090793 Planning Commission Mtg
t!!
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 1993
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
DRAFT
Chair Rosenberger called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Chair Rosenberger; Commissioners Bean, Bonach, Borkon, Hansen,
Malam and Pisula; Planning Director Nielsen, Engineer Dresel, and
Council Liaison Lewis. Administrator Hurm and Council member Stover
participated in a portion of the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Borkon moved, Hansen seconded to approve the minutes of the Commission's August
3, 1993 meeting, amended on Page 2, Paragraph 5, Sentence 2, to read:
" . ..guidelines for speakers exolaining that a 3-minute time limit would be keot. that
auestions asked by the oublic would be recorded by Commissioner Bonach. that the
Planning Commission would address each auestion after the oublic hearing was
closed. and that anyone wishing to soeak a second 3-minute oeriod could be heard
again after comoletion of the initial sian-uo list."; on Page ." Paragraph 1,
Sentence/Question 1 to read: "...on the corner of Seamans Drive and Yellowstone?";
on Page 7, Paragraph 6, Sentence 3 to read: "The Senior Housing Task Force... .";
and on Page 13, Paragraph 1, Line 14 to read:" ...,the wetlands have already been
taken into consideration in allowing the smaller lots." (Added material underscored.)
Motion passed 7/0.
Borkon moved, Pisula seconded to approve the minutes of the Commission's August
17, 1993 meeting, amended on Page 1 under Aooroval of Minutes, Sentence 2, to
read: "Pisula moved, Bean seconded to approve the minutes of the Commission's July
28, 1993 meeting." (Corrected names underscored.)
Motion passed 7/0.
1. GIDEON'S WOODS P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT STAGE APPROVAL - Tabled from
August 17, 1993.
Aoolicant:
Location:
Katter Development Corporation
24590 Glen Road
Chair Rosenberger announced the case of Katter Development Corporation's request
for approval of the development stage plan for Gideon's Woods P.U.D., 24590 Glen
1
..
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 2
Road.
Nielsen reviewed the Applicant's development stage plan as revised since tabling on
August 17, and detailed in his report dated September 3, 1993 and in the Engineer's
September 7, 1993 letter. The developer's revised grading plan includes a larger
ponding area in the southeast corner of the site, redesign of the proposed garage for
the Gideon home, and an unde~tat'lding of a final landscape plan.
Nielsen stated that according to the Engineer, the pond will be sufficiently sized and
site grading will be designed to actually reduce the rate of runoff to the west by at
least 15 % of the predevelopment rate. City water will be provided by Tonka Bay
under an existing water service agreement; the developer must pay the required fees.
The landscape plan shows that existing vegetation on the west side of the property
will be protected; some existing vegetation can be preserved on the east side; white
pine and spruce trees no less than 6' in height will be used to create a buffer between
the proposed structures and County Road 19; and a mixture of apple and other fruit
trees will be planted around the relocated Gideon house. The Historical Society will
assist in ensuring the accuracy of the historic plaque to be incorporated into a stone
monument at the entry to the site. The final landscape plan will detail how existing
trees will be preserved. Any mature trees identified to be saved will be replaced on the
basis of caliper inches if lost to construction. Further review by the Historical Society
is not necessary. Nielsen suggested that verification that no further documentation
is necessary from the Indian Affairs Council be included in the conditions for approval.
The developer will break the Gideon house garage into two structures and move them
to a location 40' from the rear lot line and the garage design will be adjusted to reflect
the character of the house.
The developer must obtain required permits listed in the Engineer's letter prior to a
issuance of a grading permit and prior to final plan approval. In addition to the final
detailed landscape plan, the developer must .provide, prior to final plan approval,
maintenance and protection covenants covering the Indian mound and the Gideon
house and provision for ownership and maintenance of the utilities on the site.
Nielsen recommended approval of the revised development stage plan for Gideon's
Woods P.U.D., subject to the conditions described.
Bean noted the developer previously agreed to providing replacement trees no less
than 6" in diameter. Hansen commended the developer for excellent responses to the
issues raised previously by the Commission and staff.
Hansen moved, Malam seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the
development stage plan of Katter Development Corporation for Gideon's Woods
P.U.D., 24590 Glen Road, subject to the staff recommendations, and pending
verification from the Indian Affairs Council, and that replacement trees will be on the
basis of caliper inches with a minimum of 6" in diameter.
Motion passed 7/0.
2
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 3
The Council will consider the recommendation at its September 13, 1993 meeting.
2. 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT - RIDGE ROAD ADDITION
Aoolicant:
Location:
Robert Engstrom Company
South End of Ridge Road on Silver Lake
Chair Rosenberger announced the case of a request for preliminary plat approval from
Robert Engstrom Company for Ridge Road Addition. He outlined the procedures for
a public hearing and requested that those wishing to speak sign up on the sheet
provided.
Nielsen reviewed the request to subdivide the property on the west side of the south
end of Ridge Road and Silver Lake into two lots. The property is zoned R-1 A and is
also subject to the requirements of the Shoreland District. An old silo and the
foundation of an old out-building currently occupy the site. Lot 1 is proposed to
contain 42,500 square feet of area and Lot 2 is proposed to have 69,800 square feet.
The applicant has shown how future homes might be placed on the lots and how
access could be provided to them. Nielsen stated both lots comply with the
dimensional and area requirements of the zoning district.
Nielsen pointed out that as with other recent subdivision requests, l?ite access is a
concern, although the topography of this site is not as severe as other sites in the
vicinity. The proposed plat shows driveway grades at 10%, the maximum allowed.
Staff has suggested that additional parking area for each lot at the top of the site be
provided. These recommended parking areas provide parking during severe weather
and serve as pull':'outs for traffic on Ridge Road.
Nielsen recommended approval of the preliminary plat subject to the following
conditions: the final plat must be submitted within 6 months of Council approval of
the preliminary plat and provide the required drainage and utility easements; Exhibit
C, Recommended Parking/Pull-out Areas, be included in the final plat resolution;
existing nonconforming structures must be removed; required park dedication and
local sanitary sewer access charges must be paid prior to release of the final plat;
application for final plat must include a title opinion or commitment for the City's
review; and driveways for the proposed lots shall not exceed 10% grade and site
grading must not result in disturbed slopes exceeding 3: 1.
Robert Engstrom confirmed the information presented and pointed out that two
substantial homes will be built on the site. He indicated he is aware of the concerns
regarding deterioration of the private street.
Chair Rosenberger opened the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m.
Allan Ostehauge, a resident of Ridge Road representing the Ridge Road Homeowners
Association, stated the residents must protect their investment in the private road
since they must repair it. The proposed construction is located at the end of Ridge
3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 4
Road which means the entire length of the road will be used and will cause further
deterioration, therefore the association requests that a bond be posted to cover any
repairs to damage occurring because of the construction. He expressed concern
regarding the driveways and requested that the grade be 10% or less. . Safety of the
residents is a concern particularly during the winter season. Ostehauge agreed it is
imperative that provision be made for additional parking at the top of the roads for
inclement weather and guest parking as well as during the construction period. He
recommended that the setbacks be closely reviewed and that the requirements be
adhered to. Ostehauge stated the silo and building on the property are part of the
history of Ridge Road and the surrounding community. The Historical Society is
currently reviewing their historical status and value to the community. Ostehauge
requested that the review be completed prior to issuance of the proposal's required
permits.
Colleen Nelson, future resident of Ridge Road, indicated the structural soundness of
the silo has been reviewed and although it may add to the charm of the location, it
is considered unsound; however, she suggested something may be done with the
bricks. She stated the plans for her home meet the necessary setback requirements.
Chair Rosenberger closed the Public Hearing at 7:45 p.m.
With regard to Mr. Ostehauge's request that a bond be posted to assure repair of
construction damage to the road, Nielsen stated this has not been required since
covenants of the homeowners association provide for maintenance and repair of the
private road. However, he recommended referring the matter of requiring a bond to
the City Attorney.
Borkon inquired whether the association has been in contact with the developer
regarding road deterioration during construction. Ostehauge indicated a conversation
with the developer did not reach a conclusion. He further stated there is hesitancy
in contacting neighbors with respect to road repairs. Bonach agreed that approval of
the development at the end of the road will further deteriorate the full length of the
road. Hansen stated it cannot be assumed that construction will damage the road.
However, Bonach indicated the developments on that road have in fact contributed
to deterioration of the road. Borkon acknowledged the City has no jurisdiction over
private roads, but agreed that the road is in poor condition and pointed out that heavy
trucks break it up creating large dangerous potholes.
Hansen stated it appears the association may not have maintained the road adequately
over the years. Rosenberger requested clarification of the City's responsibility for
private roads. Nielsen stated private roads are generally discouraged; however, in
cases of private roads constructed in conjunction with developments, the City requires
that the homeowners association bylaws provide for assessments for maintenance of
the common roads and facilities. He indicated the Ridge Road association may be
somewhat vague in this regard. While the residents prefer that the road remain
private, the City provides for improvements as it can by requiring the additional
parking/pullout areas. Nielsen reiterated that he will request an opinion from the City
4
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 5
Attorney regarding posting of a bond for any further road damage caused by
construction related to this subdivision, although he pointed out it may be difficult to
determine the extent of damage that may be attributed to this particular subdivision.
Bean reiterated it appears the homeowners association may not have adequately
maintained the road during development of the area over the years. Further, Bean
pointed out, it is unfair to require the developer of the last property on the road to be
responsible for road repairs. Hansen stated opposition to requiring a bond and
explained that the association as a neighborhood, of which the new residents will be
part of, should be responsible collectively, rather than this particular developer
exclusively. Bean agreed with Hansen's viewpoint and reiterated that although the
road is in poor condition, the City has no jurisdiction over Ridge Road. Bonach
recalled that in conjunction with approval of an earlier development in the area, it was
suggested the builder and the association work together to resolve construction
damage issues.
Rosenberger agreed it was imperative for the developer and the association to work
toward resolution of the issue. Mr. Engstrom described his difficulty in determining
the appropriate officials of the association, indicated this may provide the opportunity
for the association to take appropriate actions and expressed his full cooperation.
With regard to the issue of the driveways and pull-out/parking areas, Nielsen reiterated
that the pullout areas will be added to the developer's grading plan (Exhibit C) and
made a part of the approval resolution. He stated the setback requirements are
adequately met as the lots have substantial buildable area.
With regard to the issue of the historical value of the silo, Nielsen indicated the
Historical Society is assisting in determining the age of the structure. If the structure
qualifies, the process involved for preservation may be lengthy. Hansen stated that
nothing on this property is currently on the historical registry, therefore, the issue has
no impact on action taken on this preliminary plat request.
Malam expressed concern regarding the safety of the silo and suggested the
association be responsible for making it safe and/or preserving it. Bean stated the
structure is nonconforming and from the City's standpoint, the safety issue must be
addressed before the historical value question.
Bonach expressed concern regarding the continued destruction of the road which will
be further exacerbated by approval of this development and expressed frustration in
the City's inability to control this. She stated the construction contractors and
subcontractors should be required to repair the road. Borkon inquired whether the fire
department services Ridge Road and whether the City has responsibility for the road
in that connection. Nielsen explained the fire department serves that road and is paid
for through the General Fund, however the City does not have jurisdiction over
maintenance or repair of the road because it is private. Nielsen stated the City has
not required a bond for road repairs related to construction on City streets.
5
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 6
Bean moved, Hansen seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the Ridge
Road Addition preliminary plat request of Robert Engstrom Company at the south end
of Ridge Road on Silver Lake, subject to the staff recommendations detailed in
Nielsen's September 3, 1993 report, including removal of the nonconforming
structures.
Motion passed 5/2. Bonach and Borkon voted nay.
The Council will consider the recommendation at its September 27, 1993 meeting.
3. 7:45 PUBLIC HEARING - SETBACK VARIANCE
Aoolicant:
Location:
Ernest Pavlisich
27470 Pine Bend
Chair Rosenberger announced the case of a request for a setback variance by Ernest
Pavlisich, 27470 Pine Bend, and outlined the procedures for a public hearing.
Nielsen reviewed the background to the request noting that Mr. Pavlisich, the current
owner of the property, proposes to build an addition similar to one proposed by the
previous owner, Mr. Norenberg. He stated the previous owner was granted a setback
variance in 1986, however the addition was not built and the approval expired after
one year. Additional living and garage space will be built on the east side of house.
The corner lot is narrow and is subject to 50' setback requirements on both Howards
Point Road and Pine Bend. An 18' variance is requested in order to align the addition
with the existing house line along Pine Bend. Nielsen indicated the analysis contained
in the 1986 staff report is still valid, however, the recommendation to prohibit further
expansion to the south could be modified to anticipate a future deck or patio. Nielsen
recommended approval of the variance.
Mr. Pavlisich stated the report by Nielsen accurately reflected his request.
Chair Rosenberger opened and closed the Public Hearing at 8: 1 0 p.m. there being no
comments from the public.
Bean inquired why the entire home is in variance with the buildable area. Nielsen
indicated it is likely that the home pre-dates the ordinance. Malam concurred with the
recommendation noting that the narrow lot precludes other options.
Bean moved, Borkon seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the
request of Ernest Pavlisich, 27470 Pine Bend, for a setback variance subject to the
staff recommendations, and that no further building be allowed to the south side of
the property other than to erect a patio or deck with a depth limited to no more than
12 feet.
Motion passed 7/0.
6
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 7
The Council will consider the recommendation at its September 27, 1993 meeting.
The meeting recessed at 8:15 p.m. and reconvened at 8:20 p.m.
4. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION
Aoolicant:
Location:
Shirley Frantz
4815 Suburban Drive
Chair Rosenberger announced the case of a simple subdivision request from Shirley
Frantz, 4815 Suburban Drive.
Nielsen reviewed the background to the proposal to subdivide the property into 3 lots.
The property is zoned R-1C and contains approximately 69,472 square feet of area.
The Frantz home is located on the middle of the 3 proposed lots. Nielsen stated the
proposed lots comply with the dimensional and area requirements of the zoning
district. He noted that even though the westerly most lot is surrounded by public
right-of-way on three sides, it has ample buildable area. Although the location of the
exiting house does not comply with rear yard setback requirements, this subdivision
will not increase the nonconformity.
Nielsen recommended approval of the subdivision subject to: preparation of legal
descriptions for drainage and utility easements to be incorporated into deeds in favor
of the City; provision of a title opinion or commitment for review by the City Attorney;
payment of park dedication and local sanitary sewer access charges for Parcels A and
C; and recording of the division within 30 days after Council approval.
Malam moved, Hansen seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the
simple subdivision proposed by Shirley Franz, 4815 Suburban Drive, subject to the
conditions detailed in the September 2, 1993 staff memorandum.
Motion passed 7/0.
The Council will consider the recommendation at its September .27, 1993 meeting.
5. BUILDING MOVING PERMIT
Aoolicant:
Location:
Rolf B. Torkelson
23690 Gillette Curve
Chair Rosenberger announced the case of a request for a building moving permit from
Rolf B. Torkelson, 23690 Gillette Curve.
Nielsen stated the existing garage on the Gideon's Woods project will be moved to
Gillette Curve by way of Glen Road, County Road 19 and Minnetonka Drive. He
recommended approval of the request subject to approval of the route by the City
Engineer and approval of the time and day by the police department. Movement on
7
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 8
County Road 19 must be approved by Hennepin County. Nielsen stated the site plan
for the new location on Gillette Curve complies with the zoning district setbacks.
Borkon moved, Bean seconded to recommend to the Council that it approve the
request for a building moving permit for Rolf B. Torkelson, 23690 Gillette Curve,
subject to the City Engineer's approval of the route and the police department's
approval of the date and time of the move.
Motion passed 7/0.
The Council will consider the recommendation at its September 13, 1993 meeting.
6. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING R-1A TO P.U.D. - MEADOW WOOD
COMMUNITY - Continued from August 3, 1993
Aoolicant:
Location:
Diversified Housing, Inc.
25400 State Highway 7
Chair Rosenberger announced the continuation of the case of a rezoning request from
R-1A to P.U.D. for Meadow Wood Community-Diversified Housing, Inc., 25400 State
Highway 7. He outlined the procedures for a public hearing and stated that residents
wishing to speak, must sign up to do so. He stated 20 minutes will be allowed for
comments from the applicant and from Shorewood Homeowners Association
representatives collectively.
Nielsen stated additional materials have been provided in response to issues raised at
the initial hearing on August 3, 1993. This information includes: the developer's
revised concept plan showing 44 units rather than 60; City Engineer's report re: traffic
counts and water service capability; City Attorney's report re: age restriction
requirements; DNR letter and response re: Shoreland requirements; and City
Assessor's report re: property value impact. In addition, the developer has provided
a report dated September 7 addressing some of the concerns and a traffic analysis
prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates.
Nielsen reviewed the DNR's response which addresses a number of issues in addition
to the Shoreland Management Regulations, including wetlands, stormwater treatment,
erosion control and construction dewatering. Its response to the specific question
with respect to Shoreland Management Regulations indicates this project would not
adversely impact the shoreland district. DNR indicates there is likely another wetland
on the south portion of the property and it must be delineated as part of any further
approvals.
Nielsen stated the developer has submitted a conceptual landscape plan. He has
requested distribution of the senior housing task force site map and intends to address
why this particular site was chosen over some of the others. Nielsen noted that
letters regarding this project and senior housing in general have been received from
a number of senior residents.
8
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 9
Jud Knoll, architect, planner and developer of the proposed project, stated the
Meadow Wood Community project is at the concept stage, described the purpose of
this stage as outlined in the City's zoning code and noted the elements that must be
included in the general concept plan. He stated the materials submitted to date
exceed those required for review under the P.U.D. concept plan. He submitted the
materials which would normally be required for the next review stage to demonstrate
his personal commitment to the high quality of design. He noted this is not the final
approval on this project and described the sequence of events and approvals required.
He described the project concept based on single story cottage style units grouped in
clusters. Knoll stated the plan has been reduced from 60 to 44 units, all set back
requirements have been met or exceeded, the Shoreland requirements have been met,
and the landscape plan submitted meets or exceeds all the major elements required.
Knoll reviewed the conclusions reached by the traffic consultant that the proposed
development would have no measurable impact on traffic operations or safety on the
surrounding street system, the development would generate only 26 more total trips
on a daily basis than 7 single-family homes, which increase would be virtually
undetectable to a casual observer. Knoll stated that in his experience, this is the first
instance that he has encountered the notion that senior housing causes property
devaluation. He indicated zoning codes provide for protection of property values and
emphasized that senior housing does not decrease the value of surrounding property.
He referred to a similar project located in Maplewood where adjacent property has not
devalued and to the City Assessor's statement supporting the view that the project
will not have a detrimental effect on the surrounding properties. Knoll stated retired
persons make conscientious neighbors. Acknowledging that another wetlands area
may exist in the southeast corner of the site, Knoll reviewed the consulting engineer's
report dated September 3, which concludes that the Watershed District concerns can
be addressed by using the ample areas on the south and west sides on the proposed
site plan if it can be shown that the wetland in southeast corner cannot be avoided
and that impacts to the wetland have been minimized. Knoll stated the plans are
viable and additional engineering work will be completed to address the wetlands
issue in the developmental stage plans. Knoll stated the profit to be accrued from this
project is limited to 6% by the Housing Authority and the Federal government. Knoll
stated the primary. criteria for site selection is to locate the very best site to be found
for deserving senior citizens. Knoll stated the legitimate concerns of the citizens and
the City of Shorewood regarding the project have been professionally addressed, the
decision on this proposal will test the City's commitment to senior housing, and
reiterated that the proposal offers affordable quality housing on the best site available
in Shorewood.
Vern Knoll, Tonka Bay, father of Jud Knoll, reviewed the site selection criteria and
process and described the elimination procedure of the other sites identified by the
senior citizen task force.
Chair Rosenberger opened the public hearing at 8:50 p.m. and reviewed the guidelines
for the hearing including speaker time limits.
9
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 10
Steve Frazier, 6125 Seamans Drive, stated that spokespersons of the Shorewood
Homeowners Association, will present concerns, questions and independent findings
regarding the proposal including the developer's qualifications, traffic and wetlands
issues and zoning violations. Frazier commented on the Planning Commission's
charge and responsibility to the City and its residents to maintain a semi-rural
residential City and to preserve family homes and quiet neighborhoods. He stated
opposition to the proposed project because of infringement on the semi-rural character
of the neighborhood and inconsistency with the City's comprehensive plan.
Mike Peterson, 5910 Eureka Road, presented information examining the professional
architectural qualifications and credentials and motivation of the developer. He stated
the Shorewood I Homeowners Association has reserved the Diversified Housing, Inc.
name until January 4, 1994, since the authority to use the name was not renewed by
the developer when it lapsed on September 5. He stated opposition to the proposed
development based on the ambiguous character of the developer.
