Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
072307 CC Reg AgP
CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, JULY 23, 2007 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call Mayor Lizee Woodruff Turgeon Callies Wellens 2 3 B. Review Agenda APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, July 9, 2007 (Att. -Minutes) B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, July 9, 2007 (Att.- Minutes) CONSENT AGENDA -Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions Therein: NOTE: Give the public an opportunity to request an item be removed from the Conse~at 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 -Part-time Liquor Store Clerk (Att. -Staff memorandum) C. City Clerk's License Approvals -Horse Stable and Refuse Collection (Att. -Deputy Clerk's memorandum) D. City Council Packet Delivery Services Agreement (Att. -Deputy Clerk's memorandum) E. Accept Bids and Award Contract for Lift Station No. 12, City Project 06-O1 (Att. - Engineer's memorandum, Resolution) F. Appeal Notice to Remove (Att. -Planning Director's memorandum) Appellant: John McMasters Location: 4530 Enchanted Point G. Appeal Notice to Remove (Att. -Planning Director's memorandum) Appellant: Nicholas Evans (Gregg Smith, Renter) Location: 25645 Valleywood Lane CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA -July 23, 200'7 PAGE2OF2 H. 2007 Spring Clean-Up Report (Att. -Director of Public Work's memorandum) I. Authorization Regarding Release of Escrows (Att. -Planning Director's memorandum) 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken.) 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Representative, Tom Skramstad Report on LMCD Activities (Att. -Report) 6. PUBLIC HEARING 7. PARKS -Report by Representative A. Report on Park Commission Meeting Held July 10, 2007 (Att.- Draft Minutes) 8. PLANNING -Report by Representative A. Conditional Use Permit Request (Att. -Planning Director's memorandum) Applicant: Michael and Susan Fannon Location: 5625 Christmas Lake Point B. Conditional Use Permit Request (Att. -Planning Director's memorandum) Applicant: Gregory and Lorraine Scott Location: 28100 Woodside Road 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Proposal for City Hall Planning Services (Att. -City Administrator's memorandum) 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff B. Mayor & City Council 12. ADJOURN c~Ti or ~ SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday, 23 July 2007 • 6:15 p.m.- Council Work Session • The annual Economic Development Authority (EDA) meeting will immediately follow the Regular City Council meeting Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval'. Agenda Item #3B: Staffing -This item recommends approval of the hiring of Nathan Stillwell as apart-time Liquor Store Clerk. Agenda Item #3C: .One additional Refuse Hauler and two Horse Stable Permits have been received at the City and reviewed for completeness. The City's horse ordinance was originally approved in 1961, and minor edits were made to it in 1977. As it has been quite some time since this ordinance has been reviewed, Staff is recommending the ..Planning Commission review the regulations for horse stables. Its findings will be brought forward to a future City Council meeting. Also, a Special. Event Permit for the Tour de Tonka Bicycle Ride on Saturday, Aug. 4, has been received and reviewed by staff and public safety officials. As all license and permit requirements have been met, a license/permit has been issued to each of the applicants noted. Agenda Item #3D: For the past 9+ years, Don Rogers has provided delivery service of the City Council Agenda Packets. During this time, Don's rate of pay for this service has remained at $25 per delivery. Don is requesting a rate increase to $30 per delivery to help compensate for inflation, plus mileage reimbursement at the current IRS rate. It is estimated that this increase will cost the City an additional $200 for 2007. Sufficient funds are available in the General Government department budget to cover this cost. Staff recommends that Council approve the Delivery Service Agreement, effective July 23, 2007. Agenda Item #3E: Staff received four bids for the Rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 12 project. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the resolution that accepts the bids for the project and awards the contract to Engineering and Construction Innovations, Inc. in the amount of $104,471.00. ®s 7-~® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Executive Summary -City Council Meeting of 23 July 2007 Page 2 of 3 Agenda Item #3F: Mr. John McMasters has requested additional time to comply with a zoning violation notice and notice to remove for his property at 4530 Enchanted Point. He has agreed to relocate his boats and trailers to comply with setback requirements and to build a fenced enclosure to screen items he has stored outside. Staff recommends that he be given 30 days to comply with the City Code, after which the matter should be turned over to the City Attorney for prosecution. Agenda Item #3G: Nicholas Evans was sent a Notice to Remove for several violations of Shorewood's Code. His renter, Gregg Smith has indicated that he will have the property cleaned up by 20 July. Staff has recommended that the property be reinspected on 27 July, and any violations found to remain should be turned over to the City Attorney for prosecution. Agenda Item #3H: On May 19, 2007, the City conducted the annual spring cleanup day. Staff has promised the City Council that a report would be provided regarding costs and revenue for the project, as this was the first year that curbside pickup was not performed. Staff has prepared the summary report and is recommending that costs not covered by the revenue collected for dropped off items be funded by the City's Recycling Fund. Agenda Item #3I: Staff has found the recent policy regarding the release of checks to place an unnecessary delay on refunding escrow money received from homeowners, builders and developers. Such escrows are used to cover City expenses in the processing of applications and, in other instances, to guarantee that certain required work gets completed in a timely manner. The Planning Director and City Administrator recommend that these refunds be allowed as an exception to the current policy which requires Council approval of virtually all checks prior to release. The Council is urged to contact the Planning Director or Administrator prior to Monday night's meeting, if you have questions relative to this recommendation. Agenda Item #4: Pastor Linus Nyambu has requested an opportunity to address the City Council during Matters from the Floor, and is expected to do so this evening. Agenda Item #SA: Tom Skramstad, Lake Minnetonka Conservation District representative, will present a report of LMCD activities. Agenda Item #7A: Park Commissioner Jeremy Norman will report on the July 10 Park Commission meeting. Agenda Item #8A: Michael and Susan Fannon propose to demolish their existing home at 5625 Christmas Lake Point and build a new one. Since the buildable area of the lot is located within the bluff setback for Christmas Lake, they have requested a variance to the bluff setback requirement. They have also requested a variance to the 25 percent hardcover requirement. Although they will be reducing the amount of impervious surface by 20 percent and correcting a number of setback nonconformities, the plans still exceed 25 percent hardcover. The Planning Commission agreed that the excess hardcover was due, at least in part, to the topography and configuration of the lot, which necessitates a longer Executive Summary -City Council Meeting of 23 July 2007 Page 3 of 3 driveway than would otherwise be needed. The Commission also agreed that the property would be in much greater compliance with the Code in spite of the variances. The variances are mitigated by a 20 percent actual reduction in hardcover, the use of permeable pavers for driveway and patios and the elimination of structures within the 75-foot lake setback. Staff should be directed to prepare a findings of fact for adoption at the next meeting. Agenda Item #8B: Gregory and Lorraine Scott have applied for a conditional use permit for accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet. Their request involves a nonconforming boathouse that they do not want to move or remove pursuant to the Zoning Code. This is the first request to come in under the Code amendment that provides for the preservation of certain nonconforming accessory buildings. The Ad Hoc Committee appointed to review and comment on this type of application recommended that the building in question is consistent with the criteria established by the City. The minutes of their 18 June meeting are included in your packet. The actual CUP is quite simple -the Scotts propose to remove a wall within the existing garage structure that was previously considered part of the house. The Planning Commission recommended unanimously to approve the CUP, subject to a brief, recordable agreement between the City and the property owner. Staff should be directed to prepare a findings of fact and an agreement for the next Council meeting. Agenda Item #9A: At the June 11 work session, Council requested a proposal from BKV Group to refine the 2004 "bridge" concept plan as well as to update construction cost estimates for the addition/renovation and new building schemes presented late in 2005. While this proposal was planned to be on the July 9 Council agenda, due to electronic difficulties the proposal did not arrive until after the meeting. The proposal outlines the next phase of planning work to be done at a cost not-to-exceed $5,000. The work is expected to take 30 to 45 days to complete. Funds for the work are available from the balance in the General Fund. Staff recommends that authorize the work as contained in the proposal by the BKV Group. CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY, JULY 9, 2007 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 6:04 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Callies, Tm•geon, Wellcns and Woodruff; Administrator Dawson; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: None Also present: Pamela Helling B. Review Agenda Without objection from Council, Mayor Lizee proceeded with the Agenda for the meeting. 2. CLARIFICATION OF PRO-RATED INSURANCE BENEFITS Administrator Dawson stated apart-time regular employee had made a request to participate in the City's health insurance plan. Currently no regular part-time staff members working between 20 - 32 hours per week participated in insura»ce beneCts. Dawson explained the policies iil' Section 1.05 and Section 7.01 in the employee Handbook were inconsistent regarding insurance eligibility for regular part-time employees. Section 1.05 stated part-time employees who worked an average of between 20 and 32 hours per week may be eligible to purchase from_the City's health and life insurance on a pro-rata basis. Section 7.0] stated apart-time employee who averaged the same number of hours of work per week may purchase from the City's health and life insurance at their own cost. Thgse two policies which were updated in 2006 were intended at minimum to make insurance.. available to employees work worked at least half-time. Dawson then explained the City currently paid up to $680 per employee per month for insurances. Under the pro-rata interpretation the City would pay up to $340 toward premiums fora 0.5-employee, $408 toward a 0.6-time emplo}ice, etc. Dawson stated there were differing opinions among Staff regarding the interpretation of the policies. The pros for the pro-rata approach were: it would be consistent with the benefit basis for employees working 32 hours per week; and the benefit of the City paying part of the insurance costs was attractive for recruitment and retention of staff. The pros for the employees' full-cost interpretation were: it was less cost to the City; an employee purchasing insurance through the City's group plan would most likely be less costly than purchasing insurance on one's own; and it was becoming a more common benefit among other organizations. #2A CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 2 of 5 Director Nielsen explained there were two employees that shared a position in the Planning Department; one of those employees had made the request. He stated the job-sharing situation provided better coverage for the department than if there was one full-time individual. He encouraged the Council to consider the pro-rata approach to attract the job-sharers and continue their employment with the City. The following noteworthy clarifications were made. - Health and life insurance premiums were age based. - Although there had only been. one request to date from a 20 - 32 hour per week part-time employee to purchase insurance from the City, it would apply to any part-time employee working an average of 20 - 32 hours per week. Currently only one part-time employee was affected. - Part-time employees must contribute to PERA if they earn more than $425 per month or if they work more than 67 calendar days per year. There was Cotimcil consensus to amend the Employee Handbook so Section 1.05 and Section 7.01 were consistent with regard to health and life insurance bene.tit opportunities for regular part-time employees; both sections would state the employee may be eligible to purchase from the City's health and life insurance on a pro-rata basis. This item would be added to the agenda for the upcoming City Council regular meeting. 3. ACTIVITY INDICATORS Administrator Dawson first reviewed his memorandum of the City's history regarding the use of activity indicators during the budget process. He stated the indic~ltors that had been selected were to give an idea of the activity performed, or the amount of things that needed to be addressed with a program budget. Because the City was virtually filly developed, there had been little change in the indicators from year to year. Dawson stated he had asked the department directors to identify activities which were cost drivers for the resources needed for their departments: He. clarified that was different from needing resources available to respond to requests for service which the City was responsible to do, regardless of the number of requests thafmay bereceived in a year. Dawson explained that in the ?007 adopted budget book, the statistical information indicated the breadth of responsibilitti~ (e.g. acres of parks and number of athletic facilities; miles of streets and streets plowed, etc.), estimates based on historic experience (e.g. tons of salt and sand used), or range of effort expected (e.g. number of new home permits, average inspections per permit based on type). Dawson stated it was important the key performance indicators were identified; it was time consuming and therefore costly to collect data that were of little value when making decisions about allocating resources. Dawson noted suggested indicators identified for Public Works and Engineering were attached to his memo. There was lengthy ensuing discussion with regard to indicators. The following noteworthy comments and clarifications were made. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 3 of 5 - Regular activities should be identified as well as emergency activities for Parks and Recreation, the Sanitary Sewer System, Storm Water Management System, and the Water System. It was not necessary to separate the regular and emergency activities if the task would be atime-consuming task. - The budget for things such as Parks or Sanitary Sewer activities reflected the number of person hours required to do those activities assuming average conditions. - Water consumption for watering the City's parks was not a performance indicator; water usage varied based on the rainfall for the year. Water consumption information may be valuable for other purposes. - It may be cost effective and beneficial to track statistical data ~r~lated to administrative, general, and support services. - The service indicators that had been used in the past should be reviewed to determine if which indicators provided value in preparing the bud~e.i. - It may be beneficial to track statistical information that would indicate a need for future funding increases for particular activities because tl7e cost of materials had increased. - Building permit statistics could be gathered for the Planning Department. Unfortunately, the complexity of many activities had increased ever the years; therefore5 the same amount of personnel resources were required to perform fewer activities. Buildings were more complex, building codes were more complex, and complaint processing was more complex. - The Planning Department would collect data on the number of permits, complaints, inspections, etc. - The new indicators would not provide enough historical information to have a significant value in preparing the 2008 budget, the statistical information would prove valuable in future years. - The performance indicators would address the .major cost drivers, not all activities performed. There was consensus that it would be most appropriate for the department directors to identify meaningful performance indicators. "hhere was also consensus that the Public Works and Engineering indicators presented «~ere a solid fou~idation. 4. CIP -120ADWAY AND DRAINAGE; PROJECTS Administrator Dawson explained that at itsJune 25, 2007, work session Council reviewed a 2008 - 2013 schedule of improvements for road reconstruction of the worst-rated local streets and the related storm water improvements, and other storm water system improvements. Based on the schedule deficits would be incurred in both the Local Street Reconstruction Fund and the Storm Water Management Fund if current levels of funding were continued. He stated he did not clearly understand Council's direction for how to fund those projects. He then stated at that same meeting Council decided that $100,000 should be added annually to the City's sealcoat and street overlay programs. Funds for 2008 would come from a transfer from the balance in the General Fund; although it was not directly stated, future increases would have to come from General Fund availability. Dawson stated if the street reconstruction projects were funded on a "pay as you go" basis it would require a significant levy increase. He explained that capital improvement bonding (sometimes referred to as roadway bonds) were available to the City for projects listed in the Local Street Reconstruction Fund within the CIP. He then stated Staff had asked Northland Securities, Inc., to prepare figures to illustrate various impacts of that type of bond financing; those figures had been provided to Council as part of the meeting packet. The bonds could be issued in 2008 or 2009. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 4 of 5 With regard to the Storm Water Management Fund, Dawson explained the projects in the 2008 - 2013 schedule depicted deficits in that fund starting in 2008. Approximately an additional $175,000 annually would be needed to fund the accumulated $1.1 million in deficits through 2013 year-end. Staff recommended the City use apay-as-you-go funding approach for the storm water projects. He noted that Council had increased the residential rate in 2007 by $4 per month, which would yield approximately $100,000. The rate would need to be increased $7 per month beginning in 2008. The following noteworthy comments and clarifications were made. - If the City financed the storm water improvement projects ~-vitl~a longer-term bond, the specific projects the bond proceeds would be used for would have to be identified when the bond was issued. - Storm water bonds came from a utility bond revenue source; roadways bonds called capital improvement bonds were intended to be paid back with general revenues. - Councilmember Wellens suggested the City. assess property owners for localized storm water system improvements. Others thought that approach could be unfair because water flowed from the highest point to the lowest point; therefore, the property owners at higher ground may have not have storm water concerns, yet the water Mowing from the higher ground caused storm water concerns at the lower elevation properties. A Chapter 429 assessment process would be more difficult to use because it would difficult to determine the exact benefit to the property; under Chapter 429 a special assessment amount shall not exceed the special benefit test (i.e. increase in value to the property as a result of the improvement). - The City's Comprehensive Plan suggested storm water system improvements could be funded through a Chapter 444 special tai district process; the test for those charges would be "just and equitable". - A special tai district can be defined based ,,on a specific project's geographical boundaries. - It would be rare that a property could be located in two taxing districts with regard to the same type of prgjcct (e.g., storm water system improvements); in that rare circumstance Council would deed. to treat the. property as a special case so that it would only be taxed once. - it waspossible to issue bonds for a special tax district project; but, it was important to limit the Humber of times the City issued bonds for economy in issuance costs. For projectssuch as the Mary Lake project which would be a small special tax district but was projected to be very costly, a combination of funding approaches may have to be considered. In summary, there was Councii consensus that roadway bonds would be issued for the Local street reconstruction projects. Staff would define the best approach to fund the storm water system improvements; rate increases, special tax districts, or a combination of both would be considered. Councilmember Woodruff stated he would prefer a special tax district approach over a rate increase if possible; he thought the tax district approach was more visible to the property owners, where the increased rate was more like a hidden tax. Councilmember Callies stated she did not think a rate increase would be hidden from the property owners as it would be displayed on their bills. 5. OTHER There was no other business for discussion. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 5 of 5 6. ADJOURN Woodruff moved, Callies seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of July 9, 2007, at 7:05 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: Christine Lizee, Mayor Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk 5 CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, JULY 9, 2007 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:07 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Callies, Turgeon, Wcllcns and. Woodruff; Administrator Dawson; Associate Attorney Mayeron; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: None B. Review Agenda Administrator Dawson stated at an earlier City Council work session Council asked that Item 9.B, Clarification of Part-Time Benefit Eligibility, he added to the agenda. Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the Agenda as Amended. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, June 25, 2007 Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of June 25, 2007, aspresented. Motion passed 5/0. B. City Council Regular Mceting Minutes, June 25, 2007 Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of June 25, 2007, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Callies moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Staffing -Approving the Regular Appointment of James Landini as City Engineer (This was moved to Item I O.B under Engineering/Public Works) #ZB SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 2 of 9 C. Approving ORDINANCE NO. 437, "An Ordinance Titled "License, Permit, Service Charges and Miscellaneous Fees"." D. Spring Clean-up Progress Report (This was moved to Item 10.C under Engineering/Public Works) E. Authorize Expenditure of Funds for a Water Truck Tanker F. Extend Variance Deadline for Obtaining Building Permit Applicant: Tony Lund Location: 27695 Island View Road Motion passed 5/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS None. 6. PUBLIC HEARING A. Vacate Public Right-of--Way -White Street Mayor Lizee opened the Public Hearing at 7:12 P.M. Director Nielsen stated Mike Seifert,who owned the properties located at 6085 Lake Linden Drive and 5990 Lake Linden Conrt, had requested a street vacation of a "paper street" known as White Street. White Street was an ~undevcloped right-of--way which was approximately 300 feet south of the Yellowstone Trail/Lake Linden Thrive intersection. He explained the property had never been developed as a Citystreet, but it did have sanitary sewer main in it that served Mr. Seifert's two properties. Nielsen stated that White Street would be combined with the 6085 Lake Linden Drive property. He went on to state that because the sewer main served the two Seifert properties, Staff recommended the City retain a utility easement. over the sewer line. The City Engineer recommended that the easement be 20- feet wide, centered over. the main. The easement would be recorded with the resolution vacating the street. Nielsen explained all the City's fire lanes extended to a body of water; the "paper streets" do not. He stated the there were a number of other "paper streets" in the City. Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this topic, Mayor Lizee opened and closed the public testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:16 P.M. Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. 07-046, "A Resolution Vacating Part of White Street" subject to the City being granted an easement over White Street. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING July 9, 200'7 Page 3 of 9 Director Nielsen stated the existing driveway would remain where it was. Motion passed, 5/0. Mayor Lizee closed the Public Hearing at 7:18 P.M. B. Public Hearing regarding financing by the City of Deephaven for an Educational Facilities Revenue Note for Excelsior Covenant Church Mayor Lizee opened the Public Hearing at 7:18 P.M. Administrator Dawson stated Deephaven, on behalf of Excelsior Covenant, had agreed to issue an Educational Facilities Revenue Note for up to $3.0 million -for the renovation of an addition to the Church's education facilities. Based on federal and state la«~s and regulations, a public hearing must be held in the "host city" (the Church was located in Shore~a~ood), and Council must lake formal action to grant host approval for the project financing. Steve Fenton, on behalf of Excelsior Covenant Church, stated the Church approached Deephaven regarding financing because it was important the note be bank qualified. Klein Bank would hold the note and would offer better rates on the note if itwas bank qualified. He stated the Deephaven City Council had approved the issuance of the note subject tip Shorewood approving the financing. Mr. Fenton stated there was no risk to the City as the "host city' ;the City would have no obligation to repay the bond should Excelsior Covenant Church not be able to repay it. He then stated the project was a $4.3 million project, and a successful $2.7 million cahital campaign had been conducted. Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this topic, Mayor Lizee opened and closed the public testimony portion of the Public Nearing at 7:24 P.M. Turgeon moved, Callies seconded,Approving RESOLUTION NO. 07-047, "A Resolution Giving Host Approval to the Issuance of an Educational Facilities Revenue Note under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1651 and (Excelsior Covenant School Project)." Motion passed, 5/p., Mayor Lizee closed the Public Hearing at 7:25 P.M. 7. PARKS Director Brown stated ,~hcre had not been a Parks Commission meting since the last regular Council meeting. The next meeting was scheduled for July 10, 2007. 8. PLANNING A. Zoning Violation Appeal -Catain Director Nielsen stated the City had received a resident complaint that Michael Catain, 4550 Enchanted Point, had installed a second dock on his property. The City's Zoning Code restricted the number of docks on a residential property to one. After inspecting the properly and determining that situation was SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 4 of 9 true, the City sent a violation letter dated June 18, 2007, to Mr. Catain directing him to correct the violation by July 2, 2007. The City also gave Mr. Catain the opportunity to file an appeal. His attorney, Jeffrey Lambert, filed an appeal on July 2, 2007. Staff responded to the points raised in Mr. Lambert's appeal. Director Nielsen then stated he had received a call from Mr. Lambert today, July 9, requesting Mr. Catain be granted athirty-day extension to determine if it was feasible to bring the docks into compliance under the City's and the LMCD's ordinances. Nielsen noted Mr. Lambert was present this evening. Nielsen commented that he was skeptical the docks could be brought into compliance, but he was willing to consider a plan. Councilmember Callies stated that ordinarily she was not opposed to granting an extension of time to resolve a violation. Her concern with this case was Mr. Catain would be allowed to continue to use the second dock during the extension and if the docks could not be brought into compliance he ~wouid have additional time to correct the violation; therefore, Mr. Catain would have had the advantage of the second dock for a large part of the summer. She was not in support of allo~~~ing NIr. Catain that much time to use a dock in violation of the City's Code. Councilmember Turgeon stated she would be wi I ling to grant aten-day extension. Councilmember Woodruff stated there was another dock on Mr. Catain's properly; therefore, removal of the second dock would not be a hardship. He stated he was not in favor of granting an extension. Callies moved, Woodruff seconded, o deny the appeal and to grant Mr. Catain until August 9, 2007, to bring his dicks ia~to compliance with City Code. Motion passed 5/0. 