05-12-14 CC Reg Mtg MinCITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, MAY 12, 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 7:04 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, Sandberg, and Woodruff; Attorney
Keane; City Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong;
Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and City Engineer Honaby
Absent: None.
B. Review Agenda
Sandberg moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, April 28, 2014
Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of April
28, 2014, 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 Resolution Therein.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14 -030, "A Resolution Approving Transfers of Funds
to Close Deficits."
Motion passed 510.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
5. PUBLIC HEARING
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 2 of 19
A. Public Hearing for Sunnyvale Lane Improvements, City Project 14 -01, Ordering
Improvements and Preparation of Plans and Specifications
Mayor Zerby opened the Public Hearing at 7:06 P.M.
Engineer Homby noted that the meeting packet contains a copy of a memorandum from him describing
the proposed improvements for Sunnyvale Lane and the process for those improvements as well as the
executive summary from the Feasibility Report. Copies of comment cards from the resident workshop as
well as a letter from a resident were placed at the dais this evening. This evening's public hearing is about
the watermain extension portion of the project because it's the City's policy to assess for that. The memo
identifies the properties that would benefit from the extension.
Engineer Homby gave a brief presentation about the Sunnyvale Lane improvements project. The
highlights are as follows.
➢ The project location map indicates the west end is Meadowview Lane and the east end is Eureka
Road. To the north is Valleywood Lane and to the south is Wild Rose Lane.
➢ The proposed improvements include concrete curb and gutter, stonnwater management
improvements, watermain extension and sanitary sewer system improvements (that involves
inflow and infiltration improvements).
➢ The improved roadway will be close to a standard roadway. It will be 26 feet wide back to back
surmountable curb. It would be similar to Valleywood Lane, Meadowview Lane and Wild Rose
Lane.
➢ He displayed a slide summarizing the street improvements and the estimated cost of $585,119.
The cost includes a 10 percent construction contingency and 25 percent for indirect costs. The
proposed project funding is $357,649 out of the Street improvement Fund, $21,862 out of the
Sanitary Sewer Fund, $102,328 out of the Stormwater Management Fund, and $103,290 out of
the Water Fund.
➢ The assessment amount for each of the six parcels in the project area (there are a total of eight
parcels) that are not served by municipal water is $17,215. The two parcels abutting Eureka Road
are served by municipal water and the property owners have already paid the connection fees. He
displayed a slide of the preliminary assessment role.
➢ He displayed a copy of the project schedule and noted the project is on schedule.
Councilmember Sandberg asked how many of the properties represented at the resident workshop were
opposed to water. Engineer Homby responded that four of the five were opposed and the one that was in
favor would not connect to municipal water until the well on that property failed.
Mayor Zerby noted that it has not been the City's past practice to force municipal water onto property
owners. In order to be responsible it is a question the City needs to ask. He explained that major roadway
improvement projects are to last a long time. It's his understanding that roadways were constructed in the
1970s which makes them roughly 40 years old. The decision about whether or not to install watermain
under the roadway will have a 40 -year impact. There may not be an opportunity to extend watermain
under the roadway for another 40 years. Extension of watermain is less expensive when it is done in
conjunction with major roadway improvement projects. A City Council is charged with considering the
needs of the citizens today as well as for the next 40 years. He noted that Council values the residents'
opinions on this. He stated he would appreciate the property owners considering a long -tern perspective
on the potential watermain extension.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 3 of 19
Mayor Zerby opened the Public Testimony of the Public Hearing at 7:14 P.M. He asked those wishing to
speak to keep their comments to no more than 5 minutes.
Joe Nelson, 25785 Sunnyvale Lane, stated his properly would be one of the benefiting properties if the
watermain extension moves forward. He noted that the assessment would be an extreme financial
hardship for him and he is therefore opposed to it. He had sent the City a letter expressing that opinion.
He stated he thought he heard that the watermain extension does not mean a person has to connect to
municipal water. He asked someone to clarify if his understanding is correct.
Judy Benka, 25780 Sunnyvale Lane, stated she finds it hard to believe that it will cost $103,290 to extend
the watermain that short distance. She asked what process was used to determine the estimated
assessment cost. She stated the feasibility study reflects that the service stub would be located in the
middle of each lot. That is not practical for property owners. Property owners would want to install a
service line that is the shortest distance to their homes.
Engineer Homby clarified that the location of service stubs will be finalized in the final plans and the
property owners would be contacted to determine the best Iocation. Normally the stubs would be lined up
with the existing wells. He explained that the estimated cost is based on history. Staff would look at more
recent cost estimates and cost estimates from 2014 for utility improvements under a street. If there is not
enough information an estimated guess is made.
Dale Carrenter, 25680 Sunnyvale Lane, stated he is more than 80 years old and is not interested in paying
for someone else's water. He noted he paid for the sewer system when that was constructed. And, he paid
to have a new well drilled several years ago.
Lauri Behrends, 25720 Sunnwale Lane, stated she was initially told the cost would be $10,000 to extend
watermain and now the cost is over $17,000. And, the cost to hookup is going to be $3,000 — $6,000. The
current cost estimates are a financial hardship for property owners. She noted she is opposed to the
watermain extension.
Mayor Zerby closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:21 P.M
Councilmember Woodruff clarified that it has been the City's policy that if watermain is installed and
there is an existing dwelling on a property the City does not require the property owner to hookup to
municipal water. They can hookup when they want to. The property owner does have to pay for their
portion of the watermain extension. He noted that there are property owners who have chosen not to hook
up to municipal water after watermain was extended.
Couneilmember Siakel noted the estimated assessment for properties is significantly higher because of the
low number of properties that would be benefiting from it. She stated the high cost of extending
watermain seems to be a reoccurring theme. She questioned if it might be more appropriate for an
assessment to be capped at, for example, $10,000 and then have the City pay for part of the extension
based on a theory that if more property owners connect to municipal water there would be a break even
situation eventually. She stated the cost does seem to be prohibitive for some people. Yet, there are some
neighborhoods where property owners are asking for watermain to be extended. She asked if the property
owners in this project area are opposed at any cost or do they want to work more closely with the City to
make it happen.
