Loading...
06-27-16 CC Reg Mtg Min CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, JUNE 27, 2016 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Labadie, Siakel, 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: Councilmember Sundberg. B. Review Agenda Labadie moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of June 13, 2016 Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of June 13, 2016, as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Zerby reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Siakel moved, Labadie seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolution Therein. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Appointment of Two Seasonal Employees in Public Works C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16-046, “A Resolution Adopting Performance Measures.” Motion passed 4/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. Discussion moved to Item 6.A on the agenda. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 2 of 20 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. Vacate Right -of -Way Applicant: Mike and Elizabeth Cannon Location: 25170 Woodside Road This was discussed after Item 6.A on the agenda. Mayor Zerby opened the Public Hearing at 7:25 P.M. Director Nielsen explained Mike and Elizabeth Cannon own the property located at 28170 Woodside Road. When they rearranged the property line between their lot and the one to the south of it in 2015, they were required to dedicate 17 feet of right -of -way (ROW) to make Woodside Road 50 feet wide at that location. Woodside Road was originally platted 66 feet wide down to the point where it came to the southerly lot where it narrowed to 33 feet. The Cannons would like to square off their property with the southerly lot. They have requested a partial vacation of 1231 square feet of ROW. In doing so the resulting ROW would be 50 feet wide adjoining their property. The paved surface of Woodside Road is situated on the easterly side of the ROW. Even after the vacation, the paved surface will be 17 feet from the new ROW line. The additional property also increases the conformity of the Cannon property with respect to lot area. Nielsen noted that staff recommends approval of the vacation. The applicant has provided a legal description of the parcel to be vacated. He stated the vacation would be legally combined with the applicant's parcel. Seeing no one present to comment on the case, Mayor Zerby opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:27 P.M. Councilmember Woodruff stated the way he sees the map all of the properties to the north of the Cannon property along Woodside Road are faced with the same existing easement. Director Nielsen confirmed that. Woodruff stated if Council approves this request he asked if there is any reason the other property owners would not make a similar request. Nielsen explained the only facts that might be different is if the paved surface of the roadway were to veer over to that side; then the City may not want to vacate 17 feet. Woodruff stated he assumes that requests would be reviewed on a case by case basis. Nielsen concurred and noted the property owners could get together to make a request. Woodruff moved, Labadie seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16 -047, "A Resolution Vacating a Portion of Woodside Road." Motion passed 4/0. Mayor Zerby closed the Public Hearing at 7:29 P.M. Discussion moved to Item S.A on the agenda. b. REPOR'T'S AND PRESENTATIONS A. 2015 Audit Report by Abdo, Eick and Meyers This was discussed after Item 4 on the agenda. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 3 of 20 Director DeJong noted Andy Berg, with the independent CPA firm of Abdo, Eick & Meyers, LLP, is present to provide an overview of the City of Shorewood's 2015 financial audit. Mr. Berg noted the firm he works for issued a clean (unmodified) opinion on the City's financial statements. The firm also issued a separate report on Minnesota League of Compliance; there were seven different categories that are tested by the Office of the State Auditor. That also received a clean opinion. There were not any compliance issues with Minnesota Statutes. He explained there were two 2015 internal control findings. The first was material audit adjustments and auditing capital assets. There were a number of different entries mainly related to accrual entries and getting the correct classification between funds. Because that was a material dollar amount it was reported as a finding. That is corrected within the financial statements. The second was timely bank reconciliations. During the audit it was noted that the bank reconciliations were not completed timely. The 2015 statement reconciliations were finally completed in May 2016. The recommendation is that the bank reconciliations be completed within 15 days of month end. He noted that for 2014 there was an internal control finding relating to signers on an investment account. That was taken care of. He also noted the City implemented Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements No 68 and 71 for 2015. GASB 68 was related to public pensions. He explained the City participates in the Public Employee Retirement Association (PERA) pension plan. PERA is a multi - employer plan. The plan has a total pension liability which all employer participants in that plan have to recognize their proportionate share of that net pension liability. The City's share is calculated based on its contributions to the plan. The amount recognized in the City's 2015 financial statements as a liability was about $1,088,000. He provided a financial overview of the City's General Fund expenditures and revenues. He displayed a five -year trend graph of the City's General Fund balance and how it relates to the next year's expense budget. He explained the City's General Fund balance was about 77 percent of 2016 budgeted expenditures at the end of 2015. The balance at the end of 2015 was $4,502,167 and the 2016 budgeted expenditures are $5,857,087. The balance increased $416,696 in 2015. That has increased as a dollar amount and percentage over the last five years. The City's General Fund Balance Policy requires a fund balance of 55 — 60 percent of the next year's expenditures. He highlighted the summary of the 2015 operations. The summary showed final budgeted amounts, actual amounts and variances from the final budgets. Revenues were $255,527 over budget. That was primarily because Licenses and Permits were $127,797 higher than budgeted. Miscellaneous revenues additional refunds and reimbursements were $68,349 higher than budgeted. Expenses were about $303,347 under budget. That was mainly in the Public Works and General Government areas. There was a net increase of revenues over expenditures of $558,874. Transfers out to other City funds equaled $1,018,513; that was the budgeted amount as well. He displayed a graph comparing five sources of revenues excluding property taxes and transfers in for 2011 — 2015. He explained that property taxes made up about 86.0 percent of the revenues in 2015 at $4,949,126. Property tax revenues were $4,787,195 in 2011. In 2013 there was a spike in Other revenues and that was because of the approximate $317,000 from the sale of capital assets. Licenses and permits revenues have increased over the last five years. He displayed a graph comparing five sources of expenditures and transfers out for 2011 — 2015. He explained the majority of the City's expenditures are in public safety and general government with them being 29.6 percent and 23.4 percent respectively of the total expenditures and transfers out. There has been a trend of a slight increase in public safety expenditures over the last five years. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 4 of 20 He explained that at the end of 2015 the bonds outstanding totaled about $7.4 million and the total interest remaining for the life of the bonds is about $1.425million. He displayed a graph of the principal and interest scheduled payments for 2016 — 2028. In 2023 the bonded debt for the public safety facilities will be paid off. There will only be the 2008 lease revenue bonded debt remaining; at the end of 2015 there was just $980,000 in principal remaining. He noted the City has only one special revenue fund; the Southshore Community Center (SSCC) Fund. The SSCC operations ended 2015 with an operating loss of $60,365. There was a $70,000 transfer in to cover the operating loss and improve the Fund balance. The Fund balance at the end of the year was $53,379. He explained the City has six capital project funds. The six funds totaled approximately $3.251 million at the end of 2015. That reflects an approximate decrease of about $44,600 when compared to 2014. The Street Reconstruction Fund decreased close to $83,600; the year -end balance was about $1.453 million. Transfers in were over $813,900 and capital outlay expenditures were about $907,900. The Park Capital Improvement Fund increased about $5,600. The Equipment Replacement Fund increased about $251,100; there were $261,197 in transfers in. The Trail Construction Fund decreased about $162,600; revenues in were about $63,300 and expenditures were $231,850. The Community Infrastructure Fund decreased about $54,700; revenues were $120,446 and expenditures were $175,171. Mr. Berg highlighted the Enterprise Funds (water, sewer, recycling, and storm water management). For each fund he displayed a cash flow graph and a cash balance graph for 2012 — 2015. He explained the cash balance in the Water Fund has decreased each of the last three years. The 2015 year -end balance was $3,058,372. The decrease in 2015 was mainly related to about $660,000 in capital expenditures during the year. Also, operating receipts did not fully cover operating disbursements and debt service payments during the year. The remaining bonded debt on the G.O. Water Revenue Bonds at the end of 2015 was $1.9 million. The cash balance in the Sewer Fund at the end of the year was about $2.566 million. It was about $3.2 million at the end of 2014. The major cause of the decrease was a $500,000 transfer to the Stormwater Management Fund. The cash flow graph indicates the cash receipts from operations basically covered operating cash disbursements. The cash balance is significant in relation to the minimum target balance of four months of operating disbursements; it was a breakeven cash flow. The Stormwater Management Utility Fund cash flow graph reflects the $500,000 transfer in from the Sewer Fund. The 2015 year -end balance in the Fund was about $497,800. The 2014 year -end balance was about $119,000. The Recycling Fund is basically a break -even fund. There are never any big capital projects it has to fund. Receipts were higher than disbursements in 2015. The cash balance was $122,701 at the end of 2015; it was $69,716 at the end of 2014. The increase was mainly due to a decrease in operating disbursements during 2015. Mr. Berg reviewed the ratio analysis over a four year period comparing some of the City's financial ratios to peer group ratios for cities of similar size. The City's 2015 debt -to- assets ratio (for the City's assets this measures how much is owed for them) was 27 percent; the 2014 peer group's was 32 percent. The City's debt - service- coverage ratio (the ability of the Water Fund to pay back its debt service) was 1 percent. The cash flow from operations has decreased each of the last four years. It was 144 percent in 2012. The debt- CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 5 of 20 per - capita ratio (the total outstanding debt broken down by resident) was $1,253; the 2014 peer group's was $2,506. It has been decreasing over the last four years as the bonded debt is being paid down. The City's taxes -per- capita ratio was $664; the 2014 peer group's was $484. It has been consistent over the four -year period with a slight increase in 2015. The City's current- expenditures -per- capita ratio was $525; the 2014 peer group's was $674. It has been consistent over the four -year period. The City's capital - expenditures -per- capita ratio was $254; the 2014 peer group's was $320. The City's capital assets percent left to depreciate — Governmental ratio was 26 percent; the 2014 peer group's was 63 percent. The City's capital assets percent left to depreciate — business -type ratio was 43 percent; the 2014 peer group's was 61 percent. Councilmember Woodruff asked if there is an extraordinary item that is driving the City's debt- service- coverage ratio (the ability of the Water Fund to pay back its debt service) of 1 percent. He stated he does not recollect anything about the operating costs causing the City not to have the cash it needs to cover the debt. Mr. Berg explained in 2012 the operating receipts were greater than the operating costs and the debt payments combined. In 2015 the operating receipts were not sufficient to cover the operating costs and debt payment combined. The City may want to reassess its water rates. Director DeJong explained that water rates were last changed in 2009. At that time the City implemented conservation rates which meant that the more water a person consumed in the summer months the higher the rates. Consumers have responded to that by consuming less water. There have also been a couple of years when the need to water lawns and landscaping was not as great. The highest revenue period used to be during the summer when people were using a lot of water for outdoor things; water above their base consumption. Because of the reduction in consumption during the summer months the revenue stream has dropped considerably. Councilmember Woodruff stated he understands there have been instances when water revenue did not cover operating expenses. But, the City has had an extremely large cash balance in the Water Fund (about $3 million) and the City has not had any particular use for that. Councilmember Siakel stated it is her understanding that the surplus in the Recycling Fund is due to changes in the recycling program. That allows the City the opportunity to expand services. Some things discussed were fall cleanup and yard waste. She suggested Council discuss either expanding the services or reevaluate the rates. Councilmember Woodruff noted in a couple of prior years there had been a finding about untimely bank reconciliations. He encouraged Administrator Joynes and Director DeJong to take the steps necessary to ensure the bank statements are reconciled in a timely manner every month. If there is a reason that cannot be done he asked that Council be informed of that so Council can help. Director DeJong explained he has been working with Joe Rigdon, with BerganKDV and recommended by Abdo, Eick & Meyers, to try and work through the reconciliations. The two of them have spent at least four full days working on it. There is something in either the process or how things are being handled internally in the financial software system that causes things not to balance on a monthly basis. The adjusting journal entries were posted in May. He has been balancing and getting close on a monthly basis but it had not balanced all year long. Even with Mr. Rigdon's help they could not get there to be a consistent variance from month to month. He is in the process of rebuilding the system starting in 2016. He has another meeting scheduled with Mr. Rigdon in mid -July. Mayor Zerby noted that the year is about half over. He asked if the 15 -day reconciliation recommendation is being met. Director DeJong stated he has entered all of the adjusting journal entries but he has not CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 6 of 20 posted them into the system. He explained the system allows for journal entries to be entered and use them as uncommitted so that reports are accurate. He reiterated they have not been posted and finalized into the system. That will be done after he and Mr. Rigdon get them balanced. Zerby asked if that means the 2016 bank statements have not been reconciled yet. DeJong stated they have not been reconciled to the penny but they have been reconciled within a small margin of error. In response to a question from Councilmember Labadie, Director DeJong explained the Stormwater Management Fund received a $500,000 transfer in from the Sewer Fund in 2015. That was authorized by Council. Woodruff moved, Labadie seconded, accepting the draft 2015 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) as presented and asking that it be filed. Motion passed 4/0. Mayor Zerby thanked Mr. Berg for his efforts and for coming this evening. Discussion returned to Item 5.A on the agenda. 