Loading...
022585 CC Reg Min . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1985 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Shorewood City Council was called to order by Mayor Rascop at 7:30 P.M., Monday, February 25, 1985. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Rascop opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance and a Prayer. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Rascop; Councilmembers Haugen, Shaw, Stover and Gagne. Staff: Attorney Larson, Engineers Norton and Morast, Planner Nielsen, Administrator Vogt, and Clerk Kennelly. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Gagne moved, seconded by Haugen to approve the minutes of the regular Council Meeting held February 11, 1985 as corrected. Motion carried - 4 ayes, 1 abstain (Stover - due to absenoe from that meeting). PARK COMMISSION REPORT Carol Butterfield reported on the plans for a broomball tournament to be held at Badger. The Commission interviewed Mrs. Richie Hemping for the vacancy available after the resignation of Roger Stein. Funds were requested for the following: 2 Freeman Park signs Tennis net Paint - Cathcart warming house Used vacuum cleaner 4 appreciation dinners for rink attendants $254.40 (cedar) 110.00 100.00 100.00 40.00 Gagne moved, seconded by Stover to authorize the requests, omitting the dinners until a legal opinion can be obtained. Motion carried-5 ayes. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING (JANUARY 28, 1985) TRAFFIC STUDY ACCEPTANCE Council reviewed all new written comments received. Many of the letters requested the City to do a corridor study covering the area between Excelsior and State Highway 101. Stover asked, who would be responsible for paying for a corridor study? Engineer Morast indicated MnDOT would ask the City to participate in the cost or a request could be made to MnDOT and they would put it on their list to do on their own timetable. MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MON., FEBRUARY 25, 1985 page two ~ Traffic Study Hearing, continued: Stover asked if Minnetonka requested the study, would Shorewood have to participate. Morast felt we would pay nothing unless we volunteered to join the request. Gagne moved, seconded by Haugen to accept the traffic study and submit Alternate Plan #3 to MnDOT for approval. Shaw offered an amendment to the motion to delete paragraph #2 of Section 4.0 of the traffic study. Amendment was denied - 2 ayes (Rascop and Shaw), 3 nays. Council then discussed various other options of solving the existing Vine Hill Road intersection. Rascop offered an amendment to Gagne's motion to include a slip on and slip off ramp with the closing of the south side of the Vine Hill/ Highway 7 intersection, seconded by Haugen. Gagne accepted a slip off east bound only. Amendment was accepted - 4 ayes, 1 nay (Shaw). TRAFFIC STUDY RESOLUTION NO. 10-85 Motion offered by Gagne, seconded by Haugen to accept the Traffic Study and forward Plan #3 to MnDOT with the south side closing of Vine Hill Road/State Highway 7 intersection with a slip off ramp eastbound on the basis of safety. Motion carried by roll call vote - 3 ayes, 2 nays (Rascop and Shaw). . PRESENTATION OF SERVICE AWARD - ROGER STEIN Mayor Rascop presented a plaque to Roger Stein for his eight years of service to the Park Commission. Members of the Park Commission were there in support of the presentation. SHOREWOOD YACHT CLUB DISCUSSION Mr. Ronald Zamansky, Attorney, representing John Cross and the Minnetonka Mooring Inc. came before the Council to explain the changes under the new ownership of the Yacht Club. Minnetonka Mooring Inc. will form a Minnesota non-profit corporation that will be member-owned with the lease of each of the 80 docks to the members. Shaw moved seconded by Gagne to authorize the Mayor to sign a statement that approves the operational changes and ownership of the Yacht Club. Motion carried - 4 ayes, 1 abstain (Haugen). Haugen would like to make sure the current boat storage is not on the railroad right-of-way. 1985 DOCK LICENSES RESOLUTION NO. 11-85 Gagne moved, seconded by Haugen to issue the following Dock Licenses: . 1. Mrs. Adeline Johnson 2. Minnetonka Portable Dredging 3. Boulder Bridge Farm 4. Howard's Point Marina 5. Upper Lake Minnetonka Yacht Club 6. Minnetonka Moorings, Inc. - Shorewood Yacht Club MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MON., FEBRUARY 25, 1985 page three . 