112706 CC Reg AgP
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2006
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
AGENDA
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A. Ro 11 Call
Mayor Love _
Lizee
Turgeon _
Callies
Wellens
B. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Work Session Minutes, November 13,2006 (Att. - Minutes)
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, November 13,2006 (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 removedfrom 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. Temporary Gambling License for the American Legion Auxiliary Unit #259/Excelsior
(Att. - Deputy Clerk's memorandum)
D. Agreement with Minnetonka Country Club regarding Deer Removal (Att. -
Administrator's memorandum)
E. Concept Stage Approval for Residential P.U.D. (Att. Resolution)
Applicant: Mark Kawell
Location: 20025 Manor Road
F. Acceptance of the Badger Well Improvements (Att. - Director of Public Works
memorandum, Resolution)
G. Fire Services Agreement with City of Mound (Att. - Administrator's memorandum)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 27, 2006
PAGE 2 OF 3
H. Required Revisions to Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (Att. -
Engineer's memorandum)
I. Gideon Glen Conservation Easement (Att. - Draft Resolution, Easement)
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken.)
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
6. PUBLIC HEARING
7. PARKS - Report by Representative
A. Report on Park Commission Meeting Held November 14, 2006 (Att.- Draft Minutes)
8. PLANNING - Report by Representative
A. Conditional Use Permit - Fill in Excess of 100 Cu. Y ds. (Art.-Planning Director's
memorandum; Draft Resolution)
Applicants: Tim and Melia Liester
Location: 26355 Oak Ridge Circle
B. Conditional Use Permit - Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet
(Att.- Planning Director's memorandum; Draft Resolution)
Applicant: James Loffler
Location: 6030 Mill Street
C. Conditional Use Permit - Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet
(Att.- Planning Director's memorandum; Draft Resolution)
Applicant: Ryan Smolik, Lake Country Bldrs (Erickson residence)
Location: 6155 Murray Court
D. Conditional Use Permit - Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet
(Att.- Planning Director's memorandum; Draft Resolution)
Applicant: Paul V ogstrom
Location: 6140 Pleasant Avenue
E. Zoning Code Text Amendment Regarding Dock Regulations (Att.-Planning Director's
memorandum; Draft Ordinance)
9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Request for Approval to Install Street Light (Att. - Planning Director's memorandum)
Applicant: Shorewood Ponds Homeowners
Location: West End of Park Lane
B. Request for Speed Study for Park Lane (Art. - Planning Director's memorandum)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 27, 2006
PAGE30F3
C. Resolution for Preliminary Authorization for the EDA to Refinance Public Safety Bonds
(Att. - City Administrator's memorandum)
D. Amending Ordinance regarding Sump Pump Inspection (Art. - Planning Director's
memorandum)
E. Request to Review EFD Funding Formula (Att. - Administrator'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 27 November 2006
A meeting of the EDA will immediately follow the Council meeting.
Agenda Item #3A:
Agenda Item #3B:
Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval.
Staffing - no action required.
Agenda Item #3C: This item is a resolution to approve a Temporary Gambling License for
American Legion Auxiliary Unit #259/Excelsior. The date of the raffle is Saturday,
March 17,2007, at the American Legion Post #259,24450 Smithtown Road in
Shorewood.
Agenda Item #3D: The City Council has made approvals to put into motion a deer removal
program on the property of the Minnetonka Country Club. The City Attorney's Office
has drafted an agreement that delegates the City's authority under the DNR's special
permit to remove deer, and places all responsibility and liability with the Country Club.
Minnetonka Country Club Association, Inc., has signed the agreement. Staff
recommends approval of the agreement.
Agenda Item #3E:. In October, the City Council directed staff to prepare a resolution
approving a concept plan for a planned unit development consisting of four lots, which
are located for the most part in Deephaven, but served by Shorewood utilities and access.
A draft resolution is enclosed for your consideration. The Planning Commission will
hold a public hearing related to the development stage plans on 5 December.
Agenda Item #3F: Staff is recommending approval of the resolution that accepts the final
improvements for the Badger Field Well House, and releases final payment to Encomm
Midwest, Inc.
Agenda Item #3G: In May, the City Council discussed a proposal by the City of Mound to
change the funding formula for fire services in the next agreement for services. All of the
councils of the cities contracting with Mound, as well as the Mound city council,
indicated their agreement with the proposed formula and for a three-year agreement.
Mound has prepared the contract for 2007-2009 with the new formula (which will result
in a reduction to Shorewood's percentage of the MFD budget). Staff recommends
approval of the agreement.
,.
t' . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
..,.,
Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of November 27, 2006
Page 2 of3
Agenda Item #3H: On May 22, 2006 Council approved a new application for the Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Program, and directed staff to submit the application before
June 1,2006 as required by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The
MPCA has reviewed the application, and requires minor changes to five of the 35 BMP
Summary Sheets. The changes have been made and are presented for your information.
Agenda Item #31: A draft conservation easement for Gideon Glen, in favor of the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District has been included in your packet for your consideration. An
accompanying resolution will be distributed at the meeting on Monday.
Agenda Item #7 A: Director of Public Works Larry Brown will report on the November 14,2006,
Park Commission meeting.
Agenda Item #8A: Tim and Melia Liester intend to build a swimming pool in the rear yard of
their property at 26355 Oak Ridge Circle. Due to poor soils, they need to bring in
approximately 900 cubic yards of fill. The Planning Commission has recommended
approval of a conditional use permit, subject to conditions.
Agenda Item #8B: James Loffler has requested a conditional use permit to construct a garage on
his property at 6030 Mill Street that puts him in excess of 1200 square feet of accessory
space. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval.
Agenda Item #8C: The Ericksons propose to build a detached garage, that, when combined with
their existing attached garage, exceeds 1200 square feet. Their property is located at 6155
Murray Court. The Planning voted unanimously to recommend approval of the conditional
use permit necessary for the project.
Agenda Item #8D: Paul V ogstrom is building a new house at 6140 Pleasant Avenue. He wishes
to keep and renovate an old accessory building on the property which puts the property in
excess of 1200 square feet. Subject to conditions that the renovation occur in conjunction
with the new home, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval.
Agenda Item #8E: After several study sessions at which residential dock regulations were
discussed, the Planning Commission voted to recommend an amendment to the Zoning Code
that clarifies what a single dock is, and imposes a conditional use process on multiple dock
licenses.
Agenda Item #9A: The Shorewood Ponds Homeowner's Association has requested that a
street light be installed at the west end of Park Lane. The location of the light complies
with Shorewood's policy for street light locations. Staff has sent notice to all property
owners within 500 feet of the proposed light.
Agenda Item #9B: The Shorewood Ponds Homeowner's Association has petitioned for a
reduced speed limit on Park Lane. Staff recommends that the required State speed study
be requested for next June, in advance of which the City would conduct its own
preliminary study.
Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of November 27, 2006
Page 3 of3
Agenda Item #9C: City Council has been apprised of the proposal and progress to refinance
the remaining principal for the bonds for the public safety facilities. The City of
Shorewood is the lessee for the West Station, and will need to be an approving party for
the transaction as refinancing will change (actually reduce) the payment schedule in the
lease. The EFD Board, SLMPD Board, and City of Deephaven have approved
resolutions giving preliminary authorization for the Shorewood EDA to issue refunding
bonds. After pricing is obtained and known, all these parties, and the City Council,
would need to adopt later resolutions actually authorizing the sale and issuance of the
refunding bonds. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the resolution giving
the Shorewood EDA preliminary authorization to issue refunding bonds for the public
safety facilities.
Agenda Item #9D: At the November 13 meeting, Councilmember Wellens asked that the
Council consider repeal part or all of City Code Sec. 904.09, Subd., 2. Council requested
comments from staff regarding implications of the repeal before acting on
Councilmember Wellens's item. The staff memorandum is included with the agenda
materials. Council will need to decide what action it wishes to take.
Agenda Item #9E: The City of Deephaven has requested that the member city councils of the
Excelsior Fire District review the funding formula for the cities' payments to the EFD.
On November 15, the EFD Board heard comments from the Deephaven board member
and agreed to share them with their respective city councils. The Board also
recommended a framework that the city councils consider to perform the review. The
staff memorandum summarizes the comments and recommendation. Council will need to
decide what action it wishes to take.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2006
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5:30 P.M
MINUTES
budget
as well.
A. Roll Call
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M.
Present:
Mayor Love; Councilmembers Callies,
Wellens; Administrator Dawson;
Brown; and Acting City Engineer
Turgeon and
Public Works
Absent:
None.
B.
Review Agenda
Wellens moved, Callies seconded,
Lizee arrived at 5:31 P.M.
2.
Administrator
year, and the budgets
The Enterprise Funds
Fund Budget had been discussed earlier in the
be presented this evening for discussion.
to the City's business operations. The
evening of the budgets for Water Operations and Debt
Management, Recycling Funds, and Liquor Operations.
budget would be discussed first as Mr. Swandby (Liquor
for that discussion. He explained the Liquor Operations
to the General Fund, and Liquor Operations would break even
Dawson noted
projects. He stated
budget packet, and
an increase in the stormwater rates in order to fund future capital
for the spring 2006 curb-side-pickup of recycling were included in the
may want to discuss whether that program should be continued in 2007.
A. Liquor Operations
Director Burton explained the City anticipated small profit levels at its two current municipal stores; she
commented the 2007 budget had been prepared quite conservatively. A transfer to the General Fund of
approximately $40,000 was also anticipated. New countertops, painting, and new floor-covering were
budgeted for the Waterford store; and new wood shelving was budgeted for the Shorewood Plaza store.
The capital outlay for those improvements was approximately $30,000. The City had received notice
1#2A I
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORKSESSTlON MEETING
November 13,2006
Page 2 of7
from the owner of the Waterford store property that the owner planned to downsize the store's current
space, a provision of the current lease.
Burton then explained the combined budget for the two stores depicted a slight profit of approximately
$300. She commented the depreciation of approximately $31,000 was a non-cash item. She also
explained a transfer in from the liquor reserves for an amount of $30,000 was required to fund the
improvements at the Waterford store, and that transfer was offset by a transfer-out to the General Fund.
October
had been
$6,100 -
over 7% of its
priced in such a
expressed concern
not be able to purchase
the $40,000 transfer to
as profits.
Mr. Swandby explained although the net profits for Liquor Operations
the General Fund and the approximate $30,700 in depreciation should
In response to a question from Mayor Love, Director Burton
used for future improvements. Mr. Swandby stated that
Liquor Operations over that last seven years. In response
standard accounting depreciation standards were used in
,
depreciated would be
had been made from
Burton explained
In response to a question from Councilmember
would be downsized from 4,500 square-feet to
existing lease amount). The improvement costs were
a question from Mayor Love, Mr. stated the
sales. He explained the variety of stock
each particular item displayed may be
the Waterford store vvas
as well as expected.
the area over the last seven years.
store may have had an impact on the sales at the
be designated by the owners of the Shorewood
liquor stores were generally not viewed as a
In response to a question from
performing better than
Swandby commented
He thought the
store, and he has
Plaza.
destination, but were
Club on the on sales.
$3,100 of at-cost tobacco products inventory in stock
the sale of tobacco products at the two liquor stores at an
was slightly high on that day because new inventory
2005 profits from the sales of tobacco products was approximately
20% of the Liquor Operations net operating income and
sale of tobacco products was not promoted, nor were the products
competitive; the products were sold as a convenience to customers. He
that there could be a loss of customers because a customer would
products at the same time they purchased liquor products.
Swandby noted the current at-cost tobacco products inventory was valued at $2,300, and the majority of
that inventory was low turnover. In response to question from Councilmember Lizee, Swandby stated
cigarettes did have a shelf life.
In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, Mr. Swandby stated very little of the inventory
cost would be recovered if the suppliers would even consider taking the inventory back.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSTION MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 3 of 7
Mr. Swandby explained the majority of the profit on tobacco products was made on the high-turnover
items. He stated to sell the existing inventory would take a long time.
In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Mr. Swandby stated he did not think it was
worth renewing the tobacco license to sell only the existing inventory. His preference was to allow for
the purchase of additional high-turnover inventory if the license was to be renewed, and the sale of
product would only occur at the Shorewood Plaza store.
With
there would be no tax
In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, Director
advantage to disposing of the existing inventory.
B. Water Budget
Finance Director Burton explained the Water Fund
Service budget and the Water Operating Budget.
payments for the existing bond issues, including
improvements in 2006 and 2007. These debt
$380,000 and would be paid for by a transfer of $3
to explain the 2007 Water Operating Budget
while expenses (including depreciation) forecast to
expenditures to be funded from 2007
W oodhaven Well Abandonment and
Southeast water tower wash and
the Water Debt
budget included
water and well
Operating went on
to be approximately $693,000,
$1,372,000. Proposed capital
the Amesbury Well enhancements,
Radio Read Meter project, and the
Director Burton also stated
provide for
vvater rate increases
currently
1265 in 2007) and
possible feasibility
to assure the system could
at a three-year step approach to
Council several years ago. She noted there are
is expected to increase to approximately
quarter. The 2007 budget includes $8,000 for
the Public Works staff provided task specific
Accounting Department would capture that actual information.
improvements to the City's water system as a result of
had been a significant increase in the stability of the utilities
becoming internal to the City's operations.
In response Director Brown explained the increase in number of
connections and 2007 projected was conservative; if the number was budgeted
aggressively and the was short of the projection that could have serious negative impact on
funding. Brown there would be an additional 18 water connections on Wedgewood Drive
alone, and he anticipated additional connections in spring 2007 in the Amesbury Southeast Well area.
Councilmember Callies stated she had understood the cost of the proposed Southeast water tower wash
and rehabilitation would be $20,000 - $30,000. Director Brown explained the cost of that project was
projected to be $200,000; the $9,000 in the 2007 budget was for a wash only.
In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, Director Brown stated there would be a drop in
the request for capital improvement funds in future years as a result of the more recent major capital
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSTION MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 4 of7
improvement expenditures. Brown commented there was finally a shift to an "improvement mode" with
regard to the City's water system as a result of those expenditures.
In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, Director Burton stated she did not have figures
immediately available that identified what percentage of the residents connected to City water used less
than the minimum 10,000 gallons per month; she stated Staff would research that and provide that
information to Council. Wellens suggested if there was a significant percent that were under that amount,
maybe the City should consider lowering the minimum water-usage amount. noted senior citizens
and low-income residents were billed at a discounted rate. stated the reason for a
minimum rate was to help cover the cost of the entire system.
Burton then
Environmental
processing. The
2006. The City's share
known
the
the
I
projects that had been
improvements.
Councilmember Lizee commented the list of water-system
completed was impressive. She stated it was also important to
In response to a question, Director Brown stated the
provided it was planned to be done that way.
C. Sanitary Sewer Budget
With regard to the Sanitary Sewer
connections to its Sanitary Sewer
expenditures for year 2007 were
included capital improvements of
capital improvement projects would be
Fund was very stable, and it
Director
the City currently had about 2,800
proposed operating revenues and
85,000. She noted those amounts
of two lift stations. The
She commented the Sewer
in expenses was the Metropolitan Council
charge, a charge the City pays for wastewater
of approximately $112,000 (24%) over
using a formula based on the last actual
She noted the City would not be subj ect to
the MCES planned to implement in 2007. For
that program, the City would have to be proactive regarding I &
for that purpose. Although Staff did not recommend a
current rate is $70 per quarter), it was imperative that the
Director with the significant increase in the MCES wastewater charge. He
then stated it the City to hire an Engineering Consultant to assess the current 1&1
situation and to monitoring practices to provide additional and/or more accurate data
for determining of flow and cost. He guesstimated the cost for such a study would be
$100,000, a expenditure from his perspective. He was concerned the MCES estimated
much of the City's flow when determining the City's share ofthe cost.
Mayor Love stated he thought it would be beneficial to gather benchmark data that the City could use in
the future. He questioned if there were neighboring cities that would willing to participate in that type of
study - his experiences had been that the State and County appeared to be more receptive to addressing
concerns when more than one city shared the concerns. Director Brown commented wastewater did not
flow in conjunction with cities' boundaries.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSTION MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 5 of7
In response to question from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Brown stated the City had its sewer lines
televised approximately 10 years ago. He commented the City had not done much with trying to reduce I
& I, that would be done within the next few months. He stated a significant portion of I & I comes at the
connection points to the right-of-way sewer line; those connection points were replaced when a house is
rebuilt.
D. Recycling Budget
was
of approximately
from Hennepin County
in the recycling program
Director Burton stated the Recycling Budget contemplated revenues
$120,000. The City anticipated receiving approximately $21,000 in
Grant Funds. She commented that the number of households
remained stable at approximately 1,100 households per month.
Administrator Dawson stated the six-city group (including
services had prepared an RFP for those services. He
result of a new contract. He noted the rates had been
increase was proposed at this time, and the impact
contract for recycling
t rate increase as a
stated no rate
reserves.
Administrator Dawson stated the City was somewhat
some items as part of it spring clean-up He
other items, and the costs for the site
explained the net costs for the overall
whether or not they used the service; that
Staff heard from utility customers. The
household, while the
service cost was
was the costliest
of the convenience
of curb-side collection for
City also offered a drop-off site for
the residents who used that site. He
paid by residents, regardless of
was the single-most complaint
in 2006 was $15 per
(the total curb-side collection
because the curb-side collection
Council may wish to consider if the benefit
Councilmember
clean-up
willing
curb-side collection as part of their spring
to determine what the residents would be
they would prefer to have included in the
collected residents' used appliances at the curb-side.
in geographic size between Shorewood and Greenwood
provide such a service would be quite large.
his ward there were a number of residents that had expressed a desire
collection service; the residents preferred the drop-off site
that approach could be viewed as more equitable.
In response to a Councilmember Lizee, Director Brown stated having the collection site
located at the Public site was very manageable. Lizee questioned if the drop-off site program
could be expanded to include additional items. Brown stated that was viable, but the challenge was the
City may not generate enough recyclable waste to warrant a being charged a minimum fee by Hennepin
County for pickup of the waste, particularly household hazardous waste. Brown commented that the City
had received a request for the yard-waste collection program to be reinstituted.
Discussion ensued with regard to the costs versus benefits of a curb-side collection program versus a
drop-off site program, and the reaction of the residents with regard to the program.
Mayor Love stated he was in favor of a once-a-year curb-side collection program, but he thought it would
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSTION MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 6 of7
be appropriate for the residents who participated in the program to fund the costs, for equity reasons.
In response to a comment by Councilmember Turgeon, Director Brown stated the Public Works site
should continued to be used for the recycling drop-off site because the site could be controlled with
regard to what items were dropped off.
Mayor Love stated he thought he heard a common desire among Councilmembers and Staff to revise the
City's spring clean-up program. He also stated he did not think Councilor residents thought it was
appropriate for residents to pay for curb-side collection if they didn't use
and
through the City's waste
Administrator Dawson commented residents could arrange for
management services provider.
Discussion ensued with regard to how to charge for
agreed that the curbside collection service should be
Councilmembers
E. Stormwater Management
contemplated revenues and
payment due the Sewer Fund for
of approximately $191,000
project ($70,000, which would be
sewer survey and design
the Boulder Bridge
A stormwater rate increase to
per quarter) was contemplated
in 2003 when Council approved a small
increase since the inception of the Stormwater
$4 per quarter to $13 per quarter.
Director Burton stated the 2007 Stormwater
expenditures of $325,000. The amounts the
the Gideon Glen land acquisition. Also
for the following projects planned for
funded by a grant from the Metropolitan
project ($74,000); the Manitou Drive /
Pond project survey ($
$5.00 per month from $1
to fund those
inflationary
Fund in 1993. She
the
that had arisen with regard to stormwater
and those needed to be addressed. Therefore, an increase in
would be adequate funds to address those issues. Administrator
work for three of the projects would be completed in 2007,
would be completed in 2008 and 2009.
Director
Turgeon, Engineer Gurney stated the Manitou Drive /
the Glen Road stormwater drainage issues.
Mayor Love
necessary to address
the increase in the stormwater rates in order to fund the projects
drainage issues.
In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, Director Brown explained a significant portion
of the drainage projects were located on the western side of the City primarily because historically rural
areas were served by culvert drainage rather than storm-sewer drainage. Mayor Love commented areas
that had been developed earlier tended to have more drainage problems as those developments were
subject to fewer restrictions during those times.
In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, Engineer Gurney explained the Stratford Place
project would address an eroding bank in that area - the bank would be reshaped, the area would be
cleaned out, and rip-rap would be installed for protection.
CITY OF SHORE WOOD WORK SESSTlON MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 7 of7
Councilmember Turgeon suggested the City may want to consider assessing the four property owners
that would benefit from the Boulder Bridge Pond improvements the cost of those improvements. Director
Brown stated it may an opportune time for the City to consider how it would want to fund stormwater
management improvement projects in future years; many of the projects to-date had been funded by the
developers.
In response to a question from Director Burton, Mayor Love stated
consensus amongst Councilmembers to support the proposed rate change.
Staff had assessed a
was deemed the most
analysis of drainage
determine if the rate
In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Director
number of rate increase alternatives and the proposed increase
appropriate. She stated after the majority of the problems
problem areas within the City had been resolved, the rate
was still appropriate.
Administrator Dawson commented that
completed, there would continue to be
stormwater ponds.
be
out the
Dawson explained an outcome
problem areas that needed to be
In response to a comment from
of the analysis of drainage problem
addressed and a probable cost for the
3. ACTIVITY
This item was not
4. OTHER
No other
5.
the City Council Work Session Meeting of November
Christine
Woody Love, Mayor
ATTEST:
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13,2006
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
B.
Review Agenda
Administrator
Nielsen; Director
Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present.
Mayor Love; Councilmembers Callies,
Dawson; Attorney Keane; Finance
of Public Works Brown; and Acting
Absent:
None
i\},
Lizee moved, Callies seconded, APprovin~;t~~~~~Wda as
'i '~ :j t t @ I 1 t
,:(t
H,
passed 5/0.
, ,- i > i ~, ';
2.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Coun~jJI!11Unt";~ession MinJ~~~}lbctobe;!~"P~~06
dl1lii' 'G\lllllh 'II!;'
Wellens moved, Tu~gd<<~if~condedmt-pproving the;~ity,;Council Work Session Minutes of October
23,2006, as presented. Ml',tfRn pas~ijd 5/0. illi;!
!lllll! III 'I II Ii! II I mil! I \ i ill!;;'" i' lli;l'l'l"
B. .d!llmmHmIR~ncil RQg<<l~r Mee'tHiglll11ljnutes, October 23,2006
, } Ii ; J t :: :~ ""I ~ 'i }: ; f t i i ~. :1 111 t. 1, - t ~. I; t I I;',
Callie,fllWl~ved, Lizee s~~~~tf;~' APp~"~\n~i the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of October
23, ~0061~n~fpresented. MotjtMipassed'~1(J;
, I I ". ~. ,. -,- .:. 'f 1 ~. -, "
~n~U~}~., -:n:~t:;:;
C. ';ljllm~nvassing Bo~~d Meeting Minutes, November 8, 2006
;G\'llIlh', ;II!'
Lizee moved, CallieMif!f~on~~~i;Approving the Canvassing Board Meeting Minutes of November 8,
2006, as presented. M!~~'~mlpassed 5/0.
qq"'
f'd
D. City Cduncil Special Meeting Minutes, November 8, 2006
Callies moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the City Council Special Meeting Minutes of
November 8, 2006, as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Love reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
1#2B I
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
November 13,2006
Page 2 of 10
Callies moved, Wellens 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. Approving ORDINANCE NO. 430, "An Ordinance Amending Chapters 603 and
703 of the Shorewood City Code."
I 1 f Il :1: .'~ ;
F. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-08~'lll4Jj(:Resolution
Connection Charges Related to thetl\~~utheast A.rea Well /
Interconnection Project, City Proj~ci\Q~m?" .
D. 2006 Audit Engagement Letter
E. Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Fina'ncial
Motion passed 5/0.
5.
'iT]
4.
MATTERS FROM THE
li':::
ji:jj:;:J,;
tllt:,;-
There were no matters from the floor
A.
Chief for the Excelsior Fire District. Chief
served as
residents of
Ambulance for
for the warm welcome the cities and their communities had
position. He stated he had served as risk and emergency
the last 14 years, and for the last 10 of those years he had
for the Chaska Fire Department. He and his family were
two positions he was a paramedic for Ridgeview Medical Center
Gerber stated from had observed to-date the EFD's greatest strength was its people, both
members of the EFD members of the communities. He then stated he thought there were three
challenges facing the 1) communication, both internal and with the communities; 2) the continual
strive to be a beneficial and positive team; and 3) to continue the EFD's focus on providing great service
to the EFD as a whole (both internally and externally). He went on to state over his first two months as
Fire Chief it had become apparent to him that the members of the EFD had to improve the District's
marketing of itself (what it was and what services it provided) to the EFD member cities' residents,
businesses and members of the EFD. He noted that from his perspective the EFD provided emergency
services that were "second to none", and that message needed to be effectively communicated to all
affected parties. He also stated over the next few months an effort would be made to better define the fire
inspection program and prepare an effective work plan for the program.
CITY OF SHORE WOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 3 of 10
Councilmember Turgeon thanked Chief Gerber for the efforts expended to host the EFD Fire Prevention
Open House that was held on October 12, 2006. Gerber stated EFD Inspector Murphy-Ringate and the
other firefighters had spent a great deal of time in preparing a quality health and safety program for the
event.
On behalf of the City of Shorewood, Mayor Love thanked Chief Gerber for joining the EFD. He stated it
was a tremendous tribute to Gerber that there was consensus amongst all the EFD stake holders
participating in the chief selection process to select Gerber as the choice for
1.
an update on the
B. Report by Tom Skramstad on Lake Minnetonka
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Board Chair
following LMCD activities (as detailed in the report
d.
Milfoil treatment "demonstration
Milfoil harvesting - the ultimate
Public Access Inspection Program -
video inspection pilot program in
Protection Company, a program that allowed
Joint LMCD/DNR exotic sp~j
Lake Minnetonka Shoreline'
information on properties wh
where the dock and platform
DNR's
LMCD
ma
a.
b.
c.
e.
f.
g.
LMCD (re: lake level monitoring, the MCWD's
meetings, etc.)
h.
In res Wellens, Mr. Skramstad explained the LMCD had
t\ L
author !~l~mall amount to the Environmental Century Protection Company, a
startup coillfl~.~i.. That comp I had the actual pilot program, and was in the process of
developing irriPf~~!"lid technolo that would activate the camera at the launch site when it detected metal
(from a trailer, 1ic~~~~jplate, e~;; in front of it. That company had received a number of orders from the
State of Wisconsin f0~!lI~<r. r<rillpte monitoring system, including cameras.
"C, '; T 1: i.~!;'
In response to a questi~rr from Mayor Love, Mr. Skramstad clarified the LMCD could only be more
restrictive than the State of Minnesota (the DNR) with its dock regulations.
6. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Wedgewood Drive, Mallard Lane, Teal Circle Watermain Improvements Final
Assessment Hearing
Mayor Love opened the Public Hearing at 7:29 P.M., for the final assessment of water main installation as
part of the Wedgewood Drive, Mallard Lane, and Teal Circle Road Reclamation Project.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 4 ofl 0
Administrator Dawson stated the public hearing this evening was a continuation of the special
assessment process (the 429 process) that had been initiated earlier in the year to finance the installation
of water main as part of the Wedgewood Drive, Mallard Lane, and Teal Circle Road Reclamation Project.
He stated a number of residents that had requested to have the balance of their connection charge added
to their assessments. He noted the procedures utilized in the Public Hearing.
Engineer Gurney thanked the residents along the project corridor for their patience during the project. He
commented the watermain had been tested and certified, and residents would now be able to connect to
it. He stated the final assessment public hearing this evening was the last the special assessment
process (Chapter 429) remaining to be completed.
Gurney explained the construction costs,
consistent with the preliminary
preliminary assessment roll of $8,523 per
installation component;
limits. Gurney then
a single residential
paid would be
exceed
line from
Gurney reviewed the site plan location for the entire project and
he noted the watermain was extended from Smithtown Road
reviewed the City's water connection policy - the
property; $15,000 for a duplex; and $20,000 for a
reduced by any amount assessed for watermain
$lO,OOO). He noted the property owner was
his/her house to the City's water valve in the right-of-way.
and observation costs, were
not be any deviation from the
proposed special assessment,
property, $6,477 for a duplex,
been offered the option to include
single-family residential property owners
their full connection charges be specially
assessment be financed over fifteen years in equal
Callies, Engineer Gurney clarified there were other
for their connection charge.
portion of the Public Hearing at 7:35 P.M.
