10-12-15 CC Reg Mtg AgendaP
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, OCTOBER 12, 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 September 28, 2015 Minutes
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of September 28, 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. Retirement Recognition for Pat Fasching Administrator’s memo
C. Authorize Submittal of the Three Rivers Park District Director of Public
Regional Trail System Winter Use Permit Works’ memo
D. Accept Donations for the Arctic Fever event Finance Director’s
memo, Resolution
E. Approval of Tobacco License Renewals Clerk’s memo,
Resolution
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
(No Council Action will be taken)
5. PUBLIC HEARING
6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
7. PARKS
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA – October 12, 2015
Page 2
8. PLANNING
A. Minnetonka Country Club Development Planning Director’s
Applicant: Mattamy Homes memo, 2 Resolutions
Location: 24575 Smithtown Rd –Minnetonka Country Club Property
1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment
2) Concept Stage Approval of a P.U.D.
3) Authorize Soil Remediation
B. Contracting for Planning Assistance Planning Director’s/
City Administrator’s memo
9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Urban Forester/ISA Certified Arborist
B. City Administrator Position
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. Trails Schedule Trails Schedule
B. Mayor and City Council
12. ADJOURN
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 952-960-7900
Fax: 952-474-0128 www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Executive Summary
Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting
Monday, October 12, 2015
7:00 p.m.
Agenda Items #2A & 2B: Approval of Minutes from the September 28 Council meetings.
Agenda Item #3A: Approval of the verified claims list.
Agenda Item #3B: This sets the date of October 29 for a retirement recognition for Pat Fasching to be
held at the Southshore Center over the lunch time.
Agenda Item #3C: Staff recommends submittal of the Three Rivers Park District Regional Trail
System Winter Use Permit for the three year period (2015-16; 2016-17; and 2017-18). The
authorized winter activities include hiking, biking, snowshoeing, cross country skiing, pet walking,
horseback riding, walking.
Agenda Item #3D: This items accepts the following donations for the Arctic Fever Event: Two $25
gift cards from Cub Foods, $100 from MidCountry Bank; and $500 from WSB & Associates Inc.
Agenda Item #3E: This resolution approves the renewal of tobacco licenses for five establishments in
the City of Shorewood -- Cub Foods, Holiday Stationstore, Lucky’s Station, Shorewood Cigars
and Tobacco, and Wine & Spirits by JD dba MGM Liquors. All license requirements have been
met.
Agenda Item #4: Matters from the Floor – no council action will be taken
Agenda Item #5: There are no reports or presentations scheduled this evening.
Agenda Item #6: There are no public hearings scheduled this evening.
Agenda Item #7: There are no park items this evening.
Agenda Item #8A: At its last meeting, the Council directed staff to prepare resolutions approving the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment and P.U.D. Concept Stage Plan for the Minnetonka Country
Club Redevelopment project. Draft resolutions, including a “pre-development agreement” for the
subsequent application stages, are included in your packet.
Agenda Item #8B: The City Council has suggested that the City consider hiring additional temporary
staffing to assist the Planning Department as the MCC project proceeds. Staff recommends
contracting with Northwest Associated Consultants for the services of Michelle Barness, a
graduate landscape architect and planner with experience in trail and open space design. The
arrangement would be hourly, cost, plus time and materials that would be passed through to the
Executive Summary – City Council Meeting of October 12, 2015
Page 2
developer of the MCC project. The Council should authorize staff to enter into an agreement for
services with Northwest Associated Consultants.
Agenda Item #9: There are no Engineering/Public Works items this evening.
Agenda Item #10A: An update on the Urban Forester/ISA Certified Arborist position will be provided
this evening.
Agenda Item #10B: An update on the City Administrator search will be provided this evening.
Agenda Items 11A: Staff reports are included in the packet and will be provided at the meeting.
#2A
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2015 6:30 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Labadie, Siakel, Sundberg, and Woodruff; Administrator
Joynes; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong; Director of Public Works
Brown; and, City Engineer Hornby
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Woodruff moved, Labadie seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
2. 2016 ENTERPRISE BUDGETS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Director DeJong noted that the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) has been adjusted since the last time
Council has discussed it because of new information Director Brown received.
He highlighted the Enterprise Funds.
With regard to the Water Fund, he explained he reduced the projected revenues in the budget when
compared to the 2015 adopted budget. The 2016 Budget anticipates $500,000 in revenues; the 2015
Budget anticipated $600,000. In 2009 a water rate study was done. At that time Council adopted water
conservation rates. There are three rates tiered to encourage water conservation. They were designed to be
revenue neutral. Residents responded to the rates and used less water that last few years. He thought
$500,000 is much more in line with what residents are consuming. He commented there has been quite a bit
of rain the last few years and that likely impacted the amount of water residents were consuming. He noted
that Fund has a balance in excess of $3 million. There may be a need to increase rates at some point.
With regard to the Recycling Fund, he predicted there would be a healthy surplus in the Fund. The
recycling services provider reduced the rates when the contract was renewed for 2014 – 2016 because it
dropped its Recycling Bank Program. The recycling program has been run on a breakeven basis. In
addition to revenues from residents the City has been receiving a grant from Hennepin County in the
amount of about $20,000. He thought it would be possible to reduce the rates slightly.
With regard to the Sewer Fund, he stated there is a substantial balance in the Budget.
With regard to the Stormwater Management Fund, he explained the City is operating on a breakeven
positive basis on expenditures. Because stormwater management is an enterprise fund the way accounting
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 2 of 3
works is the City amortizes project costs over a number of years (generally 10 - 15 years). Because of that
the cash has been decreasing at a fairly substantial rate. He noted that the City has used funds from the
Sewer Fund to fund stormwater management projects in the past. There needs to be some analysis done to
determine what the transfer amounts should be over the next few years.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought the fee the City charges for recycling services in very much in
line. She suggested Council consider expanding recycling services rather than reducing recycling rates. She
questioned if tree and shrub recycling services could be included as recycling.
Siakel asked what happened to the Recycle Bank Program. Director DeJong noted Republic Services, the
recycling service provider, discontinued that Program and reduced its recycling rates because of that.
Councilmember Woodruff noted that if residents still have Recycling Bank points they need to use them by
the end of the year.
Woodruff stated the Stormwater Management Budget does not reflect the assessment income the City will
receive from the watermain extension along Star Lane and Star Circle. That would be at a rate of about 10
percent a year for 10 years. He then stated the Water Fund Budget shows a deficit of over $92,000 in 2016.
He explained that is not a cash deficit because there is $280,000 in depreciation that is not reflected in that
accounting budget. That would add about $190,000 to the cash budget. The Sewer Fund also has about
$100,000 in depreciation. That offsets about one half of the deficit in the Sewer Fund Budget.
Woodruff then stated that because all residents pay for recycling services Council could consider reducing
the recycling rate and increasing the stormwater management rate so there would be no change to the
residents.
Councilmember Siakel asked Director DeJong to explain what the Special Assessment revenue line item in
the Recycling Fund Budget is. DeJong explained that is the delinquent utility amounts that are certified to
Hennepin County and the County assesses those amounts to property taxes. The City then receives those
delinquent amounts from the County. The delinquent amounts carry an interest rate of 8 percent.
Mayor Zerby stated the 2015 Water Meter Supplies line item in the Water Fund Budget is $15,000 and
year-to-date (YTD) just over $3,000 has been spent. The budget for 2016 is $15,000. He asked if that is
realistic. Director DeJong responded yes. DeJong clarified that also includes components that go along with
the water meters. A number of those will have to be put in for the development on the former Minnetonka
Country Club property. He stated there may be some commercial water meters that may need to be
replaced and they are more expensive than residential meters. Zerby asked staff if it anticipates the
purchase of $12,000 for meters in 2015. Director Brown responded yes.
Councilmember Sundberg stated the Other Services & Charges Communications line item in the Water
Fund Budget is 186 percent higher than in the adopted 2015 Budget. She asked what the rationale is for
that. Director Brown explained the City used to contract out for maintenance of its water system. The City
took over responsibility for that maintenance because staff did not think it was being adequately
maintained. Over the last 10 years a lot of work has been done to bring the facilities up to where they
should have been. The City uses the SCADA (Superior Control and Data Acquisition) System. Currently
the City is relying on telephone lines to communicate between the well houses and the water towers. Often
when it rains communications fail. The goal is to get to an online system. Unfortunately, to have an internet
service provider host that is somewhat costly.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 3 of 3
Mayor Zerby asked why the 2016 Other Services & Charges Contractual line item in the Water Fund
Budget doubled to $60,000 from $30,000 in 2015. Director Brown explained staff is trying to be less
reactionary and be more proactive in providing services. The City has not been having inspections of wells
done in a timely matter. The goal is to get wells pulled and brought in to a vendor for inspections and then
reinstalled more regularly.
Councilmember Woodruff noted that the Stormwater Management CIP includes $230,000 in 2016 for
improvements that would be made when the Galpin Lake Road trail segment is constructed. Yet, the Parks
Improvement CIP has that project slated for 2018. He suggested the stormwater improvements be moved
out to 2018.
Administrator Joynes noted that the City has certified a 3 percent maximum tax levy increase for 2016 with
Hennepin County. Council can reduce that levy before it adopts the 2016 budget in December but it cannot
be increased.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he has been reading about there being significant health insurance
premium increases for 2016. Administrator Joynes stated the City’s increase given the plan the City would
likely select would be about a 6.4 percent for 2016. Woodruff asked if that can be accommodated in the
budget. Director DeJong responded yes. DeJong explained that a few years ago the City decided to renew
employee insurance plan coverage in December rather than January. Therefore, the City will get this year’s
increase for 11 months of 2016. The increase for December 2016 would be significantly higher.
Administrator Joynes stated the City may try to join a group. One group option is the LOGIS (Local
Government Information System) Health Care Group. LOGIS is a consortium of government agencies.
3. ADJOURN
Woodruff moved, Sundberg seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session of September 28,
2015, at 6:50 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
Scott Zerby, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
#2B
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2015 7:00 P.M.
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, Siakel, Sundberg, and Woodruff; Attorney
Keane; City Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong;
Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and City Engineer Hornby
Absent: None.
B. Review Agenda
Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, September 14, 2015
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of
September 14, 2015, as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Zerby reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
Sundberg moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Administrative Assistant Position
Motion passed 5/0.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Introduction of Police Chief Mike Meehan
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 2 of 22
Mayor Zerby welcomed South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) Police Chief Mike
Meehan who started with the Department on September 14, 2015.
Chief Meehan thanked Council for the opportunity to lead what he considers to be an organization
composed of very professional and dedicated officers and employees. He stated he started at a very
stressful time; it was shortly after the tragedy in the City of Greenwood. He noted he was very proud of
how people responded. He hoped that people could build on that and provide excellent service to all of
the SLMPD member cities.
Councilmember Woodruff asked Chief Meehan if he has any short-term big action plans.
Chief Meehan stated he is taking time to learn the environment and how it operates. He noted that the top
priority is staffing. One officer is on maternity leave, another officer is going to retire in January and he
thought a younger officer is going to leave to take a job with a larger police department. Losing that many
people can hit critical mass quickly.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he is expecting more traffic / speed enforcement than there has been in
the past because of the addition of one more officer to the force. Chief Meehan stated there is a plan in
place to study the issue and then approach it from a data driven perspective. Councilmember Siakel stated
the speeding issue has been brought to Council’s attention numerous times.
Councilmember Siakel commended the SLMPD in how they dealt with the tragedy in Greenwood. She
asked Chief Meehan if the Department had what it needed and if the officers had the support they needed
to get through that crisis.
Chief Meehan stated that last week there was a professional debriefing and officers could decide if they
wanted to attend to help them with any difficulties they had with dealing with what they saw that day. He
thought that most of the people are doing quite well. He expressed hope that the community is doing the
same.
Councilmember Sundberg encouraged Chief Meehan to let Council know if there is anything it can do to
be of help and to offer up any suggestions he may have.
Mayor Zerby thanked Chief Meehan for coming.
6. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Continuation of Public Hearing – Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concept
Stage Approval of a Planned Unit Development
Applicant: Mattamy Homes
Location: 24575 Smithtown Road – Former Minnetonka Country Club Property
Mayor Zerby opened the Public Hearing at 7:06 P.M. for a Shorewood Comprehensive (Comp) Plan
amendment and a Concept Stage approval for the planned unit development (PUD) of the former
Minnetonka Country Club property, and he noted that it is continued from September 14, 2015.
Zerby then re-opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:07 P.M.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 3 of 22
Zerby asked that those people in the audience who want to speak on this item to keep their comments
brief in order to be respectful of other people’s time. He stated if a person has a comment that has already
been shared by someone else that person should briefly acknowledge it but not elaborate on it.
David Cooley, 24725 Smithtown Road, stated that during the Public Hearing on September 14 he brought
up the potential need for extended right and left lanes for Smithtown Road eastbound traffic and for
extended right and left lanes for Country Club Road northbound traffic. He anticipates that may require
the City acquiring additional right-of-way (ROW). He had also brought up the potential need for delaying
the construction of the Smithtown Road sidewalk east extension or rerouting a portion of that extension.
He thought rerouting a portion of that extension needs immediate attention. The turn lanes may need to be
acted on immediately but he thought that may require some type of action. He asked if Council is going to
consider the turn lanes. Or, is Council going to move forward without pursuing turn lanes thereby
eliminating any option for improvement in the future.
Mr. Cooley then stated the proposal is to build 140 single-family homes. He anticipates each household
will have at least two vehicles. Many of the families will have nannies. There will be service vehicles
coming to the properties so people can clean the homes, mow the lawn and plow the driveways and so
forth. There will be more than one trip to and from each property daily. That would add a significant
amount of traffic to the community and to the roadways around the area. He noted that he understands the
traffic issue on Highway 7 is a Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) issue. He stated he
thought it important for Council to make a difficult decision now. He noted that he understands that
Mattamy Homes has a right to develop the site. He stated he, and he thought other residents, do expect
Council to act in their best interests and take the appropriate measures to ensure the City can deal with
what comes in the future. He assumes there will be additional developments in the area near the
Smithtown Road and County Road 19 intersection in the future although not as significant.
Mr. Cooley stated he wants to know this evening if Council is willing to step up and address the traffic
issues. If not, then he does not think there would be any value in him participating on the Traffic
Committee.
George Greenfield, 24715 Yellowstone Trail, stated his disappointment with this process has been what
he considered a lack of real conversation. Residents have asked questions but there has not been a
response to them. He has heard the owner of the 24650 Smithtown Road property raise concern about the
east access point to the development being located directly across from his home and that the headlights
on vehicles leaving the development would shine into his front window. He has not heard that person get
an answer. He has never gotten answers to any of the questions he himself has raised. He raised some of
his concerns with a member of Council and he considered the response given as avoiding the issue.
Mr. Greenfield then stated that he spoke with Administrator Joynes and confirmed that under the existing
zoning for the property the developer could only build 80 houses on the property. From his perspective
the idea has been cultivated that the developer’s agreement that would go with the PUD would be some
kind of magnanimous gesture on the part of the developer. He commented that it is obvious the developer
would make more money by building 140 houses than by building 80 houses. Building 80 houses would
eliminate some of the traffic issues and could possibly eliminate the need for the entrance off of
Smithtown Road onto the site on the east end; the entrance across from the 24650 Smithtown Road
property. He thought there would be a lot of positives that would come from building only 80 houses.
From his vantage point if the developer has a so call right to build he suggested it be exercised under the
rules of the current zoning.
Mr. Greenfield thanked Council for the opportunity to speak.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 4 of 22
Whitley Mott, 24890 Yellowstone Trail, noted his property is located near the southwest corner of the
former MCC property. He stated that based on what he has read it is his understanding that the City will
ultimately be responsible for maintaining the public open space on the redeveloped site. He asked how the
City will do that. The former golf course has somewhat gone to seed and there are many weeds on it. He
then stated that the meeting minutes indicated that the drainage issues from the site would be taken care
of. He explained the property has been draining down to a retaining pond. He has spoken with Mr. Packer
with Mattamy Homes about the drainage pipe that conveys stormwater to Lake Minnewashta. That pipe is
raised out of the ground. Caretakers of the Country Club used to park a tractor on top of the pipe to keep
the pipe down so the stormwater would drain. When he brought the issue of the raised pipe to Mr.
