10-22-12 CC Reg Mtg AgendaCITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2012
AGENDA
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
Attachments
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A. Roll Call
B. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Executive Session Minutes, October 8, 2012
Mayor Lizee
Hotvet
Siakel
Woodruff
Zerby
Minutes
B. City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2012 Minutes
C. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2012 Minutes
3. CONSENT AGENDA - Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda & Adopt
Resolutions Therein:
NOTE: Give the public an opportunity to request an item be removed from the
Consent Agenda. Comments can be taken or questions asked following removal
from Consent Agenda
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List Claims List
B. Tobacco License Renewals Deputy Clerk's
memo, Resolution
C. Setting the Date of the Canvassing Board Meeting Deputy Clerk's
memo
D. Resolution in Support of the Grant Application for Hennepin County 2013 Planning Director's
Sidewalk Participation Program memo, Resolution
E. Approval of the 2013 Concessions Operation Agreement Park & Rec memo,
Agreement
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
(No Council action will be taken)
5. PUBLIC HEARING
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA — October 22, 2012
Page 2 of 2
Attachments
6.
REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Report on ICA Food Shelf by Cathy Maes, Executive Director
7.
PARKS
A. Report on October 9, 2012 Park Commission meeting
Draft Minutes
8.
PLANNING
A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment
Planning Director's
Study
memo, Resolution
9.
ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS
10.
GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS
A. Logo for Trail Projects
Communication
Coordinator's memo
11. OLD BUSINESS
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. Monthly Budget Report Finance Director's
memo
B. Mayor and City Council
1. Minnetonka Family Service Collaborative Interim Adm. memo
2. Galpin Lake Road Sidewalk/Trail Andrew Morrow
memo
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, 22 October, 2012
7:00 p.m.
A 6:00 p.m. Council Work Session is scheduled this evening
Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval.
Agenda Item #313: Staff recommends Council adopt a resolution approving licenses to sell
tobacco products to Cub Foods, Holiday Stationstore, and Shorewood Cigars and
Tobacco, Inc.
Agenda Item #3C: Staff recommends setting the date for the Canvassing Board meeting for
Tuesday, November 13, prior to the Work Session and Regular City Council meeting.
Agenda Item #3D: At its last meeting, the City Council authorized staff to submit a grant
application for the Hennepin County Sidewalk Participation Program for the trail on
County Road 19. The application requires a resolution from the Council supporting the
application. A draft resolution is in the packet for your consideration.
Agenda Item #3E: The Park Commission recommends the City Council approve formalizing
the Concession Agreement for 2012 with Russ Withum.
Agenda Item #5A: There are no public hearings this evening.
Agenda Item #6A: Cathy Maes, Executive Director of the ICA Food Shelf, will report on
current ICA needs and activities.
Agenda Item #7A: A Park Commissioner representative will report on the recent Park
Commission meeting.
Agenda Item #8A: After three years of work, the Planning Commission has forwarded the 3rd
Draft of the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study to the City Council with a
recommendation to include the Study into the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan. A
resolution to that effect is included in your packet.
Agenda Item #9: There are no items for Engineering/Public Works
Executive Summary — City Council Meeting of October 22, 2012
Page 2 of 2
Agenda Item #10A: Staff recommends Council authorize the expenditure of funds in the
amount of $250 for the development of a simple trail logo design by Elise Kling Marty,
and authorize staff members Brad Nielsen, Julie Moore and Council Member Hotvet to
make the final logo design decision.
Agenda Item #11: There are no items of Old Business this evening.
Agenda Item #12A: The monthly budget report is provided.
Agenda Item #12131: Council is being asked to determine if an official Committee position for
the Council be established for the Minnetonka Family Collaborative Council.
Agenda Item #12132: Consideration of a request by resident Andrew Morrow to fund a feasibility
study for the Galpin Lake Road Sidewalk/Trail.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION
MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2012
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, W
Administrator Joynes
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Interim Administrator Joynes asked that Item 2.1) Administrator Sez
Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, approving the agenda as ame
2. PERSONNEL ISSUES
#2A
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5:30 P.M.
; and, Interim City
be added to the agenda.
d. Motion passed 510.
Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Hotvet Siakel, Woodruff and Zerby; Interim Administrator Joynes were
present. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the following personnel issues.
A. Finance Issues
or
Position
UNNEERI\ 11 III
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconde4
2012, at 5:59 P.M.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST
Item
Adjourning the City Council Executive Session of October 8,
Christine Lizee, Mayor
William S. Joynes, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
MONDAY, OCCTOBER 8, 2012
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 6:03 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel,
Administrator Joynes; Finance Director DeJong; Di
Engineer Landim
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:00 P.M.
xff and Zerby; Interim
Public Works Brown; and
passed 510.
2. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PR
Interim Administrator Joynes stated this evening Coin
Capital Improvement Program (CIP). He noted that no
the intent this evening is to provide a high level overvic
stated the meeting packet contains a document that reflc
need a cash infusion to fund the purchases identified. H
proposed in the CIP are fundable. After that for those f
need to decide if it wants to push projects out, drop prof
DeJong to review each of the funds separately. He no
funds.
will start discussions about the 2013 — 2022
,isions have to be made this evening. He stated
if the CIP with concentration on 2013. He then
which of the capital funds are stable and which
:plained that for 2013 all of the capital projects
s which are not adequately funded Council will
or find a way to fund them. He asked Director
Staff will be asking for some consolidation of
With regard to the Park Capital Improvement CIP, Director DeJong reviewed the major changes to the
Park CIP when compared to last year. All Badger Park projects were pushed out to 2014 from 2013
because there are varying perspectives among the Park Commissioners about what should be done at
Badger Park. Improvements there need to be deliberated on more. The hockey rink at Badger Park has a
number of challenges and they are primarily related to bad soils. The rink is built on what used to be a
wetland area. Constructing a new rink will be expensive because the area will have to be excavated and
refilled with compactible' soils. The Commission discussed possibly moving the rink to Freeman Park but
that is not very feasible because of the location of the utilities. That would require and setup and takedown
each year. The 2013 CIP includes a project to install a versa -court tennis surface in Manor Park in 2013.
The 2015 CIP had included a project to resurface the Manor Park tennis courts in 2015. Signage ($4,000)
and parking lot improvements for Gideon Glen were also added to the 2013 CIP. The capital items in 2015
— 2021 are standard maintenance items which were included in the CIP last year. Gideon Glen was put
under the Commissions purview recently. The Park Commission is asking for commitment for funding the
2013 projects.
Mayor Lizee noted the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is expecting to partner for Gideon Glen costs.
She encouraged the Park Commission to contact the District.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 2 of 5
Councilmember Woodruff stated that Staff is again suggesting that any project in the approved CIP that
has a cost of less than $100,000 be delegated to the Staff to complete without further authorization
provided it will not cost more than the budgeted amount. He noted he is troubled by that clip level for
several of the items in the Park CIP. He thought the Gideon Glen project needs to come back to Council
before there is any expenditure of funds. Director DeJong asked Councilmember Woodruff what level of
authorization he would be comfortable with. Woodruff stated that he would be comfortable with the versa -
court project because it has been talked about and it is a planned improvement. Woodruff then stated the
authorization is more about understanding what the projects are than a clip level. One example is $8,500
for Eddy Station; he does not know what that project is. DeJong stated it is to replace some bad siding and
for painting.
Woodruff asked Staff to provide Council with a narrative about the
Director DeJong stated he is more than willing to provide Council with the electronic copy of more detailed
documents that include a description of what each project is. It is much more cost effective to do it
electronically than to print a copy for everyone. Councilmember Woodruff stated he would be fine with an
electronic copy. Interim Administrator Joynes suggested Staff send Council a synapsis with a brief
description of each project. Woodruff stated a line or two would be sufficient.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the $8,000 for a water source to garden at Manor Park will benefit the
couple of people who are volunteers who take care of that garden. He noted he thought that is a lot of
money to spend so two people don't have to carry water. He stated buying 200 feet of hose that they could
use to connect to the other water source would be a better alternative.
Councilmember Siakel asked if the intent this evening is
it to look at the big picture. She stated for Badger Park
$600,000. She indicated she thought the Park Commis
for Badger Park. She questioned if the hockey rink beloi
with other cities could be considered or if the rink coul
comfortable just saying if a project is under the $1
necessary unless Council has been provided with suffi
does not want to nitpick what the Council is doing this e
go into the detail about each of the projects or is
ie total cost for the improvement projects is over
n needs more time to decide what is appropriate
s at Badger Park, and also if maybe partnerships
be located in another park. She noted she is not
1,000 then no further Council consideration is
,nt information and justification. She stated she
iing when it is taking the time it needs.
Interim Administrator Joynes stated the intent this evening is to show Council the broad budget document.
He then stated it is his intent to at some point have Council in a work session to go through all of the items
and decide what it wants to do, and that may happen after the new Council is sworn in in 2013. Providing
Council with information about where there are insufficient funds was to help Council decide what it wants
to spend and on what. He went on to state that Council has one hour this evening to go through all of the
Capital Funds and therefore he does not expect Council to make any decisions other than about this budget
document for 2013. He commented he thought there are some projects slated for 2013 that he thought need
to be pushed out, noting there is adequate funding for the 2013 projects. For example, there is a lot of
money budgeted for tennis courts and in terms of the costibenefit analysis he is not sure that is a good idea.
Councilmember Woodruff expressed concern that the Park Capital Improvement Fund will have a balance
of approximately $12,000 going into 2014 based on the CIP, noting that is before any transfer is made
from the General Fund to the Park Fund and that has been $42,000 for the last few years. He then stated he
would like to be provided with more detail and justification about the Skate Park Rehabilitation project
scheduled for 2014. He expressed discomfort with $5,000 for fencing around the community gardens
because he is not sure it is important to the community other than to the 16 residents who have community
garden plots.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 3 of 5
Interim Administrator Joynes promised that Staff will assemble additional information together and discuss
it with Council in a work session in the beginning of 2013 before any of the projects slatted for 2013 are
done. At that time Council can decide if it wants any trigger limit for when a project approved in the CIP
must come back for Council approval.
Councilmember Zerby stated there is no discussion in the documents about possible grant funding
opportunities or partnerships with other agencies. He noted that there has been some discussion about
partnering with the Minnehaha Creed Watershed District on Badger Park improvements and for projects at
Gideon Glen. He then noted that the Skate Park was built as a collaborative effort with the other cities in
the South Lake area.
Interim Administrator Joynes noted the CIP document is a fluid do(
pursuing grant opportunities when they are available. He cautioned
source in the CIP because it not predictable.
With regard to the Equipment CIP, Director Brown noted there i
2014. What that should say is that a Skid Steer will be purchased in
Councilmember Woodruff stated the documents reflect
will be exhausted in 2016. They reflect there is roughly a $250,OC
$50,000 is put into the Fund annually. That can't be changed for
already been set. Council could decide to change how it intends to
balances in the funds are based on budizet. He asked Staff to
projected expenditures. For example, in 2012 laptops were not
DeJong clarified that the $5,000 budgeted for that was used to 1
server.
Woodruff asked Staff to
it is anticipated that the
other $10,000 for operas
Windows 7 operating sy
to new versions.
ong noted that as
Equipment Rept
General Fund balance to fund
as Councilmember Woodruff 1
he thought it prudent to ensure
Councilmember Siakel stated I
what is needed by Public Worl
2009 there had been a $175,000 transfer from the General
decision was made to reduce that transfer in in order to use
general operations in order to deal with levy challenges. He stated that
A out there is a lot more appetite than funding coming in. He then stated
funded for the long term in order to maintain the equipment that is used.
word appetite is used but from her perspective she views the equipment as
She noted Public Works is not asking for things it does not need.
Councilmember Woodruff noted that in the past Council has discussed with Director Brown pushing
purchases out further and considering the purchase of used equipment.
Councilmember Zerby asked how many public works staff employees there are. Director Brown stated
there are eight. Zerby then asked if there is a need for four dump trucks to be in use at the same time.
Brown responded yes. Zerby asked if that is equipment that can be rented from time to time rather than
owning it. Brown responded from a practical perspective no. He explained the trucks are used year round.
Typically two are used for asphalt and two will be hauling trees or other materials. There is not a normal
work day that the four trucks are not in use.
stated Staff will recommend
luding that potential funding
blower attachment for Skid Steer in
lace of a blower attachment.
in the Equipment Replacement Fund
annual'` appetite. They also reflect that
3 because the maximum tax levy has
,nd funds in 2013. He then stated the
, date_ the ,:documents to reflect 2012
,hased__for Councilmembers. Director
and the purchase of the new network
$20,000 computer upgrade budgeted for 2013. DeJong explained
used for the normal $10,000 for PC replacement items and the
software upgrades. Most of the Staff PCs are not running on the
re using Microsoft Office 2003. He thought it prudent to upgrade
111
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 4 of 5
Director DeJong noted that Director Brown does push the purchase of equipment out as far as he can.
Brown does it to the point where a loader quit working on the edge of a lake and an emergency purchase
had to be made because the equipment was necessary.
Councilmember Siakel stated based on this discussion there was a conscious decision made to reduce the
funding into the Equipment Replacement Fund. She thought it should be revisited in 2013.
Councilmember Woodruff stated there may be a need to get funding from somewhere other than the tax
levy. There are a couple of alternatives he can identify.
Woodruff asked Staff if it wants some action on the consolidation of funds. Director DeJong explained
Staff has combined projects into the Equipment Replacement Fund. That is under the assumption that they
are all competing for the same pool of money. Woodruff noted he is okay with doing that. DeJong stated
the Public Facilities Fund has a balance of approximately $178,000 and the Technology Fund has a
balance of approximately $79,000. DeJong stated if there is Council consensus to transfer those two Funds
into the Equipment Replacement Fund he will bring a resolution back to Council to make an equity transfer
and close those two Funds out.
There was Council consensus to transfer the balance in the Public Facilities Fund and the Technology Fund
into the Equipment Replacement Fund and to close the first two funds out.
With regard to the Street Reconstruction CIP, Director DeJong ` explained that in 2011 Staff provided
Council with an extensive 20 -Year Pavement Improvement Plan (PMP) which provided the basis for the
Street Reconstruction CIP. This CIP incorporates all seal -coat, mill and overlay, and reconstruction
projects. He noted that Elbert Point and McKinley Circle have been move to 2014 from 2013, and Shady
Lane was moved to 2013 from 2014 (this matches up with Shady Hills Road and alley project).
Councilmember Woodruff asked Staff to update the 20 -PMP to reflect those three changes and to provide
Council with an electronic copv of it.
With regard to Minnesota State' Aid (MSA) Construction funds, Director DeJong noted there is only one
project in the 10 -year CIP and that is for Eureka Road North. It is scheduled for 2019. He explained the
City is accumulating MSA funds annually at the Minnesota Department of Transportation. By the time
Eureka Road North is reconstructed the accumulated MSA funds will be a little short of the amount needed
(approximately $25,000). He then explained that Engineer Landim has pointed out MSA construction
funds can also be used for sidewalk construction along MSA routes. That would make it a potential
funding source for the Smithtown West trail segment and the segment from the LRT Trail at County Road
19 to near the Tonka Village Shopping Center, but doing that would take away from funds need for Eureka
Road North reconstruction. He noted he does not know what the requirements are for using the funds for
trails.
With regard to the Trail CIP, Director DeJong explained that there are three trail segments in the 2013
CIP. One is the segment from the LRT on the east side of County Road 19 to near the Tonka Village
Shopping Center. The second is the segment from the Shorewood/Victoria border to the Minnewashta
Elementary School and then on to the LRT Trail. The third is a trail along Excelsior Boulevard and it was
added to the CIP as part of the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services' force main project that will
go through the Cities of Excelsior, Greenwood and Shorewood. The projects are scheduled based on the
Trail Committee's priorities. He stated the assumption continues to be that the funding source for the trail
segments will be the Community Infrastructure Fund, noting that is up for Council discussion. He then
stated there will likely be grant opportunities but they are not factored into the CIP because they are
speculative in nature.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 5 of 5
Mayor Lizee noted that she is pleased to have the trail segments included in the CIP.
Councilmember Zerby stated that recently Councilmember Hotvet brought up the suggestion to sell the
City -owned property located next to City Hall. He suggested serious consideration be given to doing that.
He indicated that he does not think the housing market is going to improve a lot. He stated he thought
owning that property has probably caused more problems than benefits derived from owning it. The
property was purchased just in case it was needed for a City Hall renovation/construction project and that
project is done.
Councilmember Woodruff expressed his support for that idea while noting the City recently renewed the
lease for the property and that lease is not up until next summer. Therefore, that would be the earliest it
could be sold.
Councilmember Zerby stated he is looking at this over a 5 -year
Interim Administrator Joynes stated if that is what Council
that direction.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he would like to have some idea of
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought the lease is up in July 20
leased on a month -to -month basis.
