The URL can be used to link to this page

111306 CC Reg AgP CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 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, October 23,2006 (Att. - Minutes) B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, October 23,2006 (Att.- Minutes) C. Canvassing Board Meeting Minutes, November 8, 2006 (Att. - Minutes) D. City Council Special Meeting Minutes, November 8, 2006 (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. Amending Chapters 603 and 703 of the Shorewood City Code (Att. - Administrator's memorandum, Draft Ordinance) D. 2006 Audit Engagement Letter (Att. - Finance Director's memorandum) E. Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting (Att. - Finance Director's memorandum) F. Assessment Roll for SE Area Water Connection Charges (Att. - City Engineer's and Finance Director's memorandum, Resolution) 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken.) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - November 13,2006 PAGE 2 OF 2 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Introduction of Fire Chief Scott Gerber B. Report by Tom Skramstad on Lake Minnetonka Conservation District matters (Att.- Report) 6. PUBLIC HEARING A. Wedgewood Road, Mallard Lane, Teal Circle Watermain Improvements Final Assessment Hearing (Att. - Engineer's memorandum, Resolution) 7. PARKS A. Report on the Park Commission meeting held October 24,2006 (Att. - Draft Minutes) 8. PLANNING - Report by Representative A. Conditional Use Permit for Storage Shed on City Property (Att.-Planning Director's memorandum; Resolution) Applicant: South shore Center Location: 5745 Country Club Road (Badger Park) 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Gideon Glen Conservation Easement (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum) 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff B. Mayor & City Council 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 Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday 13 November 2006 A Work Session will be held at 5:30 p.m. Food will be provided. Agenda Item #3A: Agenda Item #3B: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval. Staffing - no action required. Agenda Item #3C: Amendments to Chapters 603 and 703 of the City Code are needed in order to allow the use of weapons and allow trapping and hunting for wildlife management and removal activities. These amendments are pursuant to the Council's decision for deer removal from the Minnetonka Country Club property. Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance, which requires a simple majority vote. Agenda Item #3D: This motion approves an agreement with City Auditors Abdo, Eick and Meyers for annual auditing services for the year ending December 31, 2006. A simple majority vote by the Council approves this motion. Agenda Item #3E: Good news! The City of Shorewood has been awarded the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. This is the 13th consecutive year that the City has received the award by the Government Finance Officers Association. Agenda Item #3F: As a courtesy to the residents along the SE project corridor, and to encourage users to connect to City water, the City offered a one-time opportunity for residents to finance their connection charges through an assessment to their property. Residents who wished to do so, submitted written requests and this resolution certifies these charges and adopts the assessment roll prior to transmittal to Hennepin County. Agenda Item #5A: The Excelsior Fire District's new chief, Scott Gerber, will be present to introduce himself to the City Council. Agenda Item #5B: Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Representative Tom Skramstad will provide a report on LMCD activities. ~" f . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .... Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of November 13,2006 Page 2 of2 Agenda Item #6A: The hearing this evening is a continuation of the special assessment process (the 429 process) that was initiated earlier this year to finance the installation of watermain as part of the Wedgewood Road, Mallard Lane, Teal Circle Road Rehabilitation Project. The proposed assessment amount for each property is the same as previously presented. As a courtesy to the residents along the project corridor, and to encourage users to connect to City water, the City offered a one-time opportunity for residents to finance their connection charges by combining them with the assessment to their property. Residents who wished to do so, submitted written requests. The resolution certifies these charges and adopts the assessment roll prior to transmittal to Hennepin County. Agenda Item #7A: Park Commissioner Julie Westerlund will report on the October 24,2006, Park Commission meeting. Agenda Item #8A: The Friends of the South Shore Senior Community Center have requested permission to construct a small storage building on park property, just south of the parking lot in front of the Center. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the matter and recommended in favor of a conditional use permit, subject to staff recommendations, the recommendations of the Park Commission and conditions that the building have no windows and must be located at least five feet from the parking lot curb. The Park Commission voted 6-1 to approve the conditional use permit. A resolution is included in your packet setting forth proposed conditions of approval. Agenda Item #9A: As the Gideon Glen conservation open space project nears completion, one of the items remaining is to establish a conservation easement guaranteeing that the property will remain as conservation open space in perpetuity. A sample easement from the Conservation Open Space Plan for the City of Shorewood (March 2003) is forwarded for your review. It is recommended that the City Attorney be direct to modify the easement accordingly, naming the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as the beneficiary of the easement. CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 23,2006 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:30 P.M MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 6:33 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Love; Councilmembers Callies, Dawson Administrator Absent: None B. Review Agenda Without objection from Council, Mayor for the meeting. 2. SEVERANCE POLICY Administrator Dawson had supported the Employee who had in excess October 9, 2006. 2006, the majority of the Council / benefit policy in the revised directed him to meet with the three employees sick leave; that meeting occurred the week of were loyal employees; they had accrued sick leave due come to work when they were ill. Their high balances were not to have high balances available for long-term illness or injury, or Dawson at the end balances. The policy) would and the City had had been agreeable to reducing their balances to 800 hours of their excess hours, rather than being able to maintain their high the 50% conversion. He then explained a 50% conversion (proposed $36,000, and a 33% conversion (current policy) would cost $24,000; to make the one-time payments to the three employees. Dawson noted a policy for addressing the three employees whose balances were in excess of 800 hours was a separate matter from the revised Employee Handbook, although Council had requested a policy for addressing the matter be developed. In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, Administrator Dawson explained under the current policy an employee would be paid one-third of the amount over 400 hours (e.g., 1600 - 400 = 1200) as severance at time of termination. 1#2A I CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 2 of3 In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, Administrator Dawson clarified the buy-down of hours to 800 hours for these employees was a one-time effort. Council member Turgeon stated if the employees had actually taken their sick leave, the hours would have been paid at 100% of their then current rate of pay. She questioned if it was possible to compensate the employees for the excess hours at a 100% rate of their sliding-average pay rate over their tenure. Administrator Dawson explained the current severance policy was calculated based on the current rate of pay. Discussion ensued with conversion rate. clarified that at time of He noted there was a cap on In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, termination an employee's vacation was paid out at their current the amount of vacation that could be accrued. Mayor Love request this issue be broken into two compon excess of the proposed cap (which was the conversion rate that would be used for that a 50% rate (based on the proposed sick leave/ current policy rate). sick leave hours in and 2) the compensated at rate (the Councilmember Callies stated Council for consideration of how they would prefer to be compensated for their compensation. She questioned if there was 50% rather than the current rate of 33%. policy back to the three employees addressed, and they stated they would would support their request for at the proposed rate of rate versus the proposed policy Council member used much of their using the to them. hard working, loyal employees. They had not their job responsibilities. She stated the Council's and the City's commitment back to consider was a 100% conversion rate as long as the leave cap imposed. had not been a vote at the previous Council meeting regarding the there had been agreement on the proposed cap. He noted to change their minds. He noted Council had requested employees. Councilmember because Council had approved a two-phased plan to bring employees to their market-rate of pay (with the first phase effective July 1, 2006), the employees had from his perspective received a bonus. Therefore, he would prefer a compensation rate of 33%. Councilmember Lizee stated she did not classifY increasing an employee's rate of pay to the market rate as a bonus. Councilmember Callies echoed Lizee's comments. Callies could see the logic in the 33% compensation rate, although the buy-down was not totally analogous to the severance benefit. Mayor Love stated his major concern had been to ensure the three employees were treated equitably, and he could support either the 33% rate or the 50% rate. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 3 of3 Councilmember Turgeon again stated if the employees had taken their sick time they would have been paid at 100% of their then current rate of pay. Therefore, compensating them at 100% of their then current rate of pay would be considered equitable. She then stated a decision to buy down the excess hours should not occur until the proposed policy had been adopted. She stated in hindsight maybe the buy-down proposal and the severance-cap proposal should have been considered in reverse order. Mayor Love clarified the buy-down was contingent on the proposed policy being adopted. He also stated the intent of placing a cap on accrued sick leave was to limit the City's liability. Administrator Dawson stated he had mentioned to the three employees on the current rate, would be equitable. The three employees he presented to Council. .believed a 33% rate, based 50% rate, which is what Mayor Love asked that this item be considered for formal follow. meeting that was to 3. OTHER None. Christine Freeman, Session Meeting of October 4. ADJOURN Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, 23,2006, at 6:50 P.M. Motion passed Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2006 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Love; Councilmembers Callies, Lizee, Dawson; Attorney Keane; Planning Director and Acting Engineer Gurney Wellens; Administrator Public Works Brown; Absent: None B. Review Agenda Administrator Dawson requested an Item 1, Buy-down of Agenda for the evening under GeneralINew Sick Leave Hours, be added to the October time period October." passed 5/0. Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, Approving 2. APPROVAL OF A. October 9, 2006 Lizee moved, Callies 9, 2006, as Executive Session Minutes of October the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of 8.A, Page 5, Paragraph 8, Sentence 1, change "during the October." to "during the time period 16 May through 14 C. Session Minutes, October 9, 2006 Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of October 9, 2006, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. D. City Council Executive Session Minutes, October 16,2006 Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the City Council Executive Session Minutes of October 16,2006, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA 1#2B I SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 2 of 15 Mayor Love reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the Motions contained on Consent Agenda & Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Staffing - No action required C. City Clerk's License Approvals - License to Sell moved to Item 9.D under GeneralINew Business) (This item was and as Part Project, City Cost to be Assessed, for Hearing on Drive, 02-02." D. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-082, "A Ordering Preparation of Proposed Proposed Assessment - Watermain Mallard Lane and Teal Circle Road 4. MATTERS E. Extension of the Recycling F. Adopting Improvements in the Resolution Accepting Public Unit Development." G. Authorize Expenditure of Filtration Plant for the SE Area Well and Motion passed 5/0. 5. Bond Sale 2006 General bond rating at rating. Pfannenstiel, of Northland Securities, would present the results of the Bond sale. He noted Moody's Investors Service kept the City's the City's size was what prohibited the City from having an Aa2 Mr. Pfannenstiel Securities had received four bids for the City's $1.45 million Water Revenue Bond sale that day. The four bids were very competitive, and the best bid was received from Piper Jaffray. The true interest cost (TIC) on the bid was 4.05%. He noted the City's good credit rating made the bonds quite attractive to investors. He explained the TIC of 4.05% was 25 basis points below the budgeted TIC of 4.31 %. He then stated that Northland Securities recommended the City award the bond sale to Piper Jaffray. Administrator Dawson noted that the difference between the actual TIC of 4.05% and the budgeted TIC of 4.31 % would result in an approximate $40,000 savings in interest over the life of the bonds. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 3 of 15 Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-084, "A Resolution Awarding the Sale of $1,450,00 General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A, to Piper Jaffray; Fixing Their Form and Specifications; Directing Their Execution and Delivery; and Providing for Their Payment." Motion passed 5/0. B. Gideon Glen Update Administrator Dawson stated Eric Evenson, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) Administrator, and Peter McDonagh, a consultant project manager to the from The Kestrel Group, were in attendance this evening to present an update of the Gideon Mr. McDonagh then reviewed the plant site wetland plugs and which also depicted where done at a what activities had in the Gideon Glen initiated in 2000. At assistance of the started as a land some of the Mr. Evenson thanked the Staff and Council, on behalf of the City, wetland restoration / water quality demonstration project. He that time the City made one of the first land conservation MCWD when it acquired the 5.8-acre Gideon Glen preservation effort, it evolved into a much larger City's flooding issues, surface water quality issues, Mr. McDonagh reviewed a site plan of a black-ash bottom of a hill at the point of water seepage), which was contained one of the rarest plant in Hennepin community was salvaged. The excess eventually that supported that plant community. trees grow at the restoration target areas. The area He explained the rare plant replaced with vegetation identified the locations of the and where trees would be added. It pounds per acre. He also reviewed explained herbicides were used on non- the native plantings. The herbicide used had a one of the safest herbicides to use for a number of above 560. Mr. number of pine trees removed during the basin excavation tree removal in the wetland areas, but the majority of the removal Mr. McDonagh determine what of the new plugs and seeding would be assessed in the spring to planting and seeding must be done as a result of high water. In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Mr. McDonagh reviewed the species that were planted and seeded. He noted no herbaceous plants had been removed. In response to another question, Mr. McDonagh stated the habitat would attract a larger range of species. In response to a question from Mayor Love, Mr. McDonagh explained if the plugs survive until spring of 2007 they would reach an "established" level within 1 - 1 1Iz years, and the seeded areas would require 2 _ 3 years to become established. In response to another question, Mr. McDonagh stated the City would receive an update on the state of the plantings in the spring. Mr. Evenson commented the City would also receive reports over the next few years. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 4 of 15 Mr. McDonagh stated the installation contractor was also responsible for the maintenance of the area. He would conduct spot herbiciding for the non-native species, and he would conduct a controlled burn in either 2008 or 2009 to destroy aggressive species in the area. In response to a question from Councilmember Lizee, Mr. McDonagh explained that two-thirds of the 5.8 acre parcel had been restored and the other one-third of the parcel contained "wetland" type trees. He explained the two-thirds area had been highly-disturbed old growth, and the one-third area was old- growth forest. He noted the mature trees (such as maple, basswood) remaine~in the old-growth forest on the western one-third of Gideon Glen. Councilmember Lizee commented.mere;~ad been misconception on the part of the residents that the maple 1 basswood forest had been d~s(poyed. In response to a question from Mayor Love, Mr. Evenson stated t~yre w6ulp~9~ an annual inspection of the storm water pond, and cleaning of the pond would be Ollan as-needed. basis. He noted it was common for more maintenance to be required in the first and it wOllil<fi x~duce in subsequent years. Mr. McDonagh commented that some basins after three - f64riyears, and others would require cleaning after seven years. Mr. Evenson stated a assumption was there and for planning the herbaceous explained. how the water In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, flowed from the site and where it flowed to. Mr. McDonagh noted that wetland plants would not be a great deal of visible green also stay green for a longer period oftime in plants, therefore there of May. The plants would with a lot of small trees. The with trees (and they were less costly), was 90% survival rate. The planting density for the City on this project. Work on Saturdays on Wedgewood Drive, Project 02-02 Director the recent rainy weather, the Wedgewood Drive, Teal Circle, and Mallard Lane had moved forward with a substantial amount of progress achieved each day. He project goals was to have the edge and the base course of asphalt installed this fall; projected dates were November 1 (for edging) and November 6 (for asphalt). Based on the contractor had requested to work the upcoming two Saturdays between the hours of A.M. and 5:00 P.M., and the City's ordinance allowed for that. Staff agreed that the time was needed to complete the scheduled tasks. In response to a comment from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Brown stated he was aware the contractor had previously been working one-half day on Fridays. He explained the contractor most frequently worked ten - twelve hour days as daylight permitted. The City had the authority to specifY the hours work would be allowed, but it did not have the authority to specifY how the contractor should conduct its operations. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 5 of 15 In response to a question from Mayor Love, Director Brown stated there would be instances when the Saturday work would require brief complete road closures. He noted the vast majority of work requiring complete road closures had already been completed. He stated the contractor was aware the excavation would have to cease in the event of an emergency. Councilmember Turgeon stated she was pleased with the work the contractor had performed to date. Director Brown stated there was an approximate $20,000 additional cost for rock to stabilize the roadway as a result of the rainy weather. Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, Authorizing the Contractor to Saturdays on Wedgewood Drive, Mallard Lane, and Teal Circle Construction Work on passed 5/0. 6. PUBLIC HEARING None. Brown reviewed the events was involved in City's liquor stores Council member with the Winter 7. PARKS - Report by Representative A. Report on Park Commission Meeting 10,2006 Director Brown stated there was not a meeting. He then reported on matters meeting). He noted there was a special Park 2006, Park Commission in the minutes of that for October 24,2006. Event, and who from Shorewood for the was January 20,2007. He stated the to be the same time as the community event. to reschedule its Frosty Days to coincide Lizee stated a to-be-elected Tonka Bay of the event. Lizee commented the that same weekend. 8. considered and actions taken at the October 17,2006, Planning the minutes ofthat meeting). Commission A. Approval for Residential P.U.D. Mark Kawell 20025 Manor Road Director Nielsen explained the history of the case, noting Mark Kawell, who represented Richard Bowman, proposed subdividing the property located at 20025 Manor Road into four single-family residential lots. The result of that subdivision would be three new building sites (Lots 2 - 4, which would be located in Deephaven), plus Mr. Bowman's existing homesite (Lot 1). He noted the property was approximately 10.5 acres and it straddled the ShorewoodlDeephaven boundary. Nielsen then explained the property had been the subject of two previous subdivisions. The first was approved in 1990 and it resulted in the creation of two lots (20005 Manor Road in Deephaven, and 20015 SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 6 of 15 Manor Road in Shorewood). Both of those lots had since been built upon. That subdivision also created Bowman Court - a public right-of-way upon which a city street was to be constructed at such time as additional lots were platted. In 2003 the two cities agreed to an amendment to the agreement that allowed the lot at 20001 Manor Road (in Shorewood) to be created, without construction of the street. He noted that lot was accessed directly from Manor Road, and a house had since been constructed on the lot. Nielsen went on to explain Mr. Kawell's proposal depicted Lot 1 (the Bowman residence) and Lot 2 (one of the new lots) would be served by a common driveway directly from The Bowman Court right-of-way would be vacated in favor of a private road serving the at 20005 Manor Road and two new lots (Lots 3 and 4). He stated Mr. Kawell preferred build the city street because of the location of one of the wetlands. He also stated the be primarily served with sanitary sewer and water from the City. was Because the City for Nielsen stated the project required approval from both the Shorewood had a public unit development (P.U.D.) concept approval prior to approaching Deephaven. Nielsen explained Staff had originally recommended the because the utilities were not under a public street. Mr. that Deephaven preferred to have the utilities were to be publicly owned, then Nielsen stated the Planning Commission Staff and Commission recommendations. of the P.U.D. subject to the Director Nielsen noted the Council may have. Nielsen explained Deephaven did have the case). He commented that a P.U.D. was question, Nielsen explained the City would be one in the City), and one of the conditions stipulated satisfied. He stated the development would not adversely Callies, Director Nielsen explained one of the reasons a was a private road involved. The plan was to vacate the Bowman private road, because the road would serve three houses. If it were amount of site alteration would be required. In response to a from Councilmember Wellens, Mr. Kawell stated the three new houses would be sprinklered. He also stated a fire hydrant would be installed on the property line between Lot 1 and Lot 2, and it would be located less than the 150 feet (which was the requirement) from the house on Lot I, Lot 2, and Lot 4. In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, the existing house did not have to retrofitted to have a sprinkler system. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 7 of 15 Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, Approving the Concept Plan P.U.D. for Mark Kawell, who represented Richard Bowman who was the Owner of the Property Located at 20025 Manor Road, subject to Staff and Planning Commission Recommendations. Motion passed 5/0. B. Conditional Use Permit - Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet Applicant: Lance Black Location: 20270 Excelsior Boulevard Director Nielsen explained Lance Black had applied for a conditional use permit to construct a gazebo on his property, located at 20270 Excelsior Boulevard. The floor area of th~.i~azeb?, when combined with his existing attached garage, brought the total area of accessory spacei~m;the property over 1200 square feet. The property was zoned R-l A, Single-Family Residential anp>GPntflined approximately 88,009 square feet of area. Nielsen reviewed the site plan. The existing house area on the main floor alone. The existing garage, contained 1156 square feet of floor area. The approximately 160 feet north of the house. It accessory space on the site to 1350 square feet. 210q;square feet of floor located at the southWe~tGnd of the house, be located ;i~Blft~\; rear yard, which brought\tpe total area of Nielsen then reviewed how the 1201.03 Subd.2.d.(4) of the City's Zoning complied four criteria specified in Section a. The total area of accessory floor area above grade of the only). not exceed the total square feet - main floor b. exceed ten percent of the minimum lot square feet = 4000 square feet). house complied with the setback \;r~.-IA district. The new gazebo would be fe ~lfmm yjther side of the property and approximately 100 of FdqmVake (which was designated wetland). Given the size thea,mount of existing vegetation on the site, drainage and considered to be issues in this request. d. design of the new gazebo were consistent with the character of and garage. Nielsen stated because applicants' request was considered to be consistent with the requirements of the City's Zoning Code, the Planning Commission recommended that the conditional use permit be granted as requested. Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-085, "A Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit for Additional Accessory Space to Lance Black, 20270 Excelsior Boulevard." Motion passed 5/0. 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 8 of 15 A. Approval of Certification of Delinquent Utility Charges Administrator Dawson stated State Statute allowed for cities to certifY unpaid utility charges to property taxes. The City Code provided for annual certification of delinquent utility charges to the property tax rolls. He explained each property owner was given an opportunity to object to that proposed certification of delinquent accounts; and as part of the appeal process, they could request a hearing in front of the Council. Dawson stated the City had received one written request for a hearing. The request was from Ron Johnson, 5355 Shady Hills Circle, it was dated October 20, 2006, and it ..wasr~ceived via U.S. mail on October 23, 2006. On October 23, 2006, the City also received corre~H9ndence from McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. (MFRA) regarding Mr. Johnson's property. to Council prior to a site visit to his pit inside his as Ron Johnson, 5355 Shady Hills Circle, first made somel.;lprela,~ed addressing the issue of delinquent charges. Mr. Johnson stat~diMfRA had property at which time it determined that Mr. Johnson diqinot have a sump pump house. Mr. Johnson referred to a history of floodin~J~>>fl?is adjoinir,g property being relevant to the certification of his sump pump Surclia,~grldelinqH~PHY' Mayor Love questioned if Mr. Johnson may want to focus}ijl~pomments on the topic at hand, his delinquent sump pump surcharge for 2006. noted the corresP9l,1qence from MFRA would prove to be of benefit to Mr. Johnson. Councilmember tenure as Mayor. surcharge. there ordinape;~ a number of years ago. From pumps drained down the public orks Staff had flushed hydrants that Mr. Johnson stated the City had passed a his vantage point, he felt many of his roadways and then on to He day, and some of that his the entire length of Mayor Love's the topic of the 2006 delinquent sump pump from MRF A to Mr. Johnson which stated She explained the sump pump surcharges taxes were because he had not had an inspection. The pump and, if so, how did it discharge. The inspections City's sanitary sewer system. She stated that although the City's traditional method, she would support accepting the MFRA 2006 delinquent sanitary sewer charge to Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson previous delinquent sump pump surcharges also be dropped. He stated he had received via Judge Aldrich's law clerk that the Judge had thought his previous delinquent charges be reversed after an independent inspection had been completed. He then stated from his perspective he should not have incurred any delinquent charges after he had filed a lawsuit against the City regarding the sump pump surcharge. Council member Callies clarified the item before Council that evening was regarding to approval of a resolution certifYing utility charges to the 2007 property tax rolls. She stated she would support a decision not to charge Mr. Johnson for the 2006 sump pump surcharge because he had an inspection done. She went on to state she was not in favor of reversing charges for previous years because Mr. Johnson had not had an inspection of his property as was required by the City's Code. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 9 of 15 Callies moved, Wellens seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-086, "A Resolution Directing Delinquent Sewer Charges, Storm Water Utility Charges, Water Charges, Recycling Charges, City Clean-Up Charges, Dry Hydrant Charges, and Sump Pump Charges, be Placed on the 2007 Property Tax Rolls subject to the Exemption of Exhibit B." Mr. Johnson stated this was the first time the City had made the effort to determine if he had a sump pump. He stated Mayor Love and then City Engineer Brown had observed the flooding problem on his property in March 1999. Love noted neither he nor Brown had inspected the interior of Mr. Johnson's house, nor had they been invited into the house for that purpose. Mayor Love suggested Mr. Johnson may want to consider sump pump surcharge. relative to the 2006 Discussion ensued with regard to Mr. Johnson's history of flooding on Mr. to the City's Codetegtf~ing sump pump felt relative to hisc~r[Tlifygarding the been appealeqland it was no Mr. Johnson cited a particular State Statute and how it surcharges. He also cited a ruling by Judge Burke's delinquent sump pump surcharges. Attorney longer under contention. Councilmember Callies questioned if delinquent surcharge to his 2007 property assess a 2006 sump pump Mr. Johnson requested Council review the Councilmember Turgeon licensed engineer; past the City would MFRA firm was a report. Councilmember different; could be done by Staff or a Administrator Dawson clarified in the of the inspection. Dawson then stated the whether or not to accept its inspection the City's Code was written was somewhat integrity of the City's sanitary sewer system. refund his previous delinquent sump pump surcharges. B. Permit for Deer Removal Council had discussed a written request the City had received from the Minnetonka Country to "issue a permit to eliminate the deer problem" at its September 25, 2006, work session. At that time Council indicated its preference to pursue a special permit from Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to remove deer as a "local control" (i.e., the Country Club property), rather than a City-wide effort. Dawson explained there were two common methods for removing deer - a trap-and-dispatch method, and a bow-and-arrow method. He stated SLMPD Chief Litsey recommended the trap-and-dispatch method; that method was safer in terms of (1) weapons accuracy, and (2) ensuring that the deer would be killed and there would be no damage or injury caused by a wounded deer. He then stated Bo Witrak, president of the Minnetonka Country Club, had agreed to the Minnetonka Country Club being responsible to SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 10 of 15 arrange and pay for the removal of deer. He also stated the SLMPD would have to authorize all personnel who would trap and remove deer. Dawson also explained the DNR required that there be an opportunity for public comment on the City's deer management plan. Council consideration and opportunity for public comment at this Council meeting would be sufficient to proceed with the application for the DNR permit. Dawson stated Staff had prepared a proposed deer management plan for Council's review and consideration, public comment, and submission to the DNR. He reviewed ~l1e five major points in the proposed plan. Dawson noted there were two chapters (603 and 703) in the City Co~~tnat~would need to be amended to allow the use of weapons for deer removal. Chapter 603 prohibitf)qthe disMl~fge of firearms except by law enforcement personnel. Chapter 703 prohibited the huntingilndtrapping of~t;limals. Dawson stated he had received comment from Richard Strpinberg, 5510 W edgewoo~!t1f:ive, via email in which he stated his preference for the deer removal~ to be and that tn~IA~w-and-arrow method should be allowed to dispatch the deer. Daws progniwbe addressed separate from the Minnetonka County Club request. Mayo viewed a local effort and a City-wide effort as two separate issues, although he did was prudent to at some time have discussions regarding a City-wide effortlHh.ouncilmembers that the two efforts should be addressed separately. Mr. Stromberg stated his property abutted 40+1~.fres8'ft'iWH~:~~;and . land that a number of residents had bought and donated.. to the City a fe\\f)re~f~jl:)ack,:lmfffR~last 8 - 10 years the deer population on that property and othefli~mn~~nffing propertie$'!'