The URL can be used to link to this page

05-28-24 CC Reg Mtg MinutesCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2024 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Mayor Labadie called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call Present. Mayor Labadie; Councilmembers Callies, Maddy, Sanschagrin, and Zerby; City Attorney Shepherd; City Administrator Nevinski; City Clerk/HR Director Thone; Planning Director Darling; Director of Public Works Morreim; Park and Recreation Manager Czech; and, City Engineer Budde Absent: None C. Review Agenda Mayor Labadie stated that she would like to request that item 2. 1. be moved to the regular agenda as item 5. A. Zerby moved, Maddy seconded, approving the agenda, as amended. Motion passed. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Labadie reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Zerby explained that for item H, he wanted to commend City staff with relation for their choice to clean the water tower which he felt was a better option than just painting it. Callies moved, Sanschagrin seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes of May 13, 2024 B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of May 13, 2024 C. Approval of the Verified Claims List A Approve Data Practices Policy Annual Update, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-035, "2024 City Data Practices Policies." CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 2 of 29 E. Approve LAX Net Donation, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-036, "A Resolution Accepting a LAX Net Donation from Minnetonka Lacrosse Association." F. Authorize Execution of Service Agreement with Hennepin County or Nearmap Technology Information, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-037, "A Resolution Authorizing Execution of a User Agreement with Hennepin County for Nearmap Technology Information." G. Re -Approve Variance to Expand a Non -conforming Home located at 20980 Ivy Lane, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-038, "A Resolution Approving Variances to Front and Side -Yard Setbacks to Expand a Nonconforming Home for a Property Located at 20980 Ivy Lane." H. Accept Quotes and Award Contract for Water Tower Cleaning, City Project 24-05, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-039, "A Resolution to Accept Quotes and Award Contract for Water Tower Cleaning." I. AppFeve Amplified Musir. in FFeeman Park, 840, (moved to agenda item 5.A.) Motion passed. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Jeff Fox 5270 Howards Point noted that he was a seventy year resident of the City with the last thirty-nine years spent at this address. He stated that he was here to make comments regarding agenda item 7.A. and explained that he was extremely concerned about approving an encroachment agreement because of the potential safety issues of everyone who uses this roadway. He stated that this is one the most narrow points of Howards Point and there is also an inverted incline that already has restricted views. He stated that he was surprised that this did not fall under a variance request which would mean that the applicant would have to explain what hardship was present for the City to consider their request. He stated that he had reached out to the nine neighbors to his north, and seven of them indicated that they planned to send a letter to the City about this request. He reiterated that the issue that he has the most concern with was the safety of anyone that uses the road. He stated that if the City agrees to the proposed encroachment agreement, he would like to know who will maintain and trim the trees every year. He stated that there was no benefit for the residents or the community and appeared to be so the homeowner could just keep their existing set-up. John F Heeley, 26040 Shorewood Oaks Drive, stated that he was here to tonight to speak for himself as well as Joel Smith who lives in at 26020 Shorewood Oaks Drive. He explained that he wanted to discuss the music in the park issue with the Council. He stated that over the years, the Minnetonka Baseball Association has shown a callous indifference and disregard for the neighbors who live in Shorewood Oaks and Shorewood Ponds. He stated that they create so much noise that there have been times that they had to actually close all their doors and windows in order to have a quiet meal. He stated that they have been known to leave all sort of trash on Fields #1, #2, and #3 and also walk on neighborhood property with impunity. He noted that they also drive on the pedestrian walkways and stated that he and his wife witnessed a father have his child get out of the car, move the cones out of the way, and drive on the walking just leaving the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 3 of 29 cones just scattered. He stated that the Association also allows their players to use this walkway to hit balls into Shorewood Ponds, and use the woods as a bathroom. He stated that they have also torn down the handicap signs so people can park in those spots. He explained that the Minnetonka Baseball Association now wants to play music every time they get on the field and noted that they are playing music tonight before the Council has even made a decision. He stated that he feels the situation is a joke and noted that not even professional teams have walk-up music during practices and asked who would be responsible for enforcing this action. He stated that he felt that the Minnetonka Baseball association has taken advantage of the City and the neighborhood for years. Barry Brown, 6050 Burlwood Court, stated that he has continued to research buckthorn removal at Freeman Park without using dangerous chemicals. He stated there was a recent University of Minnesota article which stated that two separate research teams from the Department of Plant Pathology had received funding from the Minnesota Invasive Terrestrial Plants and Pests Center to study how crown rust colonizes and kills buckthorn. He gave a brief explanation of what crown rust is and how it has been used. He stated that the City has crown rust on plants in Freeman Park and noted that he had submitted samples from the park to the researchers for their analysis. He suggested that the City monitor this research and also rely on Mike Schuster and others from the University of Minnesota for additional insights. He stated that Minneapolis Parks Commission released its 2024 Integrated Pest Management guide after eight years of discussion. He explained that they had classified areas in their parks as 100% no pesticide zones including playgrounds, exercise equipment, athletic fields, dog parks, picnic areas, and community gardens. He stated that rather than pesticide use, they will be using cutting, mowing, and hand pulling methods. He noted that the Shorewood Citizens Advocate had published an article he wrote about his vision for Freeman Woods. He explained that he had asked them to publish this information after the administration at the City had refused his request to present his vision to the City Council. He stated that this was the second time he had been refused the opportunity to give a presentation to the Council and explained that his purpose has always been to educate, improve operational efficiencies, and save taxpayer money, which cannot be accomplished in three minutes during Matters from the Floor. He explained that he had been baffled when a resident recently came to the Council and asked them for a $25,000 donation to a worthy cause and was allowed to go over the three minute speaking limit without getting interrupted or cut-off like most of the residents do. He stated that this particular individual was even invited back to give a full presentation to the Council. He asked the Council to help him help the community and noted that his article could be read at www.shorewoodcitizensadvocate.com. He handed his research information to City staff. Mayor Labadie asked City Administrator Nevinski to make sure that copies of Mr. Brown's information was distributed to the full Council. Alan Yelsey, 26335 Peach Circle, asked if the Council was planning to have a discussion regarding the Data Practices Act. Mayor Labadie explained that she was not sure what Mr. Yelsey was referring to. Mr. Yelsey stated that there was an item on tonight's agenda related to the Data Practices Act document. City Administrator Nevinski stated that item was on the Consent Agenda. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 4 of 29 Mayor Labadie confirmed this was item 2.D. on the Consent Agenda, which had already been approved. Mr. Yelsey stated that means that it was voted on without discussion. He explained that he supported the comments and feedback given by the three individuals who had already spoken during Matters from the Floor. He stated that with relation to data practices, he felt that the City has continued its outrageous, illegal, and undemocratic practices regarding public access to the publics own data. He explained that State law says that all towns shall make and preserve all records necessary to a full and accurate knowledge of their official activities. He stated that the City has failed this test and the Council does not seem to give a damn about it. He noted that he felt that the City deliberately misrepresented State law regarding free inspection of data and quoted a portion of the language from the law. He explained that the City does not follow this practice and, in his opinion, are doing something that is illegal. He stated that because of this, he would ask the Council to retract their approval related to data practices. He stated that he cannot find any of the basic data that many of the residents need to understand the government on the City's website. He stated that he felt that the City deliberately refused to post the most useful compiled and organized data, project budgets, costs, and major contracts which means that the residents have no choice but to make formal data requests. He stated that the City charged two - thousand dollars for him to get data on the projects happening in the City that were costing the City twenty million dollars, which he felt was absurd. He stated that he felt the City withholds data, denies free remote inspection of electronic data and penalizes residents by charging them thousands of dollars for this information. He urged the City Council not to approve the current Data Practices document and not deny the residents the right to their own data and oversight nor to dishonor the veterans and citizens by deliberately weakening the democracy and their free speech rights. Mary Idle, 6120 Pondview Drive, stated that she echoed the comments made by Mr. Heeley regarding the noise from the ballfields. She stated that he is correct that it is already noisy without any music and would appreciate if the Council would reconsider approving their request for music. Mayor Labadie noted that there has not been a decision made regarding the music issues at the park. 4. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. 2023 Auditor's Report City Administrator Nevinski introduced Justin Nilson from Abdo to present the 2023 Auditor's Report. Justin Nilson, Abdo, expressed his appreciation to the City staff for all their help with the audit process. He stated that they had issued a clean/unmodified opinion and had found no internal control or legal compliance findings for the City. He reviewed General Fund to future budget, budget to actual, revenues and expenditures, special revenue fund balance, and debt service funds. City Administrator Nevinski explained that the audit materials had been linked within the City packet and the presentation would be accessible to the public on the screens in the Council Chambers and online. Staff worked through the technicalities for presenting the slide presentation. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 5 of 29 Mayor Labadie stated that while staff was working on resolving the technical issue she wanted to thank the American Legion and the VFW for the work to host the Memorial Day celebration for the area. City Administrator Nevinski stated that the information was ready for viewing. Mayor Labadie apologized for the technical difficulty. Mr. Nilson continued his presentation and reviewed capital project fund balance, water fund, sewer fund, stormwater management utility fund, recycle fund, cash/investment balances and gave an overview of key performance indicators related to taxes, debt, and expenditures. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that Mr. Nilson had mentioned that the City has a target of debt at sixty percent of revenue. Mr. Nilson clarified that there is a fund balance policy of sixty percent of the City's future year General Fund expenditures and explained that he did not think it had anything to do with debt. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked how this compared with other cities that Abdo worked with. Mr. Nilson stated that every city has their own story and noted that it depended a bit on city philosophy. He stated that in his experience, he has probably seen more cities in the forty to fifty percent range for their fund balance policies and explained some of the variations he had seen. He stated that Shorewood has a minimum of sixty so from a `minimum' perspective, it is a bit higher than other cities. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he believed that Mr. Nilson had said that the City had actually been at ninety percent for a few years and asked if that meant the City would potentially have excess cash that they would need to plan for within their budgeting. Mr. Nilson stated that could not comment on that and explained that the City just had ninety percent as compared to sixty percent. Councilmember Zerby noted that one thing he was pleased to see was that there were `no findings' and stated that he thinks findings would be better described as `red flags'. He stated that the audit did not find any, which he felt was a testament to the City staff and finance team. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if Mr. Nilson had seen any concerns, for example, within the Enterprise Funds. Mr. Nilson stated that based on his knowledge from doing the audit for the last few years, the City has had a lot of capital activity over the last few years in the Enterprise Funds. He stated that he could not comment about specific concerns but would say that he would recommend that they continue to focus on the capital improvement plan and tie in the related expenditures for the future and pay off the debt. Mayor Labadie apologized for the technical issues that they had at the beginning of the presentation and reminded residents that there is a link to the information on-line. Maddy moved, Zerby seconded, to Accept the 2023 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, as presented. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 6 of 29 Motion passed. 5. PARKS A. Approve Amplified Music in Freeman Park (formerly item 2.1. of the Consent Agenda) Park and Recreation Manager Czech explained that the Minnetonka Baseball Association has requested that they be allowed to play walk-up music as well as music between innings during their tournament scheduled for June 7-8, 2024 in Freeman Park. He stated that along with this request, they have also asked that coaches be permitted to utilize amplified music during games or practices throughout the year. He explained that their intent was to enhance the atmosphere of the games and practices but not to be a nuisance or be harmful to the neighborhood. He stated that the intent was not to bring out large, loud speakers and would primarily be using small, blue - tooth type speakers. He stated that Minnetonka Baseball Association has indicated that if the City decided not to let them have amplified music for the entirety of their season, they would appreciate if it is allowed for their big tournament on June 7-8, 2024. Councilmember Callies stated that her understanding of the decibel levels was that they are notoriously difficult to monitor. She noted that she felt it was important to have this language within the resolution, but for practical purposes it was not really meaningful. Park and Recreation Manager Czech stated that he would agree and noted that he had consulted with a number of different cities and it appears as though some have decibel limits in place, but it is hard to enforce. He stated that they had included it in the language so they would at least have some form of measurement and not simply use a phrase such as, `kept to a reasonable level'. Councilmember Callies asked how this would be monitored and enforced. Park and Recreation Manager Czech stated that if the City moved forward and gave this a trial run for the tournament, he would be willing to be available via phone so if there were issues, he could stop by or connect with representatives from the Minnetonka Baseball Association to get the music shut down. Councilmember Zerby asked if the Park Commission had weighed in on this request. Park and Recreation Manager Czech stated that the Park Commission had not weighed in on this request. He explained that he began his position about a month ago and they had not held a meeting since that time. Councilmember Zerby stated that without having the Park Commission involved, he could not support this request. Mayor Labadie stated that she agreed and also could not support this action. She noted that comparing this particular park with other cities parks is not accurate because Freeman Park is right in the middle of a residential area. Councilmember Maddy stated that he believes that the Minnetonka Baseball Association had won some sort of contest and the St. Paul Saints came out and had a one day music/fun event, which he thought was completely acceptable. He explained that he imagined that this was similar to CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 7 of 29 what they want for their tournament. He noted that the tournament will take place prior to the next City Council meeting. He stated that his feeling from the Council is that they do not want to grant them permission to have an entire season worth of noise making capabilities and asked if there may be a way to modify this and allow them to have some noise at their tournament in June. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he was hearing that there are a lot of existing issues with things right now, so he would rather not move in that direction, until those issues have been resolved. Mayor Labadie noted that Councilmember Maddy could make a modified motion and if there is a second they would then put it to a vote. Maddy moved, Callies seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-040, "A Resolution Approving Amplified Music for Minnetonka Baseball Association Events for the 2024 Season,", but striking `along with the association sponsored games, practices, and tournaments for the 2024 season on Fields 1, 2, and 3, and change the language in item #2 to state `Amplified music must be restricted to reasonable volume levels', and strike the remainder of the language in that item. Mayor Labadie stated that she would be concerned about enforcing this because it will take place on a weekend, after-hours. Councilmembers Maddyand Callies. Nays: Mayor Labadieand CouZerby and Sanschagrin. Motion failed 2-3. ncilmembers 6. PLANNING A. Report by Commissioner Huskins on May 7, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commission Huskins gave a brief summary of the May 7, 2024 Planning Commission discussion and recommendations. Councilmember Sanschagrin noted that the meeting minutes made mention of lights being full cut-off and asked what that meant. Planning Director Darling explained that full cut-off lights means that the light beam goes straight down and does not spread out. Councilmember Maddy stated that the definition that most manufacturers use is that nothing can go up because lights to have to spread out a little bit. B. PUBLIC HEARING: Vacation of Easement Location: 24880 Bentgrass Way Petitioners: Kelly and Matthew Pedersen Planning Director Darling explained that the applicants have proposed a partial vacation of a drainage and utility easement behind their home so they can build a pool and patio. She reviewed the current easement location and explained that it had originally been set up to drain to the east and they were proposing to alter this to drain to the west and over to the catch basin. She stated CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 8 of 29 that staff would like the Council to open the public hearing and take any testimony that may be provided, but asked that they continue this item without closing the public hearing, so staff has time to increase the notice area for this application. She stated that the request from staff is for the Council to continue this public hearing to the June 10, 2024 City Council meeting. Mayor Labadie opened the Public Hearing at 8:03 p.m. Patrick Jacobson, 24520 Bentgrass Way, stated he was a neighbor to the subject property and was also a builder in the area, so he was familiar with drainage, grading, and what those could mean to adjacent properties and environments. He explained that he had reviewed all of the information and stated that he did not see any reason that the Council should not to approve this request. He stated that the homeowners are currently out of town and he wanted to speak on their behalf and shared that the Pedersen's