Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
09-26-16 CC Reg Mtg Agenda
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 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 Regular Meeting Minutes of September 12, 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. Election Judge Compensation Rates Clerk’s memo, Resolution C. City Administrator Employment Agreement Attorney’s memo D. City Hall and Public Works LED Lighting Retrofit Administrator’s memo 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council Action will be taken) 5. PUBLIC HEARING 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 7. PARKS A. Report by Molly Barr on the September 13 Park Commission meeting Minutes 8. PLANNING A. Report by Patrick Johnson on the September 20 Planning Commission meeting B. Amendment to City Code Chapter 1004 (Rental Housing) Planning Director’s memo Regarding Short-Term Rental Draft Ord,. Resolution CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA – September 26, 2016 Page 2 C. C.U.P. for Accessory Space Over 1200 Sq. Ft. Planning Director’s memo, Applicant: Mark Magney Resolution Location: 21195 Radisson Road D. C.U.P. for a Special Home Occupation Permit Planning Director’s memo, Applicant: Patricia Oys Resolution Location: 5825 Brentridge Drive 9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Accept Proposal for Professional Services – Lilac Lane Engineer’s memo Drainage study B. Accept Bids and Award Contract for the 2016 Trunk Watermain Engineer’s memo, Extension Project (Oppidan), City Project 16-04 Resolution 10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. MPCA’s Water Quality Standards Councilmember Woodruff’s request 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. Trails Schedule Trail Schedule B. Mayor and City Council 12. ADJOURN CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 952-960-7900 Fax: 952-474-0128 www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday, September 26, 2016 7:00 p.m. 6:00 PM – Council will gather for the Badger Park Play Field Ribbon Cutting 6:30 PM – A cake & coffee reception for Administrator Joynes follows the ribbon cutting Agenda Items #2A: Approval of Minutes from the September 12 City Council Regular meeting. Agenda Item #3A: Approval of the verified claims list. Agenda Item #3B: The state minimum wage increased as of August 1 to $9.50/hour. The city falls under the state minimum wage requirements. The resolution provided increases the Election Judge salaries for 2016 from $8.50/hr to $9.50/hr. and the Supervisor/Head Election Judge salary from $9.50 to $11.00/hr. This increase is in line with other cities. Agenda Item #3C: Attached is the City Administrator’s contract for Council’s consideration and approval. Agenda Item #3D: Staff is recommending approval of the quote of $37,315 from Prehall Electric for the city hall and public works LED retrofit lighting project. The 2016 budget has $38,000 allocated for this project. The Xcel Energy estimated rebate is $6,100, bringing the final estimated project cost at $31,215. Agenda Item #4: Matters from the floor – no council action will be taken. Agenda Item #5: There are no Public Hearings scheduled this evening. Agenda Item #6: There are no scheduled Reports or Presentations this evening. Agenda Item #7A: Park Commissioner Molly Barr will be present to provide an update on the September 13 Park Commission meeting. Agenda Item #8A: Planning Commissioner Patrick Johnson will be present to provide an update on the September 20 Planning Commission meeting. Agenda Item #8B: The Planning Commission has recommended amendments to the Shorewood Housing Code that will prohibit the rental of property in residential zoning districts for periods of less than 30 consecutive days (a.k.a. short-term rentals). A draft Executive Summary—City Council Meeting of September 26, 2016 Page 2 ordinance is provided for your consideration, as well as a summary ordinance for publication purposes. Agenda Item 48C: Mark Magney has requested a conditional use permit that would allow him to keep an existing shed on his property at 21195 Radisson Road. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the CUP. A resolution to that effect is included in your packet. Agenda Item 481): Patricia Oys has requested a conditional use permit for a special home occupation permit to conduct exercise classes at her home at 5825 Brentridge Drive. The Planning Commission recommended approval with two conditions: 1) client parking must be located in the applicant's driveway and no closer than 25 feet from the back of the curb; and 2) the number of clients at any one time is limited to four. A resolution which includes these conditions is provided for Council's approval. Agenda Item 49A: This resolution accepts bids and awards the contract for the 2016 trunk watermain extension project. Agenda Item 4913: A proposal for Professional Services to prepare a feasibility report for drainage concern at 21710 Lilac Lane is provided for Council's consideration. Agenda Item 410A: This is a request from Council Member Woodruff regarding MPCA water quality standards. Agenda Item#11 A: Staff reports are provided in the packet and will be given at the meeting. Agenda Item 411B: The Mayor and Council members may provide reports at the meeting. #2A CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 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, Sundberg, and Woodruff; Attorney Keane; City Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and, City Engineer Hornby Absent: Councilmember Siakel B. Review Agenda Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes of August 22, 2016 Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of August 22, 2016, as presented. Motion passed 4/0. B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of August 22, 2016 Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of August 22, 2016, as presented. Motion passed 4/0. C. City Council Executive Session Minutes of August 29, 2016 Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, Approving the City Council Executive Session Minutes of August 29, 2016, as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Zerby reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Woodruff moved, Labadie seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Approval of Mound Fire Department 2017 Budget Motion passed 4/0. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 2 of 17 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Brock Austin, 19690 Sweetwater Curve, stated he was present on behalf of the steering committee for the Silver Lake Homeowners Association (HOA). The HOA was formed out of concern about the water quality in Silver Lake. He asked if it would be possible to reserve his comments until after the presentation for Item 6.A about the Riley Purgatory Bluff Watershed District. Mayor Zerby stated Council would accommodate Mr. Austin’s request and noted Item 6.A is not a public hearing. George Greenfield, 24715 Yellowstone Trail, noted that he had received the wage history information he had requested from the City. Therefore, he is now prepared to respond to a claim made during the July 14, 2016, Council special meeting during the public hearing regarding tax increment financing for Oppidan Investment Company’s Shorewood Senior Housing project. He explained the claim was the City was careful to make sure that the wages for its nonsupervisory employees maintain their value. The information he was about to use is from the City of Shorewood and the Federal Government Bureau of Labor Statistics. He explained in 1970, about the time the wage erosion began, nonsupervisory Shorewood employees made $12,000 – $18,000 annually. In today’s dollars that range is about $74,550 – $116,600. Given Shorewood’s current wage rates those employees have lost 35 percent of the value of their wages. The situation from 1991 – 2016, the last 25 years, was slightly better. In 1991 a nonsupervisory Shorewood employee made $22,000. That same employee today makes $46,000 or 15 percent more in real dollars than he or she made in 1991. That increase is only 0.6 percent each year. That apparent gain on their part is compromised by two local facts. Since 1991 the appraised value of a modest home in Shorewood has tripled. For that same period the employee’s salary has doubled. Therefore, the employee lost 33 percent of their home buying power in Shorewood. In 1991 a year’s tuition at the University of Minnesota was $2,300. Today it is $12,200. Therefore, the same employee whether it be a man or a woman has lost 67 percent of their buying power for educational purposes either for themselves or for their children. Therefore, it is clear that wages have not maintained their value for Shorewood nonsupervisory employees. The claim that they do is as mistaken as was the claim made that the deal with Oppidan was the same thing as buying a bond. He asked that two items be entered in to the minutes for this meeting regarding two items from that July 14 Council meeting that occurred prior to the July 14 meeting that were not included in the July 14 meeting minutes. He explained the first is that 10 minutes before the July 14 public hearing representatives from Oppidan were still presenting information to Council about the mechanics of the proposal between Oppidan and the City. The second is three pages of printout detailing the mechanics and the particulars of that deal are dated July 14, 2016; the same day as the public hearing. Therefore, the inference is that no one, the citizens of Shorewood and the members of Council, had the proper time to study and reflect on that deal to ensure that it was the best interest of Shorewood. Mr. Greenfield thanked Council for its time. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Update by Doctor Claire Bleser, District Administrator for Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 3 of 17 Mayor Zerby introduced Doctor Clair Bleser, District Administrator for the Riley Purgatory Bluff Watershed District (RPBCWD). Doctor Bleser noted that she has worked for the RPBCWD for four years. She also noted it is the first time she has come before the Shorewood Council. She explained the RPBCWD was founded in 1969 and created out of a citizen based petition. It is a local government unit. It is charged with implementing projects and programs that protect, restore and manage water resources located within the District. There are five people on the RPBCWD Board of Managers; four (Mary Bisek, Jill Crafton, Perry Forster, and Leslie Yetka,) were appointed by the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners and one (Richard Chadwick) by the Carver County Board of Commissioners. The RPBCWD has three employees with her being one of them. It also has a seasonal staff person that helps during field season. The water resources within the District total approximately 50 square miles in surface area. Portions of the Cities of Bloomington, Chanhassen, Deephaven, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, and Shorewood are located in the District. There are also two streets in Chaska within the District. The first step in the process of managing water resources is to understand their current condition. Monitoring and data collection are the foundation for gaining that understanding. The District has about 11 lake monitoring sites; Silver Lake is one of them. There are 18 monitoring sites in total on all three creeks within the District. The branch of Purgatory Creek that comes out of Silver Lake is monitored as well. The data collection provides the information needed to determine whether or not the water body is healthy or unhealthy. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has established standards for determining if shallow lakes and deep lakes are healthy or not. The MPCA will define wetland standards next. It has definitions for what a shallow lake, a deep lake and a wetland are. The MPCA is currently assessing the entire lower Minnesota River area to determine if lakes are healthy or not based on its standards. The MPCA has not previously assessed Silver Lake based on its standards. As part of an initial meeting of RPBCWD and MPCA representatives a year and a half ago the RPBCWD asked the MCPA if it would classify Silver Lake as a wetland or shallow lake. The RPBCWD provided the MPCA with data it had collected for the various MPCA parameters. Based on the MPCA’s definitions for the three types of water bodies the MPCA thought Silver Lake fits more into its definition of a wetland; it does not quite fit into its definition for a shallow lake. That does not change the name of Silver Lake. The RPBCWD recently finished a palynological study of Silver Lake. The information stored in the bottom of the Lake was assessed to determine what has happened in the past. Information was pulled from back in the 1820s; it was from three meters down. It was determined that more sedimentation came into the Lake starting in the 1920s / 1940s. In 2000 it started to decrease; there is still some sediment going into the Lake. Based on one diatom species, a microscopic algae that stores quite well in the bottom of the lake, it was possible to determine past water quality. For the study the Science Museum of Minnesota studies how water quality changed over time. They determined that it was rich in nutrients in the past. There was a time when there was a decrease and then later an increase. That could have been during a time when there were heavy droughts in Minnesota. The Science Museum representatives encouraged the RPBCWD to interpret the results with caution due to the abundance of species that predict habitat better than nutrients. What can be determined from the recent data gathered is that the water quality used to be better. In the past it seems like there was less sediment going into the Lake and there were also fewer nutrients. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 4 of 17 The RPBCWD monitors the carp population in water bodies alternating which water bodies they monitor. Carp are bottom feeders. If they like where they are they reproduce a lot and take over. They stir up the bottoms of lakes and ultimately help degrade water quality in one sense. The good news is there are no carp in Silver Lake. Wild rice continues to grow on the south end of Silver Lake. There is a plant biologist working with the RPBCWD to help determine how healthy the rice plants are. The RPBCWD has revised all of the floodplain elevations for the three creeks in the District because a new atmospheric atlas had been published in 2014; Atlas 14. The 10-year average was higher than what the RPBCWD was using which was from the 1960s. The revisions were based on the last 30 years of actual data. Using the RPBCWD hydrologic and hydraulic (H&H) model the RPBCWD teamed up with cities within the District to estimate flood risk when there was ten inches of rain. Now people need to determine if there are projects that can be done to mitigate that risk. After gathering all of the data the next step is to identify solutions to problems. The RPBCWD conducts studies for each of the water resources in the District. There is a draft document for the Purgatory Creek Protection and Restoration Study. The RPBCWD’s current 10-year plan addresses what to do in order to have Silver Lake meet shallow lake standards. Quite a few projects were identified that would benefit the Silver Lake watershed. That is in draft form and was just presented to the Board the previous week. She had spoken with Shorewood’s city engineer about next steps and about coordinating efforts. She has also had a conversation with the Chanhassen representatives because the southern tip of Silver Lake is located in Chanhassen. The next step is to determine what can be done to improve the health of Silver Lake. The RPBCWD’s current 10-year plan (the one that came out in 2011) does not identify any implementation projects for the Silver Lake area. Efforts are underway to refresh the 10-year plan. There was a lot of public input process for the 10-year plan over the last eight months. More than 400 participants provided input through an online survey. Open houses were also held to solicit input from residents about their concerns. Residents were also asked how they would prioritize the various projects for the various water resources. RPBCWD staff took all of the input it received to develop a list of goals and plans for the District for the next 10- year plan. The RPBCWD has a cost share program. In 2015 it awarded $39,691.77 in grants. Projects kept an estimated 4.99 pounds of phosphorous and 22,235 pounds of sediment out of water bodies. The RPBCWD coordinates with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), the Carver County Water Management Organization, the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. It also coordinates with cities that are located or partially located within the RPBCWD. The RPBCWD has a permitting program and it developed a set of rules for development and redevelopment. 2015 was the first full year of the program. It has estimated that the 2015 permitting program resulted in 27,000 pounds of total suspended solids (sediment) and 200 pounds of total phosphorous being kept out of water resources. Mayor Zerby asked Council if it had any questions for Doctor Bleser. Councilmember Sundberg stated in the fact sheets Doctor Bleser provided it states Silver Lake is classified as a shallow lake. Doctor Bleser explained when Silver Lake was included in the RPBCWD’s 2011 10-year plan it was assumed it would meet a shallow lake classification. When District CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 5 of 17 representatives entered into discussions with MPCA representatives the District did have questions about how the MPCA classified a shallow lake. The MPCA provided its parameters for that classification. The RPBCWD staff reviewed criteria as it related to Silver Lake and provided that information to the MPCA. The MPCA scientists reviewed the information and thought Silver Lake better fit the definition of a wetland. Sundberg asked what Silver Lake’s current classification is. Doctor Bleser clarified there is no classification by the MPCA. The RPBCWD’s current 10-year plan assumed a shallow lake classification. Sundberg then asked what percentage of the RPBCWD’s budget is directed to carp research and carp control. Doctor Bleser responded it is not as much as it used to be and noted that work is internal. It is run through its data collection program. She explained she thought the RPBCWD was relatively successful at controlling the carp population in the Riley Creek chain of lakes by using an aeriation system. The intent is to keep blue gills alive because they eat baby carp. There are quite a few problems around Purgatory Creek lakes at the south end of the District. District staff is trying to mitigate that with the use of a barrier. Once data is gathered representatives from other agencies are asked to participate in determining next steps. Sundberg went on to ask when the revisions will be made to the 10-year plan. Doctor Bleser stated the updated 10-year plan should be sent out for comments during spring of 2017. She reiterated District staff just completed the public input process. In response to a comment from Sundberg, Doctor Bleser reiterated there is a draft document for the Purgatory Creek Protection and Restoration Study. Sundberg asked how much the RPBCWD staff has worked with the Silver Lake Homeowners Association (HOA). Doctor Bleser noted the HOA is relatively new and that one member of the HOA is on the RPBCWD Citizens Advisory Committee. She stated the HOA was in the process of developing when RPBCWD representatives were meeting with MPCA representatives to discuss Silver Lake. HOA members have come to RPBCWD Board meetings and asked questions. They also asked for some data. Councilmember Woodruff stated from his perspective the MPCA seldom does anything without a reason. He thought the MPCA’s reason for reclassifying Silver Lake must be driven by something. Doctor Bleser clarified the MPCA is not reclassifying the Lake; it is looking at formally classifying it. The MPCA is specifically looking at the Lower Minnesota River Watershed. It is assessing the health of all of the creeks in that Watershed. She also clarified it is not about a classification; it is about which standards are appropriate for Silver Lake. She explained the MPCA developed the definition for a shallow lake and then after that it developed standards for determining the health of a shallow lake. Silver Lake does not fit the MPCA’s definition and standards for a shallow lake. Woodruff asked what change in behavior the MPCA and the RPBCWD will make with regard to Silver Lake if Silver Lake is classified as a wetland rather than a shallow lake. Does a wetland have less stringent clarity requirements than a lake? Doctor Bleser explained that by the MPCA classifying Silver Lake as a wetland the MPCA’s shallow lake standards would not apply to the Lake. After the MPCA develops water quality standards for wetlands those standards would apply to the Lake. Woodruff then asked how Shorewood, for example, could interact with the MPCA and the RPBCWD to understand what the impact would be on Silver Lake. Doctor Bleser asked if Councilmember Woodruff’s concern is that the RPBCWD does not care about Silver Lake. She noted that over the last few years RPBCWD staff has demonstrated that it wants to know about the health of Silver Lake and in determining solutions for the future. She also noted the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 6 of 17 RPBCWD‘s current 10-year plan does not include any improvement projects for Silver Lake. She thought the updated plan would. She went on to note that it is important to protect and/or restore any wetland. All water resources are important to protect. Councilmember Woodruff stated the sediment and phosphorous level graphs for Silver Lake indicated an increase in both over time. If Silver Lake is classified as a wetland he expressed concern that might result in agencies thinking those increases are not an issue and the increases can continue over time. He asked why an agency would fund projects to improve the quality of Silver Lake if the Lake meets the wetland water quality standards. Doctor Bleser stated if science indicates there are projects that could be done on a water body to help improve the quality she asked why agencies would not want to protect them. Woodruff then stated that based on his experience with the City organizations and agencies tend not to spend money improving things that already meet standards. Doctor Bleser stated if there is an unhealthy water body in a community she assumes a community and/or agency would want to improve the water quality. Woodruff noted that he assumes water quality wetland standards would be less rigorous and onerous than lake standards. Doctor Bleser noted no one knows that yet because the MPCA in the process of developing wetland standards. Doctor Bleser explained that Shorewood could provide science data that shows projects could be done to improve Silver Lake and then include funding for the projects in the Shorewood Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) or team up with the RPBCWD. She noted the MPCA does not fund capital improvement projects. Councilmember Woodruff stated the RPBCWD staff is less than 10 percent of size of the MCWD staff yet the two Districts cover roughly the same geographic area. He asked why there is such a difference in staff size and ultimately funding for programs. Doctor Bleser clarified the water resources surface area within the RPBCWD is about one-third the size of that in the MCWD. The RPBCWD has different issues than the MCWD. She noted she was not present to compare one watershed district to another. Doctor Bleser stated staff at the RPBCWD believes it is important to work in partnership with others. She has spoken with Shorewood’s city engineer. She noted that Shorewood representatives have partnered at looking beyond Atlas 14 regarding the impact to the community. She explained the RPBCWD is a very dynamic watershed district. It is implementing projects. It uses science to help find solutions. She stated she assumes that what people will find over the next 10 years will be different from what happened during the last five years. Doctor Bleser noted she thought it is important to protect water resources; she does not think it is good to be reactive. It costs more to be reactive and restore water resources than it does to protect them. With regard to Silver Lake and other wetlands in that area she stated she thought it prudent to review solutions that have been identified and determine what can be done to make sure Silver Lake is healthy. She then stated that based on science and all of the data gathered it is important to identify how to improve the quality of Silver Lake. Councilmember Sundberg stated she thought the reason Council has some concern about the wetland classification goes back to the history of the RPBCWD before Doctor Bleser joined the District staff. Before that the focus was mainly directed toward lakes. There was little focus on the wetlands. She noted she was pleased to hear Doctor Bleser indicate there would be more of a balance between wetlands and lakes. She expressed concern that Silver Lake has not received the attention that lake bodies do. She stated she was pleased to hear RPBCWD staff is working with representatives from the Silver Lake HOA CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 7 of 17 and that she hoped that would continue. She stated she thought it important for Shorewood staff to comment on the revised 10-year plan. Councilmember Labadie expressed concern that classifying Silver Lake as a wetland could result in their being less monitoring of it or in the water quality deteriorating because the standards used to measure the quality would be less stringent than those for a shallow lake. She asked Doctor Bleser to talk about the RPBCWD‘s cost-share grant program for things such as planting native buffers and installing rain gardens. She also asked her what the contact number is for residents to call and where information can be found on a website. She then asked staff to publish that information about cost-share grants in the next City newsletter. Doctor Bleser stated people can find information about the cost-share grants on the RPBCWD’s website www.rpbcwd.org. She noted the cost-share grant program for this year has closed. It will open again next year. Mayor Zerby noted that during matters from the floor one resident asked for the opportunity to comment after Doctor Bleser had spoken. He asked him to come forward. Brock Austin, 19690 Sweetwater Curve, stated he was present on behalf of the steering committee for the Silver Lake Homeowners Association (HOA). He explained the HOA was formed about one year ago by a number of residents concerned about the water quality of Silver Lake. They wanted to become active in trying to improve the quality of the Lake. He explained that when members of the HOA spoke with representatives of the MPCA in December 2015 the members were advised that the Lake was categorized as a shallow lake. At that time the MPCA had not assessed whether or not it was impaired. The MPCA has a list of impaired shallow lakes. It provides that information to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and that allows people to apply for a grant for an impaired lake. The HOA had no doubt that once the assessment was done Silver Lake would be called impaired. The HOA is waiting for the results of the assessment. The MPCA standards for lakes are not regulatory; they are guidelines. Guidelines contain words like typically, generally and may or may not. Therefore, there is some subjectivity involved in determining whether or not a particular body of water falls into the shallow lake category or the wetland category. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has a national wetland inventory map and on it Silver Lake is identified as a lake with pieces along the fringes of the Lake as wetland. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has identified Silver Lake on its public waters inventory as a lake. It has a “p” next to it for public water. Other wetlands are identified as a “w”. He had spoken with a representative at the DNR earlier in the day and learned that the State has also classified Silver Lake as a “class 5 wetland”. By definition a “class 5 wetland” is a shallow lake. The representative at the DNR admitted there is some confusion about Silver Lake between various state agencies. When members of the Silver Lake HOA spoke with representatives from the MPCA the representatives advised the members that a lot of data they used to determine whether or not Silver Lake met its guidelines for a shallow lake or wetland came from the RPBCWD. The HOA members then decided they should be dealing with the RPBCWD; the MPCA agreed with that. People can then come back to the MPCA after the HOA and RPBCWD had met. After speaking with the MPCA the HOA sent a letter to Doctor Bleser asking her to setup a meeting and asking her to give the HOA any information about Silver Lake that they had given to the MPCA. He noted the Silver Lake HOA understands that Council is not making a decision about whether Silver Lake is a shallow lake or a wetland. He stated the HOA is asking Council to table any endorsement of CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 8 of 17 whether or not Silver Lake is a shallow lake or wetland until Council has been presented with additional information. The HOA may ask for Council’s assistance at a later date with respect to information provided to the MPCA. The HOA thinks that some of the data that has been provided to the MPCA is inaccurate. He stated the Silver Lake HOA is concerned that Silver Lake would move down on the priority list if it is classified a wetland. The HOA is also concerned about whether Silver Lake would qualify for grants to improve or protect the Lake. If Silver Lake is not a shallow lake on the impaired list there will be grants that Silver Lake will not be eligible for. Mr. Austin thanked Council for its time. Mayor Zerby stated he thought Mr. Austin’s comments were well spoken. Karen Missen, 5780 Covington Road, noted her family has lived in their house for about 10 years. She stated over the last couple of years they have watched Silver Lake rapidly deteriorate. They used to be able to watch blogs get blown back and forth across the Lake. Now they cannot move because of all of the weeds and lily pads. She asked that be addressed to free up the area. Councilmember Woodruff stated Mr. Austin stated a couple of things that he personally thought were quite important because he does not understand it. He then stated he is unsure of what, if any, involvement the City personally has with the MPCA when it comes to classifying Silver Lake. He does not think the City has any at this time. He asked staff if there will be a review period when the City can participate or does the MPCA just make a ruling. Engineer Hornby noted that he cannot specifically speak to this case and offered to get back to Council on it. He stated there may be some projects that will be done that require public input and then the City can respond in some manner. Woodruff asked staff to find out from the PMCA if Council will have an opportunity to provide input. Councilmember Sundberg stated from her perspective Council can share its opinion with the MPCA. She thought it is in incumbent for Silver Lake HOA members and representatives for the RPBCWD to ensure the MPCA has been presented with all of the facts. Mayor Zerby asked staff to keep engaged with what is going on relative to Silver Lake and to keep active with the RPBCWD. He stated he does not think anyone wants to have the quality of Silver Lake degrade. Based on the charts Doctor Bleser presented it appears the quality has been improving; the sediment has been decreasing. Councilmember Labadie stated from her perspective Council’s encouragement should be to nudge the MPCA to define the water quality standards for wetlands. Councilmember Sundberg asked staff to provide Council with a quarterly update on Silver Lake. Engineer Hornby suggested having RPBCWD representatives come and provide Council with an update periodically. Councilmember Sundberg suggested that be done quarterly. Hornby stated he will work with Doctor Bleser to set up a schedule for updates. Councilmember Woodruff stated he was not sure that the City’s interests and the RPBCWD’s interests are aligned with regard to Silver Lake. He suggested staff contact the MPCA because if the MPCA is going to set up a wetland classification that could affect the other wetlands in Shorewood. He stated it is his understanding that the federal government has 10 different classifications for wetlands. Mayor Zerby stated there may be a need for outside help on this concern. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 9 of 17 Engineer Hornby stated he would ask one of the WSB & Associates environmental scientists to contact the MPCA to find out what it is doing regarding classification and standards for Silver Lake. He will report the findings back to Council. Council noted it would appreciate that. 7. PARKS A. Report on the August 23, 2016, Park Commission Meeting Director Nielsen reported on matters considered and actions taken during the August 23, 2016, Park Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Councilmember Labadie noted the Movie in the Park event occurred on September 9. The movie was Aladdin. 8. PLANNING 9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Consideration of Drainage Concern at 21710 Lilac Lane Director Brown noted that Mayor Zerby asked staff to review a drainage concern at the property located at 21710 Lilac Lane. The concern was brought to Zerby’s attention by Larry Stokes, the owner of the subject property. He also noted the meeting packet contains a copy of a site location map, aerial photograph and topography maps. He explained the elevation of the house pad ranges 6 to 12 feet lower than the surface of Lilac Lane (a Shorewood Roadway). The boundary between the Cities of Shorewood and Chanhassen is very near the Lilac Lane pavement. A portion of Chanhassen drains to Lilac Lane. The driveway on the property is located at the low point of the roadway. The western half of the Lilac Lane does not have curb and gutter; the eastern section has surmountable curb and gutter. He noted that a long-time (about 40 years) Shorewood Public Works employee had told him that the City had to clear out a culvert where the original house was located many times. He explained when staff discussed the concern in a staff meeting they decided it would not be appropriate to take this issue on based on the request of just one member of Council. Therefore, staff is seeking direction from Council on how it wants staff to proceed. The City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) does not include any improvements to mitigate the problem. Staff contacted the Chanhassen City Engineer to find out if Chanhassen has any capital improvements planned for in that area. The sewer main on Lilac Lane is schedule to be lined within the next three years. That Engineer told him that the watermain along Lilac Lane and located in Chanhassen is cast iron and it should be replaced whenever Lilac Lane is reconstructed. Brown noted the most obvious solution would be to install concrete curb and gutter along that area of Lilac Lane and intercept it by storm sewer due to the size of the area that drains to that low point in the roadway. That improvement would not be inexpensive. He stated if Council believes the issue is a City issue Council should direct WSB & Associate representatives to prepare a mini feasibility report for Council. If Council believes it is the property owner’s responsibility staff would like to have Council clarify that. Larry Stokes, 21710 Lilac Lane, explained the amount of storm water that drains off of City property onto his property is quite substantial. After it rains water drains for 1 to 2 hours after the rain stops onto his property. In addition to the water gravel, sand and mud also flow onto his property. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 10 of 17 He stated the information Director Brown shared about the culvert being cleared out in the past was news to him. He explained that culvert is under the roadway and it is completely covered on both sides. He noticed the culvert when he was excavating dirt that has washed down the roadway to try and create a pathway to divert the water and materials down one section of his property. He expressed his appreciation for all of the time and attention given to his concern. He explained the drainage problem has eroded his driveway as well as portions of his yard and shed. He cannot replace anything until some solution for channeling the stormwater is put in place. Mr. Stokes noted he is willing to help, both financially and with labor, to address the concern. He thanked Council for its time. Councilmember Sundberg asked if most of the drainage problem came about after the residential development was built near that area in Chanhassen. Mr. Stokes stated he has lived in his house for 23 years. He noted a lot of the houses on the Chanhassen side had been there for quite some time. He explained over the last 23 years the City has come out to assess the situation. One time the City put a small asphalt berm at the end of his driveway. There is so much stormwater that it flows around the end of it. He reiterated a great deal of water, sand and dirt flows on to his property. Councilmember Labadie thanked Mr. Stokes for the approach he has taken with his concern. Mr. Stokes asked for help rather then begged for forgiveness. She noted that she went to look at the property earlier in the day. She stated it would have been easy for Mr. Stokes to divert the stormwater off of his property by digging a trench and installing some type of pipe and then have it drain onto his neighbor’s property. She noted that she does not think the problem is only Shorewood’s problem. The stormwater is flowing off of the development in Chanhassen just passed Lilac Lane. She stated she thought any improvements need to be done as a collaborative effort with the two Cities and the property owner. Labadie asked Engineer Hornby how much it would cost to prepare a mini feasibility report. Hornby stated he would have to scope the effort out in order to come up with a cost. Hornby then stated he thought Director Brown was talking about a letter feasibility report that would not be as detailed as a full feasibility report. Hornby noted that some stormwater modeling would have to be done for the area. Mayor Zerby asked Hornby if he could come back with a quote for that if Council asked for it. Hornby responded yes. Labadie stated Council needs to have the quote before it decides what the next step should be. Councilmember Woodruff asked if it is correct for him to think the culvert was serviced recently. Director Brown stated the culver could have been covered when Mr. Stokes’ home was rebuilt. The culvert is buried. Woodruff stated based on the topo map it looks like the properties in Chanhassen on one side of Lilac Lane drains on to that roadway. Director Brown stated a substantial portion of the drainage goes onto Lilac Lane. Mayor Zerby stated those houses look like they are elevated 8 feet. Woodruff asked if there are drainage easements on the property. Director Brown stated he does not think so and noted that implementing a solution would likely require acquisition of some drainage and utility easements. Councilmember Labadie stated there are a number of mature trees on Mr. Stokes’ property; their roots are visible. She noted she thought it would be a shame to lose those mature trees. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 11 of 17 Mayor Zerby stated he had met with Mr. Stokes about three weeks ago and toured his property. He noted he was pleased that Councilmember Labadie had gone to look at the site and he encouraged other members of Council to do so also. He stated he thought the City has some responsibility to work with the property owner on this issue. The stormwater flows from quite a large area onto the roadway and then mostly on to Mr. Stokes’ property. He noted that Mr. Stokes has indicated a willingness to work with the City and possibly even financially. He stated he had alerted representatives from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) of this issue. They appeared to be willing to assess the issue and determine if mitigation of the issue would qualify for MCWD grant funding. Mr. Stokes reiterated that when there is a hard rain a tremendous amount of water flows on to his property. Engineer Hornby stated WSB will prepare a scope of services letter to do a mini feasibility report for Council’s considerations during its September 26 or October 10 meeting. 10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Summit Avenue Parking Restrictions Director Nielsen explained that when the Summit Woods Development north of Murray Hill Road on Summit Avenue was approved the City stipulated to the developer that on-street parking of construction vehicles would not be allowed. Two houses have been built to date and there was not an issue with parking. While the third is being constructed the issue of subcontractors parking on the street has become more of a problem. The police department has offered to help with enforcement but officers cannot issue citations until the area is approved by Council as a no parking and posted as no parking. The City has received complaints about parked vehicles. Staff assessed the roadway from the border with the City of Chanhassen down to Murray Hill Road to determine where the no parking restriction should begin and end. With the roadway being narrow, steep and curvy up at the top staff concluded that there should not be any parking in that stretch. Staff had prepared a resolution that would place parking restrictions on both sides of the stretch of roadway between the Chanhassen boarder and Murray Hill Road. He noted that staff recommends Council adopt the resolution restricting parking. Councilmember Sundberg asked if residents in that area are receptive to the parking restriction for all vehicles in that area. Director Nielsen responded he was not sure. Director Nielsen reiterated the roadway is quite narrow in that area. He explained when the development was approved there had been discussion about various alternatives for improving the roadway; the residents were not receptive to them. Councilmember Sundberg asked if the parking restriction would be eliminated once construction was complete. Director Nielsen stated that if after construction is complete residents decide the restriction is an inconvenience they can petition the City to remove it. Councilmember Labadie stated the hairpin curve in the roadway is very dangerous. Labadie moved, Sundberg seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NON 16-072, “A Resolution Restricting Parking on Summit Avenue.” Motion passed 4/0. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 12 of 17 B. Southshore Center Painting and Lighting Improvements Administrator Joynes explained that during the February 9, 2016, Council and staff retreat a list of maintenance improvements to the Southshore Center was discussed. A quote for interior was received from Superior Painting Contractors painting for an approximate cost of $5,705 and a quote for lighting improvements was received from Prehall Electric for an approximate cost of $7,942 (a copy of the quotes was included in the meeting packet). The chairs in the facility need to be replaced. Staff is searching for replacement chairs. Council will likely be asked to consider the replacement of the chairs before the end of the year. Joynes noted there has been a steady increase of about 6 percent per year in the use of the Center since January 2014. Mayor Zerby stated that a few months ago Council asked to be provided with the financial information for Center operations. Administrator Joynes stated staff will provide that information to Council and noted rental revenue has increased. Councilmember Sundberg asked if staff solicited bids for the work. Administrator Joynes clarified staff asked for quotes and noted the City has used the two contractors in the past. Sundberg then asked if Shorewood is solely responsible for paying the cost of those improvements. Administrator Joynes stated that unfortunately at this time it is. Councilmember Woodruff stated because there is not been a conclusion about the ownership of the Center he will vote against paying for the proposed improvements. He wants a ruling from the Court and discussion by Council about the ownership. Mayor Zerby noted the Court has ruled. Woodruff stated it is being appealed again. Zerby noted Council has not discussed that. Administrator Joynes confirmed that an appeal notice has been filed in order to reserve the City’s right to appeal. Councilmember Labadie asked what the deadline is for Council to vote to pursue the appeal. Attorney Keane responded September 19. Labadie noted that she will also vote not to fund the improvements at this time. Mayor Zerby noted there is not another Council meeting scheduled before September 19 to vote on that. Attorney Keane explained the papers to perfect the appeal have been filed. That is a placeholder petition and is quite customary. The City could withdraw the placeholder prior to September 19. Councilmember Sundberg stated it was her recollection Council had an executive session to talk about this. Mayor Zerby concurred. Sundberg stated there has not been any follow-up on the pros and cons of doing that. Sundberg noted she thought resolving the ownership issue is the highest priority. Attorney Keane stated Council can convene into executive session after this meeting. He noted the public has to be advised prior to the close of this meeting that Council will go into an executive session to discuss the ownership issue. There was Council consensus to continue the approval of the funding for Southshore Center improvements to a future Council meeting. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 13 of 17 C. Country Club Road / Yellowstone Trail / Lake Linden Drive Discussion Engineer Hornby explained the Traffic Committee presented its final report to Council during Council’s July 11, 2016, meeting. The report identified potential solutions for addressing traffic concerns along the Country Road 19 / Country Club Road / Yellowstone Trail / Lake Linden Drive corridor. Mayor Zerby asked that staff put an item on the agenda to further discuss what the next steps are. He noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the Committee’s report. He highlighted some of the higher weighted suggestions in the Committee’s report. Smithtown Road at Country Club Road Signaled intersection coordinated with CSAH 19 Widen the roadway from the Mattamy entrance to Country Club Road Country Club Road Widen the roadway approaching Smithtown Road including the addition of a left turn and right turn lane Add bike lanes with a 25 miles per hour (mph) speed limit Yellowstone Trail (Country Club Road to Lake Linden Drive) Stop sign enhancements (e.g., blinker stop signs) Improve sight lines (e.g., cut trees back) Intersection improvements (e.g., at the Lake Linden Drive intersection add a street light, a pedestrian cross walk, and a children’s crossing sign) Yellowstone Trail (east of Lake Linden Drive) Improve sight lines – trim trees and realign Yellowstone Trail at Seamans Drive to a more o 90 angle and add blinker stop signs Stop signs – add all way blinker stop signs at the entrance to the Mattamy development Lake Linden Drive Improve sight lines – trim trees and straighten curve south of Yellowstone Trail Improve sight lines – fix grade changes north of the CUB development access for left turning vehicles Lake Linden Drive at CUB Entrance / Trunk Highway 7 / Trunk Highway 41 Access improvements – close CUB development exit from the east at the frontage road (Lake Linden Drive) while maintaining inbound movement Roadway improvement – widen Lake Linden Drive eastbound to three approaching lanes (one right turn to westbound Highway 7, one through to Highway 41, and one left turn to eastbound Highway 7) and one exiting lane westbound beginning at the existing center CUB development access Miscellaneous Technology improvements – remove the use of Country Club Road, Yellowstone Trail and Lake Linden Drive from Google Maps directions Enforcement – improve/enhance enforcement of speed limits and traffic controls on area roadways Traffic calming – add drive feedback speed control signs at selected locations on Yellowstone Trail and Lake Linden Drive Mayor Zerby noted that he asked that this item be placed on the agenda again because residents who served as members of the Traffic Committee have asked what Council intends to do with the information it provided. When the report was presented to Council in July two approaches were discussed. The first was for staff to prioritize the recommendations and to provide high level cost estimates and information CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 14 of 17 about the effectiveness of the modifications. The second approach was for Council to prioritize the suggestions. Councilmember Sundberg commended the Traffic Committee for excellent job it did. It took a complex issue and made it somewhat understandable. She stated the next step is for staff to provide cost estimates for the high priority recommendations (items rated 4 and higher), the feasibility of making the changes, and timelines for implementing them. If some of the lower rated recommendations are economical and easy changes that would achieve some benefit then maybe those should be considered also. Mayor Zerby stated he has spoken with Engineer Hornby about the need to be mindful of which solutions would work in other areas of the City. It is difficult to make improvements for one area and not for other areas without there being a policy for it. He noted that there are not any stop bars (the white painted lines at a stop sign) along the corridor route. The corners at the Country Club Road / Yellowstone Trail and Yellowstone Trail / Lake Linden Drive intersections are somewhat “rounded off”. There has been increased police traffic enforcement. Unfortunately, enforcement results in short-term changes in diving behaviors. He went on to state that Hornby had indicated that the tightening of the corner and stop sign enhancement at the intersection of Birch Bluff Road and Edgewood Road appears to have helped. He noted the corridor route is a Minnesota State Aid (MSA) route. Maybe that requires a little different standard (e.g., more visible stop signs). He stated he would like to have staff identify which suggested improvements would be applicable for other traffic “pain points” in the City. Councilmember Woodruff stated he agrees with Councilmember Sundberg’s suggestion to concentrate on those recommendations ranked 4 or higher. He suggested staff prepare a brief statement about the feasibility of implementing each recommendation and what the benefits of doing so would be. Councilmember Labadie suggested staff also estimate how long it would take to implement the recommendations. Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought that changing the intersection at Highway 7 and Highway 41 near CUB would be like pushing a boulder uphill. It may be worth having a discussion about it. Teresa Elsbernd, 5880 Minnetonka Drive, noted she was a member of the Traffic Committee and she was one of its elected spokespersons during Committee meetings. She explained the Committee’s impetus was to identify ways to improve the roadways in the corridor route. It also considered the increase in traffic that will be generated by the Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) residential development and the impact on the various intersections along the corridor that are already somewhat problematic. She noted the light at the intersection south of CUB at Highway 7 only allows about six cars to go though at any one time. It easily takes 3 – 5 minutes to get through that intersection. Ms. Elsbernd explained that one of the improvements the Committee discussed a lot was constructing a traffic circle or maybe two at the north end of Country Club Road where it intersects with Smithtown Road then on to Country Road 19. The goal was to keep most of the traffic on Country Road 19 and off the corridor route to get to Highway 7. She thought that idea received high support from the Committee members. She asked Council to keep that idea at the top of the list. Councilmember Woodruff stated there are three roundabout items on the list of recommendations for Smithtown Road at country Club Road. But, none of them scored very high. He then stated he would like the dual roundabout (Country Club Road and Country Road 19) to be considered. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 15 of 17 Ms. Elsbernd clarified that when the Committee did the ranking it did not call it a priority. It was intended to convey committee support for a recommendation and not priority. Priority would have implied the Committee thought it was the most important and that was not the case. Engineer Hornby stated using the word priority was not his best choice of words. The report titled the rankings as committee support. The recommendations he highlighted earlier had high or medium support from the Committee. There was Council consensus to have staff factor Council’s comments in and come back with a shorter list of items with a brief statement of the feasibility, estimated costs and estimated time effort to implement for each of them. 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. Trail Schedule Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the Trail Schedule. Engineer Hornby noted the schedule for the Smithtown Road east sidewalk extension was updated to show a construction substantially complete date of September 2 and a ribbon cutting ceremony date of September 12. He explained one pole needs to be removed before the contractor can finish the other sidewalk panels. Staff will prepare a punch list for the contractor to complete. Mayor Zerby stated that some of the punch list items he has noticed include putting traffic signs back up. He noted that some properties had small sidewalks coming out to the street before construction of the sidewalk and now there is a small gap between where their sidewalk and the City sidewalk is. He asked who has to restore that. Engineer Hornby explained if it was disturbed during construction it should be restored as part of the project. Zerby listed a few other items for the punch list. Hornby stated the contractor will likely come back and do some of those things after it completes the concrete work. Zerby thanked people for doing a good job on this project. 2. Country Club Road Traffic Counts Director Brown stated he had not been able to download the traffic count data from the counters along Country Club Road. He will try to have that data for the next Council meeting. Other Engineer Hornby stated street sealcoating was supposed to continue today. Director Brown stated it will resume tomorrow and explained that because of the rain the contractor had an opportunity to work in another part of the state. Hopefully the contractor will finish sealcoating on September 13. Hornby noted that someone crashed into the contractor’s seal coat spreader and that delayed two City projects. Hornby then stated that 2016 mill and overlay effort is mostly completed. The paving of the wear course for Star Lane and Star Circle will be done the week of September 19. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 16 of 17 Hornby went on to state there will be a public information meeting on September 15 from 6:00 – 7:00 P.M. at City Hall for the residents living along the route of the watermain extension project for the Shorewood Landing Senior Living project. Director Nielsen stated the construction of the artificial play field in Badger Park is progressing nicely. He noted the contractor for that project has been very good to work with. He stated the plan is to have a ribbon cutting ceremony toward the end of September. Mayor Zerby stated he had heard Director Brown indicate that the removal of the equipment in the Skate Park had been delayed. Brown indicated that was because of other priorities for Public Works personnel. Director DeJong stated that he has been working on wrapping up the implementation of accepting credit card payments for minor permits. He then stated he is working on certification stuff. He noted AT&T has renewed its lease agreement for another five years. He also noted that he will be out for the next two weeks because he is going to have knee replacement surgery. Administrator Joynes stated that he and Attorney Keane will meet with representatives from the City of Excelsior next week to plan out the schedule for The Waters of Excelsior project and the annexation of Shorewood land to Excelsior. Councilmember Labadie stated the Minnewashta Elementary School Back to School 5K run occurred on September 10. The entire race was run in Shorewood. She thanked members of the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) for patrolling the race very well. They also had patrol cars at the School at the end of the race. Officers spoke to the children after the race and they let them sit in vehicles. It was a great police presence for the young children. She also thanked residents for cheering the young runners on. The race is a fundraiser and replaces the need for children to sell things like candy bars and gift wrapping paper. It is the School’s main fundraiser for the year. She then stated on the same day th there was an Excelsior Fire District (EFD) parade to celebrate the Fire Department’s 125 anniversary. It was amazing to see fire engines from places she had never heard of before. There were many volunteers there handing out an American flag to everyone who wanted one. She thanked the Department for putting on a wonderful event. Mayor Zerby stated on September 9 he and Councilmembers Labadie and Sundberg attended a ground breaking ceremony for the Oppidan Shorewood Landing Senior Living project at Highway 7 and Chaska th Road. He then stated he attended an EFD dinner to celebrate the 125 anniversary; Boardmembers, mayors and former mayors, and active and retired firefighters and their wives were invited. There was a lot of history about the Department presented. B. Mayor and City Council 1. City Administrator Search Mayor Zerby explained Council met in executive session on August 29, 2016, to discuss the results of the interviews with a subset of the applicants for the city administrator position. During the session Council directed Attorney Keane to present an offer and negotiate a contract with Council’s choice. Keane stated it was his understanding that vote for the recommended applicant would be taken by Council during this meeting. Councilmember Woodruff asked if the recommended applicant should be named in the motion. Attorney Keane responded yes. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 12, 2016 Page 17 of 17 Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, directing Attorney Keane (and City Administrator Joynes if necessary) to enter into a negotiation with and prepare an offer for the city administrator position for Greg Lerud. Councilmember Sundberg suggested that the motion be amended to include Mr. Lerud would have to relocate to within a certain distance from Shorewood within one year of starting his employment with the City. Without objection from the maker or the seconder, the motion was amended to include subject to Mr. Lerud moving closer to the City within one year of the start of his employment. Mayor Zerby stated he thought a few good candidates applied for the position. Motion passed 4/0. Mayor Zerby noted Council will go into an executive session to discuss the ownership of the Southshore Center after this meeting. Mayor Zerby recessed the Regular City Council meeting to a City Council executive session at 9:04 P.M. Mayor Zerby called the executive session to order at 9:06 P.M. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Labadie, Sundberg, and Woodruff; Attorney; City Attorney Keane and, Administrator Joynes were present. The City Councilmembers, the City Administrator, Attorney Keane discussed the Southshore Center ownership issue. The Executive Session was concluded at 9:14 P.M. The City Council reconvened in regular session at 9:15 P.M. 12. ADJOURN Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of September 12, 2016, at 9:15 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk #3A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Verified Claims Meeting Date: September 26, 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. 62916 - 62917 & ACH 41,060.16 62918 - 62955 & ACH 512,186.20 Total Claims $553,246.36 We have also included a payroll summary for the payroll period ending September 18, 2016. Financial or Budget Considerations: These expenditures are reasonable and necessary to provide services to our residents anre budgeted and available for these purposes. Options: The City Council is may accept the staff recommendation to pay these claims or may r expenditure it deems not in the best interest of the city. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the claims list as presented. Next Steps and Timelines: Checks will be distributed following approval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`7 < -27$%:B5-L\;-*(FE'''()**)*'+,+'+./*.DD''.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-0('E'' @ $&7 !,D/6>1LLJ6-"SMNI6NJ@I-6M1NJHKT-JH6E6: ;<-L O4 $; !-R16P-I$A?B &!-UAB "@a/."Z+F.'+"E@Ea/." 7b ;%-+F.'+.S :A?#B#%A%#7$-7=-F''Q-KAB-IB \A% &-**T'DRE'''()**)*'+,,'+.''.D,*'.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-**T'DRE'' @ $&7 ! CX'''R'S7?#$-67B 8A$6: ;<-L O4 $; !-(16P-I$A?B &!-UAB S =4$&-6: ;<-*ED,'()*+)*'+,,'+.''.*'+'.'''' S =4$&-6: ;<-*ER,'()*+)*'+,,++.''.*'+'.'''' S =4$&-6: ;<-+E*/'()*+)*'+,,/+.''.*'+'.'''' S =4$&-6: ;<-+E*/'()*+)*'+,,*+.''.*'+'.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-0E0R @ $&7 !+FR6 C-UMMGL-.-LPMSI`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a+."'*(*F.'("E@Ea+." 7b ;%-a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`QJHLT-JH6E6: ;<-L O4 $; !-+R16P-I$A?B &!-N 4 /(D*+(0.SJ6:B7 #$ -*'FE'''()**)*'+,,'+.''.D*DF.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-*'FE'' @ $&7 !*+FPIHHI"JH-6M HN]-JHUMS21NJMH-NI6PHM>MK]-GI"1SN2IHN6: ;<-L O4 $; !-+(16P-I$A?B &!-N 4 +''''R'RF/27$%:B5-R''-2:c-SA-L \#; -+/'E','()**)*'+,+'+./*.D/*+.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-+/'E', @ $&7 !,D,G1@JG-PIS]>16: ;<-L O4 $; !-*'16P-I$A?B &!-UAB *'+,.M<%7? = *'+,-M<%7? = %."7B<A-CA$&-/''E'''()**)*'+,+'+.F/.DD/R.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-/''E'' @ $&7 !**RJHNISH1NJMH1>-6MGI-6M H6J>T-JH6E6: ;<-L O4 $; !-*+16P-I$A?B &!-UAB /+'0*F(*'+,.2 8? :#9-G4 .Z7 -"AcA$&A<-+/FE'''()**)*'+,+'+.*D.DD//.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-+/FE'' @ $&7 !*D/Q>2-IHKJHIISJHKT--JH6E6: ;<-L O4 $; !-**16P-I$A?B &!-UAB 1".67894% -6: ;<-" 77=-># %-?5-@ $&7 -^'()**)*'+,-.-++!/0-12_"A3 -/ !"#$% &#'"(!)*! +, - *./0,# *$&/*#+""*$%-,1#(2#3#(# "# ,+'FN.27?#B .L8#%:%7V$-NMV -J$ 9 ;%#7$-L\;-FT/''E'''()**)*'+,+'+.''./D+D.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-FT/''E'' @ $&7 !*F(6>1SI-NE->JHQ6: ;<-L O4 $; !-*/16P-I$A?B &!-N 4 *'+,.*,L`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`A% -J$ 9 ;%#7$-A%->#=%-L%A%#7$-*TFD0E'''()**)*'+,,++.''.DD''.'''' D(/0`A% -S 9A# -A%->#=%-L%A%#7$-*T*/,E'''()**)*'+,,++.''.DD''.