1985 Dock Licenses, continued: Motion carried by roll call vote - 5 ayes. AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 140 - 1ST READING Attorney Larson informed the Council that if they decide to retain the helmet rule, that it should be enforced. Haugen moved, seconded by Shaw to keep and enforce the "helmet rule" and to authorize the purchase of helmets for use at each of the City rinks. Motion was denied - 2 ayes (Shaw and Haugen), 3 nays. Stover moved, seconded by Gagne to delete Section 2, Subdivision 5, Article C with sufficient public notification. Motion carried - 3 ayes, 2 nays as the 1st reading of the Ordinance amendment. DECEMBER FINANCIAL STATEMENT REVIEW Finance Director Beck reviewed the December Statement and tentative year-end total, final 1984 Budget audit has not been completed. HARDING ACRES - FINAL PLAT APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 12-85 . Engineer Norton has reviewed grading, drainage and utility plans sub- mitted by TKDA Engineers for the development of Harding Acres. Gagne expressed concerns that no added drainage be allowed to flow into the Glen Road area drainage problem. Engineer Norton explained the plans for the flow to go to the area to the northwest behind the current Wild Duck 2nd addition. The developer will be responsible to install ponding areas and a complete drainage system prior to turning the responsibility of maintenance over to the City. A request from the developer to be allowed to hookup 2 lots that face Smithtown Road at the manhole instead of the line was recommended by Engineer Norton. The line is approximately 23 feet deep and would cause large cuts in Smithtown Road in order to install. Haugen moved, seconded by Stover to approve the preliminary plat according to the seven (7) recommendations set by Planner Nielsen and in accordance with Engineer's letter dated February 19, 1985 (Planner Recommendations and Engineer's letter dated 2/19/85 attached herein). Motion carried by Roll Call Vote - 5 ayes. SEWER AND WATER BUDGET REVIEW Finance Director Beck reviewed for the Council the Sewer and Water Budget, going over the revenues and expenditures. . Gagne moved, seconded by Stover to adopt the Sewer and Water Budget as submitted. Motion carried - 5 ayes. ~ ~ ~ MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MON., FEBRUARY 25, 1985 page four ATTORNEY'S REPORT Attorney Larson asked the Council how they would like him to handle the Cabalka issue prior to his leaving the City position. He would like to have this matter remain status quo until a new City Attorney has been appointed. Council agreed not to pursue at this time. ENGINEER'S REPORT Amesbury Water Complaint Engineer Norton reviewed his report in reference to a complaint received from Mr. Berman of 20390 Knightsbridge Road. Norton felt that occasional flushing through Mr. Berman's outside faucet would clear up the rust problem. Credit should be given on his water bill for flushing. We should also make sure the outside faucet does not go through the softener. Haugen moved, seconded by Stover to follow the Engineer's recommendation and contact Mr. Berman asking for his cooperation. Motion carried - 4 ayes, 1 nay (Gagne - did not feel Mr. Berman should have to flush his own line). ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Public Works Department Administrator Vogt recommended a position for 2nd in Command be set up with a description of job duties to be then applied for by the current employees, the most qualified would then be appointed. Hourly rate will have to be agreed upon with the Union. Vogt informed the Council of his denial of 2 hours of pay requested by two employees of the Public Works Department for making phone calls to Munitech to relay a call from the Police Department. Rascop moved, seconded by Haugen to support the Administrator's denial of the pay request. CDBG HEARING SET Rascop moved, seconded by Shaw to set a Public Hearing for March 25, 1985 for the purpose of reallocating previous funds. Motion carried - 5 ayes. Authorize Advertisement for Bids Gagne moved, seconded by Rascop to authorize the advertisement of bids for the purchase of a new loader and utility tractor. Motion carried - 5 ayes. PLANNER'S REPORT Kuempel Chime Building Permit Planner Nielsen reviewed the permit to install a 8 x 8 spray painting booth, the local Fire Marshall has also reviewed the booth plans. Shaw moved, seconded by Haugen to issue the permit subject to the permit being revoked if complaints are received by adjoining property owners. Motion carried - 4 ayes, 1 nay (Stover). . . . MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MON., FEBRUARY 25, 1985 page five Planner's Report, continued: Howard's Point Marina Permit Gagne moved, seconded by Shaw to approve the issuance of a permit for reroofing a shed. Motion carried - 5 ayes. MAYOR'S REPORT Police Department is still looking at various sites to locate a new Police Department building. Mayor and Administrator will be attending a Comparable Worth session on March 8th. COUNCIL REPORTS March 7th there will be a Plmrrrrng and Zoning Seminar to be held at the Earl Brown Institute. Haugen would like direction from the Council regarding the support of continuing or discontinuing contribution and receipt of Revenue Sharing Funds. Council indicated she should support the discontinuation of the Funds at the AMM Meeting. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND ADJOURNMENT Haugen moved, seconded by Rascop to adjourn the regular Council Meeting of February 25, 1985 at 11:00 P.M. subject to approval of claims for payment. Motion carried - 5 ayes. General Fund (Acct. #00166) Liquor Fund (Acct. #00174) Respectfully submitted, ~~/~ Mayor Sandra L. Kennelly City Clerk -- - . ~. "___" .r--..-_ _ _ ORR .SCHELEN. MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors . . February 25, 1985 Mr. Dan Vogt, Administrator City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Amesbury Water line Discussion Dear Dan: Recently there has been some discussion about the rusty water problem at the Amesbury site and no means of flushing the line. While I realize that Mr. Berman (the end house) periodically has a rusty water problem, I would like to show that there was no design error in the water system layout. A few key issues affect how the system was designed and why it has problems from time to time. They are as follows: (1) UNITS SERVED: Originally when this area was in the planning stage there were goi ng to be fi ve townhouse units, as can be seen on the attached copy of the sewer as-builts. This would have meant a significantly higher water use on this line which would help keep the water fresh and the pipe line flushed out. Due to a change in housing trends the town- houses were not as marketable and 2 court-yard homes were constructed instead. The net effect was a reduction in water use by 2-1/2 times. WATER USE: Owners of the court-yard homes sometimes take extended vaca- tions leaving their homes unused for some time. The effect on the water service is that it stands dormant allowing the water to turn color and become stale. For a water system to stay fresh it must experience cont i nuous use. (2) (3) SERVICE LINE: When the system was laid out there was no intention to use this line as part of the distribution system. Therefore, the pipe that was installed was classified as a service line. As can be seen on the attached copy of the July 1977 Opflow (an AWWA PUblication) small lines come in a variety of sizes. We probably could have used a 3" for this service line instead of a 4". However, regardless of size, the line still falls under the category of a service line. As such it could not be installed with a hydrant on the end of it. WATER MAIN DESIGN: Fire hydrants can not be connected to supply mains not intended to carry fire - flows. In residential districts, mains should be at least 6" in diameter. (Two sentences from the 1968 edition of the Recommended Standards for Water Works, i.e., the 10-State Standards) . (4) As can be seen on the water main as-built, the distribution system (6" lines and larger) was laid out to serve this area with the appropriate hydrant spacing (maximum 500' apart). With this layout adequate supply .. 2021 East Hennepin Avenue · Suite 238 . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 . 612/331- 8660 . . . Page Two Mr. Dan Vogt, Administrator City of Shorewood February 25, 1985 is available and the mains can be flushed with the hydrants. House service lines were intended to be used continuously thus keeping them flushed. (5) RAW WATER SUPPLY: The source of water for this area is the deep-well at the Amesbury pumphouse. It is a Jordan Aquifer well similar to other wells in this aquifer serving other municipalities. These wells natur- ally have 0.5 to 1.5 P.P.M. (parts per million) iron in the water. For this reason, they may create rusty water problems for their users. To get rid of the iron many communities have installed iron removal plants or softening plants. Without such a plant the Amesbury well will con- tinue to supply water that has iron in it. This periodically produces rusty water complaints. (6) RUSTY WATER PROBLEM: Mr. Berman still has a problem. What can be done to solve it? A. The least expensive and simplest solution is to ask Mr. Berman to flush his line periodically. His water bill could be ad- justed so he would not be charged for the flushing water. B. Mr. Berman's service could be moved next to his neighbor's ser- vice. However this is expensive, and if they both were gone at the same time there would be no resulting benefit. C. A flushing device could be attached to the end of the 4" line or to Mr. Berman's 1" service line just before it goes into the house. This would cost approximately $1,000 - $1,500 depending on how much blacktop and sod must be disturbed. From a practiee' standpoint, I wou'd recommend asking Mr. Berman to periodic- ally flush his line, as was the intent of the original design. HoweVer, if this is not acceptable we would be happy to pursue whatever solution you choose. Should you have any questions, please call. Respectfully, ORR-SCHElEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~J"~~ f! 71"1~ James P. Norton, P.E. JPN:mln cc: Mr. Gary larson . . . FLUSHING HYDRANT IN BOULEVARD AMESBURY WATER COST ESTIMATE = $ 175.00 = 75.00 = 150.00 @ $15.00/L.F. = 375.00 @ $ 4.00/S.Y. = 200.00 1 - Flushing Hydrant 1 - 3/4" X 1" Corporation Cock 1 - Curb Box 25 L.F. 3/4" Copper 50 S.Y. Sod ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST .............................. = $ 975.00* FLUSHING HYDRANT IN BOULEVARD AND BITUMINOUS DRIVE 1 - Flushing Hydrant 1 - 3/4" x 1" Corporation Cock 1 - Curb Box 25 L.F. 3/4" Copper 6 Tons #2341 Wear Course 16 Tons Class 5 10 Sq, Yds. Sod = $ = = @ $15.00/L.F. = @ $75.00/TON = @ $10.00/TON · @ $ 4.00/S.Y. :: 175.00 75.00 150.00 375.00 450.00 160.00 40.00 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST .............................. = $1,425.00 *Assumes work done by local plumber . . >- 0:: :::> CD en ~ <t - o o u = - ., ~ Ci ~ >- a:: ::) m U) w ~ <( _r=, ~J ..., - ell .; calc:O J . \II VI V) " .. . ~--l .7"-' · . i.:t' :"'-1 :r- .. , -__J , ... \ ~ :..--\ ~-.J!! \ .~ C1- : -T ~- :... -r .. ..:_.J . ~., ~:> ~ ~ ~ r--n Professor OpFlow welcomes any questions that you may have about your facility. He can answer most any water-supply type of question, but encourages mostly operator-re- lated queries. All questions direct- ed to the professor will be answered directly. The professor will select some questions and answers to be printed in subsequent editions of OpFlowas space allows. Mall your Note:. Thlstabl~ Is ~ ~n d~d.e\"Id plpetlnea. The number?f customers may be doubled questions to Professor OpFlow, . for 2-10. and 3-10. clrculatrng pipelines only. Also, this table IS based on metered custom- AWWA, 6666 W. Quincy Ave., Den- ers. ver, CO 80235. Dear Prof OpFlow: In the IPRs, . total dissolved solids, sulfate, chloride, iron, and manganese are not listed as Inorganic chemicals. Does it mean that new regulations disregard these chemicals or no speCific limit to these chemicals? Prof OpFlow advises: The Inter- im Primary Regulations (lPRs) in- clude maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) only for those contami- nants in potable (drinking) water that may have harmful effects on human health. Therefore, limits for substances such as those men- tioned, which cause taste, odor, and appearance rather than health problems are covered by the Se- condary Regulations. * The regula- tions were proposed for comment by EPA in the March 31, 1977 edi- tion of the Federal Register. Unlike the IPRs, the Secondary Regula- tions are not federally enforceable and are considered as guidelines for the water supplier. However, you are urged to meet these regula- tions as they will result In a more pleasing and acceptable product, thereby keeping your customers . satisfied. 'OpFlow will feature a special article next month on the Secondary Regulations of SDWA. 4 . JFlfCIDffa9~~<IDrr (())l])ffll<IDW Evaluating Your Water Utility. TABLE 2 ,.. Maximum Number of Customers Desirable on Small Mains Pressure at Start of Main Pipe Length of 26 30 40 50 Diameter Main In. it Maximum Numberof Customers 1 50 1 2 4 100 1 2 150 1 1112 100 1 3 10 15 200 1 5 8 300 1 3 5 2 100 2 10 15 15 250 1 4 10 10 500 2 6 6 3 200 7 15 500 3 10 1000 1 5 . Capacity of Distribution Mains 1. Does your system use recording pressure gages to record the pressure at hours of peak demand at the points of service connection when pressures would be expected to be lowest? ,. DVes o Unknown D No 2. Do such records show that the system's pressure was at least 30 psi at hours of peak demand at all such critical points? D Ves D No D Unknown The deslr.bJe.t.nd.rd: Each system should have recording pressure gages and records of pressure at critical points of service connections showing a minimum peak hour pressure of not less than 30 psI. Rating question: Does your system meet this standard? D Ves D No D Unknown 3. In the commercial district of your community, a. What is the minimum main size in each principal street? b. What Is the minimum size of all mains? c. Is there an intersecting main In each street? D Ves D No In. In. D Unknown Thedeslr.ble stlnd.rd: In commercial districts the minimum Size of main should'be 8 In. diameter, with. intersecting mains on each street and 12.ln. mains on all principal streets. Rating question: Does your distribution system meet this standard? D Ves D No D Unknown 4. In the resIdential districts of your community, a. What Is the minimum size of mains? In. b. What Is the distance between intersecting mains on the long side of blocks? ft ~. "This Is the sixth Installment of a serialized survey contributed to OpFlow by the North Central Section, AWWA. Compile them and tabulate your rating In the final segment. July 1977 . ATTACHMENT HARDING ACRES - PLANNER'S RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Revised grading plan to be submitted including enlargement of the ponding area. 2. Grant easements to the City for drainage ways and ponding area. 3. Subject to approval from the Minnehaha Watershed District. 4. Receive Title Opinion. 5. Performance bond or letter of credit in the amount of 150% of the utility cost. 6. Park Fund fees paid. . 7. Setbacks for building private roads to be maintained the same as they are on public roads. .