Drive & 5387 Wed ewood Drive, stated she had not requested to connect
to City water at this ti . She questioned how the assessment for the watermain installation would be
paid for. Engineer Gurney explained if the Council adopted the special assessment, the assessment would
be provided to the County Auditor for inclusion on an individual's property taxes beginning in 2007.
Mayor Love closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:38 P.M.
Turgeon moved, Callies seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 06-089, "A Resolution Adopting
Assessment of Watermain Installation as part of the Wedgewood Drive, Mallard Lane and Teal
Circle Road Reclamation Project, City Project 02-02." Motion passed 5/0.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 5 of 10
7. PARKS
A. Report on the Park Commission meeting held October 24, 2006
Commissioner Westerlund reported on matters considered and actions taken at the October 24, 2006,
Park Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting).
Director Brown listed some of the activities be considered for the Winter Community Event.
8. PLANNING
he had no scheduled
In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, Director
installation date for the replacement slide for Silverwood Park.
In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, DirectotliiIPrown
Eddy Station was scheduled to be installed over the next two
Director Nielsen reported on matters considered and
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that
hearings scheduled for the November 14, Planning
A. Conditional Use Permit
Applicant:
Location:
Center (5745 Country Club Road),
building to be located on Badger Field, a City
Center to make that application at
the Planning Commission held on Public
2006, Planning Commission Meeting, and the
review and recommendation.
feet
back from
proposed bui
of the building
structure which was proposed to measure 12-
the request so that the structure would be located five feet
snow storage. That location would necessitate shortening the
to 20-feet long because the terrain dropped off to a wetland area east
Nielsen then related Commission had stated the proposed structure would be a reasonable
use of that property. agreed with the Staff recommendations listed in the Staff report.
The Commission also recommended that there should be no windows in the structure (including the
overhead door) to minimize vandalism, and that a paved apron be installed between the parking-lot curb
and the overhead door. Both Staff and the Commission recommended the color of the structure
complement those of the Southshore Center.
Nielsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the C.U.P. subject to the final
location for the structure being approved by the Director of Public Works and the City Engineer. The
Park Commission also recommended approval of the C.U.P. (motion passed 5/1).
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 6 of 10
Nielsen noted the proposed resolution stipulated the structure would be owned by the City and the
Southshore Center would lease the structure from the City. The Southshore Center would also be
responsible for providing insurance on the structure, with the City named as a co-insured.
Turgeon stated she would recuse herself from Council discussion on the C.U.P. and from voting on the
proposed resolution due to a potential conflict of interest.
Councilmember Wellens expressed concern with comments/concerns expressed by the Park Commission.
One of the concerns was with the proposed location of the structure - the ~~~lRlaced into the ground to
mark the proposed location and dimensions of the structure had been kn9H~ed down (possibly by a errant
pass on the field, and if there had been an individual attempting tO~.~~~>>!fihat pass the individual could
have been injured). He also expressed concern with the need for~lr.tonlgYil'ffj,lding to house items for a
once-a-year sale. He then expressed concern with regard to \Vha~l\Vould ha,~Rm~ to the structure if the
Southshore Center and the Friends ceased their operation~llmJh:~oll.1mented t~~nl~e did not believe a
precedent had been established when the City had allowe~I~0uth Tonka Little Leag~mfo locate structures
within Freeman Park - South Tonka Little League used:~~e 'park where the Southshore:q,enter pid not.
Councilmember Lizee stated the C.U.P. request had beene~ij!fffte9!;~mh~.9nsidered by qofh the Planning
Commission and the Park Commission, and both Commission'$I\1~f:'recommended approval of the C.U.P.
With regard to the Park Commission ques~i~~ing what types ofi ;~ri1mr would be stored in the proposed
structure, Lizee commented that the Coundll~~~ll.l~e Planning CO&~'r~ion as a general practice do not
ask an applicant what types of things they ~9Uil~!lrf~0~in an accessij~,imructure. She then stated the
representative for the Southshore Center had)i~~evio~~tW!;lfijB!~ined theil~enter had a need for storage
space for seasonal equipment in addition to domitiRns it y~~:l~Rt~~HQrit~yearly sale.
~. ii 11
~ ~, '
; ';.':' , . ,;,.j,:-..,:..;...::,:::::i:,
I..!...!'" :';::!.<'.:
.. ".,' ,. ;., __ :' "C' .. .~.... '.' .... ..
;: ; ,~ :; .\ f -! :1 :i.I :;-; :.," :l 1. { j :~
Callies moved, Turgeon~~c(irY(}~"I~.l1\~opting RES~LUTION NO. 06-090, "A Resolution Granting a
Conditional Use Per~\ti~or the <:J<<<<~truction of al~torage Building for the Southshore Center on
Park Property." M(JtHhilRfJ.~sed 3/~4~ with Wellens '~\~~~nting and Turgeon recusing.
9.
';:j.l!j:!1It:1.:, i1'1%1.1 )tii",
GENE~lrm-EW B{IJ~~ESS iiHllllHW HHilT
Hl!"iIlUm!n:,.' ;'ll:m:
,!!!~::I' GideoH:tql~!~i~ns~I;~~,~asemcnt
DireSto;llij;tql~;en stated one :~flilhe fin~~lactions remaining to be taken to complete the Gideon Glen
project w~~llt"~1;1stablishmentl,RA a conservation easement to ensure that the property will remain as
conservation O~~th\space in peffil>;etuity. He had distributed a sample conservation easement that was
provided in the clffilf"Conserv:4rion Open Space Plan which was adopted in March 2003. He explained
that although the sa<<i~\1,e~I~~&ent granted one to the Minnesota Land Trust, Staff recommended the
easement be modified S(~l~>>,~easement would be granted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (the
City's partner on the l'fcoject), and to revise some of the use conditions. A resolution to execute the
easement would be presented to Council at Council's next meeting.
iJf"
In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, Attorney Keane clarified there were various
eligible recipients of land conservation easements under Chapter 84 of Minnesota Statutes, and
subdivisions of the State would be eligible recipients.
In response to a statement from Councilmember Wellens, Attorney Keane stated the easement would be
modified to allow sediment removal from the property.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 7 of 10
Council directed Staff to continue this item to the next Council meeting.
B. Reconsideration of Resolution No. 06-086 (this item was discussed at the request of
Councilmember Wellens)
Councilmember Wellens stated he would like to reconsider 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". He explained hisdf;4F~iRnale for the request to
reconsider was Ron Johnson, 5355 Shady Hills Circle, had presented thYiWity with correspondence from
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. (MFRA) stating it had deterll}in~~!ll1at Mr. Johnson did not have
a sump pump or a sump pit inside his house. He stated Mr. Johns?mWada~$~!f:;~quested all his delinquent
sump-pump surcharges prior to those for 2006 be reversed beca>>se he ha"I~;sump-pump inspection
performed.
Councilmember Callies
surcharges
to drop
not
Chapte~904.09, SUbd:~\~ll~~flt~~,ing that he
of a without a vYA~~ant; and the
liberties (iH particular the
Wellens explained his issue was with regard to City
did not think it was appropriate to conduct an
Councilmembers took an oath of office to protect the
Fourth Amendment of the Constitution).
;j:i
Wellens moved, Reconsidering Resolutiodl.N:
Attorney Keane clarified the action taken by d
resolution certifying utility charges to the 20
surcharges for Mr. Johnson
meeting was to approve a
the delinquent sump-pump
She
or not Mr. Johnson's previous sump-pump
23, 2006. She had supported the decision
had an inspection completed in 2006, but she did
surcharges would be appropriate. She went on to state the
2, was not germane to the 2006 delinquent surcharges.
of the City Code had been upheld by the Courts; and the
searches. Whether or not the City Code should be amended
In response to a
only to reconsider the
Councilmember Callies, Mayor Love clarified the motion at hand was
Councilmember Turgeon stated her understanding of Resolution No. 06-086 was it dealt with 2006
delinquent charges that would be placed on the 2007 property tax rolls.
Mayor Love stated he continued his support for the decision made at the last Council meeting. Lizee
echoed his comments.
Motion passed 1/4 with Callies, Lizee, Love and Turgeon dissenting.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 8 of 10
C. Consideration of Repealing Provisions in City Code Sec. 904.09, Subd. 2.
Councilmember Wellens stated he thought City Code Chapter 904.09 Subd. 2 was no longer necessary as
all the houses in the City had been inspected, and that subdivision should be removed from the Code.
Councilmember Lizee stated inspections would be appropriate for new construction. Wellens stated new
construction was addressed in other sections of the Code. Council member Callies stated that suggestion
should be considered as an agenda item at a future Council meeting.
Reconsideration of Resolution No. 06-081
Councilmember Turgeon)
Subd. 2, on a future
On behalf of Council Mayor Love directed Staff to place City Code Sec.
Council meeting agenda for discussion.
D.
at the request of
'''1:>
_~ t { ! ; > j i
Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, Reconsidering, IResofo.tion No.
Approving Licenses to Retailers to Sell Tobacco J?ft~aucts for CUB Foods
Stationstore #12, and Oasis Market."}::
\"
Resolution
Holiday
.i",-;-i- ,'-'l::..:..,.C\:.','
-".,.,;"',,;.,.,.,. ""'-",. ,",
..,_c"',. "'_"
Councilmember Turgeon stated the resolution had been dis6U~~~~I~~d approved at an October 23, 2006,
Council meeting and discussed at a 13, 2006, Councili:>>l~rk session. Although she supported
the decision on October 23 to cease the tobacco produqt~lir City-owned liquor stores, she
, ) { ~: :t
believed the decision may have been a clear und:er~t~li\~ing and discussion of the
implications of that decision. It would have riate for th1ill!:ouncil first to define a policy
that stated the City would no longer be in the <<~I'~~~%6;products. She then proposed the
renewal of a tobacco license 2 (Wes~l$t6re) only for the sale of all existing
inventory at that store. ..
but he would not necessarily support a
the concerns and preferences of the Liquor Operations
to allow the liquor stores to sell the existing inventory. She
to make minimal profit from the sale of the existing inventory
Councilmember
liquor store with the
he would support the issuance of a tobacco license to a City-owned
that it would be only for the sale of existing inventory.
Administrator Dawson stated a resolution had been prepared and it would need to be amended to reflect
the above discussion.
In response to a comment by Mayor Love, Administrator Dawson clarified a tobacco license was for a
one-year time period.
Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION 06-091, "A Resolution Approving
License to Retailer to Sell Tobacco Products" as amended, "That a License for the sale of tobacco
products be issued for a term of one year, from November 13, 2006 to November 13,2007, for the
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 9 of 10
sale of inventory in stock at the time of the issuance of this license, consistent with the
requirements and provisions of Chapter 302 of the Shorewood City Code, to Shorewood Liquor
Store #2, 23670 State Highway 7."
Mayor Love stated he would appreciate discussion with regard to the proposed resolution. He clarified
the reason he had supported the original resolution was he did not think it was appropriate for the
government to profit from the sale of tobacco products once the government had settled a tobacco
lawsuit. He then stated he was not sure the profit that could be made off the sale of the existing inventory
would offset the cost of a $250 tobacco license.
10.
away.
Councilmember Callies stated the existing inventory was not
confident any profit would be made from what was sold.
Councilmember Turgeon stated the approximate profit
therefore, if the existing inventory was sold it would
In response to a comment made, Attorney Keane
Councilmember Callies stated if the premise behind
that government should not profit from of tobacco
the proposed resolution.
Councilmember Turgeon again stated
resolution prior to adopting it.
of the original
Councilmember Lizee
products was legal in
controlled, and the
In response to
approved a
the
Dawson explained if the resolution was
liquor store would be obligated to pay for
WORKS
None.
11.
A. Administrator & Staff
Administrator Dawson stated a joint meeting of the EFD Board and the SLMPD Board was scheduled for
6:00 P.M. on November 15, 2006, at the West Side Station to discuss the possible refinancing of the
bonds for the public safety facilities.
CITY OF SHORE WOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
November 13, 2006
Page 10 oflO
B. Mayor & City Council
Mayor Love stated there was an SLMPD Board meeting scheduled for 4:00 P.M. on November l5, 2006,
to discuss a proposed union contract.
12. ADJOURN
Callies moved, Lizee seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of November 13,
2006, at 8:25 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST:
PAYABLESAPPROVALS
For 11/27/06 Council Meeting
Prepared
Date:
ccounting Clerk
Reviewed by: Date:
Bonnie Burton, Finance Director
Approved by: Date:
Craig awson, City Administrator
PAYROLL APPRO V ALS
For 11/27/06 Council Meeting
Prepared by: .~ Date:
Michelle T. Nguyen, 1'. Accounting Clerk
Reviewed by: Date:
Bonnie Burton, Finance Director
Approved by: Date:
Craig wson, 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
DATE:
November 21,2006
CC:
Mayor and City Council Members ~
Jean Panchyshyn, Executive Secretary/Deputy Clerk ~ ·
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator
TO:
FROM:
RE:
TEMPORARY GAMBLING LICENSE -American Legion Auxiliary Unit
#259IExcelsior
American Legion Auxiliary Unit #259/Excelsior has submitted an application and appropriate
fee for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Permit to conduct a raffle drawing on Saturday, March 17,
2007 at the American Legion Post #259,24450 Smithtown Road in Shorewood. Proceeds from
the raffle drawing will be used to support veteran related projects.
COUNCIL ACTION
A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving the Temporary Gambling LiGense for the American
Legion Auxiliary Unit #259/Excelsior, for a raffle drawing to take place on Saturday, March 17,
2006, at the American Legion Post #259,24450 Smithtown Road in Shorewood.
,.
" . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
..,.,
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 06-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING
A TEMPORARY GAMBLING LICENSE
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code, Chapter 301, provides for the
licensing of certain gambling activities in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City prescribes certain restrictions concerning eligibility
for such licensing and application, whereby the licensee will hold the City harmless for all
claims arising out of the granting of such license; and
WHEREAS, the following applicant has met the eligibility requirements
for such a license and has agreed to all terms and conditions of the agreement contained in
the license.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Shorewood as follows:
That a single temporary license for the conduct of gambling as specified in the
terms and conditions of the license be issued to American Legion Auxiliary Unit
#259/Excelsior. Said raffle to be held on March 17, 2006 at the American Legion
Post #259 at 24450 Smithtown Road, Shorewood, Minnesota.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shore wood this 27th day of
November, 2006.
Woody Love, Mayor
ATTEST:
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator
10/13/2006 FRI 12:04 FAX 651 639 4032 Gambling Control Bd
Minnesota Lawful Gambling
LG220 Application for Exempt Permit
An exempt pennit may be issued to a nonprofit organization
conducting lawful gambling activity on five or fewer days. and
awarding less than $50,000 in prizes durings a calendar year.
Organization Information
Organization name
~002/008
Page 1 of 2 2/06
Fee $50
For Board Use Only
Fee Paid
Check No.
Previous lawful gambling exemption number
X ?J g
FPu. nty
HeJ\ f\ .
Name of chief executive officer (CEO)
Firs:ra:'(O.e :
Z{)\o\
Type of Nonprofit Organization
Type of nonprofit organization (check one)
., q/ Fraternal 0 Religious
J2Sl.Yeteran D other nonprofit organi:z:ation
Type of proof of nonprofit status - attach a copy (see instructions)
D N~!lArtlcles of In~~ or Certificate Of Good Standing - Minnesota Secretary of State's Office
o Internal Revenue Service .
D Affiliate of parent nonprofit organization (charter)
~Proof previously submitted and on file with the Gambling Control Board
Gambling Premises Information
Name of premises where gambling activity will be conducted (for raffles, list the site where the drawing will take place)
Avvlen(~ 1\ POSt- ~_f [Iub ') ,_._
Address (do not use PO box)
N \R1tun
Date(s) of activity (for raffles, indicate the date ofthe drawing)
. '~J'
Check the bo~or boxes that indicate the type of gambling activity your organization will be conducting:
D "Bingo Raffles D "Paddlewheels 0 .Pull-labs 0 "Tip boards
,
"Gambling equipment for pull-tabs. tipboards, paddlewheels, and bingo (bingo paper, hard cards, and bingo ball
Gelactlon device) must be obtained from ~ distributor liconsed by the Gambling Control Board. To find .a licensed
distributor, go to www.gcb.state.mn.us and click on list of Licensed DIstributors. Or call 651-639-4000.
This form will be made available in altemative
format (I.e. large print, Braille) upon request
The information requested on this form (and
any attachments) will be used by the Gambling
Control Board (Board) to determine your
qualifIcations to be involllEld in lawful gambling
activities in Minnesota. You have the right to
refuse to supply the information requested;
however, if you refuse to supply this
Information, the Board may not be able to
determine your qualificatlol'ls and. as a
consequence. may refuse to issue you a
permit. If you supply the information
reCluesled, the Soard will be able to process
your application.
Your nOime and and your organization's name
and address will be public information when
received by the Board. All the other information
that you provide will be private data about you
until the Board Issues your permit When the
Board issues your permit, all of the Infonnation
that you have provided to the Board In the
process of applying foryourpermitwill become
public. If the Soard does not issue you a
permit, all the information you have provided
in the process of applying for a permit remains
prJvate, with the exception of your name and
your organization's name and address which
will remain public.
Private data about you are available only to
County
~{\
the following: Board members, staff of the
Board whose work assignment requires that
they have access to the information; the
Minnesota Department of Public Safety: the
Minnesota Attorney General; the Minnesota
Commissioners of Administration, Finance,
Oind Revenue; the Minnesota I.egislative
Auditor, national and international gambling
regulatory agendes; anyone pursuant to court
order: other individuals and agencies that are
specifically authorized by state orfederallaw
to ,have access to the Infonnation; individuals
and agencies for which law or legal order
authorizes a new use or sharing of information
after this Notice was given; and anyone with
your consent.
10/13/2006 FRI 12:05 FAX 651 639 4032 Gambling Control Bd
~ 003/008
LG220 Application for Exem~e~mit Av ~ .
Organization Name ~ { ("", 5 ( 1)../1 \L( ~ U^t!-
Local Unit of Government Acknowledgment
;) $q/~f'51.b l<..-
I
Page 2 of2
2f06
If the gambling premises is within city limits. the If the gambling premises is located In a township, both
city must sign this application. the county and township must sign this application.
On behalf of the city, I acknowledge this application. On behalf of the county. I acknowledge this application.
Check the action that Check the action that
tho city is taking On this application. the county is taking on this application.
~he city approves the application with no o The county approves the application with no
ailing period. waiting period.
o The city approves the application with a 30 day o The county approves the application with a 30 day
waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a
permit after 30 days (60 days for a first class permit after 30 days. .
city).
D The city denies the application. o The county denies the application.
Print nama of city ,S~oceU:Dod Print name of county
Signature of c1ty personnel receiving application Signature of county personnel receiving application
lltle
Title Date----1------1_
Date--1_'_ TOWNSHIP: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that
the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity
within the township limits. [A township has no statutory
authority to approve or deny an application
(Minnesota Statute 349.213, subd. 2).]
Print name of township
Signature Of township official acknowledging application
Title
Date----1----1_
Chief Executive Officer's Signature
The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I acKnowledge that
the finandal report wnl be romPle:C;r"ed to the Gambling Con'ol Board w'hin 30 days of the dale of our
gamblingaclivi;,. L~~
Chief executive officer's signatu~~ ~ r<V .. ,. /"JA;>(" -
::7 ,
Name (please print) \Z()Io\u l ,DlA~ "- Date I \ I L/~
Mail Application.and Attachments
Complete an application for each Send
gambing activity: . the completed application,
. one day of gambling activity . a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and
. two or more consecutive days of . a $50 application fee. Make check payable to "state of Minnesota").
gambling activity To: Gambling Control Board
. each day a raffle drawing is held
1711 ~est County Road e. Suite 300 Soutll
Roseville, MN 65113
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cl.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council A k
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator \.it)
November 22,2006
Approval of Agreement with Minnetonka Country Club for Deer Removal
On October 23, 2006, City Council approvals set in motion a number of matters to allow the removal
of deer under a special removal permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
The City has received, but not yet executed, the special permit from the DNR. Up to 20 deer may be
removed from the Minnetonka Country Club property from December 1, 2006, through April 30,
2007. Under the terms approved by the Council, the City and the Minnetonka Country Club
Association (MCCA) would enter into an agreement whereby MCCA would assume all responsibility
and liability related to the removal of deer. The City Attorney has prepared, and the MCCA has
signed, an agreement to effect this relationship as directed by the Council.
At present, the MCCA is contacting potential contractors to remove the deer, who will subsequently
be reviewed by SLMPD prior to authorizing them to conduct the removal.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve and authorize execution of the agreement with
Minnetonka Country Club Association, Inc., for removal of deer from the latter's property.
,.
".J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
AGREEMENT FOR DEER REMOVAL
This Agreement for Deer Removal (this "Agreement") is made this _ day of
November, 2006 (the "Effective Date"), by and between the City of Shorewood, a Minnesota
municipal corporation (the "City"), and the Minnetonka Country Club Association, Inc., a
Minnesota corporation ("MCCA").
RECIT ALS
A. The City and MCCA desire to control the deer population on the property
commonly known as the Mimletonka Country Club, 24575 Smithtown Road, Shorewood,
Minnesota (the "Property").
B. The City has obtained a Special Permit for Deer Removal from the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources (the "Special Permit"), attached hereto as Exhibit A, which
grants the City permission to remove deer from the Property, subject to certain terms and
conditions.
C. The City desires to delegate its authority to remove deer pursuant to the Special
Permit to MCCA, subject to the terms and conditions set forth below.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements and covenants
contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows:
l. Delegation of Authoritv. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City
hereby delegates its authority to remove deer under the Special Permit to MCCA and
MCCA hereby assumes such authority. This delegation of authority shall commence on
December l, 2006, shall be nonrenewable, and shall automatically terminate without
notice at l1:59 p.m. on April 30, 2007, unless earlier terminated by the City pursuant to
the terms of this Agreement.
2. Removal of Deer. MCCA hereby agrees to use its best efforts to remove from the
Property the maximum number of deer permissible under this Agreement.
3. Costs of Removal. All costs of deer removal pursuant to this Agreement shall be paid by
MCCA. MCCA shall defend and indemnify the City against any claims asserted against
the City for payment of costs related to deer removal services provided to MCCA or the
City under this Agreement.
4. Independent Contractors. MCCA may use independent contractors for the removal of
deer pursuant to this Agreement. Personnel who conduct deer removal activities shall be
sufficiently skilled to safely and properly carry out such activities. All independent
contractors, personnel of independent contractors, or other personnel who will conduct
deer removal activities on MCCA's behalf must be authorized by the South Lake
Minnetonka Police Department ("SLMPD"). No later than seven (7) days prior to the
3590305.4
commencement of deer removal operations under this Agreement, MCCA shall submit to
SLMPD a list of all independent contractors, personnel of independent contractors, and
other personnel who will conduct deer removal activities on the Property. SLMPD may,
in its sole discretion, refuse to grant authorization for any independent contractor or
individual to conduct deer removal activities under this Agreement. If SLMPD refuses to
authorize a sufficient number of independent contractors and personnel in order for
MCCA to carry out deer removal activities on the Property, MCCA may continue to
arrange for and submit personnel to SLMPD until such time as a sufficient number of
personnel have been approved.
5. Conditions and Restrictions. MCCA and all independent contractors removing deer
pursuant to this Agreement will comply with the following rules and restrictions:
(i) All conditions and restrictions of the Special Pem1it shall be complied with by
MCCA and any person conducting deer removal activities on MCCA's behalf.
(ii) No more than the amount of deer permitted to be removed under the Special
Permit shall be removed from the Property during the term of this Agreement.
(iii) All deer removal activities shall be restricted to the Property, and any person
conducting deer removal activities on MCCA's behalf shall refrain from entering
onto private property for the purpose of deer removal.
(iv) Deer removal shall be conducted by trapping and dispatching by firearm in a safe
and humane manner.
(v) All deer killed pursuant to this Agreement shall be properly field dressed within
two (2) hours of killing and antlers may not be removed by any person conducting
deer removal activities on MCCA's behalf.
(vi) The meat of all deer killed shall be salvaged, as appropriate, by donation to food
shelves, charitable organizations, or needy individuals. Each deer shall be tagged,
with tags provided by the City for this purpose, with the Special Permit number,
date taken, sex and age of the deer, and name of the recipient.
(vii) MCCA shall keep records of the number, date taken, sex, and age of all deer
removed pursuant to this Agreement. Within three (3) days of receipt ofa written
request by the City, MCCA shall deliver such records to the City.
(viii) Carcasses and entrails shall be disposed of in a manner provided by the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources.
6. Compliance with Law. In engaging in the activities permitted under this Agreement and
the Special Permit, MCCA and its contractors shall abide by all applicable statutes, laws,
ordinances, rules, and regulations.
3590305.4 2
7. Indemnity. MCCA agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the City, its officers and
employees, harmless from any and all liability, claims, damages, costs, judgments, and
expenses, including all attorneys' fees, resulting directly or indirectly from an act or
omission of MCCA, its agents, employees, or contractors in the performance or non-
performance of the acts permitted by this Agreement or the Special Permit and against all
losses by reason of the failure of MCCA to fully perform, satisfy, or abide by, in any
respect, all obligations, conditions, rules, and restrictions under this Agreement.
8. Insurance. During the term of this Agreement, MCCA shall maintain a liability insurance
policy with limits of at least One Million Dollars ($l,OOO,OOO) for each person and each
occurrence, for both personal injury and property damage, that may arise directly or
indirectly from the deer removal activities contemplated by this Agreement. This policy
shall name the City as an additional insured and shall provide that MCCA's coverage
shall be the primary coverage in the event of a loss. The policy shall also insure the
indemnification obligation contained in Section 7. A certificate of insurance, which
verifies the existence of this insurance coverage, must be provided to the City prior to the
commencement of deer removal activities under this Agreement.
9. Assignment. N either party shall be permitted to assign this Agreement without the
express written consent of the other party, which may be withheld for any reason.
lO. Termination. This Agreement shall automatically terminate upon the earlier of the
expiration of the delegation of power pursuant to Section 1 or the termination of this
Agreement by the City. In the event the City, in its sole discretion, deems that MCCA is
not complying with any term of this Agreement, the City may terminate this agreement
by written notice to MCCA. All indemnification obligations of MCCA under this
Agreement and remedies available under Section 11 shall survive any termination of this
Agreement pursuant to this Section 10.
11. Remedies. In the event MCCA breaches any term of this Agreement, the City may seek
any and all remedies available at law or in equity. In the event the City breaches any
term of this Agreement, MCCA may, as MCCA's exclusive remedy, terminate this
Agreement.
l2. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
l3. Merger. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Agreement
supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject
matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties
relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers
of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when expressed in writing and
duly signed by the parties.
3590305.4 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the
Effective Date.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD:
By:
Its Mayor
By:
Its City Administrator
MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB ASSOCIATION, INe.:
By:
~ lA/~
(7~~
Its:
3590305.3
4
EXHIBIT A
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES SPECIAL PERMIT FOR
DEER REMOVAL
3590305.3
A-l
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
1200 Warner Rd
st. Paul, MN 55106
SPECIAL PERMIT NO.13926
(Deer Removal)
October 3l, 2006
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Pennission is granted to:
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator (952) 474-6543
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood MN 55331-8927
The City of Shorewood is hereby granted pennission to take deer from property of the
Minnetonka Country Club Association, Inc. in the City of Shorewood. This permit is
granted subject to the following conditions:
1. Deer shall be taken by fireann in a safe and humane manner;
2. This pennit is effective subject to provisions of paragraph l5 and expires at midnight
April 30, 2007;
3. The number of deer taken shall not exceed twenty (20);
4. Deer of any age or sex may be taken;
5. Deer may be taken day or night with ol",{.Vitho~t tP:~'d~id of artific~!, light, over bait,
and/or from a vehicle; deer may be t~,Il-~,d.1m.d.~p;at~p-e~'1'(l"th~,Jrap;"}J..? deer shall be
taken from private property without the written penni~~ion\ofthe l~doin.er;
~ ....=",,,...