Jim Thomson, 6100 Seamans Drive, presented photographs of the wetlands on the
proposed site and stated the proposed development would have an adverse impact
on adjacent properties.
Cory Nelson, 5980 Seamans Drive, spoke on issues concerning traffic and safety
related to the project. He presented data to support the site's incompatibility with the
area and as a dangerous site selection for seniors.
Bernadette Thomson, 6100 Seamans Drive, cited various City ordinances relevant to
the proposed development, described how the proposed development violates those
ordinances, and requested that the City respect the integrity of its ordinances. Ms.
Thomson asked when this matter will go to the City Council if approved by the
Planning Commission. The Council will likely consider the Commission's
recommendation at its October 11, 1993 meeting. (Nielsen later advised that it could
be scheduled for the September 27, 1993 meeting.)
Bob Reutiman, 5915 Galpin lake Road, described the City's inaction on commitments
to senior housing over the past years and the residents' general overall objection to
progress in Shorewood.
Bob Gagne, 24850 Amlee Road, pointed out the City constantly undergoes change.
He stated that 14% of Shorewood residents are seniors and the survey conducted by
the senior task force clearly indicates a need for rental and/or purchase of affordable
housing for senior citizens. He emphasized that the potential residents of senior
housing are the residents who have supported and developed Shorewood to its
current desirable location for residency. Gagne reminded the Commission that its
action on this proposal will clearly indicate to the community's senior residents its
degree of commitment to them.
Daniel Jackson, 6025 Riviera lane, described his experience as a police officer dealing
with a senior community such as the one proposed. Numerous problems were created
10
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 11
by extended families of the senior residents moving into their homes for various
reasons. He pointed out that a number of complaints have been received regarding
traffic violations at Yellowstone and Lake Linden Drive, and the development will
further exacerbate the traffic problems.
Sandy Pescheck, 6060 Seamans Drive, described Maplewood's senior housing project
and the property surrounding it. The village was used by the developer as a
comparable project with the proposed Meadow Wood Community. She pointed out
. it is located in a multi-family neighborhood in a service and amenity-oriented area,
unlike the location of the proposed development. She inquired what impact reduction
from 60 to 44 units in the proposed development will have on the rental costs.
Keith Monjak, 6140 Pleasant Avenue, stated he moved to Shorewood for its rural
atmosphere and has no objection to senior housing; however, the proposed location
is not appropriate since amenities or services are not available within safe walking
distance.
Beverly Koehnen, 2036 Canterbury Road, Shakopee, representing her father Roy
Seamans, 6115 Seamans Drive, stated that she had previously requested a survey of
the property. She stated a survey map was crucial in that her father owns property
on the west side of Seamans Drive and it appears the development is platted to
Seamans Drive. She inquired whether exits are planned for Seamans Drive. The up-
to-date map shows an exit on Seamans Drive. She indicated her father is opposed to
the project and will neither sell his property nor grant an easement to the developer.
Byron Thomson, 22665 Island View Road, stated his son and daughter-in-law moved
to a location on Seamans Drive with the understanding adjacent property would also
have single family homes on 1-acre lots. He stated services and amenities are not
in close proximity to this location. He expressed opposition to the proposed project
and stated the City should keep its promise to the residents to maintain a semi-rural
atmosphere.
Ed Weir, 25110 Yellowstone Trail, inquired what the legal procedure is to acquire the
easement if Mr. Seamans owns the property.
William Kelly, 25000 Yellowstone Trail, referred to his September 3, 1993 letter
objecting to the proposal, noted approval of the proposal would be an injustice to the
residents by destroying the R-1 designation. He stated the proposal is inadequate
with many questions left unanswered and expressed opposition to the proposed
project.
Chair Rosenberger closed the public hearing at 9:45 p.m. and thanked the residents
for their thoughtful input.
The Commissioners addressed the questions/concerns raised during the public hearing.
Developer's qualifications? Motivation for this proposal? Jud Knoll stated while his
11
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 12
AlA membership has lapsed, he fully intends to reapply; as a registered licensed
professional architect in good standing in Wisconsin since 1974, a reciprocity
agreement allows similar licensure in Minnesota, however a Minnesota license will be
obtained by the time this project requires architectural staff. He reviewed his
academic credentials which include a degree in architecture from the University of
Illinois, graduating first in his class, a master's degree in architecture and a master's
degree in urban planning from M.I.T., and has passed the required testing which
allows licensing in any state.
Nielsen stated there does not appear to be any barrier based on the developer's status
to granting concept approval of the development, however, he will refer to the City
Attorney questions regarding the developer's AlA status.
.
Rosenberger questioned the validity of the application lacking proper incorporation of
Diversified Housing, Inc. Nielsen stated the City requires a title commitment, reviews
the status of the legal entities involved in signing of a contract with the City, and
requires proof that a developer can obtain a cash escrow or letter of credit. He
stated he will refer to the City Attorney the matter of the incorporation of the
applicant.
Vern Knoll described the corporation consisting of a general partnership of family
members formed to provide economic strength to acquire land. He stated that while'
the corporation's name reservation lapsed due to a member not returning from Europe
in time, legal counsel advises that no illegal acts have been committed since legal
contracts have not been signed.
Bean stated that in his view the applicant is legitimate whether it is a corporation or
a sole proprietorship.
lack of solid financial commitment and misrepresentation? Nielsen stated the
applicant has paid a $1000 application fee and a $300 escrow deposit has been
posted to Chanhassan in connection with the water issue and noted that financial
credibility comes with the applicant's ability to acquire financing for the project. He
reiterated that the City Attorney will be consulted regarding the incorporation
question.
Wetlands shown by the developer are in variance with actual wetlands on the site?
Nielsen indicated the DNR notes the plan identifies a wetland on the National
Wetlands Inventory and suggests the Corp of Engineers be consulted regarding the
wetlands and that all wetlands on the site should be delineated. Dresel clarified the
separate entities involved in the jurisdiction of the wetlands and described
construction dewatering. Study of the proposed project plans by the wetlands
jurisdictions would not begin until preliminary approval of the development is granted
by the City. Jud Knoll recognized existence of the additional wetland and reiterated
that delineation of the wetlands will be part of the developmental stage plans to be
submitted to the City and the watershed district.
12
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 13
Traffic and safety impact? Nielsen reported a one-day (24 hours) actual traffic count
(trips per day) conducted by staff: Eureka 1484; Seamans 225; Yellowstone 397.
Dresel reviewed trip generation and distribution data according to the traffic study
performed by a consultant for the developer. Nielsen stated that although he has not
analyzed the consultant's report, he would have expected a higher projected
percentage of avoidance of Highway 7. Nielsen stated the Comprehensive Plan
suggests that higher density developments be located nearer to higher traffic facilities
so that traffic generated by those uses does not have to travel through lower density
areas. Knoll indicated that a van for transporting residents will be provided as part of
the community's programs.
Ordinance violations? Nielsen stated the specific issue to be addressed by the
Commission is the re-zoning of the property from R-1A (single family) to P.U.D.
(planned unit development district), which is a three-step process-concept,
development and final. He referred to the policies to be considered in resolving the
discrepancy between the proposal and the land use plan (map) in the Comp Plan. He
suggested reviewing the Comp Plan policies and weigh the pros and cons of the
proposal with the pros and cons of the current Comp Plan/policies/ordinances to arrive
at a decision regarding this project. Bean reiterated that there are a series of decision
points in the process that will assure a quality product. While agreeing with. the
statements made, Borkon stated it is important to consider all the issues carefully at
this time.
Families moving in? Nielsen stated the City's ordinance limits occupancy to persons
62 years and older with the exception that one care-provider may live in each unit.
He reported the City Attorney's opinion that such covenants are enforceable; however
the impact of changes in federal law which may pre-empt local laws is unknown.
Nielsen stated that according to market information, renting of these units to eligible
residents will not be difficult. Knoll stated that state regulations require that only
eligible senior residents may occupy the units for the next 30 years.
Effect of decreased number of proposed units on rental costs? Meaning of City
Assessor's report? Vern Knoll explained that the Department of Revenue's program
provides for use of the HUD formula for annual rent increases generally based on the
cost of living increase, which has been 2.6% over the past 2 years. He stated that
rentals of 1-bedroom units will remain at between $440 and $450 plus utilities - about
$15-$20 higher than when the project was at 60 units. Knoll described the eligibility
requirements for residents based on Hennepin County median income.
According to' Nielsen, determining the effect on property values and finding a
development with similar circumstances that would provide data is difficult. The
Assessor's opinion is that the project will not have a detrimental effect on the
properties surrounding it and cited a similar project in Maple Plain which did not affect
adjacent property values.
Malam stated that no change whatsoever has occurred in the value or sales of homes
adjacent to a high rise development he is familiar with on Penn Avenue.
13
, <
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 14
Why consider a location for senior housing that is not convenient to amenities or
services? Rosenberger stated the Commission is considering the application and is not
responsible for the site selection.
Survey showing ownership of the right-of-way on Seamans Drive? Nielsen stated a
survey is required as part of the development stage and the developer must
demonstrate that he owns the property.
If Mr. Seamans owns the property, what is the process for taking the land/easement
for the project? Nielsen stated the developer must acquire it. Jud Knoll stated that
an exit on Seamans Drive is not essential to the project.
Inadequate plans, off-street parking, more information? Nielsen stated the revised
plan shows attached garages. The ordinance requires that one garage and one
parking space must be provided for each unit. Jud Knoll stated the required parking
and garages will be provided.
Bean stated the major issues are the commitment to senior housing and whether this
is the best location. He expressed concerns related to the zoning of the area and
whether the density proposed (44) is appropriate relative to its location near the
Seamans, Yellowstone, Highway 7 configuration. He inquired whether approval could
be made contingent to redesign of that intersection. Nielsen stated such approval
could be made, but it would become a question of City policy whether the developer
would be required to put in the improvement or whether the City would do that.
Regardless of what decision is reached regarding this project, Nielsen stated the
problems at that intersection need to be addressed and approval of this development
would expedite resolution of the traffic problem including addressing financing of the
improvements.
Bean requested clarification of the process under which the necessary property would
be acquired for the intersection improvement. It would be acquired though
condemnation proceedings by the City in the interest of public safety. Nielsen stated
the City's proposed transportation plan, while not yet approved, indicates the need
for improvement of the intersection. He noted the developer's proposal
accommodates the right-of-way for the improvements.
Bean stated that extension of water to the proposed development from the City's
Boulder Bridge system would not be adequate and inquired whether approval of the
project could be made contingent upon confirmation that water will be from the
Chanhassan system. Nielsen stated such approval could be made, however, he noted
that City policy allows a developer to select from several options for the provision of
water to a project. . He indicated a request has been made to Chanhassen by this
developer to determine whether extension of Chanhassen water is feasible along with
a $300 escrow payment for the engineering work required. Nielsen pointed out that
recently Chanhassan has discussed the opinion that if water is extended to a project,
the location should become a part of Chanhassan.
14
.. .
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 15
Rosenberger inquired whether the developer would be willing to drill its own well.
Knoll stated their preference is the extension of the Chanhassan water system;
however, drilling a well on the site would be acceptable. Provision of adequate water
pressure for fire protection was discussed. Knoll indicated that the highest level of
fire protection will be provided to the residents and the details will be worked out
during the development stage. Borkon stated that while a number of problems exist
with the proposal, an adequate water system appears achievable.
Bonach requested clarification regarding the assertion that ordinances have been
violated and regarding the extent of the City's financial exposure at this time. Nielsen
stated he was not aware of any violations at this point. He stated, at this point,
amendment of plans and ordinances is under consideration. Currently, there is no
financial exposure to the City related to this project. Vern Knoll explained the
syndication of the financial responsibility of the project.
Bean expressed concerns regarding the time frames for completion and approval of
projects associated with the proposal including the intersection, the water system and
the additional wetland. While reaffirming his commitment to senior housing in the
community, Bean expressed concern regarding the suitability of the site. He
suggested that perhaps the role of the City's commitment to senior housing be
reconsidered and analyzed further and perhaps intervene in identifying a viable
location for the City's senior residents. He commented on the ambiguous attitude of
the residents regarding expansion and development in the community. He indicated
it is not unrealistic for a developer to be entitled to a 6% profit on a project such as
this.
Borkon generally agreed with the statements made by Bean. She reiterated that it has
been agreed collectively that senior housing is a priority for the community, however
a decision on density has not been agreed and this is a concern with the current
proposal. She stated the proposal for rezoning discounts the individual's concerns and
beliefs about the neighborhood and the protection and guarantees they believe exist.
Although she was negotiable on the matter, she expressed concern that the project
is not consistent with the Comp Plan. Traffic and safety is a concern for the seniors
and other residents and Borkon indicated restructuring of the intersection should be
completed first. The water supply issue, though solvable, is a concern. She indicated
the site does not fulfill the required obligations. Borkon suggested that available sites
be analyzed for possible land use changes to be made in accordance with residents'
input before a site is selected for senior housing. She pointed out that this parcel of
land will be developed in some manner in the future and although this developer has
proposed a nice development it may not be suited for the property.
Hansen stated the solvable issues include: water, shoreland and shoreland related to
Lake Minnewashta. According to Hansen, unsolvable issues include: wetlands and
traffic. He indicated the issue of property values was balanced. He strongly
supported maintaining the current single family zoning district as a commitment to
residents. Hansen stated he felt strongly that this site does not provide the required
access to services and amenities, therefore it is not a good site for senior hqusing.
15
~
. ..
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 16
He affirmed his commitment to senior housing in the community and reiterated that
this site is not acceptable.
Malam stated that while 99% of the issues raised are valid, the majority are not under
consideration during the current concept plan stage deliberation. He indicated the
Comp Plan is a document in constant flux and changes to the Plan are currently be
studied. He commented on the ambiguous attitude of residents. He explained and
supported the developer's motivation, credibility and financial commitment from a
business and professional standpoint. He questioned whether there is a "best" site
for senior housing in the City. Malam acknowledged that a number of issues require
resolution, but reiterated that valid points will be addressed as the proposal proceeds
through the approval process.
Bonach supported senior residents as being highly acceptable neighbors. She agreed
it is important to continue cooperative study to identify an appropriate location for
providing senior housing and indicated the City may wish to contribute assistance for
such a project. She reiterated her concern with the issues previously presented and
agreed the matters require discussion at this point. She stated she would support
rezoning for a qualified location, but indicated the proposed site was not acceptable
for senior housing.
Pisula stated he lives closest to the project and reiterated the concerns previously
stated. He indicated that significant problems with this site cannot be addressed at
this time since required information is not yet available. He pointed out that the
question is how this proposal relate to the overall intent of the City and its Comp Plan
including current study of the Plan and the substantial work completed to attempt to
meet the apparent demand for senior housing. Regarding the lack of access to
services and amenities, Pisula suggested that perhaps senior citizens are quite mobile;
however, he stated he was unable to determine at the present time whether this is
the best site for senior housing.
Rosenberger described his involvement in senior activities including liaison to the
senior task force. While he agreed that perhaps there is no "best" site in Shorewood,
he supported the proposed location and endeavor and stated the development would
be a good addition to the community. He reiterated that outstanding issues will be
addressed in the development stage.
Hansen pointed out that although this is a concept plan discussion, the piece of land
is a central component of the concept plan. Bean expressed concern that even
though concept approval may be granted, additional financial resources will be
expended for a development plan and successful resolution of a number of issues
under the development stage plan is highly questionable.
Rosenberger reiterated support for the proposal and pointed out, only one application
for this type of housing was received. He indicated the task force followed the City's
guidance and through comprehensive and diligent study and work, determined that
this was the best site.
16
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 17
Hansen and Borkon indicated that detailed information regarding the other sites
considered has not been made available. Rosenberger stated the task force made its
analysis and determination that this was the best site to recommend for this type of
senior housing and this is the current proposal before the Commission. Bean stated
the criteria used by the task force was valid based on the guidelines provided,
however, a possible change in the City's position regard financial support of senior'
housing may identify additional suitable sites. Borkon stated that because the site
may be good for the developer, it is the Commission's responsibility to determine
whether it is acceptable to the City and reiterated her objections to this site. Bonach
stated it is important to reaffirm to the City and the community the Commission's
support of senior housing. Malam agreed with Rosenberger's comments and
reiterated there is no ideal site and indicated that resolution of the issues surrounding
this proposal is achievable. Bean reiterated that he cannot support this proposal with
the intersection the way it is today and questioned whether it makes sense to grant
concept stage approval of the proposal given the lengthy time frame for culmination
of the project.
Hansen moved, Borkon seconded to recommend to the Council that it deny approval
of the revised concept plan for Meadow Wood Community, 25400 State Highway 7,
requested by Diversified Housing, Inc.
Motion passed 4/3. Malam, Pisula and Rosenberger voted nay.
The Council will consider the recommendation at its September 27, 1993 meeting.
The Commissioners agreed to consider a separate resolution to the Council addressing
senior housing.
The meeting recessed at 11 :35 p.m. and reconvened at 11 :40 p.m.
The Commissioners discussed at length an appropriate resolution to be presented for
the Council's consideration to reflect the Commission's support of the concept of
senior housing along with a recommendation for methodology to accomplish the
desired goal. Councilmembers Lewis and Stover participated in the discussion.
Issues raised during discussion include: improvement of the Seamans
DrivelYellowstone Trail/Highway 7 intersection;, consideration of the feasibility of the
City's involvement in site selection and funding; subsidizing a for-profit development;
equality in treatment of developers; resident reaction to subsidy; other financing
methods; senior housing as an investment for the City; put money aside for a
successful project; need for amenities and services; joint effort with other cities;
proactive vs reactive policy of the City; acknowledgement of the task force study and
work; political issues; reconsider the historical policy position on site selection; re-
evaluate sites identified by senior task force; identify cost to the City to make a cash-
flow site consistent with the Meadow Wood proposal; and present senior housing
question to joint consortium of lake cities.
17
.'
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 7, 1993 - PAGE 18
Lewis and Stover assured the Council's cooperation on this topic.
The Commissioners agreed to continue consideration of the matter .at a future
meeting.
7 . MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Commissioner Hansen distributed his letter of resignation from the Planning
Commission effective November 1, 1993.
8. REPORTS - None - rescheduled to next meeting agenda.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Pisula moved, Hansen seconded to adjourn the meeting at 12:05 a.m., Wednesday,
September 8, 1993.
Motion passed 7/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Arlene H. Bergfalk
Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial
18
{iii,
~~I
,. OF Tf\F
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Metropolitan Division
Waters Edge Building
1500 West County Road B2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
fiLE COpy
cr-D \993
September 9, 1993
Reply to
Telephone No.
582-1387
Bradley Nielsen
Planning Director
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, Minnesota 55331-8927
. Dear Bradley Nielsen:
SUBJECT: Si,~t?,R1.(ll).-Review" ,,-,-
Meadow Wood Community Pl!P-_....
'North'of TH 7;' Easfof 'Eureka Road
Shorewood, Hennepin County
CS 1004
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the Meadow Wood
Community PUD. We have the following comments regarding the proposal.
.
The intersection of Yellowstone Trail and Seamans Drive is unacceptably close to TH 7
and conflicts with plans to build a westbound right turn lane at the intersection.
Construction of the turn lane is planned in conjunction with a TH 7 reconditioning
project scheduled for 1996. Development that will increase traffic at this intersection
should not proceed prior to the construction of the geometric improvements to Seamans
Drive and Yellowstone Trail. Terry Humbert, preliminary design engineer, has
di:;ci.lSScd the proposed lvln/DOT plO]ect with the city. 'vVe are available tu discuss
options for construction of the imrovements at an earlier date to this intersection.
.
.......
. Current drainage patterns and rates of runoff to the TH 7 right of way must be
maintained. A Mn/DOT drainage permit will be required. Computations showing runoff
volumes before and after construction and pond storage should be submitted with a
permit application. Approval from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District may also
be required. If you have questions regarding drainage, please contact Brian Kelly of our
Hydraulics Section at 593-8571. Bill Warden, of our Permits office, may be contacted
at 582-1443 for applications and questions about the permit process.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Bradley Nielsen
September 9, 1993
Page two
.
Mn/DOT's policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land
use and highways. Residential land use adjacent to highways will usually result in
complaints about traffic noise.
.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has established noise standards and the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development also has guidelines. Traffic noise from
this highway could exceed noise standards established by these agencies.
Mn/DOT policy regarding new developments adjacent to existing highways prohibits the
expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures. The developer should
assess the noise situation and take the action deemed necessary to minimize the impact
of any traffic noise. .
