01-24-11 CC Reg Agenda PacketCITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2011
AGENDA
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
Attachments
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A. Roll Call
Mayor Liz6e
Hotvet
Siakel
Woodruff
Zerby
B. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Executive Session Minutes, January 10, 2011
Minutes
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2011
Minutes
3. CONSENT AGENDA - Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda & Adopt
Resolutions Therein:
NOTE: Give the public an opportunity to request an item be removed from the
Consent Agenda. Comments can be taken or questions asked following removal
from Consent Agenda
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
Claims List
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
(No Council action will be taken)
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. State Senator Gen Olson, District 33
B. Representative Connie Doepke, District 33B
6. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Storm Water Pollution Protection Program Public Information Meeting
Engineer's CAF
7. PARKS — Report by Representative
8. PLANNING - Report by Representative
A. Bill Mason Zoning Violation Appeal
Planning Director's
Applicant: Bill Mason
CAF
Location: 27680 Island View Road
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA — January 24, 2011
Page 2 of 2
B. Nonconforming Accessory Structure - Mary Edwards
C. Conditional Use Permit
Applicant: Shorewood Yacht Club
Location: 600 West Lake Street
9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS
A. 2010 Traffic Control Sign Inventory
10. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS
A. Spring Clean Up
11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Speed Cart
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. December 2010 Financial Report
2. 2010 Investment Report — 4 th Quarter
B. Mayor and City Council
1. Community Visioning
13. ADJOURN
Attachments
Planning Director's
CAF
Planning Director's
CAF
Engineer's CAF
Administrator's
CAF
Finance Director's
Memorandum
Finance Director's
Memorandum
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 Country Club Road • Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 • 952- 960 -7900
Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us
Executive Summary
Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting
Monday, 24 January, 2011
7:00 p.m.
A 6:15 P.M. Work Session is scheduled this evening.
An EDA Meeting is scheduled immediately following the Regular City Council meeting.
Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval.
Agenda Item #5A: State Senator Gen Olson, District 33, will be present to report on recent
activities.
Agenda Item #513: Representative Connie Doepke, District 33B, will be present to report on
recent activities.
Agenda Item #6A: As part of the federal Clean Water Act, the City of Shorewood is required
to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The two
main requirements of this permit are preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Program (SWPPP) and subsequent annual reports. Tonight's public meeting is required as
part of the permit. There will be a brief presentation outlining the city's SWPPP, items
that will be included in the annual report.
Agenda Item #7A: Park Commissioner Steve Quinlan will report on the recent Park
Commission activities
Agenda Item #8: A Planning Commission representative will report on recent Planning
Commission activities.
Agenda Item #8A: Bill Mason has appealed a zoning violation notice requiring him to reduce
the number of docks on his property from three to one. He feels that one of the structures
is not a dock, but a deck and that it should be "grandfathered in ". The structure in
question fits both the City's and the LMCD's definition of dock, and staff recommends
that the code requirement be enforced. The individual who made the initial complaint may
be at the meeting on Monday.
Agenda Item #813: When Mary Edwards was granted a conditional use permit last July, one of
the conditions of approval was that she demonstrate that a nonconforming shed /deck near
the lake was in fact a legal structure. The Planning Commission found the evidence she
submitted (a letter from an adjoining property owner) to be satisfactory and that the
structure in question should be allowed to remain. A simple motion directing staff to issue
a certificate of occupancy is all that is necessary.
Executive Summary — City Council Meeting of January 24, 2011
Page 2 of 2
Agenda Item #8C: The Planning Commission has recommended that the interim conditional
use permit issued to Shorewood Yacht Club be converted to a permanent C.U.P. They
went on to recommend that the applicants request for additional power boats be approved,
but limited to 52 power boats (plus the four they have already had) and that the power
boats be confined to piers 3 and 4. Staff should be directed to prepare a resolution for the
consent agenda of the next Council meeting (14 February).
Agenda Item #9A: Staff received three quotes to perform a traffic control sign inventory. The
inventory is the first step toward implementing any of the sign maintenance methods
recommended to comply with sign visibility requirements. Staff recommends working with
the lowest quoter, WSB and Associates, to perform the inventory and assessment for a not
to exceed $8,000.
Agenda Item #10A: Discussion on adding a curbside component to the annual spring clean -up.
Agenda Item #11A: Clarification on the speed cart donation to the SLMPD.
Agenda Item #12A.1: The December 2010 Monthly Budget report is provided.
Agenda Item #12A.2: The December 2010 Quarterly Investment Report is provided.
#Za
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION
MONDAY, JANUARY 11, 2011
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, We
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda as pr
2. LEGAL ISSUES UPDATE
The purpose of the meeting was for confidential attorney - client di;
with Ron Johnson, the court hearing held on January 5, 2011, a
Johnson's history with the City.
3. NON -UNION STAFF COMPENSATION
Council discussed non -
2011.
4. ADJOURN
Woodruff moved, Zerby s
2011, at 6:58 P.M. Motion
Christine Freeman,
ATTEST:
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:30 P.M.
and
Motion passed 510.
regarding the current litigation
around information about Mr.
proposed by Administrator Heck for
1, Adjourning the City Council Executive Session of January 10,
5/0.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk
FM
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 2011
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, W
City Administrator Heck; Planning Director Niels(
and Engineer Landim
Absent: None.
B. Review Agenda
Councilmember Zerby asked that Item 10.E City Admim
agenda.
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, approving the agenda as
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mayor Lizee explained
grammatical corrections
The corrections should'
corrections proposed, the
A. Citv Council
Zerby moved, Woodruff s+
December 13, 2010, as press
B. City Council
Woodruff moved, Zerby s
December 13, 2010, as prese
passed 510.
Councilmembers Hotvet and Siakel that if there are spelling or
o be made to minutes they don't need to be discussed during meetings.
A to Deputy Clerk Panchyshyn. If there are phrasing or verbatim
be discussed during meetings.
December 13, 2010
wing the City Council Executive Session Minutes of
assed 510.
ar Meeting Minutes, December 13, 2010
ed, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of
Motion passed 510.
C. City Council Executive Session Minutes, January 3, 2011
Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving the City Council Executive Session Minutes of January
3, 2011, as amended in Item 3.A, change "Making Appointments to Certain Offices and Positions
within the City of Shorewood for the Year 2011." to "Making Appointments to Certain Offices and
Positions within the City of Shorewood for the Year 2011:
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
Zerby; Attorney Tietjen;
of Public Works Brown;
Contract Renewal be added to the
➢ Acting Mayor will be Scott Zerby;
➢ Park Commission Liaison for January — June 2011 will be Laura Hotvet;
➢ Park Commission Liaison for July — December 2011 will be Scott Zerby;
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 2 of 12
Planning Commission Liaison for January — June 2011 will be Debbie Siakel;
Planning Commission Liaison for July — December 2011 will be Richard Woodruff;
Metro Cities (Association of Metro Municipalities) will be Richard Woodruff, with Brian
Heck as alternate;
Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission will be Scott Zerby;
South Lake Minnetonka Police Department Coordinating Committee will be Christine
Lizee, with Debbie Siakel as alternate;
Excelsior Fire District Board Member will be Scott Zerby, with Laura Hotvet as alternate;
Investment Committee — no appointments were made at this time;
Personnel Committee will be Christine Lizee and Debbie Siakel;
Weed Inspector will be Christine Lizee, with Joe Lugowski as assistant;
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Liaison will be a resident:
Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District Liaison will be a resident;
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board will be 0 resident;
Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission resident representative will be Ken
Hendrickson;
Minnetonka Community Education will be resident Tad Shaw (two -year appointment);
City Attorney will be discussed;
City Prosecutor will be Ken Potts;
Emergency Preparedness Director will be SLMPD Chiei
Official Depositories will be Beacon Bank, 4M Fund and
Official Newspaper will be Sun Sailor and notices may a
and, that the Blanket Bond is approved."
Bryan Litsey;
other Depositories as necessary;
yo be published in the Laker;
Motion passed 4/1 with Woodruff dissenting.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconde
Adopting the Resolution Therein.
A. Approval of the V
B. Travel Policy for 1
C. Sauthshore Centel
D. Staff Comnensatic
ing the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and
,rified Claims List
Jected Officials
Directional Signs
n
E. Speed Cart (This was moved to Item 10.17 under General/New Business.)
F. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 11 -03 "A Resolution Adopting the Hennepin County
All- Hazards Mitigation Plan."
Motion passed 510.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 3 of 12
5. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
None.
7. PARKS
Commissioner Edmondson first congratulated newly elected Mayor Lizee and Councilmembers Hotvet
and Siakel. He stated he is looking forward to working with this Council. He stated he looks forward to
continuing his role as a Park Commissioner.
Commissioner Edmondson then reported on matters considered and actions taken at the December 14,
2010, Park Commission meeting as detailed in the minutes of that meeting. He commented there was a
delay with the lot being surfaced and landscaping being ''done at Silverwood Park. He stated he has
observed a lot of people using the new shelter.
Director Brown clarified the lot was surfaced and the curb and gutter was placed. Brown explained that
after the lot was surfaced a decision was made to install a path behind the easterly curb to ensure there is
handicap access to the new shelter.
Edmondson then stated Denny Loving, an organizer for the Pond Hockey Tournament, contacted him
about using a power broom for the 2011 tournament. Mayor Lizee stated she had contacted Mr. Loving
and explained that because the 2011 Tournament is not scheduled for the same days as the 2011 Arctic
Fever event it wasn't appropriate for the Tournament people to use the equipment. Lizee then stated she
told Mr. Loving that if he wanted to pursue it for 2012 he should contact the Arctic Fever coordinators.
Edmondson commented that if Arctic Fever continues to be popular, the two events could bring synergy
to each other.
Edmondson went on to state he continues his liaison with the Shorewood Parks Foundation. He noted he
thought the Foundation continues to do great work.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she is interested` in creating a return on investment in cooperation with the
Park Commission for the Arctic Fever event, noting a return doesn't have to be just financial.
Mayor Lizee stated Channel 5 News interviewed three members of the staff about Arctic Fever at Manor
Park on the morning of January '7,`2011.
8. PLANNING
Commissioner Hutchins stated he looked forward to working with new Councilmembers Hotvet and
Siakel. He then reported on matters considered and actions taken at the January 4, 2011, Planning
Commission meeting as detailed in the minutes of that meeting.
Mayor Lizee stated the Planning Commission works like a "well -oiled machine "; it does a good job. She
noted she attended the January 4 "' Commission meeting because Councilmember Siakel was not able to
attend. She expressed she was pleased the Commission reappointed Chair Geng and Vice -Chair Arnst to
their positions.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 4 of 12
Councilmember Siakel stated she appreciated getting information about the request from the Shorewood
Yacht Club. She noted she will be attending the January 18 Planning Commission meeting as Council's
liaison.
9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS
A. Silver Lake
Engineer Landini explained the stormwater outlet structure located near 5750 Covington Road and Silver
Lake has sediment deposits built up to the level that the deposits restrict the function of the storm sewer
system located at Covington Road and Old Market Road. Two core samples of the sediment were taken
and analyzed. The results of the analysis indicate the soils are contaminated with polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs). PAHs need to be treated as Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) dredge
management level 3. The excavated soils will need to be disposed of at a MPCA permitted landfill.
Landini then explained Staff assembled and distributed plans and specifications to receive quotes for the
outlet structure to ten excavation contractors. Seven quotes were received and Parrott Contracting, Inc
provided the low quote. in the amount of $30,308.80.
Landini stated Staff recommends the sediment analysis report be accepted and a contract be awarded to
Parrott Contracting, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $40,000.
Councilmember Zerby asked if trees will have to be removed as part of this effort, to which Engineer
Landini responded they would.
Councilmember Hotvet asked what preventive measures will be put in place to keep this from happening
again. Engineer Landini explained Council could consider a future project to modify the storm sewer
system. Without that happening the system will continue to function the way it has in the past.
Administrator Heck stated Staff met with residents in the area about this structure. The Capital
Improvement Program includes a possible project to modify the current outlet structure. He noted the
MPCA wants to minimize the number of structures which discharge directly into lakes. He stated Staff
has been talking with the MPCA, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District about a bossible modification of the outlet structure.
Councilmember Zerby asked if the maintenance project will be a temporary fix, and would not be needed
if the outlet structure were to be modified. Engineer Landini explained this is a maintenance item and the
City will continue to have to maintain the outlet structure unless the situation is improved.
Councilmember Hotvet asked if the project could be expanded to include a long -term solution. Director
Brown clarified the quotes received are to excavate out the sediment. Also, rip rap will be placed around
the structure and that is a'minor maintenance item. Brown explained Staff has been working to modify the
outlet structure and he anticipates Council will be asked to consider a phase two to modify the structure.
Brown stated he thought the money to excavate the sediment will be spent wisely because that would
have to be done even if there were to be a phase two.
Mayor Lizee asked when the outlet structure will be excavated. Engineer Landini responded within the
next forty five days.
Councilmember Siakel stated she agrees with Councilmember Hotvet that there are a lot of concerned
residents and that it's prudent to find and implement a long -term solution to this problem.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 5 of 12
Councilmember Zerby requested Staff make sure the residents know trees will be lost. Engineer Landini
explained that he has walked the property with the owner and that individual knows there will be trees
lost. Landini noted the property owner granted a temporary construction easement. Administrator Heck
commented that the owner of the property adjacent to the outlet knows trees will be lost. Heck stated the
major concern the residents have is about the sediment.
Councilmember Hotvet asked if there is a communications plan in place to share with the residents.
Hotvet moved, Zerby seconded, accepting the sediment analysis report and awarding the contract
for the 2010 Silver Lake Storm Outlet Maintenance to Parrott Contracting, Inc. in an amount not
to exceed $40,000.
Councilmember Zerby stated the low quote is for $30,308.80 yet Staff is recommending a not to exceed
amount of $40,000. He suggested the amount be reduced to $35,000. Engineer Landini stated the extra
funds were to cover unforeseen circumstances.
Without objection from the maker of the motion, the
to $35,000. Motion passed 510.
10. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS
A. City Attorney
Administrator Heck stated that during its January 3,
contract for civil attorney services with Tim Keane,
acceptable agreement. The meeting packet includes
proposed retainer is $1,850 per month with non -ret
depending on the level of the attorney dealing with t
that is essentially a pass' through to the developer.
renewal annually unless otherwise stated by the City
month and non - retainer work is billed at $145 — $165
amended the not to exceed amount
!011, meeting Uouncil voted to enter into a one -year
)f Malkerson, Gunn, and Martin, LLP, subject to an
a copy of a draft agreement for such services. The
Liner work billed at a rate of $155 — $185 per hour
he case. The development rate is slightly higher and
The term of the agreement provides an automatic
Council. He noted the current retainer is $1,500 per
Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, appointing Matkerson, Gunn, and Martin, LLP as the firm to
provide civil legal services to Shorewood as described in the Agreement for Municipal Legal
Services dated January 6, 2014, with ''Tim Keane serving as the City Attorney.
Councilmember Woodruff stated during the January 3, 2011, Council meeting he expressed his
reservations about what he perceived to be a lack of process. He explained two years ago the City
requested proposals for providing municipal legal services. The City received seven proposals and
interviewed five firms. Tim Keane represented one of the firms interviewed. From his personal
perspective, he thought the proposal received from the firm Mr. Keane represented to be weak and he did
not rank it in the top three.
Woodruff then stated that for a variety of reasons, Council elected to select the firm Kennedy and Graven
to provide the services, noting this firm had provided the civil legal services in the past. There is one year
remaining on that contract. He noted that the city attorney serves at the will of the Council; therefore, the
contract can be cancelled at any time. He called to question the process and the rush to judgment to hire
Mr. Keane's firm.
Woodruff went on to state that Mr. Keane at present has no other municipal clients. The City hasn't asked
for a proposal other than a contract. The City has no references. He commented the City received an
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 6 of 12
email from Ron Johnson on January 7, 2011, in which Mr. Johnson stated that in 1997 "Mr. Keane was
not rehired by the City Council on grounds of incompetence ", a matter of city record. He stated he had
not been aware that this would be the third time Mr. Keane would be providing legal services to the City.
Woodruff also stated the City is being asked to agree to a more than a 20 percent increase in the base
retainer rate for civil legal services at an additional cost of $4,200 per year for no better or different
services than the City is currently receiving from Kennedy and Graven. He expressed he did not think it
would be right to frivolously spend $4,200 per year to change firms. He then expressed his absolute
commitment to a process of soliciting proposals to provide civil legal services, noting he finds such a
process healthy. He stated he has a problem with the rush to bring in Mr. Keane at a substantially higher
rate with no reference checks especially in light of the fact that this would be the third time Mr. Keane
would be hired to provide civil legal services.
Councilmember Zerby stated questioning Mr. Keane's experience is unwarranted. Mr. Keane has
represented the City two other times. Mr. Keane helped create the joint powers agreements for police and
fire services. Mr. Keane has represented numerous other cities in the past. Zerby stated Mr. Keane has
worked for the City during Mayor Lizee's and his previous tenures as City Officials and on commissions.
Zerby noted he will speak as a reference for Mr. Keane. He commented Mr. Johnson does not represent
the record as accurately as people would like.
Zerby explained he attended the interviews of firms proposing to provide civil legal services in 2008 as a
councilmember- elect. During that process he asked a number of questions as to why the then Council
wanted to change attorneys. He was told it was not for financial reasons. There were other motivations for
replacing the then city attorney and the process that was claimed to have been followed was a pretty thin
disguise for premeditated decisions.
Councilmember Siakel asked i
Mr. Keane's experience with
based on the outcome of the N
stated that from her vantage po
Council to work together. Sh(
and they deserve her support.
s it'
Mayor Lizee expressed her
Keane has sixteen years of e
He knows the City's Com
associations with the City's
many years.
Motion passed 4/1
B. Trail Discussion
of the retainer increase would be offset in other ways because of
wledge of City operations. She noted the City's residents spoke
r, 2010 election; the residents decisively elected Mayor Lizee. She
previous Council had been somewhat divisive. She encouraged this
she respects Mayor Lizee's and Councilmember Zerby's opinion
ted that although this is an awkward decision to make as a new
rtant to take a positive step and support their recommendation.
ice in Mr. Keane's abilities to represent the City. She noted Mr.
-e as Shorewood City Attorney. Mr. Keane has a great track record.
ve Plan well. He works with staff well. He has built positive
)ring communities; he has worked with their representatives over
dissenting.
Administrator Heck stated that during conversations with Councilmember Hotvet, Planning
Commissioner Arnst, and Mayor Lizee it became apparent to him that there is a strong interest in taking a
look at trails in the community. He explained that since the last time there was discussion about trails in
the City, the neighboring communities to the south have constructed trails that end at the City's border.
Residents have asked why they can't be continued. He stated residents who have children that attend the
Minnewashta Elementary School have expressed concern about students walking, and they likely don't let
their children walk because there is no safe place to do so. He noted the City received a request from
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 7 of 12
residents residing along Galpin Lake Road south of State Highway 7 asking the City to consider a trail
connecting their neighborhood to the LRT trail in the City of Excelsior.
Heck then stated Staff proposes Council establish a trail planning committee consisting of at least two
Councilmembers, two Park Commissioners, and two Planning Commissioners with Director Nielsen
serving as the "project manager" and providing support to the committee. The committee would review
existing trail plans, revise them where needed, and outline implementation steps for trail connections and
construction that could be incorporated into the Capital Improvement Program.
Mayor Lizee stated she liked the idea of establishing a trail planning committee. She recommended other
community representatives also be appointed to the committee. She expressed her support for Director
Nielsen being the coordinator of this effort.
Mayor Lizee asked Councilmembers Hotvet and Siakel if they wound be willing to represent Council on a
trail planning committee, noting both have expressed a need for connecting trails and constructing new
trails. Hotvet and Siakel indicated they are willing to do that.
Councilmember Zerby stated it's time to discuss this again and he thinks it's a great idea to establish a
trail planning committee.
Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, establishing a trail penning committee comprised of
Councilmembers Hotvet and Siakel, two Park Commissioners, two Planning Commissioners, and
two community representatives with Planning Director Nielsen serving as the "project manager"
and providing support for this effort. Motion passed 510.
C. Appointments to Boards and Commissions
Administrator Heck stated there will be two Planning Commission openings and three Park Commission
openings. Two Park Commissioners have decided to reapply. He explained an issue that has arisen is the
need for incumbents to izo through the interview brocess. Another issue is if commission incumbents are
going to be automatically reappointed, new applicants have asked why they should bother applying. He
stated the City has advertised for the Park and Planning Commissions positions in the City newsletter.
The City has received one letter of interest for the Park Commission and one letter of interest for the
Planning Commission. He noted the appointments to the Commissions are usually made in February. He
asked Council if it would like to interview the Commission incumbents along with other applicants or
would it prefer to just reappoint them for another three -year term.
Councilmember Zerby stated he appreciates having the opportunity to interview the incumbents. It
provides Council an opportunity to find out what an incumbent thinks about a Commission, and to find
out how they are aligned with the Commission and Council. He noted he understood incumbents may
think interviewing for a position they already hold to be a hassle.
Mayor Lizee stated there are two new Councilmembers and interviewing incumbents will give
Councilmembers Hotvet and Siakel the opportunity to get to know them. She then stated she would like
to keep the process as it is. She commented the application process is in the early stages. She noted one of
the Park Commissioners is ending her tenure as a Park Commissioner because she is moving to Finland
and two Planning Commissioners are ending their tenure because of family obligations. She stated she
wants all applicants to know that they will be treated fairly.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she would like to have the opportunity to interview all applicants including
the incumbents, noting she thought it's important to do that.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 8 of 12
Councilmember Siakel stated she hopes more residents will express interest in the openings, noting it's
fairly early in January.
Mayor Lizee stated the interviews will be scheduled for February. Administrator Heck stated the
interviews can be scheduled for February 14 or February 28 prior to the regular Council meeting.
D. Staff / Council Retreat
Administrator Heck stated he discussed the possibility of having a retreat for Council and staff during the
end of the 2011 budget discussions. He recommended Council approve doing so. He explained that one of
the objectives of the retreat is to ensure that everyone understands what Council's and staff's
responsibilities are. Another objective is to work with a facilitator to establish priorities and goals for
2011 and develop a methodology for future years' budget processes to develop goals and objectives. He
stated he originally recommended a one -day retreat. He related that Mayor Lizee suggested breaking it
into two half -day retreats. He noted the retreat would be held at the Southshore Community Center.
Heck then stated the City could prepare a request for proposals for facilitator services. He noted he knows
high quality facilitators that he could contact directly and ask them to submit a proposal. He also noted
the 2011 budget does have funds set aside for this. He clarified this is not a community -wide strategic
planning initiative.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she likes the concept and she supports having two one -half day sessions
during regular working hours. She then stated she wants such an effort to be a catalyst for creating a
strategic plan. She expressed support for working with a facilitator. She stated the goals of the two
sessions should be to create a foundation/framework to begin the process for creating a strategic plan for
the City, noting using staff's expertise would help create the framework. She then stated down the road
she would like to create an opportunity for residents to be involved in a short-term and long -term
capacity.
Councilmember Siakel questioned if a retreat is necessary. She stated Council could meet with each
department separately to solicit input from them about what they think the goals and priorities should be.
She indicated it would be extremely helpful to have a strategic plan to help guide things in the future, and
that she likes the idea of having a budget that that is tied to goals and objectives. She asked if this could
be accomplished by Council meeting with staff.
Administrator Heck stated having everyone meet together would be valuable. Ideas would be shared with
everyone not just those that would be impacted. A team relationship would be developed between Council
and staff as well as between staff and staff. Meeting with departments separately can potentially promote
a silo working environment. He encouraged Councilmembers to meet with staff one on one. He expressed
his bias is to have Council and staff retreat. He explained that the process used to identify goals and
priorities for 2010 did not go all that well. He stated he has led strategic planning initiatives before, but he
doesn't think it would be appropriate for him to do that now because it would end up being his plan and
not our plan.
Councilmember Siakel stated at some point during the process of developing a strategic plan it will be
important to include the neighboring Cities of Excelsior, Greenwood and Tonka Bay to help identify
opportunities for sharing services.
Councilmember Hotvet stated finding out staff's perspectives on what they think the goals and priorities
should be would be beneficial. She then stated she thought it would be prudent to conduct a resident
survey to find out what the residents want to see in their community. She expressed she thought it's
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 9 of 12
important to be proactive on this and to start creating the framework. She recommended measurable
outcomes be defined, measured and published.
Mayor Lizee expressed her support for involving a facilitator and she suggested Administrator Heck
contact facilitators he is aware of to get costs. She also expressed support for having two half -day sessions
that would be held in the mornings. Councilmember Zerby stated he could support this.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she thought it would be beneficial to talk to other cities of similar size to
find out what approaches to doing this have worked well for them.
Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, directing Staff to contact three or four consultants to obtain quotes
for facilitator services and to identify dates for holding two morning half -day brainstorming
sessions. Motion passed 510.
E. City Administrator's Contract Renewal
Councilmember Zerby stated during its December 13, 2010, meeting Council approved extending City
Administrator Brian Heck's contract with the City to the end of 2012. He explained he wants to
reconsider that motion in order to make a change to the terms.
Zerby moved, Lizee seconded, reconsidering the motion extending City Administrator Brian
Heck's contract with the City to the end of 2012. Motion passed 4/1 with Woodruff dissenting.
Councilmember Zerby stated he wanted the contract renewal terms to be restored to the original contract
language. The term of the original contract was to automatically renew annually unless otherwise stated
by the City Council. He noted a two -year term is not standard in the industry. Administrator Heck noted
he preferred the original language.
Mayor Lizee stated she prefers City Administrator Heck's contract automatically renew annually until
specific action is taken by Council. She wanted the original contract language restored.
Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, restoring the term 'language in City Administrator Brian Heck's
contract so that the contract automatically renews annually unless otherwise stated by the City
Council. Motion passed 510.
Speed Cart
This item was removed from the consent agenda at Councilmember Woodruff s request.
Councilmember Woodruff stated about three years ago the City replaced its existing speed cart because
the old cart was not repairable. He then stated he thought it fair to say the cart has been deployed
intermittently without there being any plan. It's his understanding the City can't deploy the cart; it has to
be deployed by the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department ( SLMPD). He explained the speed cart
has the capability to capture valuable information about traffic counts and speeds. He stated he favors
donating the speed cart to the SLMPD and asking the SLMPD to take full charge and ownership of
deploying the cart on some reasonable basis.
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, donating the City of Shorewood's speed cart to the South Lake
Minnetonka Police Department ( SLMPD) with the understanding that: the SLMPD will schedule
the deployment of the cart; the SLMPD will make use of the data the cart can capture; the SLMPD
will report back to the SLMPD Coordinating Committee on the use of the cart; the SLMPD will
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 10 of 12
become 100 percent responsible for the maintenance of the cart; and, the City of Shorewood would
be afforded 50 percent use of the cart.
Councilmember Zerby asked how the SLMPD can make sure the cart gets used. Councilmember
Woodruff responded that's not being done now and it's now up to SLMPD Chief Litsey to figure that out.
Mayor Lizee stated Staff has dealt with a lot of requests from the other three SLMPD member cities and
she assumed there is a need for the cart in the City of Deephaven as well. She then stated the SLMPD is
aware of troublesome locations. She indicated this would streamline how the speed buggy will be utilized.
She stated currently the SLMPD stores the buggy and deploys it. She noted she will ask for this item to be
added to the January 20, 2011, SLMPD Coordinating Committee meeting agenda for discussion and
acknowledgement.
Councilmember Zerby stated he would like to receive a report
information. He wants some assurance that the speed cart will be
Director Brown stated SLMPD Community Service Supervisor (CS
requests for deployment and deployment is done on a first -come fi
usually a backlog of requests for the use of the cart. The cart is h
months. He noted he received a request from CSS Hohertz earlier
deployed. He explained that originally the City's Public Works de
cart takes a significant amount of time to deploy and set up. A few
would mind taking over responsibility for deploying and setting u
the Public Works Department's time. He expressed appreciation for
Councilmember Zerby thanked Director Brown for I
Administrator Heck stated he had sent SLMPD Cl
speed cart and he has spoken to Litsey in the past
cart.
Motion passed 510.
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
Administrator He
Appeal and Equal
P.M. at City Hall.
and of utilization
) Hohertz maintains a running list of
t- served basis. He explained there is
;hly used throughout the non - winter
Y the day asking if the cart could be
rtment deployed the speed cart. The
ears ago the SLMPD was asked if it
the cart because it took aware from
le SLMPD's efforts.
Litsey an email containing a proposal about the
ut the SLMPD taking over responsibility for the
County Open Book Meeting Date — May 2, 2011
unty will hold an Open Book meeting in place of a Local Board of
The meeting is scheduled for Monday, May 2, 2011, from 5:00 — 7:00
2. Arctic Fever Staff Report
Director Brown stated this year's Arctic Fever event is scheduled for January 15 and 16 This will be
the second time skijoring will be one of the activities planned, noting this activity has been expanded for
2011. He noted that earlier today Three Rivers Park District agreed to supply a groomer to groom the
proposed trails for this activity. He explained this is great news because the alternatives were not very
good from an ordinance or neighborhood standpoint. Staff will meet with the Park District on January
I P h . Pending Council's approval, Public Works personnel will begin packing snow on the LRT trail on
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 11 of 12
January l P h to create the skijoring track. He noted there are some concerns because the LRT is heavily
used.
Brown explained the race route along the LRT crosses Smithtown Road and Wedgewood Drive.
Attendants will be located at the two crossings as crossing guards. Public Works will build a snow
crossing at the two crossings to allow the skijorers to cross the pavement. Barriers will be place along the
two crossings to narrow the traffic crossings to help slow motorists down.
Director Brown stated he wanted to make Council aware of this activity and the challenges it presents.
Mayor Lizee asked if it would be possible to place notices along the route in the snow in the next few
days informing LRT trail users of the upcoming races. Director Brown stated signs are being designed
and will be posted along the route. Lizee then asked when the snow will be put down and removed from
the two crossings. Brown explained the snow will be put down the morning of January 15 and it will be
removed after the races. Brown stated the plan is to blade off the LRT trail on January 16
Councilmember Siakel asked how many skijoring races there will be and how many people are registered
to race. Administrator Heck stated there will be a pro race, an intermediate /amateur race and novice race,
noting the Midwest Skijor Club has several hundred members. Director Brown stated the Club has the
registration information.
Councilmember Hotvet asked what time the races are scheduled for. Administrator Heck stated the first
race is scheduled to start at 9:00 A.M. The second is scheduled to start 10:00 A.M. — 10:30 A.M. The
third is schedule to start 11:00 A.M. — 11:30 A.M. Heck commented that members of the Club have told
the Arctic Fever Committee that the course is too short
Councilmember Hotvet asked if other locations, such a
Director Brown explained that in 2010 skijoring was
Freeman Park. Having the races on the Lake was con
and what could be done ''ahead of time caused the Ch
can't be any severe dep
them ahead of time. He
not cross any roadways
could cross ''the regional
I in the area that
then stated the
to the south.
Lake Minnetonka, were considered for the races.
a much smaller event and it was hosted out of
idered but the hurdles of the permit requirements
to shy away from that. For Pond Hockey there
ould be problematic if a snowmobiler were to hit
eld again next year he recommends the race route
south is an excellent alternative because the route
Councilmember Hotvet stated Director Brown's memorandum explains the race will have bi- directional
traffic and the width of the route is not ideal. Brown clarified not ideal based on the width requested.
Hotvet asked if the race route could be point -to- point. Brown stated the point -to -point route was
discussed, but not for long. In response to a question from Hotvet, Brown explained the event
coordinators have to urovide insurance waivers.