6. The City of Shorewood may retain personnel necessary to carry out activities
authorized by this permit. All such personnel shall be sufficiently skilled to safely and
properly carry out their assigned tasks;
7. All deer killed pursuant to this permit shall be properly field dressed within two hours
after killing. Antlers may not be removed by permittee;
8. Conservation Officer Steve Walter (952) 466-2296 shall be called prior to
commencement of removal activities. Carcasses of all deer killed shail be salvaged and
utilized as appropriate by donation to food shelves, charitable organizations or needy
individuals. Each deer will be tagged by permittee with the special pennit number, date
taken, sex and age of the deer and name of the recipient: tags will be provided for this
purpose;
9. The City of Shore wood shall be solely responsible for any and all damage or injury to
persons, domestic or wild animals and reall)r personal property of any kind., resulting from
any activities undertaken pursuant to this permit:
10. The City of Shorewood shall hold the State of Minnesota, its officers, agents, and
employees harmless from any and all liability and damages resulting from any activities
undertaken pursuant to this permit; .
11. This pennit shall not be construed as a guarantee or representation by the Department
of Natural Resources or the State of Minnesota that any particular method or degree
of deer removal will result in any attenuation of deer depredation problems.
12. This pennit shall not be construed to exempt the City of Shorewood, their agents or
employees, from any provisions oflocallaw, ordinances or regulations that may apply to
the activities authorized by this pennit;
13. The City of Shorewood shall consult local law enforcement authorities concerning
public safety in the activities authorized by this permit;
14. The pennittee must submit the attached Report of Deer Harvest and Disposition and
return unused tags to the Regional Wildlife Manager within ten (10) days of the expiration
of this permit.
l5. This pennit is not valid until one copy of the acceptance clause has been signed and
dated by the pennittee and sent to and received by the North Metro Area Wildlife Office
(Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 5463-C W Broadway, Forest Lake MN
55025). The second copy of the acceptance form should be retained by the pennittee. This
pennit may be revoked at any time upon written notice to the pennittee.
Tim Bremicker
REGIONAL WILDLIFE MANAGER
~N OF WILDLIFE
~'7~' ~~
C: Cathy Hamm, Regional Enforcement Supervisor
Scott Carlson, District Enforcement Supervisor
Steve Walter, Conservation Officer (952) 466-2296
Diane Vejtruba, Research
Dennis Simon, Wildlife Management Section Chief
Bryan Lueth, Urban Area Wildlife Manager
Tong Yang, DNR Community Outreach Liaison
ACCEPTANCE CLAUSE
I have read the foregoing pennit, Special Pennit No. 13926, and agfee to abide by the
conditions set forth there in.
Signed:
City of Shorewood
Dated:
Report of Deer Harvest and Disposition
050604
Permit No.
13926
This form must be returned to Tim Bremicker, Regional Wildlife Manager, 1200
Warner Rd, St. Paul, MN 55106 within 10 days ofthe expiration of the permit.
Date
Time
Sex
Harvest Location Possession Tag # and
Disposition: Name, address, phone #
Tag#
Recipient:
Tag#
Recipient:
Tag#
Recipient:
Tag#
Recipient:
----
Tag#
Recipient:
Tag#
Recipient:
--
Tag#
Recipient:
-
Tag#
Recipient:
Tag#
Recipient:
,
,
Tag#
Recipient:
Tag#
Recipient:______.__
----.-----------------
Tag# .
Recipient:
-
Tag#
Recipient:
.-------
Tag# -
Recipient:
-- ---~
l--_ - -----
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONCEPT PLAN
FOR BOWMAN ADDITION P.U.D.
WHEREAS, Richard Bowman is the owner of certain real properties located in the
Cities of Shorewood and Deephaven, County of Hennepin, legally described in Exhibit A,
attached hereto and made a part hereof; and
WHEREAS, Mark Kawell (Applicant) has, on behalf of Richard Bowman, applied
to the City for approval of a Concept Plan for the construction of a residential planned unit
development known as Bowman Addition P.U.D., containing four (4) single-family lots on
approximately 10.6 acres of land which straddles the Shorewood/Deephaven municipal
boundary; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his
recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated
28 September 2006, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at its regular meeting of 3 October 2006
recommended approval of a Concept Plan for the Bowman Addition P.U.D., subject to
conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was considered by the City Council at its
regular meeting of 23 October 2006 at which time the City Planner's memorandum and the
minutes of the Planning Commission were reviewed and comments were heard by the City
Council from the Applicant and City staff; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
1. The Applicants' request for approval of a Concept Plan for the Bowman
Addition P.D.D. is subject to the following conditions of approval:
(a) The Applicants propose to divide the subject property into four (4)
lots as shown on Exhibit B, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
(b) The proposed private road serving Lots 3 and 4 will be widened to
14 feet of paved surface.
3f
(c) The applicant's attorney shall prepare easement and maintenance
agreements for the private road and for the common driveway serving Lots
1 and 2.
(d) The sanitary sewer and water mains shall be owned and maintained
by the City of Deephaven.
( e) The new lots shall pay to the City of Shorewood the local sanitary
sewer access charges and water connection charges in effect at the time the
final plat is filed.
(f) The Applicants shall submit a tree preservation and reforestation
plan as part of the development stage plans.
(g) The Applicants shall dedicate wetland conservation easements over
the City designated and Wetland Conservation Act wetlands and the buffer
area required in Shorewood's Wetland Code.
(h) As part of the final plat for the property, the Applicant shall place
survey monuments locating the wetland buffer area on each lot.
(i) Protective covenants for the P.UD. shall clearly set forth provisions
for protecting the wetlands (i.e. no dumping of yard waste, no fencing, no
site alteration, etc.).
(j) Properties within the P.UD., and the lot at 20005 Manor Road will
be assigned addresses consistent with Shorewood's house numbering
policy.
(k) Approval is subject to the review and approval of the City of
Deephaven.
2. City Council approval of the Concept Plan is subject to all applicable
standards, regulations, and requirements of the Shorewood City Code, including,
but not limited to the following:
(a) Section 1201.04 Subd. 1. regarding the procedures for review and
approval of conditional use permits;
(b) Section 1201.06 Subd. 3. regarding special procedures for the
establishment of a P.UD. by conditional use permit;
2
(c) Section 1201.25 Subd. 6.(b)(1) regarding the purpose of concept
plan approval.
3. Approval of the Concept Plan is not intended, nor does it act to grant
approval of a Development Stage Plan or Final Stage Plan which are required
pursuant to Section 1201.25 Subd. 6.(c) and (d).
CONCLUSION
1. The application of Mark Kawell for approval of the Concept Plan for the
Bowman Addition P.U.D. as set forth above is hereby approved.
2. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHOREWOOD this 27th day of November 2006.
WOODY LOVE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK
3
(INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION - EXHIBIT A)
4
(INSERT CONCEPT PLAN - EXHIBIT B)
5
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Mayor and City Council
Craig Dawson, City Administrator
Larry Brown, Director of Public Works p /
November 22, 2006 '/
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Accept Final Improvements Badger Field Well House
Encomm Midwest, Inc. has completed final improvements and punch list items for the Badger Well
House. Representatives from Encomm have submitted final paperwork, bonds and withholding
certificates.
Therefore, Staff is recommending approval of the project and release of the payment retainage
amount for the project.
As part of the close out of the project, the financial numbers for the construction of the project are
as follows:
Original Construction Contract Amount:
Final Construction Amount:
Percent Under Contract
$
$
%
498,894.00
465,3 14.75
6.7
Staffwas able to reduce the amount expended for the contract, based upon observed soil and
contaminated soil conditions in the field.
Recommendation
Staff is recommending approval of the resolution that accepts the final improvements for the Badger
Field Well House, and releases final payment to Encomm Midwest, Inc.
,.
t..J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 06-
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FINAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR
THE BADGER FIELD WELL HOUSE PROJECT
CITY PROJECT 98-06
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has entered into a contract with Encomm Midwest,
Inc., for City Project 98-06, Badger Field Well House; and
WHEREAS, the Contractor has petitioned for final acceptance of the project based on
work performed to date; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has reviewed said Improvement and declares
that the Improvement appears to conform to the approved plans and specifications.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
The City hereby accepts the work completed, pursuant to a one year guarantee provided for in
said contract for construction and shall commence as of the date of this resolution subject to the
following items:
1. The Contractor must make satisfactory showing that he has complied with the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes 290.92 requiring withholding State Income tax; and
2. Evidence in the Form of an affidavit that all claims against the Contractor by reasons
of the Contract have been fully paid or satisfactorily secured.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shore wood this 27th day of
November, 2006.
WOODY LOVE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
CRAIG W. DAWSON, 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: City Council
FROM: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator
DATE: November 22,2006
SUBJECT: Fire Services Contract with City of Mound
Shorewood contracts with the City of Mound Fire Department to provide fire and rescue services to
The Islands. As a practical matter, this is the only and best provider available to Shorewood to serve
The Islands. Mound also provides services under contract to the cities of Minnetonka Beach,
Minnetrista, and Spring Park. These contracts expire at the end of this year.
At a City Council work session in May, the City of Mound reported on results of a study and
recommendations by Mound's Fire Commission, an advisory group with representation from each
contract city. For the past several decades, the funding formula was based 50 percent on assessed
market valuation ofthe cities in the fire contract, and 50 percent on the previous three years' average
of firefighter hours spent in the city. After four months of study, the funding formula endorsed by the
advisory Fire Commission was:
. 20% on percentage of previous three years' average firefighter hours in each City
. 20% on market valuation of land
. 30% on market valuation of structures
. 30% on population
The advisory Fire Commission also believed that the minimum term of the service agreement should
be three years, and the City of Mound indicated a preference for five years.
Under this formula, in 2006 each contract city would have seen a reduction in contract costs, and
Mound would have had a 2.7 percent increase. Shorewood would have had a 13.2 percent reduction,
from $25,600 to $22,500.
The Mound City Council indicated it would be supportive of this formula and either a three-year or
five-year duration, provided that all of the contract cities also agreed. At is work session in May, the
Shorewood City Council indicated that it would be supportive of this formula, but if a five-year
contract duration occurred that a five-year average of firefighter hours in each city should be used.
#.
~ . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
..,.,
2007-2009 Mound Fire Contract
November 27,2006, City Council Meeting
Page 2
Over the summer and in the cities' budgets, the councils of the contract cities all indicated agreement
with the new formula and a three-year duration of the agreement. Mound has prepared a new three-
year (2007-2009) service agreement which includes the new formula and minor updated wording.
The wording in the agreement for each contract city is identical, with the exception of the name of the
city receiving services in each agreement.
Future Trends: The growth in the service area is occurring in the City of Minnetrista. Minnetrista
and Mound have been working on agreements regarding new facilities that would be located in
Minnetrista. As the years go on, Minnetrista will assume a greater percentage of the contract costs
for the cities, as it will have greater valuation and demand due to new development. Shorewood's
percentage of the total will drop somewhat, and its costs should increase slowly.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve and authorize execution of the Joint
Cooperative Agreement and Contract for Fire Service between the cities of Shorewood and
Mound.
JOINT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AND
CONTRACT FOR FIRE SERVICE
1. THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
2. Sections 438.08-10, and 471.59, this 1st day of January, 2007, by and between the City
3. of Mound, a municipal corporation in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota
4. (Mound), and the City of Shorewood, a municipal corporation in the County of
5. Hennepin and State of Minnesota.
6. RECITALS:
7. The City of Shorewood wishes to have fire protection service furnished by
8. Mound's City Fire Department.
9. Mound has the facilities, equipment, and capability to provide fire protection
10. service to the City of Shorewood and is willing and able to do so.
11. Mound has prepared for the City of Shorewood an annual financial budget
12. covering truck bonded indebtedness, fire equipment, capital outlays, annual operating
13. costs, and the costs and expenses of the Mound Fireman's Relief Association.
14. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants of the parties
15. hereto, it is agreed as follows:
16. Section 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS. For purposes of this Agreement,
17. the terms in this section have the meanings given them.
18. 1.01. "Contract term" means a three year period during which fire protection
19. services are to be rendered or were rendered to the City of Shorewood by the
20. Mound City Fire Department. The contract term commences January 1,2007, and
21. terminates on December 31, 2009.
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
1
22. 1.02. "Contracting city" means any city that is a party to this Agreement. The
23. contracting cities are Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista, Shorewood, and Spring Park.
24. 1.03. "City of Mound Fire Budget" includes all preliminary estimated and
25. actual costs of operating the Mound Fire Department for a given contract year
26. as set forth in Mound's adopted budget of the City.
27. 1.04. "Area Fire Service Fund" is a proprietary fund which includes all revenues
28. generated and expenses accumulated by the Mound Fire Department.
29. 1.05. "Fire Service Area" of each contracting city is that area within
30. the contracting city shown on Exhibit A attached hereto.
31. Section 2. AREA PROTECTED. The Mound Fire Department will
32. provide fire protection service for the City of Shorewood in the area ("Fire
33. Service Area") described in Exhibit A.
34. Section 3. LEVEL OF SERVICE. Mound, through its fire department,
35. will endeavor to prevent, protect and save life and property from destruction by fire
36. and provide other emergency response services in the protected area to the same extent as
37. within Mound. The extent of service provided through the Mound Fire Department
38. includes, but is not limited to, fire inspection and prevention services by a member of the
39. Fire Department or an approved subcontractor. Other services will include professional
40. quality fire and rescue protection, emergency medical, HAZMA T and special rescue
41. services. Any fire inspection and prevention subcontractor employed by a contracting city
42. must be approved and supervised by the Mound Fire Department Fire Chief.
43. Section 4. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY. Fire protection services
44. rendered to the contracting cities are under the direction of Mound. The degree of
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
2
45. services rendered, the standards of performance, the hiring and discipline of the
46. personnel assigned, and other matters relating to regulation and policies, are determined
47. by Mound. Disputes between the parties to this Agreement as to the extent of
48. functions and services to be rendered, or the level or manner of performance of such
49. services, are to be resolved by the Mound City Manager. If a contracting city disagrees
50. with the resolution of the dispute, the contracting city may appeal in writing, within
51. seven days of receipt of the resolution, to Mound asking for arbitration as provided in
52. section 8. Mound must submit a monthly report of services rendered to each contracting
53. city. Mound will genuinely consider any suggestions regarding either contractual,
54. financial, and service level changes that it considers helpful or beneficial.
55. Section 5. VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS OF THE CITY OF MOUND.
56. Personnel assigned to provide fire protection services in a contracting city will be paid-
57. on-call firefighters of Mound. Mound retains and assumes all obligations with
58. regard to worker's compensation, Firefighter's Relief Association, withholding tax,
59. insurance, etc. for such firefighters. A contracting city is not required to furnish any
60. of the foregoing fringe benefits or assume any other liability of employment to any
61. employee or other person assigned to fire protection duty in the contracting city.
62. If a contracting city employs such an employee or person directly, independent of this
63. Agreement, to provide fire protection services in the contracting city, all obligations
64. and liabilities with respect to employment of such employee or person will be the
65. responsibility of the contracting city. No such direct employment of fire protection staff
66. may be entered into by the contracting city without first obtaining the written approval of
67. the Mound City Manager.
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
3
68. Section 6. TERMINATION. This agreement is in effect until December 31,
69. 2009, and will be renewed automatically thereafter for successive three-year contract
70. terms unless cancelled with respect to any party by that party serving written notice upon
71. the Mound City Manager and the other contracting cities by December 3l of the year
72. prior to the next ensuing contract year.
73. Section 7. FIRE CONTRACT COST CALCULATION FORMULA:
7.01 Allocation of contract costs to contracting cities are based upon four allocation
74. and fire formula factors.
75. The factors are: U & V-L & V-S & P. These factors are explained and weighted
76. as described below. The factors are not weighted equally, but together totall 00% of
77. the fire contract cost calculation formula.
78. . Utilization of firefighter hours (U) - 20% of the fire service formula and costs
79. are based upon each contracting city's average percentage of the total firefighter
80. personnel hours used for the most recent previous three year period.
81. . Value Land (V-L) - 20% of the fire service formula and costs are based upon
82. each contracting city's average percent of market valuation ofland from the most recent
83. previous three year period as provided by the Hennepin County Assessor. Each
84. contracting city's market valuation of land percentage is based upon that city's percent
85. of the total market valuation of all the land values within the Mound Fire Department
86. serVIce area.
87. . Value Structure (V-S) - 30% of the fire service formula and costs are based
88. upon each contracting city's average percent of market value of structures from the most
89. recent previous three year period as provided by the Hennepin County Assessor. Each
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
4
90. contracting city's market valuation of structure percentage is based upon that city's
91. percent of the total market valuation of all the structure values within the Mound Fire
92. Department Service Area.
93. . Population of City (P) - 30% of the fire service formula and costs are based
94. upon each contracting city's average percent of total population in the Mound Fire
95. Department service area from the most recent previous three year period. The
96. population figures are to be provided and certified by each contracting city's clerk.
97. 7.02. FIRE DEPARTMENT FUNDS. To facilitate the accounting and
98. reporting of all fire funds, a special Fund of Mound called "Area Fire Service Fund"
99. is created and continued. All operating expenses of the Fire Department are to be paid
100. from this Fund. Other separate Fire Department funds already in existence include, Fire
10 l. Department Capital Outlay Fund (Equipment Reserve), Firemen's Relief Association
102. Fund, and Fire Truck Bonded Indebtedness Fund. Reports on each of these Funds will
103. be provided annually to each contracting city by Mound as soon as practicable following
104. the end of the contract year. Reports related to these Funds are the responsibility of
l05. the Mound Finance Director/Treasurer.
106. 7.03. BUDGET. Not later than September 1 of each year, Mound must
107. notify each contracting city of the estimated costs for the next contract year. The
108. final estimated cost will be determined by Mound and the contracting cities notified
109. by December l5 of each year. The final estimated cost must be paid in equal quarterly
110. installments on January 1, April 1, July 1 and October 1 of the next contract year.
111. The contracting city understands and agrees that it is impossible to project with
l12. complete accuracy the actual cost for labor and equipment as well as the service to be
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
5
113. required by each city for the forthcoming contract year, and therefore agrees to a yearly
114. audit to adjust the prior year's estimated cost of service to the actual costs incurred by
115. Mound. Mound will tabulate the actual cost of the Fire Department expenses for the
116. prior contract year and will, as soon as practicable, submit a summary of actual costs
117. to each contracting city. The actual cost and a summary thereof of the Fire Department
118. expenses for the prior year will be submitted by Mound to all contracting cities annually.
119. The actual costs set forth for the prior contract year may result in either a credit or a
120. debit to each contracting city. A surplus carried over from the prior year must be placed
121. in a Operations reserve fund maintained by Mound. The Operations reserve fund will be
122. accrued until a fund balance equal to ten percent of the prior year's operating budget is
123. arrived at. When the ten percent operations reserve fund level is established, each
124. contracting city will decide whether to reduce its annual operating contribution to offset
125. the operating fund balance or contribute to sustain the ten percent reserve fund level. The
126. Operations reserve fund will be utilized to pay any increase in actual costs for service, or
127. ifthere is a Operations reserve fund shortfall, the additional annual costs will be included
128. in the following year's budget. The allocation of the credits or debits will be made
129. pursuant to the basic cost formula set forth in Section 7 above.
130. 7.04. DEFICIENCIES. If any of the above mentioned Funds requires
131. additional funds prior to the next contract year, Mound will notify each contracting city
132. of such shortage in estimated revenue. In the event of a shortage of revenue, Mound will
133. elect to either transfer amounts from the reserve fund(s) or to pay them as part of the
134. current year's quarterly costs set forth in Section 7.
135. Section 8. ARBITRATION. If a contracting city is aggrieved by a
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
6
136. determination of Mound as to the allocation of the actual costs of the prior year's
137. service, the contracting city may appeal that determination within 30 days after receipt
138. of Mound's annual audit made pursuant to Section 7.02. The appeal must be made in
139. writing and addressed to Mound asking for arbitration by a Board of Arbitration. The
140. Board of Arbitration consists of three persons: one to be appointed by Mound; one to be
141. appointed by the appealing contracting city; and the third to be appointed by the two so
142. selected. The name of each arbitrator selected must be submitted, in writing, to the other
143. party. In the event that the two arbitrators so selected do not appoint the third arbitrator
144. within 15 days after their appointment, the Chief Judge of the District Court of Hennepin
145. County has jurisdiction to appoint, upon application of either Mound or the appealing
146. contracting city, the third arbitrator to the Board. The third arbitrator need not be a
147. resident of Mound or the contracting city, but must be a city manager or city
l48. administrator. The arbitrator's expenses and fees, together with other expenses, not
149. including counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration, are to be divided
150. equally between the parties to the arbitration. Arbitration is to be conducted in
151. accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 572. The
152. arbitration will be binding on both parties.
153. Section 9. CAPITAL EXPENDITURES OR INTERIM INCREASES IN
154. THE FUND. The contracting cities may be heard regarding any proposed capital
155. expenditures by Mound that are not in the annual estimated cost budget and that exceed
156. $25,000, or interim increases in the funds not otherwise included in the annual budget.
157. Notice of such proposed and non-budgeted capital expenditures or interim increases in
158. Funds must be in writing to the contracting cities prior to actual expenditures for such
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
7
159. items. The contracting cities will thereafter have ten days in which to approve or
160. disapprove the same in writing. If a contracting city does not disapprove the
161. expenditure, it is agreed that such proposed expenditure may be made and the cost
162. thereofinc1uded in the year's budget.
163. Section 10. FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION. The
164. contracting cities agree that it is essential that the firefighters of Mound have a relief
165. association that will provide retirement benefits to compensate the firefighters for the
166. volunteer work hours they contributed. The contracting cities also realize the wisdom of
167. contributing to this fund on a pay-as-you-go basis. The contracting cities also recognize
168. that as retirement levels increase that additional contribution will be required beyond the
169. present 2007 contribution level. The retirement costs paid to the Relief Association
170. Special Fund is to be considered as a part of the prior years operating costs. The
171. contracting city's amount being paid for relief benefits will be determined and paid as per
172. the estimated budget as described in Section 7. An increase in pension benefits and/or
173. increase in contributions to the Relief Association Fund will be determined by Mound.
174. Section 11. PRIOR CONTRACT. If Mound cancels this Agreement
175. under the provisions of section 6 or if a contracting city cancels the Agreement for
176. any reason, then the Fire Department Capital Outlay Fund established by Mound to
177. purchase capital equipment will be evaluated and the contributing city's capital
178. investment will be considered.
179. Section 12. PRIOR AGREEMENTS. Notwithstanding any language herein
180. to the contrary or in prior contracts between the parties, any credit or debit due to a
18l. contracting city or to Mound because of prior agreements and contracts for fire protection
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
8
182.
183.
184.
185.
186.
187.
188.
189.
190.
191.
192.
193.
194.
195.
196.
197.
198.
199.
200.
201.
202.
203.
204.
205.
206.
207.
208.
209.
210.
211.
212.
213.
214.
215.
216.
between the parties will be payable in the year following pursuant to the contract
currently in force.
Section 13. NOTICES. Written notices and communication required to be
given under this Agreement are to be in writing and sent by U.S. Mail or fax addressed:
If to Mound:
City Manager
Mound City Hall
534l Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
If to Minnetonka Beach:
City Administrator
Minnetonka Beach City Hall
2945 Westwood Road, P.O. Box 146
Minnetonka Beach, MN 55361
If to Minnetrista:
City Administrator
Minnetrista City Hall
770l County Road 110 West
Minnetrista, MN 55364
If to Shorewood:
City Administrator-Clerk
Shorewood City Hall
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
If to Spring Park:
City Administrator
Spring Park City Hall
4349 Warren Avenue
Spring Park, MN 55384
Section 14. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Agreement is effective as of
January 1, 2007, as to Mound or any contracting city that has, on any date, filed a
certified, executed copy of this Agreement with the Mound City Manager.
Section 15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement constitutes the
entire Agreement between the parties and supersedes and replaces any prior agreement
between the parties on the same subject.
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
9
217. Section 14. AMENDMENT. This Agreement may be amended only with
2l8. the written approval of Mound and each contracting city.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY OF MOUND
By: Woody Love
Its Mayor
By: Pat Meisel
Its Mayor
And
And
By: Craig Dawson
City Administrator
By: Kandis Hanson
City Manager
300873v3 DJK MU220-3
10
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, Public Works Director
Steve Gurney, City Enginee~ ~l~
V'(J?/i
November 27,2006
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Required Revisions to 2006 Permit Application
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP)
On May 22,2006 Council approved a new application for the Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Program, and direct staff to submit the application before June 1,2006 as required by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Part of this submittal included "BMP Summary Sheets" that
outlined how the City would address each ofthe requirements of the permit.
Attachment #1 is the November 9,2006 letter received from the MPCA is response to the City's
application. The MPCA has reviewed the application, and they are requiring minor changes to five of
the 35 BMP Summary Sheets.
The changes are relatively minor in nature and can be addressed without any changes to our current
policies. Due to this fact, and the MPCA's need to receive the updates immediately, Staff made the
changes and returned the revised BMP Summary Sheets to MPCA.
The majority of the comments are related to non-stormwater discharges to the City's stormwater
system. Attachment #2 contains the list of items specifically identified by MPCA as non-stormwater
discharges. Based on discussions with MPCA, they are requesting that non-stormwater discharges be
explicitly mentioned in the BMP Summary Sheets even if a city has identified them as not being a
significant contributor of pollutants to the City's storm sewer system, as is our case.
Attachment #3 contains the revised sheets and supporting information sent to MPCA in response to
their letter.
Recommendation
No action is needed for this item.
,.
t . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
..,.,
Mi
II
520 Lafayette Road North I St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 I 651-296-6300 I 800-657-3864 I 651-282-5332 TTY I www.pca.state.mn.us
CERTIFIED MAIL NO. 7003 3110 0004 8476 5504
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
November 9, 2006
Mr. Steve Gurney, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Shorewood
57555 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331-8927
RE: MS4 Storm water Permit Application and BMP Summary Sheets, City of Shorewood
Dear Mr. Gurney:
I have finished the technical review of the MS4 Application and BMP Summary Sheets for the
City of Shorewood. The following are BMP Summary Sheets that need to be re-worked:
1. BMP 1 c- 3: Education Program: Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination:
Under the heading of Educational Goals for Each Audience you address educating
citizens to discourage them from illegal dumping and provide information on
drop-off sites for household hazardous waste. A large portion of this BMP must
also address non-stormwater discharges into the City of Shorewood' s storm sewer
system and how city will investigate and stop this kind of activity.
2. BMP 1e-1 Annual Public Meeting:
It must be stated in this BMP that the Annual Meeting will be held before June 30
of each year.
3. 3c-l Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Plan:
In the BMP Description there needs to be a discussion about training the City of
Shorewood's staff to detect and eliminate non-stormwater discharges.
4. 3d-1 Public and Employee Illicit Discharge Information Program:
Within the BMP Description there needs to be a discussion about non-stormwater
discharges.
Attachment # 1
St. Paul I Brainerd I Detroit Lakes I Duluth I Mankato I Marshall I Rochester I Will mar I Printed on 100% post-consumer recycled paper
Mr. Steve Gurney
Page 2
November 9, 2006
5. 5b-1 Regulatory Mechanism to Address Post Construction Runoff from New and
Redevelopment:
In the BMP Description there is no mention of the regulatory program Shorewood
will have in place so they can actually regulate these post construction activities.
If you have any questions regarding these requests for updating the BMPs do not hesitate to
contact me. Due to the volume of applications we are processing for public notice, I would like
you to re-submit the BMP write ups to me no later than November 15,2006.
gc:~"o,'LeL~fif,L>;;;
e th . Cherryholmes, PhD
Stormwater Management Unit
Municipal Division
KLC :wgp
11 of33
Permit No: MNR040000
a. You must develop, if not already completed, a storm sewer system map
by June 30, 2008, or on another date established by the Commissioner,
showing the location of:
1) Ponds, streams, lakes and Wetlands that are part of your system;
2) Structural pollution control devices (grit chambers, separators, etc.)
that are part of your system;
3) All pipes and conveyances in your system as a goal, but at
minimum, those pipes that are 24 inches in diameter and over; and
4) Outfalls, including discharges from your system to other MS4s, or
waters and Wetlands that are not part of your system (where You
do not have operational control); structures that discharge storm
water directly into groundwater; overland discharge points and all
other points of discharge from your system that are outlets, but not
diffuse flow areas.
b. You must, to the extent allowable under law, effectively prohibit,
through ordinance or Other Regulatory Mechanism, non-Storm
Water discharges into your storm sewer system and implement
appropriate enforcement procedures and actions.
c. Yon must develop and implement a program to detect and address non-
Storm Water discharges, including illegal dumping, to your system.
d. You must inform employees, businesses, and the general public in your
MS4 area of hazards associated with illegal discharges and improper
disposal of waste.
e. You must address the following categories of non-Storm Water
discharges or flows (i.e., illicit discharges), only if Yon identify them as
significant contributors of pollutants to your Small MS4:
water line flushing, landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, rising
ground waters, uncontaminated ground water infiltration (as defined at
40 CFR 9 35.2005(b)(20)), uncontaminated pumped ground water,
discharges from potable water sources, foundation drains, air
conditioning condensation, irrigation water, springs, water from crawl
space pumps, footing drains, lawn watering, individual residential car
washing, flows from riparian habitats and Wetlands, dechlorinated
swimming pool discharges, and street wash water, discharges or flows
from fire fighting activities.
