DEEPHAVEN CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY,
FEBRUARY 6, 2006
7:00 P.M.
PAGE 1
1.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Anderson called the meeting to order at
7:00 p.m.
John Wheaton
STAFF: City Administrator Dana Young,
Police Chief Virgil Gustafson, City Attorney Jerry Gilligan and Zoning
Coordinator Gus Karpas
2.
APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA
Motion
by Councilmember Crockett to approve the consent agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Kask. Motion carried 5-0. The following consent items were approved:
a) Minutes of January 5, 2006.
b) Verifieds.
c) Resolution No. 03-06,
Authorizing the Extension of the EPDB License Agreement.
d) Appointment of Woody
Woodburn as 2006 Park Committee Chairman and Jennifer Young as 2006 Park
Committee Vice-Chairwomen.
e) Appointment of David Paulson
as 2006 Boat Committee Chairman and Pete Onstad as 2006 Boat Committee
Vice-Chairman.
f)
Appointment of Daniel Dyb as 2006 Planning Commission Chairman and
Warren Nelson as 2006 Planning Commission Vice-Chairman.
g) Appointment of Josh Sparber
to the Planning Commission to serve a term of office that expires on April
2007.
3.
MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Mayor
Anderson opened the Matters from the Floor portion of the meeting.
Sue
Dodson, representing the South Tonka League of Women Voters, was present to
present the Community Handbook of Information & Services to the
Council. She stated that the handbook
was a collaborative effort with the Minnetonka Family Collaboration and is
available to all residents with children attending the Minnetonka Public
schools. She stated that the handbook is
a resource of useful information particularly for new residents.
4.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A.
Special Use Permit –
Deephaven Education Center, 4584 Vine Hill Road (R-2, 40,000). A
request for a Special Use Permit to construct one hundred and thirty-five square feet of signage in the form of fabric awnings over the front entryway. It was noted that there wasn’t anyone present to represent Deephaven Education Center in this request.
Councilmember Kask stated that he was unclear from the material on whether the awnings were intended to be lit. Councilmember Crockett stated that there would be no additional lighting other than what currently might be present within the cement overhang to light the stairs and the doorway. She added that the awnings would be a royal blue color with white lettering.
Councilmember Kask asked if Deephaven Education Center was still considering the installation of a monument sign. Councilmember Crockett stated that the LED sign was denied by the Council and understood that this awning is intended to replace the monument sign.
Councilmember Skrede asked for a clarification on which of the four signs included in the information packet had been selected. Councilmember Crockett stated that the sign in the lower left corner of the handout was the final selection.
Mayor Anderson asked Councilmember Crockett for a report from the Planning Commission on this request. Councilmember Crockett stated that the Planning Commission had unanimously accepted the proposal with the acknowledgement that the Deephaven Education Center needed an awning in the front of their building to help identify the building.
Further discussion was held on the attempt to clarify the proposed size of the awning and whether it was seven or four feet in height. Councilmember Crockett moved to table further discussion on this request until the dimensions of the awning can be verified. Seconded by Councilmember Skrede. Motion carried 5-0.
B.
Variance – Andy and Barbi
Mahoney, 19390 Walden Trail (R-2, 40,000). A request for a
variance to rebuild a portion of an existing non-conforming structure located within the required side yard setback. The requested variance is for seven feet, six inches of the required twenty-five foot side yard setback.
David Steingas, of Steiner and Koppleman, stated he was present to represent the Mahoney’s with their request before the City Council. He stated that the purpose of their request is to repair an existing den and add a second story to increase the size of a bathroom. He added that all would be built within the existing footprint. Councilmember Skrede asked if there were copies of letters from the Mahoney’s neighbors demonstrating support for the project? Zoning Coordinator Karpas stated that all the neighbors have been notified about the request and no one chose to comment on the request.
Mayor Anderson noted that the City Council usually permits latitude to homeowners if construction is proposed within the existing footprint. He opened the meeting to any public comments. Hearing no comments, the public hearing was closed.
Councilmember Kask moved to approve a variance permitting a north side yard setback of 17’6” to permit the reconstruction of the den and a second story addition due to the hardship that the property is in need of repair, the proposed construction would be within the existing footprint and the building would not further encroach into the side yard setback. Seconded by Councilmember Wheaton. Motion carried 5-0.
C.
Rezoning – David Wheaton,
20760 Linwood Road (R-2, 40,000). A request to rezone eight
properties along Linwood Road from R-2 Single Family to R-3 Single Family.
