10-25-10 CC Reg AgPCITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2010
AGENDA
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
Attachments
1.
2.
9
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A. Roll Call Mayor Lizde
Bailey _
Turgeon _
Woodruff _
Zerby _
B. Review Agenda
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Work Session Minutes, October 11, 2010 Minutes
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, October 11, 2010 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 betaken or questions asked, following removal
from Consent Agenda
4.
5.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List Claims List
B. Tobacco License Renewals Deputy Clerk CAF,
Resolution
C. Authorize Expenditure of Funds for Sanitary Sewer Lift Station repairs Director of Public
Works CAF
D. Setting the Date of the Canvassing Board meeting Deputy Clerk CAF
E. Authorize Expenditure of Funds for Stormwater CIP project Engineer CAF
MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
(No Council action will be taken)
REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Silver Lake Drainage Update Administrator's
CAF
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA — October 25, 2010
Page 2 of 2
6. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Star Lane and Star Circle Road Improvement Project, City Project 11 -01
7. PARKS - Report by Representative
8. PLANNING - Report by Representative
A. No Right Turn — Shorewood Village Shopping Center westerly entrance
9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Wellhead Protection Plan
B. Ordinance Banning Coal Tar
C. Waterford Right -of -Way Encroachment
D. Shady Hills Neighborhood Petition — Traffic
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
I. Monthly Financial Report
2. Report on Therapeutic Massage License Fees
B. Mayor and City Council
12. ADJOURN
Attachments
Engineer CAF,
Resolution
Planning Director
CAF
Administrator CAF
Administrator CAF
Planning Director
CAF
Planning Director
CAF
Finance Director
Report
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 Country Club Road . Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 •952- 960 -7900
Fax: 952 - 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us
Executive Summary
Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting
Monday, 25 October, 2010
7:00 p.m.
A 6:00 P.M. Council Work Session is scheduled this evening.
Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval.
Agenda Item #313: This resolution approves licenses for the sale of tobacco products to two
establishments in Shorewood: Cub Foods and Holiday.
Agenda Item #3C: Staff recommends approval of a motion authorizing the expenditure of
funds, not to exceed $7,000 (including taxes and contingency) for maintenance to the
sanitary sewer lift stations.
Agenda Item #313: The Canvassing Board must meet between Nov. 5 -12. This motion sets the
Canvassing Board meeting for Monday, November 8, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. to approve the
local election results.
Agenda Item 43E: Staff received three quotes for the Storm CIP project. Staff recommends that
the City Council direct staff to work with Parrott Contracting, Inc. for the storm drainage
improvement project not to exceed $12,000.
Agenda Item 45A: An update on the Silver Lake drainage.
Agenda Item 46A: As special assessments are being considered for part of the Star Lane and
Star Circle improvement project (in this case, the installation of City water), a public
hearing is required by statute. As the watermain portion of the improvement was
initiated by the City, at least a four -fifths vote of the Council to approve ordering the
improvement to include the proposed assessment is required.
Agenda Item #7: Park Commissioner Josh Trent will report of the recent Park Commission
meeting.
Agenda Item 98: A Planning Commission representative will report on the recent Planning
Commission meeting.
Agenda Item #8A: The Planning Commission held a public forum last month to consider
changes to the no right -turn restriction at the westerly outlet to the Shorewood Village
Shopping Center. Based on resident input, they recommend limiting the turn restriction
Executive Summary —City Council Meeting of October 25, 2010
Page 2 of 2
to trucks only and enhancing the turn radius to allow cars to make the right turn more
safely.
Agenda Item #10A: The Minnesota Department of Health is requesting submittal of a
Wellhead Protection Plan for all of our municipal wells. Staff is recommending an intern
be hired to work on this project; if an adequate intern cannot be found, staff recommends
preparation of an RFP for consulting services to prepare and complete the plan.
Agenda Item #1013: This item relates to the consideration of a Coal Tar Sealants Ordinance.
Staff recommends council hold off on adopting an ordinance banning undiluted coal tar
sealant products due to the issue of enforcement and regulation. Staff suggests
information be provided to residents on the hazards of the product and encourage the use
of alternatives. Staff also recommends the city work with our legislative delegation in
support of a ban on the use of this type of product.
Agenda Item #IOC: The Waterford Homeowners Association proposes to replace a boulder
retaining wall, part of which encroaches into the Waterford Place right -of -way. Staff
recommends approval subject to the Association entering into an encroachment
agreement.
Agenda Item #I OD: The City has received a petition from residents in Shady Hills for changes
in traffic controls affecting their neighborhood. Staff recommends that a public hearing
or foriun be scheduled to meet with the neighbors to discuss alternatives. One of the
options is to forward this matter to the Planning Commission for review and comment.
#za
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
MONDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2010
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Mayor Liz6e called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Liz6e; Councilmembers Bailey (arrived
Z,erby; Administrator Heck; Finance Director Di
and Engineer Landini
Absent: Planning Director Nielsen
B. Review Agenda
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, appr
2. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT
Administrator Heck stated Director Brown, Direct
to talk about the City's 20m Ma
presentation that DeJong will give this evening it
but he hoped that by re ltd of the presentation
Staff has identified a coinole of anoroaches that s
roadway improvements. Heek tumetl tfte m
management which is.the outcom"'e of the dis+
both the maititenariceandrehabilitation of the
Bailey arrivedcat 6:03
agenda as
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:00 P.M.
Woodruff and
Works Brown;
Motion passed 4/0.
DeJong, Engine& Landim and he met several times
gement Plad and financing the plan. During the
ay initially appear that efforts have gone backward,
will become apparent that progress has been made.
ula:klolp in providing a better financial forecast for
Oyer to DeJong for the presentation on pavement
5 among staff members. The presentation addresses
roadways.
Director DeJong, first reviewed staffs 'understanding of the PMP. The PMP, initially prepared a few
years ago, contains an accurate 'inventory of the City's roadways and a rating for the condition of the
surface of each roadway. The. =Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER) System is used to
determine the Pavement:Condition Index (PCI) or rating. The rating is used to determine what types of
improvements, if any, Vg likely be needed for each roadway. The improvements are filling of cracks,
sealcoating, mill and ovclay, or rehabilitation (reconstruction or reclamation). In 2009 Staff developed a
decision flowchart to help in determining if a roadway in need of rehabilitation should be reconstructed
or reclaimed. The flowchart will be reevaluated to ensure the results of using the decision flowchart
depict what should be done. After that a 20 year financial plan will be prepared to support the updated
20 -Year PMP. Council can then decide if the financial plan is affordable and to fund it.
DeJong then reviewed some of the decisions that must be made before the financial plan can be
developed. Council has to decide how frequently roadways should be maintained and what rating a
roadway must have to trigger some form of rehabilitation. Things that factor into the decision about what
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 2 of 6
type of rehabilitation should be done are whether or not there are stormwater management issues, sub soil
issues, and right -of -way (ROW) issues.
DeJong stated the 10 -point PASER System is a widely used tool. It's based on visual observations so
staff members can fairly accurately determine the condition of the roadway by evaluating the condition
of the roadway surface. Councihnember Bailey asked how much variability there would be between
evaluators using the PASER rating criteria. Director Brown stated when the City first started to have its
pavement surfaces evaluated there was a significant variance. Brown noted there is some subjectivity
involved when evaluating pavement. DeJong noted the PASER System also identifies treatment methods
for the various pavement conditions.
DeJong explained a good roadway base has two feet of sand for
or more of Class 5 aggregate. A native base has good native so
more of Class 5 aggregate. There are also some bases with sa
aggregate.
DeJong reviewed the things that cause surface pavement to
most deterioration; water freezes and heaves the top"kurface
control allows water to flow under the pavement and that
heat. Lack of preventative maintenance allows asphalt to dry
weigh close to or more than a road's load - bearing capacity cat
DeJong explained reactive maintenance inwi es 4illing in
maintenance includes sealcoating and mill and over: Se
preserve and protect asphalt pavements. Mi1I and ov Se
surface down at the edges and then putting
the existing asphalt surfade.'Otherrnaintena
catch basins and drains, .
DeJong displayed a
a native base anti.
with DrevenfF fve ma
are rahix g the end of their useful life:
natchine and - repair before a swill and
that
drainage, and eight inches
( clay) and eight inches or
is soils with little class 5
turated sub =soils cause the
and pothofss.`Lack of edge
tlt to exDajid under load or
lose flexibility. And, vehicles that
areas. Preventative
tg involves applying a sealant to
ves grinding the existing asphalt
f two inches of new asphalt over
be done include clearing clogged
fated life of roadway surfaces that have a good base,
Ise with good base materials can be extended longer
.hat have a poor base. Ile noted that clot of the City's
970s. Roadways that were not originally constructed well
.aired that a roadway surface with a rating of three needs
is done. When major overlays are repeatedly done to a
roadway, theleyel of recovery decreases each time
Councilmember Zoby stated one of the things he takes from the graph is that a pavement surface cannot
be milled and overlaid forever; it eventually will deteriorate to the level where it has to be rehabilitated.
He then stated the grapk.also indicates a roadway can be milled and overlaid for 60 years before it has to
be rehabilitated. Administrator Beek stated for a well constructed road the City will pay less over time
before rehabilitation has to be considered.
DeJong explained the differences between reclamation and reconstruction, noting reclamation does not
address any sub soil issues. During reclamation a milling machine pulverizes the asphalt surface. The
ground up asphalt is mixed with the underlying aggregate and that mixture is put back down. A two —
three inch layer of new asphalt is put down over the mixture. During reconstruction the pavement and
poor soils are removed. Granular materials and a drainage system are put down. A new eight -inch
aggregate base is put in and four - inches or more of asphalt are placed over the granular material.
Concrete edge control may be installed on each side of the roadway surface.
CITY OF SHORE' WOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 3 of 6
DeJong stated there is one school of thought that fixing the worst roads first may not be the most cost -
effective strategy. Preservation treatments are able to cover a lot more roadway surface per given dollar.
He displayed a slide showing the different types of improvements and the cost per mile to make that
improvement, and also the miles of roadway that can be improved for each type based on the cost per
mile amount. A great deal more surface can be improved if pavement reconditioning /maintenance is
done.
DeJong showed a slide that was prepared by the Transportation Resource -Board about principles of
pavement preservation. The slide was based on a situation in the State of e gan. For exampled, the
cost to reconstruct a roadway is $508,000. If the newly constructed roadway isn't maintained it has a
useful life of about 25 years and then it has to be reconstructed for as additional cost of $498,000. If the
newly constructed roadway is properly maintained through sealcQating and-pill and overlay, the useful
life of the road can be extended for 18 years for an additional cost close lb $150,000. Another slide
showed the surface doesn't deteriorate very much during the first few years of life for a newly
constructed roadway and about 75 percent of the way out into the useful life it begins to deteriorate
rapidly. When a roadway reaches a state of fair condition the ma should std berg done to
extend the life of the pavement. '
DeJong stated Staff took information from the PMP and calculated the average condition of roadway
pavement surfaces. The average in 2005 was, 6.85; in 2006 it wasabqut 6.5; in 2008 it was about 6.25; in
2009 it was about 6.5; and in 2010 it is about The roadways were not rated in 2007. The averages in
2009 and 2010 reflect the impact of inereased"flao hag for maintenance and - rehabilitation of roadways.
He explained the averages were calculated by taking'the ;�guare -foot area of each roadway, multiplying
that by the roadway's rating, adding the results for each rvatiway together, and finally dividing the total
by the total square - footage for all ,roadways.
DeJong noted that the American Assoeiation of State Highway and Transportation Officials standards
indicate the minimunfacceptable twQ4ane driving surface width for a roadway is 20 feet wide. A 20-
foot- wide driving surface"is,man the edge, to� crack up a lot, access for school buses and
emergency vehicles can be pnklemai vehicles are parked on the surface, and that width of roadway
should be labeled nA�aiking. Fob tine City s Tvfianesota State Aid eligible roadways the minimum two -
lane driving' surface width as 24 fdeh Standard surmountable curb is 28 inches wide on each side of the
roadway. The total width'U just over;28 feet. Approximately 20 percent of the City's roadways (or
appwximingly 10 miles of i4ore eligible for MSA reimbursement for construction and maintenance.
MSA mainferiance reimbursement is pot` in the General Fund and reimbursement for construction has
been borrowed against to help fund the County Road 19 project. In order for a reconstruction effort to be
eligible for MSA`Gpnstruction reimbursement the roadway must be reconstructed to MSA standards.
In response to a comment fribm Councilmember Turgeon, Director Brown explained in 2012 the funds
the City borrowed againsi will be paid off.
In response to a comment from Mayor Liz6e, Director Brown explained the City is allocated MSA
construction reimbursement equal to some dollar amount multiplied by 20 percent of the total mileage of
City -owned roadways. For 2009 the amount was $184,414. Once the City's loan is paid off, that amount
is what the State will hold for reimbursement for a construction project. For the reconstruction of MSA
classified roadways the roadway will have to be reconstructed to meet MSA standards in order to be
entitled to any of the funds. He noted MSA maintenance reimbursement dollars are put into the General
Fund, and a transfer is made out of the General Fund to the Local Street Reconstruction Fund.
Director DeJong stated that in order to accurately estimate the cost of roadway maintenance and
rehabilitation Council needs to make a number of decisions about the current assumptions. Is the current
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 4 of 6
goal of sealcoating a roadway every 5 years (or 20 percent per year) still correct? The current assumption
is a roadway will be milled and overlaid every 50 years. Staff recommends that be changed to every 20
years. What PASER rating should trigger rehabilitation? Staff recommends a rating of 2. How do items
such as stormwater management issues, poor sub soils, and ROW issues factor into whether or not a
roadway should be reconstructed or reclaimed?
In response to a comment from Councilmember Zerby, Director Brown stated that patching, sealcoating
and mill and overlay are all forms of maintenance. They don't necessarily extend the life of the roadways
but they do help achieve the anticipated life. In response to another comment from Zerby, Brown
explained on the west coast they use some treatments that are typically doiie in warmer climates. The
roads are closed to traffic when those particular treatments are performedx
Councilmember Zerby stated he did not think the PMP had a category f6r - the type of base. Director
Brown explained Staff can tell what type of base a roadway has to high degree 3f accuracy based on the
pavement surface, noting there can be surprises. Zerby askediftlrqPASER ratini"ihcuirs the condition of
the sub soils in. Brown explained the sub soils are indirect` factored in through theag of the surface.
Councilmember Woodruff stated from his vantage jioinY,4he ob,
residents think their roadways are okay. He stated a roadw . e1
...
and the residents are happy. In five years that will happen agatf
He thought residents only care about havin ,roadways that dons
troublesome issues and they want them to be hat way almost all
rehabilitating roadways.
Director DeJong stated there are times subjective evaluati
improvements to make to some of the roadways. It may be n
poor base and starting to fapfto'deteriprate to the point where
some resident push back bir reconstructing roadways that have deteriorated and have a poor base because
the pavement surface o I a good, alth6ugh it won't look good for very long. If maintenance won't extend
the life of such roadways`.it may annronriate to -the roadways deteriorate until it must be
rehabilitated.
is customer satis�fiction; do the
rail and sealcoatra, it looks good
se the roadway has deteriorated.
potholes or large cracks or other
time. Residents don't care about
be made about what, if any,
,five to leave roadways with a
is a necessity. There has been
Councilmember Woodruff stated as part of the proposed rehabilitation project for Amlee Road, Mannou
Lane and Glen Road there -were heat discussions from some of the residents in that area. The then
eouncltl decided to have those roadways'patched and sealcoated in 2008 and it sounds as if the residents
are pleasei3 with what was done'. Star Lade and Star Circle were patched and sealcoated last year and the
residents are 'pleased with the condition of the roadways. Director Brown clarified that was done the year
before. Woodruff commented Lalceway Terrace has big ruts and holes in it.
Councilmember Wod ftff stated if a sealcoat and patch will extend the life of a roadway 4 — 5 years then
that is what should be dotte because it's the most cost effective thing to do, provided there are no serious
issues such as stormwater management issues.
Mayor Liz& stated she can appreciate Councilmember Woodruff s viewpoint from the perspective of
financially extending the 20 -Year PMP. She said visuals are important but other things must be factored
into the decision; the condition of the roadway surface and sub soils; stormwater management issues and
additional drainage; and, the infrastructure (the age of the infrastructure, undersized sanitary sewer pipes,
the lack of City water, etc.). Once Council understands how these items fit into the plan it can be
explained to the residents.
Administrator Heck stated Council needs to come to consensus on when a roadway reaches a certain
rating significant maintenance will be discontinued and the roadway surface will deteriorate until it
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 5 of 6
reaches the state where rehabilitation is required. The current decision flowchart indicates if a roadway's
PASER rating is less than five it moves on to being considered for some type of rehabilitation. Staff
suggested the trigger -point rating be equal to 2 or less. He noted that if it's determined that the sewer
system or other utilities are in dire need of repair that the roadway will be torn up no matter what its
rating is. He stated Star Circle and Star Lane have a rating of 4 [per the comments made during the
September 27, 2010, meeting they have a rating of 3]. He asked Council if it's comfortable with reducing
the trigger -point PASER rating.
Councilmember Bailey asked what a roadway with a PASER rating of
Turgeon stated it would be worse than Amlee Road which was rated a
sealcoated.
Councilmember Turgeon stated she has no problem with h
stated that Amlee Road and Glen Road had not had anything
since 1984 until there was a major patch and sealcoat done a I
the way the roadway looks. The roadways could not have die
obtain the needed easements. She questioned if it would
improvements to roadways until such time there &I in
roadway. She stated based on Council's experience it's chfft
roadway when it looks good on the surface. She indicated she
,r-mu the trig
ne o them, '6
years ago. Tl
reconstructed
be better to contu
more`Ihat can be
high. But, she questioned if the City will be,able to rehabilitate
owners resist granting the necessary easements
Administrator Heck stated earlier in the day Staff dis
availability of the needed ROW to construct a'AISA
chooses not to pursue the acquisition of the needed RC
even though that is the best option-11,A council may fa
process or acquire the needed ROW, through the em
easement. That is Bred into deciding on what ty
comments made earlierliat in order to receive
reconstructing an MSA to
like. Councilmember
it was patched and
Joint rating. She then
than some cold patch,
gidents are happy with
ansie the City couldn't
the
onvinee residents. rehabilitate a
a trigger - rating of 4 may be a little
ays with a lower rating if property
sled the need for easements. If there isn't the
id ^to MSA width standards and a council
that may6liminate reconstruction as an option
to spend money to go through a condemnation
nt domain process in order to get the needed
gf rehabilitation will be done. Ile reiterated
!SA construction reimbursement funds for
to meet MSA standards.
Councilmeirlber Woodruff stated he thought every year potholes should be filled in for every roadway.
As currently planned, ead ivadway iuitl be sealcoated every five years. A mill and overlay will be done
whe necessary. As currently -done, eat roadway will be reevaluated every year. If the new PASER
rating of a roadway is 2 or less iihecomes a candidate for rehabilitation. Mayor Liz&e noted that potholes
are filled in eaeh year. Woodruff, questioned if potholes are filled in on all roads annually. Woodruff also
questioned if the sealcoat plan should be more aggressive for a while in order to get all roadways on the
5 -year cycle.
Councilmember Zerby asked what the definition of a pothole is. Is it a one inch hole? He suggested that
be agreed upon. 0"
Councilmember Bailey stated based on the current conditions of roadways there won't be a major
reconstruction of a roadway for a while. He expressed concern that because of that a future council may
take that as an opportunity to reduce the funding for the PMP. Council has appropriately delayed the use
of funds in the Local Street Reconstruction Fund by not doing major rehabilitation. Eventually roadways
will have toe be rehabilitated and the needed funds should be available at that time.
Director Brown stated that just because the average rating for all of the roadways is 6 — 7 it does not
imply the City should stop all rehabilitation efforts right now.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 6 of 6
Councilmember Bailey stated it's his understanding that Star Circle and Star Lane were being considered
for rehabilitation now because they are in the worst shape. He does not have the impression that there are
roadways in worse condition in the City that won't be rehabilitated now because Star Circle and Star
Lane will be considered first. Director Brown explained roadways with a rating lower than the average
will deteriorate faster.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he would like to be able to review the list of the new ratings.
Mayor L,iz& asked Council if it would like to change the trigger -point rating; U currently 4. She stated
per Administrator Heck Staff recommends changing it to 2.
Councilmember Turgeon stated a trigger -point rating of 4 is too higlr Councilmember Bailey agreed.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the PASER System explana #ion indicates a'rating of 3 should have
major maintenance done but it does not suggest rehabilitation.
There was Council consensus to change the tngor -pojnl rating `to 2 which is consistent with the
recommendations in the PASER System.
Administrator Heck stated during the first r#eeting in November`thiere will be work session to discuss the
revised financial plan for funding roadway it *foxements.
Councilmember Woodruff requested Staff pro 'Vide Council with information on what it will take to get
all roadways in sync with a 5 -year sealcoating eyele. C;o�cihnember'Lerby stated he wants to know
what the cost will be first. Engineer Landini notedthe City is caught up with its sealcoating program, but
not with its mill and overlarriaru
Mayor Liz&e stated a, thlic hearing Is scheduled for October 25, 2010, regarding potential assessments
for the possible extension t- waternain,if Star Circle i6dStar Lane are reconstructed. She asked if the
public hearing is being held toospod
0
2010, at
Motion
the City Council Work Session of October 11,
Christine
ATTEST
Christine Liz6e, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2010
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:07 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Bailey, Turgeon,
City Administrator Heck; Finance Director DeJ
and Engineer Landini
Absent: Planning Director Nielsen.