4. Construction site Storm Water runoff control. Within six months after
extension of coverage under this permit, Yon must have developed and must
have commenced to implement and enforce a program to Reduce pollutants in
any Storm Water runoff to your Small MS4 from construction activities
Attachment #2
BMP Summary Sheet
MS4 Name: City of Shorewood
Minimum Control Measure: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
Unique BMP Identification Number: Ic-3
*BMP Title: Education Program: Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
* Audience(s) Involved:
City of Shorewood residents, City staff, and the general public.
*Educational Goals for Each Audience:
The City or its designee will discourage illegal dumping by educating the public on alternative uses for
unwanted materials and provide information on drop-off sites for household hazardous waste. This BMP
includes providing information on recycling options, services, and programs within the City. The City will
train staff, implement procedures, and incorporate best management practices in the handling of hazardous
materials used by Ci ty staff. .....rh~..(ijy..~j.o.G.~..J.l.ot..h;ly.G...;!l1.y...I.1.o11.~.~.(orlJ.)Wi!tGI....~li.~(':h;lrgG.s..Jh;I(..;II:G...signi1JrQ.lJj
~:oJl(]:ihm91>_QLp_ol!l!lm]tsJQJb.G.~lon)l.s(':':\ygL;;Y~1~111,.rh('::...GijY.lyULtrAi)J;:;m!I1Q[Gs:O.\91ix(':Jh(':,sL~Li;;(':h;!m~s,
and willl11onitor them to verify that non-stormwater discharges within the Citv do not become significant
(,:QntTjh,LtoX;;..Qfp.QUJIJ[lIJ1~J9JbG"sJ(mn 5g.YYGr~Y5t(':m,
* Activities Used to Reach Educational Goals:
The City will distribute recycling program literature to residents a minimum of one time annually and
continuously on the City's Storm Water website. The City will also review the current educational
activities undertaken by its staff to prevent illicit discharges from daily public works activities. These
activities may include, but are not limited to, educational videos, training, and workshops.
* Activity Implementation Plan:
This activity will be conducted and evaluated annually from 2006 through the expiration of this permit,
May 31,2011.
*Performance Measures:
The City will record all comments received, requests for information, and complaints regarding potential
illicit discharge. The effectiveness of this BMP will be measured by the documented amount of material
collected by the recycling program, and during the City's annual clean-up day. The City will annually
evaluate the success of this BMP by comparing the previous year's amount ofrecyclables and hazardous
wastes received to the current year.
*Responsible Party for this BMP:
Name: Steven G Gurney, P.E.
Department: City Engineer
Phone: 952474-3236
E-mail: sgurn ey(i'ilci. Shorewood .mn. u S
*Indicates a REQUIRED field. Failure to complete any required field will result in rejection of the
application due to incompleteness.
City of Shorewood
Stonnwater Pollution Prevention Plan Jl<:,yj5Q,Li\oVtOmb,(;r,Jil,2006
Attachment 3
BMP Summary Sheet
MS4 Name: City of Shorewood
Minimum Control Measure: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
Unique BMP Identification Number: Ie-I
*BMP Title: Annual Public Meeting
*BMP Description:
I The City will hold an annual public meeting prior to June 30:h of each vearto distribute educational materials
and present an overview of the MS4 program and the City's SWPPP. Oral and written statements will be
received and considered fDr inclusion into the SWPPP by City staff.
Location(s) in SWPPP of detailed information relating to this BMP:
The information included or referenced on this summary sheet is intended to meet all SWPPP requirements
for this BMP
*Measurable Goals:
The City will document the number of attendees at the public meeting, all comments received, and responses
to each comment in the record of decision. The effectiveness ofthis BMP will be measured by the number of
residents who attend the annual public meeting. The success of this BMP is defined by the public's increased
awareness about Storm water pollution and the MS4 program.
*Timeline/Implementation Schedule:
This activity will be conducted annually through the expiration ofthis permit, May 31, 20 II.
Specific Components and Notes:
Specific topics most requested and/or discussed will be expanded for discussion on the City's Storm water
website and/or at the next scheduled annual public meeting.
*Responsible Party for this BMP:
Name: Steven G Gurney, P.E.
Department: City Engineer
Phone: 952474-3236
E-mail: ::igurney((iki.ShorewQod.mn.lIs
*lndicates a REQUIRED field. Failure to complete any requiredjield will result in rejection of the
application due to incompleteness.
City of Shorewood
Stonnwater Pollution Prevention Plan
2006
Formatted:
CD~I~t:~d:M~;22mmmmmmmm'J
._---"-~._._----
BMP Summary Sheet
MS4 Name: City of Shorewood
Minimum Control Measure: 3-ILLlCIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND
ELlMINA TION
Unique BMP Identification Number: 3c-1
*BMP Title: Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Plan
*BMP Description:
The City removes debris from the roadside ditches during its sweeping activities, as well as other times as
necessarY.J,:_h.~CiJ.\L~jJJS..9lllim\S:,lQDJQL1j\9L;mYI.lQI!::?tQID.l~Y_;lt~Lgh\:LWJgs:?,_JLtbes~_~U,~(;JJ;lru~?jD<::l'e,\.?,"~-,
\b~city\'!iJJJlJ"g?t~P?JQr<c.Qm,e;lllYPQIJ\.lt<Jm<::QllJrih\.lti..9D??QJbmJb<c.yrellmill)jl1jll;;ignijJelJnLeQl1JriJ1\I\QI:
of polltjtants tQJ:be.City'~s_'i!Q.rrnwateI.5vsteJ11,
Location(s) in SWPPP of detailed information relating to this BMP:
The information included or referenced on this summary sheet is intended to meet all SWPPP requirements
for this BMP.
*Measurable Goals:
The effectiveness of this BMP wiII be measured by annual inventory of the quantity of trash (pounds)
removed from the roadway.
*Timeline/Implementation Schedule:
This activity wiII be conducted annually from 2006 through the expiration of this permit, May 3 I, 20 II.
Specific Components and Notes:
*Respollsible Party for this BMP:
Name: Steven G Gurney, P.E.
Department: City Engineer
Phone: 952474-3236
E-mail: sgurncy(i1ici.Shorewood.mn.us
*Indicates a REQUIRED field. Failure to complete any required field will result in rejection of the
application due to incompleteness.
City of Shorewood
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
L<"(;\'hQ~J Novelll!2<;;cJf!, 2006,
BMP Summary Sheet
MS4 Name: City of Shore wood
Minimum Control Measure: 3-ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND
ELIMINATION
Unique BMP Identification Number: 3d-1
*BMP Title: Public and Employee Illicit Discharge Information Program
*BMP Description:
The City or its designee will discourage illegal dumping by educating the public on alternative uses for
unwanted materials and providing drop off sites for household hazardous waste. This BMP includes
providing information on recycling options, services, and programs within the City. The City will also
review the current educational activities undertaken by its staff to prevent illicit discharges from daily public
works activities. These activities may include, but are not limited to, educational videos, training, and
workshops.
The City will educate the public and staffjo recognize non-stormwater discharges and educate them as to the
PQtt';IJti&ilDP._<J.t';J:iJoJht'Cston)lst';)",gL5Yst~!}J,:Ib~_CiJyjnJ~!Jg:iJQ....iJ]!:;i:<:;nss:JhtCgQ\)\C<J.t.iQm)LdfQn,irD<:;<;g5.S<lIY
,,-QJtEtUl1<:;.~Ijs.<;hm:g<;5_go_r)oLQ'::<;QJDL(.JsjglliKt<;mLLc_QIltJiQJl!QLoLpoll\1t(.)JJtsJoJh<::.shl[llJ5.Q\YtCL2Y.s.ttCm,
Location(s) in SWPPP of detailed information relating to this BMP:
The information included or referenced on this summary sheet is intended to meet all SWPPP requirements
for this BMP.
*Measurable Goals:
The effectiveness of this BMP will be measured by the documented quantity of hazardous waste collected per
year. Success of this BMP will be defined as distributing recycling program literature to residents and
providing educational activities to City staff a minimum of one time annually.
*Timeline/Implementation Schedule:
The City will continue to document collection activities annually in 2006, through the life ofthis permit,
May 3 I , 20 II .
Specific Components and Notes:
*Responsible Party for this BMP:
Name: Steven G Gurney, P.E.
Department: City Engineer
Phone: 952474-3236
E-mail: sgUfn ey(aici. Shorewood. Inn. us
*Indicates a REQUIRED field. Failure to complete any required field will result in rejection of the
application due to incompleteness.
City of Shorewood
Stonnwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Jl.ryj2Q,Ll';i9~nlber..l(l, 2006
BMP Summary Sheet
MS4 Name: City of Shore wood
Minimum Control Measure: 5-POST-CONSTRUCTION STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
IN NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT
Unique BMP Identification Number: 5b-1
*BMP Title: Regulatory Mechanism to Address Post Construction Runoff from New Development and
Redevelopment
*BMP Description:
The City will continue to use existing development review policies currently in place to minimize the
negative impacts storm water runoff may have on water quality within the City. Utilizing these existing
policies, all development proposals must address water quality, water quantity, erosion control and site
grading, utilizing BMPs for each of these activities. A cQDv of the Citv's Ci.9<:11s aJ.l~i P,)li~ies, <:1.0 OlltliDed in
thQCQmpr~h~JJ0j\i~SJQrmy{'!tQrJ\'h1Di\g~nleJ:lJJ)Jm},~h1t~<:Ij\Rril:I()(l},i0jlJ<::LI!4~~L<:l$i\JHlc;J1InelJJHJ.
Location(s) in SWPPP of detailed information relating to this BMP:
The information included or referenced on this summary sheet is intended to meet all SWPPP requirements
for this BMP.
*Measurable Goals:
The City will review new development plans for conformance with BMPs outlined in the SWPPP and
document the number of development plans reviewed annually. Success of this BMP will be defined as
annually documenting the number of development plans received.
*Timeline/Implementation Schedule:
The City will continue this BMP in 2006, and annually evaluate and update (if necessary) frori12007 through
May 3 I, 20 II.
Specific Components and Notes:
*Responsible Party for this BMP:
Name: Steven G Gurney, P.E.
Department: City Engineer
Phone: 952474-3236
E-mail: sgurneY((lici.Shornyood.mn.us
*/ndicates a REQUIRED field. Failure to complete any required field will result in rejection of the
application due to incompleteness.
City of Shorewood
StonTIwater Pollution Prevention Plan
2006
,..-..............................................-................................................................"
! Deleted: May 22 i
'------~_.".~"."........_----~.-------/
SECTION IV
IV. ESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS AND POLICIES
The City of Shorewoodhas developed a number of goals and policies that conform to the overall
purpose that is specified in Minnesota Statutes Section 1 03B.20 1. These goals and policies have
been developed to avoid conflict with any County, Regional or State goals and policies. They have
also been developed to preserve and use natural water storage and retention systems in order to:
1) Limit public capital expenditures that arenecessmy to control excessive volumes andrates
of runoff.
2) Improve water quality.
3) Prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows.
4) Promote ground water recharge.
5) Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities.
6) Secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of surface water.
The goals and policies that the City has developed address issues related to water quantity, water
quality, recreation, fish and wildlife, enhancement of public participation, information and education,
public ditch system management, groundwater management, wetland management and soil erosion
management. Outlined below are the goals and policies that have been developed for each of the
above areas of concern.
A. Water Quantity
Goal:
Limit public capital expenditures that are necessary to control excessive volumes and rates
of runoff.
Policies:
1. Any development or redevelopment within the City of Shore wood will be required
to control runoff to the extent necessary to be consistent with this plan. It is also
the intention of this plan to defrnerunoff rates so that there would be no increase
in these rates compared to the rates of the area in its existing condition.
Attachment # 1
City of Shore wood
WSB Project No. 1074418
C"__...:__ 1\/ n_~_.4
2. The design of all maj or stonll water storage facilities shall attemptto accommodate
a critical duration event with a 1 % chance of occurrence inany given year. These
facilities include lakes, ponds, and their outlets.
3. New storm sewer systems shall be designed to accommodate a critical duration
event with a 10% chance of occurrence in any given year (a lO-year return
frequency storm).
4. Any new development orredevelopment within the City will maintain minimum
building openings three feet (3') above the anticipated high water elevation as a
standard practice. However, if this three-foot (3') freeboard requirement is
considered a hardship, the standard could be lowered to two feet (2') if the
following can be demonstrated:
a) That within the two-foot (2') freeboard area, stormwater storage is
available which is equal to or exceeds 50% of the stormwater storage
cUl1'ently available in the basin below the 100-year elevation.
b) Thata25% obstruction of the basin outlet over a 24-hour period would
not result in more than one foot (1') of additional bounce in the basin.
c) An adequate overflow route from the basin is available that will provide
assurance one foot (1') of freeboard will be maintained for the proposed
low building opening.
5. Any new development or redevelopment in the City must set minimum basement
floor elevations to an elevation that meets the following criteria:
a)
The basement floor will be four feet (4') above the cUl1'ently-observed
groundwater elevations in the area (FHA policy).
b)
The basement floor elevation will betwo feet (2') above the elevation of
any knownhistOlichigh groundwater elevations for the area. Information
on historic high groundwater elevations can be derived from any
reasonable sources, including piezometer data, soil boring data,
percolation testing logs, etc.
c)
The basement floor elevation will be one foot (1') above the lOO-year
high-water elevation for the area unless it can be demonstrated that this
standard creates a hardship, and that the basement floor will be one foot
(l ') above the highest anticipated groundwater elevation that could result
from high smface water elevations elevating groundwater elevations in the
area during a 1 OO-year critical duration rainfall event. The impact of high
surface water elevations on groundwater elevations in the vicinity of the
City of Shorewood
WSB Project No. 1074-08
Anri! 2003
Section IV. Paae 2
6.
7.
8.
9.
stlUcture can take into consideration the site's distance from the floodplain
areas, the soils, the nOlmal water elevation of surface depressions in the
areas, the static groundwater table, and historic water elevations in the
area.
Wetlands will be protected within the City boundaries to assure that the value of
wetlands in relation to their surface water quantity benefits are not significantly
impacted by development. Goals and policies for wetlands can be found in
Section IV.G.
The City of Shore wood may allow an outlet to land locked basins, provided that
the discharge rate from these basins not exceed the 10-day, 1 OO-year average
daily run-off rate and that it can be demonstrated that this discharge will not
significantly impact the downstream flood profile.
The City will require compensatory storage equal to storage losses resulting from
floodplain fill as part of any new development. This compensatory storage must
be provided in a suitable location so as not to increase the 1 OO-year floodplain
elevation for the area.
The development of enhanced infiltration practices should be implemented
wherever it is practical and reasonable to do so, provided that past and existing
land use practices do not have a significant potential to contaminate storm water
runoff.
10.
The amountof allowable impervious surfaces within new development will be
regulated according to the City's ordinances.
11.
The City intends to use both designated and non-designated areas to store storm
waterrunoffin the 1 OO-year event. These areas include general depressions, low
points, and streets where structures and/or property is not damaged and any
inundation will only be temporary in nature.
l2.
The City intends to utilize the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the Riley-
Purgatory Creek Watershed District to pelmit activities within the City that fall
under the jurisdiction of these agencies.
13.
As part of any new development or redevelopment within the City, on-site
retention and treatment for stormwaterrunoff will be required to conform to the
policies outlined in this plan unless an approved off-site regional facility is available
to accommodate this runoff.
City of Shorewood
WSB Project No. 1074-08
ADri! 2003
Section IV - Paae 3
B. Water Quality
Goal:
Maintain or improve the quality of water in lakes, streams or rivers within or immediately
downstream of the City of Shorewood.
Policies:
1. In the design and construction of all new storm water conveyance systems and
modifications to existing storm water conveyance systems, pretreatment of stOlID
water runoff must be provided. This treatment should be generally designed to the
recommendations of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) unless
otherwise directed by the City Engineer. These NURP recommendations
(Walker, 1987) include the following:
a. A permanent pool ("dead storage") volume below the principal spillway
(normal outlet) which shall be greater than or equal to therunofffrom a
two point five inch (2.5") storm over the entire contributing drainage area
assuming full development.
b. A permanent pool average depth (basin volumelbasin area) which shall be
equal to or over four feet (:::4'), with a maximum depth of equal to or less
than ten feet C:::: 1 0').
c. An emergency spillway (emergency outlet) adequate to control the one
percent (1 %) frequency/critical duration rainfall event.
d. Basin side slopes above the normal water level should be no steeper than
four to one (4: l), and preferably flatter. A basin shelf with a minimum
width of ten feet (lO') and one foot (1') depth below the normal water
level is recommended to enhance wildlife habitat, reduce potential safety
hazards, and improve access for long-tellli maintenance.
e. To prevent short-circuiting, the distance between major inlets and the
normal outlet shall be maximized.
f. Retardance of peak discharges for the more frequent storms can be
achieved through a principal spillway design which may include a
perforated vertical riser, small orifice retention outlet, or compound weir.
2. The City of Shore wood will sweep the streets at least once annually and more
often in areas that require additional sweeping.
City of Shorewood
WSB Project No. 1074-08
C'"__"':__ "I D___ ""
3. The City of Shore wood will require the inclusion of skimmers in the construction
of new pond outlets, and add skimmers to the existing system whenever feasible
and practical to prevent floatables from being discharged downstream. Skimmer
suuctures will have aminimum four-inch (4") overlap and the maximum one-year
stonn event discharge velocity should not exceed zero point five feet (0.5') per
second.
4. The City will include provisions for com."se sedimentation and skimming floatable
materials prior to storm watel~ dischm'geto lakes andDNR-protected wetlands.
Skimmers will be designed to skim the one-year stOlID event. This requirement will
apply in all cases except where it is deemed not feasible or not practical to do so.
Considerations for variance to this policy will only be made in cases where the
direct drainage area is limited in size and the probability that a significant pollutant
discharge from the area to areas outside the City would be extremely unlikely.
5. The City will encourage programs aimed at fostering responsible water quality
management practices by its residents, including educating residents on the proper
use of fertilizer. Infonnation on the City's Public Education Program is included in
the City's NPDES Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan at City Hall. TheCity's
newsletter is in Appendix J.
6. The City will encourage homeowners with properties adj acent to water resources
to establish a vegetative buffer strip at the shoreline. This strip should consist of
native vegetation where possible and limit erosion andnuui.enttransport across the
buffer strip.
7. The City has adopted Individual Sewage Treatment System (ISTS) guidelines in
conformance with MS 7080. The City of Shorewood has transferred the
responsibility of enforcing Minnesota Agency Rules 7080 to Hennepin County.
All activities associated with the management ofIndividual Sewage Treatment
Systems will be the responsibility of Hennepin County. This ordinance is included
in Appendh: K.
8. The City has developed a stOlID water drainage system maintenance plan. This
plan was developed to assure that the retention/treatment basin cleanout and
maintenance was addressed to the extent that is feasible and practical. The goal
of this plan is to assure that the City's retention and u'eatment basins will have the
capability to retain and treat stOlID water in, future years. A copy of this
maintenance plan is included in the City's NPDES StOlID Water Pollution
Prevention Plan available at City Hall.
9. The City may develop and implement a water quality monitoring program capable
of establishing that the stOlID water treatment basins constructed within the City are
not only designed to NURP standards but also meet the anticipated design
City of Shorewood
WSB Project No. 1074-08
removal efficiencies based on actual monitoring of the system. This program will
be carried out to the extent deemed necessary and reasonable by the Shorewood
City Council. The City will keep the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and
Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District infonned of all water quality monitoring
program updates.
10. The City will adopt the MPCA Best Management Practices as described in
"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" as well as the Hennepin Conservation
District conselvation manual to provide technical direction concerning other design
and installation of proper erosion control measures.
11. As pali of any new development or redevelopment within the City, on-site
retention and treatment for stormwater runoff will be required to conform to the
policies outlined in this plan unless an approved off-site regional facility is available
to accommodate this runoff.
12. The City will work with landowners through public education efforts to reduce the
amount of animal or pet waste entering local water bodies.
13. The amount of allowable impervious surfaces within new development will be
regulated according to the City's ordinances.
14. The City will implement its NPDES Stonn Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). The SWPPP is incorporated by reference and is available in the
Water Resource Library at City Hall.
15. The City will support the State's regulations on eliminating phosphorus fertilizer
uses for residential areas and encourage the reduction of phosphorus fertilizers
from other uses.
C. Recreation, Fish and Wildlife
Goal:
Protect and enhance recreational facilities and fish and wildlife habitat.
Policies:
1. The City of Shorewood will work with and suppOli to the maximum extent
practical the effOlis of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the Corps of
Engineers, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Selvice, Milmehaha Creek Watershed District, Riley-Purgatory Creek
Watershed District, the County and other appropriate agencies in promoting public
enjoyment and protecting fish, wildlife, and recreational resource values in the
watershed.
City of Shorewood
IMea Or,.,;..,.f AI,., 1n7d-flR
2. The City will encourage land owners to maintain wetlands and open space areas
for the benefit of wildlife. The City will utilize the Planning Commission and Land
Conservation and Environment Committee members to promote this objective.
3. The City of Shorewood will sweep the streets at least once annually and more
often in areas that require additional sweeping.
4. The City will encourage residents adjacent to the water bodies pelforming erosion
control and shoreline management practices to include native aquatic p1antings as
part of shoreline stabilization.
5. A 35- foot buffer is required around all wetlands, watercourses, and lakes upon
development as outlined in the City's wetland development ordinance in Appendix
L.
D. Enhancement of Public Participation Information and Education
Goal:
Educate and inform the public on pertinent waterresourcemanagement issues and increase
public participation in water management activities.
Policies:
1. Prepare and distribute information on peltinent water management issues to city
residents a minimum of one time per year and as required as part of the NPDES
Phase II prgram. This infOlmation will be incorporated into the City's newsletters
and will provide an oppOliunity for residents to participate in watershed
management activities.
A copy of the description of the program to be implemented by the City is in the
NPDES StOlm Water Pollution Prevention Plan at City Hall.
E. Public Ditch Systems
Goal:
Provide a mechanism through which public ditch systems will be managed.
Policies:
1. Work with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and Riley- PurgatOlY Creek
Watershed Disu1ct to assure adequate inspection, maintenance and repair of all
ditches under their jurisdiction within the City.
City of Shorewood
WSB Project No. 1074-08
2. The City of Shorewood prefers the development of municipal drainage systems
whenever possible to the development of private drainage systems. Design of
drainage systems shall attempt to accommodate existing drainage systems including
tile lines. Existing drainage systems will be protected and drainage perpetuated.
F. Groundwater
Goal:
To coordinate activities and/or manage surface water runoffto the degree necessary to
provide groundwater protection and recharge.
Policies:
1. To promote and coordinate with other agencies the continuation of existing
groundwater monitoring, inventorying or permitting programs.
2. To encourage the development of spill prevention, conttol, and countermeasure
plans that are consistent with State and/or Federal regulations.
3. To provide assistance to State or other governmental agencies in resolving
groundwater quality problems.
4. The City will encourage preservation of wetlands, ponds and parks to encourage
inf1ltration of precipitation in areas where land use is not anticipated to adversely
affect surface water runoff.
5. The City of Shorewood will cooperate with Hennepin County Environmental
Health Depmiment to insure that all unsealed or improperly abandoned wells
within the watershed are properly sealed. Technical requirements for the
abandonment of these wells will be in conformance with the Minnesota
Department of Health Water Well Code.
6. The City of Shore wood will sweep the streets at least once annually and more
often in areas that require additional sweeping.
7. The City of Shore wood will work with Hennepin County to develop a wellhead
protection plan in accordance with State requirements.
G. Wetlands
Goals:
The City of Shorewood will protect wetlands in conformance with the requirements of the
Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 and the City's local wetland requirements.
City of Shore wood
WSB Project No. 1074-08
C"o___.:__ ", 0___ (II
Policies:
1. The City of Shore wood will defer the Local Governmental Unit responsibility for
wetland management to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the Riley-
Purgatory Creek Watershed District. These agencies will manage wetlands in
conformance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 8420 as developed by the Board of
Water and Soil Resources.
2. Prior to any site development activities, the City will require a wetland delineation
to be completed by a wetland professional to identify the location and extent of
any wetlands present. The proponent of the site development shall have the
burden of providing to the City a report showing the on-site inspection and
delineation of all wetland areas by a trained wetland professional. If any wetland
encroachment is proposed, wetland values and impacts will be replaced in
confOlmance with the cua-ent Wetland Conservation Act rules.
3. Any review of a proposed wetland encroachment will initially address the issue of
avoidance. Prior to allowing any wetland encroachment, all reasonable attempts
to avoid such alteration must be demonstrated. This avoidance review must also
consider the reasonableness of the no build alternative.
4. Development within the City of Shore wood is required to conform to the Wetland
Development Ordinance in Appendix L.
5. The Minnehalla Creek Watershed District has developed a Functional
Assessment of Wetlands report for the wetlands within the City. This assessment
information will be utilized on a case-by-case basis as development is proposed.
6. Based on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Functional Assessment of
Wetlands rep0l1, wetlands that were identified as having wetland restoration
potential included the following and are shown on the map in Appendix B:
D-117 -23-25-003
D-117-23-26-008
D-117-23-29-002
D-1l7-23-32-018
D-117-23-32-020
D-l17-23-32-037
D-117-23-33-029
D-l17-23-33-031
D-ll7-23-33-040
D-ll7 -23-33-045
D-ll7-23-33-018
D-117-23-34-002
D-ll7-23-35-015
As grants or other funding becomes available, the City will undertake projects to
restore these wetlands. These wetlands could also be restored as paIi of a
development plan.
City of Shore wood
WSB Project No. 1074-08
11 nrll ?nn~
.~..r.t;nn IV. p,.".. ~
7. A 35-foot buffer is required around all wetlands, watercourses, and lakes upon
development as per the City's Wetland Ordinance in Appendix L.
H. Erosion
Goals:
To prevent erosion and sedimentation to the maximum reasonable extent.
Policies:
1.
Erosion and sedimentation control plans for new and redevelopment shall COnfOlID
to the general criteria set fOlth in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Division
of Water Quality Document "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas".
2.
The City of Shorewood will sweep the streets at least once annually and more
often in areas that require additional sweeping.
3.
The City of Shorewood will develop and adopt an erosion and sedimentation
control ordinance to be consistent with State and local rules. A copy of the City's
erosion ordinance will be included in Appendix M once it is available.
4.
The City of will implement the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan as part of
the NPDES Phase II program.
City of Shorewood
WSB Project No. 1074-08
A nril ?1l1l'1
.c::..,.,tinn IV _ PAn.. 1 n
GIDEON GLEN
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT is entered into this _ day of November, 2006, by
and between City of Shorewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation, whose address is 5755
Country Club Road, Shorewood, MN 55331 ("Owners"), and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota having its principal office in
Deephaven, Minnesota ("District").
WITNESSETH:
A. Owners are the sole owners in fee simple of certain real property identified on
Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by this referenced, consisting of lO.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
District intends to use the Property Report in monitoring subsequent uses of the Protected Land
and enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement. Notwithstanding this, the parties may
use all other relevant evidence to establish the present condition ofthe 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 District 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 District is a political subdivision which seeks to protect water and wetland
resources within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed. The District 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.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants and pursuant to the
provisions relating to conservation easements set forth in Minnesota Statutes Sections 84C.0105,
1
3]:
3604549.1
Owners convey and warrant to the District and the District 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 of the Protected Land to activities consistent with the
terms of this Conservation Easement.
2. District's Rights. To accomplish the parties' intent, Owners convey the following
rights to the District:
A. The District shall preserve and protect the Conservation Values of the
Protected Land pursuant to the terms of this Conservation Easement.