Engineer Homby explained that the assessment cost per parcel is within a couple of hundred dollars of the
average cost identified in the 2012 water study. He noted that if watermain exists in front of a property the
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 4 of 19
City's current connection fee is $10,000. He stated that because there are only six benefiting parcels the
cost per parcel is much higher.
Councilmember Sundberg stated she is hesitant to impose such a significant cost on the property owners.
She then stated she thought that properties that are not connected to municipal water will be impacted at
the time of sale. She noted she is opposed to this proposed watermain extension.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he agrees with Councilmember Sundberg's perspective. He then stated
during his tenure on Council the majority of property owners have stated they did not support watermain
extension as part of road reconstruction projects. He then stated the 2012 water study reflected that it
would cost about $29 million to extend watermain to all properties in the City other than those on the
Islands.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she agrees with Councilmember Sundberg's perspective and noted that her
family will be faced with a similar decision in a few years. She then stated she supports Councilmember
Siakel's idea to figure out if there is a way for the City to help fund part of a watermain extension if the
cost if way too high.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought it important for the City to be consistent because it has not
forced watermain extension on other property owners and this is even more expensive than those.
Mayor Zerby stated he has been respectful of property owners' perspectives when proposing watermain
extension. He noted that this is Council's problem and not the residents. He stated he thought municipal
water is the way of the future. Having a centralized water distribution system is a better mechanism for
delivering safe, reliable drinking water to residents. Council needs to find a way to make it more
affordable to residents. He noted that Shorewood does not assess for roadway improvements; some cities
do. He suggested Council consider some hybrid solution when it comes to municipal watermain
extension. Getting more people on the water system will help spread the cost to maintain it among more
people. He noted that his property is served by a private well and he does not like it when he loses
electrical power because he cannot take a shower or use the restroom.
Woodruff moved, Sundberg seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14 -031 "A Resolution
Ordering the Project and Authorizing the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Sunnyvale
Lane Improvements, City Project 14 -01 without the Watermain Extension." Motion passed 510.
6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Report by Josh Leddy of the Lake Minnetonka Association and Resident Jack
Kimball on the 2014 Milfoil Project and Funding
Josh Leddy, with the Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA), stated that Gideon Bay and the west portion
of Phelps Bay are located in Shorewood. Those Bays were treated for Eurasian Watermilfeil (milfoil) the
last several years. In 2014 all of Phelps Bay will be chemically treated for milfoil. Phelps Bay is located
in the cities of Minnetrista, Mound, and Shorewood. By having the eastern portion of Phelps Bay treated
it will help the properties that front the Bay and people using the west side of the Bay. Gideon Bay will be
fully treated in 2014. He made the LMA's formal request for a $6,000 contribution from Shorewood for
continuing the treatment.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the email from Shorewood resident and Phelps Bay Captain Jack
Kimball provided the treatment acreage for the portion of Phelps Bay in Shorewood but not for Gideon
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 5 of 19
Bay. The email attachment shows there are minimal funds being carried over from 2013 for the treatment
for Phelps Bay. He asked if there are any carryover funds for Gideon Bay. Mr. Leddy stated there are
more carryover funds for Gideon Bay than for Phelps Bay. He then stated two years ago the treatment
was more difficult and exhausted more funds.
Councilmember Woodruff stated that it is his recollection that for last year the City's contribution for the
treatment of Gideon Bay was $1,000. This year the request is for $1,800 and there are carryover funds.
Mr. Leddy stated there are a significant number of properties in Shorewood that abut Gideon Bay. The
cost is also related to the acreage being treated. He noted this is the first year he has been serving the
LMA in his current capacity.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the City contributed $7,000 in total in 2013 for milfoil treatment with
$1,000 of that for Gideon Bay.
Councilmember Siakel stated the amount being asked for in total is $6,000 and that is the same as what
was asked for in 2013.
Councilmember Woodruff asked that next year Mr. Leddy come with information about both Bays
Mr. Leddy stated because of the late spring and the spring conditions he was not able to do all of the
mapping.
Councilmember Siakel stated Mr. Leddy's request is very reasonable. She acknowledged all of the find
raising the LMA and the Bay Captains had done the last several years to help pay for the treatments.
Siakel moved, Hotvet seconded, approving a $6,000 contribution for the Eurasian Watermilfoil
treatment of Gideon Bay and the west side of Phelps Bay.
Mayor Zerby noted the 2014 Operating Budget has allocated the $6,000 for the treatment.
Councilmember Woodruff stated that what is being requested if $4,200 for Phelps Bay and $1,800 for
Gideon Bay. It's his recollection that more was contributed to the treatment of Phelps Bay in previous
years. Bay Captain Kimball clarified $4,200 went to treating Phelps Bay in 2013.
Councilmember Sandberg stated $6,000 seems reasonable. She then stated she thought it behooves the
City to reinforce the efforts of those residents who fund raise and contribute funds for the treatments. She
thanked them for their efforts.
Mayor Zerby stated that Lake Minnetonka is often perceived as a regional park and it is used by residents
that do not own properties that front the Lake. He thanked Mr. Leddy and Mr. Kimball for their efforts.
Motion passed 510.
B. Presentation by Council Member Hotvet on the Lake Minnetonka Scenic Byway
Concept
Councilmember Woodruff stated the staff report in the meeting packet states that background information
on the Lake Minnetonka area scenic byway concept has been provided to Council under separate cover.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL :MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 6 of 19
An email with six documents attached showed up at 12:42 P.M. today. He noted he has not read any of
that. Mayor Zerby clarified that information was sent to Council in February 2014.
Councilmember Hotvet stated on February 24, 2014, staff and elected officials from fourteen
communities around Lake Minnetonka attended a meeting about a Lake Minnetonka area scenic byway
concept. The discussion was led by Wayzata Mayor Ken Wilcox. The purpose of the discussion was to
educate people on what a scenic byway is. She and Mayor Zerby attended the meeting. A scenic byway
would use existing routes around the Lake. The communities already have a very strong infrastructure in
place. The Lake is an appealing asset.
