HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-20-04 LE CCMPMayor:
Lee Hunt
Councilmembers:
Steve DeLapp
Susan Dunn
Wyn John
Dean Johnston
Please read:
Lake Elmo City Council
Tuesday
July 20, 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 INFORMATIONAL:
4. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Resolution No. 2004-058:Approve claims
B. Finance Specialist
July 6, 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.
5. FINANCE Tom Bouthilet
A. Monthly Operations Report:
Informational
6. NEW BUSINESS
7. MAINTENANCE/PARI{/FIREBUILDING:
A. Update on Building Dept. Activities:
Building Official
8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT:
A. Carriage Station Grading (Verbal)
9. PLANNING. LAND USE & ZONING:
A. Resolution No. 2004-059:Shoreland
Zoning Variance, 2225 Legion Lane, Olsen
B. Appeal of Administrative
Determination:Anderson-Sorenson
C. Amended Fence Ordinance
D. Fence Moratorium Exemption Request at
55th Street North:Ordinance No. 97-137
E. Limited Business Zoning District — Add
Family Entertainment Center:Ordinance 97-138
and 97-139
10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT:
A. Meeting Time of Council Committees
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
A. Mayor Hunt
(1) Update on Met Council Meeting
(2) National Night Out
B. Council Member DeLapp
C. Council Member Dunn
D. Council Member John
E. Council Member Johnston
Joint Meeting of Council and
Environmental Commission, July
21, 7 p.m., Tour Waste
Management Facility
Tom Prew
C. Dillerud
Lake Elmo City Council Agenda
July 20, 2004
Page 2
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 6, 2004
1. AGENDA
2. MINUTES: June 15, 2004 Postponed
3. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/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 - POSTPONED
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: (Not In Attendance)
8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT:
A. Effectiveness of Storm Water Drains on Hill Trail N.
9. PLANNING, LAND USE & ZONING:
A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment —Uses in Limited Business Zone (LB):
Ordinance 97-134 and 97-135
B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Rezoning — Olinger:Resolution No.
2004-053 and Ordinance 97-136
C. Zoning Variance — 8061 Hill Trail North/Abrahamson:Resoluiton 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:Resolution No. 2004-057
10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT:
A. Alternative City Hall Sites
B. Met Council Meeting
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
A. Mayor Hunt — Champion of Industry
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 1
Mayor Hunt called the Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
PRESENT: John, Dunn, Hunt, Johnston, DeLapp, City Engineer Prew, City Attorney
Filla, Finance Director Tom Bouthilet, City Planner Dillerud, and City Administrator
Rafferty.
1. AGENDA
ADD:8A. Storm Drain on I-Iill Trail, 11A. Authority to proceed with alternatives for
public facilities, DELETE: 4B. Finance Specialist
M/S/P John/Johnston — to approve the July 6, 2004 City Council agenda, as amended.
(Motion passed 5-0).
2. MINUTES: June 15, 2004 (Postpone until July 20, 2004)
3. PUBLIC INOUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL:
A. PUBLIC INOUIRIES
Tom McCormick, 12276 Marquess Way N., (Carriage Station), asked for consideration
for a fence permit exception from the fence moratorium for hirnself and two neighbors.
He borders 55th Street and looks across a commercial area
M/S/P Dunn/John - to accept and pass on the request front Tom McCormick for an
exception from the fence moratorium for a fence permit to the Legislative Council
Committee meeting on July 14th fora possible recommendation. (Motion passed 5-0).
Rod Reimanns stated he and Mr. Sobczaks have issues concerning the drainage easement
on the back of the lot and have a less intrusive remedy than is being proposed. He said
Tom Prew had recommended a retaining wall and there are five residents in favor of this
resolution and one against. Administrator Rafferty said this request would go to the
Public Works Council Committee on, Tuesday, 7 p.m. Council member DeLapp brought
up his concern with loosing the Tamarack swamp.
Margaret Carlson, Environmental Commission Chair., was in attendance for Single Sort
Recycling. She said the ordinance amending the Solid Waste ordinance permitting
bi-weekly single sort recycling pickup was made without input from the Environmental
Commission. She said a 14-month study showed single sort recycling had less
participation than the two -stream. At the Council Committee meeting it was
recommended to rescind the motion subject to the review by the city attorney. A joint
workshop of the Council and Environmental Commission will be scheduled for July 21 to
tour the single sort operation of Waste Management and waste haulers/ recyclers will be
invited to participate in the discussion after the tour.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 2
B. Huff 'N Puff Liquor License
MAYOR HUNT PROCLAIMED AUGUST 12-15, 2004 AS HUFF'N PUFF DAYS.
M/S/P DeLapp/Dunn — to proclaim August 12-15, 2004 as Huff N Puff Days, to approve
an on -sale non -intoxicating malt liquor license for this annual festival and to waive the
fees for the liquor license and for all the ball field lights. (Motion passed 5-0).
C. Washington County Library — Summer Reading Program
Pat Conley, Washington County Library, indicated the Library is looking for sponsors for
a 5-week summer reading program:The Communities & Libraries in Partnership:Make
Every Child a Reader project will provide materials and support needed to help keep
children develop their literacy skills during the summer months, Council member
DeLapp suggested contacting the Tubman Family Alliance. Council member John will
bring this program up to the Friends of the Library at Friday's(July 8) meeting.
4. CONSENT AGENDA:
A. Resolution No. 2004-050 Approve claims
M/S/P DeLapp/Johnston — to adopt Resolution No. 2004-050, approving claim numbers
DD183 through DD191, 25783 through 25797 that were used for staff payroll dated June
24, 2004, claim numbers 25798 through 25855 dated July 6, 2004 in the total amount of
$184,489.96. (Motion passed 5-0).
B. Finance Specialist:- Postponed until the July 20, 2004 Council
Meeting
C. Final Payment to Tower Asnhalt: Street Overlay Proiect
Resolution Na. 2004-051
Tom Prew reported in his memo dated July 1, 2004 that the 2004 Overlay Project is
$6,300.00 over the bid price due to more patching than was estimated and for additional
catch basin reconstruction work. He recommended approval of Compensating Change
Order Number No. 1 in the amount of $6,279.55 and approval of Final Payment to Tower
Asphalt in the amount of $69,079.55.
M/S/P DeLapp/Johnston — to 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. (Motion passed 5-0).
D. Partial Payment to Schifskv: Hill Trail Reconstruction Proiect:
Resolution No. 2004-052
Tom Prew reported in his memo dated July 1, 2004 that T.A. Schifsky and Sons has
completed the wear course paving and turf establishment. Prew met with the contractor
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 3
on the remaining punch list items. He recommended approval of Partial Payment No. 3
to T.A. Schifsky and Sons in the amount of $62,278.41.
M/S/P Johnston/Dunn — 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.
(Motion passed 4-0-1: Council member DeLapp stepped out of the meeting for this vote.)
E. Liquidation of Equipment
The Finance Director recommended the street sweeper, Grass Rig and the 1995 Ford
Crown Victoria be advertised for sale through the seal bid process with a minimum price.
5. FINANCE:
6. NEW BUSINESS:
7. MAINTENANCE/PARK/ZFIREBUILDING:
A. Update on Fire Dept.: Chief Malmquist — NOT IN
ATTENDANCE
8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT:
A. Effectiveness of storm water drains on Hill Trail North:
Council member Johnston stated the three storm water drains are not taking water. Torn
Prew responded these water drains were not constructed correctly, and he would be
meeting the contractor on Wednesday, July 7rh
9. PLANNING. LAND USE & ZONING:
A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment — Uses in Limited Business Zone
(LB):Ordinance 97-134 and 97-135
The City Planner reported a prospective Lake Elmo business has inquired regarding the
ability to locate a Beauty Salon/Day Spa in the Limited Business zoning district. The
business owner was notified that neither the proposed use is defined by the City Code nor
listed as either permitted or Conditional in the LB zone.
On June 28, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended 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 recommended adding the definitions of "Beauty Salon" and "Day Spa"
to Section 150 of the City Code.
Council member DeLapp encouraged the Council to hold off until the Old Village Plan
was completed because the Comp Plan has laid out the criteria for uses that should only
be located in the Old Village commercial area. Other council members said they were
willing to support the additional use since prospective businesses would still have to
obtain a conditional use permit from the City before they could open in a Limited
Business district.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 4
M/S/P John/Johnston — to adopt Ordinance No. 97-134, An Ordinance adding "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 the
Planning Commission. (Motion passed 4-1: DeLapp couldn't see that a beauty salon
belongs in a residential area and didn't think the City should be continually adding more
uses to LB.)
M/S/P John/Johnston - Ordinance No. 97-135, An Ordinance amending 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. (Motion passed 5-0).
Council member DeLapp questioned why motorcycle sales were included as an
acceptable business in a Limited Business area. Planner Dillerud responded this item was
added because it apparently already existed at some point when the LB district uses were
initially adopted.
B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Rezoning — Olinger:
Resolution No. 2004-053 and Ordinance 97-136
The City Planner reported that the Planning Commission recommended 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 Jean and Dan Olinger for those
Plan and Zoning Map actions in total. He stated that 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. The Planner noted that there was an application
years ago for platting of this area into multiple RI lots. The history was unclear as to
why this parcel is guided and was zoned RAD.
Tim Freeman, Land Surveyor and Land Planer with FFE, stated Jean and Dan Olinger
wanted to keep this parcel open and accommodate the Olinger's short term plan to
accommodate a parcel for their daughter to build a house. Freeman noted that the
applicant did agree with what the Planning Commission recommended. Council
member Dunn voiced concern with the close proximity of the landfill. Council member
DeLapp asked for consideration of rezoning to OP. Dillerud responded he didn't sense
the applicant wanted to do this.
M/S/P Johnston/John - to table until Mayor Hunt returns. Lee Hunt left the meeting at
8:27 p.m. (This agenda item requires 4 votes to pass.) (Motion passed 4-0).
M/S/P Johnston/John — to take off the table the agenda item for discussion now that
Mayor Hunt had returned. (Motion passed 5-0).
M/S/P Johnston/John - to adopt Resolution No. 2004-053, A Resolution amending the
Comprehensive Plan to reclassify a portion of the Jean and Dan Olinger property in
Section 10 from RAD to SRD based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission
(Motion passed 4-1: DeLapp)
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 5
M/S/P John/Johnston - to adopt Ordinance No. 97-136, an ordinance rezoning a portion
of the Olinger property in Section 10 from RR to R-1 based on the recommendation of
the Planning Commission. (Motion passed 4-1: DeLapp's recommendation is to go with
OP along the lake and have open space in the back which would be more compatible.)
C. Zoning Variance — 8061 Hill Trail North/
Abrahamson:Resolution No. 2004-054
The City Planner reported that the Planning Commission recommended approval of a
zoning variance at 8061 Hill Trail N. to allow an existing Tool Shed of approximately
210 square feet to be retained. 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. The screen porch now under construction on this property would
become a second accessory structure if the existing 210 square feet structure remains on
site without a variance from the 160 square foot maximum "Tool Shed" area requirement.
M/S/P Johnston/Dunn - to approve Resolution No. 2004-054, A Resolution approving a
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 tap Zoning Ordinance
specifies a 160 square foot maximum area for tool sheds, based on the recommendation
of the Planning Commission. (Motion passed 5-0).
