03-14-16 CC Reg Mtg Agenda CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, MARCH 14,2016 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 Retreat Minutes of February 8, 2016 Minutes
B. City Council Special Meeting Minutes of February 22,2016 Minutes
C. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of February 22, 2016 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. Acceptance of the Lake Minnetonka Emergency Management Administrator's memo
Operations Plan
C. Accept Proposal for Professional Services for Soil Testing Director of Public
Works' memo
D. Request to Install Mallard Nest on City-Owned Pond Planning Director's
memo
E. Approve Change Order No. 1, Star Lane/Star Circle Engineer's memo,
Utility and Street Improvements, City Project 14-11 Resolution
F. Approve Agreement for Professional Arborist Services for Engineer's memo
S&S Tree & Horticultural Specialists, Inc.
G. Accepting a Donation from the American Legion for Safety Camp Finance Director's
memo
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
(No Council Action will be taken)
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA—March 14,2016
Page 2
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Recognition of Service of Planning Commissioner Tom Geng Clerk's memo
6. PUBLIC HEARING
7. PARKS
A. Report by Stephany Vassar on the February 23 and March 8 Park Minutes
Commission meetings
B. Proposal for Professional Services for Badger Park Field Grading Plan Planning Director's
memo
8. PLANNING
9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. Edgewood Rd/Grant Lorenz Rd/Birch Bluff Rd Intersection Review Engineer's memo,
Resolution
B. Approve Professional Services Agreement for Director of Public
2016 Trunk Watermain Improvements, City Project 16-04 (Oppidan) Works' memo
Location: 6000 Chaska Road
C. Approve Plans, Specifications and Authorize Advertisement for Bids Engineer's memo,
for the 2016 Mill& Overlay Improvements (City Project 16-03) Resolution
D. Approve Partnership Request for RPBCWD Flood Impact Study Engineer's memo
10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Consideration of Fees for Special Event Permits Administrator's memo,
Ordinances (2)
B. Agreement with Mangold Horticulture for Landscape Maintenance Administrator's memo
at the Southshore Center
C. Agreement with Mangold Horticulture for Landscape Maintenance Planning Director's memo
at Shorewood City Hall and Utility Building in Badger Park
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. Trails Schedule Trail Schedule
2. MNDOT Signing Project-TH 7
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, March 14, 2016
7:00 p.m.
6:00 PM – Joint Work Session with the Park Commission
Agenda Items #2A-2C: Approval of Minutes from the February 8 Council Retreat, February 22
Special Council meeting and February 22 Regular Council meeting.
Agenda Item #3A: Approval of the verified claims list.
Agenda Item #3B: Police Chief Mike Meehan is requesting Council approve a resolution
adopting the updated Lake Minnetonka Emergency Management Operations Plan. An
electronic copy of the plan has been emailed to Council.
Agenda Item #3C: Staff recommends acceptance of a proposal from WSB & Associates for
soil testing and analysis of the stockpile of street sweepings at Shorewood Public Works,
as required by the MPCA.
Agenda Item #3D: Jim Benson of 25670 Maple View Court is requesting permission to install
a mallard nest pole in the city-owned pond to the east of his house. Staff recommends
approval of this request.
Agenda Item #3E: This resolution approves Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $7,334.84,
for Star Lane and Star Circle Utility and Street Improvements, City Project 14-11.
Agenda Item #3F: This motion approves the Agreement for Professional Arborist Services for
S&S Tree and Horticulture Specialists, Inc.
Agenda Item #3G: This motion accepts a donation of $250 from the American Legion for
Safety Camp.
Agenda Item #4: Matters from the floor – no council action will be taken.
Agenda Item #5A: Nancy Geng will be in attendance at the Council meeting to accept the
recognition plaque for her late husband, Tom Geng, for his nine years of service on the
Planning Commission from March 2007-January 2016.
Agenda Item #6: There are no public hearings scheduled this evening.
Agenda Item #7A: Report by Stephany Vassar on the February 23 and March 8 Park
Commission meetings.
Executive Summary – City Council Meeting of March 14, 2016
Page 2
Agenda Item #7B: Consideration of approval of a proposal from WSB & Associates for
preparation of the Badger Park Grading Plan.
Agenda Item #8: There are no planning items this evening.
Agenda Item #9A: This item is consideration of approval of a Resolution regarding parking
restriction and traffic control change for the Edgewood Road, Grant Lorenz Road, and
Birch Bluff Road intersection.
Agenda Item #9B: This item accepts the proposal from WSB and Associates, for preparation
of a feasibility report for extension of water to the proposed Oppidan Senior Living site at
TH 7 and Chaska Road. Staff is recommending approval.
Agenda Item #9C: This resolution approves the plans, specifications and authorizes the
advertisement for bids for the 2016 Mill and Overlay Improvement Project, City Project
16-03.
Agenda Item #9D: Consideration of entering into a partnership with Riley Purgatory Bluff
Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) to fund a flood impact study.
Agenda Item #10A: Staff has provided information on special event permit fee information
from neighboring communities, and a recommendation on the fee, for Council’s
consideration. Should Council determine to set a fee, two Ordinance amendments are
needed: 1) an update to City Code Chapter 505 regarding special events, and; 2) an
ordinance establishing the fee for special event permits.
Agenda Item #10B: Last year, Mangold Horticulture provided landscape plants and
maintenance at the Southshore Center. We requested a proposal for providing
maintenance service again this year. Staff recommends approval of the proposal from
Mangold Horticulture for landscape maintenance at the Southshore Center.
Agenda Item #10C: Mangold Horticulture has provided a quote and proposal for landscape
maintenance at city hall, and at the utility building across from Badger Park. Staff
recommends approval of both proposals.
Agenda Item #11A: Staff reports are provided in the packet and will be given at the meeting.
#2A
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 24150 SMITHTOWN RD
CITY COUNCIL/STAFF RETREAT SOUTH LAKE PUBLIC SAFETY
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2016 FACILITY TRAINING ROOM
9:00 A.M.
MINUTES
Convene City Council/Staff Retreat
Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 9:01 AM.
Present: Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Labadie, Siakel, Sundberg and Woodruff; City Attorney
Keane (departed the meeting at 12:45 P.M.); City Administrator Joynes, City Clerk
Panchyshyn, Finance Director DeJong, Planning Director Nielsen, Director of Public
Works Brown, and City Engineer Hornby
Absent: None
Siakel moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda as presented.
1. Goals and Objectives Update
Administrator Joynes highlighted the status of various items on the 2015 Work Plan/Action Items. The
format is the same as used in past years. The items are above and beyond staff’s regular work. (The
PowerPoint presentation and the meeting packet contained a copy of that work plan.)
2. Southshore Center
Attorney Keane explained the City brought the partition action seeking the dissolution of the partnership
and the allocation of the ownership of the Southshore Center to Shorewood with the determination of
compensation to be decided by a third party referee. The other four cities that co-own the Center with
Shorewood brought a motion for summary judgment arguing that Paragraph 6.A Termination: Shorewood
Option in the Cooperative Agreement required Shorewood to repay those cities the full price if
Shorewood exercised the purchase option to buy back the Center. Over the last 20 days those issues were
fully briefed by the four cities. Shorewood responded. The four cities submitted their reply brief. On
February 5, 2016, oral arguments were presented before Judge James Moore (the judge assigned to the
matter). Judge Moore has 90 days to decide. Judge Moore had been the Chief Deputy of the Civil
Division for the City of Minneapolis City Attorney’s Office. Judge Moore is quite in tune with serving
the public, local issues, the importance of efficiency in matters of public representation and he is very
conscientious.
He noted that when the oral arguments were presented during the hearing with Judge Moore Deephaven
Mayor Skrede, Greenwood Mayor Kind, Excelsior City Manager Luger, a local Beat reporter, and a
woman he did not recognize were present.
He stated Judge Moore asked good questions and it was clear he had read all of the materials before the
hearing. About one minute into Attorney George Hoff’s (the attorney for the other four cities)
presentation Judge Moore interrupted him and asked if the Cooperative Agreement required all five cities
to agree to the exercise of the option to purchase.
Keane then stated if Judge Moore denies the motion for summary judgment hopefully it will facilitate
another round of swift settlement discussions. He did not think the cities were that far apart when the
mediation ended. He thought there would be another round of mediation to try and resolve this as
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 2 of 27
efficiently as possible. It could be another six months before the referees were appointed and the cities
complete their appraisals and submit arguments about the value to the panel of referees. Or, it could be
resolved this spring.
Councilmember Sundberg asked who participated in the last round of mediation. Attorney Keane stated
Council appointed Mayor Zerby and Councilmember Siakel. Administrator Joynes noted on the others
cities side there were 16 people. Councilmember Siakel stated if another member of Council wanted to
participate she asked if that would be a problem. Keane responded it would not. Joynes commented that it
was an interesting back and forth process. He clarified the Shorewood participants were never in the same
room as the other cities’ representatives. Sundberg noted she would be interested in participating in future
mediation if it works out.
In response to a question from Director DeJong, Attorney Keane stated if three or more members of
Council participate the mediation would have to be noticed.
Mayor Zerby asked if the public is invited to attend. Attorney Keane stated that would be an exception.
Councilmember Labadie stated she would be interested in participating in a future mediation.
Administrator Joynes explained he had asked Park and Recreation Coordinator Grout and
Communications Coordinator Moore to identify interior updates that they would recommend doing to the
Southshore Center in 2016. A copy of that list was included in the meeting packet along with the long-
term capital maintenance plan for the Center prepared by Building Official Pazandak. The three interior
items recommended for 2016 are: 1) interior painting and trim for the hallway (estimated cost $5,500),
dining room and reception area; 2) purchasing 200 chairs for the dining room (estimated costs $10,000);
and, 3) replacing the fluorescent lights in the dining room with recessed lights (estimated cost $4,000).
Councilmember Siakel asked why chairs were needed. Administrator Joynes responded because of wear
and tear and noted there are opportunities to buy chairs from organizations that are getting rid of them.
Mayor Zerby stated that if the situation with the Southshore Center is going to be resolved in 2016 he
asked if it would be prudent to take a longer term view of how the Center would be operated and what the
staffing and facility needs would be. He thought that should be done before doing those three items. He
commented that a few years ago the chairs in the conference room were replaced.
Attorney Keane stated the whole point of starting the partition action was so that Shorewood could take
over control over the Southshore Center and manage its destiny. He then stated if Judge Moore ruled
against Shorewood and Shorewood then decided to drop the partition action that would be the only
outcome that would not leave Shorewood in control. Administrator Joynes noted that then capital
improvements to the Center would have to be approved by all five cities. The other four cities would also
have say about what is done to the Center. If the Judge rules in favor of Shorewood then Council
ultimately has to decide how it wants the Center to be operated.
Administrator Joynes stated in the past there has been some discussion about including the Southshore
Center as part of the parks program. Planning for improvements to the Center would need to be in part
done by the Park Commission.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought the Southshore Center needs to be considered from a business perspective.
He then stated, for discussion purposes, that there may no longer be a need for a full commercial kitchen
because senior lunches are no longer being served there. Caterers could bring food and warming trays to
the Center. Maybe fewer rooms are needed; walls could come down or be moved. He noted that it is his
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 3 of 27
recollection that Council wanted to take the Center to the next level. Maybe a contractor could help create
the vision for the Center. Councilmember Sundberg concurred and stated there are a variety of options.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought it would be best to leave the Southshore Center operations as
status quo for at least the next six months. She thought it was appropriate to make limited cosmetic
improvements.
Councilmember Sundberg asked if the reason for purchasing new chairs is because there are not enough
of them or are they becoming dilapidated. Administrator Joynes stated they are a detriment to the
operation.
Administrator Joynes stated, for example, that if a decision was made mid to late summer of this year it
would be prudent to allocate money in the 2017 budget to do a study and to allocate funds in the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) to make improvements.
Joynes then stated that Southshore Center operations loss less money in 2015 than in the past few years.
Mayor Zerby noted that Council has not been provided with a financial report on that for quite some time.
Councilmember Siakel reiterated her support for doing the three cosmetic improvements to the
Southshore Center and she cautioned against doing anything that would increase the value of the Center at
this time. She stated if the City takes control of the Center then she could possibly support doing a few
improvements in the third or fourth quarter of 2016 provided there is the needed funding to do so.
Administrator Joynes stated staff will bring back to Council the three top interior items for consideration.
Mayor Zerby stated he does not want to put anything significant into the Southshore Center until there is
a business plan.
Councilmember Labadie stated she does not recollect ever seeing a Southshore Center operations
financial report since she has been on Council. She then stated she would like the report to indicate how
often there is a need for 150 chairs. She would also like to know the number of and types of events being
held there. That information would be useful when deciding future things.
Mayor Zerby stated a church and the Historical Society used to rent space in the Southshore Center.
When the other cities quit participating in Center operations and funding those renters went away.
3. Review of City Finances
A. Projects/Funding Sources
Administrator Joynes distributed a copy of a Funding Worksheet which depicted possible funding sources
and projects funding needs. He explained it is an update of a similar sheet provided to Council last year.
The scope of time is about five years for sources and needs. It showed the total amount of funding sources
ranged from $10,053,500 – $12,207,000. The $10,053,500 amount is what the City can control. The
higher amount would require decisions by other organizations (e.g.; the Minnetonka School District for
tax abatement funds). It showed the total project funding needs to be $9,081,000 – $9,525,000. The lower
amount is what staff expects. The higher number, the worst case scenario, is if the settlement for the
Southshore Center is higher than anticipated. The takeaway is there would be sufficient resources for both
the best case and worst case situations.
He highlighted various items on the Worksheet.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 4 of 27
The Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) development project will generate revenues based on the project
design.
The $2,000,000 in municipal state aid (MSA) reimbursement will be used to help fund the construction of
nd
the Smithtown Road east sidewalk extension, the Strawberry Lane and West 62 Street trail, and the
Galpin Lake Road trail segment.
The City was awarded a $200,000 Hennepin Youth Sports Program grant for the construction of an
artificial turf ballfield, The Minnetonka Lacrosse Association has committed $175,000 and the
Minnetonka Football Association has committed $25,000 to that also.
Other items that could be included in other funding sources are: street assessments; General Fund tax
increase of 1 percent (or $50,000); and, General Obligation (GO) bonds ($1 million worth of bonds would
require a yearly payback amount of $155,000 for ten years). No decisions have been made on those three
other funding sources and they are not included in the funding sources total.
In 2023 the bonded debt for the two public safety facilities will be paid off. The City pays about $500,000
annually to pay down its share of the debt. After that is paid off, he assumes the fire and police joint
powers organizations will require funding be set aside for major capital improvements to the facilities.
The Worksheet reflects that $100,000 of the $500,000 will be needed for that leaving the other $400,000
for Shorewood specific needs.
The trail needs are partially funded with MSA funding. There are enough excess General Fund reserves to
fund the purchase of the Southshore Center. The MCC park dedication fees combined with the outside
contributions to the artificial turf ballfield should cover the cost of improvements to Badger Park. The
funding needs for street reconstruction for 2018 – 2022 for seven streets is estimated to be $4,812,000.
They are not specifically funded; there should be close to enough resources available to do what needs to
be done. A future funding source needs to be identified for street reconstruction. Assessing for street
reconstruction would be a philosophical change for the City. Bonding for reconstruction would be
different for the City as well. If the City wants to build up its tax distribution system to help fund
reconstruction, that would be a change as well.
There is currently a legislative effort underway relating to creating street reconstruction and street
maintenance utility funds. The Legislature has not approved that yet. If implemented, it would allow a
municipality to charge its residents a maintenance utility tax for streets each year. There is no guarantee
that will come to fruition so Council needs to find another source to fund streets. The City cannot be put
in a position to be without funding for streets five years out. Some cities have the philosophy that they do
not reconstruct streets until residents demand it and then the residents have to pay the cost for doing it.
nd
Councilmember Sundberg expressed concern about the sharp turn from West 62 Street on to Cathcart
nd
Drive. She asked if that would be addressed when Strawberry Lane and West 62 Street is reconstructed.
nd
Engineer Hornby responded it would not and explained West 62 Street would only be reconstructed
between Strawberry Lane and Church Road. Sundberg stated that area could be the scene of a terrible
accident. It becomes more likely with bicyclists riding their fat tire bikes on the trail year round. She
continues to observe bicyclists ignore the stop sign on the trails. She expressed concern about what could
happen at that intersection. In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Director Brown
nd
explained the City owns up to the center line on West 62 Street and the City of Chanhassen owns the
other half. Woodruff stated the trail intersects with the roadway at a diagonal and asked if the trail is all in
Shorewood there. Brown explained the portion on the north side is located in Shorewood and that on the
south side is located in Chanhassen. Sundberg stated the street configuration is bad. Councilmember
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 5 of 27
Labadie concurred and stated there are two issues with that intersection – one is the street configuration
and the other is the intersection with the trail. Both are extremely dangerous.
Councilmember Siakel noted Shorewood was quite rural a number of years ago. She encouraged Council
to remember the City cannot fix everything; Council needs to prioritize things. She cautioned Council
against reprioritizing needs too often.
Councilmember Sundberg stated that she thought that dealing with that sharp turn is a high priority item.
She cannot think of a more dangerous intersection in Shorewood.
Administrator Joynes stated that because the City will be working in that area it would be appropriate to
assess the situation. The availability of funding resources for that will depend on the City’s ability to
convince the Minnetonka School District to participate in abatement. He thought the proposed trail along
Strawberry Lane to the Minnewashta elementary School should be a solid reason for the District
participating with at least $900,000 in abatement. Discussions with the District were postponed last fall
because residents in the District were going to vote on a referendum.
Joynes then stated abatement discussions have been started with Hennepin County related to an above
grade crossing for the Lake Minnetonka Regional LRT Trail crossing at County Road 19. That would
benefit the Three Rivers Park District (TRPD). That abatement would be because of the MCC project.
The TRPD has submitted an application to the County for abatement and it will be the agency that will
champion the abatement. The TRPD has indicated there will be another chance for federal funds to help
fund the construction of the overpass.
Councilmember Woodruff stated for projects that will start in 2016 the specific funding sources need to
be identified. Administrator Joynes stated when staff presents a project it will identify the specific funding
source. Woodruff asked if the Worksheet could be expanded to show specific sources. Mayor Zerby noted
the City already has an approved budget for 2016. Woodruff stated that, for example, Badger Park
improvements are funded out of the Park Capital Fund and there is no money budgeted in the General
Fund to transfer into the Park Capital Fund for those improvements.
Director DeJong highlighted the Financial Management Plan (FMP) Summary for the City’s various
funds which reflected the estimated cash balance at the end of 2015 (based on the adopted 2015 budgets),
the end of 2024 (absent any changes to the document) and the dollar change. He explained the Summary
shows what is projected to happen to each of the funds over the course of the next 10 years. Deficits are
projected for some of the capital funds. Towards the end of the 10 years there are some unfunded projects.
There is funding for projects in the earlier years but funding decisions have to be made for the out years.
The estimates for projects in the earlier years are realistic.
Mayor Zerby asked when the City will receive the park dedication fees for the MCC development.
Director DeJong stated he included $300,000 in 2016 and the remaining $486,500 in 2017 and noted the
City may not receive it that fast. It is for a total of 121 units at $6,500 per lot. The fees are received at the
point of final platting. Attorney Keane explained the City receives the fees when the City releases a plat
to the developer for recording. Keane noted that the City has no control over when the plat is recorded,
but it must be recorded within two years. He stated there is no assurance when the Phase 2 and Phase 3
final plats will be submitted for approval. Director Nielsen noted the earliest the City will consider
approval of the final plat for Phase 1 of the project would be in March 2016. Nielsen clarified that in the
past when the City gave a developer the final plat for recording it required payment of the fees and the
developer to put up a substantial letter of credit. Councilmember Woodruff cautioned against planning to
use the fees to fund projects before the fees are actually received. Councilmember Siakel stated she
envisions phasing the improvement to Badger Park in. Administrator Joynes noted that the only
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 6 of 27
improvement that may be done at Badger Park in 2016 would be the construction of the artificial turf
playfield. Joynes also noted the City could sell abatement bonds in anticipation of the abatement funds
coming in. He stated there will be more than one builder for the MCC development and it is likely they
would want to get started.
Administrator Joynes displayed graphics depicting the level of expenditures and fund balance of the
various funds based on their 10-year FMPs and highlighted what to take from them. They were discussed
in order of relative financial health with the least healthy / speculative funds being discussed last. The
more noteworthy comments are as follows for each of the funds.
Recycling Fund
The balance in the Recycling Fund is projected to increase substantially because of changes to the
recycling contract that reduced the City’s cost.
The recycling fees could be reduced, money could be transferred out of the Recycling Fund to
other funds or service could be expanded.
Mayor Zerby asked if any money from this Fund is used to pay for the spring clean-up event. Director
DeJong stated the event is paid for out of this Fund. Zerby stated there has been discussion about bringing
curbside collection back. If that was done it could be funded out of this Fund.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he has heard residents suggest that it would be helpful to have yard
waste pickup in the fall or even during the growing season. He then stated the recycling rate could be
reduced and the stormwater management rate could be increased proportionately. He went on to state the
Fund could be used to pay for forester/arborist services.
Administrator Joynes explained there are communities that provide spring brush pickup services. A
benefit to the community of having curbside pickup is people will more likely prune their shrubbery and
trees and that helps make the urban forest healthier. There are also problems with utility lines from fallen
branches or trees.
Councilmember Sundberg suggested encouraging residents to clear out invasive growth such as
buckthorn. She stated if there are funding needs for alternative energy things may those needs could be
satisfied with funds from this Fund.
Administrator Joynes suggested consideration be given to renaming the Fund to Environmental Fund.
Councilmember Sundberg concurred with that.
Councilmember Siakel stated the chart reflects a modest increase in recycling costs. She then stated the
chart reflects there will excess funds available in 2017/2018. She asked staff to get an estimate for city-
wide brush pickup and brush drop off. Administrator Joynes stated there are a lot of examples that staff
can research. Siakel stated paying for recycling services is the first priority for use of the funds. Council
should prioritize other uses of it.
Siakel then stated if the City had one trash hauler she asked if the City would bill for that or the hauler
would bill the resident. Administrator Joynes explained there are a number of options for organized
hauling. One is it would be the City’s hauler. Another is for the City to contract with one vendor and the
City would probably bill for the service. Sometimes there is a consortium of haulers and they handle the
administrative tasks. There is a bill at the legislature that would put a moratorium on organized hauling
efforts because of residents’ emotional responses to it. He noted there was an editorial in the February 8,
2016, Star Tribune about the benefits of organized hauling.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 7 of 27
Councilmember Siakel stated she pays $75 a year for seasonal yard waste pickup. That is an option for
residents.
Administrator Joynes stated if the City provided city-wide, one-time brush pickup services the City would
select the vendor, administer the contract and pay for it.
Councilmember Labadie stated she would be interested in having staff solicit a quote for a one-day,
curbside collection and noted that some of the other communities in the area provide that. Mayor Zerby
noted the City used to do that but moved to drop off collection in the spring. He also noted residents liked
the curbside collection. Councilmember Woodruff concurred.
Councilmember Siakel stated she would prefer the brush pickup. She thought it would tie nicely into
forester/arborist services Council has decided to contract for.
Councilmember Sundberg suggested Council discuss, at a future date, the possibility of conducting
another resident survey. Councilmember Siakel stated if that is done it should be done for just a couple of
items. The last survey was very comprehensive. Mayor Zerby stated the survey questions have to be
carefully worded.
Councilmember Siakel summarized that Council would like staff to solicit quotes for brush removal and
the costs for paper shredding and any other expenses for spring clean-up.
Water Fund
This is the healthiest fund. The cash balance has about $2.5 million in excess of what the City
needs to operate. The balance will continue to grow as more residents connect to municipal water.
This Fund could loan money to other funds.
Only about one-half of the Shorewood residents are connected to municipal water; they are the
only contributors to the Water Fund.
Mayor Zerby stated, for example, if he had a water company he would want to use the excess funds to
build up the business. There are hundreds of residents who are not connected to municipal water but could
connect. He asked what kind of incentive the City could offer residents to entice them to connect.
Councilmember Siakel asked if the City could offer no interest financing over 10 years to residents to
connect.
Director DeJong noted a recent example where there were two properties fronting both Star Lane and
Smithtown Road that were assessed $5,000 each when watermain was extended along Smithtown Road.
The current connection charge is $10,000 minus any assessment. When Star Lane was recently
reconstructed watermain was extended. If the owners of those two properties want to connect to water it
would cost them $5,000 to bring water to the edge of the property and that could not be assessed. The
assessment for properties along Star Lane was $9,500 and those property owners would pay a connection
fee of $500 ($10,000 – $9,500).
Engineer Hornby explained that when watermain was extended those property owners wanted to assess
the connection to public right-of-way (ROW). It will also cost another $3,000 – $5,000 to extend the
water from the ROW to the house. That cost cannot be assessed. Offering a way to finance that $3,000 –
$5,000 cost could be a way to entice property owners to connect to water. He noted that last year there
were six inquiries about extending watermain to the ROW and only one property owner moved forward
with that. He stated there have been more inquiries in that one year than since he has provided
engineering services to the City.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 8 of 27
Councilmember Siakel asked how many properties are not hooked up to municipal water that could hook
up. She questioned how much of the excess funds in the Water Fund could be used to provide low cost
financing for the cost to connect.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested, for example, allocating $1 million of the excess funds to zero or
low cost financing option to connect. The applications for financing would be considered on a first come
first serve basis.
Councilmember Siakel reiterated she would support providing no or low cost financing. Mayor Zerby,
Councilmember Labadie and Councilmember Sundberg also indicated they would support that.
Engineer Hornby noted that along Star Lane and Star Circle there were about six property owners who
opted to connect to water. He thought there were a lot more property owners there who are interested in
connecting.
Councilmember Labadie stated with the exception of Star Lane and Star Circle she asked when the last
time was when a large number of property owners opted to connect to municipal water. Director Brown
stated it would have been for the Wedgwood Drive reconstruction project.
Administrator Joynes stated current and past Councils have generally turned down watermain extension
projects because residents did not want to be assessed for watermain extension. Out of the last nine
proposed projects eight were turned down. He commented there is a difference between dictating water
versus incenting people to want to connect to municipal water. He stated sometimes projects have been
turned down that prevented the City from providing the opportunity for municipal water in other areas of
the City.
Joynes noted the MCC development will generate about 140 connections by the time the project is
complete.
Mayor Zerby stated cost has been a barrier for a long time for people who may have wanted municipal
water to be made available for them to connect to. He has pushed to find a way to reduce that cost. He
then stated when he tells property owners that the cost to get water to their property, not their house,
would be $10,000 they decide they don’t want to do that when they having working wells.
Engineer Hornby explained that in 2012 when the water plan was updated the recommendation was to
increase the connection fee to about $17,400. That plan was not adopted by Council.
Councilmember Siakel reiterated she likes the idea of using up to $1 million out of the Water Fund to
provide no or low cost financing to residents to connect to municipal water. Councilmember Labadie
stated she likes that a lot more than having the City contributing toward the payment of the connection.
General Fund
There is excess balance in the General Fund based on the General Fund Balance Policy guidelines
that could be used for other purposes. The excess ranges from $467,000 – $1,621,000 depending
on the method used to calculate it. The greater number is based on how the Office of the State
Auditor (OSA) recommends calculating reserves. Joynes cautioned against going to level
recommended by the OSA because the City’s Policy is no less than 55 percent reserves based on
the next year’s budgeted expenses. It helps with the City’s bond rating and the availability of
funds.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 9 of 27
Equipment Replacement Fund
The Fund’s balance varies from year because equipment replacement needs vary. There is no
need to worry about this Fund.
The graphic shows a deficit of about $50,000 in 2018 but that should not be a problem.
Transfers into this Fund have been increased the last few years.
Sewer Fund
The cash balance has about $1 million in excess of what the City needs to operate.
This Fund could loan money to other funds.