Interim Administrator Joynes noted that if no notice is given the lease
Councilmember Woodruff stated that he thought the incoming Counc
put it on the market. From his perspective the reason nothing has be
five years is due to the decline in the housing market.
Director DeJong related that D
a property in the Smithtown C
idea or if there was an offer to
he thought it warrants some dis
3. ADJOURN
Zerby moved, Woodruff secoi
6:45 P.M. Motion Dassed 510.
Christine Freeman,
he would like Council to give Staff
t the property is worth.
and maybe at that point it can be
hould make the decision on when to
done with the property over the last
has talked about the possibility of swapping that property for
opment Study area. Councilmember Siakel asked if that is an
g stated it was just an idea. Councilmember Woodruff stated
Adjourning the City Council Work Session of October 8, 2012, at
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST
William S. Joynes, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
#2C
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2012 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, Woodruff and Zerby; Attorney Keane;
Interim City Administrator Joynes; Finance Director DeJong; Director of Public Works
Brown; and Engineer Landim
Absent: None.
B. Review Agenda
Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 510.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2012
Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of
October 8, 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. Setting the Date for the Appreciation Event
C. Authorize Expenditure of Funds for Public Works Facility Air Conditioner
D. Storm Retrofit Petition
E. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 12 -064 "A Resolution Electing to Not Waive the
Statutory Tort Limits for Liability Insurance."
Motion passed 510.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 2 of 7
5. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Report on Southshore Community Center by Kristi Anderson, Director
Mayor Lizee noted that Kristi Anderson, the Program Director for the Southshore Community Center
(SSCC), is present to give an update on the SSCC.
Ms. Anderson gave an update on the Oktoberfest event held at the S
Minnetonka Magazine supported the event by acknowledging it on tl
was attended by 350 — 400 people which is nearly double the attendan
Ms. Anderson formally recognized the following people or org
successful. SSCC's in -house Chef Connie Blanchard with Blanch,
food. Ms. Blanchard volunteered her time and her staff's time
samples of the beer it brews. Cellars Wine and Spirits has con
providing wine and beer. Dick Larson, a fabulous accordion pl,
CUB Foods near the Highway 7 and Highway 101 intersectio
children's events. Mrs. M provided face painting and childre
inflatable activity for children. Wells Fargo was a new sponsor to
to put towards children's activities and the inflatable.'
October 6, 2012. The Lake
of the Magazine. The event
e 2011 event.
zations that helped make the event
Catering provided delicious German
Jo that. Excelsior Brewery brought
uted to the event for four years by
played his accordion for a while.
gain donated the pumpkins for the
activities. Inflata -Fun had a giant
event this year; it contributed $200
Ms. Anderson stated since the beginning of the year the SSCC has been without a commercial air pot
coffee system. One was recently purchased. The Lake Minnetonka Museum (the Minnehaha Steamboat
Board) donated $220 toward that purchase.
Mayor Lizee thanked the Lake Minnetonka Museum for its donation and Ms. Anderson for pursuing
those donations.
Ms. Anderson stated that although she has not finalized what the total cost was for the Oktoberfest event
she thought the event basically broke even when sponsorships and donations are taken into account. Ms.
Anderson noted that this event is the biggest event of the year.
Mayor Lizee stated that she also thought the event was well attended. She commented that she spoke with
attendees who came from the different Lake area communities. She stated the other communities do
appreciate the event.
Ms. Anderson stated the event is intergenerational.
7. PARKS
None.
8. PLANNING
A. Report on the October 2, 2012, Planning Commission Meeting
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 3 of 7
Commissioner Garelick noted that he lives at Shorewood Ponds and he wanted to go on record and thank
the sixteen members of the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) who came to help the residents in the about 60
units there to ensure their smoke detectors were in working order. He noted that the average age of
residents there is about 75.
Garelick then reported on matters considered and actions taken at the October 2, 2012, Planning
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). He explained that there is a resident
who lives near Christmas Lake who has created a path around his property that is used by snowmobilers
and people on dirt bikes. The path will be used for 4 — 5 hours at a time and the riders will be as close as
10 feet from the neighboring properties. He stated the Commission is stymied by how to prevent that
from happening. He explained this Commission has been discussing a potential noise ordinance to deal
with noise nuisances. The Commission understands that the technology to measure noise levels generated
by moving targets is not available and that it would be difficult for the police department to enforce a
noise ordinance. The Commission would like Council to provide guidance on how to stop the harassment
of neighbors.
Mayor Lizee noted that same thing has happened in
Commissioner Garelick explained that about a month ago Council
Code related to accessory apartments; something the Plannin
Commission believes the older population in the City is increasing.
He noted that there were only three homes on the market yesterday
$200,000 and $300,000. He stated the Commission believes allows
allow people to stay in their homes longer and to remain residents in
Councilmember Siakel stated the Minnesota Del
regarding wave runners on Lake Minnetonka. For
a limited amount of time. She asked if there any
dirt bikes and similar things that the City could fol
Commissioner Garelick stati
to not have a lot of rules and
,dopted an amendment to the Zoning
Commission recommended. The
There are few, if any, starter homes.
in the City that were priced between
rig for the accessory apartments will
nt of Natural Resources (DNR) has regulations
ale, they can only be run within a certain area for
Statutes that regulate for noise for snowmobiles,
t people want to keep City government small and
r Siakel stated the challenge is to find a balance.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought there may be state laws that for example prohibit someone
from running a diesel vehicle in a stationary spot for an extended period of time.
Attorney Keane clarified those are customarily commercial vehicle restrictions in residential
neighborhoods. He explained the arbitration of nuisances is what Commissioner Garelick was talking
about. Unfortunately, as a strict noise enforcement matter the State has promulgated its rules and
regulations which effectively preempt local regulations. The state regulations are not directed at the
episodic nuisance event as much as the durational, longer interference with night time noise standards and
so forth. He stated he thought it prudent to review what other communities are doing with regard to
nuisance regulations for ` "snowmobiles and other recreational vehicles off trail in residential areas.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he is very sensitive to government intervening in what is happening on
private property. Yet, he believes people have an obligation to be good neighbors. Operating all- terrain
vehicles on a pseudo race track on private property may be a lot of fun for the owner of the property yet it
may still be highly annoying to residents in a residential area.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she was the Council liaison at the Planning Commission meeting when this
issue was discussed. She explained there were 5 — 6 residents present who came and indicated they had
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 4 of 7
tried to speak with their neighbor about that issue but to no avail. They explained the impact of what was
occurring on them. The Commission came to the conclusion that it was a nuisance issue.
Attorney Keane explained the general premise is a property owner is entitled to use their property in a
reasonable fashion as long as they are not interfering with their neighbors' reasonable enjoyment of their
property. That is the prerequisite for arbitrating nuisances when there is a spill -over nuisance to the
detriment of the neighbors. It is an appropriate role for the government to develop regulations to arbitrate
those nuisances.
Commissioner Garelick stated it is his understanding that the property owner creating the issue has been
asked several times to refrain from what he is doing.
Councilmember Siakel stated that rather than creating an ordinance to deal with noise to address this
issue, she asked if the City could write a letter to that individual and explain that this has been brought to
the City's attention and that if it does not cease it will be brought to arbitration. She stated this is not a
common issue in the City.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she thought it would be wise for the City to act on this
9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS
A. Acceptance of the Water Plan Update
Mayor Liz& noted that Paul Hornby, a professional engineer with WSB & `Associates, is present this
evening. WSB has prepared a 2012 Water Distribution Plan. Update for the City.
Engineer Landini noted that a copy of the Water Distribution Plan Update is included in the meeting
packet. He explained the water expansion report was discussed during at least three Council meetings.
During Council's June 25, 2012, work session Mr. Hornby reviewed the updates made to the Distribution
Plan. During that meeting there was consensus to schedule a work session to discuss financial policy
related to the expansion of the City's municipal water system. The next available opening to have that in a
work session is on December 10, 2012. He noted that Mr. Hornby is present to answer any questions
Council may have about the Plan.
Landini stated Staff is asking Council to accept the 2012 Water Distribution Plan Update dated September
29, 2012, and to direct Staff to schedule the December 10, 2012, work session.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought the Distribution Plan Update report was the fanciest report he
has seen and that it is very well laid out. It appears to be very complete.
Woodruff moved, Liz& seconded, accepting the 2012 Water Distribution Plan Update dated
September 29, 2012, as prepared by WSB & Associates.
Councilmember Zerby stated the assessment policy summary information in the Distribution Plan reflects
that a number of municipalities assess for roadway improvements. The City does not do that. The City
does assess for watermain expansion. He thought the City's assessment policy is a good bargain for its
residents. He then stated he is a little disappointed that the report does not cover any of the cities that
border Shorewood (e.g., Chanhassen, Excelsior, Tonka Bay, Victoria). There is no information about
what the bordering cities do for water expansion.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 5 of 7
Mr. Hornby stated the information is from a survey prepared for communities WSB works with. Not all
of those surveyed responded. He noted that WSB recently became the engineer consultant for Tonka Bay
and it is so for Excelsior. He stated he will ask the bordering cities what they do. Councilmember Zerby
stated he would appreciate that.
Councilmember Zerby stated the report indicates that some cities require property owners to hook up to
municipal water within a certain time period after watermain is installed. He explained there are areas
where the City has extended watermain but property owners have not connected to it.
Councilmember Siakel asked Engineer Landini what the scope of the proposed December 10 work
session discussion would be. Would it only be about the connection charge or would it include a number
of the suggestions identified in the report? She expressed her appreciation for the amount of detail in the
report. She stated she agreed that there are property owners who could connect to City water but haven't.
Engineer Landini responded the intent is to discuss the financial policy outlined in the report.
Director Brown explained the intent of the Distribution Plan was to determine if implementing the plan is
financially feasible. The cost to connect to City water and how quickly they must do so have watermain
has been expanded factor into that. He stated Council can decide what it wants the scope of the work
session discussion to be.
Councilmember Woodruff recommended having that work session after the new Council is seated in the
beginning of 2013. He stated that potentially there could be two new members on the Council starting
January 2013. He commented that Council's last meeting in 2012 will be on December 10
Councilmember Siakel stated she would be comfc
December IO She then stated there is a lot of infor
be discussed.
Interim Administrator Joynes suggested scheduling
Council has to decide. He also suggested scheduling
one hour to discuss those i
framed, noting that each of
tine. He st
Motion
having a`` work session discussion on
report and she asked which items will
work session in January 2013 to outline what
work session for a Saturday for much more than
I the issues that need to be addressed need to be
and Engineer Landini for their efforts.
10.
A. Jo
Updates Contract for Services
Interim Administrator Joynes stated the Personnel Committee discussed the need to update employee job
descriptions and to get base documents for all employees. The current job descriptions may not be in
compliance with current legal standards. He recommended Council approve a contract for services with
Laura McClemans for updating all of the job descriptions. He stated Ms. McClemans would be able to
complete the task in about three weeks.
Mayor Lizee stated that as a member of the Personnel Committee she understands the need to hire a
person with the skill set and time needed to update the job descriptions.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 6 of 7
Lizee moved, Siakel seconded, approving the contract for services with Laura McClemans for
updated the City of Shorewood job descriptions for an amount not to exceed $1,425.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought this is a good idea. He requested Council be provided the
opportunity to have input into the city administrator job description. Councilmember Siakel stated she
does not disagree with Woodruff s request, but she thought it appropriate to give Ms. McClemans the
opportunity to do the work first. Interim Administrator Joynes noted that for the city administrator job
description, Council will be consulted.
Motion passed 510.
B. Authorize Grant Application for Minnesota
Watercraft Inspections
Mayor Lizee stated the topic of a Minnesota Department of
Grant has been commented about a number of times through s
brought this up. The meeting packet contains a copy of a men
the subject.
Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, authorizing
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for w
at Christmas Lake.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought it prudent to pursue this
Motion passed 510.
C. Autho
Progn
Natural Resources
esources Watercraft Inspections
), Councilmember Woodruff has
authored by Director Nielsen on
omit' >a grant application to the
ections for aquatic invasive species
as possible.
2013 Sidewalk Participation
Councilmember Hotvet clarified the segment of trail the grant application would be from the LRT on the
east side of County Road 19 in Shorewood to the existing trail in front of the Tonka Village Shopping
Center in Tonka 'Bay. She asked if the $72,000 budgeted for that segment is still correct. Interim
Administrator Joynes stated the budgeted amount may be adjusted at a future date. Hotvet stated she did
not think the grant application obligates the City to pay a specific amount of money.
Hotvet moved,Zerby seconded, authorizing Staff to submit a grant application to the 2013
Hennepin County Sidewalk Participation Program. Motion passed 510.
11. OLD
None.
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. Report on Write -off of Uncollectible Accounts Receivable
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2012
Page 7 of 7
Director DeJong stated he is working with Directors Brown and Nielsen to determine what if anything
can be done to pursue the accounts receivable collections. Those accountable for them have been
approached again. The only vendors there has been much success with are the cell tower vendors. He
anticipates that Council will be asked to write off those that Staff deems uncollectible by the end of the
year.
Other
Director Brown stated Staff held a public information meeting on the Wellhead Protection Plan Part 1. No
members of the public attended it.
B. Mayor and City Council
Councilmember Zerby noted that Councilmember Hotvet attended the Excelsior Fire District (EFD)
Board meeting in his place on September 26, 2012. Hotvet stated that after attending that meeting she
reaffirmed how safe she feels, while noting that her neighborhood is a non - hydrant area. Zerby then noted
that the EFD Fire Prevention Open House and Safety Fair is scheduled for October 11, 2012, from 6:00 —
8:30 P.M. at Station 1. He encouraged people to attend and noted it is a very worthwhile event for all
ages. There will be demonstrations to watch and activities to participate in.
Councilmember Woodruff stated there is a Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Aquatic Invasive
Species Task Force meeting scheduled for October 12 A draft of the lake -wide vegetation management
plan will be considered. Once that plan is fairly stable he will ensure that Council gets a copy of the
report. He then stated people can view the Shorewood candidate statements on the Lake Minnetonka
Conservation District's website and if they want they can access that website through the City's website.
13. ADJOURN
Zerby moved, Woodruff secon
2012, at 7:37 P.M. Motion_ pass
Christine Freeman, Recorder
I:1
ruing the City Council Regular Meeting of October 8,
Christine Liz&, Mayor
William S. Joynes, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department Council Meeting Item Number
Finance October 022, 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 53551 through
53599 totaling $337,359.53.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the claims list.
10/18/2012 1:09 PM
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE:10 /09/2012 THRU 99/99/9999
A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT
PAGE:
INVOICE CHECK
CHECK CHECK
AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO
CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
NAME
STATUS
DATE
00051
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
D
10/09/2012
00092
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
D
10/09/2012
20005
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVC
D
10/09/2012
00086
AFSCME COUNCIL 5 - UNION
R
10/09/2012
00053
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -4
R
10/09/2012
16625
NCPERS MINNESOTA
R
10/09/2012
00052
PERA
R
10/09/2012
1
SPARTAN CHASSIS
R
10/12/2012
00700
ABDO, SICK & MEYERS, LLP
R
10/22/2012
29306
ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894
R
10/22/2012
1
ASSURED SECURITY INC
R
10/22/2012
29467
BEAUPRE AERIAL EQUIPMENT
R
10/22/2012
29338
BLANCHARD CATERING, INC.
R
10/22/2012
04090
CARVER COUNTY SERVICE CENTER
R
10/22/2012
17300
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
R
10/22/2012
26100
CENTURY LINK
R
10/22/2012
07600
CITY OF EXCELSIOR
R
10/22/2012
24600
CITY OF TONKA BAY
R
10/22/2012
29278
CLASSIC CLEANING COMPANY
R
10/22/2012
05875
CUB FOODS - SHOREWOOD
R
10/22/2012
05885
CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER
R
10/22/2012
29276
DELANO RENTAL, INC.
R
10/22/2012
PAGE:
INVOICE CHECK
CHECK CHECK
AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO
STATUS AMOUNT
000000
10,745.67
000000
2,007.45
000000
1,424.60
053551
305.92
053552
1,613.50
053553
32.00
053554
6,501.51
053556
175,092.00
053557
6,225.00
053558
13,741.20
053559
148.00
053560
917.20
053561
146.25
053562
5,021.69
053563
129.55
053564
551.82
053565
7,538.98
053566
1,818.97
053567
844.31
053568
164.01
053569
82.21
053570
93.57
2
10/18/2012 1:09 PM
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE:10 /09/2012 THRU 99/99/9999
A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT
PAGE:
INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
053571 2,334.00
053572 1,905.74
053573 10.85
053574 700.00
053575 273.64
053576 174.14
053577 296.00
053578 135.14
053579 53.28
053580 75.10
053581 749.33
053582 40.00
053583 150.00
053584 4,682.70
053585 8,611.89
053586 315.00
053587 175.00
053588 274.99
053589 54.79
053590 719.57
053591 30.25
053592 114.91
3
CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
NAME
STATUS
DATE
06630
DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT & ECON DEV
R
10/22/2012
06645
DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
R
10/22/2012
26110
DEX ONE
R
10/22/2012
29271
DREW KRIESEL
R
10/22/2012
29387
FASCHING, GREGORY
R
10/22/2012
19950
FERGUSON WATERWORKS
R
10/22/2012
1
GEORGIA KANDIKO
R
10/22/2012
03222
GREEN LIGHTS RECYCLING, INC.
