The URL can be used to link to this page

032293 CC Reg AgPCITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS sce� REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD MONDAY, MARCH 22, 1993 7:00 P.M. Following the adjournment of the regular meeting the City Council will convene to a Work Session then adjourn to Executive Session AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call C. Review Agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Stover Daugherty Lewis Mayor Brancel Benson A. City Council Canvass Meeting Minutes - March 10, 1993 (Att.No.2A- Minutes) B. City Council Work Session Minutes - March 10, 1993 (Att.No.2B- Minutes) C. Regular City Council Meeting - March 10, 1.993 (Att.No.2C- Minutes) 3. CONSENT AGENDA Motion to Approve Items on Consent A genda and Adopt Resolutions Therein A. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Declaring the Observance of Arbor Day - April 30, 1993 and May, 1993 as Arbor Month in the City of.Shorewood (Att.No.3A- Proposed Resolution) B. A Motion to Approve Continued Agreement for City Hall Cleaning Service (Att.No.3B- Agreement) C. A Motion to Approve Agreement with Lake Restoration, Inc. for 1993 Inspection of Eurasian Water Milf oil - Christmas Lake �til.l..1VV. J�. pt�lcctucua., D. A Motion to Consider an Agreement with Northern States _ Power _Company (NSP) for Street Lighting (Att.No.3D- Agreement) E. ** A Motion to Consider 1993 Spring Clean Up (Att.No.3E- Administrator's Memo and Letter of Agreement) 4. 7:30 PM - PUBLIC HEARING YEAR XIX (1993) URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM (CDBG) (Att.No. 4- Proposed Resolution) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - - MONDAY, MARCH 22, 1993 r PAGE TWO 5. PARK COMMISSION - Report on Park Commission Meetings 6. PLANNING COMMISSION A. Report on Planning Commission Meetings B. A Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare a Resolution with Findings of Fact - Setback Variance Applicant: Dave Nelson /Pete Knaeble Location: 21740 Lilac Lane (Att.No.6B- Planner's Memo, Proposed Resolution) C. A Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare a Resolution with Findings of Fact for a C.U.P. to Build on a Substandard Lakeshore Lot Applicant: Patrick Pechacek Location: 5025 Shady Island Road (Att.No.6C- Planner's Memo, Proposed Resolution) D. A Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare a Resolution for a Subdivision /Combination Applicant: Carolyn McClure Location: 22785 Murray Street (Att.No.6D- Planner's Memo, Proposed Resolution) E. Review Comments on Gideon's Woods E.A..W. /Determine Needs for Additional Environmental Review (Att.No.6E -1- Planner's Memo and 6E -2- Proposed Resolution) 7. CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR REGARDING SIGNAGE (Att.No.7- Directors Memo) 8. ** IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS ISSUES IN RELATION TO RENTAL HOUSING CODE 9. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 10. STAFF REPORTS A. City Attorney B. City Engineer C. City Planner * CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - MONDAY, MARCH 22, 1993 PAGE THREE 1 t 10. STAFF REPORTS - Continued D. Finance Director 1. - Preliminary 1992 Financial Report E. City Administrator 1. Review'Resident Survey Format (Att.No. 10E -1 -Draft Survey Document) 11. COUNCIL REPORTS A. Mayor Brancel B. Councilmembers 12. ADJOURN TO WORK SESSION SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF CLAIMS (Attachment) CONVENE WORK SESSION - No Action will be Taken at this Work Session 1. ** Discuss a Proposed Policy on Special Assessments for Street Reconstruction Projects (Attachment - Proposal) ADJOURN WORK SESSION TO CONVENE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION 1. Discuss Pending Litigation ADJOURN EXECUTIVE SESSION JCH.al 3/11/93 ** indicates tax increase or fee implications IM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MONDAY, MARCH 22, 1993 IT SHOULD BE ANNOUNCED AT THE ONSET OF THE MEETING THAT WE WILL CONVENE AT WORK SESSION FORMAT AFTER THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AND THEREAFTER RETURN INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION. AGENDA ITEM 3A - This Resolution declares April 30, 1993 as Arbor Day and the month of May as Arbor Month. AGENDA ITEM 3B - This action would be a motion to approve the continuation of our agreement with Jeffrey Reinhart for City Hall cleaning services. The weekly fee of $59 is unchanged from last year. AGENDA ITEM 3C - This action would be a motion to approve the annual agreement with Lake Restoration, Inc. for Christmas Lake Eurasian Water Milfoil Inspection. The budgeted amount is $700. AGENDA ITEM 3D - We have not had an updated agreement with Northern States Power Company for street lighting for many years. Arlo Peterson from NSP delivered the enclosed agreement. The City Attorney has reviewed and. approved it. A motion to authorize execution of the agreement would be in order. s AGENDA ITEM 3E - Enclosed in the packet is the Spring Cleanup fact sheet to be enclosed in the Spring Newsletter. Please review this carefully. A motion would be in order to authorize the Spring Cleanup as described in the attached program plan. I'VA AGENDA ITEM 4 - 7:30 PM - PUBLIC HEARING - A Public Hearing is required for the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program funds. The South Shore Senior Center request is for $8,011. This would leave $7,689 remaining to go to the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program as has been done in previous years. However, please note that there is a letter of request from Sojourn, an adult day care program. They are requesting some funding for a van for their program. The Council needs to determine how the Block Grant Fund allocation will be spent by Resolution at this meeting. The County's schedule requires our application to be sent to them by April 1. I have asked Larry Blackstad from the CDBG Program to be present. AGENDA ITEM 5 - Park Commission Chairman Steve Dzurak plans on attending but says-he may be a little late. AGENDA ITEM 6B - This would a be a motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution with "Findings of Fact" on a setback variance request for David Nelson and Pete Knaeble 'on Lilac Lane. The request is for a 15 foot setback variance to build a home. The Planning Commission at its March 2nd meeting recommended seven to zero to deny the requestedrvariance. Planning Commission minutes and the attached memorandum explain detail. AGENDA ITEM 6C - This would be a motion to direct staff to prepare a "Findings of Fact" resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit for 5025 Shady Island Road. The lot is substandard in the Shoreland Zoning District. On March 2 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request on a six to one vote with five of the conditions listed on the Planner's February 25 memorandum. AGENDA ITEM 6D - This would be a motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving a simple subdivision and combination request for 22785 Murray Street subject to the recommendations on the February 24 staff memorandum. The Planning Commission recommended approval on a seven to zero vote. AGENDA ITEM 6E - At it's March 16 meeting the Planning Commission recommended on a seven to zero vote that the Council not require an additional environmental review for the proposed Gideon's Woods development. Due to the deadline required by the environmental review process, a draft resolution has been prepared based upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission. AGENDA ITEM 7 - Enclosed is 'a memorandum listing a number of sign locations and recommendations for action resulting from the County sign installation program. Also enclosed is a resolution clarifying the placement of stop signs as a result of this program. The Public Works Director worked with the Police Department in making these recommendations. Action would be for the Council to review the memorandum and accept the recommendations, and approve the resolution identifying stop sign locations. AGENDA ITEM 8 - The rental housing code has been delayed to a meeting where all five Council members are present. A copy of the original issued memorandum is enclosed in this packet for your review. AGENDA ITEM 10E - A survey evaluating how we provide services has been approved and budgeted for by the Council. I indicated that I would send you a copy of the proposed questionnaire document before it is finalized. It is basically the survey that we reviewed together earlier. Let me know as early as possible any questions you might have. This will be included in the newsletter currently being put together for mailing. WORK SESSION - Following the regular portion of the meeting the Council will adjourn in work session format to discuss the proposed Special Assessment Policy for Street Reconstruction Projects. A two page memorandum is enclosed which highlights the main policy areas for discussion. EXECUTIVE SESSION - Following the work session will be an executive session to discuss matters of pending litigation. In a separate sealed envelope is some material for you to review before our discussion concerning MWCC. • 0 3/22/93 JH:sn CITY OF SHOREWOOD CANVASSING BOARD WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1993 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 6:00 P.M. The Shorewood City Council Canvassing Board convened at 6:25 p.m., Wednesday, March 10, 1993 to review the local election results from the Park Referendum Election - March 9, 1993. A. ROLL CALL Present: Acting Mayor Daugherty; Councilmembers Benson, Lewis and Stover. Absent: Mayor Brancel. Staff Present: City Administrator /Clerk James C. Hurm and City Attorney Tim Keane. 2. REVIEW AND APPROVE THE LOCAL ELECTION RESULTS FROM THE PARK REFERENDUM ELECTION - MARCH 9. 1993 CANVASS OF ELECTION - RESOLUTION NO. 27 -93 The Council reviewed a "Resolution Accepting the Special City of Shorewood Park and Trail Improvement Bond Referendum Results" for the special election held Tuesday, March 9, 1993, as presented by the Election Judges of the four Shorewood precincts. Lewis moved, Stover seconded to adopt Resolution No. 27 -93 "A Resolution Accepting the Bond Referendum Results." Motion passed 4/0. 3. ADJOURN CANVASS BOARD - RECONVENE INTO SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION • MEETING Benson moved, Stover seconded to adjourn the Canvass Board meeting at 6:30 p.m. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Arlene H. Bergfalk, Recording Secretary TimeSavers Off Site Secretarial ATTEST ROB DAUGHERTY, ACTING MAYOR JAMES C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR 1 �� CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL WORK SESSION WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1993 MINUTES 1. CONVENE WORK SESSION A. ROLL CALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 6:30 P.M./9:15 P.M. The work session was convened by Acting Mayor Daugherty at 6:30 p.m. Present were: Acting Mayor Daugherty; Councilmembers Benson, Lewis and Stover; Administrator Hurm, Engineer Dresel, Attorney Keane, Finance Director Rolek and Public Works Director Zdrazil. 2. ESTABLISH AND PRIORITIZE OBJECTIVES FOR 1993/1994 Hurm presented and reviewed documents containing the City Council's annual work calendar; Shorewood City Values; Statement of Purpose for Decisions and Actions of Shorewood City Officials and Employees; List of City of Shorewood's Accomplishments in 1992; and Staff Consensus of Issues Facing the City in 1993. Hurm requested each Councilmember to individually prioritize the issues identified in the document Issues Facing the City during 1993 on a scale based on being not urgent /not important to being urgent /important. Councilmembers completed the exercise and agreed to reconvene following the regular Council meeting to review the collective responses to determine priority objectives for 1993/1994. 3. ADJOURN WORK SESSION AND RECONVENE INTO THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING The work session adjourned at 6:50 p.m. 4. RECONVENE WORK SESSION Acting Mayor Daugherty reconvened the work session at 9:15 p.m. Hurm reviewed the issues identified as priorities for 1993 by the Councilmembers in attendance at this meeting. He stated that Mayor Brancel's input will be requested and incorporated into the results. The final results will be compiled by the staff and reported to the Council. 5. ADJOURNMENT The work session adjourned at 9:30 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Arlene H. Bergfalk, Recording Secretary TimeSavers Off Site Secretarial 1 c CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1993 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. The meeting was called to order by Acting Mayor Daugherty at 7:00 p.m. A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE B. ROLL CALL • � J Present: Acting Mayor Daugherty; Councilmembers Benson, Lewis and Stover; Administrator Hurm, Engineer Dresel, Attorney Keane, and Finance Director Rolek. Planner Nielsen attended a portion of the meeting. Absent: Mayor Brancel. C. REVIEW AGENDA Benson moved, Stover seconded to approve the Agenda for March 10, 1993, with the removal of Consent Agenda item 3.13. and agenda items 4.B. and 6., and removal of the Final Report portion of agenda item 7. Motion passed 4/0. PRESENTATION OF AWARD TO RESIDENT COMMISSIONER DEAN JOHNSON - LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION AND CITY OF SHOREWOOD Acting Mayor Daugherty presented an award to Resident Commissioner Dean Johnson on behalf of the Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission and City of Shorewood recognizing his outstanding service and commitment to success on the cable commission from 1985 to 1993. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Lewis moved, Benson seconded to approve the City Council Minutes of February 22, 1993. Motion passed 3/0. Stover abstained. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Acting Mayor Daugherty read the Consent Agenda for March 10, 1993. 1 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 10, 1993 - PAGE 2 Stover moved, Lewis seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and to adopt the Resolution and Motion contained therein: A. RESOLUTION NO. 28 -93 "A Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval for Deer Ridge." B. REMOVED C. A Motion Amending Final Pay Voucher No. 8 for Old Market Road City Project 91 -4. Motion passed 4/0. 4. PARK A. Park Commission Report - None. B. REMOVED Daugherty announced the results of the March 9, 1993 Special Park Referendum Election. 114 "Yes" votes and 298 "No" votes were cast to defeat the proposal to allow the City of Shorewood to borrow $900,000 by selling its General Obligations Bonds to pay for construction, betterment and equipping of park, trail and recreation facilities and related land. 5. PLANNING Lewis briefly reported on actions taken at the Planning Commission's March 2 meeting. 6. REMOVED 7. FINAL REPORT ON PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY - Nick Reuhl. EOS Architecture - REMOVED A. Consider a Motion to Approve a Resolution Accepting the Final Change Order, Pay Request and Final Acceptance of the Construction of the Public Works Building - Rochon Corporation Lewis requested clarification of the negotiations regarding several change order requests for the site work on the Public Works Facility. Dresel stated that the Rochon Corporation accepted the recommended payment adjustments for the change orders. 2 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 10, 1993 - PAGE 3 Stover moved, Lewis seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 29 -93 "A Resolution Accepting the Construction of the Public Works Building." Motion passed 4/0'. Hurm reported that work on the exhaust system in the Public Works facility has been completed without any additional costs. 8. APPEAL LOCAL SANITARY SEWER ACCESS CHARGE (LSSAC) ORDINANCE Appellant: Douglas and Bonita Shoutz Location: 6130 Cathcart Drive The appellants are appealing the Local Sanitary Sewer Access Charge (LSSAC) which was imposed as a condition of approval of their recent lot split at 6130 Cathcart Drive. Rolek outlined the Ordinance providing for imposition of the LSSAC. He noted that when the change was made to a flat fee basis, the Ordinance did not address properties that had previously been assessed for more than one unit. The property in question has already been charged two sewer units. Since there is no provision in the current Ordinance for waiver of the fee, staff proposes an amendment which would allow for credit for past assessments on a unit - for -unit basis. If the amendment is adopted by the Council, staff recommends refunding the $1,000 LSSAC paid by the Shoutzs, upon publication of the amendment. Stover moved, Lewis seconded to adopt Ordinance No. 271, "Amending Section 904.18 of the City Code Relating to Local Sanitary Sewer Service Availability • Charge." . Motion passed 4/0. Keane noted that although the amendment to the Ordinance is designed to provide that credits may be granted administratively, it is recommended that the Council take action to approve the Shoutz' appeal request to provide appropriate documentation in the City's financial records. Lewis moved, Stover seconded to approve the credit of the $1,000 LSSAC to Douglas and Bonita Shoutz. Motion passed 4/0. 9. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION SETTING POLICY REGARDING STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FEES FOR SMALL PARCELS 3 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 10, 1993 - PAGE 4 Hurm stated that in preparing for the $3.75 per quarter storm water management utility billing, the Planning Department identified about 100 small, mostly unbuildable parcels, which do not receive a utility bill at the present time. It is the consensus of the staff that although technically all parcels add to the storm water problem, parcels which would generate bills of less than $2.00 per quarter should not receive a bill at all. Therefore, considering the cost associated with establishing and maintaining these small utility accounts as well as mailing costs, staff suggests that Council consider excluding, for billing purposes, any lot which would generate a fee of less than $2.00 per quarter. Stover requested clarification of the basis of the billing. Rolek explained that the fees are based on a residency equivalency factor derived through calculations estimating the amount of run -off that is generated by a parcel. The billing is then determined by multiplying the fee ($3.75) times the factor times the acreage. i Lewis expressed concern regarding the exemption of payment of an established fee by certain parcels inasmuch as the program was created to collect funds to manage the stormwater problem. He suggested that a minimum billing be an alternative to. exemption of any payment. Staff noted that small parcels are generally those 1/4 to 1/3 acre in size. It was pointed out that $2.00 would likely cover the administrative costs associated with maintaining the small accounts once they are set up. However, in the interests of efficient and effective management, the costs to establish, maintain and bill accounts for such parcels would appear excessive. Councilmembers discussed various alternative amounts which may be appropriate. It was pointed out that amounts for small parcels will be added to those currently receiving utility bills. It was noted that policy, if approved, will take effect with the April billing. Stover moved, Benson seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 30 -93 "A Resolution Establishing Policy for Billing of Storm Water Management Utility Fees to Certain Parcels," amended as follows: THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood to establish a policy to exclude for billing purposes under Ordinance No. 268 certain parcels which are not currently receiving a utility bill which would generate a fee of less than $2.00 per calendar quarter. (language added by amendment underscored) Motion passed 4/0. 10. LMCD REPRESENTATIVE BOB RASCOP - APPLICATION FROM BOULDER BRIDGE FARMS REGARDING DOCK LICENSE Rascop reviewed a request before the LMCD from the Boulder Bridge Farms M REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 10, 1993 - PAGE 5 homeowners association to move six of thirty lagoon docks to the lake. He requested comments from the Councilmembers relative to this request. The Councilmembers generally deferred resolution of the matter to the LMCD. Rascop reported that proposed State legislation would remove the tax levy limits of organizations such as the LMCD. Hurm suggested that it appears such a proposal is a mistake on the part of the Department of Revenue since the limit was specifically included in the law at the request of municipalities. It was the consensus of the Council that local legislators be contacted to express the City's concern regarding this issue. Rascop briefly commented on the expectations for the LMCD budget. 11. MATTERS FROM TH FLOOR • Elizabeth Sims, 5010 Chasewood Parkway, Minnetonka, addressed the Council to request that heavy trucks be allowed to deliver concrete and fill to a home being built at 5555 Sylvan Lane (Wildrose and Sylvan Lane), Shorewood. She claimed that construction delays were caused, in part, by a delay in the issuance of a building permit by Shorewood. She outlined rationale for waiving the weight limits on the subject Shorewood roads, reviewed financial implications, and stated they are prepared to move immediately to have the necessary materials delivered to their home site. Dresel reviewed concerns, from an engineering standpoint, regarding allowing heavy concrete trucks on the roads at this time of the year. He stated that with several weeks of warm weather, the frost is probably out of the ground at this point. He noted that Shorewood roads are currently posted for weight restrictions. • Gary Carlson, builder, Summit Creek Homes, suggested allowing the use of six ton trucks early in the morning. Dresel indicated that although it is difficult to determine the exact status of the roads without measurement and testing, damage could be incurred by the use of such heavy equipment. Dresel further stated concern about setting precedence in approving this variance and noted that there are in 15 -20 builders in Shorewood that work around these restrictions during the year without any problems. Hurm clarified that the permit process is normally 10 days; this request was processed in 11 days. Nielsen stated that due to survey discrepancies, the request could have been delayed further until a lot line dispute was resolved. Staff does not accept responsibility for any delay in this project. While acknowledging the Sims' predicament, Councilmembers agreed that a variance that would destroy Shorewood roads could not be allowed; that it is difficult to determine whether the roads could be considered absolutely safe for use by the heavy 5 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 10, 1993 - PAGE 6 that would destroy Shorewood roads could not be allowed; that it is difficult to determine whether the roads could be considered absolutely safe for use by the heavy equipment; that accountability and responsibility for damages would be difficult to determine; and that the Ordinance allows the staff responsible for the public infrastructure to consider each variance request on a case by case basis. It was the consensus of the Council that if Sims and Carlson can provide documentation from a Registered Engineer acceptable to the staff regarding the status of the road for safe use by equipment heavier than currently allowed by the posted weight restrictions, and for adequate liability coverage, discretion for approval of the waiver of road restrictions will remain with the City staff responsible for the public infrastructure as provided in the Ordinance. 12. STAFF REPORTS • A. City Attorney Keane informed Councilmembers that he will present an update on current litigation at the Council's March 22 meeting. B. City Engineer - None. C. City Planner Nielsen stated that the Planning Commission will review the EAU comments received regarding the Gideons Woods P.U.D. at it's March 16 meeting. A provision in the guidelines states that it is the option of the City whether a public hearing is held on the comments themselves. If the Council desires a public hearing, a special meeting • may be necessary because of time limits imposed. Following discussion, it was the consensus of the Council that a public hearing not be scheduled on the EAU comments received in connection with the Gideons Woods P.U.D. Council suggested that a copy of the Planning Commission's March 16 agenda be mailed to each interested party. D. Finance Director Rolek informed Councilmembers that the City's financial audit is currently being conducted. A report will be available in April. E. City Administrator 1. Review First Draft of a Policy on Special Assessments for Street Reconstruction Projects C REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 10, 1993 - PAGE 7 Hurm brought the Council's attention to the proposed policy regarding special assessments for street reconstruction projects. It was the consensus of the Council that consideration of the document be scheduled for a Council work session. To expedite consideration of the issues, the Council requested staff to prepare a brief outline of the specific issues to be addressed and be provided to the Councilmembers prior to the work session. 13. COUNCIL REPORTS Benson commended the Park Commissioners and other supporters for their outstanding effort on behalf of the Park referendum. Lewis commended the Park Commission for its park planning efforts and stated that the process provided guidance from the voters. Stover suggested that the Council review and consider it's operating policies at a is future work session. 14. ADJOURNMENT TO CONTINUATION OF WORK SESSION SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF CLAIMS Benson moved, Stover seconded to adjourn the City Council Meeting at 9:15 p.m. to continuation of the work session, subject to the approval of claims. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED • Arlene H. Bergfalk Recording Secretary TimeSavers Off Site Secretarial ATTEST ROB DAUGHERTY, ACTING MAYOR JAMES C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR RESOLUTION NO. -93 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE OBSERVANCE OF ARBOR DAY TO BE APRIL 30, 1993, AND ARBOR MONTH TO BE MAY, 1993 WHEREAS, trees use up excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and turn it into lief - giving oxygen; and WHEREAS, trees helps conserve energy; that is, three properly planted trees around a home can cut air conditioning bills by ten to fifteen percent; and WHEREAS, trees turn urban "heat islands" into cool and comfortable "oasis ", making the concrete jungle liveable for all of us; and WHEREAS, Arne H. Carlson, Governor of the State of Minnesota, has proclaimed Friday, April 30, 1993 to be Arbor Day and the month of.May, 1993 to be Arbor Month; and WHEREAAS, in said proclamation the Governor urges all citizens of Minnesota to become more aware of the importance of trees to their well- being, and to plant, nurture, protect and wisely use Minnesota's great treasure of trees. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shorewood City Council that the citizens of Shorewood are encouraged to observe Friday, April 30, 1993 as Arbor Day and the month of May, 1993 to be Arbor Month by planting a tree and thereby hoping to ensure a green Shorewood and Minnesota in decades to come. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota this 22nd day of March, 1993. Barbara J. Brancel, Mayor ATTEST: James C. Hurm, City Administrator Worksheet for City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 • • Attention: Ms. Anne Latter #474 -3236 Entrance and Reception area General Offices Private Offices Office Washrooms Kitchenette Duties Entrance doors and glass Tile floors mopped Floors vacuumed or mats shook Waste baskets emptied Desk tops cleaned when cleared Dusting of cabinets and ledges Washrooms all fixtures cleaned and serviced, floors mopped Conference room table cleaned and counters Dust window sills 2/23/93 1) Cleaning to take place once per week (generally will be performed between Friday- Monday night). 2) City of Shorewood to purchase paper products and bags. 3) Work to begin immediately after notification. 4) Weekly fee of $59 /week to be paid on the last day of following month of service - fee includes purchase of normal cleaning solution by Assured Office Systems. - Assured Office Systems to empty trash Comments: • • • ��11.., i� /. A ll, Agreed to by. Date 0 LAKE RESTORATION, INC. 620 Hamel Road Hamel, MN 55340 (612) 478 -9421 1993 SIGN -UP FOR THE INSPECTIONS OF EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL CHRISTMAS LAKE (HENNEPIN) MR AL ROLEK OR MR JIM HURM ACT #2076 CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD SHOREWOOD MN 55424 INFORMATION: C'_ e 1. Inspections will be made for the control of: Eurasian Watermilfoil. 2. The inspection area includes: Christmas Lake. 3. Inspection program: Lake Restoration, Inc. trained and licensed personnel will conduct inspections consisting of a minimum of 10 grapple samples per acre with a more concentrated effort in public areas. Weed samples are documented and if eurasian watermilfoil is found the shore area is marked and the location mapped. A report with the findings will be issued upon completion of the program. 4. Special concerns or problem areas: PRICING & TERMS: NET 30. 1. Inspection of the entire littoral zone (area less than 15 feet deep) . Cost $ -=6-# PER INSPECTION. # ?a 0V P-- Z' 2. Inspection to be done: Please check desired inspections. (Both are recommended) 1 in SPRING 1 in FALL PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN WHITE COPY TO LAKE RESTORATION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE FOR SCHEDULING. Signature : @: Phone #: (H) (W) Billing Address (if different than above address) * keep yellow copy for your records * C LAKE RESTORATION, INC. p ` -u, 620 Hamel Road Hamel, MN SS340 (612) 478 -9421 1993 SIGN --UP FOR THE INSPECTIONS OF EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL CHRISTMAS LAKE (HENNEPIN ), MR Al._ ROLEK OR MR JIM INURM ACT 1 , 1 2076 CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD SHOREWOOD MN 55424 INFOR 1. - Inspections wil- l - -be- made for control -- of. Eurasian Watermilfoil. 2. The inspection area includes: Christmas Lc 3. Inspection program: Lake Restoration. Inc. trained and • licensed persc)nnel will conduct inspection^ cons].sting of a. minimum of 10 grapple samples per acre wit a mo, cone:.: ntrated effort in public are - Weed mples are documented an d if .eura` ian watermilfoll is found the s lOV aT o-la Is mar and the l ocation mapped A repc)) t with t findings will be issued upon completion of the p'rogvam. 4. Special concerns or problem areas: PRI & T NET 30. 1. Inspection. of the entire littoral zone (area less than 15 feet deep) Cost PER iNSPECTION 2. Inspection to be done: Please check desired inspections_ ( Both are recommended )` 1 in SPRING 1 in' FALL' PLEAS S IGN AND RETU WHIT COPY _TQ_ LAKE RESTORATION„ AS _ SOON AS POSSIBLE FOR SCHEDULING s ignature. Phone #: (H) — -- - Billing Address (if different.than above address) * kee copy ' 10r V 7 U i" i't?i: iu .T STREET LIGHTING CONTRACT MINNESOTA THIS CONTRACT, dated February a5th 19 93 , between NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, a Minnesota Corporation, hereinafter called "Company," and the City o f Shorewood , a municipal corporation in _ Hennepin County, in the State of Minnesota hereinafter called "Customer." - WITNESSETH: That the parties hereto, each in consideration of the agreements of the other, agree as follows: KIND OF SERVICE: Pursuant to the terms set forth below and the additional terms and conditions on the reverse hereof, Company agrees to supply Customer with illumination or service designated in Rate Schedules A, B or C which are attached hereto and made a part of this contract from facilities located as shown on Exhibits A, B and C which are attached hereto and made a part hereof. CHANGES AND ADDITIONS: When requested by Customer, Company will provide additional street lights. When there is a major change in the number, size, or type of light source. Customer shall provide updated sketches or drawings indicating changes. Company will then prepare . revised or new exhibits. In the event additional sizes or types of street lights are available from Company and desired by Customer, the Company will install such lights and an applicable Rate Schedule shall be expanded to include these additional lights at their respective rates. TERM: This contract shall be in force for a period of 2 years commencing on February a5th 19 93 , and shall continue in force thereafter for periods of 1 year unless terminated by written notice of cancellation given by either party to the other not less than 30 days prior to the expiration of any of said 1 year periods, provided that in no event shall this Contract be extended beyond the period for which Customer may legally bind itself. PAYMENT OF BILLS: All bills are payable at Company's office on or before the thirtieth day succeeding the date bill is rendered. RATES, RULES AND REGULATIONS: • The Customer agrees to accept and pay for such services in accordance with the rates, rules, and regulations of the Company as filed with the Minnesota Public Service Commission and in effect from time to time for this class of service. Rates presently in effect for services hereunder are shown in the attached rate schedules. Service hereunder shall be supplied for Customer's use subject to agreements contained herein and in the "Additional Conditions" shown on the reverse hereof and made a part of this contract. TERMINATION OF PRIOR CONTRACTS: It is agreed that, on the effective date hereof, this Contract terminates all prior contracts covering street lighting service furnished hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this contract to be duly executed. Customer. By James Hurm NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY B Marlow E. Peterson Title City Manager Witness As To Customer Title Community Service Manager Attest 3L Minnesota MAINTENANCE SERVICE Customer Owned THIS CONTRACT, dated February 25th ,19 , between NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, a Minnesota Corporation, hereinafter called "Company," and the City o f Shorewood , a municipal corporation in Hennepin County, in the State of Minnesota hereinafter called "Customer," WITNESSETH: That the parties hereto, each in consideration of the agreements of the other, agree as follows: AVAILABILITY: Available for electric lamps mounted on standards where Customer owns an Ornamental Street Lighting system complete with standards, luminaires with globes, lamps and other appurtenances, together with all necessary cables extending between standards and to points of connection to Company's facilities as designated by Company. TERMS AND CONDITIONS: Pursuant to the terms set forth below and the additional terms and conditions on the reverse hereof, Company shall provide street light maintenance service as set forth in the Maintenance Service Chart which is attached hereto and made part of this contract. Customer shall keep its cables, ornamental standards, foundations and fittings in a safe and workable condition and replace cables. wiring, ornamental standards and appurtenances thereto, if such replacement becomes necessary as the result of damage by collision, accidents, Acts of God, or any other cause not arising from some act of Company. RA TE: Designation of Lamps Number of Monthly Level of Lamps per Rate per Service Luminaire Luminaire KMO11 —.250 Watt High Pressure Sodium KMO11 — 400 Watt Mercury Vapor (Fix. Only) 1 $2.15 (Fix. Only) 1 $1.45 TERM: This Contract shall converge on February 25th ,19 93 , and shall continue for a period of 1 year, and shall automatically continue for an additional 1 year. PAYMENT OF BILLS: All bills are payable at Company's office on or before the thirtieth day succeeding the date bill is rendered. DAILY OPERATING SCHEDULE: The daily operating schedule of the above lamps on the All -night (AN) schedule shall be from approximately one -half hour after sunset until one -half hour before sunrise. TERMINATION OF PRIOR CONTRACTS: It is agreed that, on the effective date hereof, this Contract terminates all prior contracts covering street lighting service furnished hereunder. Customer: B James Hurm Title City Manager NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY Marlow E. Peterson By Title Community Service Manager Attest Witness As To Customer 4• FORM 17 -0455 Rate Schedule A (Minnesota) To Street Lighting Contract Dated February 25th, 19 93 OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING (Company Owned) AVAILABILITY: Available for year -round illumination of public streets, parkways, and highways by elec- tric lamps in luminaires- supported on wood poles, where the facilities for this service are furnished by Company. RATE: Number of Lamps per Designation of Lamps Luminaire KP008,- 100 Watt High pressure Sodium 1 KP008 - 150 Watt High Pressure Sodium 1 KP008 - 250 Watt High Pressure Sodium 1 • Monthly Rate per Luminaire $ 9.40 $10.55 $14.00 SERVICE INCLUDED IN RATE: Company shall own, operate, and maintain the Overhead Street Lighting system using Company's standard street lighting equipment. DAILY OPERATING SCHEDULE: The daily operating schedule of the above lamps shall be from approx- imately one -half hour after sunset until one -half hour before sunrise. OUTAGES: If illumination from any lamp is interrupted and said illumination is not resumed within 24 hours from the time Company receives notice thereof from Customer, 1/30 of the monthly rate for such lamp shall be deducted for each night of nonillumination after such notice is received. The above rate schedule has been filed with the Minnesota Public Service Commission effective November 2nd , 19 92 . Date February tL5th, 1993 Supersedes Rate Schedule A Dated June 12th, 1972 I\SP', RATE SCHEDULE B Minnesota To Street Lighting Contract Dated February 25th 19 9..L- ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING Customer Owned AVAILABILITY: Available for year-round illumination of public streets. parkways. and highways by electric lamps mounted on standards where Customer owns an Ornamental Street Lighting system complete with standards. luminaires with globes. lamps and other appurtenances. together with all necessary cables extending between standards and to points of connection to the Company's facilities as designated by the Company. RATE: Number of Daily Monthly Lamps per Operating Rate per .' Desianation of Lamps Luminaire Schedule Luminaire '~009 - 250 Uatt High Pressure Sodium 1 AN $4.35 (Group 1) Ornamental K"Y009 - 400 Watt Mercury Vapor 1 AN $6.45 (Group 1) Ornamental SERVICE INCLUDED IN RATE: Company shall furnish all electric energy necessary to operate Customer's Ornamental Street Lighting system. . DAILY OPERATING SCHEDULE: The daily operating schedule of the above lamps on the all-night (AN) schedule shall be from approximately one-half hour after sunset until one-half hour before sunrise. OUTAGES: If illumination from any lamp is interrupted and said illumination is not resumed within 24 hours from the time Company receives notice thereof from Customer, 1/30 of the monthly energy rate for such lamp shall be deducted for each night of nonillumination after such notice is received. The above rate schedule has been filed with the Minnesota Public Service Commission effective November 2nd , 19 ~ Date February 25th , 19 2L-- Supersedes Rate Schedule B Dated rutHI 12th. 1972 12192 . . ,.r " FORM 17-0457 Rate Schedule C (Minnesota) To Street Lighting Contract Dated February 25th, 1993 CUSTOM RESIDENTIAL STREET LIGHTING (Company Owned) A V AILABILITY: Available for year-round illumination of public streets by electric lamps in luminaires mounted on standards and served through underground circuits, where the facilities for this service are fur- nished by Company. Street lighting service under this schedule is limited to residential areas having a Company-owned underground electric distribution system. RATE: Desi~nation of Lamps Monthly Rate per Standard KP009 - 100 Watt High Pressure Sodium $14.10 SERVICE INCLUDED IN RATE: Company shall own, operate, and maintain the Custom Residential Street Lighting system using Company's standard street lighting equipment, which includes one lamp per standard. DAILY OPERATING SOIEDULE: The daily operating schedule of the above lamps shall be from approx- imately one-half hour after sunset until one-half hour before sunrise. OUTAGES: If illumination from any lamp is interrupted and said illumination is not resumed within 24 hours from the time Company received notice thereof from Customer, 1/30 of the monthly rate for such lamp shall be deducted for each night of nonillumination after such notice is received. The above rate schedule has been filed with the Minnesota Public Service Commission effective November 2nd , 19~. Date February 25th, 1993 Supersedes Rate Schedule C Dated June 12th, 1972 1993 SPRING CLEAN UP This year our Spring Cleanup will be handled similarly to previous years: A combination of curbside pickup for yard waste, brush and household rubbish, and a limited drop-off site for certain larger items.- Curbside Pickup The curbside effort will be conducted. on Saturday, May 22. Items you wish to have taken away must be at the street by 8:00 a.m. on Saturday. The cost of this service will be prorated to all residents of Shorewood and will appear on your second quarter utility bill. .ollowing is a list of the types of items which will be accepted for the curbside pickup: . Brush, cut in four-foot lengths and bundled so as to be handled by one person . Grass clippings and leaves in bags . General household rubbish including small furniture items, portable T.V's, bathtubs, toilets . Lawn mowers and small engines (drain off fluids) . Carpets, 6 feet or less, no more then 12 inches in diameter, tied with twine (no wire) . Dismantled swing sets (less then 8 feet) To expedite the process, please have brush and yard waste in piles separated from the trash. These items will not be accepted: Construction debris (lumber, blocks, sheetrock, etc.) and household hazardous waste (including paint cans) Limited Drop-Off Site On Saturdav. Mav 22.residents may bring larger items to the new Public Works fadlitv located at 24200 Smithtown Rd. just east of Minnetonka Plaza on County Rd 19 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Following is a list of items which will be accepted and the fees which will be charged for those items: Appliances, including water heaters $ 8.00 Mattresses, carpets (larger then 6 feet in length) and large furniture items 10.00 Air Conditioners 17.00 Automobile tires (without rims) 2.00 Automobile tires (with rims) 3.00 Truck tires, up to 16 inch (no rims) 6.00 Batteries no fee Both the curbside pickup and the drop-off site are for Shorewood residents only. Those using the drop-off site will be required to show proof that they are Shorewood residents. Large Volumes of Brush. Yard Waste and Trees Since the curbside pickup is limited to bagged yard waste and manageable bundles of brush, it may not be practical for some residents with large volumes of brush, logs, etc. to utilize the curbside service. Those residents have several options. 1. Contact a private company, listed in the Yellow Pages under Tree Service, which chips trees and brush. (Bagged wood chips can be accepted in the curbside pickup). 2. Take large loads (no compost materials) to the Hennepin County Tree Disposal Site in Maple Grove, operated by Ceres Tree Co. The site is open weekdays 8:00 a.m. to 5:45 p.m. and Saturdays 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Call 420-7045 for fees and directions to the site. 3. Make arrangements with a private company to have a dumpster brought to your property. 1Jt- . . '" NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING YEAR XIX (1993) URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Notice is hereby given that the City of Shorewood in cooperation with Hennepin County, pursuant to Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, is holding a public hearing on March 22, 1993 at 7: 30 pm in the Council Chambers, at 5755 Country Club Road. The public hearing is on housing and community development needs of the city and the Urban Hennepin County community Development Block Grant Program statement of Objectives and the proposed use of the Year XIX Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program planning allocation of $ 15,700 by the city. During the July 1, 1993 to June 30, 1994 program year it is estimated that no additional program income-from locally funded CDBG activities will be available to the city. The statement of Objectives basically consists of the following seven program areas: (1) ADMINISTRATION, to maximize program benefit and effectively administer program funds; (2) HOUSING, to rehabilitate and assist in the development of housing which is affordable to low-and moderate-income households; (3). NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION, to maintain and preserve viable neighborhoods through concentrated community development activities; (4) PUBLIC FACILITIES, to improve existing and assist in the development of new public facilities which benefit low- and moderate-income persons; (5) ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, to provide financial assistance to businesses which will provide or retain employment to the benefit of low- and moderate-income persons; (6) PUBLIC SERVICES, to expand and improve the quantity and quality of public services available to low- and moderate-income persons; and (7) REMOVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL BARRIERS, to alleviate conditions which restrict the mobility and accessibility of elderly or handicapped persons. The City of Shorewood is activities with Year XVIII starting about July 1, 1993. Activity proposing to undertake the following Urban Hennepin County CDBG funds Housing, Rehabilitation Loan Program Budget $ 7,689 Southshore Senior Center Operation $ 8,011 For additional information on the proposed activities, level of funding, program objectives and performance, contact the City of Shorewood at 474-3236 or the Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development at 348-6418. The public hearing is being held pursuant of MS 471.59. CITY OF SHOREWOOD James C. Hurm City Administrator 4 RESOLUTION NO. -93 RESOLUTION APPROVING PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS FOR 1993 (YEAR XIX) OF THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood, through execution of a Joint Coorperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is cooperGting in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has developed a proposal for the use of Urban Hennepin County CDBG funds made available to it, and held a public hearing on March 22, 1993 to obtain the views of . citizens on local and Urban Hennepin County housing and community development needs and the City's proposed use of $ 15,700 from the Year XIX Urban Hennepin County community Development Block Grant. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the city of Shorewood approves.the following projects for funding from the Year XIX Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant program related and applicable program income and authorizes submittal of the proposal to Hennepin County for review and inclusion in the Year XIX Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds. Project Budqet Southshore Senior Center Operation $ 7,689 $ 8,011 . Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL by the city of Shorewood this day of , 1993. Barbara J. Brancel, Mayor ATTEST: James C. Hurm City Administrator (fiIe.cdbg.93) . . HENNEPIN DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: OFFICE OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Development Planning Unit 822 South Third Street, Suite 310 Minneapolis, MN 55415 (612) 348-6418 FAX (612) 348-6057 February 17, 1993 Urban Hennepin County Cooperating Communities Hennepin County Office Of Planning and Development 1993 (Year XIX) Public Hearings To ensure compliance with the CDBG program's citizen participation requirements, please provide the information requested and return this form as soon possible. Community: Date of Public Hearing: Monday, March 22, 1993 at 7: 30 pm City of Shorewood - 5755 Country Club Road rrs 2 "; iCCi), ._;-. _ l;)o...rJ I J_; .\-' HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES 10709 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 111, Minnetonka, MN 55305 541-1019 FAX 541-0841 BOARD of DIRECTORS Tom Tlcen President February 17, 1993 fEB \ 8 \993 Daralyn Peifer 1st Vice President Mayor Barbara Brancel and City Council Members CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN. 55331 Marty Guritz 2nd Vice President Bob Zagaros Secretary Ryan Schroeder Treasurer Dear Mayor Brancel and Council Members: Lucille Crow Senior Community Services is requesting $ 8,011 for the 1993-94 fiscal year from the City of Shorewood to support the Southshore Senior Center. This amount reflects a 4% cost-of- living-increase. The City provided $ 7,703 for the past year through its share of County-wide Community Development Block Grant (CDBG Year xvrn) funds. We are very happy to report that the City of Chanhassen has tentatively agreed to continue to fund the Southshore Senior Center. . Walter Levesque Past President Bob Miller Member-at-Large Carla Pavone Member-at-Large Karl Dansky Robert DeGheUo Shorewood, along with the other cities that support the Southshore Senior Center, provides a very valuable service to its elderly residents. Dining, transportation and the meeting with friends, helps maintain the independence of the Center's participants in their respective communities for as long as possible. Jim Fisher Alison Fuhr Tad Jude Leonard Kopp On behalf of the seniors, who are the real beneficiaries of your funds, many thanks for your on-going support. If you have any questions, or if the City Council would like to have an informational presentation, please let me know. . John Nelson Senator Gen Olson William G. Weiler Benjamin F. Withhart Executive Director & CEO. Sincerely, ~u)~ John Young . Benjamin F. .Withhart Executive Director cc: James Hurm, City Clerk/Administrator A United Way Supported Agency n ~.1 ,ecycled paper \ . . , S[!/oUin adult day program To Honorable Mayor & City Council r.embers City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Sojourn is a community ba~ed adult d~y program, an alternat1ve to nur~ing hom~ placement, in its ?i~th year of serving the frail and elderly and their families in West suburban Hennepin County. Our continued growth indicates the increasing need for this ~ervice which allows the elderly to remain living independently in their familiar. community. We have rece~tlyopened a daily preschool program which allows the in~ermingling of children and adults, giving all involved an increased senSe of purpose. Sojourn's current transportation system is through Metromobility which is in the process of restructuring and projects cutting back service to the outlying areas. As a response to this situation, in 1992, Sojourn successfully completed a grant application and has been awarded a 15 passenger small bus through the MN department of transportation, 16(b} (2) program. This b~s will be delivered to Sojourn in Mayor June 1993. . Shorewood is one of the communities whose older residents will benefit from the use of this bus. As Paul Krauss (see attached letters of support) "joint utlization of vehicles is obviously efficient". Sojourn respectfully requests that the City of Shorewoo~ make a generous. contribution toward the 56,195 local portion of the estim~ted operating budget, for" this vehicle. We sincerely hope that the city of Shorewood will strongl~ consider ourporposal and continue to support Sojourn's efforts to serve the older residents of the community. Sincerely, ; ~awlJ, /dd~ Sally G~~hWOl Hebson, Executive pirector SOJOURN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , C/O Hqly Cross Lutheran Church 4151 Highway 7 Excelsior, ~L~ 55331 . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 March 11, 1992 Mr. Dennis McMann Grant Application MnDOT . Dear Mr. McMann: Sally Hebson has informed me that she is applYing for a grant to obtain a 10-14 passenger bus for the Sojourn program. Transportation for seniors continues to be a problem that ~ould best be resolved by having a dedicated ve~cle:' ~". .-" The City of Chanhassen is in the process '~f openirlg a Senior Center in the lower level of City Hall due to be completed in June. Although w~.will not be serving congregate dining, we are planning to cater lunches with events or speakers on a regular basis. \Vith this in mind, we have discussed utilizing the bus on an as needed rental basis during the noon hours (10:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.). This would not interfere with the transportation needs of the Sojourn clients, and would r~solve a need for the s~niors our center will be serving. . The joint utilization ofvehic:l~~'is obviously efficient, planned schedule makes this reasonable direction fot both centers. .~:.~. _ ~_':;-: _ ....:>._':.:..:..1! "- Thank you for co~i4eIip.g.S9jQ1l.I11-'s.appli<;atioIl.:~cJ~JsfiJling anurgent.c:qrogmnity ne;ed. ":'~"";:d,,[:t?-kf:-Z':r';:;i:"~c'_, . .' ... ..... .. .. .'. ............,.. ':""oo"'.c,, ." ..' . . . ,,,=: :,?;~:;J ._--:;,,'.;.....,....::;:;'~..,.;-'-'-.' ~- '." ..~:.~;' ,,;".:~-, '(2-:::.;.:': ',;;:7 . '~\. r-:. ,:.:, '" I Paul Krauss Planning Director PK:JC:k ~ a PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER arne of l\pplicqnt from Page 1: Sojourn . VIII. ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECT: . Estimated Vehicle Cost: Estimated Price of Each Vehicle Including Accessible Equipment" . Number 'Unlt Cost Total Mini Van with Romp and Tiedowns 23,&:0 Standard Van with Uft and Tiedowns 25,OCO Maxi Van with Uft and lledowns 26,&:0 . Small Bus with Uft and lledowns _. 29,&:0 29,500 Mid-Size Bus with Uft and Tledowns 34,OCO Lorge. Bus with Uft and lledowns Note: Large buses will be equipped with diesel engines 42,&:0 Total Estimate 29,500 Contingencies (5%) 1,475 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECT , 30,975 c Federal Grant Requested (80% of Project) 24,780 Local Contribution (20% of Project) ... - 6,195 *local,contribution will include 51,600 for radios which will bnng the local contribution to ~$7,795 .. Explanation of Estimated Costs: Costs quoted ore overage costs and ore the figures that should be u~ed in completing the capitol budget. The Deportment of Transport.ation purchases the equipment for recipients and the approximate unit costs have been included to assist in budgetary control. Costs cited do not Include such options os air conditioning.. Applicants desiring options not included In MnjDOT .', specifications may purchase such options separately with local funds. - · 'Includes 6.5% Motor Vehicle Excise Tax. Indicate specific sources of funds (public and private) and amounts to be used as local (non-: federal) contributions to. Federal Grant for vehicle purchase: Sojourn Adult Day Program will provide the 20% local match for the purchase of the bus. Community organizations have expressed support for this endeover and will commit funds towarq this match. Indicate specific source,s and amounts of the funds to be used for project operating expenses. The primary source of operating Iunds will be fee for service from private pay participants, Alternative Care grant funds, Medicare Alzheimers Project funds, and M.A. reimbursements. Other possible sources of funds are private contributions !rom families and area churches. -7- . . ., , - COMMUNITY HEAlJH DEPARTMENT Pre-Admission Screening Program Health Services Building - Level 3 525 Portland Avenue South. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 HENNEPIN March 14, 1992 Dennis McMann Grant Program Administrator Minnesota Department of Transportation Transportation Building, Room 815 - st. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Dear Mr. McMann: I am writing this letter of support for Sojourn Adult Day Program, which is seeking transportation assistance for their adult day care clients. : Soj ourn Adult Day Program has been a contracted vendor of the Hennepin County Pre-Admission screening(PAS) Program for over six years. Sojourn has served clients in three PAS Programs: Alternative care~, Elderly Waiver and Community Alternatives for Disabled Individuals. : This day care program has provided consistently high quality care to our clients. They provide a socially stimulating and loving environment to otherwise socially isolated clients~ Sojourn also monitors the clients' medical and social needs. I highly recommend that you consider Sojourn's request for transportation assistance. Please call me at 348-6154 if you have any questions. Very truly yo~rs~ ~~ iJrFM. (I,p/ Leslie Dodd Cox VVj Senior Program Apalyst HENNEPIN COUNTY bn equal opportunity ell)ployer SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES 1600 South 2nd Street, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 BOARD of DIRECTORS Walter Levesque President Tom Ticen 1st Vice President Bob Miller 2nd Vice PresidQ.nt Linda Stokes SEtlary Ca Pavone Treasurer John Blaser Past President Daralyn Peifer - Member-at-Large . Ryan Schroeder Member-at-Large Toni Anderson . Karl Dansky Robert DeGhetto Alison Fuhr Iy Guritz missioner Tad Jude onard Kopp Connie McCu.llough John Nelson; Senator Gen Olson Steve Rood - Russell Weinstein Bob Zagaros Benjamim F. With hart Executive Director &. C.E.O. . A United Way ., Supported Agency March J 2, 1992 Sally Hebson, Director Sojourn Adult Daycare 4151 Highway 7 Excelsior, MN 55331 Dear Sally: 933.9311 Senior Community Services supports Sojourn's application for a 1682 van. your program provides a valuable service to frail elderly in the far western suburbs. Fax 933.2101 We understand that our 1682 van serving the Southshore communities is tightly scheduled and utilized, thus making- it unavailable when needed for Sojourn client transportation. Since~elq . ~e"~- :71;;' (B jamin F. Withhart xecutive Director COMMUNITY SOCIAL SERVICES GARY BORK Director . . COUNTY Of CAQVEQ -April 20, 1992 To Whom It May Concern: CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE 600 EAST 4TH STREET. BOX 7 CHASKA. MINNESOTA 55318.2191 PHONE: 448.3661 TOO: 368.1533 FAX: 448.1206 . I am writing this letter to encourage and support Sojourn Adult Day Care in their efforts to acquire a vehicle in order to provide transportation for their clients. The Carver County Transportation Program has work ad cooperatively with Sojourn Adult Day Care 1n providing transportation for occasional activity outings. The transportation we can provide is very limited due to the fact that we are presently operating at full capacity based on the number of vehicles and drivers we have. Due to the location of Sojourn, all of their clients live in the second ring suburbs where access to public transportation is limited at best. With the uncertainty and probable discontinuation of metro mobility in this area, getting affordable transportation will be nex-t _ to impossible. considering how import-ant transportation~ is in providing day care for the' frail elderly, acquiring a vehicle is very important to sojourn enabling them to provide this valuable service. Sincerely, k o:4i m cA//l~ Kathy McGraw Carver County Community Social Services Trans~ortation' Supervisor ., Alfirmati,'t Anim( qual OPJKAtzmif)' Emplo.)'er P,i7lltd on R<<)('/eJ Papa- CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . Apr il 1, 1992 Ms. Sally Hebson Sojourn 4151 Highway 7 Excelsior, MN 55331; Dear Sally: It was an honor and a pleasuie meeting ~ith you and your ~taff these past couple ,days. Clearly I want, to help Sojourn in any possible way I can in my role as RTB member (or City Council). . Also, please be aware that Cynthia Curry at the RTB is on a committee which makes recommendations regarding 16B2 grant applications and I w~ll be in close con~act with her. . Again, it was an honor seeing you agai~ and I look f6rward to working with you in the futuie. Best regards, ~ Tom Workman ""1 .. " 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: 1 March 1993 RE: Knaeble/Nelson - Setback Variance FILE NO.: 405 (93.02) BACKGROUND Peter Knaeble and Dave Nelson own the lot at 21740 Lilac Lane (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). They have requested a 15-foot setback variance to build a home on the property as shown on Exhibit B. Their rationale for their request is included in a letter (Exhibit C), dated 5 January 1993. . The property is zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential and contains 43,589 square feet of area. The site drops approximately 34 feet from the street to a wetland north of the site. ANAL YSIS/RECOMMENDATION The applicant's request letter (Exhibit C) lists a number of reasons whya variance may be justified. While some of the concerns are considered valid, much of the need for the variance stems from placing a very. standard house plan on a lot which requires special" design treatment. It should be noted that some of the issues the applicant raises could be mitigated by simply setting the proposed house lower into the site (see Exhibit 1). Following are responses to the points raised by the applicant: 1. The house to the west of the subject site is 35 feet from the street. As can be seen on Exhibit B, the house to the east is approximately 70. feet back. The Zoning Ordinance provides for an average setback requirement where adjoining buildings are closer to the street than setbacks allow. In this case the applicant would be worse off since the average setback is 52.5 feet instead of 50. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore ~0 Re: Knaeble/Nelson Setback variance 1 March 1993 It is worth noting that a few years ago the City considered rezoning the Lilac Lane area to R-1C. This would have established a 35 foot setback from Lilac Lane. Residents at the time rejected the proposal, opting for the higher standards of the R-1A district. 2. Setting the house lower into the site would reduce the fill area by at least 10 feet. It should be realized that many of the trees the applicant is trying to save are poplar trees, which are very fast growing and fairly easily replaced. 3. Again, setting the house lower would also reduce the amount of fill, not only in the . back of the house but in front as well. 4. Due to the costs involved, city sewers do not always serve extreme situations. Consequently, no lot is guaranteed gravity sewer service. In this case lowering the house as shown on Exhibit J would still allow gravity service to tile top two floors. The lowest level could be served by a sewage lift pump. 5. Chanhassen imposes lesser setback requirements on the south side of Lilac Lane. (See the second paragraph of 1. above.) 6. While economics are not justification for a variance, staff believes that costs of fill would be reduced by setting the house lower on the site, or better yet, designing a house that better fits the lot. . RECOMMENDATION Upon examination of the applicant's plans staff is skeptical about the need for a setback variance. If, however, the City feels there is justification for a variance on the basis of saving trees and minimizing site alteration, then the following conditions should be imposed: a. The house should be set lower on the site even at a 35-foot setback. The elevation should be determined by setting the garage such that the proposed driveway does not drop more than eight percent. ~ / b. Prior to any construction the grading limits shown on Exhibit E should be estaqlished with snow fence and erosion control barrier. c. No disturbed slope should exceed 3: 1. The applicant should provide a revised grading plan including retaining walls as necessary to achieve 3: 1 slopes. - 2 - . . Re: Knaeble/Nelson Setback variance . 1 March 1993 d. The applicant should provide a detailed landscape plan, prepared by a landscape architect, showing reforestation of the site, with. emphasis on plant materials in front of the house which diminish the mass of the building as viewed from the street. e. No certificate of occupancy should be issued until all required site work (grading and landscaping) has been completed. If weather delays construction, a letter of credit for 150% of the required improvements should be required to guarantee completion. f. Regardless of whether or not the variance is granted, the driveway at the west side of the site must be eliminated. (Tl1is was a requirement of the applicant's recent subdivision approval.) BJN:ph cc: Jim Hurm Tim Keane Joel Dresel Joe pazandak Peter Knaeble - 3 - ~~~ ~ ! iD I : ! I t::" :; - :- ~-------- ... vi ~ I~ ~ ~ on .. " ", '" N on .. . : . .+.ozr.....-: . -, I U; (\ ! <l;: ! l\ t:J ~~ ~i() .; - : : , : , : , , I : , : 1_ :~ :c :~ . : _1_______. U) ......... .. .......' ~ \) ":.,-; ~ ,{J' : .- ... U'.._ ___:~.-~~r--~- \" I', I"( \ l ~ ~r~~ Exhibit A N SITE LOCATIO setback variance Knaeble/Nelson - ~~ '" w ex: '" N .... .... ~ t-- ~@ > o ~ ....... :.... :::::: ..... ...... , " ....... ....... ~i,.j ~.... ~" '< ....... C! '" .... '" ~ '" ,.., '" N LAND SURVEYORS ~A~I; ,.. · "TV ~ o Oenot.. Iron Monument . C Denot.. 'Wood Hub Set for Eltcovotlon Onlt xOOO.O Cenotes Exl.tlng Elevation (:::) Denotes Propo';'d Elevation 4IE-- O.notu Surface DrolnGg. /,,1>>.' Proposed Top of. Block I~" ,; I Propl)Jed <?or(lOe Floor ~'2. if Proposed Low..t Floor Type of BlflldlnQ ~ Et.!JI6~~~'ll ~;L UOlS'l'ERED UNDER LAWS or STATE OF MINNESOTA 1601 . 'lard AyeDue Nort.h ~a Mltmeapolll, MimlMO&& 55428 ,hntJUdI'JI ~ LB3lM> lKMES I.. l uU.CJ4's."tr " l"e..l~ ~ ~ . iii . l~ "i"'^""1. .......,(jiit . +- . PlU-IMA6j e- ""'_>1..",r.L1 iii '),\\.'l.I . . '<;f ~. lJ 'r <S' " r-,:' 'IJ - . ~ () lj\ . . 10 ~r tf"'. ., . ~ ~. . ~'.T''''''' 1~"JJ 101..,,,, . ~.. ( ~ I7,YO\ ., .' . tA~ ";'. It,;, :~ ~x.: 't.P"1' ,..~ Exhibit B PROPERTY SURVEY .~. ." That part of Lot 135, Auditor's Subdivisicn.N\IIIber 120, Hennepin County, Minnes( Peter Knaeble & David Nelson 600 1 Glenwood Ave. Golden Valley, MN 55422 934-4242 January 5, 1993 Brad Nielsen City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Rd. Shorewood,MN 55331 . Re: Front Yard Setback Variance 21770 Lilac Lane Dear Brad: Attached is a variance application and fee for the above referenced lot. The buyers of this lot and their builder (Jaque Bethke, Legend Homes) have asked us to apply for this variance on their behalf. Their building plans and lot survey are also attached. They are requesting a 35' front yard setback (vs. 50') for this lot for the following reasons: . The proposed house would match the existing house to the west, which is at a 35' setback. Since the lot is very heavily wooded, the proposed house location with the 35' setback would save a significant number of trees behind the house. To place the house at the 50' setback would require a substantial amount of fill up to the walkout basement elevation. The amount of fill would be minimized with the house at the 35' setback. The existing sewer and water services have already been stubbed into this lot, and have been assessed and paid for. The sewer service is not deep enough to serve the basement floor unless the house is raised and built at the 35' setback. The proposed 35' setback would be compatible with Chanhassen's front yard setback of 30' (Lilac Lane is the border between Shorewood and Chanhassen). According to the builder, the cost of the increased fill and foundation required at the 50' setback would be approximately $30,000. I understand that this variance request will be heard at the 2!l193 Planning Commission meeting and at the 2!l2193 City Council. Thank you for your consideration of this variance request. If you have any questions, please call. ~i~ erely, 'I,-k I] j~"A e1fr~leble CC: Jaque Bethke, Legend Homes Exhibit C APPLICANT'S REOUEST LETTER Dated 5 January 1993 '" "- "- " " " l(j) 10 I~ I=: '- \ .-, '""~~ CN lco ~ \ ~ '~ I f1l .~, I ~ \1'0 \~ ~~ I~ ---I~ I~ 11 0 .,":1 .0 _ :c" i' ~" - 52 - o "< ......../ rr1 On:,- 8rr. STREET 'Otr1 V\?,:j:>< ~>g: C/Jt1S: ~z; b:lO ~~ ~ C/J - ~ ~ ~ o ?,:j ~ / /- . - ".. GRADJliG PLAN (wi 50' Setback) 2/12/~ WETLAND / / / Tree Caliper Tree Caliper l:Q. .mb ~ l:Q. .mb ~ 1 6 ash 21 8 linden 2 24 red oak 22 12 red pine 3 17,7,7 linden 23 10 birch 4 9 linden 24 12 blue spruce 5 6 poplar 25 10 basswood 6 6 poplar 26 1 1 scotch pine 7 6 ash 27 9 spruce 8 12,13 ash 28 10 spruce 9 6 poplar 29 9 poplar 10 8 poplar 30 11 poplar 11 6 birch 31 8 ash 12 6 poplar 32 7 red cedar 13 7 poplar 3.3 16 red oak 14 5 poplar 34 16 red oak 15 4 poplar 35 6 poplar 16 7 poplar 36 6 red oak 17 4 ash 37 7 ash 18 33,32 while oak 38 11 ash 19 14 pear 39 9 basswood 20 8 ash / z ,0 ~ I~ I~ o(t'~ f' - I~ ' l c I-+: . l <- ~ I~ 1",1 I ,,' f~ ,/ .. I 0.5 \ \~ I l , I I 10 I .. ~~ I - + ~;-r-- 0(" - - -- 68.16- - ---' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~\ \ \ .":1 \ ~ T \ S 88006' 50" ~ . o \J-J 001 )>OJ oc.o v / --l ~10 tJ / N ~ I' I I ::. z.o . e:rr-' 2l- -- ,.if60 ~ / / ,/ ~- -' ", r'f.. .~___ /~ '~ Jt~ - --- "l'6 . ~- ~...~ '- --'" --~ ..~ ------ .---- - - - - -- ...,- -- q,~ /.~ ~ . I~.. ~- ., IpR ~--- --- --- --- -- -- ...... ----- '~.,.,----. .",'\ \ -l.. "-1\ 0"""'" " -~ 0.00 /[/ LA C '" )\" ""- ,00' "- - ....- - - -- 9" PVC SAN., - - 8" WATERMAJN LANE ~..lNV~99Q:.4 VJ \.M\ '- - ............ '"' , '- N 88034' 58" E 624.25 -1 ~ TERRA ENGINEERING, INC. 5301 Edina Industrial Blvd. Edina, MN 55439 831-2989 "" '\ '\ " '-.... '-.... 1(J) 10 I~ I=: ~ \-. ~.~. eN Ice - I ... '~ I rn . '~ \ IN \~ --..~ N .~ I~ : ----r ~~ ...'tt .0 .." . i' Ij" - )2 -- o ~ -- 100 Y 'Otrl w~~ UJ>8: endS: t:Jzt; teO F;~ ~S=: ~ en - ~ ~ Z -< ~ o ~ ~ REET / . . GRADING PLAN 2/12/93 (wi. 35' Setback) ~ETLAND I / / - - - 68.16~ / - - .-J \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ s , ~~ f' ~ C. C . (. c. --- 11 .______ e__ -- ----- "-e I ..." ~ ...~ ( o.~ ';" ~ ~ \i 0,(. : e.,,1 /'S' , , ~ :..~ /" <>~ I ---- ~ -..-I " .... ~. o ~ " ~ 0.00// , "0 'I ;"LI LA C --- i- lit" ,.a . "" _ _ _ ~ _ L!!t'E.J!'N.:-99Q:..4 . 9" PVC SAN. "'- - - 8" WATERMAJN. LANE v.J --vJ - \ - / --......... "'" '- N 88034' 58" E 624...25 ~ '-J L TERRA ENGINEERING, INC. 5301 Edina Industrial Blvd. Edina, MN 55439 R~1-?qRq '" '" / C' ') ~.. ~ c- <) 7 - - 0 / CJ (f) i:" ,..: - I"- -q-.c ,,') () r -r- - Q I ':::: , /1 '" I I ( N -!) li) ~I ui 0 t:1 Q ':) " I Cl - ITI - i ;l .J ~I j 'j \l-i .)1 \1. ~ ~ si () cl' oS' :>1 l>- I I ~/ ~ I .:1' ,. I . I I I ~. - 1- cOl+, r-J I tJ, I I I ! I i 4' , ;~ l.tl ' ~\ ~: ..s ~i *1 ).. 0 DL ;L \J lJ) I I : i i i I j ~ J3 ~. J.' J: el wi \11 I , I "- I ~I I I (~ LD '\;) ,() \ ........ : ..... ':) 11 () fL n- i =! W (\ ~i ) Exhibit F GRADING PROFILE - 50' SETBACK 1')- I I. la- Ir: ,r- (JiG"' I '~ It- I I~ '\l " , I, i :~! ..! : :' I I I I , I I I ! I I I i I -:.'):' j Ni~ I ' ! I I~ J ~ :-0 j' t ) o .... c .J f , o f\ () I~ " i ':) j !~ i ~ I~ / \.'- !\l. c;) 1 I j' ~ i~, \l I \S 1 I \ ~ !l ~\ ~ \ \l... Q ~\ o ';:) o Cl ~ ,., -~r I / .J) It I ~I '- I '.n' ~I :l I :i ''><. Lll t w I'~ ..... (S" U- ~ ! j C 1'; \J , I I ! i JJI', I ' , . I~! . I I . "1 !~l i \j\! I I f- ! i ' i LrJi i {\\! i I I j I I Il'. ! , f-l' ! ~ ! I'~' il' I ' I , '. ! " I ! \i i ; ! i~l "L' ill I' I leI I Iii IP--l l I ! I I -.ll 'W I . I I . Illl l:ll l\lll ''71, . I 17': I ' . I I : ! ! . l . - - .... <:l 1\ Exhibit G GRADING PROFILE - 35' SETBACK . JI - ~ ~I ~ 11 ~! . I>i i l) , '.0 ;,.. o 1. i 'I -:~ :":-"t~t.:;. ,-.-:.." '.-: ~fr-; _'!~"'~.r:'- ',; :-!f1f:~;~! i ~~-~:...~~ :;~~if 'ii~:' ,I:' 'l-':~;iL".. ~~~:;:. "",,;:: ' ; 2...!-' ~.: .~i,:'. '11', ~A1ii,', ',f" .' j:~l;t . "If'!:. 'l.. .J '~~41'" ~~~I';";" .!~r:' . . :i~~~t~~ . 'H:~~t.: ,.;~p'l~ ";I~"" I . I, ~w---l'-ill . T" . '" - t-.- ..-.-. ~....- ---:1 , . I I: i i , "\ : , ':I i, I -' . I I - .....h , I ,.Ii, : =' I ,~; , ~ 'I -" : i 1.1' : 0 . ~II ;..1 lul . '\-I i. \ 1. d: ~ :illl":'1 II .11 W II! !II .J' '.\ , : 1; j' )1 -;.-" '.i: J ! ~ 1: ~ ~ D ;1 ~ " , -\, :.1' 'f , .' i , , ~. .- ,J ,'j ... !:, :~ Q';,;:l ~ .:'l,. 'I i: l ;: ,'J: -', ; " i ;.'ii I J~""'1' li;~i If..... ';...: I ' 'o?1 . I .{J '\' " .;r, l' ;' ~-_ . : i ," ~.'~' ~';":~:~1 I L,l,,~ 'tL.:\'", ">':'''1 I. ! r r';fL'f\!~' ~ ill i,; 1 ."J ~ I.. ....~ :111\ ."g I:~ 'I.! n ;,:~ ,.1 :. A il il d ',.'it :! I: i, ;;:':,f""~l: ) , ill i i I: "~i ., :~ ....~ .. ,,;0. ......! :-./:1 , .; .l'~l ~.:: ":,~! m+-- . --....-.. ~ -+., -~".. m,~ , !- 't',", pI -. DODD DODD DODO" DODD DODD DODD, DODO DODD .. ..' ,:: ,.,,;\~ .' .:',:] . ....', .\_.~ ~,.. :'~>.':~J " :;=~l :~I . " or ," l. ... I' ..~- ,.' ~I iil '.t.1 Exhibit H BUILDING ELEVATION - FRONT 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: 25 February 1993 RE: Pechacek, Patrick - C.D.P. to Build on Substandard Shoreland Lot FILE NO.: 405 (93.03) BACKGROUND Mr. Pechacek requests a conditional use permit, pursuant to Sections 1201.03 Subd. 2.c.(3) and 1201.26 Subd. 5.b. of the City (;ode, to demolish the existing home at 5025 Shady Island Road (see Site Location }J:lap - Exhibit A, attached) ang build a new home in its place. The C.D.P. is necessary because the lot is substandard in the Shoreland Zoning District. . The property is zoned R-IC/S, Single-Family Residential/Shoreland, contains approximately 16,170 square feet of area and measures 77 feet in width. The existing single-story dwelling (see exhibit B), contains 1176 square feet of area, including a single- car carport, and is nonconforming relative to side yard setbacks (three feet from west side and 15 feet from east). The site is also occupied by a nonconforming, 8' x 8' boathouse ... located seven feet from the lake and three feet from the west property line. The new home, shown on Exhibits C - E, contains 2175 square feet of area on the first floor (including the two-car garage) plus approximately 1600 square feet on the second level and 1735 square feet on the lower walkout level. Note: As of this writing the . , applicant advises us that the home will be reduced somewhat from the sizes given here. Consequently these figures represent a maximum site development. The applicant will explain how the building will be reduced at the meeting on 2 March. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore 'v~ Re: Pechacek, Patrick C.U.P. for Substandard Lot 25 February 1993 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS The conditions for building on a substandard lot are provided in Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.c.(3) of the Zoning Code. Following is how the applicant's proposal complies: 1. The lot is in sel'arate ownership from adjoining lots. 2. The lot complies with 70% of the width and area requirements of the R-IC district (lot area is 81 % and width is 77 % ). . 3. The new home complies with all setback requirements of the R-IC/S district as follows: a. Front: 72' b. Sides: 20' east side, 10' west side, total 30' c. Rear (lake): 91' 4. Lot coverage is approximately 28 percent, whereas the shoreland requirements limit it to 25 percent. Reduction of the house, removal of the nonconforming boathouse and elimination of blacktop surfacing near the lake will bring the site plan into conformance with this requirement. It should be noted that a large blacktop area on the north end of the lot will be removed as part of this proposal. . The Shoreland District regulations also limit the amount of site alteration which can occur adjacent to the lake. Although the site will be graded to accommodate a walkout level, the grading is more than 60 feet back from the shoreline. No vegetation is proposed to be removed from the 50-foot setback area from the lake. It is recommended that the nonconforming boathouse be removed to comply with setback and impervious surface requirements. Similarly, the blacktop near the shoreline should be removed and landscaped. The City Engineer has addressed the necessity of this surfaced area for drainage purposes under separate cover. As a final note the property currently shares a common driveway with the property to the east. The site plan proposes to create a new separate driveway. If this is done, both driveways should be at least five feet from the side lot line. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the C. U.P. be granted subject to the following conditions: - 2 - . . Re: Pechacek, Patrick C.U.P. for Substandard Lot 25 February 1993 1. The blacktop surfacing near the lake must be removed and the area should be landscaped. The bituminous strip along the east side of the lot may remain for drainage purposes. 2. The boathouse should be removed. 3. The large bituminous area on the north end of the lot must be removed except as needed for the proposed driveway. 4. Impervious surface on the site must be limited to 4043 square feet of area. 5. Erosion control (and construction limits) as shown on the site plan must be in place prior to any site work being started. 6. If the common driveway is eliminated, both resulting driveways must be five feet from the property line. 7. All required improvements must be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. BJN:ph cc: Jim Hurm Tim Keane Joel Dresel Patrick Pechacek - 3 .. N' (\ . ~ J. ~ ~ ~ ~,~ N 0() l{) t- > CJ , , , , , , , , , , , ICl , IlloI ,.' --- ,~' ,,- )<,''- _'5 ~ ~ ", ~ ~'\ , , 181'" \ "~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I:::::::!I- ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~. ~~ I I I I I I I I ~/ ~ ~/ C5 , ....... ....... - - --->- ,--- ....... ........ ....... ....... " ....... ........ ....... ~ , -t- r "'- ~ j ~ -r ~ ~ .J .':) J) "> ~ fj < .I Exhibit A . SITE LOCATION Pechacek - C U . .P. I. uu' . ~ - /. e1/29/1993 11:58 FROM C E COULTER - MPLS TO 8944588 p.e1 ~[ ." G~ E.. COULTER a ASSOCIATES, INC. JOHllf .. pt.TlIIISOM FRANK If. LEHZ Jilt". PROFESSIONAL REGISTERED SURVEYORS R[G1SUAEO IN M~"ESOTA a WlSCOHSIJI LICENS€D IN CfTV OF MINNEAPOLIS 3300 l.YNOALE AVE. so. MINNEAPOLIS, MINH. 55408 TELEPHONE I 612 - 824" 0370 (>> 'D15t-lo"T"eS .~,.,t. Sq-Aby--. $4- '. t<:::r. .J;,/'?,,,,,,, '-'V,~...,~ __ ~~ -'-41.1""'" .",.r~~q".~ ~~ I( :\, ~ 9q '-": c>..:..~o€'Y. 9S~ ~(.~ / \........ 17 .// IXJA,t::; g~'1.~9S6 ' , 'I P. 't1 f 7.3S htA.T ~-' . , ~~$ . . ,\ '... ,( /r.. ~ . " r ., ~ .... .ii'S.:a \ "?'" t <!j' ~. c(; ~"'~ .\ )i ~ '- -;1,1\ *- ~ __ \ 114 \ (" ~ rJ \ ~1:~' C(l ~ . I , \ 1 o ' .. jr! .... 'j.. Qt-"'r. 0" '. ~ ~~ " \ .... \(\ , ... <f' ' 1"$ ~,. ~~~\~ .~ ~ <) ,.... ~ ~ ~, ... \\.~~ \ ~ 11..,,- ~~ '001 ~' \.(\\ 'i" ~ 't.l ~ -4\ . ".. \ ;'/'Ft..~G "'01 ?~L~ ! "I ,'i :t . ! \ \...a~ 0 ~ "w' ~ ."" \ l't.& ~~ ~\ C;\/Z ?Q~T rJ.....\. - 0 ". %~ ~ V'" '$ "'" \"'1 \ ~ I J- ~4V. 944.52 . , \ l o d) ~ \ \ -j 1 . ! : i " :1 I 1\ , .1 -J B~ho.>?t.- . i i '''1 I .1 ~,.\ 'j . I :. , . I . . "/ipnG C/..~ ~ . ~"'lJ.y..p.. . .." M\\'lN~ \V ~~\(e:.-" , i J . .. I " ! ,.1 OAT" " . I Legal Description: Lot 32, Shady Island,Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minn., s~bject to easerr~nts and restrictions of record~ if any. ~ ~4J(A 4/1 t';aolf &"14 954.29 NOTE: Elevations shown were taken January 26, 1993. All elevations shown are based on NGVD-,1929,Sea Level Datum. Lake Minnetonka Mean High Water Elevation = 929.40 as per City. Flood Plain Elevation = 931.00 as per City of Shorewood. All elevations shown were taken on the top of iron pipes unless otherwise noted. Boundary and building locations a~ per survey dated Auq.2,1974. CLIENT J. P ".Tn'" ",1:1 .10. NO. 919! Exhibit B PROPERTY SURVEY SIC.I,... 549, , . ~ I_! :; :' i" . ~- ,;. . ;~.;. .;. .' ;"' ..,:':,{:: : I. .: : ~ .; ., ..'t ":'\ . , .' .' ~ '.' "::"i>' "'..: ;.-:.;, ,. '1 .' ~ :.... "",;'" .c' i: ' ;".; :,':' ':. .', . '. ". Lt\k"t' MIN^,E"r~N"^ .~. , , .; '. ..'1' ': ,: 5 ,.' 1 . , ;' I." .~ ~. . .,1 'J; ~:~ ~ ~. .! ~ . .,t.', . , ~, '-'"l '..1 I" '.. "1'~' ,~l".\~.;:'~..:~~ ~"'...'..'.'~'., ' .;:';....:.t. ~ '\. : ~ ~ ... I . . ~ , . ,~ ,,1' ; t',.' , . .. ...., ....~~;.J.~..;:. 1~...r.,)~~,,,4...1 "I .,: f';\:~~'\"'l,~~..~v.zii'::~;'~~;~'.rf'r'~:~~:.'..IJ. ""., ,"'~i~ . ...I..~';~rft'tt~"'...,,;-t,.,.~~\l "'t.<"" ''''', .,. : ";}~\'\~t~;~il;~;X;!~:i i.'.t ' ", , ~. "'.: ; t. rr1 ~ t. '~"~';'l~ \: ,~,.(f.l'! : ';", ,!.:: -'. '1 'j ):>Y:(j>~:"~:.:~~~~~'~\G1:''',:,>:/~,,;~/:''... :.. "1' .,.Cl.""I'a,..~,:. ..,'.:~' h''''l.!r. ~,,;:, 1'\' .~....:I,~_);'::!,,~jIo!~~:'~".(~"I\' ::',.1:, " ,.~. '.:' . t ~_',.,. '..;;'-:,\;:,1;.<- .. !'.I, .."', . . " ~', '~,' :"1 /: l..~~\)~,~ !_...I J~ ~'I ',1 .-t~~ .. ,. ; I: :.c'. ~,;~i'iO-' (,:~: l~~' ,"',.,";..:.:: .' ,,"'.:. ,,~,.....,:,. ~~. .. '.I"'\"""'..l~1 -.1", "':. ....,nZ'._~i~~ ,1Il~.\tf ~;.~;Jl... :.... .. ,. I"'" \- <If! ;t:1...- U)l. I. .. ., . . ....,l;:{~~.:.~::):~ .-.., . :.:,(':}1...~1 .'.O,..,i. m.,\.f,...., .;,'. . ';,:':/:".'~'CJ' : <F'f4'.:'{ r i. -'.,:'IJ>:. )> ." t~. Z N ..~.r:. "O~:~-'}:>i.'. l: >".':1.' ..., \Ai 'O",:z. ., " ~-(,:;", .; ::~ .~~::~. ! ; ::... ;.l.; $.."',..,.0....,. ,~~!"f":'.~2i,; ',. ',.'. : :~:I!l': " :-:;. ~, .. ':;;<:.:...' :...:::.... .;.:.',....'.'.... ......~:. ,...:~:.~~+,:.;".~>..:..; '" ..l~.....~..:~,.~..S'_:~.:...'.._:.;..'_';i. ~ . .:~i;.~rf1:;~.. ::: - ~'. -- ~ ; . , ':;,r;,;.;i;'{;ij!t!i\\x.; '. ','.. "!~(""'i~1..I~ 1"";;'~~i:""V'U' . m'~r',",jcrjf~ }~I~r:; ;.i:.;" .,' , I '." ':'r ..; ..,'1_.,.. ~., . ' -. ~ :.. , .,':' t, ."!.....' .'1 ~, : '.' " ~:;:-.'i . : ',":", ~'.: ::: ... '1 .....~ : I i.,l'~: ,,,, '..:" \. .... o :.. ..; ". . . I'~: :, . ~: t '. ~ T )' j ( '" .Jl r- .... I" " ;> ,. '---1> t ,.~~ "1:'" j . .:";:] .. ,J! I'... >' <?;;:"'~: ':.,:0 I,: C. . :t:(,f,' 'i. ,8 o o '" f' '1-. t., '~i r ~ -l> .. ;l ~ pi .(i) ~ ".. ll': .,. ~~ ~y.., . f.,..".J ~ \..,,1 , ~ 2 III ... ~flo ,; ., '",~, .. ~~. 0> 0- / " '" '" I" .. ,. . '; , .' , I f.. '- ---.;. . '~. '::':: <,.,;.- ......... , '. " . . . . " . :.t,yrhr l,r:1:~,;~~~;::.'(\'~"~'(::;:"I.:.\;_' . ~ . .J ~~ ~s; U3 :::." ::On ~ ~ s ~ ~ n 1-3 ts ~ z ".., . .!o-, ", ... .\:' ';" 00 "'. =" .... . .~ .I ,,' ...JJ '" n I" ,t. .;~i::. ,0' . .;i~ ':"f :,:. ;..'; R. :'~:'J, " ': 1'1 .1: I .;;"~. Ii ~', ./'3.. :~:: 1.." .'; .".., .: .;,:: ';fi;/:r,:lf,;" , i,' " '. ~ '" r:;' ~'-~\~I ,..,:~J. '~"':""lr,,;.-.:;..:.'~,."..'..:','.:.;:.,.',::..i; :;:{}: ." . .,>'\i:i:,f:'~:: . i;:;~1~~:~!'j;~i;;iJ;~1t.:~tr~j'.." ,: .... '.. i,', " .,1 .' ~ :; ~I~;~~~~i/; "':-"*.'1 :.,., ;~. "~_1 !~ z: .. . ... 14' :i: <~~ ..~: ~ ~?~.jfiJ,~!, ":"'.,' '1' :.q. .....,..J.., ,;..t.V (~:~lt~'.;';l:;~./::~: ;;: ~~: . 'i;' .'~I:' "j' . ~"::...; ~.. ~ .: "'. ..... . . I.' .,___ ..t, .. ,'j ..... ". ...~.. ::. :.' .'- . . I.. ','" .....'" . .: '~:'./ ~' ; '-'i '. '~.. , ~ . " ,",'," . . ~ .', , . .:,',,'; :.rl \: . :: ~ .,' ~;. . :~~ ::':;i;;r,~ ;,.t ::: .,.:<:~ .~,~'~:~/',:~~.. ~ .~,~..I:! ;~n-:.~~ ~ . .~ . .... -'-'-', .......r"T!"rr -.----..'4 .p"-~'~"f~~ I:- (, i; ~:c ......', . r,' '.' ' . ~.Z"., .. "0 ' t:~~. .... .. " ...z: ~C~ ':t~:: ~) ~. 3 ~a~ :~~ " - 4( d '" ... . : c (/ ~.. .. , u '(' .. % " ". ',.' . ~ lJJ H' '> 1-, ::C', I..!l 'H a: , . I I l._ ~ ~, '"", I I I II I ' 'I I . ' . :'~ .; .'?~'~"~::~.;~' , 'l:~ ~....;~:r/.. '. .": -:, ~:~.. ~: ~-':'.: ~.;~~. . .. ...J. .~ Exhibit D BUILDING ELEVATIONS - SOUTH AND EAST ..... ". ... '.. ,., ~. . !" ': ~, -' , '. ~ , ..... ,:.... . . ". " . 01' ;- .1.. . "';'.' ~'.; ,',' .... :--:. . t:1 .11 ----..-::-~-n I II II i - ----ll . I, II !I " Ij----~~ ) II i ! IJ . ----[1 II II I I I I I I \ I \ , ' i . I I I I I I . I I \ I I I . I I I I II 11--;1 \~--ll II \ \ II I! , - --U-~I J \ - \[~U ) >. w' H > f- lL- W. ...l ~. '''. ID . ft I; I IB B ~ c' LiJ '_,l. .;~.: ~ 'u <:( a:l " ;,'"" ;- --- -on' '. --fj . &J \ II -Il-n [J\ it . E~~ EI'B-~:J:! ~ D . C~] .rlt~ , , ,', . '[. --:-:::].\ \1 ~ ~_~~ ---., L i ~. c=l "'~r-~ ~-. = :L1~ . 1==] -":J ' II; 'tJ 0 '-J E-..-.......-.....J.. / --IT J .~-~~~ / II II . ---u Exhibit E BUILDING ELEVATIONS - NORTH AND WEST . . ";;:1."-:"-'. March 15, 1993 I- MAR I 9 1993 Patrick and Catherine Pechacek 5025 Shady Island Road Shorewood, Minnesota _ i Shorewood Mayor and Ci~y Council Members City of Shore wood Shorewood, Minnesota RE: Special Use Permit for Pechacek, Lot 32 Shady Island City Council Agenda dated March 22, 1993 Dear Mayor and City Co~ncil Members, ,?1. couple of items have been brought to my attention since the City Planning Commission discussed this issue on March 2, 1993. I am under the understanding that I will not be allowed to have a dock on my property from the time I tear down wy home until I get an occupancy certificate on the new home. Also, I have been informed that if I were to chose to simply add on to my prese~t buildin~ I would not only be able to keep my dock but my boathouse and the b'acktop areas along the water as well. In fact I woule not need a Special Use Permit at all. After reviewing the entir~ project I think you will agree the new building would be in ~~he best interest of both the neighbors and the Ci y - versus an additiGn to the existinl building. Hciwever, the way the ordinances are set up, it is becoming more desirable for me to add on; keeping both my dock and my shoreline improvements rather than being penalized for removin~ the building. When I met with Brad Nielsen, prior to applying for the Special Use Permit, I was taken back by having to lose the boathouse and the blacktop. After having the City Engineer look 9ver the drainage problems, the city staff recommended leaving the blac~top path on the east pr0gerty line in tact while requiring us to remove only the blacktop along the lake. The blacktop was originally installed in the 1950's when the property was originally being developed. It was used as a -handicap wheelchair ramp for our Grandfather (original owner) to get to the dock. After the alterations and additions to the adjacent property ,were made, the path became the major way to contro~ the extreme water runoff problems. With all due respect to the City Engineer, he cannot see what we have experienced over several years in trying to solve the wash out problems. The water used to go straight over the end of the path and, while dropping the final six feet to the lake, would cause a wash out. Even after building a.boulder retain{ng wall it still would cave in. We than constructed a berm diverting the water to continue down the path that goes along the laKe. After dispersing and losing its velocity on this less steep grade the water dumpE into the lake at the dock landing. ~.. We look at the path as a major and costly improvement to the property not as a detriment nor an eye sore. We have kept it well maintained and it is not unlike the paths you would see in many parks. Referring to the shore land impact plan that we submitted you will see we have begrudgingly agreed to take out the boathouse and much of the blacktop along the water but to leave in the sidewalk as a drainage path. By allowing us to do this the drainage situation will remain a solved problem . for us. It will also give a continuity to the property because the blacktop will be perceived as a path to the lake rather than a blacktop drainage ditch down the property line~ I agree to keep my total covered surface under the 25% requirement. I am asking the City Council to pass the Special Use Permit with the drainage path as drawn and to allow us to install and maintain a dock during constructinn. Thank you ~or your consideration. sinLQy,j\~, !~/ ..f f} -' , f ' - -- 1r--- ,''f1 . r (... I Patrick and Catherine Pechacek cc: Brad Nielsen, City Planner . III .. & " . ... '" . ~'~,:':"~;' ~it~'-~~'I' :.:~>:.., . "'".;i...n)i';""" ~'~n~ ; .... "} .:' ....1' "I~;ll r~I":'; ':' ~::;''\'?:~Yr:: .~ t;. : . ~ ~'.i '. ..l. : . '1':" 0-: ; :', . . . . ~. . -. '" ~ . ., r~J ... cD . .~ ~ ,~ :,;/.. "J ':a.~ .~.:; ;: :'.:-~i!~:~~j CJ' .... '.I~'Z ';;;>:.: ::!~ . <( "1 ......q.. ". 0 ....,..;(:..:~ :':~."~~.,: %1i:.::.:(:~ ~/ 1 ~ . .... ,.' 0:';;::" '. ~.~ :~:; ~' - ~:~~._;'~"'~':H ;..'2....0.......... '0. .1. . ;0" h :,.... '<J::'{ -~E';:'Cl . ~;:~'.I'\JZ .~ ....< .' - <f)" " I . .i..... H' .:;..-;: . ~ ...' . ...... ", . Cl 0:: . '. .:;: .'~. ~trt:: ~.~.o " ..r.~' -< "0..::1: ....... _. ..' ...,...1' '.;:~; ; c.:; Q'l}J .~~. .: ..... ',.:,. ~ ,.:....~,...".,,\;'f.p..if.i;Ilf.~~~H:r::;..~, i'. i'H~..;1~{!~\C\~}1~~t~~1;J~ . ,- . .. ,.:t. .... . :_.tl'r.-:~.: ...l~l.';N..:1..~:."';..."t..x:....UJ. " : '.~ . . . . . . ..... ... ... wi III <r '. .- '" .. ;'"~.; . .: ~ '" .~... ";.1 ~ :dt ~ Q:.) ,'.1 ,. .101 .., ',-c .~ <. !-'. in ... ~ ',J '" o o 8' ~ ~ · ;-,-/-7 f~ ~. ~ ~ ._'-'-~ r--) _._-~- -- . .' . . /'" ~~.,. ~ -- '-. --....::. ~ ~...- --.,..: . '~ A..: ~~---.-===- tl33:"J.1IS-" 'S3~/f~~~t.yf.~ ~~..: . --..,.- ~.. ~~ ---'-~k--- -----;:':' ..... . -,.- f t-- ------ ~- -. ,.' ... d .... ..;' , .. "\11 r~"'J6 , .. t y: ~. ,) .>--, ) ,:~/~,. ') ,"! ~ ,... r: ~ ~t 1.~.':~,: ~ -L ~ . ~ . ~; , -oJ ... ... .... ... . '. .:, . r..:..... , ! - .... ". '.,_ :;" to' :,.'-;1 I'. ," . ",: ~ ",:";:. ?::' . .,'. ..... I "e. '. , .J " " ", .., .:~ :'"':'..~, -: ~ , ~ t. :. ; !):~:'; ','" ....~ t.: - ", ":.'., ..~~~:~ .. ':.~j~: ~,. 0' ...j : ~ " ;';" ~1. ; ~'. 'i % ~ .. << . ... 10, I" 'or , ~~.~.~>.~:. .:::~ . 01-' ,.' . '.' .:::.;' , .- " . .,,~ ';1 . '1':'1. t~" ~: .~ . .... 0, :". . : ~', .. \..:. . ~::f:.:.: ~ ~~1:~~1.'-r , ; ~ :::: ; . ..' .; .' .'....;:l:.~.! ~~::<~. " ':,'. ..~ :~. ::-.:'.;:': . '. f :', 1 , -~ ,:- :'Y~~i;l.> ~~;'?::-/ .~,.~ .;...~.:.~..::. ,0'::." I "4:. . . ~. .' 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: 24 February 1993 RE: McClure, Carolyn - Subdivision/Combination FILE NO.: 405 (93.04) The property is characterized by severe, wooded slopes on the east side, dropping down to a wetland on the west side of the site. A significant drainage ravine traverses the property from the no~heast corner to the pond. ISSUES AND ANALYSIS In reviewing a division/combination such as this, the City has two primary considerations: 1) the buildability of the two lots being created; and 2) the future development of the undeveloped land. A Residential Community on. Lake Minnetonka's South Shore (P]J Re: McClure, Carolyn Subdivision! combination 24 February 1993 As proposed, both lots (1 and 2) meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the R-IC zoning district. Lot 1 will be 180 feet wide and contain 50,300 square feet of area. Lot 2 will be 130 feet wide and contain 27,000 square feet of area. It should be noted that the southeast comer of Lot 2 is on the other side of the ravine and does not relate well to the lot. It would be better to use the center of the ravine as the boundary of the lots. If there is a desire to maintain the same amount of lot area, Lot 2 could be made somewhat deeper. A sketch of this recommendation is attached as Exhibit C. - As part of this division the City should require that 18 feet of right-of-way be dedicated to bring Murray Street up to City standards. . The applicant's plan includes a resubdivision sketch showing how the larger, vacant parcel could be developed. While the layout of the lots and future road appear to comply with current zoning requirements, this drawing does not constitute a preliminary plat. As such it is to be used simply as a guide for subdividing the property. Due to the topography of the site, grading, drainage and erosion control will be significant factors in its development. Detailed grading plans will be required to show how the proposed road will cross the ravine, and how building pads will be located on the lots. In addition, stormwater runoff calculations will be required to determine the size of storm sewer and the wetland area to be protected. Some rearrangement will likely be necessary to increase the buildable area of Lot 3. RECOMMENDATION . It is recommended that the subdivision and combination be approved subject to the following: 1. Lot 2 should be reconfigured as shown on Exhibit C. 2. The applicant must dedicate 18 feet of right-of-way for Murray Street as shown on Exhibit C. . 3. Drainage and utility easements must be provided 10 feet on each side of side and rear lot lines for Lots 1 and 2. The easement along the ravine should be increasd to 20 feet. 4. Drainage, utility and wetland easements for the larger, undeveloped parcel will be acquired at the time it is platted. 5. Any further division of the property must be done by formal platting process. - 2 - Re: McClure, Carolyn Subdivision! combination 24 February 1993 6. Prior to release of the Council Resolution approving the division and combination the applicant must pay one sewer access charge ($1000) and one park dedication fee ($750) for the newly created lot. Credit is given for the existing house and additional charges will be imposed upon platting of the large parcel. 7. The applicant must provide legal descriptions of the existing and proposed parcels and. legal descriptions of the required easements. 8. The applicant must provide an up-to-date title opinion for both existing parcels for review by the City Attorney. Anyone having an interest in the property must sign off . on the required easements. BJN:ph cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Carolyn McClure Rick Bateson . -~ ( - 3 - I I ~: ..... "" -. ~- \.~'t.t'" \ , /' "---- ...-- 6rA(p ;" 1-A~ , . , '~""'II')I 1"':;:2' ~ (2)' ~l --" ;'..~ ;'-- ...J I ....;::~~~~-r~;:3I{i. ~~~..:~...... .....-. ........._..l~~;.... .... " \:;) ") \ 196~.. 8: 'co"':: . : ':.....) , jf~ '. I -'~/ ~_ .' _..!.'.. ._. I.J' ~ . \; ~j \ . . g: .....L. ~ : .....~. ~:/'>' ""'::" (2)- "'. . ~ 1 .: r<. \ ('3(l) i 0: ('3)"- : 'C.- _. \ \ .~,: : ("35) ('31), 40"3. 12 t....... 20......0, I ......... 95 ' I I ' ~ ' v' :;:;"16.5 /".' :'ge .-t._. .. '-: I t:: \-.": .....'j 90.0$. i ~ ' ..~ N .----..---_L.. f26.()S _ \ ( 12) ....... c;f'~----(~ L___!....O~L__ - I 199 ( 1'3) /,'~ ,. 4.' -\, ,,:, ~ . I ~ ...~J} ..... / . . . ';"C:;':~ ~, . l ,,' ." \.. .1-.... ,--' -, 1 I ................................... _.__e_ f.......... --.. .......... :.~ I ., " ...-J .' .' ( 11) lI'l N c:i "'~ ~, 1 I ---------------lir----,-60------l-~---i50----::-~i30~8~-\ : .:. _: - , L.-:.' .../ ~ ~ :? _/ '~.', \ ~: . ..' '-)~"_: ( 15) :~ ( i4):.... \.. "':'16.2 -: ( 16 I 1 \ : I I .. '76 ......... : "9. ....,...: I.l..... ...... t' ~ .. .0 .. ......... 4604 .......MURRAy ~., -.. '. '-:;'/ / l. ,-. &e '--' ~ .... e1 ( 19) Sv~jtl.(...t ~'I ~-tr ~ (18) <...... ........ ..5::::: -. ..... .... -:- " '301 ~ 66 ..{,,, ------------ ------- 7 ..... 164 @ 2617.41 RES ( 22) ( 20) lI'l ::! 1 I , (21) I it I 1 I , ~<; .J ;...../.. <: :::..,' .'.,~'- ',..,,;" . (38) (41) 10. ':'.1 't.~----------. e5 I ". :~'. I .-.......... 1 I I 1 I , 1 : ~ I (42) :~.J 1 '._~ 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 // >,:......, ....1 ." C7t .;< --' ..~...' ( 24) ~/-_. , , , ,'~ ~ ( ~ -J e9 ( 2'3) I~, : ~., : ~: 1 L.-'-I?!l__ 32 Exhibit A SITE LOCATION .. McClure... subdivision/combmation \ ," {J /~. ~ o '. ~ ~ ~ ,~ ". o Q:) .... >.: l.l. l.. )., ~ ~ &.~ c;\",..: .... "- -, o ~~ .-.jO~"" Cf\~O "y~ 0 0......1'\ _/~~ --- all 0,,-,,- ~&D' - ~ ~ -# ~ . ~ ~ 'f711~ ~ ~ ~, ~. ~ ~ . $ ~ ~ ~ '" ~ \-. . ~ ~I:;~ ~~<;; .... Ii ~ "i '. ...., "I'" \OOO~ It) ~ I) ~()~ ~~ " ", ~Io\' ~,,,, ~ 't-~' "_"I- ~ ,r-v ---- ,.. ,.". -.-... 0 en ~ ~ $ " ~ ~ III .,J ~" III I ~ . "fo ll: '0 . . .~ '" ~ 'J #, l- ..., .. , " " i : .. : /( \ ~I ~ ~. . - ....... J"SI<I' _ . . ~. :', ~ .-~ .:: ~. -- ~ .: ~.,:; ~, " / ...."';! . ( ) I / -------k ,/ / - - / , I / , '! y- J:~ ~ "'t \\ .,. -2 :- -~ ---- Exhibit B PROPOSED DIVISION/COMBINA TION Also shows resubdivision 72+ ",'- 4PJ~ .. -' ...~~ :::~~;.~,:.,,,",~:~,~~I{;fij.fq~'~f::;~,!jt~~.f;;""!!;',;i'f..'?~": ..;:.. ;.--' ~ ~ o . ~ 4- C) \ -- d) o .. i .- ~ C; . --" 0,.,. ~ b ~~ ~~ . ~ It ~ '. '"'~~ ~. 'I"" \... '\) I:) "'~ 0 ~ ", "'~. 'I-~' ,N ~ I.. ).; ~ ~~~ '=t l.. . :~~ ~ .-j 0 ..... m () ~()\) o......CW\ / ~Ii:lo' -- '" - ". .", . /"'6t3;!' ( . ) ! --------/---,/ / / J) ,~' :.~ . I ~~" .., ... ~ .~ '{ ... \ - - . oS'l., _ ,. , / ,. , 0,.,. 'f&D' - ~ ~ ,7'e ~ ~ t.' ~ ~ ". Ii ~. ~~.~ ~ 0.;; "-. '~I \o()~~ ~~ " !"'l'I" ~ 1\ ~~ ----- --- , ...... -...... () CI) ~ ~ ~ .. .. ~ III .,J ",. 11/ . ". q; 'to " ~ I.. i ..... ....--- . ... "- --- , -- I +. Exhibit C RECOMMENDED DIVISION/COMBINATION ~ 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: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen . DATE: 12 March 1993 RE: Gideon's Woods P.U.D. - Response to E.A.W. Comments FILE NO.: 405 (92.26) As you are aware an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (E.A.W.) was required to be prepared for the Gideon's Woods P.U.D. due to the site's listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The 30-day comment period for the E.A.W. extended from 1 February to 3 March 1993. The City must now review the comments and make a determination as to the need for further environmental review. . The following materials are attached for your review: · Attachment 1 - The E.A.W. Process · Attachment 2 - Environmental Assessment Worksheet (E.A.W.) . Attachment 3 - Notice of Environmental Review - Press Release . Attachment 4 - E.A.W. Distrib.ution List · Attachment 5 - Comments on Gideon's Woods E.A.W. · Attachment 6 - City Engineer's Report The purpose of the E.A. W. is to determine the need for further environmental review through an Environmental Impact Statement (E.I.S.). As provided on page 15 of Attachment 1, "An E.I.S. shall be ordered for projects that have the potential for significant environmental effects." Page 15 goes on to list criteria for making the decision. A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore hE . . Re: Gideon's Woods P.U.D. Response to E.A.W. Comments 12 March 1993 In making its decision the City is obligated to make specific written responses "to each substantive and timely comment received on the E.A.W.". A number of the comments received (Attachment 5) raise technical questions which City staff will attempt to answer. The Planning Commission and City Council are urged to review all 12 of the letters contained in Attachment 5. Staff has attempted to sort through the letters and identify comments which are pertinent to the E.A.W. Following are responses to those comments: #3 - Minnesota Historical Society. The decision to remove the site from the National Register is subject to federal regulations. The City needs to decide if removing the site from the Register will have significant effects and, if so, will relocating the house on its site mitigate those effects. The developer is prepared to provide information disputing the historic listing of the property. They will ask the Historical Society to send a representative to the Planning Commission meeting on 16 March to respond to their findings. With respect to an archeological survey ,the developer has agreed to hire a qualified archeologist to determine the possible location of Indian mounds on the site (this will be discus~ed in more detail later in this report). Possibly the archeological survey could be conducted by the same individual conducting the Indian mound investigation. #4 - Mark Gideon. A response to Mr. Gideon's concern about destruction of the site would be the same as the Historical Society response. Again, does relocating the home on its site, making it more visible to the public, and enhancing the historic monument mitigate the environmental effect? Indian mounds have been documented in the vicinity of the subject property. Prior to any work commencing on the project the developer will hire a consultant archeologist approved ,by the Indian Affairs Council to determine the location of any mounds on the site. Preservation of the mounds will be coordinated with the Indian Affairs Council and the Minnesota Historical Society pursuant to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 307 (Private Cemeteries). #5 - Laura Turgeon. The project consists of 18 units. Initially the developer proposed to remove the existing home and build nine twinhomes. In response to resident concerns about the historic value of the house the developer now proposes to relocate and preserve the house on the southwest comer of the site, add an apartment to it and build eight twinhomes on the remaining acreage - a total of 18 units. - 2 - Re: Gideon's Woods P.U.D. Response to E.A.W. Comments 12 March 1993 The Department of Natural Resources has addressed the issue of wildlife in their 12 February comment letter (#2). With respect to the wetland area to the north and west of the subject site, drainage from the project will be conducted to a new pond before draining to the wetland. The pond will be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards. Design and capacity of the pond has been addressed under separate cover by the City Engineer (Attachment 6). The number of acres "lost" refers to wildlife habitat. Approximately three acres of the 4.7- acre site is considered as potential habitat. Approximately 1.4 acres of that wooded area will remain after the site is developed. . Once a preliminary plat has been prepared, more detailed calculations will be made relative to impervious surface on the site. The site must be designed so that impervious surface does not exceed 25 percent of the site area. Runoff calculations have been prepared by a registered civil engineer, reviewed by the City Engineer and must be approved by the engineers at the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Additional calculations will be required as plans are finalized. Maintenance of drainage facilities is the responsibility of the City. Detailed traffic projections have been addressed by the City Engineer under separate cover (Attachment 6). . NURP standards provide for gradual side slopes for the detention pond. Pond design will be addressed in more detail by the City Engineer at the Planning Commission meeting. The City's policy has been to design detention ponds with gradual side slopes. Neither ponds or wetlands are required to be fenced. While the developer undoubtedly would have liked to have avoided an E.A.W., relocation of the house still requires an E.A.W. The DNR Forestry Division referred us to Mike Zins at the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum for information on the life expectancy of apple trees. Hopefully this information will be available for Tuesday night's Planning Commission meeting. If the project is ultimately approved, it has been recommended that apple trees be included in their landscape plan. - 3 - Re: Gideon's Woods P.U.D. Response to E.A.W. Comments 12 March 1993 #6 - Kathie Harrison. See response to Historical Society and Laura Turgeon re: removal of home from the National Register. See City Engineer's report re: stormwater runoff. See response to Laura Turgeon re: maintenance of drainage facilities. See DNR comment letter re: wildlife habitat. See City Engineer's report re: traffic projections. Regardless of the outcome of the project the City should review turning movements at Glen Road with the Hennepin County Transportation Department. Zoning and site designs have been addressed as part of the original public hearing for the P. U.D. Driveway design will meet all applicable City, State and County design requirements. . #7 - Dave Turgeon. Staff recommended early in the review process that the historic significance of the site be addressed by the Historical Society. Although we had no response by the public hearing on the P.U.D., presumeably they would have identified the need for an E.A.W. See response to Laura Turgeon re: description of project. An E.I.S. is not automatically required by removing the house. The City makes that decision after reviewing the E.A.W. Despite its current use as a trail, the railroad r.o.w. is owned by the Hennepin County Regional Railway Authority. Although there is considerable question as to when, or even if, it would be used, the H.C.R.R.A. acquired the r.o.w. for light rail transit purposes. See DNR comment letter re: wildlife. . See City Engineer's report re: surface water runoff. Proximity of the detention pond to County Road 19 will be reviewed by the Hennepin County Transportation Department. See City Engineer's report re: traffic. #8 - Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The detention pond will be designed to NURP standards. #10 - Minnesota Landscape Arboretum. See response to Minnesota Historical Society et. al. Perhaps if the project goes forward, representatives of the Arboretum would be willing to consult with the City relative to a landscape plan which symbolizes the work and achievements of Peter Gideon. - 4 - . . Re: Gideon's Woods P.D.D. Response to E.A.W. Comments 12 March 1993 #11 - Indian Affairs Council. See response to Mark Gideon and Laura Turgeon re: Indian mound investigation. #12 - Met Council. The detention pond will be designed to NURP standards. In view of the amount of information to be studied and the deadline for responding, please call me if you have any questions or the material or the process. BJN:ph cc: Jim Hurm Joel Dresel Tim Keane Fred Katter - 5 - . ,- I .., The'EAWProcess This chapter deals with the EAW process as specified in part 4410.1<XX> to 4410.1700. It dres not address the case of the EAW fcnn in ~ing an EIS pursuant to part 4410.2100. The EA W is defined to be a "brief document which is designed to set out the basic filets necessary to detennine whether an EIS is required for a proposed project" (part 4410.0200, subpart 24). Although an EA W may am a:complish 0Iher purposes (provide ~ infonnarioo, infoan the public about a project, help identify ways to protect the enviraunent from haIm from the tmject), the pimary, legal purpose is to provide the infamation necessary for.a decision on the need for an EIS - infamarlon which bears on the question of whelher the project has the p:>tential for significant envirorunental effects. The EA W JXOCeSS coosists of four stepS: Step 1. The project proposer supplies the ircompleted data portioni' of the EAW to the RGU. Step 2. The RGU prepares the EA~ Step 3. 3O-day public comment period. Step 4. The RGU makes a decision on the need for an EIS based on the EAW and comments received. l .t Ie The procedural details of steps 1 to 3 are covered in a companion tooklet called "EA W Guidelines." The remain<:kr of this chapter highlights changes made in the EA W process am cxher topics of particular importance. . . l11l RGU CcrnX A1DN U1e Prc:poser to PI'e!De tte ~ EAW. Although it ~ frequen1ly rem the prnctice fer the proposer to fill out the entire EA W fcnn and fer the RGU to then review the infoonation fer ~y and completeness, making any rece&<>ary changes, a 1988 state district court case iOOicares that this awroach transfers too moch responsibility to the IJ'OPCH7. In State of Minnesota, et aL v. Ncrth Beach Camping Prserves, et. ai, (Mn. Dist. Ct, Div. I, Nmth Judicial Dist, Sept 2, 1988) the coon fOUIXi the EA W to be inOOequately prepared because me RGU had allowed the prqJOSer to complete the fonn, even mough the RGU subsequently reviewed am approved the EA W. The COUIt stated: The procedural details of preparing an EA Ware covered in a companion booklet called "EA W Guidelines." "However, there is a significant difference between submitting the completed data pcrtions am ~tually preparing the EA W. The process is intended as fonows: me proposer submits me data, the RGU verifies the data am makes the cooclusions as to the effects me proposed project will have on the envirooment It is these cooclusioos which constitute 'preparing' the EA W and they must be maOO by the RGU or its agenrs." The court did allow that the EA W could have been considered adequate if the RGU had documented in detail how it had "verified" 1hat me infonnation was accurate. However, since &x:umenting verificatioo would protably involye about as much work as completing me EA W in me first place, me EQB staff recommmends that the RGU independently complete the "conclu.sccy" pcrtions of the fonn itself. 111111 13 6cv'f"~ : qv..d.e... +0 i'~-t.. Rvl~~ of"' tk~ K\f"\rO?5t~ E..(\'-J~"~"f'\t'Nr'I.-tA.l \<.,4.'-' ~ lZl,l../ r'(',~ r~ N\ . I '1.g,'1 E;. J ~ + io '^ ATTACHMENT 1 EA W Process RGU determines EA W is reces<;ary RGU pepJreS ~W (ft~ supplies necessary data) RGU awroves EA W fer distributim RGU seOOs EA W to dislribution list RGU ~ press release . Notice published in EQB Monitor 7 to 21 days after recei.Jx of EA W 30 day comment period (SImtS at EQB Monitor pub1icatioo date) . 30 day comment period ends RGU decides if project needs EIS and resJX>llds to comments RGU distributes notice of decision 111111 14 Notice published in EQB Monitor 7 to 21 days after receiIX of decision . . .. . :::: ::;: if:: 1:[1 . . varies 1 to 5 woridng days 1 to 5 waking days 7 to 21 calendar days 30 calendar days 3 waking days to 30 days* 1to5wakingdays . I 7 to 21 calendar days . I ~LL ~~I~~~~Ij~~~~~I~I~~~~~~~IjI~1 Grey bill indicoIc ICliana 1bc may ocx:ur 0YtZ . pcziod cllimc *can vary depending on RGU . . The EQB staff will be revising the FA W fam in 1989. In this revision we will be trying to make a clearer separation of the "data pations" from the "cooclusirns" ro that the division of IeSJXlnsibilities between the Il1~ and RGU is clearer. Deciding on the Need for an EIS . SBldard lIl:I CriIerfa. As irxlicated at the beginning of this chapter, the IJirnary PUIJX>Se of the FA W process is to provide the f3cts needed to deteImine if an EIS is necessary for the IJ'Oject. "An EIS shaD be ordered for projects that have the potential for significant environmental eft'ects.tf (Part 4410.1700, subpt. 1.) ''In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effeds the RGU shall compare the impacts that may reasonably be expected to occur from the project with the criteria in thio; ruIe." (Subpt. 6.) ''Criteria. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effeds, the following factors shaD be considered: A. Type. ex/eTll. and rever-sibi/iry of environmental effects; B. CumuJa/ive potential effects of relaled or anticipated future projects; C. The exte1Il to which environmeTllal effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory aJ4Jhori/y; and D. The extent to which environmeTllal effects can be anticipated and cOnJro/led as a result if other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or of EIS' s previously prepared. (Sub pt. 7.) It is not sufficient to rely en the abserx:e of ooverse ccmments to justify a decision not to order an EIS. The RGU has a legal cbligalion to examine the f3cts and draw its own conclusions aOOut the significance of potential environmental effects. Record of DedsIcn To be legally defensible, rOO RGU's decision must be documented in a written record containing "SJX:Cific findings of fact" regarding the aOOve four fuctoIS and the infarnation on the project's potential enviromnental effects as revealed in the FA W and any comments received. There is no specific fonnat that must be used for this record; it may be a specially IRJmed document cr a sectien of Ihe minutes or other record routinely maintained by Ihe RGU. The impatant thing is that there be eviderx:e that the RGU rode a "hard lode" at each reasonably likely environmental effect of the project as d&;losed by Ihe EA W and commmenrs, drew a reasonable cooclusien about the significance of each effect rased on the fuels cfudased and the four cri1eria listed above, and at the end made a reasonable ccnclusion about whether the IJ'Oject had the pxentiaI for significant environmental effects. One way to <rganize rOO findings of fact in the record of decisioo is according to the various tyJ:eS of enviraunental effects listed in the s\ \V fam. (The EQB staff will attempt in the 1989 revision of the FA W form to give a clearer identification of eoch type of effect addressed by eoch item, and to improve their order in rOO FA W form.) 11.11. 