Loading...
101308 CC Reg AgPCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2008 AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call 5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD SOUTHSHORE CENTER 7:00 P.M. Mayor Lizee Woodruff Turgeon Bailey Wellens 2. 3. B. Review Agenda APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, September 22, 2008 (Att. -Minutes) B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, September 22, 2008 (Att.- Minutes) CONSENT AGENDA -Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions Therein: NOTE: Give the public an opportunity to request an item be removed from the Consent Agenda. Comments can be taken or questions asked following removal from Consent Agenda. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List (Att.- Claims List) B. Approval of City Hall Construction Project Pay Request No. 1 (Att. -Pay Request) C. City Clerk's License List -Tobacco License Renewals (Att. -Deputy Clerk's memorandum, Resolution) D. Kids Voting Proclamation (Att. -Deputy Clerk's memorandum, Proclamation) E. Minnewashta Elementary School CUP (Att. -Resolution) 1. Applicant: Minnetonka School District 276 2. Location: 26410 and 26550 Smithtown Road F. Upper Minnetonka Yacht Club (Att. -Administrator's memorandum) 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken.) CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA -OCTOBER 13, 2008 PAGE 2 OF 2 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. LMCC 2009 Budget Presentation by Sally Koenecke, LMCC Executive Director (Att. - Budget) 6. PUBLIC HEARING 7. PARKS A. Tennis Courts Proposed Fees (Att. -Engineer's memorandum) 8. PLANNING -Report by Representative 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Special Deer Removal Permit for the Minnetonka Country Club (Att. -Administrator's memorandum) B. Request for Extension of Time re: Ivy Lane Hazardous Building (Att. -Planning Director's memorandum) C. Lift Station #12 -Christmas Lake Point (Att. -Administrator's memorandum) D. Street Light Request -Virginia Cove/Smithtown Road Intersection(Att. -Planning Director's memorandum) E. Audit Services Appointment 2008 - 2010 (Att. -Finance Director's memorandum) F. Telephone System Assessment (Att. -Administrator's memorandum) 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. First Draft Illicit Discharge Ordinance (Att. -Engineer's memorandum) B. Request for Patching and Seal Coating Costs for Boulder Bridge Road (Att. -Director of Public Works' memorandum) 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff 1. City Hall Construction Update B. Mayor & City Council 12. ADJOURN Cfl't OF ~ SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday, 13 October 2008 A 6:00 p.m. Work Session is scheduled this evening. Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval. Agenda Item #3B: The first pay request for the City Hall remodeling project. Agenda Item #3C: This Resolution issues the annual license for the sale of tobacco products to the following three establishments in Shorewood: Cub Foods, Holiday Station store, Oasis Market. The current licenses expire on October 31, 2008. All applicants have .submitted appropriate documentation for license renewals. The renewal license period is November 1, 2007 to October 31, 2008. There have been no violations reported to date during the past year for the three establishments applying for a license. Agenda Item #3D: Minnetonka Public Schools has requested the City participate in the "Kids Voting Minnesota" program - a program which allows children in K-12 to go to the polls on Election Day and actually cast their vote at a polling table just for the children. Arrangements have been made to provide space at each of the four mainland polling locations in the City of Shorewood for "Kids Voting". Minnetonka Public Schools is arranging for volunteer staff at each polling location. A motion adopting the Kids Voting Proclamation is recommended. Agenda Item #3E: This Resolution approves a Conditional Use Permit for the Phase II expansion of Minnewashta Elementary School which includes additional classrooms, gymnasium, and on-site parking. Agenda Item #3F: Authorization to proceed with an appeal in the UMYC case. Agenda Item #SA: Sally Koenecke, LMCC Executive birector, will be present this evening to provide the 2009 LMCC budget presentation. Agenda Item #7A: The Park Commission recommends the City Council adopt a tennis court reservation addition to the park facility reservation policy and establish a fee in 2009. Agenda Item #9A: In 2006 and 2007, the Minnetonka Country Club Association, Inc. (MCCA) requested a special permit for deer removal from the Department of Natural ®~ ~®~® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Executive Summary -City Council Meeting of October 13, 2008 Page 2 of 2 Resources (DNR). To meet DNR requirements, the city adopted an ordinance in 2006 to amend the city code to allow for this activity. The MCCA has again requested a special permit for deer removal this winter. Staff recommends that Council approve the 2008 deer management plan, which is unchanged from 2006; direct Staff to apply for a special permit for deer removal from the DNR; and approve the agreement with the MCCA for deer removal from its property at 24575 Smithtown Road. Agenda Item #9B: A representative of the hazardous building at 21045 Ivy Lane is requesting additional time to resolve issues at the site. Agenda Item #9C: A request was made to move the vent pipe for lift station #12 at the September 22, 2008 council meeting. The council denied this request and the resident making the request is asking the Council to reconsider their decision as she was unable to make the first meeting and felt the issue was not properly represented. Agenda Item #9D: The residents of Lake Virginia Woods are requesting the installation of a street light at the intersection of Virginia Cove and Smithtown Road. Agenda Item #9E: The City received four (4) proposals in the recent Audit Services RFP process. The Audit Selection Committee (comprised of Dick Woodruff, Brian Heck, and Bonnie Burton) recommends the Council appoint the firm of Abdo Eick & Meyers, LLP as the City's independent auditor for the period 2008 -2010. This firm submitted the lowest quote for both the 2008 annual audit and the combined total 3-year bid. Agenda Item #9F: An assessment of the city hall telephone system is provided for discussion; staff is recommending the preparation of a RFP for voice and data services and an RFP for equipment and to investigate the cost and benefit of becoming part of a hosted platform system. Agenda Item #10A: One ordinance is proposed for discussion under this item. This ordinance would amend Chapter 905 of the City Code and is an addition to the Stormwater Utility code to include an illicit discharge restriction. The ordinance is required under the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Staff recommends discussion and direction on the proposed ordinance for adoption in December 2008. Agenda Item #IOB: On September 22, 2008, Mr. Tomas Wartman, property owner of 28120 Boulder Bridge Drive, appeared before the City Council and requested that a complete accounting of costs be presented for the patching and seal coating of Boulder Bridge Drive, Boulder Bridge Lane (North and South) and Boulder Circle. Included in the packet is the tally of those costs for the subject area. CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION 5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD SOUTHSHORE CENTER 6:00 P.M. Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 6:10 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Bailey, Turgeon, Wellens and Woodruff; City Administrator Heck; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: None B. Review Agenda Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Councilmember Woodruff requested Item 2.A, Publicising Sessions with Elected Officials during an Election Campaign, be added to the agenda. Without objection from the seconder, the makel• of the motion accepted the friendly amendment. Motion passed 5/0. 2. COMPENSATION PHILOSOPHY Administrator Heck stated at its August 25, 2008, work session Council asked him to review the City's compensation plan for lion-union persomlel approved in 2006 and to provide Council with his perspective as to whether ~r not that plan supported a merit (pay-for-performance) philosophy. He has since reviewed the consultant's report, on the compensation study, the compensation policy manual and information on the implementation of the plan. He has summarized his findings and recommendations in a memorandum dated September 18, 2008, which was included in the meeting packet (a copy of the memorandum is on file). The current compensation system is a hybrid system; all personnel are provided with an annual increase and have the opportunity to receive additional compensation based on their performance. Heck then stated several changes would have to be made to the compensation plan to migrate to a pure merit compensation system which is what he thought he heard Council say it wanted. The performance evaluation system should be changed so employees receive more in-depth evaluations. All supervisors and managers should receive proper training in conducting evaluations. To make the performance evaluation system work supervisors need to conduct informal evaluations and discussions with staff throughout the year to ensure each employee knows and understands the expectations. A shift to a pure merit compensation system involves a significant cultural shift. Heck then reviewed his recommendations. The compensation plan should be changed to a pure merit system; a minimum, mid-point, maximum and maximum plus wage schedule should be identified for each different job position. Because of the amount of time it will take to work out the details and change #Za CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES September 22, 2008 Page 2 of 3 the performance evaluation forms and to train all of the supervisors in conducting evaluations, implementing a pure merit based compensation