Packer’s attention he was quick to do something about that. That raised pipe results in all of the
stormwater flowing from the higher course holes not flowing on to Lake Minnewashta. It is backing up at
the retaining pond and flowing on to his property. As a result they have had a lot of trees fall over because
the ground was over saturated. That needs to be addressed. He noted that he has found Mr. Packer to be
awesome.
Mr. Mott then stated that when he and his wife had their home built in 1996 they had a flood plain study
done. Their home is potentially in the middle of the flood plain if things are not done correctly. For the
record, he stated in the event of a catastrophe if his home and yard are flooded he asked what his recourse
is with the City.
Mr. Mott thanked Council for its time.
Mayor Zerby closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:16 P.M.
Zerby noted that tonight Councilmembers finally have the opportunity to discuss their perspectives as a
group on the applicant’s requests.
Zerby asked Director Nielsen to elaborate on the maintenance of the open space and drain tile. Nielsen
explained the drainage facilities, wetland areas, proposed stormwater retention ponds and the drain pipe
that leaves the site needed for stormwater management all have to be approved by the City engineer and
the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District’s (MCWD) engineers. That will be done as part of the
Development Stage; the Stage in the PUD process when the details are worked out. Nielsen stated he has
suggested the rest of the open space where the trails go through be restored to a natural area with the
space near the trail being a mowed area. The details of that will be worked out in the Development Stage.
He noted it may take as long as four years to establish that natural area based on how long it has taken the
Gideon Glen area to establish the prairie grass. He explained the maintenance would entail maintaining
the trail and then some amount of clear space next to the trail about 6 – 8 feet wide.
Councilmember Siakel asked when the deteriorated drainage pipe would be replaced. Mr. Packer
responded in stage 1 of the development. Mayor Zerby noted that is not part of the concept plan.
Mayor Zerby asked if there is any leeway on the location of the proposed entrance off of Smithtown Road
on the east side of the site. He questioned if that is part of the concept plan. Director Nielsen explained he
thought there is leeway in terms of the design of the entry; for example, how it angles. The developer
would have to do some tree replacement and a couple of the replacement trees could be planted on the
north side of Smithtown Road to screen headlights if the property owner wants that. Zerby asked if now
would be the time to ask for the entrance to be shifted 50 feet to the east or west. Nielsen suggested that
issue be mitigated during the Development Stage. Councilmember Woodruff commented that there is no
detailed plan available at this time.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 5 of 22
Councilmember Woodruff stated it is his understanding that drainage leaving the site after the
development will at a minimum be no greater than it currently is and hopefully it will be less.
Mayor Zerby stated that Council has heard loud and clear that residents think there is a need to improve
the Smithtown Road /Country Road 19 / Country Club road intersection area. At what point does the City
get to have some say about that. Director Nielsen explained that Council had directed staff to establish a
Traffic Committee to discuss the Country Club Road / Yellowstone Trail / Lake Linden Drive collector
route. The developer is well aware that the City is going to acquire additional right-of-way (ROW) for
Smithtown Road on the east side of the site and along most of Country Club Road to bring the total width
of the ROW to 66 feet. That should accommodate turn lanes on Country Club Road on the north.
Councilmember Woodruff stated if a decision is made to construct extended turn lanes on the north end of
Country Club Road he asked what impact that would have on the work Council has already authorized for
the Smithtown Road Sidewalk East Extension Project. Councilmember Siakel stated that maybe that
Project would be slowed down. Director Nielsen explained the contractor for that project intends to do
some tree clearing in 2015 with construction being done in 2016. It is his understanding that the Traffic
Committee’s work will take about six months. That would allow the City time to order the change for the
Sidewalk Project.
Councilmember Labadie asked if the Traffic Committee has met. Engineer Hornby explained the
Committee members have been polled about their preferred day and time for the first meeting, noting that
not all members can be accommodated. The first meeting may possibly be scheduled for October 8; that
has not been confirmed yet. During that meeting a day and time will be set for future meetings.
Councilmember Sundberg noted she wants Council to be copied on information about the Committee’s
work.
Councilmember Siakel stated the Country Club had been in existence for 100 years. It had somewhat
been an icon and anchor for the west side of Shorewood. Whatever ends up being developed on the
former MCC site will be there for decades. She wants the development to be well thought out and be
something everyone can be proud of. Regardless of how the site is developed it will not be possible to
make everyone happy.
She then stated the community would benefit from the redevelopment of the site in a number of ways.
The City would receive park dedication fees that would help fund much needed improvements to Badger
Park. The redeveloped site would have open access and a natural appearance. The perimeter trail would
be a great amenity and it would provide a safe route to school and a way to access the LRT Trail. The
City’s acquisition of additional ROW along most Country Club Road and the east end of Smithtown Road
would allow the City to make some improvements to the roadways to solve traffic issues.
She noted that for the most part she is supportive of the concept plan. She explained there are a number of
residents in the City over the age of 50 who would like to continue to live in the City. That is the fastest
growing subset of the population in the City. She thought the age-targeted housing included in the
proposal is important. She does not object to the proposed age-targeted housing on the east side of the site
because it is along a cul-de-sac.
She does have concern about the age-targeted housing proposed for the west side of the site. There would
be 10 houses lined up on each side of the roadway and she does not think that fits in with the immediate
area. It is more of an aesthetic issue. She asked if Mattamy has another product to offer for there or if it
would be willing to work with another builder for that portion of the development. She thought that
maybe patio homes or townhomes could soften the area when entering the development on the west.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 6 of 22
Mr. Packer explained Mattamy offers a wide range of products. Mattamy thought the proposed age-
targeted housing was the best product given the demographics of the area. During the very first meeting
of the Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) he was surprised to learn how long people live in the area.
Fifty percent of the calls Mattamy has been receiving over the last few months have been about the age-
targeted housing. There are a couple of houses on the properties just west of the Mattamy site and the rest
is wetland and buffers. One of the owners of the residential properties to the west liked the idea of the
single-level housing; it would not have the height impact that two-story housing would. And an owner on
the other side was also supportive of the one-story housing.
Mattamy has provided Director Nielsen with some plans, some alternate elevations, that Mattamy is
constructing in Woodland Cove. Two are under construction and there is a third one underway. They have
quite a bit of character; they are not just boxes lined up in a row. There is quite a bit of attention to
exterior detail. The decks are built into the houses. There are things that make them very interesting
structures. Mattamy has no concerns that people driving past those houses would think that housing
would look funny. That age-targeted housing type is kind of a patio home; it is single-level structure.
Mattamy does offer a two-story townhome product but he does not think that would fit in on the west
side. Mr. Packer stated he thought the age-targeted housing on the northeast corner will look fine and it
would be somewhat shielded by vegetation. Mattamy will be putting in another type of single-story
product because it has a loft.
Councilmember Siakel stated she envisions 10 houses on each side of the street that would be 15 feet
apart without much character.
Mr. Packer clarified Mattamy does have a product that is about 1.5 stories high; it only has a two-car
garage.
Mayor Zerby displayed an animation view of how he perceived the age-targeted housing would look on
the west side of the site. What he displayed was a tight row of housing with not much space between
them; there would only be 15 feet. He noted that he can see the proposed age-targeted housing on the east
side. But, on the west side it does not fit in with the housing to the west of the site.
Zerby stated he thought the pre-application was for 120 houses (he referred to them as deluxe houses)
with an $800,000 price point. That amounts to $96 million dollars in housing. The concept plan being
considered is for about $85 million in housing. If the 20 age-targeted houses proposed on the west side
were replaced with 10 deluxe houses it comes out to roughly the same dollar value (just under $85
million) in housing and close to the same amount from an acreage standpoint. He suggested housing that
is somewhere between the pre-application proposal and the Concept Stage proposal would be a
reasonable compromise. He thought the PAC was looking for something like that.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought there is a need for a variety in housing and that the City needs
age-targeted housing on the east end. She then stated she thought she heard that if the 20 age-targeted
units on the west side were eliminated Mattamy would replace them with 10 traditional units.
Mr. Packer stated if 20 $800,000 houses were replaced with 40 $500,000 houses the total housing value
would be higher for the age-targeted.
Councilmember Siakel asked if there would be less traffic generated by the 20 age-targeted housing
households than by the 10 traditional single-family households. Mr. Packer noted he provided Director
Nielsen and Engineer Hornby with the following statistics earlier in the day. Mattamy’s traffic engineer
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 7 of 22
found the information on a government website. He explained a traditional single-family generates about
9.7 trips per day. An age-targeted household generates about 3.7 trips per day. Therefore, less traffic
would be generated by the age-targeted households. Mr. Packer stated from his perspective some of the
adults who purchase the age-targeted housing would likely be retired and therefore not add to the traffic
during the peak times.
Councilmember Labadie explained that the previous week she spoke with the Communications Director
for Minnetonka Public Schools and learned that based on last year’s enrollment numbers and projections
the student enrollment for this year enrollment should be about 10,100 in Minnetonka Public Schools. For
the last school year 3,000 of the students were open enrolled and they came from 36 school districts
around the state. She noted that once a child has been open enrolled in the Minnetonka Public Schools
they will not be turned away. They can attend until they graduate. Those student’s younger siblings are
not guaranteed a spot. She stated representatives from the Minnetonka Public Schools do predict that at
some point open enrollment will be closed.
She stated she thought younger families may want to purchase the age-targeted housing because they
want their children to attend Minnetonka Public Schools. She noted she has received phone calls from
parents of young families interested in the age-targeted housing because of its lower price point. Because
the age-targeted housing is not age-restricted anyone can purchase an age-targeted house.
She explained that when she served on the Planning Commission the Commission assumed a traditional
single-family household would generate 8 – 10 trips per day. An elderly or retired couple would generate
2 – 3 trips per day. If those age-targeted units are purchased by young families the amount of traffic they
would generate would be significant.
She noted she has concerns about constructing 140 houses on the site. She stated she understands the
community needs housing for seniors. Unfortunately, no one can guarantee the age-targeted units will be
purchased by just seniors. That concerns her.
She then noted that last year a Minnetonka public school received the National School of Excellence
Award from the United States Department of Education. A school has a five-star rating by the Minnesota
Department of Education. In 2015 the Niche ratings named Minnetonka High School the best public high
school in Minnesota.
Labadie stated the proposal was modified to include age-targeted housing based on feedback provided to
the developer from the PAC. She does not think that the PAC members realized that in order to get those
age-targeted units the total number of units developed was going to be increased.
Mr. Packer stated the PAC had been informed that the number of units would be increased 140 when age-
targeted housing was added. He then stated the age-targeted housing would be an unfriendly floor plan for
families.
Councilmember Labadie stated a one or two hour drive to bring a child to a school in the Minnetonka
School District is unfriendly as well. She thought a brand new house in an area with trails would be quite
appealing to families currently living outside of the Minnetonka School District area.
Mr. Packer stated the age-targeted units would not have a bedroom for children. They will have one
bedroom on the main floor. They will also have a flex room in the front of the house. The basement
would have to be finished off in order to build another bedroom.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 8 of 22
Councilmember Woodruff asked what the price point will be for the age-targeted housing. Mr. Packer
responded Mattamy anticipates the average sale price to be $500,000 – $550,000. Woodruff stated those
units would not be starter homes. He thought that at that price range there are a lot of houses in the area
for families. Multiple bedroom houses and the lots would have back yards. He does not think there will be
a rush of young families wanting to purchase those units.
Mayor Zerby stated he has concerns about the proposed 7.5-foot-wide side yard setbacks for the age-
targeted houses. He thought the proposal is to use the entire lot for those units and that would result in the
houses being 15 feet apart. The current Ordinance calls for a 10-foot-wide side yard setback and larger
lots. He thought the 7.5-foot-wide side yard setbacks will create a wall of housing look and also create
some hazards. He expressed his discomfort about the smaller setback. He stated Mattamy has a variety of
housing styles and maybe units less wide could be constructed with 10-foot-wide setbacks. Mr. Packer
indicated that going with 10-foot-wide side yard setbacks would likely result in the loss of one age-target
lot on each side of the roadway. Zerby clarified he was talking about changing the housing style. Mr.
Packer stated to accommodate a wider setback the width of the age-targeted lots would have to be
increased to 60 feet; currently they are proposed to be 55 feet wide.
Councilmember Sundberg asked if the setback width needs to be decided this evening. Director Nielsen
stated the developer needs direction on that. He explained the developer’s next plan set would include a
preliminary plat. Therefore, the developer needs to know what product it would build on the lots. Nielsen
clarified that at the very minimum the PUD Ordinance states “… no two buildings shall be nearer to one
another than one-half of the sum of the building heights, giving due consideration to solar access”.
Councilmember Sundberg stated she does not share the concern about young families buying the age-
targeted housing in part because of the price point and because they are one bedroom units. She then
stated she thought there is a need for and a demand for age-targeted housing. She stated she could support
reducing the number of units to 130.
Councilmember Siakel stated that would be done by replacing the 20 age-targeted units on the west side
of the site with 10 traditional units. She again asked if Mattamy has another age-targeted type product it
could build on the west side that would be more aesthetically appealing. Mr. Packer stated that would a
two-story townhouse. Mr. Packer then stated that about one-half of the people are age-targeted people in
its Maple Grove development. Siakel noted the townhouses near Gideon Glen are single level and they
have a basement that can be finished off. Mr. Packer stated Mattamy does not have a product like that but
that does not mean it could not build a product like that. But, corporate would have to make the decision
to design a new product for one cul-de-sac. He noted that type of product would result in less open space
because there are fewer buildings and therefore fewer setbacks.
Mr. Packer stated he would like to know if Council wants to replace the 20 single-story age-targeted units
on the west with 10 two-story traditional units. If that is what Council wants it would reduce the number
of age-targeted units on the site to 20. He asked if Mattamy still has the option to revert back to its 121-
unit proposal with no age-targeted units.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought there would be other opportunities to have age-specific housing developed
and noted he thought there is a need for that in the City. He noted that he has spoken with a developer
who is interested in developing along the north side of Smithtown Road. There is a desire to develop
some age-targeted affordable housing there.
Councilmember Sundberg asked Mr. Packer what the market is for age-targeted housing based on
Mattamy market research. Mr. Packer clarified Mattamy did not have a market study done. Mr. Packer
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 9 of 22
stated Mattamy does know there is desire for that housing type and the City’s demographics indicate that.
The popularity of that product out in Minnetrista demonstrates there is a market for it. People in their 50s
may want to move into that housing type in 5 – 10 years and still stay in the community they live in. He
noted Mattamy does not question the marketability of age-targeted housing in the least.
Sundberg noted that she does not want to lose all of the age-targeted housing. She stated she understands
Mr. Packer to be saying that if there isn’t going to be age-targeted housing on both sides of the site then
there won’t be any.
Mr. Packer clarified that he did not mean that as a threat. He just asked if he could revert back to the 121-
unit proposal. He noted that from his perspective he thought the age-targeted housing on the west side
would be the most attractive because there are few residents living near there. Two of the three owners of
properties to the immediate west of the Mattamy site have indicated they preferred age-targeted housing
and the third property is pretty distant.
Councilmember Sundberg stated she understands there may be other development opportunities for age-
targeted housing but it is likely that they would not be as nice as what would be developed on the
Mattamy site.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought the age-targeted housing would fit best on the northeast corner of the site
because of the pedestrian access that would be available to get to restaurants and shops. It would be a
longer walk for people on the west side. He stated that he has heard from owners of properties
immediately to the west of the Mattamy site who indicated they are not able to subdivide their properties
yet Mattamy can build on smaller lots. He expressed concern about setting a precedent of adding more
density on the west side of the site. Councilmember Sundberg stated she empathizes with that.
Councilmember Sundberg noted that she could support a reduction in the number of units provided there
will still be 20 age-targeted units developed on the northeast corner.
Councilmember Siakel stated the feedback the City received indicated there is a need for age-targeted
housing. The question is how many units. She explained her concern for the age-targeted housing on the
west was it could be “cookie cutter” houses built 15 feet apart. That is not what Shorewood has been
about. She stated the west age-targeted housing would not be built until phase 3 of the development. By
that time Mattamy will know how that type of housing on the east side sold. She assumes the developer
would adjust things based on need before starting that third phase. Mr. Packer commented some decision
needs to be made as to whether or not there will be the needed critical mass.