B. The District may enter the Protected Land at reasonable times to monitor
subsequent activities and uses and to enforce the terms of this Conservation Easement. The
District 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 District 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 the 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 District. 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.
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 terms of this Conservation
Easement.
3604549.1
2
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 District except
as needed to serve any additional uses, 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 of this 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 terms of this 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 except as
reasonably required for the activities or uses permitted by the terms of this Conservation
Easement and for which Owners have obtained the prior written approval of the District.
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 enhance wildlife habitat or restore native
biological communities, and (v) for other activities or uses permitted by the terms of this
Conservation Easement.
13. Interpretive Trail Use. Owners may establish and maintain trails for walking 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.
l4. 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 of the Protected
Land. With the prior written approval of Owners, the District may erect or install signs or an
3604549.1
3
information kiosk 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. District's Approval. The requirement that Owners obtain the prior written
approval of the District is intended to let the District 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 District 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 District 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 District shall notify Owners in writing of its decision within sixty
days of its receipt of Owners' request. The District may withhold its approval only on a
reasonable determination that the proposed use would he 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
District may condition its approval on the Owners' acceptance of modifications which, in the
District's judgment, would make the proposed use, as modified, consistent with this
Conservation Easement or protects the Conservation Values of the Protected Land.
l6. Access. The right of pedestrian access is granted to the public for use of the trail
referenced herein. The Owner reserves the right to access the Protected Land with equipment as
necessary to maintain the drainage facilities and trail.
l7. Costs and Liabilities. Owners retain all obligations and shall bear all costs and
liabilities of any kind accruing from their ownership of the Protected Land including the
following responsibilities:
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 District established by
this Conservation Easement. The District 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
3604549.1
4
or relating to (i) personal 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
District, (ii) the obligations retained by Owners to maintain the Protected Land and pay taxes in
Paragraphs 18(A) and (B), and (iii) the existence of this Conservation Easement.
l8. Enforcement. If the District finds at any time that Owners have breached or may
breach the terms of this Conservation Easement, the District 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 District
may commence an action to enforce the terms of this Conservation Easement.
19. Acts Beyond Owners' Control. The District 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.
20. Extinguishment. If subsequent unexpected changes in the conditions surrounding
the Protected Land make it impossible to preserve and protect the Conservation Values ofthe
Protected Land, this Conservation Easement can only be extinguished, either all or in part, by
proceedings in a court having jurisdiction.
21. Assignment of Easement. The District may not transfer its rights and obligations
in this Conservation Easement.
22. 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
DISTRICT:
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
18202 Minnetonka Boulevard
Deephaven,MN 55391
Attn: Executive Director
23. Governing Law and Construction. This Conservation Easement shall be governed
by the laws of Minnesota.
24. Entire Agreement. This Conservation Easement sets forth the entire agreement of
the parties and supersedes all prior discussions.
25. 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,
3604549.1
5
(ii) shall not affect the perpetual duration of this Conservation Easement, and (iii) is approved by
the District pursuant to its Policy Statement on Amending Conservation Easements.
26. 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 all others who exercise any right by or through
them and shall run in perpetuity with the Protected Land.
OWNERS:
DISTRICT:
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
By
By
Its
Its
By
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
This instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of November, 2006, by
and ,fue
and , respectively, ofthe City of
Shorewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
This instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of November, 2006, by
of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota.
3604549.1
6
This instrument was drafted by:
Leonard, Street and Deinard (TJK)
150 South Fifth Street
Suite 2300
Minneapolis, MN 55402
612-335-1500
3604549.1
Notary Public
7
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description
3604549.1
A-I
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, 14 NOVEMBER 2006
SOUTH SHORE SENIOR COMMUNITY CENTER
5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, and Schmitt; Planning Director Nielsen; and
Council Liaison Turgeon
Absent:
Commissioners Gniffke, Meyer and Woodruff
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
· 17 October 2006
Gagne moved, Schmitt seconded, Approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of
17 October 2006 as presented. Motion passed 3/0/1 with Conley abstaining due to his absence at the
meeting.
1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR FILL IN EXCESS OF 100 CUBIC YARDS
Applicant: Tim and Melia Liester
Location: 26355 Oak Ridge Circle
Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:05 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing.
He explained items recommended for approval that evening would be placed on a November 27, 2006,
Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for further review and consideration.
Director Nielsen explained Tim and Melia Liester, who owned the property at 26355 Oak Ridge Circle,
had applied for a conditional use permit for fill in excess of 100 cubic yards. The applicants proposed to
construct a swimming pool in the back of their yard. That project required more than 100 cubic yards of
fill to be brought onto their property. Because Shorewood's zoning regulations required a conditional use
permit for fill in excess of 100 cubic yards, the Liester's had submitted a request for such a conditional
use permit. The property was zoned R-IA, Single-Family Residential, and was presently occupied by the
applicant's home.
With regard to issues of analysis for this case, Director Nielsen stated poor soils on the back of the
applicants' property necessitated the removal of approximately 800-900 cubic yards of bad material
which would be replaced with the same amount of compacted sand. He noted the alteration of the site's
topography would be minimal; the most significant change would be that the back of the pool would
extend approximately three feet above the existing elevation of the yard, and that would be supported by a
retaining wall. He stated the project would not adversely affect drainage onto adjoining properties; the site
would continue to drain south on the applicants' property.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
14 November 2006
Page 2 of 8
Nielsen stated the City Engineer had reviewed the plans and had recommended approval. He also stated
Staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit subject to the recommendation of the Director
of Public Works, with respect to the timing of trucks hauling, and the applicants' final plans containing
provisions for erosion control, which would be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
Nielsen stated Tim and Melia Liester were present this evening to answer any questions the Commission
may have.
Chair Bailey opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7: 11 P.M.
In response to a question from Commissioner Gagne, Mr. Liester stated because of the location of trees
on the property construction equipment may have to drive over his driveway, which could result in a
damaged driveway he would have to replace.
Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7: 12 P.M.
In response to a question from Chair Bailey, Director Nielsen the City Code stated trucks could only haul
materials between 7:00 AM. - 7:00 P.M., and the Director of Public Works would determine if those
hours should be more restrictive.
Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Tim and
Melia Liester, 26355 Oak Ridge Circle, subject to Staff recommendations. Motion passed 4/0.
Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:13 P.M.
2. 7:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SQ. FT.
Applicant: James Loffler
Location: 6030 Mill Street
Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7: 13 P.M.
Director Nielsen explained the history of the case, noting James Loffler was the owner of the property
located at 6030 Mill Street. Mr. Loffler was in the process of constructing a new home on the property.
Due, in part, to the topography of the site, Mr. Loffler had chosen to create additional space under the
attached garage for additional storage. The total floor area of the two garage levels would be greater than
1200 square feet in area. Because the City Code's required a conditional use permit for accessory space
over 1200 square feet, Mr. Loffler had submitted a request for such a conditional use permit.
Nielsen then explained the property was zoned R-lA, Single-Family Residential and contained
approximately 44,800 square feet in area. He noted the location of the new house on the property survey.
The garage areas were located on the front of the home and on the back of the home (he noted their
locations on the elevation drawings), and they contained 1172 square feet of area on each of two floors.
He also noted the garage on main floor level, and he explained the lower level duplicated that space. The
proposed home contained 3164 square feet on two floors (not including the basement).
Nielsen then reviewed how the applicants' request complied with the four criteria specified in Section
1201.03 Subd.2.d.(4) of the City's Zoning Code.
a. The total area of accessory buildings (2344 square feet) did not exceed the total
floor area above grade ofthe proposed house (3164 square feet).
CITY OF SHORE WOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
14 November 2006
Page 3 of 8
b. The total area of accessory building did not exceed ten percent of the minimum
lot area for the R-IA zoning district (.10 x. 40,000 square feet = 4000 square
feet).
c. The proposed house and garage complied with the R-IA setback requirements.
Because the lower level garage occupied the same footprint as the upper level
garage, tree removal was minimized.
d. The architectural compatibility of the new garage was not considered to be an
issue because the new garage was an integral part of the house that was under
construction. The overhead doors for the garage were located on opposite
elevations of the building.
Nielsen stated because the applicant's request was considered to be consistent with the requirements of
the City's Zoning Code, Staff recommended that the conditional use permit be granted as requested.
Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this matter, Chair Bailey opened and closed the Public
Testimony portion ofthe Public Hearing at 7: 15 P.M.
Commissioner Schmitt stated he was a neighbor to applicants, and the applicants' property was heavily
wooded and he was not bothered by the applicant's request.
In response to a question from Chair Bailey, Director Nielsen explained because the new structure would
contain garage doors, the space was classified as accessory space rather being considered part of the
house.
Gagne moved, Schmitt seconded, Recommending Approval of Request for a Conditional Use
Permit for Accessory Space over 1200 Square Feet for James Loffler, 6030 Mill Street.
Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7: 17 P.M.
3. 7:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING- C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SQ. FT.
Applicant: Ryan Smolik, rep. Chantel & David Erickson
Location: 6155 Murray Court
Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:17 P.M.
Director Nielsen explained Ryan Smolik represented David and Chantel Erickson. The Erickson's owned
the property at 6155 Murray Court and applied for a conditional use permit for accessory space over 1200
square feet to construct a detached garage on the their property. He noted the location of the house and
the proposed garage on the lot.
Nielsen then explained the property was zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential and contained 74,885
square feet of area. The proposed detached garage contained 576 square feet, and when combined with
the existing attached garage, the amount of accessory space on the site would total 1764 square feet. He
noted the Ericksons' home contained 3967 square feet of floor area, divided between two of the floors
above grade.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
14 November 2006
Page 4 of8
Nielsen then reviewed how the applicants' request complied with the four criteria specified in Section
1201.03 Subd.2.d.(4) of the City's Zoning Code.
a. The total area of accessory space (1764 square feet) did not exceed the total floor
area above grade of the principle structure (3967 square feet).
b. The total area of accessory space did not exceed ten percent of the minimum lot
area for the R-IA zoning district (.10 x. 20,000 square feet = 2000 square feet).
c. The proposed garage complied with the setback requirements of the R-l C
district. Hardcover on the property was well under 33 percent (approximately
11.66 percent).
d. The architectural character of the new building would be the same as the existing
house; the siding and roofing would match the existing house.
Nielsen had received correspondence from Lynn and Jerry Cox, 6200 Cardinal Road, with regard to this
request. Mr. and Ms. Cox questioned if a survey had been done to verify the placement of the garage
would comply with setback requirements - Nielsen explained the City had a survey on file. They also
questioned if the back of the proposed building would contain windows that would allow light to be
emitted from the building during dark hours, and what (if any) type of security lights would there be and
where would they be placed. Mr. Smolik explained there was no window on the back side of the proposed
garage. Lastly they referenced a City Code Violation Citation (re: Chapter 1201.03 Subd. 2.i) that was
issued to the Erickson's in April 2004 regarding flood-style security lights attached to the exterior of the
Erickson's house which produced direct glare onto surrounding properties. They stated the Erickson's had
not taken correction action as of November 9, 2006, and they suggested that violation be resolved as a
condition of granting the C.UP. Nielsen stated he could not locate any Staff follow-up on that citation,
but he would research it further.
Nielsen stated because the applicant's request was considered to be consistent with the requirements of
the City's Zoning Code, Staff recommended that the conditional use permit be granted as requested.
Mr. Smolik provided a drawing depicting the location of the lights on the proposed structure. He
explained the planned lights would be located on the front of the new garage (facing the Erickson's
house) and they would be relatively small (similar to carriage lights).
Chair Bailey opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:23 P.M.
In response to a comment from Mr. Cox, Director Nielsen explained the outstanding City Code violation
was not part ofthis C.U.P. request, but he would do research on that violation. Nielsen stated the lights on
the proposed structure should not create any illumination issues for the Mr. and Ms. Cox.
In response to a question from Commissioner Gagne, Director Nielsen explained that resolution of that
Code violation should not be included in a motion for the C.UP. request.
In response to a question from Mr. Cox, Chair Bailey explained any conditions included as part of the
recommended approval of the C.UP. request must be related to that request.
Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:27 P.M.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
14 November 2006
Page 5 of8
Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Directing Staff to Investigate the City Code Violation Chapter
1201.03 Subd. 2.i. issued to Chantel and David Erickson, 6155 Murray Court, Dated 16 April 2004.
In response to a question from Commissioner Conley, Director Nielsen stated he had no recollection that
he had ever measured the glare from the lights in violation. Conley questioned if he could therefore
assume there was excess glare from the lights. Nielsen stated Joe Pazandak (a City Staff member) may
have evaluated the lighting situation. Nielsen explained there were two components to that provision in
the City Code - one addressed the maximum foot-candles allowed, and the other addressed the visibility
of the source of the light.
Mr. Cox stated his house was technically located in Chanhassen, but he did pay property taxes to both
Shorewood and Chanhassen.
Motion passed 4/0.
Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Recommending Approval of Request for a Conditional Use Permit
for Accessory Space over 1200 Square Feet for Chantel and David Erickson, 6155 Murray Court.
Motion passed 4/0.
Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:32 P.M.
4. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SQ. FT.
Applicant: Paul V ogstrom
Location: 6140 Pleasant Avenue
Chair Bailey opened the public hearing at 7:32 P.M.
Director Nielsen explained the history of the case, noting Paul V ogstrom was the owner of the property
located at 6140 Pleasant Avenue. Mr. Vogstrom was in the process of constructing a new home on the
property. He wanted to keep the most northerly located of three old outbuildings located on the south half
of the property; and the area of that outbuilding which, when combined with the new attached garage for
the home, would exceed 1200 square feet. Because the City Code's required a conditional use permit for
accessory space over 1200 square feet, Mr. Vogstrom had submitted a request for such a conditional use
permit.
Nielsen then explained the property was zoned R-lA, Single-Family Residential and it contained
approximately 64,279 square feet in area. The new garage was located on the southerly side of the new
house and contained 800 square feet. The existing outbuilding contained 880 square feet, bringing the
total area of accessory space to 1680 square feet.
Nielsen then reviewed how the applicant's request complied with the four criteria specified in Section
1201.03 Subd.2.d.(4) of the City's Zoning Code.
a. The total area of accessory buildings (1680 square feet) did not exceed the floor
area (3420 square feet) above grade of the proposed home.
b. The total area of accessory buildings did not exceed 10 percent of the minimum
lot size for the R-IA zoning district (.10 x 40,000 = 4000 square feet).
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
14 November 2006
Page 6 of8
c. The proposed house and garage complied with R-IA setback requirements. The
existing building was approximately 90 feet from the Highway 7 right-of-way
and 47 feet from the lot to the west ofthe subject property. Hardcover on the site
would be 15 percent, according to the applicant's survey.
d. The applicant had indicated that the outbuilding would be re-roofed and re-sided
to match the new house, and those refurbishments should become a condition of
the C.U.P. Those improvements should be completed before the applicant was
issued a certificate of occupancy for the new home. As an alternative, the
applicant could provide a letter of credit guaranteeing that the outbuilding would
be refurbished by 1 June 2007. The removal of the old lean-to structure at the
rear of the building should also be a condition of the C.U.P.
Nielsen stated because the applicant's request was considered to be consistent with the requirements of
the City's Zoning Code, Staff recommended that the conditional use permit be granted subject to Staff
recommendations.
Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this matter, Chair Bailey opened and closed the Public
Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:37 P.M.
Mr. V ogstrom stated the soffit and fascia as well as the garage door would also be replaced on the
existing outbuilding.
In response to a question from Director Nielsen, Mr. V ogstrom explained the height of the upper level of
the existing outbuilding (which was used for storage) ranged from 24 inches to slightly under six feet.
Nielsen noted a height of six feet or more would classify as another story.
Conley moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of Request for a Conditional Use Permit
for Accessory Space over 1200 Square Feet for Paul Vogstrom, 6140 Pleasant Avenue, subject to
Staff recommendations. Motion passed 4/0.
Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:39 P.M.
5. 7:20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING
DOCK REGULATIONS
Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:39 P.M.
Director Nielsen stated he had distributed a revised draft ordinance regarding dock regulations which
incorporated the recommendations the Planning Commission had made at its October 17, 2006, Planning
Commission work session.
Nielsen then reviewed and explained the proposed changes to the City's current dock regulations as
specified in the draft ordinance he presented (the changes to the City Code are underlined). There was
ensuing discussion with regard to the proposed changes during the review process.
Section 1. City Code Section 1201.02, definition of "Dock" is hereby amended to read:
"DOCK. Any wharf, pier or other structure or combination of wharves, piers, or other structures
constructed or maintained in or over a lake, whether floating or not, including all "Ls", "Ts" or
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
14 November 2006
Page 7 of8
posts which may be a part thereof, whether affixed or adjacent to the principal structure, and
which connects to the shoreline at only one location, no wider than four feet."
Section 2. City Code Section 1201.03 Subd. 14.c. is hereby amended to read:
"c. The number of docks and wharves per lot or parcel of land in the R Districts shall be
limited to one, and the same shall be operated, used and maintained solely for the use of
the members of the family or families occupying the property upon which the dock is
located. The dock shall connect to the shoreline at only one location, no wider than four
feet, and shall extend into the lake at least eight feet before branching out to form slips.
The width of the dock shall not exceed four feet at any point, except that at one location
the dock mav be no wider than eight feet for a length of eight feet.
The number of restricted watercraft, as defined by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation
District (LMCD) that may be docked or moored on a single property is limited to four.
The dock owner may exceed four restricted watercraft by obtaining an annual multiple
dock/mooring license from the LMCD and a conditional use permit from the City of
Shorewood, which permit shall be subiect to the following conditions:
(1) As part of the annual LMCD license review, the owner of the dock must
demonstrate to the City that all boats stored at the dock are owned, registered and
operated by the residents of the property on which the dock is located.
(2) As part of the annual LMCD license review, the owner of the dock must
demonstrate to the City that the dock is the minimum size necessary to store the
boats owned, registered and operated by the residents of the subiect property.
(3) Boat canopies shall be limited to the size and number that is required to cover
four of the restricted watercraft."
Section 3. City Code Section 1201.03 Subd. 14.g. is hereby amended to read:
"g. Unless specified otherwise in the City of Shorewood Zoning Code, all docks on all lakes
shall comply with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Code of Ordinances."
Section 4. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the
Official Newspaper of the City of Shorewood.
Brad, [ skipped the "he said" portion of this and just put the amendments in the motion. If that is a
problem I will add that info.
Schmitt moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of an Ordinance Amending the
Shorewood Zoning Code as it Pertains to the Regulation of Docks in Residential Zoning Districts,
as amended, in Section 1201.03 Subd. 14.c., Paragraph 1, Sentence 2, change "and shall extend into
the lake at least eight feet before branching" to "and shall extend into the lake at least eight feet
beyond the ordinary high-water mark before branching", in Section 1201.03 Subd. 14.c, Paragraph
2, Sentence 2, change "The dock owner may exceed four restricted watercraft by obtaining" to
"The dock owner may exceed four restricted watercraft only by obtaining", in Section 1201.03
Subd. 14.c.4. change "Boat canopies shall be limited to the size and number that is required to
cover four of the restricted watercraft." to "Boat canopies shall be limited to the size and number
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
14 November 2006
Page 8 of8
that is required to cover no more than four of the restricted watercraft.", and add Section 1201.03
Subd. 14.c.4. "a general statement referring to compliance with other sections. Brad you never
emailed me what you wanted to say here." Motion passed 4/0.
Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 8:02 P.M.
6. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
7. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA
Director Nielsen stated a continued discussion of nonconforming accessory structures was slated for the
November 28, 2006, Planning Commission study session. He noted he had informed Council that the
Commission would not it would have the recommended changes to nonconforming accessory structures
completed by December 11,2006. He stated he would inform the Peterson's of that delay.
Nielsen then stated there was a development stage approval for a residential P.U.D., a conditional use
permit, and a minor subdivision slated for the December 5, 2006, Planning Commission meeting.
8. REPORTS
. Liaison to Council
Director Nielsen reported on matters considered and actions taken at a November 13,2006, Regular City
Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting).
. SLUC
No report given.
. Other
Nielsen provided a provided a synopsis of the concept plan for the CSAH 19 / Southwest LRT Trail
Crossing that Council had approved.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Gagne moved, Schmitt seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of 14 November
2006 at 8:15 P.M. Motion passed 4/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128. www.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:
Liester, Tim and Melia - Conditional Use Permit for Fill In Excess of lOO
Cubic Yards
FILE NO.:
405 (06.17)
BACKGROUND
Tim and Melia Liester are the owners of the property at 26355 Oak Ridge Circle (see Site
Location map - Exhibit A, attached). They propose to construct a swimming pool in their rear
yard, which requires a substantial amount of soil correction. The proj ect requires more than 100
cubic yards of fill to be brought onto the site and they have applied for a conditional use permit
to do so.
The property is zoned R-1A, Single-Family Residential, and is presently occupied by the
applicant's home.
ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION
Shorewood's Zoning Code requires a conditional use permit whenever more than 100 cubic
yards of material is brought on to a site. This equates to approximately 10 dump truck loads of
dirt per 100 cubic yards.
Exhibit B shows the proposed location of the pool. Due to poor soils in the rear of the
applicants' property, it is necessary to remove approximately 800-900 cubic yards of bad
material and replace it with the same amount of compacted sand.
Grading. One of the primary reasons for requiring a conditional use permit is to examine the
amount of site alteration that will result from the filling. Despite the amount of material being
brought in, the alteration of the site's topography is relatively minimal. For the most part, bad
,.
t' . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
..,.,
Memorandum
Re: Liester CUP
7 November 2006
material is being replaced with good. The most significant change is that the back of the pool
will extend approximately three feet above the existing elevation of the yard. This will be
supported by a retaining wall. The area in which the pool is to be located is relatively open.
Drainage. Equally important as how the site will look, is how the site will drain. Again, in this
case, the project does not adversely affect drainage onto adjoining properties. The site will
continue to drain south on the applicants' property. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans
and has recommended approval.
Any approval of the conditional use permit should be subject to the recommendations of the
Public Works Director, with respect to the timing of trucks hauling. The applicants' final plans
should contain provisions for erosion control, subject to approval by the City Engineer.
Cc: Craig Dawson
Tim Keane
Larry Brown
Steve Gurney
Tim and Melia Liester
-2-
,
"'~ Hmt
I~
ro
..:::c:.
c
o
+-'
())
C
C
~
())
..:::c:.
ro
....J
z ....c: ~
""
1
r---
v:~~\\ *1 I
?"" ooo~.^ " V ~I II
"';,... HO OO0M3D03M
: .. .. \\ '~ 't---
~/... G~- 41 -
~ _~ . . . . :---.J;2------" '" '" 1/ I I
- ! """""" g ~
\\ >>~~.....I i -~'"., ,==.~~'-*
\tt ~l I l-~\,,~
.\ \~ ~ - 1=-= ~,,", >
\\ \ \\ .\/11 ::.- I ~'V1 ~
.~~ :~J __ .,~ ~;/,
_ \. . " U'_ >f -"'L--' II 1 I ~1
I~ ~
""
~--
"" '01:: ~
__ (1)'- (1)-
- ......c.-
~. "$-~~ --- I
' ---~" ~"..",., ,,0 3<"'Od ~
__ it HS~'VW
- -
~
""
""
""
""
-
-
To
I
I I )f-
f Ct;~
____ 'f
i,
---1"L
/t
-
SJ . ..1 ;, ,~,
~ ..,."
I oJ
( oJ
~""
""
"" \:)""
o
""
-
n;
o Q)
o u..
o.
I
HSl:!VW
-
-
o
"'
N
~ ~
o
-8
i--~
i--~
-
/-
oJ
oJ
oJ
;g
oJ
T ~~v
o
u~
~g~i!
~
~
oJ
I
oJ
oJ
""
oJ
oJ oJ
oJ
oJ
oJ
oJ
Exhibit A
SITE LOCATION
oJ Llester C.U.P. tor tIll in excess of 100 cubic
yards
oJ
~a\Q~ll ncn ~.LKD V~Q,t
11
~
J I
19 (k
~ ~
II (j
\I'~
L
\,(11
-~
"";-1
~ ~
~
I
I
I
~ '--"j
.- ::5
o
V)
~ w1
'Y ~I
w~
~.d
~J
"- l' :r
. I ~
01
;1
Q
~T 2-
Bearings are a sumed
IV
~
-.J
Subject to eas ments of r
__ Proposed garage floor elevation
a
Denotes set wo d hub and
I
I
I
,
I
de eleva tion l
-- ~
e dra~~e ~1
- J
~I
~Eis~ '
1~~~aAJr ~ /
_ Proposed top of block elevation'
_proposed lowest floor elevation
o
if any
i84.o Denotes existi g elevatio
~ ---.., --
e40 Denotes propos d fint~ g
~
I Denotes direct' on ~;'sul"f
. '~
\ IC> L_
Exhibit B
SURVEY/SITE PLAN
ereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a ~
Lot! 1, Block 1, DA'f\ R'D~f. EST/WES, HE.IJ.'PI*,ounty, Minnesota
_________~ '___+~~n
())
13
,,-"- Iii
()).-
.....()
l3 ())z L.U
::J .g>::a: u..
Cll';:: . 0
"- ~ "0 ..-
(j)Cllg II
::a:OS; :c
~::g~ ()
EC">o z
._ <o.r:.
I-NCI,) ..-
UJ
(f)
:J
o
I
c
O.c
000
CO~
<DO
OOQ..
C")
~
U
0 ())
cr: u
~ c:
())
u..
~ E
0 ::J
u .5:
()) E
0
~ ::J
;a:
~ ~
F :;::;
c: Cll
.~ "-
0
0 U
())
0
~
ll)
~
o
Q)
l-
I
C
co
L...
o
::
Exhibit C
CROSS SECTION
Pool relatIve to house
t
l
I
++ 203 LITTLE CANADA ROAD
SUITE 280
SAINT PAUL
MINNESOTA55117
TEL: 651-490-9266
FAX: 651-490-9265
Hr~@@IJ&IP0JlJi1tllli'[g1Ji'
~OFESSIONAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
INCORPORATED
August 30, 2006
Performance Pool & Spa
Attn: John
1890 Wooddale Drive
Woodbury, MN 55125
Subj: Proposed Swimming Pool
26355 Oak Ridge Circle
Shorewood, Minnesota
PEe #7280
Dear John:
This letter concerns our soil boring results and recommendations to
construct a swimming pool behind the residence at the above
referenced address. We understand the City of Shorewood requested
a soil boring be put down in the area of the swimming pool to
determine if- the soils would be suitable to support the swimming
pool construction. Additionally, we understand they were concerned
about the presence of peat soils below the swimming pool
foundation. On August 21, 2006, you requested we meet you at the
site and put down a hand auger boring in the area of the swimming
pool.
On August 28, 2060, we met you at the above referenced residence to
put down a hand auger boring. The log of our hand auger boring is
attached. Water was encountered at 42" belo~ grade in the borehole
and it maintained that elevation at the completion of the borehole.
At 8 1/2' below grade we did encounter brown fibrous peat swamp
deposited soils. Our hand auger boring did not extend through this
swamp deposit layer.
On August 29, 2006, you contacted us and informed us you plan to
construct a soil correction for the proposed swimming pool
construction. You requested we provide recommendation for the soil
correction. We understand you will use a backhoe to extend the
excavation through the swamp deposited soils and then you will
place clean sand in the excavation and compact it to provide a soil
corrected pad.
Exhibit D
SOIL ENGINEER'S REPORT
Page Two
The high water table and drainage stream in the wetland behind the
home indicate the excavation for the soil correction will be done
in the wet. We anticipate water will enter the excavation to
remove the swamp deposited soils. We recommend excavating a sump
outside of the soil correction area to provide an area to drain
away water and to push loose soil cuttings. You may be able to
reduce the amount of water into the excavation by pumping water
draining into the sump. The excavation should extend through the
swamp deposited soils and into natural mineral soils before fill is
placed. The soil correction should be oversized to allow a minimum
of l' of lateral oversize for every foot of subcut below the bottom
of pool foundation elevation.
We understand the bottom of pool elevation will be approximately 6"
below the grade at the back of the yard adjacent to the long grass
area. You informed us the plan was to have the pool extend about
3' above the existing grade. The soil correction should extend
outward at a 1:1 ratio below the outside of the foundation for the
swimming pool. Based on the proposed bottom of elevation for the
swimming pool, if the soil correction extends to 12' below grade,
the minimum lateral oversize for the swimming pool will be 12' on
each- side. Sand should be placed in the bottom of the excavation
at the point of the highest subcut and should be pushed. or moved
towards the sump to~ push any-loose soil cuttings. into the sump.