!\1ad increased, significantly. He regularly observed between 8 - 10 deer in :his backY~rq!The deer destroyed his plants and trees as well as those on his neighbors' propertie~1:;n~~fi\fing in c9~~\Y replanting e'*genses. He explained he was an avid bow hunter and rifle hunter, and he ha'QIi$Wdied "'\fer habits for mallYlyears. He stated bow hunting could be a viable way to control the deer popu1~f~~n:~q)'~I~!~~;ffftmt~fo~fr!FIe had participated in that type of effort when he was a Grov~m~ffat et'fort'!rm~~pdone on private property only after obtaining the statet;lfn:y and his neighbors wanted the deer population to be controlled. 1:{~Me:Administrator Dawson stated the DNR required an aerial any dqer removal effort for a larger area. The cost for that census was census would be conducted during the winter when the foliage was Mr. Stromberg had stated to him that the deer could be controlled through the regular deer hunting season. Mr. then stated the DNR had stated a census was needed if the removal effort was to be contracted out. Administrator Dawson explained the City Code prohibited hunting within the City limits, a practice common for many communities. He also stated if a city did not have a hunting season, then a census was required for a permit for a removal program for a large area of land. Councilmember Turgeon questioned why the Country Club could get a permit for removal of deer if Mr. Stromberg could not follow the same removal plan. Administrator Dawson stated that would be another removal permit and the permit for removal was granted to the City not to individuals. Councilmember Turgeon stating removing deer at the Country Club would not help with the City-wide deer population. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 11 ofl5 Mayor Love stated Council was very aware there was a problem with the increasing deer population. He stated the City benefited from communities to the east of the City that had attempted to address their deer population. He then stated he thought it necessary to address the growing deer population as a City-wide Issue. Administrator Dawson stated Mr. Witrak had stated there were deer nesting on the Country Club property, and there was not a guarantee once the removal effort had taken place that nesting would not occur again. In response to a question from Mayor Love, Administrator Dawson to have a City-wide removal program in place by year-end. It may in 2007 that would expire in April, but that would require a plan prepared. did not think it was possible to apply for a permit early be taken and a removal Mayor Love stated he he appreciated Chief neighboring cities Turgeon basis. On behalf of Council, Mayor Love directed Staff to City-wide removal plan. Mr. Stromberg commented a census would need to be Mayor Love thanked Mr. Stromberg for residents updated on this effort. He would keep him and the other Administrator Dawson explained to Council forward with this request. of the Country Club. He also stated of removal. He commented that be effective, safe, and humane. Councilmember regarding the removal process. a need for additional public comment on Mr. further discussion regarding a City-wide removal Deer the Appropriate Plan. Motion Staff to Submit an Application for a Special Permit for Department of Natural Resources, to Prepare an Agreement with Association, Inc., and to Prepare an Ordinance to Amend the Code in Order to Permit the Deer Management Activities in the Mr. Witrak thanked for its efforts. He commented his request was a commercial request, not a residential request. He frequently counted 10 - 12 deer on his residential property at Christmas Lake that were eating his trees and plants. He stated when a golfer was not pleased with the quality of a golf course, the golfer had the prerogative to play on a better maintained course. The Country Club had no choice but to address the situation. He stated thousands of dollars worth of trees had been planted, only to have the deer eat the plantings. He had concerns that there could be accidents on Smithtown Road because of the deer. He stated the DNR had a list of companies that performed the trap-and-dispatch activities. He commented he would keep the City abreast of the efforts. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 12 of 15 Chief Litsey stated when the SLMPD considered companies that could conduct the removal effort, there would be a strong consideration given to companies with demonstrated commitment to treating the deer humanely. C. Employee Handbook Administrator Dawson stated the Employee Handbook had been a work-in-progress for sometime. At its October 9, 2006, work session, Council discussed three items (the health insurance opt-out payment, funeral leave, and the sick leave 1 severance "800-hour" plan) and it supportep incorporating those items as presented into the final draft of the Handbook. He commented the plan:for.how to address the three employees with more than 800 accrued sick leave hours was a separate i~~ue from the Handbook. Council member Turgeon stated although she appreciated the inP\Xffronl:tllxBenefits Committee, she would prefer to use a 960-hour cap, a cap that was commonly fxported in theSt~nton Group survey, and that some other communities used as a standard. Councilmember Callies stated she would support the :~?: hour" pial}; the plan had beetm~mpbsed by the Employees Benefits Committee, Council had discussed plan, anp:tpe three employe~swith accrued sick leave hours in excess of 800 hours had the opportunity:~Q;~Iqvide their feedback :on the plan. She would also support the proposed increase of the health insuranceqpt-out payment. Callies moved, Lizee seconded, presented. Motion passed 3/2 with Turgeon City of SI1~t~}Yoo~ Employee Handbook as dissenting:: : 1. Excess Sick Leave Administrator Dawson the new 800-hour regarding how those was. accrued sick leave hours in excess of at the preceding Council work session what the preference of the three employees loyal employees; they had accrued sick leave due work when they were ill. Their high balances were not high balances available for long-term illness or injury, had expressed their preference of how they would like Mayor Love rate and a 50% conversion had been discussed by Council at its work session meeting. He stated the three employees had been agreeable to reducing their balances to 800 the end of 2006 through a buy-down of their excess hours. The employees agreed that being for 100% of their excess hours was unrealistic. Of the other two scenarios considered, a 33% conversion rate (based on the current policy) or a 50% conversion rate (based on the new policy), the employees preferred the 50% rate. Administrator Dawson noted a snapshot of their hours would be taken in December. Councilmember Turgeon stated she would prefer the employees be compensated at a 100% conversion rate. Councilmember Callies stated neither the current policy nor the new policy would have created an expectation of a 100% conversion rate. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 13 of 15 Councilmember Turgeon stated the three employees had not been given conversion rate options other than 33% and 50% to consider. She stated from her perspective the two rates considered were arbitrary numbers. Therefore, because they were good loyal employees they should be compensated for their excess hours at a 100% conversion rate - if they had used their sick leave they would have been compensated at 100% of their then rate of pay. Mayor Love stated the intent of the buy-down, which they employees agreed with, was what would a reasonable rate of compensation be for their excess sick hours (considering the change in policy). He commented the employees had not suggested a 100% conversion rate. In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, AdministraUrpi04>>,son stated only the 33% and 50% conversion rates were presented as options to the three emp~~yees. H~f~fCplained rates were based on the current severance conversion rate (33%) and the new raty) (50Q,{o). Counc:i:l private b and it had in the sale of businesses, but conversion She commented Councilmember Callies stated Council had referred the Committee for their consideration and deliberation about the conversion rate prior to this In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, sick leave 1 severance policy did not have on the number The intent of the new cap was to limit the Dawson explained the previous hours that could be accrued. Mayor Love stated he would support a 50% Lizee moved, Callies Hours in Excess of the Turgeon and Employee's Accrued Sick Leave Hours. Motion passed 3/2 with D. Wellens request. would approve licenses to sell tobacco for three liquor stores. Tobacco had been vilified for the last decade, Therefore, he suggested the City no longer be involved profit. He stated he would support the licenses for the three private the licenses for the two City-owned liquor stores. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-081, "A Resolution Approving Licenses to Retailers Sell Tobacco Products for CUB Foods Shorewood, Holiday Stationstore #12, and Oasis Market." Mayor Love stated he could support the motion. He also did not think it was appropriate for the government to profit from the sale of tobacco products after the government had taken a settlement from the tobacco industry. Councilmember Wellens stated there were would be a loss of revenue for the liquor stores as a result of this action. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 14 ofl5 In response to a question from Mayor Love, Administrator Dawson stated the current permits for the liquor stores were not valid after October 31, 2006. Dawson commented that tobacco products were sold in the stores as a convenience for customers. Motion passed 4/1 with Lizee dissenting. 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Approve Concept Plan for County Road 19 LRT Trail Cr9ssing Director Brown stated Robert Byers, a Senior Transportation Engil1~er for Hennepin County, had submitted a letter requesting consideration of a concept plan for t~RC~~1f19 1 Southwest LRT Trail Crossing. He explained the issues of pedestrians and bicyclists v(;',r~us mot<\lrWs at that intersection had been a source of concern for the City, Tonka Bay, and HennepiI1Cch~nty. Brown explained the concept plan indicated a 12-foo!I&Hde concrete raised med1flfl.in the center of CSAH 19, with the exception of approximately 12 fRR~im!il!ne with.rhe Trail that wotil~tfi~ain at grade (the exception would provide a place of refuge for TrailiM~~f~c). ~n~iRroposed chang~iwould allow a pedestrians and bicyclists to have to focus only on crossing 011~4ir~ction of traffic at a time. In to like to confusing. bicyclists at traffic, and were of Hennepin CoUm~i.to extend a trail from the new Byers had e~R\~hl..fi~ the proposed median plan Works sta(~;~nd the construction of a trail be perfOrmed as part of the plan. That Brown noted Staff had encouraged intersection to the Trail, as part of the crossing was to be completed by Hennepin along County Road 19 would be outside the trail expansion would need to be considered Brown stated Staff Hennepin County to which would thereby encourage Director Nielsen stated the ago. a corridor study that was done a few years Turgeon, Director Brown stated consideration of changes during the design phase. Turgeon stated she would Love echoed her comments, and he stated the area was were at times rear-ended when they stopped for pedestrians or Callies stated there were Good Samaritans who stopped for Discussion ensued to the need for clearer signage. In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Brown stated he could not readily think of an example of a raised median in the area. Brown stated what it would important for the signage to clearly and consistently communicate what the yield expectations were for all parties involved. In response to a comment from Mayor Love, Director Brown stated his understanding was the State law requiring motorists to stop for pedestrians in a crosswalk did not apply to a trail crossing. SHORE WOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 23, 2006 Page 15 of 15 Councilmember Lizee stated the proposed plan would provide visual clues about responsibilities to yield to pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. She stated the raised median would be a good safety feature for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the intersection. Director Brown stated the modifications to the intersection (e.g. the raised areas and curbing) would help slow traffic down. Councilmember Lizee stated the traffic counts taken as part of a feasibility study (which was conducted 4 _ 5 years ago) for an underground tunnel at the intersection the traffic volume were approximately 14,000 vehicles a day. Director Brown stated that increased substantially since then. Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, Approving a Concept Plan Train crossing. 19 1 Southwest LRT Chief Litsey applauded the concept plan design, minimize motorists passing on the right side of the stated the inclusion curbing should Motion passed 5/0. None. A. Administrator & Staff 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL Administrator Dawson stated there had been an a joint meeting of the and the at the West Side Station. the previous week, and there was November 15,2006, at 6:00 P.M. B. 12. the City Council Regular Meeting of October 23, Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City AdministratorlClerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD CANVASSING BOARD MEETING WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 8,2006 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER 6:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Love called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Love; Canvassing Board Members City Administrator/Clerk Dawson, Director Burton, and Deputy City Callies, and Wellens; Brown, Finance Absent: None B. Review Agenda Chair Love reviewed the Agenda. Callies moved, Wellens seconded, approvingitij() {\genda as passed 5/0. 2. CANVASS OF ELECTION A. " '",'::i:' ..:;. Motion to A;~9Pt a ResolWtion Approving the Local Election ElectionqfTuesday, November 7,2006. AcceptihgLocal Election Results" for the local election the EJection Judges of all five Shorewood precincts. "a Resolution Accepting Local 3. Callies at 6:03 p.m. to adjourn the Canvassing Board for the 2006 General Election 8, 2006. Motion passed 4/0. Woody Love, Chair ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk 1#2C I CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2006 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER 6:05 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Love; Councilmembers Callies, Lizee, Dawson, and Director of Public Works Administrator B. Review Agenda Motion passed 5/0. Administrator Dawson requested the addition of Items Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, Approvillg the Agenda as 2. Approve Agreement with City ofMinnet~mka for Water to 5490 Vine Hill Road Administrator Dawson explained that the City o~l~hor~U~~WI~~~iftity... had a long-standing agreement in which Shorewoo~.R~operties would'~r ~'I~(j)wed tO~~W1\ect to the Minnetonka water system under Vine Hill Road wh~nl;IWlt~nrfm~ka determint:l~.the connecti(j)n to be convenient and feasible. On September 25, the Cityt~uncil act~~I'o request thati,~~e Minnetonka City Council approve a connection to serve a new house~tl~lfi~RiVine Hu'~!