10-26-20 CC Reg Mtg Agenda Packet
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2020 7:00 P.M.
Due to the Centers for Disease Control's recommendation limiting the number of people present at a
meeting, and pursuant to MN Statute §13D.02, the Shorewood City Council meetings will be held by
electronic means. For those wishing to listen live to the meeting, please go to
ci.shorewood.mn.us/current_meeting for the meeting link. Contact the city at 952.960.7900 during
regular business hours with questions. For link issues at meeting time, call 952.960.7906.
AGENDA
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A. Roll Call
Mayor Zerby___
Johnson___
Labadie___
Siakel___
Sundberg___
B. Review and Adopt Agenda
Attachments
2. CONSENT AGENDA
– Motion to approve items on the Consent Agenda & Adopt
Resolutions Therein:
A. City Council Work Session Minutes from October 13, 2020 Minutes
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes from October 13, 2020 Minutes
C. Approval of the Verified Claims List Claims List
D. Authorize Purchase of Large Document Scanner/Printer/Copier Planning Director Memo
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
(No Council Action will be taken)
4. PUBLIC HEARING
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Andrew Myers, Candidate for Legislative Seat 33B
B. Spring/Summer Photo Contest Winners City Clerk/HR Director Memo
Presentation
6. PARKS
A. Commissioner Mangold Report on 10/20/20 Park Commission meeting
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA – October 26, 2020
Page 2
7. PLANNING
A. Commissioner Gorham Report on 10/6/20 Planning Commission meeting Minutes
B. Planned Unit Development Amendment Planning Director Memo
Applicant: Lennar Resolution 20-111
Location: 5745 Featherie Bay
C. Variance to Shoreland Regulations Planning Director Memo
Applicant: Richard Hoyt Resolution 20-112
Location: 5710 Ridge Road
8. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. Accept Proposal from Davey Resource Group Director of Public Works Memo
Resolution 20-113
9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
10. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. General Election Update
2. September 2020 General Fund Budget Report Finance Director Memo
3. Third Quarter 2020 Investment Report Finance Director Memo
4. Update on Woodside Road/Lane Project Director of Public Works
5. Shady Island Bridge Forcemain Director of Public Works
B. Mayor and City Council
11. ADJOURN
2A
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2020 6:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING
Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Johnson, Labadie, and Sundberg (arrived at 6:08
p.m.); City Attorney Keane; City Administrator Lerud; Finance Director Rigdon;
Planning Director Darling; and Director of Public Works Brown; Assistant City
Engineer Baumann
Absent: Councilmember Siakel
B. Review Agenda
Johnson moved, Labadie seconded, approving the agenda as presented.
Roll Call Vote: . Motion passed.
Labadie, Johnson, Zerby voted Aye
2. CIP DISCUSSION
Finance Director Rigdon explained that the City has a CIP that covers ten years but is reviewed
and adjusted annually. He noted that there is not a lot that has changed from the prior year but
explained that the items are flexible and can change. He reviewed the proposed CIP projects for
2021 which included: Park Improvements; Equipment Replacement; and Street and Utility
Improvements. He noted that the Smithtown Pond has already been bonded for in 2020. He
explained that the Shorewood Oaks and the Grant Street drainage projects have been moved
from 2020 to 2021. He reviewed the proposed CIP projects for Trails and Utility Funds. He
reviewed the debt service levy information.
Mayor Zerby noted that Councilmember Sundberg has arrived at the meeting.
Councilmember Johnson asked for an explanation of the addition of Minnetonka Boulevard and
St. Alban’s to the Street and Utility Improvements.
Public Works Director Brown stated that this was a request that was forwarded late in the game
by the City of Deephaven. He stated that he cannot say that this would be number one of the
City’s list, but after he talked it over with City Engineer Budde, they opted to include it in the CIP
and also included adding in the option of watermain and sewer work. He explained that the City
has really vacillated about putting it in because staff has worked very hard to make this a
predictable process especially with the public information and when it involves the neighboring
cities it doesn’t always follow a nice predictable path. He stated that the City could go back to
Deephaven and explain to them that they will have to adjust their CIP.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 2020
Page 2 of 6
Councilmember Johnson stated that he assumes that there would be some sort of cost savings
by doing the projects at the same time. Public Works Director Brown agreed and noted that it
would be pretty hard to do that roadway in different phases because it is split down the center.
Councilmember Labadie asked what he thinks would happen it the City told Deephaven that they
would have to adjust their CIP. Public Works Director Brown stated that he thinks they would be
disappointed but would understand that each City is trying to make the finances work. He
explained that he had asked City Engineer Budde to have a conversation with the city engineer
at Deephaven but he is not sure that has happened yet. He stated that the City can go back and
discuss this with Deephaven before this is finalized.
City Administrator Lerud stated that he will also reach out to Dana Young, Administrator for the
City of Deephaven. Councilmember Labadie stated that she would like the City to have a
conversation with them about their level of comfort regarding bumping it out one year, two years,
or further.
Councilmember Johnson agreed that the two cities should have a conversation about this project,
but noted that he would also like to take advantage of the low interest rates. He asked if the
project was for all of Minnetonka Boulevard and St. Alban’s, or just sections. Public Works
Director Brown stated that he believes it covers the entirety of those two roads.
Mayor Zerby asked if the City has the CIPs from the other South Lake Minnetonka cities so the
can be woven into the City’s CIP. City Administrator Lerud stated that he has not seem them, but
after the City approved its street improvement CIP this summer, he sent it to Tonka Bay, Excelsior
and Deephaven, so they should be aware of our schedule. He stated that he was not contacted
by Deephaven regarding this project.
Mayor Zerby noted that this is not the first time the City has run into this issue. He stated that
CIPs from other cities should be public information and suggested that staff go to the websites to
gather this information as part of researching and refining the City’s CIP. He asked for details
regarding some of the equipment that is planned for purchase in 2021.
Public Works Director Brown gave an overview of the equipment planned for purchase in 2021.
He explained that he has gotten feedback from the Council on evening out the hills and valleys in
the CIP and feels that this year is one of the best he has had in evening those numbers out.
The Council discussed various equipment replacement plans and the life span for the equipment.
Mayor Zerby stated that he would like to see a comparison with how the most recent CIP tracks
with previous CIPs. He gave the example of being able to see what the CIP plan from five years
ago had planned for 2021 and see how it compares with reality.
City Administrator Lerud said that there is three years of prior history included with the spread
sheet, but to carry forward year CIPs and show them would difficult to read because it would
require numerous columns. He said staff can look at how to present that information because he
believed using the past as a reference is important as we look forward. He stated expenditures
can vary dramatically year to year, but the important line in his opinion, is the revenue line. He
stated that the idea of the CIP is to take these expenditures where you will have varying amounts
each year but project revenue that is consistent year over year so taxes are not wildly rising one
year and dropping the next.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 2020
Page 3 of 6
Councilmember Labadie asked about a prior discussion about trying to get more iPads or portable
devices into vehicles and in the hands of the Public Works employees. She asked about the
status of that desire and asked how many employees currently used them.
Public Works Director Brown stated that the City started with one City-owned iPad and his own
personal iPad a few years ago. He stated that they added an iPad for the GPS units and added
one more iPad. He stated that there may be a few more purchased through the Hennepin County
Tree Grant program. He stated that he would still like to add one or two more out into the field
which would come out of the computer line item.
Mayor Zerby stated that he just received a question about whether Strawberry Court will be done
at the same time as Strawberry Lane because there is apparent interest in City water. City
Administrator Lerud stated that the City sent a letter yesterday to the residents on Strawberry
Court and Peach Circle to gauge their interest in connecting to water. He stated that both of those
streets were planned for mill and overlay by 2023, so staff is planning to consolidate those into
one project year. He stated the residents were asked to respond by the middle of November and
once this input is received it can be incorporated into the utility plan.
Councilmember Johnson stated that he wanted to highlight a change that was included in the CIP
that was a result of a Parks Commission discussion. He stated that he wanted to make sure that
there was some consensus from the Council with the Park Commission recommendation. He
stated that the Parks Commission discussion was around replacing playground equipment at
Silverwood Park or a Cathcart Park. He stated that originally, Cathcart Park was scheduled for
2021 and after discussion with the Parks Commission, that was flipped with Silverwood Park
partially because of the potential for replacement of the metal slides.
Planning Director Darling stated that the Parks Commission found that Cathcart Park was in better
physical shape than the equipment at Silverwood Park, especially the slides. She stated that the
two parks have essentially just traded places within the CIP. Councilmember Johnson stated that
he personally agrees with the Parks Commission recommendation to switch these two parks
within the CIP.
City Administrator Lerud noted that the CIP will be brought back to the Council when they discuss
the final General Fund Levy later in early December.
3. EXCELSIOR SEWER CHARGE
City Administrator Lerud noted that last year the City was reviewing invoices, and the annual
invoice from the City of Excelsior for sewer service caught his eye because it was over $50,000
and he did not recall seeing an invoice in that amount before. He noted that since 1991 and
based on a formula, Excelsior has billed the City of Shorewood the cost to convey sewer in two
areas of the City through Excelsior sewer mains to Met Council interceptors. He noted that a
previous sanitary sewer agreement was approved in 1971 between the two cities which stated
that in exchange for Shorewood paying for half the cost of the sanitary sewer main installation on
Glencoe, Shorewood would not be charged anything in the future for conveying sewage through
that line. He stated that it appears that the Met Council, in 1991, notified Excelsior that they would
no longer be paying rent on those lines and Shorewood and Excelsior entered a new agreement
in 1991. He stated that there is very little in the minutes or other documentation that shows how
the agreement or funding formula was established. He stated that through the research, staff
began to question what the City was being billed for. He stated that they found out that about
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 2020
Page 4 of 6
thirty percent of the connections that the City had been billed for since 1991 have always been
connected to the Met Council lines and not the Excelsior sewer mains. He stated that he does
not think this error was intentional and noted that there have been several meetings with the City
of Excelsior to talk about the interpretation of the agreement and noted that each City has different
interpretations. He stated that the central point from the staff is that the City has been paying for
a service that it did not receive and Excelsior incurred no cost which amounts to approximately
$270,000 and with interest has a present value of approximately $329,000. He stated that he
believes this has been taken about as far as it can at a staff level. He stated that both cities feel
a new agreement is needed, but Shorewood staff believes the reimbursement issue needs to be
resolved before moving forward, or at the very least at the same time a new agreement is being
worked on. He stated that staff is looking for direction from the Council as to how to proceed.