What is missing is a way to unify the communities. A scenic byway would offer an aggregate approach to
funding mechanisms that the communities currently do not have access to and some historical
preservation tools. What strongly appealed to her was the multi -model approach. The approach would
incorporate bicycles, kayaks, canoes and so forth to move around the lake area. It is not focusing on how
to bring more automobile traffic into the communities. The concept would draw attention to the Lake
which is a regional asset. It would help fund some historical areas or scenic overlooks and possible
roadway improvements. There are two other scenic byways in Hennepin County — The Great River Road
and the Grand Rounds. The County has the experience to help bring the pieces together.
The resolution included in the meeting packet is to express Shorewood's support for continued discussion
about the scenic byway concept. There is no funding involved. No staff resources would be committed to
this.
Hotvet concluded that her task leaving the February 24 meeting was to determine if Council, on behalf of
its constituents, wanted to continue to have representation in the discussions.
Councilmember Sandberg stated she thought it would prudent to continue being involved in discussions
with other communities about the concept. Councilmember Siakel concurred.
Sundberg moved, Siakel seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14 -032, "A Resolution
Authorizing a Feasibility Study for a Lake Minnetonka Scenic Byway Concept." Motion passed 5/0.
7. PARKS
8. PLANNING
A. Report on the May 6, 2014, Planning Commission Meeting
Commissioner Davis reported on matters considered and actions taken at the May 6, 2014, Planning
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting).
B. Appeal Notice of Violation
Applicant: Tom Kiefer
Location: 28150 Boulder Bridge Drive
Director Nielsen explained the City received a complaint about the property located at 28150 Boulder
Bridge Drive in March 2014. The complaint mentioned numerous vehicles on the property; some of them
were inoperable. It also mentioned that a skid steer vehicle, aka a bobcat, was being stored on the
property. Staff inspected the property and found some of the items mentioned in the complaint to be true.
The City Code does not regulate the number of vehicles that a property owner can have on their property
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 7 of 19
provided they are licensed, operable and registered to people that live on the property. Vehicles that are
inoperable are in violation as are vehicles that are not licensed. Staff has done two follow -up inspections.
The meeting packet includes a copy of the appellants appeal letter. The packet also includes a copy of the
complaint letter from the President of the Boulder Bridge Farm Homeowner's Association.
As of today what remains in violation is one motor vehicle that is up on blocks. That has been there since
February 2014. The City Code allows a vehicle to be worked on for up to thirty days. The vehicles that
did not have current license tabs on them have been updated with new tabs. During a follow -up inspection
the appellants had indicated that the two reservoirs on the property that had been used to store biofuel are
now being used for composting and one of them will be removed from the site. Staff has put the appellant
on notice that if the skid steer is stored outside on the property again the appellant will be cited for that
because it is a commercial piece of equipment; it is not "incidental to residential use ".
Nielsen noted that staff recommends that the appellant be given until May 23 to deal with the one existing
violation.
Tom Kiefer, 28150 Boulder Bridge Drive, distributed a copy of his remarks. He noted the inoperable
truck has been on blocks since mid- February. His son has been repairing it. He stated the City received a
letter from Cal Wright, the President of the Boulder Bridge Farm Homeowner's Association. He indicated
he wants to address some of the items in that letter that are misleading or false.
He apologized for the frustrations and cacophony surrounding the situation. He stated it has not been his
and his family's intent to vex their neighbors. His family has strived to be good people.
He noted that three days ago they received a copy of a letter to the City of Shorewood from Cal Wright,
representing the Boulder Bridge Farm Homeowner's Association. The Association told them it had sent
them a registered letter. They never received it. He stated because they never responded to the letter and
because the letter stated they were in violation of some of the Association's covenants they would lose
their boat slip, lose voting privileges and the use of the common property. He commented they are among
the term residents of Boulder Bridge; they have lived there close to 23 years.
He stated he is a practicing physician in good standing with Park Nicollet Clinic and Methodist Hospital.
He and his wife have raised five children and they have five grandchildren. He has volunteered with
Youth For Understanding for more than 25 years and at Minnewashta Church for 12 years. His wife
Betsy is a registered nurse and works full time for Youth for Understanding, a nonprofit organization with
the purpose of promoting cultural diversity at the family and secondary school level. Her job is to prepare
teenagers for their role and responsibilities in a changing world. She is an active gardener, a naturalist and
grandmother.
Their son Ryan lives at home. He works Monday through Friday from 5:30 — 10:00 A.M. and 2:30 — 7:00
P.M. as a school bus driver for First Student.
Mayor Zerby asked Dr. Kiefer if he intends to read all of his written remarks because Council has limited
time this evening.
Dr. Kiefer stated he wants Council to understand his son, him and his wife. He noted that his family
probably does things differently than most of the people living in the Boulder Bridge development do.
They have ruffled some feathers. Other residents in that area do not like the appearance of their driveway
and other things.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page S of 19
He then stated that his son believes in alternative fuels and sustainable energy. His son runs all of his
equipment on biof iol (diesel). His son is a part-time bee keeper; it is not a business because he does not
make any money doing that. Bees are essential pollinators and are endangered. He received a bee delivery
two days ago. He and his wife are proud of what their son does.
His son also repairs his own vehicles. That is why the one vehicle has been on blocks for three months.
He and his wife would prefer that it not be there. His son has excessive vehicles on their property and in
their garage that he is repairing due to lack of finances. He is replacing the axel on the van and it took
quite a while to get the part from a junkyard. He noted that one of the complaints that he has heard from
Boulder Bridge residents is his son's vehicles are old and they do not live up to community standards. He
asked how he can tell his son that he needs to get a better vehicle when he does not have the money to
buy one. His son will not take the money from him.
His son cannot earn enough money to pay his expenses. Friends and neighbors who employ him allow
him to make some money to pay for his expenses. That does not sound like a business to him.
Mayor Zerby stated the City of Shorewood has ordinances it has to enforce. These types of ordinances are
enforced on a complaint basis. The City has received a number of complaints and some of them were
found to be in violation of certain City ordinances. The ordinances deal with off - street parking, licenses,
cars and so forth. The violations are listed in the letter from Planning Director Nielsen. If the inoperable
van were moved into the garage while repairs are being made that would resolve that violation. The City
has asked Dr. Kiefer and Ms. Kiefer to comply with the City's ordinances. He asked if there is something
in the City's ordinance that the Kiefers think should be changed or are they asking for more time.
