Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
08-24-15 CC Reg Mtg Agenda
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, AUGUST 24, 2015 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call Mayor Zerby Labadie Siakel Sundberg Woodruff B. Review Agenda Attachments 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes of August 10, 2015 Minutes B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of August 10, 2015 Minutes C. City Council Executive Session Minutes of August 10, 2015 Minutes 3. CONSENT AGENDA — Motion to approve items on the Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions Therein: A. Approval of the Verified Claims List Claims List B. Adopt the Codification of the Ordinances Approved in 2014 Clerk's memo, Ord., Resolution C. Electing to Not Waive Statutory Tort Limits for Liability Insurance Finance Director's memo, Resolution D. Setting the Truth -in- Taxation Hearing Date Finance Director's memo, Resolution 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council Action will be taken) 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. Wellhead Protection Plan Review Part II Engineer's memo 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 7. PARKS A. Report by Representative on the August 11, 2015 Park Commission Meeting Minutes CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA — August 24, 2015 Page 2 8. PLANNING A. Report by Commissioner Patrick Johnson on the August 18, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting B. Conditional Use Permit for Fill in Excess of 100 Cu. Yds. Applicant: Bob Morlock Location: 24975 and 24995 Glen Road 9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS A. Eureka Road Speed Study Request B. Accept Bids and Award Contract for the Smithtown Road Sidewalk (East) Extension C. Traffic Study Results for Lake Virginia/Blue Ridge Lane D. Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission 2016 Budget 10. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS A. City Administrator Position Advertisement and Process B. Draft RFP for Urban Forester /Arborist 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. Trails Schedule B. Mayor and City Council 12. ADJOURN Planning Director's memo, Resolution Director of Public Works' memo Engineer's memo Resolution Engineer's memo LMCC's memo Administrator's memo Administrator's memo Trail Schedule CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 Country Club Road • Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 • 952- 960 -7900 Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mmus • cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday, August 24, 2015 7:00 p.m. 6:00 PM — Council Work Session is scheduled for 6:00 pm Agenda Items 92A -2C: Approval of Minutes from the August 24 Council meetings. Agenda Item 93A: Approval of the verified claims list. Agenda Item 9313: This item is approval of the tenth supplement (S -10) to the City Code Book, which includes all Ordinances passed in 2014 (No's. 511 -518). American Legal Publishing has provided the replacement pages to the City Code Book for this supplement. Council action includes Adoption of an Ordinance to enact and adopt the Supplement to the Shorewood City Code Book, and Adoption of a Resolution approving a summary publication of said Ordinance. Agenda Item 93C: Staff recommends council approve the resolution electing to not waive the statutory tort limits for liability insurance Agenda Item 93D: This resolution sets the truth -in- taxation hearing date for Monday, December 7, with a continuation date of Monday, December 14, if needed. Agenda Item 94: Matters from the floor — no council action will be taken. Agenda Item 95A: This is a public hearing for the Wellhead Protection Plan Review Part II, and includes a resolution accepting the Wellhead Protection Plan Part II for submission to the Minnesota Department of Health. Agenda Item 96: There are no scheduled reports or presentations this evening. Agenda Item 97A: Park Commissioner Lynda Gooch Hartmann is scheduled to provide a report on the August 11 Park Commission meeting. Agenda Item 98A: Planning Commissioner Patrick Johnson is scheduled to report on the August 18, 2015 Planning Commission meeting. Agenda Item 9813: This item is approval of a resolution granting a conditional use permit to place fill in excess of 100 cubic yards for Bob Morlock, located at 24975 and 24995 Glen Road. This request was reviewed and recommended by the Planning Commission. Agenda Item 99A: This item accepts a petition for change in speed limit on Eureka Road (South) and directs WSB to conduct a speed study, once school is back in session. Executive Summary — City Council Meeting of August 24, 2015 Page 2 Agenda Item 9913: Bids were received and opened on August 24, 2015, for the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension. Staff will provide the official bid results at Monday nights' meeting. A resolution accepting the bids and awarding the contract for this project is in order. Agenda Item 99C: Staff has provided results of the Lake Virginia Drive and Blue Ridge speed study and recommends a monitoring and enforcement approach to address the issue with the South Lake Minnetonka Police Dept. Agenda Item 991): The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission is requesting Council adopt a motion approving its 2016 Budget as provided. Agenda Item 91OA: Administrator Joynes has provided a proposed schedule and job advertisement for the City Administrator search. A motion approving the schedule, job ad, and to conduct an enhanced background review and management style analysis on up to three finalist candidates at an approximate cost of $7000 is recommended. Agenda Item 91 OB: Staff has provided a Draft Request for Proposal for an Urban Forester /Arborist for Council's review and approval and is requesting Council's direction to advertise for bids. Agenda Item 911A & 11B: Staff and Council reports are provided in the packet and will be given at the meeting. CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY, AUGUST 10, 2015 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. A. Roll Call #za 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M. Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Labadie, Siakel, and Sundberg; Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and, City Engineer Hornby Absent: Councilmember Woodruff B. Review Agenda Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, appraing the agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 2. PUBLIC SAFETY (POLICE AND FIRE) 2416 BUDGE'T'S A. South Lake Minnetonka Police Department 2016 Budget Administrator Joynes explained the joint powers agreement (JPA) for the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department ( SLMPD) and for the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) both require the SLMPD Coordinating Committee and, the EFD Governing Board to deliberate the budgets for their respective organization. The Coordinating Committee has unanimously recommended the 2016 SLMPD Budget and the EFD Board has unanimously recommended the three 2016 budgets. Each of the member cities of each organization must approve the budgets. Once the member, cities have approved the budgets the respective boards will record the adoption of the budgets. Joynes noted the meeting packet contains a summary of the SLMPD budget. Joynes explained that for 2016, Interim Chief Siitari made a case for hiring an extra patrol officer. The costs for that are included in the recommended budget. Siitari realigned some of the existing duties. Different levels of supervision have been changed and assignments made. The Coordinating Committee asked that the costs of the extra officer be funded in 2016 with the use of the projected 2015 surplus to reduce costs to the member cities. Budget reductions in the amount of $69,701 will be used to fund the cost over time. The overall budget increase for 2016 is 3.1 percent. Shorewood's contribution for 2016 will increase by $33,519 for an estimated 2016 contribution of $1,103,665. The total 2016 SLMPD budget is $2,497,229. Each member city experiences the same percentage increase in its contribution under the JPA operating funding formula. The SLMPD operating funding formula is in effect for five years and then it is reviewed CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 2 of 8 and possibly reset for another five years based on three factors — population, tax capacity and initial complaint reports (ICRs). The formula will be reviewed again for 2017. Mayor Zerby noted the proposed SLMPD budget will deplete the surplus which is different than the reserves. He explained that having a surplus at the end of the year is a good thing because it means the Department did not spend everything that was budgeted for. Usually a surplus goes into the reserves the next budget year. What is proposed means the reserves will not be increased because of a surplus. He likes to use the phrase "wooden nickel" for a situation like that because it takes money out of the fund to pay for a reoccurring expense in order to lower the budget for the first year of the expense. He expressed concern about doing that to fund the new patrol officer position. He did not think his concern was significant enough to vote against the budget. But, he did warn the Coordinating Committee about facing larger budget increases in the future. He stated the SLMPD has incurred a number of sigx upgraded; for example, the card reader security system He noted that he supports the addition of a patrol were clear that the new position was to be used for Zerby stated he continues to think that the JPA operating growth in liquor licenses issued by the City of Excelsior Excelsior gets compared to what Shorewood; gets for the Shorewood should either get what it pays for or Shorewood Councilmember Sundberg rec6riended the operating funding formula fbr 2017. She note Councilmember Labai there was a mediation operating forced the and essen"t Mayor Zerby explained the police spent in the member does not think'is it any more. Councilmember 8iakel note( time ago. She stated,she.thot reevaluated. She then stated this year. Some technologies were server. stated the Coordinating Committee Members patrol services such as speed enforcement. formula needs to be rebalanced. The wed the amount of policing services it pays. He noted that he has stated lypay for what it gets. prepared for discussions about resetting the think the formula is equitable now. d why the formula won't be reset sooner. Administrator Joynes explained /2006 about the, operating funding formula and the mediation resulted in an L, throe of the four member cities agreed to. Excelsior did not agree to it and doh. The 2006 arbitrator ruled to basically implement the formula mediated view pattern of every five years. All four member cities signed off on that. la was originally constructed to try and reflect the number of hours the in previous years. At the start that formula seemed to be equitable. He at she thought an additional patrol officer should have been added some the entire amount of time the department spends for each city needs to be of the SLMPD member cities are also EFD member cities. EFD member cities do not want to use excess reserves or surplus to fund reoccurring expenses. She went on to state that using a 2015 surplus to fund the new patrol officer position is kicking the budgetary can down the road. That expense should be built into the baseline budget. Director DeJong clarified that the value of each criterion used in the SLMPD funding formula will be updated for the 2017 — 2021 formula but the fundamental formula is not open to renegotiation unless there is agreement by the majority of the SLMPD member cities. Councilmember Sundberg recommended the City look at all of its options. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 3 of 8 Administrator Joynes noted that Council will consider approving this budget during its regular meeting following this work session. B. Excelsior Fire District 2016 Budgets Administrator Joynes noted the meeting packet contains copies of the final recommended Excelsior Fire District (EFD) 2016 Operating Budget, the 2016 — 2036 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and the 2016 — 2036 Building Projects Improvements Program (BPIP). Joynes reviewed the major elements of the 2016 Operating Budget adopted 2015 Budget. The Administrative Specialist position was 50 percent of the costs to be paid by the City of Chanhassen. Tb and it provides the Specialist with some stability and benefits she Board decided to move some of the Building Maintenance project budget process there was a great deal of discussion about the wa; Administrative Specialist. After researching comparable data o established in 2013/2014. The Policy identified step increases to employees were reasonably paid. They are not above the avera recommended Budget. A wage increase is budgeted for the fu's percent Operating Fund reserve per its Fund Balance Policy. That He noted that discussions have already is slated for replacement in 2018. The r into the opera es for the Fire ed when compared to the half -time to full-time with its both Fire Departments apart -time employee. The Ling fund. During the 2014 Chief,, Fire Inspector and salaries and jobs a Wage Policy was )ring their wages to a'pot where those ,e. Those increases are reflected in the fighters. The EFD does maintain a 30 s reflected in the Budget. the EFD's Aerial 11 ladder truck. Aerial 11 ,e close to,SI million. Joynes explained Shorewood's, contribution toward the EFD Budget will go up 0.3 percent or $1,863 for 2016. The total 2016 municipal contribution for fire services is $1,635,079 and Shorewood's share of that will be $615,334. The funding formula f6r fire is based on tax capacity. He noted Shorewood contracts for fire services on the Islands from the Mound Fire Department and the City's increase in cost for those services for 2016 will be about $500. Councilmember Siakel stated the EFD administrative staff had been significantly underpaid back in 2013. The EFD Board decided to give them larger increases over three years to bring their salaries up to a point where they' are reasonably, paid. She then stated a major challenge facing the District is keeping and attracting, volunteer firefighters. Back in 2013/2014 the firefighters' pay was also evaluated and it was determined their hourly rate was below average. It has been increased so it is a little closer to mid -range for other departments. She noted that she thought the EFD community gets incredible value for the money it pays. It is in the EFD member cities best interest to maintain a volunteer force from a financial perspective. She stated Aerial I I is the workhorse apparatus for the Department. Administrator Joynes stated the EFD member City Administrators /Manager and Fire Chief have had some discussions about staffing models. The EFD Board authorized the EFD Chief to try a duty crew model for about 4.5 months the later part of 2013. The two stations were staffed with two firefighters from 6:00 P.M. — Midnight on Saturday night. He explained demographics are making it much more difficult to attract paid -on -call (POC) firefighters. They can be called into service any time of the day or night every day of the year. The POC hourly rate is $11 — S 12. Firefighters have respond to a certain percentage of calls over a six month period to have those six months count toward their years of service for pension consideration. Individuals who generally apply to be a POC firefighter are generally younger and they don't have time to do that. It is difficult for younger people to find affordable housing in Shorewood and that is required to meet the response time requirements. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 4 of 8 This is a problem all over the metropolitan area and the country. People are having to reevaluate the POC service model. Some major cities are going back to having a full-time (i.e. career) fire departments. That is much, much more expensive than a POC department. The candidates the Department interviewed recently were non - traditional applicants; they were not individuals who would be with the Department for 10 — 20 years. One or two of them were over 60 years of age and had been a firefighter before. Councilmember Siakel stated one of the things outstanding regarding future staffing is the consideration of a full-time assistant chief. She thought there will be a need to do that over the next few years. Councilmember Sundberg stated that after reading the information about the replacement of Aerial 11 included with the EFD budget documents she was not convinced that rdfurbing Aerial 11 or purchasing a used truck would make sense. Based on what she read she recommended people start preparing for the purchase of a new Aerial 11 replacement. Administrator Joynes noted all the options for Aerial 11 trucks show up on the market periodically trucks are cc needs. He explained the Department uses its ladder truck not tall buildings in the EFD community. It used to stage) be able to apply water and retardants from that platform the community where it is difficult to get trucks close to a Councilmember Sundberg stated the l professionals the Department has. It is penny wise and dollar foolish. Administrator Joynes stated that th; compensation ended with fa positive working for that and stated it is average. Siakel noted it Was ,,a signil some purchasing , xpensive. He stated that although used ladder ured differently depending,on a department's 'erent than some other departments. There are entire fire scene from an elevated position. To aluable and needed. There are many places in very fortunate to be served by the quality of compensated fairly. This is not the time to be Iouncilmenmber Siakel in large part the hard fought battle about e. Councilmember Sundberg thanked Councilmember Siakel for feel good about EFD staff still being paid below the market 11 is the first truck out of Station 1 in part because of how narrow are. She stated she thought the EFD Board was moving in the Director DeJong explained Engine 22 will be paid off in 2017 and the yearly payment for that is more than $87,300. If,the replacement fors Aerial 11 were to be a 10 -year lease /purchase arrangement the $87,300 would go toward minimizing the'pact on the EFD CIP for the first five years. 3. 2015 — 2 BUDGET IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND 2016 GENERAL FUND Recommended Capital Improvement Program and Tax Levy for 2016 Administrator Joynes explained that during Council's July 27, 2015, work session there was discussion about the 2016 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and the changes staff made to it to eliminate any deficit in funds through 2017. He displayed a slide showing the changes in transfers out of the General Fund into various CIP funds. The transfer from the General Fund into the Equipment Replacement Fund had been increased by $15,000. The transfer from the General Fund into the Street Improvement Fund had been increased by 515,000. He noted he thought there was Council consensus to do that. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 5 of 8 He noted that per Council direction the City's draft 2016 General Fund Budget reflects a 2 percent increase in the tax levy. He then noted Council did not authorize an additional 1 percent levy increase specifically for the Shorewood Economic Development Authority (EDA). Council decided if there was a need for the EDA to have operating funds in 2016 funds could be transferred from the General Fund reserves to cover that. Director DeJong asked if Council will support what has been proposed for the 2016 tax levy. • Badger Park Improvements / Lacrosse Association Request Councilmember Siakel stated during the July 27 Council work session there was discussion about the reality of making major improvements to Badger Park in 2016. She thought there was Council consensus to wait until there was a better understanding of how the former Minnetonka, Country Club (MCC) will ultimately be redeveloped. The Parks Improvement Fund still shows improvements -being made in 2016 and 2017. She thought making improvements in 2018 and 2419 was more realistic. She also does not fully support making $73,000 in improvements to the Skate Park in 2016. She noted that she would prefer not to show a deficit in that Fund when the work will not beaitn in 2016. Director DeJong stated the Park Commission has not recommended making any changes to the Park Capital Improvement Program (CIP). He explained that he and Director Nielsen spoke with Park Commission Chair Mangold earlier in the day, about the CIP to ensure nothing had been left out of the CIP and to bring the CIP to the Commission during ts.September meeting. They will solicit recommendations from the Commission on the CIP. Councilmember Sundberg asked i the Park Commission is aware'o'f the development opportunity that is up in the air for the area around the MCC property. Depending on what moves forward Badger Park could change dramatically or possibly be eliminated. Director Nielsen stated the Commission is fully aware of the development potential in the area. He noted the MCC Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) advised against "blowing up" Badger Park,and putting senior housing in there. Nielsen then stated from the Commission's perspective, putting the Southshore Center aside,- ;there is no reason not to move forward with the improvements, to' Badger Park. "The commercial area north of the Park could develop around the Park. The northwest quadrant, of the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Area has little bearing on Park Improvements. The Commission has made no recommendation to do something different with the Park. Sundberg stated she was somewhat befuddled with those comments because there are so many unknowns; unknowns about the Southshore 'Center, the development possibilities and the former MCC property. From her perspective it would make sense to keep Badger Park as is until things are settled rather than make plans and assumptions. Nielsen stated the only assumption the Park Commission has made is the Southshore Center is going to remain where it is. If Council has some thought that will not be there in the future then Badger Park, improvements can wait until that decision has been made. Sundberg noted that she thought it is risky to assume the Southshore Center will stay in its current location. She stated from her perspective there are a lot of things that need to be sorted out. She clarified that she values the Southshore Center. Park Commission Chair Mangold clarified he would like to put his framework around the Badger Park discussion. He explained every Park Commission recommendation has been that Badger Park should remain a park. The Commission took a few years to come up with a concept plan for the Park. It took into consideration all of the City's parks and the Southshore Center. The concept was not a simple discussion. The Commission brought its concepts forward to Council. It ultimately came forward with a revised CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 6 of 8 concept, Concept 1.5, which Council approved for the next stage and then the MCC redevelopment came about. The Commission has not been given any direction from Council regarding what to do. The Commission has a huge issue of where things are at and what it needs to do going forward. There are other elements that have been brought forward. One element is lacrosse. He stated the Commission needs Council not to make a final decision about a concept for Badger Park but instead provide the Commission with direction on how to move forward. The Commission believes if Badger Park is developed it will improve the Southshore Center. From his perspective if the Southshore Center went away it would be highly unlikely the site could be redeveloped for senior housing because of the poor soils there. Mangold stated he thought improvements to Badger Park will happen at some point. The park Commission needs to start defining what that is going to be again. He then stated that he has been on the Commission for four years and there are only two Commissioners who had been around for the Badger Park discussions from early on. He asked if Council wants the Commission to take Badger Park out of the CIP and work on other things or should the Commission and Council iron out'more of what is going on there. He noted that for Badger Park improvements the next stage is to get out of the concept phase and move into the development phase so the Commission can work with Councilmember Labadie stated Lacrosse Association some ideas. She asked if they have presented stated the Association has access to a different s where its home base will be and then describe w and the Association is a piece of it that makes money for some unknown field. The Association it is going to do. Labadie,asked if there, is a dear know and commented that the Association is not metonka Lacrosse Association. representatives did come before Council and present to the Park. Commission since then. Chair Mangold funding grants. The Association is trying to determine is offering in a grant. If the City has a project defined .er for the Association then just saying it needs grant iot formalized�that because the City has not said what "or that grant application. Mangold stated he does not to wait a couple more years. Councilmember Siakel suggested picking a date for a joint meeting of the Council and Park Commission. She assumes that will happen during Council's regular meeting following this work session. She noted that not knowing how to move forward with Badger Park dust be frustrating for the Commission. She stated that she has always envisioned that there will Badger Park but the question is what amenities there will be in the Park. Chair Mangold stated if that is true he asked if that meant the Concept 1.5 plan for the Park is Administrator Joynes noted the City does not have funding for all of the improvements identified in Concept 1.5. He stated when the City works with developers on a development project unless there is a signed document there is no guarantee the project will come to fruition. It is not out of the question that there could be another real estate bubble or a significant increase in the interest rate could cause the project to go away for example: He hopes those things relative to the MCC redevelopment project should be known in the fall. Once that is known then decisions about Badger Park will be easier to make. He noted Council cannot commit until things fall into place. Chair Mangold asked if there should be a placeholder in the CIP to keep the plan going. If it doesn't end up being done in 2016 so be it. He questioned if could be put back in later if it is taken out now. Councilmember Sundberg clarified that she did not intend that the placeholder for Badger Park be taken out of the CIP but only that it be pushed out a year or two. She expressed concern about putting the cart before the horse. She noted that she does not want to commit to the Lacrosse Association at this time. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 7 of 8 Administrator Joynes clarified that the CIP can be modified at any time. He stated in a couple of months he thought the City would have a much better idea about the redevelopment of the former MCC property. Councilmember Sundberg stated she does not want to mislead the Park Commission. Chair Mangold stated there needs to be a joint meeting and before going into the meeting he would like to know if Concept 1.5 is still the plan being considered. He commented that Concept 1.5 was approved by Council before the MCC property was sold to a developer. The plan for redeveloping that property does not directly affect Badger Park. Administrator Joynes stated the City is being pressured to make a decision about a lacrosse field. Staff has been hesitant to do that because of what is currently being discussed. From his perspective the decision about a field should be delayed. He then stated he thought staff could come up with an estimate of resources and revenues by mid- October. Mayor Zerby stated it is his understanding that the curs repair. He heard the football league brought the issue of should be put in the CIP to make the repairs to the ball: postponed. Director Nielsen stated the plan is to reconstr needs to be put down and it needs to be drained. The field them it feels like falling on a bituminous surface. Zerby stated the Lacrosse Association has pr( that more. He then stated if the major Badg required maintenance to the ball filed may no fields. Nielsen stated aerating the field would maintenance of the field stoi)bcd Councilmember Siak( What does partnering growing sport and it c the Association wouh how all of the Citv D football uses the field in B play lacrosse on the soccer in Freeman Park is the only Councilmember for lacrosse tout call field in Badger Park is in need of some s to the City's attention: He asked if an item should major Badger Park liTiprovements be e field, It needs to be regraded, new material rv.coml)ressed and when children fall on it to Council supported investigating ut on hold he had concern that ations could decide to use other . Zerby noted he does not want how the 'construction of an artificial turf lacrosse field would be financed. City mean to the Lacrosse Association? She stated she thought lacrosse is a worthwhile to partner in constructing a field that would be used. She asked if iew field more than a soccer league would. It may be prudent to reevaluate )eing used. She asked if there is a place for a lacrosse field in Freeman Park. soccer, field could be turned into a lacrosse field in Freeman Park and noted ;ear Park. Nielsen also noted that he has been told that there are times teams Ids in Freeman Park. Mayor Zerby stated he has been told that the ball field Jd used by the particular age group that uses it. concern about there possibly not being adequate parking at Badger Park Director Nielsen suggested the City come up with a sports tournament policy. Parking for large tournaments is a problem at all of the City's parks. He stated he does not think parking is an issue for weekly sports use of the fields. Nielsen stated that he encouraged Council to review the planning work that had been done by the Park Commission before the joint meeting of the Council and Park Commission. The Commission worked on the original Parks Master Plan and it reviewed it again in 2014. That Plan states that Freeman Park is the primary park where organized sports are played. It is the central park, the largest park and the park with the most parking. He commented that hockey is played in Cathcart Park and football and lacrosse are CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 8 of 8 played in Badger Park. He stated it is important for Council and the Park Commission to have a similar vision for Badger Park and the parks in general. Administrator Joynes stated that Council has not made a decision about the $40,000 in the 2016 budget for a forester / water resources position. It is still in the budget. He reiterated the budget assumes a 2 percent tax levy increase for 2016. Councilmember Siakel stated that 2 percent tax levy increase is the goal. But, because there is a lot happening now she suggested certifying a maximum levy of 3 percent. She explained the final levy can always be reduced but it cannot be increased. Councilmember Sundberg concurred with doing that. Siakel clarified she does not want 3 percent to be built into the preliminary budget. Mayor Zerby concurred with the comments. Administrator Joynes stated Council will set the maximum 2016 tax levy during its', September 14 meeting. Mayor Zerby stated he appreciated the work staff has done on the budget and CIP. 4. ADJOURN Sundberg moved, Siakel seconded, Adj 6:51 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: the City ork Session of August 10, 2015, at Scott Zerby, Mayor CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, AUGUST 10, 2015 MINUTES 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 Labadie, Siake Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panchyshy Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Bfom Absent: Councilmember Woodruff B. Review Agenda Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, approving the agenda as 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Sundberg moved, Siakel seconded 2015, as amended in Item 6, Pag "Principal of'. Motion passed 4/0. B. City Council Work Siakel moved, Labadie seconded, Y 2015, as amended in Item 2; Pagi School Representatives' to "Dr. D Motion passed 4/0. #2B 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Attorney Keane; City .or DeJong; Planning City d. Motion passed 4/0. proving the City Council Work Session Minutes of July 7, , Paragraph 1, Sentence 1, change "Superintendent of to inut6, "July 27, 2015 the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of July 27, •aph 1, Sentence 1, change "Minnetonka Elementary son, Superintendent of Minnetonka Public Schools, ". C. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, July 27, 2015 Siakel moved, Sundberg seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of July 27, 2015, as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Zerby reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Siakel moved, Sundberg seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 2 of 13 A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 15 -054, "A Resolution Declaring the Official Intent of the City of Shorewood to Reimburse Certain Expenditures from the Proceeds of Bonds to be Issued by the City." C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 15 -055, "A Resolution Authorizing Amendment to Residential Recycling Grant Agreement with Hennepin County." Motion passed 4/0. 4. There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. Continuation of Public Hearing Creek Applicant: Chris Hamford Location: 26425 Arbor Creek l Mayor Zerby opened the Public Hearing at Chris Hamford, 26425 Arbor Creek Lane, and Director Nielsen explained utility easement on his pro, Single- Family Residential zoning district). The Arbor issues around Mr. Hamfor and utility easements that r the lot was set aside for th noted that Mr. Hamford wa Nielsen exnlaine require a revisca The size of the necessary plans" graphic showing Nielsen noted staff re resolution that would t — Arbor ge and utility easement for from July 27, 2014. ford has asked the City ;to vacate a portion of the drainage and 26425 Arbor Creek Lane. His property is located in the R -IA, ightly more than one acre in size (a full sized lot for the R -lA t was done several years ago. At that time there were drainage warily to the north. Because of that there were some drainage versized. He displayed a graphic showing that over one -half of t makes for limited use of an otherwise standard sized lot. He a sport court in his rear yard. been advised that any reduction/vacation of the easement would ng how the revision works with the overall grading of the entire plat. would be determined from that. Mr. Hamford has submitted the sultants. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans. He displayed a easement would be vacated. ids approval of the partial vacation and that the meeting contains a copy of a if approved. Mayor Zerby reopened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:07 P.M. Matt Burton, with Southview Design, noted he is a landscaper and that he has been working with Director Nielsen, Engineer Hornby and Mr. Hamford to determine a way to vacate part of the easement. He stated that everyone involved will work to the specifications of the revised grading plan. Mayor Zerby closed the Public Testimony Portion of the Public Hearing at 7:09 P.M. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 3 of 13 Mayor Zerby asked if the easement is staked out. Director Nielsen responded easements are not staked. Zerby then asked if there is any wetland there. Nielsen indicated no. Zerby stated he thought it will be a great use of land and commented that it does back up to the school. Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 15 -056, "A Resolution Vacating Certain Drainage and Utility Easements for the Property Located at 26425 Arbor Creek Lane." Motion passed 4/0. Mayor Zerby closed the Public Hearing at 7:10 P.M. 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 7. PARKS Mayor Zerby noted there has not been a Park Commission meeting since Council's last meeting. 8. PLANNING A. Report by Patrick Johnson on the August 4, 2015, Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commissioner Johnson reported on Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in and actions taken at the August 4, 2015, Commissioner Siakel noted she was the Council Liaison at the August 4, 2015, Planning Commission meeting. She stated she thought the Commissioners-did a very good job of listening to the residents who spoke about the redevelopment project for the former Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) property. The residents who spoke were very respectful and their comments were well thought out. She thought all residents who wished to address the Commission were able to do so. The majority of the residents who attended the meeting lived in close proxi CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 4 of 13 During Council's November 24, 2014, meeting during staff reports Council was told that staff had initial communication with the representatives for the developer of the MCC property. Council provided direction to staff to recommend firms to interview that could help guide the City in early discussions with the developer for the project. Council asked the Mayor, the City Attorney, Councilmember Sundberg and Planning Director Nielsen to vet the firms and bring a recommendation back to Council. During Council's January 12, 2015, meeting Council heard the result of the interviews. The interviewers recommended the City hire Stantec because it had the experience and background to guide the City. Council voted unanimously to hire Stantec. Council discussed paying for those services. The City Attorney told Council that billing of fees related to the redevelopment project to the developer is a common business practice for this type of situation. It is something employed and utilized by other cities. The City would not incur the expenses if it weren't for the application submitted by the developer. Therefore, Stantec billed the City for its fees and the City billed the developer„ for reimbursement of the fees. If the City had not been reimbursed for the fees it paid Stantec it would have equated to about a 1 percent increase to the City's tax levy. She noted that she continues to think it had been a prudent decision to use Stantec because of Stantec's expertise. She explained there had been nine PAC meetings. Stantec set up the MindMixer website for use by the public. People could follow the PAC's progress, get information and submit comments. Attendance at PAC meetings was not restricted. It is her understanding that during the first PAC meeting John Shardlow, Senior Principal with Stantec, clarified hisrole, goals for the PAC and how he was being paid. She reiterated that what the City and Council did follows, the City's policies and codes, staffs direction and the City Attorney's direction. She stated the ultimate goal is for the City to ensure there is a positive impact on the community and ott the way the MCC property will ultimately redeveloped. Siakel noted that she stands by Council's decisions and the work staff has done. She expressed confidence that the Planning Commission will provide Council with a very well thought out, balanced recommendation on moving forward with the redevelopment of the former MCC property. Commissioner Sundberg stated she would echo everything Commissioner Siakel just stated. She then stated shy was part of the team that interviewed consultants for providing planning consulting services. Stantec stood out in terms of its, excellence; technical capabilities, its work with local governments, and its ethical standards. It is unfortunate that Stantec's ethics had been questioned. She does not understand why that happened. She went on to state that she thought every member of Council wants to hear residents' ideas. She encouraged residents to keep their ideas flowing. She also encouraged them to participate in the traffic assessment and bring forth realistic solutions. The City is going to hire experts in the traffic field to help with that effort. She clarified that traffic has been an issue long before the MCC property was sold for redevelopment. It is likely the redevelopment will exacerbate the issue. She noted that Mattamy Homes has a right to redevelop the former MCC property which it purchased. But, it has to be done within the laws and the standards the City and State have established. Commissioner Labadie stated she also thought the residents who spoke during the August 4 public hearing were very respectful of the Commissioners and each other. She then stated she was pleased at the number of residents who spoke who indicated they would like to participate in the traffic assessment. Mayor Zerby noted that all but one member of Council was at the public hearing. The one who was not was out of the State. It was good to hear what the residents had to say and the passion with which they CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 5 of 13 spoke about some issues. He stated he thought a lot of good points were brought up. There is a lot to consider. He also thought having an open house prior to the public hearing was helpful. He commented that he hopes the sound system will be better for the continuation of that public hearing. Commissioner Johnson stated he appreciated hearing residents' comments. He commended staff on the open house. It was a great forum to let people factually know what is going on. He stated he thought that should be replicated for large projects. 9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS A. Reject Bids for the Lift Station 11 Rehabilitation Proj&t, City Project 13 -03 Director Brown stated the City received and opened bids for Rehabilitation Project on June 22, 2015. The City received nin received from Dave Perkins Contracting, Inc., for an amount of $] the project was $93,000. Staff is considering revamping some c qualification of bidders over the winter. The project was schedti Program (CIP). It will not harm the City to put the projeet off until Brown noted staff recommends rejecting all of the bids, and re- bidding the project next spring. Siakel moved, Labadie seconded, Adopting Bids for the Radisson Road, Lift Station directing staff to return the bid bonds to all 10. GENERAL /NEW A. The Waters Senior Living Concept Location: HiEhwav 7 and Water c Road, Lift Station 11 bids. The apparent low bidder was !,725.00. The, engineer's estimate for the bidding process relative to pre - d in the 2015 Capital Improvement bid bonds to all prospective bidders UTION NO. 15- 057. " "A Resolution Rejecting abilitation Project, City Project 13 -03" and ve bidders. Motion passed 4/0. The Waters of Excelsior Administrator Jo y1i es explained he had a few discussions with representatives from the City of Excelsior about the Concept of The Waters Senior Living for The Waters of Excelsior. The project would be on properties located in Shorewood and in Excelsior. He noted Jay Jensen with The Waters Senior Living was .present to talk about the concept and'noted Mr. Jensen has already spoken with the Excelsior Council about his proposal. Mr. Jenson thanked Council for giving him the opportunity to present The Waters Senior Living's concept for The Waters of Excelsior. He noted the new senior community would be in both Shorewood and Excelsior. He stated the project would create new housing for seniors who live in the South Lake area; there is a very strong demand for that. The project would also remove some blighted properties. He explained The Waters Senior Living has developed a number of properties in the metropolitan area over the last few years. They were in Edina, 50"' & France in Minneapolis, Oakdale, Plymouth, Rochester, Highland Park in St. Paul (opening in September), and White Bear Lake (opening in spring of 2016). The Waters Senior Living hopes the proposed The Waters of Excelsior will be the next member of the Waters family. The firm has also partnered with the University of Minnesota in providing new ways to work with seniors. It offers programs like acupuncture and aroma therapy to try and help seniors get off of some of their medications. The Waters works to help seniors thrive and achieve all they can achieve. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 6 of 13 He encouraged people to go to the firm's website or any of its properties. He also encouraged them to talk to city staff in any city The Waters has worked in. They will hear that the cities had a positive experience. He then explained the concept is for approximately 100 units; 30 of them would be for memory care and 70 would be for senior independent living apartments. The apartments would have a full kitchen and a washer and dryer. Some of the two bedroom /two bath apartments would be as large as 1,200 square feet. The building would be about four stories tall and there would be around 83 spaces of underground parking spaces. After a few years only about 10 — 15 percent of the residents in their facilities still drive. There may be 25 percent with cars but some of the cars never move. It has been the firm's experience that traffic is a non - issue. He noted the intent is to bring historical character to the exterior of the building. He also noted The Waters wants to be a good neighbor. It does not do a project unless it is a win/win for The Waters and a city. It works closely with neighborhood groups. He explained the parcels of land The Waters has purchase agreement original discussion with Excelsior representatives was about buildir old police station had been. Representatives liked the concept but it encouraged The Waters to find another site. He drove and walked , Excelsior Grill site. He saw the apartment building next door ,ands i The Waters has site control for both properties. The cost for the ap because the owner purchased them in 2008; the market was a lot difl He noted that The Waters will be working with bo that he has been involved with about 50 TIF district,, spoken with people at Bridgewater Bank about bu concept to the Excelsior Council last week. The TI from two properties as well as to get the connection sidewalk does not go all the way. for were not for sale originally. The The Waters of Excelsior where the would not have fit in that area. They ound the City and found the former looked like it needed a lot of work. -tment building was quite expensive rent than today. ties on tax increment financing (TIF). He stated r the years around the metro area. He has already a pay -as- you -go TIF note. He presented that in needed because of the cost to remove the blight i the senior housing to downtown Excelsior. The He reviewed what The Waters- will ' heed from the two Cities. It will need a Comprehensive Plan amendment. It wilt tieed a planned unit development (PUD) reflecting the mutual design of the building. It will need,a development agreement reflecting the building's design. There has to be a Redevelopment Tax Increment District created covering the three parcels of land involving both Cities. Mr. Jensen'.asked Council to authorize Administrator Joynes and staff to work with representatives from The Waters and Excelsior staff to come up with an overall plan. The Excelsior Council did that on August 3. He noted The Waters would like to break ground next May. Mayor Zerby stated he has spoken with Mr. Jensen and looked at some of the properties on The Waters website. He thought they were beautiful properties. From his perspective the proposed site is a perfect location for that type of housing. It would be within walking distance of a grocery store and health care facility as well as other amenities in downtown Excelsior. He noted that he often has concerns about height that comes with projects. He hoped that maybe there would be a way to diminish the height in a plan. He stated he has spoken with the Mayor of Excelsior and Shorewood staff about possibly doing some type of land trade. From his perspective because of the shape of the area he thought it would make sense for the development to be part of Excelsior. He would like Council to authorize staff to assess all of the options. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 7 of 13 Zerby explained the former Excelsior Grill site and the parking garage next to the apartments are located in Shorewood. The apartment buildings are located in Excelsior. It would make sense to him to clean up the odd line by letting Excelsior annex the land in exchange for money or other land. The lights at the intersection of County Road 19 and Highway 7 are located in Shorewood. The maintenance of the lights is expensive. The lights could be part of the exchange. There are discussions about other things in the area that the City might want to take advantage of. He stated it would be cleaner for the redevelopment to be done under one set of ordinances. Commissioner Siakel stated the concept of what is being proposed is needed and the location is good. The amenity is needed. She noted she does want to know more about the exchange options. She stated she thought the potential project warrants further discussion. Commissioner Labadie stated what is being proposed would be what the price point would be for the units. Mr. Jensen stated The Waters is still working on that. The cui more for independent seniors. He stated people in their eightii independent of whether or not they need to. Even after, ai marketing it without including a lot of services. It would be rnc apartments would be similar to The Waters of Edina. There u go up because they have a lot of services incorporated into the is to try and dramatically reduce the rent from there for indepe be brought to seniors as they need them. That may make the what is proposed easier for them and much easier for "their farm Commissioner Sundberg note that nature. She stated trying 1 She then noted she thought the issue for her. Commissioner Siakel asked straddles two cities. Mr: Jens Siakel moved, Labadie sec from the City of Excelsior Motion passed 4/0. ied by the community. She asked ght is to market the development ;itant to move ,into assisted living Consideration is, being given to ),a senior apartment building. The in the $3,000 — $3,200 range and The Waters of Excelsior the goal fors. Then additional services can i for seniors from their homes to likes Mayor Zerby's idea of some type of land swap or something of G development project with the two communities could be a challenge. :ion xis great and for that location a four -story building would not be an do if he envisions there being two buildings or one building that one buitdina that straddles two cities. d, directing staff to enter into a conversation with representatives The Waters Senior Living about The Waters of Excelsior concept. B. Traffic Committee Proposal Engineer Hornby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of a memorandum from him and a scope of services document from WSB & Associates for facilitation and technical support for a traffic committee that Council wants to form. He explained that committee would review the Country Club Road to Yellowstone Trail to Lake Linden collector route that is used to get from Smithtown Road to Highway 7. It is anticipated the committee will work on that for about six months. WSB has assumed it would facilitate one meeting per month. It would provide the committee with the needed technical support. He clarified the scope of services does not include doing a formal traffic study. WSB would also attend Council meetings in support of the committee. The cost of the scope of services provided will be on an hourly basis and it is estimated the effort will cost $6,174 hours. He recommended Council budget up to $10,000 in case the effort extends beyond six months. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 8 of 13 Hornby then noted staff recommends Council execute the scope of services for facilitation and technical services in support of a traffic committee. Commissioner Sundberg asked if part of the scope is to educate the committee members about the laws the City has to abide by. Engineer Hornby stated he refers to that as providing guidance and that would be part of the scope. As issues come up the traffic staff would advise the members on how certain types of traffic situations are typically handled or could be handled. Sundberg stated the City needs to have person who can lead and facilitate the committee discussions. Engineer Hornby stated WSB is proposing Chuck Rickart, a Professional Traffic Operations Engineer (PTOE), provide those services. He is very well known in the field, he is a very good traffic engineer and he is a good at facilitating in that type of situation. He has also done many traffic studies in Shorewood including some studies along Country Club Road. Director Brown stated the City has used Mr. Rickart a number of times. He is a very seasoned engineer and he is very well'respected the traffic community. Mayor Zerby noted Mr. Rickart has been before Council a number of times and he has been with WSB for 19 years. He is a Principle with WSB. Commissioner Siakel stated there are residents in the immediate area that want to participate on a traffic committee. She asked how to invite them to do that. She stated people who live all over the west side of Shorewood will be impacted by the redevelopment of the former Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) property. She asked if something could be published in the City's newsletter asking people to contact the City if they are interested in participating. Mayor Zerby cautioned against restricting participants to those who live near Country Club Road, Yellowstone Trail and Lake Linden Drive. He stated, he would like to have staff bring back a list of interested residents. He stated he has some apprehension about too many people wanting to participate. Too large of a group would not be effective. If too many residents expressed interest the City may have to consider, for example, choosing a subset of them with a lottery. Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, authorizing staff to execute the Scope of Services for professional services with WSB'& Associates to facilitate and 'support a traffic committee for an amount not to exceed $10,000 and directing staff to advertise for residents to volunteer to be a member of a traffic committee and bring the list back to Council within a month. Motion passed 4/0. C. South Lake Minnetonka Police Department 2016 Budget Mayor Zerby noted Council discussed the proposed South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) 2016 budget during its work session immediately preceding this meeting. Administrator Joynes noted the SLMPD Coordinating Committee recommended approval of the budget. He stated the Budget reflects a 3.1 percent increase when compared to the adopted 2015 budget. The increase is primarily to fund an additional patrol officer. He noted staff recommends approval of the budget. Mayor Zerby noted he supports the budget increase and stated the additional patrol officer is needed. He commented that one of the patrol officers is going on maternity leave shortly. He stated the Coordinating Committee is going to interview the recommended candidates for the Police Chief position on August 12. The Committee wants a chief that will have a little more street presence. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 9 of 13 Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, approving the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department's 2016 Budget as presented. Motion passed 4/0. D. Excelsior Fire District 2016 Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Program Mayor Zerby noted Council discussed the proposed Excelsior Fire District (EFD) 2016 Operating budgets during its work session immediately preceding this meeting. Administrator Joynes stated the 2016 EFD Operating Budget reflects a 2.79 percent increase when compared to the adopted 2015 Operating Budget. Shorewood's share increased 0.3 percent when compared to 2015. He noted there are three budgets to approve and according to the Joint Powers Agreement guidelines each should be approved with a separate motion. Labadie moved, Siakel seconded, approving the final recomn Operating Budget dated July 23, 2015, as presented. Motion pa! Labadie moved, Sundberg seconded, approving the final recom — 2036 Capital Improvement Program dated July 2015 as preset Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, approving the final recomme 2036 Building Projects Improvement Program dated July 2015':! 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. ed Excelsior Fire District 2016 4/0. ded Excelsior Fire District 2016 , Motion pas Excelsior Fire District 2016 — ,sented. Motion passed 4/0. Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the Trail Schedule. Engineer Hornby stated the plays for the Smithtown Road Sidewalk East Extension Project are available for contractors,to view online both'at WSB & Associates and at QuestCDN.com. The bids for the project will be opened on August 20 and presented to Council on August 24. Mayor Zerby asked what the status is on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) approval. Engineer Hornby stated the remaining items were submitted to the MCWD on August 7. Mayor Zerby asked for an update" on the Excelsior Boulevard trail segment. Engineer Hornby explained he asked representatives from Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) when the project will be started. He has been told the intent is to construct it this year. Zerby asked if the block that will not be used has been retrieved yet. Hornby stated that once the change order has been approved that cleanup work will be done. 2. Monthly Budget Report Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the June 2015 General Fund Monthly Budget Report. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 10 of 13 3. Quarterly Investment Report Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the June 2015 quarterly investment report and a copy of an Other Operating Funds Report. 4. Paper Shred Event — September 19, 2015 Administrator Joynes explained that last May the City held a paper shredding event in conjunction with the spring clean -up event. Residents could bring paper and have it shredded right there. The event was so successful it had to be closed early because the paper shredding truck was full.. Residents have asked if the City could have another event this fall. Staff recommends the City have another shredding event this fall and he offered up the date of September 19. For the fall event staff suggests putting limits on the amount of material a person can bring for shredding. Staff recommends having two trucks instead of one. The approximate total cost of the event is $1,200. In response to a comment from Mayor Zerby, Director Brown stated the City has some cones and he placed an order for more that day. Brown noted the event takes about 125 cones. Commissioner Siakel asked if there is a better place to have the shredding event than the City Hall parking lot. Director Brown noted that September 19 is the day of the Hennepin County hazardous waste event will be held at the Public Works facility. Commissioner Labadie noted that the Apple Oay'5K race is the morning of September 19 and last year the route went up Country Club Lane past City Hall. Administrator Joynes stated staff will come up with a new date. Siakel moved, Labadie seconded; approving a paper shredding event for the fail of 2015 for an amount not to exceed $1,200 and authorizing staff to determine the date, time and location for the event. Motion passed 4/0. the Park Commission Director Nielsen stated that during work session immediately preceding this meeting Council discussed having a joint meeting with the Park Commission. Council's work session agendas for the next few months are ,quite full. He listed two Tuesdays for a potential meeting date — August 25 and September 8. Commissioner Siakel suggested! September 22 or 29. There was Council, consensus to schedule a joint meeting of the Council and Park Commission for September 22, 2015. Other Director Brown displayed a photograph of the City's West Water Tower with a containment curtain around it. He stated sandblasting of the Tower has begun and the goal is to have the sandblasting done before school starts. Engineer Hornby stated that during Council's August 24 meeting there will be a public hearing for the City's Wellhead Protection Plan Part 2. WSB & Associates staff will present the Plan to Council. He then stated that because of the reclamation effort of a 700 — 750 segment of Minnetonka Boulevard that was CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 11 of 13 damaged from frost heave this past winter that roadway will be closed on August 11 and re- opened on August 14. The roadway will be closed during the workday those days and it will be re- opened after the work day ends. Traffic will be detoured to St. Alban's Bay Road and Manor Road. Mayor Zerby asked for an update on the Star Lane and Star Circle roadway improvements project. Engineer Hornby explained in May CenterPoint Energy came in under a right -of -way (ROW) permit and relocated its gas main. Unfortunately, there is a gas main in Smithtown Road that interferes with the storm sewer system on the north side. That main has to be relocated and it has delayed the project by 1.5 weeks. With good weather, the main should be relocated by August 13 or 14. The next step in the project is to get the remainder of the storm sewer in. After that work will begin on the excavation of the street sub grade. Mayor Zerby thanked Director Brown for putting up an additional sign up` indicating road work ahead. He asked if a flashing sign is available. Brown clarified he thought staff was asked to put up a "road work ahead" sign. Brown stated he noticed someone moved the sign going westbound and that he will talk to the contractor on August 11. Engineer Hornby noted two signs were up when construction started. Zerby stated he has heard from one resident that they are struggling to get their mail at the curb.' , Director DeJong stated he has been attending Metro Cities Municipal Revenues Committee meetings and League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) Fiscal Futures Committee meetings. The practical issue people are trying to resolve is getting the sales tax exemption for joint powers organizations solidified for starting January 1, 2016. There is also discussion about making municipalities', purchases of vehicles tax exempt. Director Nielsen explained the Planning Commission Country Club (MCC) redevelopment proposal on Al meeting. During the Hearing residents were told amendment and the Concept Stage plan for that prof; requires Council to hold,another Public Hearing. Con The developer will be noticed that the approval of the Public Hearina for the former Minnetonka st 4 and continued the Hearing to its August 18 .incil would consider the Comprehensive Plan during its August 24 meeting. The Zoning Code 1's Public Hearing will be held on September 14. ncept Stage will take longer than 60 days. Zerby stated that per staff the notification area for the open house and public hearing has gone beyond what is required by State Statutes and the Citys, Ordinance. Director Nielsen explained 750 notices of those two meetings went to an residents in an area that extended to the LRT Trail on the west end and the north end, the Shorewood /Excelsior border on, the east end and Highway 7 on the south end. That same notification area will be used'for the Council public hearing. Director Nielsen stated the opens house and public hearing were held at the Southshore Center. The Council public hearing will be held in the Council Chamber. Mayor Zerby asked for staff to look into the possibility of having a television viewing area in the City Hall lobby for overflow. Mayor Zerby stated the City had been asked to comment on the Hennepin County Natural Resource Plan. He asked if that has been completed. Director Nielsen noted he is about half way through the survey the Country submitted. Nielsen stated based on what he has reviewed so far there is a lot of overlap with what other agencies already do. Compliance with the Plan will duplicate work already being done for other agencies. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 12 of 13 B. Mayor and City Council 1. Request for Proposals for Arborist /Forester Mayor Zerby explained that he and Commissioner Sundberg met with a local arborist who works for S &S Tree and Horticultural Specialists, a division of Davey Company. The purpose of the meeting was to learn what an arborist does and what types of services S &S provides for cities. They then met with Administrator Joynes, Director Brown and Director Nielsen and had a good discussion. He thought contracting out for arborist services rather than hiring an employee to do that would be a better solution. Based on his research the skills of an arborist are different from those of anindividual that who would deal with MS4 (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System) water standards. He thought it prudent to finish the tree management plan. He thought a firm that provides arborist services could complete that. S &S has a large amount of equipment resources for dealing with fallen trees. He asked if Council is interested in moving forward with finding outside services to meet those "City needs. - -He stated he likes the representatives from S &S he has met and noted that he is not endorsing that firth. He suggested the City put out a request for proposals (RFP). Commissioner Sundberg stated that the level of expertise the City could get from a firm like S &S would be far greater than the City would get with a new hire. Mayor Zerby stated S &S had done tree management plans for other cities in the metropolitan area. He recommended finishing the tree management plan be included in the RFP. Commissioner Sundberg stated S &S would be availa"ble'to Shorewood residents to answer their questions about trees. Commissioner Siakel agreed, with putting out an RFP. She asked if a firm would be accessible to the community. If so, will the residents be charged at least a nominal fee? She stated after a storm there are tree contractors that come to try and find work that are not registered with the City. Having a tree service the City has experience would be helpful to residents. Mayor Zerby stated having the service available to residents for questions for a nominal charge would be good. Joynes stated staff will draft an RFP for Council's consideration. Commissioner Siakel stated a lot of cities contract with the Mulch Store in the City of St. Bonifacius so they can take debris, there after a storm. She asked Council to consider adding an amenity that would be paid for out of the Recycling Fund so residents could take their debris to the Mulch Store. Director Brown noted that is where the City takes its trees and debris for mulching. The City has collected 75 loads and Public Works is in the process of hauling it to the Mulch Store. He explained if residents want to take stuff to the Mulch Store they cannot transport it via Highway 7 because portions of Highway 7 on the way to St. Bonifacius are not in Hennepin County. The County has an ash tree quarantine and requires tree debris to stay within County limits. The City takes back routes that remain within the County to bring stuff to the Mulch Store. Administrator Joynes noted that Council will adjourn to executive session to discuss real estate transaction issues. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2015 Page 13 of 13 12. ADJOURN Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of August 10, 2015, at 8:17 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Christine Freeman, Recorder AT] Jear CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION MONDAY, AUGUST 10, 2015 MINUTES #2C 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD LARGE CONVERENCE ROOM 7:30 PM or Immediately Following Regular Council Meeting 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 8:25 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Labadie, Siakel, and City Administrator Joynes Absent: Councilmember Woodruff B. Review Agenda Siakel moved, Labadie seconded, approving, the agenda as presented. The purpose of the executive session was to discuss real estate transact pursuant to Minn. Stat. 13D.05 Subd. 3. Mayor Zerby; ' Councihiicmb Attorney Keane; and Administrator Joynes were in attendance. 2. REAL ESTATE LEGAL ISSUES 3. ADJOURN Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Keane; and Motion passed 4/0. on issues. The session was closed rs Labadie, Siakel and Sundberg; Adjourning the City Council Executive Session of August 10, Scott Zerby, Mayor ® #3A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood nib Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Verified Claims Meeting Date: August 24, 2015 Prepared by: Michelle Nguyen, Senior Accountant Bruce DeJong, Finance Director Attachments: Claims lists Policy Consideration: Should the attached claims against the City of Shorewood be paid? Background: Claims for council authorization. 61774 - 61778& ACH 28,955.05 Pending 61781 -61825 & ACH 443,778.23 Total Claims $472,733.28 We have also included a payroll summary for the payroll period ending August 9, 2015. 