Councilmember Sundberg asked if staff had gone through the recommended option that staff
outlined in the staff report with the City of Excelsior and whether they were amenable to it.
City Administrator Lerud stated that Excelsior staff does not agree that the City of Excelsior should
remit any money back to the City of Shorewood. He stated that, at a staff level, they stated that
they just want to look forward because it was not wrongly billed intentionally and the City of
Shorewood also did not catch it, so they just want to start fresh. He stated that in his opinion, he
feels it would be different if the City was paying twelve dollars for something that actually cost ten
dollars, but he feels this is a completely different scenario. He stated that in this example, it would
be like the City paying ten dollars for something that should have cost zero dollars and staff
believes that those funds need to be paid back to Shorewood. He stated that the City has offered
that the $329,000 be offered as a credit against future charges and are not asking for a check to
be written to the City. He noted that the existing 1991 agreement does have a cancellation
provision that allows one city to provide notice to the other that the agreement is cancelled.
Councilmember Sundberg asked if staff felt that they could continue to negotiate with the City of
Excelsior. City Administrator Lerud stated that he thinks staff’s positions are pretty set on both
sides.
Councilmember Sundberg stated that she is not sure she has an appetite for taking legal action,
but feels it is clear that Excelsior owes this money to the City. City Administrator Lerud stated
that he is not suggesting legal action. He stated that he feels the City can take that stance that it
believes that there is a proven amount the City should be credited against future payments and if
they do not agree to that, the City could just cancel the agreement and pay a reasonable amount
on the number of connections that are there and take a credit against that moving forward.
Mayor Zerby asked if the existing agreement would have to be cancelled or if it can be revised.
City Administrator Lerud stated that the 1991 agreement is very poorly written. City Attorney
Keane stated that he agrees that the 1991 is not a good starting point, and that the two cities
should start over with a new agreement.
City Administrator Lerud outlined some of the problems that exist in the 1991 agreement.
Public Works Director Brown noted that this issue has highlighted that the City needs to go
through the other existing agreements and make sure they do not need to be recrafted.
Councilmember Johnson asked if the City had a $329,000 credit, how long would it take to get
that amount back down to zero. City Administrator Lerud stated that it would take years before
the City would have to write a check to Excelsior again.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 2020
Page 5 of 6
Councilmember Johnson noted that he had a conversation last night with Dale Kushner a
councilmember in Excelsior who told him that that the council was just informed about this issue
recently. He stated that at one time, the Council had talked about the possibility of forming a
subcommittee of councilmember and mayor from both cities to talk through this type of issue. He
asked if the Council wanted to try to utilize that option in this instance or simply move forward with
the option recommended by staff.
City Administrator Lerud stated that the two councils having a conversation is a worthwhile step
but would need to happen sometime this month, so the City can provide notice to Excelsior that
Shorewood intends to cancel the agreement. Councilmember Johnson stated that he thinks that
no matter what, the City should go ahead and tell them that we will be cancelling the agreement
and then the two councils can perhaps discuss a financial remedy to the problem.
Mayor Zerby asked if there was any risk to cancelling the agreement. He gave the example of
Excelsior turning off a valve to Shorewood residents so they would not have access to the sewer
lines. City Administrator Lerud stated that he does not think they could physically do that and
reiterated that it is staff’s position that the City has essentially pre-paid the sewer costs. City
Attorney Keane asked Public Works Director Brown if Mayor Zerby’s example was a physical
possibility. Public Works Director Brown stated that it would be a physical possibility for them to
plug the pipe. City Attorney Keane stated that this would be a tremendously foolhardy step for
them to take because of the potential to damage private property.
Public Works Director Brown agreed and does not think they would take that action. Mayor Zerby
asked if that would be considered an essential service so it could not be blocked or shut off. City
Attorney Keane stated that he sees this as an essential service.
Mayor Zerby stated that his understanding of the Council discussion is to move towards option
number four as presented by staff, but to also have some dialogue between the two councils with
a subcommittee before executing a new agreement.
Councilmember Johnson offered to facilitate the formation of a subcommittee between the two
councils. Mayor Zerby volunteered to serve on this subcommittee alongside Councilmember
Johnson.
Councilmember Labadie asked if there is a creative way the credit can be applied towards other
issues with Excelsior so it does not take years and years before the balance is down to zero.
City Administrator Lerud stated that the only place the cities overlap is the two joint powers
agreements, but there is no provision in there for another city to pay more than their share. He
stated that he thinks there will be value in just keeping it related to sewer and not try to use the
credits elsewhere.
4. ADJOURN
Johnson moved, Labadie seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of
October 13, 2020, at 6:58 P.M.
Roll Call Vote: . Motion passed.
Labadie, Johnson, Sundberg, Zerby voted Aye
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 2020
Page 6 of 6
ATTEST:
Scott Zerby, Mayor
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
2B
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2020 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 Johnson, Labadie, and Sundberg; City Attorney
Keane; City Administrator Lerud; City Clerk Thone; Finance Director Rigdon;
Planning Director Darling; Director of Public Works Brown; and Assistant City
Engineer Matthew Baumann
Absent: Councilmember Siakel
B. Review Agenda
Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, approving the agenda as presented.
Roll Call Vote: . Motion passed.
Labadie, Johnson, Sundberg, Zerby voted Aye
2. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Zerby reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
Labadie moved, Johnson seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent
Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein.
A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of September 28, 2020
B. Approval of the Verified Claims List
C. Approval of Tobacco Retail Licenses, RESOLUTION NO. 20-109, “A
Resolution Approving Licenses to Retailers to Sell Tobacco Products.”
Roll Call Vote: . Motion passed.
Labadie, Johnson, Sundberg, Zerby voted Aye
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
4. PUBLIC HEARING
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
6. PARKS
7. PLANNING
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 2020
Page 2 of 5
8. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. MS4 and Storm Pond Bathymetric Survey
Assistant City Engineer Baumann explained that in order to assess the quality of the stormwater
ponds they are proposing a bathymetric survey of the forty-four stormwater ponds throughout the
City. Baumann reviewed the locations of the MS4 lines that would be inspected and noted that it
will be entered into a GIS web application called MS4 ID. He stated that for the bathymetric
survey, crews will take kayaks out into the ponds with sonar equipment and determine the actual
depths and then do a comparison with the original condition to see how much sediment has
accumulated. He stated that they will also gather sediment samples from three of the most critical
ponds to give an idea of what types of material have accumulated and what can be done regarding
disposal. He gave an overview of the proposed schedule and the plans to present the results to
the Council by spring of 2021. He stated that the cost is $43,380 to be paid out of the City’s
Stormwater Management Fund.
Councilmember Johnson asked if this system would be used for ongoing maintenance and
tracking into the future or is it a one-time snapshot. Assistant City Engineer Baumann stated that
it can be used for ongoing tracking. He stated that it makes things much more efficient moving
forward once this information is gathered.
Councilmember Johnson understands that the plans are to survey the forty-four ponds that the
City is responsible for but asked if it would also be used to track the privately maintained ponds
where those neighborhoods need to be reporting into the City with their annual inspections,
Assistant City Engineer Baumann stated that it would require a bit more work but could be used
for the privately held ponds. Public Works Director Brown stated that many of the private ponds
or basins tend to be very small that may be too small to drop a kayak in and get a good sonar
reading. He stated that it may involve good old fashioned survey work while wearing waders.
Assistant City Engineer Baumann stated that he was thinking more about tracking them with the
MS4 ID and not necessarily doing the bathymetric survey.
Councilmember Johnson agreed that he was not necessarily thinking the bathymetric survey but
would like to have a good tool to track the privately held ponds going forward. He asked if the
City wanted to reconsider using this tracking mechanism for the privately held ponds if it would
require a new cost estimate.
Assistant City Engineer Baumann stated that there would need to be a new cost estimate because
it would require a bit more effort to pull all that information together. Public Works Director Brown
stated that if Council would like to add the privately held ponds, he would recommend approving
the work for the City’s portion and staff can bring back an amendment for the privately held ponds
for the next meeting.
Mayor Zerby stated that he would like to make sure the results of the inspections and surveying
are available to the public and suggested creating a link on the City webpage that will connect to
the Bolton and Menk system.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 2020
Page 3 of 5
Councilmember Sundberg stated that she agrees with Public Works Director Brown’s suggestion
to move forward on this proposal and have staff bring back the possible amendment to a future
meeting.
Mayor Zerby stated that he has been very impressed with the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek
Watershed efforts and noted that they have put together standards for the ponds. He stated that
if the City is planning to partner with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on this project and
suggested that the City also include the Riley Purgatory Creek Watershed District.
Councilmember Labadie stated that the proposed schedule states that they are intending to
complete the inspections in the fall of 2020 and asked if there would still be time to complete the
inspections. Assistant City Engineer Baumann stated that they can do the inspections up until
freeze-up.
Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 20-110, “A Resolution
to Approve Proposal for MS4 and Storm Pond Bathymetric Survey.”
Roll Call Vote: . Motion passed.
Labadie, Johnson, Sundberg, Zerby voted Aye
9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
10. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. Update on Woodside Road/Lane Street Reclamation Project
Public Works Director Brown stated that the watermain has all been installed on Woodside and
has passed the perc and bacteria tests. He stated that the residents in the area have been notified
that they can begin lining up their contractors for hook up to City water. He stated that they are
starting to grade the roadway and noted that they have gotten quite a bit of feedback from
residents that their experience on this project has been pretty positive. He noted that there was
a design change at the end of the cul-de-sac which added a rain garden and a section of
perforated pipe to address the perceived run-off from this project. He reiterated that overall, the
project is moving along in a positive manner.
Councilmember Labadie stated that she lives near this project and has had many residents
compliment the progress of the project and has not heard any negativity other than at the very
beginning when the residents felt the amount of hours the road was closed was too restrictive.
She stated that once this was pointed out to staff, the hours were changed and the residents
complimented the City for addressing their concerns as quickly as they did.
2. Update on Enchanted and Shady Island Street Reclamation Project
Public Works Director Brown stated that Enchanted and Shady Island have been reclaimed and
the pavement is down. He stated that the crews started today on backfilling the edge of the
pavement and there will also be some minor driveway work that is needed. He stated that overall,
they have heard great compliments from the residents in the area.
3. Update on Beverly Drive – Cajed Lane Storm Sewer Project
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 2020
Page 4 of 5
Public Works Director Brown stated that many of the storm structures have been installed and
the directional bore pipes has been bored pretty much the length of the project, as of last Friday.
He stated that this project should be starting clean up and final grading soon.
4. General Election update
City Clerk Thone stated that there are three weeks until the General Election. She noted that it
has been busy with early voting and noted that they have processed about eight hundred and fifty
voters at City Hall. She stated that they are doing some last minute training for election judges
with regard to safety guidelines, curbside voting, and how to deal with challengers at the polling
places.
Mayor Zerby asked how many registered voters there are in Shorewood. City Clerk Thone stated
that there are about 6,300 registered voters in the City.
Councilmember Labadie asked how the curbside voting from your car work. City Clerk Thone
stated that the City purchased three cell phones to be used for this purpose. She explained that
there will be a phone number in front of the polling places and also at City Hall for people to call
and wait in their car and then two opposing party judges will come out to their car and help them
vote from their car. She stated that this is a good option for people that are uncomfortable going
into the polling places.
5. Timber Lane Update
City Administrator Lerud stated that it has been a few meetings since the Council authorized staff
to close access on the west side of Timber Lane. He explained that staff discussed the situation
and had decided that the best option would be a wood post installation every four feet, however
the cost estimate was over $12,000. He stated that they are waiting for a second price quote for
this project.
Other
Public Works Director Brown stated that the City received a note from Hennepin County Regional
Rail Authority that their project for culvert replacement will be starting on October 22, 2020. He
stated that the LRT will be closed for about two weeks while that work takes place.
Councilmember Johnson clarified that this project was from Eureka Road the Manitou Lane.
Communications Director Moore gave an overview of the shred event that was held October 10,
2020. She stated that it was a huge success and expressed her appreciate to Rob Hanson from
the Public Works Departments, Keely Schultz the Green Corp member, Councilmember Johnson,
and his daughter Olivia for their help at the event. She stated that there were about forty-five cars
in the parking lot before the truck even arrived, and over 7,000 pounds of paper was shredded.
She stated that Park Coordinator Grout had suggested that the City collect food for the food shelf
along with this event, so the City also collected 225 pounds of food. She noted that during the
last fall shred event, the City only shredded about 2,300, so this event was a great success. She
stated that all of the shredded paper will go to make tissue, napkins and paper towels.
Councilmember Sundberg asked why the City had such had such a substantial increase in the
participation. Communications Director Moore stated that they stopped counting cars at 167. She
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 2020
Page 5 of 5
stated that she thinks that the increase may be due to the spring shred event being cancelled and
people being home because of COVID-19 so they are cleaning things out.
Councilmember Johnson stated that he feels it was a great event and suggested that the
Councilmembers take turn volunteering at these types of events. He stated that it ended up being
a way for him to reconnect with residents in a way that he had not anticipated.
City Administrator Lerud gave an update on the storm sewer on Glen Road. He stated that the
City has had three meetings with the Hennepin County staff to discuss the City’s preferred location
of the retention pond. He stated that yesterday the County informed him that they will not allow it
to be in the preferred location. He stated that staff will be working through a few other options in
the upcoming weeks to present to Council. He stated that a private mailing went out that
contained a lot of misinformation. He stated that a meeting on October 22, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. was
just scheduled as an update on the final plan preparation to give the neighborhood an update.
He stated that the tree inventory is in progress and clarified that any markings on trees are not
meant to say that the tree is coming down and are purely for identification purposes so they can
refer back to species and condition as they put the plan together. He stated that they are only
looking at trees that they are reasonably certain are in the right-of-way and are not working on
private property. He stated that they received feedback that the meeting time did not make the
information available to the greatest number of people, so they are adding a second meeting at
7:00 p.m. on the same day.
Mayor Zerby asked that staff make sure to update this information on the Project Update portion
of the website.
Councilmember Sundberg thanked staff for being so responsive to area residents and making
sure that they have opportunities for input and have the correct information.
City Administrator Lerud stated that Met Council Environmental Services, the sewer treatment
division of Met Council, sent out a letter that they will be doing work in our area over the next few
years that will start in 2021 and be completed by 2023. He gave an overview of the areas where
work will be taking place.
B. Mayor and City Council
11. ADJOURN
Sundberg moved, Labadie seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of
October 13, 2020, at 7:40 P.M.
Roll Call Vote: . Motion passed.
Labadie, Johnson, Sundberg, Zerby voted Aye
ATTEST:
Scott Zerby, Mayor
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
#2 C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Verified Claims
Meeting Date: October 26, 2020
Prepared by: Michelle Nguyen, Senior Accountant
Greg Lerud, City Administrator
Joe Rigdon, Finance Director
Attachments: Claims lists
Policy Consideration:
Should the attached claims against the City of Shorewood be paid
Background:
Claims for council authorization.
66432 - 66465 & ACH 1,417,241.76
Total Claims $1,417,241.76
We have also included a payroll summary for the payroll period e October 11, 2020.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
These expenditures are reasonable and necessary to provide servi
budgeted and available for these purposes.
Options:
The City Council may accept the staff recommendation to pay thes
expenditure it deems not in the best interest of the city.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff recommends approval of the claims list as presented.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Checks will be distributed following approval.
$%&!'((
)*+#,- .!-/0.-'1#2 3'!.
!"#>1?0& 1
@%.AB"CCCCDEDCEFCFC#G#$2GDCGDFGFC
4567#89#:;82<=88,
!"#$%!&'()*('+#$ & !"#,)(-+#$ & !"#*(. )+/#+ "
9 H,#DCD) 1 !%(#901I
DCDGCCGDCDCGCCCC#CECC#JJKLMNEDO4P:;#PH,#5HQ<:6R<H6:
DCDGDLGSDCDGCCCC#DFKJLMENL#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
DCDGDLGSDCLGCCCC#DKMCOEON#CECC$P26G65R<
DCDGDLGSDFDGCCCC#DKCJCEOS#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGDLGSDFFGCCCC#DKCNLESJ#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGDLGSDLDGCCCC#DKJMNENL#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
DCDGDLGSDMDGCCCC#DCFECN#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
DCDGDMGSDCDGCCCC#MKFUJESO#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
DCDGDMGSDFDGCCCC#LUOEFN#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGDMGSDFFGCCCC#SDCENJ#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGDMGSDLDGCCCC#MJJEUL#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
DCDGDMGSDMDGCCCC#LFECJ#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
DCDGDNGSDCDGCCCC#JKJUJEND#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
DCDGDNGSDCLGCCCC#SDMEJM#CECC$P26G65R<
DCDGDNGSDFDGCCCC#MFJEUN#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGDNGSDFFGCCCC#MSNEMO#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGDNGSDLDGCCCC#JOFEUF#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
DCDGDNGSDMDGCCCC#SOEND#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
DCDGFSGSDCDGCCCC#LKLCJEFS#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
DCDGFSGSDFDGCCCC#FSLELC#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGFSGSDFFGCCCC#FMSEMM#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGFSGSDLDGCCCC#JDNEUO#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
DCDGFSGSDMDGCCCC#DNEDN#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
DCDGLFGSDCDGCCCC#DSKMSJELC#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
DCDGLFGSDCFGCCCC#OOLEDF#CECC8Q<265R<
DCDGLFGSDCMGCCCC#LUOEFC#CECC:62<<6#$P)<2#$P7
DCDGLFGSDFDGCCCC#DKDONEOJ#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGLFGSDFFGCCCC#DKDFUEFN#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGLFGSDLDGCCCC#FKMUDENN#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
DCDGLFGSDMDGCCCC#DKCCNEMN#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
DCDGLLGSDCDGCCCC#DOFEMS#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
DCDGLLGSDFDGCCCC#DFEUS#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGLLGSDFFGCCCC#FJEDM#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGLLGSDLDGCCCC#FJJEML#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
$2#G#)*+#,- .!-/0.-'1#2 3'!.#VDC*DF*FCFC#G#DF"DC#$RW$%? #D
!"#$%!&'()*('+#$ & !"#,)(-+#$ & !"#*(. )+/#+ "
DCDGLLGSDMDGCCCC#DOEMN#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
DCDGMFGSDCDGCCCC#FKOJDEFL#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
DCDGMFGSDFDGCCCC#FCOECU#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGMFGSDFFGCCCC#FFFELS#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGMFGSDLDGCCCC#ONOELC#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
DCDGMFGSDMDGCCCC#DMSENS#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
DCDGMLGSDCDGCCCC#DKJSSEOC#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
DCDGMLGSDFDGCCCC#DFLELS#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGMLGSDFFGCCCC#DFOECU#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