Administrator Heck noted Arctic Fever events will also be held in the Cities of Excelsior and Tonka Bay.
Other
Administrator Heck stated the City -owned house will have new tenants beginning January 15 The City
rental fee is a little higher than in the past and there will be more vehicles on the property. He then stated
State Senator Gen Olson is scheduled to be on the January 24, 2011, Council meeting agenda. He went on
to state two bills have been introduced to the State Legislature that he will be paying particular attention
to. There is a bill in the Senate that deals with variance reform; it changes variance criteria from hardship
to practical difficulty. There is a bill in the House of Representatives that would eliminate a number of
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Page 12 of 12
mandates. Several of them are for school districts and some are for the County. The mandates that affect
the City have to do with pay equity. The bill would repeal all of the provisions surrounding pay equity
and it's being supported by the School Board Administrators group.
Councilmember Woodruff asked for an update on the two Lift Station rehabilitation projects.
Director Brown explained a lift station is a waste water pumping station. He stated the mechanics for Lift
Station 15, which is located on Enchanted Island, have been completed; it's up and operational. The
alarms for Lift Station 15 come on much sooner and Public Works can remotely monitor the Station. He
then stated that despite the snow and cold weather the contractor has been making excellent progress on
Lift Station 17, which is located on Shady Island. The plan is to bring Lift Station 17 online on January
12 He noted there will earth work items and asphalt that have to be put into place in the spring.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he was at the Lift Station 17 site this past weekend and he saw a lot of
material and equipment around. He asked if the residents are okay with what is going on. Director Brown
stated there are construction easements and that to the best of his knowledge any concerns residents had
have been addressed.
B. Mayor and City Council
Attorney Tietjen thanked the City, Mayor Lizee, Councilmembers Zerby and Woodruff for the
opportunity to serve the City as City Attorney, noting she enjoyed her time at the City. She expressed her
appreciation for the staff. She stated they are very dedicated, hardworking and professional and she
appreciated their willingness to collaborate. She wished everyone well.
Mayor Lizee thanked Attorney Tietjen and Kennedy and Graven for the services provided. She expressed
her appreciation to Tietjen for her cooperativeness and her even handling of situations with Council and
residents. She stated she anticipated the City will be in contact with Kennedy and Graven in the future.
12. ADJOURN
Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of January 10, 2011,
at 8:36 P.M. Motion passed 510.
LY
ATTEST:
Recor
Christine Lizee, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department Council Meeting Item Number
Finance January 24, 2011 3A
Item Description: Verified Claims
From: Michelle Nguyen
Bruce DeJong
Background / Previous Action
Claims for council authorization. The attached claims list includes checks numbered 51196 through
51261 & EDA check numbered 1218 totaling $227,900.84.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the claims list.
1/20/2011
2:00 PM
A/P
HISTORY CHECK REPORT
VENDOR SET:
01 City of
Shorewood
2,084.08
000000
BANK:
1 BEACON BANK
2,260.00
051202
DATE RANGE:
1/11/2011 THRU
99/99/9999
051204
7,289.92
051206
650.00
051207
13,840.20
CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
051209
NAME
STATUS
DATE
00051
649.46
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
D
1/18/2011
00092
051214
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
D
1/18/2011
20005
6,614.95
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVC
D
1/18/2011
19966
051219
NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC.
R
1/24/2011
00053
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -4
R
1/18/2011
16625
MINN NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS
R
1/18/2011
00052
PERA
R
1/18/2011
17144
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AG
R
1/19/2011
29306
ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894
R
1/24/2011
1
ANDERSON COOLING & HEATING
R
1/24/2011
01977
ANDERSON, KRISTI B.
R
1/24/2011
02860
BARNES DISTRIBUTION
R
1/24/2011
03325
BOYER TRUCK PARTS DISTRIBUTION
R
1/24/2011
1
BRUCE BRASAEMLE
R
1/24/2011
17300
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
R
1/24/2011
22820
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
R
1/24/2011
24600
CITY OF TONKA BAY
R
1/24/2011
05305
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
R
1/24/2011
05885
CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER
R
1/24/2011
29363
DeJONG, BRUCE
R
1/24/2011
06630
DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT & ECON DEV
R
1/24/2011
29271
DREW KRIESEL
R
1/24/2011
INVOICE
AMOUNT DISCOUNT
PAGE: 2
CHECK
CHECK CHECK
NO
STATUS AMOUNT
000000
11,789.00
000000
2,084.08
000000
3,239.20
001218
2,260.00
051202
1,361.00
051203
32.00
051204
7,289.92
051206
650.00
051207
13,840.20
051208
2,446.00
051209
693.98
051210
41.43
051211
649.46
051212
50.00
051213
2,108.52
051214
207.07
051215
904.01
051216
6,614.95
051217
137.89
051218
113.89
051219
8.88
051220
1,740.00
1/20/2011
2:00 PM
A/P
HISTORY CHECK REPORT
VENDOR SET:
01 City of
Shorewood
12.11
051223
BANK:
1 BEACON BANK
2,700.00
051225
DATE RANGE:
1/11/2011 THRU
99/99/9999
051227
219.20
051228
228.49
051229
285.00
CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
051231
NAME
STATUS
DATE
29248
249.39
EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOG
R
1/24/2011
08712
051236
G & K SERVICES
R
1/24/2011
10506
78.39
HENN CTY INFO TECHNOLOGY DEPT
R
1/24/2011
11055
051241
INFRATECH
R
1/24/2011
11091
INTELLIGENT PRODUCTS INC
R
1/24/2011
11100
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MUN
R
1/24/2011
1
JEREMY NORMAN
R
1/24/2011
12575
LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC
R
1/24/2011
13300
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
R
1/24/2011
21340
LOCAL LINK
R
1/24/2011
13975
M/A ASSOCIATES INC.
R
1/24/2011
1
MARK MANZELLA
R
1/24/2011
00085
MINNESOTA LIFE
R
1/24/2011
29371
MINNESOTA PUBLISHING
R
1/24/2011
06645
MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
R
1/24/2011
17020
MN STATE PATROL
R
1/24/2011
50001
MNSPECT, INC.
R
1/24/2011
18085
MOORE, JULIE
R
1/24/2011
18093
MORTON SALT, INC.
R
1/24/2011
14050
MTI DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
R
1/24/2011
19500
NIELSEN, BRADLEY
R
1/24/2011
19966
NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC.
R
1/24/2011
INVOICE
AMOUNT DISCOUNT
PAGE: 3
CHECK
CHECK CHECK
NO
STATUS AMOUNT
051221
378.11
051222
12.11
051223
64.00
051224
2,700.00
051225
444.06
051226
210.00
051227
219.20
051228
228.49
051229
285.00
051230
69.95
051231
385.07
051232
50.00
051233
249.39
051234
100.00
051235
1,664.30
051236
20.00
051237
420.00
051238
78.39
051239
3,528.93
051240
56.75
051241
110.00
051242
1,775.00
1/20/2011
2:00 PM
NO
A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT
VENDOR SET:
01 City of
Shorewood
685.10
051245
BANK:
1 BEACON BANK
702.98
051247
DATE RANGE:
1/11/2011 THRU
99/99/9999
051249
663.62
051250
74.55
051251
131.25
CHECK
VENDOR I.D.
051253
NAME
STATUS
DATE
15900
75.00
OFFICE DEPOT
R
1/24/2011
29332
051258
ON SITE SANITATION INC
R
1/24/2011
20268
94,226.94
PANCHYSITYN, JEAN
R
1/24/2011
10300
QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP, INC.
R
1/24/2011
26100
QWEST
R
1/24/2011
21550
RANDALL, DANIEL
R
1/24/2011
23500
SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT
R
1/24/2011
1
SOUND SISTERS, INC
R
1/24/2011
19435
SPRINT
R
1/24/2011
23250
STANLEY SECURITY SOLUTIONS,
IN R
1/24/2011
17200
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
R
1/24/2011
1
SUSAN DAVIS
R
1/24/2011
1
SUZANNE WALCHER
R
1/24/2011
25452
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC
R
1/24/2011
29135
VALLEY -RICH CO., INC.
R
1/24/2011
1
WATER CONSERVATION SVC INC
R
1/24/2011
27590
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE
R
1/24/2011
16280
MINGER CONSTRUCTION, INC.
R
1/24/2011
20300
PAZANDAK, JOSEPH
R
1/24/2011
INVOICE
AMOUNT DISCOUNT
PAGE: 4
CHECK
CHECK CHECK
NO
STATUS AMOUNT
051243
93.25
051244
685.10
051245
48.86
051246
702.98
051247
834.07
051248
249.98
051249
663.62
051250
74.55
051251
131.25
051252
679.70
051253
77.18
051254
592.39
051255
75.00
051256
100.00
051257
237.00
051258
232.50
051259
25.00
051260
94,226.94
051261
711.73
1/20/2011 2:00 PM
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE: 1/11/2011 THRU 99/99/9999
VENDOR I.D. NAME
A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT
CHECK
STATUS DATE
** T O T A L S ** NO
REGULAR CHECKS: 60
HAND CHECKS: 0
DRAFTS: 3
EFT: 0
NON CHECKS: 0
VOID CHECKS: 0 VOID DEBITS
VOID CREDITS
TOTAL ERRORS: 0
VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: 1 TOTALS: 63
BANK: 1 TOTALS: 63
REPORT TOTALS: 64
0.00
0.00
PAGE: 5
INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
CHECK AMOUNT
DISCOUNTS
TOTAL APPLIED
154,639.05
0.00
154,639.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
17,112.28
0.00
17,112.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
171,751.33
0.00
171,751.33
171,751.33
0.00
171,751.33
171,751.33
0.00
171,751.33
01 -20 -2011 01:58 PM
C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - JANUARY 24, 2011
PAGE:
1
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE DESCRIPTION
FUND
DEPARTMENT
AMOUNT
ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894
1/24/11 JAN SVC
Recycling Utility
Recycling
13,840.20
TOTAL:
13,840.20
ANDERSON, KRISTI B.
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER -ICE PRINCESS
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
70.35
1/24/11 PARK MTG O1 /11 /11
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
187.00
1/24/11 MAKE AHEAD MEALS
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
173.44
1/24/11 MAKE AHEAD MEAL SUPPLIES
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
263.19
TOTAL:
693.98
BARNES DISTRIBUTION
1/24/11 ADDT'L PAY FOR SALES TAX
General Fund
Public Works
41.43
TOTAL:
41.43
BOYER TRUCK PARTS DISTRIBUTION CTR.
1/24/11 DAMAGED TRUCK
Equipment Replacem
Equipment Replacement
649.46
TOTAL:
649.46
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
316.29
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
General Fund
Public Works
1,118.79
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
349.48
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
Water Utility
Water
141.15
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
Water Utility
Water
182.81
TOTAL:
2,108.52
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
1/24/11 SSCC - UTILITY PAYMENT
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
207.07
TOTAL:
207.07
CITY OF TONKA BAY
1/24/11 WATER
Water Utility
Water
544.01
1/24/11 SEWER
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
360.00
TOTAL:
904.01
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
1/24/11 PCS- 01/10 -01/21
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
2,205.00
1/24/11 SSCC ASSISTANT- 01/10 -01/20
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
185.25
1/24/11 4TH QTR COMMISION
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
4,224.70
TOTAL:
6,614.95
CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER
1/24/11 DRINKING WATER SVC
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
70.09
1/24/11 DEC SALT
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
67.80
TOTAL:
137.89
DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT & ECON DEV
1/24/11 4TH QTR -NANCY STELLMAKER
General Fund
General Government
8.88
TOTAL:
8.88
DREW KRIESEL
1/24/11 DEC SVC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
610.00
1/24/11 DEC SVC
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
840.00
1/24/11 DEC SVC -SNOW SHOVEL
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
290.00
TOTAL:
1,740.00
DeJONG, BRUCE
1/24/11 GFOA MTG & MILEAGE
General Fund
Finance
70.00
1/24/11 W -2 FORM
General Fund
Finance
43.89
TOTAL:
113.89
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FEDERAL W/H
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
4,904.37
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
2,174.07
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
750.61
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
Council
49.60
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Council
11.61
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
Administration
289.65
01 -20 -2011 01:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR -
JANUARY 24, 2011
PAGE:
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION
FUND
DEPARTMENT
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Administration
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
General Government
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
General Government
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
Finance
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Finance
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
Planning
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Planning
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
Protective Inspections
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Protective Inspections
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
City Engineer
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
City Engineer
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
Public Works
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Public Works
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
Streets & Roadways
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Streets & Roadways
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
Ice & Snow Removal
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Ice & Snow Removal
1/18/11 FICA W/H
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
1/18/11 FICA W/H
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
1/18/11 FICA W/H
Water Utility
Water
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
Water Utility
Water
1/18/11 FICA W/H
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
1/18/11 FICA W/H
Recycling Utility
Recycling
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
Recycling Utility
Recycling
1/18/11 FICA W/H
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
TOTAL:
EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC 1/24/11 DAMAGED DUMP TRUCK
Equipment Replacem
Equipment Replacement
1/24/11 DAMAGED DUMP TRUCK -LIGHT
Equipment Replacem
Equipment Replacement
TOTAL:
G & K SERVICES
HENN CTY INFO TECHNOLOGY DEPT
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -457
INFRATECH
1/24/11 PW SVC
General Fund Public Works
TOTAL:
1/24/11
DEC
- 800MHZ RADIO
General
Fund
Public Works
TOTAL
1/18/11
P/R
DEDUCTS - DEFERRED COM
General
Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
1/18/11
P/R
DEDUCTS - DEFERRED COM
General
Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
TOTAL
1/24/11 HIGH PRESSURE CLEAN Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer
INTELLIGENT PRODUCTS INC 1/24/11 MUTT MITTS General Fund
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MUNICIPAL C 1/24/11 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL - PANCHYS General Fund
1/24/11 REGISTER -TWILA GROUT General Fund
LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC 1/24/11 RADIO PARTS General Fund
TOTAL
Parks & Recreation
TOTAL:
General Government
General Government
TOTAL:
Parks & Recreation
2
AMOUNT
67.75
380.68
89.03
164.60
38.49
314.05
73.45
170.01
39.76
190.69
44.60
473.58
110.77
24.14
5.65
288.35
67.44
565.04
132.15
26.61
6.22
72.08
16.86
149.14
34.88
7.82
1.83
43.30
10.12
11,789.00
57.23
320.88
378.11
12.11
12.11
64.00
64.00
1,025.00
336.00
1,361.00
2,700.00
2,700.00
444.06
444.06
135.00
75.00
210.00
228.49
01 -20 -2011 01:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - JANUARY 24, 2011 PAGE: 3
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
TOTAL: 228.49
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
1/24/11 2011 ELECTED OFF - DEBBIE SI
General Fund
Council
285.00
TOTAL:
285.00
LOCAL LINK
1/24/11 FEB WEBLINK
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
69.95
TOTAL:
69.95
M/A ASSOCIATES INC.
1/24/11 GARBAGE BAGS
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
385.07
TOTAL:
385.07
MINGER CONSTRUCTION, INC.
1/24/11 PV #2 -LS #17
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
94,226.94
TOTAL:
94,226.94
MINNESOTA LIFE
1/24/11 JAN LIFE INS
General Fund
Unallocated Expenses
249.39
TOTAL:
249.39
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
1/19/11 GREG FASCHING
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
325.00
1/19/11 DAN RANDALL
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
325.00
TOTAL:
650.00
MINNESOTA PUBLISHING
1/24/11 JAN ADS
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
100.00
TOTAL:
100.00
MISC. VENDOR ANDERSON COOLING & HEA
1/24/11 REP FURN BLDR BRDE- INV4672
Water Utility
Water
2,446.00
BRUCE BRASAEMLE
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER- SKIJOR TIMERS
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
50.00
JEREMY NORMAN
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
219.20
MARK MANZELLA
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER- SKIJOR TIMERS
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
50.00
SOUND SISTERS, INC
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
74.55
SUSAN DAVIS
1/24/11 SUSAN DAVIS:ARTIC FEVER EX
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
592.39
SUZANNE WALCHER
1/24/11 HARPIST FEE -ICE PRINCESS T
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
75.00
WATER CONSERVATION SVC
1/24/11 LEAK DETECTION @2420 SMITHT
Water Utility
Water
232.50
TOTAL:
3,739.64
MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
1/24/11 4TH QTR BLDG SURCHARGE
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
1,664.30
TOTAL:
1,664.30
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
1/18/11 STATE W/H
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
2,084.08
TOTAL:
2,084.08
MINN NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS
1/18/11 MONTHLY- JAN- ELECT LIFE I
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
32.00
TOTAL:
32.00
MN STATE PATROL
1/24/11 2011 DECALS - BRAD MASON
General Fund
Public Works
20.00
TOTAL:
20.00
MNSPECT, INC.
1/24/11 DEC INSPECTION SVC
General Fund
Protective Inspections
420.00
TOTAL:
420.00
MOORE, JULIE
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER -ICE PRINCESS
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
78.39
TOTAL:
78.39
MORTON SALT, INC.
1/24/11 SALT
General Fund
Ice & Snow Removal
3,528.93
TOTAL:
3,528.93
MTI DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
1/24/11 UTILITY TRUCK
General Fund
Public Works
56.75
01 -20 -2011 01:58 PM
VENDOR SORT KEY
NIELSEN, BRADLEY
NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC
OFFICE DEPOT
ON SITE SANITATION INC
PANCHYSITYN, JEAN
PAZANDAK, JOSEPH
PERA
QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP, INC
QWEST
C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - JANUARY 24, 2011
DATE DESCRIPTION FUND
DEPARTMENT
PAGE: 4
AMOUNT
TOTAL:
56.75
1/24/11
SLUC REG- BRAD & SUE DAVIS
General Fund
Planning
70.00
1/24/11
JAN - WELLNESS
General Fund
Planning
40.00
TOTAL:
110.00
1/24/11
EDA- CONTINUING DISCLOSURE
2003 Public Safety
Public Safety Bldg Deb
2,260.00
1/24/11
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE -WATE
Water Utility
Water
1,775.00
TOTAL:
4,035.00
1/24/11
GEN SUPPLIES
General Fund
General Government
9.51
1/24/11
GEN SUPPLIES
General Fund
General Government
13.05
1/24/11
INK
General Fund
General Government
70.69
TOTAL:
93.25
1/24/11
BADGER PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
1/24/11
CATHCART PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
1/24/11
FREEMAN PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
266.13
1/24/11
SILVERWOOD PARK
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
1/24/11
SOUTH SHORE SKATE
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
45.96
1/24/11
CHRISTMAS LK BOAT ACCESS
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
235.13
TOTAL:
685.10
1/24/11
ARTIC FEVER EXP
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
48.86
TOTAL:
48.86
1/24/11
NOV & DEC MILEAGE & BLDG E
General Fund
Municipal Buildings
314.73
1/24/11
NOV & DEC MILEAGE & BLDG E
General Fund
Protective Inspections
397.00
TOTAL:
711.73
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
3,374.96
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Administration
347.43
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
General Government
445.15
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Finance
361.17
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Planning
403.08
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Protective Inspections
226.77
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
City Engineer
223.71
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Public Works
578.88
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Streets & Roadways
29.91
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Ice & Snow Removal
351.72
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
587.04
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
31.11
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Water Utility
Water
88.81
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
178.10
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Recycling Utility
Recycling
9.15
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
52.93
TOTAL:
7,289.92
1/24/11
LASER ULITY BILLS
Water Utility
Water
175.74
1/24/11
LASER ULITY BILLS
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
175.74
1/24/11
LASER ULITY BILLS
Recycling Utility
Recycling
175.75
1/24/11
LASER ULITY BILLS
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
175.75
TOTAL:
702.98
1/24/11
JAN SVC
Water Utility
Water
597.64
1/24/11
JAN SVC
Water Utility
Water
236.43
01 -20 -2011 01:58 PM
C O U N C
I L REPORT BY VENDOR -
JANUARY 24, 2011
PAGE:
5
VENDOR SORT KEY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
FUND
DEPARTMENT
AMOUNT
TOTAL:
834.07
RANDALL, DANIEL
1/24/11
2010 BOOTS
General Fund
Public Works
249.98
TOTAL:
249.98
SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT
1/24/11
4TH QTR -COURT OVERTIME
General Fund
Police Protection
663.62
TOTAL:
663.62
SPRINT
1/24/11
SVC 12/13- 01/12/11
Water Utility
Water
65.62
1/24/11
SVC 12/13- 01/12/11
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
65.63
TOTAL:
131.25
STANLEY SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC.
1/24/11
MANOR PARK -CIP
Park Capital Impro
Park Capital Improveme
679.70
TOTAL:
679.70
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
1/24/11
ORD NO. #471 - 12/04
General Fund
General Government
44.10
1/24/11
YACHT CLUB HRG -12/25
General Fund
Planning
33.08
TOTAL:
77.18
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC
1/24/11
AUG BACTERIA ANALYSIS
Water Utility
Water
100.00
TOTAL:
100.00
VALLEY -RICH CO., INC.
1/24/11
TRANSPART WATER BREAK /REPA
Water Utility
Water
237.00
TOTAL:
237.00
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -HSA
General Fund
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
2,854.60
1/18/11
P/R DEDUCTS -HSA
General Fund
General Government
384.60
TOTAL:
3,239.20
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE
1/24/11
FIRE REPAIR
General Fund
Public Works
25.00
TOTAL:
25.00
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
General Fund
Council
800.00
General Fund
Administration
4,792.16
General Fund
General Government
6,140.01
General Fund
Finance
4,981.78
General Fund
Planning
5,559.76
General Fund
Protective Inspections
3,127.70
General Fund
City Engineer
3,085.60
General Fund
Public Works
7,984.72
General Fund
Streets & Roadways
412.48
General Fund
Ice & Snow Removal
4,851.30
General Fund
Parks & Recreation
9,447.17
Southshore Communi
Senior Community Cente
429.04
Water Utility
Water
1,225.01
Sanitary Sewer Uti
Sewer
2,456.61
Recycling Utility
Recycling
126.20
Stormwater Managem
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
729.97
TOTAL:
56,149.51
01 -20 -2011 01:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - JANUARY 24, 2011 PAGE: 6
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
GRAND TOTAL: 227,900.84
------------------------- - - - - --
TOTAL PAGES: 6
FUND TOTALS = _______________
101
General Fund
92,172.42
305
2003 Public Safety Bldg S
2,260.00
402
Park Capital Improvements
679.70
403
Equipment Replacement
1,027.57
490
Southshore Community Ctr.
7,454.43
601
Water Utility
8,136.66
611
Sanitary Sewer Utility
100,997.04
621
Recycling Utility
14,160.95
631
Stormwater ManagementUtil
1,012.07
GRAND TOTAL: 227,900.84
------------------------- - - - - --
TOTAL PAGES: 6
01 -20 -2011 01:57 PM
C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - JANUARY 24, 2011 PAGE:
1
DEPARTMENT
FUND VENDOR NAME
DATE DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
NON - DEPARTMENTAL
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FEDERAL W/H
4,904.37
1/18/11 FICA W/H
2,174.07
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
750.61
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
3,374.96
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -457
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS - DEFERRED COM
1,025.00
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS - DEFERRED COM
336.00
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
1/18/11 STATE W/H
2,084.08
MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
1/24/11 4TH QTR BLDG SURCHARGE
1,664.30
MINN NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS
1/18/11 MONTHLY- JAN- ELECT LIFE I
32.00
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -HSA
2,854.60
TOTAL:
19,199.99
Council
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
49.60
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
11.61
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
1/24/11 2011 ELECTED OFF - DEBBIE SI
285.00
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
800.00
TOTAL:
1,146.21
Administration
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
289.65
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
67.75
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
347.43
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
4,792.16
TOTAL:
5,496.99
General Government
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
380.68
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
89.03
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
445.15
DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT & ECON DEV
1/24/11 4TH QTR -NANCY STELLMAKER
8.88
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MUNICIPAL C
1/24/11 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL - PANCHYS
135.00
1/24/11 REGISTER -TWILA GROUT
75.00
OFFICE DEPOT
1/24/11 GEN SUPPLIES
9.51
1/24/11 GEN SUPPLIES
13.05
1/24/11 INK
70.69
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
1/24/11 ORD NO. #471 - 12/04
44.10
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -HSA
384.60
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
6,140.01
TOTAL:
7,795.70
Finance
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
164.60
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
38.49
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
361.17
DeJONG, BRUCE
1/24/11 GFOA MTG & MILEAGE
70.00
1/24/11 W -2 FORM
43.89
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
4,981.78
TOTAL:
5,659.93
Planning
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
314.05
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
73.45
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
403.08
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS
1/24/11 YACHT CLUB HRG -12/25
33.08
NIELSEN, BRADLEY
1/24/11 SLUC REG- BRAD & SUE DAVIS
70.00
1/24/11 JAN- WELLNESS
40.00
01 -20 -2011 01:57 PM
C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT
- JANUARY 24, 2011 PAGE:
2
DEPARTMENT
FUND VENDOR NAME
DATE DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
5,559.76
TOTAL:
6,493.42
Municipal Buildings
General Fund CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER
1/24/11 DRINKING WATER SVC
70.09
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
316.29
PAZANDAK, JOSEPH
1/24/11 NOV & DEC MILEAGE & BLDG E
314.73
LOCAL LINK
1/24/11 FEB WEBLINK
69.95
TOTAL:
771.06
Police Protection
General Fund SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT
1/24/11 4TH QTR -COURT OVERTIME
663.62
TOTAL:
663.62
Protective Inspections
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
170.01
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
39.76
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
226.77
PAZANDAK, JOSEPH
1/24/11 NOV & DEC MILEAGE & BLDG E
397.00
MNSPECT, INC.
1/24/11 DEC INSPECTION SVC
420.00
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
3,127.70
TOTAL:
4,381.24
City Engineer
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
190.69
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
44.60
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
223.71
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
3,085.60
TOTAL:
3,544.60
Public Works
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
473.58
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
110.77
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
578.88
BARNES DISTRIBUTION
1/24/11 ADDT'L PAY FOR SALES TAX
41.43
G & K SERVICES
1/24/11 PW SVC
12.11
HENN CTY INFO TECHNOLOGY DEPT
1/24/11 DEC - 800MHZ RADIO
64.00
MTI DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
1/24/11 UTILITY TRUCK
56.75
MN STATE PATROL
1/24/11 2011 DECALS - BRAD MASON
20.00
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
1,118.79
RANDALL, DANIEL
1/24/11 2010 BOOTS
249.98
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE
1/24/11 FIRE REPAIR
25.00
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
7,984.72
TOTAL:
10,736.01
Streets & Roadways
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
24.14
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
5.65
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
29.91
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
412.48
TOTAL:
472.18
Ice & Snow Removal
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
288.35
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
67.44
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
351.72
MORTON SALT, INC.
1/24/11 SALT
3,528.93
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
4,851.30
TOTAL:
9,087.74
Parks & Recreation
General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
565.04
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
132.15
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
587.04
01 -20 -2011 01:57 PM
C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - JANUARY 24, 2011 PAGE:
3
DEPARTMENT
FUND VENDOR NAME
DATE DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
ANDERSON, KRISTI B.
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER -ICE PRINCESS
70.35
1/24/11 PARK MTG O1 /11 /11
187.00
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
1/24/11 PCS- 01/10 -01/21
2,205.00
MISC. VENDOR BRUCE BRASAEMLE
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER- SKIJOR TIMERS
50.00
MARK MANZELLA
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER- SKIJOR TIMERS
50.00
JEREMY NORMAN
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER
219.20
SOUND SISTERS, INC
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER
74.55
SUSAN DAVIS
1/24/11 SUSAN DAVIS:ARTIC FEVER EX
592.39
SUZANNE WALCHER
1/24/11 HARPIST FEE -ICE PRINCESS T
75.00
INTELLIGENT PRODUCTS INC
1/24/11 MUTT MITTS
444.06
LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC
1/24/11 RADIO PARTS
228.49
M/A ASSOCIATES INC.
1/24/11 GARBAGE BAGS
385.07
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
349.48
MOORE, JULIE
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER -ICE PRINCESS
78.39
PANCHYSITYN, JEAN
1/24/11 ARTIC FEVER EXP
48.86
ON SITE SANITATION INC
1/24/11 BADGER PARK
45.96
1/24/11 CATHCART PARK
45.96
1/24/11 FREEMAN PARK
266.13
1/24/11 SILVERWOOD PARK
45.96
1/24/11 SOUTH SHORE SKATE
45.96
1/24/11 CHRISTMAS LK BOAT ACCESS
235.13
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
9,447.17
TOTAL:
16,474.34
Unallocated Expenses
General Fund MINNESOTA LIFE
1/24/11 JAN LIFE INS
249.39
TOTAL:
249.39
Public Safety Bldg Deb
2003 Public Safety NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC.
1/24/11 EDA- CONTINUING DISCLOSURE
2,260.00
TOTAL:
2,260.00
Park Capital Improveme
Park Capital Impro STANLEY SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC.
1/24/11 MANOR PARK -CIP
679.70
TOTAL:
679.70
Equipment Replacement
Equipment Replacem BOYER TRUCK PARTS DISTRIBUTION CTR.
1/24/11 DAMAGED TRUCK
649.46
EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC
1/24/11 DAMAGED DUMP TRUCK
57.23
1/24/11 DAMAGED DUMP TRUCK -LIGHT
320.88
TOTAL:
1,027.57
Senior Community Cente
Southshore Communi EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
26.61
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
6.22
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
31.11
ANDERSON, KRISTI B.
1/24/11 MAKE AHEAD MEALS
173.44
1/24/11 MAKE AHEAD MEAL SUPPLIES
263.19
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES
1/24/11 SSCC ASSISTANT- 01/10 -01/20
185.25
1/24/11 4TH QTR COMMISION
4,224.70
CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER
1/24/11 DEC SALT
67.80
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
1/24/11 SSCC - UTILITY PAYMENT
207.07
DREW KRIESEL
1/24/11 DEC SVC
610.00
1/24/11 DEC SVC
840.00
1/24/11 DEC SVC -SNOW SHOVEL
290.00
MINNESOTA PUBLISHING
1/24/11 JAN ADS
100.00
01 -20 -2011 01:57 PM
C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - JANUARY 24, 2011 PAGE:
4
DEPARTMENT
FUND VENDOR NAME
DATE DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
429.04
TOTAL:
7,454.43
Water
Water Utility EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
72.08
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
16.86
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
88.81
MISC. VENDOR ANDERSON COOLING & HEA
1/24/11 REP FURN BLDR BRDE- INV4672
2,446.00
WATER CONSERVATION SVC
1/24/11 LEAK DETECTION @2420 SMITHT
232.50
QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP, INC.
1/24/11 LASER ULITY BILLS
175.74
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
141.15
1/24/11 SVC 11/12 -12/16
182.81
SPRINT
1/24/11 SVC 12/13- 01/12/11
65.62
NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC.
1/24/11 CONTINUING DISCLOSURE -WATE
1,775.00
CITY OF TONKA BAY
1/24/11 WATER
544.01
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC
1/24/11 AUG BACTERIA ANALYSIS
100.00
QWEST
1/24/11 JAN SVC
597.64
1/24/11 JAN SVC
236.43
VALLEY -RICH CO., INC.
1/24/11 TRANSPART WATER BREAK /REPA
237.00
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
1,225.01
TOTAL:
8,136.66
Sewer
Sanitary Sewer Uti EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
149.14
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
34.88
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
178.10
QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP, INC.
1/24/11 LASER ULITY BILLS
175.74
INFRATECH
1/24/11 HIGH PRESSURE CLEAN
2,700.00
MINGER CONSTRUCTION, INC.