If you have any questions regarding this review please contact me.
Sincerel y,
o it<- vJ <C ~ J-r 87J
Cyrus Knutson
. Transportation Planner
cc:
Les Weigelt, Hennepin County
tJ,:
,JJc>.AAV~p ~'v-..uA-,J
/Yl.' f).. ,11 . ~... IHJ..,V/ .()1
, ~ JdrL a-,~ C"1' -- \
~J !~V~
A n (J
C ~ (' j'.bt/'--t...AJ
j_ _A.. '-"
~ ;f-fl~C/
Qi-;;1! ;( ~t)/(
I
Diversified
FilE COpy
Housing, Inc.
110 King Street
Madison, WI 53703
Phone:
Fax:
608251
608 255
7515
1764
.7 September 1993
-
Kirk Rosenberger, Chairman
Planning Commission
City of Shorewood
. 5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331-8927
:t;~,.~~~r.~~';i.:.""..:\.,~:..~~"_~r..'bJ~--.~ '
,RE: Meadow Wood Senior Housing Community."..:'
~ .... ,'- ".-.----.-. """"...,;...- .~~~---.~
Dear Chai.rnUm Rosenberger,
This letter and the accompanying enclosures is in response to a variety of questions relating to the
proposed Meadow Wood Senior Housing Community at 25400 Highway 7. .
TRAFFIC:
Peter'Marshall P.E.,with Barton Aschmann, Traffic Engineers; Minneapolis, will make a presentation of
his review of the modest impact of this project on the local traffic.
In addition the following programs administered by the on-site Community Manager will further lessen
the vehicular traffic generated by the Meadow Wood project
,
1. Grocery deliveries to the residents will made twice a week.
. 2. Phannacydeliveries will be madeon demand.
3. The Community Manager will have a mini-van for group outings and transportation' for the
30% of the residents who will not have automobiles.
IMPACT ON PROPERTY VALUES:
Attached is a letter from Mr. Geoff Olson, Director of Community Development for Maplewood.
Minnesota. The project in Maplewood has a density of 12 units per acre compared to Meadow Wood's
6.5 units acre., however; the Maplewood is a similar n cottage" design. Mr.. Olson's notes the favorable
community reaction to the completed project and the its impact on property values. Also included is a .
. recent clipping from Pioneer Press's expert real-estate colwnmst Dr. George KarVel touching on the same
subject. It is our further understanding that the City of Shorewood's Assessor Rolf Erlckson's office will
be forwarding a letter addressing this issue. .
CITY OF
MAPLEWOOD
1830 E. COUNTY ROAD B MAPLEWOOD, MINNESarA 55109
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 612-770-4 ;60
~'RECEI\VErl '. ,: 2. .
L. '...... ~ 7 1993
August 24, 1993
.
Jud Knoll
Diversified Housing, Inc.
110 King Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53703
VIU.AGE ON WOODLYNN SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT
Vem Knoll asked me to write you about the Village on Woodlynn Senior Housing
Project in Maplewood. It is east of White Bear Avenue and south of I-694. This project
has 60 units on five acres. It is a series of one-story connected apartments.
.
We had some objections when the project was proposed - mostly about screening and
design. Since the project has been finished, the neighbors and the City have been very
pleased with the results. The seniors are excellent neighbors. I am not aware of any
property that was devalued because of this project.
~)J'c;~
GEOFF OLSON, AICP-DIRECTOR OF COMMUNIlY DEVELOPMENT
go/b-5:village.1et (Nl/2 2)
Equal Opportunity Employer
.
.
~.
SUNDAY. AUGUST 22.1993
INSIDE REAL'EsTATE
.,.
Self-employed
face mortgage
difficulties
Q. We pur-
chased our house
six years ago. We
bought It on a 10-
year contract for
deed, with the re-
maining balance
due In 1997. My
husband has been
self-employed In
the auto business
for 10 years~'and
'we have found It
difficult to obtain
permanent financ-
Ing because of his self-employment.
When applying for a loan, he needs to
verify his Income. One look at the ad-
Justed gross Income on our tax return,
and we're told that we don't qualify for
a mortgage. Is there anyone who spe-
cializes In providing the self"employed
with mortgage financing?
A. Your accountants are doing their
jo~ .very well. In other words, by maXi-
rmzmg deductions from business income
your taxes have been kept to a minimum:
The income you report, however, is
what you are telling the U.S. government
and Internal Revenue Service you actual-
ly earn. This reported income is what a
mortgage loan officer must use when
qualifying for a mortgage loan.
The only adjustment which may be
made to your reported income is to add
back depreciation. Depreciation is a non-
cash expense, and a knowledgeable loan
officer will consider your qualifying in-
come (reported income) to include depre-
ciation added back.
Being a small-business owner has nu-
merous tax advantages. Caution, howev-
er, is in order. Overly enthusiastic deduc-
~on of expenses may leave reported
~com~ too small to qualify for mortgage
fmancmg.
Q. What effect does living near a
four-story apartment building for senior
citizens have on my property value?
A. The short answer is none. Multi-
family housing does not have an adverse
effect on property value as long, as the
building is attractive, well-maintained i
and provides adequate off-street parking.
Q. I am a 75-year-old widow and am
seriously thinking about selling my
home. I know I don't have to pay capi-
tal gains taxes on the sale, but do I
have to reinvest the proceeds In anoth-
er home within two y~ars?
1
A. The Internal Revenue Code permits
homeowners, age 55 or older, to ~lect to
defer from taxation $125,000 'df gain
from the sale of their principal resi-
dence. This electioD is permitted only
once.
Gain in excess of $125,000 will, howev-
. er, be taxed. With help from a qualified -
tax attorney or accountant, you may re-
invest the gain in excess of $125,000 in
another home, thereby excluding the ex-
cess from taxation.
GEORGE
.KARVEL
COLUMNIST
George Karvel, professor and holder of the Min.
nesota Chair in Real Estate at St. Cloud St<:te
University. talks about real-estate matters on
WCCO Radio at about 8:20 a.m. each Sunday.
You can ask a question by either calling
228-5423, writing Karvel in care of the Pioneer
Press, 345 Cedar St., St. Paul. Minn. 55101. or
sending a fax to 222-5010.
(II}) MONTGOMERY WATSON
September 3, 1993
Mr. Jud Knoll, Architect
Architecture Network. Inc.
110 King Street
Madison, WI .53703
SUBJECT: Mcadow Wood
Dear Mr. Knoll:
.
Pursuant to our di~cussions and your authorization dated September 1, 1993, Montgomery
Watson has reviewed the information you sent regarding the Meadow Wood dcve\()pment
project in the city of Shorewood. The information include.., a topographic map of th~ site and
Proposed Site Plan Sheets No. G and G 1. The project was reviewed to provide our
professional opinion of the effect - Minnehaha Creek W utershcd District (MCWD)
requirements have on the proposed development and whether lhere is a wetland in the
southeast comer of the site not shown on your site plans.
To address the wetland question, a site inspection was conducted on September 1. 1993. A
long, low area of ~tanding water was noted near the southeast com~r of the site. It appeared
to roughly correspond with the 980 contour on thc topographic map yOll provided. It is my
opinion that this area would be classified as a wetland under the 1991 Wetland Conscrvation
Al.:t rvvCA). There appear to be three alternativcs to address this welland:
.
1. Review the WCA to determine whether one oC the Act's exemption.\; applies to
this wetland,
I
2. Reconfigure the project to avoid the wetland.
3. Mitigate effects of the project on the wetland.
If the third alternative is pursued, you will need to show that the cffect~ on the wetland have
been minimized. If this ean be shown, there appear to be relatively large areas on the site
which could be used to provide-mitigation.
The MCWD is the Local Governmental Unit (LOU) f~)r the weA. The DistJ.ict has instituted
- Rule L which adopts the Board of Water and Soil-Resources (BWSR) Administrative
Guidelines: Interim Program of Wetland Regulation. This Rule has been extended until
December 31, 1993 at which time I anticipate that the MCWD will institute u pennancnt
program similar to the penn anent roles promulgaled by BWSR,
5451niJI81l MIlilnd
W~Yl3t3, MinneSlll~
!\!i:r.l1
Tol: 6124734144
Fax: 6124132512
$8fving ths World', EnvironnlllllUI Nuds
I
I
I
~GO' ON lt7:01
GO'd
~6,~O d3S
t7CGt7-~lt7-GT9:GI
e '+ 0 S <3 U U! t.-I-v!'.
Mr. Jud Knoll
.2.
September 3, 1993
In addition to Rule L, MCWD Rule il, Stormwater Management Plans for Individual
Projects, applies to development of this property. My interpretation of the rule is Lhat th~ two
main concerns of the District will be that the rate of storm water runoff discharged from the
site not increase as a result of the proposed development and that Lhe quality of stOl'mwater
runoff after development be equivalent to runoff quality for the existing condition. In my
opinion, this Rule will require stormwater ponding in the southeast purt of the sile. Although
I have not reviewed the ponding dimensions which would be required, there appears La be
adequate open area on the site to comply with the requirements. Existing wcLlands may be
used for water quantity control. Water quality treatment should be provided prior to
discharge to wetlands.
.
The site plan proposes installation ot a culvert across Eureka Road to provide nn outlet for
the wetland on the west edge of the site. Since the wetland does not currently drain in that
direction, the existing discharge rate is zero. The District may consider allowing discharge in
this direction if the rate is very low and downstreum SLormwater facilities can handle the
runoff. From a regulatory perspective, it may be easier to design the basin to be landlocked
by providing a large storage volume or maintain the existing drainage panem to the southeast
corner of the site. Water quality treatment will also be requircd at this location. There
appears to be open space available to provide additional ponding which may be required by
the Watershed District. [f a culvert is constructed under Eureka Road, the outlet elevation
must be carefully chosen to avoid draining all or part of the cxisting wetland.
"
It is my professional opinion that conceptually. the Watershed District concerns can be
addressed by using the open areas on the proposed site plan if the developer can show that
the wetland in the southeast corner of the site cannot be avoided and that impactll to the
wetland have been minimi7.ed. The wetland boundaries wi1llikely need to he ticld located lO
more closely detcnnine the impacts of the project on the wetlands. Moditication of the
ponding configuration will likely be required to address the issues nOled above. However,
there appear~ to be ample area (both on the south and west sides of the site) to addres~ Lhese
concerns.
.
If you have any questiollsregarding this review, please contact me at (6l2) 473-4224.
Sincerely.
MONrGOMERYWATSON
.~J/.2. ~,(
Ronald S. Ql1anbeck. P.E.
:crs
~O'd ~GO'oN 8v:Ot
~6,~O d3S
17GZ17-~L17-Gt9:aI
'l?1-0SaUUfw-wwr
.
.
IMPERIAL GARDEN
4214 E. Washington Ave.
Madison, WI 53704
249-0466
CHINESE RESTAURANTS
41...
~
-~
2039 Allen Blvd.
Middleton, WI 53562
238-6445
........
C]tl
~t
August 15, 1993
To Whom It May Concern:
Jud Knoll has represented Imperial Garden Inc. as architect and
general contractor on a variety of projects since 1980. Imperial
Garden Chinese Restaurant was created in 1980 under Mr. Knoll's
supervision. He remodeled an existing casual restaurant and
former car wash into a premier dining establishment. In 1982 Mr.
Knoll's design resulted in a significant addition adding elegant
dining and bar space. A more ambitious project in 1985 involved
restructuring another existing restaurant to establish a second
Imperial Garden with striking modern design. This project was
enhanced with further improvements in 1990. Renovation of the
original restaurant coupled with the construction of a model
convenience store with adjacent deli and bakery was accomplished
by Mr. Knoll in 1992. This last project completed within Mr.
Knoll's original $1.5 million estimate required precision timing
and excellent coordination to allow for continuous restaurant
service during all phases of construction. A restrictive lot,
parking requirements and a plethora of city regulations were
overcome by Mr. Knoll efficiently and independently.
Mr. Knoll has been responsible for all improvements to rental
office buildings owned by Mr. Chen and most recently in 1993
redesigned a five unit strip mall to enhance customer recognition
and attract new tenants.
Jud Knoll is a talented artist with the practical knowledge and
initiative to skillfully complete exacting projects. We have
been very pleased with his efforts and recommend his services
without reservation. Please contact me if further information is
required.
Respectfully,
~n
President
Imperial Garden Inc.
Lunch . Dinner . Carry Out . Cocktails . f3aru;uets . Parlies
...) I';:' I t..,I..L
-J~l 0-''':'' __'......-
G ENE RA L Engineering Company, Inc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
September 2, 1993
Shorewood Planning Commission
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331-8927
Re: Qualification Letter and Reference
Jud Knoll, Architect
. Ms. Mayor, City Council, and Planning Commission Members:
Jud Knoll is a gifted designer and architect. His abilities can be traced to an exceptional
educational background and the requisite experience with municipal and project planning,
conceptual designs, and working plans fOr complete development projects.
We personally checked on Mr. Knoll's credentials some years back and found them to be
impeccable with an undergraduate degree from. the University of Illinois where he graduated
first in his class to a graduate degree in urban planning from MIT. Mr. Knoll has worked on
numerous projects for our firm and for mutual clients of our firm which range in size up to 20
million dollars.
My own business relationship with Mr. Knoll dates back to 1979 and includes site planning,
conceptual planning, and working drawings for condominium projects, schools, restaurants,
and municipal planning projects. I highly recommend Mr. Knoll for all facets of project
development and welcome the opportunity to discuss previous projects and as well as current
ones.
.
General Engineering Company, Inc. is proud to have over 80 years of experience as a municipal
consulting engineering firm with clients' throughOUt Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of
Michigan.
Sincerely,
GENERAL ENGINEERING COMPANY; INC.
Ron Id J. Steiner, Vice President
Registered Professional Engineer
<8
P.O. BOX 340
P.o. BOX 272
412 E. SLIFER STReET
107 4th AVENUE
PORTAGE. WISCONSIN 63901
IRON RIVER. MICHIGAN 49935
(808) 742-2169
(906) 265-4a1 0
---
~~T~Tio@u~
~DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 5510~LENO
772-7910
FiLE COpy
PHONE NO.
SEP - 9 1993
september 7, 1993
Mr. Bradley J. Nielsen
Planning Director
city of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood , Mi.El:rle~f)'ta.. ..~ 5 ~ 31- 8 9 2 7
~-"._..-"".
RE: MEADOW WOOD COMMUNITY - SENIOR HOUSING PROJEC'I' PROPOSAL, LAKE
MINNEWASHTA(10-9P), CITY OF SHOREWOOD, HENNEPIN COUNTY
Dear Mr. Nielsen:
I have reviewed several documents related to the above-referenced
proposal, including the 8/26/93 revision of the plan you sent me on
AUgust 27, 1993 which shows a total of 44 units. We have no
objection to the city approving the proposed project.
,
I have the following specific comments to offer:
1.
DNR Wetlands. The proj ect site does. not contain any DNR
public waters or public waters wetlands; therefore, no DNR
protected waters permit is required.
Other Wetlands. There are wetlands on the site that are not
under DNR jurisdiction. The proposed plan does identify the
one wetland shown on the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
map, but it will need to be verified in the field whether
there are other wetlands on the site.
2.
,
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should be consulted regarding
pertinent federal regulations for activities in wetlands. In
addition, impacts to these wetlands should be evaluated by the
city in accordance with the Minnesota Wetlands conservation
Act of 1991.
Shore land Manaqement Requlations. A portion of the site is
within the Shoreland District for Lake Minnewashta. The
shorelandmanagement regulations only apply to that portion of
the project that is within the Shoreland District.
The portion of the project within the Shoreland District
appears to be consistent with the statewide shoreland
management regulations.
3.
4. stormwater Treatment. The plans show most of the stormwater
being routed through a detention pond, which is good. We
would object to having the stormwater routed directly to Lake
Minnewashta without treatment.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
I
,-
BARTDN-ASC:HMAN ASSCC:IA TES, INC:.
r~1 r: nonv
1 LrN~ LUa 1
111 Thl~d Avenue Sourh. S~re 350. Minneaoolls. Minnesota 55401 USA. (612) 332-~~21 . Fax 1612) 332- 6180
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Vem Knoll, Diversified Housing Inc.
Peter S. Marshall
September 3, 1993
Traffic Characteristics for the Meadow Wood Senior Rental Project
.
We have completed analyzing the traffic characteristics of the Meadow Wood Senior Housing
project which you are proposing to build in Shorewood, MN. Since the site is currently zoned
single-family residential, comparison of traffic impacts of your project should be based on a
comparison to the single-family potential. Based on data we have been able to collect, data
collected by others, and our past experience, we estimate that the project will have the following
traffic characteristics:
TRIP GENERATION
.
Peak Hour Trips - the peak hour trip generation rate should fall between 0.35 and 0.50
trips per occupied dwelling unit.
Daily Trips - the daily trip generation rate should fall between 3.0 and 3.5 trips per
vehicle owned by the residents of the project.
In addition to these rates, the following items are of importance when estimating trip generation
for this type of housing:
1. Auto Ownership - Because of the income and age requirements of the residents, auto
ownership will not be 100%. Data collected from over 700 similar units in Wisconsin
suggest auto ownership close to 50-60% (with it being extremely unlikely that any unit
would own more than one vehicle). Experience in the Twin Cities metro area suggests a
higher percentage - on the order of 70-80%. Considering the location of this project is
somewhat removed from intense commercial development, we estimate that ownership at
this project will be closer to the latter figure. It is important to note that as time goes on,
auto ownership will decrease as residents age and are no longer able to drive.
2. Alternate Transportation - Resident trips will be reduced because of several alternate
arrangements that will be made to facilitate the resident's transportation needs:
There will be an on-site caretaker with a mini-van available during daylight hours to
give residents rides. The van will make both scheduled and unscheduled trips.
Arrangements are being made with local groceries and pharmacies to provide delivery
and/or pickup services 1 or 2 times per week.
For many of the residents, especially the older ones, these two services will satisfy most of
their transportation needs.
1
[~ )PARSONS
· TRANSPORTATION GROUP
A.n Eaual Ooportunlty Employer
SARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
3. Daily Distribution - Since the majority of the residents are retired, they do not, in
general, come and go during the typical "rush hour" periods. Their trip making
behavior is spread out more evenly throughout the day - with the bulk of the trips
occurring between 9:00 AM and 3 :00 PM.
Given the above key considerations and generation rates, we estimate the trip generation of the
Meadow Wood project in the table below:
TABLE 1
TRIP GENERATION OF MEADOW WOOD PROJECT
.
# of TRIPS
LOW
IDGH
AVERAGE
Peak Hour Daily
15 106
22 123
19 115
F or comparison, seven single family homes on this site would be expected to generate
approximately 10 trips in the peak hour and 89 trips on a daily basis. Based on these numbers, the
Meadow Wood project would generate 9 more trips during the peak hour and 26 more trips on a
daily basis than a single family development.
.
TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Primary access to the development will be via TH 7, with secondary access via Eureka Road and
Yellowstone Trail. The percentages of vehicles approaching via each direction has been estimated
based on the characteristics of the surrounding roadway system, the location of nearby
development, and current traffic distribution patterns:
East onTH 7 - 50%
West on TH 7 - 5%
Yellowstone Trail- 30%
Eureka Road - 15%
Seamons Drive - 55 % (south of site driveway)
(no site traffic is expected to use Seamons drive north of the site driveway)
Furthermore, traffic entering the site from TH 7 would be spilt roughly 50-50 between the two
site entrances - one off Eureka and one off Seamons Drive.
2
aAJ:lTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
Based on these percentages, the table below summarizes the additional trips added to each route
as a result of the development:
TABLE 2
TRAFFIC INCREASES ON SURROUNDING STREETS
Percentage increase over a single family development on the same site
STREET Current Volume Add'l Daily Trips % Increase
(Daily Traffic) (over single family)
TH7 15,000 13 0.09%
Yellowstone 397 7 2%
Eureka 1484 9 0.61%
. Seamons 225 14 6%
(S. of site drive)
These increases are clearly insignificant, and would have no impact measured under any accepted
traffic engineering criteria. In fact, the statistical variations of normal background traffic patterns
are likely to be higher than the above increases.
TRAFFIC SAFETY
.
One of the issues raised at the last public hearing concerned traffic accidents at the intersection of
Seamons Drive with TH 7. Accident data was requested from the Minnesota Department of
Transportation for this intersection for the last 5 years. The records show that since 1988 there
have been 4 reported accidents at this intersection, one of which involved injuries. Of these
accidents, only one involved the collision of two vehicles - the others involved single vehicles
running off the road or hitting animals. The one injury accident involved a single vehicle. Data
was also requested for the section of Seamons Drive 200 feet north of TH 7. The records show
that there have been no reported accidents on this section since 1988.