D. OP Concept Plan- Deer Glen (Lakewood Churchl:Resolution
No. 2004-055
The City Planner reported the Planning Commission held a 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 defached lots and 25 acres of Preserved
Open Space. The property is located at the southwest corner of Highway 36 and Keats
Avenue.
Council member Dunn noted the City is`very sensitive about the water that goes into
Goetschel pond. Dillerud said the City relies on both the City Engineer and the Valley
Branch Watershed District to be our advisories regarding flood plain. John Hanson
(VBWD) had stated a concern about flood plain mitigation that would be required by the
Concept, but had recently conceded that the applicant's mitigation would likely meet
District Policy. That determination would be subject to actual grading plans and a Valley
Branch Permit.
Council member Johnston said that the Concept Plan is not consistent with the Lake
Elmo Comprehensive Plan or the Open Space Preservation Ordinance due to the proposal
to significantly alter the natural grades of the site to overcome natural drainage features to
create home sites.
M/S/P DeLapp/John - to adopt Resolution No. 2004-055, A Resolution Denying the
Open Space Concept plan, dated June 23, 2004, for Deer Glen (Lakewood Evangelical
Free Church), as presented based on the following findings:
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 6
1. The Concept Plan is inconsistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan
Environmental Protection policies regarding residential developments conforming
to the limitations presented by natural features, including natural drainage
systems, by proposing significant modifications of natural grades and existing
flood plain on the site.
2. The Concept Plan is inconsistent with the purpose of the Lake Elmo Open Space
Preservation Ordinance by proposing to significantly alter the natural drainage
features of the site.
(Motion passed 4-0: Mayor Hunt was absent for the vote.)
Grant Nelson, representative of the Lakewood Church, explained he had extensive
discussion with the staff, who tried their best to put together a -plan that responded to the
city's open space values. He said he was a bit baffled that the Plan was not in
compliance. Nelson stated it was their desire to keep the north 40 acres of the church's
108 acre site open as it is their front yard.
E. Front Yard Garage Waiver:William Deeb, 2333 Legion
Avenue:Resolution No. 2004-056
The Planner reported that William Deeb, 2333 Legion Avenue North, 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.
The proposed garage would be situated above Legion Lane and somewhat screened from
the street by existing tees. The property is located on Downs Lake, but the Planner
reported that it does not appear that the proposed garage would be visible from Downs
Lake. Staff recommended approval of this waiver due to the lake front location of this
property and the substantial set back of the proposed garage from the front property line.
M/S/P Johnston/DeLapp- to adopt Resolution No. 2004-056, A Resolution approving the
location of a 26 foot by 34 foot detached garage structure nearer the front property line
than the principal structure for William Deeb at 2333 Legion Lane, per sketch plan staff
dated July 1, 2004. (Motion passed 5-0).
F. Front Yard Garage WaiverLink Lavev, 8510 Hidden Bav Trail,
Resolution No. 2004-057
The Planner reported Link Lavey, 8510 Hidden Bay Trail, 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 would be located 10 feet from the north
property line (side) and must be 30 feet from the front property line (right-of-way line of
Hidden Bay Trail). He reported that the proposed garage would be situated such that
existing trees would screen it from Hidden Bay Trail and Lake Demontreville.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 7
Due to the lake front location of this property and the substantial mature tree coverage
between the proposed structure location on Hidden Bay Trail, staff recommended
adoption of the Resolution to approve the garage location. The City Planner noted since
the applicant's sketch appears to identify the proposed location to be 30 feet from the
approved surface of Hidden Bay Trail rather than the right-of-way property line. He
recommended 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. The Planner stated
that based on aerial photos, it appeared that the street surface of Hidden Bay Trail was
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.
M/S/P Johnston/DeLapp - to adopt Resolution No. 2004-057, A Resolution Approving
the location of a 31 foot by 32 foot detached garage structure nearer the front property
line than the principal structure for Link Lavey at 8510 Hidden Bay Trail, per sketch plan
staff dated July 1, 2004, subject to the following conditions.
1. 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.
2. No trees or vegetation shall be removed within the 30 foot street set back area to
Hidden Bay Trail.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the garage structure, the property owner
shall submit a scaled drawing depicting the exact location of the proposed garage
structure in relation to the Hidden Bay Trail right-of-way line and any other
structures on the site. The drawing shall also provide the location, approximate
size and types of foliage and trees existing within 30 feet of the proposed garage
structure, together with an indication of Which trees and foliage will be removed
during garage construction. (Motion passed 5-0)
9. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
10. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
A. Alternative City Hall Sites
Administrator Rafferty reported negotiations will continue with the owners of the
Brookfield II building, but asked the Council to give him the permission to authorize
professional services to pursue two other potential options.
M/S/P DeLapp/Dunn — to direct the City Administrator to continue developing the
proposal for alternative sites for new facilities. (Motion passed 5-0.)
B. Met Council Meetinu
Administrator Rafferty reported he, Planner Dillerud, Council member John met with
Regional Administrator Tom Weaver, Metro Council Chair Peter Bell and METC
Environmental Services Director Bill Moore to review the background of the Lake
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 8
Elmo/Met Council Comprehensive Plan issue; and, to determine if the Met Council had
actually proposed any other potential settlement — as had been reported to the City by
third parties.
Administrator Rafferty reported that the majority of the meeting involved reviewing the
June, 2003 proposal for settlement that had been suggested by Chair Bell, and thereafter
found to be unacceptable to the City Council. He also noted that Council Member John
then briefed Bell and Weaver as to the history of the Regional Sewer discussions during
the late 1990's.
He then reported that Council Member John advised the METC representatives that he
distinctly recalled the lake Elmo Council telling METC representatives at a meeting in
the Lake Elmo City Hall that the City would only consider a small WONE interceptor
capacity increase to support Business Park service as far west as Keats Avenue. The Met
Council engineers had said that such a capacity increase could be accomplished by a
short stretch of parallel piping at a cost of around $400,000. John continued that the $10
million dollar Lake Elmo Interceptor was never discussed with the City before appearing
in the Met Council amended Sewer Plans in 2000.
Administrator Rafferty summarized the Met Council position regarding Lake Elmo's
Comprehensive Plan as unchanged, with no new Met Council proposals "on the table",
and no compromise proposal so far forthcoming from Lake Elmo.
The City Planner then reminded the Council of his June 18, 2003 Memo to them which
quantitatively described the "Bell Proposal" as less of a departure from the adopted Lake
Elmo Plan, but which would still result in double the housing units and population in the
City by 2003 than the Lake Elmo Plans specifies — most of which would be located in the
area of the City between 10th Street and I-94.
11. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS;
A. Mayor Hunt — Champion of Industry
Mayor Hunt reported the City could use its annual donation from the Lake Elmo Jaycees
to help defray the costs, and he has been talking with local businesses to see if they would
be willing to help cover some of the costs. About 45 percent of the costs are covered.
Mayor Hunt and Council Member John indicated they wanted to talk about the City's
good planning and thought this was a tremendous way to have the City come together.
Council member Johnston stated that people like Lake Elmo being a well kept secret and
it was a terrible waste of money. He questioned the validity and usefulness of the award
that was given to cities that paid the $28,000 fee.
M/S/F Hunt/DeLapp — to proceed ahead with accepting the Champions of Industry 300
award for "best small town" from Pat Summerall Productions. (Motion failed:Dunn:The
remaining funding was too high for the City, Johnston:He could come up with a dozen
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 9
projects that would be better use of the City's money, DeLapp:His heart said yes, but his
pocketbook said no.)
Council member DeLapp asked staff to deal with the Buberl CUP because of the
numerous violations. He said the County and Planners haven given up on this. DeLapp
noted there was a monster garage, painted yellow and did not match the color of the
house, which was built in his neighborhood that could fit two tractor trailers.
Council adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by Sharon Lumby, City Clerk
Resolution No.
Resolution No.
Resolution No.
Resolution No.
Resolution No.
Resolution No.
Resolution No.
Resolution No.
2004-050 Approve Claims
2004-051 Final Payment to Tower Asphalt for Street Overlay Project
2004-52 Partial Payment to Schifsky & Sons for Hill Trail Reconstruction
2004-053 Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Dan & Jean Olinger
2004-054 Zoning Variance for 8061 Hill Trail N. Abrahamson
2004-055 Deny OP Concept Plan Deer Glen (Lakewood Church)
2004-056 Front yard Garage Waiver, William Deeb, 2333 Legion Ave.
2004-057 Front yard Garage Waiver, Link Lavey, 810 Hidden Bay Trail
Ordinance No. 97-134 & Ordinance 97-135 Zoning Ordinance Amendment — Uses in
Limited Business Zone for Beauty Salons and Day Spas
Ordinance No. 97-136 Rezoning for Dan and Jean Olinger
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 6, 2004 10
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-058
RESOLUTION APPROVING CLAIMS
BE IT RESOLVED THAT Claim Numbers 208, 209 DD192 through
DD202, 25856 through 25887, were used for Staff/Fire, payroll dated July 08, 2004,
Claim Numbers 210, 25890 through 25930 dated July 20, 2004 in the total amount
of $215,376.36 are hereby approved.
ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 20th day of July, 2004.