15 ~ . Procedural Changes in the Decision Process Made in 1988 ~ c:l1he DeclsIon. If the decision is made by a 00ard er council, it is now necessary only to wait three woddng days after the end of the conunent period to make the decision instead of 10 worlcing days. Since the comment period nannally ends on a Wedresday, the decisioo may re nme as early as the following Monday. PostiX'*lg a DecIsIon In Ile Event In1XXlalt 1nfamaIIa'11s~. A new provision has reen added (subpt. 2a) whX:h JXovides far up to a 3O-day delay in making the EIS decision in the event that the ROU concludes that .....infcxmation necessary to a realDled decisioo about the p;>tential far, or significance of. me or more environmental impocts is lacking, rot could re rearonably obtained..." Note that a delay may occur ooly if infonnation crlJko] to the EIS need decirion is la;:king and not simply because lmle information Which could have reen included was not in the EA W. The rew provision acknowledges that altemalively the ROU may corx:luck that the project has the potential fer significant envirorunental effects - in the absence of infcrmation demonsttating the contraIy - and pezform studies as part of the EIS to gather infamation about the uncertain implCtS. AespadrYJ to Call I IE!I lIS. Provisions were added in 1988 requiring the ROU to make a specific written re.sporlSe to each sOO>tanlive and timely comment received on the EA W as part of the record of decision, and to send a ccpy (of at least the relevent pxtions) to the commenter. (This has reen routine proctice for many ROUs over the years anyway, b.1t now is a legal requirement) In responding to comments, similar comments may re group::d together and given a single, joint response. . Commenting on an EA W Part 4410.1600 SlateS that commenters should address: the OCCl.IIa::y and completeness of the material; potential implCtS that wammt further investig4.::,.. l~fore the project is commenced; and the need for an EIS. It is the experience of the EQB staff U"t oommenters often mistakenly pla;:e their emphasis on the EAW document rather than on the EA W process. Coounenters are reminded that there are no "draft" and ..tinal" versions of an EAW. Coosequently, it is not helpful to JX)int out enurs or omissions in the text of an EAW unless these conunents are accompanied by statements arout what should re dooe aOOut the errors or omissions. FlJl'trennore, the commenter must recognize that the courses of a:lion available to the ROU within the EA W process are limited to the following: · Decide 00 the need fer an EIS within 30 days of the end of the comment period based on the EA W and the comments received; . . Posqxme a decisi.oo for up to 30 days to gather additional infonnation which is critical to the EIS decision; or . In an eXtreme circumstance withdraw the EA W and start over - this can ooly be justified if the project description in the EA W is so incomplete er ~ that reviewers are not given a fair .. . chance to review the true poject. It is the opinion of the EQB staff that there is a bwden upon each commenting agency to matce a reasonable effort to arrange with the ROU m- proposer to get any information missing in the EA W which it feels is imIXJl18Ilt to its review within the 30 day comment period. Any reviewer who finds that infcrmation needed fer his ar her review is la;:k:ing should call the contact person listed in the EA W as soon as JX)SS1ble to discuss getting further infonnation. 111111 16 ~.a; .. _.~ "f Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) NOTE TO PREPARERS This worksheet is to be completed by the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGu) or its agents. The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data necessary for the worksheet, but is not to complete the final worksheet itself. If a complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. For assistance with this worksheet contact the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) at (612) 296-8253 or (toll-free) 1-800-652-9747 (ask operator for the EQB environmental review program) or consult ''EAW Guidelines," a booklet available from the EQB. NOTE TO REVIEWERS Comments must be submitted to the RGU (see item 3) during the 3(Hiay comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. (Contact the RGU or the EQB to learn when the comment period ends.) Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information, potential unpacts that may warrant further investigation, and the need for an EIS. If the EAW has been prepared for the seoping of an EIS (see item 4), comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information and suggest issues for investigation in the EIS. 1. ProlectTltle GiDeon I s Woods 2. propo~r Glen Road Ltd. Partners Contact person Fred Katter . Address Kat ter Development Corp. . . 33 So. 6th St., Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone 339-8226 3. RGtJ City of Shorewood Contact person Bra die v J. N i e 1 s en and title P lann ing Di rec tor Address 5755 Countrv Club Road Shorpwood, MN ~~~~1 474-3236 Phone 4. Reason for EAW Preparation o EIS scoping l2SI mandatory EA W 0 citizen petition 0 RGU discretion 0 Proposer volunteered If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category number(s) 4410.4300 Subo. 31 5. Project Location NW 1/ 4 NE 1/4 Section 33 Township 11 7 Range? ~ City/Twp Shorewood .. County Hennepin Attach copies of each of the following to the EA W: a. a county map showing the general location of the project; b. copy(ies) of USGS 75 minute, 1:24,000 scale map (photocopy is OK) indicating the project boundaries; C. a site plan showing all significant project and natural features. Description Give a complete description of the proposed project and ancillary facilities (attach additional sheets as necessary). Emphasize constrUction and operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or produce wastes. Indicate the timing and duration of constrUction activities. Gideon's Woods is a planned unit development which proposes nine, twinhomes (18 units). The site will be served by city sewer and water. The new road will be 24 feet wide, bituminous. Site grading will begin in the spring of '93, and the project should be completed in two years. . Provide a 50 or fewer word abstract for use in EQB Monitor notice: ATTACHMENT 2 1 .7. ProJect Magnitude JaL3 Total Project Area (acres) Number of Residential Units Unattached 18 (twin homes) Attached Commercial / Industrial / Institutional Building Area (gross floor space) Total N / A square feet; Indicate area of specific uses: Office Retail Warehouse Light Industrial Other Commercial (specify) Building Height(s) 8. Permits and Approvals Required List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals, and funding required: Unit of Government Type of Application Status 4.7 or Length (miles) Manufacturing Other Industrial Institutional Agricultural City of Shorewood Conditional Use Permit Concept Stage approved subject to environmental review. .innehaha Creek , Watershed District Grading, drainage and erosion control Submitted and under review. 9. Land Use Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and nearby land uses; indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazard due to past land uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks. Single~family dwelling used for past several years as commercial office space. Adjacent land uses are as follows: North - abandoned railroad right-of-way, then commercial (restaurant) East - Co. Rd. 19, then commercial (Northern States Power) South - multiple-family residential West - single-family residential 10. Cover Types Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development (before and after totals should be equal): Before After Before After ~s 2 to 8 Wetlands 0 0 Urban/Suburban Lawn 1.4 2.0 ooded/Forest 3.0 1.4 Landscaping Brush/Grassland 0 0 Impervious Surface .3 1.3 Cropland 0 0 Other (describe) 0 0 11. FIsh, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources , a. Describe fish and wildlife resources on or near the site and discuss how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. Wildlife habitat (incl. squirrels, rabbits and other small mammals) will most likely disappear from the developed portion of the site. Approximately 1.6 acres of habitat will be lost and 1.4 acres will remain. Grading will be minimized on the westernmost 40 feet of the site and as necessary to maximize vegetation preservation. b. Are there any state-listed endangered, threatened, or special-concem species;rare plant communities; colonial waterbird nesting colonies; native prairie or other rare habitat; or other sensitive ecological resources on or near the site? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources was conducted. Describe measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. None known. This item will be referred to the Minnesota Departmen~ of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program staff. 2 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration (dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, impoundment) of any surface water Qake, pond, wetland, stream, drainage ditch)? 0 Yes 1]1 No If yes, identify the water resource to be affected and describe: the alteration, including the construction process; volumes of dredged or fill material; area affected; length of stream diversion; water surface area affected; timing and extent of fluctuations in water surface elevations; spoils disposal sites; and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. 13. Water Use a. Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any wells? il Yes DNo For abandoned wells give the location and Unique well number. For new wells, or other previously unpermitted wells, give the location and purpose of the well and the Unique well number (if known). ThE~ well serving the existing house will be abandoned. If possible the well may be used for site irrigation. b. Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water (including dewatering)? 0 Yes [XI No If yes, indicate the source, quantity, duration, purpose of the appropriation, and DNR water appropriation permit number of any existing appropriation. Discuss the impact of the appropriation on ground water levels. . C. Will the project require connection to a public water supply? 1XI Yes 0 No If yes, identify the supply, the DNR water appropriation permit number of the supply, and the quantity to be used. The project will be connected to the Shorewood municipal water system (Badger Well Unique Well No. 161414, DNR Permit No. 826074-3). As an alternative, the project may be connected to the Tonka Bay system. Average usage is anticipated to be 270 gallonsp_er day per unit (4860 ga. /day). 14. Water-related Land. Use Management Districts Does any part of the project site involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated lOO-year flood plain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? Cl1 Yes 0 No If yes, identify the district and discuss the compatibility of the project with the land use restrictions of the district. The project is within 1000 feet of Lake Minnetonka, a General Development lake. The project meets the impervious surface coverage requirements and is consistent with Shorewood's stormwater management plan. 15. Water Surface Use Will the' project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? 0 Yes KJ No If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other users . or fish and wildlife resources. 16. Solis Approximate depth (in feet) to: Ground water: minimum 8 average 8 Bedrock: minimum 60+ average 60+ Describe the soils on the site, giving SCS classifications, if known. (SCS interpretations and soil boring logs need not be attached.) Soils have fair suitability or are well suited to building site development, per the SCS. 17. Erosion and Sedimentation Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: acres 2 ; cubic yards 5000. Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe the erosion and sedimentation measures to be used 'during and after construction of the project. Erosion and sedimentation control will-comply with City and Watershed District requirements. See Exhibit D for location of proposed erosion control barriers. Cut and fill to be balanced on site. 3 18. Water ()lIallty. Surface Water Runoff a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe methods to be used to manage and/or treat runoff. City and Watershed District policy requires that the rate of runoff after development will not exceed the predevelopment rate. A detention pond is proposed to be constructed larger .than what the project requires. The City will investigate the use of National Urban Runoff Program standards to treat the runoff. . b. Identify the route(s) and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site. Estimate the impact of the runoff on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the runoff 11IIlY affect a lake consult ilEA W Guidelines" about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed.) Draina~e is conducted from the detention pond through a series of existing ditches to ~ C~ty-desi~nated wetland to the west, then nortn into Tonka Bay, then east ult~mately end~ng at Lake Minnetonka. It is anticipated that there will be no' noticeable impairment to water quality. 19. Water Quality. Wastewaters. a. Describe sources, quantities, and composition (except for normal domestic sewage) of all sanitary and industrial wastewaters produced or treated at the site. This project will generate normal domestic sewage at an estimated rate of 4000-5000 gallons per day, based on 40-50 residents. b. Describe any waste treatment methods to be used and give estimates of composition after treatment, or if the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of the site conditions for such systems. Identify receiving waters (including ground water) and estimate the impact of the discharge on the quality of the receiving waters. (1f the discharge 11IIlY affect a lake consult ilEA W Guidelines" about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed.) . N/A C. If wastes will be discharged into a sewer system or pretreatment system, identify the system and discuss the ability of the system to accept the volume and composition of the wastes. Identify any improvements which will be necessary. This project will use the existing city sanitary sewer system which currently serves the site. The existing sewer system has the capacity to accept the volume and composition of wastes generated by the project. 20. Ground Water - Potential for Contamination a. Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water: 8 I + minimum; R ' + average. b. Describe any of the following site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes; shallow limestone formations/karst conditions; soils with high infiltration rates; abandoned or unused wells. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards. No special site hazards are located on this property according to the SCS' Soil Survey. . . c. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present on the project site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating ground water. Potential exists for use of lawn fertilizers and herbicides by future homeowners. 21. Solid Wastes; Hazardous Wastes; Starage Tanks a. Describe the types: amounts, and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes to be generated, including animal manures, sludges and ashes. Identify the method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste indicate if there will be a source separation plan; list type(s) and how the project will be modified to allow recycling. Solid wastes are limited to normal household trash. All units are required to participate in Shorewood recycling program. b. Indicate the number, location, size, and use of any above or below ground tanks to be used for storage of petroleum products or other materials (except water). None. 4 22. Traffic Parking spaces added 1(, Existir:g spaces (if project involves expansion) Estimated total Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated 108-144 Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and its timing: unk . For each affected road indicate the ADT and the directional distribution of traffic with and without the project. Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements which will be necessary. See Exhibits E-l and 2, attached. It is not anticipated that traffic generated from this proje-ct will lower the level of service or cause significant congestion on the adjacent City or County roads. 23. Vehicle-related air emissions Provide an estimate of the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. (If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult NEA W GuidelinesN about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.) It is not anticipated that traffic generated by this project will significantly decrease air quality. 24. Stationary source air emissions Will the project involve any stationary sources of air emissions (such as boilers or exhaust stacks)? 0 Yes rn No If yes, describe the sources, quantities, and composition of the emissions; the proposed air pollution control devices; the quantities and composition of the emissions after treatment; and the effects on air quality. . 25. Will the project generate dust, odors, or noise during construction and/or operation? GO Yes 0 No If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration, and quantities or intensity, and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify the locations of sensitive receptors in the vicinity and estimate the impacts on these receptors. Dust and noise will be generated by the temporary grading, utility and street construction. Site grading will be completed within two months of start of construction. The road will be sprinkled during construction to minimize dust and construction activity will be restricted to hours determined by the City. 26. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site: a. archeological, historical, or architectural resources? !XI Yes 0 No b. prime or unique farmlands? 0 Yes ex No . c. designated parks, recreation areas, or trails? D Yes at No d. scenic views and vistas? 0 Yes IX] No e. other unique resources? 0 Yes (]I No If any items are answered Yes, describe the resource and identify any impacts on the resource due to the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The property is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The existing home will be relocated to the southwest corner of'the site, more visible to the public. The existing plaque will be enhanced by placing it in a stone monument. 27. Will the project create adverse visual impacts? (Examples include: glare from intense lights; lights visible in wilderness areas; and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.) 0 Yes 0Cl No If yes, explain. 28. Compatibility with plans Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive land use plan or any other applicable land use. water, or resource management plan of an local, regional, state, or feder:ll agency? IX] Yes 0 No If yes, identify the applicable plan(s), discuss the compatibility of the project with the provisions of the plan(s), and explain how any conflicts between the project and the plan(s) will be resolved. If no, explain. . The project is consistent with Shorewood's Comprehensive plan which suggests townhomes at a density of 3-6 units per acre (project is 3.5 units per acre). Also, two-family dwellings are permitted uses under the current zoning of the site. The project is also consistent with Shorewood's Comprehensive Storm Water Study. / 5 . 29. Impact on Infrastru.::tlJre and Public Servlcas Will new or exp '.ded utilities, roads, other infrastructure, or public services be required to serve the project? ~ Yes 0 No . If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure /services needed. (Any infrastructure thtlt is a "connected action" with respect to the project must be assessed in this EA W; see "EA W Guidelines" for details.) City watermain will have to be extended approximately 1400 feet to serve the site. As an alternative the Developer may request water from Tonka Bay via an existing watermain adjacent to the site. 30. Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts a. Are future stages of this development planned or likely? 0 Yes ex No . If yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing, and plans for environmental review. b. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? 0 Yes lXl No If yes, briefly describe the past development, its timing, and any past environmental review. C. Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or outlots? 0 Yes !Xl No If yes, briefly describe the development and its relationship to the present project. d. If a,b, or c were marked Yes, discuss any cumulative environmental impacts resulting from this project and the other development. . 31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts which were not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. None anticipated. 32. SUMMARY OF ISSUES (This section need not be completed if the EA W is being done for EIS seeping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document which must accompany the EA W.) List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. The project initially proposed to remove the Gideon home from the site. In response to City and neighborhood concerns, the Developer has proposed to relocate the building on the site, keeping it in its original setting. Relocation of the home is considered to be a good solution to the historic preservation of the site and establishes a .desirable land use transition between the proposed twinhomes and the single-family development existing along Glen Road to the west. CERTIFICATIONS BY THE RGU (all 3 certifications must be signed for EOB acceptance of the E4 W for publication of notice in the EOB Monitor) A. I hereby ce . Signature B. I hereby certify that th ~~ described in this EAW is the complete project and there are no other projects, project stages, or project components, other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as "connected actions" or "phased actio, ," as defined, resp' 'vely, at Minn. Rules, pts. 4410.0200, subp. 9b and subp. 60. Signature . C. I hereby certi Signature Title of signer Date /-/-.1-Q3 6 Minnesota E:lvironmental Quality Board. Revised June 1990. Exhibit A GENERAL LOCATION - HENNEPIN COUNTY '2: :Iii - .... ~ i:i2;: t~ 0 0'2: C W i:'i 'Z 'f--l J: g t:l , ;0; ~ -;:>-2;: Z 2'Z >- o :<l :>- z G'l t;; N.......-""o Q 00 Q 1i:go~ ..... . 0 Q 01 3 9 :!. .. ~ 0' n (II (\t 0 "0 ::r..... ........ ~ c~ *. :. ~. a: ~ ::J m -. tTV1~g - l'P tn . c - '" (1)-.0....... B;Ot,O ::I :l I\J ~3:"'" ~ 5' Z '" :l Q '" '" ., 3:l3~ ",-)> 0"'3 ... 0 '" _ 0 ., o 0 -. -. ., 0 0.... 00 -. ::I ., ::I _. QJ Q. 0._... -"'- o' ~ <=3 A", .!" - '" 3 c ~i 0(;) ,:", ~o =~ oz ZQ ~~ ....'" ~~ Z:!: ....~ "'(;) "'z g';! ",0 :tz "'0 !:l~ I '" o S. ::T N o :l '" 3 g. g.o<t -< c V> ;0 o c: ~ ( J ~ ~ f1) ;0 o c: ~ c r ::J 00' 3' ;?; "0 6.. (3 c: < -< f1) a. a. .:i . " " " II II " II " (' ,) '0-; ::ro a~ ~~ ., ... "''0 '0 ::T g'< c 2i ;- ~ (J) ;:+ A'O G> m '" ::r Ul 0... ::J ~ l'P ......0 :J Q) \000 0. ::l 01'" co... !>> 3 Ul"O 3 0 c :!1~ Ro 2: (1)'" G> (I) ii i';- Ul =r 03 2i ~~ 0- ~ 5" '< o ~ g- 3 .....- n \0 0 ~ ~ 3 a ; ... 3:0 _. '" '" .., :l - '" ::r '" 0 ~ c ... ., < 0'" '" '" '0 ... ... :l ., 0. 3'" '" 0 :l C - '" o ~ -::I 000 o '" :l 0 '" 0 '" 3 < '0 OJ :.: g. ~ ::I .... C :; ij;' ::T '" 0. CT '< iL- l: . - '" ~ ~ . Cl ~'r----':' .r .. '" z '" l}I !~ r- VI ;0 o )> o n r )> (f) !:!? ~ n ~ 6 z o 3: o III a "0 o ~ CT 0... '< Vim -1) III ., :J III 0.'< ( ':;; 'i., I, Il~/' ,l" 'f .. J -G) !!!.o III 0 :J III Q.ll) ." I' . t'-1,1 ~ P;: ttJ //' / / /' 1\ / I I I I , I I I I I I, I' , I I \ I \ \ \ \ 110 \ 2.= \ :J 0 \ "0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ , \ '-, I) r+ =r m ~ "'"-1 ~ ~ t:t:l l-=3 o Z ~ > G) ,:; m N Q.. o lI.9. o III en c ..... < m '< . t?1 / (') / ~ ;:-ro I <:> / I I b:1 I I ~ " 0 to::! I' I' I I ""- III z , I ~ ~ I 0 I ' \ I \ 'II ) (, I ~O '" I , ro I G'lZ \ I ",-I .. . I 00 \ . Oc I (j) I ~;u \ ' QI ii' , 0- I Z <-I w !!!. , "'1Tl 0 ~ \ :>l;U QI \ ;j< :J \ ~)> a. , rr "- 0..... .. )>0 8 -t C-" :;::1Tl o~ .. '" "T1 en ...... ~ \0 I\) \0 ~ " F 0 :J: ... ':l ~ ,.., ;0 ." ,.., ':l J: ;= ,.., Cl~ tT1::r ~c: ~; t""4 t""4 o () :> ~ o Z I q (I') C) (I') 0 :r fnb :r:l ":r "" 001 1J~ :::<: 3: :J: 01:- f1) "' a. III C f , , 3 -- D- c: @) S. q ~. \ - - l'l~ IUgl >>= _ __ uoc>9 __08C8 "-- ~P<llr1 ~ -:JUI 'S812130SS1f .g .lallao.l. uoy n~ III . ~\Ql (j ............_......._~ -=~:=:.~==-= V1.0S3NNIW 'OOOM3I:JOHS saOOM S.N03G1D '" OJ OJ .. ..: ,0 10 III f N I g: - - l.tf7d~d ~:-" IH IH~~I!~I -i~~ ~ .!I}~I]t~ ti H.J. 11.,1 It e;.~ MI.- Iti1,urr h I.: ~ ~ f 1 {1111 - iI { I. i jli 1 '1.1 r I fI~lf!,t l . ~ji . Hll Hl~h! S;!~ !~I,ilJfli~~ leUl ~lli!H!HIUI ~Ii h H.it1!Iha~ ~~ ~ ~ i~~1 ~i Ig g f. 1 ~iUI ~I "1<511 ::I. lii:l.~ Ii \)<-",,\.; ~ '" \ :L . c .1I ~ o I' ~ : , ~ , n ~o ... :.....(..-...-- , I , I , I I \ 'j~ \ :~.... <.', !~ .'. ...~, . KJ! \\ " ~i~~__~.. ~\~~~'"~.i.~__L~~_~~~\\;~-_.~_::S:.=.:". .\ :\ .......... ;'",0'1:61:,'. __ ..~-s- """ ,,_' S ). J ~~. ......~.... - - I _ I 1 ...0 . I" ."'.~ U:'~ I ~~ <is,, . /~ ill ~ i "'"/ I ! ~ 'l" ...oJ .0'" ~ ~ < , , ~ ..... I -t-. , I I ' I I \ I I ' I.' ' " I I. " ~.. I f'.. \ 3 \ I. I ....., ' ... '~I . ..... I 'E f I .....', . \1 I..... \ " \ , \ \ r \ , t; o ~ o ," , - , Exhibit C SITE PLAN "Z.: . . _~Cl:'" _ =:=:"_U003 --......~ -:lDI''sB12I:1OSSV = . .I811111L1J1 DaB --:;;:IH___~M" 'i'lOS3NNI1J 'aOOM3lJOHS SGOOM SJ.{O:IG1!J _ Nrld /...JJ7l1f1IDNICMlD .A.~:!. ... ." :!! '" f~ .13 I GO .0 :u III . r\iF1L --=:~=~ --------- --~----, rf) 'f~ ....\ ,/ 1 g ~\.'0 g . } .. ~ ! ~ ~ . u o . i ~~ Q ~~:; t~tJ o>~, ~~n i-~e~ 3>}( &~~: llitH ~ k..: ~,t4f~r\'. \ :" ~6.&\ ~ ~ ,-.'f:::" t ~ J .. - i 1_: t ~:~ ~ . . . 5-' .I '. : I io 1 , ~: 1 I:;::: ~( , : I: I ~ I .' , :ilk $: , . \ \ , 1,- , Q ~g ~6 ! 9 . ""~- .I~"~ l" !q ~:: .a~~ Se~~~ ~. ~ . ....--\ - :''(, . .~~ ,.' -' ~f ! , , , ' , ,= .: i ,- - " ~ I I: I I i nt1J I ~:_ I j ~tlf\! ~ ;I~~ . I I , \ ~ -' o c ~,\..~ , i~ ~ ;; : : Exhibit D GRADING. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL ll/lZ/~Z It r~~~ i Oi~ UUU vul~ .1 I N ce}J.I FilE COpy Cbo~'Y ~"" . A.~~ ?~~ H~R. 7&s:-Ac.. (J:)~~~ l~ -n=~):)S ~titlR.. 2/t:> ~Tn. .s:",~'S;: . \...t~~N G...~~ ~~~~~ ~~'t- 2, _}KJ l~S'ii~~c~T~~~,~~ "I~~~,-) l!f.l.l:trJ ~ ~ '? G:-~~~~ N1~~~~~ (~.q 87) efj ~ S- Exhibit E-l TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS - A.M. PEAK - .Q..;T!).. .:sc~~.: e. . I-l ~"""'-"""N co..~,.." \-l ""'-I \<.......'1' ~~-.- l~s'l1~l"S..'c;::::.T~'C- s:~\\~~ ~l~:~\..-.J ~"? ~~~~-r<;:;~ N'1~~(j~,- (~~ 137) 70~ IJ./12/92 FAX 1 612 338 5572 ~003 ,; 16 ~ccmIB GROrP -+-+-+ CITY - SHOREWOOD "e i N oe)l.4 Cbc~'7 ~~ -P \vi, p~~ t-h:.~~ 277 \ 7~'",.-AQ. <JJ~~~ t~ ~\"PS ~1)tJR. Exhibit E- 2 TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS - P.M. PEAK Press Release NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW - GIDEON'S WOODS P.U.D. The City of Shorewood has prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (B.A.W.) for a housing development project known as Gideon's Woods P.U.D. The developer proposes to move the Peter Gideon home within its historic site located at 24590 Glen Road, add a carriage house type apartment, and build eight two-family dwellings on the remainder of the 4.7-acre property'. The purpose of the E.A.W. is to examine what impact the relocation of the house and development of the site may have Ort its historical or architectural value. . Anyone wishing to comment on the completeness and accuracy of the E.A.W., potential impacts that warrant further investigation, or the need for further environmental review should submit their comments in writing to the Shorewood Planning Department. Comments will be taken from 1 February through 3 March 1993. The Shorewood Planning Commission will review the comments on 16 March and the City Council will review them on 22 March 1993. . The E.A.W. is available for review during normal business hours at the Shorewood City Hall, 5755 Country Club Road. Copies of the document are available at City Hall, upon written request, for a charge of $3.00. Mailed copies are $4.00. Anyone with questions regarding the E.A.W. or the environmental review process may contact Brad Nielsen, Planning Director, at 474-3236. To be published 27 January 1993 (Sailor Newspaper) A TT ACHMENT 3 rlLt Lurl MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUAUTY BOARD ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROGRAM ~,~.:. 7~L..: t, ,,"",' I' " EAW DISTRIBUTION LIST '7: ,', ,..- ~ t ,-' ~~ \'j ...:; ___ Note: Approximately 25 copies are needed for distribution. For further information regarding this list, contact EQB (metro: (612)296-8253; non-metro: 1-800-652-9747). L;,,/, ~,.-..~~.,("....t,.._\ K<,-,J~ f'r:-:rt"... --,. ENVIRONMENTAL QUAUTY BOARD Environmental Review Program 300 Centennial Office Building 658 Cedar Street / St. Paul, MN 55155 (19"PY) DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICE Jim Alan 900 American Center Building 150 East Kellogg Boulevarr St. Paul, MN 55101 (1 $f'"PY) NATURAL RESOURCES Tom Balcom Office of Planning 500 Lafayette Road, BO~10 St. Paul, MN 55155 (3 pies) --: POLLUTION CONTROL AG CY . Paul Hoff Office of Env. Analysis , 520 Lafayette Road /' St. Paul, MN 55155 (3 $0Pies) " TRANSPORTATION Isaac McCrary 124 Transportation Bldg. John Ireland Boulevard / St. Paul, MN 55155 (3 s>Pies) HEALTH Judith Ball State Health Building 717 Delaware Street SE / Minneapolis, MN 55440 (1~py) AGRICULTURE Paul Burns . 90 West Plato Boulevar~' St. Paul, MN 55107 (1 c y) , OFFICE OF WASTE MANAG ENT Dave Cera 1350 Energy Lane / St. Paul, MN, 55108 (1 ;e'PY) .L ALSO DISTRIBUTE COPIES TO: VProposer of the project ' - .Local government unit within which the project will take place. Specify waters~ districts, soil and water conservation districts, water management organizations . - Regional Development Commission, where applicable, cUld Regional Development Library for the region of the project site (see accompanying lists and map) - Representatives of any petitioners if review was initiated by a citizens' petition - Any other person upon written request ..' --=- ~J ...=.",;:-;t ....---_. ..,..- ---' .~ ~ ".=:r _.j BOARD OF WATER AND SOIL RESOURCES Doug Thomas 90 West Plato Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55107 (1~y)' HISTORICAL SOCIETY State Historic Preservation Off. 345 Kellogg Boulevar.d W~s St. Paul, MN 55102 (1 py) LEGISLATIVE REFEREJ.'\J'CE L RARY Zona DeWitt 645 State Office BUildin~' St. Paul, MN 55155 (2 ies) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSER ATION LIBRARY 300 Nicollet Mall r Minneapolis, MN 55401 (2 c ies) U.S. ARMY CORP OF ENGINEER Ben W opa t, Chief Regulatory Functions Branch 1135 U.S. P.O. & Custom H~ouse St. Paul, MN 55101-1479 (1 py) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTE ON AGENCY William D. Franz Chief of Environmental Review Board 230 South Dearborn Stre~ Chicago, IL 60604 (1 ~y) U.S. FISH MTD WILDLIFE SERVICE Twin Cities Field Office E.S. 4101 East 80th Street/. Bloomington, MN 55425-1665 (1?PY) Send to following ONLY if project is in the 7-County Metro area: METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Lynda V oge, Referrals Mears Park Centre 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101 (1~) J,_... "~Of ,L ( ~t' ,".L..I r- PRESS RELEASE A press release must be provided to at least one newspaper of general circulation in the project area within 5 working days of EA W distribution. The release must include the name, location, and a brief description of the project; the location(s) at which EAWs can be reviewed; the comment period deadline (call EQB if unknown); and to whom to submit comments. "'~' '/' , /') r ">--.......:"'_./ ; / V ATTACHMENT 4 Comments on Gideon's Woods E.A.W. I. Gregg Downing - Environmental Quality Board 2. Thomas Balcom - Department of Natural Resources 3. Dennis Gimmestad - Minnesota Historical Society 4. Mark Gideon - descendant of Peter Gideon . 5. Laura Turgeon - Shorewood resident 6. Kathie Harrison - Shorewood resident 7. Dave Turgeon - Shorewood resident 8. Paul Hoff - Pollution Control Agency 9. Matt Harrison - Shorewood resident 10. Peter Olin - Minnesota Landscape Arboretum II. Earl Sargent - Indian Affairs Council . 12. Dottie Rietow - Metropolitan Council 3/11/93 A TT ACHMENT 5 III . . FILE COpy Frs - r C. ) 0 1983 /~.2~/l:~ L/)~(/ /E:" I.A I 1..""; . February 1, 1993 Brad Nielsen, Planning Director City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 RE: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for Gideon's Woods P.U.D. Dear Mr. Nielsen: This letter acknowledges receipt of the EAW for the above-named project. The Environmental Review Program rules (at Minnesota Rules, part 4410.1500, item B) require that a press release containing notice of the EAW availability be provided to at least one newspaper of general circulation within the area and that copies of the EAW be distributed to all points on the EQB distribution list. We presume that these requirements have been met. Notice of the EAW availability will be published in the ~ Monitor on February 1, 1993. The 30-day comment period will begin on that day and will expire on March 3, 1993. Pursuant to Minnesota Rules, part 4410.3100, subpart 1, no final governmental decision to grant a permit, approve the project, or begin the project may be made until a negative declaration or EIS adequacy determination has been made. Please contact me if any questions arise about the Environmental Review process. My phone number is (612) 296-8253, or you may call toll-free by dialing 1-800-657-3794. Sincerely, . "11--- ~)-t?1- f)~~~ Gregg M. Downing Environmental Review Coordinator cc: Fred Katter 1 o fNYIRoNMfNlAl OUAlIlY BOARD 85B CfoAR snm, Sf. PAUl, MN 55155 812 298-2803 fAX 812 298-3898 SlAH PROVlon BY ImI PlANNING / ..".<t FILE COpy t! STATE OF [f::!] [N] ~ ~ @ Lr ~ DEPARTMENT OF fES 'J NATURAL RESOURCES SOOLAFAYETTE ROAD . ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA . 55155-40 10 DNR INFORMATION (612) 296-6157 February 12, 1993 . . Bradley J. Nielsen, Planning Director City of Shorewood 5575 Country Club Road Shorewood,~ 55331 ......_.,'_""_..c...~--"'''_........,.....-~._-'--,..''~~,..,~.~~,.~...,._"~ '" . .. RJ;;:,,-,-''(jideon's Woods Planned Unit Development (PUD)'" . Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) " . ..../ 'II'~r?""- ,-,~,-"~",""...,........~......_...,.....,......_--_._..~.-..._-----_.-.,,........,.........-.-......................-<->~" Dear Mr. Nielsen: The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the EA W for the Gideon's Woods Planned l!nit Development project. We offer the following comments for your consideration. Project dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day, or 1,000,000 gallons per year, will require a DNR Water Appropriation Permit. Item llb notes contact will occur with the Natural Heritage Program to determine whether this project could potentially impact ecologically sensitive natural communities or state-listed threatened, endangered, or special concern species. This contact should have been made prior to EA W preparation so that the results could be reported in the EA W for public review purposes. Please incorporate this action into the initial stages of future EA W preparation. The Natural Heritage database indicates a Blanding's Turtle, Emydoidea blandingii, (a state-listed threatened species), was sighted in the north 1/2 of section 33, T1l7N, R23W. The Blanding's turtle was observed in 1987 near a marsh adjacent to Lake Minnetonka. This species spends most of its time in shallow wetlands (1-3 feet), but travels up to 1/2 mile from wetlands to nest in open, sandy uplands'. Most of the area affected by this project is wooded and the project apparently does not involve any wetland filling. Therefore, it is unlikely that the main habitats used by this species will be affected unless adjacent wetlands are degraded by stormwater runoff. Thank you for the opportunity to review this document. From a natural resources perspective, it appears that this project does not require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). We look forward to receivmg your record of decision and responses to our comments. Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4 & 5, requires you to send us your Record Of Decision within five days AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 2 .. . . of deciding this action. Please contact Don Buckhout of my staff, at (612) 296-8212, if you have any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, ~~f:9~ Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor Natural Resources Planning and Review Section Office of Planning c: Kathleen Wallace Steve Colvin Tom Lutgen Lynn M. Lewis, USFWS Gregg Downing, EQB Fred Katter, Glen Road Ltd. Partners #900U9-01 ER6.GIDEOPUD.DOC J~-"-'- IJ FILE COpy 1.-1' \... / /J. ] . ;Ju.(&;.../ U-i . ,1:t r. v. U ~....'"' I 9 I(1Q0 .- ~ \.. ;' rtb IJv,-l t;,.,;'-'\ ,~ . MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY February 17, 1993 Mr. Bradley J. Nielsen City of Shorewood 5744 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 Dear Mr. Nielsen: Re: Gideon's Woods P. U. D.; move Peter Gideon home within its historic site at 24590 Glen Road, NW/4 NE/4 S33, Tl17, R23, Shorewood, Hennepin County MHS Referral File Number: 93-0908 ~ Thank you for providing this office a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the above-referenced project. It has been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given to the Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota Historic Sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act and through the process outlined in Minnesota Rules 4410.1600. We have two items of concern with regard to this proposed project: 1. The Peter Gideon Farmhouse is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. While the response to question 26a indicates that the house will be moved and rehabilitated and the historic marker will be retained, the proposed development will alter the property to the point where it no longer qualifies for listing on the National Register. Pursuant to federal regulations, once a property is moved, it is automatically removed from the Register. ~ 2. The previous survey of the property which resulted in its listing on the National Register did not include archaeological resources. Since the area of the project has high potential for containing archaeological resources, we recommend that an archaeological survey of the project site be completed and submitted to our office for review. For your information, we have included a listing of consultants who have expressed an interest in completing such surveys. If the project can be documented as previously disturbed or previously surveyed, we will re-evaluate the need for survey. Previously disturbed areas are those where the naturally occurring post-glacial soils and sediments have been recently removed. Any previous survey work must meet contemporary standards. We note that a burial area has been recorded in the vicinity of the project site. 345 KELLOGG BOULEVARD WEST / SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55102-1906 / TELEPHONE: 612-296-6126 3 " ' February 17, 1993 Bradley Nielsen MHS #93-0908 Page two Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Sec- tion 106 of the National Historic Preser~ation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, pro- cedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, it shou1~ be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal . agency. If you have any questions on our review of this project, please contact me at (612) 296-5462. Sincerely, ~~ Dennis A. Gimmestad Government Programs and Compliance Officer DAG:dmb Enclosure: List of Consultants . cc: Office of the State Archaeologist, c/o Donn Coddington, MHS Roger Head, Minnesota Indian Affairs Council Earl Sargent, Minnesota Indian Affairs Council . . rEB ,.., ,.., L. r'.. Mark R. Gideon 160 W. Dunedin Rd. Columbus, Ohio 43214-4006 February 18, 1993 Mr. Brad Nielsen, Planning Director Shorewood City Hall 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Mr. Nielsen, The City of Shorewood has prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (E.A.W.) for a housing development project known as Gideon/s Woods P.U.D. The developer proposes to move the Peter Gideon home within its historic site located at 24590 Glen Road, Shorewood, MN, add a carriage house type apartment, and build eight two-family dwellings on the remainder of the 4.7-acre property. The purpose of the E.A.W. is to examine what impact the relocation of the house and development of the site may have on its historical or architectural value. I feel that it will be helpful to provide some background concerning Peter M. Gideon, which will be followed by comments concerning the proposed development. Peter Miller Gideon (1820-1899) was a pioneer horticulturist who, in 1853, with his wife and children removed from Illinois to Minnesota and took up a claim of 160 acres on "Gideon/s Bay," Lake Minnetonka. For forty-five years he devoted his efforts toward developing varieties of fruit hardy enough to withstand the northern winters. After many setbacks he produced a full-sized apple from seed of the Siberian crab and named it "Wealthy", in honor of his wife. Considered the Father of Fruit Breeding on the Prairies, he demonstrated that it was practicable to raise quality fruit in the Upper Midwest despite its cold winters. The Wealthy apple became a favored variety throughout America and was even known in Europe. Fruit production rose sharply following the development of the Wealthy - some tenfold in the decade of the 1870/s alone - and Gideon/s work was a sizable contributing factor. The introduction of the Wealthy proved a boon to the Northwest, and marked an epoch in American apple growing which added millions in horticultural wealth to the area. To northwestern fruit growers the Wealthy was, for decades, unequaled as the most profitable apple for marketing. In fact, the entire Northwest fruit growing fame of today traces its history to the development of several new varieties of apples by Peter M. Gideon, the most important of which was the Wealthy. Peter M. Gideon was an honorary life member of the Minnesota and many Western State Horticultural Societies. He was Superintendent of the State Fruit Breeding and Testing Farm, on a tract adjoining his own, from its establishment in 1878 to 1889. He was a prolific writer on horticultural and various other subjects for the local press, various horticultural societies and was corresponding editor on nearly every newspaper in Minnesota, many in Wisconsin, even some in New York. Gideon traveled throughout the continent as the honored quest of horticulture associations everywhere. He won the Wilder Silver Medal for achievements in fruit growing, the highest award in pomology of the day. Co!. John H. Stevens, a prominent agricultural and horticultural leader and editor, said after Gideon's death: "He had no superior, or an equal, as a horticulturist in the Northwest." In 1900, the Minnesota State Horticultural Society established a scholarship at the University of Minnesota, known as the Gideon Memorial Fund, for the encouragement of work in horticulture among the students in the College of Agriculture. He and the "Wealthy" are commemorated by a monument erected in 1912 by the Native Sons of Minnesota in the Gideon Memorial Park on his homestead at Lake Minnetonka. A plaque commemorating Gideon/s homestead and his efforts was 4 erected there in 1965 by the Minnesota Historical society. (Copies of articles concerning the life and achievements of Peter M. Gideon are attached, for your reference.) The Peter M. Gideon homestead was placed on the National Register of Historic Places on September 17, 1974. (The National Register of Historic Places Inventory - Nomination Form is attached.) The Minnesota Historical Society nominated the site, where Peter Gideon conducted horticultural experiments from 1854 to 1899, to be placed on the National Register, however it was also stated that the house was a vital part of the entire complex, although in an altered state. Neither the E.A.W. nor the National Register of Historic Places Inventory - Nomination Form makes mention of Indian mounds on the farm which were the subject of a study by the Smithsonian Institution. An article titled, "Mounds on Gideon's Farm, near Excelsior, Hennepin County, Minnesota" in the Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution for the Year 1879, copy enclosed, describes sixty-nine mounds (one was leveled to afford a site for the house), and two lines of embankment. The article indicated that erosion and cultivation was "destroying these interesting remains of some former race, although the owner of the farm takes much pride in them, and does all he can to preserve them." . The article continues, "A little mound in the north orchard has been opened. At the depth of 5 1/2 feet, somewhat below the original surface of the ground, were found between thirty and thirty-five skulls, arranged in a circle from 5 to 6 feet in diameter, and embedded in and covered with sand, evidently brought from the lake shore, as the soil is a clay loam. These skulls rapidly crumbled on exposure to the air, so they were returned to their resting place, and again covered with earth". An. additional reference to the mounds is found in a book entitled, "Once Upon a Lake" by Thelma Jones, a copy of a portion is enclosed. It states, "Shortly after he (Peter M. Gideon) came, in the fifties, he could not resist opening one of the ninety-eight low mounds on his claim. In digging he came upon bones and broken' pottery and, feeling suddenly and strangely ill, he left the place. He became violently sick. The first thing he did when he had recovered enough to stand was to go out and close the mound. ... Through the years after that, he did his best to dissuade people from opening mounds, and a few years later when a large and well-advertised mound-opening had been arranged he refused to allow the party ashore." . In response to the proposal by the the Katter Development Corp. to develop Gideon's Woods as described in the E.A.W., prepared by the City of Shorewood, I submit the following comments: 1. First, the Peter Gideon Homestead was placed on on the National Register of Historic Places on september 17, 1974 after being nominated by the Minnesota Historical Society. The site was determined to be historically significant because of the achievements of Peter M. Gideon in the development of the Wealthy apple, as described above. It was stated that the 19th century. house was also a vital part of the entire complex, although in an altered state. In addition, the historical importance of Peter M. Gideon and the site was recognized in 1965 by the dedication of a memorial by the Hennepin County Historical Society and the erection of a plaque by the Minnesota Historical Society. The E.A.W. states that, "The project initially proposed to remove the Gideon home from the site. In response to City and neighborhood concerns, the Developer has proposed to relocate the building on the site, keeping it in its original setting. Relocation of the home is considered to be a good solution to the historic preservation of the site and establishes a desirable land use transition between the proposed twinhomes and the single-family development existing along Glen Road to the west." The proposal to relocate the home on the site appears to be an effort to mitigate an adverse impact in the previous proposal to. remove the home from the site. This proposal to preserve the home is commendable. However, it is imoossible to see how the destruction of the remaining site through the construction of a road and eighteen (18) units can possibly reSDect or preserve the historical significance of the 4.7 acre site, which is all that remains of the original 160 acre Gideon orchard and farm. In conclusion, any relocation of the home or redevelopment of the site will irreparably and significantly damage or destroy the integrity and the historical value of the site. . 2. Secondly, the E.A.W. does not address the potential impacts of the proposed development on Indian mounds, which were the subject of a Smithsonian Institution study, as described above. Documentation indicates that there were ninety-eight (98) mounds on the Gideon farm in the 1850's and sixty-nine (69) mounds were recorded by the Smithsonian Institution in 1879. The documentation further indicates that burials and other artifacts were discovered in mounds that were excavated. The Smithsonian Institution study records that one mound was leveled to afford a site for the house, which may indicate that other mounds, as shown on the map, be in close proximity to the house. The Smithsonian Institution study indicates that the burials were somewhat below the original surface of the ground. Therefore, even though visible evidence of the mounds may have disappeared through erosion and cultivation, it is possible that burials and artifacts may still be buried and intact. It is my understanding that Minnesota law prOhibits the intentional disturbance of an Indian mound. Again, it is impossible to see how the relocation of the home and the construction of a road and eiqhteen (18) units can possibly be accomplished without the disturbance of Indian burials and artifacts, previously marked by mounds, which documentation indicates may be located on the 4.7 acre site. In conclusion, any relocation of the home or redevelopment of the site will irreparably and significantly damage or destroy Indian remains and/or artifacts that may be buried on the site. Based upon the comments, as detailed above, I request that the City of Shorewood deny the proposal by the the Katter Development Corp. to develop Gideon's Woods as described in the E.A.W.. Prior to any further consideration of the proposal by the City of Shorewood, I request that an Environmental Impact statement (EIS) be prepared to further investigate the potential. impacts of the project on 'the site and to conduct further environmental review with respect to the comments, as detailed above. . . It is my understanding that comments with respect to the E.A.W. will be taken from 1 February through 3 March, 1993. The Shorewood Planning Commission will review the comments on 16 March and the City Council will review them on 22 March 1993. Thank you in advance for your consideration of my comments. If you have any questions or require additional information, please write to me at the above address or call me at (614)-263-4232. I will look forward to your reply. . Sincerely, havi~. ~ Mark R. Gideon Enclosures PETER M. GIDEON PIoneer HortIculturIst Edgar C. Duin . I:\' 185.3 Peter M. Gideon, a self-educated horticulturist and spiritualist, moved from Illinois to the south shore of Lake ~[innetonka, not far from Excelsior, ~[innesota, where he took up a 160-acre claim. "He brought to the young territory a colorful, eccentric personality, a bushel of apple seeds, and an unquestioning faith in his ability to grow fruit in this northern climate," wrote one hor- ticulturist many years later.1 For the next forty-five years Gideon worked to develop fruit, particularly ap- ples, that could withstand the cold weather. He intro- duced several new kinds of apples, the most important of which was the Wealthy. Success brought Gideon few material rewards. In- deed, he pursued his lifelong vocation often at great expense and even personal hardship. Moreover, his mysticism and fierce adherence to his own beliefs and principles frequently put him at odds with many of his colleagues. But before he died in 1899 at the age of eighty-one, Gideon had earned their respect and admi- ration. On June 15, 1912, the Native Sons of Minnesota unveiled a tablet honoring him in Gideon ~Iemorial Park on the old homestead along Gideon Bay (named for him) a short distance west of Excelsior.2 John H. Stevens, ~finneapolis pioneer, said after Gideon's death: "He had no superior, or an equal, as a horticulturist in the :\'orthwest. "3 Oliver M. Gibbs, another horticulturist, said at the time of the dedication that Gideon would have been pleased "to I-:now that this monument has been erected to his memory here at the old home, where he worked, not for money or for fame, but for his love of working for the benefit of his fellow man."4 In 1965 the Minnesota Historical Society also erected a marker near the site of the farm.5 Peter Miller Gideon was the son of George and Elizabeth (Miller) Gideon, who were of German and . 96 Minnesota History English-Welsh descent, respectively. The elder Gideon, who was from Loudoun County, Virginia, enlisted from Leesburg to fight in the War of 1812. In 1817 he emig- rated to Ohio, settling first at Millerstown, a village named for his \\oife's family, then moving on to a farm near Woodstock, where Peter was born on February 9, 1818. Young Gideon spent his childhood and early man- hood in central Ohio. Then, in 1841, the family moved westward once more, this time to Clinton, Illinois. Dur- ing Peter's twelve-year stay there - on January 2, 1849 - he married Wealthy Hull, for whom he named the famous apple he eventually developed. Wealthy Hull Gideon was herself a member of a family prominent in early American history. She was a direct descendant of . Joseph Hull, founder of the town of Barnstable on Cape .. Cod, and a niece of Isaac Hull, commander of the United States frigate "Constitution" ("Old lronsides') in the 1 \V[iIliam] H. Alderman, Det:elopment of Horticulture on the Northern Great Plains, 72 (St. Paul, 1962). 2 A. W. Latham, "Dedication of Gideon Memorial Tablet," in Minnesota State Horticultural Society, Trees, Fmit and Flowers of Minnesota , 1912, p. 247; Minneapolisjournal, June 16, 1912, second news section, p. 8. 3Trees, Fruit and Flowers, 1900, p. 25. 4Trees, Fruit and Flowers, 1912, p. 25l. 5 June Drenning Holmquist and Jean A. Brookins, Minnesota's .\lajor Historic Sites: A Guide, 42-43 (St. Paul, 1972.) Mr. Duin is a research analyst with the federal got'crnment in Washington, D.C., where he receit:ed his Ph.D. in .-\mcrican diplomatic histOl"y frOIll Georgetown University in 19.55. Born ill St. Paul, he u'as raisecl ill Sew Vim anclllllsfollcllllt'lII(wit's of a Wealthy tree in the back yard. This plus the fact that a colleague of his ;.y a great-grandson of Peter Gideon proddecl inspiration for this article. . War of 1812. Seven children were born of this union, two of whom preceded Gideon in death. 8 For health reasons, Gideon moved in 1853 for the last time - to Minnesota. With his wife and two chil- dren, he arrived at St. Paul on April 19 aboard the steamboat "Time and Tide" in company wLn Mas- sachusetts settlers who were members of the Northamp- ton Colony. This was an association of Connecticut Val- ley people who had banded together to emigrate to Minnesota to take up claims. Henry M. Nichols, later second minister of Plymouth Congregational Church in Minneapolis, was the colony's president. With a half dozen or so other families, the Gideons moved to the south shore of Lake Minnetonka and immediately took up a claim. 7 Although Gideon's primary interest was fmit grow- . 6AJlen Johnson and Dumas ~Ialone, eds.. Dictionary of .-\I1H..,-ican Biography, 7:261-62 (:'\ew York, 19.31); Isaac Atwa- ter, ed., History of .\lillneapolis alld Henllepill COUllty, 2:1292-9-1; Kenneth Gideon, \Vandering Boy: Alaska - 1913 to 1918, iii. (\\'ilshin~ton, D.C.. ~Ierkle Press, 1967); Trees. Fruit and Flou.:ers, 1900. p. 20-21. SOllie sources. including the Dictionary of American Biography, give Gideon's birth date as 1820. Others sav 1818. Most sources sav that he was eighty-one when he Jie'd in 1899. so the 1818 date has been used. 7Charles \\'. Nichols, "Henr\' ~Iartvn Nichols and the :-':orthampton Colony," in Minnesota Hist~ry. 19:132-3:3 (june, 19.'38), and Nichols, "The Northampton Colony and Chanhas- sen," in .\lilllle80ta History. 20:140-H (June, 19.'391; Atwater. History of Mill Ilea polis, 2:129.3. 