B. Review Agenda
Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, approving the agenda as pr<
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Work Session Minutes, Sep#embe
Woodruff moved, Zerby Seconded, Approving the City
September 27, 2010, as presented. Motion passe&s5 /0.
#2B
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
Zerby; Attorney Tietjen;
>f Public Works Brown;
Motion passed 5/0.
27,
Work Session Minutes of
B. City "Council - Regular - Meeting Minutes,.-September 27, 2010
Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Apprgvntg the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of
;'2010, as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
3. ,.,. AGENDA-
Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and
Adopting the Resolutions Therein.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Setting the Date for the 2010 Appreciation Event
C. Accept Amended Petition for Star Lane and Star Circle Road Improvement Project
Motion passed 5/0.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 2 of 8
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
5. PUBLIC BEARING
None.
6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
None.
7. PARKS
No report was given because there had not been a Park Commission meeting since the last Council meeting.
8. PLANNING
Chair Geng reported on matters considered and actions taken.at the October 5, ,2010 Planning
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). The Commission discussed amending
the Comprehensive Plan to reflect improvements made by the Minnesota, Department of Transportation
(MnDOT) to the intersection of Galpin Lake Road and State Highway 7. Staff is going to ask MnDOT if
it has any other plans to try and relieve congestion at that intersection. He noted the Commission held a
public forum during its September 21, 2010, meeting on the no right -turn restriction at the westerly
entrance to the Shorewood Village Shopping Center. During that forurn residents and some of the
Commissioners discussed their concerns about traffic control at the intersection of Eureka Road and
Highway 7. He stated the Commission discussed whether or not -a stop light on Eureka Road and State
Highway 7 is warranted during October meeting. Staff provided the Commission with traffic
information it had collected about that intersection from MnDOT MnDOT has indicated it does not meet
the warrants for justification. MnDOT stated the City could pursue installing a semaphore at a cost of
around $250,000 to do $o.
In response to a question from Councihnember Turgeon, Chair Geng stated the traffic information
provided for F„yeka Road includes data from 2009. He reviewed the average daily traffic count
informatiolfreceived from MnDOT. It is: 1,400 in 1999; 2050 in 2001; 2200 in 2005; and, 2,150 in 2009.
Mayrir'Lizee stated she is somewhat surprised by the data because Shorewood Ponds was constructed
after the 1999 study and the use of Freeman Park has increased since then. She noted that when the
Highway 7 study was done MnDOT expressed it did not want any more traffic signals between Highway
7 and the City of Hutchinson to slow traffic down. She stated Church Road is a relatively new road and it
is located in Chanhassen. She indicated she thought it could be beneficial to discuss making the
intersection of Church Road and Highway 7 a controlled intersection with Chanhassen. She noted
MnDOT is planning a large project on Highway 5 at the end of Minnewashta Parkway.
Chair Geng related that Director Nielsen had indicted MnDOT's objective is to keep traffic moving. If the
warrants don'tjustify a traffic signal MnDOT is not interested in having them installed.
Councilmember Woodruff expanded on the meeting report. He stated Staff is going to talk to MnDOT
about the timing of the traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 7 and Highway 41. MnDOT had
previously agreed to have gaps in the traffic flow to allow people to get onto Highway 7 from places such
as Eureka Road and Church Road. Staff is also going to get some traffic counts for two other roads.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 3 of 8
9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS
A. Accept Low Quote and Award Contract for Lift Station 15 Rehabilitation Project
Director Brown stated the meeting packet includes his staff reports about the Lift Stations 15 and 17
rehabilitation projects. He noted he will review the basic components of the projects at the same time
because they are very similar. He stated the detailed quote tabulation sheets included in the meeting
packet were incorrect and Council was been provided with corrected versions prior to this meeting.
Brown explained that on June 14, 2010, Council authorized TKDA and
and bid documents for the rehabilitation projects. TKDA completed the
Staff directed TKDA to issue proposals using a quote process rather:?
Statute allows municipalities to use the quote method if the eng
exceed $100,000. The estimates prepared by the City's engineer
Lift Station 15 and $78,522 for Lift Station 17. He noted thaf
construction by six to eight weeks when compared to the form'
ormal 1
Brown then explained plans were distributed to five
quotes and they were received at City Hall at 10:00
submitted the low quote in am amount of $118,088.80.
quote
aces to prepare the design
3ortion of the projects and
formal bid process. State
of construction does not
TKDA, were $78,021 for
recess reduces the time to
quotes. Three, provided
i, 2010. Minter Construction
Brown stated there has been a great deal of i$iscussion about why the quotes came in so much higher than
the engineer's estimate. He noted there were extreme variances between quotes for the dewatering portion
of the project. He explained each contractor views items differently. Staff believes the close proximity of
Lake Minnetonka adds significant challenges to the projects, but it's,the contractor's responsibility to
decide how it wants to do the project.
Councilmember Zerby stated there a also extreme variances in the engineer's estimate and the three
quotes for rehabilitation portion of the project. Director Brown stated contractors look at procedures
differently for how they are going to use their equipment and labor hours. Also, contractors differ in how
they spread out their profit margins. Although not applicable to this project, he explained that
mobilization is��bae oT the first things that get paid on a project. Sometimes contractors put their profit
margin in aii area that is paid earlier in the project. There is nothing that can be done to prohibit that.
Therefore. unit costs are not always comparable.
Councilmember Zerby asked if the request for proposal was specific enough. For example, is the proper
size pump specified and are all the materials adequate. Director Brown responded yes.
In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Director Brown explained if Council accepts the
low quote and awards the contract this evening the projects should be substantially complete this fall. All the
pieces will be in place but the contractor may have to come back and do some touch up in the spring of 2011.
Councilmember Woodruff asked if the residents will be notified of what the City plans on doing and how
the sites will be restored. Director Brown responded that will be done.
Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 10 -047 "A Resolution
Accepting Quotes and Awarding Contract for the Rehabilitation of Lift Stations No. 15, City
Project No. 10 -16." Motion passed 510.
B. Accept Low Quote and Award Contract for Lift Station 17 Rehabilitation Project
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 4 of 8
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 10 -048 "A Resolution Accepting
Quotes and Awarding Contract for the Rehabilitation of Lift Stations No. 17, City Project No. 10-
17. " Motion passed 510.
C. Staff Report on the Stormwater Management Program
Director Brown stated that during the September 27, 2010, City Council Meeting Councilmember
Turgeon asked Staff to report back regarding the inspection and maintenance schedule for the stormwater
management system. The meeting packet contains a report authored by him describing the components of
the system. The components are ponds and dry impoundment areas; critical o of structures; stormwater
outfalls and ditches; and, catch basins, manholes and storm sewer pipes. He then`stated he will entertain
questions from Council about his report.
Councilmember Woodruff stated a few years ago the City contra(
a stormwater management plan for the City. The Plan was app
things the City must do in order to comply with the Plan. Ong of
maintenance of the various facilities. When Council discussed
believed the Stormwater Management Utility Fund was''gmng to
Woodruff then stated after reading Director Brown's
going on with regard to the stormwater system, but there is no cot
the Plan, especially in the area of inspections. He expressed his cc
has been an increased effort at televising known issues of storm
currently funded." in Brown's report. He stated during budget
being any discussion about the lack of funding for these I
is pretty thin and he thought that in year five from now the Fund:
Associates to prepare
ientifies a number of
things identified was inspections and
Plan a number of years, ago WSB
some trouble financing the Plan.
concluded that there are activities
pensive approach for implementing
',about the statement "While there
er pipes; this is an area that is not
xssions he does not recollect there
So expressed concern that the Fund
enter into a deficit state. He asked
Staff to comment on whethet":ar' not the Plan will be- implemented, the comprehensive approach for doing
what needs to be done, the "cost to do 1t, and when the cost information will be made available to Council.
Director Brown explained the Plan.Gouncilmember Woodruff is referring to talks about meeting the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimihatiort'System (NPDES) requirements. That means inspecting 20
percent of the suctures each year. Staff is doing that. Televising of storm sewer pipes is not included in
the Plan. Staff has responded to a number of concerns about storm sewer pipes which results in televising
the pipe. There appears to be a greater, frequency of those types of issues and funding may have to be
made - available to deal with that. He noted' that with regard to NPDES requirements, inspections, and
maintenance of the structures Staff is commleting those activities.
Councilmember'' Woodruff stated he has asked Administrator Fleck for a spreadsheet showing the
structures, the items that need to be inspected, a schedule for when they will be inspected, and what has
been inspected and when. He has not been provided with that information. He stated that is what is
required to comply with the Plan and he asked if that type of document exists.
Director Brown explained there is documentation for each inspection that has been performed, but there is
not a spreadsheet document. The documentation includes when the structure was inspected, what was
inspected, what maintenance needs to be done, and any follow up action required. Each year another 20
percent is added to that documentation. There is also a mapping on file that shows all of the structures.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the culvert near Covington Road has not filled up over night; it's been
happening over time. He asked when that culvert was to be inspected. Brown stated fixing that problem
will be costly. In the past, before there were a number of regulations, it was common for the City to take a
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 5 of S
backhoe and clean out those types of structures. That structure is an outfall structure and ditch system,
and it falls outside of what he calls a normal structure check. Dealing with that will take an extensive plan
and approval from a number of agencies in order to complete the maintenance.
Councilmember Woodruff asked when Council will be made aware of situations like that which will
require significant funding and time to correct so Council can take some action to ensure funding is
available when needed. He commented he was not aware of the issue with the culvert near Covington
Road until late this summer.
Director Brown stated that out of all of the infrastructure needs, and especially-,when it comes down to
things such as ditch cleaning and outfall structures, these types of things end UP "being a lower priority
because major projects are the focus. There isn't funding available to address all drainage problem areas
identified in a drainage problem areas report. There are problems out there that can be resolved with ditch
cleaning. Council may not be aware of all of them because the focus has been onthe major projects.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested Staff challenge C
such problems and to prioritize them. Iie stated if there
Council should have the opportunity to authorize getting
Councilmember Zerby cautioned against quickly authorizing sp
to address a particular resident's issue when there are larger is
stated he did not disagree with Zerby's comment, but he did not
management system issues are.
Councilmember Bailey stated he thought it pin
maintenance of the stormwater management system
Councilmember Turgeon commented that the Minnel
wanted the City to preppa"re a list of all of the Natural
stated it's her recollection that at one time the M'
maintenance of such ponds, but she doesn't think ft
prudent to look 4f4veloping a long -term, high - lever
the funding needed to take care of
consuming current staff time, then
to take care of the issues.
of a significant amount of money
solve. Councilmember Woodruff
iow encompassing the stormwater
plan for addressing the
Creek Watershed District (MCWD) at one time bad
an Runoff Program (NURP) Ponds in the City. She
J indicated it would partner with the City in the
er happened. She indicated she thought it would be
for maintaining the ponds and the cost to do so.
Mayor.Lizee stated it would be beneficial to be provided with an overview of who the City's partners are
in this area.rShe did not think a detailed report is necessary.
Engineer Landint noted that the MCWD and the City have shared graphic information system data back
and forth as well as information about the ponds and inspections.
10.
A. Therapeutic Massage License Fees
Administrator Heck stated LaVida Massage, a therapeutic massage business, opened in August 2010 in
the Shorewood Village Shopping Center. Steven Gamm, owner of the business, asked if the City would
consider changing the license fee structure for the business. Each individual massage therapist at LaVida
Massage had to obtain an individual annual license for a fee of $150 and also pay a one -time investigation
fee of $100. Mr. Gamm has asked if the license fee for 2010 could be prorated. Mr. Gamm has indicated
that in some cities the owner has to get a license but the individual therapists either do not have pay a
license fee or pay a lower fee
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 6 of 8
Heck then stated Staff is asking Council to direct it to review the existing ordinance and fees and
recommend revisions to Council during its October 25, 2010, meeting.
Mayor Lizee stated Mr. Gamin's request seems reasonable.
Councilmember Zerby asked what liability the City takes on by licensing the individual therapists. After a
quick glance at what some other cities charge his first instinct is to continue to charge for an investigation
but to eliminate the individual license fee. He asked Staff to provide Council with a recommendation
during Council's next meeting. Councilmember Bailey agreed.
Councilmember Turgeon stated the process for dealing with this type of thing was changed so Staff can
handle it administratively. She noted the Planning Commission has always been involved with looking at
licenses and fees for other in -home occupations. She wanted to be assured that this would not be handled
differently than other types of occupational licenses and fees. 'Administrator Heck clarified this is
different than an in -home business. LaVida Massage is a storeAgnt,bu'siness. Heck stated he doesn't know
what the rational is for requiring an individual license
Council considers regulating something it should ask wl
fee should cover the City's cost. He stated be wilh"i
Commission should be involved with this. Planning C
involved in this type of thing.
Councilmember Turgeon stated she had no problem with Staff
this topic. Councilmember Woodruff agreed. _
Councilmember Woodruff asked Administrator 'F
the overall structure of licenses is in the City's on
Commission and it makes reec irnmeltdations about
sent business. He explained when
is and how it will be enforced. The
ielsen if he thought the Planning
edsthe Commission is not usually
recommendation to Council on
Director Nielsen about this because
nanees are reviewed by the Planning
establishes the fee amounts.
Administrator Fleck stated Staff will evaluate the request and make a recommendation to Council
Mr. Gamm thanked Council for considering his request.
B. Police Department Management Study
Admiri strator Heck stated during its August 23, 2010, meeting Council considered the South Lake
Minnetonka Police Department's (SLMPD) 2011 budget. During the discussion about that item
Councilmember Bailey suggested the SLMPD undergo a management study. Bailey had asked that this
item be placed on the agenda.
Heck then stated he solicited information about management studies from other city administrators and
managers throughout the county via the City /County Managers Association website. The meeting packet
includes comments from Roderick Woods, the City Manager for Beverly Hills, California. He indicated
he had informed SLMPD Chief Litsey that this item was going to be on the agenda. Litsey forwarded a
copy of a letter to the editor from one of the SLMPD member city's council members in support of the
SLMPD budget.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he supported Councilmember Bailey's suggestion at the time it was
made. He thought management studies are beneficial and he suggested one be done for the Excelsior Fire
District (EFD) and other City departments as well. He thought that periodically organizations, especially
organizations that are as thinly staffed from an administrative standpoint as the SLMPD and the EFD are,
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 7 of 8
can benefit from an outsider making as assessment of their operations and making recommendations for
improvements.
Councilmember Zerby expressed concern that the City is taking the Lead role rather than working with the
other member cities. He noted he did not want the City to be the one doing what he called an audit of the
SLMPD organization. He wanted support of the other member cities. He stated suggestions to do things
like this should come from a joint group.
Councilmember Bailey stated his suggestion on this was to have Staff report back to Council during its
November 8, 2010, meeting about what type of options are available for conducting a management study.
He thought it may ultimately have to be adopted by the joint powers group: He stated City staff could do
some research for them.. He stated that some type of review on a periodic basis is just common sense. He
then stated that Administrator Heck has proposed the City contract with a firm to enroll the City in a
Measurable Management program intended to improve operations."'
Councilmember Zerby stated he did not want the City to have to pay 'ihe full cost for a SLIvIl'D management
study. He stated that ideally the SLMPD Coordinating Committee would do this as it directly oversees the
SLMPD. He then stated he is willing to get more informafibnon this andthen discuss it furthcr,
Mayor Lizee stated management studies are a good idea for any organization. She stated if a study is
going to be done for the SLMPD she recommended one be done for the EFD at the same time. She
reminded Council that there have been studies, audits and reviews doiae of the SLMPD organization in the
last few years. She noted the SLMPD member cities are required to review the funding formula for the
SLMPD for the year 2012. She offered to bring this idea to the Coordinating Committee during its
October 19, 2010, meeting.
Councilmember Bailey statedahe wanted City staff to report back with options in order to move the
management study process forward. Councilmember Turgeon agreed.
Councilmember Turgeon stated she thought it would be beneficial to have something from Mayor Lizee
to present to the Coordinating Committee as an option. She then stated the City is not trying to tell anyone
anything. The,Clty is just trying to say there are always opportunities out there. She commented that
Chief Litse3y has stated that wearing his administrative hat takes him away from other duties he has. She
stated if the study can find more efficient andeffective ways to handle the SLMPD administrative duties,
themit4ill save all of the member cities money. She then stated she did not think there would be any
harm in getting additional information and then letting the Coordinating Committee have a discussion
about a management study. She thought an outside set of ears and eyes is warranted.
Mayor Lizee stated based on what she is hearing Council discuss it would involve looking at the joint
powers agreement also. Councilmember Turgeon commented that is not necessarily true.
Mayor Lizde then stated she will bring the idea of a management study up to the Coordinating
Committee. It needs to be decided and discussed there first and then brought back to the member cities.
And, at the same time it should include the EFD. Councilmember Turgeon stated she did not object to
including the EFD. Lizee stated the SLMPD Coordinating Committee and the EFD Governing Board
need to discuss this first. Lizee noted the 2011 budgets for those organizations have already been adopted.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he was not talking about the SLMPD joint powers agreement, the 2011
SLMPD budget or the SLMPD funding formula. What are being talked about are SLMPD operations. He
then stated he would like Council to direct Administrator Heck to draft a memorandum outlining the
objectives for a management study, an overview of how it would be done, and the expected results. He
commented that Mr. Woods could provide Heck with enough information so that Heck could draft a one
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 11, 2010
Page 8 of 8
page memorandum for Mayor Lizee to take to the October 19 "' SLMPD Coordinating Committee
meeting. He didn't think it would take Heck more than one hour or so to do that.
Councihnember Zerby stated it would be good to get more information.
Mayor Lizee stated she wanted the information copied to the EFD as well.
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
Administrator Heck stated over 300 people attended the second
Southshore Community Center (SSCC) on October 8"'. Approxinu
sign. He encouraged people to make a contribution toward the ptr
stated the League of Minnesota Cities Regional Meeting and the 1
scheduled for November 17 "' and it will be held in Brooklyn Park
know if they want to attend, noting that one has already expr
residents have called and expressed their desire to have -the Osl
contacted the owner of the tower advising them of the resident's cc
dtl'rOktoberfest event held at the
$1,0030 was donated toward a new
e of a sign for the SSCC. He then
Cities Policy Adoption Meeting is
asked Councilmembers to let him
I interest. He also staled several
return to their nesting spot. Heck
B. Mayor and City Council
Councilmember Turgeon asked for an update on the
extended her thanks to Administrator Heck, SSCC
their efforts regarding Oktoberfest. She commented
elected official present at Oktollerfest, of which there
Jik
sign for the SSCC. She note0 Mayor Rueh1'
Mayor Lizee invited . 'the residents to attend the Marc
10:00 A.M. — Noon. She stated the new boundless
shelter looks great. She commented- when she was
adults and abode cht children there:
of the most recut deer removal efforts. She
ms Manager Anderson and Twila Grout for
challerge& each elected official or potential
't many, to match her $100 contribution to a
ated $251.
open house scheduled for October 16 "' from
ound will be dedicated and the refurbished
or Park earlier in the day there were seven
12.
Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded,
2010, at 8:02 P.M. Motion passed 510.
the City Council Regular Meeting of October 11,
Christine Freeman,
ATTEST:
Christine Lizee, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk
Department Council Meeting Item Number
Finance October 25, 2010 3A
Item Description: /} Verified Claims
From: Michelle Nguyen BZ
Bruce DeJong
Background / Previous Action
Claims for council authorization. The attached claims list includes checks numbered 50702 through
50765 totaling $261,570.53.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the claims list.
10/21/2010
12:35 PM
AIR
HISTORY CHECK REPORT
VENDOR SET:
Ul City of
Shorewood
BANK:
1 BEACON
BANK
DATE RANGE:10
/12/2010 THRU
99/99/9999
CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
NAME
STATUS
DATE
00051
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/E
D
10/12/2010
00092
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
1)
10/12/2010
20005
WELLS FARGO EFALTE BENEFIT SVC
D
10/12/2010
00086
BUSIES COUNCIL 5
R
10/12/2010
00053
ICNA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -4
R
10/12/2010
00052
REBA
R
10/12/2010
01790
AMERICAN LEGAL PUB1, CORP
R
10/25/2010
01977
ANDERSON, KRISTI B.
R
10/25/2010
1
ANDRE BOON
R
10/25/2010
04081
CARQUFST. AUTO PARTS
R
10/25/2010
24600
CITY OF TONEA BAY
R
10/25/2010
29278
CLASSIC CLEANING COMPANY
R
10/25/2010
05305
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
R
10/25/2010
05885
CULLIGAN WATER CONDITIONING
R
10/25/2010
06000
DALE GREEN CO
R
10/25/2010
06560
DELEGARD TOOI, CO
R
10/25/2010
06630
DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT k ECON DEC
R
10/25/2010
29271
DREW KRIESEL
R
10/25/2010
1
DS SOLUTIONS, INC
R
10/25/2010
07480
EXCELSIOR ENGRAVING
R
1.0/25/2010
08912
G S K SERVICES
R
10/25/2010
08760
GAME. TIME
R
10/25/2010
PAGE:
INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
000000 12,313.43
000000 2,093.0 _
000000 985.60
050702 267.68
050703 1,358.55
050704 6,798.40
050706 210.00
050707 41330
050708 1,150.00
050709 91.86
050710 1,528.18
050711 749.69
050712 6,071.79
050713 40.00
050714 1,362.65
050715 288.31
050916 1,762.96
050717 1,098.73
050718 66.80
050719 10.72
050720 905.98
050721 70,972.72
2
10/21/2010
12:35 PM
A/P
HISTORY CHECK REPORT
PAGE:
VENDOR SET:
0I. City of
Shorewood
BANK:
1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE:10
/12/2016 THRU
99/99/9999
CHECK INVOICE
CHECK
CHECK CHECK
VENDOR 1.D.