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-DT0R/E'' @ $&7 !/**MUUJ6I-GI"MN6: ;<-L O4 $; !-*(16P-I$A?B &!-UAB R,FR,++/*''+K $ AB-M==#; -L499B# -(/ED+'()**)*'+,+'+.+/.D*''.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-(/ED+ @ $&7 !/*FMH-LJNI-L1HJN1NJMH-.N`JH-6JNJIL6: ;<-L O4 $; !-/'16P-I$A?B &!-UAB /+F*0+CA&3 -"<.F0DF-674$% 5-6B4?-S&-F/E*F'()**)*'+,+'+.F*.DD+'.'''' /+F*0*6A%:;A %-"A <.*,,FF-`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d ?5-S #8?4 8 $%-0+E(F'()**)*'+,+'+.+/.D//+.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-+*(E+( @ $&7 ! CX'''0(18? -Y-ZA8 -"A 6: ;<-L O4 $; !-/*16P-I$A?B &!-UAB S =4$&-6: ;<-*FE*('()+/)*'+,,++.''.*'+'.'''' S =4$&-6: ;<-+'ERD'()+/)*'+,,/+.''.*'+'.'''' S =4$&-6: ;<-+'ERD'()+/)*'+,,*+.''.*'+'.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-D,E(0 @ $&7 !DF*"SIP1>>-I>I6NSJ6-JH6E6: ;<-L O4 $; !-//16P-I$A?B &!-UAB '(+(*'+,S % 7=#%->#3:% -#$-67$= $; -S778-+T//FE'''()**)*'+,+'+.+(.D**+.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-+T//FE'' @ $&7 !//," S6P1LI-"M`IS6: ;<-L O4 $; !-/D16P-I$A?B &!-N 4 S =#BB &.'(+F+,1;;%-aR'''.('''.'0D/.R**/.S =#BB &-7$-'()+F)+,-+T'''E'''()**)*'+,+'+.+/.D*'R.'''' S =#BB &.'(+F+,1;;%-a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a,."'+DF(.(D"E@Ea,." 7b ;%-a'+DF(.(D.L8#%:%7V$-S&-IA %-L#& VAB<-IW%E-*/(T'++ED*'()**)*'+,D',.''.D,*'.'''R 1".67894% -6: ;<-" 77=-># %-?5-@ $&7 -^'()**)*'+,-.-++!/0-12_"A3 -F !"#$% &#'"(!)*! +, - *./0,# *$&/*#+""*$%-,1#(2#3#(# "# 6: ;<-N7%AB!-*/(T'++ED* @ $&7 !/FDLPMSI`MMG-NS I-@1> I6: ;<-L O4 $; !-/R16P-I$A?B &!-UAB +/'(0(G# #$= ;%-`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`1HQ-2MNJMH-"J6N SILT-JH6E6: ;<-L O4 $; !-D+16P-I$A?B &!-UAB **/''',`L.G@G-.-1BA&&#$-27\# -D'/E'''()**)*'+,+'+.F/.D*D,.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-D'/E'' @ $&7 !/R,N`JH-6JN]-`1NIS-6>JHJ66: ;<-L O4 $; !-D*16P-I$A?B &!-UAB RF0027$%:B5-CA;% #A-L\;-+''E'''()**)*'+,,'+.''.DD''.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-+''E'' @ $&7 !0,D >J-2JHHILMN16: ;<-L O4 $; !-D/16P-I$A?B &!-UAB *'+,.d ?5 ?A$->A$-J$ %#%4% .CB&3-> A& .L;7%%-d ?5-/''E'''()**)*'+,+'+.++.D//+.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-/''E'' @ $&7 !D*+@ISJdMH-`JSI>ILL6: ;<-L O4 $; !-DD16P-I$A?B &!-UAB (00+*0/(F(L V -Y-`A% -.-1;;%RD*'+0/R,.L\;-'R)*)+,.'()'+)+,-F'EDD'()**)*'+,,'+.''.D/*+.''''1;;%-aRD*'+0/R,.''''+ (00+*0/(F(L V -Y-`A% -.-1;;%RD*'+0/R,.L\;-'R)*)+,.'()'+)+,-F'ED/'()**)*'+,,++.''.D/*+.''''1;;%-aRD*'+0/R,.''''+ (00+*0/(F(L-Y-`->#$ -.-1;;%RD*'+0/R,.L\;-'R)*)+,.'()'+)+,-F'ED/'()**)*'+,,/+.''.D/*+.''''1;;%-aRD*'+0/R,.''''+ (00+(+,*D*C A&e -6 BB.,+*.R,F./FR*.L\;-'R)+/)+,.'()+*)+,-D0E0F'()**)*'+,+'+.+R.D/*+.''''1;;%-aDR,00+0++.''''+ 1".67894% -6: ;<-" 77=-># %-?5-@ $&7 -^'()**)*'+,-.-++!/0-12_"A3 -, !"#$% &#'"(!)*! +, - *./0,# *$&/*#+""*$%-,1#(2#3#(# "# 6: ;<-N7%AB!-+((E'F @ $&7 !/(F@JQJHK-1 NM21NJ6-L"SJHQ>IS6: ;<-L O4 $; !-DF16P-I$A?B &!-UAB L"'+**('S 9A# -.S %-G 5-L5 % 8-D''E'''()**)*'+,+'+.+(.D**/.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-D''E'' @ $&7 !D+F`1SHIS-6MHHI6N6: ;<-L O4 $; !-D,16P-I$A?B &!-N 4 *((/++F/1&&#%#7$AB-L \#; -6:A 3 .1434 %-+T++/E0F'()**)*'+,+'+.+(.D/*+.'''' *((/++0'2L-M==#; -*'+,.1&8#$-1 # %A$%-Y-"BA$$#$3-)-I$3#$ -1 # %A$%-+TD*FE'''()**)*'+,D'/.''.D,D'.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-*TF/RE0F @ $&7 !D'(SJ6P1SG-`MMGS UU6: ;<-L O4 $; !-D016P-I$A?B &!-UAB '(+/*'+,2 %#$32 % 7-6#%# -S \)NAW-"7B#;5-2 %#$3.'()+/)+,-/FE+''()**)*'+,+'+.+/.D//+.'''' 6: ;<-N7%AB!-/FE+' @ $&7 !D++f6I>-IHISK]T-JH6E6: ;<-L O4 $; !-DR16P-I$A?B &!-UAB L%8%aF+F0*0R/RF,FF-2 5->A$ -.-L\;-'R)'R)+,.'()'0)+,-*FE'+'()**)*'+,+'+.F*.D/R'.'''' L%8%aF+0*D'*+'6EPE-L\; .L%A% 8 $%-7$-'()*')+,-,/FE*+'()**)*'+,+'+.+(.D/R'.''''1;;%-F+DF/+0++( L%8%aF+0*D'*+'"E`E-CB&3-L\;.L%A% 8 $%-7$-'()*')+,-,'/EF,'()**)*'+,+'+./*.D/R'.''''1;;%-F+DF/+0++( L%8%aF+0*D'*+'"E`E-L% %->#3:% -L\;.L%A% 8 $%-7$-'()*')+,-+T0R*E/''()**)*'+,+'+./*.D/((.''''1;;%-F+DF/+0++( L%8%aF+0*D'*+'"A < .L%A% 8 $%-7$-'()*')+,-/0RE/('()**)*'+,+'+.F*.D/R'.''''1;;%-F+DF/+0++( L%8%aF+0*D'*+'18 ?4 5-L\;-.L%A% 8 $%-7$-'()*')+,-+T**DE,F'()**)*'+,,'+.''.D/(D.''''1;;%-F+DF/+0++( L%8%aF+0*D'*+'C74B& -C #&3 -L\;-.L%A% 8 $%-7$-'()*')+,-+TD+/E(0'()**)*'+,,'+.''.D/(,.''''1;;%-F+DF/+0++( L%8%aF+0*D'*+'LEIE-1 A-L\;-.L%A% 8 $%-7$--'()*')+,-*T,D*E0,'()**)*'+,,'+.''.D/(R.''''1;;%-F+DF/+0++( L%8%aF+0*D'*+'L% %->#3:% -.L%A% 8 $%-7$-'()*')+,.,T*,FE+D'()**)*'+,,++.''.D/R'.''''1;;%-F+DF/+0++( 6: ;<-N7%AB!-*TDD'E0+ N7%AB-=7 -6: ;<-S4$!-F+*T+R,E*' N7%AB-7=-H48? -7=-6: ;< !-DR 1".67894% -6: ;<-" 77=-># %-?5-@ $&7 -^'()**)*'+,-.-++!/0-12_"A3 -0 #3B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Approving Election Judge Compensation Rates Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk CC: Bill Joynes, City Administrator and Bruce DeJong, Finance Director Attachments: Resolution Policy Consideration: Should the Election Judge Compensation rates be increased to meet State minimum wage rates? Background: Election Judge compensation is currently set at $9.50/hour for the Supervisor/Head Election Judge and $8.50/hr for all other Election Judges. The state minimum wage law increased on August 1 to $9.50/hour. See attached. Below is a survey of what neighboring cities pay their election judges. Staff is recommending the Election Judge salaries be increased to $11.00/hr for Supervisor/Head Judge and $9.50 for Election Judges. Supervisor/Head Election Judges have more responsibilities this Election with the use and management of the new equipment (iPad) used in the polling place for checking in registered voters and for processing Election Day registrations. Supervisor/Head City Judge Election Judge Tonka Bay $10.00 $9.50 Mound $10.00 $9.50 Minnetonka Beach $10.00 $9.50 Orono $10.00 $9.50 Excelsior $10.50 $9.50 Shorewood $11.00 $9.50 Proposed for 2016 Spring Park $11.00 $9.50 Proposed for 2016 Wayzata $11.00 $9.50 Financial Considerations: It is estimated this increase will cost approximately $1,000 more for the 2016 Election Judge compensation. Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff is recommending approval of the attached Resolution establishing the Election Judge Compensation Rates of $11.00 for Supervisor/Head Judge and $9.50 for Election Judge. 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 Page 1 effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 16-_____ A RESOLUTION APPROVING ELECTION JUDGE COMPENSATION RATES WHEREAS, the City has a need for citizens to serve as election judges in the primary and general elections; and WHEREAS, the position titles and compensation rates for election judges have been reviewed; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: That the City of Shorewood will establish the following election judge positions and hourly salary rates, beginning with the year 2016 elections, for those individuals who serve as judges for both the primary and general elections: Supervisor/Head Judge $11.00 / hour Election Judge $9.50 / hour th ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 26 day of September, 2016. ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk #3C MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tim Keane, City Attorney DATE: September 21, 2016 RE: City Administrator Employment Agreement Please find enclosed the City Administrator Employment Agreement executed by Greg Lerud. Mr. Lerud’s anticipated start date is October 31, 2016. Should you have any questions please contact me at (612) 334-5015. #3D MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: City Hall and Public Works Lighting Retrofit Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 Prepared by: Bill Joynes, City Administrator CC: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works; Bruce DeJong, Finance Director Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk Policy Consideration: Should the lighting at City Hall and Public Works be upgrade to LED lighting? Background: The 2016 Budget includes $38,000 for lighting retrofit for the City Hall and Public Works facilities. Staff obtained quotes from three vendors to retrofit the lights at both facilities to LED lights. City Hall has experienced problems with the current can lights not operating well, and eventually burning out. Many have had to be replaced with a different style of light (not just replacing the light bulbs) at a cost of about $100/light. Below is a summary of the estimated quotes, including the lights and labor: Vendor City Hall Public Works Total Anisia Lighting Services $24,500 $26,500 $51,000 Norske Electric $20,749 $21,850 $42,599 Prehall Electric $15,720 $18,670 $34,390 Based upon the quotes received, Prehall Electric is the low quote for the award of the contract. Since that time, staff has performed some direct negotiation with Prehall Electric for changes. This is permitted under state statute. Staff requested some additional information on the type of LED lights and it was determined that the LED can lights which would provide the best light option would be a slight increase in cost from the original quote. This increased the total estimated quote to $37,315 from $34,390, an increase of $2,925. The total estimated Xcel Energy rebate on this project is $6,100; making the final overall cost estimate at $31,215 ($37,315 - $6,100 = $31,215). Xcel Energy has estimated the payback at 3.0 years for Public Works and 8.6 years for City Hall. Prehall Electric has provided electrical work for the city in the past and staff can attest to the high-quality of Mr. Prehall’s work. Staff is confident he will do an excellent job on this project. Prehall Electric is a Shorewood company. Financial Considerations: The 2016 Budget has $38,000 allocated for LED lighting retrofit. Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff is recommending approval of the estimated quote of $37,315 from Prehall Electric and will work with the vendor to submit the necessary paperwork for the Xcel Energy Rebate. 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 7A CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD PARK COMMISSION MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 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, Kobs, Rock, and BarrCity Council Liaison Woodruff; Finance Director Bruce DeJong; City Planner Nielsen Absent: None B. Review Agenda Kobs moved to approve the agenda as written. Rock seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of August 23, 2016 Rock moved to approve the minutes of the August 23, 2016 meeting as written. Kobs seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were none. REVIEW UPDATES OF CIP 4. DeJong reviewed the updated CIP created as a result of discussions at the August 23 meeting. He noted $400,000 has been added for Badger Park Phase 1. $10,000 was added for the Freeman Park south parking lot for a total of $60,000. Nielsen stated the estimate for the parking lot is $85,000. DeJong stated money was added to the Cathcart tot lot in 2018. Badger Park Phase 2 will be in 2019 with the current engineer’s estimate for improvements. The Freeman north playground equipment was moved to 2020 at $100,000 and Cathcart hockey rink at $150,000 in 2020. He indicated the net effect doesn’t change a whole lot. There will be deficit in 2019 when the Badger Park Phase 2 improvements are made. DeJong stated the City Council would consider transferring some of the general fund surplus into the CIP in 2019. He also discussed proposed transfers which could begin in 2018 and will be discussed with the City Council in the spring of 2017. He asked the Park Commission for their input. In response to a question from Woodruff regarding the Mattamy fees, DeJong indicated where those fees are indicated in the CIP. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 4 PAGE 2 OF In response to a question from Mangold, DeJong explained how the park amenities could be included in the CIP for better projections. Mangold stated he would like to see us get to a point where there is a suggested replacement date, and nothing gets pushed out to a later date. Kobs agreed with Mangold’s suggestion. He believed a full inventory would be a valuable tool. DeJong stated you can run into some nasty surprises when equipment does and something needs to be done right away because it hasn’t been part of a regular replacement schedule. Mangold stated it’s easy to do that moving forward with new equipment but not so easy when you don’t know when a piece of equipment was installed. He stated it appears that a lot of items are lumped together. He stated we need to find a way to phase replacements. Nielsen discussed the difficulty of replacing playground equipment on a schedule. He stated when equipment is still in good shape, it is foolish to replace it even if it is scheduled for replacement. Vassar asked if we need to have a plan before we check out grant possibilities. Nielsen stated there definitely needs to be a plan, the more detailed, the better. He discussed current funding opportunities. Vassar suggested setting a timeline for plan preparation. Nielsen stated we should look at next year’s budget, determine funding availability, and develop plans before we apply for a grant. Woodruff stated grants are uncertain. He suggested creating a budget, put them on a schedule, and determine where internal funding might come from. He stated funds come and go. Rock suggested obtaining competitive bids for items in the next year’s budget. Woodruff asked if any of the equipment is part of a state contract. Nielsen stated he was sure they were. Woodruff explained the state contract. Mangold stated he believed we need to step back, determine what parks are in need of replacement, and move ahead with replacement. 5. CATHCART TRAIL REVISION Nielsen stated staff is working on a graphic for the trail and have been working on a cost estimate. Once it is completed, the Commission can determine when to go back to Chanhassen. Nielsen discussed the ownership and maintenance of the park. Nielsen suggested another graphic to show Chanhassen might be one showing how many residents from each city use the park. Mangold didn’t think this was a priority right now. Vassar suggested it be moved to 2018 with the Cathcart playground placement. Nielsen stated the trail isn’t on the CIP right now. 6. FREEMANPARK A. South Parking Lot Pavement Mangold noted the City Engineer has provided a quote for $85,000 for the parking lot while we have budgeted $60,000. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 4 PAGE 3 OF A member of the audience stated the parking lot raises a lot of dust and dirt. She stated she has a petition from 62 units in the area who woud like to see the lot paved. Park users are also in support of the parking lot pavement. Mangold asked if there are dust control measures being done now. Nielsen stated there is not. Woodruff discussed the use of an asphalt mix that can be laid on the current gravel which controls the dust. He indicated it is very inexpensive. Woodruff discussed the use of calcium chloride which is a pollution issue. Mangold stated the next step would be to request quotes for treatment and paving. Commissioners discussed any additional costs/permits that might be required. Woodruff discussed problems with drainage in the park. He indicated the City Engineer would state the paving would not have any impact on the drainage. Mangold suggested the trail be patched up as long as the parking lot was being paved. Vassar asked if it would still be done this year. Nielsen stated the CIP has it as a 2017 project. He also indicated the City Engineer didn’t think it could be done yet this year. Vassar asked if a plan could be voted on. Woodruff stated the Council is waiting for a Park Commission recommendation. B. Grading/Lighting for Future Rink Nielsen stated there was discussion about a reduced-size hockey rink in the area of the north parking lot. He stated the parking lot would need to be leveled off, and the cost would be between $7500 and $9500 for an outside contractor. The estimate to move the lighting from Badger to Freeman would be close to $50,000. The Building Official is looking at the cost of a partition wall between the warming house and the concession area. He stated the hope is to have Public Works do the work. Mangold stated we will be without hockey at Badger Park this year. He asked if there is some way to have ice at Freeman with or without lighting. Nielsen believed the grading and wall could be done before this year’s season if it was acceptable to do it without lights. Vassar asked if temporary lighting could be rented. Nielsen stated staff could look into that. Mangold asked if the question is whether we should sit on this for a year. Vassar stated she would like to get it moving for this year. Rock agreed, stating we should try it this year and see if a larger size would be warranted. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 4 PAGE 4 OF Commissioners discussed the grading and lighting timetable. Mangold stated it would be a great idea to have it available by Arctic Fever. Vassar stated she had suggested the sculptures be moved there and possibly lighting up the trees. Mangold stated the cost of the grading would certainly be an amount that would be reasonable. He asked how quickly the electrical could be added. Nielsen stated a different contract would erect the light poles. He stated he could get a bid on the wiring or have it subcontracted. Woodruff suggested staff determine whether Public Works can grade the parking lot and, if not, get a quote for the work. Staff will confirm with Public Works if they can do the work, get a quote as a backup, and review the quote at the next meeting. Staff will also start the process on the light installation. Rock suggested the area be measured to determine where the lighting should be installed. Nielsen noted the lighting that would be installed would be for a much larger rink than this proposed area. Vassar asked if one light would be enough. Nielsen stated we have two. 7. NEW BUSINESS None 8. STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS/UPDATES A. City Council Woodruff updated the Commission on recent City Council actions. He also reported there was direction to negotiate a contract for a new administrator. B. Staff Nielsen stated on September 26, there will be a ribbon cutting for the play field at Badger at 6 p.m. 9. ADJOURN Vassar moved, Kobs seconded, to adjourn the Park Commission Meeting of September 13, 2016 at 8:29 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Clare T. Link Recorder � #sB MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: Rental Housing Code—Proposed Amendment—Short-term Rentals Meeting Date: 26 September Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen Attachments: Planning Director's Memorandum Draft Code Amendment Policy Consideration: Should the City amend Chapter 1004—Rental Housing,to address problems associated with short-term rentals of property within residential zoning districts? Background: See attached Planning Director's memorandum for detailed background. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed code amendment and voted unanimously to recommend adoption. Financial or Budget Considerations: The proposed amendment is intended to prevent the costly monitoring, regulation and enforcement associated with the short-term rental of property in residential zoning districts. Options: Adopt the attached code amendment as recommended by the Planning Commission; modify the amendment; or reject the amendment. Recommendation/Action Requested: Adoption of the code amendment as drafted is recommended. Next Steps and Timelines: The amendment will go into effect upon publication in the official newspaper. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 952-960-7900 Fax: 952-474-0128 www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 16 September 2016 RE: Short-Term Rentals – Findings and Draft Code Amendment FILE NO.: 405 (Rental Hsg – Short-Term) BACKGROUND For the past few months we have been working to develop amendments to Shorewood’s City Code that would deal more clearly and more efficiently with the issue of short-term rental of homes in Shorewood. As you are aware the short-term rental industry has greatly expanded over the past few years and we have had cases where it would have been helpful to have regulations specifically focused on the issue. Currently, Shorewood’s Rental Housing Code does not specify any time limits during which homes in residential areas can be rented. Increasingly, complaints have arisen regarding traffic, over-crowding, parking, and noise. These issues are not exclusive to Shorewood as you will find as you go through the attached background material: Exhibit A This is the current Rental Housing Code chapter with proposed deletions shown in strikeouts and additions shown in red. Exhibit B City Regulation of Short-Term Rentals by Owners, a brief report on the issue from the League of Minnesota Cities. Exhibit C Assorted emails from residents who have experienced problems with short-term rental properties in Shorewood. Exhibit D Vacation Home Rental Study by Crow Wing County Land Services. Exhibit E Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations by Explore Minnesota Tourism Memorandum Re: Short-Term Rentals 16 September 2016 This material is by no means exhaustive. There are volumes of information on the subject available on the internet. What we have attempted to do is glean a set of findings that will support the adoption of the proposed amendments in Exhibit A. PROPOSED FINDINGS The potential exists for short-term rentals to become a significant business operation in Minnesota. Many short-term rental properties may fall under the jurisdiction of state law (those that qualify as hotels, motels, or lodging establishments). The level of state licensing compliance may inevitably be low due to: - The amount of manpower required for monitoring and enforcement. - The fact that new short-term rentals constantly enter the market. - Those offering accommodations not in compliance may be notified and then take steps to avoid further detection from licensing authorities. - These same issues apply to cities trying to regulate short-term rentals Rental of private homes for temporary occupancy is contrary to the essential character and stability of residential neighborhoods because short-term tenants have little interest in the welfare of the local community, do not engage in activities that strengthen residential neighborhoods, and do not integrate into residential neighborhoods. Rental of homes for temporary occupancy disturbs residential neighborhoods by creating excessive noise, accumulation of refuse, trespassing, disorderly conduct, vandalism, high occupant turnover, excessive traffic, and excessive numbers of parked motor vehicles. Regulating rental of private homes for temporary occupancy is necessary to protect the essential character of residential neighborhoods and the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Rental of residential homes for temporary occupancy is often undertaken without adequate on-site management, compliance with state and local codes for commercial lodging establishments, and other safeguards for those renting the home. Operating a commercial business venture in close proximity to neighboring residences can lead to conflict and undermines the fundamental principles of zoning. Short-term rentals render a significant number of housing units unavailable for long-term residents and raise the cost of housing. Short-term rentals have the potential to diminish property values. Shorewood’s Rental Housing Code was originally adopted, in part, to provide safe and healthy places for people to live, not places for people to stay. The amendments included in Exhibit A are intended to reflect that original purpose. Cc: Bill Joynes Tim Keane Patti Helgesen Joe Pazandak -2- 7/,, ?J16 City Regulation of Short -Term Vacation Rentals by Owners Organizations like Airbnb (Link to: https:llwww.airbnb.coaaal? of =43720035 &c A_ TC% 3Dta2z19t9w9% 26G_ MT% 3De% 26G_ CR% 3D100808697856 %26G_N%3Ds %26G_K%3Dairbnb. 26G_ P% 3D% 26G_ D% 3Dc& gclid= CKCz- YXbaraMivCFQa7aSaQod4X8Dlty& dclid= CMttBhohbanMivCFYx4 AQodaaaUOE9w) and VRBO.com (Link to: https: / /1a tvia� vrbo. tonal) have made things interesting for cities and residents. These are services individuals may use to arrange short -term rental of someone's house, apartment, room, or bed for a night or more. Sometimes they cause issues for cities. Increasingly, cities are seeking information on whether and how to regulate these "short -term rental" situations. League research attorneys are available to answer your questions. What can cities regulate? Under state law, the Department of Health has jurisdiction to license and inspect hotels, motels, and lodging establishments unless a city or county has been delegated that responsibility. Hotels and motels are defined as buildings, structures, enclosures, or any part thereof used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be places where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public for a stay of less than a week. This alone captures a lot of short -term situations advertised online. Lodging establishments are defined as buildings, structures, enclosures, or any part thereof used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out as places where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public as regular roomers for stays of a week or more and having five or more beds to let to the public. (Lodging establishments also include accommodations for those awaiting medical treatment, their family, and caregivers.) In short, a lot of typical AirBNB or VRBO.com situations are subject to state regulation, but that does not preclude additional regulation by the city. The state and its delegates have invested a lot of effort into locating and requiring licensing compliance by applicable properties throughout the state offering accommodations through AirBNB, VRBO.com, or other means. However, the level of state /delegate licensing compliance of short -term rentals might inevitably remain low due to; The amount of state /delegate manpower required. The fact that new short -term rentals constantly enter the market. Those offering accommodations not in compliance may be notified and then take steps to avoid further detection from licensing authorities. For these reasons, the state fully supports cities adopting some regulation of situations potentially subject to state licensing to the extent it better enables state law licensing compliance. The short -term rental of any space having fewer than five beds and for periods of a week or more is unregulated by state law. These are situations only a city may regulate —at least until a legislative change gives regulatory authority to the state and its delegates or makes it exempt from any regulation, including city ordinance. There are plenty of situations the city can regulate. How can cities regulate these situations? The two basic approaches cities currently use to regulate short -term rentals are licensing /permitting or prohibition. How cities regulate short -term rentals varies in what constitutes "rental," what accommodations are subject to regulation, the location of the property, and other respects. For information on cities and counties that have taken steps to regulate these situations, contact the League Research and Information Department at (651) 281 -1200, (800) 925 -1122, or research @lmc.6rg (Link to: mailto: aeseawh @bnc. oag) . Should cities regulate short -term rentals? This is a decision for each city to make. If a city chooses to ban short -term rentals, it will have to figure out how to enforce a ban on what can be difficult to detect and yet is an increasingly popular phenomenon. If a city licenses or otherwise permits these situations, it will have to find a way to do so that doesn't discourage participation in the regulation. There are certainly reasons to, at the very least, have a record of the short -term rentals being made available within the city and to have a person to contact in the event there are complaints by neighbors. Again, the state or its delegated http:// Imc .org/page /1 /ShortTermRentalJsp Exhibit B T i. ' ^016 City Regulation of Short -Term Vacation Rentals by Owners licensing authority is eager to work with cities to maintain state licensing compliance. If you have questions about short -term rentals, contact the League Research and Information Department at (651) 281 -1200, (800) 925 -1122, or research @lmc.org (Link to: »zailto: research@ltnc.org) . Read the current issue of the Cities Bulletin (Unk to: hap:11wiviv bne.org/perge /1/ cities- bulletiiz- izewsletterjsp) Your LMC Resource Contact Edward Cadman Staff Attorney /Special Counsel (651) 281 -1229 or (800) 925 -1122 ecadman @lmc.org (Link to: mailtoxcacbmn @kc.oig) Meet our city vendors! Building a Behar NO lot All ul Us (Link to: http: / /lvtivt4t1711c.07glads /102407) hftp:/Amc.org/page/l/ShortTermRental.jsp 2/2 8/812016 Volling 042516.htm From: Volling, Jon [ Jonathan .Volling @PERKINELMER.COM] Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 3:40 PM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 Wild Rose Ln Brad, We spoke earlier on the phone regarding 26040 Wild Rose Ln. 1 found the following link on VRBO showing the home is being listed as a vacation rental property for $768 per night targeting large groups. Please see the link below httos:/ Iurldefense.uroofj)oint.comlvZlu r1 ?u= httos- 3A www.vrbo.com 723309&d=CkvICAQ&c=3mGIBQKb1eS1YDHb7az3kFkT2UAGBJ12o2lcEC1ihXk&.r=azkDIMBHPAUC2Putcultv24xnQ4DGMKaK5for29EPKI&m=wQeE1HNXGdYQfeiviD2iiRNT2Llm7hBWGoiSsW- hdn2w& s= nF1Ta 0Yv2iQ1- 9Jik2umsFocaAcHvQHiucuN zG2wM &e= Jon Volling I Regional Sales Managerl Diagnostics Mobile: 952.210 -7420 930 Winter Street, Waltham MA 02451 USA �a'!�ax,*xrlkii7C'hraJr.w.r „ „ Please consWerthe emimnment before printing INs emaW. This e�+all message and anyalatihments are cenfdenFal and proprle +ary to PerldnElmu, Inc Vf m are naMe Intended redplentof gdsmessage, please Inim #is senderby replying b fle email oreending a menage to fne sender and desYayhe message and anyaVadurents. Thankyau. Exhibit C file: / / /C:/ Users/ bnielsenlDesktopllrey% 20Resident %20emails/Volling %20042516.htm - 1/1 Johnson 051316.htm 8/8/2016 From: Bruce Johnson [bcjohnson4649 @yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 8:45 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 wild rose lane Brad Thank you for calling me on the residence at 26040 Wild Rose Lane. My experience at this residence has been primarily on the weekend, however, yesterday 4 vehicles which included 2 large passenger vans were at the house overnight. will watch for a picture opportunity to show the number of vehicles. There are 2 boats one a large pontoon that are parked in the front of this property as well. The property owners live in Texas and I'm sure they are not aware that boats are being stored there as well. We have had an issue with garbage being dragged into our yard. I'm guessing its animals in their trash. They do not appear to have a trash service. Thanks again for your help Bruce A. Johnson 26060 Wild Rose Lane 952 - 923 -1622 q` '{ 1l1 file:l / /C:IU serslbnielsenlDesktopllrey% 20Resident %20emailslJohnson %20051316.htm 8/8/2016 Volling 052216.htm From: Volling, Jon [Jonathan.Volling @PERKIN ELMER.COM] Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 11:37 PM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 Wild Rose Ln. Attachments: 20160522_090046_resized.jpg Brad, I wanted to make you aware that the home next to ours appeared o be rented out again this past weekend. Attached is a photo from this morning, May 22nd at 9:00 am. I saw the same cars in the driveway the evening before, so i know they are spending the night. Regards, Jon Volling Home owner at 25930 Wild Rose Ln. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone file:/ / /C: /Userslbnielsen/ Desktop / trey %2OResident %20emai]sNol li ng %20052216.htm 1/1 8/8/2016 Volling 060616.htm From: Volling, Jon [ Jonathan .Volling @PERKIN ELM ER.COM] Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 7:26 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 Wild Rose LN Attachments: photo 1.JPG; photo 2.JPG Brad, I wanted to make you aware that the home next door to us, 26040 Wild Rose Ln, was rented out to a large party (15 cars and 20 +people) again this past weekend (June 3rd -5th). Attached are some photos we took to show the activity. I ended tip calling the police on Saturday afternoon because of the noise and outdoor drinking games occurring next door. They have removed the boats from property which would indicate they received the letter you sent earlier, but it certainly has not deterred them form renting the property out illegally. What can we do next? Can you increase the amount of the fines? I spoke with several neighbors over the weekend and we all share a growing frustration for this type of behavior in our neighborhood. We want to work with the city and police dept to come up with a plan that will put an end to this. Please let me know what the next stores are and how we can work together. Regards, Jon Volling 952 -210 -7420 Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Jessica Volling <jessica.vollina(t-v, Date: June 6, 2016 at 7:10:27 AM CDT To: jon volling < jonathan .vollina(tvperkinelmer.com> Sent from my iPhone file: / / /C:/ Users /bnielsen/ Desktop/ Irey% 2OResident°/ o20emaiIsNolIinq °/o20060616.htm 1/1 8/8/2016 Volling 061316.htm From: Volling, Jon [ Jonathan .Volling @PERKINELMER.COM] Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 8:11 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 wild rose LN rental Brad, Just informing you that 26040 Wild Rose LN was rented out two separate times this weekend. There was a party that rented on Friday and sat and then another party that came on Sunday and is still there as of this morning on Monday. I am attaching pictures of the two separate instances. The first is from 6/11 and the 1/2 file: / / /C: /Users /bnielsen/ Desktop /Irey %20Resident %20emai] sNolling` /`20061316.htm 8/8/201 Vollina 061316.htm Please let me know when you might have some time this week to connect regarding this matter. Regards, Jon Volling I Regional Sales Manager) ionathan v-olline�,l2erkinelmer.co n Mobile: 952-210-7420 930 Winter Street Waltham, MA 02451 `S�1 www nerkinelmer.com 212 fita• / / /(:: /Llserslbnielsen /Desktop/ trey ° /a2OResident ° /o20emaiIsNolli ng %20061316.htm 8/8/2016 Volling 061316 (2).htm From: Volling, Jon [Jonathan.Volling @PERKIN ELMER.COM] Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 9:18 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: Re: 26040 wild rose LN rental Brad, Thanks for the update. I am more than willing to testify at the hearing as will other neighbors who are being negatively affected by this outrageous use of the property. I travel a considerable amount for work and would appreciate as much advance notice as possible in order to make scheduling arrangements to be available on the date of the hearing. I hope the city is continuing to fine the Ireys for each violation as their disregard for the city and the neighbors affected by their actions is completely disrespectful. Also, if possible can a written notice of the hearing be provided prior to the meeting as I would like to reach out to as many of the neighbors as possible in efforts to have a strong showing. If this is possible please send me a copy and I will be more than happy to distribute and go door to door asking for the neighborhood support to stop this nuisance behavior of the Ireys. Regards, Jon Volling I Regional Sales Manager) Jonathan yollina@perkinelmer.com Mobile: 952 - 210 -7420 930 Winter Street. Waltham MA 02451 USA www.perkinelmer.com On Jun 13, 2016, at 9:03 AM, Brad Nielsen <B`ielsenei.sloretirod.mn•us> wrote: Hi Jon, Just to let you know that the Ireys have appealed the notice we have sent, claiming that they are only renting to families and not advertising it for business use. l think the activity and their ads in VRBO and AirBnb suggest otherwise. We will be setting up a hearing in the next few weeks to consider their appeal. Everything about that is public information and the hearing itself is open to the public. In fact, when I spoke with the City Attorney, he indicated that nearby residents can testify at the hearing, if they are willing to do so, which could be very useful to us. I will keep you posted. Thanks for the photos. Everything helps. Planning Director 952- 960 -7912 ....... _ ................... ........_.. From: Volling, Jon [mailto•Jonathan Voliin @, ERKINELMER.COM1 Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 8:11 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 wild rose LN rental Brad, Just informing you that 26040 Wild Rose LN was rented out two separate times this weekend. There was a parry that rented on Friday and sat and then another party that came on Sunday and is still there as of this morning on Monday. I am attaching pictures of the two separate instances. The first is from 6/11 and the second from 6/12. <image001.jpg> <imagc002.jpg> file: l / /C: /UserslbnielsenlDesktop/ trey %20Resident %20emai IsNolli ng %20061316 %20(2).htm 1/2 8/8/2016 Vol ling 061316 (2).htm Please let me know when you might have some time this week to connect regarding this matter. Regards, Jon Volling I Regional Sales Manager ionathan.volline(a—perkineln er.coin Mobile: 52_210_742 93€1 Winter Street. Walthani MA 02451 USA www.perkinelmer.com file: / / /C:IUsers/bnielsen/ Desktop / Trey %20Resident %20emailsNolling° /x20061316 %20(2).htm i�—' —,q 2/2 8/8/2016 Johnson 061416.htm From: Bruce Johnson [bcjohnson4649 @yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2016 1:55 PM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 Wild Rose Lane Brad the web site has been revised for 26040 Wild Rose Lane on the web site "airbnb" SM # 46 This the code that the people that rent out the house use for it. Live Large 7Bedroom, 5 baths, 16 beds $2534.00 per night 2 night min. $290 cleaning fee $321 Service fee $999 security deposit $5.00 per person per night over 7 people Family reunion, great space for large group meetings, Dining for 24 with addition space No limit on parking on the street near building The same group is there that came on Sunday afternoon. 9 cars This the first time that the house has been occupied through the week. The group that was here last Thursday, left Sunday morning and the current group came Sunday afternoon. Please keep advised on when the appeal hearing is. Thank you Bruce A. Johnson file:///C: /Users/bnielsen/ Desktop /Irey %20Resident %20emails /Johnson %20061416.htm Cm °'/ 1/1 8/8/2016 Volling 062216.htm From: Volling, Jon [ Jonathan .Volling @PERT <INELMER.COMj Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 1:45 PM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: Renting 26040 Wild Rose LN for company functions Brad if you zoom in on the attached picture you will see that several of the cars have the same logo on them representing a company called "It Works ". They also had a sign on the front of the house which is a little hard to see. In addition the individuals renting the home certainly had clothing with the company logo and carried bags /products into the home representing the It works logo. This photo was taken on June 12th. Please let me know if you have any questions Regards, Jon Volling I Regional Sales Manager) _onathan vollinQ ct,�perkinelrner.com Mobile: 952- 210 -7420 930 Winter Street. Waltham MA 024511. SA www.12ci-kincliner.com fil a•ll/C:./ users / bnielsen /Desktoplirey %20Resident %20em ai IsNol li ng %a20062216.htm —' '^ ' \ / ` ` `\ � � ` 'Y\ (| � The Great Commission'. To go forth and make disciples of all nations. There are millions of people around the Xglobe and in our country waiting and needing to hear the Gospe|. Currently there are over 3OO,0)U Christian churches in America led -' people called to share re the Gospel. What if those messages could echo around the globe 8o umremched What if that echo had the power to literally feemfanmes, What v Jtcould provide for both ' mmd spiritual needs? � -'�m��m What fp the Ror�through not only h hearing but dohngo��mou6°fi �M um���o_noe� g hearts? ������V � . it can and � ` - The Provision Project takes the audio from your weekly sermon, teaching or workshop and recruits mesaage�asomeanstoe�rna\ivinQ. vvorkorxfronnunraached people groups totranscribe those Changing Lives, ~~r-----b^ Keystroke People who may never have heard God's Word are now n ot onk' able to hear but listen, understand and document the Word and through their editors' /D�uip|eo\ feedback, uonfi/rnunderstanding oftheir document. God's VVnrd,through His BodKprovides ao income to put food on the table and shoes on small feet. �~ ~// The Provision Project provides a resource not only for the unreached but for all it touches, including all of us. Quantum Learning states that we learn: ® 10% of what we read 20% of what we hear ® 30% of what we see ® 50% of what we see and hear ® 70% of what we say ® 90% of what we say and do, Isaiah 55 :11 says: It is the same with My Word./ send it out and it always produces fruit. It will accomplish all 1 want it to and it will prosper everywhere I send it. Our prayer and our calling is that we might fulfill Ephesians 4:12 -13 in "the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up on the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God". Please join us in this global outreach to encircle the globe with the Word of Christ. Will you join us fulfilling the mission given by our Lord and Savior, to make disciples of all nations? If so please contact Rebecca at 512- 966 -3710 or provision @truebluetranscriptiori.com and find out how to get started right away! You may not remember our family. We lived for 12 years at 26040 Wild Rose which some of you may know as the old Taylor house where Softsoap was invented and eventually led to the lovely octagonal master bedroom addition where our three youngest children were born . In 2013, we made the big leap to a warmer climate and moved our family of 9 to Texas. While we love our new home, Wild Rose will forever be a part of a cherished family history. I remember many crockpot meals delivered to neighbors, walking Mrs. June's dog, babysitting for the Myers family and pushing many an Irey stroller around the huge Wild Rose "block ". Our oldest daughter is now married and expecting our second grandbaby, we have become full time missionaries and our Wild Rose time now seems like the "good old days ". Since we moved to Texas, God has done a major work in our family in addition to becoming grandparents! We have started a ministry that send the Gospel to the 52 countries around the world where the Bible is restricted or illegal and have reached people in Iran, Nepal and Serbia. The Lord has also put a burden on our hearts to be missionaries in our own backyard fulfilling the commandments in Isaiah 58 to care for the widow, orphan and the prisoner. That is where our story returns to Wild Rose Lane. Despite efforts to sell our home, we were unsuccessful. However,. we met a lovely couple, Scott & ]enna, Minnesota natives who rented our home and utilize it to serve our community as a short term rental serving local families experiencing bereavement, family reunions or even parts of sports teams (Go Skippers! n0) They in turn send part of the proceeds from that effort and community service to support our mission work. Our lovely community in Shorewood is supporting us still and it warms our hearts. So far utilizing this method, we have been able to help with a homeless mission providing food, shelter and even tiny houses to families transitioning out of chronic homelessness, served in Kairos prison ministry at the prison in Lockhart, Texas, as well as serving widows with upkeep and housework they are no longer able to do. Isaiah 58 in real life! "/ Scott and Jenna are fantastic and meet every single person that stays in our home, vetting them to make sure they will fit into the community no matter how short their stay. They are utterly clear about the unacceptability of excessive noise and disturbance and that everything must be shut completely down by 10 pm as required by city code. If you ever have ANY concerns at all, I would love to chat with you by phone, email, or letter. I be happy to share any and all information and Scott and Jenna are local and will jump on any concerns you might have immediately. You can reach them at 612-701-0900 or 6-112-759-1022 if no answer. Community is so important to our family and we know it is to you too! We are so excited to be able to provide a service to the place we called home for so long just like Otis two doors down, or the security company a block up, the construction company at the end of the street and the greenhouse too! I know all of those folks blessed us at one time or another in our time in Shorewood. I am enclosing a bit more information about our ministry as well as a picture of our family in case you don't remember us or maybe you have moved in since our family moved south. May you be even more abundantly blessed than we were during your time in this wonderful neighborhood! H= W ", -T-Vi- WWR-7 512-966-3710 Rebecca & Quentin Irey June 22, 2016 I am responding to the letter left in our mail box on June 21, 2016. I think it is great that you have chosen a Christian calling and wish you success with your venture. We are amazed and confused by your interpretation of how your home is being used. We live next door and the parties that have been going on for months have been a total intrusion on our life. We can no longer feel comfortable on our deck with the activity on your decks and back yard. The Police have been called and visited your home several times. We are not the only ones affected by your home rental. Several neighbors have asked what is going on. They are concerned about the excessive drinking. On one occasion there were 30 cars in the yard and parked on both sides of the street making passing cars stop to get by. The parking stretched past our house. We did not know at the time that your home was posted on at least 2 vacation sites for short term rental. We thought it was a realtor open house. We knew that on occasion you had large groups at your house so we your let it go. We did not realize it would continue overnight and continue for 3 days. That was just the start of this nightmare. We were informed by 2 women who came to our house by mistake and asked if this was the house that was advertized on "airbnb ". We went to the site and found your home listed for rent 2 day minimum $654.00 per night. It suggested the use for Business /wedding, events, seminars, conference center and retreats. We have been informed by the City of Shorewood that you have been cited for violating zoning and you should ceace renting. This notice is dated May 20, 2016. We have not seen any change and the parties continue. The neighbors have been reluctant to call the Police as they were concerned about retaliation. In as much as there does not appear to be anyone in charge or responsible for what goes on, we have no one to contact. We have witnessed loud arguments on your decks into the early morning. Pool side parties that have gone on until 2:30 am. Day time drinking parties that covered all your property. Foul language and bosisterous groups of both groups of men and groups of women. We have Sunday morning cleaning crews with leaf blowers cleaning you're out door carpet. We saw that the web site changed again with a little different terminology and hugh increase in rent to $2534.00 per night 2 night minimum. To suggest this a place for bereavement, sporting events is hard to believe at that price. I'm afraid you are disillusioned as to how your home is being used. We were aware you were trying to sell your house. We never saw an open house and when we tried to contact the person on your sign about a tree branch, we were unsuccessful. On another occasion an alarm went off in your house and the Police contacted me to see if we knew how to get inside. You did have a renter for several months who told us they were interested in buying your house, but that it needed extensive repair. They were trying to negotiate the price because of the repairs needed. They left in Feb of 2015. During the time they were renting the large refrigerator in the kitchen was making a terrible sound for days. The renters told use the motor was shot and they were turn it off. Last fall your furnace starting making noise that made uncomfortable to be outside. This went on for weeks before that repair was made. You talked about neighbors and this great neighborhood. Mrs. June sold a couple years ago and a young coupled moved in. They have 2 small children and have had to deal with this ongoing party as we have. They have done a greatjob fixing up the June house and are very concerned what your rental house is doing to property values. The boat storage has been taken care of after the City of Shorewood had you move it. We had that pontoon overlooking our front yard since last fall. The area where the boats were stored has never been cleaned up. The weeds are waist deep there are tree branches down and the wires are still hanging from the tree that came down when you lived there. This area is your front yard which faces the road. If you truly are the Christian people you say you are, you will put a stop to this short term rental and let us have our neighborhood back. Bruce & Carolyn Johnson 26060 Wild Rose Lane, Shorewood, MN. 55331 M 8/8/2016 Johnson 071116.htm From: Bruce Johnson [bcjohnson4649 @yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 10:58 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: Re: 26040 wild rose lane We are disappointed to hear of the delay. There are 5 SUV's in the driveway that have been there since saturday. It is a larger group that have several children. Its like living next to a water park. I have not received a reply to my letter to the Ireys. We have seen people on the deck at Ireys photographing our back yard. Today a lady stopped her car in front of our house and took a photo. I don't know if any of this is related. It appears we will have to put up with this the rest of the summer. We were planning on adding a screen porch to our deck, but have put that on hold until we see what happens next door. Please keep us advised. Bruce Johnson From: Brad Nielsen <BNielsenL@ci.shorewood.mn us> To: Bruce Johnson <bcjohnson4649 cox yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 10:34 AM Subject. RE: 26040 wild rose lane Hi Bruce, The Ireys have hired an attorney, a result of which is that we need to bring in the City Attorney to represent the City side of the case. The attorneys are talking about an additional delay of perhaps a week. I will let you know as soon as I know more. Brad Nielsen Planning Director 952 - 960 -7912 From: Bruce Johnson [mai Ito: bcjohnson4649@yahoo coml Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 8:21 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 wild rose lane Good Morning Brad Its pretty quiet next door. Looks like the 4th of July renters are gone. Their pool motor is making a loud noise. I suspect it will quit one of these days. I have the date for the hearing as Wednesday July 13, however, I don't have a time. I haven't shared any info with neighbors as I was waiting for a time for the hearing. We have not been able to find the web site for rental. It does not appear where it was previously listed. Please advise. Bruce Johnson file: / / /C:/ Users /bnielsen/ Desktop /Irey %2OResident %20emails /Johnson ° /o20071116.htm t 1/1 8/8/2016 Johnson 071516.htm From: Bruce Johnson [bcjohnson4649 @yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 11:57 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 20640 wild rose lane Hi Brad Friday noon and the same 5 SUV's are here . All week it appears to be 5 families. Just wanted to give you an update. Thanks Bruce Johnson file: / / /C: /Users/bnlelsen/ Desktop /Trey %2OResident %20emails /Johnson %20071516.htm SAL, 1/1 8/8/2016 Johnson 071816.htm From: Bruce Johnson [bcjohnson4649 @yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:54 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 wild rose lane Good morning Brad. There has been a turn over of renters again yesterday. The cleaners showed up Sat. and stayed the night preparing for the new group 6 vehicles several children. They have not slowed down. They are running the house like a hotel. Do you have a date for the hearing yet? This is taking far longer than I ever imagined. Bruce Johnson 26060 wild rose lane. file: /! /C: /Userslbnielsen/ Desktop /Trey %20Resident %o20emaits /Johnson %20071816.htm �fr r/ 1/1 18 July 2016 Shorewood On June 18, 2016 at 6:30 PM my husband, my sister -in -law, my husband's step- mother and I were returning from a family event and drove by the property at 26040 Wild Rose Lane. We all commented on the abundance of cars parked not only on the road but in the driveway. And as there had already concerns expressed at city hall about the appropriate rental use of this house and the accompanying weekend party noise, I leashed up my dog and went up for a look. Attached are the pictures that I took when I wandered up to the house. There were a total of 17 cars parked there; they were parked 2 rows deep in front of the garages, all along the inside curve of the driveway and on the street. As far as I could tell they all had Kansas license plates. The pictures were taken at 7 PM. I walked up to the house and chatted with a woman sitting on the porch about who rented the house and left but was over taken by 2 gentlemen when I reached the road. I mentioned that the party was already very loud and that the house was already known to be a problem because it did not have a short term rental permit to be used in this manner (I did say that this was not his personal problem but rather an issue with the actual owners of the house), and in fact this was otherwise a very quiet neighborhood in a very quiet city. The regular, almost weekly parties that were being held here were on the police radar and while I would not be the one to call them this time, he should be aware that police would probably be by. The gentleman said they were in town for a dance event and "had some extra burgers" so they invited a few friends over. I said, there are 17 cars here. And he said, well only 5 families are staying here. He also said that the noise would abate "at the appropriate time." And he said that he would spea tto the neig -bo s f they actually came over. To which I replied, well, I am here now. I live of the property. From where we live (off th of this property) we could easily hear a considerable party under way, music, screaming and splashing. We are situated across the wetland immediately behind the house and on lower ground so the weekly party noise that emanates from this property is broadcast out the back like a band shell for all to hear. Now we check it prior to every weekend. By Friday there are 3 -5 vehicles parked in front of the garages. Many Friday or Saturday nights you can hear a loud party -loud music, yelling, splashing. Again, it is broadcast like from a band shell out the back. There was a big party for instance last weekend, with some kind of pool "competition" (you could tell by the nature of the yelling after each splash) followed by fireworks when the sun went down. (There are often fireworks at these gatherings.) There were 8 cars parked that I could count on the fly the morning of the 16th when I drove by on my way to do errands. The home is being treated as if it was a part of a resort property with noise levels and "guest" behaviors that are inappropriate for a residential neighborhood. 6e 0 E� �sx s r ``���"A,"�� � ✓fix r'�� � i� �rI'�r,r���� rar" TV, 8 n At, Agg �^r S L a t f �'��"� a �Z'31 ✓o s ins 'T- E, < ti v.0 �t Al r NN a � . _y k way it Y ii�s t p y 43° ,d3 ! �� f !. l � ?i Otto 3 'tea 1 u AW no ` 1 tx c i$ "��.&.p b. Z a _ x � 11 L � � dr soy t �N 5 � v u •L v I "50 loco � 4 w �µ 0 E� �sx s r ``���"A,"�� � ✓fix r'�� � i� �rI'�r,r���� rar" TV, 8 n At, Agg �^r S L a t f �'��"� a �Z'31 ✓o s ins 'T- E, < ti v.0 �t Al r NN a � . _y k way it Y ii�s t p y 43° ,d3 ! �� f !. l � ?i Otto 3 'tea 1 u AW no ` 1 tx c i$ "��.&.p b. Z a _ x � 11 L � � dr 8/8/2016 Johnson 072116.htm From: Bruce Johnson [bcjohnson4649 @yahoo.comj Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 3:00 PM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 wild rose lane Thursday turn over of renters. New group with small children saw 8 cars this morning. Some how they continue to find renters for that property. I don't know where it is being advertised. file:l / /C:IU serslbnielsen/ Desktop /lrey %20Resident %20emails /Johnson %20072116.htm 1/1 8/8/2016 Johnson 072516.htm From: Bruce Johnson [bcjohnson4649 @yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 3:42 PM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 Wild Rose Lane Monday July 25 We had a group with 5 SUV's several children over the week end. They were in the pool until 10:00 then quieted down. They continue to move groups in and out. It continues to be like a water park... file: / / /C:lUsers/bnielsen/ Desktop /trey %20Resident %a20emails /Johnson %20072516.htm 1/1 8/8/2016 Johnson 072916.htm From: Bruce Johnson [bcjohnson4649 @yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 9:22 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 wild rose lane turnover again Weds. New group of 5 vehicles with several children. very loud group during the day like being next to a water park. Once again they seem to be able to find renters to replace the group over and over. file: / / /C:/ Users /bnielsen/ Desktop ilrey %20Resident %20emails /Johnson %20072916.htm 1/1 8/8/2016 Johnson 080316.htm From: Bruce Johnson [bcjohnson4649 @yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 9 :27 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: 26040 wild rose lane We saw a turnover Saturday morning July 30th. It was the first Saturday night with no renters all summer. It was very enjoyable. New renters came on Sunday 5 vehicles. Somehow they continue to keep the house rented. I did send a short letter to the Ireys telling them that it wasn't us who complained to there renters. I recieved another letter from Mrs. Irey basically saying that that is there home whether they live there or not and she has the right to do as she pleases with the house. We are still looking for the August 10th hearing. Do you have a time? We would like to inform our neighbors so we get a showing...... fi I e: / / /C:/ Users /bni elsen /Desktop /Irey %2OResi dent %20em ai I s /Johnson %20080316.htm 1/1 \� [�. Al�\,* ffl", Wl\ nip M� I Brad Nielsen From: Volling, Jon [ Jonathan :Volling @PERKINELMER.COM] Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 9:21 PM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: Letter from Jon Volling to be used at the hearing regarding the Irey residence Brad, I am writing this letter to provide my personal experience regarding the continued use of the Irey's home located at 26040 Wild Rose Ln as a short term rental property over the past several months because I cannot attend the hearing in person due to out of town business travel. Please use my comments below in lieu of providing comments in person. My wife and I with our two children, ages 9 and 6, live next door (25930 Wild Rose Ln) to the Irey's property. We have owned our home on Wild Rose Ln since August, 2013 and have never personally met the Irey family. As a resident of our neighborhood and the City of Shorewood I am requesting that the city decides to not permit the use of residential properties as short term rental opportunities. Part of the attraction of living in our neighborhood and the city of Shorewood is the sense of community. We enjoy knowing who our neighbors are as we look out for each other. The short term rental from advertising on multiple "For Rent By Owner" websites such as VRBO and AirBnB has disrupted our sense of community as we never know who is staying or coming and going from the Irey residence. The Irey's stated in an earlier appeal letter to the city of Shorewood that "Our desire is to provide a needed resource to the community with little to no negative impact on our neighbors ". I can tell you that living directly next door to the rental property we have been negatively impacted in the following ways: 1. We have called the South Lake Police to file noise complaints because of excessively loud party noise sometimes well after midnight because of unruly renters partying in the backyard of the Irey's home. We also filed a complaint with the South Lake Police on a Saturday afternoon because a large party of renters at the Irey's we participating in group drinking games in their front yard. On this occasion our young children were eating lunch and as they looked out the window of our dining room they were exposed to college age individuals falling down drunk and screaming obscenities. I certainly hope this is not an example of the "needed resource to the community" that that Irey's state they are providing. Our driveway entrance is one before the Irey's driveway if traveling west on Wild Rose Ln. On a regular basis (more than once per week) we have renters mistaking our driveway for the Irey's driveway. We have a large circular driveway in our front yard in which our children ride their bikes and our dog walks on. When renters mistake our driveway for the Irey's they regularly drive all the way around the circle and several times I have had to call my dog out of the way of mistaken drivers and more importantly have to rush to my children and help them get off their bikes and into a safe place away from the passing cars. Because the Irey's advertise the property as being accommodating to large groups /parties we routinely look out our windows to find 20+ cars parked in the driveway and in the front yard of the Irey's home. We have also experienced a food truck parked in the driveway as part of a large party that used transport buses to bus in individuals to a party occurring at the Irey residence. These types of large parties /groups are renting the Irey home on a regular basis, sometimes as many as three different groups in a single week. Having to look at the excess of cars and people and listen to the noise associated with these types of groups is a nuisance to all neighbors and has no place in a residential neighborhood, especially in a city as peaceful as Shorewood. In closing, the short term rental of the Irey's home over the past several months has proven to be a nuisance to our neighborhood and an invasion of our privacy. The Irey's are not providing a "needed resource to the Community" and in my opinion the only resource provided is personal financial gain the Irey's receive from the proceeds of the short term rental of their home. Please consider the negative impact on our family and our neighborhood as described above when deciding over this matter. Sincerely, Jon Volling Jon Volling I Regional Sales Manager) Diagnostics ionathan.volling a()perkinelmer.com Mobile; 952 - 210 -7420 930 Winter Street, Waltham MA 02451 USA www.perkinelmer.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. This e -mail message and any attachments are confidential and proprietary to PerkinElmer, Inc. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please inform the sender by replying to this email or sending a message to the sender and destroy the message and any attachments. Thank you. Brad Nielsen From: Scott Brown [scott @brownmarketinginc.com] Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 6:25 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: vacation rental in shorewood I'm writing in regard to the property at 4595 Enchanted Pt. The owner does not live on the property. However, they now have hired a vacation rental agency, and are actively renting the property for short stents -- a few days to a week. It is a major problem. Sleeping dozens on the property, late night noise, drinking in the streets, parking on others properties among other. We and other neighbors have plenty of photographs. I spoke with the owner and rental agent yesterday. They said they were sorry and that they'll work to control their renters, but that they have moved in yet another group as of last night. I explained to him our objections to his business. I need your help regarding city code covering short -term vacation rentals. Are you available by phone this morning? Please give me a call at 612- 990 -3886. Thank you for your help. Scott Brown BROWN MARKETING, INC 4560 Enchanted Pt. Shorewood, MN 55364 612- 990 -3886 www.browDmarketinginc.com Brad Nielsen From: Scott Brown [scott @brownmarketinginc.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 10:06 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: house rental Attachments: 4595.jpeg M-1141 Thank you for looking into the problem we're having with the vacation rental at 4595 Enchanted Pt. Per our discussion: • This is obviously a short -term, vacation rental business effort. Our understanding is that the code protects property owners from having a hotel pop up next door. Here is a link to one of the websites being used to advertise the property: http: / /www.homeaway.com /vacation - rental /p3713284 • Frequently, the number of guests is more than 30, with cars parking up and down the street; sometimes on other's property. The attached photo is one sample. • Frequent loud, obnoxious and alcohol fueled parties -- any time of day, any day of the week. • Public drinking on the streets. • The home owner has admitted he has a problem with people breaking things, stealing things and leaving huge piles of empty booze bottles. • Capacity is so full, people sleep in tents outside. Overnight guests sometimes numbers in the 20's. Rental agents are aware of this, and allow it. • Guests are coached by the rental agency to deny they are renting the home. • After the homeowner was made aware of the problems in the neighborhood, and advised that these actions were not within the code, they checked in another 14 guests that night. Bottom line, these guests behave as if they are at a private resort; not a neighborhood. We are asking for the city to enforce existing codes so that this short -term, vacation rental ends. Thank you. Scott Brown BROWN MARKETING, INC 4560 Enchanted Pt. Shorewood, MN 55364 612- 990 -3886 www.brownmarketingine.com Brad Nielsen From: Scott Brown [scott @brownmarketinginc.com] Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:50 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: rental property problem escalating Additional input regarding the problem with the vacation rental property at 4595 Enchanted pt. In the middle of the night (7/29) we woke to thunderous, towering fireworks that lit up the entire sky. Two rounds of multiple explosives. The owner and agent are aware. No apology. Just more verbiage saying they've spoken to the renters and it won't happen again. That's the standing line -- each renter won't do it again. But it continues to happen every single time. The property is owned by Mike Rosenberg, and is being marketing locally by Chrissy Johnson of BarkerHedges. Another website link: http://www.homeawqy.coiyL/vacation-rental/T3713284#calendar. As you can see by this website, we are being subjected to new renters every week. Seriously need immediate attention. Scott Brown BROWN MARKETING, INC 4560 Enchanted Pt. Shorewood, MN 55364 612- 990 -3886 www.brow-nmarketinginc.co m , Brad Nielsen From: Scott Brown [scott @brownmarketinginc.com] Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 11:46 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: vacation rental :_..1 The neighborhood issue keeps escalating. Police were brought in last night due to renter behavior. Have you been able to identify to code managing this situation? Thanks so much. scott brown BROWN MARKETING, INC 4560 Enchanted Pt. Shorewood, MN 55364 612- 990 -3886 www.browm-narketingine.com 4 -3 7 Vacation Dome Rental Study Committee of the Whole Presentation November 17, 2014 Presented by Ilan Listug Crow Wing County Land Services Exhibit D Executive Summary: Private rental of vacation and lake homes by owners (commonly called vacation rental by owner or VRBO) has been a growing trend nationally and locally, Different approaches have been taken by state and local jurisdictions in deciding whether and to what extent to regulate VRBOs. From a land use perspective, the central question concerning VRBOs is whether the use of a single family home as a VRBO is compatible with the zoning district in which it is located. This question raises the closely related issue of whether and at what point a VRBO may become a commercial operation, This report reviews the treatment of VRBOs by popular tourist states, cities, and counties in Minnesota and across the country. A special emphasis was placed on approaches taken by Minnesota counties, including survey data from 32 responding counties. This report incorporates that data and presents a summary of the issues surrounding regulation of vacation rentals as Crow Wing County pursues a thorough, objective analysis of this issue. In Minnesota, the issue was heavily discussed at the Legislature in 2010, however no action has been taken at the state level. Existing Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) licensing laws governing lodging establishments encompass a great deal of VRBO activity, however the number of VRBOs currently licensed by the state is minimal. MDH has licensed 18 properties which would be considered VRBOs in Crow Wing County, In the absence of state regulations, some Minnesota counties have enacted VRBO - specific land use ordinances. In Crow Wing County, VRBOs are not specifically regulated in the Land Use Ordinance. In the past year, complaints have been received on two properties, Survey data collected from 32 counties shows that only five counties have VRBO ordinances, an additional seven counties state they would require a conditional use permit if the VRBO was determined to be a commercial operation, and 20 counties report they do not regulate VRBOs, Of responding counties, complaints have been received on 26 properties in the past year with no citations being issued and only one case pending in district court. This data also highlights many of the difficulties associated with enforcement against VRBOs including; identification, multiple complaints against single properties, after -hours complaints, renter behavior /nuisance activity, parking, shoreline activities, and costs of enforcement, One regulating county reports it requires between 20 -30 hours of staff time to bring one VRBO into compliance. Additionally, emerging legal issues regarding property rights, regulation of rental properties and property tax classification of VRBOs represent additional challenges to this discussion. This report concludes by summarizing some of the key issues that remain unresolved and key next steps regarding VRBOs, I. Crow Wing County Overview: A. VRBO Regulations: VRBOs may be regulated by a county under the scope of the planning and zoning authority contained in Minnesota Chapter 394. In general, zoning regulation challenges are subject to the deferential rational basis standard, and are likely to withstand judicial scrutiny if the regulation is found to have a substantial relationship to land use impacts in the area. Additionally, regulations most not infringe upon constitutional rights of equal protection and the 51'� Amendment protections against taking of private property without just compensation and due process. A case pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court may have direct impact upon how rental regulations are viewed by courts. In Dean v. City of Winonalproperty owners challenged a rental ordinance passed in Winona which limits the number of rental licenses available to 30% of a the dwellings in a given area. The ordinance has been upheld in district court and the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Several groups including; the American Civil Liberties Union, the Institute for Justice, the Minnesota Vacation Rental Association, the Minnesota Association of Realtors and the Center for the American Experiment have all joined the case raising the argument that the right to rent property is a fundamental right. If the right to rent property is determined to be a fundamental right, all regulations limiting the right would be reviewed under the strict scrutiny standard rather than the rational basis standard. Such a ruling by the Court would have significant impact upon government's ability to regulate rental property through traditional zoning ordinances. The case is expected to be decided in early 2015. B. Ordinance Challenges: Given the recent rise in popularity of using single - family dwellings located in residential or shoreland residential districts as VRBOs, many land use ordinances do not clearly encompass the use within existing definitions. A Minnesota Court of Appeals case from 2009 demonstrates the difficulty in applying existing ordinances to regulate or stop operations of undefined VRBOs. In Douglas County v. Owen 2, after receiving complaints from neighbors, the county determined that 3 VRBOs (rented for 13, 53 and 19 days respectively) owned by the Owens were operating as "resorts" under the zoning ordinance. The county sought to enjoin the rental of the properties until a CUP was obtained. The Court held, citing many deficiencies in the ordinance, that the zoning ordinance did not restrict the rental of single - family dwellings on a short -term basis, and the use of the properties did not compel the conclusion that the properties are resorts. In part because zoning laws are construed against the county and because the county sought to impose regulation on these homes beyond the plain language of the ordinance, the county's efforts to classify a VRBO within their existing ordinance failed and was held invalid twice by the court. 1 Ethan Dean, et al., v. City of Winona, A13 -1028 (Minn, Ct. App. 2014). 2 County of Douglas v. Richard N. Owen and Judith A. Owen, A08 -1776, (Minn. Ct. App, 2009). C. Current Regulations in Crow Wing County: Vacation home rentals are not regulated or defined in the Land Use Ordinance. • Commercial is defined as "any use or establishment pertaining to commerce or mercantile for the sale, lease, rental or trade of products, goods and services." • Single - family dwellings are a permitted use in all but the commercial/Ll zoning districts, and are defined as a detached residence for or occupied by one family or up to 3 non- related individuals. • Hotel/moteI is not defined in the Ordinance, and is a conditional use in most districts. • Resorts are defined as commercial establishments, and are primarily service - oriented for transient guests seeking recreation'. Resorts may obtain a conditional use permit to operate only in the ag /forest, RR 2. 5, RR5, 10, 20, and waterfront commercial zones. Bed and Breakfast Residence is defined in the Ordinance as limited to four or fewer guest rooms, must provide at least one meal per day, and the operator must live on the premises or adjacent premises. A bed and breakfast is a conditional use in nearly all districts. 4 Septic Regulations: To protect the health and safety of residents as well as prevent contamination of surface and groundwater, Land Services may require a compliance inspection whenever deemed appropriate. A VRBOs in Crow Wing County: The following represents a sampling from popular websites used to advertise VRBOs. It should be noted, because of the private nature of VRBOs there may be no way of determining the actual number of VRBOs operating in Crow Wing County at any given time. Crow Wing County Vacation Home Rental Listings: Sample as of 8 -19 -14 VRBO.com 267 Exploreminnesota.com 19 Brainerd Lakes Chamber 2 Airbnb.com 7 flipkey.com 13 lakeplace.com 25 northlandcabincare.com 21 craigslist.org 65 vacation rentals.com 31 byowner.com 56 Tota14 506 3 The Ordinance defines a traditional resort as: A commercial establishment that includes lodges, dwelling units, dwelling sites, structures or enclosures kept, used, maintained or advertised as, or held out to the public to be, a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public, and having for rent three or more cabins, rooms, dwelling units or enclosures. Resorts must be primarily service - oriented for transient occupancy for guests seeking recreation. All cabins, rooms, dwelling units or enclosures must be included in the resort rental business and rates set by resort. The entire parcel of land must be owned, controlled and managed by the single business entity which comprises the commercial .establishment. In order to qualify as a resort pursuant to this definition, the commercial establishment shall also be fully licensed and permitted under the appropriate state and local regulation. 4 Total listings may include duplicate properties listed on multiple websites 11. Approaches around the Country: As vacation home rental numbers have soared nationally in recent years, state legislatures have acted in different ways. Here is a summary of different approaches: Wisconsin: • State law requires a Lodging permit issued and administered through the Wisconsin Department of Health Services for all facilities in the state. • Vacation home rentals are classified as a Tourist Rooming House (TRH), defined as "all lodging places and tourist cabins and cottages, other than hotels and motels, in which sleeping accommodations are offered for pay to tourists or transients," • A tourist or transient is defined as someone away from their permanent residence, • Rental to a tourist or transient, regardless of duration, requires a state permit. • The application process also requires the owner to provide documentation of approved use by the local zoning authority. • Example: Door County, Wisconsin: All municipalities under county zoning jurisdiction permit short-term rentals in all zoning districts, and require registration with the county tourism commission for purposes of tax collection in addition to state licensure. Hawaii: • Individual counties in Hawaii have jurisdiction over VRBO use of property, • Most counties that allow vacation rentals in specific zoning districts and generally require a condition use permit, • Some counties prohibit vacation home rentals (rental duration ranging from under 30 days to under 90 days) unless the owner can demonstrate a legal non - conforming use certificate dating to prior than 1986. Florida: • State law prohibits local units of government from restricting the use, prohibiting, or regulating vacation rentals solely on the basis of classification, use, or occupancy if not regulated prior to 2011. • Recent changes now allow local governments to require inspections or to create certain standards (such as mandatory trash pick -up). • Vacation rental owners also must obtain a license from the state to operate a rental unit, • Example: Fort Myers Beach, Florida: Single - family dwellings located in the residential zoning district are generally restricted to rental for transient lodging to once per calendar month, with a minimum stay of 7 days, Austin, Texas: e Enacted a qualitative restriction on the number of homes that can be rented on a short- term basis. o Depending upon the location within the city, a cap was placed upon the number of short- term rentals that may operate in a given neighborhood. o The city stated a concern for the mix of short-term to long term rental properties as justification for the cap. 4 Scottsdale, Arizona: Rentals of less than 30 days are not permitted in Single Family Residential Districts. Portland, Oregon: • Enacted a tiered approach to short-term rental regulation. • For owner- occupied residences, an over the counter permit may be obtained for short- term rental of 1 to 2 bedrooms. • For 3 -5 bedroom homes, owners must obtain a CUP to operate a short-term rental. Palm Desert, California: Originally passed an ordinance requiring a CUP and 3 -night minimum stay requirement on vacation home rentals. The CUP application process cost $500 and included additional conditions on parking, noise, maximum occupants, and days the property may be rented annually, In 2012, the city significantly amended its regulation and lowered fees after finding that compliance with the CUP requirement was very low. The city now licenses all short - term rentals annually, with a $25 per property fee. The city has found license registration has greatly increased with the lower fees. 111. State of Minnesota A. State Regulation: In 2008, the Minnesota Legislature created a Task Force charged with studying VRBOs in the state. The group published a report in 2009. Citing a lack of knowledge about the application of current laws relating to VRBO owners, the Task Force offered a series of recommendations including legislation to improve awareness and compliance with existing laws. The recommendations included: • Adding a definition to the Department of Health Licensing statute defining vacation rentals as requiring a license, • Clarify sales and use tax law as it applies to vacation rentals. • Increase coordination between state and local officials regarding vacation home rental regulations. • Encourage and develop a means of proactive communication between VRBO owners and renter about the rules and regulations that must be implemented for safe operation, compliance, and interactions with neighboring homeowners. In 2010, HF1072/SF894 was introduced which would have added the Task Force definitions of vacation home rental to the Department of Health licensing statute. The proposed legislation would require VRBO owners to receive a license and comply with the licensure requirements of the Department of Health relating to safe operation. The bills received hearings in committee in both houses but did not advance. s Definition included in HF1072 /SF894: "Vacation home rental means any home, cabin, condominium or similar building that is advertised or held out to the public as a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public on a nightly or weekly basis and is not a bed and breakfast, resort, hotel or motel." 5 In 2011, HF1532/8171190 was introduced which would have mandated that use of residential property as a vacation rental must be considered a permitted residential use, but which may be licensed as rental housing by a county, The bill received no consideration, To date, no legislation has been passed specifically defining vacation home rentals. B. Current Department of Health Regulation: Under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 157, hotels /motels', lodging establishments7, and resorts$ are subject to licensure and inspections by the Department of Health (MDH) and must comply with minimum standards9 in the following areas of health and safety: • Building standards, including ADA compliance • Provide a safe and adequate water supply • Septic systems designed for and in compliance with MPCA Chapter 7080 • Removal of trash, rubbish and refuse frequently from the property • Fire protection, including egress, escapes and fire extinguishers Under the licensing statute, any facility providing sleeping accommodations for rent for periods less than one week is considered a hotel /motel and subject to licensure. VRBO owners venting their property for periods of longer than one week would not be subject to licensure because the renters would not be considered "regular roomers" as included in the lodging establishment definition. Approximately five years ago, MDH developed a list of properties potentially subject to licensure by scanning websites. MDH currently has 18 licensees in the hotel/motel category in Crow Wing County which would be considered VRBOs. IV, Minnesota Counties A. Summary of Minnesota Counties Survey Data: VRBO Specific Ordinances: ® Four counties in the state have enacted specific VRBO Iand use ordinances. ® Seven counties responded that they will require a CUP if the VRBO is determined to be a commercial operation. ® Twenty counties report they do not regulate VR.BOs. 6 M.S. 157.15 Subd. 7, Motel or motel. "Hotel or motel" means a building, structure, enclosure, or any part thereof used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public and famishing accommodations for periods of less than one week. 7 M.S. 157.15 Subd. 8: Lodging establishment. "Lodging establishment" means a building, structure, enclosure, or any part thereof used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public as regular roomers, for periods of one week or more, and having five or more beds to let to the public. 8 M.S. 157.15 Subd. 11: Resort. "Resort" means a building, structure, enclosure, or any part thereof located on, or on property neighboring, any lake, stream, skiing or hunting area, or any recreational area for purposes of providing convenient access thereto, kept, used, maintained, or advertised as, or held out to the public to be a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public, and primarily to those seeking recreation for periods of one day, one week, or longer, and having for rent five or more cottages, rooms, or enclosures. 9 Minnesota Rules Chapter 4625 MN Counties with VRBO Land Use Ordinances Approved Properties Type of Regulation Inspection Requirements VRBOs Receiving Complaints IUP and County Complaints Only Aitkin Lodging License 13 3 IUP w /Performance 1 during first year of operation, Lake Standards and MH complaints thereafter 20 2 License IUP Application inspection, complaints Mille Lacs thereafter 12 1 CUP and County FBL Annual FBL inspections, no P &Z Stearns License inspections 10 2 *Cottonwood County regulates VRBOs under an FBL ordinance Complaints and Enforcement: * Among these 32 counties, 61 complaints have been registered against 26 different properties in the past year. * Zero citations have been issued in the past year. * One enforcement has resulted in a pending court action (Lincoln County). VRBO Monitoring: * Six counties monitor VRBOs only after a complaint. * Two counties (Aitkin, Lincoln) actively scan for operating VRBOs. * 24 counties do not actively monitor VRBOs. Biggest Challenge; In response to a question about the biggest challenge relating to VRBOs, the following represent the most common responses: • Neighbor complaints. • Owner /Operator cooperation. • Concerns over clarity of zoning ordinance. • Finding VRBOs. • Gathering evidence of alleged violations. • Fairness to resorts. • Fairness of complaints -only enforcement policy. • Septic compliance and proper sizing. • Costs and staff time associated with ordinance enforcement. B. Enforcement Issues: Enforcement of a land use VRBO ordinance involves multiple challenges. Survey results have highlighted several of the main issues associated with VRBO ordinance enforcement. 7 Complaints: Of the 32 counties responding, only 61 complaints involving 26 properties were registered last year. Of these 61 complaints, fifteen issues were resolved by working with property owners, zero citations were issued, and one case is pending in district court. Identification: Given the private nature of VRBOs, scanning websites, responding to neighbor complaints, and voluntary contact are the most prevalent ways of identifying VRBO operations. Only two responding counties stated they actively seek to identify VRBOs through websites and other means, b respondents investigate after receiving a complaint, and a majority of counties do not actively search for VRBOs. Cost of Enforcement: Stearns County reports that it requires 20 -30 hours of planning and zoning staff time to bring a VRBO into compliance with their ordinance. Additional staff hours are required by food and beverage license staff. Land Services staff conservatively estimates it requires a minimum of 10- 15 hours per staff of time to process a conditional use permit application through the public hearing process. With the large number of VRBOs operating in Crow Wing County, regulation of VRBOs could represent a significant challenge given current staffing levels. Evidence of Violations: Most activity generating complaints occurs on the weekends or afterhours. By the time staff are able to respond to the complaint, the activity likely has ended. This creates the need to rely on evidence from neighbors and other sources if an enforcement action is necessary, Additionally, it is extremely difficult to know and track how many times a vacation rental has been rented in a given period. Depending upon the nature of the complaint, it can be difficult to receive law enforcement zoning ordinance support for afterhours and weekend complaints Conduct by renters: Many of the common complaints against vacation home rentals relate to the conduct of renters. This creates a very difficult environment in which to effectively enforce provisions of a land use ordinance. Survey respondents list neighbor complaints, noise, traffic, parking, dogs, and shoreline activities as the most common issues, Septic and SSTS issues are the most common land use problem reported to zoning officials. In general, jurisdictions received very few complaints, but usually multiple complaints about specific properties. Depending upon the type and scope of regulation, a more detailed cost study would need to be conducted to determine the impacts upon current workload in Land Services. Additionally, more study would be required to explore a greater partnership with the Sherriff's Office on addressing after -hours enforcement issues. Active enforcement of a VRBO ordinance may require significant staff resources, and therefore, substantial costs to taxpayers. C. Property Tax Issues: For property tax classifications, short -term rentals differ from long -term rentals because it is unlikely that the owner or renter could claim the property as a primary residence. Properties M such as lake or vacation homes that cannot be classified as residential real estate, either because it is not the primary residence of someone or is vacant and not used for any purpose, can be classified as seasonal residential recreational, An emerging issue is determining when properties used for short-term or vacation rentals can be classified as commercial for tax purposes. This issue was highlighted in a recent tax court case. In T.C. Hewitt, LLC, v, County of McLeod"' a single family lake home purchased by the LLC was classified as non - homestead residential for 6 years until reclassified as commercial by McLeod County. The owners challenged the reclassification. The Court held that the owner did not overcome their burden to demonstrate the reclassification was prima facie invalid. The Court highlighted several facts key to their analysis: • Actual Use of the Property: the LLC organizational documents reserved around five weekends per year for the owners use, with the property either held out for rent or rented for the remainder of the year. • The property is advertised for rental on a year -round basis. • The property earned a small profit or broke even for years in which it was classified commercial. • The property is not anyone's primary residence, • The property was not a "vacant dwelling not used for any purpose" because it was being used for rental purposes when held out for rent. Conclusion: This report represents a broad view of the VRBO issue. Several key questions emerge from the information provided in this report regarding determining the proper approach to VRBOs which require further analysis. On a threshold level the wide variance amongst current and potential county regulations raises questions about fairness and treatment of resort and property owners that may suggest a statewide approach is best. Additionally because most of the complaints associated with VRBOs relate the conduct of renters, land use regulations may not provide the best tools to address the problem conduct. Existing regulations, criminal statutes, legal remedies, and exploring an increased partnership with law enforcement in responding to complaints may provide an adequate framework for addressing this behavior. Finally, the potential costs associated with creating and enforcing a new regulation as well as property tax valuation and classification changes would need to be evaluated based upon the scope and implementation of a regulatory approach. 10 T.C. Hewitt, LLC., v. County ofMeLeaod, June 27,2014, Land Services Department VRBO Report Summary Committee of the Whole November 18, 2014 Scope of Study • Reviewed VRBO treatment by cities, states, and counties around the country & MN • Survey data obtained from 32 Minnesota Counties VRBO Regulations • CWC Land Use Ordinance does not regulate VRBOs • Property Rights & Dean v. City of Winona • Example from Douglas County v. Owen Crow Wing County Overview: • An estimated 500+ VRBOs are operating in CWC at any given time • Minnesota Department of Health is aware of 18 properties they consider a VRBO • Land Services has received complaints on two VRBOs in the past year Approaches around the Country a States: Wisconsin, Florida, Hawaii m Cities: Austin, TX, Scottsdale, AZ, Portland, OR, Palm Desert, CA Minnesota Approach: • Task Force recommends adding a Vacation Home Renal definition to licensing statute • No legislation has been passed on this issue • Minnesota Department of Health licenses lodging establishments and enforces regulations on health and safety • Hotel /Motel definition includes the use of a structure to provide sleeping accommodations to the public for periods of less than one week, • Providing sleeping accommodation for more than one week would not be regulated unless S or more rooms are rented, ® MDH follows the definitions closely and seeks to apply any VRBO Minnesota Counties Survey: o Survey sent to all 87 counties; 32 responses received ® 20 Counties do not regulate VRBOs © 7 Counties state they will require a CUP if a VRBO is determined to be commercial ® 4 Counties have VRBO land use ordinances • Aitkin: IUP required; 13 approved VRBOs • Lake: IUP required; 20 approved VRBOs • Mille Lacs: IUP required; 12 approved VRBOs • Stearns: CUP required; 10 approved VRBOs ® 61 complaints against 26 properties have been registered in the past year e Zero citations have been issued, one enforcement action is pending in district court Enforcement Issues: • VRBOs are difficult to identify; most found through complaints, monitoring is costly • Stearns County reports 20 -30 hours in staff time to bring one a VRBO into compliance • Evidence of violations is difficult to obtain; complaints come after -hours or on weekends • Conduct of renters is the most common source of complaint; this conduct may be difficult to regulate under a land use regulation • Septic system capacity and compliance can represent the most serious land use issues surrounding VRBOs and may be handed through existing requirements Property Tax Classification: • Different treatment of short-term v. long -term rentals • TC Hewitt v. McLeod: emerging issue of when a VRBO is commercial for property tax classification purposes • Regulating VRBOs may also implicate how these.properties are treated for tax purposes EXPLORE MINNESOTA TOURISM STATE OF MINNESOTA IKF ® ©EMT MINNESOTA VACATION HOME RENTAL TASK FORCE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2008 Legislative Session Chapter 291- S.F. 3158 January 2009 121 Seventh Place East, Suite 100 St. Paul, MN 55101 -2114 USA Telephone: 500- 657 -3637 Web sites: www .industry.exploreminnesota.com . www.exploreminnesota.com Exhibit E Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Table of Contents ExecutiveSummary ............................................... ............................... 3 Recommendations................................................. ............................... 4 Background, Opportunities and Concerns ........ ............................... 