In summary, the available data does not sl;lPport the claims that this area has a safety problem.
Furthermore, the increase in traffic at this intersection due to the Meadow Wood project would
small enough that the increase in accident exposure (accident opportunities) would be virtually
unmeasureable.
CONCLUSION
Based on our knowledge of the project, the data which has been collected, and our previous
experience, it is our opinion that the proposed development would have no measurable impact on
traffic operations or safety on the surrounding street system. lnJact,Jhe development would
g~~~(lte only~6mo!~t()_t~t~r!p~~>n a daily basis than seven single-familyh()!J1es,y~'hLqh i~_~!_
'the site is currently zoned fOJ~ This increase would be virtually undetectable to a casual observer.
3
.; i:-";ll- ' .,-..; .
., -, - -,>,.
,',. :
_...' . .'.
.-..1 .
_ 4"
Ii i
TO:
i
Brad Nielson, Shore~'lOod iZoning Administrator
I
I
i
Rolf ~rickson, Shorewdod City Asse3~Ot
I
i
I
i
September 3, 1993
FROM:
DATE:
.
I
I
RE: proposed Meadow Wood De~elopment
At your request I have reVieJ.d the proposed M,adow Wood
development and believe that lit will not have a detrimental
effect on the properties surrbunding it. My opinion is
based in part on the fol1owin~ factors:
1. Generally, you could not ~Sk for better neighbors than
retired people. The don't stay up late and make noise, they
have pride in their surroundihg~, they drive safely and urc
courteous. I
2. Haven Homes of Maple Plain ~dded a new d~5isted living
unit to its nursing home several years ago. It is similar
to the Meadow Wood project betause it is completely
sur~ounded by residential pro~'erties. Sales studies that we
do each year do not indicate hat the properties adjacent to
Haven Homes sell differently han non-adja~p.nt propertie.s.
If you have further qUestions/on this matter let me know.
I
.
.
.
. ciZl ,...... .""p'. ~.
f~Lt ~U' ")
MEMORANDUM
~[:'c
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD.
Attorneys at Law
1500 Norwest Financial Center
7900 Xerxes Avenue South
Bloomington, Minnesota 55431
Telephone: (612) 835-3800
FAX: (612) 896-3333
-:- laQ~
1"......./".
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Brad Nielsen
Tim Keane
September 3, 1993
Elderly Housing--Restrictive Covenants
You inquired of the enforceability of the City requirement
relating to the occupants of elderly housing by persons 62 years
of age or older.
The Shorewood Code of Ordinances Section 1201.03, Subd. 20,
provides that elderly housing projects shall limit occupancy to
no more than two adults, 62 years of age or older. The ordinance
further provides that the occupancy limitations shall be
memorialized in restrictive covenants approved by the City and
filed with the Hennepin County Record. As undertaken previously,
I will review the protective covenants to assure that the City of
Shorewood has the authority to enforce this provision. I will
further recommend, in review of the covenants, that the covenants
provide that the Homeowners Association provide a process for
approvals of buyers of the appropriate age. The City will have
the authority to enforce the provisions of the covenants by
mandatory injunction or other relief as appropriate.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to
inquire.
..-
.,;. .:w: ~ ~~ ~.~- ~ :~
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
.
FROM:
Brad Nielsen
DATE:
3 SepteIll_b_~r J993
RE:
Meadow Wood Community P.U.D. - Revised Concept Plan
FILE NO.
405 (93.20)
Much of the information in response to questions raised at the last Planning Commission
meeting comes from sources outside of the office. Due to problems with the FAX machine
not all of the information has been received. Enclosed are the following:
.
- Revised Concept Plan (44 units instead of 60)
-City Engineer's report re: traffic counts and water service capability
-City Attorney's report re: age restriction requirements
-Letter to DNR re: Shoreland requirements
-City Assessor's report re: property value impact
Additional information on traffic impact. and landscaping will be provided by !!1e developer at
the meeting.
If you have any questions relative to any of the above, please call me on Tuesday.
c: Dan Lewis
Iud Knoll
A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore
i
!
\
\
\.
1
-
",
",
,
.'
~
INFORMATION
AUG 2 6 1993
Is devoted entirely to rental residential unts.
,.",......._980.--.....
I
!
.............. /
.................--'.
./
,
/'.--.-'.-
......, "'-..... are .
.---- a.
".Qll?
;
!
i
I
i
i
I
Q
1<(
i~
I,~,
W
0::
:D
4J
,d tor % calculations:
.
,.a as shown on the
n_.. "Elwood wetlands map
FREEMAN
PARK
..........._.......n.u... _
d to streets:
~
~et parking:
,/
Q86
304,444 s.f. 6.99 acres
7,912 s.f.
296,532 s.f. 6.81 acres
44 % Of area
37,170 s.t. 12.5%
13,552 s.f. 4.6%
50,722 s.f. 17.1%
245,810 s.f. 82.9%
34,352 s.f. 11.6%
36,960 s.f. 12.5%
6,936 s.f. 2.3%
_.....:~_-n Phasing and Schedule: The entire project is
210',~< ucted in a single phase commencing In the spring ot 1994.
.- ~'?-"/~'~-:-"
........
r"
, , i
; / ,"'-"'-\.~"'_,_, . thirty years.
.\,~:;(~_.:~~
,/
:ovenants: The Minnesota Housing Finance
'ill require that the project remain a rental
~
/ \
G}
.
,
,
'\':OMMERClAL -
~EE NURSERY ,,/'
\ .-
"". "---.....__/,/
'\
T
:::
;
./
.~.:~~;~;~:~~.:~~:~_ 990
'-
O[k
PRO 0
~:::~
SCALE:
1 ,,:NOLL ARCHITECT
:.; STREET
N, WI 53703
7515
j :'q.~,~'~,"
-
DATE
9 JUL 93
REVISED:
25 AUG 93
PROJECT TITLE'
DRAWN BY:
JUD
PROJECT NO..
060
MEADOW WOOD
SHOREWOOD, MN
SHEET TITLE:
COPYRIGHT
25 AUG 93
SHEET NO
G
BY JUD KNOll
. '3EP 03' '33 17: 07 O~=;~"l i"lPLS, ~"1~1
P.l
September 3, 1993
Q~U=&
~ WI. AsSociates, Inc.
300 Park Place center
5775 wayzata Boulevard
Minneapolis. MN 55416-1228
612-595-5775
1-800-753-S77S
FAX 595-5774
Fl!' "'"' ..""l ~~y
t H ~1 .:_~ ~j ~. :.1 :"1 ~:,
ll~,;.,. ~ul
NIr. Bradley J. Nielsen
City Planner
City of Shorewood
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Meadowoods Senior Housing project
Water Extension review
OSM File 5047.00
E1Igineers
Architects
Planners
Surveyors
Dear Mr. Nielsen:
.
\Ve have further reviewed the possibility of extending the City's Boulder Bridge water system
to serve the referenced project. This review has been performed by focusing on three (3) key
elements from an engineering stand-point. These are: 1) Will there be sufficient pressure
both in the existing system and in the proposed project if the main is extended? 2) Are the
existing wells capable of supplying the additional volume of water required ? and 3) What
regulatory or other ancillary concerns are ther~ with such an extension?
BACKGROUND
The existing water system consists of two wells connected to a hydro-pneumatic tank located
in the Boulder Bridge subdivision on the west end of the city. The wells have a design
capacity of about 500 gallons per minute (gpm) each, but have a practical capacity of about
750 gpm when operated together. A hydro-pneumatic tank is not intended for storage
purposes, but rather serves as a pressure regulator when the wells are not running - much like
a private well system works. Due to the lack of storage capability, such a system is usually
considered to be inadequate for fue protection.
.
We have attached a copy of a portion of the City's draft Comprehensive Water Study map.
This map shows the existing system as well as the proposed future pipe sizes and locations.
We have also indicated the location of the proposed project, and the length of pipe needed to
be placed to service the project. The trunk main extension would consist of approximatdy
2400 feet of 12 inch diameter pipe, serviced from the existing 6 inch diameter pipe in
Shorewood Oaks Drive.
Water is also available directly south of the project (across T.H 7) from the City of
Chanhassen. It is our understanding that you have contacted Chanhassen about the
availability of connecting to their main. It is likely chat adequate pressure, flow and fire
protection is available from the Chanhassen line, but they will have to be contacted for their
input.
Equal Opponunity Employer
.
.
. SEP 03 ' '33 17: 08 OSi'l l'lPLS, 1'111
P ?
.~
PRESSURE CONSIDERATIONS
For this investigation, we connected a pressure gauge to the end of the existing water main in
Shorewood Oaks Drive. To simulate a normal demand from lawn sprinkling, we opened
several fire hydrants, with estimated flows of up to 100 gpm. The following pressures were
recorded:
Initial Reading (no hydrants open) 60-62 pounds per square inch (psi)
50 gpm flow at hydrant
59 psi
100 gpm between 2 hydrants
54 psi
After hydrant closure
51 psi
The fact that the final pressure reading, with all hydrants closed, was the lowest reading
indicates a wide range of operating pressures and some pressure fluctuation at this distance
from the wells. Therefore, it is our opinion that the operating pressure available at the end of
Shorewood Oaks Drive should not be estimated at greater than 40 psi during a normal
summer water use day.
Based on the above operating pressure, an elevation diiference (rise) of about 10 feet, and
the friction loss in 2400 feet of 12 inch diameter pipe under the anticipated water demand. we
estimate a working pressure of about 30-40 psi at the proposed project site under nonnal
conditions, with a 2 to 5 psi pressure drop in the end of the existing system. The nonnal
working pressure in the distribution system should be approximately 60 psi, and not less than
35 psi. Therefore, from a pressure standpoint, the proposed project is marginally acceptable.
VOLUME CONSIDERATIONS
It is generally accepted that the well capacity in a hydro-pneumatic system should be at least
ten times the average daily consumption rate. There are currently about 130 connections to
the water system; adding an additional 44 units would bring the total connections to about
174, which corresponds to about 445 people using the water system. Due to park water
connections and heavy sprinkler use, the average per capita demand on this system is
estimated at 200 gallons per capita per day. This corresponds to about 89,000 gallons per
day. or about 62 gpm (89,000/1440 minutes per day). Therefore. according to the standard
stated, the well capacity should be about 620 gpm (10X62). With both wells operating, this
is not a problem (620 vs. 750 available). However, given that there is no redundancy to this
water system other than the two separate wells, the proposed project again becomes somewhat
marginal if only one of the wells is considered.
. ~3EP 03' '33 17: 09 051'1 I'lPL'3, r'lll
P.3
REGULATORY Al'ID OTHER ISSUES
We have checked with the Minnesota Department of Health to detennine if there are any
regulations limiting the number of connections to a hydro-pneumatic system. According to
them, there are no direct regulations in force, but that "Ten States Standards" are usually
suggested. "Recommended Standards for Water Works" . published by the Great Lakes Upper
:Mississippi River Board of State Public Health & Environmental ?vIanagers (a.k.a Ten States
Standards) recommends that no more than 150 living units be placed on a water system
without providing ground or elevated storage. Obviously, placing an additional 44 units on a
system with 130 existing units will push the total beyond the recorrunended level.
.
It should also be noted that allowing 44 connections, as proposed, could preclude the future
extension of the water system within what could be considered the "nonna!" service area of
the Boulder Bridge water system, For instance, we are aware of a developer considering the
possibility of developing the vacant land southwest of Howards Point Road and Woodside
Road. As this area is adjacent to the wells and the existing water main in Howards Point Rd.,
he is understandably considering connecting to the City water system. However, allowing
44+ connections as far away as Seamans Drive may make this impossible.
SUMMARY AND RECOJ\H.'IENDATIONS
Based on the above, the following summary statements can be made about extending the
Boulder Bridge water system to the proposed Meadowood housing project:
1) The City of Shorewood would likely get a significant length of water main placed by
the developer as part of the project;
2) Water pressure at the proposed site will likely be poor to adequate, and could have a
negative affect on the existing users;
.
3)
In general, water supply capacity will not be a problem, unless one of the two wells is
taken out of service during a high water use period;
4) There will be, technically, no fire protection offered to the site by connection to the
existing water system;
5) Allowing the extension, as proposed, could possibly preclude placing homes closer to
the core system on City water.
.
.
. SEP 03 "33 17: 10 OSl1 l'lPL';, ~1~1
P.4
It is our opinion, from an engineering standpoint, that the water main extension as proposed is
marginally possible. It is very likely that the new housing units would experience periods of
low water pressure from time to time - especially during dry summers. The Planning
Commission and City Council may ultimately have to decide the issue of where the remaining
water connections are going to be allowed, and the progression of these connections.
Please contact me at 595-5695 with any questions.
Sincerely,
ORR-SCHELEN-MA YERON
& ASSOCIA1ES
Joel A. Dresel, P .E., L.S.
City Engineer
. ~
~
l-o.. ....
~ ~
.:: ...
~ ~
s:
~ -,
...
<:::
....
Q
,=::': --~.. .-
, "0
0:
, 4":1.
. (\;;
.. ~O
. .;;.J- I>~"
,:OOi;7J A
118 ~.",O?611
.
(' -"..
; .(1)
\
: ~~~.~~ lj_
,\
"
. ,a' ,
- ~..\
,.4\\
=_\\-
:t
<t
~
~
.
.
FRO~ LRRKIN & HOFFMRN
'? 3.19'?3 16:44
P. 2
l\- IE.."\tIO Rk'ID UIVI
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD.
Attorneys at Law
1500 NOl"Vlest Financial Cel1ccr
7900 Xerxes Avenue South
Bloomington, Minnesota 55431
Te1epnone: (612) 835-3800
FAX: (612) 896-3333
TO:
FROl'lI:
DATE:
RE:
Brad Nielsen
Tim Keane
September 3, 1993
Elderly HOusing--Restrictive Covenants
You inquired of the enforceability of the City requirement
relating to the occupants of elderly housing by persons 62 years
of age or older.
The Shorewood Code of Ordinances Section 1201.03, Subd. 20,
provides that elderly housing projects shall limit occupancy to
no more than two adults, 62 years of age or older. The ordinance
further provides that the occupancy limitations shall be
memorialized in restrictive covenants approved by the City and
filed with the Hennepin County Record. As undertaken previously,
I will review the protective covenants to assure that the City of
Shorewood has the authority to enforce this provision. I will
further recommend, in review of the covenants I that the covenants
provide that the Homeowners Association provide a process for
approvals of buyers of the appropriate age. The City will have
the authority to er.force the provisions of the covenants by
mandatory injunction or other relief as appropriate.
Should you have any further quescions, please do noC hesitate to
inquire.
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
24 August 1993
.
Ms. Ceil Strauss
Metro Region DNR
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106
Re: Meadow Wood Community - Senior Housing Project
Dear Ms. Strauss:
Shorewood is in the process of reviewing a planned unit development known as the Meadow
Wood Community, a 60-unit senior housing project located between Eureka Road and
Seamans Drive, on the north side of State Highway 7. A site location map is attached for
your review. During the initial review of the concept plan, a local resident brought to our
attention that the subject site is located within 1000 feet of Lake Minnewashta.
Consequently, the proposal is subject to your review and comments. The attached site plan
shows approximately how the Shoreland District cuts through the subject site.
.
I have enclosed the following information for your review:
-Applicant's application booklet, dated 6 July 1993
-Staff report, dated 12 Augt:tSt- 1993 .;l..b:::: 1.-,-1...\
-City Engineer's letter, dated 30 July 1993 ..I
The developer has indicated that the number of units will be reduced to 48. A revised site
plan will be sent to us at the end of this week. I will forward a copy to you as soon as we
get it. I have also requested, by copy of this letter, that the developer provide us with the
site coverage calculations for the revised site plan, separating out the Shoreland District area.
I spoke with Ed Fick relative to what portion of the site is subject to the Shoreland
regulations. .He informed me that the rules apply only to the portion of the property within
1000 feet of Lake Minnewashta. The developer's surveyor will be required to locate the
exact boundary of the shoreland area if the project proceeds to preliminary plat.
A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore
--
iCW
~
/
~ t--
~
r(
'[
i
I
~
I
-
/
/
.
Ceil Strauss
24 August 1993
Page two
The public hearing for this project has been continued to Tuesday, 7 September. If you have
any questions relative to any of the material, please do not hesitate to contact my office.
Sincerely,
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
Bradley J. Nielsen
Planning Director
cc:
Mayor and City Council
Planning Commission
Jim Hurm
J eel Dresel
Tim Keane
Frank Kelly
Jud Knoll
.
. :-. : - ~:
.
.
~:'~-:~.'.f
i -,,'.,, _
.'...:,;.... ...'.
TO: Brad Nielson, Shorewood Zoning Administtator
FROM: Rolf ~rick~on, Shorewood City Assee~Ot
DATE: September 3, 1993
,
i
RE: proposed Meadow Wood Development
I
i
At your request I have reviewed the proposed M~adow Wood
development and believe that :it will not have a detrimental
effect on the oroocrti~s ~urrbunding it. My opinion is
based in part on the following factors:
1. Generally, you could not LSk for better neighbors than
retired people. The don't stay up late and make noise, they
have pride in their surroundihg~, they drive safely and ure
courteous. I
I
i
2. Haven Homes of Maple Plaih added a new d~sisted living
unit to its nursing home several years ago. It is similar
to the Meadow Wood project because it is completely
surLuunded by residential properties. Sales studies that we
do each year do not indicate that the prooertles adjacent to
Haven Homes sell differently ~han non-adj~c~nt propertie~.
If you have further questions on this matter let me know.
FROM EXCELSIOR FIRE DEPT
:3. 3.1993 15:59
P. 1
r
t.
li
~.. Evt
~, "'-.1
,',J ~9
,1
11
(~InbiJJr ~irt ~qml1ribm1ltnd
339 THIRD STREET
EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331
(6' Z) 4 7 4'536~
HElKORANDUII
TO: Brad Nielson, city Planner
. FROM: Cary smith, Fire Marshal
DATE: August 3, 1993
--
RE: Meadow Wood Community Project
------
I have reviewed the proposed project plans and consulted with
Fire Chief Dana George on concerns he may have with regards to the
project. Th~ following are the areas of concern that need to be
addressed:
1) Premises identification for fire, medical and police
response;
.
Proper turning radius on streets to accommodate fire
apparatus;
3) Fire hydrant placement, flow and spacing;
2)
4) width of streets for emergency vehicle access, i. e. - "No
Parking Fire Lane" siqns.
Please keep me advised on the progress of the project.
SERVING THE SOUTH LAKE ARtA SINCE 18811
OEEPHAVE:N . EXCELSIOR · IJRE:ENWOOLJ . ilHOREWOOO . TONKA SAY
r
''''''"!.~ r c'?\--"
}~LL :'UPl
July 30, 1993
Orr
Schelen
Mayel'9n &
AsSocIates, Inc.
I~UG
~ 19~j3
300 Park Place Center
5775 Wayzata Boulevard
Minneapolis, MN 55416-1228
612-595-5775
1-800-753-5775
FAX 595-5774
Engineers
Architects
Planners
Surveyors
Mr. Brad Nielsen
City Planner
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Co~...LStage-Revi~~
-geadowwood P.D.D. -,
--.---' ~---
Dear Mr. Nielsen:
,
As requested, we have reviewed a .concept stage application dated July 6, 1993 for the
referenced Planned Dnit Development (P.D.D.). We have the following comments from
an engineering standpoint:
1) The existing sanitary sewer in Seaman's Drive appears to be deep enough to service
this property. This should be verified by the developer's engineer.
2) The proposed storm runoff will be limited to the existing undeveloped rate to both
the southeast and to the west. Because there is currently no runoff to the west, the
construction of the proposed culvert under Eureka Road may not be consistent with
this policy. If this culvert is ultimately constructed, it should be done with the future
upgrading of Eureka Road in mind, and in accordance with the comprehensive
storm water plan.
,
3)
The proposed future expansion of Trunk Highway 7 may impact the ponding site.
Mn/DOT review will be required, and they may well have comments regarding the
existing culvert under Highway 7.