Dr. Kiefer clarified that he and his wife do not want a lot of vehicles on their property. He stated his son
has used the skid steer for snow removal on their property the last three winters. His son helped a couple
of truck drivers get their trucks unstuck.
Mayor Zerby noted the only violation at present is the inoperable white van outside on the property and
the City has asked that be repaired by May 23. Dr. Kiefer stated he thought that would be doable.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the two tanks in the yard look as if they are located on Lakeshore.
Director Nielsen clarified they are near a wetland and Boulder Bridge Farm was platted before the
wetland ordinance went into effect. Woodruff asked if the City's ordinance is clear about equipment (e.g.,
the bobcat) a property owner may have for their own use and where it can be stored. Nielsen stated the
ordinance states that accessory uses have to be incidental to the residential use of the property. Residents
are allowed to keep one commercial piece of equipment on the property in a garage. Staff has told the
Kiefers that if they want to use the bobcat for snow removal on their property it needs to be kept in their
garage. Woodruff stated the applicants could apply to build an outbuilding that meets code and store the
bobcat in there. Nielsen concurred.
Councilmember Siakel noted she drove by all three properties where the property owners have appealed a
violation notice. The only violation she saw at the Kiefers' property was the white van up on blocks. She
suggested giving the Kiefers until May 27 to resolve that violation being that is after the Memorial Day
weekend.
There was Council consensus to give the Kiefers until May 27 to bring the inoperable vehicle violation
into compliance.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 9 of 19
C. Appeal Notice of Violation
Applicant: Mark Klesk
Location: 4390 Enchanted Point
Mark Klesk, 4390 Enchanted Point, stated he is a new resident in Shorewood. He moved into the City in
January 2014. He noted that he has been in contact with Director Nielsen since he received notice of
zoning violations. He stated he thinks all of the violations listed in the notice have been addressed except
the 40 -foot storage container. He explained the container was brought to the property to facilitate the
move with the anticipation of storing building materials for a garage he would like to construct. There
currently is not a garage or storage facility on the property at this time. Road weight restrictions were in
effect at the time the notice was received. There are construction materials in the container. He assumes if
he takes the materials out and puts a tarp over them that he will be before Council again in three months.
He noted that he had hoped to submit a permit application. The design of the garage is not complete yet
because a decision has not been made about the location. He stated Enchanted Lane is under water
because of the water level of Lake Minnetonka. He noted to move that container it takes a regular size
semi -truck and trailer. He expressed concern that moving the container could cause damage to the road.
The soils are soft in that area.
Director Nielsen stated that Mr. Klesk got after things right after he received the notice. He noted that
road weight restrictions were removed on May 9.
Mr. Klesk stated he thinks the container can be removed by the deadline. He stated he is concerned about
the quality of the road and the soil conditions. He explained the container was brought to the site during
the winter when the ground was frozen. The ground next to his driveway is quite soft. The roadway in
front of his property is paved but he does not know the type of pavement. He noted that there are two
spots between his property and the bridge that are currently under water. One spot is about four inches
deep and the other is about eight inches deep. He stated that if be receives a permit to build a garage he
asked what he can do about storing materials.
Director Nielsen stated that once Mr. Klesk receives a building permit he is allowed to have construction
materials on the site. Ile then stated the container is very large and it is close to the roadway. Closer than
the 15 -foot Zoning Code requirement.
Director Brown noted that the section of roadway that is under water is located in the City of Minnetrista.
He is not sure if Minnetrista has weight restrictions in place.
Scott Brown 4560 Enchanted Point, stated neighbors have asked him what can be done about the
container. He then stated the residents in that area have been dealing with a very contentious issue of the
Yacht Club and its customers. The small country road is a major issue in the summer. Drivers drive down
the road at unbelievable speeds. He noted that drivers cannot see around that corner. Around the corner
are two little boys riding their bicycles and they can't be seen. He noted that section of Enchanted Lane is
under water every year. He stated the container is in the road; the snowplow had to go around it all winter
long. He then stated he does not understand the need to have a trailer to store materials needed to build a
garage because it only takes two weeks to build a garage. He noted his key point is the safety of the
children that live along that roadway.
Mr. Klesk concurred that the container does block the view and stated he never thought much about it. He
noted he had no idea how busy the Yacht Club gets. He had not been aware of the two boys living just
down the street. He stated the container is bigger than it would need to be for materials. He owns it and
that is why he used such a big container. He then stated if there are no weight restrictions in place for
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 10 of 19
Minnetrista, Mound and Shorewood then he is sure that he can figure out how to get the container out of
there. He noted the container is in the right -of -way (ROW) not the street. He stated he agreed the
container creates a significant blind spot on the roadway. He then stated if drivers are speeding there that
is unacceptable. He clarified it was not his intention to move in and upset the residents in the
neighborhood.
In response to a question from Councihnember Woodruff, Director Nielsen explained that any type of
structure that would be used to store building materials would have to be setback 35 feet from the street
ROW while noting he is not sure that could be done and still build a garage. Nielsen stated that typically
building materials are covered with tarps.
Councilmember Sundberg stated that she believes that Mr. Klesk is being very cooperative and that staff's
recommendation makes sense.
There was Council consensus to give Mr. Klesk until May 27 to remove the container.
D. Appeal Notice of Violation
Applicant: Michael Hoy
Location: 25480 Smithtown Road
Director Nielsen stated the City received a complaint about the 25480 Smithtown Road property. He
noted the property is quite small. If there was not a house on it already it would be unbuildable. He
explained the people living there have brought in a lot of material and equipment that would normally be
put in a garage. There is no garage on site so a lot of stuff is stored outside. There is a shed on the
property. One of the original complaints included a frame with tarps over it that had collapsed over the
winter. After a notice to remove had been sent to the property owner Michael Hoy cleanup of the site
began. A follow -up inspection was done on May 8 or May 9 and the inspector advised that the cleanup
was about 50 percent complete. He noted the staff report lists the things that Mr. Hoy intends to do. The
cleanup of the brush and logs on the back of the property may take longer to do than two weeks. He stated
staff will re- inspect the property on May 27 and he hopes to be able to report back to Council that the
violations have been resolved.