9. GENERAL/NFW BUSINESS A.` 2007-2028 EFD Capital lmprovement Program Administrator Dawson stated Council had continued this item from its June 11, 2007, regular meeting. There was no' fiirther action to be taken at this time. He explained that at an EFD Board work session on June 27, 2007, there had been discussion about the proposed 2008 Operating Budget and the proposed 2007-2028 CIP; other cities' elected representatives were also present at that meeting. At the end of the meeting the Board gave direction to its staff regarding revisions to both the CIP and Operating Budget. The Board planed to consider the CIP and Operating Budget at its July 25, 2007, Board meeting, and then forward them to the cities' councils for review in August 2007. B. Clarification of Part-Time Benefit Eligibility Administrator Dawson explained the policies in Section 1.05 and Section 7.01 in the employee Handbook Approved in 2006 were inconsistent regarding insurance eligibility for regular part-time employees. Section 1.05 stated part-time employees who worked an average of between 20 and 32 hours per week may be eligible to purchase from the City's health and life insurance on a pro-rata basis. Section 7.01 stated apart-time employee who averaged the same number of hours of work per week may purchase from the City's health and life insurance at their own cost. SROREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 5 of 9 Callies moved, Wellens seconded, directing Staff to amend the Employee Handbook such that Section 1.05 and Section 7.01 both state apart-time employee whose work week averaged between twenty and thirty-two hours per week may be eligible to purchase from the City's health and life insurance on a pro-rata basis. Motion passed 5/0. 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Xcel Undergrounding -County Road 19 Administrator Dawson stated the placement of utility lines underground ~-vas completed as part of the County Road 19 intersection project. Xeel Energy originally estimated cost for the undergrounding effort to be $84,200. Early in the construction process Xcel Energy revised the cost of the effort to be $169,000. After the City received the revised cost estimate, Council authorized the City to enter into an agreement with RW Beck Consulting to review the revised cost estimate for reasonableness. RW Beck Consulting thought the $169,000 estimate was reasonable... s ,, Dawson explained that according to the terms in the cooperative agreement for the County Road 19 project, Hennepin County would pay for one-half of the cost fbr an amount of $79,500. The amount the City would have to pay was $85,987 (which included carrying charges). Dawson stated it had been Council's intent to surcharge for undergrounding at the beginning of the project. The surcharge was determined to be ~ 1.25 per month for residential rate payers for 22 months with approximately $0.15 due in the 23`d month. Administrator Dawso» stated Council had been provided with a revised resolution that reflected the discussed surcharge time period of 22.11 months. Councilmember Wellens stated he was not in favor of a surcharge to the residents to cover this cost. He preferred to "keep taxation simple and clear". k-le thought burying the utility lines should be funded out of the project fdnd, rather than as "little ta~cs" which were "hidden" on rate payer's utility bills. He suggested the cost should. be paid out of the General Fund reserves. MayorLizee stated the surcharge was not a "hidden tax". She stated the City had worked diligently with Tonka Bay,Xcel Energy, Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation to move that project forward. She stated Council had agreed at the project onset that burying the utility lines was a benefit to the City's residents. Councilmember Turgeot~ stated had she known at the onset of the project that undergrounding would have cost $200,000 or $300,000 she might have made a different decision whether to proceed. Callies moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. 07-048, "A Resolution Authorizing a Monthly Surcharge to Xcel Energy Ratepayers in Shorewood for the Placement of Its Facilities Underground for the County Road 19/Smithtown Road/Country Club Road Intersection Improvement Project." Councilmember Woodruff clarified that the amount City ratepayers would have to pay for the undergrounding efforts would be $85,987. He suggested for future projects the cost for undergrounding should be included in the cost of the project. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 6 of 9 Councilmember Callies stated that not all project costs should be considered taxes. She thought it was appropriate for ratepayers to pay for costs such as undergrounding. She stated she would prefer the law required Xcel Energy to pay for undergrounding, but it did not. She also stated Council tried to ensure that it was consistent in approving items that were not funded by the General Fund. Motion passed, 4/1 with Wellens dissenting. B. Regular Appointment of James Landini as City Engineer This item was removed from the consent agenda at Councilmember Turgeon's request. Councilmember Turgeon stated when Council discussed whether the City should have an in-house engineer or contract for those services, part of the discussion was about a need to.offset the cost for an in- house engineer by a reduction in consulting engineering services fees. She stated based on the report provided to Council she did not think that objective had been met. She noted that was not a reflection of Engineer Landini's efforts. She stated she was not yet convinced that it was more cost effective to have an in-house engineer. Administrator Dawson explained that another key element of the proposal to hire an in-house engineer was to reduce the excessive work load of Director Brown; he had i~ot only been performing engineering related activities and managing consulting contracts, he also performedhis Director of Public Works responsibilities. He stated Director Brown's excessive work load had. been reduced somewhat after Engineer Landini had been hired. He then stated that Brown had continued to work approximate I20 hours in a two-week period when the City used a consulting engineer. He explained that the in-house engineer was dedicated to engineering activities full-time; the consulting engineer (Steve Gurney) provided services 32 hones per week. Director Brown related that Mr. Gurney had felt uncomfortable with the demands of providing the on-site consulting engineering services to the City on a weekly basis; Brown was quite confident that WSB would have chosen .another associate to provide those services even if the City had not hired an in-house engineer. 1-lad Mr. Gurney left prior to the City hiring an in-house engineer, the City would have had to make a significant investment in training another consultant to perform those activities. The investment had instcadbeen made in Engineer Landini. Some of the less tangible benefits of an in-house engineer were the consistency of service; the understanding of day-to-day issues within the City; and faster response to Staff;-resident, and contractor questions. Brown stated he would not and could not again work the excessive hours he had done for a long time, nor would he be willing to forfeit 2 - 3 weeks of vacation annually as he had dgne. He noted that the cost to the City for afull-time in-house engineer was significantly less than it ~-vas to outsource for those services for 32 hours per week. In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, Director Brown explained that the costs for 2005 and 2006 general engineering services identified in the report did not include engineering services costs for the County Road 19 intersection project or the preparation of the City's Drainage Problem Areas report. Director Brown then explained that general engineering activities included items such as: working with and resolving ongoing drainage issues with residents; review of building permit grading and drainage plans; compilation of plans and specifications for maintenance programs such as seal coating and pavement markings; database management and record retention for all utility construction; National SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 7 of 9 Pollutant Discharge Elimination System programming and permitting; survey information; MCES, MPCA permitting and documentation; preparation of ordinances and codes and administration of such; and, the administration of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program. Director Brown also explained that the rates of $117 - $122 for the consulting engineering services were used in the comparison report. Callies moved, Lizee seconded, Adopting a Resolution Approving the Regular Appointment of James Landini as City Engineer. Motion failed, 2/3, with Turgeon, Wellens, and Woodruff dissenting. Councilmember Turgeon suggested that Engineer's Landini probationary period be extended to 2007 year-end. Councilmember Callies stated she did not think Councilmember Turgeon's suggestion was the appropriate approach for handling the situation. She thought it would be more appropriate to have approved the regular appointment of Engineer Landini as City Engineer as le lad done his job more than satisfactorily. If Council wanted to eliminate the in-house engineering position at a future date it could do so. She stated she strongly objected to how this was handled, but she would not stand in the way of some formal action being taken. Callies moved, Woodruff seconded, Extending the .Consideration of the Regular Appointment of James Landini as City Engineer to 2007 Year-IJnd. Motion passed ~/0. C. Spring Clean-up Progress Report This item was removed from the consent agenda at Councilmember Turgeon's request. Councilmember Turgeon stated a spring clean-up progress report was not included in the meeting packet for approval. Director Brown stated the :contractor had not submitted the necessary documentation the City required. He then stated the City haddenicd the coiitracior's invoice. This item was~continued to a July 23, 2007, Cotimcil meeting. 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff None. B. Mayor & City Council Mayor Lizee stated the Green Roof seminar Engineer Landini coordinated was attended by 38 people. She stated she had approached the Friends of the South Shore Center regarding its interest in constructing a green roof on its storage shed as part of a hands-on workshop. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 8 of 9 Administrator Dawson provided an update on a July 9, 2007, meeting of representatives from the Friends Board, city administrators and Senior Community Services (SCS). SCS's appeal to provide dial-a-ride transit services had been denied. He stated the SCS Board had agreed to provide services to the South Shore Center through October 31, 2007, and may consider extending that date to the end of 2007 provided that the cities and the Friends could come up with a plan prior to a September 2007 SCS Board meeting on how to move forward. Dawson stated at that meeting consensus appeared to have been reached that the five cities should collectively contribute $17,600 to the Friends (most likely for building related expenses) as had been agreed to for 2007; the City's portion would be $8,800 based on the funding f<~rmula. The Friends would raise $25,000 and the cities would match that same amount and give into the Friends for building related purposes. This would be a one-time only funding. Discussions would continue to reach agreement on a new proposal on what the cities and Friends responsibilities should be going forward related to the building, staffing and programs; SCS would coordinate those discussions. "there was strong agreement that the cities should shift their focus to maintaining their building asset, away from their focus on programs; the Friends Board would focus on the programs. He $commented that the Friends would consider making a commitment to establish a $100,000 reserve over Mime for building related purposes. Dawson stated the next meeting of the group was scheduled for August 13, 2007. Dawson suggested it may be appropriate to discuss this item further pit a.n August 6, 2007, Council work session. Councilmember Turgeon suggested the cities' rcprescutatives meet and agree to what the collective contribution should be for 2008 before the larger group meets. Administrator Dawson stated at the meeting this morning the elected officials from the cities agreed to bring the proposal he justreviewed to their cities' councils for discussion. He stated a summary of the proposal would be prepared f~n~ each council to consider. Councilmember Woodruff stated there had to be a commitment by all five cities to some level of funding. Administrator Dawson stated the existing cooperative agreement would have to be amended so it was binding on all the parties. Councilmember Wellens questioned if the SLMPD Coordinating Committee had recently discussed the idea of openingthc SLMPD firing range to organizations for private citizens. Mayor Lizee stated it had not. Administrator Dawson stated he understood it was scheduled for discussion at a July 18, 2007, meeting. Wellens questioned if it would be appropriate for Council to provide Lizee with its thoughts on how it would like to move forward with that item. Wellens stated he would be interested in allowing an organization to use the i:acility. Councilmember Turgeon agreed that it should be opened to the public for conceal-carry permitting classes. Mayor Lizee stated she would ask SLMPD Chief Litsey for his input on this matter. Councilmember Woodruff stated for the proper type of users he would support opening the firing range to the public. He thought Chief Litsey should be informed that three of the Councilmembers would support that. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING July 9, 2007 Page 9 of 9 Councilmember Callies stated Chief Litsey had not been in favor of that in the past. She then stated the firing range and the public safety facility were not designed for that purpose. She was not in favor of opening the range to the public. With regard to Liquor Operations, Councilmember Wellens suggested the businesses could be put up for sale now if Council approved. Administrator Dawson stated at a previous work session Council decided to discuss this matter at an August 6, 2007, Council Special meeting which was after a July 30, 2007, Liquor Operations Committee meeting. Woodruff moved, Callies seconded Recessing the City Council Regular 1Vleeting to an Executive Session at 8:21 P.M. 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Lizee convened the executive session at 8:28 P.M. The Councilmembers, the City Administrator, and the Associate City Attorney were present. Associate Attorney Mayeron provided an update on the situation rc~ardixlg City-owned property at 5795 Country Club Road. Administrator Dawson and Associate Attorney Mayeron left the executive session at 8:31 P.M. A. City Administrator's Performance Appraisal The Councilmembers discussed the City Administrator's performance. The Executive Session was concluded at 9:02 P.M. 13. ADJOURN The City Council. reconvened in regular session at 9:03 P.M. Turge~n moved, Wellens seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of July 9, 2007, at 9:03 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk PAYABLES APPROVALS For 07/23/2007 Council Meeting Prepared by: _ Reviewed by: Michelle T. Nguyen, Sr ,~ _.- ~ r ~- ~'~ ~ ~ ~ Date: ~° ,~ Accounting Clerk Date: ~ ~ d-- Bonnie Burg>n. I ~ i ~~ance Director Approved by: ~ ~ ~ Date: ~ '~ m Craig I~wson, City Administrator - ' ,'~ City of Shorewood Check Approval List for 07/23/2007 -Prepaid Items Check # Vendor Nante Description Clteck Date Invoice # Amoaant 44908 EXCELSIOR POST OFFIC 2ND QTR-WATER PSTG 7/10/2007 20TR-07 $231.90 44908 EXCELSIOR POST OFFIC 2ND QTR-SEWER PSTG 7/10/2007 20TR-07 $470.84 TOTAI. FOR EYCELSIOR POST OFFICES $702.74 44909 ICMA RETIREMENT TRU P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRE 7/10/2007 071007 $1,642.63 TO'I'AL FOR IC:1~IA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-457 $1,642.63 44910 PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 07/1 7/10/2007 071007 $3,574.39 44910 PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 07/1 7/10/2007 071007 $3,288.40 TOTAL FOR PERA $6,862.79 44911 WELLS FARGO HEALTH P/R DEDUCTS-HSA 07/10/ 7/10/2007 071007 $125.00 TOTAL FOR WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS $125.00 TOTAL CHECKS $x,333.16 Thursday, July 19, 2007 Page 1 of 1 City of Shorewood Cheek Approval List for 07/23/2007 - To Be Approved Check # Vendor Name Description Check Date Invoice # Amount 44912 ADVANCED IMAGING SO JUL SVC 7/24/2007 35925 $220.00 TOTAL FOR ADVANCED IMAGLNG SOLU TIONS Ih'C $220.00 44913 AFSCME DELTA DENTAL AUG-UNION DENTAL PRE 7/24/2007 AUG-07 $408.00 TOI AL FOR AFSCME DELTA DEN'I'AL $408.00 44914 AMERICAN BOTTLING C 7/24/2007 124664 $57.80 44914 AMERICAN BOTTLING C 7/24/2007 124665 $107.65 TOTAL FOR AtY1ERICAN BOTTLING CO $165.45 44915 AMERICAN ENGINEERIN BADGER FIELD LIGHTING 7/24/2007 37327 $3,883.53 44915 AMERICAN ENGINEERIN WOODHAVEN WELL-CIP 7/24/2007 37774 $556.40 TOTAL FOR A~YIERICAN ENGINEERING $4,439.93 44916 AMERICAN WATER WOR MEMBERSHIP 7/24/2007 20005762 $158.00. T07i~1. F'OR AiY1FBICi1 N W.9TER WORKS ASSOCIATION $158.00 44917 ANDERSON, KRISTI B. SHWD PARK COMMISSIO 7/24/2007 $170.00 TOI AI_ F'OR ANDERSON, KRISTI B. $170.00 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 37771871 $59.75 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 37771871 $69.01 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 43871830 $63.73 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 43871880 $16.52 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 43871900 $30.93 TOTAL FOR ARCTIC GLACIER INC $239.94 44919 BARNES DISTRIBUTION NUTS BOLTS 7/24/2007 80898020 $553.70 TOTAL, FOR BARNES DISTRIBUTIOiV $553.70 44920 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 7/24/2007 43177000 $102.24 44920 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 7/24/2007 43177100 $30.65 44920 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 7/24/2007 43197900 $34.60 'I'07:AL FOR BELLBOY BAR SCIPPI_Y $167.49 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41333900 $143.00 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41377700 $276.00 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41377700 $1,264.70 44921 BELLBOYCORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41377800 $1,201.50 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41377800 $1,497.95 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41424600 $1,225.10 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41424700 $2,038.80 T'O%AL FOR BELLBOY CORPORA`1'IO.N $7,647.05 44922 BERRY COFFEE CO C.H. COFFEE 7/24/2007 652872 $59.95 44922 BERRY COFFEE CO P.W. COFFE 7/24/2007 652873 $59.95 TOIAI. FOR Bh_'RRY COFF'F.F, CO $119.90 44923 BIFFS, INC. JUL RENTS 7/24/2007 W327754- $870.11 TOTAL FOR BIFFS, INC. $870.11 44924 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAG 7/24/2007 48820 $224.00 44924 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAG 7/24/2007 48821 $96.00 TOTAL FOR CAT & FIDDLE BEVF,'RAGE $320.00 44925 CINGULAR WIRELESS JUN COMMUNICATION 7/24/2007 87119550 $92.75 44925 CINGULAR WIRELESS JUN COMMUNICATION 7/24/2007 87119550 $18.50 44925 CINGULAR WIRELESS JUN COMMUNICATION 7/24/2007 87119550 $19.60 44925 CINGULAR WIRELESS JUN COMMUNICATION 7/24/2007 87122133 $138.57 44925 CINGULAR WIRELESS JUN COMMUNICATION 7/24/2007 87122133 $17.18 T07A1. FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS $286.60 44926 CITIES DIGITAL INC. EXCHANGE ROLLER KIT 7/24/2007 2235 $59.91 TOTAL FOR CITIES DIGIT.9L INC. $59.91 [7rursclay, July ly, 2007 Page 1 of'7 Cheek # Vendor Name Description Clteck Date. Invoice # Amount 44927 CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUI HYDRANT GATE VALVE 2 7/24/2007 110993 $247.45 7'OYAL FOR CL.<iREY'S SAFETYEQUIP:YIF_NT, L'VC $247.45 44928 COMMUNITY REC RESO PARK MTG 7/24/2007 54 $1,125.00 TOY:4L FOR CO~YIMUNITY REC RESOURCES $I,I25.00 44929 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WA JUL DRINKING WATER 7!24/2007 114X4187 $35.18 TO'T'AL FOR CULLIGAr'~' BOTY'I,ED WATER $35.18 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416140 $1,608.65 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416141 $36.10 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416141 $711.85 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416907 $366.35 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416907 $19.20 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416908 $776.30 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 417891 $1,899.25 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO CREDIT 7/24/2007 99561 ($7.90) TOT,9L FOR DAY DISTRIBU"I'I~'4'G CO $5,409.80 44931 DELTA DENTAL OF MINN AUG-PREM DENTAL 7/24/2007 3939948 $50.25 44931 DELTA DENTAL OF MINN AUG-PREM DENTAL 7/24/2007 3939948 $678.80 44931 DELTA DENTAL OF MINN AUG-PREM DENTAL 7/24/2007 3939948 $16.75 TOYAL FOR DEI_'Lf1 DENY AL OP MINNESOTA $745.80 44932 DEPT OF LABOR & INDU 2ND QTR SURCHARGE R 7/24/2007 CONF-207 $2,139.00 TOTAL. FOR DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTR Y $2,139.00 44933 DOCUMENT RESOURCE AP CHECK STOCK 7/24/2007 188506 $584.38 TOTAL TOR DOCU,i~lENY' RESOURCES $584.38 44934 ESS BROTHERS & SONS MANHOLE ADJUSTING C 7/24/2007 KK2598 $300.33 TO"I'AI. FOK ESS BROTFIE'RS & SONS INC $300.33 44935 EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRI 3RD QTR BLDGS 7/24/2007 3QTR-200 $76,144.76 44935 EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRI 3RD QTR OPERATIONS 7/24/2007 3QTR-200 $67,027.99 Y'DYAL FOR EYCELSIOR FIRE DIS'T'RICT $143,172.75 44936 EXCELSIOR-CITY OF 2ND QTR WATER CONN 7/24/2007 2ND-QTR- $3,921.44 TOTAL FOR EYCELSIOR-CITY OF $3,921.44 44937 EXTREME BEVERAGE 7/24/2007 572535 $32.00 Y'OY'AL FOR EXTRFAIF_ BEVERAGE' $32,00 44938 G & K SERVICES JUN SVC 7/24/2007 JUN-07 $843.40 Y'OYAI. FOK G & K SF,'RVTCE'S $843.40 44939 GAME TIME SPRING ASSEMBLY 7/24/2007 746474 $200.23 Y'OT aL FOR GAME TIME $200.23 44940 GOPHER STATE ONE-CA JUN SVC 7/24/2007 7060782 $181.62 44940 GOPHER STATE ONE-CA JUN SVC 7/24/2007 7060782 $181.63 TOTAL FOR GOPHER STATF. ONE-CALL, IN $3h3.25 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 614892 $199.70 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO PENDING CR 7/24/2007 614893 $41.33 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO PENDING CR 7/24/2007 614893 $470.20 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 614895 $201.20 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 614896 $597.79 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 615853 $110.90 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619446 $730.10 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619447 $711.10 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619448 $49.57 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619448 $888.37 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619449 $353.35 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622194 $233.70 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622194 $45.75 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622195 $45.43 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622195 $445.96 Tlrni:eday, July 19, 2007 Page 2 of 7 Check # Vendor Na-ne Description Claeck Date Invoice # Amount 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622198 $267.57 TOTAL FOR GRIGGS, COOPER & COMPANY $5,392.02 44942 GROUT, TWILA MILEAGE REIM-MN MUNI 7/24/2007 $124.16 'TOTAL FOR GROUT, TWILA $124.Ih 44943 HAWKINS WATER TREA CHLORINE CYLINDER 7/24/2007 1085891-R $35.00 TOTAL FOR HAWKINS WATER TREA'L'ME NT $35.00 44944 HEALTHPARTNERS AUG- MED PREM 7/24/2007 27720373 $12,348.40 44944 HEALTHPARTNERS AUG- MED PREM 7/24/2007 27720373 $219.75 44944 HEALTHPARTNERS AUG- MED PREM 7/24/2007 27720373 $569.05 TOTAL FOR HEALTHPART~'~'ERS $73,737.20 44945 HENN CTY INFO TECHN JUN HOOMHZ RADIO 7!24/2007 27068090 $34.40 TOTAL FOR HZiNN C'T'Y INFO 7 F.CHNOLO GY DEPT' $34.40 44946 HOHENSTEINS INC 7/24/2007 423806 $211.35 TOTAL FOR HOHENST'H7NS INC $211.35 44947 HONDA ELECTRIC BADGER LIGHTING PROJ 7/24/2007 $49,400.00 TO'lAl, FOR HONDA F_'LECTRIC $49,400.00 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091427 $5,642.80 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091428 $6,810.80 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091470 $11.60 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091470 $1,849.80 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091471 $1,539.40 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091520 $913.80 TOTAL FOR J•J• 'LAYLOR DISTRIBUTING M~'4; INC. $1 h,7h8.20 44949 J.R'S APPLIANCE DISPO '07 SPRING CLEANUP 7/24/2007 56278 $2,899.00 TOTAI. f'OR J.R'S APPLIANCE DISPOSAL $2,899.00 44950 JANI-KING OF MINNESO C.H. INITIAL CLEAN 7/24/2007 MIN07070 $266.63 44950 JANI-KING OF MINNESO P.W. INITIAL CLEAN 7/24/2007 MIN07070 $426.60 44950 JANI-KING OF MINNESO JUL C.H. SVC 7/24/2007 MIN07072 $287.96 44950 JANI-KING OF MINNESO JUL P.W. SVC 7/24/2007 MIN07072 $250.63 TOTAL FOR JANI-KING OF MIA'NESOTA, INC. $1,237.82 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283752 $1,694.05 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283752 $1,586.10 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283753 $3,395.38 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283753 $655.50 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283753 $35.98 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283754 $1,222.02 44951 JOHNSON EROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1286724 $273.10 44951 JOHNSON EROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1286724 $301.00 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1287217 $30.39 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1287217 $257.30 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1287218 $393.00 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1287218 $897.21 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO CR REF#1233509 7/24/2007 344676 ($74.40) TO"lAl. FOR JOH.VSOiV BROS LIQUOR CO $l0,hhh.h3 44952 LAKESHORE WEEKLY N WINE CLUB ADS 7/24/2007 115592 $180.00 44952 LAKESHORE WEEKLY N WINE CLUB ADS 7/24/2007 115592 $180.00 TOTAL FOR LAKESIIOXE WEEKLY NF_'WS $3h0.00 44953 LEONARD, STREET & DI MAY-GEN MATTERS 7/24/2007 376270 $1,750.00 44953 LEONARD, STREET & DI MAY-RONAL JOHNSON 7/24/2007 376271 $165.00 44953 LEONARD, STREET & DI MAY-UMYC CODE ENFO 7/24/2007 376272 $449.74 44953 LEONARD, STREET & DI MAY-LEASE DISPUTE-AS 7/24/2007 376273 $270.25 TOTAL FOR LEONARD, STREET c~ DII:'N.A RD $2,h34.99 44954 LIGHTLY EPICUREAN PLANNING COMMITTEE D 7/24/2007 3959 $40.93 TOTAL FOR LIGHT'LYEPICL•'REAN $40.93 1{uirsdn_y, J«ly I9, 2007 ~~~ Page 3 of'7 Check # Verzclor Nance Description Check Date Invoice # Anzor~cnl 44955 LOCAL LINK USA BUSIN AUG WEB SVC 7/24/2007 AUG-07 TOTAL FOR LOC.9L LINK L'SA BUSINESS SERVICES 44956 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT BEARING 7/24/2007 2074566 TO7f17.FOR MACOUEENEOUIP~'~IEiVT,INC. 44957 MAHONEY, JAMES WEED SPRAYING 7/24/2007 TOTAL FOR MAHONEY, JAMES 44958 MANN MADE PRODUCTS WELD & REFINISH HOLE 7/24/2007 1080 TOT.9I. FOR ~YIANiI'' h1ADE PRODL'CI'S 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 207246 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 207247 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 207248 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 207973 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 209875 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 210481 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 212534 'L'O'C'AL F OR MARK VII 44960 MARLIN'S TRUCKING 7/24/2007 19386/413 44960 MARLIN'S TRUCKING 7/24/2007 19386/413 44960 MARLIN'S TRUCKING 7/24/2007 19387/414 44960 MARLIN'S TRUCKING 7/24/2007 19387/414 TOTAL F OR ~1ARL IN'S TRUCKING 44961 MAVERICK EQUIPMENT '01 FL-80 VIN 1FUBBWAK 7/24/2007 TOTAL F OR 1~1AVERICK EQUIPMENT LLD 44962 MENARDS CHORDLESS DRILL & TO 7/24/2007 45683 44962 MENARDS LUMBER HOCKEY RINKS 7/24/2007 47207 44962 MENARDS LUMBER HOCKEY RINK 7/24/2007 48196 44962 MENARDS BOLDS & BOARDS 7/24/2007 50583 TOTAL F OR ~YIF.NARDS 44963 METRO COUNCIL ENVM AUG WASTEWATER 7/24/2007 851099 TOTAL F OR MF_1'RO COUNCIL ENVMT(WA STEWAT'ER) 44964 MIDWEST MAILING SYS AUG NSL POSTAGE 7/24/2007 AUG-07 TOTAL F OR MIDWF.'ST MAILING SYSTEN7S 7NC 44965 MINNESOTA DEPT OF H 2ND QTR WA SS FEES 7/24/2007 2QTR-07 TOTAL F OR MIV.VESOTA DEPT OF HL'.9LT H 44966 MINNETONKA-CITY OF 5490 VINE HILL RD 7/24/2007 TOTAL F' OR ~tIINNET'ONK~1-C'IT'Y OF 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MIP-7/13/07 7/24/2007 1001790 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS FAIRWAY DR VACANCY 7/24/2007 746095 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS BOWMAN COURT VACAN 7/24/2007 746463 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS SUBD VISION ORDINANC 7/24/2007 746464 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS VACATE ROW WHITE ST 7/24/2007 999281 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS FANNON VARIANCES 7/24/2007 999282 44967 MN 5UN PUBLICATIONS SCOTT CUP . 