Loading...
021003 CC Reg Min . CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10,2003 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Love; Councilmembers Garfunkel, Lizee, Turgeon, and Zerby; Administrator Dawson; Attorney Keane; Engineer Brown; Finance Director Burton; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: None B. Review Agenda Administrator Dawson requested that Item 3E be added to the Agenda, a Resolution Authorizing the City to Apply for a 2003 Recycling Grant Application. He pointed out two additional Resolutions for Council consideration as they worked through the evening's Agenda, Item 3D, a Resolution formalizing the Agreement for Improvements to the Chaska Road Right-of-Way, and Item 5C a Proposed Resolution Approving an Off Street Pedestrian Space on Smithtown Road. . Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the Agenda as amended. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Special Meeting Minutes, January 27, 2003 Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the City Council Special Meeting Minutes of January 27, 2003, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, January 27, 2003 Mayor Love pointed out that clarifications of the Meetings Minutes were distributed to Council for Approval. Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of January 27, 2003, with the proposed clarifications. Motion passed 5/0. C. City Council Work Session Minutes, January 27, 2003 Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of January 27, 2003, as submitted. 3. CONSENT AGENDA . Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein: . . . J REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2003 Page 2 of 12 A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Establishing Saturday, May 17,2003, as Spring Clean-up Day C. Re-set Public Hearing Date for Disposition of Public Property, Vine Street/Manor Road for February 24, 2003 D. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 03-012, "A Resolution Directing the Mayor and City Administrator to Enter Into an Agreement for Improvements to Old Chaska Road Right-of-Way." E. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 03-013, "A Resolution Authorizing the Application for a 2003 Recycling Grant and Execution of Contract with Hennepin County." Motion passed 5/0. Zerby complimented staff on reorganizing the budget line items by department, making the Check Approval List easier to read. 4. MA TTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were none. 5. PARKS A. Report on Park Commission Meeting and Work Session Held February 4, 2003 Chair Arnst reported on matters considered at the Park Commission Work Session on February 2, 2003 (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). She indicated the Park Commission set 8 Goals for the year including; Eddy Station Concession Stand, Master Plan/CIP, Commissioner Development, Dog Owner Education, Buckthorn removal education, Shorewood Community Event, and tweaking of the Trail Planning Process in terms of defining "consensus". She added that the Commission would be hosting one last meeting with the neighbors regarding the Lake Linden Trail. Chair Arnst reported that the Park Commission recommended Community Recreation Resources to provide the Park Coordinator Services for the City. B. Approval to Enter Into Agreement for Park Coordinator Services Brown reported that the search committee for the Park Coordinator Services was prepared to make its recommendation after 12 initial inquiries. Brown noted that 5 firms followed up with credentials, 4 of which were interviewed and one unanimously recommended for the position. Brown stated that Community Recreation Resources was recommended for a number of reasons, including the firm's ability to communicate effectively with the panel, its enthusiasm, knowledge of the issues and the City of Shorewood, proven organizational skills, expressed desire to build a communication base with the sports organizations and the City, and immediate suggestions to kickoff the position and establish good communication with the sports organizations. Brown recommended that the City Council direct staff to have a service agreement drafted by the City Attorney and have that executed. . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2003 Page 3 of 12 Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, to enter into an Agreement for Park Coordinator Services with Community Recreation Resources. Zerby commented that he felt it was great that the City found such qualified candidates for the Park Coordinator position in its own back yard, so to speak, and believed it would be a good fit. Mayor Love thanked the search committee for its efforts in the selection process. Motion passed 5/0. C. Smithtown Road Trail Brown reread the Park Commission motion, recommending the Smithtown Road pedestrian space, that it made at its February 4, 2003 meeting. He emphasized that a great deal of effort and deliberation was required to make such a recommendation and recognized the Commission for its efforts over the past 6 years. Based upon the motion made by the Park Commission, Brown stated that staff had prepared a resolution approving the pedestrian space along the north side of Smithtown Road from the Hennepin County Regional Trail (LRT) to the City boundary for consideration by the City Council. Brown introduced Dave Hutton, ofWSB, who was present to answer the Council's questions. Mayor Love thanked staff and the Park Commission for their time and effort devoted to this facility, and asked Brown to review this detailed and lengthy planning process. Brown gave a brief history of the trail planning process for Smithtown Road, which began with an open house on February 23, 1999, followed by a trail walk