Councilmember John Wheaton stated that he intends to obstain from voting on this request due to his relationship with the applicant.
David Wheaton, 20760 Linwood Road, stated that he is here to speak on behalf of himself and the Brattain’s (20700 & 20710 Linwood Road), the Shaw’s (20730 & 20740 Linwood Road), and the Wyard (20720 Linwood Road). He stated that their request is to rezone eight properties along Linwood Road from R-2 Single Family Residential to R-3 Single Family Residential. He stated that the Lareau’s (20750 Linwood Road) and the Jolstad’s (20770 Linwood Road) oppose the proposed rezoning of their property.
David Wheaton stated that there are three compelling reasons why these properties should be rezoned to R-3 Single Family. These reasons are due to the history of the properties, the existing size and dimensions of the properties and for reasons of equity. He summarized the history of the properties as follows:
· Pre-1969 – Only the properties owned by Jolstad, Lareau and Brattain were existing prior to 1969.
· 1969 – Platted as R-3 Single Family Residential.
· 1970 – Shaw home was constructed with 15’ side yard setbacks.
· 1973 – Properties rezoned as R-2 Single Family Residential.
· 1981 – Appraisal of Wheaton property at 20760 Linwood Road shown as R-3 Single Family Residential property.
· 1976-1986 – Properties platted on the east side of Linwood Road.
David Wheaton stated that he didn’t believe that the original zoning of R-3 Single Family ever changed or there certainly isn’t any evidence that the zoning had been changed.
He stated that the size of these eight lots are more typical of lots within an R-3 District than an R-2 District in terms of lot area, lake frontage and existing side setbacks. He stated that the minimum lot area in an R-2 District is 40,000 S.F. and the minimum lot area in an R-3 District is 20,000 S.F. He stated that of the eight lots proposed for rezoning, only two of the lots exceed 40,000 S.F. and the remainders are between 29,000 S.F. and 38,000 S.F.. He stated that minimum lot area should mean just that, a minimum.
He stated that in terms of existing side yard setbacks, the Jolstad’s were currently 16’ from the north side lot line and 17’ from the south side lot line, the Shaw’s were currently 15’ from the side lot line and the Brattain’s were only 10’ from the side lot line.
He compared the lake frontage of the Linwood Road properties with the lake frontage of certain homes on Cottagewood Avenue and Lakeview Avenue and stated that the Linwood Road properties had significantly less lake frontage than these R-3 zoned properties. He stated that the current R-2 setback requirements are too restrictive for the size of these lots. He stated that setbacks in an R-2 District require 50% of the lot width to be side setbacks which severely impact the long and narrow lots in this area. He added the Deephaven Comprehensive Plan designate these lots as Residential Low Density which require a 60,000 square foot minimum. He stated that these lots are much closer to a Residential Medium Density, which requires only a 20,000 square foot minimum.
David Wheaton stated that the final issue was one of equity. He stated that the history and dimensions of these properties are similar to other R-3 zoned properties and the properties have the same or less lake frontage than most other R-3 zoned lakeshore lots. He stated that it is inequitable that we can’t use our properties like other similarly sized R-3 zoned lots.
Mr. Wheaton stated that there were a number of arguments that have been raised in opposition to rezoning these eight properties to R-3 Single Family. He stated that some have argued that the density in this area will increase due to the rezoning. He stated that the density will actually go down due to the reduction in the allowable building pad from 6,000 S.F. to 4,500 S.F.
He stated that he has heard the argument that the applicants knew their property was zoned R-2 when they bought it. He stated that this was an irrelevant argument because the inherent inequity should be rectified.
He stated that he has heard that he should apply for a variance instead of a rezoning. He stated that variances are arbitrary and have caused difficulties in his neighborhood in the past.
He stated that he has heard the argument that this would cause a precedence throughout the City. He stated that these properties have a unique history and since the properties were zoned R-3 before they were subsequently changed to R-2.
And finally, he stated that he has heard the argument that these lots are still buildable. He stated that he doesn’t think these lots were platted as they were intended to be used.
In closing, he stated that the Council should rectify the inequity by designating these lots with an R-3 zoning. He stated that he recognized that this was a lot of information for the Council to digest and stated that he could certainly understand if the Council needed additional time to look at this matter more fully.
Mayor Anderson opened the meeting to comments from the public.