R
10/22/2012
10506
HENN CTY INFO TECHNOLOGY DEPT
R
10/22/2012
11510
J.P. COOKE CO
R
10/22/2012
12135
KIRCHER, LUCINDA & STEVEN
R
10/22/2012
13300
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
R
10/22/2012
14490
MEDTOX LABORATORIES
R
10/22/2012
15501
METRO COUNCIL ENV.(SAC)
R
10/22/2012
29320
MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.
R
10/22/2012
17275
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DIST
R
10/22/2012
50001
MNSPECT, INC.
R
10/22/2012
15900
OFFICE DEPOT
R
10/22/2012
29457
OMEGA INDUSTRIES
R
10/22/2012
29332
ON SITE SANITATION INC
R
10/22/2012
1
REBECCA MOORE
R
10/22/2012
22950
SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE
R
10/22/2012
PAGE:
INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
053571 2,334.00
053572 1,905.74
053573 10.85
053574 700.00
053575 273.64
053576 174.14
053577 296.00
053578 135.14
053579 53.28
053580 75.10
053581 749.33
053582 40.00
053583 150.00
053584 4,682.70
053585 8,611.89
053586 315.00
053587 175.00
053588 274.99
053589 54.79
053590 719.57
053591 30.25
053592 114.91
3
10/18/2012 1:09 PM
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE:10 /09/2012 THRU 99/99/9999
A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT
PAGE:
INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
053593 2,121.00
053594 70.00
053595 1,060.00
053596 3,297.69
053597 100.00
053598 566.12
053599 19.01
999999 5,358.93
999999 85.00
999999 67.00
999999 40.00
999999 187.00
999999 554.45
999999 86.87
999999 168.57
999999 131.74
999999 17,453.50
999999 617.56
999999 52.50
999999 90.83
4
CHECK
NAME
STATUS
DATE
STATE OF MN -MN DEPT OF HEALTH
R
10/22/2012
SUN NEWSPAPERS
R
10/22/2012
THE MULCH STORE
R
10/22/2012
TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLAN
R
10/22/2012
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC
R
10/22/2012
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN
R
10/22/2012
XCEL ENERGY
R
10/22/2012
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
E
10/22/2012
HAWKINS, INC.
E
10/22/2012
ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS INC
E
10/22/2012
LANDINI, JAMES
E
10/22/2012
LINK, CLARE T.
E
10/22/2012
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS, INC.
E
10/22/2012
PURCHASE POWER
E
10/22/2012
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
E
10/22/2012
GRAINGER, INC
E
10/22/2012
WSB AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
E
10/22/2012
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON, I
E
10/22/2012
WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC.
E
10/22/2012
BLUE -TARP FINANCIAL, INC.
E
10/22/2012
PAGE:
INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
053593 2,121.00
053594 70.00
053595 1,060.00
053596 3,297.69
053597 100.00
053598 566.12
053599 19.01
999999 5,358.93
999999 85.00
999999 67.00
999999 40.00
999999 187.00
999999 554.45
999999 86.87
999999 168.57
999999 131.74
999999 17,453.50
999999 617.56
999999 52.50
999999 90.83
4
10/18/2012 1:09 PM
A/P HISTORY
CHECK REPORT
PAGE: 5
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE:10 /09/2012 THRU 99/99/9999
CHECK
INVOICE
CHECK
CHECK CHECK
VENDOR I.D. NAME
STATUS
DATE
AMOUNT
DISCOUNT NO
STATUS AMOUNT
* T 0 T A L S
NO
INVOICE AMOUNT
DISCOUNTS
CHECK AMOUNT
REGULAR CHECKS:
48
250,077.83
0.00
250,077.83
HAND CHECKS:
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
DRAFTS:
3
14,177.72
0.00
14,177.72
EFT:
13
24,893.95
0.00
24,893.95
NON CHECKS:
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
VOID CHECKS:
0 VOID DEBITS
0.00
VOID CREDITS
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTAL ERRORS: 0
VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: 1 TOTALS:
64
289,149.50
0.00
289,149.50
BANK: 1 TOTALS:
64
289,149.50
0.00
289,149.50
REPORT TOTALS:
65
289,149.50
0.00
289,149.50
10 -18 -2012 12:49 AM
C 0 U N C
I L REPORT BY VENDOR- OCTOBER 22, 2012
PAGE:
1
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
FUND
DEPARTMENT
AMOUNT
ABDO, SICK & MEYERS, LLP
10/22/12
AUDIT SVC
General Fund
Professional Svcs
6,225.00
TOTAL:
6,225.00
ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS INC
10/22/12
09/15 -10/14 MAINT
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
67.00
TOTAL:
67.00
AFSCME COUNCIL 5 - UNION
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS - OCT -UNION DU
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
305.92
TOTAL:
305.92
ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894
10/22/12
MONTHLY RECYCLING SVCS
Recycling Utility
Recycling
13,741.20
TOTAL:
13,741.20
BEAUPRE AERIAL EQUIPMENT
10/22/12
SLMPD- LIGHTING PROJECT
General Fund
Public Works
498.83
10/22/12
SLMPD- LIGHTING PROJECT
General Fund
Public Works
418.37
TOTAL:
917.20
BLANCHARD CATERING, INC.
10/22/12
FALL SOUP CLASS 10/04/12
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
146.25
TOTAL:
146.25
BLUE -TARP FINANCIAL, INC.
10/22/12
VACUUM
General Fund
Public Works
90.83
TOTAL:
90.83
CARVER COUNTY SERVICE CENTER
10/22/12
2012 FREIGHT LINER DUMP TR
Equipment Replacem
Equipment Replacement
5,021.69
TOTAL:
5,021.69
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
10/22/12
5755 CTRY CLUB RD
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
22.53
10/22/12
24200 SMITHTOWN RD
General Fund
Public Works
34.70
10/22/12
5745 CTRY CLB RD & 25200 H
General Fund
Park Maintenance
29.04
10/22/12
20405 KNIGHTSBRIDGE RD
Water Utility
Water
19.63
10/22/12
28125 BOULDER BRIDGE DR
Water Utility
Water
23.65
TOTAL:
129.55
CENTURY LINK
10/22/12
612 -E45 -1785
Water Utility
Water
315.39
10/22/12
612 -E45 -8019
Water Utility
Water
236.43
TOTAL:
551.82
CITY OF EXCELSIOR
10/22/12
3RD QTR WATER CONN
Water Utility
Water
7,538.98
TOTAL:
7,538.98
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
10/22/12
SSCC - UTILITY PAYMENT
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
168.57
TOTAL:
168.57
CITY OF TONKA BAY
10/22/12
WATER
Water Utility
Water
1,438.90
10/22/12
SEWER
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
380.07
TOTAL:
1,818.97
CLASSIC CLEANING COMPANY
10/22/12
C.H. SVC
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
529.03
10/22/12
P.W. SVC
General Fund
Public Works
315.28
TOTAL:
844.31
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
10/22/12
OKTOBERFEST EXP REIMBURSEM
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
358.93
10/22/12
OCT - CONTRACT SVC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
5,000.00
TOTAL:
5,358.93
CUB FOODS - SHOREWOOD
10/22/12
FIREWORK PRMT DUPL PYMT RF
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
100.00
10/22/12
PLANNING COMMISSION -FOODS
General Fund
Planning
94.97
10 -18 -2012 12:49 AM
C 0 U N C
I L REPORT BY VENDOR- OCTOBER 22, 2012
PAGE:
2
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
FUND
DEPARTMENT
AMOUNT
10/22/12
MINNETOKA'S CUB PAID ERROR
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
30.96 -
TOTAL:
164.01
CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER
10/22/12
5755 CTRY CLUB RD- DRINKING
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
46.91
10/22/12
5735 CTRY CLUB RD -SALT DEL
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
35.30
TOTAL:
82.21
DELANO RENTAL, INC.
10/22/12
TILLER RENTAL COMM GARDEN
General Fund
Park Maintenance
93.57
TOTAL:
93.57
DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT & ECON DEV
10/22/12
PAMELA HELLING
General Fund
Administration
2,334.00
TOTAL:
2,334.00
DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
10/22/12
3RD QTR BLDG PRMT SURCHARG
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
1,905.74
TOTAL:
1,905.74
DEX ONE
10/22/12
SOUTHSHORE COMM CENTER ADS
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
10.85
TOTAL:
10.85
DREW KRIESEL
10/22/12
CONTRACT SVC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
320.00
10/22/12
GENERAL SUPPLIES
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
60.00
10/22/12
EQUIPMENT RENTAL
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
320.00
TOTAL:
700.00
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
10/09/12
FEDERAL W/H
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
4,756.02
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
1,891.47
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
653.01
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
Administration
435.54
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Administration
101.86
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
Finance
290.01
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Finance
67.83
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
Planning
288.51
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Planning
67.48
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
Protective Inspections
172.46
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Protective Inspections
40.34
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
City Engineer
148.79
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
City Engineer
34.79
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
Public Works
678.70
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Public Works
158.73
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
Ice & Snow Removal
2.80
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Ice & Snow Removal
0.65
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
Park Maintenance
228.31
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Park Maintenance
53.40
10/09/12
FICA W/H
General Fund
Recreation
50.31
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Recreation
11.76
10/09/12
FICA W/H
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
11.12
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
2.60
10/09/12
FICA W/H
Water Utility
Water
253.26
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
Water Utility
Water
59.24
10/09/12
FICA W/H
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
177.90
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
41.59
10/09/12
FICA W/H
Recycling Utility
Recycling
12.68
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
Recycling Utility
Recycling
2.97
10/09/12
FICA W/H
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
41.77
10/09/12
MEDICARE W/H
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
9.77
TOTAL:
10,745.67
10 -18 -2012 12:49 AM
VENDOR SORT KEY
C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- OCTOBER 22, 2012 PAGE: 3
DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
FASCHING, GREGORY
FERGUSON WATERWORKS
GRAINGER, INC
GREEN LIGHTS RECYCLING, INC.
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON, INC.
HAWKINS, INC.
HENN CTY INFO TECHNOLOGY DEPT
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -457
J.P. COOKE CO
KIRCHER, LUCINDA & STEVEN
LANDINI, JAMES
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
LINK, CLARE T.
MEDTOX LABORATORIES
METRO COUNCIL ENV . ( SAC )
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS, INC.
MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.
10/22/12
SEC 125 HEALTH CARE EXP
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
273.64
TOTAL:
273.64
10/22/12
WATER METER PARTS
Water Utility
Water
174.14
TOTAL:
174.14
10/22/12
BALLAST
General Fund
Public Works
131.74
TOTAL:
131.74
10/22/12
SLMPD- LIGHTING PROJECT
General Fund
Public Works
135.14
TOTAL:
135.14
10/22/12
SEPT -CR 19 TRAIL EASEMENT
Trail Capital Outl
Land & Open Space Fund
617.56
TOTAL:
617.56
10/22/12
CHLORINE CYLINDER
Water Utility
Water
85.00
TOTAL:
85.00
10/22/12
SEPT - 800MHZ RADIO
General Fund
Public Works
53.28
TOTAL:
53.28
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS - DEFERRED COM
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
1,485.96
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS - DEFERRED COM
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
127.54
TOTAL:
1, 613.50
10/22/12
DOG LICENSE TAGS
General Fund
Administration
75.10
TOTAL:
75.10
10/22/12
EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT EXP RE
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
885.40
10/22/12
EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT EXP RE
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
136.07 -
TOTAL:
749.33
10/22/12
OCT WELLNESS REIM
General Fund
City Engineer
40.00
TOTAL:
40.00
10/22/12
RICHARD WOODRUFF - MTG 11/14
General Fund
Council
40.00
TOTAL:
40.00
10/22/12
PARK MEETING 10/09/12
General Fund
Recreation
187.00
TOTAL:
187.00
10/22/12
DRUG TESTING
General Fund
Public Works
150.00
TOTAL:
150.00
10/22/12
3RD QTR -SAC REPORT
Sanitary Sewer Uti
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
4,682.70
TOTAL:
4,682.70
10/22/12
NOV NEWSLETTER POSTAGE
General Fund
Administration
500.00
10/22/12
UTILITY BILLINGS SVC
Water Utility
Water
13.61
10/22/12
UTILITY BILLINGS SVC
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
13.61
10/22/12
UTILITY BILLINGS SVC
Recycling Utility
Recycling
13.61
10/22/12
UTILITY BILLINGS SVC
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
13.62
TOTAL:
554.45
10/22/12
PICNIC TABLES
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
8,611.89
TOTAL:
8,611.89
10 -18 -2012 12:49 AM C 0 U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- OCTOBER 22, 2012 PAGE: 4
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
10/22/12
WATERSHED HEROES AWARD
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
315.00
TOTAL:
315.00
MISC. VENDOR ASSURED SECURITY INC
10/22/12
MOUNTING - OPERATION EXIT DE
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
148.00
GEORGIA KANDIKO
10/22/12
WATERCOLOR CLASS
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
296.00
REBECCA MOORE
10/22/12
STUDENT ELECTION TRAINEE
General Fund
Administration
30.25
SPARTAN CHASSIS
10/12/12
FIRE TRUCK CHASSIS
Equipment Replacem
Equipment Replacement
175,092.00
TOTAL:
175,566.25
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
10/09/12
STATE W/H
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
2,007.45
TOTAL:
2,007.45
MNSPECT, INC.
10/22/12
SEPT - BACK -UP INSPECTION
General Fund
Protective Inspections
175.00
TOTAL:
175.00
NCPERS MINNESOTA
10/09/12
UNIT #762400 -OCT- LIFE IN
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
32.00
TOTAL:
32.00
OFFICE DEPOT
10/22/12
CARTRIDGE - PAD - PENCIL -MARKS
General Fund
Administration
274.41
10/22/12
PENCIL
General Fund
Administration
0.58
TOTAL:
274.99
OMEGA INDUSTRIES
10/22/12
CHAINSAW PARTS
General Fund
Public Works
54.79
TOTAL:
54.79
ON SITE SANITATION INC
10/22/12
BAGER PARK
General Fund
Park Maintenance
45.96
10/22/12
CATHCART PARK
General Fund
Park Maintenance
45.96
10/22/12
FREEMAN PARK
General Fund
Park Maintenance
266.13
10/22/12
SILVERWOOD PARK
General Fund
Park Maintenance
45.96
10/22/12
SOUTH SHORE SKATE
General Fund
Park Maintenance
45.96
10/22/12
CHRISTMAS LAKE BOAT ACCESS
General Fund
Park Maintenance
235.13
10/22/12
CRESENT BEACH --- INV #472244
General Fund
Park Maintenance
34.47
TOTAL:
719.57
PERA
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
3,009.96
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Administration
513.86
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Finance
361.61
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Planning
395.42
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Protective Inspections
237.43
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
City Engineer
173.98
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Public Works
832.22
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Ice & Snow Removal
3.89
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Park Maintenance
305.31
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Recreation
58.83
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
13.01
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Water Utility
Water
315.35
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS - PERA
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
220.66
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Recycling Utility
Recycling
11.14
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
48.84
TOTAL:
6,501.51
PURCHASE POWER
10/22/12
E -Z SEAL SOLUTION
General Fund
Administration
86.87
TOTAL:
86.87
SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE
10/22/12
PAINT -C.H.
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
14.95
10/22/12
PAINT
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
4.14
10 -18 -2012 12:49 AM C 0 U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- OCTOBER 22, 2012 PAGE: 5
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
10/22/12
TARP & DETERGENTS
General Fund
Public Works
38.43
10/22/12
GLOVES
General Fund
Public Works
17.87
10/22/12
PLBG SUPPLY
General Fund
Park Maintenance
9.61
10/22/12
DRAIN SNAKE PARKS
General Fund
Park Maintenance
29.91
TOTAL:
114.91
STATE OF MN -MN DEPT OF HEALTH
10/22/12
3RD QTR -STATE SURCHARGE
Water Utility
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
2,121.00
TOTAL:
2,121.00
SUN NEWSPAPERS
10/22/12
SSCC- INDOOR ADS
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
70.00
TOTAL:
70.00
THE MULCH STORE
10/22/12
TREE & BRUSH DISPOSAL
General Fund
Public Works
1,060.00
TOTAL:
1,060.00
TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS
10/22/12
8/26- 9 /29 -SHWD VLYWD 1 13 R
Street Capital Imp
Street Capt Improvemen
3,297.69
TOTAL:
3,297.69
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC
10/22/12
SEPT BACTERAS
Water Utility
Water
100.00
TOTAL:
100.00
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN
10/22/12
ALTERNATE DUMPSTER- CONTAIN
General Fund
Public Works
566.12
TOTAL:
566.12
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS
10/09/12
P/R DEDUCTS -HSA
General Fund
NON- DEPARTMENTAL
1,424.60
TOTAL:
1,424.60
WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC.