8 ~Ierrill E. Jarchow, The Earth Brought Forth: A History of .\lillllesota o.\t.:/'iclIlture to 188.5. 23.5 (St. Paul, 1949). 9 Atwater. History of .\Iillllcapolis. 2: 1292; Dictionary of .-\lIIerican Biography, 7:261 (quote). 10 Atwater. History of Jlilllleal'olis, 2: 1293. WEAL THY APPLES ing and breeding, he also engaged in the usual agricul- tural pursuits. He became a livestock breeder, bought and sold farm animals, and, in the 1850s and 1860s, was a pioneer in breeding and raising poultry in Minnesota. His attempts to improve the various poultry strains were not vel)' rewarding but, like his concurrent, and more successful, experiments in fruit culture, were an indica- tion of the man's character, No matter what field he worked in, he sought doggedly to better the product. 8 Gideon was not a trained horticulturist. His formal schooling, in fact, did not progress much beyond the "three R's, with the rod not spared," but at home he had read Edward Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, the Bible, and other works. At home, also, he acquired from both his parents the love of growing fruit. When the family settled in Ohio, the first land cleared was devoted to garden and orchard. Gideon began grow- ing fruit while still a child. He planted some peach seeds, transplanted the trees into the apple orchard. and before he was nine years old was eating the fruit from the trees. 9 Gideon never acquired wealth nor did he show any inclination to do so, in spite of the great gift of apples and knowledge he bestowed upon the people of the Vpper Midwest and fellow horticulturists. In the early years especially, he and his family lived on the verge of pov- erty. The second year after he settled along Lake ~Iin- netonka, Gideon hired two men to drive some cows from. Illinois to ~finnesota. Instead, the men started selling the animals off. He lost most of his cows, "all he was worth," and went S500 in debt. Gideon worked his land for fourteen years without a team of horses, spending two days when he could have worked one with a team. 10 Nevertheles:>, he per~isted in c1e~lI;ng trees, tilling the land, and growing fruit. Fall 1974 97 Beginning in lR54 he planted 350 apple trees and about 50 pear, cherry, quince, and English plum trees. He continued to plant apple seeds over the next nine years, and he watched - and continued to replant - his trees as they were destroyed by cold or disease. Those that did produce were of poor quality and were dis- carded. The fruit was not equal to varieties grown in areas farther east and south. "Every year for nine years I pers('\'crcd," Gideon said in a report of 1899, "and at the end of ten years, I had one tree left, and that one was a crah seedling." II . IT WAS PROBABLY at this low period in his life - in 1860 or 1861- that Gideon and his family faced another cold winter with the barest of necessities, one cow, and a few chickens. He had $8.00 in his pocket and desper- ately needed a winter coat. As he was pondering his situation - and considering leaving Minnesota - "an invisible being came to him and told him to wlite to a certain address in the state of Maine for apple seeds. "12 Gideon sent his last few dollars to a man in Bangor, who shipped him "five time's the money's worth" in seeds and scions (shoots). 13 For a coat he patched and tacked two old vests together, took the legs of an old pair of pants, re-enforced some worn areas, and produced a garment "more odd than ornamental."14 But this anti- quated and makeshift coat was one means by which Peter Gideon finally achieved success. His decision to spend his last few dollars on apple seeds rather than badly needed clothing resulted in the development of the Wealthy apple. Peter Gideon's invocation of a "spirit" or "being" in this incident may help illuminate his single-minded per- sistence and devotion to horticulture. He was a very religious man, but not in the conventional sense. He was a spiritualist, a believer and an active participant in spirit communications to the end of his life. His attitude to- o ward fruit growing was touched by an aura of mysticism, as though some higher force were using him to make this contribution to his fellow men. Thus he approached his task with a perseverance that was remarked upon almost with awe by all who knew him. IS "l'eter Gideon . . . was the only man in America to pay attention to apple breeding before 1860," wrote U. P. Hedrick in his history of horticulture. Another his- torian has written that Gideon "must be recognized as the father of fruit breeding on the prairies." As a true pioneer, he had almost no precedents to follow. He took a pragmatic, trial-and-error approach to horticulture, favoring practical results over theory. 16 Gideon found quickly that the apple varieties grown farther south and east were not hardy enough to with- stand the cold winters of Minnesota and nearby areas. He believed that, by combining the hardy crab apple with the larger varieties of the common apple (Pyrus . 98 Minnesota History PETER M. GIDEON malus), he could obtain a good quality apple that would survive the weather. After many setbacks and disap- pointments, he developed several kinds of apples, the best of which was the Wealthy. His success with this apple probably came in~ 1868. It marked an epoch in American apple growing, for it was the first full-sized variety to survive cold winters, bear regularly, and have good keeping qualities. To growers of the Northwest it was for decades the most profitable apple for market. 17 11 Alderman, Deeelopment of Horticulture, 72-7;3; Trees, Fruit and Flowers, 1899, p. 352 (quote), 1900, p. 20; Peter M. Gideon, in History of the Minnesota Horticultural Society, 9 (St. Paul, 1873). 120. F. Brand, in Trees. Fruit and Flowers, 1900, p. 32. 13Farmers' Union (Minneapolis). December, 1868, p. 2. 14Trees. Fruit and Flolcers, 1900, p. 20. ISSee Trees. Fruit and Flou:ers, 1900, p. 21, 26, 27, 30, 32; Peter M. Gideon's Views of Christianity, (Minneapolis, 1887); Gideon, Fruit Culture and Fast Horses, (n.p., 1882); Gideon letter in Farmers' Union, December, 1868, p. 2. 16U. P. Hedrick, History of Horticulture in America to 1860, 451 (New York, 1950); Alderman, Derelopment of Hor- ticulture, 72; S[amuel] B. Green, in Trees, Fnlit and Flou;ers, 1900, p. 22. ~ 17 Holmquist and Brookins, ~/illnesot/l's Major Historic Sites, 4:2; L[iberty] H[yde) Bailey, St(lIIdllrd Cycloped!a of Horticulture, 2:1577 (New York, 1927 edition). . It was filr superior to most of the Russian t}lles heing introduced in th(~ northern U niled States at about the same time. Years later, Gideon himself wrote of his triumph: ''Twenty-three years ago I planted a few Cherry crab seeds, ohtained of Albert Emerson, Bangor, Maine, and from those'seeds I grew the Wealthy apple; in seven years it fruited, and that fruit con- vin('(.'d me that the true road to success was in crossing the Siberian crab with the common apple, and on that line I have operated ever since, with results surpa~sing my most sanguine anticipations. I did not suppose that in the short space of sixteen years, the time since the Wealthv first fruited, that I should have more than twent}. first-class apples [varieties] - as good as the world can produce - in succession from the first of August to March, and in hardiness of tree sur- passing all known varieties of the common large apple. But it is done, and in the doing the prob- lem is solved as to what to do and how to do it, with the material at hand with which to attain yet greater results. At the outset it 'was test and try; but now that the problem is solved it is onward, with great results certain,"IB Other horticulturists recognized at once that the Wealthy was an important new development. The November, 1868, issue of Fanners' Union, an agricul- tural newspaper, described the new fruit this way: "A seedling apple of good size, the best on exhibition [by the state agricultural society], by Peter Gideon of Excel- sior, called the Wealthy Apple." In the January, 1869, issue of that publication, a correspondent for the Cultivator and Country Gentleman of November 19, 1868, is quoted as saying he is mailing "a couple of specimen seedlings. . . grown from seed sown 13 [sic] years ago by Peter M. Gideon, and by him named the Wealthy, and presented at the State Fair in Minnesota." The writer goes on: "I never saw a finer specimen in appearance and quality. . . , This new seedling Weal- . 18Gideon, "Our Seedlings and Russian Apples," in ~Iin- nesota State Horticultural Society, Annual Report, 1887, p. 152. Although most sources say the development of the Weal- thy occurred in 1868, and Fanners' Union and other journals mention it. that early, Gideon's dates in this paragraph would put the first planting in 1864 and fruition of the Wealthy in 1871. ' 19 Ff/rmers' Union, November. 1868, p. 4, Dece~ber. 1868, p. 2, January, 1869, p. 2. 20History of the Minnesota Horticultural Society, 67; A. W, Sias, in Trees, Fruit and Flou'ers, 1900, p. 100 (quote). 21 Quotes by S. B. Green, in Trees, Fruit alld FluIL'er",. 1900, p. 22. 22Green. in Trees. Fmit and Flou'ers, 1900. p, 22. 23 Kent Pellett. Piolleers ill IUlnl Horticulture, 1,5, 16 (quote) (Des Moines, 1941). thy wiII be the starting point in native apples in Min- nesota." The seedlin~s arrived, tht" article continut'd, and the writer added: ''The beauty of this apple, to- gether with its ~ood quality and its reputed hardiness, may render it of great value at the west in market. "19 Eastern pomologists pronounced the Wealthy to be superior to any new brand of apple that had been intro- duced in the decade between 1860 and 1870. Within just a few years, as many as ten state~ exhihited the Wealthy at a horticultural exposition at Omaha - "a grand SIlC- cess over a wider range of country than any new fmit of my knowledge," wrote a colleague from Florida. 20 C'p GIDEON SPENT the rest of his life working on such improvements of the Wealthy as developing a slightly tougher skin so the apple would he a hetter "keeper." Out of all the experimentation, both in producing the \Vealthy and improving it, he originated a number of new kinds which, in his own words, were "adapted for this climate, hardy and suited for every month in the year." To emphasize this fact he gave such names as August, September, and October to different types. 21 Better known than these, however, were the apples he developed and called the Peter (which closely resembled the Wealthy), the Gideon, and three crab varieties, the Florence and the Martha (named after two of his daugh- ters) and the Excelsior, Perhaps most important, he had proved that it was practicable to cultivate good fruit in a region long sup- posed to hav"e too s.evere weather for growth of choice varietieS'. Although not a sci~ntist, Gideon contributed some essential knowledge and information to the science of pomology. Samuel B. Green, the first professor in the horticulture department at the University of ~finnesota (1888) and eventually the dean offorestl)', made a verbal bow to the achievements of the Lake ~finnetonka farmer: "He has co~tributed quite a large amount of scientific interest . . , and in so doing he has opened a broad field."22 The Wealthy's popularity and growth in reputation were helped considerably by the enthusiasm of Gideon's admirers, notably Suel Foster. an early horticulturist from MusC"J.tine, Iowa. and a founder of Iowa Agricul- tural College (later Iowa State l'niversity) at Ames. Fos- ter planted some seedlings Gideon sent him and became an avid champion of the Wealthy. The Iowan claimed he sent the apple into every state of the union and was quoted as saying that "one of the greatest things that could be done for humanity was the planting of the "'ealthy apple tree, "23 Others also were effusive in their praise of the newly developed fruit, especially as time Fal/1974 99 . THE STA TE FAIR (t:(/S held at Fort SlIelling in 1860, The display of fruit leas mcager, but its l:ery paucity spurred efforts to der;elop horticulture ill Millnesota. passed and the apple proved both its excellent quality and profitability. A 1915 seed catalog advertised the Wealthy as "without ~l doubt the most popular apple in its class." The same company said of it twenty-five years later: "Wealthy is still our leading apple of its season. . . . [It] has undoubtedly made more money for the commercial growers in :\linnesota and adjoining states than any other variety. "24 '. DURING THE YEARS of Gideon's early experiments - in the period contemporary with the state's begin- nings and early growth - :\linnesota horticulturists began to organize and give direction to their activiti:...-s. From the time of Gideon's arri\'al in the territon' until 1866, nearly fourte~n years, there was no regula~, con- certed activity anlong :\Iinnesota fruit growers. Each grower pursued his own, solitary way in seeking to find the best method of establishing fruit culture. L. :\1. Ford and John H. Stevens founded the :\lillnesota Farmer alld Gardener in November, 1860. to publicize horticultural developments, compare experiences, and stimulate dis- cussions on experimentation. Both men were leaders and future members of the !\tinnesota State Horticul- hlml Society, and Stevens was subsequently also pre~i- dent of the organization. The state fair held at Fort Snel- ling in 1860 featured a horticultural department, but the exhibit was meager. Fruit growing attempts in the area commanded in- creased attention, however. The horticultural displays at the state fair held at Rochester in 1866 were more im- pressive than at the 1860 filiI', and during the Rochester event - on October 4 - the Fruit Growers' Association was formed. It was the IJasis and beginning of the state horticultural society. A leading spil;t in the mo\'ement 100 Minnesota History was Daniel A. Robertson of St. Paul, a professor of ag- riculture at the U ni\'ersity of Minnesota. He was elected the association's first president. In 1867 the association renamed itself the :\tinnesota Horticultural Society. In 1873 it changed its name to the present Minnesota State Horticultural Society and codified its goals. Its objec- tives, as stated in the articles of incorporation, were "to collect, condense and collate information relative to all varieties of fruits, flowers and other horticultural pro- ductions, and dispense the same among the people."25 Although Peter Gideon was not a charter member of the new organization, his name appeared on its rolls starting in 1868, and he was one of the signers of the articles of incorporation. He frequently took part in the annual meetings of the group and contributed several papers to the society and to its yearly reports. Among his \vritings were descriptions of various phases of his work, including his report in 18i3 on his development of the Wf'althy and related experiments, one called "Our Seedling and Russian Apples" in the 188i annual report, and some comments in the 1899 report.26 Gideon was never one to withhold knowledge for his personal ag- grandizement; on the contrary, he was eager to share it unselfishly with his fellow horticulturists. An important part of Gideon's participation in the society's affilirs stemmed from his work as superinten- 24}. V. Bailey Nurseries, .4./1111/(/1 Price List, 1915, p. 12, 1929. p. 8, HMO, p. 5. 25History oj the :\lillllesotll Horticultural Society, 3 (quote). 5-8. 10-11. 20, 2.1-2.'5: Aldel'man. Den'lopment oj Horticulture, i8; ,\/illlleSlJta Far/J/er alld Gare/ener (St. Pau/), Ll-2. 18. 2.5 I N()\'emher, 1860). 261/i.~t()/", of the .\linnesota J/orticultural Society, 38; Gi- deon in Horticultural Sodety, .4.lIl1ual Report, 188i, p. 152. . dent of the State Experimental Fruit Farm. The I(>gista- tllre estahlislwd the farm on March 8, lR7H, 011 a 116-acre plot ofland immediately adjacent to the Gideon property on Lake Minnetonka. The farm was placed under the jurisdiction of the University of Minnesota board of regents, which was authorized to buy the land at a cost not to exceed $2,000. Another $1,000 was ap- propriated to support the farm.27 Governor John S. Pillsbury appointpd Gideon, then recognizpd as ~1innesota's leading horticulturist, to head this under- taking. He held the position until February, 1889, after making his last report to the board of regents. 28 During his administration of the farm, Gideon con- tinued his apple experimentation, concentrating on the development of "long keepers." In his 1887 report he said that practical results proved the soundness of his theories. "[It is] beyond a question that the crab infusion is to be the foundation of successful fruit culture in the Northwest," he wrote. Thousands of seeds from the state farm's experimental trees were planted. To ensure their widespread distribution, Gideon proposed that the seedlings which resulted be offered free of cost to any- one willing to dig them up or for.a small fee to those wishing them shipped. All that Gideon asked for this largess was that the recipient properly care for the trees and report on results. With the approval of the horticul- tural society, some 10,000 apple seedlings were distri- buted in Minnesota and throughout the Midwest in 1889.29 Gideon's stint of public service ended with this distribution (he was then in his seventieth year), but it did not terminate his contributions to Minnesota hor- ticulture. He continued to be active in the nursery busi- ness and to carryon his experiments until the end of his life. . o~ I THE DE~lISE of the state's ~linnetonka farm - it was abandoned and the property sold in 1889 - may have been hastened by Gideon's eccentricities and personal- ity. As was required of all University of Minnesota staff members, wrote one historian, Gideon made annual re- ports to the board of regents, "but he otherwise operated I 27 ~linne~ota, Lilies, 1878, p. 128-29; .\/illllcClpulis jUl/nllll. ~Iay 22, 1938, world afTairs and editorial section, p. 3; Minnetonkll Record (Excel~ior), September 5, 1940, p. 2; John B. Gilfillan, "History of the University of Minnesota," in J/illllewjta Historical Collections. 12;71. 28 :\Iderman, Det:efopment of H articulture, 72. 29 Horticultural Society, Annual Report, IS87, p. 154 (quote); Greell. in Trees, Fruit IIIllI FlolCen, 1900. p. :23. 30 Alderman, Dl't:elopment of H ortiClllture, 72. th(' p\\wrinwntall:mll as a eornpletply indt'\wndpnt II nit. This 'Iollt, wolf' attitude so {'haract('risti{' of all his ac- tivities did not make him popular with University administrators, . . . It is unfortunate that c1ashin~ per- sonalities prevented him from assuming more construc- tive leadership in the great fruit breeding program that was to develop throughout the region." 30 Gideon's unusual ideas and convictions - which he not only devoutly helieved hut, as Ilf' was no! a mod('st and retiring man, insisted on professing puhlicly - led to disputes with members of the horticultural society. Ill' hitterly opposed fast horses and horse racing and at one meeting of the society presented an address, which he later had printed in a book called Fmit Culture and Fast Horses: The Civilizing Effects of the Former and the GIDEON AND HIS FAMIL Y lived in this house which the horticulturist built himself. The house, although al- tered over the years, was put on the National Register of Historic Places ill September. 1974. The simpler, rear sectioll is the original building. The more elaborate, "neo- colonial" front was added later, probably early in the twentieth century. The home is still occupied. Delllorali::;atioll Caus/:'d by the Latter. The Arabian civilization, he contended in developing that theme, was a prime example of this demoralization. When the Arabs had only the trudging donkey they "grew their fruits in profusion, and as their fmits grew the people rose in morals and intelligence." but when they acquired fast horses their plains became deserts, he said, and their Fall 1974 101 . culture barbaric.31 He also attacked conventional relig- ions, the general morality in the nation, and the treat- ment ofIndians and Negroes and commented on domes- tic happiness and other subjects guaranteed to raise pas- sions. It was apparently his outspokenness that led to a break between Gideon and the other members and caused him to absent himself from horticultural society meetings for several years. In the winter of 1882-8.3, Gideon was persuaded to return to the organization in what was termed a "peace conference," "love feast," and a "sort of eompromise with spiritualism." 32 Gideon never changed his views, however. So strongly did he feel about the subject of horse racing tl1at for years he refused to exhibit his fruit at the state fair because races were held there. Later, he softened his position and did exhibit, but never for money. "It seems to me there was something grand and fitting that the old man, whom we all knew was poor, should sit there among his fruit, too proud to exhibit it for a premium," said Samuel Green. 33 Gideon, a deeply religious man in his own way, re- fused to take part in conventional denominational wor- ship, and he disapproved of opening secular meetings with prayer. He was a good friend and neighbor of sev- eral frontier clergymen but rejected their spiritual ministrations. 34 He even wrote a book about his religi- ous beliefs - Peter M. Gideon's Vieu;s of Christianity, published in 1887. After Gideon died, a number of eulogies were pub- lished in the horticultura] society's annual report. In the process, however, note was taken of his "fau]ts," his ec- centricities, his outspoken and blunt manner, and his peculiar ideas. He was termed a complex man, "a close and warm friend, a ve'i)' bitter and.sarcastic enemy," 35 a kind and unwaveringly honest man, fond of children and happy to fill their hands and pockets with flowers and apples and seeds. One writer recal]ed a revealing inci- dent during a visit to Gideon's place. The old man ad- monished him to step carefully around a toad sitting by the path, for "he is the best friend 1 have, for he catches many injurious insects, and he works for nothing."36 Another anecdote was related by a former neighbor: "He drove an old white horse who was inclined to stop suddenly in the middle of the road. The uninitiated would say that the horse was balky, but Gideon said the horse saw visions of obstacles in his way, and Peter Gi- deon was willing to sit until the horse was ready to be on its way. I've seen that horse stand straight in the middle of the road in a nice shady spot communing with spirits while its master waited patiently five or ten minutes at a t. "37 Ime. A temperance advocate, Gideon abstained from li- quor, tobacco, coffee, and tea and was temperate in his eating habits - almost a vegetarian. He was an early supporter of the abolition of slavery. At the age of eigh- . 102 Minnesota History teen he made a trip to Missouri "and being an advocate and well posted on the abolition question, soon found it necessary for his health to leave on short notice."38 He continued to raise abolition and temperan{'e questions when he went to Illinois; he was also espousing Univer- salism, "being the first advocate of each doctrine ever seen in these parts at that date." He supported ~omen's suffrage and strongly favored prohibition. He detested, men's heards and "was outspoken to the wearers. "39 He favored simplified spelling, too. In a letter to John H. Stevens he wrote, parenthetically, "I have adopted the nu mode ov spe]ing. leveing out aul silent and supur- fluous letters, spe]ing words as I pronounce them. . . . A system if generly adopted would save half the time spent bi aul students in getting a good education. "40 Gideon continued to work with his apples and other fruits until the summer of 1899 when ill health forced him to halt his investigations. He died On October 27, 1899, at the age of eighty-one. Wealthy, his wife, had preceded him in death severa] years earlier, and the old man had lived on in lonely devotion to his chosen work. I'F\@ ~J.J A HISTORIAN of this region's agricultural scene has suggested that Peter Gideon might have been a more effective leader in froi t breeding if he had been less of a "lone wolf' and had had a more conciliatory nature. The same man then added that Gideon nevertheless had to be considered the "father of fruit breeding on the prairies." These somewhat paradoxical attitudes toward this complex man followed him even after death. He was praised and damned in a single sentence. Yet perhaps his very eccentricities, his dedication and perseverance in his long, lonely quest, were qualities which made him a successful scientist. Though he died poor, he had 31 Peter M. Gideon, Fruit Culture and Fast Horses, 3 (quote) (n.p., 1882). 32:\.. W. Sias, in Trees, Fruit and Flowers, 1900, p. 100-101 (quotes); Latham, "Dedication of Tablet," in Trees, Fruit and Flowers, 1912, p. 250-51. 33Green. in Trees, Fruit and Flou:ers, 1900, p. 23. 34Dictionary of American Biography, 7:261-62. 35Wyman Elliot, in Trees, Fruit and Flowers, 1900, p. 26. 36 A. J. Philips, in Trees, Fruit and Flowers, 1900, p. 95. 37Caroline G. Johnson, "Once Upon a Time," typewritten reminiscences in manuscripts division, Minnesota Historical Society . 38 Atwater, History of Minneapolis, 2:1292. 39Dictionary of American Biography, 7:262. 4OGideon to Stevens, February 8, 1881, in manuscripts division, Minnesota Historical Society. added "millions in horticultural w('alth"41 to tll(' area. Along with developing the Wealthy apple and other species. Gideon added greatly to the science of fruit breeding, gladly sharing his knowledge, and demon- strated that it was practicable to raise qU<llity fruit in the Upper Midwest despite the cold winters there. He thus paved the way for others. It is prohably not a coincidence that fruit production rose sharply following the de- velopnwnt of the \\'ealthy - sOl11e tenfold in the decade 41 T,'l'cs, Fruit (Jlld FlOlL'Cn, 1900, p. 20. 42Jarchow, I-:arth 13rullght Forth, 244. 43 Flurence Gideun Wehster, quoted in Trees.. Fruit (Iue! Flou;ers, 1900, p. 21. . THE PHOTOGRAPH of the apple display on page 103 is published through the COllrtesy of the Minnesota State Horti- cultural Society. Alan Ominsky took the photographs of the Wealthy apples. All other photographs are from the society's picture collection. THE PLAQUE BELOW, erected by the Minnesota Historical Soci- ety in 1965, commemorates the Gideon homestead. Within view of the marker is the site of the original orchards. ;. of the IRiOs al0l1P42 - amI Gideon \ work must Iw n'- garded as at least a sizable contrihuting factor. His daughter, Florence Gideon Webster, perhaps hest summed up the complexities and contradictions of the man and his work: 'That which impresses one most was his devotion to his idea and his years of persistent toil, just as devoted and persistent without aid or encouragement as with it. . . . He lived dose to Nahlre, and much that most of us have to glean from the study of many minds seemed revealed to him direct. . "He helieved thoroughly in his work and in his ideas.. . . . But his id~as were often as blighted and frost bitten as his beloved trees. His religion, his philosophy and his politics, which cost him so many sympathizers, were as truly his own production as the Wealthy apple. . . . as his work was directed to the production of a pelfect apple, his ethics betray a striving for an [sic] universal ideal which few would have the boldness to conceive or the hopefulness to maintain. No man had ever more the courage of his convictions. He knew no compromise."43 THIS BOUNTIFUL DISPLA Y of a variety of Minnesota-grown apples would not have been possible without the work of Peter Gideon and others like him who worked to develop fruit that could grou' ill cold climates. O(J) .J Fall 1974 103 Mj,111l'Sota State Horticultural Socil'ly HIS T 0 1\ I C 1\ 1 NOTES Peter M. Gideon - 1818 to 1889 . ~ * . . nETER GIDEON was born near Woodstock, Ohio r three years aftet. his family had emigrated to Ohio from Virginia. In . 18.n, he moved to Clinton, Illinois where he married Wealth Hall, after \\'hom the \\:!!al, thy apple was later named, and where two of his 1he children were born. In 1853 the family moyed to :.\Iin- nesota and took up a claim of 160 acres of land on Gideons Bay, Lake Minnetonka in 1858 where for forty,one years, he carried on his fight agaimt the climate to deyelop a fruit for ~tinnesota growers. Peter Gideon, the man, can perhaps he best descrihed in excerpts from a letter written hy his daughter, :.\Irs. Florence Gideon Wehster, in 1899: "You all know the history of those early struggle;:, and I presume you know the task he set himself in later life-to produce a long keeping apIlle. of good quality, which should be hardy in the Northwest. His method of crossing and selecting you are familiar with, :\lany new seedlings were hrought into hearing l'ZlC'h :rear. some of the last of great promise, For many years none of the seedlings ha\'e hel'n introduced or propogated in any way. Just how man\' milestonps he had passed no one can sa\' hut he ce;.tainl\' fdt that he was far on the wa\' ' , , "That which impr~s~es one most was his de\'otion to his idea and his years of pet'sistent l~oil, ju"t .IS de\'uted and persistent withuut .lid or l'nclIllragell1C'nt as with it, "I say, you know his work, \'et no one who has not seen it in detail can realize the tOUl'h of the ma"ter 72 . . . by A. E, HUTCHINS Pioneer Minnesot3 Horticulturist "Out 011 11)(' biglJ/tl1)' /lrl1r Mlll/ilOIl Gll'Il, Lak,' ~fil1l1r- tOl/kd, is d brol1=r Illblrt IIPOll u'hkb thr pa.llab) //Ill)' rrael tbis //Ir1ll0rial T bis T dblrl C01lllllrmoralt's PETER M. GIDEON Wbo Grru' Ibr Origitllll WEALTHY ApPLE TREE Fro1l1 Srrd Oil This His Homrslrl1d ill 1 S6-l "111 1878, Ihr Rrgmls bou:<bl 11111.1 for n/l..rim"lIlal /t'ork adjoillillg Ibr Gidroll bomrslrad alld pili ad M r, Gidron iI/ ebarg". As Il rrHllt of .\fr, Gid,'oll's pilJ//n'r work 0/1 his bomrslrad, HlpplrmrlllrJ b)' bis work 1111 Ih.. /ar/ll, thr IlPple indllslr)' in Mi/llf('.IOla u:itb ils spl"lIdid W'ca/lb) flpplr, breamI' firmly rslablisbrd Illld bas ,~r('atl,) ,'lIrichrd thr StiliI'. Perbaps iI is not doing 100 IIIlIcb 10 placr .\fr. Gidroll ;'1 Ihr I"rr)' forrfronl of thosr, u.I;(J, iollolLill,~ 11)(' Irail bll1=rll b)' him, hal"c, durill,\!, Ibl' pl1sl fiflJ .)can, a.ldcd millions of dollllrs 10 Ibr u'rdllb of our farmcr..," So UTolc Ihr HOllorllbll' F, B. SlIydrr, Prrsidcl/l of Ih.. Board of Rrgrllls of Ihr Ullil"rrsily of Mill/lrsola ()II 11)(' SC/lli- cl'11lrllnial of Ibr Mil/lIC'wla Agricullural E\pcriml'lll Stalioll. hane!. He lived close to nature and much that l11u,;t of us have to glean from the study of man.\' minds seemed re\'ealed to him direct. "He helie\'ed thoroughly in his work and in hi,; idea;: as a man meant to accomplish the result"" Fain, tuo, would he have had the world helie\'e with him, But his ideas were as often hlighted and frost hitll'n a,.: hi" belo\"(~d trees, "His religion, his llhilosophy and his politiC',.:. which cost him so many sympathizers, wel'e as truly his own production as the \'"ealthy applc-ju"t a ,.:uggt',;tiun of the seed 1)lantecl. And he who looks ma~' ":C'l' that. as his work was directed to the production of a perfen apple, his ethics hetray a stri\'ing for .111 uni\'el';:al ideal which few would ha\'e the holdnpss to tunc('in> or the hopefulness to maintain, ~o man had l'\.er n1lll"(' the courage of his con\'ictiom:, He knew no l'otnl'ro- mise. "The work he has left is richer for something it had not hefore he came-a wurthy hequt'''t. n.\' hi;: work know him. lie has well eamed thl' gn'at pridll'ge of haYing what follows this world's lahor," Peter Gideon, the horticulturist. hegall the ,.:tud.\' of hortieulture at the age of se\'en hy planting p(';ll'h seeds, and he har! the pleasure of eat ing fruit from the ;:eedling:< produced, At the age of ('Ie\'<.'n. young- Peter planted apples, peaches, ('herrie:< and curTallt'" and furni"hed his family with a profu,.:ioll of fruit. On coming to :\linnesota. his fil'st expl'rillll'nt,.:, ahout lK',;\ 01' IH,j-l. consistl'd of planting thirty \'aril-til'" or MINNESOTA HORTICULTURIST . apple trees, a collection of pear, plum and chl'rry trees, a bushel or apple seed~ and a ll{'Ck of peach se('{Is. He added to this annually for the next nint> years only to find at the end of ten years that the Minnesota winters had kllled all of them hut one seedling of a Siberian crab. Although the results were certainly very dlscour. aging. he was, In the words of Mrs. Laura A. Alder. man of the Territorial Horticultural Society of Dakota, one ". . . of a few heroic souls like Gideon who said he would make appl~s grow In Minnesota or he would lea\'e the State; and he did not leave the State." In- stead, through the growing of seedlings, primarily from cross-bred apples and crabapples, he continued his efforts to produce a long keeping, good quallt~. apple hardy enough for Minnesota, planting and test- ing seedlings up to the year before he died. Gideon, himself, tells how, after all his trees had been killed after the first ten years, irr,poverished and with a large family to support, he took the last eight dollars which the family possessed and sent it to Maine for seeds and scions. He, in sore need of clothing, sewed together two old vests, and reinforcing patches on patches, succeeded in making himself a winter suit, "More odd than ornamental". It was the. gOod fortune of 1\Iinnesota that he was so tenacious, for from the seed of the Siberian Crab, he developed the \Vealthy apple, in 1868 which was his most famous introduction.fJ'he 'Vealthy was a boon to the apple growers of the Northwest and became fairly important throughout the apple growing regions of the northern United States and in Canaea. The Wealthy probably first appeared on the Society's list of apples recommended for Minnesota in 1874. Of the fourteen varieties recommended for planting at that time, only the \Vealthy and the Duchess still remain on the recom- mended list. Both are recommended for general plant- ing in districts 1 anel 2 and for fa\'orahle sites and soils in districts 3 and 4. Among the many varieties of apples and crab apples developed by Gideon from the mally thousands of seed- ling grown and tested by him wl:!t-e August, Blood Red, Excelsior, Florence, Gideon, Gideon No.6, Gracies, January, Lou, Martha. 1\10ulton, October, Peter, Re- bekah, September anel Wealthy. Se\'eral of these were on the recommended fruit list for Minnesota for vary- ing periods of time hut only the Wealthy still remains. Since it is about the same age as the Horticultural Society, perhaps the Society can consider it as its cen- tennial apple. Peter Gideon's experience in showing that, in gen- eral, established eastern anel southern apple varieties wel'e not hardy in Minnesota and that new varieties suitahle to l\linnesota should and could be established through the growing and testing of seedlings, was an important contrihution to fruit growing in 1\linnesota. That his ideas were valid to a considerable extent is indicated by the fact that about two thirds of the apples and crab apples on the present recommended list for ~Iinnesota were developed by the Fruit Breed, ing Farm of the University of 1\Iinnesota by somewhat, similar breeding and testing methods. \\Thile Peter Gideon's primary horticultural interest was in fruits, principally apples, he definitely was in- terested in all phases of horticulture and probably in all growing things. Professor S. B. Freen states that "He was especially interested in flowers. I visited him . JUNE. 1966 ' a year or two ago (1R!)"i) . . . and !;Clint' rhllclrrn came there from one of the hoardln~ houses on thr lake and wanted some flowrrs; and he seemed to think that an apology was necessary to them that he could not give them to them right away. People around th<.' lake could go there and get flowers at any time. His little house, In that bunch of sugar maplel'l, surrounded with a peach orchard and his Peter and Wealthy lIpple trees. the space bctwe<.'n the house and the road covered with perennial flowering plants-his house would, pl'rhaps, meet the Ideal of the horticulturist as would no other place be likely to meet it, and it seems to me that gin's a side of the man's character that we could dwell on; his love of flowers and putting himself out in giving them away," Peter Gideon was a'lso interested In growing nuts in Minnesota. In 1879, he planted on his farm several' kinds of hickory nuts from seed which he brought from Clinton, Illinois. Butternuts and Black Walnuts were probably planted in 1860. Some of these trees still remainec' in 19-15 when Professor Brierley collected seed from some of the Shellbark Hickory trees, germi- nated them and distributed the seedlings for trial at different locations in the State. There is no evidence that Gideon did any particular work with vegetable crops. However, he did have a \-egetable garden which was well cared for and exten- sive enough to supply much of the produce needed by his family and in which he planted and tested the new varieties as they became available. Peter M. Gideon became an annual member of the Minnesota State Horticultural Society, then known as the Minnesota Fruit Grov..'ers Association. in 1868 and remained an annual member until 1872. At that time, at the annual meeting of the Society, he started to read an essay on "Fast Horses in General and Against Trotting at Agricultural Fairs in Particular." The paper was apparently too strong for some of the mem- bers and, in the middle of the reading, he was inter- rupted and not permitted to finish. He then pocketed the paper and walked out, not to return until 1883 when there was a reconciliation in which the Society (Continued on page 78) 7] . HISTORICAL NOTES- (Co'lttilllll'd front page 73) agreed to publish his paper In full and made him an honorary llfe member. In regard to this dlsagreen :!nt and relations of Mr. Gideon to the Horticultural Society, a quotation from a speech by Oliver Glbhs shortly before the reconcllla. tlon Is of Interest. "He has had his frlendg and de- tractors in our debates but, when puhllshed In our. transactions, the record Is all ngalnst MI'. Gideon. 1 for one, am tired of this. I feel that the Socicly. Instead of being his detractor. should honor him." "Other State Horticultural Societies arc ringing with his praises as a puhllc henefactor. E\"er~' one of them In western states has made him an honorary life member and welcomes. In facl seeks, his. contrlbu. tions to its trangactions. But It comes to pass here, in this case. that a prophet is not honored in the Horti. cultural Society in his own ('ountry and the fact does not at present stand to our credit." "\Vhat is the reason for this~ '!III'. Gideon was in\"ited to read his papel'.on 'Fruit Raising and Fast Horses' before this Society. In that paper he introduced matters not strictly horticultural yet, in his opinion. relative thereto. He commented freely, it was thought irre\'er- ently, in language that will stand. in some instances. as models of vigorous English. on social vices and sundry shams. It was too strong meat. The members could not all stand it. Its further reading was inter. rupted in the middle of the paper and forhidden by vote. Mr. Gideon placed the manuscript in his pocket and retired from the meeting, He has. not been here since and probably will not until his paper is recalled and spread upon our minutes entire." "But what of this? Because we han' got up a little rumpus with :-'Ir. Gideon, shall the whole business of thorough, systematic experimenting in the propagation of new varieties of apples to supplement the Wealthy and other fruits be set 1;>ack. 'Because we are virtuous shall there be no more cakes and ale?' If we do not like Mr. Gideon's religious views or all his eccentrici. ties we are not obliged to forget that he has done more for horticulture than all the rest of us put together, nor that his goodness and integrity as a man are un. sullied; that while we are scolding him annually he is plodding away his experiments for our benefits as hard as ever. . _ ." . \Vas the paper so bad? His main thesis was that horse racing and some other pursuits rather unre- lated to horticulture and agriculture predominated fairs to the detriment of horticulture and agriculture. Although irrelevant of horticulture in some respects, it was not considered bad by many of the members of the Society at the time and prohahly would create very little agitation at present. At the reconciliation meeting in 1883. in a discussion of whether the Society should publish the paper in full, Co!. J. H. Stevens, a prominent agricultural and horticultural leader and editor, said "I have already published it twice in a paper with a circulation of 16,000 and want to publish it again. There is nothing in it that will hurt anyhody." To those who would like to form their own opinions, the paper is published in 7. full In Transactions, Minnesota State Hortkultur:d Society, Vol. 11, Page 103. Of the reconciliation. meeting In 1883, the secretary remarked that this was the fullegt meeting of hoth members and visitors ever held by the Mlnnegota State Horticultural Society, many having come in antlclpa, tlon of Mr, Gideon's return; quite a number coming forward, joining the Society and paying their dollar to have the prl\'l1ege of swelling what everyone knew would be an unanimous vote, Mr. Gideon was an honorary life memhe'r of the Minnesota and many Western State Horticultural So. cieties, He was Superintendent of the Slate Fruit Breeding and Testing Farm from its establishment in 1878 to 1889. He was a prolific writer on horticultural and various other suhjects for the local press. \'arious horticultural societies and such widely distributed papers as the Rural New Yorker, The Country Gentle. man and the New York Tribune. In 1900, the :\1inne- sota State Horticultural Society established a schol..r. ship at the Dnh'ersity of Minnesota, known as the Gideon Memorial Fund, in his honor; the interest from which is used as prizes for the encouragement of work in horticulture among the students in the College of Agriculture. In 1912, a monument and tablet were erected in hi;:; honor by the Native Sons of Minnesota. This is in a small half.acre wooded park about eighty rods from where the original Wealthy tree stood and near ~he site of Mr. Gideon's first house. The park and monu- ment were presented to the State Horticultural Society in 1934. In 1943. it was taken over by Hennepin County, to be maintained as a park of historical interest. As an individual. Peter Gideon was strongly reli. gious, strong willed, \'ery persevering and was a tem- peramental non-conformist who quite often stood alone or with an unpopular minority. Generosity \\'as a strong characteristic and he delighted in gi\'ing away his fruit and heaped up the measure when he sold it. His generosity and lack of interest in commercializing his products may he one reason why he remained a poor man. He never exhihited at fairs for premiums. Professor S. B. Green commented. "There was something grand about that old man, whom we all know was so poor. sitting there among his exhibits of seedling fruits. too proud to exhihit for a premium. That is the side of his character I like to think of the best." One writer in 1899 said, "Probably no other American has lahored so devotedly for the attainment of a specific ideal in the apple." Professor \V, H. Alderman, in his hook on the "Den'l. opment of Horticulture in the Great Plains" states: "Gideon as an individual already had dramatil'ally demonstrated the possibilities of breeding hardy fruits for Minnesota and the Great Plains area. It is unfor. tunate that clashing personalities prevented him from assuming a more constructive leadership in th(' grcat fruit hreeding program that was to develop through- out the region. Be that as it ma)' he still must he recognized as the 'Father of Fruit Breeding on the Prairie's.... . To us Peter Gideon left a rich inheritance hut, like many puhlic henefactors, he died poor and almost neglected. MINNESOTA HORTICULTURIST . V'! Z 0 t- U ::> ~ t- V'! Z . W W '" . I form '0.300 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT Of THE INTERrOR IT ATE:: (~.... 6.72) NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Minnesota , -\ C:OUN TV, NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES Hennepin INVENTORY - NOMINA liON FORM FOR NPS USE ONLY ENTRY DATE . (Type a/1 entries. complete applicable sections) SEP 11 1974 IV NAME .' ,....,.. :' . COMMON: Gideon, Peter, Homestead ANO/o~ "'ISTO~IC, . 12; .f.:.OCATfON. ' . - . STREET AND NUMeER, 24590 Glen Road -- CITY OR TOWN' CONGRESSIONAl. Ot~TRICT: Third . Excelsior STATE I CODE COUNTY' I CODE Minnesota I 44 Hennepin 1053 I~.: C:LASSfFICATION .... ,- ''''''-.'.,. . , "-.:: . - CATEGORY S1 A 1US ACCESSIBLE OWNERSHIP TO THE PUBLIC (Check One) 0 District 0 Builcling 0 Public Public Acquisition: rn Occ:upied Ves: (2i2 Sit. 0 0 Privot. 0 In Process 0 Unocc:upied <<l Re.tricted Structure 0 Object 0 Both 0 Being Consiclered o Preservation wor" 0 Unrutricteel In progre.. 0 No PRESE.... T USE (Check On.. Or More ,.. Appropriate) . 0 Agric:ulturol 0 Government 0 Pork o #Li~'!1J;:;:"" o Commerdol 0 Industrial !Xl Privote Residence o Ot r eelrlPI ~ / 0 Educational, 0 Military 0 Religioul e. .....1.::. '1 f./Vt- - 0 Ent.rtainment 0 Museum 0 Scientific '1;;10/ Ft:lJ ... 'CU '-J !4;:tOWNEROF PROPERTY .- . . '-:-..:-.:,,-.>. -----===f q >: c-:~/\_ '.. :'.~.:c '.'i14 ,::.:iJ::: -::':: IUWNER.'S NAME: ~ ii:; f/ONAL !;- .. /..(~I ~ -i William W. Pye )- /;,GISit. r.. ::l -i "Q -, ~ ::l PI STREET AND NUMeER: /';......... -" '\. '- RI 24590 Glen Road I "11T~1\\~ fIl 0 CITY O~ TOWN, STATE: - I COOF rt jl) Excelsior Minnesota 22 j$'(:\..cQ.CATIQN OF _~eGJ\L OESCRIF'T10N c' -.:- ,d:i:c.:.. -- -:. :'", c' d - .' ._ _' d . :, COURTHOUSE. REGISTRY OF OEEOS. ETC: n 0 Hennepin County Courthouse ::t: c: RI z ST~e:E T AND NUMBER: 5 -i ~ 5th Street between 3rd & 4th Avenue South RI ~ CITY OR TOWN, STATE CODE ~ ::l Minneapolis Minnesota 22 l~,i~J!..E~BESf:J(T'A:rlQ.N IN EXISTlN~SURVEYS ,_ ..::0::_.:::,:_: c. .:_ ....d: c '<c./ '-'- -:.' -, C__':" TlTL.E OF SURVEY: PI Z -l Minnesota Historical Society ~A 11 " -< 0 DATE OF SURVEY: March 1973 0 Federal KJ State 0 County 0 Local ~ Z :0 DEPOSITORY FOR SURVEY RECORDS: - c: z ~ "tl ~ It '" Minnesota Historical Society -.:J PI c: 1l II' STREET AND NUMeE~: ~ m Bldg. 25, Fort Snelling 0 ". z r CITY OR TOWN: STATE: CODE - - -< St. Paul Minnesota 44 c )- -i III ,\ ' Form 10.300.. (July 1969) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NA TlOHAl PARK SERVICE STATE Minnesota NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY . NOMINATION FORM COUNTY (Continuation Sheet) DATE (Numb.r .11 .ntr/..) 7. Description The house is a composite of two continuous units:' the original farm- house and an early twentieth century addition. The original portion is of frame construction which has re~ned a great deal of original clapboarding. It is two storeys in height and joins the addition to form a "T" con- figuration. Ridges of both portions intersect at a co~n plane to give the house a unified appearance. The interior of the original has been modified to accommodate kitchen facilities with bedrooms above. . The addition actually allows a stylistic classification to be made; ? that being a variation of the so-called "Neo-colonial". It boasts a simple doric colonade and open front porch with central dormer from the extended second stor-ey above. Well defined gables and dentil type brackets add to the design quality. The interior of this portion remains essentially "as built" and the entire structure is in process of preservation. The immediate grounds provide an adequate buffer from recent housing developments. The property is surrounded by a b01:der!' of trees and bushes allowed to grow thick as a shield. The house is approached by a up-hill winding gravel driveway through a thicket. Some of the' original apple trees remain to the immediate north of the house. . GPO 921.724 , . . . rr.-DE5CRIPTION CONDITION Ga Exc,lI.nt o Fol, o Coocl It! Alter.d (Check On.) o Una It".d . - OESCRIIIE THE PRESENT ANO ORIGINAL. (I( "nown) PHYSICAL APPEARANCE I o Ruin. 0 Un..po.... (CII.ck On.) o Moveel ell O,llIlno I $190 (CII.ck On.) o Dote,jo,oteel The site of Peter Gideonts horticultural experiments from 1854 to 1899 is in excellent condition with many of the trees he planted still standing. The gabled farm residence was constructed by Gideon after his apple tree experiments proved successful, and an addition was built in the first decade of the 1900's. Although in an altered state, the house is a vital part of the entire complex which has been mar~ed by the Minnesota Historical Society, and is being preserved amidst residential development. _ ~ (-\ <b \ I ,',j r ' \.',. Oll-' .I I \..\ { (/ \ ~:l~' ~ ~ .., . '. .... ,,' .'. I .. ~-----------------~------- . "7.,-1........... . ".'" '.. ), \ . : .~.-x~ /("[1 I \ ~.! :.;'f L ; ,..; i 1'IH4 ~.' .f\-r1~:: : "\' . .1 \f:~' : :=G;')';-.-.' .tJ.I~\-~ \:\ ..,. m m - z ..,. -i ;0 c: n ." 0 -i 0 ,. - 0 Z Vt \ I , -:1 . . . . r'J. SIGNIFICANCE PERIOD (Check O..e 0, MO,e e. App,op,lete) o Pr.-Columbla..: 0 16th C.ntury o 15th C...tury 0 17th Century o 18th C.nt....y litI 19th C.ntury o 20th C.ntury SP~C''''C OATEISl (II Appl/ubl. andICnown) AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE (Check One 0' Mo,e II. Approprtate) Abor iglnol 0 E ducoti on 0 Political 0 Urban Planning 0 Prehisroric o Engineering [l Religion/Phi. [) Orh.r (Specify) 0 Hlslorlc 0 I ndullry losophy ~ Agricullunl 0 Invention [.1 Science 0 Archllectur. 0 landscope 0 Sculpture 0 Art Archi ,eclllr. 0 Sac io I/Human- 0 Commerc. 0 Literoture italian 0 Communicatianl 0 Military 0 T heal.r D Conservation 0 Mllslc 0 Transpor'aHon Ion STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE "Peter M. Gide~ a native of Ohio who took up a claim on Lake Mlnnetonka in 1853, devoted forty-one years of his life to developing fruit trees that would withstand northern winters. A~though his accomplishments in fruit culture are numerous, the most famous and most important to Minnesota is the Wealthy apple, a variety he developed by 1868 from seeds obtained from Bangor, Maine, seven years earlier. The introduction of the Wealthy, which Gideon named for his wife, the former Wealthy Hall, marked an epoch in American apple growing, since it was the first full-sized variety to survive cold winters, bear regularly, and have good keeping qualities. To northwestern fruit growers the Wealthy was for decades unequaled as the most profitable apple for marketing. z o .... U ::) 0:: .... Ion Having inherited a love of horticulture from his parents, Gideon began growing seedlings when he was a very young child in Ohio. By the time he arrived in Minnes.ota he had a deep interest in the culture of many fruits, and in 1854 be planted on his Lake Mlnnetonka farm orchards of apples, peaches, pears, plums, and quinces. Within ten years, how- ever, all his trees had died, leaving him little to show for his hard work. z w ~ Ion There is an often-told story that at this time Gideon had only eight dollars in his pocket -- money that might well have been spent for a badly needed suit of clothes. He determined, however, to spend it for seeds in order to continue his experiments. For the new suit he sub- stituted a garment of his own making. He sewed together two castoff vests, cut the legs from an old pair of trousers and attached them to the vest for sleeves, and reinforced the patches on the rest of his worn clothing. Thus he made a suit that was described as -more odd than ornamental." With the money saved he obtained the means to continue the experiments that at last resulted in the Wealthy apple. Never satisfied with his efforts, Gideon continued to test and improve the Wealthy and in so doing developed several- additional strains, among them the hardy Peter and Gideon apples. In 1878 he became super- intendent of the University of Minnesotats experimental fruit farm, which was established that year on a tract adjoining his property. Some of the trees he planted still flourish there. For years he was an indefatigable laborer who "loved to work, not for fame or for money," according to one acquaintance, "but for the benefit of his fellow men." (see continuation sheet) . . Form 10.3000' (July 1969) UNITED STATES OEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE .TAT~ Minnesota NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY . NOMINATION FORM COUNTY Hennepin FOR NPS USE ONL Y (Continuation Sheet) OATE (Numbe, oil em,/ell) #8 Significance The Wealthy apple became a favored variety throughout America and was even known in Europe; its fame brought Gideon wide accla.im as a horticultur- ist. Although his reputation as a fruit breeder was unchallenged, he was considered personally eccentric and a temperamental nonconformist. He was an outspoken advocate of temperance, abolition, woman's suffrage, and Universalism. On the other hand, he did not hesitate tooecry horse racing, prayers at secular meetings, and men I s beards. '''No man had ever more the courage of his convictions," said his daughter at the time of his death in 1899. "He believed thoroughly in his work, and in his ideas as a man meant to accomplish the best results.... But his ideas were as often blighted and frost bitten as his beloved trees," she wrote. "His religion, his philosophy and his politics, which cost him so many sympathizers, were as truly his own production as the Wealthy apple." Two markers commemorate Gideon's accomplishment in producing the Wealthy apple on his Lake Minnetonka farm. They stand at the function of Hennepin County road no. 19 and Glen Road. The original Wealthy apple tree is believed to have stood about eighty rods north of the monument erected in 1912 by the Native Sons of Minnesota in Gideon Memorial Park. The second marker was erected in 1965 by the Minnesota Historical Society.1I Significant statement from: Minnesota's Maior Historic Sites, Holmquist & Brookins (1972) p.42 ~~ c? !rfCtrvW \\, ~ f:t8:~\ 1 11!Jl. W Nit 1'0 '4 ~=:::. '. REGIS~AL.. ~ ~, Err /, c-'"h./,\~, I :Z\\ GPO 921.724 .-~ . . f9, MAJOR BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES Minnesota1s Ma10r Historic Sites, Holmquist & Brookins (1972) p.42 lO.G-=OGRAPHICAL DATA LATITUDE AND L..,NGITUOE C:OOROINATES DEFINING A RECTANGLE LOCATING THE PRO<>Ff'TY CORNER LATITUDE LONGITUDE NW NE Sf 0.9,e.. Minur.. Second. o Oeg,..s Minul.. S.conds o o o o "0 g o APPRO)(,MATE ACREAGE OF NOMINATED PROPERTY: L'TITUPE AN!:, ,-"NGIT'/DE C:OORDINATES DEFINING T...... ...~."T:;R POIN I OF A ;>..OPERTY OF LESS THAN TF'N ACRES LATITUDE : ' LONGITUOE Degrees Minutes 440 54. S.conds 15. Second. 31 . 0"9,,,e. 930 Mi nul.s 35. 2 acres - ILIST Al.L STATEs AND COUNTIES FOR PROPERTIES OVERl.APPING STATE OR CODE STATE: STATE: CODE COUNTY CODE CODE COUNTY' CODE COUNTY: STATE: CODE CODE STATE: CODE COUNTY: ~lkFORM PREPARED BY NAME AND TI TL E: Henry M. Harren -- Survey Analyst DATE 2/li/74 ORGANl ZA TlON Minnesota Historical Society STREET AND NUMBER: CITY OR TOWN: Fort Snelling, Building 25 STATE St. Paul-" 12.:~T:A TE L1AISONOFFICERdCERTlFICATlON -' . - . . As the designated State Liaison OCficer Cor the Na- tional Historic Preservation Act oC 1966 ,~~!I,9lic La~ lJ9-665), 1 hereby nominate this property for inclusion in the National Register and certify that it has been "valua~ed accordinll; to the c.~terilll, an:d procedl res set Corth by the National Park ,SerVice. The recommended level of significance of this nomination is: NatiOnal? State (3il Local 0 N._ t:.~.{:t~ Title Director. Minnesota Historical Society (" ,"", " , iJ: . Date F€bruary 4, 1974 ", J', Minnesota NATIONAL REGISTER VERIFICATfON" .11 .. .";.. ,', .; I hereby certify that this property is included in the I .-I.. "' :...- .'J NstiOnaI Re&ister," '. '" ~2~.~~.A " Direc/o" Oft/c. 0/ ArcheotollY and HI.ro,/c P,e..,,,.tlon I).j'e f/trJ?'f . ATTEST: Date * u.s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; 1973-729-147/'442 3-1 !/I TfV1 11tj5!.~;"'~ 'f. JjC}1.2. z.