Mr. Packer explained there are three different styles of age-targeted houses each with four different front
elevations. Some of them are very contemporary. He encouraged people to go to Woodland Cove and
look at the two that are under construction. He can address those types of things. He stated Mattamy can
look into increasing the width of the side yard setbacks if that would help the age-targeted housing look
less “cookie cutter”. Council may decide on the 10-foot setback at the preliminary stage or maybe
Mattamy come back to Council before that in a work session because it has all of the drawings that can be
changed. He noted that he can address those types of things. He suggested maybe having neighbors on the
west side of the Mattamy site come and tell Council what they prefer for the northwest corner.
Mayor Zerby stated he hears three options being discussed. The current 140-unit option, the pre-
application 121-unit option and a hybrid option which entails replacing the 20 age-targeted units on the
west side with 10 standard units for a total of 130 units. He asked if Mattamy would consider the hybrid
option. Mr. Packer stated he cannot decide if constructing only 20 age-targeted units on the north east
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 10 of 22
corner would be a sufficient mass to warrant introducing a third product. Mr. Packer stated there is a
fourth option with attractive fronts and 10-foot-wide setbacks.
Councilmember Sundberg asked if Council needs to give Mattamy additional time to come back with
additional renderings. Mayor Zerby stated he thought Council needs to make a decision tonight on the
concept plan.
Councilmember Labadie stated if Council accepts the recommendation of the Planning Commission to
approve the Concept Stage plan then things move forward. If Council does not approve the plan then
Council can give Mattamy guidance on what it wants.
Mayor Zerby asked Director Nielsen if Council needs a yes or no vote or can Council suggest something
else. Nielsen stated Council can suggest modifications. Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought
Council can do that but it cannot approve something it has not seen this evening. Nielsen noted that
people know what the northwest corner with 10 homes on it would look like; that was what was
submitted as the pre-application. Woodruff stated he has not seen that. Nielsen clarified Council has and
Zerby concurred. Woodruff stated Council has not been asked to consider that 121-unit pre-application.
He then stated a 140-unit application is what is being considered this evening. Zerby noted the plan being
considered does not have a legal cul-de-sac on the west side. It would be irresponsible to approve that
plan. Council is being asked to consider a concept this evening. Woodruff stated Council should reject it
then.
Councilmember Woodruff expressed discomfort with what he perceived as a “loosey goosey” way of
doing business. He stated what is on the table is 140 homes. If Council is not going to approve that then
the developer needs to come back with some other plan and Council can tell the developer what it would
like to see.
Mayor Zerby stated if Councilmember Woodruff is looking at the plan as black and white the developer
has not submitted a plan with a legal cul-de-sac. Council would be irresponsible if it approved it. The
developer has submitted a concept plan. Councilmember Woodruff stated then Council should reject it.
Councilmember Siakel asked what the reason for rejecting it is. Woodruff reiterated he is uncomfortable
with what he perceived as a “loosey goosey” way of doing business.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the only thing he would be comfortable with approving tonight is the
Comp Plan amendment that says the site will be zoned a PUD. He thought all of Council would support
that and if not then there are major problems. He commented that the Comp Plan amendment needs to be
approved by the Metropolitan (Met) Council and surrounding cities.
Councilmember Siakel noted she does not think Council is doing anything “loosey goosey”. She stated if
Mattamy would be willing to work with the City to ensure the age-targeted housing on the west side of
the site would not have a “cookie cutter” look the concept is something she could consider. She then
stated she thought the choices are clear – Council can approve the concept of 140 houses as was
recommended by the Planning Commission or it can approve the concept of 130 houses.
Mayor Zerby stated this is the first time Council has had the opportunity to really discuss the concept
plan. The residents have had multiple opportunities to comment on this and so has the Planning
Commission. Ultimately, Council has the responsibility to make the decision. This is Council’s
opportunity to give the developer feedback and not just say yes or no. He noted that he does not think
Council is doing anything “loosey goosey” either.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 11 of 22
Councilmember Woodruff stated Council needs to give the developer an itemized list of what Council
wants the developer to come back with should Council reject the concept plan. Mayor Zerby stated he
would expect that to be part of a motion. Woodruff noted he would vote against anything else unless
Council does that.
Councilmember Siakel asked Attorney Keane if Council needs to have the level of specificity
Councilmember Woodruff has suggested and if so does Keane recommend Council do that.
Attorney Keane explained that Shorewood’s PUD process has three stages – the Concept Stage, the
Development Stage where the details are flushed out, and the Final Plan Stage which is the formality of
ratifying all of the previous decisions that had been made. At the Concept Stage, Council approves the
general layout which includes the basic unit mix, layout of the roadways, and the fundamental concept of
the plan. He noted there would be flexibility between the Concept Stage and the Development Stage.
There, details would have to be worked out. The spacing between units (i.e.; setbacks) would be one of
those details. Setbacks are not a Concept Stage detail. That would be a refinement during the
Development Stage. He recommended Council should fix the general concept of the plan at this point of
the approval process.
Director Nielsen stated the more direction Council can give the developer at this stage the better. He then
stated if it is necessary to draw up the hybrid options discussed during this meeting that can be done.
Councilmember Woodruff stated if Council wants something different than what has been submitted then
Council and the developer should discuss the changes Council wants made. Mr. Packer had mentioned
having a work session to do that. The outcome from that discussion would be a revised concept plan that
Council could consider and approve.
Councilmember Siakel clarified she was not saying she wants a hybrid option. She asked if her concern
about a potential “cookie cutter” look for the age-targeted housing on the west side would be addressed in
the concept plan or the development plans.
Councilmember Woodruff stated Council needs to have a reasonable idea of what it wants done during
this Concept Stage and the developer needs to be made aware of Council’s desires.
Mr. Packer stated Mattamy always end up with conditions attached to subdivision approvals. There have
been as many as 30 conditions. He then stated he would like Council to approve the concept this evening
subject to one of four options: 1) the concept is fine as it is (140 units with 40 being age-targeted units);
2) there being 130 units with no age-targeted units on the west side of the site; 3) no age-targeted units at
all (the original 121 units); and, 4) 140 units (40 of which would be age-targeted) with the age-targeted
units having 10-foot-wide side yard setbacks. He needs to go back and figure out what Mattamy would be
willing to do and he thought it would be the fourth option. He noted that prior to the preliminary plat
Mattamy would address Councilmember Siakel’s concern about what the age-targeted units would look
like.
Councilmember Sundberg stated it was difficult for her to imagine a developer building “cookie cutter”
looking age-targeted housing that costs $500,000 per unit because she does not think people would buy
them. She noted she would support the 10-foot-wide side yard setbacks for the age-targeted units because
that would be more in line with the area. She stated Council could approve the concept plan with the
understanding the age-targeted housing would have 10-foot-wide side yard setbacks.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 12 of 22
Mr. Packer stated he assumes if some members of Council don’t like the 7.5-foot-wide side yard setbacks
for the age-targeted housing proposed for the west side they don’t like them for age-targeted housing
proposed for the east side.
Councilmember Labadie asked Council to keep in mind that the 140-unit concept plan was recommended
for approval on a 3/2 vote by the Planning Commission. The two dissenting commissioners did not
approve the plan mainly because of the number of units. She commented that she does not recollect the
Commission ever having a 3/2 vote during her tenure on the Commission or Council.
Councilmember Siakel noted she is comfortable with 140 units provided the age-targeted units on the
west side would somewhat fit with the character of the area to the west. She thought it would be important
to have that housing there. She stated she could live with replacing the 20 age-targeted units on the west
with 10 standard units but she does not think that would reduce traffic.
Mr. Packer stated he thought the two dissenting commissioners’ concern about the number of units was
primarily related to traffic. Director Nielsen stated he suspected so. Mr. Packer stated he had never
presented to the PAC or the Planning Commission that traffic would be less with the age-targeted units.
Councilmember Labadie stated one commissioner stated it was too many houses.
Mayor Zerby suggested Council take action on the Comp Plan amendment.
Zerby moved, Sundberg seconded, directing staff to prepare a resolution adopting an amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use Map to change the land use for Mattamy Homes’ property
located at 24575 Smithtown Road to low density residential (1 – 2 units per acre). Motion passed
5/0.
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, directing staff to prepare a resolution approving the planned
unit development concept plan for Mattamy Homes for its property located at 24575 Smithtown
Road subject to there being 20 age-targeted houses with a variety of appearances on the east side, to
the side yard setbacks for the age-targeted housing being 10 feet wide, to adding a second access to
Smithtown Road and to replacing the 20 age-targeted houses on the west side with 10 standard
single-family houses.
Councilmember Siakel asked if that would be acceptable to Mattamy. Mr. Parker responded there would
not be 20 age-targeted units on the east because the side yard setbacks were increased to 10 feet wide for
those units. He thought 2 or 4 units would be lost but he does not know for sure at this time. It would
lessen Mattamy’s critical mass for building those units. He would prefer a hybrid of 10-foot-wide
setbacks and age-targeted housing on both sides.
Mr. Parker stated if the motion gets approved he asked if Mattamy still has the option of going with its
pre-application proposal of 121 single-family units. He noted he needs that direction.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought the 10-foot-wide setbacks would have been for the west side
age-targeted housing. She asked Mayor Zerby if he intended that to be for the east side units as well.
Mayor Zerby stated that was his suggestion but he was open to discussing that. Siakel stated she does not
think it would be necessary for the east side age-targeted units to have 10-foot-wide setbacks. They will
be along a cul-de-sac so the visual impact is different. Councilmember Sundberg asked if there is an
option for age-targeted housing on the east and west sides to all have 10-foot-wide setbacks, noting she
understands that would result in a loss of some units on each side of the site. Siakel noted she could
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 13 of 22
support Zerby’s motion provided the requirement for 10-foot-wide setback for the east side age-targeted
housing was removed.
Without objection from the maker or seconded, the 10-foot-wide side yard setback requirement for
the east side age-targeted housing was dropped.
Councilmember Labadie recommended the proposed east entrance onto the development from Smithtown
Road be moved so headlights on vehicles leaving the site do not shine into the home across the roadway.
She noted that can be addressed during the Development Stage. Mr. Parker explained the center line for
that entrance has been staked and it would line up with the driveway on that property. The headlights
would shine on the garage and other parts of the home that do not have windows. Someone has planted
arborvitae across the street and Mattamy would be willing to enhance that landscaping. He noted that
Mattamy would try and tweak the location if need be.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested Mattamy put in the conduit for the future installation of fibre optic
cable to the home. Mr. Parker stated that requires that there be a spot for that to come into the house if it
ever does come.
Councilmember Sundberg stated she could support the motion. She cautioned Council not to lose sight of
how the proposed development would impact future developments that would likely be done in the
immediate area. The Traffic Committee needs to take future developments into account as well.
Mr. Packer stated if Mattamy corporate says 18 or 20 age-targeted units would not be enough critical
mass to move forward with those units he asked if Mattamy can revert back to its pre-application 121-unit
concept and not start the process all over again.
Councilmember Woodruff stated if Mattamy cannot accept the change being recommended Mattamy can
withdraw the current application and come back with another one.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought it would be a big mistake not to have age-targeted housing.
Councilmember Sundberg concurred.
Councilmember Labadie stated if Mr. Packer finds out that Mattamy would not be willing to move
forward with just 20 age-targeted units she asked Attorney Keane if Mattamy has to submit a new
application and go through a new public hearing process. Keane stated he does not think things are at that
point in the approval process.
Attorney Keane explained that Mattamy submitted a pre-application for a 121-unit concept. The PAC
recommended adding some age-targeted housing which brought the number of units to 140. Mayor Zerby
clarified the PAC recommended there be more variety in housing types and price points. Keane stated the
121-unit concept and the 140-unit concept have been thoroughly reviewed. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the 140-unit concept. Council is now talking about modifying that
recommendation. Mattamy could retreat to its original 121-unit concept without having to start an entirely
new application process. He noted he wants that reflected in the motion and in the resolution.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought Council should support what the PAC and Planning
Commission recommended. She strongly believes age-targeted housing should be part of the
development. She noted she believes it would be a mistake not to include age-targeted housing especially
on the east side. She stated if Mattamy would not approve constructing just 20 age-targeted units she
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 14 of 22
would prefer to approve the 140-unit concept. The PAC recommended a variety of housing types. The
Commission recommended approval of the 140-unit concept.
Councilmember Sundberg agreed with the need to have age-targeted housing as part of the development.
She asked Mr. Packer if he was indicating that Mattamy would be willing to construct only 20 age-
targeted units that would be located on the east side. Mr. Packer stated he does not know if Mattamy
corporate would approve that. Sundberg stated that if Mattamy corporate won’t approve that then she
would prefer to support the 140-unit concept the Planning Commission recommended. She reminded
people that the “devil is in the details” and the details would be addressed during the Development Stage.
She stated she would not be concerned that any developer with Mattamy’s track record would build
“cookie cutter” age-targeted housing to sell for $500,000.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought people were second guessing what would happen. He noted that if the
motion on the favor does not move forward then he prefers reverting back to the 121-unit concept. He
stated the number one issue conveyed by the Planning Commission, the PAC and residents was traffic. It
was two to one over any other issue with the proposed development. Councilmember Siakel stated based
on the traffic data provided by Mr. Packer the number of vehicle trips per day would be close to the same
for 10 standard single-family households as by 20 age-targeted households.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he understands Mr. Packer to have said he has approval to move
forward with the 140-unit concept or the 121-unit concept and at this time he does not have authority to
move forward with a 130-unit concept.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought she heard Council say that if Mattamy says it would not move
forward with a concept that includes only 20 age-targeted units (i.e., the 130-unit concept) then it would
revert to the 121-unit concept without any age-targeted housing.
Mayor Zerby noted there is a motion on the table. Councilmember Woodruff stated a motion that Zerby
made and he seconded.
Councilmember Sundberg noted that she would vote against the motion on the table. She stated traffic is
an issue and it has been an issue since long before the developer purchased the property. She commented
that maybe the development proposal has prompted Council to consider dealing with the traffic situation
where possible. There will be limitations on what the City can do because of MnDOT’s involvement.
Mayor Zerby stated he understands two members of Council to be saying they will not vote for the
motion on the table yet earlier on had indicated they would. He asked them what had changed for them.
Councilmember Siakel stated the clarification of what would happen if Mattamy corporate does not
support it and then retreats back to the 121-unit concept. Siakel and Councilmember Sundberg both
reiterated they do not want to lose age-targeted housing. Zerby reiterated people are second guessing what
would happen.
Councilmember Labadie stated Council could reject the 121-unit concept if it came before Council for
approval. She asked if that would require Mattamy to start the entire process all over. Attorney Keane
stated he would have to think about that.
Mayor Zerby stated the vote against the motion would be because the developer may not be able to then
meet the desire for the age-targeted housing.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 15 of 22
Councilmember Siakel explained that for nine months Council has heard from residents about what they
would like for the development. The developer responded. The Planning Commission has vetted the
concept plan. Moving forward with a 140-unit concept does not go against what residents or the Planning
Committee have recommended. She clarified she did not have a big problem with the 140-unit concept.
She did have concerns about the possible aesthetics of the age-targeted housing. If the developer would
work with the City on the aesthetics of the age-targeted housing she would support the 140-unit concept.
Mayor Zerby stated the Planning Commission’s vote was a 3/2 split. Much of the input the PAC provided
is missing from his perspective. One example is combining the wetlands into a single wetland. He rejects
the idea that the Commission and the PAC are the authority and Council either accepts or denies the
proposal. Council can help craft what the project would look like.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested Mayor Zerby call for a vote on the motion.
Mayor Zerby clarified the motion on the table directs staff to prepare a resolution approving the planned
unit development concept plan for Mattamy Homes for its property located at 24575 Smithtown Road
subject to there being 20 age-targeted houses with a variety of appearances on the east side, to adding a
second access to Smithtown Road and to replacing the 20 age-targeted houses on the west side with 10
standard single-family houses.
Director Nielsen noted the Planning Commission had recommended other conditions of approval. He
asked if he can assume those should be included in the resolution. Mayor Zerby stated that would be his
intent.
Without objections from the maker or seconded, the motion was amended to also include subject to
the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
Motion failed 2/3 with Siakel, Sundberg and Woodruff dissenting.
Woodruff moved, Sundberg seconded, directing staff to prepare a resolution approving the planned
unit development concept plan from Mattamy Homes for its property located at 24575 Smithtown
Road subject to adding a second access to Smithtown Road and the conditions recommended by the
Planning Commission.
Mayor Zerby asked if the maker and seconder would be amenable to adding the condition for increasing
the width of the side yard setbacks to 10 feet from 7.5 feet for the age-targeted housing. Councilmember
Woodruff stated no.