4) City water availability for this site is, at best, indeterminate at this point. We are
currently investigating whether it is technically possible to extend a watermain from
the Shorewood Oaks area to this site. This site is outside of what we have previously
delineated as the service area for the Boulder B1dge well system. If it is possible to
supply at least a minimum pressure, there still remains a question of overall City
policy and fire requirements. Due to the number of units involved, it is conceivable
that extending water to this area could potentially preclude other properties within
the Boulder Ridge well system from connecting in the future. To my knowledge, the
City Council has not addressed this issue to date. In addition, it must be clearly
understood that the Boulder Bldge system does not allow for standard fire
protection. There is no reservoir associated with this water system and, therefore,
Equal Opportunity Employer
I
FJl E r. ~~\~.~
ij ~ il.J. . ~u
!; ~ .~ ii ri
'V"V''t ~
" "
-. -
. MAYOR
Barb Brancel
COUNCIL
Kristi Stover
Rob Daugherty
Daniel Lewis
Bruce Benson
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331.8927 . (612) 474-3236
MEMORANDUM
. TO:
Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Brad Nielsen
.
DATE:
2 August 1993
RE:
Meadow Wood Community - Senior Housing and Services Task Force
Recommendations
FILE NO.
405 (93.20)
On 29 July 1993 the Task Force met to discuss the proposed Meadow Wood Community
senior housing project. In attendance were Chair Barbara Keffer, Cyrus Zulgad, Phyllis
Lovrien, and Kirk Rosenberger (planning Commission liaison). In addition, Planning
Commissioner Jack Hansen and former Council member Bob Gagne appeared. Brad
Nielsen, Planning Director staffed the meeting.
.
Mr. Jud Knoll and Mr. Verne Knoll presented their plans for a 60-unit, cottage style housing
project located north of State Highway 7, between Eureka Road and Seamans Drive. There
was a concensus on the following items:
· Everyone felt that the cottage style of unit is desirable
· Distance to the detached garages is not of great concern, although they expressed a
preference for more attached garages. They thought that this issue had to be balanced
with affordability
· They agreed that the proposed rents are reasonable. While the developer will not
guarantee that they can achieve these rates, the following was proposed:
One bedroom unit - $425 per month plus utilities
Two bedroom unit - $480 per month plus utilities
Three bedroom unit - ?
A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore
*~
. ",-
.
.
Senior Housing Task Force
2 August 1993
. The group liked the idea of individual utilities for each unit
. They recognize that any decrease in the number of units increases the rents
. Indoor storage space, although limited, is acceptable
· Unit floor plans are acceptable
. There should be a good market for the three bedroom units - could be more of them ~
· Project landscaping will be extremely important
.
Outdoor storage of all kinds should be prohibited
. Lighting on the site should be low-key, but effective for security
cc: Senior Housing and Services Task Force
Jim Hurm
Tim Keane
Joel Dresel
Jud Knoll
Bob Gagne
".
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:
28 July 1993
RE:
Meadow Wood Community P.U.D. - Concept and Development Stage Plans
FILE NO.:
405 (93.20)
BACKGROUND
.
Mr. Jud Knoll, president of Diversified Housing, Inc., proposes to build a 6O-unit,
"cottage" style, elderly housing project on seven acres of land located on the north side of
Highway 7, between Eureka Road and Seamans Drive (see Site Location map - Exhibit A,
attached). The developer requests approval of concept and development stage plans which
would change the zoning of the property from R-1A, Single-Family Residential to P.U.D.,
Planned Unit Development District.
Existing land use and zoning surrounding the site are as follows:
North and East - single-family residential, zoned R-1A
South (in Chanhassen) - State Highway 7, then single-family residential, zoned
residential
West - single-family residential and a tree nursery, zoned R-1A
Additional background and description is provided by the developer's following exhibits:
(Concept Stage Plans)
Exhibit B - Project Description
Exhibit C - Existing Development Within 1000' - Shorewood
Exhibit D - Existing Development Within 1000' - Chanhassen
Exhibit E - Existing Site Plan
Exhibit F - Existing Drainage Plan
Exhibit G - Proposed Site Plan - Concept Stage
A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore
9=t=b
.
.
\
Re: Meadow Wood Community
Concept and Development Stage Plans
28 July 1993
(Development Stage Plans)
Exhibit H - Proposed Site Plan - Development Stage
Exhibit J - Grading and Drainage Site Plan
Exhibit K-l - Floor Plan - 1 Bedroom Unit
Exhibit K -2 - Floor Plan - 2 Bedroom Unit
Exhibit D-3 - Floor Plan - 3 Bedroom Unit
Exhibit K -4 - Building Elevations
A public hearing has been scheduled for the 3 August Planning Commission meeting.
Since the P.U.D. is a proposed rezoning, a second public hearing will be scheduled to be
held by the City Council after the Planning Commission has made its recommendation.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
Over the past couple of years Shorewood has recognized that a shortage of housing
opportunities exists for senior citizens in the south Lake Minnetonka area. A special task
force was established in 1990 to identify the market for senior housing in Shorewood. The
Task Force prepared A Study of Senior Housing Needs, dated May 1991, which indicated
that three types of senior housing are needed in the community: . 1) step-down housing _
smaller single-family dwellings, either attached or detached; 2) multiple family apartments;
and 3) assisted living - including staffing to provide personal care and housekeeping
support as needed. The study indicated strong support by seniors for "bungalow" or
"cottage" type housing. Anyone interested in additional background on this study is
encouraged to read the entire document.
Shorewood's regulations pertaining to senior housing are found in Section 1201.03 Subd.
20. (Elderly Housing) and Section 1201.25 . (planned Unit Development) of the Zoning
Code. The purpose of this report will be to determine how the proposed development
relates to Shorewood' s requirements and identify what actions will be necessary to process
the request.
A. Section 1201.03 Subd. 20. The purpose of this Section is to provide opportunities for
elderly housing within residential zoning districts and to maintain compatibility with
other uses within those districts. Since the developer requests a higher density than
currently allowed in the R-IA zoning district, he has requested rezoning to a P.U.D.,
Planned Unit Development District rather than a conditional use permit.
Nevertheless, the requirements of Subd. 20.b. apply:
1. The requirements for planned unit development will be addressed in B.,
following.
- 2 -
. .
Re: Meadow Wood Community
Concept and Development Stage Plans
28 July 1993
2. The project is consistent with the definition of "elderly housing" in that
occupancy is. proposed to be limited to persons sixty-two years of age or older.
The Zoning Code further limits occupancy per unit to two, making an exception
for one adult care-provider per unit.
3. The owner of the project must annually submit to the City an occupancy report
listing the number of tenants by age, per unit, in order to monitor compliance
with age restrictions.
.
4. The Code requires two parking spaces per unit, one of which must be a garage.
The developer proposes 60 garage spaces (eight attached and 52 detached), but
only 30 parking spaces.
5.
Although a landscape plan has not been submitted to-date, outdoor parking
spaces are dispersed throughout the site in clusters of three and are screened
from adjacent properties by the garages at the perimeter of the site.
6.
Development stage plans must include a signage plan.
7.
8.
All structures must comply with the I~uirements of the State Building Code.
The current R-IA zoning of the site allows elderly housing at a density of four
units per 40,000 square feet of land. Since the developer proposes a density of
7.89 units per 40,000 square feet, he requests a rezoning to a P.U.D. district.
.
It should be noted that the proposed site plan shown on Exhibits G and H shows
16, four-unit modules (16 x 4 = 64). The developer should explain this
discrepancy. .
9.
The subject site (6.99 acres) exceeds the three-acre minimum.
10. The units are attached in modules of four which are in turn connected in clusters
of three and five modules.
11. Buildings are single-level, single-story as illustrated on Exhibit K-4.
12. Elevators are not applicable to these units.
13. Usable open space on the site, not including the wetland area in the northwest
corner of the site, amounts to 53.8 percent of the lot. The Code requires at
least 20 percent.
- 3 -
. .
Re: Meadow Wood Community
Concept and Development Stage Plans
28 July 1993
B. Section 1201.25. The P.U.D. process consists of three stagt}S of review: 1) concept
stage; 2) development stage; and 3) final plan stage. The Code allows, and the
developer has requested, simultaneous review of concept and development stage
plans.
1.
Rezoning.
.
a. The primary guide for any rezoning is the City's Comprehensive Plan. The
Proposed Land Use map shows the subject site as "semirural residential"
while the developer's proposal is more consistent with a "low density
residential" classification. Despite a discrepancy in allowable densities
there are certain goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan which could
be interpreted as providing an allowance for the proposed development.
(1) One of the community goals expressed in the Plan is to provide a full
range of choice and opportunity for all residents of Shorewood. More
recently the City has identified a defmite need to provide housing
opportunities for senior citizens. Subsequently, the City has given
priority to obtaining senior housing projects for the community.
(2) A variety of housing is to be maintained.
(3) The City shall respond to the housing needs of the entire community.
.
(4) The developer proposes to provide right-of-way for the realignment of
Seamans Drive. This is consistent with the draft Transportation Plan
chapter recently prepared as part of a Comprehensive Plan update.
This design is consistent with the Highway 7 Corridor Study which
was approved by the City in 1987.
b. Rezoning must take into consideration land use compatibility. Despite the
higher density, the single-story height of the buildings and the way the
clusters are angled create a single-family residential character. Proper
landscaping is critical to enhancing the project's architectural compatibilitY
with the neighborhood.
Another factor in examining compatibility is traffic impact. Although
senior housing generates fewer trips per unit than single-family housing (3.3
trips per day versus 8 - 10 trips per day, according to trip generation rates
prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers), there will be more
units than if single-family homes were being proposed. While the site has
- 4 -
Re: Meadow Wood Community
Concept and Development Stage Plans
28 July 1993
fairly direct access to Highway 7, it is expected that Yellowstone Trail will
experience some increase in traffic. This is mitigated somewhat by elderly
driving habits not contributing as greatly to peak hour traffic.
c. The proposed development must not "tend to or actually depreciate the area
in which it is proposed". Properly done'(Le. quality construction and
ample landscaping) the proposed use can create a reasonable transition
between Highway 7 and residential development to the north. From a
community perspective, the City recognizes that there is value in keeping
senior citizens in Shorewood.
.
d. The proposed use can be accommodated by existing City services.
Although Shorewood municipal water is within reach of the subject site, the
City Engineer strongly encourages connection to the Chanhassen system
across Highway 7 to enhance fire flow.
While sanitary sewer is not an issue, storm sewer/drainage must be
carefully considered due to existing drainage problems in the area.
The local Fire Marshal has been asked to comment on fire related issues,
particularly the internal circulation syst~m.
.
2. Proposed Concept Plan. Since this report raises a number of issues which need
to be addressed, this review will be limited to the concept plan. In evaluating
the proposal the following items should be considered:
a. Maintenance of common open space areas will be handled by a single
entity, the landlord of the project. Any approval of the proposed
development should address future potential uses of the common area (e.g.
a gazebo near the pond, etc.).
b. Any approval of the project should require that deed restrictions be recorded
which guarantee that the site will remain limited to occupancy by senior
citizens. Ultimately, proposed lease agreements should be subject to review
and approval by the City to ensure compliance with age restrictions.
c. Setbacks at the periphery of the project are consistent with current
standards. There are, however, design considerations relative to setbacks
which will be addressed later in this report.
d. Internally, spacing between structures is consistent with P.U.D.
requirements.
- 5 -
Re: Meadow Wood Community
Concept and Development Stage Plans
28 July 1993
C. General Site and Design Issues.
1. Circulation. The internal street system is a 24-foot wide private road with one
access on Eureka Road and one on Seamans Drive. It should be noted that the
easterly loop of the road is located within the 50-foot setback area adjacent to
Seamans Drive. This defeats, in part, the purpose of the setback and leaves
little room for effective screening and landscaping, particularly for the two
homes on the east side of Seamans Drive. It is recommended that the developer
modify his plan to minimize the encroachment of pavement into the setback and
provide room for landscaping.
. As mentioned earlier the developer proposes to provide right-of-way for the
realignment of Seamans Drive. In addition he has provided additional right-of~
way for Eureka Road, bringing it to 50 feet of width adjoining the site.
Pedestrian circulation was addressed by the Senior Housing and Services Task
Force. Their recommendation expressed minor concern regarding the distance
from several of the units to the garages. The developer responded that
structures could be connected by covered passageways in certain locations to
reduce these distances.
.
2. Site DrainagelWetland. The site plan on Exhibit G protects a small designated
wetland in the northwest corner of the property. Although a small overflow
culvert is proposed to cross Eureka Road to the west, most of the project
drainage w~l1 be conducted to a proposed pond in the southeast comer of the
site. Ove~ow is then proposed to be piped to the Highway 7 drainage system.
Since it is lfkely that the project, if approved, would be completed before the
realignment! of Seamans Drive was done, an interim pond will have to be
designed. :$oth the interim and final pond design must be built to City and
Watershed Pistrict standards. The developer must obtain not only Watershed
District approval but also approval from the Department of Transportation.
, .
' .
Any approval of a concept plan for the site should include stipulations that
detailed runbff calculations be submitted for development stage approval.
3. Utilities. S~itary sewer is available and adequate to serve the project. Water,
however, m~y be an issue. The development requires municipal water for
financing and insurance. Although Shorewood' s watermain can be extended
from the west, staff has concerns about the adequacy of fire flow.
- 6-
.
.
Re: Meadow Wood C~mmunity
Concept and Developm~nt Stage Plans
28 July 1993
The Chan~assen water system is within reach on the south side of Highway 7.
Preliminary discussions with Chanhassen staff indicates that they are willing to
consider e*tending their system to serve this project.
4.
Landscapi~g. The developer has been asked to prepare at least a conceptual
landscape plan for the public hearing. Areas of concern are as follows:
a. With the garages located 10 feet from the north lot line, very little room
exists for effective landscaping. Although signficant tree massings exist on
the prqperty to the north, it is recommended that the visual massings of the
garage~ be softened. If the buildings can not be shifted southward, it has
been s~ggested that a berm could be built along the north side of the site
with the garages built into the berm. This would reduce the height of the
garage$ as viewed from the north and, combined with additional
lands~ping, mitigate the visual impact.
b. As me*tioned earlier, little or no opportunity exists for landscaping on the
east siqe of the development, due to the location of the driveways in the
setback area.
c. Lands~ping should be enhanced on the south side of the site to buffer the
site fro~ Highway 7.
d. Parking. Although the number of garages complies with current Code
requirements, the number of parking spaces is 30 less than required. The
developer suggests that the requirement of two spaces per unit for elderly
housing is excessive. While there may be some merit in that position, the
plan ei~er needs to be modified or the City should consider amending the
Code.
Any pl~ approval should include restrictions on parking in front of garages
and pa~llel parking. Parking should be limited to designated spaces only.
e. Snow ~emoval. There is some question as to whether adequate room exists
for snow storage in winter. The City Engineer recommends, for example,
that a cfty street should have 12 - 15 feet on each side for snow. Any
approval should include the requirement of a snow removal plan for the
site. Tlte plan should ensure that parking spaces will not be used for snow
storage!
- 7 -
Re: Meadow Wood C~mmunity
Concept and Developm~nt Stage Plans
28 July 1993
f. Trash ~emoval. While it is assumed that the elderly generate less trash
than f~ilies with children, limits on indoor storage and the distance to
garag~s raise a question as to how trash will be handled. The developer
should! explain how domestic refuse will be handled.
I
g. Outd~r Storage. Given the proximity of buildings and limitations on
space, lit is recommended that outdoor storage of any kind should be
prohibtted as part of any approval.
!
CONCLUSION
. The proposed developwent has been reviewed by the Senior Housing and Services Task
Force and was gene~y quite well received. The Task Force's comments and concerns
will be summarized uqder separate cover.
Given the issues raiseq herein it is recommended that no action be taken at this time. It is
suggested that the dev~loper be asked to modify his design as needed to resolve these issues
and others that may arise from the public hearing. It appears that resolving some of the
issues could result in the reduction of units.
cc:
Jim Hurm
Tim Keane
Joel Dresel
Jud Knoll
Verne Knoll
.
- 8 -
460-;-'" 0
400'
1000'
2000'
2640
PREPARED BY:
SHOREWOOD
FEBRUARY 199:
.
BAY North
N
~
a:
3
r
ai
..:
MANNI
~I .. r-'
- ~. t----J
LA~: I
I
I
--.--.-----"---.. --
I 3
U.~____h'::'::r..:
~
..J
(,)
,..
a:
--.----- ~:.
~I,.' ~ .
." r- ~~~.i~_, i
"", .~, w
I
I
I
I
I
n
Exhibit A
SITE LOCATION
Meadow Wood Community
.
.
5a.(3)
We are proposing construction of a public non-subsidized moderate income
housing community for citizens 62 years and over. Because the project will
be built under the provisions of Section 42, U. S. Revenue Code 1 987, less
than market rentals are available to the tenants. Section 42 provides that the
ultimate equity owners of the project are granted federal income tax credits.
The community will have an on-site manager and all maintenance and
services such as snow removal, lawn and landscaping care, exterior window
washing, etc. will be provided by the management.
One unit will be set aside for management and community use.
The city of Shorewood Senior Market Research Project's Report (May 1991)
establishes the need for senior housing and recommends development of
sjngle story cottage units for independent retirement age .adults. In addition,
the State has noted that the Southwest corner of Hennepin County has a
severe shortage of senior housing units. The only community senior housing
available in the immediate area is in Excelsior, and that project has a long
waiting list of potential residents.
The proposed project is to be single story residential cottage I bungalow
units arranged in four: unit modules which, in turn, are grouped into four
separate buildings. Parking is on grade with sixty (60) attached or detached
garages. The project has the appearance of a series of single family
residences. The scale, materials and visual texture are those of a traditional
quality suburban subdivision.
Located at the southern edge of Shorewood, abutting Highway 7 to the'
South, Seamans Drive to the East, and Eureka Road to the West; the project
provides a natural transition between the highway and the single family
residences to the North. As a retirement community of independent senior
citizens this development will fit well into the adjacent residential properties.
4!
Exhibit B
APPLICANT'S PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Meadow Wood Community P.D.D.
:./...~..';'~.
.,f"
; ~t!r!Fi
'"3:~t-
c>c;c
COo 0
Niij2S
l11QZ"
~Z(;)Z
- !II
~:E-lO
"'-::or
111 mr
l11m
~-ll>
::: ::0
()
:I:
=t
m
()
-f
::~_;~o:..:'. ,
en m
("')
> ><
r
m -
. . CJ)
~
- -I
-
II -
~ Z
0 G)
0
c
m
<
m
r-
0
-c
:s:
m
z
-I
==
-
-I
:I:
-
Z
~
0
0
0
-
~o
CJo
.
~".:
",,' ~
'-"
"S)'
\
,\\
i\d
""
7C
.
)
rv
'--'
~ ."
~
....
...... l;l
. "'"
r-
'--' C
....
~
N:o
01
,.., z......
,f
)1!l
~
......
...,
'--'
.
,
3
'"
'"
=tf'"
. "-
,. "
t. ,to,
"
'"
o
""
8
""
'"'
'~ ;!
f.,- - - - I 1.,..;\ .
I: :') "t . .......,
1; 1~1'0
-,--.--- .'"p I @
. I"" ~
I: ~.; ""a...... '-""
. ......-v. - ~
..1... ,. 0'. Ol
1 .'~~ ~
: . ~
I
,
,.
I :
~ ',:: 'j
., ~
~..,:u .
;!! '~I
]Itoo.J______
~Cl
,....
l"j
I'"
I:
I:
,:
I
---,-----
1
,
, I
t
....1
r:
. ~-~-.. ~
"\~ ~
I '.5\ 7::-
-t:- ~
.-., -:A
''r'', j ~ ()
'J Vj
rA
-'"
...,'"
......
~
@
,-r--tot>o
" \.It '" 10 .
. . 10 "'-1_
~8~~d
. ......
'" .
~6 ROOS 10 Ll~S
......
$llllll ~ SOO~H t~,;\! ~
~ \ 1-
iJi (.... I;::
-- .' _~ 2"
I
----------------------
/.... .'/
o ,"'90..
1~ ,
1 I
, ,
,.... ....',....
I ..
, f I I
~, IN
I ''''
~I If.! '"
"I I~ VI
1 ____
~ .. - 1 ~_=-~-=:--
,\ ,.-- ~.~r,1, ;
( ......:-
1 "., :~
, ','11.:j:
I (\ V. '
, . \. Z<
75 S)ltllllll Z SOOll .
: '"
I .
- J_ -,- '11
,
I
I
,\
, ,
r __,
I~ '8\
,
,
'.)01
I '
,
-.
-I
"',
I
I
.
:~
'."
I.
,,",
,0>
I
I
,
,
,
.
I
,
I
_oj
------
-0
~ ('(
'--' '\...
(~'" .
()
\1. (:-;':,/
:q(\' I
(~:..