10/22/12
SEPT -APPLE RD CHANNEL STAB
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
52.50
TOTAL:
52.50
WSB AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
10/22/12
AUG -GIS & CAD SUPPORT
General Fund
City Engineer
162.00
10/22/12
CATHCART DR & CTRY CLB RD
General Fund
City Engineer
1,584.00
10/22/12
AUG- ENGINEERING SUPPORT
Water Utility
Water
637.50
10/22/12
AUG -2012 MUNICIPAL WA EXT
Water Utility
Water
42.00
10/22/12
AUG- RADISSON RD FORCEMAIN
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
1,500.00
10/22/12
AUG- COVINGTON RD SEDIMENT
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
8,200.50
10/22/12
AUG- SILVER LK IMPRVMT
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
5,327.50
TOTAL:
17,453.50
XCEL ENERGY
10/22/12
5655 MERRY LANE
General Fund
Park Maintenance
19.01
TOTAL:
19.01
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
10/08/2012 - 99/99/9999
General Fund
Administration
7,087.85
General Fund
Finance
4,987.77
General Fund
Planning
5,454.17
General Fund
Protective Inspections
3,274.99
General Fund
City Engineer
2,399.74
General Fund
Public Works
11,478.67
General Fund
Ice & Snow Removal
53.60
General Fund
Park Maintenance
4,211.19
10 -18 -2012 12:49 AM C 0 U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR- OCTOBER 22, 2012 PAGE: 6
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
General Fund
Recreation
811.47
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
179.34
Water Utility
Water
4,349.52
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
3,043.50
Recycling Utility
Recycling
204.47
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
673.75
TOTAL:
48,210.03
______________=
FUND TOTALS = _______________
101
General Fund
80,407.41
402
Park Capital Improvements
9,361.22
403
Equipment Replacement
180,113.69
404
Street Capital Improvemen
3,297.69
406
Trail Capital Outlay
617.56
490
Southshore Community Ctr.
7,109.01
601
Water Utility
17,723.60
611
Sanitary Sewer Utility
10,060.03
621
Recycling Utility
13,986.07
631
Stormwater ManagementUtil
14,683.25
GRAND TOTAL: 337,359.53
------------------------- - - - - --
TOTAL PAGES: 6
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title / Subject: Tobacco License Renewals
Meeting Date: October 22, 2012
Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
Reviewed by: William Joynes, Interim City Administrator
Attachments: Resolution
#3B
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
Background:
This Resolution issues the annual license for the sale of tobacco products to Cub Foods, the Holiday
Stationstore, and Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco, Inc. in Shorewood. The current licenses expire on
October 31, 2012. All establishments have submitted appropriate documentation for license renewals.
The renewal license period is November 1, 2012 to October 31, 2013.
The business located at 24365 Smithtown Road (formerly Metro Petro) which was licensed last year is
not currently in operation and therefore no license request has been received for this business.
A background investigation has been conducted and there have been no violations reported to date
during the past year for any of the above - mentioned establishments.
Options:
1) Adopt the Resolution approving licenses to sell tobacco products to Cub Foods, Holiday
Stationstore, and Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco, Inc. in Shorewood.
2) Do not adopt the Resolution
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff recommends Council adopt the Resolution approving licenses to sell tobacco products to Cub
Foods, the Holiday Stationstore, and Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco, Inc. in Shorewood.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Upon approval, Staff will immediately issue the licenses.
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 LICENSES TO RETAILERS
TO SELL TOBACCO PRODUCTS
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code, Sections 302 and 1301 provide for the licensing
of the sale of tobacco products in the City; and
WHEREAS, said Code provides that an applicant shall complete an application, and shall
pay a licensing fee; and
WHEREAS, the following applicants have satisfactorily completed an application and
paid the appropriate fee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
That a License for the sale of tobacco products be issued for a term of one year, from
November 1, 2012 to October 31, 2013, consistent with the requirements and provisions
of Chapter 302 of the Shorewood City Code, to the following applicants:
Applicant Address
Cub Foods Shorewood 23800 State Highway 7
Holiday Stationstore #12 19955 State Highway 7
Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco, Inc. 23710 State Highway 7
2012.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 22nd day of October,
ATTEST
Christine Lizee, Mayor
William S. Joynes, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
1: (2 #3C
U2 MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Setting the Date for the Canvassing Board meeting
Meeting Date: 10/22/12
Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
Reviewed by: William S. Joynes, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
Attachments:
Background:
The Canvassing Board must meet between the 3 rd and 10 day following the General Election (between
Nov. 9 - 16) to approve the local Election results of the Tuesday, November 6 Election. It is
recommended that this meeting take place on Tuesday, November 13, 2012, prior to the Work Session
and Regular Council Meeting.
Council Action Required:
A motion setting the date of the Canvassing Board meeting for Tuesday, November 13, prior to the
Work Session and Regular Council Meeting at Shorewood City Hall.
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
#3D
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Hennepin County 2013 Sidewalk Participation Program — Grant Application
Meeting Date: 22 October 2012
Prepared by: Brad Nielsen
Reviewed by: Bruce DeJong
Attachments: Draft Resolution
Policy Consideration: Should the City adopt a resolution supporting the application for a grant under
the Hennepin County 2013 Sidewalk Participation Program?
Background: At its last meeting, the Council authorized staff to apply for a grant that would pay for up
to 25 percent of the cost of constructing the trail segment along County Road 19 that connects the
existing sidewalk to the LRT. Part of the application submission is a Council resolution supporting the
grant application. After discussing this matter with representatives from the County, they suggested
that the resolution include information relative to the City's commitment to the project and the
understanding that the City will maintain the trail in the future. We should look pretty good in this
regard, since the City has adopted the Trail Implementation Report, incorporated it into the
Comprehensive Plan and included the project in the CIP.
Financial or Budget Considerations: Based on the $72,000 that was earmarked for this project in the
CIP, the grant could reduce that number by up to $18,000.
Options: Adopt the attached draft resolution; modify the resolution; or do nothing.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Obviously, the City's trail dollars will go much farther with
outside help. Staff recommends adoption of the resolution.
Next Steps and Timelines: The grant application is due on 1 November. The resolution needs to be
adopted at Monday night's meeting.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Healthy environment, 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.
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE GRANT APPLICATION MADE TO THE
HENNEPIN COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM — 2013 SIDEWALK
PARTICIPATION PROGRAM
WHEREAS, in 2011, the City of Shorewood adopted a Trail Plan Implementation Report
and incorporated it into its Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Trail Plan Implementation Report identified 1200 linear feet of paved
sidewalk from the Lake Minnetonka LRT Regional Trail on the east side of County Road 19 in
Shorewood, connecting to the existing sidewalk in front of the Tonka Village Shopping Center in
Tonka Bay as a first priority; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has included the above - referenced sidewalk into its Capital
Improvements Program and begun work on acquiring necessary easements and sidewalk design,
with the intention of constructing the sidewalk in 2013; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has submitted a grant application to the Hennepin
County Transportation Department for its 2013 Sidewalk Participation Program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood recognizes the twenty -five (25) percent match
requirement for the 2013 Sidewalk Participation Program, has secured the matching funds, and
also recognizes the City's obligation for future maintenance of the sidewalk;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Shorewood
supports the grant application for sidewalk funding under the Hennepin County 2013 Sidewalk
Participation Program.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY SHOREWOOD this 22nd day of
October, 2012.
ATTEST
Christine Lizee, Mayor
William S. Joynes, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
1: (2 #3E
U2 MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: 2013 Concession Operation Agreement
Meeting Date: October 22, 2012
Prepared by: Twila Grout — Park and Rec
Reviewed by: Brad Nielsen — Planning Director
Jean Panchyshyn — Deputy Clerk
Attachments: 2013 Concession Operation Agreement
Policy Consideration:
Approving the concession agreement for 2013 with Russ Withum.
Background / Previous Action
The Park Commission at its October 9, 2012 meeting agreed to have Russ Withum provide concession
services at Freeman Park, Eddy Station in 2013. Services will be provided Monday through Sunday,
from 5:30 to 8:30 p.m. on or about May 1 and continue through August 1 or when the sports
organizations have concluded their events.
Mr. Withum has provided concession services since 2005. He has done a very good job with the
concession services over the years, and has always been willing to open up for other events.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
The contractor has agreed to pay the city $394 for the 2013 season. Payment will be due September 30,
2013. A copy of the agreement is attached.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
The Park Commission recommends the City Council approve formalizing the Concession Agreement for
2013 with Russ Withum.
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
Independent Contractor
2013 Concession Operation Agreement
By and Between City of Shorewood and Contractor
THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of , 201, by and between the City of Shorewood,
Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation with its offices located at 5755 Country Club
Road, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 (the "City ") and Russ Withum, 4924 Three Points Blvd.,
Mound, MN 55364 (the "Contractor ")
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City is engaged in the business of providing municipal services
including park and recreation opportunities within the corporate limits of the City. The City has
constructed a concession/restroom /picnic facility in Freeman Park within the City known as
Eddy Station; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to provide concession services to the patrons of Freeman
Park through the facility of Eddy Station; and
WHEREAS, the City further desires to enter in to an agreement with the Contractor for
the operation and provision of concession services.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1.) Schedule of Operation. Contractor agrees to provide concession services Monday
through Sunday, from 5:30 to 8:30 p.m., commencing on or about May 1 or whenever the first
organized sports events begin. Concession operations will continue through August 1, or
whenever Freeman Park ceases its summer use by MGSA, Adult Softball and Tonka United
Soccer. Contractor agrees to coordinate operations with the Park Scheduling Coordinator.
2.) Contractor Responsibilities.
a.) Contractor agrees to be present each day for opening, training of sales
volunteers, and all duties involved with closing the operation at the end of the day.
Contractor agrees that if for any reason he is not able to be present for any period of time,
while the concession operation is open, he will be available by pager or cell phone for
immediate assistance at the site.
b.) Contractor agrees to be responsible for the cleaning and maintenance of
the concession area.
3.) Contractor Payment. The Contractor agrees to pay the City $394 for the year
2013. Payment due to the City by September 30, 2013.
4.) PurchasinS. The Contractor agrees to purchase the necessary products and
supplies associated with concession sales at Eddy Station.
5.) Equipment. The City agrees to provide the hot dog machine, popcorn machine,
cash register, pop cooler, refrigerator and coffee machine.
6.) Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement, without cause or reason,
upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party. Either party may terminate this
Agreement without notice for cause. "Cause" includes, but is not limited to, dishonesty, failure to
meet deadlines, criminal conduct, or breach of this Agreement.
7.) Status of Contractor. As intended by both parties, this Agreement calls for the
performance of the services of Contractor as an independent contractor and Contractor will not
be considered an employee of the City for any purpose.
a.) The manner and means of performance of Contractor shall be entirely at
Contractor's discretion. Contractor is free to employ personnel to assist Contractor in
providing services to the City, but such employees shall be Contractor's responsibility
and not that of the City. The City shall not provide Contractor or Contractor's employees
or agents with any benefits from the City such as workers compensation insurance,
unemployment insurance, health insurance, income tax withholding, or social security
contributions. The City does not control the performance of Contractor and Contractor
accepts all risk of profit and loss flowing from the services provided under this
Agreement. All expenses must be borne by Contractor and shall not be reimbursed by the
City. Those expenses include furnishing Contractor's place of work, payroll expenses,
taxes, and insurance.
b.) Contractor shall conspicuously identify himself to all persons and
organizations as an independent contractor and shall not represent or imply that this
Agreement authorizes Contractor to act as an agent for, or on behalf of, the City. Neither
the City nor Contractor shall be responsible for any agreement, representation, or
warranty made by the other, nor shall the City be obligated for damages to any person or
organization for personal injuries or property damage arising directly or indirectly out of
the conduct of Contractor's business or caused by Contractor's actions, failure to act,
conduct or negligence.
8.) Indemnification. Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless from
and against any and all claims by or on behalf of any person arising from Contractor's actions,
failure to act, conduct, or negligence while performing services pursuant to this Agreement
unless such damage or liability arises from or in connection with faulty or defective materials or
facilities provided by the City. Contractor agrees to carry Commercial liability insurance in the
amount of $1,000,000.
9.) Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the
parties and no amendment hereto shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties.
There is merged herewith all prior and collateral representations, promises, and conditions
concerning Contractor and the City. This Agreement supersedes and nullifies any preexisting
agreements between the parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement. All agreements
as to payments to be made to Contractor for particular projects must be in writing.
10.) Severable. In the event any portion of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid
the remainder of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.
11.) Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall
be sufficient if it is in writing and sent by registered or certified mail to Contractor's residence or
to the principal office of the City, which ever shall be applicable.
12.) Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance
with the laws of the State of Minnesota.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year
first above written.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD CONTRACTOR
IM
Its: Its:
#�a
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2012
MINUTES
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
Chair Quinlan convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Present: Chair Quinlan; Commissioners E(
Hartmann, Gordon and Mangold;
Works Director Brown
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
7:00 P.M.
;gert, Kjolhaug,
iaison Siakel, Public
Swaggert moved to approve the agenda as presented. Edmondson seconded the motion.
Motion carried.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of September 11, 2012
Commissioner Gordon moved to approve the minutes of the 'September 11, 2012 meeting as
written. Kjolhaug seconded the motion. Motion carried.
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Andrew Morrow, 5935 Galpin Lake Road was present with his daughter to explore opportunities for
sidewalk grants through Hennepin County. He stated he is willing to help in any way he can to apply for
the grants. He believed it would be a step that there would be a lot of community support. Quinlan
discussed the existence of the Comprehensive Park Plan and thanked Morrow for his input. Brown noted
the City Council authorized the application for the grant. He discussed the logistics of such an application
and indicated staff will be meeting with Hennepin County.
Morrow noted Chanhassen has agreed to extend their portion of the trail to their border with Shorewood.
He noted he also talked to Excelsior about the trail connection in their city and requesting their support.
Quinlan noted the process is already underway. He asked if specific trail segments needed to be identified.
Siakel noted there are three trail segments identified where Shorewood is partnering with other agencies
during other construction projects. In 2014 the Galpin Lake Trail portion was identified. She discussed
other opportunities for trail grants. She agreed something needs to be done with Galpin Lake Trail under
the Capital Improvements budget process.
4. ARCTIC FEVER 2013 — SUE DAVIS
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2012
PAGE 2 OF 3
Sue Davis was present to discuss the 2013 Arctic Fever celebration. She noted meetings are being
held. She discussed activities planned. She stated adults will now be able to have dog sled rides at this
celebration. Other possible events include: a 4 -dog sled race, skijoring cabin fever party at Excelsior
Brewing, and a snow sculpture event. She suggested the Park Commission may want to sponsor the
snow sculpture event. She stated Excelsior will be doing ice carving. She stated the event will be held
on January 19 with the Princess Tea on January 20. She stated the Arctic Fever budget could fund the
cost of the "boxes" for the snow used for snow sculptures. Edmondson discussed the need to make
the sculptures visible and on main roads. Davis welcomed any and all new snow ideas.
5. EDDY STATION CONCESSION AGREEMENT FOR 20
Quinlan stated the concession agreement for Eddy Station is a
Brown stated this is similar to one that is seen every year, as
agreement rather than a 1 -year agreement. Edmondson asked
the same fee. He noted he views this as a service rather than a
Quinlan stated he would prefer it remain a 1 -year
Swaggert moved to recommend approval of the
Gordon seconded the motion. Motion carried,
6. NEW BUSINESS
None
7. STAFF AND
A. City Cow
stated the City Council is at
Park should be taken. She si
Quinlan discussed the issues
Siakel stated it :would be heh
Quinlan discussed the j
discuss common issues
communities. Quinlan
B. Staff
N REPORTS /UPDATES
e for review this evening for 2013.
-ecommended it be made a 2 -year
fee is the same. gown stated it is
.s money maker.
for 2013 as amended.
the work session held to discuss the capital improvement program. She
nt where a joint meeting would be a good idea to discuss where Badger
$20,000 was also added for Gideon Glen.
Badger Park, and he agreed a joint meeting is a good idea.
how the budget for the park should be shaped.
ility of meeting with other Park Commissions after the first of the year to
rails. Siakel stated there is interest for a trail along County Road 19 in the
I it would also be good to get other communities involved with summer events.