5 ExistingSituation ................................................... ............................... 7 Existing Minnesota Regulations ........................ ............................... 8 Recommendations................................................ ............................... 9 NextSteps ............................................................... ............................... 11 Appendices: Appendix A - Legislative Language Regarding Vacation HomeRental ................................... ............................... 12 Appendix B - Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force ....... 13 Appendix C - Vacation Home Rental Regulations in Select Citiesand States ........................... ............................... 16 Appendix D - Vacation Home Rental Regulations in Selected Minnesota Counties ....................... ............................... 21 Appendix E - Stearns County Zoning Ordinance ......................... 23 Appendix F - Minnesota Department of Health Statutory Language Recommendations ...... ............................... 25 Appendix G - Minnesota Department of Revenue Statutory Language Recommendations ...... ............................... 35 Appendix H - Minnesota Seasonal Recreational Properties Owners Coalition Concerns ........ ............................... 36 2 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations 11 A iviinnesota Vacation Home Rental Lodginis ' Task Force Report Recommendations Executive Summary At the direction of the Minnesota State Legislature, Explore Minnesota Tourism led a task force studying vacation home rental lodging. This task force of 30 members included representatives of Minnesota state departments including Health and Revenue, planning and zoning organizations, the University of Minnesota Tourism Center, several tourism businesses and tourism industry associations, associations for realtors and vacation home owners and home owners impacted by vacation home rental. The primary focus of this task force was to ensure that vacation home rentals operating as businesses are a safe lodging alternative that are managed and regulated on a level playing field with other lodging options, such as resorts and bed and breakfasts. An additional focus was the need to develop a workable means of mixing commercial and residential uses among properties on the same lake, or within the same area or building. • The rental of privately -owned vacation homes is common throughout the world and is a growing practice in Minnesota. Vacation home rentals are offered through companies that specialize in this business, or directly by the home owners. • The number of vacation homes offered for rent in Minnesota is unknown, but hundreds of Minnesota homes are promoted on various vacation home rental Web sites. There are more than 100,000 seasonal, recreational or occasional use homes in Minnesota. • The task force identified current regulations that apply to Minnesota vacation home rentals in the areas of health and safety, taxes, and zoning. The task force also researched vacation home definitions, laws, permits, licenses and related issues in several other states. • The task force determined that although current Minnesota regulations already apply to vacation home rentals, the language of the regulations does not specifically refer to this type of accommodation. As a result, most people who rent their vacation homes are probably unaware of the regulations that apply to this practice. 3 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Recommendations Although Minnesota vacation home rentals are intended to be regulated under existing statutes and rules, the task force recommends that the management and regulation of vacation home rentals in Minnesota be clarified. Specifically, in Minnesota Department of Health statutes: • Add the definition of vacation home rental in M.S. 157.15 Definitions; • Reference the vacation home rental category in M.S. 157.16 Licenses/ Required Fees; and • Add an exemption for charitable donations in M.S. 157.22 Exemptions. Minnesota Department of Revenue statutes should be revised to: Define an isolated and occasional sale of a vacation home rental that would not be subject to sales and use tax in M.S. 297A.67, Subd. 23 Occasional Sales. ■ There needs to be coordination among state and local jurisdictions and departments regarding regulations related to vacation home rentals. Proactive communication of the rules and regulations must be implemented, so those who offer vacation home rentals provide safe accommodations in compliance with state and local laws and regulations and also maintain a positive relationship with their neighboring homeowners and businesses. Note: The Minnesota Seasonal Recreational Property Owners Coalition, represented on the Task Force, disagreed wifli recommendations in this report. (See Appendix H.) 0 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Background The rental of vacation homes is growing throughout the world. Spurred by the ease of Internet marketing, the need of owners to cover increasing costs including utilities and property taxes, and overall consumer interest in savings and demand for lodging alternatives outside of the traditional hotel /motel offerings, Minnesota's second -home owners are becoming active operators in the vacation home rental market. On a national level, in Hawaii, "individual vacation units" made up 7.9% of total visitor units (5,786) for 2007. The North Carolina Vacation Rental Managers Association recently studied their vacation home rental industry and identified 23,000 vacation home rental units with a total of 92,000 bedrooms and an average length of stay of 4.6 nights. The potential exists for vacation home rental to become a significant business operation in Minnesota. The 2000 U.S. Census found that Minnesota had 105,609 housing units classified as "for seasonal, recreation, or occasional use," out of 2,065,946 total housing units (5 %). These types of housing, although traditionally thought of as cabins by a lake, also include options such as condominiums in metro areas, or "scrapbooking" houses throughout the state. ( Scrapbooking houses are accommodations that have been developed specifically for gatherings of people who scrapbook as a hobby.) They are commonly located in areas surrounded by seasonal and year - around residences that are not used for commercial purposes. Opportunities and Concerns Minnesota's lodging options are evolving. The number of resorts is steadily declining, largely due to increasing costs of operation and the overall value of lakeshore property. Within the last 20 years, Minnesota has added about 200 bed and breakfast operations that offer unique lodging alternatives to the traditional hotel /motel in communities large and small throughout the state. In more recent years, vacation home rentals have been emerging in Minnesota. One characteristic of vacation home rental that further distinguishes it from most other types of lodging is that there is not an on -site manager. To make this is a safe, viable, and economically beneficial development, there is a need to provide both guidance and regulation to these entrepreneurs. The opportunity to address a consumer market interested in this lodging option can generate economic benefits throughout an area. Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota !Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations These new lodging options need to operate on a level playing field with other businesses that offer sleeping accommodations. Specific legal and regulatory concerns include: • Payment of federal, state and local taxes • Licensing by the Minnesota Department of Health • Building code requirements such as the Americans with Disabilities Act • Septic, plumbing and water quality compliance • Fire safety • Capacity issues • Zoning compliance (commercial or residential) • Identifying and posting contact information on management • Insurance requirements In addition to legal concerns, operating a commercial business venture alongside neighboring residences (many of which are converting from seasonal to year -round homes as their owners retire), can lead to conflict. These conflicts, if not addressed on a voluntary basis, will lead to a need for additional regulation. These types of issues include: • Overcrowding /maximum occupancy • Maintenance • 24- hour - per -day contact availability with local manager for guests and neighbors • Noise • Business signage • Parking capacity/ RV parking • Driving responsibly • Garbage • Responsible use of recreational equipment • Outside camping • Trespassing • Malicious complaints • Licensing process • Enforcement 6 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Existing Situation Initially, the task force, through the University of Minnesota Tourism Center, looked at other states and communities that have addressed the development of vacation home rental. The Tourism Center gathered information on: • Arizona, including Sedona • Colorado, including Steamboat Springs and Estes Park • Florida • Hawaii • North Carolina • South Carolina • South Dakota • Texas • Wisconsin • Palm Springs All of these areas have existing but varied vacation home rental regulations, definitions, licensing, fees and taxes. Regulations deal with issues from safety to parking, as well as enforcement fines. See Appendix C for a summary. The Tourism Center also looked at a sampling of Minnesota counties: • Cass • Cook • Crow Wing • Hennepin • Goodhue • Lake • Olmsted • Stearns - has existing regulations regarding vacation home rental (Ordinance 204 enacted in June, 2008. See Appendix E for a summary.) • St. Louis Explore Minnesota Tourism used these same counties to search a sample of the vacation home rental Web sites. Within these counties, www.vrbo.com listed 344 Minnesota homes; www.alwaysonvacation.com listed 67 and www.homeaway.com listed 141. See Appendix D for a summary. Although only three Web sites were examined, based on a Google search, there are at least 816 listings of Web sites that promote vacation home rentals. It is unknown how many list Minnesota properties. Listing services also do not usually bear legal responsibility for the information. 7 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Existing Minnesota Regulations Many of the legal and regulatory issues related to vacation home rental are currently covered in state statute. According to the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), Minnesota Statutes Chapter 157 and Minnesota Rule Chapter 4625 (although not specifically defining vacation home rental) would apply to a facility offering sleeping accommodations to the public. Currently, businesses renting for a week or more with five or more -units are included in MDH licensing requirements. Licensing by MDH would require verification of a number of issues including building code requirements such as the Americans with Disabilities Act; septic, plumbing and water compliance; fire safety; capacity issues and posting contact information about management. In this process, MDH also requires verification of local zoning compliance as well as a tax identification number. Within Minnesota Department of Revenue oversight, for sales and use tax requirements, short term rentals of lodging are taxable under Minnesota Statute 297A.61 subd. 3 unless the sale qualifies as an occasional sale under Minnesota Statute 297A.67 subd. 23 Occasional Sales. Vacation home rental is not specifically defined, but included under the more general intent of the occasional sales statute. Property tax and individual income tax statutes would also apply. Real Estate licensees, who provide property rental and management services as licensed under chapter 82, are allowed to operate vacation home rental management businesses without an additional license. The vacation home rental unit or units themselves require additional licensing, which may be provided by the unit owner or the rental management company or broker. Shoreland rules are currently being updated by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources through a stakeholder committee review process. Vacation home rental has been identified for consideration in this revision process. Cities, counties and townships have their own zoning and nuisance ordinances. There are 87 counties and 853 cities in Minnesota with planning and zoning authority. Zoning decisions are made at the local level. Education and communication are the overall key to developing workable local implementation. Tools or model ordinance language can be provided to assist in local decisions. Regardless of the existing laws and statutes that govern vacation home rental, it was a group consensus that these requirements for vacation home rentals are not known, communicated and /or commonly followed at this time. 8 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Recommendations 1. Regulation of Minnesota vacation home rental properties needs to be clarified in state statute and rules. Minnesota Department of Health Regulations: Specifically, three changes are recommended to statutes regarding licensing by the Minnesota Department of Health: Amend M.S. 157.15 Definitions, by adding a definition for vacation home rental; the recommended language would appear under Subd. 20 Vacation Hoene Rental. "Vacation home rental means any home, cabin, condominium or similar building that is advertised or held out to the public as a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public on a nightly or weekly basis and is not a bed and breakfast, resort, hotel or motel." Add references to the vacation home rental category to M.S. 157.16 Licenses Required; Fees. Add a licensing exemption for one donation annually for eligible charitable donations of weekend stays or periods of a week or less for fundraising in M.S. 157.22 Exemptions. See Appendix F for language. Minnesota Department of Revenue Regulations: One change in statute is recommended by the Minnesota Department of Revenue: Amend Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 297A.67 subd. 23, to define an isolated or occasional sale of a vacation home rental that would not be subject to sales and use tax. The definition adopts the "number of days" used for federal income tax purposes for the purpose of consistency and familiarity. See Appendix G for language. 0 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation dome Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations 2. Communications Regarding Vacation Home Rental A proactive communication plan needs to be implemented to ensure awareness of the regulations, licenses, taxes and operational courtesies that need to be addressed when renting vacation home properties. Currently, requirements for licensing, fees, taxes, inspections and enforcement for the operation of a vacation home rental property in Minnesota are neither clearly defined nor widely known. Lacking clear direction, unlicensed and unregulated vacation home rentals are growing throughout Minnesota. Following the outcome of the 2009 Legislative session, communicating this information is critical to compliance. Target audiences for the communication of vacation home rental operation requirements include: • Vacation home rental property owners • Vacation property owners associations • Vacation home management and rental companies • Nearby residents • Lake associations Organizations and mediums to potentially use in communicating include: • Governing agencies at a state, local and county level • Tourism and hospitality trade associations • Realtors and realtor associations - CEU's and desk top reference guides • Continuing education sources for realtors • Promotional organizations - chambers of commerce, convention and visitors bureaus, state tourism office • Annual licensing and permitting processes • Law enforcement agencies • Insurance agencies • Electric utility companies serving vacation rental areas • Property tax statements for recreational property • Vacation rental websites Communications must be clear, concise, and consistent and have contacts for further information, both phone and Web based. Explore Minnesota Tourism will create a Web site or Web page that includes all current information about requirements for vacation home rentals. Both public relations and public information meetings need to be utilized to reach the targeted audiences. 10 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Next Steps Recommendations for statutory changes will be initiated by tourism industry associations and pursued in the Minnesota Legislature. Following the 2009 legislative session, Explore Minnesota Tourism will coordinate with the task force to implement needed communications efforts. 11 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations APPENDIX A: LEGISLATIVE LANGUAGE REGARDING VACATION HOME RENTAL CHAPTER 291-- S.F.No. 3158 An act relating to commerce; requiring Explore Minnesota Tourism to study vacation rental lodging; creating definitions; requiring a report. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Section 1. MINNESOTA VACATION RENTAL LODGING STUDY. Explore Minnesota Tourism shall conduct a study of vacation rental lodging in Minnesota and report to the legislature any recommendations needed to protect consumers, ensure tax compliance, promote safe rentals, and promote tourism in Minnesota. Explore Minnesota Tourism shall consult with the Minnesota Department of Revenue, Minnesota Department of Health, political subdivisions, and representatives of the tourism industry including resorts, bed and breakfast establishments, cabin owner associations, conventions and visitor bureaus, and others to determine and recommend regulations or legislation to define and promote the vacation rental lodging. Explore Minnesota Tourism shall report by January 15, 2009, to the chairs and ranking minority members of the house of representatives and senate committees with jurisdiction over any recommendations developed from the study, including any proposed legislation. EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective the day following final enactment. Presented to the governor May 8, 2008 Signed by the governor May 12, 2008, 1:09 p.m. 12 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations APPENDIX B: MINNESOTA VACATION HOME RENTAL TASK FORCE Tim Aarsvold Geneva Beach Resort 105 Linden Avenue Alexandria, MN 56308 320/763-3200 TIA @GenevaBeachResort.com Jane & Gary Bales 18 Harbor View Lane Federal Dam, MN 56641 218/654-3030 igbales @means.net Angie Berg Stearns County Administration Center 705 Courthouse Square St. Cloud, MN 56303 320/656-3600 Angie.berg @co.stearns.mn.us Christine Berger MN Association of Realtors 5750 Lincoln Drive Edina, MN 55436 952/215 -8471 cberger @mnrealtor.com Joel Carlson Legal Research - Government Affairs 6 West Fifth Street Suite 700 St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 651/223 -2868 idcresearch @aol.com Chuck Dougherty Minnesota Bed & Breakfast Assn. 101 Water Street South Stillwater, MN 55082 -5150 chuck@waterstreetin-n.us 13 John Edman Explore Minnesota Tourism 100 Metro Square 121 7t" Place East Saint Paul, MN 55101 651/296-4783 Tohn.edman @state.mn.us Gary Edwards MN Dept. of Health 625 North Robert Street St. Paul, MN 55155 -2516 651/201 -4513 Garv.edwards @state.mn.us Tom Ellerbe MN Dept. of Revenue 600 N. Robert St., M.S. 2230 St. Paul, MN 55146 -2230 651/566 -6136 Tom.ellerbe @state.mn.us Henry Erdman MN Seasonal Recreational Property Owners Coalition 331 Winona Street West Saint Paul, MN 55117 651 /247 -1701 Herdman4890 @earthlink.net Jeff Forester MN Seasonal Recreational Property Owners Coalition Two Appletree Square, #235 Bloomington, MN 55425 952/854-1317 jeff @msrpo.org Explore Minnesota Tourism Jim Franklin Minnesota Sheriffs Association 1951 Woodlane Drive Woodbury, MN 55125 651/451 -7216 Franklin@mnsheriffs. orR Annalee Garletz Association of Minnesota Counties 125 Charles Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55103 651/789 -4322 Garletz@rm-icounties.org Mike Grove Twin Springs Resort 3837 North Pleasant Lake Dr NW Hackensack, MN 56452 vacation@hackensacknu-i.com Kent Gustafson University of MN Tourism Center 120 BioAgEng 1390 Eckles Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55108 612/625-8274 kggstaf @umn.edu Ken Klos Greenwood Township /Lake Vermilion 7595 Timberlore Trail West Cook, MN 55723 218/666 -0359 Kk1os @2z.net Mark Lauderbaugh 38615911, Street NW Maple Lake, MN 55358 320/963-2017 mark @tridentprocess.com 14 Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Joe Mathews Association of MN Counties 125 Charles Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55103 651/224 -3344 mathews@mncounties. orLY Kevin Matzek Hospitality Minnesota 305 Roselawn Avenue East Saint Paul, MN 55117 651/778-2400 Kevinm@hospitalitynu-i.com Mark Novotny Hyde -A -Way Bay Resort 3489 Ford Drive NW Hacksensack, MN 56452 218/675 -6683 hydeawaybay @tds.net Jennifer O'Rourke League of Minnesota Cities 145 University Avenue West Saint Paul, MN 55103 651/281 -1261 jorourke @lmc.org Marissa Papineau MN Department of Revenue 600 N. Robert St. Saint Paul, MN 55101 651/556 -6974 Marissa.papineau@state.irm.us Julie Ring Local Public Health Association of MN 125 Charles Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55103 651/789-4354 ring@i-nncounties.org Explore Minnesota Tourism Gretchen Sabel Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road Saint Paul, MN 55155 651/296 -6300 Gretchen.sabel @state.mn.us Ingrid Schneider MN Tourism Center University of MN Tourism Center 120BioAgEng 1390 Eckles Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55108 612 - 624 -2736 ingridss @umn.edu Dave Siegel Hospitality Minnesota/ Associations 305 Roselawn Avenue East Saint Paul, MN 55117 651/778-2400 dave @hospitalitymn.com Kent Sulem General Consul Minnesota Association of Townships 805 Central Avenue East P.O. Box 267 St. Michael, MN 55376 763/497 -2330 ksulem @mntownships.org Colleen Tollefson Explore Minnesota Tourism 100 Metro Square 121761 Place East Saint Paul, MN 55101 651/297-2635 Colleen. tollefson @state.mn.us is Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Heather VanValkenburg Director of Government Affairs MN Association of Realtors 5750 Lincoln Drive Edina, MN 55436 952/912-2661 hvanvalkenburg@mnyealtor.com Cathy Wicks Sales and Use Tax Division Department of Revenue 600 North Robert Street Saint Paul, MN 55146 -6300 651/556 -6818 Cathv.wicks@state.mn.us Explore Minnesota Tourism 00 O N Ln 0) Q a� U ro U) a) 4-J ra .4-) 4-J U N N Cn c C O M D 0) N cl� (6 C N N 0 C O M U U X H LU r CL Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations 16 Explore Minnesota Tourism 4 0) �x o o o �o(n ° o�° x v H � o cn z� o Q«S CS bbO bO by , O (fl ii v n Cd U(v N cd V Id u O O CS N O O �O NO p 'd U U 4 m v v UO a U ZU a °�' s��° > °' H4° 10 ?�U °m U ° ° a�i o o °u O O ai m ° � v o 0 °r+° d x ?a o > 0 �° o � > ,� Cd '� a, U) 0 m o Cn \o U m 4 m ° ° ?° °m M 0 a� zz tA O O d W D �i it Q 16 Explore Minnesota Tourism 00 O O N a--) U) D CD Q U c c� 4-J ,N U N L 0 ca nCD n Wl ^^L., / I. Q� O C O f0 U (6 U X H 0 z W d. Q Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations 17 Explore Minnesota Tourism o o CD L6 CT, r-i N 00 N kf-� O (D O X O' ' m 'd A `A CD `p Ep� D Id p O w N O w U 'd cUi • r •+-� Cd cn tC () bA bA 'i�+' c14 U) m bA A o ti U 14� iv{ Ch �l v OH (la U cd a� bA bA p bA bA w o 0 CU o00 Z U U v o °° o �O O •� � O ,H' U Id N 0 0 0 U o 0 CJ N aV v d A w 17 Explore Minnesota Tourism 00 O O N Q LO U W 4-J 4-J 4-J U N Ln 0 0) L.L c 0 N O O M U ra U X Q W a Q Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations 18 Explore Minnesota Tourism o a� o v CA Ed P, O O O U O X ;:i v H X �.O o ~ 'U � ' P a) "�1 i .'� F1 o o (!1 Q 4 cd O CD O 41 N O m 0 r. U o U o O U Q-, p N zj UO O O + N 1 30-i H 00 O v X X 41 � 0 LO C7 En dpi 0 N bJJ v O w �' O D, o N m bA O bA ai U w wo 9 m w cd T.� �, O rd Ed U n (0) i b - O O O O \ O o tti p U O «S u3 T d O � O U p x U X o U �� cam ( O (a o cd � w o U 'S� 41 0� o U �.� a� H �� Lr) 0 04 ° o U U U) ° 'd ed 0 a� U V iy O 9 w H 18 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations APPENDIX C: Vacation Home Rentals in Select States and Cities (August 2008) 19 Explore Minnesota Tourism Sedona, AZ (2007) Steamboat Estes Park, CO (2004) Palm Springs, TX? Springs, CO (2008) Existing Yes — Article 6 of Yes Yes Yes — Chapter 5.25 vacation Land Development home Code regulations Definitions Rental of single Vactain Home Leasing, renting any More than one family or mobile Rental to a single unit for a total residential buildings home for less than party. Not more duration of less than rented for less than 28 30 days than two occasions 30 days vacation home consecutive days to for not more than rental— residential the same renter 29 consecutive unit leased or occupied days. on a unit basis Detail Prohibits rental Maximum of 16 Need to operate within Compliance with all more than 30 days people/ 200ft. Two residential character city fire, noise, parking (noise /traffic /design) building, & health spaces /four Two guests /room codes. 24- hour /day vehicles. No with maximum of contact with local unreasonable eight people; one manager. noise, outdoor parking lot per three sleeping, guest cars NO RV, commercial local manager required kitchens, advertising Fee/License $500 application Business license fee: Initial fee: $25.00 fee, $50 annual varies by number of renewal units Enforcement $2500 fine & six $1000 fine/ day Inspection with Misdemenor for each months in Jail operate without reasonable notice day of violation. license (three License revocation Fifteen days allowed months to after warnings to complete transition) compliance. After Inspection with 24- fourth violation, hour notice license can be revoked Tax Lodging tax Commercial sales tax 11.75% lodging tax 19 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Notes: • Sedona ordinance has become subject of court challenges • Hawaii (2007): "Individual vacation units" made up 7.9 % of total visitor units (5,786) • Maui County, Hawaii, VHR policies part of bed and breakfast ordinance (Chapter 19.64) • North Carolina VHR profile completed for North Carolina Vacation Rental Managers Association Total number of VHR's: 23,000 Total value: $9.6 billion Total'number of bedrooms: 92,000 Average length of stay: 4.6 nights Total number of VHR management companies: 142 University of Minnesota Tottrisnt Ce)iter— August 2008 20 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations APPENDIX D: Vacation Home Rental Regulations in Selected Minnesota Counties 21 Explore Minnesota Tourism Cass Cook Crow Hennepin Goodhue Lake Olmsted Stearns St. Louis Win Existing No No No No No No No Yes No— vacation vacation (P & Z Lodging P & Z (6/17/08) Possibly home rental ordnances Depart- more than Depart- Ordinance town - regulations There is a ment 30 days ment 204 ship "lodging reports no requires Indicate establish- problems) conuner- vacation ment" cial & home ordinance condition- rentals al use not a erinit roblem Definitions "Lodging More than Any group house" — 30 days of rooms (sleeping forming a rooms single furnished habitable to public/ area five+ beds) Details License Any use Application required; may be requires fees set; allowed as water test, inspection condition- sewage standards; al use inspection, construc- when it can to scale tion plan be drawing reviews; regulated penalties to preserve Max. 12 set the stated people, or general one purpose of person /50 the district gallons water/ day sewage can handle. No signs or RV's No more than two /parcel Fees/License Cond. Use License =$200; required Recording based on fee =$46 number of rooms 21 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Many vacation home rental property owners advertise their properties on the Internet, The following chart lists the totals for rentals in selected counties on three popular Web sites. Although only three Web sites were examined, based on a Google.com search, there are at least 816 listings of Web sites that promote vacation home rental. All Ely properties are listed in Lake County In some cases, it is difficult to determine whether a property is in Cass or Crow Wing County The 2000 U.S. Census data, and found that Minnesota had 105,609 housing units classified as "for seasonal, recreation, or occasional use" (i.e., seasonal) out of 2,065,946 total housing units (5 %). University of Minnesota Tourism Center - August 2008 22 Explore Minnesota Tourism www.vrbo.com www.alwaysonvacation.com www.homea,,vay.com All three Web Sites County Cass 33 4 3 40 Cook 110 23 82 215 Crow Win 95 15 23 133 Goodhue 2 0 1 3 Hennepin 27 1 8 36 Lake 22 4 5 31 Olmsted 2 0 0 2 St. Louis 51 19 17 87 Stearns 2 1 2 5 TOTAL 344 67 141 552 All Ely properties are listed in Lake County In some cases, it is difficult to determine whether a property is in Cass or Crow Wing County The 2000 U.S. Census data, and found that Minnesota had 105,609 housing units classified as "for seasonal, recreation, or occasional use" (i.e., seasonal) out of 2,065,946 total housing units (5 %). University of Minnesota Tourism Center - August 2008 22 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations APPENDIX E: Stearns County Zoning Ordinance (This Section last annended June 17, 2008) 6.49 Vacation/Private Home Rental 6.49.1 Performance Standards A Vacation/ Private Home Rental shall be subject to the administrative requirements of Section 4.18 of this Ordinance and the following performance standards: A. Submittal of an application signed by the property owner and including the following: a current water test from an accredited laboratory with test results for nitrate - nitrogen and coliform bacteria, a compliance inspection of the existing sub- surface sewage treatment system and a to -scale drawing of the location and dimensions of the structure intended for licensing and all associated accessory structures, parking areas, shore recreation facilities and sewage treatment systems. B. The occupancy of a Vacation/ Private Home Rental shall be limited to no more than two persons per bedroom plus two additional persons per building, not to exceed a maximum of 12 persons; or no more than 1 person for every 50 gallons of water per day that the building's sub - surface sewage treatment system is designed to handle, whichever is less. C. Parking shall meet the requirements of Section 7.15 of this Ordinance. Designated parking areas shall be off - street parking. D. On premise signs are prohibited. E. The Vacation/ Private Home Rental shall be connected to an approved subsurface sewage treatment system. The sub- surface sewage treatment system shall be designed and constructed with a design flow of 50 gallons of water per person per day to handle the maximum number of guests for which the facility is permitted. The sub - surface sewage treatment system shall include a flow measurement device. Flow measurement readings and monitoring of the sub - surface sewage treatment system shall be recorded monthly and records shall be made available to the Department upon request. The use of holding tanks for Vacation/ Private Home rental units shall be prohibited. F. Rental of recreational vehicles shall not be allowed. G. The Planning Commission may impose conditions that will reduce the impact of the proposed use on neighboring properties and nearby waterbodies. Said conditions may include but not be limited to a fence or vegetative screening along a property line or a native buffer along the shoreline. H. The owners of Vacation/ Private Home Rentals shall ensure that the noise standards of Minnesota Rules, chapter 7030; or successor rules, are met. The Planning Commission may impose a quiet hours standard in order to assist in achieving this goal and to reduce the potential impacts on neighboring properties. 