Michael Hov, 25480 Smithtown Road, noted he will do whatever the City asks of him. He stated he did
not know what to do after he received the notice. He called and spoke to the Assistant Planner and she
explained the Building Official lists everything he sees. From his perspective the things listed were not
nuisances or hazards. They were the things he used to have in his garage until his garage collapsed last
winter. He commented that every year he cleans up his property and takes a load to the dump. He showed
four pictures of his property that he had taken earlier in the day.
Mr. Hoy explained he has one roommate and the roommate's son comes to visit his roommate. The son's
car has a 2015 license tabs on it. He finds it difficult to understand why the son's car has to be removed.
His operable truck gets parked on his property. When the property was first inspected his truck did not
have current license tabs on it so he purchased current tabs and put them on. He does not understand how
the truck could have been a nuisance when the tabs were not current and now that there are current tabs it
is no longer a nuisance.
He noted State Statute is quite clear and it trumps the City's Ordinance when it comes to junk vehicles.
State Statute stipulates that for a vehicle to be a junk vehicle it must not have current license tabs, it must
be more than three years old, it must be clearly inoperable, it has to be missing parts and it has to be
valued less than its junk value. He stated his track is more than three years old and at the time of the first
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 11 of 19
inspection it did not have current license tabs. The other three criterions were not true. Therefore, his
truck is not a junk vehicle.
He explained that the blue barrel in the middle of the driveway covers a wellhead for safety purposes. He
has decking material on the property that he intends to use to construct a railing. He moved it down to his
corn crib so it is not so visible.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she drives by this property several times a day; she does not live far from
it. The driveway is often very full and it is difficult to see around the vehicles. She thought there are some
visible hazards and noted she is glad to see Mr. Hoy has made some progress with correcting the
violations. She asked how many structures are allowed on a property that size.
Director Nielsen explained up to three accessory buildings are allowed, noting there is a size limitation
that goes along with that. One of the structures is a fish house that was moved on to the property this past
winter. There was no zoning permit for that. The fish house is currently on Hennepin County Regional
Rail Authority ROW and possibly on City ROW as well. The shed alongside of the fish house has been
there for years and it is grandfathered in. He noted that none of the structures on the property comply with
the City's Zoning Code.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she runs on the trail near the property and she questions the stability of the
barn on the property. Director Nielsen clarified the barn is located on the property next door that Mr. Hoy
owns. Hotvet stated the barn is almost at a 45° angle with the ground. Mr. Hoy noted he has straightened
the barn. Councilmember Sundberg stated there was a time when the barn was leaning but it has been
corrected.
There was Council consensus to give Mr. Hoy until May 27 to resolve the remaining violations
9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS
A. Summit Avenue Roadway Alternatives
Engineer Homby explained that during the Council and staff retreat in February 2014 there was
discussion about three alternatives for roadway improvements for Summit Avenue. He added a fourth
alternative in his memorandum for this topic. The options are: 1) reconstruct the roadway to current City
design standards (from Murray Hill Road to the border with the City of Chanhassen) ; 2) construct cul -de-
sacs on the upper end and lower end to reduce the travel speed on the steepest section of the roadway; 3)
construct cul -de -sacs in Alternative 2 and reconstruct the upper segment of roadway to City Design
standards; and, 4) convert the roadway to one -way travel with two alternatives.
The cost opinion for Alternative 1 (total reconstruction) is estimated to be $840,000. A good portion of
that cost is to construct retaining walls on both sides of the roadway on the steeper portion of it. The cost
opinion for Alternative 2 (construct two cul -de -sacs) is estimated to be $132,000; no subgrade correction
would be done. The cul-de-sacs would be substandard; they would not be 90 feet in diameter. They would
be 70 feet in diameter to fit within the existing right- of-way (ROW). The cost opinion for Alternative 3
(construct cul -de -sacs and partial reconstruction on the top of the hill) is estimated to be $300,000. The
reconstruction would be to City design standards and it would be from the border with Chanhassen to the
curve in Summit Avenue. There would be two 11 -foor wide driving lanes and subgrade correction. The
cost opinion for Alternative 4 (convert to one -way) is estimated to be $2,400. He noted he does not
recommend pursuing Alternative 4 because it would take away an access alternative for residents in that
area. During snow events he would not want to force the residents to go down the hill in one direction or
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 12 of 19
come back up the roadway. The Street Reconstruction Capital Improvement Program (CIP) has slated
$400,000 for this roadway.
Councilmember Woodruff stated if the two cul-de-sacs alternative was chosen he asked if the two houses
on the north side of Summit Avenue would access the roadway at a cul -de -sac. Engineer Homby
confirmed they would. In response to another question, Homby stated the City could choose to leave a
portion of the pavement between the cul -de -sacs as a trail. Homby confirmed that portion of the roadway
would be closed off to everyday traffic. Woodruff stated one cul -de -sac would begin at the Chanhassen/
Shorewood border and end by the proposed planned unit development (PUD). He asked if the angled lot
would access the roadway at the cul -de -sac. Homby confirmed that. Woodruff stated the four proposed
new houses would be accessed off of Hummingbird Road as would the existing house in Shorewood
located at the Chanhassen border. The two houses north of Summit Avenue would access the Summit
Avenue cul -de -sac street. Homby confirmed that. Woodruff asked if there would be any change in the
grade. Homby stated it would be flattened out slightly.
Woodruff then stated as part of the PUD the developer was supposed to make some improvements to
Summit Avenue in front of the project area. He asked if that was factored into the cost estimate. Engineer
Homby clarified that he separated Summit Avenue improvements and the proposed PUD. And, the
developer is only going to widen the pavement and the aggregate base. The upper portion of the City's
improvement for Alternative 3 would include a subgrade correction. Woodruff commented that he
assumes the developer would contribute something to the improvements. Homby stated staff can discuss
that with the developer if the PUD moves forward.
In response to a question from Councilmember Siakel, Engineer Homby explained if the two cul-de-sacs
were built the area between them would be restored to a managed area so it is not traveled on. Homby
stated if that area is too steep to drive on, it would be too steep to walk on or bike on. Siakel asked if
Hornby was presenting options this evening or was he seeking direction. Homby clarified his intent was
to discuss this and get some indication if Council wanted staff to pursue Alternative 1, 2 or 3. It could
come back to Council for action during another meeting. Siakel stated the next item on the agenda is for a
speed study for Summit Avenue and there would not be a need for that if cul -de -sacs were constructed.