CD ~ !IIcn3:ll 1111~ , ... (;"
-< 11 :J: e <--I ,
8 !:!lom~ ell)
r-
'" g ",")>-1 lD
~ -m ::l
~~C~ w
'" 00
0 J: ~:E
m ~~ ~
m
...
tj z:E o~
In
n Z
... ~
0 ~
0
C
EUREKA
03:
Om
3:)>
s: C.
cO
z:E
-
'~ :E
o
o
c
,
S)ltIll, ~/' Z SOOIJ Zl
~
----
----
----
---~--
OO~
.'" .:~)
.=n ();. .
....,
. \
~ )
(\',.
(\
~
~
::D ~ .,]'
I'
......
)>..
.~........ \
''-J
;:::;
'"
o
'"
o
'"
v'
~
~
\9>
~29.~5
155.36 157.5 r....
1;"- ~ \.'''-:
I > -~ fP ~;: "" ~I
~ -.. N,~ ..... ~. ~l 01 _. (\ co- ~
!V 'N VI tv IV . tv q.
~~. VI" ~"':'. '" ~ ;., '-~,
.<0 :w. ~ ;,"'." 1\ ...,,'" " ~/I
N~'O"W.i".,..., NO'Jr" '<;,.
<! 1'35. 'J3 1 192. ~5, ",.
.. ~':.:- _ _ _ _. _ ]?Q..5~ _ _ '
. - - - SEAMAN6 DR
, I
I
I
,
,
I
.
.1
,
f ;.
f ~.':
I
1
I
"-I.
""
1
I
,
I
.
I
I
,
,
I
--,-. '1 - -ro-:
"
I 150
. . '\
~ I,t:
I~"'\;' .
:::I ,'--' ~
:v I ~ ~
g b;;. .
"~ ~
~,
"
!"
'!
'7....
,-~
. ""'.
'.~..
r . '.
; "',
......
~...
'--'
.....
VI
:v
'"
0>
\ j
.
"",
'^ \)'\..
r,
:?r\. .
.. t:.
"
, :
/.. ':1'
~~
,:,;\
'"
""
"" '.
rv
~:!
'--'
"
N
'"
8
""
106
001
",S~,LH.. .
r-', ...$:./1
L:. {' ~' 0",
e g: t. f::" 'f--
~'....f r-- l~;'
""'j' r)
'"
'"
'"
'"
'"
8
VJ
~ I,
VI
...--....
------------
_...--
-------.-
/'
I.'
=,~
1Io,ll':.,LI,1ltl
,
,
I
I
- ,
.so.- "'...,.:
I
I
I
I
,
I
~~
0'
,
,
,
I
,
I
,
, lJ1
! In
6< '(1.;L
c,..~
:;;~RI
....lJ1~
,nUl_
-. ~
p~v>
~ap.o
<:>
e~~
-InZ
CJ'lC:Vl
, .....;1)_
~~~
=-o~~
z~
~~ I
11:'"
~~
0: I
,.. ,
11:,.,
i;,..
A\-
.;Ii
>
'In r-
xc
........
7
I:JO
SOUT~:/l
~ ,,':~
~ ",
~ (.
""*; l!:
- ~ :-
~ f'V_ ~
..... ~ '-
~ ~
~ ,~
'" '"
,~ SOUTH ~
I
I
,
I
,
,
I
I
,
,
,
l----(------
z: .
~:
i1i:
br----------.
-I ~
"-I In,
---------~..;
(' ..,
'1 -I
'. "",
\:,.'> }!jr---,.--,.----
I,t\ ~:
, \ """
t 'of ~:
.;....., 2'
e ~:
2:
In'
,
I
,
I
,
I
I
~
~
.,.
.........,
'" (J 1
. "~ \
ntA\ :n r"
~() I'
~~ tIt
@ill""
.~
cg
(Q)
1
I~
47;6 ',,\
t ,
-.- - -...
,
I
,
I
I
r ,...."
;/1 . J:3,
I
I
I ~_
:~
'.\,^ ...1 ' ,..~
--ir-,.L'~ -~1~- ,I.. - ,-!.,
~.: i
&;j
",,'J\
.. ",
'1\' "
. '\
, \
cI\.
.....1
.. ~ :r-
o
D
w
.1J\
o
-
~
~
c
3-
f'
"
'\
c.
,
'"
rv I
rv
'-
SlINll ~ SOOll tZ
~e,
.~
~
; ~ .~~
~ '--' @
---.~.--
'.J
,. .
,
t . ,.
V\ ~ ,J
. tJ1 "
"1'\': '...
:1 ( .._,
V\
~
~
:.,y
..
'^.:
~:
i
,-
!~...., > ", ::;~~:~,f' ,,(
~ !i!f!t;
.
-..j 0)
('\),
en U1
U1
en
-..j
0)
~" '
, ' ,
, , ,
.....J..--. 0 ,
~l,
;
V)
0)
cn-(J1
-..j
r .
::0
U')
j
, ,
-j
:T.
.. ....
, .
.... .
.".
(j)
<2 -
O)-~ .
/Y/
S'
N
r-
)>
~
m
:s:
-
z
z
m
~
'en
:J:
~
'lJ
.-......
._.....P.
R.l... s.
o
A, _ CD
N 1',,) N
to 0 " N
..
~ LtJ N
f. . ~
~VE. IJ1
" 0
+'>
VJ
N
:E
x
c
,',
~
.' OJ,
VJ
N
"
+'> 01
_'I,
<))0
:J- (J1
~
~~ ..
tP
(.."1
rv
(])
6~
M
.. :JJ
LOS " I
I
,
.
~
"-'
I ~
,__,_,-'-'"l-- ': .
,~ '
, u
:o>fJ '-. ~
. (.11 /
(]) I
~, N'/'
11'
.:r.
1.>1'. ,
()
,.
'::0
'C1) .
III
· ',' f.
. 0
\<)' . ,. I'
,
I
'I
,... "' M SH r, R.f't
.,..~.~. NU.4'!.:..
n
J>
NO
i
OJ
/3
.Do/,
'Of
It" s I'ro
'.. c,
.
'::0 \
;~
'en
"
.7~- _.7.~_~
i .'
.. \
=\
i . '
, I
... ."-. fJ)
'",
nl....
" .
en
0)
:cP I.'
""'o'/'
~, \
'6'~~', .
~
'0,
-;P
\~
, ::0',
(l) ·
en
00
.L,ANE
N
L
1
I
\
iUl
..~
i
n
.~.. ....
2.
1.>1\ .
1\)\
.: i
\ .
"
.. i
~S:... .i
,
....f
f ........
vi
....,
I'Sl'
\
. ,..,~;
(~i" '.'
,
,
,
........
~
.......
~:
~
~ 'v
~~ ~
~~
WlJ
r",
'...
,.
'. "
"
1/2 lI~S
I't:!
"
\
,\
........
A
....,
........
~~
tf ~ S~NI1 S SOOll U
<;1IIl! 1 S SOO~. ~,~J\ : ~
........ ,''- 1- ~
~ (' ,>' -J~ 2~ .~
-------~-----.--;.----~ ' , ~
/.... '',I ~ .
~ .~ <Yfi)
~ ~
e::::;
._ _ __ -1:
<Yfi)
r:
t----' , ~
"",'~ ~
I'.J\. ~ _....
4:- ~ ,::!'"
"") -:A .A
.t.... J iP ~
<./:/ @
rfl
'-"'-'Or,.
,.. ~ M . .
. . . "'-1_
~8~~~
, 'W
.... ,
... ..~:"
, ~6 RODS 10 LI/or<.S
\J'
..,0,
:,,or'
\\\\
VJ~ \i\ ~~
:.A~-, \ -:t-
)7"A '5- G>
VJ ~ ~"', -..j
\. ' '~.RBOR
I~r-
1m ' ."
I -'0 C.N(~. ..- '
'1 ,,'<;j ...:__~
0"1 "), ...-
-a ~o') ",-
I.?...-"-
. 1.,.;\..
, ':'1ftr' .,r
I.., !~i"I'
I \ ,.. ,'l',' @
:- ~ , , .., . -." . J~ 0: : :: ~_ .....
" 0'0' Ol~ (;
... \ \.. - ~
,
I
I
90
:. T ?5 i
.. '. . .. ..: c . . ~ .. ,7.5,. ;
(n
~
~
N
VI
---......--...-
- .,...--=1--
.------- '.' :
(..... '-. I,......., :....
,..,,,> - :~
." ~:
(\\/ .......:
'. 'I SODlI II
S)lllll ZI\ l
:.0;
,
-I
cn~
1
I
~ ':; 1
.:... :~
...'G !::
,...... , 101
cD U( :
-," :
C'')'' I
- I
-----.1
--.....-----
...
~
~
.......0 J
. \./
C.
>
(,. , I
, \
~.:..
("'-
j
..-
Irr P~rt Of" , .
!~!MINN ,,' MeAkER
:Vl; . eWASHT" S
i~: ~~. co A LAke
'< ,
o
:0
'0 '
...
'(I) :
'0. :
-i
03:
Om
3:)>
s:c
cO
z~
-
:<:E
o
o
c
~
8
VI
S)till ZI\ l S
---~~--------~
oo~
.; ~)
(r-,
.',\ /' I
, ,
: \
(\.
'.
(\
-
.......
t
!.
, t,-,
! ~i!i!t~
//
.,....
...~. .... ..-
~!:-c...
..~C:c:
:;:iii2SO
_oz"
....jZClZ
~:e!!:O
",-::or
",Rlr
...-1
....
<:>
...
'"
-<
2
o
"
z
~
'"
m~
15
en m
n
)> ><
r
m ..-
. . en
..Jl.
..Jl.
o
o
z
G)
en
-
-I
m
1J
r-
)>
Z
)>
:;0
(')
:J:
::::j
m
(')
-f
~~
?~
lD~
...
~(J)' :ll
m J: :::. 0
~om/;;
~;O)>'4
-om ...
r-:E -
rnoC~
00
~~
z~
o
o
C
.
,
,
,
\.
......tD
..
o
I
._~/ _ .J. I
.,;g~6""'" . /,"......,
/' rn ~ '------" "':
{ z :c
! em
: ::o~/
\ ~ ~
'\ -<,
I
\
i
\
..
..
o
'"
~,....
"'-..
""-
+
'"
<0
_ _0
"
Ill.
........ .
..
..
o
"
\
(:J' '" .{/,j---\
'- )10;'.' ".',
~- :..f... 1/
; ....{
I'
i
(.'0 i ;)
:jlU.l)\
( .. " lJI/.~
'- ) r= ./ !
'__' -< ,/ J
/2../0":
,/ i
II /~.I
//(..J.
// j
.<0
"'.
.,/ -
I
i
/'
I
i
;
)
'lI:lI:
~)(
f;;~'
~~
00
::ta
~~
~.:
o~
..'"
"
o
"
r
>
;u /"/\
. I
(
!
f
!
(
,/
I
I
I
/
:..
i/
i
fl
.r-,J:..'
"
.." /
../0'
/
:'.
;0
/
i/ ,_-",.f~'"''
./ ,I i
'><'~'J../-/7/-"
I
/..,-~
<0
"
'"
I
i
,/'
/
./
I
I
I
"'.-......
/
.........
;
,-
/
i
",'
;:-..;,;:.....~ ~
_~ _~ '}8 'c>
~ ': -(b.,~-
~ .~
._._ _ ,'_<P.
I
;'
!
i
\
\
/
/
./
i
O;B<-!;l
~eoC>
m :<
o z
~ ~
o '
)
....
!.....
IN
i~
!.~
,\
(
"
\
) :
/ .
".
'-.
,~
:..
,.
I,
I
,',
./
';
,
I
,
\
.'
r
\..
,
,/
<\
/
!
i
../
)
f
/././
,
_.0
o
0,
\\
\
\
\
\
; )
i
.
"."
)>:;0
:;om
"m
~
z
<0
,'"
" ..
<0
/~
..
/
I
;
(
\,
'""
.......
\
..
l;
.,.--......".
/
I
."./
o
365-'-'
E~REKA-R9AD
o
..""
./'
,//
,r...''''.'''
~~/
,..,.,.""'''''''
//
'-...
jO--~);
,
/
r.-.,.....::::~~ ,.-.....
~ ~.t .;#i~f~\-' !~_,r
~: / :....:..:.:.:....:..:.. 00
I ........:..:. Z c
\ '') ~~
I 00
1,( \-'" S~~ 08
I:' -< m... ..c
~"77 / '-. lI: ~ ~ ~ ~
(~.> '\ t ~ ~ ~ ~
./ }{ "'-...,., lI: '" '" ~
! /) "".--:
( ,/ '-
r,/ ''''t/''
/1 -'" I
( i:
,/l l ~~/ ,,-
(/'r
;','! z
/. ' m
/./ !i\
/ I -a
\ /. ~
....// ~
,/ / E
':.//
//
...1'
..-."
.........-- .
.--
/
/
gp6
. ,g~
;g~"
0>
..'"
ilC
mZ
mm
"'-
Z
...2
0"
>
...
m
'"
.",.,.",,,,
'_ <0
.~..
<0
'"
..
'",
--C'"
-'.
-~
z
.0
~
C
~
...
'"
m
\ ~
\,.;0
)\
! \ .......---.-------------.
{ ''<. /,//
\ ':-----'"
\
\
\
:<0
:<0
:0>
r:.:'..:'~'_'.I>;'<";{J." ,_",<~<..
; q:if!F!
,,, '
-rs~
)>
r
m -'
--
...Ii.
----~-
o
o
-\
\ \,
\ \
I \\
\ 1\
\ \-
I \
\ \ '
I 1,1
I ... ! /
l r\,~,' i, ,'3,1
~ \ b. IV
\ ",~./ /
'. I /
\ I .
i I
\ \
I I
II
I I
Jf
i i
I(l !
I .
I I I
! 1/
I \ t" ,___
- \~~ -~~--
-/ I
;:; //
.~ //
6//
I //
'l "
//// \ )1
I // \
,1',,\ \
....,. ,
'-_ ' \ 1 'i~ 1 \
1-'--/ '-f
\, \//1 I,
I! ! i ;'
ill/ i \
II' ! i (
'I! I I
ill'
fi I I \
!' III I
i,f,/I,il /~/
II Ii
'1 I,
11' I
!1: !
,! i I
Ii II
ill i
m
><
----
en
-
-
z'/-
G)
C---
--
~
-,'
Z
)>
G)-
m
-0-
..
..
o
"\
""'1-' Y1. I
-.........., ~ , ,/' -",,-
......,.... + ft' , I
.~. I
"o"p :r~ m 0" ~~
/ s~~~i ,. \, ~ ~~ ~~
:J:~~;:ag \2 iP!m ~i!j
// ~~Oai: ' ~ -t< en
!1ClO~z~ OJ 0)10 ,..
omrngm I ~o-t ~
~ en ~ -t 0 / // --- !\ IT----- ~
ffiaS~~ It, m \ ~: -:--___ to
::tIo:I:::az r en' go ~ ---- n~
a? 0 ~ ~ / ~ \ m 0 --.-.-
~~~ ~v~,.,: I ~ \ ~
~~c~~. \
-t...zmz \
!" ~ m ~!: \ /' ___~_____.________ to
.' .....~~. \ /' _.--~
l.. -""
,: / /\' 0 '"
I // \, N
I; ~ // \ ii O.
j j \.--___,. ~-----c~,
I ~------_/ /
/ ) __~_i;
<;1/(
/
,I
/
/
i
I
1
i
\
\
1-
~/~ \ --------------
i
\
1
\ /fr_
/i
" i
----tJ--- // \
--- 1-
,oj /'
/ :./
--~-~ ,/\
.
.
;;J
0-
o
..--........"-...----
',,-
~------
---------.,
-------:--------------
~
'.............
;=:~~,~~=:~~-c=-:=~--':
r=-
1
'------.
00 r:-c
~-~-~ ~
~_';"r!1, Z
!C)>
-Cl
/~m--,_
m-<
:eo
)>
en
J:
-<
)>
\
I /
/
"c" /
~;o I
:;:om
"m
~ j
z
)
EIJRE GAD
/------------
//
'" 3:'" c... Uo i>>'~!!!. ~ Ul Cll -l 0 -l CJ)
0 )> 0 C
'" 0 x ;r :J ;r
52" 0 ";rIll:J c - Cll Cll -
'" ......t:r(") :r iil 0 - iil -I
Ul - ~ _ 0 Cll ::r
~ OZ " _ 3 :J Cll
ZCl Z . g :J s: OCll.:< III m
. lJ) Ul ...
... 0 Co (Q Cll :e :J Ul ;:;(t)
U1 :E-i .!"ii1'O
... - ;Il r III 0 _ !II :J -
U1 m r UlCoa ii;;'g 0 Z
U1 m 2..!ll'O
w -i r-Cll3i a
.... ~ - 0 "
0" :e Ul III III " "
0 :;:0 ",Ullll
w Cll 8 Cll Cll - :J '" 0
0 III Co :=2 - 0
:I: :I. Co 0" < C ;a
=i :J _ c - ... iii' -
lQ iil = :J :l "
m " 3 e: :l Cll Iii a 3:
Cll ... '0
0 ,gCllc5 :e III 0 '0
-f III " Ul III 0" :l S- )>
Ul
!:!,o III ::r 0 - (Q
< ;r
~:l.., !il' in Ul -I
~Cll Cll
-, ... (') 0 -
Ul C S' Ul ...
to :~ m en en s: ~U1j! 0 it 0
-< ffi:x: :l a 0" <3
c x ....--i :J
C:.. (jj mom me!"" $lgCll - "
0 0 in Z
"" :~ ~:tl)> C?r ,C '"
z ::! -m CD III Ul ... - iD
~ w z ?~ w Ul 3' S- a Co
G) f':1oC cQ'O'a (I) 3 (Q
c 00 :J 0 Cll ~ Cll
3i !!!. <II - Ul
~ ~~ ;r
-n ....0 &l c5 S' - Cll Cll
0 0 <
'" c:~ a.<':"! Q:
z z~ 0 o~ -
)> z Cll ::r Cll
-< Cll :J
G) ~ -
m 0
"tl 0
r-
)> C
z
I I
"",
\)
/
)
~/
,<0
//....
.6
/~
I
---)
l--
/ ,.,
./ ~
{
-l~
Jy
/ ,I
/
-.--..~)i........__
/
o
36S'
I
//
/
/
/
i
/
/I^vi
,/LLJ
I
,I
+
<0
'"
<0
//
./
Tj----
/,-
-~-
. SEAMANS DRIVE
-"
~-
~-!~~,-
~--~----f---
I I I
J /
, I
I ,i '"
I 1/' .. ..' .
~! / (
r= I ( )
'I .
1/ /
)
/
/
-~
/~
/
I
I",
\
,,;, /~~
) ---
/
<0
'"
0-
/
/
~
!:::"
!:qqq
/
"
...
..c..
C;c
2;0
z"
ClZ
~O
'" Xlr
",!Hr
~-1>
e :;0
o
:J:
=i
m
o
-f
m!l:
0>
"'0
Ncn
~~
.... .
'" ~
'"
-<
C
o
,.
z
o
F
G)
.
.
en
('")
)>
r-
m
-c
:;tJ
o
...II.
o
o
rn'
m
c
rn,
-
-I
m
-c
~
z
........}
",;a:~t'---',
...411 (
j
.-._.F......
CJo
:~
C;u
r~
10....
...
"'C~~3:~
0:;0 ~om~
-< ;0 ..... ....
"'C=imy:::!
g Fn~C~
m 00
~ ~~
~ z~
"'C 0
> 0
Z C
~UI~
l7'It...~
mC
or
10
...
~~2~
o~c~
.... '"
z -<
o "
I
/
.. ......i-._....
i/'"
(
\
,
",
<0
~-----
...
or""""'"
~
o
c
,..
<
m
;u
....
o
:J:,
~ :
0",
,0>
,''''
..
..
o
""\,
",-
......
~. ..........,...::
0",
,~
....
,~.
/b.
".
... .. .u.._ ~ _ :....,._.";":'"'.._.-~--........-..-.-___
o
.........3&5'--
II EUREKA ROAD
II
o
............
"
\
,J--..
..../ i \
,/ -............- ,./,.' '......
("-~/) { ~. /
't......./
It
I
(:") Gj" \
',---,/ I
( . '), ) {
" / //f'~.;1
/f
l :
./ 2.,4'0'
/ '
(:. ') ruu,u;--'7;:f;'uu.,
.. \ I i
~\ ~ 'L...<''')'
//1 1;/
. I.
.I
<0
<0
ii.It'.,
\\r' "\"
\', \
\ \ \
\i \
\1 \
1
I
'.
i,
!\
! \
tOi
~:\
(.')
" ../
'J:
C5
~
~
.....
_.._....~d. .
i
/
!
;,
"
'\
/
/
/
o
o
o
,
\
\
'.