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. Payroll G/L Distribution Report User: Mnguyen Batch: 00001.08.2015 - PAYROLL - 08102015 CITY OF SHOREWOOD Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description FUND 101 General Fund 101 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 47,426.97 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 101 -13- 4101 -0000 6,666.74 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -13- 4103 -0000 176.00 0.00 PART -TIME 101 -13- 4121 -0000 500.01 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -13 -4122 -0000 505.71 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -13- 4131 -0000 1,161.97 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -13- 4151 -0000 26.56 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -15- 4101 -0000 4,308.68 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -15- 4121 -0000 323.15 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -15 -4122 -0000 307.59 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -15- 4131 -0000 471.10 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -15- 4151 -0000 16.37 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -18- 4101 -0000 5,009.80 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -18- 4121 -0000 375.74 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -18 -4122 -0000 382.42 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -18- 4131 -0000 797.17 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -18- 4151 -0000 27.15 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -24- 4101 -0000 4,106.08 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR 101 -24- 4121 -0000 308.00 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -24 -4122 -0000 261.98 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -24- 4131 -0000 475.00 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -24- 4151 -0000 23.49 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -32 -4101 -0000 9,236.22 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -32 -4102 -0000 19.68 0.00 OVERTIME 101 -32 -4105 -0000 279.30 0.00 STREET PAGER PAY 101 -32 -4121 -0000 715.13 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -32 -4122 -0000 682.02 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -32 -4131 -0000 1,703.75 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -32 -4151 -0000 560.13 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -33- 4101 -0000 31.42 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -33- 4121 -0000 2.36 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -33 -4122 -0000 1.92 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -33- 4151 -0000 0.58 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -52 -4101 -0000 3,455.52 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR PR - G/L Distribution Report (08/10/2015 - 1:26 PM) Page 1 Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description 101 -52 -4103 -0000 1,442.00 0.00 PART -TIME 101 -52 -4121 -0000 259.16 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -52 -4122 -0000 382.32 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -52 -4131 -0000 836.83 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -52 -4151 -0000 128.44 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -53- 4101 -0000 1,250.32 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -53- 4121 -0000 93.80 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -53 -4122 -0000 91.05 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -53- 4131 -0000 18.10 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -53- 4151 -0000 6.21 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 47,426.97 47,426.97 FUND 201 Southshore Center 201 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 1,195.67 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 201 -00- 4101 -0000 668.40 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 201 -00 -4102 -0000 177.56 0.00 OVERTIME 201 -00- 4103 -0000 227.50 0.00 PART -TIME 201 -00- 4121 -0000 50.09 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 201 -00 -4122 -0000 67.50 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 201 -00- 4151 -0000 4.62 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 1,195.67 1,195.67 FUND 601 Water Utility 601 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 6,587.58 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 601 -00- 4101 -0000 4,661.42 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 601 -00- 4105 -0000 289.70 0.00 WATER PAGER PAY 601 -00- 4121 -0000 371.32 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 601 -00 -4122 -0000 343.72 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 601 -00- 4131 -0000 825.63 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 601 -00- 4151 -0000 95.79 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 6,587.58 6,587.58 FUND 611 Sanitary Sewer Utility 611 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 8,443.04 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 611 -00- 4101 -0000 5,698.14 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 611 -00 -4102 -0000 718.26 0.00 OVERTIME 611 -00- 4105 -0000 144.85 0.00 SEWER PAGER PAY 611 -00- 4121 -0000 492.10 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 611 -00 -4122 -0000 454.71 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 611 -00- 4131 -0000 825.63 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 611 -00- 4151 -0000 109.35 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION PR - G/L Distribution Report (08/10/2015 - 1:26 PM) Page 2 Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description FUND Total: 8,443.04 8,443.04 FUND 621 Recycling Utility 621 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 312.64 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 621 -00- 4101 -0000 216.97 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 621 -00- 4121 -0000 16.25 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 621 -00 -4122 -0000 12.92 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 621 -00- 4131 -0000 66.50 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY FUND Total: 312.64 312.64 FUND 631 Storm Water Utility 631 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 1,249.46 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 631 -00- 4101 -0000 1,006.04 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 631 -00- 4121 -0000 75.47 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 631 -00 -4122 -0000 71.84 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 631 -00- 4131 -0000 90.22 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 631 -00- 4151 -0000 5.89 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 1,249.46 1,249.46 FUND 700 Payroll Clearing Fund 700 -00- 1010 -0000 65,113.78 0.00 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 700 -00- 2170 -0000 0.00 31,284.41 GROSS PAYROLL CLEARING 700 -00- 2171 -0000 0.00 7,617.74 HEALTH INSURANCE PAYABLE 700 -00 -2172 -0000 0.00 4,011.95 FEDERAL WITHHOLDING PAYABLE 700 -00- 2173 -0000 0.00 1,729.94 STATE WITHHOLDING PAYABLE 700 -00- 2174 -0000 0.00 7,131.40 FICA/MEDICARE TAX PAYABLE 700 -00- 2175 -0000 0.00 6,687.49 PERA WITHHOLDING PAYABLE 700 -00- 2176 -0000 0.00 2,655.00 DEFERRED COMPENSATION 700 -00- 2177 -0000 0.00 1,004.58 WORKERS COMPENSATION 700 -00- 2179 -0000 0.00 192.00 SEC 125 DEP CARE REIMB PAYABLE 700 -00- 2180 -0000 0.00 404.07 LIFE INSURANCE 700 -00- 2181 -0000 0.00 745.96 DISABILITY INSURANCE 700 -00 -2182 -0000 0.00 318.32 UNION DUES 700 -00- 2183 -0000 0.00 1,330.92 HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT FUND Total: 65,113.78 65,113.78 Report Total: 130,329.14 130,329.14 PR - G/L Distribution Report (08/10/2015 - 1:26 PM) Page 3 Accounts Payable Check Detail User: Mnguyen Printed: 08/10/2015 - 2:22PM Check Number Check Date Amount 12 - AFSCMF COUNCIL 5 - UNION DUES Line Item Account 0 08/10/2015 Inv August -2015 Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 08/10/2015 PR Batch 00001.08.2015 Union Dues 700 -00 -2182 -0000 318.32 Inv August -2015 Total 318.32 0 Total: 318.32 12 - AFSCME COUNCIL 5 - UNION DUES Total: 318.32 5 - EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H Line Item Account 0 08/10/2015 Inv 08102015 Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 11,143.35 08/10/2015 PR Batch 00001.08.2015 Federal Income Tax 700 -00 -2172 -0000 4,011.95 08/10/2015 PR Batch 00001.08.2015 FICA Employee Portion 700 -00- 2174 -0000 2,889.83 08/10/2015 PR Batch 00001.08.2015 FICA Employer Portion 700 -00- 2174 -0000 2,889.83 08/10/2015 PR Batch 00001.08.2015 Medicare Employee Portion 700 -00- 2174 -0000 675.87 08/10/2015 PR Batch 00001.08.2015 Medicare Employer Portion 700 -00- 2174 -0000 675.87 Inv 08102015 Total 11,143.35 0 Total: 11,143.35 5 - EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H Total: 11,143.35 2 - ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -457 Line Item Account 61774 08/10/2015 Inv 08102015 Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 08/10/2015 PR Batch 00001.08.2015 Deferred Comp Flat Amount 700 -00- 2176 -0000 2,655.00 Inv 08102015 Total 2,655.00 61774 Total: 2,655.00 2 - ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -457 Total: 2,655.00 AP -Check Detail (8 /10/2015 - 2:22 PM) Page 1 Check Number Check Date Amount 11 - MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Line Item Account 0 08/10/2015 Inv 08102015 Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 08/10/2015 PR Batch 0000 1.08.2015 State Income Tax 700 -00- 2173 -0000 1,729.94 Inv 08102015 Total 1,729.94 0 Total: 1,729.94 11 - MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Total: 1,729.94 7 - MINNESOTA LIFE Line Item Account 0 08/10/2015 Inv August -2015 Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 08/10/2015 PR Batch 0000 1.08.2015 Life Insurance 700 -00- 2180 -0000 388.07 Inv August-2015 Total 388.07 0 Total: 388.07 7 - MINNESOTA LIFE Total: 388.07 10 - NCPERS MINNESOTA Line Item Account 61775 08/10/2015 Inv August -2015 Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 08/10/2015 PR Batch 00001.08.2015 PBRA Life 700 -00- 2180 -0000 16.00 Inv August -2015 Total 16.00 61775 Total: 16.00 10 - NCPERS MINNESOTA Total: 16.00 9 - PERA Line Item Account 0 08/10/2015 Inv 08102015 Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 08/10/2015 PR Batch 0000 1.08.2015 MN -PBRA Deduction 700 -00- 2175 -0000 3,104.91 08/10/2015 PR Batch 0000 1.08.2015 MN PBRA Benefit Employer 700 -00- 2175 -0000 3,582.58 Inv 08102015 Total 6,687.49 0 Total: 6,687.49 AP -Check Detail (8 /10/2015 - 2:22 PM) Page 2 Check Number Check Date 9 - PFRA Total: 8 - PRUDENTIAL GROUP INSURANCE Line Item Account 61776 08/10/2015 Inv August -2015 Line Item Date Line Item Description 08/10/2015 PR Batch 00001.08.2015 Long Term Disability 08/10/2015 PR Batch 0000 1.08.2015 Short Term Disability Inv August -2015 Total 61776 Total: 8 - PRUDENTIAL GROUP INSURANCE Total: 1 - WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS Line Item Account 0 08/10/2015 Inv 08102015 Line Item Date Line Item Description 08/10/2015 PR Batch 0000 1.08.2015 Health Savings Account Inv 08102015 Total 0 Total: 1 - WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS Total: Total: Line Item Account 700 -00- 2181 -0000 700 -00- 2181 -0000 Line Item Account 700 -00- 2183 -0000 Amount 6,687.49 293.19 452.77 745.96 745.96 745.96 1,330.92 1,330.92 1,330.92 1,330.92 25,015.05 AP -Check Detail (8 /10/2015 - 2:22 PM) Page 3 Accounts Payable Check Detail User: Mnguyen Printed: 08/13/2015 - 1:34PM Check Number Check Date Amount 634 - JOHNSON, JEFFREY & HEATHER Line Item Account 61777 08/13/2015 Inv 23625SmithtnRd Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 08/13/2015 Escrow Refund -23625 Smithtown Road 880 -00- 2200 -0000 900.00 Inv 23625SmithtnRd Total 900.00 61777 Total: 900.00 634 - JOHNSON, JEFFREY & HEATHER Total: 900.00 635 - KAPSNFR, PETER Line Item Account 61778 08/13/2015 Inv 5905SeamansDr Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account 08/13/2015 Escrow Refund -5905 Seamans Drive 880 -00- 2200 -0000 3,040.00 Inv 5905SeamansDr Total 3,040.00 61778 Total: 3,040.00 635 - KAPSNFR, PETER Total: 3,040.00 Total: 3,940.00 AP -Check Detail (8 /13/2015 - 1:34 PM) Page 1 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: Mnguyen"''" City of Panted: 08/20/2015 - 11:35AM w�9�4QArf S7�t1aa Batch: 00005.08.2015 - CC- 08242015 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Aeet Number Fund Dept Vendor 102 ABDO SICK & MEYERS LLP Check Sequence: 1 347958 Certified Audit -2014 21,700.00 08/24/2015 101 -16- 4301 -0000 General Prof Svcs Check Total: 21.700.00 Vendor 111 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, Check Sequence: 2 261181 Star Lane & Circle Street Improvement 666.70 08/24/2015 404 -00 -4680 -0017 Street Cap Non -Dept Check Total: 666.70 Vendor 123 BLUE -TARP FINANCIAL INC Check Sequence: 3 4061014370 Supplies 82.96 08/24/2015 611 -00- 4245 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Check Total: 82.96 Vendor 134 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS Check Sequence: 4 6974- 254785 Sensor 129.59 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 6974 - 255039 Batteries Generator 118.58 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 248.17 Vendor UB *00027 Jerry & Lisa Cash Check Sequence: 5 Refund Check 22.83 08/19/2015 601 -00- 2010 -0000 Water Non -Dept Refund Check 26.65 08/19/2015 611 -00- 2010 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Refund Check 11.41 08/19/2015 631 -00- 2010 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Refund Check 11.42 08/19/2015 621 -00- 2010 -0000 Recycling Non -Dept Check Total: 72.31 Vendor 136 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Check Sequence: 6 07312015 20405 Knighsbridge Rd- 06/25 -07/23 22.30 08/24/2015 601 -00 -4394 -0000 Water Non -Dept 07312015 28125 Boulder Bridge - 06/25 -07/23 21.00 08/24/2015 601 -00 - 4396 -0000 Water Non -Dept 07312015 24200 Smithtown Rd - 06/25 -07/23 64.85 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4380 -0000 General Pub Works 07312015 5745 Ctry Club & 25200 Hwy 7- 06/25 -07 40.43 08/24/2015 101 -52 -4380 -0000 General Park Maint 07312015 5755 Country Club Rd - 06/25 -07/23 24.89 08/24/2015 101 -19- 4380 -0000 General Man Bldg Check Total: 173.47 Vendor 137 CENTURY LINK Check Sequence: 7 612 &451785 612 -E45- 1785- BldrBrdg 294.00 08/24/2015 601 -00- 4396 -0000 Water Non -Dept 612E458019 612 -E45- 8019 -SE Areas 220.50 08/24/2015 601 -00- 4398 -0000 Water Non -Dept Check Total: 514.50 Vendor 138 CERTIFIED APPLIANCE RECYCLING Check Sequence: 8 41607 Spring Clean Up 5,692.52 08/24/2015 621 -00- 3732 -0000 Recycling Non -Dept Check Total: 5.692.52 Vendor 150 CLASSIC CLEANING COMPANY Check Sequence: 9 22567 City Hall Monthly Svc 495.00 08/24/2015 101 -19- 4400 -0000 General Mun Bldg 22568 Public Works Monthly Svc 295.00 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4400 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 790.00 Vendor 158 CUB FOODS - SHOREWOOD Check Sequence: 080515AF Arctic Fever Expense 28.98 08/24/2015 101 -53- 4441 -0000 General Recreation 081215 -Safety Safety Camp Expense 77.37 08/24/2015 101 -53 -3478 -0000 General Recreation 081215- SafetyC, Safety Camp Expense 18.86 08/24/2015 101 -53 -3478 -0000 General Recreation Check Total: 125.21 Vendor 159 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER (SHWD Check Sequence: July -2015 Drinking Water- July 62.25 08/24/2015 101 -19- 4245 -0000 General Man Bldg Check Total: 62.25 Vendor 588 CULLIGAN WATER (SSCC) Check Sequence: 101X28001405 Solar Salt Delivery 63.25 08/24/2015 201 -00- 4245 -0000 SSC Non -Dept Check Total: 63.25 Vendor 161 BRUCE DeJONG Check Sequence: GFOA- LMC082, GFOA -LMC -Metro Cities Mileages 141.45 08/24/2015 101 -15- 4331 -0000 General Fin GFOA- LMC082, GFOA Certificate & Expense 410.00 08/24/2015 101 -15- 4331 -0000 General Fin Check Total: 551.45 Vendor 564 MARK & ERICA DIEDE Check Sequence: 26330AIexLn081 Escrow Remaining Refund -26330 Alexand 1,700.00 08/24/2015 880 -00- 2200 -0000 Escrow Non -Dept Check Total: 1.700.00 Vendor 637 E. H. RENNER & SONS, INC. Check Sequence: 144940000 Service Boulder Well 172.00 08/24/2015 601 -00- 4400 -0000 Water Non -Dept Check Total: 172.00 Vendor 166 EARL F ANDERSEN Check Sequence: 0108679 -IN Traffic Cones 310.00 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4250 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 310.00 Vendor 167 ECM PUBLISHERS INC Check Sequence: 244986 Ordinance No. 520 78.19 08/24/2015 101 -13- 4351 -0000 General Admin 244987 Ordinance No. 521 44.68 08/24/2015 101 -13 -4351 -0000 General Admin 245165 Ordinance No, 520 53.97 08/24/2015101 -13- 4351 -0000 General Admin 245166 Ordinance No. 521 30.84 08/24/2015101 -13- 4351 -0000 General Admin 247197 Wellhead Protection PHN 94.44 08/24/2015 101 -18- 4351 -0000 General Planning Ad#412777 Bids -2015 Crack Fill & Seal - Splitting Cost 133.07 08/24/2015 404 -00 -4620 -0006 Street Cap Non -Dept Check Total: 435.19 Vendor 184 GREGORY FASCHING Check Sequence: 08172015 Child Care Reimbursement - 08/17/1.5 842.00 08/24/2015 700 -00- 2179 -0000 Payroll Non -Dept Check Total: 842.00 Vendor UB *00026 Jonathan & Susan Foss Check Sequence: Refund Cheek 10392 08/19/2015 601 -00- 2010 -0000 Water Non -Dept Refund Cheek 121.25 08/19/2015 611 -00- 2010 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Refund Check 51.96 08/19/2015 631 -00- 2010 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Refund Check 51.96 08/19/2015 621 -00- 2010 -0000 Recycling Non -Dept Check Total: 329.09 Vendor 206 TWILA GROUT Check Sequence: SafeCamp -08141 AAA for Safety Camp Bike Helmets 15.39 08/24/2015 101 -53- 3478 -0000 General Recreation Check Total: 15.39 Vendor 212 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD. Check Sequence: E172490 Water Meter Parts 393.54 08/24/2015 601 -00 -4265 -0000 Water Non -Dept E208316 Water Meter Parts - Fountain for Communit 954.63 08/24/2015 402 -00- 4640 -0000 Park Cap Non -Dept Check Total: 1.348.17 Vendor 215 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATION' Check Sequence: 100063545 Monthly 800 Mhz Radio Service 111.37 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4321 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 111.37 Vendor 471 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY TAX Check Sequence: 0815 -26 Special Assessment Annual Svc -2015 194.54 08/24/2015 601 -00- 4400 -0000 Water Non -Dept 0815 -26 Special Assessment Annual Svc -2015 194.53 08/24/2015 611 -00- 4400 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept 0815 -26 Special Assessment Annual Svc -2015 200.43 08/24/2015 631 -00- 4400 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Check Total: 589.50 Vendor 608 HYDRO- KLEAN, LLC Check Sequence: 52618 Christmas Lake Sewer Line 6,269.70 08/24/2015 611 -00 -4400 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Check Total: 6.269.70 Vendor 227 INTELLIGENT PRODUCTS INC Check Sequence: 196949A Mutt Mitt 477.96 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4245 -0000 General Park Maint Check Total: 477.96 Vendor 251 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIO] Check Sequence: 3rd Qtr -2015 Quarterly Levy Payment 8,258.00 08/24/2015 101 -11- 4433 -0000 General Council Check Total: 8.258.00 Vendor 259 CLARE T. LINK Check Sequence: 2015 -25SWD Park Commission Meeting - 08/11/15 187.00 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4400 -0000 General Park Maint Check Total: 187.00 Vendor 260 LOCATORS & SUPPLIES, INC. Check Sequence: 0237536 -IN Safety Equipment 77.22 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4245 -0000 General Pub Works 0237620 -IN Marking Paint 22.63 08/24/2015 601 -00- 4245 -0000 Water Non -Dept 0237620 -IN Marking Paint 22.62 08/24/2015 611 -00- 4245 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Check Total: 122.47 Vendor UB *00032 Patricia Malberg Check Sequence: Refund Check 140.72 08/19/2015 611 -00 -2010 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Refund Check 60.32 08/19/2015 631 -00- 2010 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Refund Check 60.30 08/19/2015 621 -00- 2010 -0000 Recycling Non -Dept Check Total: 261.34 Vendor UB *00031 Jennifer McMenomy Check Sequence: Refund Check 66.99 08/19/2015 611 -00- 2010 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Refund Check 28.70 08/19/2015 631 -00- 2010 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Refund Check 28.71 08/19/2015 621 -00- 2010 -0000 Recycling Non -Dept Check Total: 124.40 Vendor 279 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (WASTE` Check Sequence: 0001047554 Monthly Waste Water Svc 50,765.00 08/24/2015 611 -00- 4385 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Check Total: 50.765.00 Vendor UB *00033 Minnetonka Country Club Check Sequence: Refund Check 71.90 08/19/2015 611 -00- 2010 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Check Total: 71.90 Vendor UB *00028 Kimberly Morris Check Sequence: Refund Check 38.15 08/19/2015 601 -00- 2010 -0000 Water Non -Dept Refund Check 44.51 08/19/2015 611 -00 -2010 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Refund Check 19.07 08/19/2015 631 -00 -2010 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Refund Check 19.08 08/19/2015 621 -00- 2010 -0000 Recycling Non -Dept Check Total: 120.81 Vendor 309 MR. KITEMAN Check Sequence: 07312015 Kite Making Activity at Freeman Park 172.00 08/24/2015 101 -53- 4246 -0000 General Recreation Check Total: 17100 Vendor 463 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. Check Sequence: 1030291 -00 Mower Parts 185.86 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works 1030348 -00 Shaft For Mower 898 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4221 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 194.84 Vendor 311 NATIONAL RECREATION & PARK AS Check Sequence: 197377 -2015 NRPA Membership for Twila Grout -2015 165.00 08/24/2015 101 -53- 4433 -0000 General Recreation Check Total: 165.00 Vendor 636 BRANDON NEWMAN Check Sequence: 6145Mckinley Irrigation Damaged Repair -Mill & Overlay 75.14 08/24/2015 404 -00- 4620 -0005 Street Cap Non -Dept Check Total: 75.14 Vendor 322 OFFICE DEPOT Check Sequence: 785366856001 General Supplies 54.46 08/24/2015 101 - 134200 -0000 General Admin Check Total: 54.46 Vendor 325 ON SITE SANITATION -TWIN CITIES Check Sequence: 82046 Badger Pk -5745 County Club Rd 53.50 08/24/2015 101 -52 -4410 -0000 General Park Maint 82047 Cathcart Park -26655 W- 62nd ST 53.50 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Park Maint 82048 Freeman Park -6000 Eureka Rd 160.50 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Park Maint 82049 Silverwood Pk -5755 Covington R 53.50 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Park Maint 82050 SS Skate -5355 St Albans Bay Rd 53.50 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Park Maint 82051 Christmas Lk Rd -5625 Merry Ln 235.40 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4410 -0000 General Park Maint Check Total: 609.90 Vendor 331 JOSEPH PALANDAK Check Sequence: July -2015 Monthly Mileages 151.80 08/24/2015 101 -24- 4331 -0000 General Insp Check Total: 151.80 Vendor 452 PREHALL ELECTRIC INC. Cheek Sequence: ParkLight06251_ Park Light Repair 250.00 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4400 -0000 General Park Maint WtrTwr- 080815 Water Tower Power - Minnewashta School 125.00 08/24/2015 601 - 004680 -0000 Water Non -Dept Check Total: 375.00 Vendor UB *00034 Andrea Rank Check Sequence: Refund Check 45.55 08/19/2015 601 -00- 2010 -0000 Water Non -Dept Refund Check 53.1.5 08/19/2015 611 -00- 2010 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Refund Check 22.77 08/19/2015 631 -00- 2010 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Refund Check 22.78 08/19/2015 621 -00- 2010 -0000 Recycling Non -Dept Check Total: 144.25 Vendor 503 SCHMIDT'S 4 SEASON SERVICE, INC. Check Sequence: 4730 Tree Removal -Storm Damaged 1,000.00 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4400 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 1.000.00 Vendor 354 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE Check Sequence: 125751 Hardware 12.19 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4245 -0000 General Park Maint 125799 Parts 3.87 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4245 -0000 General Pub Works 125818 Parts 7.49 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4245 -0000 General Pub Works 125829 Hose Community Gardens 43.99 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4245 -0000 General Park Maint 125887 Pitch Iake 43.99 08/24/2015 101 -52- 4240 -0000 General Park Maint 125915 Hardwares 34.90 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4245 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 146.43 Vendor 355 SHRED -N -GO INC Check Sequence: 48567 Shredded Svc 35.00 08/24/2015 101 -13- 4400 -0000 General Admin Check Total: 35.00 Vendor- 360 SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA POLICE Check Sequence: July- 2015 -HCPF Henn Cry Process Fees - Steven Charles Bat 85.76 08/24/2015 101 -21 -4400 -0000 General Police September -2015 Monthly - Operating Budget Exp 89,178.75 08/24/2015 101 -21- 4400 -0000 General Police Check Total: 89.264.51 Vendor 590 STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES, It Check Sequence: 942892 Excelsior Blvd Slope Stabilization 664.00 08/24/2015 406 -00 -4620 -0018 Trail Non -Dept 943018 Minnetonka Country CIub Project 9,216.74 08/24/2015 450 -00 -4302 -0016 Comm Infr Non -Dept Check Total: 9.880.74 Vendor UB *00029 Jessica & Mark Sylvester Check Sequence: Refund Check 31.58 08/19/2015 601 -00- 2010 -0000 Water Non -Dept Refund Check 36.84 08/19/2015 611 -00- 2010 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Refund Check. 