The URL can be used to link to this page

010906 CC Reg AgP CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, JANUARY 9, 2006 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call Mayor Love _ Lizee Turgeon _ Callies Wellens B. Review Agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, December 12,2005 (Att. - Minutes) B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, December 12,2005 (Att.- Minutes) 3. CONSENT AGENDA - Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions Therein: NOTE: Give the public an opportunity to request an item be removed from the Consent Agenda. Comments can be taken or questions asked following removal from Consent Agenda. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List (Att.- Claims List) B. Staffing - No action required C. City Clerk's License Approvals - Tree Trimmer's License (Att. - Resolution) D. Setting the 2006 City Council Regular Meeting Dates (Att.- Resolution) E. Approval of the Recording Secretary Services Agreement (Att. - Deputy Clerk's memorandum; Agreement) F. County Road 19 Supplemental Agreement No.5 (Att. - Director of Public Works' memorandum, Resolution) G. Elected Officials Out-of-State Travel Policy (Att. - Administrator's memorandum) H. Establishing May 20,2006, as Spring Clean-up Day (Att. - Secretary's memorandum) 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken.) 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - JANUARY 9, 2006 PAGE 2 OF 2 6. PUBLIC HEARING 7. PARKS 8. PLANNING - Report by Representative A. Text Amendment ofC-3 Zoning District (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum) Applicant: Lynne Fisher Location: 24285 Smithtown Road 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Making Appointments to Certain Offices and Positions within the City of Shorewood for the Year 2006 (Att.- Administrator's memorandum, Resolution) B. Authorization for Benefits Consultant Services (Att. - Administrator's memorandum) C. City Hall Space Needs (Att. - Administrator's memorandum) D. SLMPD Arbitration Panel (Att. - Administrator's memorandum) 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Review of Draft Stormwater Report (Att. - Director of Public Works' memorandum) 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff 1. County Road 19 Intersection B. Mayor & City Council 1. Administrator's Review 12. ADJOURN CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us. cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday, 9 January 2006 Happy New Year Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval. Agenda Item #3B: There are 110 staffing items for consideration. Agenda Item #3C: Two additional Tree Services have applied to renew their Tree Trimmer's License for 2006. All application requirements have been met. A resolution approving Tree Trimmer licenses is provided for Council's consideration. Agenda Item #3D: This resolution sets the 2006 City Council meeting schedule, which is the 2nd and 4th Mondays of each month. If a meeting falls on a holiday, Council should provide adequate notice of an alternate meeting date. Agenda Item #3E: It has been 3-112 years since the Recording Secretary Services Agreement has been reviewed. Staff surveyed area cities to determine the going rate for this service. The current fee has been set at $150 for ameetingJ;light up to 3 hours, $200 up to 4 hours and $30 for each additional hour thereafter. Staff is proposing the new rates be set at $150 for a meeting up to 1 hour; $170 up to 2 hours; $200 up to 3 hours, $230 up to 4 hours, and $30 for each additional 112 hour. Shorewood is somewhat uniqu.e in that the Council sometimes holds more than one meeting in an evening. In these cases, staff proposes an additional $50 be paid for additional meetings held the same night as a Regular Council meeting. The proposed Recording Secretary Services Agreement is provided for Council consideration. Agenda Item #3F: This Supplemental Agreement No.5 in the amount of $65,478.38 outlines both increases and decreases to the County Road 19 Intersection contract for the . following items: 1. Revisions to the storm sewer design due to conflicts with buried utilities 2. Changes in pipe bedding materials to account for poor soil conditions 3. Modifications in rock materials to permit revised staging of traffic for changes above Costs associated with this supplemental a.greement for the City of Shorewood are State Aid eligible for reimbursement. Staff is recommending adoption of the resolution that approves Supplemental Agreement 5 for the County Road 19 Construction Project. n t.J PRINTEO ON RECYCLED PAPER Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of 9 January 2006 Page 2 of3 Agenda Item #3G: During its 2005 session, the Legislature enacted a law requiring all local units of government to adopt a policy for out-of-state travel by elected officials, beginning in 2006. A policy, in the form of a resolution, has been prepared that has been adapted extensively from a model policy from the League of Minnesota Cities. Agenda Item #3H: Staffhas reviewed the calendar to establish a date for Spring Clean-up Day. It has been determined that May 20, 2006, is a date that falls outside of Mother's Day and Opening Fishing. Should Council establish May 20, 2006, as Spring Clean-up Day, staff will commence with requesting proposals for curbside service, refuse, appliance and tire disposal. Agenda Item #8A: Lynne Fisher has requested a zoning text amendment that would allow trade contractor's shops into the C-3, General Commercial District. These are currently only allowed in the C-4, Service Commercial District. After considerable discussion, the Planning Commission voted 3-2 to deny the request. If the Council is in agreement with the Planning Commission, a simple motion to deny would be in order. It may be worth noting that the Planning Commission will be studying all ofthe allowable uses in the C-3 zoning district, starting with its January study session. Agenda Item #9A: This annual resolution makes Year 2006 appointments to certain offices and positions within the City. Agenda Item #9B: This item has been continued from the December 12 Council meeting. The recommended benefits consultant has clarified the scope of work based on Council discussion on December 12. The estimate of cost remains the same. Staff recommends that Council authorize the services of Stanton Group Services per its proposal of December 1,2005, as revised. Agenda Item #9C: Council spent the Fall of 2005 reviewing options for improvements to City Hall. At the December 12 work session, the Council directed that this item be placed on the January 9 meeting agenda in order to take action on a scope of improvements to be pursued. A decision on the scope of what should be planned will provide direction for financial planning as well as significant maintenance that may be needed for the current building. When further planning or improvements should be undertaken is a separate decision, and should be done later. At the December 12 work session, Council was reviewing remodeling and additions to the current building totaling additional space of approximately 3,500 square feet, and an estimated cost of $1.9 - 2.0 million. Agenda Item #9D: The four city attorneys of the SLMPD member cities have recommended three persons to serve on the arbitration panel for SLMPD funding allocation: James H. Gilbert, Marianne D. Short, and Peter J. Lindberg. The Greenwood and Excelsior city councils have approved these selections, and Tonka Bay's will consider it on January 10. Staff recommends that Council approve the recommended arbitration panel. Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of 9 January 2006 Page 3 of3 Agenda Item #10A: The City requested WSB & Associates, Inc. review the many drainage issues that were received after two rain events on September 4t\ 2005 and October 4th, 2005. Mr. Steve Gurney, Hydrologist for WSB and Associates, has reviewed all of the concerns received, and has compiled a draft report of his findings. This report was also deemed necessary to maintain a written record of the new and recurring drainage concerns. It is important to keep in mind that this report is as mentioned: "Draft." As this document is being published, there are still a few areas that are yet under investigation or modeling. However, the majority of the areas have been reviewed and have had a preliminary recommendation assigned. Staff is asking that the City Council review the policy statements provided in the Director of Public Works' memorandum, and in the Draft Report. If found acceptable, staffis requesting that the City Council accept the Draft Report. If approved, the final report would be presented for consideration at the January 23,2006, Council meeting. CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2005 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING - 1!'""'!I,r\... L'.' ~ r.. .:, '+' '.1. fl. ...~;'h) t..,_."\t i. U .. a41 lit.. Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Love, Councilmembers Callies, Lizee, Turgeon, and Wellens; Administrator Dawson; Attorney Keane; Finance Director Burton; Planning Director Nielsen and Director of Public Works Brown Absent: None B. Review Agenda Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the Agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, November 28, 2005 Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes of November 28, 2005, as Amended, on Page 3, Item 2, Paragraph 5, Sentence 1, change "fall short; therefore the proposed increase needs to be offset accordingly." to "are less than needed; therefore the proposed space increase is not as disproportionate as might seem". Motion passed 5/0. B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, November 28, 2005 Wellens moved, Callies seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of November 28, 2005, as Amended, on Page 3, Item 8A, Paragraph 1, Sentence 1, change "for removing his garage" to "moving his garage". Motion passed 5/0. C. Truth-in- Taxation Meeting Minutes, December 5, 2005 Callies moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the Truth-in-Taxation Meeting Minutes of December 5, 2005, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Love reviewed the Items on the Consent Agenda. Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein: A. Approval of the Verified Claims List :#~B CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 2 of 13 B. Staffing - No action required C. City Clerk's License Approvals 1. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 05-103, "A Resolution Approving Licenses for Tree Trimmers." 2. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 05-104, "A Resolution Approving Licenses for Refuse Haulers." 3. Therapeutic Massage D. Approving Year 2006 Agreements for Animal Control and Animal Impound Services E. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 05-105, "A Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to Extend the EPDB Conditional Use License Agreement with Hennepin County." F. Authorizing the City Administrator to Enter into an Agreement for Computer Network Services for the Year 2006 G. Authorizing Services for the 2005 Audit H. Approval of Extension to Escrow Agreement Deadline Applicant: Michael and Jody Laughlin Location: 5665 Howards Point Road I. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 05-106, "A Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to Enter into a Lease Agreement with Hennepin County for Election Equipment and Hardware Maintenance Service Agreement." J. Authorization for Benefits Consultant Services (This item was moved to Item 9E under New Business) K. Approval of Temporary Sign Permit Applicant: Cindy Berglund, rep. Curves for Women Location: 19905 Highway 7 (Waterford Shopping Center) Item 3J was removed from the Consent Agenda and moved to Item 9E on the Agenda. Motion passed, 5/0. With regard to Item 3D and Item 3G, Councilmember Turgeon asked for request for services proposals for Animal Control and Audit services provided in 2007 be prepared and distributed to interested parties in 2006. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 3 of 13 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS None. 6. PUBLIC HEARING None. 7. PARKS Director Brown reported there had not been a meeting of the Park Commission since the most recent Regular City Council Meeting; thus, there was nothing to report on at this time. The next meeting of the Park Commission was scheduled for Tuesday, December 13, 2005, at City Hall at 7:00 P.M. 8. PLANNING Commissioner Gagne reported on matters considered and actions taken at the December 6, 2005, Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). A. Minor Subdivisions Applicant: Timothy Anderson Location: 20520 and 20540 Excelsior Boulevard Director Nielsen explained 10Spring, Inc., representing Timothy Anderson, had requested approval of a minor subdivision of the two lots located at 20520 and 20540 Excelsior Boulevard. The easterly lot (20520) lot was currently occupied by a single-family dwelling. The westerly lot was vacant. Pursuant to Section l201.03 Subd.16 of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance, the applicant proposed dividing the lots in order to build two, two-family dwellings that are subdivided for individual ownership. He went on to explain the subject properties were located in the R-2A, Single and Two-Family Residential Zoning District. The easterly lot contained 30,687 square feet of area. The existing home and detached garage would be demolished and replaced with a new two-family dwelling. The westerly lot contained 30,507 square feet. All four of the proposed unit lots would exceed l5,000 square feet. With regard to analysis for the case, Director Nielsen explained although the existing lots were platted prior to Shorewood having any provision in its zoning ordinance for dividing lots with two-family dwellings on them, both of the base lots met the minimum 30,000 square-foot requirement. Similarly, the four new unit lots all met the minimum area requirement of 15,000 square feet. Based upon the provisions of the Shorewood Zoning Code, the request was consistent with Shorewood's zoning regulations and Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommended that the divisions be approved subject to the conditions specified by Staff. The Planning Commission unanimously voted to approve the Request for Minor Subdivision for Timothy Anderson, 20520 and 20540 Excelsior Boulevard subject to five conditions. Director Nielsen stated the applicant has yet to provide the escrow for demolition of the existing home and garage. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 4 of 13 Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. 05-107, "A Resolution Approving a Subdivision of a Two-Family Dwelling for 10Spring Homes, Inc." subject to Staff recommendations. Motion passed 5/0. B. Text Amendment of C-3 Zoning District Applicant: Lynne Fisher Location: 24285 Smithtown Road Director Nielsen stated the applicant, Lynne Fisher, requested this item be continued to a January 9, 2006, Regular City Council Meeting. Lizee moved, Wellens seconding, the Continuation of the Text Amendment of C-3 Zoning District action to the January 9, 2006, Agenda. C. Minor Subdivision Applicant: Mark Kennedy Location: 23975 Yellowstone Trail Director Nielsen explained the property located at 23975 Yellowstone Trail, owned by Mark Kennedy, had been rezoned to R-1C, Single-Family Residential, and Mr. Kennedy now proposed to subdivide the lot into two building sites. He went on to state the property contains 44,045 square feet of area and was occupied by the applicant's home and a detached garage. The proposed lots will be 23,886 square feet (westerly lot) and 20,159 square feet (easterly lot) in area. The property drops off to the southwest comer into a small wetland basin. Director Nielsen stated both of the proposed lots comply with the requirements of the R-1C zoning district. The westerly lot will have approximately 16.6 percent of hardcover. He noted the patio on the northeast side of the house encroaches into the required side yard setback. This should be corrected as a condition of approval. Director Nielsen explained the applicant had a scheduling conflict and the applicant questioned if his presence at the meeting was necessary. Nielsen told the applicant it was not necessary. The Planning Commission unanimously voted to approve the Request for Minor Subdivision for Mark Kennedy, 23975 Yellowstone Road, subject to the conditions set forth in the December 5, 2005, Staff report. In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Nielsen stated the applicant agreed to move his patio; the timetable for the move may not be possible until spring due to weather conditions. To ensure the move happened Nielsen stated the applicant would need to fulfill an escrow requirement prior to releasing the resolution. Turgeon moved, Callies seconded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. 05-108, "A Resolution Approving Subdivision of Real Property for Mark Kennedy, 23975 Yellowstone Trail" subject to Staff recommendations. Motion passed, 5/0. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 5 of 13 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. SLMPD Proposal 1) "Saunders Proposal" Administrator Dawson explained the "Saunders Proposal" had been continued from the November 14, 2005, and November 28,2005, Regular City Council Meetings. He stated Excelsior had requested some additions to the proposal which resulted in a "Revised-Binding Arbitration Proposal-12/5/05" (a/k/a the "Revised Saunders Proposal" hereafter referred to as the "Proposal"). He went on to state the "Proposal" contained a number of conditions the Member Cities must agree to before binding arbitration can commence for SLMPD funding. He stated Excelsior approved the "Proposal" with a 5/0 vote on December 5, 2005, and Greenwood approved the "Proposal" with a 4/1 vote on December 6, 2005; the Tonka Bay City Council would consider the "Proposal" on December 13,2005. Administrator Dawson reviewed the highlights of a December 8, 2005, Staff memorandum to Council that provided a detailed synopsis and analysis of the "Proposal". The highlights were: 1) Excelsior would pay $420,000 for full service in 2006; 2) there were a number of amendments to the Joint Powers Agreement relating to withdrawal, dispute resolution, and budget approval; and 3) description of the binding arbitration regarding the funding allocation. He explained there is a need for timely action by Council as the "Proposal" calls for selection of an arbitration panel (composed of three retired judges/justices) by January 15, 2006. Administrator Dawson stated many of proposed amendments are similar to items identified by the Issues Group and others items are similar to those in the Excelsior Fire District Agreement. He explained how, under the "Proposal", the 2007 budget would be determined if the Member Cities do not unanimously agree on the approved budget by September 1,2006. He stated the "Proposal" precluded two-tier levels of service and Member Cities could contract with SLMPD for additional services, provided all Member Cities agree and do not withhold unreasonably. Greenwood Councilmember Saunders explained the rationale behind the proposal was to perpetuate the SLMPD JP A. He thanked Council and Administrator Dawson for their support. In response to a question from Mayor Love, Attorney Keane sated the wording of Item 2F under Budget Approval in the "Proposal" was crafted to leave flexibility in interpretation. Greenwood Councilmember Saunders concurred with Attorney Keane. Greenwood Councilmember Saunders stated Excelsior and the other Member Cities had "mutual paranoia" regarding two-tier service. Excelsior did not want to receive two-tier service and the other Member Cities did not want to deliver two-tier service. He went on to state the Greenwood City Council discussed Item 2F at great length. Greenwood Council decided the statement "mutually-agreed" was ambiguous. He went on to state the Governing Body of the SLMPD is the Coordinating Committee and the Coordinating Committee makes decisions based on majority. Because of the ambiguity of the "mutually-agreed" statement and the role of the Coordinating Committee, Greenwood Council chose not to modify Item 2F; it felt any modifications to the "Proposal", which Excelsior had agreed to in a 5/0 vote, would probably result in continued lengthy discussions and delays in reaching consensus on the proposal. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 6 of 13 In response to a comment by Councilmember Turgeon regarding "supplemental services", Greenwood Councilmember Saunders stated Item 2F did not have to be in the "Proposal" but was included at the request of Excelsior. He went on to state Item 2F makes the process for "supplemental services" cumbersome. In response to another comment by Councilmember Turgeon, Saunders stated from his perspective the requirement for approval of any request for supplemental service is very clear, though he could not speak for Excelsior. He explained Excelsior City Attorney Staunton, who participated in revising the "Proposal", was empowered to negotiate for Excelsior and Attorney Staunton clearly understood the meaning of Item 2F. During the proposal revision process Park Control, Dock Master, and Excelsior's Art on the Lake as well as Greenwood's use of "foot patrol" services were stated as examples to ensure clarity of the statement. In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Administrator Dawson stated the supplemental services could be provided by dedicated personnel overtime work. Councilmember Callies stated she would prefer Item 2F not be in the proposal. She appreciated all the hard work that went into getting the "Proposal" to a place where Excelsior would agree to it. She stated it was worthwhile to stay in the JP A. She went on to state when the budget is fully funded, which it has not been, the need for two-tier service would be eliminated. Callies stated Council could spend time changing the wording of the "Proposal" to redress more of an emotional issue than the legal effect of the wording. In summary, Callies stated although the wording of Item 2F could possibly be worded differently or eliminated entirely she could support the "Proposal". Councilmember Turgeon clarified the budget would not be fully funded because the "Proposal" specified Excelsior was to pay $20,000 toward the 2006 budget shortfall; it did not address the entire $59,050 shortfall. She did not think a Member City should have operating budget voting privileges if they have given notice to withdraw from the JP A, and the voting issue had been discussed in the Issues Group though not resolved. Mayor Love stated once a Member City has given notice to withdraw from the JP A it in effect becomes a client. He thought the Coordinating Committee would support the voting privilege revocation for the Member City. In response to Councilmember Turgeon's comment regarding the 2006 budget shortfall, Greenwood Councilmember Saunders stated the "Proposal" provided a safety net by specifying for purposes of determining the 2007 Operating Budget the "previous year's budget" would be $1,556,100. He went on to state it took considerable negotiation with Excelsior to have Excelsior agree with $1,556,100; Excelsior wanted to use $1,355,900 (the "flat-lined" amount of required municipal revenue for 2006) for the "previous year's budget". Mayor Love stated although the "Proposal" was not a perfect agreement (and none are) it was the first time in three years the "Proposal" reached Council for a vote. He went on to state over the past three years three of the Member Cities were in concert. He stated he had received emails regarding concerns people had with the "Proposal"; one in particular was Excelsior would be able to select one arbitrator and the remaining three Member Cities would select one arbitrator. Mayor Love did not foresee any problem with the three Member Cities being able to reach consensus on the arbitrator. He thanked Greenwood Councilmember Saunders for his hard work and patience in preparing the "Proposal". In summary, he stated in the spirit of cooperation that has existed with three Member Cities over the last three years Council owes it to their partners to proceed with the "Proposal". CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 7 of 13 Councilmember Wellens expressed concern with the Item 2F statement "as mutually-agreed by all Member Cities"; he interpreted the statement to mean any three councilmembers of a Member City council could veto a Member City's request for supplemental police support and that was totally unacceptable to Wellens. He went on to state the original JPA contained language subject to interpretation thereby creating the need for JP A arbitration. He stated the "Proposal" contains a great deal of vagueness which could cause interpretation issues in the future. Wellens explained why he could not support approving the "Proposal". His reasons are: 1) Council was elected to make decisions affecting residential taxes, not a non-resident arbitrator; 2) he did not understand how the "Proposal" would benefit the Shorewood residents - Police service would either be based on the outcome of the arbitration or property values, rather than on a per call basis; 3) he did not think it was fair that Excelsior could be able to select one arbitrator and the other three Member Cities would collectively select one arbitrator; 4) he stated he thought SLMPD Chief Litsey would like to continue with the option of providing two-tier levels of service; 5) he stated the Member City Councils have approved the JP A for years and wondered why three Excelsior Councilmembers recently decided the JP A needed to be changed, and he thought the JP A should not be modified; and 6) he stated Excelsior Mayor Ruehl testified before Council that Excelsior did not claim any temporary budget problems as a reason for flat- lining. In conclusion, Wellens stated the JP A should not be modified and Shorewood should sue Excelsior for non-performance of the JP A. He would prefer Shorewood take an aggressive offensive approach rather than defensive approach to resolving this matter. Greenwood Councilmember Saunders stated the "Proposal" specifically states the arbitrators cannot specifically determine the allocation of the operating budget costs to Member Cities based on either the tax base or "call" volume alone. He explained the "Proposal" specifies the type of arbitration process to be used. The process entails each Member City providing the arbitration panel with that City's pertinent information for the JP A funding formula and the arbitration panel would make a funding formula finding to the Member Cities; this approach was not a win/lose arbitration method. Regarding the funding formula for the operating budget, Saunders stated the Member Cities have not demonstrated an ability to resolve the issue, thereby requiring a third party to assist with working the issue to resolution. He went on to state he thought the Member Cities could resolve the withdrawal, dispute resolution and budget issues. Saunders stated allowing Excelsior to select one arbitrator was done in the spirit of compromise; Excelsior felt victimized by the process to date. He then stated it was not appropriate for him to respond to whether or not Excelsior had budget problems nor could he speak for Chief Litsey. He did state he had had conversations with Chief Litsey and his understanding was Litsey was comfortable with the "Proposal" and acknowledged the process specified in Item 2F would be cumbersome but manageable. He again stated Item 2F is superfluous and thought the three Member Cities would agree. He explained Greenwood Council struggled with the wording of Item 2F and concluded it would be a moot point starting with 2007, a point Councilmember Callies made earlier. Mayor Love stated he had spoken with Chief Litsey and the police officers who were pleased the Member Cities were closer to agreement. He stated the two-tier service was difficult for the SLMPD to implement. Councilmember Wellens stated he interpreted vanous memos from Chief Litsey to mean that he preferred the two-tier service. Mayor Love stated he thought the desire for a two-tier service level was a reaction to a flat-lined operating budget and Chief Litsey would have preferred the tiered service to reducing the size of the police force. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 8 of 13 Councilmember Wellens again stated his interpretation of Item 2F statement "as mutually-agreed by all Member Cities" to mean any three councilmembers of a Member City council could veto a Member City's request for supplemental police support. Councilmember Lizee stated she was pleased with the positive movement to continue with the JP A and even more pleased with Excelsior's 5/0 approving the "Proposal". She would like to have Item 2F clarified or removed entirely in the future. She has concerns with the selection of the arbitration panel by the Member City Councils; she thought having the number of various Member Cities' councilmembers come to agreement on one arbitrator could be lengthy and suggested the Cities' Attorneys may be better equipped to make the selection expeditiously. Councilmember Turgeon thought Item 2F implied the Cities' Attorneys would recommend the arbitrator selections although it did not specifically state that, the lack of clarity supported Councilmember Wellens' point of language ambiguity. She stated she was pleased Excelsior voted 5/0 on the "Proposal" it had wordsmithed, but reminded Council that no modifications were supposed to have been made to the Original Proposal. She expressed concern with items not contained in the "Proposal" that had been discussed in the Issues Group and believed those items could be areas of contention in the future. She then stated she would appreciate Council having the opportunity to wordsmith the "Proposal" and she was not in favor of the binding arbitration from the beginning. She stated: 1) the binding arbitration process language should be more specific (the Attorneys would select the arbitrators); 2) the rescinding of operating budget voting privileges for a Member City once they have submitted a withdrawal notice should be added to the JP A; and 3) she wanted Council to have an opportunity to make minor modifications to the "Proposal" as Excelsior did. Greenwood Councilmember Saunders clarified Excelsior Council did not wordsmith the "Proposal"; it did add the last two lines of Item 2F. He stated he had initial displeasure with Excelsior making any modification to the "Proposal", but after having spoken with Greenwood Mayor Newman and Greenwood Attorney Kelly regarding the modifications they concluded the changes appeared to be "harmless language". Councilmember Turgeon questioned why Excelsior did not approve the "October 28, 2005 Proposal" three weeks ago if all it did was make "harmless language" changes. Greenwood Councilmember Saunders stated he thought Excelsior was considering other opportunities, such as litigation, during that time period before it determined this was the best approach. Councilmember Callies stated maybe there should be some legal analysis of some of the issues discussed. Councilmember Wellens expressed his concern over whether or not Excelsior would have an entirely different interpretation of some of the language than Shorewood Council would. He stated he did not believe Excelsior's modification of Item 2F was done for no reason. He does not agree it was "harmless language"; he thought Excelsior included the language for a reason. He had concerns Excelsior would exercise its veto power with regards to delivery of supplemental services. Councilmember Callies stated Shorewood could bring Excelsior to litigation, but expressed concern for the livelihood of the SLMPD staff and the service they provide. She stated these concerns provide support bringing this issue to resolution. Attorney Keane stated there is some questionability of the Member City Councils' authority to delegate budget responsibilities to the arbitration panel. He went on to state he would need to research it. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 9 of 13 Mayor Love stated the arbitration process carries some level of risk for all Member Cities and it also has an out clause so any party can exit the process. He stated the "Proposal" was not perfect but was the best proposal to-date. He stated he supported the "Proposal" and he suggested Council demonstrate goodwill to the Member Cities. Councilmember Turgeon has concerns with the arbitration panel and the language that was added to Item 2F. Councilmember Wellens stated it could harm more than help the JP A. Councilmember Turgeon concurred with Councilmember Wellens. She expressed that she did not believe all Member Cities were acting in the spirit of cooperation and she believed there were a number of areas where the language in the "Proposal" needed clarification. Councilmember Callies stated the language could be clarified, and she will support the "Proposal" because it was the best to-date. Lizee moved, Callies seconded to Accept the "Revised Saunders Proposal" to resolve the SLMPD matters. Motion passed 3/2 with Turgeon and Wellens dissenting. Mayor Love expressed his gratitude to Council for the discussion and stated the concerns discussed needed to be discussed. Greenwood Councilmember Saunders concurred with Love. Love thanked Greenwood Councilmember Saunders for the leadership he demonstrated in the handling of this matter. 2) Funding for SLMPD for 2006 Administrator Dawson recapped his memo to Council dated December 8, 2005, addressing Funding for SLMPD for 2006. He explained in August 2005 Council approved a proposal for resolving SLMPD issues (which resulted in funding a 2006 operating budget shortfall of $59,050) by having Excelsior paying an additional $20,000 for full service in 2006, and Shorewood paying an additional $39,050 (the remainder of the shortfall) for full service in 2006. When Council considered the proposed budget and tax levy it added $39,050 to the budget to be prepared for that possibility. Administrator Dawson stated in November 2005 the Coordinating Committee approved a two-tier services plan based on what each Member City had authorized for 2006. The plan identified what services could be provided at the 0.0% increase in city funding for 2006, that funding being $200,000 less than what the Coordinating Committee recommended, and what would be provided with three cities funding for Tier II services. That plan would result in the Police reducing the number of officers by one, and the investigator position working with the State Task Force into 2007 would not be filled in 2006. No existing personnel would be laid off. Administrator Dawson then explained five different SLMPD funding options for the Council to consider. He also clarified the "Proposal" did not require Shorewood to fund the additional $39,050. Councilmember Turgeon moved, Councilmember Wellens seconded Approving $715,806 in the 2006 Operating Budget for Tier II service and to keep $39,050 in the 2006 Operating Budget for policing issues but not designated for SLMPD. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 10 of 13 In response to a request by Councilmember Wellens to accept an amendment to the motion to delete the $39,050 from the 2006 Budget and reduce the tax level accordingly, Councilmember Turgeon stated she wanted to keep the $39,050 in the 2006 budget. Motion passed, 5/0. B. Approving the 2006 Budget and Approving the Property Tax Levy Collectible in 2006 Administrator Dawson stated Staff removed the $40,000 Contingency expense and the $17,000 election equipment expense from the 2006 Proposed Budget presented at the December 5, 2005, Truth-In- Taxation hearing per direction from Council. He stated Staff was developing a fund balance guideline policy for Council's future consideration. And in response to questions from Council at that meeting regarding the authorized City Engineer position, Staff strongly believes that position remains warranted as planned and approved. He stated the proposed tax increase was approximately $359,000. Mayor Love explained the removal of the $40,000 Contingency expense means that line item would not be included in future budget years unless Council specifically requested it be added to the budget. Councilmember Turgeon stated the updated performance metrics data requested by Councilmember Callies at the December 5, 2005, meeting was not included in the December 12, 2005, meeting packet, nor was the cost comparison of a staff City Engineer versus consultant position Councilmember Turgeon had asked for at that meeting. Mayor Love stated he did not think the City Engineer position costs were going to be removed from the 2006 budget, but Council was going to have future discussion regarding the pros and cons of staff versus consultant as well as the justification for that position. Councilmember Callies concurred. Councilmember Turgeon stated if the monies budgeted were not spent they would end up in the General Fund and the taxpayer would be taxed for monies not used. Mayor Love stated Council had the opportunity to modify the proposed 2006 Budget, which they did, and Staff made the recommended changes. He stated Council can review the budget at any time and make agreed upon changes. He suggested Council move forward with approval of the Budget. Director Burton stated Director Brown explained the cost of a consulting engineer was approximately $209,000 per year and the cost of a staff City Engineer was approximately $90,000 per year. Councilmember Turgeon understood just because money was budgeted for something doesn't mean it would be spent, but the taxpayers are still taxed for that money. She went on to state she did not recollect when future years budgets were reduced by the amount of money that was not spent in the previous year. Councilmember Lizee stated the budget was heavily scrutinized each budget cycle. She felt Council was fiscally responsible in budget preparation activities. In response to a comment by Councilmember Turgeon, Director Burton stated the General Fund was approximately $2.9 million or approximately 57% of the budget. Burton stated the State Auditor recommends a minimum of 50% of the upcoming year's budget be available in the General Fund balance. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 11 of 13 Councilmember Lizee stated Council's history of spending had been responsible and is reflected in the City's bond rating. Councilmember Turgeon questioned if there was a way the City could do those things that were needed without imposing a 10.9% tax increase on its residents. Lizee moved, Callies seconded, Approving RESOLUTIUON NO. 05-109, "A Resolution Adopting the 2006 Budgets and Approving the Property Tax Levy Collectible in 2006." Motion passed, 4/1 with Wellens dissenting. Mayor Love stated because the issue of the City Engineer position was raised Staff should present council with the justification information again at a January 9, 2006, Council meeting. C. Establishing the 2006 Pay Scale and City Insurance Contribution Administrator Dawson explained the 2006 proposed budget included 2% salary increases for employees effective January 2006 and again July 2006. He then explained the 2006 proposed budget also included an increase in the City's monthly insurance contribution per employee to $750 in order to keep pace with medical rates. Councilmember Turgeon understood the cost of living has increased from 2005. She expressed concern with employee salary step increases being provided when performance criteria were lacking. She stated she had asked for performance criteria to be developed for five years and to-date had not provided with that information. She did not want the staff to be penalized for the lack of performance criteria as that was not the staff s fault. Wellens moved, Callies seconded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. 05-110, " A Resolution Revising the City's Wage and Salary Range Chart for 2006 and Setting the Monthly Employer Contribution Toward the Monthly Insurance Premium for City Employees." Motion passed, 5/0. Councilmember Turgeon asked Staff to provide Council with the amount of money spent for insurance brokerage services. D. Authorizing the Transfer of Funds Administrator Dawson stated Council had budgeted for transfers of monies to and from various funds for capital improvements and other purposes in the 2005 Operating and Capital Improvement Budgets. Director Burton added Council approved a year-end transfer from Tonka Bay reserves to eliminate the Waterford (East) store deficit and to split the remainder of the Tonka Bay reserves between the Shorewood Plaza (West) store and the Waterford (East) store. In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, Director Burton stated the transfer from the General Fund to the Sewer Fund for debt services was for the property the City purchased in 2005. Callies moved, Wellens seconded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. 05-111, "A Resolution Authorizing the Transfer of Funds." Motion passed, 5/0. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 12 of 13 E. Authorizing Services for the 2005 Audit Administrator Dawson stated at a November 7, 2005, Work Session Meeting Council requested Staff provide Council with a recommendation for a benefits consultant to would review, compare and make recommendations on the City's employee benefits plan. Staff submitted request for service proposals to eight firms and recommended the engagement of the Stanton Services Group. He explained they were recommended based on their proposal, and their previous experience working with other local governments in the metropolitan area, and they had a national database of information of other public and private companies. Councilmember Turgeon explained the reason she asked this be pulled from the Consent Agenda and moved to New Business was out of concern for employees. Employees expressed concern over how the benefits were administered and communicated, and how activities associated with benefits changes were scheduled. She stated the proposal does not address those concerns and felt they needed to be included. In response to a question from Mayor Love, Councilmember Turgeon stated the plan should include an assessment of the quality of plan administration and the insurance rates charged by vendors/carriers, items specifically excluded in the Stanton Group's proposal. Administrator Dawson stated those items could be added to the proposal. Councilmember Callies questioned why the items were excluded and if the proposal included an assessment of how the money is invested. Administrator Dawson explained the City offers "457 Plan" deferred compensation options and reviewing them was not germane. In response to a comment by Director Burton, Councilmember Turgeon stated it was internal plan administration that should be assessed. Administrator Dawson stated the proposers were provided with the request for services proposal as well as the Benefits Committee Report. Based on those two pieces of information the proposers responded. Councilmember Wellens questioned if 75% of the staff is pleased with the benefits plan, why would the City hire a consultant to assess it. He went on to state that hiring a consultant would be spending money just in case there was a problem but there was no evidence there was a problem. Mayor Love stated there had been a lot of Council discussion regarding the benefits plan and the value of the plan and competiveness of the plan; he supported engaging a consultant to benchmark the plan. Councilmember Turgeon stated Staff lacked people with experience in administering benefits plans and a benefits consultant could determine if the administration could be improved and if there was a way to improve value added. She wanted to ensure the assessment addresses issued identified by the Benefits Committee and employees. Councilmember Callies stated the assessment of internal plan administration was not the Council's purpose in hiring a consultant to assess the benefits plan. Councilmember Turgeon stated would also like the consultant to review the plan administration workload issue; would there way to reduce the workload through performance improvement methods. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2005 Page 13 of 13 Mayor Love asked Staff to return to a January 9,2006, Council meeting with Councilmember Turgeon's concerns addressed in the proposal. 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS Director Brown stated there was nothing new to report. 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff 1. County Road 19 Intersection The lights have been lit and the striping will be redone in the spring. B. Mayor & City Council Mayor Love distributed the retirement party flyer for Carol Eastlund and Bob Quam who are members of the Minnetonka School Board. He also stated there was an EPD Board Meeting on December 28,2005. 12. ADJOURN Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, Adjourning the Regular City Council Meeting of December 12, 2005, at 8:48 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Woody Love, Mayor Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2005 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:30 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ~ n~\f; 1 ~~. ~>..;;-!I.\ ..l"~" . ~. II.: ';~ '~J lit' 1\' ..-c Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 5:45 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Love; Councilmembers Callies, Lizee, Turgeon, and Wellens; Administrator Dawson; Director of Public Works Brown; Finance Director Burton and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: None B. Review Agenda Without objection from Council, Mayor Love proceeded with the Agenda for the meeting. 2. REVIEW SPACE NEEDS STUDY Administrator Dawson stated at the November 28, 2005, City Council Work Session Meeting Council requested a review of the revised space needs study details. Bill Baxley from BKV Group and Staff would review the summary space analysis and possible space configurations distributed to Council prior to the meeting. He went on to state the meeting would be one of several meetings required to resolve how City Hall improvements would be made; not necessarily when they would be made. Mayor Love asked Mr. Baxley to provide an overview. Mr. Baxley stated the majority of the information had been presented to Council previously, and he had selected representative items for Council review. He reviewed departmental space summary needs and total City Hall space needs. He also reviewed possible office layouts with furniture and shared space layouts. He explained the functional requirements had been prepared with Staff input, and the space needs study would serve as a benchmark for planning. He then reviewed a very preliminary building layout used to provide a very rough estimate of costs; the preliminary layout was not intended to be a design for City Hall. Mayor Love stated he was pleased to see Mr. Baxley had addressed Council's request for multi-use areas. In response to a question from Mayor Love, Mr. Baxley stated office sizes were determined by functional requirements. He stated the layouts presented were starting points and would probably be refined. In response to a second question from Mayor Love, Mr. Baxley stated the proposed audio visual room specific requirements had not been identified to-date; the proposed A V room was included to ensure adequate space would be available to satisfy requirements. Mayor Love asked Mr. Baxley if any discoveries, either workable or unworkable, were made during the preliminary building layout process. 1i ;lA CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING DECEMBER 12, 2005 PAGE 2 OF4 Mr. Baxley stated he felt the current building was esthetically challenged; an addition on the front of City Hall would be a good way to reposition City Hall for the future. He went on to explain the rationale for the preliminary building layout, and the layout was done without input from Council and Staff. In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, Mr. Baxley stated Staff workspace sizes were determined by assessing how Staff work was performed and what types of equipment and storage were required, and by using BKV Group's professional experience with doing space needs assessments. In response to a comment from Councilmember Wellens regarding his concern with the replacement of two-year old shingles on City Hall, Administrator Dawson stated re-shingling of City Hall at that time was critical. Director Brown concurred; he stated repairs to siding and windows had been postponed because of the possible City Hall expansion/replacement. Mr. Baxley stated approximately 30% of the re- shingled roof may be salvageable. Councilmember Turgeon questioned the possibility of adding on to the back of City Hall rather than the front. Councilmember Turgeon stated the space needs assessment done in 1987 by EOS resulted in a 1500 square foot addition to City Hall, and that addition was to accommodate Staff growth to 12 people and a City population of 12,000. She stated the current population is 7,700 and did not foresee the population growing to 12,000. She wondered if anyone had insight into why the space needs study done in 1987 did not adequately satisfy today's needs; had the work standards changed that much since 19877 Mr. Baxley stated a Staff of 12 can work in the current environment, but improvements to the Staff work environment would contribute to increased job performance and increased service to the public. Councilmember Turgeon agreed there were issues with the current Staff work environment. Mr. Baxley went on to state the 1987 space needs study was not reviewed as part of the recent space needs study; current and future work requirements were assessed. Councilmember Callies stated the discussion should focus on future needs, and she did not have the necessary experience to determine office sizes; BKV Group was hired to provide that expertise. She stated the proposed space was in the middle when compared to other Cities. She also stated the City was not in a financial crisis, but Council did need to be concerned with costs. Mayor Love stated he accepted the existing space was inadequate, and all Department Directors had expressed a need for additional space. He explained the original City Hall building was small and had been expanded by building an addition. He also stated a lot had changed with work requirements in 20 years. Councilmember Lizee stated the building had physical obsolescence (e.g. leaky windows, mold, water issues, insulation, etc.) as well as technological obsolescence. She stated Council should decide whether or not it was willing to make a commitment to either expanding or replacing City Hall. She personally would commit to move forward with satisfying Staff space needs. She stated she was comfortable with building an addition on to the front of City Hall, and grading issues in the back of City Hall could prohibit an addition there. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING DECEMBER 12, 2005 PAGE 3 OF 4 Mr. Baxley stated there are grade issues in the back of the lot. He also stated if the addition were added on to the back of the building would require a basement in order to match floor lines; an addition to the front of the building would only require a slab. Councilmember Turgeon stated Council needed to decide either: 1) how much square footage to add to City Hall; or 2) how much money was it willing to spend to increase the size of City Hall. Mayor Love expressed space requirements should be the starting point. If satisfying those requirements was too costly the project would have to be postponed. He stated when project requirements aren't satisfied because of a decision to save money, expansion projects can be inadequate. Councilmember Wellens stated the space needs assessment was subj ective, as did Councilmember Turgeon. Discussion ensured regarding the difference in stated space requirements between the 2005 space needs study and the 1987 space needs study, both of which were done for a Staff size of 12; and the amount of additional space required in the 2005 study. There was also ensuing discussion regarding the relevance of the 1987 study today. Councilmember Turgeon asked for explanation of the different space requirements for the Secretary/Receptionist and Part-time Secretary/Receptionist under Administration and Engineering. Director Brown stated when Engineering tasks were performed they required more storage space than when performing Administrative tasks. Councilmember Lizee stated Staff space needs must be addressed. Mayor Love added the needs should be scrutinized, but addressed. Mayor Love stated Council needed to: 1) agree on a relative amount the space needed to increase; 2) identify the costs for providing that additional space; and 3) determine the affordability of providing the additional space. He went on to state he did not see excess space requirements for Staff. He questioned Council whether or not they saw superfluous space requested in the space needs study. Councilmember Wellens, in response to a question from Mayor Love, stated he had questioned the overall percentage increase for space at the November 28,2005, City Council Work Session. Discussion ensued regarding Council Chambers, a multi-use area that would utilize sliding doors to partition off part of the Council Chambers for a conference room when necessary. Mr. Baxley stated, from his professional opinion, the addition of 3,500 square feet of space was a reasonable number to start with, noting efficiencies would be in constant pursuit. Councilmember Callies stated the requirement for 3,500 additional square feet of space has been consistently conveyed. In response to Councilmember Wellens question, Mr. Baxley stated costs for ADA compliance, maintenance, etc., were approximated at a high level in the space needs study. He stated from his perspective Council had the information necessary to make a decision. He cautioned Council to remember the cost numbers were estimates; firm costs would be provided after a detailed plan was CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING DECEMBER 12, 2005 PAGE 4 OF4 approved. He noted small projects pay premium costs and this was a small project; overhead costs are comparable between small and large projects. He also stated working with the confines of the existing building increased costs. Mayor Love stated the first question is that of space. He stated he could not conceptually challenge the identified Staff space needs. Councilmember Lizee agreed. Councilmember Wellens wanted to clarify agreement with the overall space increase did not mean agreement with the size of specific work areas. Mr. Baxley stated the detailed plan would ensure the highest efficiency possible; it would be likely to reconfigure some of the building layout. Major Love stated off-site Council meetings would not serve Staff or the public well. Mr. Baxley stated building Council Chambers first would eliminate the need for Council to hold their meetings off-site during construction. He again cautioned Council and Staff not to underestimate the impact construction will have on the day-to-day City Hall operations. Quality planning is a requirement. Councilmember Wellens read a copy of his "letter to the editor" published to the Sailor regarding Shorewood City Hall expansion or replacement. Discussion ensued regarding the "letter". Mayor Love again stated he agreed with the Staff work space requirements. He did question the Council Chambers area. He went on to state there would be ramifications if Council would meet at Southshore Center. He again stated Staff space requirements should be satisfied. Council concurred the overall space needs approval decision would be added to the agenda for a January 9,2005, City Council Regular Meeting. 3. ADJOURN Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, Adjourning the Work Session Meeting of December 12,2005, at 6:50 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Woody Love, Mayor Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk PAYABLES APPROVALS For 01/09/06 Council Meeting Prepared by~iJ It, '7 Z;~~- Date:6~,0S/tf;0 Michelle T."N~ A.. ccounting Clerk . "_ . Reviewed by: ~/ _ Date: 61/obl~ Bonnie Burton, inance Director Approved by: Date: 0 [. '05.06 Crai awson, City Administrator #3fJ PAYROLL APPROVALS For 01/09/06 Council Meeting Prepared b'y:rJ?J4 /. ~ Date: <<O!) ;010 . Mic;elle T: ciy u'r- Accounting Clerk, .. .. Reviewed bY:~. uf'a,1 Date: 61 06 '2etit Bonnie Burton, Fi nce Director Approved by: Crai Date: DI, b5. D6 son, City Administrator . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM DATE: January 4, 2006 TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk cc: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator RE: A Resolution Approving Year 2006 Tree Trimmer Licenses Tree Trimmers operating within the City of Shorewood must complete an annual license application, provide proof of insurance coverage, and pay the appropriate license fee. The attached proposed resolution identifie~ two additional tree services that have satisfied the requirements to be licensed to provide tree trimming service in the City in 2006. Council Action A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving Year 2006 Tree Trimmer Licenses #-3C n ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION APPROVING LICENSES FOR TREE TRIMMERS WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code Chapter 305 provides for the annual licensing of tree trimmers in the City; and WHEREAS, said Chapter provides that an applicant submit an application and fulfill certain requirements concerning insurance coverage and pay a licensing fee; and WHEREAS, the following applicants have satisfactorily completed this process and have submitted the requirements for the issuance of a License for Tree Trimmer. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Shorewood that a License for Tree Trimmer be issued for a term from January I, 2006 to December 31, 2006, to the following: Permit # Company Name Address 06-25 Four Seasons Tree Service 32 10th Avenue S. Suite 213, Hopkins, MN 55343 06-26 Aaspen Tree Service 970 Wayzata Blvd., Wayzata, MN 55391 ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 9th day of January, 2006. ATTEST: Woody Love, Mayor Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us. cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM DATE: January 4,2006 cc: Mayor and Council Members Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk ~ Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator 6\) Setting the Year 2006 Regular Council Meeting Schedule TO: FROM: RE: This is a routine!organizational item which requires that Council adopt a resolution setting the Year 2006 City Council meeting schedule for the 2nd and 4th Mondays of each month. Should a meeting fall on a 110liday, Council may determine an alternate meeting date. None of the regularly scheduled meetings in 2006 will fall on a holiday. A copy of the proposed resolution is attached. #3D ~ t.J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION SETTING THE 2006 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE FOR THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes require that council must keep a schedule of its regular meetings on file at its primary office; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: For the Year 2006, the Regular City Council meetings will be scheduled on the 2nd and 4th Mondays of each month and shall be held in the Council Chamber of the Shorewood City Hall. Should a Regular City Council meeting fall on a holiday, the Council will give sufficient notice as to the alternate date for the meeting. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of January, 2006. ATTEST: Woody Love, Mayor Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us. cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM DATE: January 4,2006 TO: FROM: cc: RE: The current Recording Secretary Services Contract dates back to June, 2002. During this 3-1/2 year time period, the contracted rate has not increased. We are fortunate to contract with two Recorders who strive to provide the City witij. high-quality, professional service. Kristi Anderson has provided Recording service for the Park Commission for 5-1/2 years. ,Christine Freeman serves as Recorder for the City Council and Planning Commission. Christine recently replaced Sally Keefe, who resigned late last year. A survey of area cities recording services was conducted. Several area cities use Time Savers . Off-Site Secretarial Service for recording services. The City of Orono contracts with individuals. The table below shows the comparison of these services to Shorewood's current and proposed contract rates. Time Savers City of Orono ", Shorewood Shorewood Length of Secretarial . Contract Current Proposed Meeting Contract Contract* Up to 1 hour $116 $145 " $150 $150 Up to 2 hoUrs $173 $145 $150 $170 Up to 3 hour~ $230 . $170 $150 $200 Up to.4 hours $287 $210 $200 $230 Up to 5 hours $28.50 for each $275 $30 for each, $30 for each add'!. Y2 hour ($350 up to 6 hrs.) additional hour additional ($455 up to 7 hrs.) , 1/2 hour * For additional meetings held on the same night before or 'after the Regular City Council ( /.. / meeting, an additional $50 will be paid fo.f additional meetings. () PRINTED DN RECYCLED PAPER $3E Recording Secretary Services Contract January 4, 2006 Page Two Typically, Shorewood's Regular Council meetings run for 2-3 hours. However, Shorewood is unique in that it holds City Council Work Sessions and/or other meetings on the same night as Regular City Council meetings. Currently, the Recorder is not paid for each meeting individually, but is paid on a length of total meeting time. Although there is a benefit to holding more than one meeting in a night, additional compensation is warranted as the additional meetings can take a significant amount of time and effort to record and prepare minutes. Therefore, staff is recommending an additional compensation in the amount of $50 for additional meetings held on the same night before or after the Regular City Council meeting. An example of a two-meeting night follows: Council Work Session Council Regular meeting 6:00-6:55 p.m. 7:00-9:30 p.m. Total meeting time 3 hours, 30 minutes Additional Meeting compensation Total Compensation = $ 230.00 = $ 50.00 = $ 280.00 If the Work Session and Regular meeting were to be held on separate nights, the total compensation for two meetings ofthe length noted above would be $380. In this case, there is a $100 savings to the city when two meetings are held on the same night. Financial Sufficient funds have been allocated in the 2006 Budget for Recording Secretary Services. Staff recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Contract for Recording Services at the new rates proposed, effective January 1, 2006. A copy of the Contract for Recording Services is attached. Council Action Approval of the Contract for Recording Secretary Services effective January 1, 2006. RECORDING SECRETARY SERVICE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made between (City Recorder) and the City of Shorewood, 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood, Minnesota (Shorewood). Shorewood wishes to contract with City Recorder to provide recording secretarial services for all Shorewood City Council meetings and some or all of the Planning and Park Commission meetings. This agreement shall also encompass any special meetings that City Recorder is asked to attend. IT IS THEREFORE AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Recording Secretary. City Recorder shall attend, record, and transcribe, and submit minutes of all regular Shorewood City Council meetings, and some or all of the regular Shorewood Planning and Park Commission meetings, as determined by City Staff. Minutes of each meeting shall be submitted within seven (7) days after each meeting to the Deputy Clerk or to other such officer as the City Clerk may designate from time to time. 2. Equipment. Shorewood shall provide for each meeting at the meeting site, all tape recording equipment required to record the minutes of the meeting. City Recorder shall provide all equipment and materials necessary to transcribe and prepare the minutes and to take notes at a meeting. 