04-09-12 CC Regular Mtg AgPCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA — April 9, 2012
Page 2 of 2
Attachments
B. Police Chief /Emergency Management Director Litsey Presentation
On Storm Awareness
C. Judy Voigt- Englund, Carver Park Reserve, Report on Activities
Report
7. PARKS
8. PLANNING
A. Report on the April 3, 2012 Planning Commission Meeting
9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS
A. Accept Bids and Award Contract for 2012 Mill and Overlay
Engineer's memo,
Resolution
B. Approve Plans, Specifications, and Estimates and Authorize Advertisement
Engineer's memo,
for Bids for 2012 Sealcoat Project
Resolution
C. Approve the Apple Road Creek Restoration Grant Agreement
Engineer's memo,
Agreement
10. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS
A. Christmas Lake Access — AIS Inspection Program Planning Director's
memo, Resolutions
11. OLD BUSINESS
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
B. Mayor and City Council
13. ADJOURN
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, 9 April, 2012
7:00 p.m.
Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval.
Agenda Item #313: This is a motion approving the authorization for the expenditure of funds
for replacement of a skid steer for the Department of Public Works.
Agenda Item #3C: A resolution proclaiming Friday, April 27, 2012 as Arbor Day is attached.
The city is recognizing Arbor Day with the Tree Sale event — residents who purchased
trees will be able to pick up the trees at the City of Minnetonka Public Works on Arbor
Day or the day after, on Saturday, April 28.
Agenda Item #3D: This resolution approves Part 1 of the Wellhead Protection Plan and
requests that the Minnesota Department of Health approved said document.
Agenda Item #3E: This is a motion approving the authorization for the expenditure of funds
for the replacement of an asphalt roller for the Department of Public Works.
Agenda Item #5A: There are no public hearings this evening.
Agenda Item #6A: Former Planning Commissioner Pat Arnst will be recognized for her three
years of service on the Planning Commission.
Agenda Item #613: Police Chief/Emergency Management Director Litsey will provide a
presentation on Storm Awareness.
Agenda Item #6C: Judy Voigt - Englund, Interpretive Naturalist with the Three Rivers Park
District Lowry Nature Center in Carver Park Reserve, will provide an update to the city
on activities happening at and near Carver Park Reserve that may be of interest to the
Shorewood community.
Agenda Item #7: There are no park items this evening.
Agenda Item #8A: Report on the April 3, 2012, Planning Commission meeting by
Commissioner David Hutchins.
Executive Summary — City Council Meeting of April 9, 2012
Page 2 of 2
Agenda Item #9A: This item is consideration of accepting bids and awarding the contract for
the 2012 Mill and Overlay of streets: Clover Lane, Club Lane, Elder Turn, Knightsbridge
Road, Lakeway Terrace, Pleasant Avenue, Tee Trail, Wood Drive, and Wood Duck
Circle. The low bidder is Omann Brothers Paving Inc. in the amount of $309,308.08. The
project creates an over budget situation of $11,308.08 and can be shortened to fit within
the Street & Roadways budget amount of $298,000.
Agenda Item #913: This item authorizes the advertisement of bids for the 2012 Sealcoat
Project. The 2012 budget has $141,000 earmarked for Seal Coating of streets. Tonka Bay
and Victoria have agreed to join us in the bidding of this project.
Agenda Item #9C: Consideration of approving the agreement between the City of Shorewood
and the Minnesota Conservation Corps for the Apple Road Creek Restoration project.
Agenda Item #10A: The AIS Working Group has recommended that the City enter into
agreements with the MCWD and the Christmas Lake Association for the establishment of
an AIS inspection program for the Christmas Lake public access for the year 2012. Staff
has prepared a plan for certain improvements and laying out how the inspections will take
place on the site. Given the accelerated spring we are having, it is necessary to expedite
the program somewhat in order to have inspectors at the access starting 21 April. In this
regard, it is important to contact Planning Director Nielsen over the weekend or on
Monday prior to the meeting so that any questions that arise can be addressed at the
meeting. Have a Happy Easter!
Agenda Item #11: There are no items of old business this evening.
#Za
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, MARCH 26, 2012
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel,
Interim Administrator /Director of Public Wor
Planning Director Nielsen; and Engineer Landini'
Absent: None.
B. Review Agenda
Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, approving the agenda as prese
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, March
Hotvet moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the City Council P
2012, as presented. Motion passed 5 10.
Attorney Keane;
Director DeJong;
ion passed 510.
Meeting Minutes of March 12,
B. City Council Executive Session Minutes, March 12, 2012
Siakel moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the City Council Executive Session Minutes of March
12, 2012, as presented. Motion passed 510.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and
Adopting the Resolution Therein.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Agreement for Park Commission Recording Secretary Services
C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 12 -019 "A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 12-
011."
Councilmember Woodruff stated he sent Staff an email regarding a payment to Malkerson Gunn Martin
LLP in the amount of $1,350 with a description of Aquatic Invasive — 5490 Vine Hill Road. He
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 2 of 15
questioned the payment being that address is dry land. Director DeJong stated the description was carried
forward from an incorrect template. Woodruff asked if the description could be corrected. DeJong stated
the only way to do that is to void and rewrite the check. Woodruff stated he did not want to hold up the
check.
Woodruff stated he had asked Staff to include the vendor's address in the agreement for Park Commission
meeting recording secretary services. Interim Administrator /Director Brown noted the signature file
includes it.
Motion passed 510.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Mike Cannon, 28170 Woodside Road thanked Director Nielsen and other support staff for their
expeditious handling of a change to the driveway agreement he submitted with his request for a
subdivision, combination and variance. That request was approved by Council during its February 27,
2012, meeting. He stated he thought Nielsen represents the City very well. Nielsen does a good job of
explaining the City's rules and ensuring they are adhered to while helping the applicants accomplish their
mission. He noted that it would have been a fairly substantial setback at a great financial cost if the City
had not processed this change so quickly. He again extended his thanks to all those involved.
Councilmember Siakel thanked Mr. Cannon
have residents come and compliment the Cit
his effort.
5. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
Discussion moved to Item 7.A on the
6. REPORTS AND PRESENT
A. Dick Osgood, Lake
This was discussed after Item 7.C_;on
Mayor Lizee stated Dick Osgood, La
give a report on the herbicide treatme
TI
this evening. She noted that it is a nice change to
for their efforts_ She thanked Director Nielsen for
Association, Milfoil treatment Report and Request
Minnetonka Association (LMA) Executive Director, is present to
of Eurasian Watermilfoil (milfoil).
Mr. Osgood noted last week he emailed Staff a lengthy report titled Assessment of the Lake Vegetation
Management Plan Objectives involving five bays in Lake Minnetonka (the Lake). He stated he assumed
Council was provided with a copy of the report. He also noted that he provided a one -page summary of
that report that was placed at the dais this evening.
Mr. Osgood explained the LMA has been the project manager, along with other partners, for managing
milfoil in five bays in the Lake. Carman, Gray's and Phelps Bays were the original three bays in the
project, In 2011 Gideon and Phelps Bays were added to the treatment project. Much of the monitoring
data for the project is now available for the first four years of the treatment of milfoil.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 3 of 15
Mr. Osgood stated that based on the data the LMA is declaring the project very successful. It intends to
and desires to continue this project after 2012 (the fifth year of the demonstration project). He explained
for the five bays the project has controlled milfoil in 683 acres of the Lake. That acreage is double what
the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District's (LMCD) harvesting program manages each year. Native
plants and water quality have been projected through the project. The herbicide products used for the
treatment are very safe. The treatment has resulted in substantial public benefit. The Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has taken the Lake Vegetation Plan the project operated under
and formalized it into a short-form. The protocol the DNR is allowing throughout the State is the protocol
used for this project. He reiterated the desire to make this program operational on a long -term basis
because of the benefits derived for Lake residents and others as well.
Mr. Osgood asked the City for its continued financial support for 2013, the first transitional year. He
stated to date the project has been funded with uneven funding from public versus private sources. From
year to year, bay to bay, and city to city. From the LMA's perspective and from the condition of the Lake
it would be beneficial to level out the funding going forward.
Mr. Osgood stated the LMA is asking Council to direct the City's representative on the LMCD Board to
ask the LMCD to prepare a lake -wide invasive plant management plan. The purpose of that plan is so that
the techniques used for the project herbicide treatment and for harvesting and maybe other techniques
could be consolidated into one management plan. It should include a comprehensive funding formula
involving public and private funds.
Mr. Osgood then stated that Tom Kurak, a Bay Captain for Phelps Bay fundraising, is present this
evening to ask for funding from the City for the 2012 treatment program. He noted that the City has
contributed toward the treatment of Phelps Bay each of the last four years and it also contributed toward
the treatment of Gideon Bay last year.
Mr. Kurak thanked the City and Council for its past support. He explained that the milfoil treatment of
Phelps Bay the last four years has been privately funded for large portion of it. He noted the majority of
home owners in his neighborhood have contributed to the treatments. He assumed they will again for this
year's treatment. He stated he appreciates the lack of milfoil very much. Before the treatments milfoil
would wash up to the shoreline. He explained that he and his neighbors along Enchanted Drive would like
the City to contribute $6,000 toward the treatment of Phelps Bay. The City does not have a park or boat
ramp to maintain out on the islands. The property owners and taxpayers would appreciate the contribution
Councilmember Siakel stated she fully supports contributing another $6,000 to the treatment of Phelps
Bay. She expressed hope that the Cities of Minnetrista and Mound would also contribute to it being some
of the Phelps Bay lakeshore is located in those two Cities. She stated she agrees with Mr. Osgood that
there is a need for a larger, more comprehensive plan. She expressed her support for communicating to
the City representative to the LMCD Board the feedback Mr. Osgood suggested. She stated for the near
future milfoil mitigation will be a combination of herbicide treatment and harvesting.
Siakel moved, Zerby seconded, authorizing the release of $6,000 for the for the herbicide treatment
of Eurasian Watermilfoil in Phelps Bay in 2012.
Councilmember Woodruff stated when Council discussed funding for the herbicide treatment of milfoil in
2011 it is his recollection that he suggested increasing the City's contribution to more than $6,000
because Gideon Bay was added to the treatment area. Council chose not to increase the amount of
funding. He asked Mr. Osgood how the money was allocated between the treatment of Phelps Bay and
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 4 of 15
Gideon Bay. He stated he thought it is Council's responsibility and duty to ask the LMA, as the project
manager, for an accounting of how the money was been spent. He asked if Council authorizes a
contribution of $6,000 for the 2012 treatment what, if any, contribution will go to the treatment of Gideon
Bay.
Mr. Osgood explained it was his understanding the City contributed $6,000 to the treatment "project" in
2011. The LMA split that contribution equally between the treatment of Phelps Bay and Grays Bay.
Councilmember Woodruff stated if Council decides to contribute $6,000 to the treatment of Phelps Bay
that is all that is budgeted for milfoil treatment.
Councilmember Siakel noted the motion is for $6,000 for Phelps Bay.
Mr. Osgood stated the LMA will designate the City's contri
doesn't designate how it should be split the LMA's policy has
Councilmember Woodruff stated although it was not expressly
understanding that the 2011 contribution would be divided. Hf
unfair to Gideon Bay property owners not to contribute anythin
Councilmember Siakel stated she spoke
households along Gideon Bay are located in
Bay. It's her understanding that 15 of the
then stated that to split the City's contribu
support doing that. She went on to state she
15 households in the City along Gideon Bay.
Mr. Osgood reiterated that the D
with shoreline in a particular city
based on different criteria.
the City'
recollection that some of the 1
know if there is a positive earn
Mr. Osgood stated he does not
positive carryover balance for
treatment of those Bays this ve
xtion. the way Council wants. If the City
,en to split it equally.
stated in 2011 he thought it was Council's
then stated he thought it would be totally
toward the treatment of Gideon Bay.
Interim Administrator Brown to find out how many
rewood and how many are located in the City of Tonka
ximate 100 households are located in Shorewood. She
,qually is disproportionate, and she noted she will not
Id consider discussing an additional contribution for the
is to split a contribution from a city equally among the bays
,d the distribution of funds can be calculated different ways
sp
I he thought Council should be provided with information showing how
;nt to help treat Phelps Bay and Gideon Bay. He then stated it is his
ys treated have had positive carryover balances. It would be helpful to
ver balance or a deficit for Phelps Bay and Gideon Bay.
the financial reconciliation information with him. He noted there is a
Phelps Bay and Gideon Bay. Those balances will be applied to the
Councilmember Woodruff stated he has trouble voting in favor of the motion on the table until he
understands what the LMA's financial position is on this. Therefore, he will vote against the motion on
the table.
Councilmember Siakel stated the amount of the City's contribution to the first three years of treatment of
Phelps Bay was fairly consistent from year to year. That changed in 2011. Gideon Bay was added to the
list of bays to be treated and the LMA split the City's $6000 contribution evenly between the two bays.
She then stated Phelps Bay was one of the three original bays that were part of the demonstration
treatment project. The then Council chose to contribute to the treatment of Phelps Bay and she thought the
City should follow through for the last year of the five -year project. She noted her motion stands.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 5 of 15
Councilmember Woodruff reiterated that in 2011 he recommended increasing the contribution to the
project to more than $6,000 so that $6,000 could continue to go toward the treatment of Phelps Bay and
some could be contributed to the treatment of Gideon Bay. If nothing is contributed to the treatment of
Gideon Bay in 2012 that financial responsibility will fall on the shoulders of the residents.
Councilmember Siakel noted she is willing to entertain a request from the Bay Captain(s) for Gideon Bay.
Councilmember Hotvet asked how much the City of Tonka Bay contributed to the treatment of Gideon
Bay in 2011. Mr. Osgood responded $5,000 and it will contribute the same amount this year.
Councilmember Siakel asked what it cost to treat Gideon Bay. She questioned if the City's contribution
should be just 15 percent of that cost. She clarified she was not opposed to contributing to the treatment
of Gideon Bay, but she does want the amount to be proportional.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she would like to address the Shorewood residents along Gideon Bay as
well.
Councilmember Siakel asked Councilmember Hotvet if she was making a friendly amendment to the
motion on the table to contribute $1,000 toward the treatment of Gideon Bay as well.
Councilmember Woodruff recommended amending the motion as Councilmember Siakel suggested.
Without objection from the maker or seconded,' the motion was amended to also authorize the
release of $1,000 for the herbicide treatment of Eurasian Watermilfoil in Gideon Bay in 2012.
Councilmember Zerby
work session. He note
from Freeman Park.
Councilmember Hotvet
that have been treated.
Mayor Lizee stated the
project. She noted that the
it includes the marina. She
Mr. Osgood state
He then stated he
Motion passed 510.
discuss a funding policy' for AIS management during a future
y should support funding. It is similar to removing buckthorn
e from residents who property fronting bays
on treatment project has been very unifying for the residents out on the
The project has been successful the first four years of the five -year
nately 20 percent of the shoreline of Gideon Bay is located in the City;
nding can be worked into the 2013 budget.
ive designed things differently five years ago at the start of the project.
to look at AIS management and mitigation more comprehensively.
Councilmember Woodruff again requested that the LMA, as the project manager, provide an accounting
of how the money was been spent and what the balances are.
Mayor Lizee thanked Mr. Osgood and Mr. Kurak for coming this evening.
Discussion moved to Item 8.A on the agenda.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 6 of 15
7. PARKS
A. Report on the March 12, 21012, Park Commission Meeting
Commissioner Gordon reported on matters considered and actions taken at the March 13, 2012, Park
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting).
B. Agreement with Great River Greening for Buckthorn Removal in Freeman Park
Engineer Landini stated the City was notified by Great River Greening (GRG) that it has been awarded a
grant for restoration work in Freeman Park. Council authorized Staff to submit the grant application
during its January 23, 2012, Council meeting. The grant is to partially fund the removal of buckthorn in
two areas in the Park. One area is near the Park shelter and the other area is near the pond. The removal
effort is to occur over a two -year period. GRG will coordinate the removal event which will include
public involvement. He stated it is his recollection that Councilmember Hotvet has lined up volunteers
from South Tonka Little League (STLL) to help with the effort,'' and that she is trying to find other
volunteers as well. He noted the meeting packet contains a copy an agreement between the City and GRG
to move forward with the effort.
Councilmember Hotvet stated the STLL has agreed to find volunteers. She asked Engineer Landini if
STLL should contact him or Recreation Coordinator Twila Grout. Landini stated Ms. Grout.
Councilmember Woodruff stated when Council
meeting he did not think Council provided clear c
($11,500) of this project. He noted this is not budg
Director DeJong stated the funding would come
Councilmember Woodruff stated he could support
for this project in the Parks CIP.
Councilmember Zerby
over the two nears'. En
the grant application during its January 23r
)n how to fund the City's portion of the cost
the Parks Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
that. Woodruff asked Staff to include a line item
oject and he asked if the payments would be split
of the work will be done this year.
Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, directing Staff to move forward with the agreement between the
Citv of Shorewood and Great River Greening for the removal of buckthorn in Freeman Park.
he did in doing
Motion passed 510.
thanked Engineer Landini for moving this forward so quickly and for the nice job
C. Request for Financial Support for the Southshore Community Center Country Hoe -
Down Event in Badger Park on June 1, 2012
Mayor Lizee stated the meeting contains a copy of a memorandum from Staff about a request for
financial support for a Southshore Community Center (SSCC) country hoe -down event that will be held
in Badger Park on June 1, 2012. She asked Council if it had any questions.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she likes the idea. She noted the results of resident survey conducted in
2011 indicated there is less than desirable knowledge of the SSCC. She stated she would like to know
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 7 of 15
what kind of support the SSCC Program Director needs with regard to communications and marketing of
the event. She asked if there is going to be an outreach to the schools being it will be held when school is
still in session. Also, if there is going to be an outreach to churches, daycare centers and so forth. She
stated she thought it is a great introduction to Badger Park and the SSCC.
Mayor Liz& noted the SSCC Program Director is planning to provide Council with quarterly updates
about the SSCC.
Hotvet moved, Siakel seconded, approving the donation of $1,100 from the Park and Recreation
summer program budget for the country hoe -down event scheduled to be held in Badger Park on
June 1, 2012, and directing the Southshore Community Center Program Director to pursue
alternate funding from the Parks Foundation and the City of Excelsior. Motion passed 510.
Discussion returned to Item 6.A on the agenda.
8. PLANNING
A. Report on the March 20, 2012,
Director Nielsen reported on matters considered and
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that
Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commissii
to talk about the third draft of the Smithtown
website for comment and holds another publi
discussion during a work session preceding Co
stated that tentatively there is a discussion about
There was Council cons(
Council's regular meeting
9.
Request
Engineer Landini stated that
request for proposals (RFP)
20 -Year Water Plan. The mf
like to have any changes m,
will award the project on
during its May 29, 2012, wo
Meeting
at the March 20, 2012, Planning
like to have another joint meeting with Council
3 5tudy Report before it puts it out on the City's
on it. The Commission suggested having the
-ond regular meeting in May. Engineer Landini
;r scheduled for that work session.
to have a joint work session with the Planning Commission preceding
ne 11, 2012.
LIC WORKS
oposals for Water Plan Engineering Services
ring its February 27, 2012, work session Council directed Staff to put out a
r'water plan engineering services to do a peer review of the existing draft
ing packet contains a copy of a draft RFP. He asked Council if they would
to the RFP. He noted the RFPs would be opened on April 16 Council
it 23r and the Council will tentatively discuss the results of the review
session.
Councilmember Hotvet stated the way the RFP is written it appears to be a great place to start. She then
stated she appreciated the timeline identified in the RFP.
Councilmember Zerby stated the RFP covers what he was looking for and that he likes the schedule.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thinks the Water Plan is a complicated issue, and that this is timely and
it makes sense. She then stated Engineer Landini did a nice job in preparing the RFP.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 8 of 15
Siakel moved, Hotvet seconded, directing Staff to send out the request for proposal to review and
provide recommendations on the draft 20 -Year Water Plan. Motion passed 510.
10. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS
A. Summary of Conclusions Regarding the City Administrator's Performance
Evaluation
Mayor Lizee explained that during its March 12, 2012, Executive Session Council accepted the
resignation of City Administrator Brian Heck and authorized negotiations of a separation agreement. She
stated this evening she would like Council to consider a motion to accept that resignation and approve the
separation agreement.
Attorney Keane distributed to Council a copy of the agreement
Mayor Lizee asked if there is such a motion.
Hotvet moved, Siakel second, approving the sep
and Brian Heck as presented.
Attorney Keane recommended the motion be amended to
Administrator.
Without objection of the seconder, the maker amend(
resignation of Brian Heck as the City Administrator. M
Mayor Lizee thanked the Ct
into the City Administrator's
for all of the extra
Mayor Lizee expressed con
Session on March 5, 2012, 1
on March 7, 2012; This core
she considered this a breG
confidentiality.
Lizee stated she did not bre
spoke with City Attorney K
Internet posting. She stated
Attorney Keane. This means
Mr. Heck has signed.
the
resignation of Brian Heck as City
also include accepting the
and additional meetings that went
discussions that took place in a legally convened Executive
in an anonymous blog on the Internet, the Shorewood Insider,
le only in the context of the Executive Session. She noted that
a breach of attorney client privilege, and total breach of
this trust nor did she post the comment on the Internet. She noted she
and was assured that he did not breach the Executive Session with that
e were six people present at that Executive Session; the Council and
one of our elected officials chose to violate this trust.
Lizee then stated she found it deeply troubling as she read this statement on the Shorewood Insider,
knowing that a Councilmember unilaterally dismissed the sanctity of the Executive Session and destroyed
a sacred trust that Council, as elected and sworn officials, have taken under oath and have an obligation to
uphold. She noted Council is elected to work on the taxpayer's behalf and leave politics at the door. She
stated this type of anonymous publication is not about doing the City's business, but about petty politics.
Councilmember Siakel stated she finds this situation somewhat disheartening and quite sad. The
discussion was not about the City's Zoning Code or an activity in a City park. It was about a sensitive
matter concerning an employee. She noted she is appalled by what occurred, and that she finds the whole
situation somewhat unconscionable. She expressed her disappointment.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 9 of 15
Councilmember Hotvet stated when she took the oath of office on behalf of the City after being elected to
the City Council she took everything she said very seriously. She then stated she finds it an honor to sit at
the dais every two weeks during a regular Council meeting. She expressed her sadness that someone
would take issues being discussed at a personal level about a person in the sanctity of an Executive
Session and put it out on the Internet. She stated Councilmembers have to remain professional, and the
action a person took was very unprofessional. She noted she found it very disappointing that an adult
would behave like that.
Councilmember Zerby stated that during his 9.5 years as a Councilmember he has taken the Executive
Session as an opportunity to discuss serious matters, including personnel matters and legal issues. It has
always been very clear that those conversations are not to go outside of the room for both legal and
ethical reasons. He then stated he was shocked that some of the discussion got out. He expressed his
disappointment.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he thinks Executive Sessions are sacrosanct. He noted that he attended
that meeting, and that he reads that blog. He stated it is not clear to him what was stated in the blog that
came out of that meeting. He then stated he is not sure that the original statement that Mayor Lizee read is
accurate. He went onto state he feels that what happens in an Executive Session remains in an Executive
Session for the benefit of the City and in this case an employee.
Mayor Lizee asked Attorney Keane if the City is put at risk when the confidentiality of an Executive
Session is breached.
Attorney Keane stated the concept of confidentiality of that privilege that is undertaken in an Executive
Session with the City Attorney present is intended to provide full and frank disclosures and discussions
and to provide the opportunity for effective representation. When that privilege is waived by any
disclosure all further communications are potentially discoverable. If it is a particularly sensitive matter,
one that is a valuation of legalities and risk that may result in litigation or challenges that privilege of
confidentiality is waived with any disclosure of communications. It is important as a valuable asset on
those few occasions when it is invoked. The City conducts its business in public. But, there are a couple
of exceptions under State Statute that provide for those types of communications. The extent to which
there are disclosures can create risks to the City.
Appoint Interim City Administrator
Mayor Lizee stated the meeting packet contains a copy of a resolution appointing Larry Brown as the
Interim City Administrator.
Siakel moved, Hotvet seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 12 -020 "A Resolution Approving
the Appointment of Larry Brown as the Interim City Administrator /Clerk" and adding him as an
authorized signer to execute transactions for all financial operations of the City.
Councilmember Zerby stated in the past there has been additional compensation given for an interim or
acting administrator. He asked Council if it would like to discuss that. He expressed his confidence that
these additional responsibilities will add to Larry Brown's already heavy workload. He noted the last time
Brown served as the Acting City Administrator he received an additional $2000 in compensation
monthly. He commented that it was be prorated for partial months.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 10 of 15
Councilmember Siakel asked if the discussion about additional compensation could be continued to the
next Council meeting. She stated she supports doing that but she has not given much thought to the
amount.
There was Council consensus to continue the discussion about additional compensation to the next
Council meeting.
Motion passed 510.
Interim City Administrator Brown thanked Council for its vote of confidence. He stated Staff will do
everything it can to make the transition as smooth as possible.
C. Urban Farm Animal Permit Fee
Director Nielsen explained that during its March 12, 2012, meeting Council approved Ordinance No. 493
relating to Farm and Other Animals. He noted a permit fee needs to be established for this permit. The
meeting packet contains a copy of an ordinance establishing the permit fee that would go into the City
Code.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she served as the Council Liaison when some of the extensive discussions
about the new Ordinance occurred. She asked if it is normal to have such a fee as a one -time fee, or
should it be a renewing fee, for example, like a dog license fee. Director Nielsen explained it is not
consistent with some of the other City Ordinances. For example, the Horse Stable Ordinance is an annual
permit. Ordinance No. 493 doesn't say anything about the term of the permit. The permit is good until the
permit holder violates the conditions of the permit or they discontinue using it. He noted no one
questioned whether or not the permit should be a one -time permit or a renewable permit. He explained
Staff discussed having it a one -time permit and have the City act on complaints about violations.