Brown stated the grant cycles have run their course, and there will be new ones with the new year. He stated Kristi
Anderson reported on Southshore activities in 2012. Staff was also authorized to apply for a grant for watercraft
inspections through the DNR.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2012
PAGE 3 OF 3
Quinlan asked for an update on Boy Scout activities. Brown stated the trail on the other side of the Community
Center is being constructed. It was noted bolts on the message boards are sticking out on the back more than is safe.
Brown stated he would check them.
Edmondson reported on Park Foundation activities. He stated they are trying to get creative with fundraising
possibilities. He asked for suggestions which he could forward to the group.
Hartmann suggested Chanhassen be included in the multi -park commission
8. ADJOURN
Swaggert moved, Edmondson seconded, to adjourn the Park
2012, at 8:03 p.m. Motion carried.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Clare T. Link
Recorder
of October 9,
� #sA
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study
Meeting Date: 22 October 2012
Prepared by: Brad Nielsen
Reviewed by:
Attachments: Draft Resolution
Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study — 3 Draft
Policy Consideration: Should the City amend its Comprehensive Plan to include the 3 Draft of the
Smithtown Road Redevelopment Study?
Background: For the past three years, the Planning Commission and City Council have been studying a
plan for the redevelopment of the area surrounding the intersection of Smithtown Road and County
Road 19. After three drafts of the proposed Redevelopment Study, the Planning Commission, at its 18
September meeting, voted unanimously to recommend that the Study be incorporated into the
Comprehensive Plan as the guide for redevelopment in that area. It is worth reviewing the minutes
from the 18 September Planning Commission meeting (a public hearing) to note what those who had
been following the project had to say. Although relatively few spoke at the hearing, all comments were
considered quite favorable.
Financial or Budget Considerations: Adoption of the amendment by itself represents no significant cost
to the City. Over time, as the project area redevelops, there will undoubtedly be costs associated with
land acquisition, improvements, etc.
Options: Adopt the report and resolution as presented; modify the report; or do nothing.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Considerable time and effort has been spent arriving at a plan
that appears to have community support. It is recommended that the Smithtown Crossing
Redevelopment Study and the resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan be adopted.
Next Steps and Timelines: Once approved by the Council, the amendment is routed to surrounding
cities and affected agencies for review and comment. Subsequently, it is forwarded to the Metropolitan
Council for approval.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Healthy environment, attractive amenities and sustainable tax base.
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 ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SHOREWOOD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2009 PERTAINING TO THE SMITHTOWN ROAD
REDEVELOPMENT STUDY
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood adopted its current Comprehensive Plan in June of
2010, in which the Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan identified the northwest
quadrant of the intersection of Smithtown Road and County Road 19 as being an excellent
opportunity for redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission began a study of the area in question early in
2009, since then reviewing three different drafts of the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment
Study, holding a variety of public meetings, including a neighborhood open house and two public
hearings, the culmination of which is the report dated June 2012; and
WHEREAS, after legal notice was published in the official City newspaper, the Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on 18 September 2012, to formally present the
Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study to the public; and
WHEREAS, after holding the public hearing the Planning Commission voted to
recommend to the City Council that the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study be included in
the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, having considered the recommendations of the Planning
Commission, finds that it is in Shorewood's best interest to incorporate the Smithtown Crossing
Redevelopment Study, dated June 2012 into the Appendix Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Shorewood City Council that the
Comprehensive Plan 2009 be amended to include the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study,
dated June 2012, subject to review and comment by the Metropolitan Council and adjoining
cities.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 22nd day of October,
2012.
ATTEST
Christine Lizee, Mayor
William S. Joynes, Interim City Administrator /Clerk
#2
SMITIlTo"
CROSSI
/
�
�
\ _
-_-�`
�m |
| -'-------- _ _-----------
| |
|
� REDEVELOPMENT
STUDY
3rd DkikFT
June 20012
_
|~
`
|
� REDEVELOPMENT
STUDY
3rd DkikFT
June 20012
_
Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction................................................. ..............................1
PlanningIssues ............................................. ..............................7
Redevelopment Guiding Principles ................ .............................11
Plan............................................................. .............................13
• Zoning Parameters
- Commercial: C -1
- Residential: R -313
• Update Regulations
- Mixed Use
- Building Height
- Senior Housing Density
• Design Criteria
- Pedestrian/Bicycle Circulation
- Landscaping
- Architecture/Materials
ConceptSketch ..................................................... .............................19
CityParticipation ...................................................... .............................23
• Tax Increment Financing
• Land
• EDA
Appendix
• Planning Inventory
• List of Meeting Dates
• Traffic Volume Map
0
0
0
10
0
0 0 R H 0� 0 W 0
0 0
Executive Summary
While readers are encouraged to read the entire Study, following is a summary of the
recommendations included therein:
➢ Encourage unified /coordinated redevelopment versus a piece - meal /individual approach.
➢ Consider various incentives to achieve coordinated and higher quality development.
➢ Utilize Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) and establish parameters for mixed use
(residential and commercial).
➢ Incentives and rewards will be tied to compliance with the City's redevelopment "guiding
principles ".
• Consider use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to encourage land assembly,
common open area and high quality architecture and landscaping.
• Consider City acquisition of land as it becomes available to help facilitate land
assembly.
➢ Require marketability and traffic studies for proposed activities.
➢ Provide for bicycle /pedestrian connections and circulation within the Study Area.
➢ Require substantial, natural, low maintenance landscaping in order to create buffers and
achieve incentives.
➢ Include public /common open space internal to the project.
➢ Encourage well articulated architecture with pitched rooflines, tiered levels, interesting
shadowing and natural materials.
0
O
10
0
0 0 R H 0� 0 W 0
0 0
# ► 7 . -
low-
len
Of
.� 3` t� p r y . • <A - ���_. - � �' � _ � P �. �� ��'
d.:►.Y
�s
R
WON
L
r
Own
a £:
` a + &L
edge r.. ti f
h
• lr t t
a r %. l e, F !
IMF
Figure I
Mm
i
� .! ` • � • _ } -. , d'�'. �* '* '�; . �4� �� � � �_ 1 � - f
Introduction
Geographically, the intersection of Smithtown Road and County Road 19 (Smithtown Crossing)
is relatively centered in the City of Shorewood. The City considers the area surrounding the
intersection to be somewhat of a northern gateway to the community. As such, considerable
time, energy and money have been invested to enhance the area. The City has developed a
"civic campus" including the Shorewood Public Works Facility, the South Lake Public Safety
Building, the South Shore Community Center, and a newly remodeled City Hall. Badger Park
and the Gideon Glen Conservation Open Space area provide active and passive recreational
opportunities for the area, and proximity to the Lake Minnetonka Regional LRT Trail provides
pedestrian and bicycle access for South Lake Minnetonka residents. Finally, the intersection
itself was redesigned and reconstructed in 2005.
To date, private investment adjacent to Smithtown Crossing has not kept up with public
investment. Commercial properties in the area are characterized as disjointed, with buildings
that are low- valued and underutilized and, in many cases do not comply with current Shorewood
zoning standards. In this regard, the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan has identified the area as
being prime for redevelopment.
In order to facilitate redevelopment that makes better use of land, better serves the residents of
the community, enhances tax base, reflects the quality and character of the community, and is
commensurate with the highly desirable, highly visible Smithtown Crossing area, the City has
begun exploring options and incentives to assist the area in realizing its true potential.
The Planning Commission began working on the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study in
early 2010. The study area boundary was established as shown on Figure 1, preceding, and
Figures 2 and 3 in the following pages. The study area contains a total of 10.9 acres and consists
of three locations: 1) the northwest quadrant of the intersection; 2) the southeast quadrant of the
intersection; and 3) the area north of County Road 19, just west of Shorewood Lane. The study
focused primarily on the northwest quadrant of the intersection, which contains anywhere from
4.52 to 6.56 acres, depending on how far west a project might extend. The southwest quadrant
of the intersection contains another 2.74 acres. The area to the north of County Road 19 has 1.59
acres.
A brief planning inventory, examining the various uses in the district, property ownership,
zoning and values was prepared and is contained in the Appendix of this report. With the
exception of the American Legion, a retail /office building and a small, nonconforming apartment
building, the area is predominantly occupied by auto - oriented uses (sales, auto repair, fuel
station, car wash, etc.). Two single - family homes are also included in the study area. 0
O
10
0
Page 1
00��0 00 W0
0 0
0"/) F
m
CYJ
Gideon -Glen C-) .
(Conservation/Open Spacey�_,
Smithtown nj
R ed'ey ipment
+ 7
i -'- SlItu \ dy,- x-e
(See�Appendixfor� -�
detailed lot inf+or-mation
Shorewood, Y SouVIL'pke
Ton ka Bay i e 1
Public Works Public •Safety
W .0,10 . 1 1 1 .: 1 1 i
8ac 1 1,
WE
AM.;
■
f �
I'`V
_ r
�
9
OWL
i
Ise
s
- r
1
-•1`
1
s a _
jar
�
s . eo n - Glen
T - r
.
ega
r + 4 '. � . i � X.{ . � • ! is 7
C Feet
Iment ., y
low
smi
I sm
r 1
1
t
1
Op
I �
s
1.•I •
s
� 4
. t
,00p �+ •
low .. i
T
i #
.` d
Figure 3
Planning Issues
One of the first steps taken by the Planning Commission in its study was to identify planning
issues associated with the study area. Following are a list of issues identified to date. These are
also illustrated on Figure 2 on the following page.
• Study Area west boundary (it was decided that this edge of the study area could
remain somewhat flexible, in the event a developer chooses to acquire one or more of
the single - family residential lots that lie west of the commercial area)
• Land uses (considerable interest has been expressed in exploring mixed use for the
Study Area
• Buffering and land use transitions
• Taking advantage of views into Gideon Glen while preserving natural views from
across and within Gideon Glen
• Access (vehicular) — to and from County Road 19 and to and from Smithtown Road
• Internal circulation — vehicular and pedestrian
• Phasing
• Redevelopment of lots on an individual basis versus unified /coordinated
development*
• Future development of golf course property
• Land use and zoning of single - familly residential property at 24250 Smithtown Road
• Pedestrian connection from Badger Park to north side of Smithtown Road
• Drainage **
*The table on the following page sets forth the advantages of unified /coordinated
redevelopment versus a piece -meal approach.
* *Note. This is a significant issue and supports the concept of a unified development
effort. The City Engineer advises us that properties within the study area not only
need to address rate control, but also the new volume of water that comes from
redevelopment. This supports the concept of a coordinated redevelopment scenario
versus piece -meal redevelopment of individual sites. Individually, the properties
would have to come up with their own ponding for each site.
C
0
O
10
0
Page 7
00 W0
0 0
Unified /Coordinated versus Piece -meal Redevelopment
Smithtown Crossing
Unified /Coordinated
Maximize exposure to County Rd 19
Maximize view of Gideon Glen
Efficient drainage
P.U.D. provides flexibility relative to
internal setbacks - more efficient use of
land
Pipet--meal
Only two properties front on County Rd 19
Two properties - no view
Each site provides its own seperate pond
for rate control and volume storage; more
land consumed by ponding
Strict adherence to setback requirements
Opportunity for joint -use parking
Opportunity for 75% hardcover (site is
large enough for on -site treatment)
Consolidated access
Project identity - "Smithtown Crossing"
Possibility of City assistance (e.g. T.I.F.)
Pedestrian access /circulation
Each site provides its own parking,
resulting in less efficient land use and
circulation
Maximum 66% hardcover (individual sites
too small for treatment solutions)
Potential congestion from multiple access
points
Each business on its own
Each owner on its own
Less attractive to pedestrians (crossing
driveways and parking lots
Efficiency of landscaping Each site on its own
Page 8
Redevelopment Guiding Principles
Having identified issues associated with the study area, it was determined that a clear picture of
what the City hopes to see for the subject area should be formulated — for lack of a better term,
we will use "redevelopment guiding principles ". This is the point where we step back and view
the area as we would like to see it, say in the next 10 -15 years. The redevelopment guiding
principles should be a positive expression of what the City wants, rather than a list of what we
don't want to see.
The proposed redevelopment guiding principles starts with the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan,
which identified an interest in the following:
• Unified /coordinated development; assembly of land parcels
• Planned unit development
• Possible mixed use — commercial /residential
• Opportunity for additional senior housing
• Predominant retail and office uses versus service commercial*
*Since this was written, the Planning Commission held a meeting with real estate
development professionals, the consensus of whom indicated that there may not be a strong
market for retail. It was suggested that a stronger market may exist for personal service
commercial (i.e. banking, health and beauty services, etc.).
In addition to the above, the Planning Commission discussed other factors such as
pedestrian/bicycle circulation and connectivity, architectural treatment (e.g. residential character
and natural materials), natural landscaping, and compatibility with surrounding land use
activities as parameters for the redevelopment of the area. From this, the following was derived:
Redevelopment Guiding Principles — Smithtown Crossing
The project will result in a unified /coordinated pattern of development.
2. The use or mixture of uses of property in the study area shall be based on market needs
and analysis of detailed traffic study.
Site design should take advantage of views afforded by existing natural areas and parks.
4. Uses within the study area shall be arranged to create a transition between higher
intensity commercial development and surrounding lower density housing. Any use of
land not currently zoned for commercial development shall be limited in building height
to 35 feet or two and a half stories. The westerly edge of the project area shall be densely
landscaped to enhance the transition.
0
Page 11 00 W
E 0
5. Any housing component should add to and enhance the variety of housing choices in the
community.
6. Commercial activities should serve not only the residents of the project area, but the
community as a whole.
7. Access to and egress from, and circulation within Smithtown Crossing must be
pedestrian/bicycle friendly.
8. Useable, inviting outdoor spaces shall be integrated into the development.
9. Landscaping will be natural and substantial, diminishing parking lot massing and
softening and framing buildings on the site.
10. Attractive and articulated architecture with pitched rooflines and natural materials will
reflect the residential character and quality of the community.
11. Reduction of building mass may be achieved by using a combination of the following
techniques:
a. Variations in roofline and form.
b. Use of ground level arcades and covered areas.
C. Use of protected and recessed entries.
d. Inclusion of windows on elevations facing streets and pedestrian areas.
e. Retaining a clear distinction between roof, body and base of building.
O
0
Page 12 M R (D) W IM
E 0
Smithtown Crossing — Plan
From the very beginning of this study, it has been realized that properties within the study area
may develop or redevelop individually. It is not the City's intent to stand in the way of property
owners wishing to improve their land. Individual site development will be expected to adhere to
the development regulations currently in place.
What is the intent of this study is to encourage a higher level of quality than might occur with
piecemeal development under the current rules. In this regard, there are a number of ways that
the City can reduce regulatory obstacles and even incite or reward development built to the
higher standards envisioned by this study. The greater a project complies with the City's vision
for the area, the greater the incentive with respect to zoning flexibility and even City
participation in the project.
Zoning Parameters
With the exception of the public facilities located north of County Road 19 and the three
residential properties in the study area, all of the subject lots are zoned C -1, General Commercial
(see Figure 4). Individual lots must adhere to the standard of that zoning district, including
height limitations. Any coordinated development of several or all of the subject properties
should be done by Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.), using the C -1 District and the R -313,
Multiple - Family Residential District as the underlying standards for the project. Any use of
currently zoned residential lots shall be residential with building heights not exceeding 35 feet
and two and a half stories.
The single- family residential property on the north side of County Road 19 is surrounded by
commercial development in Tonka Bay and public facilities (public works, police and fire). The
City should be open to a rezoning of this site to R -C, Residential /Commercial.
Update Regulations
While the City's current P.U.D. provisions could be used to process a mixed use type of project,
involving a mixture of commercial and residential development, it is recommended that the
Shorewood Zoning Code be amended to specifically address mixed use. This update of the Code
would include provisions tying flexibility and reward to the level of compliance with City's
vision for the area. One such provision might include an allowance for additional building
height based on architectural design and extent and type of landscaping. For certain types of
housing in a mixed use project, higher densities than what current regulations allow might be C
considered where it could be demonstrated that the density would be compatible with
surrounding uses and where resulting traffic volumes would not adversely affect existing streets.
In this regard, a mixed use project would be required to submit a traffic study as part of its
application submittals. 00
Design Criteria
10
Inherent to any mixed use development project is attention to pedestrian and bicycle circulation. 1
0
Site planning should include both internal circulation as well as connections to existing and R
Page 13 2 M O� RR � 00 W Im
E 0
41V
it
R-C e�
C -1
C-+
._
R07
ille
Smithtown Crossing
Redevelopment
Zoning Districts
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
R -1A
Single - Family (40,000 sq. ft.)
R -1 B
Single - Family (30,000 sq. ft_)
R -1C
Single - Family (20,000 sq. ft.)