1/24/11 PV #2 -LS #17
94,226.94
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
1/19/11 GREG FASCHING
325.00
1/19/11 DAN RANDALL
325.00
SPRINT
1/24/11 SVC 12/13- 01/12/11
65.63
CITY OF TONKA BAY
1/24/11 SEWER
360.00
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
2,456.61
TOTAL:
100,997.04
Recycling
Recycling Utility EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
7.82
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
1.83
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
9.15
QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP, INC.
1/24/11 LASER ULITY BILLS
175.75
ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894
1/24/11 JAN SVC
13,840.20
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
126.20
TOTAL:
14,160.95
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Stormwater Managem EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H
1/18/11 FICA W/H
43.30
1/18/11 MEDICARE W/H
10.12
PERA
1/18/11 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA
52.93
QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP, INC.
1/24/11 LASER ULITY BILLS
175.75
* *PAYROLL EXPENSES
1/18/2011 - 99/99/9999
729.97
TOTAL:
1,012.07
01 -20 -2011 01:57 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - JANUARY 24, 2011 PAGE: 5
DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
GRAND TOTAL: 227,900.84
------------------------- - - - - --
TOTAL PAGES: 5
FUND TOTALS = _______________
101
General Fund
92,172.42
305
2003 Public Safety Bldg S
2,260.00
402
Park Capital Improvements
679.70
403
Equipment Replacement
1,027.57
490
Southshore Community Ctr.
7,454.43
601
Water Utility
8,136.66
611
Sanitary Sewer Utility
100,997.04
621
Recycling Utility
14,160.95
631
Stormwater ManagementUtil
1,012.07
GRAND TOTAL: 227,900.84
------------------------- - - - - --
TOTAL PAGES: 5
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department Engineering Council Meeting 1/24/11 Item Number: 6A
From: James Landini, P.E.
Item Description: Public Information Meeting - Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program
(SWPPP)
Background / Previous Action
As part of the Federal Clean Water Act, the City of Shorewood is required to obtain a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The two main requirements of this permit are
preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) and subsequent annual reports. In
preparation for the annual report, a public meeting must be held to discuss the SWPPP.
In accordance with those requirements, we are holding the public meeting and all public comments
received will be recorded in the Record of Decision, which will be filed with the annual report. During
the public meeting, I will be giving a brief presentation outlining the SWPPP and items that will be
included in the annual report.
The deadline for the 2010 annual report is June 30, 2011. The format of the report will be transmitted
to Shorewood soon. Some of the activities that are anticipated to be reported in the 2010 report
include the following:
• 4 water quality - related articles published in the Shoreport
• Ongoing public education and outreach (web site and seminar)
• Tonight's public meeting
Options
1. Direct staff to create a record of decision and submit the annual report by June 30, 2011.
2. Do nothing.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that once the City Council has conducted the Public Information Meeting, a motion
be approved directing Staff to prepare a Record of Decision and submit the annual report by June 30,
2011.
Council Action:
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2011
5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
A. Roll Call
Present: Chair Norman; Commissioners Trent, Quinlan,
Swaggert; late arrival City Council liaison Hot
Brown; and Park Coordinator Anderson
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Report on Arctic Fever was moved to item 8B on the
Edmondson moved, Robb seconded, approving the Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission
Trent moved, Swaggert seconded, a]
presented. Motion passed 6/0.
3. MA
There were none.
n, and
Director
Motion passed 6/0.
her 14, 2010
proving the Minutes of December 14, 2010, as
4. REPORTS
A. Report on City Council Meeting
Edmondson, Park Commission liaison to the City Council meeting of January 10 th , indicated that
the City Council discussed the LRT logistics and conditions for the upcoming Arctic Fever skijor
race and beyond.
Director Brown added that the Three Rivers Park District would be grooming the trails and laying
a snowbase at the road crossings and intersections for the race which will be removed immediately
following the race Saturday. In addition, Brown stated that the Council will be assembling a
Trails Committee with representatives Siakel and Hotvet, along with two members from each
Commission to evaluate park trails.
City Council liaison Hotvet arrived at 7: 1Opm
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2011
PAGE 2 OF 2
B. Update on Summer Activities
Anderson reported that the summer programs calendar had been filled. She reviewed several new
programs, including kite making, theatre camps at Manor Park, and golf. In addition, she shared many of
the new summer programs planned for the Southshore Communnity Center, such as, Abrakadoodle Art
Camps, Chess Camp, a Garners Camp where kids create actual video games, Jr Chefs of Southshore
cooking classes, as well as, the Poetry Slams on April 17th and May 22"d, which will run in conjunction
throughout the summer with the theatre performances in the parks as a `Poetry and Picnics in the Parks'
activity.
In reviewing the summer events budget, Trent questioned w
entire kite making class rather than pass on the $4 fee to par
Chair Norman felt a small fee was acceptable but the Commis
participants.
5. DISCUSS AND REVIEW 2011 WORK
the Park Commission should fund the
agreed to sponsor the class up to 25
Anderson commended the Commission for accomplishing many of their 2010 work program items
and shared the 2011 Work Program for their comment. She commented that the Freeman play
equipment would be focused on the south tot lot and asked for comment on the Badger warming
house improvements.
Chair Norman stated that he believed the warming douse was in need of a facelift both inside and
outside.
Brown stated that interior lighting could be improved, as well as, exterior cosmetics.
Anderson reminded the Commission that part of the intent was to repair the raised curbs and
sidewalks near the warming house, as well as, paint the exterior surfaces to coordinate with City
Hall.
Edmondson commented that the City Hall and Manor Park buildings turned out gorgeous.
Robb asked if staff had any' updates with regard to grants.
Anderson stated that, other than the Step To It Challenge grant from the County, she had not
been told of any new awards. She mentioned that Moore and Grout continue to research and
pursue grant opportunities and that she would connect with them in order to provide an update at
the next meeting.
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2011
PAGE 3 OF 2
6. COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES YEAR END REPORT
Anderson presented the Community Rec Resources (CRR) annual report for review and comment
by the Commission. She acknowledged that one of the biggest highlights for the year included the
ambtious CIP work program which was met and accomplished in coordination with many
departments within the City. Some of the accomplishments included the application and award
from Hennepin County to complete the community build at Manor Park
playground and updated warming house, the new shelter at Sil
programs and partnerships, picnic tables, streamlined and expa
more.
Anderson noted that an added responsibility to her cc
Southshore Community Center in which she added nE
ages via lifecycle recreation opportunities and increas
exceeding projected estimates by roughly $25,000, a'
of corporate entities, building relationships with civic
word of mouth, annual contracts, class offerings and
SSCC is picking up momentum.
With regard to the Sports Organizations, And
one point of contact continues to be a challen,
Although the hockey association chose not to
larger number of pick -up enthusiasts seem to
availability.
the barrier free
expanded summer
J community gardens, and
ed management of the
I programs for people of all
the rental portion of the Center's business
ak -even status. Thru active solicitation
public and businesses, positive
Anderson was optimistic the
that establishing and connecting with
inteer representatives tend to change.
,or ice this year, Anderson stated that a
- eat use of the rinks with this newfound
Anderson thanked the Commission and City for their continued support and urged the
Commissioners to contact her with any questions or suggestions they'd like to share.
7. RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL TO ACCEPT 2011 CONCESSION OPERATION
MENT
Chair Norman suggested the Commission consider recommending the Agreement be a multi -year contract
rather than an annual agreement.
Quinlan stated that he, for one, liked to see it annually and review the agreement.
Brown pointed out that the City has always viewed the concessions operation as more of a `service' to the
community than a money maker.
Robb questioned whether $300,000 in liability insurance was adequate for that type of business,
acknowledging that other contracts require a million dollar coverage.
Brown stated that he would go back and review this with the City Attorney and the Concession operator
to evaluate whether this should be changed and how this will impact the fees paid the City.
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2011
PAGE 4 OF 2
Chair Norman agreed this was a good idea and suggested the Commission hold off on making a motion
until staff discuss' the insurance issue.
8. NEW BUSINESS
There were none.
8B. ARCTIC FEVER
Anderson explained that Council liaison Hotvet contacted her and asked for some more information with
regard to the Arctic Fever event, such as, a cost summary associated with the festival, return on
investment, and overall history of the event. Anderson then asked Sue Davis to comment, as she was
planning to be here for an Arctic Fever update. In addition, a copy of a memo Director Brown had
supplied Council with earlier this year reflects those figures.
Arctic Fever Chair Sue Davis, 5490 Valley Ridge Circle, stood and gave a brief history of the Arctic Fever
festival, currently in its 5 th year. She reported that the skijor race and Princess Tea are anticipated to be
strong events. She noted that the skijor people may even be willing to host a dry land training class this
fall.
Chair Norman expanded on the history behind Shorewood's involvement in creating this winter festival at
Freeman. Over the years, Norman pointed out that the weather has been reliably cold with attendance
fluctuating between 500 -800 annually. He stated that it is their goal to continue to grow the festival to a 2-
day event and, someday possibly, find someone to sponsor a fireworks display at Freeman.
Hotvett questioned whether some of the programs squeezed into one day could be expanded and offered
throughout the winter months, as well as, full moon bonfires and snowshoeing in the parks.
Davis agreed, stating it is all about the trails. If the City could groom the trails skijor, cross country, and
snow shoeing event could habaen throughout the winter.
Chair Norman commented that providing skating at Freeman would be desirable.
Brown stated that public works staff does plow a portion of the trail, which can prove unsafe for the
drivers, especially in light of the fact one of the trucks went off the trail that day. He commented that a
portion of the gas tax is intended to go towards non - motorized activities and noted that staff would be
checking into obtaining a grant to buy a groomer for the trails this year.
Chair Norman suggested the City partner with neighbors to make a joint purchase.
Davis stated that there are many people with good ideas and talents, who are quite capable of joining the
brand and running their own programs under the Arctic Fever umbrella. She pointed out that next year
there is talk of a broom ball tournament at Badger Park. In closing, Davis noted that the Arctic Fever
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2011
PAGE 5 OF 2
committee and participants would be meeting to discuss the event two weeks following Arctic Fever to
share the pros and cons, and begin planning for next yeat.
9. ADJOURN
Robb moved, Quinlan seconded, adjourning the Park Commission Meeting of January 11,
2011 at 8:15pm. Motion passed 6/0.
Q
Kri
Rec
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department: Planning Council Meeting: 1/24/11 Item Number: 8A
From: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director
Item Description: Zoning Violation Appeal — Bill Mason
Background / Previous Action
Pursuant to a resident complaint alleging that the property at 27680 Island View Road had
certain violations of the Shorewood City Code, staff inspected the property and found at least
some of the allegations to be accurate. As a result, a zoning violation letter (see Exhibit A) was
sent to Mr. Raymond W. Mason (Bill). The letter advises Mr. Mason that the property is in
violation of Section 1201.03 Subd. 14.c. of the Zoning Code, which limits the number of docks
on residential property to one. Mr. Mason has appealed the notice (see his letter— Exhibit B,
attached), stating that one of the docks is, in fact, a deck that should be "grandfathered in ".
Prior to sending the violation letter, staff met with Greg Nybeck, Executive Director of the
LMCD. Mr. Nybeck advises us that, under LMCD rules, the structure in question is considered
to be dock. A letter (Exhibit C) from Mr. Nybeck to Mr. Mason, dated 1 December 2010,
provides Mr. Mason with the LMCD's interpretation of their code. Also attached (Exhibit D) is a
copy of Shorewood's definitions of dock and deck.
Please note that Mr. Mason informs us that he will not be putting the northernmost of his
docks out in the future. It may also be of interest to know that Mr. Mason could combine his
easterly dock configuration with the dock in question to satisfy Shorewood's code requirement,
notwithstanding whatever the LMCD may require.
Options
The Council can choose to agree with Mr. Mason and allow both structures to remain in place,
or it could enforce the current City Code. Staff has suggested a very reasonable time frame in
which the property owner can comply.
Staff Recommendation
It is recommended that the current code requirement be enforced. The property should be
reinspected on or after 1 June 2011, by which time the violation should be cured (including the
use of the docks by people who do not reside there. Staff is more than willing to work with Mr.
Mason on a dock configuration that complies with Shorewood's regulations.
Council Action:
v
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD - SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 - (952) 960 -7900
FAX (952) 474 -0128 • www.d.shorewood.mn.us • cityhaII @ci.shorewood.mn.us
29 November 2010
Mr. Raymond W. Mason, Jr.
27680 Island View Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Alleged Zoning Violations — 27680 Island View ,Road
Dear Mr. Mason:
Our office has received a resident complaint alleging that certain zoning violations have occurred
on the above - referenced property, owned by you. Upon inspection of the premises, some of the
allegations were found to have merit. The following violation of Shorewood's Zoning Code
(Chapter 1201) was found:
Three docks on one parcel of residential property
Section 1201.03 Subd. 14.c., a copy of which is attached, specifically states that residential
properties are limited to one dock, operated, used and maintained solely for the members of the
family occupying the property. At present, two of the docks on your property remain in place.
In addition to the number of docks on your property, it has been alleged that boats, not belonging
to you, or registered to you, have been kept at your docks last summer. Obviously, there is no
current violation in this regard, however, the City will monitor your property next boating season
to ensure that any boats kept at your docks are owned and registered to the family occupying the
premises.
Given the current season, we do not expect the violation to be corrected at this time of year. This
letter is to advise you, however, that the violation must be corrected by I June 2011, after which
your property will be reinspected for compliance. Failure to comply will result in the matter
being turned over to the City Attorney for further legal action.
If you wish to appeal this order to the City Council, you must do so in writing, by 13 December
2010. Your appeal must state why you can not or will not correct the violation, or if you request
additional time for compliance, how much time. Your written appeal will stop further action
until such time as the City Council has considered the matter.
0 d_a,�
` A _�7 a_,_ '" z ' Exhibit A
Mr. Raymond W. Mason, Jr.
29 November 2010
l'aae 2
If you have any questions relative to this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me on or before
that date by phone at 952 -960 -7912 or by e -mail: bruels c(ilci.shore
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
Bradley J. Niels
Planning Director
Cc: Brian Heck
Mary Tietjen
Patti Helgesen.
Joe Pazandak
Greg Nybeck, LMCD
1201.03 Zoning Regulations 1201.03
(c) Examples of special home occupations include: barber and beauty
services, photography studio, group lessons, saw sharpening, small
appliance and small engine repair and the like.
(d) The home occupation may include any of the following: stock- in-
trade incidental to the performance of the service, repair or
manufacturing which requires equipment other than customarily
found in a home, the teaching with musical, dancing and other
instruction of more than one pupil at a time.
e. Nonconforming use. Existing home occupations lawfully existing on the date of
this chapter may continue as nonconforming uses. They shall, however, be
required to obtain permits for their continued operation within one year
subsequent to the adoption of this chapter. Any existing home occupation that is
discontinued for a period of more than 30 days, or is in violation of the ordinance
provisions under which it was initially established, shall be brought into
conformity with the provisions of this subdivision.
f. Inspection. The City of Shorewood reserves the right, upon issuing any home
occupation permit, to inspect the premises in which the occupation is being
conducted to insure compliance with the provisions of this subdivision or any
conditions additionally imposed.
Subd. 13. Flood plain development. Any development of land located within the flood plain, as
defined in § 1201.02, shall comply with the provisions of the Shorewood Flood Plain
Ordinance (No. 109, Chapter 1101), as may be amended.
Subd. 14. Regulations applicable to shoreline property.
a. No structure of any kind except docks, stairways and lifts shall be built within the
required setback from the ordinary high water level of a meandered lake, as
provided in § 1201.26, subdivision 5 of this code.
b. Docks and wharves, permanent or floating, shall not be built, used or occupied
on land located within the R Districts until a principal dwelling has been
constructed on the lot or parcel.
C. The number of docks per lot or parcel of land in the R Districts shall be limited
to one, and the same shall be operated , used and maintained solely for the use of
the members of the family or families occupying the property upon which the
dock is located. The dock shall connect to the shoreline at only one location, no
wider than four feet, and shall extend into the lake at least eight feet beyond the
ordinary high -water mark before branching out to form slips. The width of the
1201 -73
1201.03 Shorewood _ Zoning and Subdivision Regulations 1201.03
dock shall not exceed four feet at any point, except that at one location the dock
may be no wider than eight feet for a length of eight feet.
The number of restricted watercraft, as defined by the Lake Minnetonka
Conservation District (LMCD) that may be docked or moored on a single
property is limited to four. The dock owner may exceed four restricted watercraft
only by obtaining an annual multiple dock /mooring license from the LMCD and
a conditional use permit from the city, which permit shall be subject to the
following conditions:
(1) As part of the annual LMCD license review, the owner of the dock must
demonstrate to the city that all boats stored at the dock are owned,
registered and operated by the residents of the property on which the dock
is located.
(2) As part of the annual LMCD license review, the owner of the dock must
demonstrate to the city that the dock is the minimum size necessary to
store the boats owned, registered and operated by the residents of the
subject property.
(3) Boat canopies shall be limited to the size and number that is required to
cover no more than four of the restricted watercraft.
(4) The provisions of § 1201.04, subdivision l.d.(1) are considered and
satisfactorily met.
d. No boat, barge, boathouse or other floating vessel or structure tied or connected
to a dock or wharf located within the city limits shall be used as a permanent,
temporary or seasonal residence.
e. No dock or wharf, permanent or floating structure shall be located or constructed
within ten feet of the side lot line of any lot of parcel projected into the lake.
f. No dock located within the R Districts shall extend further into the water than
reasonably necessary to provide docking space for boats and crafts used by the
owner of the dock, and under no circumstance shall a dock create a safety or
navigational hazard or block any channel or access to the lake from adjoining lots
or parcels.
g. Unless specified otherwise in the city zoning code, all docks on all lakes shall
comply with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Code of Ordinances.
1201 -74
2007S-2
December 2, 2010
Brad Nielson
Planning Director
City of Shorewood, MN
Brad;
I have resided at 27680 Island View Road for 16 years. In that time, I have made no
major alterations to my property, with the exception of that being required to maintain the
integrity and beauty of the landscape.
Since living there I installed one dock for mooring my boats, and I installed a 32' ski and
fishing dock on the outer shoreline.
When we bought the property, there was a deck at the south end of the lagoon, which
served as an erosion control, as the underside base is a retaining wall.
That deck has been on the property for over four decades and has been "grandfathered"
by the L.M.C.D. It still maintains that status today.
I am somewhat taken aback, but not surprised, that my neighbor has now found my
property to be offensive.
The complaint of three docks is without total merit as the aforementioned has the
"grandfather" status.
As for the ski and fishing dock, that would have been a non -issue come spring. That dock
served us while my son was young and he used it for water skiing.
Most recently, the highest use of that dock has been for guests of my neighbor, as they
came to visit them by boat. In the last two or three years, I maintained the dock for use by
neighborhood kids, who fished on it daily. Currently, those kids seem to have found other
hobbies, perhaps young ladies, as their attendance on my property has ceased.
Exhibit B
As I had the dock taken out this fall, I made the decision, at this time, not to have it re-
installed. I have donated the 32' of dock to the Excelsior Fire Department for use of the
fire and rescue boat. Needless to say, they were more than excited to receive it.
In closing, I believe by spring, all of this attention would have taken care of itself, and I
would be back in compliance by having only one dock, as allowed by the ordinance.
I hope this clears up this issue and will allow you the time to move on to more
meaningful business.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
R. W. "Bill" Mason
0
23505 SMITHTOWN ROAD, SUITE 120 • SHORE
December 1, 2010
Mr. Raymond W. Mason, Jr.
27680 Island View Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Dear Mr. Mason:
%O ✓ L \%
to
OTA 55331 • TELEPHONE 952/745-0789 • FAX 952/745 -9085
Gregory S. Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
It has recently been brought to the attention of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) that a
dock structure on your property may not be in compliance with LMCD Code. In particular, the dock on the
west- side of the lagoon appears to be approximately 60' in length and ranges in width from approximately
10' to 13'.
This appears to be a violation of LMCD Code Section 2.12 subd. 12. This allows a dock to exceed eight in
either its length or width, but not both. However, docks that were on June 30, 1982 and are in compliance
with all of the provisions of LMCD Code, other than this section, are allowed to continue in their present
form without expansion or modification until such time as such docks are replaced or until 50% or more any
such dock is damaged or destroyed.
My expectation is that this dock will be brought into compliance with LMCD Code before the 2011 boating
season. However, if you believe that you are entitled to the "grandfathered" status for docks in existence
on June 30, 1982, and the dock has not lost that status by reason of expansion, modification, replacement,
or destruction of more than 50 %, please provide me with the details of your position.
Please feel free to contact me if you have questions. Your prompt attention in addressing this matter is
appreciated.
Sincerely,
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Gregory S. Ny eck
Executive Director
Encl: Code Excerpt
cc: Brad Nielsen, City of Shorewood
Web Page Address: httr:Hwww.imcd.org
E -mail Address: Imcd anlmcd.orq
Exhibit C
Subd. 9. Fuel and Power Supply. Installation of electrical
and fueling facilities on docks, moorings and other structures
shall be in accordance with applicable building codes and subject
to state and local inspection procedures. Persons making such
electrical or fueling installation shall maintain records of
compliance with state and local codes and regulations.
Subd. 10. Structures Not to Obstruct. No dock, mooring, or
other structure shall be so located as to obstruct a navigable
channel, or so as to obstruct reasonable access to any other dock,
mooring area or similar structure authorized under this Code. No
dock, mooring area or similar structure shall be located or
designed so that it unnecessarily requires or encourages boats
using it to encroach into any other authorized dock use area. A
dock, mooring or other structure is "authorized" if it is
automatically permitted under this ordinance or if a variance has
been granted for it pursuant to Section 1.07.
Subd. 11. Space Between Boats. Reasonable space shall be
provided in mooring areas to allow navigation freely between
moored boats.
Subd. 12. Dock Dimensions. A dock may exceed eight feet,
excluding posts, in either its length or width, but not both. In
connection with issuance of a license under section 2.03, the
Board may authorize the construction and maintenance of docks used
in conjunction with the sale of fuel to the public of up to ten
feet in width to the extent deemed necessary by the Board for safe
and efficient fuel sales activities. Docks that were in existence
on June 30, 1982 and that are in compliance with all the
provisions of the LMCD Code other than this section shall be
allowed to continue in their present form without expansion or
modification until such time as such docks are replaced or until
50% or more of any such dock is damaged or destroyed. A ski jump
may exceed eight feet in width provided it is no wider than 12
feet and meets all other requirements of the Code.
Subd. 13. Use of Non - Encased Molded Expanded Bead
Polystyrene Foam Material in Buoys and Floating Structures.
a) Definition. Non - encased molded expanded bead
polystyrene foam material means any brand of expanded polystyrene
beads molded into a block, sheet, billet or other shape which is
not completely encased in a fully sealed casing, coating or
container the life of which will at least equal the time the water
structure is intended for use in Lake Minnetonka. Such casing,
-42q-
Sec. 2.12, Subd. 8 c)
(Rev. 08 -05)
c)
establishes
or maintains a municipal dock or mooring
area 100
feet or less in
length
measured parallel to the side site
lines as
extended into
the Lake;
d)
provides for
the maintenance
of a municipal park or
beach area;
and
e)
establishes
zoning
provisions regulating land use
adjacent
to the Lake
which
are not in conflict with this
ordinance.
Subd. 9. Fuel and Power Supply. Installation of electrical
and fueling facilities on docks, moorings and other structures
shall be in accordance with applicable building codes and subject
to state and local inspection procedures. Persons making such
electrical or fueling installation shall maintain records of
compliance with state and local codes and regulations.
Subd. 10. Structures Not to Obstruct. No dock, mooring, or
other structure shall be so located as to obstruct a navigable
channel, or so as to obstruct reasonable access to any other dock,
mooring area or similar structure authorized under this Code. No
dock, mooring area or similar structure shall be located or
designed so that it unnecessarily requires or encourages boats
using it to encroach into any other authorized dock use area. A
dock, mooring or other structure is "authorized" if it is
automatically permitted under this ordinance or if a variance has
been granted for it pursuant to Section 1.07.
Subd. 11. Space Between Boats. Reasonable space shall be
provided in mooring areas to allow navigation freely between
moored boats.
Subd. 12. Dock Dimensions. A dock may exceed eight feet,
excluding posts, in either its length or width, but not both. In
connection with issuance of a license under section 2.03, the
Board may authorize the construction and maintenance of docks used
in conjunction with the sale of fuel to the public of up to ten
feet in width to the extent deemed necessary by the Board for safe
and efficient fuel sales activities. Docks that were in existence
on June 30, 1982 and that are in compliance with all the
provisions of the LMCD Code other than this section shall be
allowed to continue in their present form without expansion or
modification until such time as such docks are replaced or until
50% or more of any such dock is damaged or destroyed. A ski jump
may exceed eight feet in width provided it is no wider than 12
feet and meets all other requirements of the Code.
Subd. 13. Use of Non - Encased Molded Expanded Bead
Polystyrene Foam Material in Buoys and Floating Structures.
a) Definition. Non - encased molded expanded bead
polystyrene foam material means any brand of expanded polystyrene
beads molded into a block, sheet, billet or other shape which is
not completely encased in a fully sealed casing, coating or
container the life of which will at least equal the time the water
structure is intended for use in Lake Minnetonka. Such casing,
-42q-
1201.02 Zoning Reguladi ns 1201.02
CONDOMINIUM. A multiple dwelling containing individually -owned dwelling units and jointly -
owned and shared areas and facilities, which dwelling is subject to the provisions of the
Minnesota Condominium Law, M.S. §§ 515.01 to 515.19, as may be amended.
CONVENIENCE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS. An establishment which serves food in or on
disposable or edible containers in individual servings for consumption on and off the premises.
COOPERATIVE (HOUSING). A multiple- family dwelling owned and maintained by the
residents and subject to the provisions of M.S. §§ 290.09 to 290.13, as may be amended. The
entire structure and real property is under common ownership as contrasted to a condominium
dwelling where individual units are under separate individual occupant ownership.
DAY CARE FACILITY. Any facility, public or private, which for gain or otherwise, regularly
provides one or more persons with care, training, supervision, habitation, rehabilitation or
developmental guidance on a regular basis, for periods of less than 24 hours per day, in a place
other than the recipient's own home. DAY CARE FACILITIES include, but are not limited to:
family day care homes, group family day care homes, day care centers, day nurseries, nursery
schools, daytime activity centers, day treatment programs and day services.
DECK. A flat - floored roofless platform adjoining a dwelling, used primarily for recreation.
DEPARTMENT STORE. A business that is conducted wherein a variety of unrelated
merchandise and services are housed, enclosed and are exhibited and sold directly to the customer
for whom the goods and services are furnished.
DISTRICT. A section or sections of the city for which the regulations and provisions governing
the use of buildings and lands are uniform for each class of use permitted therein.
DIVISION. A channel that intercepts surface water runoff and that changes the accustomed
course of all or part of a stream.
DOCK. Any wharf, pier or other structure or combination of wharves, piers, or other structures
constructed or maintained in or over a lake, whether floating or not, including all "Ls ", "Ts" or
posts which may be a part thereof, whether affixed or adjacent to the principal structure, and
which connects to the shoreline at only one location, no wider than four feet.
DOG KENNEL. Any place where three dogs or more, over six months of age, are boarded, bred
or offered for sale but not including veterinary clinic.
DRAINING. The removal of surface water or ground water from land.
DREDGING. To enlarge or clean out a water body, watercourse or wetland.
1201 -7
2007 S -2 Repl. Exhibit D
OU ACTION FORM
Department: Planning Council Meeting: 24 January 2011 Item Dumber:
From: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director
Item Description: Edwards Nonconforming Structure
Background / Previous Action
Ms. Edwards has submitted a letter from the adjoining neighbor in support of her keeping the shed and
deck.
The Planning Commission reviewed the information at its 18 February meeting and determined that the
evidence provided by the applicant was adequate to conclude that the shed and deck in question could
remain.
Options
The City Council can accept the Planning Commission's recommendation that the shed /deck
can remain; it can request additional documentation that the shed /deck existed prior to current
ordinances; or it can determine that the evidence is insufficient and require the shed /deck to
be removed.
Staff Recommendation
It is suggested that the evidence submitted be considered adequate for purposes of this case.
Staff agrees with a subsequent discussion with Planning Commission members that the Code
should provide greater clarity and criteria as to what constitutes adequate evidence in cases
like this one. That discussion will be added to the Planning Commission's work program for this
year.
Council Action:
A The proposed improvements to the property amount t.o 20 percent lot coverage, whereas
25 percent lot coverage is allowed.
5. Two nonconforming structures, a detached garage near the street and a shed /deck
structure near the Take, are currently located on the property.
C ONCLUSION
A. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants the Applicants' request for a
conditional use permit to constl'uct a single - family dwelling as shown on Exhibit I0, attached.
B. This approvall is subject to the following conditions:
The proposed house plan will be adjusted to comply with the front and side yard
setback requirement for the R -IA /g zoning district.
The nonconforming garage near the street may remain in place.
The 10 -foot driveway serving the existing garage must be separated from the
street.
4. The nonconforming shed and deck near the lake must be removed within six
months, or upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever comes First,
unless the Applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning
Commission and City Council that the structure is a legal nonconforming use,
constructed prior to 2 August 1956. To ensure compliance with this provision,
the Applicant shall enter into an escrow agreement with the City, providing
financial security (cash escrow or letter of credit) in the amount of one and a half
times the estimated cost of removing the structure and restoring the site.
The building permit plans for the new home shall include a tree preservation and
reforestation plan for the site.
C. The City Administrator /Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a certified
copy of this Resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CI'T'Y OF SHORE WOOD this 26th day of July,
2010.
Christine Liz6e, Mayor
ATTEST
IlH an Heck, Ciiy Adnainistr ator /Clerk
Exhibit A
EDWARDS C.U.P. RESOLUTION
GAIL OFSTEHAGE
61.40 RIDC7E TOAD
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
December 30, 2010
City of Shorewood
• r
To Whom It May Concern:
4 4�`
I understand there has been a question about the beach storage shed at Mary Edwards'
property on Ridge Road. This letter is to confirm that there has been a storage shed and deck
at the iakeshore of 6170 Ridge Road since before the City of Shorewood was incorporated. I
have been connected with the property all my life and remember playing on and about a tennis
court that was adjacent to the property along with stairs leading to the lake area with the
storage shed and deck at that lot. The children would store fishing poles there and use the area
as a fort for their play. Many of the neighbors all along Ridge Road have always had similar
structures. In fact, it is a rare property that does not have such a beach storage shed.
Please call with any further questions. 952- 474 -7705
Sin erely,
Gail Ofstehage
Exhibit B
NEIGHBOR'S TESTIMONY
CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
TUESDAY, 18 JANUARY 2011 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
EXCERPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
JANUARY 18, 2011
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Applicant: Mary Edwards
Location: 6170 Ridge Road
Director Nielsen reviewed his staff report stating that in July of last year, Mary Edwards was granted a
conditional use permit to construct a new home on a substandard lot located at 6170 Ridge Road. One of the
conditions of approval was that she must demonstrate that the nonconforming shed and deck located near the
shoreline of Christmas Lake was a legal nonconforming structure, i.e. built prior to August 2, 1956 when the
City was incorporated. This condition was to be met within six months, or upon issuance of a certificate of
occupancy, whichever comes first. Ms. Edwards has submitted a letter from the adjoining neighbor testifying
that the shed/deck have been there since before the City was incorporated.
Commissioner Arnst asked what is being requested. Director Nielsen stated the issue is whether or not a
certificate of occupancy should be issued without the applicant being required to remove the shed and deck
from their current location.