~oad. On Noviwbe.r 6, the Minnetonka City Council approved an agreement that, among otl1yr....:...i...t..p..i..ngs,...NV...i...........o.....u.. l.d allow up tOi...f1.....pur connections to serve this property, with the "; }' J' ~;t: ... .. .' } .... .... .... + .... ,.. .. '; .. .... .... cost for the one. .c..o. .nnectioni~~.......qj,....i.u..........e...:'l.te.<Blit.O..... ...2.,..1....5...1....3.......~. The agreement needs to be approved by the Shorewood 91fH'lmRH~ri;li.in ord~tlm~. ~h~' g ;tt~~.ftg proceed. ,..x."..-........".;:::)'..:...:..,.;:...;'!';!:.:..;.. '::it.:...;....; :j,?::::'::- ....:.:.:.::..:::;;:.:;:',...... :':-:?:"';:':'; t:::.:,' '''ii:::_:''.":_''::::'';::':_ :;-,>;,,:. This item. 'had been placed on the ag~nda for a special meeting as the Council had scheduled a meeting tonight to Ganvass the results of yesterday's city election. Action by the Council this evening would expedite the. ~onnection work by the property owners by almost a week. i)+1\\i Wellens movedi~liiW~i~~eon sec~ft~ed, to approve and authorize execution of the Agreement with the City of Minneton~*II~q~ co~m~ction of property at 5490 Vine Hill Road to the Minnetonka water system. Motion passllnlR{Ri i' 3. OTHER BUSINESS A. Approval to Authorize Request To Connect to Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Sewer at 23655 Smithtown Road Director Brown explained that the property at 23655 Smithtown Road needed to make a connection to the sanitary sewer system, and the line that was accessible was owned by Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). The MCES required that a city council authorize a request for such a connection. This item was requested to be added to tonight's agenda as a non-controversial item that would expedite the connection to the affected property at this late time in the construction season. [#2D I CITY OF SHOREWOOD SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING November 8, 2006 Page 2 of2 Turgeon moved, Callies seconded, to authorize a request to Metropolitan Council Environmental Services that it permit a connection to its sewer to serve property at 23655 Smithtown Road. Motion passed 5/0. B. Update on Changes regarding Traffic Signal at County Road 19/5mithtown Road Intersection Director Brown efforts that staff had taken to have Hennepin for northbound traffic on County Road 19 to make a left turn seven accidents of a similar nature where cars making this County Road 19 through the intersection. changes to the traffic signal Road. There had been vehicles southbound on In an unrelated matter, Turgeon informed the to move reconsideration of action stores. This a remaining inventory a "left turn on request - about two He had requested persistently that Hennepin County green arrow only" for traffic northbound on County it has stated it will bear the cost for the weeks. Turgeon urged that there be a greater regulations and speed at the intersection that he would contact the police chief the next activity on turning staff). Mayor Love stated accordingly. November 13 Council meeting licenses to the City's two liquor would be issued only to sell the 4. Special City Council Meeting of November 8, Craig Woody Love, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk PAYABLESAPPROVALS For 11/13/06 Council Meeting Prepared b;Z~ Date Michelle T: NguJen, Sf. Accounting Clerk Reviewed by: ~L~ Date: t;j/;f~ Bonnie Burton, Finance Director Approved by: Date: ~ Craig D son, City Administrator PAYROLL APPROVALS For 11/13/06 Council Meeting Prepared by: Date: Michelle T. .Nguyen, Sf. Accounting Clerk ,. / A I. Reviewed by: ~ ~ Date: ~ Bonnie Burton, Finance Director Approved by: Craig Date: II ~7 ~ 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 Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator November 9, 2006 Amendments to City Code Sections 603 and 703 To Permit Deer Removal At its October 23,2006, meeting, the City Council authorized an application to the Department of Natural Resources for a special removal permit for deer from the Minnetonka Country Club property. As part of the overall plan for deer removal, the City Code will need to be amended regarding (1) persons authorized to discharge weapons, and (2) hunting and trapping. An ordinance has been prepared to make these amendments. The amendments are as follows: Section 603.06, Offenses Involving Weapons Subd. 2. Discharge affirearms. No person shall fire off, discharge or explode any gun, pistol or firearm within the limits of the City. This provision shall not apply to any duly constituted law enforcement officer in the discharge of his or her official duties, or to persons authorized by the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department for purposes of wildlife management. Section 703.04, Exemptions from Provisions [regarding prohibition of hunting and trapping] Subd. 3. Trapping and hunting performed by, or with authorization of the City under a permit issued by the State of Minnesota for the purpose of managing wildlife populations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Sections 603 and 703 of the City Code. ~" f . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .... CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 603 AND 703 OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE Section 1: Section 603.06, Offenses Involving Weapons, Subdivision 2, is hereby amended to read: Subd. 2. Discharge affirearms. No person shall fire off, discharge or explode any gun, pistol or firearm within the limits of the City. This provision shall not apply to any duly constituted law enforcement officer in the discharge of his or her official duties, or to persons authorized by the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department for purposes of wildlife management. Section 2: Section 703.04, Exemptions from Provisions, is hereby amended by adding Subdivision 3: Subd.3 Trapping and hunting performed by, or with authorization of the City under a permit issued by the State of Minnesota for the purpose of managing wildlife populations. Section 3: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its publication in the Official Newspaper ofthe City of Shorewood. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 13th day of November, 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 Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM Date: November 1,2006 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From: Bonnie Burton, Finance Director/Treasurer cc: Auditing Services Contract Craig Dawson, City Administrator c1> Re: The City's auditors Abdo, Eick and Meyers, LLP, have submitted their engagement contract for services for the 12/31/2006 annual audit. As the City Council may recall, all cities with a population over 2,500 must have an annual audit by an outside independent CPA firm. The estimated fee for the 12/31/2006 audit services is approximately $21,000. By comparison, the City paid $20,450 for the 12/31/2005 audit services. A brief survey of fees to be charged to some local cities shows the following: Mound - $23,950 Excelsior - $17,850 Victoria - $28,000 Action Requested Staff recommends authorizing the Mayor and the City Administrator to enter into the 2006 audit engagement contract with the film of Abdo, Eick and Meyer, LLP for auditing services for the year ending December 31, 2006. #" f . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .., ABDO EICK & .lVIEYERS LLP (\' ('onsuhants August 4, 2006 C:;-nlIHlvll:W Sl!Uilf'{' ;"')201 Eden A''-i->!iW' Suitt, 37t) hli"". \1\ :i.-.I.\I> Honorable Mayor and Council City of Shorewood Shorewood, Minnesota We are pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide City of Shore wood (the City) for the year ended December 31, 2006. We will audit the financial statements of the govemmental activities, business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining funds, which collectively comprise the basic financial statements, of the City as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006. The following supplementary infonnation accompanying the basic financial statements is required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and will be subjected to certain limited procedures, but will not be audited. ~ Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) Also, the document we submit to you will include the following additional infonnation that will be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements upon which we will provide an opinion in relation to the basic financial statements: ~ Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements and Schedules ~ Summary Financial Report - Revenues and Expendihlres for General Operations - Governmental Funds The following additional infonnation accompanying the basic financial statements will not be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit ofthe financial statements, and for which our auditor's report will disclaim an opinion: ~ Statistical Section Audit Objective The objective of our audit is the expression of opinions as to whether your basic financial statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and to report on the faimess ofthe additional information referred to in the first paragraph when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and will include tests of the accounting records and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to express such opinions. If our opinions on the financial statements are other than unqualified, we will fully discuss the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to fonn or have not fonned opinions, we may decline to express opinions or to issue a report as a result ofthis engagement. IF)2JU"W).<J()tiO . El\ (};,)2,imS,::;2(11 WH \\' ,<I('tH(: pa;.; .f'( HIl August 4, 2006 Page Two Management Responsibilities Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal controls. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of the controls. The objectives of internal control are to provide management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorizations and recorded properly to pennit the preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. You are also responsible for all management decisions and functions; for designating an individual with suitable skill, knowledge, or experience to oversee our financial statement preparation services and any other non-attest services we provide; and for evaluating the adequacy and results of those services and accepting responsibility for them. Management is responsible for making all financial records and related infonnation available to us. We understand that you will provide us with such infonnation required for our audit and that you are responsible for the accuracy and completeness ofthat infonnation. Management is responsible for adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements and for confinning to us in the representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole. You are responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls, including monitoring ongoing activities; for the selection and application of accounting principles; and for the fair presentation in the financial statements of the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, the aggregate discretely presented component units, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund inforn1ation ofthe City and the respective changes in financial position and where applicable, cash flows, in conforn1ity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. You are responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent and detect fraud, and for informing us about all known or suspected fraud or illegal acts affecting the government involving (1) management, (2) employees who have significant roles in internal control, and (3) others where the fraud or illegal acts could have a material effect on the financial statements. Your responsibilities include inforn1ing us of your knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud or illegal acts affecting the City received in communications from employees, forn1er employees, regulators, or others. In addition, you are responsible for identifying and ensuring that the City complies with applicable laws and regulations and for taking timely and appropriate steps to remedy any fraud, illegal acts, or violations of contracts or grant agreements that we may report. We will prepare a general ledger trial balance for use during the audit. Our preparation of the trial balance will be limited to fonnatting infonnation in the general ledger into a working trial balance. As part of the audit we will prepare a draft of your financial statements and related notes. We will also use the financial statements to complete the Office of the State Auditors' City Reporting Fonn. We will also enter the current year capital asset transactions into our software based on information you provide. You will be required to review and approve those financial statements and fonns prior to their issuance and have a responsibility to be in a position in fact and appearance to make an informed judgment on those financial statements and forms. Further you are required to designate a qualified management-level individual to be responsible and accountable for overseeing our servIces. 9S2J:tFL(HYI0 . En\ ((;2.g:-~S.:{2fJ I h\\\\'..lt"tlH'I);ls.t'lllll August 4, 2006 Page Three Audit Procedures - General An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. We will plan and perfonn the audit to obtain reasonable rather than absolute assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether from (1) errors, (2) fraudulent financial reporting, (3) misappropriation of assets, or (4) violations oflaws or governmental regulations that are attributable to the City or to acts by management or employees acting on behalf of the City. Because an audit is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material misstatements may exist and not be detected by us. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect immaterial misstatements, or violations of laws or governmental regulations that do not have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. However, we will inforn1 you of any material errors and any fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets that come to our attention. We will also infonn you of any violations of laws or governmental regulations that come to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential. Our responsibility as an auditor is limited to the period covered by our audit and does not extend to any later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors. Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, creditors, and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our audit, we will also require certain written representations from you about the financial statements and related matters. Audit Procedures - Internal Control In planning and perfonning our audits, we will consider the internal control sufficient to plan the audit in order to detennine the nature, timing, and extent of our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the City's financial statements. An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identity reportable conditions. However, we will inforn1 the Councilor audit committee of any matters involving internal control and its operation that we consider to be reportable conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control that, in our judgment, could adversely affect the City's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements. Audit Procedures - Compliance Identifying and ensuring that the City complies with laws, regulations, contracts, and agreements is the responsibility of management. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we will perforn1 tests of the City's compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and agreements. However, the objective of our audit will not be to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an opinion. i);\lJU,~).