DCDGMLGSDLDGCCCC#FMECD#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
DCDGMLGSDMDGCCCC#NFECO#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
$66789:;<=$66789:;<=
01%*$2 #345
9 H,#FCD:B'! X''I#4'>>E#Y#<Z 1.#4 1. !
FCDGCCGDCDCGCCCC#CECC#DKJODENJ4P:;#PH,#5HQ<:6R<H6:
FCDGCCGSDCDGCCCC#DKCUSEUD#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
FCDGCCGSDCFGCCCC#FMESD#CECC8Q<265R<
FCDGCCGSDCLGCCCC#FJDEJS#CECC$P26G65R<
FCDGCCGSDFDGCCCC#NFEDL#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
FCDGCCGSDFFGCCCC#DCJEDN#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
FCDGCCGSDLDGCCCC#LOEMD#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
FCDGCCGSDMDGCCCC#JSECN#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
$<76=<;:6$<76=<;:6
01%*$2 #345
9 H,#JCD=%. !# .-(-.&
JCDGCCGDCDCGCCCC#CECC#DFKSUOECF4P:;#PH,#5HQ<:6R<H6:
JCDGCCGSDCDGCCCC#NKUMOESJ#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
JCDGCCGSDCFGCCCC#FDUEFJ#CECC8Q<265R<
JCDGCCGSDCMGCCCC#LUOEFC#CECC=P6<2#$P)<2#$P7
JCDGCCGSDFDGCCCC#ODOEUN#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
JCDGCCGSDFFGCCCC#JJNEMO#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
JCDGCCGSDLDGCCCC#DKFSJEOD#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
JCDGCCGSDMDGCCCC#FNUENS#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
$<>7?@=;A>$<>7?@=;A>
01%*$2 #345
9 H,#JDD:%1-.%!&#: X !# .-(-.&
JDDGCCGDCDCGCCCC#CECC#OKCDOEMU4P:;#PH,#5HQ<:6R<H6:
JDDGCCGSDCDGCCCC#SKJUFEUS#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
JDDGCCGSDCMGCCCC#LUOEFC#CECC:<=<2#$P)<2#$P7
JDDGCCGSDFDGCCCC#LNDENC#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
JDDGCCGSDFFGCCCC#LNJEON#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
JDDGCCGSDLDGCCCC#DKCFCEUF#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
$2#G#)*+#,- .!-/0.-'1#2 3'!.#VDC*DF*FCFC#G#DF"DC#$RW$%? #F
!"#$%!&'()*('+#$ & !"#,)(-+#$ & !"#*(. )+/#+ "
JDDGCCGSDMDGCCCC#DLOEUM#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
$=7A<=;9@$=7A<=;9@
01%*$2 #345
9 H,#JFD2 A&A(-1?# .-(-.&
JFDGCCGDCDCGCCCC#CECC#DKDNSEDS4P:;#PH,#5HQ<:6R<H6:
JFDGCCGSDCDGCCCC#UJCELM#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
JFDGCCGSDFDGCCCC#OFECF#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
JFDGCCGSDFFGCCCC#JUESJ#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
JFDGCCGSDLDGCCCC#OJEOD#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
JFDGCCGSDMDGCCCC#MEJC#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
$<7<:?;<?$<7<:?;<?
01%*$2 #345
9 H,#JLD:.'!>#=%. !# .-(-.&
JLDGCCGDCDCGCCCC#CECC#SKMMLEMM4P:;#PH,#5HQ<:6R<H6:
JLDGCCGSDCDGCCCC#LKSLSELO#CECC9 ++G65R<#2<) +P2
JLDGCCGSDCFGCCCC#DNLEMS#CECC8Q<265R<
JLDGCCGSDFDGCCCC#FODELS#CECC$<2P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
JLDGCCGSDFFGCCCC#FMUEJF#CECC954P#48H625@#G#4567#:;P2<
JLDGCCGSDLDGCCCC#FNLEFD#CECC<R$+87<<#5H: 2PH4<#G#4567
JLDGCCGSDMDGCCCC#DFDESO#CECC=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
$?7998;99$?7998;99
01%*$2 #345
9 H,#OCC$%&!'((#4( %!-1?#901I
OCCGCCGDCDCGCCCC#ULKFNFELL#CECC4P:;#PH,#5HQ<:6R<H6:
OCCGCCGFDOCGCCCC#CECC#SSKCLMENM)28::#$P728++#4+<P25H)
OCCGCCGFDODGCCCC#CECC#UKMJLECD;<P+6;#5H: 2PH4<#$P7P@+<
OCCGCCGFDOFGCCCC#CECC#JKSUDENM9<,<2P+#=56;;8+,5H)#$P7P@+<
OCCGCCGFDOLGCCCC#CECC#FKUDDESF:6P6<#=56;;8+,5H)#$P7P@+<
OCCGCCGFDOSGCCCC#CECC#DCKMNMENF954P*R<,54P2<#6P[#$P7P@+<
OCCGCCGFDOMGCCCC#CECC#UKNOUELL$<2P#=56;;8+,5H)#$P7P@+<
OCCGCCGFDOJGCCCC#CECC#MKMJCECC,<9<22<,#48R$<H:P658H
OCCGCCGFDOOGCCCC#CECC#FKCNFEDS=82T<2:#48R$<H:P658H
OCCGCCGFDNCGCCCC#CECC#NLCEND+59<#5H: 2PH4<
OCCGCCGFDNFGCCCC#CECC#LCFEDC H58H#, <:
OCCGCCGFDNLGCCCC#CECC#DKCSCECC;<P+6;#:PQ5H):#P448 H6
$@87>:>;88$@87>:>;88
01%*$2 #345
B(/ )#2 #345
$<:6796?;66$<:6796?;66
$2#G#)*+#,- .!-/0.-'1#2 3'!.#VDC*DF*FCFC#G#DF"DC#$RW$%? #L
2D
MEETING TYPE
REGULAR
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title/Subject: Authorize Acquisition of Large-Document Printer/Scanner/Copier
Meeting Date: October 26, 2020
Prepared By: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Attachments:
Estimate
Background:
Staff is proposing to purchase a large document scanner/printer/copier
to increase efficiency. This piece of equipment would allow multiple staff persons to
review plan sets electronically instead of exchanging paper plans and save the
documents in shared files. The printer would be able to print, scan and copy documents
up to 36 inches wide, where 17-inches is the widest paper the current copiers can
handle.
The COVID pandemic, with the resulting reduction of staff into multiple teams, has
made sharing plans vital to efficient processing of permits and other large plans.
Additionally, project research is complicated when development plan sets have never
been scanned into the permanent file banks slowing work that can be completed from
remote locations. Additionally, this piece of equipment will assist staff in moving toward
a reduced paper environment.
Staff contacted three companies and received two quotes (attached). The low bid was
from Loffler and is for one piece of equipment. The second bid was for multiple pieces
of equipment. Staff recommend the low bid for several reasons: 1) lower price; 2) good
reviews on the equipment; 3) local vendor with a good reputation for service; and 4)
space limitations to locate multiple large pieces of equipment. Although the Planning
Department is taking the lead on this purchase, it will be shared equipment.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
Funds to pay for this printer are from the
CARES Act. Total anticipated price is $5,130. The low bid was $5,594.89, less a $750
rebate from the manufacturer. New network cables would need to be run to the
intended location in City Hall and the estimates for this service are $285.
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends accepting the low bid from Loffler in the
amount of $5,594.89 by passing a motion to authorize the purchase using CARES
funds and approving the purchase by simple majority vote.
Next Steps and Timeline:
Staff will inform the company of the council’s decision, order
the equipment and schedule the work to be completed.
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.
5B
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title/Subject: Spring and Summer Photo Contest Winners
Meeting Date: Monday, October 26, 2020
Prepared by: Sandie Thone, City Clerk/HR Director
Shorewood is in its third-year hosting community photo contests having just completed the sixth
bi-annual Community Photo Contest. The theme for the latest contest was for participants to
submit photos that show off the delight and wonder of living in Shorewood in the Spring and
Summer months. In addition, for this year specifically, a category addressing the challenges the
Pandemic has had on life as we know it. The contest entrants submitted photos in the following
five categories:
People and Pets
Wildlife
Spring Wonder
Summer Delights
Together Against COVID
Winners in each category will receive a framed photo and one will be displayed at City Hall or
the Community Center as well as on our website and in the community newsletter.
Submissions for the Spring and Summer contest ran from March to September 2020.
Thank you to all the participants for their community-minded spirit and exceptional photo
submissions. It was difficult for the judges to choose! The winners of the contest are as follows:
People and Pets Category:
Photo: “Waiting for Sunset”
Submitted by Judy Voigt England
Wildlife Category:
Photo: “Barred Owl”
Submitted by Sanford Taly
Spring Wonder:
Photo: “You Said It Was Spring”
Submitted by Phil Zumsteg
Summer Delights:
Photo: “Frog Island Sunrise”
Submitted by Mary O’Keefe
Together Against COVID:
Photo: “Pandemic Perspective”
Submitted by Phil Zumsteg
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 COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2020 7:00 P.M.