7/24/2007 999283 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MIP-07/13/07 7/24/2007 999284 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MIP-07/13/07 7/24/2007 999285 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MIP-07/13/07 7/24/2007 999286 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MIP-07/13/07 7/24/2007 999287 TO7A7_ F OR ttilN SUN PURL/CATIONS 44968 MTI DISTRIBUTING COM IRRIGATION REPAIRS 7/24/2007 578923-00 44968 MTI DISTRIBUTING COM PVC CEMENT IRRIGATIO 7/24/2007 578940-00 TOTAL F OR iYlT'7 DISTRIBUTING CO:YIPAN Y 44969 OFFICE DEPOT GEN 7/24/2007 39215928 44969 OFFICE DEPOT ENG 7/24/2007 39215928 44969 OFFICE DEPOT CARTRIDGE LASER 7/24/2007 39266435 $163.85 $163.85 $179.31 $179.31 $1,544.00 $1,544.00 $48.75 $48.75 $1,315.50 $259.50 $18.45 $1,451.29 $3,494.00 $2,169.00 $1,574.10 $10,281.84 $42.50 $42.50 $48.50 $48.50 $182.00 $43,780.50 $43, 780.50 $114.64 $87.00 $34.21 $223.69 $459.54 $47, 811.41 $47,811.41 $500.00 $500.00 $2,033.00 $2,033.00 $100.62 $100.62 $210.12 $55.00 $52.25 $28.66 $48.26 $35.75 $39.33 $91.16 $129.50 $350.00 $206.50 $1,246.53 $45.84 $16.91 $62.75 $19.19 $20.06 $356.98 Tlrursrluy, July 19, 2007 Page 4 of'7 Check # Verzrlor Nance Description Check Date Invoice # Afnount 44969 OFFICE DEPOT GEN SUPPLIES 7/24/2007 39312010 $32.46 TOTAL FOR OFFICE DEPOT $428.69 44970 OPFER, LARRY ZONING APPL REF-25900 7/24/2007 $200.00 TOTAI. FOR OPF'F'R, LARRY $200.00 44971 ORONO, CITY OF JUL ANIMAL CONTROL 7/24/2007 20070060 $1,777.25 TOI'.41 FOR ORO.VO, C'ITYOF $1,777.25 44972 PAUSTIS & SONS 7/24/2007 8151963-I $363.00 TOTAL F'OR PAUSTIS ~ SO.NS $363.00 .44973 PAZANDAK, JOSEPH MILEAGE REIM-06/25-07/0 7/24/2007 $124.65 TOTAL FOR PAI_AR'DAK, JOSEPH $124.65 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484360 $241.65 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484360 $108.50 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484361 $200.00 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484362 $455.45 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484362 $768.95 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2486756 $410.00 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT PENDING CR 7/24/2007 2486756 $346.45 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2486757 $178.85 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2486757 $967.34 I'OTAI FOR PHILLIPS OVINE & SPIRITS $3,677.19 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 878878-00 $296.01 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 880036-00 ($41.09) 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 881001-00 $1,085.68 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 881001-00 $236.20 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 881002-00 $260.00 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 881002-00 $2,739.16 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 883091-00 $243.00 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 883091-00 $812.48 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 883096-00 $45.00 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 883096-00 $1,422.59 TOTAL FOR QU~17,ITY WINE & SPIRITS CO $7,099.03 44976 QUEEN OF EXCELSIOR WINE CLUB-7/11/07 7/24/2007 1063 $728.71 44976 QUEEN OF EXCELSIOR WINE CLUB-7/11/07 7/24/2007 1063 $728.71 TO7A1_ FOR QUEEN OF EXCELSIOR $1,457.42 44977 QWEST 7/24/2007 612E4517 $313.49 44977 QWEST 7/24/2007 612E4580 $124.79 TOT.9L FOR QWEST $438.28 44978 RUMPCA CO INC BRUSH DISPOSAL 7/24/2007 3582 $390.00 TOTAL FOR RUtY1PCA CO INC' $390.00 44979 SAM'S CLUB LATE CHARGE 7/24/2007 $13.85 44979 5AM'S CLUB COUNCIL 7/24/2007 2173 $18.87 44979 SAM'S CLUB SNACK BOX 7/24/2007 2173 $7.25 44979 SAM'S CLUB DISC STORAGE 7/24/2007 2173 $106.50 44979 SAM'S CLUB GEN 7/24/2007 2173 $31.70 44979 SAM'S CLUB CITY HALL 7/24/2007 5102 $191.63 44979 SAM'S CLUB LIQ 7/24/2007 9690 $10.04 44979 SAM'S CLUB LIQ 7/24/2007 9690 $10.04 44979 SAM'S CLUB LIQ 7/24/2007 9690 $53.61 44979 SAM'S CLUB LIQ 7/24/2007 9690 $53.61 TOTAL FOR SAM'S CLUB $497.10 44980 SCHMIDT" 4 SEASON SE STUMP GRINDING 7/24/2007 1168 $186.64 TOTAL FOR SCHMIDT" 4 SEASON SERVICE IA`C. $186.64 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL PARK BEACH LOCKS 7/24/2007 78617 $54.52 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL SHOP 7!24/2007 78860 $34.64 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL HOCKEY RINK 7/24/2007 78869 $34.07 T{itetsclav, Jaly L9, 2007 Page 5 of'7 Check # Vendor Name Description Check Date Lavoice # Atraocarzt 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL KATRINA HOUSE 7/24/2007 78886 $83.01 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL HARDWARE 7/24/2007 78899 $4.22 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL ELECT COVER 7/24/2007 78914 $8.51 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL 7/24/2007 78983 $6.39 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL KATRINA HOUSE 7/24/2007 79104 $23.37 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL PAINTS 7/24/2007 79322 $6.37 TOTAL, F OR SHOREtVOOD 'TRUE VAI_L'F' $255.10 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE MAY-HENN CO PROCESS 7/24/2007 071007 $561.18 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE 800 MHZ RADIO 7/24/2007 071107 $17.20 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE 2ND QTR-COURT OVERTI 7/24/2007 071207 $487.35 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE 3RD QTR LEASE PYMT 7/24/2007 30TR-07 $62,377.00 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE AUG OPERATING BUDGE 7/24/2007 AUG-07 $67,980.00 TOTAL F OR SO LK MTRA POLICE DEPT $131,422.73 44983 STAR TRIBUNE RENEWAL-8/01/07-01/29/0 7/24/2007 $55.90 44983 STAR TRIBUNE LIO ADS 7/24/2007 10049801 $276.00 44983 STAR TRIBUNE LIO ADS 7/24/2007 10049801 $276.00 'T'OTAL F OR S'T'AR TRIBUNE. $607.90 44984 TENNANT LIP ASSY 7/24/2007 94533068 $87.45 TOTAL F OR TE.NI4ANT $87.45 44985 THE GARDEN PATCH BALES OF HAY SVC 7/24/2007 22194 $42.17 T07f1L FOR THE GARDF.:V PATCH $42.17 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453158 $2,769.70 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7!24/2007 453165 $107.10 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453165 $3,210.75 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453562 $306.00 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453977 $14.35 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453977 $950.80 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453980 $959.35 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453980 $39.40 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 454529 $10.70 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 454529 $512.80 TOTAL FOR L'HORPF_ DISTRIBUTING CO $8,880.95 44987 TONGEN'S TREE SERVI TREES 7/24/2007 $2,416.40 TOT AI_ FOR TONGEN'S TREE,' SERVICE $2,416.40 44988 TONKA BAY-CITY OF 2ND QTR SW CONN 7/24/2007 2ND-07 $282.00 44988 TONKA BAY-CITY OF 2ND QTR WA CONN 7/24/2007 2ND-07 $842.81 7'OI:AL FOR TONK9 BAY-CITY OF $1,124.81 44989 TURNOUIST, JIM ESCOW REF-EXCEL COV 7/24/2007 $100.00 TOT.97, FOR TURNOUIST, JIM $100.00 44990 TWIN CITY HARDWARE TAIL PIECE 7/24/2007 246047 $11.20 T07A1 FOR TWIN CI"I'Y HARDWARE' $11.20 44991 TWIN CITY WATER CLINI JUN BACTERIA ANALYST 7/24/2007 3842 $80.00 TOTAL FOR TWIN CITY W.9TER CLINIC $80.00 44992 UNITED RENTALS SAFETY HARNESS/EQUI 7/24/2007 65738245- $646.31 TOTAL TOR UNIT'F_D RENTALS $646.31 44993 US BANK GEN OBL WA REV BDS-S 7/24/2007 14150650- $7,612.50 44993 US BANK '03 WA REFUND BONDS 7/24/2007 33588100- $6,700.00 T07A7_FOR LISBANK $14,312.50 44994 VICTORIA REPAIR AND PLATE STOCK 7/24/2007 1878 $113.96 TOTAL. F'OR VICTORIA REPAIR AND ;YIFG $113.96 44995 W,4CONIA FARM SUPPL KEY SWITCH 7/24/2007 K89059 $23.42 TOTAL FOK WACOR'IA FARM SUPPLY $23.42 44996 WATERFORD LLP AUG RENT 7/24/2007 0807E $7,006.63 TOTAL FOR WATERFORD I L P $7,006.63 Tln~rsda-y, July 19, 2007 Page 6 of 7~ Check # Vendor Nance Description Clteck Date Invoice # Amount 44997 WELLS FARGO BROKER SO SHORE CTR LEASE-I 7/24/2007 00228249 $1,647.88 44997 WELLS FARGO BROKER SO SHORE CTR LEASE-P 7/24/2007 00228249 $17,124.09 TOTAL F OR WELL S FARGO BROKERA GE SVGS LLC $18,771.97 44998 WILLIAMS TOWING 1999 SUBARU LEGACY A/ 7/24/2007 92759 $236.97 44998 WILLIAMS TOWING 1998 CADILLAC SEVILLE 7/24/2007 94635 $192.18 44998 WILLIAMS TOWING 2005 CADILLAC XLR BAS 7/24/2007 96265 $163.17 44998 WILLIAMS TOWING 2005 INFINITY G35 BASE 7/24/2007 96419 $147.18 TOTAL FOR WILLIAMS TOWING $739.50 44999 WINE COMPANY (THE) 7/24/2007 170637-00 $115.50 TOTAL FOR WLNE' COMPANY (THF.) $115.50 45000 WINE MERCHANTS 7/24/2007 196400 $782.50 45000 WINE MERCHANTS 7/24/2007 196401 $1,349.25 45000 WINE MERCHANTS 7/24/2007 197088 $398.00 45000 WINE MERCHANTS 7/24/2007 197089 $72.00 45000 WINE MERCHANTS CR REF # 190659 7/24/2007 33795 ($112.00) TO7A7_ F'OR WINE MFRCHANTS $2,489.75 45001 WINE SPECTATOR 2007 RENEWAL 7/24/2007 2007 $24.97 45001 WINE SPECTATOR 2007 RENEWAL 7/24/2007 2007 $24.98 TOTAL FOR R'IiVF,' SPECIAI'OR $49.95 45002 WORLD CLASS WINES, I 7/24/2007 196583 $420.00 TOTAL FOR WORLD CLASS WIiVES, INC $420.00 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-PROJECT OBSERVA 7/24/2007 1074-000- $4,510.50 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-WOODHAVEN WELL 7/24/2007 1074-490- $15,118.25 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-AMLEE/MANITOU/GL 7/24/2007 1074-632- $11,448.00 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-MALLARD/TEAL/BRA 7/24/2007 1074-732- $2,101.50 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-LAKE VIRGINIA WO 7/24/2007 1459-020- $509.50 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-'06 RON JOHNSON 7/24/2007 1459-200- $346.00 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-SHWD SURFACE W 7/24/2007 1459-230- $416.00 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-SE WA SYS CONN T 7/24/2007 1608-040- $755.00 TOT.1L FOR WSB AND.ASSOCIf1TF,S $35,204.75 45004 XCEL ENERGY 5700 CTY RD 19-UNIT LG 7/24/2007 17950732 $138.70 45004 XCEL ENERGY 5700 CTY RD 19 7/24/2007 17950936 $31.15 TOTAL FOR XC'EI. ENERGY $169.85 TOTAL. CHECKS $628,007.94 Tln~rsday, Jaly 19, 2007 _ Pate 7 of 7 Check Approval List for 07123/2007 Sorted by Department Check # Vendor Nanze Description Check Date Invoice # Amount 44912 44913 44916 44917 44919 44922 44922 44923 44925 44925 44925 44926 44928 44929 44931 44932 44933 44934 44935 44935 44938 44939 44942 44944 44945 44950 44950 44950 44950 44953 44953 44953 44953 44954 44955 44956 44957 44958 44962 44962 44962 44962 44964 44967 44967 44967 44967 44967 44967 44967 44967 44967 ADVANCED IMAGING SO AFSCME DELTA DENTAL AMERICAN WATER WOR ANDERSON, KRISTI B. BARNES DISTRIBUTION BERRY COFFEE CO BERRY COFFEE CO BIFFS, INC. CINGULAR WIRELESS CINGULAR WIRELESS CINGULAR WIRELESS CITIES DIGITAL INC. COMMUNITY REC RESO CULLIGAN BOTTLED WA DELTA DENTAL OF MINN DEPT OF LABOR & INDU DOCUMENT RESOURCE ESS BROTHERS & SONS EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRI EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRI G & K SERVICES GAME TIME GROUT, TWILA HEALTHPARTNERS HENN CTY INFO TECHN JANI-KING OF MINNESO JANI-KING OF MINNESO JANI-KING OF MINNESO JANI-KING OF MINNESO LEONARD, STREET & DI LEONARD, STREET & DI LEONARD, STREET & DI LEONARD, STREET & DI LIGHTLY EPICUREAN LOCAL LINK USA BUSIN MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT MAHONEY,JAMES MANN MADE PRODUCTS MENARDS MENARDS MENARDS MENARDS MIDWEST MAILING SYS MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MN 5UN PUBLICATIONS MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MN SUN PUBLICATIONS JUL SVC AUG-UNION DENTAL PRE MEMBERSHIP SHWD PARK COMMISSIO NUTS BOLTS C.H. COFFEE P.W. COFFE JUL RENTS JUN COMMUNICATION JUN COMMUNICATION JUN COMMUNICATION EXCHANGE ROLLER KIT PARK MTG JUL DRINKING WATER AUG-PREM DENTAL 2ND QTR SURCHARGE R AP CHECK STOCK MANHOLE ADJUSTING C 3RD QTR BLDGS 3RD QTR OPERATIONS JUN SVC SPRING ASSEMBLY MILEAGE REIM-MN MUNI AUG- MED PREM JUN 800MHZ RADIO C.H. INITIAL CLEAN P.W. INITIAL CLEAN JUL C.H. SVC JUL P.W. SVC MAY-GEN MATTERS MAY-RONALJOHNSON MAY-UMYC CODE ENFO MAY-LEASE DISPUTE-AS PLANNING COMMITTEE D AUG WEB SVC BEARING WEED SPRAYING WELD & REFINISH HOLE CHORDLESS DRILL & TO LUMBER HOCKEY RINK S LUMBER HOCKEY RINK BOLDS & BOARDS AUG NSLPOSTAGE MI P-7/13/07 FAIRWAY DR VACANCY BOWMAN COURT VACAN SUBD VISION ORDINANC VACATE ROW WHITE ST FANNON VARIANCES SCOTT CUP M I P-07/13/07 MIP-07/13/07 7/24/2007 35925 7/24/2007 AUG-07 7/24/2007 20005762 7/24/2007 7/24/2007 80898020 7/24/2007 652872 7/24/2007 652873 7/24/2007 W327754- 7/24/2007 87119550 7/24/2007 87119550 7/24/2007 87122133 7/24/2007 2235 7/24/2007 54 7/24/2007 114X4187 7/24/2007 3939948 7/24/2007 CONF-207 7/24/2007 188506 7/24/2007 KK2598 7/24/2007 3QTR-200 7/24/2007 3QTR-200 7/24/2007 JUN-07 7/24/2007 746474 7/24/2007 7/24/2007 27720373 7/24/2007 27068090 7/24/2007 MIN07070 7/24/2007 MIN07070 7/24/2007 MIN07072 7/24/2007 MIN07072 7/24/2007 376270 7/24/2007 376271 7/24/2007 376272 7/24/2007 376273 7/24/2007 3959 7/24/2007 AUG-07 7/24/2007 2074566 7/24/2007 7/24/2007 1080 7/24/2007 45683 7/24/2007 47207 7/24/2007 48196 7/24/2007 50583 7/24/2007 AUG-07 7/24/2007 1001790 7/24/2007 746095 7/24/2007 746463 7/24/2007 746464 7/24/2007 999281 7/24/2007 999282 7/24/2007 999283 7/24/2007 999284 7/24/2007 999285 $220.00 $408.00 $158.00 $170.00 $553.70 $59.95 $59.95 $870.11 $19.60 $18.50 $17.18 $59.91 $1,125.00 $35.18 $678.80 $2,139.00 $584.38 $300.33 $76,144.76 $67,027.99 $843.40 $200.23 $124.16 $12,348.40 $34.40 $266.63 $426.60 $287.96 $250.63 $1,750.00 $165.00 $449.74 $270.25 $40.93 $163.85 $179.31 $1,544.00 $48.75 $114.64 $87.00 $34.21 $223.69 $500.00 $210.12 $55.00 $52.25 $28.66 $48.26 $35.75 $39.33 $91.16 $129.50 17aursday, July I), 2(107 Yage 1 qf~b Check # Vendor ~'~~arne Description Check Pate Invoice # Amount 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MIP-07/13/07 7/24/2007 999286 $350.00 44967 MN SUN PUBLICATIONS MIP-07/13/07 7/24/2007 999287 $206.50 44968 MTI DISTRIBUTING COM IRRIGATION REPAIRS 7/24/2007 578923-00 $45.84 44968 MTI DISTRIBUTING COM PVC CEMENT IRRIGATIO 7/24/2007 578940-00 $16.91 44969 OFFICE DEPOT GEN 7/24/2007 39215928 $19.19 44969 OFFICE DEPOT ENG 7/24/2007 39215928 $20.06 44969 OFFICE DEPOT CARTRIDGE LASER 7/24/2007 39266435 $356.98 44969 OFFICE DEPOT GEN SUPPLIES 7/24/2007 39312010 $32.46 44970 OPFER, LARRY ZONING APPL REF-25900 7/24/2007 $200.00 44971 ORONO, CITY OF JUL ANIMAL CONTROL 7/24/20b7 20070060 $1,777.25 44973 PAZANDAK, JOSEPH MILEAGE REIM-06/25-07/0 7/24/2007 $124.65 44978 RUMPCA CO INC BRUSH DISPOSAL 7/24/2007 3582 $390.00 44979 SAM'S CLUB LATE CHARGE 7/24/2007 $13.85 44979 SAM'S CLUB COUNCIL 7/24/2007 2173 $18.87 44979 SAM'S CLUB SNACK BOX 7/24/2007 2173 $7.25 44979 SAM'S CLUB DISC STORAGE 7/24/2007 2173 $106.50 44979 SAM'S CLUB GEN 7/24/2007 2173 $31.70 44979 SAM'S CLUB CITY HALL 7/24/2007 5102 $191.63 44980 SCHMIDT" 4 SEASON SE STUMP GRINDING 7/24/2007 1168 $186.64 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL PARK BEACH LOCKS 7/24/2007 78617 $54.52 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL SHOP 7/24/2007 78860 $34.64 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL HOCKEY RINK 7/24/2007 78869 $34.07 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL KATRINA HOUSE 7/24/2007 78886 $83.01 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL HARDWARE 7/24/2007 78899 $4.22 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL ELECT COVER 7/24/2007 78914 $8.51 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL 7/24/2007 78983 $6.39 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL KATRINA HOUSE 7/24/2007 79104 $23.37 44981 SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL PAINTS 7/24/2007 79322 $6.37 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE MAY-HENN CO PROCESS 7/24/2007 071007 $561.18 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE 800 MHZ RADIO 7/24/2007 071107 $17.20 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE 2ND QTR-COURT OVERTI 7/24/2007 071207 $487.35 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE 3RD QTR LEASE PYMT 7/24/2007 30TR-07 $62,377.00 44982 SO LK MTKA POLICE DE AUG OPERATING BUDGE 7/24/2007 AUG-07 $67,980.00 44983 STAR TRIBUNE RENEWAL-8/01/07-01/29/0 7/24/2007 $55.90 44984 TENNANT LIP ASSY 7/24/2007 94533068 $87.45 44985 THE GARDEN PATCH BALES OF HAY SVC 7/24/2007 22194 $42.17 44987 TONGEN'S TREE SERVI TREES 7/24/2007 $2,416.40 44990 TWIN CITY HARDWARE TAIL PIECE 7/24/2007 246047 $11.20 44994 VICTORIA REPAIR AND PLATE STOCK 7/24/2007 1878 $113.96 44995 WACONIA FARM SUPPL KEY SWITCH 7/24/2007 K89059 $23.42 44997 WELLS FARGO BROKER SO SHORE CTR LEASE-i 7/24/2007 00228249 $1,647.88 44997 WELLS FARGO BROKER SO SHORE CTR LEASE-P 7/24/2007 00228249 $17,124.09 44998 WILLIAMS TOWING 1999 SUBARU LEGACY A/ 7/24/2007 92759 $236.97 44998 WILLIAMS TOWING 1998 CADILLAC SEVILLE 7/24/2007 94635 $192.18 44998 WILLIAMS TOWING 2005 CADILLAC XLR BAS 7/24/2007 96265 $163.17 44998 WILLIAMS TOWING 2005 INFINITY G35 BASE 7/24/2007 96419 $147.18 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-PROJECT OBSERVA 7/24/2007 1074-000- $4,510.50 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-LAKE VIRGINIA WO 7/24/2007 1459-020- $509.50 45004 XCEI ENERGY 5700 CTY RD 19-UNIT LG 7/24/2007 17950732 $138.70 45004 XCEL ENERGY 5700 CTY RD 19 7/24/2007 17950936 $31.15 TOTAL F' OR IOl GENERAL FUND $334,920.08 44915 AMERICAN ENGINEERIN BADGER FIELD LIGHTING 7/24/2007 37327 $3,883.53 44947 HONDA ELECTRIC BADGER LIGHTING PROJ 7/24/2007 $49,400.00 TOTAL FOR X102 PARK CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT $53,283.53 ~Tlzursda_y, Jrily 19, 2(77 Page 2 of 6 Check # Vendor Narne Description Check Date Invoice # Atnonnt 44961 MAVERICK EQUIPMENT '01 FL-80 VIN 1FUBBWAK 7/24/2007 $43,780.50 TOTAL FOR 403 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT $43,780.50 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-AMLEE/MANITOU/GL 7/24/2007 1074-632- $11,448.00 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-MALLARD/TEAUBRA 7/24/2007 1074-732- $2,101.50 TOTAL FOR 404 STREET CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT $13,549.50 44915 AMERICAN ENGINEERIN WOODHAVEN WELL-CIP 7/24/2007 37774 $556.40 44927 CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUI HYDRANT GATE VALVE 2 7/24/2007 110993 $247.45 44936 EXCELSIOR-CITY OF 2ND QTR WATER CONN 7/24/2007 2ND-QTR- $3,921.44 44940 GOPHER STATE ONE-CA JUN SVC 7/24/2007 7060782 $181.62 44943 HAWKINS WATER TREA CHLORINE CYLINDER 7/24/2007 1085891-R $35.00 44965 MINNESOTA DEPT OF H 2ND QTR WA SS FEES 7/24/2007 2QTR-07 $2,033.00 44966 MINNETONKA-CITY OF 5490 VINE HILL RD 7/24/2007 $100.62 44977 OW EST 7/24/2007 612E4517 $313.49 44977 OW EST 7/24/2007 612E4580 $124.79 44988 TONKA BAY-CITY OF 2ND QTR WA CONN 7/24/2007 2ND-07 $842.81 44991 TWIN CITY WATER CLINI JUN BACTERIA ANALYST 7/24/2007 3842 $80.00 44993 US BANK GEN OBL WA REV BDS-S 7/24/2007 14150650- $7,612.50 44993 US BANK '03 WA REFUND BONDS 7/24/2007 33588100- $6,700.00 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-WOODHAVEN WELL 7/24/2007 1074-490- $15,118.25 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-SE WA SYS CONN T 7/24/2007 1608-040- $755.00 TOTAZ FOR 601 WATER UTILITY $38,622.37 44925 CINGULAR WIRELESS JUN COMMUNICATION 7/24/2007 87119550 $92.75 44925 CINGULAR WIRELESS JUN COMMUNICATION 7/24/2007 87122133 $138.57 44940 GOPHER STATE ONE-CA JUN SVC 7/24/2007 7060782 $181.63 44963 METRO COUNCIL ENVM AUG WASTEWATER 7/24/2007 851099 $47,811.41 44988 TONKA BAY-CITY OF 2ND QTR SW CONN 7/24/2007 2ND-07 $282.00 44992 UNITED RENTALS SAFETY HARNESS/EQUI 7/24/2007 65738245- $646.31 T'07AL F' OR 611 SANITARY SEWER UTILITY $49,152.67 44949 J.R'S APPLIANCE DISPO '07 SPRING CLEANUP 7/24/2007 56278 $2,899.00 TOTAL F OR 621 RF_CYCLING UTILITY $2,899.00 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-'06 RON JOHNSON 7/24/2007 1459-200- $346.00 45003 WSB AND ASSOCIATES MAY-SHWD SURFACE W 7/24/2007 1459-230- $416.00 TOT X17_ FOR G31 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT UTILITY $762.00 44914 AMERICAN BOTTLING C 7/24/2007 124665 $107.65 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 37771871 $59.75 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 43871830 $63.73 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 43871900 $30.93 44920 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 7/24/2007 43177000 $102.24 44920 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 7/24/2007 43197900 $34.60 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41333900 $143.00 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41377800 $1,201.50 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41377800 $1,497.95 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41424700 $2,038.80 44924 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAG 7/24/2007 48821 $96.00 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416141 $711.85 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416141 $36.10 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO - 7/24/2007 416908 $776.30 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 417891 $1,899.25 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO CREDIT 7/24/2007 99561 ($7.90) 44931 DELTA DENTAL OF MINN AUG-PREM DENTAL 7/24/2007 3939948 $50.25 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 614892 $199.70 Thursrtay, July 19, 2007 Yage 3 of 6~ Check # Vendor Nafne Description Check Date Invoice # Amount 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO PENDING CR 7/24/2007 614893 $41.33 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO PENDING CR 7/24/2007 614893 $470.20 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 615853 $110.90 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619446 $730.10 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619447 $711.10 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622194 $45.75 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622194 $233.70 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622195 $45.43 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622195 $445.96 44944 HEALTHPARTNERS AUG- MED PREM 7/24/2007 27720373 $569.05 44946 HOHENSTEINS INC 7/24/2007 423806 $211.35 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091427 $5,642.80 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091470 $11.60 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091470 $1,849.80 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091520 $913.80 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283753 $3,395.38 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283753 $655.50 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283753 $35.98 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283754 $1,222.02 44951 JOHNSON EROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1286724 $301.00 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1286724 $273.10 44951 JOHNSON EROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1287218 $897.21 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1287218 $393.00 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO CR REF#1233509 7/24/2007 344676 ($74.40) 44952 LAKESHORE WEEKLY N WINE CLUB ADS 7/24/2007 115592 $180.00 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 207246 $1,315.50 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 207247 $259.50 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 207248 $18.45 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 209875 $3,494.00 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 212534 $1,574.10 44960 MARLIN'S TRUCKING 7/24/2007 19387/414 $48.50 44960 MARLIN'S TRUCKING 7/24/2007 19387/414 $48.50 44972 PAUSTIS & SONS 7/24/2007 8151963-I $363.00 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484361 $200.00 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484362 $455.45 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484362 $768.95 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2486757 $967.34 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2486757 $178.85 • 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 878878-00 $296.01 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 880036-00 ($41.09) 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 881002-00 $260.00 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 881002-00 $2,739.16 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 883096-00 $1,422.59 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 883096-00 $45.00 44976 QUEEN OF EXCELSIOR WINE CLUB-7/11/07 7/24/2007 1063 $728.71 44979 SAM'S CLUB LIQ 7/24/2007 9690 $53.61 44979 SAM'S CLUB LIQ 7/24/2007 9690 $10.04 44983 STAR TRIBUNE LIQ ADS 7/24/2007 10049801 $276.00 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453165 $3,210.75 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453165 $107.10 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453562 $306.00 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453980 $959.35 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453980 $39.40 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 454529 $10.70 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 454529 $512.80 44999 WINE COMPANY (THE) 7/24/2007 170637-00 $115.50 (~/uusrtay, July .19, 2l)(17 Pnge =l ot'6 Check # Vendor Mayne Desej°iption Check Date Invoice # Amount 45000 WINE MERCHANTS 7/24/2007 196401 $1,349.25 45000 WINE MERCHANTS 7/24/2007 197089 $72.00 45000 WINE MERCHANTS CR REF # 190659 7/24/2007 33795 ($112.00) 45001 WINE SPECTATOR 2007 RENEWAL 7/24/2007 2007 $24.97 'TOTAL F OR 6=~1 SHOREWOOD PLAZA LIQUOR $50,43L35 44914 AMERICAN BOTTLING C 7/24/2007 124664 $57.80 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 37771871 $69.01 44918 ARCTIC GLACIER INC 7/24/2007 43871880 $16.52 44920 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 7/24/2007 43177100 $30.65 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41377700 $1,264.70 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41377700 $276.00 44921 BELLBOY CORPORATIO 7/24/2007 41424600 $1,225.10 44924 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAG 7/24/2007 48820 $224.00 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416140 $1,608.65 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416907 $19.20 44930 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 7/24/2007 416907 $366.35 44931 DELTA DENTAL OF MINN AUG-PREM DENTAL 7/24/2007 3939948 $16.75 44937 EXTREME BEVERAGE 7/24/2007 572535 $32.00 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 614895 $201.20 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 614896 $597.79 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619448 $888.37 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619448 $49.57 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 619449 $353.35 44941 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO 7/24/2007 622198 $267.57 44944 HEALTHPARTNERS AUG- MED PREM 7/24/2007 27720373 $219.75 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091428 $6,810.80 44948 J.J. TAYLOR DISTRIBUTI 7/24/2007 1091471 $1,539.40 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283752 $1,694.05 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1283752 $1,586.10 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1287217 $30.39 44951 JOHNSON BROS LIQUO 7/24/2007 1287217 $257.30 44952 LAKESHORE WEEKLY N WINE CLUB ADS 7/24/2007 115592 $180.00 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 207973 $1,451.29 44959 MARK VII 7/24/2007 210481 $2,169.00 44960 MARLIN'S TRUCKING 7/24/2007 19386/413 $42.50 44960 MARLIN'S TRUCKING 7/24/2007 19386/413 $42.50 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484360 $108.50 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2484360 $241.65 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 2486756 $410.00 44974 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRIT PENDING CR 7/24/2007 2486756 $346.45 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 881001-00 $236.20 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 881001-00 $1,085.68 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 883091-00 $243.00 44975 QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT 7/24/2007 883091-00 $812.48 44976 QUEEN OF EXCELSIOR WINE CLUB-7/11/07 7/24/2007 1063 $728.71 44979 SAM'S CLUB LIQ 7/24/2007 9690 $10.04 44979 SAM'S CLUB LIQ 7/24/2007 9690 $53.61 44983 STAR TRIBUNE LIQ ADS 7/24/2007 10049801 $276.00 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453158 $2,769.70 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453977 $950.80 44986 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 7/24/2007 453977 $14.35 44996 WATERFORD LLP AUG RENT 7/24/2007 0807E $7,006.63 45000 WINE MERCHANTS 7/24/2007 196400 $782.50 45000 WINE MERCHANTS 7/24/2007 197088 $398.00 45001 WINE SPECTATOR 2007 RENEWAL 7/24/2007 2007 $24.98 Thursday, .)rely 19, 2007 Page ~ of~b Check # Vendor Name Description Check Dcct~ Lnvoice # Afnount 45002 WORLD CLASS WINES, I 7/24/2007 196583 $420.00 T'O7A7. FOR h42 WATERFORD LIQUOR 44989 TURNOUIST, JIM ESCOW REF-EXCEL COV 7/24/2007 TO"I'AL FOR 880 ESCROW DEPOSIT AGENCY TOTAL CHL+'CKS $40,506.94 $100.00 $100.00 $628,007.94 L'hzarstluy, July 19, 2007 Puge 6 of 6 PAYROLL APPROVALS For 07/23/2007 Council Meeting Prepared by: Reviewed by -, ~~ Date:. '~ ~ ~ `~ ~~~ ~ a d_ Approved by: _ _ ~® Date: - . Craig ~t~awson, City Administrator e 1 1 "7- 1 1 ~' Check # Last Name First Name MI Check Amt Check Date 4892 BAILEY BOYD C 1,68154 7/10/2007 4893 BROWN LAWRENCE A 2,410.86 7/10/2007 4894 BURTON BONNIE M 1,996.45 7/10/2007 4895 DAMS CHARLES S 1,083.71 7/10/200'7 4896 FASCHING PATRICIA L 1,180.46 7/10/2007 4897 GROUT TWILA R 1,188.82 7/10/2007 4898 HEELING PAMELA J 1,062.85 7/10/2007 4899 HIRSCH DANA M 52.61 7/10/2007 4900 LANDINI JAMES A 1,538.81 7/10/2007 4901 LUGOWSKI JOSEPH P 1,527.32 7/10/2007 4902 MASON BRADLEY J 1,279.65 7/10/2007 4903 MOORS JULIE K 479.7] 