Director DeJong stated there has been discussion about moving money into the Stormwater Management
Fund. The results of a rate study the City asked Ehlers to conduct recommended significant increases in
the level of the Stormwater Management Fund for ongoing charges. The Stormwater FMP indicates that
towards the end of the 10-year plan the incoming revenue should be a lot more than the annual
expenditures. He does not recommend transferring $1 million from the Sewer Fund to the Stormwater
Management Fund at this time. That can be done at a future date after assessing what the future
stormwater operational and capital needs are.
Director Brown stated The FMP does not include any increases for possible MCES (Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services) surcharges imposed for exceeding inflow and infiltration (I&I) rates into the
MCES’ sewer system. There may be increases to MCES rates in order to pay for the improvements it has
made to its system. There should be funding available to deal with those surcharges or rate increases.
Engineer Hornby explained every year the Public Works Department televises certain segments of the
City’s sewer line and makes the needed repairs to reduce I&I flow. That televising and those repairs are
funded out of the Sewer CIP. The sanitary sewer system was repaired as part of the Star Lane and
Valleywood Lane roadway reconstruction projects. The funds that were budgeted for televising were used
to make short-term I&I repairs. For the Sunnyvale Lane project the sanitary sewer was replaced because it
was in a state of disrepair.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the Stormwater Management FMP chart indicates there will be a small
deficit in the cash balance in 2016 and a small positive cash balance in 2017 and 2018 and again a slight
deficit in 2019. In 2023 the projection is there will finally be an adequate cash balance. He then stated if
money is transferred from the Sewer Fund to the Stormwater Management Fund that will result in an
adequate positive balance in the Stormwater Fund. He expressed concern about the need to keep track of
what was going to be spent for stormwater projects and what might be spent. The money in the Sewer
Fund could be spent on something else and a few years later find out the money was needed for
stormwater related things. Therefore, he advocated for transferring about $500,000 from the Sewer Fund
to the Stormwater Fund. He cautioned against coming up with a new project to spend on.
Director DeJong explained from an accounting perspective if there is a negative balance in a fund at year
end there can be an inter-fund loan made on December 31 and reversed on January 1.
Southshore Community Center Fund
There are ongoing deficits in the Fund for a variety of reasons. That will continue due to the
current structure for operating and maintaining the Southshore Center. Those deficits are offset by
the approximate $70,000 subsidy Shorewood contributes annually. Councilmember Woodruff
asked that the subsidy be foot noted on the FMP graph.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 10 of 27
Building capital needs are not included in the FMP.
Stormwater Management Fund
This was in part discussed as part of the Sewer Fund discussion.
Park Improvement Fund
Badger Park is the major expenditure in 2016 and 2017. The Park Improvement FMP graph
reflects a deficit at the end of 2017.
In response to a question from Mayor Zerby, Director DeJong explained that the Park Improvement FMP
includes $300,000 of park dedication in 2016 and the other $486,500 is included in 2017. It does not
include the $200,000 Hennepin Youth Sports Program grant for the construction of an artificial turf
ballfield, the $175,000 the Minnetonka Lacrosse Association has committed or the $25,000 the
Minnetonka Football Association has committed. Because the artificial turf playfield was not included in
the plans for the Badger Park improvements for a cost of $1.3 the $400,000 total may keep the Fund from
going into a deficit state in 2017. Other improvements to the field were included. The City has committed
$150,000 for that playfield. The balance going into 2016 was high because the proceeds from the sale of
eh City-owned residential property were put in this Fund and not much was spent in 2015.
Administrator Joynes stated the only improvement that will be made to Badger Park in 2016 will be the
construction of the ballfield. Council and staff have to discuss what will happen after that. He noted that
the cost to replace the tennis courts is $200,000 and that has not been included in the Park Improvement
CIP.
Councilmember Siakel stated she recollects the estimate for the artificial turf playfield was about
$600,000. $400,000 will be funded from outside sources. Director Nielsen stated if there is a shortfall in
funding the Lacrosse Association needs to determine how to find the additional funding.
Councilmember Siakel stated it appears there is enough funding in this Fund in 2016 to pay for the
planned projects and possibly enough to make other improvements (e.g., the tennis courts, the parking lot
or the warming house). She suggested people start to refer to the area around Badger Park as the Badger
Park Campus or something of that nature. That would include the Southshore Center.
Mayor Zerby noted that Badger Park was named after the first mayor of Shorewood whose last name was
Badger.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested Council have a workshop with the Park Commission about 2016
projects. He stated that few members of the Park Commission have participated in Badger Park
improvement discussions and come March 1 even fewer will have been.
In response to a comment from Attorney Keane, Director Nielsen explained that staff has made it very
clear to the Lacrosse Association that the new playfield is not the Association’s field. Director Brown
noted the City’s policy on accepting donations is there are no strings attached. Mayor Zerby stated that
had been made clear to the Baseball Association as well when it helped fund improvements.
In response to a comment from Councilmember Labadie, Director Nielsen stated making sure the
playfield is made out of healthy turf is the Lacrosse Association’s responsibility.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 11 of 27
Director Nielsen noted the only way to get a realistic idea of what it will cost to construct the playfield is
to bid it out. For the grant application he used the highest guestimates. He thought the actual bid would be
in line with the funds available.
Mayor Zerby noted the Park Improvement CIP includes $105,000 for Freeman Park in 2017 and $75,000
in 2018. It includes $50,000 for Cathcart Park in 2018 and $60,000 for Silverwood Park in 2018.
Councilmember Siakel stated Council needs to provide the Park Commission with direction on hockey.
Badger Park is currently set up for a hockey rink. There is also a rink in Cathcart Park. She questioned if
the City should invest in a portable hockey setup for Freeman Park. Director Nielsen noted that is what
the Park Commission has recommended. Siakel stated there is also a rink in Manitou Park in the City of
Tonka Bay. She questioned how many rinks there needs to be in a small area. Councilmember Woodruff
stated that per the Park Commission there is a demand for space for ice skating, not necessarily for
hockey. Nielsen stated the Commission asked the hockey organizers why they are not using the City’s
rinks very much. The organizers claimed it was because of the City’s player fee of $10. Baseball and
soccer organizers do not complain about that fee. The hockey organizers don’t care if the rinks are smaller
portable ones because young players can skate on those rinks. Ice skaters can also. Woodruff stated he has
heard that someone had questioned why the hockey rink would be taken out of Badger Park.
Councilmember Labadie stated a member of the Park Commission is an employee in the warming house
at Cathcart Park. It was her opinion that warming house was no longer usable. That Commissioner has a
good idea of the usage of the rink. Labadie assumes the Park Commission will ask to replace that some
time. Director Nielsen noted that warming house is a trailer.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the removal of the rink in Badger Park has been discussion by the Park
Commission numerous times over two years and Council has discussed it also. No members of the
hockey organization came to express their displeasure about that.
Councilmember Siakel stated hockey is done at Badger Park and noted the soils under that area are very
poor. Director Nielsen reiterated that is the Park Commission’s recommendation.
Mayor Zerby recessed the meeting at 10:55 A.M.
Mayor Zerby reconvened the meeting at 11:04 A.M.
Trail Construction Fund
The anticipated capital expenditures in the next few years are for the Smithtown Road east
nd
sidewalk extension, the Galpin Lake Road trail segment and the Strawberry Lane and West 62
Street trail segment.
There is funding for the Smithtown Road and Galpin Lake Road trails segments.
The Strawberry Lane segment is funded pretty minus the abatement portion which has to be
worked out. The abatement process will be a major effort this year. If the abatement situation
works out that segment will be developed in the next few years.
There was some money in this fund at the beginning of 2016.
Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds will be used to help fund trails. In 2018 and after there are no
funds left for trails. Yet, there are trails still to be constructed in the Trail Implementation Plan.
Funding is an issue Council has to address.
Director DeJong explained 25 percent of the MSA funds go towards maintenance; it goes into the General
Fund. He stated there is $4.8 million in unfunded trail projects in the Trail Implementation Plan. Director
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 12 of 27
Nielsen stated the Plan needs to be updated. The Strawberry Lane trail segment has been moved up in the
construction plan.
Councilmember Siakel explained when the Trail Committee developed the Trail Implementation Plan the
Committee took multiple plans that had been developed over the years and combined them into one plan.
Then they prioritized them. The trails were added to the CIP and the CIP became underfunded. She was
not sure it would make any sense to build some of the trails included in the Plan. She suggested
identifying one or two trail additional segments (in addition to those listed above) that it would make
sense to construct and leave those in the CIP and take the rest out. After that, the Plan should be
terminated.
Councilmember Sundberg stated she thought Councilmember Siakel’s suggestion makes a great deal of
sense.
Director Nielsen stated some of the trails listed in the Plan would have been on-street trails.
Street Maintenance Fund
The cost of major street reconstruction projects is projected to be about $4.8 million out beyond
2020.
Roadway maintenance is funded by transfers from the General Fund.
Starting in 2019/2020 the balance in the Street Maintenance Fund starts to be inadequate to fund
the necessary roadway maintenance projects.
Council needs to start thinking about a philosophy for funding roadway reconstruction (e.g.,
bonding, assessments, higher taxes, etc.). That would be the prudent thing for this Council to do
for future Councils and for residents.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought Administrator Joynes’s recommendation makes sense and
noted that all property owners pay for roadways.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the City does not transfer enough money into this Fund to fund the 20-
Year Pavement Management Plan (PMP). He then stated if the concept of the street improvement district
becomes a reality the City could, for example, be divided into five districts and levy a tax for roadway
improvements for each district. Councilmember Siakel noted that City had been divided into five
precincts once upon a time. Woodruff stated the City needs about $2 million to make this Fund healthy.
Administrator Joynes stated Council could increase its tax levy by 1 percent (or about $50,000) each year
and transfer that increase into this Fund to build the balance up. That would be much better than taxing
for $2 million all at once. Councilmember Woodruff stated he would advocate doing that.
Mayor Zerby stated he would prefer to have the benefiting property owners share in the cost of the
reconstruction. He commented that Shorewood to some extent is a City of cul-de-sacs. He noted the
Funding Worksheet indicates a 20 percent street assessment would generate about $962,000 in funding.
Administrator Joynes explained that the courts have found 20 percent to be justifiable for benefiting
properties for most cities. The other 80 percent is a city’s cost because it is a city-wide system.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought the City of Mound assesses 40 percent to the benefiting
properties. Woodruff then stated the City would still need to come up with $1.6 million.
Director DeJong explained the transfers into the Equipment Replacement Fund and the Street
Maintenance Fund have been increased by $15,000 annually for the last three or four years. He thought
that after one or two more $15,000 increases the balance in the Equipment Replacement Fund should be
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 13 of 27
sufficient to avoid deficits except when there is a major purchase such as a front end loader. He reiterated
that in 2023 the bonded debt for the two public safety facilities will be paid off. The City pays about
$500,000 annually to pay down its share of the debt. Councilmember Siakel stated there will still be a
need for funding of capital expenditures for public safety. Administrator Joynes stated the Funding
Worksheet indicates $100,000 was allocated for that and noted the need could be higher.
Administrator Joynes summarized that the City has the resources needed to fund things for about the next
five years. He noted that Council needs to make some decisions about where the funds come from. If
Council wants to schedule a workshop to discuss that staff can put together more detailed information.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested staff prepare a timetable for making decisions about funding.
Councilmember Sundberg asked if Council needs to be a little more aggressive in its support for
legislative initiatives such as the League of Minnesota Cities’ (LMC) initiative with the legislature to
implement the concept of street improvement districts. Administrator Joynes stated there various groups
that lobby for the cities. It does help if the City contacts its elected officials to ensure they understand the
City’s position. The City has sent letters to its legislators over the last few years. Unfortunately, most of
the City’s positions have not been shared by its legislators. Sundberg noted that she had contacted the two
legislators on another issue; one was responsive and one was not responsive at all. Joynes stated he is
aware of some cities getting together and having legislators come before them as a group; he thought that
is effective. Sundberg suggested doing that and noted that she does not think the City is getting the
representation it deserves.
B. Tax Abatement
This was referenced as part of Item 3.A.
C. Minnesota State Aide Advance Funding Opportunities
This was discussed as part of Item 3.A.
4. Staffing/Succession Planning
Administrator Joynes reviewed a timeline for succession planning tasks.
In June or July hire a company to conduct a compensation study for all positions. There are three
companies that do that for the public sector. There are a number of long tenured employees that
will be retiring before or during first quarter of 2017. Those individuals are at or near the top of
their pay grades. It is prudent to find out what the market rate is for the positions they hold.
The search for a new city administrator will go on during July and August. The goal is to have a
new administrator on board by October 1.
By September succession plans will be created for the following positions: the city clerk, the
planning director; the planner; the building inspector; and, the public works assistant. All have
given some idea of what the range of time is that they will retire. Most of the individuals holding
those positions have indicated they would be receptive to phasing out their departure (e.g.;
working part time, coming back on a part-time basis or overlap with a new hire). Joynes will
work with each of them to develop an exit strategy.
Joynes noted there is money budgeted for those tasks. Mayor Zerby asked how much the compensation
study will cost. Joynes responded about $20,000; about $1,500 per position. Zerby asked if the League of
Minnesota Cities (LMC) has that data. Joynes explained he has tried to use the LMC’s data the last three
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 14 of 27
years. He found the volume of data it has is much less; the LMC lost about one half of its data a year or
two ago. Councilmember Woodruff stated when the City did a study about five years ago one of the
challenges was finding comparable position descriptions. Zerby asked if the job descriptions are up to
date. Joynes stated they were updated a few years ago. Zerby then asked if there a job description for the
Public Works assistant position. Joynes responded no. He explained that there is also $4,000 – $5,000
budgeted for supervisory and public contact training for a Public Works person. Zerby asked if a Public
Works staff member could be promoted for the Assistant position.
Mayor Zerby asked what the difference is between a planner and planning assistant. Or, is it different
titles for the same job responsibilities. Administrator Joynes stated in the LMC’s survey, her
responsibilities were similar to those of the planner classification.
5. Minnetonka Country Club Development
Director Nielsen stated someone had raised a question about the park dedication fees the City will receive
from the Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) planned unit development (PUD). He displayed a chart
comparing what the City of Minnetrista received and what Shorewood will receive from the MCC project.
He reviewed the comparison chart of the two development projects.
Total project acres – Shorewood 199.6; Minnetrista 490
Total units – Shorewood 142; Minnetrista 1071 (214 are being built by Mattamy)
Public open space acres – Shorewood 42 (not including the common area); Minnetrista 73
Public open space percent of project: Shorewood 35 percent; Minnetrista 15 percent
Trails / sidewalks – Shorewood 2.1 miles (about what the City currently has constructed the last
two years); Minnetrista 11 miles
Cash park dedication fees – Shorewood $6,500 x 121 units; Minnetrista $3,000 x 214 units (the
$3,000 is what the Minnetrista finance person told Rick Packer with Mattamy Homes)
Mayor Zerby asked if Minnetrista increased the land use as well. Director Nielsen responded he does not
know.
Director Nielsen stated the meeting packet contained a copy of a MCC Development Stage
Recommendations Summary document. It also indicates where the items will get addressed – in the Final
Plans, in the Development Agreement, in the Declaration of Covenants or all three. He noted the Planning
Commission will hold a public hearing on the revised Development Stage plans during its February 16
meeting and Council will consider them on February 22. The revision to those plans is the developer is
going to move the age-targeted units originally proposed for the northeast corner of the site to Niblick
Alcove and replace those units with traditional single-family units. Mattamy representatives stated its
marketing people stated buyers would want the age-targeted units to be either walk-outs or at least look-
outs. The builder for those age-targeted units wants those style units. Depending on the developer it could
submit the final plat for its first phase of the development as early March.
Councilmember Woodruff asked why the chart indicates that the MCC project is 121 units. Director
Nielsen explained that was Mattamy’s original proposal. The Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) asked
Mattamy to also build a variety of housing types and prices. Administrator Joynes explained that was part
of the negotiation process with regard to park dedication fees and number of units. Mattamy had wanted
credit for the public open space. He noted that Mattamy will build the trails; the City will not be involved
with that. He stated that Mattamy was not pleased that the City increased the park dedication fee in the
middle of negotiations. Director Nielsen clarified that was done just prior to that. Joynes noted that City
knew what was coming at that time. Attorney Keane stated that during his entire career he has not seen a
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 15 of 27
municipality receive as much park benefits (e.g.; cash, land, trails) from a project as this without the
developer getting credit for those benefits.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought the City is going to get a lot because of the MCC development.
Ultimately, the MCC will be a nice community. She then stated the City created the PAC in order to
solicit input from its residents. The PAC asked the developer to build the age-targeted units so there
would be some price diversity that would allow residents to stay in Shorewood when they downsized
their living space. It has morphed into a premium builder building those units and the price of the units
has increased from $400,000 to $600,000 – $700,000. People originally thought those units would be
more affordable; $700,000 is not considered affordable. She does not think the City can dictate the price
of those units. She suggested the City find a way to get the Smithtown Crossing area developed including
some age appropriate housing units for a price of $300,000 – $400,000. Mayor Zerby stated he does not
think there is nothing the City can do about the changes. Director Nielsen stated the City has never
dictated price point during his 30-year tenure with the City.
Mayor Zerby stated Mattamy is asking for a lot from the City. He thought most people are happy with
what the City and developer have negotiated. He noted that it is up to Council to decide if it wants to
accept the negotiated terms or not.
Administrator Joynes stated Council has a say about very technical things. He noted Council already
approved the Concept Stage plans and the developer has spent a tremendous amount of money on
Development Stage efforts.
Director Nielsen stated if Council is interested in having lower price point housing units developed in the
Smithtown Crossing area Council needs to allow higher density. That is how the price point is lowered.
He cited the example of the Shorewood Ponds development. At the start the units were going to cost
$170,000 and by the time they were built the price increased to $200,000 – $220,000.
Mayor Zerby stated he wanted to talk about the PUD process – not the pricing or any other details. When
a Concept Stage plan is approved it basically means that the Council is interested in the project and that it
will be explored further. The final decision is made when the final plat is approved by Council. Council is
empowered to have some say in the process; it is not just about rubber stamping what is presented to
Council. Director Nielsen stated he thought Zerby downplayed what the Concept Stage approval means.
Nielsen explained that when Council approves the concept plans a developer spends a tremendous amount
of money to make the concept work. If Council did not like the mix of units proposed (independent of the
price point) then that would have been the time to say that. Zerby noted the Concept Stage was approved
on a 3/2 vote without a wetland being filled in on the northwest corner of the site. Nielsen clarified it was
filled in because the City wanted a second access on to Smithtown Road.
Councilmember Sundberg expressed her hesitancy about messing around with the project at this stage
because that would send a negative signal to other potential developers in the area. She suggested
redevelopment of the Smithtown Crossing area be revisited.
Director Nielsen stated there is a redevelopment opportunity for the area encompassed by the MCC
development. That would be more of a mid-density area. There would be an opportunity for a more
moderately price unit there.
Councilmember Siakel encouraged the City to be more proactive and go after a builder that would build
units with a $300,000 – $400,000 price point. She clarified that she is not asking anyone to revisit things
for the MCC project. She stated the price point for the age-targeted units on the east side results in there
being mid- and high-price point units. The MCC development is not going to provide owners of
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 16 of 27
moderately priced properties to downsize and still stay in Shorewood. She expressed concern that if the
City is not proactive another developer will again not offer moderately priced housing units. She stated
she thought there should be an opportunity for a diverse group of people to have access to moderate price
point units.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought part of the PAC’s recommendation was to have affordable housing.
Administrator Joynes cautioned people not to confuse affordable with price point. Director Nielsen stated
none of the proposed housing units are going to be affordable; it was not affordable when it was going to
be $400,000.
Director Nielsen stated the PAC wanted variety of housing styles as well as a variety of price points. The
developer is offering three products.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought part of the reason for going with the narrower lots was to lower the price
and keep the density. Director Nielsen stated the age-targeted units built by the other builder will cost less
than the traditional units and definitely less than the $1 million plus units. Zerby stated the age-targeted
lots will be smaller in size than most in Shorewood and they will be more expensive than the average
property in Shorewood (about $450,000 on about one-half acre lots). The age-targeted lots will be about
one-fourth acre in size and cost $600,000 – $700,000.
Director Nielsen stated staff has heard that Charles Cudd Company is going to build the age-targeted units
on the east side and that developer does not build anything for less than a $500,000 starting point. Mayor
Zerby stated Mr. Packer had indicated they were going to be closer to $600,000 and probably a little
higher.
Director Nielsen noted that Mattamy currently intends to build the age-targeted units on the northwest
corner.
Director Brown stated there are financial and legal reasons to approve or deny a concept plan.
Administrator Joynes stated if Council wants to City to be more proactive it needs to get the Shorewood
Economic Development Authority (EDA) involved. Unfortunately, it has no money. He then stated any
time a municipality wants to buy down the cost of housing it needs to have “skin in the game” (e.g.; own
the land). If Council wants the EDA to be active in that there needs to be financial resources to do so.
Councilmember Sundberg asked what it would take to get in the game. Joynes stated initially money to
do studies and market analysis. During the last budget process there was discussion about having a 1
percent levy increase for the EDA to start accruing funds. Sundberg stated that appeals to her. Director
Nielsen stated the City bought the residential property near the Smithtown Crossing area and it has an
option on the liquor store property. Those are steps in the right direction.
Councilmember Siakel asked if the Lucky’s Station and area around it would be viable for
redevelopment. She stated there are no senior cooperatives out in this area. Maybe that area would be
better than the northwest corner of the Smithtown Cross Redevelopment Area. Administrator Joynes
stated everything is viable and that there is money to fund a study.
Mayor Zerby stated there has been discussion about a potential transportation hub and working with
transit authorities.
Zerby then stated he was pleased to hear that the City will not be involved with the construction of trails
on the MCC property.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 17 of 27
6. Badger Park Improvements
There was Council consensus to schedule a joint meeting with the Park Commission to talk about Badger
Park prior to a Council meeting.
7. Policy on Providing Services to Other Cities
Administrator Joynes noted that the meeting packet contains a copy of a memorandum from Director
Brown that identifies the services Shorewood staff provides to the other South Lake cites and to the
public safety joint powers organizations and the estimated costs for doing so.
Director Brown explained the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) and the South Lake Minnetonka Police
Department (SLMPD) do not have a building engineer. He somewhat serves in that capacity for the
public safety facility located in Shorewood next to the Public Works facility. He started doing that shortly
after the facility was built when the then chief of police called him for help at 6:00 P.M. because there
was flooding in the detention area. That facility is a technical building. Public Works personnel maintain
the building and grounds which are owned by the EFD and SLMPD member cities.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought Public Works has also provided services for public safety vehicles.
Director Brown clarified that has been very minor; there have been about six instances when the SLMPD
asked for help with a dead battery, flat tire or something similar to that. Zerby commented there is a lift in
the Public Works facility. Brown stated he had been asked to give the SLMPD a proposal on providing
maintenance services on vehicles. The lift was sized for Public Works large equipment as well as fire
trucks. Nothing ever happened with that proposal.
Zerby asked how the City should go about recouping the costs for those services. He thought it was time
to stop providing the services for free. He asked staff to get a quote for snow plowing.
Administrator Joynes suggested bringing that up during the 2017 budget discussions for the two
organizations. He noted that the Deephaven Public Works Department provides free snow plow services
for the EFD station located in Deephaven. Mayor Zerby stated that Department probably provides some
maintenance services for that building as well.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought there are two options. One is for Shorewood to be
compensated for providing the services. The other is to rotate providing the services among the member
cities. Mayor Zerby stated that rotating would be up to the EFD Board and SLMPD Coordinating
Committee to decide.
Mayor Zerby questioned waiting until 2017 to start charging for the services. Maybe that could begin on
July 1, 2016.
Councilmember Siakel suggested the EFD Board and SLMPD Coordinating Committee discuss charging
for services. Mayor Zerby stated he thought Shorewood should initiate that discussion. It could send a
memo to the two organizations. Councilmember Siakel noted that she does not want Fire Chief Gerber or
Chief of Police Meehan to be put in the middle of this discussion. She thought the issue could be raised
during Operating Committee meetings or during EFD Board and Coordinating Committee meetings.
Councilmember Labadie stated her preference is for Shorewood to continue to provide the services and
get paid for doing so. Labadie commented there have been times when she has driven on a roadway
where the Shorewood portion is plowed and the part in another city is not.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 18 of 27
Councilmember Woodruff stated he also supports Shorewood continuing to provide the services and
getting paid for doing so.
Director Brown stated from a logistics stand point having more than one group responsible for providing
building maintenance services would be a disaster. There is a lot of equipment in that public safety
facility.
Councilmember Siakel suggested Shorewood charge a flat annual fee. Director Brown noted that he
thought that would be a good approach to take because it provides the Chiefs with predictability when
budgeting for the services.
Councilmember Sundberg stated she thought it would be appropriate to recoup all of the City’s costs.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he does not think Director Brown’s list is all inclusive.
Administrator Joynes stated he would bring this up to the member City Administrators/Managers.
Joynes then stated by having the Shorewood EDA do the bond refunding Shorewood’s bond rating was
used. The refunding and the bond rating saved the member cities money.
Councilmember Woodruff stated if an organization were to come to Shorewood and ask Shorewood to
put its name on a bond issue so it would be tax exempt Shorewood would get 2 – 2.5 percent of the
bonding fee. Director DeJong clarified it would be 0.5 – 1.0 percent. Woodruff stated that would be tens
of thousands of dollars. Shorewood provided that service for free for the refunding.
Councilmember Sundberg stated the City does not get anything from the other member cities. Those
cities have at times been reluctant to work with Shorewood on resolving issues.
Director Brown stated that Public Works personnel and police and fire personnel work very well together.
That was not the case when he first came to work for Shorewood. He complimented all three
organizations for building those relationships. He then stated if Public Works personnel need some help
from the public safety organizations they respond quickly. He noted that Police Chief Meehan called him
recently and thanked the Public Works personnel for their efforts during / after the recent snow storm.
Councilmember Siakel reiterated that she does not want the Fire and Police Chiefs or their employees to
be caught in the middle of this.
8. Traffic Committee
Engineer Hornby noted the Traffic Committee has one meeting remaining. The Committee had 13
members at the beginning and by the end of the process there are six to eight participating. From the way
the Committee started he is amazed at how far it got in the process. The Committee discussed a lot of
alternatives and rated them. The ratings were put into a matrix format and a copy of that matrix was
included in the meeting packet. The focus was on the area near the Minnetonka Country Club property.
The Committee will create a formal report. Chuck Rickart, a Professional Traffic Operations Engineer
(PTOE) with WSB & Associates and the main consultant for this effort, will assist with that. It is
anticipated that the draft report will be complete in March and then be distributed back to the members of
the Committee. They will provide feedback back to Mr. Rickart and he will refine the report. The report
will be presented to Council during a work session.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 19 of 27
Councilmember Sundberg asked why the active participation dropped down. Engineer Hornby stated it
may have been in part because the Committee started to meet every two weeks. One dropped out because
of a change in her work schedule. Sundberg then asked if the schedule for presenting the report to Council
will work with the MCC development schedule. Hornby clarified the MCC site was hands off for the
Committee.
Engineer Hornby asked Council what, if anything, is next for the Committee.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought that maybe those processes that were useful and effective for the
Committee could be used on a larger scale for traffic in other areas of the City. He hopes that WSB can
provide the City with guidance on what path to follow.
Engineer Hornby stated from his perspective a Committee of 5 – 7 people is big enough; a committee of
13 people was too large. Councilmember Sundberg stated she thought it is important not to create the
perception that Council is managing the committee process.
Hornby then stated the Committee did a relatively good job of sorting out what the issues are and
narrowing down the Committee’s focus.
Administrator Joynes asked if Council wants staff to make a recommendation after being presented with
the report during a work session about whether or not to have a traffic committee assess traffic issues
City-wide.
Mayor Zerby stated acting on all of the recommendations would cost the City a great deal of money.
Engineer Hornby stated that during the Committee’s last meeting there was realization that the common
element between all of the alternatives was enforcement. That will be highly emphasized.
