Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-06-04 LE CCMPMayor: Lee Hunt Councilmembers: Steve DeLapp Susan Dunn Dean Johnston Wyn John Please read: Lake Elmo City Council Tuesday July 6; 2004 3800 Laverne Avenue No. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 777-5510 777-9615 (fax) Since the City. Council does not have time to discuss every point presented, it may appear that decisions are preconceived. However, staff provides background information to the City Council on each agenda item in advance; and decisions are based on this information and experience. In addition, some items may have been discussed at previous council meetings. If you are aware of information that has not been discussed, please fill out a "Request to Appear Before the City Council form; or, if you came late, raise your hand to be recognized. Comments that are pertinent are appreciated. Items may be continued to a future meeting if additional time is needed before a decision can be made. Agenda City Council Meeting Convenes 7:00 PM Pledge of Allegiance 1. Agenda 2. Minutes 3. PUBLIC INOUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL: A. PUBLIC INQUIRIES: B. Huff n Puff Liquor License C. Vivian Perry, Washington County Library- Summer Reading Program 4. CONSENT AGENDA A. Resolution No. 2004-050:Approve claims B. Finance Specialist C. Final Payment to Tower Asphalt:Street Overlay Project:Resolution No. 2004-051 D. Partial Payment to Schifsky: Hill Trail Reconstruction Project:Resolution No. 2004-052 E. Liquidation of Equipment 5. FINANCE: 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. MAINTENANCE/PARK/FIRE/BUILDING: A. Update on Fire Dept. Activities: Chief Malmquist June 15, 2004 Public Inquiries/Informational is an opportunity for citizens to bring the Council's attention any items not currently on the agenda. In addressing the Council, please state your name and address for the record, and a brief summary of the specific item being addressed to the Council. To allow adequate time for each person wishing to address the Council, we ask that individuals limit their comments to three (3) minutes. Written documents may be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting or as bench copies, to allow a more timely presentation. Those items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion under a Consent Calendar format. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council member so requests, in which event, the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered separately in its normal sequence on the agenda. 8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: A. 9. PLANNING. LAND USE & ZONING: A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment — Uses in Limited Business Zone (LB): Ordinances 97- 134 and 97-135 B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Rezoning — Olinger: Resolution No. 2004-053 and Ordinance 97-136 C. Zoning Variance — 8061 HillTrail North/Abrahamson:Resolution No. 2004-054 D. OP Concept Plan - Deer Glen (Lakewood Church): Resolution No. 2004-055 E. Front Yard Garage Waiver: William Deeb, 2333 Legion Avenue:Resolution No. 2004-056 F. Front Yard Garage Waiver: Link Lavey, 8510 Hidden Bay Trail, Lavey:Resolution No. 2004-057 10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: 11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: A. 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: A. Mayor Hunt — Champion of Industry B. Council Member DeLapp C. Council Member Dunn D. Council Member Johnston E. Council Member John Tom Prew C. Dillerud Lake Elmo City Council Agenda July 6, 2004 Page 2 MINUTES APPROVED: June 15, 2004 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 1, 2004 1. AGENDA 2. MINUTES: May 18, 2004 3. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL: A. Public Inquiries 4. CONSENT AGENDA: A. Resolution No. 2004-045:Approve Claims 5. FINANCE: A. Budget Calendar 6. NEW BUSINESS: 7. MAINTENANCE/PARK/FIRE/BUILDING: A. Update on Fire Dept. Activities:Chief Malmquist 8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: A. Update on Hill Trail Reconstruction Project 9. PLANNING, LAND USE & ZONING: A. Resolution No. 2004-046:Zoning Setback Variances, 8017 50`h Street N. (Isaacson) B. Ordinance No. 97-130: Old Village Development Moratorium 10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: 11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: A. City Staff Organizational Chart: Resolution No. 2004-047 B. Council Organization: Ordinance No. 97-131 C. Strategic Planning Meeting 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: Mayor Hunt called the Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council chambers. PRESENT: Hunt, John, Dunn, Johnston, DeLapp, City Engineer Prew, City Attorney Filla, Acting Finance Director Tom Bouthilet, City Planner/Acting Administrator Dillerud and City Administrator Rafferty. City Administrator Martin Rafferty administered the Oath of Office to newly appointed Council Member Wyn John. 1. AGENDA: Add: 8A. Request for Update on Second lift on Hill Trail North M/S/P Dunn/Johnston - to approve the June 1, 2004 City Council agenda, as amended. (Motion passed 5-0). 2. MINUTES: May 18, 2004 M/S/P Johnston/DeLapp - to approve the May 18, 2004 City Council minutes, as amended. (Motion passed 3-0-2: Abstain: Dunn, John). LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 1, 2004 6. NEW BUSINESS: 7. MAINTENANCE/PARK/FIRE/BUILDING: A. Update on Fire Dent. Activities:Chief Malmauist — NOT IN ATTENDANCE Council requested an article in the Newsletter educating residents of the different siren tones for the tornado season. Planner Dillerud said the warning sirens had been placed on the backburner. He will work on coordinating warning sirens for the entire region. 8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: A. Update on Hill Trail Reconstruction Proiect The City Engineer reported he will check out the inquiry from a resident who received grass seed and wanted sod replanted, and there are also a few repairs needed before they do the paving. Prew stated he sent in the necessary permit, one part contractor and one part city, but the contractor sent his part in late. He said the City has all the easements required for drainage, and the City would pave the last couple of gravel driveways. The water level of the larger pond on 50th Street will be checked this week. In response to the question if there will be vegetation in the smaller holding pond, Prew said he could get the costs for planting vegetation and let the Council decide. 9. PLANNING. LAND USE & ZONING: A. Resolution No. 2004-046:Zonine Setback Variance, 8017 50th Street N., (Isaacson) Planner Dillerud reported the Planning Commission considered an application by Mr. Isaacson for side and front setback variances to accommodate construction of an attached two stall garage. The Hearing was conducted on May 10, 2004, at which time the Commission tabled the application to allow the applicant to consider amending the scale of the request. On May 20 the applicant submitted an amended application that reduced the requested side setback variance from 8.5 feet to 4 feet; and, increased the requested front setback variance from 6 feet to 10 feet. On May 24 the Commission reviewed the amended proposal and recommended approval of the variances requested by the May 20 drawings. Dillerud noted that the Commission found that a physical hardship does exist for the applicant due to the unusual size of the parcel; the amended request permits the reasonable use of the property; and there is no impact from the variances on surrounding properties. Mayor Hunt asked for the exact placement of the drainfield and where a secondary drainfield would be located. He said the City cannot alternate on drain field requests. Council member DeLapp agreed and voiced his concern if there was indeed enough area that could accommodate a secondary drain field site. Bill Isaacson said his original system was a dry well system. The septic system sits 50' back from the edge of the road. When he built in 1997, he kept the same exact footprint of the home and was asked to move the house 10' from the side property line. Planner Dillerud explained there was no LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 1, 2004 3 those positions are well suited to be officially designated as the leadership for those areas. The following recommendations were made: 1) Promote Acting Superintendent Mike Bouthilet to Superintendent of Public Works and hire an additional maintenance worker assuring the City's capability to provide the defined service responsibilities, 2) Promote Acting Finance Director Tom Bouthilet to Finance Director/City Treasurer; 3) Promote Sharon Lumby from Deputy Clerk to City Clerk; and 4) Move the Planner's position as Planner/Assistant City Administrator with specific organizational reporting changes that includes building inspections and engineering. He noted that the proposed organizational chart is within the budget. He added that he has talked to the employees regarding health care issues, and the employees will be paying a share. He will continue to look at alternatives in the future. M/SIP Dunn/DeLapp — to approve Resolution No. 2004-047, A Resolution Adopting the Administrative Organizational Structure of the City, as presented. (Motion passed 5-0). B. Council Committee Reorganization:Ordinance No. 97-131 The Administrator provided an organizational chart for the creation of three specific Council Committees. The purpose of the creation of the committees is to develop ongoing scheduled council work sessions; in specific subject areas, where each of the established ad hoc committees created by Council may report progress on mission and tasks and make recommendations that can be reviewed by the established council committee. The Planning Commission would continue to report their recommendations and findings directly to the Council as a whole. Each committee would be composed of two Council members, the Mayor and the City Administrator or staff designee. The Administrator suggested that the Mayor would annually appoint two Council members to each committee and designate one as the Chair of the committee. Meetings would be scheduled, at a minimum of, monthly on the preceding week of the last Council meeting scheduled in a month. The Council determined that the selection and makeup of Council Committee members be approved by the full City Council. The Council will indicate their interest in a primary and secondary committee they would like to serve on. M/S/P DeLapp/Johnston - to approve Ordinance No. 97-131, as amended (4th Whereas: No 1. That the selection and makeup of Council Committee members will be approved by the full City Council. The Council will indicate their interest in a specific committee by submittal of their name to the City Administrator.) (Motion passed 5-0). C. Strategic Planning Meeting, The Council will hold a Strategic Planning Meeting with the Department Heads on Saturday, June 12, 8:30 until Noon at the Wildwood Lodge. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 1, 2004 5 -take Elmo City Council July 6, 2003 Agenda Section: PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL No. 3B. Agenda Item: HUFF'N PUFF PROCLAMATION, Non -Intoxicating Liquor License: Lake Elmo Jaycees Background Information for Julv 6. 2004: The Lake Elmo Jaycees are requesting the Council to proclaim August 12-15, 2004 as Huff N Puff Days, approval of its On -Sale Non -Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for its annual Huff N Puff festival, and to waive the fees for the liquor license and ballfield lights. Action Items: to proclaim August 12-15, 2004 as Huff'N Puff Person responsible: Days, to approve an on -sale non -intoxicating malt liquor S,Lumby license for this annual festival contingent on approval of the Washington County Sheriff, and to waive the fees for the liquor license and for the ballfield lights. Attachments: Liquor License Application, Insurance Certificate Form No. 235—Application Mr Relail License In Sell Non-lulnxkuling Mali Liquor "ON" Premises. em.. wsvl RETAIL "ON SALE" *tate of Airale$ota, COUNTY OF Washington City or Lake Elmo To the City Council Washington County Jake Elmo Jaycees of the city of Business Decode Cop Lake Elmo State of Minnesota: hereby appl...f.e.s.for a license for the term of four (4) days from the 12th - 15th day of August At Retail Only, Non -Intoxicating Malt Liquors, as the same are defined by law, for consumption "ON" those certain premises in this Gity of Lake Elmo described as follows, to -wit:.. Lions Park 244!i to sell at which place said applicant operate the business of Duff-n-Puff Days Concession Stand for and to that end represent and state as follows: That said applieant is a oititen of the United States; of good moral character and repute; and ha attained the age of $1 years; that proprietor of the establishment for which the license will be issued if this application is granted. That no manufacturer of such non -intoxicating malt liquors has any ownership, in whole or in part, in said business of said applicant...,..or any interest therein; That said applicant make this application pursuant and subject to all the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances and regulations of said City of Lake Elmo applicable thereto, which are hereby made a part hereof, and hereby agree to observe and obey the same; *tate of M'itttrtegota, COUNTY OF VERIA'ICJTION iss. , being duly sworn, on oath say ; that the within named applicant......; that he ha full knowledge of the business of said applicant....., of the location thereof, and of the contents of the within application; and that the statements made in said application are true of owns knowledge. • Subscribed and Sworn to Before Me this a,,,, n, ACORD,a CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE RODUCER (952)890-9332 FAX (952)890-9319 associ-a2ed Ins. Professionals 12701 Chowen Ave. S. Suite 109 Burnsville, MN 55337 isURED Minnesota Jaycees Inc Etal 2101 West Highway 13 Burnsville, MN 55337-3066 OVERAGES THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID C' AIMS. DATE (MMWDD/YY) 05/20/2002 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW, INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE INSURER A: K & K Insurance Group INSURER B: INSURER C: INSURER D: INSURER E: POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION R TYPE OF INSURANCE I POLICY NUMBER DATE WM/DDWY) DATE (MM/DDIYY) GENERAL UABIUTY P7-0003921927600 09/22/2001 09/22/2002 EACH OCCURRENCE X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR X Participants Excl -xi AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES'IEPER: I POLICY I JEC LOC AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY ANY AUTO ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEDULED AUTOS HIRED AUTOS NON -OWNED AUTOS GARAGE LIABILITY ANY AUTO EXCESS LIABILITY OCCUR CLAIMS MADE DEDUCTIBLE RETENTION $ WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY OTHER Liquor Liability r7-0003921927600 09/22/2001 09/22/2002 LIMITS 5 15 I FIRE DAMAGE (Any one flre) I MED EXP (Any one person) PERSONAL & ADV INJURY GENERAL AGGREGATE PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGO 1 $ COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT (Ea accident) BODILY INJURY (Per person) BODILY INJURY (Per accident) PROPERTY DAMAGE (Per accident) AUTO ONLY - EA ACCIDENT $ EAACCI $ AGG $ OTHER THAN AUTO ONLY: EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE 1,000,000 300,000 5,000 1,000,000 Unlimited 5,000,000 I TORV L MITS I ER E.L. EACH ACCIDENT I $ E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYE $ E.L. DISEASE- POLICY LIMIT 1 $ Each Common Cause $1,000,000 Aggregate $2,000,000 CRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONSNEHICLES(EXCLUSI NS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENT/SPECIAL PROVISI )NS vides Evidence of Insurance for the Lake Elmo Jaycees as respects the Huff-N-Puff Event to be held ust 8-11, 2002 Lake Elmo Jaycees, 3286 Lampert Avenue North, 2T2FICATE HOLDER I I ADDITIONAL INSURED; INSURER LETTER: City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 )RD 25-S (7/97) Lake Elmo, MN 55042 CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 10 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KINb UPON THE COMPANY, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE John-Paulet/LUANN ©ACORD CORPORATION 1988 3e. P Communities & Libraries In Partnership make EVERY child a reader! Dear Children's Advocate: The Minnesota Summer Library Program and [your public library] invite you and the children you serve to participate in a fun new summer reading experience. The Communities & Libraries in Partnership: Make Every Child a Reader project will provide materials and support needed to help you keep the children you work with developing their literacy skills during the summer months. This innovative partnership expands on the traditional summer reading program — with the same great goals of 1) reducing reading loss over summer vacation and 2) promoting reading aloud to pre -readers = by providing a flexible summer reading program outside of library fadlities. For more information please read the attached flyer or contact Vivian Perry, Youth Services, at 651-275-8522. Thank you, Vivian Perry Associate Library Manager Youth Services Washington County Library The Institute of Museum and Library Services, a Federal agency that fosters innovalbn, leadership and a lifetime of learning, and the MN Dept. of Education, Library Development & Services, the MN State Library Agency supports Communities and Libraries in Partnership with funding under the provisions of the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA). J Communities & Libraries In Partnership make EVERY child a reoderl Who: Individuals or organizations serving children in their communities are eligible to participate in CLIP. This includes childcare providers, summer school teachers, ECFE programs, school - age childcare programs and any number of other possibilities. What: CLIP is a literacy program designed to bring the public library's summer reading program to children who may not be able to participate at a public library facility. The goal of the program is to have children read or be read to for 20 minutes a day, five days a week. If you would like to participate, but don't meet with the children in your care five days a week we can make the program work with your needs. Here's what your local library will provide to you: Library cards and materials A copy of the 2004 summer program resource guide for use in the library A copy of Jim Trelease's Read Aloud Handbook (5th ed) available for checkout Reading records, reading incentives, reading certificates and other materials for the children who participate Lots of support! When: CLIP activities will span six weeks from June 14th through July 23rd. This timeline can be adjusted to meet the needs of your program and the children you work with. Talk it over with your local public library. Where: Wherever you work with children. Why: How: All children need to have access to books during summer months to reduce summer reading loss by school -age children and to promote the literacy skills preschoolers need when they reach kindergarten. Complete a Notification of Community Partner Interest Fonn available through your local library and a brief pre-program survey Pick up program materials at your local public library before the program begins and at the halfway point during the 6 weeks Provide structured reading time for the children in your care (read -aloud or silent reading time) ▪ Stamp reading records for daily reading and distribute weekly reading incentives ▪ Complete reading certificates for the children • Visit your local Iibrary upon completion of the program to complete a program evaluation and receive a t-shirt! That's all there is to it To participate in this opportunity, or for more information, please contact: Vivian Perry at 651-275-8522 or 651-436-5882 The institute of Museum and Library Services, a Federal agency that fosters Innovation, leadership and a lifetime of learning, and the MN Dept of Education, Library Development & Services, the MN State Library Agency supports Communhies and Libraries In Parkin* wah funding under the provisions of the Library Services and Technology Aot (LSTA). CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004-050 RESOLUTION APPROVING CLAIMS BE IT RESOLVED THAT Claim Numbers DD183 through DD191, 25783 through 25797, were used for Staff, payroll dated June 24, 2004, Claim Numbers 25798 through 25855 dated July 06, 2004 in the total amount of $184,489.96 are hereby approved. ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 6th day of July, 2004. Lee Hunt Mayor ATTEST: Martin J. Rafferty City Administrator VA- Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List User. Administrator Printed: 07/01/2004 - 3:30 PM P 11111 lull IIIIII11111 ;:I+4 A lax IIII 11111 II III III IIIIi1IIIIII 1IIlulu, Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Vendor:ACEHARD Ace Hardware Check Sequence: 1 ACH Enabled: No 02059199 Supplies 15.61 07/06/2004 101-430-3100-42400 Check Total: 15.61 Vendor:ALLIED Allied Electrical Contractors Check Sequence: 2 ACH Enabled: No 4092 Elect. Wiring -Compressor & Washer -Fire 1,700.00 07/06/2004 410-480-8000-45800 Check Total: 1,700.00 Vendor:AMDAHL ChrisAmdahl Check Sequence: 3 ACH Enabled: No 977 Repairs Door Enteranee Lock -Public Works 616.00 07/06/2004 101-430-3100-44010 Check Total: 616.00 Vendor AMPLAN American Planning Association Check Sequence: 4 ACH Enabled: No 060704-123247 Annual Membership Dues 595.00 07/06/2004 101-410-1910-44330 Check Total: 595.00 Vendor:ARAM Aramark Check Sequence: 5 ACH Enabled: No 629-5491801 Linen -City Hall 43.18 07/06/2004 101-410-1940-44010 Check Total: 43.18 Vendor:ATTWI AT&T Wireless Check Sequence: 6 ACH Enabled: No 023-2750230 Floater Phone -Fie Dept 20.43 07/06/2004 101-420-2220-43210 Check Total: 20.43 Vendor:AVAYA AVAYA Inc. Check Sequence: 7 ACH Enabled: No 2718682067 Monthly Telephone Maint. 150.36 07/06/2004 101-410-1940-44040 Check Total: 150.36 AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/01/2004 - 3:30 PM) Page 1 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference VendorBUFS Biffs Inc. Check Sequence: 8 ACH Enabled: No W223020 Restrooms-Sunfish Park 70.26 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-44120 W223021 Restrooms-Lions Park 140.52 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-44120 W223022 Restrooms-VFW Park 70.26 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-44120 W223023 Rest<ooms-DeMontreville Park 70.26 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-44120 W223024 Restrooms-Reid Park 70.26 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-44120 W223025 Restrooms-Tablyn Park 70.26 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-44120 W223026 Restrooms-Pebble Park 70.26 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-44120 Check Total: 562.08 Vendor:CRYSTEEL Crysteel Truck Equipment Check Sequence: 9 F18857 Repairs - Fire Vehicle 189.36 07/06/2004 101-420-2220-44040 Check Total: 189.36 Vendor:EARLANDE Earl F. Andersen, Inc. Check Sequence: 10 0060291-IN Playground Set -Carriage Station 13,751.28 07/06/2004 404-480-8000-45800 Check Total: 13,751.28 Vendor:Electric ELECTRIC SYSTEMS OF ANOKA, INC Check Sequence: 11 1864 Installation of Ball Field Lights 23,615.00 07/06/2004 404-480-8000-45300 1864-1 Installation of Ball Field Lights 436.13 07/06/2004 404-480-8000-45300 Check Total: 24,051.13 Vendor:Foreman Foreman FireService & Repair 04055 Misc. Repairs on six Fire Vehicles Check Total: Check Sequence: 12 786.52 07/06/2004 101-420-2220-44040 786.52 Vendor.FOUR Four Seasons Service Check Sequence: 13 23-036657 Supplies -City Hall 43.08 07/06/2004 101-10-1940-44300 23-036771 Supplies -City Hall 28.76 07/06/2004 101-410-1940-44300 Check Total: 71.84 Vendor.FXL FXL, Inc_ Assessing Services -July Check Total: 1,700.00 07/06/2004 1,700.00 Check Sequence: 14 101-410-1550-43100 Vendor:HACH HACH Company Check Sequence: 15 3885811 Water Maintenance -Supplies 202.56 07/06/2004 601-494-9400-42270 ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/01/2004 - 3:30 PM) Page 2 Invoice No Vendor:HAWKINS 623424 Vendor:JH Larso 1345376-01 Vendor:Johnson Vendor:LINDVENN 283908-0840 Vendor:MENARDSO 33753 Vendor:MESABI H62330 Vendor:METROCA 01610453 Vendor.MILLEREX 9592 9592 Description Check Total: Hawkins Chemical Flouride-Water Check Total: J.H. Larson Company Part -Lift Station Check Total: Johnson Construction Storage Rental July - Fire Dept. Check Total: Lindquist & Vennum Legal Service Comp. Plan Appeal Check Total: Menards - Oakdale Lock -Fire Dept. Check Total: H&L Mesabi Hard Surface Blades -Public Works Check Total: Metrocall Pagers -Fire Dept. Check Total: Miller Excavating, Inc. Gravel Roads Graded Class #5 Gravel Check Total: Vendor:MINNCHEM MINNESOTA CHEMICAL CO. 287327 Labor to install Gear Washer Amount Payment Date Acct Number 202.56 Check Sequence: 16 439.31 07/06/2004 601-494-9400-42160 439.31 Check Sequence: 17 58.56 07/06/2004 602-495-9450-42270 58.56 90.00 07/06/2004 90.00 Check Sequence: 18 101-420-2220-44120 Check Sequence: 19 19,301.75 07/06/2004 101-410-1940-43020 19,301.75 Check Sequence: 20 6.38 07/06/2004 101-420-2220-42230 6.38 484.58 07/06/2004 484.58 Check Sequence: 21 101-430-3100-42210 Check Sequence: 22 83.21 07/06/2004 101-420-2220-43210 83.21 1,099.00 07/06/2004 234.43 07/06/2004 1,333.43 Check Sequence: 23 101-430-3100-43150 101-430-3100-42240 Check Sequence: 24 468.60 07/06/2004 410-480-8000-45800 Reference ACH Enable& No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/01/2004 - 3:30 PM) Page 3 Invoice No Vendor:MUSCO 114204 Vendor.Nat1 Wat 1438060 Vendor:NEXTEL 761950227-015 761950227-015 761950227-015 761950227-015 Vendor:OAKDALE 1000039700 1000046000 Vendor. OAKDRC 31508 Vendor:ONECALL 4050497 Vendor:PELNAR VendorPETERSO 11135M 11140M I1145M 11150M Description Cheek Total: Musco Sports Lighting, LLC Partial Payment -Ball Field Lights Check Total: National Waterworks Tools -Water Dept Check Total: Nextel Communications Cell Phones -Bldg Dept. Cell Phones -Public Works Dept. Ce11 Phones -Parks Works Dept. Ce11 Phones-Admin Check Total: City of Oakdale Water -North Connection Water South Connection Check Total: Oakdale Rental Center Playground Set-up Carriage Station Check Total: Gopher State One-CallOne Call Concepts, Inc Line Locates -May Check Total: KathiPelnar Animal Control Services -June Check Total: Peterson Fram & Bergman Amount Payment Date Acct Number 468.60 Check Sequence: 25 60,000.00 07/06/2004 404-480-8000-45300 60,000.00 Check Sequence: 26 160.43 07/06/2004 601-494-9400-42400 160.43 87.11 77.14 50.08 41.20 255.53 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 1,415.00 07/06/2004 6,139.31 07/06/2004 7,554.31 Check Sequence: 27 101-420-2400-43210 101-430-3100-43210 101-450-5200-43210 101-410-1940-43210 Check Sequence: 28 601-494-9400-43820 601-494-9400-43820 Check Sequence: 29 412.16 07/06/2004 404-480-8000-45300 412.16 Check Sequence: 30 170.20 07/06/2004 101-430-3100-44300 170.20 873.32 07/06/2004 873.32 2,029.36 07/06/2004 3,528.77 07/06/2004 33.66 07/06/2004 111.61 07/06/2004 Check Sequence: 31 101-420-2700-43150 Check Sequence: 32 101-410-1610-43040 101-410-1610-3045 803-490-9070-43045 803-490-9070-43045 Reference ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/01/2004 - 3:30 PM) Page 4 Invoice No 11161M Vendor:PITNEY 2817997-JN04 Description Check Total: Pitney Bowes Qrtly Postage Machine Rental Check Total: Vendor:PITPURCH Purchase Power 50937724206 Postage Check Total: Vendor:PRESS StevenPress Cable Operator Check Total: Vendor:QWEST 6517142209456 VendorROGERS 11606 11606 11606 11615 Vendor.RUD Vendor:S&T 01JC0580 01JC6905 01JC9015 01JC9018 Qwest Hudson Lift Station Alarm Line Check Total: Rogers Printing Services Business Cards Business Cards Business Cards City Letterhead & Envelopes Check Total: DianePrince-Rud Cleaning Services -City Hall Cleaning Services -Fire Hall Check Total: S&T Office Products, Inc. Office Supplies Office Supplies Admin. & Planning Office Supplies Admin. & Planning Office Supplies Admin. & Planning Check Total: Amount Payment Date 99.00 07/06/2004 5,802.40 693.00 07/06/2004 693.00 37.22 07/06/2004 37.22 85.00 07/06/2004 85.00 36.02 07/06/2004 36.02 56.23 28.12 28.11 132.06 244.52 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 360.00 07/06/2004 360.00 07/06/2004 720.00 168.44 07/06/2004 13.58 07/06/2004 221.31 07/06/2004 27.16 07/06/2004 430.49 Acct Number Reference 101-410-1610-43045 Check Sequence: 33 101-410-1940-44010 Check Sequence: 34 101-410-1320-43220 Check Sequence: 35 101-410-1320-44300 Check Sequence: 36 602-495-9450-43210 Check Sequence: 37 101-410-132042030 101-410-1520-42030 101-430-3100-42000 101-410-1320-42030 Check Sequence: 38 101-410-1940-44010 101420-2220-44010 Check Sequence: 39 101-410-1320-42000 101-410-1320-42000 101-410-132042000 101410-132042000 ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/01/2004 - 3:30 PM) Page 5 Invoice No VendorSATELLIT 24180610 Vendor:SCHILL Claim Vendor SCHWAAB R33792 Vendor:Selectiv Refund Vendor STEICHEN 209336 Vendor:STILLFOR 264382 Vendor:STILLGAZ 00003463 00003464 00003481 00003501 00003502 00003503 00003505 00003506 •00003507 00003510 C5243910 C5241460 Description Satellite Shelters, Inc. Mobile Office Rental Check Total: CliffordSchill Examination Fees Pepin-Schill Fire Dept Check Total: Schwaab, Inc. Imprint Stamps Check Total: Selective Site Consultants Refund on Overpayment - Wireless Permit Check Total: STEICHEN'S RETAIL Baseball Field Equipment -Parks Check Total: Stillwater Ford Vehicle Repairs & Maint. Fire Dept. Check Total: Stillwater Gazette Legal Notice Legal Notice -Old Village Leal Publish Notice - Council Committees Leal Publish Notice- Ordinance Leal Publish Notice - Zoning Leal Publish Notice -Antenna Leal Publish Notice -Fence Leal Publish Notice - Rezone Leal Publish Notice- Zoning District Map Legal Notice Advertise -Finance Advertise -Public Works Check Total: Amount Payment Date Acct Number Check Sequence: 40 319.50 07/06/2004 101-420-2400-44120 319.50 Check Sequence: 41 100.00 07/06/2004 101-420-2220-44370 100.00 Check Sequence: 42 129.51 07/06/2004 101-410-1320-42000 129.51 Check Sequence: 43 50.00 07/06/2004 803-490-9070-44300 50.00 Check Sequence: 44 89.97 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-44030 89.97 Check Sequence: 45 625.01 07/06/2004 101-420-2220-44040 625.01 35.70 84.00 60.90 37.80 29.40 42.00 27.30 27.30 37.80 27.30 122.70 81.80 614.00 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 07/06/2004 Check Sequence: 46 101-410-1320-43510 101-410-1320-43510 101-410-1320-43510 101-10-1320-43510 101-410-1320-43510 101-410-1320-43510 101-10-1320-43510 101-410-1320-43510 101-410-1320-43510 101-410-1320-43510 101-410-1520-44300 101-430-3100 44300 Reference ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled No ACH Enabled: No AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/01/2004 - 3:30 PM) Page 6 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number VendocTASCH T.A. Schifsky & Sons 33057 Sand 33170 Sand Check Total: Vendor:TKDA TKDA, Inc. 067859 Leak Location 5072 Marquess Check Total: Check Sequence: 47 38.74 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-42230 76.32 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-42230 115.06 Check Sequence: 48 210.95 07/06/2004 602-495-9450-43030 210.95 Vendor:TWINCIT Twin City Water Clinic, Inc. Check Sequence: 49 375 Bacteria Analysis June 2004 20.00 07/06/2004 601-494-9400-43030 Check Total: 20.00 Vendor:VFBA Volunteer FirefighterBenefit Asscoiation Annual Membership Dues -Fire Dept. Check Total: Vendor:WASHLIC Washington County License Ctr Vehicle Registration -Bldg dept. Check Total: Vendor:WEARGUA Wear Guard 54114836-2 Uniforms -Bldg Dept. 54114836-3 Uniforms -Bldg Dept. Check Total: Check Sequence: 50 204.00 07/06/2004 101-420-2220-44330 204.00 Check Sequence: 51 1,010.20 07/06/2004 410-480-8000-45500 1,010.20 Check Sequence: 52 25.89 07/06/2004 101-420-2400-44170 25.89 07/06/2004 101-420-2400-44170 51.78 Vendor. WEBBER WebberRecreational Design Inc Check Sequence: 53 379 Materials Playgorund-Carriage Station 1,629.45 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-42250 Check Total: 1,629.45 Vendor: White Be 1019595 White Bear Rental and Sales Lift Rental Check Total: Vendor:WILDWOOD WILDWOOD LODGE 10307 Strategic Planning Meeting Check Total: Check Sequence: 54 137.40 07/06/2004 101-450-5200-44030 137.40 476.88 07/06/2004 476.88 Check Sequence: 55 101-410-1110-44300 Reference ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No ACH Enabled: No AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/01/2004 - 3:30 PM) Page 7 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Vendor:XCEL Xcel Energy Check Sequence: 56 ACH Enabled: No 0073736544169 22.72 07/06/2004 101-430-3160-43810 1684846045176 12.14 07/06/2004 602-495-9450-43810 Check Total: 34.86 Vendor:YOCUM Yocum Oil Company, Inc. Check Sequence: 57 ACH Enabled: No 109968 Oil -Public Works 65.17 07/06/2004 101-430-3100-42150 Check Total: 65.17 Vendor:ZACK Zack's, Inc. Check Sequence: 58 ACH Enabled: No 25244 Shop Supplies 255.72 07/06/2004 101-30-3100-42150 25298 Paint -Public Works 38.21 07/06/2004 101-430-3100-42230 Check Total: 293.93 Total for Check Run: 150,373.44 Total Number of Checks: 58 AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/01/2004 - 3:30 PM) Page 8 Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo MN 55042 PFTERSON. FRAMCXBERGMAN N1 Sa#1.'f1.1fli elaralzzysatianuad FEES EXPENSES 11135-000008 Comp. Plan Update 2000-2020 44.00 0.00 11135-030008 SIMICH FENCE 286.00 3.75 11135-030009 CONROY SEWER 22.00 0.00 11135-040001 PURCHASE OF BROOKFIELD BUILDING 33.00 0.00 ACCOUNT NO: 11135-040005 CARRIAGE STATION DRAINAGE EASEMENT ENCROACHMENT 66.00 0.00 11135-920001 Administration 1,573.00 1.61 2,024.00 5.36 (6511 291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 Page: 1 05/31/2004 11135M ADVANCES BALANCE 0.00 $44.00 0.00 $289.75 0.00 $22.00 0.00 $33.00 0.00 $66.00 0.00 $1,574.61 0.00 $2,029.36 TH15 STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 P5TERSON. FRAMC7BERG1VIAN ptarioyawlizsi' erracrS.V..-nojtritutistSJli'M (651) 291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41.0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3800 Laverne Avenue North ACCOUNT NO: 11135-000008M Lake Elmo MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 21 Comp. Plan Update 2000-2020 05/10/04 JPF Review city reply brief. Jerome P. Filla FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED TOTAL CURRENT WORK BALANCE DUE HOURS 0.40 44.00 0.40 44.00 0.40 44.00 44.00 $44.00 THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-I 197 PF.TERSON. FRAM'BERGMAN I{V1tge1 OM Will UMW it S:NWS-`R.aNiYaaolf/8U (651) 291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41.0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11135-030008M LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 5 SIMICH FENCE HOURS 05/03/04 JPF Telephone conference with C. Smich; rev est; corr to planner. 0.40 44.00 05/05/04 JPF Telephone conference with T. Simich; draft agreement. 0.50 55.00 05/07/04 JPF Draft settlement agreement. 0.60 66.00 05/11/04 JPF Letter to Simick re: settlement agreement. 0.40 44.00 05/12/04 JPF Telephone conference with Simich re: terms of agreement. 0.30 33.00 05/18/04 JPF Telephone conference with Simich re: status; revise agreement. 0.40 44.00 Jerome P. Filla 2.60 286.00 FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED 2.60 286.00 Photocopies Fax Charge - Local TOTAL EXPENSES THRU 05/31/04 SALES TAX ON EXPENSES TOTAL CURRENT WORK 70.50 3.00 3.50 0.25 289.75 BALANCE DUE $289.75 THIS STATEMENT 15 DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul. MN 55101-1197 PERSON. FRAM'BERGMAN sGtl[Y®R�aA]4k'RfNOBr�Rz6'zWd.'E^S®�C�mztlf B�®L'Ctl 16511291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11135-030009M LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 7 CONROY SEWER 05/05/04 JPF Telephone conference with Atty Pecchia re: status on site system. Jerome P. Filla FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED TOTAL CURRENT WORK BALANCE DUE HOURS 0.20 22.00 0.20 22.00 0.20 22.00 22.00 $22.00 THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 PERSON, FRAM BERGMAN b.»rnnnmea (651) 291-8955 (6511 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41.0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3600 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11135-040001M LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 5 PURCHASE OF BROOKFIELD BUILDING 05/07/04 JPF Telephone conference with clerk re: status and appraisal. Jerome P. Filla FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED TOTAL CURRENT WORK BALANCE DUE HOURS 0.30 33.00 0.30 33.00 0.30 33.00 33.00 $33.00 THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-I 197 PF'ERSON, FRAIVICYBERGMAN rMtaois'fi--U tIShW:t IMPASSIM*L tsW Bgai.I (651) 291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID 841.0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11135-040005M LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 1 CARRIAGE STATION DRAINAGE EASEMENT ENCROACHMENT 05/14/04 JPF Telephone conference with Adm, Planner re: carriage station drainage esmt remedies; rev documents. Jerome P. Filla FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED TOTAL CURRENT WORK BALANCE DUE HOURS 0.60 66.00 0.60 66.00 0.60 66.00 66.00 $66.00 THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH W1LL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 PETERSON. FRAMC'BERGMAN (6511291.8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID#41.0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3800 Laverne Avenue North ACCOUNT NO: 11135-920001M Lake Elmo MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 149 Administration HOURS 05/03/04 JPF Review council agenda; T. Clerk. 0.70 77.00 05/04/04 JPF Prepare for council meeting. 2.50 275.00 05/07/04 JPF Telephone conference with clerk re: gambling regs; rev code and statutes; tele adm re: status carriage station drainage; re: status fence reg revisions and moratorium re: conroy sewer request; revise corr re: fence moratorium. 1.10 121.00 JPF Review PC agenda; tele planner. 0.50 55.00 05/10/04 JPF Review CIC agenda. 0.20 22.00 05/17/04 JPF Review council agenda; tele adm. 0.60 66.00 05/18/04 JPF Review CIC corr re: dog fencing - leash regs. 0.30 33.00 JPF Telephone conference with Atty Pecchia; eng re: status, feasibility of alternate system. 0.30 33.00 JPF Prepare for and attend council meeting. 2.60 286.00 05/24/04 JPF Review PC agenda. 0.40 44.00 05/25/04 JPF Telephone conference with Adm re: organizational chart; committee, commissions; statutory positions; planner re: OCC structure regs; clerk re: fence moratorium; revise same. 05/27/04 JPF Conference with McNamara re: Botziak, Anderson, Sweno, Gustafson and Hanson ppty; research re: diversion of surface water by raising level of land. 05/28/04 JPF Telephone conference with clerk re: org chart resolution; council committee resol; Old Village moratorium resolution; draft docs. 0.80 88.00 2.70 297.00 1.20 132.00 THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTHS STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 CITY OF LAKE ELMO Administration PFTERSON, FRAMCIBERGMAN 01@s�/:191 05/31/04 JPF Review council agenda. (651 1291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID (41-0991098 Page: 2 05/31/2004 ACCOUNT NO: 11135-920001M STATEMENT NO: 149 HOURS 0.40 44.00 Jerome P. Filla 14.30 1,573.00 FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED 14.30 1,573.00 Fax Charge - Local 1.50 TOTAL EXPENSES THRU 05/31/04 SALES TAX ON EXPENSES TOTAL CURRENT WORK 1.50 0.11 1,574.61 BALANCE DUE $1,574.61 THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAV OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3600 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo MN 55042 PTERSON, FRAM BERGMAN 11140-030001 Misc Prosecutions 11140-030170 Kuehn, James 11140-030225 FEES 2,370.00 60.00 Wetterstrom, William serious/fatal crash report 30.00 11140-030243 Burch, Kenneth Milton test refusal, 3rd degree DUI 225.00 11140-040011 Miller, Mitchell Hit and run -property damage careless driving 15.00 11140-040015 Garibay, Marcella DAR 11140-040029 Lindberg, David John speed 84/65 5.00 135.00 11140-040080 Graham, Daniel Joseph revoked plates, open bottle, no insurance 5.00 EXPENSES 42.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (6511291-8955 (651) 228-1753 Facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 ACCOUNT NO: ADVANCES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Page: 1 05/31/2004 11140M BALANCE $2,412.16 $60.00 $30.00 $225.00 $15.00 $5.00 $135.00 $5.00 THIS STATEMENT 16 DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 CITY OF LAKE ELMO P '6ERSON. FRAM BERGMAN minim 40-767 ACCOUNT NO: FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES 11140-040081 Berg, Roberta Joseph GM -school bus arm violation 5.00 0.00 0.00 11140-040083 Belluzzo, Jennifer Lynn 2nd degree DUI 52.50 11140-040086 Johnson, Dustin James no proof of insurance, no insurance 5.00 11140-040091 Gray, Angela inattentive driving 11140-040097 Olson, Delores Hattie forged check 11140-040099 Bubb, Jason Earl DAS 11140-040100 Dickman, Amber M. no insurance 5.00 55.00 5.00 5.00 11140-040104 Rodriguez, Ramon James Violation of Protection Order 67.50 11140-040105 Rychlik, Waclaw Andrew 2nd degree DUI 112.50 11140-040111 Barrett, Steven Dale Marshall GM -false info to police 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.61 67.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (651) 291-8955 (65I) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID R41.0991098 Page: 2 05/31/2004 11140M BALANCE $5.00 $52.50 $5.00 $5.00 $55.00 $5.00 $5.00 $67.50 0.00 $67.50 THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 CITY OF LAKE ELMO P _ ERSON. FRAM BERGMAN G Nley ll AMwtatim irateuIii.1Y-YiIJliorma1NN1 11140-040112 Paul, Jonathan Michael DAR, expired registration 11140-040113 Jarosch, Katherine Lillian OFP Violation ACCOUNT NO: FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES 5.00 0.00 0.00 32.50 0.00 11140-040114 Jones, Robert Charles 4th degree DUI, possession of drug paraphenilia 11140-040115 Feia, Suzanne Christine 2nd degree DUI 37.50 0.00 60.00 0.00 11140-040118 Weinand, Mark Allen school bus arm violation 62.50 11140-040124 Erion, Michael Lee GM-DAC-IPS, possess dangerous weapon 62.50 0.00 0.00 3,485.00 43.77 (6511 291-8955 (6511 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID 841-0991098 Page: 3 05/31/2004 11140M BALANCE $5.00 0.00 $32.50 0.00 $37.50 0.00 $60.00 0.00 $62.50 0.00 $62.50 0.00 $3,528.77 THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. SuIle 300 50 East Fifth Street St, Paul. MN 55101-1197 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH LAKE ELMO MN 55042 P ERSON, FRAM BERGMAN ACCOUNT NO: (651) 291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 Page: 1 05/31/2004 11145M FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE 11145-000003 Hill Trail North Street Improvement 22.00 0.00 0.00 $22.00 11145-040001 2004 OVERLAY PROJECT 0.00 11.66 0.00 $11.66 22.00 11.66 0.00 $33.66 THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 PERSON, FRAM'`BERGMAN g:Ytm®111Wabligliatri s`U:O 16-'W-YaYai4:QH$®ffie (6511 291-8955 (6511 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3800 Laverne Avenue North ACCOUNT NO: 11145-000003M Lake Elmo MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 7 Hill Trail North Street Improvement 05/04/04 JPF Telephone conference with Prew re: Gustafson/Hanson fill. Jerome P. Filla FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED TOTAL CURRENT WORK BALANCE DUE HOURS 0.20 22.00 0.20 22.00 0.20 22.00 22.00 $22.00 THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTB'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 P TERSON, FRAMCIBERGMAN otctasatsas.7e11Foaeroaarsyt-Atnimormonto y (651) 291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11145-040001M LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 1 2004 OVERLAY PROJECT Photocopies 10.90 TOTAL EXPENSES THRU 05/31/04 10.90 SALES TAX ON EXPENSES 0.76 TOTAL CURRENT WORK 11.66 BALANCE DUE $11.66 THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTHS STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo MN 55042 PFTERSON. FRA1VICTBERGIVIAN ACCOUNT NO: (6511 291-8955 (6511 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 Page: 1 05/31/2004 11150M FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE 11150-000003 RECO Property Permits 44.00 1.61 0.00 $45.61 11150-040004 WHISTLING VALLEY SECOND ADDITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.00 11150-040005 LAKEWOOD EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH - REZONING - SUP 66.00 0.00 0.00 $66.00 110.00 1.61 0.00 $111.61 THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo MN 55042 RECO Property Permits P3'ERSON FRAMC''BERGMAN Y e ra.YarayF.'n Me.tka ashSs'Y.oa lep aYIt4M.3 (6511291.8955 (6511 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 Page: 1 05/31/2004 ACCOUNT NO: 11150-000003M STATEMENT NO: 20 05/28/04 JPF Review planner memo, file; tele clerk re: status of plat. Jerome P. Filla FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED HOURS 0.40 44.00 0.40 44.00 0.40 44.00 Fax Charge - Local 1.50 TOTAL EXPENSES THRU 05/31/04 1.50 SALES TAX ON EXPENSES 0.11 TOTAL CURRENT WORK 45.61 BALANCE DUE $45.61 THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Flfth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 PFTERSON. FRAM IBERGMAN BAYtWsM -'lti`16r raW:kw+I:uatoc k4lit 1wro (6511291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11150-040004M LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 4 WHISTLING VALLEY SECOND ADDITION Fax Charge - Local BALANCE DUE $0.00 THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAV OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 PETERSON. FRAMC'BERGMAN PR taUlm *-'s11 R•APi:7 NIIDIMIOSeRMINIDad (651) 291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41.0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3800 Laverne Avenue North ACCOUNT NO: 11150-040005M Lake Elmo MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 1 LAKEWOOD EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH - REZONING - SUP 05/18/04 JPF Review concept plans; code; tele planner. Jerome P. Filla FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED TOTAL CURRENT WORK BALANCE DUE HOURS 0.60 66.00 0.60 66.00 0.60 66.00 66.00 $66.00 THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH LAKE ELMO MN 55042 PFTERSON. FRAM 'BERGMAN MAU.s*.-0101i w:D 11910-" . iltAgli 11161-040002 Rychlik, Waclaw Andrew vehicle forfeiture ACCOUNT NO: (6511 291-8955 (6511 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID 84 I.0991098 Page: 1 05/31/2004 11161M FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE 99.00 0.00 99.00 0.00 0.00 $99.00 0.00 $99.00 THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Suite 300 50 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1197 _PTTERSON. FRAMC'BERGMAN witty aYrat-'s*Iktwwarm' moo (651f 291-8955 (651) 228-1753 facsimile Federal Tax ID #41-0991098 Page: 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 05/31/2004 3600 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11161-040002M LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 2 Rychlik, Waclaw Andrew vehicle forfeiture 05/03/04 JPF Review repts for forfeiture basis. 05/05/04 JPF Telephone conference with deft atty re: forfeiture of car. 05/26/04 JPF Review demand for judicial review; tele deft atty. Jerome P. Filla FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED TOTAL CURRENT WORK BALANCE DUE HOURS 0.30 33.00 0.20 22.00 0.40 44.00 0.90 99.00 0.90 99.00 99.00 $99.00 THIS STATEMENT l5 DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH. PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT. Lake Elmo City Council July 6, 2004 Agenda Section: Consent Agenda No. 4.B Agenda Item: Consent Item: Hire Finance Specialist Background Information for July 6. 2004: The process of recruiting, reviewing, interviewing and selecting the Finance Specialist has concluded. Fifteen applicants applied for the position, ten were identified for the first interview and three were recalled for a second interview. The City Administrator and Finance Director have selected the most qualified person for the position. The applications were reviewed and rated by the Administrator and Finance Director. The selected applicants were presented with the same interview questions involving payables, receivables, payroll, utility billing, fund accounting and management, financial management and technology. The first interview was conducted by the Finance Director and City Clerk. The second interview and selection process was completed by the Administrator and Finance Director using a similar process. The individual selected, . has accepted the position for the compensation as budgeted and as planned for in the 2004 budget. Action Items: Approve hiring of selected candidate. Attachments: Person responsible: Martin Rafferty City Administrator Lake Elmo City Council July 16, 2004 Agenda Section: CONSENT AGENDA No. 4C. Agenda Item: 2004 Overlay Project:Final Payment to Tower Asphalt Backeround Information for Julv 6.2004: The City Engineer reported the 2004 Overlay Project is $6,300.00 over the bid price due to more patching that was estimated and for additional catch basin reconstruction work. He recommends approval of Compensating Change Order Number 1 in the amount of $6,279.55 and approval of Final Payment to Tower Asphalt in the amount of $69,079.55. Action Item: Adopt Resolution No. 2004-051, A Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $6,300.00 and Final Payment of $69,079.55 to Tower Asphalt for the 2004 Overlay Project, as recommended by the City Engineer in his memo dated July 1, 2004. Attachments: 1. July 1, 2004 memo from Tom Prew 2. Resolution No. 2004-051 Person responsible: T New CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004-051 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 and FINAL PAYMENT TO TOWER ASPHALT FOR THE 2004 OVERLAY PROJECT BE IT RESOLVED, that the Lake Elmo City Council hereby approves Compensating Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $6,279.55. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Lake Elmo City Council approves the final payment to TOWER ASPHALT in the amount of $69,079.55 for work completed on the 2004 Overlay Project, verified by the City Engineer in his memo dated July 1, 2004. ADOPTED by the Lake Elmo City Council the 6th day of July, 2004. Lee Hunt, Mayor ATTEST: Martin J. Rafferty, City Administrator JUL-01-2004 15:03 TKDA 651 292 0083 P.01 TKDA ENGINEERS•ARCHITWIS•PLANNERS July 1, 2004 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Re: 2004 Overlay Project City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota TKDA Commission No. 12996-03 1500 PiperJaota9 Plara 444 Cedar Street Saint Pall, Ma 55101.2140 (651) 292J400 (651) 292-0083 fax www.tkda.00m Dear Sir or Madam: The contractor has completed this project. The project is $6,300.00 over the bid price due to there being more patching than was estimated last fall, and for additional catch basin reconstruction work. City Council Action Requested Approve Compensating Change Order Number 1 in the amount of $6,279.55. Approve final payment in the amount of $69,079,55. Sincerely Thomas D. Prew, P.E. Project Manager TDP:tlb An EmPteYeeOwned co mAY PmmminoAmrmauvoAction and Equal Opporo * JUL-01-2004 15:04 TKDA 651 292 0083 P.02 TKDA ME. VEERS • AROKITEcrS • PLANNERS 1500 Piper Js11r' Plana 444 CedarStteet Sant Paul, MN 85101.2140 (051) 292-4400 (661) 202.0033 Fax www.tkda,com Comm. No. 12996-02 Cert. No. 1 (final1 St. Paul, MN. June 23 .20 04 To City of Lake Elmo. Minnesota Owner This Certifies that Tower Asphalt. Inc. . Contractor For 2004 Overlays Is entitled to S'xty-Nine Thousand Seventy Nine Dollars and 55/100-------..... FINAL being 1st estimate for dal payment on contract with you dated Auril 20 Received payment in full of above Certificate. TKDA Tower Asphalt, Inc. ,20 Thomas D. Prow, P.E. RECAPITULATION OF ACCOUNT CONTRACT PLUS B)C RA.S I PAYMENTS Contract Write plus etas $ 62.gOp,OO+ 1 Allpxtviouspayncnts $ Allprevious credits Extra No. ) Compensating Change OaderNo.1 l I $ 6,279.55 $ 11 It Credit No, AMOUNT OP THIS CBR 1'1N'ICATE Totals Credit Balance Mere will remain unpaid on contract after payment of this Certificate $ 69,079.55 69.079.55 I $ 69,079,55 I $ 69,079.55 k $ 69,079.55 II $ An Employee Owned Company promodnp a matNe Mien and Equal Opportunity 69,079.55 ) 2004 CREDITS 4 JUL-01-2004 15:04 TKDR 551 292 0083 P.03 TKDA Engineers -Architects -Planners Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 PERIODICAL ESTIMATE FOR PARTIAL PAYMENTS FINAL Estimate No 1 Period Ending June 23 20 04 Page 1 of 1 Conn. No. 12966-02 Contractor Sower Asvhalt Ise. Original Contract Amount S62_800.00 Project 2004 Overlays Location City of Take Elmo. Minnesota Total Contract Work Completed Total Approved Credits Total Approved Extra Work Completed Approved Extra Orders Amount Completed Total Amount Earned This Estimate $ 69,079.55 $ 0.00 0,00 $ 0,00 $ 69,079,55 Less Approved Credits $ 0.00 Less 0 % Retained $ 0.00 Less Previous Payments $ 0.00 Total Deductions $ 0.00 Amount Dike This Estimate Contractor Engineer Thomas D. Prew, P.E. Date Date Tune 23. 2004 69,079.55 JUL-01-2004 15:04 TKDA 651 292 0083 P.04 ESTIMATE N0.1 2004 OVERLAYS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA TKDA COMMISSION NO. 12996-02 ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION SANITARY SEWER 1 MOBILIZATION 2 REPAIR CATCH BASIN/REPLACE CASTING 3 4° THICK BITUMINOUS PATCH MIXTURE LVNW350308 4 BITUMINOUS WEARING/LEVELING COURSE MIXTURE LVWE45030B 5 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT PERIOD ENDING: June 23.2004 CONTRACT QUANTITY UNIT UNIT QUANTITY TO DATE PRICE LS 1 1.0 $ 3,000.00 $ EA 7 9.8 $ 1,250.00 $ SY 50 252.0 $ 25,00 $ AMOUNT TO DATE 3,000.00 12,260.00 6,300.00 TN 1,600 1.523.4 $ 30.75 $ 48,844.56 GAL 600 885.0 $ 7.00 $ 685.00 TOTAL ESTIMATE NO.7 $ 69,079,56 12996-02 JUL-01-2004 15:05 TKDR 651 292 0093 P.05 Saint Paul, MN Tune m To Tower Asobalt for 2004 Overlays for City of Lake Elnto. Minnesota CHANGE ORDER. TKDA Engineers -Architects -Planners Compensating 20 04 Comm. No. 12996.02 Change Order No. You are hereby directed to make the following change to Ariril 20 , 20 04 . The change and the work affected thereby is subject to covenants. This Change Order will (increase) (decrease) (not change) the contract sutnby Six Thousand Two Hundred Seventy -Nine Dotlars and 55/100 ($ COMPENSATING CHANGE ORDBR 1 your contract dated all comma stipulations and 6279.55 ). This change order shows the actual quantities installed at the unit price bid amounts (see attached itemization): NET CHANGE Amount of Original Contract Additions approved to date (Nos. Deductions approved to date (Nos. Conttactamouut to date Amount of this grange Order (Add) (Sedest) (No-Cli nge) Revised Contract At punt Approved City of Lake Elmo. Minnesota Owner By Approved- Tower Asphalt, lno. Contractor By TKDA Thomas D. Prow, P.E. White • Owner Pink - Contractor Blue - TKDA 6,279.55 62,800.00 62,800.00 6,279.55 69,079.55 JUL-01-2004 15:05 TKDP COMPENSATING CHANGE ORDER N0,1 2004 OVERLAYS CITY OF LAKE ELMO. MINNESOTA TRIM COMMISSION NO.12600-02 651 292 0083 P.06 PERIOD ENDING: June 23, 2004 ITEM CONTRACT QUANTITY A/- UNIT AMOUNT NET CONTRACT NO, DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY TO DATE DIFFERENCE PRICE TO DATE CHANGE AMOUNT SANITARY SEWER 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 1.0 - $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ $ 3.030.00 2 REPAIR CATCH BASIN/REPLACE CASTING EA 7 9.6 2.0 $ 1,25000 $ 12,260,00 $ 3,500.00 $ 6,750.00 3 e THICK BITUMINOUS PATCH MIXTURE LVNW360303 SY 50 252.0 202,0 $ 25.00 $ 0,300.00 $ 5,050,00 S 1,250.00 4 BITUMINOUS WEARING/LEVELING COURSE MIXTURE LVWE450303 TN 1,600 1,623.4 (76.6) S 90,75 $ 46,544.55 $ (2,355.45) $ 49,200,00 5 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT (4AI. 600 6550 66,0 $ 1.00 $ 66100 $ 65.00 $ 600.00 TOTAL COMPENSATING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 $ 69A7LSS S 0$70.$0 $ 82,500.00 1295E-02 TOTAL P.06 Lake Elmo City Council July 16, 2004 Agenda Section: CONSENT AGENDA No. 4D. Agenda Item: Hill Trail North and 50th Street N. Street Reconstruction:Partial Payment to T.A. Schifsky Backeround Information for July 6. 2004: The City Engineer reported T.A. Schifsky and Sons has completed the wear course paving and turf establishment. The engineer met with the contractor on the punch list items remaining. Tom Prew recommends approval of Partial Payment No. 3 to T.A. Schifsky and Sons in the amount of $62,278.41 in his July 1, 2004 memo. Action Item: Adopt Resolution No. 2004-052, A Resolution Approving Partial Payment No. 3 in the amount of $62,278.41 to T.A. Schifsky and Sons for the Hill Trail North and 50th Street N. Street Reconstruction, as recommended by the City Engineer in his memo dated July 1, 2004. Attachments: 1. July 1, 2004 memo from Tom Prew 2. Resolution No. 2004-052 Person responsible: T.Prew CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004-052 A RESOLUTION APPROVING PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 TO T.A. SCHIFSKY AND SONS FOR THE HILL TRAIL NORTH AND 50TH STREET N. RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT BE IT RESOLVED, that the Lake Elmo City Council hereby approves Partial Payment No. 3 in the amount of $62,278.41. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Lake Elmo City Council approves the partial payment to T.A. SCHIFKSY AND SONS in the amount of $62,278.41 for work completed on the Hill Trail North and 50th Street N. Reconstruction Project, verified by the City Engineer in his memo dated July 1, 2004. ADOPTED by the Lake Elmo City Council the 6th day of July, 2004. Lee Hunt, Mayor ATTEST: Martin J. Rafferty, City Administrator JUL-01-2004 15:10 TKD8 651 292 0083 P.01 TKDA ENGINEERS -ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS July 1, 2004 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Lake Ehno, Minnesota Re: Hill Trail North and 50th Street North Street Reconstruction City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota TKDA Commission No. 12170-03 Dear Sir or Madam: 1500 PiperJaftray Plaza 444 cedarstmet Saint Paul, MN 55101-2140 (601) 292.4400 (e51) 20241083 Fax www.ticda.cdm The contractor has completed wear course paving and turf establishment. There are only a few punch list items remaining to complete this project. I have met with the contractor on these items and they will be completing them shortly. City Council Action Requested Approve Partial Payment No. 3 in the amount of $62,278.41. Sincerely, Thomas D. Prew, P.E. Project Manager TDPttlb An Employee Owned Company PrmnoUng Affirmative Aotion and Equal 0pporwntd JUL-01-2004 15:11 TKDA 651 292 0083 P.02 TKDA ENGINEERS • ARGHtTE01S • PLANNERS Comm. No. 12170-02 Cert. No. 3 To City of Lake Elmo. Minnesota This Certifies that T.A. Schifsky & Sons. Inc. 1500 Net Jenny Plaza 444 Cedar Street 8eint Paul, PAN 55101-2140 (851) 292.4400 (651) 292.0003 Fax www.tkda.com St. Paul, MN. December 23 .20 03 Owner , Contractor For Hill Trail North and 50th Street North Street Reconstruction Is entitled to Sixty -Two Thousand Two Hundred Seventv-Eieht Dollars and 41/100 ----- ($62,278.41 1 being 3rd estimate for partial payment on contract with you dated Aueust 8 2003 Received payment in full of above Certificate. TKDA T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. 20 Thomas D. Prow, P.L. RECAPITULATION OF ACCOUNT Contract price plus extras Allpxevious payments All previous credits Extra No. Change Order No. 1 Credit No. AMOUNT OP THIS CERTIFICATE Totals Credit Balance There writ rerroin unpaid on contract atter payment afthis Certificate I 1$ N$ CONTRACT PLUS EXTRAS 401,646.35 10,464.87 417,111.22 1$ PAYMENTS 272,709.75 $ 62,278.41 $ 334,988.16 $ $ $ 77,123.06 412,111,22I S 412,111.22 II $ An Employee Owned Company Promomv AtIlmiaoia Ration and Eno (Oppnnunay CREDITS JUL-01-2004 15:11 TKDA 651 292 0083 P.03 TKDA Engineers -Architects -Planters Saint Paul, lvlinnesota 55101 PERIODICAL ESTIMATE FOR PARTIAL PAYMENTS Estimate No, 3 Period Ending December 15 .20 03 Page 1 of 1 Comm No. 12170-02 Contractor T. A. Schifskv & Sons _ Original Contract Amount $401.646.35 Project Hill Trail North and 50th Street North Street Reconstntction Location Citv of Lake Elmo. Minnesota Total Contract Work Completed $ 342,154.25 Total Approved Credits $ 0.00 Total Approved Extra Work Completed (Change Order No. 1) $ 10,464.87 Approved Extra Orders Amount Completed $ 10,464.87 Total Amount Earned This Estimate Less Approved Credits Leas 5 %Retained Less Previous Payments Total Deductions Anwunt Dne This Estimate Contractor Engineer T,A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Thomas D. Prew, P,E. $ 0.00 $ 17,630.96 $ 272,709.75 $ 352,619.12 $ 290,340.71 $ 62,278.41 Date Date December 23.2003 651 292 0053 P.04 JUL-01-2004 15:11 TKDA ESTIMATE N0. 3 HILL TRAIL NORTH AND 50TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA COMMISSION NO. 12170-02 PERIOD ENDING: December 15, 2003 ITEM CONTRACT OUANTiTY UNIT AMOUNT NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY TO DATE PRICE 70 DATE , HILL TRNL NORTH MD SOTH STREET RECONSTRUCTION 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1.0 1.0 $ 19,000.00 $ 19,000-00 2 CLEARING TR 25.0 25.0 $ 100.00 5 2,500.00 3 GRUBBING TR 26.0 25.0 $ 100.00 $ 2,500.00 4 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) LF 260,0 357.0 $ 12.00 $ 4,284.00 5 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 60.0 83.88 $ 3.10 $ 259.41 6 REMOVE BIT SURFACE SY 13,700.0 13525.48 $ 1.00 $ 13,525.48 7 REMOVEBURIED DEBRIS CY 150.0 - $ 26.2E 5 8 REMOVE CATCH BASIN EA 2.0 5,0 i 375.00 $ 1,875A0 9 SALVAGE PLATE BEAM GUARD RAIL LF 100.0 - $ 4.75 3 - 10 SAW CUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LF 750.0 780.0 $ 3,00 5 2,340.00 11 SAw CUT CONCRETE PAVEMENT LF 60.0 96,0 $ 4.00 $ 304.00 12 COMMON EXCAVATION (P) CY 5,563.0 5,563,0 $ 6.30 $ 35,048.90 13 COMMON EXCAVATION FOR PONT) CY 400.0 400.0 $ 6.30 5 2,520.00 14 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION CY 2,000.0 366.1 6,30 $ 2,306.43 15 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY 200.0 - $ 14,20 $ 16 COMMON LABORERS NR 20,0 - 5 65.00 § • 17 WATER FOR DUST CONTROL MGAL 40.0 10.50 5 25.00 $ 262.50 18 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 6 TN 11,000,0 10,501.41 $ 9.00 5 94,542.59 19 SAWED/SEALED JOINT LF 1,775,0 - $ 1,65 S - 20 4" THICK BITUMINOUS PATCH SY 50.0 - $ 19,50 $ - 21 TYPE LV AGG 4 WEARING COURSE TN 1,370.0 15.76 $ 36.00 5 558,08 22 TYPE LVAGG. 3NON-WEARING COURSE TN 1,620.0 1,43&45 $ 35.50 S 51,064.96 23 TYPE LV AGG. 4 WEARING COURSE 2" THICK FOR DRIVEWAY SY 485,0 1.283.0 5 15.00 5 19,245.00 24 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 700.0 5.0 $ 1.28 $ 8.2E 25 12 CMP CULVERT INCL. END APRON LF 36.0 30.0 $ 2625 $ 767.50 26 12" RC PIPE SEWER CLASS V DESIGN 3006 LF 208.0 370.0 $ 42.00 5 15,540.00 27 15"RC PIPE SEWER CLASSV DESIGN3008 LF 135,0 603.0 S 33.60 $ 20,269.80 28 16" RC PIPE SEWER CLASS V DESIGN 3000 LF 32.0 71.0 $ 52.50 S 3,727.50 29 12" RC PIPE APRON EA 7,0 11.0 $ 525.00 $ 5,775.00 30 18" RC PIPE APRON EA 3.0 4.0 $ 656.00 $ 2.624,00 31 CONSTRUCT CATCH BASIN DESIGN 4021D EA 8.0 12.0 $ 1,880.00 5 20,160.00 32 CONSTRUCT SURFACE DRAIN 24" EA 1,0 1.0 5 787.50 S 787.50 33 CONSTRUCT STORM SEWER MH DESIGN 48' EA 3.0 1.0 $ 1.578.00 S 1,575.00 34 D412 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LF 300.0 280.0 $ 12,60 $ 3,150.00 35 6' BITUMINOUSCURB LF 150.0 83.0 S 6.00 § 864.00 36 INSTALL SALVAGED STEELPLATE BEAM GUARO PAIL - INCLUDING NEW POSTS AS NECESSARY LF 100.0 67.2 S. 17.60 5 1652,16 37 INSTALL TWISTED END TREATMENT EA 2.0 2.0 $ 1,417.60 5 2,635.00 90,18 5 38 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY 103.0 50.40 $ 4,546.07 39 FLAG PERSON HR 40.0 89.0 5 65.00 S 4,48500 40 4' DOUBLE SOLID LINE YELLOW -PAINT LF 2,000.0 - $ 0.7E $ 41 INLET PROTECTION AT CS EA 10.0 11.0 $ 135.00 $ 1,485.00 42 SEEDING COMPLETE WITH TYPE 2613 SEEDMULTURE SY 600.0 • $ 0.90 5 - 43 WOOD FIBER BLANKET 'TYPE II 6Y BW.O - 5 1.00 $ - 44 SODDING TYPE 1 SY 2,000,0 S 2A0 $ SUBTOTAL ESTIMATE NO. 2 5 342,154.25 CHANGE ORDER NO.1 1 FURNISH ANT INSTALL RIP RAP CY 120 5 30.33 $ 459.96 2 FURNISH, INSTALL, AND MAINTAIN SILT FENCE 15 750.0 $ 1.95 $ 1,470,00 3 FURNISH AND INSTALL 6" PVC CULVERT LF 32.0 $ 26.63 $ 852.16 4 FURNISH AND INSTALL DIAMOND BLOCK RETAINING WALL LS 1.0 $ 1,207.90 $ 1,207.80 5 ADDITIONAL COST ABOVE UN PRICESTO INSTALL STORM SEWER WORK ALONG SOTH STREET LS 1.0 $ 6,474.85 $ 6.474,85 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 S 10,464.87 TOTAL ESTIMATE NO. 3 $ 352,619.12 TOTAL P.04 Lake Elmo City Council 07-06-2004 Agenda Section: Consent Agenda No . 4E Agenda Item: Liquidation of Equipment Background Information for July 06. 2004: On February 03, 2004 the City Council, directed staff to contract street sweeping services for the Spring of 2004 and retain the Street Sweeper pending review of the program. I have been advised by the Public Works Director that the Street Sweeping went as anticipated and recommends the sale of the Elgin Street Sweeper. The Fire Department has recently put the new Grass Rig in service. Due to the limited interior storage space, the Fire Chief has determined it would deteriorate with continued outside storage and recommends selling the 1985 Dodge Grass Rig. The new Building Official vehicle has been put in service and the existing vehicle has been passed along to the Building Inspector. The 1995 Ford Crown Victoria is now surplus and should be sold. The staff recommends the above equipment/vehicles be advertised for sale through the Seal Bid process with a minimum price. Action Items: Person resnonsible: Tom Bouthilet Attachments: Lake Elmo City Council July 6, 2004 Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9A Agenda Item: Zoning Ordinance Amendment — Uses in Limited Business Zone (LB) Background Information for July 6. 2004: A prospective Lake Elmo business has inquired regarding the ability to locate a Beauty Salon/Day Spa in the Limited Business zoning district. Staff has advised the business owner that neither proposed use is defined by the City Code nor listed as either Permitted or Conditional in the LB zone, but that staff could request the Planning Commission and City Council to determine whether the uses could be added to that zoning district as allowable under certain circumstances. On June 28, 2004 the Planning Commission conducted a Noticed Public Hearing to consider including "Beauty Salons" as an LB Conditional Use; and to allow Day Spas as an Accessory Use (only) to Beauty Salons. While not a Zoning Ordinance amendment (but rather a City Code amendment to Section 150, "Definitions"), the Commission also considered definitions of "Beauty Salon" and Day Spa". Following the Public Hearing the Commission unanimously acted to recommend approval of the staff prepared drafts of amendments to the LB zoning district list of Allowable Uses to include Beauty Salons as a Conditional Use and Day Spas as an Accessory Use only to Beauty Salons. The Commission also unanimously recommended adding the definitions of "Beauty Salon" and "Day Spa" to Section 150 of the City Code as a companion action. The Commission made some minor wording modifications to the staff proposed definitions — which have been incorporated in the attached draft ordinances. Action items: 1. Motion to adopt Ordinance #97 -{` gadding "Beauty Salon" as an allowed Conditional Use in the Limited Business Zone; and adding "Day Spa" as an allowed Accessory Use in the Limited Business Zone, as recommended by thhHeytanning Commission. 2. Motion to adopt Ordinance #97 -1, tending Section 150 of the City Code ("Definitions") to include a definition for "Beauty Salon" and a definition for "Day Spa", as recommended by the Planning Commission. Attachments: 1. Draft Ordinance #97 dding Uses to the LB Zone 2. Draft Ordinance #97 - , Amending Section 150 of the Code 3. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of June 28, 2004 4. Planning Staff Memo Person resndu ible: City Time Allocated: CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 97-134 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 150 OF THE LAKE ELMO MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCLUDE DEFINITIONS OF A BEAUTY SALON AND DAY SPA Section 1. Amendment: Section 150 "Definitions" of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code is hereby amended to include the definitions of a Beauty Salon and Day Spa, to wit: Beauty Salon Any commercial establishment, residence, or other establishment, place, or event wherein cosmetology is offered or practiced on a regular basis for compensation. An establishment or place where on or more persons engage in the practice of cosmetology. including hair care, nail care, and skin care on a regular basis for compensation. Day Spa A safe, clean commercial establishment, which employs professional licensed therapists whose services include massage and body or facial treatments. Treatments may include body packs and wraps, exfoliation, cellulite and heat treatments, electrolysis, body toning, waxing, aromatherapy, cleansing facials, medical facials, nonsurgical face lifts, electrical toning, and electrolysis. Services may also include Hydrotherapy and steam and sauna facilities, nutrition and weight management. No services or facilities may be offered or constructed that would include customer over night stay. Section 2. Effective Date: This ordinance shall become effective upon its passage and publication according to law. ADOPTED by the Lake Elmo City Council this day of 2004. Lee Hunt, Mayor ATTEST: Martin Rafferty, City Administrator CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE 97 —135 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 307.07 SUBDIVISION 4.K.3. AND 4. RELATING TO CONDITIONAL AND ACCESSORY USES IN THE LIMITED BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT Section 1. Amendment: Section 307.07, Subdivision 4.K.3.and 4. of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follow, to wit: 3. Conditional Uses. Limited Business Art Sale and Gallery Bicycle Sales Boats and Fishing Equipment Sales and Service Business Services Furniture, Home Furnishings and Related Equipment Greenhouses and Nurseries Landscaping Services; flowers and floral accessories. Licensed Dependent Care Centers Limited Retail Uses clearly accessory to the permitted principal use of the land 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area Uses normally associated with Office Developments (photocopy and printing shops, travel agencies.) and containing limited retail activity. 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area Medical, Dental and Research Laboratories Motorcycle Sales Pre- School Facilities Beauty Salons Skiing Equipment Snowmobile Sales and Service Sporting Goods Transmission Facilities for Teleconferencing Veterinary Clinics Vineyard and Winery Produce and Sales 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area Are not free-standing and do not extend more than 20 feet above the building to which they are attached. 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area No crematorium, outdoor kennels or storage. 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area 4. Accessory Uses. Limited Business Within the Limited Business District, the following are allowed provided they are subordinate to and associated with a permitted or conditional use: Satellite Dish Antennas to permit teleconferencing Landscape Buffers, Wildlife Areas, Internal Picnicking Areas, Walking/Jogging Trails Internal Privately Owned and Maintained Roads for off-street parking and loading areas, between building within a single platted lot Other Uses Customarily Associated with, and clearly incidental to a permitted use, as determined by the Council. Day Spas as Accessory to Beauty Salons Note: Facilities for the operation of helicopters and STOL aircraft are expressly forbidden. Section 2. Effective Date: This ordinance shall become effective upon its passage and publication according to law. ADOPTED by the Lake Elmo City Council this day of 2004. Lee Hunt, Mayor ATTEST: Martin Rafferty, City Administrator Excerpt of Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from June 28, 2004 Salon/Spa as a Conditional Use in the LB Zoning District PDRAFr Public Hearing: To add Salon/Spa as a Conditional Use in the LB District The Planner reported that, as directed at the last Commission meeting, he had published a Notice of Public Hearing to consider amendment of the LB zoning district to allow a Salon/Day Spa Use as proposed by a potential business owner in the Prairie Ridge Office Park. He continued that he has structured the proposed amendment to include Beauty Salon as a LB Conditional Use; and, Day Spa as Accessory to Beauty Salon. He said he also developed definitions for both Beauty Salon and Day Spa for inclusion in Section 150 of the City Code. He noted that the Hearing does not include the definitions, since they are not a part of the Zoning Ordinance section of the Code. Commissioner Sedro said she was confused since the definition proposed for of Beauty Salon can include a vehicle. The Planner said we should probably remove the words vehicle. He noted that the definitions proposed came from an APA Glossary of planning terms. Commissioner Van Pelt said the Zoning Ordinance prohibits Beauty Shops as a Home Occupation, but the proposed definition says it could be allowed in a residence. Also, he said that the part that says Salon/Day Spa is nurturing, safe, clean, etc., might be somewhat subjective. He noted that the list of treatments does not include massage; and, suggested that Day Spa exclude overnight resort spa scenarios. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING 9:42 PM Ms. Mary Gander Ms. Gander said she appreciates the work done by the Planning Commission for future situations and applications. She said her plan is for a lovely, upscale facility that will enhance the community. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:44 P.M. M/S/P, Ptacek/Sessing, To recommend to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow Beauty Salon as a Conditional Use in the LB Zone with a 20,000 sq. ft. maximum floor area, and to allow Day Spa as an Accessory Use to a Beauty Salon; and, to recommend amending the definitions of Beauty Salon and Day Spas but removing "residence" and "vehicle" from the definition of Beauty Salon, and to add language to differentiate between Day Spa and Overnight Spa. VOTE: 9:0. MEMO (June 21, 2004 for the Meeting of June 28) To: Lake El ,� P1._ing Commission Subject: Amendment to the Limited Business District — "Salon/Day Spa" By a letter of May 12, 2004 a potential tenant of the Prairie Ridge Office Park (Highway 5 and Stillwater Blvd.) has requested the City consider amending the List of uses allowable in the Limited Business District to include Salons/Spas as described by the May 12 letter (attached). On May 14 the Planning Commission directed Staff to publish a Notice of Public Hearing to consider the proposed amendment. A generic Hearing Notice has been published in the City's Official Newspaper, and a Public Hearing should be conducted on May 28. Staff review of the current Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance regarding the uses described and proposed to be added to the Limited Business District reveals the following: 1. "Beauty Shops" is a Permitted Use in the General Business District, while "Beauty Services" is a Permitted Use in the Convenience Business District. 2. Neither "Beauty Shops" nor "Beauty Services" are defined in Section 150 of the Code. 3. Neither "Salon" nor "Day Spa" is referenced as uses in any commercial zoning district, nor is either term defined by Section 150. 4. There is no reference to any of these uses in the Limited Business Zone. 5. The only other reference in the Zoning Ordinance to these uses is the prohibition of "beauty shops" as a Home Occupation (Section 150). 6. The Convenience Business Zone (see #1 above) is included in the Zoning Ordinance, but no land is so zoned in Lake Elmo today. However, this zone was not repealed in prior years — as was the Highway Business Zone. The original authors of the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance obviously determined that "Beauty Shops" are a reasonable use in the most intensive (GB) zone without limitation as to scale. In addition the familiar terms "...clearly incidental and subordinate to the allowed uses..." describe the range of accessory uses permitted in the GB zone. Based on the description and principal/accessory relationship of the use(s) in the Gander May 12 letter, it would appear that the "Salon" and "Day Spa" would probably be permitted in the GB zone as accessory to the "beauty shop", even though not referred to directly by the Ordinance. The same appears to be the case with the Convenience Business Zone (CB), but that is of little consequence, since the CB zone is not in use. With the repeal of the Highway Business zone; and the non-use of the Convenience Business zone, only three commercial zoning districts effectively remain in Lake Elmo: Business Park, General Business and Limited Business. With Business Park being very specialized, the net availability becomes but two zones. It is not unusual with a Euclidian zoning ordinance (such as the current Lake Elmo ordinance) to allow identical uses in commercial zones of varying intensity as "Permitted" in the more intense zone; and, as "Conditional" in the less intense zone. This strategy is in recognition that some uses can coexist with those of lesser intensity under certain conditions. If those uses can not meet those conditions, the option remains for the proponents to secure land zoned at the more intense use level. The 20+ year old term "beauty shops" may fit this description. In the 20+ years since the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance was last addressed in total, the concept of "beauty shop" has, in most cases, matured into a broader use termed "Salon" (including both hair care and other related services). The "Day Spa" concept of addling a social club setting to the Salon service is a more recent concept. If the some of the floor area of services related to hair care and the floor area of the use devoted to social activities remains Less than the floor area of the use directly related to hair care, the principal use does not vary a great deal from the original "beauty shop". In that case, it could be argued that allowing a salon as a principal use (be it Permitted or Conditional) is a contemporary replacement for the dated "beauty shop"; and, only the day spa could be considered a truly new use. The LB section of the Zoning Ordinance does not allow Accessory Uses to Conditional Uses — only Accessory Uses to Permitted uses. While, based on a lesser floor area than the salon use, a day spa might today be considered "customarily incidental" to a salon, that will not suffice in the Limited Business District if a salon use is to be Conditional — as are most LB uses. The day spa must be itself a specified Conditional Use, I believe it will also be necessary to add definitions of both "salon" and "day spa" to Section 150 of the City Code. I have attached zoning ordinance amendment language that addresses this issue in the manner above described. I have also attached the Section 150 definitions that accompany any recommendation to the City Council in this regard. To: Mr. Chuck Dillerude, City of Lake Elmo Date: 5-12-04 RE: Application for conditional use permit to locate an upscale Dayspa and Salon in the Lake Elmo's new Prairie View Ridge business development The location and esthetics of the new Prairie View Ridge business development in Lake Elmo are most impressive to me and I would like to purchase one of the buildings currently planned for construction, from Mr. Pete Tachney. Therefore, I would like to apply for a conditional use permit for proper zoning in the current `limited business' designation, for an upscale Dayspa & Salon business. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DAYSPA & SALON We envision the Dayspa and Salon to have an elegant, upscale look and feel. It will be a place fear clients to come, not only for the highest quality hair, skin, and nail services, but also for socializing in an attractive, relaxing, atmosphere. Services to be offered by the proposed Dayspa & Salon: Hair cutting, styling, and related hair care services Manicure and pedicure; and certified massage therapy Facials, skin care, hair waxing/removal; and make-up application for special occasions A limited selection of fine quality hair, skin, and beauty products will be available for purchase. (We will NOT be selling coffee, liquor or food.) We envision starting with 10-12 hair styling stations, perhaps growing to 18 stations sometime in the future. We will have 4 manicure and pedicure stations, 2 esthetician rooms and 2 massage rooms. The interior entry will be especially elegant and inviting, including a large waiting area with a fireplace, tastefully decorated with attractive furnishings and accents. The reception counter and display of selected beauty products will also be located in the entry area. In addition to the service stations and rooms, we will have two ample bathrooms; a shower room with two large walk-in showers; a dressing/changing room with lockers for clients; an employee lounge/breakroom; and a laundry room. The Dayspa & Salon will require about 3800 S.F. I plan to lease out the remaining 1200 S.F. to a complementary professional business such as a cosmetic dental practice or a dermatologist. In this way, our two businesses can enhance each other and provide convenience for our clientele. This also leaves open the option to expand my business in the future, to include additional medical spa services such as botox, microdermabrasion, and laser hair removal. I appreciate this opportunity to apply for proper zoning and eagerly await a decision. If approved, I would like Mr. Tachney to begin construction as soon as possible and will be most pleased to cooperate in any way I can. Please contact me with any questions or concerps. Sincerely, ly Mary I. Gander 31477 County Rd 1 Apple Blossom Drive LaCrescent, MN 55947 Home Phone; 507-643-6761 Cell Phone: 507-358-3009 Y ?ice Elmo City Council July 6, 2004 Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9B Agenda Item: Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Rezoning - Olinger Background Information for July 6, 2004: At its meeting June 28, 2004 the Planning Commission conducted a Noticed Public Hearing and adopted recommendations (8-1, Deziel opposed) to amend the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from RAD to SRD; and, to rezone from RR to R-1 a 4.5+ acre portion of a 14.5 acre site that is proposed by the applicant for those Plan and Zoning Map actions in total. The majority of the Commission determined that there has been no change of conditions that would support the amendments, but that there may have been an error at some point in history by not extending a the geographic pattern of SRD classification and R-1 zoning surrounding most of Lake Jane (the lake front lake ward of the road and 1 tier of lots landward of the road) to the 4.5+ acre portion of the applicant's property matching that geographic description/logic. The majority of the Commission determined that the 10 acre remainder of the applicant's site should continue to be classified as RAD and zoned as RR. During review of this application staff has discovered what appears to have been a map drafting error on the 1997 Comprehensive Plan amendment that was carried forward to the 2000 Comprehensive Plan amendments. The error involves properties to the east of the applicant's. The error results in a conflict between the Comprehensive Plan classification, and the existing zoning of 7 parcels. Correction of the error will need to be addressed by a separate action, which staff will initiate. Action items: OS3 1. Motion to adopt Resolution #2004 - , amending the Comprehensive Plan to reclassify a portion of Olinger property in Section 10 from RAD to SRD based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission. (4 affirmative votes required) I.3G 2. Motion to adopt Ordinance #97 - , rezoning a portion of Olinger property in Section 10 from RR to R-1 based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission. (4 affirmative votes required) Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution #2004 — Comp Plan Amendment 2. Draft Ordinance #97 — Rezoning 3. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of June 28, 2004 4. Planning Staff Report (Note Amended Graphic) 5. Applicant's Documentation Person responsible: City Time Allocated: CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 053 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE 1990 LAKE ELMO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, at its June 28, 2004 meeting, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 1990 Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan of the following described property, owned by Daniel and Jean Olinger, from RAD to the SRD classification. (Insert Legal) WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council reviewed and approved the Comprehensive Plan Amendment on July 6, 2004; NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Future Land Use Map of the 1990 Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan is herby amended to designate the above described property as SRD. ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council the 6th day of July, 2004. Lee Hunt, Mayor ATTEST: Martin J. Rafferty City Administrator CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 97- 13G AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 300.07 "ZONING DISTRICT MAP" OF THE LAKE ELMO MUNICIPAL CODE Section 1. Amendment: Section 300.07 Subd, 3 A.1. of the "Zoning District Map" of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code; is amended to rezone property from Rural Residential (RR) to Single Family Residential (R-1) based on conformity with the Comprehensive Plan, owned by Daniel and Jean Olinger, 9057 Lake Jane Trail, legally described as follows: (Insert Legal) Section 2. Effective Date: This ordinance shall become effective upon passage and publication, according to law. ADOPTED by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 6th day of June, 2004. AT 1'LST: Martin J. Rafferty, City Administrator Published in the Stillwater Gazette on the Rezone Olinger Lee Hunt, Mayor day of July, 2004. Excerpt Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 28, 2004 Olinger — Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment PR AFT Public Hearing: Olinger — Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment The Planner reported that the applicant has requested that a14.5 acre parcel be reguided from RAD to SRD, and rezoned from RR to R1. He noted that there was an application years ago for platting of this area into multiple RI lots. The history is unclear as to why it this parcel is guided and was zoned RAD. The Planner also noted that properties to the east appear to have been the subject of a drafting error with the 1997 Comp Plan amendment that was carried forward with the 2000 Comp Plan Amendment. While those properties are zoned R-1 reflecting the pattern surrounding Lake Jane; and, were properly guided SRD in 1990, the guiding was changed to RAD in the 1997 Plan Amendment in error. He suggested that the City should correct that error regardless of the outcome of the subject application. The Planner then advised that the review for a change to the Comprehensive Plan has to respond to one of two things, 1.) A determination that an error was made in the original guiding or, 2.) That conditions have changed to make the guiding incorrect today. The Planner observed that the only apparent logic to this area not being guided SRD was that it was not platted. He questioned whether that would be a good reason not to guide it SRD in the first place given the pattern of SRD guiding and R-1 zoning establish around Lake Jane. The Planner suggested an amendment to the application splitting the zoning such that the lake frontage north of Lake Jane Road; and one tier of lots south of Lake Jane Road would be SRD/R-1. The balance of the applicant's parcel would remain RAD/RR. He observed that this would continue the pattern of guiding and zoning that exists around Lake Jane — which could be proper grounds for a reguiding. Commissioner Sedro asked if the portion of land to the north of Lake Jane Trail is within the 100 year flood elevation. The Planner said that a portion could be flood plain ; and, with the minimum setback of 100 feet from Ordinary High Water, home siting could be a problem. Commissioner Deziel noted that everything to the west of Jamaca is zoned R-1. He asked if there is any Logic to extending R-1 to the entire parcel. He suggested that he sees no logical reason for it to stay RR. The Planner responded that the area to the west extends farther south because of previous platting. Commissioner Sedro asked about the Public Facility status of land to the south of the subject; and, if MPCA is reclaiming it due to the closed land fill.. The Planner replied that the west part of that adjoining parcel is the Public Works garage, The City has been advised repeatedly, dependent upon test wells, that the day could arrive when the City might be asked to abandon that site should water problems migrate north. If the applicant's properties were developed, Oakdale water service would be extended to service any new lots. Commissioner Schneider asked what could become of that residue RR parcel. The Planner said it can have one single home as it is today. It also could be combined with property to east for an RE project. Tim Freeman, Land Surveyor and Land Planner with FFE Mr. Freeman said there are reasons for asking for it all be under one ownership, not to chop it. One owner should mean that it will all be the same zoning. The surrounding lands were previously platted as smaller lots. The owners of this parcel wanted to keep it open, and they did not get the same opportunity Excerpt Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 28, 2004 Olinger — Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment PR AFT to plat. He said that seems unfair. He observed that in the entire Tri-Lakes area all lots are one acre or 1.5 acres. He said it seemed consistent to him to rezone the whole thing R-1. There is no master plan for the applicant's site; and, that the owners and Mr. Freeman are just looking at the big picture and they want to create a parcel for the daughter. He observed that the residue parcel zoned RR ,a s proposed by City Staff, is cumbersome to do anything with. He suggested that, assuming minimum lot sizes for RE, building a road through the entire long residue parcel to get lots on only one side is not sensible. He suggested that, if there is enough reason to reguide and rezone the north half of the parcel, there is enough reason to rezone and reguide the whole thing. He advised the Commission that Future Land Use guiding is not supposed to be used just to guide something based upon the way it is already developed. He said the applicants are not asking for a specific development request, they are just taking the first step; and, after that they can decide how it can be used. He said he thinks that this site was overlooked in the past, and community planning should take in the whole area. Chairman Helwig said knew why that parcel wasn't changed before was because Carl Olinger did not want it changed before. He suggested that what the parcel's use is, and what it should be guided can be two different things. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:18 P.M. No testimony was given. The Chairman noted that a letter was received from Mildred Thurmes supporting the application. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:19 P.M. Commissioner Deziel asked if this would be reviewed when the City again reviews the entire Comprehensive Plan, and if so when will that next review occur. The Planner said the new Zoning Ordinance could change circumstances here. Distinctions between RR and R-1 could blur. A Comprehensive Plan is required to be reviewed every ten years; and, by next year at this time, our new Systems Statement will be issued. A new or reviewed Comp Plan will be needed by 2008. Commissioner Ptacek said he agrees with the majority of the Staff Report, and he thinks drawing the line between SRD and RAD as proposed is proper. He noted that he believes two tiers of SRD guiding along Lake Jane is proper; and, will serve the applicant's near future needs. M/S/P, Ptacek/Van Pelt, To recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for certain portions of the subject parcel as proposed by the Planning Staff Report; and, to recommend approval of those same portions be rezoned R-1. Chairman Helwig said the applicant can always reapply to change the south portion of the site it later based on specific plans. Mr. Freeman said the sensible thing would be to plan the whole parcel at one time. Building a road for three lots would make little sense, it would be more realistic to build for more lots should they ever wish to rezone. Commissioner Deziel asked how often the City splits zoning on a single parcel. The Planner said it is not that unusual. Mr. Freeman added it is not the preferred method for rezoning. • Excerpt Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 28, 2004 Olinger — Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 3 DRAFT Commissioner Ptacek said that if the applicants don't want to do anything with the south ten acres, the City should leave it guided and zoned as is. Commissioner Sedro said she supports the application because R-1 was created to accommodate and fill in areas of the City that already were platted with small lots. She said she does not see that R-1 zoning as fitting the southern portion of the parcel. Mr. Freeman said there was a preliminary plat approved for this site in the past but Carl Olinger did not go forward with it. He said the applicants would not be here with this application today if he had done that, but the applicants should not be now penalized for that lack of follow-through. He observed that existing lots on Lake Jane are one-half and even one-third that size; and, that today's R- 1 standards would make newly created R-1 lots more like on the west side of Jamaca — larger than many of the other Lots around Lake Jane.. VOTE: 8:1 (Deziel, He said there has been insufficient discussion. Geometry here has just been a call). Applicant's Proposal Eisitng R-1 Zpning SRD Classification Applicant's Proposal RAD to SRD Classification RR to R-1 Zoning Existing PF Zoning (City Public Works) Location Map Existing R-1'l Zoning (RAD Classification - Error) 1 Existing RR Zoning RAD Classification R21W R20W R19W 132N T32N 131N 131N T30N - YOUAxa .v� T30N T29N T29N T28N T28N T27N i7 T27N R22W R21W R2OW Vicinity Map 240 Scale in Feet This drawing Is the result of a compilation and reproduction of land records as they appear In various Washington County offices. The drawing should be used for reference purposes only. Washington County is not responsible for any inaccuracies. Source: Washington County Surveyors Office Phone (651) 430-6875 Parcel data based on A5400 informaflon Planning Commmission Recommendation Existing R-1 Commission Recommends c RAD to SRD cc 0 a) ir Iommission aa0 Recommends z° RAD to SRD RR to R-1 W Location Map I RR to R-1 11 Exisiting RAD/RR Applicant Proposes SRD/R-1 Commission Recommends Retain RAD/RR Existing FP (City Public Works) Existing IR-1 Zoning (n Error )RAD Plan Existing RAD/RR R21W R20W RI9W R22W R2IW R2OW Vicinity Map 0 240 Scale in Feet This drawing is the result of a compilation and reproduction of land records as they appear in various Washington County offices. The drawing should be used for reference purposes only. Washington County is not responsible for any inaccuracies. Source: Washington County Surveyors Office Phone (651) 430-S875 Parcel data based on A5400 information LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Date: June 24, 2004 for the Meeting of June 28, 2004 Applicant: Daniel & Jean Olinger Location: 9057 Lake Jane Trail Requested Action: Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Rezoning Land Use Plan Guiding: RAD Existing Zoning: RR Site History and Existing Conditions: In the early 1970's the Olinger's presented a concept plan for the entire parcel, which included 15 lots. This concept was consistent with the zoning and subdivision regulations in place at the time, creating 1.5 acre minimum lot sizes. On November 11, 1981, the City Council considered a request by the Olinger's to subdivide the existing dwelling and garage into a parcel of approximately 2 acres in size, but divided by Lake Jane Trail. The Council approved the request (Resolution 81-71) with the stipulation that the parcels (shown on the concept and preliminary plat as Lots 1 and 2) be combined into one parcel — approximately 15 acres in area. That subdivision resulted in the approximate 2-acre parcel and the remainder of the Carl Olinger property in tact. On March 11, 1982, the city received a letter from Carl Olinger stating he was withdrawing his application for thel5 lot plat, which had been previously approved by the City as a concept and preliminary plat. In 1991 a Shoreland Permit and Building Permit were issued to demolish the exiting house on the 2 acre parcel; and, to construct a new home on that site. In 2000 a Minor Subdivision was approved that effectively traded ownership of the "remnant" 15 acres from the Carl Olinger parcel to the Daniel Olinger parcel (the 2 acres created in 1982). This actually amounted to no more than a property line adjustment, since no new parcels were created. Washington County tax records now show the entire 18 acres in the ownership of the applicants — Dan & Jean Olinger — while the applicants' graphics show Carl Olinger as the owner of the above referenced 2+ acres. The 16+ acre site proposed for Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezoning is made up of a level portion of 1.54 acres with 785 feet of Lake Jane frontage north of Lake Jane Trail; and, an irregular portion of as the balance of the 14.5 acres located south of Lake Jane Trail. The south portion is gently rolling, with a single family home and accessory structures. The south portion is partly farmed, and partly used for storage of assorted equipment and materials. The City leased storage on this south portion for materials until 2003. The lease has expired and the City's materials have been removed. Discussion and Analysis: The applicants propose an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would change the land use classification the 16.5 acre parcel from RAD to SRD (Suburban Residence District). They concurrently request rezoning of the reclassified lands from RR to R-1 — consistent with the land use reclassification. In the documentation submitted the applicants argue that most other properties in the Tri-Lakes area are presently classified SRD and zoned R-1. They state that no specific development is applied for, just the land use reclassification and the rezoning. Their application does refer to creation of a single new parcel, but no platting application documentation was submitted supporting that proposal. A review of the Comprehensive Plan and zoning map reveals that the applicants have offered an accurate observation — most of the lands in the Tri-Lakes area are, in fact, classified SRD and zoned R-1. It should be noted, however, that little, if any, of that so classified and zoned land is vacant and/or divisible. The vast majority of the land referred to by the applicants is platting from the 70's and well before, and the SRD classification and R-1 zoning of those properties was merely to reflect the size of the parcels as platted, not the intention of the City to create new 1.5 acre (minimum R-1 area) lots. In this case, however, the reclassification and rezoning proposed would at some point result in a plat for up to 10 single family detached lots of as little as 1.5 acres area. That raises two primary issues: 1. Is it the intent of the City to plan/zone vacant parcels that could result in 1.5 acre plats without the OP Conservation Plat process? Consider that the OP process, while allowing creation of lots as small as .75 acres to 1.0 acres, also limits the gross site density to 4/10 units/acre. The resulting site density of OP roughly equals 60% of the site density that can be attained with R-1 zoning and 1.5 acre lots. While the 1.5 acre lots may appear less dense that the .75 or 1 acre lots of OP, the actual site density of 1.5 acre conventional lots is substantially greater than OP. It is site density that, in the end, results in community character and demands for City infrastructure and services, since it is site density that dictates house count and head count that results from development. 2. Does the fact that SRD classification and R-I zoning predominates in the Tri-Lakes area, and two tiers off of Lake Jane elsewhere constitute sufficient grounds for classifying all or a portion of this 16+ acres similarly? This argument may result in a more logical zoning map appearance, but is that a good reason for the amendment? Perhaps the two tier argument could be applied here, but that, then would suggest that only the land north of Lake Jane Trail, and the initial 250 feet south of Lake Jane Trail, should qualify for SRD classification and R-1 zoning. The applicants' 16+ acres; and a parcel of a similar size to the east, share the constraint of the inability to combine with lands to the north (platted or lake) or south (City ownership and closed landfill issues) to enable a parcel size eligible for OP development. Taken together, however, those parcels could qualify, by sum area (20 acres +), as an RE conventional development (2.5 acre minimum/3.3 acre average). This 15 acres might also be a candidate for a 4/5 OP variance to create 6 OP lots (5, net of the existing home) — realizing that the OP site buffering standards would be a problem with this site shape as well. The usual factual foundation supporting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (and the requisite change in zoning) is either "change in conditions" or "error in the existing plan". While "change in conditions" can include many circumstances (such as a change in City land use policy; or, the availability of pubic infrastructure that would dictate a different land use or land use intensity), staff does not detect any change of conditions that would suggest a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is justified on the subject site. Our review of the series of Comprehensive Plan land use maps contained in the 1990, 1997, and 2000 Lake Elmo plans reveals what may be an error in drafting in 1997 that was carried forward into the 2000 Plan involving the properties to the east of the site. The 1990 Plan classified the 7 properties east of the subject site that are south of and fronting Lake Jane Trail as SRD, and the resultant zoning was R-1 (and still is). All 7 of those properties then existed as prior divisions with lot areas slightly above or below the R-1 1.5 acre minimum. There are homes on all 7 lots, and there may have been homes there in 1990 as well. The SRD Plan and R-1 zoning of those properties was both logical (to minimize the number of non -conforming sites in the City), and consistent with the Plan and zoning of the balance of the existing lots in the Tri-Lakes — and elsewhere in the City. Both the 1997 and 2000 Comprehensive Plan land use maps reclassify those 7 lots east of the subject site from SRD to RAD. Given the physical circumstances of those properties, we do not believe that was an intentional action by the City, but rather a map drafting error in 1997 that carried forward into 2000. The zoning map continues to show the R-1 zoning of those properties that was based on the 1990 Plan. We believe there was an error in the 1997 Plan regarding those 7 properties — and that error continues with the 2000 Plan. Those lots should have retained SRD classification. A Plan correction is in order, but can not be accomplished without the City initiating a formal process. The error we believe we have detected in the 1997 and 2000 Comprehensive Plans regarding properties east of the subject does not directly impact the subject site. That error does, however, affect whatever logic that can be applied to the consistency of Plan treatment of properties surrounding Lake Jane — and in the Tri-Lakes area in general. If those 7 parcels to the east continue to be planned RAD, they should be rezoned RR, as is the subject property today. The planning/zoning consistency argument for SRD plan and R-1 zoning for the subject property would be of less weight in that case. Assuming that planners in 1990 (and, short of a drafting error, in 1997 and 2000) concluded that SRD/R-I was appropriate for the lakefront north of Lake Jane Trail, and a single tier of lots south of Lake Jane Trail to the east of the subject, why did they not extend that logic across the subject property? Was it because the property was not divided into 1.5 acre (plus or minus) lots at the time; or, was it because the property owner at that time requested RR zoning (and a responsive Plan classification) due to structures and uses of the land at that time that would not be permitted (or become non -conforming) in an R-1 zone? Findings and Recommendations: Setting history and errors related to other properties in the neighborhood aside, the applicants' now propose SRD classification and R-1 zoning for the entire 16+ acre parcel. Staff finds that the City may have errored in the past to some extent by not assigning that classification and zoning to the subject property in the same manner as to the properties to the east — lake frontage and 1 tier of lots south of Lake Jane Trail. Whether or not that portion of the subject site was platted into 1.5 acre lots at the time (1990 or before) was probably not of as much significance as maintaining an established use and density pattern in the immediate neighborhood. Based on the foregoing, staff recommends the Planning Commission consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reclassify the portion of the subject site north of Lake Jane Trail (1.58 acres); and, that portion of the subject site lying south of Lake Jane Trail which is north of the south Iine of the 2 acre exception parcel (3.09 acres) from RAD to SRD. If the Commission concurs in the foregoing, we also recommend that those same portions of the subject parcel be rezoned from RR to R-1 for Plan consistency. We also recommend the City initiate actions for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to both return the 7 properties to the east of the subject to the SRD classification; and to classify SRD the remaining RAD classified properties north of Lake Jane Trail, and the "exception" parcel surrounded by the subject site south of Lake Jane Road. Again, should this foregoing recommendation by concurred in by the Commission, corresponding rezoning to R-1 is also required. Planning Commission Actions Requested: Motion to recommend a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reclassify those portions of the Dan & Jean Olinger parcels north of Lake Jane Trail (1.58 acres); and, that portion of the Dan & Jean Olinger parcels lying south of Lake Jane Trail, which are north of the south line of the 2 acre exception parcel (3.09 acres) from RAD to SRD. Also, to recommend that those same portions of the h1,ect Arcel be rl from RR to R-1 for Plan consistency. Charles E. Dillerud, City Planner Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Staff Graphics 3. Applicants' Documentation and Graphics 7) 1 a Ai aim at Trig�T ELM rri • •• r 1• • ... 1 'p 1 3 A.;-r `I 1` - 11. • f' •a 4 .o 1 / 1 Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING REZONING NARRATIVE DAN AND JEAN OLINGER June 8, 2004 The subject property owned by Dan and Jean Olinger is currently zoned RR (Rural Residential). The property is on the south shore of Lake Jane, north of the City Public Works Facility. The vast majority of the property in the Tri Lakes area is zoned RI (One Family Residential). The rezoning request is made to bring this property zoning in line with the character of the existing neighborhood. This proposed rezoning is not offered in conjunction with a development request. This rezoning request would simply square off the existing zoning areas and include an area for a second tier of lots along Lake Jane Trail North. The area is served with a public municipal water system which is capable of handling any proposed lots on this property. There is no public sewer in Lalce Ehno, and the sewage treatment of any proposed lots would be by standard on -site septic and drainfield, similar to the way the rest of the Rl lots in the neighborhood, or with a joint use or wetland treatment system. To develop the subject property with the lot sizes consistent with the existing neighborhood would require variance requests, which we believe is not the proper course of action. We believe that the rezoning of this property now will preserve the character of the neighborhood for any future development. Approval of this rezoning request would demonstrate to the Met Council that Lake Elmo is indeed willing to consider additional housing units in the appropriate areas of the City. RECEIVED JUN 1 0 2(104 5620 Memorial Avenue North, Stillwater, MN 55082 e Phone: (651) 439-8833 ♦ Fax: (651) 430-9331 • Website: www.ffe-inc.com Bruce A. Folz, 1S Timothy). Freeman, LS Todd A. Erickson, PE 1939.2001 President Vice President 9 A PAW MpL 04-10110 .94-IIEFEIEEE Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING I V 111 qw 5620 MEMORIAL AVEIVE NORTH STILLWATER, MINNEOTA 55082 • Phone (651)439-81333 Fax (651) 430-9331 V' A 42 PROPOSED RE -ZONING (R-R TO R-I) EXISTING R-I ZONING EASING RAD ZONING EXISTING R-R ZONING DIMING PUBLIC ZONING OLINOM PROPOSIV IICZONIN G AMP - LAKE HAW MN- 03=009 SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETS' Lake Elmo City Council July 6, 2004 Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9C Agenda Item: Zoning Variance - 8061 Hill Trail North/Abrahamson Background Information for July 6. 2004: At its meeting June 28, 2004 the Planning Commission conducted a Noticed Public Hearing and adopted (8- 1, Ptacek opposed) a recommendation to approve a variance at the subject address to allow an existing "Tool Shed" of approximately 210 square feet to be retained. The nay vote was based on that Commissioner's concern with the precedent he foresees by approving the variance. The Zoning Ordinance provides that Tool Sheds may not exceed 160 square feet of building area. Structures in excess of 160 square feet are considered Accessory Structures. Only a single Accessory Structure is permitted in the R-1 zoning district (in which this property is located). The screen porch now under construction on this property would be become a second Accessory Structure if the existing 210 square feet structure remains on site without a variance from the160 square foot maximum "Tool Shed" area requirement. Two adjacent neighbors appeared (one in person, and one in writing), Neither party offered objections to the variance. Person res6o4ible: Action items: Motion to adopt Resolution #2004 -s approving a variance from Cit Section300.13 Subd. 3A.1. of the City Code for Carl Abrahamson , 8061 Hill Trail to permit a "Tool Shed" of 210 square feet where the Zoning Ordinance specifies a 160 square foot maximum area for tool sheds, based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Attachments: o 1. Draft Resolution #2004 — Approving Variance 2. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of June 28, 2004 3. Planning Staff Report 4. Applicant's Documentation Time Allocated: CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 0 E A RESOLUTION APPROVING A ZONING VARIANCE FOR CARL ABRAHAMSON LOCATED AT 8061 HILL TRAIL NORTH WHEREAS, Carl Abrahamson, 8061 Hill Trail North, has made application for a zoning variance to allow an existing tool shed of approximately 210 square feet to be retained. WHEREAS, at its June 28, 2004 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the variance from Section 300.13 Subd. 3 A.1. of the City Code for Carl Abrahamson, 8061 Hill Trail to permit a tool shed of 210 square feet where the Zoning Ordinance specifies a 160 square foot maximum area for tool sheds based on the following findings: 1. The property could be put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the zoning code. 2. The variance requested results from circumstances unique to properties where structures were constructed prior to adoption of current zoning regulations; and the circumstances of the variance were not solely created by the applicant, 3. Granting of the variance will not change the essential character of the neighborhood. WHEREAS, at its July 6th meeting, the Lake Elmo City Council reviewed the zoning variance to permit Carl Abrahamson an existing building of approximately 210 square feet at 8061 Hill Trail to qualify as a tool shed and therefore be permitted in addition to the pernitted number of accessory buildings as provided by Section 300.13, Subd. 3A.1. of the City code, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Lake Elmo City Council approves the zoning variance from Section 300.13, Subd. 3A.1. of the City Code for Carl Abrahamson, 8061 Hill Trail, to permit a tool shed of 210 square feet where the Zoning Ordinance specifies a 160 square foot maximum area for tool sheds, based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission. ADOPTED BY THE Lake Elmo City Council the 6th day of July, 2004. Lee Hunt, Mayor ATTEST: Martin J. Rafferty, City Administrator Abrahamson Variance Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 28, 2004 Variance - Abrahamson Page 1 DRAFT Public Hearing. Variance - Carl Abrahamson The City Planner introduced this variance request for a resident on Hill Trail. He reported that this is an old platted area in the community, where multiple very small lots were combined to make a buildable lot. The Planner reported that an application for a building permit was granted to build a screen house on this property. At the time of application, an issue was raised by the inspector regarding the size of an existing small, and old detached garage that is used as for a storage shed on this site since no dimensions of the structure were shown on the building permit application drawing The Plattner noted that the City Code specifies an R 1 parcel can have only one Accessory Structure in addition to an attached garage. The Planner advised the Commission that a structure of less than 160 square feet can be added to a parcel in addition to the one permitted Accessory Structure as a "Tool Shed". He reported that, at the time the permit for the screen house was issued, it was assumed that the existing old structure was 160 square feet or less; and, the new screen house would have been the first accessory structure on this parcel. After construction of the screen house was commenced, an inquiry was made by a neighbor about whether the screen house would be a second accessory structure. Upon on -site measurement of the old structure by d the Building Official the old structure was found to be slightly more than 200 square feet in area. Since that was too large to qualify as a "Tool Shed", a Stop Work Order was issued on the screen house at point of construction of a concrete floor being formed and framing partly complete. He reported that the applicant felt the City is partly responsible for the dilemma, and has requested a variance to allow a tool shed in excess of 160 square feet. The Planner reported that the City Council agreed to waive the application fee for the variance. The Planner reminded the Commission that a physical hardship must be demonstrated to support approval of a zoning Variance. He suggested Findings regarding the application as follow: 1. The property can be put to reasonable use without the variance. 2. Circumstances are not entirely the fault of the applicant. City did not insist on a dimensioned drawing that would have demonstrated the with a building permit application I. The granting of the variance will not change the essential character of the neighborhood. The Planner suggested that he believes that there remains a hardship in this ease, even though Finding #1 does not a appear to support a hardship determination. He also said that this is not the first time the City has seen similar circumstances, but those circumstances are rare and reasonably unique, so as not to create a difficult precedent for the City. The Planner said he did not think this would be a precedent, so there would be no harm resulting to the Zoning Ordinance. He said staff recommends approval, however a motion to deny could be based upon Finding #1 and would require the applicant to remove of modify of one of the two accessory structures. Commissioner Sedro pointed out that if this screen porch were attached to the primary structure, this would be a moot point. Commissioner Sessing asked if there is a limit to the number of tool sheds allowed in R-1. Carl Abrahamson Mr. Abramson said he properly applied for and got a building permit for the screen house. He said the Building Inspector asked if he was sure the tool shed is less than 200 square feet. Mr. Abramson said he told the inspector that it was; and, the Building Inspector signed off on the screen house permit without further inquiry. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 28, 2004 Variance - Abrahamson Page 2 DRAFT Mr. Abrahamson said he has been a resident of the City for forty years, and is unfamiliar with the Code requirements. He suggested that portions be included in the newsletter so people know. If he knew he had to be smaller than 160 square feet, he would have planned it that way. When he told him 200 square feet, Mr. Abrahamson checked dimensions and said it was fine. The Building Official talked with him more than just during inspections, and he never mentioned a problem. The building is almost done. Commissioner Schneider asked if the old building was just a garage in the past which now functions as a tool shed. Mr. Abrahamson said yes it is one solid building with a new roof replacement a few years ago. THE CHAIR OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:22 P.M. Bud Talcott Mr. Talcott said he lives north of the applicant. He would like the Planning Commission to approve the variance because the applicant has used a portable screen house that is not as nice as this structure will be. Mr. Clayton Michaels had signed a note to the City saying he has no problem with the building. THE CHAIR CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:24 P.M. Commissioner Deziel said that the reworking of roads in area and the island that was created did create the need for the new pond immediately. That pond is right next door, and mosquitoes do breed there. He recommended that as a possible physical hardship. The screen porch is a response to the new City pond. The applicant made no complaint at all about its location. That should count for something. Commissioner Ptacek said he sympathizes with applicant, but is concerned about precedent. He said that neighborhoods might have had covenants that were more restrictive but HOAs drop off and covenants go out the door. He observed that as a precedent the City could end up with a lot of different size tool sheds. He noted that that the Code Section 300.3.B, says "...a tool shed as defined." He said that means only one tool shed. He would support approving it at 160 square feet. Commissioner Deziel recalled times where buildings were moved along in the construction process, in one form or another. He is concerned that the City could face some liability for it. The City granted the applicant a building permit. The Planner said liability is not the Commission's concern. Commissioner Van Pelt said he agrees with Commissioner Ptacek but finds it hard to ignore that the City seems partly culpable. When the applicant put together a design that he hoped conformed, the City did not perform our permit review responsibility completely. Commissioner Sedro said the City should make sure all existing buildings are measured in the future. She said she goes along with the mosquito hardship because the City created the adjacent pond. M/S/P, Dezielaohnson, To recommend approval of the variance as a demonstrated hardship, the circumstances are unique and not entirely the fault of the homeowner and that approval will not essentially change the character of the neighborhood. VOTE: 7:2 (Ptacek/Fielwig). LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Date: June 23, 2004 for the Meeting of June 28, 2004 Applicant: Carl & Judith Abrahamson Location: 8061 Hill Trail North Requested Action: Zoning Variance to Permit a Second Accessory Structure in the R-1 Zone Land Use Plan Guiding: SRD (Single Family Residence District Existing Zoning: R-1 Site History and Existing Conditions: The site is a lot of 29,700 square feet on which is situated a single family home with a 2 car attached garage; an old garage/storage structure south of the house of approximately 210 square feet; and, a partially completed screen house, also south of the house, of 180 square feet. City records are unclear as to when the house was originally constructed, but a major addition — including the 2 car attached garage — was constructed in 1978. Since then, there have been only the usual permits for roof and furnace replacement. Discussion and Analysis: A Building Permit was issued by the City for the 180 square foot screen house on May 4, 2004. The old storage structure (formerly a single car garage) was shown on the plat plan submitted for the screen house permit, but was not dimensioned on the plan. The Building Inspector that reviewed the plans indicates that he inquired as to the area of the storage structure. Based on that inquiry alone, the inspector determined that the storage structure was 160 square feet or less in size, and therefore qualified as a "Tool or Storage Shed". As such, the existing storage structure did not count in the total number of allowable accessory structures on a lot. (Section 300.13, Subd. 3B) On or about June 10, 2004 the City received a complaint that a second accessory structure was being constructed at the applicants' address. It is not known whether the complainant was aware of the 160 square foot "Tool Shed" exception in the Zoning Ordinance, but an inspector was dispatched to measure the old garage to. determine if it was 160 square feet or less - as was understood by the City at the time the building permit was issued for the screen house. In fact, the old garage actually measured at approximately 210 square feet. As such, it constituted an accessory structure; and, the screen porch under construction became a second accessory structure. The Building Official issued a "Stop Work" tag on the screen house project on June 11, 2004. The applicant brought the matter to the attention of the City Council at the June 16 meeting. The Council agreed that the applicant's only recourses were to either apply for a variance to allow a "Tool Shed" of over 160 square feet; or, remove one of the accessory structures — which could still be a result - if the variance were denied. The City Council did agree to waive the variance application fee under the circumstances of probable misunderstanding by the applicant, or the building inspector — or both. Without question, the building inspector reviewing the applicant's plans should have insisted on written certification by the applicant regarding the size the existing storage structure rather than relying on verbal understandings — misunderstandings, as it has turned out. Verbal communications regarding a rather obscure zoning code provision such as the "Tool Shed Exemption" can easily lead to misunderstandings. Findings and Recommendations: Regardless of the circumstances leading to the variance application, the same Findings are required if a variance is to be approved - which, in sum, go to "hardship" Those required Findings may be addressed as follows in this case: 1. The applicant's property could be put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the zoning code. 2. The circumstances of this case are unique to the property, and not entirely created by the landowner. 3. The variance, if granted will not change the essential character of the neighborhood. Regardless of Finding #1, it could be found that a "hardship" exists in this case, even if not a typical "hardship". While this is not the first time a case such as this has surfaced, they are rare. No precedent will result, nor will the zoning ordinance suffer harm if the variance is approved. Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission Actions Requested: Motion to recommend approval of a variance to permit a existing building of approximately 210 square feet at 8061 Hill Trail to qualify as a "Tool Shed " , and therefore be permitted in addition to the permitted number of accessory buildings, as provided by Section 300.13, Subd. 3B of the City Code based on a Finding that a hardship has been created not entirely of the applicant's own actions. coopilsiC Charles E. Dillerud, City Planner Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Section 300.13 Excerpts 3. Applicants' Letter and Graphic io .wow ieouu:: L ASd G'd dgG EttENEEE ✓ 7" i IP�l +Eol6.Airy 112 A 1e vPOA EO MADP ( AVENU4 w�A TM!McuL VOJAM4xnm Location Map rRm a mo YP.Ic<,. 11t101. OLD SHORE LINE OBsaa,.,.B i 4 96 .. Yk.T�e-"' 6a6 3a16 p Nor- 4 I aA 6a: as nFe'�Nq^2 ay_ in g 61 ''s• `�� e' , / 46B a F p R F W 8 is? •••• 50TH B STREEI NUMIn -47 9E/4110.0Il4i007147B VACATED PEReH16MI4G BG oil nR pPE�R�OL2t4 aE0 AST SHORE LANE TO gWNA0E 60000444 12 DEEDS. PO:EHI GBIWG L0100*10A PER OH 10 4I404014I n a ~r'Y`v y i• Vicinity Map 0 237 Scale in Feet ams0000f:in�can ude drawMtltonepww.Tho wu1N Kp County K0Mn0ble 14,4 braTYF 10100}ea. CounlYbnol Wiwal SIIROEMµ�'LY 6�R454%01he Portal dele bated on A4400 informalion Lake Elmo Municipal Code Chapter 3 -Zoning Section 300 -Zoning Ordinance E. No cellar, garage, recreational vehicle or trailer, basement with unfinished exterior structure above, or accessory building shall be used at anytime as a dwelling unit. C. All principal buildings hereafter erected an unplatted land shall be so placed as to avoid obstruction of future street or utility extensions and shall be so placed as to permit reasonably anticipated future subdivisions and land use. D. All principal buildings shall meet or exceed the minimum standard of the Minnesota State Building Code, the Minnesota State Uniform Fire Code, the Minnesota Department of Health, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the City's on -site sewage treatment ordinance. Subd. 3 Accessory Buildings and Structures: - A. Tunes of Accessary Buildings - storage or tool sheds; detached residential garage; detached rural storage building; detached domesticated farm animal buildings: agricultural farm buildings. The accessory buildings are defined as follows: 1. Storage or Tool Shed. A one story accessory building of Tess than one hundred sixty (160) square feet gross area with a maximum roof height of twelve (12) feet and exterior colors or materials matching the principal structure or utilizing earthen tones. No door or other access opening in the storage or tool shed shalPexceed twenty-eight (28) square feet in are�ey l'iR11 b.I :Nil 9t.te[.✓uw n..r. 2. Detached Residential Garage. A one-story accessory -building used or intended for the storage of motor driven passenger vehicles regulated in Section 300.13, Subd. 4. with a maximum roof height of twenty (20) feet. No door or other access opening shall exceed fourteen (14) feet in height. The exterior color, design, and materials shall be similar to the principal stricture. 3. Detached Rural Storage Building., A one story accessory building used or intended for the storage of hobby tools, garden equipment,'workshop equipment, etc. Exterior materials shall match the principal structure in exterior color or be of an earthen tone, The gross area of the building shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet in gross area on a parcel of between two (2) and ten (10) acres And not more than two thousand (2,000) square feet in gross area on'a parcel of greater than ten (10) acres. 4. Detached Domesticated Farm Animal Building, A one story accessory building used or intended for the shelter of domestic farm animals>"and/or related feed or other fann animal supportive materials: The building shall require a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency feedlot permit and site and building plan approval and shall not exceed 2,000 square feet in gross area for a parcel between ten (10) and twenty (20) acres and not more than one -thousand (1000) square feet in gross area on a parcel of less than ten (10) acres. 5. Agricultural Farm Building. An accessory building used or intended for use on an active commercial food producing farm operation of more than twenty (20) acres. A Minnesota Pollution Control Agency permit may be required. 300-82 2/18/97 Lake Elmo Municipal Code Chapter 3 -Zoning Section 300 -Zoning Ordinance . A tool shed as defined in this section may be placed on any lot ir♦ addition to the ermined number of accessory buildings. i C.1 No accessory building shall be constructed nor accessory use located on a lot until a building permit has been issued for the principal building to which it is acccssorv. D. No accessory building used or intended for the storage of passenger automobiles shall exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet of gross area nor shall any access door or other opening exceed the height of ten (10) feet, nor shall any structure exceed one story in height except when the garages are located in Business, Industrial or Planned Unit Developments. On parcels of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet in area or less. no detached accessory building or garage shall exceed the size of the principal building in gross floor area. . E. An accessory building shall be considered' us an integral part of the principal building if it is Located six (6) feet or less from the principal building. The exterior design and color shall be the same as that of the principal building or be of an earthen tone: the height shall not exceed the height of the principal structure unless more restrictive portions of this section prevail. F. No accessory building in a commercial or industrial district shall exceed the height of the principal building. G, No accessory buildings in apartment de-cretopm shall exceed the height of the principal building, • H. Accessory buildings in the commercial and industrial districts may be located to; the rear of the principal building, subject to the Building Code and fire zone regulations. I. No detached garages or other accessory buildings in residential districts shall be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building on that lot, except in AG. R.R. and R-1 districts where detached garages may be permitted nearer the front lot Line thahthe principal building by resoiution1,and a4I,,.4....,.., p:.:y.:.y ,,rters-4a br d except in planned unit developments or cluster developments. J. Accessory strictures located on lake or stream frontage lots may be located between the public road and the principal structure provided that the physical conditions of the lot require such a location and a resolution is issued. In no event shall the structure be located closer than twenty (20) feet to the public right-of-way. K. MI accessory.buildings over thirty-five (35) square feet in area shall have a foundation, concrete slab or wind anchor. Buildings larger than one hundred (100) square feet shall require a building permit regardless of improvement value. Roof loads and wind loads shall conform to requirements as contained in the Building Code, L. The required rear yard setbacks for detached residential garages, and storage, boat, and tool sheds shall be a distance equal to the required side yard setback for each zoning district, except on through lots when the required rear yard setback in each zoning district shall apply. • 300-83 2/18/97 Carl and Judy Abrahamson 8061 Hill Trail North Lake Elmo, MN. (40 Year resident at present location) (next to new storage/water garden/ mosquito pond) Screen House 5/4/04 - Applied for and received building permit for construction of a 12'x15' screen house. Signed by Lake Elmo Building Official Karl Horning. 5/21/04 — Finished screen house and sidewalk cement forms. Inspected for proper placement of rebar and steel mesh. Signed by Lake Elmo Building Official Jim McNamara. 5/27/04 — Poured and finished 5 yds. Cemstone Cement for screenhouse and sidewalk. 5/27/04 — 6/11/04 Continued purchasing material and building screenhouse to it's 2/3 plus completed status. 6/11/04 — Jim McNamara posted 2 red notice signs on screen house to stop any further construction. 6/11/04 + - Judy and I went to the Lake Elmo Office and talk to Jim McNamara. (We were not home at the time the building was tagged) Most of his options did not meet with our approval. He did mention contacting council members . I called Dean Jolmson and he agreed to bring up the subject at a meeting on Saturday morning. Dean called back Saturday afternoon to say that he had discussed the subject with Martin Rafferty and that I should meet with him on the following Monday at the Lake Elmo Office. Deans thoughts were that I was being treated unfairly and this was a Lake Ehno problem. He said that it sounded like that I had followed all the proper procedures. I drew up site drawing ,to scale, as I was requested to do when I called the building inspector. I applied for and received a building permit. The only thing asked of me was to make sure that I stay under 200 sq. ft.. This was confirmed by my dimensions on the application drawing. At this point I believe the problem and the solution belong to the city of Lake Elmo. I have lost and continue to lose no mosquito build days for which the building was being erected. I've calculated that only 13% of my property is now inpervious. I've checked with several of my neighbors and asked if they have any problem with building a screen house and all have said they have not. What they have said is "you should continue to build because you have a building permit" that was twice signed by Lake Elmo Building Officials. They commented that this is a good legal point. I have presently over $1500.00 in materials alone. Time and wages have yet to be determined. Please resolve this situation as promptly as possible. dARL ASRAHAMto& 8061 HILL 1RA1L NoRTN LAKE 6LMo AMAJ. ssoz,z 65 - 777-76 S8 WI' Su( too'X20o'4-/Si Long- 337- 3113 + 370 - 376 810111 ay FIELD SEPTIC SYSTEM 0 l oRTFH t HoLSE GARAGE 0 PRoPoSEb SCREE?" dre HOUSE Olt 15'9 $GALE - I"= 2o' STREET - HILL TRAIL. :7:.7, Fyn_ emx, roam, &,t-etu 4Pit44. 4-01 4-04t 44;a4-ciL eau Pgra, LakeElmo Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9D . (it; Council July 6, 2004 Agenda Item: OP Concept Plan — "Deer Glen" (Lakewood Church) Background Information for July 6.2004: The Planning Commission conducted a Noticed Public Hearing on June 14 regarding this application to develop a 48 acre site (a portion of the applicants' 108 acre site) as an OP development of 18 single family detached lots and 25 acres of Preserved Open Space. Following the June 12 Hearing the Commission tabled the application to allow the applicant to address two technical Code non-compliance issues; and, to also address issues raised in the Valley Branch Watershed review regarding flood plain mitigation. On June 28 the Planning Commission again considered the Concept Plan based on modifications by the applicant to resolve the non-compliance issues; and, based on further work by the applicant with Valley Branch on the flood plain issues. Valley Branch now advises that the plan could meet District policy regarding flood plain mitigation. Based on those Findings the Commission adopted a recommendation to approve the OP Concept Plan for "Deer Glen". The Commission's approval motion included a condition that would require the applicant to declare a planned use for the entire 108 acre site (of which the OP is but 48 acres). The applicant has stated to date that the northerly 40 acres of the 108 will remain vacant, and no use is planned at this time beyond the 48 acre OP and a 20 acre church site. Subsequently (as I advised the Commission might be the case), the City Attorney has advised Staff that this provision regarding lands not within the OP Concept Plan should not be attached to the Concept Plan approval Resolution. Person reuonsible: Action items: Motion to adopt Resolution #2004 - , approving the OP Concept Ci Plan of "Deer Glen" per Plans Staff Dated June 23, 2004, as Recommended by the Planning Commission. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution #2004 -056' 2. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of June 28 (available on July 6 — Not in this Packet) 3. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14, 2004 4. Staff memo of June 23 5. Planning Staff Report of June 9, 2004 6. Applicant's Documentation Time Allocated: CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004-055 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE OPEN SPACE CONCEPT PLAN FOR DEER GLEN (Lakewood Evangelical Free Church) WHEREAS, at its June 14 and June 28, 2004 meetings, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission reviewed the Open Space Concept Plan for Deer Glen (Lakewood Evangelical Free Church), a 48 acre site with 18 single family detached lots and 25 acres of Preserved Open Space and recommended approval to the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Lake Elmo City Council does hereby approve and accept the Open Space Concept Plan for Deer Glen, located at the southwest corner of Highway 36 and Keats Avenue, for 18 single family detached lots, as the same as on file dated June 23, 2004, with the City Administrator based upon the following findings. 1. The application generally complies with the submission requirements for an OP Concept Plan prescribed by Section 300 of the City Code. 2. The site is within the Open Space Development Area designated by the Comprehensive Plan; and OP development is a Conditional Use in the existing RR zoning district. 3. The Concept Plan complies with the mathematical requirements of the OP Ordinance, and is eligible for 16 units per 40 acres of gross site area —18 units, based on open space easements, and qualifying length of pedestrian trails. 4. The required amount of Preserved Open Space, as 50% of the buildable area of the site, is proposed for perpetual Open Space Easement. ADOPTION, by the Lake Elmo City Council this 6th day of July, 2004. AT PEST: Martin J. Rafferty, City Administrator Deer Glen Concept Lee Hunt, Mayor City of Lake Elmo PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes of June 14, 2004 Chairman Helwig called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Meldahl, Van Pelt, Berg, Sessing, Sedro, Schneider, and Ptacelc, (Deziel 7:04 p.m.). Agenda M/S/P, Berg, Sedro, To accept the Agenda as presented. VOTE: 8:0. Minutes of May 24, 2004 M/S/P, Ptacek, Sessing, To accept the Minutes of May 24, 2004 as presented. VOTE: 8:0. Public Hearing: Deer Glen, Lakewood Evangelical Free Church The City Planner introduced the OP Concept Plan for a residential developnief t located at the southwest corner of Highway 36 and Keats Avenue. He noted that this is the application for what will ultimately become a three-part approach to development of the 108.62 parent parcel, butthat this Public Hearing addresses only the OP Concept Plan for 48 acres of the 108 acres,- E. j, (Enter Deziel, 7:04 pm) The Planner said this OP Concept Plan is a 48 acre portion of the 108 acre site, depicted as Parcel A on the applicant's graphics. He further described Parcel, C, as depictedi on graphics by the applicant, as 40 acres parallel to Highway 36 with a large power easements -but no deslgpated use; and, Parcel B as a 20 acre parcel that would become the church (PF) site which',Ihethe next round of applications. The Planner noted that review of the appj eatiourevealed,the following technical issues: 1, The Plan as presented fails;to meet OP Standards. The area to the south must be buffered by the Plan at 200 feet, but the Plan.showa only 100 feet of buffer. 2. Technically, in calculating open s ace requirements, 50% of BUILDABLE site area must be dedicated as Open Space °P;r'eserveCThe applicants are about one acre short of Preserved Open Space in this plan since a deduntion not made for proposed Preserved Open Space that is not buildable. The Planner noted that revie*:by the,;Valley Branch Watershed District noted a number of depressions on the OP site where 100 year flood'slevations are located across proposed lots and public streets. The Watershed District Engineer has questioned more detail as to how the applicant would mitigate this flood plain encroachment within Watershed flood plain alteration policy. He reported that the applicant and consultant have been alerted to the problems, and they have suggested they can deal with those problems. The City Planner said the OP Ordinance requires three Findings in support before an approval recommendation can be made. He reported that the Concept Plan as shown is not in compliance with the OP Ordinance Standards. The Planner said the Conunission can recommend approval with numerous conditions, recommend denial based on the Findings, or ask the applicant to return in two weeks with a modification to their plan to address both the non-compliance with OP Standards and the flood plain issues raised by the Watershed. Commissioner Sedro asked whether the state wants to limit access to Highway 36. DRAFT The Planner said Mn/DOT has planned changes to the access to Highway 36 through the entire City. He said that in the future, he expects an overpass over Highway 36 for Keats Avenue, and some of the other intersections. This will necessitate construction of parallel service roads in the future. Commissioner Schneider asked how the 225 foot power easement affects the parcel. The Planner answered that roads, landscaping, common waste treatment system, and farming are all allowed uses of the easement, but height of landscaping will be limited. The easement can be used as Preserved Open Space. He suggested that, in this case, the City's Policies support maintenance of view sheds and rural image along major roadways, and the power line easement has and will assisted in realizing those policies. Commissioner Schneider asked if only the houses have to be outside the required OP buffer. The Planner confined that to be the standard; and that could be difficult with some of the lots as shown if the correct 200 foot buffer is substituted along the south property line of the site. Commissioner Van Pelt asked if the review of this 48 acre Concept Plan is.prepar•atory to later reviews and applications. The Planner said that is correct and that approval of an OP Co tdpi Plan accords no rights to the land owner except to be eligible to apply for a Preliminary Plat ark&tevelopnient Stage Blan. cfs - Commissioner Deziel asked about the proposed road. Would it;beari easement or public road? The Planner said the Developer builds the road, an4&dedicates it to Ihe;City. Grant Nelson Representing Lakewood Church Mr. Nelson introduced the people there who treAworkiri ..on this Concept Plan. He said that Paul Danielson of Kirnley-Horn will address Issues raised. T n Dornack, Architect; Chuck Palmer of Lakewood; Ken Larson is former Cliarch Chaiimah'and atake Elmo resident for 24 years. Grant Nelson said he also lived in the city, and is aware of-'tts values. He said their planning emphasizes Lake Elmo values. Mr. Nelson said they purchased the 1aii in 1 t& with a desire to build a church. The ordinances in place did not address the situation, and it wasinot explained sufficiently at that time. Both parties are better prepared to go forward no*The appliq"nts are here because they still want to build a church. They will be requesting PF Zoning for`twenty acres in the future. They recognize the parcels are linked. They welcome discussions on all thrfeeparcels even though the application deals only with the residential component. Mr. Nelson explained that Parcel B is 20 acres as PF zoning dictates, and would be the site of the church. The Plan locates the church in the center of the 108 acres to provide as much buffering as possible from adjoining properties. To the North is the power line easement and Highway 36. The topography of Parcel A is such that it slopes down to the South allowing for a walkout structure, keeping a lower profile, and keeping the land wooded to the South. Mr. Nelson said they believe they can overcome the concerns in the reviews by outside agencies and City staff. They are not in the business of residential development, and will turn over that aspect of the overall plan to a competent real estate developer as soon as possible. Mr. Nelson pointed out that they have no plans for Parcel C. The will leave it open and undeveloped, exactly how they like it. It is their front door for the church. Their proposal is not to change its status. Mr. Nelson said they welcome insights and perspectives. Paul Danielson, Kimley-Horn Associates Mr. Danielson said he will deal with the issues of floodplain, setbacks, and OP calculations in the following manner: 1. The 200 feet on the south side will have to be revised; the easterly cul de sac will meet the buffering requirements of the code. 2. The westerly will have to be modified without much change except to move everything 50 feet to the north while allowing enough space for house pads. 3. Open Space area calculations did not take into account wetlands and steep slopes. Lots 1 and 2 on the west are wider than necessary and deeper than average in Block Two, and they can make up for the acreage change. Mr. Danielson reported that he had several conversations with Valley Branch Engineer John Hanson and City Engineer Tom Prew. He said they have conceptually concurred with an approach to address the flood plain mitigation issues. The noted that as long as the water is stored on site, it is a grading exercise to create large enough pads and large enough water storage areas. Commissioner Sedro asked that if Lot C is to be kept open, could it be pntuito a land trust? Mr. Danielson said they plan to keep it the same way it now exists. a The Planner said that Parcel C is 40 acres in area, and is eligible for devvplopment. )However, much is absorbed by the large utility easement. Commissioner Sessing said the north side of the parcel would need a larger buffer if Parcel C is developed. Commissioner Schneider asked why the plan did not oall,for a Icing& street connecting the two residential blocks instead of cul de sacs. Mr. Danielson said they looked at alienlativeCand,rihis plan resulted in less impervious surface. The residential plan calls for two different villages of different character for each one. They looked at the easterly side of the parcel, gig the potential connectivity to another road to the east. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE','P•UI3LIGHEARING AT 7:56 P.M. Gary Retzer of 9901 6904 Ct., saidIe lives across the street from the proposed development. He said he heard the church was turned down mice. He sees other churches there, and wonders why they were turned down. He thinks the proposa'I' goes with the neighborhood. He said it was a good idea about preserving the land through a trust. He noted that between the power lines and the freeway and DOT not giving access, he believes it will remain as it is now. The applicants should be allowed to use the land. Joel Simkowski, 5415 Keats Ave., said that there are hiking trails in the back of the site Now it is being shoved into a tin can. There will be more traffic onto Keats, more people, and more chances for accidents. These are rolling hills with low spots, and kids play splat ball there. Jim Dyer 5435 Keats Ave., asked if the septic system would be shared. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:02 P.M. The Planner said the septic system concept is a common treatment system, probably a constricted wetland that serves the church and the residential development together. A traffic study will be a requirement at the next stage. The study will forecast traffic volumes generated, peak traffic counts, and the impact of the proximity of Highway 36 to the access to Keats Avenue. MIMIC Chairman Helwig asked the applicants if they wanted to table, and continue in a couple of weeks. Paul Danielson said he was hopeful that he had addressed those issues, and would like to move forward. He would prefer the Planning Commission recommend approval, with additional conditions of approval in order for it to move forward to the City Council. M/S/P, Ptacek, Van Pelt, To table based upon the Staff Report in order for the applicant to address the issues of mathematics and engineering, and to recommend the applicant waive the statutory 60 day Iimit. VOTE: 8:1 (Deziel). The Planner said if the applicants agree, and can turn it around, staff will put it on the June 28 meeting agenda. The applicants agreed. Amending Uses in the GB Zoning District The Planner said he received a letter requesting a new use in the Dolan See site. The site has had GB zoning for many years. The Council attempted to downzone to LB but'dltir at,ly did not. Instead the Planning Commission reviewed the Code. A moratorium was placed on those#iiye or six sites still zoned GB but guided as LB in the Comprehensive Plan. The moratorium expired and tl` onmg was not changed. The applicant would like to use the building as a indoor family entert ' '"tent center, In review of GB permitted and conditional uses, no remotely similar useiis currently allowed. Given the timeline of the new Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commiss oitsl ould probably look at it. The Planner said he is not asking for action but for advice on whether to consider amending the uses in the General Business District, and as to whether to publish a hearing notice to amend the use. Commissioner Ptacek asked if the site should.remairi GB of be rezoned to LB, and should this use be allowable in either LB or GB. Commissioner Deziel said the use should not be allowed 0 Permitted. He said he sees it only as a Conditional use. Commissioner Deziel note approve it. General Btiness was recommended in the past but the Council failed to Commissioner Ptacek said'the Dolan silo should be zoned LB to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Van Pelt pointed out that there were five parcels in the same situation, and that solution would fix only one of them. The parcel next door has changed hands as well. There is a narrower use criterion in LB. Commissioner Ptacek said that an entertainment center as proposed is an intense use. He would want to see the application come before the Planning Commission as a CUP with traffic and septic impact studies. Commissioner Sedro said the zoning can be looked at in terms of scale, but let the CUP dictate the scale, type and frequency of the entertainment activity, The Planner said it should not be just the Dolan parcel, but the Zoning Code that the Commission is looking at. An amendment to either GB or LB to allow the use proposed would relate to every other LB or GB site in the City as well. Commissioner Berg said we should rezone to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Dolan site should be zoned LB; and, this use considered in that context — LB. MEMO (June 23, 2004) To: Lake Elmo Planning Commission Subject: OP Concept Plan - "Deer Glen" On June 14 the Planning Commission tabled this OP Concept Plan application to enable the applicant to address redesign of the plan to address three primary issues: 1. The Valley Branch Watershed District comments/observations regarding the possible impact of flood plain areas within the site on the OP Design. The applicant has met with the Valley Branch District Engineer to determine how the plan could be graded to mitigate the flood plain encroachments in an acceptable manner — not impacting the 100 Year flood elevation by filling flood plain areas on site, and maintaining at least a 2 foot house elevation above the 100 Year event elevation. A June 21 letter to the City from the Valley Branch District Engineer advises the City of the meeting and that filling/mitigation that the developer proposes by his June 16, 2004 revised plan would be permitted by the District — subject to home sites maintaining the required "free board" above the 100 Year flood elevations. 2. The applicant has revised the plan to result in the Preserved Open Space calculations attaining compliance with the OP Ordinance formula for Preserved Open Space. This plan revision is dated June 16, 2004. 3. The applicant has revised the Concept Plan to provide the required 200 foot buffer along the south periphery of the site to replace the non -compliant 100 foot buffer of the earlier plan. This plan revision is also dated June 16, 2004. I have also attached a letter from the Minnesota Department of Transportation that provides brief commentary and permit requirements for the project. No traffic issues are raised by MnDOT. We will be submitting the plan to MnDOT again at the Development Stage/Preliminary Plat application, at which time the church facility — and, perhaps, the 40 acres as of yet undesignated use will be included in their review comments. Based on the foregoing, staff suggests the following revised (from our June 9 Planning Staff Report) Findings regarding the Lakewood Evangelical Church OP Concept Plan: 1. The Concept Plan is generally consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as reflected by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The Concept Plan is consistent with the purpose of the Open Space Preservation Ordinance. 3. The Concept Plan generally complies with the development standards of the Open Space Preservation Ordinance. Based on the foregoing Findings Staff recommends approval of the OP Concept Plan of "Deer Glen" per the revised plan Staff dated June 23, 2004, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Development Stage/Preliminary Plat shall include, or be accompanied by a concurrent plat application that includes, dedication of the public roadway required to connect the OP to Keats Avenue. 2. A complete wetlands delineation shall be submitted with the Development Stage Application for review and approval of the Valley Branch Watershed District. 3. The Preliminary Plat shall include preliminary grading plans sufficient to determine final house elevations and the hydrologic calculations for any flood plain mitigation measures proposed. It may be advisable — for the benefit of the applicant, staff, and the Commission — for the Commission to provide the applicant its position regarding the applicants proposed use designation of "Parcel C" as depicted on the OP Concept Plan. Staff has repeatedly advised the applicant that designation of the future use of Parcel C would be a staff recommendation, unless it is the applicant's intention to have Parcel C remain forever as undivided and undeveloped open space with a single residence. Should that use (undeveloped open space or farm land) be truly the intent of the applicant, that intent could be verified by the dedication of a Conservation Easement over the entire area of "Parcel C" that is not Public street right-of-way. Attachments: 1. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of June 14, 2004 2. Valley Branch Watershed District letter of June 21, 2004 3. MnDOT Review letter of June 17, 2004 4. Applicant's Letter of June 23, 2004 5. Applicant's Revised Plan of June 16, 2004 6. Original Planning Staff Report of June 9, 2004. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Date: June 9, 2004 for the meeting of June 14, 2004 Applicant: Lakewood Evangelical Free Church Location: Southeast corner of State Highway 36 and Keats Avenue Requested Action: OP Concept Plan Land Use Plan Guiding: RAD Existing Zoning: RR Site History and Existing Conditions: The site of the specific application for OP Concept approval consists of 48.62 gross acres. It is important to understand, however, that this 48 acre OP site is but a portion of 108+ contiguous acres owned by the applicant. Since the OP review process entails three steps, while the review processes contemplated by the applicant for the balance of the 108 acre site entails but two steps, this application becomes but a part of an overall proposal. If for no other reason than the 48 acre OP site would be otherwise land -locked, it is not practical or realistic to detach the OP site from the overall 108 acre site. This Staff Report will repeatedly refer to the overall 108 acre site and plans to provide context for the specific 48 acre OP Concept Plan. The 108 acre "parent" site is essentially divided into two distinct natural regimes. The north 60 acres of the site is gently rolling farm land containing several topographic depressions that will surely qualify as Jurisdiction Wetlands. The southerly 48 acres of the parent site — the subject of the OP Concept Plan application — is rolling in topography, and nearly 25% wooded, with several small topographic depressions that will be classified Jurisdictional Wetlands. An existing farmstead is located on the northerly portion of the 108 acre site adjacent to State Highway 36. The 225 foot wide power line easement crosses the entire west/east portion of the parent site. The 108 acre site was the subject of concurrent applications for Comprehensive Plan Amendment ("OP" to "P"), and rezoning ("RR" to "P") that were reviewed by the City over a 5 month period in 1996 and 1997. Both applications were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission but subsequently denied by the City Council on a 5-0 vote. An amended application to reduce the size of the area subject to Plan amendment and rezoning from 108 acres to 29 acres was also denied by the City Council on a 4-0 vote. I have attached both Planning Commission and City Council Minutes relating to those 1996 applications to remind/advise Commissioners of issues raised then. One of the issues prominent in the 1996 discussions regarding applications for this site was that of the potential scale of the church project coupled with sizeable portions of the site that remained undesignated as to future use, but proposed to be zoned "PF" — opening the possibility of even more church expansion in the future. The 1997 attempt to amend the application for "P" Plan and "P" zoning from 108 acres to 29 acres following the initial denial was obviously a response by the applicant to that issue. A second response to 1996/1997 case involving this site — this time by the City — was a lengthy (and often contentious) undertaking to amend the PF section of the zoning ordinance. A major feature of that ordinance amendment, as adopted in 2000, limits the area of any new PF zoned parcel to 20 acres. That was/is a strategy to limit the scale of any PF use (be it a church, or school, or government site). To date, there have been no circumstances where the new PF standards have been applied. That ordinance clause does, however, bear on the overall proposal for the 108 acre site. Discussion and Analysis: The applicant proposes an OP Concept Plan to develop 18 single family detached lots on a site of 48.62 'gross acres — of which 46.81 aces is `Buildable" (with the balance as wetlands and steep slopes). The required Preserved Open Space is 23.41 acres. The applicant reports the Concept Plan depicts 24.07 acres of Preserved Open Space in three parcels separated only by roadway. The applicants plan notes do not, however, report whether the 24.07 acres is all Buildable", as is a requirement. If wetlands and steep slopes existing in the Preserved Open Space need to be deducted from the reported 24.07 Open Space acreage, the net will be somewhat short of the required 23.41 acres. Open Space standards provide that at least 60% of the Preserved Open Space be in parcels of at least 10 acres. If parcel contiguity for the purposes of this standard is assumed where only road crossings divide Preserved Open Space parcels, the proposed Concept complies with the 60% standard. If however, intervening road right-of-way is assumed to divide the open space for the purpose of this standard, it appears that the Plan is somewhat short of 60% in parcels of over 10 acres — of which there is but one. The foregoing observations regarding Preserved Open Space calculations are based on rough measurements, not planimeter accuracy. Since the apparent disparities are minor, adjustments can be made relatively easily at Development Stage. The Concept Plan proposes a 200 foot OP buffer setback for structures along the west property border, but a 100 foot structure buffer along the south and east property border. The reduced structure buffer is responsive to the alternative buffering (to the 200 foot standard) the OP standards permit where both other visual impact mitigation measures are utilized; and, where the adjoining property is eligible for OP development. The adjoining parcel to the east is 66 acres in area, and thus qualifies as an OP site by exceeding 40 acres. The adjoining parcel to the south, however, is slightly less than 20 acres in area, and does not qualify for OP development. The south property line of the OP site does not qualify for the 100 foot structure setback without variance. The proposed 100 foot east structure setback may qualify, depending on the year round visual efficacy of the existing tree line. The applicant should demonstrate that structure screening efficacy with the OP Development Stage documentation. Copies of OP Concept Plan graphics are submitted by the City to `outside" reviewing agencies for comment even though the level of detail at Concept Stage is generally insufficient for complete reviews by those agencies. In fact, in many cases, we receive no response at all at the Concept Stage. We have, in this case, received a detailed response from the Valley Branch Watershed District which is attached. The District's Engineer has identified conflicts with flood plain elevations on 11 of the 18 proposed lots; and, with a portion of the proposed street system. Staff has discussed these observations with applicant's representatives, who advise that they believe that site grading and varying house design can overcome most of the observed flood plain problems. That may be possible, but we do not know that for certain at this time. I have also attached the 1996 MnDOT review of the former use proposal for the 108 acre site — no MnDOT review has as yet been received on the 2004 application. Many of the issues raised by MnDOT regarding the overall 108 acre site in 1996 remain valid in 2004 — even considering the differences between the two plans for the site. Even though there is no formal application at this point that involves the balance of the 108 acre site, (at a minimum) access to the OP site is dependent on the plan for the overall 108 acres. There may well be other interdependencies as well — even more than now obvious, depending on the outcomes of the flood plain issues within the OP site that are noted above. The applicant has met with staff on several occasions over the past year regarding the overall site. During those meetings the applicant has indicated repeatedly that their primary goal is today as it was in 1996 — construction of a church. Any other use of the 108 acres becomes financially supportive of the church mission, but secondary as development priority. The overall 108 acre site is proposed by the applicant to be addressed as three components: 1.) The 48+ acre OP residential site that is the subject of this OP Concept Plan; 2.) A 20 acre site for a church facility — the maximum size PF site per current PF standards; and, 3.) A 40 acre "remnant" parcel (adjacent to mid paralleling State Highway 36) for which no end use is specified. During the meetings with staff over the past year the applicant and its consultants have been advised repeatedly that it would be the position of staff that the entire 108 acres must be addressed as to end use concurrently with any applications for use approvals on any portion. It appears this was an issue in 1996 as well. Staff continues to believe this to be the only posture the City should take regarding this 108 acre site. Findings and Recommendations: Based on the foregoing, staff suggests the following Findings regarding the Lakewood Evangelical Church OP Concept Plan: 1. The Concept Plan may not be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as reflected by the Zoning Ordinance, with respect to flood plain development and/or alteration. 2. The Concept Plan is consistent with the purpose of the Open Space Preservation Ordinance. 3. The Concept Plan fails to comply with the development standards of the Open Space Preservation Ordinance with respect to structure buffering to the south; and, quantity of "buildable" Preserved Open Space. Planning Commission Actions Requested: Based on the Finding suggested, the Commission could adopt a Motion to deny the Concept Plan. Perhaps, however, a better strategy may be to table the application to allow the applicant to consider the issues raised here; and, amend the Concept Plan accordingly. If the tabling action is taken, the applicant must agree to waive the City's 60 day Statutory review period and the 30 day Planning Commission OP Concept Plan review period provided by Ordinance. Charles E. Dillerud, City Planner Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Valley Branch and City Engineer 2004 Review memos 3. MnDOT 1996 Review Letter 4. 1996/1997 Commission and Council Minutes 5. Applicant' Documentation and Graphics Location Map IW R10W RI DIN DON 129N l2AN 1122W R2IW R2 Vicinity Map 0 1556 Scale In Feet y▪ M ngodualon olis 111. rlan4 record/amasa e toy Th▪ . awing Cwud bouse( rtuncllkn N sPofA'blebr any lmoe�unSoon nlyb nol nnurte Wa6RF010n Caunly 6umyoln Mace. Rom I65114904096 Parcel dela bawl an P6400 Information June 1, 2004 Mr. Chuck Dillerud City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 RECEIVED JUN 0 2 2004 C Re: Lakewood Evangelical Free Church, OP Development/Concept Plan Submittal Dear Mr. Dillerud: Thank you for submitting the concept plan for the Lakewood Evangelical Free Church. On behalf of the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD), I have reviewed the information and this letter provides my preliminary comments. Because the project will require a VBWD permit, I will review the project more thoroughly once a VBWD permit application is submitted. Background & Floodplain Issues The project site almost entirely lies within the Goetschel Pond subwatershed. The Goetschel Pond subwatershed consists of over 40 small depressions, including several wetlands, which are landlocked or semi -landlocked. In 1995, the VBWD was asked by the developer of the Fields of St. Croix subdivision to investigate lowering the Goetschel Pond 100-year flood level from the level published in the VBWD's 1995 Water Management Plan. The VBWD re -calculated the 100-year flood level of Goetschel Pond and all of the upstream depressions using the VBWD's simplified method and the VBWD's 1993 two -foot topography. (See VBWD Rules, Section V, Subd. 3 for a description of the VBWD's simplified method for calculating 100-year flood levels of landlocked basins.) Based on the elevations determined in the 1995 study, much of the southwestern portion of the Lakewood Evangelical Free Church site is in a 100-year floodplain. The 100-year floodplains of these depressions were determined to be their runout elevations in the 1995 study. Specifically, the following areas appear to be within floodplains: • Lots 6-8 and 10-15 appear to be within a 100-year floodplain of a depression, which appears to have a runout elevation of approximately Elevation 969; • The proposed east -west road between the proposed church and residential lots also appears to be within a 100-year floodplain of a depression, which appears to have a runout elevation of approximately Elevation 975; • Lots 16 and 17 also appear to be within a 100-year floodplain of a depression located mostly off the site to the east. The runout elevation of this depression appears to be approximately 968. The enclosed figure shows the approximate 100-year floodplains. The VBWD requires that all homes be constructed so that their minimum floor elevations are at least two feet above the adjacent water body's 100-year flood level. The VBWD also limits the amount of fill that can be placed within a floodplain. DAVID BUCHECK LINCOLN FETCHER DONALD SCHEEL DALE BORASH DUANE JOHNSON VALLEY BRANCH WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. BOX 838 LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA 55042-0538 i4r. Chuck Dillerud June I, 2004 Page 2 Based on the current 100-year floodplains and VBWD regulations, it appears that several lots in the proposed development are unbuildable. Water Quality No stormwater runoff treatment is shown on the plans. The project will need to incorporate stormwater runoff water quality treatment measures into the design. Conceptual locations are discussed in the Kimley-Horn and Associates May 13, 2004 letter. Water Quantity Because the site drains to landlocked or semi -landlocked basins, it is important that features that will minimize the increase in stormwater runoff volumes be incorporated into the site design. Practices that will reduce the amount of impervious surfaces and encourage infiltration must be considered, including the following: • Reducing the number of parking stalls to the minimum required by the City • Constructing the size of the parking stalls to the minimum size required by the City • Dimensioning 30% of the parking stalls for compact cars only • Constructing infiltration islands in the parking lot (possibly perpendicular to the parking stalls, see Parking Lot Design Fact Sheet ) • Using vegetative roof systems • Constructing the site so that compaction in pervious areas is prevented • Requiring that soils be loosened to a depth of 24-inches to a maximum compaction of 85% standard proctor density and tilling the upper 10 inches of soils prior to planting • Directing roof drains to pervious areas • Using pervious areas for snow storage • Planting trees that at maturity will canopy over the impervious surfaces • Planting deep-rooted trees, shrubs, wildflowers, and grasses in at least 25% of the project's green space • Constructing the low -volume residential roads to a maximum width of 22 feet when parking is allowed on one side and 28 feet when parking is allowed on both sides (see Street Design Fact Sheet) • Constructing the cul-de-sac and turnaround with less impervious surfaces (see Cul-de-Sac Design Fact Sheet) • Requiring that long driveways be narrowed to a single lane (around 11 feet wide) as they approach the street • Keeping the proposed trails as narrow as practical, and consider using porous pavement. Because over a mile of trails are proposed, reducing the width by just a small amount could reduce the amount of impervious surface by a fair amount. Wetland Issues The concept plans show impacts to wetlands. The VBWD is the Local Government Unit responsible for administrating the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). The developer will need to follow all of the rules and regulations of the WCA, and submit all of the necessary documentation. The VBWD will then review the information, forward the information to the appropriate agencies for comments, and ensure the proposal conforms to the WCA and other VBWD wetland rules and regulations. The intent of the WCA is to avoid wetland impacts. Since the concept plans show wetland impacts, the developer will need to explain why the impacts must occur and how the impacts have been minimized. Any projects with wetland impacts take a minimum of six weeks from the time a complete permit Mr. Chuck Dillerud June 1, 2004 Page 3 application is submitted until a permit can be obtained. All developers proposing wetland impacts are strongly encouraged to meet with a Barr Engineering Company wetland scientist and me before a VBWD permit is submitted. As indicated in the Kimley-Horn and Associates letter, the VBWD has approved the wetland delineations conducted on the site. Erosion Issues Steep slopes are scattered around the site. The conceptual location of some of the trails and roads run through these steep slopes, which can cause more erosion than a typical site. Anticipating the construction procedures will be important in developing an adequate erosion control plan. Permit Requirements The proposed project will require a permit from the VBWD. The landowner must submit a complete permit application packet to me. Permit application material can be obtained from the VBWD's website, www.vbwd.ore. or from me. Once a complete VBWD permit application is submitted, I will review the project for conformance to the VBWD's rules and regulations, including: • Stormwater rates • Water quality treatment • Flood levels and minimum floor elevations • Wetland protection • Erosion controls • Potential downstream impacts If you have any questions, please contact me at 952-832-2622. Sincerely, ohn P. Hanson, P.E. BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY Engineers for the Valley Branch Watershed District c: David Bucheck, VBWD President Paul Danielson, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. TIKDA 'ENGINEERS •ARCHITECIS;PLANNERS MEMORANDUM KC.t,t1Vi 1J JUN 9 T ''04 Vic--T-0s21/4.,- Q O 1500 Piper Jaffrey Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, MN 55101-2140 (651) 292-4400 (651) 292-0083 Fax www.tkda.cam To: Planning Commission Members Reference: Concept Plan Review Copies To: Lakewood Evangelical Free Church City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Comm. No. 11979-041 From: Thomas D. Prew, P. E. r Routing: Date: June 1, 2004 I have reviewed the Concept Plan submittal dated May 13, 2004, and have the following comments: Streets A traffic model should be developed and reviewed. The impact of closing the intersection of TH 36 should be reviewed. Depending on the traffic volumes, a roundabout might be appropriate at the intersection of Keats and 59th Street. The eastern cul-de-sac should be a City standard island style. The intersection of the church driveway and the street is awkward and should be changed to a more conventional right angle. A second driveway entrance to the church should be built for emergency purposes. The street section east of the easterly cul-de-sac should only be graded in, not paved. Waste Water System A wetland treatment system is proposed to treat waste from the entire development. A property owners association will be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the system. Water System The church is planning a system to take care of both domestic and fire suppression needs. Each home is to have its own well. I would recommend that the developer look into the feasibility of extending water service from the church to the home sites in order to reduce the number of wells that are needed. Trails This trail plan should be reviewed in conjunction with the City's new Trail System Plan which is now being prepared. I would recommend that a trail be extended to the south end of the easterly cul-de-sac. Surface Water No ponding was shown on this concept plan. A VBWD Permit will be required. An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Minnesota Depart( Pt of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 November 8, 1996 Ann Pung-Terwedo City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Ave North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Dear Ann Pung-Terwedo: Subject: Lakewood Evengelical Free Church Site Plan Review S96-080 Southeast Quadrant of TH 36 and Keats Ave North Lake Elmo, Washington County CS 8204 NOV I S 1996 CITY OF LAKE ELMO The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the Lakewood Evengelical Free Church site plan. We find the plan acceptable for further development with consideration of the following comments. • The proposed development may create the need for improvements on the highway system. However, we are unable to make a determination based on only the submitted material. Forecasts of development -generated traffic are needed to determine the project's impact on Trunk Highway (TH) 36's intersection with Keats Ave North. We request that the city or the project proposer provide pre -development and post -development traffic volumes for thast intersection/, including turning movements. Improvements that are necessitated by specific development proposals are the responsibility of the project proposer, the city, or both. This information may be forwarded to Local Government Liaison Supervisor Sherry Narusiewicz at the above address. • In the long run, TH 36 is planned to be converted to a limited -access freeway. As you know, Mn/DOT joined with Ramsey and Washington Counties and municipalities along TH 36 to develop an access management plan for the corridor, identifying the future points of full and partial access to the proposed freeway. The long-range plan calls for Keats Ave North to have no access to TH 36. Interchanges are to be located at Lake Elmo Ave North and at a new street between Jarvis Ave and DeMontreville Trail, Conversion of TH 36 to a freeway is not expected to occur within the next twenty years. In the next six months, Mn/DOT and Washington County intend to begin a study which, will examine the, future layout of thefreeway and its connections to cross -streets. The study will allow us to develop an Official Map for the corridor, and to begin to preserve right-of-way. An equal opportunity employer Ann Pung-Terwedo November 8, 1996 page two If improvements will be needed at the Keats Ave North/ TH 36 intersection in the short term, the nature of the improvements must be evaluated in light of the long-range plan to close this intersection. Our upcoming study would be the appropriate forum in which to discuss this £other. Mark Krebsbach of our Transportation Planning Section maybe contacted at 582-1115. • Additional right-of-way along the south side of TH 36 is likely to be needed for a frontage road. Development of a frontage road could occur when TH 36 is converted to a freeway, or sooner if it is needed as an interim improvement. We ask that the church plan no permanent structures immediately adjacent to the highway right-of-way. • We also request that control over access to the highway be dedicated to the public at the location of the existing residential driveway on the site. Dedication of access control will bring us one-step closer to the more efficient and safe freeway design. Access control may be dedicated by quit claim deed forwarded to Harold Larson of our Right of Way Section at the above address. • A Mn/DOT stormwater drainage permit may be required for this development. Grading and drainage plans showing both existing conditions and proposed post - development conditions must be submitted to Mn/DOT for review prior to construction. These may be directed to Keith VanWagner of our Water Resources Section at 3485 Hadley Ave North, Oakdale 55128. Questions about Mn/DOT's drainage concerns may be directed to Mr. Van Wagner at 779-5056. • Mn/DOT's policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use and highways. Noise -sensitive land uses -- such as churches -- adjacent to highways often result in complaints about traffic noise. Traffic noise from TH 36 could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Dept. Of Transportation. Mn/DOT policy regarding new developments adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures. The project proposer should assess the noise situation and take the action deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any highway noise. If you have any questions regarding this review, please contact me at 582-1383. Sincerely, Elizabeth Malaby Transportation Planner c: Ms. Diane Sessing Sandy Cullen, Washington Co. Transportation Engineer June 21, 2004 Mr. Chuck Dillerud City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Re: Lakewood Evangelical Free Church, OP Development/Concept Plan Submittal Dear Mr. Dillerud: On June 21, 2004, Paul Danielson of Kimley-Horn and Associates met with me to discuss floodplain issues on the concept plan for the Lakewood Evangelical Free Church. As you probably recall, my June 1, 2004 letter to you discussed several floodplain issues and concluded that with the existing topography, several of the southern and southwestern lots would be unbuildable. At our meeting, Mr. Danielson reviewed his concept Existing Conditions and Environment Restoration Plan (6/16/04) with me. The plans show filling within the existing 100-year floodplains and mitigating for the fill by excavating flood storage volumes. In concept, this approach is allowed by the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) rules and regulations, and would allow homes to be constructed on the lots that conform to the VBWD's minimum floor elevation rules. As noted in my June 1, 2004 letter, the proposed project will require a permit from the VBWD. The landowner must submit a complete permit application packet to me. Permit application material can be obtained from the VBWD' s website, www.vbwd.ore, or from me. Once a complete VBWD permit application is submitted, I will review the project for conformance to the VBWD's rules and regulations, including: • Stonnwater rates • Water quality treatment • Flood levels and minimum floor elevations • Wetland protection • Erosion controls • Potential downstream impacts If you have any questions, please contact me at 952-832-2622. Sincerely, John P. Hanson, P.E. BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY Engineers for the Valley Branch Watershed District c: David Bucheck, VBWD President Paul Danielson, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. DAVID BUCHECK LINCOLN FETCHER DONALD SCHEEL DALE BORASH DUANE JOHNSON Minnesota Departnient of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road 132 Roseville, MN 55113 June 17, 2004 Chuck Dillerud City Planner / City Administrator 3800 Laverne Ave. N Lake Elmo, MN 55042 SUBJECT: Lakewood Evangelical Free Church Mn/DOT Review #SO4-046 SW Quad of TH 36 and Keats Avenue Control Section 8204 Dear Mr. Dillerud: Nt.CEIVED AIN 1 3 2004 The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the above site plan and has the following comments: • A Mn/DOT Drainage permit may be required. The proposed development will need to maintain existing drainage rates. An increase of stormwater rate of run-off to Mn/DOT right-of-way is prohibited. The City or project developer will need to submit before/after hydraulic computations for both 10 and 100 year rainfall events verifying that all existing drainage patterns and systems affecting Mn/DOT right of way will be perpetuated. This will need to be reviewed in order to determine whether a drainage permit will be required. Please direct questions concerning these issues to Steve Christianson (651- 634-2415) ofMn/DOT's Water Resources section. • Any use of or work within Mn/DOT right of way requires a permit. Please direct questions regarding permit applications to Keith Van Wagner (651-582- 1443) of Mn/DOT's Permits section. As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for development activity such as plats and site plans to: Development Review Coordinator Mn/DOT - Metro Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2) copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to An equal opportunity employer provide three (3) copies of a plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay Mn/DOT's review and response to development proposals. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to delay and/or return incomplete submittals. If you have any questions concerning this review please feel free to contact me at (651) 634-2083 Sincerely, uanita Voigt Transportation Planner Intermediate //a Copy: Wayne Sandberg / Washington County Joe Lux / Washington County Paul B. Danielson, P.E., Kimley-Hom & Assoc. Gary Ehret, K.imley-Hom & Assoc. pri KimleyHorn ishismir and Associates, Inc. June 23, 2004 Mr. Chuck Dillerud City of Lake Elmo Planning Department 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Re: Lakewood Evangelical Free Church "Deer Glen" OP Development/Concept Plan Submittal Dear Mr. Dillerud: On behalf of the Lakewood Evangelical Free Church (LEFC), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) is resubmitting information on the OP Development/ Concept Plan on the proposed "Deer Glen" development for your review and approval. At the Lake Elmo Planning Commission meeting, three items were identified that needed to be addressed to move the project forward. This resubmittal addresses those items. I will briefly outline the changes for each item. 1) Floodplain Impacts The Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) had reviewed the initial concept plan and had identified several residential lots that were impacted by the current floodplain storage on the site. I met with John Manson, VBWD Engineer, and reviewed the revised plan with him. The revised existing conditions/resource inventory plan now shows areas that we are proposing fill within the existing floodplain storage areas. In addition, the plan shows a floodplain mitigation area sufficient to replace the fill within the current floodplain area. While detailed engineering has not been done for the site, we believe we have sufficiently demonstrated to the VBWD that we can easily provide the necessary floodplain storage for this site. John Hanson has forwarded a letter to you indicating conceptual concurrence with our method to address the issued raised in his previous letter. 2) South Buffer Our initial concept plan submittal showed a 100-foot buffer setback from the south property line. Based on review comments from the City, it was determined that in order to comply with the OP Development zoning ordinance, a 200-foot ■ TEL 651 645 4197 FAX 651 645 5116 ■ Suite 345N 2550 University Avenue West St, Paul, Minnesota 55114 raw wm Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Mr. Chuck Dillerud June 23, 2004 Page 2 of 2 buffer setback is required. This additional setback only impacts the westerly cul- de-sac. The concept site plan has been revised by pushing the westerly cul-de-sac north approximately 50 feet to provide sufficient building pad area while meeting minimum lot requirements. 3) Open Space Area requirements Based on comments received by the City, it was determined that the initial submittal did not have sufficient open space area in accordance with the OP zoning ordinance. We have revised the open space area to meet the ordinance requirements. The open space calculation assumes 50 percent of the buildable area (23.41 acres) plus the steep slope and wetland areas within the proposed open space (1.48 acres) for a total open space requirement of 24.89 acres. The revised plan shows a total of 25.0 acres of proposed open space. This additional area was provided by minor lot revisions to Lots 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 13 and 18. As you requested, I have provided 3 copies of the full-size plans for the site (existing condition/resource inventory, development /concept plan, and landscape plan) along with one 11x17 copy of each plan. We believe the revised plans address the issues requested to be addressed at the Planning Commission meeting. We look forward to a favorable action at the June 28th Planning Commission and moving the project forward to the City Council on July 6th. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 651-643-0407. Very truly yours, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATE Paul B. Danielson, P.E. Project Manager C: Chuck Palmer, LEFC Tom Domack, BWBR Architects Gary Ehret, Kimley-Horn and Associates File No. 160502006.2.001 ®0 In Kimley-Horn • and Associates, Inc. May 13, 2004 Mr. Chuck Dillerud City of Lake Elmo Planning Depaitrnent 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Re: Lakewood Evangelical Free Church OP Development/Concept Plan Submittal Dear Mr. Dillerud: RECEIVED HAY 1 4 2004 On behalf of the Lakewood Evangelical Free Church (LEFC), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) is submitting an OP Development/ Concept Plan for your review and approval. LEFC owns 108 acres of property within the City of Lake Elmo. The property is "L-shaped" bounded by Trunk Highway (TH) 36 on the north, Keats Avenue on the west, and rural residential (but largely undeveloped) on the east and south. A portion of the west property abuts rural residential developed lots. The OP Development/Concept Plan shows the entire 108.62 acres and is divided into three parcels. Parcel A is a 20 acre parcel that we are requesting a rezoning from the current rural residential (RR) to public facility (PF). The LEFC building would be constructed on this parcel. Lake Elmo City zoning ordinances provide that a church is a permitted use within the PF zoning, and will be in the form of a conditional use permit (CUP) concurrent with a zoning change. Parcel B is a 48.62 acre parcel that we are requesting a CUP for an OP development within the current RR zoning. Parcel C is a 40 acre parcel that we are requesting be maintained at the current RR zoning with the existing farmhouse to remain. We have provided the following information for each parcel below: Parcel A Once the concept plan is approved, LEFC intends to submit a preliminary plat application for Parcel A. The application will request a rezoning to PF along with the approval of a CUP for the construction of a 650-seat sanctuary facility with approximately 50,000 square feet of total floor area on two levels. The PF zoning requires a minimum of one parking space per 4 seats (Chapter 3, Section • TEL 651 645 4197 FAX 651 645 5116 • Suite 345N 2550 University Avenua West SI. Paul, Minnesota 55114 prim In Kimley-Horn Mr. Chuck Dillerud and Associates, Inc. May 13, 2004 Page 2 of 5 300.07.4M Subd 5.b1). This would equate to 150 parking stalls. However, based on existing use at their current facilities and other church facilities completed in the Twin Cities area over the past several years, a parking ratio close to 1 space per 2 seats is proposed. We have shown a total of 290 parking stalls. According to the zoning code, a parcel area of up to 20 acres is required to have a buffer width of 150 feet and a maximum impervious site coverage of 35 percent (Chapter 3, Section 300.07.4M Subd 4). Section 300.07.4M Subd 5.d indicates that the buffer is not applied to property lines abutting public streets. Therefore, the 150-foot buffer is shown on the east side of the property. The north side of the property abuts a 225-foot wide transmission easement and therefore no structures can be placed in that area. Because of this, the proposed church conceptual layout shows a 10-foot parking setback (Section 300.13 Subd 6.A.10.d and e). The south and west sides of the church parcel abut public streets and a 20- foot parking setback is shown in those areas. The conceptual site plan identifies landscape islands within the parking area to accommodate the potential design of a rainwater garden as well as meet the requirements of Section 300.13 Subd 6.B.6.a related to a minimum landscape area of 10 percent of the interior parking space. We have included conceptual elevations of the proposed church facility to provide a flavor of the architecture considered for this building. Parcel B Parcel B is proposed to be developed as an OP residential development. Parcel B has 46.81 net buildable acres (gross area less wetlands less slopes greater than 25 percent). Of this net area, 51 percent is proposed to be designated as preserved open space (meeting the requirement of a minimum of 50 percent identified in Section 300.06 Subd 1.B). Based on a density of 16 units per 40 acres, the conceptual plan identifies 18 residential lots (46.81 acres/2.5 units per acre equals 18.72 units). The plan reflects a buffer zone on the west property of 200 feet in accordance with Section 300.06 Subd 2.E.1. A buffer zone of 100 feet is shown on the south and east property line since the proposed OP development abuts lands that could be eligible for future OP development (Again in accordance with the above reference code). The north boundary abuts a public street. The boundary of Parcel B connects all the way over to Keats Avenue to provide the opportunity for an internal trail system to connect from the development to Keats Avenue. Kim ley -Horn Mr. Chuck Dillerad ®SI1 and Associates, Inc. May 13, 2004 Page 3 of 5 The residential development will consist of two "villages". It is the intention of the development that each village will have a different architectural character. The homes will be 3-4 bedroom homes consistent in the style and size of other homes currently being constructed within the City of Lake Elmo. Parcel C Parcel C is proposed to remain as is with the existing farmhouse on the parcel. This parcel will be bisected by the public street connecting from Keats Avenue to the church parcel then continuing on to Parcel B. The roadway is designed to allow the extension to the east if Mn/DOT and the City of Lake Elmo desired a frontage road to parallel TH 36 and to form an intersection with the residential road west of Keats Avenue. Other Issues Wastewater System Parcel A and B will be served by a community wastewater system. North American Wetland Engineering, P.A. (NAWE) performed field investigation to determine the applicability of the use of a community wastewater system. The design flow was based on two factors: a residential component assuming the 18 lots in Parcel B plus the church facility for Parcel A. It was assumed for a preliminary basis to utilize the maximum flow allowed by code (Section 300.07.4M Subd 2.b.2 and 3) of 5,000 gallons per day. The system also assumed the potential of use from Parcel C for land sizing purposes only. The recommended wastewater treatment system is a vertical flow wetland with infiltration beds. An equalization tank is also recommended to reduce the variable loading from the church due to cyclical use of the facility. Disposal will be handled through an at -grade infiltration bed system. Water System LEFC will be served by a water well to provide domestic and fire protection. A storage tank will be required to provide sufficient fire protection storage for a sprinkler system. The residential development will be supplied by individual wells. Storm Sewer The overall site comprises 10 small wetland areas. These areas were delineated by NAWE in October 2003 and have been agreed upon with the Valley Branch Watershed District. Storm water will be treated prior to any discharge to the ®i� Kimley-Horn Mr. Chuck Dillerud and Associates, Inc. May 13, 2004 Page 4 of 5 existing wetlands. It is anticipated that the church will have a storm water treatment pond in the southwest and northeast corner of the site. In addition to these ponds, there is the possibility to design a rainwater garden to treat water from the parking lot area prior to discharge. This information will be developed during the preliminary design stage. Homeowner's Association It is the intention of LEFC to have a homeowner's association (HOA) developed that would be responsible for the preserved open space identified in Parcel B, Further the HOA will be responsible to enforce architectural guidelines for the residential development. The HOA will be responsible in perpetuity for the maintenance, repairs and replacement of the open space and community septic system. The HOA will have a set of architectural guidelines that will consider building materials, common architectural themes, ancillary structures, landscape guidelines, etc to ensure that this development will be a jewel within the City of Lake Elmo. Staging Plan It is the intention of LEFC to commence construction in spring 2005 with completion within one year. Concurrent with the church construction, it is anticipated that the westerly "village" of residential homes within Parcel B will be developed in 2005 with the easterly "village" completed by 2007. Historical Preservation Plan LEFC does not intend to make any current improvements on the existing farm structures within Parcel C. Parcel C will remain "as is" at this time. Submittal Information The following information is enclosed as part of this submittal package: 1) Development Application Form. 2) Planning Fee of $1,050. 3) Existing Conditions/Environmental Resource Plan (20 copies at 1"=100' and one copy reduced 11x17). 4) Development/Concept Plan (20 copies at 1 "=100' and one copy reduced 11x17). 5) Landscape Plan (20 copies at 1"=100' and one reduced 11x17). 6) Landscape Details (20 copies at 11x17). 7) Building Elevations of LEFC (20 color copies). ®vi Kimley-Horn Mr. Chuck Dillerad and Associates, Inc. May 13, 2004 Page 5 of 5 Thank you for the opportunity to submit this plan for your review and we look forward to working with you, other City staff, and elected officials. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 651-643-0407. Very truly yours, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Paul B. Danielson, P.E. Project Manager C: Chuck Palmer, LEFC Tom Dornack, BWBR Architects Gary Ehret, Kimley-Horn and Associates File No. 160502006.2.001 t G_FaIL WETLAND AREAS is WETLAND DUFFER TRAIL z WOODLANDS 121-2410 SLOPES >25A SLOPES — — — PROPERTY LINE LSETBACK LINE RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE IIII TOTAL PARCEL AREA II WETLAND AREA I>25% SLOPE BULBAREA 1 OPIENDASPALECE IMPACTED FL000 PLAIN AREA I=I APPRO% FL000 PLAIN BOUNDARY — LOCa 11,=1001E11n,WM... PARCEL A PARCEL B x�106 SOLIDI PARCELCTOTAL (PF ZONING) (0P CUP) (EXIST RR ZONING) 2000 AC 4862 AC 4000 AC 106.62 AC 011 AC 0EP AC 252 AC 350 AC 002 AC 0.94 AC 007 AC 1 03 AC 1987 AC 4681 AC 37.41 AC 10409 AC N/A 25.00 AC N/A 2500 AC LID�xo s�.mnx oas raa of n'm/s \SS 1 iliel 0 50 105 200 H0R120NIAL SCALE iN FEET EXISTING CONDITIONS & ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PLAN REVISED 6-16-04 ®®yl PomleyHorn ®r , and Associates, Inc. 12011 UNE06 1124/1 DI SEC E%15 ING SITE DATA TOTAL SITE 108 62 AC . WETLAND AREA 350 AC WETLAND BUFFER 3 30 AC 12R-246 SLOPED AREA 16.55 AG j >25R SLOPED AREA 1 03 AC' / . WOODLAND AREA 24.10 AC / 6189142 45"E 263919 _ BUFFER 0 r—n l ;;;;' 15. • Nme.49'.1.5"r 751111e ricnill LAIC of cr sra ----- 1, STATE HIGHWAY 36 1 i A • e'"•'' ,-,^ ^-, /.7.2 SE),20.1 -...' ' \ Y",,'.i lh'' ,,. -, I N 'rs..^ 0-,{1,1'7-A 1:tr,ER111 "ti:tilg:i%. \ 'eve —,7:7‘,r ri:Lre4IL "e nt -r I 5 hg 4T1 r•te, , i51 0011011..,„11 .0F t POMO WETLAND AREAS 31 WEILAND BUFFER TRAIL WOODLANDS :4,Lg 127.-2410 SLOPES ITEN112:17 th z I >25% SLOPES 1 1 PROPERTY UNE I bLIIIACK UNE LRIGHT-OF-WAY UNE — -- - --* I TOT& PARCEL AREA AREA I >2510 SLOPE IICNIELDA:pLAEAREA las '?••••••,, lj L J., 1 4' • 1- )1 3 It • 100' SEIBACK g50 —1 7,547 v4^,"1",re4P WOODLANDS NOqIII LIE or SCUM 1125 rra PM/4 PARCEL A PARCEL El PARCEL C (PE ZONING) (OP CUP) (DIST RR ZONING) TOTAL 20.00 AC 48,52 AC 40.00 AC 108.62 AC 0.11 AC 0.57 AC 2.52 AC J.50 AC 0.02 AC 0.94 AC 0.07 AC 1.03 AC 19.57 AC 4631 AC 37.41 AC 104.09 AC N/A 25.00 AC N/A 25.00 AC 00 HM,t1 HORIZONTAL SONE DI FEET I DEVELOPMENT/CONCEPT PLAN REVISED 8-16-04 prim Klmley-Nom \JOE 1 and Associates, Inc. 7,6•""" 5 PROPOSED PUSHO IMPROVFMFNTS i R pUBUC ROAD ROW 6.62 AC —1 LF OF PUBLIC ROW 5,535 IF — —L I— TRAts (De BIT) 5,020 LF r - - k 7-j, -,A ROWING AREAS TOO pCBUC PARKS NONE im . yOTALLOTS (OF FARM 0) I P.. sf:;V) I "_L're 4-6.31 AC X 16 LOTS/40 AC - 15.72 --7' .. ',— C —Fr.,-,— ir TOTAL LOTS - IS LOTS ,i— .7......47,;- STACONI -: 1 i \ e,41.c THE z PARCEL A (CHURCH PARCEL) I 'I" 41 SITE IS ANTICIPATED TO RE CONSTRUCTED IN 2 PHASES, 1MTH COMMENCING SPRING 2005 eMTH COMPLETION ay %INTER 2005. - — — CONCURRENT IMTH CHURCH CONS -MORON ALL OE LOTS I-5 IN in — — — 2005 WIN LOTS 9-18 ANSCPATED IN L2007 00 2006. wilt!!! LINO cE 00 'Ea 2 5 • .536,,LHoba 1 fz:ci p.9 st4:,1H..7A.47 1122 eil;)r4 14' ,I.C1)/1/11/ rir7.31:::71,me.n.HfL 10' PARKING SETBACK WOCDLAN MEAN tilFEE1} Vi "1 — 4,t wir 10 ÷4, 1 rr1.i11/•.*WR WAR �31 _o l):12.1ILLOV tn11.e �rIM 33 NOSES 1. STREET TREES NOT SHOWN IN W000LANDS AREA. FIELD VERIFICATION TO DETERMINE IF STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED IN THIS AREA. 2 LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR CHURCH TO BE SUBMITTED PATH PRELIMINARY PLAT. LANSCAPE PLAN REVISED 6-16-04 nano on to, amN .en ImT la 0151/3 PLANT PALETTE DECIDUOUS TREE Botanleat Nane Auer rattan Cattle aacidenlallo Populue Iremolaldee Duercuo rubs Acer c horinum Betula Nigro noxious nigra Feaxkms pmmegvonla ORNAMENTAL TREE Motu% 'Autumn Glory ProntoPronrmlatu CONIFEROUS TREE dunlperwa Nrglnioea Plcea pwigene Platte mimosa Common Name Spodng Red Maple 30 0.0 Hockberry 3D' O.C. Quaking Aspen 30' 0.C. Red 00k 30' 0.C. Sliver Maple 30' 0.C. River Bkah 25' O.C. Black Ash 25' 0.C. Crean Ash 25' 0.C. 1 rr HnnlloNTAL SORE IN FEET 31 o so 1 0 200 Crobopple nr 12' O.C. a r... ................. _.. Koopman Cherry 15' O.C, y\�,el n+pW,w DOM •i0PG:104 MIS Eastern Red Cedar Colorado Blue Spruce Rod pow ® Mmley-Hom W! II and Associates, Inc. e+n FE NOTE AR;A toami ---------------- L__ ODLd40 i Lake Elmo City Council July 6, 2004 Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9E Agenda Item: Front Yard Garage Waiver — 2333 Legion Lane Background Information for July 6.2004: The property owner has applied for a Waiver by Resolution to locate a 26 foot by 34 foot garage structure nearer the front lot line than the principal structure (house) on the lot. The garage structure would be located 20 feet from the north property line (side) and 85 feet from the front property line (Legion Lane). The proposed garage would situated above Legion Lane and somewhat screened from the street by existing trees. The property is located on Downs Lake, but it does not appear that the proposed garage would be visible from Downs Lake. Due to the lake front location of this property, and the substantial set back of the proposed garage from the front property line we recommend adoption of the attached Resolution approving the garage location. Person reso i/ ible: Ci Action items: Motion to adopt Resolution #2004 - pproving the location of a 26 foot by 34 foot detached a garage structure nearer the front property line than the principal structure at 2333 Legion Lane, per sketch plan staff dated July 1, 2004 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Sketch Plan Time Allocated: CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004-056 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLACEMENT OF A GARAGE STRUCTURE IN FRONT OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AT 2333 LEGION LANE WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 300.13, Subd. 31 of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code, William Deeb, the property owner has requested approval to place a 26 foot by 34 foot detached garage structure nearer the front property line than the principal structure, in accordance with sketch plan staff dated July 1, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council for the City of Lake Elmo hereby grants permission for construction of a 26 foot by 34 foot detached garage structure nearer the front property line than the principal structure at 2333 Legion Lane, per sketch plan staff dated July 1, 2004. ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 6th day of July, 2004. Lee Hunt, Mayor ATTEST: Martin J. Rafferty, City Administrator 20th Street North Location Map IN ThON ,29N I2BN R7N Vicinity Map 0 1200 Scale In Feet T:u oaring Is tha re140101 a onppnem end repremouoa a lane records ee they wpurinvonou, W.wnploncounlyor m The Jawing should be used for 1N0lerw MS.rr..epoj elble for any Inacpoonly. WasInioa0.,.comleM Source: Weshhaten county 6mayar'e Mho. PMM 186Ij4]04076 Parcel 4Jn bend on 00400 IMom:0000 Vl9a-DTJV CERTIFICATE of SURVEY SURVEY FOR: PAUL EMERSON 11980 N. l0th ST. LAKE ELMO, MINN., 55042 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (Parcel to be added to lot 6) LAND SURVEYING LAND PLANNING 14791 60TH STREET N. STILLWATER, MN. 55082 (612) 439-8833 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DRAWING IS A CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF THIS SURVEY AND ALL MONUMENTS HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THE GROUND AS SHOWN. THIS SURVEY OR PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND 1 AM A DULY REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE DE MINNESOTA. e-cace. a- 4-4,- Se o% 2? / 976 BRUCE A. FOLZ MINN. REG. NO. 9232 DATE Rev Ocf. 6r /974, That part of Lot 7, Block 2 EDEN PARK according to the recorded plat of record in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, Minn., described as follows: o 15 So Beginning at the northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence 77 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds East 150.00 feet along the north line of said Lot 7; thence North 83 degrees 45 minutes 29 seconds East 164.00 feet along the north line of said Lot 7; thence South 78 degrees 30 minutes 44 seconds West 163.72 feet; thence South 82 degrees 55 minutes 14 seconds West 150.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.05 acres, more or less. SCALE, I may: SO feet Description of Proposed Utility and Drainage Easement Vacation. That part of Lots 6 and 7, Block 2 EDEN PARK according to the recorded plat of record in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: The southerly 6.00 feet of said Lot 6 lying easterly of the westerly 30.00 feet and the northerly 6.00 feet of said Lot 7 lying easterly of the westerly 30.00 feet. //4i. 00 S O/ 7h L) i. .V(.) il,j y C. rr •- • 6 ;: v, L) 6 t-V Q tYt tidt� CV} th�D .:> IQ - 4) a y O 4 N o 41 - E u OA YLyT — - 2<,Z. f A3 2.33 o C) cc. _ lc".,. 4 z Pp LANE r „ pi-es='.Y Sn,; EAr14F'rvr 477 E, y u f.4 ry cC, r Ssc 2V Y29,v "' ti) C t ✓ • Lake Elmo City Council July 6, 2004 Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9F Agenda Item: Front Yard Garage Waiver — 8510 Hidden Bay Trail Background Information for .Tuly 6. 2004: The property owner has applied for a Waiver by Resolution to locate a 31 foot by 32 foot garage structure nearer the front lot line than the principal structure (house) on the lot. The garage structure would be located 10 feet from the north property line (side) and must be 30 feet from the front property line (Rieht-of-Wav line of Hidden Bay Trail). The proposed garage would situated such that existing trees would screen it from Hidden Bay Trail and Lake Demontreville. Due to the lake front location of this property, and the substantial mature tree coverage between the proposed structure location and Hidden Bay Trail we recommend adoption of the attached Resolution approving the garage location. Since the applicant's sketch appears to identify the proposed location to be 30 feet from the paved surface of Hidden Bay Trail rather than the right-of-way/property line, we also recommend a condition of approval that specifies that the front property line be located in the field, and the structure be no less than 30 feet from that line. From aerial photos it appears that the street surface of Hidden Bay Trail is skewed to the north edge of the right-of-way, so the garage location should not change more than a few feet from that depicted by the sketch to meet the proper 30 foot set back. Person resuoxisibl : Action items: Motion to adopt Resolution #2004 - , approving the location of a 31 foot by 32 foot detached a garage structure nearer the front property line than the principal structure at 8510 Hidden Bay Trail Legion Lane, per sketch plan staff dated July 1, 2004, but subject to a condition that the actual structure location be 30 feet from the identified front property line. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Sketch Plan City Time Allocated: CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004-057 A RESOLUTION APPROVING TIIE PLACEMENT OF A GARAGE STRUCTURE IN FRONT OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AT 8510 HIDDEN BAY TRAIL WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 300.13, Subd. 31 of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code, Link Lavey, the property owner, has requested approval to place a 31 foot by 32 foot detached garage structure nearer the front property line than the principal structure at 8510 Hidden Bay Trail, in accordance with sketch plan staff dated July 1, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council for the City of Lake Elmo hereby grants permission for construction of a 31 foot by 32 foot detached garage structure nearer the front property line than the principal structure at 8510 Hidden Bay Trail, per sketch plan staff dated July 1, 2004. The property line and right-of-way line for Hidden Bay Trail must be located and staked. A building permit shall not be issued until the Building Official verifies that the garage will be located 30 feet from the front property line as identified. ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 6th day of July, 2004. Lee Hunt, Mayor ATTEST: Martin J. Rafferty, City Administrator Location Map R22W R2IW IUOW Vicinity Map 0 1200 Scale In Feet Tin' Na invitee ampllahm nnd spraAiWen MImtl soartla no Mey Th E (Morning' eboWtlh uoWtarelen000e mpas=bNnlor my I breo�are Ceu7la nW Was Wurta: WaohFplen county 6un'aple qRa. %pna18611<200075 Peril data baud on 091m Imam W on Kim, The attached is an application for a permit to allow me to build a new detached garage forward of my existing house. The new garage would be set back 30' from the street and more than 10' from the property line on the side. By placing the new garage at this Location I will be able to use the existing driveway and will disturb the least amount of woods. By placing the garage in this location, it cannot be seen from the lake, and it will also be hidden with trees from the street. Please let me know what the next step is for me. Thank you, Link Link Lavey 8510 Hidden Bay trail Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Home: 651-777-8446 Ce11: 612-845-8011 L ot ()Oise A creS k(7:5) \to E.% Al trieel 7.7 5 1 z i 1 i f ek I 'Y L;J[. at/ 6 .23 —