Councilmember Hotvet stated from her vantage point it would be nice to have a renewal and to be
consistent with other Ordinances. Director Nielsen stated Staff can prepare an amendment to the
Ordinance to that affect. Nielsen explained that what makes this different is that as part of this permitting
process the applicant has to obtain neighborhood approval. He asked if the applicant would have to obtain
approval every time they would renew their permit. He stated the Ordinance could be amended such that
renewal applications would not require neighborhood approval. Hotvet stated maybe the renewal approval
reauirement could be driven on a conmlaint basis.
stated she can support having a one -time permit application fee.
Councilmember Zerby stated he thought the way it is proposed is okay to start with. He then stated he
appreciates all of the time and effort Staff and the Planning Commission have spent on this. He asked if
there is any liability to the City if it issues a permit for farm and other animals. Would be City be
responsible if there is a problem with how the animals are fed and kept?
Attorney Keane explained the Ordinance provides standards and criteria. If it is a nuisance condition the
City's Nuisance Ordinance would be invoked. The actual care and management of the operation is up to
the property owner that is keeping the animals. There are provisions in State health codes that govern
animal care.
Councilmember Zerby stated if a neighbor has unreasonable concerns is there anything the applicant can
do. Director Nielsen explained that 75 percent of the surrounding property owners have to approve it.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 11 of 15
Nielsen then stated it is the only Ordinance where the applicant has to obtain approval from their
neighbors. He noted that the gentleman the Planning Commission had come in to speak about urban
farming advocated doing that.
Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 494 "An Ordinance Amending
Section 1301.02 of the Shorewood City Code Relating to the Establishment of Fees and Charges for
Farm and Other Animals." Motion passed 510.
D. Discussion Regarding Proposed Upgrade to Xcel Energy Utility Lines
Interim Administrator /Director Brown explained the City received a
known as "Certificate of Need proceedings to upgrade the Southwest
Westgate 69 Kilovolt (kV) Transmission Line to 115 kV capacity ".
miles of a high voltage transmission line that runs from near Chaska
path to near Highway 41. He highlighted Xcel Energy's preferred pal
runs near the Cities of Chanhassen, Deephaven, Eden Prairie, Exec
Shorewood. As part of the project two substations will also be upg
located in the City of Deephaven and the other in the City of Excelsic
be impacted are Highway 7, from State Highway 41 to Oak Stref
Minnetonka Boulevard near Deephaven. Xcel Energy has propose(
primary route. He highlighted that route also.
Brown stated Xcel Energy has filed a r
Commission describing the need and the prof
the link http ://weblink.ci.shorewood.mn.us/
need to obtain rights of way near the area of High
hopes to have the transmission line in place in 201
Mice from Xcel Energy for what is
Cwln Cities (SWTC) Bluff Creek —
cel is upgrading approximately 14
-ollowing a somewhat of a parallel
for the line. The transmission line
;ior, Greenwood Minnetonka and
ided to 115 kV. One substation is
The areas of Shorewood that may
and along the railroad bed near
an alternate route to its preferred
concept plan with the Public Utilities
A copy of the document can be viewed at
8946 /Electronic.aspx Xcel energy may
ghway 41. Per the document Xcel Energy
Brown noted that because of the size of the transmission line Xcel Energy will have to obtain a
conditional use permit from the City per the City's Zoning Code. That provides the City and the City's
residents the opportunity to provide public comments.
Brown displayed examples of what some of the utility poles may look like. He stated at first the poles
may appear to look somewhat intrusive. He noted that along the path there is an existing line that includes
many of the elements already. He also noted that most of the path is not new.
Councilmember Hotvet asked if Xcel Energy has considered burying the lines. Interim
Administrator /Director Brown noted that there are constraints with high voltage transmission lines.
Brown stated Staff will ask that question of Xcel Energy. Hotvet then asked if this upgrade could in any
way overlap with the City's Trail Plan. If so, the City could possibly have some leverage with trail issues.
Brown stated he is not sure but it is worth researching. Brown noted there is a project coming up with
Metropolitan Council with regard to interceptor lines and there may be an opportunity to include trail
expansion projects with that as well.
Councilmember Woodruff asked Staff to provide Council with a City street map showing the proposed
and alternate routes. Interim Administrator /Director Brown stated the location information he provided is
all the detail he has from Xcel Energy.
Mayor Lizee noted that Xcel Energy has meetings planned, and that it has run a large notice in the Star
Tribune Newspaper. She stated she is pleased the City has a conditional use process that has to be
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 12 of 15
followed for this. She stated she is aware that residents have concern about the size of the poles and the
view there will be of them from Lake Minnetonka. She then stated she would like to know if it will be
possible to have underground utility service with the new transmission line.
Councilmember Zerby stated he would like to see more specific information about the location of the
poles. He expressed his preference for the transmission line to follow the alternate route along Highway 7.
He stated he can't imagine 90- foot -high poles near the Old Log Theater property and St. Albans Bay
Bridge.
11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Audio and Video Addition to Council Chambers
Councilmember Zerby stated during its March 12, 2012, meeting Council directed Communications
Coordinator Moore to seek additional quotes for adding a camera to view the audience and an audience
audio microphone (mic) in the Council Chambers. The original quote for those items was $7,520. He
explained the camera operators have indicated the audience is a bit of a blind spot for them in the
Chambers.
Zerby explained that he and Communications Coordinator
provider of the original quote) to secure a. new quote for a
remote controlled camera) and audience mic an
peripheral equipment was removed from both +
$2,580. He noted he questioned Alpha Video abo
of the cost is for the rental of a scissor lift to get'
with the new quote and supports moving forward
the mic may catch people in the audience off ;
seating area. Moore suggested displaying a sign in
recorded. He also noted there is a remote switch in f
explained the mic will not feed into the speaker system
Interim Administrator/Director Brown explained that during the March 12' meeting Councilmember
Woodruff asked about additional electrical related costs. Communications Coordinator Moore has
informed him that Alpha Video said there is no need for additional work outside of what has been quoted.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she appreciated Councilmember Zerby's and Communications Coordinator
Moore's work on this. She then stated based on the results from resident survey she did not think there is
a need to spend money on this. Residents have indicated they don't watch the recordings of the meetings
very often. And, Council has done a good job of getting those in the audience who want to talk to go to
the podium. She noted she does not support doing this.
Councilmember Zerby stated the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission has spent a lot of
money to support mobile devices. Also, agenda parsing has been added. He then stated he thought more
people will watch video meeting recordings this year because it is an election year.
a separate quote
rtes. The new q
its labor cost. He
the ceiling to in
e worked with Alpha Video (the
camera (the first quote was for a
r the audience mic. Some of the
e for a fixed camera and mic is
Ls told that approximately one half
1 the mic. He noted he is satisfied
ioted'that Moore has expressed concern that
se it would be located above the audience
g the audience that they are being audio
)rding room to turn the mic off and on. He
Chambers.
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, authorizing the purchase of a fixed camera and audience
microphone to be located in the Council Chambers for an amount not to exceed $2,580, with the
funding to come from out of $10,000 in the Equipment Fund that had been earmarked for
computers and software for Councilmembers for electronic meeting packets.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 13 of 15
Councilmember Woodruff stated he shares Councilmember Hotvet's comments about the relatively low
reported viewing of City Council meetings by residents. He commented that nationally that type of
viewing is growing at a parabolic rate. He stated he has a small reservation about the fixed camera
because if it is similar to those used in convenience stores he does not think it will be very useful. He
noted that the audience microphone is the most important.
Councilmember Zerby noted the camera selected is a 600 line resolution camera which is the same
resolution as the current cameras.
Motion passed 4/1 with Hotvet dissenting.
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
Interim Administrator /Director Brown stated he has been working`
and Country Club Road about their concerns about speeding on those
Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) Community Service Sup
the speed awareness display along those two roadways to collect
awareness display was placed along Cathcart Drive from March 14
will be analyzing the data this week and it will send the initial findi
later in the week. The display was placed along Country Club Rc
concerned parties has expressed concern about the study and that cc
Council.
Councilmember Siakel th,
stated from her vantage pc
roadways. She then stated'
Lane to turn left on to Hig
a lot of drivers take the ba
She asked what the master
Director Nielsen expla
7. As a result of them
intent. MnDOT's concern is
that local traffic should stay
there would not be addition
Eureka Road and it was not
Some streets are just going t
Yellowstone Trail and then
with residents along Cathcart Drive
roadways. He contacted South Lake
ervisor Dave Hohertz about placing
speed and volume data. The speed
to to March 19 He explained Staff
rigs to Council and interested parties
, ad today. He noted that one of the
immunication has been forwarded to
:ed Interim Administrator/Director Brown for coordinating this effort. She
Highway 7 is a major contributor to the problem of speeding on those two
you are a'resident of the City and you go down Eureka Road or Strawberry
ay 7 you are almost taking your life into your own hands. She indicated that
route because there is a stop light to make it easier to get on to Highway 7.
in is for Hiahwav 7 beini it contributes a lot to this and other traffic issues.
he City has participated in two different corridor studies related to Highway
'ity, closed ''off some direct access points to Highway 7. Doing that did push
Lions and that was the Minnesota Department of Transportation's (MnDOT)
safety on Highway 7 and keeping the traffic moving with the understanding
on local roadways. After each of the studies MnDOT has told the City that
al stoplights placed on Highway 7. The City conducted a traffic study on
close to meeting the warrants for a stop light at the entrance on to Highway 7.
o be busier. Traveling from Country Road 19 down Country Club Road on to
on to Lake Linden Drive to eventually go south on Highway 41 has been a
historic route for traffic for a long time.
Councilmember Siakel asked what the "no thru traffic" sign near the intersection of Country Club Road
and Smithtown Road means. Director Nielsen stated that is an illegal sign. It is not an authorized sign per
the Uniform Manual of Traffic Control Devices and it should be taken down. Siakel stated if it is not
enforceable it should be taken down. Nielsen stated that sign is not enforceable in any manner yet people
rely on it in some way.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 14 of 15
Director Nielsen stated he and Councilmember Zerby attended an aquatic invasive species (AIS) two -day
symposium put on by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The AIS working group was
well represented at the symposium. He noted that Attorney Keane and Mike Welch, the attorney for the
MCWD, were presenters. He also noted that United States Senator Amy Klobuchar also was present and
agreed to commit to working on the AIS issue. He stated the MCWD's Splash Newsletter has a recap of
the symposium. He indicated he would forward it to Council.
Councilmember Zerby stated he found the symposium to be educational. He explained that day one
focused on AIS plants and day two on AIS animals. He stated he thought the cross -group discussion was
very good. He noted that a number of State legislatures attended the symposium.
Director Nielsen stated when the attendees heard about the environmental problems caused by AIS the
first reaction was to think it is overwhelming. But after a while, the conversations created a lot of positive
energy.
Mayor Lizee stated the symposium was well covered on the news. She heard that hundreds of people
attended it. She noted that in the United States there are eight AIS scientists and five of them attended the
symposium. She indicated this is an opportunity for Minnesota to be on the forefront of this issue. She
noted that anyone can sign up to receive the Splash Newsletter, She thanked Councilmember Zerby and
Director Nielsen for attending the symposium.
Director DeJong stated the Finance Department continues to prepare for the 2011 financial audit which
will start on April 16 It is also working on utility billing. He noted he will be on vacation beginning
later this week for over a week. He stated that he and Interim Administrator /Director Brown have talked
about designing a project dash board on the Staff's projects. They will bring that to Staff for review and
then Council in the next month or so.
B. Mayor and City Council
Councilmember Hotvet stated she attended the Legislative Conference in St. Paul the previous week. She
noted that approximately 500 people attended the conference and they were from city governments,
school districts and counties. She came away from the conference with an appreciation that this is a very
exciting yet challenging time to live in Minnesota. Things are changing very quickly and in many ways;
demographics, economics, education, 'cultural makeup and so forth. She thought it is challenging for
elected officials at the local to state level as well as residents. She thought it prudent for everyone to
embrace the challenizes and accent the chanizes that are ahead of them.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he will attend the Metro Cities spring meeting on April 26 He then
stated if there is anything that Council should weigh in on that will be discussed during that meeting he
will ask Council for comment on it prior to the meeting.
Mayor Lizee thanked Recycling Coordinator Julie Moore for organizing a tour on March 23r of Allied
Waste's recycling facility. She noted that Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, and Zerby as well as Interim
Administrator /Director Brown, Moore and she went on the tour. Excelsior City Manager Luger and
Excelsior Councilmember Jennifer Caron and her daughter also went along. She stated she thought Allied
Waste has a very efficient operation. She encouraged Council and Staff to continue to promote recycling.
Hotvet noted that she learned that residents can get a second recycling container for free.
Lizee noted that on March 28 she will attend the bi- monthly Mayors and School District luncheon and it
will be held at Deephaven City Hall at 11:30 A.M. There is a meeting of the AIS working group that same
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 26, 2012
Page 15 of 15
afternoon at 2:00 P.M. On April 3r there is a retirement party for librarian Jane Stein. Ms. Stein is a
resident of the City and she has worked at the library in the City of Excelsior for a very long time. The
party will be held at the library from 9 — 11:00 A.M. and the public is invited.
Councilmember Zerby stated there is an Excelsior Fire District Board meeting scheduled for 6:00 P.M. on
March 28
13. ADJOURN
Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of March 26, 2012,
at 8:39 P.M. Motion passed 510.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST:
ine Liz&,
Larry Brown, Interim City Administrato
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department Council Meeting Item Number
Finance April 09, 2012 3A
Item Description: Verified Claims
From: Michelle Nguyen
Bruce DeJong
Background / Previous Action
Claims for council authorization. The attached claims list includes checks numbered 52819 through
52864 totaling $585,305.00.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the claims list.
4/05/2012
11:23 AM
A/P
HISTORY CHECK REPORT
VENDOR SET:
01 City of
Shorewood
2,096.65
000000
BANK:
1 BEACON BANK
1,663.50
052820
DATE RANGE:
3/27/2012 THRU
99/99/9999
052823
13,741.20
052824
6.40
052825
562.66
CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
052827
NAME
STATUS
DATE
00051
61.27
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
D
3/27/2012
00092
052832
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
D
3/27/2012
20005
404.25
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVC
D
3/27/2012
00053
052837
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -4
R
3/27/2012
00052
PERA
R
3/27/2012
13302
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES IN
R
3/28/2012
29306
ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894
R
4/09/2012
16275
AMERICAN MESSAGING
R
4/09/2012
29338
BLANCHARD CATERING, INC.
R
4/09/2012
17300
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
R
4/09/2012
26100
CENTURY LINK
R
4/09/2012
18100
CITY OF MOUND
R
4/09/2012
06560
DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY
R
4/09/2012
29271
DREW KRIESEL
R
4/09/2012
07653
EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT
R
4/09/2012
08712
G & K SERVICES
R
4/09/2012
11375
J & R RADIATOR CORP.
R
4/09/2012
29424
JOCHIMS STEPHANIE
R
4/09/2012
13320
LEE PEST CONTROL, INC.
R
4/09/2012
13550
LIZEE, CHRISTINE
R
4/09/2012
21340
LOCAL LINK
R
4/09/2012
15050
MEDIACOM
R
4/09/2012
INVOICE
AMOUNT DISCOUNT
PAGE: 1
CHECK
CHECK CHECK
NO
STATUS AMOUNT
000000
11,723.94
000000
2,096.65
000000
1,074.60
052819
1,663.50
052820
7,088.92
052822
11,095.00
052823
13,741.20
052824
6.40
052825
562.66
052826
1,025.49
052827
326.87
052828
6,070.50
052829
61.27
052830
681.45
052831
146,402.71
052832
1,131.59
052833
142.71
052834
404.25
052835
81.00
052836
105.00
052837
69.95
052838
50.95
4/05/2012
11:23 AM
A/P
HISTORY CHECK REPORT
VENDOR SET:
01 City of
Shorewood
2,341.35
052841
BANK:
1 BEACON BANK
70.00
052843
DATE RANGE:
3/27/2012 THRU
99/99/9999
052845
685.10
052846
527.31
052847
781.26
CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
052849
NAME
STATUS
DATE
00079
138,743.66
MEDICA
R
4/09/2012
15501
052854
METRO COUNCIL ENV.(SAC)
R
4/09/2012
00085
2,413.55
MINNESOTA LIFE
R
4/09/2012
50001
052859
MNSPECT, INC.
R
4/09/2012
14050
MTI DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
R
4/09/2012
15900
OFFICE DEPOT
R
4/09/2012
29332
ON SITE SANITATION INC
R
4/09/2012
15000
PAETEC
R
4/09/2012
1350
PRUDENTIAL GROUP INSURANCE
R
4/09/2012
29425
RIVER STATES TRUCK AND TRAILER
R
4/09/2012
21970
S.O.S. APPLIANCE SERVICE & REP
R
4/09/2012
22600
SLUC (SENSIBLE LAND USE COALIT
R
4/09/2012
23500
SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT
R
4/09/2012
17050
STATE OF MN -MN DEPT OF HEALTH
R
4/09/2012
29101
SUN NEWSPAPERS
R
4/09/2012
17200
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
R
4/09/2012
23738
T- MOBILE
R
4/09/2012
25000
TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES
R
4/09/2012
25540
UNITED LABORATORIES
R
4/09/2012
70200
VERIZON WIRELESS
R
4/09/2012
29413
VOYAGER FLEET SYSTEMS, INC.
R
4/09/2012
29269
WARNER CONNECT
R
4/09/2012
INVOICE
AMOUNT DISCOUNT
PAGE: 2
CHECK
CHECK CHECK
NO
STATUS AMOUNT
052839
15,598.14
052840
2,341.35
052841
415.66
052842
70.00
052843
306.43
052844
407.30
052845
685.10
052846
527.31
052847
781.26
052848
66,667.00
052849
159.95
052850
86.00
052851
138,743.66
052852
2,121.00
052853
371.65
052854
33.08
052855
87.86
052856
2,413.55
052857
240.93
052858
288.13
052859
4,724.91
052860
2,800.00
4/05/2012
11:23 AM
A/P
HISTORY CHECK REPORT
VENDOR SET:
01 City of
Shorewood
10,229.29
052864
BANK:
1 BEACON BANK
408.00
999999
DATE RANGE:
3/27/2012 THRU
99/99/9999
999999
667.17
999999
100.00
999999
65.00
CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
999999
NAME
STATUS
DATE
83900
2,396.21
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN
R
4/09/2012
19800
999999
XCEL ENERGY
R
4/09/2012
28600
1,457.13
ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INC
R
4/09/2012
00087
999999
AFSCME CO 5 MEMBERS HEALTH FUN
E
4/09/2012
03325
BOYER FORD TRUCK, INC.
E
4/09/2012
05305
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
E
4/09/2012
06572
DELTA DENTAL OF MINNESOTA
D
4/01/2012
07900
HAWKINS, INC.
E
4/09/2012
10473
HENN CTY TAXPAYER SVCS PUBLIC
E
4/09/2012
13070
LANDINI, JAMES
E
4/09/2012
15500
METRO COUNCIL ENVMT(WASTEWATER
E
4/09/2012
15885
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS, INC.
E
3/28/2012
15885
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS, INC.
E
3/30/2012
15885
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS, INC.
E
4/04/2012
18500
WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC.
E
4/09/2012
19445
NGUYEN, MICHELLE
E
4/09/2012
20950
KENNETH N. POTTS, P.A.
E
4/09/2012
21400
PURCHASE POWER
E
4/09/2012
22820
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
E
4/09/2012
29154
UNIQUE PAVING MATERIALS CORP.
E
4/09/2012
29363
DeJONG, BRUCE
E
4/09/2012
INVOICE
AMOUNT DISCOUNT
PAGE: 3
CHECK
CHECK CHECK
NO
STATUS AMOUNT
052861
548.02
052862
10,229.29
052864
1,048.71
999999
408.00
999999
162.72
999999
6,565.24
999999
667.17
999999
100.00
999999
65.00
999999
60.07
999999
56,259.05
999999
255.26
999999
2,396.21
999999
1,357.15
999999
1,580.85
999999
83.60
999999
2,291.66
999999
1,457.13
999999
168.57
999999
273.87
999999
40.00
4/05/2012 11:23 AM
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE: 3/27/2012 THRU 99/99/9999
VENDOR I.D. NAME
A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 4
CHECK INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
** T O T A L S ** NO
REGULAR CHECKS: 44
HAND CHECKS: 0
DRAFTS: 4
EFT: 17
NON CHECKS: 0
VOID CHECKS: 0 VOID DEBITS
VOID CREDITS
TOTAL ERRORS: 0
VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: 1 TOTALS: 65
BANK: 1 TOTALS: 65
REPORT TOTALS: 65
INVOICE AMOUNT
DISCOUNTS
CHECK AMOUNT
442,407.71
531,494.45
0.00
442,407.71
0.00
531,494.45
0.00
0.00
15,562.36
0.00
15,562.36
73,524.38
0.00
73,524.38
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
531,494.45
0.00
531,494.45
531,494.45
0.00
531,494.45
531,494.45
0.00
531,494.45
04 -05 -2012 11:22 AM
C O U N
C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- APRIL 09, 2012
PAGE:
1
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
FUND
DEPARTMENT
AMOUNT
AFSCME CO 5 MEMBERS HEALTH FUND
4/09/12
CHARLIES DAVIS
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
51.00
4/09/12
GREG FASCHING
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
51.00
4/09/12
JOSEPH LUGOWSKI
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
51.00
4/09/12
BRADLEY MASON
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
51.00
4/09/12
CHRISTOPHER POUNDER
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
51.00
4/09/12
DANIEL RANDALL
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
51.00
4/09/12
BRUCE STARK
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
51.00
4/09/12
TERRY TOWER
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
51.00
TOTAL:
408.00
ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894
4/09/12
RECYCLING
Recycling Utility
Recycling
13,741.20
TOTAL:
13,741.20
AMERICAN MESSAGING
4/09/12
612- 534 -3975 & 612 - 818 -591
General Fund
Public Works
3.20
4/09/12
612- 534 -3975 & 612 - 818 -591
Water Utility
Water
1.60
4/09/12
612- 534 -3975 & 612 - 818 -591
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
1.60
TOTAL:
6.40
BLANCHARD CATERING, INC.
4/09/12
SPRING GARDEN EVENT
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
562.66
TOTAL:
562.66
BOYER FORD TRUCK, INC.
4/09/12
LOCK ASY RETURN
General Fund
Public Works
60.62-
4/09/12
LOCK ASY
General Fund
Public Works
60.62
4/09/12
CABLE RETURN
General Fund
Public Works
162.72-
4/09/12
CABLE
General Fund
Public Works
162.72
4/09/12
CABLE
General Fund
Public Works
162.72
TOTAL:
162.72
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
4/09/12
5755 CTRY CLUB RD
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
163.28
4/09/12
24200 SMITHTOWN RD
General Fund
Public Works
309.15
4/09/12
5745 CTRY CLB RD & 25200 H
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
159.09
4/09/12
20630 MANOR RD- WARMING HOU
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
36.54
4/09/12
5735 COUNTRY CLUB RD - SSC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
138.09
4/09/12
20405 KNIGHTSBRIDGE RD
Water Utility
Water
59.54
4/09/12
28125 BOULDER BRIDGE DR
Water Utility
Water
159.80
TOTAL:
1,025.49
CENTURY LINK
4/09/12
952 - 470 -6340
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
120.88
4/09/12
952 - 470 -2294
General Fund
Public Works
57.21
4/09/12
952 - 470 -9605
Water Utility
Water
74.39
4/09/12
952 - 470 -9606
Water Utility
Water
74.39
TOTAL:
326.87
CITY OF MOUND
4/09/12
QUARTERLY FIRE SVC & PROTE
General Fund
Fire Protection
6,070.50
TOTAL:
6,070.50
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
4/09/12
SSCC - UTILITY PAYMENT
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
168.57
TOTAL:
168.57
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
4/09/12
MONTHLY SSCC CORDINATOR SV
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
5,000.00
4/09/12
MONTHLY COMMISSION SVCS
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
770.10
4/09/12
QUARTERLY BONUS COMMISSION
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
795.14
TOTAL:
6,565.24
DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY
4/09/12
DRUM PUMP
General Fund
Public Works
61.27
TOTAL:
61.27
04 -05 -2012 11:22 AM
VENDOR SORT KEY
DELTA DENTAL OF MINNESOTA
C O U N
DATE
C I L REPORT BY VENDOR-
DESCRIPTION
APRIL 09,
FUND
2012
DEPARTMENT
PAGE:
2
AMOUNT
4/01/12
MONTHLY DENTIST PREMIUM
General
Fund
Unallocated
Expenses
667.17
TOTAL: 667.17
DREW KRIESEL
DeJONG, BRUCE
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT
G & K SERVICES
HAWKINS, INC
4/09/12 CONTRACT SVC
4/09/12 GENERAL SUPPLIES
4/09/12 EQUIPMENT RENTAL
4/09/12 WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENT
3/27/12 FEDERAL W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
3/27/12 FICA W/H
3/27/12 MEDICARE W/H
4/09/12 OPERATIONS
4/09/12 BUILDINGS
4/09/12 CH SVC
4/09/12 PW SVC
4/09/12 SSCC SVC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
330.00
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
21.45
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
330.00
TOTAL:
681.45
General Fund
Finance
40.00
TOTAL:
40.00
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
4,934.11
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
2,144.15
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
740.25
General Fund
Council
80.60
General Fund
Council
18.87
General Fund
Administration
834.31
General Fund
Administration
195.11
General Fund
Finance
317.45
General Fund
Finance
74.24
General Fund
Planning
295.87
General Fund
Planning
69.19
General Fund
Protective Inspections
168.11
General Fund
Protective Inspections
39.32
General Fund
City Engineer
92.17
General Fund
City Engineer
21.56
General Fund
Public Works
550.61
General Fund
Public Works
128.78
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
293.34
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
68.59
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
11.91
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
2.79
Water Utility
Water
200.78
Water Utility
Water
46.97
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
132.96
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
31.10
Recycling Utility
Recycling
18.27
Recycling Utility
Recycling
4.27
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
168.80
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
39.46
TOTAL:
11,723.94
General Fund
Fire Protection
76,926.23
General Fund
Fire Protection
69,476.48
TOTAL:
146,402.71
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
131.38
General Fund
Public Works
929.47
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
70.74
TOTAL:
1,131.59
Water Utility
Water
100.00
TOTAL:
100.00
General Fund
City Engineer
30.00
General Fund
City Engineer
5.00
4/09/12 CHLORINE
HENN CTY TAXPAYER SVCS PUBLIC RECORDS 4/09/12 EGKF64 - MONTHLY FEE
4/09/12 VIEW RECORDED DOCUMENT
04 -05 -2012 11:22 AM
C O U N
C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- APRIL 09,
2012
PAGE:
3
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
FUND
DEPARTMENT
AMOUNT
4/09/12
EGKF64 - MONTHLY FEE
General
Fund
City Engineer
30.00
TOTAL:
65.00
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -457
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS - DEFERRED COM
General
Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
1,535.96
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS - DEFERRED COM
General
Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
127.54
TOTAL:
1,663.50
J & R RADIATOR CORP.