7/10/2007 4904 NGUYEN MICHELLE T 1,552.16 7/10/2007 4905 NIELSEN BRADLEY J 1,257.67 7/10/2007 4906 OLIVEIRA CHRISTOPHER L 167.32 7/10/2007 4907 PANCHYSITY JEAN M 1,826.56 7/10/2007 4908 PAZANDAK JOSEPH E 1,688.59 7/10/2007 4909 RANDALL DANIEL J 1,873.78 7/10/2007 4910 SCHMID CHRISTOPHER E 984.07 7/10/2007 4911 SMITH TERI L 306.37 7/10/2007 4912 STARK BRUCE H 1,472.41 7/10/2007 4913 SWANDBY DONALD R 1,892.36 7/10/2007 4914 TOWER TERRY R 1,131.90 7/ 10/2007 4915 WHETSTON JOAN M 38.10 7/10/2007 219496 BOEGEMAN DOUG A 286.25 7/10/2007 219497 DAMS PETER D 99.73 7/10/2007 219498 DAWSON CRAIG W 2,093.22 7/10/2007 219499 FLETT HEATHER E 243.34 7/ (0/2007 219500 GRABNER MICHAEL A 86.60 7/10/2007 219501 HELGESEN PATRICIA R 1,462.36 7/10/2007 219502 JOHNSON DENNIS D 1,144.69 7/10/2007 2]9503 KIRSCHT ADAM J 462.96 7/10/2007 219504 KOCKS STEVE D 279.07 7/10/2007 219505 OSLUND STEVEN W 90.83 7/10/2007 219506 PARENT MICHELLE L 461.57 7/10/2007 219507 POUNDER CHRISTOPHER J 1,557.44 7/10/2007 Total of Checks $37,942.14 Thursday, July 19, 2007 Page 1 of 1 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: July 19, 2007 To: Mayor and City Council Members :y- From: Don Swandby, Liquor Operations Manager Bonnie Burton, Finance Director/Treasurer Re: Liquor Staffing Recommendation CC: Craig Dawson, City Administrator The following staffing item is presented for the City Council's review and approval: Liquor Store Staffing Liquor Operations Manager Don Swandby recommends the hiring of Mr. Nathan Stillwell for the position of `Part-Time Liquor Clerk' at a rate of $8.50 per hour, effective June 27, 2007. Staff Recommendation The City Council is requested to approve the staffing recommendation as outlined above. v' _ ~~ . t~p® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MEMORANDUM CITY SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us DATE: July 18, 2007 TO: Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk ~~"~~ CC: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk Bradley Nielsen, Planning Director RE: LICENSES AND PERMIT APPROVALS The following license and permit requests have been received at the City and reviewed for completeness. Refuse Collection One additional Refuse Hauler, Blackowiak Disposal Inc, has submitted all the required documentation and fees for a Refuse Hauler's License. Horse Stable Permits There are currently three Horse/Stable Permits in the City of Shorewood. The two listed on the next page are complete; the third is pending inspection by the Animal Control Officer. Over the past few years, there have been occasional inquiries by prospective home buyers about the City's horse ordinance. We have also had inquiries by concerned residents regarding the amount of space needed to keep a horse. Our Building Official has also questioned if our ordinance is outdated with regard to the amount of site space needed for keeping a horse within the City. The City's horse ordinance was originally approved in 1961, and minor edits were made to it in 1977. As it has been quite some time since this ordinance has been reviewed, Staff is recommending the Planning Commission review the recommendations for horse stables. Their findings will be brought forward to a future City Council meeting. Special Event Permit Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) has submitted a Special Event Permit for the 2na annual Tour de Tonka Bike Ride on Saturday, August 4. MCE is working with public safety officials to provide police reserves at major intersections. Both the SLMPD and EFD have approved the Special Event Permit. Three options for the bike ride are available for participants (a 15-mile ride, 33-mile ride, and 65-mile ride). Route maps for each are attached. Streets affected in Shorewood include Cty. Rd. 19, Birch Bluff Road, Edgewood Road, Howards Point Road, and Smithtown Road. .: to r® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ,,,. As all license and permit requirements have been met, alicense/permit has been issued to the individual/organization listed. City of Shorewood - 2007 License Approvals City License No. Licensee Address C LICENSE TO PROVIllE REFUSE COLLECTION 07-57 Blackowial: Disposal [nc. 1195 Sunnylicld Kd N Mound, MN HORSE/STABLE PERMIT 07-58 Ramona Ebert 26830 Beverly Drive Shorewood, MN 07-59 Ted Rix 23040 Summit Avenue Shorewood, MN SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT N/A Tour de Tonka Bike Ride Cty Rd 19 -Birch Bluff- Throughout the Saturday, August 4 Edgewood-Howards Pt Lake Mtka Minnetonka Community Ed. Rd- Smithtown Rd community ~~~~ uc~r~r~~~: G {~ ,rFl ~~ w ~ •~ ~` <.~t>r+t~ ti .p Z; -~ O ~ N Q L 9 O ~ `~') .. y ~ ~ V x a ~ ~ 0 0 ~ n a w c d H cLa c b a ~ L ~ o ~ F ~ c s C C 1._._ ^ ^ !'~-~ !~-~-. ! ~ I 1 1 ~1 I ^ ! ~ I x , , C` I •~ ^ I x I I L' i ~. = ~. ^ ``' ~ I 1' L I 1 ~ G I r i i ~ 1 H ! W , a 1 ~ 1 ; __ I I i ~ ; 1 .~ 1 ~ I I !~ I 1 I ~ 1, .M ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ T ^ I 1 Q ~ ; n i . -._. _. ~. _. _._._. _. _. _. J _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1_ _ y _ ~ ! n if ~ t~ j1 ~ 1~ ~ ` 7' ~ ' 1 x ~ t it ! `` _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i 3 ~ ~ fi ~ ( ~ ~ r I ~ ~ ! 1'I ~~~. 1 `e,~ We ~ ~ ] t ~ ro i 1 0 ! 1 I 1 1j ` ; 1 _ P( 1 ~k 1 1 1. _ . V I J~~ ? I I O I ft~ 1 1` ' G _._.. ~ ._' ! ~ X11._ 1 i L. _.. ~ ~ / I I 1 C ~ _f_ 1 1 _ \ ~ I / 1 l ~ { ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 I ^ ~ ~ 1 ....._.,, .. ...._._.~._ ,,...._....__...,...,. s ( in. ~ ~ i i :v ^ ~~ CeS / ~ ,~ I ~ ~i. p I i y ' -' ~n • ^ A m ~ u I ' 1 1 ^ p ~ ! ~~ ~ ; 'v F.^ u I 1 ^ ~ ~' ..... ~ ~~ ~ d I C I ~o ~ ;X ~~.- ~ u 1 :~ G . 1 ' ~ , 1 •• ' ~ ~ 1 , I ! ~Y'! i i .. ^ ~, ~~ ~ ~;~ " 0 }ti ~e ~ ~~ ~ ~xx e l ! i i \ i ~ ~ /1 ~ y ; 1 ""'~ 1 o ~ 1 t I ~ I t -y ~ i V ~ { W 3 1 ~~ f 1 i~f 1~ ~ $ 1 .x ~x ' ~~ y- ~,~~, ~:/ j ~ cC a'" ~ .~ w • r ;:,=,1 0 l < _) O "`_ N ~ i ~ ~ ~ ` r Q . -. y ~i r~-, I O I ~ ~ ~_ 1~T I ~ 1 j I. ~+ ~" ~~ ~ ._._•;~ ~ :+ ~,,;~ c .~- ~ • I 7 ~ ~. I ~„~., .a, N I 1 I I ~ . J I _ _I ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ! I ~. ~~r p m i 1 I I.~ iti '~ ~ l; I j/ ll ~~ ~ ~ ~ _ r ., ~, W tf O ~ .' I ~ ~ ~" ' ~ I ~ ~ ~~ ~ w I o VG a 1~ \ ...~ I ~ I 1~ , ~ .~ `. (~ ' I ~~"~'~ ~ , I j! tgj ~p ~ 7 I ~L I ~' .~/ 1 ~ ~~ll ~ I I • '~ ~ v ( ~; p ..1' ~ ~ I C C~ Cl i~___J______________I____ I.~'~ H~ I~ _ - ~," ~, ~~ ~ ~ ~. ~. _. ~ ii .~ /"~ ~ 11 ~. '`fit ~ '. ~ 7t I f ~~ ``\ .` 1 ~ b . • 1 ~~,, 1 x 1 ~._ •~~ ~ 1 ~ I •, ~I 1 _ i ~ I I ~ i lol i ~ I ~• ~ .-- ~ ~._ .r fA ~ ` :d j s` ~ ~ ~~. "' 3 ~ ~ CQ i ~ I 3 ~'- 1 _~ , ~ ~~, 1 ce F ( C!1 1 Y ~./ ~Li F "O i I a `~$ ~ 1 ~ ~ g ~g O r 1 ip§j II t q jfjJ I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z m I j1 ~ 1 V] ~LFF,, ~._i ~ i - P V ~...,.+~ V ~ I I~.m 1 ~ I x ~~ ~ I O ~D U v~ I a~ -°: ,~ v~ ~ -°~ rig = w ~~ ~ ~~ N M W U a W N M \I / ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 II 1 i `-r _ ~ I ~ . try 4. q{q ~.~.~.! _._. ~k G ~ i:~f ~ ~ ~~ I~ _. ' ~ ~ ~ (/ 1 'a j ~ O I ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 -~ I o 3 ' r.., I it y (~ bf1 ~ I ~ I ~ : ~ ~ 1 .k,~,~, ~, ~ ~ ;. I 1 ~ 1 ~ G t~~ ~x ° i~. i x °" .` '4.M . `.` (j i f ~ 45: ! ~ M ~. ~ O U c%.a ~~ -- UWQ'3 ~ W pn ,. ,~.{_. _. ~. c .__.._._. ~ ~ ';. ;r,_ ~ y (~ I O 1 F !~ _~~+1 / 1 ~ ' 1 cam' 1~ ~ ?) ~~ _. _.1 j i ~ -~ , 1 ~~ ~ CQ w - ® i i 11 1 O 1 1 ~ 1 1 \ ~ \ fC1 41! ,~ ~( 1' o ~~ 1 ~~ L". i. ~ _ of l f \, / / 1 d 1 "..... `~\ ~ ~ \ 1 .11 \ i O \ \ .. .+ ~ ,, 'O ~, 1 ~ I 1~ ' 755 '^_... - ,i~ \ ! •\ `qi '\ • 1 /•_ I ~ / /~ ~'• ' ~\ ~ 1 fYJ 1 / •. S \ 1 . ". ,.... ! 3 i O 1 r ,_ i \ ~ i y~ ~VA M~ 1 O 1 1 U] -• j 1 a Q+ 1 it ~ I ~ `~,~ ,1 °~!~ ~~~ ! ~ i 1~ ./ - - ,._ \ - / 5G. a\ ~ - - F ~ i\~ /1 1 U ~ '~ / /• .--. 1 i ~ ~ ~ ' 1j /,/ 3k ./! ! s O y /. ~•i~ I 1 O ~ j /. ~ _. ..~.! 1 v i.. ! y ~ i C . - - .1 [ r,~,,.~ C 1 // M ! ~ 1 ~ 1 ^ t S W ~M ~ ~ I CO ~ C 0 H ce ~ a i. ~ O CC O d ~, x ~~ i ®~ ' ~~.. ~ ~ ~ ~~ 'a ca __ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ! ~ T 2 A CITY F SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 ° www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM DATE: July 18, 2007 TO: Mayor and City Council - ~~,-~°` FROM: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk ~ i CC: Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator RE: City Council Packet Delivery Service Agreement For the past 9+ years, Don Rogers has provided delivery service of the City Council Agenda Packets to the Mayor and City Councilmembers. During this time, Don's rate of pay for this service has remained at $25 per delivery. With the rising costs of gas and vehicle maintenance, Don's tax consultant (wife) has informed him he is barely breaking even on providing this service. Don has provided reliable and responsible delivery service over the past several years, and deserves to be fairly compensated. The City has been fortunate to have such a dedicated, community-minded person to provide this service. Don is requesting a rate increase to $30 per delivery to help compensate for inflation, plus mileage reimbursement at the current IRS rate. It is estimated that this increase will cost the City an additional $200 for Year 2007. Sufficient funds are available in the General Government fund to cover this cost. Council Action Staff recommends approving the attached Delivery Service Agreement, effective July 23, 2007. „_i, ®f ~. M' PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER DELIVERY SERVICE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made between DON ROGERS (Deliverer) and the City of Shorewood, 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood, Minnesota (Shorewood). Shorewood wishes to contract with Deliverer to provide delivery services for all Shorewood City Council meetings. IT IS THEREFORE AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Delivery Services. On the Thursday prior to the regularly scheduled Monday City Council meetings, Deliverer shall pick up the City Council Agenda Packets from Shorewood City Hall and deliver to the current Mayor and City Councilmembers, as well as deliver the Agendas only to the Shorewood Liquor Store(s) on Thursday. Staff members from Shorewood City Hall will contact Deliverer to notify him/her of the time when the Packets are ready to be picked up. Should the Packets not be ready for pick up on Thursday, Deliverer may be asked to deliver the packets on Friday, if he/she is available for this service. 2. Equipment. Deliverer shall use his/her own personal vehicle for Delivery Service. 3. Charges. $30 per delivery, plus mileage reimbursed at the current IRS mileage reimbursement rates. 4. Billing. Deliverer shall bill Shorewood, listing each delivery date and mileage. Shorewood agrees to submit each invoice with the next bill list or other applicable expense authorization list to be considered by the City Council or the authorizing official of the Council. 5. Cancellation. This Agreement may be canceled at any time by either party, subject to a thirty (30) day written notice. 6. Term. This Agreement shall become effective on July 23, 2007, and shall continue in force until canceled. Dated: Deliverer Dated: Shorewood Mayor Shorewood City Administrator/Clerk c~TS or SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator Larry Brown, P.E., Director of Public Works FROM: James Landini, P.E., City Engineer DATE: July 18, 2007 RE: A Resolution Accepting Low Bid and Awarding Contract to Successful Low Bidder Attachment 1 is the Bid Tabulation for the Rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 12 Project. Bids were opened and tabulated on July 18, 2007. The low bidder is Engineering and Construction Innovations, Inc. in the amount of $104,471.00, compared to the engineer's estimate of $75,589.00. Based on other bids received, it appears that the costs for this project, although 38% above the engineer's estimate, are reasonable. As previously discussed with Council, this project will be funded from the Sanitary Sewer Fund. Recommendation Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the attached resolution that accepts the bids and awards the contract to Engineering and Construction Innovations, Inc. in the amount of $104,471.00. A resolution is attached for your consideration. vs ~. ~e PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 07 - A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE REHABILITATION OF LIFT STATION NO. 12, CITY PROJECT NO. 06-01 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for local improvements designated as the Rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 12, City Project No. 06-01, bids were received, opened on July 18, 2007 and tabulated according to law, and such tabulation is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that Engineering and Construction Innovations, Inc. is the lowest bidder in compliance with the specifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Mayor and City Administrator/Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Engineering and Construction Innovations, Inc. in the name of the City of Shorewood, Project No. 06-01, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council on file in the office of the City Administrator/Clerk. 2. That the City Administrator/Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except for the deposits of the successful bidder and the next two lowest bidders, which shall be retained until a contract has been signed. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 23rd day of July, 2007. Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: Craig Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk f~ City of Shorewood Bid Tabulation Christmas Lake Point Lift Station #12 Improvements City Project 06-01 a~~~e~-t Lo ~~ (~~ ~ Bids Opened: 10:00 A.M. July 18, 2007 Engineer: WSB and Associates, Inc ``=No Bidder Bid Bond / Check (5°/a) Bid. 1 Parrott Contracting, Inc. ~/ ~ /~ a .7 3 ~. ~'~ 2 Lametti & Sons, Inc. 3 CCS Contracting, Inc. ~/ ~ ~ 3 C~ ~ yS~, as 4 Penn Contracting, Inc. 5 Jay Bros., Inc. l/ ~ ~ d ~; ~~ ~~r ~ 6 ~n ~~~.~~~~~~ ~-~n~~u~fi~bn / ~ 1a~ ~7lfao 7 ~Yi v v c~-h ~ s' 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Engineers Estimate $ 7.~ .Syc~ ~ ~' I hereby certify that this tabulation is a correct and true representation of the bids received on this date for this Improvement Project -~ _ ames Landini City Engineer Je n Panchyshyn ®eptrty Clerk/~Executive Secretary ~-i8-a7 Date `7-~ l~'JD~7 Date Attachment #1 MEMORANDUM CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 19 July 2007 RE: Appeal Notice to Remove -John McMasters FILE NO. Property (4530 Enchanted Point) Mr. John McMasters owns the property at 4530 Enchanted Point. Our office recently sent him a Zoning Violation Notice (Exhibit A) and a Notice to Remove (Exhibit B) pertaining to certain Code violations on his property. It has taken some time to sort through the property boundaries for this rather irregularly-shaped property. Staff met with Mr. McMasters last week and directed him as to where his boats and trailers could be stored on his property. He proposes to construct a fenced enclosure in which to keep several of the items. For this he has requested additional time. It should be noted that the utility trailer is now operable and licensed. The City Council routinely grants 30-day extensions where the property owner has demonstrated a good faith effort to correct the violations. Staff recommends that Mr. McMasters be given 30 days to remove all items in violation. This extension, however, should be conditioned on moving the boats and trailers into the buildable area of the lot, so as to comply with setback requirements. The fence should be erected within 30 days and the items stored outside should be moved into the enclosure. The applicant must obtain a fence permit prior to construction of the fence. It is suggested that the property be reinspected on 22 August 2007, after which the matter will be turned over to the prosecuting attorney if the appellant has failed to comply. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Joe Pazandak John McMasters Patti Helgesen ®~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER _~%~ ~, a Y 3 A . C~-.~t~y~~',~.t ~~'~ui5n'8~I31 25 June 2007 SHOREWO_~D 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 John M. and Dolores J. McMasters 4530 Enchanted Point Shorewood, MN 55364 Re: Zoning Violation - 4530 Enchanted Point P.I.N. 30-117-23-33-0022 Mr. and Mrs. McMasters: Our office has received a complaint alleging that certain City Code violations exist on property you own at the above referenced address. Upon inspection of the premises, the following violations of Section 1201.12, Subd. 3. of Shor~e~wood's Zoning Code was found: AAVG 032 ino enable and located in the re aired side yard Utility trailer, Lic# p q setback. Boat on trailer, Lic# CI~T 1529, located in rear yard setback. Boat on trailer, Lic# ABWL 247, located in rear yard setback Storage of licensed and operable recreational vehicles and equipment is allowed only within the buildable area of the property. The setbacks for the zoning district in which this property is located are 40' rear yard (easterly lot line), and 35' side yard abutting the public right-of-way (Enchanted Point). The above-mentioned setbacks leave very little buildable area remaining in the locations in which. the boats and trailers are being stored. The inoperable utility trailer and other items on the property are also in violation of Section 1201.03, Subd. 2.0. and Chapter 501, which restricts exterior storage of certain materials and equipment in residential districts. A copy of these code sections, and a separate Notice to Remove is included with this notification. This is to advise you that the violations must be corrected by moving the boats and their trailers to a location upon the property in conformance with the above-referenced setbacks by 5 July 2007, after which your property will be reinspected for compliance. Failure to comply will result in the matter being turned over to the City Attorney for further legal action. If you wish to appeal this order to the City Council, you must do so in writing, no later than 5 July 2007. Your appeal must state why you can not or will not correct the violations, or if you request additional time for compliance, how much time. Your written appeal will stop further action until such time as the City Council has considered the matter. ©~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER a4 ~~ John M. and Dolores J. McMasters 25 June 2007 page two If you have any questions relative to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact my office. CITY OF SHOREWOOD Bradley J. Nielsen Planning Director BJN:ph 1201.03 Zoning Regulations 1201.03 Glare. Any lighting used to illuminate an off-street parking area, sign or other structure shall be arranged as to deflect light away from any adjoining residential zone or from the public streets. Direct or sky-reflected glare, where from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding shall not be directed into any adjoining property. The source of lights shall be hooded or controlled in some manner so as not to light adjacent property. Bare incandescent light bulbs shall not be permitted in view of adjacent property or public right-of-way. Any light or combination of lights which cast light on a public street shall not exceed one foot-candle (meter reading) as measured from the center line of the street. Any light or combination of lights which cast light on residential property shall not exceed four-tenths (.4) foot-candles (meter reading) as measured from the adjoining residential property line. j . Smoke. The emission of smoke by any use shall be in compliance with and regulated by the State of Minnesota Pollution Control Standards, Minn. Rules Chs . 7009 , 7011, 7017 and 7019 , as amended . k. Dust and other particulate matter. The emission of dust, fly ash or other particulate matter by any use shall be in compliance with and regulated by the State of Minnesota Pollution Control Standards, Minn. Rules Chs. 7009, 7011, 7017 and 7019, as amended. 1. Odors. The emission of odor by any use shall be incompliance with and regulated by the State of Minnesota Pollution Control Standards, Minn. Rules Chs. 7009, 7011, 7017 and 7019, as amended. m. Noise. The emission of noise by any use shall be in compliance with and regulated by the State of Minnesota Pollution Control Standards, Minn. Rules Chapter 7030, as amended. n. Refuse. Motor vehicles not currently licensed by the state, or which are, because of mechanical deficiency, incapable of movement under their own power, parked or stored outside in violation of § 501.05, Subd. 9 of this code, as amended, are considered refuse or junk and shall be disposed of. The outdoor storage of junk in yards in all residential districts shall be considered to be a nonconforming use and shall be removed. o. Exterior storage. All materials and equipment except as provided for in §§ 1201.09 through 1201.26 of this chapter shall be stored within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties, except for the following; (1) Clothes line poles and wires; (2) Recreational equipment and vehicles; 1201-39 2006 .5-1 Repl. CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us DATE: 25 June, 2007 TO: John M. and Dolores J. McMasters 4530 Enchanted Point Shorewood, MN 55364 PROPERTY LOCATION: 4530 Enchanted Point PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NO.: 30-117-23-33-0022 NOTICE TO REMOVE Public Nuisances NOTICE IS HEREBY GNEN that there exists a condition on the above referenced property which is in violation of Chapter 501, Section 501.05, Subd. 9 of the Shorewood City Code, a copy of which Section is enclosed. The nuisance to be removed from the property includes, but is not limited to the following: UNLICENSED AND/OR INOPERABLE VEHICLES OR EQUIPMENT: • Utility trailer, Lic# AAVG 032, inoperable; filled with brush. OTHER: • Cement block; wood; logs; tarps; door parts; dock parts; pipes; sawhorses; brush; decayed wood; similar miscellaneous. You are hereby required to remove the above-described matter and any other nuisance matter located on the property and in violation of Chapter 501, Section 501.05 within ten (10) days from the date hereof. In the alternative, you may file a written notice of appeal at the Shorewood City Hall within ten (10) days, in which case your appeal will be set for hearing at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. If you do not respond to this Notice within ten (10) days, the City shall take whatever legal action as may be necessary to have the offensive matter removed. The costs incurred by the City for such removal shall be charged to the property owner and become a lien against the property. *** PLEASE GIVE TIIIS MATTEIg. ~'®LTR IMMEDIATE ATTEN'T'ION *~* I3~' ORDER OF THE SHOREWOOD CI'T'Y COUNCIL 09 acQ PRINTED CM RECrCLED PAPEP. 9~ CI'T'Y ®~ SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 19 July 2007 RE: Appeal Notice to Remove -Nicholas Evans FILE NO. Property (25645 Valleywood Lane) In response to a Notice to Remove (see Exhibit A) that was sent to the owner of the above-referenced property, his renter, Gregg Smith, has asked for a additional time to correct items in violation of City Code (see Exhibit B). He indicates that the property will be cleaned up (`the balance") by 20 July. The City Council routinely grants 30-day extensions where the property owner has demonstrated a good faith effort to correct the violations. However, given the short amount of time it has taken for the property to come into violation, staff recommends that the owner be given unti127 July to achieve full compliance. It is suggested that the property be reinspected on 27 July 2007, after which the matter will be turned over to the prosecuting attorney if the appellant has failed to comply. It is further recommended that failure to comply should result in reconsideration ofthe rental housing license for the property. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Joe Pazandak Nicholas Evans Gregg Smith Patti Helgesen `~ is ~. ~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER DATE: 29 June, 2007 CITI VF 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 TO: Nicholas T. Evans 5300 Meadow Lakes Trail Rockford, MN 55373 PROPERTY LOCATION: 25645 Valleywood Lane PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NO.: 32-117-23-11-0006 NOTICE TO REMOVE Public Nuisances NOTICE IS HEREBY GNEN that there exists a condition on the above referenced property which is in violation of Chapter 501, Section 501.05, Subd. 9 of the Shorewood City Code, a copy of which Section is enclosed. The nuisance to be removed from the property includes, but is not limited to the following: UNLICENSED AND/OR INOPERABLE VEHICLES OR EQUIPMENT: • Ford Pickup (blue), Lic# JCH 312 (Apr'07) OTHER: • Several sawhorses; clothes hamper; light; LP tank; interior tables; camping coolers; painting; bed/couch; shelving; moving dolly; lumber; closet doors; wood shingles; mirrors; four (4) toilets; desk; pipes; sink; tarp; foam blocks; wood; pallets; fencing; several gas cans; barrel; scaffolding; sled (filled w/water); hoses; similar miscellaneous. You are hereby required to remove the above-described matter and any other nuisance matter located on the property and in violation of Chapter 501, Section 501.05 within ten (10) days from the date hereof. In the alternative, you may file a written notice of appeal at the Shorewood City Hall within ten (10) days, in which case your appeal will be set for hearing at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. If you do not respond to this Notice within ten (10) days, the City shall take whatever legal action as maybe necessary to have the offensive matter removed. The costs incurred by the City for such removal shall be charged to the property owner and become a lien against the property. Y'* PLEASE EGIVE THIS MATTER FOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION *** BY ORDER OF THE SIIORE~®OD CITE' COUNCIL ~ p PRINTED O.. RECYCLED PAPER ~ ~ A o tr /'-\ .ba Gregg Smith 25645 Valley wood Lane Shorewood, MN 55331 July 10, 2007 City of Shorewood To whom it may Concern: I'm asking for an extension on the time required to move items from front of house. I have cleaned up left side of house and moved everything to the drive way on right Side of house. I will be hauling balance of materials away by July 20th. My 1994 F150 runs fine. Plates expired only in Apri12007. I will be buying tabs for the truck next week. Any other questions please call 612 209 0913. Thank you ~.. Greg Smith MEMORANDUM CITY ®F 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 TO: Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works DATE: July 19, 2007 RE: Spring Cleanup Report On May 19, 2007, the City conducted the annual spring cleanup day. Staff has promised the City Council that a report would be provided regarding costs and revenue for the project, as this was the first year that curbside pickup was not performed. Staff delayed the reporting of this matter, until such a time as the supporting documentation and proper invoicing was in place such that costs could be reported accurately. That has just recently occurred. The following table is a summary of costs for the spring clean up. Firm Description Amount Waste Tech Inc. General Refuse 11.35 Tons, On Site Personnel and Equipment $ 8,655.35 J.R.'s Appliance 68 Appliances, 24 mowers, 5440 ounds of electronics $ 2,890.00 Greenman Technologies, Inc. Tire Disposal $ 528.93 Shorewood personnel and supply On-site employees and supplies $ 1,293.85 Total Costs $ 13,368.13 Total Revenue Collected $ 5,839.00 Net Costs ~ 7,529.13 The City Council has discussed previously that the net costs would be covered by the Recycling Fund. Finance Director Burton has reported that the balance in the fund is sufficient to cover these costs. Recommendation Staff is recommending approval of a motion that authorizes the balance of the outstanding costs for spring cleanup be funded from the City's Recycling Fund in the amount of $7,529.13. va ~. j®r® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CI'I'~' F SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD •SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 • (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen Craig Dawson DATE: 19 July 2007 RE: Escrow Refunds FILE NO. 405(Admin) A couple of months ago, after questions arose regarding the release of checks, practices were adjusted to conform with the summary of statutes issued by the League of Minnesota Cities. With very few exceptions, most checks are not be released until after the Council has approved the Verified Claims List. To respond to questions raised over the past few months, staff believes a clarification regarding refunds of escrows is in order. State law provides that prior approval by the Council is not required for "other fixed charges determined under a contract that the Council has previously authorized". Escrows as required by the City maybe considered a delegation of contract authority from the Council to its staff, as the Code provides that escrows maybe required and set by appropriate staff. This processing schedule has affected the timely return of escrow monies received from homeowners, builders and developers. Shorewood requires basically two types of escrows: 1) application escrows; and 2) performance escrows. In the case of application escrows, many of our zoning applications require a flat, nonrefundable fee, plus an escrow. The escrow is used in the event the City's expenses incurred in the processing of the application exceed the flat fee. If the escrow is not used, it is returned to the applicant. Escrows are involved primarily in matters administered by the Planning Department. .a dap{ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Memorandum Re: Escrow Refunds 19 July 2007 Performance escrows are used to guarantee that certain required work gets done in conjunction with some sort of project. For example, a builder finishes a home in the middle of winter. Obviously, he can not plant trees at that time to comply with Shorewood's Tree Preservation and Reforestation Policy. So as not to hold up a certificate of occupancy, the City allows the builder or owner to enter into an escrow agreement, secured by a cash deposit. This money is placed in anon-interest bearing account and returned to the owner when the work has been completed. Both of these types of escrows have proven to be effective in getting required improvements done in a timely manner. Once the work has been done, however, the owner has a reasonable expectation of getting the money back promptly. It is, after all, their money, for which the City has a custodial role. The current policy places an unnecessary delay on getting people their money back. In the past, the longest someone would have to wait was one week. Now, it often takes two weeks and sometimes three weeks for Council action to return the escrow. For this reason, staff is suggesting that escrow refunds be considered an exception to the current policy. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council affirm and authorize the issuance of checks to refund escrow balances prior to Council approval of these claims. Cc: Bonnie Burton Patti Helgesen -2- To: City of Shorewood City Council From: Tom Skramstad, LMCD Representative Date: July 23rd, 2007 Here is my "periodic" report of LMCD activities. Zebra Mussels: The LMCD has been concerned about the introduction of zebra mussels into the Lake for about ten years. Zebra mussels have infested the St. Croix River, the Mississippi River, Lake Superior, Lake Ossawinamakee, and Lake Milacs and are spreading quickly. The LMCD has worked with the DNR on a boat inspection program for the last 4 years, and this inspection program is being conducted again in 2007. During the last State legislative session the LMCD worked with State legislators to create appropriate "aquatic invasive species" legislation. This resulted in appropriate language making its way into the "omnibus bill" which never reached the Governor's desk for signature. The current plan is for the legislature to take this up immediately upon convening in February 2008. There is optimism that the bill will pass, which will put this issue on the ballot in November, 2008, and allow the voters determine the outcome. The bill calls for the DNR to be the governing agency and sets aside $500,000 for zebra mussels over the two year budget period. The LMCD will continue to provide leadership on this important issue. 2. LMCD Newsletter: One of the LMCD's main initiatives in recent years has been to improve the public's knowledge of the agency's role and the rules that govern the use of the Lake. Towards this end, the LMCD started publishing a bi-annual newsletter in the Spring of 2006. The second newsletter for 2007 should be out this Fall. 3. Milfoil Harvesting: The milfoil harvesting program has commenced for this year, the 17th year. The objective of this initiative is to keep main boating traffic lanes clear of milfoil. This program is funded by the 14 member cities and the DNR. The LMCD appreciates the continued support from the City of Shorewood. 4. Milfoil Demonstration Project: The LMCD, in conjunction with the DNR, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Lake Minnetonka Association, conducted a "demonstration project" in 2006. In this program, three areas of the Lake (portions of Carman's Bay, Phelps Bay and Gray's Bay) were treated with known and approved chemicals to see if there might be a more effective way to treat this exotic. The preliminary results were quite positive and the official evaluation of results will be available soon. If there is an interest in continuing or expanding this type of treatment, money to do this will have to be arranged. 5. ILIDS: The term "ILIDS" is an acronym for Internet Landing Installed Device Sensor. It as a unique device that uses the capabilities of computers, cameras and the intereet to take videos of boats entering the Lake to see whether they have exotic species visibly present. (The transport of exotic species is against State law,) In 2006 the LMCD provided partial funding for this project and one unit was installed at a public landing. The program was deemed to be very successful and has been expanded this year to four sites, which are up and running. 6. Solar Lights: This program was started in 2002 and involves attaching solar lights to the top of navigational buoys in high traffic areas so that boaters can more easily find their way at night. The program has received much positive feedback and it has been continued in 2007. 7. Budget for 2008: Thanks to the input from many cities, the 2008 LMCD budget was completed and mailed (as required by State law) to the cities in late June. The overall increase was 5.8%. The largest area of increase was to fund addition enforcement of the LMCD's regulations (see next item). Regulation enforcement: Two years ago the LMCD made a commitment, largely based on public comments, to do amore effective job of enforcing its existing regulations. In 2006 the LMCD took its shoreline inventory (done every two years), which historically counts the numbers and types of boats stored around the Lake. In this latest inventory, data on several additional items was collected: docks that exceed the legal size, docks that have too many boats (more than four boats but no multiple dock license on file), and docks that appear to have boats that are not registered to the homeowner (a potentially illegal boat slip rental situation.) This year, letters have been written to owners of docks that have too many boats and docks that have 3 or more larger watercraft (potential rental situations). The purpose of the letter writing campaign is to educate the recipients about the LMCD's regulations and to ask them to come into compliance voluntarily. Additional inspections will be done next year to monitor progress towards compliance. In addition, the DNR has indicated that they are going to start to enforce their dock dimension regulation (a dock can be more than eight feet wide in only one dimension.) As stated before, the LMCD will look forward to working with the Cities on these enforcement projects. 9. Web Page: The LMCD's Website is: htt~Uwww.lmcd.org. Page -- 2 - CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 17 July 2007 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Acting Chair Gagne called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. ROLL CALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. Present: Acting Chair Gagne; Commissioners Geng, Gniffke, Hutchins, and Ruoff; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Chair Schmitt and Commissioner Meyer APPROVAL OF MINUTES 19 June 2007 Gniffke moved, Hutchins seconded, Approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 16 June 2007 as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING -VARIANCES TO BLUFF SETBACK, HARDCOVER REQUIREMENTS, AND LOT WIDTH Applicant: Michael and Susan Fannon Location: 5625 Christmas Lake Point Acting Chair Gagne opened the Public Hearing at 7:03 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He explained items reconm7ended 1'or approval that evening would be placed on a July 23, 2007, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for fiirther review and consideration. Director Nielsen stated Michael and Susan Fannon, 5625 Christmas Lake Point, proposed demolishing the existing house on their property and building a new house on the site. As proposed, the applicants' plans necessitate a variance to the bluff setback requirement and the 25 percent maximum impervious surface requirement of the City's Zoning Code. Nielsen explained the subject property was located on Christmas Lake and was located in the R-1C/S, Single-Family Residential/Shoreland zoning district. The property contained 34,659 square feet of area, which was more than 50 percent larger than the minimum area required for the zoning district. It also was somewhat narrow, 65 feet wide (Code required a minimum of 70 feet wide) at the (private) street. The topography of the site rose from a 932 elevation at the lakeshore to a high point of 1006 feet on the south side of the lot; a difference of 74 feet. The existing house encroached into a 20-foot bluff setback. The new house would also encroach, but not to a lesser degree. The applicants had attempted to minimize site alteration to the extent possible. For the most part, the only new area to be graded would be for the new garage, which would be located outside of the bluff impact zone. Nielsen also explained the impervious surface on the existing site was 36.1 percent. The new plan proposed to reduce the amount of hardcover to 31.3 percent, plus introduce permeable pavers for the driveway and patio areas to come closer to the 25 percent maximum required in the City's zoning CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 17 3uly 2007 Page 2 of 8 regulations. Much of the actual reduction would come from reducing the area of the driveway and the removal of several deck areas. Nielsen explained how the applicants' proposal complied with the four specific criteria in Section 1201.03 Subd.2.c.(3) of the Shorewood Zoning Code regarding substandard lots. 1. The subject property was in separate ownership from the two adjoining lots. 2. The lot area was more than the minimum required for the R-1C/S District. The lot area was, however, five feet less than the 70 percent required for buildable lots. The lot had previously been narrower. A neighborhood replat that was done in 1998 (to clean up property boundaries for four lots) widened the subject property but resulted in the applicant giving up approximately 10,700 square feet of area. The replat was approved by the City, commending the four residents for their cooperation. The proposed house complied with the setback requirements of the R-1C/S zoning district. A circular patio area on the south side of the house encroached into the side yard setback and should be corrected to 20 feet from the property line; this correction would reduce hardcover slightly. The proposed hardcover exceeded the 25 percent maximum by 5.3 percent in spite of a 4.8 percent actual reduction in hardcover. For this the applicants had requested a variance. 4. The floor area of all structures on the property would not exceed the 30 percent ratio of structure to lot area. With regard to variance criteria, Nielsen stated this property was somewhat plagued by both configuration and topography, both of which were referenced in the criteria for the consideration of variances. The narrow configuration of the property necessitated an extraordinary driveway length, approximately 150 feet including the turn-around area. This would result in additional hardcover to access the buildable area of the lot. The only area of the property that did not have grade issues was the area the existing house was located on. The proposed plan would not adversely affect the bluff. The applicants proposed to remove three existing decks from the bluff and Lakeshore setback areas. The removal of the decks would also reduce hardcover. Nielsen explained the applicants had proposed a permeable pavement system to further reduce impervious surface. This was similar to another application reviewed by the City in 2004. When Staff researched the previous application, it obtained information from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regarding permeable pavement systems in shoreland areas. Staff checked with the current hydrologist for the area to see if the DNR's position has changed; it had not. The DNR encouraged the use of the new technology, but it did not recommend that it be substituted for green space. Nielsen stated the City Engineer and the City's Engineering consultant had considerable skepticism as to how the systems would work long-term. The systems must be highly engineered, inspected during construction and ultimately monitored for maintenance. There were concerns regarding the enforcement of future maintenance agreements. Although Staff was reluctant to recommend that a permeable pavement system be credited for achieving the hardcover requirement, it did think the pavement system could be considered a mitigating factor. Nielsen stated there appeared to be areas where hardcover can be reduced further (e.g., correcting the patio area on the south side of the lot, reducing the driveway size somewhat, or reducing the building CITY OF SIIOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 17 July 2007 Page 3 of 8 size}. Staff suggested that 30 percent would be a reasonable hardcover percentage to achieve; 30 percent was consistent with the old DNR hardcover requirements, and the resulting reduction in hardcover would amount to approximately 20 percent less than what existed today (an amount considered to be substantial). Nielsen stated the applicants' plans would result in a relatively drastic improvement in zoning compliance in spite of the variances requested. The proposed design would blend into the site much better than the existing house, especially if earth-tone colors were implemented. If the City agreed that the application had merit, Staff recommended the approval be granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The permeable pavement system should be subject to the City Engineer's recommendations for design, construction, inspection and long-term maintenance. 2. The resolution approving the application should include reference to maintaining earth- tone colors. 3. The applicants should further reduce hardcover so as not to exceed 30 percent. Engineer Landini made the following comments regarding a permeable pavement system. A system allowed some infiltration of surface water; there was a 1/4 - 3/8 inch gap between each paver block that was filled with crushed clean rock. A system would require annual maintenance to maintain permeability (i.e., to keep the gap free of debris}. A system should be designed by a license engineer. The property in question warranted a structural investigation because of its topography and the location of the driveway. Landini explained some of the challenges for a permeable pavers included frost heave, frozen pore space, and clogging of pore space. The challenges could be minimized with adequate preparation and maintenance. Director Nielsen stated Michael Fannon was present to answer any questions the Commission may have. Mr. Fannon stated if he had not given his neighbor 10,700 square-feet of area from his property (at no cost), he would not be before the Commission today. He commented that he had been a City resident for twenty years. He explained the existing house was built in the 1960's and was not conducive for remodeling. Acting Chair Gagne opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:19 P.M. Rick Hendel with Rick-Hendel Homes, stated his firm designed the proposed new house. He circulated pictures of the existing house, and surveys of the property before and after the land exchange had been done. He stated the applicants had not yet decided what the earth-tone colors would be; he did have samples if anyone wanted to see them. He noted the circular patio area on the south side of the house had already been moved, and the proposed house square footage had been reduced by 138 square feet. Harley Feldman 5635 Christmas Lake Point, stated he was one of four property owners who worked collectively to accomplish the replat 1998 to clean up property boundaries for four properties. He stated those property owners, including the applicants, had consistently attempted to do what was best for the lake area. CITY OF SIIOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 17 July 2007 Page 4 of 8 Thomas Kelly 5595 Christmas Lake Point, stated he thought the permeable pavement system proposed by the applicants would significantly reduce the storm water drainage from the applicants' property on to his property. Currently the storm water from the applicants' driveway drains on to his property. Mr. Fannon stated the storm water runoff issues were exacerbated by the runoff from the roofs of his existing sheds. Acting Chair Gagne closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:25 P.M. In response to a question from Acting Chair Gagne, Engineer Landini explained that the height of a snow plow blade would have to be raised for plowing the proposed driveway. His experience with other permeable pavers (not the proposed blocks) had demonstrated success with the snow melting and seeping into the ground during the winter. In response to another question from Acting Chair Gagne, Director Nielsen stated enforcing the maintenance of a permeable pavement system could prove to be challenging at this time, and that was part of the reason Staff recommended credit not be given to hardcover for permeable pavers. If the DNR were to decide that some percent of hardcover credit be given for a permeable pavers, a binding development agreement would have to be developed requiring maintenance be done. A representative from Willow Creek Paving Stones stated the maintenance of the proposed system only required an annual sweeping of the driveway. Commissioner Gniffke questioned if the technology had improved in the last three years. Engineer Landini stated the technology had improved significantly over the last twenty years; he was not sure of what improvements had been made in the last three years. Mark Hauri with Yardmasters Landscapes, Inc., stated permeable pavers were only one component of a permeable pavement system. He explained there was aone-inch depth of crushed aggregate installed under the pavers. There was also asub-base of clear rock. When his firm installed clear rock it still had a 40 percent void ratio. For the proposed driveway he would suggest an 18 inch sub-base of the clear rock (drain rock). The soil underneath the system would dictate the absorption rate for storm water; therefore, he recommended a soil test be done in advance. He stated the proposed pavers set up very tight. The best way to snow plow over the pavers would be to put feet on the plow and raise it up slightly, and then to back-drag the snow. Director Nielsen stated the City had received a request from a property owner on Birch Bluff Road in 2004 in which the applicant had proposed to exceed the allowable hardcover and offset it with the use of permeable pavers or a similar type system. The request was denied. That property was different from the one being considered because it was a very substandard lot in area, the property was rectangular shaped, there was a short driveway on it, and it did not have topography issues. In response to a question from Commissioner Ruoff, Director Nielsen stated he did not know why the DNR changed its hardcover regulations to 25 percent from 30 percent. He stated the City had since adopted a hardcover requirement of 33 percent for non-shoreland properties. In response to a question from Commissioner Geng, Director Nielsen related the area's hydrologist stated the DNR had not changed its policy to allow property owners to have more hardcover because they installed permeable pavers. The DNR wanted to ensure green space was maintained. In response to another question, Mr. Hendel stated a soil test had not been done on his property yet. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 17 July 2007 Page 5 of 8 In response to a question from Commissioner Hutchins, Mr. Fannon stated the existing home was built in 1962 or 1963, and an addition was put on in 1981 or 1982. He and his wife bought the property in 1987. The driveway had always been on the property. It had been constructed of asphalt at first, and then replaced with concrete twenty years ago. Mr. Hendel noted the proposed driveway would be reduced. In response to another question from Commissioner Hutchins, Mr. Hauri stated the existing retaining wall was in excellent condition. Another wall of geo-grid was proposed to be added to the wall once the existing driveway was removed. Mr. Hauri stated the proposed driveway would be split in half. On the square portion of the driveway all storm water would flow through the drain rock; there would be a slight slope at one end of that portion. A couple of drain tiles would be installed on the right side of the house and into the back yard. At the left corner of the second half of the driveway (where the driveway meets the road) drain the would also be installed. He stated boulder walls would be installed from that corner at least three feet back. The proposed driveway would be located slightly to the right of the existing driveway to help manage erosion. Commissioner Hutchins stated Mr. Hauri indicated there would be an 18 inch sub-base, but Engineer Landini recommended a 3 foot sub-base. The representative from Willow Creek Paving Stones stated his firm had just completed a project at the South Bridge Transit Project in Shakopee where buses would drive on the system. The sub-base that was installed there was 12 - 18 inches. He thought a 12 - 18 inch sub-base would be sufficient for a residential property. He stated if there was a 2.5 inch 24-hour rain event and there was an 8-inch sub-base installed, it would handle twice that amount of water because of the 40 percent void rate. Commissioner Hutchins questioned if the applicants would experience hardship if the proposed paver space between the garage and house was reduced. Mr. Fannon stated there was no street parking in his neighborhood; therefore, the driveway was designed to allow 6 - 8 parked cars. Gniffke moved, Hutchins seconded, Recommending Approval of the Variances for Impervious Surface, Lot Width and Bluff Setback for Michael and Susan Fannon, 5625 Christmas Lake Point, subject to Staff recommendations. Commissioner Ruoff summarized the things the applicants had done to meet the City regulations the best they could. This situation was justifiably different than the 2004 request discussed earlier. Storm water drainage issues would be reduced, and the neighbors were in favor of the changes. The visual impact from the lakeside would be improved significantly. Motion passed 5/0. Acting Chair Gagne closed the Public Hearing at 7:47 P.M. 2. 7:15 P.M. P~TBLIC HEARING - C.TT.P. FOR ACCESSORY' SPACE OVER 1200 SQUARE FEET Applicant: Gregory and Lorraine Scott Location: 28100 Woodside Road Acting Chair Gagne opened the Public Hearing at 7:48 P.M. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 17 July 2007 Page 6 of 8 Director Nielsen stated this request for a conditional use permit for accessory space involved a nonconforming boathouse that Gregory and Lorraine Scott, who own the property at 28100 Woodside Road, would like to keep. Director Nielsen explained the history of the case. In 2003 the applicants added on to their existing garage with a modified floor plan which did not exceed 1200 square feet of floor area. By doing so, they avoided having to obtain a conditional use permit that may have necessitated alteration or removal of their existing "pagoda" boathouse near the lake. They partitioned off a portion of the garage, technically making a portion of it part of the house. Since then Shorewood had amended its zoning regulations, providing for the preservation of certain nonconforming structures that had historical, architectural, or cultural significance. The applicants believed their boathouse was consistent with the criteria for keeping such structures. Nielsen commented that the applicants' "pagoda boathouse" was the catalyst for the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt regulations favoring structures that had historical, architectural, or cultural significance. During the summer of 2006 the Planning Commission had discussed it would have been a loss to all if the applicants would have had to remove the boathouse. Nielsen reviewed the process that was followed to allow for nonconforming structures that have historical, architectural, or cultural significance. The City's first step was to adopt an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, setting forth its intention to recognize and preserve special structures in the City. An amendment to the City's Code was then adopted, providing conditions under which older, nonconforming structures would not have to be corrected to comply with current standards. Finally, criteria were adopted, patterned after National Park Service standards for historic designation, to guide City officials in the review of applications. Nielsen explained how the applicants' proposal complied with the four specific criteria in Section 1201.03 Subd.2.d.(4)(c) of the Shorewood Zoning Code. The applicants had provided good evidence that the boathouse was built at around the same time as the home on the property in 1920. An article in the Mpls. St. Paul magazine referenced 1910 and a real estate sales brochure from the 1930's indicated that the boathouse qualified for the age component of the Code. 2. Although the structure has not been inspected by the building official as of this meeting, preliminary observation of the building in question suggested it was in very good condition. The applicants had taken great care to restore and maintain the structure. The structure no doubt met five of the nine preservation criteria established by the City; it was only required to meet one of them. At a minimum the boathouse's notoriety as a local Lake Minnetonka landmark should satisfy the criteria. 4. If the structure was found to have satisfied the criteria, a brief development agreement should be drafted, setting forth the applicants' right to keep the boathouse and their responsibility to maintain it in good condition. Repairs or alterations to the structure should be consistent with its current style, character and materials. Nielsen stated he had provided the Commission with a copy of the draft minutes from an 18 June 2007 Nonconforming Accessory Structure Ad Hoc Committee meeting. The Committee discussed the applicants' boathouse in great deal. It also discussed what should be included in the development CITY OF SIIOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 17 July 2007 Page 7 of 8 agreement. He highlighted the discussion. The Committee recommended the boathouse was consistent with the City's amended Code and it should be allowed to remain in its current location, and a development agreement setting forth the conditions of approval should be recorded against the property with Hennepin County. Nielsen noted the development agreement would not require the applicant to keep the boathouse. Nielsen stated the applicants had done a good job demonstrating that the boathouse was consistent with the City's intent and with its current Code requirements. Staff should be directed to draft a development agreement, pursuant to Item 4 above. The agreement should be recorded with Hennepin County. Mr. Scott stated the current colors of the boathouse were the same as the original colors. Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Acting Chair Gagne opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8:01 P.M. In response to a question from Commissioner Ruoff, Mr. Scott stated the wall in the garage was not visible to their neighbors. He stated if the C.U.P. was approved, the wall would be moved to a different location in the garage. In response to a question from Commissioner Geng, Director Nielsen stated the development agreement would be legally binding. Future owners of the property would have to make modifications consistent with the current character of the building. Mr. Scott stated they had diligently worked to preserve the original character of the structures on their property. Geng moved, Ruoff seconded, Recommending -Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space Over 1200 Square Feet for Gregory and Lorraine Scott, 28100 Woodside Road; Approval to Designate the Nonconforming Boathouse an Accessory Structure for Preservation; and Staff be Directed to Draft a Document to be Recorded with Hennepin County Setting Forth the Conditions of Approval. Motion passed 5/0. Acting Chair Gagne closed the Public Hearing at 8:04 P.M. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there would be four public hearings slated for the Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for August 7, 2007. One was for a setback variance request, the second was a request for a C.U.P that would allow two houses on one property during the construction of the second house, the third was for a setback variance to resolve a zoning code violation, and the last was for an amendment to the Upper Lake Minnetonka Yacht Club's C.U.P. 5. REPORTS Liaison to Council CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 17 July 2007 Page S of 8 No report was given. • SLUC No report was given. • Other None. 6. ADJOUFNIVIENT Hutchins moved, Ruoff seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of 17 July 2007 at 8:16 P.M. Motion passed 510. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 11 July 2007 RE: Fannon, Michael and Susan - Variance for Impervious Surface, Lot Width and Bluff Setback FILE NO.: 405 (07.05) BACKGROUND Michael and Susan Fannon own the property at 5625 Christmas Lake Point (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). They propose to demolish the existing home on the property and build a new home on the site. Exhibit B illustrates how the proposed plan compares to the existing. The finished project is shown on Exhibit C. As proposed, the applicants' plans necessitate a variance to bluff setback requirement and the 25 percent maximum impervious surface requirement of the Shorewood Zoning Code. The subject property is located on Christmas Lake and is zoned R-IC/S, Single-Family ResidentiaVShoreland. At 34,659 square feet, the lot is more than one and a halftimes the minimum area for the zoning district. It is, however, somewhat narrow (65 feet vs 70 feet) at the (private) street. The topography of the site is quite dramatic, rising from a 932 elevation at the lakeshore to a high point (1006 feet) on the south side of the lot - a diffurence of74 feet. The existing home encroaches into the 20-foot bluff setback. The new home will still encroach, but not to the degree as the existing. The applicants have attempted to minimize site alteration to the extent possible. For the most part the only new area to be graded will be for the new garage, which is outside ofthe bluff impact zone. ,. f . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .. #B.A. " Memorandum Re: Fannon Variance 11 July 2007 Impervious surface on the existing site is 36.1 percent. The new plan proposes to reduce the amount of hardcover to 31.3 percent, plus introduce permeable pavers for the driveway and patio areas to come closer to the 25 percent maximum required in our zoning regulations. Much of the actual reduction comes from reducing the area of the driveway and the removal of several deck areas. The applicants' request is explained in their contractor's memorandum (Exhibit D). Proposed building elevations are shown on Exhibit E. ISSUES AND ANALYSIS A. Substandard Lots. Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.c.(3) addresses development on substandard lots of record. Following is how the applicants' request complies with four criteria provided in that section: 1. The subject property is in separate ownership from the two adjoining lots. 2. The lot area is more than the minimum required for the R-IC/S District. The lot area is, however, five feet less than the 70 percent required for buildable lots. It is worth noting that the lot had previously been narrower. A neighborhood replat in 1998 to clean up property boundaries for four lots, widened the subject property. That same replat resulted in the applicant giving up approximately 10,700 square feet of area. The replat was approved by the City, commending the four residents for their cooperation. 3. The proposed house complies with the setback requiremenls of the R-IClS zoning district. A circular patio area 'on the south side of the house encroaches into the side yard setback and should be corrected so as to be 20 feet from the property line. Proposed hardcover exceeds the 25 percent maximum by 5.3 percent in spite of a 4.8 percent actual reduction in hardcover. For this the applicants have requested a variance. 4. The floor area of all structures on the property will not exceed the 30 percent ratio of structure to lot area. B. Variance Criteria. Although not referenced in the request memo, the lot in question is somewhat plagued by both configuration and topography, both of which are referenced in the criteria for the consideration of variances. The narrow configuration of the property necessitates an extraordinary driveway length - approximately 150 feet including the turn-around area. This results in additional hardcover to access the buildable area of the lot. The topography of the property has only the level area in which the home was originally built that doesn't have grade issues. It is worth noting that the new work does not adversely affect the -2- Memorandum Re: Fannon Variance 11 July 2007 bluff. In fact, three existing decks are proposed to be removed from the bluff and lakeshore setback areas. In addition to improved setback compliance, the removal of the decks reduces hardcover. The applicants have proposed a permeable pavement system to further reduce impervious surface. This is similar to another application reviewed by the City a couple of years ago. In researching the previous application, staff obtained information from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (see Exhibit F). We checked with the current hydrologist for our area to see if the DNR position has changed. It has not. They encourage the use of the new technology but do not recommend that it be substituted for green space. In discussing these systems with the City Engineer and the City's Engineering consultant, there is still considerable skepticism as to how the systems work long- term. The systems must be highly engineered, inspected during construction and ultimately monitored for maintenance. Questions arise as to how to enforce maintenance agreements. For example, if a system is not properly maintained and fails in five to ten years, does the City end up in court trying to achieve compliance from a future owner? The City Engineer will elaborate on these issues in a separate report. ./ In this light, staff is reluctant to recommend that permeable pavers be credited for achieving the hardcover requirement. This being said, the pavement system can be considered a "mitigating factor", which combined with the actual reduction in hardcover and the improved setback compliance has some merit. There appear to be areas where hardcover can be reduced further. For example, correcting the patio area on the south side of the lot, possibly reducing the driveway size somewhat, or possibly some reduction in building size. It is suggested that 30 percent would be a reasonable percentage to achieve. This is consistent with the old DNR hardcover requirements and the resulting reduction would amount to approximately 20 percent less than what exists today, which is considered substantial. RECOMMENDATION The applicants' plans will result in a relatively drastic improvement in zoning compliance in spite of the variances requested. Not mentioned in the preceding text is the visual element. The proposed design will blend better into the site than the existing home, especially if earth-tone colors are implemented. Iftl)e City agrees that the application has merit, approval should be conditioned upon the following: 1. The permeable pavement system should be subject to the City Engineer's recommendations for design, construction, inspection and long-term maintenance. -3- Q; o <1> 0"- o. Q) ~ CO --.J rJ) CO E .- rJ) .C ..c U z....c: 0 55 0 -I '" N -I -I I -I 0 e -I Exhibit A SITE LOCATION Fannon - c.u.P.lVariance III to ... ~ 0- QI Q M 0 E ... ~ an U. 0 an :z:: -a Q 4i > Z 1&1 -a ai ~ ~ c a .. QI .. a cs: a .. :z:: ~ a A. I ~ ~ 1&1 \I a a ~ ii ~ ~ A. Q an N an ... ~~ @); ~@) ~c~ ~ ag ~ ~~ = (05) l~j 5 ~~ (S@[Qb d~ ffi ~~ ~~~ 0= c:::= @)~ ~~ (S@~ CS::?)~ 0= o c:::::J ~ ~ o c:::::J em ~c~ ~ c:::= ~ @)c~ ~@) Q 1&1 ~ ~ :) U') ... 1&1 U ~ cs: A. Q Z ti :3 ~ ... QI > o \I "E c :r: ~ III C QI ... ~ C) c .';: III .;( 1&.1 U t- U ~ t- c .0. QI c C QI :z:: .. c 0- ._ 0- -0 ... o z >- QI ~ ::::I en "'0 c a -' -a QI ... QI .. III '61 QI ~ U . . . t:' t:: t:: t:: t:: t:: ~ t:~~ , . '000--: c;aaagglllllllll.o 1IlIllIllIllNNN~~M o-OMo-COo-lI\MII\ 11\,...11\-0- 0- N #~"M- - _ M ~ Co ..!!O -0 00 ,,~ co =0 .. .. ~ Cl ~~ " " E : ;) ell:: C Cl o .. 0'- C/).c:~ UI-~ I- ;) " O.E~ z:ta co ,...' -4~ 11\- .,: E M Q> N~ "0- E E ~ Q> ~ e::.. ] -0; oJ:> ~ oX~..O Cl 0 "Cll Q> ~ )o.~Cll~O~C~" Cl C ,_ " 0 u ~~'-~1l~ C~.c: ti~~;g~Ng]~~ O'C a:! aD..2.~ II.c: ~ ~ 0._ - .. 0 _NM'ltIl)-o.....COo-_ - o QI ... QI .l:. .. .. a Q. -a QI -a ... o \I QI ... >< c .. - o ~ QI '> QI ... ... ::::I o o .. 01 C ~ o \I \I a - QI ~ .. o .. 01 C :s ... o \I \I a . - a c <t) .. 0 '" 0 0 ',t.,t. III .:: .... <:, QI a. ~ 0 'O,t. c 'i: "0 A:lo... 0 C \I "0 i III 0 QI " -a N i- 4i c \I ::::I ... 0 a u a. "ii ~ &. "ll C ;) o .. ell .: "ll c ;) ~ c " E ;) c o E C o .: {'> " .00 nO 0,15 ,""J 9.~ ~'o (> ~~ Clell Z .!: c~ o ~ ~ " ~~N ..8~g ""N ..- ell o " C f oX 'I: ;)..!! Q. OOUl .. .. ell g~i M "';: ::) ..... "ll0"ll ~ C"ii. " 0.. "ll ~ In "tJ " ;) ~ c-; II) ;0... ~ ~! . .!o-~ ...- ~ 9' <Q .00 00 0,15 ,,""J SS.)7 <!to .). ~OIJo .)"'/7 .)0.; y O,ys ~"'o 7b- 1>0, '~, -r ..~ N x '\I ~ o ~ ZL6C;l ..DD,DOPO' o 9- d: /\,/ / / ----- <l-Z 'G~ ~ t o o o o ~ o '1 C1l oi '" o o o o ~ o >- ..a >- QI -a"5.J: QI -a .. ... - c a 0 Q, E III ~ a ~ Q, _ ..2 III QI C ..J: ~ C .. ~ 0 ... >-.!!! QI ~ t] ::::I a. ::::I III ::::I ... III III 0 -- .. >-. .l:. \I QI .. QI :> .. ... .. c Z.,g:c~o o .. >- III i=.l:'E] ~ 8 'f ~ ..2 .= QI-a"O~ \I .. QI ->-~...- !:!::..a::::lQlO .... QI ... 7ii QI CII::: ... 0 ._ .. ~~E~~ -'( io! IIIV. ~ :J g . iX'" 0 ::::i Z Q ::l 7 III-o-<<i c.= "SON ..., c.= ... III VI ~ 0 v ... C)o Q ell Z )( c.=).z~~ ..., iu s: " U ~ ~ ~ g .;:)~~7 c.= en "': ~ Q ~ ~ Zz ... C)o ~S t ~ . ~co\ .. 0 C Cl In 0 =-0 QI '-a C ~ ~ ,~ '> c C QI v.2... . C 01 ~ ... C ~ 7ii .:; C .- ~ a C) e ... QI Q 110.01:: Exhibit B EY PROPERTY SURV d to proposed plan d" s compare Existing con Ihon NV'd G3:S0dOlld J 1!Q!4xtl FINAL HARDSCAPE CALCULA nONS I. TRACT C 2. PAVED ROAD TOTAL AREA FOR TRACf C I. PERMEABLE PAVER DRIVEWAY .. TOTAL AREA OF PERMEABLE PAVERs" 1,26(1 FI.J b 30% IMPERMEABLE" 971 nJ c. WILLOWCRt:EK AQUA WI( PERMEABLE PAVERS 2. HOUSE FOOTPRINT .. INCLUOt-:S; i. ItOUSE fOOTPRINT II. GARAGE iii. RAISED STOOP (I.Ali..ESJI}EJ i.... FRONT PORCIl v. PORCH STAIRS 3. EXISTING TOWER 4. DIAMOND BLOCK RETAINING WALL 5, UFTCIIAIRANDPOWERSTATlON 6, LIFT LANDING DECKS 7. BOULDER WALLS 8. 3' CIIIL TON STONE STEPS 9. 4' PATH TO THE LAKE .. TOTAL ARE^ OF PERMI::AULE "AnRs"ltl2 Frl b. ](ffl, IMPt::RMEA8LI:: -" Hl C, 4'CHIl.TONSTONESTEPS-'w>FTl 10. TWO PAVER PATIOS (LAKESIDE) .. UPPERPATlO-IIOfTJ b_ LOWERPATIO-187Fr c. lAKE SIIORE PAllO Will CONSIST OF SA"';" TOTAL HARDSCAPING AREA TOTAL HARDSCAPING % 3'.659 FT' .~ 34,206 IT' 978 FTl 5,289 I'll 92 FT' 210.,.' 27 FT' 70 FT' 418FT' 108 FT' 251 FT' 997H' 8.440 IT' 24.67% ~~--t ,/ ~ e \1'J ~ ~ o/J ftm EX!STIHG TRlU ~ ~ ~ illlllll.~ ,,1.< IIIIII!I' ~'d 'IIIIl'.:J' :;11 u Z III '" ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ z~w :5~~ "'~~ lll< C .. ~~5 ~~~ :E;~ c lll< ;!: ;1 5\:'5 ....'" ~'" ~~ ~; """ PEAMEARl F PAVER~. WlUOW CREEK, =-QUA LON. PfRMlA8l1 PAVERS [XlSnNG PORTION OF DIAMOND BLOCM WAll ~t3 Ioit~ ~ui ~ Q,) ~ ~ ~~ 75' SETBACK 4' PATH USIHQ WIUOW CREfI(. AQUA I.C* PERMEAaU PAVERS REMOVE [JUSTlNQ DiCK .....URIAI. CHRISTMAS LAKE EXISTING BOULDER WAll I ~ ~~~ :!::2 go. s::i 00 0< i=i1ililEil 02 ~~ti~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ti <( tj~~~!< aa:W ~ 7.~c..lC'Z 0- ~ 8~?;8~ ~ ~~~~~ z~ ."CE Q:iil;;~;l ~<~5:!O ~~~~~ g . l ! DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Variance Request Letter for Zoning Ordinance June 5th, 2007 Brad Nielsen, Planning Director Rick Hendel, Hendel Homes Variance for 5625 Christmas Lake Pt for bluff setback We are requesting a variance on 5625 Christmas Lake pt.; an R-1 C zoning parcel, to demolish an existing home and construct a new home. The lot is currently part of a bluff, with 70 feet of elevation change from the lake to the back of the lot. The unique topography of the lot does not allow a house to be built on the lot if was torn down. With the bluff setback rule the current house could not be put on this lot. A variance request would not set a precedent for other properties in the area due to the overall topography of the entire area. The current homeowners of 20+ years, Michael and Susan Fannon, are interested in a new home because of the costly remodeling and repair issues they will incur with the existing home. The existing home has a basement that is constantly damp and has water issues that will have to be addressed in the near future. The house was never properly waterproofed and some of the block walls are deteriorating. Existing drainage conditions need to be corrected to solve this problem. The proposed house will have poured concrete walls, waterproofing, and drain tile systems on the exterior and interior of the foundation. We are also proposing to better divert water around the house. We will also be adding a permeable paver driveway that allows water to absorb directly through the paver system, not across the driveway and into the neighbors yard. The neighbor to the South of the property has issues with run-off from the Fannon property due the inherit topography of the lot. We seeking to remedy this current situation with the permeable driveway, reducing the size of the driveway in the front(see landscaping plan), reducing the length of the driveway, and planning drainage routes. The proposed new house will also have less visual impact than the current home from the lake side. The current home has a 3-story back (lakeside) with a shed roof to the front, making it appear larger than it is from Christmas Lake. The proposed new home will have lower roof lines and earth tone colors with natural stone to blend into the natural surroundings. The current lot also is not in compliance with Shorewood's hardcover requirements. The lot has 36.1 % hardcover and a proposed new home will have 24.67%; meeting the City's zoning requirements. The calculations are based off of the landscaping plan. The house will be placed in the same location on the lot, but pulled back from the lake side, again reducing the visual impact from the lake. This new proposed location also decreases the driveway size. The current driveway is concrete (about 4570 sq ft) and causes substantial water run-off to the neighbors to the North. The proposed driveway would be 3260 sq ft, of which 30% would be hardcover (978 sq ft.). If the driveway was built in concrete (impervious) it would have the hardcover of the lot at 10,722 sq ft or 31.3% hardcover, still a decrease from the existing. This system would allow less run off and more water absorption, improving the hydraulics of the lot. The Fannon's gave away, at no cost and good will, a part of the land they owned as part of a neighborhood improvement. In 1998,4 neighbors moved property lines to eliminate driveway easements and help "cleanup" property lines. In the process, the Fannon's gave away about 10,241 square feet of land or 2560 sq ft of potential hard cover. Part of the new construction and landscaping will include a permeable paver driveway (engineering and specifications are attached). The DNR's, Molly Shodeen, strongly recommends Mark Hauri, from Yard Masters (the landscaper), as the permeable pavers installer (see attached or email). The proposed building plan is earth toned colors and natural stone walls to improving the visual impact of the lot from the lake. There are also 2 decks currently with-in the 75' setback from the lake that would be removed to bring the proposed plan into conformance Shoreline District requirements. All neighbors of the Fannon's are very much in favor of the proposed plans and would be available for comment or recommendation. Exhibit D-l APPLICANT'S REQUEST MEMO Dated 5 June 2007 Mark Hauri From: Sent: To: Subject: Molly Shodeen [Molly.Shodeen@dnr.state.mn.us] Monday, June 04,2007 12:40 PM Mark Hauri Pervious Technologies To Whom it May Concern: I have worked with Mark Hauri on several paver installations on the St. Croix River. Mark also attended a panel discussion to give an installer's perspective at a May staff meeting for DNR Waters. Installation of these systems is extremely important and Mark understands this and knows how important it is to follow manufacturer's guidelines for both installation and long-term maintenance. 1 D-2. r,;~~:'.~~~1"!:b~ff;t~"':;-\Th';1;"f~i7'=''''!I''''''''''i'''''<;'''''''O,~,-'"~~~ ~-_._..- e~' ' , . f, , I ing conventional asphalt pavement. What raises further inter- est in the project is its creator, George Bialecki, Jr., a developer who markets green building and PICP as worthwhile, not just to make money but because they might actually make differ- ence to our life support systems. This is a new sales proposi- tion that the pervious pavement industry might want to adopt. Would the world be full of George Bialecki, Juniors. We would then complete the transition from sealing the earth's surface for the past 100 years to opening it up to rainfall and respecting that fourth grade science class concept known as the water cycle. As a society, it appears we have institutional- ized the sealing process and are now beginning to reverse this trend. We are now facing de-institutionalization of the engineering, zoning and building regula- tions that perpetuated impervious pave-' ment. The movement is now toward re-institutionalizing them as expressed through a wealth of acronyms such as National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), best management practices (BMPs), low-impact develop- ment (LID), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED@) and at some point in the future, life-cycle assess ment (LCA). It took us 100 years to get tc this point of imperviousness. We expect to take less time to reverse the trend. However, some ICPI members can witness to how serious the impervious pavement mindset has become, how much it has hampered some decision- makers' ability to move to a permeable pavement mindset. The classic ex~mple D ~ ~ntinued on F Interlocking Concrete Pavement Magazine I May 201 ~rtJtU tlw EAtttJf David R. Smith Bathtub Lesson If you've been reading this magazine for any length of time, you've probably noticed quite a few cover stories and articles about permeable interlocking concrete pavement (PICP). We continue to feature stories that dem- onstrate the ability of PICP to save money by conserving real estate and in some cases reducing or eliminating storm sew- ers. The stories have also spotlighted PICP's ability to reduce stormwpter quantities and improve water quality. This issue presents Autumn Trails, a housing project with a Plep street in Illinois where permeable pavement was selected among other reasons because it was as economical as install- (. ~i:i~~S~i~~~1~r~;~~~~?!1~~~q:~~~~~~~?~~;~~7i~i~~~~-~~:'-;':~~'~~.'~-'~ I-r, . .. .. ... ....... ..... . ..... .. I \ Bathtub Lesson Continued from p. 6 little system drained away to a treatment plant where it is pro- cessed, recycled and put back into the water cycle for reuse. For a big asphalt parking lot, the water drains away into a storm sewer and doesn't enjoy refurbishment. It's just dumped untreated into a stream, river, lake, estuary, bay or ocean and those systems have to bear the brunt of treatment, and the water cycle gets short circuited in the process. The analogy to PICP is clear. All the water that falls on the pavement goes into a open-graded stone base that treats the water by reducing pollutants. It then puts some or all of the water back into the soil subgrade, back into groundwater and back into the water cycle. The PICP system is 100% pervious. Not 10%, not 50%, not 80%. 100 percent. So next time you take a bath (or shower), you can particip~te in this bathtub le~ son. And you'll be moving closer to a new mindset, one par- ticipating in the institutionalization of PICP. .:. of this difficulty pertains to the technically correct industry claim that PICP is 100% pervious. The current mindset believes that while the paver surface has a certain percentage of sur- face openings, the rest of the surface is concrete and therefore impervious. The convoluted conclusion is the surface is only as pervious as the percentage of open area. A more gener- ous, but still misguided logic might recognize that some of the rainfall that lands on the concrete units might flow into the openings. This particular mindset yields that that Plep surface perviousness is a bit higher than the actual pe~centage of open area, but not 100%. A bathtub analogy might help transform this mindset. elose the stopper in a bathtub while the water is running and the tub fills. The bathtub is 100% impervious. Open the stopper and all of the water drains out (even while the faucet is open). The surface is 100% pervious. All the water in that \ "0,4 Interlocking Concrete Pavement Magazine \ May, FINAL HARDSCAPE CALCULATIONS 1. TRACT C 2. PAVED ROAD TOTAL AREA FOR TRACT C 1. PERMEABLE PAVER DRIVEWAY a. TOT AL AREA OF PERMEABLE PAVERS = 3,260 FT2 . b. 30% IMPERMEABLE = 978 FT2 c. WILLOW CREEK AQUA LOK PERMEABLE PAVERS 2. HOUSE FOOTPRINT a. INCLUDES: 1. HOUSE FOOTPRINT ii. GARAGE iii. RAISED STOOP (LAKESIDE) iv. FRONT PORCH v. PORCH STAIRS 3. EXISTING TOWER 4. DIAMOND BLOCK RETAINING WALL 5. LIFT CHAIR AND POWER STATION 6. LIFT LANDING DECKS 7. BOULDER WALLS 8. 3' CHILTON STONE STEPS 9. 4' PATH TO THE LAKE a. TOTAL AREA OF PERMEABLE PAVERS = 182 FT2 b. 30% IMPERMEABLE = 55 FT2 c. 4' CHILTON STONE STEPS = 196 FT2 10. TWO PAVER PATIOS (LAKESIDE) a. UPPER PATIO = 810 FT2 b. LOWER PATIO = 187 FT2 c. LAKE SHORE PATIO WILL CONSIST OF SAND TOTAL HARDSCAPING AREA 34,659 FT2 - 453 FT2 34,206 FT2 978 FT2 . 5,289 FT2 92 FT2 210 FT2 27 FT2 70 FT2 418 FT2 108 FT2 251 FT2 997 FT2 8,440 FT2 TOTAL HARDSCAPING 0/0 24.670/0 'r:>-? I "'etrl ~>< 08": "'eS!. O.-? r.ntrl ~ ~ eo ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ < > --3 - o Z r.n t ~ \) 3 - ~ "t' (' ! ! 1'.IU 14~ I 11'-0" 'Tj ;;0 o Z -J m r' m < >- -J (5 Z e e ~~ EYE!IIIT El"'OOtT!-IAe!lEF't MADE I.... ~ARt"l6 'rI-lE1!>e f>1,...41'l&,ol.i'ID C'"'EC<IN.CS f1.lEI'1 FOl'I: .4CGlJlIitACT, 1'J..lE CON'tlllA::;TOflt I"IUl!IT Ci-'ec<. AU.. OETAIL6 ANO OIMEN6lON& "'NO ee: IIlEePON&leLE ~ T!olE !lAME FOI'l AU. 60VE11i:"<lNCio COOE& ANO !lUll..PlNCi F'OQACTICEa. TI-IE6'E DIllAW<NG.! COM'OOiI'1 TO GENE/lltALLT .4GCEPl'E) e..ILOIi'l6 l"!It4CTlCE&' l-IOW!YEIII alATE AND LO:;Al.. COOEa VAllI.,. WJOELY. TI-lE C1!61U"le"". Al!G COE616N aEIl!VICIt &I-lAU.. NOT BE Io€LD LIA!lL.l! I"O!I! AN.T E'Cl1lll0l'lt6. AU. CQN6T11lUCTlOI'l 6l-lAU.. COI'1f"LT lIIIno AU. APPUCA!l~ 6TA""E "l,HO L.OC.4L COOE6. 00 NOT 6CAL...E OOl!AJJ'r<<i6.l.l61! OI'lI.Y TwE "'''''INtED OlMo.l!oI~. \o'ERlI'Y \IJITW T\.IE W<NOOIIJ 1"'!.AN..F4CTUIQ;E AU... ~~ &IZE& ,1,"10 ......WCAeU: E~RE6& l'iEGIJ''''Er'''ENT6. AU. DI"'~~ "a.!IIIE T~EI'< FIOl:OMITO l'il0lJ06l.< &lU06 Of' A O/I"lE>l&lO"< Of' EI'tWEJI< Sill" (2)<. AlU061. )~. t2><<l &ll.O&J OR TO TWE OOT&IDE Of' N~l'. CO"'lT!'it,oll,CTOR &IolAU. VERIFY AU. l"'EC>aNlCAl.. ~ !l..I!:C"IIl'CAL !'itEOUlllleMENT& A.I'>lO CLl:AiIlA"~e&, CO"l~ACt""" &olAU. VEl'it;F,.. .tJ..l. F"-OOI'l ANO 1Il00l" ~l:AIIlIN6 L.OCATIONfl. COf'(TIllACTOfIi &ol.tJ..l. "'E!'itI"'T ALL eEAI"I AND ~EAOE'" &lle& FOOl! CODE COMPLIANCE. In ~ <. ~ t~ FANNON RESIDENCE tv1 -cOPYRJ<iUf Non;.- OA CO .' UOQJZUJE> OC oN cU F-~ t:.t:. ALL I2.l<;-UT" RJ;.=VI:D <-i ~Ifl f\~ f.4;.Yt..cl.~~\I'U.. ij s:z. ~" D MEYER DESIC;N SERVICE T..~__~__._-""_"" TELE, (888) 251 - 3133 _'T.'O<;~_""""_""~ Ifl" ~-:< r____.......""~............_....._ 1~4.:i..~4T ~t;Dt.T... ......,T""~T......._r.__.. U-p FAX, (651) "1 - 0411 ......-ul____~~_r_.. .6 -.......T""'..........._....TT...."""';CO> '......T__TT..............T.T_t.... ~..__~.,T...O'__ Permeable Pavement Systems in Shoreland Areas, A Guidance to Local Governmental Units DNR Waters, St. Paul, Minnesota September 10, 2003 Background The impact of impervious surfaces upon public waters has always been a concern of the statewide Shoreland Management Program. When the statewide standards were revised in 1989, the established limit of 30% impervious for shore land lots was reduced to 25%. The reason behind this reduction was explained in the Statement and Need of Reasonableness (SONAR) for the rules. The SONAR noted that most development rarely exceeds 30% and that 25% was still a "large percentage." "This is needed to prevent the excessive amount of runoff that will be generated during a rainstorm by an enlarged impervious area. Such excessive runoff will cause erosion and transport of pollutants to public waters thereby degrading water quality." Since then, much more has been learned about the impacts of impervious cover on aquatic systems. In March, 2003, the Center for Watershed Protection issued a report that summarized the results of 225 studies involving the use of 26 different stream indicators. These verified earlier studies that showed that the effects of increasing impervious cover on a healthy stream begin to be seen when the impervious cover exceeds 10%. Indicators show stressed conditions for streams having impervious watershed cover between 10 and 25%. Beyond 25%, severe degradation takes place. The report cautioned that these data have not yet been validated for non-stream conditions. However, some of the referenced studies involved lakes and drinking water reservoirs. These noted that phosphorus export to a water body increases steadily as the percent of impervious cover increases. Aggressive watershed protection strategies were recommended for reservoirs having 10 - 25 % impervious cover. Data indicate that reservoirs having over 25% impervious cover cannot sustain safe drinking water supplies. While the indicators are useful in estimating trends and cumulative impacts, the report cautioned that they should not be used empirically. In general, the rule of thumb applies: the greater the percent of impervious surface, the greater the impact to water quality and natural systems. Other parameters like percent of forest cover or natural vegetation appear to become more important when the percentage of impervious cover is low. When it is high, the impacts from stormwater over-ride other factors. rhe report suggests that non-:native vegetation like turf can be included with impervious surfaces when analyzing impacts to urban streams. Stormwater ponds, while effective at removing pollutants, were observed to have little effect in improving stream biodiversity. In fact, the study cautioned that no community has yet demonstrated that it can achieve water quality standards in an urban watershed that exceeds 25% impervious cover. "Managers should be extremely cautious in setting high expectations for how much watershed treatment can mitigate impervious cover. .. Both watershed research techniques and practice implementations need to be greatly improved (Tom Schueler. 2003. Impacts of Impervious Cover on Aquatic Systems. Center for Watershed Protection. p.21)." Exhibit F-l DNR GUIDANCE PAPER Dated 10 Sept. 2003 Workshop on Porous Pavement Surfacing Systems, November, 2002 DNR Waters field staff involved with shoreland management met on May 16,2002, with Peder Otterson, Shoreland Hydrologist, and Jay Michels, Minnesota Erosion Control Association (MECA), to discuss the use of permeable pavement systems in shoreland management. Various concerns were discussed and recommendations made. One recommendation was that MECA sponsor a workshop of skilled researchers who could address the questions being raised by field staff and local governmental units. The workshop took place November 22,2002, as described below. Bruce Ferguson, an authority on stormwater management from the University of Georgia, noted that roads and parking surfaces cover approximately twice the area of their associated, buildings and represent a good 50% of a built up urban area. For this reason alone, it is important that everyone involved in land development take seriously the emerging technologies of porous pavement systems. However, it must always begin with proper site analysis and matching the right system in the right place. He noted that porous pavement should not be used over drainfields, on steep slopes or near basements or water-supply wells. The thickness of the subbase largely determines the surface's load-bearing capability. The thickne.ss can also be used to increase storage of infiltrating stormwater where underlying soils have limited percolation. For safety, some construct the subbase to the frost depth. However, Ferguson noted that for practical protection 0.5 frost depth should suffice since the open voids allow for some expansion during freeze/thaw and the system is, to a degree, self-insulating. William James provided details of the studies he has made using cement pavers in the laboratory and field at the University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada. His studies show the positive effects such pavers can have over impervious pavement in reducing the impacts of temperature, pH and turbidity of the stormwater runoff. He found little problem with frost heave or ground water contamination. The subbase acts to retard and break down pollutants in much the same way as natural soils. Clogging with fine material seemed limited to just the upper surface ofthe spaces between the pavers. Use of a power washer to clean clogged surfaces proved superior to brush/vacuum which just skimmed the surface and did not remove the clogged layer. Both presenters stressed that surface drainage should be sloped away from the porous pavement areas to reduce the amount of clogging. This led to a number of questions concerning street sanding, routine maintenance, stormwater retention during early spring, etc. Both presenters stressed that with a properly designed and installed permeable pavement system, it should not be necessary to sand or salt the roadway since meltwater is absorbed into the pavement. A member of the audience noted that he had seen proof of this in local installations where there was observable retention of stormwater and resultant dry surface conditions during winter months. Ferguson indicated that the time is coming when porous concrete itself may provide a relatively low cost alternative to standard paved surfaces once the issue of freeze/thaw has been resolved. 