on April 10, 1999. A survey was completed on July 7, 2000; a second open house was held on April 4, 2002; and the third and final open house was held on January 14, 2003. During these comment periods, Brown indicated that the trail planning process and Smithtown Road concept plans kept moving forward incorporating revisions at each step for further review by the residents. Garfunkel inquired whether the purpose of the April 4, 2002, meeting was really for the Smithtown Road reclamation project, and not for the potential trail. Brown indicated that there were two sets of preliminary plans at that meeting, one with trails and one without, in order to gain feedback. Mayor Love referred to the 12 Step Process for Trail Planning. As the City Council liaison present at the February 4, 2003, Park Commission meeting, Turgeon observed that much of the discussion and struggle centered on what constituted a consensus in the review process. In fact, she pointed out that the Park Commission added this discussion item to its 2003 goals. Lizee stated that she could appreciate the 5-7 year ongoing process that has involved the Park Commission, the City Council, and the public whose voices have been sought and heard. She indicated that she would like to make the trail a reality for the whole community and appreciated how the Park Commission boiled the issues down to several logical points. Lizee moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 03-014, "A Resolution Approving an Off-Street Pedestrian Space on Smithtown Road. " REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2003 Page 4 of 12 . Turgeon seconded for discussion. As he indicated two weeks ago, Garfunkel stated that he still struggled with the funding availability question. He found it difficult to consider spending an additional $200,000 without taking into consideration the County Road 19 intersection or any other potential projects that might come up. Garfunkel asked how much money the City receives every year. Brown stated that each year the City receives approximately $175,000 for construction and an additional $60,000 towards maintenance of State Aid roads. Garfunkel was not convinced the City should go into hock due to this project, nor was he convinced this was the right way to spend the City's money. Turgeon pointed out that they had not yet even addressed the acquisition of ROW (right-of-way), which she believed was estimated at roughly $500,000. Brown stated that, if the City Council chose to purchase ROW's, it would cost roughly $500,000. The approach staff has typically taken in the past was to try to find a project that was palatable to the neighbors along the road. Given the go ahead by Council, staff could be directed to try to acquire the easements at a minimal cost. . Mayor Love questioned if there were any other benefits to the City in acquiring these easements. Brown maintained that there was, stating that every time an improvement project has been entertained for Smithtown Road, the ROW issue always comes to the forefront in every discussion. Turgeon stated that the Park Commission had started to wrestle with the ROW costs. She and staff informed the Commission that ROWand cost were not its realm of responsibility and Council would determine the funding. As he wished to see the road reconstructed this year and did not want to spend the entire summer going property by property negotiating easements, Zerby asked Brown how long he estimated it might take to resolve ROW issues. As of right now, Brown indicated that 14 properties on the north side would require easements. In the past, the City has maintained the position that if it remains within the footprint of the existing roadway the City has the ability to use that space with prescriptive rights. In his experience, Brown stated that typically, half of the easements can be negotiated out, while the other half require a greater degree of negotiation. In this case, Brown was optimistic that the best case-scenario would be 120 days, if a decision could be made tonight directing staff to investigate the easements, that would allow approximately 2-3 weeks for negotiating those easements, account for an April 7 date to authorize advertising for bids, and time to award the bids for work this year. . Zerby questioned whether it was a matter of semantics to simply approve the concept of incorporating trails into the plans versus actually constructing the trails. The motion did not, in his opinion, address the second portion of the Park Commission recommendation, and asked if the Council chose to remove trails from the plans, whether a 2' and 4' shoulder would be a matter of painting or grading. He questioned whether there should be a plan B in place, should the City find the financial resources to be overwhelming and the public response underwhelming. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10,2003 Page 5 of 12 . Brown stated that the road would be graded to accommodate the 2' and 4' shoulders. He added that the plans have built in timelines that must be met to accomplish the construction this year. Garfunkel eXplained that the motion was not to simply say trails were being put into the plan, but that they were going to be built, which is what he believed they had to wrestle with this evening, just as the Park Commission had done last week. Mayor Love clarified that under consideration was the trail, the acquisition of easements, and finally whether there was any risk for delaying the resurfacing project due in part to the trail considerations. He asked whether both projects needed to be mobilized at the same time, if Council were to decide on the trail later . Garfunkel asked Brown for clarification of whether the easements were needed to make improvements to Smithtown