3. Charges. City Recorder shall be paid for recording secretary services as follows: Length of Meeting Compensation * Up to 1 hour $150 1 to 2 hours $170 2 to 3 hours $200 3 to 4 hours $230 Over 4 hours $30 for each additional 1/2 hour * For additional meetings held on the same night before or after the Regular City Council meeting, an additional $50 will be paid for additional meetings. Dated: Dated: 4. Billing. Upon delivery to Shorewood of completed minutes, the City Recorder shall bill Shorewood, listing each meeting date attended. Shorewood agrees to submit each invoice with the next bill list or other applicable expense authorization list to be considered by the City Council or the authorizing official of the Council. 5. Cancellation. This Agreement may be canceled at any time by either party, subject to a thirty (30) day written notice. 6. Term. This Agreement shall become effective on January 1,2006, and shall continue in force until canceled. City Recorder Shorewood Mayor Shorewood City Administrator . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: January 5, 2006 RE: Resolution Accepting Supplemental Agreement 5 - County Road 19 Intersection Project. SAP 27-619-18; SAP Attachment 1 is Supplemental Agreement 5 for the County Road 19 Intersection Project. This agreement outlines both, increases and decreases to the contract for the following items: . Revisions to the storm sewer design due to conflicts with buried utilities . Changes in pipe bedding materials to account for poor soil conditions . Modifications in rock materials to permit revised staging of traffic for changes above. The total amount of the supplemental agreement, and the breakdown per State Aid segment is shown in Table 1 below. Total Supplemental Agreement 5 $ 65,478.38 , S.A.P ..No. ", Agency Amount " 27 -619-18 Hennepin County $ 4,680.96 216-101-02 City of ShorewQod $ 5,039.56 27-619-18 Hennepin County $ 16,950.39 216-020-02 City of Shorewood $ 21,076.47 216-101-02 City of Shorewood $ 6,746.70 216-108-01 City of ,Shorewood $ 3,233.96 N/A Local Costs Tonka Bay $ 7,750.34 Table 1 :If: 3F #. ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Mayor and City Council Supplemental Agreement 5 - CR 19 Project January 5, 2006 Page 2 of2 Table 2, below summarizes the totals for each agency. Supplemental Agreement 5 Agency Amount Hennepin County $ 21,631.35 City of Shorewood $ 36,096.69 City of Tonka Bay $ 7,750.34 Total $ 65,478.38 Table 2 Costs associated with this supplemental agreement for the City of Shorewood are State Aid eligible for reimbursement. It should be noted that WSB and Associates, Hennepin County Staff and City Staff are working on projections to determine the projected project balance sheet. Staff hopes to present this item at the next City Council meeting. Recommendation Staff is recommending approval of the attached resolution that approves Supplemental Agreement 5 for the County Road 19 Construction Project. , :... Ii . SUPPLEMENT AL AGREEMENT HENNEPIN COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION DIVISION SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 05 CONTRACT NO. 9821 COUNTY PROJECT NO. 9821 S.A.P. 27-619-18 COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY 19 LOCATION: On CSAH 19 in Shorewood & Tonka Bay CLASS OF WORK: Grading, Surfacing, Storm Sewer, Sanitary Sewer, Watermain, Signal, Signing, and Appurtenant Work. CONTRACTOR: Eureka Construction Inc. 8500 210th St. W. Suite 130 Lakeville, MN 55044 This contract is amended as follows: WHEREAS: This contract provides for, among other things, grading, surfacing, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, watermain, signal system, signing, and appurtenant work, and, WHEREAS: In order to provide a solid foundation for storm and sanitary sewer pipe in partially saturated soils and/or unsuitable material, granular foundation, and/or bedding (1 W' clear rock) is needed and, WHEREAS: In order to provide an adequate temporary driving surface during raining conditions, granular foundation and/or bedding (I Yz" clear rock) needs to be spread over saturated soils before Class 5 aggregate is applied and, WHEREAS: Due to numerous utility conflicts, several storm sewer modifications to the designed system are required involving both modification to the manufactured drainage structures along with addition of different storm sewer pipe sizes and, WHEREAS: The plans did not call for nor have bid items for granular foundation and/or bedding (1 Yz" clear rock) 12",22" RC arch-span and 27" RC pipe, Drainage Structure Design Hand Special 3, were not covered with existing bid items, and NOW THEREFORE IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Contractor shall place granular foundation material as bedding for storm and sanitary sewer pipe and as a temporary driving surface as directed by the Engineer. F:\WP Exhibit A . . 2. The Contractor shall make the necessary modifications and additions to the drainage structures, along with the storm sewer piping system, as directed by the Engineer. 3. The Contractor shall supply all labor, materials, and equipment necessary to complete this work at the negotiated unit price shown in the Estimate of Cost below. 4. The work performed will be measured and payment made in accordance with the units of measurement as shown in the Estimate of Cost which shall be compensation in full for all costs incidental thereto. 5. The Contractor shall not make claim of any kind or character whatsoever for any other costs or expenses which he may have incurred or which he may hereafter incur in performing the work and furnishing the materials required by this agreement. 6. The contract time will not be revised except as may be provided under the contract provisions of Mn/DOT specification 1806; 1903 does not apply. ESTIMATE OF COST 2000 SPECIFICATIONS Total Increase of Supplemental Aereement 5 $65.478.38 Group 1 ITEM NO. ITEM UNIT QUAN. UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 2504.601/00070 Exploratory Excavation Lump Sum 1 $423.71 $423.71 2451.609/ 00040 Granular Formation and/or Bedding Ton 118.79 $25 $2,969.75 (1 Yz" Clear Rock) 2451.607/00060 Pipe Bedding Cu.Yd. 51.5 $25 $1,287.50 Subtotal Increase $4,680.96 Net Increase Group 1 $4,680.96 Cost Distribution S.A.P. 27-619-18 = 100% Hennepin County G 6 roup ITEM NO. ITEM UNIT QUAN. UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 2502.541/07040 4" PerfPE Pipe Drain w/Sock Lin.Ft. 263 $16.12 $4,239.56 2502.602/00100 4" Draintile Connection to Ex Drainage Each 2 $400.00 $800.00 Structure Subtotal Increase $5,039.56 Net Increase Group 6 $5,039.56 Cost Distribution S.A.P. 216-101-02 = 100% Shorewood Group 10 Storm Sewer Decrease ITEM NO. ITEM UNIT QUAN. UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 2503.541/90155 15" RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006 CL V Lin.Ft. (616) $25 ($15,400) 2503.541/90182 18" RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006 Lin.Ft. (86) $27 ($2,322) 2503.541/90183 18" RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006 CL III Lin.Ft. (82) $40 ($3,280) 2503.541/90369 36" RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006 CL V- Lin. Ft. (20) $634 ($12,680) Jacked Subtotal Decrease ($33,682) 2 F:\WPWINI1388-01ISUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENTSISA 5.dac . " Increase ITEM NO. ITEM UNIT OUAN. UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 2451.609/ 00040 Granular Foundation and/or Bedding Ton 242.5 $25 $6,062.50 (1 Y2" Clear Rock) 2451.607/00060 Pipe Bedding Material Cu.Yd. 303.59 $25 $7,589.75 2501.515/90120 12" RC Pipe Apron Each 2 $325.00 $650.00 2502.541/07040 4" PerfPE Pipe Drain w/Sock Lin.Ft. 175 $16.12 $2,821.00 2502.602/00101 4" Draintile Connection to Ex Each 5 $400.00 $2,000.00 Drainage Structure 2503.541/90125 12" RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006 Class Lin.Ft. 858 $27.86 $23,903.88 V 2503.521/90222 22" Span RC Pipe Arch Sewer CL 11 Lin.Ft. 50 $104.77 $5,238.50 2503.541/90274 27" RC Pipe Sewer Drain 3006CL IV Lin.Ft. 124 $60.24 $7,469.72 2503.602/00005 Reconnect Sanitary Sewer Services Each 1 $827.10 $827.10 2503.603/00060 Poly-Vapor Barrier Encasement Lin.Ft. 195 $36.57 $7,131.15 2506.502/00303 Construct Drainage Structure Design Lump Sum 37.95 $315.95 $11,990.30 Special 3 2506.601/00035 Casting Assembly Modifications Lump Sum 1 $1,521.18 $1,521.18 2506.601/00040 Storm Sewer Structure Modifications Lump Sum 1 $4,159.44 $4,159.44 Storm Sewer Adjustments Lump Sum 1 $7,424.32 $7,424.32 Temporary Drainage Lump Sum 1 $651.02 $651.02 Subtotal Increase $89,439.86 Net Increase Group 10 $55,757.86 Cost Distribution: S.AP. 27-619-18 = 30.40% Hennepin County S.A.P. 216-020-02 = 37.80% Shorewood S.AP. 216-101-02 = 12.10% Shorewood S.AP. 216-108-01 = 5.80% Shorewood Local Cost = 13.90% Tonka Bay Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions in said Contract thereto shall remain in full force and effect. " 3 F:IWPWINI1388-01ISUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENTSISA 5.doc r' ", SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT Contractor, having signed this contract, and the County having duly approved this contract on , 2006, pursuant to such approval and the proper County official having signed this contract, the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA Approved as to form: Approved: By: Assistant County Attorney By: Assistant County Administrator, Public Warks Date: Recommended for approval: Approved as to execution: By: Date: Dir..ec..tor.'.T.ran~po rt . . Deparlm. ent and Count?/E~jrie. . ...) . I.'//J~/ /I.~ By: l:/1t/1/./I/~ /~ /'i . Project Engineer By: Assistant County Attorney CITY OF SHOREWOOD By: City of Shorewood Engineer STATE OF MINNESOTA EUREKA CONSTRUCTION INC. DEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION By: ~~-<l For Funding Approval Only: Its: ~ 1:'1,1 I....", .....~o~ ~~ Ilo/~ By: And: Metro District State-Aid Engineer Date: Its: COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) ) ss. ) EUREKA CONSTRUCTION INC. 8; '. BETTY J. KLEINOL NOTARY PUBLIC. MINNESOTA . MyCDmmfsslon Expires J~n. 31, 2010 STATE OF MINNESOTA This foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on ~ ~ /UA I" , 2006 bY~ ''/~as~,andbY as of~ ~ui-,A. Notary Public hzr;:, ~.&~ My commISSIOn expIres: 1- ~ ,- '0 4 F:IWPW/NI/388-0/:SUPPLEI4FNTAL AGREEMENTSISA 5.doc CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06-_ A RESOLUTION APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT 5 FOR THE COUNTY ROAD 19 INTERSECTION RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, S.A.P. 216-101-02; S.A.P. 27-619-18 WHEREAS, on November 22, 2004, the City of Shorewood entered into a contract for construction with Eureka Construction, Inc. for the County Road 19 Intersection Improvement Project, City Project No. 99-21; and WHEREAS, WSB and Associates has prepared Supplemental Agreement 5 attached hereto as Exhibit A, for additional work outside of the original contract; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed said Supplemental Agreement 5 and found it to be necessary to complete the project. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Shorewood to approve Supplemental Agreement 5 with Eureka Construction, Inc., that incorporates services outlined in Supplemental Agreement 5, attached hereto as Exhibit A. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 9th day of January, 2006. Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator ~ t\. December 22, 2005 lJ'J Out-of...State Travel Policy for City Council In 2005 the Legislature acted to require that beginning in 2006, the governing body of each local govemmentmust have apolicy that controls travel outside of Minnesota for the applicable elected officials. The policy must be voted on for initial adoption, and then reviewed annually. The policy must specify: 1) when travel outside the state is appropriate, 2) applicable expense limits,. and 3) procedures for approval of the travel. At least in recent history, members of Shorewood City Councils have hardly ever traveled outside of Minnesota on City business or for training and development opportunities for their roles as councilmembers. The City Council has neither encouraged nor discouraged out-of-state travel related to City business for its members. Annual budgets for the City Council have included funds under "travel, conferences, and schools" so that all councilmembers may attend functions and conferences throughout Minnesota. The League of MiIinesota Cities has prepared a model policy to fulfill the requirements of the 2005 statute. 'This policy has been adapted and put in a proposed resolution for Council's consideration. The proposed resolution sets guidelines for appropriate travel and e:Xpenses~ rather than a prescriptive list. The proposed resolution also calls for annual revi~w at the Council's first meeting each January. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council adopt the proposed resolution (subject to Council modifIcation) relating to an Out-of-State Travel Policy for Members of the City Council. 113(; n ~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06 - A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR OUT-OF-STATE TRAVEL BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL WHEREAS, an Act by the Minnesota Legislature in 2005 imposes an obligation on cities to establish an official travel policy for elected officials; and WHEREAS, the policy must address: (1) when travel outside the state is appropriate; (2) applicable expense limits; and (3) procedures for approval of the travel; and further must be reviewed and voted upon annually by the City Council; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood that the following policy for out-of-state travel for members of the City Council is hereby established: Purpose: The City of Shorewood recognizes that its elected officials may at times receive value from traveling out of the state for workshops, conferences, events, and other assignments. This policy sets forth the conditions under which out-of-state travel will be reimbursed by the City. General Guidelines: 1. The event, workshop, conference, or assignment must be approved in advance by the City Council at an open meeting and must include an estimate of the cost of the travel. In evaluating the out-of-state travel request, the Council will consider the following: . Whether the elected official will be receiving training on issues relevant to the City or to his or her role as the mayor or council member. . Whether the elected official will be meeting and working with other elected officials from around the country to exchange ideas on topics of relevance to the City or on the official roles of local elected officials. . Whether the elected official will be viewing a facility or function that is similar in nature to one that is currently operating at, or under consideration by, the City where the purpose for the trip is to study the facility or function to bring back ideas for the consideration of the full Council. . Whether the elected official has been specifically assigned by the Council to visit another city for the purpose of establishing a goodwill relationship, such as a "sister city" relationship. . Whether the elected official has been specifically assigned by the Council to testify on behalf of the City at the United States Congress or otherwise to meet with federal officials on behalf of the City. . Whether the City has sufficient funding available in the budget to pay the cost of the trip. 2. No reimbursements will be made for attendance at events sponsored by or affiliated with political parties. 3. The City may make payments in advance for airfare, lodging, and registration if specifically approved by the Council. Otherwise, all payments will be made as reimbursements to the elected official. 4. The City will reimburse for transportation, lodging, meals, registration, and incidental costs as follows: a) Airfare will be reimbursed at the coach rate. b) Mileage will be reimbursed at the IRS rate. If two or more council members travel by car, only the driver will receive reimbursement. The City will reimburse for the cost of renting an automobile if necessary to conduct City business. c) Lodging and meal costs are limited to those which are reasonable and necessary. d) Receipts are required for lodging, airfare, parking, and meals and should accompany an expense report form. It is not necessary to have receipts for public transportation, cabs and tips. The expense report shall be submitted to the City Clerk or Finance Department for payment. e) The City will not reimburse for alcoholic beverages, personal telephone calls, costs associated with the attendance of a family member, rental of luxury vehicles, meal expenses included in the cost of registration, or recreational expenses such as golf or tennis. 5. Exceptions to this policy can be made by majority vote of the City Council. 6. This policy shall be reviewed by the City Council at its first meeting in January of each year, and amendments to the policy must be made by Resolution of the City Council. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of January, 2006. Attest: Woody Love, Mayor Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www,ci.shorewood,mn.us. cityhall@ci.shorewood,mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council Pat Fasching, Secretary Craig Dawson, City Administrator January 9,2006 Motion Establishin.g May 20, 2006 as Spring Cleanup Day Traditionally, the City of Shore wood has established a date in May of each year as Spring Cleanup Day. Staff has .reviewed the calendar and has determined that May 20, 2006 is a date that falls outside of Mother's Day and Opening Fishing. Therefore, Staff is recommending that this day be established as the official day for Spring Cleanup. Once established, Staff will commence with a request for proposals for curbside service, refuse, appliance and tire disposal. Recommendation Staff is recorinnending approval of a motion that establishes May 20, 2006 as Spring Cleanup Day for the City of Shorewood. n t~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .#:3H CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 6 DECEMBER 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Acting Chair Gagne opened the Hearing process. In addition, he placed on the De 5, Regu Acting Chair Gagne; Commissioners Gnif Director Nielsen and Council Liaison We, Woodruff; Planning Acting Chair Gagne called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Present: Absent: Chair Bailey, Commissioner Conley APPROVAL OF MINUTES . 1 November 2005 Meyer moved, Gniftke seconded, Approving the Minutes as presented. Motion passed 4/0/1, Who mission Meeting at that meeting. 1. gat 7:02 P.M., mg the procedures utilized in the Public ms recommended for approval this evening would be cil Meeting Agenda for further consideration. of this g Lynne Fisher and her husband Steve are the ently loin Tonka. Bay. They had arranged to purchase the eir business. The property is zoned C-3, General Commercial, .ontractor's shops a,s either permitted or conditional uses. The ode that would allow such use in the C-3 District. Director 18,199 square of a pole type acc the site. The rear po equipment building. He re ubject property is approximately 85 feet wide and contains nonconforming with respect to setbacks and due to the presence applicants propose to completely redevelop the front portion of ; perty was occupied by a telecommunications monopole and small d uses and zoning surrounding the site. The Fishers' had requested the classification of "building trade contractor's shop" which is currently allowed as a conditional use permit in the C-4, Service Commercial zoning district, be allowed by conditional use permit in the C-3 District. Director Nielsen clarified the request being considered at this time had to do with the use of the property and what was acceptable in the C-3 District as a whole. He stated C-4 Districts are fairly limited in Shorewood. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 2 of 10 Director Nielsen stated if the Planning Commission agreed with amending the C-3 District regulations, Staff recommended taking the language currently in the C-4 District regulations which provided for this by conditional use, not as a permitted use, thereby requiring the Fishers to go through a public hearing specifically for this site. With regard to issues ofland use, Director Nielsen stated the front portion of the proposed building would house the applicants' offices. Offices are already allowed in the C-3 District. As indicated in the applicants' request letter, most of their activities take place on construction sites. Their employees typically do not come to the office location; they go directly to job sites. This being the case, the traffic generated by the proposed activity may be less than other allowable uses in the C-3 District. The rear (and larger) portion of the proposed building will be used as storage and some incidental assembly of mechanical ductwork. Director Nielsen stated the most significant concern with the use being proposed had to do with the element of outdoor storage of vehicles, equipment and construction materials. The applicants' illustration plans do not provide for such storage, nor is there space at the rear of the site to accommodate it after the required setback. The provisions of Section 1201.23 Subd. 4.e. (Service Commercial- conditional uses) attempt to address this issue by requiring screening and landscaping from the street and residential properties, and by limiting the amount of storage area to 30 percent of the lot area and no more than the area of the building. Director Nielsen stated Staff recommended the Planning Commission and City Council consider the purpose of the C-3 District - "...to provide for the establishment of commercial and service activities which draw from and serve customers from the entire community or subregion." when evaluating this request. Staff also recommended the Planning Commission and City Council consider the types of uses already allowed in the C-3 District. The applicants' request letter made some comparisons to existing C-3 businesses. Director Nielsen explained if the Planning Commission and City Council approve amending C-3 District regulations, the applicants would then apply for a conditional use permit and submit the necessary detailed plans. With regard to issues with site and building plans, Director Nielsen stated there were not enough parking spaces for the proposed building (which could require a smaller building to be built); the proposed parking design did not comply with Shorewood's parking regulations (the drive aisle and parking spaces as shown were too narrow); and additional perimeter concrete curbing is needed around the parking areas and driveways. He went on to state proposed landscaping should be consistent with the recommendations ofthe County Road 19 Corridor Study and must be prepared by a registered landscape architect, the site plan must address site lighting and trash facilities, and the property may be required to provide some sort of ponding to accommodate storm water runoff. He stated, the applicants must provide an "as-built" survey of the site showing existing site improvements, and the plans submitted must be to a workable scale. In summary, Director Nielsen stated the first decision for the Planning Commission is that of land use, is the proposed land use request acceptable for this C-3 District? Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this topic, Acting Chair Gagne opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public hearing at 7:15 P.M. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 3 of 10 Commissioner Gniffke stated the Planning Commission had recently reviewed and discussed the possible permitted uses of C-3 Districts. He stated he would not support the equivalent of a C-4 District conditional use permit in a C-3 District. Commissioner Woodruff concurred with Commissioner Gniffke. He also stated if the request were for a C-4 C.U.P., the proposed parking would have to be revised to conform to C-4 C.D.P. requirements. Commissioner White stated the auto repair shop site next to the proposed location is zoned C-3 and has a large shop in the back of the lot. She stated Shorewood had such a small portion of land zoned for C-4 use. She agreed the proposed building size would need to be reduced. She stated she could recommend approval of this request to City Council. .In response to. Comniissioner White's question; Director Nielsen explained the requirement for parking spaces is recommended by the Institute of Traffic Engineers. He stated Shorewood wanted to ensure adequate parking in commercial districts. Commissioner White stated maybe the Planning Commission should revisit parking space guidelines. She sited the Cub parking lot as an example of more parking being required than may have been necessary. She questioned the number of parking spaces this proposed request would require. Director Nielsen stated a review of parking space guidelines could be worthwhile, but he did not think the guidelines were significantly out of line. He went on to state this particular request may not need that much parking, but other C-3 land uses may need that many parking spaces.. Councilmember Wellens questioned the practicality of retail in that location; traffic in that area moves differently after the redesign of the County Road 19 intersection. He stated maybe the Planning Commission should review the possibility of changing that area to a C-4 District from a C-3 District. In response to Commissioner Meyer's question, Director Nielsen clarified if this request was approved the change applied to all C-3 Districts. He stated Shorewood does not favor spot zoning. He then reviewed which Shorewood properties were zoned C-3. Councilmember Meyer's stated he did not think this request was very different from other businesses in C-3 Districts. He stated more discussion should occur regarding broader ramifications of amending C-3 District regulations. Discussion ensued regarding what type of businesses the Planning Commission would want in this C-3 District and rezoning this site to a C-4 District. White moved Recommending Approval of Text Amendment to Allow General Trade Contractor's Shops in theC-3, General-Commercial Zoning District by Conditional Use. The motion died because it was not seconded. Jeff Speitzer, Sharratt Design Company, who was acting as the Fishers' Design Architect on the project, stated the Fishers' plans are for illustration purposes only. He stated should this request be approved it would be possible to reduce the size of the shop area, reduce the size of the office area, or possibly eliminate the proposed office space entirely. He stated the entire S J Fisher Construction staff does not go to the office on a daily basis; therefore less parking would be required. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 4 of 10 Discussion ensued regarding the varying concerns by Commissioners regarding this request. Commissioner White expressed concern about Shorewood's lack of C-4 zoned property. She stated Shorewood zoning did not support non-retail type local businesses. Acting Chair Gagne stated Shorewood was a "bedroom community". Commissioner Woodruff asked for an explanation of C-4 District regulations which are part of the Zoning Code. Discussion ensued regarding the wording and the interpretation of the wording of C-4 land U$e regulations. . Steve Fisher asked the Planning Commission if their intended use of this property was for retail, which would create more traffic than his business would create. He stated S J Fisher Construction only has 6 employees and they do not have customers coming to their offices. He went on to question what that property could be used for, he did not see retail as suitable for that property. Gniftke moved, Woodruff seconded, recommending denial of Text Amendment to Allow General Trade Contractor's Shops in the C-3, General-Commercial Zoning District by Conditional Use. Motion passed 4/0/1 with White dissenting because Shorewood does not have enough C-4 zoned property to support local businesses. Director Nielsen stated this request would still go to City Council which makes the final decision. Acting Chair Gagne closed the Public Hearing at 7:40 P.M. 2. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING SHORELAND DISTRICT HARDCOVER REGULATIONS Applicant: Frostad Development Co. Location: 23505 Smithtown Road Acting Chair Gagne opened the Public Hearing at 7:40 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the history of this case, noting Frostad Development Company, LLC proposed . redevelopmeritof the ShorewMd Nursery property at 23505 Smithtown Road as an office building site. In his letter dated 30 November 2005, Todd Frostad explained his proposal. He requested a conditional use permit for the office building and also a zoning text amendment that would allow greater impervious surface for commercial sites within the "S", Shoreland District. In addition, Director Nielsen stated the property is zoned R-C/S, Residential-Commercial/Shoreland, contains 91,860 square feet of area (2.1 acres), and was currently occupied by the Shorewood Nursery. It consisted .of three permanent structures, a trellis area, storage bins for landscape materials and outdoor storage area. The nursery exists under a conditional use permit. The property slopes gently from south to north with varying vegetation on all but the north side of the site. He went on to review land uses and zoning surrounding the subj ect property. Director Nielsen stated the Frostad proposal included a 24,000 square-foot office building with associated parking to the north and south of the building and a drainage pond, located at the rear of the property. He CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 5 of 10 reviewed revised plans for the office building. The office building would be two stories in height. He stated revised building, landscaping, grading and utilities, and lighting plans had been submitted by the applicant. Director Nielsen stated the first action item is to consider recommending approval of a proposed Text Amendment Regarding Shoreland District Hardcover. Section 1201.26, Subd. 5.a.(5) of the Shorewood Zoning Code limits hardcover on properties within the Shoreland District to 25 percent of the lot area. Although the City has adopted higher impervious percentages for nonresidential uses outside of the Shoreland District (66 percent allowable, up to 75 percent by conditional use permit with storm water treatment), this was not extended to the areas within 1000 feet of the lake. The applicant requested the City amend the Code to allow the. same percentages for comm,ercial sites within the Shoreland District, subject to management and treatment of runoff toward lakes. Director Nielsen went on to state Shorewood's preference for managing storm water runoff was always toward natural means (drainage swales and ponds), though Shorewood's Code also recognized mechanical means for control and treatment of runoff. The rather extensive underground treatment system designed for the Shorewood Shopping Center property was an example of this. That system was designed to meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District standards for phosphorous and sediment removal (the primary purposes of treatment) and appeared to be functioning as designed Director Nielsen reviewed the applicant's proposed plan for managing storm water using both natural and mechanical means. The plan was to drain the south half of the site to a new NURP (National Urban Runoff Program) pond at the rear of the site. Drainage from the north half of the property. would be conducted to a 72-inch diameter concrete pipe, buried along the east side of the property. This pipe would serve as a storage basin and would be pumped to the pond. He went on to explain the remainder of the drainage plan. He stated this proposed system would have to meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District standards for phosphorous and sediment removal. Director Nielsen stated Staff met with Julie Ekman, the MNDNR hydrologist for our area. She indicated the DNR is open to added hardcover percentages for commercial development where storm water runoff is managed and treated. He reviewed the City's consulting engineer concerns from his preliminary report. Todd Frostad, the applicant, explained the rationale behind his request. He stated his engineer believed having 75% impervious surface would actually improve the phosphorous levels over current conditions because of the proposed controlled storm water management system. He stated the 72 inch pipe being proposed would handle the storm water runoff for the site for a 2.5 inch rainfall. He expressed his willingness to. meet with the City's consulting engineer to resolve any areas of concern he has. He then reviewed some ofthe proposed building construction specifics. Director Nielsen again stated the first decision the Planning Commission needed to make was whether or not to recommend amending the ShorelandDistrict regulations text. If the decision was to amend the text then aC.U.P for this site would be required. With regard to issues of land use for this case, Director Nielsen stated there were adequate parking spaces, but the rear yard and side yard abutting Wood Duck Circle should be heavily landscaped to provide a buffer for adjacent residential uses. Staff recommended the driveway on County Road 19 be placed another 20-30 feet to the east. He stated the landscaping on the south border and the southerly end of the west of the site should be augmented with a durable low-maintenance fence and that four foot high fencing should be considered along the east side. He went on to state the landscaping of this site should reflect the recommendations of the County Road 19 Corridor Study. Specifically, large evergreens should CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 6 of 10 be placed at the rear of the site to ultimately form a backdrop for the commercial site. He stated the landscape plan must be signed by a registered landscape architect and must provide for long-term maintenance. With regard to site design issues, Director Nielsen stated parking lot access aisles encroachments into the rear and side yard setback areas should be eliminated, the trash enclosure and loading area should be moved closer to the building, the lighting should be hooded, and C.U.P. should stipulate that site lighting, with the exception of minimal security lights, be turned off by 9:30 P.M. He stated detailed plans for the proposed drainage system would be reviewed by the City's consulting engineer when submitted. He explained the issuance ofa building permit for the property would require connection to the municipal water system and payment of water charges. Based on the size of th~ property, it would be charged four REU's (residential equivalent units). Director Nielsen stated Staff suggested it was reasonable to allow more intense use of commercial. properties than residential. In this regard Staff recommended an amendment to increase hardcover, subject to the recommendations of the City engineering consultant and approval by the MNDNR. Staff . also recommended the Planning Commission consider "conceptual" approval for a conditional use permit, advising the applicant to return with revised plans that address the issues raised to the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for January 3, 2006. Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this topic, Acting Chair Gagne opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public hearing at 8: 12 P.M. Mr. Frostad stated he would modify the plans based on Staff recommendations. He explained the trash storage would be done inside the building. He stated the greatest portion of the landscaping lies on City property and was not illustrated in the original landscape plan. The revised landscape plan would include the City landscape area and indicate what landscaping would stay. He stated his objective was not to just increase impervious surface; his proposed storm water management system would benefit the DNR, Watershed District and the community at large. The exterior of the building was designed to blend in with the neighborhood and could not be seen laterally. Commissioner Woodruff expressed concern for other properties and Lake Minnetonka if the Shoreland District regulations for impervious surface be amended to increase the allowable amount to 66% hardcover with no permitting required and 75% hardcover with conditional use permitting required. He also stated he thought Mr. Frostad' s proposal was good use of the land. He went on to suggest that if the regulations were amended, they should also include the requirement for a storm water management system when the impervious surface was greater than 25%. He stated if a requirement for storm water management system was not included in the amendment, he was not in favor of allowing that much hardcover. Director Nielsen stated, in response to a question from Commissioner Meyer, the Staff recommendation would be modified to require a C.U.P. for any hardcover in excess of 25%. He went on to state maybe specific standards, such a phosphorous removal, be added to the amendment. He listed the properties that would be affected by a change in Shoreland hardcover requirements. Commissioner White questioned how long it would take to treat a 2.5 inch rainfall and what happened if it rained more than 2.5 inches. Director Nielsen stated regardless of the treatment, Shorewood has a standard specifying the threshold for rate control; the water cannot leave the site any faster after it was developed than before it was developed. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 7 of 10 He stated storm water calculations included in detailed plans are required to assess the systems ability to handle heavy and/or continuous rains. Director Nielsen stated regardless of the treatment, Shorewood had a standard specifying the threshold for rate control; the water cannot leave the site any faster after it was developed than before it was developed. He stated storm water calculations included in detailed plans are required to assess the system's ability to handle heavy and/or continuous rains. Mr. Frostad stated he did not have the release rates but would provide them. In response to Councilmember Wellens question, Mr. Frostad stated there are no current plans to operate the greenhouse. He also responded to another question from Mr. Wellens and stated there was no problem with moving the entrance from County Road 19 to the east. Director Nielsen stated Staff looked at regulations governing commercial development in Shoreland areas for Mound and Wayzata; they are relatively up-to-date. Their regulations are quite consistent with the language found in Shorewood's Shoreland regulations. Both cities allow hardcover up to 75%; Spring Park and Excelsior allow up to 100%. Restated if the Planning Commission wanted to approve a "text amendment" the language should elaborate on storm water treatment and include specific standards, such as phosphorous removal, suggested by the City consulting engineer. In response to Commissioner White's question regarding occupancy levels, Mr. Frostad stated it was variable because the building would be built to provide for single and multiple tenant occupancy. He stated it would be infrequent that all occupants would be on site at the same time. In response to White's question regarding the need for all the parking he had proposed, Mr. Frostad stated he planned for near the maximum amount of parking that would be required. Director Nielsen stated the parking space standard used was a fairly common standard. In response to a question from Commissioner Gniffke, Mr. Frostad stated the City consulting engineer's recommendations were acceptable. Acting Chair Gagne stated he did not think the hardcover percentage should be increased to 75%, and he would prefer the Shorewood Nursery to a two story building on the site. He also expressed concerns about 100 year rains that seem to be occurring every two years. Commissioner White expressed concern that allowing hardcover up to 75% would make the Shoreland properties like any other properties; Shoreland is supposed to be more green space not pavement. Director Nielsen stated the question that existed was whether or not commercial use of that site is appropriate. He stated it was currently zoned for office space with conditional use permit. Staff had spoken to the DNR and they will accept conditions similar to Mound and Wayzata.Shorewood's minimal amount of Shoreland differentiates it from the other communities. Nielsen stated if commercial use can not be made of a site then perhaps the site should not be zoned commercial. In response to a question from Commissioner White, Director Nielsen explained because the site was zoned R-C (Residential Commercial) double homes could be built on the property. Commissioner White again expressed concern with allowing up to 75% hardcover; she would like to see a lower maximum amount such as 66%. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 8 of 10 Woodruff moved, Meyer seconded, for the Planning Commission to direct Staff to prepare a draft Text Amendment to Shoreland Hardcover Regulations to Allow up to a Maximum of 75% Hardcover Subject to Storm Water Runoff Treatment Requirements and Standards. Commissioner White stated she did not want to see 75% hardcover for Shoreland allowed. She questioned the need for such a drastic increase, from 25% to 75%, and would be more comfortable with an increase to 66%. Commissioner Woodruff stated if the amended regulations specified detailed requirements for handling storm water runoff he did not see a need to require a conditional use permit process to go from 66% to 75% hardcover. . Discussion ensued regarding various impervious surfaces in the City . and what the maximum hardcover percentage should be. Commissioner White expressed concern over development of other sites in proximity to this site and how much hardcover those sites would end up with. Motion passed, 3/2 with Gagne and White dissenting. Gniffke motioned, White seconded, to Continue the Public Hearing for the C.U.P. to the January 3, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting where the Applicant would provide engineering documents and revised plans that would address site issues identified. Motion passed, 5/0. Acting Chair Gagne closed the Public Hearing at 8 :40 P.M. 3. . MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: George Danser Location: 5840 Christmas Lake Road George Danser .did not appear at the December 6, 2005, Planning Commission meeting to provide a response to areas of concern identified at the November 1, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. Woodruff moved, White seconded, to Continue the case to the January 3, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting. Motion passed 5/0. 4. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: Mark Kennedy Location: 23975 Yellowstone Road Director Nielsen explained Mark Kennedy, who owns the property located at 23975 Yellowstone Trail, had successfully gotten his property rezoned to R-1C, Single-Family Residential, and he now proposed to subdivide the lot into two building sites. He went on to state the property contains 44,045 square feet of area and was occupied by the applicant's home and a detached garage. The proposed lots will be 23,886 square feet (westerly lot) and 20,159 square feet (easterly lot) in area. The property drops off to the southwest corner into a small wetland basin. Director Nielsen stated both of the proposed lots comply with the requirements of the R.l C zoning district. The westerly lot will have approximately 16.6 percent of hardcover. He noted the patio on the CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 9 of 10 northeast side of the house encroaches into the required side yard setback. This should be corrected as a condition of approval. Director Nielsen stated Staffrecornn1ended the minor division be approved subject to the following: 1. The applicant must provide legal descriptions and deeds for drainage and utility easements, 10 feet around each lot, and a conservation easement extending to 35 feet (wetland buffer) from the wetland delineation. The conservation easement must staked on the property with wetland boundary markers approved by the City. 2. The patio encroachment into tl1erequired side yard setback on the northeast side of the house must be corrected. 3. The applicant must provide an up-to-date (within 30 days) title opinion for review by the City Attorney. 4. Prior to release of the resolution approving the request, the applicant must pay one park dedication fee ($2000) and one local sanitary sewer access charge ($1200). 5. Since the division itself does not result in the removal of any trees from the property, tree preservation and reforestation can be addressed at the time building permits are applied for. In response to a question from Mark Kennedy, Director Nielsen explained the $2000 park dedication fee was to support increased demand on the parks from new lots. He stated some cities charge 10% of the property value for the park dedication fee. Councilmember Woodruff stated the well on the proposed new lot supplies water to the existing home. He questioned ifthere were any provisions for use of the well once the existing home was sold. Director Nielsen stated there were-two approaches for the use of the well after the existing home is sold: 1) the applicant could continue to use the well until the existing lot was sold and at that time grant an easement for the new home to use the well; or 2) he could drill a new well for the new property. He went on to state a well can have a temporary abandonment for up to a year. Meyer moved, Woodruff seconded, Recommending Approval of a Request for Minor Subdivision, subject to Staff Recommendations, for Mark Kennedy, 23975 Yellowstone Road. Motion passed 5/0. 5. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 6. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated the Frostad and Danser cases are continued to the January 3, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner White stated the Planning Commission may want to consider rezoning the Fisher site to C- 4. Director Nielson stated rezoning may not be appropriate, but the land use aspects of that site could be CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 10 of 10 reviewed. White questioned the distinction between the auto repair shop site land use and the proposed S J Fisher Construction Company land use; both would have large shops on their property. Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commission reviewed the C-3 District land uses in 2005 but had not completed the task. He proposed a complete review all land uses of a C-3 District at a Planning Commission Study Session in January 2006. Council Liaison Wellens suggested a review of the C-4 strip mall also. 7. REPORTS . Liaison to Council Council Liaisons were selected as followed: January 2006 Commissioner White February 2006 Commissioner Guiffke March 2006 Commissioner Meyer April 2006 Commissioner Woodruff · SLUC No report given. · Other Acting Chair Gagne thanked Councilmember Wellens and City Council for the appreciation gathering on December 2,2005. The Commissioners extended their appreciation. 8. ADJO~NT Gniffke moved, White seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2005. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder -' . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 4 December 2005 RE: Fisher, Lynne - Request for Zoning Code Amendment to Allow Trade Contractor's Shop in the C-3 Zoning District . FILE NO. 405 (05.30) BACKGROUND Lynne Fisher and her husband, Steve are the owners of SJ Fisher Construction Co., currently located in TonkaBay. They have arranged to purchase the property at 24285 Smithtown Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached) to relocate their business. The property is zoned C-3, General Commercial, which presently does not provide for trade contractor's shops as either permitted or conditional uses. The Fishers have requested an amendment to the Code that would allow such use in the C-3 District. The subject property is approximately 85 feet wide and contains 18,199 square feet of area. It is currently nonconforming with respect to setbacks and due to the presence of a pole type accessory structure. The applicants, as mentioned in their request letter (Exhibit B) propose to completely redevelop the front portion of the site as illustrated in Exhibits C-F. The rear portion of the property is occupied by a telecommunications monopole and small equipment building. Land uses and zoning surrounding the site are as follows: . North: . commercial East: South: West: County Road 19, then retail commercial (in Tonka Bay); zoned Auto repair (transmission) shop; zoned C-3, General Commercial City Hall/Badger Park; zoned R -1 C, Single-family residential Auto fuel station and auto repair shop; zoned C-3 .... ~J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #' 1 A. . . . Memorandum Re: Fisher - Zoning Text Amendment 4 December 2005 The Fishers' request that the classification of "building trade contractor's shop" which is currently allowed as a conditional use permit in the C-4, Service Commercial zoning district, be allowed by conditional use pelmit in the C-3 District. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION Although the applicants have submitted plans (Exhibits C-F), illustrating what they intendto do with the site, the request being considered at this time has to do with the use of the property and what is acceptable in the C-3 District as a whole. The second section ofthisreport will address preliminary issues associated with the applicants' site plan. A. Land Use.. The front portion of the proposed building will house the applicants' offices. Offices are already allowed in the C-3 District, and ifthis were the only use being proposed, the site plan review process would be the only action necessary for a building permit. The rear (and larger) portion of the proposed building will be used as storage and some incidental assembly of mechanical ductwork. They intend to share their building with an HV AC contractor. As indicated in the applicants' request letter, most of their activities take place on construction sites. Even their employees typically do not come to the office location, but rather they go directly to job sites. This being the case, the traffic generated by the proposed activity may be less than other allowable uses in the C-3 District. Perhaps the most significant concern with the use being proposed has to do with the element of outdoor storage of vehicles, equipment and construction materials. The applicants' plans do not provide for such storage, nor is there space at the rear of the site to accommodate it after the required setback. The provisions of Section.1201.23 Subd. 4.e. (Service Commercial- conditional uses) attempt to address this issue by requiring screening and landscaping from the street and residential properties, and by limiting the amount of storage area to 30 percent of the lot area and no more than the area of the building. In evaluating this request, it is recommended that the Planning Commission and City Council consider the purpose of the C-3 District - " . . . to provide for the establishment of commercial and service activities which draw from and serve customers from the entire community or subregion." It is also recommended that you consider the types of uses already allowed in the C-3 District. The applicants' request letter makes some comparisons to existing C-3 businesses. B. Site and Building Plans. As mentioned above, this application is for an amendment to the zoning code. The applicants' plans are considered conceptual for purposes of this report. Ifthe City determines that the use of the property is acceptable, the applicants would then apply for a conditional use permit and submit detailed plans for a C.U.P. In doing so, the applicants should consider the following: -2- . . . Memorandum Re: Fisher - Zoning Text Amendment 4 December 2005 1. Parking. The number of parking spaces is inadequate for the size building being proposed. The office portion of the building requires 3.5 spaces, while the warehouse/shop area requires an additional nine spaces for a total of 13 spaces. It is quite likely that this requirement will necessitate a smaller building. 2. The design of the proposed parking and circulation do not comply with Shorewood's parking regulations. Specifically, the drive aisle and parking spaces as shown are too narrow. 3. The parking area and driveways must be entirely encompassed by a perimeter concrete curb. 4. Proposed landscaping should be consistent with the recommendations ofthe County Road 19 Corridor Study and must be prepared by a registered landscape architect. 5. The site plan should address site lighting and trash facilities. 6. The property may be required to p'rovide some sort of ponding to accommodate storm water runoff. 7. The applicants should provide an "as-built" survey of the site showing existing site improvements. Plans submitted must be to a workable scale. lfthe Planning Commission and Council determine that the proposed use is acceptable for the C- 3 District, staff should be directed to prepare a draft amendment for adoption. The applicants. should then apply for a conditional use permit in compliance with the amended code. Cc: Craig Dawson Larry Brown Tim Keane Lynne Fisher -3- o '.~ ~ \~ i .L_--{ ~~. \\rn 11 '("' ~ \ \ \ ~ ~ ~,..==-, \ f )/~~ -~ ~ I)~~ L~~ . J )~o\~ ~ \i ~ ~ '; ~\--) ~ - /\\ '\ ~ Ul// ~ I I ~~q:r LJI J7 /?I" .3~ Q '/ h li\2~T\ I=- \.::J e ~ ,J \ \'1 Q. 1-- - , 7 ,~ :=~~ r~ ' I l\ \ ILj t O~ an'~ A~LNno~ 51\ [f-;t ~ ~ -- 1\111 \ \ '" IT" ] .........OR __ , / / ~e ',den court~ ~\~~ ,r\ \ .. \\/0 .. (\\\ it>\\ ,.. ~ \\" ~ , .. 01::1 en1:> AH NnO:J \ ~ ~o ~~~ \\ ~~ *~ Q) o Q) o u. O. .... ~ ~ r-1t \'i e \~ z~ g I--- \ \ J ~ vx-r..'1 n\ \ o 1.0 C\I ~li ~~ '--~ ~ - ~ :i~ ~ ~ ~ il\ I) 1 ~\ ..., nOllN\fVi n 0 "~~~ ~~~) \ \-:= / ~ I Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Fisher - Zoning Code Amendment ~ J /1T,_?// j . . . Brad Nielsen Planning Director City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 October 27 2005 Re: 24283 & 24285 Smithtown Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Brad Nielsen: This application is respectfully submitted to show our interest in getting an amendment to the C3 zoning ordinances to include provision 1201.23 C-4, Subd. 4e for the above referenced property. Specifically: "Building trade contractor's shop for businesses engaged in specialized construction activities such as plumbing, painting, electrical work, carpentry and well drilling; primarily for residential development, but not including heavy construction." We intend to use the building for our companies, S.J. Fisher Construction, and Anderson Cooling & Heating. Weare local companies, currently located in Tonka Bay with the majority of our business servicing primarily the Shorewood community and surrounding area We have been renting space from Lan-De-Con, located in Tonka Bay, with the intention of purchasing an existing commercial site in the area for many years. We have established businesses, with over 20 years of combined service. Weare a good fit for the area. There are similar type servicing companies within a few blocks, specially an electrical company, carpet company, transmission company and body shop. We intend to make drastic site improvements by removing both buildings, the office and pole building, and building one office/warehouse with a cottage style facade. Weare a full service remodeling and heating company and feel it is necessary to have a building that shows the quality of work that we provide. We will create little traffic volume. Our employees typically meet at the job site. If it is necessary for them to be at the shop, they will not create high traffic volumes. Likewise, customers are typically met at the job sites and will not create high traffic volumes. Because of this, we do not require many parking spaces since the majority of our meetings are at the customers home. We expect little walk up traffic. Exhibit B APPLICANT'S REQUEST LETTER Dated 27 October 2005 . . . We will keep the area neat. Again, we need to portray a neat and orderly appearance to generate interest in our business. We feel that the combination of the above mentioned criteria, drastic site improvements, little traffic, local companies servicing local customers and the fact that there are similar type companies in the area, will show that we are a good fit for the area. Thank you for considering our amendment request to include provision 1201.23 C-4, Subd. 4e. Sincerely, , /"""' 45M-V~ Steve & Lynne Fisher Jay & Cheryl Anderson I \-- '\ \ , 'f \ \ ............;--~~~~~r~~~:~_~:~~=~----.... .......mi--_.__- -.-..- ._.......k:~~.~. ...... ..... . ..-.......--.. ._...._..:::.,,,:~ .~..-,. ~..=..t:li:?.!i~~;~::::..:c:"C5-.::::;.::;:::,:.-:;.:::::,,:;.:-:,,::,,'=.__............ ......:._.:_:=:~~-:::.:~:i5~1.........~g~:~:~:~.~:~::~~::::-:~..~::~:,,:~::,~:~~:~.:::.~:,,:~:~:'::~:~~~:::"~' L.. . . -.....:---".,.......-.,.-.:. - ~.~ ,.,..., '~',"'" '~_., ........,'. -.'-" -~..."...., 'w.,......._..:::,:'~:.:~::.-'.~,., .~ w' ....-:.-t--.-".." -"..--..-.-----.-...-~-.--. .'..,...-~':.-:."......".....:_- ..' ....~,-,.... -, . '\ 1\ .\\ \ \ . \ \ ~l3:iJ_~J._~'t:~:. ---.- /> boo, :;~- Ck~:I2::V_.t.d~...., ~I .. _.f-.r::\C",~.._-_.-:" ~.' "..~,.;.- . . ....~... ._..~... .-.............. . . . .,...' ..,..... _ ~:_.,.., ,.' --'. -'~:,. .... ",-. "'-",', -".,' ...........,..,.. ""'. ,.." I I I I J .~/;.;.:i. ,.,.~:?,if-:.-:.~::~:...i~.:- '_= ___...... _' _ _ _ ~_~. .' ....~~~~.~.::~:;:~~-:..:=~. . ~. ""-I .... ,10,. i!!!::.'. .. ".d . '"...'-\P'.,Ii; :,...""'_.--.... ....._. .:.~.,~!"1\\:.i.i.e.i.~V:l~~.'~~._....__;' . ..fS>if,r~...:g;~~..~-.~.~.~;~..~~~-~: _~m~~~-~ ---~~H~~-t-~-l~- - -J-....... ...~~Q_.:-.. ..... ~~"~ " ~ t ffi~~ . i!:;Q. .. ,..... ff') ff') l() l() . ~ ~ .Q o Q u~ o J. o Q . pool ..c:l +-lOO U E~ ~~ o == U~ ~ Q o~ ~~ .~ a ~OO ~ l() CJ:)~ ~ M . o ~ ~ o CI) CI) l--I .c ..... .-4 ..... (.) (Ij ~ C1.) ~ ~ ",en ;...; o -+-- g ~ o l.r = = ~ r.il~ ~~ oolti ~~ ~~= o8~ uoo~ r.ilt-:::!= oor.il~ ~~~ Ie r_' lti .-.:I".I!"'\~ ct .. ~'.. tZ)... o p... . o ~ ~ fl..."... .........;:0.,.. .~'#.l= ~~.. :.\:...:. III 'III e .'O..~ Exhibit C PROPOSED SITE PLAN , \ " \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ " \ -' i -1\ ~ ~ . : , i{ \ \ , , . . ; ! . , j , \ , . " l... I .~. - - ----=-- r I .r1.- I I I I ....i.~~~~e i . . "~e.. '.--""....Ie.. ._,...,.."._c-:-.~Wa . i._,,_~ . ~Ir~~':-'i- ~~.~.. -l!\~H ... --._"._~~ .. '~~~f-==:::--- : i , . : ! H ..1 -~---- ....:~.&g~::~.. ._~ ~~~f~\~l . ,'; 'j I 1)(' .II, . \ ~~.~+--~\ ...~..,_.,_.:. _ .' d"-4~:L.. . / ....._...._ ...........h.__ ......................_....._.__._.___. ...."'.-.-....-....................--.....1....-........ . Lr-+-- ~ --==..............,,,~""'.-..,,.~,.,..,.-==......~"",.-:...~.,,- "'-, ~""""""'...".-~"'.-'. -,...,..,..,=..- 4- I i i I I I . i , -iJ n' it I ": I J I { I ( ; ; kd" I.' t. .' '. . ..;.t:,I_'" .........!-'...~~__.."..d........ _ ...r..""", \iiJII'. I,"~'~"-l ,~~. .',......... .. j- _..a..--,' --;'~. ,_ .............\~00::-~=.~~==~c:...._ FL0c5p...:.-p.L.......?\.~. ..... ._......._........d_....._..~___._ ...... .. .._........._....._.. .. i~J\Le::.~ e.~~f'~"T-(_,tlf4e'J "'''-liD ~FL.--+ :.. .."'...~'_...... "", ...-..i&'..-~_.. "'-.-:....-- -L "'Ii;, ........1.'.....:..-...---.'........"'.."...1.......'.....--~~. . '., . .... ". ".. .' - - ... . --'. ". ." '.'...-....... --.... . ..~ . ...- . -- :.]!i:-.'_'~- _ ___.~ _ .. 'l"""I tf') tf') It) It) . ~ g ...... u ~ \:.I..4 ..g c<;S H ",rJJ ~ o ..... g ~ ~ o U "'C .Q o Q u~ ~ J-c o Q .,.... ..:= ~oo Q g~ U)Q ~~ o = U~ ~ Q Q)~ ~;;: .~ a ~oo ~ It) r./'1~ . M ~ M . d\ o J ~ o Q ~ r:I) r:I) - = = .... r-l.... t:rf) ~~ {/JlO ~~ ~~= oe~ u{/J~ r_~ ~ = -r-lt-- (/Ju~ ~~~ ...~lCl'l 0.... ~..... tZ). .... o ~ g P-4 ".,.'#.>. Sl~: rei -----r--.~-~_.------- -"-;.... "':~':~,~::~~,~~~--=-,~=~~,~,:~~~,-:::~~:~,:.,:",;::, ... .-'~_:::,;~c::r~:El..___...... ...... Exhibit D PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN , " I I I 1\ \... t! i ~~ ~I ~ ~: \ 1 { i ; \ . j '1,0 ,~. . , -I-- ...."" ...:.......:.-==.~ - ..~_. I ~~~~ will I ~ =EB~ ...-- . + I I-- t=:.. . =1-- i-- -.- :is!Ei *, H~"~-(11~~~. -- .~ ,-~\ ..a14~ ."-.'--1 iL-L .. (C<:l/ ~." EE... ~ ( - ~,~ ",/ L~ C OJ; ~f=q~ "'. _..:.::;r.~t.?TN~.='S'eJ;f/\.. --.-_. ._,-'._"'~"" ,,- .'.~...~,:.......~ '~'''~~~~~::~._~~'.'.:'~-~~:==~-:'_:.:,..'.='~..:...__.-- _---'_ - ...,.'~._..... - '_'. _.__. ~ ..._...... .,._..__,..". _" ",__ _.... "'_ ._.... .._.~___ _"'."W' .._....... -........ '.. . ---=--_.__..".....____".,.,_~.,._.._,.__,..,.... ,".,..__..._'.. .", "_ .._ __.___.__"." ,..,,_"."__. .." _,'u"," --..-,_,_" - '." n.',.. .._,_,_ ".,. ...d' ..~,.,,, ... ., ..-.,.-,,---.-.' -."...... ....,,~....'-'..-.__...,.._,.. -., "-.-" .,""_.",-. _.........."-,,.... ....~_.. ..,--_.......,....__._---,-',.~.--_.__.~._--_..- .---- -----.--. -. ...... .., . '~,.. .~, "... -.........., ,-'.,._.._,..~...'~,....-..-.-~_...... "-"'- . ~eQ-~J;.,~v,e.E=--.:...--:--:----:--::--.:-: L-- -- ~ ;.~~S~[-~~:~~~.:_~:..~~-~~~~--~ /v -,--'--"'''' .. .. .....- .. .. .....-..... .........-................,... /" .. ...:....... "-...', .-. ::.:~.::':::~:.- .... ":::::1..::..". ---7---":':'" " ---:---..-.... ............ ~lf t- ~ -~:,~.ZP~Ltge..::..C:....::.:.._;:~~-::::::::~.~ V =:~ir~~..~~=i~:,:~-...::L:~~:.:_..:~~:;~=~-~:;:.. IV. ~~b~~:c ~ )j..c;lLTlig.;ei:O,'~&e ' T V -dM~~~~...:~...;:.~.~...,..'....::...;..:..~,.~...-...:..:.:,:.-;.".;;.;.:.....-.~..,~;~~: ~ ~'!i: 1~:::.;~~~c~:;;:~;; .... ~ ~ tf') l(') l(') . ~ g ...... U C';$ ~ (!.) --0 C';$ ~ tIl ... l-t o +-> U C';$ ~ o U "'C .Q o Q u~ ~ ).c o Q .~ ..= ~ 00 u .E~ ~~ o = U~ ~Q 0:; ~j; .~ a ~oo ~ l(') (/'J~ ~ M . I!' (,) ~ ~ o Cl ~ ::> CI) CI) - => = ~ ~~ .. E-i ff') s~ ooll'l ~~ ~~~ Olooolt-- ul"l)~ ~~=> oo~~ 'OIt8~ l,Cr'<lI'l .:.,"It. ~l~ o ~....' U'.) o ~ ~ P-l }\ -t> ~~' .. !~ \ , ~ ;- i ..., ~>/~ . .rlf~ S.'..:.i~:";.'. -=VJlc. fIl~.....:..::.:.....:.......:e.. .Q l,I Exhibit E WEST ELEVATION f!!,:r" , .~~.... .;;. ./ .,- , ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~::~=:.,~.~~---~~~=~,~=~~~='~ -L~1~:::~~2-=':~-~~::.::-=:=:-~-=_='':::==.:=.-==:=-=~===:_. ...,..--....:-c-'.......-- ...,..._- ........ ...... .:..--- ....... ..................'-...... .....,.........,-..... ..... "---"-.""'-" _.1.. .--fr~~~~~-= . . -.--..........,.~._...._.,..h__.........._.._~~_h,_"h'.__._.._.'.....~_....~__~....._.._..."._._.~____________ ~~R~~~~~~~~~~.~=~::~~~=~~ ~T&~~!5:~-._-..._-,--,- ~~~1-~::r:--::-'_:..,.-:~:::::=::::.:'~~=::::::--- II i I I: i! i I 1 i ~ t -t l ~ ~ ~ \ i : i i ~ \ I , \' ~ ! .=~~~;~.~~~;=;~~=-~~~;~,~-~., _._-~.,---,.,....,..,...._......-~--=::,. . -..:::':=--=.~:.;::::.: ::.:~.::::::,:.:: ':.-:'.:.'". :'.'::::~,C . -.----r------..--.'-... -.. -.. ",~"-'..-.:-~.,, ---.- -,.--.... -'-' ~. if:' ~" ~ ". '-_h_~-..~~'....ith~."",~~......-t'-~;;-ht- .' ..... .. ..' ~ . . ~.. ~ ~_,.L..c~L-_~t;;;"~y~TT---~'-.-"'-'~"-""--'--~"--'-'---------"~ J-..-...----....'..--- ---....-.-~--'--'- _..::..-=--======~~:::==--::.=-==:=.,.=:.::--=-=:::.=-.---=-::...-=:::-=,:-=i=:~ _::.....::.-::=.==-...::=:..__::::,::==----==:::.~=..::_:=::::..::_..::: - . - -:.:::_::-=_ --- .. -==::::..==-- .._____''''._ ________...,+._.._______._._-:...,._~----- ____.__._"__,_.._.__,__.,._,______,.___~~~.~~""~-. .~::=,:..:9:I..:.~3-=-,:~-=~~..::=-.~-=J_,= _ !?-=.:~.._______.__.__._____ . '\., .,; j"~ '\ 'f"""4 ('f') ('f') tn tn . ~ g ...... g ~ ~ --g ~ ~ $-< o t) ~ o U '"0 .Q o Q U~ ~ ~ o Q . -C ..= ~rJJ. U B~ ~~ o =:I U~ $0-1 Q a):= ,.c:;t: .~ e ~rJJ. ~ tn r/J~ ~ M . ~ (} ~ ~ \) -' , o ~ :::> (/) (/) - = = 1'""4 r;;;l1'""4 t!~ ~~ (/)Itl ~~ ~~= oS~ U(/)~ r;;;l~= (/)r;;;l~ ~8t::l \c'""1Il .... ..~O'I o ~ tZ) o ~..'.'. o ~. ~ t~.:- ~........~........=.. -= .'. Co. "d~ Exhibit F NORTH ELEVATION . MEMORANDUM CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us DATE: TO: FROM: RE: January 4, 2006 Mayor and Council Members Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk c..{) Making Appointments to Certain Offices and Positions within the City of Shorewood for the Year 2006 This item requires Council make a motion to adopt a resolution making the Year 2006 appointments to certain offices and positions within the city. Attached is a Draft Resolution making Year 2006 appointments. The following identifies the Year 2005 appointments: Acting Mayor: Christine Lizee Council Representatives to: a. Park Commission Liaison: January - June 2005 July - December 2005 b. Planning Commission Liaison January- June 2005 July - December 2005 Christine Lizee Laura Turgeon Paula Callies Martin Wellens c. Liquor Stores Committee: Laura Turgeon &Paula Callies d. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Liaison: W oodv Love e. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District Liaison: Martin Wellens f. Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission: Paula Callies , g. Association of Metro Municipalities: Laura Turgeon n t.J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1F c; II January 4, 2006 Page Two h. Alternate Association of Metro Municipalities: Craig Dawson 1. Coordinating Committee South Lake Minnetonka Police Department: Mayor J. Alternate to Mayor on Coordinating Committee South Lake Minnetonka Police Department: Acting Mayor k. Excelsior Fire District Board Member: Woody Love 1. Alternate Excelsior Fire District Board Member: Martin Wellens City Attorney: Tim Keane, Leonard, Street and Deinard City Prosecutor: Ken Potts Emergency Preparedness Director: SLMPD Police Chief Bryan Litsey Official Depositories: Beacon Bank. 4M Fund & other Depositories as necessary Official Newspaper: Sun Sailor. Notices may also be published in the Laker. Weed Inspector: Mayor Woody Love Assistant Weed Inspector: Joe Lugowski 2. That the Blanket Bond (Official Bonds) is approved. CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO CERTAIN OFFICES AND POSITIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD FOR THE YEAR 2006 WHEREAS, it has been the policy of the Shorewood City Council to make annual appointments to fill certain offices and positions within the City government at the beginning of each year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the following persons are appointed to the following offices and positions until the 2006 City Council organizational meeting: Acting Mayor: Christine Lizee Council Representatives to: a. Park Commission Liaison: January- June 2006 July - December 2006 b. Planning Commission Liaison January- June 2006 Christine Lizee July - December 2006 Laura Turgeon c. Liquor Stores Committee: Laura Turgeon & Paula Callies d. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Liaison: Woody Love Paula Callies Martin Wellens e. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District Liaison: Martin Wellens f. Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission: Paula Callies g. Association of Metro Municipalities: Laura Turgeon h. Alternate Association of Metro Municipalities: Craig Dawson 1. Coordinating Committee South Lake Minnetonka Police Department: Mayor J. Alternate to Mayor on Coordinating Committee South Lake Minnetonka Police Department: Acting Mayor k. Excelsior Fire District Board Member: Woody Love 1. Alternate Excelsior Fire District Board Member: Martin Wellens City Attorney: Tim Keane, Leonard, Street and Deinard City Prosecutor: Ken Potts Emergency Preparedness Director: SLMPD Police Chief Bryan Litsey Official Depositories: Beacon Bank, 4M Fund & other Depositories as necessary Official Newspaper: Sun Sailor. Notices may also be published in the Laker. Weed Inspector: Mayor Woody Love Assistant Weed Inspector: Joe Lugowski 2. That the Blanket Bond (Official Bonds) is approved. 3. That such appointments shall take effect on the date hereof and shall continue for the remainder of the year or until such time as a successor is appointed by the City Council. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of January, 2006. Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council ob Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator January 5, 2006 Authorization for Services of Benefits Consultant This matter has been continued from the Council's December 12,2005, meeting. Council had requested clarification that the services to be rendered by the recommended firm would include review of benefits communication and the open enrollment process, and what improvements should be considered (including out-sourcing) some or all of its administration. Council also wanted information on brokerage fees. As this is proprietary information, the consultant's proposal would exclude analysis of brokerage fees. In response to my question, the recommended consultant indicated that in the case of health insurance, all of the plan providers in the area pay flat, standard brokerage fee per participant that is reflected in the premium. Stanton Group Services has been revised its December I, 2005, proposalto clarify the scopeofwork to be done. There is no change in the anticipated costs for the review of the City's employee benefits. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the services of Stanton Group Services to perform an independent review and analysis of the City's employee benefits program, per its proposal of December 1, 2005, as revised. =ttg5 ~ t.~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SH<?REWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cl.shorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: . FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council . . '. '. . A ~ CraigW. Dawson, City Administrator (i1)" December 8, 2005 Authorization for Services of Benefits Consultant Council reviewed the report and recommendations of the employee.Benefits Committee at a work session on November 7. During its discussion, the Council indicated that it would be beneficial to have a benefits consultant provide an additional review of benefits as proposed to be offered by the City. The consultant would compare the City's offerings with other public and private employers, and identify further changes the City might also consider. Council directed staff to present a recommendation on engaging a benefits consultant by the Council's December meeting. Staff contacted several cities and the League of Minnesota Cities to identify firms that would be able to provide these independent consulting services. The City's request specifically noted that it was not the intent of the City to engage brokerage services, but to provide an analysis and recommendations for the City's overall benefit program (including non-insurance benefits such as vacation and sick leave accrual). ' Two of the eight firms identified responded to the City's request. These firms were Stanton Group Services and Financial Concepts, Inc. The proposal made by Stanton Group Services is superior and more responsive to the City's intent to have an overall review of benefits, and not to entertain brokerage services. Stanton Group Services has ready access to a vast base of Minnesota and metropolitan data (e.g., the annual "Stanton SurVey" of Twin Cities local governments) as well as public and private employer information nationwide. Stanton Group Services could complete its work in the first quarter of2006. The anticipated fee for its services ranges from $4,000 to $5,800. Given the information already organized by staff, the fee will likely fall in the lower part of the range. Funds are available in the 2005 and 2006 budgets of the City Administrator Department. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the services of Stanton Group Services to perform an independent review and analysis of the City's employee benefits program, per its proposal of December 1,2005. '"' t~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER jj ? .- ,-,J ~J Health & Welfare Consulting Proposal Phase I: Establish goals and objectives of the study Step 1: Conduct session with The City of Shorewood to discuss the following: . Current benefit philosophy . Staffing growth plans and recruiting and retention concerns . Areas where the current benefit program may not meet the organization's needs Step 2: Review and select appropriate published survey sources. Determine if The City Of Shorewood has surveys they want included in the study to lend Stanton Group. Outcome: To establish a solid foundation for The City Of Shorewood's benefit program both now and into the future. All activities in this proposal are guided by The City Of Shorewood's philosophy. Phase II: Scope of the Project A review and analysis of the current benefits program including benefit design, eligibility, competitiveness in the marketplace, effectiveness of employee communication and administration, and cost sharing. The benefit plans to be included in this review are: . Health Insurance . Dental Insurance . Life Insurance . Short Term Disability . Long Term Disability . Sick Leave . Vacation . Education and Tuition Assistance . Flexible Spending Accounts (Health and Dependent Care) Phase III: Discovery This step involves gathering necessary information from The City Of Shorewood about their current benefit plans, including, but not limited to, benefit plan descriptions, eligibility information and contribution levels. Outcome: Gather appropriate materials to allow Stanton Group to begin the analysis phase. STANTON I GROUP The City of Shorewood December 1, 2005 1 Health & Welfare Consulting Proposal Phase IV: Analysis Stanton Group will analyze and clarify aspects of The City Of Shore wood's benefit programs, which are listed in Phase II. This report will contain a comparative analysis of employee benefits and policies provided to employees of The City Of Shorewood. Comments and suggestions relating to employee communication (including timing and processing of enrollment) and the potential for a possible cafeteria plan will be included in this part of the project. Excluded from this report will be any analysis of the quality of the administration, the quality of investment plan options, (in the case of the 457 Deferred Comp), or the insurance rates charged by vendors/carriers. Outcome: Provide The City Of Shorewood with an assessment of their current benefit plans in regards to benefit design, eligibility, and contribution levels. Phase V: Conclusions If upon analyzing the benefits, Stanton Group notices areas of significant concern, we will offer recommendations. STANTON I GROUP The City of Shorewood December 1, 2005 2 Health & Welfare Consulting Proposal Timeline/Cost The overall Health & Welfare project could be completed within 4 weeks from the time Stanton Group receives the Phase III Discovery materials. P IE f roposa s lmate Phase Description Hours Cost I Establish goals and objectives of the study, identify 3-5 $600 - $1,000 survey sources II Scope of Project - benefit plans to be included Included in Phase I III Discovery -gathering of The City Of Shorewood' s Included materials in Phase I IV Analysis 15 - 20 $3,000 - $4,000 V Conclusions 1-2 $400 - $800 Total: 19 - 27 $4,000 - $5,800 This quote does not include expenses. For this project, expenses would include mileage charged/or meetings (estimate 1-2 meetings). STANTON I GROUP The City of Shorewood December 1, 2005 3 Health & Welfare Consulting Proposal Project Team Biographies Yvonne M. Johnson, Partner Tel: 763-278-4462 Fax: 763-278-4463 yjohnson@Stanton-group.com Yvonne Johnson is a Partner at Stanton Group, where she counsels clients on the design, implementation and communication of health and welfare plans. During her 15 years with Stanton Group, Yvonne has used her in-depth knowledge of Health and Welfare, Section 125/129 plans, COBRA regulations and Chapter 488 to assist clients with benefits and cafeteria plan design and implementation, flexible spending accounts, COBRA administration, and employee communications. Yvonne works with a wide variety of clients and has specific expertise working in the public sector. Yvonne has worked in the employee benefits industry for over 16 years. Her background has primarily been in the areas of employee benefits and section 125/129 plans. Her previous positions have included administration, marketing and account management. She is a member of The International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans (IFEBP). Yvonne is licensed in insurance products. Lori B. Peterson, Sr. Benefit Consultant Tel: 763-278-4466 Fax: 763-278-4467 lpeterson@~tanton-group.com Lori Peterson is a Senior Benefits Consultant at Stanton Group where she consults with clients on their total benefit solutions. During her ten years with Stanton Group, Lori has worked with a wide variety of clients in both the public and private sectors. Her clients come from many industries, including banking, manufacturing, high technology, retail, food products and education. In her current role as Senior Benefit Consultant, Lori focuses on health care - especially self-funding, plan analysis and design, marketing trends and consulting, pharmacy carve-out programs, and employee communications. STANTON I GROUP The City of Shorewood December 1,2005 4 Lori has worked in the employee benefits industry for over 15 years. Her background has primarily been in the areas of self-funding and third-party administration. Her previous positions have included underwriting, marketing and account management. Lori received a bachelor's degree from the University of Wisconsin. She is a member of the Health Insurance Association of America (HIAA) and The International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans (IFEBP). Lori is licensed in insurance products. Susan Frick, Account Manager Tel: 763-278-4600 Fax: 763-278-4601 sfrick@Stanton-group.com Susan Frick is an Account Manager at Stanton Group. With her background in employee benefits and customer service she assists clients with the implementation and communication of health and welfare plans. During her years working with Stanton Group, Sue has worked with clients of all sizes from various industries to implement new benefit plans. As a former manager of the FSA and COBRA department, she has extensive knowledge of Section 125 plans and COBRA/continuation. Sue has worked in the employee benefits industry for over 15 years, including four years as a Benefit Coordinator for a local school district where she was responsible for the administration of the flexible spending account plan, COBRA, and monitoring the medical and dental plans. Sue gradated from the University of Minnesota - Duluth with a degree in Business with a concentration in Labor Relations. She is licensed for life, accident and health insurance in the state of Minnesota. FSA administration services are presented from Acclaim Benefits, a service of Stanton Group. Biographies for this staff are contained at the end of their proposal. STANTON I GROUP The City of Shorewood December 1,2005 5 CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us. cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council W Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator . January 5, 2006 City Hall Improvements The City Council spent the Fall of2005 reviewing options for improvements to City Hall. Discussion focused on whether to consider replacing City Hall with a new building, or to plan for remodeling and an addition to the current City Hall. At the December 12 work session, many on the Council were indicating interest in a remodeling/addition onto City Hall, rather than replacing the current building with a new one. It directed that this item be placed on the agenda of the January 9 Council meeting for a formal vote on what planned improvements, if any, should be pursued. The space needs plan and illustrative sketches reviewed by Council on December 12 showed additions totaling approximately 3,500 square feet to the upper level of City Hall, and an estimate of cost of approximately $1.9 million. Included in the space plan was a new City Council room, and some discussion about whether this room should be planned for or meetings currently in the Council room should be held off-site. The City Council room is used frequently, as it is the site for City Council meetings, Planning Commission meetings, and Park Commission meetings - some 60 meetings in all through the year. It is also used for elections, for public informational meetings, community meetings, and available for small groups in the city for occasional use. The action of the City Council tonight should be placed in the context of capital improvement program (CIP) planning. A decision on the scope of what should be planned for willprovide direction for financial planning as well as significant maintenance that may be needed for the current building. The amount of space and costs will become better knownlhrough more refined and focused planning, and further decisions can be made later regarding specific spaces (including the City Council room). When further architectural planning and any construction should occur is a later decision fo! the Council to make, and would be reflected in a subsequent CIP. City Council Action: The City Council S"hould act on whether further planning for improvements to City Hall should be based on the. concepts developed for remodeling and additions to the current building totaling additional space of approximately 3,500 square feet, and at a cost estimate of $1.9 - 2.0 million, as reviewed by Council on December 12, 2005. o PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER -# q t BKV Group Architects and Engineers OWNER: PROJ: LOC.: DATE_: REV#_: PROJ#_: City of Shorewood Concept Investigations Shorewood, Minnesota TITLE: Potential Cost Impacts FILE#_: 23.Nov.05 Addition Concept Construction Factor 4,594 LINE COST' BUILDING COST PERCENT NO. DESCRIPTION BUILDING SF SF TOTAL 1 100 ADMINISTRATION 12,200 $ 4.39 2.73% 2 SITE SURVEYS AND TOPOGRAPHY $ 3 GEOLOGICAL TESTING (SOIL BORINGS) $ 6,000 4 MATERIALS TESTING $ 1,500 5 PLAN REVIEW FEES $ 1,000 6 BUILDING PERMIT $ 2,000 7 BUILDERS RISK INSURANCE $ 2,000 8 MOVING EXPENSES $ 40,000 9 DOCUMENT PRINTING $ 800 10 MISCELLANEOUS $ 300 11 12 13 14 200 FEES 12,200 $ 12.98 8.08% 15 ARCHITECT' ENGINEER $ 152,900 16 ARCHITECT' ENGINEER REIMB. $ 3,500 17 ATTORNEY FEES $ 2,000 18 COMMISSIONING 19 20 21 22 300 CONSTRUCTION COSTS 12,200 $ 111.03 69.09% 23 SITEWORK & BUILDING CONSTRUCTION $ 1,354,550 4,594 $ 185.00 24 25 26 27 400 FURNISHINGS, FIXTURES & EQUIPMENT 12,200 $ 9.84 6.12% 28 FURNISHINGS $ 120,000 29 30 31 32 500 TECHNOLOGY 12,200 $ 8.20 5.10% 33 DATA' COMMUNICATIONS $ 100,000 34 AUDIO'VISUAL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS $ 35 36 37 600 CONTINGENCY 12,200 $ 14.26 8.88% 38 CONTINGENCY10%) $ 174,000 39 40 41 42 700 FINANCING $ 12,200 $ 0.00% 43 44 45 46 47 TOTAL 12,200 $ 160.70 100.00% 48 Note: Based on construction costs for ear 2006 Page 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us. cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator ID January 5, 2006 Approval of Arbitration Panel for SLMPD Funding Allocation The city attorneys for the four member cities of the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (8LMPD) have.reached a consensus recommendation of retired/former judges/justices to the three- member arbitration panelregarding the funding allocation issue for SLMPD. Each ofthe three persons has indicated his/her availability and willingness to commit to this case. The recommended panel includes: . James H.Gilbert, former Associate Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court, and currently with Gilbert Mediation Center. . Marianne D. Short, former State appellate judge, and currently with the Dorsey & Whitney law firm. . Peter J. Lindberg, former District Court judge and State appellate judge, and currently with ) Gilbert Mediation Center. Information regarding each person is attached. Action bv Other SLMPD Cities: On January 3, the Greenwood City Council approved these persons to serve on the arbitration panel. The Excelsior City Council did likewise on January 3, provided that none of the persons resided in the any ofthe four SLMPD cities. (None do.) The Tonka Bay City Council will consider the appointments at its January 10 meeting. ~tatus of Amendments to JP A: The arbitration panel is to be s'eated on February 1, provided that the amendments .are approved to the joint powers agreement (JP A) as contained in the proposal approved by the city councils in December. These amendments are being drafted and reviewed by the city attorneys, and are expected to be ready for consideration by the city councils at their second meetings in January (and at a special meeting for Greenwpod). RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the arbitration panel as recommended by the city attorneys of the SLMPD member cities. n ~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER #CJD Gilbert Mediation Center, Ltd. - Mediators and Arbitrators Page 1 of 2 MEDIATORS (1 ARBITRATORS James H. Gilbert I Wendell Anderson I Robert H. Schumacher I John C. Lindstrom Peter J. Gary J. Meyer I Franklin J. Knoll I Susan M. Elfstrom James H. Gilbert is a former Associate Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court. He is a former certified trial lawyer (1997 - 2004) and was named Distinguished Jurist of the Year for 2004 by the Academy of Certified Trial Lawyers of Minnesota. A member of Meshbesher & Spence, Ltd. from 1972 through 1998, Justic( Gilbert served as the law firm's managing partnerfrom 1984-1992, and as chief executive officerfrom 1996-1997. Appointed in 1997 by former gove Arne Carlson as an Associate Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court, Jl Gilbert was then elected to the position in 2000, where he served until 20C an Associate Justice, he reviewed more than 5,000 petitions, participated more than 800 decisions and authored numerous opinions, concurrences dissents. As both a trial attorney and Associate Justice of the Minnesota Supreme ( Justice Gilbert has many years of practical experience with diverse cases including commercial litigation, real estate, corporate and business law, insurance, employment law and discrimination. He has completed both Arbitrator I - Fundamentals of the Arbitration Process and Arbitrator /I - Advanced Case Management Issues with the American Arbitration Associ During his long legal career, Justice Gilbert has served both the law profe: and the community in a variety of ways. . 