Councilmember Siakel stated the City of Tonka Bay has been very aggressive in using the speed buggy
along Pleasant Avenue on recent mornings.
Councilmember Woodruff stated there have been police patrol cars out on the Islands recently; there were
two out there the previous day. There had been an officer running radar one day.
9. MS4 (Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewer System) and Forestry/Arborist Staffing /
Scope of Services
Administrator Joynes stated the meeting packet contains a document listing four different arborist /
forester service options for the contractor [S&S Tree and Horticultural Specialists] Council selected to
provide those services. The fee for those services is $65 per hour plus mileage. The 2016 budget includes
$40,000 to pay for those services. Staff is asking Council which services it wants provided.
Engineer Hornby reviewed the four service options.
1. Assist with Tree Preservation and Reforestation Management Program development and
implementation. Staff has done a tree inventory for some of the City’s parks and right-of-ways
(ROW). There remains work to be done on it. He thought the contractor could take that over.
Before doing that staff would ask the contractor to submit a proposal of what the actual cost to
complete it would be.
2. Inspect trees on City of Shorewood property and recommend corrective actions as needed.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 20 of 27
3. Inspect trees for disease and damage on private properties, particularly after storms and as part of
the tree management program.
4. Assist with public education programs related to urban forest management. Information could be
posted on the City’s website and published in its newsletter. Common issues that residents could
address on their own could also be placed there.
Hornby noted that S&S is part of a larger corporation that is based out of the State of Ohio. They have a
lot of staff that can assist with tasks.
Councilmember Siakel stated the $40,000 would pay for a little more than 600 hours of services. She
asked if the services would be requested seasonally; for example, from April to September. Engineer
Hornby suggested asking for a recommendation from S&S. He explained that certain varieties of trees
have to be pruned in late January or early February. S&S could also explain how it would improve sight
lines at problematic intersections.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought the four service options would all provide benefit. She then
stated she would like the City to offer the residents services for a fee (e.g.; $50). Mayor Zerby concurred.
Engineer Hornby stated if the S&S contractor gave advice to the resident and then decided to offer
follow-up services then that could be a conflict of interest. He then stated he recently received a new
contract from S&S and it includes a conflict of interest statement. Councilmember Siakel suggested that
the contractor could give something to the residents saying they would not be required to use their
services. Administrator Joynes cautioned against getting into a situation where the contractor identifies a
tree as diseased and then they take down the tree. The City should not be put in a situation where the
contractor classifies a tree as diseased and it is taken down only later to find out it was not diseased.
Administrator Joynes stated he thought it would be a good idea for the City to charge a fee for providing
services to inspect trees for disease and damage. He thought those kinds of services would be very
popular.
Councilmember Siakel asked how providing those inspection services would be managed. Engineer
Hornby suggested they be required to submit a statement of what they did, where and when it was done
and for how long. Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought the order for service should come through
the front desk and the fee for service should be collected upfront. The City would direct the contractor
about what to do and the contractor can set up the appointment. Administrator Joynes stated if Council
wants to do that then staff will set up the program. The SeeClickFix Customer Relationship Management
Software could be used to track that. He suggested trying it for one year. Woodruff suggested charging at
least the $65 hourly fee and ignoring charging the cost for mileage. Director Brown stated what is
proposed would mean the homeowner hires the City who then has the contractor do the work and the City
ends up with the liability.
Attorney Keane stated the City would make the service available to residents and the residents engage the
service.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the City has to pay the vendor so that the City can set the fee. Attorney
Keane stated the City pays the contractor for what the City asks them to do. Director Brown stated that
can be set by the agreement / contract.
Director Brown stated staff will work out the details on how this would work.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 21 of 27
Councilmember Labadie asked if the City has a buckthorn removal policy for City-owned property such
as along the trails. Director Brown stated when the City had buckthorn removed in Freeman Park a
resident came before Council and vehemently asked that the City quit using the chemical that was used
during that process. The City does remove buckthorn along the edges of roadways and it has been scolded
by many residents for doing so. It does not have the resources to remove it from parks. Councilmember
Woodruff stated that in order to mitigate buckthorn it has to be done on an annual basis.
Mayor Zerby recessed the meeting at 12:32 P.M.
Mayor Zerby reconvened the meeting at 12:42 P.M.
10. Other Issues
A. Residency Requirements
Administrator Joynes stated he had been asked to research Deborah Zorn’s residency because Council had
appointed her as the City’s representative on the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Board.
Based on what staff found there are no residency requirements for being the City’s representative on
commissions and boards. He noted that Councilmember Woodruff asked that Council discuss
requirements. He stated there have been times when the City had difficulty finding people to serve on
boards and commissions. He thought it makes sense to have residency requirements for the Parks and
Planning Commissions but maybe not for some other boards and commissions.
Director Nielsen clarified that about five years ago a residency requirement was put in place for serving
on the Planning Commission. There had already been a requirement for serving on the Park Commission.
Councilmember Woodruff stated a resident who lives out in the area where he lives told him Ms. Zorn
does not live in her house near him year round. She and her family live someplace else part of the year.
He questioned if it was appropriate to have someone represent the City who does not live full time in the
City. He thought that was a requirement. He clarified that he was not questioning her ability to serve on
the LMCD Board.
Mayor Zerby stated in the past he had spoken with representatives for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District (MCWD) about possibly appointing someone on Shorewood staff to attend meetings.
Councilmember Woodruff stated that situation was different; they went to audit meetings and were not a
member of the board. In the case of Ms. Zorn she is a voting member on the LMCD Board and has the
ability on behalf of Shorewood to help make law.
Attorney Keane departed the meeting at 12:45 P.M.
Councilmember Siakel stated she does not think having Ms. Zorn represent the City on the Board is an
issue. Ms. Zorn pays taxes on her property that fronts Lake Minnetonka and lives there during the
summer. She has an appreciation for issues that impact the Lake. She noted that people serve at Council’s
discretion. Councilmember Woodruff asked if that means a person needs to own property and pay taxes to
serve. Siakel stated there have been times when people did not want to serve on a commission or board.
Councilmember Labadie asked if the City has a representative to the Lake Minnetonka Communications
Commission (LMCC). Mayor Zerby stated he has been serving in that capacity and Councilmember
Siakel is the alternate. He explained that in 2015 one person applied and Council did not think that
individual was a strong applicant.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 22 of 27
Councilmember Woodruff stated if Council is saying an applicant does not have to be a resident then the
opening should be advertised as such. He then stated there has been a situation where someone moved out
of the City and they had to resign.
Woodruff then stated he had no problems leaving things the way they are with Ms. Zorn. He noted that he
was particularly concerned about the Park and Planning Commissions.
B. JPA Funding Formula
Mayor Zerby stated that he continues to think the funding formula for the South Lake Minnetonka Police
Department (SLMPD) joint powers organization is not fair for Shorewood. He thought the SLMPD
member cities (the City of Excelsior in particular) create a demand for services by decisions the cities
make. That is unfair for the other cities because they do not get to vote on those decisions. The number of
liquor licenses Excelsior has approved (29) has ultimately increased the demand for policing services.
He explained the SLMPD funding formula is based on three equal factors: population, tax capacity and
initial complaint reports (ICRs). It does not include crime statistics. The SLMPD now has a system that
makes it much easier to report on crime statistics. The SLMPD has compiled those statistics for the last
five years and Excelsior had the highest combined Part I and Part II crimes four the last four years of the
four member cities. He would like the funding formula to be based on four factors equally: population,
tax capacity, ICRs and crime statistics. He thought it prudent for there to be repercussions for decisions
the cities make.
Councilmember Sundberg noted that she wholeheartedly agrees. She asked how to go about changing the
funding formula.
Mayor Zerby stated he brought the topic up during a SLMPD Coordinating Committee meeting. The
other Committee members indicated they would listen to what he has to say during a future meeting. He
asked for Attorney Keane, who had left the meeting, and / or other staff to give Council options on how to
move that forward and to tell Council what leverage the City has.
Councilmember Woodruff agreed with what Mayor Zerby would like to have happen. He stated West
Hennepin Public Safety serves a number of cities and he thought it operated under a joint power
agreement (JPA).
Administrator Joynes explained he thought there were four or five police public safety joint powers
organizations. All of them have some underlying philosophy for distributing funds whether under a JPA
or contract for services agreement. There are funding models that could be researched. There are five to
seven factors. One formula is supported by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). The
League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) has a few funding models. Ultimately, it will come down to
negotiations between the member cities about what factors to include and how to rate the factors.
Joynes stated one of the issues with the JPA is with governance. In particular, the proportion of funding a
city contributes and how it relates to the power of a city’s vote. He explained that over time Shorewood
has come to contributing close to one-half of the funding for the SLMPD but its vote is worth the least
when compared to its share of the funding. There is the possibility that the two cities that contribute the
smallest amount of funding could lock things up. He then stated it is very likely that Shorewood would
not get one other member city to vote in support of bringing up the idea of a funding formula change. If
that ends up being the case then the only option would be to file for dissolution of the JPA noting that
would cause all kinds of community issues. That would be a year and a half long process. But, it would
encourage discussion.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 23 of 27
Mayor Zerby noted that the Mayor of Excelsior has already told him that Excelsior was not going to pay
one dollar more.
Administrator Joynes stated Shorewood may want there to be discussion about whether or not the
proportionality in terms of governance is equitable. He noted that he was involved in the mediation about
the SLMPD JPA funding formula during 2005 and 2006. Former Shorewood Mayor Wood Love brought
that proportionality issue up at that time. At that time the JPA did not include a dissolution process. That
was mediated into the JPA.
Mayor Zerby noted that in 2011 the Greenwood Council discussed possibly contracting with the
Hennepin County Sherriff’s Office for policing services.
Administrator Joynes noted that during the mediation Excelsior looked into contracting with Hennepin
County for policing services. He stated a number of communities studied what the most efficient ways to
provide policing services were. The then Shorewood City Administrator Dawson conducted a study also.
The results of the studies indicated that the joint powers approach was the most efficient way. Contracting
with Hennepin County would cost more money and provide less service. Excelsior had also approached
the City of Deephaven about that and Deephaven declined to talk about that because Excelsior is a high
demand area.
Joynes noted that he has not been able to get the member City Administrators/Manager to talk about the
funding formula.
Councilmember Woodruff commented that the other member cities have no motivation to discuss a
change to the funding formula; they know it could potentially increase what they contribute. He stated all
four member cities are obligated to pay off the bonded debt for the public safety facility in Shorewood.
Councilmember Sundberg suggested waiting until the Southshore Center issue is resolved. She noted that
she 100 percent supports trying to resolve the funding formula inequity. She is tired of all of the inequities
between Shorewood and the other South Lake cities that the other cities do not want to help resolve.
Councilmember Siakel stated all four cities would be responsible for paying off the bonded debt no matter
what. But, if a city left the remaining cities would have to pay all operational and capital costs. She then
stated the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) JPA funding formula is strictly based on tax capacity. Once the
Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) is fully built out Shorewood’s share of the funding will increase quite a
bit.
Administrator Joynes mentioned how things could play out where Shorewood would have more control.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he concurred that the big inequity with the SLMPD JPA is Shorewood
pays about 50 percent of the funding for the SLMPD yet it only gets 25 percent of the vote. A member
city that is paying a small percentage of the funding can drive the organization.
Mayor Zerby stated the 2017-2021 reallocation formula for the SLMPD Operating Fund prepared by
Greenwood Mayor Kind indicates Excelsior would pay almost 27 percent, Greenwood would pay
approximately 7.7 percent, Shorewood would pay approximately 49.5 percent and Tonka Bay would pay
approximately 15.9 percent of the funding for those five years. He asked staff to verify the calculations.
Zerby then stated his intent is to have as much conversation as he can with the Coordinating Committee
and when he hits a dead end he will come back to Council and ask for advice. Councilmember Siakel
suggested he tell the Committee that the Shorewood Council discussed the funding formula during a
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 24 of 27
Council and staff retreat and Council stated it wanted the Committee to have a meaningful discussion
about the formula.
In response to a comment from Director Nielsen, Mayor Zerby stated Excelsior representatives constantly
say Shorewood residents are part of the reason for the high crime statistics but based on data very few
Shorewood residents are getting tickets in Excelsior. More people are coming to Excelsior from outside of
the surrounding communities. He has countered the comments from Excelsior by saying residents from
communities around Excelsior are being invited to come and enjoy Excelsior establishments. He
commented that if a wall was built around Excelsior it would economically collapse; it cannot support the
number of eating and drinking establishments it has with a population of 2,600.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought it would be appropriate for Mayor Zerby to have that
discussion with the Coordinating Committee. He then stated he thought the results from the 2005/2006
mediation about the funding formula for the SLMPD were unsatisfactory.
Councilmember Siakel stated there have been discussions for a long time about the four member cities
merging. She does not think there would ever be enough cooperation to make that a reality.
Councilmember Sundberg stated when she ran for Council she did not think that; she thought it was
logical to merge. She knows better now.
Mayor Zerby stated the Mayor of Excelsior recognizes that it will become an issue for Excelsior in the
future. It will not have the money to pay for necessary services. It would be to Excelsior’s benefit to
merge with Shorewood. In order to do that, people have to overcome their egos and pride. He noted that
Shorewood will be 60 years old this coming August and for 100 years before that it was part of the
Excelsior township.
C. Conflict of Interest – Role of Liaisons
Councilmember Siakel stated that she has been told that a person does not have to abstain from voting on
approving meeting minutes if they were not present as a meeting. Mayor Zerby stated that is correct.
Siakel then stated if a vote is to be taken that would benefit the neighborhood a member of Council lives
in or directly benefit a member of Council, particularly when the City is paying for it, she thought the
member of Council should acknowledge it. She stated she had not been aware that a beaver lodge was
located near Councilmember Woodruff’s property when Council authorized hiring a person to harvest
beavers.
Mayor Zerby questioned how that would be defined and noted that he lives somewhat close to the
Minnetonka Country Club property and to Badger Park.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he comes from the perspective of if it could affect a Council member’s
personal property then they should probably abstain from a vote and maybe even the discussion. He then
stated when a vote was to be taken about the City helping fund the chemical treatment for aquatic
invasive species (AIS) in Phelps Bay he abstained from that vote. His property fronts that Bay. He was
chastised by his neighbors for doing so. If there were to be a vote on roadway improvements out on
Enchanted Island he would not abstain from the vote on because his property is only one of 90 properties
along that roadway.
Councilmember Sundberg stated she thought it would be good policy to note that a member of Council
lives nearby and then they can vote on the item.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 25 of 27
Councilmember Labadie cited the example of Mayor Zerby abstaining from a vote about power boats for
the Shorewood yacht Club because he docked his boat there in 2015.
Councilmember Sundberg suggested adding an item to the document titled Expectations and Roles of City
Council Liaisons to Advisory Commissions and Commission Liaisons to City Council about noting if a
vote is on something that would impact an area near where they live. That does not mean the person
cannot vote on the item.
D. Water / Sewer Charges from Other Cities
Director DeJong stated when municipal water is extended from other municipalities into Shorewood the
City’s residents pay an upcharge over what the municipalities’ residents are charged. That applies to
agreements currently in place as well. The municipalities include the Cities of Chanhassen, Excelsior and
Tonka Bay.
Director Brown explained there may be areas that are easily served by another municipality’s water
system when Shorewood does not have water facilities in that area. It is not uncommon for a municipality
to charge a “wholesale rate” to nonresidents. There are areas that are served by another municipality’s /
agency’s sanitary sewer system because that is the path that is most convenient for waste water to flow.
Director DeJong stated he just wanted to ensure Shorewood residents are being treated fairly by other
cities.
Councilmember Siakel stated if Shorewood is supplying water to other cities she asked if the residents in
those cities are paying an upcharge. Director Brown explained Shorewood supplies water to about 40
houses in the City of Deephaven and those agreements have been in place for more than 20 years. They
are not charged an upcharge.
Administrator Joynes stated that Oppidan Investment Company is proposing to build senior housing near
the intersection of Chaska Road and Highway 7 and it approached Excelsior about extending water from
its municipal system to that area. At first Excelsior agreed to that and then changed its position. The
public rational was Excelsior was too busy at this time.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought that water is an essential service. He asked if that would give the City any
leverage and require Excelsior to provide it.
Joynes noted that Oppidan will extend service from Shorewood instead and that is to Shorewood’s
advantage. He also noted there is a problem trying to get Excelsior to allow the extension of its watermain
to MCES’ new underground lift station near Highway 7 and Christmas Lake in Shorewood.
Director Nielsen noted that for Summit Woods in Shorewood, Chanhassen would not extend is municipal
water system to that area because Shorewood would not loop the watermain down to Chanhassen’s
system. He stated that historically if a municipality had the capacity to provide the service it would.
Director Brown explained that for the MCES lift station as part of Shorewood granting the conditional
use permit for that Shorewood was going to require MCES to extend the Excelsior watermain west of the
property up to the intersection of Christmas Lake Road and Third Avenue. Engineer Hornby noted that
lift station would only have a bathroom and cleanup station; it would not be a big consumer of water.
Councilmember Siakel stated her strong preference is not to have Shorewood suit the other South Lake
cities over some of the issues on the table. But, at some point they need to decide to be good neighbors.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 26 of 27
Other
Administrator Joynes PowerPoint presentation contained a list of outstanding items for discussion in
future work session.
Accepting credit card payment for permits and licenses. Director DeJong stated the City accepts
credit card payments for utility bills. Administrator Joynes suggested having a work session to
discuss if the City should accept credit card payments for permits and licenses and if so should it
charge a fee for what the City has to pay to credit card companies. DeJong the City pays about
2.65 percent.
A boulevard spraying policy.
The Boulder Bridge Pond issue.
MCES Lift Stations L-18 Update – that was discussed as part of Item 10.D above.
MCES Interceptor 7017-2 (Galpin Lake Road and Truck Highway 7) improvements – Engineer
Hornby noted that project has been postponed for at least one year.
Roadway pavement rating system – Engineer Hornby stated there are other ways to rate the
roadways than the current method the City uses. Currently the City uses more of a visual method.
It is cost effective.
Councilmember Woodruff stated Council and staff have discussed a couple of times the posting of less
than 30 miles per hour (mph) speed limits on roadways in Shorewood. He thought staff had been asked to
identify which have the necessary documentation authorizing those postings. He suggested staff come
back with a list of those postings and Council can adopt a resolution approving all of those postings.
Director Brown explained for Howard’s Point Road the legal speed limit is 30 mph. More than 20 years
ago the then Council chose to post the speed at 20 mph but did not know it was not an enforceable limit.
It would be difficult for Council to adopt a resolution authorizing the 20 mph posting because there is no
engineering constraints that would support that.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested there be another discussion about this item.
Mayor Zerby explained that he and Director Brown had a discussion about no parking signs and in
particular about construction project areas. Brown had told him that two things have to be in place for
them to be enforced. One is Council has to adopt a resolution saying the roadway would be posted no
parking. The second is it has to be signed as such. That is a problem residents have about the Davis
property during construction there. Councilmember Siakel stated she thought the contractor has done a
good job managing the volume of construction vehicles there. Zerby stated his concern is primarily about
the corner where children wait for the school bus. There is supposed to be no parking back to a certain
sight line.
Engineer Hornby noted an Xcel Energy utility will be extended from Grant Lorenz Road to Edgewood
Road in the City right-of-way (ROW). That would be done in the spring. The proposal is to directional
drill the entire line on the east side. That may require acquiring additional easements from property
owners. That ROW is becoming crowded.
City Council/Staff Retreat Minutes
February 8, 2016
Page 27 of 27
11. Adjourn
Councilmember Labadie moved, Councilmember Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the February 8,
2016, Council and Staff Retreat. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman
Scott Zerby, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
#2B
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING LARGE CONFERENCE RM
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2016 6:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present: Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Labadie, Siakel, Sundberg and Woodruff
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Sundberg moved, Woodruff approved, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
2. INTERVIEW CANDIDATES FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT TO THE
LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (LMCC) BOARD AND
SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION
A. 6:00 P.M. RJ Lavallee, 19595 Waterford Place (LMCC)
B. 6:30 P.M. Edward J. Rock, 5780 Kelsey Drive (Park Commission)
3. ADJOURN
Labadie moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the City Council Special Meeting of February 22, 2016,
at 6:58 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
Scott Zerby, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
#2C
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2016 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; Associate
Attorney Reppe; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director
Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and, City Engineer Hornby
Absent: City Administrator Joynes
B. Review Agenda
Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Special Meeting Minutes, February 8, 2016
Siakel moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Special Meeting Minutes of
February 8, 2016, as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, February 8, 2016
Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of
February 8, 2016, as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Zerby reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16-009, “A Resolution Approving Transfer of
Funds.”
C. Accept Proposal for Professional Services for 2016 Mill and Overlay Project, City
Project 16-03
D. Recording Services Agreement
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 2 of 11
E. Approval of the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission’s Updated 2016
Budget
F. Shorewood Yacht Club Multiple Dock Facility License
Motion passed 5/0.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Request from Grandview Middle School (Westonka School District) regarding Teen
Homelessness Awareness Month (April)
Mayor Zerby noted the City received a request from Grandview Middle School in the Westonka School
District regarding Teen Homelessness Awareness Month in April. The meeting packet contains a copy of
a resolution declaring April 2016 as Teen Homelessness Awareness Month in Shorewood.
Michael Kurtz, 3813 Meadowview Terrace, introduced himself.
Carson Meritt, 4767 Island View Drive, introduced himself.
Mr. Kurtz remarks were as follows.
“Dear City Administrator and Council,
We are seventh graders at Grandview Middle School. On April 9, 2016, Carson Meritt and I will
be competing in the Community Problem Solving category of the Future Problem Solvers
International Program. In this competition students are required to identify a real problem in
their community and then implement real solutions to help solve it. The Future Problem Solvers
International Program uses a six-step problem solving model aligned with National Curriculum
Standards, Common Core Standards, and the National Association for Gifted Children
Standards.
The state competition is April 9, 2016, in Lino Lakes, Minnesota. Our advisor is Grandview
Middle School teacher Mrs. Taintor.
The problem we have chosen is Team Homelessness.
The University of Minnesota’s Humphrey Institute has estimated there are over 4,000 homeless
youth in our state. We have interviewed homeless teens, toured a homeless shelter, and spoke
with homeless advocates. We also surveyed Grandview Middle school students and learned most
knew very little about teenage homelessness, but many of them know of someone who was
homeless.
We know that homeless teenagers have higher rates of depression, drug addiction, and dropping
out of school.”
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 3 of 11
Mr. Meritt remarks were as follows.
“This past week as part of our project to raise awareness of teen homelessness, Michael Kurtz
and I slept in a car in the parking lot of Grandview Middle School. We think our one week
experiment gave us a greater understanding of the challenges that homeless teenagers face like
coming to school after sleeping in a car, not being able to shower and trying to focus on
homework when tired and hungry. We are using this event to raise money for Open Hand
Foundation, which operates a teen homeless shelter in Chanhassen. We asked our classmates,
families and friends to donate money. They have donated over $1,000.
We’re hoping you will help us by passing a resolution proclaiming April as “Teenage
Homelessness Awareness Month” in the City of Shorewood. Your support will help to give hope
and encouragement to the homeless teens in our District. We’ll also use the Proclamation in our
competition portfolio as part of our state-wide and International completion.
Thank you for your consideration.”
Mayor Zerby thanked Mr. Kurtz and Mr. Meritt for coming and for being so well prepared. He stated
their initiative in selecting teen homelessness as their problem was impressive.
Councilmember Sundberg stated teenage homelessness is a wonderful issue to focus on and that she
supports their efforts. She suggested publishing something about their initiative in the City’s newsletter
and hopefully the local newspapers will do the same.
Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16-010. “A Resolution
Declaring April 2016 Teen Homelessness Awareness Month in the City of Shorewood.” Motion
passed 5/0.
B. Recognition of Lynda Gooch Hartmann and Steve Dietz for their Service on the
Park Commission
Mayor Zerby noted that Lynda Gooch Hartmann and Steve Dietz were not present at the meeting to
receive a plaque of appreciation and recognition for service as Park Commissioners. Ms. Gooch Hartman
had been a Commissioner for five years and Mr. Dietz had been a Commissioner for three years. Their
walnut plaques of appreciation and recognition will be mailed to them.
6. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Vacate Partial Drainage and Utility Easement
Applicant: Robert Michels
Location: 5570 Harding Lane
Mayor Zerby opened the Public Hearing at 7:10 P.M.
Director Nielsen explained Robert Michels, 5570 Harding Lane, proposes to construct a deck at the rear
of his home that would encroach into an existing drainage and utility easement in his rear yard. The
easement takes up a lot of the applicant’s rear yard. He displayed a graphic showing what portion of the
easement would be vacated. The applicant has been working with the City’s previous and current
Engineers to calculate how much area is necessary for a ponding areas in his back yard. The current City
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 4 of 11
Engineer has indicated that the easement area is in excess of what is needed and supports vacating a
portion of the easement as shown on the survey.
Nielsen noted that staff recommends approval of the vacation with a stipulation that no further
encroachments are allowed within the remaining easement area.
Seeing no one present to comment on the case, Mayor Zerby opened and closed the Pubic Testimony of
the Public Hearing at 7:12 P.M.
Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16-011, “A Resolution Vacating
Certain Drainage and Utility Easements for the Property Located at 5570 Harding Lane” with the
stipulation that no further encroachments are allowed within the remaining easement area. Motion
passed 5/0.
Mayor Zerby closed the Public Hearing at 7:12 P.M.
7. PARKS
A. Report by Justin Mangold on the February 9, 2016, Park Commission Meeting
Chair Mangold reported on matters considered and actions taken at the February 9, 2016, Park
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). He stated during the Commission’s next
meeting it will outline the steps taken and decisions made to date regarding improvements to Badger
Park. He encouraged Council to review those minutes before the Council and Park Commission joint
meeting on March 14.
8. PLANNING
A. Report by Sue Davis on the February 16, 2016, Planning Commission meeting.
Planning Commissioner Davis reported on matters considered and actions taken at the February 16, 2016,
Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting).
B. Fill in Excess of 100 Cubic Yards
Applicant: Gloria Aanenson
Location: 19325 Waterford Place
Director Nielsen explained Ms. Aanenson, 19325 Waterford Place, proposes to raise the level of her back
yard to create a somewhat level back yard for her children. The project involves bringing in
approximately 600 cubic yards of fill material on to the site and constructing a rather large retaining wall.
Shorewood’s zoning regulations require a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) for fill in excess of 100 cubic
yards. He displayed a copy of a certificate of survey and plans for the proposed retaining wall. The wall
would be made of boulders and be approximately 220 feet in total length. It would be located
approximately 65 feet from the rear lot line and as close as five feet from the side lot lines. At its highest
point it would be 11 feet tall. The back of the yard, south of the applicant’s fence around the swimming
pool, is a dense deciduous wooded area.
He noted that at staff’s direction, the applicant’s consultants revised their original plans so that no portion
of the wall within the 10-foot side yard setback area is higher than six feet tall, the height of a common
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 5 of 11
fence. Any portion of the wall taller than six feet would have to be located at least 10 feet from the side
lot lines.
Nielsen noted the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this. He also noted staff and the
Planning Commission recommend approval of the C.U.P. subject to the recommendations identified in
the City Engineer’s report dated January 25, 2016.
Mayor Zerby asked if the amount of fill being proposed requires a permit from the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District (MCWD). Director Nielsen responded yes; an erosion control permit would be
required contingent upon approval of the C.U.P.
Councilmember Woodruff stated that he read in one of the documents for this item that the applicant
would be responsible to take care of any damage caused to City streets and curbs and so forth caused by
construction vehicles for this project. It is his recollection it is usually made clear that before and after
pictures will be taken of the street. The applicant would have to restore the street to the condition it is
prior to the project. He did not see that stipulated in the resolution. He then stated one of the graphics
shows a stairway below the proposed retaining wall on the back of the wall. He asked if there is any need
to get equipment down there. Director Nielsen explained a person could get around the wall on both ends
and noted it is a natural area down there.