Homby clarified he also separated the speed study from the roadway improvements alternatives. Homby
stated that during Council's last meeting it decided requesting a speed study for Summit Avenue from the
Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) would be appropriate.
Mayor Zerby noted this is not a public hearing and asked if there is anyone from the Summit Avenue area
that wants to present a brief common consensus for those residents on what has been discussed.
Sondra Traylor, 23115 Summit Avenue, noted that she cannot say there is a common consensus and
clarified that what she is going to say are her opinions. She asked if she correctly understood Engineer
Homby to say if Summit Avenue is too steep to drive on to close the roadway. Homby responded that he
had said if the road is too steep to drive on it would be too steep to walk on. Homby noted that the
residents in the Summit Avenue area brought that to Council's and staffs attention several rimes. He
stated he drove the Summit Avenue in his standard car and he could see over the hood and see the top of
the hill and see where a driveway would be at the top. He stated Summit Avenue is a substandard
roadway based on the City's current design standards. The approach to the curve is substandard as well.
That will all come out in a MnDOT traffic study.
Ms. Traylor noted that residents are very grateful for the upcoming traffic study. She clarified that
Summit Avenue is only too steep to drive on during the winter months because of snow and ice. The rest
of the year the residents drive on it. That is not a reason to close the roadway from her perspective. She
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 13 of 19
stated for Alternative 3 she thought she heard that the grade will stay the same at the corner of Summit
Avenue and a cul -de -sac will be there. She noted she is not in favor of a cul -de -sac. Plow trucks will not
be in favor of going around that either if the angle is maintained because the other side is trees. The
corner is out sloped steep. It is not a place for a cul -de -sac that requires large trucks to turn around.
Mayor Zerby asked Ms. Traylor if she 'favors Alternative I which is to reconstruct Summit Avenue to two
11- foot -wide driving lanes, curb and gutter, storm sewer, subgrade correction, retaining walls, and
restoration based on her comments.
Ms. Traylor stated that based on what was presented that would be an $800,000 project to put the four
new houses in there. From her perspective using a PUD exceeding the quantity of traffic and houses in the
area that causes it to be a hazard is why the improvements are being done. She then stated to construct a
cul -de -sac that is still steep and one that vehicles do not want to go around would create another safety
hazard. She commented that she learned this topic was going to be on agenda the previous evening. She
also stated that a resident had previously told Council that she placed a vacuum cleaner the height of a
child at the corner to test the sight line and she and that resident found it scary.
Councilmember Woodruff stated that with Alternative 3 there would be two cul -de -sacs and the area
between them would not be drivable street. There would no longer be any corner. Not being able to see a
child in the street ceases to exist.
Engineer Hornby clarified that what is being discussed is at a very concept level. Staff has included
sloping on the top cul- de-sac that will not follow a 10 percent grade going down the hill. The lower eul-
de-sae will be somewhat steep. That could be replaced with a hammerhead turnaround. What staff
provided Council was concept level to give budgetary information. It is not a detailed review of design.
He noted the construction of a cul -de -sac on the upper end may require a retaining wall so some cost for
that was included in the estimates.
Hornby explained staff took previous roadway bid prices and threw out the lowest and highest bids and
figured out a cost per foot to determine roadway cost. They then added in the costs for retaining walls,
curb and gutter, storm sewer costs, contingencies, indirect costs and so forth. The cost options provided to
Council are conservative estimates. He noted that if Summit Avenue were reconstructed from Murray Hill
Road to the Chanhassen border it will still be substandard.
Ms. Traylor stated she did not want to live on a cul -de -sac. She did not buy her property along a cul -de-
sac. She thanked Council for the opportunity to speak.
Mayor Zerby clarified that Council is just starting to talk about concepts. Councilmember Sandberg
concurred and stated the speed study needs to be done first.
Councilmember Woodruff asked what needs to be done next about the alternatives for improvements to
Summit Avenue.
Mayor Zerby asked Engineer Hornby what he suggests be done next. Hornby responded the speed study.
Engineer Hornby stated the grade going down Summit Avenue is what it is. He noted MnDOT will
schedule the timing of the speed study.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 14 of 19
Councilmember Woodruff stated because Council and staff will start discussing the 2015 operating
budget and the CIP in July he thought it would be prudent to have some numbers available to include in
the budget by that time.
B. City Request for Speed Study on Summit Avenue
Sundberg moved, Hotvet seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14 -033, "A Resolution
Requesting the Minnesota Department of Transportation Conduct a Traffic Investigation/Speed
Study on Summit Avenue between Hummingbird Lane (City of Chanhassen, Carver County) and
Murray Hill Road in the City of Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota." Motion passed 510.
C. Lake Minnetonka LRT Regional Trail Overpass at County Road 19
Engineer Homby explained the meeting packet contains a copy of staff report regarding its 95 percent
plan review for the Lake Minnetonka LRT Regional Trail Overpass at County Road 19 it provided to the
Three Rivers Park District (TRPD) and SRF Consulting Group. The packet also includes a copy of staff's
review letter, a letter from SRF about staff s letter and some partial plans of what the proposed overpass
bridge will look.
Staff had concerns about the long access ramps (they are about 400 — 500 feet long) that will get a person
onto the LRT frail. One of them goes through the park in the City of Tonka Bay. The other ramp is on
the east side of County Road 19 and it would take a person to the east a few hundred feet from the new
trail to access the trail to go westbound. Staff also has concerns about the removal of the refuge median
on County Road 19 which is being driven by Hennepin County. Although the refuge median will be gone,
people will still cross at the surface. TRPD representatives have explained TRPD is limited by what it can
do within the right -of -way (ROW). Staff had conveyed they would like the refuge to be left in place for
safety reasons. That is not reflected in the plan. TRPD extended the structure out a few hundred feet in
each direction to try and discourage crossing at the surface. It will also add landscaping in that area to try
and discourage that surface crossing.