Motion passed 3/2 with Zerby and Labadie dissenting.
Councilmember Siakel stated Council is well aware that traffic is an issue. She clarified that establishing
a Traffic Committee was not intended to be just “putting a band aid on a problem”. She stated she would
like the Committee to take a global look at the issue. She explained the traffic that would be generated by
people living in the proposed development would be a Shorewood problem. But, the traffic issue is not
just Shorewood’s. It is also a MnDOT and a Hennepin County issue. On County Road 19 traffic can be
backed up to the Narrows Bridge in the morning. The intersection at State Highway 7 and Highway 41 is
very problematic. That is a State issue that the State needs to address. In the morning it is a 30 minute
drive to get past Excelsior and the high school. Highway 7 is a problem. There is development being built
to the west of Shorewood in St. Bonifacius; 2,100 houses are being built.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 16 of 22
She then stated the facilitator for Traffic Committee meetings needs to be very prepared for the meetings.
All options for addressing the traffic issues need to be explored regardless of their potential or viability.
She suggested a member of Council be involved with the Traffic Committee. She also suggested Council
reach out to its legislative representatives and push for help from the County and State.
She noted she has confidence in the residents who have volunteered to be on the Traffic Committee.
She stated she thought a lot could be done to improve the situation on Country Club Road but she does
not think a meandering parkway is one. There would be an opportunity to put in pedestrian crosswalks to
the trails that would be built on and near the site and to Badger Park. The crosswalks could possibly be
elevated and they would help slow traffic down.
She then stated there needs to be a plan to address the traffic at various levels of government.
She reiterated she clearly understands that traffic is an issue and that something has to be done to address
it. She is committed to trying to get that addressed.
Siakel stated that in moving forward with the Development Stage of this project the devil will be in the
details. Council has heard about a number of issues that were a result of projects done before this Council
was formed. She has always said that when working with people excellence should be demanded but not
perfection. She believes staff tries to operate in an excellent way. They are human beings and they can
only do so much. She suggested Council make additional human resources available to help manage and
assist with the details of this project going forward. Someone needs to monitor what the developer is
doing. She wants to be assured that nothing is left unchecked.
She expressed concern about the maintenance of the site as it is developed over a 4 – 6 year period. There
needs to be a plan for that. She suggested hiring the services of someone who has expertise in the
developing a natural area.
She stated she thought making additional resources available coincides with succession planning. She
recommended Administrator Joynes, Director Nielsen and the Personnel Committee meet as quickly as
possible to review Planning Department’s needs and then bring suggestions to Council during its next
meeting or two about how to adequately staff the manage the details and oversight of the project.
Siakel noted this development project will be a legacy of this Council and the City. It would be there for
decades to come. She wants it to be done correctly. She stated she wants the residents to know they have
been heard. She thought Council will do its best to ensure concerns are addressed in depth and in detail
during the next stage of the project.
Councilmember Sundberg stated she echoed nearly everything Councilmember Siakel just stated. She
suggested the Personnel Committee and staff consider a combination of staffing additions and consulting
support.
Mayor Zerby expressed his disappointment that Council chose to accept the proposal as a whole without
putting any more into it. From his perspective there are a lot of issues that have not been addressed.
Council has heard from residents through two public hearing processes. He thought Council did a
disservice to the residents because from his perspective their voices were not heard. He also thought
Council passed up an opportunity to have a say in the process rather than just letting the Planning
Commission do the work. The responsibility for the project falls on Council. He thought Council missed
an opportunity to make a difference. Councilmember Labadie concurred with that statement by Zerby.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 17 of 22
Councilmember Sundberg reiterated the devil is in the details. The details will be vetted during the
Development Stage. She noted that she has heard residents loud and clear. She stated that Council clearly
understands how big of an issue traffic is and that there is a need to explore all options for addressing it.
Additional development that will likely be done because of this development will compound the issue.
Sundberg noted she disagreed with Mayor Zerby about some of his comments. She stated the City and
Council have a good opportunity with a good developer. The developer has listened to people and has
already proactively addressed many concerns raised throughout the project process. The project provides
an opportunity to address environmental contamination on the site. She views the project and process
from a positive point of view and noted there is a great deal of work to be done.
Councilmember Woodruff asked Director Nielsen when he thought the Planning Commission would first
see a preliminary plat. Nielsen stated he anticipates the developer might submit that in November for
December meetings.
Attorney Keane asked Director Nielsen if he was going to prepare resolutions for Council’s consideration.
Nielsen responded yes. Keane stated he and staff will prepare a short-form agreement regarding the
demolition of the club house and remediation of the tee boxes. The developer anticipates doing that work
this winter. That agreement would be brought to Council for its consideration as well.
Mayor Zerby stated he hoped some of the issues with the trees could be taken care of at the same time.
Mayor Zerby recessed the meeting at 8:57 P.M.
Mayor Zerby reconvened the meeting at 9:02 P.M.
7. PARKS
A. Report on the September 22, 2015, Park Commission Meeting
Chair Mangold reported on matters considered and actions taken at the September 22, 2015, Park
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). He noted that he thought the joint
meeting of Council and the Park Commission on September 22 was productive. Mayor Zerby concurred.
8. PLANNING
A. Front Yard Setback Variance
Applicant: Wayne Hartmann and Michelle Letendre
Location: 27460 Maple Ridge Lane
Director Nielsen explained Wayne Hartmann and Michelle Letendre own the property at 27460 Maple
Ridge Lane. The property is located in the R-1A/S, Single-Family Residential/Shoreland District and
contains 42,359 square feet of area. The structure has a footprint area of 3,275 square feet, including the
attached garage. The applicants propose to build a small addition on the southwesterly corner of their
home. The 197 square-foot addition would fill in the southwesterly corner of the house.
When the applicants applied for a building permit they discovered their home is nonconforming with
respect to the front yard setback requirement for the R-1A/S District. The existing house is located as
close as 32 feet from the right-of-way (ROW) of Maple Ridge Lane. Therefore, they are requesting a
setback variance for the addition.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 18 of 22
The home was built in 1974. The building permit indicated a 50-foot setback and that no variances would
be necessary. The survey submitted with the application contained a note regarding the 50-foot setback.
Once built, the home ended up at approximately 32 feet from the public ROW.
The same type of error appears to have been made on several homes in the immediate vicinity. Out of 10
houses on that west side of Lake Virginia Drive, eight of them do not comply with the 50-foot front
setback requirement. There is no record of any variances having been granted for those properties. Staff
speculated that whoever performed the inspections on these homes may have been measuring from the
traveled surface of the roadway instead of the public ROW. All of the homes appear to be 50 feet or more
from the pavement.
With regard to the analysis of the case, he reviewed how the applicant’s request for a variance complies
with the criteria for variances set forth in Section 1201.05 Subd. 2 of the Zoning Code.
1. The variance would not alter the essential character of the area in which it is located. Given the
number of homes similarly situated nearby, the proposed addition would be in keeping with the
homes in the neighborhood.
2. The need for the variance is not economic in nature. The applicants are not requesting the
variance because it is cheaper to build as they propose. They are trying to improve the functional
layout of the home.
3. Neither the applicants nor their predecessors created their practical difficulty. In fact, it could be
argued that the City did.
4. The addition would be of minimal size; it would fill in the corner of the home. Due to the way the
house angles away from the cul-de-sac, the addition would actually be four feet farther from the
front property line than the existing house. Once completed, the property would only have 18.3
percent hardcover; a maximum of 25 percent is allowed in the R-1A/S District.
Nielsen noted the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this request during its September 1,
2015, meeting. He also noted that staff and the Planning Commission recommend the applicants’ request
be granted as proposed. The Commission suggested a note about the setback and the applicants’ request
be put in the folders of the other properties in that neighborhood with a similar setback issue.
He then noted that Mr. Hartmann was present.
Mr. Hartmann stated the addition would angle away front and noted the house would not extend any
further into the ROW.
Siakel moved, Sundberg seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 15-068, “A Resolution Granting a
Setback Variance to Wayne Hartmann and Michelle Letendre for their property located at 27460
Maple Ridge Lane.” Motion passed 5/0.
9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. Accept Quotes and Consider Award of Contract for the Trunk Highway 7 /
Christmas Lake Road Signal Painting
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 19 of 22
Engineer Hornby explained the City solicited quotes from three specialty contractors to repaint the signal
located at the intersection of Highway 7 and Christmas Lake Road. The City asked for quotes on two
options. One was for two-color (yellow and silver) painting and the other was for one-color painting (dark
bronze). The City received one quote. It was from Pole Painting Plus, Inc., for an amount of $12,900 for
two-color painting and $11,900 for one-color painting. He noted this is a cooperative project with the City
of Greenwood and the Greenwood Mayor prefers the one-color dark bronze option. He stated staff
recommends Council adopt the resolution accepting quotes and awarding contract and he suggested
Council make that contingent on the Greenwood Council doing the same. He noted both Cities budgeted
$8,000 for the project.
Councilmember Siakel asked if there would be better visibility if it were painted yellow and silver.
Engineer Hornby responded he does not think so and noted the new Minnesota Department of
Transportation standard is a galvanized poll. Siakel noted she can support either option.
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 15-069, “A Resolution Accepting
Quotes and Awarding Contract for the Trunk Highway 7 / Christmas Lake Road Signal Re-
Painting, City Project 15-07, to Pole Painting Plus, Inc. for the Dark Bronze Option for an Amount
Not to Exceed $11,900” subject to the Greenwood City Council approving Greenwood pay one half
of the cost. Motion passed 5/0.
B. Declare Costs to be Assessed, Order Preparation of Assessments and Calling for
Hearing on Proposed Assessments for Star Lane and Star Circle Watermain
Improvements
Engineer Hornby explained that although Star Lane and Star Circle are still under construction the
watermain extension portion of the project is complete. The actual construction costs are known for that
that portion of the project. Staff has provided an estimate of the project expenses (the indirect costs) and
the expenses have been applied proportionately to the watermain costs. The contract amount for the
awarded project is $665,018.13. The estimated indirect costs are $130,000. That brings the total estimated
cost for the project to $795,018.13. The assessable amount for the watermain extension is estimated to be
$122,906.30; the amount includes the actual construction costs for the watermain extension plus a
prorated portion of the indirect costs.
Hornby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of resolution for Council’s consideration. The
resolution declares costs to be assessed, orders the preparation of proposed assessments and calls for a
hearing on the proposed assessment for the Star Lane and Star Circle improvements. Staff recommends
Council adopt the resolution. The public hearing would be scheduled for October 26, 2015, at 7:00 P.M.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought the cost for watermain extension is reasonable.
Engineer Hornby noted the per parcel assessment would be slightly less than $9,500. He stated the
Feasibility Report estimated the per parcel assessment to be about $13,400.
Woodruff moved, Siakel moved, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 15-070, “A Resolution Declaring
Costs to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessment, and Calling for Hearing
on the Proposed Assessment for the Star Lane and Star Circle Improvement Project, City Project
14-11.” Motion passed 5/0.
C. Accept Professional Services Agreement from American Engineering Testing, Inc.,
for Materials Testing Smithtown Road Sidewalk East Extension, City Project 14-10
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 20 of 22
Engineer Hornby explained that for almost every construction project the City has done there is
verification that the construction materials used are in general conformance with the plans and
specifications. The City’s has used American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET) to provide those project
testing services for a number of years. AET has always provided very good services. The meeting packet
contains a copy of a proposal from AET to provide those services for the Smithtown Road Sidewalk East
Extension Project for an estimated amount of $16,221. He clarified it is an hourly based project. He noted
that staff recommends Council accept the proposal from AET as presented.
Siakel moved, Sundberg seconded, accepting the proposal for professional services for construction
and materials testing from American Engineering Testing, Inc., for the Smithtown Road Sidewalk
East Extension, City Project 14-10, for an estimated amount of $16,221. Motion passed 5/0.
10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. Trail Schedule
Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the Trail Schedule.
Engineer Hornby explained the contractor intends to grub trees this fall and then start on the Smithtown
Road Sidewalk East Extension Project in full force in May 2016. Mayor Zerby asked what the rationale is
for the late start. Hornby stated the contractor does not what to have to maintain the site during the winter
plowing season because it would be a hazard. Zerby stated that would have been an issue even if the work
was started in August. Hornby stated that by starting construction the first week of May 2016 the
contractor has until the end of June to have the project substantially complete.
Mayor Zerby asked Engineer Hornby to provide an update on the Excelsior Boulevard trail segment.
Hornby explained the contractor is preparing the site for the slope stabilization effort. Metropolitan
Council Environment Services (MCES) has indicated that after the slope stabilization is constructed work
will begin on the trail. Approvals have been obtained from the Minnetonka Department of Transportation
(MnDOT) and the designer for the slope stabilization. Zerby asked if the bituminous would be put down
this year. Hornby stated that would be done in 2015 in part because MCES helped ensure that because
MCES’ contract for its forcemain project ends at the end of the year.
Zerby stated that although the Galpin Lake Road sidewalk segment is on hold he thought the plan was to
continue to pursue the permit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Engineer Hornby
clarified that in order to get other projects ready he pushed that effort out in the schedule. Hornby stated
he intends to work on that more over the winter and his plan is to obtain approvals from MnDOT and the
MCWD in order to have the project shelf ready.
2. Monthly Budget Report
Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the August 2015 Monthly Budget Report.
Director DeJong noted that building permits revenue has exceed budget so far.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 21 of 22
3. City Administrator Search Update
Administrator Joynes stated the City received 34 applications for the City Administrator position. The
deadline for submitting applications was September 25. He explained there is a Personnel Committee
meeting on October 5 and vetting of the applicants will begin at that time. The selection will proceed as
outlined a few months ago.
Joynes then stated the City received four submittals for providing urban forester / arborist services. He
asked Council to provide staff with guidance on how it wants to proceed with that during its next meeting.
4. West Water Tower Painting Update
Director Brown stated rehabilitation of the West Water Tower is complete and the Tower is back in
service. The contractor and engineering firm have worked with the cellular service providers so they
could reinstall their antennas. He noted there is still some restoration work remaining to be done. He also
noted the project came in about two weeks ahead of schedule and there were no paint issues.
Councilmember Siakel stated the contractor did a good job on the rehabilitation. The repainted Tower
looks very nice. Councilmember Sundberg concurred.
Other
Engineer Hornby stated Star Lane and Star Circle have been paved. This week the contractor will work on
grading and work behind the curbs. After that restoration of the boulevards will be done.
Director DeJong stated he attended a Minnesota Government Finance Officers Association meeting the
previous week. During that meeting he was nominated to the position of treasurer and if normal protocol
is followed he will serve as president of the Association starting in 2019.
Director Nielsen stated the 2015 Deer Management Program started the previous weekend. Only three
deer were harvested.
Mayor Zerby noted that residents have expressed concerns to him about the condition of the former
Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) property. Some thought it violates the City’s public nuisance
ordinance. Director Nielsen stated he would speak with Rick Packer with Mattamy homes. Mr. Packer
had indicated early on in the project that Mattamy would keep the property somewhat kempt. Nielsen
noted the City does not have an ordinance regulating the length of grass but it does have a noxious weed
ordinance. Zerby asked if anything can be done about fallen trees on the property.
B. Mayor and City Council
Councilmember Woodruff stated he attended the September 23, 2015, Excelsior Fire District (EFD)
Board meeting in place of Boardmember Siakel. He highlighted the items discusses. The EFD/Excelsior
Fire Department will have been in existence for 125 years in 2016. The actuarial for the Excelsior
Firefighters Relief Association (EFRA) fund for pensions was completed. The EFD received a Life Safety
Achievement Award for 2014. It was one of 10 fire departments in Minnesota to receive the Award. The
EFD hired two new firefighters and has one offer outstanding. Two firefighters have come off of their
first year of probation and they will be recognized during a Probationary Recognition Event on October 8.
Firefighter Gary Ringate retired from being an active firefighter. The Board recorded the adoption of the
EFD’s 2016 Operating Budget, 2016 Capital Improvement Program and 2016 Building Projects
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2015
Page 22 of 22
Improvement Program. The Board authorized Chief Gerber to move forward with the acquisition of a new
Chief’s vehicle.
Mayor Zerby noted that representatives from Shorewood and the City of Excelsior met. Excelsior
representatives provided Shorewood representatives with some information. Shorewood asked for
additional information. At some point the Shorewood representatives will get together with Council
during an executive session.
12. ADJOURN
Sundberg moved, Siakel seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of September 28,
2015, at 9:28 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST:
Scott Zerby, Mayor
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
#3A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Verified Claims
Meeting Date: October 12, 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.
