Loading...
101104 CC Reg Min . . . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2004 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Roll Cal Present: Mayor Love; Councilmembers Garfunkel, and Turgeon; Administrator Dawson; Attorney Keane; Engineer Brown; and Finance Director Burton Absent: Councilmember Lizee and Zerby; Planning Director Nielsen B. Review Agenda Turgeon moved, Garfunkel seconded, Approving the Agenda as presented. Motion passed 3/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, September 27, 2004 Garfunkel moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes of September 27, 2004, as presented. Motion passed 3/0. B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, September 27, 2004 (Att.- Minutes) Turgeon moved, Garfunkel seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of September 27, 2004, as presented. Motion passed 3/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Garfunkel moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein: A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Staffing - No action C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-089, "A Resolution Approving Licenses to Retailers to Sell Tobacco Products." D. Setting the Date for the Annual Appreciation Event E. Adopting ORDINANCE NO. 408. "An Ordinance Amending Section 105.05 ofthe Shorewood City Code Relating to Mayor and City Council Salaries." . . . CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES October 11, 2004 Page 20f6 F. Schedule Canvassing Board Meeting Motion passed 3/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented. 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Report from MCES Representative Tad Shaw Tad Shaw, representative for the City of Shorewood to the Minnetonka Community Education Services (MCES) Advisory Council, reported on recent actions and past history of the MCES Advisory Council. He noted the Advisory Council had found management deficiencies in the MCES program approximately six to seven years ago, and had requested a management audit. The Advisory Council had worked with the District at that time with regard to the issues of concern with MCES programming. The MCES Advisory Council had not approved the budget, a designated function of the Advisory Council, for three years in effort to make a statement of concern to the Minnetonka School District School Board. After three years of lack of approval of the budget by the Advisory Council, the School Board authorized a management audit to review the actions ofMCES. The Audit reported similar findings to the stated beliefs of the MCES Advisory Council and further suggested formation of an "ad hoc" committee to define the future direction of the MCES. A report was written regarding the findings of the ad hoc committee. Mr. Shaw stated the report was written by the School District Administration representatives and was not representative of the entire committee at large. Mr. Shaw went on to explain there were notable differences in recent meetings due to a lack of director for MCES. Due to this absence, the directorship was being handled directly by the Superintendent of the Minnetonka School District. He stated he did not believe the Superintendent was working cooperatively with the Advisory Council, and the Superintendent had indicated to the Advisory Council his belief that the Advisory Council was operating illegally. Mr. Shaw also stated the Advisory Council had not been notified of the proposed changes shared with the MCES member cities in a recent letter. Mr. Shaw went on to state he believed this effort was made in effort to place the management policies of the MCES in the hands of the School District School Board. Mayor Love stated he had been contacted by Superintendent Peterson informally approximately thirty days ago regarding the proposed changes. He also noted the mayors of the ten member cities met with the Superintendent on a quarterly basis to discuss issues of concern. Mayor Love stated he would bring the issues raised by Mr. Shaw to the next meeting for further discussion. He also stated he believed the Council was still finding out all the facts on this issue. Mayor Love went on to state he respected Mr. Shaw's service to the City as well as his opinion on this issue; however, he wanted additional information on this issue. Without the objection of Council, he requested a direct presentation be made to Council by a representative of the School District on this issue. He believed, however, the City should withhold action until more information could be made available. . . . CITY COUNCll.. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES October 11, 2004 Page 3 of 6 Councilmember Garfunkel stated he also thought it was important to gather additional information on this issue, and he was uncertain what the motivation was for the School Board to move forward in the manner presented. Councilmember Turgeon questioned the rationale for the large number of potential members for the proposed advisory Council, as well as the process for selection of those committee members. She also questioned why cities were not notified earlier in this process regarding the proposed by law changes as it would affect the representation of each city. Mayor Love thanked Mr. Shaw for his efforts in bringing these issues to the Council. 6. PUBLIC HEARING None. 7. PARKS A. Report on the Park Commission meeting of September 28, 2004 In the absence of Park Commission Chair Davis, Engineer Brown reported on the September 28,2004, Park Commission Meeting (as detailed in the minute of that meeting). 