R - 1 D
Single Family (10,000 sq. ft
R -2A
Single/Two- Family (20, 000/30, 000 sq. ft.)
R -2B
Single/Two- Family (15, 000/20, 000 sq. ft.)
R - 2C
Single/Two Family (10 sq.ft.)
R - 3A
Two Family/Multiple (20, 000/30, 000 sq. ft)
R -3B
Two- Family/Multiple (75,000120,000 sq- ft.)
1: COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
J
U
N
A
0 200 400 800
Feet
Shorewood Planning Department
46112
Smithtown Crossing
Study Area
R=1A
BIN
nt
M1
Figure 5
C -1
General Commercial
C -2
Service Commercial
SPECIAL
DISTRICTS
L -R
Lakeshore- Recreational
PUD
Planned Unit Development
s Shoreland
Go
General Development
RD
Recreational Development
NE
Natural Environment
FL
Fire Lane
Figure 5
future trails and sidewalk systems. Sidewalks built with the reconstruction of the intersection in
2005 will ultimately provide connection with the LRT Trail to the north and to the City
Hall/Badger Field complex south and east of the intersection. The County Road 19 Corridor
Study illustrates an entire network of pedestriartlbicycle segments to the east of the study area.
Smithtown Crossing should link to that system as well as extend west along Smithtown Road to
the westerly extent of the project.
Landscaping has long been
recognized as an effective
means of creating buffers,
diminishing the impact of
building massing, enhancing
architecture and screening
and cooling of parking lots.
The County Road 19
Corridor Study, adopted in
2003 sets forth concepts for
streetscaping along the
corridor as it passes through
Shorewood. These concepts
should be implemented on
both the County Road 19 and
Sm- ithtown Road sides of the
project, converging at the
northwest corner of the
intersection. This public
right -of -way area should be redone and incorporated into the Smithtown Crossing design.
Current landscape practice focuses on natural designs that require low to no maintenance,
minimizing sprinkling and conserving water. Developers hoping to achieve additional density or
building height will want to
substantially exceed the
minimum landscaping
requirements currently found in
the City's zoning regulations,
both in terms of size and
quantities of plant materials.
Page 17
Site planning and landscaping
for Smithtown Crossing should
incorporate some sort of public
space or common area that
invites visitors to spend a little
more time in the area, relaxing
or connecting with others.
0
L (D) V +1
RI
Evample: f andwaping, vt,-reeiiinglcnolioig ptirkiiig lots
Example: Lanificaping, public space - -
It is not the intent of this report to
dictate a certain type of architecture.
This does not, however, diminish the
importance of this critical design
element. Shorewood has in the past
placed great value on buildings that
are in keeping with the residential
character of the community. While
no formal definition of "residential
character" exists, certain
characteristics have been identified
that begin to describe what the City
is looking for. Well articulated
buildings with pitched rooflines,
tiered levels and interesting
shadowing go far in mitigating the
visual impact of larger, taller articulation
buildings. Similarly, features such
as awnings, natural building materials, balconies and lighting help to diminish building masses
and create a human scale for the project. And, as mentioned in the previous section, nothing
does more to soften and enhance a building than landscaping.
At present, the C -1 zoning district allows buildings to be three stories or 40 feet in height,
whichever is least. The visual impact of such a building can be mitigated by the means discussed
above as well as by building placement on the property and use of the natural terrain. For
example, the topography found in the northwest
quadrant of the intersection may lend itself to
partially below -grade levels or underground
parking.
00
0
g0
Page 18
Example: Architecture— diminish visual impact of
building height with construction materials, landscaping
Example: Architecture pitched roofs, natural materials, shadow,
Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Concept
From the beginning of this study the City has deliberately avoided trying to dictate the design of
the site or the buildings to be located within the project area. Rather, this plan is intended to
convey the character of development the City wishes to see in the Study Area. During various
public meetings at which the study was presented, it became clear that those interested in the
project wanted more visual depictions of what was being described. Preceding pages include
photographic examples of the types of buildings and landscaping the City desires. While no
attempt has been made to produce an illustrative site plan for the Study Area, the Concept Sketch
on the following page attempts to show the potential functional relationships of the various
elements of future development.
C
O
0
Page 19 0
E
r
a
Feed
I
i
Smithtown Crossing
R edevelopment
I LL Concept Sketch
�d
`Pubiic`JV ®rks Publi ;.
LO
i
- - - r F
��V_q�•
-art-. ` � -.
1t '�
I �-
r'7
_
- �• -.. /-
-_ -
F
J
-' gagger Park
R
Figure 6
City Participation
While the plan for the redevelopment of Smithtown Crossing includes reducing regulatory
obstacles, that alone may not be enough to entice the type of development envisioned in this
study. Since the City's vision for the area requires development to substantially exceed current
regulations (e.g. extra landscaping, architectural standards, acquisition and combination of land
parcels), it will likely take some investment on the City's part. The greater the City's
involvement, the greater say the City has in how the property develops. Following are possible
ways in which the City can be involved.
Tax Increment Financing
Early on in the conversations about redeveloping the Smithtown Crossing area, tax increment
financing (TIF) was mentioned as a possible tool for enticing developers to invest in a project.
TIF is a financing tool that uses future gains in tax revenues to finance the cost of current
improvements, including - in some cases- writing down the cost of land. Shorewood has used
TIF successfully in the past when building the intersection at Old Market Road and Highway 7.
In that case, the City opted for a "pay -as- you -go" method where any future risk is assumed by
the developer. This is what is recommended for Smithtown Crossing. While there are projects
done involving cities assuming some or all of the risk, this method is not recommended for the
Smithtown Crossing redevelopment project.
Acquisition of Land
One of the most difficult obstacles to overcome in a redevelopment project is assembling land
for a unified, cohesive development. It is strongly suggested that, as parcels within the
redevelopment area become available on the market, the City consider acquiring them. These
properties should be viewed as an investment in the redevelopment and could be sold to an
ultimate developer "at cost" as a demonstration of the City's commitment to the project. This
would also provide leverage toward the City having more input on the type, quality and design of
the project.
Economic Development Authority
Shorewood already has an Economic Development Authority (EDA) which has been used
successfully in the redevelopment of the property currently occupied by the South Lake Public
Safety facility. The EDA can be useful with regard to tax increment financing as well as in the C
acquisition of property. Assisting in the correction of problem soils is yet another function of an
EDA. I'
O
10
0
Page 23 0 W Im
E 0
Appendix
0
O
00R�00w0
0 0
24250 Smithtown Rd Justinak S. F. Res R -2A 69154 1.59 $216,000 $243,000 $459,000
24200 Smithtown Rd
Smithtown Crossing Planning Inventory.xls
Prop. Address
Owner
Use
Zoning
Area (Sq.Ft.)
Area (Ac.)
Land Val.
Struct. Val.
Tot. Val. Notes
24620 Smithtown Rd
City of Shorewood
Vacant
R -1C
45731
1.05
$150,000
$150,000
24590 Smithtown Rd
Hirsch
S.F. Res
R -1C
43303
0.99
$115,000
$186,000
$301,000
24560 Smithtown Rd
American Legion
Vacant
C -1
42107
0.97
$200,000
n/a
$200,000
24530 Smithtown Rd
Femrite
M.F. Res
C -1
14632
0.33
$90,000
$295,000
$385,000 Nonconforming use
24470 Smithtown Rd
Triple B Equities (Bury)
Auto Sales
C -1
41258
0.95
$410,000
$190,000
$600,000 Substandard building
24450 Smithtown Rd
American Legion
Bar /Rest.
C -1
51431
1.18
$264,000
$136,000
$400,000
5680 County Rd 19
American Legion
Fuel Station
C -1
15804
0.36
$195,000
$105,000
$300,000
5660 County Rd 19
HopHerr Props (Heartbr)
Ret. /Office
C -1
31694
0.73
$355,000
$45,000
$400,000
Subtotals
285960
6.56
$1,744,000
$1,017,000
$2,761,000
24365 Smithtown Rd
T C Stores (Oasis)
C Store /Fuel
C -1
62970
1.45
$770,000
$170,000
$940,000
24285 Smithtown Rd
Moore
Auto Sales
C -1
18199
0.42
$171,000
$169,000
$340,000
24275 Smithtown Rd
Howe
Auto Repair
C -1
17871
0.41
$166,000
$154,000
$320,000
24245 Smithtown Rd
Wash N Roll
Car Wash
C -1
20218
0.46
$177,000
$138,000
$315,000
Subtotals
119258
2.74
$1,284,000
$631,000
$1,915,000
24250 Smithtown Rd Justinak S. F. Res R -2A 69154 1.59 $216,000 $243,000 $459,000
24200 Smithtown Rd
Smithtown Crossing Meetings
The Shorewood Planning Commission has spent many months preparing the Smithtown
Crossing Redevelopment Study. Following is a list of Planning Commission meetings at which
the Study was discussed. Some of the "milestone" meetings have been highlighted and
summaries of selected meetings are provided below. It is worth noting that some of the early
discussions referred to Planning District 3 from the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan.
February 17, 2009
April 7, 2009
January 19, 2010
February 16, 2010
March 2, 2010
March 16, 2010
April 6, 2010 Tax Increment Financing (T.LF.)
April 20, 2010 Vision Statement
May 4, 2010 Joint Meeting with City Council
May 18, 2010 Meeting with Landowners *
June 29, 2010 Meeting with Developers (Forum)
July 20, 2010
August 17, 2010 Discussion of Mobile Tour * **
September 14, 2010 Mixed Use
February 15, 2011
March 1, 2011
*The Planning Commission met with a number of owners of land within the study area. The
purpose of the meeting was to get feedback from them on issues related to redevelopment and to
illustrate to them the advantages of a unified, cohesive redevelopment versus a piecemeal
approach. The consensus of those attending the meeting appeared to agree with the direction the
Commission was proposing.
* *Early on it was determined that input from people who actually do projects was important to
the ultimate success of the project. A panel of development professionals was asked to comment
on the Vision Statement and the concept drawings that had been reviewed by the Commission.
The panel members all commented on the materials and then answered questions from the
Meetings (continued)
Commission. The general consensus of the panel was that Shorewood's development
regulations are in need of revision in order to make a redevelopment project viable. Four key
points were made:
1) The site is not well suited for retail commercial. Rather, some sort of service
commercial development (e.g. banking, personal services, possibly office, etc.)
should be expected.
2) The City should consider allowing something higher than the three stories allowed
under the current regulations.
3) Whether the housing element was market or senior, Shorewood's current density
limits are too low.
4) In this economy, redevelopment may not occur for some time.
** *The Commission spent an evening visiting mixed use and senior housing projects. There
was consensus that two projects in Golden Valley, Town Square and the Commons, contained
elements that would be desirable for Smithtown Crossing. A mixed use redevelopment project
in Glen Lake (Minnetonka) illustrated how the impact of building height could be mitigated with
construction materials, siting, and landscaping. Some of the photographs used in this report
came from the mobile tour.
NORTH �' /� T0NKA L -j
— BAY I \\ I Solberg ]EXCIELSIOR
PLEASANT AVE. \ Point
i g1RC J _ \ Duck Frog
MR 10, ° FW ORCHARD Q a �\ Island Island
J J
RD. ��;' CIR. DR. J \\ Q
YN � \
C � QO v r , -- AMLEE RD.
�P� Cl�' I C�7 > VALLEYWO OD LA. C r
1 � � NELSINE
SUNNY VALE DR
z GILD ROSE LA. a ° Q o \ ° /q ° v
U ARBOR w O w �(® a _ J ° = w 1 ( I Q �q
Ui I9 °
REEK I o s ° a ' a
H �/ _° 43 ONKA u <� —
;�RDING AV E. a
LA. ® ° r 10/ wl STAR
�r Y yo � M TO < a CIR. 1 SMITH TOWN GILCEI (� o � \ (
2� J � � �p� ` I �480 — RD _ i . � C I t y CLOVER CURVE °o 9a � \�
SCD I / �'� w z 1 V a O°I HQ�1 �° LA M C<gI N
- - Or z I m m 1 ECHO EL R i
�� SMITH , .
� ��� :5 a 1MANN LA. RIQ POINT O��o _ ACADEMY < A VE. Y Cj
PG A
CT. PARK °
w a ( �� ° D1 IIQ w vo w ST, a
a oQ Y I r . l J o w °p L i ° w w z 7 �' j - ' -- �--�
w WO > w I O _— O w z C AL � 1 z = a �� a/ ti� a ti- C.q BRACKETT
w S. L C
ER
, MAPLE z v m C VI W w I v a > IIQ� ti ° \�� A tij Q
:r: DR. w S g / qy �� MURRAY ST.
U AVE. SHOR Ew00D OAKS Q I n Q 6 �p o 4 �TF a FLOWER STRA
= d OAK LEAF J TR. P I ✓ �� 0 0 Dp C \ 9 o
M F
PARK O — — -- WILTSEY LA �\ — I 0 SvM IT v V
— _ A V o Q ,
W.
washca \Till I7N E
R23W R23W 117 r
33134 34 U
T4 1 s
2009 Traffic Volumes
Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation
#10A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Logo for Trail Projects
Meeting Date: October 22, 2012
Prepared by: Julie Moore, Communications Coordinator
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
CC: William Joynes, Interim City Administrator
Brad Nielsen, Planning Director
Background: City staff continues to work to find grant opportunities for trails and trail connections in
accordance with the trail plan developed as part of the current CIP. The grants are very competitive and
a good marketing plan for the trail system increases the chance of being awarded grant dollars for
projects. To better market the overall trail plan, both to potential funding sources and to the public, staff
recommends the city work with a local graphic designer, Elise Kling Marty, to develop a simple logo that
will tie all trail projects together over the years. Ms. Kling Marty restructured the Arctic Fever logo, and
is willing to work with city representatives to develop a simple trail logo for $250.
Because this project is time critical with grant deadlines of November 1, staff recommends the designer
begin work on a logo immediately. Staff also recommends that Brad Nielsen, Planning Director, myself,
and Councilmember Laura Hotvet, or another council representative, make the decision on the final logo
design.
This logo will also be introduced as part of the trail marketing campaign at the November 15 Smithtown
Road Trail Open House.
Financial: Funds are available in the Recreation Budget to cover this expense.
Options:
1) Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $250 for the development of a simple trail
logo design by Elise Kling Marty, and authorize staff members Brad Nielsen, Julie Moore and
Council Member Hotvet to approve the final logo design.
2) Do not authorize the development of a trail logo.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends Council authorize the expenditure of funds
in the amount of $250 for the development of a simple trail logo design by Elise Kling Marty, and
authorize staff members Brad Nielsen, Julie Moore and Council Member Hotvet to make the final logo
design decision.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Communications Coordinator Julie Moore will immediately contact Ms. Kling Marty to begin work on a
logo design.
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
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 22 2012
To: Mayor Lizee
Council Members
From: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Re: September, 2012 Monthly Budget Report
The 2012 General Fund budget continues to track about where we would expect it to be at this
point in the year — a little over last year's revenue and expenditures totals. Non -tax revenues at
this point are 85.5% of the non -tax revenue budget. Overall expenditures are at 63.2% of budget
which 4.4% higher than the prior three year average of 58.8% but slightly lower than last year.
REVENUES
• License and permit revenues are above last year, in fact exceeding budget for the full
year.
• Charges for service exceed budget primarily because of unbudgeted tree sale revenues.
EXPENDITURES
• Administration — The total expenditures are over budget because of salary allocations and
the payment Mr. Heck received for accumulated leave time, unemployment for the
position eliminated last year, and because budget allocations didn't change when salary
increases were approve in January.
• Finance — Materials and supplies are over budget because the annual support agreements
for the financial software came in higher than budgeted.
• Municipal Buildings — The insurance costs always come at the beginning of the year and
they make up the majority of the budget.
• Police and Fire - are on budget.
• Public Works — about on track as most of the road repair materials have been purchased
at this point in the year.
• Snow and Ice — lack of snow this spring should keep this under budget.
• Parks Maintenance — this should be about on budget by the end of the year as the
department personnel begin to spend more time on other Public Works activities and less
on direct park work.
• Recreation Programs — expenditures should be well under budget due to time allocations
and much less contractual service being used than was budgeted.
Please contact me or Mr. Joynes if you have any questions.
