Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
02-24-14 CC Reg Mtg Agenda
CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2014 AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call B. Review Agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Special Meeting Minutes, February 3, 2014 B. City Council Executive Session Minutes, February 10, 2014 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Mayor Zerby Hotvet Siakel Sundberg Woodruff C. City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes, February 10, 2014 D. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, February 10, 2014 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 B. Shorewood Yacht Club Multiple Dock Facility License Attachments Minutes Minutes Minutes Minutes Claims List Planning Director's memo C. Approval of Cooperative Agreement for Signal System C.R. 19 and T.H. 7 Director of Public Works' memo, resolution 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken) 5. PUBLIC HEARING 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA — February 24, 2014 Page 2 of 2 7. PARKS A. Report by John Sawtell on the February 11, 2014 Park Commission meeting 8. PLANNING A. Setback Variance /Variance to Construction Standards Applicant: Dan and Trina Volbrecht Location: 5770 Smithtown Circle 9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS A. Amendment to Chapter 610 of the Shorewood City Code pertaining to Seasonal Weight Restrictions B. Authorization for Expenditure of Funds for Seasonal Load Restriction Signs 10. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS A. Amending Chapter 201 Planning Commission of the Shorewood City Code B. Amending Chapter 202 Park Commission of the Shorewood City Code C. Badger Park Solar Energy Proposal D. Boulder Cove Proposed Development — City of Chanhassen 11. OLD BUSINESS 12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. Monthly Budget Report 2. Reminder of upcoming work session on March 10th to review the current Southshore Center Agreement and discuss the Advisory Committee Proposal B. Mayor and City Council 13. ADJOURN Attachments Minutes Planning Director's memo, Resolution Director of Public Works memo, Ordinance Director of Public Works memo Planning Director's memo, Ordinance Planning Director's memo, Ordinance Planning Director's memo Planning Director's memo Finance Director's memo CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 Country Club Road • Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 • 952- 960 -7900 Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mmus • cityhall( cTdshorewood.mn.us Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday, February 24, 2014 7:00 p.m. 6:00 PM – A Council Work Session is scheduled this evening. Agenda Item 43A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval. Agenda Item 4313: Staff recommends approval of the Multiple Dock Facility license for the Shorewood Yacht Club for 2014; staff will conduct the site inspection in the early summer when the slips are occupied. Agenda Item 43C: This item adopts a resolution authorizing an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) and the City of Excelsior for replacement of the Traffic Signal Control System at the intersection of County Road 19 and State Trunk Highway 7. Agenda Item 44: Matters from the Floor— members of the public have an opportunity to address the council on an issue not on the agenda; no council action will be taken. Agenda Item 45: There are no public hearings scheduled this evening. Agenda Item 46: There are no reports or presentations scheduled this evening. Agenda Item 47A: Park Commissioner John Sawtell is scheduled to report on the February 11, 2014, Park Commission meeting. Agenda Item 48A: Dan and Trina Volbrecht were cited for erecting a vinyl accessory structure without a permit and in violation of zoning regulations. They applied for a variance that would allow them to keep the structure, which does not meet construction standards and does not comply with setback requirements. Having been shown that the property could quite easily accommodate an accessory building that does comply with Shorewood's codes, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the variances. A resolution to that effect is included in your packet. Agenda Item 49A: The City's current ordinance provides for seasonal weight restrictions from March 1 to May 1. Staff is recommending an amendment to the city code in order to establish the time period for the city's weight restrictions to coincide with Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). Executive Summary — City Council Meeting of February 24, 2014 Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item 4913: As part of the mandated sign inventory and replacement, the City had scheduled replacement of signs and had budgeted $6300 in the 2014 Capital Improvement Program for sign replacements. This item authorizes the purchase of 120 seasonal weight restriction signs in the amount of $2,862, providing that Item 9A above is approved. Agenda Item 410A: This item addresses changes to the city code as it relates to the Planning Commission membership composition, staggering of terms, and attendance requirements. Agenda Item 41OB: This item addresses changes to the city code as it relates to the Park Commission membership composition, staggering of terms, and attendance requirements. Agenda Item #lOC: As mentioned at the Council Retreat, a local company has approached the City about providing solar power for some portion of the Badger Park property (SSCC, Badger Well, warming house and City Hall). A representative from JJR Power LLC will present his proposal Monday night. Council is asked to e -mail questions you may have to the Planning Director before Monday morning so that the questions can be conveyed to the presenter in hopes of having necessary answers at the meeting. Agenda Item #lOD: A development request for approximately 13.8 acres of land, located in Chanhassen, immediately south of the south end of Strawberry Lane has been referred to the City for review and comment. The proposal includes 31 single - family lots. Staff has raised a number of issues that are recommended to be incorporated into a response letter from Shorewood to Chanhassen. Agenda Item 411: There are no items of Old Business. Agenda Items 412.A.1: The Monthly Budget Report is provided. Agenda Item 412.A.2: Reminder of the March 10th work session to review the current Southshore Center Agreement and discuss the Advisory Committee proposal. Agenda Items 41213: Mayor and City Council Members may report on recent activities. #2a CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2014 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 5:34 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Hotvet, St Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panel Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Absent: Councilmember Siakel B. Review Agenda Mayor Zerby asked that Item 5 Letter Organizations be added to the agenda. Director Brown asked that Item 6 State Hid Deicing Chemicals be added to the agenda. Zerby moved, Woodru 2. Conditional U; Applicant: uirector melsen explained tna the Minnewashta Elementary' add two classrooms and a mu,, accommodate a state mandate to increase capacity, This does use in residential zoning distri zoning district and contains 18 for Tax- the agenda as a 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:30 P.M. Woodruff, Attorney Keane; City ice Director DeJong; Planning City Engineer Hornby for Joint Power Agreement ProJectat County Road 19 and Item 7 Motion passed 4/0. ent for Building Addition Elementary School (Mtka. School District 276) Minnetonka School District 276 (the District) is proposing an addition to pool (the School), located at 26350 Smithtown Road. It is proposing to room at the north end of the building. The classrooms are being built to hiring schools to provide for all-day kindergarten. They are not intended quire a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) because schools are a conditional The school property is located in the R -1A, Single - Family Residential acres of land. In the past parking and drainage have been an issue. The District overcame the parking issue with its last addition which was in 2008. Because capacity is not being changed no additional parking is needed. The District's original plan included a small infiltration basin just north of where the addition will be located and a small increase to a pond on the very north end of the site. After working with the City Engineer and making some revisions to how the drainage gets to that retention basin there will not be a need to deal with the pond on the north end. The City Engineer has a couple of minor technical comments such as specifying what type of plants to put in the retention basin. He noted that staff and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of the C.U.P. CITY OF SHOREWOOD SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 3, 2014 Page 2 of 7 Councilmember Woodruff stated when the District last had a construction project at the School there was concern about construction traffic on Smithtown Road. He asked how that will be addressed this time. Director Nielsen explained the City Engineer has recommended there be a traffic plan including parking. Paul Bourgeois, Executive Director of Finance and Operations, stated there should be ample parking most school days and noted the parking to the west is maybe one -third full. Nielsen noted the Engineer does not want construction vehicles to travel on Strawberry Lane or Cathcart Drive. Woodruff then stated the staff report states "... the addition is not intended to increase the capacity of the school, but rather to accommodate a state mandate requiring schools to provide for all -day kindergarten." Yet, the email from Mr. Bourgeois states the District is proposing to add two classrooms and a music room. The music room is not required by the mandate. Paul Bouraeois. Executive Director of Finance and Operations. Minnetonka School District 276. thanked Council for considering their application. He explained that chorus) are currently being held in various rooms. A few years increase participation in those activities at the elementary, le accommodate that growth. Councilmember Hotvet noted that she is pleased to know Mayor Zerby stated he thought this is a Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, Adopting a Conditional Use Permit for the Expansion Road." Mayor Zerby stated he assumes staff and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Motion passed 4/0. UTION NI washta Ele ;ic activities (band, orchestra and District made a concerted effort to School needs ,the music room to -e growing. '14 -006; "A Resolution Granting entary School, 26350 Smithtown 's representatives have been working with the Nielsen responded that is correct. 3. Approval of Rate Structure for Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Charges Director DeJong explained the meeting packet contains a copy of a proposal to raise the utility rates for sanitary,sewer and stormwater as proposed by Ehlers based on the results of the rate studies it completed in the fall 6f,2013 for those two utilities. The rates need to be increased to support projects. Those two enterprise funds are dropping in cash. The quarterly sewer, residential flat rate would go from $70.00 to $72.85. The City does have a low income rate which five out of over 800 customers are on. It would go from $46.66 to $48.57. He noted that during Council's January 13, 2014, meeting he had proposed a usage based rate. He explained he supports increasing the current flat rate in the current utility billing system. He does not want to convert to a usage based rate in the current system. He recommends doing that after the new utility billing system is operational. He clarified he is proposing an increase to the sewer flat rate at this time and then going to the usage based approach for the billing in July 2014. Councilmember Woodruff stated that last fall he indicated that he did not support the concept of paying for stormwater management improvements done as part of trail construction projects out of the Stormwater Management Fund. From his perspective part of the reason the stormwater rate needs to be increased is because of that concept. His rationale for not supporting that concept is that work is only CITY OF SHOREWOOD SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 3, 2014 Page 3 of 7 being done because a trail is /was being constructed. He called the raiding of the Stormwater Fund somewhat of an artifice to find money to fund trails. He considers the utility increase proposed for stormwater to be a backdoor way of taxing the residents to build trails. He does not think it is appropriate to do that. He recommended finding another funding mechanism for trails that is upfront and to clearly identify that is what is happening. He prefers bonding for the construction of trails. He noted that if Council moves forward with paying for some stormwater improvements done as part of trail projects out of the Stormwater Management Fund there will be enough money to construct the Galpin Lake Road trail segment in 2014. Beyond that there is no money to fund trails. He stated if trails are so darn important to this Council then Council should step up and figure out as grownups how to fund them rather than hide the cost in the Stormwater Fund. Councilmember Hotvet clarified Council is not hiding any tax or fee for trail construction. She stated it is wise accounting practice to correctly label what is being paid for whether it is,part of a larger project or a project of its own. She thought it prudent to have line items which indicate What capital improvement expenses are being paid for. Councilmember Sundberg stated Council and the City have been transparent about this all ,along. The public record is very clear. She noted she is comfortable with proceeding with things as proposed. Mayor Zerby noted he had attended a number of open houses about trails which the public had been encouraged to attend. There had been numerous concerns about stormwater management issues raised by the public during those open houses. He stated he views trail projects as somewhat of a two for one because some drainage problems are solved as a part of the project. Therefore, it is only fair that some stormwater improvements are paid for out of the Stormwater Management Fund. He then stated he thinks trails are important, and Council is just moving forward with the Trail Implementation Plan. Sundberg moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 507, "An Ordinance Titled `License, Permit, Service and Miscellaneous Fees';" regarding the stormwater management utility and sanitary sewer service rate increases proposed by staff. Motion passed 311 with Woodruff dissenting. 4. Approval of the 2014 - 2023 Capital Improvement Program and 2014 Enterprise Budgets Director DeJong noted that Council and staff have discussed the 2014 — 2023 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and the 2014 Enterprise Budgets a number of times. He then noted that the copies of the Enterprise Budgets for the Seiner Fund and the Stormwater Management have incorporated the rate increases approved under Item 2 on the agenda. He recommended Council adopt the resolution approving the 2014 -2023 CIP and 2014 Enterprise Budgets. He noted all of the CIP projects scheduled for 2014 are funded. But, funding has to be increased in subsequent years. Councilmember Woodruff stated the Park Capital Improvements Fund is a problem for him. In the Park Improvements CIP there is $133,000 allocated for projects in 2014 and $413,500 in 2015. By the end of 2015 there will be a $181,000 deficit in the Fund. The path to start towards that deficit starts in 2014 because of the $118,000 allocated to start the Badger Park Improvements Project. The Fund goes into a deficit in 2015 when that project is completed. He stated Council needs to get real about how it is going to fund things rather than keep on kicking the budgetary can down the road. He then stated Council has discussed transferring the proceeds from the sale of the residential property the City had owned. That would keep the Fund from going into a deficit state in 2015. Or Council could take some of the Badger Park improvements off of the list. There should be a sound funding plan for the 2015 CIP projects. CITY OF SHOREWOOD SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 3, 2014 Page 4 of 7 Mayor Zerby clarified that the Park Capital Improvements Fund shows a positive balance of approximately $ 160,767. Councilmember Woodruff stated if you take that balance and add $42,000 to it (that amount is normally transferred from the General Fund to that Fund) and then spend the $413,500 allocated in the CIP for 2015 it ends up with a deficit of $181,000. Director DeJong clarified that Council had already agreed to transfer the proceeds from the sale of the residential property the City sold into the Park Capital Improvements Fund. Council will be asked to approve that transfer in the near future. That will be about $288,000. He explained that many of the individual improvements identified for Badger Park are not solidified. The estimated construction costs provided by WSB & Associates for the Concept 1 option for shifting tie, ball field 20 — 30 feet to the south and making improvements to the north parking lot is about $66,000, The Park Improvements CIP has allocated $100,000 in 2014 to reorient the field to east/west. If the field is moved to the south a little there is a possibility new lights would not be needed; the existing lights could J4$t be refocused. That would be a potential savings of about $70,000 for Badger, Park improvements in 2415. Therefore, it is possible the funding needed for Badger Park may be there. He noted a long -range plan does ,need to be developed. Councilmember Sundberg stated she has concerns about some of what is being proposed for Badger Park. She believes the whole Council does. There are a number of things that have not been finalized. She then stated the funds allocated for Badger Parks: is very fluid. She noted she will approve the CIP and Enterprise Budgets as presented with the understanding Badger Park improvements are a big issue for Council. Councilmember Hotvet expressed her agreement. She stated the Park Commission has only had one meeting this year and she was Council's liaison to that. The Commission had a lot of discussion about Badger Park improvements. Mayor Zerby stated Badger Park im his perspective a budget is a gui( approves them. He went on to state ,1 Sundberg moved, Hotvet secow Adopting the 2014 — 2023 Capital Enterprise'Budgets" as presented are definitely on the City's to do list. He then stated from ,nt. The projects will not move forward until Council vareof the challenges associated with the Park. led, Adapting RESOLUTUION NO. 14 -006, "An Ordinance Improvement Program, Capital Fund Projects Budgets and 2014 by staff with the clarifications Council has made. Councilmember Woodruff stated he is torn. He noted he does not want to vote against the budgets or against some of the Badger Parkimprovements. He suggested amending the motion to include the transfer of the proceeds from the sale of the residential property to the Park Capital Improvements Fund. Without objection from the maker or seconded, the motion was amended to include authorizing the transfer of the proceeds from the sale of the residential property located at 5795 Country Club Road from the General Fund to the Park Capital Improvements Fund. Motion passed 4/0. 5. Letter of Support for Tax - Exempt Status for Joint Power Agreement Organizations Administrator Joynes noted the meeting packet contains a copy of a draft letter from Mayor Zerby that if Council supports and approves it will be sent to State Representative Cindy Pugh and State Senator David Osmek in regards to support for state sales tax exemption for Joint Power Agreement (JPA) CITY OF SHOREWOOD SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 3, 2014 Page 5 of 7 organizations. He then noted South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) Chief Litsey has made an effort to try and get the State legislators to understand this issue. There seems to be some movement on the issue. Staff placed a copy of an update from the League of Minnesota Cities regarding actions that are occurring related to that. Mayor Zerby stated this is an important issue and he had stated so before. He then stated that he has heard some comments on the legal side that cities are already tax exempt so this should not be a legal issue anyway. It does need to be clarified at the State level. He thanked Chief Litsey for pushing this forward. He stated he hopes Council will support sending the letter. Councilmember Woodruff noted he supports sending the letter of support. And, that the LMC and Metro Cities support the tax exemption for joint power organizations. He stated in addition to the two public safety organizations the City also belongs to Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission which is also a joint power organization. Woodruff moved, Sundberg seconding, endorsing sending the letter from Mayor Zerby to State Representative Cindy Pugh and State Senator David Osmek asking them to support state sales tax exemption for Joint Power Agreement (JPA) organizations. Motion passed 4/0. 6. State Highway 7 Trunk Highway Project at County Road 19 Director Brown stated there are some chalenl (MnDOT) signal modification project at the inte Street). He explained that because of the detours,i forcemain project and the City of Excelsior's far is basically shut down from Thursday at noon t apparent that the detour routes MnDOT proposed He noted that people were no calling an emergency meeti Shorewood and Excelsior, the District (EFD ), Met Council narrowed down to two. One w for two (possibly three or four was discussion about closing the contractor, „six hours of significantly. Tlie other option to work at night. Those in atte noise and vibration during con Brown asked Council with the Minnesota Department of Transportation [ion of Trunk Highway 7 and County Road 19 (Oak Will be in place with the Metropolitan (Met) Council s market and other activities Excelsior's main street zgh the Saturday during warmer months. It became ald not work effectively. re of MnDOT's detour plans until late last week and that prompted 'hose in attendance included representatives from the Cities of i Luke Minnetonka' Police Department (SLMPD), the Excelsior Fire VInDOT. 'A number of alternatives were discussed and they were ,hut down the left turn lanes and right turn lane on to County Road 19 ks during the project. People did not think that was acceptable. There the turn lanes during non -peak times but that would only have given to work and would result in driving up the cost of the project dered was to allow limited access and giving the contractor the ability e thought that was the best option. People understood there would be ion hours. on what he presented and indicated he will bring that back to MnDOT. Councilmember Woodruff stated he agreed that closing down the turn lanes would be a disaster and noted that closing them down off peak will be a major inconvenience. Director Brown explained that MnDOT had talked about routing traffic to Christmas Lake Road and have traffic go back around. Those at the meeting were not in favor of that. West bound traffic could overshoot the intersection and then take a right on the street that goes by the Excelsior Grill and go on to Water Street. He stated MnDOT originally proposed starting its project on July 1. It was encouraged to postpone CITY OF SHOREWOOD SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 3, 2014 Page 6 of 7 the project until September or October 2014 which it agreed to do. Because of funding constraints MnDOT needs to let its project relatively soon. Councilmember Sundberg stated the working at night would be the preferable approach. She noted there are a number of residents that live in that area. And, night time traffic could be an issue. She asked what night time hours meant. Director Brown responded 10:00 P.M. to 6:00 A.M. and a possible one hour shift each way. Mayor Zerby noted that Director Brown had been involved with two other intersection projects and therefore he has confidence that Brown will help sort things out. He stated he is open to Brown's suggestions. Councilmember Hotvet asked what the construction hours were for the Old Excelsior Boulevard project. Director Brown stated he thought they were typically 6:30 A.M. to 5 :30 P.M. In response to a comment from Councilmember Woodruff; Director Brown explained the lane closures are estimated to be two weeks long and the total project is estimated to be four weeks long. Brown noted he thought the project will take four to six weeks. Mayor Zerby asked what the timing is this summer for the Mel the MnDOT project overlays with that. Director Brown stated MnDOT has a number of movable components in its schedule with the contractor to finalize things. Councilmember Woodruff asked Director Brown to project. He assumes MnDOT has one. 7. Deicing C Director Brown explained th cities are logging approximat entire season. The Public emergency meeting on .�anua ry to supply deicing chemicals; for that reason. During his 1$. the supplier mid to late Fe Because Shorewood Public W deal with that. The,City has mined and comes out of the barges. Each supplier tries to River freezes agencies cannot 1 forcemain project. He asked how s not have a great answer because is able to bid the project and work a graphic for the MnDOT ere have been a number of snow events already this winter season. Most ely 28 snow events where they sent their plows out. That is typical for an Works Directors and Superintendents in the Lake area were called to an 30 to discuss the inability of deicing companies (Morton Salt and Cargill) Public Works makes an effort to try and keep Shorewood's salt/sand bin full -yea tenure with the City it has been fairly typical to receive a notice from broaly or early March stating they are cutting off all orders for the season. ors' has kept the City's salt/sand bind full or close to full it has been able to never received a supply notice as early as it did this season. The product is City of Duluth and is transported down to the City of Minneapolis by river estimate how much product to stock pile in Duluth. Once the Mississippi get any more product. He is working with the State of Minnesota and Hennepin County to try and find a way to get additional product. Cargill and Morton Salt have conveyed that the only contracts they will ship product for are the State of Minnesota contracts and the County contracts because they are under a different form of contract. He is researching if alternative deicing chemicals are available. He noted that four other communities adjacent to the City that are in the same position. He clarified the City is not in a crisis and that he is hopeful he will find supplier of another alternative product. CITY OF SHOREWOOD SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 3, 2014 Page 7 of 7 Mayor Zerby stated in the State of Wisconsin a byproduct from cheese and pickles is used to help with deicing. Other Director Brown noted that earlier in the meeting Excelsior Fire District (EFD) Chief Gerber called him out of the meeting to talk about the massive power outage that is affecting sporadic areas in the west part of Shorewood. Xcel Energy has indicated that power should be restored by 7:57 P.M. He explained that the two of them will speak at 8:00 P.M. and if the power is not restored by then they will consider opening up the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) which is located in the ,Public Safety facility in Shorewood and talk about what kind of resources are needed for residents. Councilmember Sundberg stated the power went out at 4:30 P.M. Power also went out in areas of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria as well. Mayor Zerby stated that from previous conversations he has had the variability of the outage has something to do with where the power is on one side or the other of the trail where the old railroad tracks were. Director Brown stated on January 28 there was a public safety rt how few times the EOC is activated and the desire to operate the F when it is needed. The power outage may be a good opportunity to 8. ADJOURN Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, Adjo 2014, at 6:18 P.M. Motion passe 4/0. RESPECTFULLY Christine Freeman, ATTES Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk sg and there was discussion about effectively and close to seamlessly that in play. Special Meeting of February 3, Scott Zerby, Mayor CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2014 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. Present. Absent: Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Hotvet, Councilmember Sundberg B. Review Agenda Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, 2. CITY ADMINISTRATOR The purpose of the session was closed p and Woodruff, and A 3. ADJOURN Siakel in 2014, at Jean Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk #2B 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M. Joynes ented. Motion passed 4/0. cator's performance review. The , Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel Council Executive Session of February 10, Scott Zerby, Mayor #2C CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2014 6:30 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 6:36 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel; and Woodruff, Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and, City Engineer Hornby Absent: Councilmember Sundberg B. Review Agenda Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 2. BADGER PARK IMPROVEMENTS - CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW Director Nielsen stated during Council's January 13, 2014, meeting there was some general consensus that people favored Concept I�, over Concepts 2 for Badger Park Improvements. (Concept 1 left the ball field on a north/south orientation and Concept 2 reoriented it to east/west. Concept 1 has the shelter with restrooms located in the center of the two play areas, picnic area and open green area.) He hi6li6ted some things about Concept 1 that Council should be aware of. ➢ It does have a few—more parking stalls that the Southshore Community Center (SSCC) and the Park need. But, they, are farther away from the SSCC. They are toward the middle of the Park. One of the objectives is to tie the'SSCC to the Park and City Hall. ➢ The route to the SSCC would basically be like driving through one long parking lot. ➢ Although he likes the relationship of the shelter to some of the other features in the Park, it is quite a distance`from the SSCC: It is oriented more toward City Hall. ➢ There is little or no room for landscaping along the walkway area between the ball field and the parking lot for'the SSCC. ➢ The field may have to be shortened when it is shifted a little. ➢ If a driver does not find a parking spot after driving through the long parking lot the driver would have to loop through under the canopy for the SSCC. It's possible that could be modified. He highlighted some things about Concept 2 that Council should be aware of. ➢ The route to the SSCC would somewhat have its own driving lane for a good share of it and it is envisioned to be tree lined. Once a driver gets past that lane they are in the parking lot for the SSCC. The additional parking is much closer to the SSCC. ➢ The circulation would not require a driver to loop through under the canopy for the SSCC. It has its own loop before a driver gets to the structure. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 2 of 3 ➢ The shelter relates better to the SSCC. It could be combined with some type of structure (e.g., a gazebo feature) overlooking the pond. If the shelter is remote from the SSCC as it is in Concept 1 he questioned if people using the SSCC would use it as much. ➢ The Plan should show a looped trail system but it doesn't. It only has a walkway going to the SSCC. A landscape lined walkway is envisioned along the parking lot. ➢ Concern has been expressed about reorienting the ball field to east/west because of when the sun sets. At Minnetonka Middle School the two main fields on its soccer field are oriented east/west. The soccer and lacrosse organizations that use the field in the Park have indicated they do see think there is problem with the east/west orientation. Although it would be ideal to have the field north/south, there are other competing elements that should be considered. ➢ This Concept will cost more because the field would be reoriented. Possibly $80,000 or more because of the need to move the lights. At this time it's not known if the lights would have to be moved for Concept 1. It may be possible to re -aim the lights. That has to be flushed out. He explained that he and Mayor Zerby met with representatives from a company' who would like to put in solar energy at the Park. The company is a group of' individual investors that would pay for the infrastructure and the City would buy power from the company for a cost less than or equal to what Xcel Entergy charges for a number of years. Staff will have them come and talk to Council during its February 24 meeting. He reiterated he wanted to point out the differences between the two Concepts. He noted that this project will not get started this year. He suggested, taking a dual path until cost estimates come back on the two Concepts. He stated if Concept 2 can be done within, the budget suggested early on he thought it worthwhile to look more closely at Concept 2. If it is $200,000 more than Concept l then Concept 1 it is. Mayor Zerby stated that he has always liked Concept 2 better. Itlooks tike a real park to him and it is the best use of the area. He recollects Concert 1 being chosen because of the direction of the field. Councilmember Siakel stated there are pros and cons to both Concepts. She thanked Director Nielsen for pointing out that with Concept 1 traffic would have to loop under the canopy for the SSCC. She stated either plan will be expensive to do. She expressed her preference to take a little more time to make sure it gets done right the first time. She stated that regardless of the orientation of the ball field she understands Nielsen to be saying he thought Concept 2 would overall be a better fit for the Park and the future needs of the community. Councilm6 ber Hotvet stated if she was attending a game as a parent in the Park in and if she had other small children along she would want the two play areas next to each other. She would have eyes on both the game and her other children. The ease of the turnaround is important because she would drop the athlete off. She thought it would be dangerous to loop around under the canopy. She likes the picnic area front and center. Director Nielsen stated he would switch the pre -K play area and elementary play area around for Concept 2. Councilmember Hotvet stated on Concept 1 she would not want the pre -K play area on the west side of the pinwheel. It is too far away from the ball field. Councilmember Woodruff stated with Concept 2 he is uncomfortable with having the restrooms so far away from the pre -K play area and near the northeast corner of the ball field. And, they are a long way from the tennis courts. He then stated he is okay with Concept 2 if the City can afford it. He suggested moving the picnic area to the west a little and possibly switching the shelter and the pre -K play area. He expressed concern about landscaping blocking sight lines from the parking lot. He does not think the City CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 3 of 3 should build something where people can't see the facility from the parking lot. That would just be an invitation for problems. Woodruff stated he heard Director Nielsen say the project will not be started this year yet Council recently approved a CIP that allocated funds to start it in 2014. He asked what is going to be done in 2014. Nielsen explained the Park Commission is going to shift projects in the CIP around. He explained the City had to tell soccer and lacrosse organizations if they were going to be able to use the ball field this year. Being it was likely the project was not going to be started staff told them to schedule their events. Woodruff stated he would like the design work to at least get done. Nielsen clarified that has been the plan all along and that anything that can be done that will not disrupt the activities that go on there will "get done. Mayor Zerby stated he is really excited about the solar option. He then stated he has been looking into the possibility of new LED lighting for the field and the parking lot. He went ° on to state there has been some discussion with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) about doi g,a joint water reclamation project. He noted that Council is interested in having the fteld,watered. He recommended applying for a MCWD grant sooner versus later. He stated there is a resident who will make a presentation to Council sometime in the next month or two who is interested in bees and coming up with tore bee friendly plantings. From his perspective he has been thinking about Badger Park 2020 and he thought Council and staff can come up with some forward thinking ideas that can be implemented for this Park and then used for some of the City's other parks as well. He noted that he also agrees that if a little more time is needed to do this right then more time should be taken. Director Nielsen stated he understands ( now until the costs for each Concept are somewhat of a dual path for Councilmember Woodruff asked, staff to develop a high level pro - forma "timeline so Council knows when it will have to make decisions and to establish expectations: Councilmember Siakel: asked if demolition of the hockey rink could be done this year. Director Nielsen responded it could if the City decides it does not want to offer hockey the next winter season. Nielsen stated there are a number of things that could be done this year that would make the efforts next year go smoother and easier. Siakel stated re -doing the parking lot will be a big project and when it is done getting to the SSCC will be an issue. , 3. ADJOURN Woodruff moved; Hotvet seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session of February 10, 2014, at 6:56 P.M. Motion passed 410. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2014 MINUTES 42D 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, and Woodruff, Attorney Keane; City Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works grown and, City Engineer Hornby Absent: Councilmember Sundberg B. Review Agenda Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, January, l3, 2014 Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded; ,Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of January 13, 2014, as amended W Item 2, Page 3, Paragraph 3, Sentence 2 change "... 250 feet ..." to "... 250 yards ... ". Motion passed 4/0. B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2014 Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of January 13, 2014, as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Zerby reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Accept Donation from Shorewood Parks Foundation for Arctic Fever Motion passed 4/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 2 of 12 Gabriel Jabbour, owner of the Shorewood Yacht Club (SYC), stated that in the past he has provided the City with a report about the number of complaints filed against power boaters whose boats were docked at the SYC. This year he decided to give the report in person. He thanked Council and stated that the trust the City and Council have placed in him and the SYC is not taken for granted. He hopes to never let the City and Council down. The SYC is going into its ninth year with no incidents. The SYC continues to give Shorewood residents priority and to give them a discount on their rent. He again thanked Council and the City for the trust they place in him and the SYC. He also thanked the Planning Commission. Mayor Zerby thanked Mr. Jabbour and the SYC for providing a dock slip for the Excelsior Fire District's rescue boat and for all of the things he volunteers for. 5. PUBLIC HEARING None. 