: . .' ;;tt~:if' 0 .! J f(; '. :I'\I~"J. ~1.tlC"! . :.~I.i)lir f.j. :o.,lr'..:L,; . '. . " , '. ,~"I: . ..'''': ""t"~ .:/f.".,.', . '\ttJ ~'''J~f'{ f' ~. I '"..,jh..,,, ~"I':;ol'i' ..~;:<(:1..~;; ~1'1;;111'~:! "!H 'T., ,.,. .., . ,ti-lril' ,~~ '.i...:.:.' '1' ,,'"if ,. .., 1.( . ,"J11 ~!J "II)? /,.... :1 :~~f.H ~.:s: .l'!" \.I.~ '\;'. j' . ~tlr:f 'fW...'....... ! . r.., ',:1 ;:6..... ..~ I . 1I'Z..oo" . , ..~~,81~o,;-+-z :, I ...I~J~.'!~.~~J }'V:', -: '. .:.Ii., tiH;..' -, ' I!,i. I .:;:f..~\'t!~~~l;lt.;.' . . ":':I..t1\..~r(... .,~~~ . ~'IC f-.., ,.' c::&' " . . t.. 7.5'.33 . '\....~~.-.....b.~~"'. n." "fli",~\ i6-Y," J Ui . *,l.w'f "~'b..~.f 01 I .,' '11:i :l\'~!tl"~:': I' . " :~.!..:f::\:.~\l..~~~l :~.:1, . ".: i~7~t"!i'~:'\':"'-- , :, I :....~...;....' ", "!( vr ~'\ ~.; '; 1,{ ....: , .. 1" t' " ....!,:., :. I I ~ . 'j.,-; th.','-, '- . /. ,..vlr'......., ,',\1' "WI.!.' \' . .:;i~~;~}..:-: , 1,_' t't~.,....' ,:. " !,t:~:t-~:< i,:) ,.: ......., .,~);.~';i ;..~, ~~ i,.: ~\/ .. 'j, '~'. . .... ~ ", ~,. ~ 'f ' ~... $9 " 2 . I ' I'" , . ,,~ 1 ) :,.-- Sot: Co ........- I I 'I I I 1 I I - I ..~ 1 1 I I .,::;t::E~IVU::..~tsUl=(l ,,;lU '1~..tt :;;);::\:;;"S EAR I N G S .' SHOW N A R E.. ASS U M ED". .' . . ",:. .)~'i~;;'~.;;fi~'~~. NOTES', IRON MONUMEN!i "\ :~}:~~~~.D~CEMSER~ . .'" . !l';/":;I1'."'.f'FEET:~IN' SCALE: ~ _ I ". ,.._~....: .\., ,,:...... t. .f~."":::'Otl~l.. j" --- ~ I I '~ \...l.... ........: ".~;. "':': '-:.~:::';.~;t~;T:'i;',:;' '. 0 50 100 ISO!' :'::(: :..1.... ~ ;.1 . .. ,,".. "10'" '. . . . .. . , r'"l ....... . . '-- ,.'" ....""~ .. .....P . . .' . .... -"1 " .':. "I.~..::I....~;~l'U~: . /":" '. .' . :.t.: I "50 '~'. . {~.;.' ',Ii_:.:.'\...~....f'::.;...~_:f.~.;.~.i. ':j~..i',I~,:.~.t.'1":J\f..i,:,,;,.;:..:..t...~;.;...~...~....:,.':.. ,.,..'..:.i....:......i. '~.'.:':'<.." "', :.' " .. :"' . '." N .. c;;:..:;:;:J~,,... ..,...., .;\' . ,':' :: ..eUNS!::. 7:f:i::~i!;i.d}VE :<;:: itt~'.~1!,(.::;:.:;';:, .. ;,i:.,' ~:.:.";;, M~\ai;, : . . I . ........ 'jSf..joI,J. . ...~~~J., ",.' '. . '. '.. ... , ,~:!iifl~jp"t;~?ft;.. .;,::'i . ,:::,!;:.ef}: . ..; ':: I :J'..~ I M:;:~~1';;:~~ ~.' . ::~ ~ ~.h! j'f . . . , : ! : " '. ;. ,i .. " .',' i' :..'~ .,. illl;~;;;" '';;'' t,';'j': . " .~, ;' . ;,'" " ;'. ,. . ; ~:.i.. '. . 'r.., t'i'~~'l f'f"'~1C,~.tf\"'f~'Ar;' ., ~':I. I ':. . ~ . . "'. I l' ': ~'I '::~"cli~~.~!.'f"':l' '~T, I . .,. ~: .' I I" ';.~ 1"IL.".2 t";\(.o"'_\'~.. ~'. ":: ;.t! . . I ," . . ~.l...._.l !.Il,"", ". . .", ' '.. " . j, ~. ,~l.:IQ,'IIJ:J' f;;"). .... ," :'. . I. '1':' ,.t' 4.~.....t'f'I.::!.. . I . .,', ,. . . .i,. i'",,/'i '~:'~I'~1"\.'; .:j":,., '. .". . . .,:r. . ,~J " I ..,1' ,,,..;., :- "1' :. :. . '.. ,_' ,., 'I' '.I~ .~:lt..r.l~I.~\71t'(r,.:tl,,;.~J . . '/ . .."'- :..1.":1:...1,....'1., IJ.. I .. " I ,~'Jh.'ti6:"~"";'1tlH"~",..,..,' J,' .:'" . . ',: 1~1.:i""'f'''Wo'H':'~v4,'l~:. "." f~'~" '''':' ":'j ilt...'~f:..I:6i:~,~':):-~~~il ....... ,. I . . " . " .;.~; "I'''Jt'~':~.'!-fJ!r.'' " ",.. ;,' ~.': r ;..I~.::f(:~.'rJ'l;.::r.,..I.'.... ," .' :j,:!tl~3~ii~~;::,,".. ,..' I :~.t~,;.1/~fr~:f~J1~.:i ~,." .. ';:: I ';'.: ?...,[.' .ll'"..... ~.; {;~ '.', ' I'.;,~l" ~~1~V. ',jlt,:h.~ I', 'l,.~", '. .. 1.(. d L' ....... .-1. ';''' . .. . i'h~::'. ITll'~..r. '..},t,,,.,.";' I . .'. I~" . :...... .~ 1-::::.4);.~.:,..,.j.i.\:..it.:I'!.,...T '.'",:':;'~~". :, ' .~ ,111"..":. .,It. jf..'1:"~.;.rln.~J:..~ "',,' I ~', ", '. ._ .'.t. ,"!l:~ rll ....\'i:'~i.rJ.; ..' .,... ..' I . .' 1;:.ar~:..qlJ.:~.:~f.'!f;~.' ;!....: ..;.,.....,,~ .:.:.:1"":';'li.ij\~iI!;.%t.,II'!!'>l~:'I'" --: ". '." \ "'i~ '. . it~lril\i'rt\lJ!Vi,i:..i/~:;\:.: J ;.... \.: . ,.:. ," ,......, '. 'Jt;r'.~' ~j(}:.~,( ... .:..' '" . . ( .::, , . i1l"tf;'l'f,~.;;;/hff;t~~h';', ":,.~..\ ','. i'. (\0 ,to, ,r.':'it'III.21~~IO",~!.:\I1.- ,', .... _:, _~" .. . Ii! ""', I. ,.. ~Iql.'r~r~(',~", . :, ',.,. ..: . ,,- . j 11'''~j t'~ n.ii.'P {'J; :./,,:',: .:-;. J , . .. ~j. , :;. ~I:i:'''''~'~''~.r*''-''-\:.t''': '..'1 ',',:;. ~J u.t -. I., ; ~l ... \1 ;f,i..,.1 " .... " :: tll ..,,' .r" . : '-'. : 4!)''''\I. J II..~. ~~, .-, '.'r'" ~ \~ V:: 'T" .... or-. ~ I . ,.'I'I~~:.J,.. , .... . ... ,,, ~ I t,q~""'J \ 1,..,':1~~"'111'.1 t'~' ~. ""AfI . ...., : 'fL. .,t"J.....t>J"';(,~.1 rf~'.':^\. " ,:'~. '. .. .:llji~I.. Iltl"""" itiJ~l""r7."'i.~.,:"",,-~,\~, : .;" . . . .,.~, ~ . 1.1 . . . -. . ',' ~11i ': '.. ..~i)~' 'I' !::.t:(.;.. ' .. ';"1'" .1. I '. ......, I'~ ~.~\ :~'r!: ....U:-{~i.,'ll..f...., ~~ I .: '.,: I.. :j;!ilf:-' '''1A1~~(.;:t,ltr.':~..l''::' ;': ... ," . ~. . . ~ \'<!,V Jli''',~:1:lV.~t~~t.\i::-: o~ f:J'V\ I' ,t.. ..~.....,tll.~:I~..~.li~,i~.~.:I,'t' ~'\ ".,. . '~..' . .:....,\I.t.)LI.1!~ 1~/4.!:;I.. ....'-\~ . ;' ,.'. .'.~\ \.: " " " 1 It~ I. ~ 1 Jr" ~;;yf;'.}' ~'''''.. . '.t" , 14.lJD \ : 1l:f,I.h.ki ;li:f.\I('sr.-r"o -I.'. ",;- ..t'- 6/.7.,.- -:;'.. '-. I'",. u.lh' .! -"f' !!/, ,\~ '/. . -N.".U'4T'1t! :' ,'N.S'.ZZ'4Z-11t ;I"~t' l'J"'~.r ,,0 ~"V :"" .'''............__" : ~... ..k ''- :",' !'~I""'II'~fj!l~tlt~'ll.c, ..' . . '::-1;" 1!.:":!I,I\i"f1'l',..~~I;.i: ...,: ;:~ .... t' .. I '..0' ,. '., I.... I' I . '. !'il; ',III'r' i~ ., j ..,':,.,: . ..' ..; ':.: .'; _. ..... . : .1,,;;,... '\"",1.>a ...[1. ~': .?:......'.:.:.. '. ~ ...:::..I"~-~Ot'.II..\f{l' ~~,..i...'..."..fi\,.\. ~~ ..... . . ," '-:1' I ,r. J. ~.. t " ' . :'.. '.. .' :..' .-.: ....N. 8'. ZZ'4T'w. jl ,,' " "','" ";.~~ ~'.'\,:' ___:, '... I ":,' , ~t " ao ~o ~t Iii'!." 'l~;~""; '; :~. .~-: '; ': '.'.L . ,". :, , '..:: .00 ..., i~.' . · 'l't.., -' . .'". -t,. I .., . h. :il! " ~ ~ .. .,., ..1 ': l"~"""': :,';'.' .:' :.. .,..: ." .. . r. "\:.~b' ,";'1I"itio.:1...;J.;":~::':'''-'i;'0'' .,,:,' :.:...:.....~:~.,.....'.. <-;./. .;" , ,:;.~~.~t~~i,!,\~;,~:;;:.T.;;::,;:.. .', :.. -, '.;,~...:..V . .~I"'~~l:~::..i.i..\-\-,:;;::.,.:: ."Y. : <-:....: ..... .::.:- ~ ,~Oj iI ,:' '..t/":;~:~.i.~.:'}:-~"T:"L' ';' :..~.:...:' ...;. '.i-'I,g 3l ~ ;'1.,jII. .,'I:'!l'\l"'~",,"'"' ". '.. :~. /~~ ~~~;~if~(f~~/,~' '::. ':{. ;':19;?6 10" . . \D, .: ;...': '. .;" ,. :~ . .:.:~~'. ,.'i:. ';, I . ~~ ~'.:'. .: ;-:" ., .' .; .' . .-.... C:-; :.., . !!..' . .-.. ~'. . .... ~.~;: ::;. :~~:;.~~,~. .. '. . --., ~-. r. '. ',:. ., ;.'. , . ..' . i " ,;. :.. ~\4" 8 2": '.'t 2 : (...~ ;". . '- lio.oO " '-N..II&' ZZ'iZ"w.. ~ ." . io. . ..t ; ~: __~'~".:, .i-:,;. -......-.....- "iJ\""l:,;I~.";'.~t""I~ . '. I .!.:.U"....~,"I,,'d::;..;..:..MATCH-/.INE ~ :'!f'''it.\~I~'7~,::.,t;i::~':._. '. ... '1'~~~!f:~.~;l;"..~.~J-~":'tlf'~'.' .;': .' -. '.. . .... ..~~ loI;.!r,~ l.t~..,. .."L' ., I '. --t-_"!l'h.(,:.~t;.. ''1~':.~ ';'. . \\'~:l~~~~;~f(>=:~;:.::~:.. '~." ..,. 11!:.~r . 3l0.7Z "N. 87. .J7'+:rE. .~..;.' I .~ .' . . , , 9 - . I ~ . . ': , . ;;,;):d~: ]- / ',': .... .:_,;.'.... ....,.-..-.i-~ "'~~;''':'''_:~~}~:('''''''''' f '. ......'__~.,,_... )_~:.~:/:~::;:-~~.. .:-;y:. Jl!T WEST' ...:,..i:..:j.....,. . ',; ,.: '.'., ': ).f::::'>.;. f ~ :..( ',\. .;; '.' .>.'. . ';"---- - .' - \ ;, ~...~.:' . .. .... ~.' .:-''',-: (.... "7':'-- .- r-.. . ... . i::: l'~\ .~:.:: ... ,---- ;\~};;:~,;,;..i:,:;.X;;;1fj~:. ~<.<!> '- . .:.1 vOS"."",-, .._';' L-/43.7!1 ' ' / i ..- "" '- '.~.' .......,..:.;..:-:........ '. ." I . '. _ "" .:' '" ~~, __; t.=85.00(JI.I..M1j...:~rf1.':- - .....<1..~,' ~6'. ' ..:::: '" ~ . .,., 89' "71J;j~d~S) 1 ~ \.\II.....~:~....~,.~....#'...~.~....#.~-.....# ......../' - ,. .. :... '.:,.:-,'. ",.,..t.': ,JUL/Ylr-; ".J."-';,;~:':: -... - 0' .d 'Z ., :'S40 ::.,' ,,' -' . :'50.. ,"',. ,L' S<<OIl''''' <,,::~}:.'" ~k=" .,,, .... ". ',Z8.1Jt}i. ::z.8.0.~l Lf~5:~(!"i%JJ;/ <90,.>..->($>... /f ~\'": :': ,,>~, ;.~-1~/4 ~"Ii":-' \ ~ ..:, .., . "'0"'0 ./- ~ .;.~ ';~'k>,~ ~:;it:"" . ':;:': .... ~~JY\~..<.. ..', ~ ~~~i ~.t.:~ ~:l'l} \~~~ \.: . ...c:_~~' ~1~~ /!,'\J~t~:~"" 1: <:-B' "\ "'if""; ~ ;,.;,~' ~~V:, ' .:...... .: ",,\'1,/. .' /'/ ",1,' '-'...~,- ~ .. ~ ~~<~" :,:/1.1/ .'/G..~.~~ ~~rt~. . --. T(1''/- -'{.~' ~o') ,-_. ~ ..~~..~., .:';;:;. 't8.00 t$.oo .: Z800 . ^' :;1'/" 4F ~0i4 ..,i' \.s;..Q,? 28.00 "."__' 'S',Oo:,~#.,~ ,.' ;::..' \V~A" \~~ .' ~ .,' ,''->'00 ,". :'';} .]~'_: "';o;..!?:2, '1'tI. O"ZO'"'-''' " '. .,-, , ,.:" . .' ~,"'" .$.00 '.:'1" 4:1~;e: gO "-1 " r-..,' \ ,:",".:;..' <',' . .:.,. ,...y.;~(;:.'.~..,,_ --~;:a/,-':"~. .80. Q)..'. \ ......._ '. ,....... .,' ~., / , I ~ ; \ '!... \ ", . ...... ." .' . .' . " ";,-'-:--- -:- ~ ~(; ({J'" l - ..J \;) ~. .. . II':' ...... '~'y" .. ~-".., .., '. ..1.8DZO'IJG"YY' ~ I~_- . "OJ'O/ ,".. /.::--- -- . Co',' , . . "ill ,-<." .'" .., .~' .. - . \ / {J." "d1.9B -".' .......:.. ., i Cl::i~ \':"'." ; . . 80.00 ~ '~,;...:..;..-:'" ....:.. .' ..... .~.:,.:.:.. ~ ~ \ .~.. . ~ . . . ___' /.::~'::""'" . '. . ": .:: \H I~~ :,:~ . ~. ::O'4JtW.' ~ ~~ ;'. ":. .,.. '. ",.";... .'::.' , t...~ \"~. : ,,:.0 80.00 ~ ~~ .. ~ ~ ,~'" ~ ~$~;~--~:~~:'",JF::~~.:t:..\ l~i\\\,:.\~~ ....#.~~~.w...; &\ . ~ .'___ . or .... " . ~ I..... ,... , ... \ - ~ ..._....;::-.s. ,~"';: )' ~ \" ~ .~ 90,0 .... ...#.' '. ~'z-:'. "'j ~: ~ 00 ".:'.."" :....;~~,~:..)~::...~ .... ,:'?('::;:",' :<. .:-\~ F: N' ';'0 ~ . ......~ ,: . " "~~' ,'. <:J\ ! ~ ./ .'" '. "".' ~:. ...,:...\ ;:'N,\ '. '" ~ tl-S"ZO' ow. . .'_',: ....::; ,..f.. '.. . :'. :"J.:) : '. . III . 'i~~'~ ~ 90.00 '.' ~.'." , ...... '.' I''''; ~ . <;:) . .'. .~...' 'l. ~ . :..... ,. " . -0 . '. ~ ~ .." .,~. l,.t: J I ~ --.. U. " / . I" \ 0 .... ..: I .. ,1'>- ., go ." . ... ..../ :. , I' . -Q,~ A/,80ZQ'#"w. . . :' ..' .~ ~~~/-~- .__.-~.: . " ('~ " . I ' .. ..' ,\' '. '-:!J,0(110t.17jf:'''j/!r'%::;rfT1JN',{''!''..''!~2 _ i.. __' -- - -' \ \ r-::'..\ '., i1Hff //'#1:.(1) ~ ~...,.. 67. Zt:.. ' .-. :'.' .' - 9(1. 96 :i 4QJ. . '; ';' ..'~~ P;':..:OI." \ '/.: ..: I .. \ ." .,' ..~..:: \ . :" ..'i:: '0, ' . .\i:.:" :'..---/28Z./0-- . '.:: '_'.~.. $.TJoO()'{)9''E.'' .... .. . . I . . _ ...,l'" I J ,,~... f:;~"'J --...---- I . ',\i: ;.,,..,, ~ .' . I" 'I " "_,i,. ...-:.. II' ": '.'to"":' :f' . I~ I" A '. .. .1i,1- I .,. I' ..,. Xi~;;!.' ; . 639,4-2 ," ..\, ;. : ..";. .:. "'~l . ;-.' .. .\ . . " / /,- ~ .... -', t".,'. . ,~ :. ..... /\/1 ,. l Y -'. .... o . . ~ . I; .. . .' ....:.... .....~:~ . ,-: . ~..' .' . .~ ~: -' . .... - ;' ':. .' '... . :;:--=-~:::.:-,:-~",,;;-~-"---"~:~'.,.: . --:-:-::----'~--'----'-'.......,=" ...~ .., ..,' . ~ ..~ ~~ . . ..~ME.~:sU~y - .1Q . . . ~ ".i-' . :., I . .... .- - --,.. (::~j . I . . .' .. .; . t .., . . . - -::-.......::~~:..~ .........- .' .~ : ' , , ". .. I ' '. 1,ZI..t) W; :-Q'85' .-f." I, " , ";",::',, ';',.t 0. ~ /..0 "II O() "$S , ,: . ,,' 0001 J '/ ~.,;, ~jO,E'/t10'N " t)O'!JS r:. /\IN/Wi YY#tU~IVNIW 31':;6'7 '.il4':?W.i701l_)OO'S92'.' ('Ui?fY)9L'~Z ... ... " " " \ \ o .r 11 - '0 ~- -, ~:. ..~., .;.....-- \ .... -.....,,' , ," ',. \ 1'::'<::) ':.. \' t~, :' I ~ "'.... ' I ,.. <'r) . o ' :. ' <::). ' , " :'!::~ :.11 ! ':.~r~~I)~~;~':'~~ .. '~r"" ..... -, .f, . , I , '. I . , . ' , . , I ,.~ '~.~ ' ," ' " ~~ ca" ,'0 ~~ . ....,. ;,:, "'J., ,: .- ;j~~:":~i: :.' >.) . . .. .. The following pages will show similar extensions in the common area which have been regularly approved and accepted over the past twenty years in Amesbury and Amesbury ~"est . 1. 4905 Regents Walk - fireplace and deck. -... -(-~. - - .., .~;; ~ - 12 - i # 2. 4961 Kensington Gate - courtyard fence. . . - 13 - ~ 3. 4951 Kensington Gate - fireplace. retaining walls. landscaping. . :. - 14 - 4. 4940 Devonshire Circle - courtyard fence. patio. 1 .. -~- .-J I......- .~ -,. . 4:f"~- ~ ~"-" filii!' ... .", ~ ... - 15 - , .. . .... ... .. ...... .... -.. ...... ~~ ',~. . "'- '-~1 . '" 5. 4949 Devonshire Circle - courtyard fence. patio. . - . .. ~@.; .~~., 1tI~ - r" " . .~. i~.. . . "_.. ':A.-.,...;>r, - .---,,;. '...~.~. f:.t~~ :1i.....~:~~1~~~..: ".4- .:oM.... "..1:.;..,.. .a. --. ~.~. ~ - 16 - 6. 4979 Devonshire Circle - courtyard fence. 7. 4960 Sussex Place - retaining walls. patio. - 17 - ~ ~ . . . t .. 8. 4661 Bayswater Road - fireplace. courtyard fence. patio. retaining walls. --_....' .. 9. 4971 Kensington Gate - courtyard fence. patio. . .................... . 7~"'" - 18 - ~ _I . -I '--- 'J' .. , ., .....;.; 1 ., 10. 4616 Bayswater Road - courtyard fence. landscaping patio. bay window (also extends into 50' perimeter to adjoining property area). ,- ,. , '.- .,.,. ...... .. "---'" " . ~~ --,... -' ::,>.... . "'k~ \.~ ....;7 ~ ... .... . - 19 - ~ 11. . . ~ 4616 Bayswater Road property) . deck. retaining walls (extends into 50' adjoining 20 r ~ 12. 4775 Bayswater Road - bay window. . -\ il - .'\. 'to r- " ",. , . ~~""- -- J:;. .~ .. : ~ I...~. .' '1 ..., ,". . . ,.;;. 0- ,,- ", ~~o..,...., 'L.:IV'Jo,)W.- tl,...,,,,,,, ~ P""T\CI tl_",:> :".. .... to ~ to.. eo t: - .:.vi Ie. .....,. - - .:.~ ~ .. ~ ---......-. /' . -rn- - 21 - 13. 4755 Bayswater Road - retaining wall. courtyard fence. bay window. deck. .9 'f ~;......t~::....=""'. \ .....,....~..F"...- . \..... ...~"...'! F.... 4.~"....c....... ",.,"'''M'') (l : \ ; --..- -...--..--- , .~ .:! ..:=~.~. _ u ~!...;-~:-=-:.~~~ ;..~" Q:~~:=:-~~ ,""- ~'-~ ~~"..'" .:..11 / 0tu.A.W. -=:.. rr1 ~.' t.J V '0 .... ,j ~...,...,.".....o ,.,'J:41 L"'~ () ," v I?> lo.....~ "-- ~ 11 . . r .. 4755 BAYSWATER ROAD ~~- o ... ..N 3?'.!... ';"~. ,. . '.J ~..,;..-...>......- ~, \V1' ~ , ..." ..0 .....-.. .. .,.<~~ ~ J ',0 ~"I'Z-' <",-'" -< ":" ~~'Z..,Bo ~~. 'Z. c;.......<.411 ":" I . --> ..a . !l01 0- ,,' .... h-:. \ ~. . "" 'l \ . '\" '" ...," ,\ . -'"'.... ,. - -.... . ~ -"'" -, \s) ~. - '" " , ...L . r- \J . ~'v': .. 3~ I S,7() 00 90- ': ~ '.: ..... .:.~::: ....... ...... ... ......--- .. .-..2?.-:: N -~ /~ \'~ \ \\ \ \ \ \~ \~ \ \ \..L \' ,~ . \. . -- , -.. -0 N 0 . N <::> ~ o~ '.I:l> . , I' seA i. E: I ::: Z 0 '-. C0 . ." \:, .~ \).) c:. - r- \:.) - "Z. ~ l:) ... .. .. ,.. .. , .... t'2,,0 .' -', s"'.'" ,"-: ~ . - ~ I ... .' .. ;.90 '^ .... '" o 0 -:' ~" '{'I. \ aU' 't'Jo .' I 03" .... \ 10 "S. .. ..".. '.. h...,.,_ . _........,..,_._..,... ....__- . 14. 4957 Kensington Gate - courtyard fence. 15. 4730 Bayswater Road - fireplace. bay window. .;,!,=: .~ ~ r~. ' .\ - 24 - ... ~ . . ...... 16. 4845 Regents Walk - bay window. - - -- ~. =- " '--. '. .. . A# -- -- .- .~- ,"":,,... :,.. ----- --~. "'. ., 17. 4790 Regents Walk - deck. stairway. . - 25 - f" ..; 18. 4610 Bayswater Road - fireplace. deck. courtyard fence. patio and bay window. .;, . - - .... .... =- :..?= -=--- . ! -, - ---! -.... - .. , . .. . ~, ...... _. /1.. .," , . , ~-\ . -- ...:- . ~ :j,.C tf,~ ~ . ~ , "111'"'- _. _~'Z:__..J._ ..:.... - 26 - ..... 19. 4930 Sussex Place - bay window. . - -.... 20. 4795 Bayswater Road - deck. fireplace (similar to Mr. Grable). . - ,&r' _. , '-.. :. .~,. .~_~..,..:'.~...~: t ~ "-.~'f ....., . - 27 - /' 22. 4833 Regents Walk - deck. . ""'-- .;I . --- :::It.,.,,;;..., r~~~'~i ~ -- ...~. %"':.~~ .... ';'-",,:- - - . ,o4r,e ;t.-P /S RlISS/A.} I~ a./I h,:)k./~fs /;U.- - 29 - ... 23. 4971 Kensington Gate - deck. .- ~~,.. .' ... - ~.- . . . ~ ...... ..... ....... ..- - 30 - ~ 24. 4905 Sussex Place - deck (also extends into 50' adjoining property). - - -.. - -'. -... ~ - .... .'; :::-:. .~~. .~ '...... . .,J'\.. . - '- 25. 4900 Regents Walk - patio. . - .,. , - 31 - 26. 4725 Bayswater Road - deck (similar to Mr. Grable). . :' - '. ;>~'If;"~' \,. : I. _ ..._ ~ ~ ,I " . \ '. . c _' . - 32 - .. 27. 4755 Regents Walk - deck (extends into 50' adjoining property). . . - 33 - 28. 4925 Sussex Place - deck. aoot. --L-; . .../ . . : t .~/\l ~I: .' ~"':"'''''~''''.'' \,', :~!} 'i';~ ,'. . ...- . .~~;~! ,...-~;~:!Yt'f . .' f .1. . :' 7:, ":, ';' t ",: ,,''\.' . ....';;h) : l,....~r~ -,',\ .~ 'f .' I .;J\;.il:': . ~ . . ..:. . ,.' . .. '. ~ .. f ~ '0- _' ~"''1-C> :1: - 34 - This last picture is the Grable residence as it is now existing without a deck off the patio door. . During construction. Mr. Grable changed the windows in the breakfast room to a patio door in order to maximize light. ventilation and view in a small breakfast area. He also hoped to be able to build a small breakfast deck. Since city staff raised a question about the deck. Mr. Grable has met with city staff and tried to follow all proper channels to have his request to build the deck reviewed. The Board of the Amesbury West Homes Association has approved the deck as proposed and fully supports Mr. Grable's request (attached). In summary. we believe city staff's opposition to this deck is arbitrary and not correct in view of the past pattern and practice. codes. covenants and deed restrictions. the PURD and PUD framework and the history of the areas. Mr. Grable's request to build the simple deck is: . 1. Reasonable. 2. Permitted without a variance. 3. In keeping with the area. 4. Approved by the Homes Association. 5. Practical in terms of location and floor plan. - 35 - . , , Consequently. we request the City Council to direct that the 6'X la' deck may be built as planned in the common area without the need for a variance. and that the extension of the deck into the common area that lies in the 50' area to the perimeter is also permitted without a variance. Most importantly. however. is the human and practical element. which seems to be missing in the rigid approach to this matter. We respectfully urge the members of the City Council of Shorewood be proponents the more human side of government. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted. . R. CONSTRUCTION COMP~VY f) v:;!C~ / · Date rJo 7 let f.r- DateY~~ 3, Ie:; <J.5 - 36 - r . ~ R. L. Jochims 4765 Bayswater Road Shorewood, MN 55331 December 1,1994 "/ Mr. John Grable 4720 Bayswater Road Shorcwood, MN 55331 Dear John: This is to confirm that the Amesbury W cst Homes Association Board of Directors has approved your plan to add a deck. As you know, there are similar decks in both Old Amesbury and Amesbury West. We also feel that the addition of this deck will not only be a benefit to you but will have an aesthetic effect in the whole area. Should you have any questions, please advise. .. Sincerely, ~' /J . /, . "., '. / ~~;;~..~~" r~~ /' R." L. J chims .' Presid~ t DEe 27"34 84: 15PH f<El r-1ARkETIf'lG . P.? , ' John C. Grable, Jr. 4720 Sayswater Road ShorewooQ, MN 55331 November 1. 1994 City of Shorewood 5755 r.ountry Club road Shorewood, MN 55331 Attn: Planning Commission . RE: 4720 Bayswater Road Shorewood. MN 55331 To Whom It May Concern: The 6' X 101 deck is a small breakfast deck similar to others in the Amesbury and Amesb~ry West developments. Encroachment into the common area or the Amesbury West Homes Association is permitted as part of the Covenants and Oeed Rastrictions, which were adopted as part of the Planned Unit Development. As 'a m~tte~ at law in this instance. a ~ariance may not be required. Nevertheless. I believe a hardship does exist due to being attached to another llome. .This is my only open side I nave for reasonable use. . ;:Le. ,~) John C. Grable. Jr. JCG/tmm ... Exhibit D APPU~ANT'S REQUEST L~TTER Dated 1 November 1994 . MAYOR Barb Brancel COUNCI L Kristi Stover Rob Daugherty Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331.8927 · (612) 474.3236 MEMORANDUM . TO: FROM: DAlE: RE: FILE NO.: Planning Commission, Mayo.r and City Council Brad Nielsen 1 December 1994 Grable, Jahn- SetbackYariance 405 (94.27) BACKGROUND . .. Mr. Jahn Grable has just campleted canstruction o.f a patio. hame in Amesbury West, at 4720 Bayswater Ro.ad (see Site Locatian map - Exhibit A, attached). He pro.poses to. canstruct a 6' x 10' deck o.n the narthwest side o.fthe ho.me, whichencraaches into. the 50-foot perimeter setback of the Amesbury West plat. The deck,. shawn o.n Exhibits B and C, extends approximately two. . feet into. the required setback. AlSo., fo.rty-eight square feet o.f the deck encroaches into. the co.mman area o.f the planned unit develo.pment. The applicant explains his request j.n his letter, dated 1 Navember 1994 (Exhibit D). This case began as part af an an-gaing debate between City staff and the develaper af the _ Amesbury and Amesbury West P.U.D.s regarding allo.wable encroachments into. p.u.d. co.mman areas. S_taff maintains that the co1nman area was set aside as green space and that the unif1o.t lines establish the limits o.f constructian far the buildings in the praject . This positian is set forth in aletter to. McNulty Co.nstructio.n, dated 31 October 1990 (see Exhibit E). It shauld beno.ted that the develaper is an reco.id as disagreeing with staffs position. Until naw the issue has been avaided. Befo.re this matter cauld be. resalved, however, it. was disco.vered that the propo.sed . ~ . deck encroaches into. the 50-fo.at setback at the perimeter of the p.u.d., thus necessitating review o.f a variance. .-..- ANAL YSIS/RECOMMENDATION It is very important to. no.te that constructio.n of the subject patio. ho.me began in July af this year. The builder was advised that the permit wo.uld no.t be issued until the deck issue was resalved. . . In o.rder to. get gaing the plans-were drawn to. shaw a 6' x 10' deck which co.mplies with current setback requirements and does nat encroach into. the co.mmo.n area (see Exhibit F). The patio. door which has been installed in anticipatian of receiving a variance has been installed. at the ' awner's risk. . - ~A/~T A Residential Community on Lake Minnetona~th~ Z .:tF 1/1 .. , . '" Re: Grable, John Setback variance 1 December 1994 In the application for a variance the applicant must demonstrate that some hardship exists which prevents the applicant from making reasonable use of the property. The hardship must be the result of some unique physical characteristic of the site (e.g. lot configuration. poor soils, topography, etc.), can not be economic in nature, can not alter the character of the area in which it is located, and can not be something which is brought on by the owner of the property (current or previous). This request fails to meet the criteria for a variance: 1. It has been demonstrated that a deck can be built without a variance. . 2. The most unique thing about the subject property is that it is the largest of all of the unit lots in the Amesbury West P. U.D. Over half of the unit lot is six feet larger than the other patio home lots. Ample room was, and is, available to accommodate an even larger deck. Also, if deck space is an issue, the deck on the southwest end of the building can be enlarged. substantially. 3 . As a brand new residence, the variance could have easily been avoided through design. Planned unit development has been recognized as an extremely valuable zoning tool, providing both flexibility and control in the development of land. Early on the use of p.u.d. was somewhat contentious in Shorewood~ Residents were skeptical about flexible zoning techniques and that agreements made between the City and the developer would not be enforced. For these reasons it is important that the required setback at the perimeter of a p.u.d. be preserved. Based upon the preceding analysis it is recommended that the variance not be approved and that any deck be built within the confines of the unit lot cc: Jim Hurm Tim Keane . John Grable Felix Furber . -2- . l /~ ..,:~ .' , .......~1. ....... ~ , ' '" \ :z: _/ .' ., ~ ... '3 (4) S! " ZS T 210 ( 25) 2626.69 RE 'd \'\ \ . ~. -----~\ ..'d ~ _ \1. ~.4T ~ ~ CITY OF O~2,",AVEN _ ~ CITY 2F SHOREWOOO ~ . - . i4 .' 390 ,._ 2 (46) ..., ~. ... 7"" '355. a7 NlJ9.ZS'll'" 1ft ~ ... Nort~ , I " - Z-()() - 60 2 ('3) (26) ,... vi ~ s (6) 5 ... ... ~ '" ~ sag.2S'12'E 490.24 . (Ia) ~ '3 jJIJ/J1l! 2 ( 58) Exhibit A SITE toeA nON Grable - setback variance / ~ ~ ;"'_1 In 1_ 2--'" J . SUR'IEY FOR: McNULTY CONSTRUCTION , .. LECAL DESCRIPTION: (Fumlllhed by clIent) ..,,' Lot I. Bloclc It. AUESBURY WEST accordlnq to the r_ded plot th...ot and .tuot. In H....nepln County. WInn_ta. ~TIF1CA nON: , I hereby certlty thot thl. m"" wo. prepared by m. or under my direct ....~lIlon and that I am 0 dUly Reql.tered Land Su,....yor under the Iawtl 01 the Stota of IIlnnwota. Doted this 16th doy ot June. 1994 Re"'aed thl. 28th day of Jun.. 1994 by. N01!:S: SCALE 1'" = 20 FEET 1. The orfentatlon of thl. beorlnq ayat.-n I. baaed on tha ,,~t.ny Ilna of B10clc 11. AMESSURY WEST 'whIdI hi -.med to haw II beorfnll of South 42-:5719- East. :z. Thla .,,....y doea not purport to .now GiI lm~tII to the pI"Op<<'ty. 3. No title wor1c was fumlaned for the pr~tlon 01 lhla .....y to 'Mlfy the .xi.tence of any eG1I<<II....ta or en~ . PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR=974.45 PROPOSED LOWEST FLOOR=964.15 PROPOSED GARAGE FLOOR=974.15 .. Area of the prQ94ll'ty dacrlbed hereon f. 5.J040 equate t..t or 0.123 ocr... BENCHMARK= TOP NUT OF HYDRANT AT S.E. CORNER OF BLK. 9, 976.08 '" ~ Clt- , +.... . ~. C?j, Exhibit B PROPOSED SITE PLAN Grable - setback variance P rOfo?L- ~ Q.~\(.. . EG} 7415 Woy1.ota 80 ~ -'1 ~ '. :.......... ... ."._.:'f' , .. .' ",' .. .. ..../ -' I- .. -.... ',' 'J. ........ ,. .:'":. ..' --~ I .', ...."''': ,,- . ...J..., . ':"1 .' ' ~~_~~ J...: .... .-..,.: , : ".-' ...::." , .... ;;,l.---t:.-o .....:..~.:.? -C <.s> ~ . : .,' ~ c.O., ..:-:1.... ~ ~ ~ ~ .' _.,," "I'" c9. "Ii> oc::- ....J,. _ ." ~ 4.?,: oc::- . -.0.. -....;:-... 0- ..~ is;) ~ '-l., ~.., (\ ~C2s ~~ ~~ ~9 ~ ..z..'%.. ~ '. '-" -jr~'" ~S'. ....:....; .")fc-"o...... /'\J --.~.....:.l ~'-' ,:,-~- r-:'s,<"".:g:.. ..> ~ ~'4. "_, J>.. \ ~ .. ... c.J. ',,~ -- 'S .., .-- ....- (...._- ::. , . ~ I I t~'JI{'7(1)OP:SO: 7 :, _ ..-('Sl!4W)~5"'t?b7--_. .. " tS,f/,#, ;~'-----('>>Z.~~,J<, h ~Q.s: '/1'/::-:7 ~;s../~.$.:.9 j ~ .~1Jo -I>' <':/ , 'v ~/".:J.; ~ t>'. ~ - , \ ........-~..., fl , I . -- ~/~t:!Y .,' ". :: ... t"<:) ..1: ..,.: :7' ,.' --.' , .. "'" .\1::::) '.or": ..:;,.... " .- ..-.:'--.....- , . -.~ "":. . ~ '.~. .' .' I \ \ '. ., ~'.'" ..... ".' I \ '. ....... . I __ ,___ ....:..,0.. Lt\ \ ' ~- --.' /.IJ" '. '-..... ~ 1~f:J' \ \ .. '--II ".' j '" (.. ')IllIiV ;,.vK~#..ww t- . I \ ~q) - StY;'NOP~.JQe:7..y4? ~ ,. / c::ar..~ Po("/, l I ~ -C$ t/' -t--') ';; ~~ tA<S' ~~~ it-..V'>' '" ~ \':: ~~ / f'::~~f~ . ~l~ / ,'. ~::~..) '{ :VtL ..ro' ep. AV ,.... :. :. " ~;:" -:.. ,,'J,., I~' ....,.__.$&t~&-~ '.- .'....:Z.., "'f~~ 11 ,r' ,. .' ...--; t1' , ,...' "<!./ (::~~~ //\\',':"" ......: ....; " . ,.:.-;.:' I " : (.:' ...) I - .-# , ' ...... ..... ~~,.. \ . \ \ ..~;.- f . '6~.../ . ^n.~~36 T S:3" 759' ~... .~ , ., ...." =..... .> ~. .. ~ ........ ....~.. <: ... '. .~ ! L; , ' '. #'\ :;~ . ....,...__....-: l.--, .~ .. \.. /- ~ . , . . , . ~,. ....- ":'. . .'-' .' , ~ .' ..... . , . , ' . , . - . '- -' (' c r t r #..- . .':. . ....;:::::l.... .... '. .....:.;....:/ -'---:~ .:...-.... ........... '. .:;" ~ Exhibit C AMESBURY WEST - 50-FOOT SETBACK . . . ..' lIv Sohn C. Grable, Sr. 4720 Bayswater Road Shorewood, MN 55331 November 1. 1994 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club road Shorewood. MN 55331 Attn: Planning Commission RE: 4720 Bayswater Road Shorewood. MN 55331 To Whom It May Concern: The 6' X 10' deck is a small breakfast deck similar to others in the Amesbury and Amesbury West developments. Encroachment into the common area of the Amesbury West Homes Association is permitted as part of the Covenants and Deed Restrictions, which were adopted as part of the Planned Unit Development. As a matter of law in this instance, a variance may not be required. Nevertheless. I believe a hardship does exist due to being attached to another home. .This is my only open side I have for reasonable use. ;Le .~) John C. Grable. Jr. JCG/tmm Exhibit D APPLICANT'S REQUEST LETTEE, Dated 1 November 1994 ~ MAYOR Jan Haugen COUNCI\.. Ktisti Stover ROben: Gagne Sarb Sl'lIncel Vern Wanen . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331 · (612) 474-3236 31 October 1990 ..----- ----....... Mr. James McNul~ ~.. 400 2nd Avemieo.South ~finneapolis, ~ 55401 . Re: Amesbury - Use of Common Areas (Outlots) Dear Mr. Mc...~ulty: This is in regard to our previous conversations relative to what, if any, encroachments are allowed within the common areas of the Ai.-nesbury and Amesbury West planned unit developments in Shorewood. In my opinion neither the development agreements nor the protective covenants for these two projects clearly specify what private improvements are allowed to be constructed in the common areas. Or~arily planned unit developments are allowed flexibility with respect to traditional setback requirements~ particularly where attached housing is involved. Instead of requiring standard setbaclcs from property lines, buildings are often allowed to be constructed right up to the property line of unit lots. The open space typically established by setbacks is provided by the common areas surrounding the unit lots. . While the declarations of covenants refer to reasonable encroachments by decks, balconies and other architectural features, the language is vague and no limit is specified. It is my opinion that these provisions are similar to the provisions in the zoning ordinance which list allowable encroachments into setback areas. Such features as chimneys, flues, eaves, etc. are allowed to encroach two feet into the required setback area. Other ground-level featUreS such as steps, stoops and sidewalks are allowed to encroach four and one-half feet into the required yard. Given the ambiguity of the current Amesbury .controls, it is my intention to interpret the unit lot lines as setback lines. The only way that the common areas will be treated differently than traditional setback areas is that eaves will be allowed to encroach four feet into the common areas instead of two feet. I base this interpretation on my review of previous A Residential Community on Lake Exhibit E LEITER TO MCNULTY RE: CO~ON AREA ENCROACHMENTS Dated 31 October 1990 4 , ", 4r. Mr . James McNulty 31 October 1990 page two building plans which generally include four-foot overhangs on your courtyard homes. I have no intention of trying to modify this design. Although r feel that the interpretation suggested herein is reasonable, I also believe it would be to everyone's benefit to clarify it in the Amesbury and Amesbury West development 3.:,areements. If you are comfortable with the interpretation I've described above, there may not be any need to change the agreements. However, if you 3.:,<7I'ee that further clarification would be helpful, we should meet to discuss the process for amending the p. u.d. 's. . . Please let me know if you would like to pursue a change to the development agreements. Otherwise we will continue with our present interpretation of the agreements and covenants. . Sincerely, CITY OF SHOREWOOD ~;r../!. ~ Bradley J. ~e~ Planning Director cc: Glenn Froberg Ric Rosow Patti. Helgesen Joe Pazandak . ... . .....,....-...-..-;.- ,;.:.... ~_:~_. .-.:.. .. << . I 10.: .4 ~. , ~~.. ....u. a '--- ~ " ~. , J: i 1l,...r:>4;o....,. ----~Q;..e ' : );:7 .t.\:':; ;./ -t~; f!t'...; '.;@:" :-r . l ./\0,,,- IT /\J.i\ ^ fF :1 - .' ''C/ ;.~. _.\::.1 f ''\~ ~ <r- - ~. .:Jf>': ~ I ij . . ..' . :1 Dl:C:CS. ~IRS al ~::lC:iES~. ~ ;-i~ i e All SItuc::..-.u __,MtC S. ~_., .. '. ..w !lftIWCI Wcoc: :t 1\I_"li~ ~ I il. c.c., Or TftIal8Cl..'tIoaa:"''!oY..;. '" ! '-'_1 " : t. '01:'~~: ~_I l.;~" ';.' I'~_l V , i' a /~/~i~ ~ /e./ '\j;~: '\ - 'CI -.. . { ;, . '. ....... . ~ ~ 8~ t:~~;. .... ~ _,II':'" ~ ;~, -----..,"'" f''';' ~ I _.. ~,t.. . ~. ______ -~oJI r"'-,-:r.--- ~ :.."..-.. "';;;J ....;.r~...rl"!. l: j ~ /' )1 ~-c~ ':""" ...; Wvi"j I. ~ .. . 5> . ~-f- .... I ~, O\""MI I ,,~f . i - ~ - ..:,.J. ,'> ,-- I _ .L -:.-.;;:f~ ~..... ~, . ; -i :.:;:.'::: , -f.:: I'=;~I' I .....- -..I ~- .....~_.I. . I ~~ I' . ~-. I --...~r.:.:.:..~ ~ '--' 1-'- ....:1 -..,'-/ . . . ~ ~, '.~..!:,","." l.. . .. . . ~_~""""""""'_. ..... t .;I..';'~. __~ .. ,_ ;.w.--' .~... -ro "SUU-si:=f!" . m GLASS 'NITIfIN 1!"~1 .... ~4..."""", . .' '.. '_.;: __ ...zJ ~ _r &: ~l . ~ ~\11 . OF WAUCl:,r- S,_r.;~," .....<:-.,. . ;. ~r--> ~t..-.-.;; 1Jf"~ . ~ . .'~~ _II,;:' ."'~ ",. ., It. 's.i 1 .............t' - .! I ~~"'aIi:I'~':-::~ t J.lUST Sc 'l':J,""'''''''''''' ~l . ir: r-:-' '.~! .' . ~~.",:tP~ f- - .......-."lQ,I !. I~. !'" ...,: I ".- -'~ l >. _ . 1'.-.' ..' e.'I......; ~.:".~"."" It"'''' - I. 1 ".., Gr. ... . :9t .."", ,.~.~ r I ' 4> .'1 "- . I z: l .-... 1~:.~~ -~~:.'" . . I ...;...... .\ I .~.t~. , ,.._-~... - i ^'~'~I' .': . cOl. ;. ".:. ~ J..Jj"1 !~' I 1. I;';. GUARORAi!.S .l";:Hff . 6 ....,..., Ilt_-:","",:,"""I ,... ,., . ..... tmI I'.$GHT .... ,,,,..,..-- f., Q,*,,' ~'-:::'~.~~'..'. i ~ : i ~i~ .: ; t ~ ,..; ~ '....Co...... -...-u ~ ~.' 4..~~ . I ." ..(. I; . I~~ CP5N&NGa, : ~~... ~ ~..::-.~"'!'.::~.::.-: .,.. . t ,- . 'j .' -----. 1__ f -7 - - -; .......}"..;~;,.:.;.... r. ~~C -....... ' ' " \ r ~ . <";_..'.:;.- Y".._ I .... II yI~ f !~} ,......~. . :-...,- j.. .... _. -..:::::.- <.""~..:..;..~..I;.- ....... -Jo -:,. .. ...-= . , . ,4' '. '. .i ---. ;. :- .j .. ! ,~ ~. .;;:..-1 . -- i:.... ~ .' I . ....-.-,.. ~.... --,~, ~~:;~-}~l~~~ .. I . I '; . .""".1fI1' s..-.-1'A! I ....W ~ i'10@1':'@..<8." ~~. ~" ./, h 7. -SJ j'~~'::"'I. . .f . . '. - ::::,.. ~ - f - . I .. .-; 7'.,- t...r~r- .""'" ,...... ~... /III ....,._.~ , :1 =:e~ "i: . t , '_. . I : \,./ -{~ ! ~:. . o. ... ! 1iW. ~. -- i~-I j.,~....-._I 48-".-1 I -r- :~~~'. ~~'~"'i~~~ :~?-.. ... . . ...... ,:~~ .'-"~ :'C. :- I ;.;.:.;.... ..,. "', .. ,....... ........1 ~...,..) \....,,' . ~ I .. ..' )1 ~ WIOTH CF STA1RS. .., ~A.~~~.1S ,.~ r aU-x. M5Iii' ~ IIiUC :Z-.;t :.:' ..:- -e- . ~4'IIIN.~ '.' - AZt>>SfOHE~~.l . ~ 0I'Sf SlOES ~ I i-B ~..... ~ , C-......_I, ~......-a;:1 - -. l"i~Jr. ~ .' i I:,' f I: . I: ~I .~! ! i! .. .~ .. ':t ..~ . -.-'":1 ~::.:. ... . t! 'I } . :""'t"....:t . "",-.. ! '.0 ......i.~...:.,;... ~ ...i4f ... -._:.~...~.._-.._.~. ';''''''_'.~:~I' . . ;::~:S71 - f' ~...:: {. .. . :;:,",,0. .': j :..:::.;.. .~~~. I - 'j i"." /....4Ii.~~.~.~:- -'.:~ I~ I .:.:'\el~itf~ ~ ~ ',.J~. .;0. '.. ~...;:.:.!.- I Moo ~""",,liUN -2i!':-'" ~~:: f - .!lol- WAIJJ..:.t....;. cauNG . ..... . -~- .,;. ~N ~ '!"VIle... tvu. ,.."" I I 'lI"!r :.... -' ~t ./ ;\! Exhibit F FLOOR PLAN Approved as part of 1994 building permit >c~e...._ ~~........... :I=-,n~ <Ii " ~y . . '. ". ; 'Urv, X?' /99-j/ / )fu. 'fS/lo-J. ~ I JeI~,iOM..~ ~'1~ 573"T~~'R~' ~~.. I \Q.~ J.n.1,. .ltu.e~ ) ~~~ ~ ~z:ZZ1.. ~ /U~)~~ a~ r~"'Z.. ~ ~-4.-0~ ...c,.~~ ~~ f~ AL-:;ttu. ~~ ~~ ~-z-? ~. ~ ..s$~.a:;e- ~7;~ Y3~~ }Q~. -X> a.&'~....v a... ~ ~. ~~ ~~ U~ /U~ ~ ,i.~ ~~ c.... ~/~h~~~~ ~~i~~~.. /.JCt4.LL ~ ~ ~ /U~ ~ ~ /U-~ ~ ~ ~ ...k.. ~" Ii . . MAYOR Robert Bean CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL Krisli Stover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 29 March 1995 Zachary Woods - Revised Preliminary Plat and Variance to Create a New Lot With No Frontage on a Public Street Fll..E NO.: 405 (95.09) BACKGROUND In July of last year Mr. Brent Sinn requested approval of a preliminary plat to divide his property, located at 6035 Galpin Lake Road, into five lots. A staff report, dated 27 July 1994, raised several issues relative to the proposed plat. Mr. Sinn subsequently submitted a revised plat, rearranging the proposed lots and cul-de-sac street. A staff report, dated 2 September 1994, recommended denial of the revised plat. Before the Planning Commission took any action, Mr. Sinn asked to have his plat tabled, after which it was suspended by the development moratorium. After meeting with City staff and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the applicant has now submitted a new plan to subdivide his property into four lots. As shown on Exhibit A, the revised plat proposes three lots fronting on Galpin Lake Road, with one large lot fronting on Galpin Lane, a private street on the north boundary of the site. The applicant proposes to access Lots 2 and 3 with driveways located on the north and south ends of the wetland located on the west end of the site. Lot 1 and the large lot with the existing home on it derive access from Galpin Lane. The applicant has come to an agreement with the Galpin Lane Association regarding his use of Galpin Lane. Exhibit B provides a list of concerns of the Association. Since the large lot with the house on it (shown as Outlot A) will no longer have frontage on a public street, the applicant has requested a variance. A ResidentialCommunity on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore :ft: S.c.t .- Re: Zachary Woods Revised Prelimnary Plat and Variance 29 March 1995 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS . Despite the proposed alteration of the wetland and the variance necessitated by the revised plat, the new plan is considered superior to other previous proposals. Following are issues to be considered in the review of this plat: A. Access. The new plan proposes no new streets. Three of the lots have frontage on Galpin Lake Road, while the large lot on the east side of the site will front on Galpin Lane, a private street. Although Shorewood's Subdivision Code requires that all new lots have frontage on a public street, allowing a variance in this case will result in substantially less site alteration than the previous proposals. For example, the proposed cul-de-sac street on the earlier plat required a 9-10 foot cut, altered nearly one-third of the site and destroyed numerous trees. The previous plan also required that the City condemn part of Galpin Lane, whereas the new plan does not. The revised plat requires that the ~pplic3.nt obtain an easement from the Galpin Lane Association. The Association has suggested a number of conditions for granting the access. Following is how the proposed conditions in Exhibit B relate to City requirements: 1 . Orientation of the house on Lot 1 presents no problem, provided that required setbacks are observed. I 2. Location of the drivew~y for Lot 1 must be at least 40 feet east of the Galpin Lake Road/Galpin Lane intersection. 3 . In order to comply with Fire Code requirements, Galpin Lane must be widened to at least 20 feet up to the new driveway for the existing home. The Association requires all such widening to take place on the south side of the road and at the applicant's expense. . 4. Landscaping near the Galpin Lane entry may be allowed as long as it maintains a 30- foot sight triangle. A landscape plan should be required with the final plat. A subdivision monument sign is not allowed unless there are at least 24 lots in the subdivision. '-0..'-..._" The proposed wetland alteration and mitigation must be approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. In addition the City should require a wetland conservation easement over the wetland and the proposed buffer strip. - 2- Re: Zachary Woods Revised Prelimnary Plat and Variance 29 March 1995 Prior to any work commencing the applicant must install temporary construction fencing and erosion control to delineate the limits of tree removal and fill. Fill areas should not exceed 3: 1 slope. Finally, the applicant's surveyor should, as part of the fmal plat monumentation, provide survey stakes to locate the wetland buffer strip on the site. C. SubdivisionlZonini Requirements. The proposed lots meet or exceed the size requirements of the R-IC/S zoning district. Outlot A has enough area to be redivided. However, due to lack of frontage on a public street, a restrictive covenant should be required stating that no further division will be allowed until public access can be provided. Since outlots are unbuildable parcels, Outlot A should be designated as Lot 4. Outlot B will then become Outlot A. This outlot must be legally combined with the lot to the south of it. . The neighbor to the east of the plat alleges that a discrepancy exists regarding the boundary of the plat abutting his plat. The applicant's surveyor has been asked to address this allegation. The fmal plat should include a 10-foot drainage and utility easement around the entire perimeter of each lot. D. Tree Preservation. The Comprehensive Plan proposes that all new developments preserve trees. As part of the final plat the applicant should be required to provide an inventory of trees on Lots 1-3 (outside of the wetland conservation easement). From this inventory a determination will be made as to how trees will be protected. E. City Water. The Comprehensive Plan recommends that all new development be connected to City water. Water is not currently available to the Zachary Woods project. In such cases where it is infeasible for the City to extend water to a project, the following is recommended: . 1 . Rather than a $10,000 per lot connection fee at the time of fmal plat, a $5000 per lo~, trunk charge should be required. 2. The developer should be required to install the internal water lines (in this case service stubs to the lots) for future connection to the city system. 3 . A development agreement and restrictive covenant should be required advising future lot owners that hookup to the system and a $5000 connection fee will be required at such time as the City makes water available. F. Park Dedication and Sewer Access Fees. At the time of fmal plat approval, the applicant must pay $750 per lot (3 x $750 = $2250) for park dedication fees and $1000 per lot (3 x $1000 = $3000) for local sanitary sewer access charges. Credit is allowed for the existing house. - 3- . . Re: ZacharyWoods Revised Prelimnary Plat and Variance 29 March 1995 RECOMMENDATION Subject to the recommendations herein, it is suggested that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat. The applicant must submit a fmal plat within six months of preliminary plat approval. cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Brent Sinn -4- ,,-.... Ow Nt:. 1<.. -\. LA~ VF- LO P ~e.. . 5REt\lT S, r-J tJ ('O~7 G,ALPI~ lAKF.. ROI'\Q 'S~OR..P"\)Jooo, m 1~,v..~sa"'A. 55~~\ lJM-O~E. (g\"l.- 4,0- 005(0 SUI2.Il E.~ OR. AL.I.-ANS li\Nt> SUQ.vE$I~ I'l..\ LF-w\s ~Tn..:'I:'J ~. Su \"1} \\(). ~() 2.. v~~K. OPF.F.. I (Y\ I "J tJ~ <;ort:\ sS"}7C) POI 0 rvli (g\ 1..- d4 S . 4. 0 '-7 E I\JG..I ~ F..i:.!t. ITA SC.A E~G.. I tJc.. '32.1 '5. Oi A-R 'Sc. \-I ~U- ReA() .;. "5 u \ 1'"1:. tlo. too 'SHAt<I) P~E ffi.olV E/iorA I S';)~"')q ~~ ""12.- <1~~-/C)C)~ z.o~ Il-J~ ~ }( \ c.. ~#\TE2:;\'e(),: NIl VI$t"rf),I-\A Sc\4\)() L -. 21Co P.~F.A__ 3.12. Ace.e.~- " I 30 I Sc..,le '" ~o , ,"0 t ~e e..+ Th~'-~ ~ .., ~ " 1 OI;c;;,c.R.IO'TIO>J PARCEL 1. r .. lot 199..Audltor'. s~. .~. , Soulhe,'v 01 I ,In. plltllrif .. n, ,hoWII all IIId 1l',I. A~ )( .. ftl Ihe Non"...t com., or:tot ,ft.!. A1llIftet Mlnne,oll: th.nc. South n'",,"" ftP- "lil Il!l!t: thenc. We" 140.2 lell: lh'~"ott" MlI'-- ..,. ~3id lot: thence No"" IIghty..tll ~.. "'11 jlAl..'( 20 Il:\qq. 'eyenty.nve degrees lorty mlnut.. etll 101 ril.' ... ,: ~.. ::' .s:.;:;: H\4G.l.ISr 2 1"I'l4 """I. ." , \ , "~ ,___ ',',", Th.t pwrl ollot '99..Aud~. . .Sel'T",'1e~1? 'tt,I'l')4. Southerly 01. nmi ,,'Ulf-'.~W . 1\love.""~~ t\, 1'\'\4- ft, shown on It'd'P'M iatlcf 1V1~1!.i'... ~ rF.@,~\Jo~q.'f 110, ''l<l7 EeSl"'y Iln. 01 1.1d LOI t99J'r.; . . .!. .; !; I. t=n.12I.1A~T' 2.0, \C)<)' , : !:eQ~\l"e.'1 te. 1'1", Exhibit A REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT Four lots GALPIN LANE ASSOCIATION · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Shorewood MN. 55331 GALPIN LANE ASSOCIATION MEETING - FEBRUARY 20, 1995 TOPICS DISCUSSED REGARDING ZACHARY WOODS SUBDIVISION: 1. The Galpin Lane Association (the "Association") requests that the house to be constructed on the Northwest corner of Zachary Woods install its driveway off of Galpin Lane (the "Lane") in approximate alignment with Chris Rich's driveway so that the households on Galpin Lane could appreciate full frontal view of the new house instead of the side or back of the house. The new owners would become members of the Association. . 2. It would be preferable that Mr. Sinn's driveway access off of the Lane approximately across from Chuck Howard's driveway. Mr. Sinn would also become a member of the Association. 3. The entrance to the Lane may require a wider opening to extend to Mr. Sinn's driveway. If entrance widening is required, all additional width to be added on Mr. Sinn's property only. . 4. A recommendation was made to construct a monument of landscaping materials at the entrance of the Lane in order to identify the Lane. If constructed, any signage should refer to Galpin Lane only. Low landscaping at the entrance of the Lane would be preferable for visability onto Galpin Lake Road. 4. In the process of constructing two new driveways and widening the Lane, the existing trees along the Lane may require removal. The Association desires to see trees of similar type replaced. 5. In order for the new house on the Northwest corner of Zachary Woods and Mr. Sinn's current house to have allowance of Lane usage, the Association would require that Mr. Sinn absorb the following costs: (a) expense for burying any necessary power lines up to Todd Coumbe's property; (b) costs incurred in widening the opening of Galpin Lane and any necessary repaving; (c) replacement of any trees which may need to be removed; and (d) low landscaping and monument at opening of Lane. Exhibit B GALPIN LANE ASSOC. REQUIREMENTS Dated 20 February 1995 . . OTHER CONCERNS: 1. The Association is concerned with costs which may be absorbed by the Association if the city of Shorewood demands upgrading of the road due to additional driveways. It was agreed by all members of the current Association that it will not incur any costs for Lane improvements. 2. Although the widening of the entrance of the Lane is approved by the Association, any additional street widening beyond Mr. Sinn's driveway will not be acceptable. If the City insists that the entire length of the Lane be widened to accommodate two new households in addition to fire and police access, the Association will not dedicate any additional land nor absorb any additional costs. \........J '0 C[ I u <<[ N i -.-' ...:- , , , -- . ,. - ~r- 11) " rZ z V' u. (J.. ~ u a 3 3 lJ.I _ v' ~ ~ J? .g: 1.1\ ,'::) - c::I ~::S _ /'\ 0 -- V' -- -:2 (/) II' VJ u) Ul w 505 - 00 w -...., I- 0 2 Exhibit C WETLAND SETBACKS PROPOSED ~ -~ ~ , \ --.,. ~"'-.. \ 6~: ~~N~ " 0'" 0>:, c:lZ)c:....... - e <:; c: ~ >- c: :J -cnlZ)o.... m>EUc ~~Ec:c :; 0 Q. .... - ~ U Q) _ 0.:::; c: '- ...J - .. c: _ o en Q) ..- 32 Q) ~ :l: .: CD c: 0 : CD _ _ .', -010__ '0:-("), ~ U) .... c ::0= .C coZ"C 0= Q.CDQ)Z... .J::..rJ (;; "'--c:r:. co - 0 0 u. -Soenc;;c: .r:Q)_.- L-_"C>::: r-~ _ a. 0 -0 "C c: Wz CD.rJ c: , 0 ~ ... _~ c .., MAYOA Barb Brancel COUNCI L Krist; Stover Aob Daugherty Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 .MEMORANDUM . TO: FROM: DATE: RE: fTI..,E NO.: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 2 September 1994 Zachary Woods - Revised Preliminary Plat 405 (94.17) . At the August Planning Commission meeting, the applicant submitted a revised plat for his property, moving the road to the south side of the site (see Exhibit A, attached). According to the applicant's consultants the revision was based upon a Watershed District suggestion to minimize impact on the existing wetland. The Planning Commission tabled the application and directed the applicant to prepare anew plat and grading plan showing the road on the north side of the site. The Commission encouraged the applicant to work with surrounding neighbors to resolve the location of the street entrance. To date staff has not received the revisions requested by the Planning Commission. The applicant has informed the City Engineer that he wants the plat processed based upon his revision submitted at the August meeting. . , Staff has discussed the revised plat with the Watershed District Coordinator. TheWatershed's position is that development should avoid alteration of wetlands whenever possible. Only when it is demonstrated that other' alternatives are infeasible should wetland alteration be considered. In light of this discussion, the issues raised in the 27 July staff report, and the recommendation of the Planning Commission, staff recommends denial of the revised preliminary . plat. BJN:PH cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Brent Sinn A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore #S.c,;l . \V< .- ^\~)f>.. '.- Q\"\_\\,I~ ......-:::-- .-- f).}h)F..Q..{ l):VF..LO PEl(. f3RENT S, "hj GO~7 G,AU"'11.l LP-KF.. R()~ 'SI-\OR.I:.WOOO, f'f\ '1\j.v.~sDr,;:,.. ,- . 55~~1 H-;()/..1E ~\Z.- 410- 0051.:> ~ <-' Su~u E-'1 OR. A\..vAl\lb LI\I\Jt) SU2.uE'<I~ 1'2..\ L I:.W\':> STIUi,:. T ~, Suli~ 1.\(), ~c..2.. '~Mi::"\(,apF.~ I ('1\ ltUVF..<;orA S';~-A 'O>l6oJ'i ~11..- I:l.4S - 4. 0 '-7 CtJG.llJ F-I:.~ ~ ITASC.A EI\lG.. I tJc.. ,. 32.1 'S. rnA-R-~c.l-\Au.. ReAl:) 'S \A \,. e. ~\o. 2.00 'Sl+~l<O o~ F. ffill.JN EC;orA I ~'H1<') ~"'.; ~(2.- d~'S-lcn~ ~ Lo).) I "-\~ ::. '\< \ e. \lA"il=2..':::.\'\BC, ffI, Vt0t-TP,\-IA D\sr~,c.r Sc..14,OQ L. -- 2.1<0 ~;)EA -.. 3.12. Ace.e.i- o I 30 ,"0 I ! Scvle in ~e\!.+ qo I - OS<OC.iC!.t ;:)T1()'-! .PAIlCEL It.. . lot 199. Audllor'. SulIit~;~~IXi::err.:'di:.. . Souu...ly'o,.lIne.......Wl"'~~. . .'Hdl1t ~i .. sI..._. on said plel. ANO EXCUl'u.w-dilt'1hlirwal cItieG- al ,... Norlhe..l comet 01 Leil' 1991' ~"'.$Illid""'" M''''''''SOI.: Il..ne.. ~~" nln.l.... d~i e-jtt' eIono IIIe &. f o. .'. ...,.... l'_ r~h ,,1,.,.. .f,.... !"'~ "'''-: .to? '}t. 1G:,.40 Mll)"Sl'Sb'F_ Exhibit A REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT Received at Planning Commission meeting - 2 August 1994 . . I .~ I JIlL 28'94 18: 24 OS~1 MPLS.. 1'11'1 - .HUr ~O, J.:r::f<f> P.l I Mr. BradJey J. Nielsen : City Planner ! CIty of Shorewood I r Shorewood, MN 55331 I QS\tI=~ 300 Park Place Center 5775 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis. MN 55416-1228 612-595-5775 1-800-753-5775 FAX 595-5774 r i :Re: ZACHARy WOODS Concept Plan Review OSMFlle 5218.QO Engineers ArChitects Planners . Surveyors r Dear. Mr. Nielsen: i I We have reviewed the referenced plan prepared by Allan's Land Surveying (undated)' from ~ engineering standpoint and offer the following comments: I . . b Zachary Court, as pmposed, will obvioUsly be constructed over a wetland that is most likely protected under both the City's.Wetland Ordinance and the Wetland . Conservation Act (WCA), which is governed by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed. Therefore, some type of mitigation plan will likely be required. It was our understanding that the Developer's eng:meer was to meet with the Watershed and forward their commer.ts to us. However, we have received no comments to date. j 2) It appears that Zachary Court will be' graded to a slope of about 6%, which is acceptable. However, the cul-de-sac are::t will have to be lowered about 9-10 feet, wbich will impact the building sites and existing trees. We recommend that the developer provide a detailed grading plan so that this impact can be determined. I 3} i i I i 4) ~ . RunoffcaIcuIations will be required to determine the impact of development on the area's drainage pattem. . Due to the generally p'ilor soil conditions. found in this area, the Developer should. be. aware that a street sub,:utlsand fill will likely be required. ., No proposed sewer is shown, though the sanitary sewer appears deep enough to serve . the proposed lots via a new sewer in Zachary Court. I 6)1 i PI~ call me at 595-5695 to discuss any questions you may have about this project. . ! . SiDcerely, i ~ ORR-SCHELEN-MA YERON & ASSOCIATES #~ Joel A. Dresel. P .E., L.S. OtY Engineer We assume that the Developer is plannini, on private wells. c.'~ " - i \ I'll r~' ~ . '-t \ r J 'if _ .. ,4"/ V .s'" / ;: ft" _~.t.. ,.!...,j' iJl! /J::7..,,-.,\.....1. -"^,1 G~ / Cr-;,., ___ .,~/':A'/"~ Equal Opportunity Employer =tt~.?J /' /" MAYOR Barb Brancel COUNCI L Kristi Stover Rob Daugherty Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM -. TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILENO.: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 27 July 1994 Zachary Woods - Preliminary Plat 405 (94.17) BACKGROUND Mr. Brent Sinn requests approval of a preliminary plat for his property located at6035 Galpin Lake Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached);'Mr. Sinn proposes to divide his approximately 3.7-acre site into five single-family residential lots (see Exhibit B). The property is zoned R-1C/S, Single-Family Residential/Shoreland, and is occupied by the applicant's house and a tennis court. Surrounding land uses and zoning are single-family residential, zoned R -1 C. The site rises dramatically from Galpin Lake Road.:... The existing home sits at the top of a hill, 28 feet above the street. A small wetland lies at the base of the hill, near ' the road. . The applicant proposes to access the five lots with a new street which would extend through the existing wetland.' In turn for filling the wetland, the applicant proposes to create two wetlands, twice as large as the existing. The plat initially submitted proposed to demolish the existing house, leaving the tennis court as an accessory structure with no principal dwelling; Consequently, the public hearing notice , included a request for a variance which would allow the applicant to keep the tennis court while he built a new home. The plat has since been revised, keeping the existing home and tennis court ' together, eliminating the variance. . ISSUES AND ANALYSIS Review of this plat raises' several issues: A. Zoning. -All lots meet the minimum width (100') and area (20,000 sq. ft.) requirements for the R-1C zoning district. The lots range in area from 20,000 to 46,500 square feet and average 25,880 square feet. Despite this compliance, site grading (discussed further on in this report) appears to raise questions about thebuildability of the lots.--For example, the existing house will sit over 11 feet higher than the cul-de-sac when the street is cut in. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore *5.C .L\ Re: Zachary Woods Preliminary Plat 27 July 1994 B. Wetlands. The City's Wetland Map (Exhibit C) shows two small wetland pockets on the west end of the site. The applicant's consulting engineer has delineated the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) wetland on the plat (Exhibit B). He advises us that the southerly. portion of the wetland has been filled in the past, resulting in the configuration he has shown. . As can be seen on the plat, the applicant proposes to fill in part of the wetland for the new road. To comply with the WCA, he proposes to create two wetlands, one on each side of the road. The size of the two wetlands will be twice that of the existing wetland area. This wetland alteration requires not only City approval, but also Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. When considering wetland alteration requests, the first thing the Watershed District examines is if the project can be done without altering the wetland at all. In this regard, staff has discussed two possible alternatives for the location of the new road with the applicant's consultants. . The first alternative was to bring the road in where Galpin Lane (a private road) intersects with Galpin Lake Road (see Exhibit D). This would require that the City condemn some portion of Galpin Lane. While thi.s may be the best alternative from a planning and engineering perspective, it may be politically unacceptable. The second alternative reviewed was to locate the new road approximately where the existing driveway to the house is located (see Exhibit E). While this avoids the wetland, it _ places two road (the new one and Galpin Lane) hazardously close to each other. From a safety perspective, this alternative is not recommended. Getting back to the applicant's proposal, Shorewood's Wetland Ordinance requires that an earth change plan be prepared for any project which would alter a designated wetland. Requirements for the earth change plan are set forth in Section 1102.05 of the City Code (see Exhibit F). c. Site Gradin~. The City Engineer addresses this issue under separate cover. The cul-de-sac - for the proposed street requires a cut nearly nine feet deep, raising some question about access to the existing house. Between this and the proposed wetland alteration, it is recommended that a grading plan be prepared prior to approval of the preliminary plat. The grading plan should specifically show how the existing home can be accessed without exceeding an eight percent driveway grade. General Desi~. Lot lines on the plat should be adjusted so as to radiate from the center of the cul-de-sac. This can be accomplished without any lot dropping below the minimum lot area or width. D. The applicant has illustrated how homes might fit on the lots. The buildable area on two of the lots (2 and 4) tapers to 33 feet deep or less. As illustrated on the plat. this leaves very little room for decks, porches, etc. Consideration should be given to flipping the house layouts so that the garages occupy the shallower portion of the lot. -2- . . Re: Zachary Woods Preliminary Plat 27 July 1994 RECOM:MENDATION As with several others, this plat would be effected by the moratorium which has been recommended by the Planning Commission and which will be considered by the City Council on 8 August. The moratorium not withstanding, staff can not recommend approval of the plat at this time without review of a grading and earth change plan. Before the applicant prepares such plans, however, the City must give serious thought to the road location shown on Exhibit D. If condemnation of a portion of Galpin Lane is out of the question, then the applicant's plans should be based upon the plat which has been presented. cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Brent Sinn Allen Hastings -3- . o . . ~ . '" l '--'0 ~ , ., \~___ _~.!____l~'-~________ o o i :00 1._-1 ; ~l -..- r..____..______ -~___ _____ ..__~j 00______..__ ..ill!~__~_~.:~~;:. ~ -1 ,. ~------- ~r-l : , ... ---:::..::1:::.----------- -------------::-;{ si' i--------..----...----------- =- '\ ~ ~~~~ LL9 -;v LI Lt......... .........lOllSt ......... . - \ I co ! . ~ ", \.' C ~ ~~ ..--..1--~..---..-------..!-....-j~ ~ ", \ ' .~ i : ~-ci' ; : ,..- i: 1/ N ~..., ........let........ f~~~: \-:!~ ,', ~ ____01!___ ? .: ~ -~ ~ t' ~-'--=-1- ! , ~ ; -,- - - - J---oU---: .. ~I 1- \ 7-~ '" \ ~ \ :::L j ) <: .- '- - lIS / \T ~ .... ..' o .. ~ !:!\ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ o-:;t ~ 'Z&~ \'i=:i \b ~ ~ ~ ~ . 1~ ,^S ~ .~ ...Q -1 ~-- . ~,;) " " l!l! .. I'. !Iii ~ u II '~~ I g'W It -..-------------, : ~ ~<. ~ ~oo 'liG .)- . N ~~-:.-----_-_--..: , : \",0 :2 : ;1 I : ..----csT----1l":a.~ a : , I C : t:': ~ l.i , ~ N: ,.:.~) 1 ,~~ i .:u . ) z ~~~"" I ~o . J" \V I.'; ~ . .... .". ~ ,,\) si __________ ___.._______=_~~~__:J c.o ~- ~ "\ (1\ 5Q~ -1 I:; t- > o ~ ..f /-., Z N \ ~ '" ~ \. " ,-:. a ...?:::: . 96t " .1 "'- ....a fO '10 ~ :r -~ '\ , i \ I !' ---- ICS \. ItS- , ......."".. "" :: .. _ __.:;;,_-1 ro --- j:l ~~"-- - "'1 ......... ~ . "'--!~'/{' ~ l.;.) _ ......:!:-t ~..'~\; ~ ................... ~. ...... f'~.", ........') ...~ -- -;',-- -: -- ! -- - -- .. ,.€,Il/ --- ---i~ -7----.......!.". \ ,~, f) f#;;~~,/ f7l "": "/ t::!,' '/ -....-....-I,~ 'f;? l:~ ...::.....":. .... ... : .-: =..... .::". '" :.' .'" -." '" w '" ~ '" '" <;;- ,.... $ ; ~ .. N 2 .. ~ \ , \J '\.i.\ .. ~ t:~ "9:,11. "9:, ..."Ip ~.~':p~ ~ '008 ilillA: SITE LOCATION Zachary Waads - Preliminary Plat ... Ii N .. - \' J '\ i ~ . 1 ~. ~ "'L____________~_ Cj\ -I] j ~v -l~ :,{~-:~. -, ~ \ -110\" j \ 'l?:1\' 'CO"", _ ", l - ~' ",,-" ,,~ (' .. 'U.'Jll'l\.-- \';~ ~'" ' ',,'-- . '-LJ7--,~- ,,,,.,;.-<; _ .'" ,_' " ,,' - ~:. :---' .~ ~ ~ ll'lj'i'V I If -~ !i~f::f2~ !~ _I-ii-- :II !!;!!./t r"IUflj~~ ~ iif~ . f ,if(!;r f- "')111 ,-1- .f!! !! :1 . . :iffIJI'; ~i IIII( . JIJ.:r;5 i l ii- f1iin:11 !II itICL~~li · H .: :", S ~ 1111 i . ~I~" 'lflf~IQ~ II~ itfJI11R :E!!. It' i! III !i!f I!I ! II J- 3 ~ f ' I! if. '~!i~il!!. 1!!.1 . r:~a:I!fi if .f~~"!!.! IiI mrIh ~ _:J ~ .~ .jr< <$' ~ s: fJ ro 2{ ~ -" rJ nl III -\ ~) 5-, '" I FJ ~ ~ '" 400 i j '~ ...... lfl, ~. z:.! J! ~~. o;-D CS-tG jl\ ~ ><: "'d ~ >-i <J) C it> -'C 5' -t-::> ~ " + '0 (f\ ~ ]' (1\ ()Il.~l - p T~~-ft )," :Jl:n ~, ~ ~ !/\ ~ ~ f' ~ i:_~:P t ('" ." :::- ~ ~I , ,'J> m l> 3~~t ([ I> _ C ~ .F' ~J fir = :5 l'l~ Fl1 P :J I/le . VI ~~ ~ & G' ~ (j\ (," (Jl i' "0 :r () J {O J ou'7R~ ~ ~ .J\ z,. C) <> ~0=4~ f 0 J> ;1. f' ?] U' b _' c _ u <;1 3rl: f!. O\11-7JL o lit <::. 7- In III l. ,"II 6" (11 j. 70 - fIl 0 l) , ~o (j) s::: II (..1 N ::DIQ 1~)..('C: 'V., (" i7l ;0;; iil .- ,. ..{ o rnZ,O 1J .c. ~ (J' fO :lJooJlr- ;it .. ~ , r if'l:.. -:>~. ~ 0 ,.) ..I . ,'it ( ) .. !: 'IC' .!I' ~ ".( ~ .~ & ,]1 po 'II c: 0'''<:'' f" ,U :-11 -.J ~ 01' I' I l} ~ CJ ... r: ~ ,", '" ;p ~ III " "0 C. ~ :t " l ... ~- .1, ........--. ",- ~ - j'" '.I ---_/ - ~ r) f.) {II ~\ \\f' .- ,,- ~ ]) () I ]) Al -( \ ./' \ .. .~ ~. ~ l' I"'. $ 9E 00 m 7: J) (1\ Ul (" - 0 ~ Ts:!::-i~ l'~1 :J);n '\ l J\ _ (1\ (.1 1m .( If, 0 ''', (1 1<1 . o J1" c 6' 1l;::-~ t '" C" :;:J ,II c:-' . ' ~ m ~ [g~I,f- ? f l r- ..J :pi:' l'> tl\~ F (' t> :B ." c ' tfI $I ~V ~ ;5 u; >= t$l;::j]/1'O 1>-~("~ V-, (" {il ,:>; iii' ~...{ om.... 0 v,L:.t(]'iV :ll 0 VI r- ,il. ~ , rcf'~ ::> (" ~ 0 ./ ..1 ii' () -l s:: 'JC' ,~~ "-<: ~ (J) C ji) 0' 0 ,5' +-:::> '" ~ " -0 .P 0 P .IlC o'''~ f'" \....:-11 -J ;-! <II oJ t' I !) ~ i:K'~"O ..,- if.sl~~ H:!~!i::r~" :t h lo::i7oe!i-~ I' t~ -c_i..-ili-n : ~ ; !!. h' f' f' ~ ~ f ! i;: ~ ~ iii~ . i lii~~l" f- .-III !r~-!:fi !I :1 . . ='i~flll: ~ !Bill . ~ii'!!.gii C =1. l'ir.lin~li itllll :il:l! 01 11;' ~.. ; ij ,. S ~ hill I. ~f' 'Ifff~tiii !!I~ ;I!II-li~ Ii l-ui I!!. tf !!.!:-ilil o~~ i$;;lf' :11 irJ 1.:I!!.~ij~ i!!.r ,!,!~ii!fl if .ji~i"!!.i hI mdh ......... " ......... ~ ::; -~ :;,. - -- - ~ <$" (J .. z; Sl /II- lI> ;f e ~ 17 " C fit ~ o f o I'iI ~ s= 7Q f$ ~ c[l .--1 rJ (T) {II -\ ~) $-. ~ i i.- s:: r ... NO _0 i. J; :8 , "'((:j ~. f:' ,-;- f: (/I (,' () ) ~ .0 ):0 -fV J O(jl;U,t.. fit ~ '" ~ C) ~ ~.0=-\~ 8 7' ~ : ? ~ U) b _I r:. - v 9 3rl. F, O\Jl_JlL. 0<." c:. 7- (n tll ~ ;11 G' (II i' 70 - l/I 0 o ~ ~o .f ~ f\ ) ~ ~1 ~t ill' ~ ~ .' "-~ ~ ~~ 1fI, ~- _ _ /1.,. '> '----- -~ " - ~ z:.! ..J .c "of 6' -J . (iiI> IT",C iT' . Z,"';L~. Lcf1 ~ _ ~.~~< Z A C 1-\ A I~ y/ ~\'"_~ ~~3; -4. ~JF.~EK. f4.A~do~ f""";~rli 1:)\<t.NT ::.:" N ~ r . _ \ ~ ~O~7 G,AU''1103 t,.P>.\'<,F., 1<0"" I mb'~. "1\7 'Sl-40~WOOO, m IIo3N,~SOT"':" ,... 5~!.~\ - l-"....lJ>..IE (:>\2... 4-'0- OOS~ ~. ,,~ SUl?Ur:.'10f<. Al..'vA tJ i;, L 1\ rv t:::> -.: Uk-liE I.( I tJG. 1'2.,1 LF-w,s S712..c;'~T S. ::I.l ,-~ 4\). \~2.. -: :- ;.:. v.:)i:> F. i-. iY\. I.,J oj ,,: :; ~ - ~ . :':'3 "X) '.:..."..,.. l:>'~- ~S. C.02..7 E ""6..,,,,: P..lt. ITR3<::..A E....G.. 1.",,-. :'2.1 -;:.. fT\AR~_....Au... RoACl 'Sv.,"'e. l\li.Ultl ~t-.~..:a 0,.;; f't'\,I,JN Es"r~ . SS'iiq Pk~ ~12... A~c:.-{C)=)~ W()O 0 S ~ ." ,\ ;. -'",,--- \ \ I Z.Dl-J IWG, ::. '< \ C. \j#',''l;2.SHI'H), rfll vvt"'\I\,t-\A Scl-+OO '- -- 2.1(cJ Po';::l'!.A -. 3.12. A C.e..E ~ - D's';"~,c.1 o , ~ , ,"" , ~ . Sc..\Ie. ill ~ee.+ , \..) - / '" w .,,/ U.;<:.c.R,O-'-.:-.... P AReEL 1: La' 199, Awha,'l SulIdMslan NumDer'''3a, EXCEPT !Nt lien of I8ld LoI '" Iyln; SuuUoo,1y 01 a ,.... ,I....,.' with MIl cllllUIt 120 ,"I NartII of the North ..... of Murr.y SlrHI ns .110_ lit. IlIicI IMI, AND EXCEPT tIllItlleTt therwol described n ,~: Cammenc:tng al lhe NarlheeSI comer 01 LoI t99, Audltot'I SubdlvIaton No. 1311, ............ Caun\V, MinneSOIl: INnee lout" ......\Mn degrHI East along tIllI Enl ..... of ..Id LoI 1 n. 1110.2 '''I: lhence Well 140.2 I..\: lIlence Non" -de;rftS Well 175 1..110 lhe Nanllllne 01 laid 101: 1_ Non" elgft\V-sl. _..... ''''..n mlnulel Enl 40.75 '''I; lhenc:1 Soul" ..".nly.llve deor... lorly mlnul.. Eal 107 ,"I 10 lhe I)OinI 01 beginning. . ~ velo.lrns 'i'ltuPt.\Elll I=,U'~'" G.QA~ - d-.J.~ (~. ,.J.. Eo t.,. t ,-I) _ ~ {of...J.f.. c.i.....".--'-: .' ,~__.u-,.j:t~"j.... i<..I"'" -yr---' . - .It:.....d..~ M~;~-j- _ J...t. /~ ~,,-_d A . /',...-J t.-t.:..A- j ~ .J'04-c.. PARCEL 2: . TIle, ~ 01 LoI 199, Audltor'I SulIdlvlaloft No. 1311, .........,.. CcM\ty. ~ IvIno lout.....,. 01 a .... _1leI wlth end dlalUlt'1 2Offtt'NartII ol1he NartII .... 01 Murrey S\rMI III 1_ on uId .., and Iylnv EaslUIv 01 a .... 111.2 '_I W.llerly 01 and ,I....,.' with tIllI Easlerly ..... 01 ..id Lal 199. STKE2:T 'ff-l> 'l..'l.. ~ 1G..40 N l'i';jl'5b'E. ~_. ",<,OO.,'t- MUR.QAi -;::-elll~: ..lI4LY le, ,qqq. \? Exhibit E ACCESS ALTERNATIVE 2 Between wetland and Galpin Lane . # 1102.04: CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT, RESTRICTIONS: No filling, grading, dredging, excavation or construction shall be allowed within the wetland conservation area if such activity is incompatible with the policies expressed in this Chapter and the preservation. of those wetlands in their natural state, nor shall the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka, Galpin Lake, Christmas Lake, Lake Mary, Silver Lake and Lake Virginia. be changed in any way by fill or excavation without an earth change plan bel?g filed by the applicant to so do and a pennit issued hereunder by the Clty Council for such change. (Ord. 70, 3-12-73) . EARTH CHANGE PLAN: Landowners or developers desiring to develop land or construct any dwelling or any other artificial obstruction or direct the flow of water from any underground water source, on land located within the wetland conservation area or change the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka,Galpin Lake, Christmas Lake, Lake Mary, Silver Lake and Lake Virginia within the City, shall first submit a plan of development, hereinafter referred to as "an earth change plan", to the City Council which shall set forth proposed provisions for sediment control, water management, maintenance of landscaped features and any additional matters intended to improve or maintain the quality of the environment. Such a plan shall set forth proposed changes requested by the applicant and affmnatively disclose what, if any, change will be made in the natural condition of the earth, including loss or change of earth ground cover, destruction of trees, grade changes and its effect, if ~y, upon lakes, streams, watercourses and marshes, lowlands and wetlands in the area. The plan shall minimize tree removal, ground cover change, loss of natural vegetation and grade changes as much as possible, and shall affmnatively provide for the relocation or replanting of as many trees as possible which are proposed to be removed. The purpose of the earth change plan shall be to eliminate as much as possible potential pollution, erosion and siltation. (Ord. 217, 7-10-89) 1102.05: Exhibit F EARTH CHANGE PLAN REQUIREMENTS ~- .." MAYOR Robert Bean CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL Kristi Stover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 :MEMORANDUM . TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO.: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 31 March 1995 Kimball, John - Setback Variance 405 (95.08) BACKGROUND Mr. John Kimball has requested a setback variance to construct a new attached garage at.4445 Highland Circle (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). The property on which his home is located contains 13,870 square feet of area and is zoned R-IC/S, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland. Mr. Kimball proposes to convert his existing garage into a main level bedroom suite. As shown on Exhibit B, the new two-car garage would be added to the front of the existing home, requiring a 20- foot front yard variance. . The existing home contains 1652 square feet of gross floor area divided between two levels. The existing garage contains approximately 450 square feet. As proposed, the fIrst floor of the . home will increase to 1276 square feet. The new garage measures 22' x 22' and contains 484 square feet of area. The front~ntry will be enlarged slightly to provide handicap access. . . The applicant's request is explained in his letter, dated 7 March 1995 (see Exhibit C). Plans of the existing and proposed structures are attached as Exhibits D-F. ANAL YSISIRECOMMENDATION Based upon review of Section 1201.05 Subd. 2 of the Zoning Code,-the applicant's request appears to be justified. FollOWing is how it satisfies the criteria for granting variances: 1 . The variance is the result of the unique physical characteristics of the lot. The subject lot waS created prior to any of the current zoning requirements and is substandard in area (13,870 square feet) and width (75'). The configuration of the property would not be approved in a plat under today's standards. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore :ts.b.\ "~ RE: Kimball, John Setback Variance 31 March 1995 The Code specifically cites narrowness and shape of nonconforming lots of record as examples of physical constraints. 2. The variance is not a function of economics. Due to the shape of the property there is nowhere else to build on the property. 3 . The lot configuration was not caused by the applicant, and it was created prior to current standards. .! 4. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood in which it is located. Homes on Highland Circle are situated rather compactly around the cul-de-sac. For example the garage to the south of the applicant's property is approximately 17 feet from the right-of-way. It should be noted that due to the shape of the property a relatively large yard area exists in front of the home. It is simply shifted over to the left of the cul-de-sac. Also, alternatives of extending toward the lake were discarded in order to maintain the character of the lake shore. - 5 . Lot coverage is well under the 25 percent maximum allowed by the Shoreland District. As proposed, hard surface areas will amount to approximately 21 percent. 6. Relative to homes in the area, the size of the house and the proposed garage is considered modest At the advice of this office, the applicant has modified his original plan to minimize the amount of his variance. Based upon the preceding analysis, the variance is considered justified. Approval is therefore recommended. ", cc: Jim Hurm Tim Keane John Kimball . -2- I J PHELPS BAY ---.. I ! LAKE MINNETONKA (tiPPER L.AKE) . . . . . . . . . . . . .. )bth L: -' 4r ~;^~~~:EL "/ ~ lINE ~ AERIAL AS PER PHOro @JJII.Dffl ...... ....: PNfI( NO 2 (7) ... ;" PNfI( NO I (25) ~ k 2 o . ...... :.~:.: () ') \ Exhibit A SITE L Ki OCATION rnballsetback . vanance ~ . j SURVEY FOR: JACK KIM8P1LL Prepared DESCRIPTION: Lot 9, Block 2, ENCHANTED GARDENS, according to the recorded plat thereof. BENCHMARK: Walkout level of existing house. Elevation = 933.42 (NGVD-1929). GENERAL NOTES: 1. . - Denotes iron found. 2. x933.4 - Denotes elevation. monument . existing spot " ")''')s '0 ~"" \. '. . -. .. ~ :.: .' 6> e-- . 59 07--' .ratl. . ~_.- ~~S9.17 ~ . ( rlO'T ~ ~.'-"b"!.9.\ _ -----::::- - CIRCLE ---;i/iHLA/'IO ~ AREAS: 6/831.00/ 366".se (50'80) I 8 618~1-002. (Sl-62) y: I ,~. ,/ ' ~ I SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. ENCINEERS . SURVEVORS . PI.ANNERS SOIl. TESTINC . !NVIRONMI!HTAL SERVICES t.... W4T%ATA .~Ta. U'''NITONIC4. MM. .I.JAJ 'It21 '4'-".' "AX: ...-.... / >/& ~~.....t::7 iO' QfIt", J"an.2.1, \'1<;:' to show propo~ed addition to house. TaL= _...... .House & Porch = .{ ~. _Bituminous = Brick = . . Steps =. . Stoop = -Deck = BY rs---.-- - . ----=. ~. / --_ . .LL___._._Nt:;;""""". 13.870:::: sq. ft. J :s Ii:> 7 Q ~ 1,436 sq. ft. z.o~e."Z. S[ 743 sq. ft. 3 0 3 . 0 r r t! 250 sq. ft. I $0 t l"\o.+4as 29 sq. ft. z. "i . 44 sq. ft. "i '1 274 sq. ft. 'Z.. 7"1 ;1 :" Th is drawi n9 has been checked and reviewed this ".l::- day of \:)~c:.cz.-.Iot.<" , 19~. by "])~ B . \6-L~ I hereby certify that this survey was prepared under my supervision and that I am a licensed Land Surveyor under the laws t~e S~_.- -~ u~_____._ '(;1 Exhibit B PROPERTY SURVEY To: Shorewood Planning Commission 7 March, 1995 Attn: Mr. Bradley Neilsen Subj: Request for Variance Approval Ref Attached application Our meeting 2/17/95 Encl: Site Survey List of property owners within 500 feet Proposed building plan . We are requesting a variance to build an attached garage and entry into our house at 4445 Highland Circle. The reason for our building plan is to provide same floor access for my wife who has a walking impairment from Multiple Sclerosis (M.S.). The enclosed building plan will result in the following lot setbacks: Northwest side - 10 ft (existing house is at 8 ft) Road setback - 15 ft one comer from platted cul-du-sac, centerline of garage at 20 ft, and far corner of garage at 28 ft. Please note actual cul-du-sac has a radius of29 feet instead of 50 feet shown on plat. This results in actual minimum roadway to proposed garage of 36 ft. All dimensions are plus or minus 6 inches. . Per Code 1201.05 Subd 2.b our request meets the following variance requirements: (l)(a) Our Lot 9 Block 2 is very irregular in shape and makes normal house layout impossible. (2) Neighborhood lots have similar garage to roadway variances as follows: · Lot 10 - 17 ft by plat (38ft actual) · Lot 3 - 12 ft by plat (32 ft actual) - estimated · Lot 4 - 20 ft by plat (30 ft actual) - estimated Sub2.c. We have made every attempt to make use of the existing land to make the variance the minimum variance necessary as a result of our 2/17/95 meeting. · Increased sidelot setback from 8.0 to 10.0 feet · Rotated entryway 90 degrees (still maintained handicap access minimums) We have reviewed our plans with our neighbors and have their approval. . Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions - Home 474-3975, Work 988-8704. Regards, I Ji /" '(tr~(j)1 F\'~ L \ John C. Kimball 8Lt~~r~'~L:Vt~Y;;/; ~, I / I Barbara Kimball Exhibit C APPLICANT'S REQUEST LETTER Dated 7 March 1995 ~I---- i - / "" -.I- ... ___m._ ___ . ~ .) Itl -;j- v !i :! -;u .{.. .1 ~ I ~ tl o ~ '" ~ ') ~ J --- ~ ~ ~. . i \ i g J=:,~ . \ 4- "\~ ~ () ~ ~ '" ';( '" E i"G '. wii ~ t :X:$ Il -i .. ~ I~l" "?'O.""- ;;'lSr O'~? I ,I ~ . <r It 0 ~ .s 1,';"0 ......- '''60'' -'-'V(/\ :J,>I010d ." If)Ni - 1 -I ~ - - - - - . .. - _.. I 1, - ... - - - - - - - ~- - I I~" I I ~~ .,... 6'~("---'---" ~ g Dl o ~_ .r _ ~_'_) ..) ......:1/.,.."" 1'-', " .( i ~ ,/ r:~';:~'~1llIL-=;Tu-uc-r~~~ " ,r;;: l_ !iI?lt'9al..QQ:'. I ~! it .. ~ ~ O. ~: ~ 't ~ p. ,t 1.' j~ f ~ 9 ~~ . "-;J,n , .. J!5 o i1j 0 ::l ~ \l!ll ~~ ;~..c.o ,.-=-. C? ~ ~ } >1 ~o ~"t ~. "" .. --,: ~ lil +---,;~;'<i'" .. ":t:! -7~ ;1~ "I Cl <r r- C:(~ :::J:. Q) r> \ . .- - -' i!'" 0 ~ ~i ~~~O)( ~, ,-, ~__ \' ,t~:1....J J\ :z: ... t_ --:;:a,-t::;z'f' .... uJ, .----1 1<'6>" Q iG Cl~I/'-.' J ~ ~U;h ' ~ ie;~ '\,,~ o.9i G-i oj::ji--U' .. o r- ~ .- ..l ..... ( --O~-- i~ ! ---. . rL -, 04 ~-i: " ::20 C;.!.. --;, :\ - -=:. o o D!~ ;.. '-::3 :2" >~ -.... --' - <f. ~ = .~ ~~ "t. ..,:. ~i ---...... 0:1 :>- , r <, I, \t> ~ j i u: ~ ;E. ~ ;:a 1; ~ ct Q. "- III " J u- o-z '~ y:.-_..-.- -':\l<)'o!)$ o-q, - ';>"o.vz . <r.J'SI.Sn~.L ~ '0 ~ 11 ~ ~4 :r .. :2;: - ~ o\ll 2 CUll. , !S\~ oll ~~ ~ ~\lI \Ll ~ 1Il~ '1 ~ 3~ <t...i \II'" O!. 5 ~;:: <( " " -'> -..::I ; ~!t ~\ ~l ~ hill '( ~ 4 :i ~ ~ ......>-~ ~ r/. .. i ~ ~ ~~ ~... ~E . "'=-......-_....-,-- --, -~-.;;:'- ~ - --. .'" -.. .-."',":-'." .-- - hln ~ . ~I .,... ~~ ,. I IXC( () a~ !!till "c ~, ci:...;. " . ..'" I ".... ~,. .s: ....1t ,. ... -II .' I (} ~ cp () ill t'I .0 ~i \J~ Ii I> .. - -.;- ~ ~ . o I/J \ ~ 1 , Exhibit D EXISTING FIRST FLOOR PLAN ., ....,. :-... ...';..~I:. . . . ::"; ~... .~. ~..:. ... .:~-~#.:;h :~:-~.~.~:.~. 'L,~" ,~1 . ;:...';_.;..-,;.i.,..',..:.....(:.;..,:...~...".,~.:",:r:~..,:~1~: . . . ",: ~ .~,:~ -:-.i><~:' .... ,'c '. . ~... ':.<t: .; .:. :.~. ..1-'--: ~;~ -..~...:-:...t< .~ "':. : :....,: ......,j..~::.... .. . ..~! r /. I. /::'" .J . . ):. l. ~'. e...~--':'I . .io_ ,,: . ': I '~E~:"7~' . 'p':';' ..;', . '. ~ #' -. .... ,. . . ." I' . -:~ :. .~ t.,.". .' .... '--. I ._ _:...... . .' -.-...., ...- '.,' ." ..:,.t....;.! f'f.~..:;:, . -.... :......... .~ _i:~: ::~:~;.:i;.~,:~~~ ~~.J.ff' ~ '.- '.;..... .:/:(:.. ..;;.... ...... ..... .0-... .' ;..: -. . !,.....' .:.~ .' ,':~:"~~~',2:~~~~-:::~~~ ~2. ~, .~:~":'~'~:o,,: :~.!.. ......... :'~'.., ?}:::~-:0~Y.! '::'~~~~'.. . ......~',:.'.~: .'.... ;; ;-...,~....:':1.. ., .'.;: ,';' ':.~ ':'+>.~(-;ii~",:--- ':"":':(~'" '~..-' r .. .. .-:-. :.---..--.-----.--------- C", : , -~:.~-:.~.~,~: .......~--':.,,:.. ..~-;.,<.. . .' ;;.t<....,-r''.::: - '#,.r" of-- . . ;.:..~ X.~'Z~d.. '" .' . /' ...," /-. .. --{ 1\ .:;; '7. I ,(j .. .:~ .., " j;r' -, ,', ...- /, . -' ~. '.'oj .~/ , /:.... ~/. . :~ - ;~:' , N-rlk. -H.+ "D~4:'4~ .- -"-~ .~.~ '."'.. '._ .."...lj...::..$v.J C 1 W' · :\\\~)t ......' . ] oJ /: / Exhibit E PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN ./ J., .. " t u"v . . p:- . , '. A-It_ .' ~.__.-.-.--~ -- -, f I I I .L__ .~- . I --_.._-~-~ ,. , ~~_:~61J~~~6~ \ I I'l I. J~ +-, - - - - ---' --~- --T"" - - - -: :---. . 4K~..AdJ*D~ k .' .'o::"'~~"'i ~ )($i.~-""".--.......:-=--"~.....~. I I f,..~ ~ : 01:: ... ... ~.~:..,,:>./':I"""~~tJ;,::-~ , +i If , ----r- ; fRONT I I I I , ...Lit .L__ ELEVATION :'4.",1',0" ~ . ~~~...... . . Lfl r -.;:.~ -J ~J. ~ (; s:u,:F. rt""'5 . ~v:-.; r-- l- .-.. . - .-c. '___.' \ -- :. .~ ,.... Exhibit F BUILDING ELeVATIONS . .. Attention Brad Nielsen - Planning Director Planning Commission - City of Shorewood Shorewood City Hall 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota Dear Planning Commission, , We are writing with regard to the request by Jack Kimball for approval of a setback variance and variance to expand a nonconforming structure. In the legal notice that the City of Shorewood sent us the property is described as: 4445 Highland Circle . Lot 9, Block 2, Enchanted Gardens P.I.N. 30-117-23-32-0003 Please notice that we are the Kimball's next door neighbors. Our property abuts the Kimball property on the garage/addition side of the Kimball's home. Therefore, we are very directly affected by the proposed addition. We would like to go on. record as to having no objection to Mr. Kimball's request. Regards, p~~~ . 'I/~ Dale & Linda Johnson 4425 Highland Circle Mound MN 55364-9380 .c Kimball's /)~ "s.b.~ ., . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST BY LUNDGRE.l~ BROS. INe. FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE SHOREWOOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, Lundgren Bros. Inc. (Applicant) has an interest in certain land (the Property) within the City of Shorewood, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan has designated the Applicant's land as being suitable for residential development at a density of 0-1 units per acre; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested that the City amend the land use designation for the property to 1-2 units per acre; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request has been reviewed by the City Planner and his recommendations have been duly set forth in a Memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated 30 June 1994, which Memorandum is on fIle at City Hall; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held by the Shorewood Planning Commission on 5 July 1994, for which notice was duly published and all adjacent property owners duly notified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Applicant has failed to provide adequate justification as to why the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan should be amended. 2. That the Applicant's request for an amendment to theShorewood Comprehensive Plan is hereby denied. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of April, 1995. . ATTEST: Robert B. Bean, Mayor James e. Hurm, City Administrator/Clerk 5.E. ~ .. Leial Description: "Beginning 37 rods East of SW comer of SE one quarter ofNW one quarter, thence north 20 rods, thence east 8 rods, thence south 20 rods, thence 8 rods to beginning, except road Section 32, Township 117, Range 23." PJ.N. 32-117-23-24-0006 "East 8 rods of west 37 rods of south 20 rods of SE one quarter of NW one quarter, except road Section 32, Township 117, Range 23." P.I.N. 32-117-23-24-0005 . "That part of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4, Section 32, Township 117, Range 23, described beginning at a point on the South line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 313.5 feet East from the Southwest comer of said Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4; thence East along the South line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 165 feet; thence North parallel with the West line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 330 feet; thence East parallel with the South line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 264 feet; thence North parallel with the West line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 to the North line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4; thence along said North line 429 feet more or less to its intersection of a line drawn parallel with the West line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 from the point of beginning; thence South along said parallel line to the point of beginning except that part thereof described as the West 115 feet of the South 378.78 feet as measured along the Southerly and Westerly line thereof." P.I.N. 32-117-23-24-0011 "South 378.78 feet of the W 115 feet of that part of SE 1/4 of NW 1/4 lying east of a line parallel with the west line of said SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 through a point on the south line thereof 313.5 feet east from the southwest comer thereof, except road Section 32, Township 117, Range 23." P.I.N. 32-117-23-24-0010 "That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SE l/4-NW 1/4) Section 32, Township 117, Range 23, described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest comer thereof; thence north along the West line thereof a distance of 200 feet, to the point of . beginning of land to be described; thence east and parallel to the south line thereof, a distance of 145 feet; thence south and parallel with the west line thereof, a distance of 200 feet to the South line thereof; thence east along the south line thereof a distance of 20 feet; thence north and parallel with the west line thereof, a distance of 31.29 rods; thence east and parallel with the south line thereof a distance of 9 rods; thence north and parallel with the west line thereof a distance of 48.71 rods to the North line thereof; thence west along said North line a distance of 19 rods to the Northwest comer thereof; thence south along the west line thereof a distance of 1165 feet; more or less, to a point 200 feet north of the Southwest comer thereof, the point of beginning, subject to an easement for driveway pwposes over and across the East 20 feet of the West 165 feet of the South 200 feet of said SE 1/4 of NW 1/4, according to the govenuhent survey thereof." P.I.N. 32-117-23-24-0002 "Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1064." P.I.N. 32-117-23-23-0001 EXHIBIT A ~ --.., MAYOR Robert Bean CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL Kristi Stover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM . TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO.: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 29 March 1995 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Lundgren Bros. 405 (94.05) Lundgren Bros. ' request for higher density on their site west of the Minnewashta Elementary School property was considered in the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan. Although the City chose not to increase the density in the Comprehensive Plan, no official action has been taken on their specific proposal. It is suggested that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the amendment be denied. cc: Jim Hurm Tim Keane Joel Dresel Terry Forbord . A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore .~..e.., MAYOR Barb Brancel COUNCI L Kristi Stover Rob Daugherty Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen . DATE: 30 June 1994 RE: Lundgren Bros. Construction - Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment FILE NO.: 405 (94.05) I. BACKGROUND . In April of this year representatives of Lundgren Bros. Construction appeared before the Planning Commission and City Council for a preapplication review of a Comprehensive Plan amendment for a proposed development of 73.5 acres of land located to the north of Smithtown Road and west of the Minnewashta Elementary School (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). Their proposal requests that the City change the land use designation in the current Comprehensive Plan from Semi-rural Residential (0-1 units per 40,000 square feet) to Low Density Residential (1-2 units per 40,000 square feet). The staff report for the preapplication review is attached for your review (Attachment 1, copied in yellow). The developer has now submitted a formal application to amend the Comprehensive Plan (see Attachment II). The request has been revised slightly to include additional parcels of land along Smithtown Road. The subject sites now total 76.5 acres, of which 42.7 is City- designated wetland. The lot count has increased from 36+ to 40+ (their Development Plan - Fig. 5 of Attachment TI - shows 41 lots, of which three have existing homes on them). The resulting proposed density is 1.3 units per 40,000 square feet. TI. COMP PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS The preapplication review conducted in April was informal by design. It allowed the developer to approach the Planning Commission and City Council with his request, and obtain direction for a more formal proposal. A Residential Community on Lake M;nnetonka's South Shore ~ 5. E.;}. , Re: Lundgren Bros. Construction Comp Plan Amendment 30 June 1994 The formal application involves a public hearing, which will be held on 5 July. Legal notice has been published in the official newspaper and mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the site. In addition, the developer held an informal neighborhood meeting on 29 June to review his proposal with area residents. The public hearing is conducted by the Planning Commission. At the close of the hearing the Commission may make its recommendation to the City Council. In certain instances, the Commission may table its decision, pending further consideration of information presented at the hearing or to obtain additional information. The Planning Commission may then recommend approval, denial or modification of the proposal. . Once the Planning Commission has made its recommendation, the request is forwarded to the City Council. The Council can approve, deny, or modify the proposal. It can also refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for further review. If an amendment is approved, it must be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment prior to formal adoption. This preliminary approval requires four-fifths vote of the City Council. For more detail on this process, see Shorewood's Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines. ill. MERITS OF THE PROPOSAL/ADVANTAGES OF P.D.D. The developer presents a number of reasons as to why his proposal is justified, several of . which have considerable merit: A. Assemblage of Parcels. This is perhaps the most significant benefit to the . community. One of the most common complaints generated as a result of new development is the disruption caused by construction - initially the' grading, street and utility construction, then the building of homes. If the subject sites were developed individually, both types of construction activity could occur at three different times. Developing. the three larger parcels and including the three homesites on Smithtown Road maximizes the continuity of lots within the development. Developed individually, more undesirable lot configurations would undoubtedly result. It should be noted that the middle parcel (Wartman) is virtually impossible to develop without one of the large adjoining parcels. - 2 - " Re: Lundgren Bros. Construction Comp Plan Amendment 30 June 1994 B. Circulation. The proposed looped street pattern is consistent with the concept for the area discussed in the Comprehensive Plan Update. The developer suggests that, done individually, the sites could end up with separate cul-de-sac streets or private drives on Smithtown Road. While this may be true in the short term, the City can still achieve the loop pattern through official mapping and the subdivision approval process. Doing it at once, however, is far more desirable than a piece-meal approach. C. Neighborhood Unity. There is an advantage to a unified neighborhood as suggested by the developer. All lots are developed under the same rules and covenants and all buyers are aware of the location of surrounding building sites. . D. Wetland Protection. It must be noted that ShoreVlood's Wetland Code protects those wetlands designated by the City. The Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 (WCA91) protects additional wetlands not previously identified. What this development does is prevent an attempt to develop the strip of land along the south side of the large wetland, adjoining Smithtown Road. It could be possible to force two lots where the dry land swells into the wetland. Better to leave this strip undeveloped by allowing somewhat smaller lots within the site. For the above reasons, thedevelopeJ; makes as strong an argument as can be made for a planned unit development (p.U.D.) approach to the development of the subject site. Allowing credit for marginally buildable or otherwise undevelopable land to protect natural features is one of the key purposes of P.U.D. 76.5 ac~- 2.0 ac. 42.7 ac. 3.0 ac. 28.8 ac. 43.560 - 1,254,528 40.000 31.36 ~ 34 x f + total acres Wartman homestead City designated wetland street r.o.w. net developable feet per acre square feet allowable density 10% increase for P.U.D. total lots (including three existing) - 3 . Re: Lundgren Bros. Construction Comp Plan Amendment 30 June 1994 The Development Plan shown in Attachment II shows 41 lots, 38 of which are new. As can be seen above this is seven lots more than allowed under the current rules. Attachment III contains the draft policy plan for the land use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan Update, currently under consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. This draft shows both the existing and proposed text for land use policies. In evaluating changes in land use (e.g. density), the policy plan should be the basis for determination. . For the most part, the west end of Shorewood (west of the Hennepin Co. railroad property and Eureka Road) has been set aside for large lot single-family residential. The most obvious exception to this pattern is the Brentridge development west across the wetland from the subject site. This development of 20,000 square-foot lots was consistent with the tier of existing similar sized lots on the east side of Howards Point Road. The developer cites the 1-2 unit per 40,000 square-foot density designation for the area south of the subject site. It should be noted that this area has been developed at one unit per 40,000 square feet andthe Comp Plan Update proposes to change the land use designation to 0-1 unit per 40,000 square feet. The staff report prepared for the preapplication review (Attachment II) states that rezoning to a P.U.D. zoning district would be necessary to implement the proposed land use change. Another method of implementation would be to rezone the property to R-IB, Single-Family Residential, then allow P.U.D. clustering by a conditional use process. R-IB would be consistent with the average lot size (30,598 sq. ft.) proposed by the developer. . V. DEVELOPMENT ISSUES Regardless of whether density is allowed to be increased or not, development of the subject site(s) should address several issues: A. The Development Plan proposes to serve four lots on the peninsula (northwest comer of the site) with a private road. While access to the peninsula is difficult, any private access should be limited to a common driveway servingilo more than two lots. This may require extending the cul-de-sac further to the west toward the peninsula. B. Future platting should include an access drive for the proposed water tower site located to the east on the school property. C. The westerly street entrance does not quite align with Cathcart Drive to the south, but it is as far to the east as the site allows. At such time as Cathcart Drive is improved the existing street should be turned slightly to the west to align with the new. street to create a 90-degree intersection. ~ - 4 - . . Re: Lundgren Bros. Construction Comp Plan Amendment 30 June 1994 D. The City should consider requiring public dedication of the strip between the wetland and Smithtown Road. This would allow public enjoyment of the wetland views on a more intimate basis than driving by in a car. E. The City Council has directed that new development be required to connect to City water. Although water is within reach of the site, the Boulder Bridge system lacks capacity to serve the development. Discussion on alternatives to increase capacity continues. cc: Jim Hurm Tim Keane Joel Dresel Mark Anderson John Uban - 5 - -~ , tfIlr,t . :! ~ ~Rl --- --Stn ~ ~ ... ~~ ~ -~ v.,.--ttt1' ~ " -~ C... - ~...1 ...ij Jolt tft.ON c'''. ",. ;: .- J.'Jt.....'o; .. V.I '0>$8 -~ Ot?1 $.,~ '.'11;8.'" ....~AI ...r......, \ .~ <Ii" , .. . . ~ ~ ~ j ~ ""'" @b ~ .. ~ - I: Q '2& "-:.. - -- ~ Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Lundgren Bros. - Comp Plan Amendment .c ... .. o z ! .'\ .. CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Barb Brancel COUNCI L Krlsti Stover Rob DaughertY Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (f512) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen . DATE: 29 March 1994 . RE: Lundgren Bros. - Preapplication for Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment FILE NO.: 405 (94.05) BACKGROUND Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. has asked that the City amend the Proposed Land Use Plan element of its current Comprehensive Plan to allow a higher density of residential development on approximately 73.5 acres of land, located. on the north side of Smithtown Road, just west of the Minnewashta Elementary School (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached) . . The property consists of three parcels, of which 42.7 acres exists as designated wetland. The current Land Use Plan classifies the subject property as "semirural residential", with an allowable density of 0-1 unit per acre. The developer requests a land use classification of "low density residential" , . which allows 1-2 units per acre. Pursuant to Shorewood's Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines, the developer has submitted information for the Preapplication Stage review of the process. His request and considerable background information are set forth in the attached "Proposed Land Use Guide Plan Amendment for LedinlWartmanlMinnewashta School Property of Shorewood, Minnesota", dated 1 March 1994. AMENDMENT PROCESS 1. Pu(pOse. Exhibit B, attached, is an excerpt from Shorewood's Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines, setting forth the purpose of the guidelines. The text . identifies five circumstances under which Comp Plan amendments are considered: A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's So Attachment I ~ t' ., Re: Lundgren Bros., Inc. Preapp-Comp Plan Amendment 29 March 1994 A. The developer's amendment does not identify issues which were not addressed in the original plan. The review of their proposal should, however, examine an issue not adequately addressed in the Comp Plan - city water. B. The Concept Plan proposed by the developer schematically provides more detail to the current Comp Plan. This Circulation concept is specifically consistent with the proposed Transportation Chapter of the Comp Plan update currently being studied by the City. . C. The developer's amendment request is based upon his plan for developing the . property. D. It is doubtful that the amendment responds to changes in community needs, attitudes, etc. E. The only change in law impacting this property is the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991. /, II. PreQplication Stale. Shorewood has adopted a two-step procedure for'the review of Comp Plan amendments: 1) preapplication stage; and 2) -formal application. . The preapplication stage is intended to provide adequate background information for initial evaluation, and for the developer to meet informally (no public hearing) with the Planning Commission and City Council to: ' . "(1) Familiarize the Planning Commission (and City Council) with the proposal., ' / (2) Review required information and identify any additional information necessary for proper request evaluation. (3) Refer to. appropriate Commissions and- outside agencies. (4) Provide direction for the applicant (e.g. indication of priorities, etc.). (5) Set Public Hearing date. (First regular meeting after the formal application is received, allowing time for legal notices.)" , The developer should not exPect a yes or no answer to the p~lication stage of the review. Rather, through the discussions with Planning Commission and-councll,; issues should be identified, and a general indication should be given as to the merits I of his proposal. Any direction to proceed . with a' formal application shoUld also identify any additional information which the City feels is necessary to properly evaluate the request. -2- Re: Lundgren Bros., Inc. Preapp-Comp Plan Amendment 29 March 1994 If, based up<>n the City's initial reaction to his proposal, the developer decides to pursue the amendment, he would next make a formal application which involves public notification, a public hearing and higher scrutiny of the proposal. ill. Plannin~ Process. Amending the Comprehensive Plan follows the same process as the original Plan. A. Issue. Identification. One of the most important parts of the preapplication is identifying, not necessarily resolvmg, issues related to the development request. Solutions would typically be part of the formal application. . Staff has identified several issues which need to be addressed as part of.this request: 1. City water. Shorewood's current policy is to allow private development to obtain water in any way it can (e.g. private wells, extension of existing water systems - Shorewood's or others, private central systems, etc.). That policy is currently being reconsidered as part of the Comprehensive Plan update. . The direction given to staff is to develop a plan for achieving a city-wide water system within 10 years. Part of recent discussions has been a requirement that all new development be required io connect to the City's existing system. . This issue is complicated by capacity problems in the Boulder Bridge system. The City Engineer will discuss,under separate cover, possible solutions to this problem. - Also related to. City water is the possible future location of a water. toWer immediately east of the subject property. It is likely that an access road to- the tower site will be required as part of the deVelopment of the subject property. It is also extremely important that any future residents of the development.~ specifically advised of the City's intent to locate the tower. 2. Wetland protection. In addition to the City's existing wetland regUlations, new development must contend with the Wetland Conservation Act of .1991 (WCA 91). The developer has had WCA 91 wetlands delineated (see Site Conditions graphic - Figure 3). The developer should be prepared to demonstrate how his proposal for higher density will better protect the' wetlands on the site. - 3 - . . ~ Re: Lundgren Bros., Inc. Preapp-Comp Plan Amendment 29 March 1994 3. Lot size/density. The developer should explain in greater detail why his proposed density is necessary, versus the existing zoning. In other words, why can't he develop the site at one unit per 40,000 square feet? This will be discussed more under goals and policies. 4. Traffic. From a planning perspective the impact of increased traffic from this development is minimal on Smithtown Road and Cathcart Drive, both of. which are collector. streets. Residents to the south have, however, already complained of. traffic increases from new development. to the north and west. . B. Background Information. The developer has submitted the required information for preapplication stage review. One item. which needs to. be clarified is density calculation. Shorewood's land use designations are based upon units per 40,000 square feet rather than a full acre. Also, the 40,000 square feet is a net area which subtracts designated wetlands and ~treet right-of-way from the total area. Based upon the developer's net area of 27.8 acres, the current land use plan would allow up to 30 lots. C. Policy Planning. This request is timely in that the. City is in the middle of updating its Comprehensive Plan. It is recommended that both the existing and the updated goals and policies be considered in the review of the Lundgren Bros. proposal. In this regard, the Planning Commission has" discussed the following: 1. The advantages of planned unit development. . 2. Allowing increased density only with in~ support facilities (e.g. city water). ' 3. Tying increased density to enhanced "affordability. The PlaIining Commission has expressed a reluctance to increase density except to ensure affordable housing options. The City Council has yet to review that position. 4. Requiring greater preservation and/or reforestation of development sites. - 4- Re: Lundgren Bros., Inc. Preapp-Comp Plan Amendment 29 March 1994 D. Plan Amendment. The actual amendment necessary to accommodate the developer's proposal is a change to the Proposed Land Use plan map from Semirural Residen~ (0-1 unit per acre) to Low Density Residential (1-2 units per acre). As discuSsed in recent Planning Commission study sessions, the area would also be highlighted as recommended for planned unit development. E. Implementation. The zoning action necessary to accommodate the developer's proposal would be to rezone the property to a planned unit development district. Given the configuration of the site, P.U.D. is considered the best way to develop the property, regardless. of whether the density is increased or not. . BJN:ph cc: Jim Burm Tim Keane Joel Dresel Terry Forbord John Uban . - 5 - ~ 9<ADY &.AM> I I RRFl f IA\ I LAKE M/~r~~ i _ · \ ,/ / 400 0 400 ~ I \\ I :~. i, 'II 11 . ;w3:"~ I' (UPPER LAKE) I t-.low-+h A..'\j" I : I: I In ~l ~~\ ;~~~~:~OD PLAI '\~..~.'"T .',,' ./~_., i ~~~1 \\\ :ttfll-W I ... '==.' ,: , ~~/'-'. ~~,-----: ~_n \~~l~'i'+i\!t'IJJ-i ~JI!fJ;' ;C-=~ n_ -' W;;WJ::~ ....-:::;61- ...... ~~~;i ::.i"~rfJ"'!l,~ :l) :r \\ ~!-/ :'/ ~~ - \ \"'~heq.~r - Y. : w.i~,j. ~ ;' : J..1i"""~'- ~ 'I rc M I \ on'V ~n ,.,:/ ~.\ I ~ : . . . \ ~ ~ t 1. . .1HI~l$~'1~ 511.. (i, . ~fj TONKA BAY L j IIfJf" s!;ll . ,. EDGE.\ r I AD \ l ,J. ':ii ~~ I J!!. ! ~~ ._.._.. . ----------.. ,J"~ ;....: . ':. ~"L ': . \" I' !i'I! I'" . n ~ . ~ .~' ~~:~'.~.:::.::<::<: ~>~r/ ..'1\ 1 t.:.... '-, r )-t;:-_......_.:j;_~ : - wi, .IJ~ ~: ~"'" ~,,"_A_~' "..Ic ,,'5;}..\:: ..- JYj ~?'~'::=-d~~; ~.. ~~r - <- ~~. :~:': .-~~::.:~ '. A #I"~ ~,... ..,__1 IT I / h J I F.- -'A' ,~' ~ :.. r .7,(' IR ~':...:~ _ r-..-'y--1 '1> "'" AMC~~ IIrml _~~~'1J .- ':~~~~t :~~ _ :<.,rl J 1----1 VAt.{~y- Wl:m ~j(' I J 1. 1/ ':l '/~ //i -~ I I '\. ..---- ~, J ..'::.-;-- ':";...-"';;':.-..,-- ~':: . ',II ~-rj.t ~.:) -; Wiji NELSlNE . V1 ;),{ I I -i IAn I I c --~--e'="'2P'_:"':~;::':.:'Tl;-::-"" ..... - \ I ~il /1: t"'J _~ SUM i II '''-1,,'-::. " I '. .... ';:.:',- --=- ' , ... . -- . .... NO E RD. i'.. X~ n=ro' ~ ,/ . , , "; -.~~'''': :;:. .~-~ ~;>:-. 4 1-~o:,~:..:~ A .::--, .' I ~ --I l W CLLLJI r /' / .... < _ i 1 i ! 'i 1 ~;~;2::r?:.:':~c~:~f~ : ; "'j-': -\ I II~/A/~ ~ ;;~~AVtj "'L \ il\:\~' 'I ::=LJ)______\::~j Af-. ::.' .'..' ::/.-.:.::. >: I ~ I: N :: I . l ,LIT ;.-;7/ FTi ~ I :gJ""- SWfQR ~~ T \~. '::;;;:~::.,...: : 'L". : Oi' i ill~' :l~ ~u ~~ i ~ ~ LU I --'~\\\" y,~~-~~~~.~t~'~;L.' '~~'c ". :_"-- ==- '1' ,.,:\\ 'if\ [~"'~ : 1 \ i 1I-----:~~ ~ :<<0- '~I ~ ;.,~ ...,-;'!,- .'.- -=-....' ". - ~ , ~J . ....~.,;;-~ ';-;- . ---........: ......... - ,JI ! ,\'U\ ~ :...~. ..--~"": .-L,; '!~--:=._.. .. . : ./'"""'~ 1/ ::: : T \ ~--11 L \ \ ~ ;::.~, -7.. :0' --~. -:.:"::-:;",-:: IT I W 4>//"1 v.... :: -:-+ Lj : ~i:---": \:1",,,,',;,':,,:-4#-.. ., ~Il o~,,,, :.. :./"' ::-1 : =-:...\ , ]to; ~ .~ "'~ {\.. ...m {; ;-::~' ~: - '\ \1----.. II ~T m__' f!i /' ~\ / ~ .,.:<l.-t:.,a,/' :-i -~ . .~_~~ J)-._----..l;T r:l...., I ~ I ~.--, "lfllE-OAl(~::;!Sitol/ ...t:::~!=..,-~u.._.. r I!". . 'c. .-. /~u 1N'i.., I J.~" ~ _w_' "-1 \ - ~'I L: ~:.. ~ : I //f::: T:' -= n Fe \ ~\" ~ i : "'-::.1 ~ ' kCif- .. - - t \ . II 1- w -:;;;;GE ~,... :: I~' = t-l-+- AK F TR. r- : y I' ... ... Wl~ SEY ~AI-:" !r-d ' : il ===l l-!-' ~ -- - - \ I'::::' 01 :: -j J: i..-- L--- --r STATE lIWy 7 . 1: . ~ i ~ ::SdQ tr , ().. loot ~. ~g >- <!a b:1 > ~ a ~ I - ~ '8 [ ~ (j : ~ ; I f:!!. ~ Ci . ~ m .- ... ./,.. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT GUIDELINES Section 1. PURPOSE . ~. Recognizing that planning is an ongoing process and that the City's Comprehensive Plan requires periodic .reevaluation and update, the' purpose of this policy is to create guidelines for thorough and consistent City review and adoption of proposed amendments to the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan. These guidelines establish general requirements as to how the Plan is to be amended and who may initiate such an amendment. An application process is contained herein which sets forth the minimum information required for City review and a means for collecting the necessary fees to cover any costs incurred by the City in processing a request for amendment. Finally, an administrative procedure is established to provide a step-by-step schedule to ensure an orderly and expedient review by City Staff, affected Commissions, City Council, affected residents and affected outside agencies. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan may be proposed to accomplish the following: A. Address issues which were not addressed in the original plan. B. Provide more detail to the original plan. C. .Respond to development requests. . D. Respond to changes in community needs, attitudes, etc.. E. Respond to changes in the law (e. g. the Metropolitan Land Planning Act). It is the intent of these guidelines that amendments to the Compre- hensive Plan follow the same general planning process and procedure used in the initial review and adoption of the Plan. ,'.A Exhibit B EXCERPT - COMP PLAN AMRNDMENT GUIDELINES ./ ,4. PROPOSED LAND USE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR LEDINIW ARTMAN/MINNIW ASTA SCHOOL PROPERTY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA . PREPARED FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SHOREWOOD,NUNNESOTA . Submitted by: Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. Builders of Quality Neighborhoods 935 East Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 June 7, 1994 Attachment II .. Proposed Land Use Guide Plan Amendment LedinlWartman/Minniwasta School Property, Shorewood, Minnesota 2 I. DEVELOPMENT TEAM Developer: Terry Forbord, Lundgren Bros., Wayzata, Minnesota Planning Consultant: lohn Uban, Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota Civil Engineering and Surveyor: Ken Adolf, Schoell and Madson, Minnetonka, Minnesota Wetland Biologist: Frank: Svoboda, Franklin 1. Svoboda & Associates, Shorewood, Minnesota Market Analysis: RogerConhaim, Conhaim & Associates, Minneapolis, Minnesota . Legal: Hugh Maynard, Leonard, Street & Deinard, Minneapolis, Minnesota II. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this application is to provide the Shorewood Planning Commission and staff with details of a proposed Land Use Guide Pian Amendment from semi-rural to low density residential for approximately 32 developable acres and 43 wetland acres. Three additional parcels were assembled to create a more complete development to bring the parcel acreage to 76.5 acres. ill. GENERAL STATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT INTENT . Lundgren Brothers is considering developing approximately 76.5 gross acres of land located at the intersection of Cathcart Drive and Smithtown Road. The property has a distinctive single family characteristic, and lies generally north of Smithtown Road and west of Minniwasta School. Lundgren Brothers has been developing quality neighborhoods throughout "the west metro suburbs for over twenty years. Lundgren Brothers strives to create neighborhoods that express uniqueness within the community while supporting 1he high qualities of surrounding neighborhoods. Their subdivisions also reflect the extreme care taken in working wi1h the natural environment and using 1he natural characteristics of the area to create a distinctive neighborhood. This approach to land development assures the city of high quality homes in an area where individual remnant parcels try to subdivide in a haphazard fashion wi1h uncoordinated results. Lundgren Brothers is in the process of assembling 1hree individual parcels to form a unified neighborhood. One is surplus property belonging to Minniwasta School and 1he o1her two are private residents of the area, Mr. Ledin and Mr. Wartman. Without this type of assemblage, high quality coordinated development would not be possible. Additionally, other properties in 1he area will benefit from the improvements because new public roads and utilities will be developed that can serve adjacent properties. This will provide for the orderly redevelopment potential of other adjacent properties. In addition to the development, over a quarter mile of Smithtown Road frontage will be dedicated as open space wi1h preservation covenances to protect the natural setting all along Smithtown Road. Overall, 1he process will develop a very environmentally sensitive and pleasing addition to the City of Shorewood. Proposed Land Use Guide Plan Amendment Ledin/Wartman/Minniwasta School Property, Shorewood, Minnesota 3 While the details of the potential development proposal have yet to be submitted to the City, we have carefully studied the development constraints and have reached the conclusion that the best possible arrangement of open space, utilities, road access and coordinated planning of many different parcels should take place through a PUD process. To accompany this process we are requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan from semi-rural to low-density residential. This allows for the successful clustering and adjustment of lots due to the irregular shapes and configurations of parcels, and adherence to environmental restrictions for subdivisions. Additionally, the site is primarily open pasture and does not presently contribute to the wooded character of the community. In fact, we anticipate that many more trees will be planted on the site after development than existed in its agricultural state. Upon reviewing the Lundgren Proposal, we invite you to visit other Lundgren developments and speak with the communities in which they are located. Lundgren Bros. constantly strives to successfully build neighborhoods that strengthen surrounding neighborhoods and provide excellent housing in each of its home communities. . IV. EXISTING GUIDE PLAN AND LAND USE The Comprehensive Plan also shows that the 76.5 acre parcel is shown as semi-rural in the 1981 Shorewood Comprehensive Plan. Surrounding the property on the north and west sides are a significant amount of wetland that separates this parcel from adjacent neighborhoods. The neighborhood to the west is low density, with 20,000 sq. ft. lots, while the neighborhoods north of wetlands are semi-rural large lots adjacent to Lake Minnetonka. To the east is Minniwasta School, with its large holding pond and proposed water tower adjacent to the site. The southern edge of the property abuts Smithtown Road at several points where access for a public road loop can be constructed. A vast majority of the area along Smithtown Road will be held in permanent open space to protect the general character of Smithtown Road and adjacent neighborhoods to the south. The land directly south of the parcel and south of Smithtown Road is guided for low density, one to two units per acre. The land has been developed into 40,000 sq. ft. lots consistent with the one unit per acre guiding. The subdivision of that land also had to respect complicated drainage issues and wetlands. If all the wetlands . were used to calculate density, the Lundgren Proposal would only be .5 units per acre. For the 76.5 acres, Lundgren Bros. is proposing approximately 40 lots. Overall, this density is much less than one unit per acre, - however, the net density when removing the wetlands consolidates the density to 1.3 units per acre. It is this clustering and adjusting to the specific site, with its complicated access and assemblage issues, that requires a PUD. Generalized concept and detailed calculations accompany this narrative in plan form. V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT The Lundgren proposed single fumily development will produce a density of approximately 1.3 units per acre. In order to accomplish this through the PUD process, we request a change in the Comprehensive Plan to low- density allowing the development at a 1.3 units per acre density, which is within the guide plan constraints of one to two units per acre. There are several reasons why this makes good sense for this specific piece of property . . Proposed Land Use Guide Plan Amendment LedinlWartman/Minniwasta School Property, Shorewood, Minnesota 4 . . 1. This guiding allows a creative planning process to take place to join together and assemble separate parcels that would not normally develop as a unified neighborhood. It would also give the opportunity, because of the loop road system, for other adjacent properties to subdivide in an orderly fashion. This will make the development more efficient for the City to serve and at 1he same time provide for the spacious character that the City already enjoys. 2. Open space of over 3 acres of upland, which is 10% of the net developable land, will be kept as open space in association with the wetland in the most visible parts of the property. This open space will be concentrated along Smithtown Road and upland areas within the wetland system. These very attractive areas will have a significant impact on maintaining the spacious character of 1he city and assuring existing residents that the natural amenities of the area will be protected. 3. The proposed change in density will not negatively impact the overall density of the City. The 1.3 units per acre is well within the average density of the City and supports the consolidation of development so that the surrounding environmentally sensitive areas will be maintained and preserved for the enjoyment of the whole community. 4. The proposed areas are in an area of transition next to the Minniwasta School wi1h its large buildings, parking lot and field activities. The school also has a very large, open storage basin used for water retention, adjacent to the proposed subdivision. The city is proposing a new water tower on the school site to complete the public water system to adjacent properties. The subject property contains a large amount of the open space to the nor1h and west that buffers adjacent areas. Also, by maintaining open space along Smithtown Road, the City collector will maintain a rural character with the development of the Lundgren neighborhood. 5. The proposed subdivision and change to the Comprehensive Plan will aide in protecting the environment by identifying and working with wetland systems not defined on 1he City's wetland map. These wetlands will be incorporated into the overall design and maintained for water purification and natural habitat. Fur1hermore, the lots will be served wi1h a sanitary sewer, minimizing 1he .potential impact on water quality in the area. The land is primarily unwooded except for rows of trees along property lines, which will be generally maintained as buffers to adjacent areas. Trees will be replanted as part of a development creating an overall improvement to 1he tree cover for this area. Also, the farming activities, plowing of the fields and the application of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides will be eliminated. Normal residential activity will take its place and soil erosion will be minimized upon completion of the -built subdivision. 6. The lotting pattern 1bat is necessary to complete 1he looped road system supports an increased efficiency in land utilization. In order to effectively work with 1he environment and link the adjacent properties, this road and lot pattern helps to concentrate development to help minimi7.e construction impacts and long term use of the land. This will create a stronger tax base and provide a better land pattern for supplying City services to new and existing residents. Proposed Land Use Guide Plan Amendment LedinlWartman/Minniwasta School Property, Shorewood, Minnesota 5 7. Lundgren Brothers continues to improve its building product as it develops land and builds homes. Through innovation and energy efficient design, Lundgren Brothers provides a traditional home that meets the modem criteria for energy efficient design. 8. Because the development is separated from Smithtown Road by several existing homes, most of the subdivision will not be directly viewed by many of the adjacent properties. Additionally, the land along Smithtown Road will be maintained as open space to buffer the long views of development. With the surrounding wetlands and the school property to the east, any sense of density will be well filtered through these existing conditions. This property stands on its own, separated from adjacent areas through natural features and property location. Any change in density from the existing I unit per acre to the proposed 1.3 units per acre will not have a negative impact on the overall community and neighborhood. . 9. A traffic comparison was conducted based on 1he one unit per acre and the proposed 1.3 units per acre. The 1 unit per acre would develop 296 trips per day and the 1.3 units per acre density would develop 355 trips per day. The difference is 59 trips with 1he peak hour trip difference being approximately 6 trips during that hour. That would mean an additional one car per ten minutes during that peak hour on Smithtown Road. This difference in traffic is basically UIUlOticeable on the City's collector road system. This small amount of traffic will not create any impact on the City's transportation system. It should also be noted that all this traffic enters on Smithtown Road via public streets with proposed entrance features and appropriate site distances for safe turning movements. This development would not propose any additional lots directly fronting out onto Smithtown Road which would cause conflicts during 1he peak hour to the normal commuting traffic. The Lundgren development is designed specifically to improve traffic conditions, with its loop road system and exclusion of driveways onto Smithtown Road. . VI. BENEFITS TO THE CITY Overall, the City will benefit with a well-planned neighborhood instead of individual plats developed at different times wi1h different owners and builders. This coordination serves the city very well in community planning, and the assessing and collecting of appropriate fees. The Comprehensive Plan amendment would generate more fees for the City in the form of park dedication, utility assessments, and future taxes. Additionally, approximately the same amount of road will be serviced and maintained by the City, adding some efficiency to day to day operations. The proposed Lundgren subdivision will complement the character of Shorewood and reflect the characteristics of adjacent neighborhoods while protecting the natural environment and creating an attractive neighborhood that could be easily maintained to perpetuate a strong tax base for the city. This balancing and good planning is a direct benefit to the city and supports the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. Additional points to consider are as follows: 1. The City of Shorewood will benefit from a proposed efficient layout of streets and lots on the assembled parcels. In addition to 1he assessment contribution of benefitting properties to help bear the burden of a future City water system, the yearly taxes generated from the proposed plan will provide an estimated $16,000.00 of additional taxes to help with the maintenance ~ Proposed Land Use Guide Plan Amendment LedinlW artmanlMinniwasta School Property, Shorewood, Minnesota 6 . . of public facilities, although no additional facilities would have to be built to accommodate the additional proposed lots. 2. A change in the Comprehensive Plan to allow slightly more density on the property will encourage a developer to assemble the properties and create a loop road, instead of individual subdivisions created by each landowner wi1h either private driveways or dead end cul-de-sacs. 3. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would also offer the potential of utilizing excess property from adjacent lots to further improve the existing neighborhood properties along Smithtown Road. 4. The City will benefit from the proposed development through the creation of a permanent comervation easement over one mile of wetland edge. This enhanced environmental control, which does not exist on most wetlands in 1he City, is a direct benefit to future water quality of the wetland. 5. The proposed Lundgren development creates 1hree acres of open space along Smithtown Road which will not be used for wetland mitigation. This allows an enhancement of the natural environment to be maintained and provide further diversity in the wildlife habitat. This unique approach would not be possible under an unassembled, normal development process. 6. The Lundgren proposal also includes maintaining the natural area along Smithtown Road. This natural area will be preserved and represents a quarter mile of scenic views over the extensive wetland and adjacent areas. 7. The proposed City water tower on the school site has a negative impact on value of the adjacent properties and reduces the desirability for single family development on the property. This negative economic impact must be absorbed somehow, or the adjacent property probably will not develop. Actually, the best way to absorb the negative devaluation of the property from the water tower is to assemble all the adjacent properties together and increase the . density to allow for more clustering away from the impact area. Having the water tower on the school property, which is an institutional use, produces additional buffering to the subject property. A similar situation exists at Waterford, where the water tower was located next to commercial and multi-family housing. Clearly a slight increase in the density will help the development compensate for the impact on the property values that the water tower represents. 8. The proposed development is substantially similar to the Brent Ridge low-density (1.7 units per acre) residential subdivision directly to the west. This development has the same land use designation and zoning as is being contemplated for the Lundgren development (only 1.4 units per acre). 9. The assembled parcels are separated from the existing neighborhoods by extensive wetland open space and the Minniwasta School. This separation allows transitional uses and buffering through changes of single family density to take place. . . Proposed Land Use Guide Plan Amendment Ledin/W artman/Minniwasta School Property, Shorewood, Minnesota 7 10. Over 60% of the proposed site will be dedicated to the City of Shorewood. This makes development and the economic utilization of the remaining property difficult without a slight increase in density to off balance the development costs. 11. The change in the Comprehensive Plan for this property would continue to support the housing diversity within the City of Shorewood. It has been expressed by the Planning Commission that Shorewood has eclectic housing patterns with a great variety of styles and sizes. This development would represent a continuation of those housing choice traditions, but would also build continuity in a transitional neighborhood. 12. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the low density residential designation is wise because extremely low urban (sewered land within the MUSA) densities of 0.5 units per acre gross or 1 unit per acre net are counterproductive to metropolitan urban service strategies. Very low densities create urban sprawl, inefficient utilities, roads, and services, resulting in higher public costs. 13. The development allowed by the assembly of all parcels provides the City with continuity of the neighborhood which is far more desirable than each parcel developing on its oWn. 14. The price of land in Shorewood coupled with increased development costs due to the environmental considerations and the assessments for the proposed water facilities, render these parcels economically undevelopable without increasing the density to allow for 36 units. Without increasing the density, Lundgren Brothers cannot develop this site. .. . . ,Gf1VT~ I ,..~ \,~_l-) @ _... !.~J "ufil/ / r~.frl.U..lBJ.I.n-n 'I l .,.. , .,. . ,. I" L:J1i: - l....... f. . .... (Q :rr:'" -- . Y11. ...... I,... .e .'" "''''41 Fl.. ,:.,'~.:. . , i' .. ~ .... , ~ J J ..; c.. - --- _J~ ,-,_. ! ,. I';" -- III i . ' _Moo !Ml !l. I -...... .1____ ~-. ~ i--- --.., ., 'l ~ &. ~ ~ fa .. ' 'm c.. ~ m oJ...... .. ~ !o€~'~' .,"'e , ",'" -1" ~ .:;r ..d"~.i~' .- .. .; ~ ..... 2j ., ~ ~ ...:, ~ - · ------ ..' iF , ..~~'-"., .......\"'. i I" r"i4'~~;- ~1- __ ..-: DNR ...... I~' ....,. ~ ~~!~~I': ! ~ . j .,:.. ?>_,~," ::, ,''''~rl. Fa ~ 11 '" I~~ '\ tJ DES GN) TED ; I. ,..~)....c~:.- /... ! ~ .J...... #~ ~~~\ V ~ .~~...~ c10 ," ',&.. ..D..lD r ::.. ,..J ~"I I ~L>'':' (c:. - QI ~ . if" ~. l._;~!\ cta., I~" /' .";~ I'IAAND ... ..:. .:. ... - /::... · ~i . ,f..... \ r"'- '" ",~X-:.~~;.. ,,~ l..... c.~ clo ,/ . . . j..:. #.... ... c:. c. ~ ~. =~\~~:.~_...;, Ca. C;,~. ,:;' m..-o. Oi:./. ~ 'lEi '. r............... J STjfU /. ..:....J IJ. ..:. ii' ...:. i ~~.IO .,.. .. ... .. .... . I, ! ~j ~:.".l.;:, I _ I ,.~ I - .-- S ... ,;;j ~ '~J. I'" rJ. ~ t c~7 ...r:o ""\i: · '''IIr~-Tll'i' 1 - I I,..: cltc ,.... ",1"',,, e.. ..' ~ ., c~ 'Tr;' I . . 1. . :1 --:. I: 1 !It " 'I I ." ~. ~ ~ 010 i ,"'.1"" .,:, ,\. .\, J. ,L III 2. ~. , :~ - -I SUBJECT PROPEB.~'. PIT'A 1..110, l~ I ~ ~ .\1 ,:t ~.:. >0. 0111; k ~;, f 1 j J.... -.,. I '''' lIWll I ,..:. : , n.. _ ; _Utj : .1 ~ L II \ A ", I.... lodlIl 'I , ~J .:.IdV'f ".,: .. I ~..., J.! \0'" '--- ,.~ 'r.'- ~ D "Ylj, !J.~':.~ _ "1)',.. ... ~ .. 24T I I t';f ~~ ~I .. \. ~ ,. · i _.-;.-' .~ '1) I.I L'(;~ \.~ ,~'II., I \\ ei. ~\c:.:.~ ..:.-, ~' ,. . ~ '.... '. I';'.. X., ,~~ .IIJ\ I'" ~F ,1" I \' ...l' - ..... I a ,_. ::. ... ~~ l'~ ....~.:~"; .:"1:' H I f?'~ ~ cis :'.-r- ~' , c. _t:.:. - !.. .. ~ -~~J:. A? - I e,,:' \1, ~~__ .. -;~ "..: /' ii . a. ":. ,- _7 ------: " ~ ~".. 21 ~",," 1... J1 I ...... '. 1;0" I:' i '.."'.. ! J I. QI , . 1IJj;!j' ;;., 2. ... ,:.,' ," l ,,.,, Ii. ,'" .... ~..., ) .'.... "r" .. I: 1 . --.. =l'~ .. "" .. ..... 0"'1'.. ., .... ,:.. ....r. ~ t..' '. u,.... " &. \: .. .. 'II , __." -. ~. I I{; "'.... ~.... .. p('" /...... ,," . , 01'" ~...... . .... ~..... ~ . I;;' ,,\,, L' .1,~ 1. "':.1 ~ ,:" I' c~ r~ ~ /' .", . i ... !,c;' " .. )~ ~ c:. L~ ~~'E.Jts' , I l?os":.' ~'~~rii ,'. /' '. t 'I., 'jy . .... , .. ~ ,,: . .,~.: . -.' 'PUBLIC i., r" I, . ii>>' no ).'\,r .. - --, ...... ~1~ir _ ''I1r ~\\\ I!- . t... c:. I __c:" ....t . ;:. -::;Ojl...ol j -.,jIft .: -.. y:";.- .... -::::'i -'!! ~- ctlo l - - ..,. 'i_i.:,::. _I~ 1"-.. · ><' \ ' I. IJi ' , .... -. . · ..-1' I ~;;; , . ...;; i v.::-- ; '~~lJ 1 f- \ --;r"-' .....~IO':...24f~ ..;.- . . LT.--::...... ..~~::.- - .. ... '" ~\... · .~-_._-----------l.1 . _. - - .:.. ~~'I.Allr - ~ ~!.. ,m u WJ:rLAND ~~ , -~ ~ fP ~\..od.\..~~ .:- L · I.!'! ~:" 1t7f'i f . '. ..". i., c:. 1 .:. 1ft 'I .. Ie ,. .:. c;,. c.. _ .. ~:;:. _. ...._ __. }k.t. J_c~ ::..~:~ ~ :r- CM .. '?- t .':,. '.'? : '4<",'/ .. tJ__ 10 '..11f1 I - - c:. ~ 1981 LAND USE PLAN . '_ ,. / CORPS WETT,A NO . ":"~..':' ~$....--:,~ I ~ ' .'. ~. :1t.......:1 ~~'~ j-': ~ -,~ .. c. c....4 t. ;.. (WI (~ . i .:. ~ " U:I" "' j':;'" ... ce I . a" .... $O~l.~~ ,.. rn .,. , _. ~ I'~ L ~ ~ '. -m. .. -r - I .. _ _ . OV. ~ \ c.'~::' .-' I _ ~' / - ~. - 1 ..ic ADDI1 ; ~.... ",.' ". . ' AClES C1Il -,"=:;-C-':::=- ==="~ f1 200' 400' 800' "'~';""}A" "" ~.... 1<1"" h i )':.~ .:~',-.~'~ ,~:...~ .." ~...; ..:. no'... ~~t-r..1' /' --=-===... Hfr..-=::- FIGURE 1 " :~ ;"'~~:J ~ill' ~<~: ~ i,", - · i ,"-I Ii" j' i~'I~tl~' ~ - "$.(~SHOfIEY<<)()D, ~nes J . "~'_ _ r 10 . .1 -". #'~~~. ~"",~ j L_ i""_-l .. .;.,.-z-I-:...___.!, ~ BROS. CONSTRUCTION, INC. __ . . .~~'\ '==- @ SEC.30,T.117,R.23 @ Gf1VT LOT I :>tt; .~, I .11 { ,1'1.20$ @ TT1 \,~' c.. \~~I @ ~ l~,- ~'r.~ ~ · I , 1./ . .' . V __~__ ---------r-------- I / . " ! , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , e: ".. ~ ~ . ~: ,:~.. i >.- ":~:4" i. ~.. .~'~ . I . i 'ii' ., ' " \ -- .. .t;. ;; ~ ~ / j f , OJ .;; J:'a! l ~ ~. f ~. . i . ~ l; @ ~ ,.. !a ... I s ~ S@ " , ~ -..- rJ... It. t". \... - / "'"\ .111 !I il can- .~ . II ~'t..!! I fW\ ~~. ~ '- "", , ~ ~.~'\ /1 I'a'l UJ -~ ~ I UJ ~ i g ~ b ..~ "' ~ JI ~, ... ~i . 0 0 , 0 dl . i I:Il .~ ~ b ;j (-.",- I \--" (,;~~~~i, ~i~; . l"l=? V.i t; . _22.--' ~I .u. ~~~?(I ,l!.,," , ... . 'l'~h L.'~ .; c. ~ i -~ o ~ CD Z ~ ~ ..J /' .. . .. o..~ z :: - aMI Z" ~ z~~ ..: o ~ ~ e:: 00W..... Q ClI .... .c~~G~: :E:!t:~ ~= ;~: "M"'_::':' ....;; =;: -' IE! --at; W =:; ; o !.. I :c co.. ""_./ 0 =:1 UJ s: i i ~ ; (9--:1. ;,': , '. I . -. ~ > . . --~ ~ ~ ~ z = ~(_.~. \ ~-' - \ f~' \ \ II / \ 'f'\ I J ,\ I Ir,' \ 1\ r>-'~ \,\~\\ , ,,~ '- ...... --- E g :1:1 m z l:D :1:1 ~ 8 z ; ~ 7- ~ l ~ I .... I 1/ . fIll I )'/1 . . / '1/11. ! //IJ.)iz ill 1/1~~ ~lllr;,~(...,- \ ~ \.~~::: \ '...~ ~~~ , ...', ~. \' ~~' .\~ 2 !II .. ,~~~~ "''8-.~ " '.....> .....~- 'I \ . ;; :B e m o I q ~ z p II ij I: .. N , ,.. 0 !l ! I I , ~ PI n .. .. . li'i J J N 1:0 ~.. ~ ~." ~~ I!IS ~ ~ ... n ! I ::1 l!!J m "'d Ii 0 l!!l II ~.~ ~ .. . . ; WI Z I fo~ ,i- i h <j <C tw In i ~, .(/ = ~ i ~ 0 g ~ f;I;1 b :;;. ! -......, i \ I ~....... _. I I I . - -, . I ! ----- . i ~" "~ \ \\~\~I \1 ~'J' \\J I \ / , I I ( \ \ J \ ... \ :__J I I I i I I I ______ I _______ L_____________ i I -------------------------------------- ---------- . ~ . . jr,.. ',;.~. -4' 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 bamers shall be reduced in order to increase relationships between segregated isolated areas and reinforce continuity and a sense of community. . 3. Major streets are to border, not penetrate, neighborhoods. 4-:- Related uscs and aetiyitics '.vhcn compatible shall be concentrated 8:lld elustered into functioaa:lly rdated st:lbl:lliits of the community ~ ~ OR cOFFlmunity as V/cll as ncighborhood basis, varying typcs of l8:lld uses shall be combincd and integrated when compatible and complementary, and 'NRen increased effieicacy cmd lana ~on can be achie'/cd. . 4. On a subrcgiOI~al 8:lld community, as V/cl! as categorical basis, 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. Attachment III A InA T TT Cl -,~ ". .;:.~, !' '~':: 8. The use of easements for the purpose of access is to be discouraged. r- 9. "Back lot" development shall not be permitted. only 'IIRcn Adequate access eM must be established and provided witJ:J.out to avoid creating nonconforming property. 10. Intensification of land use activity and development shall be will onlybe allowed if accompanied by sufficient corresponding increases in related supportive and service facilities such as parks, off-street parking, fire and police protection, etc. ~ Over allocatioR of l:lse typcs shall be a?loidcel OR a community as '.vell as a subarca, developmcHt district basis. 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. 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 cooperate with already established private groups in undertaking development 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 and non-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. 4/94 LU-IO ..'" .- .., . .9:- 6. 8. 9. 10. 11. LI./O.d. ...,..---..-.,..-- .,...,....... 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 iptrusion of iacompatible 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. e.:. The existing housing stock shall be preserved aHa impro'led throl:lgh inspectioH, code eaforcorneat, 8:Rd rosl:11tiag updatiRg. +: Through publie eapifa:! impfO"/cment3, an iffii'etus shall be pro'fides f-of' priyate investment to help apgrade agiRg :residential ani:ts. &- ShOfcwoed's high qt:la:lity residcatial ew/i:roftffieat SHall be maiataiaed aRd eRaS:ftced through rchabilits:tioa or where fteecssary, reae'/clopmcat of substaRdard um.ts. SliCR actioas shall be l:mdertakeR throagh private mea:as and/or pablic action, ',vh.eR feasible. Sl.lbsmndard hoasmg SHell be Iemo"..ed WRen ROt ecoaomieally feasible to correct dcficieaeics. Residential development shall be protected from adverse environmental impacts, including noise, air and visual pollution. 7. A variety of housing is to be maintained. Housing styles and development techniques which conserve land and increase energy efficiency are to be encouraged. Lot sizes in the community shall take into account the cost of land and service improvements, yet be adequate to maintain the suburban, natural characteristics of the community . Overall density shall be a primary consideration in planning for the community. Density and lot size shall be the primary considerations in the review of development requests. T IT-ll 12. All new housing shall adhere to the highest community design, planning and construction standards. ++:- Desigfl, energy eOflservation, a:ad planning inRo'/ations shaH be cRcouragcd in hONsing ~ 13. Innovation in subdivision design and housing development shall be considered through the use of devices such as the cluster and planned unit development concepts. 14. Residential development shall be prohibited on flood plains and other natural features that perform important protection functions in their natural state. 15. New residential development shall maintain the natural environmental character of Shorewood. 16. Integration of housing types or styles within a development shall be allowed when applicable as long as the total number of units conforms to the prescribed density for the total development. 17. Medium 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. 18. :McdiHffi High density housing shall not be utilized specifically as a buffer or viewed as being capable of absorbing negative impacts. 19. :Mcdium High density housing is to be developed only in relation to and support of major commercial and service centers. 20. The City shall respond to the housing needs of the entire community. 21. 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. 4/94 LU-12 .. "4 ~ ,-< . . . .,. --".' .. ~ . 9. . 10. 11. 12. -M-:- 13. 4/94 --.-'. '~.I-'- :......... ,....,~_ . , 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. ~ 'When opportl:lnities arise, existiflg uncoordinated commercial development shall be consolidated into more functional patterns. &- Developmcnt of an)" scattcred opca. parcels along existing commereial strips shall be accomplished in a fashioR ';;hich helps to cstablish more fUflctioaal developmeRt patterns (for example, utilizing sharcd access and parking, etc,). 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. Safe and convenient pedestrian movement shall be provided within service and commercial developments. When possible or when opportunities arise, major street access for service and commercial development shall be at the periphery of the area. 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. Locate neighborhood convenience centers along minor arterial or major collector streets. Limited convenience type sen1.ee and commercial centers may be dC'/c1oped within e5:S)', immcdiate acccss of rcsidential neighborhoods. Ensure that neighborhood convenience centers are provided with safe and convenient accessibility for both motorists and pedestrians. LTT-l i .f.+: Thc de",clopmeat of additiOHal Hcigfl80rhood eOHvcHicHee eCHk:r3 :llu!:ll be permitk:d only '.v.l1CH there is clea:r aad demoflstrable cyideaee H'iElieatiflg a Reed for the ases proposed fur the cCRk:r. This cvidcl'lce shall. ffielade, amol'lg othef' related coasidemtiofls, the dcliacatioa of thc rca:lli. sHpI'ort ares. Me its pOf.'1:llatiol'l, f.'1:ll'Cfts:siflg power of the rca:lli. support area by ty})e of goods 8:S weB. 8:S the prof.'ol1ioa which could be reasoAably cxpeetee to be e&f)tl:1red by the a5e5 proposed, loeatioa of compctitivc facilities, Md anticipated dol1a:r ':omme pef'sq1:l9:re foet of retail fioOf' tlfeft:- 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. IBdustrial Commercial Service 1. The existing ind1:lstrial 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 ind1:lstria:I. commercial service developments to assume the burden of making necessary improvements to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential uses. 3-:- ' Industrial dcvclopmcat shall bc permittee m the City only whefl. it eM be demonstrated that AO ne;ativc impaet ':fiR resalt and that the eharacter of Shore'.',ood will. be ma:i:ataiacd. 4-:- Should additional indl:lstrial dcvelopmeat oecar, it shall be aIlo'lIed only in those portions of the eommuaity ".vhef'c adcqtiate Sl::lppOrti.'fC facilities (access, utilities, coo.) are existiag. 4/94 LU-14 -' ..~ ~ . . . 1IjJJ ~ , ., j\j~\ '3 G \(?Ril Mr. and Mrs. Albert E. Hoops 26755 Smith town Road Excelsior, MN 55331 June 28, 1994 Brad Nielsen, Planning Director Planning Commission City Council Shorewood City Hall 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Mr. Nielsen, Planning Commission, and City Council, . It has come to our attention that Shorewood has had a request by Lundgren Brothers Construction to alter Zoning Ordinances in the City of Shorewood. We are concerned by two basic issues. Primarily, an ordinance is a statute enacted by a city government. Statutes by definition are laws meant to be maintained, not altered. We also believe that our government is designed to be fair to all citizens not just politically powerful groups. In 1957, we purchased 6 acres. In 1984, we sold 3 acres because we did not see the practicality of developing the land ourself , given the Zoning ordinance of one acre lots. If we had been given the opportunity to alter the Zoning ordinance to 1/2 acre lots, it would have been more practical for us to subdivide ourselves and more lucrative, as well. . . In our area, as follows, the listed homes all meet the Zoning ordinance of zero to one unit per acre. There exist 8 houses between Strawberry and Cathcart Lane on the South side of Smithtown Road that have one or more acre lots. All homes for 1/3 mile South of Smithtown Road are also regulation lots. Afton Meadows are all sized 40,000 square feet or greater. The lot we sold at 26675 Smith town road is 1 1/5 . ~RL acres, as IS -ewFf own. We don t understand why the North side of Smith town Road should be treated any differently than the South side, especially the 3 occupied parcels; 26550, 26600, and 26640 Smith town Road. This area has as much traffic as it can safely handle especially with Minnewashta Elementary and children walking and biking to and from school. We feel we've done our share by paying high taxes for almost 40 years to preserve the open spaces and abide by our city's Zoning ordinances. We are totally opposed to this proposed alteration of our community and believe that The Planning Commission and City Council should reject the request to lower our present Zoning standard. We feel this would be acting in fairness to all residents that have complied with Zoning of full size lots. ~ c:-~ . y~~ //7.f/' - f/tfl6' f/ FREMONT INDUSTRIES, INC. A High-Tech 100 Company ctlbiff;!>;/ ;?~ ~ 15[~ . /JI~ <;"&-?JJ .J ~ 0~Jf .~ ~'1- .,L,L ~ ~.J~/^- ~4 ~ ~~~ --~ ~t()c){)4j/ ~ /~6 . ~~Sh~-t?-- s;-~ ~ ~-dcJU -0' ~ ~ ~ eN. ?k?d c/ -&-J~ -&7- ~ ;/ ~ . j! - ,I / II ~ ~'Yn~r~/.t r r ~~ · I?~ - ""f I' 1:t:J . ;Ut~/ -/. fr/- AlMA ..I--~ /}! 7~ . ~~ ('" :;-7 2,fo ~ h~, ~-c; ?~/ ('/;rtR /;~ / I; 7c;-7 /? S at PHONE: (612) 445-4121 FAX: (612) 496-3027 ~-2.7- 97 P.O. BOX 67 4400 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL BLVD. N. SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 OFFICES . Shakopee. MN (Twin Cities) . Atlanta . Cedar Rapids . Chicago . Cincinnati . Cleveland . Columbia . Dallas Denver . Des Moines . Detroit . Fargo . EI Paso . Jacksonville . Kansas City . Los Angeles Miami . Milwaukee . Nashville . Sioux Falls . Tupelo . An Equal Opportunity EmpJoy~ ... .. , .. The Planning Commission ;!'ll~ City Council City of Shorewood Dear Sirs: JAMES K. LINDSAY ~bcec ~~PMm~ 6-23-94 JUN 2 4 /994 I~am writing in regard to the Lundgrn Bros. request for approval of an amendment to change the designated land use from residential - zero to on~unit per acre, to residential - one to two units per acre. I see no reason for making an exception to the rule for Lundgren Bros.; if they desire to develop the Smithtown Road property, they should do so at the one unit per acre density. We don't need a bunch of houses crowded into that area. ~lease, no variances!!! . Yours very truly, James K. Lindsay 5745 Brentridge Dr. Shorewood 470-0631 .. ~ Date: July 19, 1994 To: City Counsel Members, City of Shorewood Re: Proposed Lundgren Brothers Development of Wetland area along Smithtown Road: RLS NO. 1064 (between Strawberry Lane and Howard's Point Road). As a taxpaying family household of the City of Shorewood, we recently learned of a proposed land development by Lundgren Brothers of the wetland area, RLS NO 1064, along Smithtown Road. We are AGAINST the development of this area for several reasons; . 1). An inevitable increase in school population. What about overcrowded classrooms? The quality of education to our children? 2). A potential Tax Increase. Shorewood is already one of the higher tax subUrbs in the metro. Would we need another school or larger schools? 3). A definite increase in traffic to the area. Smithtown is already a very busy road and with the development of this large area would increase traffic to the area. Safety to the area kids. 4). How would this affect existing land & property values? 5). The preservation of a wetland area. It is for these main reasons which is why we would be against this development. . This letter is in no way any reflection against the Lundgren Brothers as a company or the type of or quality of work they perform. Thank You for your time and consideration in this matter. If you have any questions or concerns feel free to call. Sincerely; t!;-~ Gary & Kim Kriegel 6105 Lake Virginia Drive Shorewood, MN 55331 474-6172 .11 (l 1. J........-' 1 ' !~ '.t ;;., <~.-, C ''-0 ./' . ;t. "',_\.__~" "-. A r.",....,~,.~--~.-4-...!,... .~-;... 'wi ~.E.'3 . . Steven & Shirley Guzzi 26650 Strawberry Court Shorewood,~55331 612-470-2238 July 18, 1994 City of Shorewood Mr. Brad Neilsen 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Mr. Neilsen: We are writing to express our concern of the proposed land development by Lundgren Bros. Inc. The said properties are located at 26550/26600/26620/26640/26750 and 27000 Smithtown Road (see attached sheet). The following issues are a major concern to both of us: . Traffic increase on Smithtown Road, and the two nearest feeders streets, Strawberry Lane and Cathcart. The safety issues for our children who attend Minnewashta school and walk and ride their bikes in the summer months are our biggest concern. These roads (specifically Strawberry Lane) are very narrow now and adding 40 more homes with about 2 cars per household will greatly increase traffic. Who will pay for the improvements, Lundgren Brothers we would hope. . Keep all new development of housing to 1 unit per acre. (or at least 1 unit per .9 to 1.0 acres) with no exceptions!! . We just moved in to Shorewood (into a new house) and have a private well, which cost us several thousand dollars. We will be strongly against any proposal that requires neighborhood residents to fund a new water tower caused by the additional homes proposed by Lundgren Brothers. Let these new home-owners install private wells (which do not cause any additional tax burdens for existing residents) or let Lundgren Brothers pay for the water tower. . The additional student load at Minnewashta, adding more students will only cause excessive class sizes, many of which are currently over-crowded. Who will pay for the new schools, or worse having our children bused out of the area. These are some of the most important issues that we see. We will work with our neighbors on Strawberry Court to oppose any changes to the above listed issues. If you have any additional questions please let us know. We want to workwith the City of Shorewood to improve the quality of new homes the will be built in the future, as long as these new homes do not require current home-owners any additional financial burdens. dt~Y~ ' Steven Guzzi ~ 4f~ 1;V&'?ri Shirley Gidzi kag/ enclosures .. ~. E-. LI "t · . . JIlL 19 IC~:ii 1'1.-;'._ Mr. and Mrs. Leo C. Meloche 26120 Birch Bluff Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 Mayor Barbara Brancel and Shorewood City Council City of shorewood 5755 Country Club road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 July 18, 1994 Dear Mayor Brancel and City Council; In view of the uncluttered cbuntry character of Shorewood we all love and appreciate so much, we respectfully ask that you require Lundgren Brothers Development to be only single family homes and on minimum one acre lots. ~el(jU~ m~ t// ~ Marcia J. Meloche Leo C. Meloche =It S.e...<<5. .. ,,' . . .~~ I~I 1~~4 1,0 Jh tikt~ { ~~I j OM\. ~ 1 ~. ~~~t' 1kk~~l ~ 1M-. (" 4J ~~ ::? . t4 to 0 u.w~?~ RM ; I " -) . ., \ - ,~:,.',: ".. : /. . .,' . . . . " , ~'l .' . . :. .;.':: i' . ," l... . _1 l", . f .}/ J t t'~d.e;J~,-,--J i'1{."J~~ k-t.J1-4'( 1'" ) &:~ WI. /' .k~'/Af-z.J Ii pI .'.---'C ~" vu_'........ <'-:--c" . O~~ )~~ . ,/'J t~ lL~ Ii. -,~t " l~i , tvj 4U/~ / , 4-< .-t_?'-~ / )~ ! '( .-d;Ivr.",-<c".,~f2, 17 (i; Iffy 11A~u' ~,~~;J 1L~~7 ~~(J {""I-J' /'?'.r...t.. ,....,<-- i //,.,1-.:...< '- r..... L~rr -( A-~-t/ ) {" 1"L"'t'<..:....z...-. ./'Z ~J 7/. /J ,(l.,/t,-;:~(,-? , .1l.0 ~....'-{ ,i-+tl-~ . / C-"--t.t.-\... d f~/' / . '. fA ~~L' ~/1./>".~ i.~j.1.n.'_ / ~F. ,.:;7 <..~,.. ."2 ~L<-J ..., t..:--t J'~~ /(,,-; /I-,,-..-...1L It:'-'J ~i 'a.,.l'~7-'V? /-1......u-....... /{, .,;..~~ I . l^',~1 .-t;?'. &1.1"'<.. lA-I-(' .d4~..-t. "-:t.-.:> d~ 7 li.,..oA--;P !--t:."-.;../ i ,(<.././~~. /YT-- ;i:.:"-f;~-!-'7-c.J ? / . I~.--c/ ~ ~"'--( a/j.~::;/~ <.,Le. 7'- t/ tf-.-.....e-t(...- ~' . /1 - . ... __/l,. \-' Ii .'/ . , ,-(.'-';.....1.\ , . j ;"- tl.L rf'1 ~.. . ; t~...-':~~. I II.. t'-:.-f ,.~. C"<-,,,<'lf. Iz.>...li,- L' /(' t.(,'~~ c\ , J _ t%. <...:,:. .,... '-<0'- .{;,-- ( . c: .;" c: -'I,.. L..,,_'~( 't.. ,(C. "<-,;.1 ' ,J#-IJ'-r-<. / t~ &".l,C..L,-.....-f c.e-/'-t~- t{d.:l~-..J /(.........."L-e.) {,.t c-d.cj /'i.r74A...Lfi J !.--0 ,?1.'i. ../. t... i ~-,<J , t.l;:t , A'(.e..c..."v +- /,i.I J t 1- .~'-, ~ t! .1- f-..I- e,:... "iw. V A:, .,. '1:// / .... -,- J-ot ",'../ "'.- '" , // /'..... t.J~..Z! :~/ t..../I~__J Ct.1.-'1 ~'"1!..'-.l, c.~j:'-'V-C:~~.' I I 6-_~~i...L :._/ ky...LV-/- . I ' LU ' {!.~\_.....\ /' . :I .'" /' 'J it."-~;.w'U_'(.- ~~~/ ..;... . ....l-(' "...A--twl.-?-:..~-.... 1~~-1 i!2 /-c'"" ~ i.. I. -.. ~ ...::.. ~Li2. (,.'-~_".7 j' ./1 ) / I; oL) I "'-- '-r-' 'yo .;/7" -., 7/1'--r--,-,1,~./ C.'. (.),/t:(.,0-.. L...:"--,:., ....:.\. . .--: ;......<..-1 .!:t<-~ / /7.-z.<.....[!:....... C. M'-'-:'~ -I..... ~ " , ~ ,... , / L~,. ~:r~.r i';-.~"i'-.. /)' j ",-.. , , I' (c. '... V........., Ii L;~' " r-::J- - .cL--:::.( ;:'c" C i.''''~ (...t ./'l l/{ ,r ..A.'-i"'~' " - . 7""';' '- p__t.u l.,-.L~~;.... ,.b-,,_M. iL f- I /j f). I. t,' . -. I' L:( " ,/ I _.' _ ~ ,-!,4~- ;,(,!L-:....,..', .-<..J..-~J-I.... .J . . I-\~-~~ ~ -yo. ~(s-... ~ ..).. . '\. s.. -->l-. '-.../'-' ~ ~ c:::, v-.......~~ - . . ~ =- "" "\- C)vr- "'- Cl" ~ ~ ..Q. ~ \ ~ .....c\J 0\ C2 V Q. \. ()~...a cS. .. ~ ~ ~~ ~ 0'""-. '~'" ~ ~.~. RIX July 18, 1994 City of Shorewood Attention: Brad Neilsen Dear Brad, The purpose of this letter is to respond to the issue of developing the last wetlands within the city, the Heritage PUD (HPUD). . We are adamantly opposed to any development that involves any portion of these wetlands, period. Why do we have to develop yet another square inch of land which might just be more suitable as a habitat for nature? It is the very existence of this kind of land which likely attracted people to this area in the first place. However, as this may not be realistic, if Shorewood sees fit to allow the HPUD, then it should follow the R1-A land-use zoning ulawll, period. If any developer can't make the numbers work within these constraints, so be it. . Short of this, we certainly feel that the suggestions of Jeff Stebbins as reported in the July 6, 1994 Sun Sailor are noteworthy. The suggestion of 35,000 square foot lots seems reasonable, but lets not allow the existing two homes to encroach on these calculations. If Abingdon can't live with that, then that is its problem, period. Shorewcod can and should then just wait for a proposal that adheres to the existing R1-A zoning, if that land even needs to be developed. Lets be patient, is there any reason not to be? Other issues are important too we are sure, but when wetlands are gone, they are . gone and that is the issue for us. Respectfully sut;>mitted, ~\M~ ~.t~ l~rd a~~ Elizabeth Rlx 27410 Maple Ridge Lane . . 26525 Strawbeny Court Shorewood, MN 55331 July 15, 1994 Dear ~ Commission and Shorewood City Council Members, I was upset to hear about 1he Lundgren proposal to put two houses per acre in the development next to and west of the Minnewashtl ElemenCaty SchooL One of the reasons we moved to this area was the fact that most of the homes in and around us are on one acre lots. The area is mned for one acre lots and it should remain that way. In talking to my ueigJtbors (34 home-owncrs) on Strawberry Court, Strawberry Lane, and Peach Court, everyone was against the half acre lots being proposed and wanted to see the zoning kept at the one acre per lot allowed currently. Many people were concerned about the traffic increase on Smithtown Road, Strawberry Lane,and Cathcart Drive; the impact on the school; and the possibility of a water tower being built in the area to aid the water pressure needed to keep up with that many households. Many were not happy about the development in the first place and were angered about the proposal to reduce the lot size. Please be aware of OlU' concerns and OlU' desires to keep the density of homes in the area at a minimum. Thank you. Sincerely, ~m~ Rebecca Marsba1l . f> July 18, 1994 Brad Neilsen City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Brad: .. The following is to put in writing the opposition of the zoning change for the proposed Lundgren properties off of Smithtown Road. It is our understanding that the current zoning code would not be changed when we purchased our current home and are surprised that this is actually under consideration. The following are a list of reasons and issues why we oppose the zoning change: 1. Traffic increase 2. Decrease land value 3. Potential harm to water quality 4. The potential water tower plan 5. Possible potential tax increases due to roads, etc. 6. Water run off 7. Major school overcrowding 8. The current plan calls for building a peninsula which would be a safety hazard to fire trucks and the wetlands. . It has also come to our attention that the proposed sale of school property is forcing a referendum to come out next Sprin~ forcing the school to purchase additional land north of the current property to expand the school district. Obviously this brings up strong concerns as to why we would need to sell any proposed school district land in the first place and could have a direct effect on the planning for our school district. Please advise if you have any questions or comments. ;;j1~ ~~ Bill & Sheri Nichols 5755 Brentridge DRive Shorewood, MN 55331 Gary Lo & Barbara Jo Allan 26295 ~aJ" R~ ei.tzck S~ A1~ 55331 (612) 470-9040 :, :/ ...'-'~ 18 July 1994 The City of Shorewood Shorewood Minnesota To Whom It May Concern: Seven years ago we moved to Shorewood because of the "country" feel. the large lots. the small town atmosphere and a tax rate that was within our income. We have grown to love Shorewood and have corne to consider it our "home town". In the past seven years we have suffered through tax increases. the school district build additions to the schools and watched our son become one of many numbers in Minnewashta Elementary School. Because of the raising taxes. the development of the land attracting the affluent and influential. and finding the Minnetonka School's to be unacceptable for our son's education we are faced with the prospect of having to relocate to a municipality with more acceptable taxes and schools. In short. we are being forced out of our home because we can no longer afford the taxes. We understand there are other families that have lived here longer than we have and they too are being forced from their homes because of taxes. We are against the development of the wetlands by Lundgren Brother Development for the following reasons: - - Continued -- City of Shorewood SUBJECT: Lundgren Brothers Development 18 July 1994 Page -2- . A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. Overcrowding of schools Increase in traffic Decreased land value The proposed water tower plan Another tax increase Water runoff Allowing more mores per acre than land use dictates Destroying of our wetlands. the uniqueness of Shorewood Jf Lundgren Brothers are allowed to develop the area bounded by Smithtown ours will become just one of other families forced from their homes. We cannot withstand one more tax increase as our salaries have not increased at the same rate as the taxes. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. Very sincerely yours. J~tlc/ ~ Gary L. A1 . ~ \ . -:U ~ J;i;-JJUr ~ ~ dL~/7~ ~ r~ .~ - ~- ~~ ~ .f( L S /to. / tJt.;I ~ c:2~ .~~~.~ ~/~~~'~ A. ~/~v--L~~~ ~~ .~~~~~/ :.~ fi.-./ /?A;5..~ . ,~hl'~ - ~~ ~~I' ~L'~f~ ~~~~~~ ~~.~. uJ ~~ ~~ ~~.'~r ~~~~ ~~~ - . ~../~~ ~~~ -ro<-~J~~ ~~~~J-/ c!i~~ / a.A2- a:- ~d ~J~~ /~./~ 4e--;<)o/ ~/U'~ - / ~~~ ~~~~~~ A~.J~ . . -~-- - . '. / ~~~~. ~ f1Mr~ 1-/ 1~/q4- ;... ~ ~ a.A/---tf- ..,J' ~of.. 10 ;2ut!t?5 ~ /Zr;flUI.~~..eM-<fu/ 4:rv ~ ~~} .TX-i.- of ~~fd ~ ~ ~~~ >>j-td. (l/r..UL/ ~ ~~. )(/ ~ ~-../ ~ h4 eh ~,;t;kW~; ~ ~ P-' ~ ~ <k Md ~ ->7dM"- 10 tu ~tl-M ~ :;:::~::!2~uRWu0 .!~~' 7 . I ~tUM ~t ~~ tucq-. ~._ . ~.. i..;.,c_.J~ rJ;; ~~. ~~ "thv~~ ;V ~. . -10. u1 ?Lv.Atur ~ .,f iiCLU-R--- ~~~~~~~ !.o ~ ~~" ~ Y-IJQ.,f ~~ ~ ~~../o~~~~. I. -rnffiv ~ - C. aJo::t::rA- q.~ w..-~~c1~ 1. ~;::::Jflw-/~ ~_~~ t. ~~~ ~ ". - tJd:FJi.,'~ e~ tf. (J)c~~~ at ~ ~~~~ U ~ J ~ tM~~~ hCLb-t{o ~4lJ '..Ih?l 'J'b hL hPu-tI ~ ~ 4<.,,,,~? fP'4 cUJuJ :&.Iv e.dpJ 6i ~-Nk/d ~6 -tJt-M~/ ~ 10 fo.e ~? ~ ~ ~ ;:rod v~Yo ~Wlf/~ q~?~, ~~A:J. ~ hcr~J~ ~ ~ ~.' ~cd- ~ ~~ pnt!1r~ ~'-Io ~~.~..' U ".-::-... -....- U/.e- ./j/Y)~ ~ ~-d Uf?:td ~ ~ ~{)vA/~~M. !~/ ~ ;hd.L I ....t4 ~ (J.4 ~ ~ ~ /JJ1P A~ _~----2/ ~ r--~ J .~ LUd. .te; ~Uf ~n-!~ ~ ~ ~ -IraAA '. . w.e {.-I1tf"2Atf ib-v ~ Md- A::bd~~ d.~~a~ fu8lW/ &zJ~ ~f}V u ~ ad- {~ .uPJJ ~ ~~ ~..e.b/)1~ k~~~~~~~ ~ ~ {JAAo( ~~ ~ .~...ud- d? ~, ~ ~~~ ~~~-tb- ~w-M~-dw/~~ ~~ ~ .b)tYdm't~~ . ~"{J1e dim'/: ~.kJ~ ~ I~~ ~c7f~d4; ~~ ~Mt ~~~d~ ~~ ~~U\1- IM~~~ 'ou../- fu ~'iJ ~t'J M+-<-u ~ 10 u.,p ~ \{} .~~c/o CH/~ ~~ ~CUJ ~h~ ~ ~/;.au~~ ().A;(cf '1b citJ ~ j) Yr#-~ ~ ~.~ cJAJ~ J~J..w.) .tK-~ w~ /~~.~~ ~~- ~AL~~ #4-108Q , '3bi15tZ~c( r?d ~~ 1lu1, 5)-3~1 f)r.dc3 I <.j. \ ,'i <:1 L\ &w.JL VU-Jt, AJ ~ . ~ ~ --?- .f!4AR rI~i;:;.,. -.J~~~d57~~ ~~~ y ft.d "fUd ~ q aLL z..6....eo-z; ~~~~~ ~ZX<-~. 0 -r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -+ c.kr.z.t.. ~~G5~~~ 1~Jtl:C,p?~~~k~ - tf)aA-~ ~~<t:~ .~.aa-~di~~ ~~~k~ ~~ CJd~' . ~ ~.o&~~.~ ;22~~aJ~~ ., ~~~~~ K~~~65~ ~ WL ~ ~ ~ Z2i ZZ4." ~I ~~~Z$~ ~ . ~~~. ~o-M~~~ ~ ~-U.A-~~ ~~~. v.-k 8JX ~~ ~ 6L~ 4~~~~~ ..i.Z: .a;..~-6.e- ~~~ ~.cL ~. - ~~ (/-UA-~~ ~k~~..e&c;L. ~~~. ~t-~~ ~ ~~~-b - ~ ~ Il "'-- ~-~./) lW1A-1S".s33/ _. ,&:=> ~ ~~r'l'V - .' ~ (J tu.J1..JZ. -to(l.U~O'''' f€ltt..3 L.e)V) \f.(J)-Y~ y ~~hl-;rOrs- ~ it -MtU I -10 ~ r:.f:L. 5~O"1)ct b.t 7-IJ-'1Lf << Soover. o U ~S.' ! J PETITION REGARDING LUNGREN BROS. INC. P.U.D. SHOREWOOD . Re: Property at 26550, 26600, 26620, 26640, 26750, & 27000 Smithtown Road (legal description may be obtained at Shorewood City offices). We, the undersigned residents of the City of Shorewood adamantl~ Lungren Bros. Inc. request of a change of the designated land use from residential - zero to one unit per acre to residential - one to two units per acre. We ask the Planning Directors, Planning Commission. and Shorewood City Council to honor and abide by the existing zoning ordinance of 0 to 1 units per acre to minimize the development bordering the wetlands so as to protect the aesthetic and biological environment of the wetlands. . ~aZ1L?cX Addres~--; /. c~~~ature 7 ~~~-9' - -~~--~~.--~~---i2-Cc-------~~-----~-9"1 --?[2 __1L__~__~~lO--~~~~~~-----------------~- --~"I_l'l'hi.Q ~---------'-~----L~L02ttt!;;:-=-:~~.J1A1 . __~-~~~~Q~~ _ _ -.:_~2~ /-Y(;; __.s:..-~~'\-~.:>1.t,J..Q.elL~L,.L~L-'--.c'>----r--i.L.~.\\-~-':J~( \ -<(" __.i!~~g_tJ:tJt;i.--:2-'iQ5-(}tktii({~L--JJ..!J_DL----- ~~-.-~ '1-~J:~~~. 5~~q~L~p9'1 _~ ~ ____~11-~t~~~~- ~-L----~-~~Q~~~-- _~~ _~_ __ -~~~--~-~~~~~_'9L.:---~~1~f-1-1------ G -- .~ - ---~~C;-93~--~-~---\\----. --:FT{-:;Tq------- - -----------------------~~~____~I_~~~__--- - --~. ~71-~-~~~-Q~---------------~~li-2~~----- _'L/'JJ!::J' _:.B-_rL_ 9--&'7 :2'1ZJ'jJ.t'J/S--?____________7..=lJ::5.:z------ ~ "'1'" (/ ~f - ------;i 27-tLtir}~=========~T~~~==== '\ , ---------------~-----~~---- -------------j 26fh2-4~>>J~-Uj!dJ, 7~D='tY: ~ . ;;b~~. ~--~ . '\ . ~~;?J ~ N ~4f;.1l_---?-~)12~ :-t --, .DLL~<!.~ rr~~~ _tAJif___-2!2'dL-131Ji ~ Y:'-L_~.t!--_!dfJ~:._-2-~--9t _~... _. _ . ________2:z.2j1XJjgy-rJ-1.~k.__-J-:~~~'f----t::L2-:.rt __ _ _________,z.:2J:J-~ &~t"Cc_IY_f)z--_-~~-cf!:%/:!----7_-Ci-:3' ~ ~ to '(6 tarl ~ .J/~ 7'-'1J~qLf f!J;%l14~ S'!rr C"'=U/ 7-/3- '11 ~~ 08)' /lPlVN'f(.t). 7-/7-'1+ '-5.E.ec . PETITION REGARDING LUNDGREN BROS. INC. pun SHOREWOOD PAGE 2 - ----tA~c. ~i~,o ~~~ ~'_ ....m~~~ . -------~:1c,=~-..~~~!ifr~~~=~%!fv ....... --- - -- - n._~. .... _ _ ~J1I1 0 -_____c'f.,_'6 _Af .. . _._00 ----.---- -------- -- -.~- - /10L~-_-- ---_~c.~_~_nW~(~+: -- 711111"f __ - u_ - ~======~"L- -. ~&. t;~':"i.:!J~:~o=-~t::~:i-:--- ----~L I'\r1F---- -~o '/?-C:< T<e<,U_.., . - "iff;9/9'1;- . _-~=-=o~..lfCL.fd1~. ~~ o-~~:iJ.~i~Il(~j~ kkf4/ . lls::r~--c:2-b_~ll() .)i~1n;~-- _ _ JlL*ls_ ---------. (2,v~4~~~"=~LB ~7/()n.i;~u<t::;;~~___.___ .--rz~l-fICj~~----- --------~._---'---_._-------,._-------_._-~------.-._--.--.-----.--,-----.-- e- _.~----------_._---_._--_._--_._._~---_._--,---_.._------_.,----_._---_._-_._--~ . ------ ---- - - - -- - - - --- --~----------- ---- ----- -~ - ----- -- - - - . fI ~ -. Of UJCJ...r t:,I.... fvt'l4 ~ J \((j).Y r)(:;.( ~"'~rG' ~ , MaA f -10 ~ cf2.. 5hevu.Urro ct bt 7- 13...C; '1 "V"" SOl:) Y"er'. o u ~S! PETITION REGARDING LUNGREN BROS. INC. P.U.D. SHOREWOOD .J! H f 5 1994 Re: Property at 26550, 26600, 26620, 26640, 26750, & 27000 Smithtown Road (legal description. may be obtained at Shorewood City offices). . We, the undersigned residents of the City of Shorewood adamantly oppose Lungren Bros. Inc. request of a change of the designated land use from residential - zero to one unit per acre to residential - one to two units per acre. We ask the Planning Directors, Planning Commission. and Shorewood City Council to honor and abide by the existing zoning ordinance of 0 to 1 units per acre to minimize the development bordering the wetlands so as to protect the aesthetic and biological environment of the wetlands. . N a.r.-u- ~t~[IO--vJ ~ 'fIt ,,~~Ui.- ,)..: G- :r1Y~i T'L ;;< L.3 q S &d e.'!(~J75- 7-1'/-9Y ~ICtJ"<<-I1, f-,aH- t, ",.& , vff'J9r ~~ ~. ()g; 2v .5JZI (J6fa-fc/~. ...,/f, ,;/, "Y-':"-:Z"hrlc.J .;J~31o ~~, . ~'vtf!!fj ~~:1"3~5~~ 7/J1j/91( ~tT~K~~ dr-3~ fW-~ ~ ~::;:! ~//t#J~, c?05d ~~~ vL 11/:( , 7\/" , . (l - 2J-.-Hn 02~ 3$ 5 !lad! Cr I 7/1; ",.1 9 c / {/Iv~ L ~~J ( (I .r k7/\" ::1:._ /1. ('": II!~ j to. I ;1." .-(iI _ '7 II '4// 0 ~ v~ v~ r:?7~ jT((/:JlN~/~C?-/ L/V. ~~rKr I I ~'I ~,. ifY0- (Jfq() , 11-r-u f2 '~--=::J ,-vI 1. IJ~ 2%Z,!)~~ e- Z" 7-N-7f . : ~~7J;~ ""2G3' 2s5f;-Qv;bQ',(Ci- ._-~~~ r-1Y-?/ . . , ~.......-- .. ~ -. 1 - - - - - 1....,--... .. -.....-."J- ,............. .,...........,....,...,... 1 Mti:.l -10 ~ J2 Shtrv;.,wrroe( ~ 7-/J-~'-f << SOOrer'. . V u ~S! PETITION REGARDING LUNGREN BROS. INC. P.U.D. SHOREWOOD 1111 I 5 1994 Re: Property at 26550, 26600, 26620, 26640, 26750, & 27000 Smithtown Road (legal description may be obtained at Shorewood City offices) . We, the undersigned residents of the City of Shorewood adamantly oppose Lungren Bros. Inc. request of a change of the designated land use from residential - ~eJ11iLper acre to residential - one to two units per acre. We ask the Planning Directors, Planning Commission. and Shorewood City Council to honor and abide by the existing zoning ordinance' of 0 to 1 units per acre to minimize the development bordering the wetlands so as . to protect the aesthetic and biological environment of the wetlands. . . ~--- - - - I Mt:iA I -lo Udj 1J s~d. b-.t /t-- ----J-'--- - ----- 7 - IJ -9 Lf av- See nero ~s! PETITION REGARDING LUNGREN BROS. INC. P.U.D. SHOREWOOD niT h'. Re: Property at 26550, 26600, 26620, 26640, 26750, & 27000 Smithtown Road (legal description may be obtained at Shorewood City offices) . We, the undersigned residents of the City of Shorewood adamantly oppose Lungren Bros. Inc. request of a change of the designated land use from residential - zero to one unit per acre to residential - one to two units per acre. We ask the Planning Directors, Planning Commission. and Shorewood City Council to honor and abide by the existing zoning ordinance. of 0 to 1 units per acre to minimize the development bordering the wetlands so as . to protect the aesthetic and biological environment of the wetlands. dt~-----~~l~~~~-~,g~'l fldJ?:7--- 7iZJi;#;;L-______.Wfl.fh'*"'_l.L_ .' . -_- LZ/..2'~-- ~_~kJJtJ----~-1~il2L4dedl4--- .~, . -- 1!li-!-1--- .....J~_~~___.lq9_~~w-F!'~~.H2 . - +-~JJ/~-A--- ~. d-(;..nLL. n, ) L t It =R~~~:7~===~iiQ=B~~:~~--- ----=51~I~1== ---------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------,-- . ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------~------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------~--------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- . .. r ,~~ 1'-''' ~vv .... - r-'.......1 \.oVrJ 'f~ r ~J'lr;7Vr:it ~ 'M.a.il -10 ~ JJ.... 5~ol by 7-I:PiLf ar SOOY"eY'. o U ~.s! PETITION REGARDING '-{-'C..; '.