61911-61916 & ACH 54,169.56
Pending 61917-61957 & ACH 687,693.02
Total Claims $741,862.58
We have also included a payroll summary for the payroll period ending October 4, 2015.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
These expenditures are reasonable and necessary to provide services to our residents an
budgeted and available for these purposes.
Options:
The City Council is may accept the staff recommendation to pay these claims or may r
expenditure it deems not in the best interest of the city.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff recommends approval of the claims list as presented.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Checks will be distributed following approval.
#$% &''
()*"+, - ,./-,&0"1 2& -
!".= >&0?
@$-AB!CCCCDEDCEFCDG"H"#1"DCCGFCDG
3456"78"9:71;<77+
!"#$ %&'()'&*"# % !"+(',*"# % !")'- (*."* !
8 I+"DCD( 0 $'"8/0=
DCDHCCHDCDCHCCCC"CECC"JKLKDCEJM3N9:"NI+"4IO;95P;I59
DCDHDRHJDCDHCCCC"QLRFDEMC"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
DCDHDRHJDCRHCCCC"DKQECC"CECC#N15H54P;
DCDHDRHJDFDHCCCC"JKJEDD"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHDRHJDFFHCCCC"JKJEKJ"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHDRHJDRDHCCCC"DLDQDESK"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
DCDHDRHJDGDHCCCC"FJESM"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
DCDHDGHJDCDHCCCC"JLRCMEQJ"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
DCDHDGHJDFDHCCCC"RFREDG"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHDGHJDFFHCCCC"RCKEGJ"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHDGHJDRDHCCCC"JKDEDC"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
DCDHDGHJDGDHCCCC"DKEQS"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
DCDHDMHJDCDHCCCC"JLQRSEGG"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
DCDHDMHJDFDHCCCC"RJKESK"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHDMHJDFFHCCCC"RGKERS"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHDMHJDRDHCCCC"KSKEDK"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
DCDHDMHJDGDHCCCC"FJEDJ"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
DCDHFJHJDCDHCCCC"JLRSCEGR"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
DCDHFJHJDFDHCCCC"RFSEFS"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHFJHJDFFHCCCC"FMCEGD"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHFJHJDRDHCCCC"JKGECC"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
DCDHFJHJDGDHCCCC"DQEKQ"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
DCDHRFHJDCDHCCCC"DCLFRJEFK"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
DCDHRFHJDCFHCCCC"JDEJD"CECC7O;154P;
DCDHRFHJDCGHCCCC"GQSECC"CECC951;;5"#N(;1"#N6
DCDHRFHJDFDHCCCC"MDRERQ"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHRFHJDFFHCCCC"KKGECG"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHRFHJDRDHCCCC"DLKCREKG"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
DCDHRFHJDGDHCCCC"JKCEKK"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
DCDHGFHJDCDHCCCC"JLJGSEJR"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
DCDHGFHJDFDHCCCC"RRJEJG"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHGFHJDFFHCCCC"RFQERF"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHGFHJDRDHCCCC"MRQEMR"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
DCDHGFHJDGDHCCCC"DKCEFS"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
#1"H"()*"+, - ,./-,&0"1 2& -"UDC)CQ)FCDG"H""F!GF"#PV#$? "D
!"#$ %&'()'&*"# % !"+(',*"# % !")'- (*."* !
DCDHGRHJDCDHCCCC"DLCQREFC"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
DCDHGRHJDCRHCCCC"DMECC"CECC#N15H54P;
DCDHGRHJDFDHCCCC"KSEKG"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHGRHJDFFHCCCC"KJEQR"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
DCDHGRHJDRDHCCCC"DMEDC"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
DCDHGRHJDGDHCCCC"DEMJ"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
#567689:5;#567689:5;
/0$)#1 "234
8 I+"FCD9&/-B B& "3 0-
FCDHCCHDCDCHCCCC"CECC"DLMKJEMF3N9:"NI+"4IO;95P;I59
FCDHCCHJDCDHCCCC"DLDDJECD"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
FCDHCCHJDCFHCCCC"RDRERR"CECC7O;154P;
FCDHCCHJDCRHCCCC"FGKEGC"CECC#N15H54P;
FCDHCCHJDFDHCCCC"MREGG"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
FCDHCCHJDFFHCCCC"DCREDK"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
FCDHCCHJDGDHCCCC"REFQ"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
#87;65:;<#87;65:;<
/0$)#1 "234
8 I+"QCD<$- " -,',-%
QCDHCCHDCDCHCCCC"CECC"QLSFCEDJ3N9:"NI+"4IO;95P;I59
QCDHCCHJDCDHCCCC"JLKRREKQ"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
QCDHCCHJDCFHCCCC"DCMEQJ"CECC7O;154P;
QCDHCCHJDCGHCCCC"DGKEDC"CECC<N5;1"#N(;1"#N6
QCDHCCHJDCQHCCCC"FCCECC"CECC75:;1
QCDHCCHJDFDHCCCC"RMSESJ"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
QCDHCCHJDFFHCCCC"RQCEJQ"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
QCDHCCHJDRDHCCCC"MFGEQR"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
QCDHCCHJDGDHCCCC"DJJEQD"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
#=7><9:85#=7><9:85
/0$)#1 "234
8 I+"QDD9$0,-$ %"9 W " -,',-%
QDDHCCHDCDCHCCCC"CECC"JLMQGEKF3N9:"NI+"4IO;95P;I59
QDDHCCHJDCDHCCCC"RLDSRECR"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
QDDHCCHJDCFHCCCC"MQESD"CECC7O;154P;
QDDHCCHJDCGHCCCC"DGKEDC"CECC9;<;1"#N(;1"#N6
QDDHCCHJDFDHCCCC"FGKEMC"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
QDDHCCHJDFFHCCCC"FGJEDJ"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
QDDHCCHJDRDHCCCC"MFGEQR"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
QDDHCCHJDGDHCCCC"SDEDD"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
#57;=?:6<#57;=?:6<
/0$)#1 "234
#1"H"()*"+, - ,./-,&0"1 2& -"UDC)CQ)FCDG"H""F!GF"#PV#$? "F
!"#$ %&'()'&*"# % !"+(',*"# % !")'- (*."* !
8 I+"QFD1 A%A',0?" -,',-%
QFDHCCHDCDCHCCCC"CECC"GCSEMK3N9:"NI+"4IO;95P;I59
QFDHCCHJDCDHCCCC"RSFEQF"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
QFDHCCHJDFDHCCCC"FSEJG"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
QFDHCCHJDFFHCCCC"FDERC"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
QFDHCCHJDRDHCCCC"QQEGC"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
#?9>:;6#?9>:;6
/0$)#1 "234
8 I+"QRD9-& X"<$- " -,',-%
QRDHCCHDCDCHCCCC"CECC"DLMGQEQM3N9:"NI+"4IO;95P;I59
QRDHCCHJDCDHCCCC"DLGCMERC"CECC8 **H54P;"1;( *N1
QRDHCCHJDFDHCCCC"DDREDR"CECC#;1N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
QRDHCCHJDFFHCCCC"DCREFK"CECC843N"37I514@"H"3456"9:N1;
QRDHCCHJDRDHCCCC"SCEFF"CECC;P#*76;;"4I9 1NI3;"H"3456
QRDHCCHJDGDHCCCC"JDEKQ"CECC<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
#87;?=:=;#87;?=:=;
/0$)#1 "234
8 I+"KCC#$% &''"3' $ ,0?"8/0=
KCCHCCHDCDCHCCCC"QRLKFDECS"CECC3N9:"NI+"4IO;95P;I59
KCCHCCHFDKCHCCCC"CECC"RCLCDSEGM(1799"#N617**"3*;N14I(
KCCHCCHFDKDHCCCC"CECC"KLQDKEKJ:;N*5:"4I9 1NI3;"#N6N@*;
KCCHCCHFDKFHCCCC"CECC"RLSKMEJD8;+;1N*"<45::7*+4I("#N6N@*;
KCCHCCHFDKRHCCCC"CECC"DLKDSEKD95N5;"<45::7*+4I("#N6N@*;
KCCHCCHFDKJHCCCC"CECC"QLMKKECJ843N)P;+43N1;"5NY"#N6N@*;
KCCHCCHFDKGHCCCC"CECC"QLQKGEDR#;1N"<45::7*+4I("#N6N@*;
KCCHCCHFDKQHCCCC"CECC"FLQGGECC+;8;11;+"37P#;I9N547I
KCCHCCHFDKKHCCCC"CECC"DLCCKEFD<71T;19"37P#;I9N547I
KCCHCCHFDKSHCCCC"CECC"DSFECC9;3"DFG"+;#"3N1;"1;4P@"#N6N@*;
KCCHCCHFDMCHCCCC"CECC"JCJECK*48;"4I9 1NI3;
KCCHCCHFDMDHCCCC"CECC"KJGESQ+49N@4*456"4I9 1NI3;
KCCHCCHFDMFHCCCC"CECC"RDMERF I47I"+ ;9
KCCHCCHFDMRHCCCC"CECC"DLGDCESF:;N*5:"9NO4I(9"N337 I5
#=@76<8:9>#=@76<8:9>
/0$)#1 "234
A'. ("1 "234
#8<675?;:;9#8<675?;:;9
#1"H"()*"+, - ,./-,&0"1 2& -"UDC)CQ)FCDG"H""F!GF"#PV#$? "R
!"#$%&'&()*
+,* -$.*"&/)
0#*123!4 '*!
%1/!"*52678768976:$;$$<2<=%3
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
./0"1"233(4+#5"6+478"9"(:+#7";<- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$>6?66678768976:
@!A966>7B 1*#".1
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
678768976:I# 1 J$K*L !5;966>7$B 1*#"$.1/A*HH7;77;9977;7777$:F=77G77
@!A$966>7B 1*#".1$M "&)$$:F=77G77
$>6?66$M "&)2$:F=77G77
$:F=77G77
./0"1"233(4+#5"6+478"9"(:+#7"=,*)>?
.//"1"@+8AB+5"4: C+7;""9""6788: +";<- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$>6?69678768976:
@!A9=>77N/14/!/&+A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
678768976:I# 1 J$K*L !5;9=>77$N/14/!/&$+ A*HH7;77;9977;7777$69FO:7G77
@!A$9=>77N/14/!/&+A$M "&)$$69FO:7G77
$>6?69$M "&)2$69FO:7G77
.//"1"@+8AB+5"4: C+7;""9""6788: +"=,*)>?$69FO:7G77
M "&)2$6HF6:7G77
%;+,* -$.*"&/)$P67868976:$;$$<2<=$%3Q%&4*$6
!"#$%&'&()*
+,* -$.*"&/)
0#*123!4 '*!
%1/!"*52678798:76;$<$$62:=%3
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
./"0"+12 34" 56# 78"9"0"6#75#"(642"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$76787;8:76;
>!?@ " (*1<:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$0!/ !$. *#977<77<:6E:<7777$=6EF=:
>!?$@ " (*1<:76;$I "&)$$=6EF=:
$7$I "&)2$=6EF=:
$=6EF=:
./"0"+12 34" 56# 78"9"0"6#75#"(642";,*)<=
9"0"41;>2"0"14(4?+8"@AB"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$76787;8:76;
>!?677D:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$M*5*1&)$>! B*$I&N977<77<:69:<7777$=JK9EFL6
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$M>+ $OBC) '**$% 1"/ !977<77<:69L<7777$:J9EDF99
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$M>+ $OBC) '*1$% 1"/ !977<77<:69L<7777$:J9EDF99
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$3*5/ &1*$OBC) '**$% 1"/ !977<77<:69L<7777$D;6F9;
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$3*5/ &1*$OBC) '*1$% 1"/ !977<77<:69L<7777$D;6F9;
>!?$677D:76;$I "&)$$67JE;;FL;
$7$I "&)2$67JE;;FL;
$67JE;;FL;
9"0"41;>2"0"14(4?+8"@AB";,*)<=
/"0"7 3+"?4;7?434#;";?62;0CD/.C.0E9F"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$D6K6L6787;8:76;
>!?677D:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$.*P*11*5$+ BC$M)&"$ B !"977<77<:69D<7777$:JD;;F77
>!?$677D:76;$I "&)$$:JD;;F77
$D6K6L$I "&)2$:JD;;F77
$:JD;;F77
/"0"7 3+"?4;7?434#;";?62;0CD/.C.0E9F";,*)<=
%<+,* -$.*"&/)$Q67898:76;$<$$62:=$%3R%&4*$6
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
EG9"0"H5I#42J"@7887+3"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$76787;8:76;
>!?S*C"*B(*1<:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
7K8=78:76; 5B/!$3 !",)'$S*1?/ *#676<6=<LL77<7777$66J6=;F77
>!?$S*C"*B(*1<:76;$I "&)$$66J6=;F77
$7$I "&)2$66J6=;F77
$66J6=;F77
EG9"0"H5I#42J"@7887+3";,*)<=
.."0"37##425;+"(4>+?;34#;""51"?4K4#64"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$76787;8:76;
>!?677D:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$S"&"*$>! B*$I&N977<77<:69=<7777$6J96KF96
>!?$677D:76;$I "&)$$6J96KF96
$7$I "&)2$6J96KF96
$6J96KF96
.."0"37##425;+"(4>+?;34#;""51"?4K4#64";,*)<=
F"0"37##425;+"8714"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$76787;8:76;
>!?@ " (*1<:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$A/P*$>!# 1&! *977<77<:6E7<7777$=EEF79
>!?$@ " (*1<:76;$I "&)$$=EEF79
$7$I "&)2$=EEF79
$=EEF79
F"0"37##425;+"8714";,*)<=
.D"0"# >4?2"37##425;+"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$D6K6;6787;8:76;
>!?@ " (*1<:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$%OG $A/P*977<77<:6E7<7777$6DF77
>!?$@ " (*1<:76;$I "&)$$6DF77
$D6K6;$I "&)2$6DF77
%<+,* -$.*"&/)$Q67898:76;$<$$62:=$%3R%&4*$:
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$6DF77
.D"0"# >4?2"37##425;+";,*)<=
G"0">4?+"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$76787;8:76;
>!?677D:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$3T<%OG $.*5 "/ !977<77<:69;<7777$=J7KKF6E
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$3T$%OG $H*!*P/"$OBC) '*1977<77<:69;<7777$=J;9;FK;
>!?$677D:76;$I "&)$$DJD9;F6=
$7$I "&)2$DJD9;F6=
$DJD9;F6=
G"0">4?+";,*)<=
L"0">?6(4#;7+8"M?56>"7#26?+# 4"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$D6K6D6787;8:76;
>!?@ " (*1<:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$A !4$I*1B$./#&(/)/"'977<77<:6E6<7777$:K=F6K
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$S, 1"$I*1B$./#&(/)/"'977<77<:6E6<7777$L;:F99
>!?$@ " (*1<:76;$I "&)$$9L;FKD
$D6K6D$I "&)2$9L;FKD
$9L;FKD
L"0">?6(4#;7+8"M?56>"7#26?+# 4";,*)<=
."0"@4882"1+?M5"B4+8;B"N4#417;"2K 2"8:- "7* %"+ ,$-*"
$76787;8:76;
>!?677D:76;
A/!*$>"*B$.&"*A/!*$>"*B$.*# 1/C"/ !A/!*$>"*B$ !"
6787D8:76;%G$H&" ,$77776F67F:76;$U*&)",$S&?/!4#$ !"977<77<:6E=<7777$6J;67FK:
>!?$677D:76;$I "&)$$6J;67FK:
$7$I "&)2$6J;67FK:
."0"@4882"1+?M5"B4+8;B"N4#417;"2K 2";,*)<=$6J;67FK:
I "&)2$=DJ76KF;D
%<+,* -$.*"&/)$Q67898:76;$<$$62:=$%3R%&4*$=
Accounts Payable
Computer Check Proof List by Vendor
User: Mnguyen
City of
Printed: 10/08/2015
- 12:07PM
Shorewood
Batch: 00003.10.2015
- CC- 10122015
Iuvoice No
Description
Amount Paymeut Date Acct Number
Fund
Dept
Vendor: I I I
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC
Check Sequence:
261266
Star Lane & Circle Street Improvements
1,677.30
10/12/2015 404 -00- 4680 -0015
Street Cap
Non -Dept
Check Total:
1,677.30
Vendor: 508
BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS, INC.