7. PARIS 8. PLANNING A. Report by Bean on the June 21, 2016, Planning Commission meeting. This was discussed after Item 5.A on the agenda. Planning Commissioner Bean reported on matters considered and actions taken at the June 21, 2016, Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Councilmember Siakel thanked Commissioner Bean for recapping the meeting. She stated the points he made are "right on the money ". She explained when Council first talked about the project and tax increment financing (TIF) she had some concerns. After working through the process she came to agree that TIF makes sense. She noted that Council has heard from residents about their desire to have some senior living options in the City. She noted the point about risks was heard. Commissioner Bean stated the City will end up with an amenity that some residents think is a high priority. The TIF District would also generate some funding options to deal with traffic issues along Chaska Road. He thought the project and TIF would become a win /win for the City, local residents and the community at large in terms of the service that would be available. In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Administrator Joynes clarified that Council will be asked to approve the final TIF Plan and TIF District during its July 14 special meeting and the Shorewood Economic Development Authority meeting on July 14. Mayor Zerby noted that the Excelsior City Council voted against The Waters in Excelsior senior housing project proposal. He questioned if the option for extending Excelsior watermain to the Oppidan site could be open for discussion again. Administrator Joynes stated there had been a discussion between staff and Oppidan representatives. It is his understanding that a conversation has occurred between Oppidan representatives and Excelsior staff and that the extension of Excelsior watermain is still not an option. Excelsior has stated it is because of capacity reasons. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 7 of 20 B. Conditional Use Permit for Removal of Over 400 Cubic Yards of Soil and Depositing Over 100 Cubic Yard of Fill Applicant: Tom Wartman Location: 27135 and 26985 Edgewood Road Director Nielsen explained Tom Wartman has requested a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) for fill in excess of 100 cubic yards for his property located at 26985 Edgewood Road. (During its May 9, 2016, meeting Council approved a subdivision of that property into two lots.) He is proposing to bring in about 3000 cubic yards of fill to improve the buildability of the property. There is a new house being built on the property located at 27135 Edgewood Road and that necessitates the removal of 1200 yards of fill away from that site. That fill will be brought to the Wartman property. Removal of more than 400 cubic yards of fill also requires a C.U.P. Both C.U.P.s are being handled as one matter. Mr. Wartman has worked with Engineer Hornby for a number of months to come up with a grading plan that satisfies all of the City's requirements. The yellow outer ring contour on the grading plan indicates where water is currently stored on the site. Some fill would be placed over a portion of that area on the easterly lot. The proposed grading plan would store the same amount of water as the site currently stores. The proposed plan provides for positive drainage from the site without adversely affecting other properties. Nielsen noted the meeting packet contains a copy of a resolution that if adopted would grant the C.U.P. that approves both removing fill and bringing fill in. Mayor Zerby asked if what is being proposed would trigger a review by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Engineer Hornby clarified for the MCWD it would be an erosion control permit and that would be required at the time the building permit is pulled or when the grading work is done. Councilmember Siakel asked Engineer Hornby to clarify what erosion means. Hornby explained if there is a rain fall event during development of eh site and if there is soil with no vegetation the soil could be washed down hill. The developer would need to put up barriers such as a silt fence or fire retention logs to prevent the soil from going on to other properties. Mayor Zerby asked what amount triggers a review by the MCWD. Engineer Hornby stated for this one it would be if it is over one acre so it might be too small. He explained the redevelopment of the site is what triggers the erosion control permit. In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Director Nielsen explained the new house on the 27135 property will fill the hole where the fill is taken from. Woodruff stated based on the information provided he understands it to be that there will not be any increase in runoff from the Wartman property after the 3,000 cubic yards of fill is brought onto the site. Engineer Hornby confirmed that. Hornby explained the site contains an area where a great deal of water can be stored. It handles water from the site itself and from Edgewood Road. The proposed grading plan shows it would continue to take water from Edgewood Road. Any area impacted from fill has to be mitigated on site. The plan indicates that would happen. Woodruff stated to him it seems that the situation with the clay drain pipe on the property on the north side of the redevelopment site is under the control of the owners of that property. Engineer Hornby stated it is a private pipe. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 8 of 20 Councilmember Labadie stated she has observed that there have been times when water significantly pools on the site. She asked if bringing in the fill would alleviate an existing problem. Engineer Homby explained that when grading plans are reviewed the intent is to ensure that drainage issues are not exacerbated. If there are opportunities for improvement then an attempt would be made to do that. In this particular case he does not think there is any downstream issue. The developer has been required to provide the same amount of volume on site to store water as existing conditions allow. The developer has been told the site can continue to use drain on the easterly lot but it would have to be relocated because of the site of the proposed building pad. Councilmember Woodruff stated that it is his recollection that one or two years ago there was discussion about some change a property owner made to a lot that caused water to pool on Edgewood Road in approximately the area of the project site. Engineer Homby clarified that was for the redevelopment of a property on the north side of Edgewood Road and slightly to the west of the project site. Councilmember Siakel asked if the City has done its own assessment of the drainage situation on and around the site and not just relied on the developer. Engineer Hornby explained the biggest issue discussed during the public hearing for the C.U.P. was the clay pipe. That pipe used to run down to the lake. When a driveway was relocated to a parcel on the north and when a retaining wall was put in that pipe was interrupted. That pipe currently sticks out of a retaining wall. When water in the Wartman parcel is high enough to flow into the drain water will flow out of the exposed pipe. The property owner on the north interrupted the pipe and daylighted it instead of rerouting it down to the lake. Councilmember Labadie stated in concept it is a good plan. She again expressed concern about drainage and noted that the reports have helped alleviate that concern. Mayor Zerby asked if the drain is below the 100 year water mark. Engineer Homby explained for this project staff assessed the volume that would be impacted. The developer would have to replace the volume plus the additional impervious surface to cover 25 percent of the lot. The developer was not required to make a hydraulic model for the site. The developer just had to replace volume. He noted he does not know what 100 year mark Zerby was referring to. He explained if the