He stated TRPD is asking the City to approve the plans. As the City's engineer he cannot sign the
approval of the plans unless Council approves the plans. He reviewed the options Council should consider
in review of the project. 1) Council could approve the plans and authorize staff to approve plans by
signature of the tittle sheet. 2) Council could approve the plans and authorize staff to approve plans by
signature of the tittle sheet and direct staff to monitor the surface crossing after construction of the
overpass. 3) Council could select Options 1 or 2 and authorize staff to prepare a letter to the TRPD about
the concern for pedestrian surface crossing safety and the need for a surface crossing with the project. 4)
Other options discussed by Council.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thought it will be beneficial for everyone to have the overpass bridge.
She thought leaving the refuge median in place would encourage people to continue to cross at the
surface. She would like more to be done to prevent those crossings.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he would not object to removing the refuge median if the access to the
trail on the west is removed or so it is not convenient to get to the trail at the surface. Engineer Homby
clarified that portion of the trail will be removed and the new access would be through the park in Tonka
Bay. Where the current trail access is on the west side of County Road 19 landscaping will be planted and
a ditch might be put in. Woodruff suggested there be a fence along the County Road 19 trail on the east
side of County Road 19 south of the overpass that would curve and naturally direct people away from the
CITY OF SIiOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 15 of 19
roadway. Homby stated based on past experience people will walls on the street side of the fence because
they are going to cross at the surface. Therefore, he recommended against doing that for safety reasons.
Engineer Homby noted that Alex Meyer and Casey Black with TRPD are present.
Mayor Zerby recessed the meeting at 8:59 P.M.
Mayor Zerby reconvened the meeting at 9:03 P.M
Director Brown noted that 25 — 30 were at the last meeting with TRPD and SRF representatives. He
explained staff had asked that the concept of a switchback be exhausted. He stated the access ramps add
about 400 feet from centerline. When a person tries to head west and there is no trail access there people
will end up making a trail access rather than going 400 feet east to go west again. People will shortcut any
barrier that is put up that much further up the road. The overpass should be convenient for people to use.
He stated it's his understanding that there is limited ROW. To put in a switchback would likely be
expensive. But, putting in the wrong solution is not the right thing to do either. After that last meeting
staff was waiting for a response as to whether any sort of switchback was feasible. Now the plans are 100
percent and a switchback is not part of the plans.
Alex Meyer, Three Rivers Park District's project manager for Otis �, explained the site is very
restrictive. To get up to the overpass height there is a need for 17 foot 4 inch clearance at the road; it is
being designed for 17 foot 8 inch clearance. Federal standards dictate a 5 percent slope to make it
accessible. That is why the access ramps are so long. Early on in discussions about options it became
clear that any type of spiral /switchback would require a lot more property than was available. The original
plan was for the trail to follow along the existing trail corridor. The Hennepin County Regional Rail
Authority ( HCRRA) did not want a bridge to be built directly on that corridor. The HCRRA required that
it be put off to the side so it was pushed off to the north side because on the south side on the west end
there is a lot of wetland. The options were limited. The best solution TRPD could come up with from the
south going north was to put the access for people corning from the sidewalk back 400 feet to the east.
Mr. Meyer stated TRPD is very cognizant of the safety concern for people who are going to cross County
Road 19 improperly. He explained that TRPD will make every attempt it can to screen it. There has been
discussion about possibly putting a ditch in; something that a person would not want to ride their bike
through. TRPD can attempt to put some fencing in. TRPD had originally talked about not using the old
trail corridor and taking people down the south to Brentwood Avenue. TRPD decided the best route was
to use the existing trail corridor on the east side and make the access point from there. Hennepin County
Transportation wants the refuge median taken out because it would no longer serve the majority of the
trail users to get across the intersection. It is the County's road. He stated he does not anticipate families
will cross improperly.
In response to a continent from Councilmember Woodruff, Engineer Homby explained that he has been
working with TRPD to address the interim portion of the trail when there will be two culverts in a
spillway.
Councilmember Siakel questioned if the City will be responsible for the safety at the current crossing if
the refuge median is removed or not. She recommended Council go with Option 3 and presenting more
alternatives to Council. Some things like the ditch are in limbo.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 16 of 19
Councilmember Woodruff stated the refuge median has not been in place for a very long time and
Hennepin County decided how to deal with that crossing area. From his vantage point if it is left there it
will become an attractive nuisance that will entice people cross improperly.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she does not think the plan is the right thing yet. She then stated the refuge
median has made the crossing more confusing than before it was in place. It is dangerous.
Engineer Horaby stated he thinks there is confusion there for vehicle drivers and trail users.
Mayor Zerby stated he agrees that removing the refuge median is the best approach.
Councilmember Siakel stated if a person is on the sidewalk going north she asked what will prevent them
from crossing County Road 19 anyway. Mayor Zerby said nothing. Siakel asked what the plan is to route
people to the access ramp.
Councilmember Woodruff stated if Council finds out that it was a mistake to take the refuge median out it
would be relatively inexpensive to put one back.
Administrator Joynes stated all of the things the Council has brought up staff has been discussing for
months. He noted that because it is a County road it is not all that simple to take things out and put them
back. He asked Engineer Hornby to make a recommendation that gives him the most flexibility and the
greatest ability to address the issues he has on his plate; and, that reflects the reality of building the
overpass to the best of everyone's ability.
Engineer Homby recommended Council approve the plans and direct staff to monitor the surface crossing
after construction and then upon approval staff will send a letter to the TRPD and Hennepin County
expressing concern that there needs to be a safe surface crossing for non -trail users.
Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, approving the plans, authorizing staff to approve plans by
signature of the title sheet, directing staff to monitor the surface crossing after construction of the
overpass, and authorizing staff to prepare a letter to the Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin
County expressing concern that Shorewood believes there needs to be a safe surface crossing for
non -trail users. Motion passed 5/0.
10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Proposed Change to the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department Joint Powers
Agreement
Administrator Joynes explained the meeting packet contains a copy of a memorandum from South Lake
Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) Chief Litsey describing a proposed amendment to the SLMPD
Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) that was discussed during the SLMPD Coordinating Committee's April
15, 2014, meeting. The amendment would change the requirements for approval of the annual operating
budget from a unanimous consent requirement to a simple majority vote of three of four member cities.