Check Sequence:
11410
Ag Line Parks
1,024,43
10/12/2015 101 -52- 4245 -000C
General
Park Maint
Check Total:
1,024.43
Vendor: 134
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
Check Sequence:
6974 - 257657
Snow Plow Guides
73.08
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4221 -0000
General
Pub Works
6974- 257658
Filter
3.95
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4245 -000C
General
Pub Works
6974- 257760
Capsule
6.43
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4221 -000C
General
Pub Works
6974 - 257915
Oil Filters
17.35
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4221 -000C
General
Pub Works
6974- 258009
Valve -Oil -Parts
74.48
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4221 -000C
General
Pub Works
6974 - 258107
Lamp
11.89
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4221 -0000
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
187.18
Vendor: 136
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
Check Sequence:
09302015
20405 Knighsbridge Rd - 08/22 -09/22
22.41
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4394 -OOOC
Water
Non -Dept
09302015
28125 Boulder Bridge - 08/22 -09/22
21.00
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4396 -OOOC
Water
Non -Dept
09302015
24200 Smithtown Rd - 08/22 -09/22
64.69
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4380 -OOOC
General
Pub Works
09302015
5745 Ctry Club & 25200 Hwy 7 -08/22 -09/22
39.10
10/12/2015 101 -52- 4380 -OOOC
General
Park Maint
09302015
5755 Country Club Rd - 08/22 -09/22
25.14
10/12/2015 101 -19- 4380 -OOOC
General
Mun Bldg
79456885- 092415
5735 Country Club Rd - 08/24 -09/23
29.25
10/12/2015 201 -00- 4380 -OOOC
SSC
Non -Dept
86501806- 092415
20630 Manor Rd - 08/21 -09/22
15.00
10/12/2015 101 -52- 4380 -000C
General
Park Maint
Check Total:
216.59
Vendor: 137
CENTURY LINK
Check Sequence:
9524702294-Se 15
952- 470 - 2294 -PW
58.34
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4321 -000C
General
Pub Works
9524706340 -Sel5
952- 474 - 6340 -CH
119.82
10/12/2015 101 -19- 4321 -000C
General
Mun Bldg
9524709605 -Sel5
952- 474 - 9605- Amesbury
73.78
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4394 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
9524709606 -Sel5
952- 474 - 9606 - Amesbury
73.78
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4394 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
325.72
Vendor: 144
CITY OF EXCELSIOR
Check Sequence:
3rd Qtr- 2015 -Wat+
Quarterly Water Usage - 3rd Qtr
4,490.72
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4261 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
4,490.72
Vendor: 146
CITY OF MINNETONKA
Check Sequence:
3rth Qtr- 2015 -Wai
5350 Vine Hill Rd - 3rd Qtr
260.53
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4262 -000(
Water
Non -Dept
3rth Qtr- 2015 -Wai
5366 Vine Hill Rd - 3rd Qtr
20.25
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4262 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
3rth Qtr- 2015 -Wa
5490 Vine Hill Rd - 3rd Qtr
39.23
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4262 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
320.01
Vendor: 147
CITY OF MOUND
Check Sequence:
4th Qtr -2015
Fire Payment - 4th Qtr
5,812.00
10/12/2015 10 1 -22-4400-OOOC
General
Fire
Check Total:
5,81100
Vendor: 643
CLASSIC PROTECTIVE COATING, INC.
Check Sequence:
P.V. #2- PJ15 -01
P.V. #2 - Rehabilitation of400 Gals Elevated Wt
154,992.00
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4620 -000(
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total: 154,992.00
Vendor: 658
DAVE PYSICK
Check Sequence:
09152015
Replacement LED Traffic Signals
450.00
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4250 -000(
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
450.00
Vendor: UB *00036
Keith Dodson
Check Sequence:
Refund Check
5.10
10/07/2015 601 -00- 2010 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
Refund Check
5.95
10/07/2015 611 -00- 2010 -000C
Sewer
Non -Dept
Refund Check
2.55
10/07/2015 631 -00- 2010 -000(
Storm Water
Non -Dept
Refund Check
155
10/07/2015 621 -00- 2010 -000(
Recycling
Non -Dept
Check Total:
16.15
Vendor: 166
EARL F ANDERSEN
Check Sequence:
0109112 -IN
Traffic Cones
310.00
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4250 -OOOC
General
Pub Works
0109113 -IN
Signs
87.00
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4250 -000C
General
Pub Works
0109269 -IN
Signs
1,464.04
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4250 -000C
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
1,861.04
Vendor: 167
ECM PUBLISHERS INC
Check Sequence:
260495
PHN- Ferraro Garage CUP
50.27
10/12/2015 101 -18- 4351 -000C
General
Planning
260496
PHN -Code & Cemetery Signs
44.68
10/12/2015 101 -18- 4351 -000C
General
Planning
260827
PHN - Ferraro Garage CUP
34.70
10/12/2015 101 -18- 4351 -OOOC
General
Planning
260828
PHN -Code & Cemetery Signs
26.99
10/12/2015 101 -18- 4351 -OOOC
General
Planning
Check Total:
156.64
Vendor: 178
ESS BROTHERS & SONS, INC.
Check Sequence:
UU6787
Casting
475,00
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4250 -000C
General
Pub Works
UU7270
Casting
2,444.50
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4250 -0000
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
2,919.50
Vendor: 179
EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT
Check Sequence:
4th Qtr -2015
Building- 4th Qtr
69,039.02
10/12/2015 101 -22- 4620 -OOOC
General
Fire
4th Qtr -2015
Operations- 4th Qtr
84,328.74
10/12 /2015 101 -22- 4400 -0000
General
Fire
Check Total:
153,367.76
Vendor: UB *00037
Chris Farr
Check Sequence:
Refund Check
7.31
10/07/2015 611 -00- 2010 -000C
Sewer
Non -Dept
Refund Check
3.14
10/07/2015 631 -00- 2010 -0000
Storm Water
Non -Dept
Refund Check
3.13
10/07/2015 621 -00- 2010 -000C
Recycling
Non -Dept
Check Total:
13.58
Vendor: 656
FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY
Check Sequence:
19179
Sanitary Sewer - Replacement Hose & Nozzle
2,267.75
10/12/2015 611 -00- 4221 -0000
Sewer
Non -Dept
Check Total:
2,267.75
Vendor: 192
G & K SERVICES
Check Sequence:
September -2015
P.W.
1,146.86
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4400 -000C
General
Pub Works
September -2015
C.H.
131.76
10/12/2015 101 -19- 4400 -OOOC
General
Mun Bldg
September -2015
SSCC
48.52
10/12/2015 201 -00- 4400 -OOOC
SSC
Non -Dept
Check Total:
1,327.14
Vendor: 200
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL,
Check Sequence:
147050
Monthly Rental
118.42
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4400 -000(
Water
Non -Dept
147050
Monthly Rental
118.4'1
10/12/2015 611 -00- 4400 -0000
Sewer
Non -Dept
147050
Monthly Rental
118.42
10/12/2015 631 -00- 4400 -000C
Storm Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
355.25
Vendor: 202
GRAINGER INC
Check Sequence:
9846043405
Gloves & Wash Down & Hose Nozzle
106.82
10/12/2015 611 -00- 4245 -OOOC
Sewer
Non -Dept
9853145978
Plumbing
55.60
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4223 -000C
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
162.42
Vendor: 206
TWILA GROUT
Check Sequence:
AreticFever -S15
Arctic Fever Expense
19.20
10/12/2015 101 -53- 4441 -000C
General
Recreation
Oktoberfest2015
Oktoberfest Expense
272.56
10/12/2015 101 -53- 4438 -000C
General
Recreation
Check Total:
291.76
Vendor: 211
HAWKINS INC
Check Sequence:
3782252 -RI
Chlorine
140.00
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4245 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
140.00
Vendor: 215
HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATION TEC
Check Sequence:
1000065566
Monthly 800 Mhz Radio Service
111.51
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4321 -000(
General
Pub Works
Check Total
111.51
Vendor: 424
JOEY NOVA'S
Check Sequence:
10072015
Council Lunch Meeting - 10/07115
83.46
10/12/2015 101 -11- 4331 -0000
General
Council
Check Total:
83.46
Vendor: 243
KLM ENGINEERING, INC.
Check Sequence:
5765
Water Tower Rehab- Smithtown Road Tower
35,948.50
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4620 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
35,948.50
Vendor: 247
DREW KRIF.,SEL
Check Sequence:
September -2015
Building Maint. Services
516.00
10/12/2015 201 -00- 4400 -000C
SSC
Non -Dept
September -2015
Building General Supplies Exp
85.54
10/12/2015 201 -00- 4245 -000C
SSC
Non -Dept
September -2015
Events Program /Class Services
270.00
10/12/2015 201 -00- 4248 -000C
SSC
Non -Dept
Check Total:
871,54
Vendor: 13
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INSUR7
Check Sequence:
200027634 -2015
2015 -2016 Workers' Compensation
40,603.00
10/12/2015 700 -00- 2177 -000C
Payroll
Non -Dept
Check Total:
40,603,00
Vendor: 531
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
Check Sequence:
222793
Regional Meeting - Richard Woodruff-] 1/18/2
40.00
10/12/2015 101 -11- 4331 -000C
General
Council
Check Total:
40.00
Vendor: 620
MANGOLD HORTICULTURE
Check Sequence:
1310
'Monthly City Landscape Maint.
245.00
10/12/2015 101 -19- 4400 -OOOC
General
Mun Bldg
1314
Monthly City Landscape Maint.
190.00
10/1212015 201 -00- 4400 -OOOC
SSC
Non -Dept
Check Total:
435.00
Vendor: 279
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (WASTEWA'
Check Sequence:
0001048348
Monthly Waste Water Svc
50,765.00
10/12/2015 611 -00- 4385 -OOOC
Sewer
Non -Dept
Check Total:
50,765.00
Vendor: 453
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (SAC)
Check Sequence:
3rd Qtr- 2015 -SAC
Quarterly SAC Svc- 3rd Qtr -2015
7,380.45
10/12/2015 611 -00- 2082 -0000
Sewer
Non -Dept
Check ,total:
7,380.45
Vendor: 286
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC
Check Sequence:
3rd Qtr- 2015 -UB
Utility- Postage- 3rd Qtr
360.44
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4208 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
3rd Qtr- 2015 -UB
Utility -Svc- 3rd Qtr
94.05
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4400 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
3rd Qtr- 2015 -IJB
Utility- Postage- 3rd Qtr
360.43
10/12/2015 611 -00- 4208 -000C
Sewer
Non -Dept
3rd Qtr- 2015 -UB
Utility -Svc- 3rd Qtr
94.05
10/12/2015 611 -00- 4400 -0000
Sewer
Non -Dept
3rd Qtr- 2015 -UB
Utility- Postage -3rd Qtr
360.43
10/12/2015 621 -00- 4208 -000C
Recycling
Non -Dept
3rd Qtr- 2015 -UB
Utility -Svc- 3rd Qtr
94.05
10/12/2015 621 -00- 4400 -0000
Recycling
Non -Dept
3rd Qtr- 2015 -UB
Utility -Svc- 3rd Qtr
94.05
10/12/2015 631 -00- 4400 -000C
Storm Water
Non -Dept
3rd Qtr- 2015 -CIB
Utility - Postage- 3rd Qtr
360.43
10/12/2015 631 -00- 4208 -000C
Storm Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
1,817.93
Vendor: 313
MICHELLE THAO NGUYEN
Check Sequence:
September -2015
Mileage - September
106.63
10/12/2015 101 -15- 4331 -000C
General
Fin
Check Total:
106.63
Vendor: 322
OFFICE DEPOT
Check Sequence:
796627758001
USB Smart Card
24.43
10/12/2015 101 -13- 4200 -OOOC
General
Admin
796627890001
Folding Table
38.98
10/12/2015 101 -13- 4200 -OOOC
General
Admin
797857879001
Copy Paper
77.28
10/12/2015 101 -13- 4200 -OOOC
General
Admin
Check Total:
140.69
Vendor: UB *00035
Stephen & Linda Olmsted
Check Sequence:
Refund Check
33.69
10/07/2015 601 -00- 2010 -OOOC
Water
Non -Dept
Refund Check
3931
10/07/2015 611 -00- 2010 -OOOC
Sewer
Non -Dept
Refund Check
16.84
10/07/2015 631 -00 - 2010 -OOOC
Storm Water Non -Dept
Refund Check
16.85
10/07/2015 621 -00- 2010 -OOOC
Recycling
Non -Dept
Check Total:
106.69
Vendor: 331
JOSEPH PAZANDAK
Check Sequence:
September -2015
Monthly Mileages
166.75
10/12/2015 101 -24- 4331 -0000
General
Insp
Check Total:
166.75
Vendor: 240
KENNETH POTTS, PA
Check Sequence:
MoravecVictor
Forfeiture - Victor Quentin Moravec -2006 Toy
1,232.50
10/12/2015 101 -16- 4304 -0000
General
Prof Svcs
September -2015
Prosectution Monthly Services
2,500.00
10/12/2015 101 -16- 4304 -000C
General
Prof Svcs
Check Total:
3,732.50
Vendor: 336
PURCHASE POWER
Check Sequence:
80009000074382,
Acct# 8000 - 9000 -0743- 8223 -Annual Account
49.99
10/12/2015 101 -13- 4433 -000C
General
Admin
Check Total:
49.99
Vendor: 108
REPUBLIC SERVICES No.894
Check Sequence:
0894 - 003915319
Monthly Recycling Svc
9,577.20
10/12/2015 621 -00- 4400 -0000
Recycling
Non -Dept
Check Total:
9,577.20
Vendor: 354
SIIOREWOOD TRUE VALUE
Check Sequence:
126342
Adhesive
12.95
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4245 -OOOC
General
Pub Works
126377
Paint
3.99
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4245 -OOOC
General
Pub Works
126459
Hardware
2.40
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4245 -OOOC
General
Pub Works
126489
Hardware
16.37
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4245 -000C
General
Pub Works
126507
Hardware
899
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4245 -OOOC
General
Pub Works
126518
Repair Watemain Break- Muirfield Circle
69.99
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4245 -OOOC
Water
Non -Dept
126569
Adhesive
28.14
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4245 -000C
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
142.83
Vendor: 355
SHRED -N -GO INC
Check Sequence:
49940
Shredded Svc
70.00
10/12/2015 101 -13- 4400 -OOOC
General
Admin
Check Total:
70.00
Vendor: 360
SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA POLICE DEI
Check Sequence:
4th Qtr- 2015 -1,P
Quarterly - Lease Payment -4th Qtr
56,295.00
10/12/2015 101 -21- 4620 -000C
General
Police
October- 2015OBt
Monthly- Operating Budget Exp
89,178.75
10/12/2015 101 -21- 4400 -0000
General
Police
Check Total: 145,473.75
Vendor: 296
STATE OF MN- MINNESOTA DEPARTMET,
Check Sequence:
3rd Qtr - 2015 -SS
Water Surcharges- 3rd Quarter
2,162.00
10/12/2015 601 -00- 2081 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
2,162.00
Vendor: 657
SUMMIT COMPANIES
Check Sequence:
1086727
Annual Extinguisher Inspection
8.50
10/12/2015 101 -19- 4400 -000C
General
Mon Bldg
1086733
Annual Extinguisher Inspection
557.00
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4400 -000(
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
565.50
Vendor: 376
THE MULCH STORE
Check Sequence:
18485
Brush Disposal - September
295.00
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4400 -000C
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
295.00
Vendor: 380
TITAN MACI4INERY
Check Sequence:
6653044 -GP
Stud
16.34
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4221 -OOOC
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
16.34
Vendor: 511
CATHERINE TURNER
Check Sequence:
Oktoberfest2015
Oktoberfest Expense
49.77
10/12/2015 101 -53- 4438 -000C
General
Recreation
Check Total:
49.77
Vendor: 386
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC
Check Sequence_
6996
26352 Smithtown Rd -Water Tower- Coliform
75.00
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4400 -OOOC
Water
Non -Dept
7079
Monthly Bacteria Svc
100.00
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4400 -OOOC
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
175.00
Vendor: 645
UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA),
R
Check Sequence:
131164694 -001
Storm Sewer Plumbing
242.34
10/12/2015 631 -00- 4400 -000(,
Storm Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
242.34
Vendor: 421
VERIZON WIRELESS
Check Sequence:
9752714864
L.S. Phones - Acet985338397- 08/22 -09/21
190.80
10/12/2015 611 -00- 4321 -0000
Sewer
Non -Dept
Check Total:
190.80
Vendor: 398
VOYAGER FLEET SYSTEMS INC
Check Sequence:
869293803539
Closing Date 09/24/15
2,220.16
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4212 -0000
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
2,220.16
Vendor: 415
WARNER CONNECT
Check Sequence:
29925580
Monthly Network Maint Services - October
2,570.20
10/12/2015 101 -19- 4221 -000C
General
Mum Bldg
29926118
Additional Services Charge - September
405.00
10/12/2015 101 -19- 4221 -0000
General
Mum Bldg
Check Total:
2,975.20
Vendor: 401
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN
Check Sequence:
6837081 - 1593 -9
5735 Ctry Club Rd- Monthly Svc
187.95
10/12/2015 201 -00- 4400 -000C
SSC
Non -Dept
6837082 - 1593 -7
24200 Smithtown Rd- Monthly Svc
435.98
10/12 /2015 101 -32- 4400 -000C
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
623.93
Vendor: 405
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE
Check Sequence:
753906
Tires -F350
625.56
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4221 -OOOC
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
625.56
Vendor: 327
WINDSTREAM
Check Sequence:
58793371
City Hall
108.15
10/12/2015 101 -19- 4321 -000C
General
Mun Bldg
58793371
Public Work
5143
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4321 -0000
General
Pub Works
58793371
Boulder Bridge Well
55.12
10/12/2015 601 -00 - 4396 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
58793371
Badger Well -City of Shorewood
111.94
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4395 -000C
Water
Non -Dept
58793371
Badger- Manor - Cathcart Park
162.55
10/12/2015 101 -52- 4321 -000(
General
Park Maint
58793371
West Tower -City of Shorewood
55.12
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4321 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
545.31
Vendor: 408
WM MUELLER & SONS INC
Check Sequence:
207809
Road Maint
3,252.06
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4250 -0000
General
Pub Works
207983
Road Maint
927.42
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4250 -000C
General
Pub Works
208101
Road Maint
74.80
10/12/2015 101 -32- 4250 -000C
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
4,254,28
Vendor: 409
RICHARD WOODRUFF
Check Sequence:
09222015 -1,MC
LMC- Meeting- 09/22/15
37.38
10/12/2015 101 -11- 4331 -0000
General
Council
Check Total:
37.38
Vendor: 410
WSB AND ASSOCIATES INC
Check Sequence:
01459 -260 -8
Bridge Safety hispeetions- August
1,032.00
10/12/2015 101 -31- 4303 -OOOC
General
Engineering
01459- 350 -48
GIS & CAD Support - August
102.00
10/12/2015 101 -31- 4303 -000C
General
Engineering
01459-740-15
Ashland Woods Utility & Street - August
382.50
10/12/2015 101 -00- 3414 -0000
General
Non -Dept
01459 - 760 -23
Valleywood Area St - August
76.50
10/12/2015 404 -00- 4620 -0003
Street Cap
Non -Dept
01459- 890 -18
Wellhead Protection Plan Amend - August
707.50
10/12/2015 601 -00- 4303 -OOOC
Water
Non -Dept
01459- 940 -14
Smithtown Rd EastTrail - August
10,829.75
10/12/2015 406 -00- 4620 -000E
Trail
Non -Dept
01459- 970 -11
Star Ln & Star Cir hnprovement- August
10,945.25
10/12/2015 404 -00- 4680 -0017
Street Cap
Non -Dept
01459 -990 -8
Mill & Overlay - August
5,791.00
10/12/2015 404 -00- 4620 -000'
Street Cap
Non -Dept
02925 -000 -8
Pavement Marking - August
1,860.00
10/12/2015 404 -00 -4620 -0007
Street Cap
Non -Dept
02925 -010 -5
Sealcoat Project-August
3,128.50
10/12/2015 404 -00 - 4620 -000(
Street Cap
Non -Dept
02925 -050 -8
Gen Eng Svc - August
4,000.00
10/12/2015 101 -31- 4400 -000{
General
Engineering
02925 -060 -8
Misc. Engineering Support - August
3,599.00
10/12/2015 101 -31- 4303 -OOOC
General
Engineering
Check Total:
42,454.00
Vendor: 411 XCEL ENERGY, INC.