lot does overflow it would go to the north over Edgewood Road. He thought the water has to pond up to about four feet high to flow into the drain. Based on comments he heard during the public hearing there is likely a layer of sand there that the water infiltrates through. The MCWD had indicated there is not a wetland there. Labadie moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO 16 -0481 "A Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit to Place Fill in Excess of 100 Cubic Yards for Tom Wartman, 26985 Edgewood Road." Motion passed 4/0. C. Appeal of Administrative Determination of Number of Boats Allowed at Nonconforming Dock Applicant: Radisson Rod Easement Holders Location: 5540 Shore Road (Lot 11) Director Nielsen explained that during January 2016 Paula Callies asked staff to provide a formal determination as to how many boats could be kept at 5540 Shore Road (Lot 11). Lot 11 was a common lot that was set aside as part of the Radisson Inn Addition for the use of several lots within the Addition. Staff advised Ms. Callies that in recent history two docks have been kept at the dock on that lot. Any number beyond two would be an expansion of a nonconforming use. The City Ordinance stipulates there must be a house on a lot to have a dock and the residents living on that property can use that dock. There CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES .Tune 27, 2016 Page 9 of 20 is no house on Lot 11. The dock that has been there for long time has been grandfathered in. The Shorewood Code applies the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Code to all of the lakes within Shorewood. The LMCD Code stipulates one dock per 50 feet of shoreline. Lot I I has a little over 100 feet of shoreline and therefore would allow two boats. Two boats should not be expanded because it is a nonconforming use. There are some easement holders over part of Lot 11 that have a right to use parts of Lot 11. The courts determined that a number of years ago. A day or two before the Planning Commission was scheduled to hold public hearing for the appeal the City received information from Ms. Callies questioning the City's authority to regulate docks and the mooring of boats on Christmas Lake. That public hearing was opened and continued for about one month to provide the City Attorney time to review the information and provide an opinion on Ms. Callies' position. The City also received material from the attorney for the owners of Lot 11 supporting staff's determination. The City Attorney supported staff's determination that allowing more than two boats at the dock would be an expansion of a nonconforming use. He noted the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the appeal. He also noted that because of the time it took to review the information the appellant was sent 60 day notice. He explained the City has to act on land use items within 60 days unless the appellant, in this case, is notified that it would take longer than 60 days. In this case the City was then allowed to take up to 120 days. The 120 days would be up around August 10. He stated Council has been provided with the determination from him as the Zoning Administrator that two boats are the maximum allowed for that nonconforming dock. Ii also received documentation from the City Attorney and from another attorney supporting the determination. Nielsen noted that the Planning Commission did take public comment during the public hearing for the appeal. He stated staff suggests that if Council decides to take public comment then that should be published as a public hearing and the topic should be continued until interested parties could be notified that Council would take additional comments. Mayor Zerby noted that he was in the audience during the public hearing when public comment was taken. He also noted Ms. Callies serves as the city attorney for another municipality and she is a former member of the Shorewood Council. He stated the letter from Ms. Callies dated June 27 notes that the Boating Law Administrator and Water Recreation Manger with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) indicated to her that Shorewood has no authority to adopt LMCD regulations and apply them to Christmas Lake. He expressed concern that there is no answer to that at this time. Attorney Keane stated the issue presented in the letter from Ms. Callies (the appellant) had not been brought to his attention before today. He had not been made aware that Ms. Callies had been in contact with the DNR official. Councilmember Siakel stated from her vantage point the City needs to obey the law. Attorney Keane stated this assertion does go to Shorewood's implementation of LMCD standards for water bodies within Shorewood. He then stated he had communicated with the Assistant General Counsel for the DNR to verify his conclusion that the City was within its exercise of authority to regulate docks, dock standards and boat storage units. The question Ms. Callies presented earlier in the day is new. He went on to state if Council gives weight to the new information he can report back to Council on his findings and conclusion during Council's next meeting. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 10 of 20 Mayor Zerby stated he thought it would be worthwhile for Attorney Keane to research the new information. Councilmember Siakel stated the City has enforced LMCD guidelines in the past. Regulations requiring a house on a property if there is to be a dock and allowing one boat per 50 feet of shoreline to be kept at the dock. She does not think it would be right for the City to make an exception. The City needs to be consistent with its regulation. However, if there is truly a legal question the City has to follow the law first. She asked what direction Council wants to take. Councilmember Labadie stated she thought Council should direct Attorney Keane to research this. Attorney Keane clarified that the City has the authority to regulate docks and establish standards and to do so by ordinance. Based on information Ms. Callies received from a DNR official Ms. Callies stated the City does not have the authority to adopt LMCD regulations and standards by reference. The City has implemented and applied them for decades. Mayor Zerby stated he thought it prudent to defer Council taking action during this meeting. Attorney Keane stated because of all of the debate and lawyering and legal arguments he thought it prudent to get the response correct. Councilmember Woodruff questioned the idea that the City cannot adopt LMCD regulations by reference. He supports having Attorney Keane research the validity of that. He stated if that is true there are other areas in the City Ordinance that could be problematic. The City could write out the LMCD's regulations in the City Ordinance but he questioned the benefit of doing that. Councilmember Labadie stated the lakeshore, the lake property, docks and so forth are a very important issue Shorewood. She noted Council received an electronic copy of the letter from Ms. Callies via email at 5:00 P.M. that day. She stated it is prudent for Council to have a clear understanding of the validity of the issue before it can take action. Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, continuing the appeal of the administrative determination of the number of boats allowed at nonconforming dock at 5540 Shore Road (Lot 1.1) to Council's July 11, 2016, meeting pending legal research by Attorney Keane. Motion passed 510. Mayor Zerby asked Councilmembers if they thought there is a need for another public hearing. Councilmember Woodruff stated from his perspective if there is something that has been left out of all of the comments and documentation he suggested they be submit in writing. There was Council consensus not to hold another public hearing on the matter. 9. ENGINEERINGIPUBLIC WORKS A. Authorize Expenditure of Funds for Trail Clearing Equipment Director Brown explained the 2015 Equipment Replacement Capital Equipment Program (CIP) included the anticipated purchase of what is known as a "trackless" machine for the clearing of ice and snow from trails for an amount of $150,000. Trackless machines have been the machine of choice for many communities, due to their maneuverability and narrow width. After much discussion Public Works persomiel found it difficult to recommend spending that much money on a piece of equipment that would only be used four months out of the year. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 11 of 20 Last fall staff tried other equipment for the Trackless unit such as a mower or flail attachment with the hope that the setup could replace the agricultural tractor and flail mower that is slated for replacement. That demo mowing equipment failed miserably. Therefore, staff did not recommend the purchase of the Trackless unit last fall. After research staff found another machine called a "MultiOne Loader" that appears to accomplish the same thing. It would cost significantly less than $150,000. The mower would cost $54,927.28 off of the Minnesota State Contract. The proposed attachments include a dirt bucket, a broom and a snow blower for an attachment cost of $10,132. The total cost of the mower and attachments is $65,059.28. The machine and attachments would fit all of the implements Public Works uses on a regular skid steer. Therefore, it could be used year round. There are approximately 180 attachments for the machine making it a very versatile machine. If purchased, it could be used to aerate the new artificial turf playfield. He noted that at the dais this evening Council found a ledger of the Equipment Replacement Fund. It shows the balance in the Fund is $264,324.84. He also noted that staff recommends the purchase of a MultiOne Loader and the three attachments. Mayor Zerby stated he appreciated Director Brown's due diligence on this. Zerby moved, authorizing the expenditure of funds from the Equipment Replacement Fund in the amount of $65,059.28 for the purchase of a MultiOne Loader with cab and attachments. Siakel asked if the proposed machine will be big enough to do everything the City will need to have done. Director Brown responded yes. He stated Public Works currently tries to make use of the skid steer and lawn mowers that get converted to blower equipment. That takes a toll on the lawn equipment. Siakel seconded. Motion passed 4/0. B. Receive Feasibility Report, Order Improvements, and Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications — 2016 Watermain Extension, City Project 16 -04 (Oppidan) Engineer Ilornby explained the proposed 2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project was requested by Oppidan Investment Company to serve its proposed Shorewood Living Facility that would be located at 6000 Chaska Road just south of Highway 7. As proposed, the roadway would be restored along with the watermain improvements. Following is a summary of his PowerPoint presentation related to the proposed improvements. The watennain will be extended from the intersection of Yellowstone Trail and Minnetonka Drive to the east along Yellowstone Trail, south along Glencoe Road, east along Park Street to Pleasant Street. It would the cross Highway 7 to Pleasant Street on to Chaska Road and extend along Chaska Road to the south side. It would then cross over the Oppidan development site south of the north property line and then down Chaska Road to the end of the plat for the development. It will both 12 inch and 16 inch pipe. In addition to the watennain extension serving the Oppidan development there would be an opportunity to extend new watennain to a previously unserved area; the area south of Highway 7. There are some Shorewood properties along the route and east along Mill Street that are currently CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 12 of 20 served by the Excelsior water system that could be switched to the Shorewood system. There are also a number of properties along the route that are served by private wells. • One of the things that could occur is some or all of the Shorewood properties that area currently served by the Excelsior system that are along the route just north of Highway 7 may have to convert to the Shorewood system because that watermain may have to be replaced. Or, it may be possible to put in a parallel watermain. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of right -of -way (ROW) between the corporate boundary of Excelsior and the ROW line. He has received calls from some residents expressing concern about connecting to the Shorewood system because Excelsior softens its water. • The project would install services in the ROW along the route. A number of properties would then be able to be connected to the Shorewood water system if the property owners wanted to. A water connection fee would have to be paid by owners of properties currently not served by municipal water if they decided to connect. They would also have to pay to install pipe from the curb box at the ROW line to their home. it would be the property owner's responsibility to disconnect their well and abandon it in accordance with State Statutes if the well would no longer to be used as an irrigation well. • The intent is to keep the watermain extension on one side of the roadway but it may go back and forth to avoid impacting large numbers of trees and to satisfy the Department of Health's requirements for separation of the water utility and the sanitary sewer utility. • A jacket casing would have to be put under Highway 7 to make the crossing. That is a little different than directional boring. Highway 7 will not be interrupted. A permit will be required from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to cross its ROW. • The roadway improvements would not be a street reconstruction project. Consideration is being given to possibly putting curb and gutter along the Oppidan side of Chaska Road as well as a boulevard. Storm sewer would be installed to carry stormwater out of the area. • The total estimated project cost is $1,512,200. The watermain improvements portion is $798,800. The street restoration portion is $620,200. The storm sewer improvements potion is $93,200. Funding will come from the Water Fund ($1,112,200) and Oppidan ($400,000). • The preliminary project schedule is: ➢ Present Feasibility Report to Council /Order Project June 27, 2016 ➢ Approve Plans /Authorize Bids July 2016 ➢ Open Bids August 2016 ➢ Award Construction Contract August 2016 Construction September — November 2016 ➢ Final Completion Spring /Summer 2017 • The project entails installing about 3,500 feet of trunk watermain plus the restoration of the street. Councilmember Siakel asked if the City had ever asked the City of Chanhassen about extending its water system to areas within Shorewood. Engineer Homby stated Chanhassen would have required other conditions before doing that at the site of the Summit Woods development. Chanhassen was not asked about that for the Oppidan project. Director Nielsen explained that when a previous developer was considering the same site for a similar use for 90 units that developer set up a meeting with Shorewood staff and Chanhassen staff. Chanhassen staff expressed concern about the density of that proposed project. Chanhassen staff indicated that if it were to consider extending its water system it would want Shorewood to improve the intersection at Chaska Road and Highway 41 noting that was not in Shorewood. Nielsen then explained that for the Summit Woods development Chanhassen would have extended watermain to four lots if Shorewood would have looped the watermain down Mayflower Road to Murray Hill Road. Four lots could not support Shorewood doing that. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 13 of 20 Siakel stated if Chanhassen were to ask for improvements if it extended watermain to the Oppidan site she questioned if that might cost less than extending Shorewood watermain across Highway 7. Director Nielsen noted the original Shorewood municipal water plan intended for that area to be served by the Chanhassen water system. Engineer Homby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of a resolution that if adopted would receive the Feasibility Report, order the project and authorize the plans and specifications for the 2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project. He also noted the engineering staff would have to be working on this continually to make the schedule work. He explained a topographic survey has been scheduled for the work. The work done to date for this project has been off aerial photographs. Councilmember Siakel asked if doing this project on an expedited schedule would put other City projects behind. Engineer Homby clarified there is room in the schedule for this project and noted that he has told WSB & Associates staff to keep working on it. Engineer Homby explained that developer would like to have water to the site for construction purposes this fall and have the roads restored. Mayor Zerby asked how many of the houses that could potentially be served by the extension are currently served by private wells. Engineer Hornby stated he thought it was 60 — 70 houses. Homby noted that 22 Shorewood properties are served by Excelsior water. Zerby stated he did not think the requirement to abandon wells after a house is connected to municipal water reflects Shorewood's current policy. Engineer Homby stated residents can either abandon their well or convert it to irrigation. If it would be used for irrigation it would have to be disconnected from the municipal water source. Zerby stated it is his understanding that residents could use the well water in their homes but it had to be a separate system from the municipal water system. The two water systems could not be interconnected. Zerby suggested the word irrigation be deleted in the Feasibility Report on page 6 to match Shorewood's policy. Zerby then stated he assumes the topic of the exit off Highway 7 on to Chaska Road is not part of the Feasibility Report. Engineer Homby stated the Report is just about the watermain extension. Zerby stated he would like to add the word "advance" to the Item 4.6 on Page 7 which talks about notifying residents about activities that may affect access. Engineer Homby stated that was the intent. Councilmember Woodruff asked if the intent is to switch those 22 properties currently connect to Excelsior watermain to Shorewood watermain after it is extended. Is that decision being made tonight or is that undetermined at this time? Engineer Homby stated the City has the ability to do that with the project but that decision does not have to be made this evening. Homby then stated he thought if there is going to be a public information meeting about the project he thought there would be a number of those property owners who would come and say they want to remain on Excelsior watermain. Woodruff stated if a property is connected to a different municipal water service and the City requires them to instead connect to Shorewood's water service when it becomes available he asked who would pay for that new connection. Engineer Homby stated that change would be made at the street level. There would not be any charge to the property owner. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 14 of 20 Woodruff then stated the Feasibility Report does not mention anything about assessing the properties not connected to the Excelsior watermain for the watermain extension. Engineer Homby stated there are no assessments proposed in this feasibility report. Woodruff suggested the Feasibility Report say that because that is different from the City's policy. Currently if watermain is installed property owners are assessed for at least some of that cost. Homby stated this project is different because it is paid for by a development and the Water Fund and possibly through another financing method. If there were any proposed assessments they would be identified in the Report. Director Brown explained the City's Water Policy allows the City to order infrastructure improvements which would help with the overall infrastructure without assessing property owners. That was done with the CUB Foods watermain extension. That was also done for the southeast area Amsbury water system interconnect. Because the Report does not include an assessment schedule when Council approves the Report it is basically saying the extension will not be assessed. Woodruff again suggested the Report state the extension would not be assessed to property owners. Councilmember Siakel asked what happens to the Excelsior Watermain that is in the ground. Engineer Homby explained that one option would be to cut in valves to change the water supply route near the corporate boundary. He noted that in some of the border areas there are some Excelsior and some Shorewood properties served by the same watermain. There are some Shorewood properties that cannot be taken off of the Excelsior water system unless a parallel watermain in installed. Engineer Homby noted there is one block that would have to be on temporary water during construction because that watermain will have to be physically removed in order to install the new watermain. Mayor Zerby asked if the City has prescriptive rights to cut another city's pipe and put the City's in its place. Engineer Homby stated that detail of who owns that pipe still needs to be worked out. Attorney Keane stated he is not sure what the understanding was at the time the facility was constructed and who retained ownership of the public improvement upon abandonment. That requires research. Director Brown stated that typically if a utility is in Shorewood's ROW Shorewood would be the owning agency. However, Shorewood could have allowed another city to put a utility in is ROW. Brown noted that watermain was probably put in in the 1960s so the records could be minimal or nonexistent. Councilmember Woodruff stated it sounds like a number of nuances will have to be worked out as the project progresses. He then stated that he was convinced that there is no alternative to moving forward with this project. He noted that the City has not yet committed to Tax Increment Financing (TIF) for the Oppidan project. He asked if Oppidan is irrevocably committed to doing its proposed Shorewood Senior Living project. Administrator Jaynes explained that Council will consider the TIF Plan during its special July 14 meeting. That would be the date that the City and Oppidan agree to go forward with the TIF Plan and the Oppidan project. At that time Oppidan would give the City the $400,000. Councilmember Siakel asked why Council needs to approve this tonight and not after the TIF Plan is approved. Mayor Zerby stated Council is being asked to receive the Feasibility Report tonight. Engineer Homby reiterated Council is being asked to receive the Feasibility Report, order the project and authorize the plans and specifications for the 2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project. He noted if that is not done tonight the Project will not happen this fall. Councilmember Siakel stated she thought the City should be on its timetable; not a developer's. She then stated it is up to Council to do tis due diligence to ensure things are in place. From her vantage point Council would be approving this at risk should something fall through between now and when it considers approving the TIF Plan. She asked why there is a need to rush this; July 14 is not that far away. She expressed her discomfort with approving what Council is being asked to approve tonight. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 15 of 20 Engineer Hornby explained the City will have the developer pay a financial security to cover the cost of the final design if the developer chooses to go forward. The cost of moving forward with the plans is the developer's cost. If for some reason the TIF District does not get approved and the project is dropped there is no cost to the City. The burden would be on the developer to fund the project going forward. The developer wants municipal water at its project site this fall. The developer provided financial security to prepare the Feasibility Report and to do a portion of the water model to make sure the watermain was sized appropriately to serve the Oppidan site and parts of the City beyond there. Councilmember Woodruff stated Council will have another opportunity to decide if it wants to move forward with the watermain extension after the bids come in. Engineer Hornby stated staff will put together an escrow agreement with the developer similar to what was done for the Feasibility Report. The developer would have to put up the funding for preparing the plans and specifications. If the City decides it does not want to finance any of the watermain extension and improvements that would means the developer would have to finance it. If that were to happen it most likely means the project would not happen. There would be no expense to the City for preparing the plans and specifications. Councilmember Woodruff stated he is comfortable with the timing. He reiterated if the City decides it does not want to move forward with the watermain extension Council would not award the contract. Engineer Hornby stated that up to that point the plans and specifications are paid for by the developer. It is a 100 percent bill back to the developer for engineering time. \Mayor Zerby asked if the cost of preparing the Feasibility Report, part of the water model and the plans and specifications is above the $400,000 Oppidan will pay for the watermain extension. Engineer Hornby clarified that those costs are included in the project costs and the $400,000 from Oppidan is to help pay for the total project. Labadie moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 16 -049, "A Resolution Receiving Feasibility Report, Ordering the Project, and Authorizing the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the 2016 Trunk Watermain Extension Project, City Project 16 -04 ( Oppidan)." Motion passed 4/0. Mayor Zerby recessed the meeting at 8:35 P.M. Mayor Zerby reconvened the meeting at 8:38 P.M. C. Enchanted Lane Improvements Discussion Engineer Hornby explained that the Cities of Shorewood and Minnetrista experienced flooding in June 2014 on Enchanted Lane due to high water in Lake Minnetonka because of heavy rains. Both cities constructed temporary elevated roadways to provide a driving surface above the water line. Both cities worked with FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) to be reimbursed to restore the roadways after the water receded. Minnetrista is currently working on the preliminary design and feasibility report to improve Enchanted Lane with a pavement reclamation or mill and overlay project. Reclamation involves bringing in a large machine that picks up and grinds the pavement then mixes it in with the aggregate base below and lays it back down. That results in there being a new base to put pavement on. Minnetrista is preparing the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 16 of 20 feasibility report because their residents are assessed for a portion of roadway improvement projects. Prior to holding a public hearing Minnetrista would hold a public information meeting about the project. There had been a public information meeting about one year ago during which a number of property owners expressed they were not in favor of the improvements. The Minnetrista Council did think the improvements were needed and authorized the preparation of the feasibility report. During discussions with the Council previously and with the Mayor Zerby recently some interest has been expressed in doing a cooperative project with Minnetrista that would include a pavement improvement of Enchanted Lane in Shorewood. Shorewood's Pavement Management Plan (PMP) currently includes a Mill and Overlay of Enchanted Lane, Enchanted Cove, Enchanted Drive, and Dellwood Lane in 2024 and the same for Shady Island Road, Shady Island Point, and Shady Island Circle in 2023. Shady Island Trail is scheduled for reconstruction in 2023. If the Minnetrista project comes to fruition it would be included in its 2017 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The feasibility report is the first step in that process. Shorewood's project would be more of a bituminous leveling and overlay project. Minnetrista's project would be more extensive because a level of Enchanted Lane is quite a bit lower. There are some areas that flood seasonally due to snow melt in Minnetrista. Minnetrista is looking to reduce the seasonal flooding. It does not intend to bring the roadway surface above the 100 -year flood plain. Hornby noted that Mayor Zerby had asked that he bring this before Council as a discussion item to find out if Shorewood would be interested in pursuing this in 2017 as a capital improvement project. Mayor Zerby stated he has been having discussions with Engineer Hornby about this since the 2014 flooding. He thought it would make a lot of sense to coordinate the improvements with Minnetrista being portions of Enchanted Lane are located in both cities. He has spoken with a number of Shorewood residents who live on. Enchanted Island and they have indicated they would be interested in moving forward with the improvements in Shorewood. Councilmember Woodruff stated based on his assessment most roadways out on the islands qualify for rework. In 4 — 6 years the roadways would be in very poor condition. He thought Public Works spends about one full week patching the roadways each year. He thought it would be worthwhile to make a necessary improvement earlier than scheduled in the CIP to take advantage of some cost savings that would be gained by doing the project at the same time as Minnetrista. He also thought the Shorewood residents on Enchanted Island would prefer to disrupt the roadway once rather than twice. He noted he would support making the improvements to Enchanted Lane in Shorewood at the same time as Minnetrista makes improvements to Enchanted Lane. Councilmember Siakel stated she would like to have a better understanding of the condition of Enchanted Lane. She noted the City has already committed to making improvements to Strawberry Lane and a number of other streets that probably impact more people every day; doing them would consume a lot of the City's financial resources. She asked where making improvements to Enchanted Lane fits in to the greater scheme of roadway improvements. The staff memorandum indicates the 2023 budgetary cost of roadway improvements for Shady Island to be $250,000 and $270,000 for Enchanted Island roadways in 2024. She asked what the cost benefit would be if the improvements were made at the same time Minnetrista made its improvements to Enchanted Lane. She noted she understands the disruption component. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 17 of 20 Engineer Hornby explained there would be economies of scale by combining the projects. And, there is the avoidance of multiple disruptions to residents. In the 1990s a bridge was reconstructed on the Islands. At that time there was discussion about reconstructing a bridge near Minnetrista. Minnetrista did not do that until a number of years later. He stated doing the improvements in both Cities at the same time provides an opportunity for cost savings for both Cities. Councilmember Siakel asked how many Shorewood households are on Enchanted Island. Engineer Hornby stated between 90 and 100. Director Brown explained the goal is to keep the PASER (Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating) rating for roadways at 4 or higher. In 2015 most roadways on Enchanted and Shady Islands were rated 3 — 5 with most being a 4. Those roadways are deteriorating at a faster rate than was hoped for. When a roadway is rated below 3 then more consideration would be given to reconstructing those roadways than to restoring them with, for example, an overlay or sealcoat. He thought the life of those roadways could be extended until they are slated for more significant improvements in the CIP. But, it would take substantially more Public Works personnel time. Councilmember Labadie asked if the improvements would involve a complete redo of the bridge between Enchanted Island and Shady Island. Engineer Hornby clarified no work would be done to the bridge. Mayor Zerby stated he thought it would be beneficial to have further discussion about this during the CIP budget discussions. He then stated he thought it would make sense to have a cooperative project because there is an equipment mobilization cost that could be reduced and there would be less disruption for the residents. Councilmember Labadie stated for the next discussion about this she asked that staff provide labor costs for patching the roadways on the Islands each year. Councilmember Siakel asked