4/09/12
REPAIR COOLER SWEEPER
General
Fund
Public Works
142.71
TOTAL:
142.71
JOCHIMS STEPHANIE
4/09/12
FUSED GLASS CLASSES 03/12
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
174.00
4/09/12
PARENT /CHILD CLASS
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
33.75
4/09/12
OPEN STUDIO
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
196.50
TOTAL:
404.25
KENNETH N. POTTS, P.A.
4/09/12
MONTHLY PROSECUTION SVC
General
Fund
Professional Svcs
2,291.66
TOTAL:
2,291.66
LANDINI, JAMES
4/09/12
APR WELLNESS & GEN
General
Fund
City Engineer
40.00
4/09/12
APR WELLNESS & GEN
General
Fund
City Engineer
20.07
TOTAL:
60.07
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INS TRUST
3/28/12
PUBLIC SAFETY -CMC 33612
General
Fund
Municipal Buildings
11,095.00
TOTAL:
11,095.00
LEE PEST CONTROL, INC.
4/09/12
SOUTH SHORE COMMUNITY CENT
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
81.00
TOTAL:
81.00
LIZEE, CHRISTINE
4/09/12
SAVE THE LAKE 02/15/12
General
Fund
Council
55.00
4/09/12
PARTY OF THE YEAR- BAYVIEW
General
Fund
Council
50.00
TOTAL:
105.00
LOCAL LINK
4/09/12
APR SVC
General
Fund
Municipal Buildings
69.95
TOTAL:
69.95
MEDIACOM
4/09/12
5375 COUNTRY CLUB RD - SSC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
50.95
TOTAL:
50.95
MEDICA
4/09/12
MEDICAL PREM
General
Fund
Unallocated Expenses
15,598.14
TOTAL:
15,598.14
METRO COUNCIL ENV.(SAC)
4/09/12
1ST QTR SAC REPORT
Sanitary Sewer Uti
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
2,341.35
TOTAL:
2,341.35
METRO COUNCIL ENVMT(WASTEWATER)
4/09/12
WASTE WATER SVC
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
56,259.05
TOTAL:
56,259.05
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS, INC.
4/04/12
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS, I
General
Fund
Administration
389.50
3/30/12
APR SVC
General
Fund
Administration
340.52
3/30/12
ADDT'L POSTAGE
General
Fund
Administration
42.54
3/30/12
APR - PARK -WASTE STUDY POSTA
General
Fund
Parks & Recreation
144.21
3/30/12
APR - PARK -WASTE STUDY SVC
General
Fund
Parks & Recreation
84.77
3/30/12
APR - PARK -WASTE STUDY - POSTA
General
Fund
Parks & Recreation
111.05
3/30/12
APR - PARK -WASTE STUDY SVC
General
Fund
Parks & Recreation
95.74
3/28/12
RECYCLING INSERT
General
Fund
Parks & Recreation
255.26
4/04/12
APR -SSCC & PARKS BROCHURE
General
Fund
Parks & Recreation
271.18
04 -05 -2012 11:22 AM
C O U N
C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- APRIL 09, 2012
PAGE:
4
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
FUND
DEPARTMENT
AMOUNT
4/04/12
APR -SSCC & PARKS BROCHURE
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
170.21
4/04/12
APR -SSCC & PARKS BROCHURE
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
271.17
4/04/12
APR -SSCC & PARKS BROCHURE
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
170.21
3/30/12
QTR UTILITY POSTAGE
Water Utility
Water
309.35
3/30/12
QTR UTILITY BILLING SVC
Water Utility
Water
85.00
4/04/12
UTILITY BILLINGS SVC
Water Utility
Water
21.22
3/30/12
QTR UTILITY POSTAGE
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
309.35
3/30/12
QTR UTILITY BILLING SVC
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
85.00
4/04/12
UTILITY BILLINGS SVC
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
21.22
3/30/12
QTR UTILITY POSTAGE
Recycling Utility
Recycling
309.34
3/30/12
QTR UTILITY BILLING SVC
Recycling Utility
Recycling
85.00
4/04/12
UTILITY BILLINGS SVC
Recycling Utility
Recycling
21.22
3/30/12
QTR UTILITY POSTAGE
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
309.34
3/30/12
QTR UTILITY BILLING SVC
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
85.00
4/04/12
UTILITY BILLINGS SVC
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
21.22
TOTAL:
4,008.62
MINNESOTA LIFE
4/09/12
LIFE INS
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
415.66
TOTAL:
415.66
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
3/27/12
STATE W/H
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
2,096.65
TOTAL:
2,096.65
MNSPECT, INC.
4/09/12
MAR INSPECTION SVC
General Fund
Protective Inspections
70.00
TOTAL:
70.00
MTI DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
4/09/12
BATTERY
General Fund
Public Works
79.72
4/09/12
MOWER PARTS
General Fund
Public Works
11.28
4/09/12
MOWER PTO
General Fund
Public Works
215.43
TOTAL:
306.43
NGUYEN, MICHELLE
4/09/12
MAR MILEAGE
General Fund
Finance
83.60
TOTAL:
83.60
OFFICE DEPOT
4/09/12
GEN SUPPLIES
General Fund
Administration
201.73
4/09/12
GEN SUPPLIES
General Fund
Administration
101.26
4/09/12
GEN SUPPLIES
General Fund
City Engineer
104.31
TOTAL:
407.30
ON SITE SANITATION INC
4/09/12
BADGER PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
4/09/12
CATHCART PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
4/09/12
FREEMAN PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
266.13
4/09/12
SILVERWOOD PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
4/09/12
SOUTH SHORE SKATE
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
4/09/12
CHRISTMAS LAKE BOAT ACCESS
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
235.13
TOTAL:
685.10
PAETEC
4/09/12
5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD -C.H.
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
135.86
4/09/12
24200 SMITHTOWN RD -P.W.
General Fund
Public Works
46.90
4/09/12
BADGER /MANOR / CATHCART PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
145.60
4/09/12
26352 SMTWN RD /28125 BLDR
Water Utility
Water
98.70
4/09/12
24255 SMITHTOWN ROAD
Water Utility
Water
100.25
TOTAL:
527.31
PERA
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
3,281.90
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Administration
989.73
04 -05 -2012 11:22 AM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- APRIL 09, 2012 PAGE: 5
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Finance
393.71
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Planning
385.58
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Protective Inspections
230.14
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
City Engineer
110.10
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Public Works
687.03
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
359.38
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
13.94
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Water Utility
Water
252.33
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
165.09
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Recycling Utility
Recycling
21.36
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
198.63
TOTAL:
7,088.92
PRUDENTIAL GROUP INSURANCE
4/09/12
LIFE INSURANCE
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
781.26
TOTAL:
781.26
PURCHASE POWER
4/09/12
POSTAGE - 8000900007438223
General Fund
Administration
237.14
4/09/12
POSTAGE - 8000900007438223
General Fund
Administration
1,219.99
TOTAL:
1,457.13
RIVER STATES TRUCK AND TRAILER, INC.
4/09/12
2012 FREIGHTLINER M2 -106V
Equipment Replacem
Equipment Replacement
78,667.00
4/09/12
TRADE IN UNIT 33
Equipment Replacem
Equipment Replacement
12,000.00
-
TOTAL:
66,667.00
S.O.S. APPLIANCE SERVICE & REPAIR
4/09/12
REPAIR ICE -MAKER FOR FREEZ
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
159.95
TOTAL:
159.95
SLUC (SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION)
4/09/12
BRAD NIELSEN
General Fund
Planning
38.00
4/09/12
SUE DAVIS
General Fund
Planning
48.00
TOTAL:
86.00
SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT
4/09/12
1ST QTR - CO
General Fund
Police Protection
203.66
4/09/12
QUARTERLY LEASE PAYMENT
General Fund
Police Protection
56,283.00
4/09/12
OPERATING BUDGET EXPENSE
General Fund
Police Protection
82,257.00
TOTAL:
138,743.66
STATE OF MN -MN DEPT OF HEALTH
4/09/12
1ST QTR -2012 STATE SURCHA
Water Utility
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
2,121.00
TOTAL:
2,121.00
SUN NEWSPAPERS
4/09/12
ORD NO. 492 -03/22
General Fund
Administration
74.94
4/09/12
RESOLUTION 12 -015 - 03/22
General Fund
Administration
65.95
4/09/12
SCHREPEL CUP 03/22
General Fund
Planning
50.96
4/09/12
PROJECT 12 -02 BID OVERLAY
Street Capital Imp
Street Capt Improvemen
179.80
TOTAL:
371.65
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
4/09/12
PUBLIC HRG 03/24
General Fund
Planning
33.08
TOTAL:
33.08
T- MOBILE
4/09/12
952 - 463 -5836 - BRIAN HECK
General Fund
Administration
87.86
TOTAL:
87.86
TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES
4/09/12
APR SVC
General Fund
Administration
1,101.77
4/09/12
APR - SPRING PARKS SVC
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
1,311.78
TOTAL:
2,413.55
UNIQUE PAVING MATERIALS CORP.
4/09/12
COLD MIX
General Fund
Public Works
273.87
04 -05 -2012 11:22 AM
VENDOR SORT KEY
C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- APRIL 09, 2012
DATE DESCRIPTION FUND
DEPARTMENT
PAGE: 6
AMOUNT
TOTAL: 273.87
UNITED LABORATORIES
VERIZON WIRELESS
VOYAGER FLEET SYSTEMS, INC
WARNER CONNECT
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS
WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC
XCEL ENERGY
4/09/12
SUPPLIES
General Fund
Public Works
240.93
TOTAL:
1,048.71
TOTAL:
240.93
Fund
4/09/12
612- 865 -3582 - BRAD NIELSE
General Fund
Planning
70.64
Administration
4/09/12
L.S. PHONE SERVICES
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
217.49
5,430.42
General
Fund
TOTAL:
288.13
4/09/12
SVC THRU 03/24/12
General Fund
Public Works
4,724.91
TOTAL:
4,724.91
4/09/12
MAINT SVC
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
2,800.00
TOTAL:
2,800.00
4/09/12
24200 SMITHTOWN RD -PUB WOR
General Fund
Public Works
381.95
4/09/12
5735 COUNTRY CLUB RD -SSCC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
166.07
TOTAL:
548.02
3/27/12
P/R DEDUCTS -HSA
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
1,074.60
TOTAL:
1,074.60
4/09/12
SHOULDERING MATERIAL
General Fund
Public Works
795.15
4/09/12
SHOULDERING MATERIAL
General Fund
Public Works
785.70
TOTAL:
1,580.85
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
433.19
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
General Fund
Police Protection
4.01
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
General Fund
Public Works
468.02
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
General Fund
Traffic Control /Str Li
27.05
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
General Fund
Traffic Control /Str Li
3,374.01
4/09/12
5700 CTY RD 19
General Fund
Traffic Control /Str Li
31.48
4/09/12
5700 CTY RD 19 UNIT LIGHTS
General Fund
Traffic Control /Str Li
174.81
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
753.58
4/09/12
5735 COUNTRY CLUB RD
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
656.75
4/09/12
24253 SMITHTOWN ROAD
Water Utility
Water
237.74
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
Water Utility
Water
380.63
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
Water Utility
Water
934.91
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
Water Utility
Water
2,331.52
4/09/12
SVC 01 -24 -03/08
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
421.59
TOTAL:
10,229.29
ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INC 4/09/12 BROOMS SWEEPER General
Fund
Public Works
1,048.71
TOTAL:
1,048.71
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/26/2012 - 99/99/9999 General
Fund
Council
1,300.00
General
Fund
Administration
13,651.69
General
Fund
Finance
5,430.42
General
Fund
Planning
5,318.52
General
Fund
Protective Inspections
3,174.49
04 -05 -2012 11:22 AM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- APRIL 09, 2012 PAGE: 7
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
General Fund
City Engineer
1,518.53
General Fund
Public Works
9,476.06
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
4,956.92
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
192.15
Water Utility
Water
3,480.33
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
2,276.89
Recycling Utility
Recycling
294.63
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
2,739.92
TOTAL:
53,810.55
FUND TOTALS
101
General Fund
416,859.46
403
Equipment Replacement
66,667.00
404
Street Capital Improvemen
179.80
490
Southshore Community Ctr.
10,207.94
601
Water Utility
11,070.45
611
Sanitary Sewer Utility
62,262.69
621
Recycling Utility
14,495.29
631
Stormwater ManagementUtil
3,562.37
GRAND TOTAL: 585,305.00
------------------------- - - - - --
TOTAL PAGES: 7
® #3B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Authorize the Expenditure of Funds, Public Works, Skid -Steer
Meeting Date: April 4, 2012
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
Attachments: CIP Excerpts, Quote
Background / Previous Action
The Department of Public Works is seeking to replace one 1998 Skid Steer, (aka Unit 63). The
current Capital Improvement Program (2012 CIP) includes funding for the replacement of this
unit. Attachment 1 is an excerpt taken from the current CIP. The current CIP has $35,000
budgeted for this unit.
This unit is used for patching of roadways, grading, snow removal and pallet work. This is a
primary piece of equipment for the Department.
Minnesota State Statute allows municipalities to take advantage of the state and county
bidding process that are of record, if the municipality is a member of the Cooperative
Purchasing Venture (CPV). The City of Shorewood is a CPV member, and is allowed to take
advantage of the discounts that are offered to the state and county agencies, due to the
volume discounts.
The state contract vendor for the Case skid steer is Titan Equipment. Attachment 2 is the state
contract proposal for this unit. The total amount listed for this unit is $25,933 including
consideration of the trade in of the existing unit in the amount of $8,500. With taxes, this unit
will cost $27,819.63.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
As noted, the current CIP has $35,000 allocated for replacement of this unit, compared to the
$27,819.63 quoted for the unit. Therefore, adequate funds exist for this purchase in the
Equipment Replacement Fund.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
Options
1. Approve the expenditure of funds from the Equipment Replacement Fund in the amount of
$27,850 (rounded), and authorize staff to proceed with the trade in of Unit 68.
2. Provide Staff alternative direction on this purchase.
3. Take no action.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a motion for the expenditure of funds from the
Equipment Replacement Fund in the amount, not to exceed $27,850 and authorize staff to
trade in Unit 68, one Bobcat skid steer.
Source # Priority 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
403 - Equipment Replacement Fund
Dump Truck - Replace Unit 33
E -11 -01
1
155,000
155,000
Replace Unit 21 - 24' trailer
E -12 -01
2
16,000
16,000
Sand Pro 3000 - replace Unit 64
E -12 -02
2
13,000
13,000
Groundsmaster Mower- Toro 328D -
E -12 -03
2
24,000
30,000 54,000
replace unit 75
Air Compressor - Replace unit 38
E -13 -01
3
12,000
12,000
Dump Truck - replace unit 65
E -13 -02
3
160,000
160,000
Dump Truck - Replace Unit 68
E -13 -03
2
165,000
165,000
Pickup 44 - Replace Unit 78
E -13 -04
3
38,000
38,000
Cab for mower - replace A3
E -13 -05
3
8,000 8,000
Utility Truck w /crane & toolbox
E -14 -01
5
77,000
77,000
replace unit 76
Mower- Replace Unit 84
E -14 -02
4
25,000
25,000
Utility Vehicle - replace unit 77
E -14 -03
4
25,000
25,000
Blower Attachment for mower
E -14 -04
4
6,000
6,000
replace A8
Cab attachement for mower replace
E -14 -05
4
7
7,000
unit A4
Pick -up -4 x 4 150 Replace Unit 80
E -15 -01
5
35,000
35,000
Dump Truck - replace unit 72
E -15 -03
5
175,000
175,000
Trailer 18' replace unit 59
E -16 -01
5
15,000
15,000
SewerJetter - replace unit 60
E -16 -02
5
53,000
53,000
Pickup - 350 4x4 replace unit 81
E- -17 -01
5
42,000
42,000
Groundsmaster Mower replace unit
E -17 -02
5
28,000
28,000
91
Mower blower attachment replace
E -17 -03
5
6,000
6,000
unit Al
Cab for mower replace A4
E -17 -04
5
7,000
7,000
Vehicle Analysis station replace A9
E -18 -01
5
4,000
4,000
Skid Steer - replace unit 63
E -19 -01
5
35,000
35,000
ATV - replace unit 34
E-19-02
5
20,000 20,000
Sander replace A10
E -19 -04
5
12,000
12,000
4" pump replace unit 50
E -20 -01
5
45,000 45,000
Trailer 12' replace unit 69
E -20 -02
5
4,000
4,000
Roller - replace unit 73
E -20 -03
5
37,000
37,000
Pickup 350 44 - replace unit 91
E -20 -04
5
42,000
42,000
Sweeper - replace unit 74
E -21 -01
5
190,000 190,000
Cab for mower - replace A3
E -21 -03
5
8,000 8,000
F �
April 2, 2012
City of Shorewood
Attn: Larry Brown
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Phone: 952 - 445 -5409
6340 County Road 101 East 800 -795 -9274
Shakopee, MN 55379 Fax: 952 - 445 -9365
Larry,
We are pleased to quote the City of Shorewood the following Case equipment from the MN -DOT
contract # 30085 valid through July 31, 2012:
(1) Case SV 185 Skid Steer $ 34,260.00
with standard specifications including:
• Mechanical Controls
Standard
• High Flow Hydraulics
$ 3820.00
• 2 Speed
$ 1540.00
• Engine Block Heater
$ 130.00
• Enclosed Cab with Climate Control
$ 5,770.00
• Suspension Seat
$ 380.00
• Hydraulic Coupler
$ 985.00
• 66" Heavy Duty Dirt Bucket
$ 1,180.00
• 66" Bolt on Cutting Edge
$ 225.00
Total
$ 48,920.00
30% Government Discount
$ - 14,487.00
Government Total
$ 34,433.00
Less Trade of Bobcat 753
$ ( 8,500.00)
$ 25,933.00
Quoted price excludes all applicable taxes and is FOB Shakopee, MN. Thank you for the
opportunity to help with your equipment needs. If you have any questions or comments, please
contact me through the office at 952 - 445 -5400.
Si cerely,
Craig Arndt
Field Marketer
Titan Machinery Inc.
® #3C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Arbor Day Proclamation
Meeting Date: April 9, 2012
Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy City Clerk
Reviewed by: Larry Brown, Interim City Administrator and Director of Public Works
Attachments: Resolution
Policy Consideration:
Does the city want to proclaim Friday, April 27, 2012, as Arbor Day?
Background:
In 1872, J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day, Arbor Day,
be set aside for the planting of trees. Arbor Day was officially proclaimed by Nebraska's state Governor
in 1874. Arbor Day is held the last Friday in April, and will be celebrated this year on Friday, April 27.
The National Arbor Day Foundation encourages cities to recognize Arbor Day with a proclamation. For
the past several years, the City has adopted a resolution proclaiming Arbor Day and encouraging
residents to observe Arbor Day by protecting our trees and woodlands and /or planting trees. A
resolution is attached for Council's consideration.
Council may recall that the City had the chance to participate in the City of Minnetonka's annual tree
sale. Residents were offered the opportunity to purchase trees at wholesale prices. All of the trees have
been sold (100 trees were allocated for Shorewood) and will be available for pick up by on Friday, April
27 or Saturday April 28. This tree sale event is part of the Arbor Day celebration and also satisfies
requirements for the city's Tree City USA designation.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Adopt a resolution proclaiming Arbor Day on Friday, April 27, 2012.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Proclamation will be posted on the city's website.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy
environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through
effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 12-
A RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING APRIL 27, 2012 AS ARBOR DAY
WHEREAS, Arbor Day was officially proclaimed by Nebraska's state Governor
in 1874 and is now observed throughout the nation and the world, and
WHEREAS, trees use up excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and turn it into
life - giving oxygen; and
WHEREAS, trees help conserve energy; that is, three properly planted trees
around a home can cut air conditioning bills by ten to fifteen percent; and
WHEREAS, trees turn urban "heat islands" into cool and comfortable "oasis"
making the concrete jungle livable for all of us; and
WHEREAS, trees beautify our community.
NOW, THERE BE IT RESOLVED by the Shorewood City Council that the
City of Shorewood hereby proclaims Friday, April 27, 2012, as the celebration of Arbor
Day, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Shorewood City Council encourages
all residents of Shorewood to celebrate Arbor Day by protecting our trees and woodlands,
and planting a tree, thereby hoping to ensure a green Shorewood and Minnesota in
decades to come.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD,
this 9th day of April 2012.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Larry Brown, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
1: (2 #3D
U2 MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Accept Wellhead Protection Plan - Part 1
Meeting Date: Monday, April 9, 2012
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Interim City Administrator
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
Attachments: Wellhead Protection Plan Part 1 Draft Report, Resolution
Policy Consideration:
Should the City adopt the Wellhead Protection Plan (WHP), Part 1 Draft Report, prepared by the
Minnesota Department of Health which defines areas of protection for source water for the City's
drinking water supply?
Background:
Minnesota Rules 4720.5110 for Wellhead Protection, Section, 4720.5110, Subpart 2, states:
Wellhead protection area. For a community public water supply well and a nontransient
noncommunity public water supply well, the public water supplier must:
A. Delineate the wellhead protection area and the drinking water supply management area;
B. Prepare a wellhead protection plan for the drinking water supply management area; and
C. Implement a wellhead protection plan for the drinking water supply management area.
The Statutory Authority for this rule is provided by Minnesota State Statute, Section 1031.101.
Per the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) web page,
"Wellhead Protection is a way to prevent drinking water from becoming polluted by
managing potential sources of contamination in the area which supplies water to a public
well. Much can be done to prevent pollution, such as the wise use of land and chemicals.
Public health is protected and expense of treating polluted water or drilling new wells is
avoided though wellhead protection efforts.
Community and Nontransient Noncommunity Public Water Systems: Community and
nontransient noncommunity public water systems are required to delineate, inventory, and
manage an inner wellhead management zone. Additionally, they must also create a formal
wellhead protection plan. The wellhead protection planning process itself is broken down
into two parts. Part 1 involves delineation of the wellhead protection area and drinking
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
water supply management area, as well as an assessment of the well(s) vulnerability. Part 2
involves the creation of the wellhead protection plan itself, including goals, objectives, plan
of action, evaluation program, and contingency plan."
Under the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) rules, the Department may complete municipalities
Wellhead Protection Plan, if the City has a population served equal to or less than 3,000 residents.
While the City of Shorewood's population served equates to 3,721 individuals, due to the proximity of
the population served to the cutoff, MDH staff made a decision to perform the analysis and to complete
the City's Wellhead Protection Plan. This represents a significant savings to the City of Shorewood in
consulting fees for a licensed hydrologist to complete the subject work.
There are two parts to the Wellhead Protection Plan:
Part 1 is the wellhead protection planning process itself is broken down into two parts. Part 1A involves
delineation of the wellhead protection area and drinking water supply management area. Part 113 is an
assessment of the well(s) vulnerability.
Part 2 involves the creation of the wellhead protection plan, including goals, objectives, plan of action,
evaluation program, and contingency plan.
Attachment 1 is the document prepared by MDH and includes Parts 1A and 113.
Staff has been working with MDH regarding the wording of this report. In general, the draft report is as
anticipated. However, city staff has questioned the wording used in Section 6.1 Assessment of Well
Vulnerability, Subsection 1, which reads:
"Grouting information is not known at some city of Shorewood wells (i.e. Well 1 [232331] and Well 5
[171020], and the wells may not be up to code. However, based upon water quality results, the
borehole integrity does not appear to be compromised."
Staff contends that there is no documentation or indications that that the wells "may not be up to code.
" There is not documentation on file at the US Geological Study that indicates that the voids have been
properly grouted. Staff contends that if this were not the case, results would indicate such. MDH staff
contends, that is why they use the word "may."
With that qualification, staff finds the report to be in order.
If approved, staff will forward the approved resolution to the MDH for continuation of the process and
compilation of Part 2 of the Plan. Undoubtedly, Part 2 will include land use regulations that the City will
need to consider within the Drinking Water Protection Area to minimize contamination to the water
supply.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
At this time, there are no Financial or Budget considerations connected with this approval.
Options:
1. Approve the attached Resolution and direct staff to forward the resolution to MDH for compilation of
Part 2 of the Wellhead Protection Plan.
2. Direct staff to have the report revised and bring this back for additional consideration.
3. Take no action on the report.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff is recommending approval of Alternative 1, that the attached Resolution be approved with staff
forwarding this on to MDH.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Despite the fact that the MDH completed the Wellhead Protection Report, to meet the statutory
requirements, the City must submit a letter to MDH formally requesting that MDH approve the Draft
Plan, Part 1. Once a letter has been received from MDH stating that the Plan has been approved by
MDH, the City will have 30 days to set a date for a public hearing on the document. The City must then
conduct the public hearing within 60 days from the time of receipt of approval.