(HY)O . hl\ (()2.g:~S.:~2(, I \\ \\ v..- .;lFm~' 1 );IS.f~utll August 4, 2006 Page Four Audit Administration, Fees and Other We may from time to time, and depending on the circumstances, use third-party service providers in serving your account. We may share confidential information about you with these service providers, but remain committed to maintaining the confidentiality and security of your information. Accordingly, we maintain internal policies, procedures and safeguards to protect the confidentiality of your personal information. In addition, we will secure confidentiality agreements with all service providers to maintain the confidentiality of your information and we will take reasonable precautions to determine that they have appropriate procedures in place to prevent the unauthorized release of your confidential infom1ation to others. In the event that we are unable to secure an appropriate confidentiality agreement, you will be asked to provide your consent prior to the sharing of your confidential infon11ation with the third-party service provider. Furthern1ore, we will remain responsible for the work provided by any such third-party service providers. We understand that your employees will prepare all cash or other confim1ations we request and will locate any documents selected by us for testing. Our fee for these services will be at our standard hourly rates plus out-of-pocket costs (such as report reproduction, typing, postage, travel, copies, telephone, etc.). We estimate that our gross fees, including expenses, will be approximately $21,000 for the audit and expenses and $475 for the Office of the State Auditor's Reporting fon11. In addition, we plan to complete additional fraud testing for the 2006 audit. The tests will be completed outside our non11al audit schedule and will be scheduled on a surprise basis between engagement acceptance and the end of the year. The fees for these additional tests will be $1,500. Our standard hourly rates vary according to the degree ofresponsibility involved and the experience level of the personnel assigned to your audit. Our invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work progresses and are payable on presentation. In accordance with our fin11 policies, work may be suspended if your account becomes 90 days or more overdue and may not be resumed until your account is paid in full. If we elect to terminate our services for nonpayment, our engagement will be deemed to have been completed upon written notification of ten11ination, even if we have not completed our report. You will be obligated to compensate us for all time expended and to reimburse us for all out-of-pocket costs through the date of termination. The above fee is based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not be encountered during the audit. If significant additional time is necessary, we will discuss it with you and arrive at a new fee estimate before we incur the additional costs. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City and believe this letter accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions, please let us know. If you agree with the ten11S of our engagement as described in this letter, please print, sign, retain a copy for your records and return the original to us at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP Certified Public Accountants & Consultants ~M~ Steven R. McDonald, CPA Managing Partner f}S:lJU,:").(iO(H) ... F~l\ f62.a:L).;:;2fll \\\\"\\.af'nH'I);J~.I'llfll August 4, 2006 Page Five RESPONSE: This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City of Shorewood. By: Title: Date: q.~~2J.L).;-).(H)()O . Fil\ t:};';)2,H:);1..;~261 \\ ww.;H'nH'I.),t~,1 '(llll 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 Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM Date: November 7,2006 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Bonnie Burton, Finance Director/Treasurer ~ f From: CC: Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial RepOliing Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator (1) Re: Good news! The City of Shorewood has been awarded the Celtificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. This is the 13th consecutive year that the City has received the award by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) for its comprehensive annual financial repOli (CAFR). The Celiificate of Achievement A ward is a notable achievement in that it is the highest form of recognition in the area of governmental accounting and reporting. Its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by a government and its management. For the 2005 fiscal year, only 278 cities with populations under 10,000 received the award. There are 32,070 municipalities nationwide with populations under 10,000, so less than 1 % qualified to receive the prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, the government published an easily readable and efficiently organized CAFR. The City's Council is to be commended for its continued strong SUPPOlt for the highest standards of professionalism in the management of the City of Shorewood finances. 4"" f . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .... € ~ Government Finance Officers Association 203 N. LaSalle Street - Suite 2700 Chicago, IL 60601 Phone (312) 977-9700 Fax (312) 977-4806 October 25,2006 Bonnie Burton Finance Director/Treasurer City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood MN55331-8926 Dear Ms. Burton: We are pleased to notify you that your comprehensive annual financial report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, qualifies for a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition in governmental accounting and financial reporting, and its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by a government and its management. Each entity submitting a report to the Certificate of Achievement review process is provided with a "Summary of Grading" form and a confidential list of comments and suggestions for possible improvements in its financial reporting techniques. Your list has been enclosed. You are strongly encouraged to implement the recommended improvements into the next report and submit it to the program. If it is unclear what must be done to implement a comment or if there appears to be a discrepancy between the comment and the information in the CAFR, please contact the Technical Services Center (312) 977-9700 and ask to speak with a Certificate of Achievement Program in-house reviewer. Certificate of Achievement program policy requires that written responses to the comments and suggestions for improvement accompany the next fiscal year's submission. Your written responses should provide detail about how you choose to address each item that is contained within this report. These responses will be provided to those Special Review Committee members participating in the review. When a Certificate of Achievement is awarded to a government, an A ward of Financial Reporting Achievement (AFRA) is also presented to the individual(s) or department designated by the government as primarily responsible for its having earned the Certificate. As the designated individual we have enclosed your AFRA. Your Certificate of Achievement plaque will be shipped to you under separate cover in about eight weeks. We hope that you will arrange for a formal presentation ofthe Certificate and Award of Financial Reporting Achievement, and that appropriate publicity will be given to this notable achievement. A sample news release has been enclosed. We suggest that you provide copies of it to local newspapers, radio stations and television stations. In addition, enclosed is the Certificate Program "Results" for reports with fiscal years ended during 2004 representing the most recent statistics available. A current holder of a Certificate of Achievement may include a reproduction of the award in its immediately subsequent CAFR. A camera ready copy of your Certificate is enclosed for that purpose. If you reproduce your Certificate in your next report, please refer to the enclosed instructions. A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year. To continue to participate in the Certificate of Achievement Program it will be necessary for you. to submit your next CAFR to our review process. In order to expedite your submission we have enclosed a Certificate of Achievement Program application form to facilitate a timely submission of your next report. This form should be completed and sent (postmarked) with three copies of your report, three copies of your application, three copies of your written responses to the program's comments and suggestions for improvement from the prior year, and any other pertinent material with the appropriate fee by June 30, 2007. Your continued interest in and support of the Certificate of Achievement Program is most appreciated. If we may be of any further assistance, please contact Delores Smith (dsmith@gfoa.org or (312) 578-5454). Sincerely, Government Finance Officers Association y~ -J:J'~ Stephen J. Gauthier, Director Technical Services Center SJGlds Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to City of Shorewood Minnesota For its Comprehensive Annual Financial RepOli for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2005 A Celiificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting is presented by the Govenm1ent Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada to govemment units and public employee retirement systems whose comprehensive ammal financial reports (CAFRs) achieve the highest standards in goveml11ent accounting and financial reporting. President ~/~ Executive Director == o . "'" ...... ~ . "'" ~ o r7J. r7J. ~ r7J. ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ o a ~u ==~ ~ == == ~ . "'" ~ ~ ......~ == ...... ~IJJ. e~ == ~ ~ ...... ~ ."", ;;;. == o~ ~ ~ ~..= ..=...... ~~ '--!7 @ .~ ...t:: ..... ~ :::: ~ "" ~ lo", t::l... ~ z ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ = u < U Z ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ < ~ u z < z ~ ~ ~ o ~ < ~ < ~ ..... ro ~ +-' C) 0 ~ r:/) = ;:s C) o ~ @ ~ C).- ~~~ = -----.. " ~ b ~ +-' 0 Q) () .~ ~ ~ = ._ C) = Q b C)..l:1 ~ g;:: ~ 2l 0 .- -0 ~ .- u (:Cj~O ~ b.o (;j ........ ~.s ~ ~ O'~~~ ~ ~ .3:l ::e u u ~ e '" e ~ a bi:i ;2 :~ '" ........ .S ,.::; '" \:-, '"e -:' '-t.., ;::; '-' ~ a ~~~-%pCl., ~ ~ 3 .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;] ~ ~ ~ Cj ~ '" '" \..) '" <:i Q a ....... t-'- I.) bJ] "'l: is 0., '::l) .:: t::l... ....... ~~~~~ ;::::.........."-.; - ..... -c' s::: ~ \::i ;: '"e '- a '0 ;:: ~Cj&~~ ~ ...... 0::: ~ -....; ~~_0.,;:? ~ S .8 e'::: ~t~~~ .~ ~ e ~ ~ ....... .5 .s:: Cj ;s: ~ '" c.;: '" e ~ Cj s:: ~ ~ ;:;; '"e '- ;:: '" >~~-~ .~ ~ u ;i:.~ ~~~.~~ ~ .~ (;j s..s: b.O~l.)N""'" .~~~~~ 1.... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-e~~~ ~~~~~ --QJ>' .~ ~ EO ~-; ~ s::: ~ ~ s:: __ "-.. \D t') Cj g::':!:s::.g{l k: ~ u ....... !.... '- a "'l: a {j &......~.......s::: s:: a -c:s Cj ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ \:j .~ 2 ~ 12 :s: - l- '" e tj \J .::::;, \D ' \D C) -.:::: !.... ;::-" ~ ~ ~ ~aJ h "'l: \..).::J ~ ~ ~ \0 0 0 01 l-. .n 0 ...... 01 <.) Q) l-. .::: Q) Cl ..0 .8 Q) <.) .::: 0 "5 <.) Q) Q) >< ~ W Cl 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 Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator Larry Brown, PE, Director of Public Works Steve Gurney, PE, City Engineer~_' Bonnie Burton, Finance Director ~ FROM: DA TE: November 13,2006 RE: Approve Final Assessment Roll Connection of SE Water System to NE Water System and Other City-wide Connections On May 22, 2006, Council awarded the contract for the interconnection of SE Water System to NE Water System. The watermain has been installed and is now operational. Work remaining under this contract, scheduled to be completed in 2007, includes final restoration and placement of the wear course of bituminous pavement. As a courtesy to the residents along the project conidor, and to encourage users to connect to City water, the City offered a one-time opportunity for residents to finance their connection charges by certifying an assessment to their property. The terms of this assessment provide for financing the water connection charges at an interest rate of 7 %, over 5 years in equal installments. Attachment 1 includes the eight responses we received as a result of this offer. Attachment 2 is a request received by the City from the property owner of a vacant property that is being developed. Attachment 3 is the proposed assessment roll prepared after receiving this correspondence. Since this is a voluntary assessment, there is no need to hold a hearing on this proposed assessment unless changes are made. Recommendation Staff is recommending approval of the resolution that certifies the proposed assessment roll and directs staff to transmit the assessment roll to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. A resolution is included for your consideration. .." f . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .... UJ - UJ UJ Q) Q) :J '0 Cl C" ... Q) a: C'CS UJ a: .c - - U UJ r:::: r:::: Q) Q) r:::: :J 0 E 0 C" ~ ~ Q) 0 UJ Q) UJ 0 a: r:::: Q) Q) - "C r:::: UJ r:::: r:::: r:::: 0 0 UJ r:::: Q) C'CS U z <C 0 E "CU Q) >- UJ "C > Q) r:::: UJ Q) UJ .- Q) '3: ...J o C'CS UJ I c..EUJ >- 0"'<( - ... Q) U 0.10 ... 3: Q) .c - 0 (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ql 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C\I C\I C\I C\I C\I ~ C\I C\I C\I - ?> --- --- --- --- --- ?> --- III C') C') C') C') C') C') C') 0 ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s:: 0 q 0 q 0 q q 0 q ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o. o. 0_ 0 o. 0 0 <( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- s:: Ql E III III Ql III III <( tI7 tI7 tI7 tI7 tI7 tI7 tI7 tI7 tI7 0 0 ...... 0 "1" \0 N ...... "1" VI ii: N ...... "1" "1" "1" "1" N rrl VI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I I "1" ...... rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl "1" rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl N I I I I I I I I I rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl rrl N N N N N N N N N I I I I I I I I I r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... I I I I I I I I I VI \0 VI VI VI VI VI VI ""i" N N N N N ('.) N N rrl III "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 III ro ro ro ro ro ro Ql 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "0 "C ro "C "0 V ;>, ;>, ;>, ;>, ;>, ;>, 0 <( 2: > ro ro ro ro ro ro ~ >- o:l 'C o:l o:l o:l o:l o:l o:l Q I=: t: .... U) U) U) U) U) U) ~ Ql .S I=: I=: '1=: '1=: 'I=: '1=: I=: C. 0 0 U) ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ....... ... G) {; ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ..0 ;9 ..0 0.. < < < < < ....... u ::l <t: 's ;x: ..0 ~ ::l .....: .....: .....: .....: .....: .....: VJ 0 VJ VJ VJ VJ VJ VJ VJ VI 0\ 0 0 N 0 N 0 VI VI rrl N VI VI \0 \0 r-- 00 \0 0 0 ('.) N N N ('.) ('.1 rrl N VI VI VI VI VI VI VI ('.) I=: bJ) 'w V Q Ql U) "0 E "0 V I=: I=: III I=: I=: ro ro Z .... ro U) ffi V U) 0 G) ....... III bJ) 'S;: .- o:l 0.- V .....l ..0.:: I=: I=: V .... .... ro U) 0 V I=: U Ql 0 V Q ~ U) ~ Q I=: s:: .... I=: .... ~ U V I=: I=: 0 V ..0 ..0 0 :;s .... "0 ....... ....... U ;>, ro ro S ro 0 0 V ro 0 N ~ ~ U) :;s o:l ::l ,...., ro 0.... "0 VJ a(:l ~ .Q a(:l a(:l I=: I=: .....l a(:l V .... .~ .Q ;>, U) I=: V V ....... '2 ..0 I=: .... V 'C u ;>, ..0 S ;>, V "0 ro I=: I=: I=: 0.- ro ..0 ro :;s ro 0 V ro ::2 ~ 0 .... Z E-< Q Q ~ E-< 0 ..- C\I C') '<t L() (!) I'- Ci) CJ> Z CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT OF CONNECTION CHARGES RELA TED TO THE SOUTHEAST AREA WELL 1 AMESBURY AREA WELL INTERCONNECTION PROJECT (CITY PROJECT 05-05) WHEREAS, on May 22, 2006, Council awarded the contract for the Interconnection of SE Water System to NE Water System; and, WHEREAS, as a courtesy to the residents along the project corridor, and to encourage users to connect to City water, the City offered a one-time opportunity for residents to finance their connection charges by certifying an assessment to their property; and WHEREAS, the City has received several petitions requesting to levy the watermain trunk connection trunk charge to affected properties and the agreed upon terms for such a connection were an interest rate of 7% over a 5-year period in equal installments; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota: 1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and~made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 5 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2007, and shall bear interest at the rate of 7 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of the assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2007. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City of Shorewood, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the assessment. He may at any time thereafter, pay to the City of Shorewood the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as the other municipal taxes. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 13th day of November, 2006. ATTEST: WOODY LOVE, MAYOR CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR To: City of Shorewood City Council From: Tom Skramstad; LMCD Representative Date: November 13th, 2006 Here is an update of recent LMCD activities. . Miltoil Demonstration Proiect: This year the LMCD, in conjunction with the DNR and the Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA), conducted a "demonstration project" wherein portions of Carman's Bay, Phelps Bay and Gray's Bay were treated with milfoil specific herbicides. The LMCD coordinated the "Public Treatment Areas" (more than 150 feet from shore) and the LMA coordinated the "Private Treatment Areas" (within 150 feet of shore). This program was intended to determine the effectiveness of herbicide treatments as an adjunct to the LMCD's harvesting program. Initial reactions to the treatments were positive, and a broader analysis of the success of the project will be available later this year. The full measure of success will not be known until next spring, when we can see if the milfoil returns, does not return, or is replaced by another exotic specie (such as curly leaf pond weed.) . Miltoil Harvestina Proaram: This was the LMCD's 18th year of harvesting, which is intended to keep main boating traffic lanes clear of milfoil. This year's harvesting program ran from June through August and the program operated as planned. . Public Access Inspection Proaram: The LMCD continues to be concerned about the introduction of other invasive/exotic species into Lake Minnetonka, especially zebra mussels. This year, for the 5th year, the LMCD partnered with the DNR to inspect boats being launched for the presence of exotic species. (It is against Minnesota State law to transport exotic species while trailering a boat.) This year our team allocated over 2,000 hours to this inspection/education effort during peak times at high volume public accesses on weekends and holidays. This program is effective, as far as it goes; but we know that we are only inspecting a small percent of the boats entering the Lake. All boats cannot be inspected because doing so at all times of the day would be prohibitively expensive. . DNR Meetina: Several meetings have been held with Congressman Jim Ramstad's office, the Commissioner of the DNR (Gene Merriam), LMCD staff, LMCD Board members, and representatives from the Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA) to discuss exotic species prevention. We feel that creative thinking will be needed to keep zebra mussels out of the Lake. Two ideas that have been explored are: closing down launch ramps during certain times so that all boat launch traffic can be channeled into ramps with inspectors; and charging a fee to use Lake Minnetonka. Charging a fee would raise money to pay for inspectors, meaning that launch ramps would not have to be closed down. These ideas are not consistent with the historical thinking of the DNR, and that's OK. We need to explore creative new ideas, and work with our State government to enact new legislation (because that's what it will take.) A meeting with State legislators is being set up as a next step. . Shoreline Inventorv: The LMCD's Management Plan requires that an inventory of watercraft stored on the Lake be conducted every two years, and 2006 was one of those years. In addition to counting the watercraft, this year the staff spent additional time to inspect 1) sites storing five or more watercraft, 2) sites storing three or more larger watercraft, and 3) dock and platform dimensions that are not in compliance with LMCD (and DNR) code. The inventory has been taken and a report of results has just been made available. We will appreciate the assistance from the City regarding the enforcement of excessive numbers of boats, and illegally rented boats, that are found at residential sites as a result of this study. . LMCD Newsletter: One of the LMCD's recent initiatives has been to improve the public's knowledge of the agency's role and the rules that govern the use of the Lake. Towards this end, the LMCD published its first newsletter in April. The topics included: a message from Chair Skramstad, dock and boat storage rules, an overview of the milfoil demonstration project, exotic species management, a Boat Density Committee Update, information regarding the "Future of the Lake Day", and much more. This newsletter was mailed to residents around the Lake. A second newsletter is being readied for publication within the next few weeks. The LMCD will appreciate the support and subsequent communication of this material by the City of Shorewood. PAGE 2 . Minnehaha Creek Watershed District: A joint meeting of the LMCD and MCWD Boards was held on July 20th and a number of assignments resulted. The new Lake level monitoring "system" is close to being completed; this system is operated by the MCWD and is the basis for two things: how much water is released from the Gray's Bay dam, and setting up a Lake "high water emergency." Also, the MCWD has created a draft of its periodic "strategic plan" (called the 509 Plan) which will guide its agency for the next ten years. You can find the specific plan for Lake Minnetonka (and other lakes) here: www.minnehahcreek.or?:!draftS09plan.php The MCWD is welcoming input from the LMCD and discussion meetings have been occurring. I believe the plan will be published before the end of the year. . Water Patrol: For the sixth consecutive boating season, increased law enforcement presence on the Lake has been achieved by adding two additional full-time Water Patrol deputies during the boating season. Similar to recent years, 100% of the funding for this project has been from Hennepin County. This added presence by the Water Patrol has made a noticeable difference. The Water Patrol oversaw 56 special events in the County this summer. This included 6 or 7 triathlons in and around the Lake, several fish-a-thons, and providing protection to visiting political dignitaries. Major areas for citations were: 41 for boating-while- intoxicated, 5 for careless boating, 34 for underage drinking, and 87 for life jacket violations. They also investigated 61 cases of theft. The Water Patrol logged over 3100 hours protecting users of the Lake. . Solar Liaht Buoy Proiect: For the fifth consecutive boating season, "Save the Lake" has funded the solar light buoy project, which has installed solar lights on navigational buoys at certain high traffic channels, thereby improving nighttime navigational safety. For your information, "Save the Lake" funds come from private donations, not funds that come from the levy to the Cities. . "Future of the Lake Day" Event: The LMCD and Crystal-Pierz Marine held the second annual "Future of the Lake Day" event on Saturday, August 19th at The Commons in Excelsior. This event was held in conjunction with the St. Judes/K102 fishing tournament. The event is geared towards our youth through a variety of activities that will educate, inform, and entertain. The event was well attended and included free charter boat rides, free life jackets, and lots more, for the attendees. . Web Paae: The LMCD's WebPage address is: http://www.lmcd.org. 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 Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM FROM: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator Larry Brown, PE, Director of Public Works Steve Gurney, PE, City Engineer'~v November 13, 2006 TO: DATE: RE: Item #6: Public Hearing on Proposed Assessment Roll for Watermain Installation as Part of Wedge wood Road, Mallard Lane, Teal Circle Road Rehabilitation Project The hearing this evening is a continuation of the special assessment process (the 429 process) that was initiated earlier this year to finance the installation ofwatermain as part of the Wedgewood Road, Mallard Lane, Teal Circle Road Rehabilitation Project. The necessary steps in this process are outlined below, with the steps that were previously completed listed in bold. Action Order Feasibility Report Approve Feasibility Report Preliminary Assessment Hearing Order Project and Approve Plans & Specs Authorize Advertisement for Bids Award Contract Final Assessment Hearing Date Completed July 25, 2005 May 8, 2006 June 12,2006 June 12, 2006 June 12,2006 July 24, 2006 November 13, 2006 Resolution No. 05-069 06-039 06-043 06-043 06-053 While the project is not yet fully complete and ready for acceptance, the watermain portion of the project is complete. Staff is confident that we haveidentified the costs associated with the watermain installation and that they do not exceed the amount that was used to calculate the preliminary assessment roll. Since the construction costs, combined with the engineering and observation costs associated with the project, are consistent with the preliminary assessment roll, we are not proposing any deviation from the preliminary assessment roll. Staff is recommending that the assessment be financed over 15 years in equal installments, at an interest rate of 6.5 %. #" f . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ... Page 2 November i3, 2006 Council Meeting Public Hearing on Proposed Assessment Rollfor Watermain installation as Part of Wedge wood Road, Mallard Lane, Teal Circle Road Rehabilitation Project As a courtesy to the residents along the project corridor, and to encourage users to connect to City water, the City offered a one-time opportunity for residents to combine the connection charge with their assessment, at the same terms as the assessment. Attachment 1 includes the 15 responses we received as a result of this offer. The assessed amount for each individual property is not impacted by these 15 properties combining the fees on the proposed assessment roll. As required by Minnesota Statute ~ 429, a Public Hearing is required prior to ordering the improvements. This hearing was advertised in the Sun-Sailor October 26, 2006. Attachment 2 is a copy of the notice attached for your information. Attachment 3 is the proposed assessment roll prepared for this project. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $338,983, compared to the original amount of $315,351. This is due to the request from the 15 properties to combine the connection fee with the assessed amount In addition, there is one property that has prepaid the combined connection fee and assessment. If Council wishes to proceed, the next step is to then approve the assessment roll by way of resolution. A resolution is included for your consideration. CII~. _ -== =t:t:'t::~ '::--__ '~'_l~ ~ ~ . . newspapers AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) Richard Hendrickson, being duly sworn on an oath states or affirms, that he is the Chief Fi- nancial Officer of the newspaper known as Sun-Sailor and has full knowledge of the facts stated below: (A) The newspaper has complied with all of the requirements constituting qualification as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minn. Stat. s331A.02, S331A.07, and other applic- able laws, as amended. (B) The printed public notice that is attached was published in the newspaper once each week, for ~ successive week(s); it was first published on Thursday, the ~ day of October, 2006, and was thereafter printed and published on every Thursday to and including Thursday, the _ day of , 2006; and printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, which is hereby acknowl- edged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication of the notice: abcdefg h ij kl mno pq rs tuvwxyz BY~ Subscribed and sworn to or affirmed before me on{i~o:J:Jl~_ No~ary ublic , e MARY ANN CARLSON NOTARY PUBUC - MINNESOTA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 1-3Hl9 RATE INFORMATION (1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space $ 2.85 per line (2) Maximum rate allowed by law $ 6.20 per line (3) Rate actually charged $ 1.30 per line Attachment 2 ( 193 to 435.195, the councW nt of this special as- ty.owned by'a person would be a hardship ent of the special as- sess is terminated for any rea- son p. ' unts accumulated plus ap- plicable mte;rest become due., Any assessed property owner meetmg the requirements of this law and the ordi- nan~e adopted under it may, within 30 days of the confir- matlo~ of the assessment, apply to the city clerk for the prescnbed form for such deferral of payment of this spe- cial assessment on. his property. . Craig W. Dawson, City-Administrator/Clerk Published in the Sun-Sailor on October 26, 2006 ( Oct. 26, 2006) a1-WMT Final PH(3) CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT WATERMAIN INSTALLATION AS PART OF WEDGEWOOD DRIVE, MALLARD LANE AND TEAL CIRCLE ROAD RECLAMATION PROJECT CITY PROJECT 02-02 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the improvement of waterrnain installation as part of the Wedgewood Drive, Teal Circle and Mallard Lane Road Reclamation project by the City of Shorewood. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota: 1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2007, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.5 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of the assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31,2007. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City of Shorewood, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the assessment. He may at any time thereafter, pay to the City of Shorewood the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as the other municipal taxes. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 13th day of November, 2006. ATTEST: WOODY LOVE, MAYOR CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 3 October 2006 RE: South Shore Senior/Community Center - CUP for Accessory Structure on Park Property (Revised) FILE NO. 405(06.14) BACKGROUND Jerry Brecke, representing the Friends of the Southshore Senior/Community Center, has requested a conditional use permit to locate a small storage building on park property adjacent to the parking lot in front of the Center. The Center is located at 5745 Country Club Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). This site was carved away from Badger Field and donated to the Center by the City of Shorewood when the Center was built. Since the amount of land donated was purposefully minimized, the Center is left with virtually no place to construct any kind of storage building on its own site. Exhibit B shows where the building is proposed to be located. At its 11 September meeting, the Shorewood City Council authorized the Friends to make an application for the CUP. The Center finds itself in need of storage space, primarily to house donated items to be sold at its annual attic sale, as well as other seasonally used items. Mr. Brecke explains the request in Exhibit C, which also illustrated how the proposed building will look. The building will be a single-story structure, proposed to measure 12' x 24' and having the appearance of a small, single-car residential garage. qt> ~ ~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER "'~ #g\/\. \.... ' Memorandum Re: South Shore Senior/Community Center c.u.P. 3 October 2006 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS Although somewhat unusual, this request is not without precedent. For example, the City has allowed South Tonka Baseball to locate structures within Freeman Park. Also, much of the Center's parking is located on and shared with Badger Field. If the Center is allowed to locate its building on park property, staff recommends the same kind of conditions as were imposed at Freeman Park. A. Zoning Requirements. The Southshore Center and Badger Field are located in the R-1C, Single-Family Residential zoning district. Since buildings located in parks are subject to conditional use permits, a c.u.P. is necessary to accommodate the Center's request. It is worth noting that the Center itself is also a conditional use in residential districts. The conditions for such structures are set forth in Section 1201.11 Subd. 4.b. of the Zoning Code. For the most part, the Code concerns itself with setbacks, parkinglloading and screening. Following is how the proposed structure relates to the Code. 1. The proposed structure well exceeds setback requirements. It is approximately 250 feet away from the rear lot line of Badger Field and at least 300 feet from the nearest residential structure. It is recommended that the building be located somewhat back from the parking lot curb to facilitate snow storage. It is recommended that the building be five feet behind the parking lot curb. This does necessitate shortening the building somewhat, since the terrain drops off to a wetland area east of the building pad. It appears that a 20-foot long building can easily be accommodated without substantial site alteration and without interfering with the use of the football field located south of the building. 