David Steingas, 19555 Cedarhurst, stated that the majority of the land transactions occurred after the zoning was established in 1973. He stated that all the property owners should have realized what the zoning was before they bought the property.
Doug Jolstad, 20770 Linwood Road, stated that he opposes the rezoning request for the same reasons raised by David Steingas, the residents knew which houses were zoned R-3 and those zoned R-2. He stated that a change of zoning to R-3 would change his original understanding under which they bought their house. He stated that everybody else in the neighborhood, with the exception of the Shaw’s, purchased their lots after the zoning change in 1973.
He stated that he is also concerned with the change in density that this rezoning would cause, particularly in the front and side yard setbacks. He stated that he understands David Wheaton’s motivation to build a wider house but everyone else objected to his variance request in 2001 when he wanted to build his garage as close to the side lot line that would now be permitted under an R-3 District. He stated that with the Council’s permission, he would like to read actual quotes that were made by his neighbors when they originally objected to his request for a variance in 2001. He stated that their comments are pertinent to tonight’s discussion regarding their request for rezoning.
He stated that the Wyards wrote “we hope that our communication efforts will be complete enough and that you will decide to uphold the R-2 zoning…”, “the quality and beauty of our neighboring lot on the north side will be severely compromised”, “virtually eliminate any vista to the south that the home could have had if the zoning laws were observed”, and “It would seem that one purpose of a zoning ordinance is to protect an appropriate area of green space in a neighborhood where that green space can be preserved without creating undue hardship”. He added that Gary Wyard spoke of “the financial detriment it would create to their property”.
Doug Jolstad stated that Clint and Lois Shaw wrote to “keep the integrity of the zoning of the Linwood area intact by not granting this variance. All of the lots in the surrounding Linwood development are zoned R-2. Therefore, all nearby properties have observed the setback and hardcover requirements of R-2 zoning once it was put into place”, “This request asks for a major change in the zoning concept that was put into place for Linwood in 1973 and has been observed since”, and “Deephaven is a special place, because the unique natural beauty of the area is respectfully maintained through its zoning laws”. He added that Clint Shaw also stated “We have zoning rules to conform to and it seems once a tradition is broken it could change the character of the neighborhood. He would like to see the neighborhood left as it is now”.
Doug Jolstad stated that Don and Jane Brattain wrote that “Our interest is purely in preserving the charm and character of Cottagewood that can only exist with ample green space, setbacks and building restrictions that are in keeping with the neighborhood that Cottagewood has always been. We have all seen the deterioration of other quaint neighborhoods; it is incumbent upon us all as concerned citizens of Cottagewood to protect our community”.
Doug Jolstad concluded his comments by stating that when you buy something and know what the rules are, the rules shouldn’t be changed. He stated that the rezoning would be financially detrimental to his property if approved.
Gary Wyard, 20720 Linwood Road, stated that there was a difference in the variance request submitted by the Jolstad’s in 2001. He stated that the Jolstad’s have a large house and the request would have had a significant effect on the neighborhood. He stated that he has tried to be a responsible neighbor by maintaining the aesthetics of his vacant lot. He stated that many of his neighbors have enjoyed the view across his vacant lot and he has not planted bushes on his vacant lot or put up a fence, which he could have done. He stated that the rezoning would increase the hardcover requirements on his property, establish reasonable size and construction standards, and permit the property owners to enjoy the same rights as property owners of similar sized property.
David Wirth stated that he was an attorney representing Richard and Thelma Lareau, and that he supported the Zoning Coordinator’s report on the rezoning request. He stated that the decrease in the side setbacks will increase density and the change to R-3 would also change how the Lareau’s would be able to use their property in the future as the building pad would be reduced from 6,000 S.F. to 4,500 S.F. He stated that the vacant properties could be combined and subdivided which would add to the density. He stated that the City’s Comprehensive Plan would need to be amended, requiring a public hearing, before action could be taken on the rezoning request. He added that the history of the property is irrelevant to the Lareau’s purchase of the property as R-2 and the Lareau’s had certain expectations with this specific zoning and that the issue regarding equity should also apply to the Lareau’s.
Richard Diamond stated that he was an attorney representing the four property owners requesting the rezoning. He stated that the Council did not need to change the zoning with this request, the Council simply needed to declare that the properties have not been properly rezoned and restore it back to its original zoning of R-3. He stated that there is absolutely no proof on the record that it was rezoned to R-2. Mayor Anderson commented that the records can’t absolutely confirm whether it was zoned R-2 or R-3 prior to 1973.