Attachment: September Monthly Budget Spreadsheet
Monthly Budget Report
September 30, 2012
TOTAL
YTD
YTD
2012
% of 2012
Expected Variance
Personnel
2011
September
Adopted
Annual
% of 2012 (Negative)
Year to Date Overview
Actual
2012
Budget
Budget
Budget or Positive
REVENUE
31
Council
39
108.8%
Property Taxes
2
2
4
51.0%
50.3%
Licenses and Permits
130
127
109
117.0%
95.7%
Intergovernmental
70
35
70
50.3%
100.0%
Charges for Service
36
52
35
148.5%
88.0%
Fines and Forfeitures
28
36
54
67.5%
67.0%
Miscellaneous
41
32
63
51.1%
52.0%
Transfers from other funds
-
-
40
0.0%
0.0%
TOTAL
2
2
5
52.8% 50.9% $41
Personnel
284
333
85.5%
EXPENDITURES
Materials and Supplies
12
14
Department
59.3%
Support and Services
31
Council
39
108.8%
Total
Personnel
12
12
16
75.0%
Materials and Supplies
684
233
3
7.8%
Support and Services
56
50
86
58.2%
Transfers
1
Materials and Supplies
13
7
Total
71
63
119
52.7% 69.7% $20
Administration
Personnel
289
292
319
91.5%
Materials and Supplies
12
14
24
59.3%
Support and Services
31
43
39
108.8%
Total
333
349
383
91.2%
71.3% ($76,368.10)
Finance
Personnel
121
96
128
74.9%
Materials and Supplies
7
7
7
108.7%
Support and Services
12
6
9
71.3%
Total
140
110
144
76.4%
70.7% ($8,257.03)
Professional Services
170
164
199
82.6%
86.0% $6
Planning and Zoning
Personnel
123
130
170
76.6%
Materials and Supplies
156
-
655
0.0%
Support and Services
5
3
9
34.1%
Total
128
133
180
74.1%
69.0% ($9,204.23)
Municipal Building - City Hall
Materials and Supplies
39
29
16
177.4%
Support and Services
100
144
157
91.4%
Capital Outlay
1
2
-
Transfers
-
-
102
0.0%
Total
141
175
276
63.6%
27.3% ($100,305.00)
Police
Support Services
748
741
989
75.0%
Capital (Public Safety Bldg)
172
168
225
75.0%
Total
921
910
1
75.0%
75.0% ($101.25)
Fire
Support Services
252
248
332
74.8%
Capital (Public Safety Bldg)
203
208
277
75.0%
Total
455
457
610
74.9%
75.0% $614.25
Inspections
Personnel
89
84
118
72.0%
Materials and Supplies
154
-
200
0.0%
Support and Services
2
3
5
59.4%
Total
91
88
123
71.3%
71.3% $19.62
City Engineer
Personnel
72
58
90
64.8%
Materials and Supplies
409
144
200
72.0%
Support and Services
8
8
11
73.5%
Total
81
67
103
65.8%
65.3%
($466.76)
Public Works Service
Personnel
294
294
418
70.2%
Materials and Supplies
179
98
172
57.2%
Support and Services
83
91
134
68.2%
Transfers
-
-
750
0.0%
Total
557
484
1
32.8%
48.2%
$226
Snow and Ice
Personnel
33
15
55
27.4%
Materials and Supplies
14
10
45
22.7%
Total
48
25
100
25.3%
46.3%
$21
Parks Maintenance
Personnel
113
81
100
80.3%
Materials and Supplies
14
15
18
85.7%
Support and Services
66
23
26
89.2%
Total
195
120
145
82.6%
69.7%
($18,870.36)
Recreation Programs
Personnel
30
68
43.9%
Materials and Supplies
1
1
78.1%
Support and Services
14
34
41.5%
Transfers
-
42
0.0%
Total
-
45
146
31.1%
69.7%
$56
Unallocated
-
103
-
0.0%
Total Expenditures
3
3
5
63.2%
58.8%
Net Revenue less Expenditures
(632,060)
(587,104)
(87,435)
Note: The balanced budget includes the use of $87,435 of fund balance in Transfers in the Revenue
section.
479 680 201322.00
1: (2 #12B.1.
U2 MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject:
Minnetonka Family Collaborative Council Role
Meeting Date:
October 22, 2012
Prepared by:
William S. Joynes, Interim City Administrator
Attachment:
Minnetonka Family Service Collaborative Strategic Plan 2011 -2013
Background
Council Member Hotvet requested this item be placed on the meeting agenda for discussion to
determine if an official committee position for the Council be added to serve on the Minnetonka Family
Collaborative Council. Background information is included below and is attached.
Minnetonka Familv Collaborative Council Role:
The Collaborative Council is responsible for overall policy and direction of the MFSC. The Collaborative
Council acts very similarly to a nonprofit board where budget, work plan and fiscal controls are all
approved by the Council. Responsibility for day -to -day operations is delegated to the Collaborative
Coordinator(s) and committees. Stakeholder groups that should be represented on the Council include:
schools, law enforcement, faith community, parents, youth, health plans, community providers, elected
community leadership, and the business sector. The group meets 6 times a year for 1 -1.5 hours per
meeting.
Council Action:
Determine if an official Committee position for the Council be established for the Minnetonka Family
Collaborative Council.
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
Minnetonka Family Service Collaborative
Strategic Plan 2011 -2013
Final
January 2011
Vision
Children, youth, and families thrive in a vibrant community with full access to resources and support
services.
Mission
To support and enhance the well being of children, youth, and families in the Minnetonka School
District through partnerships within the community.
Core Beliefs
• All children, youth, and families have both strengths, and needs for support.
• Early identification and prevention of problems is the most effective long -term approach.
• The entire community has a stake in the health and welfare of its members.
• Effective collaboration depends on relationships that are mutually respectful and beneficial.
• Needs are most effectively identified and met at the local level.
• Resources are shared and allocated based on community needs.
• To address community needs means improving existing programs and the systems that
support them.
Philosophy
We...
• Are mission - driven.
• Are accessible and responsive.
• Follow best and promising practices in our work.
• Are mindful of community needs and cultural diversity /inclusion.
• Operate with transparency, with accountability, and cultural competency.
• Respect and honor confidentiality and data privacy.
Beneficiaries
• Children, youth and families
Community partners
• human /social services community organizations
• schools
• city, county, and state government agencies
• community leaders and members
1
Priority Issues
1. Lack of reliable data on existing and emerging community needs
2. Unmet emotional and social health needs
3. Unstable financial and community support for programs and services for children /youth and
families
Strategic Objectives
1. Identify needs based on community demographics and other factors.
Outcome. Relevant beneficiary data shapes community programs and resource allocations to
better meet the needs of existing and new populations.
Strategies:
a. Identify coalition partners to lead the effort
b. Partner with research /data collection expertise to determine scale and scope of plan,
being mindful of key issues of access, quality, and sustainability.
c. Identify and secure resources to support the plan
d. Partner and lead, as appropriate, with conducting community -wide needs
assessment(s)
e. Collect, evaluate and disseminate data /themes
f. Take action based on plan's recommendations
2. Support and promote integrated models for existing emotional and social health programs and
services.
Outcome: Increase participation in emotional and social health services throughout the
community.
Strategies:
a. Identify areas for improvement or opportunities to better meet community needs
b. Share information and develop a coalition led set of strategies
c. Connect with state guidelines and other state -based best practice models
d. Explore emerging issues and identify new sources of support
e. Identify and secure resources to support the plan
f. Develop education strategies around the impact of stigma in accessing emotional and
social health services
g. Collaborate /partner with the Hennepin County Children's Mental Health Collaborative
and other related community coalitions
h. Execute plan
i. Collect, evaluate
2
3. Sustain effective integrated networks of community partners and resources
Outcome. Increased financial, in -kind and human capital dedicated to support community
programs and services.
Strategies:
a. Explore, assess, and make recommendation on the family service collaborative's
position /next steps with:
i. Securing a nonprofit status
ii. Creating a foundation
iii. Creating a dedicated fund
iv. Implement targeted fundraising with the hiring of a contract development person
b. Identify gaps in community training and help provide options to the general community
c. Identify cost effective means of providing stronger and more consistent advocacy
d. Participate in a targeted /partnered legislative support effort
3
#izB.z.
Andrew Morrow
5935 Galpin Lake Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
October 16, 2012
Dear Mayor Lizee, Shorewood City Council Members, and City of Shorewood Staff:
I am writing to ask you to fund an initial feasibility study for a Galpin Lake Road
Sidewalk/Trail. Engineer Landini has been apprised of this request. This feasibility study
will require a contracted engineer to evaluate the following:
a) Potential design(s) of such a sidewalk/trail
b) Impacts of a sidewalk/trail
c) Cost to build a sidewalk/trail
d) Next Steps
Recently, the Shorewood City Council has agreed to put the Galpin Lake Road
Sidewalk/Trail project on a priority list, and because multiple municipalities and agencies
will be involved in making this project a success, an initial feasibility plan will help us
understand the scope and costs to complete the project.
The purpose of this request is to fund only a feasibility study.
This study (and ultimate project) will require support from at least the following
municipalities and agencies:
1. City of Chanhassen (connection to existing trail)
2. City of Excelsior (connection to trail across Highway 7)
3. Mn/DOT (Highway 7 guardrail, path, and crossing)
4. Hennepin County (new Trails initiative could help fund parts of this project)
5. Carver County (Chanhassen border)
6. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (Galpin Lake impact)
7. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (retaining wall `near' Galpin Lake)
8. Minnetonka School District (Excelsior Elem and MMW `Walk -to- School' routes)
Thank you for your support.
Sincerely,
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 24, 2012
Page 11 of 14
10. GENERALINEW BUSINESS
Mayor Lizee stated a resident who lives along Galpin Lake Road is present this evening to talk about
interest he and some of his neighbors have in the City's Trail Plan.
Andrew Morrow 5935 Galpin Lake Road, stated he has four daughters, three of which who attend
Excelsior Elementary School. He noted they cannot walk or bike anywhere from their home without
being on a roadway that has a 25 miles per hour (MPH) posted speed limit. Drivers tend to travel at a
speed of around 40 mph. He expressed interest in seeing that trail connected. He stated he thought that
trail segment project could be broken into two parts. One is the Highway 7 segment from Oak Street to
Galpin Lake Road and that would be a Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) project. The
second is the segment from the City of Chanhassen border to Highway 7. He thought the first component
would add a lot of value because it would enable people who are already in the area to cross Highway 7,
noting they cannot do that today. He noted there is already a push button and a light because of the
college point extension in Galpin Lake. To utilize that for anyone coming up from Galpin Lake Road
would enable that piece. He asked Council to consider doing that one segment before 2015 which is the
timetable in the Trail Plan for when the entire segment may come up for consideration.
Mayor Lizee stated the Galpin Lake Road neighborhood has expressed interest in the past.
Councilmember Hotvet asked Mr. Morrow if he has looked at the Trail Plan. Mr. Morrow stated he
briefly looked at it this evening for the first time. Hotvet stated the Trail Plan Committee is aware that a
lot of residents in that neighborhood are interested in trails. Mr. Morrow noted a lot of young children live
in that area.
Councilmember Woodruff asked Mr. Morrow if he is suggesting that something be done with the
crossing area at Highway 7 sooner than it is planned for consideration. Mr. Morrow noted there is already
a sufficient crossing there. Mr. Morrow explained he is asking for the piece that takes a person from Oak
Street to Galpin Lake Road along Highway 7.
Woodruff stated he thought it would. be useful to have Staff contact MnDOT to find out what it would
take to get something done. He concurred with Mr. Morrow that it would be a MnDOT project because it
would be in the Highway 7 right of way. He stated he was not sure if MnDOT would expect Shorewood
to participate in the funding.
Park Commissioner Gooch Hartmann stated it was her recollection that having an overpass in that area
had been discussed at one time. Councilmember Slake] stated she thought an underpass had been
discussed. Mayor Lizee stated an underpass would have to be from the west because of the water tables in
that area, and that overpasses are extremely expensive.
Mayor Lizee stated she thought this is a great opportunity to work more with Mr. Morrow and his
neighbors as well as with the City of Excelsior because children attend the elementary school there. It
would be a wonderful community collaboration effort. She asked Mr. Morrow to provide Staff with his
contact information. Mr. Morrow noted he has given Director Nielsen that information.
Mr. Morrow stated each fall there is somewhat of annual push to get people who live in Excelsior to walk
more.
Councilmember Hotvet stated the hope is to approach the Smithtown West trail segment in partnership
with the Minnewashta Elementary School. Maybe that could set a precedent for working with the
elementary school in Excelsior.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 24, 2012
Page 12 of 14
Mr. Morrow offered to try and bring other residents and/or other entities to the table.
Councilmember Hotvet encouraged Mr. Morrow to attend the November 15, 2012, meeting about trails.
Councilmember Siakel encouraged Mr. Morrow and his neighbors to give some thought to what type of
trail he and his residents envision.
Mr. Morrow noted that Chanhassen has a trail that ends at the border with the City.
11. OLD BUSINESS
None.
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
Monthly Financial Report
Director DeJong stated the meeting packet contains a copy of the August 2012 Monthly Budget Report.
The budget is about normal for this time of the year. The packet contains a copy of snapshots of other
operating funds. He noted the Southshore Community Center (SSCC) budget is under in revenues year -
to -date and it is likely to finish the year below budget. Through August revenues were approximately
$39,000 and for the same period in 2010 and 2011 they were approximately $44,000. It is likely the
SSCC will end up over budget in expenditures because the budget was not amended to reflect the increase
in the SSCC coordinator's contract approved in January 2012.
DeJong then stated the certification letters have been mailed out to residents whose utility bills are three
or more months delinquent.
DeJong went on to state a property owner has contacted the City who is possibly interested in connecting
to the municipal water system. That resident wondered how long the connection fee could be assessed for
and what the interest rate would be for the assessment levy. He explained some municipalities assess for 5
— 10 years for things such as private utilities (e.g., from the house to the sewer system). The interest rates
vary significantly. He then explained that typically when special assessments are levied in conjunction
with a construction project where funding was from bonding the rule of thumb has been about 2 percent
over the long -term interest rate for the bond issue. He stated the only interest rate he could share with the
property owner is the 8 percent rate levied on the certification of delinquent utilities. The property owner
indicated that is not much of an incentive to connect to municipal water when he refinanced his mortgage
on his home at an interest rate less than 3 percent on a 10 -year basis. That individual asked if the City
could come up with a better interest rate.
Mayor Liz& expressed her hope that Council could agree to a more attractive interest rate. She noted the
City has moved away from the applicant coming to the Council when it would like the connection charge
assessed. She commented that she thought it had been a low rate. She asked Staff to come up with some
options for Council to consider.
Councilmember Zerby suggested having an interest rate that is tied things such as the prime rate or prime
rate plus some percent. That would make the rate competitive.
Councilmember Woodruff commented there is also a municipal bond interest rate that could be used. He
stated a previous council discussed various financing options some years ago. It is his recollection that the
id CITY OF
-, EXCELSIOR
MEMORANDUM
10/09/12 Planning Comm. - Item5(g)
Hennepin County Grant Opportunities
Re: Sidewalk and Trail Connections
Date: October 11, 2012
TO: Excelsior Park and Rec. Commission From: Lane L Braaten, City Planner
The Hennepin County Transportation Department announced and posted three possible grant
fund opportunities that may be appropriate for the City of Excelsior. The three grants which
have been posted include the 2013 Sidewalk Participation Program, the 2013 Bikeway Program
Discretionary, and the 2013 Bikeway Development Participation Program. Each of these grants
are very specific and require matching funds from the community chosen. Based on the
program eligibility, criteria, and priorities the City of Excelsior may be a strong candidate for
one, two, or all three of these grant opportunities. The three grants fit the goals of the City of
Excelsior Master Parks, Trails, and Walkways Plan and the Hennepin County Transportation Plan.
Based on a quick review of the guidelines and goals stated in each of the grant documents Staff
would recommend focusing on two areas of emphasis. The 2013 Sidewalk Participation Program
may lend itself to the area of sidewalk located on the southwest side of Oak Street extending
from Water Street to William Street. This section of sidewalk is in very bad shape and needs
replacing in order to make it more useable to pedestrian traffic. We could also extend that
request to coincide with the Master Parks Plan by including a new section of sidewalk connection
along the same side of Oak Street which would extend from William Street to Excelsior Studer
Park.
The second area that Staff recommends to be considered as part of the bikeway grant funding is
the area indicated on the Hennepin County Bicycle Gap Map extending north /northwest along
Mill Street to the regional trail. This connection, due to the narrow road surface and close
proximity of homes, may be a bit tricky, but it may be an area of significance to Hennepin
County due to its inclusion as a bicycle route gap.
There may also be an opportunity to partner with Shorewood to extend a section of trail along
the south side of State Highway 7 from our pedestrian walkway, which ends near the
intersection of Oak Street /County Road 19 and State Highway 7, to Galpin Lake Road. The
majority of this section of pedestrian walkway would be located within the City of Shorewood.
Staff requests that the Park and Recreation Commission discuss the proposed grant
opportunities, the recommendations of staff, and determine which areas should be focused on
when completing the grant applications. Staff would appreciate your input as to what areas you
see as a priority as the City works toward the goals and objectives set in the Master Parks,
Trails, and Walkways Plan.