Stmt #473325728 5700 County Rd 19 - 08/26 -09/27
Stmt#473325728 5700 County Rd 19 - Unit Light - 08/26 -09/27
Check Total: 262.09
Total for Check Run: 687,693.02
Total of Number of 59
Check Sequence:
36.16 10/12/2015 101 -32- 4399 -OOOC General Pub Works
225.93 10/12/2015 101 -32- 4399 -OOOC General Pub Works
#3B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Retirement Recognition for Pat Fasching
Meeting Date: October 12, 2015
Prepared by: Bill Joynes, City Administrator and
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Background: As you are aware, after over 15 years of service, Administrative Assistant Pat Fasching is
retiring from the City at the end of October. Staff has discussed what was done at the last retirement in
2013, and is making similar plans for a retirement recognition for Pat on Thursday, October 29 from 12:00-
2:30 at the Southshore Center.
In addition to Council and Staff, others who will be invited include Pat’s immediate family members, a
handful of former employees, and staff from neighboring south lake communities.
Staff also discussed providing a retirement plaque, as well as the monetary service award in the amount
equal to that of the last years of service award the employee received. This is in line with what was
provided to past recent retirees.
Recommendation / Action Requested: A motion approving a recognition of retirement for Pat
Fasching to be held on Thursday, October 29, 2015, at the Southshore Center from approximately 12:00
noon – 2:30 p.m., with costs of approximately $300 for food/refreshments, $100 for a retirement
plaque, and $75 for the years of service award, for a total of approximately $475. If approved, funding
for this would originate from the operating budget.
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
#3C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Three Rivers Park District Winter Use Permit
Meeting Date: October 12, 2015
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Attachments: Winter Use Permit
Background: Three Rivers Park District manages the Regional Trail Corridor. The Lake Minnetonka
LRT Regional Trail (formerly named the Southwest LRT Regional Trail) runs through the Shorewood
community. The Three Rivers Park District requires that cities maintain the Trail during the winter
(November 15 through March 31) for specific activities listed on their Winter Use Permit.
Staff has prepared the Winter Use Permit application with the following activities being identified as
allowable during the winter within the Shorewood portion of the Regional Trail: hiking, biking,
snowshoeing, cross - country skiing, pet walking, and horseback - riding. These activities remain
unchanged from last year.
Three Rivers Park District is giving cities the option to submit the winter use permit for up to three
winter seasons. As the activities have been unchanged over the past several years, staff supports the
permit request for a three -year period.
Three Rivers Park District is named on the City's general liability insurance certificate.
Financial or Budget Considerations: Public Works staff will maintain the trail, as in past years.
Options:
1) Authorize submission of the Winter Use Permit to Three Rivers Park District, for a three year
period, for the 2015 -16 Winter Season, 2016 -17 Winter Season, and 2017 -2018 Winter Season.
2) Do not authorize the permit.
Recommendation / Action Requested: A motion authorizing submission of the Winter Use Permit for a
three year term for the 2015 -16, 2016 -17, and 2017 -18 Winter Seasons,
Next Steps and Timelines: Staff will submit the Permit to Three Rivers Park District.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Attractive Amenities
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy
environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through
effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT
REGIONAL TRAIL SYSTEM
2015 -2016 WINTER USE PERMIT
Name of City �ShoreC. oo City Hall Phone q5L� -q&() -Ig00
Contact Person eJuro Phone Ted,° Q 1 I
Contact Person Email Address, p« Chg5kgY1 L wr),LAS
Additional Contact if needed 6rOpm bi�'�( G� ® b���, Woa -s
� 5AA q(,Ci1.- -7q I Ll I bitm3n C-1 S5hc)re loAoeot plv).c oeN
*Indicate whether lowing grooming, or no maintenance t,:),v, r
Regional Trail Fipeffi `rhv (A, `AMC CJII Dt ShDCO
Authorized 2015 -2016 Winter Activities ci"
S k.. °1 i r\,6 , K � wot �
to
hof� ca-- rtdtr'h, 'ts.at1i i'"
Regional Trail From to
Authorized 2015 -2016 Winter Activities
Regional Trail From to
Authorized 2015 -2016 Winter Activities
Regional Trail From to
Authorized 2015 -2016 Winter Activities
Please indicated if you would like the permit for 1, 2, or 3 years.
2015 -2016 Winter Season
2015 -2017 Winter Seasons
2015 -2018 Winter Seasons
Authorization is hereby requested from the Park District Board of Commissioners to use portions
of the Regional Trail Corridor for winter use activities from November 15, 2015 through March
31, 2016 (or 2017/2018), as determined by each municipality within guidelines set,forth herein
on District Regional Trails located within individual City boundaries.
It is understood and agreed that approval from the Park District Board of Commissioners is
contingent upon the following conditions:
1. The City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Park District, its officials,
officers, agents, volunteers, and employees from any liability, claims, causes of action,
judgments, damages, losses, costs or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees,
resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of the City, its respective
contractors, anyone directly or indirectly employed by the City, and /or anyone for
whose acts and /or omissions they may be liable for related to the winter use of the
Regional Trail Corridor. Nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the City of
any statutory or common law defenses, immunities, or limits on liability. The City
cannot be required to pay on behalf of itself and Three Rivers Park District, any
amounts in excess of the limits on liability established in Minnesota Statutes Chapter
466. If City maintains general liability insurance at the time this permit is issued, City
shall provide the Park District with a Certificate of Insurance, naming Three Rivers
Park District as an additional named insured.
2. The City agrees to schedule regular trash pick -up that is appropriate to the level of use
expected on the permitted section(s) of trail so as not to create conditions where trash
containers are overflowing or offensively odorous.
3. The City also agrees to maintain the trail, including, but not limited to, any plowing,
sweeping, sanding, packing, and sign replacement, from November 15, 2015 through
March 31, 2016. For ice control on aggregate trails, Cities agree to use gray colored,
3/8" clear limestone chips from Kraemer North America, Burnsville, MN. Kraemer North
America, formally Edward Kraemer & Sons, Inc., is the only aggregate pit that supplies
the buff colored limestone that has been specified for use on these trails. Paved trails
can be treated with a Corrosion Inhibited /Treated Rock Salt;
(Specifications: A mixture of Regular Road Salt, Type I, Grade I, ASTM-
D -632 - Modified per MnDOT Specification, blended with a MnDOT
approved magnesium chloride -based product for anti -icing or deicing
use or an approved blend of Regular Road Salt and a magnesium
chloride -based product. The magnesium chloride -based product will also
contain an agricultural processing residue or an alternative MnDOT
approved agent that will depress the effective working temperature and
decrease corrosiveness of the overall compound as well as prevent
leaching of the treating solution)
or other chemical treatments approved by the Park District. The City further agrees to
immediately address all safety issues on or adjacent to trails.
4. The City will provide signage at locations approved by the Park District, notifying the
public of authorized winter activities within its city limits; activities may include, but are
not limited to, hiking, biking, cross - country skiing, snowshoeing, or walking. Winter use
signs must be installed by the City at designated locations prior to November 15, 2014
and removed by the City no later than April 15, 2015. These signs are completely the
responsibility of each municipality.
5. Snowmobiling is not allowed on Park District regional trails. Permitted use for
snowmobiles will be limited to direct crossings only. The Hennepin County Regional
Railroad Authority ( HCRRA) does not allow snowmobiling or other motorized use within
its corridors. The Lake Minnetonka LRT Regional Trail, Minnesota River Bluffs LRT
Regional Trail, Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail, and the Dakota Rail Regional Trail are
located on HCRRA corridor property and permission for a snowmobile crossing of an
HCRRA corridor must be obtained from the HCRRA prior to requesting permission from
the Park District for a snowmobile crossing of the regional trail within the corridor. If a
snowmobile crossing is permitted, cities must take steps to keep snowmobiles from
damaging paved trails, bridges and other property.
6. The City agrees to enforce rules and regulations established by the municipality as part
of its request for a Winter Use Permit.
7. The City agrees to repair all trail surface damage that occurs as a result of winter trail
activities and /or maintenance, including, but not limited to, bituminous /concrete repair,
bridge deck repair, grading or adding aggregate pursuant to guidelines established by
the Park District. The City shall contact the Park District prior to the start of any surface
repairs, for review of proposed repair plans and authorization to proceed.
8. The City agrees that winter trail use will be available to all persons, regardless of
residence.
Each City is required to submit its annual permit requests, including proposed rules and
regulations, by October 15, 2016, after which the Park District may take up to 45 business days
to process. Each permit request must be submitted as a result of formal City Council action,
with accompanying verification, agreeing to the terms and conditions outlined by the Park
District's Winter Use Permit.
The Park District reserves the right to terminate a permit at any time, if the conditions set forth
herein are not followed.
Signed:
Title:
Date:
#3D
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Accepting Donations for the Arctic Fever Event
Meeting Date: October 12, 2015
Prepared by: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Policy Consideration: All donations to the City of Shorewood must be accepted by the City Council.
Background: Cub Foods has donated two $25 gift cards, MidCountry Bank has donated $100, and
WSB and Associates has given a $500 donation for the Arctic Fever event. The contributions are
voluntary in nature.
Financial or Budget Considerations: These donations will help to cover expenses of the 2016 Arctic
Fever event that will held the weekend of January 15-17, 2016.
Options:
Accept the Donations, or
Reject the Donations
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends that the donations be accepted, and a thank
you note will be mailed to Cub Foods, MidCountry Bank, and WSB and Associates.
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
#3E
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Tobacco License Renewals
Meeting Date: October 12, 2015
Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Attachments: Resolution
Background:
This Resolution issues the annual license for the sale of tobacco products to Cub Foods, the Holiday
Stationstore, Lucky’s Station LLC #7, Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco, Inc., and Wine & Spirits by JD Inc.
dba MGM Wine and Spirits, in Shorewood. The current licenses expire on October 31, 2015. All
establishments have submitted appropriate documentation for license renewals. The renewal license
period is November 1, 2015 to October 31, 2016.
A background investigation by the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department has been conducted; no
tobacco license violations have occurred during the past year.
Options:
1) Adopt the attached Resolution approving licenses to sell tobacco products to Cub Foods,
Holiday Stationstore, Lucky’s Station LLC #7, Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco, Inc., and Wine &
Spirits by JD Inc. dba MGM Wine and Spirits, in Shorewood.
2)Do not adopt the Resolution
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff recommends Council adopt the Resolution approving licenses to sell tobacco products to Cub
Foods, the Holiday Stationstore, Lucky’s Station LLC #7, Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco, Inc., and Wine &
Spirits by JD Inc. dba MGM Wine and Spirits.
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 APPROVING LICENSES TO RETAILERS
TO SELL TOBACCO PRODUCTS
WHEREAS,
the Shorewood City Code, Sections 302 and 1301 provide for the licensing
of the sale of tobacco products in the City; and
WHEREAS,
said Code provides that an applicant shall complete an application, and shall
pay a licensing fee; and
WHEREAS,
the following applicants have satisfactorily completed an application and
paid the appropriate fee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
That a License for the sale of tobacco products be issued for a term of one year, from
November 1, 2015 to October 31, 2016, consistent with the requirements and provisions
of Chapter 302 of the Shorewood City Code, to the following applicants:
Applicant Address
Cub Foods Shorewood 23800 State Highway 7
Holiday Stationstore #12 19955 State Highway 7
Lucky’s Station LLC #7 24365 Smithtown Road
Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco, Inc. 23710 State Highway 7
Wine & Spirits by JD dba MGM Liquors 5660 County Road 19
ADOPTED
by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 12th day of October, 2015.
_______________________________
ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor
____________________________________
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
#8A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: MCC Redevelopment – Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concept Stage
Approval for P.U.D.
Meeting Date: 12 October 2015
Prepared by: Brad Nielsen
Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen
Attachments: Draft Resolution Approving Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Draft Resolution Approving Concept Stage Plan
Policy Consideration: Should the City approve a Comprehensive Plan amendment and grant concept
stage approval for a P.U.D. for the redevelopment of the Minnetonka Country Club redevelopment
project?
Background: At its last meeting the City Council directed staff to prepare resolutions approving a
Comprehensive Plan amendment and P.U.D. Concept Stage Plan for the proposed redevelopment of the
Minnetonka Country Club redevelopment project.