Commissioner Hasek said he would not support allowing the structure to remain, because he does not see any
concrete evidence showing that the shed/deck that exist today is the same structure that was on the property
years ago
Chair Geng said he is inclined to accept the letter from the neighbor for what it is — which supports the
applicant's position that the structure is legal. He said this is another good example of the need for Zoning
Permits though.
Davis, Vilett and Arnst indicated they were also in favor of accepting the neighbor's letter that supports the
applicant's request.
Commissioner Hasek said he is not questioning that there was a building at the shoreline area as the neighbor
attests. He said he questions whether it's the same building.
Arnst moved, Vilett seconded, to recommend acceptance of the letter from Gail Ofstehage, dated
December 30, 2010, as satisfactory evidence that the shed and deck located near the shoreline of the
property is legal nonconforming and should be allowed to remain as is. It is further recommended that
the applicant or Ms. Ofstehage be present at the City Council meeting to provide oral testimony
regarding the age of the structure. Motion passed 4/1 ( Hasek opposed).
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department: Planning Council Meeting: 1/24/11 Item Number: 8C
From: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director
Item Description: Shorewood Yacht Club — Conditional Use Permit
Background / Previous Action
Three years ago the Shorewood Yacht Club was granted an interim conditional use permit
allowing them to rent 35 of its slips for power boats. The permit was to be reviewed in three
and a determination made as to whether the interim permit should be converted into a
permanent part of the Conditional Use Permit. At its 4 January meeting, the Planning
Commission recommended that the interim permit be made permanent and also agreed with
the applicant's request to allow additional slips to be rented for power boats. Rather than
approve the requested 50 percent (which would have allowed 58 power boats), the
Commission recommended that the number of power boats be limited to 52, plus the four
power boats that were part of the original CUP. All of the power boat rental slips are to be
confined to piers 3 and 4.
Options
Direct staff to prepare a resolution for the next Council meeting, incorporating the Planning
Commission's recommendations; deny the conditional use permit and require SYC to return to
sailboats only; direct staff to prepare a resolution with a different number of power boat slips.
Staff Recommendation
It is recommended that the Planning Commission's recommendations be incorporated into a
resolution approving a conditional use permit for SYC. The resolution would appear on the
consent agenda for the next City Council meeting.
Council Action:
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, 4 JANUARY 2011
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Geng called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:00 P.M.
Present: Chair Geng; Commissioners Hasek, Hutchins, Ruoff, Vilett, Davis, and Arnst; Planning Director
Nielsen; Mayor Lizee.
Absent: None.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Hasek moved, Davis seconded, Approving the Planning Commission Agenda of January 4, 2011 as
presented. Motion passed 7/0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• Deferred
7 :00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING — C.U.P. FOR SHORE WOOD YACHT CLUB
Applicant: Shorewood Yacht Club
Location: 600 West Lake Street
Director Nielsen reviewed his staff report stating that in 2007, the new owners of the Shorewood Yacht Club
(SYC) requested approvals to allow them to lease 50 percent of their boat slips to owners of power boats.
Until that time the Club had been limited to sailboat slip rental only. After considerable deliberation by the
Planning Commission and City Council, the City agreed to grant an interim conditional use permit, allowing
SYC to lease 35 of its 117 slips (approximately 30 percent) to power boat owners on a trial basis per Council
Resolution No. 07 -075. The resolution provided that the interim conditional use permit would be evaluated in
three years and, based on "the number and the nature of complaints received ", a determination would be made
as to whether the harboring of 35 power boats would be allowed to continue as a permanent conditional use or
whether the interim conditional use would simply expire.
Nielsen reported that the applicant's current request contains two parts. They are asking that the interim use
permit be converted to a permanent conditional use permit, and they are again requesting approval to lease 50
percent of their boat slips for power boat docking.
Gabriel Jabbour, owner of the Yacht Club, stated that the Yacht Club has been a benefit to the City and
community residents; it provides a rental discount to residents of Shorewood who all but one are power boat
owners; they are barely getting by as a business under the current regulations; they are responsible owners and
managers; and no other marinas or sailing clubs in the area are restricted to sailboats only.
Mike Maloney, Yacht Club manager, added that most of their customers are residents of the City, and they
would not have enough customers to maintain the business if they were restricted to sailboat storage only.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
4 January 2011
Page 2 of 5
Chair Geng opened the public testimony portion of the public hearing at 7:18 P.M.
Nick Ruehl, 456 Lafayette Ave., Excelsior, said he bought his home in 1974, prior to the establishment of the
Yacht Club. He stated that the previous owner of Shorewood Yacht Club was denied a request for power boat
docking. He has had his house for sale for just under a year and, based upon comments from prospective
buyers, the Yacht Club has had a negative effect on his property value. He said power boats create a different
environment than sailboats. He asked how far should government go to support a business or the recreational
enjoyment of the community? He said his original investment when he bought his home included the dredging
company as a neighbor, but not a sailing yacht club, and especially not a marina with power boats.
Commissioner Hasek asked Mr. Ruehl if he owned a power boat. Mr. Ruehl stated he did, plus one other boat
that does not currently operate.
Commissioner Ruoff asked if Mr. Ruehl ever rented dock space from the Yacht Club. Mr. Ruehl responded
that he did not, and he has his own dock.
Dale Smith, 448 Lafayette Ave., Shorewood, said that sailboats do not create much of a wake, unlike power
boats, which create a big wake that is damaging to his boat and dock when they don't obey the minimum wake
limits.
Ruoff asked Mr. Smith how many times the power boats have exceeded the minimum wake speed limit. Mr.
Smith said he had observed at least a dozen incidents this past summer.
Mr. Ruehl said if there were a formalized system for reporting nuisances and violations, he could better
communicate the problems he has experienced. He said in the past, being hesitant to call 911 due to a nuisance,
he or his wife called the Yacht Club directly. He reported that noise has been the main problem and it seems
unusually loud when it's projected across the water — even if it's simply music and conversation by people
sitting in their boats, but it's very irritating. He said it occurs at all times, but most often it's later in the
evening.
In response to a question from Commissioner Hasek, Director Nielsen stated that Shorewood does not have a
specific noise ordinance other than reference to the decibel level regulated by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency. Chair Geng pointed out that the Interim Use Permit references hours of operation though.
Mr. Jabbour stated that he has never received a call from Mr. Ruehl about party noise, only about the sounds
from the halyards swinging against the masts. He said to say there should never be any noise is unrealistic. The
area is designated for public access by the State and other agencies. They have been very good neighbors and
they should get credit for that.
Jeff Nelson, Smithtown Road, said lie rents a slip for his power boat and receives the resident discount. He said
he spends time at the Club on a daily basis in the summer and does not come or go anywhere near the Lafayette
Ave. residences nor has he seen anyone else do so either. He stated that Mr. Maloney is very clear about the
rules.
Mr. Ruchl complimented the management of the Yacht Club stating that is not what he has an issue with. He
said his fear is that there will be more and more power boats allowed to dock at the Yacht Club, making it more
of a marina.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
4 January 2011
Page 3 of 5
Commissioner V ilett asked what the rules are for using the Yacht Club. Mr. Maloney said they include using
the channel that passes by Frog Island rather than driving near the Lafayette Ave. area. There are dredged
channels allowing limited access through the bay, otherwise it is shallow and weedy. He said he also informs
their clients of the minimum wake laws, and has them sign a contract that would allow him to revoke their
privileges if the rules are not followed.
Chair Geng asked where additional power boats would be docked. Mr. Maloney said wherever there is an
opening, but some of the docks are better suited for sailboats than power boats due to their length. Mr. Jabbour
said they can modify the docks as necessary.
Chair Geng closed the public testimony portion of the public hearing at 7:55 P.M.
Commissioner Arnst stated that she thinks the existing 35 power boat slips are enough and that a balance has
been achieved.
Commissioner Davis asked how long the waiting list is for slip rental. Mr. Maloney said it varies, depending on
what is requested versus what is available in terms of dock size. Some dock sizes have a higher demand.
Commissioner Hutchins asked if the Club were allowed to increase power boat slip rentals, would power boats
begin to replace sailboats? Mr. Maloney said they are committed to sailboat storage and that is their priority.
Sailboats are the only thing they store year round.
Hutchins said he thinks 35 power boat slips is a good balance of the ratio, but that he is open to considering
their request for an increase.
Jabbour said they are only seeking to have the option to dock up to 50 percent power boats, not to fill the slips
with power boats to that degree unnecessarily.
Commissioner Ruoff said he lives near enough to Lake Minnetonka and Howard's Point Marina to hear the
sounds and noise coming from them. To power boat owners, Shorewood Yacht Club has been an asset and one
of the most economical. He thinks the 35 power boat slips is a strong balance but is open to considering
additional.
Commissioner Davis stated she agrees with Ruoffs comments and is also open to discussing additional slips
because she is aware of the need for them.
Hasek moved, Ruoff seconded, to recommend approval of a permanent Conditional Use Permit subject to
the conditions contained in the existing Interim Use Permit. Motion passed 7/0.
The Commission deliberated on a method of containing the power boat slips and determining a suitable number
allowed by focusing on pier 44 and the west half of pier 43.
Commissioner Vilett said she thought: the Yacht Club's management may know the best location for docking
the power boats. Commissioner Arnst questioned how the docking restrictions will be enforced. Director
Nielsen said enforcement would be nearly impossible if the power boats are allowed to be scattered among the
piers.
Hutchins moved, Arnst seconded, recommending approval to allow a maximum of 52 power boats to be
docked at pier 44 and the west -side half of pier #3. Motion passed 7/0.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
4 ,January 2011
Page 4 of 5
2. ZONING ORDINANCE DISCUSSION
♦ Setbacks from Fire Lanes
Director Nielsen reviewed his staff report stating that over the past several months staff has been meeting with
realtors and prospective buyers regarding the disposition of a property on Birch Bluff Road which is situated
adjacent to a fine lane. The property's size and its structure's setbacks are substantially nonconforming with
its R -IC /S zoning classification. The site's nonconformity is compounded by its location next to the Third
Street Fire Lane, and the required 35 -foot setback from the fire lane renders the lot unbuildable.
This raises an issue which had been discussed several years ago as to whether setbacks from fire lanes should
be reduced to be the same as any other lakeshore lot. For the most part fire lanes are used for pedestrian
activities for the benefit of the neighborhoods in which they are located.
The consensus among the Planning Commissioners was to schedule a public hearing for the meeting in
February to consider this matter.
♦ Trash Enclosure Ordinance
A concern was raised about the use of dumpsters on residential properties, especially when the use is in
conjunction with home occupations. Director Nielsen reported that he discussed the issue with the City
Attorney who determined that existing regulations are adequate to control this situation.
3. WORK PROGRAM 2011
Director Nielsen noted the items slated for the 2011 Work Program so far include sustainability; Smithtown
Crossing — complete draft by end of February with a public hearing in March; Shady Hill Traffic regulations
review in January /February; cellular antennas on water towers; Zoning Permits to be revisited; Life -Cycle
Housing, with a focus on senior housing but discussion to include all types; and the annual variance
discussion.
Commissioner Vilett said the in -house GTS training was a very valuable activity and suggested it be repeated
for new Commissioners. Nielsen said that type of training is not in this year's budget, but training seminars
that individual Commission members may attend has been budgeted for.
4. NOMINATE CHAIR AND VICE - CHAIR FOR 2011
Hutchins moved, Vilett seconded, to elect Tom Geng for Planning Commission Chair and Pat Arnst for
Vice -Chair for 2011. Motion passed 7/0.
5. DETERMINE COUNCIL LIAISON SCHEDULE FOR 2011
The schedule for liaison to the City Council through June 2011 is as follows:
January:
Hutchins
February:
Vilett
March:
Geng
April:
Hasek
May:
Davis
June:
Arnst
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
4 January 2011
Page 5 of 5
6. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
None.
7. OLD BUSINESS
None.
8. NEW BUSINESS
Commission Davis informed the Commission that Attic Fever is set for January 15 °i and its organizers are
still looking for volunteers.
9. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA
The January 18' Agenda is expected to include the Shady Hills Traffic Forum; discussion/update regarding
improvements to the Highway 7 /Galpin Lake Road intersection design, and Highway 7 signal light functions;
and Smithtown Crossing area rendering with the Town Square layout.
10. REPORTS
Commissioner Hutchins reported on items considered and actions taken by the City Council at its meeting of
December 13, 2010.
11. ADJOUNMENT
Hasek moved, Arnst seconded, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting of January 4, 2011 at 9:32
P.M. Motion passed 7/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
Patti Helgesen, Recorder
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 • (952) 960 - 7900
FAX (952)474- 0128• www.d.shorewood.mmus • cityhaII @cLshorewood.mn,us -
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
FROM: Brad Nielsen
DATE: 29 December 2010
RE: Shorewood Yacht Club — Conditional Use Permit
FILE NO. 405(10.10)
BACKGROUND
In 2007, the new owners of the Shorewood Yacht Club (SYC) requested approvals to
allow them to lease 50 percent of their boat slips to owners of power boats. Until that
time the Club had been limited to sailboat slip rental only. After considerable
deliberation by the Planning Commission and City- Council, the City agreed to grant
an interim conditional use permit, allowing SYC to lease 35 of its 117 slips
(approximately 30 percent) to power boat owners on a trial basis (see Council
Resolution No. 07 -075 — Exhibit A, attached). The resolution provided that the
interim conditional use permit would be evaluated in three years and, based on "the
number and the nature of complaints received ", a determination would be made as to
whether the harboring of 35 power boats would be allowed to continue as a
permanent conditional use or whether the interim conditional use would simply expire
(see para 7. - Exhibit A -3).
There is an enormous amount of background material on this matter. Exhibit B is the
staff report from 2007. Exhibit C is an excerpt of Planning Commission minutes
from the meeting at which the Commission recommended approval of the interim
conditional use permit. Exhibit D is an excerpt from the 26 November 2007 City
Council minutes, at which the interim use permit was approved.
is
t. PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Memorandum
Re: Shorewood Yacht Club Conditional Use Permit
29 December 2010
Exhibit E contains the applicant's current request which, as you will note, asks for the
50 percent power boat slip rental proposed in his original 2007 request. Exhibit F
contains resident correspondence regarding the conditional use issue.
Staff has reported for the last three years, after the end of each boating season, any
complaints that have been received relative to the Yacht Club. The only comment we
received was at the end of the first season, and the resident actually called to say that
there had been no issues relative to power boat activity.
ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION
In light of all the background material and the wording of the 2007 Council
Resolution, there is little to add at this time. Three options appear to exist relative to
the Shorewood Yacht Club zoning status:
1. The City could simply allow the interim conditional use permit to expire,
limiting the Yacht Club to sailboats only. Based on the criteria set forth in the
resolution (complaints), this option is not considered appropriate.
2. The City could approve a permanent conditional use permit for 35 power boat
slips.
3. The City could approve a permanent conditional use permit allowing up to 50
percent of the slips to be leased for power boats. Based on 117 slips this
would result in 58 power boat slips.
A public hearing has been scheduled for 4 January 2011 to consider this matter.
Cc: Brian Heck
Mary Tietj en
Gabriel Jabbour
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 07-075
A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN INTERIM CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR MICHAEL MALONEY AND GABRIEL JABBOUR ALLOWING A CERTAIN
NUMBER OF POWER BOATS AT THE SHOREWOOD YACHT CLUB
WHEREAS, Michael Maloney and Gabriel Jabbour, (Applicants) are the owners of real
property located at 600 West Lake Street (Subject Property) in the City of Shorewood, County of
Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A, attached; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants operate a multiple dock facility at the Subject Property
pursuant to a conditional use permit as set forth in City of Shorewood Resolution No. 00-
111, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, City of Shorewood Resolution No. 00 -111 specifically limits the water
harboring of boats to sailboats, with the exception of four power boats; and
WHEREAS, City of Shorewood Resolution No. 00 -111 was amended in 2007 by
Resolution No. 07 -029 to allow a fifth power boat to be harbored at the property for the use
of the Excelsior Fire District; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants have requested an amendment to Resolution No. 00 -111
that would allow them to use fifty percent of their allowable number of boat slips for water
harboring of power boats; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his
recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission, Mayor
and City Council, dated 26 September 2007, which memorandum is on file at the Shorewood
City Hall; and
WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was
reviewed by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting on 2 October 2007. The
Planning Commission again reviewed the application at its meeting on 16 October 2007, at
which time it received additional public comment. The minutes of these meetings are on file
at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was considered by the City Council at its regular
meeting on November 26, 2007, at which time the comments of the City Planner and other City
staff, the minutes of the Planning Commission, and written testimony of numerous individuals
interested in the matter were reviewed and additional public comments were heard by the
Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as
follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Subject Property is located on Gideon's Bay, Lake Minnetonka.
Exhibit A -1
RESOLUTION NO. 07-05
Shorewood Yacht Club Interim C.U.P.
2. The Subject Property currently exists as three parcels of property containing a total of
approximately 2.4 acres and is located in the L -R, Lakeshore Recreational zoning district.
3. Land use and zoning surrounding the Subject Property are as follows:
North: Lake Minnetonka
East: Minnetonka Portable Dredging Company; zoned C-4 /S, Service
Commercial /Shoreland
South: County Road 19, then commercial; zoned C -4 /S and R -C /S, Residential
Commercial /Shoreland
West: Townhouse common area and single - family residential; zoned P.U.D.,
Planned Unit Development and R -IB /S, Single- Family
Residential/Shoreland
4. Water- harboring of boats is a permitted use within the L -R, Lakeshore Recreational
zoning district.
5. The Subject Property is occupied by the Applicants' business, which includes a
clubhouse and boat maintenance facility, caretaker dwelling, launch ramp and boat
slips for docking 117 boats, all but five of which are currently limited to sailboats only.
6. The Applicants have offered to devise a system to rent slips first to Shorewood
residents before opening rentals to the general public.
7. The westerly dock located on the Subject Property is configured for 35 boat slips,
designed to accommodate boats up to 30 feet in length.
8. Shorewood's Zoning Code provides for interim conditional use permits, one of the
purposes of which is "To allow a use for a brief period of time while permanent
location obtained or constructed."
CONCLUSIONS
A Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants the Applicants an Interim
Conditional Use Permit subject to the following:
The conditions set forth in Shorewood Resolutions No. 00 -111 and No. 07 -029
remain in force except as modified herein.
2. The Applicants are allowed to keep no more than 35 additional power boats, all
of which must be kept at the westerly dock on the property. The Applicants
shall provide a plan specifying where the previously approved five boats will
be docked.
3. Power boats kept at the westerly dock shall not exceed 30 feet in length.
-2-
A-2-
4. The Interim Conditional Use Permit shall be in effect for three years from the
date of this resolution, during which time the use of the Subject Property shall
be monitored for compliance with the terms of Shorewood Resolution No. 00-
111 and 07 -029.
5. Shorewood Planning staff will monitor complaints filed through the South Lake
Police Department and provide the Planning Commission with an annual
update as to the Subject Property's compliance with the Interim Conditional
Use Permit, including, but not limited to the following:
a. The number and size of power boats kept at the Subject Property.
b. Hours of operation.
C. Noisy activities after business hours.
d. Traffic issues (parking, congestion and accidents).
e. Verifiable adverse environmental effects.
6. The Applicants shall submit a detailed written plan, subject to approval by the
Shorewood City Council, demonstrating how residents of Shorewood will be
given first opportunity for boat slips, before slips are offered to the general
public.
7. Within three years and 60 days of the adoption of this resolution, the City shall
conduct a public hearing to consider whether the harboring of 35 power boats
may continue as a conditional use or the Interim Conditional Use Permit shall
expire. The determination shall be based upon the number and the nature of
complaints received and compliance with this permit. The Interim Use
Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to the provisions of Section 1201.04
Subd. 4.c.,f. and g. (termination, violations and revocation, respectively) of the
Shorewood Zoning Code. Any conversion from Interim Conditional Use to
permanent Conditional Use shall follow the criteria and procedures for
conditional use permits in effect at the time the conversion is considered.
B. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a certified copy of this
Resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 26th day of
November, 2007.
0 4Lle- L��
Christine Lizee, Mayor
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/ Clerk
-3-
A-3
(Insert Exhibit A —Legal Desc.)
�\-4
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 • (952) 474 -3236
FAX (952) 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mmus • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn . us
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning. Commission, Mayor and City Council
FROM: Brad Nielsen
DATE: 26 September 2007
RE: Shorewood Yacht Club — L -R Zoning Text Amendment and
Amendment to Current C.U.P.
FILE NO.: 405 (07.15)
BACKGROUND
Mike Mayoney, representing the Shorewood Yacht Club (SYC), 600 West Lake Street
(see Site Location map — Exhibit A, attached), has applied for an amendment to the text
of the L -R, Lakeshore Recreational zoning district and an amendment to the conditional
use permit that currently governs the activities on the property. The Club's intent is to
have current regulations changed, relaxing the restrictions that limit the storage and
water - harboring of boats to sailboats only (see Applicant's Request Letter, dated 24 July
2007 — Exhibit B, attached). As noted in their letter, the Club asks to have up to 50
percent of their currently allowed 117 slips available for power boats.
There is a substantial amount of background material relative to the subject property.
Since many members of the current Planning Commission and City Council were not
involved with the original zoning and conditional use permit for the property, we have
provided the following materials (copied in yellow):
• Attachment I: Planning Staff Report, dated 27 September 2000
• Attachment II: Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes, dated 3 October
2000
• Attachment III: Resolution No. 00 -111
Exhibit B -1
STAFF REPORT — 2007
0= 26 September 2007
� ®p ® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Memorandum
Re: SYC Zoning Text and C.U.P. Amendment
26 September 2007
• Attachment IV: LMCD Quiet Waters Policy Statement
The applicant cites a survey commissioned by the Yacht Club that documents the decline
of the sailing market. He has asked the leader of the survey study group to elaborate on
the findings of the survey at the public hearing on 2 October.
The L -R zoning district is set forth in Section 1201.24 of the Shorewood Zoning Code.
While Commission and Council members are urged to review the entire section, Exhibit
C contains the provision that would need to be changed in order to accommodate the
applicant's request. This change would be a zoning text amendment. The conditional use
permit governing the property is found in Attachment III. The applicant's request would
involve changing several provisions of that document, most notably item l.c.
(Conclusions) found on page 3.
PLANNING ISSUES
Representatives of the Yacht Club have made it known for several months that operating
strictly as a sailing facility was not working out financially. In order to sustain the
facility, they find it necessary to expand their market to some percentage of power boat
slip rental. They have asked that fifty percent of the allowable 117 slips on the property
be allowed to be used for power boats. They make a case that there is a substantial
market within Shorewood itself for people that desire access to the lake. In its proposal,
SYC offers to establish priorities, first for sailboats and then for Shorewood residents,
before offering slips to the general public. In addition, they propose to offer Shorewood
residents a 15 percent discount on slip rentals.
Given the history of the property, there will undoubtedly be numerous questions relative
to the proposed changes. This report attempts to anticipate, from a planning perspective,
as many of those questions as possible, and where possible provide potential solutions.
Current Property Status. In reviewing the files for the subject property, there is one item
that was not completed from the original approval. The property currently consists of
three separate parcels. The legal combination of these parcels should be a relatively
simple house- keeping measure.
Preferential Treatment for Shorewood Residents. The L -R district already contains a
provision stating that the applicant will attempt to rent slips first to Shorewood residents
first, before opening it up to the general public. This is a difficult type of provision to
monitor and enforce. The same is true of the discount proposed by the applicant.
Ordinarily the City would not incorporate such provisions in a conditional use permit.
The City Attorney advises, however, that since it has been offered by the property owner,
including it as a condition of approval would not pose a problem.
-2- �'Z.
Memorandum
Re: SYC Zoning Text and C.U.P. Amendment
26 September 2007
Number of Power Boats. Presumably, the applicant has calculated what the Club requires
to sustain itself. Fifty -eight power boats, however, may be excessive. If the City is to
consider the addition of power boats to the subject facility, it is recommended that the
character of the property as a sailing facility be maintained. In this regard, something
closer to 25 percent power boats would be appropriate. At most, power boats could be
limited to the fourth pier (35 slips). Whatever the number, the property should remain
predominantly a sailing yacht club.
Size of Boats. The applicant should indicate if there is any intent to limit the size of boats
docked at the property. The basis for this concern is the wake created by some of the very
large boats that use Lake Minnetonka. Wave action and shoreline erosion has been a
recurring concern with respect to power boats in this relatively shallow part of Gideon's
Bay. It is possible that the current dock configuration already limits the size of boats.
The applicant should address this concern.
Quiet Waters. With respect to wake and potential shoreline erosion, it seems reasonable
that restrictions might be imposed limiting the speed of all boats entering and exiting the
facility. According to Greg Nybeck, the Director of the LMCD, a quiet waters
designation exists 150 feet out from all shorelines and from structures such as docks (see
Exhibit D). It is also possible for the City to request an expansion of the quiet waters
designation from the LMCD. A relatively easily defined and logical area is described by
drawing a line from the shoreline north of the Timber Lane cul -de -sac to Duck Island to
Frog Island to the peninsula at Lafayette Avenue.
The City would have to petition the LMCD Board for an amendment to its code,
designating the area in question. The LMCD would amend its code, based on its criteria
found in Attachment IV. It should be noted that this is a time - consuming process.
Ultimately, assuming the LMCD would approve the amendment, the Hennepin County
Water Patrol would enforce the speed restrictions, as they do elsewhere on the lake.
Neighborhood Concerns. Correspondence from residents regarding the nature of power
boaters versus sailors (e.g. hours, noise, etc.) may already be addressed within the
provisions of the current C.U.P. (Attachment III). For example, hours of operation are set
forth and dock quiet hours are established between 10:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. Residents
are advised to call the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department relative to violations of
those rules.
A TRIAL SOLUTION
If the City is willing to consider amending the Zoning Code and the SYC conditional use
permit, but has reservations over some of the issues raised herein and by residents, there
is a way to approve something on a trial basis. Section 1201.04 Subd. 4. of the Zoning
Code provides for an "interim conditional use permit ". This zoning tool allows the City
-3- 5'3
Memorandum
Re: SYC Zoning Text and C.U.P. Amendment
26 September 2007
to approve a land use, or in this case a modification of use, for a specified period of time.
For example, the City could approve some level of power boat use for a period of three
years, during which time activity and complaints could be monitored, pending a more
permanent resolution. This requires little or no investment by the property owner and lets
the City determine whether the change is acceptable or not, or whether additional controls
might be in order.
If the Planning Commission feels that the interim conditional use permit approach has
merit, staff should be directed to draft such a permit, based on parameters set forth by the
Commission.
DECISION - MAKING PROCESS
Amendments to the Zoning Code and conditional use permits are subject to the
provisions set forth in Section 1201.04 Subd. l .d. of the Zoning Code. These criteria
should guide City officials in determining the acceptability of the proposed changes.
With respect to the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan, the Commission and Council are
encouraged to review the policies found in the Land Use Chapter of the Plan.
Cc: Craig Dawson
Tim Keane
Mike Mtoney
-4- ��
DUCK ISLAND
-•e- w
Subject
Propert.
�o y�
�d CD
CD aL
CD
0
ara
e-f
Fil
Ito
0
I
CUR
1°
250
A
500 1,000
Feet
AVE
July 24, 2007
City of Shorewood
Shorewood City Council
Shorewood Planning Commission
Dear City of Shorewood,
We are making formal application for an amendment to the conditional use permit which
we operate under, and a zoning text amendment to the L -R district. The change we are
seeking is to allow us to moor not more than 50% powerboats in our marina. We are
seeking this change as the demand for sailboat slips has diminished to the point where we
have currently leased 52 of our 117 slips (up 2 from last season). It is also our feeling
that many Shorewood residents would benefit from the change as it would give them
much needed access to the lake.
The Lake Minnetonka conservation District (LMCD) states in their 2004 Shoreline boat
count that there has been a 61% decrease in sailboats on Lake Minnetonka. A recent
article in the Star and Tribune (8/04/07) states that at the same time Minnesota saw a 30%
increase in boating, sailing decreased statewide by 38 %. Although the Minnesota
DNR's Boating Trends on Lake Minnetonka 1984 -2004 does not specifically mention
sailboats, its reports on other Minnesota regions all show a decrease in sailing activity.
The City of Excelsior voted at their 7/23/07 council meeting to allow powerboats to moor
at the buoys in front of the Commons Park as they have been unable to fill them with
sailboats for several years. Sailors World Marina is the only other commercial marina on
Minnetonka that caters to sailboats and currently has a total of only 18 sailboats.
The Pi Sigma Epsilon Fraternity from the U of M Carlson School of Management
conducted a survey this summer of Shorewood residents as a marketing project. Nearly
400 households responded by mail. Of the Shorewood residents who responded; 85 %+
stated that they have no direct access to the lake, about 1 /2 the respondents said they
owned a boat, the majority of the boat owners have power boats with only a handful
owning sailboats. On a 7 -point scale, the respondents averaged 4 when asked if they
would use a marina that offered priority to Shorewood residents. The average went to 5
out of 7 when asked if they would use a marina that gave Shorewood residents a
discount.
The DNR's Boating Trends on Lake Minnetonka —1984 to 2004 states that 72% of the
boats in commercial marinas come from LMCD communities showing it truly is the local
community that benefits from their services. The report also cites the lack of lake access
on the east side and especially in the "Excelsior area ". Shorewood does not currently
provide any public access to Lake Minnetonka, and it's only other commercial marina,
Howard's Point, has a limited number of slips and is on the other side of the lake. The
Lake Minnetonka Lake Access Task Force's 1994 report recommends Timber Lane on
Gideon's bay as one of 7 sites around the lake for potential lake access points. The report
also addresses "Equitable Distribution" of public access, stating "each city is encouraged
to contribute to the overall goal."
6.4
Exhibit B
APPLICANT'S REQUEST LETTER
Dated 24 July 200
1201.24 L -R, LAKESHORE RECREATIONAL DISTRICT.
Subd. 1. Purpose. This District is intended to recognize the desirability for areas to
serve the lakeshore recreational needs of the city which of their very nature are by
geographic necessity located in proximity and adjacent to residential areas of this
community. Lake Minnetonka is the largest single park and recreational facility
available for use by the citizens of this city and the providing of an opportunity for
access to that facility is, in the opinion of the city, an adjunct of zoning by the city.
Recognizing the primary residential nature of Shorewood, it behooves the city to subject
the possible areas available for access to the lake to close scrutiny and limitation so as to
insure that use of the land does not unduly infringe upon property rights and public
health, safety and welfare of others residing on nearby residential sites.
The Shorewood Yacht Club is the only property in the City currently in the L -R district,
and as only 2 Shorewood residents have boats in the marina the purpose of this zoning
district to give Shorewood residents access to the Lake is clearly not being met. It is our
firm belief that commercial marinas are very important to the public's access to Lake
Minnetonka. As the marinas continue to fall to housing development, the lake becomes a
playground for only those few who can afford to live on the lake.
Shorewood Yacht Club provides a very important role on Lake Minnetonka, housing the
majority of the lakes cruising sailboats and a venue for sailors who do not wish to
participate in the race culture of the Wayzata and Minnetonka Yacht Clubs. Shorewood
Yacht Club also provides service, storage and boat handling many sailboats who moor at
private residences and those at the Deephaven and other municipal buoys. With no other
marina providing the services we provide, most of the sailboats in our care would be
forced to leave the lake if not for the Shorewood Yacht Club. We have proved our desire
to be Lake Minnetonka's premier sailboat marina by spending over $200,000.00 on a
new travel lift for safe sailboat handling, teaming with Northern Breezes Sailing School,
the Midwest's largest sailing school, and bringing Seven Seas, a sailboat chandlery with
the largest sailboat hardware inventory in Minnesota, onto the property. We feel the
change we are seeking is our best option for keeping the Shorewood Yacht Club, a true
gem in this community, intact. Failing this change, we will need to seek other was to
make this property meet its financial obligations.