system should be delayed until 2010. Adjustments to an employee's compensation which is below market rate should be addressed separate from their merit compensation adjustment. A formal recognition system that provides for employee awards for years of service should be implemented; the award can be modest and does not have to be monetary. Councilmember Woodruff thanked Administrator Heck for clarifying the compensation system for him. In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Administrator Heck stated the City's compensation consultant conducted a compensation survey of approximately 14 cities and the City's maximum market rate for a position was set at the average maximum rate it was compared to. Councilmember Turgeon stated at the time of the survey she did not think it was appropriate to evaluate the City's compensation for positions against those in a city with a much larger population. Heck stated a market comparison is usually done against cities of comparable population, demographics and services provided. If Council chooses to revise the system he can present a list of potential cities for comparative analysis for Council's review. t In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Administrator Heck explained if the compensation scale is keeping pace with the market by making economic adjustments to the wage schedule, then there is not a need to conduct another market survey. The City may want to verify its wage schedule is consistent with the market rate every five years or so. He explained the League of Minnesota Cities and the Association of Minnesota Counties have contracted with the Waters Consulting Group (WCG); WCG has a database of salaries, health benefits, vacation days, holidays, union or non-union classification, etc. for every position in the city and county group. That resource easily allows a person to select relative comparison data. In response to a question from Councihnember Woodruff, Administrator Heck stated the merit compensation system would be for non-union personnel as the current labor agreement does not allow for merit-based compensation. The recognition. program would be for union and non-union employees. He noted he would prefer to have all employees under the same compensation system. Administrator Heck explained his memo used the example of the top of a salary range equal to 100 percent of the average maximum rate determined with a market analysis. The start of each range would be 76 percent of the market average, .and the mid-point would be 87 percent of the market. Those were just examples of how it could work, they were not his recommendations. Additional lump-sum merit payments could be earned by employees who have reached the top of their pay scale; these payments would not be added to an employee's base compensation. Councilmember Bailey questioned if a lump- sump merit payment could be given to any employee independent of where they are in their salary range, or would it just be for those at the maximum of their range. Heck stated alump-sum payment could probably be given to anyone, but it would make more sense to use it for those at their maximum range. He will research that to determine if there is any type of restriction with lump-sum payments. He explained if an employee is at the maximum of their range, and the range is adjusted upward then the employee would be eligible for an increase to their base compensation if their performance warrants it. Councilmember Woodruff stated the City Administrator as well as the department heads are responsible to ensure merit increases do not exceed the amount budgeted for increases. Councilmember Wellens stated Administrator Heck addressed compensation increases, but did not address what happens when an employee's performance is not acceptable. Heck stated if an employee's performance is not acceptable they would not receive a salary increase, and if their salary range is adjusted upward their compensation would ultimately end up lower in the range. It was an employee's CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES September 22, 2008 Page 3 of 3 supervisor's responsibility to work with the .employee to improve their performance. He noted a performance evaluation system is a development system not a punitive system. He stated there are times when an employee cannot perform to the level they have to, and the employee will have to be removed from their position. Councilmember Turgeon stated she liked Administrator Heck's approach to a compensation system. She commented she was not sure the union would ever agree to a merit compensation system. Heck stated it can be difficult to migrate to a merit-based compensation system from a step system for employees governed by a labor contract. Councilmember Bailey questioned what the next steps are. Administrator Heck stated the current compensation program is structured fairly well. He explained details such as identifying what level of performance equates to what levels of merit increase have to be determined. He noted there are a number of communities who have used amerit-based compensation system for a long time, and those could be a good starting point. He will work with staff on establishing some parameters. as Councilmember Woodruff questioned what Administrator Heck proposed to do with regard to compensation increases for 2009, noting the draft budget has $30,000 allocated to merit increases. Heck recommended the current compensation program be continued in 2009. He explained part of the merit pool would be used for merit increases and part of it would be used to train supervisors on the performance evaluation process. Mayor Lizee thanked Administrator Heck fol- clarifying the current compensation system and his recommendations. Administrator Heck commented that staff had related when the City implemented the compensation program they had not received training on conducting performance evaluations. A. Publicizing Sessions With -Fleeted Officials During An Election Campaign Councilmember Woodruff informed Administrator Heck that in 2007 there was Council consensus to temporarily stop publicizing. sessions with aa~ elected official in official City communications during an election campaign period if an oCticial was running for office. 3. ADJOURN Wellens moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of September 22, 2008, at 6:38 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SOUTHSHORE CENTER MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Bailey, Turgeon, Wellens and Woodruff; Attorney Keane; City Administrator Heck; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: None B. Review Agenda Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, September 8, 2008 Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of September 8, 2008, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 08-063, "A Resolution Establishing an Absentee Ballot Board for the 2008 General Election." C. Approving ORDINANCE N0.453. "An Ordinance Enacting and Adopting the 2008 S-3 Supplement to the Code of Ordinances for the City of Shorewood." and Adopting RESOLUTION N0.08-064, "The Official Summary of Ordinance 453." Motion passed 5/0. #ZB i ~; ~ __ 1t'-5" EXISTING FUP,CEMAIN EASEMENT .~~~~~ EXiS'IING 4° CI FORCE MAW 12' EY,ISTING PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD - .'~ •' -CONI`lECi TO EXISTING 4" CI FORCE MAIN i- REMOVE AND P,EPLACE 3S SY BITUMINOUS AS NECCESSARY FOR PROPOSED FOP,CEMAIN CONNECTION PROTECT CONIFEROUS TREE- 44 LF TREE PROTECTION FENCING EMOVE AND REPLACE ?' ;;~ EXISTING LIFT STATION ,` '' CONTROL PANEL AND; ;- CONTROLS:` '6' TEMPORARY',• :' CONSTRUCT4aN EASEMENT,' TEMPORARY • EASEMENT AREA ~ = 249 SF ji _: f I f ~_ Ef ~ ` I ~ '. ~ 4 ~ P ,' ~" ey , . - ~ - ~ ~~ o ~; io 2a L COiJTRACTOR 54ALL IvIP,KE AN 6n151TE VLSI? PP,IOR TO EIDDIidG. 2. Au_ Dh.4EN5lONS SHAD 3E thL% VERIFIED BY CG~~dTRACTGR PRI'JR TO BIDDING ANY CONSTRUCTION`!. 3. CONTRR.CT'OR SHALL 5E RESHOiv51:aLF ; U° ALL SITc PREPAR~ATiQi'~! 4`~ORi' AI I_ S:Tc ~ ~I~~,Ai~V, i^?': ~ 'i.,~.;' ~.~.''=vel7 0 "DAD SU'=ACE Af~D aOD 5 ~!_ t14il~U ~i T,•E CGi.TR4CTG~. n_ c+p v. n J~`'~d ~' ,,. n•_d I~~.411, „I_I_ b9EGhA{'~IGAI_ .,1,. 5. SSE =1 A?•. AND PR.O=P F ~~~-`;Tj =;}? p;,O:OSED SA.i~!!TA~'i' j'E ~",'R I~ EXhTIi~IG WET Ml~'~J_. X711 ,=CIJ ~-A'_L o n F i ~ _ ~~ r I c~ ,' .'',I _.,;(,r, ~~ ~ ,5~?, 0 CG ~ ^T .0 ~ h. ~ ~ ~._ ^ ~~f IgACi~R 57~, i _~?~~Ab` ADD , .Ai_ ~~_~._ ~-i~ ~ `,: _. .'~ .... .. _ I _ .- __ ~' G,I_LC~4"E~ BEJ _E1•i '•~iE i 9v_i L - ,;,(',jT!id= IRE. SILT FENCE ' 113' LF REMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTING WET WELL COVER SLAB STING SANITARY SEWER SEMENT `-PROTECT DECIDUOUS TREE - 32 LF TREE PROTECTION FENCING ~PROP05ED TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT (WORK LIMITS) ?ROTECT EXISTING TREES - 25 LF TREE PROTECTION FENCING 5 ~' Y o ~ ~ ~" °o a w ~ Gu 6 0 la o E < s NCE o ~ s IP ~ ~~ ~ ~ a ~aW o~~ ~tF~ ~ Z N a;~~ ~ <~ I~a~° F~]~ ~ z ~ ~~ ~ LL ~yy Y O ~ax ~~~5 \ ~~~ ~7°€ o _s'~~ z ARIE Q *-VARIES VARIES-+ N H LL_ ~. ~ ~ ~ NOTE. 0 ~ ~ REPLACE DRIVEWAY AS SHOWN UNLESS z ~ ~ ~ DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY ENGINEER 0 z 0 ~ 2" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MnDOT LV4 2350 ~' ~ MnDOT 2357 BITUMINOUS TACK COAT m ~ 2" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE MnDOT LV3 2350 Q = U - $° CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE MODIFIED ~ - COMPACTED SUBGRADE DRIVEWAY DETAIL R~ SCALE: NONE 'N .~ rfl ~~ ¢C W SEWA.CE BYPASS Sl'STEI~ NOTES. gee s m„~ - ,~~ 1. THE SEY~IAGE cYFA55 SYSTEb! jH.ALL 5E T~-IE TUL4'_ r~3 RESr'Oi~IS!BILiI'fOT T'nE CO~~~iTRACTOR AivD SHALL IiVCI'JCc A1J_ -' P;PIa`!G, EO'JI°MEP!~T FOR F'U~~iH!P!G ,~.5 REQUIRED, A.PdU TEti°GRARY 'm °~ 5 E~ECTRC S_,^,b~ si THE t~rol. ;n~ CGi~~T?4CTG; S~AI~ v= O°?PI F.`,i`al li~ CIlD ~' V I-~= 5E4V'~'E B'(~F=S °J',~ a-J _ ~~ „iSTEVI PS uEC_..~4'.i, i_r,°W,?^''f 5YPASj °JU'I^IG Si51 u. x jhA' ;~-_ cJc,;dlliEO i~ Tnc Ei~ISi~~IEER FUR R ~iiE'vJ -RIOR 10 S ^7~f~+.