Director Nielsen explained documenting any damage to the street is a matter of policy. It is referenced in
the Engineer’s report. The Engineer’s report is referenced in the Planning Director’s report and the
Director’s report is referenced in the resolution.
Councilmember Woodruff stated anything approved for and required by the applicant would be binding
on all future owners of the property in perpetuity. If the City ever needed to do some work behind the
retaining wall and if it caused damage the then property owner would need to pay for those repairs.
Director Nielsen noted the applicant would be required to file a recordable document with Hennepin
County and the affidavit of that recording would be given to the City.
Councilmember Labadie asked if it would be prudent to include in the resolution that any portion of the
retaining wall taller than six feet would have to be at least 10 feet from the side yard lot lines. Director
Nielsen noted it is included in the staff report which is referenced in the resolution. Mayor Zerby asked if
that could be added to the resolution. Nielsen responded yes.
Labadie moved, Sundberg seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16-012, “A Resolution
Granting a Conditional Use Permit to Place Fill in Excess of 100 Cubic Yards for Gloria Aanenson,
19325 Waterford Place” subject to amending the resolution to include that any portion of the
retaining wall taller than six feet would have to be at least 10 feet from the side yard lot lines.
Motion passed 5/0.
C. Minnetonka Country Club Revised Development Stage Plan Approval
Applicant: Mattamy Homes
Location: 24575 Smithtown Road
Director Nielsen stated Mattamy Homes had submitted two sets of Development Stage plans and
preliminary plat for its Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) planned unit development (PUD) located at
24575 Smithtown Road. He explained that during its January 5, 2016, Planning Commission meeting the
Commission recommended approval of the revised Concept Stage plan and the original Development
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 6 of 11
Stage plan and preliminary plat. Shortly before Council was to consider taking action on the preliminary
plat and the Development Stage plan during its January 25 meeting the developer informed staff it was
going to make a change to the preliminary plat. Therefore, Council took no action that day. The
Commission reviewed and considered a revised Development Stage plan and revised preliminary plat
during its February 16 meeting when another public hearing was held and recommended approval of the
revised plan and plat. The resolution included in the meeting packet did not include approval of the
revised Concept Stage plan. He noted that at the dais Council found a revised resolution which also
included approval of a revised Concept Stage plan.
He displayed a copy of the revised Concept Stage plan the Commission recommended approval of on
January 5.
He highlighted some of the revisions made to the original Concept Stage plan. A second access to
Smithtown Road was added on the west side of the site. The access on the east side of the site was shifted
slightly so headlights from vehicles leaving the site would not shine into the residential house located
across Smithtown Road. The developer provided additional right-of-way for Smithtown Road and
Country Club Road (on the east side of the plat).
The developer is going to construct a trail on the site along Country Club Road. There are wetland issues
north of the residential property located at the northwest corner of the Country Club Road and
Yellowstone Trail intersection. Therefore, the trail stops short of going all the way down to Yellowstone
Trail. The City would have to acquire right of way in that area to bring the trail further south or the last
segment of that trail could be constructed on the west side of Country Club Road if that intersection is
ever reconstructed to be a 90° angle intersection.
One of the owners of an adjoining property on west side of the site approached the developer about
purchasing the back portion of his lot. The developer has agreed to do that and that results in adding two
lots to the plat. Council had been made aware of that in previous meetings. The addition of those two lots
would bring the total unit count to 142.
As part of the Development Stage process the developer made a concerted effort to show that the age-
targeted units on the northwest corner along Ayrshire Lane would not look like row houses. The curve of
the roadway and the various architectural elevations on the front of those units result in the minimum 15
foot total side yard setback (7.5 on each side) not looking as close as some people thought. On the outside
of the curve the setbacks open out toward the back. On the inside of the curve the setback would not be
less than 15 feet. The buildings make for some varied open space.
He then highlighted the revisions made to the Development Stage plan and preliminary plat the
Commission recommended for approval on January 5. The age-targeted units originally proposed for the
northeast corner of the site along Feathere Bay were moved down to the Niblick Alcove cul-de-sac and
increased to 20 units from 17 units. The traditional home sites originally proposed for Niblick Alcove
were moved to the northeast corner of the site and were reduced to 10 units from 13 units. The total
number of units remains the same. The impetus for the change was the builder who would construct the
age-targeted units wants to build walk-out style or at a minimum look-out style units. The revision to the
plat changes the phasing plan. Phase 1 will now include all the units on the east side of the site. It would
go from Smithtown Road down to Yellowstone Trail. The custom units in the center would be done in
Phase 2. The reminder would be constructed in Phase 3. He noted that may change as the project moves
forward.
He displayed a copy of the revised preliminary plat.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 7 of 11
Nielsen again noted the Planning Commission recommended approval of revised Development Stage plan
and revised preliminary plat on February 16.
Rick Packer, with Mattamy Homes, explained a lot of custom builders in the area have expressed strong
interest to Mattamy in purchasing lots in the MCC development site, in particular the lots for the age-
targeted units. Now more builders are asking Mattamy to sell the lots for the traditional units as well. As
Mattamy entertained offers for the age-targeted, single-level living units proposed for the northeast corner
of the site it became evident to Mattamy that it had misjudged the market a little with regard to what type
of lot style builders want to construct the single-level living units on. Apparently people feel 1700 – 1800
square feet is too small without there being a space that would help them feel a connection to the
outdoors. That could be a second story or lower level. That could not be accomplished on the northeast
corner. Therefore, the location of the age-targeted lots on the east side was moved.
Mr. Packer noted Mattamy has a letter of intent with a builder to construct the age-targeted units on the
east. They are working out the formal business terms. He explained he had shown that builder’s house
plans to the Planning Commission. The builder took the photographs. Mattamy will provide the
Commission and Council with better photos of some of the builder’s existing projects at a future meeting.
Mr. Packer explained that the age-targeted units Mattamy would have built would have had two stall
garages either at the front of the house or slightly behind it. The new builder would build 2.5 – 3 stall
garages and the garages would be turned. In order to get into the garage the driver would have to drive on
to the driveway and take a right-hand turn to get into the garage. He commented he does not know why
someone living in an age-targeted unit would want to make that maneuver.
Mayor Zerby asked for clarification if what is being talked about is for the age-targeted units on the east
and not on the west. Mr. Packer stated that is correct at this time. Zerby asked how many bedrooms the
new style of age-targeted units would have. Mr. Packer stated he thought they would have three if the
downstairs was finished. Zerby stated he thought that would be for a target of 40 – 55 year old people. He
noted that based on original discussions he thought Council and staff understood it to be for 55 – 65 year
old people or older. What is currently being proposed seems like it is for a younger audience. Mr. Packer
stated he is not sure it would be for a younger audience. It is for an audience that wants single-level
living. It does apply for a particular market segment whether the age is 50 plus or 55 plus. It would be for
a maintenance free life style.
Zerby then asked what the price point would be for those units. Mr. Packer stated $600,000 plus. They
would be for more expensive clientele. Mattamy had been aiming for the low $400,000 range to low
$500,000. Zerby asked if the age-targeted units on the west side would have a lower price point. Mr.
Packer stated he cannot commit to that now when those units would not be built for another 3 – 4 years.
Zerby asked Mr. Packer if he was implying that three or four years from now there could be an
amendment to the plan that would show a different type of housing style. Mr. Packer stated that is
possible.
Councilmember Siakel stated during early discussions about this project it sounded as if people were most
unsure about the marketability of the age-targeted units. Based on what has been said it sounds as builders
are most interested in those units upfront. Mr. Packer concurred. Mr. Packer stated Mattamy has just
started developing that product. Buyers of that product take a long time to make a decision to buy it. They
make 10 – 13 trips to Mattamy’s design center; they are a high maintenance buyer. For an average house
it is about four hours. It may be more appropriate for a custom builder to build the age-targeted units. He
then stated Mattamy was asked to have some diversity in housing style and price. Mattamy told people it
did offer its age-targeted style of housing. It is targeted toward seniors and it is maintenance free.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 8 of 11
Siakel commented she thought the age-targeted units would look very nice based on who she was told the
builder was. She stated Council established the Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) to provide Council
with input. The PAC had told Council that it would like the development to include a diversity of housing
styles and price. She expressed hope that age-targeted units on the west side will sell for less. She noted
she thought what is being proposed for the age-targeted units on the east is not consistent with PAC’s or
Council’s original intent of diversity in housing. That concerns her somewhat.
Mayor Zerby stated when Council agreed to the smaller lot sizes for the age-targeted units it was in
exchange for age-targeted units that would be more affordable. What is being proposed now for those
units is more like a standard house on a smaller lot.
Councilmember Siakel stated for the age-targeted units on the west she wants the product to align with
the feedback Council received from the PAC.
Councilmember Labadie concurred with Councilmember Siakel. She does not agree that the units would
be standard houses; they are going to be very expensive.
Mayor Zerby clarified that he questioned if the proposed age-targeted units on the east should be built on
a smaller lots. It seems that they would fit just find on a regular sized lot. There is no reason to build them
on a smaller lot. He does not think there is a lot of justification for their minimum starting price point to
be $600,000.
Councilmember Labadie stated Council thought the age-targeted units on smaller lots was a tradeoff for
the City. She does not view it that way now. She then stated she likes that Phase 1 will go all the way
down to Yellowstone Trail. She also stated she was pleased that the concern of the resident living across
from the east access point was addressed.
Councilmember Sundberg stated she also wants the price for the age-targeted units on the west to be less
than the price for the units on the east. She then stated she was pleased that the age-targeted units on the
northeast corner were moved south; away from the business Country Road 19 and Smithtown Road
intersection.
Sundberg moved, Siakel seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16-013, “A Resolution Granting a
Revised Concept Plan, Development Stage Plan and Preliminary Plat Approval for the Minnetonka
Country Club Planned Unit Development.” Motion passed 5/0.
9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Making Park Commission Appointment
Mayor Zerby explained that just prior to this meeting Council met in a special session to interview
candidates for the Park Commission and the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission Board.
Councilmember Labadie stated she thought the applicant for the Park Commission was a good candidate
and would be a good fit for the Commission.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 9 of 11
Labadie moved, Siakel seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16-014, “A Resolution Making the
Appointment of Edward Rock (March 1, 2016 - February 28, 2017) to the City of Shorewood Park
Commission.” Motion passed 5/0.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought Mr. Rock was a good choice.
B. Making an Appointment to the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission
(LMCC) Board
Mayor Zerby stated that during the special session Council also interviewed an excellent applicant for the
Lake Minnetonka Communications Commissions Board.
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16-015, “A Resolution Making
the Appointment of RJ Lavallee (February 22, 2016 – January 31, 2017) to the Lake Minnetonka
Communications Commission Board.” Motion passed 5/0.
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. He stated he saw red tags
wrapped around some trees. Engineer Hornby stated he thought that should have been converted to paint
earlier in the day.
Engineer Hornby noted that he sent the residents notification earlier in the day that that the contractor will
begin clearing and/or trimming trees on February 23 at 8:00 A.M. where the Smithtown Road east
sidewalk extension will be constructed. One of his colleagues will put door hangers out today. Mayor
Zerby asked if the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) was notified so that they know
they may have to manage traffic. Hornby noted the tree service contractor has to have traffic control
people on site.
Mayor Zerby stated he saw that a couple of utility poles have been marked. Engineer Hornby explained
that poles had been identified last November. City staff spoke with Xcel Energy representatives this
winter and informed them there were some poles that have to be moved.
Councilmember Labadie asked if the tree clearing and trimming effort will go from west to east or east to
west. Engineer Hornby stated he does not know. Hornby then stated he prefers the effort would start after
the morning rush hour.
Engineer Hornby noted the contractor had indicated that this effort should take about two days.
2. December 2015 Monthly Budget Report
Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the December 2015 Monthly Budget Report.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the way he interprets the report the year will end with about a $400,000
surplus. He extended his compliments to Council and staff for making that happen.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 10 of 11
3. Quarterly Financial Report
Mayor Zerby noted a copy of the December 2015 Quarterly Investment Report was found at the dais.
Other
Director Brown stated staff is waiting to learn from representatives from the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT) when metro seasonal weight restrictions will go into effect.
Engineer Hornby stated the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) wants to partner
with Shorewood on a flood impact study in that District. It would like to know if Shorewood would be
willing to contribute $2,000 toward the $55,000 cost of the study. He clarified that this evening he just
wanted to bring it to Council’s attention. If Council wants to move forward with that he will bring it back
as a more formal request during Council’s March 14 meeting. He explained RPBCWD is going to update
its model using Atlas 14 which is the new hydrology model. He noted Silver Lake is located in that area.
Councilmember Woodruff questioned if the $2,000 share of the cost accurately reflects the portion of the
District that is located in Shorewood.
Director DeJong stated that Oppidan Investment Company is interested in moving forward with the senior
housing project it has spoken to staff about. It has provided a $10,000 escrow with Springsted for a
financial analysis. It has contracted with LAB engineers to evaluate the properties and determine their
eligibility for tax increment financing (TIF). The project likely would not move forward without some
TIF assistance.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the City had hired a consultant to facilitate Planning Advisory
Committee (PAC) meetings about the Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) redevelopment project. He asked
if the City has been reimbursed for that cost from Mattamy Homes. Director DeJong stated the City has
been partially reimbursed and he has another invoice for Mattamy.
B. Mayor and City Council
1. Addition of High Definition Channel
Mayor Zerby sated the meeting packet contains a copy of a memorandum from the Lake Minnetonka
Communication Director (LMCC) Operations Manager regarding a new high definition (HD) channel for
broadcasting LMCC member cities’ government meetings. Channel 808 will be up and running on April
1 after Shorewood upgrades its video recording equipment in the Council Chamber.
Other
Councilmember Labadie stated because of the heavy rains on February 19 a resident called her expressing
concern about a large pooling of water on a City roadway. She made that concern known Public Works
personnel. Director Brown inspected the area and dispersed crews to that area and it was taken care of
that afternoon. She then stated if residents have concerns it may not always be easy to mitigate them but
the concerns are heard. She encouraged people to thank Public Works personnel for keeping the City
beautiful. For example, they mow the grass in the City’s parks and keep the roads and trails free of snow.
Mayor Zerby stated there was a sudden, extensive melting of snow that day; it reached 50° that day. He
extended his thanks to Public Works personnel.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 22, 2016
Page 11 of 11
12. ADJOURN
Woodruff moved, Labadie seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of February 22,
2016, at 7:58 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 nib Meeting Item Regular Meeting
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Title/Subject: Verified Claims
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
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.
62351-62358&ACH 128,020.92
Pending 62359-62361 &ACH—2015 Items 16,895.33
Pending 62362-62402 &ACH—2016 Items 285,062.86
Total Claims $429,979.11
We have also included a payroll summary for the payroll period ending February 26,2016 & payroll
period ending March 6,2016.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
These expenditures are reasonable and necessary to provide services to our residents and funds are
budgeted and available for these purposes.
Options:
The City Council is may accept the staff recommendation to pay these claims or may reject any
expenditure it deems not in the best interest of the city.
Recommendation/Action Requested:
Staff recommends approval of the claims list as presented.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Checks will be distributed following approval.
Payroll
G/L Distribution Report
User: Mnguyen C!Batch: 00002.02.2016-PR-02222016 City Of
CITY OF SHOREWOOD Shorewood
Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description
FUND 101 General Fund
101-00-1010-0000 0.00 49,870.64 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
101-11-4103-0000 1,716.64 0.00 PART-TIME
101-11-4122-0000 131.31 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-13-4101-0000 5,646.69 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-13-4103-0000 192.00 0.00 PART-TIME
101-13-4121-0000 423.52 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-13-4122-0000 425.60 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-13-4131-0000 1,088.00 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-13-4151-0000 56.32 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-15-4101-0000 4,394.34 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-15-4121-0000 329.58 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-15-4122-0000 308.05 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-15-4131-0000 500.88 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-15-4151-0000 25.77 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-18-4101-0000 5,398.04 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-18-4121-0000 404.86 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-18-4122-0000 394.59 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-18-4131-0000 855.80 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-18-4151-0000 33.90 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-24-4101-0000 4,106.54 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-24-4121-0000 307.96 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-24-4122-0000 256.28 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-24-4131-0000 500.00 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-24-4151-0000 25.61 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-32-4101-0000 8,108.75 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-32-4105-0000 632.78 0.00 STREET PAGER PAY
101-32-4121-0000 655.60 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-32-4122-0000 638.96 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-32-4131-0000 1,812.10 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-32-4151-0000 356.83 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-33-4101-0000 849.09 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-33-4121-0000 63.68 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-33-4122-0000 49.46 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-33-4151-0000 29.54 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
PR-G/L Distribution Report(02122/2016- 3:11 PM) Page 1
Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description
101-52-4101-0000 3,924.40 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-52-4121-0000 294.34 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-52-4122-0000 286.90 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-52-4131-0000 898.48 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-52-4151-0000 143.25 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-53-4101-0000 985.48 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-53-4102-0000 149.10 0.00 OVERTIME
101-53-4103-0000 2,105.26 0.00 PART-TIME
101-53-4121-0000 73.91 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-53-4122-0000 234.41 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-53-4131-0000 21.68 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-53-4151-0000 34.36 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 49,870.64 49,870.64
FUND 201 Southshore Center
201-00-1010-0000 0.00 1,569.53 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
201-00-4101-0000 859.10 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
201-00-4102-0000 138.45 0.00 OVERTIME
201-00-4103-0000 382.50 0.00 PART-TIME
201-00-4121-0000 64.44 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
201-00-4122-0000 91.84 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
201-00-4151-0000 33.20 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 1,569.53 1,569.53
FUND 601 Water Utility
601-00-1010-0000 0.00 8,127.21 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
601-00-4101-0000 5,925.71 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
601-00-4105-0000 325.05 0.00 WATER PAGER PAY
601-00-4121-0000 468.79 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
601-00-4122-0000 431.52 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
601-00-4131-0000 871.55 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
601-00-4151-0000 104.59 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 8,127.21 8,127.21
FUND 611 Sanitary Sewer Utility
611-00-1010-0000 0.00 7,243.41 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
611-00-4101-0000 4,984.52 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
611-00-4102-0000 177.30 0.00 OVERTIME
611-00-4105-0000 325.05 0.00 SEWER PAGER PAY
611-00-4121-0000 411.54 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
611-00-4122-0000 384.15 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
611-00-4131-0000 871.55 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
PR-G/L Distribution Report(02122/2016- 3:11 PM) Page 2
Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description
611-00-4151-0000 89.30 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 7,243.41 7,243.41
FUND 621 Recycling Utility
621-00-1010-0000 0.00 470.90 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
621-00-4101-0000 354.94 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
621-00-4121-0000 26.62 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
621-00-4122-0000 19.24 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
621-00-4131-0000 68.48 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
621-00-4151-0000 1.62 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 470.90 470.90
FUND 631 Storm Water Utility
631-00-1010-0000 0.00 1,460.70 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
631-00-4101-0000 1,179.48 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
631-00-4121-0000 88.46 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
631-00-4122-0000 79.14 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
631-00-4131-0000 96.56 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
631-00-4151-0000 17.06 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 1,460.70 1,460.70
FUND 700 Payroll Clearing Fund
700-00-1010-0000 67,626.67 0.00 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
700-00-2170-0000 0.00 32,928.75 GROSS PAYROLL CLEARING
700-00-2171-0000 0.00 7,717.32 HEALTH INSURANCE PAYABLE
700-00-2172-0000 0.00 4,085.76 FEDERAL WITHHOLDING PAYABLE
700-00-2173-0000 0.00 1,766.68 STATE WITHHOLDING PAYABLE
700-00-2174-0000 0.00 7,462.90 FICA/MEDICARE TAX PAYABLE
700-00-2175-0000 0.00 6,744.85 PERA WITHHOLDING PAYABLE
700-00-2176-0000 0.00 2,305.00 DEFERRED COMPENSATION
700-00-2177-0000 0.00 951.35 WORKERS COMPENSATION
700-00-2181-0000 0.00 1,409.84 DISABILITY INSURANCE
700-00-2183-0000 0.00 1,419.92 HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT
700-00-2184-0000 0.00 426.30 DENTAL DELTA
700-00-2185-0000 0.00 408.00 DENTAL-UNION
FUND Total: 67,626.67 67,626.67
Report Total: 136,369.06 136,369.06
PR-G/L Distribution Report(02122/2016- 3:11 PM) Page 3
Payroll
G/L Distribution Report
User: Mnguyen C!Batch: 00001.03.2016-PR-03072016 City Of
CITY OF SHOREWOOD Shorewood
Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description
FUND 101 General Fund
101-00-1010-0000 0.00 44,014.90 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
101-13-4101-0000 5,957.85 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-13-4103-0000 228.00 0.00 PART-TIME
101-13-4121-0000 446.87 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-13-4122-0000 412.68 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-13-4131-0000 1,088.00 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-13-4151-0000 65.40 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-15-4101-0000 4,394.34 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-15-4121-0000 329.58 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-15-4122-0000 318.54 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-15-4131-0000 500.88 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-15-4151-0000 25.39 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-18-4101-0000 5,184.00 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-18-4121-0000 388.79 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-18-4122-0000 397.93 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-18-4131-0000 855.80 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-18-4151-0000 33.45 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-24-4101-0000 4,149.77 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-24-4121-0000 311.20 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-24-4122-0000 268.55 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-24-4131-0000 500.00 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-24-4151-0000 29.19 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-32-4101-0000 6,533.15 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-32-4121-0000 489.98 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-32-4122-0000 512.97 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-32-4131-0000 1,812.10 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-32-4151-0000 428.60 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-33-4101-0000 283.08 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-33-4121-0000 21.21 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-33-4122-0000 17.50 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-33-4151-0000 11.40 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-52-4101-0000 4,968.53 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-52-4121-0000 372.65 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-52-4122-0000 361.31 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
PR-G/L Distribution Report(03/07/2016- 1:59 PM) Page 1
Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description
101-52-4131-0000 898.48 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-52-4151-0000 247.60 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
101-53-4101-0000 968.44 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
101-53-4121-0000 72.64 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-53-4122-0000 75.40 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
101-53-4131-0000 21.68 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
101-53-4151-0000 31.97 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 44,014.90 44,014.90
FUND 201 Southshore Center
201-00-1010-0000 0.00 1,710.98 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
201-00-4101-0000 930.10 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
201-00-4102-0000 266.25 0.00 OVERTIME
201-00-4103-0000 307.50 0.00 PART-TIME
201-00-4121-0000 69.77 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
201-00-4122-0000 94.33 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
201-00-4151-0000 43.03 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 1,710.98 1,710.98
FUND 601 Water Utility
601-00-1010-0000 0.00 10,385.78 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