We would place the majority of the power boats on pier #4 and site 2 which is over 600
feet away from our nearest neighbor. Pier 4 is better suited for powerboats than piers 1,
2 &3 due to the shallow water and wider slips. First priority to open slips will always be
sailboats; second priority to open slips will be for Shorewood residents. In addition we
are willing to offer Shorewood residents a 15% discount on slip rental.
1201.24 Zoning Regulations 1201.25
b. A license will be issued to the applicant only and is not transferable to another
holder. Each license will be issued only for the premises described in the
application. A license may not be transferred to another premise without the
approval of the City Council. If the licensee is a partnership or a corporation, a
change in the identity of any partner or holder of more than 10% of the issued and
outstanding stock of the corporation will be deemed a transfer of the license.
(c. An application for a license shall be accompanied by a plan, prepared by the
applicant, setting forth a procedure providing that seasonal rental of available or
unrenewed slips shall be first offered to the city residents.
I'd.'! Issuance of a license shall take into consideration the historic use of the site under
consideration with respect to the use of power boats. With exception of power
boats necessary for the operation of the facility, water harboring of boats on any
site located in Gideon's Bay shall be limited to sailing boats only.
Subd. 11. ' Termination procedure for license previously issued.
a. If upon inspection by the representative of the City Council it appears the facility
is not being maintained or operated in accordance with the terms of the
outstanding license:
(1) The licensee shall be informed of the violation in writing by the Zoning
Administrator;
(2) The licensee shall be notified it has 20 days to correct the violation;
(3) If the violation is not corrected within the time, the City Council may
revoke the license, but not until licensee has been given an opportunity to
be heard at a regular meeting of the City Council.
b. Failure to have a valid license in force shall be prima facie evidence of a violation
of this chapter.
(1987 Code, § 1201.24) (Ord. 180, passed 5 -19 -1986)
1201.25 P.U.D., PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
Subd. 1. Purpose. This District is established to provide comprehensive procedures and standards
designed for district planned unit development to allow the development of neighborhoods
or portions thereof incorporating a variety of residential types and nonresidential uses.
Recognizing that traditional density, bulk, setbacks, use and subdivision regulations
which may be useful in protecting the character of
Exhibit C
1201 -149 ZONING CODE EXCERPT
Section 1201.24 Subd. .
Sec. 3. 02
(Rev. 2-04)
Section 3.02. Watercraft Speed
Subd. 1. Maximum Speeds. No person shall operate a
watercraft on the Lake at a speed greater than is reasonable and
prudent under the conditions and with regard to the actual and
potential hazards then existing. In every event speed shall be so
restricted as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person,
watercraft or structure in or upon the Lake which is in compliance
with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due
care. No watercraft may be operated on the Lake at a sp eed in
excess of the following limits:
a) 40 miles per hour during the daytime;
b) 20 miles per hour during the nighttime;
`) 5 miles per hour in the following areas:
i) a quiet waters area established by this section.
ii) that area within 150 feet of the shoreline.
(iii) area within 150 feet of an authorized bathing
area or swimmer, an authorized scuba diver's
warning flag, an anchored raft or watercraft,
_or a dock or piers except that from which a
watercraft with a person in tow is being
operated.
iv) an area of restricted speed posted in accordance
with Subd. 4.
The sheriff or executive director may provide for the erection of
signs at appropriate locations in the Lake to inform operators of
watercraft of the speed limitations established by this subdivi-
sion.
Subd. 2. Prima Facie Rule. Operation of watercraft in
excess of the speeds set forth in Subdivision 1 is prima facie
evidence that the watercraft is being operated in violation of
Section 3.01, Subd. 2 of this Code. 5 *1 $
Exhibit D
LMCD CODE EXCERPT
-47- Re: Watercraft pee
CITY OF
SHOR Ei'WOOD
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
FILE NO.:
BACKGROUND
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 • (952) 474 -3236
FAX (952) 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mmus • cityhaI1 @ci.shorewood.mn.us
Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
Brad Nielsen
27 September 2000
Shorewood Yacht Club — Proposed Rezoning, Comprehensive Plan
Amendment, Conditional Use Permit and Variance
405 (00.27)
John and Judy Cross, Representing Minnetonka Moorings, have submitted an application
for the rezoning of their property at 600 West Lake Street (see Site Location map —
Exhibit A, attached) from R -lA/S, Single - Family Residential/Shoreland to L-R,
Lakeshore Recreational. They also request a conditional use permit for the existing
caretaker dwelling on the site and for the outdoor storage of boats on the property.
Certain existing conditions on the site necessitate the processing of a variance
application. Finally, since the applicants propose to add property and dockage to the
existing site, they have requested an amendment to the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan.
The existing yacht club contains approximately 2.4 acres of land, separated through the
middle by the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority right -of -way. The site
abuts and is accessed by County Road 19. The applicants have acquired additional
acreage to the west of the existing yacht club and north of the H.C.R.R.A. r.o.w. This
property contains an additional 19,200 square feet of area(.44 acres). Both sites are
presently zoned R -1A/S. Land use and zoning surrounding the sites are as follows:
f PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Attachment I
Memorandum
Re: Shorewood Yacht Club
Rezoning, Comp Plan Amendment, C.U.P. and Variance
27 September 2000
North: Lake Minnetonka
East: Minnetonka Portable Dredging; zoned C -4, Service Commercial
and Single - Family Residential; zoned R -lA/S
South: County Road 19, then commercial (The Garden Patch and
Shorewood Nursery); zoned C -4, Service Commercial and R -C,
Residential Commercial
West: Townhouse common area, then single- family residential; zoned R-
lB /S, Single - Family Residential/Shoreland
A clubhouse facility, caretaker dwelling, a launch ramp and boat docking for 80 sailboats
occupy the existing site. The applicants' application describes a variety of activities that
occur on the property (e.g. sailboat rental, sailing school, incidental boat sales, storage of
weed harvesting equipment, etc.). The expansion site is currently occupied by three
docks, the use of which does not conform with current zoning requirements. The
applicants propose to use the property to provide 35 additional boat slips. Except for a
small pedestrian bridge and a storage rack for small sailboats, the expansion site will be
left in its natural state. The additional dockage will extend westerly from an existing
pier.
Plans for the existing property, as well as the proposed expansion are contained in a
notebook prepared by the applicant and enclosed for your review.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
Before addressing the proposed expansion of the yacht club, it is important to review how
the existing facility complies with the L-R zoning district requirements. As you know,
the L -R District was amended in September of last year, in order to encourage two of the
existing multiple dock facilities in Shorewood to apply for the zoning. During the
amendment process it was understood that these facilities would not necessarily comply
with all elements of the Code, and that certain nonconformities would simply have to be
recognized as existing deficiencies.
I. The Existing Site.
A. Comprehensive Plan. Any rezoning must be guided by the Comprehensive
Plan. The Land Use section of Shorewood's Comprehensive Plan shows the
property in question as an area of further study. Under "Lake Access" it
mentions that the L -R District has been revised "to encourage the marina on
Howard's Point Road and the yacht club north of County Road 19 to comply
with City standards." The Chapter Summary goes on to say:
"10. Recognizing certain existing nonconformities, seek ways to bring
the Howard's Point Marina and the Shorewood Yacht Club into
-2-
Memorandum
Re: Shorewood Yacht Club
Rezoning, Comp Plan Amendment, C.U.P. and Variance
27 September 2000
substantial compliance with the revised Lakeshore Recreational
(L -R) zoning district."
B. L -R Zoning Requirements.
1. Permitted Uses. The only permitted use in the L -R District is water -
harboring of boats. This is subject to an annual licensing procedure
whereby specific standards and conditions are reviewed (see below).
2. Accessory Uses. The L -R District lists off - street parking, a clubhouse
building, one storage building, gas dispensing equipment, and boat rental
as allowable accessory uses. The yacht club has an existing clubhouse
that the applicants propose to expand. Their plans are considered to be
consistent with the Code. The applicants propose to add a storage
building to the south end of the clubhouse. It is consistent with the 1200
square foot maximum area requirement. A small storage building already
exists on the site. Staff's initial recommendation to remove this structure
has been reconsidered in view of its proposed use as a dumpster enclosure.
While a fenced or walled enclosure would typically be sufficient for such
storage, having a roof over the dumpster area will enhance screening it,
particularly from the elevated H.C.R.R.A. trail. The applicants' site plan
should be modified to show the location of this structure. It is worth
noting that neither the expansion of the clubhouse or the construction of
the storage building would be allowed under the yacht club's current
nonconforming use status.
The yacht club does not dispense gas, even to its members. Gasoline used
for their own purposes is stored in a small shed located to the east of the
clubhouse building. Final approval of the applicants' request should
include a condition that the gas storage be approved by the local fire
marshal.
The applicants' application to the LMCD references public rental of five
or more boats with outboard motors. The L -R District specifically states
that water - harboring of boats in Gideon's Bay must be limited to sailing
boats.
3. Conditional Uses.
a. Single - Family Dwelling. One of the significant changes to the L -R
District was the allowance of one single - family dwelling to serve as a
caretaker residence. In this case the caretaker residence complies with
the setback requirements for the L -R District. It is located 55 feet
-3-
Memorandum
Re: Shorewood Yacht Club
Rezoning, Comp Plan Amendment, C.U.P. and Variance
27 September 2000
from the shoreline. The only other requirement for the dwelling is that
it comply with Shorewood's Rental Housing Code. Any approval of
the SYC request should include a condition that the existing house be
inspected and conform with the Rental Housing Code.
b. Open and Outdoor Dry Land Storage of Boats and Trailers.
(1) Storage of boats must be screened from view of neighboring
residential uses. Since boats are stored in the parking area to the
west of the clubhouse, this applies mostly to the homes west of the
SYC property. In this regard it is worth noting that the nearest
homes that can see the property are the Gideon's Cove twinhomes
(500+ feet to the west) and homes on Timber Lane that are
approximately 700 feet away to the west. The view of the site is
quite well screened from view of Gideon's Cove by existing trees.
Despite the proximity of boat storage to the lakeshore on the west
side of the site, there is some opportunity to enhance the
landscaping between the parking lot and the shoreline. As part of
any approval it is recommended that the applicants submit a
detailed landscaping plan for this area that introduces some sort of
evergreen tree. It is not suggested that this be a solid screen, but
should include enough trees to soften the view from the west.
(2) Storage of boats must be screened from the street. Although
property to the south of the site is zoned for commercial use, boats
stored on the south side of the H.C.R.R.A. r.o.w. are somewhat
visible. As in (1) above, there appears to be some opportunity to
enhance screening by adding evergreen trees along the south edge
of the property, along County Road 19. These should also be
included in the applicants' landscape plan.
(3) Storage should be landscaped to buffer other public r.o.w. (in this
case the H.C.R.R.A. trail). Opportunities here are limited due to
the narrow space between the boat storage area and the trail r.o.w.
It is important that existing vegetation abutting the r.o.w. be
maintained. Where possible some evergreen trees should be
incorporated into these areas.
(4) Storage areas must be grassed or surfaced to control dust. Boat
storage is limited to the existing parking areas. According to the
applicants they presently store more than just their members'
boats, using up virtually all of the existing parking areas. It is
13
Memorandum
Re: Shorewood Yacht Club
Rezoning, Comp Plan Amendment, C.U.P. and Variance
27 September 2000
recommended that future outdoor storage of boats be limited to the
spaces currently being used. If the expansion of the site is
approved, this may limit the number of non - member boats that can
be stored on the site.
(5) Lighting of the storage areas does not appear to be an issue. Based
upon a visit to the property, lighting appears to be well managed
and unobtrusive. Any additional lighting proposed in the future
should be subject to Council approval.
(6) Some of the existing parking is occasionally used for storage of
boats during the boating season. The applicants maintain that this
does not adversely affect parking. It is recommended that parking
be periodically monitored. If it is found that parking becomes a
problem (e.g. people begin to park outside of areas designated on
the site plan), the applicant should discontinue such storage during
the boating season. As an alternative, overflow parking or storage
could be accommodated in the vacant southwest corner of the site
abutting County Road 19. Since this area provides an effective
natural buffer, its use should only be required if parking becomes a
problem.
c. Lot requirements and Setbacks. The site complies with the minimum
area, width and depth requirements of the L -R District. With the
exception of parking and outdoor dry land storage of boats, the site
also complies with setback requirements. Perhaps the single most
significant deficiency on the site is the proximity of parking and
storage to the shoreline. It has already been recommended herein to
mitigate the visual impacts by enhanced landscaping. It is further
recommended that the parking areas near the lake be examined by the
City Engineer, the DNR, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
for possible ways to address drainage directly into the lake.
d. Building Requirements. The clubhouse, caretaker residence and
proposed storage building comply with setback requirements of the L-
R District. Although the proposed storage building is 20 feet high on
the east side, the fact that it is attached to the clubhouse and only the
dredging company property can see that elevation mitigates the height.
There is also merit in being able to house the portable boat hoist inside
the building during the off season.
e. Special and Specific Conditions.
-5-
Memorandum
Re: Shorewood Yacht Club
Rezoning, Comp Plan Amendment, C.U.P. and Variance
27 September 2000
1. The site is located on a lake with at least two public accesses and is
located at least 5000 feet from any other multiple dock facility.
2. Any future construction must comply with State Building Code
requirements. The caretaker residence should be subject to
inspection and compliance with the Shorewood Rental Housing
Code.
3. The number of slips authorized must comply with the requirements
of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Code. The
applicants were in the process of receiving LMCD approval when
the City requested that no action be taken pending the City's
approval process. The draft findings of fact prepared may be of
some use in the City's licensing of the facility.
4. Parking. The applicants' plans illustrate parking for 121 cars.
This more than complies with the Code for the existing facility's
80 boat slips (one parking space per slip). If the site and dockage
are to be expanded the total parking requirement would be 115.
As mentioned earlier in this report, the westerly parking area and
four parking spaces on the north side of the site are closer than
fifty feet from the shoreline. Since the westerly parking area is
crucial to the use of the clubhouse and docking facilities, their
elimination is not practical. As recommended earlier, ways to
mitigate the proximity of parking to the lake should be further
explored.
While paving of the parking areas is not recommended in this case,
the applicants have agreed to pave the driveway entry into the site,
up to the H.C.R.R.A. r.o.w. This is consistent with the Code and
plans for paving the driveway should reflect the heavy weights of
the boats as well as other heavy vehicles using the Minnetonka
Portable Dredging Company which shares this driveway.
5. Signage. The L -R District allows two signs on the site, one facing
the street and one facing the lake. The existing facility has one of
each, plus an additional sign on its entry canopy facing the east
(Dredging Company).
6. Illumination. Lighting at the existing facility is considered to be
very well managed, balancing safety, security and impact to
surrounding properties.
0
Memorandum
Re: Shorewood Yacht Club
Rezoning, Comp Plan Amendment, C.U.P. and Variance
27 September 2000
7. Noise. There is no record of complaints of noise in recent years
relative to the SYC facility. Early concerns of halyards rattling in
the wind were easily addressed by having members wrap the
halyard around the masts. The SYC has gone so far as to impose a
strict fine for members who violate this rule.
8. Drainage. No additional grading is proposed for the property,
except for the construction of the new storage building. Standard
erosion control will be required as part of the building permit
process. As mentioned earlier the City Engineer, DNR and
MCWD engineers will be asked to review and comment on the
existing drainage of the site.
9. Historic Use. The L -R District references the historic use of the
site. It goes on to specifically restrict multiple dock water -
harboring facilities on Gideon's Bay to sailboats. In the past, the
storage of power boats for management of the club has been
limited to two. Any such limitation should not include the weed
harvesting equipment kept at the site.
II. The Expansion Site. While expansion of the existing multiple dock facilities was
not specifically referenced in the L -R District, it was known at the time that at
least the Howard's Point Marina was considering some expansion. The applicants
have acquired the property immediately west of the SYC site, north of the
H.C.R.R.A. r.o.w. This property was allowed years ago to have three docks for
the use of certain residents on Timber Lane. Over the last several years it appears
to have evolved into a dock rental operation for as many as seven boats. The
docks have been accessed by a gravel driveway from Timber Lane
The applicants' intent is to add a fourth pier to their existing dock system,
providing an additional 35 slips. One of those slips provides a dock for the
property owner at 5585Timber Lane. They also propose to maintain the
easternmost of the three docks for one of their management boats. This also is
included in the 35. The additional shoreline on this site allows the applicants to
comply with LMCD boat density requirements. In addition to the additional
dockage, the applicants would like to use the newly acquired land for their kids'
sailing school and camp(not overnight). In this regard, they propose to store
several small sailboats on a rack at the east end of the parcel. They also propose a
boat dock canopy on the east end of the parcel to protect students from the
elements. This canopy would be removed at the end of the boating season. The
applicants propose to access this portion of the site by means of a small foot
bridge connected to their main facility.
-7-
Memorandum
Re: Shorewood Yacht Club
Rezoning, Comp Plan Amendment, C.U.P. and Variance
27 September 2000
With respect to the expansion, several factors should be taken into consideration:
A. Parking and Access. As mentioned earlier in this report, the applicants
propose parking for 121 cars. With the new docks the total number of slips
required under the Code is 115. It is highly recommended that access for the
westerly parcel be limited to emergency vehicles only. With the exception of
the proposed canopy and the sailboat storage rack, the westerly parcel should
remain in a natural undeveloped state.
B. Boat Traffic. The proposed docks arrangement suggests approximately a 40
percent increase in boat storage and, presumably, 40 percent more boat traffic.
The applicants estimate that their average use on weekdays is up to 10 percent
of the members, with weekends up to 30 percent (approximately 24 boats
currently). Multiplying these figures by 40 percent suggests 11 boats on
weekdays and 34 boats per day on weekends.
It is worth noting that out of necessity the sailboats using the facility must
follow a well defined channel, marked by buoys. The applicants advise us
that no additional dredging of the lake bottom will be required to
accommodate the new slips. Those on the inside, where the water is
somewhat more shallow, will accommodate smaller sailboats that have swing -
up keels.
C. Existing Dock Rights. If the expansion is approved, a stipulations should be
placed in the permit for the site that the westerly dock must be strictly limited
to one boat, for the exclusive use of the residents at 5585 Timber Lane. The
dock shall not be rented out.
RECOMMENDATION
The rezoning of the existing site is relatively uncomplicated, provided the
recommendations included herein are included in the approval. The expansion is
somewhat more challenging, but presents an interesting opportunity for the City to
achieve greater control over the property. Input from area residents will undoubtedly
raise issues not addressed herein. Assuming those issues can be adequately addressed by
the City, it is recommended that the rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment be
favorably considered. The applicants' next step would then be to make a formal
application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment, during which time staff should be
directed to prepare an ordinance and resolution approving the rezoning and conditional
use permit, respectively.
Cc: Larry Brown John and Judy Cross
DUCK ISLAND
0
0 0
�c
0
FROG ISLAND
N
500 0 500 Feet
Ion I
57
C
.
��HM
Exhibit A
SITE LOCATION
Shorewood Yacht Club - Rezoning
F
SEP 27 2000
� i
_y P Y
9/27/00
Bradley J. Nielsen
Planning Director
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Dear Mr. Nielsen:
Our family opposes the request of rezoning that Minnetonka
Moorings, Inc. has made to the City of Shorewood. The residents of
our association have previously requested a similar rezoning to permit
more docks than the two authorized by you and were turned down with
the statement that an effort is being made to limit the number of boats
on Lake Minnetonka and the two docks allowed are all that can be made
available. We accepted that decision, but reserved the right to reapply if
the situation changed.
If Minnesota Moorings is granted their request, it follows that
Gideon Cove residents are being encouraged to also request rezoning so
more docks may be built and utilized. We are asking for only ten more
docks, whereas they are asking for an additional 35.
We request that this letter be considered when you debate the
merits of their rezoning request.
Respectfully submitted,
Ruth D. Jewell
23770 Lawtonka Drive
Rdh Jewel( ❖ ❖
BILE COPY
Larry KCopp & Associates, LTD q z,,,
901 MARQUETTE AVENUE, SUITE 2820 • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55402 (612) 333 -5313 • 1 -800- 869 -0602 • FAX: 1- 612- 333 -1916
September 25, 2000
Mr. Bradley J. Nielsen
Planning Director
City of Shorewood
Planning Department
5755 County Club Road
Shorewood, MN. 55331
., 4
�t
Dear Mr. Nielsen,
The Shorewood Yacht Club is an asset of the lake community, and the
enhancement of their property poses no problems to me. I therefore support
their request.
/Since ely,
Larry L. Klopp
136 George Street
Excelsior, Mn. 55331
LK /cjl
REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE OF FORTIS INVESTORS. INC.. P.O. BOX 64284. ST. PAUL. MN 55164
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 3, 2000 —PAGE 3 of 8
The public hearing was opened at 7:35 P.M.
Mrs. Jeannie Polston, 28215 Boulder Circle was in attendance and addressed the Commission to explain
there was a title search in progress related to the unbuildable parcel to be combined. Barring any
contrary findings, she did not anticipate any problems with these suggestions.
Mr. Darrell Carver, 27910 Smithtown Road, asked Mrs. Polston if there were to be trees planted around
the new garage. She responded the area around the garage is quite wooded, and while no new additional
trees were to be planted on the south side of the garage, she did not believe Mr. Carver would be able to
see the new garage.
The public hearing was closed at 7:40 P.M.
Commissioner Woodruff questioned whether there was a plan to plant trees to screen the garage from the
east. Mrs. Polston stated they were planning to plant a few evergreen trees on that side of the garage in
an effort to provide screening.
Anderson moved, Woodruff seconded, recommending approval of a Conditional Use Permit for
Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet, for Steve and Jeannie Polston, 28215 Boulder
Circle, subject to the applicant providing a landscape plan showing where trees would be planted
for screening. Motion passed 510.
3. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING
• COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
• REZONING FROM R lA TO L-R
• CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
• VARIANCE
Applicant: Minnetonka Moorings
Location: 600 West Lake Street
*For future reference, please note there is a Planning Commission memorandum on ,file at City Hall
from Brad Nielsen, dated September 27, 2000- referencing File No. 405(00.27). This memorandum
explains, in significant detail, the history and analysis surrounding these requests.
Director Nielsen provided a detailed explanation of the issues involved in these requests. He explained
John and Judy Cross, representing Minnetonka Moorings and working through the Shorewood Yacht
Club facility, had submitted an application for rezoning of their property. In doing so, a Conditional Use
Permit, Variance, and an amendment to the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan were necessitated. Involved
in this property and further complicating matters was the recent acquisition of a parcel of land
immediately west of the Yacht Club where Mr. and Mrs. Cross were proposing additional dockage in an
effort to expand their business. In reviewing this matter, Director Nielsen provided information as it
pertained to the existing site and then regarding the expansion site. Some issues pertain to both sites.
First, Director Nielsen explained that any rezoning must be guided by the Comprehensive Plan set forth
by the City. When amended last, efforts were made to pave the way, should an opportunity arise, to
bring the marinas into compliance with the Lakeshore Recreational (L -R) zoning district. In considering
the L -R District Requirements, there are Permitted Uses, Accessory Uses, and Conditional Uses relating
to Single - Family Dwellings, Open and Outdoor Dry Land Storage of Boats and Trailers, Lot
Requirements and Setbacks, Building Requirements, and Special and Specific Conditions. Following is a
brief summary of the comparison between the subject property and these requirements as detailed by
Attachment II
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 3, 2000 - PAGE 4 of 8
Director Nielsen. A more significantly detailed discussion of these issues can be found in the Planning
Commission referendum referenced at the beginning of this Item.
The permitted use in the L -R district was subject to annual licensing procedure and had as its only use
the water - harboring of boats. Specifically, the L -R district stated the water - harboring of boats in
Gideon's Bay must be limited to sailing boats.
The L -R District had off - street parking, a clubhouse building, a storage building, gas dispensing
equipment and boat rental as allowable uses for this area. The Shorewood Yacht Club had all of these.
The storage building on the site was to be removed, however, its proposed use as a dumpster enclosure
was deemed more useful, as a roof over the area would help to conceal it from the Hennepin County
Regional Railroad Authority trail which bisects the property.
With regard to the single family dwelling on the property as part of its Conditional Uses, all setback
requirements were observed, however, it would need to comply with the Shorewood Rental Housing
Code and would need to be inspected for conformance.
While there were many issues to be examined regarding Open and Outdoor Dry Land Storage of Boats
and Trailers, the most significant matter seemed to be a need for a detailed landscaping plan for the area
demonstrating a plan for screening of evergreen trees between the parking lot and shoreline, along the
South edge of the property facing County Road 19, as well as maintaining existing vegetation abutting
the Right -of -Way near the H.C.R.R.A trail.
Director Nielsen complimented the Yacht Club on their lighting noting it was very well done for its use
as well as being sensitive in its impact on the neighbors.
There was concern for the boat storage on the site, noting that if all parking sites would be utilized and
boats stored on the site as well, the need would exceed supply. An alternative parking/storage area was
proposed in the vacant southwest corner of the site abutting County Road 19. Parking was considered an
area to monitor and adjust as needed.
The most significant concern overall seemed to be the proximity of parking and storage so close to the
shoreline. While enhanced landscaping would help to mitigate potential problems, it was recommended
that the parking areas near the lake be examined by many agencies in an effort to address issues of
drainage directly into the lake from this site.
With regard to Signage found in the Special and Specific Conditions portion of the L -R District Zoning
Code, the Shorewood Yacht Club had three signs while the requirements stated that only two signs would
be allowed.
At this point, Director Nielsen explored the background related to the expansion site and requests made
regarding this portion of land as it related to the Shorewood Yacht Club. He noted three additional docks
existed on this site primarily for the use of certain residents on Timber Lane.
The applicants would like to add a fourth dock to the existing system, providing thirty-five additional
slips. One of the docks would be maintained as a slip for a property owner at 5585 Timber Lane. The
easternmost of the three docks would be for one of their management boats utilized in assisting
customers in need of help.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 3, 2000 - PAGE 5 of 8
When considering issues involved in the expansion site, Director Nielsen explained, it would be
important to consider issues of Parking and Access, as well as Boat Traffic and Existing Dock Rights.
Parking and Access on the expansion site was recommended to include emergency vehicles only. With
the exception of a proposed boat canopy used to protect the Sailing School students from the elements
and a sailboat storage rack, the site should remain in a natural undeveloped state.
Boat traffic was believed to increase by approximately forty percent as a result of the proposed plans for
this site, however, no dredging of the lake bottom would be required to accommodate the additional slips.
Existing Dock Rights should be maintained for the exclusive use of the residents of 5585 Timber Lane
only as part of consideration of the expansion site.
Director Nielsen summarized his comments noting he believed the plans to be well done and addressed
many issues identified in the past. He stated there would be many improvements to the property and the
expansion and rezoning would allow the City to gain more control over the property. He also noted a list
of names had been submitted to the City noting no opposition to the proposed plans for this site.
John and Judy Cross were in attendance and seized the opportunity to address the Commission. Mr.
Cross noted he had few disagreements to the recommendations Director Nielsen had reviewed. He also
noted there was no current need for the overflow parking/storage area, but did not want this to be an issue
at the time it would be needed in the future.
Mrs. Cross addressed the issue of the third sign facing the lake. She stated she considered it more of a
"landscape embellishment" as it was made of rope and occupied a flower bed. She stated the members
liked it, and it could only be seen from the lake, however, it was not needed. She also stated the
neighbors that can see the property have no objection to it being there.
Mr. Cross also expressed disappointment in the necessary delay for formal approval of the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Mrs. Cross noted there are forty-one people on a waiting list for the
proposed slips, and they were hoping to have the dockage ready next spring. The timeframe that would
occur as part of the formal approval process would not allow that to happen.
Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 8:40 P.M.
Dwayne V., 5585 Timber Lane, stated his concern regarding the noise coming from the hollow booms on
the sailboats, and a concern over the potential overflow lot on the southwesterly corner of the property.
He stated he had lived at his address for twenty -eight years and knew the locale of the proposed driveway
onto County Road 19. He voiced concern for safety in that area should the overflow lot be needed.
James Hancock, 23800 Lawtonka Drive, stated he was very much in favor of these requests as he
believed it to be a more favorable use of property.
Steve and Nancy Linder, 23730 Lawtonka Drive, were in attendance. Mr. Linder addressed the
Commission with his request to reconsider dockage for the Gideon Cove residents. He state it was his
prior knowledge that additional docks had been denied in that area as a general rule, and he was surprised
to see this request coming forward for approval.
Joann Schaub, 5465 Timber Lane, was very concerned for traffic utilizing the proposed overflow parking
area. She questioned Mrs. Cross as to whether emergency vehicles were currently utilizing that area.
Mrs. Cross responded the police may be monitoring that area, but she was not sure. Mrs. Schaub
commented she had seen vehicles removing the chain and driving in on previous occasions.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 3, 2000 — PAGE 6 of 8
Julie Ingelman, 23720 Lawtonka Drive, stated her concerns over the timing of this issue, and the Gideon
Cove request for additional dockage being denied. She also noted parking seemed to be quite crowded
on the Yacht Club property, and she would like to see the mess along the H.C.R.R.A. trail cleaned up as
she utilized the trail daily
Dan Puzak, 23830 Smithtown Road, expressed concern over the lakeshore and lake bottom. He stated
this area previously served as a drainage area for the Excelsior Sanitary Sewer Treatment facility and it
was his belief that it was one of the most polluted areas of lake bottom in that area. He stated he would
like to see a viable business run in that area with clean -up of the lake bottom. He did not support these
requests due to the muck on the lake bottom potentially being disturbed. He also had concerns for traffic
on Lawtonka Drive. He believed if it was not fenced off, it would create an eyesore in that area.
Donna Delaney, 23760 Lawtonka Drive, stated her support for the improvements to the existing marina
site. She noted she did not hear any noise, and the sailboats are a beautiful view. She did, however, have
concerns regarding the proposed drive down Timber Lane. Regarding the muck on the bottom, she
believed Lake Minnetonka to be a large lake, and she did not see the muck on the bottom affecting the
rest of the lake as a whole.
Judy Cross again spoke to address concerns regarding the proposed driveway entrance. She stated there
is a process in place used for pick -up and drop -off of students for the sailing school. She did not want
the additional responsibility of dealing with students being dropped "off in the proposed driveway
entrance area. The current process would continue to be enforced regarding the students being
transported to the sailing school.
John Cross also stated that by removing the middle dock of the three on the expansion site, the area
would be left in a more natural state.
Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 9:04 P.M.
Commissioner Anderson stated his two concerns to be related to storage and screening of the boats, and
the close proximity of the parking to the lake. Also, he believed access to Timber Lane should be
controlled.
Commissioner Turgeon commented she had concerns related to proposed versus actual numbers of
parking spaces on the site. Also, she did not want to see another driveway placed onto County Road 19
in that area. Furthermore, she believed sensitivity should be used when considering implications from
the muck on the bottom of the lake. She stated she would like to approach appropriate agencies and
authorities to find out what is on the lake bottom in this area.
Commissioner Woodruff echoed Commissioner Turgeon's comments regarding the environmental
impacts in and around this area. Commissioner Boehm also supported concerns regarding environmental
impacts on this site. He also expressed concern for the parking situation and proposed overflow area.
Chair Bailey reminded the Planning Commission of the efforts put into the Comprehensive Plan. He
believed these plans to be a positive step forward, and he did not want to lose sight of the opportunity to
bring this property in compliance.