The sand- should be compacted with a large vibratory compactor
starting approximately 2' above the water table. Fill soils should
be compacted in lifts not exceeding 2' in thickness and should be
compacted to a minimum of 95% of the Standard Proctor Density as
determined in accordance with ASTM: D698. We recommend density
tests be obtained in the compacted fill to verify the consolidation
of the prepared swimming pool pad.
We do not know the requirements of the construction surrounding the
swimming pool. We do not know the impact of foundation loadings
for any construction other than the swimming pool foundation. If
retaining wall structures are constructed around the swimming pool,
we recommend extending the lateral oversize to provide foundation
support for retaining wall foundations if they are included in the
overall construction plan for the area. The recommendations we
provided for the soil correction in our opinion will support the
foundation loadings for the swimming pool. The foundation loadings
for the swimming pool are relatively minimal. The foundation must
support the weight of the soil and construction above the
foundation which is in the order of about 400 to 500 pounds per
square foot contact bearing pressure from the swimming pool
construction. Additional construction surrounding the swimming pool
will impact the loadings on the engineered fill soil correction and
the amount of lateral oversize required.
Page Three
If you have any questions regarding our recommendations, please
contact us at 651-490-9266.
Respectfully,
pr~~~~~r~g Consultants, Inc.
~hn F. G1slason, Jr., P.E.
..-
LOG OF AUGER BORINGS
PRO/ECT, ~~ 54;1111""; tl~tbol . 2--6 355-~t;/ODNO'
~ I 5
1l0"'NC NO. . ~p sr:fJ SURI"ACE ELEVATION
OE~TH 1/'01 FEET DESCR'~TlON 0... M...TERI"'L"
~w,l - L&""" chi w,f-, sa,J, iJkd::_, CL
j.I;r.j .{(....;,,"" - c Io/€/ ~a..J?1 wi:- ~'''' ,j.? Het0 w'~
~ (.f1M..6e. e> s~ d 30 I ~ wa:(Jlt~/~ I~~
~ ;sOM./ J ;fZ.") S C.
~war dfF;s/t- ,?~1: lrk<l.W~ +" ~l1S I Pi
~,,~ ~~I~J
I ,
COM'"LUION D"'TE ~2-97o b TIME cr: J.i-..cJ
Tnt 0... ...ueu~lh/l7i(..((k-et 0....3 1.2- ~ StJ/J'a.Y 2-1 fa t:j /
CIIl[:W C"'IEF, , ~ (;-/sla~&Y\ I'
1
O-Z
2/ -0f(2;
6~~ - q I
a-t <:;'
.01ll'/'oIe NO.
DIt'"TH 1/'01 "EET
COM'"LETION D"'TE
TY~E 0... AveER,
CIIIEW CH'E",
.Ollll/'ole /'010.
DItJOTH '/'01 "ItET
1.
I
I
i
i
COM'"LtTIDN DATt
TY'"E 0... ...vet..,
C"'EW CHit...:
7~
-
WATEIII LEVEL MEASVRUolE/'oITS
CAVE'IN
OE~TH
IO,"'TI: ,
Gl/1-B l>t
I
5UIII""'CE ELEVAT'ON
DESCIII'~T'ON 0" M...TU.....L
TIME
r 7/$
WATU.
l[VEL
J./. 2- /1
TIME
D"'TE
W...TEIII LEVEL MEASVREMENTS
CAVE'IN
OE~TH
WATEIII
LrvrL
SUA"...CE l[L.ltV...TION
DESCIII'''TION 0.. MATE"''''L
TIME
T'Mlt
DATI
WATE" LEVIL M/t"'SUIUMENTI
CAVr"N
DrlOTH
PRorElllONAL Ir.NnINIU-..u"
TIMe
WATr"
LIVIL
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO PLACE FILL IN EXCESS OF 100 CUBIC YARDS FOR
TIM AND MELIA LIESTER
WHEREAS, Tim and Melia Liester (Applicants) are the owners of real property
located at 263355 Oak Ridge Circle, in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, legally
described as:
"Lot 11, Block 1, Oak Ridge Estates"; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants have applied to the City for a Conditional Use Permit to
place up to 900 cubic yards of fill in order to construct a swimming pool on the above-
referenced property; and
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code requires a Conditional Use Permit to place fill
in excess of 100 cubic yards; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was reviewed by the Planning Director, and his
recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission, Mayor
and City Council dated 7 November 2006; and
WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was
reviewed by the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on 14 November 2006, the
minutes of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was considered by the City Council at their
regular meeting on 27 November 2006, at which time the Planner's memorandum and the
minutes of the Planning Commission meeting 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 located in the R-IA, Single-family Residential zoning
district and contains approximately 40,782 square feet of area.
2. The proposed fill will be contained by a retaining wall and will be used to level
off the rear yard of the Applicant's property and remove unsuitable soils in order to
accommodate a swimming pool.
3. The area of fill shall be limited to that which is necessary to correct the soils for
construction of the swimming pool.
CONCLUSION
a. The application of Tim and Melia Liester for a Conditional Use Permit as set
forth hereinabove be and hereby is granted.
b. Final grading shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
c. Erosion control measures must be in place prior to filling.
d. The timing of the hauling of the fill shall be subject to the approval of the City
Public Works Director.
f. That the City Administrator/Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a
certified copy of this Resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of
Titles.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 27th day of November,
2006.
ATTEST:
Woody Love, Mayor
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk
-2-
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD' SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927' (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
FROM: Brad Nielsen
RE: Loffler, James - C .u.p for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square
Feet
DA TE: 8 November 2006
FILE NO.: 405 (06.18)
BACKGROUND
James Loffler is in the process of constructing a new home on the property located at
6030 Mill Street (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). Due, in part, to the
topography of the site, Mr. Loffler has chosen to create additional space under the
attached garage for additional storage. The total floor area of the two garage levels will
be greater than 1200 square feet in area. The applicant has therefore requested a
conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Shorewood
Zoning Code.
The property is zoned R-IA, Single-Family Residential and contains approximately
44,800 square feet in area. The location of the new house is shown on Exhibit B. The
garage areas are located on the front of the home and on the back of the home (see
Exhibits D and E) and contain 1172 square feet of area on each of two floors. Exhibit C
shows the garage on main floor level. The lower level duplicates that space. The
proposed home contains 3164 square feet on two floors (not including the basement).
ANAL YSISIRECOMMENDA TION
Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Zoning Code sets forth criteria for granting
conditional use permits for accessory space over 1200 square feet. Following is how the
applicant's plans comply with the Code:
4""
" t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
....
Memorandum
Re: Loffler Conditional Use Permit
8 November 2006
a. The total area of accessory buildings (2344 square feet) does not exceed the floor
area (3164 square feet) above grade of the proposed home.
b. The total area of accessory buildings does not exceed 10 percent of the minimum
lot size for the R-1A zoning district (.10 x 40,000 = 4000 square feet).
c. The proposed house and garage comply with R-lA setback requirements. Also,
since the lower level garage occupies the same footprint as the upper level garage,
tree removal is minimized.
d. Since the new garage is an integral part of the proposed house, architectural
compatibility is not considered to be an issue. As previously mentioned, the
overhead doors for the garage are located on opposite elevations of the building
(see Exhibits D and E).
Based upon the preceding analysis, it is recommended that the applicant's request for a
conditional use permit be granted as proposed.
Cc: Craig Dawson
Tim Keane
James Loffler
-2-
z....c.
Qi
o (\)
o u.
o
.:
o
o
on
o
on
N
o
o
()
I-
(])
2:
CO
()
-
C
(])
(/)
(/)
CO
..c
c
CO
..c
()
Exhibit A
SITE LOCA
Lottler c.U.p~ION
L---J
/
/~
/~~
<v
/ ~ /
/ ,~v{
.~ I>...~ ~
~'~ .J 0..;'
~~
/0 !
~
7
~
~~~~f'
"" '
"" '
'" '
\
:
u~/t puno.:f
,~~-
/ \\
-9L 'f'Lfr--
M ,,90,LO.cC 5
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
'"
., ~
::,C <0
'- '"
l B~
~.-'G "0
c 0-
<l) 0
rol-
~
r-JJ
[;1
I
[;1
05
\ ~
~
~
~
rJ'J
~
~
o:l~
.......~
:B~
.....0
~~
~~
--, \
. \
~\
"t>
S
~
IS:
I ~
C)~
C),SJ
c:)~
C)h
....."
I\()
I:;;::
./
I
I
I
---
II
I
1~Cl.
~'c:
I <C <c:i
<c~
~
II
I
I
I
0 I
I
/> I
~
I
...~
'inIP~nqg
~~ldl!~~ln
J; ~~~Hh~d~~
i ~!HI!BU~j
~ ... '" '" ~ ,f;.o:i.-J ld o:l.9 0::1
,r,tT
~ :!
T
't II m
~ I
~
't ~ i
;.
~ i
~
't
~
~ ~
-'
0...
't ~
0
;. 0
II rr ~
z :.
~ ~
.'1-,'1 @~:r
.~-.< .f.-.t .1,...' ,l-J. ,9",1- .)<0-.<
,",11 ,r,9 .1<-' .f',l .10-" .1'-,9 n:~
.!t-" .r"'Pt
,9',IP'
: I i l : l:l I : l : l : III
! ! ! ! ! ! HI! I I I l ! 1 I
-fA: : 1 i III I I Il! I l I I I
~ il / ,-"-"-~-"- -r-~~- -"-"-~-"_._"
I!!.i~ i
Iii i
~Q8 !
~~s 1
I
!
~
~ i
i 3
~
-;<< ~
,;, ~
"
-it ii
~ 'I
~
"
""'
.
~
-':r
'"
t
!
I~ !
~
:1 -'f'
"
Exhibit C
HOUSE - FIRST FLOOR PLAN
1..1"il;-r'~ ;f,lGQNl-j)l; J.J1r
. ! s!
~ 1 Sl
'JNI N<}S1a 11'lQ1.J 1'1010;17)
~](]I]Nf..IJS'
\;f 10SdNNI~ '(]OOM]~Of..lS'
]IN]ClIS]'Zl 'Zl]lddOl
~- Jd 3
W
'>
t-
~
~ LL
'~ ,
~. a
%~ ~
'lL-., ....I
<j'
t-
W
C\
:::i
w
3 !lZ
a
w ~
l' .:.-.'> t-
~ ~ !;i
<Ii U
;.. ~
01
'1' ,i2l1.,\ "
___~~~___J_~__",
I' II
II
II
, II
I II
II
, II
I II
II
, II
I II
II
, II
I II
, II
I II
II
, II
I II
II
. II
I II
II
'I i!
"
, II
I II
II
\ ::
. II
I II
II
II
, II
I "
I' ::
II
, II
I II
II
, II
--------l----l\
, II
I II
.r----1 I
II r----1
II
I'::
II
I': :
II
-----------rn
<I I
III
II
<II
III
II
I'::
II
I': :
II
'II
III
II
1'\\
II
'II
I,.
II
<I'
-------~~-~~
I.'
~I
I;~~
nh
d
~~.
~~~
a~
~h
2\
)!
w
-'
w
~
~i
z'
I
B;: ,-
::J~ ~
" 0
Exhibit D
HOUSE ELEVATION - FRONT
1:>1I__H-III :f';ldrJNI-QI;' .[Dr
Ii 10c;]NNI~ 'QOOM]1I0Hc;
]IN]alS']~ ~]lLJOl
B e!
~ 1 ~l
'JNI N'Jlt;;lO -;;WCI-l \~Olt;m
II]QIdNHJc;
D~
ll!/
.~~
-J~~ ~
h! ~~i
ii!UU
aaipa.
d~~!n
~, ~h
~HI H~
m. ui
i!!iIUU
~~
;I~ ~I
~Ii I~
~~~ ~~ ~!
~~
~l ~
~im · ~
~r.~~2 ~
~~.~ ~~ ~
.g!~~" g
i~aN~: ~
1. ..
I
i
z\
o
~
':I.
w~
~a
~. ~
Hu
~
III
\ ~ I
IU
W
zl
01
~
~~
1-1:;'
~I~
I4lWU!:loIr'~
(5
j::
<{
>
':I
w"
:r..
~B
..1
;'!
w
D
OJ
z
I
dJ
<{
..1
'"
~! .
o ,
D "
~ ~
B
z ....
8~~
~ 0
Exhibit E
HOUSE ELEVATIONS - SIDES AND
REAR
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR ADDITIONAL ACCESSORY SPACE
TO JAMES LOFFLER
WHEREAS, James Loffler (Applicant) is the owner of real property located at 6030
Mill Street, in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, legally described as:
"Lot 127 Auditor's Subdivision No. 120, Hennepin County, Minnesota"; and
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for the
construction of accessory space exceeding 1200 square feet; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied to the City for a Conditional Use Permit for
the construction of an attached, two-level garage which will have approximately 2344 square
feet of floor area; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his
recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated 8
November 2006, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was
reviewed by the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on 14 November 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 their
regular meeting on 28 November 2006, at which time the Planner's memorandum and the
minutes of the Planning 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 total area of accessory space (2344 square feet) does not exceed the floor area
above grade ofthe principal structure (3164 square feet).
2. The Applicant's lot contains approximately 44,800 square feet of area, and that the
total area of accessory space on the property will not exceed 10% of the minimum lot area for
the R-1A Zoning District in which it is located (4,000 square feet).
3. The design and materials of the garage are compatible with the architectural
character of the existing home.
-1-
4. The proposed garage complies with all setback requirements for the R-1A District.
5. Construction of the home, garage and driveway will not exceed a total impervious
surface to lot area ratio of 25 percent.
CONCLUSION
1. That the application of James Loffler for a Conditional Use Permit as set forth
herein above be and hereby is granted.
2. That this approval is subject to the following:
a. The proposed garage will be used strictly for purposes of a residential
nature.
b. The Applicant is hereby advised that the City Code provides specific
regulations relative to home occupations and any future use of the
garage for other than allowable residential purposes would have to
comply with such regulations.
3. That the City Administrator/Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide
a certified copy of this Resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar
of Titles.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shore wood this 28th day of
November 2006.
WOODY LOVE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
CRAIG DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK
-2-
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128' www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years · 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
FILE NO.:
BACKGROUND
Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
Brad Nielsen
8 November 2006
Erickson, David and Chantel - c.u.P. for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200
Square Feet
405 (06.19)
David and Chantel Erickson own the property at 6155 Murray Court (see Site Location map-
Exhibit A, attached). The home is located on the northerly half of the lot (see Exhibit B).
They have applied for a conditional use permit to construct a detached garage that puts the
property in excess of 1200 square feet of accessory space. The new garage will be located in
the southwest corner of the site as shown on Exhibit C.
The property is zoned R-1C, Single-Family Residential and contains 74,885 square feet of
area. The new detached garage contains 576 square feet. Combined with the existing
attached garage, the amount of accessory space on the site will total 1764 square feet. Plans
for the new garage are illustrated on Exhibit D, attached. The Ericksons' home contains 3967
square feet of floor area, divided between two of the floors above grade.
ANAL YSISIRECOMMENDA TION
Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Zoning Code prescribes criteria for granting conditional
use permits for accessory space over 1200 square feet. Following is how the applicants' plans
comply with the Code:
a. The total area of accessory buildings (1764 square feet) does not exceed the proposed
floor area (3967 square feet) above grade of the existing home.
,It>
~ t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
.....
Memorandum
Re: Erickson - CUP
8 November 2006
b. The total area of accessory buildings does not exceed 10 percent of the minimum lot size
for the R-1C zoning district (.10 x 20,000 = 2000 square feet).
c. The proposed garage complies with R-1C setback requirements. Hardcover on the
property is well under 33 percent (approximately 11.66 percent).
d. The architectural character of the new building will be the same as the existing house.
Siding and roofing will match the house.
Based upon the preceding analysis, it is recommended that the applicant's request for a
conditional use permit be granted.
cc: Craig W. Dawson
Tim Keane
Joe Pazandak
David and Chantel Erickson
-2-
v ij t- L)L-::: '] -- I
~;~ ~ ., f- ,
I ~ ~ '~ (,:::: ~ ~ :
) ~ -- ~ \/
:\ ,,,\ I
o ~-~
\v gil
~~ \\~)) 1 II ~'~
/:::;Y \ \~-- ~-
':1
~~/~ ~ - ~
V"i<\b~ ~
JJti
~ I I~J. I r;' ~ 03
~\ ~ r-r-r ~ ~
V ~r \n I .Th~: ~ '\~. ?>fJ\ ~~ ~ I
j, I ~~~~ \ . ..~ \; ~
"i;~ I ;1>-- j ~ ,\1 J
//~ \\., - ~- \, · . fnO~'y \ ~I~~iLAcATION
, / \ \ j\ ~ ~~ Enckson C.U,P.
\ \~~ D/1
z-olllll(
1iJ
o OJ
o u..
0_
o
"?' "'"
~
~)
i
~
IS)
::s
~
""
~
~ ~ ~
filii " '..." '\
...$,1.
~~.:
-:t..,;
3
....f'~-~~-...('\---_...- ..---.--.-
~~
n,
--n
r
}..-
=
~
~
~
~...{:
7~
NOR: ~
/
./
/
/
I
/
/
I
I
I
J
I
/
I
f\
I
'/
/
I
I
I
J
h.
I
I
/
I
/
/
I
I
I
/
/
/
I
r
I
/
/
/
I
3:
CT'
--li'
IT>
7U
, "'~:j~
.".~ ~~-
Z"O
~~\
io:..~\
~'~
-,
IT>
:::::
lI>
-I
r
2;>
en
,."
~
\
---"':'_ -n ::z::
~.~~ ~ \.
~ '~PJ
---</{l 1-11
,--- p.\('")
GGl(j)
&;'1T>'ij
--,;--1 -0'>.
C5 r-
I 2, -,
~-
~'-~
Den
_\ -l
C J>
7Uen
= -0
T
5U f?:
~----\
= CO
O~
~
I
I
I
I
I
il~
36
I
I~~
Je-
D
PI
7<1
I
I
/
I
I
I
!
I
/
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
Exhibit C
SITE PLAN
)~ ~
181 ~
z_ .0 Z ."'''
. - I
~
nATC~ S~U"':US
- oROM E\IST GARAGE
VERIFY SLO~: --
111\TOI ALU~INU~l
FACIA ANJ SOFFIT
'--- FROM E\iST GAR_~GE
;-'I!\TC~ E\IS""NG
O'iER'-IANG DoT A>c
_ FOP. E\iS-ING G;\RGE
- - I":.!\ TCl' O./cRl'!\NG
@ E\lST GARAGE
---
REUSE GA '<AGE DDORS
,.- FRDM E\lST>NG GAR!\GE
11,l.TCH STJCCO DET AI,-S
.... - FRO!1 E\15T GAR~G:
J
7.0 II""
\ =
miL
4;
/1
_~---'- ASPHALT SI1!NGLES ---_/
I
I
I
I
I STEP FOWDATION '.5
I REQUIRED (VERIFY O~I SITE)
I
I
I
~
L
_- -1}--~_ _ _,
"'''; !~~f~:Ei - 8 .D-~- --'-0< D - ~~~;:~,'IL~ ~
u 0 l MAT," ";1'"
I ~
Exhibit D
PROPOSED GARAGE
6:'
o
05 ~
OO~
d:::J; '.' CJ
ICC ~
O~
w
Q.",
00:
~
Eim\DllC':
,
~
~~s !
~~ I
i"" :
~ i
~ I
~ ~ l
II
~
'::g
'.~
~
u
o
0> a.
c ~
-= 'w ~
\~ ~~
:;' 1ii ~m
.. ..: ~ 11- J:
(J) ~ ~~1U~
:E C' ~.E a1 l!! jjj
w~.Ri~::~~
t: ,_ t: ~~~.~
ffi .:. ~~~ 2M
:5:.~, ~ ,~~ ~
.
r'
~
N
r:
~
,I 11
~ 'li
Ir, i : tf1
,: '. ;l~
g~gi
. I c:
!r 0
Ji :;::;
0..
";:
CJ
(/j
Q)
CI
~
lrb:
!NiF
i+:
:~~
:~i~
Ifl; lUi
i 'i I
!;;:. i
'0' i
E::;JJ.:.
O. Q)
iiiE
::JO
UJ:
~~~
-:-.11 A..Ui iJ
!lji1 ~
,I _t" ~
m~~~~_ /
- ,"~t'--.I"- ~
<~?:/'':I'- ~,,~ /
#. ~. "I'~ 1"0'~ ~
#. "I:::-'''I~~~~
j. "i"-R::::-. ":::::-.
.b "~~~~,,,,~,,~.
J.if!;. ~t::-..f'i"-""-~"
1'\ "- '''-,,-;
'----
cD ~
t; 6 i~ ~ IS
: ' ~ ~ LU illO l':l '"
W "-l~C::--a: '"
: :)fO C::5cco f
(,) <.>;;!; G5~Ii'~.,,::,
..,;". 8~~~l...J6lI1!~l!551
~ ~~ ~~~~St3
rr-- WID I:iimzOC:
O t;;:t;~ 1::15'" Qs;~
<.>~' :;;z~t; "
:z ~ II ~;H \J5
.... "'~;z ~
u ~o g :2:
0.10
n,;j!
:l:i '"
!if~g ;
! ~!,! ~
~ ~ii m
J: - ~
d ~!
J ~t-
.~f tb
, ;lii~ b?fL--
r~j. r.<-!=
~- ,1f-
-~ \- 4') fLtf- - f-o-
#1-=1-1;-
I' i= _10-
).1'- =1- -I-
#~f-
1;' . -f- -f- ~:-
-f- -f- ~
I- f- -I-
() f-1- f-
r i- r- I--
~ll= ~I-- ~I--
:;:J,l - ~/
jlL. 1_ I- -n ~
-:z\() ~ I- I- b~ .
, , ~ F-- l-- ~ ~:$
~~_I-~ -
~~
~
~~...
I -:ri
, , ""J I
-I~
, [hill
II ,t'i I
i
f-
b=-
-:<
ca
Cl
Q)
...I
en
(/j
Q)
....
'0
'0
<t
CIl Cl
5fil~ DO
--CJ Z
I-c..w
CJ 0 :t::
~CJCJf3
CIlW!!:?-
CIl III >- . 12100
oO...J W
~I-Z >-
CJ 0
,r
.f
lL ,s.
~ :q
~ -!t1
, ~~
.111 1'-
tl~~..
i~ 'L..
: 'I ' .""ll- f-1=f-1- .
i F= i-
~ l~~~.... ~.~t ...~.
T . 'flrl'. '\111 m
'. 0
- 1 Exhibit E
.. Il EXISTINGHOMEELEVATION
, '
,,["..l"f::'r, --: f" ~
.'-. ~I\f' l'-'~' l"
f- ~~~~ :~:'
I- ' l' ~
f- '~I\c\ L"\ :'-._
= ~~~~~ ~
t rlm~~.,
~
,
-p j : i
~-
"\
1!:1\
""
g
~,
!f1 }.,
,- i:~f ~ "'''' 0 -
"'''' 'E
'<to
"'''' m
~N '" -
JIDl-JD <: -
""; 'J!. '<t'<t 0 -
~ I ~ "'''' <> if
00 " I ~ u >< <:
:,l : ~ z '"
-ru it! '*
. ... .. 1- O.ll.. ~
Z
@) ~.~ ~ Z .Q :3
: I ~. . Ii". a. Q.
~., U :;
Ji =, Z 0 0
DO! ~ .....0 ,s
!:uj
w~ - E~
O:Ot ~'r-<.a:"'J F- Em
0-
"'" _'"
.tJ! 0 I () "'" ,..."
<:m
.31. '" ro=:
III <:<:
::> III -:J
df "'"
"J:::
~ Z <>-
.~ a: ::>-
:E .,,0
01/)
1 I- .g a.;:
o i' m'"
: I _...J
i QJ en 'Iii oE
... "tJ.~
! a. ,,-
Z c: Q.~
Q) 00
" gu
. , 0 W -"
OJ:::
Ill" J:::_
, 0.0
'~ 0 -g~ f3
() ...
! C/}._ r--
I! -> '5 ;~ ;
,~ 00 .c <> ~
-<> 0
0'" -
, a) c :- ~
-m , .:::. >-0 '-
, (.) c e.E ~
, I
, CC U
Cl m20l
~l III c: j(g ~
:i2 "0,:: "5
;; "," to
I 0 55 ~
"'" J:::U '"
M fI) >. C
-- T 0 :c:g .~
..... I-..J ..J
,
/>.
~.-:" ~~
IIml ~.
~
!:
S
o
t
oJ.
IL
~ ~~J
<t "i
!;;: ~ r- l!\
o ;;;rI\ Q~
* ~ij\g:- ."
<C -dJ- QJIJ
g .JJi~ \1":1111
~ d-~~i cn~:5.J..
a: 0..J i- E~]c~~
<C "C C ~ CI () 0 (ll 0"'-0
g ,!= o.~?ii- ~~.~
en .!!!::E::unD.. Ul.!~
.E ftlow
u. all->
<c
~
<>
7: '
11.'CI. rL,
lir/ -. l/)
~i ~z
~,""Ji!'" G ~
1llJill -
% lL IJ. }
v~. 0 -
'.....! il~\M ill
1,:1, k~ Cl.;f
\,.'1 vJ.
jo.,. ,
, I
., I
~!
ir' !
:11
. I' i
['i
~1
o
u;~
z<
00
-Q.
t):J c:
W ~
~ f-I- ~
c:w
l(!;;:
00
w w'
!;;::J
00
Q.
:J
Z
:3
Q.
iJ;
'"
z
o
;::
U
., w
za.
Q",
!;(~
z
1ii
:;:
o
U
x
o
to
:.<
U
o
...J
iJ;
a:
o
'"
:;:
L-L- ffi
-=0-
ww=>
",,,,'"
<(<(m
:t::t:O
Q.c.....,
~,' i
--to
I"'.\l \I
.,..&.
~
7"
B~
~@
~f
.;.,~!!; .,
~I >-
, c:
x.o ~
;t:UI '"
_jUi.iiL: :2
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR ADDITIONAL ACCESSORY SPACE
TO DAVID AND CHANTEL ERICKSON
WHEREAS, David and Chante1 Erickson (Applicants) are the owners of real property
located at 6155 Murray Court, in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, legally described
as:
"Parts of Lots 86 and 87, Auditor's Subdivision Number 135, Hennepin County,
Minnesota:; and
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for the
construction of accessory space exceeding 1200 square feet; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants have applied to the City for a Conditional Use Permit for the
construction of a detached garage which, when combined with existing accessory space on the
property, will bring the total amount of accessory space on the property to approximately 1764
square feet; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his
recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated 8
November 2006, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was
reviewed by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting on 14 November 2006, the minutes
of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and .
WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was considered by the City Council at its regular
meeting on 27 November 2006, at which time the Planner's memorandum and the minutes of the
Planning 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 total area of accessory space (1764 square feet) does not exceed the floor area
above grade of the principal structure (3967 square feet).
2. The Applicants' lot contains approximately 74,885 square feet of area, and that the
total area of accessory space on the property will not exceed 10% of the minimum lot area for the
R-1A Zoning District in which it is located (4,000 square feet).
-1-
3. The design and materials of the garage are compatible with the architectural character
of the existing home.
4. The proposed garage complies with all setback requirements for the R-IA District.
CONCLUSION
1. The application of David and Chantel Erikson for a Conditional Use Permit as set
forth herein above be and hereby is granted.
2. That the Applicants are hereby advised that the City Code provides specific regulations relative
to home occupations and any future use of the garage for other than allowable residential purposes would
have to comply with such regulations.
3. The City Administrator/Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a certified
copy of this Resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 27th day of
November 2006.
Woody Love, Mayor
ATTEST:
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk
-2-
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
RE: Vogstrom, Paul - C .u.p for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square
Feet
DATE: 13 November 2006
FILE NO.: 405 (06.20)
BACKGROUND
Mr. Paul V ogstrom is in the process of constructing a new home on the property located
at 6140 Pleasant Avenue (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). Mr. Vogstrom
wishes to keep an old outbuilding located on the south half of the site (see Exhibit B), the
area of which, when combined with the new attached garage for the home, will exceed
1200 square feet of area. Mr. V ogstrom therefore has requested a conditional use permit,
pursuant to Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Shorewood Zoning Code.