~D tD V' m m z V' -4 ;0 c: n -t o z V' ANNUAL REPORT ----- , . , . l OF TKB BOARD OF REGENTS ..... - -- --== ~ -. ---- . ---r ---- --~--_.- - - 9--- - --- - -- - -.- - f;.. J:;' r Oll'THE . S~IITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, < HI i'l '\ ,I .1 ',\ .. I'. ! ., I t i -, :; , -d i. ).' I ~: , < ,- i ~, ~. ~- 111; 'Ji SHOWD1G THE OPERATIONS, EXPENDlTURES, AND CONDITION OF THE INSTITUTION .' - I ~ FOR THE YEAR 1879. " ..al' I 1 t ,. W ASIIINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1880. . . .~ . .:...... "'.~...:. ~; .;t.--' "~-" ~-'" 1. ~ .. "4~ . ~~ .,.",.A_..~~-oO; "t. -..:.....-: ~ -.;' " ~. ':-~' 'j" 'p' ,', :'{' ;~~{:>f~' ~ · :"\....- .; ... ,-t ;: ~:~ ! - .-' ~. . I' .~. ..- .:. . :.f . , iJ, ... 1..- ~ . ". ~-~~~~f' .diAA.... ..~~~. ~<~~;';~B'f~i;i. 4 s ~ al. ;iI:s,:.~;' ''::; l.4 ~ ~._,...: ~: .:. ~ ~ g ~.a . t ,'~" z- l""i_ ,g -e ~:jj ~ A-.i! og ~O ~~~ >-l r-> ..::l ~ i:l "9 ~~:~~ ~I='l~' ~ $.. t> ~ :':j ~ ~ Eo! ~ cC :::l ~ .g p:; .;= r1l""'l ..::l i:l /lI ..'!:l ~ -H>=l..::l .~~O .~ -~~ g~~ ~~.s ~ s p.,g~ .~. ~ ~ rn ~ ~ S < ~ ~ ;:::l Po.~. g~~!~ ~rnt' ~~ ....,g.... 0 .g B orno ~.q) -;;l 'd d ~ S - rn ~]], ~ ~ ~ '~ :g ~ ~Pg ~ -+'> ~ ......::l'd rD o~i:l ,.Q :tl....~ S <:e 0 ar l.4 ~~~ 0 ,.Q~:::l d d 6D'~ ,g lo'-l ~ ;:l . ~ ..8~~~ z ~ ~~ ~~~~~ '" - <:e ~ q S ~~..::l 1:-1 0 ~'-' 'z ~ :jj ~,...., = ~ ~.. i ~ ;<..~'. .~ rno.s :;f j ~ I:! OS "I:! ~ ~-~ ..:l <l) ~~ ~~ ~..,. "~ ~ .~ ~~ ,-...:-, - '-,. ..:. Z", ~ .' I:! 0 <u .' ~ 1--4 E-4 ~ .p ..,. ~ E-4 .~ 1--4 E-4' ~ r:n. 0 ... I '.2:; .... ;:s . 1--4 .... ... .... od "" Z ~ .. .... ~. .... .~ '1--4 . I:! Po 'Z < .. .~ .... ..c ; ,0. ~ ~ 0 . r:n. .... ~ ~ ~ "d ~ .~ '" 8 S . ... E-4 .. ~O) 'E 8 .)1 1--4 <u t- . 0 ~ ~~ 0 == 0 I ~ /II r:n. 0 ~ '0 d l-:l -<l "I:! ffi ~ ~ .... c:l I:! o~ 0 E-4 ~ .... = <l) 0 ~ ~ ~ .... 0 ~ .... ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ -<t1 r... ...... E-4 I:! ~ ;:s ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ r:n. ';lr(~ -{ - M ~ a ~ 0> ... :g s ~ ~ ~ ~ <l) ~ -~ ..:l <l) ~~ ~~ ~JJ . ~ ~~ ajGi.:! [>- Q(J 00 = o ~ ..s 'g.8.s~ 11 . Od .caacaca IE 0 ~ &3 ~.~. lll~""~ :g 0 .... a) 0 I:l~ ~ :; ...:5 <~ :a =.. ~ = ... ... :s '" po,..... Q tfJ-s..::l ~.. 0 >- A"'l = 'I:l ~ ~ ~ . Iol := ....... 1'2 ~ . Z'" 'a c=.s..= ". . . ~ ~ . ~ ~,~:; .~ ..:. '. ,., el :"8~ ~ -:::.s >- ~. . -", 00 ~ "'4 =' ~ ~ . -,< '. ." . 'E ~ 2 .s ,t.~..'.,J~,j~..,'. t._ l. ".. .... . -',' , · ~. ~ ~ ~ 6.s :;. ~ ~ _ - - .'';;. '. g {:l 'g ~ 8 a 1 ~ ., ~~,+ "It ~61 . .~, ,..'. . l'::l.~ 'f"'" ,~,.d "'-- .w..' ;~~ ~!-.:~.:Jj ;:. .~: L .;.: k'!"'--"';;:~I' -;:.- .'.UJ ~ 0 J ! ~ ;E ~ -. ~?J- ........t- .... ... 7': t~::~~~:" (,'(. -"~;' UJ 2'~ ~ ~ ~ "s g ~'~;;1',-;:-i'U'-:fo.II'- ~ '.' ' ~;;.'l;-~~ ;':'~ I -UJ el .. Q i'~ ......: ~ . .~h'" I' IV" 2Y~~J' ;;~'''l f;3~' ~ ~ ~ s 0-1 d ,lt~'~~:j~d ((.r: - . .; :~. -.1 '-'~~\~:';;f~ ;:'~~. ~~.:~ i i'~~ j ~~J~,{ ,Vi~:.' it:;;.:, ;.~ U iiHJ:': i:~i;g~.JJ.!'j ~J ~ ~ :: ~ if! ~ ~~~ 4. ...ji ,:-.t_"~.'''~'.i$ ,.' . ,..~.,; ....' .: . ~ . 'Po 1 i ~ .:~_.'.a : " . ;f." ~I ;..~, .' -,. ',0&1 . ,..s :r! ! ~.J Q .. :.~ ,~~s"~P!:L,g::~.'" !;"-~ f j ;In r} ; ~. ~~. "':"',;'. : ;;' . , ! J 1 li ! ~ j . ,j ~ lE J -: ,~ : ,f ~ .... CQ Q. '. g '.' 4f ~~. i~;,tJijti~~:~1~ ( --:-~ .., " :;;.#;.~l('::~~::f;~~._ . ~,.~.~~:~;::~~~( ." f .-~;'~:,:<!"; ~..,~~ '..;/": -~lr/' <Q ~~~ o E3 ~ d --.. .. '... ~ o I-) . .1 -"l .. ;- -:~; ,1'!_: .~. < ~ )~....." '.#, ....~I ;-r ~ ~_~.l " .1.:"\'< .,' ~ :.~-~ , t' :. ..' .. ~4~:K ~k\' '~':' ~~. /jj~2:3 . ~._-~ .~~ l.~: .~..~'~- l)I ". , '~'-I.: - , "" .;i,~;~~t~: ..'~r";~. _. .~..n'~'.$ ~~'::" '".. :. ""');~..;:'#'~":~. ---- ~. .;04"'04 ..-~..~ "''''''''J J~~'" o. " . . " " .. ""-04",,"- . . . "'"""""'.. .." .. . ". . '. .."'~.... . -- .;~... -. - ...J..... , . , . , ., _.....~~:~:~..r.: ~. '" j:.t " .-....."'" ~...., /)1 ~.~: '1 ~ .A. '\" :.-"!-{' -" .7.:~'{ . .....-... ;._... " ~:'~"'/~~W~;:%;;~' . '.~ - '. c.. ~" ~~ . ~ ~::;~-~;i:.' ;;0.- :a' , .~ 1:11 .~~ g1'""t ~- ~ o~ ~p ~~ 1:11 ~r rilp IIlril 81:11 ~p O~ ~~ Zz E1s 1:118 I-I~ ~z ~~ ~z 1:110 ~H r:ilEi S8 ~ o , ~. e . ~ III III . ~ ~i~~: E-i~lilQo ~I%ll:!lo~ . 'I'al , ):j1Ilrz1l:lci' j ~ci~~rrl ~ ~ !: .<:t ~ !: S - 'I; .. "l .... i o .... E; p ~ E; III .~ .~ o tll ~ E; ~ III ci ~ o ~ . III ~ ~ lULlS. ~ z r.l '" ~SS~~ ~1ilE-iO>< r::A..jJi~ ..s. I'al lol "'" . ..... Olo'oj~...:llo'oj j ~ .. .... ~~.! .. r_ ~ ':5....,~ ~"q;..5 . a - "t:: ~ ...e _ ~~o ~ ~ lll- i' ~.!:r:1~ ...,l::lr.il(.) "'l ~1Il I%l t' ~ cf r_: S . 0 .....~I'al ~~::s~ r.il ;::llol ~ ...:lel ~ ~~ III ~Q . . .r. . . . r.... . '. . i:!> t: I! ~'.3 ~ iI".i.t: oS P lI,t::o..3 Ii! I" gj ~ j:i ~ ~ ~-! I p. oS <:t;::""i '1iz:1.3~ :l!f =.fii~~-~~ii ~-=<;;)",.3!:...e.. ~ f'i:l ....as....... -oj ~.~~~.2~~Iiz:1.i. z o::t...S.........~- S dJ'2:~~J"l.. ~ ~ i .;j ~ if ~r-5 ~ z ~ ~ ~~r.il. S,Sj "l fij o 1Il~ -oj I%l .; r.il ~ ~ gS~I%l~~~-, ..:l g :z; p~ ~ !Xl ""l ~~""o-ojQ~aJ Orzl~E-i~~Or.il ~)/t~:i~tci~ . .O~IIlQ .~ ~~~E-iOro.l~O '}. '; :::i .~. : IC . , ;t .r .,g :l:! J ~ ~ ~. I !~ ~ ~ lJ j... ~ .;~.j ~ ~= t;~b]. ~'" .<J~...e",~ 'i""ii!"'::3""l'~ go ~~~......,,~- ." i> i: "l -,:,i ~ ,g :z;- f< "l .>t t; - ~ <:t ~b_~ ~-o ~ Q- Q ~ ro.l _ il:l~:Z;-~~ - -::;!e3 ~;~~~~~~~ b::~""b::~p..IIl~ ~p.. ~aJI%lPp.. ~~..;tci~op.;~li ;g!:i..;..jrrl~g~ ..:~ G CD ..,... ~a ~ ~ll' ~. ~ -' ~ ~.~ . .8 ...... 1i " ..~, j -;i ~ J ~ .~;"g;'".,_:.-.. .. · .'iI ~ . ~ ~ ill ~ .; ~ ~ ~. '~':e':;'.:. . . ~:;:i ~ g as E .; rii .; ~ ~ ~ S ...... .... 9 <) r:l ... . ~ ! aJ .s ~ ., :a .s . '.. CQ 8 .,~:-: ~.. '13 9 fo'; . '. ~ ~ f ~ rii ':::l .5 ~ ~ .s g . ": ~ ~ p . ,;.:,,': '.. ~ ~ ,s ~ 19..",{ '.' 1S'" .s rJJ r:l oS g !R .' '. 0 c-> ~ ;:: ::" ~ . u 1"" ::0 'a1i '. S -;' t. in ~ ~ ~ ~ ::> g ! & 'o'~ .;r .~. ,..., ~ ~ - . ~ ri' . 8.: ~ ... ,.... I-' .... ~ I:Q ~ 0 I ~ t;.. .... JIo-lI rn. ~~~":~ . $ .s 1 j p :.d'-' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~::: [~~ ~.: .~~.~~ Z ::'. - 8 .s rJJ Q ;!:: 8 ;\ ~ a i Cl ... Cl 0." ... '; =_. .':. ~ ~ .:t:~ ~ ;:1 ~ ~ ~ :' ~ ~ ~ '; ~ 3 ~ ;! 0 ~;' .. ~ ~ fS :~~: , ~ . ~ 'a ~Cl ':. ~ ~.' ~::: 11 'S ; ; g = ~ "1' .~. E:l .-':..::: I =J::i...~ .: ~':'I' ~...g i3Ui ap:j Cl ~r:l~ 'a ~ ~. c';:. :. g J::i Cl 0... ., ':::l aJ cO Cl 0 Cl ~ :g .s ell -.4 ~ :?7-",...;. ~. J ~ 1; =...:.. . r:il ,..1;. ,8 '&1 Cl g ~ III ~ ~ t4l . ..!: ~ g '; E; ro.l 0 ;,",;"." . ........! 0 ~ ""'..1. ,:3' ~~aJ... Cl "'0'" r:l'" ~........ ....:.., ... 0 .... ... ..... """'.. '. .;. · - O.cl"'o ' . .- ~ . 0"0 : . .......... . 0 . ';' . O'! 0 8 Cl ... -.. ~ .cI! l:l 0 0 :f'~rJ~ l f ~)~ ~ ~ :an.~'. :: ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -=j ~:!.~ t:;:, .', r:il. ~:.:. ,~<:~ ..~'.': 'i~='-'C;~ ._'~,:.;1 ~. ,...-S~a,QssClS"C~ 'S<3e: '_'Ir::ll:Z;~'';'''~ .-..~.~':...,:~. t~~i~6 "~"":;:.~j ',_;, ~a'S~-S"'~:ZfeJ""~l:Ij-~':::''';:-.,,~ ~.'~,\:.'..8 '.."'. .... -'<j "j:a... 'r' - ..... .... Cl Q 0 tl "" .. _ ~ .' 1:11' 1:fJ'" ... cO.Cl """::':. b ~ lzi' S ~..:l f-c.:3 ...:... "'S'~:~';'; . ........ .~...i l><t "~~'- . ':. .~o_ :z;;a;. ~:: ,:.oj ro.lJ;;l'-~~elaJo:So:s :S \~':: :..p'_...~.~.~ ;~:i~l.;:g: ~. i.,. !.i!:= :n~~9~~Ut Jt~~t~>:~:~ ;~f;,f; It: ~::.(:.,. i ~ ~ i ~i ~ :~;~'~,,~'~:"2~~.:.:~r~-+<' ~. ..~.i.:..>i. ~:~ ~. ~ ~ ::;~~\'!i: ~ ~ d Ii! ~ ~ h ~ ~I~,,],fi.'taf,. . ~ . t;: . ;.-. S:z; .' . . ~ "I ... ::;J S ,~;. ';t,:.>.....~ ~ "i ~ , _ :~, ;.,.. . o~ r.il .:. ......... :;.. -I- " " .~~~. f~~; ..,;,: ~ . M "IIII:t ,. ... /',". '':' -~ ~ L-'~;-."...,.,~.., r' _ .~...' ~. '. >1. ,. .... "" : . .:~ ~ .... '. ~ . ." _' ~~ '111" :... . . .;..~~....~.......;.;..::.;..~-.'!..........~.....,.....'/:"'''''~''.'''.~~''~'';'''''':'':'''"''' .:.!, '. -,. - . -" . '~-".' ,...j. ~.{.~.3~;,-:.'.._",", ....: -', " ~.~.. ;. ~::'&~~i~.~~,~',;~~, .,;, . -':i'. ~if~: <iI~ ';-~";".;~:~::.:~""i.::, ";'I:,'~.;_-~~i:a::a.;:~jqJ.:::iJ.f,A.:.", 0.-'\ h. - - " ~ ....~.~ ..1 > '~~"*;1.d ..' ~ -..;!-:.~ ~t.':: ,;r. . -'.~'"",~,,:,;. a..:.:. " :...;~~~~.a' .... :S~~;l:~'.;..._ ;...: . .. .. ~ .'.,,'~ ,. ;~i': ';. ~;..:. ... -. I ! .3 j ~:.s rii3aJ ':::l~';;' .s......s ~ '. Cl 'a ; ~~::> ~ JI ~';.8.~ ~ j ........38 ... . ell ... =...SJ .... ~ p.. o~ OCQ 0 'C":... ='; 8'S ~-:i s e 0 ~f~ Cl..:...l:ia~~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ Cl ~ .~ <>....Cl... ~~~s:..i i>ClJ;oO~ ....Cl.a ui~~c8 ~t>:Z;-3 ~B S ~~~faJ-f.s~ as~8 &'J~E-iS;~~~!t:~r:f r.il:!-ojaJ"o0 OCD..:l i~iin~!if! UiU~j~~~r 422 MOUNDS ON GIDEON'S FARM,' MINNESOTA. Passing over many small collcctions, 'We come to tho great shell-lump at tho Illoutlt of Bullfrog Creel" 10 milcs southeast of TUlllpll. Thill mOllnd is 30 feet high nnd ~oo feot in length by the sallle in hr(,:1ll1l1. Next in order is the shell-henp at In<liunllill. This m0\1lu1, ,,"ith the shell banks conncctel1, is 700 or 800 fect in lcngtlt and frOIll :!O to 311 fl'Ot high. Tho t.hreo hig-hcst pinnacles riso abovo tho trccs and may be 6Cl'Il four or 1h-o miles at, Sl'a. The last of the great shcll-h('aps of Tampn. Day is tho mound at Sha \l":) Point, mouth of Manateo Uin~r, which hus bcen described at lengt h in this report. The ground-plan, Plate IV, git'es all the dimellsious of the crest. Of courso tho basl.l is I1Juclt greater. MOUNDS ON GIDEO:i'S FArm, liE.\1l EXCEI,SIOIl, JlENNJo:rIN covxrr, lllXX. Dy FRANK 11. NUTfF:n, of Jrt:3t RnrbII "Y, Jl[a33. , , The accompanying' plan sho,,"s ono of the groups of Indian lIIolllu1!'l on the shor('s of Lako l\Iinuetouka, in Excelsior Township, lleuncpin County, l\Iinuesota. . Excelsior is iu the samo count.y as Minncapolis, and is, b.y road, cig-ht- een miles west of tllll.t cit.y. It lies in' tho edge of tho II big woods," lL hl'lt of hard-wood timber oxtclll1ing nearly across tho State. '1'110 countr~' is very rolling, though tho lIilIs aro not genernlly of lIluch lIe i A"1It, and, except where cleared bj' the f..trlners, or in the sloughs around the nunierouslakes, aro co_ered by a hea,y growth of hard wood, mostly of the following varieties: white, burr, red and black oak, rock and rarely white maple, wbite and slippery elm, basswood, and irOll\l'Ood, or hop hornbeam, Except on tlIe..sbores of the .lakes, rocks ami stunes, en~n 'fof small size, are ,cry scarce. This lake was in former years the bunting-ground bot.h of t.hoDakotn, and Obippewa Indians, ami as they wcre deadly enemies, bas tloubtIl'ss been the scene of many battles, Tho last one was fought about twcnty ye.ars ago at Shakopee, on the l\Iinnesota Ri_er, about eight miles soutll of this point, iu wlIich severalli"es were lost. 'fbe group of mOllnds shown on tho pIau is locatcd about one and a ha.lf miles (by road about n. mile farther) northwest of Excelsior Village', at the bead of a branch of the lake, known as Gideon's llnj'. III the map the location is marked by n. cross. .As shown on the plan, there can now be distinguished si:ttY-lliuemouuds (ono was lo,"oled to alIol'll a site for the house), nnd two lincs of embankmont, ono running ncarly north, the other about wcst. Tho largest, together with the embank- ments, are found mostly in tho grove und the orclIards o_edookillg tIll' lake, and on the beigbt of grollnd, us shown by the lIgnres on tlIe plan, giving approximate beiglIts abovo tbe present 10_01 of tbe wuter. The trees of tbe gro\'e arollne forest h-ees, left wben the land wus ~, 1 ~'"..:~~~ '\:. b';',:.~....~ tl',":', .~ 1.'1~~~\\~ ....'\1) "1) .."'I). . ,.... ". 't.:tt<3 .> ..i;;' p .I..Y II.~: C'1 $...~, .. ~o).' .... ;'~..' ,.~",...",\ ;'~';~";..~--~~ fc{:",,,. '~',-'\I..i]'~', ~" i_I:: - ". ' '~t. r. .' .;, k ,. .'.' ~!.~ V~ ~-'i' ; (,;;. : :.:: \', ';':, l~..: :.: ,~ .. ~.; ..... . I' j' .~\~l':""'~;. ..........~>. '.. - ~ .'~., ., .~'O;' ~~ ; O.l!\~"'. ,.~t:'i~':,r; 1~~O""(.9 ' -' .,.. ..,r.J- ',_ . ');~~",,;~.~....~~f; ~ ..... .~~'.;.~.~ t tJ,.,->- ..'\::~~ 1:",_ "'~';'b~.a aut .~~ '! ,~... .~..JO'O. t: ~:;).'? ;I::.~,:o~~~ .'.- ,; " ,~" 0 ~..{'O J,'.?~".:'~1~"o \~ .,~~. :j......~. ?-.'O.r:' ~'9:.3 ......~:i.. 'aJ..;.o '.~,,~ "~o,,__..._ ~.~ ~'.?..11')" ~~:.,; _~.~~.~ ~".::"..'r;~;.o" -~~~. 2 -', .~_\~, r~.o~~.: .i~" 1 ') .~. .. t. '.!. ~ ~.1I ~..~..~ .,~~-:-~ t? J", ;.~.~.}. G .0" lit :h ".:...". . ....:'\~ t'J~ ~~f~~~1{t~ ".~".~,..o ( f -'-}, ~'f',,':;,.~_n':!~7.. . '~ - , i ~-- . 423 ..~ .. .~ ~IVII'~'" . II"II/II~Q"'" :tq ll~~ .<7:~,. ."IIII~~"~~~. ~it~ Q~~ 'Q~Q O.<J ~4j:,;o: ~ .~... ~~ ~ ~ ~.!.l..~ I) n..,? ~:i:, ~. ().'~,). ''1- e ~. <):t.'o.o U,/ . .~'\ · ~'", '~'~'..l.. . .... ",. aOQ.. at" -~ ,..... .... .;'- ~ ." "--..0. 1"'" . ~ '(.- ~...,'.lt.,.':l..l:~ &.- O~ ~~i~;,~~..'{I.~:.... ~ . ~'Q<"~'~' ;t-.:j~ ..." . '\l,) ~ 0 ~"" u. ~ \i" 13 ,\:1t.~, ~Jb'!l~v''''l .' '... r.. .. tIl~ r::~:p~' .;l( Ii, ::..,:' 'U. no ~ "" ~ Prj._ ~~ C\J..... ... 'JU,~,i!-i'll'.~.""i'\.'~ T"<::Q) ~ -af'~~'I"" ~~~~'~':tt::/ j~: ~~'-~I · ... . ~. ~ V 1'111' \,~~",~~,,";il":~~"'~4.';:lh~ ~ ~, ~~ lC'~ <"} ~ ~ e. ~ " 0 .' I.III!II . :"~f.' i. :""~\~:'~l~' q. --.@ ~"'~C).. ~ i.,., II' Y'I;",~"I::..'...,' ':,'/ .~+ ( ~~ '.' ~ ~ A ~ id='f. I ~. ..;fl-~,'+' ~L-I" ~ ....", ~ <) Q:~' V... ,...~~... ... ~ ,'i[:Mf" .' ~.'~. ;,j'f( ;f ....~I1 ~ ~ '" 1Jj'~' ..... f V U' V V It'l: ~.l.. (. ..." ~~,...~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~'l ()" ,'" 1) ""1..'1,,';;" .if,...''''':....'';.. if,' "'0- ~~. I> ...'l~ '.:J.. r.-."; "4k! I~JIII:.\;,~~!i}jJ: ea. ~~ -n' CJ.J .. ~.~.'!""...:I\,~ ~ ~_~ ~ ~ !J ~ "':'<' '!I dtJwl' .;}_.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" '-1;) v..... . ID~~ . ........1...., C) ci\!!~"J..!<l(;~ (:r~". '~-::... t:"tO'~ _. ~ II ~ ,~:;il.Jtli.;~:jli~' "<' t) .:.:':JliP'.~ 0() AVo ^' . - ~ ., . s.r'l' f ~ '!"l .~') ~~ .'0' "'() ~ - Or 0 ~ ~ p,f~w~t., I'} .~,.." ~~ ~"'" ~ ~ v,~ .s-. <S ~ I'"'' .1, .;'\\1" ,3~ \... ..~;.? .<\0 ~. G''Q.~~ -~. ,;?:H"J::}I!I)I.~r~ :".~,' Jb.'~~~.'5'~ '-..: !) '9'~1) ti.. . q'/l/')"L".I","'!I'\ l.(!jf ~.., ~.~ .~~. 13 ~Q 0 <r ON~ \) " '~':' 1~.,ih'~'II.i'\'1\ .~\~l._~~~~ _.~ s {).~ 1>> l!.";1~li,.,.li,.;~r(I.I!';;~;'1 ~O.,~~..~ \')......~ 0 1\1-110 () "'~<3 <ft .:I;'.:,.'''1;<."';1.1:''';:J;,,,:11 ~~.. ~ '..L& Q W Il~l.. ,A!I'~.!'h".. '~.~~~ ~~'I.."ft c;'O:' .'! J./.b-... I '~...%;il.li:;f:":;.!~II'.,;/,.\I:I'~:"'?'" ,~.... ~~lf?':II ~.... ~-OII> . "1 0 ,I.. o' .'. '" . .... ~ 6 ~ . ..~~~ ~r...;' ,~,.~ ~ 6 0 f J1n i II H;.. ../. '... 0 I': '~~.:;" ,;,~,:''3~;'~;"l).; 2 .. ~"" ".~~~ ~~ .... J 1 ':."'l"':;" vI>-. .,1 .,~ 'a"~.~O"'.a'(\~$~"O~ .v~?~~~~.!.; ~V."ViO~ c. I~ f q \\1;; l~ H/'I,i ~ lit" OCt.~.:. I l~~~~:~~,;;'",,;:,~;'~'. \1'~ '~"fl.Q~ "'t).. ~ ..~ , \"1":": '.i- "'1 V.J.~. ~. fA ... ,~.-.~~.. ,~;.~. '2" 1'.......,:,~.;.~1.:~~-: -..:.. f lilD Ii ;Jp11 it /'! ',lli I! H~; :~, i " ... ., .:):?:\'~~ tl~;...;,.:;.~~.\i~ . . .~~.~Y; ~ ~.",.~.~ " 0.1/ Pl"l'!!;q I ( .\ l.l~U::';H .:~ '. $... . :')~...,'" · t'~I;t~~~,~~l~ ; ~ .:tllt!OH:I,WnlHi:lilHiH~ !ilnn:!~!:.\.: :~s:5f~~i~/~~i ~P.. ;..~...JT ~. <~.Jl) ~~t i.lI.' ''''i.II'' "llj:j,:,,~,'Il,t,.... ~."...~ O..t -".:.., . !~~~O'?~'!~...()li~ \!l' I :il:P~WI'J~"!! qrl,i;!;l']I!I"{.'v.s,ow .)0 Q.:'~ ol...... .....01 'l:'~.. :.. ':'.~ ,(,$~ ! 1'1' -I ' ~'1 ; . 'I' 1'" 1\0 ,,1. ~; . , . q '.i. 0 J~.....;:).~ "'IvVO"'''iri';' ~ ll"iilil"III'''~'' 1; 'c';!;'" !.!~ lot-' ~., ....' ..) .~-~..,..... ,,,()-.'t"~\."..,_w'''O.. .if :"J1I:' .~("'~r.I'lfi"':': il:"'; ~... ~~ ~,~."l.,.;~?...~t~~~""~~<;)~-.:>.~'ir ~\illllqi!!".)ii 'If::ll:1,;Pljl.,'l. ." $ ..;: II .~~~..)J.'''''''-r~''3',,'~n~f.)III.{,t, i: I J\'"f$1!"" !'I"l :..: ...~_J:I e f) Ii . :\~ ~~ r,~t3,l:,r:4~J..\;,~lI:~~~':~~ IL ~t I: Ii!, llil 'I'~ illl 'I' 11:11 I ;m~ ,.,.. ~ ~ S) ~ 'it l ....I:l..< 0 q,'~~\\JJ, o~ -", .......'. li'lll' 'If" .; " "H'I! e' ~'6...: 'A' 0 w: ~"~.>..~'J~~A~;j.-:....;~..:. ~~:,~~Ili l~ \li p;rpl! \ d,;;;, I:J ~ ')-I:"\' ~ ... '- ,~~.()..~. " . .. ,.~(~ ~ iIII' ,- y "" ....,..O""...tlI Q...~v ~ j - I ~ I 1.' ,:. '. . \ .. \ I . . . . '- . ~ ~_ ~ -... Pi ~~~~~~:~~:i'l'" ~~~l ;,~~.~ ~ ~~ ~i III Ii d H i:~!!~! (11! ; /11 jt?~~ ~o~~ I ~"tli .:."()\.~ Q. ~ ~r~.:-~G~":\~~~~~'~ ~ ~~<):.:~t'j! i 'I' ~:1: Ii Hi llll! k 1: I ., 0 '0 ~~ ~ .)q,'~'G~," ~ i" .' ,~.. ~I' ~ ....... :... ~, v.. . I " i , ; . . . 1111' I' ; :0 ir't. "", "" ~ ~..';o:~~~._~ IO'O~~"~ m~"'a..~!~~ l il i I!!\ ;;;~j!, . i t l! q 1'" 0..::)\3 ~'.""~::' .'~'''''' '.;; .-a:.~a~..9,f)'~'''''Oo$i'' "~~~~'--!'l'.;;!'~ll: I. :ill'" .....~..~~ ..~ 1l..Q ~ . ~'\.~....._~"...~j~)~'r"<)'~~'o.- .~();;...~.~1,'d:~!n1;1~lili!i !~'l~ ~.' . .,"'--.....\) ll) o 0, . ......',).. ~.')' <) , ~ 0 ~,..~ __" 1 11....' \ . ; II' 'II '''' .,. Vi.., . I ...... Qo ~ 'j ~.~ ~~~.,:;)~~ ~3~,~. r~,~ ...." "...-60 .1 ~l Pn;! ,'l i; ,!;~ o. a. 6) t ~ -." ~-b'~'! ~ r1::,.~'J_,4..l)".: ~..~W~.!~;~~ ~:-<i'\"~~.!; i q!i: II i i:t !..;~~~~~;I' ~. ~.~ ~..~. !T,l ~ ~"j,... 0 0- ~ - ~~1':ro~~'\"<I" .....; ~~j U L: !1., -:"1; ~ _.<\:. -b' .~, (j ~;;, '-<:1~...,... ." :;:. ~'o -;;. ......~".'1 ~G',?~}D .~ _. "!~"".L.&~\I).~ -'0'" () ., ..- .....ct:. .:......-- ~""fJr.o .~, ~ ...\o~-:-- ~'U ....0 ~ '.~ -;? .&.C~. ~:''''b.'S .'~.'.", ...:~ ~,~.'.~~-~~ ~ "~... "h..~<"~:.~ ~... ,0 ~ b <t-'~, .. 's'.3~ (). .. lot ~ . ~,;,- <)lt3 ~ ~ -. 'qv...."..._..O'l.tl. ,. """0 ,,!P~'''1b,It,.,o.,... ~..{'/ A A 1~ ~...""..- '3 ".C' ,... 4 . - ~~ :J 'i)\I.... ~ .... . v .'7-!S'~" -e.:'3Q)j'~" !J I)'" \} ," ~. ~ (.j" t'::' ~ .. ,. \ 'JfRi:&~,4_'(p ~"",~'f.o~ t'~ ....~6 '<i!O~~~~'1)<) ~~\..~~.~,~:G53-0 '~~::.-.V'o!Il~" '~~'''''J ....... .lt~ >a,;'3~ . "'!)~ .' ~ .(1... ...~. ,,' " \j. -':~~I/)"'._". ~~}~..~ :"'IJ:('''~ .000....Q.<3~.~,va~i~~~""('l ~ 13",\1 !..-:'.(tD-",^~I""~6.3 ~\~<~<.s..~"," No'./) .;'. i{) b,.- ~ 'i) li~'A$ .~...~~ ~ -.,.~ It~""'~"'" ..~.l'-o" ~~:9<J"'i::l,.<)..o 0:: ..'AlS.... <. -I),Q t)!' , /f.~.0!. ':> "'., ~ ;.." '.;, C eo--" .:) ~~ f)~e....:? "ov'O.-1: .~ ~ ~, ..;~ .'~)J:o'" ~~~-~~~ -i''P,~. {j:~.c.'.I!)'" ," ..~..~o~..~..'i~.~.7 ,-:.,~ . '(.~.~-..' ,~~ ....... -..,.'."" .:)"A". 0 ., . ~'r', 3..~~"...ilt~-.... .. t;; 13- -tI o~.. {) -~-~ UI ~ ........~ "at .~.... , .~'..~~~~ib!~:,;~"."'d1'. C)!J ~ ...~.6....,.... .~ ~1 tl ~'~~~..-_~ Q ).2il~ 't..v.~ ~/~:~.: ..,,:~ ,,~'::'~.!. 'ri~ 6t~ ,.,) ~'Q:' ~. ~~"4:~4 ;0, ~i..~.,.'.:.\!I'~6~ ~?...~' \; ~.,~~., ;: ~"'J~. t.~,,' 0'; ~ 110.... ~ ...~.. ~ ~ ~~ ';) Ui-'l1l)~ i;'''~ ').. tt b~'.' ......"i ~ v'i):- . .'. .....a.."'t}J<. 'L :t,.- It) ;) b r. ~ ... ll.. ~"',oI.\ ,'<?ll.' ..;o.:~.tl(\:-" ~() -"',A ...... ft,J!:), ",,"3 r....v....'~ :.".' .4~".j"':.~':':>. t ....k'\.r:l .........-;,,-~.. .1_ _e.~':!!~..e,.~~I-; ..:.... ~b. ~~. ,~~.; . ~..I.p;.oJ ~ I. .... ..,,("....~ ...... ...., ~ ...t) ,'- ~':' .. 0 ..... n .~" .:c a..~9'.,~"" ~~~~ ,~.....t:J r-: -:-r~ ~,'1. ~ ,vOI" ~..~ ~.J~~o~ ~.;....<.."'.;,........: 3& 'l).~.o-j.- \3';;.... ~.~-LA-l.('J.......,..~.. . ..~.,. ?-i'!'}"lI O#....<:"~.~o: ~.,..ew '3-'(j .l" ..~.. . ....0;.. .' 'O~_ ~l:lc?~~..~....~~.'Y'..,'()"~.e.~..- .)'.~~ '{~.",>>~c,.;'l." ~ ~~l),<:1.0.~...~.). ~-'.O,Ot"'..'Q.~~~?'I....~..~ ~..&~~ 'C'!l:._~_..~...:. ~ ~ tz: ~ ~ Pi '0 · 8 E .l ~ ~~ I g ~ ~ p:j ~ e c.: .;:. ,~ GO ~ 'Cj C .~ S- \::. foll ~ ~ ~ .~ :~ '-, '. ','.1It"11; '~ . t . '~;, '1 :H~.,~t "Irt~ ;1t:~,.. . : :t~ ~ .~t..;. .' ;,d~ '-I.. .. ~ . .'.. ':'i" ." : ~1f 424 ANTnnOI'OLOOY. clenred, t\ient.y-fiio ~'(lars ng-o, nnd nrc of Yer~'lnrgo sh,;c. I lun-c shown 011 tho plall Rel'entl wlloso position on tllo 1ll01l1ll1s would indicate that tho work was finishell beforo they took root IIpOIl t111'1Il. These trl'CS are ellll and bass-wood, allll fl'oll1 1 ~ to 2 fcet ill uiaruch'r. Tho wOOll land, l'XI'l'P(, an oCl'asional I'ullilll:t fo,r fil'e-woOll, bas IIot beell tOllchCll sinco the cOllnlrJ" was settled, mill 110 dillhcnco can ho distinguished bctwecll tile growth upon tho mOllllds mill tllat cI8cwll('l'l'. The II gruss-meadow," though now drJ' nnd used for pastumgc, Imll, when the farlll was seWell, illlpassable, but by opening it lIIore fn'l'IJi 10 the light ntlll air, allll 011 account of tho suusidellco of tho lalit" it ha~ now uccome dry laud. There sel'ms to ue no Iloubt. that at, a cOlllpara- t.i.elyrecent date this Imd nnd the other sloughs :ll'oUlltl llle lakl' WI'1'!l suumergell :1I1I1'01'llIl,'d porI ion!l of tho mnill uOll,y of ',nlrr. This 1;lI't may accollnt in sOllie (lcg-ree for tllo peculiar arrangelllent of t1H' 1II01l11l1s. The rapidity with which lhe "lIallol\ portions of proted('d 11Il.r!l atHl small uodies of wa'ter in this sectioll becolllo law I is n'l'\" wO/IIII'I'J'111. Tile pioneer plant i8 IlIe willI I'icl', growing in 1l11llO~t, i~lIpl'nl'lmhlll masses, in fl'OUl 1 to 3 fl'l't of watN" 01 bel' aqllntic.: planb~ and mos:-;('~ follow, whieh afrOI'd n. foolllol.l fur se.lgo III III willI grasll, wllile IIHI gruuunl fllll of the \'\"atl'r, owing to continued "inICl1i without 11I':I\'.Y snows, nssists in hastening tllo proccss. I lII,rsclf thiN season WI'nt, 1!J'y- shod acruss a IIII'fi(low whcro 8e'-en or eight. ~-enrs ago n boat. was necl'~- sary. A short distance to tIle norlh of these moullus, but b(,~-OJI(I the limits of tlie map, are sloughs, which exteml to the" Upper IJake," "0 the two sheets of water, whidt, lIIeasured on an cast allll west Jinr, nro now about n. mile apart, llrobauly wero onco separnteu by a much nar- rower neck of high land. ' Theso mOlllllls, excepting- the sca'ttering ones south, of tho (( AT:!!:!:- mcadow," nre located abont on tho height (,f latul and Oil tho !1m\'\" or the slope running down to the low land inclosed within theil'l'irl'Il'. Those within the woodland nro not geJlernlJ~' of much height., as ,,,ill be seen by tile figures on tho plan, and as they nro nnprotected by turf or grass, e.ery se\'ero rain assists in waslling them UOWJl, nndmust finally obliterato them, as the last t\'\"enty-fi\'o years has plainl~' shown. The necessary cuItivntion of tho orchards is also destro,Ying these interesting remains of some former race, nlthough tho owner of tho farm takes much pride in them, and docs a11110 can to preBen'e them. . The embankment which runs pm:a11el with tho lako short' once ex- tended nearly ncross the orchard 80l1ti1 of the house, but no\'\" all trace of it is lost. It is, in section, a rill~l\, sloping equally on eil her side, mHI wllere best preser.ed is nbol1t 25 feet wi do nnd 2~ feet high. A littlo nioulHl ill the north orcbard bas ueon opened. At the d{'Jlth of 5i feet, somewhat below tho original surfaco of tho ground, \'\"l'I'O found between thirty and thirt.y-ih'o skulls, arr:mged ill a circlo of ii'olll , 5 to 6 feet in uiameter, and embedded ill aud co,cred"ith sand, c,-i- dently brought from tho lake shore, nl:! the soil is a claj' loam. Theso 110 sl\l1J)s rapiflly Cl to t!wi1'1 l':-:f in~, p wa~ 1'lo\'I'JI fronl n 10\\ ('I' .iaw, wli sl'lIl1. a bo hol'(' , Tu L'l'tl'r)1. G lo('akcl, :\1111 ~111 wlliclt :lIljoillS it. lIlalioll, :\1111 for: Till' gTOl1p or }llnll :11'(', as their mill' i II a strai~h I ~it lJ:I IPd \\ IlI'n' 11 has' <lilllini..;III'tl It of a Illill' 1;ll'ther tIll' 11:1 \TO\\' ('n'pk 1101 h4'l'n l'xpllll'('( J :1111 infill'llIl'd an' ah,,"1 li.rty I' t.wo pI" I It 1'1'(' at~l'l' bill SOIlIl' Ilisl:tnl' ~\t, till' \H'st ('IJ tile ~)'Il.llJl showl! name<l froJll the J ~\t Fl'l'gl1soll's tIll' 1':lst sho\'{' of of Ihl' I'l"olllinl'Jlt 'allll 1"':1111:11111:;; lal\l' slrOl'(' Illay ht onl' 01" tllore J]' Otlter I'IIlJlloyml'] en'r, has l're'-ell1 froJll lilll1in~ 0] lIit)" to ,-isit them tain fllrther infor ill )"('g:\I'Il to tlJell: 'I'h.. Ji,lIl1win~ ill tion, w hieh is of r: mis(...II:lIlL'OI1S c1w I Itan' "hlaill('tl tl thl' Idlllhll'ss of a who i:-: also n ci ~iJl('er. "T h e moulltls whicll former leI tel' I 10 ubout t\'\"eh-c mile from IDY note-boo I ha,'c shmyn 1 illllicatc that The::;e trecs ,.wood, has not . rl~rcnce ean ho lhatebl:whl'w. ast 11r.t).:'I', was, 1I11/1'I~ Ih',.I,\; III hll 1011.", it IW:i al a l:olllpal'a- I tlte 'lal.l' W,'l'lI tl.r_iS I;wt 1'1' t 011 lit 1.-;. dell hays allll t'ry wOlldl'rfll1. , illl penet ra hlo Its ami IIIl1SSt ':oj .as::;, while tlw without 11l':l"Y Olson WCIlt. dl'Y- ! 10i1 twas IICCCS. h11t bt'yuIIII tho pper ].akc," 1;1l I wcst Iillt', :11'0 II,}" a JIIuch nOll'- IIf I hc " gr.ls,.;- IIn thl\ hl'ow of ,ill ."in').., i~hl, \rilll..: .-Il'd Ity IlIrflll' III lIIust lillally shuwlI. ',.;ll'IIying' tlH'SO liei' of thc fa1'lII 'C t hcm. shore once ex- t llowall t rat'O 'ill1l'r :;ille, ,11111 gh. At the tkpth ground, werll ,1 circle tlf frolH with slllul, I:\'i. )' loam. Thello MOUNDS ON GIDEON'S FA.RM, MINNESOTA.. 425 .< ~ ( 1 , al.ull:; l'npillly cI'l1111bled on exposure to tho nil', so thoy wero returned to t111'ir rcsl ing' placc, Hnd agaiu covcrcd with earth. Ono of these slmlls was 1,10\"(')1 frolll the top of tho hcad to tlle jaw, as thonglJ by ao ax, and a lowcr jaw, which, thongh ill two portions, scerncd to belong to the skull, also horo witncss to tbo force of tbe blow. To Pder n. Gillcon, eSfJ., owncr of the farm \\'llcro tho mounds aro loca It'd, :11111 superintcndent of the State Experimental Fritit ~'urru, whidl lltl.iojns it, lIIany thanl.s 011'0 tlne 1'01' his ldllllness in giving infor. lIIal illll, :11111 for as:-;istunce rCIIIlcrctI ill lIIukillg tho sllrvey. '1'1 It \ grollp 01' 11101111118 tl1wwn ill tho IIpper IcI't-11l111l1 corller of tho )110111 an', as 1IIl'ir tillo t;hows, lit 1I1illnctollka Lalw Park, autI about one lIIih~ ill a straig'ht. line to thc llUl'theast of tho largcr group, '1' hey are t>itualt.tJ Whl'l'll t he strip of high lallll bCt\\'CCll the Hl'pCI' lUlll lower lakes llas'tlilllillislll'tl to the narrow limits shown in tho plall. AuoutlLl}uurter 01' a wile farlhel' 1I0rth it cntls at a large slough, throug-h which winds the lIarroW t'rcck which conllccts tho two lal.es. 'I'hese mound::; bave not III~cll l'xJllorcl1. I lllll illlill'lIlctl that ahout two miles southwest, of "Gidcon'::;" there arc allllllt fill,ty 01' Iifty 1I101llUls, thl'llwlIup close together, mill covering two ~'r I hree :1I:res ot' ground. 'rhoy aro not on the shores of the lake, uut. SOIllC Ilistance illland. .,\ t I he west ('11(1 of the "Upper Lake," nnd auout seven miles from tJle grollp :-;hOWll on tho plan, is ~IUll1I11 City, a small settlement 80 IIlUllt'll fl'OlIl tho number of the mounds which are fOllnd there. At Ft'rguson's Point, about two milcs north of Execlsior Village, on tile I'ast shore of I he lake, is anot hcr collectioll of 1II01ll11ls, and at JDany of tllt\ prolllilll'nt points 'allll IIt.atllalllls of the lal,,' ,.,1t0l't\ llIay he limllll I)IIP III' III 0 l't! 1110111111:1. 01111'1' "lIlpl",\"I11I'1I1 Itow- t'\',.", lias pn~\'t'lIl1'll 1110 1'1'0111 liJlllillg' opportu- nity 10 visit them or ob. tain furlht'r ill formation "in l't'gal'tl to them. '1'111' fi,lJowi ng in 1'01'10 a- lioll, which is of rather no JII isl'l'lla 1I1'ons t:haracter, I harp IIhtaillt'cllhl'Ough tllC l,;iIIlItWSS of a f1'icnd, who is :t1sn a civil en- ginel'I'. "'f h e I ntlian l1J 0 U n tl s w 11 i chi Il 1\ lIfoUI\Illl at Eacll l'rairio, MinD. fOrllH'r letter I located at Eden Prail'ie, are in Bloomington TownslJip, uhou! tweh"o milcs souUleast of Excelsior. I give a rough sketch taken froUl m:r llote-uook, which will give some idea. of the locality. \ t I t '). MOUNT 42G A.NTIInOrOLOOY. "Tl1ese monnds, t.hirteen in DtIlnUCr, nre of the usnal size, and are sit- untcd in wlmt is now an opcn field, on a lenl plateau, from whil'll tho laud slopcs rapidly awny on t.ho south to t.ho banks of the l\tiIlIH!Rotn. Ri..er, aDd on tho north illto a (10<'1', narrow mdlle, through ",hid. flows a. urook. I do Hot think theso moulllls ha...e eycr ueen examined . ,- II any war. ' This engincer waR alllo cllgagefl in tho Rur..ey amI suuflidsioll IIf tho rcsclTatioll assigllcd to the Si~setoll and Wahpcton triues of h1lli:m:-l, in Dakota Territory, n1H1 iu tho ""01'1\: fOllnd the 1II011l1l1s to he ,elT abundant and locatel1 so III I' I)f thelll in tho sUl'yey. Tho IJIlliaHs, though unable to explain their origin, h:l\'o n. great rcyereuco for them, allll ,~ill not allow them to UO disturbed if they can pre,eut it. Tile monnds wilicil I mention aro all au or ncar tho slllllmit. of the Dakota.s, and o,erlooldug tho valley cast of them. Tho flr:;t ono noted was on the castC'l'lI l'dge of tho hills, a11l1 was about :.m fl'et in dialllet~r alll13 feet high. H. h:1Il ueen occnpiefl uy foxes, IIIHI al; I he moutus of their UUlTO\Y8 human uones wero ablllll1ant. Ncar tlH' corner of sectionIG, township l~(i, r:l1Igc 52, was a largo moul\ll Jjll fcpt in diame- ter and 4. fl'et ill height, located exactly on the top of tho Dakota~, a1ll1 overlooldug the whole nl II ey. A pit was sunk in the ccnter of thiR, ond scattered through the soil were found bones, uut so thoroughly (lecolll- posed as to ue but little lIIore than dcposits of lilllc. At the Ill'l't h (If 4 feet, the original surf:lI'c of the ~ro\llHI, was struck what S('l'III('(l to he a layer of lime cement, :mll so h:ml that a couple of hours' lahot. with spades only penctrated to the d('pth of 3 or 4. inches. At this point time faHeu, and the workmcn were obliged to nbauuou t.heir invcstign.- tions. About one nml oJl(~-half miles northwcllt of this mound was another, 75 feet in diameter and 10 feet l1ig'll, but tl1ere was no opportunity to examine it. 1\ r f('pt ill (liametcr, wit lISI'Il'S8 f"1" defense, (Jist:l1It, allll 4lJ or 5 timber nhollt. a rWe. m:m 810111 with a nH fate of its bllilders. A)"III\I1t1 ),ala) Mi SOllll't inles 1"01lllf1. ] summer, but was U1 :\11 e~~"shaped qua 3.} iu diallleter, all< It hall a (leep groo\" i tll 1];\ udle. I also cxamincd \-rhich was found '" ('ily of :\lillnrapoli- dose to~ether, wl1i long tillle. Theap I'on ill the prime 0 from enr to car, 0'" ~r.-. .'41._ ,",,'v",, ~,l",,,. ,.Io.ru. .\:,.,.,.. ",".1"", ,,,"~If, ~"'" In'u""...'~\~~~ _ ",1/", ,,'lI'h ",\I"" \\\1'.,.. ""Hili' .\I~/h' ,"\"Ith ,,,,,,,,. ~~~~~....,... - ,II". "U/" ,.lI'"' \\'''''' ,,'HI'" \,,,,,,,,~\l6t/~\III' ,""ll' '"''~~''''H''' . ~ "IG. -:=,.~~, _~ _- '"\1",,, "'"11 ...,1111, "uti, \\"~:''''\~''''A- t.v,." ,,,I.', :~~~~"""", ." . ~ \1", \\11'" .1\\11 "1111.. '\\\tI',,,,:J'~~ ,"'l7J~ ,n"" "U'':;;;:-= _'II'.. ;.I =_ ","111 'I'"'' "UH \""" ~ t ,\ll/~\'''' '.'* ,\III/u. ~~~~"c. .\tI ""'I. \\\1"" ,\I"" "n"" ...'1....., ,~.. un ""... .\""._~::.."'II" ,..:it \\\\1",. \,\111t1 '\1111' "\\It.;"~::~~-:\1'h ,\\11'. """, 'l,:....~~~~ ",.,. ."""" '\11'"" \\\\1'1' "'\'1'" ,\l\l.,., l'l11' """, .'I"h::....~~.~~~..~ ~'\h'" ,\"" ,\tll/' \\HII' ",,,'..., \'\1'" \11"'" ,\11/". '\I,"I:"';'--:'~"-:' I \ X \ Earthwork llC:lr Sissotoll Rlld WllbpotoD Rcs., Dnk. Tcr.' In this vicinit,y tl1ey also fOllllll an enrthwork, which, in its shape ami goou preseryation, seeUlcl1 to be of rather moro recent origin, allll to be the work of white men rather than Indians i although the military olli. eel'S connectcu with the resen"ation couhl lIot, acconnt for it, a!l thl'ro had never been au Indian war in that Ticillit~-. It ma.;}" 11a \-0 been erected by SOlliC of the earl,}" pioneers or explorers. It ,vas about 75 . t"- N N ~ ~:r2-o>,,~~~ ~ .~ .s ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ U '"'~-:I':~~~ .::.:~ ~~,... c ':.J-= :: ... c.. ~ ~ c ~ d ;r. ~ ~ - .,g~o "Oc~"Ot:<U a ~ <'3 ~'.J:) "0 1t;~5e2 ~ c '" ;:: >. ~~...",c-.:: .c u <'3 C':l ..: ... '"' .5 ~ u u ~o~,-.~..... c",,,o_o U .;: .2 g .z:: :; ..c: E- '" ,-.~ 0 -;::...0..::: '" "'..: ~ c:: .;oj "3 ti ~ .. e- 1:lIl.~ U 0 0<'30"0...... >..c: t: .-:l 0 I:lIl o '" .- - :I: "0 ~.-:l]~~.a ..c: '" <'3 .2 .8~~s;>~ ",80.!: "0"0 ~....~ "3~~-~~ ou.....c:-_ U C .-:l.!:P II> ...o~u~-o g>.'O"Ogs .S E ... '0 u 8 "0 C '" C':l C ~ E rJ.:: '" g g ~'5 ~ ~ z..c:ao~o U...':l 3;=~o c ':) ~I .2 J; Q' ~ '- - ,... :::" ~ ::...........,.... > ~ - ,..... o:JC-'':,)-..= .....~-6..=..:..rt: ~.- c X "'0 ~;-EJ'::::~ ... 'I) .. ... - - Cj:2 ..c: -"::l c c.. E ~ ..:: c :: ;$ ;r. ..;.: .. .. C :" :;-. -= ~ .c '~ e.Jj t...c > ~ I:: -= ~ ..:: '- c c 5;$"-- .~ ~ 2 .'" .is ~ o ,- ;:j ,.... ~ ~ ~ ... - II) -::: a ~ 5 U ~lJ .2 t: ... z ... s: ~ ~ ... "i: <- ...- ;r. c.. ~ :or. -"'c:~ J; '- E ~~~B~ .w ::I': - J': C ;r. H ~ s:; ':J. ~ : z ~ C ~ ~ 'I) en ... >-, --2-", -0 u .... ,.) ~-= r:/:; ::: eJj ..: ;l: c ;;> ':) ~ c:. ;,n c..o ~_"O :: v E ..... "'0 C C ti< c . o C ell 0 >.0 C;-C ~ 0."0 ~ - .c o 'I) '" ..c: ... 'I) _ ] S 0 ;l: eo f- "---"'" >',"-~""__U ~'~r' -' '. ~.tl ,_. .' '--_1'11 ilrc..."..-WIIlllIl.....lI'!IMIli1!iiiillJllUllro.'t..~ . ::J :.:: <: ~3 ::J Z:I:: OE-t Q., ;::> tf.l Wtz:lO'\ uz\O zOO'\ 0""'-1 \0 N N .: t b ~ ~ J, ~ '0 -= bl) "0 c:l...!. 0 '" c:l 0 "0 "0 >. '" bl) I ~ >. II) C Ci ~ ~ ~.:::: ~ ~-o- ~]~:s~-=u g~t~i~l~-=~a~i~i~ ~goE;~ ~~,~~~~ - ::l <'3 -. -0 '" c:: 11)._ >< II) 0 ... .:::: <U ..... ~~ >. U "0 '" ,...., c _ 00 c.....o ~ .. <'3 U _..c: 0. '.!!l "0 0'<;; II) II)c '" r"'l II) :;: s .0 o..c: ::l ...... 0 0. C':l 0 ... ~ - U - .c co- O..c - ~ ..c ~ v - - 0 'j3 ..c 0 ...!...... .:: t: "::l ... <lJ ... ~c~&"'g<'38 ...::lS...b~~"Ool:llloo-s~"O OC~~<lJ....~ ~~rJ~~g ~ "0 .- 0":> .0 - C ..c 0 ~ .c 0 0 c ..c: .S I:lIl C fn 0 ~ <lJ __ - II) 0 .;: .-:l ~ ~ ~c:>:> ~ O_U<lJ~..c:_<'3_.~oo ~ Uu_~l:lIlc ..c_~lI)tIl- ... ~ ~ .... C':l 0 0. .- j:l., <tl - - ::l "'"O::l ..c ...c::: -- ] ~ ..9..9 1:lIl.,g II) -= ::I ~ ~ . g .S ~ g ~ 1;; :; Be': ~ ~ .~ -g .!:P ~ '5 V> ~ ~ ~ B -5 j "; "0.0 5 ~ s C "0 c::..c ~ ::l u'o ~ u'!:: ~ "0 f5 c.. 0 0 ~.-:l ~ H Sh ~ ~ ,g E ..::: "Oc ""...._o-..~oo c:lO"'Scs.!...-I:lIl....~o O~.c ~.....: ~:>..c .. 0 ..... ......] . <'3 "0 "" ..-> c:l "0 "0 s' II) <'3 "0 '-' '" <'3 0 II) "0 ~ ~ - "0 0 <'3~EII)SS ol:lllc>.<lJ~o<'3C':l~Co~f5l1)cc 0.-<lJ o~~c-o C<'3<tl_C>' ..c:=:>~c:l>' u <'3~u..c:_Uc:: ... <'3<'300C':l1:lll ~s-~ ~ C':l~c:lC'-'<'3U ... .... ~.. "0 c:l 's l:Q ... > - 0 11)'- 0...... ..... S 0 "0 c:l <tl ~ ~ - ... .J:) "0 ~ ... ~ '" II) "0 ~ 0 '" 0 <'3 "" "O..c: c ::l '" '" e ~ <'3 E <'3...l .~ C':l '" '" 0 <'3 ~"O -8 .;; ~ >. ~ <'3 ;.~ U ~c ~ ::: ~ Ci t .,g SU ] ~ B 0 ~ 51..c t: "" g ;2 =::7 ..c ~ .S go >. ~ c:l .- '" 0 u ~ 0 0 0 c >. 0 ~ ~ ..... <tl <'3';;..c U -;;;.!!l ~ <'3 <lJ f-o... - g E 0 f! ~ <'3. ~ .<;; .rJ -= "" = e ~ ~ 0 i: >. <tl '0 U >. bl) c:l .- "0 "" C ~ 0 .~ 0. S 0. ~ "0 .!!l '0"0 g.:.4 ::l '0 ~ .:::.g .-:l .:: ~ .::- II) 0 "2 b g 8 ..c 0 0 tl ~ ~ <Ii ..: ~ Z ~ 0 C':l ::: :E ~ a ~ g t) ... :l 0 a ~ _ ~ t:: c ..c ~ ~ c .J:J .S ... .E .0 ... 6 ~ e -g ~ 0 ~ ~ 00 ........8::1<'3>. .<'3_00bl)'-'00"O<lJ1;;","O o......c~ ~j:l.,II)~..c:"" c..c"'~og.....oc.!:...:l-=o..c:bl)c]o"O<'3U]~~ ~~~ a ... c::~ 0 ~ .:::: >'.:.: S ~ - .0 "" ~ .:; _ - ~ .S '60 III 's; e..c: E <lJ .;; " ZC':l ~ ~ .... I:lIl 0 - 1;; .c _oCe . <lJu"'O<lJ"'-c",c~1:lIl <lJo~"'>.1:lIl ~..9 ",- oc. ."'0 e i>:> < 0 g ~ 0. ~ ~ .<;; j:l., .... & 0 0 0'- c II) > :I: e:a ~.S II) 0 - .... .~ ~ E <:: ~ o Li c ~ ~ 0 1;l.... 0 U >..~ '" ~ Ci go ~ ~ Ii: 0 -d 0."0 0 E ~ -= ~ -= ~ 0 8 ~ ~ ~ <II ... "~~Jo~""l~~!..c:~ltu~J~~c:l~~~~CiB"'~b~ ~0<'3 ~~ e .0 - ~ .= 0 "0 ~ ... .- :l..... 0 ::l ~ 0 T ..c c b :i' .-:l 0 ..c: '" E ~ u 'C .~ ~ t-< ] .c c:l l:Q _.,g ~ ~ ~._ ~ e -0 .0 ~ eO.g ..c ] "0 ~.- c:: 0 ~ <tl g .: ~.g : ~ ~ .. "0 d . <'3 0 ::l ~ 0 o;;J 0 0 C .; C II) ..c: =. = C .-:l - 'c;j ... l":I coo ~.:: <'3 t;; 'it g .~ 0:2 ~.Q &.:E ~ '0 8 ~ : &. g u = :I: ~ .s -5l .s ~- ~ ~ ~ c..; ~ ~ . ~ ~ c:l.!!l U ~ ~ c:l'-' C ~ ~ >. ~ ~ e C c:l 05 ::l "O'~ t ~ c:l 0 ~ S "d 0. E-o I:lIlc ~ ; c. "; l:Q :-g_ B c ~ o"'~~"O>.~i<'3 0~&."'8~..c~uO~<'3t5<lJO _tIlUo::l ~8f!~ ~;Ii:;:;e~~ t~::l;J8g&ii~~~S~5 .8~!E~ 1;;~b~S 1'- . . ," February 25, 1993 Mr. Bradley J. Nielsen Planning Director City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 MAR .- V~V),~ Subject: Environmental Assessment Worksheet - Gideon's Woods Dear Mr. Nielsen: In accordance with the guidelines of the EAW I submit the following comments for consideration: First, I am somewhat confused as to what the proposal is at this time. It seems that the conceptual plan has changed, or the information in the news release and the information contained in the EAW do not coincide. The news release states that 17 units of housing will be built, most contained in duplexes and move the existing Gideon home. The EAW suggests the nine twin homes (18 units) will be developed an later within the EAW it states that the existing home will be moved. So, are we talking about nine units in addition to the existing home or how exactly are we arriving at the 18 units of housing? Or 17 units of housing? EAW Ouestion 11 I suggest that considerable time and investigation be made in the matter of the wildlife habitat in the area, This property has basically been untouched since prior to the 1960s. To say that the only wildlife are squirrel, rabbits and other small mammals makes it sound like a residential area in Bloomington. This particular property contains pheasants, ducks owls, hawks, pileated woodpeckers to name just a few of the bird habitat. As far as other small mammals, do you include deer, fox and wild turkey? It is my understanding that there is no cataloging of wildlife in Hennepin County to access rare or endangered species so I would like to know exactly how the City proposes to research this area to see if any of the hawks are of the red-shouldered variety which are on the rare/endangered species list. In addition the wetland area is prime breeding ground for not only water fowl but for Blandings Turtles which are also rare. I'm concerned as to the quality of water runoff into the wetland area and the effects it will have on the habitats there. I would also like some clarification regarding the acres that will be lost and those that remain. I presume the 1.4 acres remaining will be the northern most section of land that abuts the trail system. Your response that 1.6 acres will be lost is what I question. That amount of acreage alone will be lost just with the moving of the existing Gideon home. Since the news release and the EAW do not coincide as to the number of units how can we/you safely assume that the impervious surface coverage requirements are being met? Secondly, to say it is consistent with Shorewood's stormwater management plan is not making much of a statement since the "plan" for the area is not proposed to take effect until 1995 and is unfunded. 5 ',' . . EAW Question 18 As we have discussed numerous time during Council meetings and Planning Commission meetings, the current residents are having a hard time believing that the runoff from this project will not exceed the pre-development rate. Since the entire 4.7 acres of this property is wooded or grass covered and the only hard surface cover is the Gideon home, the runoff now is minimal to nonexistent. I find it hard to believe that after building nine twin home units that the runoff will be the same. To suggest that a detention pond will handle the runoff and that the existing homes adjacent to the property on the west will not experience any additional problems is not a sufficient solution, considering that we have had water problems in this area for a longer period to time than we have not. I feel more consideration be given to this problem. We also get into the drainage into existing ditches into the wetland area to the west and Tonka Bay to the north. Will the City guarantee that the ditches are maintained on a regular basis? My understanding is that this has not been practiced in the past. Who will ensure that the "association" of the proposed project maintains the detention pond? Former Councilman Bob Gagne proposed the question as to what legal rights the current homeowners have in the event there is water problems from this project. The answer was that there wa a one year period to take action. Because of the history of water problems I don't believe the City is looking out for the current residents. What if the first couple years are dry, then water problems occur? EAW Question 22 The information submitted is outdated. You cannot convince me that an additional 36.40 cars accessing Glen Road, which is a very narrow, dimly lit and not well maintained residential street, does not have the potential to create a congestion and safety problem, especially the blind access from the project onto Glen Road. As it now stands, cars currently illegally pass north bound County Road 19 vehicles, turning left onto Glen Road, on the right shoulder. This lane is used by joggers and bicyclists both north and south bound. The northwest corner of Glen Road and County Road 19 is a school bus stop for junior high and high school students. 500 feet south, in front of the apartment building is yet another bus stop for elementary students. The additional traffic trying to access County Road 19 is greatly effected during school hours because of school buses halting traffic in both directions when loading and unloading of passengers. There are also no safety precautions being taken for the children who will be waiting for their buses. Additionally, the detention pond directly abuts ,County Road 19 and due to it being oversized and the fact the it is unsecured in my opinion creates yet another safety concern for the children in the area. EAW Question 26 I believe the gesture made by Mr. Katter to move the existing Gideon home 200 feet 0 the southwest and make it more visible is commendable, however, I feel this action was taken to prejudice the decision of the City to grant permission for the project and avoid an EAW. To move the home and convert it to a multi-family home does nothing to preserve its history. The home will be removed from the National Historical Register and because of the renovation to the home and the destruction of the land, it will not be eligible to be put back on the Register. Peter Gideon was a very community minded citizen that opened his property to passersby to picnic and enjoy the beautiful surrounding of his home. I can safely assure you that motorists will not be motivated to stop and view nine twin hom~s and a home that will in all probability not even resemble its current form. I had informed you a few months ago that there were still apple trees on this property and asked if they have been included , .# , - in the tree inventory performed by Mr. Katter. You informed me that they had not been included because of their size, less than 9 inches in diameter. Because apple trees only get to a maximum size of 9 inches (when approximately 50 years old), and these trees are in the 6-7 inch range I asked that a member of the DNR Forestry Service determine their age. You stated that this could be done. I have yet to hear from you on this matter. If Mr. Katter's intention in retaining the Gideon home is to preserve the former historical nature of the property I would think he would also consider keeping apple trees that could be at least 30 years old. In closing I would like to express to you my sincere appreciation for the investigation of the information I gave you regarding the necessity of performing an EAW for the project and commend you for the efforts you put forth in completing it. Even though there are areas of the EAW I don't fully agree with I will safely assume that you will respond to each of these concerns by letter in the near future. . I hope you understand it's not that I am totally against a project for the Gideon area, but I do think that the density of this particular project, although within the zoning guidelines, is just too much. It (multi-family homes) is not conducive with the existing neighborhood (single family homes) and the price range of $150,000-$180,000 seems somewhat high for our area. I really feel that the City should take their eyes off the dollar amount that this project is going to generate for them, ignore the lawsuit threats made by Mr. Katter, and give as much, if not more. consideration to the current residents as you seem to be giving to Mr. Katter. With the push to preserve our heritage and save the environment, I think a more appropriate project could be found for this particular piece of land. Anyone can threaten to sue, the residents could have sued under the Environmental Protection Act, but we are hoping that the Council and Planning Commission Members will ensure that all environmental issues are addressed fully and that the current residents will not have to suffer any adverse effects from this development. Sincerely, e) rU~ Laura Turgeon 24670 Amlee Road Shorewood, MN 55331 cc: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Environmental Quality Board :,1AR " City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Rd Shorewood Mn. 55331 2/26/93 Dear City of Shorewood, . Regarding the proposed Gideon Wood's EA W, my comments and concerns are as follows: Peter Gideon's home is on the historical registry. Once the' building is moved off the foundation it will no longer be considered a historical site. I believe that each city needs history. What other historical sites do we have in Shorewood? We should be proud of the history given to us by Mr. Gideon. The city should develop this as a historical site. There is alot of interesting information that can be found on the life of Peter Gideon and the Wealthy Apple. The neighborhood has a watershed problem that isn~ proposed to be taken care of until 1995. rm amazed the city would consider a 18 unit development before the existing problems are corrected. Has there been a survey of the runoff rate from the proposed development? rm requesting a runoff survey to be done before, during and after the development is completed, proving that the runoff rate is not greater than present onto our land. What course will I have in the future if there is a problem? Has the city established who is responsible for the cleaning of the culverts and how often, (Shorewood or Tonka Bay) from the wetland leading north into Tonka Bay. The EA W states small mammals ( squirrels, rabbits) under wildlife habitat. This needs to be looked into more closely. There are fox, deer, wild turkeys, peliated woodpeckers to name a few that would lose their habitat. The property was zoned commercial in years past so it could be used as office space. I understand from neighbors that when this was zoned the city said it could be rezoned back to single family dwelling. The city now states it cannot be rezoned, thus giving the developer the twinbome zoning. The developer has stated he wants the development to fit in with the neighborhood. I feel the property should be rezoned for single family homes to fit in with the neighborhood if this property must be developed Twin homes concern me because alot of them become rental property, which in the future will bring down the value of our homes. Traffic problems on County Rd 19 needs to be re-evaluated. The traffic projection is six years old making it outdated. There have been many accidents or close calls at the intersection. Even without this proposed project I feel County Rd 19 needs turn lanes both ways onto Glen Rd. Vehicles are constantly illegally passing on the shoulder, where the bike path is. Another concern is where the driveway is placed in the project. Near tJle curve I fmd dangerous for the children in the neighborhood I hope you will consider all issues and concerns of myself and others in this neighborhood before finaJi7.lng this development . Thank you ~~~ d17/6 ~ KoL '\:f/~~cf rnn 6533. ~7t.j -3& 7;).. 6 ~ To Brad Nielsen City Manager - Shorewood '" From Dave Turgeon 24670 Amlee Rd. Shorewood, Mn. 55331 MAR - 3 1993 Subj Gideon's Woods Development Cc Shorewood City Concil Excelsior Sailor The Entire EAW Distribution List Dear Sir: The intent of this note is to both provide comments relevant to the Environental Assesment Worksheet recently produced by the City Manager and secondly provide . further comment/objections to the development as it now stands First I would like to comment that this Worksheet would not have been performed as required by law were it not for the diligence of my wife Laura. Mr. Nielsen was totally unaware of the requirement for this Worksheet until Laura contacted the Historical Society and through their offices pointed out this requirement based on the status of the Peter Gideon home. One wonders about the efficacy of the document produced under such circumstances. . I will begin with responses to the EAW questions and answers out of deference to the EAW distribution list and follow on with my further statements. Question 6 - Project Description: The statement of development scope is in complete conflict with other comments from the developer indicating that there will be eight, (8), twinhomes developed on the property. I believe that the proposal change was made by the developer in response to learning that a complete Environmental Impact Survey would be required if the historically registered existing single family residence would either be moved off the property or razed. This would push the timescale for the development out to the point where the developer could not maximize his profit on the development. The answer provided by the preparer of the EAW for question 6 is inaccurate. . Question 9 - Land Use Including Adjacent Lands It is true that the land immediately to the North is abandoned in regard to its previous use as a railroad right of way. In truth to the North of the project property is a narrow strip of land which has always been in a state of 'for sale'. However the strip of land is so narrow that absolutely nothing of note can be done with it, it is useless. However the land which contained the railroad right of way itself can hardly be considered as 'abandoned'. Subsequent to the relinquishment of the railroad right of way, the land occupied by the railroad tracks and the railroad track bed has been redeveloped as a nature walkway for year round use, a bicycle path for good weather use and a snowmobile path for winter use. Let me assure you that this path gets an ample workout by walkers, bicyclers and snowmobile drivers. The term 'abandoned' creates a certain mental picture and at least in my estimation that picture does not accurately reflect the current use of that land. The description of the land use to the South is also incorrect. For whatever reason the preparer of the EAW chose to describe the land use to the East as 'Co. Rd. 19, then commercial (Northern States Power). However when he describes the land to the South he says, 'mutltiple-family residential'. In fact to conform to the standard he used in the Eastward land description, his decription should have read, 'Glen Road, then wetlands, then multiple-family residence'. Again the mental picture created by the EAW conflicts with an 7 accurate and complete descriPtion of the land use to the South of this ~ proposed project. . , If one were to just accurately describe only the land directly adjacent to the proposed development one might say: NORTH EAST SOUTH WEST - Unusable narrow strip of land consisting of vegetation - County Road 19 - Glen Road - Single family residential However the preparer of the survey went further than the directly abutting land to include land uses nearby. I feel that my enhancements to his answers provide a clearer picture to adjacent and nearby land use. Question 9 asks the preparer to discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and nearby land uses. One might suspect that by describing the land use to the South in the misleading manner as has been done that multiple . family dwellings are commonplace and established in this area. In reality the multiple family dwelling to the South is separated by roadway and wetlands and is totally disconnected from the project. However the single family dwellings to the West of the project are in fact totally connected to the Gideon's Woods Development. Question lla - Describe fish and wildlife resources... Herein is quite a surprise comment which more correctly should have been included in the response to question l3c. I quote from the answer to l3a. 