Much discussion centered on how to allow the applicants to move forward with plans although a formal
Comprehensive Plan amendment could not be approved this evening.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 3, 2000 - PAGE 7 of 8
Commissioner Anderson commented it seemed as though Mr. Cross had acted in good faith and he
wanted to see the Yacht Club brought into compliance. He noted the approval process can sometimes
appear daunting, and he believed it best to work with the Yacht Club on these matters.
Anderson moved, Boehm seconded, recommending approval of rezoning the parcels in question,
the Conditional Use Permits as presented, and a variance —for John and Judy Cross, representing
Minnetonka Moorings, 600 West Lake Street, subject to final approval of the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and submittal of a professional Landscape Plan, also a plan for controlling the access
to Timber Lane, and an Engineering Report on the matters of the new proposed parking spaces
and existing parking near the lake to be presented on November 2, 2000, as well as scheduling a
public hearing for a formal Comprehensive Plan Amendment on November 2, 2000.
Commissioner Turgeon stated she believed it would be possible to move forward with these requests.
Commissioner Anderson reiterated that it can be a cumbersome process to move government along, but
he believed the Shorewood Yacht Club to be an asset to the City, and he would like to work with the
Yacht Club to move matters forward.
Motion passed 5/0.
4. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING GIDEON GLEN
Director Nielsen stated the City Council had authorized up to $175,000 for the acquisition of the Gideon
Glen property. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District had agreed to provide up to $200,000 to help in
the acquisition. Other funding sources were being considered as well in an effort to minimize
expenditures for the property.
He also explained there are a number of purposes for securing this property —one of them being wetland
preservation. He also noted the acquisition of this property would be consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan for the City.
Woodruff moved, Anderson seconded, recommending approval for the purchase of the Gideon
Glen property. Motion passed 510.
5. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Mr. Jerry Brekke, Howard's Point Marina, was in attendance and stated it was good to see the Planning
Commission work as a group to resolve tough issues. He state he had remained at this meeting because
he wanted to pay the Planning Commission the compliment of doing a good job.
Chair Bailey thanked him for his fine compliment.
6. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA
The next meeting for the Planning Commission would be November 21, 2000, and would include two
items as well as a discussion regarding Right -of -Way issues.
7. REPORTS
Chair Bailey stated he would be the City Council Liaison for the month of October, 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 3, 2000 - PAGE 8 of 8
8. ADJOURNMENT
Anderson moved, Woodruff seconded, adjourning the meeting at 10:02 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Sally Keefe,
Recording Secretary
4
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 00-111
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE
FOR A YACHT CLUB TO MINNETONKA MOORINGS, INC.
WHEREAS, Minnetonka Moorings, Inc. (Applicant) has an interest in certain real
property located at 600 West Lake Street in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of
Minnesota, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to expand the Shorewood Yacht Club, which
currently occupies the property, add an accessory storage building and additional dock slips; and
WHEREAS, the existing Shorewood Yacht Club is a nonconforming use in the R -lA/S
and R -3A/S zoning districts and operates under a court- ordered conditional use permit which was
issued by the City of Shorewood in Council Resolution 24 -79, which resolution is on file in the
Shorewood City offices; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has agreed to rezone the subject property to the L -R,
Lakeshore Recreational District, in which the existing caretaker dwelling on the property and the
outdoor storage of boats require a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 1201.24 Subd. 4 of
the Shorewood City Code; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested a variance to the setback requirements for on-
site parking on the property; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his
recommendations were duly set forth in memoranda to the Planning Commission dated 27
September 2000, and 1 November 2000 which memoranda are on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was reviewed by the City Engineer, and his
recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated
1 November 2000, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was
reviewed by the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on 3 October 2000, the minutes of
which meeting are on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's request for a conditional use permit and variance was
considered by the City Council at its regular meeting on 13 November 2000, at which time the
Planner's memoranda, the City Engineer's memorandum and the minutes of the Planning
Commission were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the City Staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
Attachment III
q
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That the Subject Property is located in an R -1 /A, Single - Family
Residential/Shoreland and R- 3A/Multiple- Family Residential/Shoreland zoning district and
contains approximately 4.7 acres.
2. That the subject property currently exists as two parcels of land as described in
Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. That the westernmost parcel is currently occupied by three dock structures that
were originally intended for use by certain residents on Timber Lane. The westernmost dock is
accessed by an easement in favor of the owner of the property located at 5585 Timber Lane.
4. That the Shorewood City Council has agreed to rezone the subject property to the
L -R, Lakeshore Recreational District, upon proof of recording of the deed conveying property
described in Exhibit A to Shorewood Yacht Club that shall contain the following language:
"Grantee shall not convey this property to any other person or entity without including in
the conveyance, the property described on the attached Exhibit A (being the property
immediately contiguous to the subject property lying to the east), without prior written
consent of the City of Shorewood."
5. That a clubhouse facility, a caretaker dwelling, a boat launch ramp and boat
docking for 80 sailboats plus 2 management slips currently occupy the site.
6. That, in addition to the water harboring of boats, the Applicant's application
proposes the following activities for the subject property: 1) sailboat rental; 2) sailing school; 3)
incidental boat sales; and 4) storage of weed harvesting equipment.
7. That the Applicant proposes to extend a fourth pier from the westernmost existing
pier on the site, increasing the number of boat slips from 82 to 117.
8. That the Applicant proposes to construct a small pedestrian bridge between the
existing Yacht Club property and the newly acquired westerly parcel
9. That the Applicant proposes to locate a small sailboat storage rack for the use of a
youth sailing school which will be conducted on the westerly parcel.
10. That the Applicant proposes to erect a boat dock frame and canopy on the
westerly parcel to be used as a shelter for the youth sailing school.
11. That the Applicant's plans show parking for 121 vehicles.
2
12. That the Applicant's plans are illustrated in the site plans shown on Exhibits B
and C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
13. That the subject property is located on a lake with at least two public accesses and
is at least 5000 feet away from any other multiple dock facility.
14. That the subject property currently displays three signs, whereas the Shorewood
City Code limits the number of signs in the L -R District to two.
15. That the City has no record of complaints of noise in recent years relative to the
subject property.
16. That the Applicant proposes additional landscaping and screening along the west
side of the site, abutting the shoreline of the lake and along the south side of the H.C.R.R.A.
right -of -way and along the south side of the site abutting County Road 19, as shown on Exhibit
D, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants the Applicant's
request for a conditional use permit for a sailing yacht club at 600 West Lake Street.
2. That this approval is subject to the following conditions:
a. The Applicant must comply with the requirements of Section 1201.24 of the
Shorewood City Code and must obtain an annual license for the facility, pursuant
to Subd. 10 of that section.
b. The Applicant must obtain a multiple dock license, special density license and
necessary variances from the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District.
C. The permit shall be limited to the docking of sailboats, except for three power
boats used by the management of the Yacht Club. In addition, the dock located at
the westernmost end of the subject property shall be limited to one boat owned by
the residents of 5585 Timber Lane. Weed harvesting equipment shall not count
against the allowable number of power boats.
d. The proposed buildings shall be constructed as shown on Exhibits B and C,
attached hereto and made a part hereof, and must be constructed in compliance
with the Minnesota State Building Code.
e. Landscaping shall be installed and maintained according to the approved
landscape plan as shown on Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Landscaping shall be completed by 15 June 2001.
3
f. Hours of operation shall be as follows:
Sunday through Thursday:
Friday through Saturday:
6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.
6:00 A.M. to 1:00 A.M.
r.I
g. Dock quiet hours shall be between the hours of 10:00 P.M and 6:00 A.M.
h. Sailboats, when not in use, shall have their halyards secured by such devices as
will minimize any noise that may be caused by them.
i. Right -of -way shall be given to all barges and work boats being used by the
adjacent dredging company.
j. Any radios utilized on -board sailboats shall be kept below decks with their
volume at a discreet level.
k. The Applicant shall install a solid core steel door on the gasoline storage shed, per
the requirements of the Fire Marshall. Gasoline storage shall be limited to that
which is used by the management of the Yacht Club.
1. The shelter for the youth sailing camp shall be a seasonal boat dock canopy to be
taken down at the end of the sailing season.
m. The storage rack for the youth sailing camp shall be located 50 feet back from the
ordinary high water level of Lake Minnetonka.
n. The access drive from Timber Lane to the westerly portion of the site shall be
gated and locked except for occasional maintenance activities. The driveway shall
not be used as access to the youth sailing camp.
o. No dredging is anticipated as part of this permit. Any future dredging requests
will be subject to normal dredging permit procedures.
P. Any dock pilings to be installed must be driven as opposed to a jetting method.
q. The American Disabilities Act parking spaces must be constructed consistent with
the State Building Code and are subject to the conditions imposed by the Lake
Minnetonka Conservation District.
Curbstones shall be installed for each parking stall on the site.
S. The overflow parking area shown on Exhibit B in the southwest corner of the site
is not approved as part of this permit.
t. Prior to any further work being done on the site, the Applicant must provide in
recorded form, evidence that the deed for the land described in Exhibit A,
attached hereto and made a part hereof, contains the following language:
"Grantee shall not convey this property to any other person or entity without
including in the conveyance, the property described on the attached Exhibit A
(being the property immediately contiguous to the subject property lying to the
east), without prior written consent of the City of Shorewood."
U. The Applicant shall submit a signage plan for the property in compliance with the
requirements of the Shorewood City Code.
3. That the Applicants have satisfied the criteria for the grant of a variance under the
Shorewood City Code and has established an undue hardship as defined by Minnesota Statutes.
4. That based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants to the Applicants a
setback variance for the parking lot as shown on Exhibit B, subject to the conditions set forth
herein.
5. That the City Administrator /Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a
certified copy of this resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of
Titles.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 27th day of
November 2000.
WOODY LOVE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRADLEY J. NIELSEN, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR
n
�s.criRtion ,
irce= 1:
t
iat.part of Government Lot 2, Section 34, Township 117, Range 23, described
follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly extension of the
ist line of Lot 24, -Auditor's Subdivision Number 313, Hennepin County,
Lnnesota° with a line drawn parallel with and 25.00 feet Southerly from the
enter line of the railroad track of the Chicago and North Western
cansportation CompanY (formerly the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway
)Mary); thence Westerly along said parallel line a distance of 621.26 feet;
aence Southeasterly 29.64 feet, more or less, to a point which is on a line
cawn parallel with and 50.00 feet Southerly from center line of said railroad
rack and 606.53 feet Westerly along the last described'parailel line from the
outherly extension of the East line of said Lot 24; thence Westerly along the
ast described parallel line to the West line of said Government Lot 2; thence
oath along said West line. to the-center line of Road Number 14; thence
ortheasterly along the center line of County Road Number 19 to the Southerly
xtension of the East line of said Lot 24; thence North along said extension
o the point of beginning Hennepin County, Miftasot`a.
arcs! 2:
hat part of Government Lot 2, Section 34, Township 117, Range 23, described
s follows: Beginning at the intersection of the East line of Lot 24,
Auditor's Subdivision Number 313, Hennepin county, xinnesota','with a line
sawn parallel with and 18.00 feet Northerly from the center line of the
, ailroad track of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company
formerly the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company); thence Westerly
long said parallel line a distance of 639.21 feet; thence Northwesterly to
:he Southwest corner of Lot 25, 'Auditor's Subdivision Number 313, Hennepin
:ounty, Minnesota'; thence Eastsrly along the Southerly line of said Lot 25 to
:he Southerly extension of the East line of said Lot 24; thence South along
;aid extension to•the point of beginning.
:xcept,.that portion of the above parcels 1 and 2 embraced within Lot 297
Aditor!s subdivision Number 135 Hennepin County, Minnesota.
?arcel3:
Chat part of Lot 25. lying Westerly of the following described line:
:ommencing at -the Southeasterly corner of Lot 24; thence South along the East
Line of said Lot 25 a distance of 24.30 feet; thence deflecting right 79
3egrees 25• minutes 40 seconds a distance of 406.48 feet; thence deflecting
right 94 degrees 49 minutes 20 seconds to a point on the Southerly line of
said Lot 25 which is the true point of beginning of the line being describedi
thence continuing along last described line to the shore line of Lake
Minnetonka and there ending, "Auditor's Subdivision Number 313, Hennepin
Cnunty, Minnesota."
Together with a 12 foot easement for road purposes, the center line of which
is described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of Lot 24 of
said Auditor's Subdivision; thence South along the last line of said Lot 25, a
distance of 24.30 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described;
thence deflecting right 81 degrees 39 minutes a distance of 379.0 feet; thence
deflecting right 58 degrees 52 minutes a distance of 46.06 feet to a point on
the last line of above - described property and there ending, tasPshown 3} ddead
Document Number 1052891, riles of Registrar of Titles;
Parcel 4:
That part of Government Lot 1, Section 34, township 117, Range 23, described
as Lot 293, Auditor's Subdivision No. 135 and adjacent 60 feet of
Minneapolis and St. Paul Suburban Railway abandoned right -of -way (NOTE: Lot
293 all under water)..
Exhibit A
2 tiL1P:.
o il
i T
di
Si
era r,.ayyi.
zo
..........
MOM
k'16 it
7
l
- 77a-
'77
� �� i i {r ��{ r''t d1. __ ,ll i ! ., f� ! I 47{� ..
'4�` � � , _11� t� -- � � � � —� I Ajl ' t wl._. l ! — � _- _. i�, -,�
r—z
1.
FIF= I.
77�
4 it
!
sx"',-v�ih N.t k'aa:• -
. ': t - �` Z•15 �.' �"a w6' � ti s 13_ r a,^i -.... .. -
1
/ / y `✓ t. '4 r.? sa L\ kp ti A:a !mss it u !Y /J, .\u �`' t 1 � j
• 1 .. � • '.g r"'^tY<yjei, ti't - '< V .. .i Q `1 S.
U V / tr,Y � �'• t r„.5[ - A p r .. � p,)AC� ::: • %�.� \• \r `.. S
f • � '�1�1[al't^'js- 8� d -„ . r sS ,• fll'l� - I 4 � _ �/ tt .i� — I _, ,,...,
.I �ti ) •�- „t� /t�A�y y Sn, :z`}t. � ' � .. ' �'� • ssts� � y L ` s..c- .....
.r .jam y � "�%,r• L IP ^ .y y �aJ � ti' �. �. a,�.Y. ; � �, i�i; 1 �`•� •�'„s.�.av a,�e� :..: sf • t
.y a s f _ r ' �, I � r � . In sad �• ' v • in=.'s is-
'r
' t f9• i.ae L
j • ...�. - �r � , ."ice f t.
�` - ¢ r a w • ..v�� y' . i ' 1 � •: M• , t S ; r. � tr J • l " _- =='' "� g � �.
i;i °�_— _.. _.._i._ .�;N"�tP , C ' vyt"_•-- '.:•.... -•` .� �.•I IJ C ntLJr � :_,
ads L�`— ` ---- :� ,,..• T r--�, . \• •tt
_ �/s r ,R•i.a . y ate: ° °' �+, � y v - .1' i � `�jJ�pj :s t ` � �—
vk
[IA ymo` j� \Y�l
A 1 !� � ). G off`• "v � Jn
• •. t� .�'�� s f j 1 t fop
. i � .�� . J� /jam ._ __._ ___ -.. - - • J _ _J..cC'�_ -.__ .
' � - � ud`� Hank IL L•x Kam"•''
. - � fir: , i sll0ii 1a4itilaNw
Jai1i
I
Q
s
W
I- NUM : LMC L)
F HX NU. : f4VLlW8S
Sep. 2 ( :200 r 10:2 eHM t'1
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Q U I E T W A T E R
P Statement
3- 24 -86
Post -its Fax Note 7671 oaf �i A e ° es ►
Phone # Phone #
Fax it , i'7i r fr 1 .. Fax #
�V7-6
Attachment IV
FKUM : LMUD
F HX NU. : e45'308t> Sep. 2 r Bald r 10: 2 rHM K2
CAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
A POLICY FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF QUIET WATERS AREA
ON LAKE MINNETONK4
GOAL The goal of recreational management should be to insure each recreational
demapd the highest possible availability of satisfaction of that demand con-
sistent wXth satisfaction of other recreational demands and preservation
Of the Lake itself as a recreational resource.
The goal of the Quiet Waters program is to maintain and improve the quality
of recreational experience on lake minnetonka in the least restrictive manner.
POLICY It is the policy of the District to establish Quiet Waters areas in
strictly limited areas of the Lake where public safety, environmental and
recreational needs are demonstrated consistent with the quiet waters and
recreational, goals of the District.
GEiIERAL- To improve the recreational experience on Lake Minnetonka the District
has established general pollution, winter use, water structures, and boating
safety ruses, and has restricted activity in some traditionally congested
areas (such as channels) using the quiet waters Concept. 1.
The District has adopted lakewide regulations including the establishment of
Quiet Waters areas within 150 of the shoreline or lake structures around the
Lake and general speed limits which may affect specific Quiet Waters proposals.
F KUM : LMUI)
F HX NU. : e45ybH5 Sep. :2 r 200 e 10: 2UHM HJ
Lake 11i.nnetonka C:o77sL-rvation bistrict ?..
The District has responded to expressed need to improve the effectiveness of
Quiet Waters areas by modification, i.e.:
I. charging the boundaries of regulated areas.
2. changing numbers and /or location of Slow buoys.
3. changing time and type of regulation.
4. requesting special attention by the Water Patrol.
5. placing of special regulatory signs.
6. placing of general information signs at accesses.
7. circulation of boating information folders.
8_ other.
M430NS FOR Many reasons have been expressed for requesting Quiet
Waters areas or changes, among them:
I. Excessive noise.
2. 'traffic congestion.
3. General high, lPtey of 'bnar5n g activi 1'V.
4. Waterskiimg.
5. Intimidation of swimmers by wraterskiers.
6. 'Waterskiing too close to structures or boats_
7. Wash and wake damage to boats and dockage.
$. Wash and wake damage to the shoreline.
9. To preserve natural areas.
10. To protect fishing areas.
11. To reduce environmental impact.
12. Area too small for general boating,.
F` UM : LMCD
F HX NU. : e4t'30 t5
Sep. 2 e 200 r 1W: ;--IUHM H4
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
13. Smaller boats need protection.
14. Quiet Waters needed on weekends, not during week.
15. Only area affected needs Quiet Waters, not whole bay.
M May encourage weed growth.
17. Rule changes should be based on accident records.
18. Establishment should include adequate signing and enforcement.
19. Recent increase in traffic.
20. Normal wave action is entensified by power boats.
21. Navigattonal buoys are ignored.
22. Area is critical under LXCD boat density standards.
23. Buoy placement changes needed to be effective.
24. Specified areas of shore-zone need buoys.
25. Area is really an extended channel (high traffic) area.
26. Lack of adequate law enforcement.
27. Slow buoys are more effective for traffic control than navigation markers.
28. Mixing of drinking and boating near transient facilities.
29. Increased traffic around marinas, restaurants, launching ramps or other
multiple facilities.
30. To protect sailboat mooring areas.
31. Large waves of 4 feet to 6 feet from wakes.
32. Area is part of the "circle" route.
33. Other.
3.
F I JM : LMC D
FHx NU. : e4by01485 Sep. 2 e ebb a 10:28HM Pb
Lake MinneetMka ConservaLimi District
4.
CRITERIA for det urminijig Need Lo consider t e: stablis11t73ent of ') Q uiet Waters
area
1. Determination of need as expressed by the applicant.
2. Determinatim of the boating safety record for the area.
3. Determination of LMCD boating density index for the area.
4. Observation of the Proposed Quiet Waters area during at least three normal
high -use periods for one boating season by the LHOD.
S. Determination of any natural or special geographic features of the area
which need to be considered.
6. Determination of any special boat;Lua or other use characteristics affecting
the area.
7. Conduct a public hearing to develop further information about the application.
B. Determination, of affects of the establishment of the Quiet Waters area on
nearby areas, or on the Lake as a whole.
9. Determination of whether or not the establishment of the Quiet Waters area
would be essentially of private or of general public benefit.
t
1 F FdUM LMC I)
4
FHX NU. : f45y168S Sep. 2l 216b 10:2SHM Hb
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 5.
30. Determination of.any effects on the public health, welfare, a-nd safety
and the most general public use of the bake.
Adopted by the bake Minnetonka Conservation District Board of Directors
this 24th day of September, 1985.
/a/ Robert Rascop
Robert Rascop, Chairman
ATTEST:
/s/ Frank Mixa
Frank Mira, Executive Director
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, 20 NOVEMBER 2007
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:00 P.M.
Present: Chair Schmitt; Commissioners Gagne, Geng, Gniffke, Hutchins, Meyer, and Ruoff,
Planning Director Nielsen; and Councilmember Callies
Absent: None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
16 October 2007
Gagne moved, Hutchins seconded, Approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 16
October 2007 as presented. Motion passed 6/0/1 with Ruoff abstaining due to his absence at the
meeting.
1. L -R ZONING DISTRICT TEXT AMENDMENT AND C.U.P AMENDMENT (continued
from 16 October 2007)
Applicant: Shorewood Yacht Club
Location: 600 West Lake Street
Chair Schmitt stated this item was continued from the October 16, 2007, Planning Commission meeting.
He then stated at that meeting the Commission directed Staff to prepare a draft resolution; the
Commissioners had received three versions of the draft resolution (which included the revision it received
at the meeting). Director Nielsen explained the most recent version included a change to Item A.7 under
Conclusions; the change, which was recommended by Councilmember Callies, included a provision
which linked the enforcement and monitoring to the interim conditional use permit (C.U.P.). Nielsen then
read the revised Item A.7.
Commissioner Gagne noted that the interim C.U.P. allowed for the Shorewood Yacht Club (SYC) to rent
35 slips for power boat use; that would allow a total 40 power boats to be harbored in the water at the
SYC (the SYC was already allowed three power boats which were used by management, one power boat
for the residents of 5585 Timber Lane, and the Excelsior Fire District's rescue boat).
Director Nielsen explained this request also required an amendment to the City Code Section 1201.24
Subd. 10.d regarding the L -R, Lakeshore Recreational District. He then reviewed the draft amendment
(the changes are italicized) — "d. Issuance of a license shall take into consideration the historic use of the
site under consideration with respect to the use of power boats. With the exception of power boats
necessary for the operation of the facility and publicly -owned watercraft operated by public safety
personnel, water harboring of boats on any site in Gideon's Bay shall be limited to sailing boats only.
Upon a favorable recommendation by the Planning Commission, the City Council may license a limited
Exhibit C -1
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Excerpt - 20 November 2007
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
20 November 2007
Page 2 of 6
number of power boats, provided the essential character of the property as a sailing facility is
maintained."
Nielsen then explained the Planning Commission must first take action to recommend the text
amendment and then take action to recommend the draft resolution.
Commissioner Geng stated he had a question with regard to the following statement in the Interim C.U. P.
Item A.7 under Conclusions — "The determination shall be based upon the number and nature of
complaints received and compliance with this permit." He questioned how complaints without merit
would be addressed. Director Nielsen stated the Interim C.U.P. specified the Staff would monitor
verifiable complaints filed through the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department ( SLMPD); it would
ultimately result in a judgment call. Chair Schmitt stated he shared Commissioner Geng's concern; during
previous Planning Commission discussions on this topic the subjectivity of complaints had been
discussed which was why the nature of the complaints had to be considered as well as the number of
complaints. Commissioner Ruoff questioned how the situation would be handled if there was one
verifiable complaint filed through the SLMPD and then there were 65 others that had not been filed
through the SLMPD. Nielsen stated if, for example, the City received a complaint during normal business
hours that there were power boats docked at slips other than those designated Staff could go down and
research the complaint.
In response to a question from Commissioner Gagne, Director Nielsen explained at the end of the three -
year term for the Interim C.U.P. the Planning Commission would make a recommendation to the City
Council regarding converting the Interim C.U.P. to a permanent C.U.P. (which would require another
Public Hearing), continuing the Interim C.U.P., or discontinuing the Interim C.U.P.
With regard to a question from Commissioner Ruoff about the "essential character of the property"
statement in the text amendment, Director Nielsen explained the original Staff report recommended the
number of rental slips that could be used for power boats should be less than the 50 percent requested to
keep with essential character.
Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, recommending approval of the draft text amendment to City
Code Section 1201.24 Subd. 10.d. Motion passed 7.0.
Gagne moved, Meyer seconded, recommending approval of the draft resolution of the Interim
Conditional User Permit for Michael Maloney and Gabriel Jabbour allowing a certain number of
power boats at the Shorewood Yacht Club, subject to the review and comment by the City
Attorney. Motion passed 7.0.
Chair Schmitt stated this item would be placed on the November 26, 2007, City Council meeting agenda
for consideration.
2. MINOR SUBDIVISION
Applicants: Dan and Milissa Nelson
Location: 25865 Birch Bluff Road
Director Nielsen stated Dan and Milissa Nelson's (25865 Birch Bluff Road) minor subdivision request
was continued from the October 16, 2007, Planning Commission meeting (which had been continued
from the October 2, 2007, meeting) pending receipt of a revised grading plan. Mr. Nelson had since
submitted a new plan which had been distributed to the Commission. Mr. Nelson had also submitted a
a -,Z
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
November 26, 2007
Page 3 of 15
and County legislators. She stated it was ICA's goal to see that everyone in need got signed up to receive
food stamps; residents were often intimated by the volume of information they had to sort through before
they could apply for food stamps. Ms. Buehler stated there were two upcoming ICA fundraisers; all the
proceeds from the fundraiser to be held on December 3, 2007 would go to the ICA.
Mayor Liz6e stated the rotary club she belonged to had held its meeting at the new ICA facility last week
and she was very impressed by the facility and the activity there.
6. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
7. PARKS - Report by Representative
A. Report on Park Commission Meeting Held November 13, 2007
Director Brown reported on matters considered and actions taken at a November 13, 2007, Park
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting).
8. PLANNING - Report by Representative
Director Nielsen stated there were two items considered at a November 20, 2007, Planning Commission
meeting and he would discuss them in great detail next on the agenda.
A. L -R Zoning District Text Amendment and C.U.P Amendment
Applicant: Shorewood Yacht Club
Location: 600 West Lake Street
Administrator Dawson stated the public hearing was held during the October 2, 2007, Planning
Commission meeting to take public comment on a proposed Lakeshore — Recreational zoning district text
amendment and the Shorewood Yacht Club's (SYC) request for an amendment to its Conditional Use
Permit (C.U.P.). He then stated the City had received a great deal of communication on these items; all
of the communication received as of 5:15 P.M. this evening had been distributed to Council. The
communication was both in support of and against the SYC's request.
Director Nielsen stated there were two zoning items for consideration before Council that evening. The
first item was a text amendment to the City's Lakeshore Recreational (L -R) zoning district which would
allow the City to consider allowing powerboats at multiple -dock facilities on Gideon Bay. The second
item was an amendment to the SYC's current C.U.P. which would allow the SYC to rent no more than 35
of its slips for powerboat use. The 35 dock slips for powerboats would be in addition to the ones that
were currently allowed (the SYC was allowed three powerboats which were used by management, one
powerboat for the residents of 5585 Timber Lane, and the Excelsior Fire District's rescue boat). He noted
the SYC had requested they be allowed to rent 50 percent of its 118 dock slips (this included the one slip
for the EFD) for powerboat use. He explained the Planning Commission had considered a great deal of
information that had been provided. The Commission discussed the items at its October 2, October 16,
and November 20, 2007, meetings. After careful deliberations, the Commission decided to recommend
an ordinance amending Section 1201.24 Subd. 10.d (L -R Licenses) of the City Code; it also
recommended approval of a resolution granting the SYC's an Interim C.U.P. which would allow the SYC
an additional 35 powerboats to be water harbored at the SYC and they would all be harbored at pier 4.
Exhibit D -1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Excerpt — 26 November 2007
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
November 26, 2007
Page 4 of 15
The interim C.U.P. would be in effect for three years to assess the impact of the powerboats; at the end of
that three -year period a public hearing would be held with public notice to determine whether or not the
use should be continued on a permanent basis.
Nielsen stated the property currently consisted of three separate parcels of land and they were to have
been combined as part of the last C.U.P.; the parcels must be legally combined as a condition of the
resolution. In addition to attempting to rent slips to City residents first in accordance with a provision in
the City Code (a condition of the resolution), the applicant proposed a discount for the residents.
With regard to the number of additional powerboats allowed, Nielsen stated the Planning Commission
thought the 35 slips on pier 4 at the SYC (which was the pier furthest away from the residents) would be
relatively easy to monitor. The Commission also though the applicant should specify where the five
powerboats currently allowed would be docked; the applicant had provided such a plan. The
configuration of pier 4 limited the size of the boat that could be docked to 30 feet maximum.
With regard to quiet waters designation, Nielsen stated the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
(LMCD) had advised that a quiet waters designation existed 150 feet out from all shorelines and from
structures such as docks on Lake Minnetonka. Staff had suggested it was possible for the City to request
an expansion of the quiet waters designation from the LMCD. A relatively easily defined and logical
area was described by drawing a line from the shoreline north of the Timber Lane cul -de -sac to Duck
Island to Frog Island to the peninsula at Lafayette Avenue. The Planning Commission thought most of
the area was already designated as quiet waters; if the LMCD were to classify the entire area as quiet
waters that would prohibit property owners from activities such as skiing. Therefore the resolution did
not contain any condition regarding quiet waters.
Nielsen stated Staff had suggested a trial solution of a three -year interim C.U.P. which would be
monitored on an annual basis and the results reported back to the Planning Commission. The
Commission had questioned what types of things would be monitored during that trial period. He
explained verifiable complaints and the nature of the complaints would be monitored; any complaint
filed through the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) would be considered a verifiable
complaint. If, for example, the City received a complaint during normal business hours that there were
power boats docked at slips other than those designated, Staff could go down and research the complaint.
Nielsen noted that Council had been provided a formal ordinance approving the text amendment that
evening; the Council packet contained the actual text amendment.
Nielsen explained the proposed resolution incorporated the original resolution adopted in 2000 which set
forth all the requirements for the SYC's original C.U.P. as modified by the proposed change.
Mike Maloney, 231 Third Street and co -owner of the Shorewood Yacht Club, and Gabriel Jabbour, 985
Tonkawa Road and co -owner of the Shorewood Yacht Club, stated they were present to answer any
questions Council may have.
Mayor Lizee stated a public hearing had already been held to take public comment; but, if there was any
one in the audience who had not provided comment at the public hearing, or had not called or emailed or
written the City with their comments then Council would be willing to take their 1 — 2 minute long
comments.
P. Z
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
November 26, 2007
Page 5 of 15
Steve Haskins, 5455 Timber Lane stated most of the pertinent information had already been published in
local newspapers. He became a resident of the City 27 years ago. Shortly after that he had attended
various discussions regarding access to the Lake. At that time he was concerned about the physical
number of boats on the Lake; he continued to have that concern. He stated if a person was out on the
Lake on the weekend it was not enjoyable due to the volume of boats. To add another 35 powerboats to
Gideon Bay (and therefore the rest of the Lake) would only add to the problem. He asked Council to
consider denying the request for the benefit of the Gideon Bay residents and the users of the entire Lake.
