Loading...
10-15-24 CC Reg Mtg MinutesCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 15, 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; Park and Recreation Manager Czech; Finance Director Schmuck, and, City Engineer Budde Absent: None C. Review Agenda Mayor Labadie stated that she wanted to add an additional item under General/New Business an item Approve Master Service Agreement with Arvig as item 8.C. Zerby moved, Maddy seconded, approving the agenda, as amended. Motion passed. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Labadie reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Callies moved, Maddy seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of September 23, 2024 B. Approval of the Verified Claims List C. Approve Tobacco License Renewals, Adopting RESOLUTION NO.24-080, "A Resolution Approving Annual Retail Tobacco License Renewals." D. Approve Multiple Dock Licenses E. Approve Recruitment for Seasonal Ice Rink/Community Center Attendances F. Approve Permanent Appointment of Park and Recreation Manager CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 2 of 24 G. Liability Coverage Waiver H. Approve Smithtown Ponds Features Naming, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-081, "A Resolution To Approve Smithtown Ponds Feature Naming." Motion passed. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Alan Yelsey, 26335 Peach Circle, gave an overview of the definition of a conflict of interest and explained that today's subdivision item related to 26275 Smithtown Road should be dismissed until there is a neutral, third party arbitrator can be asked to fairly rule on this matter without bias, financial interest, and impartiality. He stated that he was a directly impacted party to this matter and stated that he felt that the Planning Commission report was irrevocably tainted since the Chair had contacted him directly prior to the hearing, as a representative of Mayor Labadie and stated, `Any candidate that chooses not to publicly communicate this, in my opinion, will lose credibility and I will question their integrity.' He explained that he was a candidate for mayor and he felt threatened by that bullying comment made by the Planning Commissioner. He stated that the majority of the Planning Commission was appointed by the biased mayor and also felt that the Planning Commissioner had acted dismissively to his testimony of damages during the hearing and attempted to stop him from explaining property damages to the Commission. He stated that Councilmember Maddy had also belittled him in public and vowed never to talk with him which he felt denied his right to communicate with the Council. He explained that he did not believe that Councilmember Maddy could be relied upon for a fair and impartial hearing. He noted that both Mayor Labadie and Councilmember Callies were also engaged in a highly charged election with him and have expressed sharply biased opinions against him. He explained that he felt that they could not view him or his position on this matter in a fair and unbiased manner. He stated that he felt that they had substantial adversarial conflict of personal interest because they will be paid for their services if they are re-elected, have a direct financial benefit, and have every motive to do everything in order to defeat him. He stated that because no one on the Council have recused themselves, he insisted that the matter related to 26275 Smithtown Road be immediately moved and heard by a neutral, unbiased third party arbitrator and if they do not, the courts will be asked to intervene, if needed, to ensure the rights of all parties are fairly heard. He noted that the City had just updated and revised their material findings and changes were made late yesterday afternoon and they have not had a chance to respond and provide a material response to the Council. Mayor Labadie noted that typically Matters from the Floor was not a time for back and forth conversations, but Mr. Yelsey made a lot of allegations during his statement so she wanted to ask City Attorney Shepherd if he saw any reason that the item referenced by Mr. Yelsey should be removed from the agenda. City Attorney Shepherd stated that he did not see any reason that this item should be removed from the agenda. He explained that Mr. Yelsey was not an applicant and the Council was being asked to make a quasi-judicial decision. He stated that every conflict of interest decision is for each to make on their own but explained that he had not heard any financial decision or impact for the decision in question that he has heard today. He noted that there may be political disagreements, but the fact that Mr. Yelsey was running for City Council did not disqualify any member of the Council from hearing the land use application that is before them from a neighboring property owner. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 3 of 24 4. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 5. PARKS A. Approve Parks and Recreation Sponsorship Guide and Policy Parks and Recreation Manager Czech gave an overview of the proposed Parks and Recreation Sponsorship Guide and Policy and noted that the Parks Commission had recommended approval. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if the businesses that would be sponsors would be Shorewood based, local businesses. He asked what types of businesses they would be and if there were some that could not be sponsors. Parks and Recreation Manager Czech stated that there are some types of businesses that cannot be sponsors and gave the example of the City not wanting to have `adult shops' sponsoring a children's program. He stated that the sponsorship would align with the City's goals and also align with the goal of the event. He noted that it would be open to all businesses, but the hope was that the local businesses would be excited to participate in this manner. Councilmember Callies stated that she felt this was a good idea and appreciated the thought behind trying to expand participation in these events and also to spread the cost around a bit. She stated that she felt this was a good marketing opportunity for the businesses. Parks and Recreation Manager Czech noted that costs rise every year for their events, so instead of having to take away some components of them, they felt this would allow the City to expand and even add new components. Councilmember Zerby stated that he felt this was an excellent guide and policy and liked the way the pricing had been structured for the sponsorship levels. He asked about sponsorship in the ballparks and the ability to erect a sign on the fence that says a business name and asked if the Parks Commission has discussed that as well. Parks and Recreation Manager Czech stated that the signage that is currently in place on the ballfields is through a CUP with the associations. He stated that was currently being evaluated and explained that they are working through the various association agreements and explained that this would also be something that is addressed through the agreements but may require collaboration with the user groups for the fields. Mayor Labadie thanked Parks and Recreation Manager Czech for all the work he put into this and asked if under 5b, Guidelines, if they should also include THC to delineate that the City would have the right to potentially exclude that business from sponsoring a children's event. Parks and Recreation Manager Czech asked City Attorney Shepherd if he could comment on that verbiage. City Attorney Shepherd stated that Mayor Labadie's suggestion fits in line with what the City can do so the Council could approve the resolution and make note within the motion that staff would make the proposed edit to the language within the Guide. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 4 of 24 Callies moved, Maddy seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-082, "A Resolution Approving the Parks and Recreation Sponsorship Guide and Policy.", with the proposed amendment to include THC businesses in item 5b, as discussed. Motion passed. B. Hennepin County STS Agreement City Administrator Nevinski gave an overview of the research City staff had been doing to try to boost the City's capacity to deal with some straightforward and simple projects. He reviewed the Sentence to Serve (STS) program and explained that staff felt that this may be a great way to get work done within the parks and rights -of -way. He explained that the goal would be to use an STS crew this fall to tackle some of the reemerging buckthorn in Freeman Park and if this work goes quickly possibly also utilize them in other parks within the City. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he had submitted a number of questions to Public Works Director Morreim prior to the meeting but explained that he wanted to run through them quickly in order to keep them part of the public record. He stated that he had asked how the work would be done and the response was that they would use hand tools and small engine equipment such as weed whips and the crew leader on site would be able to use larger, motorized equipment. He stated that in terms of clearing the buckthorn, Public Works Director Morreim said that he was not sure what their productivity would be and had indicated that this was not to the exclusion of using volunteers and was to supplement the existing efforts. Councilmember Zerby asked if there would also be City staff supervision on site during the project work. City Administrator Nevinski stated that they will probably be working with the Public Works supervisor to help arrange the work for the day and then have some type of regular check -ins. He explained that this experience in other cities that have utilized STS has been that the crew chief understands the work and is really the one supervising. He noted that there would be some check -ins to see how far they got and that the work was being done to the City's satisfaction but did not think the City would actually have a staff member standing out there monitoring their work every minute. A gentleman from the audience stated that he had a question. Mayor Labadie explained that this discussion was taking place at the Council level. The gentleman from the audience stated that he felt his question was a very easy question. Mayor Labadie reiterated that this was not up for public discussion at this time and was being handled at a Council and staff level. Callies moved, Maddy seconded, to Approve the Agreement with Hennepin County for Sentencing to Service Program for Buckthorn Removal Services. Motion passed. 6. PLANNING CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 5 of 24 A. Preliminary Final Plat and Variance for Asakenas Addition Location: 6180 Cardinal Drive Applicant: Audrius Asakenas Planning Director Darling gave an overview of the request to subdivide the property at 6180 Cardinal Drive into three lots. She outlined the property location, the existing conditions, guidance related to density, topography, and the variance request. She noted that the Commission felt that the slopes located in the center of the property made for a very difficult and unusual hardship on the applicant because they cannot run a public street through the property to provide fully conforming lots. She explained that the Planning Commission had reviewed the request and had recommended approval subject to the findings within the staff report but had also added some additional conditions. She pointed out that the vote at the Planning Commission had not been unanimous and was approved with a vote of three in favor and one opposed. She explained that the Planning Commissioner who opposed this felt that the applicant had not met the criteria for a variance for unusual hardships and felt that they should design around the slope issue in another fashion. She stated that there were three residents who spoke at the Planning Commission meeting and five letters that the City received that were included in the packet. She clarified that staff and the Planning Commission were recommending approval. Councilmember Maddy asked if the City knew what day trash and recycling were picked up in Chanhassen. Planning Director Darling stated that at the public meeting, it was reported that Chanhassen and Shorewood have the same day for trash pick-ups, so all the cans would be out on Wednesdays. Councilmember Maddy asked for a reminder on how the City defined lot width and how far back from the front line it is measured. Planning Director Darling explained that lot width was measured at the front setback which, in his zoning district, would be thirty-five feet back from the front property line and reviewed the lot widths for the three proposed lots. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if there was currently a house on the property that was considered a non -conforming use due to the driveway. Planning Director Darling explained that the lot was fully conforming in its current configuration because they had the required lot width. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked about the plans for the existing home. Planning Director Darling stated that the plans are to demolish the existing home. She referenced the applicant's narrative that pointed out some other lots in the area that have limited access to public streets which have similar situations. She noted that most are older, but had looked at a few more recent subdivisions and gave a brief overview of the details of those situations. Audrius Asakenas, 6180 Cardinal Drive, expressed his appreciation to Planning Director Darling for her assistance throughout this process. He introduced Tom Goodrum who was an engineer working with and explained that he would be able to answer any questions the Council may have. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 6 of 24 Councilmember Callies stated that the language in the subdivision ordinance that has the requirements for a variance states that `undue hardship that would deprive the applicant of a reasonable and minimum use of the land' and asked Planning Director Darling to explain that a bit and asked if, in other words, the applicant could not be maximizing the use of the land. Planning Director Darling stated that, in this case, the applicant is in an area where they are guided to have the development contain between three and five lots and they were proposing three lots, so this was the minimum request. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if they had explored ways to structure this in a way that a variance would not be needed, such as accessing the road that is further to the south rather than having the driveway there. Planning Director Darling explained that the road Councilmember Sanschagrin had referenced was a private road, so they would not have any rights to that roadway and noted that it was also located in another jurisdiction. She stated that they could explore that more fully, dedicate it to the public and have it become a shared road between Shorewood and Chanhassen, but it would require approval of all of the homeowners who have an interest. Mayor Labadie noted that she was glad to see the submission regarding the proposed garbage can collection and relocation of the mailboxes because when she first read through this she agreed that there was the potential for a lot of garbage cans in this location. She stated that she found it comforting that they had put a plan together to address this before any issues could occur. Planning Director Darling explained that she felt the applicant should work with the adjacent neighbors to come up with a solution for this issue. She noted that this was not really a zoning issue but the City did not want to contribute to neighborhood squabbles over trash can storage. Mayor Labadie stated that she agreed and would also encourage the applicant to do as suggested. Councilmember Callies asked if the City were just considering the size of the parcel, whether this would be able to be subdivided without any variances required. Planning Director Darling stated that if they could look at this two -dimensionally without the slopes, the applicant would have a lot of options to subdivide the property. Councilmember Sanschagrin explained that he had an issue with the unusual hardship and whether this should qualify for a variance because the property was the same as when the owners bought it just a few years ago. He asked why this would be considered an unusual hardship when the attributes of the property have not changed since it was purchased. Planning Director Darling explained that the unusual circumstance in this subdivision is that they are trying to subdivide it in a manner that would be consistent with lot area and the density requirements within the Comprehensive Plan. She noted that the preventative circumstance was the slopes, which were providing a greater hardship in order to be able to get the subdivision being proposed. Councilmember Sanschagrin reiterated that those slopes existed when the property was purchased. He explained that his concern was that there were properties just like this all over the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 7 of 24 City and that developers would purchase the properties with the idea of getting variances such as this. He noted that he felt that this was an important part of the code that helps the City preserve the natural character of the City and that providing this type of variance would undermine their ability to rely on the integrity of the code to prevent over -development. Mayor Labadie stated that she disagreed and noted that a variance was a unique application for each parcel and did not think it was designed to be a precedent -setting document. Councilmember Maddy stated that every lot was unique and the only precedent that they could possibly be setting is a lot that is bisected with a very steep slope that has a bluff halfway through the lot that was platted before modern zoning existed. He stated that he did not think this was abnormal from business as usual, since has been volunteering with the City. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that, as of right now, the property was being put to its minimum use but now, the owner was trying to subdivide the property. He stated that the owner knew that these limitations existed on the property when it was purchased and explained that he was uncomfortable granting this type of variance where the City would allow development in spite of their regulations. Councilmember Maddy stated that if the Council accepted that definition of minimum use, the City would not let anyone build anything on their lots, because they would already be doing the minimum. Councilmember Callies stated that the City allows subdivisions, and asked if Councilmember Sanschagrin was saying that the City should not allow subdivision of property because that increased the density in the City, which would be totally contrary to their ordinance. She stated that she did not know, for a fact, that this individual had purchased the property in the manner described by Councilmember Sanschagrin. She noted that she did not think it was correct to say that people were not allowed to subdivide their property and thought that there were so many lots like this in the City that this would turn into a slippery slope and would turn Shorewood into something like Maple Grove where there is one house after another. Mayor Labadie stated that even if there were lots like this all over the City, this was not a precedent -setting situation and was a variance that was unique to this parcel and this application. Councilmember Maddy stated that he felt this had more to do with how the City measured lot width than anything else because these clearly meet the minimum widths but have a bottleneck that is unique. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked about the purpose of code and noted that he agreed that owners are able to subdivide their properties as long as it was within code and do not need a variance, but in this case, they need a variance and need an unusual hardship to qualify for the variance. He stated that he felt that the Council needed to be very selective in how they approve these types of requests because they do not want to undermine their ability to prevent flag lots in the future. He stated that he was also concerned that this may also create a safety issue. Mayor Labadie stated that within the staff report, the steep slope is called a bluff area and asked how many bluff areas existed in the City. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 8 of 24 Planning Director Darling stated that bluffs are only in shoreland areas and outside of that would just be referred to as steep slopes. She shared examples of areas throughout the City that had steep slopes. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he was not sure how that played into this decision. Mayor Labadie explained that she was just asking and noted that she felt the topography of this lot was unique and felt that it met the qualifications that were required for the variance. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if it was a hardship. Councilmember Callies stated that it was not just stating an undue hardship because there are criteria that describe what an undue hardship is within the code. She stated that those have been listed within the proposed resolution under 2a, b, and c. She stated that she felt that in this case those criteria were met because of the topography of the lot and was unique to this particular situation. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he felt it was only an undue hardship because they were subdividing. Councilmember Callies stated that they are looking at the subdivision ordinance and the criteria. She reiterated that under code, people have the ability to subdivide their property, and when there is an undue hardship that meets the underlying criteria, they have the right to subdivide. She stated that she felt that Councilmember Sanschagrin was kind of arguing whether there should ever be a variance. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he felt the City was starting to stretch its use of variances and explained that he felt variances should be used as a tool to address things on the margin and not huge ones. He stated that this is an eighty-five percent variance from what the code requires in terms of width and asked if a variance was really intended to address a huge discrepancy like that. Councilmember Callies stated that the Council was looking at this particular application and the larger, philosophical argument of whether or not there should be variances would be for another day. She reiterated that the City allowed variances and if this application met the criteria, they should be permitted to have it. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he did not believe that they met the criteria. Councilmember Zerby stated that this lot is 2.7 acres and three homes on that amount of space was a relatively reasonable use of the land. He noted that he hated the idea of creating a flag - shaped driveway/lot, but if he thinks of it as a private road which is what exists next to them, that makes more sense to him. He stated that in an ideal situation, the private drive nearby would be a real road that they would be able to connect to with property driveways, but they do not have that which he felt was also a factor of it being unique along with the topography. He stated that he cannot personally find where this would not be a hardship because of the circumstances that he sees, but did agree with many of the points raised by Councilmember Sanschagrin. He explained that he wished there was a way for him to find a way to vote against this request, but he could not, so he would vote in favor of it. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 9 of 24 Maddy moved, Callies seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-083, "A Resolution Approving a Preliminary and Final Plat and Variances for the Asakenas Addition for Property located at 6180 Cardinal Drive." Motion passed 4-1 (Councilmember Sanschagrin opposed). B. Minor Subdivision and Variance Location: 26275 Smithtown Road Applicant: Tony and Amy Denman Planning Director Darling reviewed the request to subdivide property at 26275 Smithtown Road into two lots and outlined the variance request related to lot width. She noted that the Planning Commission found that the applicant met the requirements and showed that the shape of the lot and the presence of the stream did provide an unusual hardship and recommended approval with a three -to -one vote. She explained that the Commissioner who opposed felt that they did not find that the applicant had met the criteria for a variance, including unusual hardship. She explained that the Planning Commission had asked that the applicant revise the landscaping plan to show that they were buffering the south end of the development with additional trees. She noted that there was a concept plan attached to the packet where the applicant had added additional trees, as requested. She stated that the Planning Commission had also wanted them to take a look to see if there may be a way to provide some additional buffering on the east side of the driveway between the trail located on the City property and the driveway on the applicant's property. She noted that the applicant has proposed a number of trees in that area and has also looked at whether or not they could save a tree that is close to the property line. She stated that in reviewing the proposed additional trees on City property, there are a few reasons that staff was concerned about this because it would increase the amount of future maintenance and would add more trees very close to the trail. She stated that staff was recommending that rather than trees, they place a fence in order to provide some buffering. Councilmember Maddy stated that it was mentioned in the report that the diseased trees would not count against or add to the requirements for the replacement trees and asked how the City differentiated between diseased and non -diseased. He asked if they had to find Emerald Ash Borer or if they could just call all ash trees diseased or yet to be diseased. Planning Director Darling stated that they do not typically call all ash trees diseased, but, in this case, they have a number of trees that the forester has indicated have Emerald Ash Borer in them and noted that it was a significant number of trees on the property. She noted that some that they had proposed to be saved, but since they have the Emerald Ash Borer, they should also be removed at the same time. She stated that the City's tree preservation policy did not consider trees that are diseased or dead to be significant, even if they are large in size. Councilmember Callies asked what was meant by a `specimen' tree. Planning Director Darling explained that this tree was probably a volunteer tree and noted that this tree would probably never be a beautiful oak tree because its primary leader was leaning significantly. She stated that with the canopy proposed to be removed on the Denman property, she would say that it was at risk of being pushed over by high winds. She noted that she felt that this particular tree did not have a long life, but the applicant had indicated that they were willing to put in some effort to save it. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 10 of 24 Councilmember Callies noted that, to her, this tree looked like a hazard for the trail. She stated that, in her opinion, she did not think that they should put a lot of effort into saving that particular tree. She explained that the other point that she thought was helpful in the Planning Commission discussion and report was that the tree preservation policy applied when someone is subdividing. She stated that if they were not subdividing the homeowner could remove any number of trees that they would like. Planning Director Darling stated that was correct and noted that if they wanted to demolish the existing home and build a new home on the south side of the property, tree preservation would also apply to that, but would not apply if they just wanted to build something like a sport court in the area or just have prairie plantings. She stated that the City cannot stop people from cutting down trees on the property outside of the development if they want to do it. Councilmember Callies stated that she was not advocating for that, but was trying to clarify what the issues are with relation to the subdivision and point out the distinction of what a person was able to do and what the City's requirements were because they applied for a subdivision. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked how close the driveway was to the existing house. Rick Denman, 5885 Glencoe Road, stated that he was the father and father-in-law of the applicants and explained that he was one of the owners of the Charles Cudd Company which builds homes around the Twin Cities. He noted that the driveway is about 15 feet away from the house. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked how close the driveway would be to the park. Mr. Denman stated that it would be about five feet off the property line on that side. Amy Denman, 26275 Smithtown Road, stated that she and her husband own the property and explained that they felt fortunate to have found their home in Shorewood because it sits on a beautiful 2.5 acres of property. She stated that the home was well built and since moving in they have invested in remodeling and updating it so they felt that it still had a long and useful life ahead. She explained that they love living in the City and would like to build a new home on the back of their property. She noted that they meet or exceed all the City requirements with the exception of street frontage which was why they were requesting a variance. She stated that they did not believe granting the variance would negatively impact any other properties or the community, as a whole, and by creating another lot, they would be helping to make room for another family to be able to enjoy the benefits of living in Shorewood. Mr. Denman stated that parcel A, to the north, has the existing home, and parcel B on the back is sixty-three thousand square feet. He noted that the neighbors on the backside of the property that have concerns about this have homes that are on about forty thousand square foot lots. He stated that even if they built a five thousand square foot home there would still be about fifty-three thousand square feet of unbuilt area on the back lot. He noted that in order to make the back neighbors happier they would plant twenty trees across the back southern property line in order to help buffer things. He explained that about eighty percent of the trees were ash trees so they would be on their way out no matter what. He stated that they were also willing to build a fence along the area next to the park which staff has suggested. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if the expectation was for a lot of fill to go in. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 11 of 24 Planning Director Darling stated that she felt that they would be able to use the soil that they have on site in order to create the fill that would be needed. She noted that if they ended up needing more than one hundred cubic yards, it would require a CUP. Councilmember Callies asked about the proposed fence location. Planning Director Darling stated that the property line is just to the west of the oak tree, and described the proposed fence location. Councilmember Callies explained that one concern she had with fences was related to looks and also long-term maintenance because they can turn into an eye sore. She asked if the fence was helping something or actually addressing some issue. Planning Director Darling stated that the maintenance of the fence would be the responsibility of the Denman's because it would be on their property. She explained that the concern was raised by a speaker at the public hearing who thought that the new driveway and the trail were too close together. She stated that the Planning Commission had asked the applicant to take a look and see if there was something that could be done in order to provide some additional separation between the private and public space. She reminded the Council that the Denman's had originally proposed some additional trees along this area, but staff was recommending that they install a fence instead. Councilmember Maddy stated that if the City was going after a natural look adjacent to the pond areas, he did not think a fence would help that look because that provided more of an urban look and feel. He stated that they would not want to have border trees because that creates a maintenance issue. He noted that he would be comfortable not requiring anything and if it became a problem, the owners could go ahead and install a fence. Mr. Denman stated that another idea that they have used in similar situations was to plant some beautiful grasses that provide a natural hedge instead of a fence which would still provide a buffer that would require very little maintenance. Councilmember Callies stated that she felt like that was a better idea for this area. She stated that the City had received a letter earlier today from the neighbor's attorney regarding when the property was initially subdivided and how Pebble Creek may have affected it. She noted that she did not feel that had any particular relevance to this situation and explained that there was a creek there today that affected the subdivision of the property. Planning Director Darling stated that the creek did affect the subdivision of the property and explained that she had looked back at the plat and there was not a lot of documentation on any of the subdivisions that occurred before there was either planning consultants or professional staff hired that served the Council. She stated that all of the plat applications from the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s, there are virtually no records. She explained that what she used to review the application was 1960s topography before the subdivision was approved and compared that to the topography that is in the area now and also looked at historic aerials of the property and how it had changed over the years. She stated that what she was drawing out on her original review was that the original subdivision had difficulty using the property because of the presence of the creek and Councilmember Callies was probably correct that the presence of the creek on the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 12 of 24 property now was probably a bigger finding than it was then. She noted that the creek appears to be the only real constraint on the property. Councilmember Sanschagrin explained that he had the same issues with this application as he had with the previous item and did not feel that there was an unusual hardship in this situation because the property was like this when it was purchased. He stated that this was also a huge variance and also felt that there was a potential safety issue with a road going onto Smithtown Road next to other entrances to the park. He stated that this would also create another flag shaped lot which he felt would set a precedent and has seen them be abused. He noted that he felt it would be a dangerous path for the City to start approving flag lots within the City and stated that he was completely against flag lots. He noted that there was a neighboring property owner who was assured that there would be no development back there and he believed that the City owes it to that property owner to honor the due diligence that was performed when he purchased his property to ensure that it would not be developed. He explained that he was strongly opposed to this request. Councilmember Callies stated that when you talk about due diligence, there is something called the City code that contains the subdivision ordinance. She explained that was not one of the criteria for granting a variance to the subdivision ordinance. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that bringing harm to one of the neighboring properties was one of the criteria. Councilmember Callies asked what Councilmember Sanschagrin was stating that the `harm' was in the situation and if it was that the neighboring property owner felt that they were misled. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that was correct. Councilmember Callies clarified that was not one of the criteria. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that the City would be impacting the environment and natural character of the area by allowing more development than what the neighbor thought could happen under the City code. Councilmember Maddy read aloud a portion of the criteria and asked if this was detrimental to public health, welfare, or injurious to other property in the vicinity and if that was what Councilmember Sanschagrin was saying. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he felt that potentially it was, because he did not think they were one -hundred percent sure that this would not create harm to the community in terms of impact on water tables or general environment of the area and that the neighboring properties would not be harmed. He asked if Councilmember Maddy could say that the neighboring properties would not be harmed. Councilmember Maddy stated that he has been doing this kind of thing for the last twelve years and explained that people with big lots have the right to split them. He stated that he would not try to tell someone what they can do with their trees on their own private property. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that they were being asked to approve a variance to a code and asked about the reason for the code. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 13 of 24 Councilmember Maddy explained that the code was the reason why, for example, along Vine Hill in the southeast corner of the City they never get any variance requests because they were built to modern zoning standards. He stated that they can only have one code for the whole City so all the stuff that was platted back in the 1920s or 1950s just does not fit well with the code, so in order to allow people to utilize their property, the City has to make small adjustments to what is allowed, on a case by case basis. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he did not feel that this was a small adjustment Councilmember Maddy stated that the lot width requirement is one -hundred twenty feet and asked how wide the lot was after they get down the driveway and noted that he was certain that it was substantially wider than one -hundred twenty feet. He stated that the only problem was that there was a railroad through there when they platted this thing in the 1950s and they could not get a road to the other side because Peach Circle blocked off any other opportunity for roads coming in the other direction which means this was basically an outlot. He stated that for the City to say that they cannot split their lot that is more than sizeable enough for two lots within the City's density requirements, seems like a `gotcha', because that was how things were platted before the City even had a zoning code. Planning Director Darling noted that the lot width after they got down the driveway was two - hundred eight -four feet wide. Councilmember Maddy stated that he did not see a problem with this request and reiterated that it was the Denman's property which was a huge lot and their proposal would not be injurious to the people around them. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he disagreed. Councilmember Callies stated that when she first looked at this she also thought that it was way too large of a variance as well, but when she actually looked at the facts of the situation and this particular lot, it is a very large lot. She noted that if they were talking about people's motivations what she has heard from the applicant is that they were trying to be very respectful to the neighbors. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he appreciated that but if you read through the packet, there were discussions and reiterated that the neighbors were assured that there would be no development back there, so to him that was a breech. Councilmember Maddy stated that he had run into this many times before where realtors will just say things about homes they are selling and then the City has to tell people when they come to the City that they were sorry that the realtor had lied to them. He stated that the City does allow lot splits and variances, so he does not know who said what in the accusation, but just because somebody may have said something did not change the City code and how they have been doing business for a long time. Planning Director Darling stated that she gets a lot of questions from people that are buying adjacent to lots who ask whether development could occur on the property and explained that she generally tells them it does not meet the letter of the ordinance but she also usually follows up by saying that if an application is submitted that they would receive notice. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 14 of 24 Councilmember Callies stated that the fact that there was some testing done on the ground water that did not show evidence of it seeping up on the lot that addressed the concerns related to public health and safety. She stated that she felt the addition of vegetation along the trail area as well as on the back side of the lot would be helpful to maintain the environment of the area. Councilmember Zerby stated that he was on the fence with this application. He stated that he attended the Planning Commission meeting and heard the arguments and felt the biggest lynchpin was the definition of extreme hardship and highly unique circumstances. He stated that Planning Director Darling had described the hardship as being the stream which he struggled to see that as a hardship. He stated that the applicant was asked a question about whether the driveway could be in a different location and the obvious answer was that it would require tearing down or modifying the existing home. He stated that he knows it is always a challenge when land is developed and agreed that people have the right to develop their land and use it in a fair way. He noted that if the City was going to make this a variance he questioned whether it met the extreme hardship requirement. Councilmember Maddy clarified that the City needed to go by State statute which was `unusual hardship'. Councilmember Zerby stated that he did not know if this would be unusual, because the City was filled with small creeks, ravines, ponds, and lakes, which had not seemed to slow development too much. Councilmember Callies stated one of the issues that was coming up again which may not be relevant immediately, was related to the definition of how the City measures the lot size needed and how it was looked at, rather than by street frontage. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he also felt that getting input from the public on what they want in terms of regulating this type of development was important. He stated that, to him, going back to unusual hardship, he thinks that is close to the heart of the matter. He stated that the code does not say unusual hardship to subdivide and is an unusual hardship to use the property. He noted that the property was currently being used and currently had a dwelling on it and did not have an unusual hardship associated with it. He explained that, to him, this did not qualify as an unusual hardship. Mayor Labadie stated that the City did get public input because a public hearing was held at the Planning Commission, people spoke and others submitted written comments, and now it was at the Council level for a decision. She explained that she disagreed with the notion that the public did not have the opportunity to give their input. Councilmember Sanschagrin clarified that was not what he said and explained that he had said that as an overall policy matter, the public should weigh in on whether the City should continue to approve these types of variances to help with development. Mayor Labadie apologized for misunderstanding Councilmember Sanschagrin, but noted that would be a policy question and what was before them tonight was the variance request for this property and not the larger policy discussion. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 15 of 24 Maddy moved, to Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 24-084, "A Resolution Approving a Minor Subdivision and Variance for the Property at 26275 Smithtown Road", and strike the condition language `and provide a fence on the east side of the driveway to buffer the park property'. Mr. Yelsey spoke from the audience and asked if Councilmember Maddy was refusing to recuse himself from this matter. Mayor Labadie informed Mr. Yelsey that the floor was not his right now and reminded him that there was a live motion underway. Mr. Yelsey mentioned Robert's Rules of Order. Mayor Labadie stated that if she had to ask him one more time, she would ask him to step out into the hallway. She reiterated that there was a Councilmember making a motion and Mr. Yelsey was interrupting him. Mr. Yelsey explained that Robert's Rules allow the interruption. Councilmember Maddy noted that the Council did not follow Robert's Rules in Council. Mr. Yelsey stated that the City's lawyer told him that they do. Callies seconded the motion. Motion passed 3-2 (Councilmembers Sanschagrin and Zerby opposed). 7. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS 8. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Highway 7 Transit Management Organization City Administrator Nevinski reminded the Council that the City had received a two -hundred thousand dollar grant from the State in order to explore establishment of a Transit Management Organization (TMO) for Highway 7. He noted that there have been meetings with some of the corridor cities about ways to move this forward and one of the steps that they had agreed upon was for the cities to get resolutions that the various cities in support of the exploration of a TMO and willingness to dedicate some staff time to it. He explained that the grant funds would be used to hire a consultant to begin the exploration process and to assist in facilitating conversations with the cities along the Highway 7 corridor. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked which cities would be part of the TMO. City Administrator Nevinski explained that generally speaking, it will be the cities from the western Hennepin County boundary such as Minnetrista, Victoria, all the way to County Road 73 at the Hopkins crossroads and noted that they have also been trying to engage with the school districts. He stated that none of the cities have opted out of this process and explained that right now they are just looking at what their options may be for establishing a TMO. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 16 of 24 Councilmember Maddy asked if the two -hundred thousand dollar grant was the total amount or if the other corridor cities were also getting chunks of money. City Administrator Nevinski explained that the two -hundred thousand grant was awarded to Shorewood and noted that the City was essentially the fiscal agent in this situation. Councilmember Callies asked if they were given the grant money to just study whether or not they wanted to have a TMO and explained that felt like an awful lot of money just to figure out whether or not the cities wanted to work together. City Administrator Nevinski stated that it is a notable sum of money for this kind of process, but explained that was what was awarded. He stated that they were a bit surprised that it was awarded and was not something that they expected to receive. He clarified that it was for the process of exploring the feasibility of a TMO and clarified that was how the legislation was written. Councilmember Callies asked if it was not to also work on the problems. City Administrator Nevinski stated that it was not to actually invest in the corridor. Zerby moved, Labadie seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 24-085, "A Resolution Authorizing the City of Shorewood to Participate in a Study of the Formation of a Transit Management Organization Along Trunk Highway 7." Motion passed. B. Approve Ordinance Regulating Electric Bicycles City Administrator Nevinski gave a brief explanation of Ordinance 609 that establishes requirements surrounding the use of electric bikes which have been a large concern for the last few years. He outlined what area cities have within the regulations in relation to electric bikes. He explained that one of the concerns that the City has received is that bikes are not prohibited on sidewalks and asked Police Chief Tholen to discuss enforcement. Mayor Labadie noted that the Council had all gotten a lot of communication from residents about this issue. She stated that she had asked Police Chief Tholen to discuss some of the joint efforts between the SLMPD cities as well as defining some of the intricacies and nuances that each city had. Police Chief Tholen explained that this had been a two-year project for him and noted that they have been seeing juveniles using the bikes unsafely which began in Excelsior. He stated that they saw unsafe behaviors and people almost being hurt and wanted to try to find a way so they could make sure they did not have a tragedy. He stated that he along with some of the area mayors and chiefs went to the League of Minnesota Cities and explained the problems they had been seeing. He explained that there was no enforcement action within the State law nor did the State give any guidance that these bikes needed to be regulated somehow. He stated that they worked with Representative Morrison and Representative Myers to try to get some State law that would give them reason to stop them but also gives them some enforcement options. He explained that they were not looking to cite these juveniles or people who are misusing the bikes, they want them to be ridden safely. He explained that the State failed them because nothing was CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 17 of 24 passed which is why Mayor Fletcher from Greenwood and the other cities came to the conclusion that they had to step up and do something with ordinances. He explained that he wanted parents to have some accountability for buying these bikes and noted that the bikes he is talking about were called Super 73s. He stated that Super 73s do not fall into any of the classifications from the State because they are a hybrid of class two. He explained that Super 73s go faster than twenty-eight miles per hour and are propelled without pedaling. He stated that they are just looking to find some options to give the officers the opportunity to stop the Super 73s. He stated that these efforts in Excelsior and Greenwood have been successful and complaints and issues have gone down from what they were two years ago. He stated that the word got out and they were able to see that they were no longer using the bikes on main streets and trails because the ordinance was passed there. Mayor Labadie asked Police Chief Tholen to touch on the regional trail issue because that has been brought up by numerous people. Police Chief Tholen explained that the SLMPD did not have jurisdiction over the regional trail and explained that would be handled by Three Rivers Park, because it was Hennepin County property, but noted that they can assist. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked how put the stop signs and things on the trail. Police Chief Tholen stated that he believed that would have been done by Hennepin County along the regional trail. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that one of the things he read within the State ordinance was that bikes are not required to stop at intersections, unless there is a car coming, which means they only actually needed to yield and felt a `yield' sign would be more accurate for control efforts. Police Chief Tholen stated that there are certain intersections where bikes and pedestrians were required to stop, for example on Strawberry, because traffic does not have to stop for trail crossing. He reiterated that the SLMPD has no jurisdiction over the regional trails. Councilmember Callies asked if they had ordinances. Police Chief Tholen stated that they do and they allow electric bikes. City Administrator Nevinski noted that included in the packet was a screenshot of the regulations from Three Rivers Park District as well as their ordinance which is pretty broad. Councilmember Zerby gave the example of a fifteen year old that is stopped and given a petty misdemeanor and asked what the actual consequences would be. Police Chief Tholen stated that the SLMPD would not be issuing a citation to them because they were a juvenile. He explained that they have to have some sort of sanction with an ordinance and that would be the lowest one. He stated that the reason that was in there is that they could go as far as saying that the parents are allowing them to commit a crime and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, which means that they could then go ahead and charge the parents. He reiterated that they would never cite the fifteen year old for a petty misdemeanor. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 18 of 24 Councilmember Zerby stated that when he was growing up in Crystal you needed a bicycle license from the city. He stated that he thinks the Super 73s are a brand name and explained that he was very familiar with them because he had considered buying one. He stated that they were basically electric motorcycles with pedals attached to them. He asked if it may be reasonable to consider going to back to requiring bike licensing. Police Chief Tholen stated that he felt that may just be a Band -aid solution and stated that he felt that the State needed to step in and say that the Super 73s were electric motorcycles. He stated that he knows it is on their radar but was afraid that there would need to be a tragedy before it comes to the forefront. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if the City could add the one rider requirement to the City's ordinance. Police Chief Tholen stated that had been their plan, but then Greenwood Mayor Fletcher did some digging and determined that it did not need to be included because it was already present in the State's statute. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he was not sure that the public was aware that there was a State law and asked if they should try to flag it somehow to draw their attention to it. City Attorney Shepherd stated that the definition of electric bicycle in the City's ordinance refers to State statute and noted that typically, the City code was not used to call out that State statutes may exist on particular issues. He stated that this would be the City's code and it would be available on the website, but noted that the public was responsible for knowing State laws. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he would still like the City to somehow communicate this information because he felt this was a huge safety issue for the community. He stated that he has gotten a lot of feedback from people that they felt that sidewalks should be included because people are traveling thirty miles per hour on the sidewalks which feels dangerous for people out walking with their strollers or dogs. City Attorney Shepherd stated that the City can choose to regulate the sidewalk issue, but in terms of letting the public know that a State law exists or that there were other rules, they could do that through other communication methods through the SLMPD, Facebook, or the website. He explained that would just be a notice thing which would be different than creating a regulation within the City code. Planning Director Darling stated that she can speak to the issue of sidewalks versus trails in the City. She explained that in the City's trail plan, they specifically left it that trails and sidewalks were both trails, so that as the Council implemented the trail plan, they could add either a sidewalk or a trail alongside any of those streets. She clarified that in Shorewood, those terms have been used interchangeably and do not have separate definitions. She stated that staff had discussed whether they should exempt bikes or electric bikes from using the trails that are along roadways and say that if they have an electric bike they have to be in the street. She explained that she had raised the question of whether they want to put young, juvenile bike riders into the street with traffic where there is a lot of faster and more powerful vehicles or if they should be allowed on the sidewalks in order to keep them separated from the traffic. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 19 of 24 Councilmember Callies stated that she felt it was worth considering the sidewalk issue again because if they are riding these motorized bikes at high rates of speed that was also dangerous to people on the sidewalk. Councilmember Maddy stated that the problem is the LRT trail and noted that he rarely sees people motorcycling down the actual City sidewalks. He stated that he felt the biggest problem they had were not with the legal electric bikes. He noted that they are supposed to be limited to seven hundred or seven hundred and fifty watts and those kids are riding bikes that are around five thousand watts with full suspension. He asked if it was illegal to ride an unlicensed motorcycle as a child. Police Chief Tholen stated that it is illegal to ride an unlicensed motorcycle as a child, and agreed that the problems are not with the legal electric bikes. He stated that he would caution the Council about saying that electric bikes are not allowed on the sidewalks, and clarified that he would agree that the Super 73s are the problem and not the legal electric bikes. Councilmember Maddy stated that he felt that this proposed ordinance was only talking about the bikes that were not actually the problem. He stated that he was willing to take advice from law enforcement on this, but if it was already illegal, he asked if the helmet thing would really make a difference. Police Chief Tholen stated that he felt this was a start until the State steps up and says, `wait a second' with the Super 73s. He stated that they have seen success with being able to stop fourteen year olds riding without a helmet in Excelsior and Greenwood by calling the parents and saying that this bike cannot move and telling them they have to come pick it up. He noted that it was giving some accountability to the parents and making them aware of this and explained that they wanted this to have an educational side. Councilmember Maddy asked how they could get probably cause or RES if they know the motorcycle was not an electric bike. Police Chief Tholen stated there was no State law that says it is not an electric bike. He stated that it was probably not illegal to ride this bike because there was not anything in State law that allows or disallows it because there is a loophole. Councilmember Maddy asked if the City could define it as a motor vehicle or if it would have to go to the State statute. Police Chief Tholen confirmed that the City could not define it as a motor vehicle and explained that the State did not define the Super 73s as a motor vehicle. Mayor Labadie stated that Police Chief Tholen and Greenwood Mayor Fletcher have been the leading advocates on this matter locally, but also at the State level. She stated that she felt it was better to pass something now and just keep working at this rather than to ignore it and not do anything about it, just because it may not be perfect. Councilmember Maddy asked if Police Chief Tholen felt what was being presented was as good as the City can do right now. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 21 of 24 Councilmember Zerby agreed but reminded the Council that the LRT was not under the City's control. Councilmember Maddy suggested that people e-mail their County Commissioner because he felt the problem was really on the LRT trail rather than the City's sidewalks. Councilmember Callies stated that she was okay leaving it as proposed and suggested that the SLMPD start hanging out at the McDonald's where they seem to be hanging out. Police Chief Tholen noted that word got out quickly this summer in Excelsior and they did see more responsible riding. Councilmember Callies stated that between McDonald's and the car wash area, she has seen them using the area to do wheelies. Mayor Labadie stated that in looking back through the a -mails that have been received, the number one concern that residents had raised to her was related to riding on the sidewalks. She stated that she was glad the Council had thoroughly discussed this, but felt that was something that, down the road, may require more regulation. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked how people should report unsafe behavior. Police Chief Tholen stated that they are reporting it to the SLMPD, but sometimes they cannot get there in time. He reiterated his caution that the Council not say that electric bikes were prohibited on sidewalks because there were a lot of people who are using them safely on sidewalks and the problems were with the ones that the State needed to reclassify that are in a hybrid class. He stated that people can either call 911 or the non -emergency number and noted that they are getting less calls than they got last year. Zerby moved, Maddy seconded, Adopting ORDINANCE 609, "An Ordinance of the City of Shorewood to Regulate Electric Bicycle Use." Motion passed. C. Approve Master Service Agreement with Arvig City Administrator Nevinski stated that last week the City was informed that their managed service provider, Warner Connect, was going to close their doors at the end of November which was a surprise. He explained that the City needed to scramble a bit in order to find replacement firms in place. He stated that the City had been in contact with Arvig who provides the City's main communications line to City Hall and can also provide the City with phone service. He noted that they had considered other options, but because the actual transition time is so short, staff was recommending moving into a system with Arvig. He stated that he did believe that the City's costs would actually drop significantly with a move to Arvig. He noted that the City would continue to look for an I.T. service provider which will also need to happen quickly, but was not quite as urgent as the phone system. Councilmember Zerby stated that he felt this would be a good fit for the City and was glad to see that the cost would be lower. He asked where the e-mail server was based and if it was hosted by Warner or with Microsoft and whether the City was at risk of losing their e-mail service as well. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 22 of 24 City Administrator Nevinski stated that part of the conversation that they were having was regarding transfer of the Microsoft licenses so the City did not lose those rights. He stated that he believes that Warner Direct holds those licenses right now and not the City. He noted that the City has an on -site server, but this is part of the conversations with the I.T. providers. Councilmember Zerby stated that so many people lean hard on e-mail, so he would think that issue may be almost as urgent as resolving the phone system issue. City Administrator Nevinski agreed that it was definitely urgent and noted that the City gets far more a -mails than phone calls. He stated that they were advised to get on the phone system issue right away because of the time it takes to port the numbers over to another provider. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he thought it was great that the City was going to be able to reduce their costs. He stated that when the City has the time and resources, he would suggest that they look through all of their vendors and review the services and the costs in order to see if they may be able to identify any additional cost savings. City Administrator Nevinski explained that was something that they have already begun doing and shared examples of items that they have put on RFPs on for various services. Sanschagrin moved, Zerby seconded, Approving a Master Service Agreement with Arvig, as presented. Motion passed. 9. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS AND DISCUSSION A. Staff Parks and Recreation Manager Czech stated that a few weeks ago he attended the Minnesota Park and Recreation conference in Mankato. He shared some highlights of information and ideas he was able to glean from the community engagement sessions. He stated that he was also working through a number of agreements with the athletic associations and the senior partner group. He stated that they have also begun prepping for Arctic Fever and have partnered with Minnetonka Community Education. City Engineer Budde stated that he and Public Works Director Morreim met with the trunk highway corridor study to review the background data that had been accumulated so far. He stated that later this winter, they would move into the possible options and scenarios that could happen and explained that this group would then engage the public once again through that process. He noted that they were hoping to wrap up the study sometime in mid to late summer of 2025. Councilmember Callies asked how that fit in with the grant that was earlier on the agenda for studying the organization of a TMO. City Engineer Budde stated that the corridor study is what MnDOT and their consultants were doing to evaluate the corridor for the safety improvements that would be added. He stated that the TMO was creating more of a political body that is kind of a parallel that may help influence some of the decisions from a public engagement and city side. He stated that when they had CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 23 of 24 originally discussed their concerns with MnDOT, they basically said that there needed to be a corridor study but they also wanted a coalition or TMO to come together parallel with the study so there would be a more unified voice and not just the individual cities picking and choosing what would just help their individual city. Finance Director Schmuck stated that they were continuing to work on the Enterprise budgets which would be brought to the Council in the near future. She stated that they also submitted their preliminary levies to the County and were also working on the banking RFP that has garnered quite a bit of interest. City Clerk/HR Director Thone stated that they had their annual open enrollment for employees today and were able to add about six voluntary benefits. She stated that direct balloting will begin on October 18, 2024 and noted that they have been very busy and expect that to continue. She explained that they have processed about five hundred in -person voters at City Hall. She stated that they had a healthcare voting session at Shorewood Landing which was really a great event and had about twenty-five people who voted and the City had gotten a lot of positive feedback about being able to vote in this manner. Planning Director Darling gave an update on the City's deer management program and noted that last weekend was the first hunt and they culled eight deer, one of which was on the islands. She noted that the hunt will continue over the next two weekends and explained that there was one deer that did not get a good hit and was able to run off. She reminded the Council that they had asked to hire consultants to revise the City's subdivision regulations and noted that they had the initial kick-off meeting with them. City Administrator Nevinski stated that Public Works has been out doing a variety of seasonal work and crews were also doing a lot more trimming and cutting down within the rights -of -way. He noted that fall street sweeping will begin next week and also work on the roof would also begin next week. Councilmember Zerby stated that he had sent an e-mail about the Tonka Bay dirt and some social media rumors and asked if City Administrator Nevinski was able to find out anything about that. City Administrator Nevinski explained that he had not yet heard back but had reached out twice to Tonka Bay. He stated that he had not had time to dive in and conduct some research on the discussion that may have been happening but would say that in looking at the maps in the area, he knows that there is a parcel that the City owns at the end of Wedgewood that belongs to Shorewood. He stated that there has been no discussion about that site but explained that he would continue to try to find out information. B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Zerby stated the City would have about seven thousand five hundred dollars after switching their phone services. He stated that the City's audio system in the Council chambers was outdated and horrible and he thinks they should look at what can be done to improve it. City Administrator Nevinski stated that they did talk with LMCC about this following the last meeting. He explained that their plan was that they would begin evaluating that in 2025 and come up with a game plan and include it within the 2026 budget. He stated that he thinks that they can CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 15, 2024 Page 24 of 24 go ahead and do the initial evaluation work because there is no cost for that, but if the Council felt that the acquisition should be advanced, they would have to have a budget discussion for 2025. Councilmember Zerby stated that he would be interested in seeing the preliminary cost estimates to see if the Council had the appetite for it or not. Mayor Labadie stated that the Council had attended the EFD Open House. She stated that she had also attended the mayor's association meet -up where they toured the Hennepin County Public Works building in Medina. She stated that she and City Administrator Nevinski attended the District 6 mayors and city administrator manager meeting sponsored by County Commissioner Edelson. She noted that she also had Coffee with the Mayor at Shorewood Landings. 10. ADJOURN Maddy moved, Sanschagrin seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of October 15, 2024, at 9:39 P.M. Motion passed. ATTEST:WW_ C' � Je nifer Labadie, Mayor Sandie Thone, ity Clerk