23 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations The owners of Vacation /Private Home Rentals shall, at a minimum, comply with Minnesota Statutes, chapter 504B; or successor statue and make available to all tenants the Minnesota Attorney General's annual statement summarizing the significant legal rights and obligations of landlords and residential tenants, as described in Minnesota Statues, section 50413.275; or successor statute. The licensee shall keep a report, detailing use of the home by recording, at a minimum, the name, address, phone number and vehicle license number of all guests using the property. A copy of the report shall be provided to the Department upon request. No more than two Vacation /Private Home rentals will be allowed on a parcel. Construction of more than one single family dwelling unit or Guest Cottage shall only be allowed on a parcel that meets the requirements of Sections 10.2.8 and 10.2.12 of this Ordinance. More than two Vacation/ Private Home rentals on the same parcel or on contiguous parcels under common ownership shall constitute a resort and must meet the standards set forth in Section 10.2.23 of this Ordinance. 6.49.2 License Required A Vacation /Private Home Rental shall be licensed by the County and shall meet the requirements of Stearns County Ordinance Number 204; or successor ordinances. 24 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations APPENDIX F: MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH STATUTORY LANGUAGE RECOMMENDATIONS Subd. 2. [Repealed, 1996 c 451 art 4 s 71] Subd. 3. Commissioner. "Commissioner" means the commissioner of health. Subd. 4.Boarding establishment. "Boarding establishment" means a food and beverage service establishment where food or beverages, or both, are furnished to five or more regular boarders, whether with or without sleeping accommodations, for periods of one week or more. Subd. 5.Food and beverage service establishment. "Food and beverage service establishment" means a building, structure, enclosure, or any part of a building, structure, or enclosure used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be an operation that prepares, serves, or otherwise provides food or beverages, or both, for human consumption. Subd. 6.Food cart. "Food cart" means a food and beverage service establishment that is a nonmotorized vehicle self - propelled by the operator. Subd. 7.Hotel or motel. "Hotel or motel" means a building, structure, enclosure, or any part thereof used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public and furnishing accommodations for periods of less than one week. Subd. 8.Lodging establishment. "Lodging establishment" means a building, structure, enclosure, or any part thereof used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public as regular roomers, for periods of one week or more, and having five or more beds to let to the public. W Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Subd. 9.Mobile food unit. "Mobile food unit" means a food and beverage service establishment that is a vehicle mounted unit, either motorized or trailered, operating no more than 21 days annually at any one place or is operated in conjunction with a permanent business licensed under this chapter or chapter 28A at the site of the permanent business by the same individual or company, and.readily movable, without disassembling, for transport to another location. Subd. 10.Person. "Person" has the meaning given in section 103I.005, subdivision 16. Subd. 11.Resort. "Resort" means a building, structure, enclosure, or any part thereof located on, or on property neighboring, any lake, stream, skiing or hunting area, or any recreational area for purposes of providing convenient access thereto, kept, used, maintained, or advertised as, or held out to the public to be a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public, and primarily to those seeking recreation for periods of one day, one week, or longer, and having for rent five or-- mere cottages, rooms, or enclosures. Subd. 12.Restaurant. "Restaurant" means a food and beverage service establishment, whether the establishment serves alcoholic or nonalcoholic beverages, which operates from a location for more than 21 days annually. Restaurant does not include a food cart or a mobile food unit. Subd. 12a. Seasonal permanent food stand. "Seasonal permanent food stand" means a food and beverage service establishment which is a permanent food service stand or building, but which operates no more than 21 days annually. Subd. 13.Seasonal temporary food stand. "Seasonal temporary food stand" means a food and beverage service establishment that is a food stand which is disassembled and moved from location to location, but which operates no more than 21 days annually at any one location. Subd. 14.Special event food stand. "Special event food stand" means a food and beverage service establishment which is used in conjunction with celebrations and special events, and which operates no more than three times annually for no more than ten total days. 26 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Subd. 15. [Repealed, 1998 c 407 art 2 s 109 Subd. 16.Critical control point. "Critical control point" means a point or procedure in a specific food system where loss of control may result in an unacceptable health risk. Subd. 17.HACCP plan. "Hazard analysis critical control point ( HACCP) plan" means a written document that delineates the formal procedures for following the HACCP principles developed by the National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods. Subd. 18.Hazard. "Hazard" means any biological, chemical, or physical property that may cause an unacceptable consumer health risk. Subd. 19. Statewide hospitality fee. "Statewide hospitality fee" means a fee to fund statewide food, beverage, and lodging program development activities, including training for inspection staff, technical assistance, maintenance of a statewide integrated food safety and security information system, and other related statewide activities that support the food, beverage, and lodging program activities. place "Vacation home rental means anv home, cabin, condominium or similar building that is advertised or held out to the public as a accommodations where sleeping breakfast, resorthotel or motel. History: 1995 c 207 art 9 s 41; 1996 c 451 art 4 s 47- 55,70; 1997 c 203 art 2 s 19 -21; 1998 c 407 art 2 s 87 -91; 1 Sp2005 c 4 art 6 s 43 27 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations (3) any building owned, operated, and used by a college or university in accordance with health regulations promulgated by the college or university under chapter 14; (4) any person, firm, or corporation whose principal mode of business is licensed under sections 28A.04 and 28A.05, is exempt at that premises from licensure as a food or beverage establishment; provided that the holding of any license pursuant to sections 28A.04 and 28A.05 shall not exempt any person, firm, or corporation from the applicable provisions of this chapter or the rules of the state commissioner of health relating to food and beverage service establishments; (5) family day care homes and group family day care homes governed by sections 245A.01 to 245A.16; (6) nonprofit senior citizen centers for the sale of home -baked goods; (7) fraternal or patriotic organizations that are tax exempt under section 501(c) (3), 501(c)(4),* 501(c) (6), 501(c) (7), 501(c) (10), or 501(c) (19) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or organizations related to or affiliated with such fraternal or patriotic organizations. Such organizations may organize events at which home - prepared food is donated by organization members for sale at the events, provided: (i) the event is not a circus, carnival, or fair; (ii) the organization controls the admission of persons to the event, the event agenda, or both; and (iii) the organization's licensed kitchen is not used in any manner for the event; Such tax exempt organizations listed above may accept donations from private property owners at cabins or homes in recreational areas for weekend stays or periods of a week or less for fund raising efforts. Neither the property owner nor the tax exempt organization will be required to obtain a vacation home rental license or other lodging license for that donated period of time when limited to one donation annualh L (8) food not prepared at an establishment and brought in by individuals attending a potluck event for consumption at the potluck event. An organization sponsoring a potluck event under this clause may advertise the potluck event to the public through any means. 28 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Individuals who are not members of an organization sponsoring a potluck event under this clause may attend the potluck event and consume the food at the event. Licensed food establishments other than schools cannot be sponsors of potluck events. A school may sponsor and hold potluck events in areas of the school other than the school's kitchen, provided that the school's kitchen is not used in any manner for the potluck event. For purposes of this clause, "school" means a public school as defined in section 120A.05, subdivisions 9, 11, 13, and 17, or a nonpublic school, church, or religious organization at which a child is provided with instruction in compliance with sections 120A.22 and 120A.24. Potluck event food shall not be brought into a licensed food establishment kitchen; and (9) a home school in which a child is provided instruction at home. History: 1995 c 207 a1-t 9 s 48; 2000 c 378 s 1; 2001 c 65 s 1; 1Sp2001 c 9 art 1 s 55; 2002 c 379 art 1 s 113157.16 LICENSES REQUIRED; FEES. Subdivision 1. License required annually. A license is required annually for every person, firm, or corporation engaged in the business of conducting a food and beverage service establishment, hotel, motel, lodging establishment, public pool, vacation home rental or resort. Any person wishing to operate a place of business licensed in this section shall first make application, pay the required fee specified in this section, and receive approval for operation, including plan review approval. Seasonal and temporary food stands and special event food stands are not required to submit plans. Nonprofit organizations operating a special event food stand with multiple locations at an annual one -day event shall be issued only one license. Application shall be made on forms provided by the commissioner and shall require the applicant to state the full name and address of the owner of the building, structure, or enclosure, the lessee and manager of the food and beverage service establishment, hotel, motel, lodging establishment, public pool, vacation home rental or resort; the name under which the business is to be conducted; and any other information as may be required by the commissioner to complete the application for license. 29 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations Subd. 2. License renewal. Initial and renewal licenses for all food and beverage service establishments, hotels, motels, lodging establishments, public pools, vacation home rentals and resorts shall be issued for the calendar year for which application is made and shall expire on December 31 of such year. Any person who operates a place of business after the expiration date of a license or without having submitted an application and paid the fee shall be deemed to have violated the provisions of this chapter and shall be subject to enforcement action, as provided in the Health Enforcement Consolidation Act, sections 144.989 to 144.993. In addition, a penalty of $50 shall be added to the total of the license fee for any food and beverage service establishment operating without a license as a mobile food unit, a seasonal temporary or seasonal permanent food stand, or a special event food stand, and a penalty of $100 shall be added to the total of the license fee for all restaurants, food carts, hotels, motels, lodging establishments, public pools, vacation home rentals and resorts operating without a license for a period of up to 30 days. A late fee of $300 shall be added to the license fee for establishments operating more than 30 days without a license. Subd. 2a. Food manager certification. An applicant for certification or certification renewal as a food manager must submit to the commissioner a $28 nonrefundable certification fee payable to the Department of Health. Subd. 3. Establishment fees; definitions. (a) The following fees are required for food and beverage service establishments, hotels, motels, lodging establishments, public pools, vacation home rentals and resorts licensed under this chapter. Food and beverage service establishments must pay the highest applicable fee under paragraph (d), clause (1), (2), (3), or (4), and establishments serving alcohol must pay the highest applicable fee under paragraph (d), clause (6) or (7). The license fee for new operators previously licensed under this chapter for the same calendar year is one -half of the appropriate annual license fee, plus any penalty that may be required. The license fee for operators opening on or after October 1 is one -half of the appropriate annual license fee, plus any penalty that may be required. 30 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations (b) All food and beverage service establishments, except special event food stands, and all hotels, motels, lodging establishments, public pools, vacation home rentals and resorts shall pay an annual base fee of $150. (c) A special event food stand shall pay a flat fee of $40 annually. "Special event food stand" means a fee category where food is prepared or served in conjunction with celebrations, county fairs, or special events from a special event food stand as defined in section 157.15. (d) In addition to the base fee in paragraph (b), each food and beverage service establishment, other than a special event food stand, and each hotel, motel, lodging establishment, public pool, vacation home rental and resort shall pay an additional annual fee for each fee category, additional food service, or required additional inspection specified in this paragraph: (1) Limited food menu selection, $50. "Limited food menu selection" means a fee category that provides one or more of the following: (i) prepackaged food that receives heat treatment and is served in the package; (ii) frozen pizza that is heated and served; (iii) a continental breakfast such as rolls, coffee, juice, milk, and cold cereal; (iv) soft drinks, coffee, or nonalcoholic beverages; or (v) cleaning for eating, drinking, or cooking utensils, when the only food served is prepared off site. (2) Small establishment, including boarding establishments, $100. "Small establishment" means a fee category that has no salad bar and meets one or more of the following: (i) possesses food service equipment that consists of no more than a deep fat fryer, a grill, two hot holding containers, and one or more microwave ovens; (ii) serves dipped ice cream or soft serve frozen desserts; (iii) serves breakfast in an owner - occupied bed and breakfast establishment; (iv) is a boarding establishment; or 31 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations (v) meets the equipment criteria in clause (3), item (i) or (ii), and has a maximum patron seating capacity of not more than 50. (3) Medium establishment, $260. "Medium establishment" means a fee category that meets one or more of the following: (i) possesses food service equipment that includes a range, oven, steam table, salad bar, or salad preparation area; (ii) possesses food service equipment that includes more than one deep fat fryer, one grill, or two hot holding containers; or (iii) is an establishment where food is prepared at one location and served at one or more separate locations. Establishments meeting criteria in clause (2), item (v), are not included in this fee category. (4) Large establishment, $460. "Large establishment" means either: (i) a fee category that (A) meets the criteria in clause (3), items (i) or (ii), for a medium establishment, (B) seats more than 175 people, and (C) offers the full menu selection an average of five or more days a week during the weeks of operation; or (ii) a fee category that (A) meets the criteria in clause (3), item (iii), for a medium establishment, and (B) prepares and serves 500 or more meals per day. (5) Other food and beverage service, including food carts, mobile food units, seasonal temporary food stands, and seasonal permanent food stands, $50. (6) Beer or wine table service, $50. "Beer or wine table service" means a fee category where the only alcoholic beverage service is beer or wine, served to customers seated at tables. (7) Alcoholic beverage service, other than beer or wine table service, $135. "Alcohol beverage service, other than beer or wine table service" means a fee category where alcoholic mixed drinks are served or where beer or wine are served from a bar. (8) Lodging per sleeping accommodation unit, $8, including hotels, motels, lodging establishments, vacation home rentals and resorts, up to a maximum of $800. "Lodging per sleeping accommodation unit" means a fee category including the number of guest rooms, cottages, or other rental units of a hotel, motel, lodging establishment, vacation home rental or resort; or the number of beds in a dormitory. 32 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations (9) First public pool, $180; each additional public pool, $100. "Public pool" means a fee category that has the meaning given in section 144.1222, subdivision 4. (10) First spa, $110; each additional spa, $50. "Spa pool" means a fee category that has the meaning given in Minnesota Rules, part 4717.0250, subpart 9. (11) Private sewer or water, $50. "Individual private water" means a fee category with a water supply other than a community public water supply as defined in Minnesota Rules, chapter 4720. "Individual private sewer" means a fee category with an individual sewage treatment system which uses subsurface treatment and disposal. (12) Additional food service, $130. "Additional food service" means a location at a food service establishment, other than the primary food preparation and service area, used to prepare or serve food to the public. (13) Additional inspection fee, $300. "Additional inspection fee" means a fee to conduct the second inspection each year for elementary and secondary education facility school lunch programs when required by the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act. (e) A fee of $350 for review of the construction plans must accompany the initial license application for restaurants, hotels, motels, lodging establishments, vacation home rentals or resorts with five or more sleeping units. (f) When existing food and beverage service establishments, hotels, motels, lodging establishments, vacation home rentals or resorts are extensively remodeled, a fee of $250 must be submitted with the remodeling plans. A fee of $250 must be submitted for new construction or remodeling for a restaurant with a limited food menu selection, a seasonal permanent food stand, a mobile food unit, or a food cart, or for a hotel, motel, resort, vacation home rental or lodging establishment addition of less than five sleeping units. (g) Seasonal temporary food stands and special event food stands are not required to submit construction or remodeling plans for review. Subd. 3a. Statewide hospitality fee. Every person, firm, or corporation that operates a licensed boarding establishment, food and beverage service establishment, seasonal 33 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations temporary or permanent food stand, special event food stand, mobile food unit, food cart, resort, hotel, motel, vacation home rental or lodging establishment in Minnesota must submit to the commissioner a $35 annual statewide hospitality fee for each licensed activity. The fee for establishments licensed by the Department of Health is required at the same time the licensure fee is due. For establishments licensed by local governments, the fee is due by July 1 of each year. Subd. 4. Posting requirements. Every food and beverage service establishment, hotel, motel, lodging establishment, public pool, vacation home rental or resort must have the license posted in a conspicuous place at the establishment. History: 1995 c 207 art 9 s 42; 1996 c 451 art 4 s 56; 1997 c 203 art 2 s 22; 1998 c 397 art 11 s 3; 1998 c 407 art 2 s 92; 1Sp2001 c 9 art 1 s 54; 2002 c 379 art 1 s 113; 1Sp2005 c 4 art 6 s 44 -47; 2007 c 147 art 9 s 34; 2008 c 328 s 8 Copyright © 2008 by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All rights reserved. 34 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations APPENDIX G: Minnesota Department of Revenue Statutory Language Recommendations Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 297A.67, subdivision 23 is amended to read: Subd. 23. Occasional sales. Isolated and occasional sales in Minnesota not made in the normal course of business of selling that kind of property or service are exempt. The storage, use, or consumption of property or services acquired as a result of such a sale is exempt. This exemption does not apply to sales of tangible personal property primarily used in a trade or business. The rental or lease, for a consideration in money or by exchange or barter, of a residential dwelling, including4 anv home, cabin, condominium or similar buildi business of selling that kind of property or service as defined in subdivision 21. as a place for sleeping accommodations and which is not licensed. or required to be licensed as a bed and breakfast, hotel, motel, resort or caprotnd, is exempt as an occasional sale provided the dwelling is leased or rented for 14 or Less days in a calendar fir. [EFFECTIVE DATE.] This section is effective for rentals and leases after Tune 30, 2009. 011 Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations APPENDIX H: Minnesota Seasonal Recreational Properties Owners Coalition Concerns To the Members of the Vacation Home Rental Task Force: Colleen has asked us all to weigh in on the Draft Report to the Legislature. MSRPO spent much time working on this committee, and we supported the concept of determining if there were a lot of people who were renting out cabins as a business, but not paying the related taxes, fees or obtaining appropriate permits. This Task Force, we believe, has moved far beyond that original goal. As an organization we concur with the resort community that like businesses should be treated similarly in state law. MSRPO does not represent vacation home rental owners - we represent cabin owners and hunting land owners. From time to time some of these owners rent out their places to friends, family or acquaintances. This legitimate use of their property, based on our conversations with our 6,000 members is very infrequent and rare. We had hoped that this task force would illuminate the issues involved in these occasional rentals, and that we could pass this valuable information on to those who own cabins and hunting lands in the state. That being said, here are our thoughts on the report in its current format: 1) We have no idea if there is a problem or if there is, how widespread it might be. At every single meeting we have raised the issue of how big a problem are we talking about. This report does not answer that question. Instead it goes ahead and proposes a legislative change to solve a problem that we do not even know for certain exists. 2) The Task force was to look at those involved in vacation home rental as a business, recognizing that some property owners may, from time to time, rent out their place to friends, family or acquaintances. This is not vacation home rental as a business, but a legal and perfectly fine use of a property by an owner. Yet the proposed regulations do little to differentiate between those who are in the business of renting vacation homes, and those owners who occasionally rent out their places to help make ends meet. 3) Definition suggestion in M.S. 157.15 - We strongly believe that this definition is far too narrow and encroaches on private property rights. Property Owners who occasionally rent out their properties did not buy their properties as a business investment; they are not depending on these properties for their income. W. Explore Minnesota Tourism Minnesota Vacation Home Rental Task Force Report and Recommendations In conclusion, the changes suggested in this report do not "level the playing field" between cabin or hunting land owners who occasionally rent out their places and resort owners, who are in the full time business of renting out access to the great outdoors. These changes harm cabin and hunting land owners unfairly - they did not buy their properties as businesses and are not using them as a business and should not be treated as such. We believe the recommendations made in this report to be an unfair targeting of ALL seasonal property owners and a taking of property rights from them. We cannot support the recommendations as they are currently presented in this report. However we stand ready work with interested parties at the legislature to correct these and other issues. Sincerely, Jeff Forester Executive Director, Minnesota Seasonal Recreational Property Owners, MSRPO 37 Explore Minnesota Tourism CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SHOREWOOD RENTAL HOUSING CODE AS IT PERTAINS TO SHORT-TERM RENTAL OF PROPERTY Section 1. RECITALS (a) The potential exists for short-term rentals to become a significant business operation in Minnesota. (b) Short-term rental of property in Shorewood’s residential zoning districts has resulted in complaints from residents living near such rental properties. Section 2. FINDINGS (a) Many short-term rental properties may fall under the jurisdiction of state law (those that qualify as hotels, motels, or lodging establishments). The level of state licensing compliance may inevitably be low due to: (1) The amount of manpower required for monitoring and enforcement. (2) The fact that new short-term rentals constantly enter the market. (3) Those offering accommodations not in compliance may be notified and then take steps to avoid further detection from licensing authorities. (4) These same issues apply to cities trying to regulate short-term rentals (b) Rental of private homes for temporary occupancy is contrary to the essential character and stability of residential neighborhoods because short-term tenants have little interest in the welfare of the local community, do not engage in activities that strengthen residential neighborhoods, and do not integrate into residential neighborhoods. (c) Rental of homes for temporary occupancy disturbs residential neighborhoods by creating excessive noise, accumulation of refuse, trespassing, disorderly conduct, vandalism, high occupant turnover, excessive traffic, and excessive numbers of parked motor vehicles. (d) Regulating rental of private homes for temporary occupancy is necessary to protect the essential character of residential neighborhoods and the health, safety and general welfare of the community. (e) Rental of residential homes for temporary occupancy is often undertaken without adequate on-site management, compliance with state and local codes for commercial lodging establishments, and other safeguards for those renting the home. (f) Operating a commercial business venture in close proximity to neighboring residences can lead to conflict and undermines the fundamental principles of zoning. (g) Short-term rentals render a significant number of housing units unavailable for long-term residents and raise the cost of housing. (h) Short-term rentals have the potential to diminish property values. Section 3 . City Code Section 1004.02 is hereby amended to add the following defintions: “DWELLING UNIT (a) . A residential building or portion thereof intended for occupancy by one family, but not including hotels, motels, lodging establishments, nursing homes, boarding or rooming houses or recreational vehicles.” “OPERATOR. (b) The person or enterprise or its agent who is owner or proprietor of a rental dwelling or rental dwelling unit, whether in the capacity of owner, lessee, sublessee, mortgagee in possession, licensee, or any other capacity. Where the operator performs their functions through a rental agent, the managing agency or the rental agent has the same duties as the principal.” “REMUNERATION. (c) Compensation, money, or other consideration given in return for occupancy, possession, or use of real property.” “RENT. (d) The consideration or remuneration charged whether or not received, for the occupancy or use of another’s property as a rental dwelling or rental dwelling unit, valued in money, whether to be received in money, goods, labor, or otherwise, including all receipts, cash, credits, property, or services of any kind. Rent may include consideration or remuneration received pursuant to an option to purchase whereby a person is given the right to possess the property for a term of less than thirty (30) days.” “SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT. (e) Any structure, any portion of any structure, rental dwelling or rental dwelling unit that is rented to a transient for less than thirty (30) consecutive days in a residential district or residential planned unit development district.” “TRANSIENT: (f) Any person who, at their own expense or at the expense of another, exercises occupancy or possession, or is entitled to occupancy or possession, by reason of any rental agreement, concession, permit, right of access, option to purchase, license, time sharing arrangement, or any other type of agreement for a period of less than thirty (30) consecutive calendar days.” Section 4 .City CodeSection 1004.06 is hereby amended to read: “1004.06 SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROHIBITED. Subd. 1. Purpose. The City finds that short-term rentals located in residential zoning districts constitute commercial use of residential property, conflict with the residential character of residential zoning districts, disrupt the residential character of neighborhoods, and have a negative impact on the livability of residential neighborhoods. The City has received complaints from residents regarding short-term rentals, including complaints related to noise, over- occupancy, and illegal parking. Studies have reported that short-term rentals can render a significant number of housing units unavailable for long-term residents and can raise the cost of housing. To ensure adequate housing options for residents, preserve the residential character of the City’s residential districts, preserve property values, and reduce land use conflicts, -2- the City determines, in furtherance of the public health, safety and general welfare, it is necessary to limit short-term rentals to hotels, motels, lodging establishments and similar accommodations which are appropriately zoned and have the appropriate infrastructure and services for short-term use. Subd. 2. Prohibition. Short-term rental of any dwelling or dwelling unit to a transient for less than thirty (30) consecutive days in a residential zoning district is prohibited. State licensed hotels, motels and lodging establishments located outside residential districts or residential planned unit development districts are allowed, pursuant to applicable City codes. Subd. 3. Enforcement. An owner, operator, tenant or occupant of any building or property in violation of the provisions of this section may be charged and found guilty of a misdemeanor and may be held responsible for the cost of enforcement in addition to penalties. The City may exercise any and all remedies at law or in equity to ensure compliance with this section. All unpaid costs, charges and penalties may be certified as a special assessment levy against the property.” Section 5 .PreviousCity CodeSection 1004.06 (Administration and Enforcements) is renumbered as Section 1004.07. Section 6 . This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publication. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 26th day of September, 2016. SCOTT ZERBY, MAYOR ATTEST: JEAN PANCHYSHYN, CITY CLERK -3- CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 16-______ A RESOLUTION APPROVING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. ______ BY TITLE ANDSUMMARY WHEREAS, on 26 September 2016, the City Council of the City of Shorewood adopted Ordinance No. _____ entitled “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SHOREWOOD RENTAL HOUSING CODE AS IT PERTAINS TO SHORT-TERM RENTAL OF PROPERTY; ” WHEREAS, the City staff has prepared a summary of Ordinance No. ______ as follows: 1.The purpose of this ordinance is to protect the comfort, repose, health, peace, safety, or welfare of city residents, and the quiet enjoyment of property within the city by prohibiting the short-term rental of any dwelling or dwelling unit to a transient for less than thirty (30) consecutive days in a residential zoning district. 2.The City has determined, in furtherance of the public health, safety and general welfare, it is necessary to limit short-term rentals to hotels, motels, lodging establishments and similar accommodations which are appropriately zoned and have the appropriate infrastructure and services for short-term use. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD: 1. The City Council finds that the above title and summary of Ordinance No. _____ clearly informs the public of intent and effect of the Ordinance. 2. The City Clerk is directed to publish Ordinance No. _____ by title and summary, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.191, subdivision 4. 3.A full copy of the Ordinance is available at Shorewood City Hall and on the city’s website. ADOPTED by the Shorewood City Council on this 26th day of September 2016. ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor ________________________________ Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk #8C MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Magney, Mark – Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet Meeting Date: 26 September 2016 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen Attachments: Planning Director’s Memorandum Draft Resolution Policy Consideration: Should the City grant a conditional use permit that would allow Mr. Magney to keep an existing shed on his property at 21195 Radisson Road? Background: Mark Magney has constructed a new garage addition on his home at 21195 Radisson Road which, when combined with an existing garage and an existing shed, puts the property over 1200 square feet of accessory space, requiring a conditional use permit. Detailed background can be found in the Planning Director’s memorandum, dated 18 September 2016. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item at their 20 September meeting and voted unanimously to approve the CUP as presented. Financial or Budget Considerations: None. The cost of the application is covered by application fees. Options: Approve the request as presented, approve with conditions or deny the request. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff agrees with the Planning Commission’s recommendation and recommends adoption of the attached draft resolution. Next Steps and Timelines: Adoption of the resolution allows Mr. Magney to keep his existing shed. No further steps are required. 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 r FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 18 September 2016 RE: Magney; Mark - C.U.P. for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet FILE NO.: 405 (16.21) BACKGROUND Mr. Mark Magney has applied for a conditional use permit to construct accessory, space in excess of 1200 square feet on the property located at 21195 Radisson Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). Mr. Magney has recently remodeled the existing home and added a new attached garage (see Exhibit B — Sheet 1). The new garage, in addition to an existing detached garage and an existing shed, bring the total amount of accessory space to over 1200 square feet of floor area. The property is zoned R -1A/S, Single- Family Residential /Shoreland and contains 40,259 square feet in area. The new garage contains 467 square feet. Combined with the utility shed and the existing garage, the amount of accessory space on the site will total 1258 square feet. The proposed garage will be 30 feet from the side (east) lot line and approximately 125 feet from the northerly front lot line. Plans for the new garage are illustrated on Exhibits D and E, attached. The existing home contains 1961 square feet of floor area above grade. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Zoning Code prescribes criteria for granting conditional use permits for accessory space over 1200 square feet. Following is how the applicant's plans comply with the Code: a. The total area of accessory buildings (1258 square feet) does not exceed the proposed floor area (1961 square feet) above grade of the existing home. b. The total area of accessory buildings does not exceed 10 percent of the minimum lot size for the R -lA/S zoning district (.10 x 40,000 = 4000 square feet). Memorandum Re: Magney C.U.P. 18 September 2016 c. The proposed garage complies with R -lA /S setback requirements. The total area of impervious surface on the property will be only 21.4 percent.. Since the new structure is tucked into some rather large trees and screened by the existing garage, no additional landscaping is considered necessary. d. The architectural character of the new building is the same as the existing house. Siding and roofing of all the accessory structures is compatible with the house (see photo — Exhibit F, attached. Based upon the preceding analysis, it is recoininended that the applicant's request for a conditional use permit be granted, subject only to the standard warning that such structures are for residential use only, and that any type of home occupation conducted within an accessory building must obtain a separate permit. cc: Bill Joynes Tim Keane Joe Pazandak Mark Magney 2 ra, o C:) LL a� o J z� o -� 4-, Lo s U N , HCL o � cn a p ale] WIS u m Q cn J LU U pa i U O S I I Q Exhibit A mot- SITE LOCATION ff� c // cr. S U W n� j 0 Q &� QCk , AKE �D o� T,oN 0 w x U 0 m ui N is !i s� F QO N r n � Alf ui !i N RS s�eo ' No 2�s ui !i N C) v 0 inE � X o C W ^y � 0 ; F ~j v E�Ss �n M �� `^ 6 n :2 mc� o y R F / you$ Qi l w w E z (D c a 0 0 hF Exhibit B PROPERTY SURVEY °NQ �O�o °u X81 / 1fIOd5tN' OlJ1V,131ll19 h131J hbE / ZE A dm i - -- iz of I u< .'S', 1— i*- OzO'O ON 1 1 c .7.t o1 NZ i I OFN � I z 00 _ ..,• i J 7ZE 4 T N i U C O 4 J 1 O C 1 N C) O / 1 ............... .'�' r I z ' s 1 Q 0 O= I � 1 N p \ ,i Z W W LL- LL W W IL W W IL W W U-- LL- to m U� cn n to n to n to IL- Q �6) 0nLn0 I TC)00no zW W�� to z � 'T G-) NON �O- -m�9 0 C) w U LU p�m 0 NC�r m -O (j f - - -- _a QO N N �zZZZ In FD - r)OOtn u< Z w m - u� O ��� - °`rte W N - + N Q (n LL Q Z6) �LLLL LLLL ILWIL a-LILLL w U p = tnN -NOO° I noon ��� ztntncntn LL g Q xO �NN(�� cQNN6� I �(�O OF'���p !,,W)I P O O V' I \ — n C 9 - W � — — - - ' \ W ( n m ro =zzzz W �Q z z >- o O Q Om CO d" N = Q Q Z d- [D U Q z� H — i �� w O Q U J W W to Z Q Q Q 0 a LL- LL > cz > 1 Q o o uo W� 0 �z z o g Q� z z° mm o °� o w Zo o J � W � W m m Q Q W 0 Oz W/LLl >�Q QQQw O W O z � Q In �W �� �O� UU�I— 0) U= wQ Q o w W ��z�z > >���000z�W w �QO w a- o� �� 0 0 °00°cz o�wQ ° =zOO'� v �'�z v W :5 °o � Q�z =WOtnWotnwcngW�g QQ(n Q L zz z �Q � m E N o W � J � � V1 E rn U o E w xv E m � EU99, rn� o w n mF R �z W 0 T � 0 W p U- w N Z C w O W 0 = O W Q C) 0 Z z 0 of W m ° Z Z Lu w LLJ Zu O LL, C) T Exhibit C SITE PLAN 0 o 3 � iii �P a ni V> U 2 Q e� U z O O Q � II a 0 °p mx N N oD0 O U Q�iwO on �i �NU OXO - m • NzQ z O O Q � II a 0 — ] U N B-9 °p mx N N oD0 O U Q�iwO a w O eiw0? U za Off" oOC Q G K U� ONN� p " ,n N � -p K 3S p K p 2zr-¢ p O =' N O z u u N o ti oz p d d '� =�F NuNUNi K w 3� o n ,n �J m u � o Nv — ] U N B-9 ro 7� mP Qu N 3 o °ok �ut-i UQ �K N S Np p � ON 3 N U U � O lu KO � nO n O U 1 N p � w N O z � � 8 ] U ] u 0= � O Q - � II w _W H Q 00 Q °cccc v m�mm° 0 E fl E� =�Y R W O T � N O W E Z� 6 C O Q LU W� Zv 1^), w V �( T E E Exhibit D NORTH & SOUTH ELEVATIONS ax w mx N v zU ro 7� mP Qu N 3 o °ok �ut-i UQ �K N S Np p � ON 3 N U U � O lu KO � nO n O U 1 N p � w N O z � � 8 ] U ] u 0= � O Q - � II w _W H Q 00 Q °cccc v m�mm° 0 E fl E� =�Y R W O T � N O W E Z� 6 C O Q LU W� Zv 1^), w V �( T E E Exhibit D NORTH & SOUTH ELEVATIONS d� x o 0 LLL O F O V S O V O m � _ O NC o c o oz w °o o 3 o o Qo�o N N s W a g o w o dd O C SQ U a 0 Om C F m N° NQ �N dU,PN 6 d d� x o 0 LLL O F O V S O V O m � _ O NC o c o oz w °o o z O b a w u W -1D � W W C N L a .n k m U ui G a Q Fo Z� �? NQ 2,Q �2 3 > O ¢Ogg O EN po QK N S ,OU 0 0 ° L F q 3 O � U OzmN ry _ g N � N O z o o i- w � U U w in T J e �T d Q CC�mC —o 0 E H of 0 .ae oNh W O \� N /_ 0 O LLJ E 7 C 6 C O 5 Q LU W (�\ Z 1^ /\ UJ V � T 0 E A Exhibit E EAST & WEST ELEVATIONS o o N / F- ° OFD dd O C SQ U a 0 Om C F m 6 o - 3 x - z O b a w u W -1D � W W C N L a .n k m U ui G a Q Fo Z� �? NQ 2,Q �2 3 > O ¢Ogg O EN po QK N S ,OU 0 0 ° L F q 3 O � U OzmN ry _ g N � N O z o o i- w � U U w in T J e �T d Q CC�mC —o 0 E H of 0 .ae oNh W O \� N /_ 0 O LLJ E 7 C 6 C O 5 Q LU W (�\ Z 1^ /\ UJ V � T 0 E A Exhibit E EAST & WEST ELEVATIONS ��i"�•3.. � �,cM. �iiJ 1. `TV' F It OL: x x m O� ; �.~.•`Ri1�1' `TV' F It OL: CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. _________ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ADDITIONAL ACCESSORY SPACE TO MARK MAGNEY WHEREAS , Mark Magney (Applicant) is the owner of real property located at 21195 Radisson Road, in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof: WHEREAS , the Applicant has applied to the City for a Conditional Use Permit to keep and existing shed on the property, the area of which, when added to the area of other accessory space on the property, will bring the total area of accessory space on the property up to 1258 square feet; and WHEREAS , the Shorewood City Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of accessory space exceeding 1200 square feet; and WHEREAS , the Applicant’s request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated 18 September 2016, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS , after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting on 20 September 2016, the minutes of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS , the Applicant’s request was considered by the City Council at its regular meeting on 26 September 2016, at which time the Planner's memorandum and the minutes of the Planning Commission were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject property is located in a R-1A/S, Single- Family Residential/Shoreland zoning district and contains approximately 40,259 square feet of area. 2. The total proposed accessory space (1258 square feet) does not exceed the floor area above grade of the principal structure (2473 square feet). 3. The total area of accessory space does not exceed 10% of the minimum lot area for the R-1A/S zoning district in which it is located (4000 square feet). 4. The design and materials of the accessory structures are consistent with the architectural character of the existing home. 5. The accessory structures comply with all setback requirements for the R-1A/S. zoning- district. 6. The total amount of impervious surface on the property is 21.4 percent and complies with S District requirements. CONCLUSION A. The application of Mark Magney for a Conditional Use Permit as set forth herein above be and hereby is granted. B. This approval is subject to the following: 1. The detached garage will be used strictly for purposes of a residential nature. 2. The Applicant is hereby advised that the City Code provides specific regulations relative to home occupations and any future use of the garage spaces for other than allowable residential purposes would have to comply with such regulations. C. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide the Applicant with a certified copy of this Resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY SHOREWOOD this 26th day of September 2016. ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk -2- “Lot 1, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 246, except Parcel 216G as shown on MN/DOT Right-of-Way Plats 27-65 and 27-66.” Exhibit A -3- � #so MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: Oys, Patricia—Conditional Use Permit for Special Home Occupation Meeting Date: 26 September 2016 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen Attachments: Planning Director's Memorandum Draft Resolution Policy Consideration: Should the City approve a conditional use permit for Patricia Oys to conduct exercise classes in her home at 5825 Brentridge Drive? Background: See attached Planning Director's memorandum for detailed background on this item. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at its 20 September meeting and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the CUP, subject to conditions. Financial or Budget Considerations: Processing of the request is covered by the application fee. Options: Approve the request; modify the conditions; or deny the request. Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff agrees with the Planning Commission's recommendation, which include two conditions: 1)client parking must be located in the applicant's driveway and no closer than 25 feet from the back of the curb; and 2)the number of clients at any one time is limited to four. Next Steps and Timelines: Upon adoption of the attached resolution,the applicant may commence with group exercise lessons. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 952-960-7900 Fax: 952-474-0128 www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 15 September 2016 RE: Oys, Patricia – Special Home Occupation CUP FILE NO.: 405(16.20) BACKGROUND Ms. Patricia Oys owns the property at 5825 Brentridge Drive (see Site Location map – Exhibit A, attached). She has applied for a special home occupation permit pursuant to Section 1201.03 Subd. 12 of the Shorewood Zoning Code, to give exercise (Pilates) classes in her home. A special home occupation permit requires approval of a conditional use permit (CUP), a public hearing for which is scheduled for next Tuesday. The subject property is located in the R-1C, Single-Family Residential zoning district. As stated in her letter (Exhibit B), dated 15 July 2106, she typically teaches one on one to her students. Occasionally, however, she may have two students at once. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION This request is quite simple. Ms. Oys business would otherwise qualify as a limited home occupation, for which no permit is required. She wants to address the potential for having more than one student at a time by obtaining a CUP. Approval of the CUP is recommended with the specific condition that any client parking be limited to the existing driveway and that cars must be parked no closer than 25 feet from the edge of the street. Cc: Bill Joynes Tim Keane Patricia Oys I ^ ti i i fAn la4ar-6, Q-1 M144 -h-: AZ) Exhibit B Planning Commission City of Shorewood 5755 County Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Patricia Oys Request of a Conditional Permit SLP '19 ?0iri September 19, 0T :._ °F.!OfvvUOu I am opposed to the request for a conditional permit for a Special Home Occupation permit for the following reasons: First, there is no limitation on the number of clients which would be allowed. It simply states "to more than one client per session in her home" Second, I don't know of any other permits like this in this neighborhood and granting the request would be setting a precedence which would be difficult to overcome when the next request comes in. Robert Thiner 5855 Brentridge Dr Shorewood. MN 55331 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. __________ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT TO PATRICIA OYS WHEREAS , Patricia Oys (Applicant) is the owner of certain real property located at 5825 in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described as: “Lot 12, Block 2, Brentridge.” WHEREAS , the Applicant proposes to teach exercise classes to more than one client at a time in her home; and WHEREAS , the Shorewood Zoning Code requires a conditional use permit to conduct a home occupation involving group lessons; and WHEREAS , the Applicant’s request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated 15 September 2016, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS , after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting on 20 September 2016, the minutes of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS , the Applicant’s request for a conditional use permit was considered by the City Council at its regular meeting on 26 September 2016 at which time the Planner’s memorandum and the minutes of the Planning Commission were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the City Staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Subject Property is located in an R-1C, Single-Family Residential zoning district and contains approximately 20,502 square feet of area. 2. The lessons provided by the applicant are conducted inside the home and are limited to no more than four clients at any one time. 3. The applicant schedules classes by appointment only. CONCLUSIONS 1. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants the Applicant’s request for a conditional use permit for a Special Home Occupation Permit. 2. This approval is subject to the following conditions: a. The number of clients at the property at any one time is limited to four. b. Client parking must be entirely within the applicant’s driveway and no closer than 25 feet from the back of the curb of the street. 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a certified copy of this resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 26th day of September 2016. __________________________ ATTEST: SCOTT ZERBY, MAYOR _____________________________________ JEAN PANCHYSHYN, CITY CLERK 2 #9A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Title/Subject: Accept Proposal for Professional Services - Lilac Lane Drainage Study Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 Prepared by: Paul Hornby, City Engineer Reviewed by: Attachments Proposal for Professional Services from WSB and Associates Policy Consideration: Should the City Council enter into a contract with WSB and Associates, Inc. to prepare a drainage study for Lilac Lane? Background: The City Council requested consultant staff prepare a scope of services and professional services proposal to review drainage concerns at 21710 Lilac Lane. WSB has prepared a scope of services with tasks for the project that include project management, development of a stormwater model to evaluate existing conditions for the design a long term solution, and preparation of a preliminary drainage review and feasibility level drainage design. The total fee is estimated at an hourly cost reimbursable basis in the amount of$8,300. Council should be aware that many of the City roadways are rural, meaning the stormwater flows over the surface through ditches and culverts. There may be many drainage situations that are similar to this drainage concern throughout the City. Financial Considerations: At this time, the City budget does not provide dedicated funding for this drainage item. Professional consultant services to prepare a letter style feasibility study of the drainage issue is estimated to be $8,300. Options: 1. Accept the proposal, as presented. 2. Reject the proposal and provide staff with alternative direction. Recommendation: Staff is recommending consider the professional services proposal and consider a motion to accept the professional services proposal and authorize WSB to prepare a letter feasibility study as proposed. 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 477 Temperance Street I St. Paul,MN 55101 1 (651)286-8450 September 22, 2016 Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Proposal for Feasibility Letter/Preliminary Design Services Lilac Lane Drainage Study City of Shorewood (WSB#2925-140) Honorable Mayor and Council Members: WSB &Associates, Inc. is pleased to provide you with our proposal for the preparation of a Feasibility Letter and Preliminary Design for the Lilac Lane Drainage Study. Proiect Understanding The City Council requested a scope of services for the Lilac Lane Drainage Study on September 8, 2016 due to concerns raised by the property owner at 21710 Lilac Lane.The property currently experiences drainage down and across the driveway resulting in erosion of the driveway.The elevation of the house pad ranges from 6 to 12 feet lower than the roadway and there are currently no storm sewer facilities on Lilac Lane to handle drainage. The proposed scope of services includes the following: • Review of existing conditions of the drainage area tributary to Lilac Lane. • Develop a stormwater model to provide a detailed drainage analysis along with hydraulic modeling for designing a long term solution to remedy the issue. Proposed Services • Project management and coordination/meetings with City staff and the City Council. • Meeting with property owner to share our evaluation and identify concerns. • Collect background information and current conditions. • Develop drainage area map based on available Lidar/contour data. • Develop Stormwater model to evaluate existing conditions. • Develop hydraulic model for design of long term solution. • Prepare letter feasibility report summarizing existing conditions, possible improvements, and cost estimates. • Prepare preliminary drainage review and feasibility level drainage design. • Prepare a preliminary project schedule. • Identify necessary permitting required. Building a legacy—your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.com K:\02925-140\Admin\Dots\Lilac Lane Drainage\Professional Services Proposal-Lilac Drainage Study.docx Lilac Lane— Feasibility Proposal September 22, 2016 Page 2 We are proposing to complete the work on a cost-reimbursable basis in accordance with our current fee schedule at an hourly basis. The estimated fees for Preliminary Design/Feasibility Report Preparation is $8,300. 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 651-286-8453 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB&Associates, Inc. Paul Hornby, P.E. Associate PROPOSAL FOR: Preliminary Design/Feasibility Letter Preparation Services— Lilac Lane Drainage Study. ACCEPTED BY: City of Shorewood, MN Name Title Date K:\02925-140\Admin\Dots\Lilac Lane Drainage\Professional Services Proposal-Lilac Drainage Study.docx • � � _. - y f o 1 - # 16 Ar o JKI mi a ^ f �' + IL _. .' All Kul .rte•__ r� � • y #9B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Resolution Accepting Bids and Award of Construction Contract 2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project (Oppidan), City Project 16-04 Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 Prepared by: Paul Hornby Reviewed by: Attachments: Resolution, Bid Results Letter, Bid Summary Background: As part of the Oppidan Shorewood Senior Living Facility development, the City Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications for the for the 2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project on June 27, 2016. The 2016 Watermain Extension Project includes the extension of new watermain from the intersection of Yellowstone Trail and Minnetonka Drive to the proposed Shorewood Senior Living Facility development located at 6000 Chaska Road. To properly serve the facility, watermain 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 and extends along Chaska Road to the south property line of the development. Extension of the watermain will require open cut installation with full width street restoration. Streets disturbed by construction will be restored to the existing pavement widths. The City received bids on Thursday, September 15, 2016, and WSB has prepared the bid results with tabulation summary of bids received. The lowest responsive bid received is from Widmer Construction LLC, Maple Plain, Minnesota, in the grand total amount of $1,102,856.13. Financial or Budget Considerations: Funding for the project will come from the developer, TIF, and the City Water Fund. Options: Staff recommends Council consider the following actions: 1.Approve the resolution accepting bids and awarding the contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder for the 2016 Trunk Watermain Improvement Project, City Project 16-04. 2.Reject all bids for the 2016 Trunk Watermain Improvement Project, City Project 16-04. 3.Take no action on this item at this time. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached resolution “accepting bids and awarding contract for the 2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project, City Project 16-04” to Widmer Construction, LLC. 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 ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE 2016 TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CITY PROJECT NO. 16-04 WHEREAS , pursuant to an advertisement for bids for local improvements designated as the 2016 Trunk Watermain Improvement Project, City Project 16-04, bids were received, and opened on September 15, 2016, and tabulated according to law, and such tabulation is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that Widmer Construction LLC is the lowest bidder in compliance with the bid documents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Widmer Construction LLC in the name of the City of Shorewood, Project No. 16-04, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except for the deposits of the successful bidder and the next two lowest bidders, which shall be retained until a contract has been signed. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCILOF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD th this 26 day of September, 2016. ATTEST: Scott Zerby, Mayor Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk 477 Temperance Street | St. Paul, MN 55101 | (651) 286-8450 September 16, 2016 Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: 2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project City of Shorewood, MN City Project No. 16-04 WSB Project No. 2925-16 Honorable Mayor and Council Members: Seven bids were received for the above-referenced project on Thursday, September 15, 2016, were publicly opened and read aloud. The bids were checked for mathematical accuracy and tabulated. Enclosed is the tabulation of bids with the lowest bid as submitted by Widmer Construction LLC, of Maple Plain, Minnesota in the amount of $1,102,856.13. The Enginee $1,245,645.00. We recommend that the City Council review the bids received and if the Council choses to award the project construction contract, the project should be awarded to Widmer Construction LLC, of Maple Plain, Minnesota, in the amount of $1,102,856.13. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Paul Hornby, PE Associate Enclosures kkp Building a legacy legacy. your Equal Opportunity Employer | wsbeng.com K:\02925-160\Admin\Construction Admin\2925-16 LTR hmcc 091616.docx Jean Panchyshyn From:Bill Joynes Sent:Thursday, September 15, 2016 11:31 AM To:Richard Woodruff Cc:Paul Hornby; Larry Brown; Jean Panchyshyn Subject:RE: Page 7 of the reclassification report in previous email Dick, I will put this on the next agenda for Council direction. An independent analysis will cost some money and needs official approval. From: Dick Woodruff [mailto:dick.woodruff@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 3:03 PM To: Bill Joynes; Larry Brown; Engineer Subject: Fw: Page 7 of the reclassification report in previous email Bill, This is one of two emails from Bobby Arnold. The second follows in a separate mail to you three. I request staff evaluate what Bobby is providing and along with the other information it is gathering, make a presentation back to council at the next meeting. Staff must contact the MPCA directly to get its position on this, not relying on the lake association, RPBCWD staff and others to interpret. Dick Woodruff ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Bobby Arnold <bobbya528@gmail.com> To: Dick Woodruff <dick.woodruff@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 5:22 PM Subject: Page 7 of the reclassification report in previous email Bobby Sep 10 (3 days ago) <bobbya528@gmail.com> Arnold to Brock, Laurie, mjcas8372, Jeffrey I spoke to Laurie Susla yesterday while Jeff was at the Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce Public Policy meeting. Laurie said that she felt Pam Anderson was very helpful. From their conversation she said she thought if we took the chart that Dorothy passed out that is how MPCA makes their decision we can make some statements to change the X count which will increase the X count to favor to Shallow Lake. It is the pages she passed out and the first page says table 2 that explains what goes on page 7, figure 1, pages 2 through 6 explain the meaning of what goes on pages 7. Go to the fromto page marked 7 and the following are what should be changed the Wetland column the Lake column. The PWI both have a ? but if you look on page 1 #1 says The PWI or Protected Waters Inventory code is 136P, On table 2 the first page it says Lakes are typically coded L or LP, Shallow Lakes may be coded as either L, LP or LW, Wetlands are LW, Silver is 136P. Page 1 #3 says on the last line, "The survey identified the total littoral area as equal to the total area (70 lake. acres) of the On the first page, table 2 it says Littoral area for Wetland would be 100%. Below is more information I collected and the source Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS), Version 5.4 developed by the MN DNR and its partners The second most frequent land cover types are open water (90,000 series codes) 1 accounted for 1,835 acres (35%) of the land cover in the city. Important lakes within the City of Shorewood include Christmas Lake, Lake Minnetonka, Galpin Lake and Silver Lake. All are important resources for the city and should be afforded appropriate safeguards to maintain or improve their quality. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/shorelandmgmt/guide/classification.html dwellings per mile of shoreline. They may have some winter kill of fish; may have shallow, swampy shoreline; and are less than 15 Natural Environment (NE) Lakes usually have less than 150 total acres, less than 60 acres per mile of shoreline, and less than three feet deep. Brock this is what I take from the Silver Lake - Wetland Re-Classification document . In the Silver Lake - Wetland Re-Classification Steve McComas Survey There are only two places it references . Silver Lake - Wetland Re-Classification One place in the under Area, page 1, #4 18 acres refers to (MPCA-open water but it does not refer to where this data was obtained. 70 acres for total Lake, page 1, #3 and page 1, #4, 43 acres, the McComas survey Silver Lake - Wetland Re- same 43 acres of aquatic plant coverage page 17 of and page 3 #10 inthe Classification. 70 acres less 43 acres of aquatic plant coverage you get 27 acres of open water. No place in McComas survey did it say Silver Lake - 50% except when giving an example that specifically was Coontail. but the 50% or more was used in the Wetland Re-Classification. Two places reference RPBC observation, One place page 2, #7 references St. Croix Watershed Research Station. NO Silver Lake - Wetland Re- But place does it give reference of where the rest of the data was collected for the Classification and by whom. Silver Lake - Wetland Re-Classification This has clearly been manipulated by RPBC to facilitate a re-classification that suits Claire. Silver Lake - Wetland The fact that the new UAA was not available, in the Final form, for anyone to refer to before the Re-Classification was created and presented to Pam Anderson of MPCA would also lean toward the same conclusion 2