-{ LUNGREN BROS. INC. P.U.D. SHOREWOOD Re: Property at 26550, 26600, 26620, 26640, 26750, & 27000 Smithtown Road (legal description may be obtained at Shorewood City offices). . We. the undersigned residents of the City of Shorewood adamantly oppose Lungren Bros. Inc. request of a change of the designated land use from residential - zero to one unit per acre to residential - one to two units per acre. We ask the Planning Directors, Planning Commission. and Shorewood City Council to honor and abide by the existing zoning ordinance of 0 to 1 units per acre to minimize the development bordering the wetlands so as to protect the aesthetic and biological environment of the wetlands. . _____~~~~____m6a^1:J:~~----~::~~~~------~-~;-=-J2~Cf'-f -=~====I]C==Z==tL=,==============;:t=~~===~=~;~========= ~nJV-~~UfJ--------------~~~~-------- ---------------------------------------------------------- g====-It~==Tt===========~~===== ~l~]Ytq---~uiltL----------------------------------~--- ------~~------------------------------------------------ ___-----JLLo(.-g&&-~-dr~~) . -:-- /. ..IAl.2~_~~-~- . ~ ~-~-~-~-~ - . ~~ -aA.L . -~--~ . -~T~--.- _~. ~_ _ e.J_~_~_ :~_ ~~- __..Yd:rv =-- -.--~ -~~~~-----=-----==== ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- f . JUL \ 11 \9~4 7 - J d. - Cf <.f '\0 \.)",\\~ ~~~\} ~ ~~ J-c "0-~~ ~~~ k..~~r~ \-.'ov-v--.Q... ~ -\-c ~ ~... ~ Q>"" Yd-... o....~~ \c~~ . ~CJ r ~'-- ~c ""~~}~~ (-~~~~ \, ~ "",,,"':"'~~ ~v...)'-" ~" ,,~ ~C;)ok~/) , ~r'~:"c...... -\.c ~~\-. ~o..'--"'I. C-\---:.. \c\.r~ i '-A.~~~ \\c~ p..,"1.. \l....J... ~ i <"'d _'_" " ... . ' . . ... --... "' ,r-..... ~ ~~ CAC'~o.... d.. \'\.-...~ ""::::::> ~(~J'~~~ ~ \~ Uc...\~ o~ c-v-r \-.~" . .:.. ~, ~~I.j"\'"'\ f:>O\V '-'--\o....~" ~,\~ \,~ . c...C~""-- , 'O"-e." \<\-.,~~, M''l~ '-i , yv--... 0< ~\-..... ~ \ \-\ d- <::J (' "-Vv--~ 5. ~--U~~~ ~r [\~~~I..~~ -\-~><"2...~ " ;2,; L. \0(:) ~~ ()<;j~ uCJ'-I...)o\..'..-~ C>~ "'bc..-\--.. ()O \~.. 7. ~~ ''-v 9S ~~ ~c- w ~ ~ \awQ...( ..{"\.OW DVf:,Y --? I 'i " ( /,,- r , .~.~ . - ,....... '-,., ..... -'.;' .- . . ( r .~ VV1 11 H I 5 "'\.. 'v"-J<.)) \ . ck iI\. + iJ r - :7 //1.. 0 'H...~ "- vt J .2 d I ;'kYJ ~ 'H..x . Ai () f \fh. 5~ "hlel c~ '1-0 ~~ h(!) ~ f€ v A c. f -e 70 VItt 1""') l d~ ',+ r .:tl) fa... oJ'::> ^ i 'S ~o.[ l-f;[ (IlL) + ~ 14 tAl v-J -e I- S \M ".f hr-c-v~.),t\ f-J . / S C a //l[.e V V1-e J'. . ,'/tLe,(l,f k / ~ VI ~ vi YeMPr,'dOd0- ?HV.1(,.j r b"I~. 1 l ~ l t ! t I ! ;t ~. . ~ i ! 1: I it ~.. t , i , , I , f ) I t I I I ?- //-ql.; J\Y\... ' ~' ;-- 'p . ~~f'~" .~ ~~~d~~~ ~ ~ fJ.h-tWIZ (!~ ~ iliujuLlf ~ . Ofcu. ~~~ , . .. ~ .' ~~C;(CXbV ~~ardl . ~ ~; d~1 a . f I . I \ ! t t ! '~ { . i I , . I~ /1?/f . . j " r~I~-ql (d~1:' ~~~ . 0" , I ~)~ ",',/,?': ~ 1d~~~;: ~;fvv-n/ 1 ~ r/~ ~, ~ ~~O-CAL-. ~', _., . . ~ t~ .~/~/~ "i ~ 1\. ~~, cZ-~ uJ~ cvo ~}F h',' . ;r- iL ~ . ~, . ! f~ h ~Lt;::;~ I 1J1 ~~"~ . j P1 I I hJ \ oJ 7 / () /~~7 ~~ leer, \ i j I 1 . :J 7 tf~O gL 8.J)t,c Lv Ll71/-7rIO I . . ,. ,. ~ S/fCt/})J . - ,;Y~ , j i i I I 1 t j JUL ,3 1994 . ~~ ~ ~~-.J ~~~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~. 0 '-(JJ~ .~ ~ '^- ~ OY"\ 3 tJ l1- ~..:te ~ ~~ ~.~~ co ~ - . n_~ ~ ~~ ~D ~t$ To ~ ~~~~?-w~~ ~ ct..--~ ."",l~ iI~~~~u: -r~~~ ~~..~~~ -r' --D..AA....... _ . . ~ 0 I~ 0-.. ~ ;../~'-"~ +~ ~30~~~ 02 nci A n-^ ....()nA A ~I& ~~ ~ ~~~ U ~~CV~~ , , .~. ! '! , ! 1 ~ L ~ ::X:6 ~ ~-- - ~~~~, ~ b~J~~~ .~ ~ ~ 47-4. fI~~ ~ ~~ JX A--~t&r ~ ~~ ~~.~~~~~ - ---Ln'. ~~ . () le -I::: S rJ 01- In a.. v€...- PI'd rrcrtn - (Y);yJe G ('0 lie.. I{e.re- Lv€- COY:>?€- t . - I I fi The Hornickel Fa~lIY 1\ UN 6095 Cathcart Dnve Excelsior. MN 55331 \ "7- ID . ~ 70 ~ H A~.LUP /JA'J]^~A1" , '"Z-"ll <...:J-' IV c-c::>~~ J JUL r 3 1994 --L ~W~ ~ ~r ~ -f"h.=J- r <'.nL a.:Ja..Als.r ~ ~1; ~ 0-h~~ ~cL--u..aP--- ~ ~. 1lJ~ !-..4J1d~ 150 1;; ~. f<...oo-d- (~'Yl 0- ( ~ flRA CLUI-l..- --to <- 17:. t Pis . ~ ~ <3 -tk a~ o n~ c;3 ~ u. AM ~ aveA- (VmUc:f~JL tI1-rl1~ ~. . OW\ ~M ~ h bz- ~~ LL- (-f-t.-c7U J^- 4 ~ .~ ~~ -It> ~ ~ ~;lJb~ O'YL ~ wd{~ .r- tU1l O1lLtn&l-. ,M!cfl'hh.j -fN- ~itJ<;,~ fov--nj ~~. i . I , 0'1 f -~- p~ cW,'dL ~ --fi-e- b?(Ifrt1"!j Codo . 0 ! A~;O& a0\(., --SUl ~ j a~~ S (5 2T" J3/'€fT1r; dcf- I)r. ill . . \ 1 t ! I I I I 1 f . . . . ~ ld.f /'191 J).Q/VI. ~ (!.u.k trTt ) ~ -'V-t',(l ~ ~ rr'~ . ~. ~ ~.:U- ~ ~~~~i~ ~ ~ i ~Dcn-tJ . wa-;;;t ~ ~ -t -fJ Ju,tf a.o.~ ~ M'r ~~~ crn~ ruv-e--rn,~ 6~ - ~ () ~ , ~~~~~~~I ~ ~ o::t ~kzt OoA-u- j t?~/~~I f4~~~~ .I ~~, . ~~j... I (:J30b <I- ? /Ll-4 ~ ~ I ':J...&i705 6Jr6ac:l Rd I ! ~~C~ L.fJf d-i'Cc.} I Rf;, ~-Q ~ h-.e tc2fJ ~ ~~ \.. ~~~.~ .. . \\.;1.. t ~5 up L 0 ~ ~ - VVYI-tt 'to -the- ~ try Dr Xlftt11 {hi W,661 tt;l'/-riG-$-ShoYI.WDDe4 -rl>d"}-y ! ~H..'I'U ~~~_~ t-" ~ -- ''''''~-['-].. . ,'~"I'" ..~~ .7:"(jij. iii"jiii'il':!iiViFJ:":~:'-~'_-LUIL..L-.L.~'--~. .~:; '6."" i 7;,.' ~:-:. :E: ~~ / I 4.g:t -'-"1 ' ; : . 'fi.) . -:\ .. .. ."il.i--' ":t-n~tt. I' I i '- Iqq.!" . _.I~... . .0'. 00'0'_',' ;l:: .: e! .' ":: f ~! ~:! ; ,,, (0 ~ i I' 'w, ~ r "" :~ . _ ~ ~ ...;. ~ ~ 1- ~.-, -I ~ ~ ,:': ~ ~ ~~ I::; i ;' _, _ OO~,(; lW .~ -h ~ :~tl: \ ~~l I i i~ ~:!"e ~=I.€ \ J "'i~ ':~ ' l..--- ,.a-. \~ -----1'" . ... ., l' ; \'.- fa - - _ _ _ I' ut .. .. '<!'~' "'. . ..;; '. -----c----------. _ Inn_~=..____ .. --.. _ '0.. %~, i! :....__..1:......_. -! ~:\~f""--"~ -' DD 'IV-/.. ttn+ +hL- titS i ~ !;I~'rg .. ~..i .... ]-11"'---.1. j I : ';C"f . ~..-- .:-~F .~ ~ ~ij ~ -1/.,.--/)f,t.,Y.. W~~I'\.,{S"_' .'~ .!/., .:.;.::.... .~- elt-VlIl ~,t"l? II .. 1M 'CJ' " -R ' · ';l U ~.f~' ".. - - ell '. ~A" .~ " f'" "- ": ~.,- - ~ " 1'.. .. )~.l,.. -110 i ..!: ~\.;~: I!J:'" ~ . 0 ....--.,-"'--- <c"t-- ~: ~ .....~ :;;:11 -' ~ _.---....--161- I ! & ...~ ; , . ; ~'f . . .. \' . ~ t r _" M_'~ _ _ "'" 'N ~~ ,\lit ~ ,..J_._ ~ ~ 4 .~ - f .- ~ u .Ue" ~ f"o a.. ~.trc:\f\'~ .~ j1 ~ .... ,... , ~ ~ ~....~ .~ "1S.~ \,,) ~ 4Ill~ :! ~ t7~ ,- Is )I: .~ . ..' ~~ ~ s:.~ ~ . j .' . iC- ~ "- . 'Cillo ;1 . I: I: i Q .,.....~ '2Il. V\ ... ~ ~ ~ovcL ~ A- ~ d ~~cz>cL:r.. /X)~ WLL- -1'0 ~L ~ +0 JULp ~ l ~ pvt ~ c:.~ ~ LA- .~~ frn-- +hL- L ~~I orb ~ toiAA-/VV+- . t>vv1 ~~~~ _~~.~ ~J~C1.TiYYt tM-uL. Los~ 0VV1 Wd~. ~ <Iv ~ d ~, w-c- ~+o .5k-c~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (Z.~-l--- -fu.v- · iO~ 4- L~-1b ~~ cl- ~ c..fM;D ~. /1-:, of f'Ol-V ct- L-S ~~~ +0 Loe-L ~ ~p~-~ ~~ ~ o+kv\ - f\o+h~ ~ . . · :P YYY\ a.)fl D ~ ~OY' ~-fo~ L0~ LD +~Le.... . W.L- ~ '-0 ~U- #-e.- t~cLs ~ ('F. -fOL ~ ~ ciS ~~y wv02-. ~ ~J 7- 'rYY\ AMD ~ ~ 5~ ~ -)-0 CM:VJ~. UJ-C-~-f ~J, ~ ~~ --10 yVl~oJ.A~ ~+ ~ cJ1-V\ ~ lr-v0L-d2 ~O./ ) t-~.:r- ~ w~ 0W1 -f~ -jC> ^f u...p m- ~ ~.~ u...>~ ~ ~ ~r~'~':C ~ ~-L~ c;v.-L , q 5M~ p--vr .. . tk- ~-e/1 ~ i..6 ~~ ~.:c cJ~ ~.~0W1 -+-~~ '10j VLf ck..L -b &L.- ~ t..-U"d--eA ~ ~ ~ ~ . r ~ ~ d-s -f!-aA/L +0 ~~ +0 ~Md-~/OL z.o-n~ ~ L0~ ~~WaA . ~ VO~ IA- ~~~ ~ vr &nJ-cL 10 10 ~ ~ k-v1 ~ 4-~ f\D ~~ t)h ~ ~ S}8S ~~~ r.:; j'JL - it \cpL \_'J MEMO TO: Shorewood City Council Members and Planning Commission Members SUBJECT: Lundgren Bros. Inc. Proposed Plan FROM: Richard and Lorraine Moore 5905 Cathcart Drive Shorewood, MN 55331 DATE: July 5, 1994 This memo's purpose is to place in writing our opposition to the 4ItLundgren1s proposal to change the designated land use for the 26550-27000 Smithtown Road properties to one to two units per acre. vIe oppose the change in designated land use from zero to one unit per acre to one to two units per acre for the following reasons: 4It - The value of this area to the present owners who chose to live here because of the controlled density of population (one unit per acre) would be greatly depreciated. - Cathcart as the primary access between Highway #7 and Smithtown Road is already a racetrack thouroughfare; dangerous to all current residents but especially children. Given the fact that there are miminally 2 cars per household, adding 40 houses to this location would cause severe safety problems given the traffic increase. It is a limited vision to impose 40 additional houses on the current marshland; severely impacting the waterlevel, wildlife, etc. when indeed citizens are working toward protecting our environment. - It recently cost Shorewood tax payers dearly to update ~nd expand out schools. Why would the City Council purposely choose to bring about more problems by increasing the residential land density at this point in time. Signature: ~L.:0Lt:l.. - Date: ? 11~ Signature~ ~ 1~ate: 7~jqV 7/r-/7Y . . 26665 Edgewood Rd. Shorewood, Mn. 55331 July 11, 1994 The Honorable Mayor Barb Brancel City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Mn. 55331 Dear Mayor Brancel: You and I met at a clergy meeting in March at St. John's Church in Excelsior. I understood you to say, in the course of. the conversation, the last (final) development in .Shorewood was underway at the end of Nobel Road. Since then I have seen two more. On Howard's Point Road and on Smithtown Road. I am writing to express my great concern for this tremendous transformation of;these last bits of open land to more high priced, poorly built, trendy, look alike developments. Specifically: I am concerned with the increase in traffic, the wear and tear and additional cost for repairs on local streets. I am concerned with the over-priced nature of these homes which assume people can afford long term, high mortgages and taxes-- which, in today's economy, is a risky assumption. I am concerned with the notion that more development. means more tax revenue for the city when it seems obvious that there will be a much greater demand for city services (police, fire, snow removal and school systems). I am concerned with the abuse of land: initial grading which demolishes original topographic characteristics, squeezing the wet lands even more than they are now, obliterating open spaces for future generations, and crowding more houses into the areas than existing code permits. I strongly urge you to use your influence to curtail the Heritage development and cancel the development off Smithtown. Thank you. Sincerely, /'j \ (// ~. /~~ ~. l-/-lxt """' ~ U \ ) Ross W. Putnam JUL I 3 1,-..-. :~~~ . . .. . \IiI [5 . ~e-Q~~~~~ -tL~ ..~~-I:i~ ~ -tL. Lu~. UJ.L ~ a.L.c, ~ ~ ! . ~ ~ ;}f:L ~~j ~~~--.Q~~I ~ ~~~ ~ i ~ LJ~~~. . . ~ i ---0 4~. ~ I $'7 S- cJ . ~. S S- ~~I . De<l'0 Gl~, 'IY \.... c\eo;o ty 'J i..,..,' I \" .~\ \ '\ \ ./""'\\ (''''fl. + a LAt (~$'\-.. \,,' J.-, ,. ,_ 0~ tnY~(,R.)'Qrd a~ ffifJ, '."1'. f\A.,..... '(". '"'\. I..\-....,~.\ l\... \ .r'p\ Q 'J ~ ".' : ~ 1'1 V/ d bfJ ,3, GI \n\frH:~'1 . \AS '\ 'wo$, \~ ' \ I \ 'TIt 1"t't'--'j ......, "1 '. \ . . f' .1. - c'~,_ j'!.;-SJ'" ':-'\ ! ,""$). '. ..~. '. ' Jl -"!'.' !, .. 1 l " ''''-':''. '-'\ 'f,\. Y \....r ,\ ~ cJ'\\<eS ~ f-V'\.: \\ ~6 1'.) tJ' <" . o ........ ';\"'\;""'0...\\"\-\.. '\ \ \ .. ,... .. t . -\ ~ . \ , " ; "<:,-, l '"," s\ncef'~\'f / \\O\,\\$).'\\ \j$.~~E:J :? _I ctr; ~ /)r. S7.;;-S br~I7-Tn J '-- . If~ NIl dtt1'v ~ ?n flL (lJ1/'P/!IL- JLtm t1;~/h'1J 10 flff7M4- ~ I ~ltl- CI1U!tlnU ~>>t1-1 ku~ 5: ! fL11JSfJltv ~~ ~ /u1S/~ ~ (ibJ] tuie l ~d ~ {j Vie dt~+ (lktUV 'ttu-. vJ 11( tMi5 ~+ aM ~-I-I-u ~ (+{.jUh'V R l fplaM 3 ! ~ ~/,~ t1l-eit:ll/luJ<In-n~f y bell e,1J-e/ ~ t h f 5f"- bu 5,/ ~ ~hvri ~ 1JV"-Ut1?L IY- /~5f>;/,-,rlt, 01~$w6'\ ~ Mt.L It !V4J '/td- 6Q ~/t~ 7)J. \ wt\ i c~ Lu~j.- ~TU' .,!, II \ .J . . tll 0- ~/~ ':h)S/~! J M~ ~-r ~Yf t/h ItJ1~')UJA'thA- ~ fl tW~A[i-1U-- . Jv !~ Y6-d- fJ~1~ tW vt ~dL~~t ~y~ I MvVcr 1;vCrJ1;..trt fx QI\}\ WI ; ciA~. I X l1J'da(iOlhllirm~ ~ ~ ~+ed/1~l /;V"J'ultt ex- Itw itut ~~~. Q tin ttu"- tn'vU~ ~ ruff' 1M141'~ Jlfd nt Stn/~~'vG r/7 dil' (L- /.M-l ;f/h ~ ~ s~, , P~d/JL- wrrt\ Ch/Ji'~ +t1l'S / ~ ~+ b1V1JI/Hi y.,.v-Jrd I S S;~<L ) ~ u ~U I-?J tifl'h Po 'to- hI<;/' 6 o~/ ~SR- ("- teftL &J~ , );'~ c ~i, bt- <) tP-- ,/r:s- lJm<.,f" 'dqe /)r. J t . . . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT AFPROV AL FOR MANITOU WOODS WHEREAS, Abingdon Development Corp. (Applicant) has an interest in certain land within the City of Shorewood and has applied to the Council for preliminary approval of a plat to be known as Manitou W 0<Xis; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request has been reviewed by the City Planner and his recommendations have been duly set forth in Memoranda to the Planning Commission, dated 27 July 1994 and 30 March 1995, which Memorandum is on fIle at City Hall; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held by the Shorewood Planning Commission on 2 August 1994, for which notice was duly published and all adjacent property owners duly notified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Applicant's request for preliminary plat approval of Manitou Woods is hereby approved. 2. That such approval is subject to the recommendations set forth in the City Planner's . Memoranda, dated and the tenns and conditions contained in the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of 4 April 1995 on fIle at City Hall. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCil.. OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of April, 1995. ATTEST: Robert B. Bean, Mayor /' James C. Hurm, City Administrator/Clerk 5.F ,. - .-. MAYOR Robert Bean COUNCIL Krisli Slover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM . TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Fll..E NO;: Planning Coriunission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 30 March 1995 Manitou Woods - Preliminary Plat 405 (94.16) . Abingdon's proposal to build two twinhomes at 5580 County Road 19 had received positive recommendations from the Planning Commission and City staff before it was suspended by the development moratorium. Based upon the recommendations of the 27 July 1994 staff report, the proposal is still consistent with City requirements. The Comprehensive Plan Update impacts the proposal in two ways: 1) tree preservationl reforestation; and 2) City water requirements. 1 . Tree Preservation and Reforestation. It is suggested that tree removal be limited to only those which are minimally necessary to accommodate the proposed buildings, parking area and pond. In this regard, construction fencing should be required to be placed no further than 10 feet from the proposed building pads and around the pond, as illustrated on Exhibit A: As part of the fmal plat for this project, the developer should be required to provide a landscape plan showing foundation planting for the units and screening along County Road 19. 2. City Water. The preliminary plat proposes that the twinhomes will be connected to the Tonka Bay water system. The Comprehensive Plan Update requires new development to be connected to Shorewood's system where feasible. Although Shorewood has no immediate plans to extend water along County Road 19, this is an area which will be considered in the very near future, due to the number of potential users on this segment of the system. What has been suggested for new development where water is not available is the following: a. The developer pays a $5000 per unit trunk charge at the time of final plat approval. b. Internal water main is installed with the development of the site. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore IFs: 1:1 . . RE: Manitou Woods Preliminary Plat 30 March 1995 c. A development agreement and restrictive covenant are recorded against the property stating that connection to the system and a $5000 connection fee will be required at . such time as the City makes water available to the site. In view of this recommendation, the developer may wish to consider providing a private common well for the twinhomes rather than extension of the Tonka Bay system. cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Chuck Dillerud -2- - '"" .:. \ \ \ ( I \L \ \ \ , r\ Exhibit A PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION LIMITS za lO 0 I :II) .&0 ~ 004 ......... ,... -, . MAYOR Barb Brancel COUNCI L Kristi Stover Rob Daugherty Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM . TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO.: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 27 July1994 Manitou Woods - Preliminary Plat 405 (94.16) BACKGROUND . Abingdon Development Corp. proposes to subdivide the property at 5580 County Road 19 (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached) intotwo, two-family residential lots (two base lots, four unit lots). Exhibits Band C show their proposed preliminary plat and grading and utility plans, respectively. The property is zoned R-C, Residential-Commercial and contains approximately 44,115 square feet of area. Surrounding land use and zoning are as follows: North - multiple-family residential; zoned P.U.D; East - NSP and commercial; zoned commercial South - vacant; zoned commercial West - multiple-family residential; zoned R-C Although all four unit lots front on a public street, the applicant proposes to access them with a single access road. Based upon Exhibit C, it is their intent to connect to the Tonka Bay water system. ~ ANAL YSISIRECOMMENDATION A. Zoning. The R-C district allows two-family dwellings as permitted uses. The plat as proposed complies with lot area, width and setback requirements prescribed by the R-C district. The plat also complies with the special provisions contained in 1201.03 Subd. 16 relative to the subdivision of two-family lots. B. Subdivision Requirements. 1. Access. As mentioned, the four units will be accessed by a shared internal circulation system with one curb cut on County Road 19. Limiting direct property access on County Road 19 has been strongly advocated in the past. The access drive will A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore #-0: ):2 Re: Manitou Woods Preliminary Plat 27 July 1994 require an entrance permit from Hennepin County. Presumably, considering the proposed seven-foot r.o.w. dedication for Co. Rd. 19, the applicant has been in touch with the County. The turnaround at the south end of the access drive is considered too short for emergency vehicles to maneuver in. Also, inadequate room exists between Lots 2 and 3 for cars to back out without backing into their neighbor's driveway. Although the applicant's plans technically comply with parking requirements, it should be noted that little room exists for any guest parking, which could adversely impact circulation within the project. A possible solution to all three of these problems is shown on Exhibit D. . 2. Utilities. Sanitary sewer is available and adequate to serve the development. The applicant proposes to obtain city water from Tonka Bay. Both utilities, however, are located on the east side of County Road 19. Consequently, County approval will be required for the extensions. Stormwater runoff in the vicinity of this project is a very sensitive issue due to past drainage problems. The applicant proposes to construct a small retention pond on the west side of the site. As part of the final plat, the applicant must provide detailed runoff calculations for review by the City Engineer and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The [mal plat must include drainage and utility easements as necessary for proposed utilities and 10 feet along each side of side and rear lot lines (base lots only). Upon approval of a final plat the developer must pay $4000 ($1000 per unit) for local sanitary sewer access. . C. Cross-Easements/Maintenance Agreement. It is not known as of this writing whether the applicant proposes to establish a homeowner's association to control the maintenance of the common drive. At minimum he must provide cross-easements and a maintenance agreement subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. D. Park Dedication. Upon'approval ofa [mal plat, the developer must pay $3000 ($750 per unit) for park dedication fees. , - ,.'-----" As with other applications under review at this time, this proposal may be subject to the development moratorium which has been recommended by the Planning Commission and which will be considered by the City Council on 8 August. Upon direction by the Council, a summary of recommendations contained herein will be provided. . cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Chuck Dillerud -2- 1.9 709. ,"6 9) 1137.75 07.99 : ~ .... : ..:.: : .. ':..: ....:... o. 0 ~ 0 . 0 .... n ;:.~ 1 (7) ~ 182 _' 118. 5 S5 1/8.5 0_, 101.12 100 l,_l 100 , ',J ;; ~ ~ ,; .... .... ~ 17 18 .. 19 ~ ZO ( 25) ( 26) (27) .- /.. ''l 100 .... 21 ~ (213) ~ d\. 22 5i (29) V'l 2"3 ,.; /.....~ .... ':'- (31) TRACT A l1A:) ~ PAR lOT "t AP- ~. 24 s ... o ~ I :! r~ ... t:i .'" "" ..............23 921 .. '5L'bj~t ?~rr~ - - ----~--- ::""'2 I I'.:: 2.a; , 26 ( 12) .:.: ~< ". 1'::~:~44. 22.... : 35 R : : 1- : · , : ~~~ (IO)! i : I : , : 2S : __1~------ ~fi..-'-CI, ',' (8) 1..---00- ,~Ioo ~ . - \ . /'''. t. , . t I -.. 1.~.1 /' . 1-. - ~. I! .;..~: -' .~..~. : : ,/:,:', .... : I' ,. ",.; .; :.. p:.{/ I I '0'; .... I '/ I (6)" 1- ~ I o".t::': ' :!>O(9)~ : _.~'O , ': ::.. .: t __._ : I L_ : ',.,: ' ~ (29) ~ ~~ . I (I'. ~ ~ j'~ .' ~'~~~. ~\tl;" .-rnuJM.- -=-- li.[L- 105' '334~..,,",I\fIl.'\'1'1"1':.Ill~ · ,. ~;::-""';'-l"'~ - . ~:~ :'45. 5 , 22' 6R 6 R ./" /I...i ~ (4Z-) 8 '.:"'Jj.~ ( 19) ( 18) c:: ~ 23 (3) 24 (7) (40) -. -' (4) ;.18.01 :"79. 57 :'3:1.07 :, r .' 10 Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Manitou Woods - Preliminary Plat JI !li/ill"i I i Ii d; J i~ i J HHll_ a ~ ~IIJfI! ~ j IHij.i ~ 111111" ~.~ .. 1 ~ II ~ ~ 5 0- t IHull ~ / \ . ~ . ,if-- ~\\\O\J ~~\~ ~ ~O~\) --------- ---- ~ I~t.. ~_ 11>\11,.1 (..loe:-1' # ,.0. +~~ -cP'D fl...., ...:&"\,v " ' fife. ,~~ ,:l-..,.'Pc....~~ ",'J. c..~'~ oP].'~ ... " oJ .. ~ / / / / / ( I lis <0 I ills I g: I ". 'i" I .i I 5i L____ .. ~ ~ ~ 'Z --- I / \1 / .../' ( I I I I y... I I 1 C I I I I I I .. 1 ... I 11 ~ 1 ~ I ~ I lis ~ lis I 1 2 lis z 'lis z I "tl!l "t.. I I ;:"' ~~ I I ;: · si f i · I .. I I: I: I ~. I I i I L -;,.,- r - - - ~ - -.J ~ ('II oo.~.. ....... or,"'t'Z _.O(,"ZI..,.. ...... ~J :-l-1 ~ '~(J 1. : N ~ ~; Co'" ii &~ Ii u n Ii Ii u U ~E U Ii Ii 00>'5 ---- ! ..,.; \41'- e. b':p>.~_, -- /-1 .......-/ I / I I 01 \., : lis I hi I o~ ~.. ~~ I ~ . I I: I --__-.I ... ~ ~ ~ '" I ,. ~~ ~~ III III III 88 "!Us ~~ :!<<!..N" ;;~~ .. n~9lil ~i~~9 Uili -1 .lI ~ ;.) ;.1 .... Ol'~ i i J f i~ I ~~~ Ii: '" 0 ~~~Ii:-: Ou)~UI~ ; i i~i ~ 9 r~i ') ~ ~ il 'Z : . (j -, 4. ~ Q 3 :ri -;:" (j, . , I I ..J :::. ~! Exhibit B PRELIMINARY PLAT . . . . \. ,/" / / I ( { \ ~ -~ '~- a li : t o ~ II II \ \ \ , -- ....U==-:====-=- --- 1 .... .1 .~ - ___ OSt. -_ ____ -- - .............. Exhibit C PRELIMINARY GRADING AND UTILITY PLAN " ~ \ .. r . , I ;\ / Exhibit D ALTERNATIVE CIRCULATIONIP ARKING 2D 10 0 2D ' .to ~ "" F.I!." ~.... . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROV AI... FOR SMITHTOWN N1EADOWS WHEREAS, Abingdon Development Corp. (Applicant) has an interest in certain land within the City of Shorewood and has applied to the Council for preliminary plat approval of a plat to be known as Smithtown Meadows;. and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request has been reviewed by the City Planner and his recommendations have been duly set forth in Memoranda to the Planning Commission, dated 30 June 1994 and 30 March 1995, which Memoranda are on fIle at City Hall; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request has been reviewed by the City Engineer and his recommendations have been duly set forth in a letter to the City Planner, dated 27 June 1994, which letter is on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held by the Shorewood Planning Commission on 5 July 1994, for which notice was duly published and all adjacent property owners du1y notified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1 . That the Applicant's request for preliminary plat approval of Smithtown Meadows is hereby approved. 2 . That such approval is subject to the recommendations set forth in the City Planner's Memoranda, dated 30 June 1994 and 30 March 1995, the recommendations set forth in the City Engineer's letter, dated 27 June 1994, and the terms and conditions contained in the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of 4 April 1995 on fIle at City Hall. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of April, 1995. ATTEST: Robert B. Bean, Mayor James C. Hurm, City Administrator/Clerk 5.&~ . . t MAYOR Robert Bean COUNCIL Kristi Slover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Fll..ENO.: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 30 March 1995 Smithtown Meadows - Revised Preliminary Plat 405 (94.11) Abingdon's seven-lot plat was suspended by the development moratorium last fall. Since then the City approved a plat (see Jaeger Addition) which divided off the two lots with existing homes on them. A revised plat showing the remaining five lots has now been submitted (see Exhibit A, attached). ANAL YSISIRECOMMENDATION The revised plat is identical to the layout for which approval was recommended in our 30 June 1994 staff report. Consequently the recommendations of that report (see Exhibit B) are the same, except as follows: 1. The right-of-way issue has been resolved with Hennepin County. The"developer still - needs to obtain approval from Hennepin County for the grade crossing which aligns the new street with Eureka Road to the north. A letter, shown as Exhibit C, has been sent to the Railroad Authority, supporting this alignment for safety re(isons. 2. The proposed street name has been changed from Eureka Way to Smithtown Way. 3. The developer has provided evidence that an old Bell Telephone easement on the east end of the property has been abandoned (see Exhibit D). The Comprehensive Plan Update impacts the proposed plat as follows: a. Tree PreservationlLandscaping. Very few trees exist on the site with the exception of a row of evergreen trees along the very north edge of the property and scattered deciduous trees on the north side of Lots 1 and 2. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore *s: G./ \ Re: Smithtown Meadows Revised Preliminary Plat 30 March 1995 . Based upon the proposed grading plan for the project, there appears to be no reason to disturb trees on Lots 1 and 2. Nevertheless, these trees should be identified as part of the fmal plat submission and protected during construction. The row of evergreen trees will likely be lost to road construction. A large tree which appears to be in the proposed street r.o. w. may also be at risk. The evergreens, although in poor condition and sparse, do provide some screening along the railroad r.o.w. The developer expressed some willingness to replant trees along the new road to provide future screening for his property as well as the home located to the north of his site. ! At the time the fmal plat is submitted, the developer should be required to submit a landscape plan showing how and which trees will be protected, and the size, species and location of proposed trees. City Water. The City Council has directed that all new development be connected to City water where feasible. Shorewood has water main nearby in Freeman Park. Staff is also exploring the possibility of extending water main along Smithtown Road. Assuming the site can be served, each lot will be required to pay a $10,000 trunklavailability fee. The . developer should include internal water mains within his plat as part of his utility plans. He should also indicate whether he will petition the City to install the improvements. Subject to the original recommendations and those contained herein, it is suggested that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the preliminary plat be approved. b. cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Chuck Dillerud . :fi - 2- /. ! <",\)~j It " t- ~ v' , <-:.....?" :/ ' t-;.v' ' -'~'I: ..{,-:,~J' :/ -/ <_v' " ~ ' , ,,' ~ .......~" / . (')'".J>. I ,<." ,,' ..~'~' ~ I )> /1 / I ~f) <.:::1' -~ --I -.- ~ . "y~ " (/A <.I ,1 ,,' f'"' ...J .<-~ ,,}~j~'~/ / ", /. ~ .~~,.~ ~ ~ ;/ '-- , , , \.t , \..'f" . I 'I '-... t. '.' I . " I 'Ii ,.. ,.. , ----- (") \) ,.. l~ ,,) -- 58~o Ab ., 148 ,qq 4~ W .... le.S.Q& \./ Re: Smithtown Meadows Preliminary Plat 30 June 1994 The final plat must include drainage and utility easements, 10 feet on each side of rear and side lot lines. The developer must convince Northwestern Bell to vacate an existing telephone easement which cuts through Lots 2, 3 and 4. 3. Park Dedication. At the time of final plat, the developer must pay park dedication fees for five lots. Credit is given for the two lots with the houses on them. REC01vfMENDATION Based upon the preceding, it is recommended that the preliminary plat be approved subject . to the following: a. The developer must obtain approval for the street grade crossing from the H. C.R.R.A. b. The existing driveway encroachment is to be eliminated. c. The proposed street name must be changed (Eureka Way is already in use). d. Grading, drainage and utilities are subject to the recommendations of the City Engineer. . e. As part of final plat the developer must pay $3750 in park dedication fees and $5000 in local sanitary sewer access charges. Credit has been given for the two existing homes. f. The developer must provide for access to Lot 6 during construction of the street and utilities. g. The final plat must include drainage and utility .easements, 10 feet on each side of all side and rear lot lines. . . h. The developer must provide evidence that the telephone company has abandoned their easement acros~ the property. 1. The final pI3.t, including mylars, must be submitted within six months of Council approval of the preliminary plat. cc: Jim Burro Joel Dresel Tim Keane Chuck Dillerud - 3 - Exhibit B PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS From 30 June 1994 staff report J FILE eel COUNCI L Kristi Stover Rotl DaughertY Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 9 September 1994 . Mr. Ken Stevens Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority Hennepin County Government Center 600 South 6th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: Srmthtown Meaaows - Proposed Grade Crossing of H.C.R.R.A. R.O.W. .~-- --'" Dear Mr. Stevcns:---- . This is to document our conversation last week regarding the preliminary plat for Smithtown Meadows. The developer, Abingdon Development, proposes to cross your right-of-way, aligning their proposed street with the northerly portion of Eureka Road. While the City of Shorewood understands the Railroad Authority's interest in minimi'7.ing grade crossings or encroachment onto its r.o.w., Shorewood feels that it is in the public interest for the new street to align with Eureka Road The alternative is to have the intersection of. Eureka Road and Smithtown Road on one side of your r.o. w. and the intersection of the new street and Smithtown Road on the other side of your r.o.w. This proximity of two intersections.with a regional trail (current use) or a light rail line (future use) between them clearly poses a safety hazard. The plan presented to- you by Abingdon is the developer's response to a recommendation by Shorewood staff. We ask, therefore, that the plan be favorably considered by the H. C.R.R.A staff and the County Board. It is my understanding that this matter will be . co~idered by the Board on 16 September. Please refer this letter to them for - consideration. As I mentioned in our telephone conversation, if your staff have any suggestions as to how the safety of the intersection can be improved, the City can include them in the conditions of approval for the plat Thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, k OF SHOREWJ9P . /J ) ,~t,~ Ii Bradley ~en Planning.nirector cc: Chuck Dillerode I /1..1. I' ~,^....: \ A Residential Communit'1 on Lake M Exhibit C LETTER FROM SHOREWOOD TO H.C.R.R.A. Supporting grade crossing for new street . L AUG-25-94 THU 13:29 ...---==-.- P.03 RELEASE OF DSEMEN".J: W-132 /d 1-;...9'1 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT WHEREAS TJ S WEST COHKUNICATIONS, INC., a Colorado corporation (hereinafter referred to as U S WEST), successor in interest to Northwestern Bell Telephone Company, successor in interest to the Northwestern Telephone Exchange company, is the owner of a certain easement affecting and encumbering property in Henne1;)in CQunty, Hinnesota, described. as follows: . Lot :I., Townsite of Eureka; also, the Soutbeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SE 1/4 of NE 1/4) J.yinq South of railroad: also the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4); also Southeast Quarter of the South_st Quarter (SE .1/4 of SW 1/4) lying South of railroad; all in Section 32, T-ll7N, R-23W; part of said property is now platted as Shorewood oakS, Minnewashta, and Lots 64, 98, 99, 100, 101, 105 and 106, Auditor's Subdivision No. 133. Which said easement was qranted to the Northwestern Telephone Exchange Company by a Final Certificate dated ~, 1898 and recorded ~, 1898, in the office of the Countv Recorder in and for I'l~~nin county, Minnesota in Book ~ of Miscellaneous, Page ;uz. as DocU1llen1;. No. 278545. WHEREAS, TJ S WEST desires to release ana abandon said easement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the SU1II of one Dollar and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency whereof is herel:Jy acknowledged, the said U S WES'I' does herel:ly quitclaim, release and a.bandon the al:Iove described eat;8J11ent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said 0 S WEST has caU}ld this instrument to l:Ie duly executed as of the / V dayof M-? 19~. U S WES'l' COMHUNI~ONS, INC. . BY: 9.R~ Its: Assistant ~eneral Manaaer - InfrastrUCture Exhibit D RELEASE OF EASEMENT From U.S. West to Abingdon ..........-.- ..-.-...-- -.... .....-.......... ...... ......-..... -------- ---------- . ,tI /' MAYOR Barb Brancel COUNCI L Kristi Stover Rob Daugherty Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331.8927 · (612) 474.3236 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen . DATE: 30 June 1994 RE: Smithtown Meadows - Preliminary Plat FILE NO.: 405 (94.11) BACKGROUND . Mr. Chuck Dillerud, representing Abingdon Development Corp., has submitted a preliminary plat for approximately 4.7 acres of land located south of the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority property and east of Eureka Way (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). The developer proposes..to subdivide the property into seven lots as shown on Exhibit B. The site consists of two parcels of land, occupied by two single-family dwellings, zoned R-1C, Single-Family Residential. Surrounding land use and zoning are as follows: North - H.C.R.R.A. r.o.w. and single-family residential; zoned R-1A and R-IC East, South and West - Single-family residential; zoned R-1C The two existing homes are located on proposed Lots 6 and 7. The one on Lot 7 will be replaced with a new home. . ISSUES AND ANALYSIS The developer's plat is based upon a resubdivision sketch prepared when the property to the north was subdivided from the subject site several years ago. Following is how the plat complies with Shorewood's zoning and subdivision requirements: A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore #-6:S.2. . . Re: Smithtown Meadows Preliminary Plat 30 June 1994 A. Zoning. The plat meets or exceeds all lot area, width and depth requirements for the R-1C district. The minimum lot area is 20,000 square feet, and the lots average 22,700 square feet. Building setbacks (front-35', side-tO' and rear-40') have been shown on the preliminary' plat. All lots have ample buildable area. B. Subdivision. 1. Proposed street. The plat is served by a cul-de-sac street approximately 880 feet long. One of the most significant issues associated with this plat is the intersection of the new street with Smithtown Road (see Grading Plan - Exhibit C, attached). The proposed 50-foot right-of-way reduces down to 25 feet approximately 40 feet south of Smithtown Road. The developer proposes to bend the street to the north to align with Eureka Road, creating a four-way, 90-degree intersection. This crossing of the H.C.R.R.A. r.o.w. requires approval by Hennepin County. According to the developer they are willing to grant such approval, but details have yet to be completed. The proposed street will replace the common driveway located within the proposed r.o.w. The driveway serving the house on Lot 6 currently encroaches on the property to the north of the plat. The new street will eliminate _this nonconformity. The lot in question will be brought into conformity by now having frontage on a public street. The property owners to the south have inquired about extending the street to serve their property. This was considered when the subject property was subdivided initially. It was determined that the cul-de-sac was as long as it should be, and that the property to the south should be served with a street connecting to Eureka Road to the west. 2. Grading, Drainage and Utilities. The plat is served by sanitary sewer, but city water is unavailable at present. Lots will be served by private wells. Neighbors to the north and south of the plat have expressed concerns about drainage. Apparently the driveway which was built to serve the existing house (Lot 6) traps water on Lot 1 and the property to the north. This issue has been specifically addressed by the City Engineer under separate cover. - 2 - , Re: Smithtown Meadows Preliminary Plat 30 June 1994 The final plat must include drainage and utility easements, 10 feet on each side of rear and side lot lines. The developer must convince Northwestern Bell to vacate an existing telephone easement which cuts through Lots 2, 3 and 4. 3. Park Dedication. At the time of fmal plat, the developer must pay park dedication fees for five lots. Credit is given for the two lots with the houses on them. RECOMMENDATION . Based upon the preceding, it is recommended that the preliminary plat be approved subject to the following: a. The developer must obtain approval for the street grade crossing from the H.C.R.R.A. b. The existing driveway encroachment is to be eliminated. c. The proposed street name must be changed (Eureka Way is already in use). d. Grading, drainage and utilities are subject to the recommendations of the City Engineer. . e. As part of fmal plat the developer must pay $3750 in park dedication fees and $5000 in local sanitary sewer access charges. Credit has been given for the two existing homes. f. The developer must provide for access to Lot 6 during construction of the street and utilities. g.. The final plat must include drainage and utility easements, 10 feet on each side of all side and rear lot lines. h. The developer must provide evidence that the telephone company has abandoned their easement across the property. 1. The fmal plat, including mylars, must be submitted within six months of Council approval of the preliminary plat. cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Chuck Dillerud - 3 - . \ om) o a 6 1 ~ ~ ( 19) ~ ?O) ~ 1000 252 I 1 6'" 15 f"\ DGS.~ ~~ . ..... ~ - - ~I:L""'C:TI\ -----::::..... 914.4 . . I .... 8.. e ( 2 I) (}4 ) " ,.. n ~_ 10 ( 15) ~ :::: ZZ3 / LOT 12 ( I> - 2 . :ll (35) ~ at' ~ ., 11.79 111.51 :e r, g (36) ~ ~\UJ~ ~~~ ,to I I ,- I I I I I I I I I I I I tioT ~.~ I I I I I I I , I I I , I I I , I I I -II'> ( is) - LOT 91 ( 6) '. /- "H I ("39) \ \ \ \ . . . . . \ \ . \ 93\ . \ \ \ . \ . . (38) 61 (6) (41) 40>. LOT t 12) (I) ( 24) ... ., : (34; "\~ ~ (20) , I I , . . I , I I I I , I I , , I I I I I I , . I , , , . It> N N ~[ , . I I I , I o O' I I ...,.... ( 16) 4 .....- -------------------- "3 __________________________4 ----------------- ------------- ----------------------------- ( 23) f'"~r'A4t\. ~(' \( .. ... ... .,; ~ NORTH Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Smithtown Meadows - Preliminary Plat /' _..~~ .... I I I' ~ 'J,..eJC .' .'~' '- /.. ".- ,; .- ~, !'; ,. (17) (9)~\\~\Q)\f Il . . \ I / '~I'I V' / / ~I I // .a:1 /// Imj y // ---------JA I //;/ -:--~-j \'0-:_ / _. ---- ~s ---___ ------- - ---- --- - llfrnn-olVN -.- /---- /'l ~~....__ ____ -..... ~~ /,./ ' - --- - / / ~ / ~ ~ - - ------------- -- / r / "... . '" / / 7 / -';",,:0 / / / ?' / g-} / / ;0 ~ ~ ~.! / ;. .., ~ / <:l' / ._ / / .~~ / ~ / // "'~ / , ~ / / / / /' // / / / / / / "'" /// / k-~ // / / dl ~ / ~ ./ / ~'f- h t:."'" /'/ '\/ ~ / I ...r1' / t' ..,,,," d<<f / ./"1 ~-<.,. // / ~ <v~,. / / ,,=,'" I n..~'. / / /' "/ "'\ \ .~. / /' / ~~ // / /" I \ ~O / /' \ ~~ // / /' I \ (,0' <3/" ~o / /' , I L.~~' /// ~r:. ~ / // ~ J ~v --. / l // ~~ I ./ "2. / / uJ L I /'~ / : ( ~.~ --.J <0 ~. / / ,'I/' ~ . d" ..f" l>< q, \1)"7' ~ " ~ \~- J: ~~:I:::~.Y.!:.i:'~ ~ !I(,:' ':l )i:YP'1 I.'...".... 1.~..Vi ".' ..: i' .,. .:'1,n I' )" ~IY ~ &- 'n\'II,- .:.\. \~:. ~ ' ,. ....:~ilJL:J:~_ '~r~.~.. ._ - .-... ~ . , /; IR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 133 {l, ~ I 5 :I L_ -1 w ~ w ... ~ort h ~ +0 ~~(L- ~ ;: c( [ti I ~: .r- I ~ r ?o - -r - \ 20,200 S.F. ,22,300 S. ~, \ .P~ ~~ < ~ N e,,,,,o4-e,'4~"E. "!. b4.. oe, w z o ~ /' ~~"'.1.. \ <;''b'O' c;<"'"1-"'''W M M ,... . 0 Z uJ Z 0 v @ ..DO ..D . .0 "5 II' - V . ~ r(I 0 \I) en en a: g I C 40 ::>> c( '... o (II j W CD Z 7 2 I 22,,900 S.F. ",,,,' "" " 6 n.c.p/ ,...' -- 31,300 S.F. r~ 14~ L5 I I b'b.I,- "-I ~. 4.1.. . ., . ,,-, \V - - .-.. .. ....--...-...----....--.....-.-.----- .-........,.....,........~..-.--......1 . .. - ~ ............. - ... . .......... ........-......-........ ......-- 1 L I _......_._...___ Exhibit B PRELIMINARY PLAT Smithtown Meadows . . \ , --... - -- ----- ,-- _ ",,10 -- --- -- (- /'" --- _/ \ I - pao"olol!!.O ~ ~~ ~e.lZ.. . t-JOfZ- -r l4- - };;..\ ed.. to-~ ~ \(., /1 A I / I' '\ ,/ , .' ;/ i I \ -4 M M .- o z z o iQ > 5 m ::) en VJ Q: g c ::) <( -- ~r....,.. ta r... ., (." ...t.\MI:........' .-.rw.. ,"...--..----.. Exhibit C .-__L. PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN JUl'!-c.v;;v"t l"ILU iv' i i , . . ,. Dear Shorewood Property Owner: ~ ...' , ' ,.... .:Ij. You have recently ni.:, ~ivij a Legal Notice from the City of Shorewood announcing a Public Hearin~. ~::o b(~held July 5 regarding a "Pre1imiruuy Plat" for a site south of Smithtown Road aiid. adj::icent to the Hennepin County Regional Trail. You received that Notice because Hennepin County Tax Records show you to be the Owner of Record of property within 500 feet of the site under consideration. The Legal Notices sent out by the City are necessarily brief. It is the purpose of this letter and enclosures to more fully acquaint you with the ."Smithtown Meadows" development that will be the subject of the Hearing July 5; and to acquaint you v.;th Abingdon Development Corporation (the developer) and Tony Eiden Company (the builder). I have enclosed a reduced copy of the proposed plat of Smithtown Meadows. As you can see the plat includes the property fonnerly owned by the Jones family (including the relatively new 2 story home), as well as the property on which the Tessier house is located. Both houses are noW vacant. It is our intention to resell the former Jones house and demolish the Tessier hou~e, As a result 6 new homes will be constructed, and one existing home will remain. The plat design very closely reflects a sketch plan for the site filed with the City of Shorewood in the mid 1980' s. That design then and now meets all City requirements for lot area and dimensions. The roadway running south from Smithtown Road and parallel to the trail will be a public street constructed to Shorewood specifications and permanently maintained by the City. The intersection with SmithtO\vn Road will be squared off and cleaned up per the drawing. Tony Eiden Company will be the builder of the homes in Smith town Meadows, We have been a custom home builder in the west suburbs for 17 years. It our intention to introduce a ne\'\" product in Smithtown Meadows. Featuring the expected Tony Eiden Company quality and featUres, these homes ",ill be priced in the $200,000 range. I have enclosed a copy of the Tony Eiden Company Spring Preview brochure, While the homes featured are somewhat larger than those we plan to build in Smithtown Meadows, 1 can assure you the attention to quality and special home features will be the same. Exhibit D DEVELOPER'S LETTER TO RESIDENTS , JUN-29-94 WED 13:12 P.03 . . lfI can answer atrf questions you may have prior to the Hearing please feel free to contact me at 550-7633. Sincerely yours. Tony Eiden Companyl Abingdon Development Cotporation Charles E. Dillerud Director of Land Development CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTlNG PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR S:MITHTOWN WOODS WHEREAS, Clint Carlson and Brian Ohland (Applicants) have an interest in certain lands within the City of Shorewood and have applied to the Council for preliminary plat approval of a plat to be known as Smithtown Woods; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' request has been reviewed by the City Planner and his recommendations have been duly set forth in Memoranda to the Planning Commission, dated 1 September 1994 and 30 March 1995, which Memoranda are on fIle at City Hall; and . WHEREAS, the Applicants' request has been reviewed by the City Engineer and his recommendations have been duly set forth in a letter to the City Planner, dated 29 August 1994, which letter is on fIle at City Hall; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held by the Shorewood Planning Commission on 6 September 1994, for which notice was duly published and all adjacent property owners duly notified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: . 1 . That the Applicants' request for preliminary plat approval of Smithtown Woods is hereby approved. 2. That such approval is subject to the recommendations set forth in the City Planner's Memoranda, dated 1 September 1994 and 30 March 1995, the recommendations set forth in the City Engineer's letter, dated 29 August 1994, and the terms and conditions contained in the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of 4 April 1995 on fIle at City Hall. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of April, 1995. Robert B. Bean, Mayor A1TEST: James C. Hurm, City Administrator/Clerk #5:1-1. .. - ~- MAYOR Robert Bean CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL Kristi Stover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474.3236 MEMORANDUM . TO: FROM: DAlE: RE: FILE NO.: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 30 March 1995 Smithtown Woods - Preliminary Plat 405 (94.21) Clint ICarlson and Brian Ohland's request to plat their properties at 25865 and 25895 Smithtown Roadlinto six single-family lots was suspended last fall by Shorewood's development moratorium. A staff report, dated 1 September 1994, set forth a number of recommendations relative to the prernrmary plat (se Exhibit A). In adcilition to the original recommendation, the Comprehensive Plan Update affects the proposed divis~on as follows: . . City Water. The City Council has directed that all new development be connected to City water where feasible. It appears that water may be able to be extended from the main in Freeman Park, or possibly from an extension along Smithtown Road. The developer should include plans for internal water main within his plat Assuming the City can serve the property with water, a trunk/availability charge of $10,000 for each new lot will be _ required at the time of fmal plat. The existing homes would be charged $5000 each. Staff is exploring the feasibility of allowing a delayed payment of up to three years on the charges for the existing homes. - -- - 2. Tree Preservation/Reforestation. The developers have shown general locations of tree clusters on their preliminary plat (see Exhibit B). There are, however, additional trees on the site which have not been shown on the plans. 1. It is recommended that the developers submit a detailed tree inventory identifying the size, species and condition of all trees over six inches in diameter located on the- site. Based_ upon a proposed grading plan, it will not be necessary to inventory trees in areas which will not be disturbed by grading or utility construction. Those areas will be required to be fenced off prior to commencement of any construction activity. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore #5: #. / . . -. Re: Smithtown Woods Pre~ary Plat 30 March 1995 From this inventory the developer must prepare a reforestation plan showing how larger trees will be preserved in areas which will be disturbed by grading. Given the flatness of the site, it is not anticipated that significant tree loss will occur outside of the street right-of- way. In the next sixty days the City should develop its policy for tree replacement and landscaping. cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Clint Carlson -2- .'. . . As a condition of approval of the plat it is recommended that the existing driveways which access Smithtown Road directly be relocated so as to access the new street . , I RlfCOMMENDATION hus plat would be -~bject to delay if the moratorium which is currently under consideration by tjhe City is adopted. Consequently it is assumed that the Planning Commission will wish to table tjhe application pending the outcome of the moratorium. In the meantime the developer should be qUrected to revise his preliminary plat, showing the change in the north end of the road and the ~ghtened lot line between Lots 1 and 2. i ifJso, the preliminary plat should include a statement that it shows ill existing easements and ~ncroachments on the site. It currently includes a disclaimer for such items. ! ~en a final plat is submitted it should include the following: l. Detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and utility plans and specifications. including i stormwater runoff calculations. . ,.. . ~. Drainage and utility easements 10 feet along each side of each side and rear lot line. 3. Estimates of constrUction costs for streets, grading and utilities. From these estimates a letter of credit or cash security will be required to guarantee completion of the improvements. ~. 51. Mylar originals of the final plat for signamre by the Mayor and City Clerk. An up-to-date (within 30 days) title opinion or title commitment for review by the City Attorney. Watershed District approval. Lot size certification by the applicant's surveyor. 61. 7;. . Re~ Smithtown Woods ~Plat 1 SFptember 1994 - page 3 $ of these items must be provided within six months of preliminary plat approval. Once ~ceived, staff will prepare a standard development agreement for the project Prior to release of tl)e final plat, park dedication fees ($3000) and sewer access charges ($4000) must be paid by the applicant B~:ph cc: i Jim Hurm Tim Keane Joel Dresel Clint Carlson Mark Gronberg Exhibit A RECOMMENDATION FROM 9/1/94 STAFF REPORT ... 'C. . . ! /1 ,/ . ,/ ;...)C., ~ +~ '" ~.? ,I I West /;ne or fhe r SE ~ ..r f/o! Nl;' ..r Sec. 3Z-I/7-23 . . ~ 19'0 " ...--vv.-.... . Soufh /;ne of th1 Sf:)-.. ..r Me Hl ~ "r 5'". 32- ,,7'?3 Exhibit B PRELIMINARY PLAT Recommended revisions shown I~ .. 110 35 I z ^ C;; ... I 0 ITl .. . r ~ en I \A III ~ . .\ __J ( \ \ t, .-J.()! c; \ r~-l l I w I '---- ---..1 _ _ ~t~1/ t"\o~Lllon f\~__. ~ L 20.200__1 __ -' --;.: n _ ' . _ I . -. S<r-~t. I ~ * I I ~ 40 ~ ---_.~- .- ~-.J ~ ./ I ". IJl - 1 I .I .' .' / "", ~ " ./ /./ ~,~ vO "\. ~ ./ / " ./ fbo \ \ ,~ Ov ~ ~~ ~~ / .88' "'30' E \ \ \ LiOAL DESCRIPTION That part of the SOl Township 117. Rans_ follows: Besinnin& the Chiceso. and No' Alnn..polh <<0 SJ;, L. alons .aid Northwe8 the South line of . thence Southwesterl distance of 75 feet dearee. 06 minutes ..id center line i. Sh.dylawn Manor: th interaection with. e.id Southea5t Quar beslnnins: thence S be.innins. .ccordin County. Hinn.eota, ALSO. That part of the SOl 32. Township 117 NOl described 5S follow, of .aid Southe.st Q. tbe West 199 feet 0' thence Bsst slon. .t of_8,. line of the ~ Northe.sterly slons 153 f.et: th~nce del centerline of S~itht to its intersection South to the point r ThIs surve,. sho"s tl de.cribed propertie' improvements or ener Owner.: 'Bri.n J. Ohl.nd 29895 Smithtown Rd. Shorewood, Minn. 55., ClInton A. <<0 Janet'l 202 Penin.ula Rd. MedicIne Lake, Minn , , ....0 o t MAYOR Barb Brancel COUNCIL Kristi Stover Rob Daugherty Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM . To:i FRqM: DAtE: RE:I Fll..~ NO.: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 1 September 1994 Smithtown Woods - Preliminary Plat 405 (94.21) BA~KGROUND .. Mt. Clint Carlson and Mr. Brian Ohland propose.to combine their lots at 25865 and 25895 . S$thtown Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached) and replat the resulting parcel into si~ single-family residential lots (see Exhibit B). The properties are located in the R-l C, Single- Fajrnily Residential zoning district. There are homes on each of the existing parcels. Together th~ parcels tota1169,812 square feet or 3.9 acres. '!'lie proposed lots range'in area from 20,000 to 25,500 square feet and average 21,583 square fe~t.The lots are served by a cul-de-sac street approximately 410 feet long. i AN~ YSISIRECOMMENDATION ~e proposed subdivision has been reviewed based on the requirements of Shorewood's Zoning an~ Subdivision Codes. Following is how the plat conforms to the City's development regulations. I A.i Zoning. The R-IC zoning of the property allows single family residential development on 20,000 square-foot lots. All lots comply with the area, width and setback requirements of the R -1 C district. An existing garage located on proposed Lot 1 will be moved to comply with. setback requirements. B! Subdivision Requirements. . The proposed plat is generally consistent with the requirements of Shorewood's Subdivision Code. 1. Street. The proposed width of the street right-of-way (50') and the diameter of the cul-de-sac (120') comply with City requirements. In a separate report, the City Engineer raises a concern with the angle at which the proposed street intersects Smithtown Road. It is suggested that the north end of the street be turned westward A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore #6: 1/ :2 Re: Smithtown Woods Prel~ary Plat 1 Stjptember 1994 - page 2 . more than what is shown on the preliminary plat, as illustrated on Exhibit C. This will allow the actual paved surface of the street to intersect Smithtown Road at a 90 degree angle. 