~~_~_A. i~7i~. n ~ A ?Jt ~ '' 511 .,J ~_ ~,,~h` G G ^ ,:, i'i ~~~ c t-c. SW uR STATION NO. i2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 01608-05 ~ SITE PLAN WITH EASEMENTS SHEET C-G TREE PROTECTION DETAIL EXHIBIT B Description of Easement Area [attached] { ~JI,I (tf ~i~101'~:AV~60i.~ ~ ~~~~cltl~)i)i'af`~ ~.i)Illf~l~il~~.l ~:a c.~11r':1?t CITY ®F SHOREWOOD PROJECT ~ ~~- _ ~: ~ ~~ CORR/MTGS PAY CUNSULTPRUP/INVOICE COZY LEGALlEASE ASSN P ~ S PERf BID/DQCS _ .-__FEE 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhallQci.shorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years • 1956 - 2006 June 5, 2007 Fred and Ellen Johnson 5695 Christmas Lake Point Shorewood, MN 55331 ~: Temporary Construction Easement for Lift Station Rehabilitation Dear Mr. & Mrs. Johnson: City of Shorewood will be rehabilitating Lift Station 12 located adjacent to your property. To perform rehabilitation work we ask that you grant the City of Shorewood a Temporary Construction Easement. Enclosed is the easement document for your review and execution. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at City Hall, 952 474-3236. Sincerely, 1--~ ~ZVv.^"-- rl James Landini, P.E. City Engineer City of Shorewood 09 ~a `Q PRiMTED GiJ REC'fCLED PAPER (space above line reserved for recording information) TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT This TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT is given by the undersigned Grantors in favor of the CITY OF SHOREWOOD, a Minnesota immicipal corporation, Grantee, as of the _ day of 2007. RECITALS A. Grantors own the real property described on Exhibit A, attached hereto (the "Grantor Property"). B. Grantors desire to grant to Grantee the right to enter onto that portion of the Grantor Property shown on Exhibit B (the "Easement Area"), for the purpose of enabling Grantee to perform certain rehabilitation work related to municipal utilities. AGREEMENT 1. Grant of Easement. The undersigned Grantors, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby grant and convey to Grantee, its successors and assigns, a temporary construction easement over, under, and across that portion of the Grantor Property identified as the Easement Area. Grantors represent and warrant that Grantors own the Grantor Property and have the right to grant this easement to Grantee. 2. Easement Period. This easement shall remain effective until December 1, 2008, after which time, this easement shall expire and be of no further force or effect. 3. Scope of Easement. This easement shall be for all purposes necessary or incidental to the rehabilitation by Grantee, though its approved contractors, of Lift Station 12, in accordance with the plans and specifications set forth in the Rehabilitation of Lift Stations No. 12 and No. 16 for the City of Shorewood, City Project No. 06-O1, prepared by WSB & Associates, a copy of which is on file with Grantee (the "Project"). During the easement period, Grantee shall have the right to enter upon the Easement Area and perform all construction activities required in connection with the Project. 4. Restoration. Grantee shall have the right to remove trees, shrubs and other vegetation from the Easement Area, provided that Grantee shall not remove or injure the existing conifer tree located adjacent to the existing control panel. Grantee shall restore all affected portions of the Grantor Property to a condition reasonably equal to the condition existing prior to Project and shall replace any trees or shrubs that are removed or destroyed by Grantee in connection with the Project. 5. Delineation of Bituminous Surface. Grantor acknowledges that Grantee will be installing new bituminous surface surrounding Lift Station 12. Grantor shall have the right to delineate the edge of the bituminous surface to be located on the Grantor Property. ~ ~-iiv (~*. Sh~~l'cc;pt~Cl • ,i.,11~.~UI'r]:;t' ~~ i~il;~'tl'Lit ft.ll ~~.1; ililCil( 6. Indemnification. Grantee shall indemnify and hold Grantors harmless fiom and against any damages, losses, liens, or claims arising out of or relating to Grantee's actions in connection with the Project. [signatures on next page] ~~+~A'(}~ ~7 ~Ivl%1~:'t~i?(.~' jCI1i~J.11 cL~ _t)Il~lil ~.t !!U C:%1~-'n?~11t IN WITNESS WHEREOF, GRANTORS have executed this TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT as of the day of , 2007. GRANTORS: By: Ellen Johnson By: Fred Johnson ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was aclrnowledged before me this day of , 2007, by Fred Johnson and Ellen Johnson, Grantors. NOTARY PUBLIC This instrument was drafted by and Return to when recorded: The City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 Attn: City Engineer t i?y or:~f,>>er~p~,d .7_:~i ~~:~i~tr.~ (_ ~n~Er~.iuuni I:;~:~ n~etiC EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Grantor Property Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 596, Hennepin County, Minnesota. t. ItV~ ili 5~U?I'~A2JC~C~ • .~.,. 11~; )Y~t!"~ (liilaYfLli ~ C L Lip i sic it l: EXHIBIT B Description of Easement Area [attached] itV i-I .~Gl ~~: i. tir .,0~~ ~i ~~.Stt1 ~~J~11 ~':"V ~.,Pil~ii'~f it~~~t ~:.: Jr:cli=CPl March 22, 2007 CI'TE' ®F SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 ° (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 ° www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years ~ 1956 - 2006 Fred and Ellen Johnson 5695 Christmas Lake Point Shorewood, MN 55331 RE: Temporary Constriction Easement for Lift Station Rehabilitation Dear Mr. & Mrs. Johnson: City of Shorewood will be rehabilitating Lift Station 12 located adjacent to your property. To perform rehabilitation work we ask that you grant the City of Shorewood a Temporary Constntction Easement. Enclosed are photos and plans to describe the before and after conditions for your use. I will be contacting you the first week of April to schedule a meeting to discuss the easement. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at City Hall, 952 474-3236. Sincerely, L ~~ James Landini, P.E. City Engineer City of Shorewood ®a ~ p PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ©C~ Proposed example ;`. ~_. _ ~x~ _ Existing conditions u,-~~; a,>n ,°~.~~, ,,w QOOM32iOHS ~O.lllO tr~~,ti,,.~,.~„~.~<°~.~,e:e~„3,~,~~~,;,2,., 3Fil and x,~,rt„~ , ~.~KK., ® 3 0 94'ON ONtl Zl'ON "a~•: 9SM U .7~>,M ~>` •~~:_,~ ~ °,., SNOIltl1S ldl"i d0 NOIltllll19tlH3a ~p1~°~ O_ t- ` ~ Z a O O U N QK O dr >U J O N a m~ ¢ w~ o ¢w a¢ ~ ~ ¢wa O KI ~Z > LL~ ~ zw d~ °.- ao ¢T w =~ ~3 wo Uo - >a m a ~ o m m? O D U Z Z N Z N j Z w a~ d wz a so ~ ~N ao a~ w mm ¢ 3'^ ¢ _ ¢o z ~ ~o ~ ~w wmo aw Z Z Z ~ D OC ~ N K m Y F U 40 U J~ ~ w ~ ao cus a y~ ¢~ ~ za vxi~ ono J o3 N'" ~~ O Z W~U Zw ~V ~¢ w O ZU O~ ~~ff a aU ~ZQ DO UQ Z J~ QN ~~ az az o¢ ~¢ vooo N da ~z~ w ¢ zo z zw ~~ Nz z,=¢ zU tt O~ JO O¢ ~i ~ OHO OU it U~ GU ~. ¢Or ~ Uli t. Ua (C. ~ N rj ~ vt ,o r m w o .s- ~¢ ~2 Ulr.. U 5 ~F aw O 6Z~~w~U1a $ Z ~~~ NamQ dr ~ aQFOWJr m Fo z ~ N p T Q U Q Z 3 4 W ~Q ~z Z/Zi0 'Q vT-i0 ©~z~i<wco o~ ~~w N~~O¢~v~i- Nin E~~o Naa ¢a _an 3 wo a ~ U1-NZw ,- ~~'1. >a > ~F zo 2 ,nU vi (L-O m O WwV OEaO 20 OF ~~ Cad V¢a aw ~~ r,...¢ ioSu,xcna ~ meow w~'amz as ooin TOi TZ VNi vxi NO a m Z~ U m~ W 2 F Z O ~Oa05UOw mU0 dFZ ~ ~z3~~ aaa wz¢ i~~wowwo 4a~ ow ~3 a~-UNt-r _UN 6U~ Utl .- ~ n a U ~ Y a a J 'S ~ r ti W a Z N W W V1 !r W (G 3 T O ~ m r m Z wtWi,N za3m la- m O a Z O 1- r W I (~ N a U _ ~Zm Vt~ ~~z w wz ~ °~,n> Ow z V nvaio w ~(J..pO r ~ 4 x0 Z~ Nw ~ ~rQa w., ''::;> rtwU Nam V UU- Z ~VIW j.W ...... Ww U JW ~ H ~Iwa ~ 4 z azw N z- [rw "._ F w U w a J a i/i.: O z X ~QO Capp ~-~CLO pZ aoo O OxO~O;" rtt ~''~ /// a W Z VI W W U U....tp 1- ,~"l . u~ ova ~ z~., ZU W?K OU ~; Z(r Irma o O i U ~ I %%~ 1 I r~ y J Y `i %~ ~~ /A a // z ~ ~ 1 ~~ ~, U / ~ m K ~. .~ ~ Y x 0 ~ ~, w W _ ~~ ~ ------ _ --1 _ -~ ~ ~_ T~'i _~-----` ~I ~~ O~ ~ Ir ar zw ¢ z >p w ~~ ~¢ ~ v\¢ Xw ao ~,> '-,o> I~ rW o_z pa ~~ x~ wo a> ~Ja '_~ w¢ '- ~ w ~i ~..._._. ..._. .._._ ~" _. a a I, !. ~ ~ ~ W Z a C7 O ~ ~ v a .. ... ,. D S. :: . .... _. _...... .... W U . . ~ N i ao o oZ ~o aF a N Z WU wZ a r Z } w (r ~ a~ K a a ~' ~z O O U ~ O~ry (L N (y ozo cc o 3 W U.~ it U U W Z r N J.~ X W N I r U W O 0 7 O ~ ~ n: w N r7 ~ J p >- ~ N ~ W ~ ~ ~ U1 V1 ~ W w o p o ~ o C O ~ O j W p ~ ~ ~ Y w O U w Z L 30 U W W in¢ ~N ' o w ter- ~ a o p m ',,. Z 3 = ~ T O V7 p V~ p W N w a ~m a w O r W z z w~ a JJ N a >- u: ~ ~ ¢ w ~ ~ ~- w a 3 3~ p a W m ter- c~ m w r o~, I >i sm ~ a N ~ z 7at r 00 ~' w ~ ~ O u, o 0 ~ o U O o z r-~ w Z N ~ (~/~ ~ ~- Ow o~ U ~ l Zmo m 5_ wo C O > ~ _ I~; N~ N N p C< ~_ ~ Di N O b O 0 ~' ~ r Y Z ~ ~ W a ~ w uZ~ ~ N ~ as : .. _ ..... oa .. . .....oW r ~na Z _....~ ~a w x} _.a ~O ~~W~ W , r v _ _..: .. , . .. ~ Nm .N ..... _. ..... ... z._.... . O ._. . .. a L. w~ < N r ~ W II E w w He `0 v,~f [pIV J['n'+°+~'f~.p'W'n°aun,n.,w+r~°pavra.StreCnlWne,v>s\SC-s~~3~a\~M ^^-~, °"' °^^~~' '~ OOOM32lOHS ~O AllO =,,.,,.,~ ,aTM„H„ 0 - 3H1210~ ® yr ~ __ 9l'ON ONtl Z4'ON ".~"_c"aa 8SM e m'>x me SNOI1tl1S ldil d0 NOlltlll"119tlH3T3 0 w~`regoa~ .. ~ a~ a i ?w Z3 2°ai°z W / m< J ~ u a J N Q Uw~i¢ a YF w. _ ~ .q z~ru ~ Q a I zo C~' .- mo O~ z ~... ,"rvu,- O V~ ZO ~ ~ ~ mu '~ Q V ~o ~ ",o°v,w ~ ~ ~ ~¢ z c~ ¢ vNO ~ ~~ I Nz O ~ woc W ~ y ~ ~c I-- - ~ ~ W I Q J Q ~ ~xa J :~ ~ Z W f I„~ Q ~ L~ ~axrt d ~ ~ J _ _ 22a~ 0 1. LLQ~x o ~~ ,. ~~ ,... s ~ ~ a w gas .. . n: a ~ ~ W 0 o Q _ o z I n <o ° a ~ ~ ~ ~ < ~ c~ z r z s '~., I a oa`c~ aN ~~ ~ < ~ o ao w.o ~, - wo ~ W_ a z x i I I ar o~ ~ ~- 7 - - - o ~y m o _ :- ~ T~ n - Q n °i d ~^ z Ems`."--Fw m ¢ °~~ ~ t w ~ ~ ao z t. ,x-au~~ ~,-gym-moo ~ ,. z o ~ ~~ 'm ~woa¢ woc Y¢U ~ a g d < a ,vl~ auu~n ~~N ¢m oa > a ~ ~ ,s„ o U~a oiVn"5~., ~ zo o ,~, _- a' d wwOmU ?w Y~m dN ~o U Q\ +rt n p ~,• r ~ ~Nn O~n p K ~ ~ ~ m<'~ wON~tt U LLa u , ...~ Fjx a ~~ °o ~ o ~, ww a ~ ,wn~ it ~ ~. x uN~ ~ ow4,o~ z za 4 W ~ o° .., a v w ozo ¢ ~ rooo~ \ ¢ u i ~ n,4, - x~l.,~ < c u ~ gF sw oo~ ~ ~:'I'.'; vrUO ,`n~ooo a0J-x ~,., ww ° \\ .a m~ ~ I_. °aQ n<a s~za , ~ zo _ z_u -J'~c`i ~~ o moo i I j~\ rem uz<a a ~ ao,'-~ >j aoao ~' \~~ ~~ - "oz I > ~~ o z un _ °v`iom z \ s w \\\ M1 /\\ VYUdV1 ~ ~\ / 1.'