Zoning Coordinator Gus Karpas stated that upon his review of the Planning Commission and City Council minutes during discussions on the original plat of this area in 1969, there was a discussion that the one-acre minimum requirement was not being met. He stated that this gives a strong indication that the one acre minimum was in effect and that the area was zoned R-2. He added that there was also discussion over the fact that one of the lot lines could not be readjusted to meet the one acre standard because the lot had already been sold.
City Attorney Jerry Gilligan confirmed that the 1969 Planning Commission minutes do refer to one-acre lots and that if the Council did approve the rezoning there would have to be a minor amendment to the Comprehensive Plan.
David Wheaton stated that if there were one-acre minimum standards prior to 1973, the lots did not comply with the one acre standard.
Councilmember Keith Kask stated that he had been a member of the Planning Commission since 1983 and these parcels were identified on a 1982 Zoning Map as R-2.
City Attorney Jerry Gilligan commented that the appraisal of David Wheaton’s property in 1982 as R-3 should have no bearing on the Council’s decision. He stated that it was absolutely clear that the properties were zoned R-2 after 1973. David Wheaton commented that that is not the way that zoning should be determined.
Bruce Wheaton, 20045 Cottagewood Avenue, referring to a map of the area, stated that the southernmost lot on the west side of Linwood Road is actually zoned R-3 but is shown on the map as R-2. He stated that it is his contention that the east lots on Linwood Road were zoned R-2 and that an error was made in including the west lots as R-2 as well.
Mayor Anderson stated that he thought that the western lots on Linwood Roads would have to be zoned R-2 because of their size. Zoning Coordinator Karpas stated that the error regarding the southernmost lot was discovered when the Schmidts purchased this property and that the correct zoning designation was determined by reviewing the legal descriptions.
Jim Engstrom, 20665 Bayview Court, stated that he objected to the zoning change. He stated that he is concerned with the potential consolidation of five lots under an R-3 designation that could result in 200,000 S.F. of property available to be subdivided. He stated that he would like safeguards that this property would not be split into eight or ten lots.
Vicki Wyard, 20720 Linwood Road, stated that people have purchased their property under certain rules, both now and in 1968 or 1969. She stated that her father owned many lots and spent many hours with the City Council replatting these lots. She stated that the original plat was developed around the two existing homes, the Shaw’s and Jolstads, both that have 15’ side setbacks. She stated that when people talk about their request changing the rules weren’t with the City Council for all those hours. She noted that the western lots on Linwood Road are marked with the word exception, which she felt was shown as such because they were not considered with the other eastern lots. She stated that there was no written history but she was there during most of the early discussion. She stated that the first notification that she received that her property was zoned R-2 was when she came in to City Hall for a building permit. She added that she has been waiting a long time to see this issue rectified.
Bob Gerlicher, 4540 Linwood Lane, stated that these are wonderful people involved with this request but people move and sell their property all the time. He stated that he was concerned in with the possibility of a subdivision in the future. He stated that David Wheaton should have known the zoning of his property before he purchased it.
Gary Wyard, 20720 Linwood Road, stated that people ask for variances all the time even when they know the zoning. He stated that he has no intention to consolidate or make his lots smaller, although they might change their minds if the zoning is kept at R-2.
Don Brattain, 20700 Linwood Road, stated that Shaw’s house is currently only 15’ from the line. He stated that he was reviewing their legal records to see if the zoning of their parcel was identified but haven’t had any luck as of yet. He added that he would support the fact that they would not subdivide their lots.
Clint Shaw, 20730 Linwood Road, stated that they have had their vacant lot for a number of years and it has cost them $30,000 per year in taxes. He stated that all they are asking for is a justified alignment. He stated that both the Jolstads and Lareaus are 15’ from the side lot line and now they want to withhold the same request from Mr. Wheaton. He stated that all he is requesting is an equitable realignment that fits the size of the properties. He stated that anyone who buys these expensive lots would want the opportunity to build larger than the 50’ side setbacks.
David Steingas, 19555 Cedarhurst, asked what would happen to the other lots that are zoned R-2 and whether they would get to change their zoning designation.
Mayor Anderson thanked everyone for their contribution to the discussion, closed the public hearing and asked the Council if they had any comments.
Councilmember Skrede stated that he would like some clarification on some of the discrepancies in some of the maps and lot layouts. Zoning Coordinator Karpas stated that David Wheaton is showing a more accurate representation of the lots and that there are 8 parcels rather than the 7 that are shown in the information packet.