Lee Hunt
Mayor
ATTEST:
Martin J. Rafferty
City Administrator
Accounts Payable
Computer Check Proof List
User: administrator
Printed: 07/15/2004 - 4:17 PM
Invoice No Description
Vendor:ABDO Abdo Eick & Meyers
214805 Annual Report to State Auditor
Check Total:
Vendor:ARAM Ammark
629-5500949 Linen City Hall
Check Total:
SP
Amount Payment Date Acct Number
Check Sequence: 1
370.60 07/20/2004 101-410-1530-43010
370.60
Check Sequence: 2
43.18 07/20/2004 101-410-1940-44010
43.18
Vendor.ARCADELE Arcade Electric Check Sequence: 3
1602 Electric Work -VFW Field Lighting 2,500.00 07/20/2004 404-480-8000-45300
Check Total: 2,500.00
Vendor:BIFFS Biffs Inc. Check Sequence: 4
W226246 Restrooms-Sunfish Park 70.26 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-44120
W226247 Restrooms-Lions Park 140.52 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-44120
W226248 Restrooms-VFW Park 70.26 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-44120
W226249 Restrooms-DeMontreville Park 70.26 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-44120
W226250 Restrooms-Reid Park 70.26 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-44120
W226251 Restrooms-Tablyn Park 70.26 07/20/2004 101-450-520014120
W226252 Restrooms-Pebble Park 70.26 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-44120
Check Total: 562.08
Vendor:CAPRA CAPRA'S UTLI11hS iNC. Check Sequence: 5
Retapp Three Water Connections. -Lisbon 3,100.00 07/20/2004 601-494-9400-44030
Check Total: 3,100.00
Vendor:COPYIMAG Copy Images, Inc. Check Sequence: 6
49480 Copier Maint Agreement 255.60 07/20/2004 101-410-1940-44040
Reference
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/15/2004 - 4:17 PM) Page 1
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
Check Total: 255.60
Vendor:EOR Emmons & Olivier Resources Check Sequence: 7 ACH Enabled: No
36-01-03-08 Infiltration Project -Reimbursed 7,142.17 07/20/2004 101-410-1910-43050
36-01-04-03 Infiltration Project -Reimbursed 14,362.99 07/20/2004 101-410-1910-43050
Check Total: 21,505.16
VendoI:F.I.R.E. Fire Instruction &Rescue Education Inc Check Sequence: 8 ACH Enabled: No
04116 Training Fire Dept. 330.00 07/20/2004 101-420-2220-44370
Check Total: 330.00
Vendor.FIREEQUI Fire Equipment Specialties Check Sequence: 9 ACH Enabled: No
3691 Turn -Out Gear -New Personnel 3,976.92 07/20/2004 410-480-8000-45800
Check Total: 3,976.92
Vendor:GENESIS Next Genesis Productions Check Sequence: 10 ACH Enabled: No
1451 Computer & Server Repairs & Maint. 275.00 07/20/2004 101-410-1520-43180
Check Total: 275.00
Vendor:GTN Ramsey/WashingtonSuburban Cable Commission Check Sequence: I 1 ACH Enabled: No
4-03 Tuner for Cable Bullentin Operation 260.93 07/20/2004 101-410-1320-44300
Check Total: 260.93
Vendor:HAGBERGS Hagbergs Country Market Check Sequence: 12 ACH Enabled: No
Supplies -City Hall 26.46 07/20/2004 101-410-1940-44300
Check Total: 26.46
Vendor:ICC International Code Council Check Sequence: 13 ACH Enabled: No
0793842-1N Cards -Bldg Dept. 56.39 07/20/2004 101-420-2400-42030
Check Total: 56.39
Vendor:LANDBUIL Lang Builders Inc. Check Sequence: 14 ACH Enabled: No
Permit 3006 Escrow Return-9515 55th Street 1,000.00 07/20/2004 803-000-0000-22900
Check Total: 1,000.00
Vendor:LAW Law EnforcementTechnology Group Inc. Check Sequence: 15 ACH Enabled: No
1074 Laptop Software Implementation 2,560.00 07/20/2004 101-420-2220-44300
AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/15/2004 - 4:17 PM) Page 2 ,
Invoice No
Vendor:LEOIL
B01203
S01203
SO1208
Vendor:LIFESTYL
Permit 3872
Vendor:MARONEYS
054106
054106
054106
Description
Check Total:
Lake Elmo Oil, Inc.
Fuel -Public Works
Fuel -Fire Dept
Fuel -Parks
Check Total:
Lifestyle Homes
Escrow Return 4220 Kirkwood Lane
Check Total:
Maroney's Sanitation, Inc
Refuse Removal -Public Works
Refuse Removal -City Hall
Refuse Removal -Parks
Check Total:
Vendor:MCLEOD McLeod USA
5549526 Telephone Service
5549526 Telephone Service
5549526 Telephone Service
5549526 Telephone Service
5549526 Telephone Service
5549526 Telephone Service
5549526 Telephone Service
Check Total:
Vendor:MEYERCON Meyer Contracting Inc.
1/2 Payment 34th Lift Station Upgrade
Check Total:
Vendor.MILLEREX
9464
Miller Excavating, Inc.
Remove Street Sweepings & Grade Roads
Check Total:
V endor. MNSTATET MN State Treasurer
2nd Qtr Building Surcharge Payment-2nd Qtr
Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
2,560.00
1,179.63 07/20/2004
156.19 07/20/2004
39.46 07/20/2004
1,375.28
Check Sequence: 16
101-430-3100-42120
101-420-2220-42120
101-450-5200-42120
Check Sequence: 17
1,000.00 07/20/2004 803-000-0000-22900
1,000.00
155.89 07/20/2004
129.79 07/20/2004
183.96 07/20/2004
469.64
274.39
191.95
136.16
60.47
60.47
106.29
80.12
909.85
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
Check Sequence: 18
101-430-3100-43840
101-410-1940-43840
101-450-5200-43840
Check Sequence: 19
101-410-1940-43210
101-420-2220-43210
101-430-3100-43210
101-410-1940-43210
602-495-9450-43210
601-494-9400-43210
101-450-5200-43210
Check Sequence: 20
9,350.00 07/20/2004 409-480-8000-45300
9,350.00
2,603.96 07/20/2004
2,603.96
Check Sequence: 21
101-430-3100-43150
Check Sequence: 22
2,773.62 07/20/2004 101-420-2400-43060
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 (07/15/2004 - 4:17 PM) Page 3
Invoice No
Vendor:Nati Wat
1446578
1464733
Vendor:OAKTIRE
082370
Vendor.ONECALL
4060500
Vendor:PETERSO
11135M
11140M
11145M
11150M
11161M
Vendor:PITNEYSU
355788
Vendor:PRESS
Vendor:QUALAIR
7677
7678
Vendor:Reserve
20313037
Description
Check Total:
National Waterworks
Meter-Bluestem Central
Meter Read Equipment Repairs
Check Total:
Oakdale Tire and Auto
Tires -Fire Dept
Check Total:
Gopher State One-CallOne Call Concepts, Inc
Line Locates -June 04
Check Total:
Peterson Pram & Bergman
Legal Services -Civil
Legal Services -Criminal
Legal Services -Capital
Legal Services -Planning
Legal Services -Auto Forfetiure
Check Total:
Pitney Bowes Supplies
Postage Meter Supplies
Check Total:
StevenPress
Cable Operatot
Check Total:
Quality Air
Repair Gas Leak -City Hall
HVAC Maintenence
Check Total:
Pitney BowesReserve Account
Postage
AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/15/2004 - 4:17 PM)
Amount Payment Date Acct Number
2,773.62
405.89 07/20/2004
177.15 07/20/2004
583.04
Check Sequence: 23
601-494-9400-42300
601-494-9400-44030
Check Sequence: 24
145.00 07/20/2004 101-420-2220-44040
145.00
Check Sequence: 25
165.60 07/20/2004 101-430-3100-44300
165.60
2,388.61 07/20/2004
5,051.95 07/20/2004
66.00 07/20/2004
341.00 07/20/2004
92.50 07/20/2004
7,940.06
Check Sequence: 26
101-410-161043040
101-410-1610-43045
410-80-8000-43040
101-410-1910-43040
101-410-1610-43045
Check Sequence: 27
86.19 07/20/2004 101-410-1320-42000
86.19
Check Sequence: 28
80.00 07/20/2004 101410-1320-44300
80.00
82.00 07/20/2004
318.00 07/20/2004
400.00
Check Sequence: 29
101420-2220-44010
101-420-2220-44010
Check Sequence: 30
500.00 07/20/2004 101-410-1320-43220
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
Page 4
Invoice No
Vendor:RUD
Vendor:S&T
01JD8262
VendorSTILLGAZ
00003561
00003563
00003564
Vendor:TASCH
33362
Vendor:TESSMAN
8052769-IN
Vendor.TKDA
068148
068149
068150
068151
068152
068152
068152
068152
068152
068153
068171
068172
068189
068193
Description
Check Total:
DianePrince-Rud
Cleaning -City Hall
Cleaning -Fire Hall
Check Total:
S&T Office Products, Inc.
Office Supplies-Adntin
Check Total:
Stillwater Gazette
Legal Notice
Legal Notice
Legal Notice
Check Total:
T.A. Schifsky & Sons
Sand -Parks
Check Total:
Tessman Company
Weed Control Supply
Check Total:
TKDA, Inc.
Amount Payment Date Acct Number
500.00
240.00 07/20/2004
240.00 07/20/2004
480.00
Check Sequence: 31
101-410-1940-44010
101-420-2220-44010
Check Sequence: 32
282.00 07/20/2004 101-410-1320-42000
282.00
35.70 07/20/2004
29.40 07/20/2004
33.60 07/20/2004
98.70
Check Sequence: 33
101-410-1320-43510
101-410-1320-43510
101-410-1320-43510
Check Sequence: 34
58.71 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-42250
58.71
Check Sequence: 35
169.10 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-42250
169.10
50.74
659.62
304.44
152.22
2,440.21
50.74
105.23
362.67
355.17
200.00
50.74
1,595.45
258.23
501.27
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
07/20/2004
Check Sequence: 36
409-480-8000-43030
404-480-8000-43030
803-490-9070-43030
101-410-1930-43030
101-410-1930-43030
601-494-9400-43030
603-496-9500-43030
803-490-9070-43030
602-495-9450-43030
101-410-1930-43030
402-480-8000-43030
409-480-8000-43030
101-410-1930-43030
404-480-8000-43030
Reference
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
ACH Enabled: No
AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/15/2004 - 4:17 PM) Page 5
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acet Number Reference
068194 998.38 07/20/2004 603-496-9500-43030
068199 93.70 07/20/2004 311-470-7000-43030
068200 112.13 07/20/2004 311-470-7000-43030
068201 158.68 07/20/2004 311-470-7000-43030
068202 629.01 07/20/2004 101-410-191043030
068236 50.74 07/20/2004 602-495-9450-43030
068237 1,841.65 07/20/2004 101-410-1910-43060
068238 1,299.16 07/20/2004 409-480-8000-43030
Check Total: 12,270.18
Vendor:TOWER Tower Asphalt, Inc. Check Sequence: 37 ACH Enabled: No
Cert. 1-Final 2004-Overlays 69,079.55 07/20/2004 409-480-8000-45300
Check Total: 69,079.55
Vendor.USBANK US Bank Trust N.A. Check Sequence: 38 ACH Enabled: No
33395470 Interest Payment-2001 G.O. Bond 19,827.50 07/20/2004 310-480-8000-46110
Check Total: 19,827.50
Vendor: VISA Visa Check Sequence: 39 ACH Enabled: No
Steel Box -Fire Dept. 9.50 07/20/2004 101-420-2220-44300
Check Total: 9.50
Vendor:WASH-REC Washington County Check Sequence: 40 ACH Enabled: No
1142 Documents Request 7.50 07/20/2004 101-410-1320-44300
Check Total: 7.50
Vendor.XCEL Xcel Energy Check Sequence: 41 ACH Enabled: No
0014145749180 108.34 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-43810
0084044646179 164.98 07/20/2004 101-430-3100-43810
0176825022179 20.96 07/20/2004 101-430-3160-43810
0417949252179 350.80 07/20/2004 101-410-1940-43810
0446544592179 24.53 07/20/2004 101-430-3160-43810
0573240678179 40.71 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-43810
0592147541180 22.67 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-43810
0614943270179 31.85 07/20/2004 101-430-3160-43810
0777146175179 7.41 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-43810
1278842757180 570.24 07/20/2004 601-494-9400-43810
1427822590180 51.99 07/20/2004 602-495-9450-43810
1577643354179 145.76 07/20/2004 101-420-2220-43810
1957348187179 14.20 07/20/2004 602-495-9450-43810
2045967139181 595.00 07/20/2004 601-494-9400-43810
AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/15/2004 - 4:17 PM) Page 6
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
2175049940179 28.60 07/20/2004 101-450-5200-43810
2332806007183 1,553.09 07/20/2004 101-430-3160-43810
Check Total: 3,731.13
Total for Check Run: 171,218.43
Total Number of Checks: 41
AP - Computer Check Proof List (07/15/2004 - 4:17 PM) Page 7
MONTH
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Totals
11135
Administration
$1,320.75
$1,353.00
$2,721.92
$2,346.98
$2,029.36
$2,388.61
11140
Criminal Pros
$2, 548.83
$2,845.88
$4,762.74
$3,964.04
$3,528.77
$5,051.95
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
2002 BILLING SUMMARY
11145
Public Imp. Proj
$66.00
$88.00
$33.66
$66.00
11150
Community Dev
$330.21
$187.00
$286.00
$111.61
$341.00
$12,160.62 $22,702.21 $253.66 $1,255.82
11155
Civil Litigation
$2,196.75
$125.28
$692.76
$654.43
RECE""
PI- 415°4
11161 TOTAL
Auto Forfeiture
$109.00
$99.00
$92.50
$6,462.54
$4,511.16
$8,463.42
$7,162.45
$5,802.40
$7,940.06
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$3,669.22 $300.50 1 $40,342.03
1 7/13/2004
Suite 300
50 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55 f 01-I 197
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo MN 55042
11135-030008 SIMICH FENCE
44.00
11135-040001 PURCHASE OF BROOKFIELD BUILDING
484.00
11135-040003 MANNING TRAIL ANNEXATION
11135-040004
11135-040005
11135-920001
33.00
NORTHERN NATURAL GAS - PIPELINE
33.00
PUERSON.