The property is zoned R-lA, Single-Family Residential and contains approximately
64,279 square feet in area. The new garage is located on the southerly side of the new
and contains 800 square feet. The existing outbuilding contains 880 square feet, bringing
the total area of accessory space to 1680 square feet. The new home contains 3420
square feet on two floors (not including the basement). The new home and attached
garage are shown on Exhibit C. Photos of the existing outbuilding will be presented at
the public hearing for this request. Note that there are three outbuildings illustrated on
Exhibit B. The one the applicant wishes to save is the northerly of the three.
ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION
Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Zoning Code sets forth criteria forgranting
conditional use permits for accessory space over 1200 square feet. Following is how the
applicant's plans comply with the Code:
,11-
t t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
"''''
Memorandum
Re: Vogstrom Conditional Use Permit
13 November 2006
a. The total area of accessory buildings (1680 square feet) does not exceed the floor
area (3420 square feet) above grade of the proposed home.
b. The total area of accessory buildings does not exceed 10 percent of the minimum
lot size for the R-IA zoning district (.10 x 40,000 = 4000 square feet).
c. The proposed house and garage comply with R-IA setback requirements. The
existing building is approximately 90 feet from the Highway 7 right-of-way and
47 feet from the lot to the west of the subject property. Hardcover on the site will
be 15 percent, according to the applicant's survey.
d. For those who were able to visit the subject property, and as will be illustrated by
photographs at the public hearing, the outbuilding is in need of repair and
maintenance. The applicant has indicated that the building will get new siding
and roofing to match the new house. This should be a condition of the c.u.P. and
should be done before a certificate of occupancy is issued for the new home. In
the alternative, the applicant could provide a letter of credit guaranteeing that the
outbuilding would be refurbished by 1 June 2007. Finally, the old lean-to
structure at the rear of the building should be removed.
Based upon the preceding analysis, it is recommended that the applicant's request for a
conditional use permit be granted subject to the above conditions.
Cc: Craig Dawson
Tim Keane
Paul Vogstrom
Joe Pazandak
-2-
~7/ jB~ \r · ( '~~ \ · · ~O~J~ \\ \ U
yl / </) \\\-\1~\ ~ T~ :/"--1\
11 \ ,) · ~ \~ '
kif'/
1//
· .,"_00' ~ .",'",... ~ ~\aJJ
~i ~V{JH~
\~ g ~ \ "" /1,
\~ ~ ~~
\ _\J~.l...
\ ~l
C/)'4
/1 '"" .,,'~ -.1\1\ T T I z....c: ~ ~
Ii
o 5 ~
'"
\\ len"~j ~
1, I \ ~ ~. ."
~ :::':l( ...... \ .. . >0 I
// I. I \ 'Oft 11
I "' 0> CI) CI) ~i
~ .~ c. *
.1.0 ,1nl 30011dS .c. 0 I '*
::l s.. j:
~ ~ ~~~.i,.I.. ~
fi.8
r---? ;;; 0
L-J r~ '2
L!1 Q)
ne:
~ ctl
-liD
\ .,[",I,C
f Q)
~ CJ)
-~ CJ)
O~ V>l31Jn3 J: co
,tB~ill \ 1 ~
.. ..\tB ffi ~6
.. .. rL1~\JE
.. 8~83ttB
: .... EPrnm ~
Exhibit A
SITE LOCATION
Volkstrom C.U.P.
/k'
~
~
I
/-
-
-
-
-
~t~
~-
-
~ ~' ~/
~ /""" I Ilg
1~'\.~.Lo.'H I w ~/ /
'\ I ~ /
I ~ 7
~ " " Z 000M300'M r
~ ~~ --iF=-
~ ~"\.
~~L--- ~~ I I I
-~ ~
=~. ~n=- h jjj
--~ - ~"'\
w ~ ~
--i ~=- .~ \
--" \ ~
---C - ~\- I ~~
----"
..
..
..
.. ..
..
..
\ I
I
,~
"~
o
.
~~.
/.
. /
.{}' ///
/.
\
, \
0.'0'0'
.' \
..' \
--...........
.;>' \
."
~';>
..'
\
\
\
\
\
~ \
.~ \
." )- {i'l
,'P' ""E
t.-r;;........, ~....'" ~
V" \
\ /
V ~
(<)
.~~~
. (f\
\
.
\
\ <!i.,.:. \_
.,~ ~$~\ ~ \ 149:.
\ '!I~~\\ ~ ~ O:.~
\ "" , l
\ :" .\.~l>-:>\ \""
~( "'r--_, "'" "\
"'''''''''- \ '........ '\
. e ' ,
............. BUILDING SETBACK UNE
.... --or- '--- 1---
',~ ;~~v \ \
'~............ "'!if \ \ \
';')9' \ !Q.... \ \ ,
"," \. \ \
"' ..... \ \ \ ~......
",,", \ \ \~,
"~ \" \ \ , ", \
~\ \ /\, ",\
" .<5' \ ~ .~, \
.... ... , '!i', ~,. "-
" \.0. ~ \ 1"1 ",.' \
.... ~'....ey.... \
\. \,.... \
!1''> \
.
\
!1''> \
.
\
, \-
!1"
.'
-
zA'?
.
!1"
.
/
/
r
Exhibit B Y
PRO PERT
SURVEY
~~--~-----------
====================--Ji==-
BITUMINOUS EDGE
. ----
~6J---_______
10
I _,
..-
''I
~ ' t.',.~ '
I 11111 !
;1= .1
~'~
......:~ I
-l....J
. TI1
'~~
~....J
\:::J
~ I I III i
11111 'It'll \
I
U I I CJ
" I I
I \ I
I I
,\
I II I
~; .~
II I
n I
1I I
\= I ~ II I
~
III I I ,
-- ' i i
II II rTE3
II I I II I
II I I Em}
H I I
I III
T !. " ar
~~ 8 DO 0
II I I DO 0
II ""T. 0 DO 0
D OlD D
\ :liP. .m
'J. D DO 0
~=
~ 0 DO 0
~ 0 DO D
T
- 0 DO 0
'\
,H- I~
~L 0 DO 0
r-- 0 OD 0
U
II I I !D DO 0
0 DO 0
III I:~ . ,}II
Ih
II
~
.......
z
o 0
-'
~ ~
> ~
W
-1
W
I-
Z
o
0:::
u..
Exhibit C
EXISTING HOUSE
(Under constructIOn)
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR ADDITIONAL ACCESSORY SPACE
TO PAUL VOGSTROM
WHEREAS, Paul Vogstrom (Applicant) is the owner of real property located at 6140
Pleasant Avenue, in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, legally described as:
"That part of Lots 6 and 7 lying Easterly of the Westerly 315 feet of said lots, and
Northerly of the Northerly right-of-way line of State Highway No.7, Minnewashta Park,
Hennepin County, Minnesota:; and
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for the
construction of accessory space exceeding 1200 square feet; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied to the City for a Conditional Use Permit for the
construction of an attached garage which, when combined with existing accessory space on the
property, will bring the total amount of accessory space on the property to approximately 1680
square feet; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was reviewed by the City Planner, and his
recommendations were duly set forth in a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated 13
November 2006, which memorandum is on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was
reviewed by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting on 14 November 2006, the minutes
of which meeting are on file at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants' request was considered by the City Council at its regular
meeting on 27 November 2006, at which time the Planner's memorandum and the minutes of the
Planning 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 total area of accessory space (1680 square feet) does not exceed the floor area
above grade ofthe principal structure (3420 square feet).
2. The Applicant's lot contains approximately 64,279 square feet of area, and that the
total area of accessory space on the property will not exceed 10% of the minimum lot area for the
R-1A Zoning District in which it is located (4,000 square feet).
-1-
3. The design and materials of the garage are compatible with the architectural character
of the existing home.
4. The proposed garage complies with all setback requirements for the R-IA District.
CONCLUSION
1. The application of Paul Vogstrom for a Conditional Use Permit as set forth herein
above be and hereby is granted.
2. The Applicant is hereby advised that the City Code provides specific regulations relative to home
occupations and any future use of the garage for other than allowable residential purposes would have to
comply with such regulations.
3. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new home on the property, the Applicant
shall install new siding and new roofing on the existing accessory building located on the southerly half of
the lot. The new siding and roofing shall be the same as that installed on the new home. A lean-to structure
attached to the old accessory building shall be removed.
4. The City Administrator/Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a certified
copy ofthis Resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of TitIes.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shore wood this 27th day of
November 2006.
Woody Love, Mayor
ATTEST:
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk
-2-
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
FROM:
Brad Nielsen
DATE:
17 October 2006
RE:
Dock Regulations - Proposed Amendments
FILE NO.
Zoning (Chapter 1201.03 Subd. 14)
The Planning Commission's last discussion relative to dock regulations resulted in three issues to
be resolved: 1) definition of a single dock; and 2) what, if anything, should be done about the
size of docks, particularly in cases where the LMCD is considering issuing a multiple dock
license; and 3) updating the reference to LMCD rules in the Zoning Code.
I. Definitions. With respect to definitions, the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance and the LMCD
Code of Ordinances are virtually the same:
LMCD Definition
"Subd. 15. "Dock" means any wharf, pier, or other structure or combination of wharves,
piers, or other structure constructed or maintained in or over the Lake, whether floating or
not, including all "Is", "Ts" or posts which may be a part thereof, whether affixed or
adjacent to the principal structure."
Shorewood Definition
"DOCK. Any wharf, pier or other structure constructed or maintained in the lake, whether
floating or not, including all "Ls", "Ts" or posts which may be a part thereof, whether
affixed or adjacent to the principal structure."
Since Shorewood's regulations limit each property to one dock, it was suggested that the
definition should be amended to clarify what "one dock" means. This change could be as simple
as adding: "and which connects to the shoreline at one location, no wider than four feet".
Further restrictions could be included in the regulations, as noted in II. below.
~ll-
" ~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
.",
Memorandum
Re: Dock Regulations
17 October 2006
II. Dock Size. As has been discussed, the issue of dock sizes and configuration is extremely
difficult to regulate, given the size of many boats that are kept, particularly on Lake Minnetonka,
and what seems to be an endless combination of dock arrangements. This is especially true in
cases where the LMCD would allow multiple dock licenses under their following definition:
"Subd. 28. "Multiple dock or mooring area" means any dock or mooring area constructed
or maintained for the storage of five or more restricted watercraft, other than commercial
docks."
One suggestion relative to controlling dock sizes was to simply limit the number of slips that a
dock could provide. For example, a provision that limited the number of boats to four would
inherently result in smaller dock configurations than that allowed under LMCD multiple dock
licensing. It is suggested that better approach would be to require a conditional use permit at the
City level in cases where a multiple dock license is being considered by the LMCD. Such a
c.u.P. would allow extra scrutiny by the City and nearby affected residents. Perhaps the most
significant value to this type of approach would be an annual review of the multiple dock license
to ensure that the boats being stored at a subject site are all owned and registered to the residents
of the property, and that the dock arrangement is configured only as large as necessary to
accommodate the actual boats kept there. Monitoring of these LMCD licenses is simplified in
that the LMCD already refers annual multiple dock license requests to the City for review and
comment.
Following is how a possible amendment to Section 1201.03 Subd. 14.c. might appear
(amendment shown in italics):
"c. The number of docks and wharves per lot or parcel of land in the R Districts shall be
limited to one, and the same shall be operated, used and maintained solely for the use of
the members of the family or families occupying the property upon which the dock is
located. The dock shall connect to the shoreline at only one location, no wider than four
feet, and shall extend into the lake at least eight feet before branching out to form slips.
(Note - this provision is intended to prevent a boardwalk configuration). The width of
the dock shall not exceed four feet at any point, except that at one location the dock may
be no wider than eight feet for a length of eight feet.
The number of boats that may be docked or moored on a single property is limited to
four, unless the dock owner first obtains an annual multiple dock/mooring license from
the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District(LMCD) and a conditional use permit from
the City of Shorewood, which permit shall be subject to the following conditions:
(I) As part of the annual LMCD license review, the owner of the dock must
demonstrate to the City that all boats stored at the dock are owned, registered
and operated by the residents of the property on which the dock is located.
(2) As part of the annual LMCD license review, the owner of the dock must
demonstrate to the City that the dock is the minimum size necessary to store the
boats owned, registered and operated by the residents of the subject property. "
-2-
Memorandum
Re: Dock Regulations
17 October 2006
Also consider the following:
(3) No more than four of the slips allowed may be covered by boat canopies.
III. LMCD Code Reference. Subd. 14. g. should be changed to read:
"g. Unless specified otherwise in the City of Shorewood Zoning Code, all docks shall comply
with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Code of Ordinances. "
The above suggested provisions are considered to be consistent, but somewhat more restrictive,
than the LMCD Code.
Cc: Mayor and City Council
Craig Dawson
Tim Keane
Tom Skramstad
-3-
-S- E-C-O- N- D--- D- R-A- F - T-
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SHOREWOOD ZONING CODE AS IT PERTAINS
TO THE REGULATION OF DOCKS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
Section 1. City Code Section 1201.02, definition of "Dock" is hereby amended to read:
"DOCK. Any wharf, pier or other structure or combination of wharves, piers, or other structures
constructed or maintained in or over a lake, whether floating or not, including all "Ls", "Ts" or
posts which may be a part thereof, whether affixed or adjacent to the principal structure, and
which connects to the shoreline at only one location, no wider than four feet."
Section 2. City Code Section 1201.03 Subd. 14.c. is hereby amended to read:
"c. The number of docks per lot or parcel of land in the R Districts shall be limited to one,
and the same shall be operated, used and maintained solely for the use of the members of
the family or families occupying the property upon which the dock is located. The dock
shall connect to the shoreline at only one location, no wider than four feet, and shall
extend into the lake at least eight feet before branching out to form slips. The width of
the dock shall not exceed four feet at any point, except that at one location the dock may
be no wider than eight feet for a length of eight feet.
The number of restricted watercraft, as defined by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation
District (LMCD) that may be docked or moored on a single property is limited to four.
The dock owner may exceed four restricted watercraft only by obtaining an annual
multiple dock/mooring license from the LMCD and a conditional use permit from the
City of Shorewood, which permit shall be subject to the following conditions:
(1) As part of the annual LMCD license review, the owner of the dock must
demonstrate to the City that all boats stored at the dock are owned, registered and
operated by the residents of the property on which the dock is located.
(2) As part of the annual LMCD license review, the owner of the dock must
demonstrate to the City that the dock is the minimum size necessary to store the
boats owned, registered and operated by the residents of the subject property.
(3) Boat canopies shall be limited to the size and number that is required to cover
four of the restricted watercraft."
(4) The provisions of Section 1201.04, subdivision 1.d.(l) of this Chapter are
considered and satisfactorily met.
Section 3. City Code Section 1201.03 Subd. 14.g. is hereby amended to read:
"g. Unless specified otherwise in the City of Shorewood Zoning Code, all docks on all lakes
shall comply with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Code of Ordinances."
Section 4. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the
Official Newspaper of the City of Shore wood.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this day
of , 2006.
WOODY LOVE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK
-2-
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
FROM: Brad Nielsen
DATE: 22 November 2006
RE: Street Light Request Park Lane
FILENO.: 405 (Street Lights)
Residents of Shorewood Ponds neighborhood near Freeman Park have petitioned the City to
approve a street light for the west end of Park Lane (see attached map). The proposed location
meets Shorewood's criteria for the location of street lights.
Per City policy we have notified all property owners within 500 feet of the intersection. A copy
of the mailing list is attached for your review. As of this writing we have not received any
written comments from residents.
Cc: Craig Dawson
Larry Brown
Doug Dahl
1T9,
I': t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
"'..
o
t--
~
~
"
-
~
u.l
'4
~
~
Qi ~
o Q)
o LL
0
,..:
~
~ ~
~ ~
z---< 0
0
"'
t:
ns
0 E
"'
N
(1)
(1)
0 '-
u.
"C-~
(J).r::.l'
VI .~
0:;::;
c.(J)
o (J)
... ...
a.1ii
~
I-
z
o
1--1
~
1--1
~
IJJ
~
.......'lj
Cl) ~
~ C\l
.......
rJ) ....
C\l
C\l Cl)
....... I-<
(}) C\l
Cl).......
;:J C\l
o-<...r::
Cl)........
1-<.... ~
C\l'''''
........~
o I-<
(}) C\l
Cl)'lj
@
.,.., >...
~ CJ uS
.... S ~
'ljCl)Cl)
I-< N
0........ .,..,
o >< ,-;::
~Cl)U
Cl) (}) I-<
1-<''''' 0
0........ .,..,
...r::~~
rJ) . Cl)
.... Cl) rJ)
(})~'-l-<
'ljC\l0
~,....J >...
o ," ........
0.., ,...;L< .,..,
'lj~~
o 0.., ;:J
o '-l-< S
~ 0 S
Cl) 'lj 0
I-< ~ U
~p;.:jC\l
rJ)........~
'-l-<{})C\l
O~
(}),:> Cl)
~Cl)~
Cl)...r:: (})
'lj........C\l
.,.., ........ (})
ill C\l ;:J
I-< 'lj 0
b.OCl)'lj
~ u ~
.,.., C\l N
~,....... C\l
o P-....r::
;:::::Cl)>...
0....0,.......
'-l-< ,.......
Cl) ..8 . ~
:S........~
.......r:: Cl)
~ .290
,:>,....J P-.
~ "
-..::
t\ ,
'\ ~
) ~
''\ .... ~~
,'\ ~~
., "
\'; '.....~ ..~
\ ~~
;....~ .~ ~." ~
j"J \::}~
L"i l;'" '"
\'
\ J ~
f)
'\J I v j \ Zn
\{i ~
.. \J rl, -() \\ "- \.~ ~ r--
{}) (Q <:0
{}) '.1 -' '"
.~ \ \ I\V) '\.~ ......... "') N '-
Q) \i
l-< \J) ,.{j \" ~~, .......... >..0
"'l'j << \.1 ~
"'l'j '<s' \J ''0 ~. ~
~
Q)
S
~
Z
\
t!;:i
!:::)
''''-."
I-~, ~
--1'~ ~ 1
~Yl2
'.<C-- ~-' .~')
~ ~
". ~""t ~
~ .~ ~ ~
\ 'Y (.-- ~ ~.
) . ':< VJ S2I
~'1 ~ \~
~ ,~ :~ I~
'\~ "0 ~ f'(\;
,,;)
(-......J
>-....'\
~
)
i
~
o
"""\ \;
\ ~ ,
\~I {~ '"'---....,
n; .~~
""",,, -....,l
~
'\~...\-, , \'
~ -...:., ':::.L
,
,'- IIJ
0-~ t-1. ..,.....
w G.":-
"....\:; D (J_
'--,.... ....... '--.
.'\:) \: \r.,
}' ;~ .....
, ''''''-1 1'1 C)
" \ I"
, '-n "f
\ ",-\l 'r,{ \S)
'\
~
'" '~
~
'\''''
~
~
c~
"'~
..
\:~
-~ ~
~
.J
':l
<;-
~\
'"
'''"''
"-.."
\ ~
- ",t ~
\\~ \\. C
~ V "".:J
. ~} ~
~ ~\..>."
f'
G'- ~
~ o'C-....{
~ '-
~~~
"="2'--...
....
Q .,~---::
.~ ~,
~
\)
\. '-
l.~
n
.-....
'-
'$
~
--.....
'~
'"~
'~
" .J
,
~
~
~
"
.Gil
:;.
,
-'"
I .
, t...J
.~\
'~. ~~
, . \....).
J \ ,.\
,~ :; \
"'::.::..~t'J ~
~'- ~.'
t>S: \-\
""t \~
() \
,.....j 'I)
/, \ 1;"
\\!\ ~
\\ ~
~
<:-"
.. s;,
\\ /
l--p
='"
~
<:J
....3-
\fl.
rl:,
z
o
~
~
~
~
~
~
......'lj
Cl) ~
~ ro
......
en ....
ro
ro Cl)
...... ~
[J) ro
Cl)......
;:J ro
O"\.-C
Cl)......
~~
ro.......
......~
o ~
[J) ro
Cl)'lj
@
....... ~
~ CJ rJS
.... S ~
'ljCl)Cl)
O ~ N
...... .......
o ><:~
;SCl)U
Cl) [J) ~
~....... 0
0...... .......
~-~
en . Cl)
.... Cl) en
[J)~........
'ljroo
~....:J ~
o '" ......
p... ..-"-< .......
'lj~~
o p... ;:J
0........ S
;S 0 8
Cl) 'lj 0
~ ~ u
..2~ro
en......Cl)
........[J)~
o Cl) ro
[J) ~ Cl)
~Cl);s
Cl) ~ [J)
'lj......ro
....... ...... [J)
~ ro ;:J
~ 'lj 0
bJ:)Cl)'lj
~ u ~
....... ro N
;S"'--< ro
o 0.... ~
:::::Cl)~
0,.0...--<
........ ...--<
Cl) .8 .~
{j......~
....~ Cl)
~.~o
;::::......:J 0....
~
. ~ ~
~
\./)
U5
rJ:J
Q) '\
~~
\-1\
~
(j
\'-0
'-
-, \
" ~ .;-. i
. ~\..J .-J (~
< J j
~ ~.
~ .....
,~ ~ \ '~, J
~ , ~ j
(~ ~ ~ '- );
.~ '. ~1 ~-.../ ~ ~ -~ \.
"':;' ~~ 1:0. ~ \.
.~'~ "'L \\ \J ~ ~~, ~~ 1 ~ <."~,;-~}
) .....
. ~. ':\.' '- 'l
\ 'v <..~: '\, ~ .1
~ " '\\
J ~ \, .~ ::s J:,:, J ~ '~ \,j
~\ ~~ ..... L, C\ C'
~ ~'..., ......J! '\
~t ~ It!) ~'''';lo. ~
" ~j
\ . ~~ 0..,;, ~
. \ .\ I...\j
~ ~ \,~ '., \ ~ ~
\ lV) ~t\ ~ '" V\ ''1 ,\
.....1\ \ c=t~ \'- ~ r:; ......... \~
~ f\ -? f': ~
'~" ~ {~' '::;- ~ ~ f'
']\.0 VJ ~ /
...... . \'\ ~ \J c.{, .~ \:::, \, ., >V\
I 1\ "~ l0 ~ r:j......
~ (,.J"', ~ () ) '~ i...,('\
~ ~ \~ ~ \t ............. \./\
\\' ~ I \\; \
'y\ "- '.~ '.."
~ rJ \J _. .r\
'-Sj
\~
.J
~
'~
"'-":\
>t.~~ "~
"(",
'.\~
: ;\
VI
1".
,
~ ~
~ i
r ~
-."l
....)
, '.' \/\ }
~...,,~ .
r., .~.'..\ \~ . . ~ '~~ "'.,.J . ~'(
. \--~" \, '~ ~
.- . \' ~'\ ............
"'-. . "S' ~"\
~ ;- \' . . "
s:.......", ." \ .,......
\"'.,"" . .-.J
.\ ~
..
Q)
s
~
z
I
J
..'
/
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
NOTICE
The Shorewood City Council hereby notifies all property owners within 500 feet of the west end
of Park Lane (see site location map on reverse side) that the Council will consider a request for a
streetlight at that location during their meeting on November 27,2006 in the Council Chambers
of Shore wood City Hall, 5755 Country Club Road. The meeting starts at 7:00 P.M.
You are invited to attend this meeting to express your opinions and concems. If you can not
attend the meeting, you may respond in writing to:
Shorewood City Council
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
FAX # (952) 474-0128
e-mail: cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
If you have any questions relative to this matter, please contact the Plmming Department at
(952) 474-3236.
4'll-
~ . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
....
~
~
~
l(1
....
r@) ~
r@) C= @
@f; @ =
lliill @2)
-<l d d
~ '"
f- C= Il!!:!1
Il!!:!1 0
-' t: 2>
Il!!:!1 u.. ~
0 @
'~ f- ~
a:
<( MJ]
a.
\ - - - - - - - - -012- ~":. -
, ":.~ ~.~
, ........... --:.
-'ll .
\ ""
\ <;4.0
0 <..0
N N
<;
..... \
.....
\ \ -;.;;: Il!JIi
, "1 u..col!J!!l
\ :g 0 f- t=='
<fI\ I~ f-O~
~\ I i a.,::.. "-
-,I I - @lCi1 U-
0\ I =~@
NI I ~
<fI1 I. n
I o~. { =="
~I \/1 ~ ~
--Ni-->-=' I'!!m 00
q"\ ::.~ gt==' ~
\ 0-\ N@ 'i?
I '&.\;;' l(1
, 8\ ~~ b
I w. \ ... ...J
, 0:: \ @!; u..
\ ~\ MJlo
\ \ Z..... f-
I 'i \ .".- a.
\ 01 @
\ '5 \
, 'i::\\
\ <(,
\ 0\
- - I ;3 \
0::\
\ u..
\ 0
\ l-
I a.
\
\
q" ",f\ \
~\~ \ ~
0(: r-'"?\ ~
('oJ \oq' I- \
1'''-'0 \
~....J\
, ~ \
\:;: \
__.l
~'9S
<..0
SL~
o
z
o
Vl
Q) N \'l N -, I ~ ~ "'@2) ...s. \""J
'" N "~I- .-.-.st. l(1 l(1
in , 0 l(1 .,; ~\""J~ N
~~ en 1-' ~ _rVJ .,; ",'<:I"
-~ co 'u.. Ci1 ~ N l(1 -<l
Z l(1 '" 11 _ N
li~ N ~
!::;
5 i5 'i?
\""J \""J
S'LSI %'SSI
HinDS O~I S~'62~ C ~
- - -~SL OSI : i7i
~ ""
'"
,
I'!\!\ ~ co
~ co
Z
.--. 3
-'?P (0
~ '" ~N~I "'N co
~ N
N
l(1
0 \""J
~ ~ ----- ~ '\\"
.--. '.:J"" ,.
~ ...".
,{ 0 U'1.
~ @f, oQ, -S:
~ 0:>
t.~n @:>
S22 OSI HHlON SL'VS2
Otl \f>l
.'
"
'"
-<l
II'S29
3.~>:,L2 ,os
<Xi ~
'"
li1
~
W ~
i-1
N
t:
'" ~
co
Z
~
~
sn2S
<(
f-~
01'-
....JI'-
f- -
=>
o
3.v~,L2 ,os
J
1,1
>
w
N
N
~
,
'"
co
Z
N
o
".;
-<l
N
N
-----
------
-----~-:-6S,I-
",.~
rvJ
60'ILI
L~'ISI
3.~2,2~ ,os
101
9S'\lI
@2)
cog
\""J
~.
oi:"cit
co
N.
'"
\JJ 0} .
r:JN :~~. :J
, 002
o
C
n
WALTER G & GLORIA A JOHNSON
25595 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
EARL ERLANDER/NILA ERLANDER
25585 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
SHIRLEY S GOERS
25615 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
DORIS A STROM
25605 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ROSANNE L'ALLIER
25635 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
WALTER ORTMAN JR
25625 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
GUY L SWANSON
25655 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
GREGORY & KATHLEEN JOHNSTON
25645 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
CHARLES & NANCY MYKLEBY
25675 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
MARJORIE D SPEIER
25665 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
JOEN C JACOBSEN
25695 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
DUANE A DAILY
25685 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ALEXANDER & AVIS BEZAT
25715 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ARLENE R HORVATH
25705 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
JOYCE E STAHLBERG
25735 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
GAYLE KLUKE
25725 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
JAMES E MERTES
6015 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ROBERT A WINEGAR
6005 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
JOAN E & ROGER F DRESSEN SR
25600 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
GLADYS & LOUIS ZAKARIASEN JR
25610 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
MATTHEW R & DONNA M WALSH
25620 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
JEROME D & NANCY B SMITH
25630 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
MARIE C LOGELIN
6185 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
JOHN W & JOAN F CARROLL
6175 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
STEPHEN T MCCLOSKEY
6125 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
EUGENE E REICH/DORIS F REICH
6115 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
HELEN W THOMAS
6075 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
DONALD C/GERALDINE M WEBBER
6065 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
JOYCE M KOCH
6055 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
EUGENE E/JEAN M BRANDENBURG
6045 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
LAWRENCE E & ROSELYN E BAIER
6035 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
GLENN R & NANCY A TILLOTSON
6070 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ROBERT E & JEAN L BROWN
6100 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ANN L SEVEY
6130 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
W KENT & PATRICIA F NIELSEN
6160 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
RUTH M PULVERMACHER
25680 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
MOLLY SIVERTS
26030 SHOREWOOD OAKS DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
STACEY KLEIN
26000 SHOREWOOD OAKS DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ROY & MARY LOU SWENSON
6025 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
WILLIAM W & ELAINE J STEMPEL
6060 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ALLEN M & WILMA A KABANUK
6080 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
EUGENE E & MARILYN J MARTIN
6090 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
JANET L CRADIT
6110 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
CLAS & ELISABET ROING
6120 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ROBERT G & FRANCES K TEIGEN
6140 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
DONNA J CHRISTY
6150 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
ROBERT L SWENSON
6170 POND VIEW DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
GEORGE H WARFIELD
25670 PARK LA
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
SHOREWOOD PONDS ASSOC
C/O BROOK PARK REALTY INC
8525 EDINBROOK CROSSING
BROOKLYN PARK MN 55443
F HEALY & K A KIRK-HEALY
26040 SHOREWOOD OAKS DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
JOEL E & LUCY M SMITH
26020 SHOREWOOD OAKS DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
PETER M BUONOMO
26010 SHOREWOOD OAKS DR
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
MARGARET J OSHA
25840 STATE HWY NO 7
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128' www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cilyhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Brad Nielsen
DATE:
22 November 2006
RE:
Request for Speed Study
FILE NO.:
Streets(Park Lane)
Our office has received a petition from residents of the Shorewood Ponds neighborhood,
requesting a reduction in the current speed limit (30 mph) on Park Lane. This east/west
street extends through Shorewood Ponds and serves as the southerly access road for
Freeman Park.