\
\
\
)
i>
Cil
I>>
o
::::
III
-
.,
10
~
\ \-<0
~ :~
/ \
/' - ,-~-_/
! ~---~--
\
\
\
\
;,
lD
III
c:
lD
:2
-
i:
t5&>
;-i~
ee (') 2
~gll
...a. ~ cr
t02:J
~ 0, "0
lD::r
Q.~
;-~
I>> I>>
III :2
S' Q.
ee C/l
lD 0
'tl ::r
::rlD
I>> Q.
III I::
lD iD
i
-I:
0'
-
!.
;0/
lD
III
s:
II
~.
8
<
10
::I
I>>
::I
In
>
Cil
Q.
lD
<
o
@"
Q.
>
Cil
I>>
o
-
a.
o
ee
I>>
OJ
ee
l):.
Z
lD
-
C/l>
lD Cil
3 I>>
I>> 6'
:2 III
III _
SJ5
I>> ...
Q.IO
.. !.
ce'
:2
3
10
:2
-
'tl >
a I::
'tl ~
CD 0
::\.::!.
'<~
o=::
:=
::r ...,
-. lD
~.g
'< iii'
lD
I>>
.,
!II
>
Cil
I>>
Q.
10
<
o
@"
Q.
-I
o
i:
0'
,I::
is:
S'
ee
I>>
Cil
I>>
I>>
Cil
I>>
C
III
10
Q.
Q.
=::
~
S'
ee
I::
:!.
~
0'
:.
c:
;-
ee
I>>
iil
!l!
o
5
l!l.
iil
~
!'!
o
(')
o
3
3
o
:2
o
'tl
10
:2
III
'tl
I>>
(')
,~
0'
.,
"if!.
'tl
I>>
.,
:>I"
;-
ee
&l
0'
I::
iii
-
o'
:2
!'!
-
::r-l
!!'.::r
lD
~
lD 3i:
S'
'tl :2
a lD
c;" ~
lliii
Cil :I:
3 g
!!!. III
:2 S'
I>>ee
Cil 51
:2 I>>
~~
10
8 -I
3 ::r
3 10
lD lD
:2 :2
(') -
~. a
_. "C:l
::J a
;t1D
lD II
iii'
IV
.....
w
0.
w
.....
01
o
IV
......
w
:,..
.....
.....
.,..
UI
c...
01
o
III
:."
UI
......
0.
.,..
01
III
;-..
IV
W
.....
IV
.....
.....
.,..
0.
IV
o
III
;...
UI
to
Co
ClO
o
III
;-..
ClO
:...
IV
01
III
;-..
III
:."
III
;...
III
;...
w
N
"if!.
IV
.....
:...
"if!.
......
ClO
.....
"if!.
"if!.
a
I>>
Cil
I>>
01
IV
ClO
I>>
(')
.,
lD
III
UI
W
~
o
....
01
en
ffl.
'--
i
i
I
l
(
;
\
.".
.........-........
-"\
\
i
"
,
/
}
('
;
/,
.../
i
0>
..
0>
\
,
\.
"
\,
-'. ""- '-'i..
.'
\
..
t
! ..
I I
; .'
.............J'/
,;.....-...-......
. ,
o
~
<0
-f" .
'.-.:g..
'"
...10_............
o
_~L... -'
-------------" ,
~
o
-
a~
iii
aa
C/llll
::rill
o iil
Cil I>>
:E I>>
g III
Q.IIl
::r
=:: ~
~ :2
iiio
a:2
III ~
3 lD
I>>
'R
......
CD
.....
IV
!II
;""
m
)(
iii"
-
;-
ee
III
;::;
10
I>>
Cil
!l!
w
~
~
III
;...
01
io
to
I>>
o
Cil
III
-I
::r
lD
'tl
.2-
lD
(')
-
en
-
-I
m
-
z
"
o
AJ
s:
)>
-I
-
o
z
iii"
Q.
10
<
o
-
10
Q.
lD
~
Cil
-<
5
.,
CD
:2
i:
Cil
III
c:
lD
3-
~
c
3-
!"
i::'if~!:~IW}:::'~::~:{:{':{f
.
.
"';I:"'t..
O>"'c:
..cO
Niii2S0
~Oz"
.;zG'lZ
~:E!!lO
"'-:or-
UlUlHlr-
~-l>
:::l ;0
o
::t
~
m
(")
-f
'"
-<
c
o
'"
z
~
:I:
en
(")
)>
r
m
-a
;;a
o
. .
~
o
o
en
m
c
en
-
-I
m
-a
!;
z
~o
CJo
:~
c:"
r-jIi
<D~
...
"'tJ CIlen~
;0 ffi:I:;::a
o~om
"'tJ :::!~)>
o ;:!=e
en moO
m 00
~ ~:E 0
~ z:E ~
"'tJ 0
~ 0
Z 0
~<D~
.......
mC~
Qr-
<D
...
~~
z
~
i-
I,
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
m..z
r-om
mz:;
~oo
....r-c:
-~r-
i1r-~
..........
~O-l
o~~
~~
zo
"
o
o
~&5-'-
II EUREKA ROAD
,...._..~.........--~-........
....~.......,
,.
,
\
".
\
'.
.....
o
i
< 1
'" I
i~ \
I; \
I
"'
,;
":
\
i
\
.)
;
':
!
\
\
'.
.'...........
';
\.
() s-1~
()~I
o !
/
:J:
(5
~
~
......
i
i
j
'"
0\
,
j
(
\
\
\
\
...............
:
o
T
.~_r- .-"
\,
')
\"\
j
v
{
..//
~
seAMANS DRIVE .r,:
" .".---"~".-"f_." ~-(.~=t--"i.----..-
~:< ~~
~ ~ ,( ~
~ ~ ~~
o (/) ....
C .... n
ill m S;
n .... G)
~ ~ S;
'" C l>
~ ..... Cl
:I: m
'"
.,
't:l Z
c 0
0'::1
~CD
.g2.
CD g
::I CD
~ !e.
~ fD
!1l III
1iI
1lI
(ii'
-t
-<
"0
(';
)>-
r-
"0
)>-
:;0
"
Z
Q
en
~
r-
:.
ee en
a :i"
5 lil
a. III
III =
; 0
III ....
(') :;
o CD
;;-s:
ill 0
cg-g
CIl
III CD
::I a.
a. 0'
os.
Diti
- 5'
::!lee
o CIl
Q 1lI
III Cil
iil CIl
III 5'
llIee
ill co
CD !!l.
.c 0
~~
:;
CD
-t
::r
CD
ill
III
;
::I
o
CD
><
!a:
:;
ee
0'
~
a.
:;
CQ
CIl
.0
::I
-l
o
~
....
6'
o
..,
III
ill
!l!
-l
sa.
e!.
o
o
3
3
o
::I
o
't:l
CD
::I
CIl
't:l
III
(')
CD
III
..,
CD
!l!
en
c:
CD
~
III
~
CIl
1lI
ill
Ul
,.
9
Ul
<0
bo
CIO
o
CIl
;-..
8
<
CD
ill
ee
CD
~
(')
~
(')
c
~
0'
:3
CD
co
3
CD
::s
~
"..
/~
'-:: .~'
~
c:
!1l
o
0'
CD
(')
o
:3
<
CD
~
a.
o
..,
a.
CD
a.
0'
III
-
CD
a.
o
..,
/,/
-
::r
CD
/
,.
-
::r
CD
!!!,
!D
N
...
to)
u,
to)
...
en
~
bl
CIO
CIl
;....
i'
2.
CIl
;-..
n
!;
.,.
~ c5 ~
_::r..,
e!.olll
co..,c:
!!L:;:g;
"""I <0 ~
CD III
CIl ee -
ti~c
CD 1lI ::I
atgS'
e!. .., 1lI
3~a
o CD ee
a._Ill
='0 ill
!II N CQ
oCD
. m
~1lI
cg.ill
C)'!e.
..,~
:tar
CD m
8 0
....-<
:La
g.3
CD
...
o to)
.... .
illenenz
.0;';:;0
cc.c(1)iD
~CD"O"
CD CD iii -l
a. )( ::s
0' ~ (It ~
... 't:l C
.........0""'0
::r_3(;
CD ::r - 't:l
c~S'o
CD a. m
<:; CD
CD CD III Q.
6' men
't:l III CD ;::;:
3li><CD
CD;::;:~"O
ao'~iii
::s -::l
~2!.Q-,
III m
cg [gti
::rg:;!1:
~ :t co ~
CD~Q~
ggg:o
CD III !!l
::s ::s III :;
III a.-CD
limb>-o
~;:~a
, CD 't:l
g.~~
_ CD
III Q.
en
-
-I
m
-
z
"'T1
o
;;a
s:
)>
-I
-
o
z
!:" .
:-:--:->::' . . .
. . '.'~ ",
~,', '.
!!QiP"!
CJ) G)
('")
~ ~
r
m
. .
~ C
..
..
II -
ZH
~
0 G)
0
c
~
-
Z
)>
G)
m
en
-
-I
/
~....
.'
,
/')>
Z
/'
~a
"'~:::c..
O)>oC
00 !:!" 0
~g;z~
....ZClZ
. Ul 0
"'=:-i
~-~r
01 mr
~-i>
~ ;0
W n
::r:
=i
m
n
-I
'"
-<
c
"
"
z
~
018
c...~
C;!!
....~
to
W
G)~~S:~
;0 rnom~
> -<;;0 -t
Q ~~~~
Z "0
G'> 00
Qo ~~
o z~
~ 0
> 0
~ C
~
c...~
o
.
.
I
./
,
i
I
;
!
\
..".,
......-.......
/
.~,.--~-.........
,.
/
: .~_...
o
rn..z
~~;
<00
~J;;~
0<<
zmm
,.."
"-t-t
~o....
i:>~~
"0 ,
-t,..,
~c,~
,"1\)
..-.......
/'
,
J
!
i
....~
"
\
i
..
..
..
,
t.
i
I
/
....,:...
..
.0>
:0>
>J:.'"
".-
,-
/
'"
./~
0.
0.
....3.55!........
.:. .::..:....:~ ROAD
II EUREKA
0.
..~.......;...-..
._~... . .-'
l~
"--
,
I
m
:u
0.
(f)
(5
z
n :g
.g"'A
:u
0.
,
'"
m
l!i
...~ ..':
..
..............::
\
\
\
'-.
\
\",,- ~~..--_._.._.._.--._,."-
.,,~,-.
'"
"i.
,..
/
:.,
'0
I
i
j
,/ ,(/
J
/
I
/
;'
;
g ~ f
/ ~ ~ j
'..'
(Q" ." co
0> lito
/OJ .".......z
/' n
/' Z
,/ G')
(
;,
\
)
/'
/
./
./
z
..~
m
~
'"
-<
z
Cl
n
0.
c
Z
...
0.
:u
'\
l
!
f
\
'\'- :..
:0 :~
f\'-'g .
/: /'
( '",~//
\
\
,
\
\
n
0.
Z
...
0.
c
~
o
o
o
"
'-
"
\
\
\
I
i
---"
/---------- "
.-,-/
~ ""j;
Cllc...~
mC
0....
to
W
O;Jl2~
~~c~
~ '"
z -<
o
!~~::~jX8~~~~(~'":6~2~g*8
~ ~t!f!fi
.
.
.
,
"
"
"
-
on i:l
1---- --=-1--- r----i- -
o 0 ~ ___
s -'l--rr
--rt-
= =,=~ - ~,-~== =-=:~;l~::tl
---I--- I-ul n ~ ~- ----I 1-'-
f--c- f----i~ --- --+-1:--- - I
.....0-- I )-, --- I
I If ,., I ?E I -I
--+--- ~ .0.. -- ..\ ;t I j
I II II J \... .Y1-~
{~CClt=~-~~~.. - Jtl-f~,lH- I '!
/:r-l-. ~ ~ ~ =;.~;,::: "1 '11- ~ -. JIIF II I '
At-~I~~~~ ~ =_~~~ r-ij! <<.,+)ltfO 1 / I
~'" ~ ~ 1\ !G ~- l___~" \:::-J /1 -
~~ --~- ~=~ ~ ~ -~~ ~=- -=f~~ -- : ~
" LIL
"-.~- - 1------17
,~~~V
c
-
z
-
z
G)
r-
S
z
G)
i
I
'--------~------------"
"
"
'-,
/
/J
-'-'-----~__--"
'-- ~ .J: I
-~'V'
OJ
m
C
:;:0
o
o
s:
"en -n
'~r-
.-0
~o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L ___ _____________ _._ _______ ___ __ __ ___ ___ __________u __"".
:
...i
~
-
"'tJ
" r-
~)>
oz
"'3:"'<- GJo ...... c::
~>c;c 0)
..~2S0 ...... Z
VlOZ" en -
... _z G'l Z 0 -I
~::E ~ 0
"'-;or- e -I
VI mr- )>
VIm -<
~-i)> ::u
~ ;tJ m "'tJ
0 "T1 m
:I: I~ m
::j m . .
m -f ....I.
0
~ OJ
m
'" ~~ (fl s: ~ CD ~ C
-< J:
C m <..---<
0 C '" m m mC!':' ;0
" r- ~ ---< or-
z ---< )>
~ U) __ =1 U) 0
... r ...
IT1 C
" 0 0
~ 0 <"0 s:
m c~
~ 0 0::;
z
'"
0 -<
~ 0 .,
C
!::::'ff,:.:.1f/y{/M5{)?'l!,{~
.
I'
.
! ~ '! f! i!
I
I 0 0
I --
I f---- 0-0 ,--- ----
'" --
rn
I "
'" -.-
j p
j 'Tr III-II
- .. rttl
I -- ...- -- -- I.- --- - --+i --- - -- "..-- ...~.
. I
, -I-j- ::-1-
--~ ~- - -g'!l-
! .-- . -- n. nu --.. - - .- g~ 1-'1'" c . t -
I ,- I'~ ! :11 .
r 0 '-' '-1 ill
...,,_" _ :2~~(:~ _ ->.:::::::-::~.(
! ~ t! rf r!
.
,<
.
~-
00
---- ---I-,
00
~
-
-
r-
-
<
Z
G)
o
-
Z
Z
G)
T 'I
- I
I ~ ....... 1-1
l.!' I~' , I ILl I
- ~I-- -- .l.I.. '----t-t-rg;;.. -H-i-i., Bi I
1iT1-1-- .~ _c-l--
~- ,-H- -, I ii,
f(YT-..W
I ~ ^ ::!E I I
1-_-1-___ .a.. --?: I ,j
I . ~
;
II
OJ
m
o
:;0
o
o
s:
N
Vl
\
\
"
',,---
-.......----
I _. - - 0 ------.
I I
]: I
/' ..I I
I-- i
01 G _11"'_1- ~
-J '-.J I-I-- /
I '" I
<- I 0 I
I ~
I '"
.~ V
/
/
I
_....:-.::_:::_-:U: ":- --_. :u ..
~ -+- _.--f-
;;.I
~
_.----
-- ".- -- - ~ -- -- - - . - -
Ij
.--1---- --- -- - ---\- ---< 1,-
.. . ~c----
I
.1'
en "
(") r-
)> 0
r-
m 0
..
...a. :;0
-
,I:l. "
" r-
...a. ):-
-
I
0 Z
I
I
I
I
i
1
,
I OJ
I m
I 0
I :;0
101
I I 0 I
i s: I
i (..)
I I
I ( I
I I r----------------
: I I
I I
I I
l_________________________________J
--.
\~
OJ
m
o
:;0
o
o
s:
~
"'3:"'(.. CtJo ...a. c:
:;>~c: 0
N~ZSC ...a. Z
(,Jl
"'oz" -
....;zG>z en -I
;:;:~~O D
"'-::or -f
'" m r C
~~)> ~ )> -<
::: ::0 ;:0 "
0 m
::J: '"T1 m
=i
m m
0 m CN
-t -f
OJ
m
'" con '"T1(Jl s: coo C
-< c..~ r-ili >
c..-<
c c~
a C:ll O~ m :;0
'" r-c; r- ,.
z I O~ :t> co
~ co-< 0
w w
;:Om 0
~ ""C 0 0
r- :E 0 '-a s:
)> '" c:~
z :E 0 0::;;
z
'"
0 -<
eN 0
0
~;f~.,::;:~'t~'; :,'<<<{::{';'~~~; :~'~.:~~::,
. '.'!'!
t..
g:;c::: C CJ
co l; 0 c
:;:u;~ "
~~Cl Z
.... en 0
~::!1;d r
..rne- . 0
~.... ~
o ;;0
... (')
:I:
=i
m
(')
-l
en
~ ~8
C c:~
~ ,....<!!
~ ~~
"
~
~~ 3:
"U~ m
o::J .,."
)-~ ",
r C
m 0
~ ~
~ ~
o 0
z 0
C/) C
""., g
~c..'"
me".'
qr-
<D
w
O:Jjc..o
OlOC~
o~c~
... lD
Z -<
o
.
.
C/) -f C/) -f
(") (")
)> -< )> -<
r -0 r -0
m m
.. - -
...... n ...... n C)
- )> ~)> )-
co ~
II r- II r- C)
...... ...... m m
I - m I -
0 r- 0 r-
m m
~ ~
-f -f
- -
0 0
Z Z
m
Z
-f
~ .m
z
-f
~
I\)
OJ
m
C
;:;0
0
0
s:
(')
r
C
en
-f N
m G>
;:;0 )- OJ
:E ~ m
c ' .
- G> ;:;0
G> m
> C/) 0
;:;0 0
> s:
G> (')
m r
c
en
-f
m
;:;0
~
G>
>
m ~
z
-f G>
~ m
::E "! < < ." l> l> n
0 n ~ Z ;:0 r- en 0
0 0 -< ~ c: "'C Z
0 r- ,r- l!: :J: ....
Z m Z l> Z
.... m en en OJ r-
;:0 ;:0 i5 :J: c: .... c:
i: c: 0 l!: 0 m
"'C z =1 ~ en U> Z
0 Cl ." :J:
U> ~ m 0 l> Z ~ -f
.... ;:0 n Cl 0
en ;; ~
.... en r- Cl
0 l>o m m
en
.... en <
m
:J: 0 Z
m ." ....
~ :::;
l>
....
:J:
m
;:0
,
..
""
T'E::'\\\PN A~A\~~\ ~6Z"()N\NCr
ro( tDQ::C! ~~t. r\€('\,f JjL 1 0
W~(-tk U~~"-~( ~ t"Q.s~~~ -iL ~"'-~~~
be.-\ ~ C-0~$-l ~e...-e-~ .\ec- r-e.."Z.OV\ I~ -\-0 <x-\ll;)w <X-. c; 0 - \j V\>+-
~\)-.i>\~ ~1O~e G+-, o.s<... s.~'3l 'i O~p<:>s.e.A,.. ~ -tk ~~OS.e.6
feZOV\.\l^~y ~S IS Q. >I~le.-~i \y Y\.€"'~ "'\O~C Ir-c,~
~ t~ \~ I ~~ - S+y (~ (~- vJe..- ~\ '\tL ~U.()~~
\;>D0 \~. '1K'e'l u-s.l \:,\ '-I O-.\~ +-k. V\e\<\, ~~ ~. '\I0e..
ose... sht,G~ 0- +- -tWs. ~(l)~~ O-~ h.<L \\ ~ ~ '\ ~
1J.)tt-J\?::. s.tt1 w-s. \~ Co ~ {b M.\>L -\k. \ I bi-yle.. O~ ~
L~~ ~\~"'-~. .'+ ~(\\ ~UL ~ ~~ \\~ c,.c
~ ~~\"0'~~. \~ ~~\~( to\- we\'\ >~"'\ .\i~\",A-tJ
i~~e.... tw..\\\c, M)~ O-.-~ ~ ~ ()0, c1i~~.
~ \5. ~ ~~ ~\.)~ ~'t~.s.\)~~ ~'1' ~ \K;~
~ ~""I.- ~ ~~t>f~\-'
~~~ A~~ ~b\NL
.~~ilii.
JD ~
tv /6i) 5e&..lvlc..16 Dr. ~wdd 17t.f-?'f<fR-
eel ~ $"""",--. ~ D. ~f ...) -=:: ~ of
C?tl(9 ::;; by 4?~-/tJfL3-
loooo ~s Dv. ~ 474-/Offi
$&0 ~WWlOAIv> 1A. &w,w~ 4:K2-OI~
S'"''iJ<j ~ s.~ . ~, _ 91 "'f{'
-Sr~g{' ~t/~ II>, ~~
y,rj J
.J-r!OS &){'; : OfetUad-
5~ &u,tQ ,1 /,t ~(9- LjlJq-l)Jc5/]
. ~ s~ ~\. &~~ Lf7\f.~1~'{i
1 S-( 7 b r-W~ b-r Cf-i7l/ - f; ?.z :2.
/)( a-h 0 l/- rJJJ,"",! ~ 1 J LL
,. .f\J~
A~~~~
- ~
C \..