NAME
STATUS
DATE AMOUNT
DISCOUNT NO
STATUS AMOUNT
09400
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
R
10/25/2010
050722
228.40
27195
GRAINGER, INC
R
10/25/2010
050923
155.36
27400
HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD.
R
10/25/2010
050724
217.94
10506
HENN CTY INFO TECHNO%.OGY DEPT
R
10/25/2010
050725
64.00
1
JEFF CLAPP
R
10/25/2010
050726
50.00
1
JIM BROWN'S
R
10/25/2010
050727
33.35
11650
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED
R
10/25/2010
050728
3.,626.38
12425
KREMER SERVICES, LLC
R
10/25/2010
050729
644.4E
1.3070
LANDINI, JAMES
R
10/25/2010
050730
138.49
13300
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
R
10/25/2030
050731
80.00
21340
LOCAL LINK
R
10/25/2010
050732
69.95
1
MARK MASS PLUMBING & GRATING
R
10/25/2010
050733
8,778.00
1
MARY MCCARTHY
R
10/25/2010
050734
352.00
15050
MEDIACOM
R
10/25/2010
050735
49.95
15176
MENARDS
R
10/25/2010
050736
49.08
15501
METRO COUNCIL ENV.(.SAC)
R
10/25/2010
050739
4,158.00
15800
MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP.
R
10/25/2010
050738
29,869.65
15885
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC
R
10/25/2010
050739
500.00
81500
ME CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC.
R
10/25/2010
050740
741.94
06645
MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
R
1.0/25/2010
050741
1,452.20
29368
NORTH STAR POMP SERVICE
R
10/25/2010
050742
2,397.84
19750
NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIP CA
R
10/25/2010
050743
142.59
3
10/21/2010
12:35 PM
A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT
PAGE:
4
VENDOR SET:
01 City of Shorewood
HANK:
1 BEACON SANK
DATE RANGE:10
/12/2010 THRU 99/99/9999
CHECK INVOICE
CHECK
CHECK CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
NAME
STATES
DATE AMOUNT
DISCOUNT NO
STATUS AMOUNT
15900
OFFICE DEPOT
R
10/25/2010
050944
42.45
1
OLSON FIRE INSPECTION INC
R
10/25/2010
050745
165.00
29332
ON SITE SANITATION INC
R
10/25/2010
050946
999.02
20500
PETTY CASH
R
10/25/2010
050949
100.00
20950
POTTS, KENNETH N.
R
10/25/2010
050748
728.18
29281
PYRAMID HOME SPECAILTIES
R
10/25/2010
050749
4,232.25
26100
QWEST
R
10/25/2010
050950
551.66
22349
REMPCA CO INC
R
10/25/2010
050751
228.00
22585
SOUTHERNER SENIOR PARTNERS
R
10/25/2010
050752
60.00
19435
SPRINT
R
10/25/2010
050753
3.31.46
23185
STERLING FENCE INC
R
10/25/2010
050754
613.23
29101
SUN NEWSPAPERS
R
10/25/2010
050955
200.20
17200
SUN PATRTOT NEWSPAPERS
R
10/25/2010
050956
221.28
23772
THE GARDEN PATCH
R
10/25/2010
050757
137.12
25540
UNITED LABORATORIES
R
10/25/2010
050758
506.90
2933
WHEELER HARDWARE COMPANY
R
10/25/2010
050959
5,261.01
18500
WE. MUELLER & SONS, INC.
R
10 /25/2010
050760
7,403.16
28451
ESE AND ASSOCIATES
R
10/25/2010
050761
25,280.48
27180
WW GOETSCH ASSOCIATES, INC.
R
10/25/2010
050764
286.96
1
MIKITYUK, DANIIL
R
10/25/2010
050765
9.11
10/21/2010 3.2:35 PM
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: I BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE:10 /12/2010 FRED 99/99/9999
VENDOR I.D. NAME
A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT
CHECK
STATUS DATE
** T 0 T A L S -*
NO
REGULAR CHECKS:
61
HAND CHECKS:
0
DRAFTS:
3
EFT:
0
NON CHECKS:
0
VOID CHECKS:
0 VOID DEBITS
VOID CREDITS
TOTAL ERRORS: 0
VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: 1
TOTALS: 64
BANK: 1 TOTALS:
64
REPORT TOTALS:
67
0.00
0.00
PAGE: 5
INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNTS TOTAL APPLIED
193,882.99 0.00 193,882.97
0.00 0.00 0.00
15,392.04 0.00 15,392.04
3.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.03 3.00
209,275.01
0.00
209,235.01
209,275.01
0.00
209,275.01
209,295.01
0.00
209.275.01
10 -21 -2010 12:34 AM
C O U N C
I L REPORT BY VENDOR - OCTOBER 25, 2010
PAGE:
1
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE
DES CRIPTION
FU ND
DEPARTMEN
AMOONT
RESIDUE COUNCIL 5
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS - UNION DUES
General Fund
NON -DEPARTMENTAL
269.68
T'OT'AL:
269.68
AMERICAN LEGAL PUHL CORP
10/25/10
CODE OF ORDINANCES RENEWAL
General Fund
General Government
210.00
TOTAL:
210.00
ANDERSON, KR'_STI B.
10/25/10
PARK COMM MTG 10/18
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
180.00
10/25/10
PARK -OPEN HOUSE EXP
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
32.93
10/25/10
SUPPLIES
Sonthshore Communi
Senior Community Cenie
75.56
10/25/10
OKTOBERFEST SUPPLIES
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Conte
124.81
TOTAL:
413.30
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
10/25/10
FILTERS & CLAMP
General. Fund
Public Works
91.86
TOTAL:
91.86
CITY OF TONKA HAY
10/25/10
2010 ANNUAL SPRINKLER SYS
General Fund
Public Works
325.00
10/25/10
WATER
Water Utility
Water
843.18
10/25/10
SEWER
sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
360.00
TOTAL:
1,528.18
CLASSIC CLEANING COMPANY
10/25/10
AUG-C.H. SVC
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
469.95
10/25/10
OC'T SVC
General Fund
Public Works
299.94
OTAI.:
749.69
COMMUNITY AEC RESOURCES
10/25/
PCS - 1 _0/11 -10/22
Genera]. Fund
Parks & Recreation
2,520.00
10/25/1D
SSCC ASSISTANT 10/11-10/21
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cents
1 _95.00
10/25/10
3RD QTR COMMISSION
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cents
3,356.99
TOTAL:
6,091.79
CULLIGAN WATER CONDITIONING
10/25/10
REFUND PIMP 20575 PARK OR
General Fund
NON DEPARTMENTAL
35.00
'10/25/10
REFUND PRMT 20575 PARR PL
General Fnnd
WON DEPARTMENTAL
5.00
TOTAL:
40.00
DALE GREEN CO
10/25/10
PUL MIX
General Fund
Streets & Roadways
0.00
10/25/10
PUL MIX MANOR & SILVERWOOD
nark Capital Impro
Park Capital improveme
545.06
10/25/10
PUL MIX -MANOR & SILVERWOOD
Park Capital Tmpso
Park Capital Impx'oveme
545.06
10/25/10
PUL MIX MANOR & SILVERWOOD
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
292.53
TOTAL:
1,362.65
DELEGARD TOOL CO
10/25/10
BALL JOINT ADAPTOR SET
Genera :i Fund
Public Works
28 8.31
TOTAL:
288.31.
DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT & ECON DEV
10/25/10
3RD QTR UNEMPOYEE- DAWSON
General Fund
Administration
1 ,762.96
TOTAL:
1,762.96
DREW KdIESEL
10/25/10
SSCC SEPT SVC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Conte
240.00
10/25/1.0
SSCC SEPT SUPPLIES & MAINT
Scithehore, Communi
Senior Community Cents
610.00
10/25/10
SECT SEPT SUPPLIES & MAINT
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cents
248.73
TO'CAL:
1,098.73
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
10/12/10
FEDERAL W/H
General F¢nd
NOR DEPARTMENTAL
4,630.95
10/12/10
FICA W/H
Central Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
3,113.17
10/12/1.0
MEDICARE W/H
General Pond
NON DEPARTMENTAL
128.07
10/12/10
FICA W/H
General Fund
Administration
248.10
10/12/10
MF.D ?CARE W/H
General Fund
Administration
58.03
10/12/10
FICA W/H
General 'Fund
General Government
324.06
10 -21 -2010 12:34 AM
C 0 U N C
1 L REPORT HE VENDOR -
OCTOBER 25, 2010
PAGE:
2
VDNJOR SORT KEY
DAT
DESC
FUND
DEPARTMENT
AMO
10/12/10
MEDICARE I WIR
General Fund
General Government
95.98
10/12/10
FICA W /19
General Fund
Elections
95.1.7
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Elections
19.58
10/12/10
FICA W/H
General. Fund
Finance
291.27
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Finance
68.12
10/12/10
FICA W/H
General Fund
Planning
296.82
10/12/1.0
MEDICARE W/H
Genera]. Fund
Pl anuing
64.74
10/12/10
FICA W/H
General Fund
Protective Inspections
187.45
10/12/10
MEDICARE WIN
General Fund
Protective Inspections
43.83
10/12/1.0
FICA W/H
General Fund
City Engineer
186.92
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
City Engineer
43.71
10/12/10
FICA W/H
General Fund
Public Works
453.03
10/12/10
MEDICARE WIN
General Fund
Public Works
1 05.96
10/12/10
FICA W/H
General Fund
Streets & Roadways
154.80
10/12/10
MEDICARE. W/H
General Fund
Streets & Roadways
36.20
10/12/1.0
FICA W/H
General Fund
Tree Maintenance
15.84
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Tree Maintenance
3.70
10/12/10
FICA W/H
Ceneral Fund
Parks & Recreation
387.92
10/12/10
MEDICARE, W/H
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
90.72
10/12/10
FICA W/H
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
49.95
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
Southshore COmmuni
Senior Community Cent,
11.68
10/12/10
FICA W/H
Water Utility
Water
290.69
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
Water Utility
Water
67.98
10/12/10
FICA W/H
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
137T2
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
Sanitary Sewer Pit
Sewer
32.07
10/12/10
FICA W/H
Reoycling Utility
Recycling
19.33
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
Recycling Utility
Recycling
4.52
1.0/12/10
FICA W/H
Snormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
13.90
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
Stormwat er Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
3.25
TOTAL:
12,313.43
EXCELSIOR ENGRAVING
10/25/10
3RUCS DEJONG NAME PLATE
General. Fund
Finance
10.72
TOTAL:
10.72
G & K SERVICES
10 /25/10
CH SVC
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
113.02
10/25/10
PW SVC
General Fund
Public Works
945.72
10/25/10
SSCC SVC
Southshore Com:nuni
Senior Community Conte
47.24
TOTAL:
905.98
GAME TIME
10/25/10
MANOR PARK PLAYGROUND
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improvems
65,000.00
10/25/10
MANOR PARK SWING
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Tmproveme
5,972.72
TOTAL:
70,972.72
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
'.0/25/10
SEPT RENTAL
Water Utility
Water
114.20
10/25/10
SEPT RENTAL.
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
114.20
TO "CP.L:
228.40
GRAINGER, INC
10/25/10
OMRON PINTIMER
Water Utility
Water
155.36
TOTAL:
155.36
HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD.
10/25/10
WATER METER
Water Utility
Water
217,94
TOTAL:
217.94
SEEN CTY INFO TECHNOLOGY DEPT
10/25/10
SEPT 800MHZ RADIO
General Fund
Public Works
64.00
TOTAL:
64.00
-LU10 t2:34 AM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - OCTOBER 25, 2010 . PACE: 3
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE
DESCRIPTIO
F UND
Public Works
DEPAR TMENT
AMOUNT
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST- 302131 -457
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS- DEFERRED COM
General
Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
1,025.00
10/25/10
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS DEFERRED COM
General
Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
333.55
TOTAL:
644.46
'TOTAL:
1,358.55
MILEAGE
KENNUR & GRAVEN, CHARTERED
10/25/10
GEN MATTERS
General
Fund
Professional Svcs
1,541.00
General Fund
City Engineer
10/25/10
RON JOHNSON
General
Fund
Professional Svcs
85.38
City Engineer
40.00
TOTAL:
1,6 26.38
138.49
KREMER SERVICES, LLC
10/25/10
AXLE RRPL TRAILER
General Fund
Public Works
118.12
10/25/10
U BOLT
General Fund
Public Works
59.85
10/25/10
LEAF WIPING UNIT 33 DUMP T
General Fund
Public Works
466.49
TOTAL:
644.46
LANDINI, JAMES
10/2S/10
MILEAGE
General Fund
City Engineer
58.50
10/25/10
GPS
General Fund
City Engineer
39.99
10/25/10
WELLNESS
General Fund
City Engineer
40.00
TOTAL:
138.49
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
10/25/1.0
1.1/17/10 REGIONAL BIG WOOD
General Fund
Council
40.00
10/25/10
11/17/10 REGIONAL MTG -HECK
General Fund
Administration
40.00
TOTAL:
80.00
LOCAL LINK
10/25/10
NOV Svc
General Fund
Municipal Buildinge
69.95
TOTAL:
69.95
MEDIACOM
10/25/10
SSCC - 07/16 -08/15 SVC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
49.95
'DOTAL:
47.95
MENARDS
10/25/10
FENCE STAPLES
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
11.72
10/25/10
SILT FENCE MANOR PARK
Park Capital Impro
Park Caoi.tal Imp rovImp
37.36
TOTAL:
49.06
METRO COUNCIL ENV .(SAC)
10/25/10
SEPT SAC REPORT
Sanitary Sewer ITT
NON DEPARTMENTAL
4,158.00
TOTAL:
4,158.00
MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP.
10/25/1.0
P.V.42 -MILL & OVERLAY P10-
Street Capital Imp
Street Cant Improvemen
29,869.65
TOTAL:
29,869.65
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC
10/25/10
NOW NEWSLETTER POSTAGE
General Fund
General Government
500.00
TOTAL:
500.00
MISC. VENDOR ANDRE BOON
10/25/10
ANDRE BOON: MANOR PARK PA
Park Capital impro
Park Capital. Improveme
1,150.00
DS SOLUTIONS, INC
10/25/1.0
PRE MARKED TEST DECK SPREA
General Fund
Rlections
66.60
JEFF CLAPP
10/25/10
CUSTODIAL & PARKING ISSUE
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cent.
50.00
JIM BROWN'S
10/25/10
ROLLS SOD- WAT5RMAIN BREAK
Water Utility
Water
33.35
MARK MASS PLUMBING & 11
10/25/10
MANOR PK PLUMBING PK PAVIL
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
8,778.00
MARY MCCAR'THY
10/25/10
MARY MCCARTHY:YOGA CLASS F
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
352.00
MIKITYUK, DANIIL
10/25/10
10- 905003 -00
Water Utility
NON DEPARTMENTAL
9.1.1
OLSEN FIRE INSPECTION
10/25/
OLSEN *'IRE INSPECTION INC:
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
1.65.00
TOTAL:
10,604.26
MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC.
10/25/10
C.H. 10%
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
68.28
10/25/10
C.H. 30%
General Fund
Mnnicipal Buildings
5.90
10/25/10
P.W 15E
General Fund
Public Works
102.42
10/25/10
P.W. 1,5
General Fund
Public Works
8.87
10/25/10
PARKS 60%
General Pend
Parka & Recreation
409.68
1u -21 -1110 12:54 AM
C U U N C
I L REPORT By VENDOR - OCTOBER 25, 2010
PAGE:
4
V ENDOR SOR; K EY
DATE
D ESCRIPTI ON
SEND
DEPARTME
:4MOl
10/25/10
PARK 60
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
35.48
'_0/25/10
WATER 15%
Water Utility
Water
102.42
10/25/10
WATER 15%
Water Utility
Water
8.89
TOTAL:
741.94
MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
10/25/10
3RD QTR BLDG SURCHARGE REP
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
1 ,452 .2 0
TOTAL:
1,4S2.20
MN MN DEPT OF REVENUE
10/12/10
STATE: W/H
General Fund
NON DEPARTMENTAL __
2,093
TOTAL:
2,093.01
NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE
10/25/10
L.S.415 & 17 REPAIR
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
504.48
10/25/10
L.S.415 & 17
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
1,893.36
TOTAL:
2,39/.84
NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIP CO
10/25/10
TOOLS FOR PLAYGROUND
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
142.59
TOTAL:
152.59
OFFICE DEPOT
10/25/10
GFN SUPPLIES
General Fund
General Governneni
42.45
TOTAL:
42.45
ON SITE SANITATION INC
10/25/10
BADGER PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
10/25/10
CATHCART PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
10/25/10
FREEMAN PARK
General. Fund
Parks & Recreation
266.13
10 /25/10
MANOR PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
10/25/10
SILVERWOOD PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
10/25/10
SOUTH SHORE SKATE
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
10/25/10
CHRISTMAS LAKE. BOAT ACCESS
Ceneral Fund
Parks & Recreation
235.13
10 /25/10
BIRCH BLUFF ROAD
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
TOTAL:
997.02
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
NON DEPARTMENTAL
3,137.73
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Administration
289.85
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Ceneral Fund
General Government
366.78
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Elections
84.86
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General. Fund
Finance
328.85
10 /12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Planni rg
357.35
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Protective Inspections
2-4,18
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
City Engineer
211.74
10/12/1.0
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Public Works
528.86
10/1.2/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Streets & Roadways
174.76
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Tree Maintenance
17.88
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Parke & Recreation
468.59
1.0/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
SouChshore Communi
Senior Community Cents
56.39
10/12/10
1? /R DEDUCTS -PERA
Water Utility
Water'
336.63
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
158.44
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Recycling Utility
Recycling
21.82
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
15.69
TOTAL:
6,998.40
PETTY CASE
10/25/10
SSCC PETTY CASH
Southshore Communi
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
100.Be
TOTAL:
100.00
POTTS, KENNETH N,
10/25/10
TOM LYNCH FERFEITURE -'00 D
General Fend
Police Protection
728.ig
TOTAL:
928.18
11 - 61 -lr1V 11:19
"I
C U U N C
1 L HSPUR'1
BY
VENDOR
- OCTOBER
25,
2010
WEED CONTROL AT POLICE & F
PAGE:
5
213.75
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
General Frid
Parks & Recreation
FUND
DEPARTMENT
AMOUNT
PYRAMID HOME SPECAILTIES
10/25/10
WEED CONTROL AT CITY HALL
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
384.95
10/25/10
WEED CONTROL AT POLICE & F
General Fund
Police Protection
213.75
10/25/10
WEED CONTROL AT PARKS
General Frid
Parks & Recreation
3 ,633.75
TOTAL:
4,232.23
QWEST
10/25/10
OCT SVC
Water Utility
Water
315.23
10/25/10
OCT SVC
Water Utility
Water
236.43
TOTAL:
551.66
R'UMPCA CO INC
10/25/10
TREES DISPOSAL
General Fund
Tree Maintenance
228.00
TOTAL:
228.00
SOIITHSHORE SENIOR PARTNERS
10/25/1.0
LUNCHES FOR C ARGILL -SEPT
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cents
60.00
TOTAL:
60.00
SPRINT
10/25/10
SVC 09/13 -10/12
Water Utility
Water
65.73
10/25/10
SVC 09/13 - 10/3_2
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
65.73
TOTAL:
131.46
STERLING FENCE INC
10 /25/10
HOCKUY RINK FENCE
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
613.23
TOTAL:
613.23
SON NEWSPAPERS
10/25/10
ELECTION BALLOT 10/14
General Fund
Elections
92.95
10/25/10
T- MOBILE CUP 10/07
General Fund
Planning
42.90
10/25/10
STAR WATERMAIN 10/07 & 14
Water Utility
Water
6 &.35
TOTAL:
200.20
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
10 /25/10
ABSENTEE VOTE HRG 09/25
General Fund
Elections
44.10
10/25/10
SAMPLE BALLOT 10/16
General Fund
Elections
44.10
10/25/10
STRAWBERRY LANE ERG 09/25
General Fund
Planning
33.08
10/25/10
T- MOBILE HEARING 1 .0 /09
General Fund
Planting
36.95
10/25/10
STAR LN AEARING 10/16
Water Utllity
Water
63.25
TOTAL.:
221.28
IjE GARDEN PATCH
10/25/10
BALES STRAW
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
17.19
10/25/10
BALES HAY
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
51.32
10/25/10
BALES STRAW
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
42.85
10/25/10
BALES STRAW
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
25.71
TOTAL:
137.12
UNITED LABORATORIES
1.0/25/10
NEUTRALIZER
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
226.04
10/25/10
SOAP
General Fund
Parke & Recreation
282.66
TOTAL:
508.70
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -HSA
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
889.60
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -NSA
General Fund
General Government
96.00
TOTAL:
985.60
WFEELER HARDWARE COMPANY
10/25/10
MANOR PARK EXPANSION
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
4,488.16
10/25/10
MANOR PARK AUTO UNLOCK SYS
Park Capital Tmpro
Park Capital Imp rovAce
"/12.85
TOTAL:
5,261..01
BE. MUELLER & SONS, INC.