Road within the footprint, or whether the easements were required to construct the pedestrian space outside that footprint. Brown stated that, for the most part, other than areas to correct drainage issues, Garfunkel's assumption would be correct. Even if Council were to approve the plan updates including the trail, Zerby believed that there were many opportunities where it could actually decide not to build the trail; for instance, during the bid process. . Brown stated that the plans for the project have exceeded 100 sheets and were at a point where a decision on this issue had to be made. Brown indicated that the hope tonight would be that staff have a clear direction from the Council with regard to the design it wanted prepared for bid. He reiterated that they were at the point in the design plans, where a decision needs to be made whether to proceed with this trail or not; otherwise the City would be spending many thousands of dollars looking at concepts in design mode. Turgeon asked whether the trail could proceed if, of the 14 residents, only 10 suppOlted the project. She asked if it was feasible to stop and start the trail at certain points. Brown indicated that this could be feasible if the properties were contiguous areas. He pointed out that it was not unusual to begin a project before obtaining all of the ROW. Brown stated that the project could feasibly put the contract out for bid with 80-90% ROW acquired, and still be working on obtaining the rest at that point. Lizee stated that, according to the Minutes, the trees and gardens of approximately four homes of the 14 would most likely be impacted by the construction. She had difficulty seeing this as a major hurdle that outweighed the benefit to all in view of how busy the road is, the life of the project, and how many people would be using the trail. Beyond his reluctance to spend precious state aid dollars on the nicety of a trail rather than the necessity of maintaining roads, Garfunkel indicated that he questioned, as Park Commissioner Young had, where a consensus tied into the decision. . While he could appreciate the struggle the Commission had with the lack of a unanimous consensus, Mayor Love stated that a consensus decision, with regard to Council decisions, has merely referred to the majority needed to pass a motion. He indicated that, while he had been to many of the meetings and was aware that there were people who did not at first support a trail along Smithtown Road, he observed that REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2003 Page 6 of 12 . when they had the opportunity to talk with City staff their concerns were addressed. Unfortunately, Mayor Love pointed out that there would never be a way to get everyone to show up for this kind of face to face discussion. The Mayor stated that, in reality, the funding of Smithtown Road through MN State Aid and gas tax money fit into the philosophy followed by the City Council, long before he got onto it, which was to look at road repairs not on a special benefit and assessment basis, but as a resource to the community. While the Commission certainly had to look at the most affected people, he believed there was an overwhelming amount of support from people in the affected neighborhoods as well. Mayor Love felt comfortable supporting the motion in terms of the trail issue. Mayor Love maintained that money questions must be addressed and remain in front of the Council in any case. Questions surrounding the intersection project, a project once estimated at $1.4 million, now nearly $4 million, due to unanticipated prices people had asked for their properties, will need to be worked out with the County. Garfunkel had concerns regarding shifting the money and resources for the various projects, especially in light of potential bonding. Mayor Love agreed that the City would need to look at other funding opportunities. Zerby believed that the County intersection could be worked out; however, he felt strongly that changes along Smithtown Road were long overdue to address safety issues and pedestrian access to the road. The school along the road has asked repeatedly for pedestrian safety to be addressed. Along with transportation cuts within the school budget which would require children to provide their own transportation, either walking or being driven, the problems would compound on Smithtown. Zerby disagreed that offering the pedestrian space should be viewed as a nicety, he maintained that this is a serious issue that needs to be addressed, and believed the trail could resolve the issue. . While she could understand Garfunkel's position with regard to the MSA dollars, Turgeon asked whether there was a middle ground or perhaps an opportunity to put a cap on the amount of money the City would be willing to spend on obtaining ROW's. Brown indicated that the City has $2.5 million in MSA funding available now, with an estimated overall project cost of $2.1 million. Zerby questioned whether the public safety facility was partially responsible for driving the cost of the intersection up and wondered if the other communities should share in the rising costs of that portion of the project. Turgeon maintained that the rising costs are due to the delays in construction of the intersection. While he could appreciate Zerby's point that a broader community benefits from this intersection and public safety facility, Mayor Love pointed out that the public safety facility has not really built any additional costs into the intersection either. Dawson stated that, while the scope of the project increased a little more due to the public safety project, there was minimal increase in local costs. Garfunkel asked how many miles of MSA roads ran through Shorewood. Brown stated that there were 