Connection to Vision / Mission:
A Wellhead Protection Plan puts in place guidelines and regulations that assist the City in minimizing
contamination to the public water supply.
4 4 � irA x BJ ^we final
1
,
Protecting maintaining and improving the health of all Minnesotans c
l_,- 2 1 " " y`" =
November 2, 2011
Mr. Larry Brown
Director of Public Works - City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, Minnesota 55331
Dear Mr. Brown:
Subject: Wellhead Protection Plan Part I - Draft Report - PWSID 1270051
Enclosed is the draft copy of the Part I report, which delineates the wellhead protection area and drinking water
supply management area (DWSMA) for the city of Shorewood. The report describes technical details for the
delineation of these areas and their vulnerability assessments, based on our guidelines and the information we have
available.
Please review this report and note any areas where you have questions. We would like the opportunity to meet with
you to discuss the delineation and any modifications you may like to incorporate. However, if you would like to
have the Part I report approved without modifications, you must send us a formal letter requesting that the Minnesota
Department of Health (MDH) approve Part I of the Wellhead Protection Plan. It seems a convoluted process in the
sense that you ask us to approve work we have done for you, but it is a way to document that you formally accept the
Part I report. I have enclosed a template letter requesting approval that you could use. We will send you a final copy
of your Part I report with the approval letter.
Once the delineation of the wellhead protection area, DWSMA, and vulnerability assessments have been formally
approved by MDH, you must notify local units of government of this information and hold a public information
meeting. The MDH wellhead planner and I will work with you to meet these requirements. You will then be able to
move on to working on Part II of your Wellhead Protection Plan.
I would appreciate your reviewing the Part I report within the next two weeks and then contacting me to let me know
how you want to proceed. We look forward to working with the city of Shorewood on the completion of your
wellhead protection plan.
Sincerely,
Amal Djerrari, Hydrologist
Source Water Protection Unit
Environmental Health Division
P.O. Box 64975
St. Paul, Minnesota 55164 -0975
651- 201 -4577
AMD:kmc -
Enclosures attachment 1
cc: John Freitag, MDH Planner, Metro Office
General Information: 651 - 201 -5000 • Toll-free: 888-345-0823 • TTY. 651 -201-5797 • www.health.state.mn.us
An equal opportunity employer
(Today's Date)
{MDH.Hydrologist)
Source Water Protection Unit
Drinking Water Protection Section
Minnesota Department of Health
625 North Robert Street - P.O. Box 64975
St. Paul, Minnesota 55164 -0975
Dear XXX:
Regarding: City of XXX Wellhead Protection Program - Part I
In accordance with the Minnesota Wellhead Protection Rule (4720.5300 , subpart 1) the City of
XXX formally requests that the MDH review the enclosed Wellhead Protection Plan, Part 1
report for approval. The approval pertains to the following work products:
1) The proposed Wellhead Protection Plan report;
2) The Wellhead Protection Area and Drinking Water Supply Management Area
delineations; and
3) The vulnerability assessments of the well(s) and the aquifer within the Drinking Water
. Supply Management Area.
We thank you for your assistance, and look forward to receiving your comments.
Sincerely,
(Your Name)
(Address)
Wellhead Protection Plan
Part I
Delineation of Wellhead Protection Area
Drinking Water Supply Management Area Delineation
Well and Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability Assessments
Prepared for
The City of Shorewood
October 2011
Amal M. Djerrari, P.E., Hydrologist
Minnesota Department of Health
Review copy pending MDH approval.
Table of Contents
Page
Glossaryof Terms ........................................................................................................ ..............................i
Table 2:
Acronyms................................................................................................................... ...............................
ii
1 . Introduction .......................................................................................................... ...............................
l
2 Assessment of the Data Elements ........................................................................ ...............................
l
3 General Descriptions ........................................................................................... ...............................
4
3.1 Description of the Water Supply System .................................................... ...............................
4
3.2 Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting .................................................. ............................... 4
4. Delineation of the Wellhead Protection Area ...................................................... ............................... 9
4 .1 Delineation Criteria .................................................................................... ............................... 9
4.2 Method Used to Delineate the Wellhead Protection Area ........................ ...............................
11
4.2.1. Porous Media Delineations ........................................................... ...............................
11
4.2.2. Fractured Rock Delineation .......................................................... ...............................
14
4.2.3. Composite Delineations ................................................................ ...............................
14
4.2.4. Addressing Model Uncertainty ....................................................... .............................14
9
5. Delineation of the Drinking Water Supply Management Area ........................... .............................16
Annual Volume of Water Discharged from Water Supply Wells ........... .............................10
6 . Vulnerability Assessments ................................................................................... .............................16
Table 6:
6.1 Assessment of Well Vulnerability .............................................................. .............................16
6.2 Assessment of the Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability .........................17
7 Selected References ............................................................................................. .............................17
List of Tables
Table 1:
Public Water Supply Well Information .................................................... ..............................2
Table 2:
Assessment of Data Elements .................................................................. ...............................
3
Table 3a:
Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting at Shorewood Wells 4 (171020)
and5 ( 171023) .......................................................................................... ..............................5
Table 3b:
Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting at Shorewood Well 3 ( 161414 ) ............................
6
Table 3c:
Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting at Shorewood Wells 1 (23233 1)
and6 ( 122298) .......................................................................................... ..............................7
Table 3d:
Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting at Shorewood Well 7 ( 416160 ) ............................
8
Table 4:
Description of WHPA Delineation Criteria ............................................. ...............................
9
Table 5:
Annual Volume of Water Discharged from Water Supply Wells ........... .............................10
Table 6:
Other Permitted High- Capacity Wells Within Two Miles ...................... .............................10
Review copy pending MDH approval.
Table of Contents - Continued
List of Figures
Page
Figure la: Drinking Water Supply Management Area - Wells 4 and 5 .................... .............................20
Figure lb: Drinking Water Supply Management Area - Well 3 ............................... .............................21
Figure lc: Drinking Water Supply Management Area - Wells 1, 6 and 7 ................ .............................22
Figure 2: Modeled Groundwater Flow Field and Spatial Distribution of Modeling Errors -
JordanSandstone Aquifer ........................................................................ .............................23
Figure 3: Geologic Cross - Section Locations .......................................................... .............................24
Figure 4a: Geologic Cross Section A— A ................................................................................................ 25
Figure 4b: Geologic Cross Section B —B' .................................................................. .............................26
Figure 4c: Geologic Cross Section C —C' .................................................................. .............................27
Figure 4d: Geologic Cross Section D —D ................................................................................................ 28
Figure 4e: Geologic Cross Section E— E ................................................................................................. 29
Figure 5a: Wellhead Protection Area Delineation - Wells 4 and 5 ........................... .............................30
Figure 5b: Wellhead Protection Area Delineation - Well 3 ...................................... .............................31
Figure 5c: Wellhead Protection Area Delineation - Wells 1, 6 and 7 ....................... .............................32
Figure 6a: Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability - Wells 4 and 5 .......................... 33
Figure 6b: Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability - Well 3 ......... .............................34
Figure 6c: Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability - Wells 1, 6 and 7 ......................35
Review copy pending MDH approval.
Glossary of Terms
Data Element. A specific type of information required by the Minnesota Department of Health to
prepare a wellhead protection plan.
Drinking Water Supply Management Area ( DWSMA). The area delineated using identifiable land
marks that reflects the scientifically calculated wellhead protection area boundaries as closely as
possible (Minnesota Rules, part 4720.5 100, subpart 13).
Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability. An assessment of the likelihood that the
aquifer within the DWSMA is subject to impact from land and water uses within the wellhead
protection area. It is based upon criteria that are specified under Minnesota Rules, part 4720.5210,
subpart 3.
Emergency Response Area (ERA). The part of the wellhead protection area that is defined by a one-
year time of travel within the aquifer that is used by the public water supply well (Minnesota Rules,
part 4720.5250, subpart 3). It is used to set priorities for managing potential contamination sources
within the DWSMA.
Inner Wellhead Management Zone (IWMZ). The land that is within 200 feet of a public water
supply well (Minnesota Rules, part 4720.5 100, subpart 19). The public water supplier must manage
the IWMZ to help protect it from sources of pathogen or chemical contamination that may cause an
acute health effect.
Wellhead Protection (WHP). A method of preventing well contamination by effectively managing
potential contamination sources in all or a portion of the well's recharge area.
Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA). The surface and subsurface area surrounding a well or well
field that supplies a public water system, through which contaminants are likely to move toward and
reach the well or well field (Minnesota Statutes, part 103I.005, subdivision 24).
Well Vulnerability. An assessment of the likelihood that a well is at risk to human - caused
contamination, either due to its construction or indicated by criteria that are specified under Minnesota
Rules, part 4720.5550, subpart 2.
Review copy pending MDH approval.
Acronyms
CWI - County Well Index
DNR - Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
EPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency
FSA - Farm Security Administration
MDA - Minnesota Department of Agriculture
MDH - Minnesota Department of Health
MGS - Minnesota Geological Survey
MnDOT - Minnesota Department of Transportation
MnGEO - Minnesota Geospatial Information Office
MPCA - Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
NRCS - Natural Resource Conservation Service
SWCD - Soil and Water Conservation District
UMN - University of Minnesota
USDA - United States Department of Agriculture
USGS - United States Geological Survey
Review copy pending MDH approval. ii
1. Introduction
The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) developed Part I of the wellhead protection (WHP) plan
at the request of the city of Shorewood (public water supply identification number 1270051). The
work was performed in accordance with the Minnesota Wellhead Protection Rule, parts 4720.5100 to
4720.5590.
This report presents delineations of the wellhead protection areas (WHPAs) and drinking water supply
management areas (DWSMAs), and the vulnerability assessments for the public water supply wells
and DWSMAs. Figures la, lb, and lc show the boundaries for the WHPAs and DWSMAs. The
WHPAs are defined by 10 -year times of travel. Figures 1 a, lb, and 1 c also show the emergency
response areas (ERAs), which are defined by 1 -year times of travel. Definitions of rule- specific terms
that are used are provided in the "Glossary of Terms."
This report also documents the technical information that was required to prepare this portion of the
WHP plan in accordance with the Minnesota Wellhead Protection Rule. Additional technical
information is available from MDH.
The wells included in the WHP plan are listed in Table 1.
2. Assessment of the Data Elements
MDH staff met with representatives of the public water supplier on March 21, 2011, for a scoping
meeting that identified the data elements required to prepare Part I of the WHP plan. Table 2 presents
the assessment of these data elements relative to the present and future implications of planning items
that are specified in Minnesota Rules, part 4720.5210.
Review copy pending MDH approval
Table 1
Public Water Supply Well Information
Review copy pending MDH approval
Unique
Casing
Casing
Well
Date
Well
Local Well Name
Use /Status
Diameter
Depth
Depth
Constructed/
Aquifer
Number
(inches)
(feet)
(feet)
Reconstructed
Vulnerability
Well Amesbury 1
232331
Primary
20x16
244
528
1973
Not Vulnerable
Bedrock
St. Peter -
Jordan
Well Badger 3
161414
Primary
24x16
332
372
1981
Not Vulnerable
Bedrock
Prairie du
Chien - Jordan
Franconia -
Well Boulder Br. 4
171020
Primary
12
398
640
1981
Not Vulnerable
Bedrock
Ironton -
Galesville
Franconia -
Well Boulder Br. 5
171023
Primary
12
399
640
1981
Not Vulnerable
Bedrock
Ironton -
Galesville
Well Amesbury 6
122298
Seasonal
8
276
326
1982
Not Vulnerable
Bedrock
Prairie du
Chien
Well Waterford 7
416160
Primary
30x24
223
415
1986
Not Vulnerable
Bedrock
Prairie du
Chien - Jordan
Review copy pending MDH approval
Table 2 - Assessment of Data Elements
Data Element
Present and Future
Im lications
Data Source
w
p
2 .4
a�U
A
C
Precipitation
Geology
Maps and geologic descriptions
M
H
H
H
MGS
Subsurface data
M
H
H
H
MGS, MDH, CWI
Borehole geophysics
M
H
H
H
MGS
Surface geophysics
L
L
L
L
Not Available
Maps and soil descriptions
Eroding lands
Water Resources
Watershed units
List of public waters
Shoreland classifications
Wetlands map
Floodplain map
Land Use
Parcel boundaries map
L
H
L
L
Metropolitan Council
Political boundaries map
L
L
L
L
PLS map
L
H
L
L
MDH
Land use map and inventory
M
H
M
M
Comprehensive land use map
I L I
L I
L
I L
Zoning map
L I
L
L
L
Public Utility Services
Transportation routes and
corridors
Storm/sanitary sewers and PWS
system map
Oil and gas pipelines map
Public drainage systems map /list
Records of well construction,
maintenance, and use
H
H
H
H
Public Water Supplier, CWI, MDH files
Surface Water Quantity
Stream flow data
Ordinary high water mark data
Permitted withdrawals
Protected levels /flows
Water use conflicts
Groundwater Quantity
Permitted withdrawals
H
H
H
H
DNR
Groundwater use conflicts
L
L
L
L
DNR
Water levels
H
H
H
H
CWI, MDH
Review copy pending MDH approval
Definitions Used for Assessing Data Elements:
High (H) - the data element has a direct impact
Moderate (M) - the data element has an indirect or marginal impact
Low (L) - the data element has little if any impact
Shaded- the data element was not required by MDH for preparing the WHP plan
Acronyms used in this report are listed on page ii, after the "Glossary of Terms."
3. General Descriptions
3.1 Description of the Water Supply System
The city of Shorewood obtains its drinking water supply from five primary wells and one seasonal
well. Table 1 summarizes information regarding them.
3.2 Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting
The description of the hydrologic setting for the aquifers used to supply drinking water is presented in
Tables 3a through 3d.
Figures 3, 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d and 4e show the distribution of the aquifers and stratigraphic relationships
with adjacent geologic materials. They were prepared using well record data that is contained in the
County Well Index (CWI) database. The geological maps and studies that were used to further define
local hydrogeologic conditions are provided in the "Selected References" section of this report.
Review copy pending MDH approval. 4
Present and Future
Im lications
Data Element
Data Source
Q 40 ,
'°a0
Surface Water Quality
Stream and lake water quality
management classification
Monitoring data summary
Groundwater Quality
Monitoring data
H
H
H
H
MDH
Isotopic data
H
H
H
H
MDH
Tracer studies
H
H
H
H
Not Available
Contamination site data
M
M
M
M
Not Available
Property audit data from
contamination sites
MPCA and MDA spills /release
reports
Definitions Used for Assessing Data Elements:
High (H) - the data element has a direct impact
Moderate (M) - the data element has an indirect or marginal impact
Low (L) - the data element has little if any impact
Shaded- the data element was not required by MDH for preparing the WHP plan
Acronyms used in this report are listed on page ii, after the "Glossary of Terms."
3. General Descriptions
3.1 Description of the Water Supply System
The city of Shorewood obtains its drinking water supply from five primary wells and one seasonal
well. Table 1 summarizes information regarding them.
3.2 Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting
The description of the hydrologic setting for the aquifers used to supply drinking water is presented in
Tables 3a through 3d.
Figures 3, 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d and 4e show the distribution of the aquifers and stratigraphic relationships
with adjacent geologic materials. They were prepared using well record data that is contained in the
County Well Index (CWI) database. The geological maps and studies that were used to further define
local hydrogeologic conditions are provided in the "Selected References" section of this report.
Review copy pending MDH approval. 4
Table 3a - Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting at Shorewood Wells 4 (171020)
and 5 (171023)
Aquifer
Attribute
Descriptor
Data Source
Aquifer Material
Sandstone
Well Logs
Primary Porosity
0.20
Estimated, and porosity value
used in the Metro Model.
Aquifer Thickness
194 feet
Well 4 well log (171020)
Stratigraphic Top
Elevation
510 feet MSL
Well well log (171020)
Stratigraphic Bottom
Elevation
316 feet MSL
Well 4 well log (171020)
Hydraulic
Confinement
Confined
Well 4 well log (171020)
The aquifer test plan was
approved on June 27, 2011, and T
Reference Value:
5,560 ft /day
was determined from a specific
capacity test conducted at
Shorewood Well 4 (171020).
Franconia-
Transmissivity (T)
The range of transmissivity
Ironton-
Range of Values:
values was obtained from a
Galesville
5,560 - 10,006 fe /day
specific capacity test conducted at
(FIG)
Shorewood Well 4 (171020) and
Well 5 (171023).
The reference value for hydraulic
conductivity was obtained from
Reference Value:
the reference value of the
26.6 ft2 /day
transmissivity and the aquifer
thickness at Shorewood Well 4
Hydraulic
(171020).
Conductivity (K)
The range for hydraulic
Range of Values:
conductivity was obtained from
26.6 - 5 1. 1 ft/day
the range of transmissivity values
and the aquifer thickness at
Shorewood Well 4 (171020) and
Well 5 (171023).
Groundwater Flow
Flow to the southeast.
Hennepin County Atlas
Field
Hydraulic Gradient: 1.6 x 10 feet/ft
(Kanivetsky, 1989)
Review copy pending MDH approval.
Table 3b - Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting at Shorewood Well 3 (161414)
Aquifer
Attribute
Descriptor
Data Source
Aquifer Material
Dolomite and Sandstone
Well logs
Primary Porosity
0.05 (Dolomite) and 0.20 (Sandstone)
Estimated, and porosity values used in
the Metro Model.
Well log (Shorewood Well 3, 161414,
Aquifer
for the thickness of the Prairie du Chien
Thickness
131 feet
dolomite and Excelsior Well 1, 205674,
for the thickness of the Jordan
Sandstone).
Stratigraphic Top
Elevation
645 feet MSL
Well 3 well log (161414)
Stratigraphic
514 feet MSL
Well 3 well log (161414) and estimated
Bottom Elevation
aquifer thickness.
Hydraulic
Confinement
Confined
Well 3 well log (161414)
The aquifer test plan was approved on
Reference Value (OPCJ):
June 27, 2011, and T was determined
12,342 ft2 /day
from a specific capacity test conducted
at Shorewood Well 3 (161414).
Prairie du
Transmissivity
Reference Value (OPDC):
7,038 ft /day
The reference values for the
transmissivity the Prairie du Chien
(T)
of
Chien-
and Jordan were calculated from the
Jordan
Reference Value (CJDN):
reference values of the hydraulic
Sandstone
5,304 ft /day
conductivity of the Prairie du Chien and
(OPCJ)
Jordan and the formation thicknesses at
Shorewood Well 3 (161414).
The reference value for the hydraulic
conductivity of the Jordan Aquifer was
back - calculated from the
transmissivities and the formation
Reference Value (OPDC):
thicknesses at Wells 1 (23233 1) and 6
261 ft/day
(122298). This value is also in
agreement with that used in the Metro
Hydraulic
Model (Metropolitan Council, 2009).
Conductivity (K)
The reference value for the hydraulic
conductivity of the Prairie du Chien was
Reference Value (CJDN):
back- calculated from the reference
51 ft/day
value for the transmissivity, the
reference value for the hydraulic
conductivity of the Jordan Aquifer, and
the formation thicknesses at Shorewood
Well 3 (161414).
Groundwater
Flow to the southeast.
Hennepin County Atlas (Kanivetsky,
Flow Field
Hydraulic Gradient: 1.6 x 10-3 feet/ft
1989)
Review copy pending MDH approval
Table 3c - Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting at Shorewood Wells 1 (232331)
and 6 (122298)
Aquifer
Attribute
Descriptor
Data Source
Aquifer Material
Dolomite and Sandstone
Well logs
Primary Porosity
0.05 (Dolomite) and
Estimated and porosity values
0.20 (Sandstone)
used in the Metro Model.
Aquifer Thickness
244 feet
Well 1 well log (23233 1)
Stratigraphic Top
Elevation
650 feet MSL
Well 1 well log (23233 1)
Stratigraphic
Bottom Elevation
406 feet MSL
Well 1 well log (23233 1)
Hydraulic
Confinement
Confined
Well 1 well log (23233 1)
The aquifer test plan was approved
on June 27, 2011, and T was
Reference Value (OPCJ):
determined from a specific
21,104 ft2 /day
capacity test conducted at
Shorewood Well 7 (416160).
Reference Value (OPDC):
The reference values for the
Transmissivity (T)
16,565 ft /day
transmissivity of the Prairie du
Chien and Jordan were calculated
Prairie du
Reference Value (CJDN):
from the reference values of the
Chien-
4,539 ft /day
hydraulic conductivity of the
Jordan
Prairie du Chien and Jordan and
Sandstone
the formation thicknesses at
(OPCJ)
Shorewood Well 1 (232331).
The reference value for the
hydraulic conductivity of the
Jordan Aquifer was back-
calculated from the
Reference Value (OPDC):
transmissivities and formation
107 ft/day
thicknesses at Wells 1 (232331)
and 6 (122298). This value is also
in agreement with that used in the
Hydraulic
Metro Model (Metropolitan
Conductivity (K)
Council, 2009).
The reference value for the
Reference Value (CJDN):
hydraulic conductivity of the
51 ft/day
Prairie du Chien was back -
calculated from a specific capacity
test conducted at Shorewood Well
6 (122298) and the formation
thickness at this well.
Groundwater Flow
Flow to the southeast.
Hennepin County Atlas
Field
Hydraulic Gradient: 1.3 x 10 3 feet/ft
(Kanivetsky, 1989)
Review copy pending MDH approval
Table 3d - Description of the Hydrogeologic Setting at Shorewood Well 7 (416160)
Aquifer
Attribute
Descriptor
Data Source
Aquifer Material
Dolomite and Sandstone
Well logs
Primary Porosity
0.05 (Dolomite) and
Estimated and porosity values
0.20 (Sandstone)
used in the Metro Model.
Aquifer Thickness
205 feet
Well 7 well log (416160)
Stratigraphic Top
Elevation
705 feet MSL
Well 7 well log (416160)
Stratigraphic
Bottom Elevation
500 feet MSL
Well 7 well log (416160)
Hydraulic
Confinement
Confined
Well 7 well log (416160)
The aquifer test plan was
approved on June 27, 2011, and
Reference Value (OPCJ):
T was determined from a
21,104 ft /day
specific capacity test conducted
at Shorewood Well 7 (416160).
Transmissivity (T)
Reference Value (OPDC):
z
17,789 ft /day
The reference values for the
transmissivity of the Prairie du
Reference Value (CJDN):
Chien and Jordan were
Prairie du
3,315 ft2 /day
calculated from the hydraulic
conductivity values and the
Chien-
formation thicknesses at
Jordan
Shorewood Well 7 (416160).
Sandstone
(
The reference value for the
hydraulic conductivity of the
Jordan Aquifer was back -
calculated from the
transmissivities and formation
thicknesses at Wells 1 (232331)
Reference Value (OPDC):
and 6 (122298). This value is
131 ft/day
also in agreement with that
used in the Metro Model
Hydraulic
(Metropolitan Council, 2009).
Conductivity (K)
The reference value for the
hydraulic conductivity of the
Reference Value (CJDN):
Prairie du Chien was back -
51 ft/day
calculated from the reference
value for the transmissivity, the
reference value for the
hydraulic conductivity of the
Jordan Aquifer, and the
formation thicknesses at
Shorewood Well 7 (416160).
Groundwater Flow
Flow to the southeast.
Hennepin County Atlas
Field
Hydraulic Gradient: 1.6 x 10-3 feet/ft
(Kanivetsky, 1989)
Review copy pending MDH approval.
4. Delineation of the Wellhead Protection Area
4.1 Delineation Criteria
The boundaries of the WHPAs for the city of Shorewood are shown in Figures 5a, 5b, and 5c. Table 4
describes how the delineation criteria that are specified under Minnesota Rules, part 4720.5510, were
addressed.
Table 4 - Description of WHPA Delineation Criteria
Criterion
Descriptor
How the Criterion was Addressed
The rivers provided boundary conditions to the model
Flow Boundary
Mississippi, Minnesota,
that extended to these natural boundaries. They were
and Crow Rivers
included in the model and set the regional
groundwater flow boundaries.
The pumping amounts were determined based on the
Flow Boundary
Other High - Capacity
averaged 2000 -2009 pumped volumes. The pumping
Wells (Table 6)
amounts of these wells were included in the methods
used for the delineation.
Pumping information was obtained from DNR
Daily Volume of Water
See Table 5
Appropriations Permit 1974 -5226. The annual
Pumped
p
pumped volumes were converted to a daily volume
pumped by a well.
Groundwater Flow
The model calibration process addressed the
Field
See Figure 2
relationship between the calculated versus observed
groundwater flow field.
Reference Value (FIG):
5,560 ft2 /day
The aquifer test plans were approved on June 27,
Aquifer Hydraulic
2011, and T was determined from specific capacity
Transmissivity
Reference Value (OPCJ):
tests conducted at Shorewood Well 4 (171020),
Shorewood Well 7 (416160), and Shorewood Well 3
21,104 ft /day
(161414).
Time of Travel
10 years
The public water supplier selected a 10 year time of
travel.
Information provided by the city of Shorewood was used to identify the maximum volume of water
pumped annually by each well over the previous five -year period, as shown in Table 5. No changes in
pumping volume are expected in the next five years. Previous pumping values have been reported to
the DNR, as required by Groundwater Appropriation Permit 1974 -5226. The maximum daily volume
of discharge used as an input parameter in the model was calculated by dividing the greatest annual
pumping volume by 365 days.
Review copy pending MDH approval. 9
Table 5 - Annual Volume of Water Discharged from Water Supply Wells
Well
Name
Unique
Number
Total Annual Withdrawal (gal /yr)
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010'
1
232331
6,224,000
4,024,000
1,745,000
3,619,000
20,738,000
3
161414
0
0
35,304,000
40,813,000
30,040,000
4
171020
0
0
26,636,000
32,047,000
11,714,000
5
171023
0
0
24,566,000
6,662,000
18,604,000
6
122298
8,876,000
7,643,000
5,834,000
28,100
374,000
7
416160
0
0
82,159,000
94,497,000
59,615,000
Totals
15,100,000
11,667,000
176,244,000
177,666,100
141,085,000
Source: DNR State Water Use Database System Permit Number 1974 -5226.
'Source: City of Shorewood. Bolding indicates greatest annual pumping volume.
Table 6 - Other Permitted High - Capacity Wells Within Two Miles
Review copy pending MDH approval. 10
Average
Unique
Well
Permittee
DNR Permit
Aquifer
Use
Withdrawal
Number
Name
Number
2000 -2009
(g allons! year
214487
1
MINNETONKA
1966 -0030
Quaternary
Commercial &
26,240,000
COUNTRY CLUB ASSOC
Buried Artesian
Institutional
529487
2
SHOREWOOD VILLAGE
1975 -6064
Quaternary
Commercial
and
380,000
CENTER
Buried Artesian
Institutional
205674
1
EXCELSIOR, CITY OF
1975 -6164
Prairie du
Municipal
20,180,000
Chien- Jordan
205675
2
EXCELSIOR, CITY OF
1975 -6164
Prairie du
Chien - Jordan
Municipal
16,340,000
232336
3
EXCELSIOR, CITY OF
1975 -6164
Prairie du
Municipal
73,250,000
Chien - Jordan
223349
1
TONKA BAY, CITY OF
1979 -6313
Prairie du
Municipal
33,610,000
Chien - Jordan
205657
2
TONKA BAY, CITY OF
1979 -6313
St. Peter-
Municipal
38,770,000
Jordan
200195
3
CHANHASSEN, CITY OF
1981 -6089
Prairie du
Municipal
158,590,000
Chien - Jordan
541545
7
CHANHASSEN, CITY OF
1981 -6089
Prairie du
Municipal
97,270,000
Chien - Jordan
578953
8
CHANHASSEN, CITY OF
1981 -6089
Prairie du
Municipal
82,840,000
Chien - Jordan
709304
9
CHANHASSEN, CITY OF
1981 -6089
Prairie du
Municipal
58,560,000
Chien - Jordan
200810
WEST
CHANHASSEN, CITY OF
1981 -6089
Prairie du
Municipal
140,000
Chien - Jordan
Review copy pending MDH approval. 10
4.2 Method Used to Delineate the Wellhead Protection Area
The WHPAs for the city of Shorewood Well 4 (171020) and Well 5 (171023) were determined using
an existing regional MODFLOW Model that simulates porous media groundwater flow within the
major aquifers and aquitards within the seven - county metropolitan area.
The WHPA for Shorewood Well 6 (122298) was determined using a calculated fixed radius procedure
to address flow within the secondary porosity features of the Prairie du Chien Group.
The WHPAs for Shorewood Well 1 (232331), Well 3 (161414), and Well 7 (416160) were determined
using:
• the existing regional MODFLOW Model that simulates porous media groundwater flow within
the Prairie du Chien Group and Jordan Sandstone, and
• a calculated fixed radius procedure to address flow within the secondary porosity features of
the Prairie du Chien Group.
The delineation methods are described in more detail in the following sections.
4.2.1. Porous Media Delineations
The porous media capture zones for Shorewood Well 1 (232331), Well 3 (161414), Well 4 (171020),
Well 5 (171023), and Well 7 (416160) were determined using an existing regional MODFLOW Model
that was developed by Barr Engineering Company for the Metropolitan Council (Metropolitan
Council, 2009). MODFLOW is a 3D, cell - centered, finite difference, saturated flow model developed
by the U.S. Geological Survey (McDonald and Harbaugh, 1988; Harbaugh et al., 2000).
The regional Metro Model consists of nine layers that represent the major aquifers and aquitards within
the seven - county metropolitan area. These layers represent, from top to bottom, the following units:
(1) surficial aquifer of glacial deposits; (2) St. Peter Sandstone or Quaternary Buried Artesian Aquifer;
(3) Prairie du Chien Group; (4) Jordan Sandstone; (5) St. Lawrence Formation (aquitard);
(6) Franconia Formation; (7) Ironton- Galesville Aquifer, (8) Eau Claire Formation (aquitard); and
(9) Mt. Simon Sandstone. The regional groundwater model was calibrated to steady -state water levels
and river base flows.
A regional model limited to Hennepin and Carver Counties was extracted from the regional seven -
county model. This extracted model extends to the natural hydraulic boundaries, the Mississippi River
to the north and east, the Minnesota River to the south, and the Crow River to the northwest. These
river boundaries, along with wells, lakes, and infiltration, provided the model boundary conditions.
The regional Hennepin - Carver Counties model provided the boundary conditions for a telescopic,
refined sub -model that was used to delineate the wellhead protection areas. The sub -model had head -
specified boundary conditions prescribed along the northern, eastern, and western sides of the model
domain. River boundary conditions (i.e., representing the Minnesota River) were prescribed along the
southern side of the model domain. The model grid was refined around the Shorewood wells.
Variable grid spacing was used, ranging from one meter near the wells to 250 meters at the edge of the
grid. This refinement was required for an accurate computation of the particle flow paths and,
therefore, the WHPA delineation.
Review copy pending MDH approval. 11
Prior to its use in the delineations, the following modifications were incorporated in the refined model:
• Local areas of the modified top and bottom of the aquifer and modified horizontal
conductivity were included in the model to reflect the local aquifer geometry and the
reference values for the hydraulic conductivities described in Tables 3a, 3b, 3c, and 3d.
• The pumping rates from Table 5 were assigned to the city of Shorewood wells.
• The pumping rates from Table 6 were assigned to the permitted high- capacity wells located
within two miles of the city of Shorewood wells.
The delineation was performed by backtracking particles from each well to a 10 -year time of travel
using the particle tracking MODPATH Code. A series of 50 particles were launched at each pumping
well. Porosities of 5.6, 20, and 20 percent were used for the Prairie du Chien Dolomite, the Jordan
Sandstone, and the Franconia - Ironton- Galesville Sandstones, respectively.
4.2.1.1 Calibration and Sensitivity
Model quality is commonly evaluated by three different measures: calibration, sensitivity, and
uncertainty analyses. Model calibration is a procedure that compares the results of a model based on
estimated input values to measured or "known" values. This procedure is used to define model
validity over a range of input values. The result of calibration is an assessment of the general quality
of the model and the confidence that may be placed in the model results. As a matter of practice,
groundwater flow models usually are calibrated using groundwater elevation and flow (if available).
Sensitivity analysis quantifies the differences in model results produced by the natural variability of a
particular parameter. Uncertainty analysis addresses the effects of poor data quality (lack of local
detailed information or deficiencies in the data) on the model results. Together, sensitivity and
uncertainty analyses are commonly used to evaluate the effects that natural variability and
uncertainties in the hydrogeologic data have on the size and shape of the capture zones. In regards to
the WHPA delineation, these analyses are used to document that the delineation is optimal,
conservative, and protective of public health based on existing information.
4.2.1.1.1 Calibration
The regional Metro Model was calibrated to the CWI database water level targets and stream flow
targets by the Metropolitan Council (2009). The calibration of the regional model was performed by
applying an automated calibration procedure using PEST, a parameter estimation code that
automatically adjusts the recharge rates and hydraulic conductivity values and compares modeled
piezometric heads against measured values at observation well locations until a satisfactory fit is
obtained.
The regional Hennepin - Carver Counties model derived from the calibrated regional Metro Model
provided the boundary conditions at the head - specified cells at the boundaries of the telescopic refined
model. After construction, the telescopic MODFLOW Model calibration was verified by comparing
modeled head results to the static water elevations in wells that were selected from the CWI database.
The selected wells were completed in the aquifers used by the city of Shorewood (i.e., Prairie du
Chien - Jordan and Franconia - Ironton- Galesville Aquifers).
Review copy pending MDH approval. 12
4.2.1.1.2 Sensitivity Analysis
Sensitivity is the amount of change in model results caused by the variation of a particular input
parameter. Because of the relative simplicity of the Metro Model, the direction and extent of the
modeled capture zone may be very sensitive to any of the input parameters:
The pumping rate directly affects the volume of the aquifer that contributes water to the well. An
increase in pumping rate leads to an equivalent increase in the volume of aquifer and an expanded
capture zone, proportional to the porosity of the aquifer materials.
Results - The pumping rate defined by WHP rule requirements is the highest rate that can be
expected under normal water demand. Therefore, with respect to the delineation of the WHPA,
the sensitivity of the capture zone to variations in the pumping rate is minimized.
The direction of groundwater flow determines the orientation of the capture zone. Variations in
the direction of groundwater flow will not affect the size of the capture zone but are important for
defining the areas that are contributing water to the well.
Results - The ambient groundwater flow field that is defined in Figure 2 provides the basis for
determining the extent to which each model run reflects the conceptual understanding of the
orientation of the capture area for a well. The regional model has been calibrated to hydraulic
heads, and the local refined model calibration was verified. The sensitivity of the WHPA to the
direction of groundwater flow should not be significant, given the current knowledge of
hydraulic head distribution in the aquifer.
The hydraulic gradient (along with aquifer transmissivity) determines the rate at which water
moves through the aquifer materials.
Results - The regional model has been calibrated to hydraulic heads. The local refined model
calibration was verified. The sensitivity of the WHPA to the direction of groundwater flow
should not be significant, given the current knowledge of hydraulic head distribution in the
aquifer.
The horizontal hydraulic conductivity influences the size and shape of the capture zone. In the
base -case scenario, the hydraulic conductivity was estimated from a specific capacity test
conducted at Shorewood Well 4 (171020). This value was used in the local model to delineate the
10 -year time of travel capture zones. Because no pumping test was conducted on the Shorewood
wells, the uncertainty of the hydraulic conductivity can be great. To evaluate the impact of this
uncertainty on the WHPA delineation, a horizontal hydraulic conductivity was also estimated from
a specific capacity test conducted at Shorewood Well 5 (171023). This latter value is larger than
the one estimated from the specific capacity test conducted at Shorewood Well 4 (171020)
(Table 3a).
Results - The capture zone was estimated using both the high and low hydraulic conductivity
value (Figure 5a). A high value for the hydraulic conductivity yields an elongated capture
zone. A decrease in hydraulic conductivity decreases the length of the capture zone and
increases the distance to the stagnation point, making the capture zone more circular in shape
and centered on the well.
The aquifer thickness and porosity influence the size and shape of the capture zone.
Results - Decreasing either thickness or porosity causes a linear, proportional increase in the
areal extent of the capture zone.
Review copy pending MDH approval. 13
4.2.2. Fractured Rock Delineation
In addition to the porous media delineation, fracture flow capture zones were delineated using a
calculated fixed radius procedure for the Prairie du Chien Group. Groundwater may move at much
greater velocity in aquifers influenced by secondary porosity than in porous media aquifers. And, flow
directions are considerably more variable in unconfined aquifer settings influenced by fractures or
conduit flow because of focused recharge. Therefore, numerical or analytical methods traditionally
used to designate capture zones for wells completed in porous media aquifers may not apply to
fractured and solution- weathered bedrock aquifers. To include the increased variability in flow
velocities and directions for these settings, MDH has developed the document entitled, "Guidance for
Delineating Wellhead Protection Areas in Fractured and Solution - Weathered Bedrock in Minnesota"
(MDH, 2005).
A fracture flow analysis is required where flow through fractures or solution- weathered features exist.
Specific to the setting in Shorewood, Delineation Technique 3 of the guidance (MDH, 2005) addresses
wells such as Shorewood Well 1 (232331), Well 3 (161414), and Well 7 (416160) that are open to both
a porous media aquifer and a fractured or solution- weathered aquifer. The delineation involved using
1) a groundwater model for the porous media Jordan Aquifer, and 2) a calculated fixed - radius capture
zone for the Prairie du Chien Aquifer, which exhibits secondary porosity.
Delineation Technique 2 of the guidance (MDH, 2005) addresses wells, such as Shorewood Well 6
(122298), which are open only to a fractured or solution- weathered aquifer. The delineation involved
using a calculated fixed- radius capture zone for the Prairie du Chien Aquifer, which exhibits secondary
porosity.
All calculated fixed radii were modified for 1) upgradient flow, and 2) uncertainty in the flow direction
using the MDH ArcFlow routine.
4.2.3. Composite Delineations
The WHPA for the city of Shorewood Well 4 (171020) and Well 5 (171023) in Figure 5a consists of a
composite of the 10 -year porous media capture zones calculated using the model parameters for the
base -case and the modified parameters for the sensitivity analysis. The WHPA for Well 6 (122298) is
based only on the calculated fixed radius procedure (with extension) to address flow within the
secondary porosity features of the Prairie du Chien Group. The WHPAs for Well 1 (232331), Well 3
(161414), and Well 7 (416160) consist of a composite of the porous media aquifer delineation and the
fractured rock delineation (Figure 5b and 5c). The input files for all models are available upon request
at MDH.
4.2.4. Addressing Model Uncertainty
Using computer models to simulate groundwater flow necessarily involves representing a complicated
natural system in a simplified manner. Local geologic conditions may vary within the capture area of
the Shorewood wells, but existing information is not sufficiently detailed to define this degree of
variability. In addition, the available groundwater flow modeling techniques may not represent the
natural flow system exactly, but the results are valid within a range defined by the reasonable variation
of input parameters.
Review copy pending MDH approval. 14
Traditional numerical groundwater models were used to delineate the capture zones for porous media
aquifers that contribute water to the public water supply wells. The secondary porosity in the Prairie
du Chien Group provided the greatest uncertainty because there is little detailed information to
understand the orientation of the joints and the degree to which the void spaces are interconnected.
A porous media flow model was developed for comparison. In most cases, the fracture flow
delineation technique ultimately resulted in a much larger contribution area in comparison to the
capture zone calculated from a porous media flow model. Thus, there was no need to perform a
sensitivity analysis for the porous media capture zone delineations, the exceptions being Well 5
(171023) and Well 6 (122298), for which capture zones were delineated using only the groundwater
flow model. A sensitivity analysis for transmissivity was performed by analyzing the variation of
Well 5 (171023) and Well 6 (122298) capture zones to a two -fold increase in transmissivity. This
range was based on the results of specific capacity tests performed in these two Shorewood wells. The
analysis revealed a slight variation in the estimated capture zones that was accounted for in the final
WHPA delineation using a composite capture area, developed for the whole range of transmissivities
at Well 5 (171023) and Well 6 (122298).
Specific to the hydrogeological conditions in Shorewood, there is insufficient information available to
address location and orientation of fractures in the bedrock. Therefore, the influence that these
fractures have on groundwater flow directions and velocities within the Prairie du Chien Aquifer is
undefined. Another large uncertainty is the source of recharge to the aquifer. The most likely source
is focused recharge through coarse alluvial sediments in the stream valleys. Other potential sources
also may be unsealed or improperly constructed wells that cross - connect aquifer layers.
The uncertainty associated with the fracture flow delineation results from the lack of local detailed
information mentioned above and the fact that the fractured rock procedure cannot be calibrated. The
measures employed for this delineation to address the uncertainty of the wells' capture areas are listed
below:
• Pumping Rate - For each well, a maximum historical (five -year) pumping rate or an
engineering estimate of future pumping, whichever is greater (Minnesota Rules,
part 4720.5510, subpart 4). Therefore, the uncertainty associated with this parameter is
minimized.
• Ambient Flow Field - Uncertainty in the groundwater flow field was accounted for by creating
a composite of capture zones from angles of flow that were 10 degrees greater and 10 degrees
lesser than the representative angle of ambient flow (Minnesota Rules, part 4720.5510,
subpart 5 B(2).
• Aquifer Thickness - The smaller open -hole interval of the wells was used rather than a
representative thickness of the aquifer. Using this value rather than the aquifer thickness
results in a more conservative well capture zone.
• Porosity - A reasonably low value for porosity, listed in Table 3b, was used to address
variability in aquifer composition, resulting in a more conservative well capture zone.
• All calculated fixed radii were modified for 1) upgradient flow, and 2) uncertainty in the flow
direction. The WHPAs for Well 1 (232331), Well 3 (161414), and Well 7 (416160) consist of
a composite of the porous media aquifer delineation and the fractured rock delineation
(Figure 5b and 5c)
This provides a conservative approach to addressing model uncertainty and produces a WHPA that
will likely be most protective of public health.
Review copy pending MDH approval. 15
5. Delineation of the Drinking Water Supply Management Area
The boundaries of the DWSMAs were defined by the public water supplier using the following
features (Figures la, lb, and lc):
• Center -lines of highways, streets, roads, or railroad rights -of -ways;
• Public Land Survey coordinates;
• Property or fence lines; and
• Political boundaries.
6. Vulnerability Assessments
The Part I wellhead protection plan includes the vulnerability assessments for the public water supply
wells and DWSMAs. These vulnerability assessments are used to help define potential contamination
sources within the DWSMAs and to select appropriate measures for reducing the risk that they present
to the public water supply.
6.1 Assessment of Well Vulnerability
Well 4 (171020), Well 5 (171023), and Well 6 (122298) are nonvulnerable; this assessment is based
upon the following conditions:
1) Grouting information is not known at some city of Shorewood wells (i.e., Well 1 [23233 1] and
Well 5 [ 171023]), and the wells may not be up to code. However, based on water quality results,
the borehole integrity does not appear to be compromised.
2) The geologic conditions at the well sites include a cover of clay -rich geologic materials over the
aquifers that is sufficient to retard or prevent the vertical movement of contaminants.
3) None of the human- caused contaminants regulated under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act have
been detected at levels indicating that any well serves to draw contaminants into the aquifers as a
result of pumping.
4) A water sample was collected from Shorewood Well 4 (171020) on March 30, 2011, and analyzed
for tritium. Tritium was detected at less than one tritium unit (i.e., 0.9 TU).
Well 1 (232331), Well 3 (161414), and Well 7 (416160) are vulnerable; this assessment is based upon
the following conditions:
1) Grouting information is not known at Well 1 (232331), and the well may not be up to code.
2) Water samples were collected from Shorewood Well 1 (232331), Well 3 (161414), and Well 7
(416160) on March 30, 2011, and analyzed for tritium. Tritium was detected at more than 1 TU in
all samples (i.e., 4.8 TU, 1.3 TU, and 5.4 TU in the samples from Well 1 [232331], Well 3
[ 161414], Well 7 [416160], respectively).
Review copy pending MDH approval. 16
6.2 Assessment of the Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability
The vulnerability of the DWSMAs is low to moderate and is based upon the following information:
1) Water chemistry data from wells located within the DWSMAs indicate that the aquifers contain
water that has no detectable levels of human- caused contamination.
2) Review of the geologic logs contained in the CWI database and geological maps and reports
indicate that the aquifer exhibits a very low geologic sensitivity throughout the DWSMA of
Shorewood Wells 4 (171020) and 5 (171023). The L- scores from wells in the area vary from 4 to
11, indicating that 40 to 110 feet of clayey material overlies the Franconia - Ironton- Galesville
Aquifer (Figure 6a). In addition, the static water levels in those wells are 30 to 50 feet lower than
Lake Minnetonka's average water level, further corroborating that the deep aquifers are not in
direct connection with the lake.
3) The low vulnerability status for Wells 4 (171020) and 5 (171023) DWSMA is in accordance with
the low tritium level that was detected in the sample from Well 4 (171020) (Figure 6a). The
Franconia - Ironton - Galesville Aquifer used by Shorewood is, therefore, isolated from the direct
vertical recharge of surface water.
4) Review of the geologic logs contained in the CWI database and geological maps and reports
indicate that the aquifer exhibits a very low geologic sensitivity throughout the DWSMA of
Shorewood Well 3 (161414). The L- scores from wells in the area vary from 2 to 21, indicating that
20 to 210 feet of clayey material overlay the Prairie du Chien - Jordan Aquifer (Figure 6b). In
addition, the static water levels in those wells are 30 to 50 feet lower than Lake Minnetonka's
average water level, further corroborating that the deep aquifers are not in direct connection with
the lake.
5) The low to moderate vulnerability status for the DWSMA of Well 3 (161414) is in accordance with
the relatively low tritium level that was found in Well 3 (Figure 6b).
6) The low to moderate vulnerability status for Wells 1 (232331), 6 (122298), and 7 (416160)
DWSMA is in accordance with the tritium level that was detected in Wells 1 (232331), and 7
(416160) (Figure 6c). The Prairie du Chien - Jordan Aquifer around Wells 1 (232331), 6 (122298),
and 7 (416160) may not be isolated from the direct vertical recharge of surface water, as indicated
by elevated tritium levels in water from those wells.
7. Selected References
Balaban, N.H., (Ed.) (1989), Geologic atlas of Hennepin County, Minnesota, County Atlas Series, C -4,
Minnesota Geological Survey, St. Paul, Minn., 9 plates, scale 1:100,000 and smaller.
Geologic Sensitivity Project Workgroup (1991), Criteria and guidelines for assessing geologic
sensitivity of ground water resources in Minnesota, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources,
Division of Waters, St. Paul, Minn., 122 p.
Harbaugh, A.W., Banta, E.R., Hill, M.C., and McDonald, M.G. (2000), MODFLOW -2000, the U.S.
Geological Survey modular ground -water model - -user guide to modularization concepts and the
ground -water flow process, Open -File Report, 00 -92, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Va., 121 p.
Kanivetsky, R. (1989), Bedrock hydrogeology, in Geologic atlas of Hennepin County, Minnesota,
Balaban, N.H., (Ed.), County Atlas Series, C -4, Plate 6, Minnesota Geological Survey, St. Paul, Minn.,
scale 1:150,000.
Review copy pending MDH approval. 17
Selected References - Continued
McDonald, M.G., and Harbaugh, A.W. (1988), A modular three - dimensional finite- difference ground-
water flow model, Techniques of Water - Resource Investigation, 06 -A1, U.S. Geological Survey,
576 p.
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area (2009), Twin Cities Metropolitan Area regional
groundwater flow model version 2.00: Technical report in support of the Metropolitan Area Master
Water Supply Plan, St. Paul, Minn., 142 p.
Meyer, G.N., and Hobbs, H.C. (1989), Surficial geology, in Geologic atlas of Hennepin County,
Minnesota, Balaban, N.H., (Ed.), County Atlas Series, C -4, Plate 3, Minnesota Geological Survey,
St. Paul, Minn., scale 1:100,000.
Minnesota Department of Health (2010), Minnesota public land survey system quarter- quarter
sections (derived from section corners), computer file, St. Paul, Minn.
Piegat, J, (1989), Sensitivity of ground -water systems to pollution, in Geologic atlas of Hennepin
County, Minnesota, Balaban, N.H., (Ed.), County Atlas Series, C -4, Plate 7, Minnesota Geological
Survey, St. Paul, Minn., scale 1:100,000.
Minnesota Department of Health (2005), Guidance for delineating wellhead protection areas in
fractured and solution - weathered bedrock in Minnesota, St. Paul, Minn., 80 p.
Steffen, K. (2004), Soil survey of Hennepin County, Minnesota, Soil Survey, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C., 1059 p., 64 sheets, scale 1:12,000.
Review copy pending MDH approval. 18
Figures
Review copy pending MDH approval. 19
Review copy pending MDH approval. 20
Shorewood Wells
O Emergency Response Area
Q Wellhead Protection Area
O DWSMA
x �.
910 455 0 910
Enlarged Area
Figure 1 b
Drinking Water Supply Management Area
Well 3
(Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 21
Shorewood Wells
O Emergency Response Area
O Wellhead Protection Area
M DWSMA
w�.
1,000 500 0 1,000 Feet
Enlarged Area
Figure 1c
Drinking Water Supply Management Area
Wells 1, 6, and 7
(Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 22
CJDN Residuals (in meters)
RESIDUALHE
0 0 -2
0 2 -4
O 4 -6
O 6 -8
O a -10
O 10 -12
O 12 - 14
O 14-16
O 16 -18
Q 19 -26
Tonka_Bay_ wells
Shorewootl_wells
CJDN Residuals (in meters)
RESIDUALHE
• - 12.E - -12.0
• - 11.9 - -10.0
•
-9.9--8.0
•
-7.9--6.0
•
-5.9--4.0
• - 3.9 - -1.5
• - 1.4 - -0.2
920 Hydraulic Head Contours
(in feet above MSL)
6113
3,600 1,800 0 3,5oo Feet
Enlarged Area
MINNESOTA Figure
= Modeled Groundwater Flow Field andSpatial Distribution of Modeling Errors
Jordan Sandstone Aquifer
DEPARTMENToFHFAITH Shorewood, MN
Review copy pending MDH approval. 23
n , ; ® CWI Wells on Cross - Sections
g ' Cross - Section Lines
Prairie du Chien Group
as: _ i
i TP
1 31 O = OS
Jordan
St. Lawrence- Franconia
i Tonka Bay
(223349) Y Shorewood 6 T
(122298) ( Shorewood 1
t uK'tOnig (23 31)
V
Shorewood 4 '2Q 57 23
(171020) F �. 11590,02 �.
426 7, 7 --
t 5
.'Slu,rrwu..l v: s'�l. i't ky. '•. ..1� 73
f2 Shorewood 5 462 ' o
4
1 (171023) 89 e
20 5684
163897 Shorewood 7
15904
130779 O o438v1'8 °. 2 "''.p.' , '�:..�`, (416160) -.
O. 4128 [ 0 2,050 4,100 8,200
O 138 ?'G" 2 ;803 O f1 `1991d�
- 138741 V 137386 O 161404 O { Feet
352
O 151 >82 - - _.. y'18fl942 -..0,- �..`.'. - 133227
205128
5 945 Shorewood 3
p (161414) 205695 EF Enlarged Area
p
.,' 200810
r a
z
MINNESOTA
Figure 3
' Geologic Cross - Section Locations
DEPARTMENToFHEAtTH (Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 24
Vert. Exag. = 10X
Stratigraphy
Primary Lithology
Unkown
Fill
Boulder
Soil
Clay
Sand
Gravel
Cobble
® Dolomite
- Shale
- Siltstone
Sandstone
0 2,000 4,000 8,000
Enlarged Area
Figure 4a
Geologic Cross - Section A -A'
(Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 25
d
Y
m
_
_j c
A'
ua
c v
V
to
S.2
O ' O. j0
�y
OON
CV
M
N a >
C �'W
O
°3
p
lLO
WW
..00
0o
Q
C? c�
°' c
y
V m
og
o
0
N y
cc
r�
to
y '6
I e
o
v
°
.�. Z 3
`r°
a,
yo°
t
L
0.