10/25/10
P.V.43- WILDROSE /NEIAINE /ME
Street Capital Imp
Street Cant Imnrovemo-i
-
7
TOTAL:
9,403.16
WSB AND ASSOCIATES
10/25/10
AUG BRIDGE SAFETY TNSPECTI
General Fund
City Engineer
192.00
10 -21 -2010 12:34 All C O G N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - OCTOBER 25, 2010 PAGE: 6
SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT
GRAND 'OCTAL: 261,570.53
TOTAL PAGES: 6
10/25/10 AUG GIS & CAD SUPPORT General Fund
City Engineer
983.00
10/25/:0 AUG SMITHTOWN LN REHAB Street Capital imp
Street Capt Improvemen
2,963.20
10/25/10 AUG HARDING LN /AVE REHAB Street Capita? imp
Street Capt Improvemen
896.50
10 /25/10 JUNE NIELSON DR Street Capital Imp
Street Capt Improvemen
692.00
10/25/10 JUN MEADOWVIEW NEIGEBORH00 Street Capital Imp
Street Capt Improvemen
8,988.00
10/25/1.0 AUG -2010 BIT MILL & OVERLA Street Capital Imp
Street Capt Improvemen
5,088.00
10 /25/10 AUG 2010 CITY ST SEAL COAT Street Capital Imp
Street Capt Improvemen
1,421_00
10/25/10 STAR LN & CIA REHAB Street Capital Imp
Street Cart Improvemen
2,860.28
10/225/10 AUG CARS 19 REPAIRS Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
96.00
10/25/10 jUS WATERFORD POND ST SW R Stormwacer Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
815.50
10/25/10 AG 5925 GRANT ST DRAINAGE Stormwacer Managem
STORMWATF.R MANAGEMENT
525.00
TOTAL:
25,280.48
WE GOE"TSCH ASSOCIATES, INC.
10/25/1.0 PUMP SEAL KIT SE PLANT Water Utility
Water
286.96
TOTAL:
286.96
"PAYROLL EXPENSES
10 /11/2010 - 99/99/9999 General Fund
AdminiP' ration
4,112.15
General Pund
General Gover....t
5,239.82
General Fund
Elections
1,212.2']
General Fund
Finance
4,699.82
General Fund
Planning
5,105.01
General Fund
Protective Inspections
3,488.31
General Fund
City Engineer
3,024.80
General Fund
Public Works
9,555.13
General Fund
Streets & Roadways
2,496.64
General Fund
Tree Maintenance
255.40
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
6,694.31
6outhsbore COmmuni
Senior Community Cente
805.59
Water Utility
Water
4,808.16
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
2,263.60
Recycling Utility
Recycling
311.95
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
224.16
TOTAL:
52,295.52
-------
FUND TOTALS
LO'_
General Fund 87,595.01
402
Park Capital Improvements 87,698.86
404
Street Capital Imp rovemer. 59,941.79
490
Southshore Community CIT. 6,596.69
601
Water Utility 8,020.26
611
Sanitary Sewer Utility 9,783.00
621
Recycling Utility 357.42
631
StOrmwater ManagementUtil 1,597.50
GRAND 'OCTAL: 261,570.53
TOTAL PAGES: 6
"1 11111 11:11 .wn
C O U N C 1 1, REPORT BY DEPARTMENT -
OCTOBER 25, 2010 PAGE:
1
DEPART
F UND VENDOR NAM
DATE
DESCR
AMOUNT
NON DEPARTMENTAL
General Fund EFTPS FEDERAL W/H
10/12/10
FEDERAL W/H
4,630.95
10/12/10
FICA W/H
3,113.19
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
923.09
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
3,137.93
IONA RETIREMENT TRUST- 302131 -459
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS - DEFERRED CON
1,025.00
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS- DF.FSRRED COM
333.55
AFSCME COUNCIL 5
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS - UNION DUES
269.68
FIX DEPT OF' REVENUE
10/12/10
STATE W/H
2,093.01
CULLIGAN WATER CONDITIONING
10/25/10
REFUND PRMT 20575 PARK PL
35.00
10/25/10
REFUND PRMT 20575 PARK PL
5.00
MN DEFT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
10/25/10
IRE QTR BLDG SURCHARGE REP
1,452.20
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -RSA
889.60
TOTAL:
17,710.96
Council
General Fund LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
10/25/10
11/17/10 REGIONAL MTG -WOOD
40.00
TOTAL:
40.00
Administration
General Fund SPITS FEDERAL W/H
10/12/10
FICA W/H
248.10
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
58.03
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
287.85
DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT & ECON DEV
10/25/10
IRE QTR UNEMPOYEE- DAWSON
1,762.96
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
10/25/10
11/17/10 REGIONAL MTG -HECK
40.00
**PAYROLL EXPENSES
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
4,112.15
TOTAL:
6,509.09
Genera ?. GOVe,nO.,t
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1.0/12/10
FICA W/H
324.86
1 0/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
75.98
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS PERA
366.78
AMERICAN LEGAL PURL CORP
10/25/10
CODE OF ORDINANCES RENEWAL
210.00
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC
10/25/10
NOW NEWSLETTER POSTAGE
500.00
OFFICE DEPOT
10/25/10
GEN SUPPLIES
42.45
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -HSA
96.00
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
10 /11/2010 - 99/99/9999
5,239.82
TOTAL:
6,855.89
Elections
General Fred EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
10/12/10
FICA W/H
75.17
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
19.58
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
84.86
RISC. VENDOR AS SOLUTIONS, INC
10/25/10
PRE - MARRED TEST DECK SPREA
66.80
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
10/25/10
ABSENTEE VOTE HRG 09/25
44.10
10/25/10
SAMPLE BALLOT 10/16
44.10
SUN NEWSPAPERS
1 0 /25/10
ELECTION BALLOT 10/14
92.95
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
1,212.27
TOTAL:
1,637.83
Finance
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
10/12/10
FICA W/H
291.27
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
68.12
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
325.85
EXCELSIOR ENGRAVING
10/25/10
BRUCE DEJONG NAME PLATE
10.72
* *PAYROLT EXPENSES
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999 _
4,697.82
TOTAL:
5,396.78
PrDfess"nal. Svcs
General Fund KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED
10/25/10
GEN MATTERS
1,541.00
10/25/10
RON TO ESON
85.38
TOTAL:
1.626.38
to -21 -2010 1l:iu AM
EFTPS - FEDURAL W/H
C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT
- OCTOBER 25, 2010 PAGE:
2
DEPA
FU
V ENDOR NAME
DATE
DESCRI
AMOUNT
PPRA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
244.18
- PAYROLL EXPENSES
Pianni.n9
Ceneral
Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
10/12/10
FICA W/H
276.82
TOTAL:
3,963.77
10/12/10
MEDICARE SIR
64.94
FICA W/H
186.92
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
357.35
43.71
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
10/25/10
STRAWBERRY LANE. HBO 09/25
33.08
LANDINI, JAMES
10/25/10
10/25/10
?- MOBILE HEARING 10/09
36.95
10/25/10
SON NEWSPAPERS
10 /25/10
T MOBILE CUP 10/07
42.90
10/25/10
WELLNESS
-PAYROLL EXPENSES
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
5,105
.01
AUG BRLECE SAFETY INSPECTI
192.00
TOTAL:
5,916.65
AUG GIB & CAD SUPPORT
Municipal Buildings
General
Fund G & K SERVICES
10/25/10
CH SVC
11.3.02
3,024.80
LOCAL LINK
10/25/10
NOV SVC
69.95
Public Works General Fund
EFTPS FEDERAL W/H
CLASSIC CLEANING COMPANY
10/25/10
AUG -C.H. SVC
469.75
10/12/10
PYRAMID HOME SPECAILTIEIS
10/25/i0
WEED CONTROL AT CITY HALL
384.76
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS ?ERA
MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC.
10/25/10
C.H. '_0%
68.28
10/25/10
FILTERS & CLAMP
91.86
10/25/10
C.H. 10%
5.90
BALL JOINT ADAPTOR SET :'
288.31
G a K SERILCPS
'TO'T'AL:
1., 111
.65
Felice Protection General Fund
POT'TS, KENNETH H.
PYRAMID HOME SPECAILTIES
1.0 /25/10 TOM LYNCH FERFEITURE -'00 D 728.18
10/25/10 WEED CONTROL AT ]POLICE & F 213.75
TOTAL: 941.93
Protective Inspections General Fund
EFTPS - FEDURAL W/H
10/12/10
FICA W/H
187.45
i0 /12/10
MEDICARE W/H
43.83
PPRA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
244.18
- PAYROLL EXPENSES
10 /11/2010 - 99/99/9999
3,458.31
TOTAL:
3,963.77
City Engineer General Fund
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/R
10/1.2/10
FICA W/H
186.92
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
43.71
PERA
10 /12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
211.74
LANDINI, JAMES
10/25/10
MILEAGE
58.50
10/25/10
GAS
39.99
10/25/10
WELLNESS
40.00
NSA AND ASSOCIATES
10/25/10
AUG BRLECE SAFETY INSPECTI
192.00
10/25/10
AUG GIB & CAD SUPPORT
983.00
- PAYROLL EXPENSES
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
3,024.80
TOTAL:
4,780.66
Public Works General Fund
EFTPS FEDERAL W/H
10 /12 /
FICA W/H
453.03
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
105.96
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS ?ERA
528.86
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
10/25/10
FILTERS & CLAMP
91.86
DELEGARD TOOL CO
10/25/10
BALL JOINT ADAPTOR SET :'
288.31
G a K SERILCPS
10/25/10
PW SVC
745.72
HENN CTY INFO TECHNOLOGY DEPT
10/25/
DEPT 800MHZ RADIO
64.00
KREMER SERVICES, L6C
10/25/10
AXLE REPL TPJIA LER
-18.12
10/25/10
U BOLT
59.85
10/25/10
LEAF SRPING UNIT 33 DUMP T_
466.49
C OF TORRE, BAY
10/25/10
2010 ANNUAL SPRINKLER SYS
325.00
CLASSIC CLEANING COMPANY
10/25/10
OCT SVC
279.94
MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC.
10/25/10
P.W '_5%
102.42
10/25/10
P.W. 15%
8.87
10 -21 -2010
12:30
AM
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
C O U
N C I L REPORT
BY
DEPARTMENT -
OCTOBER
25, 2010
PAGE: 3
DEPARTMENT
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
10/12/10
FUND
154.80
VENDOR NAME
10/12/10
DATE DESCRIPTION
36.20
AMOUNT
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
9,555.
I3
TOTAL:
.1.,193.56
Streets & Roadways
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
10/12/10
FICA W/H
154.80
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
36.20
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
114.96
DALE GREEN CO
1.0 /25/10
PUL MIX
0.00
* *PAYROLS, EXPENSES
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
2
TOTAL:
2,862.40
Tree Ma;.ntenance
General Fund EFTPS FEDERAL W/H
10 /12/10
FICA W/H
15.84
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/9
3.90
PERA
10/'_2/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
19.88
RU"MPC'A CO INC
10/25/10
TREES DISPOSAL
228.00
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
10/11./2010 99/99/9999
255.40
TOTAL:
520.82
Parks & Recreation
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
10/12/10
FICA W/H
387.92
10/12/10
MEDICARE WIN
90.72
PERA
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
468.59
ANDERSON, KRISTI B.
10/25/10
PARK COMM MPH 10/18
180.00
10/25/10
PARK -OPEN HOUSE ESP
32.93
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
10/25/10
PCS - 1.0/11 10/22
2,520.00
MINABLE
1.0/25/10
FENCE STAPLES
11.72
NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIP CO
1.0 /25/10
TOOLS FOR PLAYGROUND
142.59
STERLING FENCH INC
10/25/10
HOCKEY RINK FENCE
613.23
UNITED LABORATORIES
10/25/10
NEUTRALIZER
226.04
10/25/10
SOAP
282.66
PYRAMSD ROME SPECAILTIES
10/25/10
SEED CONTROL. AT PARKS
3,633.75
ON SITE SANITATION INC
10/25/10
BADGER PARK
45.96
10/25/10
CATHCART PARK
45.56
10/25/10
FREEMAN PARK
266.13
10/25/10
MANOR PARK
45.96
10/25/10
SILVERWOOD PARK
45.96
10/25/10
SOUTH SHORE SKATE
45.96
16 /25/10
CHRISTMAS LAKE BOAT ACCESS
235.13
1.0/25/10
BIRCH BLUFF ROAD
45.96
MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC.
10/25/10
PARKS 60=
409.68
10/25/10
PARK 60%
35.48
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
6,694.31
TOTAL:
16,506.64
Park Capital Improveme
Park Capital Impro DALE GREEN CO
10/25/10
PUL MIX MANOR & SILVERWOOD
545.06
10/25/10
PUL MIX -MANOR & SILVERWOOD
545106
10/25/10
PUL MIX -MANOR & SILVERWOOD
272.53
GAME TIME
10/25/10
MANOR PARK PLAYGROUND
65,000.00
10/25/10
MANOR PARK SWING
5,9 12.72
MISC. VENDOR ANDRE BOON
10/25/10
ANDRE BOON: MANOR PARK PAT
',150.00
MARK ;ASS PLUMBING &
Y. 10/25/1.0
MANOR PK PLUMBING PK CAVIL
8,7/8.00
MENARDS
10/25/10
SILT FENCE MANOR PARK
37.36
THE GARDEN PATCH
10/25/10
BALES STRAW
17.14
10/25/10
EALES HAY
51,42
10/25/10
BALES STRAW
42.85
10/25/10
BALES STRAW
25.71
WHEELER HARDWARE COMPANY
10/25/10
MANOR PARK EXPANSION
4,488.16
10 /25 / 1 .0
MANOR 'ARK AUTO UNLCCK SYS
772.85
1U -21 -2010 12:30 AM C 0 U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - OCTOBER 25, 2010
PAGE: 4
DEPARTMENT FU ND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIP ^ION AMOUNT
T.0'TAL
Street Capt Improvemen Street Capital Imp MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP.
WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC
WSB AND ASSOCIATES
NON- DEPARTMENTAL Southchore Communi PETTY CASE
10/25/10 P.V.42 -MILL & OVERLAY P10-
10/25/30 P.V.43 WILDROSE /NELSINE /ME
10/25/10 AUG SMITHTOWN LN REHAB
10/25/10 AUG HARDING LN /AVE REHAB
10/25/10 QUNE NIELSEN DR
10/25/10 JUN MEADONVIEW NEIGHBORHOO
10/25/10 AUG -2010 BIT MILL & OVERLA
10/25/10 AUG 2010 CITY ST SEAL COAT
10/25/10 .STAR LN & CID REHAB
TOTAL:
10/25/10 SSCC PETTY CASH
TOTAL:
Senior COmf9unl. ty Cente Southehore Communi EFTPS - FEDERAL W /F.
10/12/10
FICA W/H
10/12110
MEDICARE" W/H
PERA
10 /12/10
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
ANDERSON, EXIST! B.
10/25/10
SUPPLIES
1.0/25/10
OKTOBERFEST SUPPLIES
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
10/25/10
SSCC ASS'ISTAN'T- 10 /1.1 -10/21
10/25/10
31GD RIG COMMISSION
G & K SERVICES
10/25/10
SSCC SVC
MISC. VENDOR JEFF CLAPP
L0/25/10
CUSTODIAL & PARKING ISSUE
MARY MCCARTHY
10/25/10
MARY MCCARTHY:YOGA CLASS F
OLSEN FIRE INSPECTION
10 /25/10
OLSEN FIRE INSPECTION INC:
MEDIACOM
10/25/10
SSCC - 09/16 -08/15 SVC
SOUTHSHORE SENIOR PARTNERS
10/25/10
LUNCHES FOR C ARGILL -SEPT
DREW KRIEFEL
10/25/10
SSCC SEPT SVC
10/25/10
SSCC SEPT SUPPLIES & :AIN'T
10/25/10
SSCC SEPT SUPPLIES & MAINS
- PAYROLL EXPENSES
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
TOTAL:
NON- DEPARTMENTAL water Utility MISC. VENDOR MIKITYJK, DANIL
10/25/10
10- 905003 -00
TOTAL:
Water Water Utility EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
PEEK
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
MISC. VENDOR JIM BROWN IS
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
SPRINT
CITY OF TONES BAY
OWING
WE GOETSCH ASSOCIATES, INC.
GRAINGER, INC
HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, IDD.
SUN NEWSPAPERS
MIN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY TNC
10/12/10 FICA W/H
10/12/10 MEDICARE: W/E
10/12/10 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
10/25/10 SEPT RENTAL,
10/25/10 ROLLS SOD- WATERMAIN BREAK
10/25/10 STAR LN HEARING 10/16
10/25/10 SVC 09/1.3 -10/12
10/25/10 WATER
10/25/10 OCT SVC
10/25/10 OCT SVC
10/25/10 PUMP SEAL KIT SE PLANT
10/25/10 OMRON PINTIMER
10/25/10 WATER MUTED
10/25/10 STAR WATERMAIN 10/07 & 14
30/25/0 WATER 15N
10/25/10 WATER 1S?
29,869.65
9,403.1.6
2,963.20
876.50
672.00
8,988.00
5,088.00
1,421.00
2,860.28
59,941.99
10 0.00
100.00
49.95
11.68
56.39
95.56
124.81
195.00
3,356.79
49.23
50.00
352.00
165.00
47.95
60.00
240.00
610.00
248.93
805.59
6,496.69
9.11
9.11
290.69
67.98
336.63
114.20
33.35
63.25
65.73
843.18
315.23
236.43
286.76
155.36
217.94
64.35
102.42
8.89
10 -21-2010 12:30 AM C 0 U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - OCTOBER 25, 2010 PACE: 5
DEPARTMENT FIMD VENDOR NAME IATF. 1T1rRTPrTC1N
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
Sanitary Sewer Uti METRO COUNCH, ENV.(SAC)
S ewes Sanitary Sewer Uti EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
PERA
GOPHER STATE. ONE CALL
SPRINT
CITY OF TONKA BAY
WSB AND ASSOCIATES
NORTH STAR POMP SERVICE
* *PAYROLI, EXPENSES
RS,yC7.ing Recycling Utility PRIOR - FEDERAL 1 4/11
PERA
**PAYROLL EXPENSES
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Stormwater Managem EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
PERA
SIR AND ASSOCIATES
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
-------
__— ..-__.._ FUND TOTALS =_____
4,8'08.76
101
General Fund
89,595.01
402
Park Capital improvements
87,698.86
404
Street Capital ImPYOVemen
59,941.79
490
Southahore Community Cti.
6,596.69
601
Water Utility
8,020.2E
613
Sanitary Sewer U41 Zy
9,783.00
621
Recycling Utility
357.42
631
Stcr[nwater Managementuttl
1,59750
GRAND TOTAL: 261,570.53
TOTAL PAGES: 5
10/11. /2010 - 99/99/9999
4,8'08.76
TOTAL:
8,011.15
10/25/10
SEPT SAC REPORT
4,158.00
TOTAL:
4,
10/12/10
FICA W/H
137.12
10/12/10
MEDICARE WIN
32.07
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
156.44
10/25/10
SEPT RENTAL
114.20
10/25/10
SVC 09/13 - 10/1.2
65.73
10/25/10
SEWER
360.00
10/25/10
AUG CSAH 19 REPAIRS
96.00
10/25/10
L.S.$15 & 17 RETAIN
504.45
10/25/10
L, S.#15 & 17
1 ,893.36
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
2,26
TOTAL:
5,625.00
10/12/10
FICA W/H
19.33
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/H
4.52
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
21.82
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
311.95
TOTAL:
357.42
10/12/10
FICA W/H
13.90
10/12/10
MEDICARE W/E
3.25
10/12/10
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
15.69
10/25/10
SUN WATERFORD POND ST SW R
815.50
10/25/10
AS 5925 GRANT ST DRAINAGE
525
-00
10/11/2010 - 99/99/9999
224.16
TOTAL:
1,599.50
TOTAL PAGES: 5
i
Department
Council Meeting
Item Number
Administration /Clerk
October 25, 2010
From: lean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
Item Description: Tobacco Licenses for 2010 -2011
M
Date:10 /20/10
Background / Previous Action
This Resolution issues the annual license for the sale of tobacco products to two establishments in
Shorewood. The current licenses expire on October 31, 2010. Both applicants have submitted
appropriate documentation for license renewals. The renewal license period is November 1, 2010 to
October 31, 2011.
There have been no violations reported to date during the past year for the two establishments applying
for a license.
The city has not had a response from one establishment, SASA, LLC (dba Metro Petro Gas and Food)
regarding the renewal of its tobacco license. A notice will be mailed to this establishment to remind
them that after October 31, 2010, they are not licensed to sell tobacco products. The South Lake
Minnetonka Police Department will be notified as well, so they can check on this establishment after
October 31, 2010.
Staff Recommendation
Approval of a Resolution issuing licenses to establishments to sell tobacco products.
Council Action:
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING LICENSES TO RETAILERS
TO SELL TOBACCO PRODUCTS
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code, Sections 302 and 1301 provide for the licensing
of the sale of tobacco products in the City; and
WHEREAS, said Code provides that an applicant shall complete an application, and
shall pay a licensing fee; and
WHEREAS, the following applicants have satisfactorily completed an application and
paid the appropriate fee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
That a License for the sale of tobacco products be issued for a term of one year, from
November 1, 2010 to October 31, 2011, consistent with the requirements and provisions
of Chapter 302 of the Shorewood City Code, to the following applicants:
Applicant Address
Cub Foods Shorewood
Holiday Stationstore #12
23800 State Highway 7
19955 State Highway 7
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 25th day of October, 2010.