601-00-4101-0000 8,006.40 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
601-00-4105-0000 144.95 0.00 WATER PAGER PAY
601-00-4121-0000 611.35 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
601-00-4122-0000 569.49 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
601-00-4131-0000 871.55 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
601-00-4151-0000 182.04 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 10,385.78 10,385.78
FUND 611 Sanitary Sewer Utility
611-00-1010-0000 0.00 5,994.09 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
611-00-4101-0000 4,251.32 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
611-00-4105-0000 144.95 0.00 SEWER PAGER PAY
611-00-4121-0000 329.73 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
611-00-4122-0000 321.27 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
611-00-4131-0000 871.55 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
611-00-4151-0000 75.27 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 5,994.09 5,994.09
FUND 621 Recycling Utility
621-00-1010-0000 0.00 382.36 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
PR-G/L Distribution Report(03/07/2016- 1:59 PM) Page 2
Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description
621-00-4101-0000 284.50 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
621-00-4121-0000 21.33 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
621-00-4122-0000 6.28 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
621-00-4131-0000 68.48 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
621-00-4151-0000 1.77 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 382.36 382.36
FUND 631 Storm Water Utility
631-00-1010-0000 0.00 1,100.87 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
631-00-4101-0000 861.28 0.00 FULL-TIME REGULAR
631-00-4121-0000 64.60 0.00 PERA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
631-00-4122-0000 62.58 0.00 FICA CONTRIB-CITY SHARE
631-00-4131-0000 96.56 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE-CITY
631-00-4151-0000 15.85 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total: 1,100.87 1,100.87
FUND 700 Payroll Clearing Fund
700-00-1010-0000 63,588.98 0.00 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
700-00-2170-0000 0.00 29,847.36 GROSS PAYROLL CLEARING
700-00-2171-0000 0.00 7,717.32 HEALTH INSURANCE PAYABLE
700-00-2172-0000 0.00 4,151.92 FEDERAL WITHHOLDING PAYABLE
700-00-2173-0000 0.00 1,789.76 STATE WITHHOLDING PAYABLE
700-00-2174-0000 0.00 6,837.66 FICA/MEDICARE TAX PAYABLE
700-00-2175-0000 0.00 6,588.79 PERA WITHHOLDING PAYABLE
700-00-2176-0000 0.00 2,305.00 DEFERRED COMPENSATION
700-00-2177-0000 0.00 1,190.96 WORKERS COMPENSATION
700-00-2180-0000 0.00 441.87 LIFE INSURANCE
700-00-2182-0000 0.00 368.42 UNION DUES
700-00-2183-0000 0.00 2,349.92 HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT
FUND Total: 63,588.98 63,588.98
Report Total: 127,177.96 127,177.96
PR-G/L Distribution Report(03/07/2016- 1:59 PM) Page 3
Accounts Payable
b �
Check Detail
User: Mnguyen
Printed: 02/22/2016- 3:47PM
w city of
Shorewood
Check Number Check Date Amount
4-AFSCMF CO 5 MEMBER HEALTH FUND Line Item Account
0 02/22/2016
Inv February-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 Dental-Union 700-00-2185-0000 408.00
Inv February-2016 Total 408.00
0 Total: 408.00
4-AFSCME CO 5 MEMBER HEALTH FUND Total: 408.00
3-DELTA DENTAL OF MINNESOTA Line Item Account
0 02/22/2016
Inv February-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 Dental-Non Union 700-00-2184-0000 426.30
Inv February-2016 Total 426.30
0 Total: 426.30
3-DELTA DENTAL OF MINNESOTA Total: 426.30
5-EFTPS-FEDERAL W/H Line Item Account
0 02/22/2016
Inv 02222016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 Federal Income Tax 700-00-2172-0000 4,085.76
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 FICA Employee Portion 700-00-2174-0000 3,024.19
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 FICA Employer Portion 700-00-2174-0000 3,024.19
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 Medicare Employee Portion 700-00-2174-0000 707.26
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 Medicare Employer Portion 700-00-2174-0000 707.26
Inv 02222016 Total 11,548.66
0 Total: 11,548.66
5-EFTPS-FEDERAL W/H Total: 11,548.66
AP-Check Detail(2/22/2016- 3:47 PM) Page 1
Check Number Check Date Amount
6-HEALTH PARTNERS-GROUP Line Item Account
62351 02/22/2016
Inv February-2015
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/09/2016 PR Batch 00001.02.2016 Health Ins-CoPay 700-00-2171-0000 2,036.08
02/09/2016 PR Batch 00001.02.2016 Health Insurance-HSA 700-00-2171-0000 5,681.24
Inv February-2015 Total 7,717.32
Inv February-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 Health Ins-CoPay 700-00-2171-0000 2,036.08
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 Health Insurance-HSA 700-00-2171-0000 5,681.24
Inv February-2016 Total 7,717.32
62351 Total: 15,434.64
6-HEALTH PARTNERS-GROUP Total: 15,434.64
2-ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-457 Line Item Account
62352 02/22/2016
Inv 02222016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 Deferred Comp Flat Amount 700-00-2176-0000 2,305.00
Inv 02222016 Total 2,305.00
62352 Total: 2,305.00
2-ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-457 Total: 2,305.00
686-KANSAS CITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY Line Item Account
0 02/22/2016
Inv February-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/22/2016 Long Term Disability-City of Shorewood-20323 700-00-2181-0000 695.24
02/22/2016 Short Term Disability-City of Shorewood-20323 700-00-2181-0000 714.60
Inv February-2016 Total 1,409.84
0 Total: 1,409.84
686-KANSAS CITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY Total: 1,409.84
286-MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC Line Item Account
0 02/22/2016
AP-Check Detail(2/2212016- 3:47 PM) Page 2
Check Number Check Date Amount
Inv 75192
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/01/2016 Newsletter Postages-March-2016 101-13-4208-0000 456.90
03/01/2016 Newsletter Svc-March-2016 101-13-4400-0000 413.44
Inv 75192 Total 870.34
Inv Feb-2016-Addtl
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/01/2016 Newsletter SvcFeb-2016 101-13-4400-0000 27.73
Inv Feb-2016-Addtl Total 27.73
0 Total: 898.07
286-MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC Total: 898.07
11-MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Line Item Account
0 02/22/2016
Inv 02222016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 State Income Tax 700-00-2173-0000 1,766.68
Inv 02222016 Total 1,766.68
0 Total: 1,766.68
11-MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Total: 1,766.68
9-PERA Line Item Account
0 02/22/2016
Inv 02222016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 MN-PERA Deduction 700-00-2175-0000 3,131.55
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 MN PERA Benefit Employer 700-00-2175-0000 3,613.30
Inv 02222016 Total 6,744.85
0 Total: 6,744.85
9-PERA Total: 6,744.85
1-WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS Line Item Account
0 02/22/2016
Inv 02222016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/22/2016 PR Batch 00002.02.2016 Health Savings Account 700-00-2183-0000 1,419.92
AP-Check Detail(2/2212016- 3:47 PM) Page 3
Check Number Check Date Amount
Inv 02222016 Total 1,419.92
0 Total: 1,419.92
1-WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS Total: 1,419.92
Total: 42,361.96
AP-Check Detail(2/2212016- 3:47 PM) Page 4
Accounts Payable
b �
Check Detail
User: Mnguyen
Printed: 03/10/2016- 1:38PM
w city of
Shorewood
Check Number Check Date Amount
259-LINK,CLARE T.Line Item Account
0 02/22/2016
Inv 2016-6S WD
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/09/2016 Park Commission Meeting-02/09/16 101-53-4400-0000 187.00
Inv 2016-6S WD Total 187.00
0 Total: 187.00
259-LINK,CLARE T.Total: 187.00
Total: 187.00
AP-Check Detail(3/10/2016- 1:38 PM) Page 1
Accounts Payable
b �
Check Detail
User: Mnguyen
Printed: 03/02/2016- 1:42PM
w city of
Shorewood
Check Number Check Date Amount
302-MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Line Item Account
62353 03/02/2016
Inv Hanson-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/02/2016 Robert Hanson-Class SC Cert&Training 611-00-4331-0000 55.00
Inv Hanson-2016 Total 55.00
62353 Total: 55.00
302-MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Total: 55.00
Total: 55.00
AP-Check Detail(3/2/2016- 1:42 PM) Page 1
Accounts Payable
b �
Check Detail
User: Mnguyen
Printed: 03/02/2016- 1:50PM
w city of
Shorewood
Check Number Check Date Amount
302-MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Line Item Account
62354 03/02/2016
Inv 2016-Dues
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/02/2016 Collection System Operation Con£-Fasching-Hanson-Stark-Bauman 611-00-4331-0000 1,200.00
Inv 2016-Dues Total 1,200.00
62354 Total: 1,200.00
302-MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Total: 1,200.00
Total: 1,200.00
AP-Check Detail(3/2/2016- 1:50 PM) Page 1
Accounts Payable
b �
Check Detail
User: Mnguyen
Printed: 03/03/2016- 3:21PM
w city of
Shorewood
Check Number Check Date Amount
495-JOYNES,WILLIAM Line Item Account
0 03/03/2016
Inv February-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
02/29/2016 Admin Monthly Services 101-13-4400-0000 7,150.00
Inv February-2016 Total 7,150.00
0 Total: 7,150.00
495-JOYNES,WILLIAM Total: 7,150.00
279-METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (WASTEWATER)Line Item Account
0 03/03/2016
Inv 1051866
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/03/2016 Monthly Waste Water Svc 611-00-4385-0000 49,053.02
Inv 1051866 Total 49,053.02
0 Total: 49,053.02
279-METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (WASTEWATER)Total: 49,053.02
302-MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Line Item Account
62356 03/03/2016
Inv Baumann-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/03/2016 Brett Baumann-Class SC Certification&Training 611-00-4331-0000 55.00
Inv Baumann-2016 Total 55.00
62356 Total: 55.00
302-MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Total: 55.00
314-NIELSEN,BRADLEY Line Item Account
0 03/03/2016
AP-Check Detail(3/3/2016- 3:21 PM) Page 1
Check Number Check Date Amount
Inv SamsungTab2
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/03/2016 Samsung Galaxy Tab S2&Keyboard 403-00-4640-0000 438.60
Inv SamsungTab2 Total 438.60
0 Total: 438.60
314-NIELSEN,BRADLEY Total: 438.60
415-WARNER CONNECT Line Item Account
0 03/03/2016
Inv 29928337
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/03/2016 Monthly Network Maint Services 101-19-4321-0000 2,587.00
Inv 29928337 Total 2,587.00
0 Total: 2,587.00
415-WARNER CONNECT Total: 2,587.00
Total: 59,283.62
AP-Check Detail(3/3/2016- 3:21 PM) Page 2
Accounts Payable
b �
Check Detail
User: Mnguyen
Printed: 03/03/2016- 3:28PM
w city of
Shorewood
Check Number Check Date Amount
314-NIELSEN,BRADLEY Line Item Account
0 03/03/2016
Inv GalaxyTab2
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/03/2016 Samsung Galaxy Tab 2-Addt'1 Reimbursement 403-00-4640-0000 100.00
Inv GalaxyTab2 Total 100.00
0 Total: 100.00
314-NIELSEN,BRADLEY Total: 100.00
Total: 100.00
AP-Check Detail(3/3/2016- 3:28 PM) Page 1
Accounts Payable
b �
Check Detail
User: Mnguyen
Printed: 03/07/2016- 3:38PM
w city of
Shorewood
Check Number Check Date Amount
12-AFSCMF COUNCIL 5-UNION DUES Line Item Account
0 03/07/2016
Inv March-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 Union Dues 700-00-2182-0000 368.42
Inv March-2016 Total 368.42
0 Total: 368.42
12-AFSCME COUNCIL 5-UNION DUES Total: 368.42
5-EFTPS-FEDERAL W/H Line Item Account
0 03/07/2016
Inv 03072016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 Federal Income Tax 700-00-2172-0000 4,151.92
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 FICA Employee Portion 700-00-2174-0000 2,770.81
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 FICA Employer Portion 700-00-2174-0000 2,770.81
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 Medicare Employee Portion 700-00-2174-0000 648.02
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 Medicare Employer Portion 700-00-2174-0000 648.02
Inv 03072016 Total 10,989.58
0 Total: 10,989.58
5-EFTPS-FEDERAL W/H Total: 10,989.58
2-ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-457 Line Item Account
62357 03/07/2016
Inv 03072016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 Deferred Comp Flat Amount 700-00-2176-0000 2,305.00
Inv 03072016 Total 2,305.00
62357 Total: 2,305.00
2-ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-457 Total: 2,305.00
AP-Check Detail(3/7/2016- 3:38 PM) Page 1
Check Number Check Date Amount
11-MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Line Item Account
0 03/07/2016
Inv 03072016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/07/2016 PR Batch 0000 1.03.2016 State Income Tax 700-00-2173-0000 1,789.76
Inv 03072016 Total 1,789.76
0 Total: 1,789.76
11-MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Total: 1,789.76
7-MINNESOTA LIFE Line Item Account
0 03/07/2016
Inv March-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 Life Insurance 700-00-2180-0000 425.87
Inv March-2016 Total 425.87
0 Total: 425.87
7-MINNESOTA LIFE Total: 425.87
10-NCPERS MINNESOTA Line Item Account
62358 03/07/2016
Inv March-2016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 PBRA Life 700-00-2180-0000 16.00
Inv March-2016 Total 16.00
62358 Total: 16.00
10-NCPERS MINNESOTA Total: 16.00
9-PERA Line Item Account
0 03/07/2016
Inv 03072016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 MN-PBRA Deduction 700-00-2175-0000 3,059.09
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 MN PBRA Benefit Employer 700-00-2175-0000 3,529.70
Inv 03072016 Total 6,588.79
0 Total: 6,588.79
AP-Check Detail(3/7/2016- 3:38 PM) Page 2
Check Number Check Date Amount
9-PFRA Total: 6,588.79
1-WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS Line Item Account
0 03/07/2016
Inv 03072016
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
03/07/2016 PR Batch 00001.03.2016 Health Savings Account 700-00-2183-0000 2,349.92
Inv 03072016 Total 2,349.92
0 Total: 2,349.92
1-WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS Total: 2,349.92
Total: 24,833.34
AP-Check Detail(3/7/2016- 3:38 PM) Page 3
Accounts Payable
b �
Check Detail
User: Mnguyen
Printed: 03/10/2016- 11:22AM
w city of
Shorewood
Check Number Check Date Amount
143-CITY OF CHANHASSEN Line Item Account
62359 12/31/2015
Inv 2014-CertAdd
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
12/31/2015 Certified-PID35-117-23-33-0039-2014 Tax 601-00-4263-0000 559.83
Inv 2014-CertAdd Total 559.83
62359 Total: 559.83
143-CITY OF CHANHASSEN Total: 559.83
683-GREAT PLAINS INSTITUTE Line Item Account
62360 12/31/2015
Inv 1630
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
12/31/2015 Renewable Energy Project-Oragne Environmental 450-00-4400-0000 7,680.00
Inv 1630 Total 7,680.00
62360 Total: 7,680.00
683-GREAT PLAINS INSTITUTE Total: 7,680.00
689-HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE Line Item Account
62361 12/31/2015
Inv 1000070492
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
12/31/2015 Room&Board-Case#27CR1420387-October-2015 Svc 101-21-4400-0000 397.50
Inv 1000070492 Total 397.50
62361 Total: 397.50
689-HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE Total: 397.50
251-LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Line Item Account
0 12/31/2015
AP-Check Detail(3/10/2016-11:22 AM) Page 1
Check Number Check Date Amount
Inv 4th Qtr-2015-Levy
Line Item Date Line Item Description Line Item Account
12/31/2015 Quarterly Levy Payment-4th Qtr-2015 101-11-4433-0000 8,258.00
Inv 4th Qtr-2015-Levy Total 8,258.00
0 Total: 8,258.00
251-LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Total: 8,258.00
Total: 16,895.33
AP-Check Detail(3/10/2016-11:22 AM) Page 2
a
h h w w w w
d
Lei
O
O
O
w �
o O
�,a
v f/1
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
01 01 CO CO CO CO CO �
U u O u O
U U U U O O O u O u O O O O O O O
\O \O \O U U \O \O N U
A N N N N N N N N N N N N N
to M M M M M M M M M M M M M
a
o0 o0 01 cl CO V1 O O h \o M
h r— 01 cl h O cl N N 't cl N \o 't N
M M 01 01 01 'I: O M N N O \O \O h N c"
01 01 �o oc O cl 01 h \o O �n
G� M
U � _
a
y �
w a w ` Vl N 01 N 01 01
O
o
c) 0
a4 '°2 �' N a a
o abbe F� :2 o x o
o w 0 0.1 Z a o a U U a
a o" U c o U U a F" a °' °mob U
O o v o W o ai o o H o N oO v v v OM o E
o ry m P 0 0 3 a°i o 0 Q 0 Z v N v n m o 0 Z
P to N Mo A a U 0.1 U U W a U 0.1 U U coy N N % % % N U U
Ct 0 0 0 0
cn
cl r-
0
FBI � a o o x
U
UU
r! C o O N N N
oc O N
cl oc
y h 01 cC U oo O
U 44 O N () O O O O O CO CO O
U N L O cl O O O U O O N N N N N O O
to
O N U 7 G O G G w O C G O G N N N N N G U
E �' N \O O O O O s. N N N N N N N 01 \o U p"
U a 0.1 -- c v 6 a O O o 0 0 r— oo
N
U
bA
a
U U U U U U
d �
Chi u Q u u u u u
o
0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O cl o o a o 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 o 0 0 0 0
0 � o � o � o � o 0 0 0 0
to o 0 0 0 o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0
v v o J o o
N N 01 01 CO '� '� z
cl�N N N N N N
01 O O N N 01 CO M M O O CO CO O CO CO N O O
O U M U O O
--� --� O --� --� U U h o0
U O O O O O O U O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
d M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
26 i
+' 01 \o h \O \O \O \O O O O 01 O O O 01 O O O O
o0 oo O 01 O h O o0 oo O O O O
o CO O m 01 cl
m CO CO O O M \O \O 'n h \O CO O O \O O O
--i M N_ h h Vl N Vl Vl M M M 0000 O O
G
U
w
Q U to
Cx/l U yam. a
O
to
v o J, �6 0 0.1 m N N C U Us. U U
o cl v O o o p °o
NI? � o w o o w °' o o a o. o o b y o aUi aUi
o 4 v v h h ° h C7 °p °A a s h a3 h on an
v v v v o
to c� c� c� c� h ovo h
A c, c, c, c, U U o U U N U U Q U W P. P. P. P. P. P. P. U w U w
w
0
0
a
x
U
.L"
w w w w
o
z NM � � o
N �oc, c,
44 O O O O O F: oo \o O h n O N
h h h h O N O O '� O �n O M M M O '/� O \o h O
•O M M 'C N U
01 01
'n cn cn cl N N N O N N O ,--i N Or N 0o 0o
i--i a1 a1 a1 a1 � o � N � � � M M M M M M M M M M � Q' � � �
M
U
bA
a
N N N N N N U
w w w w h h h
d
Lei
M � V1 \O h CO 01
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
U O u O u O O u O O O u O U O M u O O u O
M U U U U
N U \O \O \O U \O \O U
Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
to M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O.i
O O O O O 01 \o N h O O M M O O O O O O
oc CO \O \O \O O O O O
O O M M M \o O M M M M --i o0 M M
N 01 M M
x
O �
� O �
a
cl
° N z
to
x z M
w °
•� � � z Y� x �' U a x x' x U �. x x � � � x x' .,� .,� x z •° x �
z x x w O o 0 0 w
A ¢� U w w U U u u U c7 a U c7 U c7 U x U U U x x U a
w
0
0
a
x
U
U
N �
� 01 N O 01 O O N
'Z NO
O 0 CL
to
•0 4 CO O O O
h h h O c, CO O O
N \O O "� 01
cl G' G' z G' Q Q u G' oc G' N N N G' N G' O
o U .a . oo O O O o0 00 o
� � � N � U a � w w w � v � �o �o �o � M M � � �
a
w w w w h h w w
d
Lei
N O O N O N O N O O O O O N O N O N O N O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O 4 O v, v, x O o0
O O O O O O O O O O M O O O O
rn
c vu, vu,
O O O O O M N O
U O O O O O O O O O O O O O
U U U U N N N N N U U U U N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N
d M M M M M M M M M M M M M
�. O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O
O.i
+' O O O O O O O O \o h O O O O o1 01 O O
't 't o0 O O O O O O h O O o0 h O O o1 cl
O \O \O N M M O O cl r- N \O o1 O O cl 00 al al
O M M
Q
U m bA � N oc m a
E - 00 0 0
N
on on
cD
cD
to
o
� to to o o h x h h
to
Q Z U x U z U Q 0.1 x W 0.1 U d U U a U ° U N U
w
0
0
a
x
U
U
U
\O Ol cD O h \O \O \O \O \O "'� .� Ol M M u
N M O ti ti ti ti ti \O y, O
O N N h Ny, N O O O O O N \o N Q N N h �
z
to
•o -°o a1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
v c, o M o o o U o 0 0 0 0 U cD
a
w w h w w w h h
d
Lei
oo 01 O N M
N O O N O M O M O M O O M O O O O O O M O O O M
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
U O O U O U O U O U O O U O O O O O O U O O O U
to O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O M M O O N N O O O O O O O O O O N N
z
M
U U U U ~ U U ~ ~ U U U
U o o U o U o U o U o o U o 0 0 0 0 o U o 0 o U
to
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
to M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
O.i
N M O O O O O O M O O O
O O O \o \o O O O oo N N h N N M O O 01 O
C Mi h O O c1 c1 O O N r-: M M 01 M M : r-: O O h CO
�p oo oo M O
to
W �
h W w u
N z cl
Z L U O O
to tto
ct a w aO Q i y v x a a o y a w y x
to
ai
° U w a a o m
A U U U U U Z x U O m m U O 0.1 U w m m U U c°� c°� U x
w
0
0
a
x
'O U
oo Vl Vl O N Vl O r-+ \O O U
O N M M M
to
to �--i O Z
i; i; i; i; W i; \O \o i; N M � \o 'D
O O O O �n O O �p �p �p �p �p �p O O U
•O 'C oo M 'C N 'C 'O M 'C 'O x CO CO CO CO CO 'C
G' � oo G' L7
U oo O U h U U U U N
w N oo oN o U U N O w U U
a
w w w w w w a,
d
Chi u u u u u u w
o r- oo cl O
O M O M o0 M O O O O O O O O O O O O M O O O O O
O O o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 o
v o o m m J J m m m m m m J J o 0 0 0
O O N N N N N N N N N O N O O M
U N N N N N N N N N N N N M O
d ° U U °v U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o U o U o 0 o U ~°o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
d M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O.i
+' O O O O 't ' N o1 ! \o 01 cl h h x O O O O o0 o0 O
O O O O \O \o oc cl r— �o
C O O O O O O
O O 116 \o O ; � � O
M O N 1n O
O O N �n h N M
G� Vl Vl h h M M M oc cD �
QI N N cl al Ni M Vl
w Q O
w
w
3 O O a
I'D
0
0000 Z W W
to to
to
z
o u u a z M
o m xt s. It s. s. s. s. s. s. s. �
lb
N o
y
to
U U a a U U U U U U U
w
0
0
a
x
N U
Q1 �
cl
U
�p oo CO o1 Vl O P. w \o op yy
O cl Vl Vl \o U
O O 0 M M M x O
F N O O Cl.
to O o N O
4 i; �' i-. Pti i. al O h M h Vl M h N M al i.. i-. y', p O i.. O o
• o c, o o Ao h oo M M VO h h O O M r- o cl O N N o O
c 'a oo a '� O O O N N N N o oo o U o N U
o oo oo oo oo oo oo oo oo oo oo oo oo -c N a
a
o
o °
cl
cl
� M
Vl Vl Vl N N N N N N N N h M
U Ca Ca Ca ol o0
cl
w w w w w w w w ct
d
U U U U U U U U U U
O O O O O M O O O O O O
O O O O O O
O O O U O U O U O U O O U O U O U O U O O
to
N ,--i
z N N
O
O U U O U O
U O O O O O O O O O u
U U O U O U U O ~
v �o
to
Ca o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
to M M M M M M M M M M M M M
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O.i
+' O O O O O O N N M M O O O M M O O
C� O O O O O O M M 01 cl cl O O oo o0 h 00
oo O O m m N N 01
M
N
� N
N
0.i to N w O V� cd W 7 O
�
to
cl
cZ O Cxj o Z W o N o So
to to
o U x O U O cl vM
o o
o v C7 ° C7 W U .w
N� N Z a Ca W Z p Z it
cD °° 0 0
cZ y s.
a to N o
0.1 o W u o o W o a 0 0 0 0 0 a o Z O 0
F" W >, F" � F" � E� U E-� � � E-i w F. O u �
A 0.01 U a U Q U h U Z U h U a U a U .a
w
0
0
a
co cn v
x
a1 a1 a1
cl
U
o a
\o h oo M O l\ oo M M oc O1 M '�oc O O O �'., M O N CL
y O O O O O N '
O O O i. i. N i. O i. i.. i-. i. a i.. O O O
O O O O O oo O O O O O O �' O - 01
.O O O U
o0 oo
00
a
0 0 0
O O o
000 000 000 h w o o_
M M M M Vl h 00 O, Ao
O O
c, c, O O O O O O O O N
� oc oc oc r� L� O O W O O O O O O W W
F o 0 o x x o o x O O O O O O x x
O N M
O O O
O O O U O U O O U O O O O O O U O O O U O O O O O O O O O
O N O O O N
c,N N N O O N N al al N N O N N O N CO O O O
N N N N N
.,. O Vl
O O
U O M u O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O O
U U
cD cD cD cD cD
Ca o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
d M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O.i
+' t M M v, CO 00 h M O Mi O O, CO al
't 't 't oc N N \O '/, N O �/, h �/, N 't M
00 al M 'i O 00 N N_ N \O h 00 N \O h O, O
41 CO \O Vl O Vl Vl �--i \O v, h 00 �p V, M M 00 N h O, O h
M N N \O v, 00 h \o N cl N \O O
O O 7
M M p
O O M
\O \O O
0o z
NN O a � � a
O O cl
oc
M M \O
O O �
oho v m m Q' F; P-. s. ., o
o +
o
A m a w °
A m m m U U U v N U U a 0.1 0.1 0.1 U m m m U m m rJ m m w C7 E�
w
0
0
a
x
U
U
u
00 O, (+1 (+1 h 00 O U
N a O a O cD
O 00 00 00 M \o M V, M
CO CO CO O M M M M M M 't cl pO, 000 Vl O �U.•
y 00 4 Vl al al al al al al G
M i. \O \O i. i. 'r, \O CO CO al al O O
O O, O \O \O O N N N N N N O 0�0 p O 01 01 01 01 01 01 00
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 N �/, �/, �/, �/, �/, �/, O N N U
\O \O \O G' O, G' O, O, G' N N N N N N G' ,--i G' \O O, cl
h h h N 'O N 00 00 N O, O, O, O, O, O, N ,--i ,--i N N N
-- a, a, cl oo �o v v v v v v N N N o O O O O O O O O
a
d
\O O O c, O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U O
N M M O O O vi O O 01 O \o x O 01 c, N vi
O O O O x 01 00 00 01 00 01 01 01 00 01 00 01 c,
uc
�-� O O
a., O O M O U O O M M O O O O O O M M U M
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
d M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
�. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O.i
00 \O 01 O \o 00 cl h M O O \O \O
O N N O N M 't 00 00 h 01 M \o \o CO V1 \O r- 00 00 00
O 06 h O M 01 c1 N M \O �n vi h CO c1 01 'I: N c1 c1 c1 N
O 00 M 00 O O O O h O \o 00 N h 00 00 \p
M O h M \o N 00 O h h N O
oc
N
� N
N
� O N 'r N r- `p \O N \O \O N �
N N N N ti , N
N a
O N ti O N _
O \p N O N N N N N O
vi ,--i N N O N N N O
r' ti N N N O F7 N O ti N to i
CL N N p + O O F7 -
y O O' U p
_ p N Z," id U N 0.i p 01 01 L� W
to ct
U U U
U v v v v O O U U a
N U w P a 0.1 m m N n n n U N R. U E E
w
0
0
a
x
U
U
\O 01 N N N N N N N N \O 01 CO CO
M N 01 01 `c ^c oc ^c oc x x \O h h N oc oc
O O O O 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO CO CO n \O 01 01
h O O O O O O O O
d x 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 cl
4 i. 't 't 't 't 't 't 7r 7r 7r � � 't ' 00 p
•O N N N N -- 4t 4t 4t 4t 4t 4t 4t 4t 4t 4t 4t 4t 4t ,o U
N N N N c) L1.
#3B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Acceptance of the Lake Minnetonka Emergency Management Operations Plan
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
Prepared by: Bill Joynes, City Administrator
CC:
Attachments: Police Chief Meehan Correspondence, Resolution
Background:
Police Chief Mike Meehan is requesting the City Council approve a resolution adopting the Updated Lake
Minnetonka Emergency Operations Plan (LMEO). An electronic copy of the plan has been provided to
Council. Changes to the plan are noted in the attached correspondence from Police Chief Meehan.
Council Action:
A motion approving the resolution adopting the Updated Lake Minnetonka Emergency Operations Plan
(LMEO) as submitted.
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
South Lake Minnetonka Police Department
TO:
Bill Joynes, City Administrator and the Shorewood City Council
FROM:
Chief Mike Meehan
rd
DATE :
February 23, 2016
:
RE
Lake Minnetonka Emergency Operations Plan Update
Over the past several months, the Lake Minnetonka Emergency Management Group
has been working on updating our emergency operations plan. We have completed the
final revisions and it has been distributed to all jurisdictions involved in our emergency
management group. The changes to the plan include three new annexes: Domestic
and Exotic Animal Directory, Terrorism, and Volunteer/Donations, along with other
updates such as name changes and several minor grammatical changes.
You will find a copy of the emergency management operations plan in digital format,
th
along with a hard copy at the March 14, 2016, Shorewood City Council meeting.
Attached to this memo is a resolution asking for your acceptance of the Lake
Minnetonka Emergency Management Operations Plan. We would ask the City Council
to approve the resolution accepting the changes to the plan and authorizing the Mayor
to sign the resolution accepting the changes.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 16-
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE UPDATED LAKE
MINNETONKA EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN (LMEO)
WHEREAS
, the City of Shorewood is a member of the Lake Minnetonka Emergency
Management Group; and
WHEREAS
, the City of Shorewood holds a common ordinance describing the
responsibilities of the Lake Minnetonka Emergency Management Group with the other
jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS
, the Emergency Mangers for each jurisdiction, who are appointed by their
elected boards, are responsible for the Lake Minnetonka Emergency Operations Plan; and
WHEREAS
, the Lake Minnetonka Emergency Operations Plan must be updated and
reviewed to ensure compliance with the latest laws and requirements; and
WHEREAS
, the Lake Minnetonka Emergency Operations Plan has been updated and
approved by the Lake Minnetonka Emergency Managers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the City Council of the City of
Shorewood approves the updates to the Lake Minnetonka Emergency Operations Plan as of
September 15, 2015.
______________________________
Scott Zerby, Mayor
ATTEST
:
_______________________________
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
® K
MEETING TYPE
Ity of Shorewood nl Meeting l Item Regular Meeting
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Title/Subject: Accept Proposal for Professional Services for Soil Testing
Meeting Date: March 12, 2016
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by:
Attachments Proposal by WSB and Associates
Policy Consideration: Should the City Council enter into a contract for Soil Testing Services with
WSB and Associates, Inc?
Background: Over the past three years, the materials generated from street sweeping have
been stockpiled at the Shorewood Public Works Facility, located at 24200 Smithtown Road.
Currently, there is stockpiled approximately 400-500 cubic yards of sweepings, on site.
In accordance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) regulations, sweepings to
be hauled off site or used as fill materials shall be tested for heavy metals and other chemicals,
and shall have a "Waste Profile" generated for the materials.
Therefore, staff has solicited a proposal from WSB and Associates, to perform the soils testing
and analysis. A proposal is attached to this memo, as Attachment 1.
Testing services will include various visual tests, in addition to testing for:
• Diesel range organics (DRO) using the Wisconsin Method with silica gel cleanup
• Gasoline Range organic (GRO) using the Wisconsin Method
• Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) using EPA Method 8260
• Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) using EPA Method 8270
• RCRA-Metals using EPA Method 6020
If the waste profile for these materials is returned as material that can safely be utilized as
general fill materials, staff may return to the City Council with a grading plan and erosion control
permit for the North side of the Public Works Facility property. This portion of the property has
extreme erosion control issues that are in need of stabilization. Utilizing these materials in the
substrate of the fill materials may save the City thousands of dollars in trucking fees.
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
Financial Considerations: These services, if approved, will be divided amongst the Operating Funds for
the Roadway and Stormwater budgets. Costs of the proposal are not to exceed $2,500.
Options:
1. Accept the proposal, as presented.
2. Reject the proposal and provide staff with alternative direction.
Recommendation: Staff is recommending that the proposal be accepted, as presented.
A
WSB
-planning-enlr0t mnu � nst�construction scra engineering 701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis,MN 55416
Tel 763-541-4800
Fax 763-541-1700
February 25, 2016
Mr. Larry Brown, PE, Director of Public Works
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Scope of Work and Cost for Stockpile Sampling at the Shorewood Public Works Facility,
Shorewood,MN.