15.79 08/19/2015 631 -00- 2010 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Refund Check 15.79 08/19/2015 621 -00- 2010 -0000 Recycling Non -Dept Check Total: 100.00 Vendor 376 THE MULCH STORE Check Sequence: 18045 Brush Disposal - July 755.00 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4400 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 755.00 Vendor UB *00030 Donald & Kathleen Twiford Check Sequence: Refund Check 74.95 08/19/2015 611 -00- 2010 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept Refund Check 32.13 08/19/2015 631 -00 -2010 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Refund Check 32.12 08/19/2015 621 -00- 2010 -0000 Recycling Non -Dept Check Total: 139.20 Vendor 132 TWILIGHT ZONE OUTDOOR CINEMA Check Sequence: 1171- MIP2nd MIP- 09/11/15 -2nd Half 622.00 08/24/2015 101 -53- 4246 -0000 General Recreation Check Total: 622.00 Vendor 601 USA BLUEBOOK Check Sequence: 713388 Pressure Data Logger 693.26 08/24/2015 601 -00- 4240 -0000 Water Non -Dept Check 'Total: 693.26 Vendor 638 VALLEY PAVING - SHAKOPEE Check Sequence: PV #1- P01459 -9" P.V. #1 -Star Lane & Cir Improvement -Proj 187,533.57 08/24/2015 404 -00- 4680 -0017 Street Cap Non -Dept Check Total: 187.533.57 Vendor 421 VERIZON WIRELESS Check Sequence: 9749927538 S & W Lines - Aect842017386- 07/02 -08 /0 50.28 08/24/2015 601 -00- 4321 -0000 Water Non -Dept 9749927538 S & W Lines - Acet842017386- 07/02 -08/0 5016 08/24/2015 611 -00- 4321 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept 9749927538 S & W Lines - Acct842017386- 07/02 -08/0 50.26 08/24/2015 631 -00- 4321 -0000 Storm Water Non -Dept Check Total: 150.80 Vendor 415 WARNER CONNECT Check Sequence: 29925132 Additional Services Charge -July 1,383.75 08/24/2015 101 -19- 4221 -0000 General Mun Bldg 29925322 Monthly Network Maint Services 2,570.20 08/24/2015 101 -19- 4221 -0000 General Mun Bldg CM00669 Credit for Inv29925132 - 202.50 08/24/2015 101 -19- 4221 -0000 General Mun Bldg Check Total: 3.751.45 Vendor 486 WARNING LITES OF MINNESOTA, INt Check Sequence: 146646 Project Control 422.00 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4400 -0000 General Pub Works 149190 Project Control 60.00 08/24/2015 101 -32- 4400 -0000 General Pub Works Check Total: 482.00 Vendor 402 WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE Check Sequence: 6029 Leak Detection -Old Market Rd & Chartwe 281.05 08/24/2015 601 -00 -4400 -0000 Water Non -Dept Check Total: 281.05 Vendor 410 WSB AND ASSOCIATES INC Check Sequence: 01459- 350 -46 GIS & CAD Support - June 408.00 08/24/2015 101 -31- 4303 -0000 General Engineering 01459- 700 -32 MCES Forcemain - June 76.50 08/24/2015 611 -00- 4680 -0011 Sewer Non -Dept 01459 - 810 -25 Galpin Lake Trail - June 705.00 08/24/2015 406 -00- 4620 -0002 Trail Non -Dept 01459- 850 -17 Sunnyvale Ln Improvements - June 521.50 08/24/2015 404 -00 -4620 -0010 Street Cap Non -Dept. 01459 - 860 -15 Lift Station No. 11 Rehab - June 4,459.25 08/24/2015 611 -00- 4680 -0000 Sewer Non -Dept 01459- 890 -16 Wellhead Protection Plan Amend -June 2,189.75 08/24/2015 601 -00- 4303 -0000 Water Non -Dept 01459-930-11 Mill & Overlay - 2014 -June 38.25 08/24/2015 404 -00 -4620 -0005 Street Cap Non -Dept 01459- 940 -12 Smithtown Rd EastTrail - June 13,421.50 08/24/2015 406 -00 -4620 -0008 Trail Non -Dept 01459 -970 -9 Star Ln & Star Cir Improvement -June 4,811.25 08/24/2015 404 -00- 4680 -0017 Street Cap Non -Dept 01459 -990 -6 Mill & Overlay - 2015 -June 559.75 08/24/2015 404 -00- 4620 -0005 Sheet Cap Non -Dept 01608 -060 -2 Skate Park -June 726.25 08/24/2015 402 -00- 4680 -0000 Park Cap Non -Dept 02092- 710 -16 MS4 Svcs - .Tune 3,521.00 08/24/2015 631 -00- 4302 -0009 Storm Water Non -Dept 02925 -000 -6 Pavement Marking - June 1,668.00 08/24/2015 404 -00- 4620 -0007 Street Cap Non -Dept 02925 -050 -6 Gen Eng Svc - June 4,000.00 08/24/2015 101 -31- 4400 -0000 General Engineering 02925 -060 -6 Misc. Engineering Support-June 6,640.75 08/24/2015 101 -31- 4303 -0000 General Engineering Check Total: 43.746.75 Total for Check Run: 443,778.23 Total of Number of 58 #3B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Adopt the Codification of the Ordinances Approved in 2014 (Supplement 10) Meeting Date: August 24, 2015 Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Reviewed by: William S. Joynes, City Administrator Attachments: Ordinance, Resolution Background: On November 22, 2004, Council adopted Ordinance No. 409, which approved the Municipal Code Book recodification provided by American Legal Publishing and the League of Minnesota Cities. With this recodification, the Code Book was current through Ordinance No. 401 passed on February 23, 2004. Nine supplements have been completed since the initial recodification. The tenth supplement (5 -10) to the City Code Book includes Ordinance No.'s 511 -518, which includes ordinances approved through January 12, 2015. American Legal Publishing has provided copies of the replacement pages to the City Code Book for this 5 -10 supplement. The attached Exhibit A provides an outline of the sections /pages of the Code Book that have been updated. The attached Ordinance accepts the replacement pages, which includes Ordinance No's 511 -518. The Code Book is available on the City's Web site in a searchable format, via a link to American Legal Publishing Corporation. Financial or Budget Considerations: The total cost for 37 pages of 5 -10 was $705. Funds exist in the Administration budget for this expense. Recommendation / Action Requested: Adoption of an Ordinance to enact and adopt the 2015 5 -10 Supplement to the Shorewood City Code Book, provided by American Legal Publishing Corporation; and Adoption of a Resolution approving a summary publication of said Ordinance. Next Steps and Timelines: Staff will continue to update all of the city code books with the new pages Connection to Vision / Mission: Providing quality public service. 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 ORDINANCE NO. 522 AN ORDINANCE ENACTING AND ADOPTING THE 2015 S -10 SUPPLEMENT TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD MINNESOTA WHEREAS American Legal Publishing Corporation of Cincinnati, Ohio, has completed the tenth Supplement to the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shorewood, which supplement contains all ordinances up through and including Ordinance No. 518 of a general and permanent nature enacted since the prior supplement of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shorewood; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City of Shorewood to accept these updated sections, as outlined in the attached Exhibit A; NOW THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota, ordains: Section 1. That the tenth supplement to the Code of Ordinances of the City of Shorewood as submitted by American Legal Publishing Corporation of Cincinnati, Ohio, is hereby accepted. Section 2. This ordinance adopting the 2015 S -10 Supplement to the Code of Ordinances shall take effect upon publication in the City's official newspaper. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota, this 24th day of August, 2015. Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk REMOVE OLD PAGES Title Page S O EWOO , MINNESOTA Instruction Sheet 2015 S -10 Supplement TITLE 100: ADMINISTRATION INSERT NEW PAGES Title Page 17 through 20 105 -3, 105 -4 105 -3, 105 -4 106 -1, 106 -2 106 -1, 106 -2 109-1, 109 -2 109 -1 through 109 -4 TITLE 400: LIQUOR REGULATIONS i 501 -5 through 501 -10 503 -3, 503 -4 TITLE 1300: MUNICIPAL FEES 1301-3, i 1301-9 through 1301-12 PARALLEL REFERENCES 3,4 27,28 1 SMB 5/15 I through 503-3, 503-4 i 1301-9 through 3, 4 27 through 30 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE OFFICIAL SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 522 The following is the official summary of Ordinance No. 522 approved by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota, on August 24, 2015: An Ordinance Enacting, Codifying and Adopting the 2015 S -10 Supplement to the Code of Ordinances for the City of Shorewood, Minnesota, which contains Ordinance No.'s 511 -518, approved since the codification of the 2014 S -9 Supplement. A printed copy of the Ordinance is available for inspection by any person at the Office of the City Clerk. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota, this 24th day of August, 2015. ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Scott Zerby, Mayor 3C MEETING TYPE Regular Meeting City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Title / Subject: Resolution Electing To Not Waive Statutory Tort Limits For Liability Insurance Meeting Date: August 24, 2015 Prepared by: Bruce DeJong Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn Attachment: Resolution Policy Consideration: Should the City waive the statutory tort limits, waive the limits and purchase excess liability coverage, or waive the limits and not purchase excess liability coverage. Background: The City Council is required to annually pass a resolution indicating if they wish to waive or not waive the monetary limits on municipal tort liability insurance established by Minnesota Statute 466.04. On January 1, 2008 the statutory liability limits increased from $300,000 to $400,000 per claimant and from $1,000,000 to $1,200,000 per occurrence. If the city does not waive the statutory tort limits, an individual claimant would be able to recover no more than $400,000 on any claim to which the statutory tort limits apply. The total which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would be limited to $1,200,000. These statutory tort limits would apply regardless of whether or not the city purchases the optional excess liability coverage. If the city waives the statutory tort limits and does not purchase excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover up to $1,200,000 on a single occurrence. The total which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to $1,200,000, regardless of the number of claimants. If the city waives the statutory tort limits and purchases excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover an amount up to the limit of the coverage purchased. The total which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to the amount of coverage purchased, regardless of the number of claimants. Financial or Budget Considerations Waiver of the monetary limits will increase the likelihood of larger payouts which will increase insurance costs. 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. Options: The City Council may choose to: 1. Accept the staff recommendation and not waive the limits as shown on the attached resolution. 2. Waive the statutory limits and do not purchase excess liability insurance coverage. 3. Waive the statutory limits and purchase excess liability insurance coverage. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution as submitted by staff. Next Steps and Timelines: Staff is proceeding with the regular insurance renewal process for the November 1 renewal date. Connection to Vision / Mission: This process contributes to sound financial management through proper insurance coverage. CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 15- RESOLUTION ELECTING TO NOT WAIVE STATUTORY TORT LIMITS FOR LIABILITY INSURANCE WHEREAS, pursuant to previous action taken, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust has requested the City to make an election with regards to waiving or not waiving its tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04; and WHEREAS, the choices available are to not waive the statutory limit, to waive the limit but to keep insurance coverage at the statutory limit, or to waive the limit and to add insurance to a new level; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD AS FOLLOWS: That the Shorewood City Council does hereby elect to not waive the statutory tort liability limit established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04 and that such election is effective until amended by further resolution of the Shorewood City Council. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of August, 2015. ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Scott Zerby, Mayor 3D MEETING TYPE Regular Meeting City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Title / Subject: Selection of the Truth -in- Taxation Hearing Date Meeting Date: August 24, 2015 Prepared by: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director Reviewed by: Bill Joynes, City Administrator Attachment: Resolution Policy Consideration: Adoption of this resolution will allow Shorewood to certify the Truth -in- Taxation public hearing date to Hennepin County for inclusion on the Truth -in- Taxation property tax notices. Background: The Truth -in- Taxation process to be followed this year is similar to years past. The traditional date for cities to hold their Truth -in- Taxation hearing is the first Monday in December. The attached resolution sets Monday, December 7, 2015 as the Truth -In- Taxation hearing date with a follow - up hearing date at the next regular City Council meeting of December 14, 2015. Staff recommends adoption of the resolution setting these dates for the truth -in- taxation hearings. If there are no changes recommended for the budget, it can be adopted on December 7th and a memo and resolution will be included in the packet for adoption on the hearing date. The meeting and adoption can be delayed to the next meeting on December 14th if there are questions or changes required to the budget prior to adoption. Financial or Budget Considerations: This process allows residents an opportunity to provide input on the budget and property tax levy. Options: The City Council may choose to: 1. Adopt the resolution and dates as presented. 2. Change the date and adopt the amended resolution. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution as submitted. Next Steps and Timelines: At the next budget meeting, staff will present the Capital Improvement Plan and Enterprise fund budgets. The final budget, tax levy, capital outlay, enterprise fund, and CIP adoption will occur in December after the Truth -in- Taxation public hearing is completed. Connection to Vision / Mission: This process contributes to sound financial management through public input into the tax levy and budget for desired city 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. 15- SELECTION OF THE TRUTH -IN- TAXATION HEARING DATE WHEREAS, Minnesota State law requires local governments to hold public hearings on their proposed budgets and property tax levies; and WHEREAS, the customary date for the budget hearing is the first Monday in December; and WHEREAS, it is in the spirit of full and open disclosure of the City's financial condition to provide as much information as necessary for the City Council and residents and property owners to evaluate the budget; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Truth -in- Taxation public hearing for property taxes levied in 2015, collectible in 2016, is set for Monday, December 7, 2015. 2. A continuation date if necessary is set for Monday, December 14, 2015. 3. The Finance Director is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to Hennepin County for inclusion on the parcel specific notices to be mailed in November. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of August, 2015. ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Scott Zerby, Mayor #9A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Resolution Accepting Part 2 of the City of Shorewood Wellhead Protection Plan for Submission to the Minnesota Department of Health, City Project 13 -11 Meeting Date: 08/24/2015 Prepared by: Paul Hornby, City Engineer Reviewed by: Attachments: Resolution, PowerPoint, WHP Plan Background: The City of Shorewood has completed developing its Wellhead Protection (WHP) plan pursuant to the requirements of Minnesota Rules. Minnesota Rules require the plan to be discussed at a public hearing to provide the opportunity for public comment. Following the public hearing, dependent on City Council acceptance, the WHP plan shall be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Health for formal approval. The plan is required to be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Health by September 1, 2015. The WHP plan is comprised of a collaboration of the results generated in Part 1 and other items such as land use, utilities, water quantity, and water quality. The Part 2 plan is a management strategy to protect the drinking water supply management area. Financial or Budget Considerations: The WHP Plan budget is $14,955 for the Part 2 portion of the WHP Plan development project. Options: 1. Approve the resolution accepting the WHP Plan for submission to the Minnesota Department of Health, City Project 13 -11. 2. Request revisions to be made to the WHP Plan, City Project 13 -11. 3. Take no action on this item at this time. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommendation for Council action will be to approve the Resolution accepting Part 2 of the City of Shorewood WHP Plan for submission to the Minnesota Department of Health, City Project 13 -11, on Monday, August 24, 2015. 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. 15 - A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PART 2 OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN FOR SUBMISSION TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CITY PROJECT NO. 13 -11 WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has completed developing its Wellhead Protection Plans pursuant to the requirements of Minnesota Rules 4720.5100 to 4720.5590; and WHEREAS, the goal of the Wellhead Protection Plan is to prevent human- caused contaminants from entering the water supply wells and to protect all who use the water supply from adverse health effects associated with groundwater contamination; and WHEREAS, Part 1 of the Wellhead Protection Plan is a technical exercise that uses groundwater modeling to delineate the wellhead protection area (WHPA), Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) and includes a well and aquifer vulnerability assessment; and WHEREAS, Part 1 was approved by the Minnesota Department of Health in October 2011; and WHEREAS, Part 2 of the Wellhead Protection Plan describes how the results of the Part 1 can be applied to best protect a community's water supply, through the evaluation of several data elements, including physical environment, land use, public utilities, water quantity, water quality, an inventory of potential contaminants, and the preparation of a management portion of the plan; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held, as required by Minnesota Rules (part 4720.5350, subpart 4) on August 24, 2015 for review of Part 2 prior to submittal to the Minnesota Department of Health for approval; and NOW THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shorewood that Part 2 of the Wellhead Protection Plan is accepted for submittal to the Minnesota Department of Health for approval. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of August, 2015. Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Wellhead Protection Plan Part II . an nl CITY OF SHOREWOOD City Council Meeting August 24, 2015 I P-, , , " - 1--:::: rr��� Outline Background Part 1 Results— What did we learn? Part Z Scope — What have we completed with this effort? Part Z Plan o Action — What are we committing to? Next Steps Questions Background MN Rules 4720.51 to 4720.5590 Consists of two parts: -Part I - Approved by MDH in October 2011 Delineates the Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) and the Drinking Water Supply Management Area ( DWSMA) Completes well and aquifer vulnerability assessment determining that the DWSMA is of low to moderate vulnerability Part I Res Cities of.- Shorewood, Tonka Bay, Greenwood, and Excelsior Legend 1:30W$MA Low Vvinera 114-v madermalff vu,abiury . . . . . . IND m WRIM "'J"Ifform �F-'.Wmmmm U Its County: Hennepin IL r. 4% IL Background MN Rules 4720.51 to 4720.5590 Consists of two parts: - Part 2- Distributed to impacted local government units on junel,2015 for mandatory 6o -day review and comment period. Plan of action for the protection of the DWSMA Part 2 Scope Evaluates Several Data Elements Physical Environment o Land Use Water Quantity Water Quality Inventories Potential Contaminants Wells, storage tanks, pipelines, spills, etc. Prepares Management Portion of the Plan Goals • Plan of Action • Evaluation Part 2 Plan of Action Categories Example Activities A -Well Management - Newsletters B - Public Education C - Storage Tank Management D - Data Collection E- Planning and Zoning F - Implementation G - Evaluation - Website links - Educational brochures -Well maintenance i W PF Part 2 Goals Goal 1- Maintain or improve current level of water quality Goal 2 - Continue to supply sufficient water quantity Goal 3 - Promote activities that protect source water aquifer Goal 4 - Collect data to support future wellhead protection efforts Comment Period Plan sent to LGUs for 6o day review -June i, aoi5 Public Hearing - August 24, 2015 Next Steps City Council Accepts Plan for Submitting to MDH a Submit Plan to MDH for Final Approval 3 Formal Adoption of Plan by MDH 4 Formal Adoption of Plan by City Council Implement the Plan of Action MDH Evaluation - every z 1/a years WHP Plan Amendment -Every io years Shorewood Wellhead Protection Plan Part II Questions? 6 � Vill CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY OF SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 2015 MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Mangold convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Mangold, Commissioners Council Liaison Siakel; City Pla Absent: Dietz and Stelmachers B. Review Agenda Hartmann moved to approve the a carried 3 -0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meetin4 Hartmann moved t meeting as amende skate park. Vassar B. Park Commissi C. Park Commissi Hartmann moved to apps July 14, 2015 meetings as visited at all. Vassar seco the as written. 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD SHOREWOOD CITY HALL 7:00 P.M. Vassar; City seconded the motion. Motion Minutes of May 12, 2015 Lutes of the Park Commission meeting of May 12, 2015 -e to read: Nielsen noted there were only two people at the ion. Motion carried 3 -0. Tours of June 9, 2015 Tours of July 14, 2015 e the minutes of the Park Commission tour of June 9, 2015 and vended: Christmas access was on July 14 and Badger was not ed'the motion. Motion carried 3 -0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were none. 4. MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW (PARK DEDICATION) Nielsen stated one of the duties of the Park Commission is to review park development in the city. He noted the Minnetonka Country Club has completed a several month study of the area, and the PAC recommended that there are places for senior housing on the north side of Smithtown Road PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 2015 PAGE 2 OF 4 and north of city hall where the automotive business is located. The Park Commission is being asked to weigh in on what kind of park dedication to request for the development of the country club property. Nielsen noted there is park property on either side of the country club property now. He stated if the city takes cash, there will be enough money to complete the second phase of the Badger Park development. Staff is recommending a cash park dedication. He discussed trail locations which would satisfy the credit requirement for a cash dedication. The PAC supported the idea of publicly owned trails in the development. Staff is also recommending credit for the trails. Vassar asked what will be on the trail, if there are trees along not been designed at this point. He stated there will be a loot areas. The design will depend on the design of the wetlands z developer has agreed to put in sidewalks where necessary wb trails. In response to a question from Vassar, Nielsen noted location would not be feasible. Mangold believed it A Mangold moved to recommend moving City will determine what the park dedii Hartmann seconded the motion which i 5. FREEMAN P Nielsen stated we honoring a former volunteer at Freems moved to re ar seconded yard with the n fees should ed 3 -0. ,AGUE trail Nielsen stated the trail has trail through the open space storm water features. The will lead to the more natural ige of putting a ball field in this ;reate a traffic issue. credit for the trail system and the be in cash instead of land. that a memorial plaque be installed at Freeman Park passed away. Diane Agnew was a dedicated garden 1 of the memorial plaque for Diane Agnew in Freeman carried 3 -0. 6. FOLLOW -UP OF PARK TOURS Nielsen stated it was usefulto have the tours a little later after more work has been completed in the parks. The list is pretty short this year. He stated there is one issue in Freeman Park in the ball fields with the weeds along the fence lines. He believed there is some reluctance with Public Works. Mangold stated a tour of Badger Park needs to be done this year. He suggested it be done with the City Council during their joint meeting. Nielsen suggested meeting at 6:30 then while there is still light. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 2015 PAGE 3 OF 4 7. SCHEDULE JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL Nielsen stated the City Council has determined that September 22 would be the best choice for a date for a joint meeting. Mangold preferred starting the meeting at 7 p.m. 8. PREPARATION FOR JOINT MEETING WITH CHANHASSEN ON CATHCART PARK Nielsen stated it has been suggested that the Park Commissions from Shorewood and Chanhassen meet to discuss a possible contribution to Cathcart Park. He stated, the park is located in Chanhassen, and there is a new development that puts a burden on this park. He stated one option might be a perimeter trail. He stated there isn't a date set yet for a meeting. He suggested it could be held during the regular meeting on September 8: Hartmann noted Labor Day is the day before the meeting if that should make a difference.' Mangold stated he didn't see a rush having the meeting and even October would be okay. It was unknown when the Chanhassen Park Commission meets. Nielsen suggested continuing the conversation about what we will say and do, and he will check possible dates. Commissioners and staff discussed a possible trail location and the likelihood that Chanhassen would support such an effort. Nielsen asked if it would be wise to let them know what we have in mind in advance of the meeting. He suggested options be laid out in advance. Vassar stated it might be a good idea tai visit some of their parks and trails to see what they have and to use as examoles in the discussion. 9. DETERMINE LI[ASONS FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS Liaisons for Council meetings; were discussed. August Lynda Hartmann September Justin Mangold October Stephany Vassar November Steve Dietz December Paul Stelmachers 10. NEW BUSINESS None PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 2015 PAGE 4 OF 4 11. STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS /UPDATES A. City Council Nielsen and Council member Siakel updated the Commission on recent City Council actions. Hartmann suggested putting in a dome. Nielsen discussed the need to take a look at tournament management. B. Staff 12. ADJOURN Hartmann moved, Vassar seconded, to adjourn the 11, 2015 at 8:01 p.m. Motion carried 3 -0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Clare T. Link Recorder of August City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Title / Subject: Morlock — C.U.P. for Fill in Excess of 100 Cubic Yards Meeting Date: 24 August 2105 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen Attachments: City Engineer's Memorandum, dated 30 July 2015 Draft Resolution ;� MEETING TYPE Regular Meeting Policy Consideration: Should Bob Morlock be granted a conditional use permit to place approximately 1160 cubic yards of fill on his property at 24975 and 24995 Glen Road? Background: Mr. Morlock proposes to fill the front of his two lots in order to direct drainage to the street side of the property and away from the two properties to the west of his. The amount of fill requires a conditional use permit. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on 4 August to consider the application, and on a 5 -0 vote has recommended the C.U.P. subject to the conditions recommended by City staff. Financial or Budget Considerations: The fee paid by the applicant covers the cost of processing the permit. The applicant has been advised that he is responsible for any street cleaning that may be necessary as a result of erosion into the street. Options: Approve the request per the Planning Commission's recommendation; deny the request; or modify the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the C.U.P., a resolution to which effect is attached for your consideration. Next Steps and Timelines: The applicant has already place 100 cubic yards of material on the two lots with a permit from our office. Upon approval of the resolution, the remaining fill will be brought in. The project is to be completed by the end of October 2105. Connection to Vision / Mission: Regulation of large scale grading projects contributes to a healthy environment. 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 5755 Country Club Road • Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 •952- 960 -7900 Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityha11 @ci.shorewood.mn.us DATE: July 30, 2015 TO: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director FROM: Paul Hornby, City Engineer RE: Morlock Property C.U.P. — 24975 and 24995 Glen Road Grading Plan Review I have completed my review of the proposed grading plan submitted by Bob Morlock, for Lots 7 and 8 Manitou Glen. Plans were prepared by Otto Associates, dated July 7, 2015, and I have the following comments: ■ The grading plan describes the import of approximately 1,770 cubic yards of fill for the two lots. Approximately 1,160 cubic yards of material is proposed for Lot 7 (the westerly lot). The City has received drainage complaints west of Lot 7, after demolition of an existing house. The existing drainage directs runoff behind and in front of the house immediately west of Lot 7. Part of the issue may have been resolved after the basement /foundation was filled (it was holding water for a period of time), and there is an existing grading pattern that directs water to the easterly basement window of the house immediately west of Lot 7. ■ The grading plan needs a slight modified to Lot 7 to direct water toward Glen Road as part of the site filling for the C.U.P. When a building permit is submitted for Lot 7, we will review the proposed grading plan again, since the drainage may be modified to accommodate the type of structure proposed on the lot. At this time, I do not see a need to retain storm water on the site since standing water on the site may have contributed to adjacent property water issues. Please contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information regarding this Grading Plan Review. t N Isi le i Y A. L Tonka Bay u L-___� bj m es N A 0 300 600 1,200 Feet • int 0 lick and 0 it I_ —edge of bituminous — oa-- — - - a - N F I n F SF SF-' i SFr SF SF -- - r X963. 13 65.18 I 968 970,_.. X9 5.41 NN X965.56 970 X963.31 j 972 1 0 Be mark: I ��� y 2• a T p of Pipe — 65.07 ev =966.5 — l X962.98 �s POSSIBLE HOUSE PAD ��' POSSIBLE HOUSE PAD J I 7F=97.7 TF-972.7 �Ji I 1 G =971.4 96� \ G =972.4 1 LF =9630 LF =964.0 X68\ 6�. ° I �` X964.65 / QO 7 -7 I 66.0\` ^ .. I G. "Il e X963.45,ll 1 I 65.0 I I X964.5 p66 I >90.92 I X965.04 1 I X964.37 I j , \ /968/ � I I i Patti Helgesen From: Scott Johnson [scottj5896 @gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2015 1:09 PM To: Planning Subject: CUP for Bob Morlock In regards to the CUP request for the properties at 24975 and 24995 Glen Road by Bob Morlock. We live at 24955 Glen Road, right next to the properties and have no issues at all with this request. It would be nice if Bob could move forward and develop these properties. Thank You. Scott Johnson and Patricia Stalberger. CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PLACE FILL IN EXCESS OF 100 CUBIC YARDS FOR BOB MORLOCK WHEREAS, Bob Morlock (Applicant) is the owner of real property located at 24995 and 24975 Glen Road, in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, legally described as: "Lots 7 and 8, Manitou Glen, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota "; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied to the City for a Conditional Use Permit to place 1160 cubic yards of fill to raise and level off the above - referenced property; and WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code requires a Conditional Use Permit to place fill in excess of 100 cubic yards; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was reviewed by the City Engineer, and his recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Director, dated 30 July 2015, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting on 4 August 2015, the minutes of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was considered by the City Council at its regular meeting on 24 August, at which time the City Engineer's memorandum, and the minutes of the Planning Commission were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject property is located in the R -1C, Single - Family Residential zoning district, consists of two residential lots, containing a total of 1.78 acres. 2. The area of fill shall be limited to that which is shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. property. The proposed fill is necessary to alleviate drainage issues currently present on the -1- CONCLUSION a. The application of Bob Morlock, for a Conditional Use Permit as set forth hereinabove be and hereby is granted. b. The fill and grading shall be constructed in accordance with the recommendations of the City Engineer. C. Deliveries of fill and grading operations are limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturday and no deliveries or grading on Sunday. d. The Applicant shall be responsible for scheduling delivery of fill material, such that no stacking or parking of trucks occurs on Glen Road. Any such stacking or parking of trucks on Glen Road will result in the issuance of a "stop work order" until deliveries can be properly rescheduled. f The City shall document the condition of the pavement in front of the subject property and in front of the property at 24975 and 24995 Glen Road. Any damage to the pavement must be corrected, at the Applicant's expense, prior to 15 October 2015. g. Erosion control measures must be in place prior to filling. h. Vegetation shall be restored on the area disturbed by grading. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 24th day of August, 2015. ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk -2- Scott Zerby, Mayor .1".—edge of bituminous —00 6494 55"bas,-;,vood —01' G124"oulin SF r. �N F S SF's SF St` SF SF Al X96313 65.18 966 I n'SP -.970 X9 5.41 X965.56 970 ot A-, - — - — - — - — - — - — - X96331 972 mark, TA p of Pipe 965.07 ev =966.5 X962.98 ( '" '-b 1 POSSIBLE HOUSE PAD 7 ' " POSSIBLE HOUSE PAD 7F=971.7 Gw971.4 I '0 t 7F= 9 72 7 LF=963.0 G=972.4 LF=964.0 X964.65 -7 56..0 0 iN X963.4'1 -\ N X964.5; 96392 X965.04 X964.37 '6 '96 12 Exhibit A • Al MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Request for Change in the Posted Speed Limit, Eureka Road Meeting Date: August 24, 2015 Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Attachments MN Statute, Petition, Site Location Map, Policy Policy Consideration: None Background / Previous Action: Changes in the State Statute 169.14 permit cities some discretion to lower the posted speed on residential roadways from 30 Miles per hour (mph) to 25 mph for residential roadways, as shown in Attachment 1. The City Council has recently utilized this change for a speed posting along Strawberry Lane. Attachment 2 to this memorandum is a petition requesting such a revision to the posted limit along Eureka Road (South), between Smithtown Road and State Trunk Highway 7. Attachment 3 is a site location map for the subject roadway. The City Council adopted a policy to consider such requests. This policy is included as Attachment 4. As cited in the policy, the first order of business is for the City Council to accept a petition for the change in the posted speed. If sight lines or roadway conditions do not immediately suggest an immediate change in the limit, it is recommended that the City Council order the City Engineer to deploy, or have deployed, speed counting devices to record the speed, times of travel, and volume of traffic along the subject roadway. Once data has been collected, WSB and Associates will make recommendation regarding the posted speed limit, based upon the recommendation of a Professional Traffic Engineer. In turn, the data and recommendation will be presented to the City Council for consideration. Previously, the City Council has considered similar requests for speed limit changes. At that time, the Council opted to hold off performing the speed study, until such time as school was back in session, as the route under consideration was perceived to be impacted by school traffic. Staff believes Eureka Road is also such a roadway that is impacted by school traffic. Therefore, it is recommended that the study be temporarily postponed until school is in session. 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 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the petition be accepted and that the City Engineer is to deploy traffic counters on Eureka Road, once school is back in regular session. Financial or Budget Considerations: Costs for the study will include approximately six hours of consultant time to deploy counters, gather traffic data, analyze the data, and make recommendation. If the City Council determines that the posted speed limit is to be changed, the costs of four speed limit signs amounts to $160, in addition to staff time for installation. Options: 1. Accept the petition, as outlined and proceed as documented. 2. Provide Staff with alternative direction. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff is recommending Option 1 that accepts the petition be approved, with direction to the City Engineer to deploy traffic counters on Eureka Road (South), once school is back in session. 169.14 - 2014 Minnesota Statutes 2014 Minnesota Statutes 169.14 SPEED LIMITS, ZONES; RADAR. Subdivision 1. Duty to drive with due care. No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions. Every driver is responsible for becoming and remaining aware of the actual and potential hazards then existing on the highway and must use due care in operating a vehicle. In every event speed shall be so restricted as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, vehicle or other conveyance on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care. Subd. la. License revocation for extreme speed. The driver's license of a person who violates any speed limit established in this section, by driving in excess of 100 miles per hour, is revoked for six months under section 171.17, or for a longer minimum period of time applicable under section 169A.53, 169A.54, or 171.174. Subd. 2. Speed limits. (a) Where no special hazard exists the following speeds shall be lawful, but any speeds in excess of such limits shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful; except that the speed limit within any municipality shall be a maximum limit and any speed in excess thereof shall be unlawful: (1) 30 miles per hour in an urban district; (2) 65 miles per hour on noninterstate expressways, as defined in section 160.02, subdivision 18b, and noninterstate freeways, as defined in section 160.02, subdivision 19; (3) 55 miles per hour in locations other than those specified in this section; (4) 70 miles per hour on interstate highways outside the limits of any urbanized area with a population of greater than 50,000 as defined by order of the commissioner of transportation; (5) 65 miles per hour on interstate highways inside the limits of any urbanized area with a population of greater than 50,000 as defined by order of the commissioner of transportation; (6) ten miles per hour in alleys; (7) 25 miles per hour in residential roadways if adopted by the road authority having jurisdiction over the residential roadway; and (8) 35 miles per hour in a rural residential district if adopted by the road authority having jurisdiction over the rural residential district. (b) A speed limit adopted under paragraph (a), clause (7), is not effective unless the road authority has erected signs designating the speed limit and indicating the beginning and end of the residential roadway on which the speed limit applies. (c) A speed limit adopted under paragraph (a), clause (8), is not effective unless the road authority has erected signs designating the speed limit and indicating the beginning and end of the rural residential district for the roadway on which the speed limit applies. (d) Notwithstanding section 609.0331 or 609.101 or other law to the contrary, a person who violates a speed limit established in this subdivision, or a speed limit designated on an appropriate sign under subdivision 4, 5, 5b, 5c, or 5e, by driving 20 miles per hour or more in excess of the applicable speed limit, is assessed an additional surcharge equal to the amount of the fine imposed for the speed violation, but not less than $25. Page 1 of 6 ATTACHMENT 1 169.14 - 2014 Minnesota Statutes Subd. 2a. Increased speed limit when passing. Notwithstanding subdivision 2, the speed limit is increased by ten miles per hour over the posted speed limit when the driver: (1) is on a two -lane highway having one lane for each direction of travel; (2) is on a highway with a posted speed limit that is equal to or higher than 55 miles per hour; (3) is overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction of travel; and (4) meets the requirements in section 169.18. Subd. 3. Reduced speed required. (a) The driver of any vehicle shall, consistent with the requirements, drive at an appropriate reduced speed when approaching or passing an authorized emergency vehicle stopped with emergency lights flashing on any street or highway, when approaching and crossing an intersection or railway grade crossing, when approaching and going around a curve, when approaching a hill crest, when traveling upon any narrow or winding roadway, and when special hazards exist with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather or highway conditions. (b) A person who fails to reduce speed appropriately when approaching or passing an authorized emergency vehicle stopped with emergency lights flashing on a street or highway shall be assessed an additional surcharge equal to the amount of the fine imposed for the speed violation, but not less than $25. Subd. 4. Establishment of zones by commissioner. On determining upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation that any speed set forth in this section is greater or less than is reasonable or safe under the conditions found to exist on any trunk highway or upon any part thereof, the commissioner may erect appropriate signs designating a reasonable and safe speed limit thereat, which speed limit shall be effective when such signs are erected. Any speeds in excess of such limits shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful; except that any speed limit within any municipality shall be a maximum limit and any speed in excess thereof shall be unlawful. On determining upon that basis that a part of the trunk highway system outside a municipality should be a zone of maximum speed limit, the commissioner may establish that part as such a zone by erecting appropriate signs showing the beginning and end of the zone, designating a reasonable and safe speed therefor, which may be different than the speed set forth in this section, and that it is a zone of maximum speed limit. The speed so designated by the commissioner within any such zone shall be a maximum speed limit, and speed in excess of such limit shall be unlawful. The commissioner may in the same manner from time to time alter the boundary of such a zone and the speed limit therein or eliminate such zone. Subd. 4a. [Repealed, 1997 c 143 s 20] Subd. 5. Zoning within local area. When local authorities believe that the existing speed limit upon any street or highway, or part thereof, within their respective jurisdictions and not a part of the trunk highway system is greater or less than is reasonable or safe under existing conditions, they may request the commissioner to authorize, upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation, the erection of appropriate signs designating what speed is reasonable and safe, and the commissioner may authorize the erection of appropriate signs designating a reasonable and safe speed limit thereat, which speed limit shall be effective when such signs are erected. Any speeds in excess of these speed limits shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful; except that any speed limit within any municipality shall be a maximum limit and any speed in excess thereof shall be unlawful. Alteration of speed limits on streets and highways shall be made only upon authority of the commissioner except as provided in subdivision 5a. Page 2 of 6 169.14 - 2014 Minnesota Statutes Subd. 5a. Speed zoning in school zone; surcharge. (a) Local authorities may establish a school speed limit within a school zone of a public or nonpublic school upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation as prescribed by the commissioner of transportation. The establishment of a school speed limit on any trunk highway shall be with the consent of the commissioner of transportation. Such school speed limits shall be in effect when children are present, going to or leaving school during opening or closing hours or during school recess periods. The school speed limit shall not be lower than 15 miles per hour and shall not be more than 30 miles per hour below the established speed limit on an affected street or highway. (b) The school speed limit shall be effective upon the erection of appropriate signs designating the speed and indicating the beginning and end of the reduced speed zone. Any speed in excess of such posted school speed limit is unlawful. All such signs shall be erected by the local authorities on those streets and highways under their respective jurisdictions and by the commissioner of transportation on trunk highways. (c) For the purpose of this subdivision, "school zone" means that section of a street or highway which abuts the grounds of a school where children have access to the street or highway from the school property or where an established school crossing is located provided the school advance sign prescribed by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices adopted by the commissioner of transportation pursuant to section 169.06 is in place. All signs erected by local authorities to designate speed limits in school zones shall conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. (d) Notwithstanding section 609.0331 or 609.101 or other law to the contrary, a person who violates a speed limit established under this subdivision is assessed an additional surcharge equal to the amount of the fine imposed for the violation, but not less than $25. Subd. 5b. Segment in urban district. When any segment of at least a quarter -mile in distance of any city street, municipal state -aid street, or town road on which a speed limit in excess of 30 miles per hour has been established pursuant to an engineering and traffic investigation by the commissioner meets the definition of "urban district" as defined in section 169.011, subdivision 90, the governing body of the city or town may by resolution declare the segment to be an urban district and may establish on the segment the speed limit for urban districts prescribed in subdivision 2. The speed limit so established shall be effective upon the erection of appropriate signs designating the speed and indicating the beginning and end of the segment on which the speed limit is established, and any speed in excess of such posted limits shall be unlawful. A copy of the resolution shall be transmitted to the commissioner at least ten days prior to the erection of the signs. Subd. 5c. Speed zoning in alleyway. Local authorities may regulate speed limits for alleyways as defined in section 169.011 based on their own engineering and traffic investigations. Alleyway speed limits established at other than ten miles per hour shall be effective when proper signs are posted. Subd. 5d. Speed limit in work zone when workers present. (a) Notwithstanding subdivision 2 and subject to subdivision 3, the speed limit on a road having an established speed limit of 50 miles per hour or greater is adjusted to 45 miles per hour in a work zone when (1) at least one lane or portion of a lane of traffic is closed in either direction, and (2) workers are present. A speed in excess of the adjusted speed limit is unlawful. (b) Paragraph (a) does not apply to a segment of road in which: (1) positive barriers are placed between workers and the traveled portion of the highway; (2) the work zone is in place for less than 24 hours; Page 3 of 6 169.14 - 2014 Minnesota Statutes (3) a different speed limit for the work zone is determined by the road authority following an engineering and traffic investigation and based on accepted engineering practice; or (4) a different speed limit for the work zone is established by the road authority under paragraph (c). (c) The commissioner, on trunk highways and temporary trunk highways, and local authorities, on streets and highways under their jurisdiction, may authorize the use of reduced maximum speed limits in work zones when workers are present, without an engineering