ATTEST
Christine Lizee, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk
IN
Department
Council Meeting
Item Number
Public Works
October 25, 2010
From: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
3C
Date: October 21, 2010
Description: Authorize the Expenditure of Funds for Lift Station Maintenance
Repairs
Background / Previous Action
Each year Public Works has a service technician perform inspections and service checks on our
fifteen lift stations. This year is no exception. North Star Pump Service performed the service
checks and found a relatively small list of items. A brief summary of the work is shown in the
table below. The proposal for the work to be performed is included in Attachment 1.
Lift Station
Description
Amount
LS #6 - 27190 Smithtown Rd
Replace impellor, Pump 1
$1,850.00
LS # 9 - 20995 Minnetonka Blvd
Replace impellors, Pumps 1
and 2. Replace guide rails.
$4,590.00
LS # 17 — 5295 Shady Island Rd.
Will be addressed under
separate contract.
$0.00
Total
$6,440.00
As noted in the table above, Lift Station 17 will be completed under a separate contract under
the Lift Station 17 Rehabilitation Project. Therefore, that amount has been deleted from the
proposed work under this request.
Funds for this work have been budgeted, as part of the Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund and CIP
at a level of $25,000. Therefore adequate funds have been budgeted for this expenditure.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of a motion authorizing the expenditure of funds, not to exceed
$7,000 (including taxes and contingency) for maintenance to the sanitary sewer lift stations.
Council Action:
9245 24Th Street W,
NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE Office: ( 952`) 46950422
in Fax: (952) 469 -5246
Municipal * Industrial * Commercial northstarpumpservice.com
October 13, 2010
Larry Brown, Pub.Wks.Dir.
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331 -8926
Larry —
Thank you for recently having our man, Al Keuler, inspect your lift stations. Al noted a couple
of repairs that you may wish to consider.
Lift Station 46 — 27190 Smithtown Rd.
The impeller in your 41 pump is worn out and should be replaced. Your cost to have us famish
and install a new impeller in this pump - $1,850.00.
Lift Station #9 — Fatima Place
The guide rails for both pumps are badly worn and should be replaced. The impellers on both
pumps are also worn out and should be replaced. A new handle should be installed on #2 pump.
Your cost to have us famish and install all new stainless steel guide rails, two new impellers and
one new handle - $ 4,590.00.
Lift Station # 17 — 5295 Shady Island Rd.
The hoisting chain is badly rusted on your #1 pump and the impeller is worn out on your #2
pump. This impeller is now obsolete and the factory no longer makes a replacement. We have a
refurbished impeller, in good condition, that we offer for this pump. Your cost to have us furnish
and install new chain on your #1 pump and a refurbished impeller in your #2 pump - $1,580.00
Prices include all labor, equipment, material, travel time and mileage charges. Tax is not
included. Please call Al Keuler or myself at the cell phone numbers on the bottom of this page if
you have questions or would like to schedule any of this work.
Sincerely,
Carl Hirt
Pump Sales, Installation & Repair * Control Panel Sales & Repair * Valve & Pipe Repairs
Rental Pumps * Bypass Pumps * Periodic Maintenance Inspections
Bob Crooks (612) 597 -7373 * Mike Riippa (612) 597 -2284 * Carl Hirt (651) 398 -1049
Russ Madden (612) 597 -2269 * Kent Lehmann (612) 382 -3717 * Al Keuler (612) 597 -0685
ATTACHMENT
Department
Council Meeting
Item Number
Administration /Clerk
October 25, 2010
From: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
3N
Date: 10 /20/10
Item Description: Setting the Date for the Canvassing Board meeting
The Canvassing Board must meet between the 3 rd and 10` day following the General Election (between
Nov. 5 - 12) to approve the local election results of the Tuesday, November 2 Election. It is
recommended that this meeting take place on Monday, November 8, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. The Work
Session and Regular City Council meeting will follow the Canvassing Board meeting.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUIED:
A motion setting the date of the Canvassing Board meeting for Monday, November 8 at 6:00 p.m. at
Shorewood City Hall.
Council Action:
Department Engineering Council Meeting 10/25/10 Item Number: 3E
From: James Landini, P.E.
Item Description: Authorize Expenditure of Funds for Storm CIP project
Background / Previous Action
In 2010 we propose to improve storm drainage at 5925 Grant Street, Drainage Problem area
number 7. Staff met with the property owner to acquire an easement to install the
improvements. The property owner did not want to grant the easement but asked that the
handmade inlet be improved. Upon further investigation it was noted the storm pipe and
structure in the street was degraded. The specifications were sent to four firms, inviting them
to quote the project. The project included replacing the degraded pipe, installing a sump
structure and improving the inlet at 5925 Grant Street.
Three firms provided a Quote for the 2010 Storm Improvement Project which were opened and
tabulated on October 10, 2010. The low quoter is Parrott Contracting, Inc. in the amount of
$9,657.00. The other quoters are G. F. Jedlicki, Inc. at $11,267.40 and Machtemes
Construction, Inc. at $10,408.00.
The City of Shorewood works often with Parrott Contracting, Inc during water main breaks.
1. Direct staff to contract with Parrott Contracting, Inc. for this project.
2. Direct staff to utilize a different quoter.
3. Do nothing.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends direction to work with Parrott Contracting, Inc. for the 2010 Storm
Improvement project not to exceed $12,000.
Council Action:
C11
C
—IT
L T ,
V SANITARY SEWER
PARK S T
�� I
j
i F
954,46
E T EX 12
I �
oil
- --- ---------
0 FT
INSTALL '9UBOW
AND PVC GRA E A
END OF 4" RVE
48" DIA. PRECAST
15" FES
u ROE 960.90
CONCRETE BASE
DIA. STRUCTURE
'DOT 4011G
:TED SUBGRADE (INCIDENTAL)
STRUCTURE NO. 5000
9 NOTE:
1. CONTRACTOR TO CONTACT GOPHER STATE
ONE—CALL PRIOR TO DIGGING. PROTECTION
OF EXISTING UTILITIES IS INCIDENTAL.
2. CONTRACTOR TO SELECT TRAFFIC CONTROL
BASED ON CONSTRUCTION METHODS USED.
3. MAINTAIN ACCESS TO SOUTH DRIVEWAY.
Proposal Form
WSB PraUect Grant Street Storm Sewer Repairs Lesrspra By: SGG
Pro ton,- : City ofS
Project Loc.i Shorewood
City project No.: 10-=
WZBF,qiecIJVo. - 1-459-43 Dte: 10/142010
Na
Q
I MNIDOT
$pociscation
I
Do,saiptim,
umt
Eomnmed
utood,H unt
T.C] Unit P..e
Amo
Ourottv
Gr Street Storm Seaver
Repairs
1
2021,501
MOBILIZATION
LUMP SUM
1 1
2
2104
N
U
-AD
$
$
3
2104T503
REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
�IT
T
I 460
$
$
4
2104602
REMOVEMANHIJILE
EACH
1 1
$
$ -
5
2 4,602
SALVAGE & R9NSTALL CASTING AS SEMBLY
EACH
1 i
ID
$
6
21
EXCAVATION
CU YD
12
$
$ -
7
2501,616
15" RC PIPE APRON
EACH
$
5
8
250161' '
16" RC PIPE SEWER CLASS V
UN FT
34
$
$
9
2606 5'6
PVC DRAINAGE GRATE
EACH
1
$
10
2461 6022
GRANULAR FOUNDATION ANWOR BEDDING
TON
17
$
11
25066.6011
CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48.4020
LIN FT
6
$
1 2
4
2 5 11 .607
RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III
CU SO
4 4
1
$
1 13
"' 1 '0'
1 2511.616
-
GEOTESLEFABRICTYPER/
�1� D
8,8
$
$
74
2563.60ti
TRAFFIC CONTROL
LUMP SUM
I
$
$
Clow S".1 St.. .ww pop.im
$
1 L I L
I<
J_4LDRANTLL
REMOVE 40 LF OF
1
INSTALL 34 LF OF
15,'�',CP + 1 APR
�������
EXCELSIOR
GIDEON BAY ST ALBANS
QQQT OSR A,
� PARK
T
-Y,
LAKE
EL
LOCATION MAP
1Qa*3J:@4MzR1TA:12I
LGzu
W
W
to W
Z UJ
rn
0
(n
SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEE
12
BASE, CLASS 5
(INCIDENTAL)
I EVA
Over the past several months, James and I have been working with a few residents who live on
Silver Lake regarding drainage concerns and lake quality issues such as excessive plant
growth, reduction in wild life, and potential infill of the lake.
James and I have also communicated with the MPCA regarding storm water issues and
examined possible alternatives to the current storm water system along Covington Road.
On Tuesday, October 19, 2010 an additional concern regarding possible pollution was raised,
the specific pollutant cited was Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH).
James and I met with four residents, council member Turgeon, and council member Woodruff
and walked with the residents around the Sweetwater area looking at the various
ponds /wetlands that discharge into Silver Lake. We discussed what agency is responsible for
maintenance of the ponds1wetlands. We also discussed what agency is responsible for
addressing the various concerns raised by the residents.
1) Energy Dissipater and storm water flow off Covington Road. This is a concern to one
resident in particular as her property abuts the discharge area. The City is responsible
for maintaining the dissipater structure, which means we are responsible for inspecting
the structure to ensure it is clean and clear and functioning as it is designed. If the
structure is not operating as designed, the city is responsible for doing the necessary
maintenance and repair to get it in operational condition. The city is also responsible for
correcting or modifying the storm water conveyance system if needed in this area. The
city is in the process of obtaining the necessary permits and easements to allow us to
clean the area around the dissipater.
2) Constructed storm water ponds (NURP). There are two constructed ponds in Shorewooa
whose water ends up in Silver Lake. The city is responsible for ensuring the inlet and
outlet structures are functioning properly and are maintained in working condition. As we
all saw on the tour Wednesday, these inlets and outlets for the two ponds are in good
repair and functioning properly. The city is also responsible for maintaining the holding
capacity of these two ponds.
There are two pre- existing natural wetlands that are also part of the storm water system.
The city does not maintain these natural bodies.
The other ponds that feed into Silver Lake are the responsibility of the City of
Chanhassen.
There is an outlet from Silver Lake and the city maintains this structure. We ensure the
structure is clean and operating as designed. If there is work necessary, the city is
responsible to complete the work.
3) Silver Lake Water Quality. The residents brought forth several issues concerning the
quality of the lake water. The residents raised concerns about non - native and invasive
plants, filling in of the lake bottom or capacity to hold water in the case of a 100 year rain
event, possible pollution.
a) Generally speaking, the Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD)
is responsible for monitoring the lakes water quality and for developing plans to
correct possible issues. Depending on the type of issues, the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) and /or the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) may
also have a role in monitoring and correcting possible issues.
b) PAH — the residents raised the issue of PAH in the lake. First off, the sediment in the
lake has not been tested for the presence of PAH or other possible pollutants. We
have not tested for the presence of this material at the inlet location off Covington
Road. This may be a part of the clean -out process. Second, the cause of PAN is not
due to street maintenance activities conducted by the City. The City does not use
undiluted coal tar based products in our sealcoating operations. Undiluted coal tar is
common in commercial driveway sealants used by homeowners. The city has the
authority to adopt an ordinance banning the use of such sealants in the city;
however, enforcement and regulation is problematic which is why legislation was
introduced last year for a statewide ban.
c) I was told by the watershed district that Silver Lake is scheduled to undergo three
years of water sampling and testing including vegetation and fish assessment. The
testing period is 2011 — 2013. The information collected will be submitted to the
MPCA and become part of the RetSort program.
54! 1012 M w V UM101 1 1 151
Department Engineering Council Meeting 10/25/10 Item Number: 6A
From: James Landini, P.E.
Item Description: 2011 Road Improvement Star Lane and Star Circle
Background / Previous Action
At the Sept 27, 2010 Council meeting the feasibility study for Star Lane and Star Circle was accepted.
This included the potential to extend municipal water with the road improvement. As special
assessments are being considered for the Star Lane and Star Circle improvement project, the City must
hold a public hearing before the City Council may act on a resolution to order the improvement. As the
assessable portion of the project — installation of City Water— has been initiated by the City, at least
four - fifths of the Council must vote to approve the ordering of the project. If the Council decides that it
will not have special assessments the improvement can be ordered with a simple majority vote of the
Council.
As required by Minnesota Statute §§ 429.011 to 429.111, a Public Hearing is required prior to ordering
the improvements. This hearing was advertised in the Sun - Sailor on October 7, 2010, and October 14,
2010. The Engineer's Estimate and the proposed Assessment Roll are attached.
At the Sept 27, 2010 Council Meeting, the Feasibility report was accepted by Council. The Feasibility
report listed the following improvements:
Potential Watermain for Star Lane and Star Circle.
Sanitary sewer for Star Lane and Star Circle.
Storm sewer for Star Lane and Star Circle.
Star Lane and Star Circle to be reconstructed at a 24 -foot driving surface with edge control.
Council discussed at the meeting the design width as being 22 -foot driving surface with edge control.
Also at the Sept 27, 2010 and the Oct 11, 2010 Council meetings the Council accepted petitions to stop
the rehabilitation project.
If Council wishes to proceed, the next step is then to order the project by Resolution. Three resolutions
are attached for your consideration. One includes extension of municipal water service, one does not,
and one extinguishes the project.
Options
1. Direct staff to contract with WSE, Inc. for this project by resolution.
2. Direct staff to prepare a different resolution.
3. Do nothing.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends from a technical standpoint that the Council adopt a resolution to order
the Star Lane and Star Circle Road Improvement Project as the reconstruction option
described in the Feasibility Report.
Council Action:
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ORDERING FINALIZATION OF PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND
ESTIMATE FOR THE STAR LANE AND STAR CIRCLE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
INCLUDING WATERMAIN
WHEREAS, the 2010 -2014 Capital Improvement Program identifies the need to
improve Star Circle and Star Lane; and
WHEREAS, public information meetings for said improvement have been conducted
with solicitation of comments of affected property owners being received by the city; and
WHEREAS, WSB, Inc., has submitted the feasibility report for the initialization of
project Plans, Specifications, and Engineering Estimate.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Shorewood,
Minnesota:
That the proposed improvement be referred to WSB, Inc., for preparation of Project
Plans, Specifications, and Construction Estimates, and is to incorporate into said design
the following features.
Star Circle and Star Lane is to be reconstructed at a minimum width roadway of
22.0 feet in width driving surface, and surmountable concrete edge control outside
of the minimum width.
2. Sanitary Sewer Improvements.
3. Storm Sewer Improvements.
4. Watermain Improvements.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
this 25th day of October, 2010.
ATTEST:
Christine Lizde, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ORDERING FINALIZATION OF PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND
ESTIMATE FOR THE STAR LANE AND STAR CIRCLE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the 2010 -2014 Capital Improvement Program identifies the need to
improve Star Circle and Star Lane; and
WHEREAS, public information meetings for said improvement have been conducted
with solicitation of comments of affected property owners being received by the city; and
WHEREAS, WSB, Inc., has submitted the feasibility report for the initialization of
project Plans, Specifications, and Engineering Estimate.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Shorewood,
Minnesota:
That the proposed improvement be referred to WSB, Inc., for preparation of Project
Plans, Specifications, and Construction Estimates, and is to incorporate into said design
the following features.
Star Circle and Star Lane is to be reconstructed at a minimum width roadway of
22.0 feet in width driving surface, and surmountable concrete edge control outside
of the minimum width.
Sanitary Sewer Improvements.
Storm Sewer Improvements.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
this 25th day of October, 2010.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
I�'
A RESOLUTION TERMINATING THE STAR LANE AND STAR CIRCLE
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the 2010 -2014 Capital Improvement Program identifies the need to
improve Star Lane and Star Circle; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing in regard to the proposed
improvement project; and
WHEREAS, at such hearing the City Council received written and oral statements, and
heard petitioners for or against the proposed improvement; and
project.
WHEREAS, a majority of the written and oral statements opposed the improvement
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Shorewood,
Minnesota:
1. That the proposed Star Lane and Star Circle Improvement Project be terminated.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SIOREWOOD
this 25th day of October, 2010.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk
O
O
O
0
M
O
F
0
U
F
z
W
m
W
0
O
CL
CL
E
z
a
K
W
LU
0
r
LU
W
O
M
N
O
EE
T
Z_
W
IL
z
Z
w
y
w
ti
a
v
c
E
N
v
Q
ti
a
m
a
v
LL
N
N
O
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
m
M
M
M
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
�
y
o
Nl
a
�
to
V3
fR
fR
fA
fA
fA
fPr
fA
(f}
d3
b}
fR
b}
fPr
Q
�
J
@
N
F
�
p
O
.-
.-
O
O
�
J
F
2
CO
n
m
W
n
m
OJ
O
•-
N
M
V
In
(D
N
N
N
M
M
N
N
N
N
N
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
d
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
w
gg
<
<
<
<
Ir
�
cr
of
<<
a
af
w
z
K
K
K
tY
K
Ir
af
cr
cr:
z
x
O
F
F
a
H
a
<<
Q
a
a
F
l
l
l
la-
N
0
0
N
N
N
(n
N
N
In
0
In
0
0
w
to
to
Ln
In
tCJ
l()
to
N
N
lfJ
In
I.f)
If1
lC!
to
x
U
�
O
Z
Z
Q
CG
z
Z
a
W
W
z
Z
U
=
U
J
0
Er
w
w
a s
0
W
w
LU
a
a
a
0
O
J
v a
W
U
Z
O
Z
F
K
otf
to
Y
M
O}
m
Z
v
0
U
U
'�
O
x
a
W
'+
W
J
o(>
Q
J
m
c G
W
l
}
4S'
Y
Z
.6
O
J
Z Z
Q
U
Q
x
Q
Z
Q
j
U
p
Y
L~
W
O
a
LL
H
o m U N
O
N
0
J
Z
W�
I-
W
cts
U
_
m>
>
Y
K
m
m o a
>>
a
o q co
d
m 0
a 0 Z
�
N
M
v
m
w
n
m
m
o
.-
-
M
v-
U U S�
O
O
O
0
M
O
F
0
U
F
z
W
m
W
0
O
CL
CL
E
z
a
K
W
LU
0
r
LU
W
O
M
N
O
EE
T
Z_
W
IL
z
Z
w
y
w
ti
a
v
c
E
N
v
Q
ti
a
m
a
v
LL
N
N
O
OPTION I — PAVEMENT REMOVAL AND WATER MAIN
CONSTRUCTION
STREET FUND $464,200.00
SANITARY SEWER FUND $6,900.00
STORM WATER UTILITY FUND $27,300.00
WATER MAIN $104,300.00
OPTION 2 — PAVEMENT RECLAMATION WITHOUT
WATER MAIN CONSTRUCTION
STREET FUND $309,700
SANITARY SEWER FUND $5,900.00
STORM WATER UTILITY FUND $27,300.00
WATER MAIN $0.00
Based on this funding scenario, thirteen (13) of the benefiting property owners in the proposed
project area would be assessed $8,023.08 for Option 1— Pavement Removal. The residents of
5720 and 5715 Star Lane were assessed for water main on a previous project. The City funds
will cover the remaining costs outlined above.
Feasibility Report
Star Lane and Star Circle
Rehabilitation Project
City of Shorewood Project No. 11 -01
WSB Project No. 1459 -46
Page 9
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
Chair Norman convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Present: Chair Norman; Commissioners Edmondson,
Administrator Heck; City Council liaison Ba
Absent: Commissioner Gaidos
B. Review Agenda
Item 6A, Arctic Fever, was added to the Summer Activities
Edmondson moved, Quinlan seconded, approyltig the Agenda as
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutis of
Robb moved, Quinlan seconded, a pproving the Minutes of
Motion passed 6/0. ,
3. MATTERS
There
4. .- REPORTS
A. Report on GitT Council Meeting
and Swaggert;
passed 6/0.
14, 2010
14, 2010, as submitted.
Administrator Heck reported thatthe Council discussed road improvement plans and budget during their
work session and will be talking about the CIP and enterprise funds at their next meeting.
Bailey stated that, while the Council approved the extra five plots for the Community Garden, they
suggested the Commission consider how to assign the plots fairly in 2011 and beyond. He indicated that
the Council would prefer people not be `grandfathered' in and guaranteed their same lot every year and
instead the Commission consider a lottery system for selection.
Anderson stated that she would consider revising the Community Garden Guidelines to reflect a lottery
after next season, as the approval allowed current users to return next year.
Chair Norman agreed that giving everyone a fair shot would be best.
EM
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010
PAGE 2 OF 5
C. Update on Work Program
Anderson pointed out that the 2010 Work Program was virtually complete. She noted that the Community Garden
signs finally arrived on October 10 "', suggesting staff find a new vendor with a faster turn around time. In addition,
Anderson stated that the Skate Park drinking fountain would be installed this fall, as state approval had just been
given and public works would be working with a plumbing contractor to begin the work.
Chair Norman commended the Commission and staff on accomplishing so many of its work items for 2010.
D. Update on Manor Park Shelter and Playground
Anderson reported that the Manor Park shelter was almost complete whereas; Building Inspector Pazandak was
finalizing some finishing details on the project interior. She remindedsthe Commission of the Open House
scheduled for Saturday, October 16 at the park from loam -I2pm and invited them to attend to answer questions
and meet the neighbors. Edmondson, Quinlan, and Chair Norman thought they would be attending. Anderson
explained that public works was awaiting a final loader =peagravel fa place back in near the swing set before
putting the swings back up on the set for the kids to enjoy. She also notes] that, while meeting there on Monday,
probably 15 young children and moms were using the play structure.