Dear Mr. Brown:
Outlined below is the scope of work and cost to perform stockpile sampling at the Shorewood
Public Works Facility located in Shorewood, Minnesota (the Site). The purpose of the sampling
is to characterize a sand stockpile (consisting of street sweeping material) located at the Site.
The sampling activities will be performed in general conformance with Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) guidelines. The sampling results will be used to identify possible reuse
options for the stockpile as specified in the MPCA's reuse guidance. The following tasks are
anticipated as part of this scope:
Task 1: Observation and Screening
WSB will visually observe the stockpile for evidence of debris, staining, or other indicators of
possible contamination. In addition, WSB will field screen the stockpile using a photoionization
detector (PID) with a 10.6 eV lamp. It is anticipated that up to 30 representative stockpile
samples will be PID field screened.
Task 2:Stockpile Sampling
WSB will collect composite samplings of the stockpile using a hand shovel. The stockpile will
be divided into three sections (thirds) and 10 aliquot samples will be collected from each section.
An equal amount of soil (4 oz.) will be removed from each aliquot and composed into one
sample for laboratory analysis. A total of three (3) representative composite soil samples will be
analyzed for the following parameters:
Diesel range organics (DRO)using the Wisconsin Method with silica gel cleanup
Gasoline Range organic (GRO)using the Wisconsin Method
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)using EPA Method 8260
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)using EPA Method 8270
RCRA-Metals using EPA Method 6020
ATTACHMENT 1
St.Cloud• Minneapolis•St.Paul PROPOSAL
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
Mr. Brown
February 25, 2016
Page 2
If possible, the City will provide mechanical equipment (frontend loader, backhoe, etc.) to
disturb the stockpile prior to sampling.
Task 3:Sampling Reporting
WSB will summarize the results of the stockpile sampling in a final documentation letter report.
At a minimum, the report will include the following:
Scope of work
Sample location map
Sample methods and procedures
Investigation results
Conclusions and recommendations
Scope Assumptions
All samples will be analyzed with a standard 10 day laboratory turnaround time.
The City will provide mechanical equipment (frontend loader, backhoe, etc.) to
disturb the stockpile prior to sampling.
The City will provide one review of the sampling letter report.
Total Cost and Schedule
The cost to perform the described stockpile sampling is not to exceed $2,500. If additional work
is required beyond the scope outlined above, WSB will bill on a time and materials basis with
approval from the City. Upon authorization, the work can be initiated as early as the week of
February 29th, 2016. If you wish to authorize this work, please sign below and submit a copy to
WSB.
Sincerely,
WSB &Associates,Inc.
"u� .
Ryan Spencer
Senior Environmental Scientist
I hereby authorize the above scope of work, schedule, and fee.
Name (Print)
Signature
Date
#3D
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title/Subject: Benson—Request to Install Mallard Nest on City Property
Meeting Date: 14 March 2016
Prepared by: Brad Nielsen
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn
Policy Consideration: Should the City allow Jim Benson to
erect a small mallard nest pole on a city-owned pond next to
his home.
Background: Jim Benson owns the property at 25670 Maple
View Court. He has asked permission to erect a pole in the
city-owned pond to the east of his house that would
h
accommodate a straw mat mallard nest(see attached
example photo).
Financial or Budget Considerations: Mr. Benson proposes E�
to do this at his own expense.
r
Options: Approve the request; deny the request; request
detailed plans and engineered specification; or do nothing.
Recommendation/Action Requested: This is almost too
minor a matter to bother the Council with, but since it is city
property, and since Mr. Benson was good enough to ask w
permission, staff recommends approval.
Next Steps and Timelines: Mr. Benson would like to take advantage of the ice on the pond to install the
nest(it may be too late for that). Otherwise, sooner than later.
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: Star Lane and Star Circle Utility and Street Improvements,City Project 14-11—Change
Order No. 1 Additional Work Request
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
Prepared by: Paul Hornby
Reviewed by:
Attachments: Change Order No. 1, Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1.
Background:The City Council awarded the construction contract for Star Lane and Star Circle Utility and
Street Improvements Project(City Project 14-11), on May 26, 2015. The contractor has constructed the
utilities and street except for the bituminous wear course and will return in 2016 to complete the
surfacing work, restoration and punch list items.
During construction of the project the City did receive some complaints from residents of standing water
on the roadway and had concerns about access to their property.The water standing on the roadway
was due to the flat topography and enhanced by the excavation work for utility construction. The
standing water resulted in mud on vehicles and residents walking through front yards during
construction. Staff worked with the contractor to provide a temporary means of access consisting of
crushed rock for pedestrians and vehicles in areas that were collecting water.
During construction of utilities, staff noticed a sanitary sewer manhole section was damaged and
previously repaired, but in need of replacement. Staff directed the contractor to replace this manhole
section to reduce the potential for excavation and replacement in the new road sometime in the future.
Change Order No. 1 compensates the Contractor for the crushed rock stabilization material, and for the
replacement of the top reinforced section of a sanitary sewer manhole.
Valley Paving, Inc. has signed the change order detailing the additional work items after negotiation with
staff. The change order has been reviewed by staff with regard to the work scope and additional costs,
and recommends approval.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The project construction contract as bid was awarded by the
Council in the amount of$665,018.13. Change Order No. 1 will increase the contract$7,334.84 to
$672,352.97, approximately 1.1%above the original contract amount.
Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the enclosed Resolution 16-
Approving Change Order No. 1.
Payment for this change order is included in Payment Voucher 4 on the verified claims for this Council
meeting agenda.
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
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
2015 STAR LANE/STAR CIRCLE IMPROVEMENTS FEBRUARY 22,2016
CITY OF SHOREWOOD,MN
WSB PROJECT NO.1459-97
OWNER: CONTRACTOR:
CITY OF SHOREWOOD VALLEY PAVING-SWHAKOPEE
5755 COUNTRY CLOUB ROAD 8800 13TH AVENUE EAST
SHOREWOOD,MN 55331 SHAKOPEE,MN 55379
YOU ARE DIRECTED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION:
Add the quantities of the items indicated to the contract.
IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS CHANGE ORDER INCLUDES ALL ADDITIONAL COSTS AND TIME EXTENSIONS WHICH ARE IN ANY WAY,SHAPE,OR
FORM ASSOCIATED WITH THE WORK ELEMENTS DESCRIBED ABOVE.
CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIME:
ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE: $665,018.13 ORIGINAL CONTRACT TIME: 6/30/2016
PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS: $0.00 NET CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS: NONE
CONTRACT PRICE PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE ORDER: $665,018.13 CONTRACT TIME PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE ORDER: 6/30/2016
NET INCREASE OF THIS CHANGE ORDER: $7,334.84 NET INCREASE OF CHANGE ORDER: NONE
CONTRACT PRICE WITH ALL APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS: $672,352.97 CONTRACT TIME WITH APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS: 6/30/2016
RECOMMENDED BY: APPROVED BY:
PAUL HORNBY, PE, PROJECT MANAGER CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE
WSB&ASSOCIATES, INC. VALLEY PAVING-SHAKOPEE
ENGINEER CONTRACTOR
APPROVED BY:
CITY ENGINEER CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE DATE
K:1014 59-9 7 014 dminlConstruction AdminlChange Ordersl
Page 1 of 2 1459-97 C01 022216CO 2
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 DETAIL
2015 STAR LANE/STAR CIRCLE IMPROVEMENTS FEBRUARY 22,2016
CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MN
WSB PROJECT NO. 1459-97
ADDED ITEMS
Item No. Mat.No. Description Qty Unit Price Extended Amount
102 2451.609 ROCK STABILIZATION 182.49 TON $29.80 $5,438.20
103 2506.502 CONE SECTION (48"DIA-STATIONARY) 1 EACH $1,896.64 $1,896.64
TOTAL ADDED ITEMS CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 $7,334.84
DELETED ITEMS
Item No. Mat.No. Description Qty Unit Price Extended Amount
TOTAL DELETED ITEMS CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 $0.00
KM1459-97MAdmiMConstruction AdmiMChange Orders)
Page 2 of 2 1459-97 C01 022216CO 2 Detail
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 16 -
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR
STAR LANE AND STAR CIRCLE UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT 14-11
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood Council awarded the contract for the Star Lane and
Star Circle Utility and Street Improvements Project (City Project 14-11), on May 26, 2015 to Valley
Paving, Inc. of Shakopee, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Change Order No. 1 is necessary to construct the improvements and
associated work; and
WHEREAS, Change Order No. 1 will increase the project construction costs in the amount
of$7,334.84, from the original contract amount of$665,018.13 to $672,352.97;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood,
Minnesota:
1. Change Order No. 1 in the amount of$7,334.84 is hereby approved.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 14th
day of March, 2016.
ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
#3F
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Title/Subject: Consideration of approval of Agreement for Professional Arborist Services for S&S Tree
and Horticultural Specialists, Inc.
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
Prepared by: Paul Hornby, City Engineer
Reviewed by:
Attachments: Agreement for Professional Services—S&S Tree and Horticultural Specialists, Inc.
Background:The City Council previously requested proposals for consultant arborist services and
selected S&S Tree and Horticultural Specialists, Inc. (S&S)for these professional services. S&S has
prepared an agreement for professional services for Council consideration of approval.
The agreement has been reviewed by staff and is in conformance with the scope of services of the RFP.
Staff recommends working with the consultant after selected to prepare a policy for forest management
and resident services. There are examples of management and resident services that staff have
researched from other cities and will work with the consultant for future Council policy consideration.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The professional services are proposed at$65 per hour for work
performed for the City including "portal to portal" time, plus mileage expenses incurred associated with
work performed at the IRS reimbursement rate. The fees are in conformance with the consultant
proposal.
Options: Staff recommends Council consider the following action options:
1. Approve the agreement for professional services, pending City Attorney review
2. Take no action at this time
3. Provide further direction to staff
Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the agreement for professional
services, contingent upon review and approval by the City Attorney.
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
AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
This Agreement for Consulting Services ("Agreement") is made as of this
day of , 2016 by and between S&S Tree and Horticultural
Specialists, Inc. ("Consultant"), a Minnesota corporation; and the City of Shorewood,
MN ("Client").
In consideration of the mutual promises contained herein and for good and
valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Consultant
and Client agree as follows:
1. TERM and SERVICES.
a. Under the terms, conditions and procedures set forth in this Agreement,
Consultant agrees to provide Client with consulting services (the "Work") as defined in
this Agreement.
b. Any work that is not covered under the Work outlined in this Agreement that is
requested by Client will be performed by Consultant only upon Consultant submitting a
bid for the work or services and after Client has notified Consultant that Consultant is
authorized to perform the work or services. Other than the compensation and
consulting services outlined in this Agreement, so long as this Agreement is in effect,
any work or services performed by Consultant will be pursuant to the terms and
conditions outlined in this Agreement.
c. The Work to be performed under this Agreement will commence on or about
and will continue until terminated as provided for in this Agreement.
2. CONSULTANT PERSONNEL. Consultant shall employ for the Work employees
or, if approved by Client, contractors, of Consultant known to it to be qualified to
perform the Work. At Client's request, the credentials of Consultant's employee(s) or
contractor(s) assigned to perform the Work shall be submitted to Client.
3. WORK, COMPENSATION AND TERMS OF PAYMENT.
a. Consultant shall perform the following Work for Client:
i. Assist Client with the preparation of long- and short-term policy and
strategies for Client's Tree Preservation and Reforestation Management Program;
ii. Assist Client with the implementation of Client's Tree Preservation and
Reforestation Management Program;
iii. Assist Client with risk management and emergency preparedness as
outlined in the Tree Preservation and Reforestation Management Program;
iv. Perform inspection of trees on City of Shorewood property as directed by
Client for tree quality, defects, infestations and pest control, damage, assessed value
and possible corrective measures;
v. Provide assistance and technical consulting to staff, citizens,
governmental agencies and other outside agencies on matters of concern regarding
City of Shorewood urban forestry issues as directed and approved by Client;
vi. Assist Client with public education programs related to urban forest
management ideas such as "Tree City USA," Arbor Day and Earth Day;
vii. Assist Client with presenting programs to City advisory commissions,
committees, civic groups, schools, private developers and others as directed by Client;
Page 1 of 6
viii. Assist Client with other duties consistent with this Agreement that are
related to Client's urban forest management programs that are reasonably requested by
Client.
b. Compensation for the Work performed will be paid by the Client to Consultant
as follows:
i. Sixty-five dollars ($65.00) per hour for Work performed for Client.
Consultant will begin charging on a per-hour rate on a portal-to-portal basis;
ii. Mileage while performing Work or traveling to and from Work while in the
City of Shorewood jurisdictional limits charged at the Internal Revenue Service mileage
reimbursement rate on a per-mile rate.
c. Client shall pay Consultant on a monthly basis for Work performed. Consultant
will submit an invoice on a monthly basis outlining the Work performed in the month
covered by the invoice.
d. Unless otherwise set forth herein, payment, including any applicable taxes on
the Work, shall be made by Client no more than thirty (30) days from the date of
invoice.
e. Consultant will be responsible to withhold and pay all amounts related to
payments to its employees, including but not limited to, income taxes, FICA, social
security, Medicare, FUTA, unemployment compensation or other taxes.
4. PERMITS. Unless this Agreement otherwise provides, Client shall, at its own
expense, obtain from appropriate governmental authorities all permits and licenses
which are required for Consultant to perform the Work, except for permits and licenses
required to be obtained by Consultant to perform the Work.
5. WARRANTY.
a. Consultant warrants that it shall perform the Work with the care, skill, and
diligence set forth by the applicable professional standards currently recognized by
such profession and that the Work shall conform to the requirements of this Agreement.
b. Other than as contained herein, Consultant does not make and expressly
disclaims any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied, with respect
to the Work including, but not limited to, merchantability or fitness for a particular
purpose.
c. Consultant provides Work at a certain point in time and the parties understand
and agree that the facts and conditions underlying the Work may change over time.
Therefore, any facts, conclusions and recommendations are applicable only at the time
the Work is performed. In that Consultant cannot predict or otherwise determine
subsequent developments or events concerning the subject of the Work, Consultant will
not be liable for any subsequent developments, changes, acts, or conditions not known
or considered at the time the Work is performed, nor will Consultant have any
responsibility to advise Client about any changes.
d. To the extent Consultant has reviewed and relied upon publicly available, Client
provided, or other third party records or other information, Consultant has assumed and
Page 2 of 6
is entitled to rely upon the genuineness of such documents and other information.
Consultant disclaims any liability or responsibility for errors, omissions, or other
inaccuracies resulting from or contained in any records or other information obtained
from these sources.
6. CONFIDENTIALITY
a. Any data, drawings, plans, specifications, calculations, reports and other
documents and information associated with the Work, regardless of form, and any
information that Consultant provides, shall be and remain the sole property of
Consultant, referred to herein as "Consultant Confidential Information," unless such
information is incorporated in or provided as part of the Work provided to Client.
b. Any data, drawings, plans, specifications, calculations, reports and other
documents and information associated with the Work, regardless of form, and any
information that Client provides, shall be and remain the property of Client, referred to
herein as "Client Confidential Information," unless such information is incorporated in or
provided to Consultant as part of the Work provided to Client.
c. Consultant will use Client Confidential Information solely to perform the Work
and shall not disclose Client Confidential Information to any third party without Client's
authorization.
d. The restrictions set forth in this Article shall not apply to Confidential
Information: (i)which is in the public domain at the time it was disclosed; (ii)which was
already known to a party prior to the time it was disclosed; (iii)which is independently
developed by a party who did not receive Confidential Information and who developed
without the use or benefit of Confidential Information; or (iv)which is disclosed to a
party from a source absent a breach of this Agreement.
e. Upon termination of this Agreement, each party will continue to keep
confidential, as provided above, any Confidential Information of the other party.
7. INDEMNIFICATION.
a. Consultant will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Client from and against
any and all losses, costs, damages, claims, liabilities, fines, penalties, and expenses,
including, without limitation, attorneys' fees and other professional fees and expenses,
and court costs, incurred in connection with the investigation, defense, and settlement
of any claim asserted against Client (collectively, "Losses"), which Client may suffer or
incur as a direct result of actions, omissions, or negligence on the part of Consultant.
Consultant will not be liable for any actions, omissions, or negligence of Client or of any
third party.
b. Client will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Consultant from and against
any and all losses, costs, damages, claims, liabilities, fines, penalties, and expenses,
including, without limitation, attorneys' fees and other professional fees and expenses,
and court costs, incurred in connection with the investigation, defense, and settlement
of any claim asserted against Consultant (collectively, "Losses"), which Consultant may
suffer or incur as a result of actions, omissions, or negligence on the part of Client.
Client will not be liable for any actions, omissions, or negligence of Consultant or of any
third party.
Page 3 of 6
c. A party's obligations under this paragraph shall not be limited to the extent of
any insurance available to or provided by any party. This Article will survive termination
of this Agreement.
8. INSURANCE
a. Consultant will carry the following types and amounts of insurance:
i. General liability$300,000 per occurrence, $1,000,000 aggregate
ii. Automobile Liability $300,000 per occurrence, $1,000,000 aggregate
iii. Professional Liability $300,000 per occurrence, $1,000,000 aggregate
iv. Workers Compensation as required by State law.
b. At Client's request, Consultant will furnish certificates of insurance naming
Client as a certificate holder.
9. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
a. In performing the Work, each party shall operate as and have the status of an
independent entity and, except as outlined in this Agreement, shall not act as or be an
agent or employee of the other party. Nothing in this Agreement or in the performance
of the Work shall be construed to create a partnership, joint venture or other joint
business arrangement between Consultant and Client.
b. Consultant is not entitled to any of the benefits that Client may make available
to its employees including, but not limited to, life insurance, profit sharing or retirement
benefits, or group health benefits. Consultant is not authorized to make any
representation, contract or commitment on behalf of Client unless specifically
authorized by Client.
10. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS, REGULATIONS. During the performance of this
Agreement, Consultant and Client shall each comply with all federal, state and local
laws, rules or regulations and executive orders applicable to the Work and their
respective obligation.
11. FORCE MAJEURE. Neither party shall be liable to the other for any expenses,
loss or damage resulting from delays or prevention of performance arising from causes
beyond its reasonable control including caused by fire, flood, accident, strikes, civil
commotion, governmental or military authority, insurrection, riots, embargo, unavoidable
delays in transportation, acts of God, adverse weather conditions, delays or changes,
inaccurate or incompatible information provided to one party by another, or public
enemy. In the event of any delay arising by reason of any of the foregoing events, the
time for performance shall be extended by a period of time equal to the time lost by
reason of such delay or as otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties.
12. ASSIGNMENT. Except as outlined in this Agreement, neither party may assign
any rights or claims, or delegate any duties under this Agreement, in whole or in part,
without the prior written consent of the other party.
13. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. Under no circumstances shall Consultant, its
subsidiaries and affiliates, and their successors and assigns be liable for any
anticipated profits or for incidental, special, or consequential damages, even if advised
Page 4 of 6
of the possibility that such claim may occur. Consultant's liability for any claim, damage
or loss caused by or related to the Work will be limited to the Work expressly
contracted.
14. NON-WAIVER. The delay or failure of either party to assert or enforce in any
instance strict performance of any of the terms of this Agreement or to exercise any
rights hereunder conferred, shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment to any
extent of its rights to assert or rely upon such terms or rights at any later time or on any
future occasion.
15. PROHIBITION OF PUBLICITY. Neither party shall refer to this Agreement or
reference the other party, its subsidiaries and affiliates in its advertising or promotional
materials without express written consent of the other party.
16. TAXES. All amounts referenced herein are in United States dollars and do not
include any sales, use, ad valorem, personal property taxes, custom duties, registration
fees and the like arising from the Work performed. Client will pay or reimburse
Consultant for any such taxes on Work performed upon receipt of invoice or demand.
17. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant will not
accept work or enter into an agreements that interfere with or would be deemed a
unlawful conflict of interest with this Agreement. To the best of Consultant's
knowledge, Consultant is not aware of any work or agreements that constitute a conflict
of interest with Client.
18. TERMINATION. Consultant or Client may terminate this Agreement for any reason
at any time upon thirty (30) days prior written notice. In the event of termination under
this Section, Consultant shall be entitled to and shall receive payment in full for all
services provided and all reimbursable expenses incurred up to and including the
effective date of termination. In the event of a termination under this paragraph, Client
will pay all shut-down costs and/or start-up costs as reasonably determined by
Consultant that have not been recovered or are incurred because of the termination.
19. INTERPRETATION. The following principles of interpretation shall apply to this
Agreement:
(a) paragraph headings and captions are inserted for convenience only and shall
not be considered in construing intent;
(b) neither Consultant nor Client shall be considered to be the party responsible for
the drafting of any particular provision of this Agreement;
(c) the words "hereof," "herein," "hereunder," and words of similar import shall refer
to this Agreement as a whole and not to any particular provision hereof;
(d) the word "including" means "including, but not limited to" and shall be
interpreted as broadly as possible;
(e)words in the singular include the plural and vice versa;
(f) all references to "days" shall be calendar days (and not merely business days,
unless the Agreement so states); and
(g) any provision hereof that is prohibited or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall,
as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or unenforceability
without invalidating the remaining provisions hereof or affecting the validity or
enforceability of such provision in any other jurisdiction and the provision that is
Page 5 of 6
prohibited or unenforceable shall be reformed or modified to reflect the parties' intent to
the maximum extent permitted by applicable legal requirements.
20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; AMENDMENTS. This Agreement is the entire
understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes
all prior oral or written representations, understandings or agreements between the
parties. This Agreement shall be amended only by a written instrument executed by
authorized and empowered representatives of the parties.
In witness whereof, the parties have agreed to and signed this Agreement as of
the day and date first above written.
CONSULTANT CLIENT
S&S Tree and Horticultural Specialists, Inc. City of Shorewood, MN
By: By:
Print Name: Print Name:
Title: Title:
Page 6 of 6
#3G
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Accepting a Donation from the American Legion for Safety Camp
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
Prepared by: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Policy Consideration: All donations to the City of Shorewood must be accepted by the City Council.
Background: The American Legion has given a $250 donation for the Safety Camp event. The
contribution is voluntary in nature.
Financial or Budget Considerations: This donation will help to cover expenses related to this year’s
Safety Camp which is scheduled for Wednesday, August 10.
Options:
Accept the Donation, or
Reject the Donation
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends that the donation be accepted, and a thank
you note will be mailed to the American Legion.
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
#5A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Planning Commissioner Recognition
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
CC:
Attachments:
Background:
Council routinely recognizes the service of city volunteers on the Park and Planning Commissions and
other local boards.
Nancy Geng will be in attendance at the Council meeting to accept the recognition plaque for her late
husband, Tom Geng, for his nine years of service on the Planning Commission from March 2007 -
January 2016.
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
#7
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2016 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
Chair Mangold convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
A. Roll Call
;
Present: Chair Mangold, Commissioners Vassar Stelmachers, Kobs and Rock
City Council Liaison Labadie; City Planner Nielsen
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Kobs moved to approve the agenda as written. Vassar seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
Mangold welcome new Park Commission members Paul Kobs and Ed Rock and introduced them.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of February 9, 2016
Vassar moved to approve the minutes of the February 9, 2016 meeting as written. Stelmachers seconded
the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were none.
4. REVIEW OTHER CITIES’ TOURNAMENT FEES
Nielsen provided research on what other cities charge for tournament fees. Following damage during a
tournament in 2015, steps have been taken to correct the issues. He indicated Shorewood is right in line
with what other cities charge. He indicated renting police is part of the sports organization’s
responsibilities. He stated staff is doing an overall study of costs associated with special events. He
indicated there are so many events, the police cannot work every single weekend. He asked the
Commission for input on whether fees should change. He stated the Public Works Director reviewed fees
and stated they cover all labor costs.
In response to a question from Stelmachers, Nielsen clarified the difference in lighting costs. Stelmachers
noted Eden Prairie charges much more than Shorewood for field usage. Mangold didn’t think it was fair to
compare small and large cities.
Stelmachers asked when fees were last changed. Mangold believed it has been at least four years.
Mangold didn’t think fees needed to be changed; however, the damage deposit seemed quite low. He
indicated the report provided very good background information.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, MARCH 8 , 2016
5
PAGE 2 OF
Nielsen stated the soccer organization has indicated they would utilize shuttle services and limit field usage
in the future.
Commissioners agreed the fees shouldn’t be changed.
Nielsen indicated any field damage was repaired by the organization responsible.
5. UPDATE ON BADGER FIELD
Mangold stated the lacrosse organization is present this evening. He stated the Commission would review
everything we have on the history of the park development.
Nielsen reviewed the history beginning with the TKDA development of a master plan. He indicated issues were
identified in 2013 and rough sketches were created which showed what should be done at the park. He discussed
possible amenities and improvements to connect the Southshore Center to city hall. The decision was made that
the play field would remain. There was talk about removing the hockey rink and keeping the tennis courts.
Mangold stated this was all done by city staff. He indicated the plan was to open the park up to create a campus
feel and provide additional open space by removing the hockey rink. The recommendation from the Park
Commission was to move forward with the concepts with the condition the hockey rink is moved somewhere else.
He stated there wasn’t a current plan for the new hockey rink location at this point.
Nielsen reviewed concept 2 which was the first plan the Park Commission looked at. The plan provides more
parking for the Center in close proximity to the Center and also for use by the park itself. The walkway is tree-
lined, and an outdoor gathering area would also serve the Center and the park. The driveway to the Center was
reconfigured. He indicated the consultant came back with a new plan, labeled concept 1, which would not require
the moving of the current lighting. One of the downfalls of the plan is the traffic flow to the Center and back.
The Commission liked the pinwheel design of the open area and the playfield location. Concept 1.5 reconfigured
the turnaround near the Center which resulted in the loss of some parking spaces. The playfield orientation is
correct, and the pinwheel design remains. This plan was recommended to City Council. He indicated the Park
Commission felt it should be done in two phases and the hockey rink located. The Council delayed it because of
the Mattamy project. There was thought given to move the park to the Mattamy site. This idea was shelved.
Nielsen stated the park fees from the Mattamy project and the funds from the sale of the house next door to City
Hall would be used to finance the park. He did note the park fees from Mattamy would not all come in one lump
sum. He stated we are proposing the playfield first, then the parking lot, and then the remainder of the park. The
plan is not to disrupt the field play too much.
Nielsen stated we were successful in getting a grant for $200,000 ($300,000 was requested). He stated lacrosse
and football would also be giving money for the improvements. He indicated we are still short. We requested
proposals from three vendors (two were received). He reviewed the playfield quotes.
Mangold reviewed the budget for the quotes for concept 1.5. He indicated it included a grass field at the time.
He questioned the storm sewer improvements and what they involved. He asked if a warming house structure
would be needed if the rink is relocated. Nielsen stated the building need would still be an item for discussion.
He indicated some type of pergola structure with restrooms could be an option. He indicated the tennis courts
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, MARCH 8 , 2016
5
PAGE 3 OF
would need to be refurbished at some point. Mangold stated the current budget did not include anything for the
tennis courts.
Nielsen reviewed the playfield quotes. He compared the quotes for FieldTurf and AstroTurf. He stated the
AstroTurf quote is well within the budgeted amount but it wasn’t clear if it compares to the FieldTurf quote. He
indicated we were waiting for a response from AstroTurf.
Vassar asked FieldTurf knew they would be higher. Nielsen stated they knew from experience their quote would
be high.
Lance Nelson, Lacrosse Association, gave a background on the history of the organization. He stated they don’t
have a home field and rent field from Chanhassen, Minnetonka and Shorewood. He stated they consider Badger
Park to be their home field. He stated the field conditions aren’t optimal.
Steve Wells agreed Badger Park would be a great location for their association. He indicated no organization got
more than $200,000 from the County this year.
Nelson indicated Badger is a great location in the west metro area. He stated their greatest need would be during
May and June.
Stelmachers asked if the turf companies could recommend other areas they’ve done that the Commission could
visit. Nielsen stated FieldTurf installed the turf at Minnetonka High School, and he could get additional
references from both companies.