9 miles of MSA roads within Shorewood. Brown pointed out that there is talk at the Governor's office on how to reduce the state aid balance. . Dawson clarified for the Council, and the audience, that the legislature has been talking about reducing the amount of local government aid it provides to cities, including LGA of about $9,000. In 2002, the REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2003 Page 7 of 12 . City received $96,000 in market value homestead credit, so there was a total of about $105,000 at risk. In contrast, 85-90% of the funding for the Municipal State Aid program comes from gas tax revenues and is not at risk under the Constitution of Minnesota. Mayor Love pointed out that the City has not dipped into its MSA Funds for approximately 10 years. Garfunkel added that now the City would be bonowing those funds into the future. Despite the state preference to see those funds used within five years, Dawson indicated that the City had told the State that the City needed to accumulate funds over time to pay for the Smithtown Road project, a big-ticket item. While she agreed that the funds should be used wisely, Lizee pointed out that they need to use the funds and have been accming them for this purpose. Zerby concuned, stating that design plans have only now gotten to an acceptable point. Garfunkel stated that he had laid out his concerns as far as funding; however, he believed not much had changed with regard to citizen input to wanant the change by the Council since it first decided not to go forward with the Smithtown trail project five years ago. Lizee cautioned the Council that, similar to the rising costs at the intersection, the costs for the Smithtown project will only increase year after year. Zerby disagreed with Garfunkel, stating that he believed things had changed a great deal in the past 4-5 years. He pointed out that more options have become available to consider, including the 5' concrete pedestrian space versus an 8' bituminous trail, and the fact that school budget cuts may necessitate many more youths walking to school. . Having been present to observe the Park Commission work through its process over the past 4-5 years, Turgeon believed the City could not get a compelling level of interest or attendees either way in support or opposition to the trail. Despite the ROW issues, Turgeon praised the Park Commission recommendation came down to its vision within the Comprehensive Plan for trail interconnectivity. Turgeon complimented the Park Commission for its due diligence and voiced her respect for its process. Garfunkel inquired what the Council would do after it approves the trail, suddenly costs balloon. He asked if the reclamation project and trail need to be tied together or whether the Council could delete the trail. Brown encouraged the City Council first, if it chooses, to approve the trail and incorporate it into the design, and then send staff out to acquire ROW's. Within one month he believed he could have a handle on the level of SUPPOlt of those willing to grant easements. Brown stated that he could come back to the Council and report that the trail project will or will not fly, which would allow the Council to proceed from there. As more residents spoke up this time in support of a pedestrian space, Mayor Love asked if this project would be put out as a bid alternative. He indicated that he would not wish to hold up the process by asking for two products from the bid process. Hutton indicated that the City would need to have its decision by the time the bid process began. Mayor Love asked Brown to report back to Council with regard to the ROW progress, to afford the City Council the opportunity to assess the situation further. . Brown stated that he had promised to address drainage issues for the neighbors and would need to know whether the trail was part of the design or not in order to address these other issues. . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2003 Page 8 of 12 Garfunkel asked what the drop-dead date would be. Brown indicated that, in order to meet a June construction timeline, Council would need to authorize advertisement for bids on April 7 for the statutory three-week advertisement period in the bid process. Turgeon asked if Council should add to the motion that the final determination of a trail be based on the engineer's recommendation. As the plans need to be submitted to MnDOT for state aid review, Brown asked Hutton how much lead time or how the review process would be impacted if the City Council later decided to pull the trail out of the project. Hutton stated that, in order to meet the April 7 deadline, WSB and staff will need to be running on a dual track, the plans will need to be finished up and submitted to the state aid offices for review and approval, while at the same time Brown is out talking to property owners about the pedestrian space. If Council subsequently removed the pedestrian space from the plans, there will be timing problems, changes will need to be made to the plans and resubmitted to the state aid office. In fact, State Aid won't allow award of the bid until proof of easements is in the City's possession. As there were no further comments, Mayor Love called for the vote. Motion passed 4/1, Garfunkel dissenting. While he appreciated the process that the Park Commission went through to get to this point, Garfunkel stated that his biggest concern was the dollar expenditure of MSA funds. 