1992-1997: Chair, Ad Hoc Committee on Appointments to the Sup Court, Appellate Court, Minnesota Tax Court and Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals. In this position, Justice Gilbert he to advise former Governor Arne Carlson on more than 90 judicial appointments. . 1997-2003: Minnesota State Bar Association Certified Civil Trial Specialist. http://www.lawgilbert.com/mediators/jhgilbert.html 1/4/2006 Gilbert Mediation Center, Ltd. - Mediators and Arbitrators Page 2 of2 . Since 1998: Member of the State Board of Directors for MN DAR (Drug Abuse Resistance Education), MN DAR.E. Advisory Counc . 2004: Appointed by the Minnesota Supreme Court as chair of the Standing Committee on No-Fault Arbitration for Minnesota. The committee is charged with reducing caseload numbers in Minneso courts and to speed the process of No-Fault Automobile Claim arbitration. Justice Gilbert has been licensed to practice law in Minnesota since 1972. was admitted to practice in Wisconsin courts in 1984, The United States T Court in 1978, the U.S. District Court-Minnesota, 8th Circuit Court of Appe 1988, U.S. Supreme Court in 1984, and the U.S. District Court-Arizona in He also is a member of the Minnesota State and Hennepin County Bar Associations. Contact James H. Gilbert: Phone: 952.767.0167 E-Mail: jhgilbert@lawgilbert.com Gilbert Mediation Home' Alternative Dispute Resolution' Mediators & Arbitrators' Resources' Visit Us . Contact Us @2005 Gilbert Mediation Center Ltd. http://www.1awgilbert.com/mediators/jhgilbert.html 1/412006 Dorsey & Whitney LLP: Attorneys: Marianne D. Short Page 1 of3 MEIUA, 1l"~I!IUlrS;6Ui,.s;rs; SITE SEAR DiCRBSY Advanced: SERVICES i BIOGRAPHIES PUBLICATIONS IN THE NEWS CAREERS l.OCATlONS ABOUT 001 ATTOlitl\liEVS l'i1LIVI.LE();AI.:l\,(PiRO'FEScSI.QNAI.S ATTORNEY 8m Marianne D. Short Partner short. marianne@dorsey.com <: BACK El i ~j\!l#J1. r. l.la' !'RINT FU Minneapolis Office (612) 340-2833 : p (612) 340-2807: f Marianne D. Short has nearly 30 years of courtroom experience as a trial lawyer and an appellate judge. She has been no Superlawyer by Minnesota Law & Politics in multiple categories, including Business Litigation, Appellate, Antitrust Litigatio Employment Litigation. She is certified by the Minnesota State Bar Association as a Civil Trial Specialist. She received th Corporate Woman of Achievement 2004 Award from the National Association of Women Business Owners. She has serv trial and appellate counsel for a number of major companies in their most important litigation, including antitrust, securities healthcare, products liability, and class action lawsuits. As a state appellate judge, from 1988-2000, she authored over 90 opinions in virtually every area of civil and criminal law. Representative Litigation Ms. Short was lead co-counsel for Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota in a federal class action lawsuit brought by a gl chiropractors alleging antitrust, ERISA, RICO and state insurance violations. She designed a defense strategy that resulll federal court dismissing several counts of the complaint, ruling for her client as a matter of law on significant antitrust clain sustaining Daubert challenges to exclude plaintiffs' expert testimony. The case eventually was resolved on favorable terr Ms. Short represented Governor Jesse Ventura in the constitutional litigation to determine Minnesota's congressional and legislative boundaries following the United States Census. The decennial redistricting litigation was argued and tried to a specially appointed five judge panel. Ms. Short used demographics, land use and population changes, as well as constitu principles and case law, to argue for the novel concept of "politically competitive" districts. Ms. Short was lead counsel to Ceridian Corporation in a breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, noncompetl licensing lawsuit. She obtained a permanent injunction against a former executive that prohibited his use of customer and information, as well as marketing strategies. Ms. Short currently represents Medica HealthPlans and its Board of Directors in regulatory litigation involving issues of sel governance brought by the Minnesota Attorney General. She advises the Board and management on issues involving eXI compensation, retirement plans, protections for intellectual property and board procedures. Ms. Short is lead trial and appellate counsel for owest Corporation in several tax cases. She is arguing that the purchase telecommunications equipment is exempt from sales tax as capital equipment under applicable statutes. Ms. Short was appellate co-counsel to 3M in Minnesota breast implant insurance coverage case. As co-counsel, she was http://dorsey.com/attorneys/bio.aspx?FlashNavID=attorneys_search&bioid=2818003&expa...1/412006 Dorsey & Whitney LLP: Attorneys: Marianne D. Short Page 2 of3 successful in obtaining millions of dollars of insurance coverage for 3M's defense costs. Legal Writings >> "The Taming of the Shrew: May the Act of the State Doctrine and Foreign Sovereign Immunity Eat and Drink As Friends?," M. Short & C. Brower, Hamline Law Review, Vol. 20, Issue 3, 723-738, International Symposium, Spring 19! >> "History and Scope of the Press' Right of Access to Foreign Battlefields," M. Short & J. Pope, 41 Naval Law Review, 1- 1993. >> "Rules of Construction," M. Short & H. Caligiuri, Chapter in Minnesota Insurance Law Deskbook, John R. Crawford Ed 1997 and 2000. >> "Corporate Litigation: One View," Bench & Bar of Minnesota, published by the American Law Institute and the America Bar Association, Vol. L1V, No. IV, April 1997 at 28-30. >> "Tips for Successful Appellate Practice," The Practical Litigator, published by the American Law Institute and the American Bar Association, Vol. 7, No.1, January 1996 at 25-33. Legal Teaching >> "Appellate Advocacy" at the University of Minnesota Law School, 2000-present. >> "Judicial Practicum" at Hamline University School of Law, 1994-1999. >> "Trial Ethics," and "Appellate Advocacy" at the National College of District Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, 1999. >> "The Human Rights Movement in the United States," "Topics in Criminal Law," and "Law of War" with the International Training Department of the Naval Justice School in Newport, Rhode Island and in Bogota, Columbia, 1994. >> "Evidence" and "Ethical Appeals" in Bemidji Criminal Trial Advocacy Course, sponsored by Minnesota County Attorney Association and Minnesota Public Defenders' Office, 1990-1999. >> Speeches at American Bar Association Annual Meetings (1995-1999), and continuing legal education seminars (1980- present) on litigation topics, including appellate practice, ethics, evidence, first amendment/media cases, minority shareholder's rights, and employment issues. Admissions >> Minnesota >> Massachusetts >> United States Supreme Court >> United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit >> United States District Courts for Minnesota, Massachusetts, and North Dakota Honors >> Corporate Woman of Acheivement Award 2004, given by the National Association of Women Business Owners >> Named a Superlawyer, Minnesota Law & Politics (in the Business Litigation, Appellate, Antitrust Litigation and Employment Litigation categories) Education >> Boston College Law School, J.D., 1976 >> Newton College of the Sacred Heart, B.A., 1973 Professional Activities Ms. Short is a leader in her community, her profession, and her law firm. She is well known by attorneys and judges throu the Upper Midwest and Massachusetts. Community Leadership >> Ms. Short serves on the Board of Directors of numerous community organizations, including Ordway Center for Performing Arts, Schubert Club, Saint Thomas Academy, CommonBond Communities, and Catholic Charities of St. Pa and Minneapolis. She also serves on the Board of Governors of the Minneapolis Club, the Board of Overseers of Bostl College Law School and the Board of Trustees of Boston College where she is on the Executive Committee and chairs the Academic Affairs Committee. Professional Leadership >> Ms. Short's professional leadership includes Board of Visitors of the University of Minnesota Law School, Board of Directors of the Academy of Certified Trial Lawyers in Minnesota and of The Fund for the Legal Aid Society, and a Fellc http://dorsey.com!attorneys/bio.aspx?FlashNavID=attorneyssearch&bioid=2818003&expa.. . 1/4/2006 Dorsey & Whitney LLP: Attorneys: Marianne D. Short Page 3 of3 of the American Bar Foundation. She serves on the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Rules of Appellate Procedure and the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedure. >> During her time on the bench, Ms. Short chaired several committees comprised of judges and attorneys. She chaired t Minnesota Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Judicial Growth and Experience (1994-95), which lead to the adopti, of jUdicial rotations and professional development programs. Ms. Short co-chaired the Pilot Program to Improve Individual Judicial Performance (1992-93), which introduced a formal evaluation process to the judiciary. She co-chain the Minnesota Judiciary Strategic Planning Committee (1991-92), which implemented a business review and strategic planning process for the state judiciary. From 1992 through 1999, Ms. Short founded and chaired the Partnership Amc Minnesota Educators and the Judiciary, a state-wide program which pair judges with educators to teach conflict resolut skills to elementary and high school students. Ms. Short was a member of the Minnesota Supreme Court Advisory Committee to Review Lawyer Discipline (1993-94), which lead to changes in the rules of professional responsibility for lawyers. In 2002, at the request of the judges of the Eighth Judicial Circuit, Ms. Short co-chaired the Program CommittE for the 2003 Eighth Circuit Judicial Conference. >> She is a member of the American Bar Association, Minnesota State Bar Association, Hennepin County Bar Associatior Minnesota Women Lawyers, and National Association of Women Judges. Law Firm Leadership >> Ms. Short has been elected to leadership positions throughout her career at Dorsey & Whitney. She currently serves 0 the Policy Committee, the governing body of the Firm. She was also on this committee during her early career with the firm. The Policy Committee oversees operations of the Firm's over 650 attorneys and 20 offices in the United States, Canada, Asia and Europe. The Policy Committee's responsibilities include appointing the Managing Partner, confirmin Practice Group Heads, partner compensation decisions, opening and closing regional offices, partnership admission ar termination, and overseeing all policy decisions. >> Ms. Short served as one of five members on the Firm's Growth Committee, which evaluated opportunities for growth through mergers and acquisitions. Since 2000, Ms. Short has been one of three members on the Investment CommittE responsible for monitoring performance of the Firm's 401 (k) and HR 10 plans. From 2001-2003, she served on the Capital Contribution Committee that developed the Firm's capital contribution plan. Ms. Short served as one of five members of the Partner Compensation Committee from 2002-2003, which resulted in changes to the Firm's compensation system. From 2000-2002, Ms. Short was one of eleven members of the Professional Personnel Committee conducting bi-annual evaluations of all associates and non-partner lawyers in the Firm. Ms. Short was one nine members of the Firm's Recruiting Committee from 1978-88, and chaired the committee for two years. Personal Information Ms. Short is a Minnesota native. She joined Dorsey & Whitney after serving as a Special Assistant Attorney General for th of Minnesota following graduation from law school. She is married to Raymond L. Skowyra, Jr. (Worcester Polytechnic Ins B.S. cum laude 1971; Harvard University, M.B.A. 1976), a business strategy consultant specializing in high technology me They have two children. Louis is in the class of 2005 at Boston College majoring in English and a member of Marine Optio ROTC. Nicholas is in the class of 2006 at St. Thomas Military Academy in Mendota Heights and is co-captain of the AlpinE Team. To keep up with her boys, Ms. Short is an avid distance runner and skier. SITE ~AI' TERMS <:IF usE @ 2006 Dorsey & Whitr DORSEY & WHITNEY is a registered service mark and DORSEY and the ellipses are service marks of Dorsey & Whitney LLP. In London, Dorsey & Whitney is a multinational partnership affiliated with Dorsey & Whitney LLP. http://dorsey.com!attorneys/bio.aspx?FlashNavID=attorneys _ search&bioid=2818003&expa... 1/4/2006 Gilbert Mediation Center, Ltd. - Mediators and Arbitrators Page 1 of2 ;;<= "'-<< MEDIATORS &; ARBITRATORS James H. Gilbert I Wendell Anderson I Robert H. Schumacher I John C. Lindstrom I Peter J. Gary J. Meyer I Franklin J. Knoll I Susan M. Elfstrom Mediator / Arbitrator Judge Lindberg's varied and accomplished career path lends itself to the alternative dispute process. As Judge of the Fourth Judicial District (1974- he expanded and implemented the alternative dispute resolution process. As current chair of the USA Hockey, Inc.'s Legal Council he is involved in oversight of contract relations as well as reviewing the organization's litiga Also, under Judge Lindberg's leadership, the Legal Council adopted an arbitration process for resolution of disputes between hockey individuals a their organizations. As Legal Council Chair his involvement is a direct ove of that arbitration process. Judge Lindberg is also the Chair of the USA Hockey, Inc.'s Suspensions ~ Appeals Committee, having performed the same role in the past for the Minnesota Amateur Hockey Association and its regional offices. Judge Lir is currently one of 200 arbitrators worldwide for the Court of Arbitration for which is the world organization designed to resolve disputes between athl, and their sports federations and also to determine Olympic or Internationa competition eligibility. . Minnesota Court of Appeals, Retired Judge Appointment (2001 - ~ . Fourth Judicial District Court Judge, State of Minnesota (1974 - 2( Chief Judge (1988 - 1992) . Court of Arbitration for Sport (1988 - present) . Partner, Messerli & Kramer law firm (1969 -1974) . Lawyer, Joseph Robbie law Office (1964 -1969) http://www.lawgilbert.com/mediators/lindberg.html 1/4/2006 Gilbert Mediation Center, Ltd. - Mediators and Arbitrators Page 2 of2 . USA Hockey, Inc. Vice President, Director; (1983 to present) Chair of Legal Council . Minnesota Amateur Hockey Association Director, Officer (1974-1 President (1983 -1985) District VI Hockey Association President I - 1979) . Minneapolis Athletic Club Member (1973 -1983) Board of Directors (1986 - 1989) Contact Peter J. Lindberg: Phone: 952.767.0167 E-Mail: pjlindberg@lawgilbert.com Gilbert Mediation Home' Alternative Dispute Resolution' Mediators & Arbitrators' Resources' Visit Us' Contact Us @2005 Gilbert Mediation Center Ltd, http://www.lawgilbert.com/mediators/lindberg.html 1/412006 . CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: January 5, 2006 RE: Draft Drainage Report Dated January 4, 2006 On September 4th, 2005 a strong thunderstorm developed over the City of Shorewood. In the course of approximately three hours, close to six inches 'of rain fell within the City. During this time, large hail also was observed, stripping leaves from trees and adding to the general debris that was present within the storm sewer system. The City experienced a second storm on October 4th, 2005. This storm produced approximately 4:5 inches of rain within a four-hour period. The City requested WSB & Associates, Inc. review the many drainage issues that were received. Mr. Steve Gurney, Hydrologist for WSB and Associates, has reviewed all of the concerns received, and has compiled a draft report of his findings. This report was also deemed necessary to maintain a written record of the new and recurring drainage concerns. It is important to keep in mind that this report is as mentioned; "Draft." As this document is being published, there are still a few areas that are yet under investigation or modeling. However, the majority of the areas have been reviewed and have had a preliminary recommendation assigned. Despite a few areas that need to be finalized, staff thought it prudent to present the report to the City Council. Primarily to provide the City Council with an update as to the number and status of the drainage issues. Secondly, to provide the City Council an opportunity to review the policy statements made regarding prioritization. The City of Shorewood has utilized a prioritization policy for evaluation of the stormwater issues in the past, very similar to what is presented here. However, Mr. Gurney is recommending that the areas be expanded slightly to include a few more categories. These policy statements for evaluating stormwater issues ,are provided below. n tJPRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .#=- IDA Mayor and City Council Review of Draft Drainage Report January 5,2006 Page 2 of2 1) PUBLIC SAFETY AND HEALTH Primary attention will be paid to those projects that impact the public health or safety. These projects would include ice problems on the road, erosion that is causing a hazardous structural problem (i.e. undermining a road), or storm water that is causing a significant health problem (such as flooding the sanitary system). 2) SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL IMPACT TO THE CITY This category will include those projects that, while not endangering the public health, will still have a negative impact on the residents as a whole. Projects in this category include minor infrastructure replacement that cannot be funded cost effectively by other means. Other potential projects include erosion causing property damage and minor structure replacement. 3) PUBLIC NUISANCE This category includes those projects that cannot be considered a substantial hazard, are not likely to cause a financial loss to the City, but are a public nuisance. These projects include standing water in the roadway, unwanted flooding in public parks, and minor erosion projects. 4) PRIVATE NUISANCE WITH LIMITED CITY RESPONSIBILITY This category includes projects that are a nuisance to a single residence or small group of residences that the City Council deems that the City has some responsibility to help correct. These projects include those instances where a large drainage area is causing a problem to a small area or where a substantial portion of the runoff is generated within the City's Right-of- Way. In order for the City to participate, the homeowner(s) must be willing to provide a right-of- entry to City crews and provide Drainage and Utility Easement over improvements without cost. 5) PRIVATE NUISANCE WITH NO CITY RESPONSIBIL TY This category includes projects that are a nuisance to a single residence or small group of residences that the City Council deems that the City has no responsibility to help correct. These projects include those instances where a limited drainage area, consisting of private property, is causing a problem to a small area. The nuisance problem will involve little or no runoff that is generated from City Right-of-Way. Mayor and City Council Review of Draft Drainage Report January 5, 2006 Page 3 of3 6) NO FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED This category includes projects that are under way, or have been addressed through various means, such as individual homeowners correcting the problem himself or herself or City crews fixing the problem. As the City Council considers these items, it is important to consider what constitutes needed involvement by the City for drainage issues. More often than not, runoff that is pooled in a front of or within a rear yard area, is caused by a property owner's own grading, landscaping, or construction. In these instances, the City has traditionally remained with the policy that there is not a public interest in those instances, and will not resolve these types of issues. However, there are instances that involve tributary areas that are public right of ways. Since every parcel is adjacent a roadway, often times the initial concern is poised that the public rights of ways are the cause for all of the issues. This is typically the case where there is not barrier or storm sewer system between the roadway and front or rear yards. Therefore, the amount of tributary area from the public right of way has to be reviewed to determine if the City has a responsibility for a specific issue. Mr. Gurney has compiled the report and some very preliminary cost opinions. Please note that these figures are concept in nature that assists the City Council in order of magnitude. Survey, design, or feasibility studies have not been completed for this report. It was intended to compile concept numbers for discussion and order of magnitude. Mr. Gurney will be in attendance during Monday nights meeting to address any questions. Action Needed Staff is asking that the City Council review the policy statements provided here, and in the report. If found acceptable, staff is requesting that the City Council accept the draft report. If approved, the final report would be presented tentatively for adoption on January 23,2006. ANALYSIS OF DRAINAGE PROBLEM AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA Draft January 4, 2006 Prepared By: WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 (763) 541-4800 (763) 541-1700 (Fax) A copy of this report is available in its entirety at Shorewood City Hall