2. The building is separated from adjacent residential uses by a relatively thick band of trees. What may be seen of the building during leaf-off season is very much in keeping with residential buildings in the area. 3. The proposed building neither takes up any parking nor necessitates any new parking. 4. The overhead door faces the parking lot. Given the occasional use of the structure, it is not recommended that any kind of surfacing, other than grass be required at this time. If, in the future, the grass becomes difficult to maintain, the area between the door and the curb could be covered with a class V rock material. B. Construction, Ownership and Maintenance. Although not specifically stated in the request, it has been implied, and should be expected, that the proposed building will not involve City expense. It should go without saying that the building will be constructed in compliance with minimum requirements of the State Building Code. It is assumed that -2- Memorandum Re: South Shore SeniorlCommunity Center c.u.P. 3 October 2006 the Center will carry the appropriate insurance during construction of the building. The City should be named as co-insured on the policy. Similar to the buildings on Freeman Park, it is recommended that the ownership of the structure be turned over to the City of Shorewood. The building can then be leased back to the Center for a dollar per year. The Friends would still be responsible for maintenance and insuring the building. Again, the City should be named as co-insured on the Center's policy. In the event that the Center ever ceased operation, the building would belong to the City. C. Park Commission Review. Although conditional use pennits are within the purview of the Planning Commission, the request involves the use of part of Badger Field. While the proposed location ofthe building should not interfere with the use of the park, it is recommended that the Park Commission review and comment on the application. This item has been scheduled for the 10 October Park Commission meeting. One of the items the Park Commission may wish to consider is the building appearance, particularly the color scheme. Since the City does not currently have a theme for buildings in Badger Field, it is suggested that the colors of the new building reflect those ofthe Southshore Center. RECOMMENDATION Staff will stake out the location of the proposed building in order to better illustrate where the building will be located. If approved, the conditional use permit should include the following conditions: 1. The building should be limited in length to 20 feet and its northerly side should be five feet south of the parking lot curb. 2. Until such time as it is demonstrated that maintenance of the grass becomes a problem, the strip of land between the building and the parking lot curb should be maintained as grass. If maintenance becomes an issue, class V rock should be placed between the overhead door and the curb. 3. The building must meet the minimum requirements of the State Building Code. The Southshore SeniorlCommunity Center should carry the appropriate insurance during the construction of the building. The policy should name the City of Shorewood as co- insured. 4. Upon completion of the building, the ownership of the building should be turned over to the City of Shorewood, after which it should be leased back to the Center for a dollar per year. The City Attorney should draft the necessary agreement. 5. The Center should provide the City with evidence of ongoing insurance, both building and contents, naming the City as co-insured. -3- Memorandum Re: South Shore Senior/Community Center c.u.P. 3 October 2006 6. The conditional use permit should be subject to review and approval by the Shorewood Park Commission, including, but not limited to, the appearance of the building. Cc: Park Commission Craig Dawson Tim Keane Larry Brown Bonnie Burton Jerry Brecke -4- c A~ <~\f ~\ - ~ :\ ~ _1i;Y o ~ u. ~ '\ ~ \( \ ~ )A ~ ~\ ki! ~\ ~;; Ii \\-- \ ~\ ,\ -- I (=J~ \\ ~ ,\ / ~ Hl~ }lone aOOM ~ ~ ~'?r1 1 N] ~ ';::::::; r--' \ ~ ~~ a ~ , w 3. S. g ~? j:R;. , JEJC \~ 00 \ ~ ~( \ I / <{} \ \ \ \\ \ ~\ / ~r-l ~ ~ - / \ ~. LJdl I~\~~ I Iii 'J / ~ I ~ lin~ \,_v /"/ \,~~H ;=::e-\ <l;- \ ; f---.., _ ." \ 'l-') \ - --- y-< I\~ ~ I} I ':\ \ ~~ - ; \ \ ~ ~I \ ,..Jjp r I O"B' .[ :,,\l \>.~1 I H 0 n ","iNnno ,: ;:::/L~ ---l \ 0 11 g ~ \:J r-\~ ~ u- ~~~ \\ blL~ ~~~ ~-<~ \ - \\ ~ \\ 1 \ ., \" a ? \' ~ ~ /~ \ y/ .~\\~ ~J>, ",'l'l" ~ '\ \ (~~.--.;; ., ., \\\.\ ~~ ~ ., ., I z~ g l!) I-- " '" "\ \ ""J ~ \ AO" n \ \ I \ \ T'";=[J \ ~ Exhibit A " \ \...----- SITE LOCATION ~ ;(1 T\ \ ~ South Shore Senior --< m~J.s Community Center - C.U.P. / I o l!) N ~ "",,,/ ~ o z 'tfl nOllNVW :;:) \ \ ............~ --- '- ...~._.~ ....---- '\';." . .- .~.;.- ,..~ " . ! ........ ~ .'..;,:' ~ :,:: . '. . I , ~ ~__J - ~- -~-* ~- th, __ '''=I~CC> ) \ ~ \"'. ( (,)1. ~:: - . W~"D ~b BL~J-- ~: \_~ I~ \. I ~ 12-J \ ~ C DL> 1"1" . o o o J o o / / ( - -- +---- I VI ~ VIU-A6tE- PUMP o LD \, G n Ll\ \ Ul \ ii, \'1 I \ : ' : \ I I,"" ; \ \1- \ '\ UL':t TENNI? , cPUI'-T~ \ ' II \ 'i' \ : 'I U\ ~ L---- f!.e.Loc..AT'e: UOHot-I<-E.Y F-I~J~ --- I I o {t:~=:J . I I /' /' -- ....... ....... CJ -r a~ Exhibit B SITE PLAN o / '/ Et:HO fZ-oA(7 1-- -- ----- -- I I I I --..1 " '" - - ------ ~(/t.i 01, i/v'e a Fe r e ;"7' e4iC e.1' /~....... #f.. ',7 " ,cz , /<~A.;AY , '-L s /or~~'~ - .. P. " ':S;/~"'~'''''P- ./' ro .f' / b~-~oe;,.u. LVe / ' .tf"2&'ti!:.veE' blf .s '/0 ,- e <:::4::/t:' ,-,,; dr..ll JP1 eed...c .J:ay ..... C!?U r J~ c. ",... I' d ._tV! .,;;)a f e" __ ~ C77' - / tft(t'!'" P' / """.- ~ ,,' / ,j;/e' ~~:r d R T~ 11'-1 ~v~ /' -P u J . c}.:f- J-' ~ ..f (J ""'l I' <~/ - / ~ /~"J...;;; e')fi ~cep. H @If!? cI.r Gt 6~d ic--n/- to!' rl 0 /:i'te :h~ f"',~ I r/ tit e.t' /1 A~'..s ..... ')7'?1/ e'.: J::. ~" J ct." if. .f' U A <t:.t se Of /,f;~'1 ,~~- ~F~U.r- (~ 0 .-:::1>'ll .::t"g ~ -;<.. II" <'/' a 6"~':JJ " (I " II /I: ~: 1.: d, .{\ .j " j .....~~/".-"......-:.. - - .,U ~ ~,;~;'r,/'~:: ----=-,.- ~/, .', .' .. ~v~///v~ /..;-- " '~. .,.. ./-~':..->....,; ".,,.,/;:... /" / ~:r/ _ ~ / /",.""~( ,~ Pk~.--..-_.., //-"'/'''-- ,,//~ '/ r#/~~/.~~~~~"/~:?:_~'t~n/~A If ~f#Z/Y~~..d,' /'///" .../. u-./ /' ~"",-..-- 7~?,/c r ,'l;k E h'b' C "///'/#'/H"/'f.< 1f11/L?"/.-r r~~ &-....~ x 1 It ~; /~:~~/.y~ PROPOSED STORAGE BUILDING 38 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A STORAGE BUILDING FOR THE SOUTH SHORE SENIOR COMMUNITY CENTER ON PARK PROPERTY WHEREAS, the Friends of the South Shore Senior Community Center (Applicant) proposes to construct a building at 5755 Country Club Road to provide storage space for the South Shore Senior Community Center; and WHEREAS, the property is legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the Shorewood Zoning Code allows community centers (and structures accessory thereto) by conditional use permit (C.u.P.) subject to certain conditions; and WHEREAS, the request was reviewed by the City Planner and his recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council, dated 3 October 2006, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, after required notice, a Public Hearing was held and the Applicant's application was reviewed by the Shorewood Planning Commission at its regular meeting on 3 October 2006, the minutes of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's application was reviewed by the Shorewood Park Commission at its regular meeting on 24 October 2006, the minutes of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was considered by the City Council at its regular meeting on 13 November 2006, at which time the Planner's memorandum, the minutes of the Planning Commission and the minutes of the Park Commission were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject property is occupied by Badger Field Park and the Shorewood City offices, and is zoned R-l C, Single-Family Residential. 2. The proposed building is one story in height and measures 12' x 24'. 3. The proposed building will be constructed of materials consistent with the nearby South Shore Senior Community Center. 4. The proposed location of the building complies with building setback requirements. 5. The location of the building will not reduce parking spaces or interfere with the use of the nearby football field in Badger Field. CONCLUSIONS 1. The proposed use of the property is consistent with the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan. 2. The conditional use permit for the South Shore Senior Community Center storage building is hereby granted subject to the following: a. The proposed building shall be constructed by the Friends of the South Shore Senior Community Center, after which ownership shall be conveyed to the City of Shorewood. b. The building shall be limited to 12' x 20' in size and shall be situated according to plans approved by the City Engineer. c. The proposed building shall not have windows. d. The Friends of the South Shore Senior Community Center shall maintain insurance on the proposed building, consistent with the recommendations of the City Attorney. 3. The City Clerk shall provide the City Attorney with a certified copy of this resolution for purposes of recording with the Hennepin County Recorder. 4. This resolution must be recorded within 30 days of the Applicant's receipt of a certified copy hereof. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shore wood this 13th day of November, 2006. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK -2- (insert Exhibit A - Legal Description) -3- 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 Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 7 November 2006 RE: Gideon Glen - Conservation Easement FILE NO.: 405(Natural Resources - Gideon Glen) One of the final actions to be taken in completing the Gideon Glen project is the establishment of a conservation easement to ensure that the property will remain as conservation open space in perpetuity. The attached conservation easement is a sample that is provided in the Conservation Open Space Plan for the City of Shorewood, which was adopted in March 2003. Although the sample easement shows an easement granted to the Minnesota Land Trust, staff recommends that it be modified so as to grant the easement to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, our primary partner in the project. It is recommended that the City Attorney be directed to modify the sample easement for adoption at the next City Council meeting. A resolution will also be presented at that time, authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute the easement. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane q'j\. l" . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ..... #914< I ) ] ] .J ] J ] ] 'J ] I J Larkin Hoffman 9/4/2002 8:42 PAGE 18/26 RightFax CONSERVATION EASEMENT THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT is entered into this _ day of February, 1999, by and between City of Shorewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation, whose address is 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood, MN 55331 ("Ownersll), and the Minnesota Land Trust, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation having its principal office in St. Paul, Minnesota C'Trust"). WIT N E SSE T H: A. Owners are the sole owners in fce simple of certain real property identified on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, consisting of 10.8 acres of land located in Hennepin County, Minnesota ("Protected Land"), B, The Protected Land is primarily woodlands, wetlands and open space. In addition, the Protected Land has outstanding scenic qualities that can be enjoyed by the public from Eureka Road in Shorewood, C. The natural and scenic qualities and forested, open space character ("Conservation Values") of the Protected Land are set forth in a Property Report dated within thirty days of the date hereof, which the parties acknowledge accurately represents the present condition of the Protected Land, Each of the parties has a copy of the Property Report. The Trust intends to use the Property Report in monitoring subsequent uses of the Protected Land and enforcing the terms ofthis Conservation Easement. Notwithstanding this, the parties may use all other relevant evidence to establish the present condition of the Protected Land in the event of a disagreement as to whether a subsequent activity or use is consistent with the terms of this Conservation Easement. D. Owners intend to convey to the Trust the right to preserve and protect the Conservation Values of the Protected Land in perpetuity and to prevent or remedy subsequent activities or uses that are inconsistent with the terms of this Conservation Easement. E. The grant of this Conservation Easement will serve the policies of the State of Minnesota which encourage the protection of Minnesota's natural resources as set forth in part in Minnesota Statutes Section 84C,01-02 (Conservation Easements). F. The Trust is a publicly supported, nonprofit corporation which seeks to protect the natural, scenic, agricultural, forested, and open space conditions ofland in Minnesota. In addition, the Trust is qualified as a conservation organization under Sections 501(c)(3) and 170(h) of the InternaL Revenue Code. The Trust has agreed to assume the obligation of protecting the natural and scenic qualities of the Protected Land in perpetuity according to the terms of this Conservation Easement. Exhibit D SAMPLE CONSERVATION EASEMENT ] ] 1 J ] ] J ] ] ] ] 'I I ~, I i ,.J , i ~ Larkin Hoffman 8/1J:/2002 8:1J:2 PAGE 18/26 RightFax Shorewood Conservation Easement Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration oftheir mutual covenants and pursuant to the provisions relating to conservation easements set forth in Minnesota Statutes Sections 84C. 0 1- .05, Owners convey and warrant to the Trust and the Trust accepts a perpetual conservation easement on the Protected Land of the character and to the extent set forth herein. 1. Intent The parties intend to permanently retain the Protected Land in its predominantly natural and scenic condition and to prevent or remedy any subsequent activity or use that significantly impairs or interferes with the Conservation Values of the Protected Land. Owners intend to restrict all subsequent use ofthe Protected Land to activities consistent with the terms oftlUs Conservation Easement. 2. Trust's Rights To accomplish the parties' intent, Owners convey the following rights to the Trust: A. The Trust shall preserve and protect the Conservation Values of the Protected Land pursuant to the terms of this Conservation Easement. B. The Trust may enter the Protected Land at reasonable times to monitor subsequent activities and uses and to enforce the terms of this Conservation Easement. The Trust shall give reasonable prior notice to Owners of all such entries and shall not unreasonably interfere with Owners' use and quiet enjoyment of the Protected Land. C. The Trust may act, pursuant to Paragraph 19, to prevent or remedy all subsequent activities and uses of the Protected Land not consistent with the terms of this Conservation Easement. 3. Prohibited Uses Owners shall not perform or knowingly allow others to perform acts on ihe Protected Land that would significantly impair or interfere with the Conservation Values of the Protected Land. This general restriction is not limited by the more specific restrictions set forth in Paragraphs 4-13. The parties acknowledge that the present use of the Protected Land is consistent with the terms of this Conservation Easement and the Owners may, subject to the restrictions set forth in Paragraphs 4-14, continue making such use of the Protected Land. 4. Residential. Commercial & Industrial Uses Owners shall not subdivide all or part of the Protected Lands for residential, commercial or industrial development. Owners shall not subdivide, either legally or physically, the Protected Land for any other reason without the prior written approval of the Trust. Owners shall not engage in commercial or industrial activities on the Protected Land. Owners shall not engage in the exploration or extraction of soil, sand, gravel, rock minerals, hydrocarbons or any other natural resource on or from the Protected Land. Owners shall not grant rights of way on the Protected Land in conjunction with commercial or industrial activities or residential development on lands other than the Protected Land. ) ] J ] ] ..J ] ] l ...J l ..J l i .... i .