FRAIVIC7BERGMAN
began aI8-Ytaionotfai Vti7:trzsmi 6:FA19'r/AO
FEES EXPENSES
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.61
ACCOUNT NO:
CARRIAGE STATION DRAINAGE EASEMENT ENCROACHMENT
154.00 0.00
Administration
1,639.00
2,387.00
0.00
1.61
ADVANCES
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
(651) 291-8955
(651) 228.1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID 4441,0991098
Page: 1
06/30/2004
11135M
BALANCE
$44.00
$484.00
$33.00
$34.61
$154.00
$1,639.00
0.00 $2,388.61
/0(-1/J0-/6/O-y3OVO
THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEWED AFTER THE U4ST 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
P ERSON__._
FRAM BERGMAN
j dltY'e3G� s''d-71gtn tlyYRN'M-Ya�(�vi�nitlic.
(6511291.8955
(651) 228-1753 Facsimile
Federal Tax fl it4I-0991098
Page: 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO 06/30/2004
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11135-030008M
LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 6
SIMICH FENCE
HOURS
06/04/04 JPF Telephone conference with Simich re: status. 0.20 22.00
06/23/04 JPF Telephone conference with Simich re: status. 0.20 22.00
Jerome P. Filla 0.40 44.00
FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED
0.40 44.00
TOTAL CURRENT WORK 44.00
BALANCE DUE $44.00
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
PFTERSON,
FRAMCYBERGMAN
I013010 aR.INSIiteigOr:iM01:0.9-'k9II0gM:@ Re110
1651) 291-8955
(651) 228.1753 fecsir0(le
Federal 'Fax IO #41.0991098
Page: 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO 06/30/2004
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11135-040001M
LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 6
PURCHASE OF BROOKFIELD BUILDING
06/03/04 JPF Telephone conference with Adm; revise purch
agreement; corr same.
06/07/04 JPF Telephone conference with Ray Marshall; adm re:
terms of purchase agreement.
06/10/04 JPF Telephone conference with Marshall; McDonald; review
purch agreement; corr adm.
06/11/04 JPF Telephone conference with adm re: revisions.
06/15/04 JPF Telephone conference with Marshall (2); Adm (3) re:
terms of purchase agreement; planner.
06/23/04 JPF Telephone conference with Marshall, Rafferty re:
purch agreement terms; corr same.
Jerome P. Filla
FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED
TOTAL CURRENT WORK
BALANCE DUE
HOURS
0.90 99.00
0.40 44.00
0.90 99.00
0.30 33.00
0.80 88.00
1.10 121.00
4.40 484.00
4.40 484.00
484.00
$484.00
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
PF'ERSON,-.__,
FRAMIC'BERGMAN
IMO WO mi-`5.-11t€R LI wiRES--L* Sif flC S°iJ
(6511 291-8955
(6511 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41-0991098
Page: 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO 06/30/2004
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11135-040003M
LAKE ELMO MN 55042 - STATEMENT NO: 4
MANNING TRAIL ANNEXATION
06/24/04 JPF Letter to adm re: municipal bd order.
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 55101.1197
PETERSON,___ _.
FRAM&BERGMAN
e.r,.aan.r.nwmw.m.�m.ra me,xew.•.am.w uxx.a,.W
(6511291.8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID 841-0901098
Page: 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO 06/30/2004
3800 Laverne Avenue North ACCOUNT NO: 11135-920001M
Lake Elmo MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 150
Administration
06/01/04 JPF Telephone conference with adm; animal control
officer re: confinement of potentially dangerous and
dangerous dogs; notification and classification
process.
JPF Review state and city regs re: dogs; corr to CIC re:
city regs.
JPF Review city code re: accessory bldg regs; tele adm
and bldg inspect.
JPF Prepare for and attend council meeting; conf Adm,
Planner re: accessory bldgs - RR Zones.
06/02/04 JPF Letter to L. Brucker re: city dog regs.
JPF Complete review of city acc bldg regs; corr bldg
insp.
06/04/04 JPF Review city regs 1968-1974 re: applicable setbacks.
06/07/04 JPF Telephone conference with planner re: carriage
station esmt; clerk re: Highlands Trail st vacation;
clerk re: city records.
JPF Review SEH Trail contract; tele planner.
06/14/04 JPF Review PC agenda; council agenda.
06/15/04 JPF Prepare for and attend council meeting.
06/16/04 JPF Telephone conference with clerk re: undue hardship
std.
JPF telephone conference with Prew and clerk re: legals
for vacation of Highlands Trail; corr same; prep
legal.
06/17/04 JPF Review planner re: sale of Berckon ppty.
HOURS
0.70
0.90
0.80
2.90
0.30
1.60
0.90
0.50
0.40
77.00
99.00
88.00
319.00
33.00
176.00
99.00
55..00
44.00
0.40 44.00
2.40
0.20
0.80
264.00
22.00
88.00
0.30 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 55101-1197
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
Administration
PF3'ERSON.
FRAMCIBEI GMAN
arxrd;�®n�-n_;41�s S.Wa AbS ®1IBntAYItlafl fl
1651) 291-8955
(6511 228.1753 facsimile'
Federal Tax ID #41.099I098
Page: 2
06/30/2004
ACCOUNT NO: 11135-920001M
STATEMENT NO: 150
06/21/04 JPF Telephone conference with adm; planner re: Dolan
Boat ppty; city regs.
JPF Telephone conference with planner, Atty Dietzen re:
status and 60 day rule.
06/28/04 JPF Review PC agenda; tele planner.
JPF Telephone conference with Adm re: Fire Dept regs.
Jerome P. Filia
FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED
TOTAL CURRENT WORK
HOURS
0.40 44.00
0.40 44.00
0.70E 77.00
0.30 33.00
14.90E 1,639.00
14.90 1,639.00
1,639.00
BALANCE DUE $1,639.00
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 MONTHS STATEMENT.
PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT.
Suite 00
50 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-1197
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo MN 55042
PF--ERSON.
FRAMC BERGMAN
Ito tistwali-IISPEINVitit:V-WitaXagarallitipailq
ACCOUNT NO:
(651) 291-8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41-0991098
Page: 1
06/30/2004
11140M
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE
11140-030001 Misc Prosecutions
2,905.00 56.82 0.00 $2,961.82
11140-030219 Zafft, Marsha Ann
criminal damage to property
30.00 0.00 1,152.63 $1,182.63
11140-030225 Wetterstrom, William
serious/fatal crash report
0.00 0.00 45.00 $45.00
11140-040008 Tamasese, Joseph
violate OFP
27.50 0.00 0.00 $27.50
11140-040009 Armstrong, Casey Robert
GM -false info to police, no ins.
5.00 0.00 0.00 $5.00
11140-040065 Mackey, Paul Joseph
GM-DAC, Gm -false info to police
35.00 0.00 0.00 $35.00
11140-040078 Schmidt, Lance Nicholas
theft by check
5.00 0.00 0.00 $5.00
11140-040104 Rodriguez, Ramon James
Violation of Protection Order
5.00 0.00 0.00 $5.00
/01-1410-/&/0 ydos<3 = SO51,2�
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
PETERSON.
FRAMCIBERGMAN
1Gelajsh aS single nif9Roawastst.`r islssU:r%reyl
11140-040105 Rychlik, Waclaw Andrew
2nd. degree DUI
ACCOUNT NO:
(6511291-8955
(6511 228<1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41.0991098
Page: 2
06/30/2004
11140M
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE'
112.50 0.00
11140-040109 Ajuchan, Carlos
no insurance, no MN DL, fail to
yield to emergency vehicle
5.00
11140-040113 Jarosch, Katherine Lillian
OFP Violation
11140-040117 Torbenson, Jane Marie
DAR
11140-040118 Weinand, Mark Allen
school bus arm violation
11140-040123 Wieland, Tabitha
inattentive driving
11140-040125 Boucher, Paul Michael
speed 53/40
11140-040127 Wenzel, Jacob Michael
domestic assault
0.00
30.00 0.00
5.00 0.00
5.00 0.00
5.00 0.00
25.00 0.00
42.50 0.00
11140-040128 Levasseur, Daniel Joseph
theft
22.50
0.00
0.00 $112.50
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $30.00
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $25.00
0.00 $42.50
0.00 $22.50
THIS STATEMENT 15 DDE 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
PTERSON,
FRAMC BERGMAN
7tiIAuBSI2i iziotoowaiMi=r-` .-Bonier WpioRsigoi
11140-040129 Romero, Roman Joseph
DAR, speed
11140-040130 Marchio, James Anthony
3rd degree DUI
ACCOUNT N0:
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES
35.00 0.00 0.00
15.00
11140-040131 Mcshannock, Duncan John
test refusal (GM), 4th degree DUI
62.50
11140-040132 Thorsen, Kyle Theodore
3rd degree DUI
11140-040133 Van Allen, Kenneth J.
domestic assault
11140-040136 Ramirez, Alicia Dawn
assault
11140-040137 Rodriguez, Ramon J.
Violate OFP
11140-040138 Rodriguez, Ramon J.
Violate OFP
67.50
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
11140-040139 Larson, Joel Timothy
fence violation around pool
5.00
11140-040143 Brockenberg, Carol Ann
improper lane use
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
(6511 291-8955
(6511 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID M 1-0991098
Page: 3
06/30/2004
11140M
BALANCE
$35.00
$15.00
$62.50
$67.50
$5.00
$5.00
$5.00
$5.00
$5.00
0.00 $10.00
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 Firth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-1197
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
P1'ERSON.