Councilmember Crockett stated that there is a lot of information to digest and would also like some clarification on some of the issues and the chance to more carefully evaluate all the claims made this evening in order to determine an appropriate direction. She stated that she felt it was important to discuss the importance of the history of the lot versus what do we want the zoning to be. She stated that even if it is determined that the history supports the applicant’s position, perhaps an R-2 zoning designation is still what we think it should be.
Mayor Anderson stated that these issues come before the Council all the time. He stated that it is very rare that lots actually meet the minimum area requirement since lots are a hodge podge of all different sizes throughout Deephaven. He stated that this is the reason why most councils have dealt with so many variances. He stated that the minimum area requirement for an R-2 is 40,000 S.F. and 20,000 S.F. for an R-3 district and most of the lots they are considering tonight are 30,000 S.F. or more. He stated that he could understand why these properties were designated R-2. He added that the prior council might have designated it R-2 to control density and limit the subdivision of the properties. He stated that the Council is familiar with dealing with variances and the applicants are asking for a rezoning which is something very difficult for the Council to consider.
Councilmember Skrede stated that it would be difficult to ask everyone to attend future meetings on this issue so he stated that it would be considerate if the Council would ask questions of the public now. Mayor Anderson agreed that he would prefer to decide the issue now but would be willing to table the issue if necessary.
Vicki Wyard, 20720 Linwood Road, stated that this is a unique situation with a lot of factual information to absorb. She stated that she would be happy to answer any questions from the Council. She stated that although the Council is more familiar with dealing with variances, variances depend on the Council’s that are currently in power. She stated that some Council’s would be agreeable to review Jolstad’s variance request, others have not been. She stated that this is the reason for our rezoning request. She stated that somebody changed the rules back in 1973 after she had been working with the Council four years earlier. She stated that her primary objection to Jolstad’s variance was the fact that his request would have resulted in a very long brick wall next to her property. She stated that every Council interpret variances differently.
Gary Wyard, 20720 Linwood Road, stated that the recent Council has been generous in their review of variance requests while other Councils have been a real hodge podge. He stated that he and the rest of the applicants are trying to avoid the variance process.
Councilmember Kask stated that there are people on both sides of this issue and that rezoning is a very difficult issue to consider. He stated that he has not seen a rezoning request since he first joined the Planning Commission in 1983. He added that the defacto zoning of this area since 1973 has been as an R-2 district. He stated that these properties are closer in size to an R-2 rather than an R-3 district. He added that he can’t find true fairness in this matter and in the interest of consistency would be very reluctant to consider rezoning of this area.
Clint Shaw, 20730 Linwood Road, stated that the current Council is refreshingly open-minded and would ask that they keep in mind the economics of these lots. He stated that they are worth $2 million on up and they would be hard to sell if homes are limited to 50’ in width. He stated that this is really at the heart of their need and they are not interested in subdividing but believe 50’ setbacks restricts the potential sale of the properties.
Mayor Anderson stated that it might be hard for everyone to appreciate but this is not an unusual situation in Deephaven. It is, in fact, very typical. He stated that the only hard facts are available from 1973 and forward. He stated that rarely do we have variance requests that receive a lot of objections with the exception of this area of Linwood. He stated that these types of requests seem to be an emotional issue for this portion of Deephaven.
Councilmember Skrede stated that sooner or later we need to address the applicant’s request to consider the change of zoning from R-2 to R-3. He stated that we have to consider what is the proper zoning district for this area as opposed to what was intended pre-1973.
Councilmember Crockett agreed and stated that the Council had looked at the rezoning of the Back Bay and ending up changing the lakeyard setback rather than rezoning the entire area.
Mayor Anderson stated that the issue in the Back Bay was very different in that it involved a definition of a lake that was actually 400’ of weeds. He stated that prior to looking at or hearing all this testimony, he felt the best fit for this area is R-2.
David Wheaton stated that there is a 125’ lake frontage requirement for an R-2 district and asked how many lots within the area that is requested for rezoning this 125’ requirement? Mayor Anderson stated that none of the lots meet this requirement but that he still feels that these lots most closely fit an R-2 district.
Skip Jewett, 4290 Cottonwood Lane, stated that if these properties are rezoned to R-3, the Council would have to consider changing the zoning of all R-2 properties.