DRAFT MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Maddy called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Maddy; Commissioners Eggenberger, Gorham, Gault (arrived at 7:25 p.m.)
and Riedel; Planning Director Darling; and, Council Liaison Siakel
Absent: None
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Riedel moved, Gorham seconded, approving the agenda for October 6, 2020, as presented.
Roll Call Vote: All – all. Motion passed 4/0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
August 4, 2020
Eggenberger moved, Riedel seconded, approving the Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of August 4, 2020, as presented. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion passed 4/0.
September 1, 2020 Joint Work Session
Chair Maddy noted a change on page 3, item 4, that should state Strawberry “Lane” and not
Strawberry Land.
Gorham moved, Riedel seconded, approving the Joint Park/Planning Commission Work
Session Meeting Minutes of September 1, 2020, as amended. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all.
Motion passed 4/0.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chair Maddy explained the Planning Commission is comprised of residents of the City of
Shorewood who are serving as volunteers on the Commission. The Commissioners are
appointed by the City Council. The Commission’s role is to help the City Council in
determining zoning and planning issues. One of the Commission’s responsibilities is to
hold public hearings and to help develop the factual record for an application and to make
a non-binding recommendation to the City Council. The recommendation is advisory only.
A. PUBLIC HEARING – PUD AMENDMENT FOR MINNETONKA COUNTRY
CLUB-5745 FEATHERIE BAY
Applicant: U.S. Homes dba Lennar
Location: Lot 7, Block 3 Minnetonka Country Club
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 6, 2020
Page 2 of 8
Planning Director Darling summarized the staff report regarding the request to allow the rear yard
of an existing home to be regraded and in the process increase the height of the home beyond
the 35 feet already permitted. She gave an overview of the standards to be considered when
evaluating a PUD amendment and noted that staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Eggenberger asked if the property just needed more slope in order for the water
to drain correctly.
Planning Director Darling stated that regrading will keep the water away from the home rather
than have dirt up against the water barrier.
Commissioner Riedel stated that generally when you dig down further you will increase the
likelihood of water pooling next to the foundation, but in this case, they are lowering the grade to
improve drainage.
Planning Director Darling reiterated the plans to regrade the house are in order to drain water
away from the home and noted that this requires an amendment because it will result in the home
being above the maximum height allowance.
Paul Tabone, Lennar Homes, stated that he believes the original structure was built and
developed in 2015. He stated that when the home was originally graded, there was about one
foot of fill that was brought in to essentially make the home meet the height requirement, so a
vapor barrier was put in along the foundation. He explained that earlier this year, the vapor barrier
failed so the intent is to regrade the back yard by bringing down the grade by about 8 to 10 inches
around the home and then regrade the remainder of the yard so that when the water falls it runs
further away. He stated that because they are taking away the dirt, then more of the house is
showing which means it is roughly 10 feet over the average land grade.
Chair Maddy stated that the applicant had already gone out of its way to make sure this house
was conforming and then a year later there was a surprise.
Mr. Tabone stated that this was correct and the home, as originally proposed, was about 5 or 6
feet taller than it is now. He stated that they ordered roof trusses to bring that down and they did
what they could to meet the definition of average land grade or average height for the
neighborhood.
Commissioner Riedel commended Lennar Homes for going through the process and applying for
the amendment because this seems quite minor.
Commissioner Gorham asked if the vapor barrier would be removed.
Mr. Tabone stated that he will have to check to make sure, but imagines that since the barrier
failed it will need to be removed. He stated that he can find out and report back to the
Commission.
Chair Maddy opened the Public Hearing at 7:17 P.M. noting the procedures used in a Public
Hearing.
There being no public testimony, Chair Maddy closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public
Hearing at 7:20 P.M.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 6, 2020
Page 3 of 8
Riedel moved, Gorham seconded, recommending approval of the PUD Amendment to
allow the height of the building to exceed 35 feet a 5645 Featherie Bay. Roll Call Vote: Ayes
– all Motion passed 4/0.
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. Variance for Setback to Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of Christmas Lake
Applicant: Richard Hoyt
Location: 5710 Ridge Road
Planning Director Darling stated that this application is a request for a variance to the setback of
the OHWL to allow a deck to be constructed six feet from the OHWL where 75 feet is required.
She explained that a previously constructed deck was demolished by a mudslide in 2014 and
indicated that the accessory building and a stairway were not removed as required. She gave an
overview of the proposed location for the deck and how the deck would look. She gave an
overview of the variance criteria and stated that staff is recommending denial. She noted that the
criteria are open to interpretation and the Commission could reasonably disagree. She gave an
overview of the three conditions that staff would attach to the variance, if the Commission saw fit
to approve the request. She updated them on the steps the property owner had taken to stabilize
the bluff. She stated that attached to the staff report is a letter from the neighbor indicating support
for the request.
Commissioner Riedel explained that he would be abstaining from this discussion since he is a
neighbor of the applicant.
Commissioner Gorham stated that the applicant had already received a variance in 1997 for the
previous deck structure, but asked if the Commission should consider this as a new application
since the location of the deck is in a different location.
Planning Director Darling confirmed that each variance has to be reviewed on its own merits.
Commissioner Gault stated that a key point for him is that some of the key components of the
1997 variance have not been fulfilled and asked why the City would have any expectation that
the conditions on a new variance would be fulfilled.
Chair Maddy asked if the property was under the same ownership as during the previous variance.
Planning Director Darling stated that it was the same owners.
Commissioner Gault noted that the 1997 variance was granted after the deck had already been
constructed without any permitting.
Commissioner Gorham stated that the letter gives the impression that this is a replacing a
previous deck that had a previous variance, which is a bit misleading.
Commissioner Gault asked about access to the deck from the trolley area.
Planning Director Darling stated that the applicant would just walk across the grass because the
lot is relatively flat in that area.
Chair Maddy asked if there was still a funicular rail.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 6, 2020
Page 4 of 8
Planning Director Darling noted that the original one was destroyed in the mudslide and they have
repaired and replaced it in the same location.
Chair Maddy opened this item up for public testimony at 7:35 p.m. There being no public
comments, he closed the public testimony.
Commissioner Gorham stated that he does not see the criteria being met to allow for a variance.
He noted that the Commission has not discussed the essential character issue and feels it would
set a really bad precedent if it is allowed.
Commissioner Eggenberger stated that he agreed with Commissioner Gorham.
Commissioner Gault stated that he concurred with the other Commissioners.
Eggenberger moved, Gorham seconded, recommending denial of the variance request by
Richard Hoyt for the property at 5710 Ridge Road. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – 4 (Maddy,
Gorham, Eggenberger, Gault). Abstain – 1 (Riedel). Motion passed 4/0/1
5. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Zoning Ordinances Amendment (Continued)- Miscellaneous text
amendments discussion
Planning Director Darling stated that before there is a public hearing on these proposed
amendments, she would like the Commission to take another look at the amendments that they
had previously discussed. She reminded the Commission that these changes were discussed in
January and February of 2020 but then the COVID-19 pandemic hit which pushed them to the
back burner. She stated that the proposed changes primarily fall into two categories, substantive
and housekeeping. She stated that the substantive changes are related to lighting regulations,
two homes on a property, allowing decks and porticos to encroach into the front setback, egress
pit encroachments, digital order signs, zoning permits, and the PUD process. She reiterated that
she is looking to gather comments from the Commission on the proposed ordinance amendments.
Planning Director Darling went through the proposed changes page by page and asked for
comments.
The Commission discussed clarifying the language around the building height requirement so it
makes sense as a standalone statement even if people do not go look up the definitions.
Commissioner Riedel noted that the definition of the word “dock” went to the Minnesota Supreme
Court.
Chair Maddy stated that the City had cleaned up that issue a few years ago.
Planning Director Darling stated that she will double check this one because the codifiers did not
get all of the code changes. She noted that she will compare ordinances to make sure she didn’t
miss anything. She reviewed Section 1201.03, General Provisions as it relates to two homes on
a property.
Commissioner Gault noted that he thought the Commission had discussed tying this to the
Occupancy Permit if construction of the new home was going to take longer than 9 months.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 6, 2020
Page 5 of 8
Planning Director Darling stated that she will look back over the minutes and incorporate the
feedback from the Commission.
Chair Maddy noted that it is not uncommon for a custom home to take a year of construction.
Commissioner Gault stated that he does not have a problem with the language as it is proposed,
but was looking for ways to perhaps not have to deal with this in the future.
Commissioner Riedel asked about the detached accessory building language. He stated that he
understands the intent, however modification 12, seems redundant.
There was discussion about the accessory building language and the Commission decided to
leave the detached accessory building language alone.
Commissioner Riedel stated that he feels the detail on the lighting provisions is very well written.
Chair Maddy stated that he agreed and while this language cannot be perfect, is on the right track.
Commissioner Gorham asked where Planning Director Darling got the changes to the lighting
provisions.
Planning Director Darling explained that she had used information gathered from Plymouth,
Bloomington, and Excelsior. She stated that if the Commission felt it was too much, it can be
stepped back because the City only has about 15 commercial properties.
Chair Maddy that he thinks the proposed changes are within the realm of reasonable.
Commissioner Riedel stated that he thinks that as commercial applications come into the City that
is when the problems will come to “light” and reiterated that he feels this is well written and very
specialized.
Commissioner Eggenberger suggested that it may be a good idea to see if the proposed changes
stand the test of time.
Planning Director Darling reviewed the revision related to allowing encroachments into residential
areas and one thing the Council has expressed interest in having the Commission review some
of these for things like attached open decks and porticos and allowing them to bump out into the
front setback regardless of when the home was constructed.
Commissioner Riedel that just above Section 19, he believes that there is a copy/paste error on
number 7.