FRA,IM & BERGMAN
P 1,41 MO De WM:01W Mt ritrazezi ISM *MI WW1
ACCOUNT NO:
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES
11140-040144 Schlaeppi, Bradford James
DAS, no seat belt
5.00 0.00 0.00
11140-040146 Tjosvold, Brian Keith
domestic assault
5.00 0.00 0.00
11140-040147 Barslou, Daniel Leroy
no insurance, no headlights in
inclement weather
5.00
11140-040148 Meyer, William Henry
GM -child neglect
11140-040149 Haltiner, Eva Mae
shoplifting
0.00
52.50 0.00
27.50 0.00
11140-040150 Wilson, Allen Dale
DAS, possess mj in mv, possess
drug paraphenilia
27.50 0.00
11140-040152 Robert, Christy Jean
4th degree DUI, 4th degree .10
10.00
11140-040156 Flaherty, Sean Gregory
GM -test refusal, 4th degree DUI
62.50
11140-040157 Wright, Donald W.
DUI, crim. damage to property
22.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
1651129i-8955
(6511 48.1753 facsimile
Federal Tax I1 #41-0991098
Page: 4
06/30/2004
11140M
BALANCE
$5.00
$5.00
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $52.50
0.00 $27.50
0.00 $27.50
0.00 $10.00
0.00 $62.50
0.00 $22.50
THUS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OP 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
PERSON,
FRAMI°'BERGMAN
11140-040158 Schmidt, Brian Anthony
DAC-IPS
11140-040160 Peterson, Matthew J.
DOC
11140-040162 Johnson, Stuart
Speed 82/65
FEES EXPENSES
47.50 0.00
5.00 0.00
10.00 0.00
11140-040164 Virock, Steven Michael
GM-DAC-IPS, small amount of mari
juana in mv, possess drug para.
15.00
11140-040165 Larson, Thor Joseph
GM test refusal, 4th degree DUI
22.50
0.00
0.00
3,797.50 56.82
ACCOUNT NO:
ADVANCES
0.00
(6511 291-8955
' (6511 228.1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41.0991098
Page: 5
06/30/2004
11140M
BALANCE
$47.50
0.00, $5.00
0.00 $10.00
0.00 $15.00
0.00 $22.50
1,197.63 $5,051.95
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 a s
50 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-1197
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH
LAKE ELMO MN 55042
PFTERSON__._._
FRAMO-BERGMAN
�:9fYeJl anvizsyygenen 4t:0.'1 amodokis M ite oll
ACCOUNT NO:
(651) 291-8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41-0991098
Page: 1
06/30/2004
11145M
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE
11145-040002 HAGBERG - VFW BALL FIELD EASEMENT
66.00 0.00 0.00 $66.00
66.00 0.00 0.00 $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
PT'ERSON,
FRAM&BERGMAN
16511 291-8955
(651) 228.1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #A I.0991098
Page: 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO 06/30/2004
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11145-040002M
LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 3
HAGBERG - VFW BALL FIELD EASEMENT
06/16/04 JPF Telephone conference with clerk; Prew; revise
Hagberg esmt; corr same.
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
ACCOUNT NO:
16511 291-8955
(6511 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41-0991098
Page: 1
06/30/2004
11150M
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES - BALANCE
11150-000003 RECO Property Permits
319.00 0.00 0.00 $319.00
11150-040004 WHISTLING VALLEY SECOND ADDITION
22.00 0.00 0.00 $22.00
341.00 0.00
6-o3-Y9o-9o-po Y3DMd
0..00 $341.00
THIS STATEMENT l5 DDE 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
06/07/04 JPF
06/18/04 JPF
06/25/04 JPF
PFERSON.
FRAMC'BERGMAN
te...031a.-i.'ilste r:IPtta':1.S'veJINi:eg1Rr4
1651) 291-8955
(6511 228.1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID 441-0991098
Page: 1
06/30/2004
ACCOUNT NO: 11150-000003M
STATEMENT NO: 21
Review RECO extension agreement; rev 15.99 and case
law; tele planner.
Telephone conference with Dietzen re: prelim plat;
final plat; 15.99; rev stet and case law; tele
planner; review city code.
Review city and state regs re: status of RE co plat;
tele planner; tele Atty Deitzen.
Jerome P. Filla
FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED
TOTAL CURRENT WORK
BALANCE DUE
HOURS
0.90 99.00
1.10 121.00
0.90 99.00
2.90 319.00
2.90 319.00
319.00
$319.00
THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAVADLE 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
PI TERSON,
FRAMCI'BERGMAN
(6511 291-8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID 841.0991098
Page: 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO 06/30/2004
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11150-040004M
LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 5
WHISTLING VALLEY SECOND ADDITION
06/04/04 JPF Telephone conference with Land Trust re: status cons
esmt.
Jerome P. Filia
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 IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL DE 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
PETERSON,_,___
FRAM''BERGMAN
taatolltplizenalsAiveraloWthIMPAonelkaniil
11161-040001 Belluzzo, Jennifer Lynn
vehicle forfeiture
11161-040002 Rychlik, Waclaw Andrew
vehicle forfeiture
ACCOUNT NO:
(651) 291-8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41-0991098
Page: 1
06/30/2004
11161M
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE
37.50 0.00 0.00 $37.50
55.00 0.00 0.00 $55.00
92.50 0.00
/o/-y,a-/b/0- 30'r
0.00 $92.50
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
PETERSON.
FRA C7BERGMAN
OHI.✓17'aA a nute9aU inzsomom* a 1'ki
16511 291-8955
(651I 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID 841.0991098
Page: 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO 06/30/2004
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11161-040001M
LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 3
Belluzzo, Jennifer Lynn
vehicle forfeiture
06/24/04 CSM Review file.
Cameron S. McLelland
FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED
HOURS
0.50 37.50
0.50 37.50
0.50 37.50
TOTAL CURRENT WORK 37.50
BALANCE DUE $37.50
THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT.
PLEASE. RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT.
Suite 300
50 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-1197
PFTERSON.
F'RAMCIBERGMAN
Yullcieealtn_JKmertergr: 7rte %$!Iuren.l
(6511291.8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41-0991098
Page: 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO 06/30/2004
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH ACCOUNT NO: 11161-040002M
LAKE ELMO MN 55042 STATEMENT NO: 3
Rychlik, Waclaw Andrew
vehicle forfeiture
06/04/04 JPF Telephone conference with clerk of ct re: scheduling
order.
06/23/04 JPF Letter to deft atty re: affid of prior conviction.
Jerome P. Filla
FOR CURRENT SERVICES RENDERED
HOURS
0.20 22.00
0.30 33.00
0.50 55.00
0.50 55.00
TOTAL CURRENT WORK 55.00
BALANCE DUE $55.00
THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LASTDAY 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 20, 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, Hristo Galiov, has accepted the position for the compensation as budgeted and as
planned for in the 2004 budget.
Person responsible:
Action Items:
Martin Rafferty
Approve hiring of selected candidate. City Administrator
Attachments:
As of 7/16/2004 (Periods 1-7)
Description
Mayor & Council
Part-time Salaries
FICA Contributions
Medicare Contributions
Travel Expense
Miscellaneous
Dues & Subscriptions
Conferences & Training
Sub -Total
Administration
Full-time Salaries
PERA Contributions
FICA Contributions
Medicare Contributions
Health/Dental Insurance
Workers Compensation
Office Supplies
Printed Forms
Newsletter/Website
Postage
Travel Expense
Legal Publishing
Insurance
Miscellaneous
Dues & Subscriptions
Books
Conferences & Training
Transfer Out
Sub -Total j
Elections
11 Part-time Salaries
Office Supplies
Printed Forms
I Travel Expense
Miscellaneous
Sub -Total $8,250.00
Budget Per Range Amt
$12,100.00
$750.00
$176.00
$450.00'
$4,000.001
$5,500.001
Monthly Operating Report
Variance Comments
$5,667.00 $6,433.001
$583.85 $166.151
$136.54 $39.46
$3,750.00 -$3,300.00
$14,668.28-$10,668.28j
$2,477.00 $3,023.00
$5,000.001 $12.00 $4,988.00
$27,976.00 $27,294.67 $681.33
1
$124,020.001
$6,858.00
$7,689.00,
$1,798.00
$21,834.00
$1,688.001
$7,000.00
$800.00
$14,000.00
$9,500.00
$1,500.00
$6,000.00
$27,360.00
$6,000.00
$1,500.00
$500.00
$2,500.00
1 $70,500.00
$311,047.00
1
$7,000.001
$100.00
$300.00,
$50.00
$800.00
$54,481.45
$2,260.69
$3,393.95
$793.78
$7,187.22
$0.00
$3,292.36
$188.29
$3,412.56
$4,899.54
$260.00
$1,832.48
$29,581.00
$3,048.59
$1,799.66
$0.00
$20.00
$0.001
$116,451.571
$191.67
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$340.00
$69,538.55
$4,597.31
$4,295.05
$1,004.22
$14,646.78
$1,688.00
$3,707.64
$611.71
$10,587.44
$4,600.46
$1,240.00
$4,167.52
-$2,221.00 Annual Premiums Paid
$2,951.41
-$299.66
$500.00
$2,480.00
$70,500.00
$194,595.43
$6,808.33
$100.00
$300.00
$50.00
$460.00
$531.67 $7,718.331
Description Budget Per Range Amt Variance Comments
Finance
Full-time Salaries $41,432.00 $12,481.60 $28,950.40
PERA Contributions $2,569.00 $622.94 $1,946.06
FICA Contributions $2,291.00 $774.86 $1,516.14
Medicare Contributions $601.00 $181.25 $419.75
Health/Dental Insurance $7,318.00 $1,256.30 $6,061.70
I Office Supplies $800.00 $0.00 $800.00
Printed Forms $1,000.00 $28.12 $971.88
Software Support $4,000.00 $1,475.00 $2,525.00
Hardware Support $2,000.00 $1,058.50 $941.50
Software Programs $3,000.00 $500.00 $2,500.00
Travel Expense $1,000.00 $16.00 $984.00
Miscellaneous $200.00 $240.70 -$40.70
Books $200.00 $0.00 $200.00
Conferences & Training $1,000.00 $20.00 $980.00
Sub -Total $67,411.00 $18,655.27 $48,755.73
!Accounting Services $24,000.00 $18,856.29 $5,143.71
!Assessing Services $35,000.00 $10,200.00 $24,800.00
0
(Legal Services $15,000.00 $16,021.84 -$1,021.84
Civil Attorney Criminal $45,000.00 $23,002.71 $21,997.29
Sub -Total $60,000.00 $39,024.55 $20,975.45
Planning & Zoning
Full-time Salaries $75,586.00 $37,119.95 $38,466.05
PERA Contributions $4,180.00 $2,903.73 $1,276.27
FICA Contributions $4,686.00 $2,315.91 $2,370.09
Medicare Contributions $1,096.00 $541.57 $554.43
Health/Dental Insurance $11,686.00 $4,674.79 $7,011.21
Workers Compensation $847.00 $0.00 $847.00
Office Supplies $500.00 $36.75 $463.25
Printed Forms $500.00 $0.00 $500.00
Zoning Ordinance Dev - CDBG $0.00 $8,776.97 -$8,776.97 Expense offset by Grant received from Washington County $ 49,666