We advised the individual who submitted the petition that reductions of speed limits
below 30 mph are subject to the approval of the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
MNDOT requires a formal speed study prior to making such a determination. The study
takes into consideration roadway conditions (e.g. hills and curves, etc) and existing traffic
speed.
Staff recommends that a speed study be requested for next June, when park activities are
under way. We also suggest that the City do its own preliminary study, using its new
traffic monitoring equipment, in advance of the State's study.
If you have any questions relative to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me prior
to the meeting.
Cc: Craig Dawson
Larry Brown
Tim Keane
Doug Dahl
..."
.. t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
..."
o '"d Q)
-I-' rcl ;j
:2 8 i2
p-< ' .-<
S..bb
o~Q)
C00~
__ Q) (f)
-I-'...c: -
';::j -I-' ~
l:1 (f)''-<
.,.....( .,.....(
..J(f)'"d
'"d:E~
Q)-I-'Q)
Q) .... ~
P-<(f)rcl
rJ) ~..J
Q)~~
...c:rcll-<
-I-'...c: rcl
,5 u p..
~ -I-' ~
oX 0
'.0 i--I ~
uz 0
Z~;;;SS
~ -I-' S
O _~o
<v Q) U
OJ) ~ .;Q
I--l ,5 l-< OJ)
L.......I -I-' 0 r.
L"""" iD -I-' ,~
I--l ;j Q) '"d
L.......I ry<;j ~
L"""" ~ Q ~
~ ~i~
~ ~;;;S ~
'"d .... p..
~'"d ~
OOrcl
p..oS
'"d;sQ)
oQ)Q)
o l-< l-<
;s..2 f.I.<
~rJ)o
o cJ'"d .
...c: ~ ~ 2
rJ)rclQ)~
..........J...c:Q)
o ~ -I-' '"d
(f) l-< ;j'c;)
-I-' rcl 0 Q)
~ p.. rJ) l-<
Q) Q) l-<
] S~'8
~--..oQ)
...c:-I-'(f)
Q) p-< OJ) l-<
~ S.5 ;j
.... '"d 0
~Q) 0 rcl l-<
NQ)O
--.......... ........
CJ5
r;/)
QJ
lo-i
"'0
"'0
<
..
QJ
S
~
Z
~
~
o
-.9
\(I
c(,
~
~
\)
'~
,~,
, y
i' '< ~
\\ )
~
~ '\
'"\ ~
~.~'
o '"d <li
....... ro ;:i
Z8i2
0... .......
s~>-'
o~"t:)
('f)o~
"-' <li Cf)
.~ -B ro
S Cf).~
"1""""'1 0'1"'""'1
~Cf)'"d
'"d....... ~
<li..c: ro
....... <li
<li "'~
Jr~ro
<li 0.0 ~
iJ~~
~..c: ro
....... u p..
~.......~
000
'.0 Q ~
uZ 0
Z .g~ s
~....... s
O ro~O
<li u
o.oUCf)
~ ~ <li.......
~ ....... l-< 0.0
....... 0 r.
~....... .:::i
~ ;:i <li '"d
~ [8~
rTl <li . CJ}
s:: ~~~
Cf) ~ ro
'"d "' p..
~ '"d ~
o 0 ro
p..OS
'"d~<li
o <li <li
o l-< l-<
~.2 ~
<li r '"' '4-<
l-< VJ 0
o c.) '"d .
..c:~~2
CJ}ro<li~
'4-<~..c:<li
o .......'"d
Cf) ~ ;:i.......
~~c75~
<li p.. l-<
:-s~~t5
~ 0........2
l-<---..O<li
..c:.......Cf)
~ 0... 0.0 l-< ;. ~
....... S.8;:i ;
"' '"dO $::l
~Orol-< ra
;>N<liO Z
"-',.......; '4-<
.))
~
~
'-
Ct5 "
r.rJ
Q)
~
"'0
"'0
<
~ f~
~~
~
~
\
V")
~
~
J
\I
l
"'""
'~
1-,
~
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator 1\ l\.
November 22, 2006 lLlJ
Resolution for Preliminary Authorization to EDA To Refinance Public Safety Bonds
For a more complete background explanation, please refer to the memorandum on this topic in your
packet for the EDA meeting scheduled to occur after the Council meeting. The Council needs to act
on this item separately from what it will consider as it sits as the EDA Board.
The City of Shorewood is a party to the refinancing transaction as it is the lessee for the Police/Fire
building at 24200/24150 Smithtown Road. The City in turn subleases to the South Lake Minnetonka
Police Department and the Excelsior Fire District. Even when refinancing results in lower payment
obligations, in order to realize the potential savings, the parties to the various leases, subleases, and
other bond documents involved in the initial financing need to approve amendments to them relating
to payment schedules.
The SLMPD and EFD have approved resolutions giving preliminary authorization to the Shorewood
Economic Development Authority to refinance the 2002 bonds only, or both the 2002 and 2003
bonds, subject to minimum net savings being achieved. The City of Deephaven approved an
identical preliminary resolution on November 20. Whether to refinance the first or both years' bonds
is discussed in the memo in the EDA agenda packet. Their resolutions do not obligate the EDA to
refinance any of the bonds. It should be noted that the City of Shore wood currently pays
approximately 48 percent of total bond obligations.
A preliminary resolution to authorize the Shorewood EDA to refinance the bonds for the public
safety facilities is attached. With the exception of the name of Shorewood and reference only to the
West Station and a condition in Deephaven' s resolution that the sale must occur by April 1, 2007, it
is identical to the preliminary resolutions approved by the EFD, SLMPD, and City of Deephaven.
Final authorization related to issuing the new bonds and amending to the appropriate documents
would be done by resolution after pricing has been secured on the bonds for refinancing.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the resolution giving preliminary approval to
the Shorewood Economic Development Authority to issue refunding bonds to the West Public
Safety Facility.
",1l-
l': . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
....
.....
.....
-....
.....
VI
N
o
o
0\
..
~
'"
c
3
"
'"
""
....
o
"'0
o
o
o
....,
"r:I
c
::>
c..
en
o
::l
::c
~
@
C
en
"
c..
S-
O
"
~
el
"
""
c:;
o
"'0
o
o
o
....,
::r
"
N
o
N
....,
3
a
c
..,
q.'
o
....,
::r
"
l:I.l
"
..,
Cij'
'"
N
o
o
N
('j
I:l:l
o
::l
c..
~
~Zt""''''
~g.~R<>
e?- r.t:l ~
z~'"rjg'
CD 5' S g.
~<oa~p.
\...1 cr
5' O::l
Cltl ::l,...,
CIl q...,.
0: 0
I:: 3
Cti 0..
0.. CD
~
ll)
CIl
CD
::l
(")
CD
*
~
....
o
-..J
V,
\.0)
N
....--
_ - N
0........
-..J O-..J
'\0'0'\0
-..J O-..J
VlOVl
'-'
~
N
-
\.0)
~,
-
0\
~
....--
O\--N
NO........
O-..JO-..J
00'\0'0'\0
....-..JO-..J
QOVlOVl
'-'
~
....
\.0)
0\
V,
....
QO
....--
- -
0....
-..J 0
'\0'0
-..J 0
U\ 0
'-'
~
N
....
N
a,
-..J
N
~
0\
-..J
\0
~N
N
o
....--
-
....
o
'0
o
o
'-'
-
o
-..J
'\0
-..J
VI
(JJ Z
~ CD
5, (fq
a
oa ~2"
CD
(JJ2;>
2" 0"
n _.
~ q
CD ~
CD
t""'
CD
.<
g..
N
....
-..J
'\0
-..J
VI
N
,!:>.
-..J
'\0
-..J
VI
.~
Z"'Z
g.:<~
." (JJ (JJ
:< ~ ~
5. 5'
t:t:l Cltl
CD Cltl CIl
::l CIl
CD ~
::n
.....
~ ~
t""'
CD
<
g..
N N
o \0
~QO \0
QOv,
N VI
U\ -..J
~ ~
- N
,!:>.-
\0\.0)
':.:..~
0\ -
\0 0\
~ ~
t"'"
CD
<
g..
\.0) U\
U\ -
,!:>.QOJ'-l'!:>'
V,NQOW
\.0) \0 -..J -
'#.,!:>.\.o)'#.
~ ~
t"'"
CD
<
Cll
-
N \.0)
N N
QO QO
".....1 v,
_ -..J
QO \.0)
~ ~
t"'"
CD
<
g..
-N
0\ ,!:>.
QO N
~\.o) a,
VI -..J
.... N
~ ~
t"'"
CD
<
g..
\.0) U\
\0 -...J
~-...J-
_'ON
_ -..J ....
'#.NVI
z:>:>
n ~ ~
:;z:l~~
a ll) ll)
en CD CD
Zzo
~ ~ 0:
~VI
-~
N-...J
'#.'#.
~Ul
-~
N -...J
'#.'#.
~Ul
-~
N-...J
'#. '#.
U\
~
-...J
'#.
I
,!:>.U\
wO
U\
,!:>. ;:;;'"
'#. "'....
U\
~
-..J
'#.
I
,!:>. Ul
W 0
....~
'#. "'....
U\
~
-...J
'#.
I
,!:>. ,!:>. VI
wwo
0\
.... ,!:>. ;:;;'"
'#. '#. "'....
1
~'"rjZZ."
o I:: CD CD ll)
l""'t- ::s ~ l""'f- ,..,
~~
Cll ::l
:;: ::r::
fF ~
I:: 0..
CD
g'S1~
o ll) 0
~ g a
S' 5'
Cltl Cltl g'
." R<> ~
ca trJ 5
3 ~ ~
_. ,.., Q..
S ~
8" ~
'0'0
ll) 0
g. ~.
~
~,!:>.
QO
N
Ul
~o
o
o
....
-a,
\.0) \0
o VI
'0'0
o 0
o 0
~
\.0)
~
0\
U\
'0
o
o
\.0)
~N
\0 -...J
o Ul
'0'0
o 0
o 0
~
~QO
-
\0
o
'0
o
o
-...J
N'\o
N-...J
o 0
'0'0
o 0
o 0
~
U\
".....1
-
o
'0
o
o
Ul
....--_0,
0\ .... \.0)
UlOUl
.o~ob
000
000
'-'
~
,!:>.
N
\0
o
'0
o
o
....--
Ul
~U\
o
o
o
'-'
-
-
o
'0
o
o
~
-
o
'0
o
o
~o
o
o
....--
-
N
o
'0
o
o
'-'
N
Ul
o
'0
o
o
~
~
:;'
t!)
~
1J:J
n
~ Cll
~ ;;
r;' .,
Cll 0'
....
~
0-3
o
.....
:::.
~
~
:;'
t!)
~
....
N
\.0)
U\
'0
o
o
1J:J
n
~ Cll
~ ;;
r;' .,
t'T1 c"
N
~
.\0
CXI
-...J
o
'0
o
o
0-3
o
.....
:::.
('j\Jj
~ Q
Q =
C/l _
C/l =-
Q t"""
~ ~
>- trl
9:-~
S g'
n trl
trl _
~ g
~~
J:l,.'"d
S' g.
0Cl ~
n
\Jj\Jj
n ~
!:S ~
.... trl
E;-<
....
Q "'rj
C/l ~
n
....
-
....
-<
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO
ISSUANCE OF REFUNDING BONDS RELATED TO
CERTAIN PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council ("Council") of the City of Shorewood,
Minnesota ("Shorewood") as follows:
Section 1.
Recitals; The West Side Fire Proiect.
1.01. The Excelsior Fire District ("District"), in conjunction with Shorewood
and the Shorewood Economic Development Authority (the "Authority") financed a
portion of the cost to construct a fire facility located in the City of Shorewood (the "West
Fire Side Project"), through issuance by the Authority of its $3,865,000 Public Safety
Fire Facility Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2002A (City of Shorewood, Minnesota Lease
Obligation) (the "Series 2002A Bonds"), pursuant to a Trust Indenture dated as of
September 1, 2002 (the "West Side Indenture") between the Authority and U.S. Bank
National Association, as trustee (the "Trustee").
1.02. The District, in conjunction with Shorewood and the Authority, financed
additional costs of the West Fire Side Project through issuance by the Authority of its
$1,195,000 Public Safety Fire Facility Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2003A (City of
Shorewood, Minnesota Lease Obligation) (the "Series 2003A Bonds") pursuant to the
West Side Indenture as modified by a First Supplemental Trust Indenture dated as of April
15,2003 (the "Supplemental Indenture").
1.03. The District and the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (the
"Department") lease certain property to the Authority pursuant to the Ground Lease (West
Side) dated as of September 1, 2002, as amended by a First Amendment to Ground Lease
(West Side) dated as of April 15, 2003 (the "West Side Ground Lease"), and the Authority
leases such property, together with the buildings, structures or improvements now or
hereafter located thereon, to Shorewood pursuant to a Lease Purchase Agreement (West
Side Fire Facilities) between the Authority and Shorewood dated as of September 1,2002,
as amended by a First Amendment to Fire Facility Lease-Purchase Agreement dated as of
April 15, 2003 (the "West Side Fire Facility Lease").
1.04. With the Authority's consent, Shorewood entered into a Sublease Purchase
Agreement (West Side Fire Facilities) with the District dated as of September 1,2002 (the
"West Side Fire Sublease"), under which the District undertakes Shorewood's obligations
under the West Side Fire Facility Lease.
1.05. Pursuant to an Assignment and Security Agreement dated as of September 1,
2002, as amended by a First Supplemental Assignment and Security Agreement dated as of
April 15,2003 (the "West Side Assignment"), the Authority assigned to the Trustee all of
the Authority's right, title and interest in and to the West Side Ground Lease, the West Side
Fire Facility Lease, the West Side Fire Sublease, and the Lease Payments to be made by the
District thereunder'( other than certain rights to indemnification and payment of expenses) as
security for the Series 2002A Bonds and the Series 2003A Bonds.
1.06. The outstanding principal amount of the Series 2002A Bonds is subject to
optional redemption on February 1, 2009 and any date thereafter; and the outstanding
principal amount of the Series 2003A Bonds is subject to optional redemption on
February 1,2010 and any date thereafter.
Section 2.
Recitals; The West Side Police Proiect.
2.01. The Department, in conjunction with Shorewood and the Authority,
financed a portion of the cost to construct a police facility located in the City of
Shorewood (the "West Side Police Project"), through issuance by the Authority of its
$4,025,000 Public Safety Police Facility Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2002B (City of
Shorewood, Minnesota Lease Obligation) (the "Series 2002B Bonds"), all pursuant to a
Trust Indenture dated as of September 1, 2002 (the "West Side Indenture") between the
Authority and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee (the "Trustee").
2.02. The Department, in conjunction with Shorewood and the Authority, financed
additional costs of the West Side Police Project through issuance by the Authority of its
$1,220,000 Public Safety Police Facility Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2003B (City of
Shorewood, Minnesota Lease Obligation) (the "Series 2003B Bonds"), pursuant to the
West Side Indenture as modified by a First Supplemental Trust Indenture dated as of April
15, 2003 (the "Supplemental Indenture").
2.03. The Department and the Excelsior Fire District ("District") lease certain
property to the Authority pursuant to the Ground Lease (West Side) dated as of September
1, 2002, as amended by a First Amendment to Ground Lease (West Side) dated as of April
15,2003 (the "West Side Ground Lease"), and the Authority leases such property, together
with the buildings, structures or improvements now or hereafter located thereon, to
Shorewood pursuant to a Lease Purchase Agreement (West Side Police Facilities) between
the Authority and Shorewood dated as of September 1, 2002, as amended by a First
Amendment to Lease-Purchase Agreement dated as of April 15, 2003 (the "West Side
Police Facility Lease").
2.04. With the Authority's consent, Shorewood entered into a Sublease Purchase
Agreement (West Side Police Facilities) with the Department dated as of September 1,2002
(the "West Side Police Sublease"), under which the Department undertakes Shorewood's
obligations under the West Side Police Facility Lease.
2.05. Pursuant to an Assignment and Security Agreement dated as of September 1,
2002, as amended by a First Supplemental Assignment and Security Agreement dated as of
April 15, 2003 (the "West Side Assignment"), the Authority assigned to the Trustee all of
2
the Authority's right, title and interest in and to the West Side Ground Lease, the West Side
Police Facility Lease, the West Side Police Sublease, and the Lease Payments to be made by
the Department thereunder (other than certain rights to indemnification and payment of
expenses) as security for the Series 2002B Bonds and the Series 2003B Bonds.
2.06. The outstanding principal amount of the Series 2002B Bonds is subject to
optional redemption on February 1, 2009 and any date thereafter; and the outstanding
principal amount of the Series 2003B Bonds is subject to optional redemption on
February 1, 2010 and any date thereafter.
Section 3.
Refunding Authorized.
3.01. In order to realize debt service savings, the District and the Department
have proposed that the Authority issue one or more series of advance refunding bonds in
order to refund all or a portion of the Series 2002A Bonds, Series 2002B Bonds, Series
2003A Bonds and Series 2003B Bonds. In addition, the District has proposed that the
Authority issue advance refunding bonds to refund its $2,060,000 Public Safety Fire
Facility Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2002C (City of Shorewood, Minnesota Lease
Obligation) (the "Series 2002C Bonds"), which were issued to finance the cost of a fire
facility located in the City of Deephaven ("Deephaven"), such facility being referred to as
the "East Side Fire Project." The Series 2002ABonds, Series 2002B Bonds and Series
2002C Bonds are referred to together as the "Series 2002 Bonds"); and the Series 2003A
Bonds and Series 2003B Bonds are referred to together as the "Series 2003 Bonds").
3.02. The City authorizes and requests the Authority, the District, the
Department and Deephaven and their consultants to take all steps necessary to issue
advance refunding bonds to refund the Series 2002 Bonds and the Series 2003 Bonds,
subject only to the following terms and conditions:
(a) The Authority and Shorewood may determine in their joint
discretion whether to refund all the Series 2002 Bonds and Series 2003 Bonds
("Scenario 2"), or only the Series 2002 Bonds ("Scenario 1 "), based on
Shorewood's determination regarding the total amount of bonds expected to be
issued in calendar year 2007 and Shorewood's desire to issue bonds on a "bank
qualified basis" under Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended.
(b) The Authority, in consultation with its financial advisor, may issue
refunding bonds on a negotiated or competitive basis, as they determine to be in
the best interest of the District and the Department.
(c) The Authority is authorized to accept bids or enter into a bond
purchase agreement for each series of bonds only if the refunding bonds meet the
following parameters:
3
Minimum Net Debt Service Savings*
Scenario 1:
Fire Facilities (East and West)
Combined savings for
Series 2002A and 2002C
$299,557
Police Facilities
Savings for Series 2002B
$213,316
Scenario 2:
Fire Facilities (East and West)
Combined savings for
Series 2002A, 2003A
and 2002C
$328,573
Police Facilities
Combined savings for
Series 2002B
and Series 2003B
$242,672
*Debt service savings are net of any savings related to defeasance of a portion of
Series 2002C with unspent proceeds.
Approved by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota this 27th day
of November, 2006.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
Woody Love, Mayor
ATTEST:
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator
4
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128' www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator
November 22,2006
Repeal of Provision in City Code regarding Inspections for Sump Pump Connections
Councilmember Wellens has requested that this matter be placed on the agenda for the November 27
Council meeting.
At the November 13,2006, City Council meeting, Councilmember Wellens requested that the City
Council consider removing a provision in City Code Sec. 904.09, Subd. 2, regarding inspections for
sump pump connections. City Council agreed that this matter should have comments from staff
when it next considered the possible repeal of this provision.
Section 904.09, Subd. 2, reads as follows:
"Authority to inspect. Every person owning improved real estate that discharges into the
City's sanitary sewer system shall allow inspection by authorized City employees or its
agents, as deemed appropriate and authorized by the City Council, of all properties or
structures connected to the sanitary sewer system to confirm there is no slimp pump or other
prohibited discharge into the sanitary sewer system. The authority to conduct further
inspections on a property under this section shall lapse upon a determination that the property
is in compliance with the requirements of this section." [Emphasis added.]
Removing the underlined sentence or the entire subdivision are options. Staff has identified the
following concerns with removing or advantages of retaining the entire subdivision.
. By retaining this provision in the Code, it is very clear that the City's inspection authority is
limited. With this provision that explicitly limits inspections until compliance occurs,
retaining it would appear to be to the future advantage of a property owner.
. Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) has instituted a new infiltration and
inflow (III) surcharge program. For those cities who are or who may be added to the list to be
surcharged, MCES is encouraging a wide range of activities for III reduction, among which
are inspections for sump pump connections and foundation drain tile connections. Should re-
inspection become necessary for Shorewood if it is placed in the III surcharge program, or if a
regular schedule of reinspections becomes a metro-wide mandate, something along the lines
of the current Sec. 904.09, Subd. 2, would need to be placed in the City Code.
#'.
t.J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Re: Possible Repeal within City Code Sec. 904.09, Subd. 2
November 27,2006, City Council Meeting
Page 2
. This section of the Code refers to "sump pump or other prohibited discharge into the sanitary
sewer system." These other discharges are roof drains, unauthorized swimming pool
discharge, cistern overflow pipe or surface drain connected and/or discharging into the
sanitary sewer. Removing the entire Subdivision 2 would take away the City's authority to
inspect for these "other prohibited discharges". Retaining the current wording in its entirety
would ensure that inspections could be made only until the property was in compliance.
. To extrapolate on the point immediately above: While the sump pump connection inspection
program is now completed (and inspection during new construction ensures there is no
connection), other prohibited discharges (like unauthorized discharges from swimming pools)
can occur in the future.
. Compared to finding the original ordinance when needing to research or reference to
prohibited discharges and surcharges, having this provision remain in the Code is more
convenient.
Cost of a Connected Sump Pump: The MCES staff has provided illustration of the volume and cost
of a sump pump discharge to the sanitary sewer system. With the following assumptions and
specifically to what would be found in Shorewood:
. Most residential sump pumps will between 10 and 15 gallons per minute (gpm). Assume an
average of 12 gpm.
. Running 50% of the time is not an unrealistic assumption, particularly in areas of a high water
table.
. A 12 gpm pump running 50% of the time discharges 8,640 gallons in one day. (12 gpm x
50% x 1,440 minutes/day)
. The typical metro residential household discharges about 220 gallons per day (gpd). For
purposes of illustration and a conservative comparison, assume that Shorewood's household
discharge is 300 gpd.
. Thus, a single household's sump pump discharge would be equivalent to 29 typical
households' discharges (8,640 gpd /300 gpd = 28.8 households).
. With the City's flat sewer fee of $70/quarter, the charge for 29 households would be $2,030
per quarter.
. In a 90-day quarter, the 8,640 gpd sump-pump-connected household would discharge 777,600
per quarter.
. The MCES 2005 rate charged to cities was $1,464.56 per million gallons.
. The cost to the City (and its ratepayers) for this single household's sump pump discharge
would be $1,138.84/ quarter.
City Council Action:
The Council should provide direction on what, if any, amendments should be prepared for
further Council consideration.
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128' www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator
DATE: November 22,2006
SUBJECT: Request by Deephaven To Review Funding Formula for Excelsior Fire District
At the October 25,2006, meeting of the Excelsior Fire District, Deephaven City Councilmember
David Wheaton requested that the formula for funding the EFD by its member cities be reviewed. He
mentioned that the review should consider changes based on individual cities' use of EFD resources,
rather than the full transition to tax capacity (aka ad valorem, aka taxable value) as the basis for
funding beginning in 20 I O. The EFD Board noted that it did not have authority to consider changes
to the joint powers agreement (JP A), and that conversation would need to occur between the member
cities' councils. Board members indicated they would be open to a presentation by representatives of
Deephaven, so that Board members could be informed as they brought Deephaven's request to their
city councils.
On November 20, 2006, the Board received a resolution from the Deephaven City Council (attached)
and an explanation from the Board member from Deephaven. He noted that EFD responses had
evolved to 60% medical / 40% fire split, which was perhaps different than what was envisioned when
the District was formed in 2000. Given that people, rather than property, was the greater component
ofEFD's service, tax capacity (i.e., the value of property protected) might not be the appropriate
basis for funding. He also related that it would be appropriate to keep the funding basis to pay the
lease obligations solely on a tax capacity basis.
The Board then recommended a framework for an effective discussion among the EFD member
cities. It recommended that a forum group be created as soon as possible and include:
. The mayor or mayor-elect from each City.
. One alternate from each city, preferably a sitting councilmember who was former Board
member, or a past representative to the Board who can provide a historical perspective to the
forum group.
. That the discussion include the funding formula and the protocol for medical responses
(which Deephaven has in the past is duplicated within its jurisdiction, as this is provided by its
police department).
#"
'-J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Request by Deephaven To Review EFD Funding Formula
November 27,2006, City Council Meeting
Page 2
Dispute Resolution: The Lakeshore Weekly News reported in its November 20 edition that this matter
could go into dispute resolution as provided in the lP A. This statement is incorrect.
The relevant provision in Section 9.1 of the lP A states:
"... when any Member City believes that there is a misrepresentation or a violation of the specific
terms and conditions of this Agreement, that Member City may initiate the dispute resolution
process by submitting to the District and each Member City a written statement outlining the
dispute or disagreement."
The dispute resolution process is limited to how the agreement is followed, and not to disputes about
whether or how the lP A should be amended.
City Council Action:
The City Council should indicate whether it wishes to participate in the forum group as
recommended by the EFD Board and, if so, who would be the City's representatives to it.
RESOLUTION NO. 25-06
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING A REVIEW OF
THE EFD FUNDING ALLOCATION FORMULA
WHEREAS, the cities of Deep haven, Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood and Tonka Bay established
the Excelsior Fire District in August 2000 through a Joint Powers Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, Section Seven of the Joint Powers Agreement states that each Member City shall
contribute an allocated share to the District based upon each Member City's percentage of total tax
capacity, estimated market value, population, tax parcels, and total number of calls over a three period
of the entire District; and,
WHEREAS, Section Seven further states that the allocation formula will transition over a ten year
period until 2010 when the allocation fonnula will be based solely on each members percentage of
total tax capacity of the District; and,
WHEREAS, the District has been operating under the established allocation formula for five years
with ample operational data now available to detennine whether each Member City is contributing a
fair and equitable contribution to the District; and,
WHEREAS, good governance often requires the District to periodically review its operational policies
and procedures to ensure its ongoing commitment to achieve the goals stated in the EFD Mission
Statement; and,
WHEREAS, the intent of this Resolution is not to promote one funding allocation formula over
another but rather to create a fruitful discussion on the current allocation formula to determine whether
it remains a fair and equitable formula as the services provided by the District continue to grow and
evolve in the future.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DEEPHA VEN, THAT:
The Deephaven City Council respectfully requests a review by the EFD Board ofthe current
allocation fornmla to determine whether it continues to serve the needs of the District and
continues to provide a fair and equitable allocation to each Member City.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Deephaven this 6th day of November 2006.
Paul Skrede, Mayor Pro Tern
Attest:
Dana H. Young, City Administrator