2. Grading, drainage and utilities. Little is shown on the plat at this time. Given the relatively level terrain on the property, site alteration is expected to be minimal. The fmal plat should include a detailed grading plan showing building pad elevations and proposed building type (e.g. walkout, lookout, split entry, etc.) for each lot. The fmal plat should also include detailed stormwater runoff calculations for the development. It is anticipated that a small ponding area will be required. C General. Design. In an attempt to work around the existing dwellings, all lot areas and widths are very tight. It is recommended that the lot line between Lots 1 and 2 be straightened so as to be perpendicular to the street. It will have to be moved northward slightly in order to maintain 20,000 square feet of area on Lot 2. . As a condition of approval of the plat it is recommended that the existing driveways which access Smithtown Road directly be relocated so as to access the new street. REC)OMMENDATION . TWs plat would be subject to delay if the moratorium which is currently under consideration by th4 City is adopted. Consequently it is assumed that the Planning Commission will wish to table th~ application pending the outcome of the moratorium. In the meantime the developer should be cfuiected to revise his preliminary plat, showing the change in the north end of the road and the str~ghtened lot line between Lots 1 and 2. Al~o, the preliminary plat should include a statement that it shows all existing easements and enfroachments on the site. It currently includes a disclaimer for such items. Wlten a final plat is submitted it should include the following: 1 . Detailed grading, drainage, erosion control and utility plans and specifications, including stormwater runoff calculations. 2. Drainage and utility easements 10 feet along each side of each side and rear lot line. 3 . Estimates of construction costs for streets, grading and utilities. From these estimates a letter of credit or cash security will be required to guarantee completion of the improvements. 4. Mylar originals of the final plat for signature by the Mayor and City Clerk. 5. An up-to-date (within 30 days) title opinion or title commitment for review by the City Attorney. 6. Watershed District approval. 7. Lot size certification by the applicant's surveyor. . . Re: i Smithtown Woods Prelfminary Plat 1 S~ptember 1994 - page 3 AliI of these items must be provided within six months of preliminary plat approval. Once re~eived, staff will prepare a standard development agreement for the project. Prior to release of tht final plat, park dedication fees ($3000) and sewer access charges ($4000) must be paid by the applicant. BJN:ph cc: Jim Hurm Tim Keane Joel Dresel Clint Carlson Mark Gronberg ~ , . ! , . s: ~ a: ~-;,.. ~ ~I ~: . --- '--1_ ~__ ___.: .CL~j'-6i _;-_~~: i ____;J!;!:-' __ :.:1:.__ __ _; _ _~.~ <1'.' ~ ".,... . ~!! s: <<> .. ... ;;; I. '1 ~ ~i:;~~.a,. ......J ~ I ~ ~~ ~ \-::z.~" 7. ". a; ~ ~ ~ . ~ '- I '::: t ~ .:ttl.._.. _:_"";;-';~:.lj~--/- --- ii' ,I, 9- -; ~ -= i" (:;) .. .._---~........,. ..----.... --g~ '" w a: ,., '" ..: N <0 N l~ on := ... 4) no, ~ . -.=, - '" :0 . ~ !- : ~---------_.._--- 1~ a I~ 0 : ~ ~--_.._--~-----...i : : ! : :,.: ! :~ ~ .~ ~ I : =:: ,..: I : \.{): : L..': 06' f " :0 ,., ~ @ . I / '; , . , ! ; I ~ ~. :"', ~ : ~ ~;' :~ ~. t~L~~~:_~~~~~~~ ~~ . ': \ "'- ".... ~N ~~ <<> N ....., ON ............~ .. ... ~ -i ... - " Exhibit A N SITE LOCATIO _ Preliminary Plat Smithtown Woods '. . ... ~'" I - ;; cb ". ) 'r ~. ~ LiGAL DESCRIPTION ~o+ ~~~ "- "- /1 ,;oJ' /' /' /' / \ 13/,/,. s../bo..It ('in.. ~/YP.1 I~ \ 25.500 I/~ 50. S,J... ;;; 3S I E.>;~r;".9 I z ^ HOfJse rr1 '" I ~ 0- I r ~ <n I I \,) ~ VI .\ , '" ~ Lo __J \ \ ~ /.2(Jf I I I .35 / / / / / ,_/../ ~ ~/ '" _<of?' / r.:j' / . "-.. ( '\. "'", ( //',. .' ,'I '-.. ~;J\ . ,o....,,{? -- 'b ~i~\' TO ~ ...-"'"\ \0 r " 'I J ,-.~ - - ),' 0 , I ) 3 /' ( r," ~~ 1 20.800 / ~.-' ~~ ,C---L_--'~---' ,,' Q ,?\ \ l.., -F'/ JF)~ ~,. \ .......~.~./ --./ 'l.l( r:' \ /' /' /' 6 :z: o . ':l ~ ~ aSt !~ i r-~L--: 7 20.000_.J ~H /" I / / , 1// '&- // I'e r.... /..l ~ f OVT- <QV ,. -l :t . $ / I I .... . III ,., III o / / /' EP . ." "\.lest Jine of /~e r Slh.-or /~ Nt:.. of Sec. .3(:'//7-23 , ~, /9'1.0 '.' ...-vv-... Sou," 'ine of the Sf: l'.. of" I^" NE k, "r S"c, 32-/l7'Z3 I~(,t N,88' 5")0' E \ \ /45',69 That part of the S, Townahip 117, Rang' follows: Besinnin the Chie.so, and N Ainne.polis & St. alons ."id HortllW'! the South line of thence Southwester distance of 75 fe'! decreee 06 minutes ..id center line i Shady lawn Manor: t intersection with sai~ S~utheast Qua beS1nn1ns: thence becinning, accordi County, Minnesota. o :0 \ \- / .l5 \ '~-l \~ I "'- I I ",'---- 35 I 5 ~ l 20.200__1 - -' _u:.: ," -- -- -- S<?,~/. '8 I I k III ~ I I 2 I 40 l ~--_..~- ,- =-- - .J ~ ALSO, That part of the g, 32, TOlfnship 117 N, described 8S folIo' of sald Southeset { the West 199 feet ( thence Bast alon8 ' of -way line of the Northeaaterly alonr ISJ feet; thence d. centerline of Smitt ~o ita Intersectior Sou~h to the point i;; ". This survey shows t ~e.cribed properti~ improvements or ene Owners: .Brian J. Ohland 29895 Smithtown Rd. Shorewood, Minn. 5~ / Clinton A. & Janet 202 peninsula Rd. Medicine Lake, MinI ... ",. ,0 / ", IX> .. .' "0 o .' .' / -l... ~ / -' ~,G;, ,,0 e;, A.. . / .,/ Cb- ,e;, 0" ~q ~~ ~,~ Exhibit B PRELIMINARY PLAT / , " ~o+ to ~t:ttk, I~ 1/0 0; 35 I Z ^ fTI l!' I 0 . r ~ (I) I IJo) ~ tJ\ .\ , __J ~ \ \ ~ /.26/ ".i () IT, l") '0 \ r~-l o \~ .~ _ I"J 4..;~t<!~/ ","~AJToTI ~~ -: \ " [ 20.200.....1 __ -' ....:.;: .. . ,- -. -. S<f:-(/. W ,." - I I ~ ~ / I I 2 I 40 L _" -' -t- "~_ I ~ --.J ,/ .., :t ~ (. / . .,," 'G- 11./ / U~ - q 0 <QV .s' .0 .-- -- I _n " tt'" " l1> Q) ~ / ,. I I l .", , 0, ,.. .... () / / .' .l -' / ..I , ~---..' / I, "'est line or ~"e r Sf)1, or 'he HE;' ; orSec.3Z-I/7-23 ~,G;, ",Q ~,\. / / ./ /' .-," I .. /99.0 , I ~'~O(';h: Sf h of /At! Nt X, "r S~c. 3Z' "7' 23 L. \ \ ~ ......~._- ,. LtGAL DESCRIPTION That put of the S. Township 117, Rang follows: Beginnin the Chicaso, and N Alnne.polis & S~. along .8id Northw@ the South 11 ne of thence Southwester distance of 75 fe@ de,re.. 06 minutes said center line i Shadylawn Manor: t intersection with said South.ast QuA b~8innin8: thence bill inning, accordl County. Minnesota. ALSO, That part of the S 32, Township 117 N described as foil~ of said Southeast the West 199 fellt ' thence Bast along : of -way line of thll Northeasterly slonr 153 feet: thence d. centerline of Smit! to its lntersectiol South to the point This survey shows I dueribed properti. improvements or en' Owners: 'Brisn J. Ohland 29895 Smithtown Rd. Shorewood, Minn. S' Clinton A, & Janet 202 Penlnaula Rd. Mediclns Lake, Min. ....0 o 1~6' Exhibit C RECOMMENDED REVISIONS ,~ Q'" ~<? ~~ ~~. / ,.1.86'56'30'[ 145.G8 \ \ "A . . .oJ August 29, 1994 Q,'}S M.' Orr , '" '". Schelen ;, . . ., Mayel'9n& AsSociates, Inc. 300 Park Place Center 5775 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55416-1228 612-595-5775 1-800-753-5775 FAX 595-5774 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Engineers Architects Planners Surveyors Attn: Mr. Brad Nielsen Re: Smithtown Woods Preliminary Plat Review Dear Brad: We have completed our review of the preliminary plans for the referenced project, prepared by Coffin & Gronberg, Inc. for Brian Ohland and Clint Carlson, and we have the following comments: 1) The proposed street (Kelsey Drive) intersects Smithtown Road at about a 500 angle. This may cause sight. distance problems for vehicles entering Smithtown Road, depending upon existing topography of the areas west of this intersection. 2) Proposed horizontal street alignment is not indicated. 3) Proposed drainage patterns are not indicated. 4) Sanitary sewer appears to be available to this site, however, water does not presently serve this area. This review has been prepared strictly from an engineering standpoint with regard to site and drainage issues. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 595:5695. Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MA YERON & ASSOCIATES, me. #~c~ / Joel Dresel, P.E., LS. City Engineer nm H:\S218.00\CML\CORRES\082994.BNJ Equal Opportunity Employer ... .. ? MAYOR Robert Bean COUNCil Krish Slover Bruce Benson Jennifer McCarty Doug Malam . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474.3236 l\tIEMORANDUM . TO: FROM: DA1E: RE: mE NO.: Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 20 April 1995 Simon, Steve - Modification of c.U.P. 405 (94.29) . In February Mr. Simon received approval of a conditional use permit to exceed 1200 square feet of accessory space on his property at 26710 Edgewood Road. Among the buildings which were approved was a poolhouse :0 be located at the southeast comer of the proposed swimming pool. Mr. Simon now proposes to move the poolhouse approximately 15 feet to the east. Although the relocation of '"he structure complies with setback requirements for the property, it changes the site plan which was specifically approved by the City in the c.u.p. process. Staff does not feel that the change adversely impacts any adjoining property, thereby warranting a new c.u.p. The revision should, however, be subject to City Council approval. The applicant also proposes to put a lower level beneath the poolhouse (see Exhibits B and C). This is not acceptable since accessory structures are limited to one story and 15 feet in height. It is recommended that the City Council approve the revised site plan as shown on Exhibit A, attached. The property owner to the east of the property has been advised of the proposed revision by copy of this memo. cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Steve Simon Ellen Raisbeck 5, I, A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore . .' '~,..... ~1 X:1.}...~i .~'. +';,f.\. { . , . ::-11 \l- .... .J ::~"1' :'" . ,. ..~, ' ~..~~',.." ~,:'. ' ' ,,' ! (.:;"; " '.'. ". '~~'l' ~" ,',~' I ". " " . '''';' ,J, ..' , ., '.' ..,.' ' It;..:,. j1t',; i; ~ iZ' '~r;I" /,,' i.J .:;' ""':.' "'.' :.. "\'~' , 'r."l:.,~'.r~ ,".' ....(,.1\,..;..... ',~ ;~' "':. i', to'" .. ,,,,'. 11',' .. ,'.. ,'" .I ,~;}(' ~/,~:: ",:;t, i,,, J;: ;(>'1' ' ,,~ ;' ',' ';'" -,~;' :. ~I~:i!'~..,. I .;,,,".:', ~;.' ,J.:..~..::.ti .,~. :.'.~.!.~f..~'.\:;~,.'. ,f.,,~ ,. '" .,.' '~~,'.": CJJ ,'~, ....'1.....'" II:""'" l:', ~' ,," ,I ". '." .. .' ..' " ."l' ",'.;::,' . "'i" """ ,'.,~, 'J'" . t'!., t , , . ,.', ' .. ' , ," " ., ,- .. " ,'" ' , . , ' ,,' <:,:' , '" >" ~~i.' .~_.~~;' ,': '.. 'I~ ...:'," '!-' " ". ';: ,,'" ," ",.,., ....1 :~..,' ~, .,,'l . J .M'.. :..\: '.. '.,.' ",' \'" 'L, ,. ...~. " ,','A" = ' .. ~ i~.,\ .~I' ~\ ","'.::\" ". ,.' '.' "," ~ : \ .,' <0 . ",., , .'" ' " ,,'''. ' .... ./y.:.""..... ....;'. . ',,, "'.~' ,....~\a ".....'.tl';'\.(. ~', " ,'" ..', .. "! "," , ' f ," " .'i · . .:., ".( .. (, ' . \ "-;., .' 1 ., ....:.,...:i.. " '.J<. / ' .'~ f': ....' .. '. .." ~', ./: : ,,{.. :""~t'; '';'~' ., ' '. ' : jr' . . 1 ,. 'l~ :,' ,', . t.,,, T .r ..r~{, . ~' : ,':\ .', " ' ~~ hJ./~ '. /i ~ ;:,:..1: . ',,: .'l '\ ' ... " !. .~.: \1.. X", .... ""'-\.... . J,,.;' "~I ' " ( . ~" ,.'\~..::.:.~. ~,,~ ,,' :;':' oJ " . , ,;. ~ ;> .~f ,:~ ," ....f..l ;'l~f \/'Y' ',.. ~.t;., ~:J ....(. " .,i~' .,.~y ::. '" /~.~,: ' ',~,' '.:' ' " '! ' 'i"'~' ',.'~, ~/ ::' ~ ' . .' :,,; ~., '"" , " ,,' ,-, h t'l! ...~ ~~ . :1/ ,) .\'~ or,' ('I ~: .' ,I.. '. >.. . c~.\: . . . ., , .. I ~~ .... "'~ f!I:' .~ ;., .' . , d <' ~ " .t.. ') ,', .', . , . . '. If .~r; ~ I." " ';,j .:.' ~. ;.~.".l"~ ." ~ ..." " ''? V k. " ..". '. '.;'J lo, l' ",.\.0}... \ -;" .~ "1 ,r 't , . ,..I.:' "'.......;"... . ') f" II ,,\.', , 'l;1 ','" :.. ~ ... . . ~" " ~~. :.:, . ,; I'''. h ,. i\ ,",- uj/" . ~~\( . '. ., , ~i ' ~ . ~. . \'1' r.:"l7' , :f' ..I,~ ,: ,~.. '~i' . , .... ;:..~..\ " ~' ....0 ':t '. .,~ ... ~ ..,.. . ~ t' ~ .A ~, '. ..- ~ t' " GIZ.4 / I / I -' //~ I /' 1 ,/ "/. ~ I ~/ ~ ~ ! I '/ ,,// ~ I T "'- i I , A/--------- ~ I. I ~ '-. I I, 1 CD CD. rn m - . r /I I II I I I I I \ 'r I \ I I I I I I I , I \ l I I I T 1 \ ~ T I I I I I . 'TTf T 1 l 'X X ,\T I 1 , I I I . I i If I 11ll ~ ~-' I I I '1 I i \ : ~ 'II ~ I I I I I I ' I d I I T I I II \ I I I ! T r I I 1 I I I I I , I I I i ! 1 I I I I I I I \ I I I I I 1 : I I Ifl \ i i I I I I I I I i I I I I 1 I I I T'f I I II I 'II 1 II TI1 I I ! I II , I I I ( "II , f I f I T I I I II I I If .txf l.L... I I I I 1 1 I I 1 II J .\1 J/ 'I I I T"l I I 1 I I I I . :.... -z.- &~,c./p.~ hJif , :,~U I - ; I I - r I I I i , I i I , I i , i I I i I I , I , I . I 57E.OS ~ r - - ___..J I~rr I --.- ___-1 1\\\= T I I I I I I I I I 1~o " ~~ I .\ I I l ...J ,----- --I - - - I I ~--I ---;;; I , ' I f~------~ -------1 I ' , -------f r------- I ! i ~I\l \\ \= ! ==-H \ =:'\11 HI' -= != IH :/1'- ,1 t= ::::: \\ , - - -:.. = -- - - -= = = =. ~ - - - --.=-;-:J I I ;",1= '-- : -:::: I n ft;f~ - - ~_.~~-- , I .-,.-- I - -- ..-.. - -- -I - , _ _.1. , '-:1 ; I ..., Sa..;iJI r Lc (.-#Iil>0 ! '/4 ::;: i..) hh~ biT B ; I i i i r ! i ~ i , : ; I : i I i I ! ill I :: II i I: ' : ~1-~--r---~----' \ Ii ill j I' ~ I ! /j' I j j ! ! II. I i /.,/ . ) lit I ( 1 : I ; , I /' /' .' r -1\ j II It i' I! I' :,!,' if; t l 1 ! . . ! ' il I , I I I I ' ~ ! I . ,I! , ", I ! ! I' '1 i, j', I ; I, ! i I ! I J ( I; I : i; : 1 I II I ! ' i ! II ! I( Iii I .',. J, : 1111 i II ! I : : uJlLu.u j ; p .--------.-..- -~-_..- - - -_._-_.-:~ ~? : .J::-- 1 .,' ,-, l~. ;i ! : Ii :II 'q Iii "I ' I illl ' ~ ;, I 'I' I'll I' 'I . . liim ilt OJ I ' I I I I ! ' i i I I I ! I I I j I I I II I~~ , :' ; ~ __~ _i\~, ,. \IT , , i ' . " : ~ , j i ; ! , , . I';; ; 1 : J: t I Ii I .i , ;1 ! i J , I II I! , I Ii 1,- ; ; I j I I , I ii, !Ii n.: ~lJ 0 -' - II :: '::J ..:t ~ ('\ ~ \.J \u " ~ ~ ~ ~ ....;) ,~ I.U \?S \,} N ''\.J '::-" ~ '1 Q. - if ~' ~ , N kll \, ~ 1 ! i ! t ' I I Ii , J II ~h; brt G CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 95-_ A RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR LIEUTENANT JOHN HODGDEN WHEREAS, on February 1, 1971, John Hodgden was hired by the City of Shorewood Police Department; and WHEREAS, several of the many milestones of John Hodgden's police career are listed herein: . January 21, 1972 - Completed BCA Basic Police Science Course January I, 1973 - Became an original member of the South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department Completed FBI and BCA Criminal Investigation Course Appointed a Detective by Chief Dale Remus Recognized by the Minnesota Chief s Association with an "Honorable Mention" in the 1975 Police Officer of the Year competition for his actions in apprehending a bank robber on June 25, 1975 October 11, 1976 - Promoted to Sergeant by Chief Donald Davis November 12, 1976 - Completed FBI and BCA Intermediate Command Course June 23, 1978 - Completed FBI and BCA Police Management Course July 18, 1985 - Promoted to Lieutenant by Chief Richard Young March 8, 1974 - February 1, 1975 - April 14, 1976 - NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Shorewood City Council, on its behalf, and on behalf of the residents of the City of Shore wood, do hereby publicly commend Lieutenant John Hodgden for 24 years of exemplary police service to the City of Shorewood and the entire South Lake Minnetonka area. . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that an original executed copy of this resolution become part of the permanent record of the City of Shorewood, and that an original executed resolution be presented to John Hodgden on behalf of the City Council and the City of Shorewood. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of April, 1995. ROBERT B. BEAN, MAYOR ATTEST: JAMES C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR it0 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 95-_ A RESOLUTION REVISING PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS FOR 1995 (YEAR XXI) OF THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood, through execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is cooperating in the Orban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and . WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has developed a proposal for the use of Orban Hennepin County CDBG funds made available to it, and held a public hearing on February 27, 1995 to obtain the views of citizens on local and Orban Hennepin County housing and community development needs and the City's proposed use of $17,996.00 from the Year XXI Orban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shorewood approves the following projects for funding from the Year Orban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant program and authorizes submittal of the proposal to Hennepin County for review and inclusion in the Year XXI Orban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program Statement of Objectives and Projected Ose of Funds. 1995 Year XXI: . Protect Southshore Senior Center Operation Housing Plan & Implementation of Affordable Housing Strategies Rehab of Private Property ~udaet $ 3,598.00 5,000.00 9.398.00 $17,996.00 ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 24th day of April, 1995. ROBERT B. BEAN, MAYOR ATTEST: JAMES C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR ~7 ",-... CJ:TY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTJ:ON NO. 95-17 A RESOLUTJ:ON APPROVmG PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS FOR 1995 (YEAR XXJ:) OF THE URBAN HENNEPJ:N COUNTY COMMO'N'J:TY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood, through execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is cooperating in the Orban Hennepin County. Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has developed a proposal for the use of Orban Hennepin County CDBG funds made available to it, and held a public hearing on February 27, 1995 to obtain the views of citizens on local and Orban Hennepin County housing and community development needs and the City's proposed use of $17,403.00 from the Year XXI Orban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant. NOW, THEREFORE BE J:T RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shorewood approves the following projects for funding from the Year Orban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant program and authorizes submittal of the proposal to Hennepin County for review and inclusion in the Year XXI Orban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program Statement of Objectives and Projected Ose of Funds. 1995 Year XXJ:: 'Protect Southshore Senior Center Operation Housing Plan & Implementation of Affordable Housing Strategies Sojourn Van Rehab of Private Property Budaet $10,986.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,417.00 ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 27th day of February, 1995. 2L~~~'----- ROBERT B. BEAN, MAYOR ATTEST: iwv-uJtfvVvw' JAMES c. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR if " j ,/, . . ~ MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ~ "C 0 G) .... G) VI ~ ~ "C VI =Sll) ~ G) G) -a a .... ~ sen is "C Q) :::::::11) . ".;:i C) gen . ~ Q) -- G . "'C ~"C =' "g N ~ C)~ -G VI"C ".;:i cc Q)- D..c JaQ) S "t: CIl Q) "'C "g"C Q) U ...... ... 0 Q) VI Q) "g. ~-8 ~ ~ c.::: ~ .'6 S! .I ftIt ..c. '-e u; G Q) Q) ~ .xQ) .xG Q) a =11) =' ::E,~ ~ ... ~"g ....en ~g Issue/Budget Objective :Q'U VI 3:.! 3:S o! o ~ VI U z_ '" Televise all City Council meetin~s 1 '" Inform citizens through quarterly City newsletters 1 Identify and address zoning issues for specific sites '" for senior housing projects 1 Meet with Cooperative Services Study Task Force '" semi-annually 1 Undertake a meaningful goal setting session during '" the first 60 days of 1 995 1 5 As part of comprehensive plan update, undertake a *Adm '" City visioning process 1 * Adm - Duplicate Administration/Projects Key: 1 = Reporting First Quarter January - March 2 = Reporting Second Quarter April - June 3 = Reporting Third Quarter July - September 4 = Reporting Fourth Quarter October - December 1 995 ISSUES PRIORITIZED AND BUDGET OBJECTIVES Status Report: April, 1995 4/95 Page 1 of 11 *g If- . -::1- - V1 II . r 1995 IS.~III::~ DDll"\n-.___ _ _ __ _ ~ PUBUC WORKS oS ,.. : a; ,.. ~ ." .. a; ;; .. e ~ ~... .8 -l; i .!o ." .2 'i... -S.: .. . .. Cl ,,0 .. . :2 "tI elle .5." ~'i .Q ::0 1XIG) ..- ell" oS .2 ." .Q." ...I: .. ~ .Q (,) ";j .. III > .. .. .. . ,.. Ii: c; a; ..1: 0" >~ a; III CJ Ii. .1:(,) - ~ :: " .... . .. G) G) .... .. ~.! (,) e =", " :E:ii e ~ ~ .!!og _0 .. IssuelBudaet Obiective 0 ~ .~ ~ ! .g .5 .! ".0 (J := 0 ~ Perform preventative maintenance on all equipment within 100 miles or 10 hours of scheduled service 1 ~ Perform 90% of City building repairs and preventative maintenance using City personnel 1 ~ Maintain or improve on helpfulness rating of PW personnel (92% helpful to very helpful) Streets and Roadwavs: ~ Develop a pavement management system to aid in scheduling of street projects 1 ~ Paint lane markings on all designated streets 1 ~ Sweep each City street at least once. annuaUy 1 ~ Mow roadsides at least twice annually 1 ~ Mow boulevards at least 6 times annually 1 ~ Visually inspect storm drainage grates annually and repair as needed 1 ~ Increase satisfaction rating on condition of streets (my street 58%; streets in general 64%) ~ Maintain or improve satisfaction level on cleanliness of streets (81%) ~ Increase citizen excellent/good service rating on street maintenance (62%) Snow and Ice Removal: ~ Remove snow and ice and complete saltlsand operations within 14 hours after the end of a snow event 1 ~ Complete widening and clean up functions within 48 hours of a snow event 1 ~ Maintain high citizen excellent/good service rating on snow removal (91%) Traffic Control/Street Linhts: ~ Perform a cost efficiency study of street lighting system 1 SanitatlonlWaste RemovallWeeds: ~ Resolve all property cleanup complaints 1 ~ Resolve 100% of weed complaints 1 Tree Maintenance: ~ Remove 100% of diseased trees on public property 1 ~ Respond to all property owner request to identify diseased trees 1 ~ Maintain and trim trees on City property which present a hazard to public 1 Water: ~ Supply a safe. clean uninterrupted source of water to all connections 1 ~ Explore possibility of interconnecting with other communities 1 ~ Maintain helpfulness rating of water utility personnel (95%) Sanitary Se~ er: Work with MWCC to correct inflow and infiltration into the ~ sanitary sewer system 1 ~ Work with MWCC to reduce sewage treatment costs to the City 1 Rec, clina: ~ Continue weekly pickup of recyclable materials 1 ~ Hold curbside pickup of household and yard wastes in the Spring of the year 1 ~ Improve on excellent/good rating for recycling program (85%) ~ Provide a leaf and yard waste disposal site in Fall of the year 1 4/95 Page to of 11 . . . PARKS AND RECREATION >- "0 0 CIl - a; fIl >- ~ "0 fIl 'S CIl a; 'E .. e ~ CIl11) 0 "0 - _en .s::. "0 0 CD ~II) .!! .5 fIl a:s :;: C) :Jen CIl a:s 'tJ .5 "0 CIl N ale :J"O .c :;: :J CIl .- alCll fIl CIl 0 .;: lD CD "0 .c"O CIl.s::. .!!.! .. - 0 .c u ';: UJ > CIl fIl CIl a:s Gi CD >- c;: - a:s.s::. o CIl >:E a; Q. CIl .c u - .. :;: fIl CIS u 1i a:s .:.: CIl CD CD .:.: CIl .:.: CIl u e =11) :J ==:c e .. .. ls.c .!. 0 _en fIl Issue/Budget Objective 0 o CIl .cU o c .!!.! "70 0 3:.c 3:.8 o ~ z_ , ..J Make playground equipment handicap accessible to people with disabilities through use of COSG funding 1 ..J Add and/or replace 5 picnic tables per year 1 ..J Plant at least 10 trees per year 1 I Assist Shorewood Parks Foundation in coordination of I ..J fund raising efforts 1 I I I Assist Shorewood Parks Foundation in building a I ..J 1 concession building - Freeman Park north ..J Undertake park project management internally 1 ..J Continue to develop user support for funding improvements and maintenance in parks 1 i ..J Increase knowledge and use of Shorewood's parks 1 I ..J Increase satisfaction rating of condition (84%) and amount of recreation equipment in parks (75%) I ..J I I i I Maintain satisfaction rating of park maintenance (91%) i Page 11 of 11 Fa;x.=fransmlttal Memo 7672 rjr- .~.... . .". ... . i." r 1........51/ ,r;r. ~ (( Ie .??-z. " CoIIIIlIny , . . . .... r r~ ,. i Il1O. or.... , (~o.a."..,... ''',' .:Tiftit" .. ..~~.~..'^~.cJl~AC( ..e.?-- ~c:o.,., . . . .. . . ...,. '... ...... " ...-' , .. . j '" . ...... -, '.... ". ,'<if, '" :\,.~ fFGr" '.' ...... .' 2%---' . .". ..........i:;-... --...... _.~,"{:-~......". [,.' ;;~'f.'...(/. -. Cll.._.._,.... .... ... . .,6' L-Y/f. I' O/I'? "'"""""." /.. .....~... .........~..;=.:......-d~ _A. ..~~.._....~6.;::~~~ . . . . April 20, 1995 Mayor Robert Bean City of ShorewOOd 5755 Country Club Rd Shorewood, MN 55331 Oear Mayor Bean and Councllmembers: In response to the question what happens to the Souths hare Senior Center Program after the recent federal(y mandated cuts: . The Center will remain open three days a w,ek. It is currently open three days a week, The day will be shortened to &-1/2 hours. The current Center Director (JoAnn J<vern) will no longer be assigned to' the center. The Oenter will be staffed by a Center Coordinator (less expensIve/loss experienced). * The transportatIon program will be reorganized. Currently we utilize a van 5 days a week using a combination of volunteers and a part-time van driver. We. will moth-ball the van and out the part-time paid drIVer. We also operate the Tamarack Senior Center (serving Wayzat.a. Long Lake, Medina and Orono). The Tamarack Center is : also a three day.a-week Center. Our plan Is to share one van between two Centers. The current servICe will be condensed Into two longer days. Our subcontract with I.C.A; for doctor appoIntment-type rides will remain in Plac.. Senior Community Services Is absorbing $5,:000 of the Program Support(AdmlnlstrBtlOnlbOOkkeepll'1g1 seoretarlal/newsletter) Charges. The Southshore Senior Center seniors have pledged to raise $2,000 for the Program. . .. -, .. * We assume all cities at full 20010 C.D.B.G., except Chanhassen. . . This should be our "basement- - any addltlqnal tundralslng or new funds will be used first to support ttle transportation effort. We do not anticipate attempting to fund raise until the capital campaign fUndr;dslng Is oompleted. In summary, Senior Community Services Is co~mltted to the Southshore communities and our local senior cttl~ns needing the center services. We will continue to utilize almost 100 dedicated senior volunteers. We realize the unfortunate timing of this federal mandate, but want to assure yo~r community that 5outhshore Center will continue to serve,. . Sincerely, Benjamin F, Wlthhart Executive Director . ~,..../" . SENIOR · ~&;.n.lCES -~Rl:SENIOR 4117/85 EXPENSES 1995 1995. Revised Personnel Center Director 23.2$8 Center OOOrdlnator 15.000 Cook 4,430 4.-430 Van Orlver . 6.023 Taxes & Benefits 8.550 3,888 Sub-total Personnel 39.301 23,316 Dining Program Food & Supplies 12,800 12,800 PrOfessional Fees 549 .549 Supplies 440 440 Phone 1,684 1,884 Postage 355 3.S5 Space 2,932 2,932 Insurance 1.270 1.270 EQuipment Q6 :96 Prlntlna & Publlcallons ns n5 Travel 737 137 Vllm-lnsurancelGaslRepalrslMalntenance 6,568 2,000 Conferences & Training ) 412 412 Memberships 85 as Mise 122 1~ Depreoiatlon 1,679 1,679 Program Support 7,113 2.000 TOTAL EXPENSES $76.898 $51.232 REVENUES . ~~ , Senior Community Services United Way of Minneapolis 14.805 14,805 Southshore Cente, AdVisory Board . 2,000 Wost Metro Coord. Transportation (IIIB) 3.200 3,200 Van Donations 1,200 1,200 Agency Self SuPPort-Contributions/a rants 1.913 2.192 Volunteers of America Title 11I0 12.800 12,800 Calvery Lutheran Church In-kind Space 2.932 2,932 Sub-total 36,850 39.129 Southshore Cities Chanhassen 5.170 .0 Deephaven 9,556 2,~8 . 3.4$2 Excelsior 8.984 Greenwood 1,840 636 Shorowood 10.986 3.599 Tonka BaV 3.732 1.600 Sub-1otal 40,048 12,103 TOTAL REVENUES $76.898 $51,232 . r'" . . . . ~ 'd LEASE n THIS LEASE is made this ____ day of April, 1995, by and between the CITIES, consisting of the municipalities of Deephaven, Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood and Tonka Bay, operating under a Cooperative Agreement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes S 471.59 ("Landlord"), and THE FRIBNDS OF SOUTHSHORE SENIOR COMMUNITY CENTER, a Minnesota nonprotit corporation (IITenant"). Landlord and Tenant, intending to be legally bound, hereby covenant and agree as follows: ARTICLE 1. PREMISES Landlord does hereby lease, demise, and let unto Tenant, and Tenant does hereby hire and take from Landlord, upon the terms and conditions set forth herein (the "Lease"), that certain parcel of real property situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally descri~ed on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the ULand"), subject to and together with all easements and rights-of~way of record, together with all structures now or hereafter located thereon and all appurtenances thereto (the "Improvements1t), all of which Land and Improvements are hereinafter referred to as the Premises. ARTICLE 2. TERM The term ot the Lease shall commence on , 1995, and ter.minate on the earlier of (i) the 25th anniversary of the commencement date, or (ii) the expiration of the useful lite of the Facility (as defined in ArtiCle 9 hereinbelow), as the expiration of such useful life is mutually agreed upon by Landlord and. Tenant in writing. If Landlord and Tenant disagree as to whether the USeful lite of the Facility has expired, the issue shall be determined by arbitration in accordance with Article 12 he~eof. . ARTICLE 3. RENT 3.1) Tenant shall pay to Landlord as the Annual Rent for the Te~ an amount equal to One Dollar ($1.00) per year and other good and valuable consideration. . ~~~ ~f:~f S66f.lB.~0 S9l~968-Zf9 N3~90NIl ^l~O N~W~~OH NI~~~l wo~~ :~::: U n 4.1) It is the intention and purpose of the parties hereto that the Lease shall be a "Net Lease" to Landlord. All coses and expenses that mar b~ necessary in or about the operation of the Premises, includ n9 all hazard and liability insurance, taxes, special assessments, utilities, maintenance, and repairs, except as otherwise expressly provided herein, shall be paid directly by Tenant as "Additional Rent" hereunder. However, Tenant ehall not be Obligated to payor to reimburse Landlord for any insurance that Landlord elects to carry, or any taxes or assessments levied or imposed against Landlord (in contrast to the Premises) as a result of Landlo~d's ownerShip of the Premises. 4.2) Bxcept as otherwise expressly provided herein, Tenant covenants and agrees that if at any time it fails to pay any amount required by the Lease, or to obtain, pay for, maintain, or deliver any of the insurance policies herein p~ovided fo~, or fails to make any other payment or perform any Other act required to be made or perfor.med by the Lease, then, upon delivery of not less than thirty (30) days notice and opportunity to cure to Tenant, or notioe for such longer period as is reasonably necessary to cure if it cannot reasonably be cured within said thirty (30) days provided that Tenant has commenced cure within said thirty (30) days and is diligently pursuing such cure, Landlord, without waiving or releasing Tenant trom anI obligation of Tenant, contained in the Lease, and without any obl gation to do so, may effect any such insurance coverage and pay premiums therefore and may make any other payment or perform any other act on the part of Tenant to be made and perfo~ed as provided in the Lease, in suoh manner and to such extent as Landlord may deem desirable, and in exerCiSing such right to pay necessary and incidental costs and expenses. ARTICLE 5. TAXES AND ASSESSMDrI'S 5.1) Tenant shall pay, as Additional Rent hereunder, before any fine, penalty, interest, or costs may De added thereto for the nonpayment thereot, all real estate taxes and installments of special assessments payable during the Ter.m of the Lease which shall during the Ter-m be laid, assessed, levied, or imposed upon, or shall become payable and a lien upon, the Premises or any part thereof ("Impositions"). Bowever, upon th. tet:mination of this Lease, Landlord shall reimburse TRant for the value of any publiC improvements benefitting the Prem!ses to the extent paid by Taant's payment of .ss.....nts,lor example, but without limitat10I1, for sewer or water connection, ace.s. and/or lines. 2. ~ Od S:l :S:l S66lOlB O~B S9~S:968-~l9 N3~90N[1 ^l~O N~W~~OH N[~~~l wo~~ .'- . . . . I; "d ARTICLE 6. U'I'ILITIES Tenant shall directly payor cause to be paid, as Additional Rent hereunder, all charges for sewer and water services, gas, electricity, light, heat, air conditioning, power, telephone I or. other services or utility used, rendered, or supplied upon or in connection with the Premilles (the "Utilities") during the Term hereof. Tenant shall contract tor the Utilities in Tenant's own name and shall hold Landlord ha~ess trom any liability or expense for any such Charge. AR'rICIti 7. REPAIRS I MAINTENANCE, AND ALTERATIONS Tenant shall, during the Term ot the Lease and at Tenant's expense, keep the Premises and the Facility in good order, condition, and repair. If Tenant does not keep and maintain the Premises as herein provided, upon not less than thirty (30) days notice and opportunity to cure to Tenant, or such longer period as is reasonably necessary if cure cannot reasonably be made within such thirty (30) days, so long as Tenant commences cure within thirty (30) days and diligently pursues said cure, ~andlord may, but need not, make such repairs and replacements, and Tenant shall pay Landlord, as Additional Rent, the cost thereof upon being billed tor the same. ~. . .' f n ARTICLB 8. . :'" , / INSURANCE 8.1) Tenant shall, as Additional Rent hereunder and at Tenant's sole cost and expense, keep the Premises, including all buildings, improvements, furniture, and equipment on, in, or appurtenant thereto at the commencement of the Term and thereatter erected thereon or therein, including all alterations, rE!build1ngs, replacements, changes, additions I and improvements, fully insured for the mutual benefit of Landlord and Tenant, as their interests may appear, as named insureds (a) agains~ loss or damage by tire and (b) against those perils included trom time to time in the standard fOrm ot extended ooverage insurance endorsement. 8.2) All policies of insurance relating to fire and extended coverage shall provide that the proceeds thereof shall be payable to Landlord. All such poliCies ot insurance shall provide that any loss shall be payable to Landlord notwithstanding any act or omission of Tenant which might otherwise result in a forfeiture or reduction of said insurance. 8.3) Tenant shall also, as Additional Rent hereunder and at Tenant's sole cost and expense, but tor the mutual benefit of 3. .t ::l:t 1;66t "le".e 1;9~:l:968-~t9 N3~90N[1 hlijO N~W~~OH NI~~~l wo~~ Landlord and Tenant, as named insureds, maintain during the Term at the Lease general public liability insurance in Such amount or amounts as Tenant may fram time to t~e reasonably deem appropriate. 8.4) Tenant shall insure the contents ot the rmprovements owned by Tenant, for the benefit of Tenant, against loss or damage by fire, windstorm, or other casualty for such amount as Tenant may desire, and Tenant agrees that such policies shall contain a waiver of subrogation clause as to Landlord. Tenant waives, releases, and diSCharges Landlord from all claims or demands whatsoever which Tenant may have or acquire by fire or extended coverage riSK, whether such claim or demand may arise because of the negligence of Landlord, its agents or employees or otherwise, and Tenant agrees to look to insurance coverage only in the event of such loss. . ARTICLE 9, THE FACILITY 9.1) Tenant may.make certain improvements to the PaCility as pX'ovided herein. 9.2) Par~j,ng. . ARTICLB 10, DESTRUCTION BY FIRE 10.1) t:e the Improvements, or any portion thereof, are damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, however or by whomever caused, then this Lease shall ter.minate unless otherwise agreed by Landlord and Tenant in writing, 4. 9 'd tol:S:1 S661"lE!'to0 S9~S:968-~19 N3~9aH[' ^'~a N~W~~OH NI~~~' WO~~ . . '- "d ARTICLE 11. CONDEMNA'l'ION 11.1) It during the Term of the Lease the entire Premi.ses shall be taken &s a result ot the power of eminent domain, condemnation proceedings, or other like proceedings (the "P:roceedingstf), the Lease shall terminate on the date ot taking of possession pursuant to the Proceedings. Tenant may claim and recover from the condemning authority an award for Tenant's moving expenses, business dislocation damages, Tenant's personal property and fixtures and any other award applicable to Tenant as the operator of the Facility. 11.2) If during the Term less than the entire Premises is taken by the Proceedings, and it does not remain feasible and practicable to continue the operation of the Facility in the determdnation of Tenant, then the Lease shall terminate as of the date ot taking of possession pursuant to the Proceedings. . ARTICLB 12. DISPUTE RESOLUTIO~ ARTICLE ASSIGNMENT AND SUBIdSTTING Tenant shall not assign or transter any of its rights under the Lease or sublease any part ot the Premises (an "Assignment") without prior written consent from Landlord. No Assignment shall relieve Tenant from any of its obligations contained in the Lease, nor ahall any Assignment be ettective unless the assignee shall, at the time ot such Assignment, assume in writing all the teroms, covenants, and conditions of the Lease to be perfor.med thereafter by Tenant and shall agree in writing to be bound thereby. Landlord hereby consents to Assignments to related or affiliated entities ot Tenant.' ARTICLE 14. DEFAULTS OP LESSBD 14.1) If du~1n9 the Ter.m Tenant shall default in fUlfilling any of the covenants of the Lease or is otherwise in default 5. St:~l S66l"'-S"l>S S9~~968-~l9 H3~9qH[1 ^l~q H~W~~OH HI~~~l wo~~ , I hereunde~, (other than the covenants for the payment of Base Rent or Additional Rent), Landlord shall give Tenant notice ot any such default or of the happening of any contingency referred to in this paragraph, and if at the expiration of sixty (60) days after the service of such notice the default or contingency upon which said D9tice was based shall continue eo exist, or in the case of a default or contingency which cannot with Que diligence be cured within a period of sixty (60) days, if Tenant fails to proceed promptly after the service of such notice and with all due diligence ~o cure the same and thereafter to prosecute the curing of such default with all due diligence, Landlord, at its option, may terminate the Lease, and upon such ter.mination, Tenant will quit and surrender the P~emises to Landlord. ARTICLE 15. IMPROVIMENTS AM) lI'IXTURES . Any permanent improvements installed by Tenant in or as a part of the Improvements or on the Land, whether used solely in Tenant's business or whether usable in the nmprovements without regard to such business or otherwise, Shall become the property of Landlord upon such installation. ARTICLE 16. LANDLORD'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 16.1) Landlord represents, warrants and covenants that: (a) it is the fee owner of marketable title to the Premises, subjeet to no liens or eneumbrances; (b) that it has the full right and power to make the Lease; (c) that if and so long as Tenant shall not be in default hereunder, Tenant shall quietly hold, occupy, and enjoy the Premises during all of the Term. 16.2) Landlord further covenants, represents and warrants to Tenant that: . ARTICLB 17. USE OF PREMISES The Premises shall be used for the operation of a community center primarily for the benefit of the senior citizens .of the Cities. Tenant shall not use or occupy the Premises or knowingly per.mit the Premises to be ueed or occupied contrary to any 6. a 'c/ Sl:~l S661"lel"1>e S9~~968-~19 N3~90NIl ^l~O N~W~~OH NI~~~l wo~~ ( . . 6 0<1 statute, rule, order, ordinanoe, requirement, or regulation applicable thereto or in any manner which wou~dvio~ate any certificate of. occupancy affecting the same. Tenant shall promptly upon discovery of any such use, take all reasonable steps to compel the discontinuance of any such use caused by Tenant. ARTICLE 18. PERMITS Tenant shall diligently seek and, upon issuance, maintain in force and effect all permits, licenses, and similar authorizations to use the Premises for the aforesaid purposes required by any governmental authority having juriSdiction over the use thereof. Landlord shall, at Tenant's request, join with Tenant in executing, acknowledging, and delivering any and all petitions, consents, applications, approvals, reviews, easements, or similar documents that may be required for the installation of any Improvements, utilities, public improvements, roads, water lines, sewer lines, storm drainage facilities, subdivision, rezoning, special use, platting, or other similar development of the Premises, for the purpose of development, cons~ruction and operation of the Paoiliey. ARTICLB 19. n. I ~t.': ,-'.~ I COMPLIANCE WITH LAW Tenant, at its sole expense, shall promptly comply with all laws, ordinances, and requirements of federal, state, county, and municipal authorities relating to Tenant's use and occupation of the Premises, and with any lawful order or direction of any public otficer relating to Tenant's use and occupation of the Premises during the Term of the Lease. Nothing herein contained, however, shall prohibit Tenant from appealing from or contesting the validity or legality of such laws, ordinances, requirements, orders,. or directions and, notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Article, Tenant shall not be deemed to be in default hereunder so long as Tenant diligently prosecutes such appeal or contest. . . ARTICLB 20. LANDLORD'SACCBSS TO PREMISDS Tenant shall permit Landlord and the authorized representatives of Landlord to enter the Premises at all times during usual business hours for the purpose of inspecting the same and making any necessary repairs to comply with any laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, or requirements of any public authority or of the Board of Fire Underwriters or any similar board, pursuant to the terms of this Lease. Nothing herein shall imply any duty upon the part of Landlord to do any such work which, under any provision of the Lease, Tenant is required to 7. St:~t S66tolllOvll S9~~968-~t9 H3~SQHIl ^l~Q H~W~~OH HI~~~l wo~~ ") perform, and the performance thereof by Landlord shall noe oonstitute a waive~ of Tenant's defaUlt in failing eo pe~for.m the Sante. . ARTICLE 21. ATTORNEYS 11 FEES If it is necessary tor Landlord or Tenant to retain the services of an attorney at law to enforce any of the terms, covenants, or provisions hereof, or to collect any sums due hereunder, if said party prevails, then the other party shall to the prevailing party upon deman,d the cost of such services related costs and expenses. pay and ARTICLE 22. ESTOPPBL Ci~rIFICATE g. .;~.. . ~ \, f . Landlord and. Tenant shall, at .!lny time and from time to time, upon not less than twenty (20) days' prior notice from the othe~ party, execute, acknowledge, and deliver to the requesting party a statement in writing certifying that the Lease is unmodified and in full force and effect (or if there shall have been modifications that the Lease is in full force and effect as modified and stating the modificatjlons) and the dates through which Base Rent has been paid, and stating whether or not (to its best knowledge) the other party is in default in the performance of any covenant, agreement, or condition contained in the Lease and, .if so, specifying each such dGafault of which it may have knowledge, it being intended that amy such statement delivered pursuant to this Article shall be In a form approved by and may be relied upon by any prospective ass:l.gnee or lender ot the requesting party. . ARTICLE :~3. SIGNS Upon prior written approval by Landlord of design and construction, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, Tenant may erect such signs upon the Premises as it may deem desirable, as long as sa1d signs do not exceed in weight the safe carry10g capacity of any bearing st:ructure, oX' violate the laws of the state or ordinances of the muni,cipality in which the Premises is situated. ARTICLE 24. / NOTICES Any notice or election herein requested or permitted to be 9i ven or served by either party herE!to upon the other, shall be deemed given or served in accordance with the provisions of the s. Ell"d 9t::i:t S66t"l.El"v0 S9Z:i:968-Zt9 H3~90HIl ^l~O H~W~~OH HI~~~l wo~~ .. . . 11 "d Lea.e it delivered to either party hereto and receipt is obtained therefor, or it mailed in a sealed wrapper by United State. certified mail, postage prepaid, properly addressed to such other party at the address hereinafter specified. Unless and until changed by notice as herein provided, notices and communications shall be addressed as follows: If to Landlord: It' to Tenant: With a copy to: Attn: At tn = Bach such mailed notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given to, or served upon the party to which addressed, on the date that is three (3) days after the same is deposited in the united States certified mail, postage prepaid, properly addressed in the manner above provided. Each such delivered notice or communication shall be deemed to have heen given to, or served upon, the party to whom delivered, upon delivery thereof in the manner above provided. Either party may change the address' to which mailed notice is to be sent to it by giving to the other party hereto not lese than thirty (30) days' advance written notice thereof. All payments of Base Rent or Additional Rent hereunder shall be made to Landlord at the address above designated, or as may be hereafter designated. n M::=~S g . . 25.1) Severahility ~ If any term, condition, or provision of the Lease or the application the~eot to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be held to oe invalid or unentorceable, the remainder thereof and the applioation of such terms, provisions, and conditions to persons or circumstances other than those as to whom it shall be held invalid or unenforceable shall not be affeoted thereby, and the Lease and all the te~, provisions, and conditions hereof shall, in all other respects, continue to be effective and to he complied with to the full extent permitted by law. 9. 9i :ti S66i ".lEI "1>0 S9Zt968-Zi9 H3~90Hll ^l~O H~W~~OH NI~~~l wo~~ '.. 25.2) CQnsent - Wherever in this Lease consent or approval is to be obtained from either party, such party agrees not to unreasonably withhold, condition or delay its approval or consent. 25.3) Short Fprm Lease - At the request of either party hereto, a short to~ lease shall be prepared in for.m and substance reasonably satisfactory to each of the parties and shall be executed by each of the parties in duplicate, such lease to be filed for record in the. county in which the Premises are located. 25.4) Headings. The headings incorporated in the Lease are for convenience in reference only and are not a part of the Lease and do not in any way limit or add to the terms and provisions hereof. 25.5) Bindina Effact - All of the covenants, conditions, and . agreements herein contained shall extend to, be binding upon, and inure to the benefit Of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors, and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Lease the day and year first above written. LANDLOROt By: ItS: TENANT: . By: ItS: THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY&. LI:NDGRBN, LTD . 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTBR 7900 XiRXBS AVENUE SOUTH BLOOMINGTO~, MINNESOTA 55431 (612) 835.3800 TJK:MP2s 10. 2: 1" d .U:1::1 S661"lB"1:>B S92:1::968-2:19 N3~90NIl ^l~O N~W~~OH NI~~~l WO~~ ~ . . ~t'd BXH:IBIT A to that certain LEASS by and. between , Landlord and I Tenant Legal Description ot the Property: TJK:MP2s .u:~t S66t"lB"l>B S9~~968-~19 H3~90HIl ^l~O H~W~~OH HI~~~l wo~~ f.-' ~ COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE This Cooperative Agreement (the Agreement) for the Southshore Senior Community Center (the Center) is made on this _ day of April, 1995, by and between the City of Deephaven, a Minnesota municipal COrporation (Deephaven), the City of Excelsior, a Minnesota municipal corporation (Excelsior), the City of Greenwood, a Minnesota corporation (Greenwood), the City of Shore wood, a Minnesota municipal corporation (Shorewood) and the City of Tonka Bay. a Minnesota municipal enrpQ!!1t!on (To!'_~ Bay) (h~:einnftcr collectively referred to as the "Citiestt). RECITALS . WHEREAS, the Cities desire to provide a Center for use by senior citizens for socializing, arts, crafts, music and similar programs of enriclunentj and WHEREAS, the Cities desire to provide a congregate dining facility to serve the needs of senior citizens; and WHEREAS, the Cities desire to provide a public facility to be used by citizens for meetings, banquets, receptions, reunions and similar public and private activities; and WHEREAS. the Cities desire to combine their resources to ensure the development, construction, maintenance and operation of the Center. NUW THEREFORE, the Cities do hereby agree and covenant as set forth below: PURPOSE . The parties to this agreement have determined that their conununities are more economically and efficiently served by construction and operation of a Senior Community Center than for each to do so separately. The purpose of this Cooperative Agreement is to set forth the terms governing the parties in the ownership. construction, operation, maintenance, and use of the Center. The parties agree that the Center will be used for providing educational, recreational. arts, enrichments, and other community-based and related activities such as those commonly provided at community activities centers thoughout the area. Such programs and activities will be consistent with the use of the surrounding and adjoining facilities. The overall guiding principle embodied in this Agreement is the mutual desire oftha Cities to maximize the use of the Center by all members of the Cities' respective constituencies. This Agreement is made pursuant to Minn. Stat. ~ 471.59. l> t "d .U:~I S66t"l.S"l>0 S9~~96S-~t9 H3~9~HIl ^lij~ HijW~~OH HI~~ijl wo~~ .4 . . OWNERSHIP n The development of the Center will be financed through a pooling of resources from the Cities. The Cities shall own the Center as tenants in common, with the ownership interest of each City proportionate to the amount of such City's investment in the Center. The amount of the investment from each of the Cities shall be as specified in the attached Exhibit A, which may be amended from time to time. Shorewood will be responsible for the design and construction of the Center, which shall be completed on land owned by the City of Shorewood, in accordance with the legal description for such land in the attached Exhibit B. Shorewood agrees to enter into a Ground lease with the Cities as tenants in common for a term of Twenty Five (25) years at a lease rate of One Dollar ($1.00) per year and other good and valuable consideration, which ground leasQjShall allow the Cities to proceed with constnJction of the Center. LEASE Upon completion of construCtion, the Center shall be leased by the Cities to the Pdends of the South Shore Senior Community Center, a non~profit corporation organized and established pursuant to Sections 170(c)(2) and SO 1( c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The term of the lease shall be Twenty Five (25) years and the amount of the Center Jease between the Cities and Friends shall be One Dollar ($1.00) per year and other good and valuable consideration. OPERAnON~ MAINTENANCE Friends shall be required to operate and maintain the Center so as to achieve the objectives of the Cities' as specified in this Agreement and in accordance with the lease agreement between the Cities and Friends. Friends shall be required to purchase any and all forms of insurance as necessary to adequately insure the Center and the Cities against any and aU risks associated with operating and maintaining the Center, both known and unknown. including workers compensation insurance for Center employees and liability insurance up to the statutory limits of liability relating to the Center and each such policy shall name the Cities as insureds. By entering into this Agreement, the Cities do not agree to asswne any risk or responsibUlty for the acts or omissions relating to the operation and maintenance of the Center by Friends, nor for the procurement. or failure to proc\Jte, by Friends of insurance against all insurable risks, both known and unknown, related to the Center, nor for the acts or omissions of any other individual City. TERMINATION Any of the Cities may terminate and rescind it's partiCipation in the Center at any time and for any reason In accordance with this Agreement, upon thirty (30) days notice in writing to the remaining Cities stating an intent to do so. The remaining Cities shall not have a right to 2 S l' d S9lr96S-l19 N3~90N[' h,ijQ N~W~~OH NI~~ij' WO~~ 81 :rl S66l "l0 '''0 .. ,,' ~.. object to the withdrawal from this Agreement of any City. provided that the withdrawing City relinquishes and permanently forfeits its undivided ownership interest in tho Center to the remaining Cities. The lease between Cities and Friends may be terminated upon the occurrence of any of the following: (1) insolvency or dissolution ofFrlends; (2) failure by Friends to achieve the mission and objectives specified in this or any other Aareement; or (3) the unanimous decision of the Cities to Terminate.. FUNDING AU amounts due from the Cities for development ofilie Center shall be remitted to Shorewood at the date of execution ot this Agreement by an. authorized representative of the . respective Cities. Shorewood shaU act as the finance manager during the design and construction of the Center and shall establish separate books of account in behalf of the Cities to monitor the payment of funds from the Cities~ as well the payment of funds to certain unidentified claimants relating to their design and construction ot the Center. Upon competition of the construction of the Center. the Cities shall be under no further obligation to fund the maintenance, operation. programming or staffing of the Center. AMENDMENT The terms of this Agreement may only be amended by unanimous consent of the Cities in writing. This Agreement must be constnted and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Cities otDeephaven, Excelsior. Greenwood, Shorewood and Tonka Bay have. in accordance with authorizing resolution from their respective City Councils (copies of which are attached in Addendum). caused this Agreement to be duly executed. . , Dated: FT CITY OF DEBPHA VEN By: Its: City (Clerk) Administrator 3 91"d 61 :s:t S66t "HI"l>0 S9~S:968-~t9 H3~9qHI1 ^1~q H~W~~OH HI~~~1 WO~~ . . ***(]H3*** Dated: Dated: Dated: Dated: 00763"',01 ,n "d 6t:tt S66t"l9"v0 CITY OF EXCELSIOR By: Its: City (Clerk) Administrator CITY OF GREENWOOD By: Its: City (Clerk) Administrator CITY OF SHORBWOOD By; Its: City (Clerk) Administrator CITY OF TONKA BAY By: Its: City (Clerk) Administrator 4 S9~t968-~t9 H3~90HIl ^l~(] N~W~~OH NI~~~l wo~~ ~ RECEIVED APR 1 9 1995 STUART J. BONNIWELL Certified Public Accountant 7101 York Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 (612) 921-3354 March 3, 1995 To The Coordinating Committee South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department Excelsior, Minnesota . I have audited the combined balance sheet of South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department and the related statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balance as of and for the year ended December 31, 1994, and have issued my report thereon dated March 3, 1995. In planning and performing the audit of the basic financial statements, I considered the system of internal control structure in order to determine the extent of auditing procedures necessary for expressing an opinion on the basic financial statements of the Department and not to provide assurances on the internal control structure. My study and evaluation of the internal control structure made for the limited pur- pose described in the first paragraph would not necessarily disclose any material weaknesses in the structure. Had I performed additional procedures or performed an audit of the internal control structure in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, other matters might have come to my attention that would have been reported to you. Accordingly, I do not express an opinion on the Department's system of internal control structure taken as a whole or on any of the categories of controls. . The purpose of this letter is to communicate certain matters involving the Depart- ment's internal control structure and other operational procedures noted during the audit. These comments are presented for your consideration and are not intended to be a criticism of the performance of Department management in fulfilling its duties and responsibilities. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Coordinating Committee, management and others within the organization. Recommendations are intended to improve internal control structure or financial management and administration. Segregation of Duties The Department has a limited number of office personnel involved with certain accounting procedures. The limited number of personnel responsible for recording, reconciling, and reporting of financial transactions and performance of related accounting procedures prohibits optimum segregation of duties. The segregation of duties and responsibilities of individuals is a fundmental principal and key ele- ment of a system of internal control structure. This comtemplates that no one individual has access to both the physical assets and related accounting records or handles a transaction from its inception to its completion. I recognize that employment of additional personnel for the purpose of improving the segregation of duties is not practical from a financial standpoint, but, I am required under pro- fessional standards to bring this matter to your attention. :fF8~ AI To The Coordinating Committee South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department Segregation of Duties, continued Presently one individual is responsible for receipt and disbursement of Department funds. This individual is also responsible for maintaining the general ledger of the Department. This situation does not provide for an optimum segregation of duties, however, the Department has implemented several accounting related policies and procedures to minimize the impact of this situation. Therefore, accounting duties, policies and procedures should be routinely reviewed to determine that they are being adhered to and functioning properly or whether circumstances have changed necessitating modification of existing accounting policies and procedures. Some of the most effective controls are management's knowledge of and active participa- tion in Department operations. Collateral and Investments Minnesota statutes requi~e that Department deposits be protected by insurance, . surety bonds, or collateral. Funds on deposit in excess of insurance provided by the depository must be protected by surety bonds and/or collateral. The market value of collateral pledged shall be at least 110% of the deposits not covered by insurance or surety bonds. At December 31, 1994, Department deposits (combined total of-checking and savings accounts) at one of its depositories totaled $111,944. The amount of insurance coverage for these funds should be reviewed with bank officials. Based upon my understanding, demand and time accounts are each protected by $100,000 of federal depository insurance. However, if the bank considers both accounts as demand deposits, there would be only $100,000 of insurance protection provided by the bank. To avoid this concern, the Department should, monitor its deposits at this deposi- tory and maintain a combined total of less than $100,000. During the year the Department had excess funds invested in a money market. The only activity in this account was interest being added to the account. If these funds are excess funds, the Department should research other permitted investments ~ to determine if the funds can be invested to earn a greater rate of return than is presently being realized and yet maintain a high degree of security. Financial Condition For the year ended December 31, 1994, revenues exceeded expenditures by $15,457. This was a favorable variance compared to the budgeted deficit of $24,500. The increase is largely attributed to insurance reimbursements of $17,689 from policy dividends and rebates; in addition, no amount was budgeted as revenue from these reimbursements. The combined fund balance of the Department totaled $109,569 as of December 31, 1994, of which $15,000 has been designated for the 1995 operating budget and $62,257 for special accounts, of which $57,582 is attributed to the insurance reserve. The combined fund balance represents approximately 10% of the budgeted expenditures for 1995. This fund balance provides the Department with a degree of financial stabilty and serves as a safeguard against potential revenue shortages or unexpected expenditures. - ~>~--~...-..,.-_.--. - . To The Coordinating Committee South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Coordinating Commi~tee, management and others within the organization. If the Committee wishes, I would be pleased to meet and discuss any of these observations, comments, or recommendations mentioned or other matters pertaining to the audit with the Committee or management at your convenience. I wish to express my appreciation for the courtesies and cooperation extended by the Chief of Police and other Department personnel during the engagement. ~n.0~ Stuart J. i~~iwell Certified Public Accountant . . CKNO 15831 15832 15833 15834 15835 15836 15837 15838 15839 15840 15841 15842 15843 15844 15845 15846 15847 15848 15849 15850 15851 15852 15853 15854 15855 15856 15857 15858 15859 15860 1 5861 15862 15863 15864 15865 15866 15867 15868 15869 15870 15871 . CHECK APPROVAL LISTING FOR APRIL 24, 1995 COUNCIL MEETING CHECKS ISSUED SINCE APRIL 7, 1995 TO WHOM ISSUED PURPa3E US POSTMASTER NEWSLETTER POSTAGE FARMERS UNION TRAVEL GFOA CONFERENCE AIRFARE MS. GLORIA OLSON PARTIAL ESCROW RELEASE BROWNING FERRIS IND. APRIL RECYCUNG HAMLlNE UNIVERSITY SPRING TUmON JAMES HURM MILEAGE METRO COUNCIL WASTERWATER MARCH SAC CHARGES CELLULAR ONE ACCESS CHARGES MINNCOMM PAGING APRIL PAGER NSP UTILITIES ALAN ROLEK SEC 125 REIMB SCHAD TRACY SIGNS LIQUOR SIGN SUPERAMERlCA FUEL BELLBOY CORP UOUOR MIDWEST COCA-GOLA MISC DAY DISTRIBUTING BEERI1V1ISC EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEERI1V1ISC GRIGGS, COOPER & CO L1QUORIWINE/BEER/MISC HUEBSCH MAT CLEANING JOHNSON BACS LIQUOR CO L1QUORIWINE LAKE REGION VENDING MISC L1NDERHOLM TRUCKING FREIGHT MARK VII BEERI1V1ISC NORTH STAR ICE MISC PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS L1QUORIWINE/MISC QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS BEER/WINE THORPE DISTRIBUTING CO BEERI1V1ISC WEEKLY NEWS, INC ADVERTISING FIRST STATE BANK FED/FICA TAX PER4. PER4. ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 457 DEFERREDCOMP CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT CHILD SUPPORT -G. DAVIS ANOKA CTY SUPPORT/COLLECT CHILD SUPPORT -G. SCHMID MN DEPT OF REVENUE MARCH SALES TAX MN DEPT OF REVENUE STATE TAX WITHHOLDING KATHLEEN HEBERT SEC 125 REIMB BRADLEY NIELSEN SEC 125 REIMB NORTHERN STATES POWER UTILITIES JOSEPH PAZANDAK MILEAGE PEPSI COLA CO MISC AMOUNT $491.07 331.00 3,750.00 27.00 840.00 97.50 4,207.50 11.06 14.38 1,160.52 35.12 422.85 332.67 1,659.88 809.64 3,815.70 11,338.20 2,382.20 24.05 3,431.58 217.23 425.60 3,425.84 69.00 2,862.95 51 7.64 9,729.60 397.50 6',782.64 2,139.40 864.98 477.00 92.50 139.44 8,910.00 1,145.68 192.31 100.00 1,084.85 74.19 295.93 Page 1 ~lO . . . CKNO 15872 15873 15874 15875 15876 15877 15878 15879 15880 15881 15882 15883 15884 15885 15886 CHECK APPROVAL LISTING FOR APRIL 24, 1995 COUNCIL MEETING CHECKS ISSUED SINCE APRIL 7, 1995 TO WHOM ISSUED PURFQ3E SOUTH LAKE MTKA PSD RETIREMENT GIFT-HODGDON CITY OF TONKA BAY APRIL RENT US WEST COMMUNICA11ON BELLBOY CORPORA110N LIQUOR BOYD HOUSER CANDYITOBACCC MISC DAY DISTRIBU11NG BEERiMISC GRIGGS, COOPER & CO L1QUORIWINEJMISC HONEYWELL PROTECTION QTRL Y MONITORING 5-7/95 JOHNSON BRCS LIQUOR CO L1QUORIWINE LAKE REGION VENDING MISC MARK VII BEERiMISC PAUSTIS AND SONS WINE PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS L1QUORIWINE QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO L1QUORIWINElBEER WORLD CLASS WINES, INC . WINE TOTAL CHECKS ISSUED Page 2 AMOUNT 100.00 1,000.00 48.93 3,015.38 235.08 2,914.15 4,736.05 100.00 3,306.76 167.10 2,723.70 255.60 1,226.32 2,833.96 51.20 CITY OF SHOREWOOD CHECK APPROVAL LIST FOR APRIL 24,1995 COUNCIL MTG CHECK~ VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION DEPT. AMOUNT '-"~'-"-"-"--'- -,---,,-'-"'-~"-'-'-'--~'-"-"-"-"-'-'-'-'-'-"".... .-....-..-.....--..-.--..-.-.-..--.--.--.-.---..- --.--..---.--.--- .-....-..-.--..-.--... 15887 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY ~3HOP SUPPLI~::S L5888 ABDO, ABDO. AND EICK ;:;UDIT (;~UDIT 1~~UD I I P1UD I T ;;~UD I T *** TOTAL FOR ABOG. ABDO, AND EICK 15:3:39 ;:~LE3 I HSON r:,~EDUCT IOr..j 15:390 APPLIED GRAPHICS ASSOC. NEWSLETTER PRINTING 15891 JEFF REIHHART DBA MARCH JANITORIAL . 15892 UIFFS" It.,.i.C. PORTAULE TOILET RENTAL 15893 BOB RICHARDS PHOTOGRAPHY COUNCIL PHOTO 15894 BOYER TRUCK PARTS E::'-~UIP (iPlli',lT 15:395 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS, INC. RIP-RAP .1.S ~:~ ~:.) (, C '"> i<. SEED IHC Ci f-< (;~ S ~3 SEED <~{ :, . ~L5:397 Ct~TCO F)~::F~ or S ;:~HD SER\/ICE E'~UIP 11,~)IHT 15898 CHANHASSEH LAWN AHD SPORT SUPPLIES 15899 CROSSTOWH-OCS. IHC. COFFEE . .1'::1 (:.) () () DICK FLOR GRAPHICS 1:J :~~~}:( :{ ~3 FEST I V;:.'1L 15901 DRISKILL'S SUPER VALU C:I~K.E 15902 ERICKSOH, ROLF E.A. MAY ASSESSOR FEES (;~SSE3S0F~~ SLIF'I:JLIES *** TOTAL FOR ERICKSON, ROLF E.A. 15903 EXCELSIOR-CITY OF 2HD QTR FIRE CONTRACT 15904 E-Z RECYCLING INC. f'/i;;~F<~CH REC:YC:L I i.J,Cl 15905 FIHA FLEET FUELIHG FUEL ~5906 HOPKINS PARTS COMPANY :::) }-I () F) ~) IJ F) F) 1._ I E: :3 15907 INTERNATIOHAL OFFICE SYST FAX MAlHI COHIRAcr 15908 MTI DISTRIBUTING COMPANY TORO GROUNDSMASTER 15909 M C L TELECOMMUHICATIONS MARCH LONG DISTANCE PUH lrJf<':3 Ph~OF SEr:,' :/')(in::F~ DE :3EI/.j[r~~ DE 1.1 ,. Son " 00 PL!~'11"..!H I HG COUNCIL ['-j Ul',j [; L D C1 F.i ::'~ F~ }<. ~:) 8<. COUNCIL PUE3 I;,Jf<'::3 FJ f'{ F~~ l-< ::; 8<. pue 1/.)f<.3 THEE ["i{~ I ['-jUt.,.! CLDC F) t~:) F~~ r<. ~:) !1<. COUNCIL Pi~OF SEr,~ pr~~OF SEf<~ .5 _i~~l ,,. ~L \' 2,700" ()( 3(:>() '. ()r 31.S'l() '. ()t. 540" (H 5<:'p:) .. O( 4" ;;31.0.. 4) 32.::1,.. ()(" ()..L M :2( 47,. eX' 2::3 .. ::.Sl~: "7 (~ ,. ~').J :2 ~ (~()~? '. .~::)< ~3t;o ,. ()t 122..3; 117,,01 200.. OC Si ,. '~:.) (~ :::S,.449..0~: 108..0':'. ::s-,~ .5.5'/ ,. .l() FIRE PRO 29~267~5(:~ F<:EC'y'CL I (J, CITY Gi;~H eIT'.,,' G;:;f<' f'/iU(.! E\!_DG 4,.570" OC .~::I :2 3 ,. .~:j (. 1~..:2 ,. :5 ::~:. .1()3,,. ')". iviU(.! Ct..DC PROJECTS 15.l91_1 101 .15~).j.(.) ~iE~"r.R(:) S(~l._E3 lNC RICOH COPIER MAlNT AGREE MUH BLDG (. ;::~ ,1. ,~ CITY OF SHORE WOOD C}~~~CK APF)ROVAL L.rS-l" I=OR APRIL 24,1995 COUNCIL MTG CHECK~ VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION DEPT. AMOUNT ..__..._'~'_.._.._"'- ....__.._.._.._._......_.._....._._.._._.._._.._.~._.........~_.._.... -..--.-.----.--..-..-.-.....-.-.----.-..-..-.---.-..... ---.,.-...-.------ ...-..-..-.---..-.--..-..,. 15911 METRO COUNCIL WASTEWATER MAY TREATMENT CHARGES 15912 MIDLAND EQUIPMENT CO. STEEL 15913 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS POSTAGE MACHINE MAINT 15914 MUNITECH. INC. MAY MAINTENANCE h f~ ''1'' j"ii:; I j...j T e i'..j :;~ i..j C [ *** TOTAL FOR MUNITECH, INC. 15915 NAVARRE TRUE VALUe SMALL TOOLS SUPPLIE~:; *** TOTAL FOR NAVARRE TRUE VALUE . 159.16 PE:PSI COLf4 COf"'iP?4NY 15917 POTTS, KENNETH N POP MACHINE RENTAL MARCH PROSECUTIONS 15918 SHORE WOOD TREE SERVIce REMOVE/HAUL TREE 15919 SO LK MTKA PUB SAFETY DEP MAY POLICE CONTRACT SEWER DE 35~569,.OO PUU I,..)KS ('11.fj"...j E3 L D G 19..9b 2 O~::' .. () () WATER DE 4,030.00 SEWER DE 2,170.00 6,200.00 CITY GAR 36,.16 CITY GAR 6.27 42..4ZS ("j U i..! E: L_ D G j:1 F~~ () F ;:; ::: r~ rF<E E r"if~ I 11 .. 5~3 .1 ;~ d. .:::1 ;::~ ,~ ::::~ :.S :231... .51:) ~lO!_ICE P 35~301.~'75 15920 TIME SAVER OFF SITE SEC MINUTES GEN GOVT 179.50 MINUTES PLANNING 133.00 *** TOTAL FOR TIME SAVER OFF SITe 312.50 15921 TONKA AUTO AND BODY SUPP SHOP SUPPLIES 1.5~~)~22 TONKA BAY-CITY OF BARRIER FLOATS-CRESCENT LIQ LIABILITY INS 1ST QTR WATER PURCH-TB 1ST QTR WATER PURCH-TB TB LIQUOR UTILITIES *** TOTAL FOR TONKA BAY-CITY OF . 15923 TONK A EQUIPMENT COMPANY I/JPdT:F~FOFm I/JELL 15924 TWIN CITY STAMP AND PRINT 2 NAMEPLATES 15925 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICES Ut...j I r::OF<~t"'iS 15926 US POSTMASTER POS"rAGE ~)ERM.r-T (l2~3) 15927 VISU-SEWER CLEAN & SEAL, SEWER CLEANING .1.592:3 1!.)(jTEF<'Ph~(J II'} (;~ -r E:: F< f'/j E: T E~ }~ ~3; 15929 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS 1~[Cj(iL ("!OT I CI::: .I~_ _.t,' '..1... .-'......,'...... TOTAL CHECKS FOR APPROVAL Page' 4 C I T''{ G(iF~~ F) ::~ Fi: K. S I:X i/') (~l T E::F<~ DE SEI/.JEF~ DC :2 :'1-(:) 3 '7 -,~ '7 -:::. WI:YTER DE GE(...j GOVT C I T\' GI~~F;I GEi...j GOVT S[It,)Ef:;~ DE :/')(1TER DE 8[j..j GOVT 1.5 .:~l 'j () .i:1"7 ,~ () ,) 3...1.4 708.9() J, 0~38 .. O() .5 .~t'7 I~ :2S .:~l 199..:20 8(q. ~ 3() 719..86 "7.,. 19:') 378.. 17 170..00 7,847..10 <;J '~;) .:::1 a ~1' ~;; 1r:31..s.S CHCC:KH . . CITY OF SHORCWOOD C: l--! E: C: }<. {~j:J F) F~: () \/ (~J... L. I :::) T F= Cl F..~ APRIL 24,1995 COUNCIL MTG VCNDOR NAMC DESCRIPTION DE:PT" *:;~* TOTAL CHECK APP:RlW.AT. LIST 252.897.52 P"a", r:; (':f'iOIJi..!T C H ,- C K R E G I S T E R I:: CHECK CHECK EMPLOYEE NAME CHECK CHECK TYPE DATE NUMBER NUMBER . AMOUNT COM 4 18 q'- 70 KIMBERLY A. ALLEN 209309 80.94 ,.:> COM 4 18 95 120 ROBERT B. BE(~N 209310 230.87 COM 4 18 95 1'"',1:: BRUCE E. BENSON 209311 184.70 .L-.J COM 4 18 95 375 JODI A. DALLMAN 209312 116.69 COM 4 18 95 500 CHARLES S. DAVIS 209313 621.88 COM 4 18 95 775 JAMES C. EAKINS 209314 654.63 COM 4 18 95 870 KELLY P. FLANAGAN 209315 44.32 COM 4 18. 95 1001 JOHN M. FRUTH 209316 72.53 COM 4 18 95 1105 KERI ANNE GRAF 209317 . 72.03 COM 4 18 95 .1170 MARLENE S. HAPTONSTALL 209318 417.76 COM 4 18 95 1190 KATHLEEN A. HEBERT 209319 583.94 COM 4 18 95 1400 PATRICIA R. HELGESEN ' 209320 861.81 COM 4 18 95 1415 SHAWN D. HEMPEL 209321 204.33 COM 4 18 95 1550 JAMESC. HURM 209322 . 1619.93 COM 4 18 95 1601 BRIAN D. JAKEL 209323 59.10 COM 4 18 95 1700 JEFFREY A. JENSEN 209324 724.72 COM ,4 18 95 1800 DENNIS D. JOHNSON 209325 797.18 . COM 4 18 95 1940 LOREN A. JONES 209326 152.59 COM 4 18 95 1950 MARTIN L. JONES 209327 116.10 COM 4 18 95 2100 WILLIAM F. JOSEPHSON 209328 632.19 COM 4 18 95 2212 MARY BETH KNOPIK 209329 113.59 COM 4 18 95 2500 SUSAN M. LA TTERNER - 209330 342.55 COM 4 18 95 2555 TAMMY E LENZEN 209331 120.97 COI"! 4 18 95 2800 JOSEPH P. LUGOWSKI 209332 819.56 COM 4 '18 95 2875 DOUGLAS J. MALAM 209333 184.70 COM 4 1S' 95 2930 JENNIFER T. MCCARTY 209334 182.05 COM 4 18 95 2955 CHRISTOPHER M. MCNEAL 209335 96.97 COM 4 18 95 3000 THERESA L. NAAB 209336 642.59 COM 4 18 95 3100 LAINRENCE A. NICCUM 209337 894.78 COM 4 18 95 3400 BRADLEY J. NIELSEN 209338 1070.10 COM 4 18 95 3500 JOSEPH E. PAZANDAK 209339 1087.59 COM 4 18 95 3530 SANDRf.', R. PETERSEN 209340 15.24 COM 4 18 95 3600 DANIEL J. RANDALL 209341 858.62 . COM 4 18 95 3701 BRIAN M. ROERICK 209342 146.75 COM 4 18 95 3800 ALAN J. ROLEK 209343 1186.39 COM 4 18 95 3900 CH.R I STOPHER E. SCHMID 299344 411.60 COM 4 18 95 3910 R CONRAD SCHMID 209345 137.37 COM 4 ..18 95 4.190 DANAG. "SHAW '2Q9346: ~; 221.64' COM 4 18 95 4500 KRISTI "STOVER 20934:'1 . 184.70 COM 4 18 95 4600 BEVERLY J. VON FELDT 209348 605.96 COM 4 .18 95 4750 RALPH A. ItoJEHLE 209349 625.28 COM" 4 18 95 4900 DEAN H. YOUNG 209350 656.84 COM 4 18 95 5000 DONALD E. ZDRAZIL 209351 1231.35 ****TOTALS**** 20085.43 PaQ:e 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA FINANCIAL REPORT YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1994 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CONTENTS Page INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT 1 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS EXHIBIT A - Combined Balance Sheet - All Funds and Account Groups - December 31, 1994 2 EXHIBIT B - Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - General Fund - For the Year Ended December 31, 1994 3 NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 4-12 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I STUART J. BONNIWELL Certified Public Accountant 7101 York Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 (612) 921-3354 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT To The Coordinating Committee South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department Excelsior, Minnesota I have audited the accompanying combined balance sheet of South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department as of December 31, 1994, and the related statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balance of the General Fund for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department management. My responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on my audit. I conducted my audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that I plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstate- ment. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by man- agement, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. I believe that my audit provides a reasonable basis for my opinion. In my opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department as of December 31, 1994 and the results of its operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. ~9~~ Stuart J. Bonniwe11 Certified Public Accountant March 3, 1995 -1- SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT COMBINED BALANCE SHEET - ALL FUND TYPES AND ACCOUNT GROUPS DECEMBER 31, 1994 EXHIBIT A Totals General (Memorandum Only) General Agency Fixed --------------------- ASSETS Fund Fund Assets 1994 1993 Cash and Investments $232,225 $232,225 $214,604 Accounts Receivable - Members 3,386 3,386 1,103 Other Receivables 14, 180 14, 180 11,999 Investments Held by Trustee - Deferred Compensation Plan $123,590 123,590 110,695 General Fixed Assets $300,352 300,352 292,224 Totals $249,791 $123,590 $300,352 $673,733 $630,625 ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY Liabl1 it ies Accounts Payable Accrued Payroll and Taxes Accrued Compensated Absences Deferred Compensation Benefits Payable $8,655 26,042 105,525 $8,655 26,042 105,525 123,590 $123,590 Total Liabilities 140,222 123,590 263,812 Fund Equity Fund Balance - Unreserved Designated Special Accounts Operating Reserve Undesignated 62,257 15,000 32,312 62,257 15,000 32,312 Total Fund Balance Investment in General Fixed Assets 109,569 109,569 $300,352 300,352 Total Fund Equity 109,569 300,352 409,921 Totals $9,745 23,749 100,100 110,695 244,289 40, 150 5,000 48,962 94,112 292,224 386,336 $249,791 $123,590 $300,352 $673,733 $630,625 ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements. -2- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT B STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE GENERAL FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1994 Revenues Member Assessments Member Reimbursements Grants and Aids Investment Income Sale of Equipment Insurance Reimbursements Other Revenues Total Revenues Expenditures Salaries Employee Benefits Professional Services Conmunications Maintenance and Repairs Motor Fuels General Supplies General Insurance Building and Other Rent Utilities Cleaning and Waste Removal Office Supplies and Printing Uniforms Conferences and Staff Training Memberships, Subscriptions and Other Special Projects Capital Outlay Total Expenditures Budget $945,580 13,000 70,000 4,800 8,000 5,450 1994 Var1ance- Favorable 1993 Actual (Unfavorable) Actual $945,580 16,815 80,312 6,978 8,200 17 , 689 13,331 1,046,830 1,088,905 692,710 131,000 2,500 14,400 14,500 17 ,000 9,000 55,000 41,200 13,820 4,400 7,750 5,000 6,000 700 9,500 46,850 700,714 129,884 2,448 11,323 16,062 14,353 8,423 55,255 41,276 13,298 4,261 7,701 4,470 6,943 605 1 0, 145 46,287 1,071,330 1,073,448 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over Expenditures ($24,500) Fund Balance Beginning of Year Fund Balance End of Year ---------- ---------- 15,457 94,112 $109,569 ---------- ---------- $ 3,815 10,312 2,178 200 17 ,689 7,881 $925,472 12 , 120 77 ,119 4,999 12,630 19,821 6,550 42,075 1,058,711 (8,004) 1,116 52 3,077 (1,562) 2,647 577 (255) (76) 522 139 49 530 (943) 95 (645) 563 671,769 129,981 2,262 13,630 12,852 13,143 7 , 153 53,499 41,134 13,357 3,820 8,159 4,850 5,734 1,517 9,372 69,270 (2,118) 1,061,502 $39,957 ---------- ---------- See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements. -3- (2,791) 96,903 $94,112 ---------- ---------- SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1994 Note 1. Significant Accounting Policies South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department was established by a joint and coop- erative agreement between the Cities of Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood and Tonka Bay. The Department is organized to provide law enforcement services to the four communities. The financial statements of the Department have been prepared in con- formity with generally accepted accounting principles, as established and applied to governmental units by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. The more significant accounting policies are described below. A. Reporting Entity In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, the financial state- ments of the Department are required to include all funds, account groups, commis- sions and other organizations over which the Department exercises oversight respon- sibility. It was determined that there are no such organizations subject to the Department's oversight responsibility which would require inclusion in the accom- panying financial statements. B. Fund Accounting The Department uses funds and account groups to report on its financial position and the results of its operations. Fund accounting is designed to demonstrate legal compliance and to aid financial management by segregating transactions related to certain government functions or activities. A fund is a separate accounting entity with a self-balancing set of accounts com- prising its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues and expenditures. Financial resources are allocated to and accounted for in individual funds based upon the pur- poses for which they are to be spent and the means by which spending activities are controlled. An account group, is a financial reporting device designed to provide accountability for certain assets and liabilities that are not recorded in funds because they do not directly affect net expendable available financial resources. The Department's funds and account group consist of the following: General Fund - The General Fund is the primary operating fund and accounts for all activities of the Department not accounted for in another fund. Agency Fund - The Agency Fund accounts for assets maintained by the Depart- ment on behalf of others as an agent. The fund is custodial in nature and does not involve the measurement of the results of operations. General Fixed Assets - Property and equipment owned by the Department are recorded as assets in the General Fixed Assets Account Group. This account group is concerned with the measurement of financial position and is not involved with the measurement of the results of operations. -4- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1994 Note 1. Significant Accounting Policies, continued C. Measurement Focus The accounting and financial reporting treatment applied to a fund is determined by its measurement focus. The General Fund is accounted for on a current financial resources measurement focus. With this measurement focus, only current assets and current liabilities are generally included on the balance sheet of the General Fund. Reported fund balance is considered a measure of "available spendable resources." The operating statement of the General Fund presents increases (revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current assets. Accordingly, this statement presents a summary of sources and uses of available spendable resources. Fixed assets acquired and used by the General Fund are accounted for in the General Fixed Assets Account Group, rather than in the General Fund. D. Basis of Accounting Basis of accounting refers to when revenues and expenditures are recognized and reported in the financial statements regardless of the measurement focus. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used by all funds of the Department. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized when they become measurable and available as net current assets. Measurable means the amount of the transaction can be determined and available means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to pay liabilities of the current period. Expen- ditures are generally recorded under the modified accrual basis of accounting when the related fund liability is incurred. E. Budgets A plan of financial operation for the Department is established in the budget adopted by the Coordinating Committee. The budget outlines proposed expenditures and the means of financing them. The budget of the General Fund is adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Budgeted amounts shown in the statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balance are as originally adopted or as amended. Budgeted expenditure appropriations lapse at year end. In addition, outstanding encumbrances expire at year end. F. Cash and Investments Cash includes demand deposits and short-term investments with a maturity date within three months of acquisition date. Investment earnings are recognized as earned; realized gains or losses from investments are recorded in the period in which they occur. Investments are stated at cost, except for investments of the deferred compensa- tion plan which are stated at market value. -5- SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1994 Note 1. Significant Accounting Policies, continued G. Property and Equipment Property and equipment owned by the Department are recorded as assets in the General Fixed Assets Account Group. General fixed asset additions are recorded as expendi- tures in the General Fund and capitalized in the General Fixed Assets Account Group. These assets are recorded at cost where historical records are available and at estimated historical cost when such records do not exist. Donated fixed assets are valued at their estimated fair market value at the date received. Depreciation is not provided for on general fixed assets. H. Accrued Compensated Absences Department employees are entitled to vacation pay based upon length of employment. In addition, the Department has a severance pay policy based upon accumulated sick leave accrued, subject to certain regulations. Employees are also allowed to accrue compensatory time. Vested or accumulated compensated absences are reported as a liability of the General Fund since the liability is expected to be liquidated with current expend- able available financial resources. I. Fund Equity Designated fund balances represent tentative plans for future use of current finan- cial resources. Portions of the fund balance has been designated for a self- insurance program, acquisition of equipment and other purposes. In addition, $15,000 of the fund balance has been reserved to finance the current year's operating budget. J. Total Column on Combined Balance Sheet The total column on the combined balance sheet statement is captioned "memorandum only" to indicate that it is presented only to facilitate financial analysis. Data in these columns do not present financial position, results of operations or changes in financial position in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Neither is such data comparable to a consolidation. Interfund transactions have not been eliminated in the aggregation of this data. K. Comparative Data Comparative totals for the prior year have been presented in the accompanying finan- cial statements in order to provide an understanding of changes in the Department's financial position and operations. -6- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1994 Note 2. Cash and Investments The Department maintains deposits at those depository banks authorized by the Coordinating Committee. Cash and investments of $232,225 as of December 31, 1994, include bank demand deposits of $110,343 and money market fund shares valued at $121,857. The bank balance (before reconciling items) of bank deposits amounted to $111,944 and was covered by federal depository insurance. Money market fund shares were invested in accordance with Minnesota State Statutes. Investments of $123,590, managed by the trustee of the deferred compensation plan, are carried at market value as of December 31, 1994. Note 3. Property and Equipment Changes in general fixed assets for the year ended December 31, 1994 are as follows: Balance January 1, Balance Additions Deletions December 31, Building Improvements Automotive Equipment Furniture and Other Equipment $32,057 9,554 $29,979 3,504 $4,451 134,083 161,818 $4,451 132,005 155,768 $292,224 $41,611 $33,483 $300,352 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- Note 4. Fund Equity Designated Fund Balances - Designated amounts represent tentative plans for future uses of current resources. Changes in designated accounts for the year ended Decem- ber 31, 1994 are as follows: Balance Balance January 1 , Additions Deletions December 31, ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- Insurance Reserve $40,145 $72,692 $55,255 $57,582 Equipment Acquisition (702) 36,500 32,057 3,741 Other 707 1 , 000 773 934 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- $40,150 $110,192 $88,085 $62,257 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- In addition, $15,000 has been designated for Department operations in 1995. Undesignated Fund Balance - This amount is available to finance current and future years' expenditures. Investment in General Fixed Assets - The equity of the Department in its general fixed assets is reflected in this amount. -7- SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1994 Note 5. Lease Commitments The Department leases its office facilities from the City of Excelsior. Terms of the lease agreement require a base rent of $38,400 per annum, payable in monthly installments of $3,200. Rental payments shall continue until the amount expended by the City of Excelsior, together with interest at 7.00% per annum, is fully amor- tized, approximately another eighteen years. The leases continues in perpetuity unless terminated as provided in the lease. In addition, the Department leases certain equipment on a monthly basis. Total rental expense of the Department for the year ended December 31, 1994 for building and equipment leases amounted to $52,525. Note 6. Joint Powers Agreement South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department entered into a joint powers agree- ment with other law enforcement agencies to form the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force. The agreement is for one year, subject to annual renewal by its members. The Department contributed $8,400 to the Task Force during the year ended Decem- ber 31, 1994. The Department has renewed its participation in the Task Force and a similar contribution will be made in 1995. Note 7. Deferred Compensation Plan The Department offers its employees a deferred compensation plan created in accor- dance with Internal Revenue Code Section 457. The plan, available to all Depart- ment employees, permits them to defer a portion of their salary until future years. Participation in the plan is optional. The deferred compensation is not available to employees until termination, retirement, death or unforeseeable emergency. All amounts of compensation deferred under the plan, all property and rights purchased with those amounts, and all income attributable to those amounts, property or rights are (until paid or made available to the employee or other beneficiary) solely the property and rights of the Department subject only to the claims of the general creditors of the Department. Participants' rights under the plan are equal to those of general creditors of the Department in an amount equal to the fair market value of the deferred account for each participant. It is the opinion of the Department's legal counsel that the Department has no liability for losses under the plan but, .does have the duty of due care that would be required of an ordinary prudent investor. The Department believes that it is unlikely that it will use the assets to satisfy the claims of general creditors in the future. Investments are managed by the plan's trustee and reported at market value. The choice of the investment option(s) is made by the participants. -8- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1994 Note 8. Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide A. Plan Description All full-time and certain part-time employees of the Department are covered by defined benefit pension plans administered by the Public Employees Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA). PERA administers the Public Employees Retirement Fund (PERF) and the Public Employees Police and Fire Fund (PEPFF), which are cost- sharing multiple-employer retirement plans. PERF members belong to either the Coordinated Plan or the Basic Plan. Coordinated members are covered by Social Security and Basic members are not. All new members must participate in the Coor- dinated Plan. All police officers, firefighters and peace officers who qualify for membership by statute are covered by the PEPFF. The Department's payroll for employees covered by PERF and PEPFF for the year ended December 31, 1994 was $63,002 and $626,331, respectively; the Department's total payroll was $693,586. PERA provides retirement benefits as well as disability benefits to members, and benefits to survivors upon death of eligible members. Benefits are established by State Statute, and vest after three years of credited service. The defined retire- ment benefits are based on a member's highest average salary for any five successive years of allowable service, age, and years of credit at termination of service. Two methods are used to compute benefits for Coordinated and Basic members. The retiring member receives the higher of a step-rate benefit accrual formula (Method 1) or a level accrual formula (Method 2). Under Method 1, the annuity accrual rate for a Basic member is 2% of average salary for each of the first ten years of service and 2.5% for each remaining year. For a Coordinated member, the annuity accrual rate is 1% of average salary for each of the first ten years and 1.5% for each remaining year. Using Method 2, the annuity accrual rate is 2.5% of average salary for Basic members and 1.5% for Coordinated members. For PEPFF members, the annuity accrual rate is 2.65% for each year of service. For PERF members whose annuity is calculated using Method 1, and for all PEPFF members, a full annuity is available when age plus years of service equal 90. There are different types of annuities available to members upon retirement. A normal annuity is a lifetime annuity that ceases upon the death of the retiree. No survivor annuity is payable. There are also various types of joint and survivor annuity options available which will reduce the monthly normal annuity amount, be- cause the annuity is payable over joint lives. Members may also leave their contri- butions in the fund upon termination of public service, in order to qualify for a deferred annuity at retirement age. Refunds of contributions are available at any time to members who leave public service, but before retirement benefits begin. B. Contributions Required and Contributions Made Minnesota Statutes Chapter 353 sets the rates for employer and employee contribu- tions. The Department makes annual contributions to the pension plans equal to the amount required by state statutes. -9- SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1994 Note 8. Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide, continued B. Contributions Required and Contributions Made, continued According to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 356.215, the date of full funding required for the PERF and PEPFF is the year 2020. As part of the annual actuarial valuation, PERA's actuary determines the sufficiency of the statutory contribution rates to- wards meeting the required full funding deadline. The actuary compares the actual contribution rate to a "required" contribution rate. Current combined statutory contribution rates and actuarially required contribution rates (as reported in the July 1, 1993 actuarial valuation reports) for the plans are as follows: Public Employees Retirement Fund (Basic and Coordinated Plans) Public Employees Police and Fire Fund Statutory Rates ------------------- Required Employees Employer Rates 4.30~ 7.90~ 4.60~ 11.70~ 9.68~ 17.45~ Contributions made by the Department for the year ended December 31, 1994 were: Percentage of Amounts Covered Payroll Employees Employer Employees Employer Public Employees Retirement Fund Public Employees Police and Fire Fund $2,665 47,703 $2,823 71,555 4.23~ 7.62~ 4.48~ 11.43~ $50,368 $74,378 --------- --------- --------- --------- The Department's contributions to each of the funds for the year ended June 30, 1994 (PERA's fiscal year end), represented less than 1~ of the total contributions required of all participating entities. C. Funding Status and Progress 1. Pension Benefit Obligation The "pension benefit obligation" is a standardized disclosure measure of the pre- sent value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of projected salary in- creases and step-rate benefits, estimated to be payable in the future as a result of employee service to date. The measure, which is the actuarial present value of credited projected benefits, is intended to help users assess PERA's funding status on a going-concern basis, assess progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due, and make comparisons among Public Employees Retirement Systems and among employers. PERA does not make separate measurements of assets and pension benefit obligation for individual employers. -10- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1994 Note 8. Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide, continued C. Funding Status and Progress, continued The pension benefit obligations of the plans as of June 30, 1994 are shown below: PERF PEPFF (in mill ions) Total Pension Benefit Obligation $5,625.6 $1,021.0 Net Assets Available for Benefits, at Cost (Market Values of $4,762.5 and $1,237.5, respectively) Unfunded (Assets in Excess of) Pension Benefit Obligation 4,733.8 1,229.8 $891.8 ($208.8) ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- The measurement of the pension benefit obligation is based on an actuarial valua- tion as of June 30, 1994. Net assets available to pay pension benefits were valued as of June 30, 1994. For the PERF, significant actuarial assumptions used in the calculation of the pen- sion benefit obligation include; a) a rate of return on the investment of present and future assets of 8.51 per year, compounded annually, prior to retirement, and 51 per year, com- pounded annually, following retirement; b) projected salary increases taken from a select and ultimate table; c) payroll growth of 61 per year, consisting of 51 for im ,t ion and 11 due to growth in group size; d) post-retirement benefit increases that are accounted for by the 51 rate of return assumption following retirement; and e) mortality rates based on the 1983 Group Annuity Mortality Table set forward one year for retired members and set back five years for each active member. Actuarial assumptions used in the calculation of the PEPFF include; a) a rate of return on the investment of present and future assets of 8.51 per year, compounded annually, prior to retirement, and 51 per year, com- pounded annually, following retirement; b) payroll salary increase of 6.51 per year, compounded annually, attributable to the effects of inflation; c) post-retirement benefit increases that are accounted for by the 51 rate of return assumption following retirement; and . d) mortality rates based on the 1971 Group Annuity Mortality Table projected to 1984 for males and females. 2. Changes in Plan Provisions The 1994 legislative session did not include any benefit improvements which would impact funding costs for the PERF and the PEPFF. -11- -12- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 1994 Note 8. Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide, continued C. Funding Status and Progress, continued 3. Changes in Actuarial Assumptions Prior to fiscal year 1994, the salary increase assumption and the mortality tables used in the calculation of pension benefit obligation for the PERF were the same as those specified for the PEPFF. For the July 1, 1994 actuarial valuation, PERA's board of trustees approved new mortality rates updated to the 1983 Group Annuity Mortality Table, salary increases which were changed to a select and ultimate table and a new payroll growth assumption which was changed from 6.5% to 6%. These changes were made to reflect actual experience of the plan. With the adoption of the actuarial assumption changes and the new mortality tables for the PERF, the pension benefit obligation increased $56.6 million. The actuarial assumption changes also necessitated a $81.2 million transfer from the PERF Benefit Reserve to the PERF Minnesota Post Retirement Investment Fund (MPRIF) Reserve to finance the increased obligation for future retirement benefits. The change in the mortality rate assumption increased the PERF's costs because pensioners are living longer than assumed previously. The change in the salary increase assumption, how- ever, offset some of the additional costs because lower salary increases generally translate into lower benefit liabilities in the future. Potential changes in the assumptions used for the PEPFF may be made in the future after completion of a special experience study for that fund. Completion of the PEPFF experience study is expected by February 1, 1995. D. Ten-Year Historical Trend Information Ten year historical trend information is presented in PERA's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 1994. This information is useful in assessing the pension plan's accumulation of sufficient assets to pay pension bene- fits as they become due. E. Related Party Transactions As of June 30, 1994, and for the fiscal year then ended, PERA held no securities issued by the Department, its member cities or other related parties. J CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDA Y, APRIL 4, 1995 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Borkon called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Borkon; Commissioners Kolstad, Lizee, Pisula, and Turgeon; Council Liaison Benson, and Planning Director Nielsen. Commissioner Foust entered the meeting at 7 :08 pm. Commissioner Rosenberger entered the meeting at 7: 18 p.m. APPROV AL OF MINUTES Turgeon moved, Kolstad seconded to approve the March 21, 1995 Commission meeting minutes. Motion passed 4/0. Pisula abstained. 1. 7:00 PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW A LOT WITH NO FRONTAGE ON A PUBLIC STREET- ZACHARY WOODS Applicant: Location: Brent Sinn 6035 Galpin Lake Road Chair Borkon announced the case and outlined the procedures for a public hearing. , Nielsen reviewed the background related to the applicant's mid-1994 request to divide his property at 6035 Galpin Lake Road into 5 lots. The Planning staff recommended denial of a revised plat, however before the Planning Commission took any action, Mr. Sinn requested tabling of the request. The application was subsequently suspended by the development moratorium. After meeting with City staff and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the applicant submitted a new plan to subdivide the property into 3 lots fronting on Galpin Lake Road and 1 large lot fronting on Galpin Lane. Lots 2 and 3 will be accessed on the north and south ends of the wetland on the west end of the site. Lot 1 and the large lot with an existing home are accessed from the private street, Galpin Lane. Mr. Sinn has reached agreement with the Galpin Lane Association for use of that street. Because the large lot does not have frontage on a public street, the applicant requests a variance. Nielsen reviewed the analysis of the proposed plan and recommendations regarding: access, wetland alteration, subdivision/zoning requirements, tree preservation, City water, park dedication and sewer access fees (detailed in his 03-29-95 memorandum). Although Code requires that all new lots have public street frontage, a variance in this case results in substantially less site alteration that prior proposals by the applicant. No further division should be allowed, however, until public access can be provided. Galpin Lane Association conditions for granting access to Galpin Lane relating to City requirements provide that the Lot 1 driveway must be at least 40' east of the Galpin Lake Road/Galpin Lane intersection, Galpin Lane must be , -1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 4, 1995 - PAGE 2 widened to at least 20' up to the new driveway for the existing home, and final plat landscaping plan must maintain a 30' sight triangle at Galpin Lane. Nielsen reviewed recommendations with respect to water connections and stated the fmal plat should include a tree inventory and protection plan. The proposed wetland alteration and mitigation must be approved by the Watershed District and the City should require a wetland conservation easement over the wetland and the proposed buffer strip. Despite the proposed alteration of the wetland and the required variance, the new plan is considered superior to previous proposals for the subdivision. Nielsen suggested the Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat, subject to the staff recommendations. Borkon inquired whether the City is bound by the conditions outlined by the Galpin Lane Association. Nielsen explained the conditions correspond to what the City would require and pointed out that Mr. Sinn needs the Association's cooperation to accomplish the proposed subdivision. Mr. Brent Sinn, the applicant, concurred with Nielsen's review of the application, and indicated the proposal, developed with input from the Galpin Lane Association, is workable and that he will continue to consult with the City and the Association for a mutually beneficial completion of the project. Chair Borkon opened and closed the public hearing at 7:25 p.m. No comments were made from the public. The Commissioners considered the application. Lizee noted that the plans include a 35' wetland buffer strip and a 15' building setback from the buffer strip in accordance with the Commission's recommendations for wetland protection. Turgeon commended the applicant for an improved proposal and inquired whether the staff recommendations are acceptable to the applicant. Mr. Sinn stated he agreed with the recommendations and noted he will discuss matters related to provision of water with the City Council. Rosenberger commended the applicant for consulting with the neighborhood! Association. Borkon, Kolstad, and Pisula had no objections to the application. Foust inquired how driveways might be routed should Lot 4 be subdivided in the future. Nielsen reviewed 2 acceptable options available should Galpin Lane be upgraded to a City/public street or if a street is built in connection with possible development of property located to the east. Foust requested clarification of the recommended water related charges. Nielsen explained that the $5000 per lot trunk charge assessed at the time of final plat includes the water tower and project pump mains and the $5000 water connection fee (to be paid at the time the City makes water available) is the customary connection fee (currently $4000, anticipated to rise to $5000). Foust asked whether the Commission will review the applicant's tree preservation plan. Nielsen stated the plan will be considered by the Commission and noted that the Ordinance will be developed by the Commission. Turgeon moved, Pisula seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the revised Zachary Woods preliminary plat and variance to create a new lot with no frontage on a public street, subject to staff recommendations. Motion passed 7/0. The Council will consider the recommendation at its April 24, 1995 meeting. 2. 7:15 PUBLIC HEARING - SETBACK VARIANCE AND VARIANCE TO EXPAND A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE Applicant: Location: John Kimball 4445 Highland Circle . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 4, 1995 - PAGE 3 Chair Borkon announced the case and reviewed the procedures for a public hearing. Nielsen reviewed the applicant's request for a 20' front yard setback variance to allow construction of a new 2-car attached garage to the front of the home at 4445 Highland Circle. The existing garage is to be converted into a main level bedroom suite. Nielsen explained how the request is justified under the Code's criteria for granting variances and recommended approval of the variance. An overhead of the guidelines for granting variances was shown. Mrs. Barbara Kimball stated the plans represent consultation with the City staff, the next-door neighbors approve of the proposed construction, and that the building plan is designed to accommodate a health impairment. Chair Borkon opened and closed the public hearing at 7:44 p.m. There were no comments from the public. A letter from Dale & Linda Johnson, 4425 Highland Circle, Mound, in support of the garage/addition was acknowledged. The Commissioners considered the application, agreed it is justified under variance criteria, therefore interposed no objections. Turgeon moved, Rosenberger seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the 20' front yard setback variance for John and Barbara Kimball at 4445 Highland Circle, subject to staff recommendations. Motion passed 7/0. The Council will consider the recommendation at its April 24, 1995 meeting. 3. FORMAL APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT- Tabled from 10-04-94 meeting. AWlicant: Location: Lundgren Bros. Inc. 76.5 acres north of Smithtown Road west of Minnewashta School Nielsen stated this request was suspended by the development moratorium. He explained that although the City chose not to increase the density for this site in the updated Comprehensive Plan, official action to deny the amendment is suggested. He noted the developer has submitted a new plan for this site. The developer was not present at this meeting. Rosenberger moved, Pisula seconded to recommend to the Council that it deny the application of Lundgren Bros. Inc. for a Comprehensive Plan amendment for higher density at the developer's property west of the Minnewashta Elementary School. Motion passed 7/0. The Council will consider the recommendation at its April 24, 1995 meeting. 4. DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLAN - HERITAGE P.U.D. - tabled from 10-04-94. AWlicant: Location: Abingdon Development Corp. South of Edgewood Road approximately 700' east of Howards Point Road Nielsen referred to his 04-04-95 memorandum drafted in outline form reviewing the development stage plans for the Heritage P.D.D. Because of the incomplete staff report and issues raised, he suggested that consideration of this plan be tabled. He explained that although the Commission . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 4, 1995 - PAGE 4 recommended approval of the concept plans, this project was suspended by the development moratorium. Nielsen reviewed the preliminary outline of the staff analysis of the development stage plans. A number of revisions are recommended including flattening the curve in the street, lot lines perpendicular to the street, lots should not exceed 1/40000 sq.ft. plus 10%, and Outlot B considerations. Grading, drainage and erosion control plans require review and approval of the City Engineer. The Commissioners participated in a preliminary discussion on the development stage plans and the staff recommendations with Nielsen and Mr. Chuck Dillerud, representing the developer, and provided direction and guidance with respect to acceptability of the plans. A completed staff analysis and the developer's plans will be availabl~ for the Commissioners next meeting. Turgeon moved, Pisula seconded to table to April 18, 1995, consideration 0 f Abingdon Development Corp.'s Heritage P.U.D. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Borkon recessed the meeting at 8:45 p.m. arid reconvened at 8:52 p.m. 5. PRELIMINARY PLAT - MANITOU WOODS - tabled from 10-04-94 meeting. Applicant: Location: Abingdon Development Corp. 5580 Manitou Road Nielsen stated this proposal for construction of 2 twin homes received positive recommendations from the staff and the Planning Commission prior to its suspension by the development moratorium. The Comprehensive Plan Update impacts the proposal in 2 ways: tree preservation/reforestation and City water requirements (detailed in Nielsen's 03-30-95 memorandum). Nielsen recommended that tree removal be limited to those minimally necessary to accommodate the proposed buildings, parking area, and pond. A landscape plan as recommended is to be part of the final plat. It is proposed that the twin homes will be connected to the Tonka Bay water system. Nielsen reviewed the recommendations suggested for this plat with respect to Shorewood water. It is likely that extension of water along the west side of County Road 19 to Glen Road will be explored in the near future. Approval of this preliminary plat is recommended. The Commissioners considered the proposal. Turgeon inquired about hardcover and the water problem in the Glen Road area. Nielsen explained the project does not fall under the hardcover ordinance and the storm water improvements are included in the 1996 capital improvement program. Mr. Dillerud explained the pond will be built to NURP standards to control run-off. The homes are priced at about $200,000-$250,000. Turgeon moved, Kolstad seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the Manitou Woods preliminary plat, subject to staff recommendations, at 5580 Manitou Road. Motion passed 7/0. The Council will consider the recommendation at its April 24, 1995 meeting. 6. PRELIMINARY PLAT - SMITHTOWN MEADOWS (REVISED) Applicant: Location: Abingdon Development Corp. 25655 Smithtown Road (Outlot A) Nielsen stated this 7-10t plat was suspended by the development moratorium. In the interim, the Jaeger Addition plat which divided off the 2 lots with existing homes was approved. ..~. . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 4, 1995 - PAGE 5 Abingdon Development Corp. submitted a revised plat showing the remaining 5 lots. Nielsen indicated the layout is identical to that recommended for approval in mid-1994. He noted the right- of-way issue with Hennepin County has been resolved, the street name has been changed to Smithtown Way, and evidence of abandonment of a telephone company easement has been provided. Nielsen reviewed the Comprehensive Plan update impact on the proposed plat with respect to tree preservationllandscaping and City water. The fmal plat should include a landscape plan showing how and which trees will be protected, and the size, species and location of proposed trees. Assuming the site can be served with City water, each lot will be required to pay a $10,000 trunk/availability fee. Internal water mains should be shown on the plat and the developer should indicate whether the City will be petitioned to install the improvements. Details of the staff analysis are contained in Nielsen's 03-30-95 memorandum. Nielsen suggested that the Commission recommend approval of the revised preliminary plat subject to the original recommendations and those contained in his 03-30-95 memorandum. Mr. Dillerud stated the cost of City water is an issue for this development. He indicated that the petition referred to has been sent to the City. Replacement of trees is a part of the plans. Dillerud also stated that work continues to resolve the storm water problem in the area. The Commissioners discussed the drainage problems including the drain tiles and the Engineer's recommendations. Pisula moved, Turgeon seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the preliminary plat for Smithtown Meadows, 25655 Smithtown Road, subject to the recommendations of the staff and City engineer. Motion passed 7/0. The Council will consider the recommendation at its April 24, 1995 meeting. 7. PRELIMINARY PLAT - SMITHTOWN WOODS - tabled from 10-04-94 A'pplicant: Location: Clint Carlson and Brian Ohland 25895 and 25865 Smithtown Road Nielsen stated this project was suspended by the development moratorium. The Comprehensive Plan updated affects the proposed platting of 6 single-family lots in terms of City water and tree preservation/reforestation (Nielsen's 03-30-95 memorandum). Nielsen reviewed the water related recommendations to enable connection to City water and tree preservation/reforestation recommendations. Nielsen suggested that the Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat subject to the staff recommendations in his 03-30-95 and 09-01-94 memoranda. Mr. Clint Carlson stated recommendations related to water were brought to his attention this morning. He requested clarification of the City's intention to provide water to the project. He preferred that water be provided to the project by the City and recognized that the proposed costs can be discussed with the Council. Carlson commented on his tree preservation and reforestation plans. During the Commissioner's discussion, Rosenberger suggested that the segment required for extension of City water to this project be added to the current feasibility study. Rosenberger moved, Lizee seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the Smithtown Woods preliminary plat, subject to the staff recommendations, and recommended that the Council initiate a feasibility study to expedite the connection of City water to this plat. Motion passed 7/0. The Council will consider the recommendations at its April 24, 1995 meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 4, 1995 - PAGE 6 8. CONCEPT STAGE PLAN - SHOREWOOD SENIOR HOUSING - tabled from 10-04-94 meeting. AWlicant: Location: International Development IT 25600 State Highway 7 & 6140 Eureka Road Nielsen reported the developer met with the staff to discuss the status of its proposal and the effects of the Comprehensive Plan Update on the plan. If the developer pursues the project, new plans should be received no later than AprillO for placement on the Commission's May 2 agenda Rosenberger moved, Pisula seconded to table to May 2, 1995, consideration 0 f concept stage plans of International Development II for Shorewood senior housing at 25600 State Highway 7 and 6140 Eureka Road. Motion passed 7/0. 9. MA TTERS FROM THE FLOOR - None. 10. REPORTS Council Liaison Benson commented on the Council's plans for study of water policy issues. In response to Borkon's inquiry regarding absenteeism, Nielsen stated a formal policy does not exist. 11. ADJOURNMENT Turgeon moved, Pisula seconded to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Arlene H. Bergfalk Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial ... ..,. '- " '" NOTICE The Shorewood City Council will meet on the following dates: Wednesday, April 26, 1995 Wednesday, May 10, 1995 Wednesday, May 24, 1995 beginning at 7: 00 p.m. in Work Session Format in the City Hall Council Chambers. at 5755 Country Club Road The purpose of the meeting is for the City Council to meet with the members of the Watermain Assessment Advisory Group to discuss revisions to the 1995-1999 Capital Improvement Plan and special assessment policies. Meetings of the City Council are open to the public. James C. Hurm, City Administrator/Clerk - .I ~ To: Mayor and City Council From: James C. Hurm, City Administrator ;JJ Date: April 17, 1995 1V Re: Attached Tony Eiden Company Memo I Chuck Dillerude has communicated to me his strong concern for a $10,000 per lot water system charge for small developments. They are trying to put together (Manitou Woods, 2 duplexes; and Smithtown Meadows, 5 new lots). I indicated to him the City Council feels it is important to treat all new lots equally whether they are larger areas which can perhaps absorb additional charges easier or divisions of one large lot. He responded with the attached memo requesting a TIF district be established. I indicated that the City Council would consider a TIF district for affordable senior housing but were much less likely to consider a TIF district as he proposes. I also indicated to him his proposal would be passed on to the City Council. cc: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director Al Rolek, Finance Director Tim Keane, City Attorney Advisory Group Members - ~ flP~-06-95 THU 09: 35 P. 02 TO: JIM HURM FROM: CHUCK D!LLERtJD Sl:JBJECT:W A TER SYSTEM TR!JNK IMPROVE.\1ENTS FINANCING Have you considered a TIF Renovation District responsive to MSA469.174, SuM. lOa? It strikes me that with careful district delineation you may be able to aggregate sufficient older portions of Shorewood with the proposed new subdivisions to meet the criteria for a Renovation District. Then the trunk improvements (including water tower) constrUcted within the district(s) could be funded with TIF bonds secured by both the Watzr Fund and the tax increments the district(s) win realize from our new home construction. Both our new homes and those existing V'tithin the TIF district(s) could be spared the huge front end hit for the trunk improvements. Our new developments will still be effectively financing the water system. but, in a slightly different fashion. (indee~ the school district and the county will be participating). I doubt whether Shorewood has previously done much TlF due to the lack of the qammerciallindustrial land use necessary to support the more common Economic Development TIF districts. We did a bunch of Economic Development Districts in Plymouth. It worked great for the City! We funded all or a portion of several very costly TOad projects and free\vay interchanges V'tith the increments :from those districts - and there remains an 8 figure balance in the Plymouth TIF account today. One could hardly consider the use afTIF to install a water system an abuse ofTIF' (we would not, after aU, be assisting a K Mart as was the most common example of abuse) Yes, the school board may be upset, but, after all it could be argued that without the water system all those high value homes may not be built at aIL It seems to me that this is one of the guiding philosophies behind TIP anyway. While qualifying a Renovation District may appear onerous at first glance, it looks like MSA 469.174 Subd 10 (immediately prior to lOa referenced above) gives the City quite a bit of latitude in determining those qualifications. The "substandardness" of the existing homes can be imputed rather than determined by actual inspection, which would be onerous politically. ..y .-...,,'-IoW. ... ".''''110..' ."''' ,.r-r.. loOt.. :.cr...""'._ ,.... J r ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE ADOPTING AN ASSESSMENT POLICY FOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION THE PROVISION OF MUNICIPAL WATER THE CITY COUNCn. OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Section is renumbered as Section Section 2. Chapter _ of the Shorewood City Code is hereby amended by adding the following: SECTION - STREET WATER ASSESSMENT POLICY Subd. 1 - SCOPE AND PURPOSE This policy is intended to provide a fair, equitable, and consistent means of allocating the cost of street reCOflStnIetion water improvements. to existiBg streets. This policy does Bot apply to Be'.\' constructiofl Bor to maintena:flce fimCtiOBS which are defined as patcl1fag, seal coating and o'/eday. Street reconstmotiofl is coasidered to be a:flY street improyemeat over afld above these FB:aii:J:tena:nce functions. Subd. 2 - DEFINITIONS a. Adjusted Front Footage: A method for determining the average front footage for odd-shaped lots which would be equivalent to the footage of a rectangular shaped lot of the same area and depth. b. Annual Rate: The rate used for City water assessments as computed under Subdivision 5. c. Building Site: An area of land on which a building exists or an area of land meeting city code requirements on which a building could be constructed d. Construction Cost: Amount paid to contractors for constructing the improvements. e. Construction Interest: Cost of fmancing the improvements from the time the project is initiated until the assessment roll is approved by the City Council, less any interest earned on invested funds. The interest rate will be at the expected assessment rate. f. Dwellinf Unit: See Subdivision _ under the City's Zoning Code. g. Equivalent Residential Units: Equivalent residential units are the number of assessment units into which a large or unplatted parcel of land, which abuts a City functionally classified collector or arterial street, is divided in order to determine an assessment rate. The number of equivalent residential units is determined by dividing the adjusted front footage of the parcel by the average street footage of the project. .. h. Front Footage: The shortest dimensions of existing or potential sites abutting the streets. 1. Lot: Land occupied or to be occupied by a building and its accessory buildings, together with such open spaces as are required under the provisions of this zoning regulation having not less than the minimum area required by this Zoning Ordinance for a building site in the district in which such lot is situated and having its principal frontage on a street, or a proposed street approved by the Council J. Lot: Comer: A lot situated at the junction of and abutting on two (2) or more intersecting streets; or a lot at the point of deflection in alignment of a single street the interior angle of which is one hundred thirty-five degrees (135 0) or less. k. Project Cost (Total Cost of Im,provements): All construction costs, plus costs for administration, engineering, legal, fiscal, easement acquisition assessing, and any project related work previously done but not assessed. 1. Residential Unit: A residential unit is a platted single family residential lot which, in accordance with the City of Shorewood's zoning and subdivision regulation, cannot be further subdivided. m. Side footage: The longest dimension of existing or potential comer building sites abutting the street. Subd. 3 - SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS a. Benefit Principle Special assessments, as authorized by Minnesota State Law, Chapter 429, may be levied only upon property receiving a special benefit from the improvement. In Minnesota, the Constitution and courts apply this general rule by placing the following limitations upon the power to levy special assessments: 1) the rate must be uniform and consistent upon all property receiving special benefit; 2) the assessment must be confmed to property specially benefited; and 3) the amount of the assessment must not exceed the special benefit. The special assessment is a financial tool employed by the City of Shorewood as a means of allocating the costs of specific improvement projects to the benefited properties and spreading those costs over a number of years as specified by the City Council. Special assessments are billed to the property owner along with real estate taxes. There is, however, a distinct difference between taxes and special assessments. Real estate taxes are a function of the real estate value as determined by the municipal assessor, while special assessments are a direct function of the enhancement of value or the benefit which a specific improvement gives to the property b. Consistent & Equitable Once an improvement project is initiated and it is determined that the improvements are necessary and desirable, the special assessment procedure is intended to equitably and consistently allocate and levy the cost of specific improvements to the benefited properties. !he City must r~cover the appropriate portion of the expense of installing public Improvements, If undertaken, while ensuring that each parcel pays its fair share of the project cost in accordance with these assessment guidelines. This policy sets forth the general assessment methods and policies to be utilized by the City Administrator and City Engineer when preparing assessment rolls for approval by the City Council so as to assure uniform and consistent treatment to the various properties from year to year. The following policy is general in nature, and that certain circumstances may justify deviations from stated policy as determined by the City Council. Subd. 4 - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE A flow chart on the Shorewood Public Improvement Process for Special Assessment projects giving a detailed explanation of the process is shown on the next page. a. Initiatin~ the Proceedin~s Improvement proceedings may be initiated in anyone (1) of the following three (3) ways: 1. By a petition signed by the owners of not less than thirty-five percent (35%) of the frontage of the real property abutting on the streets named as the location of the improvement; 2. By a petition signed by 100% of the owners of real property abutting any street named as the location of the improvement. Upon receipt of a petition of 100% of the abutting property owners, the City Council must determine that it has been signed by 100% of the owners of the affected property. After making this determination, a feasibility report shall be undertaken and the project may be ordered without a public hearing, or 3. By the initiative of the City Council. Petitions for improvement shall be referred for Administrative report and estimated budget. A simple majority vote of the City Council is needed to start the proceedings Whether initiating the proceedings or accepting a petition requesting such proceedings, the City Council may simultaneously order a feasibility report on the proposed improvement. Feasibility reports shall be paid for by the City in the case of street reconstruction projects and recouped once the project as completed under the terms of this policy. b. Preparin~ the Feasibility Study An improvement project which is initiated by action of the City Council or by a 35% petition may be ordered only after a public hearing. Prior to adopting a resolution calling a public hearing on an improvement, the Council must secure from the City Engineer a report advising it in a preliminary way as to: 1. Whether the proposed improvement is feasible; 2. Whether the proposed improvement is consistent with Capital Improvement Planning; . 3. Whether the improvement should be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement; 4. The estimated cost of the improvement; 5. A proposed project schedule; and 6. Any other information thought pertinent and necessary for complete Council consideration. c. Holding a Public Hearing on the Improvement Improvement projects which are initiated by a 100% petition may be ordered by the City Council without a public hearing if the City Council detemunes the project may be undertaken without unreasonable changes to the Capital Improvement Finance Plan or the petitioning property owners agree to pay 100% of the cost of the improvements. In the case of a Council-initiated project or petition of less than 100% of abutting pro{>erty owners, the Council must adopt a resolution calling a public hearing on the Improvement project for which mailed and published notices of the hearing must be gIven. The notice of public hearing must include the following information: 1) The time and place of hearing; 2) The general nature of the improvements; 3) The estimated cost; and 4) The area proposed to be assessed. Not less than ten (10) days before the hearing the notice of hearing must be mailed to the owner of each parcel in the area proposed to be assessed. The notice of public hearing must be published in the City's legal newspaper at least twice, each publication being at least one week apart, with the last publication at least three (3) days prior to the hearing. At the public hearing, the contents of the feasibility study will be presented and discussed with the intent of giving all interested parties an opportunity to be heard and their views expressed. d. Ordering the Improvement and Ordering Preparation of Plans & Specifications Following a public hearing a resolution ordering the improvement may be adopted at any time within six (6) months after the date of the hearing by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council, unless the petition was initiated by a 35% petition in which event it may be adopted by a majority vote. The resolution may reduce, but not increase, the extent of the improvement as stated in the notices. At this time a special assessment is considered to be "pending" for all assessable properties in the improvement area. After the order of an improvement project, the City Council must order the preparation of plans and specifications which may be included as part of the resolution ordering the improvements. When the Council determines to make any improvement, it shall let the contract for all or part of the work, or order all or part of the work done by day labor, no later than one (1) year after the adoption of the resolution ordering such improvement unless a different time limit is specifically stated in the resolution ordering the improvement. e. Advertisin~ for Bids If the estimated cost of the improvement exceeds $25,000, bids must be advertised for in the legal newspaper and such other papers and for such length of time as the City Council deems desirable. If the estimated cost of the improvement exceeds $100,000, the advertisement must be in a paper published in a fIrst class city, or in a trade paper not less than three (3) weeks before the last date for submission of bids. The notice must contain the following information: 1. The work to be done; 2. The time when bids will be publicly opened which must be not less than ten (10) days after the fIrst publication of the advertisement when the cost is less than $100,000, and not less that three (3) weeks after publications in all other cases, and 3. A statement that no bids will be considered unless they are sealed and accompanied by cash, a cashier's check, bid bond or certifIed check for such percentage of the bid as specifIed by the City Council. f. A wardin~ Contracts Following receipt of the bids, the City Council must either: 1. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder; or 2. Reject all bids The contact must be awarded no later than one (1) year after the adoption of the resolution ordering the improvement unless that resolution specifIes a different time limit. The City Council may purchase the materials and order the work done by day labor or in any manner it deems proper if: 1. The initial cost of the entire work does not exceed $25,000; 2. No bid is submitted after advertisement; or 3. The only bids are higher than the engineer's estimate. g. Preparin~ Proposed Assessment Roll After the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the completion on an improvement have been calculated as defined in Section VI-C Project Costs, the City Council must determine the amount it will pay and the amount to be specially assessed. The City Engineer and Administrator/Clerk must calculate the amount to be specially assessed against every parcel of land benefited by the improvement. The area to be assessed may be less than, but not more than, the area proposed to be assessed as stated in the notice of public hearing on the improvement The assessment roll should contain a description of each parcel of property and the assessment amount including any deferred assessments. The assessment roll must be filed with the City Administrator/Clerk and be available for public inspection. h. Holdin~ Public Hearin~ on Proposed Assessments A p~blic h~aring on the special assessments must be held following published and rruuled notice thereof. The notice of the assessment public hearing must include the following information: 1. The date, time and place of the meeting; 2. The general nature of the improvement; 3. The area proposed to be assessed; 4. The total amount of the proposed assessment; 5. That the assessment roll is on file with the Clerk; 6. That written or oral objections will be considered; 7. That no appeal may be taken as to the amount of assessments unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing; and 8. That the owner may appeal the assessment to the district court by serving notice on the Mayor or City Clerk within three (3) working days after the adoption of the aSsessment and filing notice with the court within ten (10) days after such appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk. The notice of the assessment hearing must be published in the legal newspaper at least once, not less than two (2) weeks prior to the hearing. The City Clerk must mail notice of the assessment hearing to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll at least two (2) weeks prior to the hearing. The mailed notice must also include, in addition to the information required to be in the published notice, the following information. 1. The amount to be specially assessed against that particular loti piece or parcel of land; 2. The right of the property owner to prepay the entire assessment and the person to whom prepayments must be made; 3. Whether partial prepayment of the assessment has been authorized by ordinance; 4. The time within which prepayment may be made without the assessment of interest; and 5. The rate of interest to accrue if the assessment is not prepaid within the required time period. Adopting the Assessments At the assessment hearing or at any adjournment thereof, the City Council may adopt the assessments as Eroposed or adopt the assessments with amendments. If the adopted assessment differs from the proposed assessment, the clerk must mail the owner a notice stating the amount of the adopted assessment. The adopted assessment roll shall include any and all deferments on large or unplatted parcels of land along the City's street system. J. Transmittin~ Assessment to County Auditor Afte~ the adoption of the assessment, the Ciry Clerk must transmit a certified duplIcate copy of the assessment roll, includmg all deferred equivalent residential umts to the County Auditor. Subd. 5 - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICIES It is the policy of the City of Shorewood that all properties shall pay their fair share of the cost of local improvements as they benefit. It is not intended that any property shall receive the benefits of improvements without paying for them. +hes& policies r~late to street reconstructioa projects. a. Establishin~ an Annual Rate 1\8. aflIll:lal asseSSFneat rate shall be establiSHed by the eoo of February by City Council R-eSOlatiOfl I:lpon recommendatioa of the City Eagiaeer. TIle City Eagineer SHall undertak-e a study to determffie the per foot project cost of a "typical" 24 foot, rural cross section street ("-"'lith no carb and gutter) ia the metropolitan Mea, adjusted for typiOal. SHorewood soil conditions (see followiBg page). Wl1en deterrnirHflg an anB1:lal rate with constructioa costs of tHe previous COflStructioa seasoa the construction cost index as pablisHed by tbe "Eagineeriflg News R-ecord" or consumer price index may be used. When the City detennines that a street shm:1ld be recoflstructed it would be rebl:lik to its current width. Current v:idth could be adjusted by the City Council upon request of the property owners or by the Council following public heariflg if traffic COUBts or saf-ety considerations suggest a wider street is 'llarranted. An annual assessment rate shall be established by the end of February by City Council resolution upon recommendation of the City Engineer. The City Engineer shall establish the rate based on the index of construction costs as published by the "Engineering News Record" or the Consumer Price Index, with a base rate as established below. b. Assessable Street R-econstructiofl Projects Street reconStnletiofl projects Me not likely to require tBe same amol:lnt of work throughout the entife leagth of the project. That is, some sectioas may Beed to be fully excayated and back filled while other sections may Beed simple reshaping It is the policy of the city taM a project is assessable '.~:hen its aggregate cost is estimated to be at least 150% of a simple 2 inch overlay project. Base Rates From time to time, at the direction of the City Council, the City Engineer shall determine an updated base rate. This study will include, but not be limited to, the following items: 1) Proposed Capital Improvement Costs; 2) Existing Water Fees; 3) Existing Water Fund Balance, c. Project Costs Project cost shaR include, bet flOt be limited to, the followiBg: 1. Total COflstmctioa east iBcl1:ldmg iRterseoaaas 2. Eagifleering fees 3. .\dmiflistrative fees 1. Right of way/easemeat acquisitioRleoademaatioR costs 5. Legal fees 6. Fiscal Fees 7. Capitali2ed interest d. Term of Assessment Assessments for street recoastructioa water should be assessed for a tea (10) fifteen (15) year period unless the City Council determines that some other period of time is more appropriate. e. Government Owned Properties Properties belonging to government jurisdictions, including the City, will be assessed the same as privately owned property. f. Non-developable Land Special Assessments shall not be levied on properties deemed unbuildable due to the existence of undeveloped lands lying wholly and completely within zoned wetlands, flood plains, DNR protected wetlands and/or having restricted soils as determined by the City Building Inspector. However, all parcels of land are assumed to be buildable until proven otherwise by the owner. , g. Interest Rate The interest rate charged on assessments for all projects financed by debt issuance shall not exceed two percent (2%) of the net interest rate of the bond issue. This is necessary in order to msure adequate cash flow when the City is unable to reinvest assessment prepayments at an interest rate sufficient to meet the interest cost of debt or when the City experiences problems of payment collection delinquencies. In the event no bonds are issued then the rate of interest on assessments shall not exceed two (2) percent greater than the average rate of interest on all bonds issued in the previous calendar year or the current market municipal bond rate. Interest on initial special assessment installments shall begin to accrue from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment. Owners must be notified by mail of any changes adopted by the City Council regarding interest rates or prepayment requirements which differ from those contained in the notice of the proposed assessment. h. Payment Procedures The property owner has four available options when considering payment of assessments: J. Reapportionment Upon Land Division When a tract of land against which a special assessment has been levied is subsequently divided or subdivided by plat or otherwise, the City Council may, on application of the owner of any part of the tract or on its own motion, equitably apportion among the various lots or parcels in the tract all the installments of the assessment against the tract remaining unpaid and not then due if it determines that such apportionment will not materially impair collection of the unpaid balance of the original assessment against the tract. The City Council may require furnishing of a satisfactory surety bond in certain cases as specified in Minnesota Statutes Section 429.071, subd. 3. Notice ofthe apportionment and of the right to appeal shall be mailed to or personally served upon all owners of any part of the tract. In most cases dividing the assessment balance evenly on a unit or lot basis would result in an equitable apportionment. If equitable in a particular case, such a procedure would be most practical and administratively effective Subd. 6 - ASSESSMENT METHOD Once an assessmeat rate has beeR established for the year, that rate will be atilized for each project, ao ~r the widtli, GesigR, or type of street beiag reconstructed. The City Cm:1neil may l:ltiJ.i.ze oae of two methods of assessmeat for eaeh projects "uRit" or "froRt foot." The City Eag1Reer shall r~commead the method and prepare the proposed assessmeat roll baseG I:lpaR which method results in the most fair and eqaitable assessment roR for that poojeet. 'The unit method is to be utilized WRen the front footage of the assessable pOOJ3erties are of relatively equal length or the benefit to the properties is similar. 'The froat footage method is to be utilized whee there is a significant differeatial iB the froat footage, or benefit, of the assessable properties. a. Unit Method The unit method of assessment is most commonly I:lsed when the beaefitiag properties ar~ of similar benefit, bat Rat Recessarily similar geometry. For instance, road recollstructioR along a particl:llar road '.viR likely beRefit the sev:eral properties OR a pri'rate drive as ml:lch as it benefits teese properties directly abutting the road beiBg tmpro'leG. In sach a case, simply assessiRg the abl:lttiag front footage wOl:lld not be eql:litable. A unit assessment shall be lleri':eG according to the following formula. "^....~.n1:lal assessment rate X project leRgth X 0.33/ number of assessable I:lnits. The number of assessment units assigned to each par<Jel of land within the assessment area shall be equal to the maximum number of potential lots which could be possible on that parcel as determined by the City Planner. .\ lot shall be defined in aceordance with the City's Zoniag Or-dinance. Comer lots saall typically ha'.~ one half (0.5) of its assessable units applied to each street. Hm':e';er, the entire oomber of assessable I:laits can be assessed ia conjunction with the street improvement project dORe firSt. This approach would normally be taken where a siBgle lot derives a majority of benefit from the reconstruction of the frrst project ooe to lot, dri':e',yay, and home location. b. Front Footaqe 'Method The actual physical dimensions of a parcel abutting a street r~construction project shall NOT be construed as the frontage l.:ltilized to calculate the assessmeat for a particulaf' par-ceL Rather, an "adjusted froat footage" will be determined. The froat footage assessment rate shall be derived accor-ding t-o the following f-ormma: L^.B.OOal assessment rate X project length X .33 / total adjusted front footage. The purpose of this method is to equalize assessment cakulatioas for lots of similar size. Indiyiooal parcels by their very nature differ coasiderably iB shape and area. The . following procedures 'l:ill apply whefl calculatiag adjusted front f-ootag.e. The selectIofl of the appropriate procedure will be determHied by the specific .configuratIon o~ the parcel. All measuremeats will be scaled from a'/ailable plat and sectIon maps and WIll be rounded dmvn to the nearest foot dimension with any excess fraction deleted. Categorical type descriptioRs are as f-ollows: 1. Standard Lots 6. Irregularly Shaped Lots 2. RectaRgular VarietiOR Lots 3. Triangular Lots 1. CuI de sac Lots 5. Curved Lots 7. Comer Lots 8. Flag Lots aRd Back Lots 9. Double Frontage Lots The ultimate objective of these procedures is to arrive at a fair and eqaitable distribution of cost whereby consideratioR is given to lot.size aRd all parcels are eomparably assessed. Assessments for City water shall be made in accordance with the formula in the following table: j'ormula 1 ype oJ JJwellmg ftxlstmg .rroposea or Zoning Single Family 1* R 2* RA . A Multiple Family* R A + (1/4* No. Units) RA 2RA + (1/2*No of Units) RA Commercial 1.5*RA 1.5*RA Where RA = Annual rate as established under Section 5.a No of Units = Number of dwelling units * Multiple family dwellings include those homes housing more than a single dwelling unit under one roof (i.e. duplex, trz-plex, apartments). For the purposes of this ordinance, no more than 12 awelling units will be allowed for each base rate applied. In addition to the above, developers of new subdivisions will be required to install later mains, services and appurtenant items at the time of platting. In those cases where CIty water will not be available at the time of platting - as determined by the City Engineer - the development shall pay, at the existing rate until suc~h time as water is available. At that time, the aifJ.erence between the proposed ate and the amount already pala shall become due ana payable. Subd. 7 - DEFERRED ASSESSMENTS a. The City Council may defer Special Assessments: 1. OR POrtiORS of large tracts of laRd as allowed iR this chapter so as to miRiF.B:ize the influence of the proposed improvement on the developmeRt of said land. 2. On homestead property owned by a person who qualifies under the hardship criteria set forth below. b. Procedure The property owner shall make application for deferred payment of special assessments on a form prescribed by the Hennepin County Auditor and . supplemented by the Shorewood City Administrator. The application shall be made wIthin 30 days after the adoption of the assessment roll by the City Council and shall be renewed each year upon the filing of a similar application no later than September 30. The City Adririnistrator shall establish a case number for each application; review the application for complete information and details and make a recommendation to the City Council to either approve or disapprove the application for deferment. The City Council by majority vote, shall either grant or deny the deferment and if the deferment is granted, the City Council may require the Rayment of interest due each year. Renewal applications will be approved by the City Administrator for those cases whereby the original conditions for qualifications remain substantially unchanged. If the City Council grants the deferment, the City Administrator shall notify the County Auditor who shall in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 435.194, record a notice of the deferment with the County Recorder setting forth the amount of assessment. Interest shall be charged on any assessment deferred pursuant to this Section at a rate equal to the rate charged on other assessments for the particular public improvement projects the assessment is fmancing. If the City Council grants an assessment deferral to an applicant, the interest may also be deferred, or the interest may be due and payable on a yearly basis up until the assessment period terminates and only the principal is deferred. The decision as to whether the principal and interest or just the principal is deferred is decided by the City Council when considering the application. 1. Laq;e Tracts of Land UpOF!. applioation, the City COllFl:cil may defer the assessmeets OR large tracts of laFld that may be subdivided or developed iF!. the future. k is the mteF!.t of this policy to grant deferments of special assessments to large tracts so as to minimize the influence of the proposed improvement OIl the premature de':elopmeat of said land. The deferment grant-ed pursuant to this seetioIl may be of indefinite duration subject to the occurrence of: o The subdivisioB. of the property resultiag iR the er-eatioF!. of aIle'.\', buildable lot o If the City Council determines there is no ooBtim:1iBg Reed for the deferment. 2. Conditions of Hardship a) Any applicant must be 65 years of age, or older, or retired by reason of permanent andlor total disability and must own a legal or equitable interest m the property applied for which must be the homestead of the applicant, or b) The annual gross income of the applicant shall not be in excess of the very low income limits (50% of median) asset forth by family size in Hennepin County's Section Eight guidelines. Calculation of the total family income shall be determined by the summation of all available income sources of the applicant and spouse. Income specified in the application should be the income of the year proceeding the year in which the application is made, or the average income of the three years prior to the year in which the application is made, whichever IS less, and . . c) The special assessments to be deferred exceed $1,000.00. d) Permanent and/or total disability shall be determined by using the criteria established for "permanent and total disability" for Workman's Compensation, to wit: 1) The total and permanent loss of the sight of both eyes. 2) The loss of both arms at the shoulder. 3) The loss of both legs so close to the hips that no effective artificial members can be used. 4) Complete and permanent paralysis 5) Total and permanent loss of mental faculties. 6) Any other injury which totally incapacitates the owner from working at an occupation which brings himlher an income . An applicant must substantiate the retirement by reason of permanent and/or total disabiIiry by {>roviding a sworn affidavit by a licensed medical doctor attesting that the applIcant IS unable to be gainfully employed because of a permanent and/or total disability . Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCn... of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota this day of ROBERT B. BEAN, MAYOR ATTEST JAMES C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK S4 O~eU/Od.J COr y "'. . . , I ,I Form Q 1~4 - Poucher, Mpls. STATE OF MINNESOTA, . County of Hennepl n City m Shorewood We, the undersigned, Boardof Review - "Equalization - of the Ci tv 01 S ho rewood In said County, do hereby certify that we, and each of us, attended at the office m the S ho rewood Clerk on the Fifth day of Apr i1 19~. The day set forth In the notice given by the Clerk, and III accordance w~h the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 274.01. We made changes in the 19~ Assessments as entered in the following forms. Witness our hands thIs ~ 4 day of _ ~ Q~----- Chairman /;;<- K. } J O-r t.f (~) CHANGES MADE BY LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW - 'Applies only to Cities whose Charters provide for a Board of Equalization instead of a Board of Review. "Enter "Ves" or "No" for each Description. Identify Parcel on which Residence is Located with Letter "H", Indicate if Mid.Year or Fractional Homestead. - ""Indicate Type of Property: R - esidential. C . Commercial, I . Industrial, U. Utility, F - Farm, T - Timber. Homestead: 2a, 1 a or 1 b, SRR . Seasonal Recreational Residential, SAC.. Seasonal Recreational Commercial, FH - National Housing. * 0,' Other, Specify: Mineral - 5.25%; Railroad - 3.30% . 5.25%. /' \ \....~J Ind, Indi- ~te Estimated ~te type C""of I""""" "",",,,, ....... NAME OF "",,'" ""'. Two. Number of Numbo< Ho~ of "'-' '0 " ""...of PROPERTY OWNER '" DESCRIPTION '" '" RoO ""..of ""..of ..... "- Estimated Esllmated Omll1ed REMARKS AND ADDRESS Desc. No. Lof elk Deeded Land Farm Land V.. erty M.""" Me""" RoO I '" by Agri. All ""... ""... "'-' ..... '00e No" S,.,. cullural 01"" L B 00"" 0011.. Dollars 0011.,. Q\" ~ v-+ J""Oo.-\"'-' ~ WI .; .<5-1/7- 2.3 -2..2. - OO<('r Y Rl #0 Ql.ta..... 'i e ! D'o...\I\a DI1\J \ ;;l S' -I n - 2.. J -2 S - 00 I '3 Y R No d~"...",e. BeH" P~i ~~ V\ f?1r ~ S -lI1- L'3 2"S - ool<.f '/ R 1./0 e~a... D. k P-.,^lA 'pJ-l- ~~\"nk ;;l" 5-117- 2 3-?2..- 004/ 'I Y 110 e~nlA :;c:> o. \. ~ ('ut>.h ,2 'S -117... 2'3 -32 -OO'ig' Y R No c,L. q... P. Teir'lI-llV\( P_ Me,Vlc..\'\ ~ 5 -117 - 2. J-J + 002.0 Y R #0 I2lt4f.oc e. L If' P_v, 2- C~c..V\ .... ~ .2S"-117 -2.3 -'N-ClD3'-1 y R 9rc fJO 5"bS'O 0 a J '/0'6 MCl.l" !L ko~l.s 2(,.- 1/7- 2.)-/1-0017 Y R ),/0 e /,.. a.IA Co p, c.) OCo.. V\ 11\ e. A \ ,\ "':1 c..L., ;2.Ce.- /11- 23 -11-00'30 Y. R No (;. ~ Gl....~e. 1A1,1 \ (0....... Voc",e-\ 2 '- - (/7 - 2. 3 -1'1- 002.$ Y R Al~ tl.a...~ ~ Da.V' \e\Ae.. Do..ll......,.,l.., 2" -tll- 2.:1 -i'{ - 002'7 'j 1<- ~ 2...0 Ij 47000 IC\o.:l~ Pa.v \ l"\~:ste.,.. 2~-li7- 2 J -33 - 001...'1 Y R -Ale;; 044"-'J;'~ Do~'" I J &"<,,<<..,.dS: '2g-117- 23-3)- oaz.y Y RL 1'1 Sou /Sq Soo IOl"~ La.vl-C<. R.&<-:'~L cr ;;Z Cf -117- 2 3 -]</ - 000 $ Y RL 40 (1(,"....0_ i:fo\""", .R Y'.\ ~v~ t<!.. .2 '1- 11'1- 2. 3 - I-] '1- 000 7 Y RL No e. t.. a..... ~ ce. 'i;?,.,b"u..+ tJvo."v", .....! 30- \ 1'1 - 2 1 -3; .. 19 00 2. Y RL /J{) CL. a......ve. Lev-ov k v-~"",...,ir 30-/17- 23-:13- 0002,. Y Rt.. Vo Ch a.... r.> DaJ' ;\ Gr.ove. ~ 0 -117- 2'3 -l..{L(.. 001 '1 Y K JJo t ~ 'l..~ ~ t!!.- v NOTE: Where omitted Real Property is added indicate value of Land. Buildings and Machinery Separately. ~ Fonn Q 1-4 - Poucher. Mpls. STATE OF MINNESOTA, County of fl...;J....'f of S\"OIl-e.......CooJ We. the undersIgned. Board of Review - '"'Equalization - of the of of the Clerk on the day of Section 274.01. We made changes in the 19_ Assessments as entered in the following forms. 2 of If in said County, do hereby certify that we, and each of us, attended at the office 19_. The day set forth in the notice given by the Clerk, and in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes. WItness our hands this 2..~ day of "'r .. 19 9$ Chairman CHANGES MADE BY LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW - 'Applies only to Cities whose Charters provide for a Board of Equalization instead of a Board of Review. "Enter "Yes" or "No" for each Descriptton. Identify Parcel on which Residence is located with Letter "H". Iodate if Mid-Year or Fractional Homestead. - .....Indicate Type of Property: R - Residential, C . Commercial. I - Industrial, U - Utility, F _ Farm, T - Timber. Homestead: 28. 18 or 1b, SRR - Seasonal Recreational Residential, SRC. Seasonal Recreational Commercial. FH. National Housing.. * O. Other, Specify: Mineral- 5.25%; Railroad - 3.30%.5.25%. / lndi- lndl. "'.. Estimated "'.. ".. Class 01 ,,"""" D""'... ....... NAME OF Po"'"' "'" Twp. Number of ","""" Home- '" Property I, " ""...'" PROPERTY OWNER ~ DESCRIPTION ~ ~ Rng. Acresof ""..'" ...., Prop- Estimated Estimated 0_ REMARKS AND ADDRESS Desc. No. Lot .1< Iloododl>nd Farmlarld Y.. My ....... ....... Reo! ~ by Ao<' All Va'''' ""... "'-' """' 100. Noo S,.,. CYltural 01"" I.- 13 ""'00 Do"". Dol"" Dol..", f'la IJdp- lJ)" J ("ul,OlI-+L '3/-1/1- 2. 3-11- 0005 Y RL No tZ4a....'" p tJo t"'....."''-....... \. "....... .{I-II1- I 3-2..<(- 0010 Y RL .vo e.ito..,,-"c.. ... < R...oev- \..1 7':;.~ +L..e V "~i -1\1 - 2. '3 -'il - 002. 3 'I R UO CL. 0..'" ';; e... be\t"d\d . fl.... <> \t.a..vJ "< I -111- 2. 3- q<(- 0001.{ Y Rl V'"' Ch"-<<.<i8 <:;{ell~e\A -,-; e IJ- V\. e-. 'I 32..-111- 23-/2.- 003J If. R No e /.t '1I"~ D. It' AV-~ C(.....C- { To",\'" n" j +J.. '.?2--1\1- 2~-ji./- OOJL Y R No t..~ a ....(/'" e M" ;v-.; ~"...l<<>.- 3 2.-1I1 - 2'3 -]/- 0191 ~ Y R (,1..\00 4 f)(';)(J v /3:I 2CO Da.vi J L",HI e1:., .\ c:I 3J-i/7- 2..3 -/2 -002.) Y R. 32. 5019 I Slo OeD /J3 ODD DolAo.. \ d \'Lo~,,"l.~lr-Q, <3-117- 2.3-2.)-002.'1 Y R 1.10 Cl..<l......e. A\\c..IA \/"11I"\"'\1-\: ,. ~--.I", 33 -117 - 23 -2..<-1- 0031 Y R. I/~oO 1.f2000 122500 I ~ "-"" .. s IA\" \ <:D'" :P.-tll- 2)-'{1- 001.,-/ Y LR Sooo 2DO<:JO I . I , I . . lo ,I y LIl 20()Oo 5000 ~obe.\r+ f.!l.a,^ ,) e "'S' 33-i17- 23 -'14- 0040 Y K Vo CL. G....." " ! \) i c. tt.. hoc. e. \ \ " :?<f-/I7- 2.3- 23- DOlL Y R. lJe> C.Jo-1. "'-:: ... co. i 13ilo<"'l.,a..- (r~Q k \-c e"" 3<-1-111-2]-21 -002..9 '/ R tJo a.l.""'.,"e.. I Ph" ~J... e. U" \1"....... ",'1-nv. < '1- Ili_ 2.' -l ) - 00 s9 y R /Vo tL., Q"'; e- f'kv1A P..."eh I; ~L 3</-117 - 2. 1-2..1- 00 n. '/ R AID t~a..."'... I I M'I-I... }i\r.~k....",7; '"_ .<I.Hn- 23-)/- 1701..f Y R 5000 qQOO() ., I 000 NOTE: Where omit1ed Real Property is added indicate value of Land, Buildings and Machinery Separately. .;. Form 0 1-4 - Poucher, Mpls. STATE OF MINNESOTA, County of ;:-, ~ 1. of S"k"...e. \N" " c:l We, the undersigned, Board of Review - *Equalization - of the of of the Clerk on the day of Section 274.01. We made changes in the 19_ Assessments as entered in the following fQrms. :5 6+ t{ in said County, do hereby certify that we, and each of us, attended at the office I 19__ The day set forth in the notice given by the Clerk. and in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes. W"ne.. our honds this 2.,,( day of A p .. 19....J..S.. Chairman CHANGES MADE BY LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW - <Applies only to Cities whose Charters provida for a Board of Equalization instead of a Board of Review. *Enter "Ves" or "No" for each Description. Identify Parcel on which Residence is Located with Letter "H". Indicate if Mid.Year or Fractional Homestead. - '"'*Indicate Type of Property: R - Residential. C. Commercial,l . Industrial. U. UtUity, F - farm. T - Timber. Homestead: 28. 1 a or 1 b, SRR . Seasonal Recreational Residential, SAC. Seasonal Recreational Commercial, FH - National Housing. * 0 - Other. Specify: Mineral - 5.25%; Railroad - 3.30% . 5.25%. Indl- In," oale Esl_ oale .",. Class of ,....... o.c..... ....... NAME OF ~ $eo. Twp. Number of Nu_ ...... 01 ..--- '0 ;n """,01 PROPERTY OWNER " DESCRIPTION " " Ro~ ""..01 .....01 ..... -- Estimated Estlmeled 0_ REMARKS AND ADDRESS Desc. No. Lo! ..~ Ooeded Lo"" _Lao. "" en, ....... ........ Reol " by Agri. All "''''' ""'" - ..... 1('0. No. Sym- cultl..ral """ ..... 001"" 001<... 001"" ......... F..l.)" 3 r..{ -Ill - 2.} -3 2... 0014 Y R S'("DO C,Sooc 6S'1DO , 0....... ~r o ~III..V'+ P nv I 3<i -111- 2.)_]2-0020 Y R N 0 I1L_-=~-:-l { (.\,1'"1'; e. '1 i ~ +z.. 3"1-111- -2) -'11.{- 0003 Y RL '1'100 71Soo /I., <{~<J r ~.j.""ve" Mo.".ii.... 3 S -- , t7 - 2. ") - U - 001 q Y ?. Alo (!'4 <<.. &; <2- I :T nL. '^ .111",,1-.-. 3 S -117- 2.) -)2...-00)7 Y p'c- No (!,/"'a...~... AI^>' vJ k', -\- G 3$-n"7 ~ 23 -1)-DO)) Y 'R #0 c'"'..... ~ e. , EIA.f", 1<...., \<."" 0.. .55 -Ill - 2 3-3'/- 001'1 'I F:. No t.h<l,,~e R, c\.........,) 0" ~'''' It 35"-((7- 2. "3 -<-( 3 -- boo 7 y t?- Ilo t- t. a....;: e.. F..."",,\-t... ~c.. \~ elM SR. 3S-H7- 2.3 -'f'f- Doo7 Y RL Mo tit. e< .. c e .N1o..V'\j f It<<. 1- zelr 3'- -117- 2. ~-12- - 00"3 S Y R - N() C. h t<,lA,::e 5tv~ yol F-,,,,,,,e\l 3(.. -111- 2. 3-/3 - 002..(, 'I R JI" l2.l..a-': ,.. ~"'V1~nI4 p" v. J i k ... II" 3 L. -\ l 7 -- "2.. 3 - /'I. OD7.."L Y R No ~L..a.".-'Zo_ fl_L.A.~(.p<, r:::-o,-< ':?t.. - 11"7 - 2-) -Jif- OD5'1 Y r<. No et. d,"'~e... ();~ k. L.611' '-0'" "< (" - 1/7 - 2.. ) - ,,,. ()Oh'l Y P- Alo ct. r......':" S'td.1I e- PP~+C:-I.-lr c:: 3(..-111-;2.. "3 -LI - 0012-- Y fC. )/0 ~l...eH.;:... .'\ L. ",I ..\ 0 v.. S""c.--b-lr J{..-117 -23 - 31 ~ 001.0 Y ~L !./o e(..a..~... f)a.tJ,d S<-I/.. fA,) S :H.-111-2)-<.fI.OOS-o Y R No tl.."'k~e.. M........h- /VI I .ll",-t-kvY' :1~-lt1- 23-"'/- 0057 Y r< JJ o c:..k,a,..~..._ v NOTE~ Where omitted Real Property is added indicate value of Land, Buildings and Machinery Separately. .,. Form a 1-4 - Poucher. Mpls. STATE OF MINNESOTA, County of e.i~f of Sl.............."""j We. the undersigned, Board of Review - .Equalization - of the of of the Clerk on the day of Section 274.01. We made changes in the 19_ Assessments as entered in the following' forms. 'f o-t L( In said County, do hereby certify that we, and each of us. attended at the office . 19______. The day set forth in the notice given by the Clerk. and in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes. Witness our hands this 2. <..( day of ~ /.- - 19-K Chairman CHANGES MADE BY LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW - "Applies only to Cities whose Charters provide for a Board of Equalization instead of a Board of Review. .Enter "Yes" or "No" for each Description. Identify Parcel on which Residence ls Located with Letter "H", Indicate if Mid-Year or Fractional Homestead. - ulndicate Type of Property: A . Residential, C - Commercial, 1- Industrial. U - Utility, F . Farm, T - Timber. Homestead: 2a, 1 a or 1 b, SRR - Seasonal Recreational Residential, SRC . Seasonal Recreational Commercial. FH . National Housing. * 0 : Other, Specify. Mineral - 5.25%; Raftroad- 3.30% - 5.25%. Ind. Ind> cate Estimated cate type Cl8ssof """".. -.... ....... NAME OF """" Soc. Twp. Numberof Number Home- 01 p,operty ,. in "''''01 PROPERTY OWNER '" DESCRIPTION '" '" Rng. "",..01 "",..01 ""'" Prop- Estimated Estimated Omll1ed REMARKS AND ADDRESS Desc. No. lol 81' Oeodod "'od """'lao' '<eo erty M_ Ma~" Reo! '" by Allri- All """' "'... -rty "- 'OCO N,. S,... cultural """" L 13 ..,... ""''''' Dollars ""'"" t..l "~e-... II" (/ i ........ 3(.-1/7 -2J-lf3- 002.'1 Y R 5'1300 12.3000 '18S700 ! D_.\ ~ F(.rL.. elr 3 C:,- III -:1-1-'11 - 00 tj 0 y R /78'00 S3000 3()03oo M'c..\".n"d R.....l..t....,. ~(,.-II.,- 2.1-4<-/- DOLiq 'I P- Jo e.L..~"'D - M^\--c.. r~^V-~" 3" -ll' - 2. 3 - 'f <f - 00" 2 Y. R- /Jo CL...<:<....u", ,;I ,(\0"..1".- A", ~e....^ ""' .?c, -111-:1-3 -'1'-1- 007/ Y It /Ja tJ-1.... a .... ,,,,:.J "" .v If Kr~S+:...-(... It. 0.<, _.. 25"-1/7 - 2.3 -'f'-l-DDS7 Y R N", C-l-........ P. ~lli. '.\A {I_I),^- ,-.....4- I .~2- 11l~ 23 -~'i-OOI7 Y (l. U{.) c.L.,-,~c ,.. ~i.c..lt..r,,,,j /31"-0 v..J 11\ 3 '\. III - 2. 3 - 2 1- 00 If, Y R Ho C. ka ~"a e- El\ 2.0.. be.+L Alo\l'-+o..... ~4-117- 23-2..)-00)0 Y R. J./a ~L"" ..~ - QA \-,,,,,v-~ <:'", .1 le.... -<(.,-111- 23-jJ-oI'JU'i i R- ;./0 c.. !... e.t ";:J,, _ D .1. -1. ~ ~/o--.h rA' 3 (." - ill - 2. 3 -J i-t>o l l- i RL. /Jo e.t-t"'k"'- \ V \. NOTE: Where omiUed Real Property is added indicate value of Land, Buildings and Machinery Separately. S O.XYl P 1-(. ~ Rober, COUNc. Kristi Slover Bruce Benson Jenrnler McCarty Doug Malam CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331.8927 · (612)474-3236 33-117-23-44-0040 ROBERT MANDERS .51 05 RAI"1PART CT SHOREWOOD, MN 55331 25 April 18, 1995 Dear Local Board Attendee: At the direction of the Shorewood Board of Review we have reviewed your property records. It is our opinion that the estimated property value as of January 2, 1995 is $ COrrect as APPraised This value has been recommended to the Local Board of Review. Our recommendations will be voted on when the Board reconvenes on Monday, April 24th at 7:00PM. If you agree with this value you do not need to attend to meeting. If you disagree with the assessor's recommendation you may appeal to the Hennepin County Board of Equalization since the Local Board generally hears no additional testimony at the reconvened meeting. Directions for further appeal are given on your 1995 valuation notice. If you have any questions please ca1l473-1844. 