Financial or Budget Considerations: Given the complexity of the proposed redevelopment, standard
application fees are not considered adequate to cover the City’s anticipated cost of processing the
applications. Staff has prepared a “pre-development agreement” in the amount of $25,000 (see Exhibit
B of the Concept Plan resolution) whereby the developer will post a cash escrow or letter of credit.
Options: Approve the applications as drafted; modify the resolutions; or deny the applications.
Recommendation / Action Requested: The draft resolutions contain the recommendations of the
Planning Commission and the direction from the City Council given at its last meeting. Approval is
recommended.
Next Steps and Timelines: If approved, the Comprehensive Plan amendment will be forwarded to the
Metropolitan Council for its review. The developer has already been advised that the review process
will exceed the statutory 60-day period. Also, if approved, the developer has indicated that
development stage plans would be submitted as early as November for December meetings.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Sustainable tax base, sound financial management.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 15-___
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SHOREWOOD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2009 PERTAINING TO THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE
MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB PROPERT
WHEREAS
, the City of Shorewood adopted its current Comprehensive Plan in June of
2010, in whichthe Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan identified the proposed land use
of the Minnetonka Country Club property, located at 24575 Smithtown Road, as “Semi-Public”;
and
WHEREAS,
the Minnetonka Country Club golf course closed down late in 2014, since
which Mattamy Homes has purchased the property to redevelop it for single-family residential
housing and requested that the proposed land use classification of the property be changed from
“Semi Public” to “Low Density Residential (1-2 units per acre)”; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council hired an independent planning consulting firm to conduct a
study of the golf course site and the surrounding area, and appointed a Planning Advisory
Committee to assist the Planning Commission and City Council in determining the best use for the
property and surroundings; and
WHEREAS,
after a series of meetings over several months, the Planning Advisory
Committee forwarded its findings to the Planning Commission and City Council, which findings
are on file at the Shorewood City Hall; and
WHEREAS,
the Planning Commission held an open house meeting on 28 July 2015 and,
after legal notice was published in the official newspaper, the Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing on 4 August 2015, the minutes of which are on file in the Shorewood City Offices;
and
WHEREAS,
after holding the public hearing the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, reclassifying the
property from “Semi Public” to “Low Density Residential”; and
WHEREAS
, after legal notice was published in the official City newspaper, the City
Council conducted a public hearing on 14 September 2015, which hearing was continued to 28
September 2015, at which time the Council directed staff to prepare a resolution approving the
Comprehensive Plan amendment; and
WHEREAS
, the City Council, having considered the recommendations of the Planning
Advisory Committee, and the Planning Commission, and taking testimony from the public finds
that it is in Shorewood’s best interest to amend the Proposed Land Use map in the
Comprehensive Plan to reclassify the Minnetonka Country Club property as “Low Density
Residential (one to two units per acre)”.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
, by the Shorewood City Council that the
Comprehensive Plan 2009 be amended as referenced above, subject to review and comment by
the Metropolitan Council and adjoining cities.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
of the City of Shorewood this 12th day of October,
2015.
ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
-2-
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A P.U.D. CONCEPT PLAN
FOR MATTAMY (MPLS) PARTNERSHIP (MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB
REDEVELOPMENT)
WHEREAS
, Mattamy (Mpls) Partnership (Applicant) has an interest in certain real
properties located in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, legally described in Exhibit A,
attached hereto and made a part hereof; and
WHEREAS,
in January of 2015 the Applicant filed a pre-application for a Comprehensive
Plan amendment to reclassify the Minnetonka Country Club from “Semi-Public” to “Low Density
Residential (1-2 units per acre)”; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council hired an independent planning consulting firm to conduct a
study of the golf course site and the surrounding area, and appointed a Planning Advisory
Committee to assist the Planning Commission and City Council in determining the best use for the
property and surroundings; and
WHEREAS,
after a series of meetings over several months, the Planning Advisory
Committee forwarded its findings to the Planning Commission and City Council, which findings
are on file at the Shorewood City Hall; and
WHEREAS,
the Planning Commission held an open house meeting on 28 July 2015 and,
after legal notice was published in the official newspaper, the Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing on 4 August 2015, the minutes of which are on file in the Shorewood City Offices;
and
WHEREAS
, the Applicant has applied to the City for approval of a Concept Plan for the
construction of a residential planned unit development known as Minnetonka Country Club
Redevelopment, containing one hundred and forty (140) single-family lots on approximately
118.64 acres of land; and
WHEREAS
, the Applicant’s request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his
recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated 29
July 2015, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; 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 Commission dated 28
July 2015, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS
, the Park Commission, at its regular meeting of 11 August 2015
recommended that the City should require cash in lieu of land to satisfy the park dedication
requirement for the development; and
WHEREAS
, the Planning Commission at its regular meeting of 18 August 2015
recommended approval of a Concept Plan for redevelopment of the Minnetonka Country Club
property, subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS,
after legal notice was published in the official newspaper, the City Council
conducted a public hearing on 14 September 2015, at which time the findings of the Planning
Advisory Committee, the recommendation of the Park Commission, the recommendation of the
Planning Commission, the recommendations of staff were reviewed and public testimony was
heard, the minutes of which meeting are on file in the Shorewood City Offices; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
1. The Applicant’s request for approval of a Concept Plan for the Minnetonka
Country Club Redevelopment P.U.D. is subject to the following conditions of approval:
(a) This approval allows as many as 140 single-family residential units to be
constructed on 118.64 acres of land resulting in a density of 1.2 units per 40,000
square feet of net buildable area.
(b) The project shall include a mix of traditional single-family residential homes
and age-targeted single-family homes. Minimum building setbacks for the
traditional homes shall comply with those set forth in the R-1C Zoning District of
the Shorewood Zoning Code. Minimum building setbacks for the age-targeted
homes shall be: 25 feet front; 30 feet rear; 7.5 feet side; and 25 feet side yard
abutting the street.
(c) The proposed circulation system will include a second access/entry to
Smithtown Road, creating two means of ingress and egress from Smithtown Road.
(d) City-designated and Wetland Conservation Act wetland buffers shall be
determined at the time of Development Stage Plan approval.
(e) A 15-foot structure setback shall be maintained from the buffer areas
referenced in (d) above.
(f) The Applicant shall dedicate wetland conservation easements over the City
designated and Wetland Conservation Act wetlands and the buffer area required in
(d) above.
-2-
(g) Upon completion of final grading, the Applicant shall place survey
monuments locating the wetland buffer area on each lot.
(h) Protective covenants for the P.U.D. shall clearly set forth provisions for
protecting the wetlands (i.e. no dumping of yard waste, no fencing, no site
alteration, etc.).
(i) Preserved open space and the trail system will be owned and maintained by
the City of Shorewood.
(j) The development stage plans will include the dedication of additional
public right-of-way for Smithtown Road and Country Club Road, abutting the
development, bringing the total right-of-way width for both streets to 66 feet.
(m) The Applicant shall submit a tree inventory and reforestation plan as part of
the development stage plans.
(n) The P.U.D. shall be connected to the municipal water system and shall be
subject to the assessment and connection policies in effect at the time the final plan
is approved.
(o) The Applicant shall enter into a pre-development agreement (Exhibit B,
attached) prior to submitting an application for development stage plan approval.
(p) The Applicant shall enter into a separate escrow agreement to ensure site
restoration measures are in place following remediation of contaminated soils on
certain locations within the property.
2. City Council approval of the Concept Plan is subject to all applicable standards,
regulations, and requirements of the Shorewood City Code.
3. Approval of the Concept Plan is not intended, nor does it act to grant approval of
a Development Stage Plan or Final Stage Plan which are required pursuant to Section
1201.25 Subd. 6.(c) and (d).
-3-
CONCLUSION
1. The application of Mattamy (Mpls) Partnership for approval of the Concept Plan
for the Minnetonka Country Club Redevelopment P.U.D. as set forth above is hereby
approved.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
2.
this 12th day of October, 2015.
_______________________________
ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor
____________________________________
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
-4-
(insert legal description)
Exhibit A
-5-
DRAFT
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
HENNEPING COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PRE-DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Minnetonka Country Club)
THIS AGREEMENT
, made and entered into this ___ day of October, 2015, by and between the
City of Shorewood, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota,
(the “City”), and Mattamy Minneapolis LLC, a limited liability corporation organized under the
laws of the State of Delaware (the “Developer”).
RECITALS
1.The Developer has requested to make certain applications to the City for the
property described in the attached Exhibit A (the “Property”), upon which the Developer
proposes the construction of its project (hereinafter the “Project”).
2.The Project requires approval of City Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance
amendments.
3.The Project has received Comprehensive Plan and Concept Stage Planned Unit
Development approval as reflected in Shorewood Resolution 2015-xx.
4.The Developer seeks to undertake certain on-site pre-development activities on
the Property including demolition of the clubhouse, accessory buildings and remediation
of certain contaminated soils.
5.The Developer seeks to enter into this Pre-Development Agreement to
acknowledge the City's consent to the pre-development activities and which further
obligates the Developer to reimburse the City for certain expenses associated with the
development applications.
6.The Developer further seeks to enter into this Pre-Development Agreement which
confirms the cost participation for the design, construction and implementation of public
improvements of Shorewood, Minnesota.
AGREEMENT
1.Developer petition for application. Developer intends to make application for
approval of Development Stage PUD and Final Stage PUD (the “Applications”). Developer
acknowledges that this Agreement does not grant any approvals for the Project, the development,
permits, building or land disturbance, land use permits or other preliminary or final permits.
2.City Authorization. The City authorizes the Developer to undertake the
remediation of contaminated soils in the tee box and putting green areas of the Property. Subject
to application for and issuance of a building permit, the City further authorizes the demolition of
the clubhouse and other buildings on the Property.
Exhibit B
3.Developer reimbursement of City expenses. The Developer agrees to reimburse
the City for all out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the City in the processing and permitting of
those certain applications for permitting, approval and development of the Project on the
Property. Developer agrees to reimburse the City within 45 days of invoice for all out-of-pocket
expense incurred by the City including but not limited to expert consultation expenses of
engineering, planning, landscape architect, and legal services as well as publication of notices.
4.Escrow Deposit. At the time of filing Applications, Developer shall pay to the
City an escrow deposit in the amount of $25,000.00 (the “Escrow Deposit”). The Escrow
Deposit will be deposited on account and remain there until completion of all City work. The
City reserves the right to apply any portion of the Escrow Deposit toward a delinquent payment
or to apply upon final billing for planning, engineering or legal services paid for by the City.
The City shall return to the Developer all excess funds on deposit within 60 days of a)
completion of the pre-development process established by application denials by the City council
or execution of a Project Development Agreement; or b) withdrawal of the applications by he
Developer.
5.Binding effect. The terms and provisions herein shall be binding upon and
anywhere to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto
and shall be binding upon current and future owners of the Property.
6.Notice. Any notice or correspondence to be given under this Agreement shall be
given if delivered personally or by U.S. Mail:
City: Bill Joynes Developer: Rick Packer
City Administrator Land Development Manager
5755 Country Club Road Mattamy Homes
Shorewood, MN 55331 7201 Washington Avenue South
Edina, MN 55439
Or such other address as either party may from time to time modify by notifying the other
party in writing.
7.Remedies on Default. Whenever any event of default or failure to conform to the
terms and conditions of this Agreement occurs, the City shall give notice of the event of default
or failure to perform to the Developer by United States mail to the last known address. If the
Developer fails to cure the event of default or failure to perform within thirty (30) days after the
date of mail notice, and in addition to any other remedy provided herein, and without waiver of
any such right, the City may avail itself of any or all of the following remedies for so long as the
Developer is in default.
a)Halt all Project development work until such time as the event of default is cured.
b)Withhold building permits or occupancy permits within the Project.
c)Apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin the continuation of the default
and any other remedies as provided in equity or in law.
d)The City may draw upon and utilize the Developer's funds and/or security in order
to cover the costs of the City to correct the event of default.
-2-
e)Fees and costs incurred in the enforcement of the terms of this Agreement shall be
the responsibility of the non-prevailing party.
8. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF
, the City and Developer have caused this agreement to be duly
executed on the day and year first above written.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD MATTAMY HOMES OF
MINNESOTA
By:_______________________________ By:___________________________________
Its:_______________________________ Its: __________________________________
-3-
#8B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Contracting for Planning Assistance
Meeting Date: 12 October 2015
Prepared by: Brad Nielsen, Bill Joynes
Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen
Policy Consideration: Should the City hire planning consultant services to assist the Planning
Department during the redevelopment of the Minnetonka Country Club property?
Background: At its last meeting, the City Council suggested that there may be a need to bring additional
help for the Planning Department to reduce the current work load and assist with the processing of the
Minnetonka Country Club redevelopment project. In discussing this with staff, it has been determined
that the most useful help we could use is a landscape professional. Staff recommends contracting with
Northwest Associated Consultants (NAC) for the services of Michelle Barness. Ms. Barness has a
master’s degree in landscape architecture and one of her specialties is parks, trails and open space
design. We feel that Ms. Barness’ service will prove extremely valuable with respect to planning for the
open space elements of the MCC project. NAC has worked for the City previously, most recently in
preparing a housing condition survey. We may also look to Ms. Barness for assistance on park work.
Financial or Budget Considerations: Ms. Barness’ charge rate is $75 per hour, which would be a pass-
through cost to the MCC project.
Options: Authorize staff to contract for the services of Michelle Barness; continue looking for other
outside assistance; or do nothing.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Ms. Barness comes highly recommended and her expertise will
be of considerable assistance to staff. Aside from the initial work on the MCC open space areas, we may
wish to call on her for evaluation of tree preservation plans and park landscape issues.
Next Steps and Timelines: If the City is interested in outside assistance, hiring someone soon would
work quite well as we head into the Development Stage of the MCC P.U.D.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Healthy environment and attractive amenities.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
#11A.1
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 952-960-7900
Fax: 952-474-0128 www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
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
Planning Commission recommendation to Council re trail segment for following year
Council authorizes preparation of survey and Feasibility Report
Survey (30 days) – May
Feasibility Report (30 days) – June
Planning Commission review of feasibility report and trail walk – July
Planning Commission recommendation to Council re Feasibility Report
Council approves Feasibility Report
Planning Commission holds Neighborhood Meeting (Open House)
Council award of land acquisition services and authorizes preparation of Plans and Specifications
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
Land Acquisition Process (start approx. mid-way through plans and specs)
Land Acquisition process not required due to design modifications
o
Individual temporary easements or rights of entry may be required
o
Reduces project schedule
o
10/30/14
Neighborhood post-bid meeting
N/A
City possession of easements/letter of compliance
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
Page 2
Trail Schedule Update – Galpin Lake Road and Smithtown Road (East)
Smithtown Road East (LRT Trail to Country Club Road) Walkway Schedule
6/03/14
Planning Commission recommendation to Council re trail segment for following year
6/23/14
Council authorizes preparation of survey and Feasibility Report
/14/14 – 9/10/14
Survey (30 days) – (In Process) 7
/18/14–10/10/14
Feasibility Report (30 days) – 8
10/21/14
Planning Commission review of feasibility report and trail walk
10/21/14
Planning Commission recommendation to Council re Feasibility Report
10/27/14
Council approves Feasibility Report
10/30/14
Planning Commission holds Neighborhood Meeting (Open House)
12/08/14
Council award of land acquisition services and authorizes preparation of Plans
and Specifications
12/11/14 -5/31/15
Preparation of Plans and Specifications (90-120 days) (99% complete)
2/1/15- 8/31/15
Land Acquisition Process (start approx. mid-way through plans and specs)
Complete parcel descriptions and legal descriptions
o
Review proposed easements with staff/attorney
o
Letters to property owners regarding survey staking
o
Field stake proposed easements for Appraiser/RW Agent
o
Easement viewing – parcel owner and RW Agent on-site
o
Appraisal information
o
Appraisal review
o
Council considers resolution to authorize staff to make offers and eminent domain schedule
o
Prepare and deliver offers to parcel owners
o
3/23/15
Begin eminent domain action
/03/15
Neighborhood informational meeting (Open House) 6
Council approves Plans and Specifications and authorizes ad for Bids 7/13/15
8/21/15
Receive bids for construction
8/24/15
City possession of easements/letter of compliance
Council awards Construction Contract 8/24/15
9/09/15
Neighborhood preconstruction meeting
Groundbreaking Ceremony 9/14/15
5/02/16
Begin Construction
6/30/16
Construction substantially complete
Ribbon Cutting Ceremony 6/30/16
6/30/16
Restoration complete