E. Report on Phase 3 of Wonor Park Gardens
Anderson segued into details regarding her meeting at the park Monday, stating that Inspector Pazandak,
Communication Coordinator Moore, Park Secretary Grout, Mayor Lizee and .Julie Westerlund of the MCWD all
met with her at the Park to discuss next steps for the Park.
Together they discussed a pervious paver patio, native gardens to aid in water quality improvements, as well as,
drainage. Anderson no tl that the Julie Westerlund suggested the City consider applying for a Cynthia Kreig
Grant to apply to the park. Anderson indicated that the city had applied for and received similar grants in the past
with few requirements regardlJp
rgafohingg, nda,etc. With the Commissions support, she stated that Moore,
Grout, and herzffvvoad be com§ag a grant application for Manor Park and the Southshore Center, to clean up
the creek arm near it, ifterdqr to rueefthe upcoming deadline of October 20 "'.
agreed and requested an, update with regard to the application when available.
on Sherwood Park Shelter
Anderson complimented the Public Works staff on a great job at Silverwood, noting that the grading, sodding and
seeding, and clean up wu complete. She stated that the site looks great and encouraged Commissioners to stop by
to take a look. She added, that each time she has visited the site; residents have been using the new shelter and
thanked her on behalf of the city for installing it.
G. Update on Arctic Fever
Chair Norman stated that many of the same participants have joined ranks again this year and that planning is in
full swing for 2011. He stated that there would be an Arctic Fever Committee meeting on Wednesday evening.
Anderson interjected that she had partnered with Arctic Fever on behalf of the Southshore Center and would be
creating a Medallion Hunt for adults following clues to a $500 cash prize and a Find Frosty contest, a children's
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010
PAGE 3 OF 5
plush version of the hunt. She mentioned that the Festival would be expanding to two days this year with a hot air
balloon lift off Sunday morning in Excelsior followed by a Princess Tea Party at the Southshore Center in the
afternoon, featuring the Arctic Fever Princess, harp music, face paint, tea party and American Girl Doll prize
drawing.
5. BUILDING A COMMUNITY DVD
Anderson introduced the `Building a Community DVD' for the Commission to view stating that
Administrator Heck had received it and asked her to view it to determine whether -fit might be worthwhile
of the Park Commission to view. Created in partnership with TPT television and the Mn League of
Cities, Anderson stated that it was a thought provoking and locally produced video
Following the video, Heck invited the Commission to share what thoughts it sparked for them with
regard to what more the Commission or Shorewood could conside"oing with its summer programming
and the importance of keeping, providing, and nurturing its growth.
Edmondson indicated that he was intrigued by what more the City could = w and should be doing. With
regard to adding theatre, recognizing our local history, poetry, and much more, Edmondson urged staff to
funnel all of the ideas towards parks.
Chair Norman stated that, while art is a broad unabbella. and we do wairt fo grove our activities in the park,
we offer quite a bit in our parks already for a communtf-' o size.
T
Quinlan welcomed new ideas and agreed with Edmondsoh that we should consider new opportunities.
Acknowledging that they may; atifires, have limited vision, he welcomed a more artistic approach. He
thought the creative vets, es on the sidewalks were brilliant and an inexpensive way to put a signature on
the community.
Trent commended staff for
and the Commfs"on:ovenn
their viewing. He thought it triggered in him
Swagggrt,suggested the Commission consider carving out a niche or focus to pursue.
Robb noted that, although quite, pread out and difficult to instill a real sense of community, Shorewood
should strive eyen,more so to build our spaces, as well as, provide green space and art in our parks as
suggested by the TKDA proposal in order to create a unique sense of community.
6. SUMMER ACTIVITTES,
The previous DVD discussion spilled over to a discussion of Summer Activities. Anderson touched on
the many successful activates the City provides over the course of the summer and provided the
Commission with staff suggestions for their consideration. Anderson strongly urged the Commission to
make a recommendation with regard to 2011 programs in order for staff to meet many publication
deadlines missed last year. She reminded the Commission that music in the park this year failed because
the Commission did not choose to move forward on them in a timely enough fashion to make newsletters,
newsprint, magazines, or other deadlines for 2010.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010
PAGE 4 OF 5
Chair Norman suggested that the Arctic Fever funding allocation of $1500 be adopted as one of staff
recommendation bullet points as well.
Trent urged the Commission to consider re- allocating some of the money from the larger music in the
park performance and spread it over some new activities spurred by the DVD.
Quinlan agreed that, while it is important to have a variety of programs to create a well rounded
portfolio, he realized the Commission cannot spend too long debating what too or they will miss
valuable deadlines once again.
Chair Norman stated that, having spoken to his neighbors, many
many music outlets vying for their attention and that they would
else.
Robb questioned that, while the music in the park was
what else could the City provide that is not being met,
that there are just too
pd to attend something
to compete with other music outlets,
Edmondson suggested they consider the concept of local community theatre
Heck stated that, while he has experience ineatre, Shorewood does a pt have an amphitheatre in its
parks. He pointed out that New Hope and Ply t�,bave these prograxhsand are successful. Although
we do not have the lights, sound, sets, etc, he believetf- basic needs covld7ie met on a downscaled
version.
Chair Norman threw out the idba of hosting different music options, such as big band, blue grass, or
swing, if music in the park-Were to'sTa. He suggested that the Commissioners provide Anderson with a
list of their most creatJ e pew park p amming concepts in the next one to two weeks so that staff can
research and report back at the mext meeting and action "chi be taken.
Anderson urged the -Commission to;take action on all of the bullet point items regarding park programs as
possible this evening. She asked whether the movie in the park at Manor appealed to them or if staff
could ptit ue and book some of the other park Friday programs in order to submit them for publication.
Trent moved:t the Commission proceed with all of the bullet park items, including Arctic Fever
funding, exee0flor music in the park.
Chair Norman suggested . they make separate motions.
Trent withdrew his
Trent moved, Edmondson seconded, recommending that the Park Commission not move forward
with Root City Band for 2011 Music in the Park. Motion passed 511. Quinlan opposed to
eliminating the music in the park program altogether.
Trent moved, Swaggert seconded, recommending that staff proceed with all of the other bullet
items, with the addition of Arctic Fever funding of $1500 for 2011. Motion passed 511, Robb
dissenting as he did not support the movie.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2010
PAGE50F5
Chair Norman encouraged staff to investigate arts grants.
7. DETERMINE LIAISON FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS FOR OCTOBER,
NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER
October 25 - Trent
November 22 - Swaggert
December meeting Chair Norman
8. NEW BUSINESS
Administrator Heck pointed out that, with the CIP discussion scheduled at the 6691 Council meeting, he
suggested the Commission reconsider its line item to create a, ieromment sliding hi41gn Freeman Park. In
talking with staff, not only did public works find it difficult to attend to the construction of a mound of
dirt this summer, they questioned the ongoing maintenafice of the hit]. They questioned hovb4t would be
mowed, and if not, what condition of weeds would be covering it in the summer, creating acid eyesore.
Heck stated that public works is willing to dedicate time to creating the sliding hill of snow for Arctic
Fever in the winter, and in fact enjoy doing so. Not only does building the snow hill provide public
works with a place to store the snow, it me]A in the spring, thus eliminating any mess.
Chair Norman stated that he had no problem removing 4 from the CiP if`pub1ic works staff can build the
sliding hill each winter.
Heck indicated that, if
Swaggert moved,
passed 6/0.
9.
moved, Quinlansecond'
p.m. Motion Dasaed 6/0.
works will build the
removing to sliding hill from the 2011 CIP. Motion
the Park Commission Meeting of October 12,
Kristi B..
Recorder
CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
TUESDAY, 21 SEPTEMBER 2010 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Gong called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M.
ROLL CALK
Present: Chair Gong; Commissioners Vilett, Davis, Arnst, and Hasek; Planning Director Nielsen; Council
Liaison Woodruff
Absent: Commissioners Hutchins and Ruoff
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Arnst moved, Hasek seconded, approving the Planning Commission Meeting Agenda of September 21,
2010 as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of the September 14, 2010 Meeting Minutes was deferred to a future date.
1. PUBLIC FORUM — DISCUSS NO -RIGHT -TURN SIGN AT SHOREWOOD SHOPPING
CENTER AND LAKE LINDEN DRIVE
In early September a notice was sent to property owners within 1000 feet of the Shorewood Village Shopping
Center property at 23800 State Highway 7 informing them of this meeting. As a result the City received
written comments from area residents, and there were several persons in attendance at the meeting. For the
benefit of the audience, Chair Gong described the role of the Planning Commission as an advisory body, and
he explained that this meeting was a forum for information and discussion purposes, rather than a public
hearing.
Director Nielsen reviewed his staff report stating that in 2002 the owners of the Shorewood Village Shopping
Center made application to redevelop the Center including the addition of the CUB Food Store. During the
application process, the developer attempted to address concerns raised by area residents, many of which had
to do with traffic on Lake Linden Drive, Yellowstone Trail and Country Club Road. One of the measures
proposed was to design an entry to the Center that would preclude certain traffic movements. The driveway
located on the west side of the CUB Foods parking lot was designed as a right- in/left-out only, restricting a
right -turn onto Lake Linden Drive. The purpose was to prohibit truck traffic from going north on Lake
Linden Drive and to discourage non -local traffic from using it as a shortcut to Comity Road 19.
Initially the effectiveness of the no -right -turn restriction was questioned, and many local residents were
ticketed for violating it. More recently, the restriction has been questioned due, in part, to lack of
enforcement. The City agreed to revisit the matter after improvements were completed at the intersection of
County Road 19 and Smithtown Road since the new intersection was designed to curtail cut - through traffic
from the same route.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
21 September 2010
Page 2 of 4
Roger Ludke, 5915 Minnetonka Drive, stated that he shops at CUB Foods five days a week, sometimes twice
a day. He said he uses the west entry by turning left off of Lake Linden Drive, but when leaving he said he
uses the main exit in accordance with the law, but which is a pain. He said he never sees trucks turning right
(illegally) at the west exit, but said lie often sees cars doing so. He stated that he would like to see the sign
changed to restrict trucks from turning right onto Lake Linden Drive, but allow the shoppers to turn right.
Jerry O'Niell, 24550 Nelsine Drive, said he agrees 100% with Roger Ludke's statements. He said the only
vehicles he sees taking a left turn out of the west exit are semis, and they couldn't turn right if they wanted to.
He said in the late afternoon the traffic is all backed up in front of the main exit, so anyone wanting to leave
the parking lot is going to turn right at the west exit.
Roger Ludke said he never sees the Police there to enforce the right -turn violators and it really bothers him.
Sally Schwarz, 24200 Yellowstone Trail, stated she would like to see traffic discouraged from going through
that area however it is possible. She said she likes to walk but there are so many people speeding and using
their cell phones while driving it feels dangerous.
Roger Champa, 25000 Nelsine Drive, said he sympathizes with what Ms. Schwarz said about the dangers of
walking, but things have changed a lot over the last ten years. He said ten years ago, Highway 7 had five
entrances and now there are only two. Shorewood has a real problem with Highway 7, especially at Eureka
Road and Hwy. 7 where there needs to be a stop light. The whole picture needs to be looked at. He said he
sat at CUB Foods for six minutes and saw fourteen cars turn right illegally. He said he is in favor of changing
the sign, maybe to a no -left turn.
Commissioner Hasek commented that he cannot understand how someone can take a right -turn where a sign
clearly indicates no right -turn. He stated that while he has never violated the no -right turn himself, he sat
across from the west exit on Saturday from 9:45 A.M. to 10:00 A.M. and observed eight cars leave the site at
the main exit legally, and another eight cars turned right at Lake Linden Drive illegally. He said every single
car that turned illegally crossed over the centerline due to the configuration of the curbing. He said there was
also a garbage truck that turned illegally and crossed entirely into the other (on- coming traffic) lane. Along
Yellowstone Trail, the problem isn't the cars, he said, the problem is the buses and large trucks and the City
needs to find a way to get some of the traffic off of that route. He noted there could have been many traffic
tickets issued just within the fifteen minutes he was sitting at the site, and in his opinion the sign should either
be enforced or eliminated, but the greater problem is truck traffic.
Commissioner Arnst said that from looking through the information provided it doesn't appear there was any
more reason for the sign than as a way to appease neighborhood fears about traffic and large trucks. She said
she supports the idea of changing the sign to restrict right -turns for trucks only, and a reconfiguration of the
curbing. She stated she agrees with everyone that the real problem is traffic volume.
Commissioners Vilett and Davis both agreed with Artist about changing the sign to restrict trucks and also
looking at the volume of traffic.
Council Liaison Woodruff said he thinks a no- right -turn for trucks is a reasonable change and if trucks are
observed violating the restriction then there needs to be enforcement.
Director Nielsen said if the sign specified "trucks over 8,000 lbs" that would be clearly understandable as to
which vehicles are subject to the turn restriction.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
21 September 2010
Page 3 of 4
Hasek moved, Vilett seconded, to recommend changing the no -right -turn sign at the Shorewood Village
Shopping Center northwest access to Lake Linden Drive to a no -right -turn for commercial vehicles
over a certain weight. Motion passed 5/0.
Council Liaison Woodruff suggested that the cost estimates for reconfiguration of the curbing be available by
the time this item goes before the City Council. Director Nielsen said that would be the meeting of October
25, and he will have the curbing costs ready as well as the suggested weight limit for restricted vehicles.
2. UNDEVELOPED RIGHT -OF -WAY STUDY
Director Nielsen stated that periodically the City gets requests from property owners for vacation of public
right -of -way. In some cases it's an unusually wide street right -of -way. where they just want part of the excess
width vacated, and in other cases it's a request to vacate the entire right -of -way of a "paper street ", an
undeveloped right -of -way. The study is an attempt to be prepared ahead of time in the event a right -of -way
vacation is requested.
Director Nielsen said some of the undeveloped rights -of -way are actually old Fire Lanes. A Fire Lane Study
was done several years ago resulting in a classification system for the existing Fire Lanes. These Fire Lanes
remain as lake access for local neighborhoods, and no changes are being recommended.
The staff report identifies fifteen undeveloped rights -of -way, provides a brief description, and a
recommendation in the event of a vacation request. The Planning Commission reviewed the report street by
(undeveloped) street.
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
None.
4. NEW BUSINESS
Commissioner Arnst stated that based on the comments received at the Forum regarding the no-right -turn
sign, it appears that traffic volume in Shorewood needs attention, especially the intersection of Eureka Road
at Highway 7 which is very dangerous. She noted that the volume of traffic on Smithtown Road has
increased since the new intersection at the west end of Smithtown Road and Highway 7 was completed.
Director Nielsen said the Commission can start a study on transportation by reviewing the traffic counts and
other information that is already available.
Commissioner Vilett said enforcement is another issue that should be part of the transportation study.
Council Liaison Woodruff said local law enforcement gets a relatively small portion of revenues from traffic
fines, which might be part of their enforcement priorities. He said if there is a consensus among the
Commission for increased enforcement, then that should be brought to the attention of the City Council.
5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA
Director Nielsen said that discussion regarding the intersection of Galpin Lake Road /Highway 7 and Eureka
Road traffic information will be part of the October 5` Agenda. Also, a site visit to the Smithtown Crossing
area would be slated for 6:15 P.M. that evening.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
21 September 2010
Page 4 of 4
6. REPORTS
• Liaison to Council
None.
• SLUC
None.
• Other
None.
7. ADJOURNMENT
Vilett moved, Arnst seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of September 21, 2010 at
8:33 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
Patti Helgesen, Recorder
X1111RI11AiX GKOMI
Department: Planning Council Meeting: 10/25/10 Item Number: 8A
From: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director
Item Description: No Right -Turn Restriction — Shorewood Village Center
Background / Previous Action
When the CUB Foods store was added to the Shorewood Village Shopping Center at the
intersection of State Highways 7 and 41, approval of the site plan included a no right -turn
restriction at the westerly access drive to the property. At that time there was some concern
that the new store would increase traffic, especially truck traffic, on Lake Linden Drive,
Yellowstone Trail and Country Club Road. Also at that time, the City was beginning the redesign
and construction of the intersection of County Road 19 and Smithtown Road. When the site
plan was approved, it was suggested that traffic on Lake Linden, Yellowstone and Country Club
Road be monitored and the issue of the turn restriction should be revisited some time after the
County Road 19 intersection was completed (see attached staff report for greater detail on the
background).
The Planning Commission held a public forum on this matter in September, after staff had
notified property owners within 1000 feet of the Center (the same mailing radius used for the
original development). After reading written comments and listening to public testimony, the
Planning Commission voted to recommend that the sign be changed so as to restrict truck
traffic, but not automobile traffic. In this regard, staff recommends that the sign read: "No
Right -Turn Vehicles in excess of 8000 Ibs GW ". This allows the standard pickup truck or
automobile to turn there, but prohibits larger vehicles including step vans (e.g. single -axle
bakery trucks) from making that turn.
Along with the recommendation to change the sign, they suggested that the curb radius for the
right turn be increased to make the turn easier. Staff was asked to determine the cost for doing
that and estimates it at approximately $4000 (considerably less than the original $100,000
estimate). It may be worth noting that an un -named staff member made the turn in an average
sized pickup truck to see how tight the turn actually is. With caution, it is possible to make the
turn without having to cross the center line with the front of the truck and without clipping the
curb. However, anyone making the turn in a hurry or approaching the street too close to the
curb would likely do one or the other.
Council Action:
Options
As always, doing nothing is an option. Otherwise, the Council could direct staff to remove the
turn restriction entirely, change the sign to apply only to truck traffic, and reconstruct the curb
with a greater radius.
Staff Recommendation
Given the concerns of area residents, staff agrees with the Planning Commission
recommendation to change the restriction to trucks over 8000 lbs. Public Works Director
Brown recommends that the sign not be changed until the curbing can be corrected. Given the
time of year, this would have to be a spring project. This leaves only the question of where the
money to pay for it comes from.
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD - SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 • (952) 960 -7900
FAX (952) 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhali@d.shorewood.mn.us
TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
FROM: Brad Nielsen
DATE: 20 September 2010
RF: No Right -Turn Restriction — Lake Linden Drive (from Shorewood
Village Shopping Center
FILE NO. 405(02.01)
The Planning Commission meeting scheduled for 21 September includes a public
forum to discuss the no right -true restriction that currently exists at the westernmost
access to the Shorewood Village Shopping on Lake Linden Drive. This is intended to
provide some background as to how the restriction originally came about,
In 2002, the owners of the Shorewood Village Shopping Center made an application
for the redevelopment of the Center which included the CUB Food Store that
currently exists there today. The developer was initially turned down on its first
proposal which included certain variances to Shorewood's Zoning Code. A second
application resulted in approval of the site plan shown on Exhibit A, attached. The
revised plan attempted to address several concerns raised by area residents, many of
which had to do with traffic on Lake Linden Drive, Yellowstone Trail and Country
Club Road. Exhibit contains examples of correspondence received by the City
during the review of the CUB proposal. It must be noted that these examples are not
exhaustive, but rather somewhat representative of comment we received.
Exhibit C contains excerpts from the developer's application booklet that were
intended to resolve, or at least mitigate, neighborhood concerns. One of the measures
proposed was to design the entry in question to preclude certain traffic movernents.
The original design was a simple right -in only that would accommodate delivery
trucks- Due to some revisions required by MNDOT at the main at the 7/41
intersection, the Lake Linden access was modified as shown on Exhibit A. The turn
restriction was added to prohibit truck traffic from going north on Lake Linden and to
®b
0.14 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Mernora ndum
Re: Lake Linden Drive Turn Restriction
20 September 2010
discourage non -local traffic from using Lake Linden, Yellowstone and Country Chub
as a short-cut to County Road 19.
At the time there were those who questioned the effectiveness of the restriction and
the City agreed to revisit the matter after improvements to the intersection of County
Road 19 and Smithtown Road were completed. When local residents were later
ticketed for violating the turn restriction, the City once again agreed to revisit the
matter at some time in the future. Most recently, the restriction has been questioned .
due, in part, to lack of enforcement.
For Fuesday night's meeting, a notice was sent to property owners within 1000 feet of
the Center, the same mailing list as the original development proposal. To date we
have received written correspondence from only five people, although a number of
people have indicated they would be at the meeting.
Cc: Brian Heck
Larry Brown
James Landim
-2-
e
tt f E W
7 w K S
CO'
RENFRNS
ci
W L o
(D
Q C
� W
J
W m
O U f
� 3
z
L 1
O O �
T �
fin e
s
w
y ,
Vii
t F7
MAY 2 2 2x02
To the: Shorewood Planning Commission, City Council and Staff
RE, Cub Development
I would like to take this opportunity to express our opposition to the proposed Cub Foods
at 7 & 41. Approximately 12 years ago, Byerly's was proposed to build at Old Market &
7. The Planning Commission, City Council and Staff all carefully listened to the citizens of
Shorewood. The proposal was defeated because the voices of the citizens were heard and
the proposal was removed. Byerly's relocated elsewhere._ Chanhassen.
This proposal of Cub Foods is very similar to the 'Byerly's proposal because of the fact
that it will totally disrupt our peaceful neighborhood that we wish to continue living in.
The citizens of Shorewood have never asked for Cub Foods. We addressed this situation
a few months ago, and Super Valu delayed the proposal. What part of we don't taunt you
in our neighborhood is it that Cub /Super Valu and the City doesn't understand?