Planning Director Darling stated that she will double check that section and correct it if
appropriate.
Commissioner Gault noted that throughout the document there is significantly different formatting
between the commercial and the residential. He noted that he thinks the commercial formatting
is more clear and suggests that the formatting under the residential be revised so it is similar. He
gave examples of a bullet pointed list being easier to understand than a paragraph.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 6, 2020
Page 6 of 8
Planning Director Darling reviewed the sign section and asked if there was anything that needed
to be revised in this section.
Commissioner Riedel stated that he assumes political signs are specifically excluded and are
allowed without a permit.
Planning Director Darling stated that is correct.
Chair Maddy stated that he believes that is pre-empted by State law so the City does not need to
cite it.
Planning Director Darling stated that there are some things that can be done to limit political
signage but it is nothing the City will take on without discussion from a wider group of people and
not during an election year. She reviewed the proposed changes in CUP and administration.
Commissioner Riedel asked about the possibility of going paperless with digital applications.
Chair Maddy noted that at his work they use Bluebeam so they do not deal with paper anymore.
Planning Director Darling stated that they are looking into some options such as Bluebeam but
still need to use paper for some applications for the time being.
Chair Maddy asked the Commission for their opinion on the City moving towards becoming
paperless.
Commissioner Riedel stated that he would support that but understands that it also will mean
dealing with the archival aspects of the stacks of plans and surveys that are in the basement. He
stated that he agrees it should be done, but realizes that would involve a substantial amount of
time and effort in order to be converted.
Planning Director Darling explained that the City already has the surveys scanned in and are
available electronically. She stated that the plans would probably not be scanned in and noted
that it is not required that the City keep them beyond a certain time period so the additional
expense of scanning them all would be unnecessary.
Commissioner Gault asked what determines whether or not a residential deck requires a building
permit.
Planning Director Darling stated that it is outlined within the building code. She stated that if it is
30 inches or more off the ground, it requires a building permit and if it is less than 30 inches it
does not and simply requires a zoning permit. She reviewed the proposed changes to the PUD
section of the zoning ordinance.
Commissioner Riedel noted that the 60-day requirement for PUD applications was removed. He
asked if State law mandated that there be a response within 60 days.
Planning Director Darling confirmed that State law does mandate a 60-day response and the City
has the right to extend it.
Commissioner Riedel commended Planning Director Darling for doing such a great job on this
document and noted the importance of language in this type of document.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 6, 2020
Page 7 of 8
6. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Tim Leister, 26355 Oak Ridge Circle, stated that he has lived in this location since 1993 and in
the area since 1971. He stated that he understands the City is doing a survey regarding the fire
lanes and wanted to specifically address Fire Lane #3. He stated that there are a group of about
20 people in the neighborhood that are interested in amending the fire lane to a class 2 status.
He explained that the objective is to allow them to continue to reasonably use the fire lane in a
manner consistent with what they have been doing for over 30 years. He stated that he
understands that the City is conducting a study and is curious about the status of the study and
asked what the next steps are in the process.
Chair Maddy stated that Fire Lane #3 is at the end of Grant Lorenz Road and explained that
barriers were put up last winter when there was concern that as the law is right now, people are
not allowed to use motorized vehicles on that fire lane.
Planning Director Darling stated that there was a discussion at City Council about the fire lanes.
She stated that the Council directed to staff to enforce the current codes while the City was
studying the issue, which is why the barriers were put up last winter. She stated that at this point,
the fire lanes have been surveyed and staked and Park Commission and Planning Commission
members have all toured them. She stated that they held one joint meeting where the
Commissioners could share their ideas regarding public uses in some of the fire lanes and have
asked for some additional information, regarding vacation of fire lanes, but noted that this doesn’t
necessarily pertain to fire lane #3. She stated that she will be bringing this information back to
the two Commissions for further discussion sometime in November of 2020.
Mr. Leister asked if it will be in front of the Council in November.
Planning Director Darling stated that she is not sure when it will be on the Council agenda, but
will be on the Park Commission and the Planning Commission agenda for one of their November
meetings.
Mr. Leister asked if the public will be allowed to speak at those meetings.
Planning Director Darling explained that would be at the discretion of the Chairs.
Chair Maddy stated that the public will be allowed to speak at the Planning Commission meeting.
Planning Director Darling noted that usually Matters from the Floor is located earlier in the agenda
and suggested that the Commission may want to move it for future meetings.
Commissioner Eggenberger agreed and stated that he had already written himself a note to bring
that up so people don’t have to sit through the bulk of the meeting in order to speak to the
Commission.
Chair Maddy asked that Matters from the Floor be moved to item #3, directly following Approval
of the Minutes, on all future agendas.
7. REPORTS
• Council Meeting Report
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 6, 2020
Page 8 of 8
Council Liaison Siakel reported on matters considered and actions taken during Council’s
September 28, 2020, meeting (as detailed in the minutes for that meeting).
• Draft Next Meeting Agenda
Planning Director Darling noted that the Commission will discuss the code amendments and there
may also be a CUP for fencing on the agenda
• Liaison Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings
October – Commissioner Gorham
November – Commissioner Eggenberger
December – Commissioner Gault
January – Commissioner Riedel
February – Chair Maddy
8. ADJOURNMENT
Riedel moved, Gault seconded, adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of October
6, 2020, at 8:37 P.M. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion passed 5/0.
#7B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Planned Unit Development Amendment
Location: 5745 Featherie Bay
Applicant: US Homes dba Lennar
Meeting Date: October 26, 2020
Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Review Deadline: January 20, 2021
Attachments: Planning Memorandum
Resolution
Background:
The request is to alter the maximum height to 35 feet, 10 inches for
one property in the Minnetonka Country Club to allow the applicant to regrade the
rear-yard lot to correct a drainage issue behind the existing home. See the planning
staff memorandum for detailed background on this item.
At their October 6, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission unanimously
recommended approval of the request for the increased height for the home as they
found the change would have no impact on the neighborhood. No one from the public
requested to speak.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
The fee paid by the applicant covers the cost
of processing the application.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff and the Planning Commission
recommend approval of the request for a PUD amendment, subject to the conditions
in the attached resolution.
Action on this item requires a simple majority.
Next Steps and Timelines:
If the item is approved, the resolution would be recorded
at Hennepin County and the applicant could complete the grading and yard restoration
in the back yard.
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.
S:\Planning\Planning Files\Applications\2020 Cases\5745 Featherie Bay Height PUDA\CAF.docx
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
·
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD, SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927
952.960.7900
·
www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Marie Darling, Planning Director
MEETING DATE:
October 6, 2020
RE: PUD Amendment to allow the height of a building to exceed 35 feet
APPLICANT: Lennar Homes
LOCATION: 5745 Featherie Bay
ZONING:
PUD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
Low Density Residential
REVIEW DEADLINE:
January 20, 2021
FILE NO.: 20
.14
REQUEST SUMMARY
The applicant has proposed modifying the height
requirement for the existing home on Featherie Bay
to resolve a drainage issue around the foundation.
Because the property is a PUD, requests for
modifications to the original approval are
considered amendments to the PUD rather than
variances.
Notice of this application was published in the City’s official newspaper and mailed to all property owners
within 750 feet of the property at least 10 days prior to the Planning Commissions public hearing.
BACKGROUND
Context:
In 2015, the City Council approved a concept plan to develop the subject property for 142 single
family residential lots and various outlots.
Page 2
In 2016, the City Council approved a development stage plan and final plat/development agreement
for the first addition which included 73 lots.
In 2017, the City Council approved a final plat/development agreement for the second addition. The
development agreement included two amendments: a) to the phasing plan to increase the number of lots in
the second addition (to 53 lots) and reduce the number in the third addition (to 16) and b) to make a setback
adjustment to allow window wells within the 10 foot setback and drainage and utility easement to be located
as close six feet from the property line for some of the lots. The first addition was subsequently amended to
include the change for window wells.
In 2018, the City Council approved a final plat/development agreement for the third addition that
included the final 16 lots and a PUD amendment to allow taller homes on a select number of lots that were
internal to the development.
In 2019, a building permit was issued for the home on the subject property. The house was under
construction when staff noticed the home was too tall and re-reviewed the plans. Staff had missed that the
height of the home was over the requirement and worked with Lennar to correct the issue. Lennar revised
the roof trusses to reduce the height of the home. The revised trusses brought the home within eight inches
of compliance with the city’s height requirement. To make the house fully conforming, Lennar proposed to
regrade the rear of the home to be no greater than 35 feet.
Earlier this year, the construction methods Lennar used to protect the basement from water intrusion
failed during a rainstorm and the basement of the home flooded.
REQUEST
Lennar provided emergency grading behind the home and corrected the issues to protect the home from
further water issues. Lowering the grade means that the height of the home is out of compliance by 10
inches. The total height of the home would be 35 feet, 10 inches.
To review the application, staff used the following criteria:
Consideration of the specific policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan
Compatibility with present and future land uses in the area
Likelihood to depreciate the area
Accommodated by the existing public services
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The property is residential in an area classified residential before and after the proposed grade changes.
COMPATIBILITY/ DEPRECIATE THE AREA
Because only the grades of the rear yard are changing and nothing with the building, the additional 10
inches in height would not be noticeable from the adjacent streets. Additionally, the home is situated on a
lot that is separated from Country Club Road by a landscaped buffer of trees and additional distance.
The property values of adjacent homes are unlikely to be affected by the request. With or without the
amendment, each of the homes in the subdivision affected by the amendment would be constructed with
Page 3
quality materials to the same and higher standards as any of the new homes being constructed in
Shorewood.