and traffic investigation required. The work zone speed limit must not reduce the speed limit on the affected street or highway by more than: (1) 20 miles per hour on a street or highway having an established speed limit of 55 miles per hour or greater; and (2) 15 miles per hour on a street or highway having an established speed limit of 50 miles per hour or less. (d) A work zone speed limit under paragraph (c) is effective on erection of appropriate regulatory speed limit signs. The signs must be removed or covered when they are not required. A speed in excess of the posted work zone speed limit is unlawful. (e) For any speed limit under this subdivision, a road authority shall erect signs identifying the speed limit and indicating the beginning and end of the speed limit zone. Subd. 5e. Speed limit on park road. The political subdivision with authority over a park may establish a speed limit on a road located within the park. A speed limit established under this subdivision on a trunk highway is effective only with the commissioner's approval. A speed limit established under this subdivision must be based on an engineering and traffic investigation prescribed by the commissioner of transportation and must not be lower than 20 miles per hour, and no speed limit established under this subdivision may reduce existing speed limits by more than 15 miles per hour. A speed limit established under this subdivision is effective on the erection of appropriate signs designating the speed limit and indicating the beginning and end of the reduced speed zone. Any speed in excess of the posted speed is unlawful. Subd. 5f Speed limits on certain rural residential districts. (a) A rural residential district existing and lawfully signed before August 1, 2009, continues to qualify as a rural residential district. (b) A rural residential district existing and lawfully signed before August 1, 2009, is subject to the speed limit signed before August 1, 2009. [See Note.] Subd. 6. [Repealed, Ex1971 c 27 s 491 Subd. 6a. Work zone speed limit violations. A person convicted of operating a motor vehicle in violation of a speed limit in a work zone, or any other provision of this section while in a work zone, shall be required to pay a fine of $300. This fine is in addition to the surcharge under section 357.021, subdivision 6. Subd. 7. Burden of proof. The provisions of this chapter declaring speed limitation shall not be construed to relieve the plaintiff in any civil action from the burden of proving negligence on the part of the defendant as the proximate cause of an accident. Subd. 8. Minimum speeds. On determining upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation that a speed at least as great as, or in excess of, a specified and determined minimum is necessary to the reasonable and safe use of any trunk highway or portion thereof, the commissioner may erect appropriate signs specifying the minimum speed on such highway or portion thereof. The minimum speed shall be effective when Page 4of6 169.14 - 2014 Minnesota Statutes such signs are erected. Any speeds less than the posted minimum speeds shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful. Subd. 9. Standards of evidence. In any prosecution in which the rate of speed of a motor vehicle is relevant, evidence of the speed of a motor vehicle as indicated on the speedometer thereof shall be admissible on a showing that a vehicle is regularly used in traffic law enforcement and that the speedometer thereon is regularly and routinely tested for accuracy and a record of the results of said tests kept on file by the agency having control of said vehicle. Evidence as to the speed indicated on said speedometer shall be prima facie evidence that the said vehicle was, at the time said reading was observed, traveling at the rate of speed so indicated; subject to correction by the amount of error, if any, shown to exist by the test made closest in time to the time of said reading. Records of speedometer tests kept in the regular course of operations of any law enforcement agency shall be admissible without further foundation, as to the results of said tests. Such records shall be available to the defendant upon demand. Nothing herein shall be construed to preclude or interfere with the cross examination or impeachment of evidence of rate of speed as indicated by speedometer readings, pursuant to the Rules of Evidence. Subd. 10. Radar; speed- measuring device; standards of evidence. (a) In any prosecution in which the rate of speed of a motor vehicle is relevant, evidence of the speed as indicated on radar or other speed- measuring device is admissible in evidence, subject to the following conditions: (1) the officer operating the device has sufficient training to properly operate the equipment; (2) the officer testifies as to the manner in which the device was set up and operated; (3) the device was operated with minimal distortion or interference from outside sources; and (4) the device was tested by an accurate and reliable external mechanism, method, or system at the time it was set up. (b) Records of tests made of such devices and kept in the regular course of operations of any law enforcement agency are admissible in evidence without further foundation as to the results of the tests. The records shall be available to a defendant upon demand. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to preclude or interfere with cross examination or impeachment of evidence of the rate of speed as indicated on the radar or speed- measuring device. Subd. 11. Handheld traffic radar. (a) Law enforcement agencies that use handheld radar units shall establish operating procedures to reduce the operator's exposure to microwave radiation. (b) The procedures, at a minimum, must require: (1) that the operator turn the unit off when it is not in use; (2) if the unit has a standby mode, that the operator use this mode except when measuring a vehicle's speed; (3) that the operator not allow the antenna to rest against the operator's body while it is in operation; and (4) that the operator always point the antenna unit away from the operator and any other person in very close proximity to the unit. Subd. 12. Radar jammer. For purposes of this section, "radar jammer" means any instrument, device, or equipment designed or intended for use with a vehicle or otherwise to jam or interfere in any manner with a speed- measuring device operated by a peace officer. Page 5 of 6 169.14 - 2014 Minnesota Statutes No person shall sell, offer for sale, use, or possess any radar jammer in this state. History: (2720 178) 1937 c 464 s 28; 1939 c 430 s 6; 1947 c 428 s 12,13; 1955 c 802 s 1, 2; 1957 c 580 s 1; 1963 c 843 s 1 -4; 1969 c 623 s 1; 1975 c 53 s 1; 1975 c 363 s L2; 1976 c 166 s 7; 1979 c 60 s 1; 1980 c 498 s 4; 1984 c 417 s 24, 25; 1986 c 444; 1987 c 319 s 1; 1991 c 298 art 4 s 9; 1993 c 26 s 1; 1993 c 61 s 1; 1994 c 635 art I s 12; 1994 c 640 s 1; 1994 c 645 s 1; 1995 c 118 s 1; 1995 c 265 art 2 s 18 1996 c 455 art I s 5, 6; 1997 c 143 s 9 -11; 1997 c 159 art 2 s 20,21; 1999 c 44 s 1; 2001 c 213 s 9; IS 2003 c 19 art 2 s 27; I Sp2005 c 6 art 3 s 41, 42; 2008 c 287 art I s 45; 2009 c 56 s 4, 5; 2009 c 165 s 1-2010c356s1; 2014c312art11 s7,8 NOTE: Subdivision 5f, paragraph (b), as added by Laws 2009, chapter 56, section 5, expires when the speed limit signs erected before August 1, 2009, are replaced. Laws 2009, chapter 56, section 5, the effective date. Copyright n 2014 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All rights reserved. Page 6 of 6 R�c�ivFO C�V000 Li l 41vvzi-�,&� AL ark C2 LA s F 10 S O:Y, - - - ATTACHMENT 2 Petition Eureka Road (south portion between Smithtown Road and Highway 7) does not have any shoulders and is not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians safely when two vehicles approach at the same time. I support a reduction of the speed limit on Eureka Road, south portion between Smithtown Road and Highway 7, Shorewood, MN, from 30 MPH to 25 MPH. Printed Name Signature Date At I I\`. - k -, Address C,--, 'zt s le 2 t� � '% P V4 -�> -) �: I . � 5IIc `i✓kk.k,�_ Eureka Road (south portion between Smithtown Road and Highway 7) does not have any shoulders and is not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians safely when two vehicles approach at the same time. I support a reduction of the speed limit on Eureka Road, south portion between Smithtown Road and Highway 7, Shorewood, MN, from 30 MPH to 25 MPH. Printed Name iy X Signature Date Address C. 2 . aeon ROAD . . . Hamtou Park c). NeiqftbcThoM . \ - AtaF \Street . ak J:ROAD � g> LEY ooP wNL . N ELS I NED@' ® ±r�lA� ENE ' _ G2w D C�D L-�E ROAD . . . . . . . ~ «%Dm3 LAN E } _\ L ? \_ `� . -- I ƒ 2 / 7 / Eureka Rd. (So m% | 4 /- - ra N R ¥ . RIDGE mIQ — \Freeman Park ) - ¥ ®®9999D0%KSDBQE r ........ - - � K E« TRAIL ' /\ X 3 LAN ATTACH - —� ATTACH MENT3 A WSB Ilk Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction & Associates, h1r. Memorandum To: Larry Brown Public Works Director 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 From: Sean Delmore, PE, PTOE Date: June 18, 2015 Re: Speed Limit Policy for the City of Shorewood Purpose 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763- 541 -4800 Fax: 763- 541 -1700 This policy was created to define the process used to set speed limits along local streets in the City of Shorewood, MN. The City of Shorewood will address speed limit related concerns based upon guidelines from Minnesota Statutes, MnDOT policies, the MUTCD and engineering judgement. The city will be proactively reviewing existing speed limit signing within the city limits to ensure that they are correctly posted. Speed limits that are not supported by Minnesota State Statutes, Council approval, or MnDOT Commissioner's Order will be planned for replacement. Background The City of Shorewood has local streets with speed limits ranging from 25 -40 mph. The basis for setting a speed limit follows the Minnesota State Statutes and the MN MUTCD. The following segments of information were taken from the MN Statutes and MUTCD, those of which apply to the city of Shorewood. A blurb from the FHWA discussing best practices is also included showing how engineering studies are used to set new speed limits or change existing ones. 2014 Minnesota Statues: 169.011 DEFINITIONS Subdivision 64. Residential Roadway A "residential roadway" is a city street or town road whose length is up to a half -mile. 1IPage ATTACHMENT 4 ,, A:j && Assac Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763- 541 -4800 Fax: 763- 541 -1700 169.14 SPEED LIMITS, ZONES; RADAR. Subdivision 1. Duty to drive with due care. No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions. Every driver is responsible for becoming and remaining aware of the actual and potential hazards then existing on the highway and must use due care in operating a vehicle. In every event speed shall be so restricted as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, vehicle or other conveyance on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care. Subdivision 2. Speed limits. (a) Where no special hazard exists the following speeds shall be lawful, but any speeds in excess of such limits shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful; except that the speed limit within any municipality shall be a maximum limit and any speed in excess thereof shall be unlawful: (1) 30 miles per hour in an urban district; (Subdivisions 2.2 -2.6 do not apply here, therefore were excluded) (7) 25 miles per hour in residential roadways if adopted by the road authority having jurisdiction over the residential roadway; and (8) 35 miles per hour in a rural residential district if adopted by the road authority having jurisdiction over the rural residential district. (b) A speed limit adopted under paragraph (a), clause (7), is not effective unless the road authority has erected signs designating the speed limit and indicating the beginning and end of the residential roadway on which the speed limit applies. (c) A speed limit adopted under paragraph (a), clause (8), is not effective unless the road authority has erected signs designating the speed limit and indicating the beginning and end of the rural residential district for the roadway on which the speed limit applies. MnDOT MUTCD: 28.13 Speed Limit Sign A Standard: Speed zones (other than statutory speed limits) shall only be established on the basis of an engineering study that has been performed in accordance with traffic engineering practices. The engineering study shall include an analysis of the current speed distribution of free - flowing vehicles. 21 Page ,, A:j && Assac Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763- 541 -4800 Fax: 763- 541 -1700 The speed limit (R2 -1) sign shall display the limit established by law, ordinance, regulation, or as adopted by the authorized agency based on the engineering study. The speed limits displayed shall be in multiples of 5 mph. Speed Limit signs, indicating speed limits for which posting is required by law, shall be located at the points of change from one speed limit to another. An Option: Other factors that may be considered when establishing speed limits are the following: • Road characteristics, shoulder condition, grade, alignment, and sight distance • The pace speed • Roadside development (nearby school) and environment • Parking practices and pedestrian activity (mainly children) • Reported crash experience for at least a 12 -month period Methods and Practices for Settim Speed Limits: An Informational Report by the FHWA Safety Program Most engineering approaches to speed limit setting are based on the 85th percentile speed —the speed at which 85 percent of free - flowing traffic is traveling at or below. The typical procedure is to set the speed limit at or near the 85th percentile speed of free -flow traffic. Adjustments to either increase or decrease the speed limits may be made depending on infrastructure and traffic conditions. The 85th percentile speed method is also attractive because it reflects the collective judgment of the vast majority of drivers as to a reasonable speed for given traffic and roadway conditions. This is aligned with the general policy sentiment that laws (i.e., speed limits) should not make people acting reasonably into law- breakers. Setting a speed limit even 5 mph below the 85th percentile speed can make almost half the drivers illegal; setting a speed limit 5 mph above the 85th percentile speed will likely make few additional drivers legal. Under the operating speed method of setting speed limits, the first approximation of the speed limit is to set the speed limit at the 85th percentile speed. The MUTCD recommends that the speed limit be within 5 mph of the 85th percentile speed of free - flowing traffic. The posted speed limit shall be in multiples of 5 mph. While the MUTCD recommends setting the posted speed limits near the 85th percentile speed, and traffic engineers say that agencies are using the 85th percentile speed to set speed limits, in reality the speed limit is often set much lower. At these locations, the 85th percentile operating speeds exceed the posted speed limits; and, in many cases, the 50th percentile operating speed is either near or exceeds that posted speed limit as well. Many agencies deviate from their agency's written guidelines and instead post lower speed limits. According to an ITE Engineering Council Technical Committee survey, these reduced speed limits are often the result of political 31 Page ,, A:j && Assac Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763- 541 -4800 Fax: 763- 541 -1700 pressures. However, it is important to note that setting speed limits lower than 85th percentile speed does not encourage compliance with the posted speed limit. Implementation The City of Shorewood has established this policy to define the process for setting a speed limit and to what extent they can be modified. To make a request for a speed limit change, one must send a formal written document to the city. The local road authority can either determine the speed limit acceptable, not acceptable, or perform a speed study or engineering investigation. Streets that drive relatively similar should be set to the same speed limit for consistency, whether they are 25, 30, 35, or 40 mph. Speed limit evaluations should only take place when specific concerns are raised, and not on a regular basis. When final decisions are made they are not to be requested upon again unless a situation occurs (i.e., a large development is being constructed, or multiple accident occurs). If further monitoring needs to occur on a street, driver feedback signs or physical changes may be considered. The flowchart below shows a simple example of how this process goes: 1 Request gets = Speed limit gets 41 Page #9B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Resolution Accepting Bids and Award of Construction Contract for Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension, City Project 14 -10 Meeting Date: August 24, 2015 Prepared by: Paul Hornby, City Engineer Reviewed by: Attachments: Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract Background: The City Council approved plans and specifications, and authorized advertisement for bids for the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension, City Project 14 -10, on July 13, 2015. The proposed sidewalk improvement extends along the south side of Smithtown Road from the Lake Minnetonka Regional Trail to Country Club Road and includes the sidewalk, concrete curb and gutter, storm sewer, bituminous paving and restoration. The City received bids on Thursday, August 20, 2015, and WSB has prepared a tabulation of bids for the project. WSB will provide a bid results letter with recommendation for awarding the project to the Council on Monday, August 24, 2015. Financial or Budget Considerations: The Capital Improvement Plan budget includes $795,000 for construction and $1,340,000 for overall project costs. Options: 1. Approve the resolution accepting bids and awarding the contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder for the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension, City Project 14 -10. 2. Reject all bids for the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension, City Project 14 -10. 3. Take no action on this item at this time. A Resolution will be provided to the Council on August 24, 2015, with the bid award recommendation letter from WSB. A draft Resolution is included with this agenda item for Council reference. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends Council approve Resolution 15 Accepting Bids and Awarding the Construction Contract for the lowest responsive bid received, to (Company) , for the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension, City Project 14- 10. 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. 15 - A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE SMITHTOWN ROAD EAST SIDEWALK EXTENSION PROJECT CITY PROJECT 14 -10 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for local improvements designated as the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension, City Project 14 -10, bids were received, opened on August 20, 2015, tabulated according to law, and such tabulation is attached hereto and made a part hereof, and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that(COMPANY) is the lowest responsible and responsive bidder in compliance with the specifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with _(COMPANY) in the name of the City of Shorewood, Project No. 14 -10, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except for the deposits of the successful bidder and the next two lowest bidders, which shall be retained until a contract has been signed. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24h day of August, 2015. Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk 477 Temperance Street .Òz7zm ;m -ä äÒ© ;m -äu St. Paul, MN 55101 Tel: 651-289-8450 Fax: 651-286-8488 August 20, 2015 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension and Appurtenant Work City of Shorewood Project No. 14-10 S.A.P. 216-101-005 WSB Project No. 1459-94 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Bids were received for the above-referenced project on Thursday, August 20, 2015, and were opened and read aloud. Three bids were received. The bids were checked for mathematical accuracy and tabulated. Please find enclosed the bid tabulation indicating the low bid as submitted by S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc, Jordan, Minnesota in the amount of $769,873.00. The 795,000.00. We recommend that the City Council consider these bids and award a contract in the amount of $795,000.00 to S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. based on the results of the bids received. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Paul Hornby, PE Associate Enclosures kkp Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com BID TABULATION SUMMARY PROJECT: Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension and Appurtenant Work OWNER: City of Shorewood, MN WSB PROJECT NO.: 1459-94 Bids Opened: Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 10:00am Bid Security (5%) ContractorGrand Total Bid 1SM Hentges & Sons ConstructionX$769,873.00 2New Look Contracting, Inc.X$865,791.00 3GL Contracting, Inc.X$1,044,307.15 Engineer's Opinion of Cost$795,000.00 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct tabulation of the bids as received on August 20, 2015. Paul Hornby, PE Project Manager Denotes corrected figure K:\01459-940\Admin\Construction Admin\Bidding Information\1459-94 Bid Tab Summary 082015 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 15-062 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE SMITHTOWN ROAD EAST SIDEWALK EXTENSION PROJECT CITY PROJECT 14-10 WHEREAS , pursuant to an advertisement for bids for local improvements designated as the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension, City Project 14-10, bids were received, opened on August 20, 2015, tabulated according to law, and such tabulation is attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. is the lowest responsible and responsive bidder in compliance with the specifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. in the name of the City of Shorewood, Project No. 14-10, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except for the deposits of the successful bidder and the next two lowest bidders, which shall be retained until a contract has been signed. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCILOF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD th this 24 day of August, 2015. ____________________________ Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk #9C MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Speed study results — Lake Virginia Drive and Blue Ridge Meeting Date: August 24, 2015 Prepared by: Paul Hornby, City Engineer Reviewed by: Attachments: WSB Memorandum, dated July 27, 2015 Policy Consideration: Should the City of Shorewood consider a speed limit reduction requested by residents in the Lake Virginia Drive /Blue Ridge Lane area? Background: The City Council authorized a speed study be performed at the request of resident in the Lake Virginia Drive and Blue Ridge Lane area. Residents expressed concern of vehicles travelling speeds well over the speed limit of 30 MPH. WSB has performed a speed study of both roadways and their findings are attached in the memorandum dated July 27, 2015. WSB performed the speed study of a 48 -hour period between July 21" and July 24th. The results of the study data collected indicated that the 85th percentile speed is 30 MPH for Lake Virginia Drive. The data collected indicated that 163 of the 180 vehicles on Lake Virginia Drive were traveling at or below 30 MPH. Blue Ridge Lane had two data collection points due to the looped alignment of the roadway. 