2s350 fY1~ L.~
S9~ ~ 02cl
....3/~/ 'OJ>~~
=fci?d / :lJ.+tL7M~U7fi J:>.e..
~;?/I &,.b~"". c.'- ():~
~:2
-3 . ;;Q) .
_523/ j)fferI7(oecrf/--~
f~~__
'7
t{-7l.{- --II ~r
C t l(
9Z'~cJ/~
J-j"14 -t./,~~o
l(70-/CoO>
~~ --~{/~
~1L.J - 72-~':;;
~ ~~~ --
r. ~
i-J 70 -01<67
Lj7l{~/D
Lfio-1it.{?:;
4'ltf-19:2"3
'{- 7 t..( -~
.;?F~
\.{i Y -c, ( 7 J
L/7 -/c:;c;
Lf70 ~C>92 /
.c/71...?h ~3
-I7/- ~~-
970-6730
L/71/-;1 7</:3
i-/7 Lj-S67 Z
~ D(oD ~~ ~V"'V
. DbD ai?1.L~
! I (
~~ V~ / ~
.... AA~t?/ A~~ 611 5<; ~AALj)~
~(fu~ - ~/?~;!~SJi-
--.
~ ~. ~~ 5'"1 ~ ;;SUl-J 0-Ct--n.-a .J) /) .
~(AA~~I
I~~~
,
CoU~
ru!~
IJ
5865 cfJRt!<fJ.. A ij) .5'flw~
~~o E~ pjJ
S"<6Lfo QcA
I
If
I (
,!Jk~6t' c, f;J / Ii ~'rf/ I j(''d-
(j
if?f<- :?6"h/
7'?;4/-9&,&"r
17 tf. -d?S"SV
047 J../ - '6S"s 0
Cfl y-j?c;.$-30
Lf7Lf - ?glr
If - '3i If-
1-/71/56/7
/)
LI1 Y g'a. ~
'-I7fEJ-99~
'-17'1 7S /
(;7tj~ 3~
.-L/7Lf 8/S~
L/7Y J>?Y5---
t.f7{' -t:?3Cf3
., '. '*
N Arn;:.,
A ~ /' /
. bDKJi~S
(): . c) { ..> ...;-.
\' \1. I "\.;::.. ~
1<
Lf7L( -6Y.d- .
1/7tJ - 0 7tfJ 7
y 7 Y - ~ (F7 --
;/
'174- ~6o
'17'1 -!5'o 60
_l{ /1 -c, ~c; 7'
17~ - iEJYQI'/
Y?y- t::J6t:7
Y7 _?d6 CJ
474- / tt-< ()
FILE COpy
Bigos Investment
AUG , 2 \9€G
August 10, 1993
Shorewood Planning Commission
Shorewood City Hall
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN
. Attn:
Brad Nielsen
Planning Director
Dear Mr. Nielsen:
This letter is to formally state my opposition to the proposed
60-unit elderly development on Eureka Road and Highway 7.
I have resided on Eureka and Highway 7 intersection for over 11
years. I moved in looking to have a residential, not commercial
neighborhood. Also, there already is a large amount of traffic
on Highway 7 & Eureka, we do not need any more.
I own an 8,000 sq. ft. house with 5 acres of land on that quadrant
and therefore have a large investment there. I vigorously oppose
that development and hope it will not be approved.
.
Thank you.
ely,
926-2494
4820 Highway 7
81. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416
(612) 926-2494
--
SE? -3 1m
KELLY LAW OFFICES
WILLIAM F. KELLY
MARK W. KELLY
351 SECOND STREET
EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331
(612) 474-5977
FAX 474-9575
Mr. Brad Nielson, Planner
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
HE: Meadow Wood Community PUD Concept Plan
Dear Brad;
e
Because I will not be able to be present at the Planning
Commission's continued public hearing to be held on September 7th,
I want the record to note my personal objection to the above
proposal. For the Planning Commission to recommend this proposal
would do an irretrievable injustice to the citizens of Shorewood.
It is my understanding this property is zoned R-1A.
Section 1201.03, Subd. 20 allows elderly housing to proceed in R-1A
as a conditional use under PUD requirements. The maximum density
for the project based upon net acreage without a variance would be
26 units. Your report of July 28, 1993, indicates the applicant
has requested to proceed as are-zoned PUD under Section 1201.25.
Unfortunately, the density provisions under this section are vague
and not determinable by Shorewood citizens. The provision on
density (9) refer to:
t
"The exact density allowable shall be determined by
standards agreed upon between the applicant and the
City. ..
The file contains no reference to allowable density and I am not
aware of any agreement between the City and the developer,
Diversified Housing, Inc., concerning density. I believe the
public should be made aware of all facts the City is considering
before the public hearing is completed.
As I read the ordinance, density is limited to 4 units per acre or
28 units for this project without amending the comprehensive plan
and the zoning ordinance. Should this problem not be openly
discussed at the hearing, then this defect should be a basis to
terminate consideration of the plan at this time.
I am also concerned with the manner in which open space has been
determined.
-
.J
..... -
4J/;;:~
Il ~ ~f:"C --
"...i (rqg3
:ilLt ~ '~
() tf01~V..dt. ~~ttd- LoL
10~ iL ~ . ~ -./lad.~ ;.....
. ~.~. 7 _r~1J:~
~y~~~ ~ ~
. -A.'~~h~~'.~
. ~V~ Vc-ARJi:::::1:~
.' Ud;~~~~
~J:f-~~,
0- Lu12-.~ ~. - y
~a~.hv~~
~~LLXA~~J
· ~~$~~-4~~
~ . ~ lue ')n,UJX, ~
~(tuPc-. ~~
(J f) pJ.;, L. · 4"", D !/~~
. q ~~~~~c1
/
07/' ,(;J // - C
-~~7 ~---~~~
.
71993
}-
.
.
Df-f)-A /'t1 /);/ tf\ ~flJ7l1) C ~J- / SEP 2~. I::
r f}fii tJ'P'!'j/.1)G jL) ?J'pJ?E5S -rJjAT T
17)1r. Il/,j-r //1; FA-t/t;/\ V r j}-j E P/5t:J j>,t.?SC5()
RE- xcIV 11lJ&, Fol< {tiE ?,. !...{, j), .0;1) f/hj/17
fr T !3i,{ ~ E-X ri A})f :I ft.,:;o c.( ~ I) jU, T .h] ~ ~ To
P,~Jv"'I.A) J YC:'C-( -r-H J4-r- T H If ,f').. /J./f/////,.tJG,
It f) Iv... ( Y1J ij ~ H r lOA) U ~f61> IJ-G";"I J1/ 5 7 /'1:
/
f 11\/ D I (~' C, ) / jv ;0 [;; ft,v IN I't jJ / ~t-" flul} t 15. S'l} 6-
/
--r fll4l /7 ~) rl" '7 f II v PcA JV -r rl ~ /1/ G I c;}I ,/3t7 ~ JI CJot'
~, c: H Y-J-,v C;; C F~' "r- -rH E- 61.. ( J9 J') lS/(.J 7 ~ 1'./1,1/ q
If! )1., ., tJ tA ~ 4/ /3:1",;; rt Nt.< w\ 13 ~ .<:\ 6 j:: r J;.d j:f 2,J!.'l"
t,) I T I( -rH 6 0 ZA.I S / ';f - --1/{ A -?rlC- j 5,4;':6 7)// t.Jjf)y
h;E-r). IT II/Pi - / tl- A Sc::' >>- .h J4<:.-~ 0 F II- D 'Tn t!:. /V ) T )175
'F.::>A ;)-j E cc~, ~ l.( 41 I TJI. -tf/ Jt.}. -r CJ v~.Jl,., j:}.L t.. -rml?~
4J'GA~ 'G/Ju(.(C H 1P,~t:})..t-,,^,~ t1 ill!J c..~:; NC-&,.c).t:Js;- JT
/vC-'U.h}) I!Jb --r NO-r -jc'" r';t..oC IE-Jj r:f ~J / -J-f/ 7-)-J-J5
:5 i -rE Jj~-r '"TN >>7 '-j-r/E <:::-/ 1(y C~C{IVC-/~
ltJ l? l.( A j) 1}-L-- T/ {,/ G 1. !f S'l3- EI< tP l.-ff I} /1J
~ It- G. <::: F f'-r If 1J?.1- E- :; i Ie. 11 tV 0 4;t? R 1< Iv' I 7'11 ~
}) f:-l'/ z=.J.....cJ jJrf:J2... --J?:> If L< (J..d 5 I..t rr)f t3)... G -p ~ G I W'
.
--;;LJVv~ ~
JtUA-f/t$~
7/
4. V~'}-/
~" --
September 19.1993
Mavor of Shorewood or
Shorewood City Council Member
SEP 2 0 1993
FILE COpy
Dear !l7crn ~c:d .
lvly name is Bill Hardenbergh and I am an active member of the Shorewood
One Homeowners Association. However. I am writing this letter agaInst the
proposed Meadowood P.U.D. as a resident of Shorewood. As I'm sure you are
aware. this issue has generated a great deal of sound and fury. Interestingly,
most of the facts have come from the citizens. while the emotion has flowed
from those individuals on the planning com mission who unabashedly
advocate this project.
,
f
.
The purpose of this letter is to try to present some facts that rise above the
advocacy and emotion and address the central issue or this whole aHair- is
Ibi~ IIJe rigbl sile? A reasoned and logical reading of the facts will
demonstrate that this site is very wrong for both the neighborhood and the
prospective residents.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD PERSPECTIVE:
FACT: The planning commission has advised the council that this IS not a
good site for the project. I hope you will respect their analysis.
FACT: The proposed density of this P.U.D. is almost 3 times that allowed
under the 'zoning laws- laws that were written to protect neighborhoods
from proximity to excessive density and development.
.
FACT: The proposed density is almost 8 times all existing adjacent property.
There is abSOlutely no buffer or transition between this project and
surrounding homes.
....
FACT: This site is only being pursued by the developer based on economics,
not appropriateness. By Vern Knoll's own statements. this was the 4th or 5th
sit they pursued.
F ACT: Only one of the four adjacent streets is remotely appropriate to this
project. Hwy 7 is too busy, Seamans and Yellowstone are too narrow and
local.
FACT: Other semor s~ proj~cts sited in the study are, almost without fail,
located in a transition zone between downtowns. stores. malls or other
developed areas.
FACT: The existing flora and fauna on this property serves an effective noise
barrier to Hwy 7. This would be lost, leading to even more road noise for the
neighborhood.
....,
~Lcf
~l=P -;:; Ie':
"-'i..... - ,..
September 2, 1993
FILE COpy
Shorewood City Council
Shorewood Planning Commission
5755 Country Club Road
Shorc.vocd,~~! 55331
Dear City Council:
.
In September of 1990, the City of Shorewood's City Council commissioned a study of
the needs of Shorewood area retirement age adults for housing. We were appointed to
that Task Force. At that time the City also hired an outside market research firm to
direct the project.
In May of 1991, a study of Senior Housing Needs was submitted to the City Council.
This study clearly indicated a need for senior housing in Shorewood. As a result of this
study, another Task Force was formed to carry out the findings of the first study.
As members of both Task Forces, we feel It is up to the City Council and Planning
Commission to provide zoning for senior housing. We also realize that many people
will complain as a result of this zoning.
If the present property under consideration is not suitable, we feel it is your
responsibility to find suitable property for such a project.
.
It is difficult to believe that in a..'1 a1"e~ the size of ShCr?~"TOod, nrc~zr~' C4'.r.nct be rcund
. ...&. J. "J
for this zoning.
Sincerely,
)~~ ~~
Shirley Barnum
JZt:)l, q~-v
Jack Barnum
"'" ,. - --'
.
~..~ if'"" no?,
Ii'" h t: L;:'-"
~ H.. U':'
((t~ -nG...xY\e... -\~ '~e..(",<IC~ \V\O{"(}5D{\- l l,~e.. en GtOO
~^ YY1(J\-<) "1:..<'L~E:- '-'\ <"'2.VQ.:v<2.li"\~ <;"nuc-~-cd. ~ ~u-"()e.c~ A~
-c'~l ~~~.l~~~cJ'c'<2~~~ +O~~
~<..eA (}..Q,ve 4'e m~a~ l
~
\~ ~. '0c,,-~ w~~e..lu\ d-e..u.Ql~~12ti. b,thQC\.l'\Q..L~ -\c ~Q.td_
-^Uidm\~ aM- ~lle.. ~t ~ ~ ~ l'.~ d.-
o ('OJ...LcccAJ ~ C:.o()~\cJ...Qr' \('(). 0--':". u\:J Vy\. ~
\ ')
~ rb\
~~~\no0 I
J
\-€-b~~rrd\d'\ tU~~
.t~
"\
bOQ v\ -\bl' YVA 4-u k2D
i\-:;;~'-\o i\t 1)), ~\ u..V\t. ~G. D ~ Q ha.tC)..fu., 1--L (Pia Ylj
Q !.bF* (L(i>(~~)~\Q.. f^.l~'f19~~\~ C"A 10~ ~~--
, << /
I ' ,I
. >
.
WL-DI\ ~W_Jf\\ C\.x'lCl ~\l(::h.L:\9... ~\J~G\ lL42.~~ 6; ~\A...L G..c-CC,-)
'\ \,
5LL6~d Glu.! C~) \\~ ~'~~ UsDSL L.,L,'d.O ,0 ~e.v!cl. '-to o~
. '~~CU,.Q..1..~__~~&\.Ul i.~"\ r:0U.r 1'1 ~~ \ -., v{(D~C--"~ /
_St.lh~-j. 6l(\) (ch) \ h..o-_~~ U4S-- ~ '\Q;L~~f'(~d)Od.G...J:tq
_u \..LC'.,; ~J\,L;~~\ ()\."Qr\)u..A(:lC.-1/1
, . ~~I \~ L ~ -tD q03. u.:.o...-u.1
\' ,cc..::h.cY1 ~ 0-
f" ('~f) '~j) ~~j ~V'\ \Yo
::::s-~,.::=.~(cc.) I
~\.Q./V1CI~. ~O\. oS' v iL o/<"oQ:>-"'1D d M.J D
\'\.e ~0tJ.J::Llul \iV'\ CAJ. CUJ9.. ~\LQ i 1\ ~"){\C~M o~
flililLl'.; 'LV\O~O[X~. A\::::c, tU(\dOA \'dOLO'S ,0LLl':x:lu.).J (~
~ Cii.Ll 0.. 8'Dr}J tt ~
~ l ~\Sl.. \cu,"Cl Of\D-. V\~ ~'<2Qro ~ ~
\CU'l !\.lM ~ ~ {f'Q..:)Q;~. -rG.e~€-.
~ r,\m{~ r~ II \ Q ~~()1('~ '~f'\ ~ ~ rri:"""d~
Ol.~~ ~~~~~~ =~~~:; ~:::r:;:::g.
Yl
-\,(,frq~\~) 1 ['~Q.,\ :S~'Pt1jl J €..-t~
\
0l0\ u..,QSL. ~\ ~
: Qo.:QC <s ~~ill'\O ~~ \\Clf\ \ef\().AClvr({~s.
1\ '<'f\ O..YI ~\..DIvd) ~^-.OJ'd c..t::-(\-\-CCi) tCuIld ~~,
. P . 11-0 e.;.\,-^ "0\-\D1fl.:t l>-~ 0i.dy, ~V16~ .
\ \ ..... \)
0_ .~~. On ~--,.Jcli.Li.0~0Q.\ v....a.L.~.r~ cnnCOJr{\ ~\
...l..
[lsL~ c~ JU.l~.rY\C\ \ wid, O-.WQL:yo\.Q.(1-\. Oc&..tmd.lY1CJL
\;) ()t I dC.o .) ~ u..,~ '\ 'Ai ~ ~ 0-- \:> \j 0 Q..o...Y"\ oY\..~
~ '\~ '-\-t~ atrj~J? f~eJ{'f\CYl1.~
(~CLt-t\L~\L1..n"2> o.se... ~l":)~ c1 .\o..~ ~.Q..
~\)~ ,"",> '(I~~d t:A 1?~~QCirl&.r ~
. ~~, ~ \l r\ C()
~ ~Q ~~
~ ~ ~ '^-~~ ~\\ lli~ :3
. \ X .
\ .'. '....l
). ~ . <1O..J ~ ~ ~(\ ~,dJ! Ao.:tu.'\\r)
~\..9.... ~
6r
:v
~o
1t -'..-
SHOREWOOD HOUSING PETITION
('1:"1:) - 3 1993
We urge the Planning Commission and the City Council to review Shorewood's housing
survey completed in 1991. We believe you will agree that the results of this survey show
that there is indeed a need for affordable housing for senior citizens in our community. We
urge the council to seriously consider the affordable housing units that are being proposed
for the area near Eureka Road and Seamans Drive.
~b~~~
)J{).,
~ S1LJ\?
~~t!-~f3~~ 574'<!/ e~~_ Ji~
I .
"7'1 .... ,)
;;JfA--~~~,?~
Name
11~~2/~;(J )'clvp>tdf
fZ? I 1:'
f 6--e~ 0:(, U
,,"j---
17:L -r
,/ if ~.-bt..<-1J.--J'-,r..I
Y~UL~ f I C~~-~
Address
Phone
-1 "2 cf'-'7' ,', ' .
r-..... .1 4 ~" _7
. / ~ LJ-d:,..{./!>t.t. <'-J l.t,,V/}/z,,,:.... -<:::1t....-zA..'(
~j
-r .d /
G 17~ vV6-u'
77Lj - 7,1 $L'
ij;7. _ 38 o~
L;-
))~ g / () 7'f/14./"0n-X..JLa- (. 0 /U...~
~;l '// 73/(f
fij.33
~!/I
v-1 3 '7 3 6
f.-Y.LJ.~ 9-7'1 - 22- 2-,
N~/-.t ~ S...t:cuttJucf) ~7 ~ ,.--t~~
,)
v
S1/~~
w~ tf\-tL )h~~~ i...J-1Y- - s367)
'-I7Y-;)~
cv)o .;:~. , ~'-C>I,
J..0(}. , ( ~/ ,'\-) CL
t< 6 ~ / C). YJLivv ?/Y/ Q . ~~I
n.
..,. </ 9~b r
tf 11/- PC)
.. >
We urge the Planning Commission and the City Council to review Shorewood's housing
survey completed in 1991. We believe you will agree that the results of this survey show
that there is indeed a need for affordable housing for senior citizens In our community. We
urge the council to seriously consider the affordable housing units that are being proposed
for the area near Eureka Road and Seamans Drive.
Name
Address
Phone
~.
olt
~flJJ
/7
;/7// f
h (1"/,,/ /. "
.10 r ;L4~.T.
j/']/;
,q~'
~~-?~1
Y/f'gJK~
:zt-F9Yr
~75!-rllf~
7Y/Py):]
\"":- "L
'17 JI-- :? / .f'.l
dJn
~t if:, t:
~< d#
LJ 7" -{, Y&:Jr
,~u .,r~
JI
~~ Ae/~'
!J
II
r(
.(
I (
S-~^tJ ~ rfJrftlx
1-7'(--'3 r~{.,
.
We urge the Planning Commission and the City Council to review Shorewood's housing
survey completed In 1991. We believe you will agree that the results of this survey show
that there Is indeed a need for affordable housing for senior citizens in our community. We
urge the council to seriously consider the affordable housing units that are being proposed
for the area near Eureka Road and Seamans Drive.
~
A
Name Address Phone
'-"':/l /~7/~c~,----/ ~69!:?;- I ; ~! ~ f 7'1-77<9,
L~~.....-7'...t-...-pL"l
~ ~ A."' ~ J
I ,/\ cr. s(; r~: ~ i.{7 I-F) X'.> ~
1M ",JJ. .}c H . . ( '/-L I: I
/~t.~.H.. " 6' !;~ f"--6' ........
) \....A.,;......- -" ; '. . ~~~"
-' U ' ,
/ MLL "'-d- ",t'..::; A'.:>
/diL; i>Jiit '- 4.{ la, <'- ~/ .? /" no j, c. L . <j-?y /!-::>..
,=.; ([ c.';<' ) r.L-LJ L"ra.o.lU{~ / -.....)-.J&
- ( .
...J
1\ ~ .-{:' t g'-A+- c~ /j 1.<41- r2~ r./'7 f-{'f>' 71
!, L
I( I
/'~ ~ " '( I( i( 4
I~
s.. <- ~
.
.