3 &t~~ A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore I I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 35-117-23-32-0037 35-117-23-33-0033 29-117-23-44-0007 30-117-23-33-0002 36-117-23-41-0055 35-117-23-34-0019 33-117-23-12-0023 25-117-23-44-0034 36-117-23-44-0071 33-117-23-41-0024 33-117-23-41-0025 34-117-23-32-0020 33-117-23-23-0029 36-117-23-12-0035 36-117-23-44-0062 29-117-23-34-0005 36-117-23-21-0012 26-117-23-14-0029 31-117-23-24-0010 31-117-23-41-0023 34-117-23-23-0012 34-117-23-23-0038 34-117-23-23-0029 34-117-23-32-0014 30-117-23-44-0014 33-117-23-44-0040 36-117-23-44-0049 26-117-23-14-0025 34-117-23-23-0052 25-117-23-23-0014 25-117-23-23-0013 33-117-23-24-0031 36-117-23-31-0020 34-117-23-44-0003 25-117-23-32-0048 30 117 28 81 0004 32-117-23-14-0032 35-117-23-13-0019 28-117-23-33-0024 25-117-23-34-0020 35-117-23-44-0007 34-117-23-31-0028 28-117-23-33-0028 26-117-23-11-0017 32-117-23-12-0033 36-117-23-44-0054 86 117 28 18 0024 31-117-23-44-0004 84 117 28 2J OOOJ 25-117-23-22-0049 36-117-23-13-0026 31-117-23-11-0005 35-117-23-43-0007 36-117-23-14-0064 36-117-23-43-0029 36-117-23-14-0059 30-117-23-31-0002 32-117-23-31-0015 26~117-23-11-0030 36-i17-?3-43-0040 36-117-23-14-0022 36-117-23-41-0057 25-117-23-32-0041 t"100RE WHITE BRIDGE KRAMER SCHAUS BE CKt'1AN LITTLEFIELD CHAN It.J ANDERSON WILSON \..oJ I LSON RAU KRONBERG PLATZER GORDON BERGHOFF PETERKA DALLMANN CUNN I NGHAtvl GINTHER LOGELI N HARRINGTON BROKKEN EDDY GRO\.,-IE tvlANDERS BEC~(ER VOGEL FROEHLING PFIFFNER PAHL VANDERLINDE SPARBER TIETZ loJALZ t1C DONALD LOCKOt.) ITCH MARTIN KASTER tvlC NALLY FALLON,JR MACKENZIE BONGAARDS KOHLS TIERNEY TAUSCHER JIROTA BROKAt...1 ::;TUDCR JOCHIt'lS FINNEY WADSWORTH DYER I I LARSON '..)OLL I NG FO>( NYGAARD CARLSON ALDRICH FISHER PAt'..JAN D I K E F<~ t'lC ARTHUR STABECK .JOHt',J Atvl'( .JOHt...j LEROY DAI,) I D ELDEN DAVID IRENE DOUGLAS .JAt1ES .JAMES ROBERT DONALD MARY t"lA R C LAURA DA\..'E DARLENE ...TO BE,,'ERL Y DICK PHOBE BINGHAM .JAt1ES DA......'ID ROBERT t1 I CHAEL v..II LL I At1 DAt) I D BETTY' D I At.JA ALLAN SHELDON CARRIE ROBERT t1 I CIIACL MARGARET STE"'''EN PAUL TERRANCE FRANCIS t'lYRLE DONALD t'lARK STEPHEN PATRICIA .JUDITII GERALD TOIJY RO'BERT STUART t.-t. t.,1. E . RICHARD DICK .JAtvlES CHARLES ROBERT NA (Itvl I J OANt-..j E PETER tvlAI'..J GA LA t'lARK KENt...JETH 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 10 23980 YELLOWSTONE TR 11 5760 EUREKA RD 12 19765 MUIRFIELD CIR 13 19335 MC KINLEY CT 14 26760 EDGEWOOD RD 15 5540 COVINGTON RD 16 4815 FERNCROFT DR 17 28170 WOODSIDE RD 18 5790 BRENTRIDGE DR 19 5735 MINNETONKA DR 20 23870 ELDER TURN 21 23770 MC LAIN RD 22 5830 MINNETONKA DR 23 5375 HOWARDS PT RD 24 6105 RAMPART CT 25 19260 MC KINLEY CT 26 21000 IVY LN 27 23665 GILLETTE CUR 28 4965 SUBURBAN DR 29 4985 SUBURBAN DR 30 5625 STAR LN 31 5840 RIDGE RD 32 22680 GALPIN LN 33 5125 SUBURBAN DR 34 4693 LAOOrn4 DR 35 25620 SMITHTOWN RD 36 5750 CHRISTMAS LK RD 37 25535 BIRCH BLUFF RD 38 20390 EXCELSIOR BLVD 39 1050 HOLLY LN 40 5975 GLENCOE RD 41 25360 BIRCH BLUFF RD 42 21035 MINNETONKA BLVD 43 26200 WILD ROSE LN 44 19360 MC KINLEY CT 45 19673 CIIARTWCLL III LL 27320 BLUE RIDGE LN 47 5605 t1H4~4CTO~41<A DR 18 4765 BAYSWATER RD 49 19710 CHARTWELL HILL 50 5460 HOWARDS PT RD 51 6070 BRAND CIR 52 5610 VINE HILL RD 53 6200 SIERRA CIR 54 5660 VINE HILL RD 55 4785 LAGOON DR 56 5955 CATHCART DR 57 4770 LAKEWAY TER 58 6130 SWEETWATER CT 59 19425 VINE RIDGE RD 60 6080 WHITNEY CIR 61 20454 KNIGHTSBRIDGE R 62 22340 BRACKETTS RD 22355 BRACKETTS RD 25810 BIRCH BLUFF RD 4475 ENCHANTED LN 6020 WHITNEY CIR 6125 APPLE RD 24775 GLEN RD 5310 SHADY HILLS CIR 6125 MC KINLEY CIR 24140 YELLOWSTONE TR 46 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE WITHDREW THEIR REQUEST TO APPEAR ON THE LOCAL BOARD LIST Ray Barton Frank Fox Mike McDonald Judy Sirota Tony Studer 5915 Christmas Lake Rd. 27990 Smithtown Rd. 4695 Lagoon Dr. 19675 Chartwell Hill 5685 Minnetonka Dr. 35-117-23-42-0020 31-117-23-34-0004 30-117-23-31-0009 36-117-23-13-0024 34-117-23-23-0003 THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE CALLED IN AFTER THE INITIAL BOARD OF REVIEW AND WOULD LIKE TO PRESERVE THEIR RIGHT TO FURTHER APPEAL Richard Brown 5635 Harding Ln. Kristine Thayer 5345 Shady Hills Cir. Robert Snyder 19855 Chartwell Hill Blain Conant 26050 Shorewood Oaks Dr. Elizabeth Norton 23730 Mclain Rd. Robert & Elevlyn Thompson 5920 Ridge Rd. 33-117-23-23-0047 25-117-23-44-0057 36-117-23-13-0018 32-117-23-44-0017 34-117-23-23-0030 36-117-23-31-0016 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 70,000. 73,500. 73,500. BUILDING 143,000. 150,500. 126,600. TOTAL 213,000. 224,000. 200,100. ASSESSOR Tan Haller DATE 4-13-95 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I SUBJECT INFOrot~TION SHEET NAME lmrj White ADDRESS 22355 Bracketts Rd. PID# 35-117-23-33-0033 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ 1110,000 SALE DATE 6/22/93 YEAR BUILT 1989 STORY HGT. 2 story BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 27878 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 3265 BATH-DELUXE 1 PORCH-GLAZED Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 1586 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT . 3U~r 3/4 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS Owner did not request a review. CUrrent 1995 value is less than 1 1 /2% over what property was purchased for in 1993. VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 50,500. 295,500. 346,000. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION 53,500. 301,500. 355,500. DATE 4-11-95 1995 PAY 1996 - - 53,500. 301,500. 355,500. Gail Navratil 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME John Bridge ADDRESS 25810 Birch Bluff Rd. PID# 29-117-23-44-0007 PROPERTY TYPE RL SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1951 STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. 'FINISHING 50 % LOT SIZE 110 FF GROSS BLDG. AREA 1417 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 1 41 7 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3/4 1 OPEN DET. 1/ 2 DECK TUCKUNDER 2 Car # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE Upper Lake MISC. COMMENTS See attached 2 sales sheets. Sale 1 is smaller with superior site. Note-after sale, house was demolished for new construction. Sale 2 has inferior site. Also see page 11 0 in sales book, similar quality but smaller house. Location is superior althouqh lot has less FF and is quiet irregular. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 165,500. 200,000. NO BUILDING 71,500. 77,000. CHANGE TOTAL 237,000. 277,000. ASSESSOR Lisa Matt/Tan Haller DATE 4-14-95 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 26760 Edgewood Rd. PID# 29-117-23-34-0005 SALE PRICE $ 285,000. SALE DATE 5-93 YEAR BUILT 1955 STORY Rambler GROSS BLDG. AREA 1288 DECK Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 1288 BSMT. FINISHING .80 % GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car PORCH-GLAZED DET. SCREEN Yes TUCKUNDER OPEN # OF BEDROOMS 2 BATH-DELUXE FIREPLACE(S) 1 FULL 1 3/4 1 CENTRAL AIR No 1/2 WALKOUT Yes LOT SIZE 120 FF LAKESHORE-BAY Upper Lake MISC. COMMENTS b" LE. ~ 3A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS: 26140 BIRCH BLUFF RD PID#: 29-117-23-43-0025 SALE PRICE: $ 267,500 YEAR BUILT: 1900 GROSS BLDG. AREA: 2072 GROUND FLR. AREA: 1184 GARAGE #1: ATTACHED # OF CARS: 2 GARAGE #2: # OF CARS: 0 FIREPLACE (S) : 1 CENTRAL AIR: YES SALE DATE: STORY HEIGHT: DECK: YES BSMT. FINISHING: PORCH-GLAZED: SCREEN: 9410 2 STORY 00 % WALKOUT: YES LAKESHORE-BAY: UPPER LAKE COMMENTS: OPEN: YES BATH-DELUXE: 0 FULL: 1 3/4: 0 1/2: 1 LOT SIZE: 80 FF INFORMATION DEEMED RELIABLE BUT NOT GUARANTEED S.ALf 2- 3B I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Leroy Kramer ADDRESS Vacant lot PID#30-117-23-33-0002 PROPERTY TYPE LR SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 50 FF GROSS BLDG. AREA BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA FULL SCREENED GARAGE-A'IT. 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR WALKOUT LAKESHORE Upper Lake MISC. COMMENTS This lot gives the owner lake access. $10,000. is a minimal value for a lake access lot. Easements were taken into consideration. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION .- - LAND 10.000. 10.000. NO BUILDING CHANGE TOTAL 10,000. 10,000. ASSESSOR Gail Navratil DATE 4-13-95 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I 1 SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET BSMT. FINISHING 70 BATH-DELUXE 1 FULL 1 3/4 1 1/2 1 # OF BEDROOMS 4 WALKOUT Yes VALUATION 19 94 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION - - LAND 60,000. 69,000. 69,000. BUILDING 180,000. 1 96 ,000 . 173,400. TOTAL 240,000. 265,000. 242,400. ASSESSOR Tan Haller DATE 4-7-95 5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Dave Littlefield ADDRESS 24775 Glen Rd. PID# 33-117-23-12-0023 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1963 STORY HGT. Split Level BSMT. FINISHING 80 % LOT SIZE 79715 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 2330 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 2330 FULL 3 SCREENED GARAGE-ArT. 3/4 1 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER 4 Car # OF BEDROOMS 5 # OF FIREPLACES 2 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sales book pages 100-102. Subject is larger and has larqer lot size. Due to floor plan of subject, adjustments have been made. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 71,500. 80,000. 80,000. BUILDING 119,500. 1 45 , 500 . 113 , 000 . TOTAL 1 91 ,000. 225,500. 193,000. ASSESSOR Lisa Matt DATE 4:--7;..0.95 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I BSMT. FINISHING 50 BATH-DELUXE FULL 1 3/4 1 1/2 1 # OF BEDROOMS 3 WALKOUT No VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 51,000. 56,500. 56,500. BUILDING 88,000. 91,500. 81,900. TOTAL 139,000. 148,000. 138,400. ASSESSOR Tan Haller DATE 4-6-95 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET BSMT. FINISHING BATH-DELUXE FULL 1 3/4 1 1/2 1 # OF BEDROOMS 3 WALKOUT No 1 VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 55,000. 64,000. 64,000. BUILDING 103,000. 112,000. 112,000. TOTAL 1 58 ,000. 176,000. 176,000. ASSESSOR Gail Navratil DATE 4-13-95 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME James Wilson ADDRESS Address Unasigned PID# 33-117-23-41-0024 PROPERTY TYPE LR SALE DATE YEAR BUILT SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. GROSS BLDG. AREA GROUND FLR. AREA GARAGE-ATT. DET. TUCKUNDER CENTRAL AIR MISC. COMMENTS Owner concurred with raise. He presented wrong parcel, other parcel tore lowered. This is a long narrow high lot adj acent to owners hone. See low site on next page. BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 42918 SF BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED FULL SCREENED 3/4 OPEN 1/2 DECK # OF BEDROOMS # OF FIREPLACES WALKOUT LAKESHORE VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 1 4 . 700 . 15,000. 20,000. BUILDING TOTAL 14,700. 15,000. 20,000. ASSESSOR Rolf Erickson DATE 4-15-95 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME James Wilson ADDRESS Address Unasiqned PID# 33-117-23-41-0025 PROPERTY TYPE LR SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. GROSS BLDG. AREA GROUND FLR. AREA GARAGE-ATT. DET. TUCKUNDER CENTRAL AIR MISC. COMMENTS Unbuildable lot, low land, was denied buildinq perIni t, ad; acent to owners hone. Map on following page. BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 43800 SF BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED FULL SCREENED 3/4 OPEN 1/2 DECK # OF BEDROOMS # OF FIREPLACES WALKOUT LAKESHORE lOA I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ---..... i,- f; r ~ L- ~ . t I 10B I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NAME Bob Rau ADDRESS 23980 Yellowstone Tr. PID# 34-117-23-32-0020 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE GROSS BLDG. AREA 2848 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 2848 FULL 2 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3 Car 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT No LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS 1995 market value is for $211,000. The property was ourchased 5 years aqo for $210.000. SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET 1960 69696 SF 1 VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1995 PAY 1996 68.500. 142,500. 211,000. Gail Navratil RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO mANGE 1994 PAY 1995 58.500. 138,500. 197,000. DATE 4-13-95 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME IX>n Kronberq ADDRESS 5760 Eureka Rd. PID# 33-117-23-23-0029 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. 2 story BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE GROSS BLDG. AREA 2191 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1123 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3 Car 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER 1 Car # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS Owner had a question regarding 1990 addition. Addition calculated at porch or house square feetage rates? Porch is heated and therefore calculated at house square footaqe rate. 1915 40511 SF 1 VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 40,500. 79,500. 120,000. 1995 PAY 1996 40,500. 79,500. 1 20 ,000 . RECOMMEND 40,500. COUNCIL ACTION 79,500. 120,000. 4-7-95 DATE Lisa Matt 12 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Mary Ellen McNutt-Platzer ADDRESS 19765 Murifield Cir. PID# 36-117-23-12-0035 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1987 % LOT SIZE .60 Acres PORCH-GLAZED Yes SCREENED OPEN BSMT. FINISHING 60 BATH-DELUXE 1 FULL 1 3/4 3 1/2 2 # OF BEDROOMS 6 WALKOUT Yes Yes 5 VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 90,000. 114,000. 114,000. BUILDING 455,000. 446,000. 431,000. TOTAL 545,000. 560,000. 545,000. ASSESSOR Tan Haller/Lisa Matt DATE 4-14-95 13 I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET BSMT. FINISHING 2114 BATH-DELUXE 1078 FULL 3/4 1/2 # OF BEDROOMS WALKOUT No VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 55,000. 64,000. 122,000. 132,000. 177,000. 196,000. Gail Navratil RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO CHANGE DATE 4-13-95 14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Laura Berqhoff ADDRESS 26760 Edqewood Rd. PID# 29-117-23-34-0005 PROPERTY TYPE RL SALE PRICE $ 285.000. SALE DATE 5-93 YEAR BUILT 1994 STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING 70 % LOT SIZE 120 FF GROSS BLDG. AREA 2276 BATH-DELUXE 1 PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 2276 FULL 2 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3 Car 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE Upper Lake MISC. COMMENTS Purchase price on 5-93 included 1288 SF, 1955 Rarrbler which was demolished after sale. New structure was built in 1994. See sales book page 112 for similar square footage on smaller lot and attached sheet. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 210.000. 285.000. 285,000. BUILDING 75,000. 283,300. 283,300. TOTAL 285,000. 568,300. 568,300. ASSESSOR Tan Haller DATE 4-14-95 15 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 27720 Islandview Rd. PID# 31-117-23-12-0003 SALE PRICE $ 670,000. SALE DATE 4-30-93 YEAR BUILT 1976 STORY Rambler GROSS BLDG. AREA 2496 DECK YPF>. GROUND FLR. AREA 2496 BSMT. FINISHING 80 % GARAGE-ATT. 3 Car PORCH-GLAZED DET. SCREEN Yes TUCKUNDER OPEN # OF BEDROOMS 5 BATH-DELUXE FIREPLACE(S) 2 FULL 2 3/4 1 CENTRAL AIR Yes 1/2 1 WALKOUT Yes LOT SIZE 200 FF LAKESHORE-BAY Phelps Bay MISC. COMMENTS 15A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME D3.vid Peturka ADDRESS 5540 Covinqton Rd. PID# 36-117-23-21-0012 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1993 STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING 80 % LOT SIZE 40000 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 2060 BATH-DELUXE 1 PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 2060 FULL SCREENED GARAGE-ATT . 3 Car 3/4 2 OPEN DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 2 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sales book page 22 and 23. Refer to owners letter d~ted ~r. 5. 1995 for owners estimate of cost. This area is due for review next year. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION - - LAND 95,000. 99,500. NO BUILDING 290,400. 291,500. CHANGE TOTAL 385,400. 391,000. ASSESSOR Dave Wilde DATE 4-15-95 16 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Darlene Dallmann ADDRESS 4815 Ferncroft Dr. PID# 26-117-23-14-0029 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1973 STORY HGT. 1 1/2 story BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 21540 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 2100 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1400 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3/4 1 OPEN DET. 2 Car 1/2 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 5 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE Lake William MISC. COMMENTS See sales l::x:)Qk page 1 08, ccmpa.rable is a newer 2 stOry with less square footaqe located on a nicer lot. Subi ect was reviewed last year and at that time needed some basic cosmetics. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND LAND 52,500. 47,000. 47.000. BUILDING 90,500. 107,200. 1 01 ,000. TOTAL 143,000. 154,200. 1 48 , 000 . ASSESSOR Gail Navratil DATE COUNCIL ACTION 4-13-95 17 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Jo cunningham ADDRESS 28170 Woodside Rd. PID# 31-117-23-24-0010 PROPERTY TYPE RL SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE GROSS BLDG. AREA 2348 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 2348 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-AT!. 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER 3 Car # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE Upper Lake MISC. COMMENTS o.vner did not request a review. See sales book page 11 0, canpa.rable is significantly smaller than subject; year built is 1956 and is in better condition. Canparable has a similar lakeshore lot. 1900 80 FF Yes VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 193,000. 212,000. 212,000. BUILDING 79,000. 85,000. 85,000. TOTAL 272,000. 297,000. 297,000. ASSESSOR Gail Navratil DATE 4-11-95 18 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 42,000. 128,600. 1 70,600. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO CHANGE 1995 PAY 1996 - - 42,000. 136,000. 178,000. Rolf Erickson DATE 4-15-95 19 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Dick Logelin ADDRESS 5735 Minnetonka Dr. PID# 34-117-23-23-0012 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1965 STORY HGT. Split Level BSMT. FINISHING 80 % LOT SIZE 22464 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 1515 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1515 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT . 2 Car 3/4 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 1 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT No LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS House was reviewed and found to be in average overall condition. See attached sales sheets. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION - - LAND 42,000. 42,000. 42,000. BUILDING 74,000. 82,000. 82,000. TOTAL 116,000. 124,000. 124,000. ASSESSOR Ga.il Navratil DATE 4-13-95 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 23890 Elder Turn PID# 34-117-23-23-0036 SALE DATE 4-26-93 STORY Rambler DECK BSMT. FINISHING 50 PORCH-GLAZED SCREEN OPEN BATH-DELUXE FULL 1 3/4 1/2 LOT SIZE 39200 SF MISC. COMMENTS % 20A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I J - ~'-l- X tf RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 23665 Gillette Cur. PID# oo5~ 34-117-23-23-~ SALE PRICE $ YEAR BUILT GROSS BLDG. AREA GROUND FLR. AREA GARAGE-ATI. DET. TUCKUNDER . # OF BEDROOMS SALE DATE STORY 9-93 Rambler 30 % 2 Car 3 20:6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. NAME Phobe Harrington ADDRESS 23870 Elder Turn PID# 34-117-23-23-0038 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1957 Rambler BSMT. FINISHING 30 % LOT SIZE 27026 SF PORCH-GLAZED 1 SCREENED Yes OPEN GROSS BLDG. AREA 1560 BATH-DELUXE GROUND FLR. AREA 1560 FULL GARAGE-ATT. 3/4 DET. 1/2 TUCKUNDER 2 Car # OF BEDROOMS CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT DECK Yes 3 # OF FIREPLACES 1 No LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS CMner did not schedule an appointment for a review. House next door sold 4-93 for $128,000. and is a 1336 SF rambler built in 1957 with a one car tuckunder qaraqe. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION 44,000. 72,000. 116,000. DATE 4-13-95 VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 42,000. 65,600. 107,600. Gail Navratil 1995 PAY 1996 44,000. 72,000. 11 6 I 000 . 21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Binqham Brokken ADDRESS 23770 McLain Rd. PID# 34-117-23-23-0029 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1967 STORY HGT. Split Level BSMT. FINISHING 50 % LOT SIZE 23.958 S.F. GROSS BLDG. AREA 1176 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1176 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT No LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS Owner did not request a review. Sales in the area supoort our market value. See paqes 6, 7 and 8 for properties with similar sauare footaqe and aqe. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 42.200. 44,000. 44,000. BUILDING 62,300. 70,000. 70,000. TOTAL 104.500. 114,000. 114,000. ASSESSOR Gail Navratil DATE 4-14-95 22 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME James & Kimberly Eddy ADDRESS 5830 Minnetonka Dr. PID# ~4-117-?~-~?-0014 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING 40 % LOT SIZE GROSS BLDG. AREA 1268 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1268 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3/4 1 OPEN DET. 2 Car 1/2 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS Reviewed property and made adjusbnent to basement finishing auality. On Mary Lake. 1955 47916 SF VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 61 .500. 65.000. 65,000. BUILDING 62,500. 71,500. 65,900. TOTAL 124,000. 136,500. 1 30,900. ASSESSOR Lisa Mott DATE 4-7-95 23 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFOR~~TION SHEET 1924 40946 SF BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED FULL 1 SCREENED 3/4 1 OPEN 1/2 1 DECK Yes # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 1 WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 19 94 PAY 19 95 90,000. 108,500. 198,500. COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMEND 90,000. 122,800. 212,800. 1995 PAY 1996 90,000. 122,800. 212,800. Gail Navratil DATE 4-11-95 24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NAME Robert Manders ADDRESS 6105 Rampart ct. PID# 33-117-23-44-0040 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1993 STORY HGT. 2 stOry BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 28314 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 2188 BATH-DELUXE 1 PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1138 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT . 2 Car 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT No LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sales book page 42, subject is larger and newer. See paqe 53, subiect is newer. SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 43.000. 122,800. 1 65 ,800 . Lisa Matt 1995 PAY 1996 43.000. 134,000. 177,000. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO CHANGE DATE 4-7-95 25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I BSMT. FINISHING BATH-DELUXE 1 FULL 1 3/4 1/2 1 # OF BEDROOMS 4 WALKOUT No VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 19 94 PAY 19 95 55.000. 111,000. 166,000. 1995 PAY 1996 64,000. 121 ,000. 185,000. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO CHANGE Lisa Matt DATE 4-7-95 26 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Bill & Cheryl Vocrel ADDRESS 21000 Ivy Ln. PID# 26-117-23-14-0025 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. 1 1/4 story BSMT. FINISHING 40 % LOT SIZE GROSS BLDG. AREA 1050 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 840 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3/4 OPEN DET. 1 Car 1/2 1 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 2 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE Lake William MISC. COMMENTS See sales book page 1, subj ect is larger, has garage and several other ammenities. Also, see attached sales sheet frcm last years sale book. 1958 14810 SF Yes VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 - - LAND 33,500. 38,000. BUILDING 56,500. 59,000. TOTAL 90,000. 97,000. ASSESSOR Lisa Mott RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO CHANGE DATE 4-10-95 27 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 20720 Idlewild Path PID# 25-117-23-23-0023 SALE PRICE $ 102.000. SALE DATE S-2S-Q1 YEAR BUILT 1950 STORY 1 1/4 Story GROSS BLDG. AREA 1083 DECK Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 908 BSMT. FINISHING % GARAGE-ATI. 1 Car PORCH-GLAZED DET. SCREEN TUCKUNDER OPEN # OF BEDROOMS 2 BATH-DELUXE FIREPLACE(S) 1 FULL 1 3/4 CENTRAL AIR Yes 1/2 WALKOUT Yes LOT SIZE 25.827 SF LAKESHORE-BAY MISC. COMMENTS 27A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME David Freehling ADDRESS 23665 Gillette Cur. PID# 34-117-23-23-0052 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1983 STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING 30 % LOT SIZE 26572 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 1568 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1 568 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car 3/4 1 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS Owner did not request a review. Current 1995 value is only 2% over what house was purchased for in 1993. VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 43,000. 43,000. 83,500. 95,000. 126,500. 138,000. Gail Navratil RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION 43,000. 95,000. 138,000. DATE 4-13-95 28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Betty pfiffner ADDRESS 4965 SUburban Dr. PID# 25-117-23-23-0014 PROPERTY TYPE SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1960 STORY HGT. 2 story BSMT. FINISHING 0 % LOT SIZE 65,575 S.F. GROSS BLDG. AREA 3443 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 11RO FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT . ? (';:!r 3/4 2 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 5 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT No Basement LAKESHORE No MISC. COMMENTS ONner did not request an appointment for us to review the house. See sales l::x:lOk page 35. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 58,500. 65,000. NO BUILDING 91,500. 1 01 ,000. CHANGE TOTAL 150,000. 166,000. ASSESSOR Gail Navratil DATE 4-13-95 29 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NAME Diana Pahl ADDRESS 4985 Suburban Dr. PID# 25-117-23-23 -0013 PROPERTY TYPE SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. GROSS BLDG. AREA GROUND FLR. AREA GARAGE-ATT. DET. TUCKUNDER CENTRAL AIR MISC. COMMENTS Question. about 1994 assessment which was answered. No auestion on 1995 assessment. SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED FULL SCREENED 3/4 OPEN 1/2 DECK # OF BEDROOMS # OF FIREPLACES WALKOUT LAKESHORE VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 19~ PAY 1995 Rolf Erickson 1995. PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION ro CHANGE DATE 4-14-95 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Allen Vanderlinde ADDRESS 5560 Shorewood Ln. PID# 33-117-23-24-0031 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1990 STORY HGT. Split Level BSMT. FINISHING 20 % LOT SIZE 29400 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 1845 BATH-DELUXE 1 PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1 845 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-A'IT. 3 Car 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS Interior inspection canpleted 4-4-95. Basement finish was lowered, bathrocm quality was upgraded resulting in net reduction of $1,500. See sales l::xJok paqe 17 and 1 8, similar properties. VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 42,000. 113 , 000 . 155,000. Tan Haller 1995 PAY 1996 42,000. 124,000. 166,000. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION 42,000. 122,500. 164,500. DATE 4-15-95 31 I I I I ,I I I I I ,I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Sheldon Soarber ADDRESS 5840 Ridqe Rd. PID# 36-117-23-31-0020 PROPERTY TYPE RL SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. Rambler BSM!. FINISHING 40 % LOT SIZE GROSS BLDG. AREA 1824 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1824 FULL 2 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE Christmas Lake MISC. COMMENTS OWner did not request a review. See attached sales sheet. Canparable is larger than subj ect but is similar in age. '!he subj ect suffers frOll functional obsolescense since the kitchen is located in the basement. '!his is reflected in their market value. 1958 1 35 FF VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND - - LAND 234,000. 245,700. 245,700. BUILDING 91 ,000. 91 ,000. 91 ,000. TOTAL 325,000. 336,700. 336,700. ASSESSOR Gail Navratil DATE COUNCIL ACTION 4-11-95 32 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 6030 Ridge Rd. PID# 36-117-23-33-0001 SALE PRICE $ 478,000. SALE DATE 12-22-92 YEAR BUILT 1955 STORY Rambler GROSS BLDG. AREA 2182 DECK GROUND FLR. AREA 2182 BSMT. FINISHING 10 % GARAGE-ATT. PORCH-GLAZED DET. SCREEN TUCKUNDER 2 Car OPEN # OF BEDROOMS 4 BATH-DELUXE FIREPLACE(S) 2 FULL 1 3/4 1 CENTRAL AIR No 1/2 WALKOUT No LOT SIZE 145 FF LAKESHORE-BAY Christmas Lake MISC. COMMENTS 32A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Carrie Tietz ADDRESS 22680 Galpin Ln. PID# 34-117-23-44-0003 PROPERTY TYPE RL SALE DATE YEAR BUILT BSMT. FINISHING 50 % LOT SIZE 1941 11 OFF. BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED FULL 1 SCREENED 3/4 1 OPEN 1/2 1 DECK Yes # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 1 WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE Galpin Lake VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 70~000. 73.500. 73.500. BUILDING 99,000. 128,800. 119,400. TOTAL 169,000. 202,300. 192,900. ASSESSOR Tan Haller DATE 4-15-95 33 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 4690 Lakeway Terr. PID# 26-117-23-11-0057 33A I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME ADDRESS Robert Walz 5125 Suburban Dr. I SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. 1 1/4 stOry I GROSS BLDG. AREA 888 GROUND FLR. AREA aS8 I GARAGE-ATT. DET. II TUCKUNDER CENTRAL AIR Yes I I I VALUATION I LAND BUILDING I I PID# 25_117-23-32-0048 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE DATE YEAR BUILT % LOT SIZE PORCH-GLAZED SCREENED 1920 34848 SF BSMT. FINISHING BATH-DELUXE FULL 3/4 1/2 # OF BEDROOMS Yes 1 OPEN DECK Yes 2 Car 3 # OF FIREPLACES LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS House was reviewed and found to be in avera e overall condition. ExpanSion area is currently unfinished. See sales book page 1 · WALKOUT No m.,...,xable is similar in size rot ~ an:'! located on a much smaller lot. TOTAL 80 ,500. 1995 PAY 1996 42,000. 44,000. 86,000. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION 1994 PAY 1995 38,000. NO CHANGE 42,500. ASSESSOR Gail Navratil DATE 4-13-95 34 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Maroaret Lockovi tch ADDRESS 25620 Smithtown Rd. PID# 32-117-23-14-0032 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1950 % LOT SIZE 16553 SF PORCH-GLAZED SCREENED OPEN 1994 PAY 1995 36,000. 53,500. 89,500. 1995 PAY 1996 36.000. 58,000. 94,000. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO QIANGE Gail Navratil DATE 4-13-95 36 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME steve Martin ADDRESS 5750 Christmas Lake Rd. PID# 35-117-23-13-0019 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. 1 1/2 story BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE GROSS BLDG. AREA 1365 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 910 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3/4 OPEN DET. 2 Car 1/2 1 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT No LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS We did drive by property to verify recorrmendation of no chanqe Tn W'llllP. !=>pp sales book pages 28-31. each of which has easier access to Hiqhway 7 but subject is located across the street from Christmas Lake. 1937 41230 SF Yes 1 VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION - - LAND 64,500. 67,500. NO BUILDING 59,500. 64,500. CHANGE TOTAL 124,000. 132,000. ASSESSOR Lisa Mott DATE 4-14-95 37 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFOR}~TION SHEET NAME Paul Kaster ADDRESS 25535 Birch Bluff Rd. PID# 28-117-23-33-0024 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1940 SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. Rambler GROSS BLDG. AREA GROUND FLR. AREA GARAGE-ATT. DET. TUCKUNDER CENTRAL AIR No MISC. COMMENTS OWner voiced concern about the 1 994 value at the Board of Review. He had called our office in January 1995 and an abatement for the 1994 value was sent to Hermepin County. BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 682 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED 682 FULL 1 SCREENED 3/4 OPEN 1/2 DECK Yes # OF BEDROOMS 2 # OF FIREPLACES WALKOUT No LAKESHORE VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 35,000. 32,500. 67,500. 1995 PAY 1996 35,000. 27,300. 62,300. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION 35,000. 27,300. 62,300. DATE 4-11-95 Gail Navratil 38 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME .Terrance McNally ADDRESS 20390 Excelsior Blvd. PID# 25-117-23-34-0020 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING 40 % LOT SIZE GROSS BLDG. AREA 1260 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1260 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 1 DECK TUCKUNDER 1 Car # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT No LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sales book paqes 4-8, they each have less square footage and are newer than subject. This property is situated on a high, wocded site with views of Christmas Lake. 1924 25530 SF 1 VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 LAND 48,500. 54,000. BUILDING 46,800. 48,500. TOTAL 95,300. 102,500. ASSESSOR Lisa Matt RECOMMEND NO CHANGE COUNCIL ACTION DATE 4-14-95 39 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Francis Fallon, Jr. ADDRESS 1050 Holly Ln. PID# 35-117-23-44-0007 PROPERTY TYPE RL SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1950 STORY HGT. 1 3/4 story BSMT. FINISHING 90 % LOT SIZE 150 FF GROSS BLDG. AREA 3480 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 2322 FULL 2 SCREENED GARAGE-ATI. 3 Car 3/4 1 OPEN DET. 1/2 1 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 2 CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT No LAKESHORE Christmas Lake MISC. COMMENTS Subiect has 40% basement with 90% finished. Additional depreciation taken on structure for age of original structure. See page 104 in sales book for larqer structure with inferior access. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 293,700. 308,500. 308,500. BUILDING 125,000. 139,500. 126,500. TOTAL 418,700. 448,000. 435,000. ASSESSOR Tan Haller DATE 4-14-95 40 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. 1 3/4 story GROSS BLDG. AREA 1932 GROUND FLR. AREA 1176 GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car DET. TUCKUNDER CENTRAL AIR MISC. COMMENTS SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Myrle MacKenzie ADDRESS 5975 Glencoe Rd. PID# 34-117-23-31-0028 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1963 BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 21780 SF BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED FULL 1 SCREENED Yes 3/4 OPEN Yes 1/2 1 DECK # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES No \oJ ALKOUT No LAKESHORE House in need of maintenance. 1 VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION - - LAND 40,000. 40,000. 91 .000. BUILDING 87,500. 96,000. 40,000. TOTAL 127,500. 136,000. 131,000. ASSESSOR Lisa Matt/Dave Wilde DATE 4-14-95 41 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Donald Bonqaards ADDRESS 25360 Birch Bluff Rd. PID# 28-117-23-33-0028 PROPERTY TYPE RL SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1950 BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 110 FF BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED FULL 2 SCREENED 3/4 1 OPEN 1/2 DECK # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 1 WALKOUT No LAKESHORE Upper Lake MISC. COMMENTS Additional depreciation qiven to structure due to deferred maintenance. See attached sheet for sale of property adjacent to subject with smaller square footage and smaller site. SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. 2 story GROSS BLDG. AREA 2873 GROUND FLR. AREA 2574 GARAGE-ATT. DET. TUCKUNDER 2 Car CENTRAL AIR Yes VALUATION 19 94 PAY 19 95 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 145,000. 159,500. 159,500. BUILDING 113 , 000 . 122,500. 108,000. TOTAL 258,000. 282,000. 267,500. ASSESSOR Tan Haller DATE 4-14-95 42 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 25370 Birch Bluff Rd. PID# 28-117-23-33-0027 SALE PRICE $ 225,000. SALE DATE 4-13-93 YEAR BUILT 1976 STORY 1 3/4 Story GROSS BLDG. AREA 1990 DECK Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 1276 BSMT. FINISHING None % GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car PORCH-GLAZED DET. SCREEN TUCKUNDER OPEN # OF BEDROOMS 2 BATH-DELUXE FIREPLACE(S) 1 FULL 1 3/4 CENTRAL AIR No 1/2 1 WALKOUT No LOT SIZE 23000 SF LAKESHORE-BAY Upper Lake MISC. COMMENTS ~() Fr 4211 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Mark Kohls ADDRESS 21035 Minnetonka Blvd. PID# 26-117-23-11-0017 PROPERTY TYPE SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. GROSS BLDG. AREA GROUND FLR. AREA GARAGE-ATT. DET. TUCKUNDER CENTRAL AIR MISC. COMMENTS Mr. Kohls left early and did not address the council nor did he request a review. BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED FULL SCREENED 3/4 OPEN 1/2 DECK # OF BEDROOMS # OF FIREPLACES WALKOUT LAKESHORE VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO CHANGE Dave Wilde DATE 4-15-95 43 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NAME Stephen Tierney ADDRESS 26200 Wild Rose Ln. PID# 32-117-23-12-0033 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1989 STORY HGT. 2 story BSMT. FINISHING 50 % LOT SIZE 39988 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 2177 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1189 FULL 2 SCREENED Yes GARAGE-A'IT . 3 Car 3/4 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 1 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS Basement finishing 40% completed as of 1995 assessment. Sales book provides numerous 2 story sales with similarities. pages 48-56 SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET VALUATION LAND -BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 61,500. 127,500. 1 89,000. 1995 PAY 1996 - - COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMEND NO CHANGE 61,500. 140,900. 202,400. Lisa Matt/Gail Navratil 4-14-95 DATE 44 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFOR}1ATION SHEET SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. NAME Karl & Patricia Tauscher ADDRESS 19360 McKinley ct. PID# 36-117-23-44-0054 PROPERTY TYPE R 205,000. SALE DATE 7-89 YEAR BUILT 1989 2 story BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 11600 SF 1 PORCH-GLAZED Yes 1 SCREENED OPEN GROSS BLDG. AREA 2224 BATH-DELUXE GROUND FLR. AREA 1348 FULL GARAGE-ATI. 2 Car 3/4 DET. 1/2 TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes DECK 1 4 2 # OF FIREPLACES LAKESHORE Yes MISC. COMMENTS See paqe 45 of sales book for smaller square feet and 1987 built sale on same street. Page 52 similar square feet and 1990 built. Page 56 similar square feet and age. VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL 1995 PAY 1996 64,000. 144,000. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION 1994 PAY 1995 55,000. 135,400. 190,400. 64,000. 144,000. 210,000. 210,000. ASSESSOR DATE 4-10-95 Tan Haller 45 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Gerald & Susan Brokaw ADDRESS 27320 Blue Ridqe Ln. PID# 31-117 -23-44-0004 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1980 STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING 60 % LOT SIZE 42140 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 1768 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1768 FULL 1. SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3/4 2 OPEN DET. 1/2 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER 2 Car # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sales book paqe 15, smaller square footage and older structure. See paqe 1 7, smaller sQUare footaqe but newer structure and page 1 8. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION - - LAND 42.000. 46,000. 46.000. BUILDING 95,600. 102,000. 102,000. TOTAL 137,600. 148,000. 148,000. ASSESSOR Tan Haller DATE 4-14-95 47 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. GROSS BLDG. AREA GROUND FLR. AREA GARAGE-AT!. DET. TUCKUNDER CENTRAL AIR MISC. COMMENTS NAME Robert Jochims ADDRESS 4765 Bayswater Rd. PID# 25-117-23-22-0049 PROPERTY TYPE SALE DATE YEAR BUILT BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED FULL SCREENED 3/4 OPEN 1/2 DECK # OF BEDROOMS # OF FIREPLACES WALKOUT LAKESHORE Mr. Jochims did not request a review of his property. VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO CHANGE 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 DATE 4-14-95 Dave Wilde 49 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME stuart & Gail Finnev ADDRESS 19710 Chartwell Hill PID# 36-117-23-13-0026 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1988 STORY HGT. 2 stOry BSMT. FINISHING 50 % LOT SIZE 23600 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 2657 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 1539 FULL 2 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT . 3 Car 3/4 OPEN DEI. 1/2 2 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT No LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sales l:::nok pa.ge 62. subject is larqer and has a qlazed porch. Also see paqe 71, subiect similar house. VALUATION 19~ PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 72,000. 96,000. 96,000. BUILDING 234,000. 238,000. 219,000. TOTAL 306,000. 334,000. 315,000. ASSESSOR Rolf Erickson DATE 4-12-95 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Maud Wadsworth ADDRESS 5460 Rewards Point Rd. PID# 31-117-23-11-0005 PROPERTY TYPE RL SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1900 STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 70 FF GROSS BLDG. AREA 1463 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1 463 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car 3/4 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 2 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT No LAKESHORE Upper Lake MISC. COMMENTS See attached sales sheets. Both are located in Orono; the sites are inferior to subi ect. '!his is a minimal lakeshore property. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 LAND 67.500. 74,000. BUILDING 33,500. 37,000. TOTAL 101 .000. 111 ,000. ASSESSOR Lisa M:>tt RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO CHANGE DATE 4-12-95 51 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ORONO RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA Address: 3925 Shoreline Map# 30-5/B PID# 20-117-23-22-0001 Financing: Cash Sale Price: S120~000 Year Built: 1910 Condition: Average Living Area: 1,100 Rooms: 5/2/1 Garage: Doulbe Date of Sale: 4/89 Style: 1 sty Amenities: Fireplace Lot: Small/Lakeshore 65x30 Comments: 65 ft lakeshore~ on busy street~ 51A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 3905 Shoreline Dr. PID# 20-117-23-22-0003 SALE PRICE $ YEAR BUILT GROSS BLDG. AREA GROUND FLR. AREA GARAGE-ATT. DET. TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS FIREPLACE(S) CENTRAL AIR WALKOUT LAKESHORE-BAY Spring Park Bay % 1 Car 2 1 No No 51B I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Richard Dyer ADDRESS 6070 Brand Cir. PID# 35-117-23-43-0007 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1968 STORY HGT. Split Entry BSMT. FINISHING 80 % LOT SIZE 36590 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 1092 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1 092 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 3/4 1 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 2 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT No LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sales book paqe 87, subj ect I s land and building are superior. See attached sales sheet, located next to subject. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 LAND 40.000. 43,000. BUILDING 74,000. 78,000. TOTAL 114,000. 121,000. ASSESSOR Lisa Matt RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO aIANGE DATE 4-12-95 52 I I I I I I I !I I I I I I I I I I I I ADDRESS PID# RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA 6045 Brand Cir. 35-117-23-43-0009 SALE DATE 9-27-91 STORIES R~mhlpr PORCH OR DECK Enc. Porch 8SM'T FINI~IING 80% # BATHS I-Full, 1-3/4, 1-1/2 CENTI~^I. A II~ No WALKOUT No 52A I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET BSMT. FINISHING BATH-DELUXE 1 FULL 1 3/4 1/2 # OF BEDROOMS 2 WALKOUT Yes 2 - VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 LAND 45,000. 49,000. BUILDING 94,300. 104,000. TOTAL 139,300. 153,000. ASSESSOR Lisa Matt RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION NO CHANGE DATE 4-12-95 53 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NAME Charles J. Fox ADDRESS 5660 Vine Hill Rd. PID# 36-117-23-14-0059 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1989 STORY HGT. 2 stOry BSMT. FINISHING % LOT SIZE 12820 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 2254 BATH-DELUXE 1 PORCH-GLAZED Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 1134 . FULL SCREENED GARAGE-ATT . 2 Car 3/4 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 2 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sales book page 55, slightly older house, similar in size. Has sane basement finishinq but no four season parch. If values decline in the future due to traffic on Vine Hill Rd. it will be reflected in future market values. Also see page 61 for sale on Vine Hill Rd. VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET 1994 PAY 1995 37,600. 130,800. 168,400. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION 1995 PAY 1996 - - 43,000. 147,000. 190,000. 43,000. 147,000. 190,000. DATE 4-13-95 Gail Navratil 55 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Robert Nygaard ADDRESS 4785 Lagoon Dr. PID# 30-117-23-31~0002 PROPERTY TYPE RL SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1951 % LOT SIZE 110 FF PORCH-GLAZED SCREENED OPEN BSMT. FINISHING BATH-DELUXE FULL 1 3/4 1/2 # OF BEDROOMS 3 WALKOUT No VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION - - 110.000. 115.500. NO 60,000. 69,500. mANGE 170,000. 185,000. Lisa Matt/Rolf Erickson 4-12-95 DATE 56 . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 5080 Shady Island PID# 30-117-23-13-0015 SALE PRICE $ 219,900.00 SALE DATE 8-22-93 YEAR BUILT 1977 STORY Split Foyer GROSS BLDG. AREA 1360 DECK Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 1360 BSMT. FINISHING 50 % GARAGE-ATI. 2 Car PORCH-GLAZED DET. SCREEN Yes TUCKUNDER OPEN # OF BEDROOMS 2 BATH-DELUXE FIREPLACE(S) 2 FULL 2 3/4 CENTRAL AIR No 1/2 WALKOUT Yes LOT SIZE 100 FF LAKESHORE-BAY Upper Lake MISC. COMMENTS 56A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION - - LAND 40,000. 40,000. BUILDING 139,900. 144,600. TOTAL 179,900. 184,600. ASSESSOR Rolf Erickson DATE 4-12-95 57 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Joanne & Russell Aldrich ADDRESS 4770 Lakewav Terr. PID# 26-117-23-11-0030 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE PRICE $ SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1960 STORY HGT. Rambler BSMT. FINISHING 10 % LOT SIZE 13070 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 1242 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1242 FULL 1 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car 3/4 OPEN Yes DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 3 # OF FIREPLACES 2 CENTRAL AIR No WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE Lake William MISC. COMMENTS See sales book paqe 1 07, also see attached sales sheet, subi ect has superior site. (on lake) VALUATION L994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 54,000. 60,000. NO BUILDING 68,700. 73,000. CHANGE TOTAL 122,700. 133,000. ASSESSOR Lisa Mott DATE 4-14-95 58 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS 4650 Lakewav Terr. PID# 26-117-23-11-0021 SALE PRICE $ 130,000.00 SALE DATE 3-30-93 YEAR BUILT 1966 STORY Rambler GROSS BLDG. AREA 1205 DECK Yes GROUND FLR. AREA 1205 BSNT. FINISHING 50 % GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car PORCH-GLAZED Yes DET. SCREEN TUCKUNDER OPEN # OF BEDROOMS 3 BATH-DELUXE FIREPLACE(S) 2 FULL 1 31LI CENTRAL AIR Yes 1/2 1 WALKOUT No LOT SIZE ] 3 r 070 SF LAKESHORE-BAY MISC. COMJ'1ENTS 58A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Peter Fisher ADDRESS 6130 SWeetwater ct. PID# 36-117-23-43-0040 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 1991 % LOT SIZE 28000 SF PORCH-GLAZED SCREENED OPEN 1 VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 83.000. 1 02, 1 00 . 83,000. BUILDING 300,300. 299,000. 300,300. TOTAL 383.300. 401 , 1 00 . 383,300. ASSESSOR Dave Wilde DATE 4-15-95 59 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Mangala pai Panandiker ADDRESS 19425 Vine Ridqe Rd. PID# 36-117-23-14-0022 PROPERTY TYPE R SALE DATE YEAR BUILT 2 story BSMT. FINISHING 50 % LOT SIZE 1987 1 0454 SF GROSS BLDG. AREA 2374 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1226 FULL 2 SCREENED GARAGE-ATT. 2 Car 3/4 OPEN Yes DEI. 1/2 1 DECK TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 4 # OF FIREPLACES 1 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sales book pa.qe 55, subiect sliqhtlv larqer with more basement finishinq less 1 bath. VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION LAND 47.000. 51.000. NO BUILDING 131,000. 143,000. CHANGE TOTAL 178,000. 194,000. ASSESSOR Lisa r-btt DATE 4-14-95 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET NAME Mark McArthur ADDRESS 6080 Whitney Cir. PID#36-117-23-41-0057 PROPERTY TYPE' R SALE PRICE $ 178,000 SALE DATE 4/8/90 YEAR BUILT STORY HGT. 2 StOry BSMT. FINISHING 50 % LOT SIZE GROSS BLDG. AREA 2192 BATH-DELUXE PORCH-GLAZED GROUND FLR. AREA 1112 FULL 2 SCREENED GARAGE-ATI . 2 Car 3/4 OPEN DET. 1/2 1 DECK Yes TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 5 # OF FIREPLACES CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes LAKESHORE MISC. COMMENTS See sale infonnation above. In 1992 added deck; in 1995 canpleted resement finishing. See sales book pages 44 and 46-49, which are ~ 1 ; ght-1 Y f'ml;::) 11 p-r, sli (;~htly older and have less or no basement f inishinq . 1990 19000 SF Yes 2 VALUATION 1994 PAY 1995 1995 PAY 1996 RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION - - LAND 60,000. 69,000. NO BUILDING 123,000. 1 40,000. CHANGE TOTAL 183,000. 209,000. ASSESSOR Lisa Matt DATE 4-14-95 61 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NAME Kermeth & Beatrice Stabeck ADDRESS 20454 Kniqhtsbridqe Rd. PID# 25-117-23-32-0041 PROPERTY TYPE Y 154.000. SALE DATE 10-25-92 YEAR BUILT 1979 2 stOry BSHT. FINISHING 30 % LOT SIZE carnnon area PORCH-GLAZED SCREENED Yes OPEN NO PICIURE ABAILABLE (looks like following comparable) SUBJECT INFORMATION SHEET SALE PRICE $ STORY HGT. GROSS BLDG. AREA 1820 BATH-DELUXE GROUND FLR. AREA 1036 FULL 1 GARAGE-Air. 2 Car 3/4 1 DET. 1/2 1 TUCKUNDER # OF BEDROOMS 2 CENTRAL AIR Yes WALKOUT Yes MISC. COMMENTS Note above sale of this property. DECK # OF FIREPLACES 1 LAKESHORE Five Amesbury townhouses ~(')ldbetween 10-1-93/9-30-94. The lowest sale price was $176,700. See followinq sales sheet. VALUATION LAND BUILDING TOTAL ASSESSOR 1994 PAY 1995 .- - 34.700. 107,500. 142,200. 1995 PAY 1996 34,700. 121 ,500. 156,200. Rolf Erickson 62 RECOMMEND NO CHANGE COUNCIL ACTION DATE 4-15-95 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ADDRESS: 4967 KENSINGTON GATE PID#: 25-117-23-32-0034 SALE PRICE: $ 176,700 SALE DATE: 9405 YEAR BUILT: 1978 STORY HEIGHT: 2 STORY GROSS BLDG. AREA: 1820 DECK: YES GROUND FLR. AREA: 1036 BSMT. FINISHING: 80 % GARAGE #1: ATTACHED PORCH-GLAZED: # OF CARS: 2 SCREEN: GARAGE #2: OPEN: # OF CARS: 0 BATH-DELUXE: 0 FIREPLACE(S) : 2 FULL: 1 CENTRAL AIR: YES 3/4 : 2 WALKOUT: YES 1/2: 1 LAKESHORE-BAY: LOT SIZE: AC COMMENTS: AMESBURY TOWNHOUSE INFORMATION DEEMED RELIABLE BUT NOT GUARANTEED 62A To: Mayor and City Council James C. Hurm, City Administrator From: Teri Naab, Deputy Clerk Date: April 24, 1995 Re: Reconvened Board of Review Mr. Dick Larson, 5610 Vine Hill Road (refer to Page 53 in the book of recommendations), called on Monday, April 24 to voice a concern that he had regarding procedure of the Board of Review. He indicated that prior to the April 5 meeting he was told by office personnel that a letter would suffice and he did not need to attend the actual meeting to voice his concern. However, he is now upset that the Assessor has recommended no change to his valuation and he has not had an opportunity to voice his concern to the Board. He asked that he be allowed to address the Board at the meeting this evening. Past practice has been that all testimony is taken at the initial Board of Review meeting and the Assessor's recommendation is considered at the reconvened meeting. The Board, at its discretion, may take additional testimony, change the recommended valuation, or adopt as presented. Mr. Larson intends to be present for the Reconvened Board of Review and you may proceed as you see fit. I did inform him that he has preserved his right to appear before the County Board, however, he was not fully satisfied with that response.