°—'
a
3
N
y
a�i
o sv
M
w
U o
c
159048 438118
741285 100142
133227
205684
N
M
M
1000'
� r
-
N
�
' 900
_
Clay
Sand /G
soo'
an 1dY
COY. ...................
C Y
goo'
_.
—
Prairie du C en Group-
600'
-
c
Jordan Sandstone
500'
St. Lawrence Formation
m
400'
Fre
nia Formation
W
300'
Vert. Exag. = 10X
Stratigraphy
Primary Lithology
Unkown
Fill
Boulder
Soil
Clay
Sand
Gravel
Cobble
® Dolomite
- Shale
- Siltstone
Sandstone
0 2,000 4,000 8,000
Enlarged Area
Figure 4a
Geologic Cross - Section A -A'
(Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 25
1100'
157861
1000' 127318 12
J 900'
Clay
m
w 800'
c
c
O 700'
m
m
W 600'
500'
400'
300'
Vert. Exag. = 10X
Stratigraphy
Primary Lithology
Unkown
® Fill
Boulder
® soil
Clay
Sand
- Gravel
- Cobble
- Dolomite
- Shale
- Siltstone
- Sandstone
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet
Enlarged Area
Figure 4b
Geologic Cross - Section 13-13'
(Shorewood, MN)
Sand /Gravel 122221
163897
Cl)
Q N
O
C �
O
Y
0 '0
d O
rn O
U) 3
N
O O
Us
y 138741 151482 505945
137386
•�..
7 Clay and Sand
St. Lawrence F
Clay
Sand and
Franconia Formation
Review copy pending MDH approval. 26
Stratigraphy
Primary Lithology
Unkown
0 Fill
Drift
Boulder
Soil
Clay
c
0 c = N
', m o� Sand
O .
M o a, c? Gravel
200810 CN rn H a 0 m ; Cobble
N 0 - 206942 0 Y
1100' 205696 N 0 U 0 h 1-2 = Dolomite
N 1 205636 ® Shale
y 1000' c
M N
900 Clay - Siltstone
w Cl y Sandstone
= 800' Clay and Sands
700' rairie du Chien G
d 600' 0 7501,500 3,000 4,500 6,000
W
Jordan Aquifer Feet
500'
400' Enlarged Area
Vert. Exag. = 10X
J
MINNESOTA
' Figure 4c
Geologic Cross - Section C -C'
DE MMENTorHEALTH (Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 27
Stratigraphy
Primary Lithology
Unkown
Fill
Boulder
a St. Peter Sandstone p' Soil
m M - Clay
c r Sand
12
®Gravel
Cobble
1 8841 159002
426564 12229 Dolomite
205658 Clay
2 1000' _ -- 05657 ® Shale
y - Siltstone
2:
.: 900' ........_ ......._ __ ...... .............
a 'i Clay Sand and vel - Sandstone
a
S 800'
700' -- — - y 0 1,450 2,900 5,800
.2 Prairie du Chien Gro Feet
> 600'
m
W
500' - Jordan Sandstone
Enlarged Area
400'
Vert. Exag. = 10X
d a
WMEN Figure 4d
Geologic Cross - Section D -D'
(Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 28
i
� M
M
� N
M
CD
c N
Q tO
Water Level in
N m °
m
Q `
Nearby Christmas Lake
N 0 c
c=
cv
O
y
—
0 .0
:+ r�
O L
a L
`J Q
m�
oU C
O
_j
M
co
d
1100'
O i
V s
v
N N
`o
t
OM
r o
N
N
r
CO
d
Lf)
O CCO
Z
1000'
N
900'
Clay
elm Sand/
ly and nd and an Clay
Sa
Gra
a d
d
d
800'
—
y andy Clay
St. Peter San son
Clay
ay
c
700'
St. Peter Sandston
0
>
Prairie du Chien Group
m
600'
w
500'
Jordan Sandstone
400'
Vert. Exag. = 10X
Stratigraphy
Primary Lithology
Unkown
0 Fill
Drift
Boulder
Soil
Clay
Sand
- Gravel
- Cobble
- Dolomite
- Shale
- Siltstone
- sandstone
0 1,500 3,000 6,000
Feet
Enlarged Area
Figure 4e
Geologic Cross - Section E -E'
(Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 29
y� Shorewood Wells
O DWSMA
O FIG (10 -yr Capture Zone - Base case)
Q FIG (10 -yr Capture Zone high Transmissivity)
O FIG (1 -yr Capture Zone - Base case)
= FIG (1 -yr Capture Zone high Transmissivity)
0
420 210 0 420 Feet
Enlarged Area
Figure 5a
Wellhead Protection Area Delineation
Wells 4 and 5
(Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 30
Shorewood Wells
Wellhead Protection Area
Emergency Response Area
1,200 600 0 1,200 Feet
Enlarged Area
Figure 5b
Wellhead Protection Area Delineation
Well 3
(Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 31
* Shorewood Wells
Q Emergency Response Area
Wellhead Protection Area
1,400 700 0 1,400 Feet
Enlarged Area
Figure 5c
Wellhead Protection Area Delineation
Wells 1, 6, and 7
(Shorewood, MN)
Review copy pending MDH approval. 32
Review copy pending MDH approval. 33
- , t .
O r
Y t
, 1
}ma
t , v •a �.
r �
Ift
• • • •
s
,1
VIA
-..
..
M=
Drinkin Water Mana Vulnerab
n
(Sh orewood ,
Review copy pending MDH approval. 33
Review copy pending MDH approval. 34
+ Shorewood Wells
y
DWSMA
DWSMA Vulnerability
A Y
L: Low
Mo d e rate
+� r
-h
1.3 TU: Tritium Results from
March I 20 11
(In tritium units)
a�
f
,
• ••• 3]
770 385 0 770 Feet i
f
+
#
r
Y.
At
i
r
Enlarged Area
Figur 6b
WN,
Drinking Water Supply Management
Area Vulnerability
(Sh orewood ,
Review copy pending MDH approval. 34
* Shorewood Wells
L- scores
• H
L(1 -3)
• L (4 -7)
M
• VL (8 -11
• VL ( >12)
DWSMA Vulnerability
- L: Low
- M: Moderate
DWSMA
4.8 TU: Tritium Results from
March 30, 2011 Sampling
(in tritium units)
0
990 495 0 990 Feet
Enlarged Area
Figure 6c
Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability
Wells 1, 6, and 7
(Shorewood, MN)
99
Review copy pending MDH approval. 35
Larry Brown
From: Djerrari, Amal (MDH) [amal.djerrari @state.mn.us]
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 1:49 PM
To: Larry Brown
Cc: Freitag, John (MDH)
Subject: RE: Part I of Wellhead Protection
Hi Larry
1) The answer to your first question is in the paragraph 6.1. It states:
"Grouting information is not known at some city of Shorewood wells (i.e., Well 1 [232331] and Well 5 [171023]), and the
wells may not be up to code. However, based on water quality results, the borehole integrity does not appear to be
compromised. "
The wells, according to the code need to be grouted. When the information is missing in the well log
(such as for Wells 1 and 2), we put this generic statement. That is why we use the term "may ". It is
because we do not know.
2) As for your second question, the city council does need to approve draft Part 1.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
ITIM,
Amal M. Djerrari, P.E., CGWP, Ph.D.
Hydrologist
ph: (651) 201 -4577
Cell: (651) 245 -1918
Fax: (651) 201 -4701
e- mail: amal.dierrarigstate.mn.us
From: Freitag, John (MDH)
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 1:31 PM
To: Djerrari, Amal (MDH)
Subject: FW: Part I of Wellhead Protection
Hi Amal,
Can you respond Larry's questions below?
Thanks,
John
From: Larry Brown jmailto :LBrownashorewoodpw.coml
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 1:27 PM
To: Freitag, John (MDH)
Cc: James Landini
Subject: RE: Part I of Wellhead Protection
Gentlemen:
First, I thank you for your extreme patience in waiting for my response to Part 1 of the WHP for the City of Shorewood.
Our City Council has had some very dramatic demands and changes in staffing that have had our staff, including myself,
preoccupied and committed.
Second, I have reviewed the report and have two questions!
1. Section 6.1 subsection 1) states that wells 1 and 5 may not be up to code. I am not sure what is meant by this?
Can you clarify what code violation there may be?
2. Is this draft to be approved formally by the City Council?
Larry Brown,
Interim City Administrator &
Director of Public Works
for the City of Shorewood, M
Direct 952 -960 -7913
From: Freitag, John ( MDH) [ mailto :iohn.freitag@state.mn.usl
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 9:36 AM
To: Larry Brown
Cc: Djerrari, Amal (MDH)
Subject: FW: Part I of Wellhead Protection
Hi Larry,
According to Amal we have yet to receive a letter requesting approval of your Part I Wellhead Protection plan. This is a
rule requirement and must be completed in order to keep the process moving forward.
Feel free to contact me if you have any questions,
John Freitag
Principal Planner
Source Water Protection I Iriit
Minnesota Department of Health
651- 201 -4661
john.freita@state.mri.us
From: Freitag, John (MDH)
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 10:24 AM
To: Larry Brown ( LBrown0)shorewoodpw.com )
Subject: Part I of Wellhead Protection
Hi Larry,
I wanted to follow up with the voicemail I just left you. I have attached a copy of the template letter we are waiting to
receive in order to move forward with the approval of Part I of your Wellhead Protection (WHP) plan. I have also
included a checklist of the next steps that need to occur as part of the development of the first part of the city's WHIP
plan.
Let me know if you have any questions,
John Freitag
Principal Planner
Source Water Protection Unit
Minnesota Department of Health
651- 201 -4669
john.freitaestate.mn. us
3
FINAL PART I WHP PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS CHECKLIST
Steps for Part I Plan Approval Process:
City Council review and approve Part I Plan.
2. City sends a letter formally requesting MDH approve WHP Part I Plan (and a copy of the plan
in cases where MDH staff did not prepare the plan).
After receiving formal MDH approval, send the following portions of the Part 1 Plan:
A) WHPA map
B) DWSMA map
C) Vulnerability assessment
to local units of government (LUG'S) and MDH - same list that has been noticed in the past.
The letter accompanying the Part I Plan should also include the date, time, and location for the
public information meeting. This step must be completed within 30 days after receiving
MDH approval.
4. Hold a public information meeting on Part I Plan. This step must be completed within 60
days after receiving MDH approval.
TEMPLATE LETTER TO MDH REQUESTING APPROVAL OF PART I PLAN
(Today's Date)
(MDH Hydrogeologist)
Minnesota Department of Health
Drinking Water Protection Section
Source Water Protection Unit
P.O. Box 64975
St. Paul, Minnesota 55164
Dear (MDH Hydrogeologist):
Re: (System Name) Wellhead Protection Plan, Part 1
In accordance with the Minnesota Wellhead Protection Rule (part 4720.5330, subpart 1), the
(System Name) formally requests that the Minnesota Department of Health review our enclosed
Wellhead Protection Plan, Part 1, for approval. The (Governing Body) has reviewed and
approved Part 1 of the plan on (Date).
We thank you for your assistance and look forward to receiving your comments.
Sincerely,
(Wellhead Protection Manager Name)
(Employer Name)
cc: Trudi Witkowski, Minnesota Department of Health
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 12-
APPROVING PART 1 OF THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN,
FOR THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD MUNICPAL WATER SYSTEM
WHEREAS, Minnesota Rules 4720.5110 for Wellhead Protection, directs each
community water system to prepare, or have prepared, a Wellhead Protection Plan for the
drinking water system, and;
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Health has elected to prepare said plan
for the City of Shorewood, and;
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Health has prepared Part 1 of the
Wellhead Protection Plan for the City of Shorewood, and;
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has reviewed said plan and finds it to
be in order.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood that Part 1 of the Wellhead Protection Plan, dated October, 2011, is hereby
approved.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 9th day of April,
2012.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Larry Brown, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
® #3E
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Authorize the Expenditure of Funds, Public Works, Asphalt Roller
Meeting Date: April 4, 2012
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
Attachments: CIP Excerpts, Quote
Background / Previous Action
The Department of Public Works is seeking to replace one 2000 Beuthling Asphalt Roller, (aka
Unit 73). The current Capital Improvement Program (2012 CIP) includes funding for the
replacement of this unit. Attachment 1 is an excerpt taken from the current CIP. The current
CIP has $37,000 budgeted for this unit.
This unit is used for patching of roadways and all asphalt work.
Minnesota State Statute allows municipalities to take advantage of the state and county
bidding process that are of record, if the municipality is a member of the Cooperative
Purchasing Venture (CPV). The City of Shorewood is a CPV member, and is allowed to take
advantage of the discounts that are offered to the state and county agencies, due to the
volume discounts.
The state contract vendor for the roller is Ziegler Incorporated. Attachment 2 is the state
contract proposal for this unit. The total amount listed for this unit is $28,120 including
consideration of the trade in of the existing unit in the amount of $1,800. With taxes, this unit
will cost $30,165.73.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
As noted, the current CIP has $37,000 allocated for replacement of this unit, compared to the
$30,165.73 quoted for the unit. Therefore, adequate funds exist for this purchase in the
Equipment Replacement Fund.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
Options
1. Approve the expenditure of funds from the Equipment Replacement Fund in the amount of
$30,500 (rounded), and authorize staff to proceed with the trade in of the existing roller
Hilf M
2. Provide Staff alternative direction on this purchase.
3. Take no action.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a motion for the expenditure of funds from the
Equipment Replacement Fund in the amount, not to exceed $30,500 and authorize staff trade
in Unit 73, One Beuthling Roller.
Source # Priority 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
403 - Equipment Replacement Fund
Dump Truck - Replace Unit 33
E -11 -01
1
155,000
155,000
Replace Unit 21 - 24' trailer
E -12 -01
2
16,000
16,000
Sand Pro 3000 - replace Unit 64
E -12 -02
2
13,000
13,000
Groundsmaster Mower- Toro 328D -
E -12 -03
2
24,000
30,000 54,000
replace unit 75
Air Compressor - Replace unit 38
E -13 -01
3
12,000
12,000
Dump Truck - replace unit 65
E -13 -02
3
160,000
160,000
Dump Truck - Replace Unit 68
E -13 -03
2
165,000
165,000
Pickup 44 - Replace Unit 78
E -13 -04
3
38,000
38,000
Cab for mower - replace A3
E -13 -05
3
8,000 8,000
Utility Truck w /crane & toolbox
E -14 -01
5
77,000
77,000
replace unit 76
Mower- Replace Unit 84
E -14 -02
4
25,000
25,000
Utility Vehicle - replace unit 77
E -14 -03
4
25,000
25,000
Blower Attachment for mower
E -14 -04
4
6,000
6,000
replace A8
Cab attachement for mower replace
E -14 -05
4
7
7,000
unit A4
Pick -up -4 x 4 150 Replace Unit 80
E -15 -01
5
35,000
35,000
Dump Truck - replace unit 72
E -15 -03
5
175,000
175,000
Trailer 18' replace unit 59
E -16 -01
5
15,000
15,000
SewerJetter - replace unit 60
E -16 -02
5
53,000
53,000
Pickup - 350 4x4 replace unit 81
E- -17 -01
5
42,000
42,000
Groundsmaster Mower replace unit
E -17 -02
5
28,000
28,000
91
Mower blower attachment replace
E -17 -03
5
6,000
6,000
unit Al
Cab for mower replace A4
E -17 -04
5
7,000
7,000
Vehicle Analysis station replace A9
E -18 -01
5
4,000
4,000
Skid Steer - replace unit 63
E -19 -01
5
35,000
35,000
ATV - replace unit 34
E-19-02
5
20,000 20,000
Sander replace A10
E -19 -04
5
12,000
12,000
4" pump replace unit 50
E -20 -01
5
45,000 45,000
Trailer 12' replace unit 69
E -20 -02
5
4,000
4,000
Roller - replace unit 73
E -20 -03
5
37,000
37,000
Pickup 350 44 - replace unit 91
E -20 -04
5
42,000
42,000
Sweeper - replace unit 74
E -21 -01
5
190,000 190,000
Cab for mower - replace A3
E -21 -03
5
8,000 8,000
Source # Priority 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Flatbed - 4 x 2 Replace unit 49
E -24 -01
5
44,000
44,000
Broom Attachment - Skid Steer
E -25 -02
5
3,000
3,000
replace Al
Street Sign Replacement
LR -99 -001
n/a
6,000
6,300
6,600
6,900
7,200
7,500
7,800
8,100 8,400 8,700
73,500
South Shore Community Center
PF -11 -01
n/a
2,500
42,000
2,000
46,500
Public Works Building
PF -12 -01
n/a
4,000
6,500
81,000
91,500
City Council Laptop Computers (5)
T -12 -01
1
5,000
5,000
Server and Operating System
T -12 -02
2
10,000
10,000
Replacements
Financial Software
T -12 -03
2
90,000
90,000
Computer Upgrades
T -99-99
1
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000 10,000 10,000
100,000
- Equipment Replacement Fund Total
392,000
199,300
255,600
256,900
239,200
208,500
72,800
68,100 253,400 36,700
1,982,500
404 - Street Reconstruction Fund
Clover Lane
LR -12 -01
2
26,000
26,000
Club Lane
LR -12 -02
2
25,000
25,000
Elder Turn
LR -12 -03
2
26,000
26,000
Knightsbridge Road
LR -12 -04
2
62,000
62,000
Lakeway Terrace
LR -12 -05
2
46,000
46,000
Pleasant Avenue
LR -12 -06
2
21,000
21,000
TeeTrail
LR -12 -07
2
19,000
19,000
Wood Drive
LR -12 -08
2
46,000
46,000
Wood Duck Circle
LR -12 -09
2
36,000
36,000
Elbert Point
LR -13 -01
3
27,000
27,000
KcKinley Circle
LR -13 -02
3
21,000
21,000
McLain Road
LR -13 -03
3
26,000
26,000
Shady Hills Rd
LR -13 -04
3
29,000
29,000
Shore Road
LR -13 -05
3
26,000
26,000
Valleywood Circle & Lane
LR -13 -06
3
601,000
601,000
Charleston Circle
LR -14 -01
4
36,000
36,000
Club Valley Road
LR -14 -02
4
29,000
29,000
Lake Virginia Drive
LR -14 -03
4
63,000
63,000
Radisson Entrance
LR -14 -04
4
33,000
33,000
Shady Lane
LR -14 -05
4
24,000
24,000
Sunnyvale Lane
LR -14 -06
4
228,000
228,000
Timber Lane
LR -14 -07
4
55,000
55,000
Chaska Road
LR -15 -01
5
87,000
87,000
Mayflower Road
LR -15 -02
5
33,000
33,000
SEQ. #467-511 STATE OF MINNESOTA May, 2011
Pricing Pages
(Typed Responses Preferred)
Vendor Name:
Caterpillar CB14
Contact Person:
Matt DuCette
Street Address:
901 West 94th Street
Fuel Tank capacity
79 gall
City, State, Zip
Minneapolis, MN 55420
Phone #:
952-888-4121
Toll Free #:
800-352-2812
Fax #:
952-887-5820
Email Address:
matt.ducetteA�Je_q'1eLc:g' com
Steering Type (articulation or crab)
Articulation
Turning Radius, Inside
Furnish separate price quote for: ARTICULAT STEELDRUMUPAD FOOT ROLLER (Method #1)
1.0 Make &Model
Caterpillar CB14
Engine KAoko & Horsepower rating
Caterpillar C1 1 /21 h np
Fuel Type (gas ordiesel)
Diesel
Fuel Tank capacity
79 gall
Engine Cooling System (air orliquid)
VVabar
Hourmeter
uoanoono
Transmission Type
Hydrostatic
Number of Speeds (forward &reverse)
1
Speed Range
Q-5MPH
Steering Type (articulation or crab)
Articulation
Turning Radius, Inside
Inside: 8'8"
Articulation/oscillation Angle (in degrees)
32 degrees d egrees
Type of Vibration System
Hydraulic
Vibration to Front Drum
Yes
Vibration to Rear Drum
Yee
Auto Vibration Stop in Neutral
No
Total Applied Force
5814
Operating Weight (full ballast)
3308
Overall Length
O'8"
Overall Height
5'4"
Overall Width
34'
Curb Clearance
14.5"
Compaction Width
31"
Front Drum Width and Diameter
31" x22.5"
Front Drum Shell Thickness and Finish
.39" machine
Rear Drum Width and Diameter
31" x22.5"
Rear Drum Shell Thickness and Finish
.3S''machine
Gradeobi|ity (96)
N8
Pressurized Sprinkler System
O ptional
Water Tank Material and Capacity
Plastic 2^5 g all
Intermittent Spray
Standard
Retractable Scrapers
Standard
Fuel Tank Capacity
79 gall
Tow Valve
Standard
RC)PG (Roll Over Protection Structure)
Optional
ERDPS (Enclosed ROPS)
N/A
FOPS (Falling Object Protective Structure
N/A
VVarnantv Details - Months, Years, Hours, etc.
One year / unlimited hours
2.5
2.11
2.12
2.13
3.0
3.2
0
Light protectors (steel grids to prevent damage to the light assemblies) $
Muttier witn sparK arrestor
Biodegradable hydraulic oil. Factory fill only
Single point lifting attachment
One complete set of additional parts, service, repair and operations
manuals to be delivered with the articulating roller.
4.0
EXTENDED WARRANTY OPTIONS
4.1
Warranty - 3 year /3,000 hour Powertrain
4.2
Warranty - 4 year /4,000 hour Powertrain
4.3
Warranty - 5 year /5,000 hour Powertrain
4.4
Warranty - 6 year /6,000 hour Powertrain
4.5
Warranty - 7 year /7,000 hour Powertrain
4.6
Warranty - 3 year /3,000 hour Premier
4.7
Warranty - 4 year /4,000 hour Premier
4.9 Warranty - 6 year /6,000 hour Premier
4.10 Warranty - 7 year /7,000 hour Premier
4.11 Preventative maintenance contract (3 years /2,000 hours). Travel
included within 50 miles of Ziegler location
4.12 $200.00 deductible per occurrence after 1 st year on Premier
warranties. Warranty excludes wear items, tires, cutting edges, lights,
brakes, batteries, and non -Cat attachments.
4.13 Warranty and downtime clauses cover the Caterpillar machine only.
Standard manufacturers warranty applies to all non Caterpillar
equipment.
t �t
$ 600.00
$ 570.00
$ 300.00
$
130.00
$
200.00
$
290.00
$
390.00
$
510.00
$
240.00
$
390.00
$ 960.00
$2.45 per hour
Subtotal
$
29,920.00
Less Trade Value :
$
1,800.00
Total Machine Sell Price:
$
28,120.00
1: (2 #6A
U2 MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Commissioner Recognition
Meeting Date: April 9, 2012
Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy City Clerk
Reviewed by:
Attachments:
Background:
Former Planning Commissioner Pat Arnst will be in attendance at the April 9 Regular City Council
meeting to receive a recognition for her three years of service on the Planning Commission. Ms. Arnst
served on the Planning Commission from March 2009 — February 2012.
City Council Action
Presentation of the recognition plaque to Ms. Arnst.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy
environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through
effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
#6C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Report on Carver County Park Reserve Activities
Meeting Date: April 9, 2012
Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy City Clerk
Reviewed by:
Attachments:
Background:
Judy Voigt- Englund, Interpretive Naturalist with the Three Rivers Park District Lowry Nature Center in
Carver Park Reserve, requested time to provide an update to the city on activities happening at and near
Carver Park Reserve that may be of interest to Shorewood residents.
Attached is a handout with some key points of wildlife happenings and nature programs in the area.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy
environment a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through
effective, efficient and visionary leadership. Page 1
i nreeRivers
PARK DISTRICT
LOWRY NATURE CENTER in CARVER PARK RESERVE
Cspreys have returned to nest on the Badger Park cel l tower for the third year. The pair fledged six
chides the past two sum - ers. The banded male hatched near Schutz Lake —he is 6 years old. Five
other osprey nests are just 4 miles down the regional bike trail, in and near Carver Park Reserve.
WILDLIFE HAPPBVINGS near Shorewood
March 13— Bluebirds singing, Trunpeter sv\ans return
March 14- 0horus Frogs singing, Tortoise shell butterfly
March 15— MDsquito and wooly bear caterpillar
March 16 —First wood tick (male)
March 17— Garter Snakes emerged, Mourning Cloak butterflies sipping rraple sap
March 18—Ice out on all local lakes, Wood Frogs singing,
March 22— Painted turtles sunning
UPC DVENG NATURE CENTER PRCGRAMS
April 21— Digital Photography Workshop 1-4 pm
May 13— Mother's Day Brunch 10:30 -2 pm
July 7 —Csprey Babies, chick banding 9 -11 am
Third Saturday of every r7i Bird banding 9-12 am
Third Sunday of every math Raptors in the Yawl 2 -4 pm
Low Nahze Center 763 - 694 -7650 Program Reservatiore;: 763 - 559 -6700
Wtebsite: www.ThreeRiversParks.ora
® #9A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: A Resolution Accepting Low Bid and Awarding Mill & Overlay Contract to the Successful
Policy Consideration: None
Background: Exhibit A is the Bid Tabulation for the 2012 Bituminous Mill, Overlays and Appurtenant
Work for Clover Lane, Club Lane, Elder Turn, Knightsbridge Road, Lakeway Terrace, Pleasant Avenue, Tee
Trail, Wood Drive, Wood Duck Circle, Project 12 -02 which were opened and summary tabulated on April
2, 2012.
The low bidder is Omann Brothers Paving Inc. in the amount of $309,308.08. Based on the other bids
received, it appears that the costs for this project are reasonable.
Financial or Budget Considerations: This project will be funded by the Streets & Roadways Operating
Budget which has $298,000.00 budgeted for the mill and overlay portion of street maintenance in 2012.
The project creates an over budget situation of $11,308.08 and can be shortened to fit within the
budget amount.
Options:
1. Approve the resolution directing staff to enter into a contract with Omann Brothers Paving, Inc.
For the construction project.
2. Direct staff to utilize a different contractor and approve an amended resolution.
3. Do nothing. Leaves the streets in poor condition.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends the contract for the 2012 Mill and Overlay be
awarded to Omann Brothers Paving Inc. for the proposed street distances. A resolution is attached for
your consideration.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Connection to Vision / Mission: Maintaining the infrastructure is a sound financial strategy and provides
quality public services.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
Low Bidder
Meeting Date:
April 09, 2012
Prepared by:
James Landini
Reviewed by:
Jean Panchyshyn
Attachments:
Resolution, Exhibit A
Policy Consideration: None
Background: Exhibit A is the Bid Tabulation for the 2012 Bituminous Mill, Overlays and Appurtenant
Work for Clover Lane, Club Lane, Elder Turn, Knightsbridge Road, Lakeway Terrace, Pleasant Avenue, Tee
Trail, Wood Drive, Wood Duck Circle, Project 12 -02 which were opened and summary tabulated on April
2, 2012.
The low bidder is Omann Brothers Paving Inc. in the amount of $309,308.08. Based on the other bids
received, it appears that the costs for this project are reasonable.
Financial or Budget Considerations: This project will be funded by the Streets & Roadways Operating
Budget which has $298,000.00 budgeted for the mill and overlay portion of street maintenance in 2012.
The project creates an over budget situation of $11,308.08 and can be shortened to fit within the
budget amount.
Options:
1. Approve the resolution directing staff to enter into a contract with Omann Brothers Paving, Inc.
For the construction project.
2. Direct staff to utilize a different contractor and approve an amended resolution.
3. Do nothing. Leaves the streets in poor condition.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends the contract for the 2012 Mill and Overlay be
awarded to Omann Brothers Paving Inc. for the proposed street distances. A resolution is attached for
your consideration.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Connection to Vision / Mission: Maintaining the infrastructure is a sound financial strategy and provides
quality public services.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 12 -
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR
THE 2012 BITUMINOUS MILL, OVERLAYS AND APPURTENANT WORK
FOR CLOVER LANE, CLUB LANE, ELDER TURN, KNIGHTSBRIDGE ROAD,
LAKEWAY TERRACE, PLEASANT AVENUE, TEE TRAIL, WOOD DRIVE,
WOOD DUCK CIRCLE.
CITY PROJECT NO. 12 -02
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for local improvements
designated as the 2012 Bituminous Mill, Overlays and Appurtenant Work for Clover
Lane, Club Lane, Elder Turn, Knightsbridge Road, Lakeway Terrace, Pleasant Avenue,
Tee Trail, Wood Drive, Wood Duck Circle, City Project No. 12 -02, bids were received,
opened on April 2, 2012 and tabulated according to law, and such tabulation is attached
hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that Omann Brothers Paving Inc. is
the lowest bidder in compliance with the specifications.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
1. That the Mayor and City Administrator /Clerk are hereby authorized and
directed to enter into a contract with Omann Brothers Paving Inc. in the name of the City
of Shorewood, Project No. 12 -02, according to the plans and specifications therefore
approved by the City Council on file in the office of the City Administrator /Clerk.
2. That the City Administrator /Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except for the deposits of
the successful bidder and the next two lowest bidders, which shall be retained until a
contract has been signed.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
this 9th day of April, 2012.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Larry Brown, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
City ofShorewood
Bid Tabulation
2012 Mill and Overlay
Shorewood City Project No.12'U2
Bids Opened: 10:00 A.M.
Engineer:
City of Shorewood
LM
' Midwest
I
Asphalt
NA
$
356,499.00
2
Northwest Asphalt
X
NA
$
344,597.25
3
Mueller and Sons
X
NA
$
352,101.23
5
Safety Signs
NA
7
DMJ asphalt
NA
9
Hard Drives, Inc.
X
NA
$
421,524.90
10
Geyer Signal
NA
11
Omann Brothers
X
NA
$
309,308.08
12
Tiller Corp.
NA
13
Valley Paving
NA
14
IQ3 Contracting
NA
| hereby certify that this tabulation iaa correct and
true representation of the bids received uA this date
for this Improvement Project
James Landini,
City En
tf~a~Az
Date
Deputy CierklExecutive Secretary
— /.;z-
Date Exhibit
1: (2 #9B
U2 MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Accepting Plans, Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for Seal Coating
of Streets in 2012.
Meeting Date: April 9, 2012
Prepared by: James Landini
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn
Attachments: Resolution, Ad for Bid
Policy Consideration: Should the city proceed with the project, "Seal Coating of Streets for 2012 "?
Background: As part of the Operating Budget, funds are set aside each year for Road Maintenance. The
2012 budget has $141,000 earmarked for Seal Coating of streets. Tonka Bay and Victoria have agreed to
join us in the bidding of this project.
Streets chosen for the seal coat for 2012 are Academy Ave., Broms Blvd., Cardinal Dr., Charleston Cir.,
Chaska Rd., Club Valley Rd., Country Club Rd., Deer Ridge, Division St., Echo Rd., Galpin Lake Rd.,
Glencoe Rd., Grant St., Lake Linden Ct., Lake Linden Dr., Lawtonka Dr., Maple St., Mary Lake Tr.,
Mayflower Rd., Minnetonka Dr., Murray Ct., Murray St., Murray Hill Rd., Oakview Ct., Park St., Rampart
Ct., Riviera Ln., Shorewood Ln., Spruce Hill Ct., Summit Av., Timber Ln., Yellowstone Tr. This schedule
may change due to budgetary constraints.
The attached resolution approves the plans and specifications for such services and authorizes the
advertisement for bids. If approved, the bid opening for this project is scheduled for 10:00 a.m.,
Monday, May 7, 2012.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The 2012 Seal coating of streets budget is $141,000.
Options:
1. Approve the resolution Accepting Plans, Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids
for Seal Coating of Streets for 2012.
Direct staff to select different roads.
3. Do nothing.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution
approving plans and specifications for the Seal Coating of Streets for 2012 and authorizes advertisement
for bids.
Next Steps and Timelines: The Ad for Bid will be published; bids will be opened on May 7 and the low
bid will be considered for approval at the May 14 City Council meeting.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Maintaining streets provides quality public services, attractive
amenities and sound financial management.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 12-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATE AND
AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENTS FOR BIDS
FOR BITUMINOUS SEAL COAT PROJECT 2012
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood designates $141,000 for seal coating; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has identified streets within the City that need bituminous
seal coating; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared Specifications and an Estimate dated April 9,
2012 for a project within the City of Shorewood for the 2012 Bituminous Seal Coating of Streets.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood,
Minnesota:
The Specifications and Estimate was prepared by the City Engineer for such
improvement. Said Specifications and Estimate are hereby approved and shall be filed
with the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in
Finance - Commerce an advertisement for bids, attached hereto as Exhibit A, upon
the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The
advertisement shall be published for 2 weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall
state that bids will be opened and considered by the Council at 10:00 a.m. (CST), on
May 7, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered
unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's
check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the Clerk for 5 percent of the amount
of each bid.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day
of April, 2012.
ATTEST-
Christine Liz&, Mayor
Larry Brown, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
2012 Bituminous Seal Coating of Streets
For the Cities of Shorewood,
Victoria and Tonka Bay,
Minnesota
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed proposals will be received at the City Clerk's Office in
the City of Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota at the Shorewood City Hall, 5755 Country
Club Road, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, until 10:00 A.M. on Mon., the 7th day of May, 2012
and will be publicly opened at said time and place by two or more designated officers or agents of the
City of Shorewood. Said proposal is for furnishing street maintenance materials and service for
complete seal coating of streets.
171,901 Sq. Yd. Class "A" Rock Seal Coat (Contractor Furnished CRS — 2P & FA -2)
504 TON Placement of Owner Furnished FA- 2 Grey Granite Seal Coat Aggregate
11,273 GAL Contractor Furnished CRS — 2P Bituminous Material for Seal Coat
Proposals arriving after the designated time will be returned unopened.
The bids must be submitted on the proposal form provided in accordance with the contract
documents, plans and specifications as prepared by the City of Shorewood, 5755 Country Club
Road, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, which are on file with the City Clerk of the City of
Shorewood.
Copies of Proposal Form Specifications for use by the contractors submitting a bid may be obtained
from City Hall, City of Shorewood, 5755 Country Club Rd, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, upon a
deposit (non - refundable) of Twenty Five Dollars and No Cents ( $ 25.00 ) per set or a PDF file for
free by emailing jlandini ,ci.shorewood.mn.us to request the electronic file.
No Bids will be considered unless sealed and endorsed upon the outside wrapper, "BID FOR 2012
BITUMINOUS SEAL COATING OF STREETS" and filed with the City Clerk of the City of
Shorewood and accompanied by a cashier's check, payable to the City of Shorewood for 5% of the
amount of the bid to be forfeited as liquidated damages in the event the bid is accepted and the
bidder should fail to enter promptly into a written contract and furnish the required bonds.
The City of Shorewood reserves the right to reject any and all bids. No bids may be withdrawn for a
period of (30) days from the date of opening the bids.
Date: April 9, 2012
BY: ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Larry Brown, Interim City Administrator
PUBLISHED IN: The "Finance- Commerce" April 17 & May l 2012
The "Sun Sailor" April 19 & April 26 2012
2012 Bituminous Seal Coating AFB
® #9C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Agreement between the City and Minnesota Conservation Corps for Apple Road Creek
Restoration Project
Meeting Date: 4/09/12
Prepared by: James Landini
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn — Deputy Clerk
Attachments: Agreement between the City of Shorewood and MCC
Policy Consideration: Approving the agreement between the City of Shorewood and Minnesota
Conservation Corps so that the Apple Road creek restoration project can begin.
Background:
The Apple Road Creek Restoration project started out in the 2006 Drainage Problem Areas report,
progressed to the CIP. During my field visit to begin the project I realized this was a larger project and
enlisted the assistance of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) and the City of Chanhassen. We
applied for a Clean Water Fund grant for Minnesota Conservation Corps (MCC) time and received 16
days of crew time. MCC is to harvest trees that have been arranged for removal by the homeowners for
brush bundles and the trunks are to drop parallel to the creek to slow the overland water speed. They
also are to perform seeding of the slopes and installing erosion control fabric. They will not begin
harvesting before Wenck and Associates has plans completed.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The CIP has a budget of $37,000 for this project. The match portion
of this project is $4,640. At a future date quotes will be presented for the excavation and materials for
the project to meet this match requirement.
Options:
1. Direct staff to move forward with the agreement.
2. Do not move forward with the agreement.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Direct staff to move forward with this agreement.
Next Steps: Wenck & Associates to complete plans and specs, MCWD to present to Citizen Advisory
Committee and Board for amount of project participation, staff to obtain quotes for excavation and
materials to present for Council's future consideration. Then stabilize the creek.
Connection to Vision / Mission: This process would help reduce the sediment deposited in the down
slope wetland thus improving its water quality.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
CLEAN WATER GRANT FUND WORK ORDER BETWEEN THE
City of Shorewood AND
CONSERVATION CORPS
Project Number: 11492
This work order is between the Project Host, City of Shorewood ( "Project Host ") and CONSERVATION
CORPS ( "The Corps "). This work order is issued under the authority of the Laws of Minnesota 2011, Chapter
6, Article 2, Sec. 7(a), which requires the Board to contract with the Conservation Corps for restoration,
maintenance, and other activities, for at least $500,000 in each year of the 2012 -13 biennium, and is subject to
all provisions of the Board of Water and Soil Resources Clean Water Grant Fund Contract, which is
incorporated by reference.
1. TERM OF WORK ORDER
1.1 April 2 " 2012, or the date the Corps obtains all required signatures under, whichever is later.
1.2 December 31S 2012, or until all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first.
2. DUTIES OF THE CORPS
2.1 Complete services as specified in Clean Water Fund Project Request Form, which is attached hereto, and
shall be a part of this work order.
2.2 Enroll and supervise AmeriCorps members in accordance with program guidelines.
2.3 Provide basic orientation and training as appropriate for corpsmembers.
2.4 Provide consultation and on -site project review to ensure that service is progressing in accordance with
this work order and program guidelines.
2.5 Provide personnel and payroll administration for corpsmembers.
2.6 Provide all necessary transportation of corpsmembers to and from service sites.
2.7 Provide basic tools, safety gear, personal supplies and equipment needed by corpsmembers to meet all
PROJECT HOST and federal safety requirements. Provide professional liability and worker's
compensation insurance for all corpsmembers.
2.8 Track services completed and make this information available to PROJECT HOST upon request.
2.9 Report financial information on the use of state funds, and outcome and match information in eLINK
using information provided by the PROJECT HOST.
3. DUTIES OF PROJECT HOST
3.1 Provide project specific direction and assistance to the corpsmember(s).
3.2 Provide any requested project information for purposes of grant reporting.
3.3 Provide at least one media promotion to the public stating that the services(s) are being performed by the
Corps. Any publicity regarding the subject matter of this work order must not be released without prior
approval from the Corps' Authorized Representative.
3.4 Ensure safe working conditions in and around project areas that meet all state and federal standards.
3.5 Secure all local, county, and federal permits required by law prior to the commencement of work.
3.6 Provide Conservation Corps Crew with training and educational opportunities relevant to the services
being performed. This includes an on -site project overview at the outset of the project which outlines
project background, goals and overall outcomes expected as a result of the crews efforts.
3.7 Provide specialized tools, safety gear, personal supplies and equipment that are not available through the
Corps that is needed by corpsmembers to meet all state and federal safety requirements.
3.8 Assist in the acquisition of camping /lodging accommodations if necessary.
3.9 Provide all project materials, supplies and chemicals.
4. CONSIDERATIONS AND PAYMENT
4.1 The Corps will pay for services performed, utilizing its Clean Water Grant Fund accounts. Expenditures
from these accounts shall be expended only for the purposes for which they were approved and intended.
Page 1
4.2 Materials (chemicals, lumber, hardware, plant material, etc.) shall be provided by the PROJECT HOST at
the expense of the PROJECT HOST.
5. PROJECT MANAGERS
The PROJECT HOST's Project Manager is James Landim, City Engineer, 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood,
MN 55331, (952) 960 -7910. The PROJECT HOST's Project Manager will certify acceptance on each invoice
submitted for payment. If the PROJECT HOST's Project Manager changes at any time during this work order,
the PROJECT HOST must immediately notify the Corps.
The Corps' Project Manager is Brian Miller, District Manager, 60 Plato Blvd E, STE 210, St. Paul, MN 55107,
(651) 209 -9900 x19. If the Project Manager changes at any time during this work order, the Corps must
immediately notify the PROJECT HOST.
6. DUPLICATION, DISPLACEMENT, SUPPLANTATION
6.1 Conservation Corps crews are subject to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. §§ 12501 - 12682 and 45 C.F.R.
parts 2500 - 2550. These laws require, in part, that AmeriCorps assistance be used only for a program
that:
6.1.1 Does not duplicate, and is in addition to, an activity otherwise available in the locality of the
program;
6.1.2 Will not displace an employee or position, including partial displacement such as reduction in
hours, wages, or employment benefits; and
6.1.3 Will not create a service opportunity that will infringe on the promotional opportunity of an
employee.
6.2 An AmeriCorps /Conservation Corps member shall not perform services or duties or engage in activities
that:
6.2.1 Would otherwise be performed by an employee as part of the employee's assigned duties.
6.2.2 Will supplant the hiring of employed workers.
6.2.3 Are services or duties with respect to which an individual has recall rights pursuant to a collective
bargaining agreement or applicable personnel procedures.
6.2.4 Have been performed by or were assigned to any presently employed worker; an employee who
recently resigned or was discharged; an employee who is on leave, on strike, being locked out,
subject to a reduction in force, or has recall rights subject to a collective bargaining agreement or
applicable personnel procedure.
7. CANCELLATION
7.1 This work order may be cancelled by the PROJECT HOST or the Corps at any time, with or without
cause, upon 30 days written notice to the other party. In the event of such cancellation, the Corps shall
expend dedicated funds for services performed up to date of cancellation.
7.2 The Corps reserves the right to withdraw corpsmembers from PROJECT HOST for emergency response
work including, but not limited to, natural disasters and wild fire response. THE CORPS will make
reasonable efforts to accommodate the needs of the PROJECT HOST to ensure rescheduling.
CONSERVATION CORPS PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT HOST AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE
By:
By:
Title:
Title:
Date:
Date:
Page 2
Clean Water Fund 2012
Project Application
canservat an
corpses
Project name:
Apple Road Channel Stabilization Project
Date of application:
November 13, 2011
Contact address:
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Local Government unit:
City of Shorewood
Contact name:
James Landini
Contact phone:
952 - 960 -7910
Contact title:
City Engineer
Contact e-mail:
jlandini @ci.shorewood.mn.us
Water resource of
Lake Minnetonka and Galpin Lake
concern:
Anytime ground not frozen.
Install live stakes November thru
December or March thru April.
BMP to be installed:
Stream channel stabilizaton
[from el-INK BMP /activity list]
extends for 100' plus into Chanhassen.
Clearing and snagging
To download a copy of the list
go to the Conservation Corps
CWF Web Page
Erosion control
Pollutant reduction
Pollutant
Amount
Estimation method:
estimate [choose from the
Sediment - TSS (tons /yr)
39 ton /yr
Other:
drop -down or insert estimator
under "other"]:
To download a copy of the list
go to the Conservation Corps
The urban runoff immediately directs storm flow into the channel, street and overlan
0.3ft /yr lateral recession rate
according to NRCS, WI Field
Office Technical Guide, 11/03
CWF Web Page
project area and reuse the trees as slope breaks and toe protection. Cut limbs will be
650LF Channel 3' high
Phosphorus - est.
7lb /yr
Other:
reduction (lbs /yr)
Assume 100mg /kg phosphorus
by restoring vegetation, 2) stop soil loss from the channel by installing bank toe
concentration in sediment
CLICK HERE
CLICK HERE
CLICK HERE
CLICK HERE
Estimated length of
crew time required:
[# of days based on 5 person
crew]
25
Season /Dates
preferred:
[Between March 1 and
Dec 15, 2011]
Anytime ground not frozen.
Install live stakes November thru
December or March thru April.
Project location: [address
Southwest of the intersection of Apple Road and Stratford Place in Shorewood. Project
or physical description]
extends for 100' plus into Chanhassen.
Attach aerial photo /map
with project location
indicated
Detailed description and
The purpose of this project is to provide vegetated slopes and ground cover to protect
purpose of project
the stream bank toe, prevent head cutting and slow slope erosion. The project area
including desired
has a tree canopy that has shut our sun light and not allowed any ground vegetation.
outcomes:
The urban runoff immediately directs storm flow into the channel, street and overlan
backyard flow. The project will thin a significant number of trees over the 0.7 ac
project area and reuse the trees as slope breaks and toe protection. Cut limbs will be
formed into brush bundles that will be used as toe protection and slope breaks.
Where possible large logs will be anchored into the channel wall at pools to provide
coarse woody debris habitat. The project will be done jointly with the City of
Shorewood who will be responsible for installing rock grade control structures and
relocating larger trees. The outcomes are to 1) stop soil loss from the overbank area
by restoring vegetation, 2) stop soil loss from the channel by installing bank toe
protection, and 3) improving habitat by installing CWD alongside pools.
Clean Water Fund 2012
Project Application
canservat an
corpsN ESOTA
Description of crew
The crew will be responsible for tree thinning, building and installing brush bundles for
responsibilities and
bank protection, installing logs adjacent to the pools, live stake harvesting and
tasks to be carried out:
installation, seeding the slopes and installing erosion control fabric.
List hand and power
Chain saws, drills, lever bars, mauls, knives, bolt cutters, cable cutters, box end
tools needed for the
wrenches, socket set.
project:
Equipment supplied by Shorewood: backhoe with operator. $6,000
Matching fund total:
[# of crew days listed above X
$290 = match required]
You must meet or exceed this
amount.
25 crew days x $290 /day = $7,250.00
Itemized matching fund
Material supplied by MCWD /Shorewood: 3000LF 3/8" Manila rope, 750 oak wood
sources and description:
stout stakes, seed and erosion control type 2S for 2600SY, 60 #68 Duck Bill anchors,
[in -kind staff time, non -state
300LF 1/8" stainless steel cable, 1 container rooting hormone, 1 container microrhizal
funds and /or project materials]
fungi, 250CY Class III rip rap, 50CY Class III riprap, 400SY Geotextile fabric. $31,000
groundwater plan, surface water
Equipment supplied by Shorewood: backhoe with operator. $6,000
intake plan, or well head
Labor supplied by MCWD: 90 hours on -site observation, resident contact, Shorewood
protection plan been approved and
Public Works coordination and grant administration. $4,600
locally adopted? Please explain.
Professional services supplied by MCWD: 40hr Wenck stream restoration engineer.
How will this project ensure
$6,800
practices implemented will be of
Total matching funds: $29,150
Has a TMDL Implementation Plan,
the watershed has a completed a state approved comprehensive
watershed management plan,
watershed management plan. The District also has water
county comprehensive local water
management plans for Galpin Lake and each bay of Lake
management plan, local surface
Minnetonka including Excelsior and Gideon Bay that includes
water management plan, metro
Aream restoration and bank stabilization as management projects.
groundwater plan, surface water
Halpin Lake and Excelsior and Gideon Bays are listed in the 2008
intake plan, or well head
protection plan been approved and
impairments for nutrients.
locally adopted? Please explain.
How will this project ensure
The overbank area and channel slopes will be vegetated with
practices implemented will be of
grasses and live stakes to ensure that as the project ages the
long- lasting public benefit with a
ooting mass will increase and provide more strength and beauty.
minimum 10 years effective life?
Both the District and City will include this site in their storm water
maintenance activities.
Description of educational value of
The District and consultant staff will provide design and
the project to crew members or
construction tutorials for bioengineering restoration practices and
what education the project host
- onduct assessments before and after with project monitoring to
may provide to the crew:
assess improvements in sediment reduction and habitat
improvement.
Is this project already being
reported in eLINK? ❑ Yes ® NO
[approved projects outcomes are required to
be reported in the state database] Please explain:
Clean Water Fund 2012 canservat an
Project Application corps
MINNE50TA
Forward completed electronic Project Application, maps and any other documentation to
cleanwater @conservationcorps.org
Conservation Corps Minnesota
2715 Upper Afton Road, Suite 100
Maplewood MN 55119
Phone: (651)209 -9900 X18
www.conservationcorps.org
B"
0
ry
� I
V -
ML
_
q 1
lbw •-
• �p
* III ! �: ., � •
,
IR l
Amin= pi
At
Ilk Ak
, n
c �
+
+
.. � I t •• a !�
-.
~�� ,..'J �' - 4�° �y � �2._e } �, , I ���1 "�s,� ��. '• F' Ry ! � °, � 9 f_j `+� � '
i ce: 1 ,y�4 j, •. ,. �,.. J a a,:� � - ry ., _ 4
- V
r
�.� � .ter �'.�. 4• --
�w
J�
i, — : I --
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title / Subject: Christmas Lake Access — AIS Inspection Program
Meeting Date: 9 April 2012
Prepared by: Brad Nielsen
Reviewed by:
Attachments: Planning Director's Memo
Resolution - Cooperative Agreement With MCWD
#10A
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
Resolution — Accepting Memorandum of Understanding With Christmas Lake
Association
Policy Consideration: Should the City enter into agreements with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District and the Christmas Lake Association to establish an inspection program for this coming boating
season, intended to address aquatic invasive species in Christmas Lake.
Background: See attached Planning Director's memorandum, attached. Please note that due to
technical issues, Exhibit C — the AIS Inspection Site Plan — will be forwarded to you under separate cover.
Watch for it in your e -mail later Thursday evening.
Financial or Budget Considerations: Staff estimates the City's cost for improvements listed in the
Planning Director's memorandum to be approximately $750, in addition to some Public Works time and
some volunteer labor. We will try to have better estimates in time for Monday night's meeting.
Options: Approve the agreements, modify the agreements or take no action.
Recommendation / Action Requested: It is suggested that the agreements be approved, subject to the
City Attorney's comments. Staff should be authorized to acquire the signs recommended in the
Planning Director's memorandum and obtain the necessary materials for the compost bin and new
message board.
Next Steps and Timelines: Due to the unseasonably warm weather, the AIS Program is being
accelerated so as to have Level I inspectors on the site as of 21 April. Since there will no doubt be
questions relative to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me (use my cell phone number) over
the weekend, preferably Saturday. Hopefully we can provide answers to whatever questions you may
have for the meeting on Monday night.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Quality public service, healthy environment and attractive amenities.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY ADMINISTRATOR
TO ENTER INTO A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE MCWD TO PROVIDE AIS
INSPECTION SERVICES AT THE PUBLIC ACCESS ON CHRISTMAS LAKE FOR THE
YEAR 2012
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood (City) and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
(MCWD) have a common goal of preventing or delaying the introduction of zebra mussels into Christmas
Lake; and
WHEREAS, a Cooperative Agreement attached hereto and made a part hereof, setting forth the
responsibilities and expectations of the City and the MCWD with respect to establishing an Aquatic
Invasive Species (AIS) inspection program for the public water access on Christmas Lake, has been
prepared;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Shorewood City Council hereby authorizes
and directs the Mayor and Interim City Administrator to enter into the Cooperative Agreement, attached
hereto and made a part hereof, for the year 2012.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9 th day of April,
2012.