Mike Kramer, 5425 Timber Lane stated he had been a resident of the City for 52 years with the last 27
of them being at his current address. He stated the residents on Timber Lane were comprised of either
two- wage -earner families or retired individuals. He recited a passage from a nineteenth century novel,
Jane Eyre. He then reviewed what had changed from his vantage point in the last 32 years after John
Cross had first established the Yacht Club (now known as the Shorewood Yacht Club). With the sailboat
marina operating at the SYC the number of canoeists, rowers, and kayakers had increased significantly in
the small sub -bay of Gideon Bay where they are generally free from the wakes of powerboats. He stated
in the past the City Council had been excellent stewards of the small amount of lakeshore resource on the
Lower Lake. He explained that Mr. Cross's request for additional sailboat dockage had been
recommended, but before the additional dockage was installed Mr. Cross began to market slips for
powerboat use which was contrary to what he had told the neighbors of his property; therefore, Council
had denied his request. He cautioned Council to be sensitive to responding to what, from his vantage
point, was essentially an economic argument; financial hardship was seldom allowed in the variance
process in the City. He stated Mr. Jabbour had not kept it a secret that he wanted the SYC to make more
money by renting dock slips for powerboat use. He then stated from his vantage point the Council would
put itself at serious risk for the appearance of subsidizing a commercial enterprise at the prospect of the
reduction of the livability of the neighborhood and the congestion of a very small part of Gideon Bay. He
asked Council to please continue its good stewardship of the most livable city in the western suburbs by
denying the SYC's request.
Mayor Lizee stated the Council was considering an application on the SYC's property.
Gene Marien, 5815 Echo Road stated he was a SYC sailboat member and as most of the City's residents
he did not live on the Lake. He was able to enjoy the Lake because he had the availability of the SYC. He
thought there were a lot of residents of the City who did not live on the Lake that would like a place
available like the SYC. He stated he thought the SYC was a beautiful facility for the City. He commented
the SYC members wondered every 2 — 3 years whether or not the SYC would remain in business. He
then stated he would like the SYC to remain in business and he understood the problems the SYC was
experiencing trying to increase the number of sailboats at the SYC. He would like the SYC to remain
sailboats only but that was not realistic. He would support granting a request for a small number of
powerboats of limited size.
PeM Ryan, 31395 Casco Circle, Navarre stated he also owned the property located at 422 Lafayette
Avenue and he had previously lived at 430 Lafayette Avenue for 8 years. He stated the applicant's
request letter stated "we are seeking this change as the demand for sailboat slips has diminished to the
point where we have currently leased 52 of our 117 slips ". He then stated he had not been privy to how
many slips had been leased at the time the current owners purchased the SYC. He went on to state the
request letter stated "the purpose of the L -R zoning district was to give Shorewood residents access to the
Lake ". He noted the letter did not refer to the statement in the City Code which said "it behooved the city
to subject the possible areas available for access to the lake to close scrutiny and limitation so as to
insure that use of the land does not unduly infringe upon property rights and public health, safety and
9.3
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
November 26, 2007
Page 6 of 15
welfare of others residing on nearby residential sites ". He distributed a graphic depicting the residential
locations in the Gideon Bay area of the people who signed a petition to deny the request. He stated
granting the request would result in an infringement upon property owners' rights; it would pose
additional threats to health, safety, and welfare; and it would result in additional environmental impact,
erosion, and damage to the shoreline. He distributed a graphic from the Hennepin County Sheriff's Patrol
which he thought depicted that once a boat was past the first set of buoys (especially near Lafayette
Avenue) it could speed up. He commented that according to the Sheriff's Patrol, the area past the first set
of buoys should not be posted as quiet waters. He stated the request letter stated "Failing this change, we
will need to seek other ways to make this property meet its financial obligations "; that type of threat had
been presented before. He stated at a Planning Commission meeting Director Nielsen had stated that the
SYC property could support 12 condominiums. That number would result in an additional 10 — 12 boats
on the Lake at the same time. He then stated Planning Commission Chair Schmitt was quoted to say "if it
doesn't work as a sailboat -only marina and it has to close up its doors, who knew what the property could
be developed as ". He suggested the number of powerboats allowed should not be any more than what
would be allowed if the property were developed into a residential area. He again asked what had
changed since 2003 to have the Council consider allowing 40 power boats at the SYC when only 10 — 12
condominiums could possibly be developed there. He stated Director Nielsen's report dated September
26, 2007, stated (with regard to the City Code) "these criteria should guide City officials in determining
the acceptability of the proposed changes ".
Stanley Shapiro, 14614 Karyl Drive, Minnetonka stated he had a sailboat on the Lake for over 30 years.
He had a vested interest having the SYC stay in business because there were not many marinas on the
Lake for sailboats. He then stated since 2003 the volume of boat traffic had increased substantially
around Gideon Bay and Frog Island; the Minnetonka Portable Dredging Company was very active and it
made a great deal of noise doing business; and there had been an increase in non - residents and lakeshore
property owners in the area waterskiing and pulling people on various flotation devices. He suggested if
the powerboats in the area were going to be a problem maybe the boating recreational activities (except
for anchoring a boat for fishing) could be limited to entering and exiting Gideon Bay. He stated he had
observed residents water ski from their docks and he thought that created problems. He had also observed
a resident wakeboarding and he thought that created more havoc than other boating activities. He stated
the number of boaters on Gideon Bay had increased since 2003 because there were more boats on the
Lake already.
Mr. Jabbour stated that although he was reluctant to speak this evening he thought it prudent that he
provide some comment. He commented that since the American Indians lived on the lakeshore a lot had
changed. He stated the SYC was in the mode of rejuvenate or liquidate (a mode of every business). He
noted Mr. Cross had requested that the SYC be allowed to rent all of its slips for powerboat use. He then
stated he and Mr. Maloney understood they had a right to request a change and they asked to be allowed
to use 50 percent of the dock slips for water - harboring of powerboats; they did not challenge the
Planning Commission for fewer than that. He explained a 2004 LMCD and DNR joint study indicated
there had been a 25 percent reduction at the peak time in the number of powerboats on the Lake; also, at
any given time the number of powerboats harbored at a marina that left a marina harbor was 21 percent
and at a maximum peak it was 29 percent. Therefore, if there were 35 additional powerboats harbored at
the SYC the maximum that would leave the SYC at any given time would be 9 — 10. He stated he had
demonstrated his ability to convince boaters who harbored their boats at his other marinas to be good
custodians of the Lake. He commented he believed in allowing everyone public access to the Lake.
Mr. Jabbour then stated in 1992 the Lake Access Task Force identified the SYC property as having the
potential to become a Lake access site. In 1994 the DNR, the LMCD, the Cities of Shorewood and Tonka
1P4
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
November 26, 2007
Page 7 of 15
Bay, and the Metropolitan Council approved it. He clarified that he was not threatening anything. He
stated he wanted the SYC to remain in business to be able to a render a service to the Lake communities.
He noted that the SYC was the only yacht club on the Lake that catered to non - racing sailors. He stated
the SYC had commissioned a survey by members of the marketing fraternity at the University of
Minnesota Carlson School of Management which documented the decline of the sailing market as well as
the desire for residents to have access to rental dock slips. He explained that 2100 surveys had been sent
out and approximately 20 percent had been returned. Based on a rating of 7 being high and 1 being very
unlikely, the respondents average was close to 5 with regard to the likelihood of their docking a boat at a
marina that gave priority to the residents of the City and the average was close to 6 for docking at a
marina that offered a discount to residents.
Dave Ronal, 55 Crabapple Lane, Tonka Bay stated in 1985 he would observe approximately 25 boats on
Gideon Bay on a very busy day; this past summer the average was 34. Gideon Bay was known as a great
bay to be in for waterskiing and floating around on. The Bay had become so busy it was harder to enjoy.
He questioned what the environmental and lake use impact of the increased number of powerboats would
be. He suggested someone determine what the Lake can bear. He stated he appreciated the SYC may
have to increase its boat harboring density to be economically viable; but to ask for a zoning change now
was presumptuous.
Mayor Lizee stated there were a number of entities that dealt with public waters (e.g., the State, the DNR,
the LMCD, etc.); and although the City had some jurisdiction with regard to shoreline, it looked to those
other entities for legislation and help regarding boat density and other legal issues.
Dan Frederick, 422 Lafayette Avenue, Excelsior stated he had been renting the house on that property
for the last two years and he and his wife were building a house a few properties down (the property was
located on the south shore of Gideon Bay). He explained the rental property was located at the choke
point between Frog Island and Excelsior where the buoys were located. He stated on any given day he
could call the SLMPD to report boats that did not honor the minimum wake restriction; it did not seem
realistic that people would call the SLMPD that many times to ensure they had a verifiable complaint. He
commented that he moved from Wayzata Bay so he could live in a quieter area on the Lake. He stated
from his vantage point power boaters used the Lake differently from sailors, in particular during the
evening. He expressed concern that if the SYC was allowed to rent 35 dock slips for powerboat use that
it would eventually request more. He stated the Planning Commission had stated there was a difference
between a marina and a yacht club. He then stated from his perspective the only reason that the
application would be approved would be for Mr. Jabbour to make more money.
James Hancock, 23800 Lawtonka Drive stated he kayaked on Gideon Bay and he harbored a sailboat at
SYC. He commented he was the President of the Gideon Cove Homeowners Association which consisted
of 12 twin- homes. He stated those homeowners had no place to harbor their powerboats on the Lake. He
commended the Planning Commission for recommending a plan for the public to be able to use the Lake
as they should be able to. He stated the viability of the SYC was an asset to the neighborhood and the
City.
Todd Frostad, owner of the Southlake Office Building located at 23505 Smithtown Road stated if the
SYC was not able to be economically viable then someone like himself would acquire the property and
develop it for other uses. The quaintness of the SYC area today would change.
Peter Watson, 5495 Timber Lane stated he had lived at that location for 35 years. He stated he would
like to have the recreational quality of Gideon Bay and the rest of the Lake preserved. He stated he would
D•5
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
November 26, 2007
Page 8 of 15
like to understand what the impact on the City's carbon footprint would be if the request were approved.
He commented that other cities around the Country were beginning to work very hard to try and reduce
their carbon footprint. He asked that Council vote no as its way to do a little bit in the right direction on
that.
Tom Nicol, 3895 Glacier Count, Minnetrista stated he was a business owner in the City. He then stated
he had been working with Mr. Jabbour as a captain out Mr. Jabbour's marina, as well as using his
services over the years. He also stated the comment that Mr. Jabbour made his request only to make more
money was ridiculous and a disservice to a man that had done a great deal for the Lake. He went on to
state as a business owner he would be the first in line to request the opportunity to rent a dock slip for his
powerboat. He commented that many residents wanted access to the Lake. He stated the character attack
on Mr. Jabbour was unacceptable.
Deb Termer, 438 Lafayette Avenue stated she had lived on her property for 22 years. She then stated
there was a difference between how lakeshore property owners used and respected the lake and non -
lakeshore residents. She was concerned about what could be the lack of accountability of the non -
lakeshore power boaters to the City and the residents.
John Mielke, 16311 Limerick Lane, Minnetonka stated he was a SYC member and a SYC
Boardmember. He stated the SYC had a social membership and any person who harbored a boat at the
SYC was a member. He stated the SYC members were held accountable and the powerboat members
would be held to the same standards.
Duane Bagdons, 5585 Timber Lane stated his property was located next to the SYC property. He
commented he had a powerboat and he loved to fish. He stated he had empathy for the Council for having
to make the decision as Council had heard good arguments in support of and against the request. He then
stated he would like the SYC to remain economically viable under the current use or the requested use.
He asked Council to approve the request.
Mayor Lizee stated the Council did not make decisions based on the number of people that were in
support or against an application. The application was considered by Council based on its merits, after a
public hearing had occurred and evaluated by the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City
Council.
Councilmember Callies questioned how a three -year timeframe for the interim C.U.P. was arrived at.
Director Nielsen explained that the Planning Commission thought a one -year timeframe would not be
adequate to fairly assess the success or failure of the situation. The Planning Commission agreed with the
suggestion in the Staff report that the interim C.U.P. be in effect for three years; Staff would provide the
Commission with a status report annually.
Councilmember Callies stated the applicant had a right to make a request about the use of its property.
Tonight Council was considering the applicant's request to rent out a percentage of its existing dock slips
for powerboat use. She stated she did not agree with the statements made earlier that lakeshore owners
were more concerned and well behaved individuals than non - lakeshore owners. She explained one of the
reasons for considering an interim C.U.P. rather than a permanent C.U.P. was to allow the City an
opportunity to assess the impact of water - harboring an additional 35 powerboats at the SYC. She stated if
a resident had problems with a neighbor having loud overnight parties repeatedly then they should file a
complaint with the SLMPD or the City. She commented that economic factors were a fact of life for
anyone, but the economic viability of the SYC was not germane to the issue. Council needed to consider
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
November 26, 2007
Page 9 of 15
whether or not the applicant's request was permitted based on the City Code as well as considering what
the effect granting the request would have on the Lake and the SYC's neighbors.
Callies went on to state based on the information that had been provided and discussed, she thought it
would be appropriate to grant an interim C.U.P. Public access to the Lake was important. She again
stated the request did not include the addition of dock slips. She commented things do change over time.
She stated the applicant requested it be allowed to rent a percentage of its dock slips for powerboat use.
She commented that many people used the Lake and many people used the Lake inappropriately. She had
not heard any comments that there had been particular problems with boaters who water - harbored their
boats at the SYC. There had been comments about powerboat operators, water skiers, wake boarders and
power boaters partying on their boats into the evening but there was no evidence linking that to the SYC.
She explained that when she drove around the area near the SYC and nearby properties on Gideon Bay
and in the City, it appeared that all of those Lakeshore residents had powerboats. She stated it was
difficult for her to make a distinction such that powerboats should not be allowed at the SYC yet they
should be and are allowed at many more places on the Lake. She then stated it was prudent for the City to
exercise caution; that was the reason for the interim C.U.P. which would allow the City the opportunity
to monitor the effects (both positive and negative) of the additional powerboats. She stated she was in
support of granting the interim C.U.P.
Councilmember Wellens stated he was also in support of granting the interim C.U.P. The new SYC
owners realized it was not appropriate to request the SYC be allowed to use 100 percent of its dock slips
for water harboring of powerboats; the previous owners had requested it be allowed to use 100 percent of
its slips for powerboat use and that request had been denied. The interim C.U.P. would be re- evaluated in
three years. At that time it could be possible to consider petitioning the LMCD to make all of Gideon Bay
a quiet waters area. The purpose of the L -R zoning district was to address the Lakeshore recreational
needs of the City. The Lake had been described as a park and it did not make sense to have a park if
people couldn't access the park. Granting the applicant's request would increase public access to the
Lake which was in concert with the L -R zoning district. The City's residents would have a priority to rent
the dock slips and they would receive a residential discount. He went on to state there were a lot of
people who were hostile toward and suspicious of businesses and business owners. He stated businesses
and businesses owners were of great benefit to the community; he expressed his gratitude toward them.
With regard to what had changed, he cited the example that Excelsior had many regulations on store
fronts; some of its storefronts were boarded up because Excelsior was not willing to change its
regulations to conform to how the economy was changing. From his vantage point, he thought
government needed to change to realize the changes in the marketplace and to support and accommodate
businesses to some degree. He stated the DNR and the LMCD identified the area as one lacking in Lake
access based on a survey of boaters; the LMCD and the DNR had encouraged the Lake area cities to
contribute to the goal of a more equitable distribution of access to the Lake.
Councilmember Wellens questioned if the applicants would be willing not to water - harbor any boat that
had an exhaust system above the water. Mr. Jabbour explained that Lake Minnetonka was the only lake
in the United States that a decibel -sound rule that was 2 decibels below the national average (an 82-
decibel sound rule); boats with motors having a decibel level higher than that were against the law. Also,
it was not legal to have an exhaust system that could be switched to be above or below the water. He
stated the SYC intended to abide by those rules and it would ensure that all boats water- harbored at the
SYC were within compliance with State Statute. He stated the SYC's contracts with it members were
extremely extensive.
V-1
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
November 26, 2007
Page 10 of 15
Councilmember Turgeon stated she was not in support of the interim C.U.P.; she did not think it was an
appropriate use. She commented that in 2003 the previous owners had requested it be allowed to use 100
percent of it docks slips for powerboat use. The Planning Commission recommended that request be
denied because it was inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan in two areas — the natural
resources section (which related to the natural and aesthetic quality of the lakeshore environment and the
reduction of lake pollution); and to the protect the lakeshore from over intensification and use and
development, along with protection of the residential neighborhoods from adverse environmental impacts
(including noise, air, and visual pollution). She stated from her vantage point she did not think anything
had changed since 2003; she had the same concerns that she had in 2003. In 2003 the Council upheld the
Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the request.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he was not in support of the interim C.U.P. He commented that this
request was a contentious issue. He stated from his vantage point it was strictly a financial discussion.
The SYC appeared not to be viable without changing the use of its property. The City had a long history
of stating economics were not a reason for considering a variance or change. He stated earlier in the year
the Council had a contentious discussion about the Upper Minnetonka Yacht Club's use of some of its
dock slips for powerboat use (which was located on Enchanted Island). The Council ultimately adopted a
resolution to clarify the resolution which granted the UMYC a C.U.P. to dock or moor boats; the original
resolution inadvertently omitted the word "sail" in front of "boats ". He considered the SYC's request to
be similar to, if not exactly the same as, the UMYC's. The UMYC was claiming financial hardship and it
needed to be allowed to use some of its dock slips for powerboat use to be financially viable; Council
denied that. He went on to state the interim C.U.P. referenced the SLMPD. He explained the SLMPD had
no jurisdiction over the Lake, and was incredulous that anyone thinks that the City will tool for this 3-
year interim C.U.P. He then stated the LMCD and the Hennepin County Sheriff's Department were not
effective in enforcing their responsibilities too. He related that he lived on the Lake and was a sailor and
power boater. He observed that the decibel rule is violated routinely every weekend, as was the speed
limit, and the no -wake zone, as is the unsafe boating practices. He did not think that Shorewood was
going to be able to monitor and track, and after three years with some good judgment, evaluate the
results. He again stated he was not in support of the request.
Mayor Lizee stated she was in support of the interim C.U.P. She stated Council was considering an
application for a C.U.P.; it was not considering a variance. She stated one of the things the interim C.U.P.
was intended to do was address behavior. She stated public access to the Lake was very important; the
Lake was an asset that everyone should share. The interim C.U.P. would open Lake access for more
residents to use and have safe harbor for their boats. The Lakeshore Residential District permitted the use
being requested. In 2003 the previous owners requested the SYC be allowed to use 100 percent of its
dock slips for powerboat use. The current owners' application requested the SYC be allowed to use 50
percent of its dock slips for powerboat use. There was a significant difference between the SYC's request
and the UMYC's request: the UMYC was located in a R -1C /S, Single- Family Residential /Shoreland
zoning district and the SYC was located in a Lakeshore Recreational District. She stated the Sheriff's
Water Patrol which would be dispatched through the 911 call center could also be responsible for calls.
She believed there would be a lot of monitoring of activities by members of the SYC.
Wellens moved, Callies seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 443 "An Ordinance Amending
Section 1201.24 Subd. 10.d. (L -R Licenses) of the Shorewood Zoning Code. Motion passed 3/2 with
Turgeon and Woodruff dissenting.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
November 26, 2007
Page 11 of 15
Wellens moved, Callies seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 075 "A Resolution Granting an
Interim Conditional Use Permit for Michael Maloney and Gabriel Jabbour Allowing a Certain
Number of Power Boats at the Shorewood Yacht Club."
Director Nielsen stated the interim C.U.P. required the applicant submit a plan subject to approval by the
Council. The applicant had submitted a plan and it had submitted a drawing depicting where all
powerboats would be located. The plan did not address the residential discount. He suggested the
applicant's plan be set aside for future consideration. He explained the plan could be approved by a
motion.
In response to a comment from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Nielsen stated he suggested the
resolution not be released for recording until the three separate parcels of land had been legally
combined.
The maker and seconder of the motion amended the motion to include approval subject to the
three parcels of land on the Shorewood Yacht Club property being legally combined.
Motion passed 3/2 with Turgeon and Woodruff dissenting.
Mayor Lizee recessed the meeting at 8:37 P.M.
Mayor Lizee reconvened the meeting at 8:45 P.M.
B. Minor Subdivision Request
Applicants: Dan and Melissa Nelson
Location: 25865 Birch Bluff Road
Director Nielsen stated Dan and Melissa Nelson owned the property at 25865 Birch Bluff Road, and they
proposed a minor subdivision of their property into two lots. He explained the property was zoned R-
1A /S, Single - Family Residential /Shoreland, and the westerly portion of the property was occupied by the
applicants' house. Both lots would exceed the width requirements of the R -IA district. The westerly lot
(Parcel A) would contain 45,895 square feet of area, exclusive of wetland area; the easterly lot (Parcel
B), or new lot, would contain 40,000 square feet of area, exclusive of the wetland area. The major issues
with the requested subdivision were site alteration and access.
With regard to access, Nielsen explained the existing home was accessed via a private driveway that was
located in the right -of -way of Second Street, a "paper street" that had never been improved. The second
property could share that common driveway. A common driveway could have a minimum width of
twelve feet which was the width of the driveway; twelve feet was all the existing right -of -way could
accommodate leaving five feet on each side of the traveled surface for snow storage. The issue was when
the lot to the east of Second Street (Block 5) needed to have access to it; if an access were to serve three
properties it would require, at a minimum, a private road. While private roads were highly discouraged,
the Comprehensive Plan allowed them where no other alternative existed, where no more than three
properties were served, and where a 50- foot -wide easement with an adequate turn- around was provided.
A Fire Code access road (a 20 -foot paved surface) was the minimum design for a private road. A private
road design could not be achieved within the 22- foot -wide Second Street right -of -way. Consequently,
the existing lot of record on the east side of the right -of -way (Block 5) could not be built upon unless an
additional right -of -way or easement was acquired and the Fire Code access road was constructed, placing
the entire cost of it on that owner.
ID •9
December 27, 2010
Brad Neilson
Shorewood Planning Commission
Background: In 2006/2007 Shorewood Yacht Club requested from the City of
Shorewood to be able to lease 50% of their slips for power boats. Giving the Yacht Club
the flexibility to manage the supply and demand, the ability to be more selective of its
customers, and to control it's business environment. The application resulted, after
extensive debate, with the interim use permit.
A substantial amount of discuss took place during the application and public hearing
process. One of the options was to give us less and see how it goes. We are requesting
from the Planning Commission at this time to be able to lease 50% of our slips to power
boats.
Findings: No more than 20% of the power boats were ever out on the lake at the same
time, even during peak times.
A substantial demand by citizens of Shorrewood exists for the mooring of power boats
(see attached memo to Mayor and Council).
Zero incidents occurred during the trial period, Shorewood Yacht Club is the only parcel
zoned in the city for waterfront recreation (to the best of my knowledge).
Both cities, Tonka Bay and Excelsior, provide their residents with municipal docks and
both Mayors stated at the December 8' 2010 LMCD meeting that they have more than
60 people on a waiting list.
On December 8, 2010 the city of Tonka Bay requested and was granted additional slips
going form 47 to 97 slips in Gideons Bay, The city of Excelsior went form 114 to 128.
(see attached email from LMCD).
On December 8, 2010 at the LMCD meeting none of those who were invited to comment
had any negative comments regarding either of those applications.
Applicant comments: I believe that we have clearly shown that the variety of concerns
regarding power boats that existed in the past did not materialize. We wish to give a
priority to sailboats and we would like to have the ability not to accept some clients who
may not be conducive to our overall policies such as quiet hours etc ... Having a fallback
position on potential power boats is extremely helpful. I enclosed a copy of the survey
that the Carlson School of Business conducted in Shorewood encompassing 100% of the
households with a phenomenal response rate. If I can be of any further help please do not
hesitate to call me.
Gabriel Jabbour
612 -599 -2838
Exhibit E -1
APPLICANT'S REQUEST
Dear Mayor Lizee and Council,
This years summary regarding Shorewood yacht club is as follows:
We had 31 power boats and 2 jet skis. Overall 19 Shorewood residents received 15% discount
and we accommodated 3 latecomers at Tonka
Bay Marina. Again this year we had the LMCD boat at no charge.
This year we hosted the 'Heart of Sailing' program for autistic children. Enclosed is a link to the
website for your convenience. If there are any
additional questions don't hesitate to call me at 612 -599 -2838 or Mike Maloney at 952 -221-
7387.
Respectfully,
Gabriel Jabbour
F -Z
Page 1 of 1
r1ADDIM IAPP(MIR
From: " Judd Harper" <jharper @lmcd.org>
To: "Gabriel Jabboue' <gabrieljabbour @msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:14 PM
Subject: Information Request
Below is information that you had requested.
City of'Tonka Bay - LMCD Multiple Dock License
• Main site
o 47 BSUs (37 Slips, 10 slides)
• Woodpecker Ridge Rd.
o Pre 2008 -20 BSUs
o 2008 to 2010 -10 BSUs
2010 Total = 57 BSUs
2011 Proposal = 97 BSUs
City of Excelsior - LMCD Multiple Dock License
• Pre 2003 - 80 BSUs
• 2003 - 116 BSUs (92 overnight BSUs, 24 transient)
2007 - 116 BSUs (100 overnight BSUs, 16 transient)
• 2009 - 114 BSUs (lost two BSUs at the end of Lafayette Ave- Wehrman Variance)
• 20I0 Proposal - 1.28 BSUs (112 overnight BSUs , 1.6 transient)
Both applications are scheduled for the 12/8/10 LMCD Board Meeting.
Please call me if you have any questions or need clarification.
Judd Harper
Administrative Technician
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
(952)745 -0789
Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature database 5625 (20101.1.16)
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
littp://www.eset.com
12/27/2010
F1.-3
Executive Summary: Shorewood Survey Results
In mid April, Pi Sigma Epsilon, a National Professional Fraternity for Marketing, Sales
Management and Selling from the University of Minnesota - Carlson School of Management was
engaged to study Shorewood residents' interests in special docking privileges and discounts at an
area boating facility.
Nearly 2100 surveys were sent out and an impressive 394 (18 %) surveys were returned. The
high response rate may be attributed to PSE a letter pointing out that respondents were helping a
student organization. (Many surveys offered wishes of good luck to the students.)
Key Findings
1. Shorewood Residents are More Likely to Dock at Marina if Given Resident Priority
• Respondents were in favor of a resident priority. At a level of 4.3 (on a 7 point scale -7
= very likely and 1 = very unlikely) they said they would purchase a slip at a marina
within their community if given priority over non - residents. Broken down further, 32% of
people either ranked 6 or 7 suggesting they are very likely to dock at a marina that gives
them priority.
2. Residents are More Likely to Dock at Marina if Given a Resident Discount
• Respondents averaged 5.2 on the same 7 point scale when asked if they would purchase a
slip at a marina within their community that offered a resident discount. 5 1. 1 % of people
either ranked 6 or 7 meaning they are very likely to dock at a marina that gives them a
discount.
Caveat: While not a "random sample," the survey population was representative of the
Shorewood community. The age of respondents was slightly higher than the US Census age for
the community; respondent income was slightly higher than US Census figures, while gender
was nearly 50/50.
The full report, which contains responses about the use and quality of parks and recreation
facilities in the area, is attached.
If you have any questions regarding the survey or analysis feel free to contact Michelle Ferber
( ferb00112umn.edu )or Kevin Upton ( upton006 c2umn.edu
V'4
Shorewood Survey Results
Introduction
-Sent out 2100 surveys (US Census 2000 = 2,500+ Households)
-Received 394 responses (18% response rate)
-Used 392 surveys (99.5% usage rate)
Respondent Age
•18 -24 10.7% (US Census 2000: 15 -24 = 9.2 %)
•25 -39 16.6% (25 -34 = 6.9 %)
•40 -55 38% (35 -54 = 40.7 %)
•56+ 31.1% (55+ = 16.5 %)
*Missing responses 14%
Respondent Gender
-Male 50% (US Census 2000 = 50 %)
-Female 43.6%
*Missing responses 6.4%
Respondent Income
•$0- $50,000 5.1% (US Census 2000: 20.8 %)
•$51,001 - $100,000 23% (31.8 %)
•$100,001- $200,000 45.4% (30 %)
•$200,001 - $500,00018.6% (200k+ = 18.3 %)
•$500,000+ 1%
*Missing responses 6.9 %Children in Household
-048%
-1-236.5%
-3-412.5%
-5+0%
S, -
-(US Census 2000 showed 45.3% of households with residents under 18)
*Missing responses 3.1%
Property Type
-On Lakeshore 2.3%
-Near the lake without direct access 92.3%
-Near the lake with direct access 0.5%
*Missing responses .5%
Lived at Present Residence
-Less than a year 1%
*Between 1 and 5 years 21.2%
-Between 6 and 10 years 24%
-More than 10 years 53.8%
Primary reason moved to Shorewood
-Live near lake 23.3%
*Be close to parks 12.2%
-Be close to trails 11.7%
-Live close to work 11.2%
-Good school system 10.2%
-Live on lake 3.3%
-Live far from work .3%
-Other responses:
—Liked house 2.3%
— Pretty area 2%
—Close to family 1.7%
�' tP
*Were able to have more than one response
Familiar with Local Parks and Recreation System
-Yes 92.3%
-No 7.7%
Park and Recreation Amenities Used
-Trails 57.1%
-Bike trails 49.2%
-Beaches 34.9%
-Soccer fields 21.7%
-Public boat launches 16.8%
-Softball fields 13.3%
-Other responses:
— Playgrounds 3.6%
— Tennis Courts, Picnic Areas, Ice Rink .8%
*Were able to have more than one response
Own Boat
-Yes 37.5%
-No 61%
*Missing responses 1.5%
What type of boat?
-Power 24' or larger 23.3%
-Power 24' or under 21.9%
-Sailboat 15.1%
-Canoe or Kayak 7.1%
*Were able to have more than one response ��
If own, where do you dock?
-At Home 32.6%
-Marina on Lake Minnetonka 21.7%
-Personal dock 19%
-Dock through City 4.1%
-Marina someplace else 1.4%
Why not own a boat?
-Not interested in boating 41.2%
-The cost of a boat 18%
-Limited recreation time 16.4%
-The cost of boating 11.5%
-Access to docks 5.5%
-Other
—Have boat at my cabin 9.1%
—Too old 4%
—My parents have a boat 3.3%
Are you considering boat ownership?
-Yes 44.2%
-No 55.6%
*Missing Responses 0.2%
If considering boat ownership, what type of boat?
-Power 24' or larger 40.5%
-Power 24' or under 40.5%
•Canoe or Kayak 7.4%
-Sailboat 5.7%
f'S
-Other
— Fishing boat 5.7%
If there were a marina in your community that offered priority to residents how likely would you dock there? (7 very
likely, 1 very unlikely)
•4.3 Average (32% ranked this 6 or higher)
*Missing responses 23%
Priority to Resident Break -down: Responded 6+
Age
•18- 2410.2%
•25- 39 22.4%
*40-5549%
-55+18.3%
Gender
-Male 42.3%
-Female 57.6%
Income
•0- $50,000 5.1%
-$50,001-$100,000 17.2
•$100,001 - $200,000 41.2%
•$200,001 - $500,000 34.5%
•$500,001+ 1.9%
-Boat Ownership
-Yes 48.5%
-No 51.5%
EI-9
If there were a marina in your community that offered a discount to residents how likely would you dock there? (7
very likely,1 very unlikely)
•5.2 Average (51.1% rated this 6 or higher)
*Missing responses 8.9%
Age
-18-244.3%
•25- 39 22.8%
-40-5540%
-55+22.8%
Gender
-Male 46.8%
-Female 53.2%
Income
•0- $50,000 3.5%
•$50,001- $100,000 22.2%
•$100,001 - $200,000 53.6%
-$200,001-$500,000 19.4 %
•$500,001+ 1.2%
Boat Ownership
-Yes 41.3%
-No 58.7%
Open -Ended Responses
Please see attachment.