Cub /Super Valu has not been honest with the citizens and City about store deliveries. The
times of deliveries and amount of delivery trucks. Even now I see vendor trucks leaving
Driskill's, cutting through Lake Linden, Yellowstone Trail and Country Club Road to go
to Mound. It will only get worse. And fixing the corner of Country Club Road, Co. Rd
19 and Smithtown Rd. is not going to make it better. I think the Planning Commission
and City Council need to visit the Cub at 7 & 101 and truly get a chance to see the amount
of trucks that come every day seven days a week. You would be surprised how many
trucks there really are. Don't be misled by a large corporation looking at dollar $$ signs.
You need to ask yourself some questions, Why are they so determined to build this Cub
Foods three (3) miles from 7 &101? What exactly are there ulterior motives?
Please, please, please do not let them build Cub Foods at 7 & 41. It's not what the
citizens of Shorewood want. Your respect and support in this issue is much appreciated.
Thank..you,
�
Brian and Ma`ha I�uhnlyl
24300 Ridge Pt, Cir.
Shorewood, MN 55331
r+
KIMBERLEY A. POE
May 26, 2002
Dear Planning Director,
My name is Kimberley Poe and I reside at 23320 Park Street My property has
frontage on Yellowstone Trail.
I am opposed to building a Cub Foods at the proposed site for the following
reasons:
1) Yellowstone Trail and our neighborhood has yet to realize the traffic impact of all of the
new construction in and around the area.
2) Yellowstone Trail, Eureka, Country Club and Minnetonka Drive would be adversely
affected by those living in Minnetrista, Mound, Orono, Tonka Bay Excelsior and other
communities that would cut across from Highway 19 to Lake Linden.
3) Driskill's is a member of our corrununity. Driskill's is the only non - superstore grocery
remaining in out area and I prefer the ability to run in, pick up a few items and get out in a
short amount of time. Should our only choice be Cub or SuperTarget?
4) Who wants to see a big box at the gates of our precious core vanity? Do we really want
downtown Shorewood to be represented by Cub Foods or any other superstore?
5) A concept such as this should not be considered at intersection that sits in the backyards
of existing residential home. It forces our Shorewood neighborhood roads to become the
expressway for other communities to access it. Cub should consider other locations where a
true 4 -way intersection already exists.
6) And most importantly, this intersection remains dangerous enough without adding even
more traffic to the mix.
Please do not allow the developers proposal to advance. The property tax increase
for that parcel could never outweigh the irreparable damage to out commu. ity!
Sincerely;
Kimberley Poe
Realtor, GRI
Minnetonka Realty, Inc.
23320 PARK SPRBIP.T ^ I XCP.LSIOR, MINNiSOTA ^ 55331
HOME PHONE. 952- 470 -6749 ^ CELL PHONE: 612- 270 -0406
Pat Fasching
From:
Ken Huskins [ken.huskins @sopheon.com]
Sent:
Wednesday, June 26, 2002 8:53 AM
To:
'cityhaII @ci.shorewood.mn.us'
Cc:
'Ruth Lane'
Subject:
Proposed Cub Foods Store at 41 & 7
Woody Love, Mayor
Christine Lizee
Scott Zerby
Laura Turgeon
Dear Al :L :
My wife and I reside at 24075 Mary Lake Trail, Shorewood, and we are
COMPLETELY AGAINST the placement of a Cub Foods store at 41 & 7. We built
our home just over a year ago and moved to Shorewood for the quality of
life. Already, we see increased traffic in our neighborhood and don't want
it to increase more. Also, we are worried about the impact on the water
table.
Please take into account our wishes when you vote on July 8th.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Ken Huskins and Ruth bane
24075 Mary Lake Trail
Shorewood, MN 55331
daytime phone: 952 -851 -7563
ken.huskinsWsopheon.com
job
1 m
Pat Fasching
From:
Curt Ahart [ahartcurtis @gwest.net]
Sent:
Wednesday, June 26, 2002 10:28 PM
To:
cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us
Subject:
Cub
My entire neighorhood opposes Cub foods coming to Shorewood. I am sure
somebody will profit from this, but not are community. I HAVE NOT HEARD
ANYBODY PRESENT ANY COMPELLING LOGIC FOR A CUB IN SHOREWOOD. WE HAVE A CUB
AT 7 AND 101, WHY DO WE NEED ANOTHER? MOST OF US DRIVE BY THAT CUB
EVERYDAY!!!!!!!! WE DON'T WANT THE TRAFFIC AND PEOPLE COMING INTO OUR
COMMUNITY!!!:
Curt Ahart
WiseNets
952- 470 -6600 Office
952 - 250 -6720 Cell
ahartcurtis @gwest.n.et
3/03/02
TO: City of Shorewood / Planning Department
Subject: Cub Foods Store at Hwy. 41 & 7
c
MAR 6 2002
We live at the south end of the Minnetonka Country Club off of Yellowstone Trail. We use
Hwy. 41 & 7 and Lake Linden Drive to enter our neighborhood. We" are a heavy user of
the Shorewood Shopping Center spending about $300 to $400 a month at Driskills plus
we shop at Snyder and True Value.
We wanted to make this short and to the point but after going to the meeting on Feb. 19
we find that to be impossible. This neighborhood would be giving up a lot just to save a
few dollars on groceries.
We do not want a Cub Foods at this center far the following reasons:
We do not want the added congestion on Country Club Yellowstone Lake Linden Hwy
41 & 7 or in the parking lot itself.
• There have been several deaths at Hwy. 41 & 7 - Adding more traffic is not a
good idea.
• Most of Cub's customers will not come from the west side of Shorewood. (Even
Cub agrees they will come from Chaska, St. Boni, Tonka Bay, Mound.)
Cub does not fit in with the look and feel of Shorewood.
® The resident who said that "the foot is too big for the shoe" is 100% correct.
Even with adding a few stripes of red brick and block windows it is still TOO BIG.
® We like the look and feel of the area we live in. The trees and woods interspersed
between properties offer a buffer to the homes near by from the noise and traffic of
Hwy. 7 and the shopping center. The size of a Cub store - replacing woods and
trees with a large concrete block building and paved parking lots is repulsive. It is
completely out of character with what Shorewood is.
We do not want a Cub foods because they do not add service. convenience or value to our
life.
® We prefer a grocery store that can be navigated in a short time and offers added
services like bagging and carry out of your groceries.
® We do not need endless selection and huge sizes of products. If we do need this on
occasion there are 6 large grocery stores a mere 4 to 5 miles from 7 & 41.
r
Sh opping C enter Expansion P • • •'
Sh orewood y i
SH ORE WOOD
are facing TH 7 and TH 41 where all the primary access is located. The
residential neighbors will be 'buffered with substantial evergreen plantings and
special entry features. The plan does in fact protect the neighbors from high
intensity use intrusions and complies with required City separations and buffers.
4. Residential neighborhoods shall be protected from penetration by through traffic. (Plan
pg. LU -8)
Proposal: Because of existing cut - through traffic, the City of Shorewood is rerouting
County Road 19 to restrict the connection to Country Club Road north of the
shopping center, thus reducing the volume of unwanted traffic on Country Club
Road and southerly connecting streets. The proposed shopping center addition
uses primarily vacant commercially zoned land for development. The plan also
constrains access to Lake Linden Drive making the southern entrance at TH 7 and
TH 41 most convenient for traffic outside of the immediate neighborhood. This
provides for maximum protection to the neighborhood against traffic cutting
through.
5. Residential neighborhoods shall be protected from adverse environmental impacts,
including noise, air and visual pollution. (Plan pg. LU -9)
I Proposal: Landscaping and buffering will shield adjacent residential development from any
additional visual impacts at the Shorewood Village Shopping Center. Drainage is
directed toward other drainage districts where possible, with underground storage
7 replacing walled storm ponds previously proposed. Lights will be shielded and
downcast to prevent glare, and air emissions from the shopping center will meet
I all applicable state and local requirements. The shopping center is orientated to
the south away from residential areas, with the building located between
residential land and Hwy 7 to maximize noise attenuation. The side drive through
3 previously proposed has been eliminated and redesigned access off of Lake
Linden Drive will further reduce non - neighborhood traffic. The City is likely to
place further restrictions on noise and light through an hours of operation
ordinance with which the shopping center and Cub Foods intend to comply.
3
6. The City of Shorewood's commercial development shall be oriented towards
"convenience" type of shopping geared toward neighborhood or community scale
markets. (Plan pg- LU -9)
Proposal: The urban Land Institute states in its Shopping Center Development Handbook,
the definitive reference material for development standards, that "a supermarket is
the principal tenant in the neighborhood center. The neighborhood center
provides for the sate of convenience goods (food, drugs, and sundries) and
personal services, those which meet the daily needs of an immediate
Narrative for Application
Page 9 of 22
11 i e , qirua� 20
Shopping Center Expansion Propos-cM.
Shorewood VillagM
SHOREWOOD,
9. Low density residential neighborhoods within the community shall be protected from
encroachment or intrusion of incompatible higher density residential land uses, as well
as nonresidential use categories, through adequate buffering and separation. (Plan pg.
11O -7)
Proposal: Actually, the parcel that is proposed to be reguided, is a protusion of a residential
parcel into the commercial area, and therefore restricts unified shopping center
development encouraged on page LU -12 of the Comprehensive Plan. (See
Comprehensive Plan, Proposed Land Use Plan, pg. LU -23 and Figure 113) The
residential area around the parcel is low to medium density (the closest home is a
duplex) and transitional to commercial. The proposed plan provides all required
buffers with minimal visual intrusion. The redesign minimizes access off of Lake
Linden Drive, calming neighborhood traffic. The shopping center and addition
are facing TH 7 and TH 41 where all the primary access is located. The
residential neighbors will be buffered with substantial evergreen plantings and
special entry features. The plan does in fact protect the neighbors from high
intensity use intrusions and complies with required City separations and buffers.
10. The character of individual residential neighborhoods shall be respected and maintained.
(Plan pg. HO -7)
Proposal: Through the use of extensive landscaping within the perimeter buffers and
additional plantings along Lake Linden Drive, the character of the neighborhood
is being respected and maintained. The developer is also proposing to add special
neighborhood monuments as a gateway feature to augment traffic - calming and
neighborhood identity. (See Proposed Concept A, Lake Linden Gateway Feature)
By moving access to the shopping center from Lake Linden Drive further to the
south with a right in turn lane from the south, impacts will be further minimized
in the residential area.
11. Residential developments shall be protected from, and located away from, sources of
adverse environmental impacts including noise, air and visual pollution. (Plan pg. HO-
7)
Proposal: The proposal is for commercial development between a low to medium density
neighborhood with some R -C zoning to the west and the regional highway
system. Commercial is more appropriate at the intersection of two state highways
than residential land uses. The extra land being sought for commercial uses does
not push further north into residential areas, rather it just fills in a notch on the
west corner of the commercial area to allow a more unified commercial layout
and to mitigate the acquisition by the City of 0.79 ac for TH 7 right -of -way
expansion. The building location creates a physical barrier for the northerly
residential area to adverse 'impacts associated with TH 7.
Narrative for Application
Page 11 of 22
11 February 2002
Shopping Center Expansion Proposal
Shorewood Village
SHOREWOOD,
TRAFFIC
Traffic from the proposed Cub Foods Grocery Store versus a similar amount of general retail for
an expanded Shorewood Village Shopping Center as it affects the collector road, is an issue that
has been researched and analyzed by Meyer Mohaddes Associates, traffic engineers. Their full
report and analysis is included with this Application. (Traffic Study, Shorewood Village Center
Expansion, September 4, 2001) The comprehensive findings show that there will be a modest
increase of 190 vehicles per day (vpd) on Lake Linden Drive due to customers visiting Cub
Foods. The proposed plan also includes the traffic calming measure of moving the Linden Lake
Drive entrance to the south to control truck traffic access along with a neighborhood gateway
feature on Lake Linden Drive. The study fully details both weekday and weekend vehicular
trips. In addition, Trunk Highway 5 and 41 intersection capacity was analyzed, finding that
operations at a level of service C are maintained under all scenarios.
Based upon the analysis of traffic forecasts and operations, the following conclusions were made
(Traffic Study, pg. 14):
• Traffic increases on Lake Linden Drive, Yellowstone Trail, and Country Club Road
will be very modest with the Cub Foods re- development plan when compared to an
expanded shopping center without Cub Foods. The difference in traffic on city streets
is as follows:
• Lake Linden Drive will increase by 190 vpd on a weekday and 174 vpd on a
Saturday.
• Yellowstone Trail will increase by 127 vpd on a weekday and 118 vpd on a
Saturday.
• Country Club Road will increase by 112 vpd on a weekday and 104 vpd on a
Saturday.
• Cub Foods operates on a 24 hour - basis, the current development pattern operates on
an 18 -hour basis. Therefore, traffic volumes will increase on the road system
between the hours of 12 a.m. and 6 a.m. The business activity for Cub Foods during
this time period is light, the number of total trips generated during this period will be
139 vehicles on a weekday and 154 vehicles on a weekend day. Most of these trips
will take place on TH 7 and TH 41.
• The capacity of the
collector street system will
adequately handle
the change in
vehicles generated
by the Shorewood Village
Shopping Center
redevelopment
scenarios.
• The intersection of TH 7 and 41 will accommodate the additional traffic generated by
the redevelopment of the Shorewood Village Shopping Center for both the Cub Foods
Narrative for Application
Page 19 of 22
11 February 2002 _
Shopping • • Proposal
Shorewood •
SHOREWOOD,
development scenario and the comparative scenario. The intersection is expected to
operate at Level of Service C. No mitigation will be required.
Narrative for Application
Page 20 of 22
11 February 2002
Capacity Analysis
The capacity of the intersection of TH WTH 41 was analyzed using Synchro. Synchro is a
macroscopic traffic analysis program that replicates Highway Capacity Manual Methods. The
intersection with the re- designed configuration with the Cub Foods re- development traffic and
the comparative development traffic operated at a Level of Service C. In addition, an analysis
was conducted increasing the traffic volumes by a theoretical 20% which was used to reflect
regional growth in traffic. Each of these analyses resulted in Level of Service C operation the
detailed calculations can be found in the appendix.
The capacity of the city streets was assessed against service volrune thresholds provided in the
Highway Capacity Manual. 5,000 vehicles per day or less is equal to ,Level of Service A
operation. Level of Service D or better is considered to be acceptable operations on streets in
urbanized areas.
Conclusions
Based upon the analysis of traffic forecasts and operations the following conclusions can be
made:
• Traffic increases on Lake Linden Drive, Yellowstone Trail, and Country Club
Road will be very modest with the Cub Re- development plan when compared
to an expanded Shopping Center without Cub Foods. The differnce in traffic
on city streets is as follows
• Lake Linden Drive will increase by 190 vpd on a weekday and 174 vpd on
a Saturday.
• Yellowstone Trail will increase by 127 vpd on a weekday and 118 vpd on
a Saturday.
• Country Club Road will increase by 112 vpd on a weekday and 104 vpd
on a Saturday.
• Cub Foods operates on a 24 hour- basis, the current development pattern
operates on an 18 -hour basis. Therefore, traffic volumes will increase on the
road system between the hours of 12 a.m and 6 a.m. The business activity for
Cub Foods during this time period is light, the number of total trips generated
during this period will be 139 vehicles on a weekday and 154 vehicles on a
weekend day, most of these trips will take place on TH 7 and TH 41.
® The capacity of the collector street system will adequately handle the change
in vehicles generated by the Shorewood Village Shopping Center re-
development scenarios.
® The intersection of TH 7 and 41 will accommodate the additional traffic
generated by the re- development of the Shorewood Village Shopping Center
for both the Cub Foods Development scenario and the comparative scenario.
No mitigation will be required_
September 2001 14
Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
Shorewood Village Shopping Center
Site Plan Review
May 20, 2002
Page 2 of 4
located on the north side of the site. Trucks would leave the site by making a left hand turn from the
westerly exit onto Lake Linden Drive. MN/DOT required this reconfiguration to reduce the number
of conflict points (points where traffic movements intersect) in close proximity to Trunk Highway 7.
Any reduction in the number of conflict points will increase the allowable traffic capacity of the
intersection, thereby minimizing potential impacts to the T.H. 7 & 41 intersection.
City Staff was quick to point out that the configuration mandated by MNIDOT forces a motorist
leaving the northeast quadrant of the customer parking area to utilize the center entrance opposite the
Cub Foods Store. While this configuration does reduce the number of conflict points within the
public right of way, it is likely that minor congestion will occur within the interior of the parking lot .
during the peak rush hours. However, this congestion is minor, and will not affect the level of service
on the frontage road or the Trunk Highway 7 intersection.
As a consequence to the revision listed above, the westerly access from Lake Linden Drive has been
revised from an "enter only" access to an access that permits entrance and exists, with the exception
of no right hand turns leaving the site. Signs prohibiting right turns will be posted at this access.
While these signs have proven to be effective in most areas, a small percentage of the users will
choose to ignore the prohibition.
Drainage Analysis
Water Quantity
The Developer has revised the storm water management plan for the site to reduce the total runoff
rate below the pre - developed runoff rate. This is achieved by construction of an underground pipe
gallery that would provide 70,000 cubic feet of storage underground (refer to Attachment 4).
Mr. Steve Gurney of WSB and Associates, has reviewed the storm water capacity and found this
proposal to be adequate. (Refer to Attachment 5).
Water Quality
Underground detention basins have been in the market place for several years. As land prices
escalate, balancing the costs associated with underground piping become more feasible. The
challenge in these types of systems has never been quantity storage, but finding a way to remove
contaminants, such as phosphorous.
The City of Shorewood's regulations require that the entire site be brought into compliance for water
quality standards. This includes the remainder of the shopping center site. This is contrary to what
has been proposed previously which only treated the increase in volumes associated with the
development.
1 O a OR
Department Council Meeting Item Number
Administration October 25, 2010 10 -A
From: Brian Heck, City Administrator
Item: Wellhead Protection Planning
Description /Background /Previous Action
We were notified this past week by the Minnesota Department of Health that we are required to
prepare and submit a Wellhead Protection Plan to the MDH for all our municipal wells in accordance
with Minnesota Rule 4720.5130. The program is intended to prevent contaminants from entering the
wells.
Shorewood is to begin the WHP plan by March 1, 2011 and complete it by March 1, 2015. The
Minnesota Department of Health will provide a fair amount of assistance in preparation of the plan. For
example, a planner and hydrologist are assigned to each public water supplier when they enter the
program. Furthermore, the MDH will assist in completing a substantial portion of Part I of the plan for
systems serving 3,300 people or less. They will also provide training, guidance documents, maps, budget
assistance, forms, etc, to entities required to prepare a plan.
I spoke to Larry and James regarding this requirement and also sent inquiries to Tonka Bay and Excelsior
asking if they are also on the list of public water suppliers required to prepare a plan to see if we could
look at the potential for a joint plan. I have not heard back as of yet. Deephaven and Greenwood do not
have public water systems and therefore are exempt from the requirement.
In looking at current and future work program, Larry and James will be deep in road maintenance, 1/1
mitigation, park improvements, and storm water maintenance and repair. Thus, there will be little time
to devote to this project unless we rearrange priorities.
Options:
We have a few options available to complete this project.
1. Hire an intern. Utilization of an intern provides project management experience to a graduate
student as well as experience working with various agencies, staff, and council. Cost for an
intern can range from $10.00 - $15.00 per hour with no benefits. Position can be part -time and
is limited in scope to this project. One concern is the field of study due to the technical nature of
the plan. Based on the level of support offered by the MDH, this might be less of a concern. The
other concern is quality of work and staff time to supervise and review work. Using an intern
does not preclude the use of consultants for small segments of more specialized work if needed.
Council Action:
2. Hire consultant to complete the project. Staff would prepare an RFP for consultant services to
complete the plan. Limited staff time is necessary for project management of the consultant. My
best guess for cost to complete this project will range from $10,000 - $20,000 or more
depending on the level of staff used to work on the project. The Park Plan ran just over $20,000.
Using a consultant will ensure the project is completed, should require less staff time, and
generally the final product is comprehensive and of good quality. Cost appears to be the main
issue with a consultant. Another possible issue with a consultant is follow -up and
implementation.
3. Use existing staff to complete the project. Using existing staff will require us to readjust
priorities away from existing projects such as road maintenance and storm water items. While
this option may be the most cost effective, because of competing priorities and the lengthy
timeline to complete this project, there may be the tendency to delay work on this item in favor
of other projects. This may result in not meeting the established timeline. Since staff would be
preparing the plan, there would be a clearer understanding of implementation and ongoing
compliance and more likelihood there is follow through on the plan. Use of existing staff does
not preclude the use of consultants to complete more specialized parts of the plan.
Recommendation:
Staff is recommending pursuing the use of an intern to work on this project. Because this relates to the
water service, expenses to prepare and implement the plan will come from the water fund. If we are
unable to find an adequate intern, we recommend preparation of an RFP for consulting services to
prepare and complete the plan.
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department Council Meeting Item Number
Administration October 25, 2010 10 -B
From: Brian Heck, City Administrator
Item: Coal Tar Sealants Ordinance
Description /Background /Previous Action
During the Manor Pond discussion, staff indicated to Council that the MPCA sponsored a grant program
to help communities with the clean -up of areas contaminated with PAH, a carcinogen, and by- product of
coal tar based driveway sealants. A community qualified for the grant if they enacted an ordinance
banning the use of undiluted coal tar based driveway sealants. Staff stated at the meeting that seal
coating operations did not use this type of material. Staff also advised Council that there was a strong
likelihood the state legislature would take up a bill for a statewide ban. A bill banning the material was
introduced late in the session and the Environment and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on
the bill. Staff expects introduction of the same bill during the 2011 session.