8. PLANNING Commissioner White reported on matters considered and actions taken at the October 5,2004, Planning Commission Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS None. 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Discussion of the Shorewood Oaks Drainage Issues Engineer Brown explained that at the September 27,2004, City Council Work Session Meeting, Mr. Pete Willenbring, ofWSB & Associates, had presented alternatives for the Shorewood Oaks drainage issue for consideration by the Council and neighborhood. At that meeting, Staff had indicated a meeting with the n~ighbors would follow based on the alternatives presented, and a design for a bituminous overflow swale to direct drainage from the Freeman Park area, through the City's out lot, and onto Shorewood Oaks Drive to avoid further infiltration to the neighborhoOd, would be brought back to the Council for additional consideration. Engineer Brown went on to state Staff had met with Mr. John Healy, 26040 Shorewood Oaks Drive, and Ms. Molly Siverts, 26030 Shorewood Oaks Drive, regarding the proposed overflow swale location and implications to surrounding trees and lots. Engineer Brown then shared a proposed overflow swale design, noting the proposed alignment for the swale was outside of the City property, due to presence of a large cottonwood tree in the middle of the out lot area. He also explained Staffhad received comments that the CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES October 11, 2004 Page 4 of6 . width of the overflow swale could be reduced from its current proposed size of 8 feet wide with one-foot rolled curbing to six feet wide with one-foot rolled curbing to minimize the impact of the necessary easement to Mr. Healy's property for placement of the swale. In addition, Engineer Brown explained the slope of the swale would allow for puddles to form as it was quite gradual; however, the overflow swale would reduce infiltration to the neighboring properties and would increase outflow to the street area. Since completion of the design, Staffhad held discussions with both property owners and agreement reached for the cottonwood tree to be removed. While agreement had been reached with the adjacent property owners regarding the alignment of the swale and removal of the tree, Ms. Siverts strongly objected to the material be utilized for construction of the overflow swale due to the aesthetics and was present this evening to address Council on this matter. Engineer Brown stated it was important to consider the cost of all potential materials to be utilized as well as the cost of other alternatives suggested by Mr. Willenbring. Estimated costs for the bituminous overflow swale were approximately $22,600. Engineer Brown reminded all parties present the Council committed to pay for the material costs associated with this project. . Bill Thiede, 26060 Shorewood Oaks Drive, thanked Council for providing alternatives to this drainage matter, and stated he wished to clarify the two options presented at the Work Session meeting two weeks ago on this issue. He summarized the two options presented, noting Mr. Willenbring had indicated a preference for Option 2 in this case; however, Mr. Willenbring noted it might be cost-effective to try Option 1 presented as a bituminous overflow swale first before expending approximately $80,000 on Option 2. He stated he had also heard that evening that Option 2, involving placement of a pipe along the edge of Freeman Park would necessitate requests for property easements from area residents, and could potentially cause a delay in the project. He stated he would favor proceeding with Option 1 in this case, as he believed, water damage affected property values far more than a bituminous pathway. John F. Healy, 26040 Shorewood Oaks Drive, stated he was in favor of the pathway, but was not in favor of having the swale on his property. He stated he would like to see the cottonwood tree removed as he believed this was an issue of public safety and nuisance. He stated he would not be in favor of granting an easement to the City for placement of the swale as he had gone to a great deal of time and expense to install landscaping in the proposed swale area around his house. Molly Siverts, 26030 Shorewood Oaks Drive, stated she was not against having the problem fixed for the neighbors, but she was concerned about certain aspects of the swale, such as width. She questioned whether alternative materials could be utilized for the swale, such as patterned cement or other pathway materials similar to those found in other places accessing Shorewood Oaks subdivision. She also asked Council to consider landscaping around the swale area to minimize the aesthetic impact of a bituminous pathway. She stated she had contacted representatives of Gray Gardens who had stated he would be willing to speak to Council regarding any potential landscaping plans around the swale area. In addition, she questioned whether the easements necessary for placement of the piping in Option 2 would be from Shorewood Oaks residents. She went on to state it would be difficult to assume there would delay in obtaining these easements if all property owners were experiencing drainage problems. . Engineer Brown explained the pipe as proposed would be constructed in the rear yards of Shorewood Oaks residents, and he was not certain these residents were affected by the drainage issues to the extent that Ms. Siverts and Mr. Healy were in this case. He went on to state easements could be difficult and lengthy to obtain. CITY COUNCn. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES October 11, 2004 Page 5 of6 . In response to Mayor Love's question, Engineer Brown stated, with the cooperation ofMr. Healy and Ms. Siverts in the removal of the necessary trees, the overflow swale could be constructed within the City outlot area and would not require an easement from Mr. Healy. Councilmember Garfunkel clarified that the design presented for the bituminous overflow swale by Mr. Willenbring would handle additional water flow than what had occurred in recent history. Engineer Brown stated the swale had been designed to handle a lOO-year rainfall event. Should such an event occur, he cautioned, it was important to realize rainfall could and had exceeded that event in the past, and the swale would help but not mitigate all water in that area. Engineer Brown also stated he would review the proposed design with Mr. Willenbring regarding such an event, and would also discuss replacement oftrees within the City right-of-way area based on necessary removal to allow the swale. Councilmember Turgeon questioned the cost difference in utilizing patterned cement versus bituminous pavement as planned. Engineer Brown stated the cost estimates would double for plain concrete alone. He also noted he was concerned with the use of concrete in this area due to a forgiving subgrade and permeable soils that would contribute to cracking. He also stated, in response to Councilmember Garfunkel's question, that the life cycles of each pavement were quite similar ifbedded properly as designed. He further noted the City would be responsible for maintenance of the swale area. . Mayor Love stated he appreciated the input of the neighborhood in working through this issue. He stated he thought the swale width should be narrowed to be able to keep it within the City's easement area and avoid tree loss as much as possible and still keep the infiltration and outflow benefits. In addition, he thought it important to keep within the budget for the proposed swale to allow future Councils to expend additional funding if necessary to bring further resolution in this case. Councilmember Garfunkel stated, as a swale he did not find bituminous materials particularly attractive, however, this swale would most likely serve as a pathway entrance to Freeman Park as well and he did find the dual use aspect of the swale attractive. He was not certain a swale!pathway could be considered a detriment to property values, nor was he certain stamped concrete would remove value as well. Councilmember Turgeon stated if the residents were interested in funding the additional costs to utilize materials other than bituminous asphalt, she could support such an action; however, she also remained concerned about the use of cement in permeable soils. Diane Aslesen, 26055 Shorewood Oaks Drive, stated she would not mind the aesthetics associated with the use of bituminous materials in this case, as it would be similar to viewing any of the numerous bituminous driveways present in the Shorewood Oaks area. She stated her main concern was that the swale direct the water and move it along the appropriate drainage areas in the street. She then questioned how the drainage would be directed from the Freeman Park area to the overflow swale. Engineer Brown stated there were a number of grade alterations that would require further examination. Staff would be trying to examine potential alternatives to reshaping and berming the southerly parking lot area of Freeman Park to allow appropriate water flow without creating additional water problems for other residents. . In response to Ms. Sivert's question regarding the potential funding by the City regarding landscaping along the swale, Mayor Love explained that in the past, the City had welcomed volunteer gardeners for . ( CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES October 11, 2004 Page 6 of6 . plantings to be done in the out lot areas throughout the City. He stated he would not support additional funding for plantings along the swale. Councilmember Turgeon stated she believed tree replacement to be appropriate use of City funding; however, she was not interested in seeing hedges or other plantings that could potentially obstruct the swale planted as additional landscaping. She stated she thought it best to allow Staff to determine the appropriate low vegetation to be utilized in the area and where best to place that vegetation. Discussion ensued regarding the maintenance of snow removal for the swale. Engineer Brown noted City streets would obviously need to take priority over this swale area. Mayor Love thanked all parties involved for the efforts made in this matter. He stated he believed this case to be a good discussion with outstanding conclusions. Engineer Brown stated he would report back at the next Regular City Council meeting with a revised plan for a swale as well as quotes for the smallest effective width swale to be placed in the City out lot. 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff 1. County Road 19 Construction Update . Administrator Dawson stated the bids for the County Road 19 Construction project would be opened on Wednesday, October 20, 2004, with possible award of the project on October 25, 2004, as part ofthe Regular City Council Meeting Agenda. B. Mayor & City Council No additional reports were made by the Mayor and Council. 12. ADJOURN Turgeon moved, Garfunkel seconded, Adjourning the Regular City Council Meeting of October 11, 2004, at 8:26 P.M. Motion passed 3/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Sally Keefe, Recording Secretary a Woody Love, Mayor Attest: .