�.' Id
Brad Nielsen
From: Nick Ruehl [nruehl @mchsi.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 11:15 AM
To: Brad Nielsen
Subject: Shorewood Yacht Club
Attachments: Shorewood Yacht Club - 9 -2007 - signed.pdf; City of Shorewood - Shorewood Yacht Club -
May 29, 2003.pdf; City of Shorewood - Shorewood Yacht Club - 3- 21- 1999.pdf;
CIMG0003.jpg; Slide1.JPG
Brad:
Please find attached the history of correspondence on this property. I would ask that you share the history and this
email with the Planning Commission and Council as you deliberate on the Conditional Use Request:
We (the many folks that opposed the introduction /expansion of the power boats 3 years ago) knew that 3 years hence it
would be next to impossible to have the power boats removed, and Mr. Jabbour would want to expand the number of
power boats at the marina. Sure enough, the request for more power boats has come. The more the power boats are
present, the fewer the sailboats will be.
We oppose the expansion of power boats. It is simple, power boats are larger, sit higher in the water (obstruct views)
and provide a party environment. It simply brings unnecessary noise, no matter what management does. Over the
years we have had problems with party noise — even from people on the sail boats. A marina does not belong this close
to neighbors. We have had to live with what is there, but you can choose to exacerbate the issues, or just say no.
Please, say no more.
One late afternoon, my wife and I heard considerable noise coming from the marina, so we boated over to observe two
power boats at the outside of the docks (see below). We should not have to be dealing with these issues by calling Mike
or 911 to report noise. Please, just say no.
Exhibit F -1
RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE
Thank you. I will be at the meeting to bring a voice to our concerns.
Nick Ruehl
456 Lafayette Avenue
Excelsior, MN 55331
612 -889 -2851
F•z
LJ
Im
4 13 11 N' P.3,' 3 4'3 9 , ? 3 f 1 v 9 55 1, Eye ait .. 1556 2 „
1 5 5 6 2 f t
Kathy and Nick Ruehl
456 Lafayette Avenue
Excelsior, Minnesota 55331
May 29, 2003
Mr. Bradley J. Nielsen, Planning Director
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 -8927
Re: Proposed Zoning / Conditional Use Revisions
Shorewood Yacht Club
Dear Mr. Nielsen
I am writing to object to any change in the current zoning ordinance / conditional use that would allow more
powerboat storage than the current ordinance. I am quite upset and bewildered at the request of Mr. Cross
for changing the use.
Four years ago I generally supported the zoning revisions for the Lakeshore Recreational District; however
I did specifically express 5 concerns at the Planning Commission meeting and reiterated those concerns in
the attached letter dated March 21, 1999. As noted, Mr. Cross stated at the meeting that he had no problem
restricting the dock space to sailboats. My understanding is that the final ordinance allowed dockage for 4
powerboats.
In May of 2000, I supported the expansion of the sailboat docks for Mr. Cross (see the second attached
letter), as up until that time he was quite responsive to the concerns of our residential neighborhood relative
to halyard /mast and people noise.
Over the past two summers, however, we have had nothing but problems with the occupants of two
particular sailboats — "Ooh Baby" and "Pinch Me." Well into the evening the people are loud and most
times their behavior is obnoxious. No end of complaining to the management of the marina has resulted in
either a relocation of the boats or reduction of noise. This year we intend to contact the Police rather than
the management.
I cannot think of anything worse than introducing more powerboats to the marina. For all of the previously -
stated reasons this is a terrible idea. Add to those, the reality that powerboats are more conducive to late
night gatherings of people (and alcohol), and the result will be more noise (engine / people) and a huge
disturbance in a predominantly residential neighborhood.
Based on the above, I ask the Planning Commission to reject the request to expand powerboat dockage.
I intend to be at the upcoming public hearing. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Nick Ruehl
f:-+
I Nicholas Ruehl, Architect
456 Lafayette Avenue
Excelsior, Minnesota 55331
March 21, 1999
Mr. Bradley J. Nielsen, Planning Director
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 -8927
Re: Proposed Zoning Revisions
Marina & Yacht Club
Dear Mr. Nielsen:
Thank you for the opportunity to meet with the Planning Commission members and City Staff
last Tuesday. At the meeting I was able to respond to the second draft of the proposed
ordinance for Lakeshore Recreational Districts. We discussed the following issues relative to
the Shorewood Yacht Club:
1. In 1975, John Cross was successful in establishing the Yacht Club, over the objections of
many. During his application process, I told John that I would support his project with the
following reservations:
• There would be no powerboats docked at the Yacht Club;
• There would be no gas sales from the docks;
• There would be no late night parties allowed on the sailboats;
• There would be little, if any, noise from howling masts or snapping halyards.
2. The proposed ordinance appears to allow powerboats and gas sales.
3. Powerboat docking and gas sales would fundamentally change the character of the back
bay of Guideon's in a negative way, by encouraging higher intensity usage. This would
generate more traffic, noise, and certainly affect water quality, as the bay is rather shallow.
4. Guideon's Bay, particularly the Back Bay, is essentially residential in character. I am very
concerned about anything that would affect the quiet neighborhood.
5. John Cross was present at the 3/16 meeting and indicated that he had no problem with
restricting the Shorewood Yacht Club to sailboats and no gas dock sales.
Based on the above, I ask the Planning Commission to limit the Shorewood Yacht Club to
sailboats and not allow gas sales at the dock.
Thank you for your consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need additional
information.
Sincerely,
Nick Ruehl
�.I
23750 Lawtonka Drive
Shorewood, MN 55331
December 31, 2010
Sincerely,
MENEMEMM
Dear PIanning Commission,
First, I am very dissapointed that the residents of Timber Lane were not notified of the mecting agenda, especially after the last ten
years. We just heard about it today via the grapevine. Even though you are not required to do so, you would appear Tess covert in your
agenda setting. Also, it seems rather interesting that the meeting is being held so early in the year as I do not think we are close to
finishing the three years. Additionally as in our case, we can not attend due to our snowbird status -- as are others.
1 am not going to revisit all of the reasons we have objected to the marina expansion over the past 35 years. They have not changed,
and we do not feel that it is right to change a conditional use permit that was designed to protect the bay. Increasing the number of
power boats and permanentizing the CLIP by the city represents a favoring of non - residents. 90 residents signed petitions against the
previous permit three years ago -- what do you think they would say to expanding it. We all know that the owner would really Like to
have 100% of the slips available for powerboats. A few years from now that will come before you. You allowed him to get his foot
in the door -- when are you going to represent us? Is this finally a time when you say no?
We really want to know what is going on. We request you notify the residents of your actions and when it might come before the
council. We are the taxpayers and request transparency. We respectfully request the applications be turned down -- at least for the
expansion.
Best Regards and Wishes,
Steve and Diana Haskins
Brad Nielsen
From miNsk@winbemet.onm
Sent: Tueaday, January 04. 2011 4:20 PM
To: Brad Nielsen
Subject: shnnawood "yacht club" slip request
Brad:
Please add my voice to the sentiment from Steve Farnes and the Haskins.
We don't need additional traffic in our small sub-bay.
Nothing has changed except for the "SYC" trying to continue to convert a sailing marina into
a powerboat marina, as ]ohn Cross wanted to do when he first bought the property several
decades ago.
Please don't support Gabriel's Minnetonka monopoly.
Thanks, and hope all is well with you and yours for the Holiday season.
Best regards,
Mike
PS: I would attend if I could, but I'm working in Rochester all week.
»
��
��' /7
1
Brad Nielsen
Fromm:
Stephen Farnea .net]
Sent;
Tuesday, January O4.201i 8:51 FM
To:
Brad Nielsen
Subject:
Fwd: ShorewoodYachtClub- additionalUloughts
-The present owners of the Club petitioned for the conditional use permit after owning the
facility for less than a year. Did they buy the club knowing it had a shaky business model
with the expectation that they could "flip" the council into letting them change the basic
nature of the business? A bigger question: should the city council subsidize a business at
the expense of the quality of the life and natural resource issues for the current residents?
-Keep in mind that the owner and operator of the club are NOT residents of Shorewood. They
make money OFF of the opportunity that Shorewood generously provides them. THEY don't pay
1
Shorewood taxes, their customers do. Their interests are fundamentally different than those
of Shorewood residents, who live here and pay taxes out of their own pockets.
-I remember a figure of 70 percent occupancy for the sailboat slips presented by the owners
three years ago, and that was why they originally petitioned the council to permit the
expansion and conversion of their slips. What is that figure now? Could they be profitable
today without the motorized business? How does their slip rates compare to other private
marinas in the area? How many Shorewood residents are customers? Do they get a discount?
Remember that Shorewood is overwhelmingly a low-density residential community. The interests
of business should take a back seat to the wishes of the residents, especially when it comes
to a high-profile and high impact business like a marina.
Brad Nielsen
From: 8tephenFarnes .Met
Sent: Tuem6my, January 04 2011 &53 PM
To: Brad Nielsen
Subject: Fwd: Shorewood Yacht Club
Regarding the Marina, Z can't lie and say it was hugely disturbing and "party central"-type
situation. But it does represent another step in the gradual decline of the quality of life
in this area and a disturbance of the natural resource. Make sure they do not expand. Frostad
(who has an office across Hwy 19) and other developers are drooling over the prospect of
draining the wetland and putting commercial properties in that area. In fact the Yacht Club
now controls the Niccum property as weII. Wetlands of course, are crucial to keeping the
water clean, as well as serving as a natural habitat. They should not be compromised.
Z am not sure I will be there tomorrow at the Planning Committee meeting. I have forwarded
your email to the rest of the residents on Timberlane if you haven't emaiIed them aIready.
Some points I would like you to bring up if I am not there:
1\ Brad likes to talk about the 4 dollar "donation" that the Club offered up last in the
Gideon's Bay MiIfoiI herbicide project that never Quite got off the ground. Brad will almost
certainly bring it up tomorrow night, The Yacht Club's offer on the surface sounds impressive
and very neighborly and public spirited, But looking at things more closely, that "donation"
comes to less than 35 dollars per marina boat. In contrast the MtIfuil group was asking each
lakeshore property owner to donate 1,000 dollars. Most folks only have one motorized boat
but even figuring two per property that is 500 dollars per boat- a big difference from 35
dollars. Plus, if the Yacht Club could advertise a miIfoil free bay to dock on, they could
charge a premium rate for each renter and easily make up the difference. So, in my opinion,
neighborliness had nothing to do with it- it was a business decision with an added PR
benefit.
2\ Why do they leave the green tarps on the boat slips? It looks awful and few other marinas-
if any-do this,
3\ The Yacht Club has been warned at least once- and possibly twice- not to store their
sailboats on the Trail (LRT) right-of-way. They continue to do so anyway. The LRT ROW extends
for twenty five feet south of the trail, and eighteen feet to the north of it. Especially on
the south side the sailboats are jammed in where they should not be. Is this what LRT users
want to see?!
Pat Z am not sure if the Club will claim poverty (again) and want to expand their motorized
slips, but if they do, demand to see their books. Z will be happy to help you go over them!
1
----- original Message -----
From: "Pat Arnst" <pat@arnst.net>
To: sfarnes@pol.net
Sent: Monday, January 3, 2011 6:25:14 PM GMT 606:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Shorewood Yacht Club
I am currently on the planning commission and we have a public hearing on the SYC tomorrow
night. Have you been noticed and are you planning on attending? Please let me know your
thoughts on the increased number of motor boats. Thanks!
Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5757
(20110103)
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
tjLtp. /
Jwww.eset-c2m
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department Engineering Council Meeting 2/24/11 Item Number: 9A
From: James Landini, P.E.
Item Description: Traffic control sign inventory
Background / Previous Action
Traffic control signs are an integral part of the road infrastructure. The signs guide residents to
their destination. The signs degrade over time and need to be maintained just like the roads
and pipes located within the City.
The 1993 DOT Appropriations Act recognized that traffic control signs need to be maintained
for a minimum nighttime visibility. The Federal Highway Administration studied and acceptable
minimum nighttime visibility and added language to the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (MUTCD) which Minnesota DOT adopted in 2008. The MUTCD has specific milestone
due dates which are: 1/22/2012 adopt a policy on the maintenance method, 1/22/2015 most
signs should comply with minimum visibility, 1/22/2018 all signs should comply with standard.
These are general statements, there are exceptions written in the MUTCD.
The League of MN Cities will be providing a draft policy and ordinance. When that is available,
staff will schedule a work session to discuss draft policies and ordinances. The MN Local
Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) has published a book as guidance. The book is online at
http: / /www.mnitap.umn.edu /Publications/ Handbooks /documents /signmaint.pdf The book
recommends an implementation approach which the first step is an inventory of traffic control
signs.
Staff collected three quotes for the traffic control sign inventory. WSB quoted $8,000, Bolton &
Menk quoted $16,000 and HTPO quoted $24,467. WSB has discounted the work for winter and
will be utilizing technicians that have completed many inventories to minimize costs.
Options
1. Direct staff to contract with WSB for this project.
2. Direct staff to utilize a different quoter.
3. Do nothing.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends direction to work with WSB for the traffic sign inventory not to exceed
$8,000.
Council Action:
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department Council Meeting Item Number
Administration January 24, 2011 10-A
From: Brian Heck, City Administrator
Item — Spring Clean -up
Description /Background /Previous Action
Each spring in May, the City sponsors a "Spring Clean -up" for residents to clear out old and unwanted
items. The event takes place on a Saturday and is held at the Public Works Garage. Residents can bring
general household refuse, electronics, batteries, etc, for little to no cost and contracted vendors collect
and properly recycle or dispose of the materials.
In previous years, the city provided a curbside collection and it was suggested the city consider bringing
back the curbside collection this year. The city, as I understand it, added the cost of the curbside
collection to every resident's utility bill, whether they used it or not.
Staff contacted Allied Waste, the contracted refuse hauler we use for spring clean -up, to request an
estimate for a curbside collection option for spring clean -up 2011. According to Rich Hirstein of Allied
Waste, the cost of a curbside collection of refuse that is legally accepted in the landfill would be
approximately $20 per household based on 2,800 households. This is just an estimate, and an exact
quote would be provided should we decide to pursue this option.
This estimate is based on the understanding that appliances, electronics, and any household hazardous
waste items would not be collected. It should also be understood that they would not be separating out
any recyclables from this collection.
Staff is looking for direction on whether or not we should pursue this option as part of the event. If the
Council wishes to provide the curbside option, staff recommends this be further investigated for the
2012 program, as there isn't adequate time to properly research and request bids for 2011.
Council Action:
2,A.
MEMORANDUM
Three departments exceeded their budget for the year. They are:
General Government - $263 over - which seems to be related to coding of part-time
wages. It is exceeded in this department which puts other departments under budget.
Elections - $6,603 over — which was previously highlighted. The salary portion should
be offset by reductions in other departments in which election staff are coded.
Sanitation/Waste Control - $6,603 over — which is due to wages being coded into this
department without any express budget authority.
Since all of these items are generally related to salary coding, I believe it is important to
highlight the fact that total salaries are well below the amount authorized by the City Council.
The budget for salaries and benefits in the General Fund was $1,571,437. The total expended
was $1,490,619 which is $80,818.39 under budget.
Please be aware that some of these totals will change by the time we finish the annual financial
report. Modified accrual accounting requires that we keep the books open through February to
determine what resources are available and measurable within 60 days of the year end.
Additional revenues may come in during the 60 day accrual period. These preliminary
expenditure figures are also subject to additional bills for goods and services provided in 2010,
but not paid until 2011. There will also be journal entries that will affect prepaid items and other
accruals.
Please contact me or Mr. Heck if you have any questions.
Attachment: December Monthly Budget Report
Monthly Budget Report
December 31, 2010
Personnel
YTD
YTD
YTD
2010
% of 2010
Expected
Variance
Materials and Supplies
2009
Nov
Dec
Adopted
Annual
% of 2016
(Negative)
Year to Date Overview
Actual
2014
2010
Budget
Budget
Budget
or Positive
REVENUE
66,015
52,345
63,605
64,194
99.1 %
$589.00
Property Taxes
4,703,369
2,463,855
4,767,760
4,776,292
99.8%
100.0%
Licenses and Permits
127,883
133,263
154,112
106,270
145.0%
100.0%
Intergovernmental
66,411
67,022
67,022
65,000
103.1%
100.0%
Charges for Service
41,649
42,564
42,882
46,000
93.2%
100.0%
Fines and Forfeitures
52,968
32,274
32,274
55,000
58.7%
100.0%
Miscellaneous
82,755
55,770
69,635
128,000
54.4%
100.0%
$8,745.80
Transfers from other funds
40,000
-
33,464
198,842
16.8%
100.0 %
TOTAL
5,115,435
2,794,748
5,167,149
5,375,444
96.1%
100.0%
($208;255.00)
Personnel
16,794
15,394
16,794
16,794
100.0%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
3,064
616
1,035
1,200
86.3 %
100.0%
Support and Services
46,157
36,335
45,776
46,200
99.1%
100.0%
Total
66,015
52,345
63,605
64,194
99.1 %
$589.00
Administration
Personnel
149,285
127,049
140,849
147,712
95.4%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
40
-
-
-
0.0%
100.0%
Support and Services
7,908
3,136
3,136
4,150
75.6%
100.0%
Capital Outlay
-
1,631
1,631
2,500
65.2%
100.0%
Total
157,233
131,816
145,616
154,362
94.3%
$8,745.80
General Government
Personnel
219,755
170,815
189,500
181,639
104.3%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
17,861
13,731
14,749
19,975
73.8%
100.0%
Support and Services
31,506
23,187
31,220
32,305
96.6%
100.0%
Capital Outlay
6,540
1,213
1,213
2,500
48.5%
100.0%
Total
275,662
208,946
236,682
236,419
100.1%
($263.00)
Elections
Personnel
840
38,983
39,864
30,689
129.9%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
2,024
3,569
3,570
4,950
72.1%
100.0%
Support and Services
25
1,011
1,508
2,700
55.9%
100.0%
Capital Outlay
-
-
-
600
0.0%
0.0%
Total
2,889
43,563
44,942
38,939
115.4%
($6,603.00)
Finance
Personnel
166,032
129,750
142,572
178,584
79.8%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
6,953
7,576
7,576
7,700
98.4%
100.0%
Support and Services
4,799
2,809
3,261
7,500
43.5%
100.0%
Capital Outlay
2,483
-
-
-
100.0%
Total
180,267
140,135
153,409
193,784
79.2%
$40,375.00
Professional Services
223,858
167,509
173,426
199,000
87.1%
100.0%
$25,574.00
Planning and Zoning
Personnel
195,474
154,413
169,929
193,605
87.8%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
2,139
149
149
655
22.7%
100.0%
Support and Services
8,989
5,637
6,881
4,700
146.4%
100.0%
Capital Outlay
-
-
-
100.0%
Total
206,602
160,199
176,959
198,960
88.9%
$22,001.39
Municipal Building - City Hall
Materials and Supplies
34,321
47,964
50,929
54,800
92.9%
100.0%
Support and Services
123,957
35,223
40,247
133,000
30.3%
100.0%
Capital Outlay
5,425
15,713
15,713
20,000
78.6%
100.0%
Transfers
99,773
-
160,368
166,000
96.6%
100.0%
Total
263,476
98,900
267,257
373,800
71.5%
$106,543.46
Police
Materials and Supplies
-
20
20
-
100.0%
Support Services
943,988
869,729
949,183
950,000
99.9%
100.0%
Capital (Public Safety Bldg)
232,940
228,068
228,068
230,000
99.2%
100.0%
Total
1,176,928
1,097,817
1,177,271
1,180,000
99.8%
$2,729.00
Fire
Support Services
323,180
322,535
322,535
315,858
102,1%
100.0%
Capital (Public Safety
- --
97.5%
100.0%
ro - ta,
600,450
595,164
595,164
595,482
99.9%
$318.00
inspections
Personnel
119,185
101,791
112,124
117,943
95.1%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
139
29
28
400
7.0%
100.0%
Support and Services
6,944
3,758
4,178
6,800
61.4%
100.0%
Total
126,L68
105
1 16,330
125,143
93.0%
$8,813.00
City Engineer
Personnel
114,548
83,795
91,459
94,875
96.4%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
741
44
152
425
35.8%
100.0%
Support and Services
7,638
8,501
8,937
15,146
59.0%
100.0%
Capit
1,000
53.8%
100.0%
Total
125,781
92,877
101,086
111,446
90.7%
$10,360.00
Public Works Service
Personnel
279,601
245,725
275,852
295,372
914%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
58,801
48,902
61,858
71,123
87.0%
100.0%
Support and Services
40,539
37,650
40,624
42,690
95.2%
100.0%
Capital Outlay
180 003
100 0
103,800
96.3%
100.0%
Total
558,944
332,277
478,334
512,985
93.2%
-
$34,651.00
Streets and Roads
Personnel
69,846
87,784
88,618
95,607
92.7%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
53,168
77,077
80,253
85,000
94.4%
100.0%
Support and Services
27,234
21,274
21,274
23.500
90.5%
100.0%
Capital Outlay
700,000
-
700,000
700,000
100.0%
100.0%
Total
850,248
186,135
890,145
904,107
98.5%
$13,962.00
Snow and lee
Personnel
35,995
29.866
47,062
40,857
115.2%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
38,457
20,129
32,453
45,117
71.9%
100.0%
Total
74,452
49,995
79,515
85,974
92.5%
$6,459.00
Traffic control / Street Lights
Personnel
-
-
-
-
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
3,412
2,528
2,528
6,000
42.1%
100.0%
Support and Services
42,291
35,675
37,589
45,049
83.4%
100.0%
Total
45,703
38,203
40,117
51,049
78.6%
$10,932.00
Sanitation I Waste Control
Personnel
2,764
4,764
5,827
-
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
21
-
-
500
0.0%
100.0%
Support and Services
-
3,210
3,210
4,400
73.0%
100.0%
Total
2,785
7,974
9,037
4,900
184.4%
-
($4,137.00)
Tree Maintenance
Personnel
7,512
20,366
20,497
17,279
118.6%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
437
106
107
2,700
4.0%
100.0%
Support and Services
9,501
8,093
11,461
13,500
84.9%
100.0%
Total
17,450
28,565
32,065
33,479
95.8%
$1,414.00
Parks and Recreation
Personnel
147,532
139,035
149,672
160,481
93.3%
100.0%
Materials and Supplies
10,094
14,231
14,237
16,300
87.3%
100.0%
Support and Services
109,779
86,468
94,321
92,600
101.9%
100.0%
Transfers
45,000
-
42,000
42,000
100.0%
100.0%
Total
312,405
239,734
300,230
311,381
96.4%
$11,151.00
Unallocated
-
-
853
-
0.0%
Total Expenditures
5,267,416
3,037,312
5,082,042
5,375,404
94.5%
$293,615
Net Revenue less Expenditures
(152,381)
(273,265)
85,107
-
Note: The balanced budget includes the estimated use of $155,000 of fund balance in the Transfers line item of the Revenue section
#'12. A.
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 20, 2011
The City's cash reserves are beginning to be investedin both cash flow type of investments to
meet ongoing expenditure needs and longer-term securities with higher returns than cash. It is
important to remember our investment priorities in order of concern:
1. Safety — preservation of principal;
2. Liquidity — having funds available when needed to pay expenses;
3. Yield — earning market rates of return for the amount of principal risk we are willing to
accept.
With the investments that the City currently holds, and with our philosophy of holding
investments to maturity, we are exposed to minimal risk of principal loss. The only expected
change is when investments are marked to market and gains or losses are recognized at year end.
In order to decide what time frames should be targeted for various investments, a cash flow
projection has been prepared. Over the past three years, the city has only had three months
where cash flow is positive — June, July, and December. Those months are when we receive tax
settlements. The rest of the months, need about $500,000 on average to cover operating costs.
This means that the City should have a mix of callable and non - callable investments with both
short -term cash flow needs being met and longer maturities targeting major cash needs over the
investment horizon.
The current investment climate has improved slightly since October. We are beginning to find
investments in the four year and under time frame that return over 1.5 %. I will slowly ramp up
investments that are targeted to meet cash flow needs over the next five months as cash flow type
investments become available that mature in our targeted months.
For our annual financial reporting purposes, we need to mark these securities to the market value
at year end. The change in value will then be reported as a gain or loss in investments, which
will flow through to the income statements of all the city's funds. This will change the amount
of revenues and expenditures in the general fund and other funds when we make these accrual
entries, so the interest earnings that you see today will be changing when we finalize our audit
later this year.
Please contact me or Mr. Heck if you have any questions.
Attachment: 2010 Investment and Interest Schedule
INSTITUTION
Beacon Bank
PrimeVest Govt. Money Mkt Acct
Checking Account 100 -0643
Money Market Acct 130 -0822
TOTAL
4 -M FUND
Money Market Account
W -1IF1!
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
2010 INVESTMENT AND INTEREST SCHEDULE
DECEMBER, 2010
INTEREST ORIGINAL CURRENTLY
PAID INVESTMENT INVESTED RATE
MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY)
FNMA
Semi -Ann
FNMA
Semi -Ann
Cole Taylor Bank, IL
Maturity
Branch Bank & Trust CD
Semi -Ann
CIT Bank - UT CD
Semi -Ann
Bank of India, NY - CD
Maturity
Bank of America, NC - CD
Maturity
Bank of China, NY - CD
Maturity
Bank of Baroda, NY - CD
Maturity
Firstbank of Puerto Rico - CD
Monthly
Compass Bnk, AL - CD
Semi -Ann
Compass Bnk, AL - CD
Semi -Ann
Citibnk NA -NV CD
Semi -Ann
Citibnk NA -NV CD
Semi -Ann
Natl Bnk So. Carolina CD
Semi -Ann
Natl Bnk So. Carolina CD
Semi -Ann
Wright Express Fin -UT CD
Semi -Ann
Wright Express Fin -UT CD
Semi -Ann
Compass Bnk, AL - CD
Semi -Ann
Amer Exp Bnk, FSB - CD
Semi -Ann
Amer Exp Bnk, FSB - CD
Semi -Ann
Amer Exp Centurion Bnk- CD
Semi -Ann
Amer Exp Centurion Bnk- CD
Semi -Ann
GE Capital Fin, UT - CD
Semi -Ann
GE Capital, UT - CD
Maturity
GE Capital, UT - CD
Maturity
Capmark Bnk, UT - CD
Semi -Ann
Capmark Bnk, UT - CD
Semi -Ann
CIT Bnk, UT - CD
Semi -Ann
CIT Bnk, UT - CD
Semi -Ann
Money Market Fund
Maturity
TOTAL
TOTAL
PURCH MATURITY RECEIVED
DATE DATE YTD
232,933.68
0.00
12/31110
6.92
123,176.53
219,653.13
0.50
12/31/10
1,095.30
0.00
575,763.34
1,102.22
1,805,905.19
0.02
12/31/10
739.04
0.00
1,805,905.19
739.04
200,000.00
200,000.00
2.38
03/30/09
04/01/14
4,750.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
2.00
07/15/09
07/15/14
4,000.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
4.35
01/30/08
01/28/11
4,176.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
2.25
03/25/09
03/25/11
2,160.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
2.40
03/25/09
03/25/11
2,304.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
0.60
05/13/10
05/11/11
600.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
0.55
05112/10
05/12/11
550.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
0.55
05/12/10
05/12/11
550.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
0.60
05/14/10
05/13/11
600.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
0.80
05/14/10
05/13/11
800.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
2.15
06/30/09
06/30/11
689.28
54,000.00
54,000.00
2.15
06/30/09
06/30/11
387.72
240,000.00
240,000.00
1.50
12/30/09
12/30/11
1,545.60
8,000.00
8,000.00
1.50
12/30/09
12/30/11
51.52
240,000.00
240,000.00
1.60
01/08/10
01/09/12
835.20
8,000.00
8,000.00
1.60
01/08/10
01/09/12
27.84
240,000.00
240,000.00
1.35
01/08110
01/09/12
3,240.00
8,000.00
8,000.00
1.35
01/08/10
01/09/12
108.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
1.30
05/14/10
05/14/12
624.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
2.60
07/01/09
07/02/12
2,496.00
54,000.00
54,000.00
2.60
07/01/09
07/02/12
1,404.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
2.60
07/01/09
07/02/12
2,496.00
54,000.00
54,000.00
2.60
07/01/09
07/02/12
1,404.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
3.05
06/25/09
06/25/13
2,928.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
3.05
06/25/09
06/25/13
2,928.00
53,000.00
53,000.00
3.05
06/25/09
06/25/13
1,616.50
96,000.00
96,000.00
3.35
07/01/09
07/01/13
3,216.00
54,000.00
54,000.00
3.35
07/01/09
07/01/13
1,809.00
96,000.00
96,000.00
3.35
07/01/09
07/01/13
3,216.00
54,000.00
54,000.00
3.35
07/01/09
07/01/13
1,809.00
0.00
5,245,238.81
0.07
12/31/10
3,339.11
3,523,000.00
8,768,238.81
2.03
56,660.77
INSTITUTION
|wTsnear
PAID
CITY oFanomsvvoVo
zn1n INVESTMENT AND INTEREST SCHEDULE
DECEMBER, 2010
ORIGINAL CURRENTLY
INVE STMENT |wvs m
ruRCH
E
MATURITY
DATE
TOTAL
RECEIVED
rTo
NORTHLAND SECURITIES
Money Fund
Maturity
6.722.54
12/3 1/10
TOTAL
6.722.54
6.722.54
0�00
PIPER JfFFRAY
17.751.77
17.701.77
non
12/31/10
000
17.751.77
17.701.77
000
Decatur /LoAo
Semi-Annual
390,000.00
390,000.00
17n
12m7/10
12/15/12
noo
Carlton cm/mwoAo
Semi-Annual
180.387o0
180.387.00
1.05
12/29/10
05/12/10
0.00
Carlton omvMwaAo
Semi-Annual
185.758a0
185.758.50
1.35
12/29110
05/12/10
000
Carlton Cmy MIN aAo
Semi-Annual
196.456.e5
196.456o5
1.80
12/29/10
05/14/10
0.00
rwmm
Semi-Annual
500,000.00
500,000.00
1.65
12m0n0
06m0/14
000
rHLa
Semi-Annual
500,000.00
500,000.00
1.63
12/30/10
12/30/15
0.00
pnLa
Semi-Annual
1.200.000.00
1.200.000.00
1.75
12/30/10
12/30/15
000
TOTAL
3.152.602.15
o.mo.onu.m
0.00
WELLS FARGO INVESTMENTS
Carolina 1st ankGreenv
Semi-Annual
100.000.00
100.000.00
1,35
0e111me
03n1n1
1,338.90
Bank mChina, NY - CID
Maturity
49,000.00
49,000.00
m55
05/12/10
05/12/11
0.00
no|ummmonk&Trum GA-CD
Maturity
1+5,000.00
145,000.00
0.45
05/12/10
05m2/11
mm
Bank samua.wY oo
Maturity
49.000.00
*n.mm.00
0.60
05n4n0
05n3n1
0.00
Carolina 1st snxGreenville-CD
Semi-Annual
100.000u0
100.000.00
175
09/11m9
09/12/11
1.735»2
Columbus anxmTmst.GA-CD
Semi-Annual
100.000o0
100.000.00
2.30
09/16m9
09/17/12
2.281,10
Ksenx Smithfield. NC-CD
Monthly
100.000o0
100.000o0
2.50
09/18/09
05/17/13
2.267A3
American Eagle snx. E/om /L-co
Monthly
100.000.00
100.000o0
2.60
09/18me
09118/13
2.308.49
Wells Fargo Money Market
Maturity
1.398.223.86
0.15
12m1/10
304.74
rnrnL
743.000.00
2.141.223.86
10.235.98
GRAND TOTAL
16,468,157.66
68,738.01