The JPA amendment must be approved unanimously by the four member City Councils. The Excelsior
City Council has already voted the amendment down. Although Council's action would be moot, he
thought it prudent for Council to make a pronouncement on this.
He noted that if the amendment were approved the other three member cities could dictate a budget to
Shorewood. He stated that would not necessarily be a bad thing if all four cities contributed equally to the
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 17 of 19
costs for the Department. But, Shorewood pays just about one -half of the costs. From his vantage point, to
have the other three cities be able to dictate how the majority of the budget is spent over Shorewood's
possible objections would be inappropriate.
Joynes noted that staff recommends Council deny the amendment. He stated Mayor Zerby has been
involved in discussions about the proposed amendment and Attorney Keane has looked at it as well. They
agree with the staff's recommendation.
Mayor Zerby stated the Coordinating Committee voted to move the amendment forward to the member
City Councils for consideration on a 3/1 vote. He noted he is very against this. He stated he did not think
anything good would come out of the amendment. It would allow one member City Council to vote
against the budget and be on record as one city voting against the budget rather than just one member of
that council (which was the case last year). From his perspective, the amendment would break the spirit
and intent of the JPA which is all four member cities are in this together and they need to work things
through. If there is something that the cities cannot get past then there is a larger reason to go to the
default budget provision in the JPA. He thought it prudent to find a way to make the JPA work. He
recommended voting against the proposed amendment.
Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, disapproving the proposed amendment to the South Lake
Minnetonka Police Department Joint Powers Agreement relating to approval of the Annual
Operating Budget. Motion passed 510.
11. OLD BUSINESS
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
Update on Country Club Road Speed Awareness Display
Director Brown explained the meeting packet includes a copy of a graphic showing a speed distribution
by percentage of traffic from the speed awareness display signs next to County Club Road for the period
December 18, 2013, to May 8, 2014. At the dais this evening there was a document with additional
information about the 85t" percentile highest and lowest speeds summary reports for northbound and for
southbound traffic. The last time speed data was analyzed for this roadway the 85 "' percentile was
approximately 35 miles per hour (mph) on average. The 85"' percentile for this new period was 31 mph
northbound and 33 mph southbound for the highest speeds and 23 mph northbound and 22 mph
southbound for the lowest speeds. It is difficult to draw conclusions about change in driving behavior
from the sample data the signs capture. Drivers who drive the road regularly can see some positive change
in behavior. As drivers approach the signs they generally slow down if they are driving much over the
posted speed. Staff recommends putting the road tubes out on that roadway to capture actual vehicle
counts.
Councilmember Woodruff expressed his appreciation for the documents staff provided. He concurred that
the 85th percentile average speed has come down slightly. He agreed that putting the tubes out will help
everyone get a better understanding because there will be actual vehicle counts.
There was Council consensus to place the road tubes out on Country Club Road for a period of time.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 18 of 19
Other
Director Brown stated there had been a watemain break at Sweetwater Curve. Restoration is in progress.
He then stated Public Works is behind on mowing activities because of all the rain.
Director DeJong noted the 2013 audit field work has been completed; there is a punch list of items to do.
He stated that this week there will be some staff training on employee self- service. That will allow
employees to enter their time sheets directly into the payroll system and view their payroll and benefits
information online. Next week staff will parallel the utility billing system. The plan is to go live with the
new system the end of June for the July utility bills.
Director Nielsen stated about a month ago Council and staff agreed there would be value in surveying
residents about their thoughts regarding the Deer Management Program for 2014. The aerial survey done
early this year showed a low deer count. Most of the feedback supports keeping the Program going. Staff
will report on the survey results during Council's May 27 meeting and ask for direction on the 2014
Program.
Administrator Joynes stated he and Director Brown attended a meeting hosted by Xcel Energy about the
Scott Comity West Gate transmission rebuild project. A portion of that project area is in Shorewood.
Information about that will be placed on the City's website and the few individuals who own property that
will be affected will be notified. The project should start in July.
B. Mayor and City Council
Councilmember Sandberg asked Director Nielsen about the status of the request for proposals (RFP) for
the renewable energy assessment. Director Brown stated after staff talked about the REP it decided to ask
WSB & Associates to submit a proposal for services to prepare the REP. Administrator Joynes clarified
staff is asking WSB to help identify the scope for the REP. The REP will be sent out to many firms.
Councilmember Woodruff stated Xcel Energy had hired a company to trim trees out on the Islands. The
firm's technique in some cases was to cut trees off to about 10 feet off the ground and leaving the stump.
He asked that not be perpetuated in any other area of the City. Administrator Joynes stated staff has asked
Xcel about its standards and the elimination of brush piles and about the complaint process.
Councilmember Siakel stated the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) Board had its first 2015 budget work
session on April 16. The proposed budget reflects a municipal contribution increase of 3.4 percent for
2015. Shorewood's share of that contribution will be 38.56 percent. Shorewood's share increased for
2013, decreased for 2014 and will increase for 2015. She explained that during the work session there was
discussion about how to utilize the Operating Fund reserves in excess of the 20 — 30 percent level
recommended by the EFD auditor and specified in the EFD's Fund Balance Policy. EFD Chief Gerber's
proposed budget reflects transferring $72,000 in reserves to the Fire Relief Fund to fund potential future
mandatory contributions to the Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association (EFRA) fund for pensions. She
supports putting some funds aside to lessen the impact of future mandatory contributions on the member
cities. The Board discussed if $72,000 was the right amount. She noted provided the budget information
to Director DeJong and intends to set up a meeting with him, and Councilmember Woodruff if he wants
to attend being he is the alternate to the Board, to talk about various budget related things.
Mayor Zerby stated he thought it prudent to set some funds aside for that purpose. He noted the market
event in 2008 resulted in mandatory contributions for a few years. He stated it is always good to have a
portion of one's investments in cash.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 12, 2014
Page 19 of 19
Councilmember Siakel noted the EFD Board will discuss the budget again during its May 28 meeting.
13. ADJOURN
Woodruff moved, Sundberg seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of May 12,
2014, at 9:39 P.M. Motion passed 5/0..
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST:
J64n Panchyshyn, City Clerkd
:_.��_._
40A1- X
Sc Zerby, Malt r