. \~\ ~QVwwiz NN m N I~H I ~\~~`~`j o0 ~O 3 w ~¢ ~ ®~ ®~ >¢s ( ~ aluU ~OmD ~? i' ~~ val w z ~ w ~ N ~- ~ Q ~W?wm "'~ ar of ~ a~ tt~ - r~-° oo am r j °Q n! W < °ai - e~ J °mQ<~ ~ ° ed w' z w N o w w a w - • J O j J f O ~3~ ~ u m `a ,a-,n mi w O ~w wR ~ n ~ZWd Z 3av,m < ~_ .z o vood -- o~ _ ~ .a m~ wo~Nrww poooza w "' ~~ wag ~~m~~~ o~~W ~ _ o - mQUNmo °~ ~~ n ,~ oz ~o ~N<< ~~ - ua~ ¢aix 00o r~ o-'¢ a a n „r~u~ o~ n~w- rm ec u.. ewvmc CITY OF 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952)474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 9 October 2008 RE: Street Light Request -Smithtown Road/Virginia Cove FILE NO.: 405 (Street Lights) Residents of Lake Virginia Woods have requested a street light at the intersection of Virginia Cove and Smithtown Road (see attached petition, resident notification and location map). The petition cites vehicular safety as the reason for the proposed light. The request is consistent with current policy, which allows street lights. at intersections. As of this writing we have received no response from nearby residents who were notified of the request. If you have any questions relative to this matter, or if you need additional information, please contact me prior to Monday night's meeting. cc: Brian Heck Larry Brown James Landini Karl and Dawn Riem ~~ ®~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #9.D. 27695, Virginia Cove Shorewood, MN 55331 Brad Nielsen Planning Director City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Brad: The homeowners of Lake Virginia Woods would like to petition for a street light to be installed at the corner of Smithtown Road and Virginia Cove. This would be on the south east corner next to the street sign at the entrance to the cul de sac. Currently it is very dark and not only is difficult for nighttime visitors to find the road but it is not safe for walkers or drivers leaving the cul de sac. We are the only residents presiding in the cul de sac right now but only two properties remained to be sold so we expect we will have new neighbors in the near future. In fact another house is almost complete and should be occupied by the end of the summer. We appreciate your help in bringing this to the City Council and in sending out the mailings to the surrounding neighbors informing them of our request. We can be reached at the information listed below. We look forward to your reply and hope our petition is successful. Sincerely, .~ ~ A~;~ i Karl and Dawn Riem- 27695 Virginia Cove, I~c~; c~i. ~~~~ [fTY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us NOTICE The Shorewood City Council hereby notifies all property owners within 500 feet of the intersection of Virginia Cove and Smithtown Road (see site location map on reverse side) that the Council will consider a request for a streetlight at that location during their meeting on October 13, 2008 at the Southshore Cormnunity Center, 5735 Country Club Road. The meeting starts at 7:00 P.M. You are invited to attend this meeting to express your opinions and concerns. If you can not attend the meeting, you may respond in writing to: Shorewood City Council 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 FAX # (952) 474-0128 e-mail: plamling~a,ci.shorewood.mn.us If you have any questions relative to this matter, please contact the Planning Department at (952) 474-3236. ~s sa*' PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER -~ ~ a~ ~ dl 03fV0 O ~ V O - O ~ ~ ~ ^~ ~ ~ ~ z .~ -~ 0 ocE oa eaE~` ai O oa ~ N gREN'(R~~~E j Rp y~ 3~J0Rf ~ PRpS Pp~N Np d70 w O G~p~ ~EJ ~ S a '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~I -71 C a ~ y eou~ER ea~G ~ ~ (,~ S m ~ ~ ~ a ~' f6 o U ~ ~ ~ Od 2 ~ O ~i0 U e°p YZ al '~ ~ ~ 8 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~1 ~ > T "= m • U ~ r U Z W F- oa aoisaooM ~ ~ ~ N O ~~~S~~EP U Q ~ , V .1~ / \ O '~ '~ ~ .~ p ~ O m O ~ M W ~ C 3 c o c ~ 0 J CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM Date: October 6, 2008 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members ~- From: Bonnie Burton, Finance Director/Treasurer ~' ~~ CC: Audit Selection Committee Members: Brian Heck & Richard Woodruff Re: Audit Services 2008 - 2010: Audit Selection Committee Recommendation The deadline for submitting proposals for the Audit Services RFP was Wednesday, October 1, 2008. The RFP was advertised on the League of Minnesota Cities website and there were six (6) firms who expressed interest in submitting proposals; from this group the City received four (4) proposals. The Audit Selection Committee (comprised of Councilmember Dick Woodruff, City Administrator Brian Heck, and Finance Director Bonnie Burton) met this week to review the proposals, make a selection, and prepare a recommendation for the City Council. The quotes for Audit Services are as follows: Firm 2008 Bid Tota13-Year Bid Abdo Eick & Meyers, LLP $24,335 $75,280 HLB Tautges Redpath 25,000 77,250 Kern DeWenter Viere (KDV) 24,950 78,600 Larson Allen, LLP 28,450 89,000 Each proposal was reviewed in conjunction with evaluation criteria as specified in the City's RFP, All of the proposing firms have a good reputation however some of the proposals failed to address certain points or provide information as requested by the City. The firm of Abdo Eick & Meyers, LLP submitted a complete and very satisfactory proposal, in addition to submitting the lowest quotes for both the 2008 audit (to be conducted in early 2009), and the total 3-Year Bid. (For reference, the audit fee for 2007 was $24,390.) Some factors in their is d-r~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .f f r ~^ Audit Services Memo Page 2 favor include: standard rates that are very competitive; the firm has similar engagements with about 100 similarly sized cities; they were amongst the first to implement the "paperless audit" and portal technology; and the firm has performed satisfactorily for many years as the City's auditor, which is to the City's advantage in that they are familiar with our operations, thus minimizing the learning process to get up to speed. Recommendation It is the Audit Selection Committee's recommendation that the City Council appoints the firm of Abdo, Eick and Meyers, LLP, as the City's independent auditor for the period 2008-2010, and authorizes the City Administrator to enter into the annual audit engagement contract for the year ending December 31, 2008, as per the firm's proposal. N N d T O tq a ~ O E ~ O ~ O O N N ~ rn ~ r } > O O. Q Z N > ~ ~ ~ o. a a N ~ N O O ~ U N ~. C ~ N N d N tNq N ~ ~ U U r C N N N p } O O Z O O O O ~ t!7 u7 O O O V O m O N ~- .N- C W 01 O m (9 N N M a0 ~ T ~ ~ C O m N f ~ T C N ~' ~' O. 0 0.~ as ° U`~ O ~ U N ~ O O ~6 _ N U L O O O O O N d N ~ O O N C O ~ ~ ? ~ O u7 O N O O ~ O ~- ~' Z+ , ,r N ' X ~ ~ O N Z C ~ O N ~ 7 fD I~ M ~ ~ O O D ¢ Z Z` C~ m m a ~ ... m ~ > O O 'D C Z Z O O U C ~ ~ 3 F d 0 d S ~ NLL W Ou ~~ _ U, U u N N d T O N O. ~ 0 E '~ O ~ o ~ M ~ O p j ~ O > O a ~ a > N N O. O. ~ Q ~ O ' O O ° ~ N c aci ° .° ° '° D ~ a i a i a O. o n o n O I~ ~ N M N O 'O O H M N ~ N d N C ¢ N n 6 + N N . O N y ~ Z } } } O O T O d N .M- ~M- J O ~ O.O. J U N V N ~ 0 .U E ~ 3 N N . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N N a ~ Q O~~ F'S N U otS M O cOl N W O O ' } r O N ~ ~ N N` V W C ~ d N } E ¢ N N f~ R W d O. (n ~ fa y C ~ t0 'D Q ~ ~" y0 't T Q N N ~ ~ W ~ ~ N . C ~" m E r m 0 a U N N ~ Q"' a ' W ~ W °' o ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 _ ~ o c a~i a~°i d ~~ ~ ~ ~ 3 O 'C C j C9 0 ~- - N ~ ~ v CJ °~ L ~ ~ O p ~ ~ O j O. N Q' O ots Z' c as ~ N E m U C y N O. C~ ~ (n O U ~ Z N Q U` D. ~ c ~ ~ o. ~ ~ I~a a ~ c ~ O (6 (n ~ p Q C~ U U O 'SC C N O W U D. '~ C LL W ~ m C~ d m '~' E m ° ~ ~+ D U E ~ E ~~¢ ~ o. E G J LL W fn f7 W Q' LL N M d' u) O r W O m T O O O M N N N Q U U W O d U U N > d Q. ~ d N N _ EEE E Z 'E mmm cxa ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ m m N N N N C > > > > ' ' ' ' O tD y N y y w ~ 7 > > 7 C C C C ~ U Q N . . - - ~ N ~ O N O) Q Q Q Q ~ C~ 0 N . w w w .. ~ d ~ (n H H I- ~ d' O d N a J J C O O O O d ~ ~ O O ~~ v_carn o ~~rn ~~°rnm G ° COmO Qi N N M W N~ t0 J d d w O O O O d ~ O ~ O O ~ m N ~ CO V' m O ~ ~~~~ V'CO t~ W N~ G NNN r G d Y ~ Z ~ Q 3 Q J S ~ N W LL 0 LL U U !+ v J L d O O O O ~ O u7 O t!') O N O O M~ ~ y O h u7 N { ~ N ~ r a i ~~m ~ M N~~ NNN 1~ N F m S a J J d m ~c7N O ~ (h I~ ~ W O ~ l!') O ~ LL) ~ M O a0 N CO i 0 i 0 W i 0 ~ O Y NNN r V LLI O Q N (6 N T W m O M ~ O O NNN Q w N N N N - U U U U U c ~ d d 0. ° E E E E R ~ > E EEE ~ ttJ _ X x X X ~ O C ~ ( CO ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N C N N N N N > > > > ~ N N N .~ ~N ~N ~tp w Q N Q ~ 7 7 3 U U U U ccc c !D w. ~ N ~~ ` d .~-+ ~ N ~ .o`a r Qm ~`~~ Qm ¢¢Q Q mcm`o d ~ 'o~m`o 'D 'C C C ~ U w r C C '~ U ~ d i i 0 0 0 0 ~~ ~N~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ F- I- F- ~ v7 U N M -~~~ . ,` -,."~L :l it DOLLAR COST PROPOSAL CITY OF SHOREWOOD SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008, 2009 AND 2010 SUBMITTED September 30, 2008 ABDO, SICK & MEYERS, LLP CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS GRANDVIEW SQUARE 5201 EDEN AVENUE, SUITE 370 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55436 (952) 835-9090 CONTACT PERSON Andrew K. Berg, CPA (952) 835-9090 aberg@aemcpas.com LLP CerGif iecl Pt~b~ic Elccoun,tn,nls & Consuls.«nls AEDO EICI~ ~& MEYERS, LLP 5201 EDEN AVENUE, SUITE 370 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55436 SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES CITY OF SHOREWOOD SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE DECEMBER 31, 2008, 2009 AND 2010 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Summary Schedule Not-to-exceed Year amount 2008 $ 24,335 2009 25,073 2010 25,872 $ 7,280 As a partner of Abdo, Eick and Meyers, LLP, I certify that I am empowered to submit this bid and authorized to sign a contract with the City of Shorewood located in Shorewood, Minnesota. a.~~. _ °_ 09/30/08 Andrew K. Berg, CPA ABDO, EICK &MEYERS, LLP Date ABDO EICI~ & MEYERS, LLP 5201 EDEN AVENUE, SITITE 370 EDINA,1VIIl\TNESOTA 55436 SCHED>(TLE OF PROFESSI01\~AL FEES Ald'D EXPENSES - COISTTIN-UED CITY OF SHOREWOOD SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE DECEMBER 31, 2008 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS BASE BID Hours Standard Hourly Rates Quoted Hourly Rates Total Partners 56 $ 180 $ 180 $ 10,080 Audit Staff 133 95 95 12,635 Other -Secretarial 17 65 65 1,105 Subtotal 206 23,820 OSA reporting form 515 Total all-inclusive maximum price for the audit $ 24,335 The fee estimate above assumes that the City completes our audit plan provided upon proposal acceptance. If the plan is not completed, additional charges may be billed at our standard hourly rates. We will review the status of the plan when fieldwork begins and cormnunicate any anticipated additional fees at that tune. ABDO EICI~ & MEYERS, LLP 5201 EDEN AVENUE, SUITE 370 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55436 SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES -CONTINUED CITY OF SHOREWOOD SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE DECEMBER 31, 2009 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS BASE BID Hours Standard Hom-ly Rates Quoted Ho~u-ly Rates Total Partners 56 $ 185 $ 185 $ 10,360 Audit Staff 133 98 98 13,034 Other-Secretarial 17 67 67 1,139 Subtotal 206 24,533 OSA reporting form 540 Total all-inclusive maximum price for the audit $ 25,073 The fee estimate above assumes that the City completes our audit plan provided upon proposal acceptance. If the plan is not completed, additional charges may be billed at our standard hourly rates. We will review the status of the plan when fieldwork begins and communicate any anticipated additional fees at that time. ABDO EICK & MEYEIZS, LLP 5201 EDEN AVENUE, SUITE 370 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55436 SCIIEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES -CONTINUED CITY OF SHOREWOOD SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE DECEMBER 31, 2010 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS BASE BID Hours Standard Hourly Rates Quoted Hourly Rates Total Partners 56 S 191 $ 191 ~ 10,696 Audit Staff 133 101 101 13,433 Other-Secretarial 17 69 69 1,173 Subtotal 206 25,3 02 OSA reporting form 570 Total all-inclusive maximum price for the audit ~ 25,872 The fee estimate above assumes that the City completes our audit plan provided upon proposal acceptance. If the plan is not completed, additional charges may be billed at our standard hourly rates. We will review the status of the plan when fieldwork begins and communicate auy anticipated additional fees at that time. :, , r ~ r ~ u it ices 9 September 30, 2008 Submitted By: HLB Tautges Redpath, Ltd. 4810 White Bear Parkway White Bear Lake, MN 55110 651.426.7000 www.hlbtr.com ~~~::a u rant .`` .~ ~ edit alEty tr ! a.. HLB Tautges Redpath, Ltd. is a member firm of the AICPA's Governmental Audit Quality Center David J. Mol, CPA David E. Blumberg, CPA a ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~a ~~~o Certified Public Accountants and Consultants We believe our estimate of professional hours and fees to be competitive yet allow us to be responsive to your needs and provide high-quality service. We will respond to routine questions from the City of Shorewood personnel during the year at no additional charge. (f however, questions require additional research, we will provide an estimate of the additional fees before beginning the work. If you request special projects, we will provide a fee estimate in advance along with a separate engagement letter, if necessary. We will not proceed with any project without prior approval. The fee is based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not encountered during the audit. The fee estimated in this proposal is based on City personnel completing the following before final fieldwork: All closing entries and accrual entries posted to trial balance. Workpapers that agree to the trial balance. Providing an electronic trial balance one week before final fieldwork. The scope of services to be provided include financial audit, performed in accordance with generally accepted government audit standards, preparation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, and issuance of reports on internal control, legal compliance and communication to those charged with governance. It is our understanding that a federal single audit is not required. A summary of fees is as follows: Year Amount 2008 $25,000 2009 25,750 2010 26,500 Detail of hours and personnel are included in Appendix C. City ®f Sh®rew®®d, IViinnesg#a Page 25 4~ "- Y ' ~ ~~ Certified Public Accountants and Consultants i 11 r r I hereby certify that I am entitled to represent HLB Tautges Redpath, Ltd. and am empowered to submit the bid and am authorized to sign a contract with City of Shorewood, Minnesota. ~ ~ ~ -~-David J. Mol, Partner schedule of Professional Fees and Expenses 2008 Hourly Rates Hours Standard Quoted Total Partner 8 $303 $233 $1,864 Senior Manager 25 212 163 4,075 Audit Senior 95 147 113 10,735 Audit Assistant 85 104 80 6,800 Support staff 20 70 70 1,400 Subtotal 233 24,874 (Other: Miscellaneous out-of-pocket expenses /rounding 126 IT'Otal $25,000 City ®f Shorewood, f~innesota PR PSAL 'I' PISVIE AU I'I' SE 'VICES FR CITE' Ili S TA September 26, 2008 Presented by: F=~ ,' `;;, Expert advice. When you need it.s'~' 220 Park Avenue South P.O. Box 1304 St. Cloud, Minnesota 56302 7100 Northland Circle North, Suite 119 Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55428-1500 Contact: Steven Wischmann Phone: 320 251-7010 Fees Our estimate of the fee to provide audit services includes the following assumptions: ® City representatives will prepare audit schedules and retrieve documents as requested during the course of the audit process. ® City representatives will be available to answer questions arising during the audit. ® City representatives will compile information necessary for an accrual and modified accrual basis financial statement presentation. The fees to perform the services summarized in this proposal are as follows {see the following page for fee schedule detail): Saammary Schedule Financial Statements Audit for Not-To-Exceed the Year Ending Amount December 31, 2008 $ 24,950 December 31, 2009 $ 26,200 December 31, 2010 $ 27,450 Single Audit (if Required) Other Services (as Requested) * Billed at Quoted Hourly Rates (see fee schedule detail) We eazcourage our clietats to contact us whenever they have questions during the year. We will not invoice the City of Shorewood additional amounts unless saabstantial research or work is required, ita which case we will discuss the scope of any additional work aaad proceed only after we have reached a raautaaally agreeable fee arrangement. We are enthusiastic about the opportunity to serve as your independent auditors. The City of Shorewood can be assured we are committed to providing timely, quality service and effective communication with you and the Council for the December 31, 2008 year-end and into the future. ~DV Proposal to Provide Audit Services for the 18 City of Shorewood, Minnesota KEAN•DEWENTER•VIERE Sehedule ®f Pr®fe~s~®nal Fees and Expenses F®r the Audit ®f the 200 F~nanc~al Statements Standard Quoted Hourly Hourly Hours Rates Rates Total Partners 20 $ 205 $ 165 $ 3,300 Managers 30 140 135 4,050 Supervisory Staff 60 110 105 6,300 Staff ~ 120 90 85 10,200 Administrative 20 60 55 1,100 Subtotal 250 24,950 Out of Pocket Expenses: Meals and Lodging - Transpo rtati on/Mil eage - Total Not-To-Exceed Cost for the 2008 Audit $ 24,950. If a Single Audit is needed, the completion of the Single Audit will be at the above hourly rates. Proposal to Provide Audit Services for the 19 City of Shorewood, Minnesota KERNDEWENTER•VIERE City ®f Sh®r°ew®® Schedule ®f Pr®fessi®nal fees and Expenses ~'®r the Audit ®f the 2009 financial Statements Standard Quoted Hourly Hourly Hours Rates Rates Total Partners 20 $ 210 $ 170 $ 3,400 Managers 30 145 140 4,200 Supervisory Staff 60 115 110 6,600 Staff 120 95 90 10,800 Administrative 20 65 60 1,200 Subtotal 250 26,200 Out of Pocket Expenses: Meals and Lodging ' Transportation/Mileage ' Total Not-To-Exceed Cost for the 2009 Audit $ 26,200 if a Single Audit is needed, the completion of the Single Audit will be at the above hourly rates. ~~, T ,;., J Proposal to Provide Audit Services for the 20 ®® City of Shorewood, Minnesota KERN•DEWENTER•VIERE City ®f Sh®r°ew®®d Schedule ® r®fess~®nal Fees and Expenses F®r° the Audit ®f the 2010 F~nanc~al State ants Standard Quoted Hourly Hourly Hours Rates Rates Total 20 $ 215 $ 175 $ 3,500 Partners 30 150 145 4,350 Managers Supervisory Staff 60 120 115 6,900 Staff 120 100 95 11,400 65 1 300 Administrative 20 70 Subtotal 250 27,450 Out of Pocket Expenses: _ Meals and Lodging _ Trans portati on/Mil eag e Total Not-To-Exceed Cost for the 2010 Audit $ 27,450 If a Single Audit is needed, the completion of the Single Audit will be at the above hourly rates. - ~` Proposal to Provide Audit Services for the 21 City of Shorewood, Minnesota KERN-DEWENTER-VIERE ~~ Audit Serviccs Prep®sal Due October 1, 2008 Craig W. Popenhagen, CPA Principal 612-397-3087 cpopenhagen(a~larsonallen. com Thomas P. Koop, CPA Principal 218-825-2903 tkoo~a,larsonallen, com PROPOSED FEES FOR AUDIT SERVICES FOR ~, -~ ~~~ - - __ Total All-Inclusive Maximum Price for Auditing Services For the years ending: December 31, 2008 December 31, 2009 December 31, 2010 Grand Total Audit $ 28,450 29,650 3 0.900 2Sy,000 * Subject to signficant changes in City operations, service requirements, audit standards and federal compliance audit procedures. Craig W. Popenhagen, CPA, Principal, is entitled to represent the firm, empowered to submit the bid, and authorized to sign a contract with the City of Shorewood. ~e ~~.rs ~~n lien ~, ~~ C'.I'r1~, ~:~>nsul~anCs ~ f\d~~is~~rs www.lar~«nail~~;n.~:~rn ~~~ LarsonAllen LLP ©2008 LarsonAllen LLP 0 0 u~ v Z tA) W W ~ ~ W Z H a w ~' ®a a ~' z ~a wz w ,~ ~ o a® z~ o e ~~ cn W c~a 'l W O~ ~a~ ~- O J 0 ~ Q WTT WTT nl. i U I- N O i R ~ ~ ~ rn p m ~ ~ c ~ '~ ~ ~ U d ~ (n fn in a y O N C W v U O R ~ 0 0 ~ O w ~ ~ ~° ~_ N Q ~ ~ m O C .~ _ :.