EXISTING PUBLIC SERVICES
The alteration of the rear grades would have no impact on the public infrastructure and would return the
rear yard grades to the original grading plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff finds the applicant’s request meets the standards for PUD’s and is beneficial to protect the new
homeowners from further water damage and recommends approval of the request to allow a home to be 35
feet, 10 inches in height where 35 feet is required.
Staff notes the city has more discretion with requests for PUD amendments and the Planning Commission
could reasonably disagree.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
Applicants Narrative and Plans
S:\Planning\Planning Files\Applications\2020 Cases\5745 Featherie Bay Height PUDA\PC memo 10 6 2020.docx
5745 Featherie Bay Location Map
September 8, 2020
Ms. Marie Darling
Planning Director, City of Shorewood
RE: PUD Amendment, 5745 Featherie Bay, Minnetonka Country Club
Dear Marie:
As previously discussed, please consider this our formal submittal for a PUD amendment at 5745 Featherie
Bay in Minnetonka Country Club. The request is for a PUD amendment to allow this home to be
approximately 36’ feet in height. As demonstrated by the grading plan, the homesite was originally
designed to be graded with a finished rear elevation of approximately 983 feet.
nd
This home already had the 2 story framed when the discovery regarding average land grade was made;
it was not caught during building permit review. The home was put on hold, and new roof trusses were
re-designed to lower the roof peak 5’-3” from the original design (re-designed elevations & roof plan
attached).
Even with these modifications, the height is still roughly 10” over the 35’ maximum. In order to adhere to
the average land grade interpretation, Lennar was required to build up the grade along the rear walkout
wall of the home (see the Grading as-built attached). Material was placed against the wood framed
basement walls (not our typical construction method). After our recent heavy rains, this system failed and
water intruded into the home which has a finished basement.
In an effort to remedy this situation, Lennar is asking for a PUD Amendment to allow us to grade this home
as originally designed and ensure this homeowner doesn’t have any future water intrusion issues in their
basement.
Please let me know if you have questions and we look forward to getting on an agenda quickly so we can
move this forward. Thank you for assisting us through this process.
Regards,
Paul J. Tabone
Land Entitlement Mgr
Lennar Minnesota
RESOLUTION 20-xxx
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB P.U.D.
FOR 5745 FEATHERIE BAY
WHEREAS
, US Homes, dba Lennar (Applicant) has requested an amendment to the
Minnetonka Country Club PUD to allow a home to be taller than 35 feet on one lot in the
PUD to allow for grade changes in the rear yard on the property legally described as:
Lot 7, Block 3, Minnetonka Country Club, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS,
the Applicant proposes to increase the height to 35 feet, 10 inches, where
35 feet is allowed, to regrade the rear yard to allow the lot grade to drain away from the
home; and,
WHEREAS
, the Applicant’s request dated, September 10, 2020 and October 1, 2020,
was reviewed by the Planning Director, whose memo was forwarded to the Planning
Commission for their meeting on October 6, 2020; and
WHEREAS
, the application was considered by the Planning Commission at a public
hearing held on October 6, 2020, the minutes of the meeting are on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS
, the City Council considered the application at its regular meeting on
October 26, 2020, at which time the Planning Director's memorandum and the Planning
Commission's recommendations were reviewed and comments were heard by the
Council, from the Applicant, the public and city staff.
NOW THEREFORE
, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Applicant's request for an Amendment to the Minnetonka Country Club PUD
to allow the home to be 35 feet, 10 inches instead of the previously approved 35
feet is hereby approved based on the findings that the applicable standards have
been met and in accordance with the plans submitted September 10 and October
1, 2020.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this
resolution with Hennepin County.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
this 26th day of October, 2020.
Scott Zerby, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
#7C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Variance to shoreland setback regulations
Location: 5710 Ridge Road
Applicant: Richard and Ingrid Hoyt
Meeting Date: October 26, 2020
Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Review Deadline: January 19, 2021
Attachments: Applicants Narrative
Planning Memorandum from the October 6, 2020 Meeting
Resolution
Background:
See attached planning memorandum for detailed background on this request.
At their October 6, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission found the applicants had not met
the variance criteria and did not show practical difficulties associated with the application. The
applicant was not present at the meeting. One neighbor submitted a letter in support of the
request (attached to the Planning Memorandum.)
Financial or Budget Considerations:
The application fees are adequate to cover the cost of
processing the request.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend
denial of the application to construct a deck within six feet of the OHWL where the ordinance
requires 75 feet. Should the City Council determine that practical difficulties exist, staff
requests referring the item back to staff to draft a resolution to that effect.
Proposed motion:
Move to adopt the attached resolution denying a variance for Richard and
Ingrid Hoyt for property located at 5710 Ridge Road based on the findings and conditions in
the attached resolution.
Any action on this request would require a simple majority.
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.
S:\Planning\Planning Files\Applications\2020 Cases\Hoyt 5710 Ridge Road\CAF Memo.docx
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
·
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD, SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 952.960.7900
·
www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Marie Darling, Planning Director
MEETING DATE:
October 6, 2020
REQUEST:
Variance to shoreland setback regulations
APPLICANT:
Richard and Ingrid Hoyt
LOCATION:
5710 Ridge Road
REVIEW DEADLINE:
January 19, 2021
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION:
Minimum Density Residential
ZONING:
R-1A/S
FILE NUMBER:
20.13
REQUEST:
The applicant requests a variance to construct a
deck that would be 6 feet from the ordinary high
water level (OHWL) of Christmas Lake where 75
feet is required.
Notice of this application and the public meeting
was mailed to all property owners within 500 feet
of the property at least 10 days prior to the meeting.
BACKGROUND
Context: The adjacent properties are all developed with single-family homes and zoned R-1A/S.
The lot was created in 1985 as part of the Silver Ridge subdivision and the home was originally constructed
in 1957. No portion of the property is within a floodplain. The property contains mature trees, but the
proposed project is not subject to the tree preservation policy. No trees are proposed to be removed for the
proposed project.
Page 2
In 1997, the property owner built a multi-level deck into the bluff without requesting permits. After the city
received a complaint regarding the structure, the owners applied for and received a variance to keep the
deck although he was required to remove several improvements including a screen porch built on top of the
deck, the easterly four feet of the deck, stairs, an accessory building, and a holding tank. A mudslide on the
property destroyed the previous deck in 2014.
The property contains a bluff with about 90
feet of elevation change between the bluff and
the lakeshore.
Applicable Code Sections:
Section 1201.26 subd. 5. a. of the zoning
regulations prohibits any structures except
stairs, lifts, piers and docks, walkways and
steps placed closer than 75 feet of the OHWL.
Additionally, Section 1201.26 subd. 5. d.
prohibits any structures or accessory features,
except stairways, lifts and landings from being placed within a bluff impact zone.
Section 1201.02 defines the bluff impact zone as the bluff and land within 20 feet from the top of the bluff.
ANALYSIS
The applicant’s narrative and supporting documents are attached. The applicant proposes to construct a
deck that would be 15 feet by 25 feet with a fabric canopy that would be 12 feet by 20 feet. The deck
platform is about 30 inches off the ground, and it sits below the toe of the bluff. The deck platform is
shown as sitting on top of the ground rather than having permanent footings.
Variance Criteria:
Section 1201.05 subd.3.a. of the zoning regulations sets forth criteria for the consideration of variance
requests. These criteria are open to interpretation. Staff reviewed the request according to these criteria
as follows:
1.Intent of comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance: The comprehensive plan includes the
following objectives and policies related to preservation of the natural environment:
(obj) All environmentally sensitive areas (shoreland, floodplain, wetlands) are to be
protected.
(pol) Environmental regulations shall be formulated, updated and enforced to
ensure the proper protection of natural environmental resources.
(pol) New development and the expansion of existing activities shall be restricted
and regulated where environmental damage may result.
(pol) Development on or near shorelands, wetlands, floodplains and other natural
features which perform important environmental functions in their natural state
shall be restricted or prohibited.
(pol) To the extent possible, development policies and regulations shall be applied
consistently and uniformly.
Page 3
(pol) Shorewood’s lakeshore shall be protected from over-intensification of use and
development.
(pol) Residential development shall be prohibited on floodplains, bluffs, wetlands,
and other natural features that perform important protection functions in their
natural state.
The intent of the Comprehensive Plan’s objectives and policies is to prevent any development or
expansion of development within sensitive environmental areas. The intent of the setback from the
ordinary high water elevation is to implement the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive
Plan.
2.Practical difficulties: Practical difficulties include three factors, all three of which must be met.
a.Reasonable: A deck is a reasonable residential use on a residential property.
b.Unique Situation vs. Self-Created: While the property has a great deal of challenging
topography, the slope is not the factor that prevents the applicant from having structures that
others are permitted. The only structures permitted in the setback are those to provide access
to the shoreline and the applicant has access to the shoreline. Many of the properties
abutting the shore of Christmas Lake have either steep slopes or bluffs and are prohibited
from constructing new structures on them.
c.Essential Character: The essential character of the area could be affected by allowing this
property owner a structure that others are not permitted. The applicant states that he will
construct the deck behind a tree line. According to the applicant’s photos, the tree line
consists of two small saplings and would be fully visible from the water. While there are a
few non-conforming structures around the lake, the City has not permitted new structures,
(except those expressly permitted, including docks, piers, stairs and lifts, and landings no
greater than 4 feet by 8 feet.)
The previous deck was constructed six feet from the water and when the mudslide occurred,
the structure ended up in the lake, see applicant’s photos 4 and 5. That could reasonably
occur again, especially as the structure is proposed without any footings. Additionally, the
canopy proposed could reasonably also be pulled off the structure during high winds and end
up into the lake.