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Hennepin County Commissioner Jan Callison Report on Activities Mayor Zerby welcomed Hennepin County Commissioner Jan Callison and noted she is present to give an update on activities. Commissioner Callison noted that she will 2013 visits to various council meetings. Commissioner Callison exph Taxation statement property I will pay in 2014. The Count, is averaged with the last th Regional Rail Authority is work on the Bottineau LRT I $1 million from the vroposed County's budge the County re rty tax levy wa the increase i �, That is large uncil twice in 2014 because this is the last of her was adopted on December 17, 2013. The Truth in ved is pretty accurate with regard to the taxes they ncreased by 0.98 percent and if the 2014 increase 0.19„ percent per annum. The Hennepin County because of the Southwest LRT as well as some ing and Redevelopment Authority was reduced by Commissioner Callison noted the constrizctionF of the new Excelsior Library facility is on schedule. It is scheduled to open in the fall of 2014. She explained that in early January 2014 the 250 hours per week were added m CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 3 of 12 Commissioner Callison stated Commissioner Dorfman has submitted her resignation and her last day is February 28. A special election will be held on May 13 to fulfill her term in 2014. The individual elected on that date will likely run in the general election in November 2014 for a full term. Commissioner Callison stated she reviewed her list of constituent issues for 2013. That reaffirmed for her how important roadways are. She gets a lot of feedback about roadways and trails. Councilmember Hotvet stated she has heard that the conversation about re- engineering County Road 19 and installing some pedestrian and bicycle friendly access has come up again. Commissioner Callison stated there are no plans to update that roadway in any major way over the next five years. She noted the County has hired a new bike and pedestrian coordinator. She stated County Road 19 is on the County's radar screen because the Commissioners hear about it often. The cities,hive had differing opinions about how to move forward with what to do. The County needs to hear what the cities are interested in. When asked about where County Road 19 was in the schedule people checked the safety record and there are not a disproportionate number of bicycle and pedestrian accidents. People might say that is because people are afraid to be on it. It does not rise to the top because of that. Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought the County has done a good job with winter. this Commissioner Callison stated that she received an email today ,that the County may have to adjust its budget for snowplowing. Many of the County businesses tell the County to convert to a different source of fuel which is more expensive when power usage is high enough. Councilmember Woodruff stated that he has heard rumors that the property assessment process west of Highway 494 for this year is being driven to increase property values overall by 10 percent. Commissioner Callison stated she has not heard anything about that. She noted that there are State standards the County has to meet to ensure everyone is assessed the same way throughout the County. She doesn't know if that Dortion of the County is out of whack. Mayor Zerby asked for an explained the ground breaki fall of 2014 but she is not e Councilmember Siakel notes She stated she would like worthwhile to have discussi come up with commo discussions occur and Mayor Zerby suggest( associated with that as County roads. ergency Call Center. Commissioner Callison and she thought it is scheduled to open in the that. it she has heard a lot of very positive things about the library in Excelsior. inty Road 19 to be on the radar a little sooner. She stated it may be with representatives from Shorewood, Excelsior and Tonka to try and tions. Commissioner Callison asked people to let her know when those I `see if the County's pedestrian and bicycle coordinator could participate. ng Mill Street in that discussion because there are two County roads the City is considering constructing a trail along with Excelsior along the Mayor Zerby thanked Commissioner Callison for coming and apologized for rescheduling her visit twice. B. Report by Minnetonka School District Vantage Group on Southshore Community Center Mayor Zerby noted that four of the five Minnetonka High School (MHS) students who are members of a Minnetonka School District Vantage Team are present this evening to make a presentation about the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 4 of 12 business plan they prepared for the Southshore Community Center (SSCC). That activity was driven by the Southshore Center Advisory Committee. The four members of the Vantage Team that were present introduced themselves — Mason Nuss (the marketing and finance specialist), Tommy Garber (the customer specialist), John Compuzano (the product and organization specialist) and Matthew Henning (communications specialist). It was noted that Michaela Moulder the fifth member of the Team is currently participating in high school basketball. The highlights of their joint presentation are as follows. ➢ Vantage is a program offered at the MHS which allows students to take what they have learned in the classroom and apply it to real world business situations such as the SSCC. Members of the program meet every day for three hours where they learn AP (Advanced Placement) economics micro /macro, IB (international baccalaureate) business and business communications. ➢ Their team was given a Sponsor Committee comprised of. Theresa: Zerby (Shorewood and Southshore Senior Partners representative), Deb Kind (Mayor of Greenwood), Nick Ruehl (Excelsior representative) and Elli Ansari (Tonka Bay Councilmember). ➢ They also interviewed: Paul Skrede (Mayor,of'Deephaven), Tim Litfin (Director of Minnetonka Community Education - MCE), Deb Taylor (Senior Community Services Director), Dave Johnson (Director of Parks and Rees Minnetonka), and Mindy Anderson (Director of Gillespie Center). ➢ They sent out a survey through the Minnetonka School District's elementary schools and they targeted parents ages 35 — 54. Fifty percent of the responses, were from that age group. The survey results indicated: ■ 57 percent of the respondents had heard of the SSCC but many were confused about what the SSCC is, what activities are hosted there and many thought it was senior center. That clearly conveyed that awareness,is an issue. ■ When asked what the respondents look for when renting a space the top two popular responses werc,appearance and size. ➢ They used the survey'xesults and the materials from their interviews to help formulate their final recommendations. ➢ Their Vantage Team had three deliverables to give to their sponsors 1) research on community centers throughout the local area and what assets make them effective; 2) a list of activities in the local area and the likelihood of moving them to the SSCC; and, 3) recommendations for how to run the SSCC in the future with some cost analysis in the plans. ➢ Deliverable 1 • Currently the SSCC'covers approximately 60 percent of its costs. The group determined that a successful community center covers about 90 percent of its costs. In the local area there are six centers,that cover more than 90 percent of the costs. • The most common elements of the six profitable centers include a daycare center, meeting space, a fitness center, gyms, swimming pools and ice rinks. They were found in at least at four of the six centers. ➢ Deliverable 2 • Although the list of activities not held at the SSCC is quite large, they chose the following five to focus on for this presentation — AA meetings, Boaters Safety Education, Toys for Tots, Art on the Lake and Grill Nights like in Cottagewood. • Three of those activities could be hosted at the SSCC. • AA meetings could be held in the SSCC conference room. There are tables and space to accommodate them. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 5 of 12 • Toys for Tots could be collected. All that is required is to register online, get a box to place the toys in and to put a sign on the door. • Boaters Safety Education could be held there in the meeting room. In order to do this requires registering with the government and getting people to teach there. • Two of the activities could not be held at the SSCC. • Art on the Lake is a very large event that happens at the Excelsior Commons each summer. The SSCC and parking could not accommodate an event that large. • For Grill Nights the SSCC doesn't have the funding to put towards grills and supplies every Friday night in the summer. Grill Nights in Cottagewood are used to bring the community together. • They recommended a signature event — an Oktoberfest. • An Oktoberfest event has been held at the SSCC in the fall ,in the past. But, it was a breakeven event. • They are recommending an Oktoberfest fund raising event for most of the activities throughout the winter. It would bring people together. • Two weekends ago there was a microbrewery beer dabbler winter carnival at the State Fair Grounds. The event was sold out. Minnesota has a lot of microbreweries. An event like that could possibly be held at the SSCC. ➢ Deliverable 3 — Final Recommendations — Plan A ■ The SSCC Facebook page is rarely updated. That, Facebook page could really help in reaching that target market of parents,and working adults. The SSCC website is in dire need of an update. They recommend hiring a high school intern to manage the Facebook page and social media efforts to focus on marketing. ■ They recommend a new organizational system. ■ They recommend entering into a partnership with NICE to try and increase awareness, people and activities at the SSCC,., ■ They borrowed the idea of, a Summer Hangout from the Williston Community Center. For that program, essentially forty children would get dropped off in the morning on weekdays and picked up at the end of the day during the summer. They can be taken to all the different parks and beaches in the South Lake community. The SSCC's commercial kitchen could be used to prepare lunch for the children. They estimate $600 per month per child. The program would be run by a teacher, director from one of the local elementary schools — Minnewashta or Excelsior. The program would use three 15- person passenger vans to transport kids to the Darks and beaches. ■` They recommend a facility update; new decorations and furniture. ■ Vantage meets in the Excelsior Commons. Whenever a guest instructor comes to the Commons they always comment about how amazing the space is. They would like people to say that about the SSCC. ■ For an organization system they recommend the use of an event form which documents who rents what rooms in the SSCC, number of people attending, fees paid and expenses incurred. That currently is not being done. It would help in deciding what parts of the SSCC to invest in and which activities are most prosperous. ■ The financials for Summer Hangout • Revenue = $72,000 (40 children at $600 a month). Explorer's Club is $880 per month over the summer. • Startup costs = $34,000 ($24,000 of it is for buying three 15- person passenger vans and that could be reduced by leasing the vans) CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 6 of 12 • Payroll = $21,120 (the teacher would be $20 per hour and there would be three high school students hired to help with the activities and manage the children) • Other ongoing expenses = $15,250 (e.g., gas, food, etc.) • Profit per summer = $35,629 • Financials for Plan A as whole • $70,000 estimated for total startup costs o $34,000 for Summer Hangout o $20,000 for updates to the SSCC o $15,000 for organizational updates and marketing to rebrand the SSCC as more than a senior center o $1,000 to update the SSCC website • $82,000 total estimated revenue annually o $10,000 from NICE and increased awareness that it would bring o $72,000 from Summer Hangout • Plan A would bring the cost coverage up to about 93 percent • Startup cost by current member city ownership • Shorewood = $35,000 (50 percent) • Deephaven = $15,750 (22.5 percent)` • Excelsior = $10,220 (14.5 percent) • Tonka Bay = $6,300 (9.0 percent) • Greenwood = $2,730 (3.9 percent) ➢ Deliverable 3 — Final Recommendations —'Plan B ■ They recommend a new organizational system and new event calendar. ■ They recommend hiring a high school intern to manage the Facebook page. ■ They recommend advertising and marketing to rebrand the SSCC to not just a senior center. ■ The total startup cost is, $6,000 ■ The total annual revenuc is ,$8,000 ■ Financials for Plan B as whole • $5,000 one -time expense for advertising and marketing • $1,000 one -time expenee for website update • $2,500 for a high school intern • $8,'000 i,the estimatcd revenue from Plan B • Plan B would bring the cost coverage up to about 65 percent from 60 percent The Vantage Team thanked Council for the opportunity to come before Council this evening. Mayor Zerby thanked the Vantage Team for the well done report and presentation. He stated he thought the Team provided Council with'some well thought out ideas that Shorewood and the other partner cities can work with. He then stated he thought the presentation showed Council why the community needs a community center and how it needs to operate. Councilmember Hotvet thanked the Vantage Team for coming this evening. She stated sometimes it is nice to have fresh eyes and new energy to provide a different outlook on things. She then stated it was a well thought out presentation. Councilmember Siakel complimented the Vantage Team for the nice job it did of presenting its material. She stated she thought they did their homework and presented creative ideas of how to use the SSCC. She asked if the Team thought there would be additional costs for the Summer Hangout program (e.g., CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 7 of 12 insurance and wear and tear on the SSCC) that should be explored. Mr. Nuss stated he was thinking about some of those when he came up with his estimates and they do need to be looked into further. 7. PARKS A. Report by John Sawtell on the January 14, 2014, Park Commission Meeting Park Commissioner Sawtell reported on matters considered and actions taken at the January 14, 2014, Park Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought Commissioner Sawtell indicated that there will some sports groups that will not be able to use the field in Badger Park in 2014. Yet during Council's work session just before this meeting Director Nielsen stated no construction work will be done on the project in 2014. Nielsen noted the Park Commission has not heard about that yet. Sawtell stated he thought some teams were told that. Nielsen stated staff told the soccer and lacrosse organizations that they could schedule games for the field in 2014. Mayor Zerby asked if there has been any conversation about using Crescent Beach for pond hockey. Commissioner Sawtell stated the only conversation the Planning Commission has had about using a lake was regarding the Excelsior Commons but he can certainly bring that up. Zerby suggested asking Public Works if they would have the capability to do that. Sawtell stated one of the concerns raised when talking about the Commons was about insurance for vehicles. Councilmember Siakel noted that is a major access point for people who are going ice fishing. Sawtell stated the Commission has talked about what size rink is needed. Councilmember Woodruff stated exploring that has some merit but there are some things (e.g., permitting and Public Works vehicles going on the ice) that,have to be considered. 8. PLANNING A. Report by, Tom Geng on the February 5, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commission Chair Geng, reported on matters 'considered and actions taken at the February 5, 2014, Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Mayor Zerby noted he recently attended ,a forum for the mayors of the five South Lake cities that was hosted by the League of Women Voters, South Tonka. During the forum the question came up about whether or =not the cities have ordinances that address size /mass and scale. An example was presented about where a property with a small lake cottage on it is purchased and the cottage is taken down and replace with a large house that does not fit in with the scale of the other houses in the area. During the discussion it was pointed out that the City of Greenwood has ordinances to deal with that and that the City of Edina just approved ordinances to deal with that. The City of Deephaven has changed the way it measures the height of structures. It thought the old way of measuring height when all the roof pitches were all the same no longer works. Height is not measured to the top of the roof. He questioned if staff and the Planning Commission think they should start talking about that. The City of Excelsior has indicated it will start discussing that and the Excelsior Mayor thinks it will take 3 — 5 years to reach some conclusion. Chair Geng stated the Commission is in the process of developing its 2014 work plan so the Commission will include that. He then stated the City Ordinance does have some height restrictions. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 8 of 12 Director Nielsen concurred that the City's Ordinance does have height restrictions. He explained the City also has a provision that prohibits combining small lots into one huge lot. The Ordinance restricts combining the lots to no more than 1.5 times the minimum zoning requirement. A number of communities have scale ordinances. Mayor Zerby stated he thought this topic is worthy of discussion. B. Accept Proposal for Professional Engineering Services for Galpin Lake Road Trail Project Director Nielsen explained on January 21, 2014, the Planning Commission held an open house informational meeting about the Galpin Lake Road and Mill Street trails, segments. The next step in the process is to work on the final design, right -of -way (ROW) acquisition` and bidding documents for the Galpin Lake Road segment. There is no funding available for the Mill Street segment at this time. The City has received a proposal from WSB & Associates for professional engineering services to perform those tasks. Engineer Hornby explained a lot of the services that werc inch for the Smithtown Road west sidewalk. The only thing that is a appraiser. It does include the land acquisition. Staff assumed 't would have to deal with eight property owners. There are two p; City may need some temporary easements to deal with some i the wetland delineation report and permitting process. On the Resources protected wetland there will be some impacts lher portion as well. The cost for WSB to coordinate that work is solicit a separate proposal from a geotechnical consultant. led in the proposal are the same as those Dt included in this proposal is the review at on the conservative side that the City rcels where the City will need ROW. The staining wall. The proposal also includes south end of,the Department of Natural A budget was set on the geotechnical icluded in the proposal but the City will Councilmember Woodruff asked for more detail about the open house. Director Nielsen stated the feedback from those in attendance was almost entirely positive. One individual was concerned about the side of the road the Galpin Lake Road trail segment will be on because his house is located closer to the road than most of his neighbors. He noted the comments will be posted on the City's webs�te and if there were questions asked staff will answer them. He stated the resident turnout was relatively decent, being it was extremely cold outside that evening. He noted that residents that were interested in the Mill Street trail segment were disappointed that it is not scheduled for Councilmember Woodruff stated there is a need for some realignment with the Highway 7. Engineer Hornby stated he has,not spoken with the Minnesota department of Transportation (MnDOT) about that issue. He asked if the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that Council recently approved included the easement acquisition and legal costs. Hornby explained an attempt was made in the feasibility report to include comparable costs of retaining walls in place of trying to estimate the cost of easements. The conservative way was to estimate retaining walls. Councilmember Siakel noted she attended the open house and stated she did not hear any negative comments. She thanked staff for doing a great job and being there to answer questions. She stated that the residents understood why it was better to wait until the City of Excelsior constructs their portion of the Mill Street trail segment before the City constructs its portion. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 9 of 12 Mayor Zerby stated that he attended the open house also. He learned that the Galpin Lake Road trail segment will be six feet wide. He asked Director Brown if Public Works will be able to plow a six-foot - wide trail. Director Brown stated it already uses a skid steer to do that in some areas in the City. Councilmember Siakel stated she is interested in knowing how people will cross State Highway 7 to get to the Excelsior Elementary School. Mayor Zerby stated that he learned that residents are crossing Highway 7 at the spot where Galpin Lake Road reaches Highway 7 even though it is dangerous and there is a warning sign on each side of Highway 7. He recommended putting up a barrier. Director Nielsen explained the residents do not like walking along side of Highway 7 to get to the crossing at the stop light. Residents would like an overpass over Highway 7. Zerby noted the casual crossing shows up on Google maps. , Siakel moved, Hotvet seconded, accepting the proposal from'WSB & Associates for professional services for final design, right -of -way and bidding fees for the Galpin Lake Road Trail Project for an amount not to exceed $124,368 and with construction costs estimated to be: $116,507. Motion passed 4/0. 9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS A. Traffic Data Collection Director Brown explained on December 18,'2 into service along Country Club Road. The City collected data that was logged between that da data and generate a report of the data. The meet page report. Although the literature at displays do not record th skews the data somewhat times. Or, if a vehicle is, i and speed data for a the displays is just a random sam going slower, than before the d He displayed a couple of grap: one for the southbound traffic or below the posted speeds b( random sample exceeded; the f exceeding the posted speed tra ntry Club replacement spud awareness displays were put i able to connect to them wirelessly. The displays nuary 22, 2014. Staff was able to download that st containsa copy of the first two pages of the 60- signs and the canned report itself talk about the number of vehicles the er of vehicles. The displays put out a test point every ten seconds. That if a vehicle is moving at a very slow place it would be counted multiple very, quickly it may not be counted at all. A smart trailer collects vehicle )eed study. The traffic engineer stated the data from the speed awareness and the only thing the displays help with is in determining if traffic is lays were put up. 1cpicting the data the displays logged; one for the northbound traffic and e explained the graphs indicate that the majority of the traffic travels at northbound and southbound. For southbound traffic 26.7 percent of the ed speed and for northbound traffic it was 14 percent. Most of the traffic ed at or less than five miles - per -hour (MPH) over the posted speed. The 85"' percentile is the speed that a reasonable prudent driver drives (that is used to set speed limits). The 85"' percentile on Country Club Road has dropped a couple of points — from 35 to 33 for southbound traffic and from 35 to 32 for northbound traffic when compared to the data from the original true traffic study. He noted that the traffic engineer with WBS & Associates suggested having the displays collect data without displaying the actual speed during this summer. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 10 of 12 Councilmember Hotvet stated she likes Director Brown's suggestion of doing something that will actually count the vehicles and capture speeds. She asked if that would be an added expense. Brown explained the City has tubes that are a completely different that will count vehicles and capture the speed they are traveling during non - winter months. Councilmember Woodruff suggested doing this again around the end of April. He stated the data captured indicates there are some predictable timeslots when drivers predictably drive at higher speeds. He noted he likes Director Brown's suggestion of targeting speed enforcement a couple of hours a day for northbound and southbound traffic when the speeds are higher. Mayor Zerby stated he agrees with the speed enforcement suggestion. Councilmember Siakel stated she agrees with the speed enforc to do what is necessary to capture vehicles along with speed. satisfy a request to help slow traffic down in other neighl discussions about slowing traffic down on Country Club R southbound traffic was brought up. She asked what else can be Director Brown stated that speed awareness displays do not track nu cart. The displays the City has cannot be modified to count v Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) does have a smart cart. He measures that could be put in place such as using a wider fog lines all to make it look narrower and create the perception that drivers should Councilmember Woodruff stated it is his recollection that the measures were the most productive approach. He then sta experiment to see if they could help modify behavior and they Director Brown stated traffic roundabouts. Those things a other physical things but it is could be covered by estimate to.�atrine the There was Council consensus for exceeding the posted speed 10. 11. OLD BU zggestion as well as the suggestion ed what would have to be done to . She stated that during previous topic of striping the roadway for try and slow traffic down. of vehicles unless it is a smart He noted the South Lake there are some traffic calming ing the roadway on both sides at a slower speed. igiiieer did not think traffic calming ;peed awareness displays were an to a slight degree. eem to support more of the physical barriers such as chicanes and sed but they cost a great deal. Striping does not do what those striping would not be very effective during the winter months because it the snowplows would grind it off. He asked staff to come up with an for additional speed enforcement during the more problematic hours untry Club Road. 12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. Report on January 21, 2014, Trail Open House This was discussed as part of Item A.B on the agenda. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 11 of 12 2. Quarterly Investment Report Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the December 2013 Quarterly Investment Report. Other Engineer Hornby stated staff has started to work on the preliminary design for Sunnyvale Road which is a 2014 project. Staff will send out a notice to residents along that roadway that staff wants to meet with them in a neighborhood meeting to solicit feedback from them about positive and negative issues with the roadway and to tell them what the City does for a typical project. He noted a copy of the notice will also be sent to Council. Director DeJong stated that with the new financial sy balances and will then generate comparison reports. That Administrator Joynes stated staff will provide Council with of the Council and staff retreat held on February 8, 2014. items and put that into a work plan. Mayor Zerby noted that B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Siakel reported on the Excelsi January 22. She stated there was again a great d Association (EFRA) per-year-of-service (PYOS) Board unanimously approved policy guidelines the funding coverage percentages (FCP) propose pension reaches a FCP an associated PYOS pe approved a $500 increase to the PYOS benefi increased in 2007. She noted that significant pr talked about for many, many years—She noted the e and the benefit increase during EFRA' annual b or Fire District (EFD) Board meeting she attended on eal of discussion about the Excelsior Firefighters Relief pension benefit and increases to that benefit. The EFD for determining future increases to the PYOS including d by the Greenwood Council. When the EFRA's fund for per aff is working on pulling in last year's be done before the next Council meeting. report in the next couple of days y ,and put timelines on the action the retreat was very helpful. increase will be considered. The EFD Board then t in 2014 on a 3/2 vote. The PYOS benefit was last ogress has been made on that; something that has been EFRA membership also approved the policy guidelines usiness meeting. Mayor Zerby stated there has been a lot, of discussion about that and a lot of work has gone into gain some consensus about it. He thanked Councilmember Siakel for her efforts. Councilmember Siakel stated there is a lot more detail about the discussions related to that but she just wanted to update Council on what was resolved. Mayor Zerby stated he thought Siakel undersold that project. Councilmember Woodruff commented that he has been keeping track of what has been going on with the EFD Board with regard to the PYOS benefit discussions. He stated Council's October 28, 2013, meeting minutes indicate there had been discussion about around a 4 percent increase to the benefit. He came to find out that the Council's representative was one of three who voted for an 8 percent increase. He expressed his disappointment that Council had a discussion about the benefit increase and then the representative approves double of what was discussed. He then stated that he found out that the EFRA submitted paperwork to the State on the condition of the fund and the State came back informing the EFRA that the most the EFRA can increase the benefit in 2014 is $350. From his perspective the EFRA has taken it upon itself to take the other $150 that Councilmember Siakel reported on and make that an CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2014 Page 12 of 12 automatic increase in 2015. He noted he finds it hard to understand that logic. He stated he is maybe a minority of one on the Council but he does not think the process went the way he had expected. Councilmember Siakel clarified that as a member of the EFD Board she has the latitude to make a decision. She noted there had been a tremendous amount of negotiation and she did what she thought was fair in working with the firefighters and with representing Shorewood. Councilmember Hotvet stated representatives from the Lake Minnetonka communities are going to meet on the scenic byway initiative on February 24, 2014, from 9:30 — 11:00 A.M. at Wayzata City Hall. Representatives from the State of Minnesota have also been invited. 13. ADJOURN Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of February 10, 2014, at 8:10 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: Jear by, Mayor City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Title / Subject: Verified Claims Meeting Date: February 24, 2014 Prepared by: Michelle Nguyen, Senior Accountant Bruce DeJong, Finance Director Attachments: Claims lists from both old and new financial systems #3A MEETING TYPE Regular Meeting Policy Consideration: Should the attached claims against the City of Shorewood be paid from current funds available? Background: Claims for council authorization. 55064 - 55068 $28,143.00 60104-60107 30,545.19 Pending Checks 85,900.43 Total Claims $144,588.62 Staff has implemented the new software for the financial side of the operations, but we are still sorting out reporting processes. We have included the claims from the old system which are payments for invoices dated through the end of December. New claims for 2014 are entered into the new software. We have also included a payroll summary for the payroll period ending February S, 2014. Financial or Budget Considerations: These expenditures are reasonable and necessary to provide services to our residents and funds are budgeted and available for these purposes. Options: The City Council is may accept the staff recommendation to pay these claims or may reject any expenditure it deems not in the best interest of the city. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the claims list as presented. Next Steps and Timelines: Checks will be distributed following approval. 2/2G/2014 1:39 PM A/P HISTORY CilrCK REPORT VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood REGULAR CHECKS: 5 L3ANK: 1 BEACON RANK 9,697.00 HAND CHECKS: DATE RANGE: 2/li/2014 THRU 9919919999 0.00 0.00 DRAFTS: 0 O.uo CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE 01475 AMERICAN ENGINEERING R 2/24/2014 02000 EARL P. ANDERSEN- DIVISION OF S R 2/24/20 =4 12250 KLM ENGINEERING INC R 2/24/2014 17025 MN DEPT OF 'LABOR AND INDUSTRY R 7/24/2014 29490 NORTH MEMORIAL URGENT CARE R 2/24/2014 28451 WSB AND ASSOCIATES, INC. E 2/24/2014 PAC;F: INVCiCE CHECK CI3ECK CHECK AMOUNT DISCO.Tr NO STATUS AMOUNT 055064 600.00 055065 5,238.00 055066 3,809.00 055067 10.00 055968 49.00 999999 18,446.00 * T 0 T A L S '" - NO INVOICE AMOUNT DISCOUNTS CHECK AMOUNT REGULAR CHECKS: 5 9,697.00 0.00 9,697.00 HAND CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 DRAFTS: 0 O.uo 0.90 O. no EFT: 1 18,446.00 0.00 18,446,00 NON CHECKS: - 0 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 VOID CHECKS: - - '.0 VOID. DEBITS 9.00 - - .. .VOID CREDITS - 0.00 0.00 0.00 _OTAL ERRORS: 0 NO INVOICE AMOUNT DISCOUNTS CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: I TOTALS: 6 28,143.00 0.00 '.'28,1.43.00 aANX : 1 TOTALS: 6 28,143.00 0.00 78,1:.43.00 REPORT TO'T'ALS: 6 28,1,43.00 0.00 28,143 00 02 -20 -2014 01:38 PM C 0 U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - FEBRUARY 24, 2014 , PAGE: 1 VENDOR SORT KEY 600.60 DATE DESCRIPTION 2/24/14 PUNL Park Capital lmpro DEPARTMENT AMOUNT AMERICAN ENGINEERING 2/24/14 TESTING SMITHTOWN RD TRL TTraz.:, Capital Outl Trail Expenditures 600.00 TOTAL: 600.60 EARL P. ANDERSEN - DIVISION OF SAFETY ST 2/24/14 CIP - SIGNS Park Capital lmpro Park Capital Improveme _ 5,238.00 TOTAL: 5,238.60 KLM ENGINEERING INC 2/24/14 AT &T ANT?;NNA -OLP MRKT RD T General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 3,800.00 TOTAL: 3,800.00 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 2/24/14 PRESSURE VISSEL General Fund Public Works 10.00 TOTAL: 10.00 NORTH M8MORTAL URGENT CARE 2/24/14 DRUG & ALC TEST -GREG F. General Fund Public Works TOTAL: 49.00 WSB AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 2/24/14 DEC- ASHLAND WOODS UTI & ST General Fund NON- DEPARTMENTAL 262.50 2/24/14 DEC - SUMMIT WOODS DVLPMT General Fund NON- DEPARTMENTAL 66.50 2/24/14 DEC -C.E. SVC General Fund City Engineer 4,000.00 2/24/14 DEC -2013 PAVEMENT MARKING 'General Fund City Engineer 93.75 2/24/14 DEC- VALLEYWD AREA ST IMPVM Street Capital Imp Street Capt Improvemen 438.50 2/24/1; DEC -2013 MILL & OVERLAY PR Street Capita:' imp Street Capt Improvemen 4B0.00 2/24/14 DEC- SMITHTOWN RD TRL Trail Capital Outl Trail Expenditures 5,376.00 2/24/14 DEC -CTY RD 19 SIDEWALK Trail Capital. Out! Trail Expenditures 602.25 2/24/14 DEC- GALPIN LK RD TRL CONN Trail Capital Outl Trail Expenditures 66.50 2/24/14 DEC -ENG SUPPORT- WATER 114ST Water Utility Water 1,201.50 .. 2/24/14 DEC -MCES FORCIEMAIN IMPVMT Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 250.50 2/24/14 DEC -ENC SUPPORT -APPLE RD C Stormwater Managem- STORMWA UR MANAGEMENT 1,381.25 2/24/14 DEC -MS4 SVC Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 4,226.75 TOTAL: ____ __ ____� FUND TOTALS =_==_ ----------- . 101 General Fund 6,281.75 402 Park Capita:. Improvements 5,238.00 404 Street Capital. Improvemen 918.50 406 Trail Capital Outlay 6,644.75 601 Water Utility 1,201.50 61:1. Sanitary Sewer Utility. 2S0.SO 631 Stormwater. ManagementLitil 5,608.00 GRAND TOTAL: 28,143.00 'xOTAI., PAGES : - Accounts Payable Check Detail UJ er: mnguyen Printed: 02/20/2014 - 1:29PM Check Number Check Date Amount I - WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS Line Item Account 0 02/10/2014 Inv Line Item Dale Line item Description Line Item Account 02/11/2014 PR Batch 00001 .02.2014 Health Savings Account 700 -00 -2183 -0000 1,288.05 Inv Total 1,288.05 O'rotal: 1.288.05 I - WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS Total: 1,288.05 11 - MN DEPT OF REVENUE Line Item Account 0 02/1012014 Inv Line Item Hate Line Item Description Line Item Account 02/11/2014 PR Batch 00001.02 2014 State Income'rax 700.00- 2173 -0000 1,976.68 Inv Total 1,976.68 0 Total: 1,976.68 11. - MN DEPT OF REVENUE Total: 1,976.68 12 - AFSCME COUNCIL 5 - UNION Line Item Account 00104 0211012014 Inv Line Item Date Line Item DcscYjpjon Line Item Account 02/11/2014 PR Batch 00001.02.2014 Union Dues 700 -00- 2182 -0000 312.32 Inv Total 312.32 601.04 Total: 31232 12 - AFSCME COUNCIL 5 - UNION Total: 312.32 2 -1CMA RETIREMENT TRUST- 302131457 Line Itern Account 50105 02/10/2014 Air -Check Detail (2/2012014 - 1:29 PM) Page 1 Cheek Number Check Elate Amount Inv Line Item Date line Item Description line Item Account 0 2/1 1 120 1 4 PR Batch 00001.02.2014 Deferred Comp Flat Arnowit 700 -00- 2176 -0000 1,325.00 Inv Total 1.325.00 60105 Total: 1,325.00 2 - ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302231 -457 Total: 1,325.00 429 - SCHREPEL, THOMAS & VELINDA Line Item Account 60106 ' 0211.0/2014 Inv 02106!2014 Line horn Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 02/11/2014 28180 Woodside Rd- Escrow Refund for Tree; Replacement 880 -00- 2200 -0000 7,068.00 Inv 02/06/2014 Total '7.0(18.00 60106 Total: 7,068.00 429 - SCHREPEL, THOMAS & VELINDA Total: 7,068.00 5 - EIaTPS - FEDFRAL W/H Line Item Account 0 02/10/2014 Inv Line Item Date Lille Item .Description line Item Account. 02/1112014 PR Batch 00001,02,21014 Federal Income Tax 700 -00- 2172 -0000 4,430.03 02/11/2014 PR Batch 00001.022014 FICA Employee Portion 700 -00- 2174.0000 2,978.22 02/11/2014 Ply Batch 00001 -02 2014 FICA Employer Portion 700 --00- 2174.0000 2,978 22 0211 1/2014 PR Batch 0000 1.02.2014 Medicare Employee Portion 700 -00- 2174 -0000 696.51 02/11/2014 PR Batch 00001.022014 Medicare Employer Portion 700 -00- 2174 -0000 696.51 Inv Total 11,779.49 0 Total: 11,779.49 5 - FFTPS - FEDERAL W/H Total: 11,779.49 9 - PERA Line Item Account 0 02/10/2014 Inv Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 02/11/2014 PR Batch 0000 1.02.2014 MN -PERA Deduction 700 -00 -2175 -0000 3,036.88 02/11/2014 PR Batch 0000 1.02.2014 MN PERA Benefit )employer 700 -00- 2175 -0000 3,52177 Inv Total 6,559.65 AP -Check Detail (2120/2014 - 1:29 1'M) Page 2 Check Number Check Bate Amount 0 Total: 03.559.65 9 - P'ERA Total: (3,559.65 Total: 30,309.19 AP -Check Detail (2120)2014 - 1:29 PM) Page 3 Payroll GIL Distribution Report User: bdejan- Batch: 0000 1.02.2014 - PR 021014 CITY OF SI-IOREWOOD Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description FUND 101 General Fund 101 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 53,794.87 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 101 -13 -4101 -0000 7,587.99 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -13 -4121 -0000 479.78 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -13- 4122 -0000 508.40 0,00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -13- 4151 -0000 29.93 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -15- 4101 -0000 4,646.68 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -15- 4121 -0000 306.24 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE I01 -I5 -4122 -0000 311.23 0,00 FICA CONTRIB _ CITY SHARE 1.01 -15- 4151 -0000 17.34 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSNI'ION 101 -18 -4101 -0000 5,884.26 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -18- 4121 -0000 364.79 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -18- 4122 -0000 357.06 0.00 PICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -18- 4151 -0000 22.34 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -24- 4101 -0000 4,324.81 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -24- 4121 -0000 280.92 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -24 -4122 -0000 252.12 0.00 FICA CONTRID - CITY SHARE 101 -24- 4151 -0000 23.42 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSAIJON 101 -32 -4101 -0000 7,833.34 0.00 FULL - TIME REGULAR 101 -32 -41.02 -0000 88.80 0.00 OVERTIME 101 -32- 4105 - 0000 284.00 0.00 STREETPAGERPAY 101 -32- 4121 -0000 486.60 0A0 PERA CON I'R1.Ci - CITY SHARE 101 -32 -4122 -0000 526.28 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -32- 4151 -0000 343.92 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -33- 41.01- 0000 6,787.21 0.00 FULL - TIME REGULAR 101 -33- 4102 -0000 1,894.72 0.00 OVER] IME 101 -33- 4121 - 0000 629.44 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CI TY SHARE 101 -33- 4122 -0000 545,20 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -33 -4151 -0000 402.45 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -52- 4101 -0000 4,768.67 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR 101 -52- 4121 -0000 293.78 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -52- 4122 -0000 307.90 0,00 PICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -52 -4151 -0000 207.58 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -53- 4101 -0000 1.133.64 0.60 FULL -'TIME REGULAR 101 -53 -4103 -0000 1,569.38 0.00 PART -TIME PR - G/L Distribution Report (02/1012014 - 4:40 PM) Page I Account Number DebitArnount CreditArnount Description 101 -53- 41.21 - 0000 80.90 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -53- 4122 -0000 205.20 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -53 -4151 -0000 8.55 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 53,794.87 53,794.87 FUND 201 Southshore Center 201 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 1,175.71 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 201 -00 -41.01 -0000 788.45 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 201 -00- 4103 -0000 24830 0.00 PART - TIME.. 201- 00-4121 -0000 57.16 0.00 PIRA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 201 -00- 4122 -0000 76.86 0.00 PICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 201 -00- 41510000 494 0.00 WOIRICERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 1,175.71 1,1.75.71 FUND 601 Water Utility 601 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 5,239.64 CASIT. AND INVESTMENTS 601 -00 -4101 -0000 4,282.63 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 601 -00- 4102 -0000 106.50 0.00 OVERTIME 601 -00- 41.05 -0000 142.00 0.00 WATER PAGER PAY 601 -00- 4121 -0000 272.55 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 601 -00 -4122 -0000 286.68 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SIIARE 601 -00- 4151 -0000 149.28 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION TUNIS Total: 5,239.64 5,239.64 FUND 611 Sanitary Sewer Utility 611 -00 -1010 -0000 0,00 3,834.74 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 611 -00 -4101 -0000 3,130.85 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 611 -00- 4102- 0000 61.30 0.00 OVERTIME 611 -00- 41.05 -0000 142.00 0.00 SEWER PAGER PAY 611: -00 -41.21 -0000 185.72 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 611-00-4122-0000 210.98 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 611 -00 -4151 -0000 103,89 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 3,834.74 3,834.74 FUND 621. Recycling Utility 621 -00 -1010 -0000 0.00 337.57 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 621 -00- 4101 -0000 299.37 0.00 PULL -TIME REGULAR 621 -00 -4121 -0000 18.74 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 621 -00- 4122 -0000 19.46 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE FUND Total: 337.57 337.57 PR - G/L Distribution Report. (0211012014 - 4:40 PM) Page 2 Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount (Description FUND 631 Storm Water Utility 631 -00 -1010 -0000 0.00 1,131.84 CASH ANDINVES- 1 -MENTS 631 -00- 4101 -0000 991.27 0.00 FULL -TIML REGULAR 631 -00- 4121.0000 66.15 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 631 -00- 4122 -0000 67.30 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE. 631 -00- 4151-0000 7.06 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Tatal: 1,:131.84 1,131.84 FUND 700 Payroll Clearing Fnnd 700 -00- 101.0- 0000 64,852.00 0.00 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 700 -00- 2170 -0000 0.00 32,617.66 GROSS PAYROLL CLEARING 700 -00- 2171 -0000 0.00 6,478.75 HEALTH INSURANCE PAYABLE 700 -00 -2172 -0000 0.00 4,430.03 FEDERAL WITIHOLDING PAYABLE 700 -00 -2173 -0000 0.00 1,976.68 STATE WITHHOLDING PAYABLE, 700 -00- 2174 -0000 0.00 7,349.46 FICA/MEDICARE TAX PAYABLE 760 -00- 2175 -0000 0.00 6,559.65 PERA WITHHOLDING PAYA BLE, 700 -00 -2176- 0000 0.00 1,325.00 DEFERRED COMPENSATION 700 -00 -2177 -0000 0.00 1,320.70 WORKERS COMP ,.NSATION 700 -00 -2179 -0000 0.00 192.00 SEC 125 DEP CARE REIMS PAYABLE 700 -00 -2180 -0000 0.00 195.42 LIFE INSURANCE 700 -00 -2181 -0000 0.00 362.82 DISABILITY INSURANCE 700 -00- 2182 -0000 0.00 312.32 UNION DUES 700- 00 -2J.83 -0000 0.00 1,288.05 HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT 700 -00 -2184 -0000 0.00 239.46 DENTAL DELTA 700 -00 -2185 -0000 0.00 204.00 DENTAL - UNION FUN1D'fotal: 64,852.00 64,852.00 Report Total- 130,366.37 130,366.37 PR - GIL Distribution Report (02/1012014 - 4:40 PM) Page 3 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: mnguyen City of Printed: 02/20/2014 - 1 :O1PM Shorewood Batch: 00004.02.2014 - COUNCIL- 02242014 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Fund Dept Vendor: 105 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS Check Sequence: 1 INV42063 Konica Minolta Printer -Svc 01/15 -02/14 72.00 02/24/2014 101 -19- 4321 -0000 General Mun Bldg Check Total: 72.00 Vendor: 106 ALLDATA Check Sequence: 2 FW539279 -2014 Membership - Brad Mason 1,500.00 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4433 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 1,500.00 Vendor: 435 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE Check Sequence: 3 46493 Global Alero Mesh Back Chair 413.46 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4200 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 413.46 Vendor: 111 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Check Sequence: 4 61432 Smithtown Road Sidewalk Improvements -Jan Svc 512.50 02/24/2014 406 -00- 4620 -0001 Trail Check Total: 512.50 Vendor: 118 APPLIED MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES Check Sequence: 5 96356034 Drill Bits & Supplies 174.33 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4240 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 174.33 Vendor: 123 BLUE -TARP FINANCIAL INC Check Sequence: 6 4061061401 Fittings 11.98 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 11.98 Vendor: 125 BOYER TRUCKS PARTS Check Sequence: 7 811913 Governor & Gasket 38.13 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 38.13 Vendor: 133 CARGILL DEICING TECHNOLOGY Check Sequence: 8 2901521650 De -Icer 2,218.01 02/24/2014 101 -33- 4245 -0000 General Ice & Snow Check Total: 2,218.01 Vendor: 134 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS Check Sequence: 9 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: mnguyen City of Printed: 02/20/2014 - 1: O 1 PM Shorewood Batch: 00004.02.2014 - COUNCIL- 02242014 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Fund Dept 6974- 218225 Headlamps & Fluids 37.61 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 218262 Headlights 24.34 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 218962 Hydraulic Parts 153.88 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 219212 Fluids 90.11 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 219226 Hydraulic Parts & Fluids 135.22 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 219579 Wipers & Electrical 21.60 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 219647 Belt 42.20 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 219653 Transmission Fluid 10.84 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 220004 Fluids 22.06 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 220068 Wipers & Lights 32.43 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 220129 Wipers 15.38 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 585.67 Vendor: 137 CENTURY LINK Check Sequence: 10 BB- 02012014 612 -E45- 1785 -Bldr Brdg -Feb Svc 315.39 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4396 -0000 Water SE- 02012014 612 -E45- 8019 -SE Areas -Feb 236.43 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4398 -0000 Water Check Total: 551.82 Vendor: 143 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Check Sequence: 11 2013 -WA CERT 2013 - Chanhassen's Water Certification Payments 2,407.08 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4263 -0000 Water Check Total: 2,407.08 Vendor: 147 CITY OF MOUND Check Sequence: 12 1st Qtr -2014 2014 -Fire Payment - 1st Qtr 5,893.25 02/24/2014 101 -22- 4400 -0000 General Fire Check Total: 5,893.25 Vendor: 150 CLASSIC CLEANING COMPANY Check Sequence: 13 20349 City Hall -Feb Svc 495.00 02/24/2014 101 -19- 4400 -0000 General Mun Bldg 20350 Public Works- Feb Svc 295.00 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4400 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 790.00 Vendor: 158 CUB FOODS - SHOREWOOD Check Sequence: 14 020814 - Retreat Feb 8- Council Retreat 51.31 02/24/2014 101 -11- 4331 -0000 General Council Check Total: 51.31 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: mnguyen Printed- - 1.O1PM Batch: 00004.02.2014 - COUNCIL- 02242014 Invoice No Description Vendor: 159 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER Jan -2014 Drinking Water - Dec & Jan 02/24/2014 101 -19- 4245 -0000 Check Total: Vendor: 161 BRUCE DeJONG COPIER- 021914 Printer Check Total: Vendor: 433 DELL MARKETING L.P. XJC3FR948 Computers XJC3KT4K8 Computers XJC3P9PK8 E -Port Plus Equip Repl Check Total: Vendor: 167 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 74110 Ord. No. 507 - 02/13/14 74313 Ord. No. 507 - 02/15/14 Check Total: Vendor: 184 GREGORY FASCHING 02/18/2014 Dependent Care Reimbursement 02/24/2014 403 -00- 4640 -0000 Check Total: Vendor: 186 FERGUSON WATERWORKS No.2516 0066806 Water Meters Equip Repl Check Total: Vendor: 188 FLEETPRIDE TRUCK & TRAILER 59006173 Brake Parts- Dump Truck 59146331 Brake Parts- Dump Truck Check Total: Vendor: 192 G & K SERVICES -MPLS INDUSTRIAL Jan -2014 P.W. Lill I - rqq Amount Payment Date Acct Number Fund Dept Check Sequence: 15 110.68 02/24/2014 101 -19- 4245 -0000 General Mun Bldg 110.68 Check Sequence: 16 374.05 02/24/2014 403 -00- 4640 -0000 Equip Repl 374.05 Check Sequence: 17 2,876.70 02/24/2014 403 -00- 4640 -0000 Equip Repl 1,373.36 02/24/2014 403 -00- 4640 -0000 Equip Repl 329.98 02/24/2014 403 -00- 4640 -0000 Equip Repl 4,580.04 Check Sequence: 18 143.64 02/24/2014 101-13-4351-0000 General Admin 92.52 02/24/2014 101 -13- 4351 -0000 General Admin 236.16 Check Sequence: 19 615.00 02/24/2014 101 -00- 2179 -0000 General 615.00 Check Sequence: 20 1,583.65 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4265 -0000 Water 1,583.65 Check Sequence: 21 13.96 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 218.55 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 232.51 Check Sequence: 22 972.38 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4400 -0000 General Pub Works Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: mnguyen Printed- - 1.O1PM Batch: 00004.02.2014 - COUNCIL- 02242014 Invoice No Description Jan -2014 C.H. Jan -2014 SSCC Mun Bldg Check Total: Vendor: 200 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 90988 -SW Annual Fee 90988 -WA Annual Fee 1,113.71 Check Total: Vendor: 202 GRAINGER INC 9332116582 Respirator Wipes Check Total: Vendor: 208 HACH COMPANY 8689106 Water Chemical Check Total: Vendor: 227 INTELLIGENT PRODUCTS INC 172168A Mutt Mitts 611 -00- 4433 -0000 Check Total: Vendor: 243 KIM ENGINEERING INC 5109 AT & T Antenna Upgrade - Smithtown Tower 02/24/2014 Check Total: Vendor: 247 DREW KRIESEL Jan -2014 Jan Svc - Cleaning & Shovel & Event Check Total: Vendor: 259 CLARE T LINK 2014 -03 Park Commission Meeting - 02/11/14 2014 -04 SSCC Meeting - 02/12/14 Check Total: Lill, - rqq Amount Payment Date Acct Number Fund Dept 94.97 02/24/2014 101 -19- 4400 -0000 General Mun Bldg 46.36 02/24/2014 201 -00- 4400 -0000 SSC 1,113.71 Check Sequence: 23 50.00 02/24/2014 611 -00- 4433 -0000 Sewer 50.00 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4433 -0000 Water 100.00 Check Sequence: 24 84.12 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4245 -0000 General Pub Works 84.12 Check Sequence: 25 247.55 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4245 -0000 Water 247.55 Check Sequence: 26 455.94 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4245 -0000 General Parks 455.94 Check Sequence: 27 4,500.00 02/24/2014 101 -00- 3414 -0000 General 4,500.00 Check Sequence: 28 540.00 02/24/2014 201 -00- 4400 -0000 SSC 540.00 Check Sequence: 29 187.00 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4400 -0000 General Parks 187.00 02/24/2014 201 -00- 4400 -0000 SSC 374.00 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: ranguyen City of Printed: 02/20/2014 - 1 :O1PM Shorewood Batch: 00004.02.2014 - COUNCIL- 02242014 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Fund Dept Vendor: 260 LOCATORS & SUPPLIES INC Check Sequence: 30 0219846 -IN Snow Plow Blade Supplies 186.70 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4245 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 186.70 Vendor: 262 LUBE -TECH Check Sequence: 31 2322414 Motor Fuel Lube 1,362.23 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4212 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 1,362.23 Vendor: 277 MEDTOX LABORATORIES, INC. Check Sequence: 32 012014504782 Drug & Alcohol Test 51.65 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4305 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 51.65 Vendor: 279 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Check Sequence: 33 0001030346 Waste Water Svc - Mar 45,684.54 02/24/2014 611 -00- 4385 -0000 Sewer Check Total: 45,684.54 Vendor: 431 MID AMERICA METER, INC. Check Sequence: 34 013 -3011 Water Testing & Repair 440.94 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4400 -0000 Water 014 -0030 Water Testing 227.50 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4400 -0000 Water Check Total: 668.44 Vendor: 301 MN HELICOPTERS INC Check Sequence: 35 3162 Deer Count Survey 610.00 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4400 -0000 General Parks Check Total: 610.00 Vendor: 302 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Check Sequence: 36 2200094533 Hazardous Waste Annual Fee 251.00 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4437 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 251.00 Vendor: 434 MOTION PICTURE LICENSING CORPORATIO -N Check Sequence: 37 503883637 SSCC -Movie License 309.58 02/24/2014 201 -00- 4437 -0000 SSC Check Total: 3 09.5 8 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: mnguyen Printed- - 1.O1PM Batch: 00004.02.2014 - COUNCIL- 02242014 Invoice No Description Vendor: 314 BRADLEY NIELSEN EAB Symposium14 EAB Symposium Register 02/24/2014 101-18-4331-0000 Check Total: Vendor: 322 OFFICE DEPOT 697329529001 Supplies 697528416001 Supplies Check Total: Vendor: 325 ON SITE SANITATION INC A- 528215 Badger Park - Svc 02/01 -02/28 A- 528216 Cathcart Park - Svc 02/01 -02/28 A- 528217 Freeman Park- Svc 02/01 -02/28 A- 528218 Silverwood Park - Svc 02/01 -02/28 A- 528219 South Shore Skate - Svc 02/01 -02/28 A- 528220 Christmas Lk Boat Access - Svc 02/01 -02/28 Check Total: Vendor: 329 JEAN PANCHYSITYN 01/22/14 -Mile MCFOA Meeting - Eden Prairie 02/ 13 / 14 -Exp Computer Mouse Check Total: Vendor: 332 PETTY CASH 01312014 -Mail Water Sample Check Total: Vendor: 349 SCHWAAB INC D58947 Dater Pad Ink 160.32 Check Total: Vendor: 354 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 118038 Mouse Traps & Supplies 118049 Rope 118115 Chain & Clevis Lill, - rqq Amount Payment Date Acct Number Fund Dept Check Sequence: 38 168.00 02/24/2014 101-18-4331-0000 General Planning 168.00 Check Sequence: 39 50.39 02/24/2014 101 -13- 4200 -0000 General Admin 53.58 02/24/2014 101 -13- 4200 -0000 General Admin 103.97 Check Sequence: 40 53.44 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Parks 53.44 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Parks 160.32 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Parks 53.44 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Parks 53.44 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Parks 235.13 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Parks 609.21 Check Sequence: 41 11.20 02/24/2014 101 -13- 4331 -0000 General Admin 31.06 02/24/2014 101 -13- 4200 -0000 General Admin 42.26 Check Sequence: 42 6.50 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4208 -0000 Water 6.50 Check Sequence: 43 47.24 02/24/2014 101 -13- 4200 -0000 General Admin 47.24 Check Sequence: 44 20.26 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4245 -0000 Water 12.99 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4245 -0000 General Parks 45.79 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4245 -0000 General Pub Works Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: mnguyen City of Printed: 02/20/2014 - 1: O 1 PM Shorewood Batch: 00004.02.2014 - COUNCIL- 02242014 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Fund Dept 118121 Scraper 31.99 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4240 -0000 General Pub Works 118311 Mail Box 16.99 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4245 -0000 General Pub Works 118341 Exterior Bulbs 5.99 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4223 -0000 General Pub Works 271512 Shovel 19.98 02/24/2014 101 -33- 4245 -0000 General Ice & Snow Check Total: 153.99 Vendor: 358 PATRICK SKEIE Check Sequence: 45 02/03 -10/14 Council Video Production - 02/03 -10/14 120.00 02/24/2014 101 -13- 4400 -0000 General Admin Check Total: 120.00 Vendor: 360 SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA POLICE DEPT. Check Sequence: 46 Jan - 2014 -HCPF Henn Cty Processing Fee - Jan 415.72 02/24/2014 101 -21- 4400 -0000 General Police Check Total: 415.72 Vendor: 383 TONKA WATER Check Sequence: 47 1002104 -IN SE Water Plant 253.00 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4221 -0000 Water Check Total: 253.00 Vendor: 432 UNITED FARMERS COOPERATIVE Check Sequence: 48 20- 554151 Tire Chains 91.25 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 91.25 Vendor: 421 VERIZON WIRELESS Check Sequence: 49 9719342478 Phones - Svc 01/02 -02/01 55.30 02/24/2014 601 -00- 4321 -0000 Water 9719342478 Phones - Svc 01/02 -02/01 55.30 02/24/2014 611 -00- 4321 -0000 Sewer 9719342478 Phones - Svc 01/02 -02/01 55.30 02/24/2014 631 -00- 4321 -0000 Storm Check Total: 165.90 Vendor: 394 VICTORIA REPAIR AND MFG Check Sequence: 50 5961 Shaft 60.00 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4245 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 60.00 Vendor: 396 VIKING LAND TREE CARE INC Check Sequence: 51 2942 5350 Vine Hill Rd - Tree Removal 700.00 02/24/2014 101 -32- 4400 -0000 General Pub Works Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User- mnguyen City of Printed- 02/20/2014 - I.01PM Shorewood Batch- 00004.02.2014 - COUNCIL- 02242014 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Fund Dept Check Total- 700.00 Vendor- 415 WARNER CONNECT Check Sequence: 52 14351 Comp Maint -Jan Addt'l Svc 911.25 02/24/2014 101 -19- 4221 -0000 General Mun Bldg 14363 Comp Maint -Mar Svc 2,548.60 02/24/2014 101 -19- 4221 -0000 General Mun Bldg Check Total- 3,459.85 Vendor- 411 XCEL ENERGY Check Sequence- 53 Stmt 4400870987 5655 Merry Ln - Svc 01/09 -02/09 12.45 02/24/2014 101 -52- 4380 -0000 General Parks Check Total- 12.45 Total for Check Run- 85,900.43 Total of Number of Checks- 53 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: mnguyen Printed: 02/20/2014 - I:OIPM Batch: 00004.02.2014 - COUNCIL- 02242014 Invoice No Description r;Aq M*3 - • • • Amount Payment Date Acct Number Fund Dept AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/20/2014 - 1 :01 PM) Page 8 Meeting Date: February 24, 2014 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen, City Planner Reviewed by: Attachments: Multiple Dock Facility License Application Policy Consideration: The City Code section 1201.24, Subd. 10, requires the Shorewood Yacht Club, located at 600 West Lake Street, to apply for a Multiple Dock Facility License. Background: This is the Shorewood Yacht Club's annual multiple dock facility license application. City Code section 1201.24, Subd. 10 states that renewal of the license shall be granted provided the operation is in conformance with the terms of the conditional use permit. As indicated on the application, the owner agrees to arrange for necessary inspections to ensure that the property is in compliance with the city code. A site inspection will be conducted when the slips are occupied in the summer. Per the CUP, the applicant has submitted a plan showing where the five non - rental boats will be moored. Financial or Budget Considerations: The fee for the license is $2.00 per boat slip. The applicant has 117 boat slips and has paid the fee of $234.00. Options: As the license requirements have been met, and the owner has agreed to a site inspection, which will be conducted in the early summer, approval of the Multiple Dock Facility License application for 2014 is in order. Recommendation / Action Requested: Approval of the Multiple Dock Facility License application for the Shorewood Yacht Club for the year 2014. Next Steps and Timelines: Staff will issue the License for the Multiple Dock Facility for the Shorewood Yacht Club for the year 2014, and conduct a site inspection in early summer when the slips are occupied. Connection to Vision / Mission: Inspection of the site for compliance with the city code requirements satisfies the mission of providing quality public service, and providing a healthy environment for residents and users of the Shorewood Yacht Club. 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 MULTIPLE DOCK FACILITY LICENSE QcCITY OF APPLICATION SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 • (952) 474 -3236 PLANNING AND PROTECTIVE INSPECTIONS (Please Print or Type) SITE Address: � � � L e -) Lot: Block: P.I.N. 191W 001 Name: (' 1 �e��� �� d�� 6!Ltl Telephone:((,,0(_2_ ) ,6_ J l'_-;2T y Address: (City) (State) (Zipcode) AGENT O-R�MANAGEMENT REPRESENTATIVE (if different than owner) Naive: I (,�� -/ �2 A Telephone: (, j� �.) Address: �� ®``i� �I �L- n� _0�� (City) (State) (Zipcode) NUMBER OF BOAT SLIPS (AUTHORIZED BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND LMCD) I'`I (Office Use Only — Do Not Write In Shaded Area) I ZONING LICENSE FEE District: Fee Per Unit: $ Conforming Use ❑ No. of Boat Slips: X Nonconforming Use ❑ Total Fee: _ Receipt No. L/ INSPECTIONS Date: r t (Date) (Inspector) Initial In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I Compliance: have reviewed the requirements of the Lakeshore Follow -up: Recreational Zoning District and agree to arrange for necessary inspections to ensure that my property complies with the Code. ^' Approved: °19 '3 (Compliance Official) (Date) Signat re f Owner of Agent Date #3C MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Approval of Cooperative Agreement for Traffic Signal System, Intersection of CR 19 and TH 7, SP 2706 -225 Meeting Date: February 24, 2014 Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works Reviewed by: Attachments Draft Plans and Proposed Cooperative Agreement, Resolution Policy Consideration: Should the City Council enter into an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation ( MNDOT) and the City of Excelsior for replacement of the Traffic Signal Control System at the intersection of County Road 19 and State Trunk Highway 7? Background: MNDOT is proposing to replace the traffic control signal system at the intersection of CR 19 and Trunk Highway 7, in addition to the addition of a second left turn lane, from eastbound T.H. 7 to northbound C.R. 19. An excerpt of the draft set of plans have been included as Attachment 1 to this report. As noted in previous discussions regarding this project, MNDOT, Hennepin County, the City of Excelsior, and the City of Shorewood all own and maintain pieces of right of way that encompass this signal system. As such, each agency will take part in agreements for this improvement. The agreement that is under consideration follows the standard format and conditions of signal agreements, and is very consistent with the current agreement that is place for the existing system. This has been included as Attachment 2 to this report. Under this agreement, the Cities of Excelsior and Shorewood are responsible for furnishing power and ongoing electrical costs of operation of the signal, relamping of the LED signal indications, and cleaning and upkeep of the exterior of the signal control cabinets. This is consistent with other signal control agreements that the City has entered into previously. Staff is also pleased to report that MNDOT has addressed the concerns staff had raised about the initial design limitations of the Emergency Vehicle Preemption (EVP) system that provides emergency responders safer access through the signalized intersection. Financial or Budget Considerations: The entire cost of this project is being funded by MNDOT and Hennepin County. This is documented in Section 4 of the recitals. Therefore, any financial obligation by the City of Shorewood equates to ongoing maintenance of lamps, painting and exterior cabinets. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 Options: 1. Adopt the Resolution that directs the Mayor and City Administrator to execute the agreement on behalf of the City of Shorewood. 2. Provide Staff with alternative direction. Recommendation /Action Requested: 1. Staff is recommending Option 1 that approves the Resolution be adopted. Connection to Vision / Mission: Providing safe and effective traffic infrastructure is part of providing quality services. — M h A) uj 'o NN � 6 w O 4 4 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR- GRADIN.G,BITa_S_U FACING, -LIGHT ING,51GNAL AND- _ ADA__IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED ON _ 11__7__________ _ _ _ __ FROM -105(Y W OF -GO RD 19---- - - - -TO ___300'_E__OF__00__RD _19__IN- _EXCELSIOR STATE PROD. N0,_27.OS- 225 ------------- GROSS LENGTH- - - - - -- 1323.0__.FEET ---- 0.25- -MILES TH 7 EQUATIONS: BRIDGES-LENGTH -------------- FLLT -------- MILES 2144 +99.71BK = EXCEPTIONS-LENGTH ---------- FEET -------- MILFS NOTE: LENGTH AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT NET LENGTH---------- 13230-- FFFT- -- 925 - -MILES IS BASED ON TH 7 EB ALIGNMENT. 2145+01.73 AH REF. POINT - - -- 182 ±00.559 - -TO REF. POINI- 182 ±04.810 INDEX MAP BEGIN S.P. 2706 -225 T.H. 7 E.B. STA. 2139 +09 SCALES PLAN 50' PROFILE 50' 5' HORIZ. VERT. INDEX MAP 1500'1 R23w cLAOE AvE. GREENW Z �R9 II JNNJLJ��N 2GI 885/ m a sr. 36. MIHIETOWA Gfd— Hoy .1i. ARFY LA. 36. LINDE4 9r. 42. FLORENCE OR 39. EL N FL. Duck Frog 40. LAFAYETTE ���Island /1 S lsland 1 1� / e - Rg o City Raw SHOREWOOD RTDIE FO 17 �4 2010 POP. 11307 N.0 Af. u VYyLDyS•- ��` °� `mss BI- RUE J4T CIR, Px. AumsNR ciR. 8]. TEAL CIA. 04. PIRTRITN,E CIA. R5. W41TETAIL RIDGE CT. 94. NOLINE CI P. " F ASANT CM. 41 R y ENO• ���//����f�0�1 POE Av E. PART( ST. Dig � Nce � . [A• 5 e 41 � � p saxuE� cArE FAY RL 9T. P' �. 2,188 - 1 6 42. CENTRAL FL. O �LJ 43. COVINOTON ST. )4. FOREST DP. F re ruf°r / 5 FMEYIEN CT, vD� sr SL Alm,ss vkcLxN'L rr ,w £ +sLaa Le -eLro - uuRRer sr. ko➢P l kOE I� iutq n 6 cIR. ism � x D D C a� � e4 4xnE sTV 1EV TkFE LOGY u cIR. AR, BSI IAkE rc CHANHASSEN 2010 POP. 22,952 upm, TA (I? LILAC u ids �x¢r J li �y9•tl , RN4 TR. 4. rasxral +� 1. � M. 0 Y 113. ARLINGTON CT. STRdTIdI a mGT \A, .ARE LVCY L V2-$pV P LJi p. CT. GIP. 1/ SOH LA. Lnke LNCy W &,' L i o V I EoR DESIGN DESIGNATION Design ESALS 2033 = N/A -------------- PLAN REVISIONS ADT (Current Year) -2011- = _32,500 Design Speed__50___MPH - DATE SHEET NO. APPROVER ADT (Future Year) - - - -- = -- - - - - -- BOSed on-STOPPING-Slghit Distance__________ OHV (Design Hr. Vol.) =-- - - - - -- height of eye - - - -- Height of object ........ PROJECT LOCATION D (DirectionalDlstr.) _ ------- 7, Design Speed not achieved at.............. COUNTY : __HENNEPIN -_ T (Heavy Commercial) ___ -.- -7 STA,----- - - - - -- TO STA, MPH ------ - - - - -- - -- DISTRICT STA TO STA, MPH X T.H. 7 E.B. STA. 2152 +32 END S.P. 2706 -225 190111M M4112,11 T 116 N FOR PLANS AND UTILITIES SYMBOLS SEE TECHNICAL MANUAL STATE PROJ.NO, CHARGE IDENTIFIER FED, PROD. NO. STATE _FUNDS ------------ --------------- - - -- GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS THE 2014 EDITION OF THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 'STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION', SHALL GOVERN, INDEX SHEET NO. TITLE L TITLE SHEET 2 - 3 ESTIMATED QUANTITIES 4 SOILS & CONSTRUCTION NOTES AND STANDARD PLATES 5 - 6 TABULATIONS 7 - 8 INPLACE UTILITY TABULATIONS 9 INPLACE TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES PLAN 10 REMOVAL PLAN 11 - 12 TYPICAL SECTIONS 13 - 31 STANDARD PLAN SHEETS AND DETAILS 32 ALIGNMENT PLAN AND CROSS SECTION LAYOUT 33 ALIGNMENT TABULATION 34 CONSTRUCTION AND DRAINAGE PLAN 35 PROFILES 36 INTERSECTION AND ADA DETAILS 37 EROSION CONTROL AND TURF ESTABLISHMENT PLAN 38 DRAINAGE PROFILES AND TABULATIONS 39 DRAINAGE DETAILS 40 WATER RESOURCES NOTES AND SWPPP PLAN TCI - TC12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS PM1 - PM4 PAVEMENT MARKING PLANS ST1 - ST7 SIGNING PLANS SSI - SS20 SIGNAL PLANS X1 - X7 CROSS SECTIONS THIS PLAN CONTAINS 90 SHEETS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT [AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. PRINT NAME : ---- YICTOR__E- VASAS--- - - - - -- LICENSE N - - -- 23720 --------- DATE:---------- - - - - -- SIGNATURE:----------------------------------- DESIGN SQUAD --- QtiIiAGFR,]I.JDIENST.M.AMMK. YANG___________ _ _ ____ RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL ----------------------------------- T 117 N "�k� GTT � NAOf' Rp RECOMMENDED FOR n _'-------- OREW D i 93. c.T1:srNu Sibe, Chrisvnus �}, FOR APPROVAL ------------------------------------ 20 ------ n nN P231r iv DISTRICT y 1 Alex. /� w sPEer.0 RECOMMENDED EoR DESIGN DESIGNATION Design ESALS 2033 = N/A -------------- PLAN REVISIONS ADT (Current Year) -2011- = _32,500 Design Speed__50___MPH - DATE SHEET NO. APPROVER ADT (Future Year) - - - -- = -- - - - - -- BOSed on-STOPPING-Slghit Distance__________ OHV (Design Hr. Vol.) =-- - - - - -- height of eye - - - -- Height of object ........ PROJECT LOCATION D (DirectionalDlstr.) _ ------- 7, Design Speed not achieved at.............. COUNTY : __HENNEPIN -_ T (Heavy Commercial) ___ -.- -7 STA,----- - - - - -- TO STA, MPH ------ - - - - -- - -- DISTRICT STA TO STA, MPH X T.H. 7 E.B. STA. 2152 +32 END S.P. 2706 -225 190111M M4112,11 T 116 N FOR PLANS AND UTILITIES SYMBOLS SEE TECHNICAL MANUAL STATE PROJ.NO, CHARGE IDENTIFIER FED, PROD. NO. STATE _FUNDS ------------ --------------- - - -- GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS THE 2014 EDITION OF THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 'STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION', SHALL GOVERN, INDEX SHEET NO. TITLE L TITLE SHEET 2 - 3 ESTIMATED QUANTITIES 4 SOILS & CONSTRUCTION NOTES AND STANDARD PLATES 5 - 6 TABULATIONS 7 - 8 INPLACE UTILITY TABULATIONS 9 INPLACE TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES PLAN 10 REMOVAL PLAN 11 - 12 TYPICAL SECTIONS 13 - 31 STANDARD PLAN SHEETS AND DETAILS 32 ALIGNMENT PLAN AND CROSS SECTION LAYOUT 33 ALIGNMENT TABULATION 34 CONSTRUCTION AND DRAINAGE PLAN 35 PROFILES 36 INTERSECTION AND ADA DETAILS 37 EROSION CONTROL AND TURF ESTABLISHMENT PLAN 38 DRAINAGE PROFILES AND TABULATIONS 39 DRAINAGE DETAILS 40 WATER RESOURCES NOTES AND SWPPP PLAN TCI - TC12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS PM1 - PM4 PAVEMENT MARKING PLANS ST1 - ST7 SIGNING PLANS SSI - SS20 SIGNAL PLANS X1 - X7 CROSS SECTIONS THIS PLAN CONTAINS 90 SHEETS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT [AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. PRINT NAME : ---- YICTOR__E- VASAS--- - - - - -- LICENSE N - - -- 23720 --------- DATE:---------- - - - - -- SIGNATURE:----------------------------------- DESIGN SQUAD --- QtiIiAGFR,]I.JDIENST.M.AMMK. YANG___________ _ _ ____ RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL ----------------------------------- -20 ------ DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL --------------------------- _'-------- 20 ------ DISTRICT MATERIALS ENGINEER RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL ------------------------------------ 20 ------ DISTRICT WATER RESOURCES /HYDRAULICS ENGINEER RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL 20 - - - - -- DISTRICT TRAFFIC ENGINEER RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL ___ __________ ____________20______ STATE PRE - LETTING ENGINEER OFFICE OF LAND MANAGEMENT APPROVAL---------------------------- - - - - -- 20 - - - - -- DIRECTOR, LAND MANAGEMENT APPROVED------ - - - -20 --- - - - - -- - STATE DESIGN ENGINEER APPROVED _ - _ _ _ _ - ---------------------- 20- - - - - -I HENNEPIN COUNTY ENGINEER DISTRICT STATE AID ENGINEER 20------ REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AID-RULES/POLICY APPROVED FOR FUNDING ---------------------------------------- 20------ STATE AID ENGINEER - - -- 2705-225 - -- ----- - - - - -- ---------- - I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FINAL FIELD REVISIONS, IF ANY, WERE PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL --------- - - - - -- --------------------- ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. ------ - - - - -- --------------------- PRINT NAME: -- ------------------------- .LICENSE 11 -- - - - - -- - - -- DATE: SIGNATURE :_____ ______ ___ __ __ _ _ _ ___ -- STATE AID PROJ.NO. 027 -619 -024 STATE PROJ. NO. 2706 -225 (TH 7 = 012) SHEET NO. 1 OF 40 SHEETS - - • 1 m 0 N 0 z O W W W q W ti C) 0 0 0 l�O N y z a p W (P) PLAN QUANTITY. (1) 1007 STATE FUNDS. (2) 100% STATE AID FUNDS. (3) INCLUDES 3 CU YDS OF BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT REMOVAL MATERIAL. (4) 7" DEPTH. (5) INCLUDES TOPSOIL EMBANKMENT. (6) FERTILIZER RATE IS 350 LBS /AC, ANALYSIS 22 -5 -10, 80% W.I.N. 0% CL. (7) RESTORE ADA WORK AREAS WITH SEED AND FERTILIZER AS DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL SEEDING AREAS. TABULATION INDEX TAB SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION A 5 EARTHWORK B 5 REMOVALS C 5 BITUMINOUS AND AGGREGATE D 6 ADA, CURB & GUTTER AND CONCRETE WALK E 6 TRAFFIC BARRIER AND FENCE F 6 EROSION CONTROL AND TURF ESTABLISHMENT G 38 DRAINAGE AND CASTINGS SUMMARY TC TC2 TRAFFIC CONTROL PM PMi PAVEMENT MARKING AND SIGNING ST ST1 SIGNING SS SS1 SIGNAL STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED QUANTITIES TAB LETTER SHEET NUMBER ITEM NO. ITEM UNIT TOTAL PROJECT QUANTITIES SP 2706 -225 SAP 027 - 019 -024 100% STATE FUNDED QUANTITIES (1) 100% COUNTY STATE AID FUNDED QUANTITIES (2) 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 0.83 0.11 2051.501 MAINT AND RESTORATION OF HAUL ROADS LUMP SUM 1 1 PM PM1 2102.501 PAVEMENT MARKING REMOVAL SQ FT 270 270 PM PM1 2102.502 PAVEMENT MARKING REMOVAL LIN FT 150 150 B 5 2104.501 REMOVE CONCRETE CULVERT LIN FT 82 82 B 5 2104.501 REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER LIN FT 155 155 B 5 2104.501 REMOVE CHAIN LINK FENCE LIN FT 58 58 E 6 2104.501 REMOVE CABLE GUARDRAIL LIN FT 493 493 E 6 2104.501 REMOVE GUARDRAIL -PLATE BEAM LIN FT 108 108 B 5 2104.503 REMOVE CONCRETE WALK SQ FT 1495 1495 B 5 2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (4) SQ YD 1374 1374 B 5 2104.509 REMOVE CONCRETE APRON EACH 2 2 E 6 2104.509 REMOVE ANCHORAGE ASSEMBLY -CABLE EACH 2 2 E 6 2104.509 REMOVE ANCHORAGE ASSEMBLY -PLATE BEAM EACH 2 2 B 5 2104.509 REMOVE DROP INLET EACH 1 1 ST ST1 2104.509 REMOVE MARKER EACH 1 1 ST ST1 2104.509 REMOVE SIGN TYPE C EACH 5 5 ST ST1 2104.509 REMOVE SIGN TYPE D EACH 1 1 E 6 2104.509 REMOVE ENERGY ABSORBING TERMINAL EACH 1 1 B 5 2104.513 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LIN FT 1921 1921 E 6 2104.521 SALVAGE GUARDRAIL LIN FT 584 584 ST ST1 2104.523 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE D EACH 1 1 A 5 2106.607 EXCAVATION - COMMON (P) (3) CU YD 787 787 A 5 2106.607 COMMON EMBANKMENT (CV) (P) (5) CU YD 491 491 C 5 2211.503 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 6 CU YD 677 677 C 5 2221.503 SHOULDERING BASE AGGREGATE (CV) CLASS 2 CU YO 25 25 C 5 2331.603 JOINT ADHESIVE LIN FT 3108 3108 C 5 2360.501 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (3,C) TON 453 453 C 5 2360.502 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (3,B) TON 371 371 G 38 2501.569 18" RC SAFETY APRON EACH 1 1 G 38 2503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 LIN FT 101 101 G 38 2503.541 18" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 LIN FT 638 638 G 38 2506.501 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN H LIN FT 3.6 3.6 G 38 2506.501 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 48 -4020 LIN FT 12.5 12.5 G 3B 2506.501 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 96 -4020 LIN FT 5.7 5.7 B 5 2506.503 RECONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE LIN FT 5 5 G 38 2506.516 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH 5 5 D 6 2521.618 CONCRETE WALK SQ FT 619 619 D 6 2531.603 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 61 61 D 6 2531.618 TRUNCATED DOMES SQ FT 60 60 TC TC2 2533.507 PORTABLE PRECAST CONCRETE BARRIER DESIGN 8337 LIN FT 800 800 TC TC2 2533.508 RELOCATE PORTABLE PRECAST CONC BARRIER DESIGN 8337 LIN FT 780 780 E 6 2554.501 TRAFFIC BARRIER DESIGN B8338 LIN FT 492 492 G 38 2554.509 GUIDE POST TYPE B EACH 1 1 E 6 2554.521 ANCHORAGE ASSEMBLY PLATE BEAM EACH 3 3 E 6 2554.523 END TREATMENT TANGENT TERMINAL EACH 1 1 E 6 2554.603 INSTALL GUARDRAIL LIN FT 584 584 TC TC2 2554.615 IMPACT ATTENUATOR ASSEMBLY 2 2 E 6 2554.615 IMPACT ATTENUATOR NO 1 ASSEMBLY 1 1 TC TC2 2554.615 RELOCATE IMPACT ATTENUATOR ASSEMBLY 1 1 1 OF 2 ESTIMATED QUANTITIES DRAWN BY: VEV CHECKED BY: VEV CERTIFIED BY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGIKgA LIC. N0. 23720 DATE 12/13/13 S.P. 2706 -225 S.A.P. 027- 619 -024 (TH 7) SHEET NO. 2 OF 40 SHEETS 1 , N O N 0 z w w 0 w ti 0 0 N ti O 6 O tr � h � ui O N N � Q 1 � a R i' LU U W q LL- (P) PLAN QUANTITY. (1) 100% STATE FUNDS. ( 2 ) 100% STATE AID FUNDS. (3) INCLUDES 3 CU YDS OF BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT REMOVAL MATERIAL. (4) 7" DEPTH. (5) INCLUDES TOPSOIL EMBANKMENT. (6) FERTILIZER RATE IS 350 LBS /AC, ANALYSIS 22 -5 -10, 80% W.I.N. O% CL. (7) RESTORE ADA WORK AREAS WITH SEED AND FERTILIZER AS DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL SEEDING AREAS. TABULATION INDEX TAB SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION A 5 EARTHWORK B 5 REMOVALS C 5 BITUMINOUS AND AGGREGATE D 6 ADA, CURB & GUTTER AND CONCRETE WALK E 6 TRAFFIC BARRIER AND FENCE F 6 EROSION CONTROL AND TURF ESTABLISHMENT G 38 DRAINAGE AND CASTINGS SUMMARY TC TC2 TRAFFIC CONTROL PM PM1 PAVEMENT MARKING AND SIGNING ST ST1 SIGNING SS 551 SIGNAL STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED QUANTITIES TAB LETTER SHEET NUMBER ITEM NO. ITEM UNIT TOTAL PROJECT QUANTITIES SP 2706 -225 SAP 027 -019 -024 100% STATE FUNDED QUANTITIES (1) 100% COUNTY STATE AID FUNDED QUANTITIES (2) E 5 2557.501 WIRE FENCE DESIGN 60 -9322 LIN FT 58 58 TC TC2 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 0.83 0.17 TC TC2 2563.602 MEDIAN BARRIER DELINEATOR EACH 53 53 TC TC2 2563.613 PORTABLE CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGN UNIT DAY 10 10 ST ST1 2564.531 SIGN PANELS TYPE C SQ FT 59 59 ST ST1 2564.537 INSTALL SIGN TYPE 0 EACH 1 1 SS SS1 2565.511 TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM SIG SYS 1 0.67 0.33 SS SS1 2565.601 EMERGENCY VEHICLE PREEMPTION SYSTEM LUMP SUM 1 0.67 0.33 F 6 2573.530 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 7 7 F 6 2573.540 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE COMPOST LIN FT 2440 2440 F 6 2573.602 CULVERT END CONTROLS EACH 3 3 F 6 2575.501 SEEDING ACRE 0.4 0.4 F 6 2575.502 SEED MIXTURE 25 -141 POUND 24 24 F 6 2575.523 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 SQ YD 1883 1883 F 6 2575.531 FERTILIZER TYPE 3 (6) POUND 137 137 0 6 2575.602 SITE RESTORATION (7) EACH 3 3 TC TC2 2581.501 REMOVABLE PREFORMED PLASTIC MARKING LIN FT 2455 2455 TC TC2 2581.603 REMOVABLE PREFORMED PLASTIC MASK (BLACK) LIN FT 1510 15L0 PM PM1 2582.501 PAVEMENT MESSAGE (LT ARROW) EPDXY EACH 4 4 PM PM1 2582.501 PAVEMENT MESSAGE (RT ARROW) EPDXY EACH 2 2 PM PM1 2582.502 4" SOLID LINE WHITE -EPDXY LIN FT 1983 1983 PM PM1 2582.502 24" SOLID LINE WHITE -EPDXY LIN FT 32 32 PM PMI 2582.502 4" SOLID LINE YELLOW -EPDXY LIN FT 851 851 PM PM1 2582.503 CROSSWALK MARKING -EPDXY SQ FT 270 270 20F2 ESTIMATED QUANTITIES DRAWN BY: VEV CHECKED BY: VEV CERTIFIED BY LICENSED PRUESSIONAL ENGINEER LIC. ND. 23720 DATE 12/13/13 S.P. 2706 -225 S.A.P. 027 -619 -024 (TH 7) . SHEET NO. 3 OF 40 SHEETS a M N w cr cr Q 41 ti ti 0 J 4 c � 1 d d N cr o 0 ti U Z �4w i i i i I I 0TO? APS3 \ i I I j (ATTACHED TO SIGNAL POLE) 6300 I I (SITE #3 NG301 I I `Q,� r I " I tp \ -------- - - - - -- CSAH 19 Qom\ W \� �- LOREB7 K - - - - - - - - - - - - 2149 �- GUTTERI (� LORWB7 APS2 SITE #2 DETAIL & GUTTER POINTS POINT X Y ELEVATION NOTES G100 452248.06 139032.24 950.69 APS3 G101 452254.92 139036.39 950.81 FOR GUTTER ALIGNMENT DETAILS,SEE ALIGNMENT TABULATIONS. 0102 452251.08 139026.76 950.56 AND ELEVATION G200 452221.90 139101.76 950.71 G201 452220.14 139100.72 950.70 EDGE OF WALK G202 452213.25 139096.64 950.62 EDGE OF WALK G203 452212.10 139095.95 950.58 P.C. G204 452208.42 139091.03 950.39 . - ..: :...:. O : 960 :.w10.:.:.:.:.:.: ..:.. G205 452209.34 139064.93 950.20 P.T. 0206 452212.73 139079.33 950.00 L. P. G207 452214.83 139075.85 950.12 P.C. G208 452221.19 139070.27 950.38 .:- ........:.. ±3..p2% G209 452227.67 139069.12 950.58 EDGE OF WALK G210 452229.60 139069.37 950.62 P.T. G211 452236.07 139070.69 950.75 EDGE OF WALK G212 452238.12 139071.10 950.78 C213 452229.56 139083.36 951.02 :... .....:........::: N .... _ o 0214 452225.76 139090.40 950.90 940 :..- :::::o O - :- i':r.:2::Q f...............A :::: ::d. G300 452183.72 139070.68 951.08 G301 452191.03 139083.36 951.15 0302 452179.58 139090.401 951.25 Q APS POINTS POINT X Y APS1 452256.59 139032.43 AP52 452227.29 139086.60 APS3 452186.88 139161.24 LEGEND INPLACE- SIGNAL POLE * PROPOSED SIGNAL POLE FO PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON STATION I- PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON XXX7\9 CONTROL POINTS AT GUTTER FLOW LINE ® TRUNCATED DOMES (SEE STANDARD PLATE 7038) CONSTRUCT CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER X" CURB HEIGHT ® LANDING AREA - 4'X 4'MIN.DIMENSIONS AND MAX 2.0% SLOPE IN ALL DIRECTIONS T INDICATES PEDESTRIAN RAMP - SLOPE SHALL s BE BETWEEN 5.0% MINIMUM AND 8.37 MAXIMUM IN THE DIRECTION SHOWN AND CROSS SLOPE SHALL NOT EXCEED 2.01 INDICATES PEDESTRIAN RAMP - SLOPE SHALL F BE GREATER THAN 2.0% AND LESS THAN 5.0% IN THE DIRECTION SHOWN AND CROSS SLOPE SHALL NOT EXCEED 2.07 DRAINAGE FLOW ARROW 4" G2� � Oil 212 - l - NOTE: ......... : ......... : ......... .......... :......... :.........:...... ........ FOR GUTTER ALIGNMENT DETAILS,SEE ALIGNMENT TABULATIONS. GUTTER PROFILE LOCATION AND ELEVATION 4" G2� � Oil 212 - l - ......... : ......... : ......... .......... :......... :.........:...... ........ 214 9 :...................... .......:.........:.........:... .......... ....... ............. .......::::: :::.:: .. 2150 ....... :::::. r�0 -::.••SO :II .. _ - :N :::: -.M ..-~ ..::.. . - ..: :...:. O : 960 :.w10.:.:.:.:.:.: ..:.. :.. .. ::i�: ::::.Q :::: . ....'.:::::.:. m CD (P ....:.... .:.:.:.:. .... ..........:..u, ........u, :.... ...... . ............. : - 1r:Q0!.::::::- ... ::::-'-- .:- ........:.. ±3..p2% .. .2..001: ...... €..::::::. 950 :::::: ........... .:•fl9Y -- ...... ......... . ...... ............................... ....... ....... .. .. �l 0lp 0 01 1 :. ....i:::::..0CD ......v .Q,..O..;. a p ..... p ,�. N :... .....:........::: N .... _ o N--v.. ..:erl::lG:::' � -�m ...... ......... ...:,W.tn .. .. ...... 940 :..- :::::o O - :- i':r.:2::Q f...............A :::: ::d. i:n5 :..vS ::� ::::,��, ... ....: ................... ........ .a- .....�- �....:... r......... ... ....T+ T ....... ... C Id O Q ......o ..b b :b ,o.. i:..... : :NN:. :...N .N .. �...:N :..: .. �. -0 -.. .:. 'o� ....�� .. ...... ...:��......... 2 � S PSI - - _ _ .. ........._ .................... :.......,.: , _ c'..... Y..._..:.:......._...":.....`.. ............................ . .......... .:...:............... 7, - - - - - - - - - - - .. ... . INTERSECTION DETAIL PLAN DRAWN BY: MRA CHECKED BY: VEV CERTIFIED BY LICENSED PN ESSr w E INEE L IC. NO. 23720 DATE 12/13/13 S.P. 2706 -225 S.A.P. 027- 619 -024 (T.H 7) SHEET N0. 36 OF 40 SHEETS N N 'o z W cr crO w a a a y N 0 a 0 0 U 12 6 � O o •� g b C w U LEGEND 1 SEED MIXTURE 25 -141, FERTILIZER TYPE 3 AND I EROSION CONTROL BLANKET CATEGORY 3 (1) / / ® CATCH BASIN 13 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION / DROP INLET —BR— SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG - TYPE COMPOST — Q SAFETY APRON (:�CP CULVERT END CONTROLS - STORM SEWER '%, DRAINAGE FLOW DIRECTION N\k • /� - -,�i� LORWB7 INP /W =cicp \ ��� J \`CA �` — i� I I �j �� N f • _ 7WBTURNLAI� \ �_ u k � O � � ► . � INP. \R / � 2145 TER1 +~ L +25 31 cEcp ' ` r r 2145 o L rr0i 2144 II +14 — LOREB7 -2 ` ` ~ LOREB7 -1 I +Oro LOREB7 TRAIL 'f I �-1C INP. R /W--- - - -�__ 7 fir/ END S.P. 2706 -225 f T.H. 7 E.B. STA. 2152 +/(2 J NOTES: (1) ALL NATURAL NETTING AND STITCHING I Jr •�T. H. 7 E.B. J I A /21 +0/9// BEGIN S.P. 270 -2 GALPIN LAKE EROSION CONTROL AND TURF ESTABLISHMENT PLAN DRAWN BY: DOD CHECKED BY: VEV CERTIFIED BY ICENS D PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER LIC. N0. 23720 DATE 12/13/13 S.P. 2706 -225 S.A.P. 027- 619 -024 (T.H 7) SHEET N0. 37 OF 40 SHEETS N W d ti 6 t b h v 4 u� N N O ti N of � ro U � 4 3 Q N 4 O LZ J s' LL � Z o2S O � � Foi r7 I �� y0 �O / NdSON suN, 4 aQ 1, / Non smvao / �a -V IV QaoN G! 19 0 a� ti � d Oy 7 O yp o� a yob U l NOTES: 1) F &I WZ -1 WZ -3 WZ -5 & & WZ -7 7 DAYS IN ADVANCED OF START OF PROJECT AND OR CLOSURES 2) MOUNT WZ -2 WZ -4 & WZ -6 PANELS UPON START OF PROJECT ANb OR CLOSURES AD NCED SIGNING DRAWN BY: KF CHECKED BY: TD CERTIFIED BY tiCENSEO PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER LIC. N0. DATE 11/14/7013 S.P. 2706 -225 (TH 7) S.P.027JAA024 SHEET N0. TC 5 OF 12 SHEETS o W W W F� F� C" 0 c o� h v Q In N N Lo Q ti N N Lo ~ h �1 U � b N 4 4 N � d � SE ' Z " Lj� IL � O � q � � s X C TH 7 TO NB CSAH 19 DETOUR DETOURS DRAWN BY: KF CHECKED BY: TD CERTIFIED BY LICENSED Pft0FE5510NpL ENGINEER LIC. N0. DATE S.P. 2706 -225 (TH 7) S.P. 027- -024 SHEET NO, TC 6 OF 12 SHEETS 0 N O N ti o w � N r ti 2 U C O VI 4 O i n 'o N q W w w ti 0 iA ST ST �c�� � � ���• ado EX 5 OR BLV 2�a 3r d N a w N a � 4 � � COUNTY `�%• 41 � I 4 CSAH 19 TO TH 7 DETOUR DETOURS I DRAWN BY: KF CHECKED BYm TD CERTIFIED BY L«ERSeo rROFE5510HaL ENG[r[R LIC. No. DATE 11/14/2013 S.P. 2706 -225 (TH 7) S.P. 027- -024 SHEET N0. TC 7 OF 12 SHEETS a LOOP DETECTOR CHART NUMBER SIZE (FT) LOCATION 01 -1 2 -6X6 20 & 50 DL -2 2 -6X6 5 & 35 02- 1,02 -2 6x6 400 04- 1,D4 -2 6X6 120 04- 3,D4 -4 2 -6X6 5 & 20 D5- 1,D5 -2 2 -6X6 20 & 50 05- 3,05 -4 2 -6X6 5 & 35 D6- 1,D6 -2 6X6 400 0 -ALL LOOP DETECTORS SHALL BE PVC UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE - LOCATION: DISTANCE FROM a CROSSWALK /STOP BAR IN FEET Qz W W O 4 � a o, y h"] d N ti z 3 W a 00 4 N Q ti I 3 4 d w LZI z w w � a z w � w Uzan c ti o 4 4 co 1 N m 3 a r N 2" CONDUIT 2- 2/C#14 INPLACE:2" RSC I I I F &I:3 -1 /C#2 15 04 -1 D4 -2 I I 20 w I I IN9 LLI 2!2 /CO#14IT // I N I I NeI�I I V I O I 4" CONDUIT 14 I c" 1 — 1 1n z�� CONDUIT 1 2/C#14 � I I 5 -: F/0 B / 6-2/C#14 12 12 04 -3 ( D4 -4 I I 11 3 E] o II 6 -2 V 4" CONDUIT 2- 12/C#14 ye 1— R /r+HA i 4" CONDUIT 6- 2/C#14 6 &i EVP 9 — D5 -2 D5 -4 D5 -2 D5-4 T.H.7 E,R. 50 MPH _ - - - - -- — -- -- - — — — — — D5 -1 D5 -3 Q a H > v CONTROLLER PHASING, PEDESTRIAN INDICATIONS AND PUSH BUTTONS PB3 -3 O / 4 (D3) V 1 0] P3 -4 �r E^ 6 P PB3 -2 2 (D2) P_3 5 2 —� PB3 -1 P3 -1 O• V PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTONS SHALL BE LOCATED AS SHOWN ABOVE BY I DATE 1 REVI51ON5 SIGNAL SYSTEM OPERATION - THE SIGNAL SYSTEM FLASH MODE IS ALL RED. - NORMAL OPERATION IS 5 PHASE,WITH PHASES 1 AND 5 BEING FLASHING YELLOW ARROW LEFT TURN PHASES BY TIME OF DAY. - PHASES 2 AND 6 SHALL BE ON VEHICLE RECALL. SYSTEM ID: 20133 METER ADDRESS: 400 OAK STREET MASTER ID: X GR. 2 &5 EVP 7 1 -2 3" CONDUIT 2- 12/C#14 *1-3/C#14 1- 3/C#14 (LUM) *1-3/C#20 1 -1 /C#6 INS. GR. V IT 11 1 INPLACE:3" RSC F&It 3-1/C#2 I I 112" CONDUIT �fE1- 3 /C#k20 40 II III SCALE IN FEET © SIGNAL FACE CHART FACE R Y FYA 1 -1,1 -2 F 4--4— 2- 1,2 -2,2 -3 0 0 II'' < — 4- 2/C#14 4-1,4-2,4-3 0 4-- 5- 1,5 -2,5 -3 -4— 4-- 6- 1,6 -2,6 -3 1 0 1 -1 /C#6 INS. GR. -ALL SIGNAL INDICATIONS SHALL BE 12" LED �INPLACE :2" RSC -ALL SIGNAL HEADS SHALL BE BLACK F &I:3 -1 /C#2 POLYCARBONITE WITH BACKGROUND I I \ SHIELDS II � II ` F &I: 2" CONDUIT II INg � IN P\ PULLBACK: FO PIGTAIL AND REINSTALL 11 cz 0 II Q1 __�� - -_ —BA ]/ / 2'2/C#14 IT 17 -BUR \--- `-- _ - - -_ -- 2 F/ -411 CONDUIT T.E. 5142 INTERSECTION LAYOUT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM T. E. T.H. 7 AT CSAH 19 (OAK STREET) IN EXCELSIOR. HENNEPIN COUNTY NOTES: 1.SEE SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR STATE FURNISHED MATERIALS. SEE "FOR INFORMATION ONLY" SHEETS FOR INPLACE SIGNAL COMPONENTS. 2.THE EXACT LOCATION OF HANDHOLES, POLES, LOOP DETECTORS, EQUIPMENT PAD,AND PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE DETERMINED IN THE FIELD BY MNDOT TRAFFIC OFFICE PERSONNEL. 3.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING THE CONNECTION OF THE POWER FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM. 4.FOR TYPE D SIGNS SEE DETAIL SHEET. ALL SIGNS REQUIRED ARE INCIDENTAL. 5. THIS PLAN SPECIFIES CONDUIT SIZES, TYPES, AND GENERAL LOCATIONS. THE EXACT LOCATIONS WILL BE DETERMINED IN THE FIELD. CONDUITS UNDER THE ROADWAYS REQUIRE BORING. 6.ALL NEW CONDUIT SHALL BE PVC - SCHEDULE BO OR HDPE SCHEDULE 80 AND SHALL CARRY t /C#6 GREEN INSULATED GROUNDING CONDUCTOR AS SHOWN IN THE PLAN. 7.ITEMS DENOTED WITH AN * ARE INCLUDED IN PAYMENT FOR THE EVP SYSTEM PAY ITEM. & PULLBACK 1 -FO CABLE FROM EXISTING CONTROL CABINET AND INSTALL IN NEW CONTROL CABINET. THIS WORK IS INCIDENTAL. 9.SALVAGING AND REINSTALLING CAMERA POWER SUPPLY AND EXTENSION ARM WORK IS INCIDENTAL. IO.REMOVAL OF EXISTING SIGNAL IS INCIDENTAL, S.A.P. NO. CERTIFIED BY STATE PROJ.NO. 2706 -225 (T.H.7) DRAWN BY:MAS JCKD BY:GAK DATE:I1 -5 -13 LIC. NO. 26829 DATE, SHEET NO. SS14 OF SS20 SHEETS 2150 2- 3/C#14 - 2_3/C#14 (LUM) T.N. 7 w.B. II'' < — 4- 2/C#14 11') — — — 1.L 1- 3/C#14 (CAMERA POWER) — — — — — — COM -RILE — — — — 50 MPH N II i- COAXIAL CABLE — — — — — 1 -1 /C#6 INS. GR. 01 -2 L -L 4 CONDUIT 61 12/C#14 1- 4/C#14 1Y�� 3/C##114 - O 2- (LUM) }a- 2- 3/C#20 (n 3" CONDUIT 2- 2/C#14 II 1- 4/C#14144 1 -COM CABLE Z CABLE 2- 3/C#14 2150 - 3/C#14 (LUM) I-1/C#6 INS. 2 1- 3/C##114 (CAMERA POWER) f- Q 4 -3 1- COAXIAL CABLE E 1 -I /C#6 INS. GR. 6 PED PS STATION 1 -APS PB AND SIGN (LT ARROW)(PB3 -L) EXTEND INTO HH 6: 1" CONDUIT 1- 2/C#14 T.E. 5142 INTERSECTION LAYOUT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM T. E. T.H. 7 AT CSAH 19 (OAK STREET) IN EXCELSIOR. HENNEPIN COUNTY NOTES: 1.SEE SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR STATE FURNISHED MATERIALS. SEE "FOR INFORMATION ONLY" SHEETS FOR INPLACE SIGNAL COMPONENTS. 2.THE EXACT LOCATION OF HANDHOLES, POLES, LOOP DETECTORS, EQUIPMENT PAD,AND PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE DETERMINED IN THE FIELD BY MNDOT TRAFFIC OFFICE PERSONNEL. 3.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING THE CONNECTION OF THE POWER FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM. 4.FOR TYPE D SIGNS SEE DETAIL SHEET. ALL SIGNS REQUIRED ARE INCIDENTAL. 5. THIS PLAN SPECIFIES CONDUIT SIZES, TYPES, AND GENERAL LOCATIONS. THE EXACT LOCATIONS WILL BE DETERMINED IN THE FIELD. CONDUITS UNDER THE ROADWAYS REQUIRE BORING. 6.ALL NEW CONDUIT SHALL BE PVC - SCHEDULE BO OR HDPE SCHEDULE 80 AND SHALL CARRY t /C#6 GREEN INSULATED GROUNDING CONDUCTOR AS SHOWN IN THE PLAN. 7.ITEMS DENOTED WITH AN * ARE INCLUDED IN PAYMENT FOR THE EVP SYSTEM PAY ITEM. & PULLBACK 1 -FO CABLE FROM EXISTING CONTROL CABINET AND INSTALL IN NEW CONTROL CABINET. THIS WORK IS INCIDENTAL. 9.SALVAGING AND REINSTALLING CAMERA POWER SUPPLY AND EXTENSION ARM WORK IS INCIDENTAL. IO.REMOVAL OF EXISTING SIGNAL IS INCIDENTAL, S.A.P. NO. CERTIFIED BY STATE PROJ.NO. 2706 -225 (T.H.7) DRAWN BY:MAS JCKD BY:GAK DATE:I1 -5 -13 LIC. NO. 26829 DATE, SHEET NO. SS14 OF SS20 SHEETS PEDESTAL FOUNDATION 1 13'PEDESTAL POLE PLUS BASE 1- STRAIGHT MOUNT SIGNAL AT 90' 1- STRAIGHT MOUNT C.D.PED IND AT 270' 1 -APS PB AND SIGN (RT ARROW)(PB3 -3) 3" CONDUIT TO HH 17: 1- 12/C#14 1- 4/C#14 N 1- 2/C#14 L -1 /C#6 INS. GR. 0 W D OPEDESTAL FOUNDATION 2 L3'PEOESTAL POLE PLUS BASE ° L- STRAIGHT MOUNT C.O.PED IND AT 270' 4 L- STRAIGHT MOUNT C.O.PED IND AT 90' L -APS PB AND SIGN (DOUBLE ARROW)(PB3 -2) 3" CONDUIT TO HH 5: 1- 12/C#14 1- 2/C#14 1 -1 /C#6 INS. GR. /r ©PEDESTAL FOUNDATION 131PEOESTAL POLE PLUS BASE 1 -ONE WAY EVP DETECTOR 2" CONDUIT TO HH 16B- 1-3/C#20 PA100 POLE FOUNDATION TYPE PAL00 -A -55 SALVAGE & REINSTALL: 1 -X6 -350 /CAM 400 (MOUNTED AT 350 DEG) SALVAGE & REINSTALL: 1- CAMERA POWER SUPPLY 1 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNAL OVERHEAD AT 0' 3- STRAIGHT MOUNT SIGNALS OVERHEAD AT 11' 23' AND 35' 2 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNALS AT 90 AND 180 DEG L -ANGLE MOUNT C.D.PED IND AT 90' • L -ONE WAY EVP DETECTOR AND CONFIRMATORY LIGHT (PHASES 2 &5) LUMINAIRE -LED 1 -R10 -X12 SIGN (42" x 4811) ADJACENT TO HEAD (5 -2) 1 -TYPE D SIGN (D- 2) (SEE SIGN DETAILS) 3" CONDUIT TO HH 6: 3 -12 /C #14 1 -4 /C 414 • 1 -3 /C #14 1 -3 /C #14 (LUM) • 1 -3 /C #20 1- 3/C#14 (CAMERA POWER) i -COM CABLE 1- COAXIAL CABLE 1 -I /C #6 INS. GR. DATE REVISIONS 2" CONDUIT N 2- 2/C#14 LO c\1 - - -- _ y'F /0 `BORE 3 D6 -1 G7 Lu ~ ~ D6 -2 Z r--: 2 U F- Q F 2145 2" CONDUIT 2- 2/C#14 1. w r ~ �� - -- 2145 D2 -2 D2 -1 SYSTEM ID: 20133 METER ADDRESS: 400 OAK STREET MASTER ID: PA85 POLE FOUNDATION 4 TYPE PA85- A- 20 -D40 -9 (DAVIT AT 350 DEG) 1 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNAL OVERHEAD AT 0' 2 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNALS AT 90 AND 180 DEG CIF 1 -ONE WAY EVP DETECTOR AND CONFIRMATORY LIGHT (PHASES 4) LUMINAIRE -LED I -TYPE D SIGN (0- 1)(SEE SIGN DETAILS) 1 -TYPE R9 -343 SIGN (NO PEO)FACING POLE 5 3" CONDUIT TO HH 7: 2 -12 /C #14 1 -3 /C #14 1 -3 /C #l4 (LUM) 1 -3 /C 420 1 -1 /C #6 INS. GR. PA100 POLE FOUNDATION TYPE PAIOO- A- 50 -D40 -9 (DAVIT AT 350 DEG) 1 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNAL OVERHEAD AT O' 2- STRAIGHT MOUNT SIGNALS OVERHEAD AT 11' AND 23' 1 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNAL AT 180 DEG >� 1 -ONE WAY EVP DETECTOR AND CONFIRMATORY LIGHT (PHASES 6+1) LUMINAIRE -LED 1 -RLO -X12 SIGN (42" x 4811) ADJACENT TO HEAD (1 -1) 1 -TYPE 0 SIGN (D- 2)(SEE SIGN DETAILS) 2 -TYPE R9 -3a SIGNS (NO PED)FACING POLES L AND 3 3" CONDUIT TO HH 12: 2 -12 /C #14 • 1 -3 /C #14 1- 3/C#14 (LUM) • 1 -3 /C #20 I -1 /C #6 INS. GR. 0 m 3 Q Z J U `a f T.E. 5142 POLE NOTES AND MATCHLINE LAYOUT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM T.H. 7 AT CSAH 19 (OAK STREET) T. E. IN EXCELSIOR, HENNEPIN COUNTY S.A.P. NO. CERTIFIED BY a 2" CONDUIT II iIF 1- 3/C#20 I I` I 11 1L 11 16B STATE PROJ.NO. 2706 -225 (T.H.7) IN#2QUIT )NOUIT 4*0 MATCHLINE "A' DRAWN BY:MAS ICKD BY:GAK DATE:11 -5 -13 LIC. NO. 26829 DATE= SHEET NO. SS15 OF SS20 SHEETS 40 SOP -WOOD POLE OINPLACE g (BY XCEL ENERGY) SCALE IN FEET O EQUIPMENT PAD (SEE DETAIL SHEET) A SERVICE CABINET (559) a CONTROLLER AND CABINET (STATE FURNISHED) 0 4" CONDUIT TO HH 1: 4" CONDUIT TO HH 17: i 6 -12/C *14 3 -12 /C *14 1 -4 /C *14 1 -4 /C #14 a 2 -3 /C *14 1 -3 /C #14 6 -2 /C *14 11 -2 /C #14 3 4F2 -3 /C *20 2 -3 /C 020 2 I -COM CABLE 1 -1 /C #6 INS. GR. 1- COAXIAL CABLE W 1 -1 /C 46 INS. GR. 1 -2" AND 1 -3" CONDUIT STUBBED OUT (CAPPED BOTH ENDS) 3/4" CONDUIT STUBBED OUT (FOR TELEPHONE LINE) y o CONTROLLER CABINET TO SERVICE CABINET: b W 2" CONDUIT o` 2 -1 /C #6 ti 1 -L /C #6 INS. GR. �t 4 CONTROLLER CABINET TO SERVICE CABINET (COMMS): o z 2" CONDUIT k; 1 -6PR #19 W W SERVICE CABINET TO HH 18: z 2" CONDUIT W 3 -L /C #2 SERVICE CABINET TO HH 1: ti 2" CONDUIT 3 -3 /C #14 (LUM) I- x 1- 3 /C #(4 (CAMERA POWER) ° HH 1 TO HH 17: o 2" CONDUIT 1 -3 /C #14 (LUM) CONTROLLER CABINET TO TMS VAULT: 2" CONDUIT S &I: FO PIGTAIL DATE REVISIONS 2" CONDUIT N 2- 2/C#14 LO c\1 - - -- _ y'F /0 `BORE 3 D6 -1 G7 Lu ~ ~ D6 -2 Z r--: 2 U F- Q F 2145 2" CONDUIT 2- 2/C#14 1. w r ~ �� - -- 2145 D2 -2 D2 -1 SYSTEM ID: 20133 METER ADDRESS: 400 OAK STREET MASTER ID: PA85 POLE FOUNDATION 4 TYPE PA85- A- 20 -D40 -9 (DAVIT AT 350 DEG) 1 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNAL OVERHEAD AT 0' 2 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNALS AT 90 AND 180 DEG CIF 1 -ONE WAY EVP DETECTOR AND CONFIRMATORY LIGHT (PHASES 4) LUMINAIRE -LED I -TYPE D SIGN (0- 1)(SEE SIGN DETAILS) 1 -TYPE R9 -343 SIGN (NO PEO)FACING POLE 5 3" CONDUIT TO HH 7: 2 -12 /C #14 1 -3 /C #14 1 -3 /C #l4 (LUM) 1 -3 /C 420 1 -1 /C #6 INS. GR. PA100 POLE FOUNDATION TYPE PAIOO- A- 50 -D40 -9 (DAVIT AT 350 DEG) 1 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNAL OVERHEAD AT O' 2- STRAIGHT MOUNT SIGNALS OVERHEAD AT 11' AND 23' 1 -ANGLE MOUNT SIGNAL AT 180 DEG >� 1 -ONE WAY EVP DETECTOR AND CONFIRMATORY LIGHT (PHASES 6+1) LUMINAIRE -LED 1 -RLO -X12 SIGN (42" x 4811) ADJACENT TO HEAD (1 -1) 1 -TYPE 0 SIGN (D- 2)(SEE SIGN DETAILS) 2 -TYPE R9 -3a SIGNS (NO PED)FACING POLES L AND 3 3" CONDUIT TO HH 12: 2 -12 /C #14 • 1 -3 /C #14 1- 3/C#14 (LUM) • 1 -3 /C #20 I -1 /C #6 INS. GR. 0 m 3 Q Z J U `a f T.E. 5142 POLE NOTES AND MATCHLINE LAYOUT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM T.H. 7 AT CSAH 19 (OAK STREET) T. E. IN EXCELSIOR, HENNEPIN COUNTY S.A.P. NO. CERTIFIED BY a 2" CONDUIT II iIF 1- 3/C#20 I I` I 11 1L 11 16B STATE PROJ.NO. 2706 -225 (T.H.7) IN#2QUIT )NOUIT 4*0 MATCHLINE "A' DRAWN BY:MAS ICKD BY:GAK DATE:11 -5 -13 LIC. NO. 26829 DATE= SHEET NO. SS15 OF SS20 SHEETS MnDOT Contract No: 04597 STATE OF MINNESOTA. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION And CITY OF EXCELSIOR And CITY OF SHOREWOOD TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT State Project No. Control Section (C.S.): Trunk Highway Number (T.H.): Signal System 1D 2706 -225 2706 7 =012 20133 This Agreement is between the Mate of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Transportation ( "State "), the City of Excelsior acting through its City Council ( "Excelsior "), and the City of Shorewood acting through its City Council ( "Shorewood "). Recitals Hennepin County, Excelsior, Shorewood, and the State have found it in the best interest of the Public to remove the existing Traffic Control Signal and Emergency Vehicle Preemption System and install a new Traffic Control Signal with Accessible Pedestrian Signals ("APS "), Signal Pole Mounted L.E.D. Luminaires, Interconnect, and Signing ( "Signal System "); and a new Emergency Vehicle Preemption System ( "EVP System ") on Trunk Highway No. 7 at County Mate Aid Highway No. 19 (Oak Street) in the Cities of Excelsior and Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and 2. Excelsior, Shorewood, and the State wish to define their respective power, operation, and maintenance responsibilities for the new Signal System and EVP System., on Trunk Highway No. 7 at County State Aid Highway No. 19 (Oak Street) in the Cities of Excelsior and Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and 3. Excelsior, Shorewood, and the State will participate in the power, operation and maintenance of the new Signal System and EVP System. 4. Municipal Agreement No. 04956 between the State and Hennepin County will address the cost participation for the new Signal System and EVP System; and 5. Minnesota Statutes § 1.61.20, subdivision 2 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to make arrangements with and cooperate with any governmental authority for the purposes of constructing, :maintaining and improving the trunk highway system. Agreement 1. Term of Agreement; Survival of Terms 1.1. Effective date. This Agreement will be effective on the date the State obtains all signatures required by Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 2. 1.2. Expiration date. This Agreement will expire when all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled. 1.3. Survival of terms. All clauses which impose obligations continuing in their nature and which must survive in order to give effect to their meaning will survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement, including, without limitation, the following clauses: 5. Liability; Worker Compensation Claims; Insurance; 7. State Audits; S. Government Data Practices; 9. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue; and 1.1. force ATTACHMENT 2 -1- SIGNAL AGREEMENT MnDOT Contract No: 04597 Majeure. The terms and conditions set forth in Article 2. Signal System and EVP System Power, Operation and Maintenance may be terminated by another Agreement between the parties. 2. Signal System and EVP System Power, Operation, and Maintenance Operation and maintenance responsibilities will be as follows for the new Signal System. and EVP System on Trunk Highway No. 7 at County State Aid Highway No. 19 (Oak Street) in the Cities of Excelsior and Shorewood. 2.1. Excelsior /Shorewood R(- ,sponsibilities A. .Power. Excelsior and Shorewood shall be Jointly responsible for the installation of an adequate power supply to the service pad or pole, and for providing all necessary electrical power for the operation of the new Signal system and EVP System. Excelsior shall receive the bill for the electrical power including connection fees and the monthly electrical bill for the new Signal System and EVP System, and invoice Shorewood for 50 percent of the costs. 13. .Minor Signal System Maintenance. Excelsior and Shorewood shall jointly be responsible for the following, without cost to the State. i. Maintain the signal pole mounted. L.E.D. luminaires and all internal components, including replacing the luminaires when necessary. ii. Replace the Signal System L.E.D. indications. iii. Clean the Signal System controller cabinet and service cabinet exteriors. iv. Clean the Signal System and luminaire mast arm extensions C. Sidewalks. Excelsior and Shorewood shall jointly be responsible for the maintenance of any sidewalk construction, including stamped and colored concrete sidewalk (if any) and pedestrian ramps. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, snow, ice and debris removal, patching, crack repair, panel replacement, mowing grass boulevards (if any) and any other maintenance activities necessary to perpetuate the sidewalks in a safe, useable, and aesthetically acceptable condition. Excelsior shall perform the minor signal system maintenance and sidewalk activities listed above and bill Shorewood 50 percent of the costs. D. EVP. Excelsior and Shorewood will provide the State's District Engineer or their designated representative a list of all vehicles with EVP emitter units, if requested by the State. 2.2. State Responssibilities A. Interconnect; Timing; Other. Maintenance. The State will maintain the interconnect and signing, and perform all other Signal System, APS, and signal pole L.E.D. luminaire circuit maintenance without cost to Excelsior and Shorewood. All Signal System timing will be determined by the State, and no changes will be made without the State's approval. B. EVP System Operation. The EVP System will be installed, operated, maintained, and removed according to the following conditions and requirements: i. All maintenance of the EVP System must be done by State forces. ii. Emitter units maybe installed only on authorized emergency vehicles, as defined in Minnesota Statutes § 169.011, Subdivision I Authorized emergency vehicles may use emitter units only when responding to an emergency. iii. Malfunction of the EVP System must be reported to the State immediately. -2- MnDOT Contract No: 04597 iv. In the event the EVP System or its components are, in the opinion of the State, being misused or the conditions set forth in Paragraph ii. above are violated, and such misuse or violation continues after Excelsior or Shorewood receives written notice from the State, the State may remove the EVP System. Upon removal of the EVP System pursuant to this Paragraph, all of its parts and components become the property of the State. v. All timing of the EVP System will be determined by the State 2.3. Right of Way Access. Each party authorizes the other party to enter upon their respective public right of way to perform the maintenance activities described in this Agreement. 2.4. Related Agreements. i. This agreement will supersede and terminate Agreement No. 66167, dated August 8, 1.990, between Hennepin County, Excelsior, and Shorewood, for the intersection of Trunk Highway No. 7 and County State Aid Highway No. 19 (Oak Street) in Excelsior and Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Hennepin County will be sent a letter of termination regarding this agreement. ii. This agreement will supersede and terminate terms and conditions of Agreement No. 7818IR, dated September 17, 1999, for maintenance and operation of the Emergency Vehicle Pre - emption System, on Trunk Highway No. 7 at County State Aid Highway No. 19 (Oak Street) between Shorewood and the State. 3. Authorized Representatives Each party's Authorized. Representative is responsible for administering this Agreement and is authorized to give and receive any notice or demand required or permitted by this Agreement. 3.1. The State's Authorized Representative will be: Name/Title, Allan Espinoza, MnDOT Metropolitan District Traffic Engineering (or successor) Address: 1500 County Road. B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 Telephone: (651) 234 -7812 Fax: (651) 234 -7850 E -Mail: allan.espinoza @state.mn.us 3.2. Excelsior's Authorized Representative will be: Name/Title: Dave Wisdorf, Excelsior Public Works Director (or successor) Address: 151 Oak Street, Excelsior, MN 55331 Telephone: (952) 474 -5233 Fax: (952) 474 -6300 3.3. Shorewood's Authorized Representative will be: Name/Title: Larry Brown, Shorewood Public Works Director(or successor) Address: 24200 Smithtown Road, Shorewood,'>VTN 55331 Telephone: (952) 960 -7900 Fax: (952) 474 -0128 4. Assignment; Amendments; Waiver; Contract Complete 4.1. Assignment. Neither party may assign or transfer any rights or obligations ender this Agreement without the prior consent of the other party and a written assignment agreement, executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved this Agreement, or their successors in office. M'nDOT Contract No: 04597 4.2. Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed. and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original Agreement, or their successors in office. 4.3. Waiver. if a party fails to enforce any provision of this Agreement, that failure does not waive the provision or the party's right to subsequently enforce it. 4.4. Contract Complete. This Agreement contains all prior negotiations and agreements between Excelsior, Shorewood, and the State. No other understanding regarding this Agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party, 5. Viability; Worker Compensation Claims; Insurance 5.1. Each party is responsible for its own acts, omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and will not be responsible for the acts and. omissions of others and the results thereof. Minnesota Statutes § 3.736 and other applicable law govern liability of the State. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and other applicable law govern liability of Excelsior and Shorewood. 5.2. Each party is responsible for its own employees for any claims arising under the Workers Compensation Act. 6. Nondiscrimination Provisions of Minnesota Statutes § 181.59 and of any applicable law relating to civil rights and discrimination are considered part of this Agreement. 7. State Audits Under Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 5, Excelsior's and Shorewood's books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the State and the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this Agreement. 8. Government Data practices Excelsior, Shorewood, and the State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to all data provided by the State tinder this Agreement, and as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, cased, maintained, or disseminated by Excelsior and Shorewood under this Agreement. The civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes § 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either the Excelsior or Shorewood or the State. 9, Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue Minnesota law governs the validity, interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement. Venue for all legal proceedings arising out of this Agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 10. Termination by Mutual Agreement This Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement of the parties. 11. Force Majeure Neither party will be responsible to the other for a failure to perform under this Agreement (or a delay in performance), if such failure or delay is clue to a force majeure event. A force majeure event is an event beyond a party's reasonable control, including but not limited to, unusually severe weather, fire, floods, other acts of God, labor disputes, acts of war or terrorism, or public health emergencies. (The remainder of this page intentionally left blank) -4- CITY OF EXCELSIOR The undersigned certify that they have lawfully executed. this contract on behalf of the Governmental Unit as required by applicable charter provisions, resolutions or ordinances. By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: -5- MnDOT Contract No: 04597 CITY OF SHOREWOOD The undersigned certify that they have lawfully execrated this contract on behalf of the Governmental Unit as required by applicable charter provisions, resolutions or ordinances. By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: MnDOT Contract No: 04597 DEPARTMENT OF 'TRANSPORTATION Recommended for Approval: By: (District Engineer) Date: Approved: By: (State Design Engineer) Date: COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION By: (With delegated. authority) Date: INCLUDE COPY OF RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING ITS EXECUTION. -6- CITE' OF EXCELSIOR RESOLUTION IT IS RESOLVED that the City of Excelsior enter into MnDOT Agreement No. 04597 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes: To participate in the power, operation and maintenance of the new Signal System and EVP System, on Trruak Highway No. 7 at County State Aid Highway No. 19 (Oak Street) within the corporate City limits of Excelsior and Shorewood, under State Project No. 2706 -225. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the (Title) amendments to the Agreement. and the (Title) are authorized. to execute the Agreement and any CERTIFICA`l['ION I certify that the above Resolution is an accurate copy of the Resolution adopted by the Council of the City of Excelsior at an authorized meeting held on the day of 2013, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 2013 Notary Public My Commission Expires (Signawre) (Type. or Prin' Name) (Title) CITE' OF SHOREi WOOD RESOLUTION IT IS RESOLVED that the City of Shorewood enter into MnDOT Agreement No. 04597 with the State of Minnesota; Department of Transportation for the following purposes: To participate in the power, operation and maintenance of the new Signal System and EVP System, on Trunk Highway No. 7 at County State Aid Highway No. 19 (Oak Street) within the corporate City limits of Excelsior and Shorewood, under State Project No. 2706 -225. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the (Title) amendments to the Agreement. _ and the (Title) are authorized to execute the Agreement and any CERTIFICATION I certify that the above Resolution is an accurate copy of the Resolution adopted by the Council of the City of Shorewood at an authorized meeting held on the day of 2013, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of�, 2013 Notary Public My Commission Expires (Signature) (Type or Print Name) ('Title) CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO A COOPERATIVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT, S.P. 2706 -225 (T.H. 7 =012) WHEREAS, on September 23, 2013, the City Council of the City of Shorewood approved a preliminary agreement for the reconstruction of the Traffic Control Signal System and Amenities for the intersection of Trunk Highway 7 and County Road 19 (Oak Street); and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has prepared Traffic Control Signal Contract No. 04597 which outlines the maintenance responsibilities and financial obligations for the City of Shorewood, the City of Excelsior and the Minnesota Department of Transportation for said signal system; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has reviewed said Cooperative Agreement and found it to be in order. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota: That the Mayor and City Administrator, on behalf of the City of Shorewood, are hereby authorized to enter into Mn/DOT Contract No. 04597, attached hereto as Exhibit A, with the City of Excelsior and the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes: To outline each agency's responsibilities, as it relates to the operation and maintenance of the traffic signal system located at the intersection of State Trunk Highways 7 County Road 19 (Oak Street); and ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of February, 2014. Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2014 MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Quinlan convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Acting Chair Edmondson; Commissi Savtell; Citv Council Liaison Hotve Absent: Hartmann, Quinlan Edmondson thanked Kjolhaug for all his years of encouraged all Park Commissioners to enga e'th( B. Review Agenda Mangold moved to approve the carried 5 -0. 2. APPROVAL OF A. Park Con Commissioner Kjolhau written. Mangold secor 3. 4. FREEMAN PARK Edmondson stated the use program at Freeman Park. a 7A _57_5_5 COUNTRY CLUB RD SHOREWOOD CITY HALL 7:00 P.M. tern Kjolhaug, Mangold, Dietz, and City Planner Nielsen fe as this N as his last meeting. He ,es in park issues and activities. the motion. Motion lutes; of January 14, 2014. the minutes of the January 14, 2014 meeting as otion carried 5 -0. UNITY GARDEN REQUEST FOR WATER barrels for the community garden's water use has been a pilot he would like input on the water issue. Dietz stated the request for water upgrade is appropriate Kjolhaug asked how much the garden and water has been used. Nielsen stated the users are all from The Ponds area that rent garden spaces at Freeman Park. He noted other renters are from other areas. Nielsen stated the users are requesting a cost estimate for a water line for water for the garden. He explained how the water would be provided. He noted the Park Commission had anticipated there would be this request. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2014 PAGE 2 OF 5 Mangold stated he is opposed to this request. He believed the money should be put into the path. He stated for the cost proposed, the garden at the other location could be increased where water is already provided. Sawtell stated the cost of moving rain barrels out there and keeping them full must be costly. Edmondson asked if there have ever been any complaints about water not being there. Nielsen stated he didn't hear about any complaints. Mangold asked what Public Works perspective is on the amount of work involved. Nielsen stated it is just one more thing they have to do. He stated it is similar to the skate park site where rain barrels were provided, and it would just be easier to provide a permanent water source. Edmondson stated he is leaning toward one more year of rain barrels at Freeman Park. Kjolhaug stated this is a great thing for the city to be providing. If we are at maximum capacity, it may not be enough to justify putting in a permanent water line. He stated the site near Freeman Park is a good fit for the seniors in the area. Commissioners requested an estimate for a water, line. Dietz stated he would also like to know if there are more options to add additional plots. Edmondson, stated he would like the users to let us know what their thoughts are on future needs at the garden. _5. SKATE /DOG P Edmondson stated this Louis Park on how they at a previous meeting. Staff received input from St. Nielsen noted St. 'Louis Park only ,Adds wood chips to their dog park. Their site is 3/4 acre. The users are responsible for cleaning up after their dogs. He reviewed a possible '/z acre site at the proposed location. He also reviewed' a possible cost of $11,000. He noted some of the trees would need to be encompassed into the site. He noted some of the larger dog parks have trees on the site. Edmondson noted the Carver Dog Park is only about five minutes away. He noted a dog park in Duluth is just mud now with nothing left of the landscape. Mangold didn't think it was a good thing to see when you first come into Shorewood. Dietz stated the issue is what the community might think about having a dog park. We don't have any information about that at this point. Mangold stated we are looking at losing all our expansion area at the garden if there is a dog park. Edmondson stated another question is whether the antiquated skate park will remain on the site. If we don't need the skate park, there is more room for a dog park. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2014 PAGE 3 OF 5 Mangold stated if Nick Swaggert wants to continue the survey of residents in the area, he should do so. This should not remain a priority at this time. Edmondson stated Swaggert should be contacted to continue his survey of residents and have the question of the skate park continuation be added as a survey question. Nielsen believed the survey is a great start to begin talks about this park's fixture. 6. HOCKEY RINK AT FREEMAN PARK Nielsen stated a new dravdng has been made available this evening the parking lot. He stated this works better in terms of using the p, Commissioners discussed the portable rink construction. N discussed the water source. Savaell stated the use of Crescent Beach was suggested at there, a small trailer would also need to be hauled in there. Commissic ice. It was also noted it is an access to the lake for fishing in the Mangold questioned the value of having a full-sized rink or having there is a lot of intense usage. Kjolhaug stated that is why it is important to get tI is common for a game to be in progress at one end Hotvet discussed the Commissioners an area is flood Savaell asked if it would be stated organized hockey do( not accept organized games Edmondson asked tha play hockey also be ii hockey in Shorewood ping a north/south configuration in lot. sed storage when not in use. He y Council meeting. Nielsen stated ;cussed concern N-,ith shift in the hbekey style. He didn't believe e in and discuss usage. He stated it at the other. of a rink'' similar to Cathcart *n Excelsior at some point. ed flooding an area for skating. Nielsen noted when kills the grass. to get results of the survey of current usage of the rinks. Nielsen the ice any more. He stated from what he was seeing, Tonka Bay does of the need of open skating. ups be invited to a meeting. Hotvet suggested that someone N -,ith kids who meeting. She stated she had heard residents do not want to pay to play stated he would invite groups to the next meeting. Commissioners discussed portable lighting. Nielsen stated there is no reason why lights cannot be placed. They could also be used for parking lot lighting. He stated the only issue is the cost. Mangold stated hypothetically, lighting would cost between $70,000 - $90,000. Nielsen stated he would get additional information on lighting costs. Commissioners discussed the possibility of a skating oval track. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2014 PAGE 4 OF 5 Dietz suggested a trail be created to skate from Crescent Beach to Excelsior. 7. REVIEW CIP Commissioners Nyere provided N ith a copy of the CIP. Nielsen indicated Nyork on Badger Park in 2014 Neill not be a reality. He stated it is too late to do an-- thing. The City Council Nyanted to talk about the Southshore Center first. They all agree the Center should be tied to the park in some way. Nielsen stated engineering has indicated it is too late to get plans and specs done for this year. If there is anything else that can be done in the N-,-a-,- of prep Nyork for 2015, it could be done. Hotvet stated there is some fine tuning on the concept that the Council has also requested. Commissioners and staff discussed the process folloNving a Park Commission recommendation. Nielsen discussed hoNy the Citv Council reviews recommendations in order to make a final decision. He stated the sloNydoN -,n occurred because of the Southshore Center discussions. Nielsen discussed park projects Nyhich can be completed in 2014 because of the Badger Park delay. He suggested projects not be pulled fonyard until Badger Park is nailed. dovn. He stated Nye can't rely on park dedication fees because Nye are fairly Nyell developed at this point. The determination needs to be made N-,-here funding Neill come from. It is the City Council's job to find the money. He stated the bottom line is the Commission Neill keep plugging along and snake recommendations. Commissioners discussed removing maintenance Nielsen stated he Nyould have DeJong attend a mf Kjolhaug believed there shbul Badger plan is to find a place better made following the�nex Kjolhaug asked h6W,most citi they determine hoN-, much the Mangold stated Freeman hoct Park. 8. NEW BUSINESS I be a rink at Freeman for the ice that N ill be and how the issues should be defined. e the one at Badger Park is removed. Part of the Edmondson stated the determination can be stated it is similar to N-,-hat Shorevyood does — in 2014, roof at Freeman, and resurfacing at Badger Edmondson stated liaisons are needed for City Council meetings. The folloN ing dates Nyere scheduled April Edmondson Mav Hartmann June Mangold July Dietz 9. STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS /UPDATES A. City Council Hotvet reported on recent City Council actions. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2014 PAGE 5 OF 5 Edmondson thanked the Commission for their engagement in the meeting this evening. B. Staff Nielsen stated the City Council is looking at going to a 5- member Park Commission and Planning Commission in the future. Part of the reason is there aren't any applicants for open positions. Nielsen stated there Neill be more information at the next meeting. 10. ADJOURN Kjolhaug moved, Mangold seconded, to adjourn the Park at 8:42 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Clare T. Link Recorder of January 14, 2014 CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2014 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Geng called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. Present: Chair Geng; Commissioners Charbonnet, Davis, Garelick; Labadie, and Maddy; Council Liaison Sundberg; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner Muehlberg APPROVAL OF AGENDA Davis moved, Maddy seconded, approving the agenda for February 5, 2014, as presented. Motion passed 6/0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Deferred 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING — SETBACK VARIANCE /VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS Applicant: Dan and Trina Volbrecht Location: 5770 Smithtown Circle Chair Geng opened the Public Hearing at 7:01 P.M., noting the procedures used in a Public Hearing. He stated this evening the Planning Commission is going to consider a request for variances for Dan and Trina Volbrecht, 5770 Smithtown Circle. He explained the Commission is comprised of residents of the City of Shorewood who are serving as volunteers on the Commission. They are appointed by the City Council. The Commission's role is to help develop the factual record for an application and to make a non - binding recommendation to the City Council. The recommendation is advisors- only. He noted that if the Planning Commission makes a recommendation this evening this item will go before the City Council on Februan- 24, 2014. Director Nielsen reviewed the City's criteria for granting variances. All four of the following criteria have to be met. 1. The applicant has to prove that it would be a reasonable use of property. The first thing that is asked when considering a variance is if it can be done without one. If it can it is extremely difficult to warrant granting a variance. The circumstances have to be unique to the property. That means that the owner faces problems that other property owners in the zoning district do not. The question comes up about whether or not the variance would create a precedent for other properties. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 2 of 10 The circumstances cannot be caused by the property oN -,ner including actions of the previous oN -,ners of the property. 4. The variance cannot alter the essential character of the area. Presidence and compliance N-, th zoning and other codes are taken into consideration. Nielsen explained Trina and Dan Volbrecht oN -,n the property located at 5770 SmithtoN -,n Circle and they have requested a couple of variances. The property is zoned R -1C, Single - Family Residential and it contains 24,713 square feet of area; the minimum size lot for this zoning district is 20,000 square feet. The property is a corner lot, located in the northwest quadrant of SmithtoN -,n Road and SmithtoN -,n Circle. The property is occupied by the Volbrechts' home, which has an attached two -car garage facing SmithtoN -,n Circle, a small shed at the rear of the property, and the structure in question. The Volbrechts Nvere issued a zoning violation notice late in 2013 for constructing a vinyl storage structure in their rear yard Nv thout a permit and in violation of Shorewood zoning regulations. The structure does not comply Nvith requirements for the rear yard setback and side yard setback abutting the street, and it is constructed out of vinvI not out of materials similar to the principle dwelling. With regard to zoning requirements, in the R -1C district the rear yard setback is 40 feet, the front yard setback is 35 feet (which is the SmithtoN -,n Circle side) and everything complies Nvith that. The setback for a side -Tard abutting the street is treated the same as the front (35 feet), and there is a typical 10 foot side yard setback on the northerIv side of the property. The reason for having setbacks is to establish minimum open and /or green spaces on any given lot and to create a continuity of open space. The City Nvent to great length to address building materials in its Zoning Ordinance. The intent is to ensure houses and their accessory structures meet a high standard of design and building material. The 14.5 foot by 32 foot structure is oniv 323 feet from the rear of the lot (40 feet is required) and 15.6 feet from the public right - of -waN- (ROW) for SmithtoN -,n Road (35 feet is required). With regard to variances, the State law changed a few Nears ago from a standard of "undue hardship" to "practical difficulties ". The City changed it zoning regulations to comply Nvith that change. Nielsen reviewed how the request does or does not comply Nvith the four criteria for granting variances Reasonable Use — A detached garage is considered to be a reasonable use provided it is located on the property as it is supposed to be. The alternative structure locations exhibit in the staff report shows that an accessory structure similar in size to what they are proposing could easily be situated in at least three different locations on the property that Nvould not require a setback variance. Circumstances Unique to the Propertv — There is nothing unique about the property in question Nvith respect to this situation. Corner lots in all zoning districts are subject to the "side yard abutting the street" setback requirement. The size of the lot is greater than the minimum lot area for the R -1C District (24,713 square feet vs. 20,000). The house complies Nvith the setback requirements. There is ample room on the property Nvithin the buildable area to locate a detached accessory structure. 3. Circumstances Not Caused by ON -,ner — The Volbrechts did not build the existing house on the lot. But, they did inherit the actions of the oN -,ner that did. In this case, a different house design CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 3 of 10 could easily have accommodated a three -car or larger garage. The previous oN -,ner brought this "practical difficulty on him or herself. The Variance Will Not Alter the Essential Character of the Area — If this Nvere approved it Nvould be very difficult to deny similar requests, both Nvith respect to open space and construction quality. That Nvould have an adverse effect on the Zoning Code and the residential character of ShoreNvood. Although the structure is good quality as far as vinyl structures go, it is far from the quality of a building that can comply Nvith Building Code requirements. In order to obtain a building permit the manufacturer Nvould have to demonstrate that the structure can comply Nvith snow and Nvind loads required by the State Building Code and there is good reason to doubt that the structure Nvould comply. He noted that based on analysis of the case staff does not recommended the variances be granted. Approval Nvould set an extremely undesirable precedent. Assuming the Planning Commission and Council agree, the applicants should be given 15 days to remove the violating structure. Nielsen stated the applicants are present to state their case. Dan Volbrecht, 5770 SmithtoN -,n Circle, stated he and his N ife Trina first Nvant to provide a little background on their property. He distributed four handouts to the Planning Commission to provide a visual perspective of the property. He explained they bought the property in 2000. One of the things they lilted about the property is the Nvooded privacy it afforded in the back of the lot. He noted they have lost mariv trees to Dutch elm disease. He explained after purchasing the property they quickly discovered that during the snow melt in the spring there Nvas a stormwater runoff problem on the southNvest corner of their property. They added about 75 feet of extension near the culvert on the southern portion of the property to the corner of the property so the runoff Nvould drain through the property properly. He noted they have invested in making improvements to the property both financially and emotionally. He stated they have a berm and a fence along the south end of the property for privacy purposes. Mr. Volbrecht stated this has been a learning experience for them. They had not knoN -,n that a permit Nvas required for Nvhat they consider to be a non - permanent detached structure or that there Nvas a size restriction on it. He displayed one of the handouts shoN ing the approximate location of their vinyl accessory structure and the setbacks as Nvell as other possible locations for that rectangular structure or a 24 foot by 24 foot square structure. They do not think it Nvould be reasonable to have to put the structure in the middle of their yard because of setbacks and openness. And, it Nvould create more clutter in the center their yard. To make something like that happen they Nvould have to take down some trees. He then stated Nvith regard to the uniqueness of their property he explained the side yard abutting the street setback of 35 feet does confine the buildable space on the property. It creates the situation where they Nvould have to put the structure directly in their back yard. He displayed a map of sorts shoNving properties within 500 feet of their property. There are only a couple others that have the same setbacks because of a corner lot situation. There is an acute angle in the back southNvest corner of their property and that Nvould force the structure further into the buildable space. He explained there is a 35 foot setback on the side abutting the street and a 40 foot setback along the rear of the property. There is also a 20 foot easement on the north property line. He is not sure whN- that is there. That basicalIv confines the buildable space to the Nvalls of their house through the Nvestern portion of their property. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 4 of 10 Mr. Volbrecht stated they Nvould like to have their variance requests approved and noted they have invested a lot in trying to make the current location of the structure Nvork. They believe there are some unique aspects about their property. Seeing no one present to comment on the case, Chair Geng opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:25 P.M. Commissioner Garelick stated he spent five Nears on the City of St. Louis Park Planning Commission. During that time he spent a lot of time driving in alleys to see Nvhat back yards Nvere like. He saw lots of blue colored tarp in the yards. He thought that aestheticalIv affected the neighborhoods. He noted he appreciates the Nvork the Volbrechts have done to their yard. He expressed concern that their structure Nvill change the character of the area and that it Nvould establish a precedent. He noted that he does not Nvant to see a lot of blue tarps in ShoreNvood. That Nvould not fit. He stated he Neill vote to recommend the application be denied. Commissioner Davis asked the Volbrechts how big their boat. Mr. Volbrecht stated it is 21 feet long. Davis then asked if the structure comes doN -,n in the summer. Mr. Volbrecht explained it Nvas just put in the fall of 2013. Ms. Volbrecht explained their original intent Nvas to build another garage until they learned Nvhat the setback requirements Nvere. Thev Nvould have had a permanent structure basically in the middle of their back yard and that Nvould not have looked good. They thought they Nvere being compliant by having a non - permanent structure because they have seen them in their neighborhood. Where she Nvallcs their dog though Freeman Park she sees non - permanent structures all over the place. Although they may not be nice they are better than tarps draped over boats Nvhich can be seen all over their neighborhood. Chair Geng stated he appreciates the time and effort the Volbrechts have spent to keep up their property. Unfortunately that has no bearing on this application or on the variances. He then stated the City has adopted a Code for the orderly maintenance of properties and the setback requirements are in place to provide some continuity of open space. He expressed concern that granting these variance requests Nvould set a precedent for future similar requests. The City Code then becomes subject to exceptions rather than uniformity. He stated he appreciates whN- the applicants don't Nvant to place the structure inside of the setbacks but that is Nvhat the Code requires. He then stated he does not think the request meets any of the criteria for "practical difficulty ". He noted that he Neill vote to recommend denying the application. Commissioner Davis asked if the City is doing anything to try and pursue those types of structures throughout the City. Director Nielsen stated the City has not made any attempt to go looking for them. Nielsen explained the City goes after them on a complaint basis. Davis asked if someone complained about the Volbrechts' structure. Nielsen stated he Nvould have to check the inspection slip. It is possible the Building Inspector just saw the structure when he Nvas driving. Davis indicated the property kitty- corner the Volbrechts' property could use some inspection. Davis noted she had a boat as Nvell and had a structure that had to come doN -,n as Nvell. She stated her boat is now stored in a secure Nvooded area on her property and that she had to remove trees to be able to store it there. She noted that State law states that if something can be done from a practical perspective a variance is not warranted. She stated she Nvill also vote to deny the request but she Nvould recommend they take it doN -,n after N inter is over so their boat remains covered and so that they have time to think about Nvhat they are going to do. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 5 of 10 Ms. Volbrecht stated because the ground is frozen it Nvould not be possible to take it doN -,n now. Commissioner Davis stated from her perspective the structure seems like an av'fully big structure for a 21 foot boat. It is about 10 feet longer than they need. Mr. Volbrecht stated there is a snov mobile trailer in there as Nvell. Davis indicated they need another solid structure for their stuff. Davis asked the Volbrechts what their neighbors think about the structure. Ms. Volbrecht stated they are still open to building a real garage. She then stated Nvith the berm and fence there she does not understand the green space continuation. It looks less organized than if it Nvere butting up next to a fence. Commissioner Davis stated the Volbrechts have a storage canopy for a boat and snov mobile and they have a 100 square foot shed. It's clear they need more storage space. A solid structure could be built on the back of the property and integrated Nvith the landscaping. From her vantage point it is not an insurmountable design problem. Commissioner Charbonnet stated he supports Commissioner Davis's recommendation that they be given until the end of N inter to take the structure doN -,n. He then stated he Nvill vote to recommend denial of the application mainly because it Nvould set a precedent. Director Nielsen stated the violation has been suspended for the moment and the Planning Commission can recommend suspending it longer. Commissioner Labadie suggested setting a specific date by which it has to be removed. There Nvas Planning Commission consensus to recommend that the structure be taken doN -,n by May 15, 2014. Maddy moved, Labadie seconded, recommending denial of the two variance requests for Dan and Trina Volbrecht, 5570 Smithtown Circle, and that the vinyl structure be removed by May 15, 2014. Motion passed 6/0. The Volbrechts noted they are not sure they can make the February 24, 2014, Council meeting when their application Nvill be considered. Chair Geng closed the Public Hearing at 7:37 P.M. 2. DISCUSS MILL STREET AND GALPIN LAKE ROAD TRAILS OPEN HOUSE Director Nielsen explained the Planning Commission held an open house on January 21, 2014, for the Mill Street and Galpin Lake Road trail segments. He thought the turnout Nvas relatively good on a very cold night. The response to information from the feasibility studies Nvas very positive. One individual Nvas concerned about the side of the road the Galpin Lake Road trail segment Neill be on because his house is located closer to the road than most of his neighbors. Very few comment sheets Nvere filled out that evening. A number of emails Nvere sent to the City folloN ing the open house. The Planning Commission Nvas provided a copy of them this evening. He clarified he is not looking for action on them this evening. He stated there are some ideas that Nvere conveyed that he thought the Commission should discuss. For example, one resident brought up the idea CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 6 of 10 of planting some screening along the section of trail along HighNya -,T 7. Staff Nyill look into that but it is a very, very tight space. He noted the comments Neill be posted on the City s Nyebsite and if there Nyere questions asked staff Nyill ansNyer them. He stated one person asked NyhN- the Mill Street trail segment Nyas even being considered N-,-hen it Nyould not connect to a trail in the City of Excelsior. They did not understand that it Nyould connect to the trail in the Citv of Chanhassen. He noted that the Mill Street segment has no funding at this time. Nielsen stated that during the February 8, 2014, Council and staff retreat there Nyill be discussion regarding N-,-hat to do about the unfunded trails. Only tNyo more trail segments are funded in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) — the SmithtoN -,n Road east sideNyallc/trail segment from the LRT to County Road 19 is funded in 2015 and the Galpin Lake Road trail segment is funded in 2014. Commissioner Garelick asked hoNy the trails are funded. Director Nielsen explained the City has used a number of funding sources so far. The City received a grant from Hennepin County for approximately 25 percent of the cost of the County Road 19 trail segment. The rest of the funding for that came out of the Trail Fund. The proceeds from the operation of and sale of the City s liquor operations Nyere used for trails. The City Nyill use some Minnesota State Aid (MSA) funds to help fund the trails because that funding can be used for trails along MSA routes. When a person buys gasoline about a certain portion of the tax on that goes into the MSA fund and it is distributed to cities Nyith populations of 5,000 or more for improvements to MSA routes or trails near MSA routes. Assessing for trails is not being considered. Some of the stormwater improvements made as part of trails projects Neill be paid for out of the Stormvyater Management Fund. Commissioner Garelick asked N-,-hat Excelsior's position is about connecting to abutting communities trail systems. Director Nielsen stated he thought Excelsior Nyants to do that. Nielsen explained that Shorevyood and Excelsior Jointly applied for a grant from Hennepin County to do the Mill Street trail segment feasibility study. Excelsior chose not to do the study at that time for a variety of reasons. He indicated the County Nyas disappointed Excelsior did not move fonyard Nyith the study because it Nyould like to have that segment next to the County road done. Director Nielsen stated there is a gap on the Chanhassen side of both proposed trail segments. Chanhassen's trail ends just short of its border Nyith Shorevyood. Chair Geng stated a couple of the residents along Galpin Lake Road had expressed concerns about traffic N-,-here the trail Nyould end near Excelsior. He asked Director Nielsen if they are real concerns. Nielsen responded they are. Nielsen stated in one of the comments the City received the person asked if there could be an overpass at County Road 19. Nielsen noted that is a Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and Hennepin County item because it is a State highNyaN- going over to a County road. There is no reason the City cannot support that. He then noted there is a signaled crossNyallc at that intersection. Nielsen stated N-,-hen people Nyallc up Galpin Lake Road some of them cross the HighNya -,T there albeit very dangerous. Geng asked if an overpass could possibly be funded out of the Legacy Amendment funds. Nielsen stated that funding seems to be used for a lot of things. Nielsen noted MnDOT built tunnels under HighNya -,T 7 further Nyest of the intersection. Commissioner Davis stated N-,-hen there are trails on both sides of a MnDOT roadNya -,T reconstruction project a tunnel is constructed. Commissioner Davis commented residents seem to be more supportive of constructing trails in the City. There is not resistance like there had been in the past. She asked if the SmithtoN -,n Road east segment Nyill be a nice sidevyallc as Nyell. Director Nielsen stated he assumes it Nyill be a sidevyallc as Nyell and that the outstanding question is Nyhich side of the roadNyaN- it Nyill be located on. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 7 of 10 Chair Geng asked what the timeframe is for doing the Galpin Lake Road trail segment. Director Nielsen stated currentIv the hope is to seek Council approval for the design during April, and noted that he thought more easements Nvill be needed for that. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 4. OLD BUSINESS / NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Davis stated she Nvould like to revisit the vinvl structures all over toN -,n and clarified that she is not suggesting the City go after them. She sees junk all over toN -,n Nvith tarps and Fleet Farm tents. She cited the example of the little house that is in the railroad right- of -Nvay (ROW) Nvith the fish house, tents and extra garage on it. Then there is the one Nvith the permanent tent over a boat in the driveway. Commissioner Maddv stated it almost seems unfair that the couple who had requested the variances and have invested in their property probably Nvon't have their variances granted for the reasons the Planning Commission discussed. Director Nielsen suggested publishing an article in the Citv's newsletter and on its Nvebsite informing residents that canopies over things like boats are not allowed. That might get residents to call in and file a complaint. Commissioner Maddv stated maybe the article could sav that Council directed staff to do a sweep of the City on, for example, June 1, 2014. That could possibly incent residents to remove those things in violation. Commissioner Davis stated they Nvould have until the end of the 2014 boating season to figure out what they Nvant to do Nvith their boats. Director Nielsen stated there are a lot of boats stored on residential properties and most of them do not have a canopy over them. He noted that residents can have their boats on their driveway. Commissioner Davis asked if the Volbrechts' fence pole height is in compliance. Director Nielsen stated part of addressing the violation that they Nvill have to shorten the poles. Commissioner Davis stated the City should publish an article on accessory structures. Chair Geng suggested dovetailing that Nvith information about the zoning permits. 5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated the developer for the proposed Summit Woods planned unit development (PUD) submitted an application for the Development Stage approval of that project on the first Tuesda -T in Januarv. It Nvas rejected because it Nvas not complete. The City had ten days to review the application. Commissioner Davis asked what Nvas missing from the application. Director Nielsen stated the Citv had asked for more information about soils and the architecture. He clarified that the Citv does not dictate the architecture. He stated the Citv knows they Neill have architectural covenants as part of the project and the City Nvants to see them. Their proposed drainage CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 8 of 10 solution Nvas not adequate so they provided more information and changed the drainage solution to be behind the houses. The City prefers the runoff flow toNvards Galpin Lake Road rather than Summit Avenue. The City asked them to add more detail to the grading plan. He explained that he met Nvith one of residents in that neighborhood earlier in the day. The resident seemed pleased that the City Nvas pushing for those things. Because someone has a reason to believe there is an issue of perched Nvater tables so the City is having them do a soil test for that. Director Nielsen stated if the application for the Summit Woods Planned Unit Development (PUD) Development Stage is complete the public hearing for it Nvill be on the Planning Commission's March 4, 2014, meeting agenda. A minor subdivision and a public hearing for a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) for accessory space over 1,200 square feet are also slated for that agenda. Those two items Nvill be placed before the Summit Woods PUD. Commissioner Davis stated when she Nvent through the packet of materials for the February 8, 2014, Council and staff retreat there is agenda item regarding Summit Avenue roadwav improvement alternatives. She then stated she does not believe four new gigantic houses can be built at the top of Summit Avenue and not have a road. Director Nielsen noted that the project Nvould N iden the roadvmy in front of the project area. He stated during meetings on the Summit Woods PUD Concept Plan residents have stated Summit Avenue is hazardous today. If that project Nvent away tomorrow the City Nvould still need to do something to that roadvmv. He then stated he thinks the residents like the roadvmv the Nvav it is; they do not Nvant it changed. Chair Geng stated the residents play up the hazard of Summit Avenue yet oppose any changes to it. Director Nielsen stated Summit Avenue is quaint; it is picturesque. Commissioner Davis stated those people who are at the bottom of Summit Avenue are not happy because of all of the runoff that runs doN -,n that roadvmv and onto their properties. Commissioner Maddy noted a typical urban block in a city like Minneapolis has one single -lane alley to serve 26 properties. And, there are Nvay less than 26 properties along Summit Avenue. Director Nielsen stated if some of the issues that Nvere raised during discussions about the Summit Wood PUD concept plan are addressed, if some decent landscaping is put in and if the additional runoff does not affect anv residential properties adversely then he thinks in time people Neill end up thinking the project is not too bad. Commissioner Davis stated when the foliage is off the trees she marvels how steep that hill is when she is driving by on Galpin Lake Road. She commented she Nvould not ski doN -,n a hill that steep. Director Nielsen stated the majority of the residents in that neighborhood do not go up or doN -,n Summit Avenue in the Nvinter. He then stated that the City had not heard complaints about Summit Avenue for mariv Nears until this project came about and the residents complained about roadvmy. There had been a time N hen the City of Chanhassen took care of that roadvmv when it ploNved Hummingbird Road. After hearing the complaints about Summit Avenue the Shorewood Public Works Department has made a concerted effort to make sure it is clear and that sand is put doom. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 9 of 10 6. REPORTS Liaison to Council Council Liaison Sundberg reported on the February 3, 2014, City Council special meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). She stated that during the February 8, 2014, Council and staff retreat there Nvill be discussion about the Southshore Communitv Center. She noted that she cannot attend the retreat because she has to go to a funeral. She Nvent on to state that Director Nielsen told her the Planning Commission is going to be discussing potential renewable energy issues. She noted that she Nvas pleased to hear that. She stated a lot of communities have various residential solar energy issues. She asked the Commission to talk about what uses the community has for solar energy. The results of the resident survey the City conducted a few Nears ago indicated the residents have a lot of concern about environmental issues. She stated there are many incentives available and financing options available for alternative energy (some Nvould be very risky for the community and some Nvould have limited risk). She commented there are consultants that deal Nvith just solar and Nvind energy and they know the technology and the financing options that are available. Also, there are consultants and vendors that it Nvould be best to avoid. She asked the Commission to discuss if there are some modest things that could be considered. She stated she thought there are other members of Council who also Nvould like the Commission to look into alternative energy. Commissioner Davis stated the City of Duluth has a fantastic composting site. She is not sure there is room for one in the City. She then stated Carver County has a program where residents can get a $70 dollar Smith and Hawken yard composter for $25. The composter looks nice and it Nvas large enough to generate enough compost for a Near from a family of four. Chair Geng stated he does not think any of the neighboring communities have room for a composting site either. Ma-,-be the City could partner Nvith other communities. Council Liaison Sundberg stated solar gardens are popular. She has heard pros and cons about them and is not sure it Nvould be a good idea. Maybe the City could partner on such an initiative. She stated she Nvould like to build more cooperation Nvith the neighboring communities. Chair Geng stated it is about economics and that Shorewood is the largest South Lake community. Geng suggested revisiting the GreenStep initiative. Director Nielsen stated that is on the Planning Commission's 2014 Nvork program. Director Nielsen stated he and Mayor Zerby met Nvith some solar people and they had an interesting proposal that might Nvork in Badger Park and that could possibly pick up two steps in that initiative. Geng asked if there have been any inquiries about the SmithtoN -,n Crossing redevelopment possibility. Director Nielsen stated he and Mavor Zerbv met in late December 2013 Nth representatives from a company that could pull the entire project together — a senior housing component and a commercial element. He had given them a copy of the study and highlighted it for them. They seemed excited about it at that time. He has not heard back from them recently. The City has received some inquiries about the American Legion's extra lot. That Nvould be a tough piece to do by itself. Because it is up against the residential boundary and therefore has a 50 foot setback on a 100 - foot -Nvide lot. There have been a few inquiries about the Legion's corner lot. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 10 of 10 SLUC None. Other None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Davis moved, Maddy seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of February 5, 2014, at 8:20 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder #8A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Volbrecht — Request for Variances Meeting Date: 24 February 2014 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Patti Nelgesen Attachments: Planning Director's Memorandum, dated 29 January 2014 Draft Resolution Background: Dan and Trina Volbrecht were cited for having erected a 12' x 34' vinyl structure without a building permit, in violation of setback requirements and zoning construction material requirements. The owners chose to apply for variances in order to keep the structure and enforcement action has been suspended, pending the outcome of their request. Detailed background on this item is contained in the Planning Director's memorandum, attached. The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the application and voted unanimously to recommend denial of the request. They also recommended that the owners remove the structure by 15 May 2014, rather than the fifteen days recommended by City staff. A resolution to that effect is attached for your consideration. Options: Deny the request as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission; approve the request for variances; deny the request with different conditions than those recommended by the staff or Planning Commission. Recommendation / Action Requested: Given the weather issues referenced by the Planning Commission, it is recommended that the variances be denied and that the structure in question should be removed no later than 15 May 2014. Failure of the owners to comply with that deadline should initiate recommencement of the zoning /building violation enforcement action. Next Steps and Timelines: The structure in question should be required to be removed no later than 15 May 2014. 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 Re: Volbrecht Variances 29 January 2014 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS A. Zoning Requirements. It is useful to take a moment to consider the, reasons for the various zoning restrictions that apply in this case: 1. Setback Requirements. Building and other setbacks are an extremely important aspect to zoning. While lot sizes control the density of development in residential areas, setbacks are what establish minimum open and /or green spaces for those areas. The amount of open space varies from one zoning district to another, depending on the character of the neighborhood in question. For example, front and rear setbacks in the R -1A (acre lot) district are 50 feet and 50 feet respectively. Setbacks in the R -11) district (quarter -acre lots) are 30 feet in front and 35 in the rear. All of Shorewood's single- family residential zoning districts have 10 -foot side yard setbacks. Also, side yards abutting streets (for corner lots) are treated the same as front yards with respect to setbacks. Not only do these setback requirements establish a minimum amount of open space on each lot, they also provide continuity of open space so as to tie green space from one lot to another. Without setback requirements, buildings could be scattered anywhere on the lot, resulting in a clutter of man -made structures and defeating the purpose of lot size requirements. Finally, setbacks provide protection for sensitive areas such as wetlands and shorelines. 2. Building Materials. Section 1201.03 Subd. 7. of the Zoning Code was adopted to ensure that accessory structures reflect the high quality of Shorewood's housing stock. Accessory structures greater than 150 square feet in area are required to be constructed with materials and a design compatible with the general character of the principal structure on the lot. As with the setback provisions referenced above, these requirements are in place to preserve property values in Shorewood. B. Variances. State law and Shorewood's zoning regulations have changed in recent years from a standard of "undue hardship" to "practical difficulties ". In spite of that change, the criteria for granting variances has remained pretty much the same. The very first question to be asked in considering a variance is - can it be done without a variance? In this case, the answer is yes. Exhibit F illustrates three locations that could accommodate an accessory structure the same or similar in size to what the applicants have built. With respect to specific criteria for granting variances, following is how the request complies: -2- Memorandum Re: Volbrecht Variances 29 January 2014 1. Reasonable Use. A detached garage is considered to be a reasonable use provided it fits on the subject property. The illustration on Exhibit F shows that a detached garage could easily be located on the property in a number of ways that do not require a variance. 2. Circumstances Unique to the Property. There is nothing unique about the property in question. Corner lots in all zoning districts are subject to the "side yard abutting the street" setback requirement. The size of the lot is greater than the minimum lot area for the R =1C District (24,713 square feet vs. 20,000). The wetland referenced in the applicants' request letter is located entirely within the rear yard setback area and does not adversely affect the location of a detached garage. 3. Circumstances Not Caused by Owner. The Volbrechts did not build the existing home on the lot. However, they inherit the actions of the owner that did. In this case, a different house design could easily have accommodated a three -car or larger garage. The owner brought this "practical difficulty" on him or herself. 4. The Variance Will Not Alter the Essential Character of the Area. In light of the preceding, it would be very difficult to deny similar variances if this one is granted, both with respect to open space and construction quality. We cannot disagree that the structure is good quality as far as vinyl structures go, but it is far from the quality of a building that can comply with Building Code requirements. According to the Building Official, in order to obtain a building permit the manufacturer would have to demonstrate that the structure can comply with snow and wind loads required by the State Building Code and there is good reason to doubt that the structure would comply. RECOMMENDATION Based on the preceding, the variances cannot be recommended. Approval would set an extremely undesirable precedent. Assuming the Planning Commission and Council agree, the applicants should be given 15 days to remove the violating structure. Cc: Bill Joynes Larry Brown Tim Keane Dan and Trina Volbrecht -3- I CD �O �z a1 1 1 SOS Subject SMITHTOWN RD SMITHTOWN LA Q� Ac VALLEYWOOD LA ❑ SUNNYVALE LA W 0 O w WILD ROSE LA N Freeman Park A 0 250 500 1,000 Feet -1 a�C � Ac Ac CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY: °iwa+ncn+ooeDwennxDmmoanom�` "rw a�rnlnDOeD wErznluD mmcanaHnREe. °rz,:, oDCD wmaDDU dames Add DSe: Oaf�'rll, LEGAL DESCRIPTION: jG D� TRre 13nIC tl° Dan Dr p( Lot I, Block 2, SMITHTOWN CIRCLE, Hennepin f'1 \ 0 15 30 60 County, Minnesota 5,770 SMITHTOWN CIRCLE SHOREWOOD, MN 55331 1 HONt °tai ]W �°n° BENCHMARK: twA \ / RIM RIM SAN MANHH SAN OLE AT cL OF SMITHTOWN RD AND SMITHTOWN CIRCLE HAS AN ELEVATION --- = 962.59 FEET, ASSUMED DATUM .2� AREAS: LOT AREA = 24,713 SQ. FT. OR 0.567 ACRES BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA = 1,982 SQ. FT, E 19467 N ADDRESS: PNaG S is. o �\ 5770 SMITHTOWN CIRCLE SHOREWOOD, MN 55331 0.1 c °avr \\ ,- 5D \ LEGEND: FOUND IRON MONUMENT GPRPGE N \ , (0 STORM MANHOLE \ 10' i =-SHED I S 5 \ o D SANITARY MANHOLE Y� : / \ \ �� ❑ CATCH BASIN I [D TELEPHONE BOX m K / a ® ELECTRIC BOX S /8PC � �J ® CABLE BOX S11D4 ° D — «— STORM SEWER W/ FLARED END WETLAND DELINEATION o lo\ ♦� / p0\Rkj 6 / `/5� 17 062` DRAINAGE DITCH a WOOD FENCE <N /c�� / \ CONCRETE ow Z 16059` / GRAVEL BRICK PAVERS Io I �\ 00 oD b� ' WETLAND FLAGS DELINEATED BY PROSOURCE �'� TECHNO 0 IN p� „;a��'o°o�'r�o«�:H �c =r, woweENce .srcnmmurRxloaznauuosennwc H � \ /� L GIES, C. WERE LOCATED ON o /21/11 \ ` EXISTING WETLAND AREAS: �\ \\ / TOTAL DELINEATED WETLAND AREA: 2,615 S.F. WETLAND IN RIGHT -OF -WAY AREA: 650 S.F. �k WETLAND IN PROPERTY AREA: 1,965 S.F. \ / \ °iwa+ncn+ooeDwennxDmmoanom�` "rw a�rnlnDOeD wErznluD mmcanaHnREe. °rz,:, oDCD wmaDDU dames Add DSe: Oaf�'rll, Idaagm°M Mntwe qen, syodlicalworreppr„x eropvredq ma aundorm,+vlmr�porv,donW AVlrvnudNyucwsod v�W r�rm $EPTENOER 8, 2011 tEd25 Nro ucwuoNwrno swo. D� TRre 13nIC tl° Dan Dr p( SMITHTOWN CIRCLE ALLIANT 0 15 30 60 �j HENNEPIN COUNY, MINNESOTA SCALE IN FEET N LOT 1, BLOCK 2 1 HONt °tai ]W �°n° C l � Exhibit C PHOTO - STRUCTURE IN QUESTION Street view picture from Smithtown Road Street view picture across the SW corner of property Exhibit D PHOTO 2 16 December 2013 City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Variance Application — 5770 Smithtown Circle (PID# 32- 117 -23 -13 -0030) City of Shorewood: The purpose of this letter is to request a variance of Shorewood zoning regulations as it relates to the storage canopy on the property. Recent property improvements and landscaping efforts support the location of the storage structure, as well as conditions governing consideration of this variance request. A berm and fence were added to the side property adjacent to Smithtown Road. Also, a berm and over 20 pine trees were added to existing tree & brush cover along the rear property. This results in partially blocked visibility of the structure from Smithtown Road traffic and adjacent property. With all of these efforts therefore, it does not unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the neighborhood. Additional considerations of the structure: 1) The general appearance is professional and high quality in nature. 2) It does not impair an adequate supply of light or air to adjacent property, nor unreasonably increase the danger of fire or public safety. 3) Usage and access to the storage canopy from Smithtown Road is infrequent and seasonal in nature. Therefore it would not unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street. Special conditions exist due to the peculiar orientation of the land relative to the front & side adjacent roads and rear property. The front setback is 35, the side setback abutting Smithtown Road is 35', and the rear setback abutting side of adjacent property is 40'. Also, the SW property corner is an acute angle with a portion of the property designated as wetland. These combined characteristics are unique to the property as compared to other properties within 500'. These larger setbacks along with the acute angle of the SW lot corner would put the storage structure at an unreasonable position in the middle of the back yard. The property at time of purchase had over 100 trees that resulted in dense wooded privacy. In the thirteen years we have lived here, over $20,000 has been invested in attempting to save the trees from Dutch Elm disease, removing the dead trees, and addressing the storm water runoff. The additional storm sewer has greatly increased the management of sitting water for us and our neighbor. It is our hope the variance will be approved in the existing location to restore backyard privacy and finish the restoration of this piece of property. Thank you for your consideration. L� Dan and Trina Volbrecht 5770 Smithtown Circle Exhibit E APPLICANTS' REO VEST LETTER Dated 16 December 2013 4% T- L,J 0 z < Ld 0 z 0 0 ui lop 101 I Ski A it N1 21 % �19 94067 \,\1 Z6 'A Awl 00' LL 91\ 44, 44;�" 100 ,110 00 Exhibit F N ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURE LOCATIONS CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION DENYING SETBACK AND BUILDING CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS VARIANCES TO DAN AND TRINA VOLBRECHT WHEREAS, Dan and Trina Volbrecht (Applicants) are the owners of property located at 5770 Smithtown Circle, said property being described as: "Lot 1, Block 2, Smithtown Circle, Hennepin County, Minnesota. "; and WHEREAS, the Applicants erected a vinyl covered, frame structure on their property, without a permit and in violation of Shorewood's Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, having received a zoning violation letter from the City ordering removal of the structure, the Applicants have filed an application for variances to keep the structure; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and the application was reviewed by the Planning Commission on 5 February 2014 and, after deliberation, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the variances; and WHEREAS, the City Council at its regular meeting held on 24 February 2014 reviewed the material submitted by the Applicants, the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and the Planning Director's staff report, dated 29 January 2014, which report is on file in the Shorewood City Hall; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicants' property is located in the R -1C zoning district and contains 24,713 square feet of area. 2. The Applicants' property is a corner lot, occupied by a single- family residential home with an attached garage and a small, detached utility shed. 3. The structure erected by the Applicants is made of a vinyl material stretched over a frame which measures 14.5'x 32' and is located 32.3 feet from the rear of the property, where 40 feet is required, and 15.6 feet from the right -of -way for Smithtown Road, where 35 feet is required. 4. Shorewood's zoning regulations require that accessory structures in excess of 150 square feet in area must be constructed with materials and design compatible with the general character of the principal structure on the lot. 5. There is ample room on the Applicants' property to locate an accessory structure in compliance with the setback requirements of the R -1C zoning district. CONCLUSIONS A. The Applicants have failed to demonstrate that practical difficulties exist that prevent them from making reasonable use of their property. B. The Applicants request for variances to keep the vinyl covered structure is hereby denied. C. The Applicants are hereby directed to remove the vinyl covered structure from their property no later than 15 May 2014. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of February 2014. ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Scott Zerby, Mayor 2 #9A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Amending Chapter 610 of the Shorewood City Code Pertaining to Seasonal Weight Policy Consideration: Should the Seasonal Weight Restrictions be amended to conform to the Spring Load Restriction (SLR) as recommended by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)? Background: The City's current ordinance provides for seasonal weight restrictions from March 1 to May 1. Staff is recommending an amendment to the city code in order to establish the time period for the city's weight restrictions to coincide with Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). The code would still allow for the Public Works Director to impose further restrictions, if needed. Section 610.09, Subd. 2 of the existing city code regarding the Seasonal Weight Restrictions would be amended to read as edited below: "It shall be unlawful for any vehicle or combination of vehicles during the peFied e# M-Areh 3 We May 1 Spring Load Restriction (SLR) dates established by MnDOT of any year to operate upon the streets or highways within the city with a gross weight of any single axle exceeding 8,000 pounds. The Public Works Director may prohibit the operation of vehicles upon any public street or highway within the city or impose further restrictions as to the weight of vehicles to be operated upon the streets or highways, whenever that street or highway may be seriously damaged or destroyed by vehicular use, including, but not limited to deterioration, usage, rain, snow or other climatic conditions." Section 610.09, Subd. 5.b. of the existing city code regarding the Seasonal Weight Restrictions would be amended to read as edited below: "b. It shall be unlawful for any vehicle or combination of vehicles during the period e# M-Areh' to May 11 Spring Load Restriction (SLR) dates established by MnDOT of any year to operate upon any of the above streets or highways within the city with a gross weight of any single axle exceeding 12,000 pounds. The Public Works Director may prohibit the operation of vehicles upon any public street or highway within the city, or impose further restrictions as to the weight of vehicles to be operated upon said streets or highways, whenever that street or highway may be seriously damaged or destroyed by vehicular use, including but not limited to deterioration, usage, rain, snow or other climatic conditions. " 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 Restrictions Meeting Date: February 24, 2014 Prepared by: Larry Brown Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn Attachments: Draft Ordinance Policy Consideration: Should the Seasonal Weight Restrictions be amended to conform to the Spring Load Restriction (SLR) as recommended by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)? Background: The City's current ordinance provides for seasonal weight restrictions from March 1 to May 1. Staff is recommending an amendment to the city code in order to establish the time period for the city's weight restrictions to coincide with Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). The code would still allow for the Public Works Director to impose further restrictions, if needed. Section 610.09, Subd. 2 of the existing city code regarding the Seasonal Weight Restrictions would be amended to read as edited below: "It shall be unlawful for any vehicle or combination of vehicles during the peFied e# M-Areh 3 We May 1 Spring Load Restriction (SLR) dates established by MnDOT of any year to operate upon the streets or highways within the city with a gross weight of any single axle exceeding 8,000 pounds. The Public Works Director may prohibit the operation of vehicles upon any public street or highway within the city or impose further restrictions as to the weight of vehicles to be operated upon the streets or highways, whenever that street or highway may be seriously damaged or destroyed by vehicular use, including, but not limited to deterioration, usage, rain, snow or other climatic conditions." Section 610.09, Subd. 5.b. of the existing city code regarding the Seasonal Weight Restrictions would be amended to read as edited below: "b. It shall be unlawful for any vehicle or combination of vehicles during the period e# M-Areh' to May 11 Spring Load Restriction (SLR) dates established by MnDOT of any year to operate upon any of the above streets or highways within the city with a gross weight of any single axle exceeding 12,000 pounds. The Public Works Director may prohibit the operation of vehicles upon any public street or highway within the city, or impose further restrictions as to the weight of vehicles to be operated upon said streets or highways, whenever that street or highway may be seriously damaged or destroyed by vehicular use, including but not limited to deterioration, usage, rain, snow or other climatic conditions. " 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 A draft ordinance amending the City Code for seasonal weight restrictions is attached for Council's consideration. Financial or Budget Considerations: It is noted that if approved, the roadway signage will have to be changed. Costs for those changes will be funded from the $6,000 planned sign replacement that was approved as part of the budget. Council may recall that the latest sign inventory had indicated that the current postings needed to be replaced anyway, due to the failure to meet current reflectivity standards. Options: 1) Adopt the attached draft ordinance amending Chapter 610 of the Shorewood City Code pertaining to seasonal weight restrictions. 2) Do nothing; leave the ordinance as is. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the attached ordinance. Next Steps and Timelines: The ordinance amendment will be published in the legal section of the Sun Sailor and Laker, and will be effective upon publication. If adopted, signs for postings will be ordered and changed. Connection to Vision /Mission: Protecting the existing infrastructure is a key component of maintaining quality public services. CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 610 OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE AS IT PERTAINS TO SEASONAL WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS Section 1. Chapter 610.09, Subd. 2 is hereby amended to read: "It shall be unlawful for any vehicle or combination of vehicles during the Spring Load Restriction (SLR) dates established by MnDOT of any year to operate upon the streets or highways within the city with a gross weight of any single axle exceeding 8,000 pounds. The Public Works Director may prohibit the operation of vehicles upon any public street or highway within the city or impose further restrictions as to the weight of vehicles to be operated upon the streets or highways, whenever that street or highway may be seriously damaged or destroyed by vehicular use, including, but not limited to deterioration, usage, rain, snow or other climatic conditions." Section 2. Chapter 610.09, Subd. 5.b. is hereby amended to read: "It shall be unlawful for any vehicle or combination of vehicles during the Spring Load Restriction (SLR) dates established by MnDOT of any year to operate upon any of the above streets or highways within the city with a gross weight of any single axle exceeding 12,000 pounds. The Public Works Director may prohibit the operation of vehicles upon any public street or highway within the city, or impose further restrictions as to the weight of vehicles to be operated upon said streets or highways, whenever that street or highway may be seriously damaged or destroyed by vehicular use, including but not limited to deterioration, usage, rain, snow or other climatic conditions." Section 3. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the Official Newspaper of the City of Shorewood. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of February, 2014. Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk 913 MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Authorization for Expenditure of Funds for Seasonal Load Restriction Signs Meeting Date: February 24, 2014 Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Attachments None Policy Consideration: None Background: This item follows and is contingent upon the City Council giving approval to the draft ordinance changes to the Section 610.09, Seasonal Weight Restriction Ordinance. If that change is found acceptable, 120 seasonal weight restriction signs are to be replaced. Since time is of the essence, staff is recommending that the authorization for the replacement signs proceed, as they are fairly generic in nature. As part of the mandated sign inventory and replacement, the City had scheduled replacement of the seasonal weight restriction signs, this year and had budgeted $6,300 in the 2014 Capital Improvement Program for these signs and others. The State Contract pricing for the weight limit signs are $ 23.85 each. Shipping is free on this size of an order, and the order is tax free. Thus, the total amount equates to $2,862.00. Financial or Budget Considerations: If approved, $2,862 would be funded from the City's Capital Improvement Program. Options: 1. Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $2,862. 2. Provide Staff with alternative direction. Recommendation /Action Requested: Staff is recommending Option 1 which authorizes the expenditure of funds from the CIP be approved. Connection to Vision / Mission: Providing proper signage is a key component to providing good service for the community. 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 #10A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Amending Chapter 201 of the Shorewood City Code Pertaining to the Planning Commission Meeting Date: February 24, 2014 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn Attachments: Draft Ordinance; Chapter 201 of the Shorewood City Code Policy Consideration: Should the number of members of the Planning Commission be reduced from a membership of seven to five members, and should the attendance requirements be amended? Background: At the February 8, 2014, City Council retreat, Council discussed reducing the membership of the Planning Commission from seven to five, as well as considering a review of the attendance requirements. It is recommended that the review of the attendance requirements be done by the Planning Commission at its March 4, 2014 meeting. A copy of the existing Chapter 201 of the City Code is attached. The existing city code Section 201.02 regarding the Planning Commission's membership would be amended to read as edited below: "The Planning Commission shall consist of sew five members, who are current residents of Shorewood, appointed by the City Council. It shall be the policy of the city to endeavor to appoint one of the Commission members who is a resident of Enchanted Island or Shady Island." In addition, staff recommends an amendment to section 201.03, Subd. 1, to address the staggering of terms. The current appointment cycle has two member's terms expiring February 28, 2015, and three member's terms expiring February 28, 2016. In 2016, Council may consider making two three -year appointments and one one -year appointment or one four -year appointment in order to provide for a 1- 2-2 staggering cycle. To allow for an appointment for a period other than three - years, the existing Section 201.03, Subd. 1 of the City Code would be amended to read: Subd. 1. Term of appointment. The City Council shall by resolution appoint the Planning Commissioners to serve three -year terms, unless otherwise authorized by the Council, and the terms shall be staggered. All appointments shall be made by resolution. Terms of appointment commence on March 1 and terminate on the last day of February, or until the vacancy is filled. A draft ordinance making the amendments noted above is attached for Council's consideration. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 Options: 1) Adopt the attached draft ordinance amending Chapter 201 of the Shorewood City Code pertaining to member composition and staggering of terms, and direct the Planning Commission to review the attendance requirements at its next meeting. 2) Do nothing; leave the ordinance as is with a seven member composition. 3) Providing other direction to staff as determined by Council. Recommendation / Action Requested: Council should determine how it would like to proceed with this amendment. Next Steps and Timelines: If a draft ordinance amending the composition of the planning commission is adopted, it will be effective immediately and upon publication in the legal paper. Connection to Vision /Mission: providing residents quality public services. CHAPTER 201 PLANNING COMMISSION Section 201.01 Establishment 201.02 Composition 201.03 Members of Commission 201.04 Organization 201.05 Attendance 201.06 Staff for the Commission 201.07 Powers and duties 201.08 Amendments 201.01 ESTABLISHMENT. The Planning Commission is hereby established. The Planning Commission shall be the city planning agency authorized by M.S. § 462.354, Subd. 1,' as it may be amended from time to time. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the Planning Commission shall be advisory to the City Council. .(1987 Code,...§ 201.01.) (Am. Ord. 466, passed 4 -26- 2010) 201.02 COMPOSITION. The Planning Commission shall consist of seven members, who are current residents of Shorewood, appointed by the City Council. It shall be the policy of the city to endeavor to appoint one of the Commission members who is a resident of Enchanted. Island or Shady Island. (1987 Code, § 201.02) (Ord. 336, passed 5 -26 -1998; Ord. 348, passed 1--11 -1999; Am. Ord. 466, passed 4.26 -2010) 201 -1 2011 S -6 201.03 Shorewood - Boards and Commissions 201.03 MEMBERS OF COMMISSION. 201.04 Subd. 1. Term of appointment. The City Council shall by resolution appoint the Planning Commissioners to serve three -year terms and the terms shall be staggered. All appointments shall be made by resolution. Terms of appointment commence on March 1 and terminate on the last day of February, or until the vacancy is filled. Subd. 2. Liaisons, The City Council shall designate one of its members as its liaison to meet with the Planning Commission, and it shall direct the Planning Commission to designate one member of its body as a liaison to meet with the City Council, and one member from time to time as a liaison to meet with.the Park Commission as needed. Subd. 3. Removals, The City Council shall have the power to remove any member of the Planning Commission, Subd. 4. Vacancies. Vacancies in the Planning Commission shall be filled for the unexpired term of the member whose place has become vacant in the manner herein provided for the appointment of members. Subd. 5. City policies. Except where indicated, the Shorewood Personnel Policy Manual shall not apply to Commission members. (1987 Code, § 201.03) (Ord. 336, passed 5 -26 -1998; Ord. 348, passed 1 -11 -1999; Am. Ord. 406, passed 9 -13 -2004; Am. Ord. 466, passed 4 -26 -2010; Am. Ord. 469, passed 6 -14 -2010) 201.04 ORGANIZATION. Subd. 1. Officers. The Chairperson and Vice - Chairperson shall be appointed annually by the members of the Planning Commission, Subd. 2. Term. The term of the Chairperson and Vice - Chairperson shall be for one year. Subd. 3. Meetings and hearings. All meetings of the Planning Commission shall be held at a regularly scheduled date or at the call of the chair or at the request of a majority of the members of the Commission, in accordance with Minnesota Open Meeting Laws. Subd, 4. Minutes and records. The Planning Commission shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the vote of each member upon every question, or if absent or failing to vote indicating the fact, and shall also keep records of its hearings and other official actions. 201 -2 201 I S -6 201.04 Planning Commission 201.07 Every requirement, decision or determination of the Planning Commission shall be filed with the City Council and shall be a public record. Subd. 5. Rules and procedure. The Planning Commission shall conduct its meetings consistent with Robert's Rules of Order and other procedures consistent with the statutes of the State of Minnesota or with this chapter. Subd. 6. Quorum. No business shall be conducted by the Planning Commission without a quorum, consisting of the majority of all members. The concurring vote of the majority of all members present shall be necessary to any action by the Planning Commission. (1987 Code, § 201.04) (Ord. 77, passed 9 -24 -1973; Am. Ord. 407, passed 9 -27 -2004; Am. Ord, 435, passed 3 -12 -2007; Am. Ord. 466, passed 4 -26 -2010) 201.05 ATTENDANCE. Duly appointed members of the Planning Commission shall be required to attend no less than half the official meetings of the Planning Commission held within a given calendar year. Failure to attend no less than half of the official meetings within a given calendar year shall be considered as formal notice of resignation from the Planning Commission, In addition, failure to attend four consecutive regular meetings without excuse of the Chair of the Planning Commission, shall be considered as formal notice of resignation from the Planning Commission. (Ord. 466, passed 4 -26 -2010) 201.06 STAFF FOR THE COMMISSION. The Planning Director shall act as primary staff for the Planning Commission and shall attend Commission meetings. Other city staff and the City Attorney may act as staff for the Planning Commission as may be required. City staff may provide the Commission with information as requested by the Commission. The City Clerk or the City Clerk's designee may perform secretarial duties for the Commission, such as the keeping of minutes, and is responsible for the keeping of records. (Ord. 466, passed 4- 26- 2010) 201.07 POWERS AND DUTIES. Subd. 1. Generally. The Planning Commission shall have the powers and duties given to city planning agencies generally by law, including the authority to conduct public hearings as 201-3 2011 S -6 202.07 Shorewood - Boards and Commissions 202.07 directed by City Council or city policy. The Planning Commission also shall exercise the duties conferred upon it by this chapter. Subd. 2. Comprehensive Plan, It shall be the purpose of the Planning Commission to -prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan for the physical development of the city, including proposed public buildings, street arrangements and improvements, efficient design of major thoroughfares for moving of traffic, parking facilities, public utilities services, parks and playgrounds, a general land use plan and other matters relating to the physical development of the city. This plan may be prepared in sections, each of which shall relate to a comprehensive plan program. After the City Council has adopted the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission may periodically, but at least every five years, review the Comprehensive Plan and any ordinances or programs implementing the plan. Subd. 3. Means of executing plan. Upon the adoption of a comprehensive plan or any section thereof, it shall be the concern of the Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council reasonable and practical means for putting into effect the plan or section thereof, in order that it will serve as a pattern and guide for the orderly physical development of the city. Means of effectuating the plan, among other things, shall consist of a zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations, capital improvement programirning and technical review, and recommendations of matters referred to the Planning Commission by the City Council. Subd. 4. Zoning ordinance. Pursuant to M.S. § 462.357, Subd. 3, as it may be amended from time to time, after adoption of a comprehensive plan, the Planning Commission shall review all proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance, conduct public hearings as directed by City Council or city policy, and make recommendations to the City Council concerning zoning ordinance amendments and their relation to the Comprehensive Plan and other land use controls. The Planning Commission shall report its recommendations to the City Council for action. Subd. 5. Conditional use permits. The Planning Commission shall make recommendations on all requests for a conditional use permit under the terms of the zoning ordinance, and conduct public hearings as directed by City Council or city policy. The Planning Commission shall report its recommendations to the City Council for action. Subd. 6. Interim use permits. The Planning Commission shall make recommendations on all requests for an interim use permit under the terms of the zoning ordinance, and conduct public hearings as directed by City Council or city policy. The Planning Commission shall report its recommendations to the City Council for action. 201 -4 20.11 S -6 201.07 Planning Commission 201.07 Subd, 7. Subdivision regulations. The Planning Commission shall make recommendations about the subdividing of land as prescribed by the ordinance and conduct public hearings as directed by City Council or city policy. The Planning Commission shall report its recommendations to the City Council for action. Subd. S. ,honing variances. All applications for variances shall be referred to the Planning Commission, and forwarded with or without recommendations directly to the City Council, The City Council shall have the powers of a board of appeals and adjustments, as provided for in M.S. § 462.357, Subd. 6, as it may be amended from time to time, for its decision. Subd. 9. Appeals to interpretation of zoning code provisions or denials of zoning or building permits based on the zoning code. In cases where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision or determination by an administrative officer in the enforcement of the zoning code, appeals shall be referred to the Planning Commission, and forwarded with its recommendations directly to the City Council. The City Council shall have the powers of a Board of Appeals and Adjustments, as provided for in M.S. § 462.353, Subd. 4, as it may be amended from time to time, for its decision. Subd. 10. Capital improvements. Pursuant to M.S. § 462.356, Subd. 2, as it may be amended from time to time, after adoption of a comprehensive plan, the Planning Commission shall review all proposed capital improvements within the city by the municipality, or any special district or any agency thereof, or any other political subdivision having jurisdiction within the municipality, and make findings as to the compliance of the proposed capital improvement with the Comprehensive Plan, The City Council may, by resolution adopted by two- thirds vote, dispense with the requirements of this section when in its judgment it finds that the proposed capital improvement has no relationship to the Comprehensive Plan. Subd. 11. Purchase and sale of real property. Pursuant to M.S. 462.356, Subd. 2, as it may be amended from time to time, after adoption of a comprehensive plan, the Planning Commission shall review all proposed acquisitions or disposals of publically owned interests in real property within the city by the municipality, or any special district or any agency thereof, or any other political subdivision having jurisdiction within the municipality, and make findings as to the compliance of the proposed acquisition or disposal of real property with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council may, by resolution adopted by two- thirds vote, dispense with the requirements of this section when in its judgment it finds that the proposed acquisition or disposal of real property has no relationship to the Comprehensive Plan. Subd. 12. Comprehensive Plaza amendments. Pursuant to M.S. § 462.355, Subds, 2, 3, as they may be amended from time to time, after adoption of a comprehensive plan, the Planning 201 -4A 2011 S -6 201.07 Shorewood - Boards and Commissions 201.08 Commission shall review all proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, hold at least one public hearing, and snake recommendations to the City Council relative to the amendments and their relation to the Comprehensive Plan and other land use controls, The Planning Commission shall report its recommendations to the City Council for action. (1987 Code, § 201.04) (Am. Ord. 466, passed 4 -26 -2010) f�IiTill�ll !:l•`�►`�i.1�l►1�17►� I',�1►�Y�1."1 This chapter shall be amended only upon approval of a majority vote of the entire City Council. (1987 Code, § 201.05) (Ord. 315, passed 11 -25 -1996; Am. Ord. 466, passed 4 -26 -2010) 201 -4P 2011 S -6 CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 201 OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE AS IT PERTAINS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Section 1. Chapter 201.02 is hereby amended to read: "The Planning Commission shall consist of five members, who are current residents of Shorewood, appointed by the City Council. It shall be the policy of the city to endeavor to appoint one of the Commission members who is a resident of Enchanted Island or Shady Island. Section 2. Chapter 201.03, Subd. 1. is hereby amended to read: "Subd. 1. Term of appointment. The City Council shall by resolution appoint the Planning Commissioners to serve three -year terms, unless authorized by the Council, and the terms shall be staggered. All appointments shall be made by resolution. Terms of appointment commence on March 1 and terminate on the last day of February, or until the vacancy is filled." Section 3. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the Official Newspaper of the City of Shorewood. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of February, 2014. Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk #10B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Amending Chapter 202 of the Shorewood City Code Pertaining to the Park Commission Meeting Date: February 24, 2014 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn Attachments: Draft Ordinance, Chapter 202 of the Shorewood City Code Policy Consideration: Should the number of members of the Park Commission be reduced from a membership of seven to five members, and should the attendance requirements be amended? Background: At the February 8, 2014, City Council retreat, Council discussed reducing the membership of the Park Commission from seven to five, as well as considering a review of the attendance requirements. It is recommended that the review of the attendance requirements be done by the Park Commission at its March 11, 2014, meeting. A copy of the existing Chapter 202 of the Shorewood City Code is attached. The existing city code regarding the Park Commission's membership would be amended to read as edited below. In addition, staff recommends an amendment to address the staggering of terms. The current appointment cycle has two member's terms expiring February 28, 2015, and three member's terms expiring February 28, 2016. In 2016, Council may consider making two three -year appointments and one one -year appointment or one four -year appointment in order to provide for a 1 -2 -2 staggering cycle. To allow an appointment for a period other than three - years, the existing Section 202.02, Subd. 1.a. of the City Code would be amended to read: Subd. 1. Membership in the Commission. Membership shall consist of up to seven five residents of the city appointed by the City Council. Terms of all members shall be for three years, unless otherwise authorized by the Council, and the terms shall be staggered. All appointments shall be made by resolution. Terms of appointment commence on March 1 and terminate on the last day of February, or until the vacancy is filled. A draft ordinance amending the membership from seven to five members and authorizing Council to provide for an appointment of a term other than three years is attached for Council's consideration. Options: 1) Adopt the attached draft ordinance amending Chapter 202 of the Shorewood City Code pertaining to member composition and staggering of terms. Council may also direct the Park Commission to review the attendance requirements at its next meeting. 2) Do nothing; leave the ordinance as is with a seven member composition. 3) Provide other direction to staff as determined by 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 Recommendation / Action Requested: Council should determine how it would like to proceed with this amendment. Next Steps and Timelines: If a draft ordinance amending the composition of the park commission is adopted, it will be effective immediately and upon publication in the legal paper. Connection to Vision /Mission: Providing residents quality public services. CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 202 OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE AS IT PERTAINS TO THE PARK COMMISSION Section 1. Chapter 202.02, Subd. 1. A. Membership in the Commission is hereby amended to read: "a. Membership shall consist of five residents of the city appointed by the City Council. Terms of all members shall be for three years, unless otherwise authorized by Council, and the terms shall be staggered. All appointments shall be made by resolution. Terms of appointment commence on March 1 and terminate on the last day of February, or until the vacancy is filled." Section 2. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the Official Newspaper of the City of Shorewood. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of February, 2014. Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk CHAPTER 202 PARK COMMISSION Section 202.01 Purpose 202.02 Commission created, membership, term of office 202.03 Organization 202.04 Powers and duties 202,05 Amendments 202.01 PURPOSE. The city does now operate and maintain public parrs for the benefit and pleasure of its citizens, and the city has in the past expended monies for capital improvements and maintenance of these parks. It is the desire of the city to establish a Park Commission for the city as an advisory body to the City Council, to aid that Council in the expenditure of monies so that the greatest benefit may be obtained from the use and maintenance of the parks. (1957 Code, § 202.01) (Ord. 84, passed 6 -23 -1975; Am, Ord. 468, passed 5 -24 -2010) 202.02 COMMISSION CREATED, MEMBERSHIP, TERM OF OFFICE. A Shorewood Park Commission is created which will serve as an advisory body to the City Council, Subd. 1. Membership in the Commission. a. Membership shall consist of up to seven residents of the city appointed by the City Council. Terms of all members shall be for three years, and the terms shall be staggered. All appointments shall be made by resolution. Terms of appointment commence on March 1 and terminate on the last day of February, or until the vacancy is filled. b. Exception. those appointments made in January, 1999, shall be effective immediately upon passage of the appointment resolution. 202 -1 2011 S -6 202.02 Shorewood - Boards and Commissions 202.03 c. The City Council shall designate one of its members as its liaison to meet with the Park Commission, and it shall direct the Park Commission to designate one member of its body as a liaison person to meet with the Planning Commission. Subd. 2. Removals, The City Council shall have the power to remove any member of the Park Commission. Subd. 3. Attendance. Duly appointed members of the Park Commission shall be required to attend no less than one half (six meetings a year) of the official meetings in a given year. Failure to attend the requisite number of meetings shall be considered resignation from the Park Commission. Subd. 4. City policies. Except where indicated, the Shorewood Personnel Policy Manual shall not apply to Commission members. (1987 Code, § 202.02) (Ord. 84, passed 6 -23 -1975; Ord, 264, passed 1 -11 -1993; Ord. 278, passed 8 -23 -1993; Ord. 317, passed 12 -4 -1996; Ord. 349, passed 1 -25 -1999; Am. Ord. 406, passed 9 -13 -2004; Am. Ord. 468, passed 5 -24 -2010; Am. Ord. 469, passed 6 -14 -2010} 202.03 ORGANIZATION. Subd. 1. Officers. The Chair and Vice -Chair of the Park Commission shall be selected by the members of the Commission, and those persons shall serve in their respective positions for a period of one year. The Parr Commission may appoint a Secretary from among its members. Subd. 2. Meetings. The Park Commission shall meet at least monthly, and all meetings shall be open to the public. Subd. 3. Rules of order and business. The Park Commission shall adopt rules and regulations governing the conduct of its meetings. A majority of its membership shall be required to conduct official business, Subd. 4. Minutes and records. The Park Commission shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the vote of each member upon every question, or if absent or failing to vote indicating the fact, and shall also keep records of its hearings and other official actions. Every requirement, decision, or determination of the Park Commission shall be filed with the City Council and shall be a public record. (1987 Code, § 202.03) (Ord. 84, passed 6 -23 -1975; Ord. 102, passed 8 -14 -1978; Ord. 317, passed 12 -4 -1996; Am. Ord. 407, passed 9 -27 -2004; Am. Ord. 468, passed 5 -24 -2010) 202-2 2011 S -6 202.04 Park Commission 202.05 202.04 POWERS AND DUTIES, The Commission is designated the following responsibilities: Subd. 1. Consider, review, report and advise on all matters which the Council may refer to the Commissions; Subd. 2. Plan, on a long -term basis, for the future park and recreational needs of the city and recommend to the Council a feasible means of financing the long -term requirements; Subd. 3. Recommend to the Council operating policies and procedures for use of existing parks; Subd. 4. On or before July 15 of each year, develop and refer to the Council a recommended Operational and capital improvement budget for parks for the ensuing year; Subd. 5. Submit to the Planning Commission comments on any proposed subdivisions, as the same may or may not affect the city's park and playground requirements. (1987 Code, § 202.03) (Ord. 84, passed 6 -23 -1975; Am. Ord. 468, passed 5 -24 -2010) 202.05 AMENDMENTS, This chapter shall be amended only upon approval of a majority vote of the entire City Council. (Ord. 468, passed 5 -24 -2010) 2011S-6 202 -3 #10D MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Badger Park — Solar Energy Proposal Meeting Date: 24 February 2014 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Patti Nelgesen Attachments: Introduction Material Proposal Background: At the Council retreat last week, staff mentioned that the Mayor and Planning Director met with representatives of JJR Power LLC to discuss the possibility of installing solar equipment to serve some portion of the electric power for the Badger Field property owned by the City (including the SSCC, the Badger well building, Badger Field and City Nall). As explained in the attached materials, JJR's proposal is for them to install the necessary infrastructure (solar array) to provide, initially, up to 40Kw of solar power to the site. The City would then buy this solar power from JJR at a reduced rate per Kwh. This rate would be below that being charged by Xcel Energy and would be locked in for a select number of years. When we asked how the company makes its money, we were told that the proposal works partly through the sale of power, but quite significantly through State Department of Commerce program (Made in Minnesota Solar Incentive Program), part of which provides substantial tax credits to JJR's investors. To participate in the upcoming round of this program, the City is being asked to provide a nonbinding letter of intent stating its interest. Representatives of JJR will present their proposal at Monday night's City Council meeting. JJR tells us that the letter of intent is necessary for them to apply for the program on behalf of the City, but does not in any way obligate the City to participate if its questions are not satisfactorily answered. Staff has numerous questions, including: 1) what does the solar look like and where can it be located in Badger Park ?; 2) what is the potential liability to the City ?; 3) what facilities might be powered by the solar equipment ?; and 4) what other cities are participating in this program ?; etc. Undoubtedly the Council will have additional questions. We ask that you e -mail those questions to the Planning Director before Monday so that the questions can be conveyed to JJR and they can be prepared to answer them at the meeting. Financial or Budget Considerations: JJR will discuss the energy cost savings as part of its presentation. Options: Authorize the Mayor to send a letter of intent in order to get in on the next round of the program; wait to participate in next year's program; or reject the JJR proposal. Recommendation / Action Requested: If the Council determines that the JJR proposal has merit, it is suggested that the letter of intent be authorized with an understanding that the City is under no obligation to participate until its questions and concerns are fully addressed. Next Steps and Timelines: JJR asks that the Council authorize a letter of intent at Monday night's meeting so that they can get its application in by 28 February. Installation of equipment, if the program goes forward, would be done in conjunction with Badger Field improvements. Made in Minnesota Solar Energy Production Incentive I Department of Energy Page 1 of 3 31 ; _ 1 Search Energy.gov I `_ PUBLIC SERVICES I SCIENCE & INNOVATION I ENERGY SAVER ABOUT ENERGY.GOV I OFFICES Home » Made in Minnesota Solar Energy Production Incentive MADE IN MINNESOTA SOLAR ENERGY PRODUCTION INCENTIVE ELIGIBILITY Commercial, Multi - Family Residential, Nonprofit, Residential, SAVINGS CATEGORY Solar, Buying & Making Electricity, PROGRAM INFO FUNDING SOURCE Made in Minnesota Fund START DATE 1/1/2014 EXPIRATION DATE 12/31/2023 STATE Minnesota PROGRAM TYPE Performance -Based Incentive REBATE AMOUNT To be determined by Commerce; rate will be recalculated each year PROVIDER Minnesota Department of Commerce Beginning in January 2014, The Department of Commerce (DOC) will administer a state Made in Minnesota Solar Energy Production Incentive. Systems must be less than 40 kW -DC and be certified as "Made in Minnesota" (see below for details). Residential, commercial, non - profit, and multi - residential customers are eligible for the incentive. The incentive rate must be set by the Commissioner of Commerce, and will be recalculated annually for new contracts. Each incentive contract will be a 10 -year term; payments will be made to the customer no later than July 1 st following http: // energy.gov/ savings/ made - minnesota- solar - energy - production- incentive 2/20/2014 Made in Minnesota Solar Energy Production Incentive I Department of Energy Page 2 of 3 the year of production and RECs are transferred to the utility. The utility must provide a meter to measure the system production at the cost of the customer. Interested customers must apply between January 1st and February 29th of each year from 2014 through 2023. At the end of the application period, the DOC will select applications at random. No systems will begin to receive payments after December 31, 2024, and no payments will be made for generation that occurs after December 31, 2033. If the applicant pool allows, approximately half of the funds will be allocated for residential customers and approximately half will go to commercial and non - profit customers. For the purposes of this allocation, multi - residential facilities are considered residential facilities unless the PV system exceeds 10 kW in capacity, or the output from the PV system is purchased by several residents (shared ownership). Manufacturers interested in participating in the incentive program must apply to the DOC to be certified as "Made in Minnesota." In order to be eligible, the PV module must be manufactured at a facility located in Minnesota that is registered and authorized to manufacture in the state. Systems must be UL 1703- certified by a UL or UL- approved agency, and systems must be manufactured by a process that includes tabbing, stringing, and lamination, or must be manufactured by interconnecting low- voltage DC PV elements that produce the final useful PV output of the modules. Modules manufactured by attaching microinveters, DC optimizers, or other power electronics to a laminate or solar PV module that has received UL 1703 certification outside of Minnesota are not eligible. OTHER INFORMATION Systems must be certified "Made in Minnesota" SOURCE http: / /www.dsireusa.org/ incentives / incentive .cfm ?lncentive_Code =MN175F Careers & Internships Contact Us ABOUT THIS SITE In ENERGY DEPARTMENT http: / /energy. gov/ savings /made - minnesota- solar- energy - production- incentive 2/20/2014 - P- R- O- P- O- S -A -L- ICI JJR POWER Term Sheet (for Review) Shorewood, MN Solar Project — February 2014 Project Description: The City of Shorewood, MN is considering a distributed 40 kW ( + / -) solar array at Park in Shorewood, MN. The currently as a community center, ball fields, hockey rinks and pump stations sited within the park boundaries. The park is owned by the City. The park currently buys electric power from Xcel Energy under tariff. The park and site have an average annual load (kWh consumption) of - kWh. The project is expected to replace of the grid power. Structure PPA Location Shorewood Utility Xcel Power Purchaser municipality City PPA Term (years) 20 PPA Extension None PPA Rate TBD $/kWh $0.0750 PPA Escalation 3.50% Total kW: 40 Production kWh (est., year 1) kWh 51,000 Capacity Factor 14.55% NTP Ta rget TBD COD Target TBD EPC IPS O&M TBD Insurance TBD Total Capital Cost $142,400 ...per Watt $3.56 Construction Finance N/A Incentives: The Federal Government and Xcel Energy offer various financial incentives to encourage the deployment of solar, including: a) Thirty percent investment tax credit (ITC) b) Accelerated depreciation (5 year) 11R - Shorewod Confidential c) A twenty year, cash production payment from Xcel for $.20 /kWh. Estimated Total Cost: $3.56/Watt/$142,000 Estimated kWh Cost: $.07 -$.09 kWh (various escalations), rate to be determined Commercial Operation: October 2014 Constructor: Innovative Power Systems, Inc. Site Lease Payments: None PPA: 20 year Interconnection: Net Metered Permitting /Environmental: TBD Sales Tax: Exempt Property Tax: Exempt Insurance: Paid by project Configuration: TBD O &M /Monitoring/ Warranties: O & M under contract with EPC. Panels warranty 20 years, inverters 10 years Savings Analysis: 11R - Shorewod Confidential Date: 2/17/2014 Energy Savings Analysis System kW: 40 Average Annual Savings: $2,794 Solar Production (yearl) 51,000 Total: $55,887 Annual Degradation:_ 0.50% Utilty Purchase Rate: $0.105 Utility Rate Escalation: 4.50% PPA Escalation 3.50% -,MR POWER- _ 20 Total Savings $55,887 Avoided Replacement kWh Solar Average Cost of Energy, kWh, Grid Production $0.164 Utility Rate (solar) Rate Spread Production $s Saved %Saved 1 2011 $0.105 $0.075 $0.030 51,000 $1,510 28.3% 2 2012 $0.109 $0.078 $0.0_32 50,745 $1,608 3 2013 $0.114 $0.080 $0.034 50,491 $1,711 4 2014 $0.119 $0.083 $0.036 50,239 $1,819 5 2015 $0.125 $0.086 $0.039 49,988 $1,933 6 2016 $0.130 $0.089 $0.041 49,738 $2,053 7 2017 $0.136 _$0.092 $0.044 49,489 $2,179 8 2018 $0.142 $0.095 _$0.047 49,242 $2,311 9 2019 $0.149 $0.099 _$0.050 48,995 $2,449 10 2020 $0.155 $0.102 $0.053 48,750 $2,595 11 2021 $0.162 $0.106 $0.057 48,507 $2,748 12 2022 $0.170 _$0.109 $0.060 48,264 $2,908 13 2023 $0.177 $0.113 $0.064 48,023 $3,076 14 2024 $0.185 $0.117 $0.068 47,783 $3,253 15 2025 $0.194 $0.121 $0.072 47,544 $3,438 16 2026 $0.202 $0.126 $0.077 47,306 $3,632 17 2027 $0.212 $0.130 $0.081 47,069 $3,836 18 2028 $0.221 $0.135 $0.086 46,834 $4,049 19 2029 $0.231 $0.139 $0.092 46,600 $4,273 20 Total Savings $55,887 Net Present Value of Solar Savings $19,930 Average Cost of Energy, kWh, Solar Power $0.106 Average Cost of Energy, kWh, Grid Production $0.164 Contact: John Jaffray, 952 - 715 -3082, **affray @**rpower.com Mike Woodley, 612- 382 -0082, mwodleyl @gmail.com JJR - Shorewod Confidential i . JJR ii POWER— 11111 Date: 24 February 2014 Re: Proposed Shorewood Solar Project From: John Jaffray /Mike Woodley Questions from the City for Discussion: 1. What percentage of which power demands will this satisfy? A 20 kW array will generate about 25,000 kWh. We do not have an exact usage number for the city to measure this against, though their consumption at the site is higher. We will ultimately size the arrays to maximize the savings, the size (relative to site load). 2. Who pays for connecting PV system to our buildings and points of usage? If Shorewood, Cost? Shorewood pays nothing for the interconnection. 3. Who has system maintenance responsibility including, grounds maintenance around equipment? The project will have an O & M contract, paid for by the project, same thing for insurance. The arrays will be fenced. Regarding maintenance inside the fenced area, we would ask the city to mow as normal in the park. 4. How many square feet will this occupy? 20 kW = 2,000 square feet, approximately. 5. Who owns system after 20 years? The city. 5. What happens of company "defaults" or can't perform during 20 year period? The array remains there and it produces energy. If the company "goes away" then the City would not have to make power payments, thus reducing costs to the City. 6. What recourse does City have if things don't go as initially planned? Normal contractual default issues. 7. Company references and track record? (This is from our limited partnership memorandum) JJR is an energy finance, development, and advisory firm founded in 2006 that specializes in renewable energy. Based in Minneapolis, Minnesota, the limited partnership has development rights in Hawaii, Minnesota and Connecticut totaling roughly 2,000 kW, and has been an active financier and project developer in solar since 2009. Since its inception in 2006, the company organized, funded, and operated a Delaware limited partnership, MH Partners LP, a $1.25 million fund active in the Eastern Interconnect power markets (MISO, PJM, ISO- New England, and ISO New York). In 2010, JJR (with its partners Goldman Sachs and Bergen County Community Action Partnership), organized a $10 million fund to construct and own projects in New Jersey. 350 Highway 7, Suite 236, Excelsior, MN 55331 952- 715 -3082 jjrpower.com JJR has also been active in organizing projects in: Colorado (235 kW and 221 kW) New Mexico (2900 kW) North Carolina (5200 kW) Connecticut (600 kW) Hawaii (200 kW) New York (350 kW) Minnesota (1100 kW) John S. Jaffray iii —JJR - - -- POWER— 11111 Mr. Jaffray (56) is the President and Founder of JJR, founded in 2006. JJR, in turn, was the General Partner in MH Partners LP, with its primary limited partner a global management consultancy. The fund was an active trader in MISO, ISO New England, and PJM. JJR also originated a CAP Solar fund (201012011), a $10 million New Markets Tax Credit fund focused on solar projects for non - profits New Jersey, with Goldman Sachs was the investor. The fund built and is operating 35 projects in the New Jersey today. Since 2009, JJR has been focused on finance and development of solar assets in the US. Mr. Jaffray has extensive and direct experience in many aspects of the power sector including project development, contract portfolio management using multiple fuels, landfill gas, wind power, power plant construction, and solar power. He approaches the sector from a structural and financial perspective, and has led the financings on all the power undertakings listed above. In 1998, Mr. Jaffray founded Origix, a multi -city network operator, which was sold to Anschutz Communications. In 2004, (with investors) he recapitalized and was President of FPD Power Development, a firm focused on construction of utility power plants, particularly gas fired peakers. Before running FPD Power Development, Mr. Jaffray founded JPower in 1995, an electric power marketing company, and in 1997 he founded Northern /AES Energy, a trading firm managing approximately 1,000 MW of power assets and contracts. Northern /AES was sold to the partners in 1999. Mr. Jaffray has experience in the energy, grain, commodity, and bond markets. In 1983, Mr. Jaffray joined Cargill, Incorporated where he was a member of the Minneapolis Grain Exchange, the Chicago Board of Trade and the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. From 1988 to 1991, Mr. Jaffray was active in early on -line cash settlement activities and merchant payment activities. From 1991 to 1995, Mr. Jaffray traded and sold corporate bonds. Mr. Jaffray earned graduated from Ithaca College with a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science in 1980. Cornelius Boersma IV Mr. Boersma (52) is a Managing Director of the General Partner. Mr. Boersma is currently heading the origination and syndication area with JJR Power. Before joining the General Partner, Mr. Boersma served as the Managing Director and Trading Manager for Pricelock Inc. for five years where he was responsible for the pricing and trading associated with a national, online retail call option fuel platform. He also worked with clients to help them with hedging execution, hedging plans, risk analysis and identification, risk process, fuel surcharges, and FAS 133 1ASC 815 accounting analysis. He worked with clients on their diesel, gasoline, natural gas, electricity, and propane needs. He was also responsible for the company's Dodd -Frank filing with the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Prior to joining Pricelock, Mr. Boersma worked for FCStone for over 5 years as a Commodity Risk Manager and Trading Manager. He has extensive experience in financial trading, cash merchandising, commercial sales, and analytical roles in the energy, corn, and wet milling co- products, and for all modes of transportation. In addition, he has consulted with clients on purchasing physical natural gas, electricity, natural gas pipeline transportation and the negotiation of utility agreements. On an ongoing basis, he 350 Highway 7, Suite 236, Excelsior, MN 55331 952- 715 -3082 jjrpower.com iii —JJR -- ROWER— (1111 consulted and managed risk management activities for clients and provided risk processes, fundamental and technical market analysis in order to manage many companies' commodity risk and purchasing activities. He was responsible for the over - the - counter trade desk activities which included energies, grains, hogs, canola oil, cattle, lumber, pulp and paper, cotton, and oilseeds. Mr. Boersma was also responsible for the price risks associated with the trade desk, counterparty risk management, pricing new risk structured products, futures and options trading, and settlement risks. He was also in charge of the development of new over - the - counter financial hedge products, such as steel and fertilizer. Prior to joining FCStone, Mr. Boersma worked for Cargill for 18 years. During his final six years with Cargill as an Energy Trader within the Energy Group, Mr. Boersma was responsible for managing Cargill's North America's operational energy usage of 46 Bcf (Billion Cubic Feet), for over 400 plants. This included natural gas, electricity and heating oil which totaled approximately one billion dollars in 1997 dollars. Mr. Boersma was also responsible for the financial trading and buying, including the cash basis, spreads, complex options, and NYMEX priced purchasing. In addition, he set up risk systems to quantify and analyze these inherent price risks for Cargill's operating units. Mr. Boersma served as the Commercial manager of Williams Coal Terminal in Williams, Iowa where Cargill marketed coal to industrials and utilities, totaling approximately one million tons per year. In addition, he was also involved in managing external natural gas accounts, optimizing natural gas pipelines' assets and negotiating pipeline transportation contracts. Mr. Boersma has considerable experience quantifying, modeling, packaging, marketing, and managing both price and volumetric risks for clients across multiple commodities. Mr. Boersma earned a MBA (Finance) at the University of Memphis at the Fogelman College of Business in 1998. He completed additional Masters course -work at the University of Minnesota at the Carlson School of Management. Before that, he graduated from The Ohio State University at the Max M. Fisher College of Business and earned a B.S. in Production and Operations Management. 8. Who owns this company and who are the officers? See above 9. Expected useful life of PV arrays and other equipment? 20 years 10. What are assumptions of power production by calendar month? It varies across the year: 350 Highway 7, suite 236, Excelsior, MN 55331 952 -715 -3082 jjrpower.com iii JJR POWER— 1111) PVWatts: Monthly PV Performance Data Requested Location:] Shorewood] City of Measurement FLYING CLOUD Stater MN Lat (deg N):, 44.821 _ Long (deg ft 93.45 El ev (m): 283 Array Type:! Fixed (open rack) Array Ti It (deg): i 25 Array Azimuth (deg) 4 _ _ 180 DC Rating (kW)r 20 DC to AC Derate Factor: = 0.831 Month I AC System Output(kWh) January] _ 1,331 February= 1,751 March' 2,246 Apri I ( 2,259 May'; 2,913 Junes _ 2,388. 1ulyl 2,998 August; 2,950 September 2,222 October 1,199 November 682 December 889 11. Explain Xcel and other rate assumptions and the annual escalation? The annual escalation proposed in the JJR contract is 2.4 %. We used as a comparison an Xcel annual escalation of 4.5 %. Over the past 10 years, the Xcel escalation has been 40 %. 350 Highway 7, Suite 236, Excelsior, MN 55331 952- 715 -3082 j]rpower.com #10D MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Boulder Cove — Proposed Chanhassen Development Meeting Date: 24 February 2014 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen Attachments: Attachment I — Development Proposal Attachment 11 — Previous Review (2006) Background: The City of Chanhassen has referred a development proposal to the City of Shorewood for its review and comment. As described in Attachment I, Lennar Corporation proposes 31 single - family residential lots on 13.8 acres of land, located between the Shorewood municipal boundary and State Highway 7, approximately 300 feet east of Church Road. The project is served by a 1200 -foot long cul- de -sac that extends southward from the southerly end of Strawberry Lane. Staff has reviewed the application materials and raises a number of concerns. In no particular order, they are: 1. The proposed intersection with Strawberry Land and West 62nd Street should be a "T ". 2. The name "Strawberry Court" has already been used on a Shorewood street about two blocks to the north. 3. Shorewood should request that the water main serving the project include an interconnection to the Shorewood system on Strawberry Lane. 4. It appears that the developer has paid particular attention to drainage on the site. Shorewood should state that there should be no increase in runoff volume to the north. 5. Although the proposal refers to single - family homes, Lennar refers to them as their "NextGen" products, which appears to be single - family, but are set up to house two adult families. The question is — are they simply two - family dwellings? 6. In light of 5. above, the City should request that a traffic study be prepared, evaluating the effect of as many as 62 units on the local streets (Strawberry Lane and West 62nd Street). 7. West 62nd Street should be upgraded to City standards. This street lies in both Shorewood and Chanhassen. 8. Thirty one homes (potentially 62 units) are a lot of homes to be served by one very long (1200 feet) cul -de -sac. Staff has examined this, but does not expect that MNDOT would allow an access directly to Highway 7, especially considering the short distance to Church Road. 9. Clarify the use of Outlot B — drainage? 10. Chanhassen is its own LGU (Local Government Unit) for purposes of storm water management. We should expect that the City will require a long -term maintenance agreement for the proposed drainage facilities. 11. A street light is proposed for the new intersection with West 62nd and Strawberry Lane. This project was originally reviewed in 2006, at which time several issues were addressed from the Shorewood City Council to the City of Chanhassen (see Attachment 11). At that time the two primary 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 issues were drainage and traffic. Ultimately, that project (39 townhomes, twin homes and single - family homes) was never built. Options: Send a letter, over the Mayor's signature, stating the concerns raised above; or remain silent relative to the development proposal. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends the same approach taken in 2006 — writing a letter to Chanhassen. Next Steps and Timelines: Comments are due by 6 March in order for them to be available for the Chanhassen Planning Commission's meeting on 18 March. OFCHANHAS�E+,: EECEIVEti Boulder Cove Community Narrative ; Ed 14 Chanhassen, MN � 1PlNf'.�$Er'I pj,APIItiiIN�� +1Ft�� I. Location The Boulder Cove property (site) is located in the City of Chanhassen, MN along Highway 7 (HWY 7) between Church Road and Shorewood Oaks Drive. West 62nd street is located to the north of the site. Refer to the location map below. II. Context The Boulder Cove site is currently vacant. The property was used for agricultural purposes until the late 1990s and was later occupied by a_landsca.p ng_company until approximately-late 2006_or_early_20.07. Old equipment, dilapidated structures, and debris such as chunks of concrete, asphalt, scrap metal and wood have been left on -site. Single family homes border the subject property to the north. HWY 7 and single family homes border the site to the south, and single family homes also border the site to the east and west. The property that borders the site to the north is located in Shorewood, MN and contains Single Family residences. The zoning classification for the Boulder Cove property is RLM- Residential Low and Medium Density with a Comprehensive Plan land 1 Attachment I use of Residential Low Density. Properties to the south, east and west are zoned RSF- Single Family Residential with Comprehensive Plan Land Uses of Residential Low Density. III. Development Description General Overview Lennar is pleased to submit an application for subdivision of the Boulder Cove site into 31 single - family lots with a proposed landscaped buffer along the northern and southern edges to provide visual and noise reduction screening. It is Lennar's intent to clean up waste that has been left behind prior to beginning construction of single family homes. Outlot A includes a tot lot while preserving a large specimen oak tree located in the southwestern portion of the site. Outlots B and C provide seasonal drainage areas. Phasing is to be done in one stage, as shown on the proposed preliminary plat. Access & Traffic Access to the Boulder Cove neighborhood will be provided through a paved local street that terminates in a cul -de -sac. The proposed local street extends from West 62nd Street, the community's northern border. The proposed local road ends in a cul -de -sac and the roadway itself exceeds the City's standard length of 800' for a cul -de -sac. A variance is being requested for the length of the local road and is explained in more detail below. According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, a single - family home produces approximately 9.52 vehicular trips per day. The proposed Boulder Cove Neighborhood would produce approximately 295 additional vehicular trips, which is less than the 371 daily vehicular trips that would have been produced by the previously- approved 39 -lot subdivision. Open Space Lennar recognizes the importance of integrated open space planning. Open space is provided for functional and passive use. Three outlots totaling 3.20 acres are proposed, constituting approximately 24% of the site. Outlot A contains a tot lot or pocket park for use by residents. Outlots B and C provide seasonal drainage basins and landscaped amenities with visual appeal. Landscaped buffers are provided along West 62nd Street and HWY 7 to provide visual and noise reduction screening from the residences to the north and the highway to the south. Sewer & Water Service Boulder Cove is located in the MW -1 sub - district of the Minnewashta Sewer District. Existing infrastructure includes the MCES Shorewood Interceptor that runs adjacent to the property within HWY 7. City Sanitary Sewer lines are located along the northern side of the site within West 62nd Avenue. It is anticipated that the proposed community will tie into and be served by the existing sewer and water system infrastructure in the area. 2 IV. Design Review Lennar prides itself on our home designs. With five series of homes, and 6 to 14 models and floor plans in each series, coupled with hundreds of exterior and interior options, each home feels custom - designed by the owner while still meeting local requirements for setbacks, architectural colors and materials, and landscaping and hardscape elements within the community. Lennar has successfully constructed several communities within the City of Chanhassen. Among these communities are Pinehurst, Camden Ridge, and Reflections. The vision for Boulder Cove would include similar architectural styling and exterior treatment to Reflections. Lennar's Landmark Series is anticipated for the Boulder Cove neighborhood. This series consists of 13 floor plans with typically 4 bedrooms, 2 to 4 bathrooms, and 3 car garages. Anticipated price points would be in the low to mid $400,000 range. Colors consist of warm earth tones like greys, beiges and browns, or neat, clean solids, such as reds or whites. High quality materials will be used on the exteriors. The materials may consist of a variety of stone, brick, or wood composites. These composites allow for a natural looking finish while providing maximum durability to withstand the elements over the life of the home. Some of the architectural accents included are porch pilasters, accented shutters and fascia boards, soffit eaves, decorative brackets, accented trim, and dormers. Samples of our house plans are included in this submittal. Please note this sampling does not constitute all plans that will be available to consumers. V. Land Use & Conformance Analysis Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Designation of the Boulder Cove Site is Residential Low Density, which consists of low- density, single - family detached housing. Page 2 -3 of the Comprehensive Plan states that net densities within this category range from 1.2 to 4.0 du /ac. There are several zoning applications within the low density category including RSF, R -4, RLM, and PUD -R. The proposed site plan has a net density of 3.05 du /ac, which implements the Comprehensive Plan density for this land use designation. The Comprehensive Plan also lists goals and policies regarding new development within Chanhassen. The goals and policies directly implemented by the proposed community are discussed below. Chapter 2 — Land Use Goal: Achieve a mixture of development which will assure a high quality of life and a reliable tax base. 3 Policy: Encourage low density residential development in appropriate areas of the community in a manner that reinforces the character and integrity of existing single - family neighborhoods while promoting the establishment of new neighborhoods of similar beauty. Implementation: The proposed Boulder Cove neighborhood will directly implement this Land Use Goal. The density of 3.05 du /ac implements the density designated in the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code. Prior to construction of homes, the site would be improved and the existing structures removed, cleaning up a trespass problem. Vegetated buffers along the northern and southern sides of the community would promote the establishment of this new neighborhood while utilizing an infill parcel within the City that is well - placed between various lake communities. Chapter 4 — Housing Goal: Provide housing opportunities for all residents, consistent with the identified community goals: o Accommodation of all racial and ethnic groups in the purchase, sale, rental, and location of housing within the community. o A variety of housing types for all people in all stages of the life cycle o A community of well- maintained housing and neighborhoods, including ownership and rental housing o Housing development that respects the natural environment of the community while striving to accommodate the need for a variety of housing types and costs Implementation: Boulder Cove will directly implement the housing goals listed above. Homes will be available to all persons for purchase regardless of racial or ethnic background. With a $400k price point, the anticipated homes will target the first -time move -up buyer in a community adjacent to Lake Minnetonka, Lake Virigina, and Lake Minnewashta. Homes will be located within the Minnetonka School District. A Homeowners Association will be created to maintain the open space areas to ensure that the integrity of the community is maintained. Consistent with Comprehensive Plan policy, the proposed layout and lot configuration respects the natural environment of the community and does not encroach into natural resources or physical features. This has been achieved through the provision of several outlots that provide drainage basin spaces and some passive open space for use by residents within the neighborhood. A large specimen oak tree is also being preserved. Prior to constructing the proposed neighborhood, all existing structures will be removed, resulting in an environmental improvement on -site. The Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan specifically states on page 4 -3 that the largest household type in the City is a family household — a married couple with children. The desire for family households is driving the demand for the detached single - family homes in Chanhassen. Based on the City's location in eastern Carver County and access to employment centers, family housing will continue to have a strong demand. Furthermore, page 4 -6 states that over half of the City's Housing stock is more than 20 years old. Page 4 -10 notes that the City has less than 1,000 acres of residential land left for development. It is anticipated that the majority of the residential land will be developed by 2020, and the growth between 2020 and 2030 will be infill 4 development. The Comprehensive Plan suggests that there is demand for for -sale housing within the City of Chanhassen that will remain through 2030. As an infill lot, the community has been planned to establish a new neighborhood while taking design site constraints into consideration. The Boulder Cove neighborhood adds 31 more single - family detached homes to the City of Chanhassen on an infill property that is currently littered with trash, debris, old equipment, and dilapidated structures. Prior to construction of homes, the property would be cleaned, resulting in a visually appealing neighborhood in this area of Chanhassnen. It is the City's goal to provide a variety of housing types while promoting the integration of life -cycle housing opportunities throughout the community. Lennar would like to introduce our NextGen Series to the City of Chanhassen. This revolutionary series is a multi - generational home plan designed specifically to accommodate two adult generations living under one roof with privacy and convenience. This new home allows for a separate first floor living space that includes its own entrance, living area, kitchenette, attached laundry, and garage. It is not a detached guesthouse or simply an extra bedroom, but a separate space to be locked from the main house, or to offer easy access depending on family needs. This could include care for elderly family members, care for children with disabilities, or visiting family members such as college students or guests traveling from abroad. The result is a 5 bedroom, 5 bathroom home that creatively satisfies a variety of housing needs while fitting with the architectural styling and development regulations of the neighborhood. Chapter 6 — Parks and Open Space Goal: Provide a balanced park system which includes neighborhood parks, community parks, special use facilities, preserve areas, regional facilities and schools. Goal: Create a city -wide trail and sidewalk system that connects neighborhoods to parks, schools, and other community destinations. Implementation: The proposed site plan for Boulder Cove will directly implement the goal above. Three outlots are proposed within the neighborhood, totaling 3.20 acres in seasonal drainage basins and passive open space while preserving a specimen oak tree. Outlot A Includes a tot lot /playground area in the southwest corner of the site, and outlots B and C provide seasonal drainage. Although the open space and drainage areas may not be counted by the City as open space, the proposed 3.20 acres of open space constitutes 24% of land that makes up the community. The proposed open spaces preserve existing vegetation, protect natural resources and provide residents with access to existing natural areas close to home, all while maintaining buffers between existing neighborhoods. A sidewalk is also provided along Strawberry Court which facilitates pedestrian access up to 62nd Street West. Chapter 7 — Transportation Goal: To create an integrated multi -modal transportation system which permits safe, efficient and effective movement of people and goods while supporting the City's development plans, and complementing the metropolitan transportation system that lies within its boundaries. 5 Roadway Policy 2: New roadway facilities should be constructed in conjunction with new developments and designed according to the intended function. They should be planned and designed to be compatible with the surrounding environment. Roadway Policy 4: Residential street systems should be designed to discourage cut -thru traffic, to promote the connection of neighborhoods, and to be compatible with other transportation modes including transit, bicycle and walking. Subdivisions: As a part of platting, each development should provide dedication and improvement of public streets consistent with the standards found in city ordinances. The city will promote the provision of street and pedestrian connections to maximize safety and ease of access. Buffers: Sufficient setbacks and /or berming should be designed into all development projects adjacent to major public roadways. Neighborhoods: It is the City's policy to require interconnections between neighborhoods through the construction of local streets to foster a sense of community, to improve safety, and to provide convenient access for residents Implementation: The proposed neighborhood at Boulder Cove will directly implement the transportation goal and policies above. A local road is proposed for access connecting to 62 "d Street to the north. The local road is designed to meet City requirements, resulting in safe, efficient, and effective access and mobility for future residents. Because it is designed to meet City requirements, it is compatible with the existing roadway network in the area. The proposed local street terminates in a cul -de -sac, serving only the homes at Boulder Cove. Boulder Cove will eliminate 2 existing connections to HWY 7. It will also result in 8 less units from the previous approval resulting in 76 fewer daily vehicular trips than the 39 -lot subdivision that was previously approved. The local street also includes a sidewalk for pedestrian access throughout the neighborhood. Buffers are located on the northern and southern sides of the community to provide privacy. Homes on the south side of the community are also located closer towards the front of the lots along Strawberry Court to allow for a larger rear setback and buffer area backing up to HWY 7. A 6 -foot privacy fence will also be installed along HWY 7. Zoning The Boulder Cove site has a zoning classification of RLM (Residential Low and Medium Density). The intent of the "RLM" District is to provide for single - family attached or detached residential development on land guided residential —low or medium density in the city's comprehensive plan with a maximum net density of eight units per acre. Compliance with development regulations for single family residences within the RLM Zone are shown below: 6 Lot Requirements and Setbacks Boulder Zoning .. 20-645 Compliance Minimum lot area: 9000 sf 10 Minimum lot frontage: 50 feet Minimum lot depth: 110 sf f� Maximum lot coverage: 35% Cl Setbacks: - Front Yards: 25 feet - Rear Yards: 25 feet Q - Side yards: 5 feet garage side; 10 feet house side - Minimum separation between structures: 15 feet Maximum Height: 35 feet El The proposed subdivision map for the Boulder Cove site implements these development regulations. All lots exceed the 9,000 square foot minimum lot size, and 65 -foot lots are proposed. All lots are deeper than 110 square feet and impervious site coverage is below the 35% maximum. A spreadsheet is included with this submittal package. Proposed building areas meet all required setbacks and proposed homes are 2- stories, which is beneath the 35 -foot height limit. Variance A variance is being requested to allow for a road longer than 800' because the site is constrained due to shape, size, and proximity to a major highway. Pursuant to City Code Section 20 -58, the request for a variance complies with the findings in the following ways: • The variance would allow for development consistent with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. • The site is constrained; practical difficulties include access, soils that make development challenging, shallow groundwater depths, and the overall size and shape of the site. • The requested variation is not based on economic considerations alone; the variance for the proposed access road is due to the fact that that Minnesota Department of Transportation will not approve an access point on to a highway (HWY 7). Boulder Cove also eliminates two existing connections onto HWY 7. • The constraints of the site are not due to circumstances beyond owner control, nor were the constraints created by the current land owner. • The variance, if granted, will not alter the character of the locality; it would allow for a neighborhood on an infill piece of property and the property that will be cleaned prior to construction of proposed homes. VI. Summary Lennar has historically worked successfully with Chanhassen City staff to deliver several notable communities within the City. We look forward to working closely with City staff on this opportunity and eliminating blighted land while establishing another community that both the City of Chanhassen and Lennar can be proud of. 7 r F+ %se F.isl. ��auCem r. 5 erx13E I% of Ado F� � °%ne M V6 Cesl °en umweml N w66YTb.E es3%e w.lA� 472 6. J -A -- - - - -- - -.�. I I 4oD,ba• ` - -o - -r r., �.._.._.._..-� ,� fouTLOTC„ I : la` - 14 :a��; 9 15 II \ .T. FILTRATION 10 sFwb \ /- `` \. ;ev/ _ uTsU •'\ \\ p i:°]ir'i v' I\''V \`„ ='se -I r ,A \y / - o.� 10 �`� ~' � \ §�$s �,.•,,, \:;�Ty% , � 6 GOVT 9 \'`,:96,Y5F � \\.�;H�T > ':+ �4 / / 1 yp •\ ``T �-- T�6 _ \ : `� \=\ LENNAR ".0.],?9' 6635E `/� 16306 36TH'AVEkVE N. CO(IE 690 a�TLeT A AD.rDINN RrimmFW uALEss- I SHLs 9riYTN INICATED.ANOADJCININOIOTNNES, .S.O. M.LN. NWess CHECKED C.5.0. GbeM. � I � I I F 14— sE OENOIES WT AREA -4 —Y OENUIES ALLOWABLE I ERNOUS AR. - ---- DENOTES 6U1LO91C 9ERAL FRONT 30' REM SIBS- 10$BULLOINC/S +GARAGE MOM NWY ] = 50' I EI XONRTC � RGM \ -- S�FPKR�� \ \ lr \\ \ \\ \\ 1 6 s6.6D• P %6 E 0UTL0T B PROPOSED ROW = 242 ACRES PROPOSED W . - 320 ACRES TOTAL NET AREA= 7.76 ACRES NET OENBIFY PROPOSEO = 399 UNITS PER AC MAX OENSTY PERMI FFEO = &0 UNITS PER ACA \\ of \ \ l a v q\ \\ F 4 1 � m OWJWISEANa UII FuY9AHE SHOWNTIUa 1\�A, r 1 d`, r F+ %se F.isl. ��auCem r. 5 erx13E I% of Ado F� � °%ne M V6 Cesl °en umweml N w66YTb.E es3%e w.lA� 472 6. J -A -- - - - -- - -.�. I I 4oD,ba• ` - -o - -r r., �.._.._.._..-� ,� fouTLOTC„ I : la` - 14 :a��; 9 15 II \ .T. FILTRATION 10 sFwb \ /- `` \. ;ev/ _ uTsU •'\ \\ p i:°]ir'i v' I\''V \`„ ='se -I r ,A \y / - o.� 10 �`� ~' � \ §�$s �,.•,,, \:;�Ty% , � 6 GOVT 9 \'`,:96,Y5F � \\.�;H�T > ':+ �4 / / 1 yp •\ ``T �-- T�6 _ \ : `� \=\ LENNAR ".0.],?9' 6635E `/� 16306 36TH'AVEkVE N. CO(IE 690 a�TLeT A AD.rDINN RrimmFW uALEss- I SHLs 9riYTN INICATED.ANOADJCININOIOTNNES, .S.O. M.LN. NWess CHECKED C.5.0. GbeM. � I � I I F 14— sE OENOIES WT AREA -4 —Y OENUIES ALLOWABLE I ERNOUS AR. - ---- DENOTES 6U1LO91C 9ERAL FRONT 30' REM SIBS- 10$BULLOINC/S +GARAGE MOM NWY ] = 50' ITTO 9 -,gN—n., in.�dlF�efiisli uTES F.c06TWaz.YSaz LENNAR CHANHASSEN,MN FAKE NWNEIYASNTA SITE wmm z °, N M1a. w,c ama..E.xwl Fa tiwly ,� ENiIA IIe'of1e WS «l oebon eklo�tlal 59 &]o MwiF1 ana let .D , u. Iwua, a.. ava v <xYly„e w..lwrr er M A: e w r e 6a.t er YR ae x Temmw r.6 xwr.. Nmg. P3 we =r. ,.. < +�<a e, rwle., N<J N<,I: n<e r m, r Nmrn IFO of mM surM 5 r Us esralY IFe hl Ina lgM1l -ol.av el sfeto irwz§ Hknx Y Nw FkF A�nt- Hs41 !w m 0eswkeodwn Cas�Nw� 50M1 en ite 'SUS ai�<a or Ue Ina NwiN Fe b aeb YxlMai. I�mn Hu Nwm la 6egMn�ge na` woe°JHg In�e HrH oms pN W.g. aabimw slre .ie„ne cairn ozxm N to [asr i eegmNeq of o oo'ahlm<a el W I�ala mmMU�n a o wle u,ea�un :xwlMY ¢r <aY'I ^: oioSNTu22a4=�ey Tme PRELIMINARY PLAT 1 14 -0105 OF 6 I EI XONRTC � RGM S PRROPOSED PQVNC \ TOTAL PRO.ECT AREA= 1336 ACRES SNCLE FAMILY= 31 LOTS CROSS OEkSTY PRGPOSEO - 232 WIS PER PROPOSED ROW = 242 ACRES PROPOSED W . - 320 ACRES TOTAL NET AREA= 7.76 ACRES NET OENBIFY PROPOSEO = 399 UNITS PER AC MAX OENSTY PERMI FFEO = &0 UNITS PER ACA ITTO 9 -,gN—n., in.�dlF�efiisli uTES F.c06TWaz.YSaz LENNAR CHANHASSEN,MN FAKE NWNEIYASNTA SITE wmm z °, N M1a. w,c ama..E.xwl Fa tiwly ,� ENiIA IIe'of1e WS «l oebon eklo�tlal 59 &]o MwiF1 ana let .D , u. Iwua, a.. ava v <xYly„e w..lwrr er M A: e w r e 6a.t er YR ae x Temmw r.6 xwr.. Nmg. P3 we =r. ,.. < +�<a e, rwle., N<J N<,I: n<e r m, r Nmrn IFO of mM surM 5 r Us esralY IFe hl Ina lgM1l -ol.av el sfeto irwz§ Hknx Y Nw FkF A�nt- Hs41 !w m 0eswkeodwn Cas�Nw� 50M1 en ite 'SUS ai�<a or Ue Ina NwiN Fe b aeb YxlMai. I�mn Hu Nwm la 6egMn�ge na` woe°JHg In�e HrH oms pN W.g. aabimw slre .ie„ne cairn ozxm N to [asr i eegmNeq of o oo'ahlm<a el W I�ala mmMU�n a o wle u,ea�un :xwlMY ¢r <aY'I ^: oioSNTu22a4=�ey Tme PRELIMINARY PLAT 1 14 -0105 OF 6 Re: Boulder Cove Development March 3, 2006 Page two We understand that Boulder Cove is within the density range prescribed by your Comprehensive Plan; due to the concerns relative to traffic, however, we would hope that something more in the middle of the range (i.e. two units per acre net) would be approved, as it would be more consistent with the existing surrounding development in both Chanhassen and Shorewood. We are concerned that the development as proposed will have an undue impact on the infrastructure in Shorewood. We urge the City of Chanhassen to consider zoning on the proposed Boulder Cove property that is consistent with its neighborhood as well as Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan. This good, sensitive planning will result in desirable, complementary development throughout the immediate area. Thank you for the opportunity to include Shorewood's comments in the record. Sincerely, Woody Love Mayor On behalf of the City Council Christine Liz6e, Ward 1 Laura Turgeon, Ward 2 Paula Callies, Ward 3 Martin R. Wellens, Ward 4 TY OF SHORE WOOD COUNCIL MEETING .;oruary 27, 2006 Page 4 of 11 question that remained was whether it should be a permitted use or a conditional use. Nielsen noted the applicants chose not to wait until the C -3 District land use study was complete. With regard to analysis of the case, Director Nielsen stated Staff had researched how other cities handle day care facilities in commercial zoning districts. He noted Shorewood required a C.U.P. for day care facilities in the R -C, Residential/Commercial District, and that the City specified size limitations in addition to the provisions found in the State requirements. No such size limitations are proposed for the C -3 District. Director Nielsen explained Staff had recommended day care facilities in the C -3 District be listed as permitted use subject to new general provisions. After much discussion, the Planning Commission felt it was important for day care facility applications to be part of a public hearing process because the activity areas associated with day care facilities could be located fairly close to residential areas. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommended day care facilities be listed as conditional use. He stated the draft text amendment before Council added day care facilities to the C -3 District as conditional use subject to the provisions listed. Director Nielsen then reviewed the provisions of the draft text amendment to the General Provisions of the Zoning Code 1201.03 Subd. 22 Day Care Facilities. He explained Minnesota Rules, Chapter 9503 contained several pages setting forth the requirements relative to daycare facilities. Director Nielsen then explained Staff asked the applicant to provide plans showing how a day care facility and its required outdoor activity area would fit within the Shopping Center, noting the plan was not required for a zoning text amendment,. He reviewed the proposed site plan. He stated a crosswalk, with speed bumps and signs, connected the facility to the play area, and the State Rules allow the play area to be as far as 2000 feet away from the center. Director Nielsen explained the approval before Council was about the draft text amendment and not about the proposed site plan. He then explained if the draft text amendment was adopted, the representatives of the Shorewood Village Shopping Center would submit a conditional use permit application at which time the site plan would be reviewed in great detail. He noted the Planning Commission expressed concern with the activity area being located such that it required children to cross a roadway used by delivery trucks. Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commission unanimously agreed to recommend approving the draft text amendment. In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, Director Nielsen stated the draft text amendment would not apply to residential daycare facilities for 10 or fewer children, and residential day care facilities are limited to homes and homes are not allowed in the C -3 District. Callies moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 421, "An Ordinance Amending Section 1201.23 Subd. 4. (C -3 Conditional Uses) of the Shorewood Zoning Code ". Motion passed in C. Discuss Boulder Cove Development in Chanhassen Mayor Love explained how this topic on the agenda would be addressed. First, Staff would provide background on the subject as was stated in Director Nielsen's correspondence to the City of Chanhassen. Second, the City Attorney and the City Administrator would briefly discuss the Council's role and CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2006 Page 5 of 11 authority in this type of situation. And, although this was not a public hearing, Mayor Love would provide the residents with the opportunity to be heard for the record in a manner that would lean toward brevity and completeness. Director Nielsen stated the project in question was a project in Chanhassen called Boulder Cove Development. The development was proposed for property located on the north side of Highway 7 and the south side of West 62nd Street. The proposed development would be served by a cul -de -sac street extending off the south end of Strawberry Lane. The project was a residential project which is a combination of single - family, two- family, and three- family dwellings totaling 39 units in all. Nielsen stated the development plans were sent to Staff for review and comment. He then stated he had sent an email to Sharmeen Al -Jaff, a Senior Planner with the City of Chanhassen, expressing two primary concerns of the Staff: 1) drainage in the area; and 2) traffic. Nielsen stated, for clarification, that any comments to Chanhassen and to the public were strictly Staff comments and not Shorewood's formal position. Nielsen stated Strawberry Lane and West 62nd Street were both local streets in the Shorewood's Comprehensive Plan, and both streets were somewhat substandard with regard to width. He stated Staff had expressed concerns to Chanhassen regarding the impact of the proposed development on Shorewood streets in particular, and had informed Chanhassen that Strawberry Lane served as both a vehicular and pedestrian route to the Minnewashta Elementary School. Nielsen stated Chanhassen was working with MnDOT to pursue having a traffic light installed at Highway 7 and Church Road. He stated corridor studies that had been done on Highway 7 did not designate that intersection to be a controlled intersection based on their daily traffic thresholds. With regard to tree replacement, Nielsen stated Al -Jaff explained the project would re -plant more trees than the Chanhassen ordinance required. With regard to drainage, Nielsen stated the Shorewood Oaks area had a relatively high water table and was poorly drained naturally. He explained a drainage system had been installed as part of the Shorewood Oaks Project, and essentially all the lots in the area drain into the drainage system (noting it was not a storm water system). He then stated the system does handle the drainage relatively well for a poorly drained area, and he expressed concern with adding the proposed development to a poorly drained area. With regard to density, Nielsen stated Staff had expressed its preference for the density to be in the middle of Chanhassen's density range of 1.2 — 4 units per acre for Residential — Low Density site (the site is currently zoned for a lower density). He explained the Shorewood Oaks area had a density of 2 units per acre, and the proposed development was for a density of 3.7 units. Nielsen stated the developer of the proposed site is marketing the units as retirement age units. He explained Shorewood Ponds was a senior development, and he stated senior developments do generate less traffic than a family development area may. He explained that Chanhassen did not have any covenant . with the developer that would restrict the units be sold to individuals that are 55 years -of -age or older. Nielsen then stated Chanhassen was conducting a public hearing on March 7, 2006. Staff had recommended to those individuals who had contacted the City they attend the public hearing. He then stated Staff also had encouraged Shorewood residents to express their concerns to the Shorewood Council at its meeting tonight. CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2006 Page 6of11 Administrator Dawson stated the project was a Chanhassen project subject to Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan zoning regulations, and Shorewood's role was to provide Chanhassen with its comments and concerns regarding the proposed development. He explained the right -of -way at West 62nd Street was in both Shorewood and Chanhassen and the entry into the development would be on the Chanhassen right -of -way. He then explained the sewer hookup would be to a Metro sewer and not a City of Shorewood sewer. City Attorney Keane explained the City of Shorewood had no authority over a Chanhassen zoning decision. He then explained individuals can comment to Chanhassen, Council can submit a letter from Council stating the Council's perspective on the proposed development, or the Council could prepare a resolution making a collective statement from the Council that is adopted by the Council. Keane then stated there is no provision in Minnesota law or as a joint exercise of power for extraterritorial exercise of power from one community to the other. Mayor Love explained how he would conduct the public feedback session. He asked that each individual state their name and address for the record. He encouraged them to keep then comments to under three minutes, and not to repeat a point previously made. Once public comments were completed, Council members would resume discussion amongst themselves. Marcus Hoffman, 6195 Strawberry Lane, expressed concern with the volume of traffic that would be added to the area. Based on 39 units which could have three cars each, the additional traffic could be as high as 120 trips. He stated if the project were to be approved he wanted there to be a mechanism in place to ensure traffic did not exceed the 1000 trips allowed for residential streets. He expressed concern with regard to: property assessments for additional curb and gutters and sidewalk improvements; measures to increase the safety of local pedestrians; the increased need for speed limit management; and loss of lot values due to local property assessments. Steve Bradley, 6175 Strawberry Lane, expressed concern for the safety of the neighborhood children. He stated the noise has been on a steady increase due to development. He expressed safety concerns because cars have gone into the first three yards on Strawberry Lane when they were entering onto Strawberry Lane from West 62nd Street. He expressed concern with his family's ability to walk and bike to the parks safely with increased traffic. He hoped Shorewood would be able to have some leverage with the proposed development because the exit from the development would use Shorewood's half of West 62nd Street. Dorothy Croskey, 26265 Oak Leaf Trail, expressed concern with the impact that additional school -age children would have on the already overcrowded schools and buses. John Haesler, 26225 Oak Leaf Trail, expressed concerns with drainage and traffic. He stated the proposed development would be raised three feet, and water would run into his neighborhood. He stated multi -unit dwellings would create a great deal of impervious surface thereby increasing the drainage problem. He explained the neighborhood already experienced an increase in traffic from individuals taking neighborhood residential streets rather than the main roads, and he stated that type of traffic would increase. Bruce Palm, 26170 Oak Leaf Trail, expressed concern with drainage. He stated the drainage was similar to a conduit from Highway 7 through the community. He questioned why Shorewood had no formal authority over the proposed development when Shorewood would be negatively impacted. CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2006 Page 7 of 11 Mayor Love explained the MCWD would normally have permitting authority over surface water management in the Watershed District; he then added Chanhassen was one of the few cities in the Watershed District that had taken on the responsibility for permitting except for things such as creek crossings. He noted the MCWD does oversee the process. Director Brown stated Staff thought the separation of the drainage areas for the proposed development was inadequate. He then stated Staff would attempt to ensure the separation of the Shorewood Oaks area and the Boulder Cove proposed development would be well defined. He noted the separation would probably be a ditch, and there are tradeoffs to having a ditch (e.g. tree loss). Mr. Palm asked if Shorewood would have any recourse over the developer with regard to negative impacts on Shorewood residents. City Attorney Keane explained the developer must design the property in a manner that would not increase the rate of run -off, and the developer would have to construct on -site mechanisms to maintain the historic rate of run -off. Director Brown stated the proposed development was intended to drain toward Highway 7. The development plan proposed a ditch and storm sewer that would ultimately drain into a pond on the southwest corner of the property, and the storm water would ultimately end up in the ditches of Highway 7. Brown stated the overland barrier needed to be well defined to ensure adequate storm water management during high water times. Mark Plewka, 26540 West 62nd Street, questioned whether: or not the access to the development could be directly off of Highway 7 at Church Road. He stated morning traffic was unique at that intersection. He then stated Church Street and West 62nd Street were narrow streets with no sidewalks for commuting to the park, and he stated widening the streets and installing sidewalks would reduce existing lot sizes. He also stated drainage issues were increased because of the high clay soil bed. Director Brown stated MnDOT's objective was to limit access points to State trunk highways to 1 — 1 'h miles apart. He stated based on Shorewood's past efforts to have a traffic signal installed at Eureka Road and the State's parameters for traffic signals, he would be surprised if MnDOT would install a traffic signal at Church Road. Dan Torgerson, 6185 Strawberry Lane, explained the proposed cul -de -sac is across from a 90- degree curve on an existing street and asked Council for help in getting the developer to have access to the site from Highway 7 and align with Greenbriar Avenue where the road was wider than at Church Road. He then stated about 500 yards west of Church Road the City of Chanhassen had approved a new development called Hidden Creek Estates which has approximately 40 single - family dwellings in the first phase which has direct access to Highway 7. He also stated it appeared that phase two for that development had been started. Mayor Love noted when the new access for Hidden Creek Estate was granted the access from Piper Curve access was removed. Leah Schneider, 26420 West 62nd Street, expressed concerns with drainage. She stated her sump pump runs continually all year long. She then stated all the residents on that side of the road have constant lakes in their yards. CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2006 Page 8 of 11 Tom Croskey, 26265 Oak Leaf Trail, stated his main concern was some legal standards were not being observed in the rezoning. He specifically cited the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Chanhassen's Ordinance for General Conditions for Granting a Variance. He stated the Shorewood residents would pursue legal action and would expect support from Council. Robert Hensley, 28110 Woodside Road, stated he believed the Cathcart Park property was owned by Shorewood but was located within Chanhassen. He had concerns with the possible impact the proposed development would have on the Park. He questioned the potential standing Shorewood may have as a landowner in Chanhassen, and he asked Council to determine what that standing would be. Lisa Wagner, 26145 Oak Leaf Trail, stated she had observed a dramatic increase in traffic since she became a resident in 1993, and she had experienced drainage problems. She stated she did not think many Shorewood residents knew of the proposed development. She stated the developer did conduct an information gathering meeting but did not notify the Shorewood residents until two days prior to the gathering. She stated her husband attended the meeting but he did not believe the developer answered the questions asked. Councilmember Turgeon explained that Shorewood was not required to send out a notice because it is Chanhassen's public hearing, and she stated that Director Nielsen would send out Chanhassen's notice. Nielsen stated he had been informed that Chanhassen would send out the notice to all Shorewood residents within 500 feet of the proposed development site. Wade Navrutil, 3751 West 62nd Street, stated he owned the long parcel of land along the west side of the proposed development, that the developer never made a purchase price offer to him, and he stated would be willing to sell the land. He stated he was well aware of the drainage issues. He also stated he would be affected the most by the proposed development because 70% of the development would run adjacent to his land. Martin Heiland, 26510 West 62nd Street, expressed concerns with the increase in traffic. He stated the roads were currently in need of repair. He questioned how quickly road repairs could begin once the development was started, and what portion of the repairs would be paid by Shorewood and what portion would be paid by Chanhassen. Mayor Love closed public comments at 8:10 P.M. Mayor Love stated Council's awareness of the public's concerns had been heightened by their expression of their concerns at the meeting. He then stated Staff had already raised concerns which Council was going to discuss. He also stated water knows no municipal boundaries; therefore, the City will be able to review all drainage related components of the project. Love stated Staff had wanted the Boulder Cove topic to be on the agenda so Council could decide whether or not it wanted to take an official position regarding the concerns. He summarized the major concerns heard: safety for children, traffic, drainage, and the road quality of Strawberry Lane and West 62nd Street. Councilmember Turgeon stated it was difficult to be in the position of not being able to regulate a development because it was not in Shorewood. She then stated she would support Staff drafting a formal resolution to send to the City of Chanhassen with regard to the concerns of the Shorewood residents about the proposed development. The first part of the resolution would state Council did not approve the proposed zoning change. She asked Director Brown to assess whether there were other access alternatives to the development site. She suggested Council and Staff determine if there were any ways to resolve the traffic concerns for Strawberry Lane and West 62nd Street. She then stated the biggest CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2006 Page 9 of 11 challenge for Council and Staff was to determine how to most effectively communicate to Chanhassen Shorewood's recommendation to reject the zoning change and the rationale supporting the recommendation. City Attorney Keane stated a resolution would be appropriate. Councilmember Wellens stated suggested Shorewood use the resources of the MCWD and the Metropolitan Council to help address concerns with run -off and the changing of Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan. Director Nielsen clarified Chanhassen was changing zoning, not its Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Lizoe stated she was pleased with the number of residents that came to the meeting to express their concerns. She encouraged them to attend Chanhassen's public hearing regarding the proposed zoning change on March 7, 2006, to state their concerns, and to write letters to Chanhassen. Mayor Love stated he, too, was pleased with the number of residents, including a non - Shorewood resident, that expressed their concerns tonight. He stated their presence at the Chanhassen meetings would be noteworthy. He also stated the concerns raised at the meeting had also been expressed by Chanhassen residents with regard to other Chanhassen development projects. He recommended the residents attend the Chanhassen meetings regarding the proposed development and seek out Chanhassen residents that share the same concerns. Councilmember Callies stated she was also impressed with the attendance at the meeting. She did state she did not support Council making a resolution taking a position on the proposed rezoning because she was not educated on the Chanhassen development regulations. She then stated she was comfortable communicating the concerns regarding drainage and traffic to Chanhassen. She also stated because Cathcart Park was in Chanhassen it did provide Shorewood with more leverage with regard to the impact on the Park. She explained it was not the Council's role to become an advocate for private interests; the Council's role was to take on issues related to the public infrastructure. Callies then stated she would support a resolution to Chanhassen regarding the impact of drainage and traffic issues on Shorewood residents, and Shorewood parks and roads. Councilmember Turgeon moved to direct the Staff to prepare a resolution for review at the next Council meeting. It was noted the next Council meeting would be after Chanhassen's public hearing on March 7, 2006. Mayor Love suggested Staff draft a letter to Chanhassen summarizing the stated concerns under his signature and on behalf of the Council. Council agreed. Mayor Love noted the letter would be a matter of public record. Mayor Love thanked the attendees for taking the time to attend the meeting and voice their concerns. He again encouraged them to attend the Chanhassen meetings regarding the proposed development and express their concerns. In response to a question from the public, Mayor Love stated lie did not see a role for a member of the Council in attending the Chanhassen public hearing. Director Nielsen stated the project progress can be tracked on Chanhassen's website. ® MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Representative Appointment on the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Board Meeting Date: February 24, 2014 Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Reviewed by: Attachments: Resolution Policy Consideration: Should the City Council appoint an interim representative to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Board until a representative can be appointed? Background: The City has advertised for a resident volunteer to serve on the LMCD Board. The city has received one letter of interest, and that applicant will be interviewed by the City Council on March 10, 2014. In the interim, if the City Council decides to appoint a representative at this time to serve until a permanent appointment is made, staff member and Shorewood resident Julie Moore is willing to serve in this capacity. The next LMCD meeting is Wednesday, February 26. Options: 1) Council may approve a resolution appointing Julie Moore as Shorewood representative to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board 2) Council may approve a resolution naming someone else to serve as representative to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board 3) Do nothing and wait to make an appointment decision after interviewing the applicant on March 10. Recommendation/ Action Requested: Council may decide how it wishes to proceed with this item. Next Steps and Timelines: If an interim representative is appointed, staff will notify the LMCD of the appointment. Connection to Vision/ Mission: Making an appointment to the LMCD Board provides residents with quality public services. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 14- A RESOLUTION MAKING AN APPOINTMENT TO THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood appoints a resident to represent the City on the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District; and WHEREAS, the City advertised this volunteer board opportunity for appointment to said Board; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to appoint an interim representative until a representative is appointed; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood to hereby appoint as interim representative for the City of Shorewood on the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board effective February 24, 2014 and until a representative is appointed. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of February, 2014. ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk MEMORANDUM Date: Febwary 24, 2014 To: Mayor Zerby Council Members From: Brice DeJong, Finance Director Re: December, 2013 General Fund Unaudited Budget Report The 2013 General Fund looks very good. Revenues are in great shape and expenditures are almost right on budget overall. We are still reviewing entries made in 2014 and will have journal entries related to year revenues and expenditures that need to be posted prior to the audit. It certainly looks like we will end up with a positive variance to our budget. Most departments came in very close to budget as we refine our forecasting. As we tighten up the estimates it means that we run a 50/50 chance of being over budget in almost every department. Because of the house sale, we will add to the General Fund Balance this year. GENERAL FUND REVENUES Property Taxes — We have make a journal entry for the final property tax settlement which was received in 2014 and amounts to about $55,000 which will increase revenues. Licenses & Permits — We have experienced excellent revenues this year based on the minor subdivisions that have been approved in the past year. Miscellaneous Revenues — This is the category where we budgeted the revenues from water tower cell phone leases. This also includes the $317,000 proceeds from the house sale. GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES • Administration — This budget is under primarily because of the shift to a contractual service with Midwest Government Advisors for Mr. Joynes services. This leads to a corresponding decrease in Personnel which is under budget from both Mr. Joynes and from Ms. Grout coding more time to Recreation. • Municipal Building — City Hall is over budget primarily because of repairs made to the home at 5795 Country Club to prepare it for sale. • City Engineer — This budget is below the prior year because we shifted to contracting for engineering services. The cost of engineering may be higher in some of the enterprise funds and project budgets like the Smithtown trail because those services are no longer provided in- house, but the General fund does reap the benefit of no longer paying for a full -time employee. • Recreation Programs — This budget is higher than last year primarily because of salary expense. We actually had an ice skating season that required rink attendants while no rink attendants were hired in 2012 because of the warm weather and poor ice conditions. Ms. Grout is also coding more of her hours to this activity than was anticipated at budget time. Please contact me or Mr. Joynes if you have any questions. Attachment: December Budget Spreadsheet Monthly Budget Report - UNAUDITED December 31, 2013 YTD YTD 2013 % of 2013 Expected Variance 2012 December Adopted Annual % of 2013 (Negative) Year to Date Overview Actual 2013 Budget Budget Budget or Positive REVENUE Property Taxes 4,783,939 4,709,543 4,763,319 98.9% 100.0% Licenses and Permits 175,086 204,600 124,200 164.7% 100.0% Intergovernmental 76,102 70726 70401 100.5% 100.0% Charges for Service 64,825 33,194 35,150 94.4% 100.0% Fines and Forfeitures 66,230 58,019 57,000 101.8% 100.0% Miscellaneous 141,343 477,496 213,900 223.2% 100.0% TOTAL 5,307,525 5,553,578 5,263,970 105.5% 100.0% 289,608 EXPENDITURES Department Council Personnel 16794 16794 16,800 100.0% Materials and Supplies 887 2,035 2,000 101.8% Support and Services 80,309 72,667 72,450 100.3% Transfers 13,600 47700 47700 Total 111,590 139,196 138,950 100.2% 100.0% (246) Administration Personnel 373,915 234,593 359,671 65.2% Materials and Supplies 17,906 14,849 18,450 80.5% Support and Services 82,008 125,066 421175 296.5% Capital Outlay 370 - Total 474,199 374,508 420,296 89.1% 100.0% 45788 Finance Personnel 120,556 134,206 132,929 101.0% Materials and Supplies 8,042 8,225 81400 97.9% Support and Services 11,686 11499 11,600 99.1% Capital Outlay - - Total 140,284 153,930 152,929 100.7% 100.0% (1,001) Professional Services 190,592 203,542 203,390 100.1% 100.0% (152) Planning and Zoning Personnel 181,382 176,892 170,666 103.6% Materials and Supplies 137 292 650 44.9% Support and Services 7,691 7,684 71400 103.8% Capital Outlay - - 200 0.0% Total 189,210 184,868 178,916 103.3% 100.0% (5,952) Municipal Building - City Hall Materials and Supplies 40799 60,118 221130 271.7% Support and Services 149,878 194,358 164,800 117.9% Capital Outlay 2441 - - Transfers 102,200 100450 100450 100.0% Total 295,318 354,926 287,380 123.5% 100.0% (67,546) Police Materials and Supplies 1,328 - - Support Services 991,383 1,018,679 1,015,077 100.4% Capital (Public Safety Bldg) 225,132 227764 235,437 96.7% Total 1,217,843 1,246,443 1,250,514 99.7% 100.0% 4,071 Fire Support Services 331,987 345728 349,582 98.9% Capital (Public Safety Bldg) 277,906 287,655 287,643 100.0% Total 609,893 633,383 637,225 99.4% 100.0% 3,842 Inspections Personnel 114,396 120,237 120,588 99.7% Materials and Supplies 242 - 200 0.0% Support and Services 5,813 6,813 5,300 128.5% Total 120451 127,050 126,088 100.8% 100.0% (962) City Engineer Personnel 84,615 460 92,549 0.5% Materials and Supplies 144 - 200 0.0% Support and Services 21,688 68,690 11,220 612.2% Capital Outlay - - - Total 106447 69,150 103,969 66.5% 100.0% 34,819 Public Works Service Personnel 417,330 424,169 428775 98.9% Materials and Supplies 120,684 142,310 171,300 83.1% Support and Services 121758 105,846 139750 75.7% Transfers 750,000 772,500 772,500 Total 1409772 1,444,825 1,512,325 95.5% 100.0% 67,500 Snow and Ice Personnel 27,502 55,166 56,662 97.4% Materials and Supplies 29,509 44,835 45,000 99.6% Total 57,011 100,001 101,662 98.4% 100.0% 1,661 Parks Maintenance Personnel 101,395 80,476 103,358 77.9% Materials and Supplies 17,095 17,986 20,222 88.9% Support and Services 32,808 39738 30,910 128.6% Transfers - - - Total 151,298 138,200 154490 89.5% 100.0% 16,290 Recreation Programs Personnel 37,627 51,091 36,360 140.5% Materials and Supplies 1,171 4,818 1,500 321.2% Support and Services 15,446 13,033 20,145 64.7% Transfers 42,000 42,000 42,000 100.0% Total 96,244 110,942 100,005 110.9% 100.0% (10,937) Unallocated 31,571 - Total Expenditures 5,170,152 5,312,535 5,368,139 99.0% 100.0% 55,604 Net Revenue less Expenditures 137,373 241,043 (104,169)