Cimarron Study -CDBG $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
Comprehensive Planning $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
Engineering Services $2,500.00 $7,868.99 -$5,368.99
Legal Services $1,000.00 $341.00 $659.00
Infiltration Project $0.00 $21,505.16 -$21,505.16 Expense offset by Grant received from METC $29,501.00
Old Village Tax Abatement $73,148.00 $15,308.88 $57,839.12
Travel Expense $2,000.00 $631.75 $1,368.25
Miscellaneous $200.00 $0.00 $200.00
Dues & Subscriptions $500.00 $710.00 -$210.00
Books $200.00 $0.00 $200.00
!Conferences & Training $2,500.00 $635.36 $1,864.64
1 Sub -Total $201,129.00 $103,370.81 $97,758.19
2
Description
Engineering Services
Attorney Fees
Gov't Buildings
Cleaning Supplies
Building Repair Supplies
Telephone
Electric Utility
Refuse
Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg
Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
Miscellaneous
Sub -Total
Law Enforcement Contract
Transfer Out
Sub -Total
Fire
Full-time Salaries
Part-time Salaries
PERA Contributions
FICA Contributions
Medicare Contributions
Health/Dental Insurance
Workers Compensation
Office Supplies
Printed Forms
EMS Supplies
Fire Prevention
Fuel
Equipment Parts
Building Repair Supplies
Small Tools & Equipment
Physicals
Telephone
Radio
Travel Expense
Vehicle Insurance
Electric Utility
Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg
Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
Rentals - Building
Budget
$26,000.00
$100,000.00
$500.00
$500.00
$6,500.00
$5,000.00
$2,040.00
$8,000.00
$6,000.00
$400.00
Per Range Amt
$10,276.63
$77,442.48
$49.63
$85.62
$2,071.69
$2,698.25
$609.24
$5,984.92
$3,242.16
$345.31
Variance
$15,723.37
$22,557.52
$450.37
$414.38
$4,428.31
$2,301.75
$1,430.76
$2,015.08
$2,757.84
$54.69
$28,940.00
$322,000.00
$15,000.00
$337,000.00
$15,086.82
$157,791.08
$0.00
$157,791.08
$17,434.00 $5,731.21
$93,850.00 $62,679.09
$964.00 $307.77
$5,583.00 $4,241.97
$1,306.00 $992.10
$3,127.00 $677.62
$2,469.00 $0.00
$1,500.00 $133.03
$750.00 $0.00
$2,000.00 $0.00
$4,000.00 $0.00
$4,500.00 $1,097.09
$0.00 $348.00
$1 ,000.00 $56.45
$1,200.00 $486.27
$2,000.00 $2,344.00
$4,600.00 $1,448.06
$7,500.00 $97.40
$2,000.00 $1,156.85
$11,792.00 $12,908.00
$4,400.00 $2,740.82
$7,000.00 $3,595.00
$23,000.00 $3,830.83
$1,080.00 $630.00
$13,853.18
$164,208.92
$15,000.00
$179,208.92
$11,702.79
$31,170.91
$656.23
$1,341.03
$313.90
$2,449.38
$2,469.00
$1,366.97
$750.00
$2,000.00
$4,000.00
$3,402.91
-$348.00
$943.55
$713.73
-$344.00
$3,151.94
$7,402.60
$843.15
-$1,116.00 Annual Premiums Paid
$1,659.18
$3,405.00
$19,169.17
$450.00
Comments
3
Description
!Uniforms
Miscellaneous
Dues & Subscriptions
Books
Conferences & Training
Pension Contribution
Fire State Aid
Equipment
1Transfer Out
Sub -Total
Building Inspections
Full-time Salaries
PERA Contributions
FICA Contributions
Medicare Contributions
Health/Dental Insurance
Workers Compensation
Office Supplies
Printed Forms
Fuel
Engineer Sery Utility Permits
Plan Review Charges
Surcharge Payments
Telephone
Travel Expense
Insurance
Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
Rentals - Building
Uniforms
Miscellaneous
Dues & Subscriptions
Books
Conferences & Training
Transfer Out
Sub -Total
Civil Defense
Animal Control
Printed Forms
Contract Services
Impounding
Miscellaneous
Budget
$9,500.00
$1,300.00
$2,300.00
$200.00
$15,000.00
$41,000.00
$25,000.00
$10,000.00
$60,000.00
$367,355.00
$113,365.00
$6,292.00
$7,029.00
$1,644.00
$23,588.00
$616.00
$1,000.00
$1,500.00
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
$5,000.00
$13,500.00
$0.00
$1,000.00
$877.00
$500.00
$4,000.00
$600.00
$200.00
$300.00
$300.00
$2,500.00
$5,000.00
$194,811.00
$9,000.00
$500.00
$5,600.00
$6,000.00
$400.00
Per Range Amt
$2,012.53
$3,850.95
$2,422.45
$0.00
$5,485.00
$0.00
$0.00
$711.89
$0.00
$119,984.38
$59,014.36
$2,859.88
$3,667.98
$857.84
$8,281.93
$0.00
$370.62
$354.59
$151.13
$0.00
$0.00
$663.10
$685.66
$130.00
$872.00
$963.92
$2,236.50
$156.93
$208.41
$290.00
$0.00
$450.00
$0.00
$82,214.85
Variance Comments
$7,487.47
-$2,550.95 New Laptop Set Expense $2560.00-To be Offset by Grant funds received from Co.
-$122.45
$200.00
$9,515.00
$41,000.00
$25,000.00
$9,288.11
$60,000.00
$247,370.62
$54,350.64
$3,432.12
$3,361.02
$786.16
$15,306.07
$616.00
$629.38
$1,145.41
$2,84-8.87
$3,000.00
$5,000.00
$12,836.90
- $685.66 Cell Phone Expense
$870.00
$5.00
- $463.92
$1,763.50
$443.07
-$8.41
$10.00
$300.00
$2,050.00
$5,000.00
$112,596.15
$0.00 $9,000.00
$0.00 $500.00
$4,400.54 $1,199.46
$0.00 $6,000.00
$0.00 $400.00
Sub -Total $12,500.00
$4,400.54 $8,099.46
4
Description
Budget Per Range Amt Variance Comments
Public Works
Full-time Salaries $106,087.00 $51,476.78
Part-time Salaries $0.00 $900.00
PERA Contributions $5,867.00 $2,497.71
FICA Contributions $6,577.00 $3,247.95
Medicare Contributions $1,538.00 $759.62
Health/Dental Insurance $24,607.00 $6,833.79
Workers Compensation $3,773.00 $0.00
Office Supplies $300.00 $28.11
Fuel $8,500.00 $6,428.07
Shop Materials $2,500.00 $944.12
Equipment Parts $10,000.00 $2,171.11
Building Repair Supplies $1,000.00 $612.09
Street Maintenance Materials $22,500.00 $505.04
Landscaping Materials $2,500.00 $325.79
Sign Repair Materials $4,000.00 $786.77
Sand/Salt $20,000.00 $4,808.16
Small Tools & Minor Equipment $1,500.00 $474.32
Engineering Services $2,000.00 $0.00
Contract Services $22,500.00 $26,341.96
Telephone $3,750.00 $1,189.73
Radio $200.00 $0.00
Travel Expense $500.00 $10.00
Insurance $11,265.00 $13,603.00
Electric Utility $6,500.00 $3,923.29
Refuse $250.00 $635.34
Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg $2,000.00 $1,028.00
Repairs/Maint Imp Not Bldgs $1,500.00 $1,411.11
Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt $4,500.00 $3,624.80
Rentals - Buildings $1,500.00 $0.00
Uniforms $900.00 $761.35
Miscellaneous $2,000.00 $1,239.26
Dues & Subscriptions $500.00 $150.00
Conferences & Training $500.00 $100.00
Clean-up Days $9,500.00 $11,282.74
Other Equipment $12,250.00 $0.00
Transfer Out $78,693.00 $0.00
Sub -Total $382,057.00 $148,100.01 $233,956.99
Street Lighting
$16,800.00 $8,342.52 $8,457.48
$54,610.22 1
-$900.001Salary Split between Part -Time Parks
$3,369.29
$3,329.05
$778.38
$17,773.21
$3,773.00
$271.89
$2,071.93
$1,555.88
$7,828.89
$387.91
$21,994.96
$2,174.21
$3,213.23
$15,191.84
$1,025.68
$2,000.00
- $3,841.96 Street Sweeping $ 17086 Snow Plowing $9738.00 Roads Graded 2603.00
$2,560.27
$200.00
$490.00
- $2,338.00 Annual Premiums Paid
$2,576.71
-$385.34 Budget Error Past Budget classified into Contract Services
$972.00
$88.89
$875.20 1
$1,500.00
$138.65
$760.741
$350.00 1
$400.00
-$1,782.74 Expense offset with Gate Receipts
$12,250.00
$78,693.00
5
Description Budget Per Range Amt Variance Comments
Sanitation
Recycling Supplies
Newsletter
Miscellaneous
Sub -Total
$6,000.00 $0.00
$5,000.00 $0.00
$7,100.00 $0.00
$18,100.00 $0.00
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
$7,100.00
$18,100.00
Parks
(Full-time Salaries $58,215.00 $26,481.48 $31,733.52
Part-time Salaries $23,550.00 $11,693.94 $11,856.06
PERAContributions $3,219.00 $1,521.40 $1,697.60
FICA Contributions $5,069.00 $2,369.46 $2,699.54
Medicare Contributions $1,186.00 $554.19 $631.81
Health/Dental Insurance $9,916.00 $2,476.19 $7,439.81
Workers Compensation $2,819.00 $0.00 $2,819.00
Office Supplies $250.00 $0.00 $250.00
Fuel $2,200.00 $248.49 $1,951.51
Shop Materials $1,000.00 $105.96 $894.04
Chemicals $500.00 $0.00 $500.00
Equipment Parts $4,000.00 $559.51 $3,440.49
Building Repair Supplies $1,000.00 $153.57 $846.43
Landscaping Materials $10,000.00 $2,335.19 $7,664.81
Small Tools & Minor Equipment $1,000.00 $45.49 $954.51
Telephone $1,500.00 $635.71 $864.29
Travel Expense $0.00 $40.00 -$40.00
'Insurance $2,900.00 $3,084.00 -$184.00 Annual Premiums Paid
Electric Utility $6,050.00 $3,145.88 $2,904.12
Refuse $2,400.00 $1,103.76 $1,296.24
Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg $2,000.00 $1,060.93 $939.07
Repairs/Maint Imp Not Bldgs $5,000.00 $317.90 $4,682.10
Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt $1,000.00 $6.38 $993.62
Rentals - Buildings $2,500.00 $2,248.33 $251.67
Uniforms $400.00 $52.37 $347.63
Miscellaneous $100.00 $128.00 -$28.00
Dues & Subscriptions $100.00 $50.00 $50.00
Transfer Out
Conferences & Training $400.00 $0.00 $400.00
$16,500,00 $0.00 $16,500.00
Sub -Total $164,774.00 $60,418.13 $104,355.87
General Fund Total $2,392,150.00
$1,018,442.27 $1,373,707.73
Description
Budget Per Range Amt Variance Comments
Water Operating Enterprise
Full-time Salaries $61,939.00 $37,187.57 $24,751.43
PERA Contributions $3,425.00 $1,806.69 $1,618.31
FICA Contributions $3,840.00 $2,310.52 $1,529.48
Medicare Contributions $898.00 $540.35 $357.65
Health\ Dental Insurance $9,171.00 $4,031.65 $5,139.35
Workers Compensation $890.00 $0.00 $890.00
Office Supplies $100.00 $0.00 $100.00
Printed Forms $1,050.00 $202.36 $847.64
Chemicals $2,000.00 $439.31 $1,560.69
Utility System Maintenance $1,200.00 $1,033.93 $166.07
Water Meters & Supplies $16,000.00 $1,505.59 $14,494.41
Small Tools & Minor Equipment $197.00 $255.43 -$58.43
Engineering Services $2,500.00 $2,253.55 $246.45
Software Support $4,000.00 $379.00 $3,621.00
Telephone $2,000.00 $640.68 $1,359.32
Postage $650.00 $0.00 $650.00
Travel Expense $600.00 $351.00 $249.00
Insurance $2,380.00 $2,985.00 -$605.00
Electric Utility $12,000.00 $6,869.71 $5,130.29
Water Utility $35,000.00 $28,889.98 $6,110.02
Repairs\Maint Imp Not Bldgs $1,000.00 $5,136.26 -$4,136.26 Retapp Three Water Connections-3100; Repair of Water Main Break 1049
Miscellaneous $5,000.00 $1,359.00 $3,641.00
Conferences & Training $500.00 $110.00 $390.00
Other Equipment $1,800.00 $0.00 $1,800.00
Sub -Total $168,140.00 $98,287.58 $69,852.42
Sewer
Full-time Salaries $17,594.00 $8,877.09 $8,716.91
PERA Contributions $973.00 $420.03 $552.07
FICA Contributions $1,091.00 $551.77 $539.23
Medicare Contributions $255.00 $129.06 $125.94
Health/Dental lnsurance $2,375.00 $870.39 $1,504.61
Workers Compensation $328.00 $0.00 $328.00
Utility System Maint Supplies $524.00 $58.56 $465.44
Small Tools & Minor Equipment $200.00 $0.00 $200.00
Engineering Services $1,500.00 $4,235.05-$2,735.05 Services for Lift Station Upgrades