were frustrated that this would be continued in order to notify other individuals because they had met all the City deadlines for the information and had the expectation that it would be voted on tonight. Councilmember Maddy asked if the City had met all the statutory requirements in this situation and if the City's hands were essentially tied regarding moving this forward tonight. Planning Director Darling stated that she believed that their hands were tied regarding moving this tonight. She explained that in consultation with the City Attorney, they found that they needed to widen the notice area for this application. Zerby moved, Maddy seconded, to continue the public hearing for Vacation of Easement located at 24880 Bentgrass Way for Kelly and Matthew Pedersen to the June 10, 2024 City Council meeting. Motion passed. C. PUBLIC HEARING: Partial Vacation of Maple Avenue Location: East side of Maple Avenue Petitioners: Helgesens, Hashbargers, Laughlin Planning Director Darling reviewed the request for a partial vacation of Maple Avenue and noted that this had been submitted by five property owners in the area. She reviewed the current condition and location of this portion of Maple Avenue and noted that the City currently plows the gravel driveway up to the edge of the right-of-way for Maple Avenue. She explained that the petitioners were asking that this portion of Maple Avenue be vacated because of the number of people that use it as a short cut to the regional trail as well as the delivery trucks who use the roadway thinking it is a through street and end up getting stuck. She outlined details of the proposed vacation request. Patti Helgesen, 6120 Strawberry Lane, stated that the misguided deliveries have been increasing and the trucks are trying to get to the property located on Church Avenue. She stated that the most recent truck was from Davey Tree and they had a huge dump truck full of mulch that had to back out and then attempt to turn. She explained that she had taken pictures of the damages that occurred which she had submitted to the Council. She stated that she felt there would be a safety benefit of reducing access onto Strawberry Lane and noted that the offset of Shorewood Oaks Drive and Maple Avenue is too close together. She noted that the speed people travel on Strawberry Lane has definitely increased since the improvements were made during the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 9 of 29 reconstruction. She stated that if this was not approved, the plat they were presenting for the addition on the next agenda item, would be greatly affected. She explained that their Preliminary Plat shows four lots because they needed to follow the density requirements laid out in the Comprehensive Plan, but noted that they only want one lot. She stated that their plans take into account the vacated right-of-way because without it they would not have enough frontage for three lots without a variance. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if this would mean that Maple Avenue would no longer exist. Planning Director Darling reminded Mayor Labadie that she had not opened the public hearing yet. Mayor Labadie opened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Cliff Loughlin, 26505 Maple Avenue, stated that he had gotten a phone call from a representative of the local government who told him that the City would not continue to maintain or plow Maple Avenue. He stated that as he had previously stated, this vacation is `partial' and referenced the location of the fire hydrant. He noted that the State Fire Code says that the fire hydrant has to be free and accessible at all times. He stated that he did not feel that the Planning or Public Works Department has the right to make that decision regarding maintenance. He stated that in his opinion, that authority rested with the City Council and stated that they would request that the City continue to maintain and plow Maple Avenue. Paul Helgesen, 6120 Strawberry Lane, stated that he would like to emphasize the safety issue with the truck traffic who end up having to back up onto Strawberry Lane. He stated that the bigger trucks have little to no vision and end up backing out onto Strawberry Lane blind. He noted that the number of trucks coming down the street has been increasing as people use the apps that direct them onto the road even though it does not connect. Mayor Labadie closed the Public Hearing at 8:19 p.m. Councilmember Sanschagrin repeated his earlier question about whether Maple Avenue would continue as a street. Planning Director Darling explained that Maple Avenue is a public right-of-way where there is not a public street that is improved to City standards. She noted that there are a number of driveways that go through this area that the City does not plow or maintain. She stated that staff was recommending that the Council consider this situation the same as those situations. She referenced the aerial photo and pointed out Mr. Loughlin's driveway and the proposed new connection to Church Road. She stated that the City does not plow the driveway to the north that is located within a portion of the public right-of-way. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that currently there is a sign at the corner of Strawberry and Maple Avenue and asked if the City would remove the Maple Avenue signage if this was approved. Planning Director Darling confirmed that it could be put down on the corner of Church Road. Councilmember Callies asked to see the picture that showed the boulders. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 10 of 29 Planning Director Darling displayed the picture and explained that it was taken from the perspective of standing in the Church right-of-way looking down Maple Avenue to the east. Councilmember Callies asked if the gravel portion shown was the driveway. Planning Director Darling stated that she believed what was shown in the picture was actually mulch. Councilmember Callies asked what the boulders were blocking and asked if the mulch area was Maple Avenue. Planning Director Darling stated that the right-of-way area was the mulch which was all in public right-of-way. She stated that just behind the boulders was the driveway down Maple which then turns and goes south. Councilmember Callies stated that right now it was being plowed and maintained and asked how those trucks were getting there now. She asked if they were coming up the portion of Maple Avenue that would be vacated. City Engineer Budde stated that if this was approved, the boulders would go away and the applicant would have to create a curb cut for the driveway in order to get into the one remaining home. Councilmember Callies stated that it sounds like the City does not know why the maintenance began but noted that it sounds as though it may be hazardous for the City vehicles to be on this road if it is hazardous for the other trucks to be on the road. She stated that to her, it did not seem like it would be a good idea to have City maintenance vehicles coming up from Strawberry Lane. City Engineer Budde stated that when the vehicles pull all the way in to the cul-de-sac thinking that they can get all the way through is when they have to back all the way out once they get there. Councilmember Zerby stated that it would be the same as going down a long private driveway that does not have a turnaround or hammerhead at the end. Councilmember Maddy asked what the City's plan was for maintaining access to the hydrant if the City opts to vacate this area. Public Director Morreim stated that the City would treat this like most hydrants that are in the public right-of-way. He explained that, in general, most of the hydrants are accessible and noted that many times adjacent property owners maintain them, but staff can go out and do it, if necessary. Councilmember Zerby asked if there was a reason that the driveway was not relocated when the cul-de-sac went in. Planning Director Darling stated that she was not sure and noted that she thought that decision pre -dated all of the existing staff members. CITY QFSHOREWO0QREGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28,2D24 Page 11qf29 K8a. He|geoen stated that in 1991 Church Road was improved and prior to that it was just a dirt road and there were also nohouses at the end ofi1like there are now. Councilmember Callies stated that she thinks the proposed vacation made sense. CalAies moved, K8addy seconded, Adopting "A Resolution Approving a Partial Vacation ofMaple Avenue." Motion passed. Mr. Loughlin asked if approving the vacation nne8n\ that included the maintenance and snow plowing inthe west end ofMaple Avenue. Mayor L8bGdiSstated that maintenance was not part ofthe application. Planning Director Darling clarified that the Council had voted to vacate the roadway and did not give direction to staff on whether or not it would be acceptable if they stopped plowing. Councilmember Zerby stated that the resolution language did not include anything about the City's maintenance Ofplowing OfMaple Avenue. Mr. Loughlin stated that they were just moving the entrance from Strawberry to Church so, to him, it did not make sense fOstop the maintenance and snow plowing. Mayor Labodie reiterated that the issue that was before the Council tonight was simply the vacation of the east portion of K4Gp|8 Avenue and that was what they voted on. She n[@[8d that for the maintenance on the west 8nd, that vvQu|d be 8 separate topic which was not part of the C0unCi|`svote. Mr. Loughlin asked how the residents could proceed with that issue. Councilmember Callies stated that she felt it did not make any sense to have a vacated road that the City still maintains. She stated that if the City v8C8t8S this rOad, therm would not be City maintenance and noted that from a practical standpoint, her understanding is that the trucks could not even get there easily. Mayor Labadieasked City Engineer Budde torepeat what hehad stated regarding the barricades and the curb. City Engineer Budde explained that vacating this roadway kind of goes with the presumption that the next agenda item vvOu|d utilize some of that right-of-way. He stated that an part of that dave|oprnent, they would have to create e better acC8SS off ofthe Church Road cul-de-sac by removing the boulders and Sign@ge in order to Create access to the home that currently takes access off ofMaple Avenue. Councilmember Callies explained that her personal opinion is that the City should not continue to domaintenance ofthat section because itissomebody's driveway. City Engineer Budde stated that was also 3t8f[S consensus and that if the City was going to vacate the e88enn8nt. they do not want todothe maintenance for the piece that is left. He stated CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 12 of 29 that they were recommending that it be treated like a driveway, just as they do for several other areas throughout the City that have similar circumstances. Mr. Loughlin stated that they still have a street sign that says Maple Avenue and noted that his address would not change and would still be listed as being on Maple Avenue. He reiterated his question about access to the fire hydrant. Mayor Labadie stated that typically the City was not responsible for fire hydrants and shared an example of the hydrant in front of her home where she had the responsibility of clearing a path from the road to the hydrant and also the perimeter around the hydrant. City Attorney Shepherd stated that the property owners are responsible for ensuring that the fire hydrant is accessible by the Fire Department. He stated that he thinks the issue in this situation is that they are kind of doing two things at once. He stated that assuming that the next agenda item would be approved for the Preliminary and Final Plat, part of that would be making the curb cut to there is access to the western portion of Maple Avenue. He stated that what he was hearing from the City Engineer is that this is essentially a glorified driveway and not an improved street. He stated that the City plows and maintains improved streets. D. Preliminary and Final Plat Ray Helgesen Addition Location: 6120 Strawberry Lane Applicant: Paul and Patti Helgesen Planning Director Darling gave an overview of the Preliminary and Final Plat application to subdivide property located at 6120 Strawberry Lane into four lots. She explained that it would be phased with the first phase subdividing into two lots, with one lot for their son and one lot for their own home. She reviewed the location of the property, the surrounding land use and zoning, stormwater and rate control plans, and the initial shared driveway plans during phase one. She noted that staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the application, subject to the conditions in the attached resolution Councilmember Zerby asked if the fourth lot would have the same problem that they have now with relation to delivery trucks going down a long driveway and having to back out onto Strawberry Lane. Planning Director Darling stated that they would not have vehicle access to that pathway and with the vacation of Maple Avenue in the area, it will not show up on the geographic information systems as a roadway. Councilmember Zerby asked where an Amazon delivery truck would drop off the package for that lot. Planning Director Darling stated that depending on where they build the home, it is likely that they would access the property on the portion of Maple Avenue that would remain and not be vacated, so delivery drivers would enter from the Church Road side into the property. Councilmember Zerby asked if the City would be responsible for maintaining that portion of Maple Avenue. Planning Director Darling stated that would not necessarily be the case. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 13 of 29 Councilmember Sanschagrin suggested adding a tenth condition to the resolution that the applicants would assume responsibility for plowing that section of Maple Avenue. Planning Director Darling stated that was possible and noted that the Council should also consider putting in a condition in the resolution that the applicant's provide the curb cut for conforming driveway access over to Church. Councilmember Zerby asked if that meant that the emergency response would be reliant on the homeowners to ensure that it was accessible. Planning Director Darling stated that was correct. Mayor Labadie stated that within the staff report were references to other shared driveway situations and asked if the Council approved this, if it would essentially be creating a similar situation. City Engineer Budde stated that if the City vacated it, it would create a similar situation what ones that already exist and noted that typically those homeowners have a maintenance agreement among themselves to outline who would be responsible for things like plowing snow. Councilmember Zerby asked if this home would have a Church Road address or a Strawberry Lane address. City Engineer Budde stated that Lot 4 will most likely have a Maple Avenue address. Councilmember Zerby stated that they have been hearing how trucks get mixed up and go down Maple Avenue and explained that he was not sure how this was going to help solve that issue. City Engineer Budde noted that he felt there may be some confusion about the shared driveway off of Strawberry Lane and explained that the reason that they are shared right now is because they are only creating two lots. He stated that the existing driveway comes out on Strawberry Lane and the shared location will be in the same location as the existing driveway. He noted that the staff report has two references to shared driveways and he believes that may be where some of the confusion was coming from. He explained that in the future, when this was built out as four lots, the fourth lot will go out towards Church and have a shared driveway with Mr. Loughlin's lot. He stated that current plans are for two lots to access off of Strawberry which will also have a shared driveway for the interim period until they can split the large remaining lot. Mayor Labadie referenced item #7 from the proposed resolution where it states that the shared driveways between Lots #1 and #2 shall be removed and conforming driveways built for both lots, when the new home is constructed on Lot #1 or it is further subdivided, whichever comes first. City Engineer Budde stated that was correct and explained that the reason the City was allowing it now was because of the applicant's intent to eventually demolish the existing home and build a new home which will be the trigger to separate the shared driveways. Councilmember Callies stated that when this portion of Maple Avenue is vacated it will not continue to be gravel and will be sodded over, so a truck would not drive on it. She asked if there was anything in the language about removal of the curb cut from Strawberry to Maple. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 14 of 29 City Engineer Budde stated that there had been some discussion and noted that they think the timing of the curb cut will happen after Strawberry Lane is paved, so in that case, from an engineering perspective, he was comfortable leaving that curb cut because there are some utilities that will occasionally need that access. He stated that Councilmember Callies is correct that there will be turf there and explained that this would stop feeling like someone's driveway and start feeling and looking like someone's yard. Councilmember Sanschagrin repeated his suggestion to add a condition that the applicants would be responsible for maintenance and snow removal of the portion of Maple Avenue that was vacated in the last agenda item. Councilmember Maddy stated that the discussion surrounding the vacation seemed to be focused on snow removal and noted that he did not think they were taking anything away from anybody by taking this action. He stated that the City has been paying to remove snow from about three hundred feet of roadway that only leads to one home. He noted that the City uses a different truck for this because the area is not paved. He explained that, in his opinion, this is a rather substantial subsidy that the City has been giving to this property owner for the last thirty years, when everyone else in the City ends up with a ridge of snow at the end of their driveway that they are responsible for. He stated that he is finding a disconnect between treating everyone the same and trying to make sure one house still has snow removal. He stated that he does not see this action as a `taking' at all. Councilmember Callies stated that she thought there had been plans to include conditions related to shared driveway agreements and maintenance, but noted that she did not see them in the resolution. Planning Director Darling referenced item 3.b. of the resolution that covered those items and explained that there was also the intent to include a condition that the Maple Avenue right-of-way had to be upgraded to remove the gravel, open a curb cut, and install barriers on the Strawberry Lane side with the construction of the home on Lot #2. City Attorney Shepherd reiterated that he felt the Council was getting confused about the shared driveways. He stated that western Maple Avenue is now the unimproved, but still right-of-way that accesses Mr. Loughlin's lot. He stated that the City needs to make sure that this resolution accounts for the curb cut and noted that he thought Planning Director Darling had also said she wanted to include a provision that the driveway. Planning Director Darling clarified that it would not necessarily have to be paved where the driveways would come out onto Church Road, but the portion of the gravel in the vacated portion of the right-of-way would need to be removed, restored to turf, and would also need some type of barrier. City Attorney Shepherd suggested that the Council take these as two separate items, so on the western side they will need a curb cut so Mr. Loughlin can access his lot from Church Road, which needs to be a condition. He suggested that when this was being discussed that they state either `eastern' or `western' so nobody gets confused. He reiterated that he would suggest that the Council add a condition related to the requirement for a western curb cut. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 15 of 29 City Administrator Nevinski stated that he feels that could be added to item #7 of the resolution or could have its own stand-alone number. Councilmember Callies stated that she would prefer to have a stand-alone item for that requirement. Councilmember Maddy asked if there were any concerns about the shared driveway for the eastern portion that would be shared temporarily. Councilmember Callies stated that she did not and suggested that perhaps the Council pause this item in order to allow staff to draft some additional language before they make a motion. There was consensus of the Council to allow time during the meeting for City Attorney Shepherd to draft additional language for the proposed resolution before the Council takes action on the application. E. PUBLIC HEARING: PUD Amendments for Marine Sales & Display Location: 19765 State Highway 7 Applicant: MM Capital Shorewood, LLC Planning Director Darling reviewed the request by MM Capital Shorewood, LLC for a PUD Amendments to the Waterford PUD to allow marine sales and service with outdoor boat storage. She reviewed the existing Waterford PUD, the proposed changes to the site, and additions to the building. She stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval and noted that in addition to the individuals who spoke in favor of this project at the Public Hearing, the City had also received about eighteen letters of support. She noted that the Planning Commission had recommended changes to a number of the conditions that had been proposed by staff and shared highlights of their recommendations as compared to staff recommendations. She stated that following the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant submitted some exhibits that showed the turning radii of the school buses that could be accommodated through the rear of the site and also provided additional information that showed where the servicing would take place within the building. She explained that staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval, subject to the conditions included in the resolution. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if staff had a time limit in mind for the maintenance services that would be allowed outdoors. Planning Director Darling explained that she would like to see it be something small, such as fifteen minutes. Councilmember Zerby stated that the neighbors on the sides have concerns about some of the access through the property and asked for clarifications on those concerns. Planning Director Darling stated that her understanding is that there are cross access easements across all of the Waterford commercial properties so they share access and parking. She stated that the school district would prefer that the site maintain access around the south side of the building in order to allow the buses to continue to drop the students off on the west side of their building. She stated that the school district had also indicated that they were not interested in having any changes to their site and would not be in support of alterations to the landscape island or the additional access point. She noted that the front drive aisle will be a fire lane and the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 16 of 29 applicant has proposed widening the access point. She explained that they had submitted a question to the fire marshal to make sure that will still work. Mayor Labadie asked when staff felt that the fire marshal would get back to the City with this answer. Planning Director Darling explained that she had been hopeful that she would hear back before the meeting, but had not. Mayor Labadie stated that the Council could approve this with the condition that the fire marshal approved it as well. Councilmember Callies stated that her understanding is that there is an overriding PUD for all of Waterford, including the shopping center. Planning Director Darling stated that was correct and explained that it was all approved through a few different Final Plats. Councilmember Callies asked if that meant that anything that was approved for the boat business would also mean that other properties in this PUD would also be permitted to do the same thing. Planning Director Darling clarified that the approvals that are being proposed are only for this site. Councilmember Callies asked if anything approved for this site would apply to any future users for this particular site. Planning Director Darling stated that was correct. Councilmember Maddy asked if the school district had any opinions other than the letter in the packet with the three conditions that they requested. Planning Director Darling stated that she believed that they were satisfied with this request, with the inclusion of their proposed conditions. She explained that the school district had no objections to the use on the property, but just wanted to maintain their access rights. Mayor Labadie opened the public hearing at 9:09 p.m. Mayor Labadie noted that she wanted to have full disclosure and share that she was a former and current customer of the applicants and their boat store. She stated that she did not feel that her patronage of their store would impact or influence her decision so she did not plan to remove herself from the vote on this item. Swami Palanisami, 8200 32nd Place Crystal, stated that he owns the property for the mall and explained that his concern was regarding the possible effects in the future with the parking being changed. He stated that there were about seventy parking stalls that were being reduced to forty-three spots. He stated that he just met the applicant in the hallway and she shared that she was comfortable with it, but as an engineer, he goes by rules. He asked what would be done if it is found that forty-three spots were not enough. He stated that he would like to see some type of condition be included that outlines what would be done if more parking spots became necessary. He stated that he also had concerns for the time in the future when CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 17 of 29 someone else may purchase the building because their usage may be different than what it is for the applicant. He stated that other than those two items he did not have any concerns and thinks they have a good business. Brad Rosenberger, 19722 Waterford Court, stated that he was the closest property to the business and noted that the applicant had spoken with them about putting in trees or perhaps fencing. He stated that for his property, putting in a six foot fence would not make much of a difference because he sits so much higher on the hill. He explained that he would be in favor of putting in trees and not fencing. He stated that he had discussed this issue with his neighbors and while some of them were in favor of fencing, most of them would just like to see trees and no fence. He stated that he also felt that adding a fence would interfere with the sunlight for the existing trees and cause problems. He suggested that the applicant get together with all of the neighbors at one time to discuss these details so they can reach a satisfactory conclusion for everyone. He noted that other than this issue the applicant had addressed most of the issues that the neighborhood had brought up. Mayor Labadie closed the public hearing at 9:13 p.m. Councilmember Callies stated that she attended the Planning Commission meeting when this item was discussed. She stated that she has some concerns about the recommendations from the Planning Commission and explained that she agreed with the comment made by Planning Director Darling in the staff report regarding the display spaces. She noted that she understood that the business would like to have as much visibility as possible, but explained that she thinks that the City needs to keep this property, as a whole, as attractive and appealing as possible for current and future use of the site. She stated that she did not agree with eliminating the landscaping on the northern part of the site or using it for boat display in an unobstructive manner. She stated that there is another Boatworks in Minnetonka near Ike's that has landscaping in front of the boats. She explained that she understood why the owner was interesting in relocating from their current location because their current site is overcrowded, but noted that she would not want this site to look like that. She noted that this is a residential area and she felt that they needed to keep up the appearance of the entire area, which was also noted in many of the written comments received on this item. She stated that she would not support removing the landscaping islands and allowing parking in the northerly section. Mayor Labadie asked if she was referring specifically to the two boat display areas. Councilmember Callies confirmed that was what she was referring to the two boats in the display area. She stated that with regard to parking, she also felt that the City needed to have some stronger language included that if there are problems with the parking that the boat facility should be required to convert the display spaces back to parking. She noted that she felt the language in the revised resolution was a bit `wishy washy' with relation to parking and would suggest that the language be more specific that the spaces would need to be converted back to parking. She stated that she also liked the suggestion made by Mr. Palanisami to include language that if the use changes in the future that the parking requirement go back to Code requirements rather than automatically agreeing to the lesser amount of spaces for future uses. Mayor Labadie stated that she thinks that was a wise comment because the forty-three spaces for the current business model is most likely adequate, but she could foresee a future business that may have a higher volume and that may not be enough spaces. She explained that she would support that proposed modification. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 18 of 29 Councilmember Zerby stated that he agreed with Councilmember Callies opinion regarding the two display spots for the boats and also about changing the language that a change in use would revert back to the Code requirements for parking. Mayor Labadie stated that she also agreed that the two boats in front should not being there. She asked how much exterior signage is allowed, per business, under the existing PUD. Planning Director Darling explained that the existing PUD allows one free standing sign and two other signs. Councilmember Zerby stated that there was mention of testing boat motors and possible power washer activities and asked if that would fall under the noise ordinance parameters. Planning Director Darling stated that those activities would fall under the decibel levels under the noise ordinance. She noted that the Planning Commission had recommended that there be hand - washing only outside and that the boats be brought inside the building, if a power washer was needed. Councilmember Callies stated that she also felt that the Council should improve the language in the resolution under the 2.c. related to `light service'. She stated that her recollection of the discussion by the Planning Commission was that they had specifically wanted to leave this language loose, but she felt it would be better stated to say that the light service be completed with only hand tools and may not include fluid changes or other similar services, as indicated in the staff report. Mayor Labadie stated that she agreed and noted that Planning Director Darling had also referenced a possible time limit of the exterior service work. She stated that her concern with that suggestion was about who would monitor the time limits, which is why she was not in favor of having a time limit. Councilmember Maddy suggested that the City indicate no power tools or fluids for the outdoor light service activities. He stated that he felt limiting the type of tools allowed rather than the time, may make things a bit simpler. City Attorney Shepherd stated that the City cannot restrict the type of tools that are being used for the repair shop, so they have to be site specific zoning decisions. City Administrator Nevinski stated that he thinks something that may be helpful is for the Council to identify some of the key principles that they want in the conditions. He stated that staff can then draft them and bring them back for approval at the June 10, 2024 City Council meeting under the Consent Agenda. He stated that there is a lot of discussion and suggested changes which, in his opinion, was making things a bit messy. He reiterated his suggestion that staff take the input that the Council was giving and allow staff to draft the appropriate language. Mayor Labadie asked the Council to share the things in the proposed resolution that concern them so staff is able to bring back a cleaner, more concise version of the resolution at the next meeting. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 19 of 29 There was consensus of the Council to not allow the two display boats on the north side; to keep the noise reduced; and that the parking revert back to City code with a change in use. Mayor Labadie noted that the neighbors had asked that the applicant sit down and meet with the neighbors about the landscaping. She explained that she felt that it would help the Council if they saw the neighbors and the applicant have reached an agreement. Councilmember Callies stated that it was not just what the neighbors and the applicant would agree to, because the City has to keep in mind the overall area. She stated that she understood that the neighbors were supportive of this project, in general, but does not want that to outweigh the general requirements. Mayor Labadie acknowledged that was a good clarification because even if the applicant and the neighbors agreed on something, the Council would still need to vote on it. Councilmember Callies stated that there was currently a condition that mentioned a privacy fence and believes that the thought now was to take that requirement out. Mayor Labadie asked if Planning Director Darling could provide some further direction related to the landscaping and fencing. Planning Director Darling explained that the applicant had proposed four, ten foot trees on the south end in the area where there are holes in the visibility which should provide some pretty good landscaping in the future, but it will take time for them to mature. She stated that she believed that the Planning Commission thought behind adding a six foot privacy fence was that it would give some additional time for the landscaping to fill in, but can understand why the property owners would be hesitant to take on the maintenance of a fence. Councilmember Zerby referenced 3.f. which touches on a conforming tree inventory, tree preservation plan, and landscaping plan and asked if the City could just insert language to say `in consultation with adjoining neighbors'. Planning Director Darling stated that since the idea is to come back with changes before the next meeting, staff can look in more depth at this item. Mayor Labadie stated that she would also like to have the feedback from the fire marshal prior to the next meeting. City Attorney Shepherd stated that he would recommend that the Council make a motion to bring back a revised resolution for approval at the next meeting. Zerby moved, Sanschagrin seconded, to direct staff to bring back a revision resolution related to the PUD Development Amendment for "Waterford PUD" on the property located at 19765 Highway 7, for approval at the June 10, 2024 City Council Meeting. Michelle Mueller, CEO Minnesota Inboard Watersports, 720 Galpin Lake Road, Excelsior, explained that she was not aware that she should have spoken during the public hearing portion of the meeting. She thanked the Council for their consideration in this matter and explained that they are a family owned business that was founded by her husband's parents thirty-two years CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 20 of 29 ago. She noted that in addition to their Excelsior location, they have sales locations in Baxter and Detroit Lakes and service departments in New Germany, Brainerd, and Detroit Lakes. She stated that the City of Excelsior has been very good to them and the only reason that they are considering a move is because of site limitations. She noted that they want to stay within the Lake Minnetonka community and believe this property will satisfy their needs. She stated that while she understands some of their requests are challenging, she would ask for some leniency and that they trust them to know what they need to safely and successfully operate a first class dealership. Councilmember Maddy asked if any of the conditions that have been bounced around by the Council were detrimental to the business plan. Ms. Mueller stated that parking is a huge concern and understands that the City wants a lever to pull should there be parking complaints, but she is confident that the parking they are proposing is what will be needed. She stated that if this property flips to a new use after them, it will naturally go back to additional parking because of the spaces that they are dedicating to parking the boats. She noted that they only use hand tools outside, so that comment would be perfectly fine with them and agreed that putting a time limit on this work would be very difficult to police. She stated that the two display spaces are very important for them and understands that it would be different than what was currently there. She noted that her understanding is that they will have to take out the berm and will install holding tanks for water management and explained that as it is put back together, they would like to have pads there. She stated that it will look different, but would be tastefully done. She explained that they have these in all of their locations and noted that it would be a concrete pad with landscaping around it and an American flag flying in the center. Motion passed. Item 6.1). Continued: Preliminary and Final Plat Ray Helgesen Addition Location: 6120 Strawberry Lane Applicant: Paul and Patti Helgesen City Attorney Shepherd reviewed the three additional conditions he would suggest be added to RESOLUTION 24-043. Councilmember Maddy stated that his only concern was the snow removal of the west side being required by the residents of Lot #4 and #2 in perpetuity. City Attorney Shepherd stated that he thinks there was consensus from the applicant that they would have an agreement with respect to providing the snow removal. He explained that it would be an agreement regarding providing that snow removal that would be recorded against the property. Councilmember Maddy clarified that the snow removal with these changes would no longer be the City's problem. City Attorney Shepherd stated that was correct because there would be an agreement among the property owners. Mayor Labadie asked if the applicant had any questions or concerns with the proposed changes to the resolution language. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 21 of 29 Ms. Helgesen stated that there is no specific timeline indicated and stated that one of the staff reports said that there would be storm sewer extended from the middle of Maple to the Church Road cul-de-sac for drainage and asked if that would be happening this summer. City Engineer Budde explained that this would be discussed at the next City Council meeting. Ms. Helgesen stated that it would be torn up with that project, that would be the timeframe for putting the curb cut back in. She stated that she also assumed that they would take out the gravel when the construction began on their son's home, which she was hoping could happen this summer. Mayor Labadie stated that it did not sound like Ms. Helgesen had any concerns with the proposed new conditions. Ms. Helgesen stated that she did not have any concerns with the new conditions. Planning Director Darling referenced condition #5 which says that the improvements proposed would be constructed with the first home, but would not see any issue if they were to be completed sooner than that. Public Works Director Morreim asked about the maintenance language included in the new conditions. City Attorney Shepherd read aloud the proposed new condition #11. Public Works Director Morreim stated that he would like it to be included that it is road maintenance and not just winter maintenance because this will basically be a private driveway. Councilmember Zerby stated that he believes in the past the City had `oiled' this area in order to try to keep the dust down, so there would be maintenance involved. City Attorney Shepherd read through additional language changes to the new condition related to the feedback just given by Public Works Director Morreim. Mr. Loughlin stated that he was a ninety year old veteran and was having trouble keeping up with the conversation. He stated that he still did not believe he had heard a valid reason why the City would stop maintenance and snow plowing because Maple Avenue will still exist and the City has been plowing it for forty years. He stated that the Council keeps mentioning a driveway and it is not a driveway, because it is Maple Avenue. Public Works Director Morreim explained that it currently serves one property and the City would be vacating a portion of it, which he would call a driveway entrance because it would be the only property that this would be serving. Mr. Loughlin stated that it would have to go past the second driveway and also past the fire hydrant. Public Works Director Morreim stated that the City does not. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 22 of 29 Mr. Loughlin explained that he had enough trouble trying to maintain his own driveway and now the City is telling him he has to go out and snow plow Maple Avenue and keep the fire hydrant accessible for the neighbors. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that part of the agreement being suggested is that, because the applicant is getting a benefit in terms of the vacation of the eastern portion of Maple Avenue, they will take over the snow plowing and maintenance that had previously been done by the City. He stated that the idea is that this solution would be fair and equitable. Mr. Loughlin suggested that this process be simplified and they will just get together and do it themselves. City Attorney Shepherd gave a final read through of the revised proposed additional conditions, as discussed. Zerby moved, Sanschagrin seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-043, "A Resolution Approving a Preliminary and Final Plat for Ray Helgesen Addition for Property Located at 6120 Strawberry Lane", as revised, including the addition of three new conditions as presented by the City Attorney. Motion passed. 7. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Approve Encroachment Agreement for Fence and Landscaping Location: 5290 and 5300 Howards Point Road Applicant: Gregerson, Rosow, Johnson & Nilan, Ltd. City Engineer Budde explained that staff had received a complaint regarding encroachment of arbor vitae and fencing in front of properties located at 5290 and 5300 Howards Point Road. He reviewed the timeline for inspection, notice of violation, and extension of the timeline for reinspection to June 1, 2024. He explained that the applicant had submitted a request to encroach into a roadway easement that was dedicated a part of their lot split in the past. He reviewed the right-of-way and easement details and outlined the staff review of their request. He explained that the applicant would like to move the fence and arbor vitae out of the right-of-way, but would like to encroach into the five foot roadway easement. He stated that the applicant would also like to install some gates, but staff had concerns about that because gates take time to open and asked the applicant to come up with a solution that did not impede the right-of-way. He reviewed details of the proposed encroachment agreement. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked about the location of the actual property boundary and asked if the agreement was to bring it back to the property boundary. Planning Director Darling clarified that the applicant was proposing to relocate all of the fencing that they placed within the public right-of-way onto their property, within the roadway easement. She noted that they would have the option of trimming down the arbor vitae that are located in the right-of-way, or they could relocate them. She stated that the question for the Council to consider is if the applicant could remove the fencing from the public right-of-way and place it into the five foot roadway easement or if they had to move it even further back. She stated in this case, there is fifty-five feet of right-of-way in the area, which is more than what the City has for CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 23 of 29 the rest of Howards Point Road and explained that this was the only reason that staff would consider allowing this encroachment into the roadway easement. Councilmember Callies asked what the difference was between the roadway easement and right- of-way. City Attorney Shepherd explained that it was really related to the time it was dedicated. He stated that the right-of-way was dedicated at the time of development and the roadway easement was dedicated as part of a lot split. He stated that functionally, it was essentially the same, but it is delineated separately because it was dedicated separately. Councilmember Maddy asked if it was intended to be used for road use and noted that usually the City requires a drainage and utility easement. He asked if City Attorney Shepherd was saying that this is what that was, but it just had a different name or if it meant that the City had exclusive access to put a road on this piece of property. City Attorney Shepherd answered that if the City needed to expand the road, they could, but does not know why they would. He stated that he was correct that usually there would be right-of-way and drainage and utility easements which are two separate things. He noted that roadway easements are not seen very frequently, but agreed that the purpose of them was to put in a roadway or sidewalk. City Engineer Budde stated that it would also be to manage the utilities per the right-of-way ordinance and being able to allow communications, gas, and power to be in there as well. Councilmember Zerby referenced the drawing in the packet that showed a point and asked if that indicated that it was located in the roadway. Planning Director Darling confirmed that the roadway goes over the property corner and explained that from the property line back five feet is the roadway easement. City Engineer Budde clarified that technically the roadway was located outside of the right-of-way but is not encroaching into the private property because they have this roadway easement. City Attorney Shepherd explained that the fence was in the right-of-way. Councilmember Zerby asked how sight lines were considered topographically. He stated that when he had visited this site, he saw it in what is referred to as 3D and noted that there is a pretty substantial climb up the hill. City Engineer Budde stated that when he looks at sight lines, he looks at it from a purely horizontal perspective and noted that the overall radius of the roadway is about three hundred feet, which is a design speed for thirty miles per hour. He stated that the next piece that he looks at is the stopping sight distance and the various curves and noted that from an engineering standpoint, there is adequate stopping sight distance but had not looked at in detail for thirty miles hour. Margaret Neuville, an attorney with Gregerson, Rosow, Johnson & Nilan, explained that she was representing the property owners, Gary and Janet Grevillius. She stated that when the fence was installed there was a mutual mistake of fact between the fence contractor and the City inspector about its location and noted that she was not sure if anyone even knew about the roadway CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 24 of 29 easement. She stated that her clients were committed to doing this right and explained that her clients understand the City's concerns, but want to keep the fence because it is very attractive. She stated that was why they were asking for this encroachment agreement and noted that, as staff indicated, this five foot roadway easement was kind of a unique situation which was why they felt this request was reasonable. She stated that related to the sight line issues that have been raised, her clients were willing to commit to keep the arbor vitae trimmed to three feet. She stated that the current deadline is June 1, 2024 and they would also request that the deadline for all of the work by moved to July 15, 2024 in order to allow time for the contractor to complete the work correctly. Councilmember Callies asked about the gates and noted that she did not see how moving the gate opening into the property would resolve the queuing issue because people would still have to wait for it to open. City Engineer Budde explained that there was enough room for a vehicle to pull up to the gate and be completely off of the roadway and the gate could still open. He noted that it would basically give them a parking space that would be off of the roadway. Councilmember Callies asked when the arbor vitae and the fencing was installed. Ms. Neuville stated that she believed the installation was completed last fall. Planning Director Darling noted that she believed the arbor vitae was installed sometime in 2018. Ms. Neuville stated that she was under the impression that they were all installed within the last year. City Administrator Nevinski stated that his understanding was that the fence was put in last year, but the arbor vitae were installed prior to that and referenced the Google image that was included in the packet from September of 2022. Ms. Neuville stated that under the encroachment agreement, her clients fully understand that should the City ever need this property for roadway purposes, that it will be moved at his expense. Mayor Labadie stated that she understands that the applicant has indicated that they will keep the arbor vitae trimmed, but she believed that would basically mean chopping the tree in half. She stated that the photo included in the packet was not a current or accurate representation because it was from September of 2022. Councilmember Zerby stated that he always struggles with this kind of request where it is sort of giving free land back. He noted that in looking at the neighbor across the street it appears as though they have about twenty feet back from the road and expressed concern that the neighbors may start asking for equal easements so they can start putting fences and bushes out further. Mayor Labadie noted that an encroachment agreement was not a precedent setting event. Councilmember Zerby noted that he felt it would be a signal to someone living across the street. Mayor Labadie stated that this item dealt with only this property. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 25 of 29 City Attorney Shepherd stated that was correct and the Council can take every property and every situation and make the decision that they felt was appropriate. He noted that the Council, in the past, has made the decision to grant these encroachment agreements and explained that cities have done this when there has been a mistake or something had been installed before there was a realization that it should not be there. He reminded the Council that an encroachment agreement is a way to keep the status quo but also gives the City the ability to tell the property owner to remove the items at any time should they need the roadway easement. He stated that the City would not be giving up their rights but simply making a determination about how it is used for the time being. Councilmember Zerby asked if the sight line on a corner was intended to be thirty feet. Planning Director Darling stated that was what the clear view triangle says it should be. Mayor Labadie stated that what concerned her was the amount of e-mails and communications that the City had received from the neighbors to the north that all expressed concern about sight lines. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that the encroachment would create less safety because of the curve and also that it goes downhill. He stated that the City code talks about the restriction being welfare and safety. He stated that he thinks that a higher standard should be put on the fence companies to send a signal to them that they need to understand what their limitations are. He expressed concern that they would essentially signal that the City has lower standards and they could just put the fence where they want and simply ask for a permit after the fact. He read aloud from the code regarding obstruction and excavation in the right-of-way and the need for a permit for this activity. Councilmember Callies stated that the fence company installed the fence, but noted that the City had also allowed it. She 'noted that it appears that the applicant has plenty of land to work with and this comes down to the cost to move the fence and the arbor vitae. Ms. Neuville noted that she believes that there was a City inspector on site three times during the fence inspection who had essentially approved the location each time. She explained that she did not fault anyone for what happened because as everyone found out later, this is kind of a unique property. She noted that she also did not feel that anyone was acting in bad faith when this happened. She stated that her clients are trying to make this right without having to redo everything. Councilmember Callies stated that she believed the language that Councilmember Sanschagrin was quoting from was the right-of-way and not the roadway easement language. Ms. Neuville stated that the encroachment agreement includes language that says `to keep or maintain encroachments in the right-of-way' which she thinks encompasses things that are already there. Councilmember Maddy stated that this is a tough situation because there were minor mistakes made on all sides. He stated that there have been instances when someone puts a patio within a setback, and the City has told them that they need to move it, even though it was done in error. He stated that it is not something that he likes to do, but he felt it was something that the City has to do. He stated that one of his pet peeves is when people start using City property and City CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 26 of 29 exclusive rights -of -way as their own property. He stated that what happens is they get used to and then sell their property and then get mad at the City when they are told they do not have the right to do that. He stated that he was not happy that the fence was installed in the wrong spot or that City staff missed it on inspections, ,but was also not happy that they were offering one more agreement to pay attention to in perpetuity. He stated that he would say that they should just get out of the easement, because then there will not be a problem and would just be a mistake that had to get fixed. He stated that he does not want this to be made more complicated than it needed to be and did not see the point in letting this owner or future owners think that they have complete control over the City's roadway easement. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he had seen the City reject similar applications for things like putting a pipe underneath the road in order to maintain the easements. He stated that he agreed with Councilmember Maddy's statements and reminded the Council that the picture included in the packet was not accurate in what it looked like today. Councilmember Maddy stated that he felt granting this request would end up being more work than it was worth for just a fraction of road easement. He reiterated that the does not like doing this and understands that it was truly a mistake. Councilmember Callies asked how much further back the fence would be if they moved it out of the easement and right-of-way area. City Engineer Budde stated that on the south end, the fence would move about eight feet but that would not allow room for the arbor vitae. He stated that if the idea was to have the arbor vitae in front of the fence, then they would probably move the fence back about twelve feet. Councilmember Maddy stated that he did not want to overstep the roadway easement and asked if they would be allowed to have arbor vitae within the roadway easement. City Engineer Budde explained that the requirement is that it has to be less than three feet tall. Councilmember Maddy stated that if the City's easement language allows this as long as it is no higher than three feet tall, he did not feel like he could say no to that use. Councilmember Callies asked what the point would be in telling the applicant to move the fence but could keep the arbor vitae. She explained that she felt it was a somewhat goofy design to move the fence back twelve feet and have the arbor vitae still within the easement. City Engineer Budde stated that he thinks that they could put the arbor vitae on the back side of the fence and could just be set up differently, but that would also change the look and aesthetic of what is currently there. Mayor Labadie reiterated that she did not feel the Council could ignore the letters that had been sent from neighbors on the street that had shared safety concerns. She clarified that was not the only thing to consider, but wanted to bring it up to the Council one more time. Mayor Labadie asked if anyone would like to make a motion on this application. No one spoke. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 27 of 29 Mayor Labadie explained that this action had failed for lack of a motion. City Attorney Shepherd stated that there was clearly an encroachment in the City's right-of-way and roadway easement which the Council was clearly not okay with, and stated that he felt it would be helpful to give a deadline for its removal. Councilmember Maddy asked how much time would be needed to move the fences and trim the arbor vitae. Ms. Neuville asked if the direction from the Council was that every portion of the fence that was within the five foot roadway easement must be moved outside of that and towards the property. She noted that this would still be within the drainage and utility easement, which from her understanding, would be allowed. She asked if her understanding was correct that the arbor vitae can stay in the roadway easement as long as it was trimmed to three feet. City Attorney Shepherd confirmed that this was what the right-of-way ordinance stated. Ms. Neuville stated that she believed the idea was that the aesthetics of it were nicer if the arbor vitae was located right next to the fence. Councilmember Maddy noted that the owners can solve this problem however they wish, but the fence cannot be within the roadway easement and the arbor vitae, if they are in the roadway easement, have to be less than three feet. He suggested that the Council give them until July 15, 2024 or August 1, 2024. Ms. Neuville stated that the contractor was still waiting to order the gates until a decision was made by the City. She noted that he had assumed approval and had communicated that he thought July 15, 2024 would be an appropriate deadline, however, she would like to ask for more time than that because now they will have additional issues to resolve based on what the Council has communicated. She suggested that the deadline be extended to August 15, 2024 or the end of August. Mayor Labadie stated that she felt that was a reasonable request. Councilmember Zerby stated that he did not think the Council had made a determination about the gates. City Administrator Nevinski stated that the applicants had not submitted a permit application for gates. Planning Director Darling clarified that they have submitted a permit application for gates, but explained that it had not been issued pending Council action on this item. Mayor Labadie stated that means that gates were not formally before the Council nor were they part of tonight's discussion. Councilmember Maddy stated that staff can take action on that application outside of the easement discussion. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 28 of 29 City Attorney Shepherd stated that was true, but the Council could consider what the applicant was saying with respect to timing. Ms. Neuville stated that they would like to install the gates and get everything moved at the same time. The Council discussed extending the deadline to August 15, 2024. Ms. Neuville stated that they would accept that extended deadline, for now, but she would discuss it with her clients and the contract and if they felt that would not be enough time would come back with an official request for another extension. 8. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS 9. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Staff 1. Special Election Update City Clerk/HR Director Thone gave an overview of the Special Election that took place on April 30, 2024 and May 14, 2024. She thanked staff, election judges, and Public Works for their assistance in helping the City have another flawless election. Other Park and Recreation Manager Czech stated that the Park Tour that was cancelled on May 21, 2024 has been rescheduled to June 4, 2024. He noted that a rain -check back up date for the tours scheduled for June 11, 2024 has been scheduled for June 18, 2024. Public Works Director Morreim stated that they will be starting sewer cleaning on May 29, 2024. He stated that they continue waiting for drier weather in order to get out to Freeman Park with their equipment to get the remainder of the material. He stated that they were able to get some of it about a week ago, but it had been raining again, so they have not been able to get the rest. He noted that they have done seeding in about seventy-five percent of the areas and hope to get to the remaining area in the next few weeks. He stated that the tree planting has been completed but there are a few tree guards that still need to be installed because they ran out. He noted that they were able to plant around one -hundred and sixty trees. He stated that they will be finishing up the DNR grant application and will also look at the maintenance plan over the next few months. City Engineer Budde stated that rain has slowed things down so projects were making slow progress. He stated that the 2024 mill and overlay project is making good progress because they are close to finishing Phase One. Mayor Labadie noted that she had noticed a lot of dirt and mud on Birch Road and asked staff to keep an eye on the contractors. City Clerk/HR Director Thone stated that the City had received ten applications for the Finance Director position and there were plans to interview three of those individuals in early June. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 28, 2024 Page 29 of 29 B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Zerby stated that he had attended the Excelsior Fire District meeting to review the preliminary 2025 budget and gave a brief overview of the information and discussion. He noted that right now, the proposed budget increase is a little above thirteen percent. He suggested that Chief Mackey be invited to present to the Council prior to taking a vote on the 2025 budget in order to hear some of the details. Councilmember Maddy stated that June 1, 2024 is the seventy-first annual fish fry and dance put on by the Mound Fire Department. He stated that the tickets are fifteen dollars in advance through the Fire Department or through Harbor Wine and Spirits Liquor Store in Mound and noted that the tickets will cost twenty dollars at the door. Mayor Labadie encouraged the Council to sign up for the League of Minnesota Cities legislative update on June 3, 2024 at 11:00 a.m., but noted that they will also offer a video replay. 10. ADJOURN Sanschagrin moved, Maddy seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of May 28, 2024, at 10:38 P.M.