Attachments Email provided by Cathy Rude, 2013 Sidewalk Participation Program,
2013 Bikeway Program Discretionary, 2013 Bikeway Development Participation
Program, and section of the Hennepin County Bicycle Gap Map.
Lane Braaten
From: Cathy Rude <cathyrude @live.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 12:12 PM
To: Lane Braaten
Cc: Kristi Luger; Nick Ruehl; Dave Wisdorf,jbeattie @messerlikramer.com
Subject: New Hennepin Bike / Sidewalk grants
Attachments: Hennepin County Sidewalk Participation Guidelines 10- 1- 12.docx; Hennepin County
Bikeway Discretionary (Gap Program) Guidelines 10- 1- 12.docx; Hennepin County
Bikeway Development Guidelines 10- 1- 12.docx
Lane,
Have you seen these new grant opportunities from Hennepin County to gain funding for bicycle trails and pedestrian
sidewalk infrastructure improvements? They are due November 1, 2012.
I really feel Excelsior has a great chance to be awarded something like this. The benefits to our community would be
wonderful. The Park Board has some potential matching funds. The one grant in particular is to complete
the sidewalk /bike trail gap on Mills Street from St. John's Catholic Church into Excelsior or a connection to the LRT trail. It
is a Hennepin County Road. It is highlighted as one of their trail gaps. A bike trail completion connects many parts of
Chanhassen to our downtown, the LRT, the Commons Park, two school systems as well as our new library.
A second area many community members would like to see improved is a short trail, separated from HWY 7, connecting
Galpin Road to the crosswalk intersection at Hwy 7 /County Road 19. Or maybe we use this grant to create a great trail
system in conjunction with the Forced Main Project.
What is the best way to move forward with this? Set up a meeting and bring stakeholders to the table to determine
interest, focus area, and potential for moving forward? Is a feasibility /need assessment needed? The Park Board already
discussed and supported moving forward with a Hennepin County planning grant app I shared with you. Does City
Counsel need to get involved from the start?
I am willing to put the time and effort in to get stakeholders involved and a grant application completed. I am looking for
the recommended first step to assist in a smooth, painless process. There is a strong need and want for a safe crossing
over Hwy 7 by foot or bike into Excelsior for individuals of all ages in this community.
C,athv Rude
Hennepin County
Transportation Department
1600 Prairie Drive
Medina, MN 55340
www.hennepin.us
Hennepin County Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
2013 Sidewalk Participation Program
Solicitation Guidelines
Purpose of the solicitation process: to assist in funding to develop and implement effective sidewalk
projects that extend the system of sidewalks along Hennepin County roads, provide pedestrian safety
improvements at intersections, provide ADA compliant facilities, support local plans, and support the
implementation of the Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan including the Hennepin County
Complete Streets Policy.
Goals
The primary goal of the Sidewalk Participation program is to support and enhance the network of
sidewalks along Hennepin County Roads. This program prioritizes projects that:
• Improve safety for pedestrians to support the Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan
(HC -TSP) goal of a 50% reduction in year 2000 pedestrian crashes by 2030.
• Serve a transportation purpose, increase opportunities for active living, and support the Cool
County initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
• Contribute to a denser and better connected network of sidewalks and complete streets within
Hennepin County.
• Provide access to transit service and community destinations.
Fundinq Available
A maximum of $300,000 is available for the calendar year 2013. A maximum of $50,000 is available
per project.
Eligible Applicants
Cities within Hennepin County are eligible for these funds.
Eligible locations
Sidewalk construction and reconstruction projects should be on a Hennepin County road where no
sidewalks exist along at least one side of the road or existing sidewalks are in poor condition. Curb
bump outs and crossing treatment projects should assist pedestrians in crossing intersections that
include at least one Hennepin County road. Project connections to other walkway systems should be
noted in the application.
Eligible projects
The construction of sidewalk infrastructure and crossing treatments are eligible for Sidewalk
Participation funds. Eligible project expenses include construction, repair, and reconstruction of
sidewalks, curb bump outs, and crossing treatments. Sidewalk and curb ramp designs must comply
with PROWAG guidelines.
Program criteria and priorities
Priorities for Sidewalk Participation are based on the goals of the program and on the anticipated
need and demand for the sidewalk. Priorities include:
High priority:
• Potential to improve safety /reduce crashes.
• Project readiness for construction, with priority to projects that are ready for construction in the
2013 construction season.
• Cost effectiveness, as determined by evaluation of the project cost compared to project length
and connections to the Hennepin County sidewalk network.
• Transportation purpose and connection to pedestrian trip generators, indicated by' /2 mile
proximity to origins and destinations such as:
a. Transit lines /transit centers
b. Retail centers /commercial nodes
c. Employment centers
d. Schools
e. Libraries
f. Service centers or other county facilities
g. Higher density housing
h. Parks
i. Other generators, to be described by the applicant
Medium priority:
• The project provides access across existing barriers for walking (freeways, bodies of water,
etc.).
• The project leverages Safe Routes to School or other grant funds.
Also considered:
• Community Support: synergy with City, advisory groups, other agencies, etc. for reasonable
assurance that the project has support to be constructed.
2
Cost Participation Policies
Cost participation is up to 25% to a maximum of $50,000 for any project. Ownership and maintenance
is responsibility of the applying agency.
If outside funding is also involved, county participation is limited to 25% of the local match up to a
maximum of $50,000 per construction project.
Application Timeline
October 1, 2012: Announcement and posting of applications.
November 1, 2012: Deadline for applications.
November 1 — 30, 2012: Review of applications and briefing to Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners.
December 3 -7, 2012: Board action to select recipients of funds contingent on budget approval.
December 10 -14, 2012: Applicants will be notified of the status of their application.
Agreements will go to the County Board in January or February 2013.
Project design can begin during the winter and implementation can occur as soon as the following
construction season. A project construction contract award must be made within 3 years of the date of
the funding award.
Application Process
Applicants must submit one electronic copy of the application, a map of the project limits, and relevant
plans or layouts as determined necessary by the applicant. Submit applications by November 1, 2012
at 4:00 PM to:
Rose Ryan, Pedestrian and Bicycle Planner
Hennepin County Housing, Community Works and Transit
Rose. Ryan(a)co.hennepin.mn.us
612- 348 -3009
Hennepin County
Transportation Department
1600 Prairie Drive
Medina, MN 55340
www.hennepin.us
Hennepin County Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
2013 Bikeway Program Discretionary
Solicitation Guidelines
Purpose of the solicitation process: to assist in funding to develop and implement effective bikeway
projects that eliminate gaps in the Hennepin County bikeway system, support local plans, and support
the implementation of the Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan including the Hennepin
County Complete Streets Policy.
Goals
The primary goal of the Bikeway Program Discretionary (Bicycle Gap Program) is to connect various
segments of bikeways where a short gap exists between existing bicycle facilities. This program
prioritizes projects that:
• Improve safety for bicyclists to support the Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan
(HC -TSP) goal of a 50% reduction in year 2000 bicycle crashes by 2030.
• Increase bicycling in Hennepin County to support the HC -TSP goal of doubling bicycle usage
by 2030.
• Close gaps in the Hennepin County bikeway system to support the HC -TSP goal of closing all
bikeway gaps by 2030.
• Serve a transportation purpose, increase opportunities for active living, and support the Cool
County initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
• Contribute to a denser connected network of bikeways and complete streets within Hennepin
County.
• Provide the appropriate bikeway facilities for the context of the corridor, including on- street
bikeways, off - street trails, or "full accommodation" (both on- street and off - street bikeways).
Funding Available
A maximum of $250,000 is available for the calendar year 2013. A maximum of $100,000 is available
per project.
Eligible Applicants
Cities and independent park districts are eligible for these funds.
Eligible locations
The project must be a designated gap on the most current Hennepin County Bicycle Gap map.
Eligible projects may be along Hennepin County Roads or in corridors operated by other agencies.
Project connections to other bikeway systems should be noted in the application.
Eligible projects
The construction of bicycle infrastructure is eligible for Bikeway Program Discretionary funds. Eligible
project expenses include construction of trails, bike lanes, shoulder widening, bridges, tunnels, etc.
Project design and plan preparation are eligible expenses as part of bicycle infrastructure projects.
Bikeway design must follow Hennepin County and MnDOT Bicycle Design Guidelines.
Program criteria and priorities
Priorities for the Bikeway Program Discretionary are based on the goals of the program and on the
anticipated need and demand for the facility. Priorities include:
High priority:
• Potential to improve safety /reduce crashes.
• Project readiness for construction, with priority to projects that are ready for construction in the
2013 construction season.
• Cost effectiveness, as determined by evaluation of the project cost compared to project length
and connections to the Hennepin County bicycle network.
• Transportation purpose and connection to bicycle trip generators, indicated by '/2 mile
proximity to origins and destinations such as:
a. Transit lines /transit centers
b. Retail centers /commercial nodes
c. Employment centers
d. Schools
e. Libraries
f. Service centers or other county facilities
g. Higher density housing
h. Parks
i. Other generators, to be described by the applicant
Medium priority:
• The project provides access across existing barriers for bicycling (freeways, bodies of water,
etc.).
Also considered:
Community Support: synergy with City, bicycle advisory groups, other agencies, etc. for
reasonable assurance that the project has support to be constructed.
Cost Participation Policies
Cost participation is up to 50% to a maximum of $100,000 for any project. Right -of -way, signing and
striping are also eligible project costs as part of project construction. Off - street trail ownership and
maintenance is the responsibility of the applying agency.
If outside funding is also involved, county participation is limited to 50% of the local match up to a
maximum of $100,000 per construction project.
Application Timeline
October 1, 2012: Announcement and posting of applications.
November 1, 2012: Deadline for applications.
November 1 — 30, 2012: Review of applications and briefing to Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners.
December 3 -7, 2012: Board action to select recipients of funds contingent on budget approval.
December 10 -14, 2012: Applicants will be notified of the status of their application.
Agreements will go to the County Board in January or February 2013.
Project design can begin during the winter and implementation can occur as soon as the following
construction season. A project construction contract award must be made within 3 years of the date of
the funding award.
Application Process
Applicants must submit one electronic copy of the application, a map of the project limits, and relevant
plans or layouts as determined necessary by the applicant. Submit applications by November 1, 2012
at 4:00 PM to:
Rose Ryan, Pedestrian and Bicycle Planner
Hennepin County Housing, Community Works and Transit
Rose. Ryan(a)co.hennepin.mn.us
612- 348 -3009
Hennepin County
Transportation Department
1600 Prairie Drive
Medina, MN 55340
www.hennepin.us
Hennepin County Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
2013 Bikeway Development Participation Program
Solicitation Guidelines
Purpose of the solicitation process: to assist in funding to develop and implement effective bikeway
projects that extend the Hennepin County bikeway system, support local plans, and support the
implementation of the Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan including the Hennepin County
Complete Streets Policy.
Goals
The primary goal of the Bikeway Development Participation program is to support and enhance the
Hennepin County bikeway network. This program prioritizes projects that:
• Improve safety for bicyclists to support the Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan
(HC -TSP) goal of a 50% reduction in year 2000 bicycle crashes by 2030.
• Increase bicycling in Hennepin County to support the HC -TSP goal of doubling bicycle usage
by 2030.
• Serve a transportation purpose, increase opportunities for active living, and support the Cool
County initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
• Contribute to a denser network of bikeways and complete streets within Hennepin County.
• Provide the appropriate bikeway facilities for the context of the corridor, including on- street
bikeways, off - street trails, or "full accommodation" (both on- street and off - street bikeways).
Fundinq Available
A maximum of $250,000 is available for the calendar year 2013. Funds are focused on two
categories:
1. Construction of bicycle infrastructure.
2. Feasibility studies to support future construction of bikeways on the Hennepin County system.
Studies should refine the feasibility and scope of a project and may provide information to
support the modification of the Hennepin County bikeway system. Studies should be funded
after the applicant has narrowed the list of bikeway alternatives to a few feasible options and
initial planning and community support has been established. The goal is to provide
design /construction -ready projects for future rounds of Bikeway Development Funding and
provide Hennepin County with added assurance that projects will move forward as planned.
A maximum of $20,000 is available in the feasibility study category.
Eligible Applicants
Cities and independent park agencies are eligible for these funds.
Eligible locations
The project must be adjacent to a Hennepin County Road and must be a designated route on the
most current Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation System Plan map or Bicycle Gap Study, map.
Project connections to other bikeway systems should be noted in the application.
Eligible projects
Eligible projects fall into two categories:
• Infrastructure projects such as construction of trails, bike lanes, shoulder widening, bridges,
tunnels, etc. Project design and plan preparation are eligible expenses as part of infrastructure
projects. Bikeway design must follow Hennepin County and MnDOT Bicycle Design
Guidelines.
• Feasibility studies to refine the scope of a project and determine the readiness of the project
for future rounds of funding. Feasibility studies should result in locations ready for design
and /or construction. Locations deemed feasible could apply for future infrastructure project
funds.
Program criteria and priorities
Priorities for the Bikeway Development Program are based on the goals of the program and on the
anticipated need and demand for the facility. Priorities include:
High priority:
• Potential to improve safety /reduce crashes.
• Project readiness for construction, with priority to projects that are ready for construction in the
2013 construction season.
• Cost effectiveness, as determined by evaluation of the project cost compared to project length
and connections to the Hennepin County bicycle network.
• Transportation purpose and connection to bicycle trip generators, indicated by '/2 mile
proximity to origins and destinations such as:
a. Transit lines /transit centers
b. Retail centers /commercial nodes
c. Employment centers
d. Schools
e. Libraries
f. Service centers or other county facilities
g. Higher density housing
h. Parks
i. Other generators, to be described by the applicant
Medium priority:
• The project provides access across existing barriers for bicycling (freeways, bodies of water,
etc.).
Also considered:
Community Support: synergy with City, bicycle advisory groups, other agencies, etc. for
reasonable assurance that the project has support to be constructed.
Cost Participation Policies
Infrastructure projects: participation of up to 50% to a maximum of $100,000 for any project. Right -
of -way, signing and striping are also eligible project costs as part of project construction. Maintenance
is responsibility of the applying agency.
Feasibility studies: participation of up to 50% to a maximum of $20,000 for any project.
If outside funding is also involved, county participation is limited to 50% of the local match up to a
maximum of $100,000 per construction project.
Application Timeline
October 1, 2012: Announcement and posting of applications.
November 1, 2012: Deadline for applications.
November 1 — 30, 2012: Review of applications and briefing to Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners.
December 3 -7, 2012: Board action to select recipients of funds contingent on budget approval.
December 10 -14, 2012: Applicants will be notified of the status of their application.
Agreements will go to the County Board in January or February 2013.
Infrastructure project design can begin during the winter and implementation can occur as soon as the
following construction season. A project construction contract award must be made within 3 years of
the date of the funding award. Feasibility studies must occur in the year following the award, with
expected completion by the end of 2013.
Application Process
Applicants must submit one electronic copy of the application, a map of the project limits, and relevant
plans or layouts as determined necessary by the applicant. Submit applications by November 1, 2012
at 4:00 PM to:
Rose Ryan, Pedestrian and Bicycle Planner
Hennepin County Housing, Community Works and Transit
Rose. Ryan(o
612- 348 -3009
1
1
1
1
Y ,
in
0
T
y
c
LL
�/
ll
1
�
1
N
L - - 1 O y�alllN 3l�lA
L - --
a)
0
ml'IIIN
6L
}I
o
O
O
I..L
m
ca
3NIA t
1
V/
_
LL
1
•
Y
,
1
\ W
1
3
CL
o
O
z
G
U
Y
- 6
cu
a
U)
�,
0
CD
'm
l
I
V
V
a
V
70
o
�
o
o
CU
O
f0
o
o
_
M �
W
m
O
O
o
1
1
1
1
Y ,
in
0
T
y
c
LL
�/
ll
1
�
1
L - - 1 O y�alllN 3l�lA
L - --
a)
0
ml'IIIN
6L
}I
o
O
I..L
m
3NIA t
1
V/
v 1
"d
1
•
Y
,
1
\ W
1
`
a
1
1
I
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
O/ I
1
L W.
I
� � 1
M V6£
O
O 1
1
1
i
1
1
I
1• LL
1, r
1 Y
1 �♦ � J. ° y 1 �
♦ ♦ 1 f
\ 1 ``♦ m 1
1
1
1 G
� F
/ 1
� 1
1 %
I % 1
• 1 1 ` I 1
I------------- - - - - --
i 1
1 1.
1
N
L
vI
f
1:
i
{ � I
S � 1
1.
r
L L
�J g} 1
1 fi ZT i
� 1
U
\ F i
.
r � O z
W g
e
0
1 N
1 N
h
0)
Q
m
lie
m
m
N
O
0.
m
O
C
5 C
O
3
oy