2 2- f..z Recommendations on the Use of Permeable Pavement Systems in Shoreland Areas Often, the term "porous" and "permeable" are used interchangeably. Technically, porosity refers to the amount of connected open spaces a material has while permeability is a measurement of the rate at which water is able to pass through it. The surface of a paving stone is often impermeable while the large pore spaces between stones allow for water to flow through. The pavement surface may have high porosity (lots of pores or holes), but the system may still be relatively impermeable if the subbase is not properly designed and constructed. Rather than focusing on either the surface of the material or the subbase, it is better to consider the full design and function of the entire system. Finally, although a permeable pavement system can indeed be designed and installed to meet any given stormwater requirement, the system itself can never replace the many benefits that native soils and vegetation provide in shoreland areas: such things like habitat, nutrient uptake, soil and pollutant retention, vegetative screening, and aesthetics. DNR Waters recommends that local governments include in their zoning ordinances a definition for impervious surfaces. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's new stormwater management rules define "impervious surface" to be: "Impervious surface" means a constlUcted hard surface that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil and causes water to lUn off the surface in greater quantities and at an increased rate of flow than prior to development. Examples include rooftops, sidewalks, patios, driveways, parking lots, storage areas, and concrete, asphalt or gravel roads," A similar definition can be found in the Blue Earth County, MN, Shoreland Ordinance: Impervious Surface. The surface area of a lot which has been physically altered in a maImer which impacts the ability of the lot to percolate water into the ground, causing lUnoff. Impervious surfaces include rooftops of buildings, blacktopped or concrete driveways and patios, and areas of landscaping underlain with plastic or other impermeable liners. If taken as part of the overall site design and used as part of a larger stormwater management plan, permeable pavement systems can compensate for some of the impacts that other impervious surfaces have on a lot. However, they do not take the place of native vegetation and undisturbed soils, especially, in the Shore Impact Zone, that area which is closest to the shore and extends to halfthe setback of the structures. DNR Waters recommends the following as a reasonable approach for local governments to follow on the use of emergent technologies like permeable pavement systems in shoreland areas until such time as greater research, experience and testing can answer the questions raised. Based on the information provided by the Center for Water Protection referenced earlier, it appears that such use may be more beneficial when applied to areas of new development at:ld as part of an integrated stormwater management plan, related stormwater management ordinance or NPDES, Phase II permit. On degraded sites where 25% impervious is already exceeded, the retrofitting of permeable pavement systems may be of lesser value. Exercise caution in using infiltration techniques in areas of ground water sensitivity like wellhead protection zones or sites of known surface contaminants. 3 J F-~ 1. Areas of New Development. Strict adherence to shoreland standards. Where possible, encourage limiting percent of impervious cover to below 10%. No credit for permeable pavement systems unless included in a comprehensive stormwater management plan that emphasizes infiltration and on site retention of stormwater through a combination of methods including buffer strips, swales, rainwater gardens and other low impact development methods. This assumes LGU oversight of design, construction and future maintenance. 2. Areas of Redevelopment. Where existing percent impervious varies between 10 and 25%, LGUs are encouraged to adopt comprehensive stormwater management controls as described above, giving credit for those that help to reduce percent impervious. LGUs should strive to limit overall percent impervious to under 25%, as required in shoreland management rules. For lots exceeding 25%, redevelopment must reduce impervious surfaces to 25% or less. Otherwise, a variance is required. 3. Redevelopment or enlargement of nonconforming structures on lots exceeding 25% impervious. Under Minnesota Statutes, the required variance is to be acted upon by the local Board of Adjustment according to standards established in statute, rule and local ordinance. Should the Board decide to grant a variance involving the use of permeable pavement systems, DNR recommends consideration of the following conditions to the variance: a. No permeable pavement system in Bluff Impact Zone or Shore Impact Zone (area to be maintained or restored to natural vegetative buffer); b. Where native vegetation is lacking in the above zones, additional vegetation may be required in order to enhance buffer and screening. c. The base of the installed system (subbase) must be above the established ground water table (DNR recommends three feet of separation similar to onsite sewage treatment systems to ensure soil absorption and enhanced retention of stormwater); d. System to be designed and certified by a registered engineer or landscape architect and installed by someone qualified in the particular system used; , e. System should be set back from structures having basements, septic system leach fields, steep slopes and wells; f. The design should allow for the infiltration of the first inch of any storm. If stormwater retention is a goal, DNR recommends that the design meet the two year 24 hour storm (approximately 2.5 inches); g. The site should be inspected during construction for compliance. h. The designer must include maintenance instructions to the property owner along with a maintenance schedule with copy to the Zoning Administrator or Building Inspector to be filed along with the permit. 1. When possible, the system should be designed so that it can be periodically monitored to ensure it continues to work as planned. J. System must be compatible with local stormwater management plans, ordinances, and NPDES Phase II stormwater permits, where required. 4 if t..4 Appendix Porous Pavement Surfacing Systems: Will they Work in Northern Climates? (Notes and Comments from the November 22,2002, Workshop) Presentations by the Two Principle Speakers: Bruce Ferguson, University of Georgia: A Global Perspective on Porous Pavements. "Porous pavement is perhaps the greatest invention since the automobile!" Why, because roads and parking spaces cover roughly twice the area of their associated buildings and represent a good 50% of the built up area. They affect downstream water quality and temperature and even the health of urban trees. Porous pavement has the potential to restore urban watersheds. Despite the many misgivings (water weakens pavement, won't work in northern climes, etc.), the topic is too important to simply discredit. Ferguson has examined over 300 systems in North America and concluded there is not a simple "yes" or "no" to the question. Porous pavement got off to a bad start around 1970 when EP A began pushing porous asphalt on R&D projects. This was a big flop since asphalt is by its nature self-clogging. Porous concrete works much better-especially, if it is made of single size aggregate (creates a medium with roughly 20% voids). This could easily be used for off-highway use and should cost about the same as regular concrete. Like a forest soil, it has its own storage capacity and retention and develops its own micro-ecosystem (moist, aerated bacteria) that has been shown capable of biodegrading oil products through a 12 inch layer. The problem lies in repeated freeze/thaw cycles that can reduce the pavement to powder over time. Ferguson believes this can be resolved within the next two years. Some basic maintenance principles are to avoid sanding, but use angular, graded aggregate and keep drainage from soil offthe pavement (as it can introduce fines). For strength, a minimum base course 0 f six inches is required. Corps of Engineers has developed nationwide curves on frost depth, etc., based on the number of freezing days at a site-e.g. a 10 year frost depth based on 2500 freezing days is 80 inches. For complete protection, one should build the sub-grade to the frost depth. However, for practical protection, 0.5 frost depth is generally used. Open voids allow some expansion during freezing and the ponded water within the system is, to a degree, self-insulating. Use graded material to avoid differential heaving (frost boils). End result of using porous systems is cleaner water, longer lived trees, cooling (evapotranspiration), quieter streets, safer driving, beauty, reduced costs, and conformance to development regulations for stormwater management. It should be designed to drain away from the edges in all directions. It should not be used over drain fields, where there are leachable toxins, on steep slopes, near basements (20 feet) or water-supply wells. l) f..? Some myths are that they don't work over clay, require compacted subgrades, won't work in freezing climes, get clogged and fail quickly, are costly and "there is no experience of using them in our area." All ofthese myths can be debunked through proper design, construction and attention to site specific conditions. As familiarity and confidence with their use increases, the cost should also come down. Costs also come down when one includes the pavement as part of the entire drainage system (i.e. in place of some of the pipe and pondage that otherwise might be required). Q/A: How long can such a system be expected to work without clogging? Generally, the greatest decline is in the first e - 8 years and can be avoided by designing it right in the first place to control sedimentation and clogging of the subgrade. What about plowing and sanding? By using a roller on the plow or setting the blade one inch above the surface, there should be no problem. "And don't you dare sand!" (It shouldn't be necessary to sand if designed properly.) What about spring snow melt? Don't you still need to design ponding for 100 vr event if part of an integrated design? Not completely. Jay Riggs noted that even in winter there is quite a bit of infiltration over porous pavement he has seen. Construction sequencing?-i.e. the problem of building roads first and then clogging them up with a lot of sediment. Do the roads last or at least the final treatment. William James; University of Guelph: Design and Testing of Interlocking Concrete Block Pavement. Porous pavement is good at reducing three main concerns from runoff: temperature, pH and turbidity. Traditional pond design is costly (earth moving), has a high m'l-intenance cost, is aesthetically challenging and potentially dangerous. Porous pavement can provide flood control without ponds, water quality and temperature control, and help preserve aquatic ecology. Thermal pollution or "thermal enrichment" is directly proportional to a site's % impervious. Ecostone has approx. 12% voids and should not be put next to basements. It helps to aerate the underlying soil. Clogging . occurs only in the top crust. Sand is itself dispersed by traffic in the driving lanes and has not been a problem at his test sites. Curbs are bad Gust a guide for plows) and should not be used. Geotextiles provide a good substrate for microbes. The rough surfaces of the stone reduce ice problems. Pea gravel about ~ inch in diameter is good for the fill and substrate. Fine particles do penetrate, but are ultimately snagged. Vegetation in the cells is not a problem and helps to keep fines out. A power washer is better than a brush/vacuum for cleaning cells (brush just skimmed the crust). Frost heave has not been . a problem. Nor has ground water contamination (filtered by substrate). Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) provides design overkill for questions of water quality and quantity. One can install 800 square feet/hour by hand; 1200 square feet, mechanical. . 2 t., F-l., Comments by DNR Staff who attended the Workshop Fifteen DNR Waters staff attended the workshop; eleven provided written comments. Many respondents expressed skepticism. However, others noted that unless we encourage some use, it is not likely we will ever have much to review to see how well they do perform here. Here are some representative samples of the comments: I'm still skeptical. Nothing was presented that showed alternative paving systems are a suitable substitute for a vegetated surface for things like thermal buffering, habitat for insects and other small critters, sediment entrapment. The visual impact, especially in the shore impact zone, could be significant. Unless we encourage some installation, we probably won't see much put in and, therefore, will have few opportunities to evaluate and improve them. For trout streams that are dependent on surface water (i.e. most of them in NE Minnesota), infiltration is important if stream temperatures are to be protected from development. We should promote systems that enhance infiltration where it makes sense to do so and there is some capacity to monitor the results. Porous pavement will never replace fish and wildlife habitat. Its use should be limited, especially, in the shore impact zone. Such systems would require close attention to onsite conditions, design, installation and maintenance. It is not a natural system where there is good interaction among plants, soil, air and water. Even if they have the expertise; most local staff lack the time needed to ensure that systems are properly designed, installed and monitored. Even if such systems are capable of mimicking natural soils and vegetation in their retention and treatment of surface water, they lack the aesthetic appeal of a natural shoreline and provide nothing to help screen structures. We need to encourage these kinds of systems so we can learn about how they work here in Minnesota. If they were to be treated as permeable under shoreland rules, their experimental nature would still require the need for certain maintenance and monitoring conditions. In addition, the landowner should be required to do something extra on their property (enhance a natural buffer strip with native vegetation instead of sod, etc.) as an "insurance policy. " Concerned about the maintenance required-both public and private. In general, public works departments are poorly funded and poor at maintaining what they already have. 3 1 F-1 Conclusion In examining both the pros and the cons to the use of permeable pavement systems in shoreland areas, it is worth noting the purpose for which the shoreland rules were written: To manage the effects of shoreland and water surface crowding, to prevent pollution of surface and ground waters of the state, to provide ample space on lots for sewage treatment systems,. to minimize flood damages, to maintain property values, to maintain historic values of significant historic sites, and to maintain natural characteristics of shorelands and adjacent water areas, shoreland controls must regulate lot sizes, placement of structures, and alterations of shore land areas. (Minnesota Rules 6120.3300, Subp. 1). Because of the inter-related values that shoreland management addresses, one should proceed cautiously with any new technology, no matter how promising, that seeks to address certain discrete elements addressed in shoreland management. For general purposes in shoreland management, permeable pavers should only be treated as truly permeable when they are part of a local government's comprehensive stormwater management program where it is but one of many tools (rainwater gardens, swales, preservation of natural vegetation, buffer strips, low impact development, etc.) designed to enhance infiltration and reduce surface runoff from developed areas into public waters. One way to accomplish this is through the flexibility provisions of the rules by any local government having the interest and resources tl1at are clearly required if such systems are to be effectively used as both manufacturers and researchers intend for them. For the vast majority oflocal governments who lack the capacity to effectively apply and oversee low impact design standards in stormwater management, permeable pavers may be allowed, but there should be no credit for their use in meeting the 25% impervious limitation. Instead, where development on a site exceeds 25% impervious and a variance is requested, the Board of Adjustment may, on a case-by-case basis, consider the use of permeable pavers provided there is sufficient guidance on their design, installation and maintenance. Other conditions a LGU should consider in its variance approval would be provisions to enhance or widen the use of natural vegetation within a buffer strip and no use of pavers within the Shore and Bluff Impact Zones. Peder Otterson DNR Waters 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155-4032 Tel. 651-297 -2405 4 9 F#f, " CITY OF ) SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128. www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commision Brad Nielsen, Director of Planning Larry Brown, P.E., Director of Public Works 1 FROM: James Landini, P.E., City Engineer Sf J- July 12, 2007 DATE: RE: Permeable Pavement 5625 Christmas Lake Point '- Mr. Hendel from Hendel Homes submitted information for review with respect to a ~ variance request. I will offer some comments on permeable pavers. 1. Permeable Pavers do allow some infiltration of surface water. 2. Permeable Pavers will require annual maintenance to maintain permeability. 3. Permeable Pavers system should be designed by licensed Engineers. 4. Existing site topography warrants a structural investigation. Some Minnesota challenges for Permeable Pavers include frost heave, frozen pore space, and clogging of pore space. All of these challenges can be minimized with adequate preparation and maintenance. The submitted typical section of 6" base and bedding shown on Willow Creek Aqua- Loc Permeable Concrete Paving Stones brochure does not appear adequate in depth to address frost heave or offer much stormwater storage. It would be suggested to have an average of3' of base and bedding to minimize frost heave and provide storage. This is the amount of rock under the Ramsey Metro Washington Watershed districts permeable bituminous parking lot. I will be at the Planning Commission to provide technical assistance on July 17, 2007. 5625 Christmas Lake Rd 7/12/2007 .... , t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ... Recommendations Staff recommends the Permeable Paver be approved contingent upon: 1. Permeable Pavers be installed at the end of the construction project to minimize subsurface compaction and pore space clogging. 2. Permeable Pavers system be engineered to maintain structural strength due to site topography and ensure adequate stormwater storage capacity. 3. Permeable Pavers system be installed by qualified contractors and be inspected by Design Engineer to ensure quality control. 4. Permeable Pavers system maintenance plan be developed and followed. 5625 Christmas Lake Rd 7/12/2007 '-- ~ CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us " MEMORANDUM TO: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Nonconforming Accessory Structures, Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: \ Brad Nielsen DATE: 14 June 2007 RE: Scott, Gregory and Lorraine - Nonconforming Boathouse FILE NO.: 405 (07.06) BACKGROUND Gregory and Lorraine Scott own the property at 28100 Woodside Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). In 2003 they added on to their existing garage (see Exhibit B, attached), modifying the floor plan so that they did not exceed 1200 square feet of floor area. In so doing, they avoided having to obtain a conditional use permit that may have necessitated alteration or removal of their existing boathouse near the lake. They partitioned off a portion of the garage, technically making it a portion of it part of the house. Since then Shorewood has amended its zoning regulations, providing for the preservation certain nonconforming structures that have historical, architectural, or cultural significance. The Scotts believe their boathouse is consistent with the criteria for keeping such structures. The City's first step in amending its zoning regulations was to adopt ap amendment to the Comprehensive Plan (Exhibit C), setting forth its intention to recognize and preserve special structures in Shorewood. An amendment to the Zoning Code (Exhibit D) was then adopted, providing conditions under which older, nonconforming structures would not have to be corrected to comply with current standards. Finally, criteria were adopted (Exhibit E), patterned after National Park Service standards for historic designation, to guide City officials in the review of applications. ,. ~ . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER .., #88., Memorandum Re: Scott C.U.P. 14 June 2007 The applicants' case is well laid out in their request letter (Exhibit F), dated 5 June 2007 and in the supporting documents attached as Exhibits G and H. ISSUES AND ANALYSIS Following is how the applicants' request complies with Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4)(c): 1. City staff has researched old aerial photos trying to verify the existence of the structure prior to 1956. Due to the small scale of available photos and the presence of vegetation in the vicinity, the photos were not much help. Nevertheless, the applicants have provided good evidence that the boathouse was built at around the same time as the home on the property - 1910. An article in Mpls. St. Paul magazine references 1910 and a real estate sales brochure from the 1930's indicate that the boathouse qualifies for the age component of the Code. 2. While the structure has not been inspected by the Building Official as of this writing, preliminary observation of the building in question suggests it is in very good condition. The Scotts have taken great care to restore and maintain the structure. 3. The structure no doubt qualifies under more than one of the criteria set forth in Exhibit E. rfnothing else, the boathouse's notoriety as a local Lake Minnetonka landmark should satisfy the criteria. - 4. rf the structure is found to have satisfied the criteria, a brief development agreement should be drafted, setting forth the applicants' right to keep the boathouse and their responsibility to maintain it in good condition. Repairs or alterations to the structure should be consistent with its current style, character and materials. RECOMMENDATION It is worth noting that the building in question was the catalyst for the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt regulations favoring historically and or architecturally significant accessory structures. As the first case to be considered under the new rules, the applicants have done a good job demonstrating that the boathouse is consistent with the City's intent and with its current Code requirements. Staff should be directed to draft a development agreement, pursuant to paragraph 4. in the preceding section. The agreement should be recorded with Hennepin County. Cc: Craig Dawson Tim Keane Gregory and Lorraine Scott -2- * l'b~ * !!6 ~ I- II N A o 250 SOO . * 1,000 . Feet 1 * . .~l( * * * Smithtown Bay Lake Minnetonka , \ ED~ /I I:f-J -,~~ \D ~ JI I / \ ~ --\\:::::. '. · Subject /!ltw1 ~V -..-. \ \ .c::: . · () · '. ~!~ ~ Property /I I I \ \ ~ ~ ~ \2 ) - ~ \~~ ,\~ · v. · 'II j ~ ~ ~ \ -i II "'s ~ \ ---I * * 09 '[ _ L *** i ~n~\ < ~' ~ ~ V'\\\ll - I "\V I I. * * ~\)f --.LJ \ .':...:'. ~ ~I II'M1 ** * ~ .I~ L/f1 * ~~ ~\~ * * * * * .~~ \ ~....... ~~"r\\12 ~ ~, -r---- * * * ~ ~ - - - "^' AFTON RD ootrl .....x --3::J'" ~& t"" ~. 0> (":) > --3 ..... o z * ~ ~~ * >.to. City of Victoria, Carver County border -. --- (.) \ I "< /- --- :it U) o~ >- \J)~~ SX a s.S: :s ~ tj) -.\l. \f) ~ \1), ~ ,~-~~ D _)Ig < 1\)' .~ ~ o &\ ~) 3 ~ \{'j ~ I LL) K \J) -- '-D UJ ~ \ )- ~ ~ ~ -- --) ~~~ ~ --- -- . -\ I B '-:.- \)() . : t'- ..... - - -.--.-- - -~/ .-------/ / - --- ...~ -- ~..../' \\\ ~ , I /cP : I "<~,,\, ~ 1 ...-,3 I ::;..")j , ... \ CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SHOREWOOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS IT RELATES TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION WHEREAS, Shorewood's current zoning regulations require that nonconforming accessory structures be brought into compliance with current standards in order to obtain certain zoning approvals; and WHEREAS, it is recognized that there are structures in Shorewood with historic, architectural, or cultural value that are worthy of preservation; and WHEREAS, after considerable study and discussion, the Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood has recommended that the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan be amended to address the preservation of certain nonconforming accessory structures; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting of 16 January 2007, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider comments by the public regarding the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's recommendations were considered by the City Council at its regular meeting of22 January 2007; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood that the Historic Preservation section of the Land Use Chapter of the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 22nd day of January 2007. CHRISTINE LIZEE, MAYOR ATTEST: CRAIG W. DAWSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK Exhibit C - I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT " " Historic Preservation There exist buildings, structures, sites and areas that are reminders of past eras, events and persons important in local, state and national history. There are also places which provide significant examples of architectural styles of the past, or which provide present and future generations examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived and worked. Shorewood recognizes these buildings and places as assets that can help to promote community pride and create a sense of community. It is not the City's intent to regulate or restrict the use or development of properties of historic, architectural or cultural value. Rather, it is in the interest of the community to evaluate tools and implement policies that encourage property owners to protect and preserve these buildings and places. In this regard, the City should create and maintain an inventory or data base of potentially historical, architectural or culturally significant structures. A program of physically identifying these sites should be established to enhance awareness of the locations and provide educational information regarding these places of interest. In Shorewood, these reminders of the past often exist as lesser structures that were accessory to some long-gone farm or estate. Since most of them were built before zoning regulations ever existed, they seldom comply with current development standards. To minimize conflicts between current standards and the desire to preserve historic/significant structures, Shorewood's development regulations should be amended to allow for the preservation of those found to be significant. Strict criteria should be established that address the age of the structure - recognizing that age alone does not make a building worthy of preservation, structure condition, and its historic, architectural or cultural value. Exceptions to current standards should be subject to heightened scrutiny. A special ad hoc committee under the Planning Commission should be created to review and comment on cases where exceptions to current standards are requested. When exceptions are granted, it shall be incumbent on the property owner to maintain the structure in very good condition. Exhibit A ') ... E:..'i. C. - 2. CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. 433 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SHOREWOOD ZONING CODE AS IT PERTAINS TO THE REGULATION OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Section 1. City Code Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4)(c) is hereby amended to read: "(c) In evaluating the conditional use permit, the city shall take in to consideration the location of existing and proposed structures, site drainage and landscaping." Section 2. City Code Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(:D is hereby amended to include! t(~ As a condition of approval of the conditional use permit, existing nonconforming hccessory structures located on the property shall be removed or brought int6 ~onformance with this code. Under very special circumstances, a nonconfo~ing hccessor): structure may be allowed to remain nonconforminKRrovided thatr m The applicant can demonstrate that the structure was constructed prior to 2 Aug~ It 956. Evidence of date of construction may include, but is not limited tor- property surveys, assessor's information, aerial photographs or affidavits 'frOirt Rersons who lived on or near the RroRerty on or before 2 August 1956! rill The structure must be in sound structural condition with respect to roof, walls and foundation. If the structure requires fifty percent or more replacement, th~ building must be removed or brought into conformity with this Code. The extent bf reRlacement reguired shall be determined by the Building Official' (iii) The applicant can demonstrate that the structure has historic, architecturalOll tultural value. Specifically, the structure shall meet one or more criterir ~stablished by the City and patterned after the National Park Service standards ~ historic designation. The historic, architectural or cultural value of the structure ~hall be subject to review and comment by a special ad hoc committee, consisti~ bf one member of the Planning Commission, City Council and Park Commission' riv)_ The owner of the property shall enter into a development agreement with the City! the purpose of which is to set forth what, if any, repairs may be necessary to pla~ ~he structure in good condition. The agreement shall be recorded against thJ ~roperty to ensure that the structure is kept in good condition. Repairs to th~ '-- ~tructure shall be consistent with the original architectural style and materials of ~he structure. Nothing in this section shall prevent the owner from bringing thE ~cture into conformance with this Cod~or removing it from the RroRert~ Section 3. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the Official Newspaper of the City of Shore wood. Exhibit D ZONING CODE AMENDMENT / / // / CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANN'~.~ COMMISSION MEETING 15 May 2007 Page 4 of 5 one or more criteria established by the City, criteria that were patterned after the National Park Service standards for historic designation. Nielsen stated Staff had reviewed a number of preservation codes and proposed a list of preservation criteria. Staff recommended that in addition to the age and condition requirements set forth in the Code, the ad hoc committee would evaluate candidate structures for preservation based on the condition that they would meet one or more of the following criteria. 1. The character, interest or value of the structure is part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the community; 2. The structure is the location of a significant local, county, state or national event; 3. The structure identifies with a person or persons significantly contributing to the local, county, state or national history; 4. The structure embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style valuable for the study of a period, type, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials; , 5. The structure was the work of an architect, landscape architect, or master builder whose work has influenced development in the county, state or nation; 6. The structure is an example of #ther architectural or structural innovation; 7. The proposed structure has archaeological significance; 8. The structure relat 0 other distinctive structures or sites which would also be determined to of historic significance; and 9. The structure must have been built prior to 2 August 1956; however, age alone does not necessarily confer a special historical, architectural or cultural significance, value or interest. In response to a question from Chair Schmitt, Director Nielsen stated the criteria would be adopted into a policy; they would not be included in the Code. It was easier to amend a policy than the Code. In response to a question from Commissioner Geng, Director Nielsen stated that when researching what other cities had done, two cities had included their preservation criteria in their city code and one city had adopted it in a policy. Nielsen stated it was possible to incorporate the policy into the Code after the policy had been in effect for a while and it was proven to be effective. Commissioner Gniffke questioned the requirement in the Code amendment that a nonconforming accessory structure had to have been built before 2 August 1956 if it was to be considered for preservation. Director Nielsen explained the City's Code went into effect on 2 August 1956; therefore, any building constructed prior to that date would have been a legal structure. PC questioned if the Code should be amended to also include a specific age that a structure could be to be considered for preservation (e.g. a minimum of 50 years old); 30 years from now it may be appropriate to Exhibit E PRESERVATION CRITERIA To the City of Shorewood, June 5, 2007 The property known as "Pagoda House" at 28100 Woodside Rd., with its unique 3-story boathouse was designed and built for the Robbins family. Harry and Helena Robbins went to Japan on their honeymoon and fell in love with the culture and style of the orient. Upon returning they had "Pagoda House" and its boathouse built in 1910. Architecturally the boathouse is a unique structure. The main body is brick and reinforced poured concrete, overlaid with stucco. The top floor is a screened porch accessible from a bridge on the high bank. The second floor and lower level are served by a lovely Oriental lattice pattern staircase that goes from the top to the bottom of the structure. The second floor is a large family room with oak woodwork, vaulted ceiling, and large lake rock stone fireplace. It originally served Mr. Robbins as his summer office. Over the years the pagoda boathouse has been the most recognizable navigation point on the Upper Lake. Almost every conversation about directions on Smithtown Bay starts with "You know the pagoda boathouse? Well, we are just down from it..." It is part of the lives of all the people who grew up on the lake. In addition, this boathouse is a landmark within the whole metropolitan area. It was featured on the cover of Mpls St Paul Magazine, and was described as "the most spectacular boathouse on the lake." It has also been the subject of a story on the 6 and 10 pm local television news. In today's world, where so much of Lake Minnetonka's history and unique architectural heritage have been thoughtlessly swept away to make room for the next McMansion, this boathouse stands as a reminder that some good, beautiful things endure, and will be here for future generations to marvel at. This boathouse is truly a gift to the lake. As far as the current owners, the Scotts, it is important that the boathouse no longer be considered a non-conforming use. They wish to remove a wall in their garage. Because the boathouse currently has the non-conforming status the Scotts can never have more than 1200 sf of utility space even though they qualify for more by the amount of land, setbacks, and living space. They have a 24' x 47' garage that had to be built with 2/3 of the space arranged as living space to qualify as a legal addition. They wish to be able to utilize the whole space for utility space. It would make the total utility space approximately 1900 sf. Ordinarily this would present no problem, but current definitions for boathouses don't allow for this variance. Addressing this issue will allow the Scotts to remove the wall in the garage that sets aside the living space that had to be defined to build the structure. Thank you for your consideration, Gregory and Lorraine Scott Exhi bit F APPLICANT'S REQUEST LETTER Dated 5 June 07 Exhibit G MPLS-ST PAUL MAGAZINE EXCERPT ";' The Leg e- n d a r y Boathouses Lake o f 'Mlnnetonka All aboard for a tour of nine little gems. " By Bette Hammel Photography by Karen Melvin A certain air of mystique hangs over the boundless blue waters of Lake Minnetonka. Famous not just for its size (125 miles of shoreline) and incredible number of bays, peninsulas, and islands, the big lake also carries many colorful legends of the past. The 1880s were Minneton- ka's glory days when steamboats carried tourists to the lake's fancy resort hotels. Though the era is long gone, Twin Cities boaters s'till flock to its waters every summer. But they come not just for adventure-the shoreline's variant architecture has become a major attraction. Today, houses of every size, shape, and vintage, fr~m glamorous new manor homes and large historic estates to comfortable old houses and cozy cottages, dot Minneton- ka's shores on both the lower and upper lake. Not much remains of the past, but everyone who built a house of any size in the early years put in a dock and boathouse right on the shore. Many of the charming little boathouses re- main scattered around the lake today, lending an air of en- chantment to the shoreline. (In the early 1970s, local cities around the lake began passing setback regulations pro- hibiting building anything close to the shore unless it's built within an old structure's footprint.) . ,At first, most boathouses were used for storing boating necessities or as changing rooms close to a beach. Some contained a special pump' used to pump water from the, lake onto the owner's lawns and gardens, a custom that continues today. Many, called wellhouses, were designed close to the wa- terline so the owner could drive a boat right up onto tracks into the boathouse. (With lake water levels varying from year to year, the technique was not very dependable.) As the lake became more and more congested, homeowners found their little boathouses a great refuge, a place for nestling in and en- joying the lake's vistas. Lakeside residents, those lucky enough to 86 JUNE 2005 MPlS.ST.PAUl inherit a boathouse on their property, chuckle when asked about the architeCtural style of their particular boathouse. "It's just a little cabin," they say. 'Actually, there's quite a range of styles: Swiss chalet, Japanese tea- house, English cottage, Yankee clipper, European classic, Greek Revival, American Victorian, and, of course, Min- nesota summer cabin. On the upper lake's Smith town Bay stands the most spectacular boathouse on the whole lake. The "Pagoda," as it's called, has long been a Lake Minnetonka landmark remarkable for its Japanese de- . sign. Built in three levels, the white stucco ,boathouse is trimmed in bright red and green. Its pagoda roof piped in green . curves upward at the tips like a saucer: When Gregory and Lorraine Scott bought the ' .'\' property in 1991, they became owners o(the esta(e's unique Japanese-style house and.matching boathouse builtin 1910 by the original owners, a young couple who had honeymooned in Japan and brought back visions of The Pagoda on'Smithtown Bay is owned by Gregory and Lorraine Scott. It was built in 1910 by I ayoung couple who had honeymooned in Japan. J Japanese architecture. The Scotts painstakingly restored and renovated both the main house and boathouse. For the boathouse, they rebuilt the chimney, repaired the white stucco cladding over the concrete, reconstructed. the wooden railings using an Asian lattice pattern, and - repainted the railings and the main fa<;ade. The top floor serves as a breezy screened porch offering great lake views; the middle-level room with its massive stone fire- place acts as a cozy family retreat. The lower l~ver con- tains a shower, toilet, storage space for a small boat, and an irrigation system used for watering the property. On the lower lake, along the shores of the posh Fern- dale neighborhood, four early twentieth-century boathouses remain overlookingWayzata Bay. ! . In 1894 the Northrup family, founders of Northrup King seed company, built a Greek Revival house and c'ar- riage house, later adding a swim pavilion and handsome boathouse. when Clyde Jorgenson bought the estate in 1995, he began renovating all four buildings, converting .~, I The new boathouse (above) built on the former Philip Pillsbury estate reflects an English country house . style. Denny and Mary Newell's Yankee boathouse (below) guards Woolsey Channel. Clyde Jorgenson's Greek Revival boathouse (opposite) on Wayzata Bay matches his house. them into the Italian Revival style. Tod,ay,.a classical portico leads dowp. the slope from the main house Fhrough a European-style garden' to the boatlJouse at the water's edge. Jorgenson found that the old structure, used mostly for storage, badly needed to be re- paired and restuccoed. With five children in his family, he redecorated the interior, con- verting it into a "honeymoon cottage," complete with a peach~covered four-poster bed, dressing room, and mar- ble floors. Looking out at the lake over the new wrought iron railings, guests feel as though they are on a canal in Italy. _. Il) contrast, a bit farther south on the Fer.ndale shore- line stands another boathouse that's completely new above its foundation. it is located on the former Philip Pillsbury estate, where architect Ralph R,apson's land- mark modernist home stood uptil a new owner, william Cooper, razed it in the late 1990s and built an English-style country hOl}se. The boathouse was built. on top of an old boathouse footprint that had been found. It was designed as a small cine-level cottage c"a small reflection of an English country house"), using the same materials as in the main house: salmon-colored brick, cast con- crete, and painted doors and.trim: On the south-facing Fe'rndale shore, built right into the hill, is'a distinctive ivy-covered stucco ,\ " OFFERED FOR SALE by ~onfer Bros.~ Ine. PLAN OJ: FI~ST PL.OO~ 34 EAST GRANT STREET .;> MINNEAPOLIS o Phone ATlantic 7274 An' a..!v " 'PLAN Of SECOND n.ooR. 1ll1;9c]JljJf ~ ;,...-. .,:.,"'-:;:. ..:..::0. >.rt:*~1~~'";;. <'I:'-<<~..~ .' .<~~ ..\t.., 'l~!~~t:;.~.L.:~;\;.~)&..~,; ~...~. '. .1O'/,-.;V;." ....c . ',~r_' *.~:~.~~;.~~'. . ~.~~~. .:-~.-~t i. ~'. ..~< --~'\{' "., ~''<'''' '3~;~;~<;r'~~ :.. .;..<.". ... '"";:f- i 11 J .....k.. .. '.~ -,." ~.. ". ". . ":" .' :. :. '. . . . ().....:n...'.. . 3" -. . . ':_:".- '! '. .".;. ... :' . '. ,'", . .'C " 0,'1.. '. . Exhibit H SALES BROCHURE FROM 1930's ~:: ~J ~''-'f . -~..", ~. .,~.- ;: ta.." . .-... ;~/'" . '1.- ( '~', ';. .~, "By the Waters of Minnetonka" A Year-rolLnd Home One of the most favored SpOtS in America for health, fun, sports, and relaxation. The very livable and substantial home pictured on these pages is located on the south shore of the Upper Lake at Woodside, four miles west of Excelsior. The beautiful grounds comprise nearly four acres with lake frontage of 397 feet of fine sandy beach. The inspiring western outlook across the lake toward Wawatosso Island is a view never to be forgotten. The main-floor rooms of the house center about a large hall which runs from the entrance porch to the view terrace. At one side is an 18x30 foot living room, on the other, an 18x20 foot dining room, each having a fireplace and with a splendid lake panorama. Upstairs are four family bedrooms (two with fireplaces) and three baths, study and two servants' bedrooms with bath. There is a full basement with low-pressure vapor heating system. Considerable thought and money was spent to insure a very well built and livable, permanent home. On the grounds is a two-car garage with a three-room gardener's apartment above. A unique feature is the three-story Pagoda on the lake shore. In this structure is a distinctive den with fireplace, a room that offers complete seclusion. Above this is a screened-in tea room; and on the water level the boat house. The advantages of living only twenty miles from Minneapolis, in the country providing exceptional summer and winter sports, are too obvious to need enumeration to those familiar with Lake Minnetonka. But for the uninformed. . . BOATING takes on an added zest and thrill, fishermen will find a well stocked lake, you'll have SWIMMING in your own front yard, and there are several sporty GOLF courses in the surrounding region. Now offered by out-of-town owner at LESS THAN HALF ITS ORIGINAL COST. -D-R-A-F-T- CITY OF SHOREWOOD NONCONFORMING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, 18 JUNE 2007 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:30 P.M. MINUTES CONVENE NONCONFORMING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING With all committee members present, the meeting convened at 5:30 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: City Council Member Dick Woodruff, Planning Commissioner Dave Meyer, Park Commissioner Robert Hensley, and Planning Director Brad Nielsen.! Planning Director Nielsen welcomed the members and thanked them for volunteering to participate in the Ad Hoc Committee to review nonconforming accessory structures. Nielsen briefly reviewed the purpose of the Committee, which is to provide an extra level of scrutiny in the process of determining if certain accessory buildings have historical, cultural or architectural significance or value. The Committee's advice and recommendation will be used by the Planning Commission and City Council in the consideration of conditional use permits involving nonconforming accessory structures. B. Boathouse Structure - Gregory and Lorraine Scott - 28100 Woodside Road Gregory and Lorraine Scott are the owners of the property at 28100 Woodside Road. The Scotts have requested a conditional use permit for the expansion of their existing garage. Since they have a nonconforming boathouse on their property that would have to be removed or moved into conformity as part of the C.U.P. process, they have provided background information relative to the subject boathouse that would allow the structure to remain in its current location, due to its historical, cultural and architectural value. In their application the Scotts state that the "pagoda boathouse" has become a landmark on the west end of Lake Minnetonka. Director Nielsen reviewed his memorandum to the Committee, dated 14 June 2007. The report provided background information on the Scott property, the Comprehensive Plan amendment addressing the preservation of certain structures in Shorewood and the Zoning Code amendment implementing the Comprehensive Plan policy. The staff report also set forth criteria, based on National Park Service criteria for the preservation of historic structures. Nielsen noted that the outside dimensions of the Scotts' garage would not be any larger than it appears today. They propose to remove an inside wall that will convert what is now considered part of the home into garage (accessory space). Gregory and Lorraine Scott presented their request which included background information on the boathouse, explaining that it was built in approximately 1910 - the same time as the house on the property. The Scotts presented old photographs and a sales brochure from the 1930's, showing the boathouse near the lakeshore. They indicated that lake maps over the years have referenced the "pagoda boathouse" as a local landmark. Committee member Woodruff asked if the deck on the lake side of the boathouse had always been there. NONCONFORMING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, 18 JUNE 2007 The Scotts responded that the deck shows up in the photos in the old sales brochure. The Scotts mentioned that they intend to replace a door on the west side of the structure to make it look more like the door in the photograph. Committee member Hensley stated that the request appeared to meet the four criteria set forth in the Zoning Code amendment. Committee member Meyer agreed. Hensley went on to say that former owners of the property had been heavily involved in the Girl Scouts of America movement. Meyer and Hensley indicated that the request was consistent with criteria 1, 3,4,6, and 9 of the criteria approved by the Planning Commission. Woodruff questioned whether the building was an example of architectural or structural innovation. Hensley questioned what items should be included in a development agreement between the owner and the City. Specifically, should the agreement require that the color scheme of the building be maintained? After considerable discussion, it was agreed that the development agreement should reference maintaining the character of the structure. The agreement should tie the approval to the criteria that fit the application. In summary, the consensus of the Committee was that the boathouse structure was consistent with the following criteria: (1) The structure is a well-known local landmark, as noted in the Mpls St. Paul magazine article. (3) The property was formerly occupied by a family heavily involved in the Girl Scouts movement. (4) The pagoda style, the roof support system as described by Mr. Scott, and the method of construction exhibit the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style. (6) The architecture of the structure is innovative for the area. (9) The structure was built in approximately 1910. The Committee agreed that the boathouse is consistent with the criteria set forth in the Zoning Code and should be allowed to remain in its current location. A brief development agreement setting forth the conditions of approval should be recorded against the property. C. Adjournment Having no further business, the Committee adjourned at 7:00 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Bradley J. Nielsen Planning Director CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 . (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128' www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: , FROM: DATE: - SUBJECT: City Council Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator IVf\ July 19,2007 U j..) Proposal for Architectural Services for City Hall Planning J Council reviewed the history of planning and several options regarding changes to City Hall at its June 11 work session. At that time, it expressed an interest in revisiting the "bridge" concept identified in 2004, with the idea that it would be more fully developed as a long-term, rather than bridge, solution. A main feature of this concept would be the conversion of the Council Room for other uses, and moving the Council Room meeting activities off-site. The Council also requested updates on probable 2008 costs for two options (a major renovation/addition, and a replacement building) presented in late 2005. '-- BKV Group has prepared a proposal to perform these services at a cost not to exceed $5,000. It expects that this work, which would still be at a concept level in order to provide the basis for further refinement, could be completed in 30 to 45 days. Funds for this work would be available from the undesignated balance in the General Fund. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council authorize the City Hall planning services as proposed by BKV Group, and that they be funded from the undesignated balance in the General Fund. ,. f . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ... =ff9A ~.~ 3-c 0'", C 0 '-c en 0 Ol en Q:CD CD..... CD 0 X =E -Co CD , i;l^ CD:::r en 0 =E5. :::r,< g: ~. =Eg =Ol O'":J CD~ 0'" ..... =0 roCD a.X ~~ () CD oa. en en ~c 3 o - -Efl 01 o o o o o 0' , g (jj' =E o , ^ "2- C en OJ n o ::J n CD 't:l .. "'C ::r l>> en CD 'TI CD CD -" ->. co co -.j 0> ;->-9' ~;l=>-~!,> -g.g. IJ 0:;:0:;:0:;:0)>3 IJ 0 0:0: o<ro~~~~iilO!l~CDCD ..... CD -c CD :J -. -. - a. -. CD :J :J OOOl-CDCDCD'<CD3-~~ en -c 'CD 0 3 =E =E NCD Cil -. 0 -<'-<' o -c . :J-c - CDa. Ol -c CD -c (') -c Ol ..... Ol Ol 3 :J 'CD -., ."""! '-' :J :J -. () ro ..... -.:< CD '<; ro a. a. 8. ~ g 3' a ~: Q 3' 8 3' ~. ~. CD C ~ -. en :J a. -. :J -. - CD .- a...... :J CD Ol :J-' ~ ()CD:J C en -. '-' Ol - '" Ol a. a.:J....."""!CD-<Ol"""! -C"""!CD~ Ol (0 -c '<; () :J '<; ..... '<; (0 or Ol :::r-c m 8 ~ 0 0 0 ro ~ . CD ~ a a. :J en"E- "E- "E- ro CD ~ iii' CD roo ~ ~ - o' o' o' < !!!. 0-a.()CD-cQ:J :J:JOl..... -cCD.....=..... en enen~~ :::ren()30~- en- :J o -. 0 -. -c CD 0 :::r 0 () Ol ..... co CJ) ~ ~ _ ..., n" = 0 ..... o :J ..... Ol -. -. Ol '" 0 en -. .en 0'" ~ -< g ~. a. ~ =E ~ ~ enO:J en:J< o::i":::r() ;:;:o(08=EOl~ :J(O'<O CD ~ CD :J -. -<..... en. en C "2.~CD () gOlc8 ~g-c=,.~ Ol=E~.{g'<~CD oc:!!!.= i;l ;:;: 3-' ..... g CD!!!. _(0 () 3 . :::r o,ena. -cCDOCD ::!! Ol ~ -c (0 en (jj' ii) () 3 CD 0=CD~,3Ol :JO-c~ o . oOCDa. :JO:J ,~ ?C:J< Q,():J(O -c Ol -c ..... Ol Ol CD CD en ii) -c - 0:J (0 "E- :J -c ::r 0-1\::\t...,-,.... :J -. , Ol '" Ol -c en Ol .en () --c (0 3 Ol 0 () CD-cCD en'_CD ~~ ~=!'l. OlOl!'l ~ Q 0'" fJ ~~ ro Ol3 OlQ: ~33 6-~ ~CD Ol. 0 :J o' () ~..... .en:J Olo 0 CD :J :J :Jen 0- a.en () c: Ol fJ g~ is. m enOl a. -. ~ 3 () a.o Ol:::r ~:J en Ol ~!'l !!!. 3 -. :J 0'" o (0 CD :J , en 3.g Ol~ (0 -. CD en en ^ CD ..... () :::r CD .en () ro g < () 1!i: CD..... "E-Ol o 0 0 :J -ca. .06-ro Q?"'O :J =::. -. ..... en en go'" CD CD:J g ('))> CD ~i Ii ~~ ~ o~ en 00 (jj' .1:>.0 )> 01 :J :J C 3 '" o o ~ o - g CD ->. en '< () , -'-i ()CDO~g.:::r ~~3~~CD 3!'l-g~:3i~ Ol-iOl() CD CD g:::r~oa.~ () (jj' CD ~ g o' o=E=Een :J ~o;:;:-go en,:::rQCD- o^Ol",,,,g :Jen=OOCD ~~gg~(') -,' 0 )>O'"ro "2-:J O'"CD:J-iOl() ,_.....:::r.:J.{g CDO()CD.......... Ol()o -:::r ^ca.O'"CDIJ a. 8l CD ::l. _:::r 2 a.engQ?~ < Ol CD -'CD :JO:J .a. o :J a. () (Q (jj' -oJ"'" 0 CD...... g,O:J()O CDc:s.~Oro -c (0 ~ -c :J < , CD. 3 ..... ~ (jj' .g()Ol=E-cCD oOm=........... en:J- .....:::r CD(),<:JOCD a.CDen~,() IJ "E- CD a. m. 0 --c =2 ..... ro ~ Ol-CDo()en :JOl..... ..... (')? :::rg-Ol 0' o 0'" CD S':J ' :Jc()(O~o () =3' ..... Q. :JCD CD a.---..:::r-c -c -. en CD Ol 0 ..... ~ ..... -1\ en (Q :J 0'" CD ..... CD3CDCa.:::r =2Ol~6:()CD o'~ en S.g 0' m S' 0' (0 ~ ~ -. (Q , S' 2 0 en. gC()-C ~~CD 6-6- _a.:J :J:J o CD Olen 6' ~ :J =E '" a. en 0 .. + ..... :::r , CD CD -c , CD < o' C en -< c: CD ~ =<; co' a. i:- n o ::J n CD 't:l .. "'C ::r l>> Ul CD Ch n o 't:l CD o - :e o ... ^ "'C l>> ::I. enOl-i g. -c ~ CD Ol en 3 ~-c ~Ola -. (0 -c ()CDo 8a!G ~(O = !'liil~ -Co ~~g CD () en Ol3CD :JOla. gmo -., :J -g ![-< mOlo .....:J:J :::ra.g CD ro CD g-ii)(') m CD g ~a.() o a. CD :JOl-C S-w~ 2:o~ en Ol en =E a. CD OCDOl , .n :J ^liia. .......... ..... OCD:::r 0'"-< CD CD()a. O'"O~ CD :J -. ~~~ CD '< iil CD()O'" :Jo- w:JCD o () (jj' Ol.{g :J :J ..... ..... a.(i)CD .I:>.-:J O1Olg. a.:Ja. Ola...... '< 0 !'l 0'" CD a.Og(')g~ mOCDOCDCD ()g:J~(')Ol ::l. 3 CD CD ;:;: , gCD~"E-'<CD a. :J -c IJ a "2- -. Cii :::r :::r CD :J OlOlenOl -cOlenen:::ren Ol:JCDCDOCD ;4. .a. en ro a. =(')a~=EC 00a.<8-c -i;lCD~a.ro g.....!!!.o. en -. 2 (Q -c CD en():J3~:J -C~I CD CD"'" agen~Olg -c ().'CD' o)>:::r -c !G a. CD ;j1~ a :-33=0-c S' Ol 0 -c 0 -. ~ =E 0 en ~ () S'!!!.!!!. Ol 0(0 :J _ ~CD.....(O 0 g !!!.~c~ (0 0 -i.:J ~~ :J :::r0:J~~ CD CD () -'-C en en CD a...... CD -. -c CD a. en <g ..... S' CD C IJ -. en 0'" 0 :::r ~ -. enCDOlOl(O CD<en-:J .n CD CD a. en ~OOlm~ :J -c :J -. <; ..... 3 a. <g o' -cCDOlenCD :::r :J -c CD en 3l ......~ =2 0' CD (') 0 -. , eno<~g ~i;l.!!!.enCD CD q" -. 0' (') 0'" C :!. , ;:;: ~. u ~ :T '< m. o' ~ CD I -<:Jg ~ o 0 - - o CD Ol , 5: ;'"1 -:;0)> 0. CD 0. ~<Q. ~ (ii';::;: -<' 5' o' -'CC ::J ~ "'C e!. niii'Ch o ::J CD Ul :;;! = 0_. Y' - n _NCD Q g Ul ~c.n 0".. ::::!.o 0.... CCCD CD_ n- CD o~ ::IN nc CDc 't:lCll) .. n o Ul .. Ul o Ol =E en o :J :;0 CD (')5: ;::::;:..., '< . )>(') a.iil ~.cC' :!.O en Ol q"=E Ol en CO ,:J I (') ;:;: '< o - en :::r o ro =E o o a. c.... C -< -" 0> '" o o -.j Our hourly rates are as follows: Partner Senior Project Architect Architectural Technicians Interior Designer 135 105 85 85 Reimbursable expenses include, but are not limited to printing of plans, photo copies, photographic work, long distance phone charges, delivery services, travel, etc Finally, there may be other consultants or services that are not included in our fee above. They can include: . Civil Engineer . Soil Testing . Traffic Consultants . Sound and Lighting Consultants . Others Part II. Subsequent Design Phases and Work Scope II.A Schematic Design Phase Following the completion of the Concept phase, SKV Group will provide design services for the Schematic Design phase. The Schematic Design phase is intended to complete the "big picture" design concept and shall develop preliminary architectural and structural, mechanical and electrical engineering concepts, as well as initial interior design concepts and refinement of overall building plan and image concepts. The intention of the Schematic Design Phase is to clearly define the design intent of the project's exterior and interior components, develop the design concept fully enough to determine appropriate building systems and preliminary configurations, to develop a design pricing package for cost estimating, and to develop information sufficient for the owner's use. All information provided at the completion of the Schematic Design phase is understood to be preliminary and subject to change as the design develops further. It is anticipated that at the completion of the Schematic Design Phase, the Owner shall be capable of successfully selecting a contractor team member for accurate project budgeting. II.B Design Development, Construction Document, and Construction Administration Phases Following the completion of the Schematic Design Phase and adequate project financing, SKV Group will develop a detailed project scope for the completion of the design development, Construction Documentation, and Construction Administration services. At this point, SKV Group will develop a standard AlA Owner Architect agreement for full design services for your review. II.C Schedule The final project schedule shall be determined pending finalization of project scope and financing. II.D Suggested Compensation for Part II Phases of Work 1. Our fees for all the phases of work listed above as part of Phase II work will be defined more accurately at the completion of the Concept Phase I. However, for your general budgeting at this time, we would anticipate our fees to be in the range of 9 to 11 % of the construction cost based on values in the metro area. Much of this fee ultimately can be presented in menu fashion so you can pick and chose services that may be completed by others or by alternate methods. This can be reviewed in detail later as the project proceeds. 2. In addition to the above fee, we would request an allowance for reimbursable expenses. Reimbursable expenses include, but are not limited to printing of plans, photo copies, photographic work, long distance phone charges, delivery services, travel, etc. 3. Compensation shall be invoiced monthly based for time expended on the project and payment is expected 30 days of receiving invoice for services. Invoices not paid within 45 days of invoice may be charged a late fee equal to 1 % over current prime per annum. On behalf of BKV Group, we appreciate this opportunity to be of service on this very exciting project. Please review this letter of intent and, if acceptable, sign and return a copy to our office, signifying authorization to proceed. If accepted, BKV Group will enter into this work promptly. If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at 612-373-9151. Sincerely, William M. Baxley, AlA Partner BKV Group, Inc. Accepted: City of Shorewood Date: C: Ted Redmond Lois Bullock