ATTEST:
Christine Liz&, Mayor
Larry Brown, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND INTERIM CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO
ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE CHRISTMAS LAKE
ASSOCIATION TO PROVIDE AIS INSPECTION SERVICES AT THE PUBLIC ACCESS ON
CHRISTMAS LAKE FOR THE YEAR 2012
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood (City) and the Christmas Lake Association (CLA) have a
common goal of preventing or delaying the introduction of zebra mussels into Christmas Lake; and
WHEREAS, a Memorandum of Understanding, attached hereto and made a part hereof, setting
forth the responsibilities and expectations of the City and the CLA with respect to establishing an Aquatic
Invasive Species (AIS) inspection program for the public water access on Christmas Lake, has been
prepared;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Shorewood City Council hereby authorizes
and directs the Mayor and Interim City Administrator to enter into the Memorandum of Understanding,
attached hereto and made a part hereof, for the year 2012.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9 th day of April,
2012.
ATTEST:
Christine Liz&, Mayor
Larry Brown, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
CITY OF
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD a SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 • (952) 960 -7900
FAX (952) 474 -0128 - www.d.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Brad Nielsen
DATE: 4 April 2012
RE: AIS Inspection Program — Christmas Lake
FILE NO. 405 (AIS)
BACKGROUND
As we have been reporting for the past several months, the AIS Working Group consisting of
Mayor Lizee, Councilmember Zerby, the Interim City Administrator, the Planning Director, the
City Attorney and representatives from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, have been
working on a plan intended to prevent, or at least slow down, the introduction of zebra mussels
into Christmas Lake. In turn, the group has worked with representatives of the Christmas Lake
Association, which has offered to play a major financial role in this year's program. 'The MCWDD
has taken the lead in working with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
Although the group has considered long -term strategies and continues to monitor state
legislation, its immediate goal is to provide one hundred percent AIS inspections at the Merry
Lane access to Christmas Lake for this coming boating season. To this end, the MCWD has
offered to finance the first $10,000 of a pilot inspection program for the access. The CLA has
agreed to pay the remaining cost of inspections, including some sort of identifying clothing (cap
and /or vest) for inspectors. The proposed inspections will be contracted through Volt, Inc.,
which will provide seasonal staff trained as Level I inspectors. The CLA has asked that the
program extend from 21 April to 31 October. Level I inspectors would be on site whenever the
access is open. The gates installed last year would be closed between the hours of 10 P.M. and 6
A.M., consistent with the hours of park use and preventing uninspected watercraft from entering
the site.
While everyone has been enjoying the early arrival of spring, the wane weather has advanced the
2012 boating season. Unfortunately, this prescrits a certain urgency in pulling the program
together.
01%
4,® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER.
Memorandum
Re: AIS Inspection Program = Christmas Lake Access
4 April 2012
LOGISTICS
Obviously, given the several agencies involved, program logistics, will be challenging. To a Large
degree, the Working Group has suggested copying, to the extent possible, the pilot program
being conducted at Lake Minnewashta this year. In addition to partial funding of the program
and working with the DNR to obtain delegation authority for the inspection program, the MCWD
will contract with Volt, Inc. to provide Level I inspectors. MCWD had initially hoped to
piggyback on the contract currently in place between Volt and the Lake Minnetonka
Conservation District, which has been conducting limited inspections on Lake Minnetonka for
the past two years. It was decided, however, that it would be cleaner to have a separate contract
between the MCWD and 'Volt for the Christmas Lake program. Volt has agreed to the same rate
schedule as they have with LMCD. Volt has arranged to have additional people trained as Level
I inspectors to satisfy the demands of the Christmas Lake program. They have also agreed to
have inspection personnel available on 21 April.
As we have reported previously, the City has offered, and the DNR has accepted, the use of the
South Lake Community Center for an all -day training session on 20 April. In addition, personnel
from the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department have gone through the peace officer training
conducted by the DNR.
The MCWD has presented an agreement (see Exhibit A, attached) setting forth the arrangements
between the District and the City. The City will be responsible for billing the CLA for its share
of the inspection program. To that effect, a Memorandum of Understanding has been submitted
to the City by the CLA (see Exhibit B). The MOU sets forth the expectations and responsibilities
of the CLA. The City will then forward payment to the MCWD.
ACCESS /INSPECTION PLAN
Since the Christmas Lake access is city -owned park property, the layout for the inspection
program has been prepared by City staff (see Exhibit Q. The plan is based on the Aquatic
Invasive Species Best Practices for Water Access published by the DNR. Boaters turn left from
Merry Lane to access the site. They will be asked to stop at the boat preparation/AIS inspection
station located along the easterly curb, north of the access ramp. It should be noted that the
parking area for the access was designed to drain away from the lake to a small retention pond in
one of the landscape islands. This allows for much of any minor drainage from a boat to
evaporate as it crosses the pavement. A Level I inspector will perform the boat inspection prior
to allowing the boat to be launched. Level I inspectors are authorized to conduct visual and
tactile inspections of the outside of the boat only. While they may deny a boater access to the
ramp, the inspectors are not authorized to detain anyone or write any kind of citation. The
inspectors are directed to contact the SLMPD or a:DNR conservation officer to report violators.
A series of sighs, some existing and some new, will direct boaters and provide information as
they proceed through the site. Although not completed as of this writing, educational handouts
will be available to boaters, advising them of the rules for the access as well as providing
information on AIS.
-2-
Memorandum
Re: AIS Inspection Program - Christmas Lake Access
4 April 2012
Once cleared to launch, the boater backs its trailer onto the ramp, then proceeds in a clockwise
direction to park in one of the seven parking stalls located at the site. It should be noted that
occasionally, people will drop off a boat and then find another location to park the car /trailer.
Parking is not allowed on Merry Lane or Radisson Road near the access.
When not inspecting boats, the inspector will be located in the shaded landscape island directly
across from the inspection station. As of this writing, it not been decided as to who will
provide some sort of seating (lawn chair) or canopy for shelter from the rain. There is already a
storage locker located on the site which should be able to be used for storing handout materials,
clipboards, etc. for use by inspectors. In the southwest corner of the site there is a driveway
access to the rear yard of the property at 5695 Merry Lane. It is our hope that the property owner
will allow this space for parking for the inspectors' vehicles.
Upon leaving the access ramp, the boater pulls up to the AIS Removal Area/Tie -Down Area,
located along the westerly curb of the parking lot. In addition to tying down the boat, this is
where any vegetation clinging to the boat or trailer is removed. The DNR BMP's suggest that a
small simple compost bin be located at the tie -down area to collect any such vegetation and allow
fishermen to dump unused minnows, rather than tossing these items into the trash receptacle
located near the ramp. The Planning Director has volunteered to build the bin if the City
provides materials. After cleanup and tie -down, the boater then pulls up to the exit gate which
will rise upon approach.
To date the City's expense in this process has been quite minimal, limited to some staff and City
Attorney time for attending meetings. The proposed improvements to the access do involve
some expense to the City. Following are items needed to implement the plan:
1; New signs. Many of the signs proposed for the access are stock DNR signs and may be
provided by the DNR. The Working Group has suggested that directional signs leading
to the public access should have additional information advising boaters that AIS
inspections are required at the Christmas Lake access. There are four locations where
these signs are located (see Exhibit D). It is proposed the words "AIS Inspection
Required" be added to these signs. The first two locations are on Highway 7. As we are
painfully aware, these signs require approval by MNDOT before they can be modified.
What is proposed is an auxiliary sign placed beneath the current sign. The new sign
would be six to eight inches in height with lettering four inches high. For these signs,
assuming MNDOT is agreeable, the colors would match the existing signs. `
The third location is at the intersection of Radisson Road and Christmas Lake Road (see
Exhibit E). It is suggested that this sign be the same size as the DNR access sign and
again be located beneath the existing sign. Since the DNR uses a white sign with red
lettering for their "Protect This Lake" signs, that is what is suggested here. Otherwise if
the Council feels differently, the DNR brown with cream lettering could also be used.
The last off -site sign is located at the intersection of Radisson Road and Merry Lane (see
Exhibit F). 'Similar to the Highway 7 signs, it is proposed that a narrow sign band (6 -8
3
Memorandum
Re: AIS Inspection Program — Christman Lake Access
4 April 2012
inches high), the same width as the existing sign, be placed beneath the existing sign. In.
this case the white with red lettering is proposed.
2. Some minor additional signs that will be required are:
• AIS Inspector Parking (same size and color as a "No Parking" sign)
•. AIS Compost Bin (may be able to obtain from DNR).
• Pull Up — Gate Will Open (4 -6 inches high, no more than three feet wide; with 2"
lettering; colors to be determined)
• AXIS Inspection Site Rules (no larger than 24" x 36", white with red lettering, to be
mounted on new message board)`
• New message board (similar in size and design to the existing one near the ramp)
Again, the Planning Director has offered to build the message board if the City
will provide materials
• AIS Removal Area/Tie -Down Area (no larger than 24" x 36 ", white with red
lettering)
3. Finally, it is recommended that white bars (6" wide by 8 feet long) be painted on the
pavement perpendicular to the curb, indicating the locations of the inspection station and
the AIS Removal area.
As of this writing, staff does not have firm prices for the work suggested above. It is,
however, estimated that the cost of the additional signs and the materials for the new
message board and compost bin (assuming volunteer labor and some Public Works time)
will not exceed $750. We will try to have more details on this by Monday, night's
meeting.
Staff is currently working on an ordinance that will augment/reinforce the state law regarding
inspections at the local level. A draft of that ordinance will be presented' at the next meeting:
RECOMMENDATION
Attempts to prevent, or even delay, the introduction of zebra mussels into Minnesota lakes that
are not already infested no doubt has skeptics and critics. Clearly there is no guarantee that the
efforts described herein will keep the critters out of Christmas Lake. What is surely guaranteed'
is that if nothing is done, the infestation will occur . sooner than later. In this regard, any time that
can be bought only serves to improve the possibility of some larger, more global solution to the
problem being developed.
In light of the MCWD's willingness to contribute money to this effort and the CLA's extremely
generous financial commitment, it is recommended that the City approve the agreements attached
'hereto and authorize staff to proceed with the City's share of the improvements listed herein.
Cc; Larry Brown AIS Working Group,
Tim Keane Christmas Lake Association
-4
Between the City of Shorewood and
the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
for Aquatic Invasive Species Inspections
This agreement is made by and between the City of Shorewood, a body corporate and politic and
a statutory city in the State of Minnesota (Shorewood) and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, a watershed district with purposes and powers as set forth in Minnesota Statutes
Chapters 103B and 103D (MCWD). This agreement is executed tinder authority of Minnesota
Statutes § 471.59, which allows one governmental unit to exercise its authorities on behalf of
another.
Recitals and Purposes
WHEREAS AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES (AIS) such as Eurasian watermilfoil and zebra
mussels have rapidly established themselves in the state and in the Minnehaha Creek watershed,
damaging the ecological health and threatening recreational utility of waters and AIS have a
significant capacity not only to change the aesthetics of aquatic ecosystems, but also to replace or
;
damage plants and animals of horticitlltWrpl, agricultural, ecological, cultural and recreational
value, cause or exacerbate disease, an
commerce and industry, and the capa
fundamentally undermined if AIS are
eliminated;
ecology, recreation, property values,
dies to support designated uses can also be
contained, controlled, managed or
WHEREAS SHOREWOOD owns and
only public watercraft access on Christmas
Lake, a public waterbody largely within Shorew604's jurisdiction, at 5655 Merry Lane in the
City of Shopevybod kthe Access), under an agreement with the DNR and the Christmas Lake
Homeo -1 S "� ssociaEil?n, an d Shorewood wishes to itinplement an inspection program at the
vublict, cress to Christni Lake to ensure the lake remains free of zebra mussels and other
invasivesp gies not already"I and in its waters;
WHEREAS MJD has authority, and responsibility to protect and improve water resources
throughout the M ndehaha Creeka atershed, including Christmas Lake; and has conducted
scientific and field research andppb3npiled data on the spread of AIS in the watershed;
WHEREAS MCWD has entefed into the joint powers agreement with the state Department of
Natural Resources (DNR), attached hereto for reference as Exhibit A, that provides the District
with the authority to conduct AIS inspections as provided in Minnesota Statutes section
84D.105, subd. 2(b) and issue orders as provided in Minnesota Statutes section 84D.10,
subdivision 3(a), clauses 1, 3 and 4; and
WHEREAS the agreement with the DNR allows MCWD employees or contractors to:
• Visually and tactilely inspect water - related equipment to determine whether aquatic
invasive species, aquatic macrophytes or water is present; E x h i b it 7 A
A
MCWD- Shorewood 1 Exhibit
AIS Inspections — Christmas Lake
• Instruct persons on how to comply with state AIS Laws by removing AIS, draining,
decontaminating, or treating AIS and water- related equipment to prevent the
transportation and spread of aquatic invasive species, aquatic macrophytes, and water;
• Issue verbal orders to prohibit placing water - related equipment, that has AIS attached
or water that has not been drained, into waters of the state;
• With owner's consent, assist with the removal of AIS from water - related equipment;
and
• Contact DNR conservation officers or licensed peace officers if a person transporting
watercraft or water - related equipment refuses to take corrective actions to remove
AIS or fails to comply with requirements to drain w prior to leaving the water
access; and
WHEREAS the parties to this agreement have formedt ,AIS w rk group consisting of staff and
office - holders representing each party (Work Group).
NOW, THEREFORE it is mutually agreed by and between
1. PURPOSE. The parties enter this agreement to utilize the
described above to provide ALS,. ins
Lake at the Access during ttie�8lts
extent possible, Christmas LalCo
presently found in the lake, ancY`t
preventing the spread of AIS. The'
of either party to ensure the success
2. MCWD TASKS AND
of watercraft entering
WD as follows:
and capacities
✓ing Christmas
the agreement and thereby prevent, to the greatest
�ipg infested with zebra mussels or other AIS not
the parties' knowledge and capacity for
convene as necessary and at the call
of the Program.
a. 'MCWD will develop a 2012 budget ford manage the Program, in coordination
�'_` - With"SlRiimood. All activity by MCWD a €'the Access will be conducted in a safe and
,:�. workmanlike fanner and MCWD will conduct the Program and all related activities
a profession�frnanner, respectful of the adjacent property owners and the interests
d#, to City of Shorewood.
b. MCWb coordinate. DNR training and certification of inspectors. MCWD will
maintain ie list of cii d inspectors authorized to conduct inspections under the
Program. N6'lodiv,4 I will act as an inspector for the Program who does not appear
on the list of authpaLed, certified inspectors maintained by MCWD.
c. MCWD will employ and/or contract with inspectors, and will direct and be solely
responsible for the conduct of inspections under the Program, including but not
limited to the designation, assignment, scheduling and the supervision of inspectors.
d. MCWD will contribute $10,000 toward the costs of the Program and will pay legal
fees and management expenses incurred by MCWD in administering the Program.
Management expenses as that term is used in this agreement will be limited to the
costs of employing District staff other than inspectors.
MCWD - Shorewood 2 April 5, 2012
AIS Inspections — Christmas Lake
3.
4.
SIIOREWOOD TASKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
a. Shorewood hereby authorizes MCWD, its employees, agents and contractors to enter
and use the Access to conduct the Program.
b. Shorewood will approve the 2012 budget for the Program and any amendments
thereto. After approval of the budget and with the contributions to the costs of the
Program by MCWD as provided in paragraph 2.d herein, Shorewood will bear all
costs incurred in implementing the Program, including but not limited to the costs of
employing and/or contracting with inspectors and all expenses for equipment
necessary for the Program. Shorewood will reimburse MCWD for costs and
expenses incurred in implementing the Program, except as specifically provided
otherwise herein. Invoices will be subihltted monthly for costs and expenses incurred
during the preceding month. Paymenffor undisputed costs and expenses will be due
within 30 days of receipt of invoice. �i enses will not be reimbursed except with
prior written approval of the Shorewoc,4 ministrator.
c. Shorewood will maintain and provide to MC"'a list of licensed peace officers who
have received AIS- inspection and - enforcemerif% ning from DNR. The list of
trained licensed peace officers will include contac "W ation, including but not
limited to emergency contact information for use by P gram inspectors to ensure
enforeemetlt:o,'state ilvasive species law (Minnesota Statutes chapter 84D).
GENERAL
a. Effective Date;
effective on exeeuticni by both pat
completed or Decembef3l, 2012,
defend, indemnify and hold harm]
survive the completion oft e ' I
ivance of Obligations. This Agreement is
and will remain in force until the Program is
etever is earlier. Warranties; obligations to
and document retention requirements will
and the expiration of this Agreement.
b. Subcontract and Assignment. Neither party will assign, subcontract or transfer any
obligation or interest under this Agreement to a third party without the written
consent of the other party. Written consent to any subcontract, assignment or transfer
will not relieve the party from its obligations and responsibilities under this
Agreement to the other party, nor in any respect relieve its indemnification, duty to
defend or agreement to hold harmless.
c. Acknowledgment. No signage or other informational material, in hard copy or
electronic form, will be deployed for use in the Program unless and until approved by
both Shorewood and MCWD. Each party, at its own cost and in accordance with the
terms herein, and the parties together may place and maintain appropriate signage at
the Access, identifying and describing the Program and informing the public of its
purposes and the contribution of the parties to the Program. Any publicly distributed
MCWD- Shorewood 3 April S, 2012
AIS Inspections — Christmas Lake
or displayed printed or electronic documents or other text display concerning the
Program prepared by either of the parties or the parties together will acknowledge the
contributions to the Program provided by the other party.
d. Independent Relationship. This Agreement does not create a joint powers board or
organization within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes section 471.59. No manager,
councilmember, representative, contractor or employee of either party to this
Agreement has acted or may act in any respect as the agent or representative of the
other party. No party to this Agreement agrees to be responsible for the acts or
omissions of the other within the meaning of Minn Statutes section 471.59,
subdivision 1a.
c. Indemnification and Immunities. Each ply is responsible for its own acts and
omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized.by law. Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 466 and other applicable law govern the parties'' liability. A party's approval
of or concurrence in plans prepared by or on behalf of the o*party is solely to
allow the first parry to ascertain the nature and timing of its ovVa contributions to the
work described by this agreement. Such approval does not in any respect constitute a
certification or warranty xu the other party, or any third parry, of the pis and
specifications. No actio "I"I ., tion of a party under this agreement creates a duty of
care for the benefit of any Ord party x This Agreement creates no right in and waives
no immunity, defense or lia ",J lrrnrtat'on with respect to any third party or any
other party to this Agree ment.`'Pursuant ttr i Statutes section 471.59,
subdivision 1 a, neither party to th agreeklientill be liable for the acts or omissions
of the other. For purposes of detertp total liahili for damages, the parties are
considered a single governmental on�`tand the parties' total liability will not exceed
the limits on governmental liability fora single governmental unit as specified in
, see t h.456.04, subdivision 1.
otice. Any mitten communication required under this agreement will be addressed
the other part�as follows, except that any party may change its address for or the
dividual designat to receive notice by so notifying the other party in writing:
M
If Shorewood
Country Club Road
sior MN 55331
To MCWD: Administrator
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
18202 Minnetonka Boulevard
Deephaven, MN 55391
g. Property of Shorewood. All property furnished to or for the use of MCWD or a
contractor to MCWD, and all property purchased by Shorewood, with the exception
of property fully used in the performance of the Program, including but not limited to
MC WD- Shorewood 4 April 5, 2012
AIS Inspections — Christmas Lake
equipment, supplies and materials will remain the property of Shorewood and will be
returned to Shorewood at the conclusion of the Program, or sooner if requested by
Shorewood. MCWD will not disseminate, furnish, sell, transfer or dispose of any
Shorewood materials or data to any other person or entity unless specifically
authorized in writing by the Shorewood.
h. Data Practices; Confidentiality. Both parties to this agreement are subject to the
Data Practices Act, Minenesota Statutes chapter 13 (DPA), and data created, prepared
or obtained by the parties in conjunction with the Program may be "government data"
as that term is defined in the DPA. If either party receives a request for data the party
possesses or has created related to the Program it,iviil'nforin the other party
immediately and transmit a copy of the requestd M parties will coordinate response
to any such request. Nothing in this agree, ;- feXpnods the applicability of the DPA
beyond its scope under governing law.
i. Compliance with Laws. Both parties will comply with th !�,hws and requirements of
all federal, state, local and other governmental units in connection with implementing
the Program, and MCWD will procure all licenses, permits and other rights necessary
to perform the Program.
Nondiscrimination. In theirperfexance of the Program, both parties are obligated
to ensure that no person is exclude full employment rights or participation in or
the benefits of any program, service or activity on the ground of race, color, creed,
religion, age, sex, disability, marital status,scxual orientation, public assistance status
or national origin; and no person mho ii pYotected "b� applicable federal or state laws,
rules or regulations against discrimination otherwise will be subjected to
discrimination.
✓erni4 L,aw and Venue. This agreement will be governed by and interpreted in
Drdance`� the laws of the State of Minnesota. Venue for all legal proceedings
of this agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court
r competent jurisdiction in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Waiver; Waiver by Shorewood or MCWD of any breach or failure to comply with
any provis ton of this;agxeement will not be construed as nor will it constitute a
continuing waiver t ueh provision or a waiver of any other breach of or failure to
comply with any p�`b'vision of this agreement.
in. Merger. This Agreement contains all the negotiations and agreements between
Shorewood and MCWD. No other understanding regarding this Agreement, whether
written or oral, may be used to bind either party.
n. Amendment. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be
effective until it has been signed and approved by the same parties who executed and
approved the original Agreement or their successors in office.
MCWD- Shorewood 5 April 5, 2012
AIS Inspections — Christmas Lake
o. Recitals Incorporated. The recitals above are incorporated as binding terns of this
Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, intending to be legally bound, the parties hereto execute and
deliver this agreement.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD MINNEHAHA CREEK
WATERSHED DISTRICT
By
Its
Date
Approved as to
form and execut
Counsel
By
MCWD - Shorewood 6 April 5 2012
AIS Inspections — Christmas Lake
Memorandum of Understanding
This Memorandum of Understanding (the WOU ") documents the expectations and
commitments between the Christmas Lake Homeowners Association (the "CLHA ") and
the City of Shorewood for the planned aquatic invasive species (AIS) inspection program
at the Christmas Lake public access for the 2012 boating season (the "Program ").
As background, the City of Shorewood, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (the
"MCWD ") and the CLHA, share a common objective to prevent the spread of additional
AIS into Christmas Lake. To that end, our three organizations have been jointly planning
2012 AIS inspection program at Christmas Lake.
The joint City of Shorewood and CHLA expectations (the "Expectations ") for the
Program include:
1. Inspection of all watercraft intending to laun
2. Inspections will take place whenever the C1
3. Inspections will begin on April 21, 2012 or E
October 31, 2012.
4. AIS inspectors will have the authority to req
watercraft that do not pass inspection.
5. AIS inspectors will wear an identification
6. From April 21, 2012 through May 28,
thought the boat ramp will be open1intil "10
These are commitments for the P
1.
The City of Shorewood w
Specifically, the City oft
Level 1 gr Level 2 AIS ins
the Pro gram " „,
2.
The „Ci #y of ShoreWood.w
M6,W6 to execute th' PF
CLHA will fund the "c
Minnehaha Creek Water <,
separately.
4
The` "jCLA will reimburse
to rat eaf$ 5.75 /hour. - +.
a for
I will
or theiraquivaieht, to perform all inspections of
ah any and all agreements required with the
of the AiS,inspectors, with exception that the
t District will fund the first $10,000, as agreed
City of Shorewood for AIS inspectors at the agreed
Lake.
ramp is open.
id will end on
of
at 8 pm, even
to meet the Expectations.
nnesota DNR certified
5. The City of'- §borewood wilIinvoice the CLHA monthly for the CLHA share of the
inspector cosh;:-
6. The CLHA will'pro * uniform clothing to the inspectors. This clothing is likely to
include a shirt arid
7. The City of Shorewood will provide the AIS inspectors with handouts that detail
their authority as certified AIS inspectors.
8. The City of Shorewood will provide additional signage on the nearby road(s) and
at the public access to support the Program.
9. The City of Shorewood will arrange for South Lake Police Department support for
the Program. The South Lake Police Department will be dispatched if a call for
assistance is received from the AIS inspector regarding disagreements with the
watercraft operator related to AIS policy or ramp operations.
10. Within 5 days of signing this MOU, the CLHA will provide a named contact
person and a backup to act as a liaison to the City of Shorewood for the
Program.
Exhibit B
Page 1 of 2
Memorandum of Understanding
11. Within 5 days of signing this MOU, the City of Shorewood will provide a named
contact person and a backup to act as a liaison to the CLHA for the Program.
12, The Program will be suspended if, as a result of the CLHA lawsuit against the
DNR, a temporary injunction is operationalized that meets expectations
numbered 1 through 4 above, and this suspension is agreed to by the CLHA and
the City of Shorewood.
13. The expectations and commitments in this MOU can be modified by written
agreement of the City of Shorewood and the CLHA.
As agreed,
Page 2 of 2
mill
P
"
I �
b4 Q
N "d
Cq
J
U
Q �
z�
o
0%
. -
V
V �
DRE
c�
3
t
a�
no
a
U)
m
E
L QD
U�
f
m
a�
C) U-
0
co
z 0
0
v
0
0
N
0
O�SI�IQ
Exhibit D
Public Water Access Sign — Christmas Lake Road/Radisson Road
-5-
Exhibit E
Public Water Access — Radisson Road /Merry Lane
in
Exhibit F
'4 Public Water Access
' Sign
Entrance Gate
_
Board 42 "x60"
PNOTECi THIS LdifE FFOY
dOUFT1G INVRSIVf SPECIES
HSAH Large
Sign48 "x48"
NO i +.
PARKING t
ANY
TIME
7 '
HSAH Small
Sign 4" .
i - AIS Removal Area/Tie -Down Area
AIS Compost Bin Toilet
I -
Compost Bin Alert Sign r_
AIS Inspector Parking
Christmas Lake Access
AIS Inspection Program
Boat Launch Aquatic Invasive
Species Prevention
Shorewood Planning Department
April 2012
NORTH
Boat Prep /AIS Inspection Station
Invasive Species Alert
Signs
Board 42"x60"