Nelson cautioned the Commission to review the AstroTurf quote. He indicated their quote didn’t include any civil
engineering work.
Mangold thanked the representatives from Lacrosse for stepping up to help with the development. Mangold
discussed the timetable for moving forward with the development of the playfield. He didn’t think a
recommendation could be made until the information requested would be received from AstroTurf. He suggested
there be an additional meeting before a recommendation could be made.
Wells suggested their organization contact AstroTurf for the requested information. He discussed the importance
of the quote. He believed it could be accomplished in the next few days. Stelmachers agreed AstroTurf should be
given another chance.
Mangold asked the group for a list of the additional needs they would have for the area. Nelson stated a small
practice area would be required. Nielsen stated there would be space in the pinwheel area to provide that.
Wells stated they would need about 400 square feet to construct a shed for storage. Nielsen stated we would
want something that would fit the park. He stated the current utility building could be used for the time being.
Mangold asked if there are any alternates in the quotes that could be removed. Nielsen stated FieldTurf has
fencing on both sides when fencing on the south side would not be needed. The goals were removed as they
already have those. The amounts in the quotes subtracts out these items.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, MARCH 8 , 2016
5
PAGE 4 OF
Mangold asked if netting would be good enough along the walking trail. Wells stated the netting on the north end
would be needed because of the location next to a parking lot for safety reasons.
th
Nielsen stated a joint meeting would be held with the City Council on the 14. He asked if the Commission
would be willing to have an additional meeting.
Wells indicated the contractors would be available this spring but would be very busy in the summer. They
would require 60-75 days from start to finish.
Commissioners set March 22 at 7 p.m. for their special meeting date.
Nielsen stated the lacrosse representatives would be speaking before the City Council on the safety of the turf.
Labadie requested the information be provided to the Council in advance.
Nielsen discussed possible maintenance needs for the turf. Nelson stated he would contact the turf company for
clarification of what would be needed.
Mangold reminded the Commission the joint meeting with the Council is at 6 p.m. on March 14.
6. RECAP OF WARMING HOUSE TOURS
Nielsen stated the trailer from Cathcart has been gutted and the inside walls redone. Flooring from Badger
would be a possibility for Cathcart. Work is also being done at Freeman. Ramps would also be redone.
Vassar asked if some short boards could be used at Freeman. Nielsen stated it could be researched.
Mangold stated the lack of lighting on the buildings was also an issue. He suggested this item be a regular
item on an agenda. Nielsen stated it would also be more effective to have the tour when the rinks were still
operational. The Commission agreed.
7. DETERMINE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
Mangold stated he would be happy to continue as Chair. Motion by Stelmachers, second by Kobs to
approve Mangold as Chair. Motion carried 5-0.
Mangold suggested Stelmachers serve as Vice Chair. Motion by Mangold, second by Vassar to
approve Stelmachers as Vice Chair. Motion carried 5-0.
8. CHANGE DATE OF APRIL 12 PARK COMMISSION MEETING
Nielsen stated he would be unable to attend the April 12 meeting. Commissioners agreed the meeting
would be rescheduled for April 26 at 7 p.m.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, MARCH 8 , 2016
5
PAGE 5 OF
9. DETERMINE LIAISONS FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS
May 9 – Stelmachers; 23 - Rock
June 27 - Kobs
July 25 - Vassar
August Mangold
10. NEW BUSINESS
None
11. STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS/UPDATES
A. City Council
Labadie updated the Commission on recent City Council actions.
B. Staff
None
12. ADJOURN
Stelmachers moved, Rock seconded, to adjourn the Park Commission Meeting of March 8, 2016 at
8:37 p.m. Motion carried 5-0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Clare T. Link
Recorder
OB
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Title/Subject: Proposal for Professional Services for Badger Park Grading Plan
Meeting Date: 22 February 2016
Prepared by: Brad Nielsen
Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen
Attachments: Professional Services Proposal—WSB
Policy Consideration: Should the City Council enter into a contract with WSB &Associates, Inc. to
prepare a grading plan for the Badger Park playfield?
Background: Having obtained a grant for the construction of an artificial turf playfield, as well as
commitments from Minnetonka Lacrosse and Minnetonka Football, staff has begun obtaining actual
quotes from vendors to build the project. A next step in the process is to prepare a grading plan for the
playfield area. Staff asked WSB to provide a proposal for this work,which is attached for your
consideration.
While budget discussions are continuing, it is important to realize that the grading plan is necessary
whether the field is natural or artificial turf. In other words,the money is not wasted.
Total Estimated Engineering Fee: The cost to provide the scope of services outlined in this proposal is
estimated to be$7500.
Time Schedule: Based on the current project schedule,WSB &Associates, Inc. proposes to commence
immediately with the project beginning as early as late spring.
Financial Considerations: Fees for professional engineering services have been included in the budgeted
amount of the 2016 CIP, and appear to be in order.
Options:
1. Accept the proposal, as presented.
2. Reject the proposal and provide staff with alternative direction.
Recommendation: Staff is recommending that a motion accepting the proposal for professional services
for the Badger Park Grading Plan be approved.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
WSB
S
d- dssrrt urres,In e. engineering lanningi ��envlrontnentab construction 701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis,MN 55416
Tel 763-541-4800
Fax 763-541-1700
February 29, 2016
City of Shorewood
Attn: Brad Nielsen,Planning Director
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
RE: Badger Park Grading Plan of Athletic Field Area
Dear Mr.Nielsen:
On behalf of WSB &Associates, Inc. (WSB), this letter proposal outlines a scope of service, fee
schedule, and other elements to provide professional services required to prepare a grading plan for the
athletic field area at Badger Park in the City of Shorewood (CITY).
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Task 1— Grading Plan:
1. WSB will collect information from the CITY related to the size of field they plan to
construct and the necessary cross section required for the artificial turf system (this info
will be needed to help determine the proper vertical elevation of the field to minimize the
amount of earthwork).
a. NOTE: It is WSB's understanding that the CITY's selected artificial turf
manufacturer will be responsible for testing,verifying and/or correcting subsoils as
they deem necessary for the subsoils to adequately support the artificial turf system.
2. Based on the existing concept plan prepared in 2014 and the information collected in the
step above, WSB shall develop a grading plan for the athletic field area.
3. WSB will meet with the CITY to discuss the grading plan and highlight any potential
concerns that may prevent other concept plan elements from being implemented in the
future.
4. Based on CITY comments resulting in the meeting above, WSB will revise grading plan
if needed.
5. Summary of Meetings to be held in Shorewood, MN:
a. 1 meeting with the CITY to review grading plan
6. Deliverable: one digital copy of materials developed. Anticipated deliverables include:
a. Final grading plan—this will indicate proposed contours and erosion control required
for the athletic field area
b. 3d cad model& estimated earthwork quantities
c. Estimate of probable cost to construct
St.Cloud • Minneapolis•St.Paul
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
K:\Persoual\Jasou Amberg\Proposals\Sho—ood\LTR propo B Nielsen 2016-02-26 Badger Park Gradiag.dorx
Mr. Brad Nielsen
February 29, 2016
Page 2
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Any services other than those listed in the Scope of Services above that are requested and
authorized in writing by the CITY shall be considered Additional Services and billed on an
hourly basis according to WSB's current hourly rate schedule at the time the work is completed.
The CITY shall be responsible for providing project coordination with one individual
representing the City's interests.
PROJECT COST
It is proposed that this project be billed hourly with an anticipated total cost of$7,500.
If you would like us to proceed with the above work,please sign the statement provided below and return
the executed copy to me at your convenience. If you have any questions regarding this proposal,please
contact me at 763-231-4841.
Sincerely,
ACCEPTED BY:
WSB &Associates,Inc.
City of Shorewood
By.
Jason Amberg, RL
Associate/Group Manager—Landscape Title:
Architecture
Date:
K:\PersonalVason Amberg\Proposals\Shore—od\LTR propo B_Nielsen 2016-02-26 Badger Park G'ading.docx
#9A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Title/Subject: Edgewood Road/Grant Lorenz Road/ Birch Bluff Road Intersection Review
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
Prepared by: Paul Hornby, City Engineer
Reviewed by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Attachments: Resolution, Location Map,Traffic Memorandum
Policy Consideration: Should the City approve parking restriction and traffic control change for the
Grant Lorenz Road, Edgewood Road and Birch Bluff Road intersection?
Background:The City received resident requests for parking and traffic control review at the
intersection of Grant Lorenz Road, Edgewood Road and Birch Bluff Road. Staff reviewed the resident
request for the parking restriction and had WSB's Traffic Engineer perform a review of the intersection
for traffic control with respect to traffic, sight lines, site conditions and roadway geometry.
Staff reviewed the intersection for parking restriction and recommends:
1. Edgewood Road NO PARKING from Grant Lorenz Road to the first driveway to the west on the
north side of the road
2. Grant Lorenz Road/Birch Bluff Road NO PARKING on both sides of the roads from the south side
of Edgewood Road through the first driveway on the north side
The Traffic Engineer has made the following recommendation for traffic control:
1. Clear the roadway right of way by trimming and removing trees to improve sight lines for all
directions
2. Convert the existing YIELD sign to a STOP sign for eastbound Edgewood Road
3. Reduce the radius to provide traffic calming for the tuning movement at the northwest
quadrant of the intersection.
Staff also recommends reducing the radius on the southwest quadrant of the intersection and the radii
include curb to reduce cutting of the corners. It should be noted that one resident did advise staff that
a stop condition may not allow westbound traffic to have traction at the recommended stop condition
during seasonal conditions. We recommend additional sand and deicing in this area if this condition
occurs.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The recommended radii modifications can be included in the 2016
Mill and Overlay Project. Replacement of the yield sign with the stop sign can be performed by staff.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
Options: Staff recommends Council consider the following action options:
1. Adopt the resolution for the parking restriction and traffic control modification
2. Take no action at this time
3. Provide further direction to staff
Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff recommends adopting the resolution authorizing the
parking restriction and traffic control modifications as outlined herein.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 16 -
A RESOLUTION RESTRICTING PARKING ON
EDGEWOOD ROAD, GRANT LORENZ ROAD AND BIRCH BLUFF ROAD
WHEREAS the City of Shorewood has reviewed parking and traffic control at the
intersection of Edgewood Road, Grant Lorenz Road, and Birch Bluff Road; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made recommendation for parking restriction for:
1. Edgewood Road NO PARKING from Grant Lorenz Road to the first driveway to the
west on the north side of the road
2. Grant Lorenz Road/Birch Bluff Road NO PARKING on both sides of the roads from the
south side of Edgewood Road through the first driveway on the north side; and,
WHEREAS, City Traffic Engineer has made recommendation for traffic control change
at the intersection:
1. Replace the existing YIELD sign to a STOP sign for eastbound Edgewood Road.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood, that the City of Shorewood shall prohibit parking recommended by the City
Engineer.
NOW BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shorewood,
that the YIELD sign will be replaced with a STOP sign as recommended by the City Traffic
Engineer.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 14th
day of March, 2016.
ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
i
MbIAI
°o ax, mopea W LL
�
N,
p z o
o c
}
L 4
L IE
U,
COL.
0 p2� zuaao� jueaE)
� co
(D —i
® — v (D
r
ridge Q
W Cir
co � U
C: 70
(
o
0 z
'o
�
co p.
o.
J 0)
0
w
� U
Infrastructure■ Engineering■ Planning■Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South
1,"Iyvt Yah'a.hN Suite#300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763 541-4800
Fax: 763 541-1700
Memorandum
To: Larry Brown, P.E., Public Works Director
Paul Hornby, P.E., City Engineer
City of Shorewood
From: Chuck Rickart, P.E., P.T.O.E.
Transportation Engineer
WSB &Associates,Inc.
Date: March 8, 2016
Re: Intersection Traffic Review
Edgewood Road at Birch Bluff Road/Grant Lorenz Road
City of Shorewood,MN
WSB Project No.: 2925-014
Questions have been raised as to the appropriate traffic control and safety of the intersection at
Edgewood Road and Birch Bluff Road/Grant Lorenz Road. The City has received complaints
that vehicles from southbound Birch Bluff Road/Grant Lorenz Road turn the corner too fast
without available sight distances for the southbound traffic or the eastbound traffic from
Edgewood Road. Currently Edgewood Road is controlled by a Yield Sign. No other traffic
control is provided at the intersection.
Appropriate traffic control at an intersection is critical to the operation and safety of both
intersecting roadways. If incorrect traffic control is installed for the traffic conditions and
topography of the intersection, undue delays and even unnecessary crashes could occur. The
traveling public, especially persons not familiar with the area, typically drive based on instinct.
Drivers subconsciously evaluate their surroundings to determine if a Stop Sign or Yield Sign
should or should not be located on an intersection approach.
There are many factors to determine what the correct intersection control should be; however,
the following factors should be considered when determining intersection control:
Traffic Conditions:
The traffic conditions of an intersection include:
• Traffic approach volume
• Speed of traffic approaching the intersection
• Number of turning vehicles in an intersection
• Vehicle makeup (i.e. trucks, buses, etc.)
• Crash history in the intersection
Traffic Review—Edgewood Rd at Birch Bluff Rd/Grant Lorenz Rd
City of Shorewood, MN
March 8, 2016
Page 2
Topes aphic Conditions:
The topographic conditions of the intersections are the physical features in the area, including:
• The grade of each approaching roadway
• Sight lines on each approach
• Location and size of adjacent buildings or structures
• Angle of the intersection
• Geometries (number of lanes) of the intersection
• If a school,park or major pedestrian generator is located in the area
Based on these conditions and factors, the potential intersection control can be evaluated and the
appropriate signage determined. Several techniques have been developed to determine what type
of intersection control is warranted at specific locations. The procedures evaluating the need and
location of all-way stop sign control can be found in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MnMUTCD), Section 213-5.
Two-way stop sign controlled intersection:
1. Intersection of a less important road with a main road where application of the normal
right-of-way road is unduly hazardous or,
2. Street entering a through highway or street or,
3. Unsignalized intersection in a signalized area or,
4. A combination of high speed restricted sight distance and serious crash history indicating
a need for control by a stop sign.
A site visit of the intersection was conducted and the analysis procedures as outlined in the
MnMUTCD were reviewed and the follow conclusions were made based on the traffic
characteristics:
1. Clear the roadway right of way by trimming or removing trees to improve the sight lines
for all approaches.
2. Convert the existing Yield Sign to a Stop Sign for eastbound Edgewood Road. This will
provide clear indication of vehicle right of way. Generally the approaching leg to the
single approaching leg at a"Tee" intersection will have the stop condition. Birch Bluff
Road/Grant Lorenz Road would have the through (not stopping) movement.
3. Reduce the radius in the northwest corner to provide a calming effect for traffic making
the right turn from Birch Bluff Road to Edgewood Road.
Should you have any questions or concerns regarding this memo,please do not hesitate to
contact me at 763-287-7183
® 913
MEETING TYPE
Ity of Shorewood nl Meeting l Item Regular Meeting
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Title/Subject: Accept Proposal for Professional Services for Preparation of a Feasibility
Report for Watermain Extension for Oppidan Senior Living Facility.
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by:
Attachments Site Map, Project Map, Proposal by WSB and Associates
Policy Consideration: Should the City Council prepare a Feasibility Report for the extension of
city water to the proposed Oppidan Senior Living Facility, proposed at 23075 State Highway 7,
as shown in Attachment 1?
Background: The Oppidan Investment Company is proposing to build an Oppidan Senior Living
Facility that is to be located at 23075 State Highway 7. Currently the site plan is under design
review. An excerpt of the draft plans has been included for reference only, as Attachment 2.
The developer would like to begin construction in the spring or summer of 2016. Currently, the
site does not have access to city water, and there are no water facilities in the immediate area
to service the property. The closest watermain outside the area is owned by the City of
Excelsior, as shown in Attachment 3. This existing watermain currently serves Shorewood
residents along Academy Avenue and Grant Street.
The feasibility report will explore costs for the extension of the Shorewood Water System, to
serve the subject property and properties along the proposed route. This extension of the
watermain will require extensive trenching that would require a full width street restoration.
As an alternative, costs are also to be calculated for the impacted roadways to be reconstructed
to the current city standards.
Staff had originally asked WSB and Associates to include, as part of this proposal, preparation of
a mathematical model for trunk and watermain sizing for ultimate build out of the water
system. This modeling is known as WaterCAD Modeling. Originally, it was discussed that these
costs would be split by the developer of this site, and the City. However, the more that staff
debated this, it was decided that this model belongs to the overall system buildout, and should
be paid for by the Municipal Water Fund.
Therefore, preparation of the Feasibility Report equates to $18,342. Costs to develop the WaterCAD
Model are $4,500. It was discussed and decided that the optional tasks for topographic survey and
geotechnical reports at $6,335 and $7,000 respectively, would not be pursued until the final design
phase of the project.
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
Financial Considerations: Costs for preparation of the Feasibility Report are for the benefit of the
developer. If approved, preparation of the feasibility would not commence until such time as an
official petition form, filed by the developer, requesting preparation of the feasibility report and
agreeing to reimburse the City for costs incurred for such, is filed with the City.
WaterCAD modeling is to be funded from the City's Municipal Water Fund.
Options:
1. Accept the proposal, as presented.
2. Reject the proposal and provide staff with alternative direction.
Recommendation:
Staff is recommending approval of a Motion that accepts the proposal presented by WSB and
Associates for preparation of a Feasibility Report, contingent upon the developer filing an
official petition form with the City, bearing all costs for the Feasibility Report, as outlined in this
memorandum.
Furthermore, the City Council authorizes the expenditure of funds from the Municipal Water
Fund for WaterCAD modeling, contingent upon the petition form referenced for the subject
development has been filed with the City.
I
F,
IN4
41
P"I
IJ
ID
IV
�j
NO
Z
p ryV w'I,
1j"
CD
'D fur,
uj
z,
rq
Q 12
�
4, W u, 41"Po'
61 I'VIAv I
IL
"Da
14" 1111� �11�
Lr
V
IiI3
ef
q
W
C
rc
Lff, e , I
LAI I" V-N !J,"T I D 11
TP L', II
CAN LAI
12 NO I"
9""'A
Ip
U,Y qp
Wf, W
1D
UN, l
rm,
Aa,
qp"
I R
VA Ail J'r< .0
V, -'k,
Ul any, Ent r
8 age a its v
i
v v
v
.3G _ H -- ON
in a
r F koY aoo - -oGW oG p 3jo= Q Qj
�� iLL -
iG? _ -_°C _ °�� zG �°- X30 -
oil tog "hQ
a - ;s„ WH§ "'H p L 3Y .:Ho
ao w 3 No mGWG Y¢oo 6i to "us WHO
U O `N DoE m U m�� n,22 5 Z s<w os° HO Py
0 0 o z ~s oo "0 0°s� s
Pq 'A°s - ' Z c c Buz
�G
Q �Gz �Gm
3 oil hill
luZlll,lllll° z
F
w
irr \
I
���-- ---—- -- —— —- -— — ��
co c
cl
N �m
co
n o
2 l
cm
G
M
H
Z
WW
G
V
Q
_ �ivacm c
N
X
w
cu
ol`fn a�D co N
cn o
� � c
o m
U U 2!
A 09
i
. ,
cn
O
P,i o
o
Ilk
G R 44,
f,
i
�rrrip S
ylµu
�u� L
J U
WSB
AllilililliM iul hnp� .i h42,.fl y y10ur h p.i.V 477 Temperance Street
St.Paul,MN 55101
Tel: 651-286-8450
Fax: 651-286-8488
March 14, 2016
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Proposal for Feasibility Report & Preliminary Design Services
2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project
City of Shorewood, MN
City Project Number 16-04
WSB Project Number 2925-16
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
WSB &Associates, Inc. is pleased to provide you with our proposal for the preparation of a Feasibility
Report and Preliminary Design for the 2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project. The proposed
improvements are to extend new water main from the intersection of Yellowstone Trail and Minnetonka
Drive to the proposed Oppidan Senior Living Facility development located at 23075 State Highway 7.
Project Understanding
The Oppidan Senior Living Facility is currently under design review by WSB &Associates, Inc. staff. The
property is proposed to begin construction in the spring/summer of 2016. Currently there are no water
facilities located along State Highway 7 or Chaska Road to service the property. In order to properly
serve the facility, water main will need to be extended from the intersection of Yellowstone Trail and
Minnetonka Drive, to the east along Yellowstone Trail, south along Glencoe Road, and east along Park
Street to Pheasant Street. The extension will need to cross State Highway 7 from Pleasant Street to
Chaska Road. Extension of the water main will require open cut installation with full width street
restoration. As an alternative, the road can be reconstructed to meet current City road standards.
The following represents a detailed account of our understanding of the scope of services.
Proposed Services
• Review the existing conditions of the street pavements, underlying soil conditions,
utilities, and drainage characteristics. A geotechnical report is listed as an optional task
and will be required during final design. Assumptions will be made based on available
geotechnical data in the area to complete preliminary design.
• Prepare preliminary project schedule.
• Review aerial maps and LIDAR data to identify surficial information/landmarks and
existing grades. A topographic survey is identified as an optional task and will be
required during final design.
• WaterCAD modeling of the City to determine extension size necessary to serve the
Senior Assisted Living Facility and property owners adjacent to the water main extension
improvements.
ATTACHMENT 4
Equal Opportunity Employer PROPOSAL
wsbeng.com
K:\02925-160\Admin\Docs\Proposal\2925-16 Proposal LTP 030916.docx
}{ }
\\_ �
t ! ,
\
k `
§ `
� !
b
/ \!
\ a = \
2 \ \ f&
� # \
§ ® c
� §
° >7
& _
\ /2
\
o ,
){{» `
\{\
IT
_ \
] ;
'
��5{7j\$7f Ef
) m m
) a - a
LLA) ?) ] ]
m m 0 v`-'i v`�i a 00 � m m Q7
t0 m 00 t0 t0 t0 rn O �,
N M
N.
ti
C C io m 00 n n ti ti 1O ry C
� 2 �
m
00 00
lu'u m rn
•� n ti
L N
O O m m
u
O n n
00
c 3 0
O v
a O
3
� w
00 00
m 10 0
u o w
00
tLJ O O O �O O
lu
0 O
O y 00 00
W ID
ou 00o� �o
p rn Z
W O O 00 O 00
lu
u 2
Q v w
y y >
ID G1 0.
fC O Vf O
0 a w F C N tp tp tp 0 00 0 C O
O�0 ` z
0
O 0
H N N 4,
LU O O
G1 Vf 1c0 r �i
}� O C O N ci N ci ci ci ci ci N N
ID
O d d
L
`v v
a
c �
3 3 =
un
(D N N U
un O X
X v v
O ccO a N
cm O E C
N
lo
m a v O
� Y ^
o
o ° 0 O
N E N N v >
O. Y 3 i N bA C L a
2 CL
c a U a =
0 v v E .10• a�'i
v v c ~ E `o
a � �
' C O LL O E d
v o
O H v w O i N O
0 O E O E D O
0 - t
O E
E
Y E
o� v +O
O O
� v a c c
m a
Ql d
QQ
U w 4 U a
0
q c c v o v •3 i v w � �.-. � o
m m � � O p
a` of c 4 E
E
w O a
m a 0
o Q o
N
d)
N
O_
Y
2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project- Feasibility Proposal
March 7, 2016
Page 2
• Prepare detailed preliminary opinion of potential construction and indirect project costs
with contingencies but excluding costs of acquisition of land due to the variability in land
costs.
• Prepare a Feasibility Report depicting the improvement corridor existing conditions,
proposed improvements, funding requirements and resources, figures depicting the
improvements, and feasibility statements regarding the improvements.
• Identify potential for funding sources.
• Identify owners of parcels along the proposed improvement corridor that may be
impacted by construction.
• Identify potential need for the acquisition of permanent and temporary easements.
• Identify the necessary permitting agencies and requirements.
• Review the determination of the necessity, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of the
project.
• Coordinate location of private utility company facilities within the improvement
corridor. This coordination will include performing a utility design locate request to
provide a quality level D location for existing utilities.
• Project management and coordination/meetings with City staff and the City Council.
• Attendance of a public information meeting with residents to discuss the project and
receive comments regarding the design approach and proposed design. The goal is to
have an informational meeting prior to Feasibility Report presentation to the Council.
• Attend one Public Hearing and provide a brief presentation on the Feasibility Report.
Proposed Fee
We are proposing to complete the work on a cost-reimbursable basis in accordance with our current fee
schedule. The estimated fee for Preliminary Design/Feasibility Report Preparation is$18,342 and the fee
to Develop the WaterCAD Model is$4,500. Optional tasks include a topographic survey and
geotechnical report estimated at$6,335 and $7,000 respectively.
Thank you for this opportunity to provide professional consulting services to the City of Shorewood. If
this proposal is acceptable, please execute the signature block below and return as our authorization to
proceed.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 651-286-8468 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB&Associates, Inc.
Nick Guilliams, P.E. Paul Hornby, P.E.
Project Manager Sr. Project Manager, Associate
K:\02925-160\Admin\DOGS\Proposal\2925-16 Proposal LTP 030916.docx
2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project- Feasibility Proposal
March 7, 2016
Page 3
PROPOSAL FOR:
Preliminary Design/Feasibility Report Preparation Services
2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project.
ACCEPTED BY:
City of Shorewood, MN
Name
Title
Date
K:\02925-160\Admin\DOGS\Proposal\2925-16 Proposal LTP 030916.docx
#9C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Title/Subject: Approve Plans,Specifications and Authorize Advertisement for Bids for the 2016 Mill
and Overlay Improvement Project,City Project 16-03
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
Prepared by: Paul Hornby, City Engineer
Reviewed by:
Attachments: Resolution
Background:As part of the City Capital Improvement Plan and Pavement Management Plan,the City
budgets for the maintenance of roadways as part of the Bituminous Mill and Overlay project.
The 2016 Mill and Overlay Improvement Project includes the following roadways:
• Garden Road from Minnetonka Boulevard to the southeast terminus
• Gillette Curve from Minnetonka Drive to east terminus
• McKinley Place N from Near Mountain Boulevard to the north terminus
• McKinley Place S from Near Mountain Boulevard to the south terminus
• Shady Hills Circle from Shady Hills Road to Shady Hills Road
The 2016 Capital Improvement Plan budget includes$200,000 in the Street Reconstruction Fund for
road maintenance and bituminous mill and overlays. Summit Avenue has been postponed to 2017 due
to development and the construction of homes along this roadway.
The enclosed resolution approves the project plans and specifications and authorizes the advertisement
for bids. The opening of bids is scheduled for 10:00 a.m.Thursday,April 14, 2016.
Options: Staff recommends Council consider the following actions:
1. Approve the resolution Approving Plans, Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids
for the 2016 Mill and Overlay Improvement Project, City Project 16-03.
2. Direct staff to modify plans.
3. Take no action at this time.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approving the Resolution Approving Plans, Specifications and
Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for the 2016 Mill and Overlay Improvement Project, City Project 16-
03.
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. 16 -
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND
AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
2016 MILL AND OVERLAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
CITY PROJECT 16-03
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood designated $200,000 in the Street
Reconstruction Fund for roadway maintenance as bituminous mill and overlay in the
Capital Improvement Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications for the
2016 Mill and Overlay Improvement Project, City Project 16-03, on February 22, 2016;
and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the City
Project 16-03, 2016 Mill and Overlay Improvement Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
1. The plans and specifications prepared by the City Engineer for such
improvement. Said plans and specifications are hereby approved and shall be
filed with the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and
according to MN State Law an advertisement for bids upon the making of such
improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement
shall be published for 3 weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state the
bids will be opened and considered by the Council at 10:00 a.m. (CST), on
Thursday, April 14, 2016, in the City Hall Council Chambers, and that no bids
will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a
cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the Clerk
for 5 percent of the amount of each bid.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
this 14th day of April, 2016.
ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
#9D
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Title/Subject: RPBCWD Flood Impact Study Partnership Request
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
Prepared by: Paul Hornby, City Engineer
Reviewed by:
Attachments:
Policy Consideration: Should the City enter into a partnership with the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek
Watershed District(RPBCWD)to fund a flood impact study.