'Grading will be minimized on the westernmost 40 feet of the site and as necessary to maximize vegetation preservation. Is this a red herring slipped into this portion of the EAW so that its impact on natural water distribution will be overlooked ? As one observes the slope of the land as it is at this time, the general slope of the land from the rear of the Peter Gideon home is to the North and West, down to my back yard, the back of my home and to the wetland to the North of my western neighbors property. This quote attempts. to give the impression that the developer is doing us a favor by attempting to retain the vegetation on the westernmost 40' strip of the project. It seems to me that by keeping the grade as it is and increasing the impervious surface surface with housing and pavement that there is absolutely no way that my property cannot suffer additional water runoff after completion of the project. Most of the Eastern side of our home is several feet below the grade level of the western portion of the project. Most certainly I will suffer ,jIl additional runoff with the very real potential to basement damage as a resu~ of the grading method chosen. By the way, the vegetation to be saved by this grading method doesn't amount to much without the balance of the habitat remaining intact, its density is quite sparse. . Question lIb - Endangered or threatened species...s... I know for a fact that the pileated woodpecker is resident in the woods to be mostly razed. There may be others but by saying that this item will be referred to the Minnesota DNR assures that no one will provide a proper investigation in a timely fashion. There may be others but we will never know. Question 12 - Physical Impacts on Water Resources. Here the preparer responds in the negative. The project calls for a water holding pond to be constructed directly adjacent to Cty. Rd. 19 on the Northeast corner of the development. Exhibit D. of the EAW attachments clearly shows that specification. I believe that this falls under the category of 'impoundment' as stated in the description of this question. If I am correct then the response to this question is incorrect. Question l8a - Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff... I have previously detailed in my response to the question lIb my concerns. I am greatly concerned that insufficient attention has been paid to this issue and if any negative consequences are incurred, they will be after the fact of the project completion and costly to correct, if they are correctable at all. Also there is no certainty as to whom would take responsiblity to correct errors in this ludoement should the assumPtions provided prove to be incnrrpcr. ,,~ . and my property and household suffer. Here the detention pond is mentioned wherein it should have been commented on under question 12. It should be noted that that this detention is not proposed to be protected from access in any fashion. Its location is astride or immediately adjacent to the service lane of Southbound County Road 19. This service lane also serves heavily in the summertime as the route bicyclers use for recreation and to a lesser degree snowmobilers in the wintertime. This aspect of the proposal most certainly poses some hazard against the use that space currently undergoes. Question 22 - Traffic, Parking Spaces Added... In exhibit D the EAW preparer estimates that the existing neighborhood generates 18 exits during the morning and evening rush hours. These figures have been obtained from a couple of sources. There are approximately 45 single family residences in the Amlee Acres community at this time. To say that each residence generates only one peak rush hour trip each way may be an understatement. There are several residences with more than one working adult which add to the total. There may be some households which do not in fact generate peak rush hour traffic but I doubt that the preparer has taken the time to determine the exact demographics. The numbeer in exhibit D appears to have come from a handbook, I do not believe that anyone has taken the time and made the effort to verify these traffic projections. . To support my contention that the supplied traffic counts are most probably low, let me provide the following data about the four homes directly adjacent to mine. Our household has two cars, both my wife and myself work and our household provides two outbound and two inbound rush hour traffic trips each and every day of the week. . The same is true for the next two homes to the North and West of our house. The home directly to our South has three adults and four cars. All three adults work and that household generates three rush hour trips outbound and three inbound each day. The next home to the South and West has two retired adults and two cars. I cannot be certain of the number of additional rush hour trips generated by this household but most assuredly it is at least one and is potentially larger. A new home is in the process of being built in our community just to the South and West of our home. As I understand it this household will consist of two working adults and two children. Again this addition to Amlee Acres defies the accuracy of the rush hour traffic figures provided in the survey. In total in the five existing homes and one home about to be completed there are 13 adults, 14 vehicles and at a minimum 11 rush hour trips generated each in the morning and in the afternoon. If the same numbers were applied as an accurate sampling of the Amlee Acres communiti~s rush hour traffic flow each day, this would then project to 84 rush hour trips generated during the morning rush hour and another 84 during the evening rush hour. This does not compare favorably with the numbers in exhibit D, almost an increase of double. For the sake of argument let us then say that the six households are not an accurate sampling but do represent an accuracy of 50%. That is 1/2 of the 46 households in the Amlee Acres neighborhood generate rush hour traffic at the same ratio as provided in exhibit D, one trip per each rush hour period per house. Then the balance of the households provide 42 rush hour trips each peak period. That number summed to the other 50% of the households gives us a number of 60 rush hours exits and 60 rush hour returns. This gives us an inaccuracy of 33% in the numbers provided in the EAW and this inaccuracy is before factoring in the new traffic generated by the proposed project. The preparer hypothecates that there will be 18 additional peak rush hour trips per day. No matter how you slice it, 18 twin homes will have at LEAST 18 vehicles and there will be even more vehicular traffic generated by the new residents of the Gideon home as it is proposed to be a multiple family dwelling and those families must included in any traffic projections. If one applies the same ratios to the new development as I have used for the existing homes. (Bv the way. I hnVR n() ~l1nn()rri"p ~r.::lri~rir.::ll pvi':"::mrQ ,...t-nQ,... t-n:::l'n ....., ~~. personal knowledge of my neighbors) , then the 20 new families will generate 28. rush hour trips in the morning and 28 more at night. .... To summarize, the EAW suggests that there will be 63 rush hour trips out of and into Glen Road morning and evening. My amateurish calculation suggest that a figure between 84 and 121 would reflect increased accuracy. Of course no one will know until the time is taken to take a proper survey of the actual traffic really departing and entering Glen Road during each rush hour period. The numbers of ~dditional trips generated by the new twinhome traffic will continue to be an unknown until the demographics of the new neighbors are known. There are a number of families with school age children who have after school activities which add to the evening rush hour count. This is another of those imponderables which cannot be factored in until somebody actually takes the time and makes the effort to count rush hour traffic out of and into Amlee acres. Another traffic factor is that several families in this neighborhood will have children reaching the age where they will be eligible to be owning and driving cars before long. This is a'factor which will increase traffic figures to an unknown point. Do we not include the near future in our studies as to project feasibility ? ~ The water detention pond proposed to be located adjacent to the County Road 19 service lane should be evaluated for traffic affects. Please see the further comment on this matter in my response to question 18a. This ends my comments on the Environment Assessment Worksheet produced by the Shorewood city administration. I hope that these remarks have been of assistance in determining the efficacy of the proposed Gideon's Woods development. My thanks for all who took the time and made the effort to read and evaluate my copmments. And now my further general comments on the Gideon Wood's project. Our property abuts the northern 200+ feet of the western border of the proposed development. I am fully aware of the commercial value of property development and the tax dollars this property development will bring once this development is complete. However I was unaware that 'bottom line' motivitation was the ... primary basis for city council decisions on such matters. . ~ Both yourself and the council members appear to be simply shrugging your shoulders to this development proposal based on the legalities of the current zoning of the property. All this seems to be predicated on the totally misguided rezoning of this property in the latter 1970s and subsequent rezoning in the 1980s. While I grant this apparent legal stand, I totally challenge the moral stand, or lack thereof. 'Bottom line' .seems to be all that influences your august selves in this decision process. Neither Shorewood city administration nor the developer seem to have any concern for the Arnlee Acres neighborhood, the residents and their multiple concerns and contact with the long term implications of this development as it currently stands. That is if the differences between data PU9lished in separate portions of the E.A.W. and other published statements regarding the development get resolved. . This little bit of Shorewood stands geographically separate from all the rest of our small community. Across Glen road sits an apartment building but set back quite a bit from the rest of Arnlee Acres. I wonder if it physically is a part of the parcel of land officially designated as 'Arnlee Acres'. Even the homes located to the north of the homes bordering the northern portion of Glen Road are quite separated from this portion of Arnlee Acres. ; . . ~ To this point, there are no multiple family dwellings in the Amlee Acres community. The average price range for the homes in this community looks to come in around $100K. With a majority of the homesteads below that figure and a very few sufficiently higher to seem to reach that average. This development has been advertised as averaging between $160K-$180K per family unit. This skews against the property and home values of the rest of Amlee Acres. However now the council and city management has caved in to this developer and is allowing a development which is totally out of character with the rest of our tiny community. We like our community the way it is, single family dwellings. Only 'bottom line' concerns seem to be leading us away from this family atmosphere. At this point I quote from a campaign statement made by one of our city council members during her successful effort to gain a seat on the council. The quote is taken verbatim from the Excelsior Sailor dated Oct. 21st, 1992. 'I would like to see Shorewood continue to be a low-density residential community... ...That will require a continually up-dated comprehensive plan which stresses preservation of the natural assets, such as lakes, wetlands, woods, etc., that set Shorewood apart from other suburban areas. ...but what drew me to SHorewood many years ago is still what draws people today; the unique, country-like, quiet beauty of our area. I believe in change, but not change for change's sake - only if it means enhancing the character of Shorewood' I share these beliefs, have always, does the person quoted still believe so ? DO any of the rest of the city administration believe so ? Or are these words simply the rhetoric of campaign blather ? With that in mind it has been suggested several times that we have no objection to development of this property, we simply object to this development in its current form, multiple family dwellings, with the retention of the old Gideon residence on the property only to avoid an Environmental Impact Survey. The developer has adopted the stance, 'my way or the highway'. His only concern is obviously his 'bottom line'. Is that our city administration's only concern as well ? I suggested that development might consist of a lesser number of multiple family dwellings, or better still, at least for the Amlee Acres community, single family dwellings. The developer has made it quite clear that this option does not maximize his investment sufficiently for his interest. The city seems to be either shrugging its decision making shoulders to the tune of, 'its legal, what can we do ?-', or fully in support of this development as proposed. My objections are largely in the change of character that Amlee Acres will undergo after this development is complete. There is a longer list of valid objections that city administration appears to be ignoring as well. The well documented water problems of this neighborhood have gone unresolved for a periOd of time longer than I have been resident, since 1980. The additional traffic generated onto Glen Road and County Road 19 will make that intersection a far more dangerous traffic problem than it is today. County Road 19 is a multiple use roadway, not only car traffic, but foot traffic, bicycle traffic, snowmobile traffic and schoolchildren use this roadway. I am convinced that the increased activity at that intersection will pose an unnacceptably high increase in traffic hazards. Of course none of this can really be measurable until AFTER such a development is completed and it has become a fait accompli thereby necessitating a further investment by the city to rectify whatever problems which do arise. Of course this will also be true if the watershed problems increase as a result of this development. We have been told that we have a year to detect any increase of water runoff onto our properties as a direct result of this ~ development. That then subjects the abutting property owners to the vagaries of .'~ 'acts of god', as insurance companies are wont to quote. That one year policy will not help us one whit if the first year is quite dry, and we are then struck by the aforementioned deities thunder. In conclusion I am convinced that this is an excercise in futility. Our quality of life seems to be of little note to city administration. While other neighborhoods in Shorewood seem able to make themselves resoundingly heard, (read Byerly's), our voices are as of a lonely voice crying in the wind. Nevertheless I do issue my cry into the wind, if never said at all, it never may be heard. Regards D~~e Turgeon ~g ~ . . celebratio MAR - ? Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Celebrating our 25th anniversary and the 20th anniversary of the Clean Water Act March 2, 1993 Mr. Bradley J. Nielsen Planning Director City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 Dear Mr. Nielsen: RE: Gideon's Woods Environmental Assessment Worksheet Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Gideon's Woods residential development to be built in the city of Shorewood, Hennepin county. Based on the information contained in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), the Environmental Analysis Office staff believes that significant environmental effects are not likely to occur as a result of the project. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) does not appear warranted. We do, however, have the following concern: Regarding Item 18.a of the EAW, based on the project size, it would appear that a storm water permit is not required for the project. However, because a detention pond would be constructed and some runoff is expected, we encourage the project proposer's efforts to use best management practices in managing storm water runoff. We look forward to receiving the required responses to our comments, and your decision on the need for an EIS. If you have any questions regarding our comments, please contact Christy Peterson of my staff at (612) 297 - 8236. Sincerely, Paul Hoff, Director Environmental Analysis Office Administrative Services Division PH:ns 8 520 Lafayette Rd.; St. Paul, MN 55155 -3898; (612) 296 -6300; Regional Offices: Duluth • Brainerd • Detroit Lakes • Marshall • Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer • Printed on Recycled Paper �gg3 My feelings on the Gideon House Development MPS I am a twelve year old boy from the neighborhood that the development is planned to be in. I have seen the plans from my father George Harrison and one of the properties is supposed to touch the corner of my backyard. I have lived in the same house for all my life and my uncle Brad Smith played in these very same woods when he was a child, I have played there all my life too. I would also hope that when I am older I could bring my kids or even my grandkids here to play and have as much fun as I did in these last few years. Mr. Nielson if you are reading this right now i would wish you to know that I know that every kid in this world has their own special place to get away from it all, this is mine. My friends and I used to go exploring back in those woods for the sheer excitement of getting lost and trying to fmd your way back like your GI. Joe lost in the battlefield. The Gideon House has also always been a wonder and amazement, everyone always thought that the ghost of Peter Gideon still lurked around the house. We would run up to the house someone would say "Ahhhhhhhh a ghost," and we would all run away terrified. I walk through that yard every morning and afternoon going to and from the bus stop. There are just so many memories for me, my brother, all my friends, and everyone who has ever been to this house, I would just hate to see it go. Sincerely, Matt Harrison 12 year old Minnetonka Jr. High A leiref2V40-77 1 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Minnesota Landscape Arboretum P.O. Box 39 3675 Arboretum Drive Chanhassen. MN 55317 ~ ) i~ t" March 2, 1993 t Mr. Bradley J. Nielsen Planning Director city of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Mr. Nielsen: We are writing in opposition to a development plan which proposes to move the Peter M. Gideon homestead, 24590 Glen Road, Excelsior. This home built by Peter Gideon, one of Minnesota's first and premier horticulturists, is of such statewide and national historic significance that it needs to be kept in situ as a significant monument to the development of the state of Minnesota. In addition, as Peter Gideon planted many of the trees at this site, they should also be preserved. New development should be buffered, as well, to retain the rural landscape of this historic site. t In today's world which puts all land as a commodity to be used for more intensive development, we must preserve both our historic buildings and some of our landscape history as well as honor those who made Minnesota a most livable state. A man of Peter Gideon's significance should not have his home or the near surrounding site destroyed for the convenience of or profit to the present owner's proposed development. Peter Gideon was a horticulturist and a man of science. His first hardy apple, Wealthy, was the precursor to the Haralson and others which are still being introduced today from the Horticultural Research Center at the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum. He was the first director of the University of Minnesota's Fruit Breeding Farm, which is now the Horticultural Research Center in Victoria. He played the seminal role in making horticultural crops a part of Minnesota's agricultural base. Today, annual sales of the nursery, greenhouse, and fruit industry total nearly $700,000,000. The basis for developing the hardy fruit, vegetables. and landscape plants appropriate .to Minnesota's climate has made us horticulturally competitive with much of the rest of the United states. COfi f ~~.L d, ~ Y\~r t:t"3 hr( . .-....) -' 10 . State of Minnesota INDIAN AFFAIRS COUNCIL 127 University Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Phone: (612) 296-3611 March 2, 1993 1819 Bemidji Avenue Bemidji, Minnesota 56601 Phone: (218) .755-3825 Bradley J. Nielsen Planning Director 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 . RE: Gideon's Woods, Section 33, Township ll7, Range 23 Dear Mr. Nielsen: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced project. This review is conducted under our responsibilities in Minnesota Statute 307.08, the Private Cemeteries Act. A review of our records indicates that the proposed project is within the boundaries of the recorded cemetery known as Gideon's Bay Mounds (Minnesota archaeological site file number 21 HE 47). The site is recorded as a group of at least 98 burial mounds. This cemetery was recorded in 1879 in the Smithsonian Institution's Annual Report of the Board of Regents published in 1880. The site was surveyed again in the early 1880's and the information was published in 19l1 in Newton Winchell's Aborigines of Minnesota. . Prior to the proposed development, it will be necessary to have the project area reviewed for the presence of burials utilizing procedures established pursuant to the above referenced statute. Thank you for your support of these important efforts to protect the heritage of Minnesota's Native Americans. :m Earl Sargent Minnesota Indian Affairs Council Liaison AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 11 I ~ METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park CellTre. 230 East Fifth Street. St. Pal/I. MN 55101-1634 6/2 291-6359 FAX 6/2 29/-6550 TTY 6/2 29/-0904 FILE COpy March 4, 1993 Bradley J. Nielsen, Planning Director City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 r.__'_. _.__..._..~- .-.-"' ,"-"--- -.-.----. . RE: .~:g~VironlI!(:E.!~! ~~~sment Worksheet (EA W) Gldeons Wooas--' --.- -.---- .-.,.,-- ...- ---.... City of Shorewood Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 15770-1 Dear Mr. Nielsen: At its meeting on February 25, 1993, the Metropolitan Council adopted the EA W fof Gideon's Woods Planned Unit Development. The following report from the Committee of the Whole Consent List was adopted by the Council: . "It is recommended that the EA W should be amended to indicate who will be responsible for routine and nonroutine maintenance of the proposed stormwater runoff pond; indicate that the proposed stormwater detention pond will be designed and constructed to meet National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) wet detention basin standards, consistent with the Council's Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution; and state that all construction and development planned for the site occur in accord with MPCA's Best Management Practices (BMP) publication entitled Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas." A copy of the complete staff report is enclosed. Sincerely, ~.~ Dottie Rietow Chair DR:lv Enclosure cc: Gregg Downing, EQB James Hurm, Administrator, City of Shorewood Fred Ketter, Ketter Development Co. Ann Braden, Metropolitan Council Staff * Recycled Paper /2- .. ' MEfROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612 291-6359 IDD 612 291-0904 DATE: January 28, 1993 TO: Metropolitan and Community Development Committee FROM: Research and Long Range Planning (Ann Braden) SUBJECT: Consent List Item Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) Gideon's Woods City of Shorewood Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 15770-1 Metropolitan Council District No.13 Shorewood submitted an EA W for a housing development project known as Gideon's Woods P.U.D. The developer plans to move the Peter Gideon home within its historical site located at 24590 Glen .. Road, add a carriage house-type apartment, and build eight two-family dwellings on the remainder of the 4.7 acre property. The project is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. The Council's concerns focus on surface water runoff management. The site will drain into Lake Minnetonka, a "priority lake" of the Council. Any degradation in the quality of Lake Minnetonka caused by this development would be inconsistent with a number of the Council's Water Resources Management Guide policies. Although a stormwater detention pond will be built, the EA W does not specify the design efficiency criteria for it, nor who will be responsible for maintaining the pond. To minimize the impact of the proposed project on Lake Minnetonka, the project developer will want to design the detention pond according to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards consistent with the Council's Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution to all Metropolitan Water Bodies. The developer should also use the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA) Best Management Practices (BMP) to manage land development activities. . RECOMMENDATION To be complete and accurate, Section 18 (WATER QUALITY SURFACE WATER RUNOFF) of the EA W should be amended to: . indicate who will be responsible for routine and nonroutine maintenance of the proposed stormwater runoff pond; . indicate that the proposed stormwater detention pond will be designed and constructed to meet National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) wet detention basin standards, consistent with the Council's Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution. . state that all construction and development planned for the site occur in accord with MPCA's Best Management Practices (BMP) publication entitled Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas. b:\..\compplaa1Crm02Don ---~--'-:'J ._, ."-r- -~., --"--..-~ - -. ..- ~, " '.--7";~:::~:'---~'~:'---:~~,~";':"-:- .~....-_.-:--:-'-:~ 1'1RR 12 ' 93 13: 58 051-1 ~'lPL'::;, 1'11'1 P.l ,- --015' M-orr ',' -- - - -, s&eJen'--- --:-:- 300 Park place Center - Mayerpn& 5775 1.'/3jLata Boulevard , Associates,Inc. 1'/1innez:polis. MN 55416-1223 - 1- 612-595.5775 1-80Q-753-5i75 FAX 595-5774 ,Memorandum TO: 1\fr. Brad Nielsen, City Planner Joel Dresel, Oty Engineer-~i March 12, 1993 '0. 11011)3986 >>- ~ DATE: FROM~: Fl.lXif SUBJECT: Gideon's Woods EAW Responses OSM File 5047.05 You have asked us to review and comment on the responses to questions 18 and 22 in the EA W prepared for the referenced site. These questions are related to stormwater quantity/quality and traffic concerns, respectively. With regard to site drainage, the following major questions have been raised: 1. Has there been a 'lrunoff survey" completed to date? 2. Will 'a detention pond be sufficient to maintain the existing runoff rate from the proposed site? 3. Will "Best Management Practices" for the stormwater runoff be practiced on this site? 4. Is the proposed pond an unusual hazard to traffic along County Road 191 It would be costly, unusual and probably impossible to perform a runoff survey as has been suggested. Currently, accepted engineering standards are based on mathematically modeling the runoff from a site in both the existing and developed conditions. These models utilize historic rainfall data, soil type, and land use datll. to determine runoff characteristics. It is likely that the Minnehaha Creek Wat~rshed District will require that developed runoff rates be no greater than existing rates tased on such a model. We have previously reviewed preliminary runoff dataprovid(;d by the developer and it does appear feasible to maintain the pre-existing rates, though this has not been fully documented. Though the City has not formally adopted the use of "Best Management Practices", we have previously suggested the possible use of National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) guidelines for proper water quality management on this site. To utilize these guidelines, a more detailed plan will be required prior to pr,oject acceptance. Finally, provided that the slopes of the proposed pond are flatter than a 3:1, we do not foresee a significant safety problem from pond construction. However, Hennepin County should be asked to review the design prior to final project acceptance. A TT ACHMENT 6 .. _: ..._.. . _,.._....:.~._._. .. ~...~..._....: . '~:J:"'_,~'!(,:-. .' , I I }e 1 I e MRR 12 ' 93 13: 59 osr'1 MPLS, ~ll'j P.2 Mr. Brad Nielsen City Planner March 12, 1993 Page 2 Therefore, with regard to stonnwater runoff, the plans presented to date appear to be acceptable. This does not mean, however, that significant alterations to the plan will not be necessary during the next design stages. Both the Watershed and the City will very likely require at least some changes to the plan prior to final acceptance. If the current rules governing these stonnwater issues cannot ultimately be fulfilled, we will recommend denial of the final plat in its current configuration. With regard to traffic, we have asked our Transportation Department to review the specific responses in the EA W, and their response is attached for your review. The basic outcome of their review is, however, that the addition of this development will have very little, if any, impact on, the safety of traffic on either County Road 19 or Glen Road. Again, we recommend that Hennepin County be given the chance to review these plans prior to final project acceptance. Please call me with any questions. Attachments /nm l I I. I ! I. I i I t } tvlAR 12 ' 93 13 : 59 0311 tvlF'lS, l'llJ P.3 O-.SU =& ~ \JL ASsooares,lnC. 300 Park Place Center 5775 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis. wiN 55416-1228 612-595-5775 1-800-753-577 5 FAX. 595.0774 TO: Joel Dresel FRO~I: Charles Rickart C~ DATE: March 12, 1993 SUBJECT: Gideon's Woods Development, Shorewood, ~IN EAW Comments In reviewing the EA W comments of Question 22, Tra.ffi~ five concerns were raised: 1. Existing and projected traffic estimates. 2. Traffic congestion. 3. Site Distance. 4. Need for turn lanes on County Road 19. 5. Accidents. Each concern is discussed below: 1. Existinl: and project traffic estimajes The existing traffic volumes on CR 19 appear to be slightly low. Based on Hennepin County 1991 traffic volumes, and assuming a 2% per year adjustment to 1993, these volumes would be: . : AM. peak hour: 242 northbound 565 southbound . P.M. peak hour: 735 northbound 315 southbound The traffic generation rates used by the EA W preparer represent average weekday condition for studies conducted across the country. These rates are nationally accepted by traffic engineering professionals. However, to look at a worst case alternative the following rates/volumes could be used. ;::"..,I....:~....-: . ;"rr;.,i~_.!"'~ . Ol~.'.,....~.: . ':"'1'1"".',-';'-'''': j . I i \ i I I I. I j I i I i i I !. I \ I I I I \ 1 ~'lAR 12 "33 14: 00 O::::t'1 r'lPLS, MI'J P.4 Memo Joel Dresel March 12, 1993 Page 2 . AM. peak hour: outbound 1.5 trips/unit = 68 trips. inbound .2 trips/unit = 10 trips. P.M. peak hour: outbound .36 trips/units = 16 trips. inbound 1.5 trips/unit = 68 trips. . These same rates can be applied to the proposed Gideon's Woods Development. The resulting trips generated would be: · A.M. peak hour: outbound 27 trips inbound 4 trips. · P.M. peak hour: outbound 7 trips inbound 27 trips. 2. Traffic coniestion Based on the traffic volume data above a capacity and level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted. The results indicate that no significant change in intersection level of service or capacity would occur with the addition of the proposed Gideon's Woods Development. The results are illustrated below: Glenn Road at CR 19 . AM. peak hour: A B without development with development LOS LOS . P.M. peak hour: without development with development Glenn Road at Site Entrance A B LOS LOS . A.M. peak hour: A LOS LOS . P.M. peak hour: A Level of service is measured A through F, with F representing the worst condition. Each level is discussed below: . . ; I l . ~ . .., " ." ",' .. MAR 12 '93 14: 00 OSr'l 1'1PLS, 1'1t'l P.5 Memo Joel Dresel March 12, 1993 Page 3 Level' of Service A describes completely free-flow conditions. The operation of vehicles is virtually unaffected by the presence of other vehicles, and operations are constrained only by the geometric features of the highway and driver preferences. Level of Service B is also indicative of free flow, although the presence of other vehicles begins to be noticeable. Average travel speeds are somewhat diminished from LOS A Level of Service C represents a range in which the influence of traffic density on operations becomes marked. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stre~ and to select an operating speed, is now clearly affected by the presence of other vehicles. Minor disruptions may be expected to cause serious local deterioration in service, and queues may form. behind any significant traffic disruption. Severe or long term disruptions may cause the facility to operate at LOS F. Level of Service D borders on unstable flow. Speeds and ability to maneuver are severely restricted because of traffic congestion. Only the most minor of disruptions can be absorbed without the formation of extensive queues and the deterioration of service to LOS F. This is typically the level which is the accel1ted level for peak hours in suburban areas. Level of Service E represents operations at or near capacity, and is quite unstable. Thus, disruptions cannot be damped or dissipated, and any disruption, no matter how minor, will cause queues to form and service to ; deteriorate to LOS F. Level of Servi~e F represents forced or breakdown flow. It occurs at a point where vehicles arrive either at a rate greater than that at which they are discharged or at a point on a planned facility where forecasted demand exceeds the computed capacity. While operations at such points (and on immediately downstream sections) will appear to be a capacity or better, queues will form behind these breakdowns. Operations within queues will form behind these breakdowns. Operations within queues are highly unstable, with vehicles experiencing short 'spurts of movement followed by stoppages. -- ~ . . . . 1'1AR 12 ' 93 14: 01 OSI1 1'1PLS, Mt'l P.6 Memo Joel Dresel March 12, 1993 Page 4 3. Site dis~nce Based on the :MIl/DOT road design standards for turning vehicles at intersections, a site line of approximately 400 feet should be provided. There appears to be no obstacles which would currently limit this site line. However, the developer should maintain a 20 foot buffer behind the property line where no trees can planted in order to maintain this site line. 4. Turn lanes on County Road 19 Based on the capacity and LOS analysis, additional turn lanesfby pass lane are . not required. Hennepin County: would have the jurisdiction to add any turn lanes if warranted. Hennepin County did not comment on the need for turn lanes as part of the EA W. 5. Accidents Over the past three years, no accidents bave been recorded at the CR 19 jGlenn Road intersection. Although close calls are serious, roadways cannot be designed or mitigated based solely on these factors. Hennepin County would again be the governing body to determine if improvements are required for safety purposes. It can be concluded based on analyzing the proposed development under a worse case scenario, that no significant traffic impacts to the roadway system would occur. Therefore, with respect to traffic, an EIS would not appear to be warranted. H:\u.sIWR\BJf\ TRANS\ CfR\MEMOS\03l29.3J.AD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION IN THE MATIER OF GIDEON'S WOODS :ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET WHEREAS, Katter Development submitted an application to the City of Shorewood to develop a residential subdivision consisting of relocating the existing house, adding on accessory apartment and construction of eight (8) two-family dwellings for a total of eighteen (18) units (the Project); and . WHEREAS, the Project is located at 24590 Glen Road; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410 provide the procedures for environmental review; and . WHEREAS, Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300, Subp. 31 provides for the mandatory preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) for (the potential) destruction of a property that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places; and WHEREAS, the Shorewood Planning Commission reviewed the EA W and the comments at a public meeting held on 16 March 1993; and WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has considered the procedures and criteria for deciding whether the Project has the potential for significant environmental effects as defined in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, Subp. 7; and . WHEREAS, the EA W has been mailed to the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and to all persons and agencies on the official EA W distribution list. The EA W was published in the EOB Monitor on 1 February 1993. The thirty (30) day comment period was scheduled to expire on 3 March 1993; and WHEREAS, comments to the EA W have been received from: 1. Environmental Quality Board (Gregg Downing) 2. Department of Natural Resources (Thomas Balcom) 3. Minnesota Historical Society (Dennis Gimmestad) 4. Descendant of Peter Gideon (Mark Gideon) 5. Shorewood resident (Laura Turgeon) 6. Shorewood resident (Kathie Harrison) 7. Shorewood resident (Dave Turgeon) 8. Pollution Control Agency (paul Hoft) 9. Shorewood resident (Matt Harrison) 10. Minnesota Landscape Arboretum (peter Olin) 11. Indian Affairs Council (Earl Sargent) 12. Metropolitan Council (Dottie Rietow); and to f- - 2.. . . WHEREAS, the Shorewood City staff reviewed the EA W comments and prepared responses in a memorandum dated 12 March 1993, attached as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, . the Project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects as defined in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, Subp. 7; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, based upon the plans, reports, testimony, comments and responses considered by the City of Shorewood, as well as the findings defined in this document, the City Council of the City of Shorewood, acting as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for the EA W, concludes as follows: A. The preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Project is not required or recommended. B. The City may proceed with the review and consideration of the permits to allow construction of the Project in compliance with the rules of the Minnesota Environmental Review Program and in conformity with the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA, this 22nd day of March, 1993. Barbara J. Brancel, Mayor ATTEST: James C. Hurm, City Administrator/Clerk - 2 - RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING STOP SIGN LOCATIONS WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Council has the authority and responsibility for public safety and for the placement of stop signs, and; WHEREAS, Hennepin County and the City of Shorewood agreed to participate in the Hazard Elimination Safety Program for Non-Federal Aid on Local Roads, and; WHEREAS, said program resulted in the placement of various signs throughout Shorewood in 1992, and; WHEREAS, stop signs are among those installed through said program, and; . WHEREAS, clarification is needed as to the intent of the City Council in regard to placement of said stop signs relating to said program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL YED by the Shorewood City Council that stop signs are authorized and directed to be placed at the following locations: . On Afton Road at Cathcart Drive On Anthony Terrace at Vine Street On Beverly Drive at Cathcart Drive On Boulder Bridge Circle at Smithtown Road On Boulder Bridge Drive at Smithtown Road (east) On Boulder Bridge Drive at Smithtown Road (west) On Boulder Bridge Lane at Boulder Bridge Drive On Brentridge Drive at Howard's Point Road (north) On Cajed Lane at Beverly Drive On Church Road at West 62nd Street On Clover Lane at Minnetonka Drive On Club Lane at Smithtown Road On. Edgewood Road at Howards Point Road On Elder Turn at Minnetonka Drive On Elmridge Circle at Edgewood Road On Enchanted Drive at Enchanted Lane On Gillette Curve at Minnetonka Drive On Howard's Point Road at Edgewood Road On Lee Circle at Birch Bluff Road On McLain Road at Minnetonka Drive On N elsine Drive at Eureka Road . On Noble Road at Grant Lorenz Road On Oakridge Circle at Grant Lorenz Road On Pine Bend at Howard's Point Road (south) 7 On Pine Bend at Howard's Point Road (north) On Radisson Entrance at Radisson Road On Shore Road at Radisson Road On Smith town Circle at Smith town Road On Star Lane at Smith town Road On Sunnyvale Lane at Eureka Road On Sylvan Lane at Wildrose Lane On Valleywood at Eureka Road On Vine Street at Manor Road On West 62nd Street at Church Road ADOPTED BY T!lE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 22nd day of March, 1993. · . Barbara J. Brancel, Mayor ATTEST: James C. Hurm City Administrator/Clerk . . . LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: SIGN RECOMMENDATIONS MARCH 15, 1993 RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: Lilac Lane Dead End It was on the County List and they did not install it. Install new sign on north side of Lilac Lane just to the west of the intersection with Teton Lane because the old sign was installed before Teton Lane existed, making it incorrect at this time. Enchanted Lane No Parking County was supposed to remove all 5' high signs when they installed the new signs. Remove all old 5' signs because County did not remove them. Wedgewood Drive Curve Sign was installed into the underground street light wire. City removed it so wiring could be repaired. Replace sign, due to repair removal Valleywood Lane at Eureka Road Stop Sign was stolen, post still there Replace, send letter to neighbors asking them to watch - criminal offense to remove signs. Sunnyvale Lane at Eureka Road Stop Sign stolen along with one section of post Replace, send letter to neighbors asking them to watch _ criminal offense to remove signs. LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: Wildrose Lane at Grant Lorenz Road Stop and Stop Ahead Stolen Do not replace, not required according to Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device Excelsior Boulevard at St. Alban's Bay Road All Ways signs installed under stop signs Because the County installed the signs, and the City of Shorewood removed them City already removed them, it was not an all way stop, the fourth side, eastbound on Excelsior Boulevard, does not stop. Not required by Minnesota Manual on U.T.C.D. St. Alban's Bay Road near Manor Road Stop Ahead Was on County list. Sign was either never installed or it was stolen. Install, send letter to neighbors asking them to watch - criminal offense to remove signs. e Suburban Drive Winding Road To be removed Remove, not required by Minnesota Manual on U.T.C.D. Rustic Way Winding Road To be removed Installed on wrong street, was supposed to be on Suburban, which is to be removed anyway (see above). LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: . RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: . LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY IT'S ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY IT'S ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: Yellowstone Trail Curve Stolen Replace on approximate property lines between 25110 and 25040 Yellowstone Trail. Send letter to neighbors asking them to watch -criminal offense to remove signs. Grant Lorenz Road at Wildtose Lane Stop Signs on Wildrose and Grant Lorenz stolen Leave only northbound on Grant Lorenz Stop, others not required by Mn Manual of V.T.C.D. Boulder Bridge Lane No Outlet Stolen Replace on property line between 5980 and 5910 Boulder Bridge Lane. Send letter to neighbors asking them to watch -criminal offense to remove signs. Chartwell Hill No Outlet Was installed in middle of 19855 front yard. Sign was removed pending this review. Reinstall sign on property line at 19855 Chartwell Hill. Send letter to neighbors asking them to watch -criminal offense to remove signs. Tiffany Lane at Radisson Road Stop Installed on Radisson Road instead of Tiffany Lane Install in correct position on Tiffany Lane, a private road.. LOCATION: KIND OF SIGN: WHY ITS ON THE LIST: RECOMMENDATION, AND WHY: Wedgewood Drive Winding Road Remove Not required according to Mn. Manual of V.T.C.D. . . ; . /--. , . CITY OF SHOREWOOD - MAYOR Barb Brancel COUNCI L Kristi Stover Rob Daugherty Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson ,5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen . DATE: 3 February 1993 RE: Rental Housing Code FILE NO.: 405 (City Code Chapter 1004) . In 1990, after direction by the City Council and considerable work by the Planning Commission, the City adopted Chapter 1004, a Rental Housing Code providing rules and regulations pertaining to rental housing of all types. Before the Code was published, putting it legally into effect, the Council heard from a number of rental property owners who--_ objected to not having input into the Code. The Council then directed staff to put the Code on hold and establish a committee to review the Code and comment to the City Council. The only people who volunteered for:.!!1e committee were the following rental property owners: ';< .- Pat Niemi Warren Clague (representing Dutcher properties) Helen Schimmelfennig David Ryan . . .- -' , I In addition, Councilmember Gagne and Mayor Brancel participated in two meetings' with the group. Due to the subsequent -change-over in City Administrators no action was taken on the Code. - Consequently, we have an ordinance on the books which is not beirig enforced.~"Staff feels the Council needs to decide whether to publish the Code and begin enforc~~g it or repeal it. , A copy of the summary of the Code is attached for your review. Also we are forwar~ing a , complete copy of the Chapter in case you have detailed questions., . A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore .:~ " \: 8 (; Re: Rental Housing Code 3 February 1993 ,~ , ,Following are the comments made by the rental property owners: 1. ~ ' The general concensus of the group is that the Code discriminates agaiD.st renters and , rental property. They feel that the types of problems which had been raised can be addressed with existing codes (e.g. the Building Code), and that tenants have other remedies against problem landlords. They also feel that the Code punishes the good landlords because of the practices of a few poor ones. Their basic recommendation is that there' should not be any code. " ( , ' 2. If there is to be a housing code it should apply to all residential property - not just " rental property. 3.' Licenses should be issued every three years and the fee should be paid every three years. 4. Fees should reflect the number of inspections required. Lower the initial fee and charge for follow-up inspections. 5. There should be no initial inspection, the Code should be enforced only on a complaint basis. 6. The group was split 2.:..2 on whether a resident agent should be required. 7. ", They questioned who had standing to make a complaint . tenant - yes, but current only . -. neighboring tenant - yes . neighboring property- split 2-2 . . Councilmember~ - yes, but subject ~o other complaints · angry competitor - no . 8. The grqup ~as -split on \Vhether screens should be the responsibility of the landlord. -', 9. Correction of imm~iat~ hazards (Sect, 1004.04 Subd. 4) sh()uld be the responsibility ~ofJhe owner or his agent- nofthe occupant or other responsible person.':,' :~ ~, S.!affwill be prepared to answer'questions on the Code at Monday night's meetln'g. need any additional in!ormation,~ please call me prior to the pleeting. cc:' . Jim Hu~ ~ Helen Schimmelfennig Tim Keane Dave Ryan', Pat Niemi Bob Gagne\' Warren Clague' ,- If you i :' ,/ '/ , ' -\ - 2 - -. . T -\ I - + L(,j~ {'~ rcg[P)f CITY OF SHOREWOOD OFFICIAL SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 223 On March 19, 1990, the Shorewood City Council adopted Ordinance No. 223 entitled: An Ordinance Amending Title 1000 of the Shorewood City Code Adopting A Rental Housing Code. The Shorewood City Council hereby adopts this Offi~ial Summary of the Ordinance. . Sharing the concerns of a growing number of Minnesota communitlesr Shorewood has adopted a rental housing code. The intent of the new regulations is to correct and prevent housing conditions that may adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of Shorewood's rental population. The code is also intended to improve and maintain the quality of Shorewood's housing stock. The new code establishes a procedure for the licensing of rental dwelling units, imposes minimum standards relative to health and safety, provides for a system of inspections, and establishes procedures for administering and enforcing the code. Anyone operating a rental dwelling unit must obtain a license to do so. This requirement applies not only to apartments, duplexes and double bungalows, but also extends to single-family homes, or parts thereof (e. g. accessory apartments). The cost of obtaining a license is $35 per unit. Licenses must be renewed annually or upon change of ownership, whichever occurs first. . The new code requires that rental dwelling units comply with certain minimum health and safety requirements. Standards for plumbing, wiring and heating have been adopted by reference from the Uniform Housing Code. Property maintenance is also addressed in the reg~lations . In order to obtain a license, owners of rental units will be required to have their properties inspected. The code provides for an initial inspection to. ensure compliance with the aforementioned minimum standards. T hereafter inspections will be made every three years or when changes in ownership occur. Inspections will also be made on a complaint basis. T he last section of the code establishes deadlines for compliance 1 a~d an appeal process. Penalties for violating the code are also prescribed. ~.b;t ~ A copy of the new code is being mailed to all known owners of rental property. Copies of the code are also available for review or purchase at the Shorewood City Hall. The Rental Housing Code goes into effect as of 1 June 1990. A complete text of the Rental Housing Code, Ordinance No. 223, is available for review in the City offices located at 5755 Country Club Road during regular office hours. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 14th day of May, 1990. Jan Haugen, Mayor ATTEST: Laurence E. Whittaker City Administrator/Clerk #1_ . . City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood MN 55331 Dear Shorewood Resident, The Shorewood City Council and all of us who are involved in providing municipal services are very interested in learning your thoughts on how we are doing our job. It is important that we receive a response A> this survey from someone in your household to get a representative sample of Shorewood individuals. We ~ave devised a simple way for you to choose the adult in your household to fill out the survey. Please select the adult (anyone 18 years old or older) who most recently had her or his birthday. Please understand that year of birth plays no role in the choice. Please spend the few minutes needed to answer all the questions on this "report card" survey, fold it so the return address is exposed, tape it shut, and mail it (no postage necessary). Responses are being returned to an outside firm. Be sure your answers are given in complete anonymity. Your participation in this survey is important. It will help us identify areas we need to improve. If you have any questions call me at 474-3236. Please help make Shorewood the best community it can be. Thank you. Sincerely, James C. Hurm City Administrator . SHOREWOOD SERVICE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE Please fill out this questionnaire if you are the adult (age 18 or over) in the household whose birthday most recently passed.. For-each question, please circle the number that best represents your opinion. 1. PLEASE INDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH THE FOLLOWING SERVICES THAT ARE CURRENTLY PROVIDED BY SHOREWOOD (CIRCLE ONE RESPONSE FOR EACH ITEM). Haven't Used/ Very Somewhat Don't Know Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied A. PHYSICAL CONDmON OF MY STREET. X 3 2 1 0 B. PHYSICAL CONDmON OF STREETS IN GENERAL. X 3 2 1 0 C. CLEANLINESS OF STREETS. X 3 2 1 0 D. AMOUNT OF STREET LIGHTING. X 3 2 1 0 E. NUMBER OF TREES ALONG CITY STREETS. X 3 2 1 0 F. LEVEL OF PARK MAINTENANCE. X 3 2 1 0 G. CONDmON OF THE HIKING/BIKING TRAIL. X 3 2 1 0 H. CONDmON OF PARK PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT. X 3 2 1 0 I. AMOUNT OF RECREATION EQUIPMENT IN PARKS. X 3 2 1 0 J. TELEVISING OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. X 3 2 1 0 K. FEELING OF SAFETY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. X 3 2 1 0 2. IN THE PAST YEAR HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THE FOLLOWING? IF SO, HOW HELPFUL ARE THEY WHEN YOU NEED INFORMATION ABOUT PROGRAMS OR SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD OR NEED TO HAVE A PROBLEM RESOLVED (CIRCLE ONE FOR EACH ITEM). Have had Very Somewhat Not No Contact Helpful Helpful Helpful Helpful A. CITY OFFICE PERSONNEL X 3 2 1 0 D. CITY ASSESSOR X 3 2 1 0 C. INSPECTION SERVICE PERSONNEL X 3 2 1 0 D. POLICE PERSONNEL X 3 2 1 0 E. FIRE PERSONNEL X 3 2 1 0 F. PUBLIC WORKS PERSONNEL X 3 2 1 0 G. WATER UTILITY PERSONNEL X 3 2 1 0 H. ANIMAL CONTROL PERSONNENL X 3 2 1 0 over 1/)[ 3. PLEASE INDICATE 11" YOU HAVE lIAD CONIAd wrm THE FOLLOWING SERVICES CURRENTLY PROVIDED BY SHOREWOOD. U' :>0, now WOULll YOU EVALUATE EACH OF TUEM'! t CIRCLE ONE FOR EACH) Have bad no contact Excellent Good Fair Poor A-I SOUTH LAKE POLICE, OVERALL SERVICE X 3 2 1 0 A-2 POLICE RESPONSE TIME TO MY CALL X 3 2 1 0 A-3 POLICE COURTEOUSNESS/PROFESSIONAL IMAGE X 3 2 1 0 A-5 POLICE CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAMS X 3 2 1 0 A-6 POLICE TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT X 3 2 1 0 B-1 FIRE DEPT OVERALL SERVICE.' X 3 2 1 0 B-2 FIRE DEPT RESPONSE'TIME TO MY CALL X 3 2 1 0 B-3 FIRE DEPT COURTEOUSNESS/PROFESSIONALISM X 3 2 1 0 B-5 FIRE DEPT INSPECTION AND FIRE PREVENTION PROGRAM X 3 2 1 0 C-1 ANIMAL CONTROL OVERALL SERVICE X 3 2 1 0 C-2 ANIMAL CONTROL RESPONSE TIME TO MY CALL X 3 2 1 0 C-3 ANIMAL CONTROL COURTEOUSNESS/PROFESSIONALISM X 3 2 1 0 D-1 CITY ADMINISTRATOR AND CLERKS OVERALL SERVICE X 3 2 1 0 D-2 ADMINISTRATIVE COURTEOUSNESS/PROFESSIONALISM X 3 2 1 0 B-1 BUILDING INSPECTION OVERALL SERVICE X 3 2 1 . B-2 BUILDING INSPECTION COURTEOUSNESS/PROFESSIONALISM X 3 2 1 F-1 CITY ASSESSOR OVERALL SERVICE X 3 2 1 0 F-2 CITY ASSESSOSR COURTEOUSNESS/PROFESSIONALISM X 3 2 1 0 G-1 PLANNING DEPT, OVERALL SERVICE X 3 2 1 0 G-2 PLANNING DEPT, COURTEOUSNESS/PROFESSIONALISM X 3 2 1 0 H-1 FINANCE DEPT OVERALL SERVICE X 3 2 1 0 H-2 FINANCE DEPT COURTEOUSNESS/PROFESSIONALISM X 3 2 1 0 I. MAINTENANCE OF MY STREET X 3 2 1 0 J. SNOW REMOVAL X 3 2 1 0 K RECYCLING PICKUP PROGRAM X 3 2 1 0 4A. ARE YOU SERVED 4B. IFYr~,PLEASEINDICATE BY CITY WATER? HOW SATISFIED YOU (circle answer) ARE WITH: Don't Very Somewhat a Know Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied YES WATER PRESSURE X 3 2 1 0 WATER QUALITY X 3 2 1 0 NO MAINTENANCE/CREW RESPONSE X 3 2 1 0 For the following questions please mark an (x) by the most correct answer. SA IN THE PAST TWELVE MONTHS HAVE YOU MADE A COMPLAINT TO THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD? SB. IF YES, WHAT TYPE OF COMPLAINT? ANIMAL _ YES, AND I WAS SATISFIED WITH THE WAY MY COMPLAINT WAS HANDLED TRAFFIC _ YES, AND I WAS DISSATISFIED WITH MY COMPLAINT WAS HANDLED _ JUNK/NUISANCE _ STREET REPAIR/MAINTENANCE _ NO, I HAVE NOT MADE A COMPLAINT OTHER 6. WHICH CITY PARKS HAVE YOU OR YOUR FAMILY USED IN THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS? FREEMAN BADGER 7. HOW LONG HAVE YOU LlVEDINSHOREWOOD? 8. YOUR GENDER: MALE FEMALE LESS THAN 2 YRS 2 - 5 YEARS 9. IS THIS A: RESIDENCE BUSINESS CATHCART MANOR 6 - 10 YEARS 11 - 20 YEARS IF RESIDENCE, ANSWER #10 AND #11 SILVERWOOD 21 YEARS OR MORE 10. DO YOU: 11. IS YOUR HOME A: 12. WHAT IS YOUR AGE? OWN RENT OTHER SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX APARTMENT TOWNHOUSE 18 - 30 31 - 49 50 - 64 65 AND OVER CK NO CHECK APPROVAL LISTING FOR MARCH 22, 1993 COUNCIL MEETING TO WHOM ISSUED CHECKS ISSUED SINCE MARCH 5, 1993 11110 11111 11112 11113 11114 11115 11116 11117 11118 11119 11120 11121 .122 123 124 11125 11126 11127 11128 11129 11130 11131 11132 11133 11134 11135 11136 11137 11138 .1139 1140 11141 11142 11143 11144 11145 11146 11147 11148 11149 11150 11151 (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (L) (L) (G) (L) (L) (L) (L) (L) (L) (L) (L) (L) (L) (L) (L) (G) (G) (G) Wendy Davis Void First State Bank Commiss of Revenue Pera ICMA Retirement Trust City cty Credit Union AFSCME Local #224 Child Support Enforcemt Anoka cty Suppt/Collectn Airsignal, Inc. Randie Berg Wendy Davis Hardrives, Inc. Dennis Kleve L. Edmond Leipold Northern States Power Joseph Pazandak Kenneth N. Potts Rochon Corporation Mr./Mrs. Douglas Shoutz US West WMI svcs of Mn Bellboy Corporation Boyd Houser Candy/Tobac. Midwest Coca-Cola Co. Milbert's Lock & Safe Day Distributing East Side Bev Co. Griggs, Cooper and Co. Hoops Trucking Johnson Brothers Liquor North Star Ice Pepsi-Cola Co. Ed Phillips and Sons Pogreba Distributing Quality Wine/Spirits Thorpe Distributing on last list Bradley Nielsen Susan Niccum University of Minnesota PURPOSE Section 125 reimbursement Payroll deductions Payroll deductions Payroll deductions Payroll deductins Payroll deductions Payroll deductions Payroll deductions Payroll deductions Beeper services Parks mileage Sec 125 reimbursement PaYment voucher #8/final Water hook up reimburse. S/A reimburs. pd in 1992 Street light utilities Mileage Feb prosecuting fee PaYment voucher #8/final Release of escrow Telephone services Waste removal Liquor purchases Misc and supplies purchases Misc purchases Open jammed door Beer and misc purchases Beer and misc purchases Liquor and wine purchases Liquor and wine purchases Wine purchases Misc purchases Misc purchases Liquor and wine purchases Beer and misc purchases Liquor and wine purchases Beer and misc purchases Sec 125 reimbursement Sec 125 reimbursement Course regist-Johnson TOTAL GENERAL TOTAL LIQUOR TOTAL CHECKS ISSUED -1- AMOUNT 110.00 6,060.12 1,016.02 2,049..07 641.57 320.00 134.40 87.50 110.59 9.58 40.17 140.00 83,920.73 870.24 196.28 1,967.25 79.74 1,458.33 30,560.85 100.00 201.95 354.00 2,333.76 1,844.23 446.80 62.00 3,199.91 3,864.00 3,872.44 120.40 979.38 67.56 267.27 2,805.65 873.75 256.00 6,632.40 140.00 447.00 55.00 131,070.39 27.625.55 158.695.94 CK NO CHECK APPROVAL LISTING FOR MARCH 22, 1993 COUNCIL MEETING TO WHOM ISSUED CHECKS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL 11152 11153 11154 11155 11156 11157 11158 11159 11160 11161 11162 11163 11164 11165 11166 11167 11168 11169 11170 11171 11172 11173 11174 11175 11176 11177 11178 11179 11180 11181 11182 11183 11184 11185 void A-I Rental American Ntl Bank J Reinhart-Assured Offc Biff's Inc. Business Records Corp. Crosstown OCS Dem-Con Landfill, Inc. EOS Architecture Rolf E.A. Erickson Finer Meats Gnerer Welding Gopher State One-Call Griffco, Inc. Hennepin County Hoisington Koegler Grp Kar Products Mti Distributing Co. MacQueen Equipment Co. J Meldahl-Crad-Mel Ent. Metro Waste Control Mn Sun Publications Munitech, Inc. Navarre True Value OPM Information systems Pam Companies Power Brake & Equip Co. Shorewood Tree Service Standard Spring Co. So Lk Mtka Pub Safety Time Saver Off site Sec. Twin City Water Clinic Unitog Rental Services . X' ergon PURPOSE Sewer rodder Bond fees Janitorial services Satellite rental Referendum supplies Coffee supplies . Dumping fees PW facility svcs April assessing fee/supplies Dinner meeting cutting edges/bolts One call services Shop supplies Jan prisoner expense Park planning services Plow bolts Tractor w/mower & cab Plow repair supplies Pressure washer supplies April contract payment Publishing April contract payment Maint supplies Typewriter maint contract Overhead exhaust system Vehicle supplies 'Brush hauling #24-right front spring April contact payment Council/plan commiss minutes Feb water testing Uniform rental svcs Welding rod CHECKS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL TOTAL CHECK APPROVAL LIST -2- AMOUNT 42.60 440.40 236.00 129.43 371. 