when the last time was when any major roadway repairs were done on the Islands. Director Brown stated there has not been any reconstruction short of on Enchanted Point where a gravel roadway treatment was done. For paved roadways improvements have included overlays of those areas where they were raised due to flooding and that was done in conjunctions with FEMA. That section of roadway was about 450 feet long. Other than that during his about 28 -year tenure there has only been patching and sealcoating. Administrator Joynes asked Engineer Hornby when a decision needs to be made about this in order to coordinate with Minnetrista assuming Minnetrista moves forward with its project. Hornby responded after the Minnetrista Council has considered its feasibility report; he thought that would happen in the later part of July or early part of August. Joynes stated based on that Council and staff could discuss this during its CIP discussion before making any commitment to moving forward. Councilmember Woodruff stated he hopes that Engineer Hornby continues to work with Minnetrista on the possibility Shorewood might move forward with the project based on the discussion this evening and that Hornby would bring Council more information as it becomes available. Engineer Hornby explained that the areas where there is seasonal flooding will likely require some mitigation of filling the flood plain. He ran a preliminary number for Minnetrista and the early estimate is that it would need to mitigate about 500 cubic yards of flood plain fill, Minnetrista had an agreement with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) where there was a land swap. For Shorewood an CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 18 of 20 assessment would have to be made about what would have to be done for flood plain mitigation. He can speak with MCWD representatives because the MCWD is the one doing the mitigation project. D. Smithtown Road East Trail Extension Work Order No. 1 Engineer Hornby explained that on August 24, 2015, the City Council accepted bids and awarded the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension Project to S. M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. There is some work that came in that was out of scope. Different storm sewer pipe materials were required due to the actual location of the watermain with proximity to the storm sewer. That required additional material and construction work necessary to construct the drainage system. That is identified in Work Order 1. The amount of Work Order 1 is $3,366. The project construction contract as bid was awarded by the Council in the amount of $769,873.00. Work Order 1 will increase the contract amount to $773,239.00 (approximately 0.43 percent). Hornby noted staff recommends Council adopt the resolution approving Work Order 1. Siakel moved, Labadie seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 1.6 -050, "A Resolution Approving Work Order 1 for the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension Project, City Project 14 -10, in the amount of $3,366." Motion passed 4/0. 10. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff Trail Schedule Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the Trail Schedule. Engineer Hornby explained that since June 23 staff has been working the contractor on the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension project about timing of activities. The contractor wanted to pour curb on June 28. The contractor intended to do grading work on June 23 and 24. That did not happen. The contractor then wanted to pour curb on June 29. If the curb had been poured on June 29 it would have kept residents along that route without direct access to their driveways through the Fourth of July holiday. Staff did not think that would have been a good idea. Staff therefore told the contractor to schedule the pouring of the concrete curb after July 4. The contractor was not sure he could have a crew he week of July 4 but did think he could do that the following week. Once the curb is poured the contractor will start processing the backfilling and creating the base for the sidewalk. Then the sidewalk will be poured. From the time the curb is poured for a three week period residents will have to park outside of their driveways for two weeks. Mayor Zerby asked if there are designated spots for them to park. Hornby stated they would have to park on the side roads or in the driveways of residents across the street; that is the same thing residents had to do for the west side of the sidewalk. They cannot park on Smithtown Road. In response to a question from Mayor Zerby, Engineer Hornby explained that a newsletter was sent out to residents preparing them for this week. A newsletter is being prepared to inform residents that the work would not be this week and it would be done sometime after July 4. Door hangers had also been put out. Zerby asked if there is any news about the utility poles. Hornby explained Xcel Energy has contracted the owner of the fiber optic and that is the next thing that has to be moved to the new poles. After that cable CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 19 of 20 television and cable will be moved but he does not know the schedule of those moves. Hornby noted that he invites utility representatives to a weekly meeting he has. Zerby asked if the plan is to move forward regardless of that schedule. Hornby confirmed that. Zerby stated there had been some grading done the previous week and now there is a significant drop in the edge in some spots. Hornby stated that will have to be backfilled. Zerby then sked if that would be an additional cost to the City to have that done. Hornby stated the contractor may want to charge for that additional fill and noted it is the contractor's responsibility to provide a safe access at that edge. The contractor will have to do that this week if it is still that way. Councilmember Woodruff stated the trail schedule included in the meeting packet indicates the sidewalk would be substantially complete by June 30. He asked what the new date is. Engineer Hornby stated because of delays because of things like relocating utilities the contractor will be compensated with more time. He anticipates that the date for the restoration to be complete would be July 31. Councilmember Labadie asked what the causes for the delay were. Engineer Hornby explained the relocation of the utilities caused most of the delay. The contractor was also asked to delay some work when work was being done along Country Club Road and Yellowstone Trail; that cost the contractor about one and one half weeks. The City also asked the contractor to delay pouring the curb. He noted the contractor is going to do the grading before pouring the curb. Monthly Budget Report Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the May 2016 Monthly Budget Report. Other Director DeJong stated he has been busy with the audit and is getting ready to start working on the budget. Director Nielsen stated the first of the two park tours for the Park Commission is scheduled for June 28. Director Brown stated the parks included in that tour are Freeman Park, Cathcart park, Crescent Beach, Badger Park and Gideon Glen. Administrator Joynes stated staff will be working on the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Plan for the Oppidan project with Springsted this week. He then stated he will speak with representatives from the City of Tonka Bay about Crescent Beach maintenance this week. B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Siakel reminded Council that the Council liaisons to the Park and Planning Commission change beginning July. Mayor Zerby stated the City received a response from the Greenwood Council on the proposed joint powers agreement changes. Administrator Joynes noted that is the only response he has seen. He is waiting for a response from the Deephaven and Tonka Bay Councils. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 27, 2016 Page 20 of 20 12. ADJOURN Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of June 27, 2016, at 9:03 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder [Vo4okw 5� S erby, "o b �yM a r JAn Panchyshyn, City Clerk