Background: Staff received a project partnership request from the RPBCWD Administrator for
development of a floodplain study and risk assessment map using Atlas 14 hydrologic curves. The
RPBCWD is funding a $55,000 study and looking at local partners to fund $26,900. The RPBCWD is
requesting$2,000 funding partnership with the City of Shorewood.
Staff discussed this item as a staff report at the end of the last Council meeting. Council asked what the
pro-rata share of the RPBCWD area Shorewood includes, more from curiosity. The RPBCWD
Administrator has indicated that the City of Shorewood includes the headwaters of Purgatory Creek
(Silver Lake) and 492.6 acres (approximately 1.7%) of the Districts 29,719.7 acres. A pro-rata share of
the study fee would be approximately$460. The RPBCWD will provide shapefiles for the flood zones to
the Cities for their reference.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The requested funding amount for the project is$2,000 which
currently is not included in the CIP or stormwater fund.
Options: Staff recommends Council consider the following action options:
1. Authorize staff to enter into a funding partnership with the RPBCWD for this project
2. Take no action at this time
3. Provide further direction to staff
Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff requests council consider the funding partnership request
of the RPBCWD and provide direction to staff.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
#10A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Consideration of Fees for Special Event Permits
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
From: Bill Joynes, City Administrator
Attachments: Shorewood Special Event Permits (2014-2016)
Special Events Permit Requirements/Fees of Neighboring Cities
Shorewood City Code Chapter 505-Special Event Registration and Permit
Recommended Ordinances (2)
Background: At its May 11, 2015, meeting, Council discussed establishing a fee for special events that
occur in the City, and asked staff to recommend a fee schedule.
Attachment 1 is a list of Special Event Permits from 2014-2016. This does not include private property
events such as graduation parties, birthday parties, weddings, church events, etc. Recurring community
events in Shorewood include:
Wells Fargo Lake Minnetonka half marathon (May)
th
Firecracker Run (4 of July)
EFRA Firefighter Fundraising Event/Dance (July)
Tour de Tonka bike ride (August)
Chamber Apple Day 5K run (September)
EFD Fire Prevention and Life Safety Education (October)
Attachment 2 is a list of neighboring communities’ permit fees.
Staff reviewed the fees from the various cities which range from no fee to as much as $3000. Cities such
as Excelsior and Wayzata, which have events that take place in public spaces along the waterfront, have
a need for a wider range of fees due to their park locations along the lake, and they have a larger
number of events that take place in their cities because of this.
Mound is reviewing their fees; they currently charge $300 for events on public property with over 50 in
attendance.
Deephaven charges $50 for events on public property.
Tonka Bay charges $75 for events on public property; $200 for athletic events.
Large cities such as Chanhassen and Minnetonka, do not charge a fee for similar events (bike rides &
runs).
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
The city of Shorewood already has Park fees established for picnic shelter reservations, field /rink use
reservations, and sports organization tournaments. Therefore, the Special Event Permit fee would cover
events that use city streets. For example, the Firecracker Run uses city streets and Manor Park. For this
event, both a Special Event permit and Park Shelter reservation are required.
Recommendation/ Action Requested: Considering the number of special events that take place in
Shorewood that are not in a city park, as well as the existing fees for the use of park fields and shelters,
staff recommends a flat fee of $50 for special events of over 75 participants that take place on public
property which are not already covered under the park use fees. Attachment 3 highlights an
amendment to Chapter 505 of the city code regarding Special event registration and permit fees.
Staff Recommends approval of the attached two draft ordinances provided for Council’s consideration:
1.An ordinance amending city code chapter 505 regarding special event registration and permit
fees; and
2.An ordinance establishing a special event permit fee of $50 for events on public property with
75 or more attendees/participants.
It should be noted that the $50 recommended fee is administrative in nature, and will not cover actual
costs that are incurred by the Public Works Department for services they perform for some of the events
that take place on city streets, such as street sweeping for Tour de Tonka. If Council is interested in
recovering these costs, staff will need to calculate those expenses and bring that back to Council. This
would be a considerably higher fee.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
m
Cu
O
0
0
0
Q.
CL
CL
CL
CL
CL
0-
a
tv
m
m
fu
CLO
to
on
C:
c
c
c
41
M m
0
0
0
u
u
LL
41
M m
0
0
0
C�
0
0
0
C)
CL -0
.7
0
0
0
0
0
c)
C�
(A
0
rH
c�
0
0
Ln
C
fy�
00
cy)
(Y)
Lr)
m
(1313
r,
6
Lr)
0
00
c
a)
r 4a
0
0
m
ry�
00
0
0
tB
0)
s0
c
0�
06
3:
u
0
V)
Z:
(U
-0
-C
4�
2E
4�
r
U
2i
E
u
cc
Q)
>
.2
CG
m
0
C:
X
uj
C:
4-
3:
0
u
-Ln
a)
C:
c
U
X
u
>
0
0
LU
4�
u
0
L)
0
0
LLJ
4�
=
t
a) 0
4�
E
X
UJ
4� CL
Q)
m
0
4
4�
V)
0
4�
M
Ln
+,
Ln
E
cu
Ul
m
0
E
4�
E
E
0
4�
n
OZ�
LA
Ln
V)
cz
4�
Ln Ln
0
CD
m
=
0
m
o
o 4
00
C)
2
0
0
C)
N
0
C
ri
w
r-i
Q0
rH
0
I
m
>
m
�t
r,
N
rq
LL
> a_
rq
> a_
0
0
0
0
4�
ru
4�
m
4
4�
C:
u
0
LU
LU
m
LU
.2
0
0
m
M
4�
41
-0
Ln
V)
Ln
�n
m
>
0)
C:
V)
0
Ln
4!
-C
C:
u
0
>,
m
Q.
2
co
06
V)
4�
Ln
06
c
V)
V)
a)
a
N
-j
0
0
0
_0
"a
E
rH
0
0
CL
4�
Q)
-x
m
0L
.2
4�
C)
__j
<
+1
(U
0
<
0
C:
m 0
0
>
c
c
(U
>
o
m 0
w
>
LL
cu
Li-
U
U
Y
u
C
E
a.
-0
N
V
C)
>
C to
Q)
:3
N
ui
u
C-1
0
-mi
LL
<
u
iz
7
E
E
E
E
E
m
CL
E
m
m
E
C
m
E
LO
0
0.
U")
0
Ln
p
,4
0.
�4
ro
rH
Iq
'tt
E
r-4
rH
6
Ol
EE
E
CL
VH�
1
E
1
E
0
0
E
E
c
<
CL
m
<
')
i�
V)
m
M
CL
o
rn
C)
C)
E
0
C
0
0
6
1
0
0
E
C)
m
In
IR
m
(P
In
m
M
001
00
r, 1
001
100
r-
00
ul
-C
1--
00
r-
00
Ln
It
rH
Ln
rH
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
H
H
0
N
"
0
VH
--
Ln
rH
rH
Ul
rH
H
rH
0
NO
r-I
0
0
0
c"I
0)
N
0
lD
0
0
N
fIq
rN
0
0
N
fN
--
�.D
I
H
0
41
m
ro
Ln
0
l.o
Ln
t-
00
0
--1
m
H
Ln
L.0
r,
r�
C*
m
0)
.-1
Ln
r-
0)
H
I
INL
Special Events Permit Requirements/ Fees of Neighboring Cities
��
�erra��t
Coinm�nts;
City does not require a permit for Tour De Tonka. They pay
for police services from the County. There are several 5K
style races in the community and they do not require permits
for these either. They have a public gathering permit for
large political gathering, parades, etc. There is no fee for this,
Public Gathering Permit: free
but they often will have an agreement for reimbursement of
City of Chanhassen
Neighborhood party /street close: free
special expenses.
see Exhibit A - Fee schedule
Athletic event: $200
City of Tonka Bay
Event on city property: $75
$25 for Minnetonka School District events
City of Deephaven
Permit held on public property: $50
Flat Fee
Street closure permit is for neighborhood gatherings,
parades, etc.; $50 deposit if baracades are provided; Require
City of Victoria
Street closure permit: free
$2 million certificate of insurance for runs /etc.
City of Minnetonka
Permit required: free
Permit for over 50 on public property:
Council can decide to waive or reduce fee. Working on
City of Mound
$300
guidelines.
see Exhibit B fee schedule; Permits
City of Wayzata
required.
Also have labor fee schedule.
see Exhibit C fee schedule; Permits
City of Excelsior
required.
$30 for Minnetonka School District events
7n k_c ,`
Permit Level and Description
Authorization Required
Non Local
A Separate Application is Required for
Application
Local Fee
Fee Per
City
Each Event
Deadline
Council
EFD
SLMPD
Per Event
Event
Fee
Events on City Property
❑ Over 75 participants & spectators
5 -10 hour event that does not leave
anything on City property overnight
(30 day application deadline)
One -day event or events that are
multiple days that do not leave
60 days
Yes
Yes
Yes
$75
$150
+tax
anything on City property overnight
❑ Multiple day event that keeps
apparatus on City property
overnight
F1 Road closures /traffic control may be
required
Pre -event meeting may be required
Athletic Event that Uses Streets
or City Parking Lot
30 days
Yes
Yes
Yes
$200
$400
Fl Pre -event meeting required
Parade
60 days
Yes
Yes
Yes
$30
$60
Temporary Liquor License on
30 days
Yes
No
Yes
$100
n/a
Private Property
Temporary Liquor License on
Public Property
❑ Requires applicable liquor licenses
60 days
Yes
No
Yes
$300
$600
Requires a minimum of one SLMPD
police officer (separate fee
Damage Deposit
$300 ($1,000 for Manitou Park events)
Permit Fee of $25 per event for all Minnetonka School District events. TOTAL FEE $
SALES TAX
(7.275 %) $
AMOUNT DUE
(including $100 late fee if applicable) $
City of Wayzata
600 Rice St East
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
952- 404 -5363
2016 SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE
Permit Level and Description
Authorization Required
Local
Non
CITY
PUBLIC
FIRE
POLICE
A Separate Application is Required for Each Event
Application
Fee Per
Local Fee
Deadline
COUNCIL
WORKS
DEPT
DEPT
Event
Per Event
Events on City Property - Level I (other than City
Parks)
• 20 -50 participants & spectators
Ten
• Minimum disruption
business
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
$150
$200
• No road closures -May require No Parking Sign
days
postings
• Includes small events that use City Sidewalks
Events on City Property - Level 2
• 50 -500 participants & spectators
• One day event or events that are multiple days that
do not leave anything on City property overnight
30 days
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
$250
$500
• Road /Sidewalk closures /traffic control may be
required
• Limited City services needed
• Pre -event meeting required
Events on City Property - Level 3
• Over 500 participants & spectators
• Multiple day event that keeps apparatuses on City
60 days
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
$1,500
$3,000
property overnight
• Road closures /traffic control may be required
• Pre -event meeting required
Wayzata Chamber of Commerce Annual
Community Events - Level 3a
• Over 500 participants & spectators
• Multiple day event that keeps apparatuses on City
60 days
*Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
$600
N/A
property overnight
• Road closures /traffic control may be required
• Pre -event meeting required
Events on Private & City Property
15 days
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
$200
N/A
• Under 500 participants & spectators
Events on Private Property (meets any Step 1
10 days
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
$100
NIA
requirements)
Events in City Parks
10 days
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
$150
N/A
Athletic Event that Uses City Streets & Public
Parking Lots /Under 200 participants & spectators
30 days
*Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
$250
$500
• Pre -event meeting is required
Athletic Event that Uses City Streets & Public
Parking Lots /Over 200 participants & spectators
60 days
*Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
$500
$1,000
• Pre -event meeting is required
Street and /or Sidewalk Closure
• Events that require the closure of Streets or hold
60 days
*Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
$250
$500
their event on City sidewalks
° Pre -event meeting required
Parades
60 days
*Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
$500
$1,000
*Special Events listed on page ten are excluded from annual authorization by the City Council.
Any application that is submitted after the application deadline will be charged a $100 late fee.
Page 2 of 10
2016 Special Event Application
4 City of Wayzata
600 Rice St East
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
952 -404 -5363
2016 SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT INSTRUCTIONS
Step 5 — Review Process, Policies and Fees (continued)
Special Event Labor and Rental Fees Provided by the City
• Labor Fees
• Police Contractual Services, per hour
$82.00
• Public Works Services, per hour
$61.00
• Fire Personnel hourly services
$61.00
• Rental Fees
• Public Works: Signs, Barricades, and Equipment
❑ Single Tier Barricades
$1.00 /item /day
❑ Reflective Cones
$1.00 /item /day
❑ Reflective Drums
$1.00 /item /day
❑ Temporary no parking "Police Order" sign including Lath
$2.00 /item
❑ Pickup; '/2 or 3/a Ton — per hour (not including operator)
$65.00
❑ 1 Ton Pickup Ton — per hour (not including operator)
$90.00
❑ Street Sweeper — per hour (not including operator)
$100.00
• Fire Department: Fire Equipment (including operators)
❑ Aerial Ladder — per hour
$300.00
❑ Engine /Pumper — per hour
$300.00
❑ Heavy Rescue — per hour
$150.00
❑ Tanker — per hour
$175.00
❑ Utility Vehicle — per hour
$100.00
❑ Boat — per hour
$150.00
• Fire Department -Other
❑ Fireworks Inspection (N /C if Special Event Permit Fees Paid)
$61.00
❑ Temporary Membrane Structure (Tent)
$80.00
• $20.00 for each additional structure)
• Special Event Food Stand
❑ First Day
$82.00
❑ Each Additional Day
$36.00
❑ Each Day- existing license holder
$36.00
❑ Maximum -each license
$189.00
• Special Event Food Stand (Pre- packaged non- potentially hazardous food)
❑ First Day
$31.00
❑ Each Additional Day
$31.00
❑ Each Day - existing license holder
$31.00
❑ Maximum -each license
$189.00
Page 10 of 10
t----Y CC) si ()(-
Permit Level and Description
Authorization Re quired
Local
Non
A Separate Application is Required for
Fee
Local
Each Event
Application
city
Per
Fee Per
Deadline
Council
EFD
SLMPD
Event
Event
Fee
Events on City Property - Level I
• 25-100 participants & spectators
• Event is for a couple of hours
Two
• Minimum disruption
business
No
No
No
$150
$300
• No road closures
days
• Includes events that use City property,
but are primarily held on Lake
Minnetonka regardless of attendance
+ tax
Events on City Property - Level 2
• Over 100 participants & spectators
• One day event or events that are
No, but
multiple days that do not leave anything
30 days
No
No
forward
$500
$1,000
on City property overnight
• Road closures/traffic control may be
permit
required
• Limited City services needed
+ tax
Events on City Property - Level 3
• Over 100 participants & spectators
• Multiple day event that keeps
apparatuses on City property overnight
60 days
Yes
Yes
Yes
$1,500
$3,000
• Road closures/traffic control may be
required
• Pre-event meeting required
+ tax
Athletic Event that Only Uses Streets
30 days
Yes
Yes
Yes
$250
$500
• Pre-event meeting may be required
Athletic Event that Uses Streets and
The Commons or City Parking Lot
60 days
Yes
Yes
Yes
$500
$1,000
e Pre-event meeting may be required
Water Street and/or Sidewalk Closure
Events that require the closure of Water
60 days
Yes
Yes
Yes
$500
$1,000
Street or that hold their event on the
sidewalk
Parade
30 days
Yes
Yes
Yes
$30
$60
Events on Private Property
14 days
No
No
Yes
$100
N/A
Temporary Liquor License on Private
30 days
No
No
Yes
$200
N/A
Property
Add On - Selling Alcohol on City
Property
• Requires applicable liquor licenses
60 days
Yes
No
Yes
$250
$500
• Requires a minimum of one police officer
from SLMPD (separate fee)
Add On - Temporary Liquor License
60 days
Yes
No
Yes
$480
$960
Add On - Ticketed Event
60 days
Yes
No
No
$1 per
$1 per
ticket
ticket
Add On - Reserve Parking Meter(s)
30 days
No
No
No
$20 per
$20 per
I
, meter
meter
Damage Deposit for The Commons
Levels 1 - $100 and Level 2 & 3 - up to $1,000
* Permit Fee of $30 per event for all Minnetonka School District Events TOTAL FEE $,
SALES TAX (7.275%) $
i "I � , � "1 11 1, 1111 ''1 1 IT
ril.�--------�--,l ii-, k C, I I 1 01, 1 - - -
6
CHAPTER 505
SPECIAL EVENT REGISTRATION AND PERMIT
Section
505.01 Purpose
505.02 Event registration and permit
505.03 Enforcement
505.04 Violation
505.01 PURPOSE.
The purpose of this chapter is to ensure the continued health, safety, comfort and repose of the
public at events such as neighborhood block parties, residential parties, public events, and any other
events at which a large gathering of persons is anticipated.
505.02 EVENT REGISTRATION AND PERMIT.
Subd. 1. Event to be registered. Any person or persons sponsoring an event at which it may reasonably
be anticipated that there will be more than 75 persons in attendance shall, prior thereto,
register the event with the City Administrator /Clerk, giving the location, date, time,
purpose, parking and safety provisions, names of all sponsors and the number of persons
it is anticipated will be in attendance.
Subd. 2. Permit for additional events. Within a period of six months following the event, no additional
event, at which it may reasonably be anticipated that there will be more than 75 persons
in attendance, shall be permitted at the same location unless the person or persons who
propose to sponsor the same shall first have obtained an event permit therefor approved
by the City Council. Application for the event permit shall be made to the City
Administrator /Clerk.
Subd. 3. Application for event registration and permit. Pursuant to this section, application for an
event is made on a form as provided by the City Administrator /Clerk.
. 4. Registration and Permit fees. No fee is required for private property events or city sponsored
:vents, including public safety events. Registration and permit fees on public property are
;stablished by the City Council as provided in Chapter 1301 of this code!
Attachment 3
505 -1
505.03 Shorewood - Public Health 505.04
545.03 ENFORCEMENT.
A police officer may order all persons present, other than the owners or tenants of a dwelling
unit, to immediately disperse from the event in lieu of being charged under this chapter, should
the continued health, safety, comfort and repose of the public be in jeopardy, or if the event is in
violation of the provisions of Chapter 501.
505.04 VIOLATION.
Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
(Ord. 101, passed 8 -14 -1978)
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 505.02
OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE
Section 1. Section 505.02 of the Shorewood City Code is hereby amended to add
Subd. 4. as follows:
"Subd. 4. Registration and permit fees. No fee is required for private property events or
city sponsored events, including public safety events. Registration and permit fees on
public property are established by the City Council as provided in Chapter 1301 of this
code."
Section 2. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in
the Official Newspaper of the City of Shorewood.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 14th day of
March 2016.
Scott Zerby, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
i' D&I as M 1!
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE TITLED
G6LICENSE, PERMIT, SERVICE CHARGES AND MISCELLANEOUS FEES"
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 1301.02 of the Shorewood Code of Ordinances is hereby amended as follows:
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
LICENSE, PERMIT, SERVICE CHARGES
AND MISCELLANEOUS FEES
Section 2. Addition to Miscellaneous Permits and Licenses:
LICENSE, PERMIT, SERVICE CHARGES AND MISCELLANEOUS FEES -T
Type of Charge /Fee
City Code Reference
Charge /Fee
I. Miscellaneous Permits and Licenses
Special Event Registration and Permit
505.02.4
$50 for events on public property with 75 or
more attendees /participants.
Section 3. This ordinance is effective for events starting in 2016, and upon publication in the
Official City of Shorewood newspaper.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota
this 14th day of March, 2016.
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Scott Zerby, Mayor
#10B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Proposals for Southshore Center Landscaping Maintenance
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
From: Bill Joynes, City Administrator
CC: Twila Grout, Park & Rec Coordinator; Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Attachments: Proposals from Mangold Horticulture
Policy Consideration: Should the landscaping at the Southshore Center be maintained?
Background: The Southshore Center is used for a wide range of events including meetings, church
services every Sunday, wedding and funeral receptions, graduation and birthday parties, as well as other
senior and community classes and activities.
Last year, the City Council approved an agreement with Mangold Horticulture for the clean-up, weeding
and mulching of several areas in front of and around the Southshore Center, as well as planting 31 shrubs
and 30 Daylilies, and providing monthly landscape maintenance. This work greatly improved the
appearance of the exterior landscaping around the Center. The existing shrubs near the building that
were not removed but were trimmed and maintained are also beginning to come back better than they
had look in the past.
The city has received a proposal from Mangold Horticulture (see Attachment 1) for continuing the
landscape/garden maintenance around the Center facility this year, at a total cost of $2,010. This includes:
1.Garden Maintenance around the Southshore Center
8 months (April – Nov) at $190/month $ 1,520
2.One spring clean up visit @ $150 $ 150
3.Two fall clean up visits @ $150 each $ 300
4.Trim back woods edge 5’ on east side of Southshore Center $ 40
TOTAL $2,010
Recommendation / Action Requested:
The work that was completed last year greatly improved the exterior appearance at the Southshore
Center. Staff believes this is a fair and reasonable quote to maintain the plantings that were placed last
year, as well as provide general landscape maintenance service around the areas of the Center that are
seen and most used by visitors and renters.
Staff recommends Council make a motion to approve the proposal from Mangold Horticulture for the
Southshore Center landscape/garden maintenance in the amount of $2,010.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Providing attractive amenities to the community.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
#10C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Agreement with Mangold Horticulture for Landscape Maintenance at
Shorewood City Hall and the Utility Building in Badger Park
Meeting Date: March 14, 2016
From: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director
CC: Twila Grout, Park & Rec Coordinator; Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Attachments: Proposals from Mangold Horticulture (2 proposals); Photos
Policy Consideration: Should the City renew its agreement with Mangold Horticulture for
maintenance of City Hall and the utility building in Badger Park?
Background: Mangold Horticulture has been providing landscape maintenance at Shorewood City
Hall the past few years, and has provided staff with a quote for this service for the 2016 season
(Attachment 1). Mr. Mangold’s quote includes the following:
1.Garden Maintenance around City Hall
8 months (April – Nov) at $245/month $ 1,960
2.Mulch topdressing $ 2,100
3.One spring clean up visit @ $150 $ 150
4.Two fall clean up visits @ $150 each $ 300
TOTAL $4,510
Mr. Mangold has indicated that the mulch topdressing is needed, as it has been several years since this
has been placed and it is deteriorating. Fresh mulch will not only help maintain the appearance of the
landscaping, it will also help to keep the weeds under control. If it is decided to not include the mulch
topdressing, the monthly maintenance fee will increase by $67.50/month, an increase of $540, as more
weeding will be required. Staff recommends placing the mulch topdressing.
Staff requested a quote for cleaning up and providing landscaping around the Utility Building
(Attachment 2). There are parking spaces around three sides of the building, and a sidewalk along the
rear of the building. This parking area is used frequently for visitors to the park, fields, and the
Southshore Center, and the landscaping around that structure is in need of maintenance. The attached
photos show the current condition; in the summer it is mostly overgrown with weeds. For this area, Mr.
Mangold is recommending:
1.Trim/Clean out dogwoods, weed, mulch back corner $ 220
2.Front of building - Prepare soil; add 28 dwarf bush honeysuckle,
mulch and rip rap to gutter outlets $ 1,950
3.Place rip rap rock at the rear of the building between
the sidewalk and the building $ 610
4.Monthly garden maintenance around the utility building
7 mths (May-Nov) @ $45/mo. $ 315
TOTAL $3,095
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff recommends approval of the quote from Mangold Horticulture for landscape maintenance, mulch
placement, and clean-up around city hall in the amount of $4,510.
Staff recommends approval of the quote from Mangold Horticulture for landscape maintenance around
the utility building across from Badger Park in the amount of $3,095.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Providing attractive amenities to the community.
Billing Address:
City of Shorewood
Brad Nielsen
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Work Site Address:
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Dear Brad:
PO Box 250
Excelsior, MN 55331
952-999-1633
mhort.com
2/24/2016
Quote # 323
You recently requested pricing information from our company. Thank you for giving us the opportunity
to bid for your business. We are working hard to establish a reputation for quality and we look forward to
showing you that it is well deserved.
Passionate people, outstanding results - Our team is excited about what we do and would love the
opportunity to work with you.
Here is our quote:
Garden Maintenance Around City Hall Building -
- Shrub & Ornamental Tree Pruning - As needed for the season
- Landscape Bed Weeding - Every other week visits April to November
- Perennial & Shrub Fertilizing - 2 visits per year
- Landscape Bed Pre-emergent Weed Control - 2 visits per year
- Fall/Spring Perennial Cut Backs - 1-2 visits per year
Garden Maintenance per month April through November -
Amount: 245.00
Mulch Topdressing - 1 visit per year
Topdressing per visit -
Amount: 21.00.00
Spring Cleanup - 1 visit per year
Cleanup per visit -
Amount: 150.00
Fall Cleanup - 2 visits per year
Cleanup per visit -
Amount: 150.00
Pricing does not include applicable Minnesota sales tax.
Quote pricing is based on net 30 payment terms. Either party has the unconditional right to cancel at any
time. Upon cancellation Mangold Horticulture will invoice the next business day after tennination for all
work completed by cancellation date. Mangold Horticulture crews shall arrive at the property
unannounced unless noted herein. Any alterations and /or additions to this quote shall be handled with a
new quote as needed.
With acceptance of this quote the above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and hereby
accepted. Mangold Horticulture is authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as
outlined above.
Signature and Date:
City of Shorewood
Mangold Horticulture
Upon accepting this quote an email will be sent detailing how to get scheduled. Again, passionate people,
outstanding results - Our team is excited about what we do and would love the opportunity to work with
you.
AN XCEL ENERGY COM MUNITY PAIFITNER SHIP
Since you're committed to empowering energy sustainability, renewability, efficiency and
environmental programs for your community, we would like to be your energy partner. Join our
Partners in Energy program to engage your community in a collaborative effort that will enable
you to meet your energy goals.
Form An Energy Action Team
We help you assemble the best team to serve your community energy approach.
You will identify your program leads — Community Energy Ambassador and Community
Manager — as primary points of contact for the duration of the program. We will assemble an
energy action team to work on the development of your plan that includes leaders and
stakeholders from across the community. This team will represent all perspectives of your
community as they develop your strategic energy action plan.
If your community already has an energy plan, we will focus on ways to help drive you toward
your energy goals.
Create Your Unique Energy Action Plan
Develop an energy action plan based on your culture, needs and goals.
Whether you have an action plan in place or not, plan development is a team effort. Your
energy action team will meet to develop your community's strategic energy action plan. Your
plan document will identify and guide what goals and activities will be pursued over the next 18
months:
INTAKE — Xeel Energy will develop; a, profile of your community based on energy use, program
participation and market segmentation.
PLANNING SCHEDULE — Together we will create ':a timeline for the development of your energy'
action plan.
DEVELOP VISION AND GOALS — The energy action team will work together to determine your
specific goals that will be measured throughout the two years.
IDENTIFY STRATEGIES — Based on your community profile and goals, the action plan team will
identify programs and tactical approach to help you reach your goals.
COMMUNITY RESOURCES — Included in the plan are any additional resources that your
community has available to help you drive goal activities.
Apply Energy Actions To Your Community
Put your energy action plan to work by engaging your community members.
Based on your unique Partners in Energy plan, your energy strategies will include a combination
of activities and resources to help you reach your goals. Events, mailings, PR or an educational
approach may be used to promote your objectives, energy savings tips and resources to your
community's businesses, residents and municipal staff.
To simplify the process, your dedicated team partner from Xcel Energy will provide you with
templates you can use to achieve your communications objectives. The following templates will
serve as your communications starter Idt:
Website content to help you build your own Partners in Energy community webpage. We will
include a way to show energy goal progress and links to resources needed to meet your goals.
• Announcement messaging
E-newsletter templates
Customizable posters
• Event invitation templates
Direct mail templates
• Recognition programs
• Presentations
• Social media content
• Press releases or news articles
• Other ways to get the word out
Your Xcel Energy Partners in Energy team will support your needs throughout implementation
of your plan.