Loading...
11-28-11 CC Reg Mtg MinCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2011 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:07 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, Woodruff and Zerby; Attorney Keane; City Administrator Heck; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: None. B. Review Agenda Mayor Lizee stated that Director DeJong asked that Item IO.0 Adoption of the Modified Preliminary 2012 General Fund Operating Budget be added to the agenda. Councilmember Woodruff asked that Item 10.1) City Administrator's Performance Appraisal be added to the agenda. Mayor I:,iz& stated she will address that under Item 12.13 Mayor and City Council Reports. Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, approving the agenda as amended. Motion passed 510. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Special Meeting Minutes, November 14, 201.1 Siakel moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Special Meeting Minutes of November 14, 2011, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. B. City Council Work Session Minutes, November 14, 2011 Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of November 14, 2011, as presented. Motion passed 510. C. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, November 14, 2011 Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of November 14, 2011, as amended in Item ILB, Page 7, Paragraph 2, Bullet 1 change "It doesn't address very long leashes" to "It doesn't address retractable leashes ". Motion passed 510. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 2 of 17 Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolution Therein. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Authorize Participation in Hennepin County 2012 Deer Aerial Survey C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 11 -065 "A Resolution Directing Delinquent Sewer Charges, Storm Water Utility Charges, Water Charges, Recycling Charges, and Dry Hydrant Charges, be Placed on the 2012 Property Tax Rolls." Motion passed 510. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. PUBLIC HEARING None. 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) Report by Tad Shaw Mayor Liz& stated Tad Shaw, the City's representative on the Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) Advisory Council, is present this evening to discuss MCE activities. Mr. Shaw noted MCE publishes a catalogue of programs it offers three times each year. It is mailed to every household in the Minnetonka School District. He explained MCE was founded 40 years ago and it is now a total subsidiary of the Minnetonka School District, The City's residents don't have any financial liability for MCE. Anyone can take a class from MCE; there are no borders for community education organizations. Mr. Shaw explained there were 4140 toddlers living within the Minnetonka School District area in 2001. In 2011 there are 2415. The levy MCE receives from the State is based on the number of children living in the District. It gets $5.42 for each child. He noted the State has not adjusted upward the levy for Early Childhood Family Education (ECFE) for years. Because of the reduction in levy money MCE has to change the fee schedule for ECFE. He explained MCE gives out a lot of scholarships to students. He stated there has also been a reduction in the number of high school age and college age young adults living in the District. There has been in 20 percent decrease in the population residing in the District over 10 years. In 2001 there were approximately 50,000 residents and in 2011 there are 39,984. The amount of levy money the MCE receives has decreased about $56,000 since 2001. Mr. Shaw then explained the MCE's audited budget for last year was $8.5 million. Of that 87.5 percent was user fees. The remaining 12.5 percent came from levy money from the State. The MCE program is one of the best community education organizations in the State of Minnesota when it comes to generating user fees to cover expenses. He stated he thought the residents living in the District have been fortunate to have had the leadership for the District and MCE they have had. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 3 of 17 Mayor Lizee noted that Ms. Shaw has been the City's representative on the Advisory Council for a very long time. She also noted that MCE's budget last years was twice as much as the City's budget. She stated MCE, like the City, is cognizant of the impact the shift in population and demographics have on funding. "The need for creative funding is continually increasing. Mr. Shaw stated the District currently has an initiative for innovation to identify ways of doing what it does better. He noted that more than 30 percent of the students attending schools in the District live outside of the District. That is how the District has been able to survive a 20 percent loss in population. The District was the first school district in the area to start promoting public education to children living in other school districts. NICE has started doing an innovation exercise to identify ways to serve the public better. MUM No report was given on the November 15, 2011, Park Commission meeting 8. PLANNING Commissioner Arnst reported on matters considered and actions taken at the November 15, 2011, Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Councilmember Zerby stated at the open house about the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study comment sheets were available for attendees. He asked if they have been tabulated and published for the public to review. Commissioner Arnst noted the City only received four comment sheets back. Director Nielsen stated they were tabulated and provided to the Planning Commission. Nielsen stated that could be added to the to the Study information on the City's website. Zerby stated he has received feedback from residents indicating they would like to see a recap of the comments made during the open house and submitted on comment sheets. A. Shady Hills Traffic Study Director Nielsen explained the City received a petition from residents living in the Shady Hills neighborhood asking for certain revisions to the traffic controls in their neighborhood. The Shady Hills residents believe they are being inconvenienced more than the traffic controls are worth. The Planning Commission discussed the petition several times. Nielsen stated traffic controls were looked into several years ago when the Vine Hill Road intersection was redone. There were certain traffic controls put in place at the request of the residents in that neighborhood at that time to attempt to minimize drivers taking a short cut through the neighborhood on their way to and from the Minnetonka High School. Nielsen explained staff conducted a cursory traffic volume and speed count using the speed buggy operated by the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department. That speed test was done once during the school year and once during the summer months when school was not in session. The results were reported back to the neighborhood residents during an August Planning Commission meeting. The residents expressed concern that there may have been "speed buggy intimidation" so staff agreed to redo the counts using simple traffic counters that go across the road. The concern was drivers may have slowed down when they saw the speed buggy. The findings were presented during a subsequent Commission meeting. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 4 of 17 Nielsen stated the Planning Commission made a motion recommending the vegetation at the southeast quadrant where Shady Hills Road meets Brom's Boulevard be cleared back to provide better visibility at the intersection, installing a no -right turn effective from 7:00 to 8:00 A.M. sign from eastbound Brom's Boulevard onto Shady Hills Road year round, and removing the no -left turn sign from Shady Hills Road onto Brom's Boulevard. The Commission also recommended placing the resolution on the consent agenda for the December 12, 2011, Council meeting. The petition requested physical improvements be made to Shady Hills Road roadway. The City Engineer recommended assessing for the improvements if they are made in advance of other improvements planned for that roadway. The consensus of the residents in the neighborhood was they didn't want to pay for that. Mayor Lizee stated this issue has been around for quite a while. She noted the meeting packet contains a great deal of information about this. The Planning Commission has been discussing it for quite some time and it has solicited a great deal of resident input. Councilmember Zerby stated he was pleased to have residents take on initiatives like this and he was also pleased with the work the Planning Commission and Staff did with regard to this issue. Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, directing Staff to prepare a resolution establishing the revised turning restrictions as recommended by the Planning Commission. Motion passed 510. B. Zoning Text Amendment for Dynamic Signs Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commission has spent a fair amount of time this past year discussing whether or not it thought the City should allow electronically changeable message signs typically referred to as dynamic display signs. The new sign that was purchased for the Southshore Community Center (SSCC) falls into this category. The SSCC's sign is an alpha- numeric dynamic display sign; there are no graphics on it. The Holiday gas station is interested in installing a digital display advertising signs. Nielsen explained the Planning Commission first identified it didn't want to allow graphic displays that change rapidly. The Commission considered what a lot of other cities' ordinances allow. Some cities don't allow dynamic display signs. The Commission and Staff have developed a relatively cautious draft ordinance that would allow that technology to be used while controlling the effects the signs may have on traffic and neighborhoods. Nielsen then explained the draft Ordinance included in the meeting packet is the result of the Planning Commission's study. The Commission held a public hearing on the draft Ordinance during its November 1, 2011, meeting. The Commission recommended Council approve the Ordinance. Towards the end of the public hearing Mike Cronin, representing the Holiday Stationstores, recommended the Ordinance include a provision requiring an ambient light sensor. Because that was not included in the Planning Commission's original motion the Commission made a follow -up motion asking the Council to consider adding that provision. He noted he provided Council with revised alternative language for including the provision this evening. The revision changed "sunrise to sunset" to "sunset to sunrise ". Mayor Lizee thanked the Planning Commission for its efforts. Mr. Cronin, who was present in the audience, stated he endorsed the Ordinance. Councilmember Siakel stated the Planning Commission and Staff did a good job. She then stated she supports the revised alternate language for Section 9(a) and Section 9(b) which includes the provision for an ambient light sensor. Councilmember Zerby concurred with Siakel's comments. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 5 of 17 Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 487 "An Ordinance Amending the Shorewood Zoning Code as it Pertains to Dynamic Display Signs" subject to it including the alternate language for a provision for an ambient light sensor. Motion passed 510. C. FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE Applicant: Don and Kiki Gloude Location: 4675 Fatima Place Mayor Liz& explained Don and Kiki Gloude, 4675 Fatima Place, have requested a front yard setback variance. The applicants have met with the Planning Director and the Planning Commission. The Commission held a public hearing on their request during its November 1, 2011, meeting and it continued the hearing to its November 15, 2011, meeting. The Commission has recommended the request be denied on a 4/2 vote. She noted the Commission discussed the request in great detail. Liz& noted the City put off considering variances for about one year because of changes in State Statutes. Council approved an ordinance amending the Shorewood Zoning Code as it pertains to the granting of variances during its November 14, 2011, meeting in order to make the Code consistent those changes. Liz& asked the Gloudes if they would like to withdraw their request. She explained her reasons for asking that question. The Planning Commission recommended denying the request because it doesn't satisfy the criteria for granting a variance. The Commission has made a decision to discuss potential changes to the Code to address issues as they relate to front yard setback restrictions for residential districts in January 2012 to assess if the setbacks are still appropriate. There are many older homes in the City and residents want to update them to satisfy new needs they have. If the applicants are willing to withdraw their application the City will refund their escrow money. Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commission will discuss potential changes to front yard setback restrictions, especially for older homes, during its first meeting in January. Mr. Gloude stated Director Nielsen offered up the idea of considering an ordinance amendment because there are many older homes in their neighborhood and other residential areas that encroach into the front yard setback area. He explained a planning commissioner had asked him how long their build schedule is and he told them it would be about six months long. He expressed concern that the Planning Commission took that to mean it would have six months to assess the Code and decide if it should recommend amendments to the front yard setback restrictions. He clarified the six months is to the completion of the project. Mr. Gloude explained there is a logical sequence of events in building a structure. They have two stories of structure framing up and roofing material on. They want to tie the framing and roofing material into the siding. They would prefer not to have to come back in six months to try and piecemeal the roof over the stoop into the rest of the structure if the Code is amended in a way that would allow them to do that. He then explained they have received mixed information from the Planning Department. For example, over one year ago they were told they could build the entry way but it had to be a side entrance. During the November 15 Planning Commission meeting, Director Nielsen stated that it could be a front entrance. They designed the entrance to satisfy what they were originally told. Ms. Gloude explained she has notes from three conversations she had with the Planning Director going back as far as fourteen months. Her notes say they had to have a side entrance. During the November 15' meeting they were told it didn't have to be a side entrance. During the November I` Planning CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 6 of 17 Commission meeting they found out they didn't need the variance for the stoop they had been told they needed after months of working on it. She stated they would like a continuous roof and maybe they will be told they don't need a variance for that now. She then stated they are really confused on how the City has flip flopped on this. She distributed a sketch of how they would like their roofline to look as well as what the City says it will allow. If the roof is constructed the way the City will allow people are going to ask why there is a notch in the roof. She noted they will abide by whatever decision the City decides to make. She reiterated the two restrictions they had been told were set in stone are now not an issue at all. She stated they are asking not to have to have a notch in their roofline in order to protect stoop in front of the entry into their home from snow and ice. It would amount to about two feet of additional roof. She commented she doesn't know how to respond to the suggestion that they withdraw their variance request. She stated she doesn't know what it means. Mr. Gloude stated over the last year they have hired someone to design their reconstruction plans based on information they received from Brad. He noted the Code states that covered porches are not allowed to encroach into the front yard setback. He stated their home is over 50 years old, with a 30 -foot setback with no entry and no ability to recess it. They are able to build an entry onto their home. They are making the entry into their home handicap accessible for family friends who use a wheelchair. A roof over the stoop in front of the entry would make it safer. Councihnember Siakel stated she went to look at the Gloudes' property. She commented that she can understand why they want to have a continuous roof. The question for Council is how to work with them to make that happen. She explained she agreed with Mayor Lizee that the Planning Commission has to take the next step by assessing if the Code needs to be amended to allow things similar to what the applicants are asking. She stated she likes the suggestion to withdraw the variance application allowing the Commission the opportunity to decide if a Code amendment should be recommended for consideration by Council. She asked the Gloudes' if they could wait until spring to finish the roof. Mr. Gloude responded it would cost more to have a builder tie the additional roof into the rest of the roofline, to redo some siding and so forth. Siakel stated she didn't think Council could make an exception and allow this variance request. Comhcilmember Woodruff stated he appreciates what the Gloudes want to do. He apologized on behalf of the City for any confusion the City may have created. He noted he was the council liaison to the November I" and November 15` Planning Commission meetings and heard the discussion about this variance request. He expressed his support for opening up the Code for review, noting the City should be doing that on a regular basis. Woodruff asked Attorney Keane and Director Nielsen to explain what benefits there would be to the applicants for withdrawing their variance application. Director Nielsen explained they would get all of their escrow money back if they withdraw their request. Attorney Keane noted it's the prerogative of the Council to refund the application fee with a request for withdrawal. Keane then explained if the variance request is denied they could not reapply for a similar request until six months has elapsed from the time of denial. Councihnember Zerby stated from his vantage point it is silly that the Gloudes can't do what they want without having a variance request approved. Variance requests come before Council so it can interject some sensibility into the process. He thought their request is very sensible. He noted the footprint of the home isn't going to be changed by having a continuous roofline. He also noted that it sounds as if there have been some communication issues on the part of the City. He stated to him it sounds like Council is interested in changing the Code to allow this and similar things in the future. He expressed a willingness CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 7 of 17 to approve their variance request and then amend the Code. He did not think there would be a backlash from residents. Councilmember Hotvet stated she agreed with approving the variance request and then amending the Code. She stated the notched roof will be more dangerous when entering the house. Councilmember Siakel stated from her vantage point this is about fairness and not making an exception for one person and then not another. She stated she thought the most effective way to make sure the Gloudes can do what they are asking is to make sure the Code is updated. She agrees the restriction is silly. Councilmember Zerby stated during his 9 -year tenure as a Council Member he has considered requests where Council had to exercise caution in order to not establish a precedent or violate previous precedents that had been established. The Gloudes request is trivial from his vantage point. Councilmember Woodruff explained the Code is law. What the Gloudes want to do doesn't meet the law or the criteria for a variance established under state law and the City's code. Council is discussing potentially violating the City's law and state law. The City is allowed to do that. But, from his vantage point it is really dangerous to do that especially when Council probably doesn't need to. Council has expressed a desire to assess the Code and find a way to modify it so this sort of thing can be accommodated. Council is not considering approving a variance request for a porch; it is considering a variance request to allow a roof to encroach into the front yard setback area. He asked how many other people may want to put a roof on that encroaches into the front yard setback area. He recommended Council be careful as to how it would allow that, if it does allow it. He stated there are a lot of emotional reasons for why granting this variance makes sense. But, Council needs to be very careful when considering this request. Director Nielsen stated he didn't think the Planning Commission intends to take six months to decide if a Code amendment should be recommended to address this. He then stated he thought the Commission could hold a public hearing on an amendment during its first meeting in February 2012. It could then be considered by Council during its second meeting in February. He noted he did not think the amendment would be that complicated. Mayor Liz6e stated there is a great deal of interest in getting this done. She noted that financial impacts cannot factor into the variance request decision making process. She noted this request doesn't fit the City's practical difficulty standard for granting a variance. She stated it makes sense for the Gloudes to want that pmt of their sidewalk covered by the roof. She again recommended the Gloudes withdraw their variance application and allow the Planning Commission and Council to work together on this. She noted she doesn't want to set the precedent of granting a variance just because it makes sense. She commented that most variance requests make sense. She stated Council has to play by the rules. Director Nielsen noted if Council doesn't take action on this during this meeting the City will have to notify the applicants that it is going to take longer than 60 days to complete the consideration of this application. Mr. Gloude stated if the Code were to be amended he asked if there would be any cost to them to modify their permit to include the continuous roof. Director Nielsen stated the permit would be amended at no cost. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2077 Page 8 of 17 In response to a question from Ms. Gloude, Councilmember Woodruff stated there are two things the applicant will get if they withdraw their variance application. The first is they will be refunded their escrow. If the Planning Commission and Council decide to take some type of action on amending the Code and the applicants are not satisfied with the amendment they could apply for another variance right away. Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, directing Staff to draft a resolution approving the front yard setback variance for Don and Kiki Gloude, 4675 Fatima Place. Attorney Keane noted that if the motion on the table fails it does not mean the Gloudes' variance application has been denied. They can still decide to withdraw their application. Councilmember Zerby commented that if he were a betting person he would bet the Code will be amended in a few months which would negate the need for a variance. Motion failed 2/3 with Lizee, Siakel and Woodruff dissenting. Mr. Gloude withdrew their variance application. Councilmember Siakel asked if Staff has created a 2012 draft work program for the Planning Commission. She stated she thought there is consensus to have a draft plan prepared by the end of the year. She then stated she wants to make sure the Planning Commission addresses this right away in January. She asked if any action can be taking by the Planning Commission this month. She then asked what can be done now to start the process to make sure this is addressed. Director Nielsen stated the 2012 draft Planning Commission work program will be on its December 6, 2011, meeting agenda. He noted the Commission has directed Staff to come prepared to discuss a potential amendment during the Commission's first meeting in January 2012. He stated he did not think an ordinance amendment would be a complicated thing. Councilmember Zerby thanked the Gloudes for coming forward on this. Siakel moved, Woodruff seconded, directing Staff to have the City refund the Gloudes' escrow payment upon receiving their written request to withdraw their variance application. Motion passed 510. 9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS A. Silver Lake Storm Water Sediment Trap Improvement Engineer Landini explained the storm water outlet located near 5750 Covington Road disperses the sediment collected by the storm sewer on Covington Road and Old Market Road into Silver Lake. The project is located across from Silverwood Park. Staff proposes a box culvert.with baffles inside be built underneath the soil there to make the water still so the sediments settle to the bottom before they reach Silver Lake. Eventually the sediment will have to be vacuumed out as part of routine maintenance. Landim reviewed other sediment removal devices Staff discussed during the design but ruled out and why they were ruled out. They are as follows. ➢ A priority vortex device because it wasn't large enough to handle the volume of stormwater CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 9 of 17 ➢ Infiltration due to the volume of stormwater. ➢ Surface ponding at the site due to neighborhood aesthetics and it would scour the bottom. ➢ An ADS storm water treatment device (a plastic underground tank) due to volume of stormwater (the largest pipe it can handle is 15 inch and the stormwater management pipe is 30 inch). ➢ Rain gardens due to the volume of stormwater. ➢ Iron sands filter due to the volume of stormwater. ➢ Redirecting the storm sewer through Silverwood Park to an adjacent wetland located to the southeast due to it requiring a flood insurance study to be done first. ➢ Heating Covington Road and Old Market Road to reduce winter sanding sediment due to the project scope and expense. ➢ Cistern or reuse storage due to lack of irrigation possibilities. ➢ A screen filter due to volume of water and clogging. Landini explained the City received three quotes for the project — Machtemes Construction quoted $102,090.50; G. F. Jedkicki Inc. quoted $96.472; and, the low quoter Parrott Contracting Inc. quoted $93,290.50. The Stonnwater Management Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes $40,000 for the Silver Lake Outlet project and $75,000 for the Covington Road Storm Sewer. The Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District has pledged a $40,000 grant contribution towards the project to help minimize the sediment that flows into Silver Lake. Mayor Liz& stated it's nice to have a partner on this project. She noted this problem has been plaguing the City for quite a few years. She thanked Staff for soliciting a lot of resident input. In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Engineer Landini explained WSB & Associates worked on the design. In response to another question from Woodruff, Landini explained one catch basin will be removed and two will be installed. The two new ones will have a very large opening in the curb line. They should be able to handle the volume of stormwater. Concrete curb and gutter formed as a spillway will be installed to catch water that misses the catch basins. In response to a third question from Woodruff, Landini explained the surface above the box culvert will be vegetation and there will also be a few manhole covers. Councilmember Zerby stated lie likes the keep it simple design. He noted he has spoken with many of the Silver Lake area residents and they are excited about the effort that has gone into this. He then stated he likes the fact that Parrott Contracting, the low quoter, has some actual experience at the site. It performed the sediment cleanout last winter. Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, awarding the contract for the Silver Lake stormwater improvements to Parrott Contracting, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $93,290.50. Councilmember Hotvet asked how often the box culvert will have to be vacuumed out and if the City has the equipment to do that. Engineer Landini explained the City has the necessary equipment, but he doesn't know how often it will have to be cleaned out. Director Brown explained that based on what he has seen for sediment load he assumes it will have to be vacuumed out once or twice a year. Hotvet asked if the residents will be notified of the project. Landini responded he will let them know who the project has been awarded to tomorrow. Motion passed 5/0. B. Petition for City Water CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 10 of 17 Engineer Landini explained that at the November 14, 2011, Council work session the City received a petition from residents near Pleasant Avenue for the extension of watermain. Eight residents from the area signed the petition. He noted the petition process is governed by Minnesota Statutes § 499 and the City of Shorewood Code of Ordinances. The petition does not contain enough signatures along any conceivable watermain extension route to meet the City Code or State Statutes. He explained a loop could be made out of several different routes to improve the City's water system so if there were a watermain break there would be another path for water to get to the rest of the City. Landini reviewed the three options for Council consideration this evening. They are as follows. 1) Defer consideration of the petition until enough signatures are obtained along the watermain extension routes. Offer a free room rental at the Southshore Community Center (SSCC) for a neighborhood meeting, and offer mailing assistance for information distribution and invitations. 2) Order the feasibility study to be completed by order of the Council with consideration of a water system improvement. 3) Deny the petition. Councilmember Zerby stated he is excited to hear that residents want to be able to access city water. He stated he supports pursuing this request further. He then stated he wants the City to encourage this grass roots movement in any way it can. He expressed his support for getting the residents in the area a free room at the SSCC to discuss this and having City staff present to answer questions. Councilmember Hotvet stated she supports educating residents about the process. She also supports the beginning of the feasibility study and finding out what residents want. She stated the meeting would be open to anyone in the City. Mayor Lizee asked if she is hearing a motion to direct Staff to contact the people who put the petition together and offer assistance with mailings and a meeting place at the SSCC. Councilmember Siakel asked if anyone knew how many property owners in the area said no to the extension of city water to their neighborhood. She stated she supports having a town hall type meeting about city water. Engineer Landini stated he wasn't sure how the information about city water was distributed by a resident to the residents. Councilmember Woodruff stated he can support the City facilitating a meeting of the residents living along the routes where watermain could be extended asking if they are interested in signing a petition for city water. Once that is done Staff could determine if there is enough interest along any of the routes identified on the map included in the meeting packet. The City could explain the City is considering extending city water in their area but the City wants to solicit your input and that they need to sign a petition. Councilmember Siakel stated it could be prefaced by explaining residents recently petitioned the City about extending city water. Director DeJong noted that Mann Lane and Seamans Drive are scheduled for reconstruction in 2018 and 2020 respectively. As part of those efforts it would be possible to get watermain close to Pleasant Avenue properties. Administrator Heck stated it's prudent to clearly explain this is a resident driven request. The City's involvement will be to answer questions and facilitate the meeting. CITY OF SH'OREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 11 of 17 Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, directing Staff to offer a free room at the Southshore Community Center for a neighborhood meeting to talk about expanding the City's water system, to offer mailing assistance for information and distribution of invitations, and to have Staff present at the meeting to provide information and answer questions. Motion passed 5/0. 10. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS A. Establishing Fees for the Domestic Partnership Registry Administrator Heck explained that during its November 14, 2011, meeting Council adopted an ordinance establishing a Domestic Partnership Registry. The fees for initial registration ($25), amendment to the registration ($25), termination of registration ($25) and certificates and additional certified copies ($2) need to be established in the fee schedule. The meeting packet contains a copy of an ordinance amending the fee schedule. Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 488 "An Ordinance Titled `License, Permit, Service Charges and Miscellaneous." Motion passed 510. B. Domestic Partnership Resolution to State Agencies Administrator Heck explained that during its November 14, 2011, meeting Council directed Staff to draft a resolution for Council's consideration that would be forwarded to the City's legislative delegation, the Governor of Minnesota, the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) and Metro Cities requesting their consideration and support for legislation creating a domestic partner registry. Councilmember Zerby noted this is something that he asked for. Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 11 -066 "A Resolution Supporting Domestic Partnership Registrations" subject to changing "many cities have adopted" to "many Minnesota cities have adopted ". Councilmember Woodruff stated that he understood Council to ask Staff to draft a resolution requesting the LMC and the State adopt a similar registry. From his vantage point the language in the resolution goes beyond that. Therefore, he can't support adopting the resolution. His concerns are as follows. The statement "the City of Shorewood City Council supports and believes committed domestic partners should have equal access to employer provided benefits, hospital visitation rights, etc." may or may not be what the Councilmembers believe. What Council did say is domestic partners should have the ability to register their partnership. That statement doesn't say that and it goes beyond that. With regard to the statement "... the City council of the City of Shorewood that the State of Minnesota move to pass legislation allowing committee domestic partners to have their relationship legally recognized" he stated the City's Domestic partnership Registry doesn't say the City is having their relationships legally recognized. The City is simply registering them and recording the registration. He then stated he doesn't want the resolution to be sent out with that language in it. Administrator Heck stated he was assigned the task of drafting a resolution that would essentially convey to the State that this type of activity belongs at the state level and not at the city level. He then stated he put in the language "equal access" because Council discussed the registry could provide access similar to that which married couples have access to. He explained the City's Ordinance as well as many other cities' ordinances don't make it a legal recognition similar to a civil union. lie is not sure it was the intent of the Council to have the State legally recognize the partnerships. He stated he wanted to sensitive to the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 12 of 17 different points of view particularly because of the marriage amendment that is being discussed. He was trying to balance the idea of a domestic partner registration that gives some recognition without implying that the City of Shorewood supports the legal recognition of same sex marriage. Mayor Liz& stated she doesn't have a problem with leaving the word legal in the resolution. She asked Attorney Keane to comment on it. Attorney Keane stated Council is asking a policy question about a position that Council is communicating to the State and the public. He noted there are no legalities that affect this Council. Council understands what is not legal in the State with regard to marital unions. By adopting a Domestic Partnership Registry Council authorized a statement in it self as to the value of those relationships by registering them at the local level. He noted it's up to Council to decide on its policy position. Councilmember Zerby stated he recollected Councilmember Woodruff talking about hospital visitation rights when the Domestic Partnership Registry was discussed. He asked Woodruff if he was uncomfortable with that now. Woodruff stated Ire didn't think it needed to be in there. Councilmember Woodruff requested the maker of the motion withdraw it and that Staff be asked to revise the resolution. Councilmember Zerby stated he is comfortable with the way the resolution is written with the exception of adding the word Minnesota. He questioned why you would register the partnership if it's not legally recognized. Motion passed 4/1 with Woodruff dissenting. C. Adoption of the Modified Preliminary 2012 General Fund Operating Budget Mayor Liz& noted this item was added per the request of Director DeJong Director DeJong explained that during the work session immediately preceding this meeting Council discussed the modified preliminary 2012 General Fund Operating Budget. He reviewed the major changes that were made to the preliminary 2012 General Fund Operating Budget adopted during Council's August 22, 2011, meeting. The part-time web coordinator position was eliminated. 'The contract with Community Rec Resources for managing recreation programs will not be renewed starting 2012. There was a $5000 reduction in the contribution required for the police public safety facility bonds. These changes save over $78,000. Unfortunately, it still leaves the General Fund with a budget deficit of approximately $87,400. DeJong clarified during the Truth -In- Taxation meeting scheduled for December 5, 2011, the budget discussed will include those new figures. Councilmember Zerby noted Council has been discussing this budget for many months. He stated he thought it appropriate to move this forward. Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 11 -067 "A Resolution Adopting a Modified Preliminary 2012 General Fund Operating Budget." Councilmember Woodruff stated the modified preliminary 2012 General Fund Operating Budget is set at $5,223,830. The levy remains at $4,763,319. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 13 of 17 Motion passed 5/0. 11. OLD BUSINESS A. Tobacco License Ordinance and License Request Administrator Heck explained that during its November 14, 2011, meeting Council discussed a new license application for the sale of tobacco products for Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco Inc. located at 23710 State Highway 7 in the Shorewood Village Shopping Center. During that meeting Councilmember Zerby expressed a concern about the background check conducted. He also expressed concern that some of the devices that might be sold at the establishment could be similar to items sold at the gas station / market located in Greenwood along highway 7. Some people might consider certain devices to be drug paraphernalia; the City's tobacco ordinance calls them drug related devices. Zerby suggested Council review the City's tobacco ordinance and decide if it should, or can, be modified to address the sale of drug paraphernalia in the City. Heck then explained based on the background information obtained and the City's tobacco ordinance and talking with Attorney Keane he does not think there is a sound reason for denying the license. Staff recommends approving the license. With regard to amending the City's tobacco ordinance to include something about what could be considered drug paraphernalia he stated he couldn't find in State Statutes or in other ordinances anything specifically states that certain devices are drug related paraphernalia. He noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the definition of drug paraphernalia found in State Statutes. He also noted the Greenwood City Council also talked about amending its ordinance to address drug paraphernalia. That Council concluded that state law already covers this and if the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) officers believe devices are drug related paraphernalia they can issue a citation. Heck went on to explain that some of the tobacco related infractions are administrative in nature. Those infractions don't show up during a background check because they do not go through the court system. In the future the application will require the applicants to identify other cities they have or have had licenses in. The City can then contact those cities to determine if the applicant has had issues in those cities as part of the background process. Councilmember Zerby expressed his appreciation to Staff for having done the research on this. He stated he is willing to approve the license request. Attorney Keane stated with regard to the paraphernalia devices and definition the city attorneys have wrestled with that somewhat illusive issue. If there is consensus it is that that they look to the law enforcement community to help with identifying the rapid changes in devices of conveyance as well as the products. That environment is changing daily. Councilmember Zerby stated in the not too distant past there were changes made to state law to address a certain type of synthetic drug. He thought that was well defined and it was defined in such a way that the law did not have to be amended to address each new variations. He then stated it would be good to see a similar law applied to devices that are considered drug paraphernalia. He noted law enforcement personnel can only consider a device drug paraphernalia if it has drug residue on them or drugs in them. Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 11 -062 "A Resolution Approving a License to a Retailer to Sell Tobacco Products for Shorewood Cigars and Tobacco, Inc., 23710 State Highway 7." CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 14 of 17 Mayor Liz6e stated she will bring this topic to the SLMPD Coordinating Committee. Motion passed 510. Mayor Liz6e recessed the meeting at 8:59 P.M. Mayor Liz& reconvened the meeting at 9:04 P.M. B. City Border Signs Administrator Heck explained that Director Brown asked WSB & Associates personnel with expertise in designs to prepare a mockup of a sign that will meet the minimum requirements for lettering on signs for roads with speed limits of 25 miles per hour (mph) or higher. For those signs the uppercase letters must be a minimum of 6 inches tall and lower case letters must be a minimum of 4.5 inches tall. The mockup displayed was 24 inches tall and 42 inches wide. Some of the new signs that were put up are 48 inches tall and approximately 72 inches wide. Heck then explained Staff is considering replacing the eight recently purchased 48 inch by 72 inch signs with the to be ordered 24 inch tall by 42 inch wide signs. When City border signs have to be replaced because of poor visibility or damage in the future the 24 inch by 42 inch sign will be the new standard border sign. The signs along Highway 7 will only say the City of Shorewood and the population. The Minnesota Department of Transportation considers the phrase "... a South Lake Community" to be advertising and that is not allowed on a border sign. Councilmember Zerby stated he likes the smaller sign. He expressed his appreciation for the work Staff has done on this. He suggested the sign be 24 inches tall by 48 inches wide because that is what he sees in other neighboring communities. Councilmember Woodruff asked what the sign will look like for streets with speed limits less than 25 mph. Administrator Heck responded the same size sign can be used. Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, authorizing the purchase of 24 inch by 48 inch border signs to replace the current 48 inch by 72 inch signs to be placed on local streets with high volume traffic such as County Road 19 and Smithtown Road; authorizing the purchase of two signs for placement on State Highway 7 that meet Minnesota Department of Transportation requirements; Motion passed 4/1 with Woodruff dissenting. Councilmember Woodruff stated he still has the same objections he had when this was first discussed. C. Dog License Ordinance Amendment for Discussion Mayor Liz6e noted the City has both a dog licensing ordinance and a dog registration ordinance. She suggested tabling this to a latter date. She stated the meeting packet contains a copy of revised City Code Chapter 701 Dogs containing a number of changes. She suggested tabling this to a latter date. Liz6e explained the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department ( SLMPD) provides animal control enforcement to the four SLMPD member cities, of which the City is one. She stated she wants to bring the topic of dog ordinances and dog registration to the SLMPD Coordinating Committee and ask the Committee if it will support having SLMPD Community Service Supervisor (CSS) Hohertz and the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MELTING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 15 of 17 member city City Administrators /Manager and City Planners work on drafting one common ordinance for the four member cities. Zerby moved, Liz& seconded, tabling the discussion about an amendment to the City's dog licensing ordinance and the dog registration ordinance. Councilmember Siakel asked if Council needs to provide direction on what it thinks about the licensing ordinance and the registration ordinance. She stated it makes sense to have a consistent ordinance across the four cities. Administrator Heck stated he has a meeting scheduled with SLMPD CSS Hobertz on November 30' to discuss the dog licensing ordinance originally proposed as well as to discuss the concept of a registration in stead. Heck then stated that during the November 14, 2011, Council meeting when this was discussed Councilmember Hotvet raised concern about the section on destruction of animals. Deputy Clerk Panchyshyn also commented on that same thing. He asked Hotvet for clarification. Hotvet responded some things were too vague. Motion passed 5/0. 12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff Administrator Heck stated Staff does not anticipate it will hear about the City's grant application for to help fund the $72,000 cost of constructing 1200 linear feet of paved trail from the LRT Trail on County Road 19 Tonka Bay /Shorewood border to Smithtown Road until the beginning of 2012. 1. GreenStep Cities Program Update Administrator Heck explained Staff is working on having an energy audit done of the City's facilities. Communication Coordinator Moore obtained quotes from a number of sources for conducting the audits. Moore determined the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency will do them for free. The goal is to have at least one facility done by the end of the year. IIe then explained that he is going to make revisions to the GreenStep Cities Program Best Practices document he created based on a requests made by the Planning Commission. He stated he has been working with the Department of Administration to get additional buildings added to the benchmarking program. He explained that a number of the web pages on the City's website have a button that links to the City's GreenStep Cities Program progress page. He noted there is a South Lake Minnetonka Police Department Coordinating Committee meeting scheduled for November 29, 2011, but he will not be able to attend because he and Councilmember Hotvet are going to attend an Innovation Conference. Director Brown explained that on November 15` there were two watermain breaks near the intersection of County Road 19 and Glen Road. He stated Building Official Pazandak has been working with contractors in preparation of the demolition of the house on the City -owned property located at 24620 Smithtown Road. The Excelsior Fire District did use the house for live burn training on November 26` Once the house is demolished the Public Works Department will do some restoration work on the site. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 16 of 17 Director Nielsen stated during the fourth weekend of the 2011 deer harvesting effort the bow hunters took four more deer bringing the year -to -date harvested total to 31. That is more than in past years. The hunters are considering possibly harvesting the fifth weekend that was approved. He then stated that Councilmember Hotvet had asked him to report on the status of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to incorporate the City's Trail Plan Implementation Report into the Plan. It's out for review and comment by the adjoining communities and affected agencies. They have 60 days to respond and that 60 -day period ends on January 10, 2012. After that it will be sent to the Metropolitan (Met) Council for review and comment. It also has 60 days to provide comments back. He noted he doesn't anticipate the Met Council will have any issues with it. Hotvet stated there is a for sale sign in front of the old gas station located at the corner of Smithtown Road and County Road 19. She asked Director Nielsen to 'find out information about that property. Attorney Keane stated that property is located within the Smithtown Crossing redevelopment area so the City should pay attention to it. Councilmember Zerby stated he heard it was foreclosed on and it is for sale for slightly less than $700,000. Administrator Heck stated property went to a Sheriffs foreclosure sale three week ago. B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Siakel stated during the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District's (LMCD) November 16"' work session there was a lengthy discussion about aquatic invasive species (AIS) and the future management of it. The LMCD Board did approve a resolution that looks at a partnership between the LMCD and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) to develop a plan for managing AIS going forward. She indicated she thought the work session was very productive. Councilmember Woodruff stated he attended the Metro Cities and the League of Minnesota Cities regional meeting on November 17` Metro Cities held a short business meeting and voted to adopt the legislative policies for 2012 as drafted. Metropolitan (Met) Councihnembers Steve Elkins and Wendy Wulff were present and they discussed what is going on with the Met Council. He found it interesting that except for Ms. Wulff, who has been on the Met Council for about two years, everyone else is new on the Council and trying to figure out what they are supposed to be doing. He went on to state if Councihnembers ever have the opportunity to hear Ramsey County Chief Judge Kathleen Gearm speak he believes they will find it very informative and very entertaining. She gave a speech during the dinner. Councilmember Zerby stated he attended the Excelsior Fire District (FED) Board meeting on November 16` He explained the Board recorded the adoption of the ETD's 2012 budget. The Board also approved the Engine 22 Replacement Truck Committee moving forward with the project. Engine 22 is proposed to be replaced with a tanker / pumper hock and it will cost close to $500,000. The proposed new truck will be able to carry substantially more water to locations within the District's service area that don't have fire hydrants. He stated he observed the EI?D's live burn training exercise on November 26`' done at the City - owned property located at 24620 Smithtown Road. There were a dozen different controlled burns and they went off as clockwork. A couple of other departments participated in the exercise. He noted the City has received many thanks for providing that opportunity. Mayor Liz6e stated she attended the Senior Community Services annual meeting. During the meeting Tom Gillaspy, the State Demographer, gave a presentation. She noted Mr. Gillaspy explained how significantly the State's demographics are changing. She stated that budgets, ordinances and services need to be adjusted accordingly. She noted she will be attending the SLMPD Coordinating Committee meeting on November 29` She also noted there is a Personnel Committee meeting scheduled for December I". She went on to note the City's Truth -In- Taxation meeting is scheduled for December 5"'. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 28, 2011 Page 17 of 17 13. ADJOURN Siakel moved, Zerby seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of November 28, 2011, at 9:27 P.M. Motion passed 5 /0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: Brian eck C /Clerk l ')W bristine LiZe, Mayor