The issue is back as a few residents raised the issue about the City not having an ordinance and
therefore not being eligible to apply for possible clean up grants from the MPCA.
Options:
1. Prepare and consider an ordinance banning undiluted coal tar sealant products. Adopting an
ordinance may qualify the city to apply for possible clean up grants and does send a message
regarding the potential hazard of using such materials. However, enforcement and regulation
will be nearly impossible as residents can still purchase the material. The only realistic way to
regulate and ensure the material is not used is to require a permit to sealcoat your driveway and
license driveway contractors. — Attached is the model ordinance from the LMC.
2. Work with our representatives, the LMC, and MetroCities in support of a statewide ban on the
materials. This entails communicating with our representatives to support bills banning
undiluted coal tar sealants, passing resolutions in support of such bills, etc.
3. Provide educational material regarding the use of undiluted coal tar sealants to residents and
encourage the use of alternative products.
4. Do nothing and wait to see what happens.
Recommendation:
I recommend the Council hold off on consideration of adopting an ordinance banning undiluted coal tar
sealant products due to the issue of enforcement and regulation. I suggest we provide information to
residents on the hazards of the product and encourage the use of alternatives. I also recommend the
city work with our legislative delegation in support of a ban on the use of this type of product.
Council Action:
This model ordinance is drafted in the form prescribed by Minn. Stat. § 412.191, subd. 4, for
statutory cities. Home rule charters often contain provisions concerning how the city may enact
ordinances. Home rule charter cities should consult their charter and city attorney to ensure that
the city complies with all charter requirements. If your city has codified its ordinances, a copy of
any ordinance regulating the use of coal tar -based sealers must be furnished to the county law
library or its designated depository pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 415.021.
This ordinance may affect current blacktop sealer practices within the city's jurisdiction.
Therefore, prior to ordinance adoption, the city may want to provide commercial sealer
companies, city residents, and other interested persons an opportunity to provide input.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE USE OF COAL TAR -BASED SEALER
PRODUCTS WITHIN THE CITY OF , MINNESOTA
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE.
The City of understands that lakes, rivers, streams and other bodies of water
are natural assets which enhance the environmental, recreational, cultural and economic
resources and contribute to the general health and welfare of the community.
The use of sealers on asphalt driveways is a common practice. However, scientific
studies on the use of driveway sealers have demonstrated a relationship between stormwater
runoff and certain health and environmental concerns.
The purpose of this ordinance is to regulate the use of sealer products within the City of
in order to protect, restore, and preserve the quality of its waters.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS.
Except as may otherwise be provided or clearly implied by context, all terms shall be
given their commonly accepted definitions. For the purpose of this ordinance, the following
definitions shall apply unless the context clear indicates or requires a different meaning:
ASPHALT -BASED SEALER. A petroleum -based sealer material that is commonly used
on driveways, parking lots, and other surfaces and which does not contain coal tar.
COAL TAR. A byproduct of the process used to refine coal.
UNDILUTED COAL TAR -BASED SEALER. A sealer material containing coal tar that
has not been mixed with asphalt and which is commonly used on driveways, parking lots and
other surfaces.
CITY The City of
MPCA. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
PAHs. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. A group of organic chemicals formed during
the incomplete burning of coal, oil, gas, or other organic substances. Present in coal tar and
believed harmful to humans, fish, and other aquatic life.
SECTION 3. PROHIBITIONS.
A. No person shall apply any undiluted coal tar -based sealer to any driveway, parking
lot, or other surface within the City of
B. No person shall contract with any commercial sealer product applicator, residential or
commercial developer, or any other person for the application of any undiluted coal tar -based
sealer to any driveway, parking lot, or other surface within the City.
C. No commercial sealer product applicator, residential or commercial developer, or
other similar individual or organization shall direct any employee, independent contractor,
volunteer, or other person to apply any undiluted coal tar -based sealer to any driveway, parking
lot, or other surface within the City.
SECTION 4. EXEMPTION.
Upon the express written approval from both the City and the MPCA, a person
conducting bona fide research on the effects of undiluted coal tar -based sealer products or PAHs
on the environment shall be exempt from the prohibitions provided in Section 3.
SECTION 5. ASPHALT -BASED SEALCOAT PRODUCTS.
The provisions of this ordinance shall only apply to use of undiluted coal tar -based sealer
in the City and shall not affect the use of asphalt -based sealer products within the City.
SECTION 6. PENALTY.
Any person convicted of violating any provision of this ordinance is guilty of a
misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or
imprisonment for not more than ninety (90) days, or both, plus the costs of prosecution in either
case.
SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this ordinance is found to be invalid for any reason by a court of
competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining provisions shall not be affected.
SECTION 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.
........ . - -- - -.. ....__.._ q
This ordinance becomes effective on the date of its publication, or upon the publication
of a summary of the ordinance as provided by Minn. Star. § 412.191, subd. 4, as it may be
amended from time to time, which meets the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 331A.01, subd. 10, as
it may be amended from time to time.
Passed by the Council this day of 20
Mayor
Attested:
Clerk
Department: Planning Council Meeting: 10/25/10 Item Number: 10C
From: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director
Item Description: Waterford Right -of -Way Encroachment
Background / Previous Action
As you may be aware, part of the boulder retaining wall located on the north side of Waterford
Place, just west of Waterford Circle (see Site Location map — Exhibit A, attached) is failing.
Rather than simply repair the wall, which has had issues in the past, the Waterford
Homeowners Association proposes to rebuild the entire wall, which consists of two tiers of
boulders, the lower of which encroaches into the Waterford Place right -of -way. Shorewood's
Code requires that an encroachment permit and agreement be approved by the City Council.
The initial request by the HOA was to move the lower tier closer to the street, however, this
would have hampered snow plowing operations and the current plan is to build it in its current
location. The HOA has submitted engineered plans for this, using larger boulders for the
reconstruction. The wall replacement as planned is considered to be an improvement.
Options
Deny the permit or approve the right -of -way encroachment permit /agreement.
Staff Recommendation
Staff strongly recommends approval of the encroachment permit and agreement, a copy of
which is attached. The HOA would like to begin work early next week if the permit is approved
at Monday night's meeting.
Council Action:
ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
This Agreement, is entered into this day of October, 2010, by and between the
Waterford Homeowners Association, and the City of Shorewood, a Minnesota municipal
corporation.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood (the "City ") is a Minnesota municipal corporation
operating as a statutory city under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the Waterford Homeowners Association (the "HOA ") owns a boulder
retaining wall located at the rear of Lots 3and 4, Block 2, Waterford Addition within the City and
shown in the attached Exhibit A (Site Location neap); and
WHEREAS, the HOA proposes to rebuild the existing boulder retain wall(the
"Improvement "), part of which is within the Waterford Place Right -of -Way; and
WHEREAS, the HOA and City have agreed to the installation of the Improvement in the
location depicted on the plans on file with the City dated April 25, 2002.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City consents to allow the contractors
and agents of the HOA or its successors and assigns to enter upon the Right -of -Way to constrict
the Improvement in the same location as it currently exists and as depicted in the plans on file
with the City to be approved by the City Engineer and further the HOA agrees to provide that
financial surety as required by the City Engineer; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the HOA and its
successors and assigns do hereby indemnify and waive the City, by and through its City Council,
officials and employees, from any and all claims arising from the use of the Right -of -Way and
construction of the Improvement, together with those claims of the users of the Right -of -Way
through the customary and incidental use of the Right -of -Way.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, in the event the city at any
time requires the use or alteration of the Improvement within the Right -of -Way, the Property
Owner and its successors and assigns agree to make no claim for damages to the City.
PROPERTY OWNER
IN
Waterford Homeowners Association
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
:
Christine Lizee
Its: Mayor
Brian Heck
Its: City Administrator /Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on October, 2010, by
Christine Lizee and Brian Heck, the Mayor and City Administrator /Clerk, respectively, of the
City of Shorewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on October 2010, by
_(officer) , Waterford Homeowners Association.
Notary Public
2
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd.
1500 Wells Fargo Plaza
7900 Xerxes Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 5 543 1 -1 194
(952) 835 -3800 (TJK)
EDITED BY:
Shorewood Planning Department
mm
E
Exhibit A
SITE LOCATION
Watrrfnrd Rrtainina Wall
: W
Department: Planning Council Meeting: 10/25/10 Item Number: 10 D
From: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director
Item Description: Shady Hills Neighborhood Petition - Traffic
Background / Previous Action
Several years ago, at the request of Shady Hills Residents, the City installed signage to restrict
turning movements in and out of the neighborhood. The intent was to discourage traffic,
primarily motorists going to and from the Minnetonka High School, from shortcutting through
the neighborhood. Mr. Robert Edmondson, 19585 Shady Hills Road, has now submitted a
neighborhood petition requesting several changes to traffic controls, particularly at the
intersection of the Highway 7 service road and the narrow street that serves as the westerly
outlet from the neighborhood. The petition, attached, proposes five measures that area
residents have weighed in on.
Options
Ignore the petition — bad idea. Tally up the resident comments and institute what the majority
appear to want. Direct staff to review and comment on the various measures presented and
conduct a neighborhood meeting to go over them with the residents.
Staff Recommendation
The traffic restrictions currently in place were imposed after meeting with the residents. This is
the suggested approach now as well. The only question is whether the Council wishes to
conduct the meeting, or forward it to the Planning Commission for its review and
recommendation first.
Council Action:
Citizens Of Shady Hills Rd./Are
TIME FOR A CHANGE?
* ®o you find leaving the frontage rd. Shady
Hills Turn a hassle?
*Should the "no left "turn onto the frontage
rd. be abolished?
*Should the "no right "turn from the frontage
rd. be abolished?
*Have you ever done it?
*There have been many from here who've
got ticketed!!
*Should we make it a time constraint?
(no left 2 -4 pm, no right 7 -9 am, mon -fri ?)
(Minnetonka H.S. pertinent hrs.)
*Should the sharp turn be rounded more?
*Should the Access to the frontage rd. be
widened, and right side made more visual?
*Should a Shady Hills Rd.street sign be put
up?
PETITION FOR CHANGE:
I HEREBY SUPPORT AND PROPOSE THE
IvAt 1
2-3 5
_,A A
d
L ;��
�2
13w sl s
uAd
fS 2- -7 t z 3�
r D
4 6rx - r
T T,
57
Gc�
Y ,
71
Pol 7 �_7
.4)v441
I I le? ck
Sr�41
- PETITION FOR CHLANGE
I HEREBY SUPPORT AND PROPOSE THE
FOLLOWING
6-
61t,
Ll '7 - 56 1 �
,'3 shjy H1
L
5 S , s
5 7
�G:. -�6� ` u` � C�,� L�&
%acb��
jil
l t j l� A�l AL 5
-Vi
Wl
PETITION FOR CHANGE-
FOLLOWING:
"V4 VY k Gf
Caj��r)
(vk
2
C
qq
5 1
C-
( - - . 3c , ccL 5
- 0-k Lx"o-KAt
71 if
41) h (
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 21, 2010
To: Mayor Lizee
Council Members
From: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Re: September, 2010 Monthly Budget Report
The 2010 General Fund budget looks to be in pretty good shape at this point in the year and with
the limited review that I have had time to perform. I have plugged in the percentage of
expenditures from previous years in the analysis. Based on the calculations, it looks like we are
performing better on both revenue ($111,084.73) and expenditures ($183,318) than our recent
history would indicate. Let's take some time to discuss the merits of this revised format and
determine if this helps the City Council in your evaluation of the city's financial condition.
Please contact me or Brian if you have any questions.
Monthly Budget Report
September 30, 2010
EXPENDITURES
2009
2010
2010
% of 2010
Expected
Variance
75.24
79.58
Personnel
90,520
YTD
YTD
Adopted
Annual
%of 2010
(Negative)
% of Budget Expended
Year to Date Overview
Actual
Date
Budget
Budget
Budget
or Positive
2007
2008
2009
REVENUE
155.7% 105.12 143.07 218.85
Support and Services
21,427
35,943
46,200
77.8%
68.6% 62.6 74.96 68.22
Total
$ 35,682 $
Property Taxes
2,360,483
$ 2,463,855
$ 4,776,292
51.6%
49.1%
0
48.8
49.11
49.42
Licenses and Permits
97,147
107,598
106,270
101.2%
70.8%
89.03
70.18
53.28
Intergovernmental
63,847
67,023
65,000
103.1%
79.9%
48.39
93.07
98.23
Charges for Service
32,583
41,289
46,000
89.8%
101.8%
149.94
83.52
71.84
Fines and Forfeitures
37,900
32,274
55,000
58.7%
67.7%
77.91
49.06
76.04
Miscellaneous
70,671
52,008
128,000
40.6%
75.1%
109.11
66.86
49.24
Transfers from other funds
-
38,824
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0
TOTAL
$ 2,662,631
$ 2,764,046
$ 5,215,386
53.0%
$111,084.73
EXPENDITURES
135,968
142,644
181,639
78.5%
78.5%
Department
75.24
79.58
Personnel
90,520
103,853
Council
70.3%
82.2%
70.29
112.56
63.86
Personnel
11,196
12,595
16,794
75.0%
73.9% 75 71.8 75
Materials and Supplies
3,059
616
1,200
51.3%
155.7% 105.12 143.07 218.85
Support and Services
21,427
35,943
46,200
77.8%
68.6% 62.6 74.96 68.22
Total
$ 35,682 $
49,154 $
64,194
76.6%
I(p,'17Q:3$j
Administration
135,968
142,644
181,639
78.5%
78.5%
80.74
75.24
79.58
Personnel
90,520
103,853
147,712
70.3%
82.2%
70.29
112.56
63.86
Materials and Supplies
40
-
-
0.0%
114%
0
20.36
19.9
Support and Services
2,849
2,569
4,150
61.9%
34.6%
33.26
16.37
54.03
Capital Outlay
$ 166,609 $
1,631
2,500
65.2%
0.0%
0
0
0
Total
$ 93,409 $
108,053 $
154,362
70.0%
$14,854.19
General Government
Personnel
135,968
142,644
181,639
78.5%
78.5%
80.74
75.24
79.58
Materials and Supplies
11,698
10,919
19,975
54.7%
W8%
42.63
68.36
68.34
Support and Services
14,078
18,615
32,305
57.6%
52.3%
55.68
57.28
4199
Capital Outlay
4,865
1,213
2,500
48.5%
29.1%
0
0
87.21
Total
$ 166,609 $
173,391 $
236,419
73.3%
0.0%
0
0
0
Elections
105,748
104,787
178,584
58.7%
63.4%
51.85
68.89
69.31
Personnel
748
23,184
30,689
75.5%
19.6%
3.68
393
15.33
Materials and Supplies
1,244
2,886
4,950
58.3%
87.7%
92.52
116.53
54.08
Support and Services
25
693
2,700
25.7%
47.6%
20.37
39.96
82.5
Capital Outlay
$ 116,649 $
-
600
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0
Total
$ 2,017 $
26,763 $
38,939
68.7%
,(41G,130051
Finance
Personnel
105,748
104,787
178,584
58.7%
63.4%
51.85
68.89
69.31
Materials and Supplies
6,835
7,384
7,700
95.9%
713%
66.78
63.79
83.35
Support and Services
2,388
2,565
7,500
34.2%
23.7%
16.91
22.74
31.48
Capital Outlay
1,678
'x$1206,.7 }I 100
0
0
17.2%
14.2
0
37.3
Total
$ 116,649 $
114,736 $
193,784
59.2%
$5,665.83
Professional Services 183,557 159,497 199,000 80.1% 85.6% $10,827.10 79.73 85.59 91.45
Planning and Zoning
Personnel
121,646
126,949
193,605
65.6%
71.5%
67.84
75.35
71.2
Materials and Supplies
1,473
149
655
22.7%
110.5%
49.3
192.95
89.36
Support and Services
2,789
5,204
4,700
110.7%
43.2%
43.73
53.16
32.63
Capital Outlay
465
'x$1206,.7 }I 100
0
0
31.6%
0
94.69
0
Total
$ 126,373 $
132,302 $
198,960
66.5%
$8,807.75
Municipal Building - City Hall
Materials and Supplies
19,310
40,920
54,800
74.7%
61.9% 86.68
30.82
68.21
Support and Services
24,674
13,630
133,000
10.2%
14.3% 10.89
12.77
19.27
Capital Outlay
$ 803,190 $
15,713
186,000
8.4%
8.7% 25.97
0
0
Total
$ 43,984 $
70,263 $
373,800
18.8%
'x$1206,.7 }I 100
0
0
Police
Materials and Supplies
-
20
- 0.0% 0 0 0
Support Services
628,485
711,716
950,000 74.9% 81.3% 83.36 85.6 75.02
Capital (Public Safety Bldg)
174,705
171,051
230,000 74.4% 75.0% 75 75 74.98
Total
$ 803,190 $
882,787
$ 1,180,000 74.8% $62,301.00
Fire
Support Services
242,385
241,901
315,858
76.6°%
78.1%
78.91
78.84
76.67
Capital (Public Safety Bldg)
207,953
204,472
279,624
73.1%
73.2°%
73.3
73.18
73.09
Total
$ 450,338 $
446,373 $
595,482
75.0°%
$5,095.33
58.7°%
67.5%
Inspections
87.59
53.37
Support and Services
28,540
31,829
Personnel
72,367
83,185
117,943
70.5%
77.1%
77.18
83.45
70.64
Materials and Supplies
-
28
400
7.0%
15.8%
46.23
1.28
0
Support and Services
2,071
2,739
6,800
40.3°%
401%
56.48
45.8
19.68
Total
$ 74,438 $
85,952 $
125,143
68.7°%
$7,798.03
Streets and Roads
City Engineer
Personnel
84,776
67,376
94,875
71.0%
70.6°%
60.68
79.95
71.22.
Materials and Supplies
320
44
425
10.3%
54.0°%
615
43.8
54.57
Support and Services
4,384
6,419
15,146
42.4%
31.4%
29.45
37.31
27.53
Capital Outlav
1.828
388
1,000
38.8%
58.7%
70.17
85.36
20.52
Public Works Service
Personnel
191,939
197,286
295,372
66.8%
78.2%
81.52
74.95
78.19
Materials and Supplies
36,952
41,727
71,123
58.7°%
67.5%
61.4
87.59
53.37
Support and Services
28,540
31,829
42,690
74.6%
70.5%
73.88
69.25
68.41
Capital Outlay
-
-
103,800
0.0%
0.1%
0.34
0
0
Total
$
257,431
$
270,842
$
512,985
52.8°%
$38,392.59
Streets and Roads
Personnel
46,877
72,189
95,607
75.5°%
74.2%
63.99
98.08
60.66
Materials and Supplies
37,539
59,130
85,000
69.6%
80.3%
76.93
103.9
60.01
Support and Services
3,390
774
23,500
3.3%
19.5%
7.5
18.64
32.4
Capital Outlay
-
-
700,000
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0
Total
$
87,806
$
132,093
$
904,107
14.6°%
$11,712.46
Snow and Ice
Personnel
15,833
26,827
40,857
65.7°%
52.1%
60.74
57.11
38.46
Materials and Supplies
24,271
12,594
45,117
27.9%
44.4°%
5738
22.4
53.53
Total
$
40,104
$
39,421
$
85,974
45.9%
$1,915.35
Traffic control I Street Lights
Personnel
-
-
-
0.0%
0
0
0
Materials and Supplies
670
145
6,000
2.4%
304.8°%
706.17
191.53
16.76
Support and Services
24,709
26,659
45,049
59.2°%
64.9%
56.71
72.53
65.47
Total
$
25,379
$
26,804
$
51,049
52.5°%
$20,723.50
Sanitation I Waste Control
Personnel
1,994
4,691
-
317.6%
330.88
312.84
309.14
Materials and Supplies
21
-
500
0.0%
3.6%
0
6.44
4.26
Support and Services
3,210
4,400
73.0%
65.7°%
32.57
164.49
0
Total
$
2,015
$
7,901
$
4,900
161.2%
I?$4
Tree Maintenance
Personnel
3,851
14,870
17,279
86.1°%
65.4°%
64.44
100.2
31.69
Materials and Supplies
344
41
2,700
1.5%
11.0°%
15.62
3.54
13.92
Support and Services
5,086
6,792
13,500
50.3%
49.3%
49.93
41.85
56.04
Total
$
9,281
$
21,703
$
33,479
64.8%
Parks and Recreation
Personnel
99,678
116,560
160,481
72.6%
76.4%
65.72
80.1
83.46
Materials and Supplies
9,248
13,062
16,300
80.1°%
77.3%
49.81
106.38
75.63
Support and Services
75,552
70,890
92,600
76.6°%
98.6%
52
85.55
158.23
Transfers
5,003
42,000
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0
Total
$
189,481
$
200,512
$
311,381
64.4°%
$26,031.26
Unallocated
$
-
$
14,538
$
-
0.0%
0
0
0
Total Expenditures
$
2,799,051
$
3,037,312
$
5,375,404
56.5%
$183,318
Revenues less Expenditures
$
(136,420)
$
(273,265)
$
(160,018)
Transfers Out
$
-
$
-
$
1,030,000
Net Revenue less Expenditures $ (136,420) $ (273,265) $ (1,190,018)