09 117.50 24.50 328.80 3,286.23 14.95 188.61 17.50 82.80 1,079.00. 822.33 129.82 14,763.03 194.35 25.56 30,795.67 125.28 6,200.00 248.63 207.00 45.21 39.01 291. 66 211.10 32,468.64 199.50 . 20.00 423.60 146.93 93.716.73 252.412.67 CHECK APPROVAL LISTING FOR MARCH 22, 1993 COUNCIL .MEETING _ CK NO TO WHOM ISSUED HOURS AMOUNT CHECK REGISTER FOR MARCH 9. 1993 PAYROLL 207124 Void 207125 (L) Scott Bartlett 11.5 reg hours 66.38 207126 (G) Randie Berg 47.0 reg hours 237.64 207127 (G) Eric Chiles 45.5 reg hours 214.98 207128 (G) Jeff Chiles 21.5 reg hours 109.21 207129 (G) Charles Davis 80.0 reg hours. 570.44 207130 (G) Wendy Davis 80.0 reg hours 720.17 207131 (L) Julie Dunn 8.0 reg hours 41.74 207132 (L) Cory Frederick 44.0 reg hours 195.62 207133 (L) John Fruth 18.0 reg hours 97.83 207134 (G) Timothy Heiland 18.0 reg hours 87.27 207135 (G) Patricia Helgesen 80.0 reg hours 633.07 207136 (G) James Hurm 80.0 reg hours 1,540.97 .07137 (L) Brian Jakel 29.0 reg hours 161.19 07138 (G) Dennis Johnson 82.0 reg hours 756.11 207139 (L) Loren Jones 14.5 reg hours 73.74 207140 (L) William Josephson 80.0 reg hours 630.22 207141 (L) Mark Karsten 36.5 reg hours 191.58 207142 (L) Sandra Klomps 14.0 reg hours 73.05 207143 (G) Mary Beth Knopik 34.0 reg hours 184.69 207144 (G) Douglas Koerting 17.25 reg hours 77.47 207145 (G) Jason Koerting 7.0 reg hours 35.55 207146 (G) Anne Latter 80.0 reg hours 859.35 207147 (L) Susan Latterner 29.25 reg hours 159.13 207148 (G) Joseph Lugowski 80.0 reg hours-2 ot 762.68 207149 (L) Russell Marron 33.5 reg hours 186.96 207150 (G) Lawrence Niccum 80.0 reg hourts 784.87 207151 (G) Susan Niccum 80.0 reg hours 702.26 207152 (G) Brent Nicolle 31.5 reg hours 157.91 .207153 (G) Bradley Nielsen 80.0 reg hours 953.51 207154 (G) Joseph Pazandak 80.0 reg hours 1,033.73 207155 (G) Daniel Randall 82.0 reg hours-4 ot 821.77 207156 (L) Brian Roerick 5.0 reg hours 28.86 207157 (G) Alan Rolek 80.0 reg hours 1,225.31 207158 (L) Brian Rosenberger 4.1.0 reg hours 209.26 207159 (L) Christopher Schmid 80.0 reg hours 404.27 207160 (G) Howard Stark 80.0 reg hours-4.5 ot 707.57 207161 (G) Beverly Von Feldt 80.0 reg hours 579.74 207162 (G) Ralph Wehle 80.0 reg hours 614.97 207163 (L) Dean Young 80.0 reg hours 614.44 207164 (G) Donald Zdrazil 80.0 reg hours 1.189.45 TOTAL GENERAL 15,560.69 TOTAL LIQUOR 3,134.27 TOTAL PAYROLL 18,694.96 -3- ASSESSMENT POLICY FOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTS CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA . MARCH, 1993 DRAFT : ~ ~ , . . t ~ ~ ., . t t . . . . . ASSESSMENT POLICY FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS I. HISTORY. . . . . . . . . . . .. . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. ... . . .. 1 IT. SCOPE AND PURPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 . . 2 ITl DEFINITIONS 0...... 0 . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 0 . . . . . . . . . . 3 IV. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CONCEPT ........ 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . . . . . 0 0 0 . . 5 A. B. Benefit Principle ....... 0 . . . . . 0 . . 0 . . . . . . . 0 . . . . 0 . . . . . 0 0 5 Consistent and Equitable . . . . 0 . . . . . 0 . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . .. 5 V. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE .. 0 . 0 . . . . . 0 . . . . 0 . . . . . . . 7 A." Initiating the proceedings . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . 0 0 0 . 0 7 B. Preparing the feasibility study ...................... 0 0 0 .. 9. C. Holding a public hearing . . . . 0 0 . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 9 D. Ordering the Improvement and ordering Plans and Specifications 10 Eo Advertising for Bids . . . 0 . . . 0 0 . . 0 . . . . 0 . 0 . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . .. 11 F. Awarding Contracts 0 . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . 0 0 . . . . . 0 . 0 . 0 . . 0 o' 12 G. Preparing Proposed Assessment Roll. . 0 . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . 0 0 . 0 12 H. Holding Public Hearing on Proposed Assessments ....... 0 0 0 0 13 1. Adopting the Assessments ...... 0 . 0 . . . 0 0 . . . 0 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 0 . . 0 14 J. Transmitting Assessments to County Auditor 0... . 0 0 . 0 0 . . 0 .. 15 VI. ASSESSMENT POUCIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16 A. Establishing an annual assessment rate ................... 16 B. Assessable Street Reconstruction Projects ................. 16 C. Project Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17 D. Term of Assessment .............................."... 17 1. Standard Lots ................................. 2. Rectangular Variation Lots ....................... 3. Triangular Lot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Cul-de-sac Lots ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Curved Lots .................................. 6. Irregular Shaped Lots ........................... 7. Corner Lots .................................. 8. Flag Lots and Back Lots ......................... 9. Double Frontage Lots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E. Government Owned properties ......................... 17 F. Non-developable Land. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18 G. Interest Rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18 H. Payment Procedures ................................. 18 1. Appeal Procedures .................................. 19 J. Reapporriol]J;llent upon Land Division .................... 19 VII. ASSESSMENT METHOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 21 A. Unit Method . . . . . '.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Front Footage Method ............................... VIII. DEFERRED ASSESSMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28 A Large Tracts of Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 29 B. Conditions of Hardships .......:...................... 29 C. Termination of Hardship Deferment ..................... 31 . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD ASSESSMENT POllCY FOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTS SECTION I - HISTORY The City Council has become concerned with street reconstruction needs for a number of reasons: 1) Street mileage and costs associated with . reconstruction have been increasing; 2) Shorewood's becoming eligible for the Municipal State Aid Program (MSA) in 1990 has provided funding for certain street reconstruction on an accelerated basis; and, 3) many of Shorewood's streets were last worked on beyond normal maintenance in the early 1970's with the installation of city-wide sanitary sewer. The Council has further concerns that the necessary financial resources may not be available to properly reconstruct city streets as the need arises. These concerns culminated in the City .council creating an ad hoc citizen Street Reconstruction Financing Task Force in 1992. That Task Force 'concluded that"...replacing . streets on a forty year cycle would be a tremendous drain on the City's general fund". Therefore it recommended "...that an assessment procedure be established for the reconstruction of streets", and that"...the special assessment rate be established at 33 percent of the cost of a standard 24 foot street with a rural cross section (no curb and gutter)". This special assessment policy is based on the recommendations of the Task Force Final Report dated August 18, 1992, attached to this policy as Appendix A. 1 . SECTION II - SCOPE AND PURPOSE This policy is intended to provide for a fair, equitable, and consistent means of recovering and distributing the cost of street reconstruction improvements to already existing streets. This policy does not apply to new construction nor to maintenance functions which are defined as patching, seal coating and overlay. Street reconstruction is considered to be any street improvement over and above these maintenance functions. . 2 SECTION III - DEFINITIONS Adjusted Front Foota2e: A method for determining the average front footage for odd- shaped lots which ,:\,ould be equivalent to the footage of a rectangular shaped lot of the same area and depth. 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. Construction Cost: Amount paid to contractors for constructing the improvements. . Construction Interest: Cost of financing 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. 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. . Front Foota2e: The shortest dimensions of existing or potential sites abutting the streets. 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. Lot: Corner: 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 (1350) or less. 3 Proiect Cost (Total Cost of Improvements): All construction costs, plus costs for administration, engineering, legal, fiscal, easement acquisition assessing, and any project related work previously done but not assessed. 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. Side footal:e: The longest dimension of existing or potential corner building sites abutting the street. 4 . . . . SECTION IV - SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS CONCEPT 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 confined to property specially benefitted; 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 benefitted 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 ar~ 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 benefitted properties. Minnesota Statutes and the courts have extended broad authority to City Councils for determining assessment methods and policies. 5 The City must recover 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. It is important that assessments .be imple~nted in a reasonable, consistent and fair manner. 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. . . 6 SECTION V - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE A flow chart on the Shorewood Public Improvement Process for Special Assessment projects giving a detailed eJPJanation of the process is shown on the next page. A. Initiatinfl the Proceedinfls 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 is completed under the terms of this policy. 7 City of Shorewood Public Improvement Process for Special Assessment Projects Staff Activities/Tasks rF~w:::::::::--:::::::::::::::::~:::-":::-~::.":"-::::::::::::::~:::::m::~::::::~::::::"-::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::-:::::::-~::::::::::::::::::::::::::-"::::::X::::::::::::::: ~:::::::::::::: .:.:.:.: .:.:.:.: :.;.:.:. :::::=:: :.:.:.:. .:.:.:.: :::::::: :.:.:.:. Prepare/update capital improvement program & budget or comment on petitioned project ~~:::~:~::::::::-.(.:::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-"::::~:::::::::::::::X:::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::--::::::::::::::::::::::;::::--::::::: :;::::;::::::::;::::::::::::::::::::::=::::::::::::;::::::: ~~;t :.:.:.:- .:.:.:.: .;.:.;.: :.:.:.:.' ........ :.;.:-:. Feasibility report; prepare cost estimate, project budget, and schedule; determine benefited area and proposed assessments ::?::::X:::::::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::--:::::::::::::::::::=:::::::::::::::::::::=:::::::::::=:::;.;::::::::::::::===:::~::~::::::::::=:::: :::::::::::::::.-:::::w::::::::::::::::::;::=::: .:.:.:.: :-:.:.:. .:.:.:.: .:.:.:.: Mail hearing notices; prepare engineering agreement ~:::::~r-::::::::::;::w:=:=:::::::::::::::::::::::::::=:=:-.--=:::::::::::::=:::::::::'-::::::~~:::,.-:=:::=:::::::::::::=:::::::--:::::::::::::::::=:::::::=::::::::::::::::::::::::x:::,-:::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::.-:::::::::::;.......::::::l-.::::::::::: ........ . ::::l-':= :::==::= ::::$:: Prepare plans & specs ~rt::::.-:::=:::::::::--:::::::::::::::::::::::::::=:::::::=:::::--::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~;:=::::::::~::::::;;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::=:::'-:-':::~::'-:::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::=:::::::::::;::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::. ~:;:~: ~:::::.: Take bids, compare with estimates ~::::::X::::::::::~":'-:::::::::::::::::::::~::'$;..'..'..':::::::"'."~.""~.~~:".~'.::....::......."$...:::'!-::::::::~:::::>.:~:::::::m::::::~:x:::::::::::::::::::::::::::-"M:::-'::::::::::=:: :::::::: :-:.:.:. Prepare & execute contract; initiate & adminis- ter construction; prepare fmal assessment roll :~:~~!:~::-~::.w:.":-,,:=,:<<-::::m:-':.:-.~~::::-~::::=:::::::::::'"~:::::~~:::::;,-:::::::::::::::::::::~::*~::::::::::::::::"@:::::::::"J!:X:~.x%::::e Prepare & mail hearing notices :.;.:.;. .:.:-;.; ~:~:~~:~::::-:::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::;:.:::-:-:-:::::::~::::::::.:-::::::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::::-::::::~::::::::;::~:::::::::::::::X::::::-::::::~::::;::::::::::::::::::':=X::'::":'::: ::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::-,::':-:::::::-:':::::~ Certify assessment to County Auditor 8 ,ity cQundl Decisions :::":::::.:::::::::-:-:-:::~:::::-:-:X-:::-:':::::::::::-:-:-::>>:::-:-:-:<<-:<<-:-:-:::-:-~~':-:::::X:::'=.........::........~.........-:....:.:-:<<-:~:::. Modify/approve capital improvement program and! or budget, or resolution declaring adequacy of petition, and resolution ordering preparation of feasibility report ::::::::;.::::::::;:::::-.::::::::::~;.::::::::::::X::::::::::::::::X:::::::::~@:::::::::m::::~~*:Xt;:::::::::::::X'X'X!.xx::x:::::::::w.::::::~::::x~::::...... Accept report and call for hearing -::; :.:.:.:-:-:.:-:.:.:-:.:-:.:-:-:-:.:-:-x-:.x<<-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-x-:.x.:<<-:<<->>:-:*:-:-x.:.:.:-:.:-:.:.:-x.:-:<<.:-:<<-:-:<<-:->>:-:*:-:-:.:-:-:.:<<<<-:-:<<*:.x*:-:<<-:.:<<-:-x-:.x-:.:-~::. Hold public hearing on the proposed project; order the improvement and preparation of plans; ap- prove engineering agreement ::::.>>:::-::::::;.:.:.:.:-x-:-:<<.:..v,':':-X<<-:-:-*:-::>>M->>:<::-:::-:<<~;'-'~-:-:-:->>>>:::-:<<<<-:::-~-:::<<'>>:-:-::.'.........::..~>>~<<::: Approve plans and order advertisement for bids :::.:-:-~::::::.:.:-:-:::::.:::.:-:-:.>>:::.:-:.:-:-:-:::.x-:-:-::::x.:-:-:::-:~.,.....:-:-:::.::::w..:::::-:<<->>,:<<<<-:<<-:::-:<<<<::::-:::.v,.:-:xx<<::-::x........~.t:(.~?;-:~x-::::::r Accept bid and authorize contract .. :-:. ::::::::;:~-;:., o::xx.;.:.:.:.:.~::...<<<<:"...~<->>>>>>x~-:.......o.o...:.:.:O.O"'.'.' c:::.oo::.e:.....~:~e::..o..~~(t~ Accept work & call for final hearing on pro- posed assessments ::X::::::;,::::':-:::::::--.(.::::;:;.-:::xwx~::~.<<....':"W.-:-:::::;:-w..:,:::-:::-:<<:::".(.:>>:::-y~w(.;.:y(....(.~.;::::::>>:X~'W'.IY.":l.,.~x~'1~ Hold fmal assessment public hearing and adopt assessment roll . . . B. Preparin2 the Feasibility Study An improvement project which is initiated by action of the City Councilor 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. Holdin2 a Public Hearin2 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 determines 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. 9 .; In the case of a Council - initiated project or petition of less than 100% of abutting property 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 prop~sed 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. Orderin~ the Improvement and Orderin~ 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 notice. At this time a special assessment is considered to be "pending" for all assessable properties in the improvement area. 10 . . 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. Advertisin2 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. , 11 F. Awarding Contracts Following receipt of the bids, the City Council must either: 1. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder; or 2. Reje~t 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. Preparing 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 benefitted 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 12 deferred assessments. The assessment roll must be filed with the City Administrator/Clerk and be available for public inspection. H. Holdinl: Public Hearinl: on Pro{)osed Assessments A public hearin~ on the special assessments must be held following published and mailed 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 oJJjections 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 le'ast once, not less than two (2) weeks prior to the hearing. 13 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 lot, 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. Whetber 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. I. Adoptin2 the Assessments . At the assessment hearing or at any adjournment thereof, the City Council may adopt the assessments as proposed 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 .. ~ssessment roll shall include any and all deferments ~n large or unplatted parcels of land along the City's street system. 14 . . J. Transmitting Assessment to County Auditor After the' adoption of the assessment, the City Clerk must transmit a certified duplicate copy of the assessment roll, including all deferred equivalent residential units, to the County Auditor. 15 SECTION VI - 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 benefit~ of improvements without paying for them. These policies relate to street reconstruction projects. A. Establishin2 .an Annual Rate 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 undertake a study to determine the per foot project cost of a "typical" 24 foot, rural cross section street (with no curb and gutter), in the metropolitan area, adjusted for typical Shorewood soil conditions (see appendix B). When determining an annual rate with construction costs of the previous construction season the construction cost index as published by the "Engineering News Record" or consumer price index II,lay be used. The annual Assessment Rate Resolution is appendix C of this document. . B. Assessable Street Reconstruction Projects . Street reconstruction projects are not likely to require the same amount of work throughout the entire length of the project. That is, some sections may need to be fully excavated and back-filled while other sections may need simple reshaping. It is the policy of the city that a project is assessable when it's aggregate cost is estimated to be at least 150% of a simple 2 inch overlay project. 16 . . C. Project Costs Project cost shall include, but not be limited to, the following: A. Total Construction cost including intersections B. Engineering fees C. Administrative fees . D. Right-of-way/easement acquisition/condemnation costs E. LegaL fees F. Fiscal Fees G. Capitalized interest D. Term of Assessment Assessments for street reconstruction should be assessed for a ten (10) 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. 17 F. Non-developable Land Special Assessments shall not be levied on properties deemed unbuildable due to the ~xistence 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 buildabl~ 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 insure adequate cash flow when the City is unable to reinvest assessI?ent p'repa~ents 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: 1. Tax l?ayment - If no action is undertaken by the property owner, then special assessment installments will appear annually on the individual's property tax statement for the duration of the assessment term. 18 . . 2. Full Payment - No interest will be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days of the date of adoption of the assessment roll. In the initial year, the property owner may at any time between that date and November 15, prepay the balance of the assessment with interest accrued to 'December 31 of that year.' 3. Parti~ Payment - The property owner has a one-time opportunity to make a partial payment reduction of any amount against his \her assessment. This option may only be exercised within the 3D-day period immediately following adoption of the assessment roll. . 4. Prepayment - The property owner may, with the exception of the current year's installment of principal and interest, pay the remaining assessment balance at any time, prior to November 15 without further interest charges. Thereafter, the next installment, with interest through December 31 of the following year, will be levied for collection with the real estate taxes payable the ensuing year. The principal balance will be reduced by the amount of the installment. I. Appeal Procedures . No appeal ~ay be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Administrator's office prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The property owner may appeal an assessment to District Court by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Administrator within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within 10 days after service of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Administrator. 19 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 of the 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. . 20 SECTION VII - ASSESSMENT METHOD Once an assessment rate bas been established for the year, that rate will be utilized for each project, no matter the width, design, or type of street being reconstructed. The City Council may utilize one of two methods of assessment for each project, "unit" or "front foot". The City Engineer shall recommend the method and prepare the proposed assessment roll based upon which method results in the most fair and equitable assessment roll for that project. The unit method is to be utilized when the front footage of the assessable properties are of relatively equal length or the benefit to the properties is similar. The front footage method is to be utilized when there is a significant differential in the front . footage, or benefit, of the assessable properties. A. Unit Method . The unit method of assessment is most commonly used when the benefitting properties are of similar benefit, but not necessarily similar geometry. For instance, road reconstruction along a particular road will likely benefit the several properties on a private drive as much as it benefits those properties directly abutting the road being improved. In such a case, simply assessing the abutting front footage would not be equitable. A unit assessment shall be derived according to the following formula: Annual assessment rate X project length X 0.33 / number of assessable units. The number of assessment units assigned to each parcel 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. A lot shall be defined in accordance with the City's Zoning Ordinance. 21 Comer lots shall typically have one-half (0.5) of its assessable units applied to each street. However, the entire number of assessable units can be assessed in conjunction with the street improvement project done first. This approach would normally be taken where a single lot derives a majority of benefit from the reconstructiqn of the first project due to lot, driveway, and home location. B. Front Foota2e Method The actual physical dimensions of a parcel abutting a street reconstruction project shall NOT be construed as the frontage utilized to calculate the assessment for a particular parcel. Rather, an "adjusted front footage" will be determined. The front footage assessment rate shall be derived according to the following formula: . Annual assessment rate X project length X .33 / total adjusted front footage. The purpose of this method is to equalize assessment calculations for lots of similar size. Individual parcels by their very nature differ considerably in shape and area. The following procedures will apply when calculating adjusted front footage. The selection of the appropriate procedure will be determined by the specific configuration of the parcel. All measurements will be scaled from available plat and section maps and will be rounded down to the nearest foot dimension with any excess fraction deleted. Categorical type descriptions are as follows: . 1. Standard Lots 6. Irregularly Shaped Lots 2. Rectangular Variation Lots 7. Corner Lots 3. Triangular Lots 8. Flag Lots and Back Lots 4. Cul-de-sac Lots . 9. Double Frontage Lots 5. Curved Lots The ultimate objective of these procedures is to arrive at a fair and equitable distribution of cost whereby consideration is given to lot size and all parcels are comparably assessed. 22 1. Standard Lots. In this instance, the adjusted front footage for rectangular lots will be the actual front footage of the lot. The frontage measured shall be the lot width at the front lot line. - MAIN:. AVENlE ~o 90 A .S Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES Lot A-50' Lot B.- 90' 2. Rectanqular Variation Lots. For a lot which is approximately rectangular and uniform in shape, the adjusted . front footage is computed by averaging the front -and back sides of the lot. This meth~d is used only where the divergence between front and rear lot lines is 20 feet or less. . MAN AVEf\U: Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES 90' 7d Lot A 90 -+- 110 = 100' 2 Lot B - 70 -+- 80 = 75' A 8 2 110' 80' 3. Trianaular Lots. For a triangular shaped lot, the adjusted front footage is computed by averaging the front and back lot lines. The measurement at the back lot line shall not exceed a maximum distance in depth of 150 feet. Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES . MAIN AVENUE .-'00' I~O' _L~ Lot A - 100 -+- 40 = 70' 2 Lot B - 40 -+- 130 = 85' 2 Lot C - 120 -+- 0 ... 6 0 ,. 2 23 4. Cul-de-sac Lots. The adjusted front footage for those lots that exist on cul-de-sacs will be calculated at the building line as defined by the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance. 8 110' Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES Lot A -75' Lot B - 110' Lot C - 80' . 5. Curved Lots. In certain situations such as those where lots are located along curved streets, road patterns create curvilineal frontages. In such instances the adjusted front footage will be the width of the lot measured at the midpoint of the shortest si?e lot line. A: . 24 8 -. -... 7~' -.. -c ISO' 90'/ Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES Lot A 70 ' Lot B 90' Lot.C -150' . 6. Irreqularlv Shaped Lots. In many cases, unplatted parcels that are legally described by a metes and bounds description are irregular and oddly shaped. The adjusted front footage will be calculated by measuring the lot width at the building setback line based upon the zoning district in which the lot is located. ,,: SBL! -1 MAIN AVENUE Adj. Front.Footage EXAMPLES Lot A - 115' Lot B - 140' Lot C - 125' SBL = Setback Line . 7. Corner Lots. a. Residentially Zoned Corner Lots. The adjusted front footage will be assessed on the short side. A 150 foot side lot allowance credit will apply along the adjacent side street. Any remaining frontage will constitute an additional assessment. The short side will be assessed in those cases where the improvement' may exist on one side only as well as for improvements abutting on both sides. ' . Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES Lot A - 95' Lot B - 225' A -.., en -~ - 8 125' 150' 100' MAN 'AYENLE 25 7. Commercial Zoned Corner Lots. b. No allowance relief will be granted because of the higher inherent property value associated with improved traffic frontage and greater visibility along business district intersections. The adjusted front footage shall be the entire frontage measured along the setback line comprising the bUilding envelope. Adj. Front Footage EX.~"'P!.ZS I I I J J . I~ - I or A ~! I I::OJ I ----- - --..--.. "'c N o o N Lot A - 280' Lot .a 390" -0 "'f' , r I ~1 r , r""' 8 ,- 27~1 L------------------1 )J . . l~' MAN AVEl\lE: 1 . I 300' 8. F1aq lots and back lots. Properties which utilize a narrow private easement or maintain ownership of access to their property exceeding a minimum length of 125 feet, thereby 'having a small frontage on a street, will be assigned an adjusted front footage based on the minimum lot width for the zoning district in which it is located. . This dimension is consistent.. with the zoning ordinance which prescribes such length as the minimum lot width along a public roadway. The adjusted front footage. for flag lots whose driveway access is under 125 will be measured at the building setback line from the access terminus. 20' MAIN /$IE. Adj. Front Footage E:G.MPLES A 8 Lot A - SO' . Lot B 90' 170' ~ 26 . . 9. Double Frontaqe Lots. It a parcel, other than a corner lot, comprises frontage on two streets and is eligible tor subdivision, then an adjusted tr9nt footage assessment will be .charged along each street. For double frontage . lots lacking the necessary depth tor subdivision, only a single adjusted front footage will be computed. MAIN AvE. 110' MAIN AVE. eo' - Adj. Front Footage &:XAMPLES Lot A - 220' Lot B - 80' -., A f'- C\.I -~ B 110' 27 SECTION VIII - DEFERRED ASSESSMENTS The City Council may defer Special Assessments: 1. On portions of large tracts of land as allowed in this chapter so as to :tirinimize the influence of the proposed improvement on the development of said land. 2. On homestead property owned by a person who qualifies under the hardship criteria set forth below. 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 applicatio~ 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 Administrator 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 payment 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. 28 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 financing. 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. A. Large Tracts of Land . Upon appli~ation, the City Council may defer the assessments on large tracts of land . that may be subdivided or developed in the future. It is the intent of this policy to grant deferments of special assessments to large tracts so as to minimize the influence of the proposed improvement on the premature development of said land. The deferment granted pursuant to this section may be of indefinite duration subject to the occurrence of: . The subdivision of the property resulting in the creation of a new, buildable lot . If the City Council determines there is no continuing need for the deferment . .. B. Conditions of Hardship 1., Any applicant must be 65 years of age, or older, or retired by reason of . permanent and/or total disability and must own a legal or equitable interest in the property applied for which must be the homestead of the applicant, and, 2. The annual gross income of the applicant shall not be in excess of the income limits asset forth by family size in Hennepin County's Section Eight guidelines. Calculation of the total family income shall be determined by the summation 29 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, 3. The special assessments to be deferred exceed $1,000.00. 4. Permanent and/or total disability shall be determined by using the criteria established for "permanent and total disability" for Workman's Compensation, to wit: a. The total and permanent loss of the sight of both eyes. . b. The loss of both arms at the shoulder. c. The loss of both legs so close to the hips that no effective artificial members can be used. d. Complete and permanent paralysis. e. Total and permanent loss of mental faculties. f. Any other injury which totally incapacitates the owner from working at an occupation which brings him \her an income. . An applicant must substantiate the retirement by reason of permanent and/or total . disability by providing 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. 30 C. Termination of Hardship Deferment . . The Qption to defer the payment of special assessments shall terminate and all .-, amounts accumulated plus applicable interest shall become due upon the occurrence of anyone of the following events: 1. 2. 3. 4. The death of an owner when there is no spouse eligible for deferment. The sale, transfer, or subdivision of all or any part of the property. Loss of homestead status on the property. Determination by the City Council for any reason that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. Failure to file a renewal application within the time prescribed in A. above. The end of the term of the original special assessment. 5. 6. Upon the occurrence of one of the events specified in this section, the City Council shall terminate the deferment. Thereupon the City Administrator shall notify the County Auditor and County Assessor of the termination, including the amounts accumulated on unpaid principal installments, plus any applicable interest, which shall become due and payable as a result of the termination. The City Administrator may negotiate and establish a payment schedule on the principal and interest owed after the deferment terminates. Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit the City Council from considering an application of hardship on the basis of exceptional and unusual circumstances which are-not covered by the standards and guidelines as set forth in this ordinance. This consideration and determination must be made in a non-discriminatory manner so as not to give the applicant an unreasonable preference or advantage over other applicants. 31 APPENDIX. . MAye;:; Baro ara"c" C::UNC: L Kttttl S:o....r Boo G..q". RoO OaU9nltrrl Ca",.1 l......, CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHORE'NOOD. MINNESOTA 55331 . (6121 474.3236 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: street Reconstruction Financing Task Force Members: "'Robert. McDougal, James Finstuen, and Robert Shaw Kristi Stover, Council Liaison Robert Bean, Planning commission Liaison James c. H~, City Administrator Joel Dresel, City Engineer Al Rolek, Finance Director . DATE: Au~st 18, 1992 Final Report R"!:". -. .This report is the result of the charge assigned the street Reconstruction Financing Task Force in t..'le "Purpose" and IIObjectives'" portion of Resolution No. 54-92 dated June 8, 1992. The Task Force met on June 24th and 30th; July 11th and 28t...'l; and August 11th. The Task Forces conclusions are as follows: Ob;ective 1 - Define a reconstructed street. The Task Force defines maintenance as patching, seal-coating, and overlay. Reconstruction is defined as any street improvement over and . above these maintenance functions. When the City determines that a street should be reconstructed it would be rebuilt to its current width. Current width could be adjusted by the city Council upon request of the property owners or.by the Council following public hearing if traffic counts or safety considerations suggest wider street is warranted. The Task Force broke the streets down into four categories: 1) MSA./Collector 28'+ Curb & Gutter 2) Standard Local 24'+ Curb & Gutter where necessary 3) Substandard Local 20-24' curb & Gutter where necessary 4) Other Less than 20' Curb & Gutter where necessary .. A Resident:/al Communiry on Lake Minneronka's Sourh Shore Ob;ective 2 - Review street reconstruction needs and review options. funding . The Task Force dete~ined ~~at ~~e only t~o feasible funding sources . are from t.'1.e City I S general fund and from special assess~ents to abutting property owners. Projections show that replacing streets on a forty year cycle would be a tremendous drain on the City's general fund. Ob;ective 3 - Develop a program to match projected revenues with projected needs. It is very difficult to project when a street is going to bre~~ up. Perhaps a pavement management system could be utilized to attempt to make better proj ections of street needs. The Task Force however believes that it is likelY ~~at ~~e needs in the foreseeable future will be greater than our cUrrent revenues will handle. Ob;ective 4 - Propose a fair and equitable method and procedure of financing reconstruction of streets. . The Task Force recommends t.~at an assessment procedure be established for the reconstruction of streets. We found in our analysis that utilizing only general funds results in high valued properties paying a disproportionately high portion of street improvement costs throughout t...'1.e ci ty. Some form of special assessments to pay for street improvements is very standard in municipalities t...~oughout the state of Minnesota. A special assessment procedure would require a public hearing. This qi ves the property owner a formal way to offer input into the reconstruction Of the street. In addition there is a fairness argument to consider. Should a resident who just paid for a new street be required, through the general property taxes, to pay for street improvements throughout the city for the next forty years? Perhaps those residents who abut a street which is being approved should be required to pay a percentage of that improvement. . The Task Force recommends that the. ..soecialassessment rate be established at 33 percent of the costs of a standard 24 foot street width a rllr.al cross-section (no curb and gutter). Each resident, no matter which of the four categories they would fall, would be required to pay this same rate established annually. by ~~e city council after study and recommendation by the city Engineer. That means that in a~y one year any street of the ci tywhich is being reconstructed whether ~ t be a 28 foot MSA road with curb and gutter, or a 20 foot local road with no curb and gutter would pay the same rate. Again it is wor..h noting that any changes to the current width or .street sta~dard would have to be made by the city council only after p~lic hear~ng. 2 The last question considered by the Task Force was UMethod of Assessment". In establishing a policy for this it is recommended that the guiding princ~ple should be: special assessments 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: ~) the rate must be uniform and equal upon all'property receiving special benefit: 2) the assessment must be confined to property" specially benefited; and 3) the amount of the assessment must not exceed the special benefit. A survey of methods used by municipalities similar in nature to Shorewood indicated that some have chosen to determine the "Method of .Assessmentl1 on a project basis in view of the fact that the "Front Footage" method may be most equitable in some cases and the "Unit" method in others. Following in depth discussion the Task Force recommends that the city of Shore wood and its citizens and property owners would be best served by choosing this course. In doing so, it would be necessary to develop policies for applying both methods. It is the opinion of the Task Force that its assignment as defined in Resolution No. 54-92, has been satisfied in his report. . aJ/taskforce..st 3 L 21. Drown By: P.S.H. QSM.orr ScheleIli l.layeroln Sc Associates, Inc. En&lneers . Archlle<:la . Planners . Sur..e,or. 300 Park Pia... Cenler . 5775 W.y...la, Bouleurd IIlnn.apollo. 11M 55416'1228 . 1112-595-5775 Dote: 2-4-93 APPENDIX B-1 50' R/W J 24' 4" TOPSOIL 21. 1'1211 BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE W / ROLLED BIT. CURB 311 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE 6" CLASS 5/GRAVEL (1001. CRUSHED) BASE COURSE 11 SUBCUT W / SELECT GRANULAR BACKFfLL GEOTEXTILE FABRIC NO SCALE Drawing Title Comm. No. TYPICAL SECTION FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES PER ORDINANCE Sheet no. I~ 21. Drown By: P.S.H. QS;\\orr Schelen Wayeron. 8<< Associates. Inc. Enalneers _ Arc:h1leels _ Planners ., Surveyors 300 Park Plaee CeDle. _ :177:1 ".y:..\.a BouJnard IIlnn.apolll. ilK :1:1418-1228 _ 812-:l9i~-577:1 Dote: 2-4-93 APPENDIX B- 2 50'R/W J 24' 21. SUB-DRAIN 1!j2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE 3" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE 6" CLASS 5/GRAVEL (1001- CRUSHED) BASE COURSE l' SUBCUT W / SELECT GRANULAR BACKFILL GEOTEXTILE FABRIC NO SCALE Drawing Title Comm. No. TYPICAL SECTION FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES Sheet no_ ALTERNATE WI SUB-DRAIN .'" .' CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1993 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Rosenberger called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Rosenberger; Commissioners Bean, Bonach, Borken, Hansen, Malam and Pisula; Council Liaison Lewis; Planner Nielsen. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Malam moved, Bean seconded to approve the minutes of the Commission's February 16, 1993 meeting. Motion passed 7/0. 1. 7:00 PUBLIC HEARING - SETBACK VARIANCE Apolicant: Location: Dave Nelson/Peter Knaeble 21740 Lilac Lane Rosenberger reviewed the Public Hearing Procedure: - Chair announces case - Staff presents case analysis - Applicant responds to staff analysis - Public testimony - Planning Commission discussion - Planning Commission recommendation. Nielsen reviewed the basic tests and legal criteria set forth by statute and City Code which must be met for variances to be granted: _ Circumstances must be unique to the property - Applicant must demonstrate undue hardship _ Economic considerations alone shall not constitute hardship - Burden of proof is on the applicant _ If a variance is granted, the City may attach reasonable conditions. 1 ".' ... I.. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1993 - PAGE 2 Nielsen reviewed the applicant's request for a 15-foot setback variance to build a home on property located at 21740 Lilac Lane. He stated the property was recently subdivided and that the property is characterized by significant drops in topography and is also wooded. The request is based primarily on those characteristics. The property is zoned R-1 A, which requires a 50' front yard setback. The applicant is asking to build the home 35' from the street. Nielsen referred to the applicant's request letter dated January 5, 1993 citing the reasons why a variance may be justified. The staff report responds to each of the points raised by the applicant. Nielsen stated that, for example, the applicant cites that the house to the west of the subject site is 35' from the street. Nielsen pointed out, however, that the house to the east is approximately 70' back. The City zoning ordinance provides for an average setback requirement where adjoining buildings are closer to the street than setbacks allow. In this particular case, however, Nielsen stated the applicant would be worse off, since the average setback is 52.5' instead of 50'. Nielsen referred to the applicant's statement that since the lot is very heavily wooded, placing the house with a 35' setback would save a significant number of trees primarily because of the amount of grading required to accommodate the 50' setback. Nielsen stated that staff's study of the request indicates that it is possible to minimize the amount of fill required to accommodate the 50' setback. If the house were set lower into the site, a considerable amount fill could be saved as well as eliminating a number of problems. Nielsen pointed out that no lot is guaranteed gravity sewer service, however, lowering the home by 4' should still provide gravity service to all but the basement level of the home as well as minimize the amount of fill required on the site. He indicated the lowest level of the house could be served by a sewage lift pump. Nielsen stated that the lot actually requires a home of special design which would mitigate the applicant's reasons for a variance. Nielsen stated the staff recommends denial of the setback variance request primarily because the need for the variance stems from placing a standard house plan on a lot which requires' special design treatment. He noted, however, that if there is justification for a variance on the basis of saving trees and minimizing site alteration, a number of conditions should be imposed on the variance. Nielsen reviewed those conditions. He noted that regardless of whether or not the variance is granted, the driveway at the west side of the site must be eliminated under the conditions of the subdivision approval. Rosenberger called for comments from the applicants. Mr. David Nelson commented that the lot has been sold and the variance is requested so a house can be built on the lot. Rosenberger opened and closed the Public Hearing at 7:22 p.m. there being no comments from the public. Bean requested additional information from the applicant regarding concerns related to the driveway grade. Mr. Nelson indicated that he desires that the garage be located on a higher level. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1993 - PAGE 3 Borkon inquired whether the sale of the property is contingent upon the variance. Mr. Nelson replied "Yes." Bonach inquired whether the property is for sale. Nelson indicated it was sold last fall. Hansen stated that based on his inspection of the site, it appears that the lot is not particularly appropriate for construction of a garage higher than the house. He noted that there are a thousand poplar trees on the site and that a 35' setback would not save any trees on the site. He noted that the lot is "interesting" and probably would not accommodate a traditionally-designed house. Hansen stated that it appears that insufficient time has been spent in designing a home for the lot and basically agreed with the staff's recommendations. Borkon asked for clarification on the sale of the lot. Nelson stated that the sale made last fall is contingent upon this variance and that closing has not occurred. Borkon asked what implications a revised design of the house would have on the current request. Nielsen stated staff did not attempt to place a different home on the site, but did retreat from the notion that the garage be higher than the street and that all levels of the house be served by City sewer. Nielsen pointed out that the plans submitted by the applicant are for a three-story home; whereas the City's ordinance limits houses to 2-1/2 stories. Rosenberger noted that it is not the staff's responsibility to place a differently designed home on the site. Hansen stated that the applicant's estimate of the cost of the increased fill and foundation required at the 50' setback seems extremely high. Nielsen explained that economic considerations are not justification for a variance and that an applicant's ability to finance a project should not be the City's business. Rosenberger noted receipt of the January 8, 1993 letter from John and Ruth Breckheimer regarding this request. Bonach requested clarification of the location of the garage on the site. Nielsen reviewed a suggested location which would take advantage of the contours of the site. Malam indicated that hardships for the applicant appear to be created by somewhat deficient proposed plans. Bean moved, Borkon seconded to recommend to the Council that it deny the request of Peter Knaeble and Dave Nelson for a 15 foot setback variance at 21740 Lilac Lane. Motion passed 7/0. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1993 - PAGE'4 2. 7:15 PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. TO BUILD ON A SUBSTANDARD LAKESHORE LOT Aoolicant: location: Patrick Pechacek 5025 Shady Island Road Nielsen presented an overview of the Classification of land Uses zoning ordinance which include permitted uses, accessory uses, and conditional uses. Nielsen reviewed the applicant's request for a conditional use permit to demolish the existing home at 5025 Shady Island Road and build a new home in its place. He noted that the C.U.P. is necessary because the lot is substandard in the Shoreland Zoning District. The applicant has provided site and building plans and grading plans. Nielsen reviewed how the applicant's proposal complies with the R 1 IC zoning code for building on a substandard lot. He reviewed necessary changes required to bring the site plan into conformance under the Shoreland District regulations. Nielsen recommended that the C.U.P. be granted subject to the following conditions: 1. Blacktop surfacing near the lake must be removed and the area landscaped, while the bituminous strip along the east side of the lot may remain for drainage purposes; 2. Boathouse be removed; 3. Bituminous area on the north end of the lot must be removed except as needed for the proposed driveway; 4. Impervious surface on the site must be limited to 4043 square feet of area; 5. Erosion control and construction 'limits. shown on the site plan must be in place prior to any site work being started; 6. If the common driveway is eliminated, both resulting driveways must be 5' from the property line; and 7. All required improvements must be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Nielsen commented on the impact on the adjoining neighbor regarding separate driveways. Nielsen clarified the requirements under the Ordinance regarding lot width and lot area. Rosenberger asked for comments from the applicant. There were none. Rosenberger opened the Public Hearing at 7:50 p.m. Mr. Bert Monten, 5045 Shady Island Road, stated he owns the lot and house next door. His driveway is 7' wide. He indicated there has been some consideration of the property line and the driveway and stated that a row of arborvitae trees have been planted along the driveway. .His house has been designed to fit the common driveway. Monten indicated he doesn't know what the schedule for building is, but that while he did have some plans regarding the driveway, he is now unable to deal with the issue in the near future due to complications that have arisen. Mr. Gerald Kennedy, 4995 Shady Island Road, stated he is directly on the west side, and that it is a benefit to him not having the house on the property line. 4 . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1993 - PAGE 5 Rosenberger closed the Public Hearing at 7:55 p.m. Borkon requested additional information on the driveway issue. Nielsen stated that drainage was an issue with the common driveway and that recently, parking has also become a problem and ~hat is the reason the arborvitae was planted. He indicated that he was not aware of an easement by either party across the other party's land nor of the existence of a maintenance agreement between the parties. He noted that it is a difficult situation in that the request before the Commission hinges on compliance of another piece of property. Nielsen suggested that one solution could be leaving the common driveway and dealing with the matter when both parties are ready to do so. Nielsen was not prepared to recommend alternatives other than to leave the common driveway or to have the parties work it out. Monten indicated that no easements exist as the situation has been that way since 1955. He reiterated that his driveway is 7'wide and it is not big enough to drive a car through, he does not make claims to the driveway, but needs more room than that to drive his vehicles through. He indicated the trees are planted so they are right on the edge of the property line. He would like to see his driveway 5' away from the property line, but acknowledged that conditions don't allow it. He stated he will have to take a fair amount of his backyard to make a turnaround for his vehicles. Hansen stated concern that the condition relating to the driveways does not specifically have to do with the matter before the Commission, but is related generally to the completion of improvements prior to issuance of a certificate of pccupancy. He expressed concern about tying issuance of a certificate of occupancy to the actions of an adjacent property owner that he is forced into. Rosenberger expressed discomfort about tying the adjacent owner's actions with another person's opportunity and suggested that alternatives be researched. Nielsen stated this action proposes to change the shared driveway. The suggestion places responsibility for resolution of the problem on the owners as opposed to making the City responsible. Once it is allowed to be separated, Mr. Monten will be compelled to correct his driveway. If he is unwilling or unable to do so, Nielsen stated the City will be required to sue to accomplish that. Rosenberger expressed concern regarding a precedent being set in this action by placing the onus of the problem on one party. Bean asked if the absence of easements creates a nonconforming setback issue for both property owners. Nielsen stated that a joint driveway is an exception to the 5' setback requirement. Borkon noted that once the division is made, a problem is created. Borkon asked for clarification regarding the location of the arborvitae. The plantings are on the Pechacek property. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1993 - PAGE 6 Malam questioned the applicant about the reduction in the size of the home. Pechacek stated that due to the 30% increase in the cost of lumber, he is looking at different options to bring the cost of the home into compliance with the budget. One option, he stated, is to reduce the size of the home, however, he has not yet formally made the changes, but the basic idea is to reduce the size to accommodate the increase in the cost of lumber. In response to Malam's inquiry regarding the blacktopping, Pechacek stated that the original owner of the lot constructed the blacktop path to facilitate use of a wheelchair. He also described problems and resolutions installed related to water flow on the property. Pechacek outlined his relationship with Monten and their discussions regarding the shared driveway. Rosenberger strongly suggested that the individuals resolve the problem between them. Rosenberger requested clarification regarding the Engineer's notation that the plans have not been prepared by a licensed professional. Nielsen stated that a building permit cannot be issued based on the drawings submitted for the site plan and that an updated survey must be provided with the house staked on the lot. Borkon requested clarification regarding the recommended removal of the boathouse on the property. Nielsen stated that the nonconforming boathouse should be removed to comply with setback and impervious surface requirements. Borkon expressed concern about the driveway issue. Bean asked whether there was a precedent to issuing a C.U.P. contingent upon another property owner performing certain actions. Nielsen indicated this is an unusual situation, but that the individuals have the option of retaining a common driveway. Bean suggested that resolution of the driveway issue be tied to issuance of the bl;Jilding permit rather than to the occupancy certificate forcing resolution at the outset rather than at the completion of the project. Nielsen stated that if there were no resolutions available for compliance, then it would be appropriate to tie it to the issuance of the building permit. However, he indicated there are options available for resolution of the problem. Hansen asked for clarification of whether the Ordinance requires tieing the two issues. together and suggested that conditions 6 and 7 of the staff's recommendations be waived. Nielsen stated that the Ordinance requires that the driveways must be 5' from the property line and the recommendation places the burden of resolving the driveway issue on the property owners. Monten stated that for possibly the next year or two, it is impossible for him to make his driveway wider. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1993 - PAGE 7 The Commissioners generally agreed that it appears inappropriate to require one property owner to perform certain actions based on actions of another property owner. Hansen moved, Bonach seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the request of Patrick Pechacek, 5025 Shady Island Road, for a C.U.P. to build on a substandard shoreland lot, subject to the staff's recommendations 1 through 5 detailed in Nielsen's memorandum dated February 25, 1993. Motion passed 6/1. Bean voted nay. Bean stated that he voted to deny approval of the applicant's C.U.P. request because he objected to allowing a nonconforming use to exist without any ability to tie it to any reasonable time frame for resolution. Further, he stated that in the proper process, a stipulation should be made for resolution of the existing nonconformance tied to either the occupancy certificate or to the building permit. 3. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION/COMBINATION Apolicant: Location: Carolyn McClure 22785 Murray Street Nielsell reviewed the applicant's request for the subdivision of property located at 22785 Murray Street. The property consists of one parcel on which the applicant's home is located and one parcel which is undeveloped. The applicant proposes to subdivide the lot with the house on it, creating a second building site, and to combine the remainder of the site with a larger undeveloped parcel for future development. Nielsen described the proposed lots using visuals. Nielsen stated that the City's primary considerations in reviewing this division/combination include the buildability of the two lots being created and the future development of the undeveloped land including use of the future road. Nielsen reviewed the proposal as it related to the requirements of the R-1 C zoning district and described alternative lot configurations to provide for better use of the resulting lots. He noted that detailed grading plans win be required due to the topography of the site. Stormwater run off calculations will also be required to determine the size of storm sewer and wetland area to be protected. Staff recommends approval of the subdivision and combination subject to the conditions outlined in Nielsen's February 24, 1993 memorandum. Rosenberger called for comments from Ms. McClure, the applicant. There were none. Malam asked the applicant whether the suggested re-configuration of the lots are acceptable. Ms. McClure stated that some changes to the original proposal have already been made by the developer. Nielsen stated that the "panhandle" configuration is not recommended as it does not result in more usable area for any of the lots. 7 .. < PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1993 - PAGE 8 Bonach questioned the applicant's reason for the "panhandle" configuration. McClure stated it was meant to add more area to lot 2. Nielsen stated it would, however, create zig-zig lot lines. Malam moved, Borkon seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the simple subdivision and combination request of Carolyn McClure at 22785 Murray Street, subject to the recommendations of the staff. Motion passed 7/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR - None. 5. REPORTS Elizabeth Fuller, Park Commissioner, reviewed the informational activities regarding the March 9 park referendum proposed to fund major improvements to the City's parks and trail system. Lewis briefly commented on the Council's discussions at its February 22 meeting and answered the Commissioner's questions regarding the status of the City's actions against the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. Nielsen noted that the EAW related to the Gideon's Woods P.U.D. will be examined at the Commission's March 16 study session. 6. ADJOURNMENT Pisula moved, Bonach seconded to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Arlene H. Bergfalk Recording Secretary TimeSavers Off Site Secretarial 8 .' l' d MAR 19 '93 15:58 OSM MPLS, MN P.l OSM. Orr Schelen Mayeron& AsSociates, Inc. 300 Park place Center 5775 Wa~p..ata BOulevard Minneapolis, MN 55416-1228 612-595-5775 1-800~ 753-5775 FAX 595.5774 March 19, 1993 Mr. James C. Hunn Administrator City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Preliminary Review MWCC Information Dated March 10, 1993 OSM Project No. 5047.00 Dear Mr. Hurm: We have the following conunents from our preliTr1inary review of the information referenced above: 1) The MWCC is willing to make a 27 million gallon adjustment to the 1992 flows. At a rate of $1156.55 per million gallons, this corresponds to a financial adjustment of $31,226.85 in 1992. It is not clear whether or not the MWCC is willing to adjust more than one (1) year of data. 2) Based on the measured infiltration into the Silver Lake Interceptor. and adjusting for allowable ("normal") infiltration, it would appear that an adjustment for at least another 2.8 million gallons in 1992 ($3,238.34) is justifiable. 3) It is the conclusion of the MWCCs consultant that t1there are no sewer sections. either local or interceptor, that have abnormal flow rates'l in the Shorewood West system. This system includes. essentially, that part of the City west of Excelsior. 4) It is the conclusion of the MWCC's consultant that 'There appears to be unaccounted flow on the order of 200,000 to 250,000 gpd" at the main meter along Vine Hill Road. This corresponds to about 73 to 91 million gallons per year, or about $84,400 to $105,000 in MWCC charges. 5) This unaccounted flow is suspected to be coming either from the MWCC's interceptor along Covington Road, or from the City's laterals north of Covington, or both. . The adjustment mentioned in 1) above is based on a televised portion of the interceptor along Covington showing an approximately 50 gallon per minute leak (72,000 gpd). ".' ......':..',:' ,. .. MAR 19 '93 15:59 OSM MPLS, MN P.2 Mr. James Hurm March 19, 1993 Page 2 ~ECOMMENDATION~ The MWCC has apparently ruled out a significant problem in the City's western area, and in that area south of Covington Road. We should immediately try to verify the flow in the Shorewood . laterals north of Covington Road to determine the extent of infiltration. These laterals enter at Old Market Road and at Vine Ridge Road. We should perhaps consider televising parts of these pipes, and we will try to obtain a rough cost estimate for this work prior to the Monday night Council Meeting. There is a substantial amount of data to review, and the above infonnation should only be considered preliminary in nature. We wnt likely have to have several meetings with the MWCC's technical staff to gain the most from their findings. Please call me at 595- 5695 with any questions. Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MA YERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. /L Joel A. Dresel, P.E., L.S. Oty Engineer P.l ..~ J< J It ~~WQDO ~ 'LH~t;t,.5 WI~ ::: /'4(,(/ c C. r~,"e1'"17>Jt: _:1:' t.' .': ~"-": .' ......-:.. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 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 CITY OF SHOREWOOD FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE MONTH ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1992 A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore I I I I (.J w 0 I I if) b w 0 I :::J a. Z w (f) w I > " W ::J -l <( Ct: <( ::l I- -l I ~ ::J I- 0 J W -I N " <( Z ~ at 0 ::;J Z at ::l b I ::)W .::J .,... []J <( J LLg :J ~ 0 + I ---1[]J <( 0:: 0::: a. I W <( Z ~ <( I w ~ 0 m w La.. I z <( ""'::J I + 'If- ID N N DO ID 'If- N .,... DO ID N 0 . . . . . . . . . . . N N N .,... .,... .,... .,... 0 0 0 0 I I I S~loa I I I I I () w 0 I > if) 0 z I w 0::: 0 :::> 0 I l- n. - I.&J 0 (f] I z (.!) W :::J ..J <( D- <( :) I x t; ..J :) L:i W <( -:l ..J N (.!) <( 0 at 0 :) 0..... z m ::> ..... I :) ,.... OJ ~ Z~ -:l ::>g ~ 0 + ,I LLOJ ~ -..J 0:: a.. I <( <( ~ I w z w OJ w I <.9 I.L.. Z <( -:l I to V N N DO to V N ,.... DO to V N 0 . . . . . . . . . ci I N N N ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... 0 0 0 II (SUO!lI!~) I S~iOa I I I I ,I (J LaJ 0 I > 0 z I t> 0 I CL w (/) 0 (/) La.l " I z 0::: :) :::::I <( :::> !:: 0 VJ I lL. z ..J VJ LaJ LaJ ::) W 0::: CL J :::::I :::::I - --.-I x N Z ~ <( La.l 01 W 0 0 Z 01 > z I :) ,.... W LaJ 0::: I- J 0::: a... W (/) X La.l ~ LaJ Z :::::I 0 I z W La.l + > G La.l e::: 0::: a... I <( 0::: <( I ~ m LaJ I I.&.. ~ """:l I ~ N N DO IJ:) ~ N DO IJ:) ~ N a ,.... . . . N N ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... a a a a I 'I I S~lOa I I, CITY OF SHOREWOOD PAGE BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:29 I FUND . 10 GENERAL FUND i I ASSETS CURRENT- ASSETS I CASH & INVESTMENTS 1,225,677.65 PETTY CASH 100.00 I INVESTMENTS 31,000.00 ACCRUED INTEREST RECEIVABLE 29,695.57 TAXES RECBLE-CURRENT 11,002.24 I TAXES RECBLE-DELIQUENT 96,092.98 A/R MISC 30,591.72 S/ARECBLE DEFERRED 957.19 I CONTRACTS FOR DEED RECEIVABLE 92,228.85 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 1,517,346.20 I TOTAL ASSETS 1,517,346.20 I LIA8ILITIES & FUND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES I ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 48,849.35 ACCRUED SALARIES PAYABLE 10,101.68 ESCROW DEPOSITS PAYABLE 25,825.00 I DEFERRED REVENUES 174,930.22 VOL. DEDUCTION WITHHOLDING 8.09 I TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 259,714.34 FUND EQUITY I FUND BALANCE 1,252,193.24 NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES YTO 5,438.62 I TOTAL FUND EQUITY 1,257,631.86 TOTAL LIABILITIES/FUND EQUITY 1,517,346.20 I I , I I CITY OF SHOREWOOD PAGE 2 BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:29 FUND 4 40 CAPITAL IMP FUND ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS CASH & INVESTMENTS 123,019.63 ACCRUED INTEREST RECEIVABLE 9,886.37 S/A RECBLE-CURRENT 1,840.61 S/A RECBLE-DELINQUENT 23,197.31 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 157,943.92 TOTAL ASSETS 157,943.92 LIABILITIES & FUND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES DEFERRED REVENUES 16,740.94 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 16,740.94 FUND EQUITY FUND 8ALANCE 497,967.56 NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES VTD 356,764.58- TOTAL FU~D EQUITY 141 ,202.98 TOTAL LIABILITIES/FUND EQUITY 157,943.92 I II .1 I I I I I t I I I 'I I I I I I I CITY OF SHOREWOOD BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:29 FUND I 42 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS CASH & INVESTMENTS ACCRUED INTEREST RECEIVABLE TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS TOTAL ASSETS LIABILITIES & FUND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES FUND EQUITY FUND BALANCE NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES YTD TOTAL FUND EQUITY TOTAL LIABILITIES/FUND EQUITY PAGE 4 81,469.82 1,644.62 83,114.44 83,114.44 0.00 105,000.00 21,885.56- 83, 114 . 44 83,114.44 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 CITY OF SHOREWOOD BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME OB:29 FUND j 43 STREET RECONSTRUCTION ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS CASH & INVESTMENTS TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS TOTAL ASSETS LIABILITIES & FUND EQUITY CURRENT lIABILITIES TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES FUND EQUITY NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES YTD TOTAL FUND EQUITY TOTAL LIABILITIES/FUND EQUITY PAGE 5 312,000.00 312,000.00 312,000.00 0.00 312,000.00 312,000.00 312,000.00 . \ CITY OF SHOREWOOD PAGE 6 BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 . TIME 08:29 FUND # 45 SALT/SAND BLOG-GRADING ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS CASH & INVESTMENTS 81,878.85 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 81,878.85 TOTAL ASSETS 81,878.85 LIABILITIES & FUND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES ACCQUNTS PAYA8LE 14,659.61 CONTRACTS PAYABLE-CURRENT 69,982.00 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES B4,641.61 FUND EQUITY FUND BALANCE 240,002.35 NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES YTD 242,765.11- TOTAL FUND EQUITY 2,762.76- TOTAL LIABILITIES/FUND EQUITY 81,878.85 I I I I I I I (I I I I I I I I I '" : I I CITY OF SHOREWOOD PAGE 8 8ALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:29 FUND. 47 SE WATER TRMT PLANT ASSETS CURRENT' ASSETS TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 0.00 TOTAL ASSETS 0.00 LIABILITIES & FUND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 0.00 FUND EQUITY FUNO BALANCE 23,505.08 NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES YTD 23,505.08- TOTAL FUND EQUITY 0.00 TOTAL LIABILITES/FUND EQUITY 0.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF SHOREWOOO BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:29 FUND I 49 CHURCH ROAD IMPS PAGE 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CURRENT ASSETS CASH & INVESTMENTS 22,632.18 ACCRUED INTEREST RECEIVABLE 1,963.36 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 24,595.54 TOTAL ASSETS 24,595.54 LIABILITIES & FUND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 1,663.80 CONTRACTS PAYABLE-CURRENT 4,646.00 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 6,309.80 FUND EQUITY FUND BALANCE 142,410.74 NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES YTD 124,125.00- TOTAL FUND EQUITY 18,285.74 TOTAL LIA8ILITIES/FUND EQUITY 24,595.54 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF SHOREWOOD BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:29 FUND # 50 SHADY HILLS STORM SWR ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS TOTAL ASSETS lIABILITIES & FUND EQUITY CURRENT lIABILITIES TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES FUND EQUITY FUND BALANCE NET REVENUES/EXPENDITURES YTD TOTAL FUND EQUITY TOTAL lIABILITIES/FUND EQUITY PAGE 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 12,639.64 12,639.64- 0.00 0.00 CITY OF SHOREWOOD PAGE 12 BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:29 FUND I 51 SILVERWOOD PK GRADING ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS CASH & INVESTMENTS 29,739.62 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 29,739.62 TOT AL ASSETS 29,739.62 LIABILITIES & FUND EQUITY CONTRACTS PAYABLE-CURRENT 29,145.00- TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 29,145.00 FUND EQUITY NET REVENUEfEXPENDITURES YTD 594.62 TOTAL FUND EQUITY 594.62 TOTAL LIABILITIES/FUND EQUITY 29,739.62 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 CITY OF SHOREWOOD PAGE 18 BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:29 FUMD . 90 1987 REFUNDING ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS CASH & INVESTMENTS 479,893.17 ACCRUED INTEREST RECEIVABLE 8,537.26 S/A RECBLE DEFERRED 70,500.00 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 558,930.43 TOT AL ASSETS 558,930.43 LIABILITIES & FUND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES DEFERRED REVENUES 70,500.00 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 70,500.00 FUND EQUITY FUND BALANCE 547,998.74 NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES YTD 59,568.31- TOTAL FUND EQUITY 488,430.43 TOTAL LIABILITIES/FUND EQUITY 558,'930.43 PAGE 21 845,847.47 14,256.42 8,288.09 32,638.84 231,553.23 1,132,584.05 1,132,584.05 264,192.07 264,192.07 831,963.28 36,428.70 868,391. 98 1,132,584.05 CITY OF SHOREWOOD BALANCE SHEET DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:29 FUND # 99 1992 IMPS, REFUNDING ASSETS CURRENT' ASSETS CASH & INVESTMENTS ACCRUED INTEREST RECEIVABLE S/A RECEIVABLE CURRENT S/A RECEIVABLE DELINQUENT S/A RECEIVABLE DEFERRED TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS TOTAL ASSETS LIABILITIES & FUNO EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES DEFERRED REVENUES TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES FUND EQUITY FUND BALANCE NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES YTD TOTAL FUND EQUITY TOTAL LIABILITIES/FUND EQUITY " PAGE 25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 339,847.82 5,505.01 351. 57 758.74 679,537.84 1,026,000.98 1,026,000.98 680,296.58 680,296.58 919,972. 75 574,268.35- 345,704.40 1,026,000.98 I DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 3 I ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITlE MTD ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT -------------- ------------- ---------- ..--------- ------------------ 10-5126 GENERAL SUPPLIES 194.79 421. 79 400.00 105% I 10-5135 CONTRACTUAL 957.60 5,591. 35 6,440.00 87% 10-5137 TRAVEL, CONF, SCH 1,370.27 2,277.77 2,500.00 91% 10-5138 PRINT /PUBLISH 0.00 4,720.69 3,800.00 124% I 10-5143 MISC. SERVICES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5146 TRANSPORTATION TASK FORCE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5153 SUBSCRIP-MEMBER 108.63 24,446.63 24,788.00 99% I 10-5163 OTHER IMPROV 0.00 600.00 600.00 100% 10-5165 FURN & FIXTURES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL MAYOR & COUNCIL 3,486.13 48,686.13 48,698.00 100-% I ADMINISTRATOR I 10-5201 REGULAR SALARIES 6,550.08 67,184.06 71,446.00 94% 10-5202 OVERTIME 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5203 PART TIME SALARIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-5205 MN UNEMP COMP FUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5206 FICA CITY SHARE 661.73 5,095.05 5,465.00 93% 10-5207 PERA CITY SHARE 2,556.81 3,010.29 3,200.00 94% 10-5208 INS. CITY SHARE 433.63 6,434.51 7,294.00 88% I 10-5209 MEDICARE CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5223 MAINT-EQUIPMENT 0.00 524.00 524.00 100% 10-5226 GENERAL SUPPLIES 36.18 238.18 250.00 95% I 10-5235 CONTRACTUAL 0.00 2,362.00 2,800.00 84% 10-5237 TRAVEL, CONF, SCH 177 . 93 2,697.23 3,250.00 83% 10-5243 MISC SERVICES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-5253 SU8SCRIP-MEMBER 0.00 687.00 605.00 114% 10-5265 FURN & FIXTURES 0.00 1,496.00 1,500.00 100% TOTAL ADMINISTRATOR 10,416.36 B9,728.32 96,334.00 93% I GENERAL GOVT SERVICES I 10-5301 - REGULAR SALARIES 5,510.09 43,811. 33 35,454.00 124% 10-5302 OVERTIME 0.00 489.22 0.00 0% 10-5303 PART TIME SALARIES 390.00 9,573.89 13,100.00 73% I 10-5305 MN UNEMP COMP FUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5306 FICA CITY SHARE 440.12 3,992.85 3,714.00 108% 10-5307 PERA CITY SHARE 248.34 1,992 . 22 1,588.00 126% 10-5308 INS. CITY SHARE 259.00 4,089.02 3,396.00 120% I 10-5309 MEDICARE CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5310 SEVERANCE & OTHER PAY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5320 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,241.75 10,113.31 11,000.00 92% I 10-5323 _ MAINT-EQUIPMENT 0.00 1,332.50 2,145.00 62% 10-5326 GENERAL SUPPLIES 380.14 574.21 150.00 383% 10-5335 CONTRACTUAL 1,030.64 1,330.64 4,500.00 30% 10-5336 COMMUNICATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-5337 TRAVEL, CONF, SCH 29.58 1,511.64 1,850.00 82% 10-5338 PRINT /PUBLISH 523.93 2,350.72 3,000.00 78% 10-5343 MISC. SERVICES 399.52 896.97 500.00 179% I 10-5352 LICENSES~ TAXES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5353 SUBSCRIP-MEHBER 51.00-CR 239.00 170.00 141% 10-5363 OTHER IMPROVE 0.00 1,252.50 1,200.00 104% I 10-5365 FURN & FIXTURES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I I DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08: 19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 5 I ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE MTO ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT -------------- -----------...- ---------- ---------- ------------------ 10-5663 OTHER IMPROVE 0.00 7,518.00 7,700.00 98% I 10-5665 FURN & FIXTURES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL PLANNING & ZONING 11,933.56 94,432.55 80,120.00 . 118% I MUNICIPAL BLDG-CITY HALL I 10-5723 MAINT-EQUIPMENT 2.97 2,992.79 2,800.00 107% 10-5724 MAIHT-8UILDINGS 59.35 984.00 2,000.00 49% 10-5726 GENERAL SUPPLIES 426.91 2,603.83 3,500.00 74% 10-5735 CONTRACTUAL 767.00 3,125.95 4,000.00 78% I 10-5736 COMMUNICATION 587.09 4,693.53 4,600.00 102% 10-5739 UTILITIES-GAS/ELEC 1,725.15 8,289.31 8,000.00 104% 10-5741 INS-TOTAL 35,517.00 56,709.00 69,000.00 82% I 10-5743 MISC. SERVICES 10.64 217 . 88 0.00 0% 10-5750 RENTAL 10.65 449.97 500.00 90% 10-5752 LICENSES- TAXES 0.00 1 ,481. 97 3,500.00 42% I 10-5762 MACHINERY-EQUIP 0.00 1,866.85 300.00 622% 10-5763 OTHER IMPROVE 0.00 4,826.03 0.00 0% 10-5765 FURN & FIXTURES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-5770 PERMANENT TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 45,000.00 0% I TOTAL MUNICIPAL BLDG-CITY HALL 39,106.76 88,241.11 143,200.00 62% I TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT 107,923.45 585,272.02 640,289.00 91% PUBLIC SAFETY I POLICE PROTECTION 10-5823 MAINT-EQUIPMENT 0.00 430.00 500.00 86% I 10-5835 CONTRACTUAL 31,398.81 376,785.75 376,786.00 100% 10-5839 UTILITIES-GAS/ELEC 6.28 35.99 50.00 72% 10-5843 MISC. SERVICES 2,395.35 12,359.73 15,000.00 82% I 10-5862 MACHINERY-EQUIP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL POLICE PROTECTION 33,800.44 389,611.47 392,336.00 99% I FIRE PROTECTION 10-5935 CONTRACTUAL 0.00 95,398.00 95,398.00 100% I 10-5939 UTILITIES-GAS/ElEC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION 0.00 95,398.00 95,398.00 100% I PROTECTIVE INSPECTION . 10-6001 REGULAR SALARIES 5,751.60 46,753.02 55,266.00 85% I 10-6003 PART TIME SALARIES 0.00 177 . 00 0.00 0% 10-6006 FICA CITY SHARE 381.26 3,232.78 4,228.00 77% 10-6007 PERA CITY SHARE 257.67 2,094.59 .2,476.00 85% I 10-6008 INS. CITY SHARE 272.14 4,346.75 5,348.00 81% 10-6009 MEDICARE CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6023 MAIHT-EQUIPMENT 1,130.71 1,495.71 1 ,365.00 110% I 10-6026 GEHERAL SUPPLIES 153.65 388.17 400.00 97% 10-6035 CONTRACTUAL 0.00 0.00 800.00 0% DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08: 19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 6 I ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE MTD ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT -------...------ -------...----- ---------- ---------- ------------------ I 10-6037 TRAVEL, CONF, SCH 236.84 1,891.06 2,250.00 84% 10-6038 PRINT /PUBLISH 0.00 138.00 200.00 69% I 10-6043 MISC. SERVICES 2,801.00 11,020.30 15,000.00 74% 10-6044 OTHER SERVICES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6053 SUBSCRIP-MEMBER 0.00 75.00 100.00 75% I 10-6054 STATE SURCHGS 3,112.05 8,455.96 6,000.00 141% 10-6062 MACHINERY-EQUIP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6063 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 6,000.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 100% 10-6065 FURN & FIXTURES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL PROTECTIVE INSPECTION 20,096.92 86,068.34 99,433.00 87% TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY 53,897.36 571,077.81 587,167.00 97% I PUBLIC WORKS I CITY ENGI NEER 10-6101 REGULAR SALARIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6102 0.1. SALARIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6103 PART TIME SALARIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6106 FICA CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6107 PERA CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-610B INS. CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6109 MEDICARE CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6121 MOTOR FUEL & LUBE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6122 SMALL TOOLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6123 MAINT-EQUIPMENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6126 GENERAL SUPPLIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6133 ENGINEERING . 30,349.74 68,812.66 37,401.00 184% 10-6135 CONTRACTUAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6136 COMMUNICATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6137 TRAVEL, CONF, SCH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6138 PRINT /PUBLISH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6150 RENTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6152 LICENSES-TAXES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6153 SUBSCRIP-MEMBER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6161 BUILDINGS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6162 MACHINERY-EQUIP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6163 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6165 FURN & FIXTURES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL CITY ENGINEER 30,349.74 68,812.66 37,401.00 184% I PUBLIC WORKS SERVICE 10-6201 REGULAR SALARIES 20,181.55 116,832.21 92 , 158.00 127% I 10-6202 0.1. SALARIES 40.93 100.95 0.00 0% 10-6203 PART TIME SALARIES 0.00 117 . 50 0.00 0% I 10-6206 FICA CITY SHARE 1,513.58 8,766.44 7,050.00 124% 10-6207 PERA CITY SHARE 905.92 5,235.19 4,129.00 127% 10-6208 INS. CITY SHARE 985.52 10,555.35 8,809.00 120% I 10-6209 MEDICARE CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6221 MOTOR FUEL & LUBE 1,977.28 10,585.95 13,000.00 81% 10-6222 SMALL TOOLS 299.99 1,134.23 1,100.00 103% 10-6223 MAl NT-EQUIPMENT 3,418.17 11,015.07 11 , 750. 00 94% I I DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08: 19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 7 I ACtOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE MTD ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT 8UDGETED PERCENT --------..----- ------..---..-- ---------- ---------- ------------------ 10-6224 MAINT-BUILDINGS 101.99 402.67 1,000.00 40% I 10-6226 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,529.B6 5,985.69 8,200.00 73% 10-6235 CONTRACTUAL 817.10 4,858.44 4,500.00 108% 10-6236 COMMUNICATION 231. 61 889.00 1,200.00 74% I 10-6237 . TRAVEL, CONF, SCHOOL 354.18 763.58 750.00 102% 10-6238 PRINT /PUBLISH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6239 UTILITIES-GAS/ELEC 2,101.02 5,702.29 6,500.00 88% I 10-6243 MISC. SERVICES 21. 26 57.42 200.00 29% 10-6250 RENTAL 22.50 249.34 1,000.00 25% 10-6252 LICENSES- TAXES 0.00 931. 3S 1,000.00 93% 10-6253 SUBSCRIP-MEMBER 0.00 25.00 50.00 50% I 10-6261 8UILDINGS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6262 MACHINERY-EQUIPMENT 0.00 30.61 0.00 0% 10-6263 OTHER IMPROVE 2,893.10 9,061.20 0.00 0% I 10-6265 FURN & FIXTURES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6270 PERMANENT TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS SERVICE 38,395.56 193,300.08 162,396.00 119% STREETS & HIGHWAYS I 10-6301 REGULAR SALARIES 2,404.18 62,964.70 67,085.00 94% 10-6302 O.T. SALARIES 0.00 243.22 500.00 49% 10-6303 PART TIME SALARIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6306 FICA CITY SHARE 176.66 4,546.75 5,170.00 88% 10-6307 PERA CITY SHARE 107.69 2,831.70 3,027.00 94% 10-6308 INS. CITY SHARE 125.52 6,121.34 7,032.00 87% I 10-6309 MEDICARE CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6326 GENERAL SUPPLIES 3,490.58 60,197.57 62,000.00 97% 10-6335 CONTRACTUAL 0.00 247.50 1,000.00 25% 10-6337 TRAVEL, CONF, SCH. 0.00 0.00 100.00 0% I 10-6343 MISC. SERVICES 0.00 2,000.00 3,000.00 67% 10-6360 LAND - RIGHT OF WAY 24,005.00 24,005.00 0.00 0% 10-6362 , MACHINERY-EQUIPMENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6363 OTHER IMPROVE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 10-6370 PERMANENT TRANSFERS 451.75-CR 0.00 312,000.00 0% I TOTAL STREETS & HIGHWAYS 29,851.88 163,157.78 460,914.00 35% SNOW & ICE REMOVAL I 10-6401 REGULAR SALARIES 3,045.68 7, 177 . 22 13,417.00 54% 10-6402 O.T SALARIES 2,093.09 3,714.84 5,000.00 74% 10-6406 FICA CITY SHARE 387. 19 802.10 1,409.00 51% I 10-6407 PERA CITY SHARE 230 . 22 487.95 825.00 59% 10-6408 INS. CITY SHARE 224.08 789.01 1,415.00 56% 10-6426 GENERAL SUPPLIES 10,428.03 12,882.07 13,000.00 99% I TOTAL SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 16,408.29 25,853.19 35,066.00 74% TRAFFIC CONTROL/STR LGTS I 10-6523 MAINT-EQUIPMENT 181. 56 353.70 1,000.00 35% 10-6526 GENERAL SUPPLIES 18.87 3,151.06 4,500.00 70% I 10-6539 UTILITiES-GAS/ELEC 1,014.49 3,791.59 2,500.00 152% 10-6543 MISC. SERVICES 1,(l67.32 20,118.17 27,000.00 75% DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08: 19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 8 I ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE MTD ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT I -------------- ------------- ---------- ---------- ------------------ TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL/STR LGTS 2,882.24 27,420.52 35,000.00 78% I SANIT, WASTE RMVL & WEEDS 10-6701 REGULAR SALARIES 0.00 2, 129.58 500.00 426% I 10-6702 O.T SALARIES 0.00 245.44 0.00 0% 10-6706 FICA CITY SHARE 0.00 168.70 38.00 444% 10-6707 PERA CITY SHARE 0.00 106.39 22.00 484% I 10-6708 INS. CITY SHARE 0.00 2~5.90 50.00 472% 10-6735 CONTRACTUAL 88.43 934.54 1,000.00 94% 10-6743 MISC. SERVICES 0.00 2,240.00 3,000.00 75% I 10-6770 PERMANENT TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 0% TOTAL SANIT, WASTE RMVL & WEED 88.43 6,060.55 14,610.00 42% I TRFE MAINTENANCE 10-6801 REGULAR SALARIES 702.47 . 5,186.88 10,734. 00 48% I \0-6802 O.T SALARIES 0.00 38.13 0.00 0% 10-6806 FICA CITY SHARE 53.77 375.55 821.00 46% 10-6807 PERA CITY SHARE 31.47 234.13 480.00 49% I 10-6808 INS. CITY SHARE 37.35 479.87 1,152.00 42% 10-6826 GENERAL SUPPLIES 0.00 89.97 100.00 90% 10-6835 CONTRACTUAL 650.50 11,734.64 12,000.00 98% I 10-6837 TRAVEL, CONF, SCH 0.00 83.40 100.00 83% TOTAL TREE MAINTENANCE 1,475.56 18,222.57 25,387.00 72% TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS 119,457.70 502,827.35 770,774.00 65% I CULTURE & RECREATION I PARKS & RECREATION 10-6901 REGULAR SALARIES 5,289.93 43,909.82 50,678.00 87% I 10-6902 O.T SALARIES 136.43 149.10 500.00 30% 10-6903 PART TIME SALARIES 943.13 10,506.54 20,370.00 52% 10-6906 FICA CITY SHARE 449. 17 3,927.33 5,473.00 72% I 10-6907 PERA CITY SHARE 243.12 1,973.74 2,291.00 86% 10-6908 INS. CITY SHARE 211. 62 4,143.13 6,490.00 64% 10-6909 MEDICARE CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 10-6922 SMALL TOOLS 0.00 34.73 150.00 23% 10-6923 MAINT-EQUIPMENT 57.45 1,306.90 2,000.00 65% 10-6924 MAINT-BUILDINGS 63.95 613.93 1,500.00 41% I 10-6926 GENERAL SUPPLIES 30.57 18,164.89 17,200.00 106% 10-6933 ENGINEERING SERVICES 0.00 0".00 0.00 0% 10-6934 " PLANNING 495.75 5,714.95 5,000.00 114% 10-6935 CONTRACTUAL 8,915.86 13,061. 29 15,000.00 87% I 10-6936 COMMUN I CA TI ON 75.84 623.46 1,200.00 52% 10-6937 TRAVEL, CONF, SCH 151.54 193.64 50.00 387% 10-6938 PRINT /PUBLISH 37.50 91.28 600.00 15% I 10-6939 UTILITIES-GAS/ELEC 334.52 1,915.56 2,000.00 96% 10-6943 MISC. SERVICES 37.50 51.50 600.00 9% 10-6950 RENTAL 490.01 3,692.80 4,500.00 82% 10-6953 SUBSCRIP-MEMBER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08: 19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 16 I ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE MTD ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT I --------...----- ------------- ---------- ---------- ------------------ . SE WATER TREATMENT PLANT REVENUE I PROJECT REVENUE I 47~4781 BOND PROCEEDS , 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 47-4784 MISC REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL PROJECT REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% INTERFUND TRANSFERS I 47-4887 TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I EXPENDITURES PROJECT EXPENDITURES I 47-7305 ADMINISTRATIVE & OFFICE EXPENSE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 47-7330 ATTORNEY FEES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 47-7333 ENGINEERING FEES 146.25 8,146.25 0.00 0% 47-7334 CONSULTING FEESD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 47-7335 CONTRACTUAL-CONSTRUCTION 14,658.00 18,265.45 0.00 0% I 47-7338 PRINTING & PUBLISHING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 47-7343 MISC CONTRACTUAL 0.00 1,896.20 . 0.00 0% TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES 14,804.25 28,307. 90 0.00 0% I OTHER REVENUE/EXPENDITURES I 47-8512 INTEREST EARNINGS 1,362.11 CR 4,873.10 CR 0.00 0% 47-8545 SERVICE CHARGES 5.0B 70.28 0.00 0% TQTAL OTHER REVENUE/EXPENDIT 1,357.03 4,802.82 0.00 0% I INTER FUND TRANSFERS I 47-9101 TRANSFERS TO OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 I TOTAL EXPENDITURES 13,447.22 23,505.08 0.00 0% NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES ~3, 447.22.- 23,505.08- 0.00 0% I I I DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08: 19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 18 I ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE MTD 'ACTUAL YTO ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT -------------- ------------- ---------- ---------- ------------------ I FUND . 49 CHURCH ROAD IMPS REVENUE I PROJECT REVENUE I 49-4781 BOND PROCEEDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 49-4784 MISC REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL PROJECT REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% INTERFUND TRANSFERS I 49-4887 TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I' TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I EXPENDITURES I PROJECT EXPENDITURES 49-7305 ADMINISTRATIVE & OFFICE EXPENSE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 49-7330 ATTORNEY FEES 2,061. 30 9,978.45 0.00 0% 49-7333 ENGINEERING FEES 9,335.96 21,712.68 0.00 0% 49-7334 CONSULTING FEES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 49-7335 'CONTRACTUAL-CONSTRUCTION 92,919.58 92,919.58 0.00 0% 49-7338 PRINTING & PUBLISHING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 49-7343 MISC CONTRACTUAL 91,561. 51 - CR 7,390.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES 12,755.33 132,000.71 0.00 0% OTHER REVENUE/EXPENDITURES I ~ 49-8512 INTEREST EARNINGS 2,073.63 CR 7,995.25 CR 0.00 0% 49-8545 SERVICE CHARGES 2.94 119.54 0.00 0% I TOTAL OTHER REVENUE/EXPEND IT 2,070.69 7,875.71 0.00 0% INTER FUND TRANSFERS I 49-9101 TRANSFERS TO OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 'TOTAL ,INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 I TOTAL EXPENDITURES 10,684.64 124,125.00 0.00 0% I NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES 10,684.64- 124,125.00- 0.00 0% I I 61-8545 INVESTMENT SERVICE CHARGES 74.61 714.74 0.00 0% I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TOTAL OPERATING' EXPENSES REVENUE ANO EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 24 MTO ACTUAL YTO ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUOGETEO PERCENT ---------- ---------- ------------------ 0.00 343.44 500.00 69% 20,518.20 48,723.00 32,175.00 151% 3,315.60 6,631. 20 7,000.00 95% 31,389.00 376,668.00 376,665.00 100% 190,494.36 666,582.72 541,701.00 123% OATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:19 CITY OF SHOREWOOO ACCOUNT NUM8ER ACCOUNT TITLE 61-8263 61-8284 61-8285 61-8286 OTHER IMPROVE METRO SAC CHARGES EXCELSIOR SEWER CHARGE METRO SERVIGE CHARGE 'OTHER REVENUE/EXPENSE TOTAL OTHER REVENUE/EXPENSE 74.61 714.74 0.00 0% INTERFUNO TRANSFERS 61-9101 TRANSFER TO OTHER FUNOS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL INTERFUNO TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL EXPENSES 190,568.97 667,297.46 541,701.00 123% NET REVENUE/EXPENSE 5,910.13- 15,777 .44- 15,799.00 100% .-'+, ... I DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08:19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 25 I ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE MTO ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT -------------- ------------- ----------- ---------- ------------------ \ FUND I 62 RECYCLI NG I REVENUE I OPERATING REVENUE I 62-4057 COUNTY RECYCLING AID 0.00 56,895.96 CR 40,800.00 CR 140% 62-4115 RECYCLING SERVICE CHARGES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 62-4116 CITY CLEAN-UP 514.89 CR 11,847.74 CR 15,000.00 CR 79% 62-4118 RECYCLING BIN SALES 204.00 CR 204.00 CR 0.00 0% I 62-4120 RECYCLING PROCEEDS FROM CONTRACTOR 0.00 2,033.32 CR 5,000.00 CR 41% TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE 718.89 70,981. 02 60,800.00 117% I INTERFUND TRANSFERS 62-4887 TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS 10,000.00 CR 10,000.00 CR 10,000.00 CR 100% I TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS 10,000.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 100% TOTAL REVENUE 10,718.89 80,981. 02 70,800.00 114% I EXPENSES I OPERATING EXPENSES I 62-8401 REGULAR SALARIES 0.00 101.68 5,900.00 2% 62-8402 OVERTIME 0.00 345.71 0.00 0% 62-8406 FICA CITY SHARE 0.00 31. 21 452.00 7% 62-8407 PERA CITY SHARE 0.00 20.06 264.00 8% I 62-8408 INSURANCE CITY SHARE 0.00 47.29 470.00 10% 62-8409 MEDICARE CITY SHARE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 62-8420 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 0.00 100.00 0% I 62-8426 GENERAL SUPPLIES 0.00 3,550.00 0.00 0% 62-8435 CONTRACTUAL 8,254.20 58,014.96 61,000.00 95% 62-8438 PRINT /PUBLISH 0.00 0.00 500.00 0% I 62-8443 MISC. EXPENSE 325.00 1,325.00 1,300.00 102% TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 8,579.20 63,435.91 69,986.00 91% I OTHER REVENUE/EXPENSE 62-8512 INTEREST INCOME . 75.84 CR 75.84 CR 0.00 0% I 62-8545 INVESTMENT SERVICE CHARGES 2.06 2.06 0.00/" ..0% '. TOTAL OTHER REVENUE/EXPENSE 73.78 73.78 0.00 0% I TOTAL EXPENSES 8,505.42 63,362.13 .69,986.00 91% NET REVENUE/EXPENSE 2,213.47 17,618.89 814.00 165% I I CITY OF SHOREWOOD PAGE I INCOME STATEMENT DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08: 18 I ----CURRENT PERIOD---- ----yEAR TO DATE---- NET AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. BUDGET BALANCE FUND II 71 LIQUOR STORE I I SALES I LIQUOR SALES 16,531.54 30.52 168,010.09 29.11 0.00 168,010.09- WINE SALES 10,881.44 20.09 86,557.73 15.00 0.00 86,557.73- I BEER SALES 23,807.93 43.95 289,170.58 50.10 0.00 289,170.58- MISC SALES 2,928.12 5.41 33,689.99 5.84 0.00 33,689.99- BOTTLE DEPOSITS 18.09 .03 203.73- .04- 0.00 203.73 I TOTAL SAtES 54,167.12 100.00 577,224.66 100.00 0.00 577 ,224.66- COST OF GOODS SOLD I LIQUOR PURCHASES 12,708.48 23.46 141,357.97 24.49 0.00 141,357.97- WINE PURCHASES 8,323.09 15.37 61,144.49 10.59 0.00 61,144.49- I BEER PURCHASES 31,254.23 57.70 227,582.85 39.43 0.00 227,582.85- MISC PURCHASES 4,466.98 8.25 30,820.02 5.34 0.00 30,820.02- TOTAL COST OF GOODS SOLD 56,752.78 104.77 460,905.33 79.85 0.00 460,905.33- I GROSS PROFIT 2,585.66- 4.77- 116,319.33 20.15 0.00 116,319.33- I EXPENSES PERSONAL SERVICES I SALARIES 3,926. 14 7.25 29,332.68 5.08 0.00 29,332.68- PART TIME SALARIES 2,743.34 5.06 19,376.86 3.36 0.00 19,376.86- I FICA CITY SHARE 494.66 .91 3,604.94 .62 0.00 3,604.94- PERA CITY SHARE 202.66 .37 1,656.99 .29 0.00 1,656.99- INS. CITY SHARE 381. 97 .71 4,583.64 .79 0.00 4,583.64- MEDICARE CITY SHARE 0.00 .00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 I TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 7,748.77 14.31 58,555.11 10.14 0.00 58,555.11- SUPPLI ES I OFFICE EXP/POSTAGE 6.38 .01 89.81 .02 0.00 89.81- I REPAIRS AND MAIHT - 0.00 .00 696.00 .12 0.00 696.00- SUPPLIES-GENERAL 110.87 .20 731.89 .13 0.00 731.89- TOTAL SUPPLIES - 117.25 .22 1,517.70 .26 0.00 ,517.70- I OTHER CHARGES FINANCIAL PROF SVCS 0.00 .00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 I AUDIT PROF SVCS 0.00 .00 959.40 .17 0.00 959.40- CONTRACTUAL 0.00 .00 1,200.00 .21 0.00 1,200.00- MTGS SCHOOLS MILEAGE 0.00 .00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 I UTILITIES 913.91 1.69 5,181.83 .90 0.00 5,181.83- INSURANCE EXPENSE 677 . 84 1. 25 4,436.00 .77 0.00 - 4,436.00- BAD DEBT EXPS 985.32 1.82 1,023.85 .18 0.00 1,023.85- I I DATE 12/31/92 TIME DB: 19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 27 ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE MID ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT I -----------..-- ------...------ ---------.. ---------- ------------------ FUND # 92 SEWER IMP 71, 72, 72B I REVENUE I SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 92-41B6 SA CURRENT/COUNTY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 92-4187 DElINQ SA/COUNTY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 92-4752 SA PREPAYS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% INTERFUND TRANSFERS I ' 92-4887 TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I EXPENDITURES DEBT SERVICE I 92 - 7285 MISC E.XPENSE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 92-7286 PRINCIPAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 92- 7287 INTEREST AND FEES 175.29-CR 462.50 0.00 0% 92-7288 REFUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 175.29- 462.50 0.00 0% OTHER REVENUE/EXPENDITURES I 92-8512 INTEREST INCOME 80.13 CR 125.20 CR 0.00 0% 92-8545 INVESTMENT SERVICE CHARGES 0.21 2.30 0.00 0% I TOTAL OTHER REVENUE/EXPENDITRE 79.92 122.90 0.00 0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 255.21- 339.60 0.00 0% I NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES 255.21 339.60- 0.00 0% I I I I I DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08: 19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 31 ACCOUNT NUM8ER ACCOUNT TITLE MTD ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT I -------------- ------------- ---------- ---------- ------------------ FUND I 97 SHADY HIllS STORM SWR I REVENUES I TAXES 97-4001 SPECIAL AD VALOREM 4, 199.23 CR 8,078.57 CR 0.00 0% I 91-4003 DElININQUENT AD VALOREM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL TAXES 4,199.23 8,078.57 0.00 0% I INTERFUND TRANSFERS 97-4887 TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL REVENUE 4,199.23 8,078.57 0.00 0% I EXPENDlTURES DEBT SERVICE I 97 - 7285 MISC EXPENSE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% . 97-72R6 PRINCIPAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% 97 - 7287 INTEREST AND FEES 0.00 2,273.33 0.00 0% I TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 0.00 2,273.33 0.00 0% I OTHER REVENUE/EXPENDITURES 97-8512 INTEREST EARNINGS 31.25 CR 74.74 CR 0.00 0% 97-8545 SERVICE CHARGES 0.17 1.19 0.00 0% I TOTAL OTHER REVENUE/EXPENDITRE 31.08 73.55 0.00 0% I INTERFUND TRANSFERS 97-9101 TRANSFERS TO OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 31. 08- 2,199.78 0.00 0% I NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES 4,230.31 5,878.79 0.00 . 0% I I I -------- --- DATE 12/31/92 TIME 08: 19 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT PAGE 33 I ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE MTD ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL TOTAL AMT BUDGETED PERCENT -------------- ------------- ---------- ---------- ------------------ I FUND I 99 1991 PROJ & REFUNDING REVENUE I SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS I 99-4186 SA CURRENT/COUNTY 77,763.19 CR 121,138.86 CR 0.00 0% 99-4187 SA DELINQ/COUNTY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I 99-4752 SA PREPAYS 810.20 CR 86,537.5.7 CR 0.00 0% 99-4781 BOND PROCEEDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 78,573.39 207,676.43 0.00 0% I INTERFUND TRANSFERS 99-4887 TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL REVENUE 78,573.39 207,676.43 0.00 0% EXPENDITURES I DEBT SERVICE I 0% 99-7285 MISC EXPENSE 0.00 196.28 0.00 99-7286 PRINCIPAL 0.00 725,000.00 0.00 0% I 99-7287 INTEREST & FEES 37,986.73 65,185.50 0.00 0% TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 37,986.73 790,381. 78 0.00 0% OTHER REVENUE/EXPENDITURES I 99-8512 INTEREST EARNINGS 4,890.52 CR 8,663.40 CR 0.00 0% I 99-8545 SERVICE CHARGES 26.67 226.40 0.00 0% TOTAL OTHER REVENUE/EXPENDIT 4,863.85 8,437.00 0.00 0% I INTERFUND TRANSFERS 99-9101 TRANSFERS TO OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% I TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 33, 122. 88 781,944.78 . 0.00 0% I NET REVENUE/EXPENDITURES 45,450.51 574,268.35- 0.00 0% I I I ...~.~.4 . "~ ~ - ---- 1@ Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre. 230 East Fifth Street. St. Paul. Minnesota 5510 1-1633 612 222-8423 March 10, 1993" Mr. James Hurm city Administrator city of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Jim: This letter is a follow-up to our discussion of February 17, 1993 concerning the 1993 and 1994 cost allocation for the city of Shore- wood. Through our Chief Administrator, staff of the MWCC has reviewed what we discussed and the following represents our thoughts at this time. 1. Inflow and Infiltration ( If I) investigation of MWee inter- ceptors. Enclosed is a copy of two reports. First, the flow analysis completed for the If I investigation of the Commission's interceptor system within the City of Shorewood and second, the report on the televising of the commission'S interceptor system. If you have any questions in regard to these reports or would like to review the televising tapes, please contact Donald Bluhm of the Commission's staff at telephone number 229-2116. The results of the If I analysis of MWCC interceptors indicates the presence of unaccounted for water entering the sewer system on the east side of the city of Shorewood. The source of this water has been narrowed down to the interceptor on "covington Road and the connections entering the interceptor from the north. Through the televising program, the Commission has noted that a portion of our interceptor located on covington Road, just downstream of the forcemain, has several sections of interceptor that are badly deteriorated. The commission has a proj ect to repair these sections of interceptor in 1993. It is estimated that the approximately 50 gpm of water may be entering the commission's interceptor "in this area. For this reason, the commission has made a 27 million ga"llon adjustment in the 1992 flows for the city and are investigating to determine if we can retroactively include 1991. Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer ~ ~;] o J. Hurm March 10, 1993 Page 2 2. Flow Adjustment The next 'issue is regarding possible flow adjustments for errors 'at the Commission's Meter M-415. The Commission has installed an ultra sonic measuring device into the meter that is being run alongside the existing bubbler system. Although the instantaneous metering data shows that the bubbler system is subj ect to periodic plugging, the overall flow for the month using both devices shows a total flow within one percent of each other. Although the commission plans to continue to review the meter's operation, it does not appear, that a substantial error will be found. For this reason, no flow adjustment is planned at this time. One of the recommenda- tions of the III analysis was'to remove the existing 18-inch flume and install a 9-inch flume in its place. with, the diversion of the upstream flow through the Lake Ann Interceptor in Chanhassen, the current meter is larger than necessary. It is believed that a smaller flume will increase our accuracy and be easier to maintain. A project will be initiated this year to make this change. 3. ~993 payment Schedule As we are all aware, the monthly billing from the MWCC to the city of Shorewood is $46,235 per month. Shorewood has been making monthly payments of $30,295.67 per month. A portion of the MWCC billing is based on what Shorewood owes to the MWCC for the 1991 flow. If Shorewood is interested in requesting a payment schedule for what is owed to the MWCC for the 1991 flow, the MWCC would be interested in considering a plan. It should be noted that it can only be done on that portion resulting from the 1991 underpayment, that the MWCC would have to apply a reasonable rate of interest of approximatelY 6% and would require MWCC board approval. . We encourage Shorewood to consider this as soon as possible. Also, arrangements should be made as soon as possible on that portion of the $15,439.33 monthly difference that is not a result of the 1991 flow so as to avoid other complications. 4. Technical Assistance The commission would like to offer the city, free of charge, technical assistance in the form of engineering knowledge to assist the city in establishing a groundwater management program. The commission has already established an III grant program whereby the city is eligible for $10,'000 in matching grants to assist you in III work. It is our understanding that the city will be applying for a grant and we are willing '" ./ /~ ./' ./ J. Hurm March 10, 1993 Page 3 .//' to work with you. These services would be common to all the communi ti.es in the Lake Minnetonka area and the Commission would also be interested in working with a group of communities in the area. Jim, after you have reviewed these items, please give me a telephone call on 229-2097 and we can discuss them in more detail. We should also follow up with another meeting so as to finalize the 1993 and 1994 cost allocations. szel~ Louis R. Clark Chair LRCjLS c: Dottie Rietow, Chair -Metropolitan council Marcel Jouseau, Metropolitan council Gloria Vierling, MWCC commissioner Gordon Voss, Chief Admin. -MWCC Lois Spear, MWCC Don Bluhm, MWCC Timothy J. Keane, Attorney for city of Shorewood t. .~ CITY OF . SHOREWOOD MEMO TO: MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS, AND CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: AL ROLEK, FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE: MARCH~16, 1993 RE: FOURTH QUARTER, 1992 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS MAYOR Barb Brancel COUNCl L Kristi Stover Rob Daugherty Daniel Lewis Bruce Benson Attached are the preliminary financial statements for the City of Shorewoodfor the fourth' quarter of 1992. These statements' reflect the financial activity of the City for the year ended December 31, 1992. The data is considered accurate and final, pending the final outcome of the city's annual audit ,which is currently underway. Following are a few brief comments relating to the statements. . GENERAL FUND The General Fund did well for the year, ending with a balance of revenues over expenditures and transfers of $5,438. . This is within less than 1% of the 1992 budget of $2,358; 638. . While the budget contained the use of surplus fund balance to finance services for the year, revenues in other areas were sufficienttq'avoid the use of these surplus funds. Similarly, there, was no significant addition to the General Fund balance at year'end. Transfers to various capital project and equipment, funds from the General Fund were budgeted for 1992 and were made a,t year'end in accordance with a Council resolution. These, transfers were budgeted in the department to which the activity pe'rtains;however, only the total of the transfers is shown ,at the bottom the General Fund Revenue and Expenditures report. /'" A Residential :Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore. M~O FOURTH QUARTER, 1992 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS MARCH 16, 1993 PAGE 2 A recap of the General Fund activity for 1992 is as follows: Revenue Expenditures Net Revenue before transfers $2,307,389 (1.775.351) 532,038 1992 Budgeted transfers Net Revenue after Transfers (526.600) 5.438 Further analysis of budget data shows that neither revenue nor expenditures actually exceeded budgetary levels. While the budget for both revenues and expenditures was $2,358,638, total revenues for 1992 were $2,307,389 and total expenditures transfers were $2,301,951. Although there appears to be a shortfall in revenue, the budgeted figure included the use of $162,200 in surplus fund balance. Therefore, the revenues actually exceeded expectations by about $111,000. The sources of this higher than expected revenue were primarily building permits, which exceeded budget by $43,000 interest earnings, over by $34,000, and miscellaneous revenue which exceed expectations. And, total property tax collections for the year were at 100% of levy versus 98% to 99% in previous years. Unlike previous years, the City received its full HACA allotment, in 1992. Earlier in the year the State expected these revenues to the local governments to be cut, however, the cuts never materialized. Expenditures for 1991 were also under budget. Departmental expenditures, as a rule, came in at under budgeted levels. Because certain personnel demands fluctuate between departments of a general heading (ie: Streets, Snowplowing, etc. are Public Works departments) there is some variance between the budget and actual for some departments. However, when these departments are total under these headings, the budgets versus actual, in most cases, are favorable. Expenditures which exceeded budget were in the areas of planning (which is offset by protective inspections), engineering, and general public works services. Overall, the General Fund was well within budget, with no significant effect on the General Fund balance at year end. The General Fund balance, which started the year at $1,252,193, stands at $1,257,632 at year end. This level, which equates to approximately 53% of our annual budget, is designated as working capital. As the City receives the bulk of its revenues in July and December, it is necessary to accumulate such a balance to carry out operations throughout the first half of the year and to avoid \ MEMO FOURTH QUARTER, 1992 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS MARCH 16, 1993 PAGE 3 borrowing for this period. A level of 33% to 50% recommended by the city's auditor. The City should attempt to maintain this ratio without becoming excessive. WATER AND SEWER FUNDS There are mixed reviews for these funds for 1992.. The Water Fund experienced a net revenue of $38,600 for the year as opposed to net loss in the Sewer Fund of $15,777. The loss in the Sewer fund is directly attributable to depreciation expense. The cash balance of both funds has increased during the year, which shows that the funds operate on a positive cash flow basis. These funds can be recapped as follows: Revenue Expense(wjo depreciation) Net Income before Depr. Less: Depreciation Net Income (Loss) Water Fund $234,287 (134.559) 99,728 ( 61. 128) 38.600 Sewer Fund $651,520 (490.687) 160,863 (176.610) ( 15.777) Cash Balance, Dec. 31 Cash Balance, Jan. 1 Net Increase $171,637 84.757 $ 86.880 $661,477 607.529 $ 53,948 As it can be seen, each fund experiences a net increase in cash flow for the year. Increasing rates by the MWCC and the need to rebuild our lift stations and control I & I have a great impact on the Sewer Fund, especially for the 1993 and 1994. Sewer rates were increased in 1992, but will need to be increased again to finance operations and infrastructure repair and replacement. Funding from other sources (MWCC) would help to defray these increases. The net income in the Water Fund will contribute to the reduction of the deficit balance in this fund, helping to restore the health of the fund. LIQUOR FUND The Liquor Fund finished the year with a net operating profit, before transfers, of $39,687. This compares with $89,-574 the ~ MEMO FOURTH QUARTER, 1992 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS MARCH 16, 1993 PAGE 4 previous year. Sales for the year were off $77,000, from $1.455 million to $1.378 million, a decrease of 5.29%. Sales in 1991 were unexpectedly high due to the large number of national events held in the Twin City area during the -year (Super Bowl, World Series, Final Four, etc.). Reduced sales for 1992 were anticipated. However, the profitability of the store suffered greatly from the previous year, going from 6.15% to 2.88%. The gross profit percentage (sales - cost of goods sold) is 1.5% lower than the previous year. This generally will show up after a physical inventory is taken and adjustment in inventory figures are made. I have made the Liquor Operations Manager aware of this and he is working to restore the percentage to previous levels. OTHER FUNDS The city's construction funds for the various projects, and the debt service funds appear to be financially sound. Capital projects funds for projects completed and accepted by the City Council were closed at year end to their respective debt service funds. We will maintain capital project funds for those projects which are in progress, and will continue to maintain the capital Reserve fund and Capital Equipment fund. INVESTMENTS The interest rates in 1992 continued to be volatile, with short- term rates falling dramatically and long-term rates also on a down trend. While this is good news economically, it spells markedly lower yields for the investor, and the City is no exception. Our average yield has fallen by over 1% in the last year. Because of our limited investment opportunities due to portfolio size, liquidity needs, concern for safety of principal and statutory limitations, it is difficult to hedge against the low short-term rates. ,Our yield does track favorably to the 1 year T-bill. The City's investments as of December 31, 1992, are as follows: Institution Marquette Bank Dain Bosworth paineWebber Prudential-Bache smith Barney witt Financial TOTAL INVESTMENTS AND AVG. INTEREST RATE Average Interest Rate 6.57% 4.26% 7.50% 6.00% 4.92% 4.58% 5.64% Amount Invested $2,211,187 214,466 97,875 98,000 1,705,416 198.000 $4,526,944 MEMO FOURTH QUARTER, 1992 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS MARCH 16, 1993 PAGE 5 A detailed investment schedule attached for your reference. All investments of the City's excess funds are made in accordance with guidelines set forth by Minnesota State Statutes.. I will cover many of meeting March 22. statements. I will convenience. these points during my report at the Council Please feel free to call me regarding the be happy to discuss them with you at your