6. PLANNING Commissioner Pisula reported that at the February 4, 2003, meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding a Comp Plan Amendment for 2075 Manor Road, Carmichael's wrecking yard, for Capestone Builders. The builder has proposed a 24-unit detached twin home development starting at $460,000. The environmental Phase I review has identified some issues, and the Commission awaits a Phase II report which should be completed for the continued public hearing scheduled for March 4. Pisula informed the Council that public feedback seemed positive and that Greenwood residents concerns regarding traffic on Manor Road were addressed. He stated that, in general, the Commission looked favorably upon the project as a good use of the space and would recommend the Park Commission get involved, as trails may be a part of the development. Pisula reported that an easement was granted for the western parcel of the Spruce Hills development for driveway access and that preliminary plan approval was given for the Spruce Hills second addition. Next, Pisula reported that the setback variance request for a property along Chaska Road failed on a 5/2 vote, as the Commission felt the project be done without granting an easement. With regard to the Carmichael site, Turgeon asked if there would be a water connection to the SE tower. Pisula stated that this subject was brought up and the Commission found this to be a desirable scenario. Although a 1,800' run to bring in water, Pisula noted that the City would like to make this connection to improve the overall water system. . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2003 Page 9 of 12 Nielsen pointed out that the increased density could warrant the hook up, since the developer has requested 3-6 units per acre. Mayor Love agreed that this was a great opportunity to require the hook up. The City Council took a Recess from 8:36 P.M. - 8:45 P.M. 7. GENERAL A. Discussion on County Road 19 Options Dawson reported that at the January 27 meeting, Council requested that staff identify alternative courses of action it could take in order to gain agreements or decisions needed to assure that construction would begin soon on the County Road 19/5mithtown Road/Country Club Road intersection project. As Hennepin County has designated County Road 19 to be in the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) system, each municipality affected by CSAH improvement projects must approve final plans before the County may undertake construction. Consequently, Dawson stated, the councils of the cities of Shorewood and Tonka Bay must individually give their final approval before the Hennepin County Board may give its approval. Alternatives suggested to spur action included mediation, dispute resolution, the County's use of eminent domain, detachment/annexation, and/or encouragement for action by Tonka Bay. At this time, Hennepin County has authorized the City of Shorewood to prepare plans for the intersection project, which WSB has prepared to the "95 percent level". Dawson indicated that these plans have been found satisfactory to the staffs of Hennepin County, the City of Shorewood, and by the State Aid Office of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. During a recent meeting with Jim Grube, Transportation Director for Hennepin County, he indicated that the issue of new ownership of Smithtown Crossing was settled during the holidays. Since that time, Dawson stated that Grube has been able to resume progress on the intersection project. Grube has requested the opportunity to address the City Council on February 24, and further requested that the Council not pursue any of the alternatives listed in the memorandum until he has the opportunity to speak to them. Mayor Love reported that, in recent conversation, the new owner of the shopping center has voiced support for completion of the intersection. While she empathized with Jim Grube's position, Turgeon stated that she was unhappy waiting two more weeks to make a decision. She indicated that the only way she would support another extension was if she were guaranteed the Council would make a decision on February 24. Both Mayor Love and Lizee concurred that they wished to see the project completed this year, in light of the fact that the preliminary approvals have been given. Turgeon maintained that the only thing holding up the construction was the liquor store operation and that Tonka Bay had approved the final plans. Lizee moved, Zerby seconded, to continue the meeting to February 24, 2003. Motion passed 5/0. B. Dog Ordinance Amendment Dawson recommended Council approval of the dog ordinance amendment to include language that . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2003 Page 10 of 12 requires dogs on the Southwest Regional Trail (LRT) Trail be kept on a six-foot leash, as discussed at the January 27, 2003, City Council meeting. While Zerby felt this was the right thing to do, he regretted not running the ordinance amendment past the Park Commission for its comments. Turgeon stated that she had brought up the ordinance amendment at the last Park Commission meeting, and asked that the Ordinance be sent to the Park Commission as it has affects on trails and parks. Mayor Love directed staff to send the ordinance amendment to the Park Commission for a 3D-day review. C. SLMPD Task Force for Joint Powers Agreement Amendments In addition to himself, Mayor Love requested that Council member Turgeon be appointed to the task force if the Council agreed. The Council members voiced their support. D. Administrative Penalty Provisions in Liquor License Ordinance Judd Mowry, 445 Lakeview Avenue, Tonka Bay, thanked the Council for having this on its agenda, stating that he is a member of several boards that work to restrict access of alcohol by underage individuals and that this is one of the three legislative priorities their coalitions are working on at the Capitol this year. Dawson stated that, in the past, offenses were considered on a case by case basis; however, the proposed administrative penalties would