3.Economic Considerations: The applicant has not proposed the variance solely based on economic
considerations, but to enjoy the lakeshore.
4.Impact on Area: The property owner is not proposing anything that would impair an adequate
supply of light and air to an adjacent property, increase the risk of fire, or increase the impact on
adjacent streets. However, debris in the lake could cause a safety hazard to others enjoying the
lake.
5.Impact to Public Welfare, Other Lands or Improvements: The project could be detrimental to the
public water based on the reasonable hazard for mudslides on the slopes, debris in the water and
other improvements to the area, etc. At the time of packet release, the applicant had not answered
questions regarding whether he had had the slope integrity evaluated by an engineer. Any
additional information provided on this topic after printing will be sent to the Planning
Commission separately.
Page 4
6.Minimum to Alleviate Practical Difficulty: Staff finds the variance request has not shown that
situation faced by the property owner is unique nor that it would not impact the essential character
of the area. Consequently, the request is not the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical
difficulties on the property.
FINDINGS/RECOMMENDATION
Staff finds the variance proposal does not meet the criteria above and recommends denial of the
variance. The variance criteria are open to interpretation and the Planning Commission could
reasonably find otherwise.
Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance, staff recommends the following
conditions:
1.The applicant be required to acquire all necessary permits (zoning or building) prior to
construction.
2.With the permit application, the applicant shall provide the following:
A foundation plan to prevent the structure from sliding into the lake under periods of high
water or wake.
Documentation that the canopy would be designed consistent with the building code’s
exposure category B, to withstand ultimate wind speeds of 115 miles per hour.
Provide existing and proposed impervious surface coverage calculations indicating that the
property would conform to the 25 percent maximum impervious surface coverage.
ATTACHMENTS
Location map
Applicants’ narrative, photos and plans
Resolution 97-64
Correspondence Received
S:\Planning\Planning Files\Applications\2020 Cases\Hoyt 5710 Ridge Road\PC memo.docx
5710 Ridge Road Location Map
RESOLUTION NO. 20-xxx
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE SHORELAND
REGULATIONS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5710 RIDGE ROAD
WHEREAS,
Richard and Ingrid Hoyt, (the “Applicant”) are the owners of real property, legally
described as:
Lot 2, Block 1, Silver Ridge, Hennepin County, Minnesota
WHEREAS
, the Applicant has applied for a variance to allow a deck to be 6 feet from the
Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) where the zoning ordinance requires 75 feet; and
WHEREAS
, the Applicant’s request was reviewed by the planning staff, whose recommendation
is included in a memorandum for the October 6, 2020 Planning Commission meeting, a copy of
which is on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS
, the Planning Commission held a public meeting on October 6, 2020 to review the
application, the minutes of the meetings are on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS
, the City Council considered the application at its regular meeting on
October 26, 2020, at which time the planning staff memorandum and the Planning
Commission’s recommendations were reviewed, and comments were heard by the City Council
from the Applicant, staff and public.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The subject property is located in the R-1A/S zoning district.
2. Section 1201.03, subd. 3 of the zoning regulations requires all structures to be set back
75 feet from the OHWL of Christmas Lake.
3. The Applicant’s proposal is identified on the application materials and plans submitted
on July 21, 2020 and September 21, 2020.
4. Section 1201.05 of the zoning regulations provides that a variance and its resulting
construction and use, must be consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the
general purposes and intent of the zoning regulations.
5. Section 1201.05 of the zoning regulations provides that the purpose of a variance is to
allow a process to deviate from the strict provision of the zoning regulations when there are
practical difficulties and the action is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulties.
CONCLUSIONS
A. Based upon the foregoing, and the records referenced herein, the City Council
hereby concludes that the Applicant's proposal for a variance is in conflict with the criteria for a
variance listed in Item 4 under Findings (above) and hereby denies the application as the
request is in conflict with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the general purposes and
intent of the zoning regulations.
B. The City Council further concludes that the Applicant’s request conflicts with item
5 under Findings (above) and hereby denies the application as there are no practical difficulties
affecting the property.
C. The City Council further concludes that the Applicant’s proposal conflicts with
Item 5 under Findings (above) and hereby denies the application because without a finding that
there are practical difficulties, the application is not the minimum action to alleviate the practical
difficulties.
th
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
this 26
day of October, 2020.
Scott Zerby, Mayor
Attest:
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
-2-
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 20-113
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FROM DAVEY RESOURCES
GROUP FOR UPDATES TO TREE INVENTORY
WHEREAS, it is beneficial to the City of Shorewood to have a current tree inventory
;
and database to manage the city’s resourcesand
WHEREAS, staff has solicited a proposal from Davey Resources Group for data
collection and update to the city’s existing database; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has reviewed said proposal and found it to be
in order.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota accepts the proposal by
Davey Resources Group, in the amount of $2,958 for updates to the current tree
inventory for the City.
262020.
Passed by the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota this th day of October
Scott Zerby, Mayor
ATTEST
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
City of Shorewood
General Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Through the Month Ended September 30, 2020 (Unaudited)
Prior
CurrentCurrentCurrent
FinalYear-to-DateYear-to-DateVarianceYear-to-Date
BudgetAmount% of BudgetWith FinalAmount
202009/30/2009/30/20Budget09/30/19
REVENUES:
Taxes$ 5,856,611$ 3,063,75852.3%$ (2,792,853)$ 2,859,294
Licenses and Permits 232,225 387,903167.0% 155,678 403,409
Intergovernmental 123,500 116,89594.7% (6,605) 100,279
Charges for Services 52,860 35,94768.0% (16,913) 53,521
Fines and Forfeitures 60,000 35,96359.9% (24,037) 44,744
Special Assessments 5,000 2,70154.0% (2,299) 6,516
Miscellaneous 211,000 197,97093.8% (13,030) 194,784
Total Revenues 6,541,196 3,841,13758.7% (2,700,059) 3,662,547
EXPENDITURES:
Current:
General Government 1,495,185 1,106,83474.0% (388,351) 1,003,512
Public Safety 2,385,377 2,091,78987.7% (293,588) 2,144,557
Public Works 1,195,008 771,245 64.5% (423,763) 715,429
Parks and Recreation 324,596 207,35663.9% (117,240) 173,496
Total Expenditures 5,400,166 4,177,22477.4% (1,222,942) 4,036,994
Excess of Revenues
Over (Under) Expenditures 1,141,030 (336,087)-29.5% (1,477,117) (374,447)
OTHER SOURCES (USES):
Transfers In 25,000 25,000100.0% - 25,000
Transfers Out (1,222,415) (1,222,415)100.0% - (1,646,305)
Total Other Sources (Uses) (1,197,415) (1,197,415)100.0% - (1,621,305)
Excess of Revenues & Other Sources
Over (Under) Expenditures & Other Uses (56,385) (1,533,502)2719.7% (1,477,117) (1,995,752)
FUND BALANCES:
January 1 4,269,389 - 4,419,413
September 30$ 2,735,887$ (1,477,117)$ 2,423,661
BalanceBalance
20202019
CASH:
January 1$ 4,100,412$ 4,286,039
Increase (Decrease) in Cash (804,053) (1,944,123)
September 30
$ 3,296,359$ 2,341,916
City of Shorewood
General Fund Statement of Expenditures and Other Uses by Program/Department
Through the Month Ended September 30, 2020 (Unaudited)
CurrentCurrentCurrentPrior
FinalYear-to-DateYear-to-DateVarianceYear-to-Date
BudgetAmount% of BudgetWith FinalAmount
202009/30/2009/30/20Budget09/30/19
EXPENDITURES:
Current:
General Government
Council 84,100 60,25071.6% (23,850) 56,631
Administration 502,656 367,68573.1% (134,971) 349,801
Elections 26,000 17,33366.7% (8,667) -
Finance 202,745 154,29576.1% (48,450) 146,008
Professional Services 252,000 146,94158.3% (105,059) 136,888
Planning 230,434 187,56081.4% (42,874) 162,650
Municipal Buildings 197,250 172,77087.6% (24,480) 151,534
Total General Government 1,495,185 1,106,83474.0% (388,351) 1,003,512
Public Safety
Police Protection 1,507,501 1,294,73585.9% (212,766) 1,274,788
Fire Protection 693,325 693,325100.0% - 678,797
Protective Inspections 184,551 103,72956.2% 111,749 190,972
Total Public Safety 2,385,377 2,091,78987.7% (101,017) 2,144,557
Public Works
City Engineer 90,250 105,974 117.4% 15,724 47,150
Public Works Service 991,688 606,585 61.2% (385,103) 572,540
Ice and Snow Removal 113,070 58,686 51.9% (54,384) 95,739
Total Public Works 1,195,008 771,245 64.5% (423,763) 715,429
Parks and Recreation
Park Maintenance 258,939 155,79360.2% (103,146) 128,562
Recreation 65,657 51,56378.5% (14,094) 44,934
Total Parks and Recreation 324,596 207,35663.9% (117,240) 173,496
Total Expenditures 5,400,166 4,177,22477.4% (1,030,371) 4,036,994
OTHER USES:
Transfers Out:
Southshore Center - Building 32,300 32,300 100.0% - 49,800
Southshore Center - Operations 70,000 70,000 100.0% - 70,000
EDA Debt City Hall 95,115 95,115 100.0% - 92,005
Equipment Replacement 95,000 95,000 100.0% - 172,500
Street Improvements 835,000 835,000 100.0% - 810,000
Park Capital 95,000 95,000 100.0% - 222,000
Manor Park Pond - - N/A - 230,000
Total Transfers Out 1,222,415 1,222,415100.0% - 1,646,305
Total Expenditures & Other Uses 6,622,581 5,399,63981.5% (1,030,371) 5,683,299