~ O ~ O m Q Q ~ ~ c m ~ o~ ~ ~ ~ f~ O ~ cn E E '7 Q F a ..] ...1 c Q 0 4. ro J 0 O N CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: City Council ..FROM: Brian Heck, City Adm CC: Staff DATE: October 9, 2008 SUBJECT: Telephone System Assessment One component discussed.. as part of the remodel project is the voice and data communications system. The recommendation from staff is to seek an RFP for a new phone system and upgraded data communications system with the goal of connecting the Public Works building to City Hall. To support this recommendation, staff developed a list of limitations and issues present in the current telephone system. LIMITATIONS: 1. The current phone system is over 20 year old. This makes maintaining the system problematic. Furthermore, finding replacement units is equally difficult. 2. The. system does not have caller ID. Caller ID is beneficial in cases where individuals are making harassing or threatening calls and fail to provide their name. 3. There is one line that does not go through the switchboard and quality on this line is poor. There is background noise including the "buzz" and "chirp" of a fax machine and the robotic voice saying "if you would like to make a call...." 4. All other calls go through a main switchboard as staff does not have their own direct dial lines.. 5. Voice mail frequently gets delayed such that a message left at 9:00 a.m. does not show up unti14:00 p.m. and sometimes not until the next day. 6. Public works building is not part of the city hall system for voice or data. The public works building has its own line and is not part of the computer .network and has its own Internet connection and unique e-mail. os ~. a` PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 7. The system is not capable of integrating with other technologies such as cellular telephones and e-mail. 8. The current system does not have the capacity to expand to integrate new technology. 9. The system is powered by 10 analog trunk lines that at times are full so staff is unable to call out and customers are not allowed to call in. POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS W/NEW SYSTEM: 1. Integration of voice, data and wireless. 2. Direct dial lines for all staff -reduces calls through a main switchboard operator/receptionist. 3. Ability to create a "virtual municipal campus" by adding the public works building to the overall system. 4. Potential to expand services such as paying bills by phone. 5. Staff availability after hours with the inclusion of direct dial lines. 6. Possibility to include auto-attendant for self-service options. 7. Potential to increase the number of over all lines for fewer busy signals. 8. Caller ID. 9. Potential to improve the timeliness of voice mail delivery 10. Less wiring is needed as phone and data run on same backbone. 11. With current technology, Shorewood could participate in a hosted platform system -that is the phone hardware and software are housed and maintained by an offsite organization and Shorewood becomes a customer of the system. This reduces the need for the City to maintain and upgrade the hardware and software, program the system, troubleshoot issues, etc. Recommendation: staff recommends the preparation of an RFP for voice and data services (the lines coming in to the building to support the system), and RFP for the equipment and to investigate the cost and benefit of becoming part of a hosted platform system. MEMORANDUM CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us TO: Mayor and City Council Brian Heck, City Administrator FROM: James Landini, City Engineer , ' - DATE: October 9, 2008 RE: Illicit Discharge ordinance discussion As part of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the City of Shorewood the Illicit Discharge ordinance was listed for adoption by 12/31/2008. The SWPPP requires the pennittee to develop, implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges. The permit states "You must, to the extent allowable under law, effectively prohibit, through ordinance or other regulatory mechanism, non-storm water discharges into your storm sewer system and implement appropriate enforcement procedures and actions." Examples of illicit discharges are dumping oil or paint in a catch basin, having a septic field drain to a roadside ditch, etc. Tim Keane, City Attorney has reviewed the ordinance and his comments have been incorporated into this draft. The attached draft ordinance is based off a model ordinance provided by the Enviromnental Protection Agency. Recommendation Staff recommends discussing this ordinance at the City Council meeting October 13, 2008. Staff will revise the draft to include Council comments and present the final ordinance to Council in December for adoption. ~,,,yg,~,~.. s. ~~ FEINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER B ~~ P ~/ ~ ~ Model Illicit Discharge and ConnectionStormwater Ordinance e ORDINANCE NO. t SECTION 1. PURPOSE/INTENT. The purpose of this ordinance is to provide for the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Shorewood through the regulation ofnon-storm water discharges to the storm drainage system to the maximum extent practicable as required by federal and state law. This ordinance establishes methods for controlling the introduction of pollutants into the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) in order to comply with requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process. The objectives of this ordinance are: (1) To regulate the contribution of pollutants to the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) by stormwater discharges by any user (2) To prohibit Illicit Connections and Discharges to the municipal separate storm sewer system (3) To establish legal authority to carry out all inspection, surveillance and monitoring procedures necessary to ensure compliance with this ordinance SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of this ordinance, the following shall mean: Authorized Enforcement Agency employees or designees of the director of the municipal agency designated to enforce this ordinance. Best Management Practices (BMPs~ schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, general good house keeping practices, pollution prevention and educational practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants directly or indirectly to stormwater, receiving waters, or stormwater conveyance systems. BMPs also include treatment practices, operating procedures, and practices to control site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or water disposal, or drainage from raw materials storage. Clean Water Act. The federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq.), and any subsequent amendments thereto. Construction Activity. Activities subject to NPDES Construction Permits. These include construction projects resulting inland disturbance of 5 acres or more. Such activities include but are not limited to clearing and grubbing, grading, excavating, and demolition. Hazardous Materials. Any material, including any substance, waste, or combination thereof, which because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics may cause, or significantly contribute to, a substantial present or potential hazard to human health, safety, property, or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed. Illegal Discharge. Any direct or indirect non-storm water discharge to the storm drain system, except as exempted in Section X of this ordinance. Illicit Connections. An illicit connection is defined as either of the following: Any drain or conveyance, whether on the surface or subsurface, which allows an illegal discharge to enter the storm drain system including but not limited to any conveyances which allow any non- stormwater discharge including sewage, process wastewater, and wash water to enter the storm drain system and any connections to the storm drain system from indoor drains and sinks, regardless of whether said drain or connection had been previously allowed, permitted, or approved by an authorized enforcement agency or, Any drain or conveyance connected from a commercial or industrial land use to the storm drain system which has not been documented in plans, maps, or equivalent records and approved by an authorized enforcement agency. Industrial Activity. Activities subject to NPDES Industrial Permits as defined in 40 CFR, Section 122.26 (b)(14). National Pollutant Discharge Elimination S stem PDESI Storm Water Discharge Permit. means a permit issued by EPA (or by a State under authority delegated pursuant to 33 USC § 1342(b)) that authorizes the discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States, whether the permit is applicable on an individual, group, or general area-wide basis. Non-Storm Water Discharge. Any discharge to the storm drain system that is not composed entirely of storm water. Person :means any individual, association, organization, partnership, firm, corporation or other entity recognized by law and acting as either the owner or as the owner's agent. Pollutant. Anything which causes or contributes to pollution. Pollutants may include, but are not limited to: paints, varnishes, and solvents; oil and other automotive fluids; non-hazardous liquid and solid wastes and yard wastes; refuse, rubbish, garbage, litter, or other discarded or abandoned objects, ordinances, and accumulations, so that same may cause or contribute to pollution; floatables; pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers; hazardous substances and wastes; sewage, fecal coliform and pathogens; dissolved and particulate metals; animal wastes; wastes and residues that result from constructing a building or structure; and noxious or offensive matter of any kind. Premises. Any building, lot, parcel of land, or portion of land whether improved or unimproved including adjacent sidewalks and parking strips. Storm Drainage System. Publicly-owned facilities by which storm water is collected and/or conveyed, including but not limited to any roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, gutters, curbs, inlets, piped storm drains, pumping facilities, retention and detention basins, natural and human-made or altered drainage channels, reservoirs, and other drainage structures. Storm Water. Any surface flow, runoff, and drainage consisting entirely of water from any form of natural precipitation, and resulting from such precipitation. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A document which describes the Best Management Practices and activities to be implemented by a person or business to identify sources of pollution or contamination at a site and the actions to eliminate or reduce pollutant discharges to Stormwater, Stormwater Conveyance Systems, and/or Receiving Waters to the Maximum Extent Practicable. Wastewater means any water or other liquid, other than uncontaminated storm water, discharged from a facility. SECTION 3. APPLICABILITY. This ordinance shall apply to all water entering the storm drain system generated on any developed and undeveloped lands unless explicitly exempted by an authorized enforcement agency. SECTION4. RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADMINISTRATION. The City of Shorewood shall administer, implement, and enforce the provisions of this ordinance. Any powers granted or duties imposed upon the authorized enforcement agency may be delegated in writing by the Director of the authorized enforcement agency to persons or entities acting in the beneficial interest of or in the employ of the agency. SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person, establishment, or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or application of this Ordinance. SECTION 6. ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY. The standards set forth herein and promulgated pursuant to this ordinance are minimum standards; therefore this ordinance does not intend nor imply that compliance by any person will ensure that there will be no contamination, pollution, nor unauthorized discharge of pollutants. SECTION 7. DISCHARGE PROHIBITIONS. Prohibition of Illegal Discharges. No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged into the municipal storm drain system or watercourses any materials, including but not limited to pollutants or waters containing any pollutants that cause or contribute to a violation of applicable water quality standards, other than storm water. The commencement, conduct or continuance of any illegal discharge to the storm drain system is prohibited except as described as follows: (a) The following discharges are exempt from discharge prohibitions established by this ordinance: water line flushing or other potable water sources, landscape irrigation or lawn watering, diverted stream flows, rising ground water, ground water infiltration to storm drains, uncontaminated pumped ground water, foundation or footing drains (not including active groundwater dewatering systems), crawl space pumps, air conditioning condensation, springs, non-commercial washing of vehicles, natural riparian habitat or wet-land flows, swimming pools (if dechlorinated -typically less than one PPM chlorine), fire fighting activities, and any other water source not containing Pollutants. (b) Discharges specified in writing by the authorized enforcement agency as being necessary to protect public health and safety. (c) Dye testing is an allowable discharge, but requires a verbal notification to the authorized enforcement agency prior to the time of the test. (d) The prohibition shall not apply to any non-storm water discharge permitted under an NPDES permit, waiver, or waste discharge order issued to the discharger and administered under the authority of the Federal Environmental Protection Agency, provided that the discharger is in full compliance with all requirements of the permit, waiver, or order and other applicable laws and regulations, and provided that written approval has been granted for any discharge to the storm drain system. Prohibition of Illicit Connections. (a) The construction, use, maintenance or continued existence of illicit connections to the storm drain system is prohibited. (b) This prohibition expressly includes, without limitation, illicit connections made in the past, regardless of whether the connection was permissible under law or practices applicable or prevailing at the time of connection. (c) A person is considered to be in violation of this ordinance if the person connects a line conveying sewage to the MS4, or allows such a connection to continue. SECTION 8. REQUIREMENT TO PREVENT, CONTROL, AND REDUCE STORM WATER POLLUTANTS BY THE USE OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. City of Shorewood will adopt requirements identifying Best Management Practices for any activity, operation, or facility which may cause or contribute to pollution or contamination of storm water, the _ storm drain system, or waters of the U.S. The owner or operator of a commercial or industrial establishment shall provide, at their own expense, reasonable protection from accidental discharge of prohibited materials or other wastes into the municipal storm drain system or watercourses through the use of these structural and non-structural BMPs. Further, any person responsible for a property or premise, which is, or may be, the source of an illicit discharge, may be required to implement, at said person's expense, additional structural and non-structural BMPs to prevent the further discharge of pollutants to the municipal separate storm sewer system. Compliance with all terms and conditions of a valid NPDES permit authorizing the discharge of storm water associated with industrial activity, to the extent practicable, shall be deemed compliance with the provisions of this section. These BMPs shall be part of a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPP) as necessary for compliance with requirements of the NPDES permit. SECTION 9. WATERCOURSE PROTECTION. Every person owning property through which a watercourse passes, or such person's lessee, shall keep and maintain that part of the watercourse within the property free of trash, debris, excessive vegetation, and other obstacles that would pollute, contaminate, or significantly retard the flow of water through the watercourse. In addition, the owner or lessee shall maintain existing privately owned structures within or adjacent to a watercourse, so that such structures will not become a hazard to the use, function, or physical integrity of the watercourse. SECTION 10. NOTIFICATION OF SPILLS. Notwithstanding other requirements of law, as soon as any person responsible for a facility or operation, or responsible for emergency response for a facility or operation has information of any known or suspected release of materials which are resulting or may result in illegal discharges or pollutants discharging into storm water, the storm drain system, or water of the U. S. said person shall take all necessary steps to ensure the discovery, containment, and cleanup of such release. In the event of such a release of hazardous materials said person shall immediately notify emergency response agencies of the occurrence via emergency dispatch services. In the event of a release of non-hazardous materials, said person shall notify the authorized enforcement agency in person or by phone or facsimile no later than the next business day. Notifications in person or by phone shall be confirmed by written notice addressed and mailed to the [authorized enforcement agency] within three business days of the phone notice. If the discharge of prohibited materials emanates from a commercial or industrial establishment, the owner or operator of such establishment shall also retain an on-site written record of the discharge and the actions taken to prevent its recurrence. Such records shall be retained for at least three years. SECTION 11. ENFORCEMENT. A. Notice of Violation. Whenever the City of Shorewood finds that a person has violated a prohibition or failed to meet ' requirement of this Ordinance, the authorized enforcement agency may order compliance by written notice of violation to the responsible person. Such notice may require without limitation: (a) The performance of monitoring, analyses, and reporting; (b) The elimination of illicit connections or discharges; (c) That violating discharges, practices, or operations shall cease and desist; (d) The abatement or remediation of storm water pollution or contamination hazards and the restoration of any affected property; and (e) Payment of a fine to cover administrative and remediation costs; and (f) The implementation of source control or treatment BMPs. If abatement of a violation and/or restoration of affected property is required, the notice shall set forth a deadline within which such remediation or restoration must be completed. Said notice shall further advise that, should the violator fail to remediate or restore within the established deadline, the work will be done by a designated govermnental agency or a contractor and the expense thereof shall be charged to the violator. SECTION 12. APPEAL OF NOTICE OF VIOLATION Any person receiving a Notice of Violation may appeal the determination of the authorized enforcement agency. The notice of appeal must be received within ten (10) days from the date of the Notice of Violation. Hearing on the appeal before the appropriate authority orhis/her designee shall take place within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice of appeal. The decision of the municipal authority or their designee shall be final. SECTION 13. ENFORCEMENT MEASURES AFTER APPEAL If the violation has not been corrected pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Notice of Violation, or, in the event of an appeal, within 10 days of the decision of the municipal authority upholding the decision of the authorized enforcement agency, then representatives ofthe authorized enforcement agency shall enter upon the subj ect private property and are authorized to take any and all measures necessary to abate the violation and/or restore the property. It shall be unlawful for any person, owner, agent or person in possession of any premises to refuse to allow the govermnent agency or designated contractor to enter upon the premises for the purposes set forth above. SECTION 14. COST OF ABATEMENT OF THE VIOLATION Within 14 days after abatement of the violation, the owner of the property will be notified of the cost of abatement, including administrative costs. The property owner may file a written protest objecting to the amount of the assessment within 10 days. If the amount due is not paid within a timely manner as determined by the decision of the municipal authority or by the expiration of the time in which to file an appeal, the charges shall become a special assessment against the property and shall constitute a lien on the property for the amount of the assessment. Any person violating any of the provisions of this article shall become liable to the city by reason of such violation. The liability shall be paid in not more than 12 equal payments. Interest and fees at the rate of 10 percent per annum shall be assessed on the balance beginning on the 1st day following discovery of the violation. SECTION 15. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any provision or fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Ordinance. If a person has violated or continues to violate the provisions of this ordinance, the authorized enforcement agency may petition for a preliminary or permanent injunction restraining the person from activities which would create further violations or compelling the person to perform abatement or remediation of the violation. SECTION 16. COMPENSATORY ACTION In lieu of enforcement proceedings, penalties, and remedies authorized by this Ordinance, the authorized enforcement agency may impose upon a violator alternative compensatory actions, such as storm drain stenciling, attendance at compliance workshops, creek cleanup, etc. SECTION 17. VIOLATIONS DEEMED A PUBLIC NUISANCE In addition to the enforcement processes and penalties provided, any condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance is a threat to public health, safety, and welfare, and is declared and deemed a nuisance, and may be summarily abated or restored at the violator's expense, and/or a civil action to abate, enjoin, or otherwise compel the cessation of such nuisance may be taken. SECTION 18. CRIMINAL PROSECUTION Any person that has violated or continues to violate this ordinance shall be liable to criminal prosecution to the fullest extent of the law, and shall be subject to a criminal penalty of $500 dollars per violation per day and/or imprisonment for a period of time not to exceed 365 days. The authorized enforcement agency may recover all attorney's fees court costs and other expenses associated with enforcement of this ordinance, including sampling and monitoring expenses. SECTION 19. REMEDIES NOT EXCLUSIVE The remedies listed in this ordinance are not exclusive of any other remedies available under any applicable federal, state or local law and it is within the discretion of the authorized enforcement agency to seek cumulative remedies. SECTION 20. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publication. All prior ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 20_, by the following vote: CITY O~ 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Brian Heck, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: October 9, 2008 RE: Costs of Patching and Seal Coat for the Boulder Bridge Area On September 22, 2008, Mr. Tomas Wartman, property owner of 28120 Boulder Bridge Drive, appeared before the City Council and requested that a complete accounting of costs be presented for the patching and seal coating of Boulder Bridge Drive, Boulder Bridge Lane (North and South) and Boulder Circle. Attachment 1 is the letter of request. by Mr. Wartman. For reference, Attachment 2 to this memorandum is a spreadsheet that indicates the costs of seal coating this area, versus a bituminous mill and overlay. Attachment 3 is a tally of the costs for the patching and seal coating, as requested. ~~ ~®~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ~~ September 22, 2008 Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Shorewood As a Shorewood resident of fifty-seven years and developer of Boulder Bridge Farm, I find it necessary at this time to ask the City Council for accountability into the recent Boulder Bridge Farm street seal coating project. I have repeatedly asked over the last three years for help in addressing the road conditions for Boulder Bridge Drive, Boulder Bridge Lane and Boulder Bridge Circle. Since installation of the city streets at my expense in 1981 for Boulder Bridge Drive and in 1983 for Boulder Bridge Lane, the city has only applied one seal coat until this year.. With much breakup occurring in the roadway areas, I asked Mr. Larry Brown to help the association address the benefits of and cost of a "mill overlay" vs. a seal coating. A mill overlay would have been an effective way to extend the life of the roadway areas with a onetime expense vs. repeated costs to patch and overlay problem breakup areas. The City Council was led to believe there were no other costs associated with seal coating or benefits to the city with a mill overlay. As a result, no consideration was given to additional moneys being contributed towards a mill overlay. However, prior to the seal coating being done, extensive amounts of asphalt were overlaid in an attempt to patch areas badly needing repair and in fact approximately 2/3 of Boulder Circle was entirely overlaid with asphalt. This resulted in haw many tons of asphalt being used? How many man hours and equipment related expenses to the city? All of this could have and should have been expensed toward a mill overlay and new life for our roads. This could have resulted in a shazed expense with the Boulder Bridge area residents and been a model for future road improvement projects. Instead, a "Band-Aid" approach was used and next spring and fall we'll see continued break up in ATTACHMENT 1 Letter of Request by Tom Wartman problem areas and continued expenses which would have been avoided had the issue been properly addressed. I ask for a true accounting of the asphalt materials used and the labor man hours along with equipment and related costs associated with the repair work prior to the street seal coating. This will hopefully inform the Council so that in future consideration of similar projects the Council is better informed and can manage our road funds, street issues and concerns of Shorewood's Residents. ~~~~ Thomas B. Wartman 28120 Boulder Bridge Drive Shorewood, MN 55331 o~ o~ v ~ ao ' ~'~ o o: ~ l eo X1 ~ 0 U I ~ C Ri rn ' v h o , tl7 ' ~ N t MI S '~: O ~ : M v~ v31 va ~» va 63 N to 00 i t!') N O O N V O Oi N M; V' M "~ O _ Rj (,~ o N ~ o0 I ~ o ! v3i ~ ~j ~ v3i ts3 d? N O~ ~ O ~ W C i 0 (D A N N i I . L '':I O ~ O W N N N V r ', 67 '~: • ~ v/ ', e0 tf') N 00 CO I, ! ~ ~ ~ N, i _ ~, ~ E N N N ~1~+ N N ' ! O " ° o o! V (.~ ' i a o m ~ ~ ~~ ~n ~~ ~~ ~ o) ~ I O ~ ~ rn ~ rn ~ O N ~I ' I .a ! O ~ ~ . e4~ l : i 3i O ': l ~ - _. -- - - ! ••^^ v+ ~ o o o ono ' ~ L s ~ ~ ~ O'O O N ',~ ~ ~; ~~ - - - ~ `' o m . I ' .~_ V as ~ O l ~ J o m U `~ v ~ .~ ~': I ~' '~ ~ O I O m` ~ U U N y 00 .~v s -ooa': O ~ ° n ~ ° N c m z UV, I ii ~ -p ~ J 0 ~ ~ !:, ~ ~ N O ~ -o . N i o N o N o i i y.. 3m ; i m ; m ; m j ~ I o ' I ~ ~ L ~:. "~ 7 'D 7 i '~ 7 la 'a 7 ! i f~,m m I m ~,m A ~-- I _ O i0, O i RC j !, O~ N ~ ~l ~ ~ O ~ ;`~ ~ ~~ I i ~ ! ii V Z ~ ~ O Q~ C I IC ~J R J . t6 iJ '. '' i (~ ~ C L d; d 'o 'o d a ~ a ~ N ! ~-; ; -a ~ i ~ , ~ L ~ C L~ L L L ': a;~o a ~ a ~ ° ° ° ° ' ° i ~ m m m m m l ATTACHMENT 2 Seal Coat vs. Bit. Overlay Costs O O d O .~ O .r~+ V ° ° ~ o o O a0 00 O ~ Q 69 6M9 O O O V O ~ C O C O f c r- ~ O C1 G a 07 N C ~ ~ H ,~ +~+ L i+ ~ O V ~ a ~ ~ ' N ~ C ~ ~ j O U e ~ ~ ~ t a ;a+ ~ _ tSS . -.-~ ~ .` ~ ` fC N Q ~ Q ~ ~, o ~ v o0 ~ r L(~ tC) r ~ t ~ ~ ~ O ~() O O ~ rt rt ~ N Q ~ r ~ ~ EA EA EA 6R 4+ tf~ M M . RS ~ M C'7 ~ ~ ~ ~ 6 ~} ~_ ~ i ~ ~ = O O O _ _ _ ° ° ° o o o ~ N N N 7 d' d' d' ~ C .~ V N . a _ C N ~ O ~ U ~ d a ~ ~ ~ L O U ~ tC J ~ C o a O N ~ R N ~ G d ~ J J d _ ~ ~ ~ d. ~ ~ O W ~ U F- ~ cn ' o + 0 0 0 o i° ~ ~ ~ O O ~ O ~ O N oO tC O ~ ~ r ~' Q ~ Efl d} 64 ~ .4+ O N O O !a L!) O r O ~ ~ H} Efl ~ ~ 7 ~ _ _ _ _ _ ' 0 0 0 0 ''' c 0 0 0 0 ~ N N N N ~ ~ ~' d' ~ N O V M _ ~ C . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ .Q N o J .,,,, o .a O ~ p ~ ' N 'C U o ~ ` o cn C O M ~' ~ O J d w+ I..L ~ N ~ . fd C. ~ O Q (A (6 O 3 N ~ ~~ ~ Q ~ W O LL W (n Q !n o ~ 0 0 ~ ~ eF t4 ~_ ~ m V d ~ a ~ d N 'a G m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~, a N ~ O ,~,, V O ~ ~ V ,. _ L O .C .,-. O 4- O N U C ~ fB U ~ o a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m° ~ -~ c~'`a N ~ N J ~ (p N C N ~ N C ~ ~ m O ~; O N j N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ N ~ ~. ~ :~+ ~ ~ C .C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N (`0 U L ~ ~ ~ O ~ 'O "p O ~ ~ C C ~ N t0 CD (6 ~ ~ p -p N ~ N ~ m ~ p ~ ~ N CD .C cn cn ~ 00 U ~ -p 'C ~ ~ O ~ ON ~-«~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ c ~ a ~ fn ~ ~ ~ O ~ o cn o~ o ~ ~ O O N ~ O N N C ¢ C ~ ~ E ~ ~ O ~ 7 N ~ r Q J W t_'JO m Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ATTACHMENT 3 Cost of Patching and Seal Coating CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 13, 2008 PUBLIC SIGN-IN SHEET For the record, please print your name and address below. Thank you. Name Address 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. -~ 4- .~-~~,~.. -~ ~~ lye.. ~?tc - ~~. ti C4.- .~ `i ~'. ' h ` ~ ~ ``• +r.R:'t x 1 s ~~ .~ .~,: _ y`, it '"~-`~_ ~ ~~ b h . ~. 444 _~ ~ lei~~ ~; ~~ . a ~~^ ~;. _ _. 4 - ~ - f _ / 1' r~ t . _~ ~ ~~+ ~ :~ ~' ~ _,•, z- ` v `~ - -- ~ ,s. ; ~mr ~ ___ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ '~f' ` ~ s } i ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ , . ~' ~ ~~ ~ 3 ' .~ i~ 1 ~~' ~ ~~ ~ ~ . ~ ._ ~ 4 i~ 5 ~ ~~$ s sf t ~ __ ~ a . i j. i ~~- ~. ay KST } ~ ' '~ ~~ ,~i ~ , ~ v. f ~ - - Fes:;: t i Y. ;~, 's: 9 j ':f ~ ~ ~; ~ ~.- ~ s j € ~ ~ ~, ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ °~ ~v ~ ~' ~ ` ~ ~ ~ r~' ~s ,~ ~ r ~ a.; ~ r ~ ~ ~ ' ~ h a i ~, . ' ~ Sl fI i 5 ~,Y ~_ ~" S~ '~' ~ ~ i + ~ r. ' I,t s ~' F'~ j 1 ~4~ µ ~, i ~ ~' - s ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~.: . ~~ ~_ ~'