be similar to those of other communities. Turgeon asked whether the City could refuse to renew licenses of repeat offenders. Attorney Keane stated that the City could put those individuals on probation, suspension, or revocation penalty. Turgeon suggested that the Liquor Committee look at whether these options should be considered. Attorney Keane maintained that license enforcement rests with the City Council, although the City could get the Liquor Committee's comments. Zerby asked if the City Council would like to strengthen the City's position with regard to compliance and suspension policy. Turgeon asked what tools or training were available to the liquor store employees to ensure that they would not be out of compliance again. Dawson indicated that the police department, typically, makes this available. Attorney Keane stated that it is the person making the sale that is charged with a crime. Mayor Love asked how the City can ensure that the standard policies include ongoing training. Turgeon stated that, at the least, she would like to require the City-owned liquor stores to have every employee benefit from training. Since the City's number one goal would be to control the distribution of alcohol, Zerby stated that the City should train its employees to card everyone who comes into the store. . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10, 2003 Page 11 of 12 Garfunkel moved, Zerby seconded, Adopting ORDINANCE NO. 393, "An Ordinance Amending Title 400 of the Shorewood City Code Relating to Liquor Regulations." Motion passed 5/0. Garfunkel moved, Zerby seconded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. 03-015, "A Resolution Setting License, Permit, Service Charges and Miscellaneous Fees for Administrative Fines for Liquor Licenses in Violation. 8. ENGINEERINGIPUBLIC WORKS A. Petition to Prepare Feasibility Study for Watermain Extension for Shorewood Village Shopping Center Nielsen explained that the Shorewood Village, Inc., has submitted a petition requesting a feasibility study for the extension of water main from its current location at Gillette Curve and Minnetonka Drive to the Shorewood Village Shopping Center. Nielsen noted that current policy requires that petitions will be considered when submitted by a majority of property owners affected by the improvement. He noted that Mike Seifert, developer of the Linden Hills development, has also come forward to sign the petition. Nielsen indicated that staff recommends that the City's engineering consultant, WSB, be directed to prepare a feasibility study. Garfunkel inquired whether service stubs would be put in all the way up the line. Nielsen confirmed that stubs would be placed the entire length. Zerby moved, Garfunkel seconded, directing staff to have WSB prepare a feasibility study for water main extension for Shorewood Village Shopping Center. Motion passed 5/0~ 9. REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff 1. County Road 19 Intersection Administrator Dawson noted that items 1 and 3 had been discussed earlier. 2. Public Safety Facilities Administrator Dawson reported that the bid documents were not yet prepared and the award date may be pushed back one week. 3. Smithtown Road Administrator Dawson stated there was nothing further to report on this matter at this time. 4. Rental Housing Code Nielsen stated that rental housing property owners would be receiving notification of the 3-year renewal. ~ . . . .- " REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 10,2003 Page 12 of 12 B. Mayor & City Council Mayor Love had nothing fUlther to report. Turgeon questioned the liability Shorewood might have taken on when entering into the joint powers agreement with Excelsior with regard to the WAFTA (Western Area Fire Training Academy) site. She stated that according to the Star and Tribune, while no formal investigation of the contamination of the site has been performed, and she had heard of estimates ranging from $500,000 - $2.2 million to clean it up. Turgeon inquired how the liability would affect the Fire District budget and asked whether Shorewood would be liable for a $45,000 + portion of the costs, now that the City has entered into a joint powers agreement. She felt the need to have a serious discussion with regard to these issues. Dawson explained that Excelsior's name was on the deed for the site and that a number of studies have been done suggesting that WAFT A plays a small role in the clean up. He stated that at the time the joint powers agreement was signed there was knowledge of a WAFT A site and concern about the liability for Excelsior. At this time, Dawson indicated that it is unknown if the clean-up will be voluntary or through designation as a state super fund site, as the utility companies have not come forward to help with the clean-up. Turgeon believed that Excelsior should have a Phase I and Phase IT report in hand. She stated that she would like to see what Geomatrix is saying with regard to who is liable. Dawson indicated that WAFT A, too, has been frustrated by the lack of progress on this site and assured the Council that Excelsior would have at most a 1/11 interest as members in the joint powers agreement. Mayor Love concurred, stating that WAFT A is a minor player in the issue and that the utility companies need to be held accountable. Zerby stated that the Council would wait for a further repOlt from Administrator Dawson on the matter. Dawson stated that the Excelsior Chamber of Commerce would feature South Lake Minnetonka mayors at its luncheon on February 20, 2003. 10. ADJOURN Zerby moved, Lizee seconded, Adjourning the Regular City Council Meeting of February 10, 2003, at 9:37 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Kristi B. Anderson Recording Secretary ATTEST: