Loading...
04-14-14 CC Reg Mtg MinCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 14, 2014 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, Sundberg, and Woodruff, Attorney Keane; City Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and City Engineer Hornby Absent: None. B. Review Agenda Sandberg moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 510. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, March 24, 2014 Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of March 24, 2014, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, March 24, 2014 Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of March 24, 2014, as presented. Motion passed 510. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Zerby reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14 -023, "A Resolution Approving Election Judge Compensation Rates." C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14 -024, "A Resolution Approving the Regular Full Time Employment of Brett Baumann as Light Equipment Operator." D. Accept Proposal for Safety Training CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL :MEETING iMINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 2 of 21 E. Accept Proposal from American Engineering Testing, Inc., for Galpin Lake Soil Borings F. Accept a Donation from the American Legion G. Accept Proposal and Authorize City Administrator to Enter Into an Agreement for City Hall Landscape Maintenance Motion passed 510. 4. MATTERS FROM THE ELOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. PUBLIC HEARING None. 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Recognition of Service of Park Commissioner Bob Edmondson Mayor Zerby stated it has been his pleasure to work with Bob Edmondson during his five -year tenure on the Park Commission. Mr. Edmondson has been a champion of the community and the City's park system as its trail system to a large extent. Mr. Edmondson's catch phrase for some time was "to connect the spider web of trails to connect our community together ". Mr. Edmondson helped build that web and the City is stronger for it. He expressed his appreciation for Mr. Edmondson's leadership on the Park Commission. He stated he looks forward to Mr. Edmondson continuing to whisper in his ear when he thinks things need to be fixed or has concerns. He thanked Mr. Edmondson for his service. Councilmember Ilotvet stated she worked with Mr. Edmondson during her tenure on Council. She noted she has never met anyone with a bigger heart or who puts more effort or emotion into a project he was involved with. She stated she thought Mr. Edmondson really loves the City of Shorewood. She encouraged him to continue to whisper in Councilmembers' ears. She thanked him for his service. Councilmember Sundberg stated that although she had less time working with Mr. Edmondson she found him a delight to work with. His energy and his enthusiasm are infectious. With humor she forewarned Mayor Zerby that she did not think Mr. Edmondson would be whispering in his ear. Councilmember Siakel also thanked Mr. Edmondson for his service. She stated he is an artist. The paint colors in City Hall and in the Southshore Community Center were his creation; they are warm and friendly like his personality. On behalf of the Council and the residents of Shorewood. Mayor Zerby thanked Bob Edmondson for his five years of service as a Park Commissioner and presented him with a plaque of appreciation and recognition. Mr. Edmondson thanked staff, the City Council and Public Works personnel noting he has become friends with some of them. He stated his tenure on the Park Commission has been a fun ride and that he CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 3 of 21 could not have done it without their mentoring, patience, understanding and support. They made his role easier because they did their jobs which they are good at. They became a well-oiled machine; a team that worked well together to make Shorewood owned parks the best they can be. He noted that is resignation from the Commission came as a surprise to people. It was also a surprise to him. He stated he had planned on finishing out his second term as Chair of the Park Commission. A position he worked hard to achieve and thought he deserved. The voting for the chair position did not work out as planned nor as it should have. After the voting he found himself perplexed. He knew that working with Chair Mangold and Commissioner Hartmann was not going to be an option after he was kicked to the curb. It took a lot of courage for him to resign. He expressed hope that the new Commission will stay focused and positive like it had been in the past. Mr. Edmondson again thanked people and noted it was not goodbye. He noted that he has Lived in this community for 49 years and that he will continue to be visible and ready to help in many other ways. He stated he loves the area like no other. He wished everyone well. ►11W.11 0 :(.9 A. Report on the April 8, 2014, Park Commission Meeting Park Commissioner Sawtell reported on matters considered and actions taken at the April 8, 2014, Park Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). He noted the Commission welcomed new Commissioner Jeff Ische. 8. PLANNING A. Report on the April 1, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commissioner Labadie reported on matters considered and actions taken at the April 1, 2014, Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). She noted her report is based on the briefing she received because she was not at the meeting. B. Summit Woods Planned Unit Development Conditional Use Permit — Development Stage Applicant: Homestead Partners Location: 23040 Summit Avenue Director Nielsen explained that Homestead Partners has submitted Development Stage plans and a preliminary plat for the Summit Woods planned unit development (PUD) proposed for the property located at 23040 Summit Avenue. The PUD approval process is a three stage process. The first stage is the Concept Stage and Council granted approval of the Concept Stage plan in December 2013. A number of issues identified during that process have been addressed in the Development Stage plans; the second stage in the process. Staff has always referred to the Development Stage as the nuts and bolts. It is when the details are looked at and conditions imposed for inclusion in the Final Plan Stage plans and into the development agreement for the project. The Planning Commission held a public hearing during its March 4, 2014, meeting on the Development Stage plans. The hearing was continued to its April 1 meeting to give the developer time to provide more detailed information on some items with the most significant item being the grading /drainage plan. Commissioners wanted more information about how stormwater runoff will flow through the site. A CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 4 of 21 drawing illustrating how the water will drain on the property and based on the grading plan submitted after the March 4 meeting was displayed and explained. The front yards of the four proposed lots would be depressed. Drainage would be conducted from the front of the houses into the depressed front yards. It will flow back through drainage swales between the houses and be conducted into a rain garden on each of the lots. Each rain garden has a small emergency overflow. Essentially all of the stormwater for this project goes to the east; not down Summit Avenue which was a concern of a lot of residents. Nielsen noted there are three staff reports included in the meeting packet; one Planning staff report and two Engineering staff reports. He also noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Development Stage plans subject to the conditions identified in those reports. He explained that basically the reports become a punch list for the Final Plan Stage plans. They will need to be addressed in either the construction plans for the project or in the development agreement attached to them. The development agreement is recorded against the property and stays with the land. Engineer Homby stated if Council approves the Development Stage plans staff will continue to work with the developer's engineers to refine the details for the construction plans. Mayor Zerby clarified that this evening is not a public hearing. He stated he is going to limit public comment time to thirty minutes in total. He explained there has been a great deal of public comment heard and Council has been provided a copy of the minutes from the March and April Planning Commission meetings when the public hearings were held. Public comments were recorded nearly verbatim. He asked that those who wish to comment to speak to different points than those already made. Doing so will make the best use of time. Tom Strohm with Homestead Partners, explained over the past few months he and the Homestead Partners team have focused on the concerns raised during the Planning Commission and Council meetings with a concentration on drainage and erosion. The main focus was to capture the stormwater on the impervious surface and prevent it from flowing off the site onto Summit Avenue. He stated Homestead Partners and its builder have been working hard with Director Nielsen and Engineer Homby. The first meeting between City staff and Homestead Partners representatives was in August 2013. They have had two rounds with the Planning Commission and this is their second round with Council. Mr. Strohm explained they took time over the winter to test the road per Mr. Horhby's recommendation. A couple of borings were done to see what the existing road is constructed of. A couple of soil borings were done on the site. They have implemented a draft construction management plan. It directs the contractors on material management on site, where they can and cannot park, hours of operation and so forth. There had been questions about architectural covenants and what the houses may look like. The application submitted in January 2014 also included guidelines of what the architectural requirements are. They have also drafted rain garden easements and maintenance agreements for the maintenance of the infiltration basin which will be recorded along with the properties. He noted that Pete Knaeble, their engineer for this project, is also present this evening. Councilmember Siakel stated that based on what she has read the extension of the City of Chanhassen's municipal water system to the project site is not part of the plan. She asked why not. Mr. Strohm explained Chanhassen was not interested in doing that unless the watermain would be fully looped down Summit Avenue to Murray Hill Road. He stated they have spoken with City staff about doing private wells instead. Siakel asked for more information that would help her understand why watermain extension is not being done. Director Nielsen noted the City cannot force Chanhassen to extend its watermain and without extending it down Summit Avenue and connecting to the watermain under Murray Hill Road Chanhassen is not willing to extend it just to the project site. Siakel asked if staff has asked CITY OF SIIOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 5 of 21 Chanhassen to reconsider its position. Nielsen responded yes. Mr. Strohm stated it would be ideal to extend the watermain and Homestead's clients typically like city water. Ile explained without the complete extension it would have just created a longer dead -end watermain which would create more opportunity for contamination and increase maintenance. Councilmember Hotvet stated one of her main concerns and a concern of many residents is Summit Avenue which is a substandard road. The Planning Commission report dated February 26, 2014, under Item B.4 states City staff continues to explore alternative measures for addressing issues relative to the substandard condition of the roadway. She asked for more detail on that. Engineer Hornby explained staff is looking at options to alter the existing condition for a low traffic volume road. Those options were discussed during the Council and staff retreat held in February 2014. Staff has a draft of three options that will be presented to Council at a future meeting. The options are: 1) to reconstruct Summit Avenue to City standard roadway or near City standard roadway; 2) to construct a cul -de -sac; and 3) to make Summit Avenue a one -way roadway. Charles Liedtke, 6231 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, stated his property is adjacent to the Rix property. He noted that no one in his neighborhood opposes development, but they are all opposed to the PUD for a variety of reasons. He stated there is a density problem that has been created by Council's decisions. He explained residents have raised a number of concerns dating back many months. They do not think all of them have been adequately addressed; in particular traffic and safety. They do not know what the plan is for Summit Avenue because the analysis has not been completed. He stated from his perspective Council is faced with a very important decision this evening with inadequate data. From his vantage point the City of Shorewood is granting someone special rights to build several houses spaced close together at the top of a hill on a blind curve next to a substandard road. It's likely that many of the new residents will be children. It is unlikely that the PUD will be a retirement community; he would like to hear from the builder on that. Residents were repeatedly told that details and analysis do not occur in the Concept Stage. They occur in the Development Stage. It's time for them to be provided. The improvement options for Summit Avenue presented this evening are news to him. For each option it would be nice to know what the impact is on pedestrian safety, driver safety, traffic patterns and traffic levels. It would be good to have a competent analysis done. He asked how much difference a one -way down Summit Avenue would be than the status quo. How many signs and where? Would that apply to pedestrian and bike traffic? What about emergency responders? Any new resident who leaves their home has to return going down Hummingbird Road and past his home. It would be directing traffic through Chanhassen. The minutes from the February 8, 2014, Council and staff retreat reflect that person x stated "... when the new homes are constructed, there will be four new residents who will likely have input on this issue." He agrees with that statement. Person x also stated "She believes it would be best to address the road issues when development goes in, and agrees that a feasibility study would be needed at that time to ]mow what the costs are for the options." Person y stated "... the one -way option is a cheap experiment that could be tried." From his perspective this is not the time for a cheap experiment after development; it's too late. It's time for competent, thoughtful analysis of traffic and safety prior to development which could inform and guide development in a thoughtful way. It should not be a reactive response after buildings have been constructed. People should be less concerned about dollars and more concerned about lives. He asked that the City not conduct a cheap experiment after houses have been built with his family and current and future neighbors. He then asked what a human life is worth. Profit should not trump safety. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 6 of 21 He reiterated comments he had previously made. He asked that the City of Shorewood conduct and make publicly available for comment a thorough traffic and safety study before Council approves the Development Stage plans. He stated the City promised the time for analysis and details is now. From his perspective traffic and safety have not been addressed. Yet the concern has been raised for months. He asked the City to please take a look at that. Laura Liedtke, 6231 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, stated she lives on the property located next to the development. She stated she had asked Chanhassen Planning Director Bob Generous why there would be private wells put in for the PUD properties. She related that he told her it was because the developer and the City of Shorewood do not want to pay for the extension of Chanhassen's watermain. She noted her comments will focus on safety on Summit Avenue as a result of increased density and the liability Shorewood may be incurring. She stated she has gone through all of the public documents on Shorewood's website. She was pleased to see that Council and the Planning staff have met to discuss options about the safety. She noted she does not agree with the timing. She stated that most of the staff and Council feel the safety study should occur after development. She and her 'fellow neighbors believe analysis and resulting policies should be done well before the City allows development of any kind. During the February 5, 2014, Planning Commission meeting Director Nielsen stated "... the City had not heard complaints about Summit Avenue for many years until this project came about and the residents complained about the roadway." She stated she could not agree more. She noted that in the last 30 years there have been two adults living at the top of Summit hill; Mr. Rix and Sondra Traylor. She explained the proposed PUD will change the demographics and density on the top of Summit. Four large houses are slated for development each with four bedrooms upstairs. Say, for example, there will be two families with three children and two families with two children living in those houses — that's eight adults and ten children. That is a population increase of 900 percent. That is what is driving residents' safety complaints. The Shorewood Council is under no obligation to approve the PUD. The developer stands to make a profit; yet, the developer is not contributing to the costs Shorewood will bear to improve the roadway. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) publishes formulas to determine breaking and stopping distances. The posted speed limit for Summit Avenue is 30 miles per hour (mph). But the safest speed is about 15 mph. If a driver is traveling at a speed of 15 mph the breaking distance and perception reaction requires 44 feet before a car can stop. If the driver is going downhill it is 60 feet. Jeff Shoenwetter, the builder, stated in the April 1, 2014, Planning Commission meeting that he and his wife drove around the area because they heard concerns about safety. Mr. Shoenwetter did not think there is a blind corner in Summit Avenue. And, from a safety standpoint the sight lines exceed any engineering requirements. Mr. Shoenwetter had said he could see 150 feet ahead of him. At one point that would be true because the PUD is 250 feet long. If a person is at the Shorewood/Chanhassen border they could see for 150 feet. But, that is the only place where a person could see 150 feet of Summit Avenue going up or coming down around the blind curve. She asked that Mr. Shoenwetter pay for an engineering study to back his claims. She stated a few days ago she and Ms. Traylor, her neighbor, tested the theory. They placed an object about the size and height of a child in the middle of Summit Avenue in front of the first two proposed driveways. They then drove a car up the hill until they could see the object. They were 30 feet away before they saw the object. That was clearly not enough distance to react. Their experiment does not account for children who may run out into the street, children going down the hill, summer foliage or the fact that trucks need more distance to stop. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 7 of 21 The Minnesota Safety Council states "Adults often overestimate a child's ability to walk and cross streets. Children under the age of 10 do not always have the necessary skills to judge the speed and distance of oncoming traffic. In addition, their peripheral vision is 113 less than adults. Children often act quickly and behave unpredictably in traffic situations." She is a mother of three and has lived in the neighborhood for 14 years. She lives on the very straight portion of Hummingbird Road. Drivers can see when children are playing and biking well in advance. She noted she had contacted a few attorneys to seek their legal opinion about two very real scenarios. She explained this past winter she was driving down Summit Avenue when she hit a patch of ice and her vehicle slid through the intersection at the bottom. Fortunately, there was no one going through the intersection. What if she had hit someone? The attorneys she spoke with said the City would have immunity in this case. Discretionary immunity protects cities when they have policies in place. In this case Shorewood has a policy in place to snowplow, sand and salt the roadways. She asked what happens if the City allows the four houses to be built and have 18 new residents move in before any improvements to Summit Avenue are made or any policies are made. What happens if someday she is driving up or down Summit Avenue and a little girl runs out onto the street and she hits her? Assuming she was traveling the speed limit and driving in accordance with all of the rules she would not be liable. She may be scarred for life. The developer would not be liable. But Shorewood, according to an attorney, might be. She quoted "Sovereign Immunity which once protected local governments is often waived today. Liability could result if a local government fails to warn or when it has actual knowledge of a defect or dangerous condition. In this case the city would likely not be covered by discretionary immunity." She found several cases where cities and counties were held liable. In one case a runner was killed on a blind curve. The family's attorney proved the volume of traffic increased dramatically and no improvements had been made. The attorney showed the road was in dangerous condition because of inadequate width, lack of shoulders and no curve warnings. The case went to trial and the woman successfully won millions of dollars in damages against that city. She noted that she is publicly warning the City that this development, resulting in increased density and change in demographics, will pose a safety threat. Summit Avenue is not designed to accommodate the additional traffic and pedestrians, and the location of the development does not provide adequate line of sight. The Council could make the City vulnerable to litigation if it chooses not to conduct a study and create policies that warn the public. These policies must be based on sound analysis and discovery in order for the City to have immunity and most importantly to insure the policies actually prevent personal injury. She proposed the City make two motions: 1) The Council denies the Development Stage plans and preliminary plat; and, 2) The Council requests that a safety and feasibility study be conducted in advance of any development in order to create policies that protect drivers and pedestrians on Summit Avenue. She stated she understands the City has liability insurance. That does not cover the City for negligence of conscience. Ms. Liedtke thanked Council for the time to speak. Mayor Zerby noted there is time for one more resident to speak. Kristin Osterby, 6271 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, stated her property is located adjacent to the Liedtkes and just south of the development. She commented that she will not talk about traffic and safety because they have been spoken to by Mr. and Ms. Liedtke. She stated she will reiterate comments she made to the Planning Commission about a month ago. She noted that she was pleased that the City Planner and City Engineer attempted to get them addressed. She then noted that she is a professional planner and landscape architect and that she works around the country in many jurisdictions. She has a CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 8 of 21 sense of what is required in terms of PUDs and expected high sensitivity to particularly environmental issues. Water and drainage would be key to those. She expressed disappointment that there is not a higher level of quality. She stated she still does not think answers have been provided about drainage; in particular how to deal with stormwater runoff and actually convincing treatment of the tree preservation areas. By approving the PUD the City is granting the developer the opportunity to develop the property more readily and make a higher profit in exchange for granting the value of a tree conservation area. That conservation area is also extended by a limitation of development that includes supposed credit for many existing trees. From her vantage point if the documents are overlaid it does not convincingly appear that some of the City's standards will be met for protecting the drip lines of the trees and the root zones of the trees in terms of the area between the conservation area the limited grading. Some of the areas that are shown to be protected are less than 10 feet from some of the building plat areas. There will need to be substantial grading; earth work equipment will need to move around those areas. She does not think the plan not truly show a detailed plan for grading around the trees. It does not mean the City's standards. Rain gardens are a new technology. They provide and require special care. Staff s suggestion for a more comprehensive grading plan in the back is what should be required. From her perspective there is no planting plan that actually shows planting convincingly around the disturbed areas let alone in the rain gardens. There is not sufficient treatment to show bow the overflow or the weirs happen from those areas. There is no treatment shown at all for the water that comes from the garages and driveways that does flow onto Summit Avenue. The slopes shown on the grading plan are 3.5 percent; that is a positive flow. There is no convincing information that shows that flow will not go onto Summit Avenue and onto Hummingbird Road. She noted the plan is similar to what is being proposed for a development in Chanhassen. The plans show parking pullouts and there is planting located on the property line in what is supposed to be an easement for drainage and utility. At this time there is nothing convincing about the environmental treatment for stormwater and for the trees that are shown to be preserved shown on the plans. Ms. Osterby stated residents understand that this will be a concern of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). She stated if Council essentially approves a development plan tonight it will be doing so prior to knowing it meets the City's development standards let alone the MCWD's standards. Councilmember Hotvet asked has what conversations have occurred with the MCWD. Engineer Homby explained the developer applies for the MCWD permit; not the City. For this project the developer will have to pull a permit for erosion control per MCWD rules. lie does not think this project will require a water quality treatment rule. Pete Knaeble, with Terra Engineering which is the engineer for the project, stated they have spoken with MCWD representatives. This project has been designed to exceed MCWD, Shorewood, Chanhassen and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency standards. Terra Engineering did some stormwater management design as part of the preliminary design for the project. The developer has also hired Civil Site Group, a firm specializes in stormwater issues, to do the final design. That firm has also been in contact with the MCWD. It has designed the project to exceed those standards. The MCWD does not accept applications until the preliminary plans are approved. That would be a construction phase permit. Councilmember Siakel asked if Chanhassen responded in writing that is does not want to extend its watermain only to the project site. She stated she still does not understand why that is not feasible. Engineer Hornby explained the City can only require that the developer extend watermain to the end of CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 9 of 21 the plat which the developer would gladly do. Chanhassen will only extend watermain if it will go as far as border between the two Cities at Murray Hill Road and be connected with existing watermain there. The City would have to finance that extra portion. There are only two parcels, or possibly three, in Shorewood that would benefit from that additional extension. The City could consider assessing those three properties for the extension of that loop or the City could finance that improvement. Councilmember Siakel asked Planning Commissioner Labadie if she understands the residents to be saying there are some gaps. She stated it did not appear to her after reading all of the related documents that the Planning Commission overlooked any gaps. She asked if the gaps had been addressed from Commissioner Labadie's perspective. Commissioner Labadie noted that she was not at the April I Planning Commission meeting but she was at the March 1 meeting. She explained that during the March meeting the Commissioners had enough concerns that the Commission voted (on a 3/1 vote) to continue the public hearing and asked that the developer provide additional information for the April meeting. She stated she thought the concerns residents are raising are real. The Commission gave the developer time to address them and the developer provided additional professional documentation for the April 1 meeting. The residents have had ample opportunity to present their concerns in a public foram. She stated the Commission does think the Development Stage plans for the PUD fit within Shorewood's development standards. However, it needs to be looked at in a totally. All of the residents' concerns have not been addressed to 100 percent. The planning and zoning issues have been addressed 100 percent. That is what the Commission recommended for approval. The part the Commission has authority over as an advisory group must have been met for the Commissioners to unanimously recommend approval. She noted that at least three engineers have provided written reports on the project. And, no one on the Planning Commission is an engineer. Mayor Zerby stated the PUD proposed building four houses rather than five; three on the front and two on the backside of the hill. It is fitting four houses on the site rather than three. His concern has always been about whether or not the conservation easement is a fair trade for the extra lot. He continues to think it worthwhile to consider just three lots on the top of the hill and two on the slope. Lot 1 has been his biggest concern because the lot is located near the curve in Summit Avenue. He noted he has been up and down that roadway a couple of times and he finds it to be a tight corner with limited visibility. He stated in Planning Commission minutes he has read about discussion about a shared driveway. He asked if that would be possible to do that for at least Lots I and 2. He then asked if there is a reason the four houses will basically be in a straight line versus staggered. Director Nielsen explained the front yard setbacks for the three southerly lots (Lots 1, 2 and 3) two of them (Lots 1 and 2) exceed the setback requirement of 35 feet for the R -1 C zoning district and one (Lot 3) meets it. Lot 4, the northerly lot, has a reduced front yard setback. There is an extraordinary width of right -of -way (ROW) for Summit Avenue in the project area so there will be a lot of space between the property line and the paved surface. He stated it is up to the developer if it wants to stagger the placement of the houses. The Zoning Ordinance stipulates a minimum requirement. Depending on the house design it may be better to stagger the houses. Mayor Zerby asked if that could be controlled through the PUD process. Mayor Zerby asked if the Lot 1 driveway could be repositioned or can Lots 1 and 2 share a driveway. Director Nielsen and Engineer Homby stated that is something that could be looked at. Homby noted that may require combining some of the drainage systems for Lots 2 and 3. The developer could identify alternatives if Council wants them to do that. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 10 of 21 Councilmember Hotvet asked Mr. Strohm if the developer has been asked to participate in a safety study. Mr. Strohm stated they have met with City staff several times and staff did not see a direct need for a full safety study for the impacts of four houses. There was a lot of discussion about how traffic would be impacted by the addition of the houses. Hotvet asked if Homestead Partners would be willing to fund a full traffic study. Mr. Strohm stated he is not opposed to that. Hotvet stated that is a personal gap for her because she lives along a substandard roadway. She noted that she would feel more comfortable if that were attached to this approval. Mr. Strohm stated Homestead has been open to all options about how to work with the existing roadway. They have spoken with Chanhassen representatives about the issues as well. The intention is to widen Summit Avenue in front of the plat and that to some extent will help mitigate the concern about what people think is a blind corner in Summit Avenue. Hotvet stated everyone has beard that safety is a real concern for residents. Councilmember Sandberg asked staff why it did not feel a full traffic study was warranted for this development. Engineer Homby explained Summit Avenue is a deficient roadway; the deficiency will be basically the same whether or not the PUD moves forward. From his perspective adding the four houses generates minimal traffic trips. Therefore, he does not know why there needs to be a traffic study. The way to make the roadway less deficient is to widen it. Currently the roadway is about one standard lane wide; about 13 feet wide and increasing to 16 feet in some areas and 20 feet in others. The cost to widen the roadway outside of the plat area would be borne by the City. He noted he does not think making Summit Avenue a one -way roadway works. The cul -de -sacs do not work because they do not fit into Chanhassen's requirements for length of cul -de -sac trail was left between the two cul -de -sacs, an upp roadway is today. That leaves reconstructing the preliminary costs for how to go about doing that. and there would need to be an alternate access. If a r and lower one, it would be about as wide as the roadway to a City standard width. He has some Councilmember Siakel stated the developer is doing its part by widening the roadway in front of the plat. It comes back to the City to decide what to do from there. She then stated the City has done traffic studies for areas far more populated and more highly traveled. The results don't usually come back with conclusions that the residents would have anticipated. She went on to state she agrees with Engineer Homby that the additional traffic will likely not have a huge impact. She noted the City clearly needs to address the deficient roadway. That is not the developer's issue. She asked that the watermain extension issue be more thoroughly addressed. Mayor Zerby stated he is specifically concerned about the curve and the alignment issues it causes. He noted that he does not think the fourth house is a good idea. It is too tight. Mr. Strohm stated last fall Director Nielsen expressed concern about vehicles backing out on to Summit Avenue. Nielsen suggested installing turnarounds on the lots and that is shown in the plans. He then stated he thought Homestead Partners would be open to considering a shared driveway for Lots 1 and 2 if that is what is recommended. Mayor Zerby stated he would like to see that addressed before moving this forward. He wants to have measurements taken for visibility on the curve and how the driveway on Lot 1 fits into that. If the driveway could be moved further south then maybe the curve would be less problematic for drivers. Councilmember Siakel asked if that has to be addressed for before approval of the Development Stage plans or can that be addressed later with the developer. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 11 of 21 Director Nielsen stated that could be included as part of any motion. That would be in addition to the conditions identified in the staff reports. Councilmember Sundberg asked how long it will take for staff to have a draft street widening proposal for Summit Avenue available for Council to discuss. Engineer Homby stated he could have very preliminary costs for the next Council meeting. If Council wants things pursued further staff would prepare more detailed cost estimates. Sundberg stated she would like the street issue to be addressed and it seems that width is critically important. Homby stated one reason staff wanted the developer to look at widening the roadway in front of the plat was to bring it up to fire code. Staff did not want the developer to build to a City standard street because when/if Summit Avenue is reconstructed it would make it more difficult. It would be easier to reconstruct the roadway if it were to be done all at once. He then stated things can be left open with developer about putting in curb and gutter half street in front of the plat as part of the proj ect. Sundberg stated it's the City's responsibility to have safe and adequate roadways. As part of this development the City needs to offer some assurances that it will address the roadway issues to some extent. Ms. Liedtke stated the City and developer have had engineers look at soils and stonnwater management and stormwater runoff but they don't have experts looking into safety; the engineering part of Summit Avenue. She asked what is preventing the City and developer from doing that. Residents have talked about safety during the Planning Commission public hearings. She had brought up concern that safety was not being talked about. She reiterated that the builder stated during the Commission's April 1 meeting that the sight lines exceed any engineering requirements. She asked to see that. She commented that the previous day she was driving up Summit Avenue and when she came up to the corner there was a large tom turkey on the roadway and she missed the turkey by about a foot. She did not know it was there. She stated if there are four houses with families up there she does not want one of her 16 year olds to drive up Summit Avenue and run into someone. Mayor Zerby stopped taking any more public comment. Councilmember Siakel asked Engineer Homby what has to be inserted in the motion to address the roadway issues and the next step in the process. Homby explained during Council's next meeting roadway improvement options will be presented and discussed; both temporary and permanent solutions. He clarified that the City is limited to the ROW it has to work in unless the City wants to acquire additional land. He explained to make the curve in Summit Avenue different it would take additional ROW. Alternatives could be considered to soften, but not eliminate, some curves and to have signage about advance warnings. The grade down to Murray Hill Road is what it is today. There will be a steep section. It could potentially be made a little steeper in the middle in order to have a flatter landing at the bottom. The same thing would be considered as you approach the top of the hill. Those things would be assessed during the design phase. By the nature of the topography Summit Avenue will be deficient. The roadway should be wider. It is up to Council if it wants to widen the roadway as part of the PUD project or after the major construction is done. Mayor Zerby stated wider is just part of it. He explained that as you approach the curve in Summit Avenue the roadway incline gets steeper. A person is essentially staring into the sky at they reach the top of the curve. He then stated if the forth lot is squeezed in then to accommodate that driveway it will be a very costly construction project to widen the roadway at the curve and soften the curve. He noted the land slopes away at the curve. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 12 of 21 Engineer Homby stated a fourth option could be to work with the fire chief and Chanhassen to have a longer cul -de -sac that runs down that street. Mayor Zerby stated he thought a cul -de -sac would require a large retaining wall. It will not be a cheap project by any means in order to accommodate the fourth lot and driveway. Councilmember Siakel stated she is confused about what the motion to approve the Development Stage plans need to include. She then stated she thought the developer has satisfied the engineering requirements and answered the questions. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. She asked what needs to be included in the motion to clarify a shared driveway option needs to be assessed and roadway issues need further clarification. Attorney Keane stated a conditional approval of the Development Stage plans is appropriate. The PUD will come back before Council for additional approval. Therefore, incorporating conditions for including engineering recommendations about sight lines, access radiuses, and curb cuts in the Final Plan Stage review as well as other concerns would be appropriate. Councilmember Siakel stated if Council conditionally approved the Development Stage plans she asked if there will be time to address the conditions. Keane noted they can be addressed in a motion at this time and to refer to staff for final recommendations for Final Plan Stage approval. Councilmember Woodruff asked what people are trying to achieve by modifying the location of the driveway on the most southerly lot. If that cannot be articulated then how will someone know what change is expected. He asked what is trying to be dealt with by moving the driveway. Mayor Zerby noted he is trying to save the City an expense. Zerby explained if that driveway is put in where proposed at that corner he thinks the City will be on the hook to rebuild that corner for a substantial construction cost. Woodruff stated if the driveway is moved six feet north or six feet south he asked if that will deal with the problem and asked what the problem is. Zerby noted his concern is visibility going up the hill and a little going down the hill. Woodruff stated then the motion should include what needs to be addressed. Woodruff stated that as previously mentioned there is quite a bit of ROW between the property line and the paved surface. Could that driveway be moved down to where it says existing sanitary sewer on the drawing? That would make it a diagonal driveway versus a driveway straight out to the street. It would move it about 30 feet south. He noted he is not sure what can be done in the City owned ROW. Engineer Hornby stated that could be a temporary solution and then if the roadway is widened sometime in the future then things would have to change. Woodruff stated if the City reconstructs the roadway the driveway would have to be moved somewhere else. Hornby noted that there could be a request to develop one more property whether it is accessed from Mayflower Road or Summit Avenue. Woodruff stated that is not before Council at this time. Councilmember Sandberg stated the turnarounds off of the driveways address the issue of cars backing out of their driveways. She clarified she is not against moving the driveway and noted she is not sure it is that big a fix. The more significant fix was adding the turnaround areas on each driveway. Mayor Zerby reiterated the sight line at the curve is horrible. That is what scares him. Councilmember Sundberg asked what the posted speed limit is for Summit Avenue. Mayor Zerby responded 30 mph. Councilmember Woodruff stated if Council wants a condition on the approval he asked what would it be for. Is it for vehicles entering the property or leaving the property? Is it for vehicles going up Summit Avenue or down? CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 13 of 21 Mayor Zerby stated he is looking for safe travel up the curve and if that curve has to be changed he wants to know what the cost to deal with the driveway on Lot 1 will be. Councilmember Siakel stated she has heard Mayor Zerby say he wants to hear about more options for the driveway on Lot 1 or about a shared driveway for Lots 1 and 2. She then stated she thinks things are beyond whether it should be three or four lots. Mayor Zerby stated he does not think the City is beyond that. Mayor Zerby stated from his perspective if the City will have to spend $500,000 to change the corner of Summit Avenue so that things work for the fourth house at the comer then the conservation easement the City would get in exchange for the PUD is not worth it to him. But, at this time no one knows what that cost would be. Councilmember Sundberg asked who it is not worth it to. Zerby responded to the taxpayers if the City has to spend that amount of money to make it safe for that fourth lot to be at the corner. Mayor Zerby stated he does not have the information he needs to say he is okay with what is being proposed in the Development Stage plans. Councilmember Siakel stated it goes back to the fact that the roadway is the City's responsibility. And, it is likely that the other lot on top will be developed some time. Mayor Zerby stated his concern is primarily about how tight the corner is to that fourth house. Councilmember Sundberg stated conditional approval is appropriate and noted she would like to keep things high level so staff has the opportunity to evaluate all options including some that may not have been discussed. What Council wants in the conditional approval is adequate safety at the curve and an adequate roadway. Councilmember Woodruff stated the reconstruction of that curve and the street down the hill from there is outside of the PUD. It is not the developer's responsibility. Councilmember Sandberg went on record stating it is the City's intention to make Summit Avenue safer, without identifying what that should be at this time, and to come to terms about what to do in a timeframe that does not harm the developer. She clarified that the City would not be granting special rights to the developer if it approves the PUD; that is the legitimate right of the developer. The legitimate concerns of the residents in the area also have to be considered. That is what Council has been trying to do. She stated staff has the competence to come up with what the solution should be. Council does not. Councilmember Woodruff asked if there is a deadline by which the Council has to take action on the Development Stage plans. Director Nielsen explained if action is not taken tonight the 60 -day requirement has to be extended for 60 days. That can be done for cause. Woodruff stated if that were to be extended he asked if staff would be able to present viable options to Council within that timeframe. Engineer Homby stated they would. Woodruff stated during the February Council and staff retreat there was discussion about alternatives for improvements to Summit Avenue. Engineer Homby has articulated them clearly and discarded some for good reason. Therefore, he thinks at a high level Council could decide if the City is going to make changes to Summit Avenue. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 14 of 21 Councilmember Siakel stated decisions about what to do to Summit Avenue is separate from the PUD. Director Nielsen stated that during the Council and staff retreat the alternatives were discussed. It was noted at that time that regardless of the PUD project the City needs to address Summit Avenue. If the project went away tomorrow Council would still have to make a decision about what to do about the roadway given all the comments made and concerns expressed about the roadway. That does not land on the PUD or the fourth lot. Mayor Zerby reiterated his concern about the alignment of the driveway on Lot 1 to the curve in Summit Avenue. Director Nielsen stated that can be addressed between now and the Final Plan Stage approval. If a shared driveway further to the south is a solution so be it. Zerby noted that he wants to see an engineering study or something that shows sight lines. Zerby then stated he does not want the City to get into a situation where a bigger problem is created than what is already there. He agrees the roadway is a problem and that needs to be resolved. He would like to avoid more expensive alternatives for the curve area by possibly placing the driveway on Lot 1 different than proposed. Director Brown stated the City cannot force the developer to make improvements away from the site. However, the developer does have the opportunity to participate in that area adjacent to its plat. He then stated if reconstruction of Summit Avenue is to move forward that may require the developer to construct a standard street section in front of the plat to be determined. Councilmember Sundberg stated improvements to Summit Avenue are the City's burden. Director Nielsen stated he understood Director Brown to mean that if the City decides to go with a standard width City street then the portion the developer would be widening in front of the plat would be widened to City standards; it would be 24 feet wide versus 20 feet wide. There was discussion about how the conditional approval should be worded and the following was agreed to: Siakel moved, Sandberg seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14 -0251 "A Resolution Granting Development Stage Plan and Preliminary Plat Approval for Summit Woods Planned Unit Development" subject to the conditions identified in the staff reports; continued discussion between staff and the developer about the possibility of a shared driveway for Lots 1 and 2 or relocating the driveway on Lot 1; the developer participating in discussions about what Summit Avenue needs to be redeveloped like in front of the plat; and to assess the sight fines in the area near the curve of Summit Avenue. Mayor Zerby stated he appreciated everyone's efforts to move this forward. Motion passed 510. 9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS A. Retaining Wall Change Order Alternatives for the Excelsior Boulevard Trail Engineer Hornby explained that the Excelsior Boulevard Trail is the section that extends from Manor Road to Barrington Way. Staff had been working with representatives from Metropolitan Council Enviromnental Services (MCES) to get the fine details of the retaining wall identified. Staff had submitted a performance specification to MCES to include in their contract documents for the retaining CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 15 of 21 wall that specified "Unit Face Texture shall be determined by the Owner" with further clarification to come. The intent was there was going to be a third addendum to the MCES bid documents. Council had approved the type of wall block staff recommended which was called weathered edge. That type of block is a little more expensive than standard block. MCES chose not to release a third addendum because of time constraints. Instead it decided to issue change orders for items post bidding. Through the MCES bidding process the subcontractor for the wall bid a standard limestone face block with light stain. He noted that the meeting packet contained a photograph of a section of a retaining wall with each of those types of block as well as one with a limestone face block concrete color. He stated the question at hand is whether or not the City should issue a change order for the weathered edge block face. He explained the weathered edge block is $2 per square foot more from the supplier than what was bid. Per MCES the cost to go from the wall that was bid (the limestone face texture) to a weathered edge block face is $10,180. The wall was estimated to be 2,800 square feet. To add a three - color stain to color the block it would cost an additional $8,211. The additional cost for that wall would be $3.63 per square foot. MCES has indicated that if Council wants the wall to be weathered edge it would pay the cost of the wall face above $2 per square foot. But, MCES would not pay the cost for the color. He explained the City could wait for MCES to complete building the wall, accept it, and then have a contractor color it at a future date. He noted for change orders there are a subcontractor and a contractor markup, and they would amount to about 15 percent of the change order amount. Or, the color could be done as part of the project. He stated from his perspective either block works. He clarified the reason staff has brought this before Council is the block the contractor bid is not what staff intended it to be. Mayor Zerby stated to hire the weathered edge block is most Like the stone around the old Highway 7 picnic area. He clarified the retaining wall will not face Highway 7. He stated it is a toss up to him. Councilmember Woodruff stated it is his understanding that the only people who are going to see the retaining wall are the people driving on Highway 7. Engineer Hornby clarified the people on Excelsior Boulevard would see it. The wall would 'face the Barrington development and Excelsior Boulevard. The wall would be on the south side of Excelsior Boulevard and the north side of Highway 7. The wall would not be visible from Highway 7. Councilmember Woodruff noted he was confused about who would see the retaining wall. He stated the wall would be at the same level as the trail. He asked how people living in the Barrington development could see it. Engineer Homby clarified if you are on Excelsior Boulevard from Manor Road, it drops down to Barrington Way and then goes back up toward the Skate Park. If a person is driving eastbound on Excelsior Boulevard they will see about a four - foot -high wall along the trail. The trail is at the same level as the roadway surface. Councilmember Siakel stated the question is whether or not to spend the extra money. Engineer Hornby suggested going with the base block (the limestone cement color) and coloring it later. It would be the most cost effective thing to do. Woodruff moved, Sundberg seconded, authoring going forward with the base block and color it later. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 16 of 21 Councilmember Siakel explained that her family put in a driveway which required a retaining wall. When they showed up and put the brick in it looked ugly. She stated for this project she prefers to spend the money to do it right. She noted that she does not want to approve a wall with the condition to color it after it has been constructed. She asked for reaffirmation of what the cost to color the block face up front would be. Engineer Homby responded $8,211 for the limestone block face the contractor has bid. Siakel stated she is fine with that. She then stated MCES will pay the additional cost for the weathered edge block face. Engineer Homby stated MCES had added a 15 percent contingency to the agreements on to the total amount. He explained that if MCES did not chip in for the change order and if the City went with the weathered edge block face and three -color stain the additional cost would be about $18,400. The contingency in the agreement is about $19,350; that is only charged if it is spent. But, MCES has agreed to pay the cost for block face above $2 per square foot. Mayor Zerby recessed the meeting at 8:55 P.M. Mayor Zerby reconvened the meeting at 8:58 P.M. Councilmember Sundberg asked how many people will see the retaining wall. Councilmember Hotvet stated the people that live there and that is important. Councilmember Woodruff stated there is one very important person who fives there. Councilmember Siakel asked who. Director Nielsen stated anyone that drives that section of Excelsior Boulevard will see it. Mayor Zerby stated anyone who uses the trail will also. Motion failed 1/4 with Hotvet, Siakel, Sundberg and Zerby dissenting. Siakel moved, Hotvet seconded, approving the retaining wall be constructed with three- color, weathered edge block face. Councilmember Woodruff stated he thinks the three -color weathered edge block face would be really cool. He then stated he has a tough time saying there is contingency money so let's spend it. The trail has not been built yet and the City has not done a trail project yet where there have not been a lot of change orders. The entire contingency will be spent for the block face. Motion passed 4/1 with Woodruff dissenting. 10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Approval of a Resolution Making an Appointment to the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission Mayor Zerby noted that at 5:30 P.M. this evening Council had a special meeting to interview applicant Paul Stelmachers for an open position on the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission. He stated he thought he was a very good candidate and would be a good fit, noting that he also sits on the Commission. Zerby moved, Sandberg seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION 14 -026, "A Resolution Making the Appointment of Paul Stelmaehers to the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission Effective CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 17 of 21 April 14, 2014, through January 31, 2015." Motion passed 4/0/1 with Hotvet abstaining due to her absence at that meeting. B. Mayor and City Council Compensation Administrator Joynes explained that during the February 2014 Council and staff retreat there was a brief discussion about compensation for elected officials. Staff was directed to research comparable pay for the position of mayor and council members in metro cities with similar structure, scope (budget and number of employees) and size. He noted there has not been an increase in the compensation for Shorewood's elected officials for ten years. He stated even if Council wanted the pay to be at the lower medium area of surrounding areas an increase would be justified. He explained that based on his research a range for the mayor's annual compensation of between $4,800 and $5,000 would be appropriate and for a city council member it would be $3,800 — $4,000. He noted that based on the normal number of hours a council member would work based on meetings and activities a person earns about $11 — $12 per hours. lie recommended that Council considered what he has proposed. He noted that an ordinance is required to set the compensation and when it goes into effect. Mayor Zerby noted that past practice has been to put an increase into effect the following election cycle. He stated he thought it important to have compensation that is fair. It may encourage others to spend time on such an important task for the community. Councilmember Woodruff stated he had suspected that Shorewood's elected officials were not compensated competitively. Woodruff moved, increasing both the mayor's and the council members' salary by $90 per month ($1080 per year) effective January 1, 2015. Administrator Joynes stated that would place the mayor's salary at $4,680 and the council members' salary at $4,080. Councilmember Siakel stated she is somewhat uncomfortable giving herself a raise and noted that she did not run for Council because of the money. She suggested an increase of $50 per month for council members and $100 a month for the mayor. She stated the mayor spends a lot more time on City activities. Motion failed for lack of a second. Administrator Joynes commented the data shows there are some cities that pay virtually nothing to their elected officials. However, Council may want to give consideration to how to encourage people to do these things. He stated this evening's regular meeting was not comfortable. He went on to state that some people may want to donate their compensation. But, there are people who may make a decision about whether or not they want to run for elected office based on getting their expenses paid for. If the compensation is so low that it discourages people from running it would be a disservice to the community. He noted that he thinks it is appropriate to establish salaries that are competitive and relate to what other people think the positions are worth. If members of Council chose to do it differently they can be accommodated. Councilmember Sundberg stated the compensation for the mayor's position has the widest gap. She suggested increasing the salary for the mayor by $150 per month to bring it up to what the average 2013 compensation for mayors is, and the council members by $50 per month bring it to the average. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 18 of 21 Councilmember Woodruff clarified $50 a month would only bring the salary for council members to $3,600 and the average is $3,900. And, the $150 would bring the mayor's salary to $5,400. Administrator Joynes suggested increasing the salary for the mayor to $5,000 and increasing the salary for a council member to $3,900. Both are in line with the average 2013 compensation for those positions. Sandberg moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving Ordinance No. 511, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 105 of the Shorewood City Code Relating to Salaries for the Mayor and City Council setting the annual salary of the Mayor of the City at $5,000 and the annual salary for each member of the City Council at $3,900. " Motion passed 4/1 with Hotvet dissenting. Woodruff moved, Sundberg seconded, setting the commencement date for the salary increases for January 1, 2015. Motion passed 4/1 with Hotvet dissenting. C. Agreement with the Christmas Lake Homeowner's Association for Inspections Director Nielsen explained that aquatic invasive species (AIS) inspections (primarily for zebra mussels) have been conducted at the Christmas Lake boat access the past two years. The first year the Mimnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) oversaw inspectors from Volt Workplace Solutions, the contractor. Last year the MCWD simply provided grant money and the City was responsible for the oversight. In both years the Christmas Lake Homeowners Association (CLHA) basically paid any cost for the inspections that were not covered by the grant which was about one half. For 2014 the CLHA has suggested that it contract with Volt directly subject to the City's rules and regulations. Staff agrees with that suggestion. The copy of the agreement included in the meeting packet would replace the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the City and the CLHA from the past two years. Staff recommends this change. He noted there will end up being an agreement between the CLHA and Volt that staff would want to review and approve. The agreement would include reporting requirements. He stated he has a meeting set up with the CLHA this week and he would like to go through the agreement during the meeting if this is approved. Woodruff moved, Sundberg seconded, authorizing the City Administrator to execute the AIS Inspection Agreement between the City and the Christmas Lake Homeowners Association subject to the addition that the Association has to comply with the reporting requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Motion passed 510. 11. OLD BUSINESS 12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. Three Rivers Park District Lake Minnetonka LRT Pedestrian Bridge Update Engineer Homby stated that the Three Rivers Park District (TRPD) has sent out 95 percent complete plans for the LRT pedestrian bridge for staff to review. Comments on the plans were due by the end of the business day today. He will ask the City Clerk to send the comments on to Council. He explained the plans indicate a pedestrian bridge that has been extended onto peers so people can see through. That provides better site lines. Although this has not formalized yet, the TRPD plans a bid opening sometime in late .Iuly, and starting construction in August 20 t4. The trail work and part of the structure would be CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNTCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 19 of 21 done in 2014. The main span bridge will be done in 2015. It construction completion date will be around July 2015. 2. Municipal Street Improvement District Legislation Administrator Joynes explained that the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) has spear headed an effort for a number of years that would help create an alternative funding mechanism for municipalities to build and maintain streets. The LMC has conveyed to the legislature that the differed maintenance of roadways has come home to roost. The LMC believes it is important for municipalities to have the option to in a sense create a utility fund for street maintenance. The LMC is asking cities to support their efforts. Over 100 cities have done that to date. Virtually all of the associations that represent municipalities back this. He clarified backing this does not mean the City has to do this. Councilmember Woodruff stated a year ago Council passed a resolution and sent a note to the Legislature in favor of this. He noted he believes Council should do this again. Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, directing staff to prepare a letter in favor of the Municipal Street Improvement District Legislation. Motion passed 5/0. Other Director Brown stated Public Works personnel have started street sweeping efforts going east to west. He then stated the issue with the sanitary sewer system out on the islands has been resolved. Councilmember Hotvet asked when additional sodding or seeding will be done around the Smithtown Road west sidewalk. Engineer Homby stated that cannot be done until late May or early June. Councilmember Woodruff stated a few meetings ago Council and staff talked about the speed data collected for travelers on County Club Road. At that time Council directed staff to request additional speed enforcement there. He asked what has happened with that. Administrator Joynes noted that South Lake Minnetonka Police Department ( SLMPD) Chief Litsey has been asked to do that. Director Brown noted he has briefly discussed the data with the SLMPD. He explained that the SLMPD Chief and Deputy Chief believe that a judge would not uphold a written citation for going 3 — 5 miles over the posted speed limit. Woodruff stated he had pointed out there are times of the day when drivers travel at speeds significantly in excess of the 30 miles per hour (mph) posted speed limit. He asked that be looked into. Woodruff then stated a few weeks ago he asked Director Brown to find out if the SLMPD can enforce the City's weight restrictions. He has not heard back. Director Brown explained the SLMPD officers are certified to do that but the scales are not. There may be issues with the scales. Staff has been researching what it may cost to replace the scales. He thought one scale would cost $2,000 — $3,000. Woodruff asked Mayor Zerby to bring the topic up during the next regular SLMPD Coordinating Committee meeting. Engineer Homby stated CenterPoint Energy is going to be sending out a postcard to all of its customers telling them what to do if they have a clogged sewer service. CenterPoint would like customers to call them. The information will be put on the City's website Mayor Zerby asked for project timelines for the Galpin Lake Road trail project and the pending Smithtown East trail project. He would like them included in the meeting packets over the summer. He asked for an update on the projects. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 20 of 21 Engineer Hornby explained that for the Galpin Lake Road, WSB & Associates staff will meet this week and review the current progress. Through the City Attorney they are receiving the title information. They are trying to make adjustments so the City does not need to take permanent right -of -way (ROW). There may be a need for the City to acquire temporary easements. The frail design has been roughed out and it is in the process of being refined. Staff is discussing the possibility of a slight realignment at the intersection of Mayflower Road and Galpin Lake Road. That was not in the feasibility report. Doing that may make it possible to avoid acquiring permanent ROW on two parcels. With regard to the Smithtown Road east trail/sidewalk project, he stated he and Director Nielsen are discussing scheduling the first informational public meeting. He noted there will be issues on either side of the roadway. Mayor Zerby asked that Council have an opportunity to weigh in on that sooner rather than later. Director DeJong stated the 2013 audit field work will start next week. He then stated staff will be in training the following week on the utility billing component of the new financial system. He noted that Engineer Homby forgot to mention that he had determined that there is more Municipal State Aid (MSA) funding available to the City. Homby has submitted a reimbursement request for $825,000. Mayor Zerby thanked Hornby for doing that. Council was impressed. Mayor Zerby noted that he has received a request from City of Excelsior staff to get information about the City's credit card processing system. Director Nielsen stated the Park Commission has started to work on its part of the manual for landscaping of City -owned property. Administrator Joynes noted there is a South Lake Minnetonka Police Department Coordinating Committee special meeting on April 15 and an Excelsior Fire District Board budget work session on April 16. There is a League of Minnesota Cities conference scheduled for June 18 — 20 and it will be held in St. Cloud. If people sign up by May 1 the rate is reduced. He explained staff is close to doing some security upgrades for the Council Chamber and the City Hall reception area. B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Woodruff stated there is a Metro Cities business annual meeting on April 24 at 5:30 P.M. in St. Paul. He will be attending. He noted he will not be attending the League of Minnesota Cities conference; he is the LMC representative. Councilmember Hotvet stated she attended a Minnetonka Family Collaborative Council (MFCC) meeting as the City's liaison. The MFCC's grant cycle just ended. If staff has any reason to apply for a grant having to do with the mental health and wellbeing of children and adults supported by the Minnetonka School District she can give staff more information. She then stated that on May 3 from 3:00 — 7:00 P.M. on the corner of Lake Street and Water Street the Lake Minnetonka Excelsior Rotary Club is putting on a Bingo and Burgers by the Bay event. All proceeds will go the Excelsior - Lake Minnetonka Chamber of Commerce's July 4 fireworks display; the only free fireworks display in the area. Sponsors of the event include Excelsior Brewing Company (donating beverages) and Maynard's (donating all of the food). Entertainment will be by the Basement Kings. Mayor Zerby stated it is a fun event; he went last year. Mayor Zerby stated that he attended a meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission (LMCC) Executive Committee. The Committee has recommended moving the franchise renewal agreement with Mediacom on to the full Commission for its May meeting. The LMCC has a new chair and a new secretary. He then stated on April 12 he attended a Shallow Lakes Forum (lakes less than 15 feet deep) hosted by a number of watershed districts. He found it fascinating. There was a lot of CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 14, 2014 Page 21 of 21 discussion about flipping lakes; taking water from an algae state to a clear state. People are looking at using a bristle machine to pick up zebra mussels on the beach; something similar to a bristle machine used to pick up acorns off the ground. He noted he will attend the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department Coordinating Committee special meeting on April 15. Councilmember Siakel stated she will attend the Excelsior fire District Board budget work session on April 16. 13. ADJOURN Siakel moved, Hotvet seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of April 14, 2014, at 9:35 P.M. Motion passed 510. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: S�cy erby, Ma 00 Jean Panchyshyn, Cit Clark