68 vehicles were counted on Blue Ridge Lane during the 48 -hour study period combining both locations. The weekday traffic data indicated that 30 of the 68 vehicles were traveling at speeds greater than 50 MPH. WSB broadened the study period through the weekend hours and found that 117 vehicles traveled the roadway and 12 vehicles were traveling speeds greater than 50 MPH. The remaining 105 vehicles were traveling speeds of 30 MPH or less. WSB concluded that the issue for the study area doesn't seem to be a problem with the speed limit, but a more specific individual or small group of individuals that are intentionally driving with excessive speeds on Blue Ridge Lane. The Traffic Engineers are recommending addressing this issue with Education, and Enforcement. The Engineer's opinion is the issue will not be solved with engineering solutions, such as posting a lower speed limit on the roadways. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends a monitoring and enforcement approach to address the issue with the SLMPD. 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 ■ WSB &Rssoc Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction Memorandum To: Larry Brown, Public Works Director 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 From: Sean Delmore, PE, PTOE Date: July 27, 2015 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763- 541 -4800 Fax: 763- 541 -1700 Re: Speed Study on Lake Virginia Drive and Blue Ridge Lane in Shorewood, MN A speed study was performed on Lake Virginia Drive south of Smithtown Road and Blue Ridge Lane. Data was collected on Lake Virginia Drive between the two intersections with Blue Ridge Lane, and at two locations on Blue Ridge Lane, about 100 -150 feet from both the north and south intersections. Tube counters collected data on Lake Virginia Drive for 48 hours from 12:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 21" through 12:00 p.m. on Thursday July 23rd and on Blue Ridge Lane from 12:00 p.m. on Friday, July 24th through 12:00 p.m. on Monday July 27th.The study area and data collection locations are shown in Figure 1. The results of the data collection show that on Lake Virginia Drive, the 85th percentile speed is 30 miles per hour (mph), and 163 of the daily 180 vehicles traveled at or below 30 mph. At the north collection site on Blue Ridge Drive, while 20 of 53 weekday vehicles were traveling at or below 30 mph, 20 vehicles were also moving at a speed greater than 50 mph. On Saturday and Sunday, 92 of the 94 vehicles were at or below 30 mph. At the south collection site on Blue Ridge Drive, 10 of the 15 weekday trips traveled above 50 mph, 7 of the 16 Saturday trips and 3 of the 7 Sunday trips traveled at a speed greater than 50 mph. The data is shown in tabular form below. The issue for this study area doesn't seem to be a problem with the speed limit or the majority of traffic traveling at a high speed, but more a specific individual or small group of individuals who are intentionally driving with excessive speeds on Blue Ridge Lane. Week Day Saturday Sunday Veh Per Day Veh. < 30 mph Veh. >50 mph Veh Per Day Veh. < 30 mph Veh. >50 mph Veh Per Day Veh. < 30 mph Veh. >50 mph Lake Virginia 180 163 0 - - - - - - Blue Ridge Norlh 53 20 20 61 59 2 33 33 0 Blue Ridge Soulh 15 2 10 16 9 7 7 4 3 The issue for this study area doesn't seem to be a problem with the speed limit or the majority of traffic traveling at a high speed, but more a specific individual or small group of individuals who are intentionally driving with excessive speeds on Blue Ridge Lane. Generally an issue can be addressed using the 3E approach; Engineering, Education and Enforcement. As this is not a problem that can be solved with engineering solutions, our recommendations to address the issue include: • Education — a neighborhood awareness campaign. • Enforcement — targeted enforcement on Blue Ridge Drive. Figure 1 Study Area and Data Collection Locations 7: 8/14/15 To: All LMCC Member Cities From: Jim Lundberg, Operations Manager Reason: LMCC's 2016 Budget DEEPHAVEN Along with this brief memo, I have included a copy of the LMCC's 2016 Budget which was approved unanimously at last week's August 9'11 EXCELSIOR LMCC Full. Commission meeting. GREENWOOD You'll note that our 2016 budget is significantly lower than our 2015 INDEPENDENCE budget as the organization grows more comfortable with its new size. LONG LAKE One highlight of the 2016 budget is our Capital Budget which will allow the LMCC to make a playback upgrade that will take us from an analog LORETTO system to a true digital system capable of transmitting in both Standard Definition digital or High Definition digital. We hope to be broadcasting MAPLE PLAIN at least one channel in High Definition be-fore the end of 2016. 1 am MINNETONKA including a copy of our 5 Year Plan as well. As you can see, the SD/1-1D BEACH Playback Upgrade is the only large Capital purchase forecast over the next 5 years. ST. BONIFACIUS SHOREWOOD We ask that your Council approve our budget as soon as possible and notify us once you have. maimfirgimm Thanks so much for your support! Jim Lundberg Operations Manager LMCC (952)471-71.25 x104 jim@lmcc-tv.org Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission 2015 Budget Detail vs 2016 Budget 2015 2015 2016 2016 Quarterly Annualized Quarterly Annualized Budget Revenues Franchise fees $ 68,318.55 $ 273,274.20 60,969.02 $ 243,876.08 PEG fees $ 17,390.90 $ 69,563.60 15,451.00 $ 61,805.00 Mound Usage fees( 1959 subscribers) $ 11,846.24 $ 47,384.96 11,462.57 $ 45,850.28 Studio Rental $ 500.00 $ 2,000.00 625.00 $ 2,500.00 All other $ 500.00 $ 2,000.00 1,000.00 $ 4,000.00 Total Budgeted revenues Salaries PERA Contributions FICA Contributions Health, dental and disability insurance Worker's Compensation Insurance Total 2015 Budget - Personnel Expenses Office Supplies Special Events /Meetings Repairs & Maintenance Supplies Studio Expendables Audit /Accounting Fees Access Contractors Legal Fees Copier Expense Payroll Services Janitorial Services Security Services Telephone /Communications Postage Computer Consulting Training Travel Mileage Printing & Publishing Insurance Utilities Refuse & Recycling Bank Finance Fees Contracted Building Repair Maintenance Repair Equipment Equipment Rental Advertising Van Operation Web streaming /Broadband Licenses Other Expenses / Contingency Capital Building Improvements TotalBudget - Expenses Total Budget - All Expenses Capital equipment expenditures budget Total 2015 Budget - All expenses plus Capital $ 98,555.69 $ 394,222.76 $ 224,969.50 $ 13,498.17 $ 17,210.17 $ 42,410.52 $ 2,500.00 $ 300,588.36 $ 1,600.00 $ 300.00 $ 500.00 $ 2,660.00 $ 13,000.00 $ 15,500.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 3,507.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 900.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 400.00 $ 900.00 $ 500.00 $ 400.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 10,500.00 $ 900.00 $ 10.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 30.00 $ 200.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 63,760.89 $ 456,856.25 Page 1 89,507.59 $ 358,031.36 $ 182,488.82 $ 13,686.64 $ 13,343.67 $ 25,521.60 $ 1,349.30 $ 1,000.00 $ 300.00 $ 500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 13,000.00 $ 13,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 3,507.00 $ 1,876.00 $ 2,730.00 $ 300.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 400.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 400.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 10,500.00 $ 900.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 200.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 7,800.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 500.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 76,017.00 2016 LMCC Budget Final 2016 5 Year Plan Year 1: Master Control Upgrade for HD: Qty: Description: Mfg.: Part #: Tax Each: X Qty: Total: 2 2 +1 Channel HD Server Tightrope SX2 HD $ 21,265.00 $ 1,594.88 2 $ 45,719.76 1 Control Unit Tightrope Pro VOD $ 4,945.00 $ 370.88 1 $ 5,315.88 1 SD /HD Graphics Players Tightrope CG330 SDI $ 3,075.00 $ 230.63 2 $ 3,305.63 1 Dual Channel Up /Down Conversion AJA FS2 $ 4,115.00 $ 308.63 1 $ 4,423.63 1 Single Channel U/D Conversion AJA FS1 $ 2,880.00 $ 216.00 1 $ 3,096.00 1 16x16 SDI Router AJA Kumo 1616 $ 1,645.00 $ 123.38 1 $ 1,768.38 1 6 Channel Multi Viewer Decimator DMON -6S $ 1,020.00 $ 76.50 1 $ 1,096.50 NA Misc. See Full Quote NA $ 2,167.00 $ 162.53 1 $ 2,329.53 1 Installation Alpha Video Labor $ 9,680.00 NA 1 $ 9,680.00 Total: $ 76,735.31 Year 2: New Non - Linear Edit Bays: Qty: Description: Mfg.: Part #: Cost Each: Tax Each: X Qty: Total: 2 Edit Computers Apple Mac Pro $ 4,511.00 $ 338.33 2 $ 9,698.66 2 Adobe Premiere Cloud(60 Months) Adobe Premiere Cloud $49.99mo $ 3.78 120 $ 6,452.40 2 Patch Bay and Control AJA to XT $ 1,495.00 $ 112.13 2 $ 3,232.26 2 27" Thunderbolt Monitors Apple tbmonitor27 $ 939.00 $ 70.43 2 $ 2,018.86 2 Magic Mouse Apple magicmouse $ 62.00 $ 4.65 2 $ 133.30 2 Thunderbolt Cables Apple tbcable $ 40.00 $ 3.00 2 $ 86.00 2 2Tb Portable Drives Apple MyPassport $ 110.00 $ 8.25 2 $ 236.50 2 Apple Care Protection(2Yrs) Apple Warranty $ 224.00 $ 16.80 2 $ 481.60 2 Installation & Configuration Alpha Video Labor $ 1,000.00 $ - 2 $ 2,000.00 Total: $ 24,339.58 2016 5 Year Plan Year 3: LAN Upgrade & Monitors Qty: Description: Mfg.: Part #: Cost Each: Tax Each: X Qty: Total: 1 LAN Server Dell 1U Rack Mount $ 2,700.00 $ 202.50 1 $ 2,902.50 1 Tower Work Station for Playback Dell 13847- 6161BK $ 549.99 $ 41.25 1 $ 591.24 3 Staff Laptops Dell 17548- 2129SLV $ 629.99 $ 47.25 3 $ 2,031.72 1 Network Printer HP m401n $ 269.99 $ 20.25 1 $ 290.24 1 20 Port Gigabit Network Switch D -Link DWS- 3160 -24PC $ 3,214.86 $ 173.61 1 $ 3,388.47 10 Inistall /Integrate /Migrate Data Labor NA $ 120.00 NA 10 $ 1,200.00 Replace Old CRTs 6 19" LCD tv /monitors Insginia NS- 19E310NA15 $ 99.99 $ 7.50 6 $ 644.94 1 32" tv /monitor Insignia NS- 32D220NA16 $ 159.99 $ 12.00 1 $ 171.99 Total: $ 11,221.10 Year 4: Van Qty: Description: Mfg.: Part #: Cost Each: Tax Each: X Qty: Total: 1 2 in 2 out Instant Replay for Flint Broadcast PIX ReVue $ 23,600.00 $ 1,770.00 1 $ 25,370.00 1 Codec Pack for Instant Replay Broadcast PIX 703 $ 4,715.00 $ 353.63 1 $ 5,068.63 1 SDHC Recorder for Van Panasonic AG -HMR10 $ 1,495.00 $ 112.13 1 $ 2,616.13 1 4 Person Intercom System Eartec TCS4000 $ 1,100.00 $ 82.50 1 $ 1,182.50 2 19" SD /HD Monitors Insignia NS- 19E310 $ 149.99 $ 11.25 2 $ 322.48 Total: $ 34,559.74 Year 5: Replacement Production Truck 1 Used Racked Production Van Open NA $ 25,000.00 $ 1,875.00 1 $ 26,875.00 Total: $ 26,875.00 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 15-_____ A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROPOSED 2016 LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION BUDGET WHEREAS , the City of Shorewood (“City”) is a member of the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission (“LMCC”); and WHEREAS , the Joint Powers Agreement governing the LMCC requires that an annual budget be proposed and that it shall be adopted unless rejected by a majority of members within 45 days; and WHEREAS , the City Council has reviewed the proposed 2016 LMCC Budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves the 2016 LMCC budget. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 24th day of August, 2015. ___________________________ Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Background: Below please find the proposed schedule for search activities that will commence in August: August 24 - Job ad approved by Council September 25 - Applications close October 12 - Semi - finalists recommended to Council November 2 - Finalists chosen, additional assessment, interviews November 30 - Selection, Employment Agreement January 4, 2016- Administrator begins The job advertisement is attached for Council's review. It is strongly suggested that Council consider putting the finalist candidates through an enhanced background review and management style assessment prior to the final interviews in November. Recent experience with the Police Chief selection process indicates an approximate cost of $7,000 for three candidates. Recommended Council Action: A motion approving the Job Advertisement, Proposed schedule, and performing an enhanced background review and management style analysis on finalist candidates prior to the final interviews in November. 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 LMC Job Listing Draft The City of Shorewood, MN (pop 7307) is seeking a City Administrator. Shorewood is a western Hennepin County suburb on the south shore of Lake Minnetonka, predominately residential with a 5- member City Council, a 5.3 million dollar general fund budget and 20 employees. It is the largest city in a 4- member police, joint powers association and a 5- member fire, joint powers association. The City prides itself on its environmental stewardship and is an active member in various conservation and watershed districts. Requirements include a BA, (MA preferred), in public or business administration with 3 to 5 years of executive experience in a government setting or any combination of related training and experience. Must have knowledge of local government operations, be team - oriented and possess effective communication skills. Experience with Housing, Redevelopment or Economic Development activities a plus. Salary negotiable DOQ. Send cover letter, resume and salary history to: City Administrator Bill Joynes at: bjoynes @ci.shorewood.mn.us. Inquiries to Bill Joynes @ 952 - 474 -7905. Applications close on September 25, 2015. #10B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Draft RFP for Urban Forester /Arborist Meeting Date: August 10, 2015 Prepared by: Bill Joynes, City Administrator Reviewed by: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director Background: Please find attached the draft RFP requested by the Council at the last meeting on August 10, 2015. Please review Section II, A, General Duties to ensure that we have listed all of the activities you are interested in bidding. We have brought forward the areas of interest the Council suggested at our past retreats. The services would cover planning and implementation of various tree preservation and disease control programs and also provide advisory services to Shorewood citizens for trees located on private property. Whether this becomes a fee based service is yet to be determined. It is assumed that this vendor will recommend procedures and treatments for private trees but not do the actual work. The City maintains a list of qualified contractors that citizens can access to perform any of the services they wish to implement. Recommended Council Action: Staff recommends approval of the RFP and asks for Council direction to advertise for bids. The 2016 budget, as proposed, includes $40,000 for Forestry 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 REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROPOSALS URBAN FORESTER /ARBORIST CONSULTANT I. INTRODUCTION The City of Shorewood is requesting proposals (RFP) for professional services of an experienced Urban Forester and /or ISA certified Arborist to perform tree management duties for the City. The professional services are to be performed by qualified individuals, firms or companies experienced in the desired duties. A. RFP Content. This RFP contains the following sections: Introduction II. Project Information III. Proposal B. Addenda /Clarifications. Any changes to this RFP will be made by written addendum. Verbal modification will not be binding. C. Pre - Contractual Expenses. The City will not be responsible for any pre - Contractual expenses. Pre - contractual expenses are defined as expenses incurred by the proposer(s) in- 1 . Preparing its proposal in response to this RFP; 2. Submitting that proposal to the City of Shorewood; 3. Negotiating with the City of Shorewood any matter related to this proposal; or 4. Any other expenses incurred by the proposer(s) prior to the date of execution of the Proposed Agreement. D. Contract Award. Issuance of this RFP and receipt of proposals does not commit the City of Shorewood to award a contract. The City of Shorewood reserves the right, for its own convenience, to accept or reject any or all proposals received in response to this RFP, to negotiate with other than the selected proposer(s) should negotiations with the selected be terminated, to negotiate with more than one proposer(s) simultaneously, or to cancel all or part of this RFP. E. Contact Person. The Consultant's contact for specific questions regarding information in this proposal is William Joynes, Administrator, City of Shorewood, 5755 Country Club Rd, Shorewood MN 55331, (952) 960 -7900, bioynesa- ci.shorewood.mn.us . Page 1 of 4 II. GENERAL DUTIES — Urban Forester /Arborist A. General Description — Urban Forester /Arborist The City of Shorewood has prepared an inventory of trees on most City owned properties, with the exception of one park that contains a significant number of trees, including Ash trees. The City desires to retain an experienced Urban Forester and /or an ISA Certified Arborist for the following services- 1 . Assists the City with preparation of long and short term policy and strategies for the Tree Preservation and Reforestation Management Program 2. Assists the City with implementation of the Tree Preservation and Reforestation Management Program 3. Assist the City with risk management and emergency preparedness of the Tree Preservation and Reforestation Management Program 4. Perform inspection of trees on City properties for tree: a. Quality b. Value c. Defects d. Infestations /pest control e. Damage assessment and corrective measures 5. Provide assistance and technical expertise to staff, citizens, governmental agencies and other outside agencies on matters of concern regarding City urban forestry issues. 6. Assist the City with public education programs related to urban forest management principals such as "Tree City USA ", Arbor Day, and Earth Day. 7. Assist the City with presenting programs to City advisory commissions, committees, civic groups, schools, private developers, and others as may be directed by the City. 8. Assist the City with other duties that may be requested, related to urban forest management. B. Qualifications The desired qualifications of the individual(s), firm or proposer(s) performing services under this request for proposals is to include- 1 . Bachelors Degree from an accredited college or university in Urban Forestry, Forestry, or ISA Certification as an Arborist 2. A minimum of 5 -years experience as an Urban Forester, Forester, or Certified Arborist. 3. Active membership in the International Society of Arboriculture and /or the Society of Municipal Arborists 4. Working knowledge of Municipal policies, operation, procedures, and functions 5. Has effective communication skills both written and oral, with citizens, staff and governmental officials. 6. Ability to coordinate multiple tasks related to urban forestry and management Page 2 of 4 7. Ability to prepare routine reports and correspondence 8. Ability to read and interpret technical documents, regulations, and procedure manuals C. Proposal Content. The proposal is to include the following items to be considered: a) Qualifications of the Urban Forester and /or ISA Certified Arborist, including resume(s) b) Relative Experience with the desired qualifications c) References of similar work performed by the proposed Urban Forester and /or ISA Certified Arborist d) Proposed fees (the proposer is to assume between 8 hours and 20 hours of professional service per month for the purpose of the proposal) e) Identify terms of the proposed fees — Hourly, retainer, other. f) Sample contract g) Sample invoice Proposer(s) should anticipate that from time to time certain projects will be outside of the scope of the City general services requested. These projects may include development/redevelopment projects, City projects involving infrastructure improvements, and special tasks as requested. III. PROPOSAL A. Submission of Proposal. Submit the proposal to: Mr. William Joynes, Administrator City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Rd Shorewood, MN 55331 Proposals shall be received by 4:30 PM, Friday, September 25, 2015. Proposals received after this time will not be accepted. B. Copies. The Consultant shall submit two (2) bound copies and one electronic (pdf) format of the proposal in a sealed package addressed bearing the Consultant's name and address, and clearly marked as following: "Urban Forester and /or ISA certified Arborist ". Page 3 of 4 C. Exceptions and Deviations. The proposer(s) may include other services outside the scope of this proposal that the firm feels maybe needed. Any exceptions to the requirements in this RFP, including the language in the contractual terms, must be included in the proposal. Page 4 of 4 #1l.A.I 12 CITY OF SHOREWOOD UM21; 5755 Country Club Road • Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 • 952- 960 -7900 Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mmus • cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us Re: Trail Schedule Update — Galpin Lake Road and Smithtown Road (East) Prepared by Paul Hornby and Brad Nielsen Galpin Lake Road Walkway Schedule — PROJECT IS POSTPONED TO 2016 0 Planning Commission recommendation to Council re trail segment for following year 0 Council authorizes preparation of survey and Feasibility Report 0 Survey (30 days) — May 0 Feasibility Report (30 days) — June 0 Planning Commission review of feasibility report and trail walk — July 0 Planning Commission recommendation to Council re Feasibility Report 0 Council approves Feasibility Report 0 Planning Commission holds Neighborhood Meeting (Open House) 0 Council award of land acquisition services and authorizes preparation of Plans and Specifications 0 Preparation of Plans and Specifications (90 days) ■ 95% Complete submittal to MnDOT 7/01/14 ■ MnDOT Review Complete 7/31/14 ■ CC Authorization to Advertise for bids 6/23/14 ■ Open Bids 8/19/14 ■ CC consideration of Award 8/25/14 L Land Acquisition Process (start approx. mid -way through plans and specs) • Land Acquisition process not required due to design modifications • Individual temporary easements or rights of entry may be required • Reduces project schedule 0 Neighborhood post -bid meeting 10/30/14 ❑ City possession of easements /letter of compliance N/A ❑ Groundbreaking Ceremony TBD ❑ Begin Construction TBD ❑ Construction substantially complete — Phase 1 Construction TBD ❑ Construction substantially complete — Phase 2 Construction TBD ❑ Ribbon Cutting Ceremony TBD ❑ Restoration complete TBD Trail Schedule Update Galpin Lake Road and Smithtown Road (East) Page 2 Smithtown Road East (LRT Trail to Country Club Road) Walkway Schedule n I D D D D Planning Commission recommendation to Council re trail segment for following year 6/03/14 Council authorizes preparation of survey and Feasibility Report 6/23/14 Survey (30 days) — (In Process) 7/14/14 — 9/10/14 Feasibility Report (30 days) — 8/18/14 - 10/10/14 Planning Commission review of feasibility report and trail walk 10/21/14 Planning Commission recommendation to Council re Feasibility Report 10/21/14 Council approves Feasibility Report 10/27/14 Planning Commission holds Neighborhood Meeting (Open House) 10/30/14 Council award of land acquisition services and authorizes preparation of Plans 12/08/14 and Specifications Preparation of Plans and Specifications (90 -120 days) (99% complete) 12/11/14 - 5131115 Land Acquisition Process (start approx. mid -way through plans and specs) 2/1/15 - 8/31/15 o Complete parcel descriptions and legal descriptions • Review proposed easements with staff/attorney • Letters to property owners regarding survey staking • Field stake proposed easements for Appraiser /RW Agent • Easement viewing — parcel owner and RW Agent on -site • Appraisal information • Appraisal review • Council considers resolution to authorize staff to make offers and eminent domain schedule • Prepare and deliver offers to parcel owners Begin eminent domain action Neighborhood informational meeting (Open House) Council approves Plans and Specifications and authorizes ad for Bids Receive bids for construction City possession of easements /letter of compliance El Council awards Construction Contract El Neighborhood preconstruction meeting El Groundbreaking Ceremony El Begin Construction El Construction substantially complete El Ribbon Cutting Ceremony El Restoration complete 3/23/15 6/03/15 7/13/15 8/21/15 8/24/15 8/24/15 8/27/15 8/27/15 9/07/15 6/30/16 6/30/16 6/30/16