Mayor Anderson asked the Council if they would like to make the decision regarding the rezoning tonight? Councilmember Skrede, Kask and Mayor Anderson all indicated that they were prepared to make a decision tonight. Councilmember Wheaton reiterated that he would obstain from voting. He also asked if there was a question of fact as to whether the properties are currently zoned R-2. Attorney Jerry Gilligan stated that it is clear that the properties have been zoned R-2 since 1973 and the request should be treated as a rezoning rather than the Council declaring the zoning to have remained R-3 as suggested by the applicant’s attorney.
Gary Wyard, 20720 Linwood Road, asked if this meant the properties are zoned R-2 by defacto. Attorney Gilligan reiterated that yes, the zoning district has been clearly established as R-2 since 1973. Mayor Anderson stated that there was no official action of rezoning of this area by the Council in 1973 only that this area has clearly been zoned R-2 since that time.
Councilmember Kask moved to affirm that the eight parcels are zoned R-2 Single Family Residential and to deny the applicant’s request for rezoning it to R-3 Single Family Residential. Seconded by Councilmember Skrede. Councilmembers Wheaton and Crockett abstained. Motion carried 3-0-2.
5.
NEW BUSINESS
A.
Approve Six Month
Probationary Period (
Motion
by Councilmember Skrede to approve the successful completion of the six-month
probationary period of
B.
Review City Fiscal Policy
Administrator
Young presented the City Fiscal Policy for Council review.
C.
Purchase of New Council
Chairs & Table
Administrator
Young stated that the Capital Improvement Fund budget has included the purchase
of a new council table and chairs since 2003 but have never been purchased due
to a fondness for the old council table.
He asked if the Council would like staff to pursue the purchase of these
items for this year, or if not, staff would recommend the use of a portion of
the funding for these items towards the purchase of six file cabinets for the
storage of files in the City Hall meeting room.
The
Council requested that City Staff provide costs and selections on 10 council
chairs and approved the purchase of six file cabinets.
6.
DEPARTMENT REPORTS
A.
Police Department
Police
Chief Gustafson provided an update on recent department activities. He stated that January had been a quiet month
and part-time employee Jim Nolen was making excellent progress on clearing up
the backlog of paperwork. He stated that
Officer Bridget Joyce was in the process of finishing up CounterAct at St.
Therese for the season. He stated that
the new Ford Expedition experienced engine failure and was informed by Ford
Motor Company that they would stand behind the vehicle. He stated that a decision would be made on
whether the vehicle will receive a rebuilt engine or a completely new
engine. He stated that he would be
pushing for a new engine with a new warranty that goes into effect after the
new engine is installed.
B.
Excelsior Fire District
Councilmember
Skrede provided an update on recent district activities. He stated the EFD Board will be meeting at
5:00 p.m. on February 9th at the East Side Station to continue
discussion on the hiring of a new Fire Chief.
He stated that until a new Fire Chief is hired, Dana George has been
appointed as Interim Chief. He stated
that further discussion on this matter has included whether to hire an internal
or external candidate, hiring a facilitator to assist with the hiring process,
and whether to establish a residency requirement for the new Chief. Mayor Anderson stated that he thought it
would be more prudent to require the new Chief to live within a certain number
of miles from the District rather than actually require the Chief to reside
within the District. He noted that there
are a number of EFD firefighters that actually live in Minnetonka or
Chanhassen.
C.
Public Works
City
Administrator Young provided an update on the monthly report of public work
activities, a summary of the January 11 and February 1, 2006 Public Works
Committee meetings and on a petition from several residents on Eastwood Road
objecting to the proposed improvements planned for Eastwood Road by the City of
Minnetonka.
Councilmember
Wheaton commended the Public Works crew for the maintenance of the ice rinks
this season. Both Councilmember Crockett
and Wheaton requested that the crew keep flooding the rinks through the end of
February if the weather cooperates.
D.
Administration
Administrator
Young provided a brief summary of 2005 revenues and expenditures for each City
Fund; informed the Council of a meeting that had been held with an individual
who expressed interest in constructing a cell tower in Deephaven; provided a
brief update on the Wireless Internet meeting that had been sponsored by the
LMCC on January 12th; provided notification of a proposed Council
Work Session on February 23rd to review the preliminary dock plans
for St. Louis Bay and Carson’s Bay and to review the preliminary feasibility
report on the Storm Water Project; and an update on two Finance Committee
meetings that were held on group health proposals and on Senior Community
Services.
E. Adjournment
Respectfully
submitted,
Dana
H. Young
City
Administrator