= , Larkin Hoffman 9/4/2002 8:42 PAGE 20/26 RightFax Shorewood Conservation Easement Page 3 5. Construction Owners shall not construct or install buildings or improvements of any kind including, without limitation, fences, driveways, parking lots, and roads, on the Protected Land, except as needed to serve other uses permitted by the tenus of this Conservation Easement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Owners may widen Eureka Road (adjoining the Protected Land to the west) a maximum of seven (7) feet onto the Protected Land if such widening is reasonably required by future transportation needs of the area. 6. Utility Systems Owners shall not install utility systems or extensions of existing utility systems on the Protected Land including, without limitation, water, sewer, power, fuel, and communications lines and related facilities, without the prior approval of the Trust except as needed to serve any additional uses, buildings, and improvements permitted by the terms of this Conservation Easement. 7. Agricultural Use Owners may not conduct agricultural operations on the Protected Land. For purposes ofthis paragraph, the term Agricultural Operations shall mean raising livestock, growing crops to feed such livestock, and growing crops for sale in the agricultural marketplace. 8. Surface Alteration Owners shall not alter the surface of the Protected Land including, without limitation, the filling, excavation, or removal of soil, sand, gravel, rocks, or other material except as reasonably required in the course of activities or uses permitted under the tenus oftrus Conservation Easement. 9. Soil and Water Degradation Owners shall not engage in activities or uses that cause or are likely to cause soil degradation, erosion, or water pollution, either on the surface or underground. 10. Waste Removal Owners shall not dump or dispose of refuse or other waste material on the Protected Land. 11. Water Bodies and Courses Owners shall not alter existing bodies of water or water courses or construct new bodies of water or water courses on the Protected Land ex.cept as reasonably required for the activities or uses pennitted by the terms oftms Conservation Easement and for which Owners have obtained the prior written approval ofthe Trust. 12. Trees. Shrubs. and Vegetation Owners shall not remove, destroy, cut, mow, or alter trees, shrubs, and other vegetation except (i) for areas immediately adjacent to improvements permitted by Paragraph 5, (ii) to prevent or control insects, noxious weeds, diseases, fire, personal injury, or property damage, (iii) as reasonably required to construct and maintain the trails permitted in Paragraph 13, (iv) to enhancewiidlife habitat or restore native biological communities, and (v) for other activities or uses permitted by the tenus of this Conservation Easement. 1 ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] I j ] l j ! i ,..; - Larkin Hoffman 9/4/2002 8:42 PAGE 21/26 RightFax Shorewood Conservation Easement Page 4 13. Recreational Use Owners may establish and maintain trails for fire breaks, walking, horseback riding, cross-country skiing, and other non-motorized recreational activities on or across the Protected Land. Owners shall not use or allow others to use motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, or other motorized vehicles on the Protected Land ex.cept as reasonably required for other activities or uses permitted by the terms of this Conservation Easement. 14. Signs Owners shall not erect or install any signs or billboards on the Protected Land except for signs stating the name and address of the Protected Land, announcing the activities or uses permitted by the terms of this Conservation Easement, designating the boundaries of or directions to the Protected Land, or restricting entry to or use ofthe Protected Land. With the prior written approval of Owners, the Trust may erect or install signs announcing that the Protected Land is subject to this Conservation Easement. For all signs permitted by this Paragraph, the location, number, and design must not significantly diminish the natural and scenic qualities of the Protected Land. 15. Trust's Approval The requirement that Owners obtain the prior written approval of the Trust is intended to let the Trust study the proposed use and decide if it is consistent with this Conservation Easement and maintains or enhances the Conservation Values of the Protected Land. Owners shall submit a request in writing to the Trust at least ninety days prior to the proposed date of commencement of the use in question. The request shall set out the use for which approval is sought, its design and location, the impact of the proposed use on the Conservation Values of the Protected Land, and other material information in sufficient detail to allow the Trust to make an informed judgment that the proposed use is or is not consistent with this Conservation Easement or would adversely effect the Conservation Values of the Protected Land. The Trust shall notifY Owners in writing of its decision within sixty days ofit5 receipt of Owners' request. The Trust may withhold its approval only on a reasonable determination that the proposed use would be inconsistent with this Conservation Easement, impairs the Conservation Values of the Protected Land, results in violation of any applicable law or regulation or that it lacks information in sufficient detail to reach an informed judgment that the proposed use is or is not consistent with this Conservation Easement. The Trust may condition its approval on the Owners' acceptance of modifications which, in the Trust's judgment, would make the proposed use, as modified, consistent with this Conservation Easement or protects the Conservation Values of the Protected Land. 16. Public Access No right of access by the public to any portion of the Protected Land is conveyed by this Conservation Easement. 17. Reserved Rights Owners reserve all rights accruing from their ownership of the Protected Land including, without limitation, the right to engage in or allow others to engage in all activities or uses of the Protected Land that are not prohibited or limited by this Conservation Easement, the right to exclude all or any of the public from the Protected Land and to sell or I I 1 I ] ] ] dJ ] ] ] ] ] ] 1 ,.-' ] J Larkin Hoffman 9/4/2002 8:42 PAGE 22/26 RightFax Shorewood Conservation Easement Page 5 transfer all or part of the Protected Land subject to this Conservation Easement. Owners shall inform all others who exercise any right by or through them on the Protected Land of the terms of this Conservation Easement. Owners shall incorporate by reference the terms of this Conservation Easement in all deeds or other legal instruments by which they transfer any interest, including a leasehold interest, in all or part of the Protected Land. Owners shall give sixty days, prior written notification to the Trust of a transfer of all or any part offee title to the Protected Land. 18. Costs and Liabilities Owners retain an obligations and shall bear all costs and liabilities of any kind accruing from their ownership of the Protected Land including the following responsib ilities: A. Owners shall remain solely responsible for the operations, upkeep, and maintenance of the Protected. Land. Owners shall keep the Protected Land free of all liens arising out of work performed for, materials furnished to, or obligations incurred by Owners. B. Owners shall pay all taxes and assessments levied against the Protected Land including any taxes or assessments levied against the interest of the Trust established by this Conservation Easement. The Trust may, but is not obligated to, make any payment of taxes or assessments levied against the Protected Land or the interest established by this Conservation Easement and shall have a right of reimbursement against Owners for such amounts. C. Owners shall remain solely responsible for maintaining liability insurance for its uses of the Protected Land and the Protected Land itself. Owners shall remain solely responsible for all liabilities, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims, demands, or judgments, including, without limitation, reasonable attorney's fees, arising out of or relating to (i) p'ersonal injury, death, or property damage resulting from an act, omission, or condition on or about the Protected Land unless due solely to the negligence or willful act of the Trust, (ii) the obligations retained by Owners to maintain the Protected Land and pay taxes in Paragraphs 18(A) and (8), and (ill) the existence oftbis Conservation Easement. 19. Enforcement If the Trust finds at any time that Owners have breached or may breach the terms of this Conservation Easement, the Trust may give written notice of the breach to Owners and demand action to cure the breach including, without limitation, restoration of the Protected Land. If Owners do not cure the breach within thirty days of notice, the Trust may commence an action to (i) enforce the terms of this Conservation Easement, (ii) enjoin the breach, ex parte if needed, either temporarily or permanently, (iii) recover damages, (iv) require restoration of the Protected Land to its condition prior to Owners' breach, and (v) pursue any other remedies available to it in law or equity. If, in its sole discretion, the Trust determines that immediate action is needed to prevent or mitigate significant damage to the Protected Land, the Trust may pursue its remedies under this Paragraph without written notice or giving Owners time to cure the breach, I ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] J ] ] ] -I j ] Larkin Hoffman 9/4/2002 8:42 PAGE 23/26 RightFax Shorewood Conservation Easement Page 6 20. Costs of Enforcement If the Trust prevails in an action brought under Paragraph 19, Owners shall reimburse the Trust for all costs incurred by the Trust in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement including, without limitation, costs of suit, reasonable attorneis fees, and costs of restoration. If Owners prevail and the District Court finds that the Trust brought the action without reasonable cause or in bad faith, the Trust shall reimburse Owners' costs of defense including, without limitation, costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees. ' 21, Waiver The enforcement of the terms of this Conservation Easement is subject to the Trust's di.scretion. A decision by the Trust not to exercise its rights of enforcement in the event of a breach of a term of this Conservation Easement shall not constitute a waiver by the Trust of such term, any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, or any of the Trust's rights under this Conservation Easement. The delay or omission by the Trust to discover a breach by Owners or to exercise a right of enforcement as to such breach shall not impair or waive its rights of enforcement against Owners. 22. Acts Beyond Owners' Control The Trust shall not exercise its rights of enforcement against Owner for injury or alteration to the Protected Land resulting from causes beyond the reasonable control of Owners including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from any prudent action taken by Owners under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate significant injury or alteration to the Protected Land resulting from such causes. 23. Extinguishment If subsequent unexpected changes in the conditions surrounding the Protected Land make it impossible to preserve and protect the Conservation Values of the Protected Land, this Conservation Easement can only be extinguished, either all or in part, by proceedings in a court having jurisdiction. The amount of proceeds to which the Trust is entitled from an extinguishment shall be used consistent with the preservation and protection of the natural and scenic qualities ofland in Minnesota. 24. Proceeds To establish the amount of proceeds to which the Trust is entitled on extinguishment, the parties agree that this Conservation Easement has a fair market value ascertained by multiplying the fair market value at the time of the extinguishment of the Protected Land without this Conservation Easement by a fraction, the numerator ofwmch is the value of this Conservation Easement at the time of extinguishment and the denominator of which is the value ofthe Protected Land without this Conservation Easement. Not withstanding this, the amount of the proceeds the Trust is entitled to shall not be less than the values used to calculate the Owners' deduction for federal income taxation under Section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue' Code. 25. Assignment of Easement The Trust may transfer its rights and obligations in this Conservation Easement only to a qualified conservation organization, as provided in Section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code, which may hold conservation easements, as provided in I I I I } ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 1 ] J Larkin Hoffman 9/4/2002 8:42 PAGE 24/26 RightFax Shorewood Conservation Easement Page 7 Minnesota Statutes Sec. 84C.Ol(2) (1992). As a condition of such transfer, the Trust shall require the continued enforcement of this Conservation Easement. 26. Notices Any notice or other communication that either party wishes to or must give to the other shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the following addresses or such other address as either party shall designate by written notice to the other: OWNERS: City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 TRUST: Minnesota Land Trust .2356 University Avenue West, Suite 400 St. Paul, MN 55114 ATTN: Land Projects Committee 27. Governing Law and Construction This Conservation Easement shall be governed by the laws of Minnesota. 28. Entire Agreement This Conservation Easement sets forth the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes aU prior discussions. 29. Amendment The parties may amend this Conservation Easement provided that such amendment (i) shall not impair or threaten the Conservation Values of the Protected Land, (ii) shall not affect the perpetual duration of this Conservation Easement, (iii) is approved by the Trust pursuant to its Policy Statement on Amending Conservation Easements, and (iv) shall not affect the qualification of this Conservation Easement under Minnesota Statutes Sections 84C.O 1- 84C.05 or the status ofthe Trust under Section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code. 30. Binding Effect The covenants, terms, conditions, and restrictions of this Conservation Easement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties, their personal representatives, heirs, successors, assigns, and aU others who exercise any right by or through them and shall run in perpetuity with the Protected Land. OWNERS: TRUST: CITY OF SHOREWOOD MIA:f.TA L~UST By . B . \ David B. Hartwell, Presi~ent By Its By It.s I I I I ) I ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] "] J ] ] l Larkin Hoffman 9/4/2002 8:42 Shorewood Conservation Easement Page 8 ST ATE OF MINNESOT A COUNTY OF HENNEPIN PAGE 25/26 RightFax This instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of February, 1999, by and the and City of Shorewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation. , , respectively, of the STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY Notary Public This instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of February, 1999, before me by David B. Hartwell, President of Minnesota Lan st, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation. This instrument was drafted by: Minnesota Land Trust 2356 University Avenue West, Suite 400 St. Paul, lvfN 55114 651.647-9590 @ RENAY H lEONE .JJ P<<JTMt f'l,IIU) WNBOT" CARVeR COOl'liY . loW cc........l4\ ~ 011111JOQO I I ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] -; - Larkin Hoffman 8/4/2002 8:42 PAGE 26/26 Shorewood Conservation Easement Page 9 EXHffirr A Legal Description Lot 52, Auditor's Subdivision 133, Hennepin County, Minnesota. RightFax