iTelephone $1,150.00 $759.01 $390.99
Travel Expense $0.00 $22.00 422.00
1 Electric Utility $1,225.00 $879.44 $345.56
Repairs\Maint Imp Not Bldgs $1,000.00 $2,511.29 -$1,511.29
Miscellaneous Expenses $0.00 $300.00 $300.00
Conferences & Training $0.00 $189.20 -$189.20
9 Sub -Total $28,215.00 $19,803.79 $8,411.21
7
Description Budget Per Range Amt Variance Comments
Surface Water Utility
Full-time Salaries $24,751.00 $0.00
PERA Contributions $1,369.00 $0.00
FICA Contributions $1,535.00 $0.00
Medicare Contributions $359.00 $0.00
Health/Dental Insurance $4,771.00 $0.00
Workers' Compensation $340.00 $0.00
Office Supplies $500.00 $0.00
Utility System Maint Supplies $2,162.00 $0.00
Small Tools & Minor Equipment $1,000.00 $0.00
Engineering Services $4,500.00 $9,166.00
Erosion Control $2,100.00 $0.00
Software Support $1,000.00 $4,050.00
Postage $1,576.00 $515.00
Contract Services $2,000.00 $0.00
Repairs/Maint Not Bldg $2,000.00 $0.00
(Miscellaneous Expenses $0.00 $348.26
Transfer Out $30,315.00 $0.00
Sub -Total $80,278.00 $14,079.26
$24,751.00
$1,369.00
$1,535.00
$359.00
$4,771.00
$340.00
$500.00
$2,162.00
$1,000.00
-$4,666.00 Initial Set-up Expense
$2,100.00
-$3,050.00 Initial Set-up Expense
$1,061.00
$2,000.00
$2,000.00
-$348.26
$30,315.00
$66,198.74
Total Enterprise Operating $276,633.00 $132,170.63 $144,462.37
Grand Total $2,668,783.00 $1,150,612.90 $1,518,170.10
7/,
June-tuu4
Permits
Issued
New Residential 2
New Commercial 2
Other Residential 35
Other Commercial 2
Total 41
Summary Building Report
Valuation
$839,000.00
$500,000.00
$444,051.00
$320,000.00
$2,103,051.00
Total Building Fees Collected I $25,659.37
Plumbing
Summary Plumbing Report
15 $155,253.00
Total Plumbing Fees Collected ' $1,206.50
Summary HVAC Report
HVAC 11
Total HVAC Fees Collected
Summary Grand Total Fees
Surcharge Fee Paid to State
SAC Fees Paid to Met Council
WAC Fees Paid to Oakdale
Misc. Expenses
Total Fees Retained
Credit Fees to Bldg
Credit Fees to Water
Credit Fees to Sewer
$69,400.00
New Residential
New Commercial
rear to uate
Permits
Issued Valuation
7 $4,096,968.00
4 $1,000,000.00
Other Residential 158 $1,837,888.00
Other Commercial 17 $744,783.00
Total 186 $7,679,639.00
Total Building Fees Collected I $101,486.75 I
Summary Plumbing Report
Plumbing
55 $466,754.00
Total Plumbing Fees Collected I $4,078.75
Summary HVAC Report
HVAC 59 $275,158.00
$955.50 Total HVAC Fees Collected ' $4,082.75 I
$27,821.37 i Summary Grand Total Fees
$1,037.58
$0.00
$0.00
Surcharge Fee Paid to State
SAC Fees Paid to Met Council
WAC Fees Paid to Oakdale
;• Misc. Expenses
$26,783.79 ' Total Fees Retained
$26,783.79
$0.00
$0.00
Credit Fees to Bldg
Credit Fees to Water
Credit Fees to Sewer
$109,648.25
3,802.70
0.00
0.00
0.00
$105,845.55
105,220.55
400.00
225.00
City ofLake Elmo
Building Department
Building Permit Detail Summary
June 01, 2004 Through June 30, 2004
Occupancy
Class Of Work: Add
Permit # Description of Work
4096 driveway
Totals for Class Of Work: Add
Totals for Occupancy:
Occupancy
Class Of Work: Repair
Permit*
4135 reroof
Totals for Class Of Work: Repair
Totals for Occupancy:
Occupancy B
Class Of Work: Remodel
Permit #
4140 Remodel
Totals for Class Of Work: Remodel Number of Pernnits = 1
Number ofPemnits = 1
Number of Permits = 1
Description of Work
Number of Permrits = 1
Number of Permits =1
Friday, July 02, 2004
Description of Work
Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
6/3/2004 Single Family Dwelling 5,700
Sum of Valuation = 5,700
Sum of Valuation =
Date Issued Use of Building
6/28/2004 School
5,700
Valuation
295,000
295,000
Sum of Valuation = 295,000
Sum of Valuation =
Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
6/30/2004 Commercial 25,000
Sum of Valuation = 25,000
Page 1 of 5
Class Of Work: New
Permit # Description of Work
4113 Commercial
4112 Commercial
Totals for Class Of Work: New
Totals for Occupancy: B
IOccupancy U-1
Class Of Work: Add
Number of Permits = 2
Number of Permits = 3
Permit # Description of Work
4109 Garage
Totals for Class Of Work: Add
Class Of Work: Repair
Permit #
4138 reroof
Number of Permits =1
Description of Work
Totals for Class Of Work: Repair Number ofPemnits = 1
Totals for Occupancy: U-1 Number of Permits = 2
Occupancy
Friday, July 02, 2004
R-3
Date Issued Use of Building
6/14/2004 Office Building
6/14/2004 Commercial
Sum of Valuation =
Sum of Valuation =
Valuation
250,000
250,000
500,000
525,000
Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
6/10/2004 Single Family Dwelling 50,000
Sum of Valuation = 50,000
Date Issued Use of Building
6/29/2004 Single Family Dwelling
Sum of Valuation =
Valuation
5,910
5,910
Sum of Valuation = 55,910
Page 2 of 5
Class Of Work: Add
Permit # Description of Work Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
4100 Deck 6/7/2004 Single Family Dwelling 2,283
4091 mobile home setup 6/2/2004 Single Family Dwelling 3,500
4108 addition & remodel 6/9/2004 Single Family Dwelling 80,000
4107 Deck 6/9/2004 Single Family Dwelling 4,000
4106 Finish Garage 6/8/2004 Single Family Dwelling 700
4103 driveway 6/7/2004 Single Family Dwelling 3,500
4110 swimming pool 6/11/2004 Single Family Dwelling 20,000
4101 Fireplace 6/7/2004 Single Family Dwelling 2,000
4098 Other 6/4/2004 Single Family Dwelling 800
4094 Deck 6/2/2004 Mobile Home 750
4093 addition 6/2/2004 Single Family Dwelling 30,000
4092 mobile home setup 6/2/2004 Single Family Dwelling 3,500
4102 void pemtit 6/7/2004 Single Family Dwelling 800
4126 Deck 6/22/2004 Single Family Dwelling 2,000
4114 Deck 6/15/2004 Single Family Dwelling 4,000
4116 Garage 6/15/2004 Single Family Dwelling 20,562
4133 mobile home setup 6/25/2004 Mobile Home 2,000
4120 Deck 6/17/2004 Single Family Dwelling 2,500
4130 Deck 6/23/2004 Single Family Dwelling 3,500
Friday, July 02, 2004
Page 3 of 5
4121 addition 6/17/2004 Single Family Dwelling 22,400
Totals for Class Of Work: Add Number of Permits = 20 Sum of Valuation = 208,795
Class Of Work: Remodel
Permit* Description of Work Date Issued Use of Building
Valuation
4141 Remodel 6/30/2004 Single Family Dwelling 45,000
4128 Roof Replacement and Windows 6/22/2004 Single Family Dwelling 4,000
4099 Roof Replacement 6/7/2004 Mobile Home 400
4125 Remodel 6/21/2004 Single Family Dwelling 750
4105 Siding & Window Replacement 6/8/2004 Single Family Dwelling 39,000
4115 Basement finish (includes plmg&htg) 6/15/2004 Single Family Dwelling 8,000
Totals for Class Of Work: Remodel Number of Pemnits = 6 Sum of Valuation = 97,150
Class Of Work: New
Permit# Description of Work Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
4142 New House 6/30/2004 Single Family Dwelling 189,000
4123 New House 6/17/2004 Single Family Dwelling 650,000
Totals for Class Of Work: New Number of Permits = 2 Sum of Valuation = 839,000
Class Of Work: Repair
Permit# Description of Work Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
4111 driveway 6/11/2004 Single Family Dwelling 5,418
4104 reroof 6/7/2004 Single Family Dwelling 18,128
4117 Roof Replacement 6/15/2004 Single Family Dwelling 4,950
4134 Other 6/25/2004 Single Family Dwelling 28,000
Totals for Class Of Work: Repair Number ofPerrmits=4 Sum of Valuation = 56,496
Friday, July 02, 2004 Page 4 of 5
Class Of Work: Alter
Permit # Descripffon of Work Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
4097 Excavation & Grading 6/3/2004 Excavation & Grading 10,000
4095 swimming pool 6/2/2004 Single Family Dwelling 10,000
Totals for Class Of Work: Alter Number of Perrmits = 2 Sum of Valuation = 20,000
Totals for Occupancy: R-3 Number of Permits = 34 Sum of Valuation = 1,221,441
Grand Total for All Permits Issued:
Friday, July 02, 2004
Number of Permits 41 Total Valuation = 2,103,051
Page 5 of 5
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Building Permit Detail Summary
Occupancy R-3
Class Of Work: New
Permit # Description of Work Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
4142 New House 6/30/2004 Single Family Dwelling 189,000
4123 New House 6/17/2004 Single Family Dwelling 650,000
Totals for Gass Of Work: New Number of Permits = 2 Sum of Valuation = 839,000
Totals for Occupancy: R-3 Number of Permits = 2 Sum of Valuation = 839,000
Grand Total for All Permits Issued:
Friday, July 02, 2004
Number of Permits 2 Total Valuation = 839,000
Page 1 of 1
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Plumbing Permit Detail Summary
June 01, 2004 Through June 30, 2004
Permit # Description of Work
4108 alter resd plmg & Septic
4112 New Commercial
4113 New Commercial
4118 water heater install
4122 commercial plumbing alter
4123 new resd plmg & sewer/septic
4127 alter septic
4131 alter septic
4132 alter septic
4136 water heater install
4137 alter septic
4139 lawn sprinkler
4140 commercial plumbing alter
4141 alter resd plmg
4142 new resd plmg & sewer/septic
Date Issued
6/9/2004
6/14/2004
6/14/2004
6/15/2004 715
6/17/2004 2,738
6/17/2004 32,000
6/22/2004 8,000
6/23/2004 3,400
6/25/2004 6,000
6/28/2004 400
6/28/2004 12,000
6/29/2004 2,500
6/30/2004 2,500
6/30/2004 15,000
6/30/2004 30,000
Number of Permits 15 Total Valuation = 155,253
Friday, July 02, 2004
Valuation
20,000
10,000
10,000
Page 1 of 1
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
HVAC Permit Detail Summary
June 01, 2004 Through June 30, 2004
Permit # Description of Work Date Issued Valuation
4108 alter resd hvac 6/9/2004 4,500
4112 New Commercial 6/14/2004 8,000
4113 New Commercial 6/14/2004 8,000
4119 alter resd hvac 6/17/2004 6,700
4121 alter resd hvac 6/17/2004 3,000
4123 HVAC-residential 6/17/2004 12,000
4124 alter resd hvac 6/18/2004 2,700
4129 alter resd hvac 6/23/2004 1,500
4140 alter commercial 6/30/2004 6,000
4141 alter resd hvac 6/30/2004 7,000
4142 HVAC-residential 6/30/2004 10,000
Number of Permits 11 Total Valuation = 69,400
Friday, July 02, 2004
Page 1 of 1
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Building Permit Fees
June 01, 2004 Through June 30, 2004
Date Permit # Permit Fee Surcharge Plan ReviewOther InvestigatioiSAC Fee Sewer Fee WAC Fee Meter Sales Tax
6/2/2004 4091 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $75.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/2/2004 4092 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $75.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/2/2004 4093 $442.25 $15.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/2/2004 4094 $32.65 $0.38 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/2/2004 4095 $181.25 $5.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/3/2004 4096 $125 25 $2.85 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/3/2004 4097 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/4/2004 4098 $32.65 $0.40 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/7/2004 4099 $23.50 $0.20 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/7/2004 4100 $83.25 $1.14 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/7/2004 4101 $69.25 $1.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/7/2004 4102 $32.65 $0.40 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/7/2004 4103 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/7/2004 4104 $307.25 $9.06 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/8/2004 4105 $533.15 $19.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/8/2004 4106 $29.60 $0.35 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/9/2004 4107 $97.25 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/9/2004 4108 $853.75 $40.00 $0.00 $50.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/10/2004 4109 $644.25 $25.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/11/2004 4110 $321.25 $10.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/11/2004 4111 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/14/2004 4112 $1,833.75 $125.00 $1,191.94 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Friday, July 02, 2004
Page 1 of 3
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Building Permit Fees
June 01, 2004 Through June 30, 2004
Date Permit # Permit Fee Surcharge Plan RevieriOther Investigatioi6AC Fee Sewer Fee WAC Fee Meter Sales Tax
6/14/2004 4113 $1,833.75 $125.00 $1,191.94 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/15/2004 4114 $97.25 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/15/2004 4115 $153.25 $4.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/15/2004 4116 $335.25 $10.28 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/15/2004 4117 $111.25 $2.48 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/17/2004 4120 $8325 $1.25 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/17/2004 4121 $363.25 $11.20 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/17/2004 4123 $3,946.25 $325.00 $2,565.06 $126.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/21/2004 4125 $32.65 $0.38 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/22/2004 4126 $69.25 $1.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/22/2004 4128 $97.25 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/23/2004 4130 $97.25 $1.75 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/25/2004 4133 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $75.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/25/2004 4134 $422.05 $14.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/28/2004 4135 $2,085.75 $147.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/29/2004 4138 $125.25 $2.96 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/30/2004 4140 $391.25 $12.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/30/2004 4141 $593.65 $22.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6/30/2004 4142 $1,492.15 $94.50 $969.90 $126.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Friday, July 02, 2004
Page 2 of 3
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Building Permit Fees
June 01, 2004 Through June 30, 2004
Date Permit # Permit Fee Surcharge Plan RevieiOtl:er InvestigationcAC Fee Sewer Fee WAC Fee Meter Sales Tax
Totals: $17,972.95 $1,037.58 $5,918.84
Friday, July 02, 2004
$730.00
$0.00 $0.00
$0.00
Grand Total of Building Related Fees Collected: $25,659.37
$0.00 $0.00
$0.00
Page 3 of 3
Totals:
Date
6/9/2004
6/14/2004
6/14/2004
6/15/2004
6/17/2004
6/17/2004
6/22/2004
6/23/2004
6/25/2004
6/28/2004
6/28/2004
6/29/2004
6/30/2004
6/30/2004
6/30/2004
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Plumbing Permit Fees
June 01, 2004 Through June 30, 2004
Permit #
4108
4112
4113
4118
4122
4123
4127
4131
4132
4136
4137
4139
4140
4141
4142
Permit Fee Surcharge
$50.00
$150.00
$150.00
$50.00
$150.00
$100.00
$0.00
$0.00
$50.00
$50,00
$50.00
$100.00
$150.00
$50.00
$100.00
$1,200.00
Grand Total of Plumbing Fees Collected:
$1,206.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.00
$0.00
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$6.50
Date
6/9/2004
6/14/2004
6/14/2004
6/17/2004
6/17/2004
6/17/2004
6/18/2004
6/23/2004
6/30/2004
6/30/2004
6/30/2004
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
HVAC Permit Fees
June 01, 2004 Through June 30, 2004
Penni! #
4108
4112
4113
4119
4121
4123
4124
4129
4140
4141
4142
Permit Fee
$50.00
$150.00
$150.00
$50.00
$50.00
$100.00
$50.00
$50.00
$150.00
$50.00
$100.00
Totals: $950.00
Grand Total of HVAC Fees Collected:
$955.50
Surcharge
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$0.50
$5.50
Lake Elmo
City Council
July 20, 2004
Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9A
Agenda Item: Shoreland Zoning Variance — Olsen/2225 Legion Lane
Background Information for Julv 20. 2004:
At its meeting July 12, 2004 the Planning Commission conducted a Noticed Public Hearing to consider an
application to reconstruct a deck in the OHW setback of Downs Lake that would be located 48 feet from the
OHW. A 1970's vintage deck that was located 48 feet from the OHW has been removed by the applicant
due to deterioration. The new deck would essentially replicate the prior deck — but be 2 feet further from the
OHW (less non -conforming) across a portion of the deck. Since the entire home is located within the OHW
setback of Downs Lake, therefore precluding any deck location that would not also be within the OHW
setback.
Finding that no reasonable alternative deck location was available to the homeowner (within the context of
"reasonable use of the property"; that the variance circumstances are not totally the result of the owners
actions (pre-existing the Shoreland standards); and, that the new deck will reduce the extent of setback non-
conformity, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the variance. A Resolution
consistent with the Commission's approval recommendation is attached for City Council consideration.
Action items:
059
Motion to adopt Resolution #2004 — approving a variance to
permit reconstruction of a pre-existing deck within the Shoreland
OHW of Downs Lake at 2225 Legion Lane per plans Staff dated
July 8, 2004, and based on the recommendation of the Planning
Commission.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of July 12, 2004
3. Planning Staff Report of July 8, 2004
Person resnbnsible:
C
Time Allocated:
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-059
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT VARIANCE
FOR THOMAS AND JENEAL OLSEN AT 2225 LEGION LANE
WHEREAS, at its July 12, 2004 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing and recommended approval of an application from Thomas and Jeneal Olsen, at
2225 Legion Lane, for a shoreland overlay district variance to reconstruct a pre-existing
deck within the Shoreland Ordinary High Water of Downs Lake per plans staff dated July
8, 2004.
WHEREAS, at its July 20, 2004 meeting, the Lake Elmo City Council reviewed
the application of Thomas and Jeneal Olsen for a shoreland overlay district variance and
made the following findings:
1. The property can not be put to reasonable use without the granting of the variance
requested. Reasonable use must be defined in the context of pre-existing conditions
related to the layout of the house, and the need to reconstruct a deteriorated deck
constructed prior to Shoreland Standards.
2. The variance requested results from circumstances unique to properties where
principal structures were constructed prior to adoption of current zoning regulations; and,
the circumstances of the variance were not solely created by the applicant. Also, that the
applicant proposes to reconstruct the deck at 2 feet less encroachment to the OFIW
setback than the previously existing deck.
3. Granting of the variance will not change the essential character of the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Lake Elmo City Council approves
the Shoreland Overlay District Variance at 2225 Legion Lane to allow reconstruction of a
pre-existing deck on Downs Lalce for Thomas and Jeneal Olsen, based on a plan staff -
dated July 8, 2004, and on the Findings of the Planning Staff Report dated July 8, 2004.
ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 20rh day of July, 2004.
Lee Hunt, Mayor
ATTEST:
Martin J. Rafferty, City Administrator
z0
t
E
s
Location Map
'T3IN� Td IN
T:OII rtyar
'1`d9N }1 IITI9N
IIPNT THN
Vicinity Map
0 457
Scale In Feet
Ms drm.Io a lno inner a compilation
and moroducbsn a landrecords as they
appear In ramm Washington conn0 anon.
Ina dowkp should W usedlor rolmence
P pnpoorclsdeior aMInlnaceuraotos. l
Source' wasmn9lon Count Sunaprs OW.
Phan 061I 4904070
Parcel dale based on A400I0IOIma0IM
Excerpt of Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of July 12, 2004
Variance from OHW — Olsen 1
PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE FROM OHW — OLSEN
The City Planner introduced the application for a variance from the Shoreland Standards
of the Code to allow reconstruction of a deck within the setback from OHW of Down's
Lake. The deck lies a minimum of approximately 48' from Ordinary High Water where
150 feet is required. He reported that the applicant has removed a deteriorated deck
constructed in the 1970's but can not rebuild in the same location without a variance. The
new deck would be 2 feet further from the OHW across a portion of the width. He
reported that the DNR does not object to the variance. The Planner recommended
approval based upon Findings in the staff report.
AT 7:07 p.m. THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
No testimony was offered.
AT 7:08 P.M. THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Commissioner Deziel said photos depict foliage screening of the original deck and the
house from the lake and he appreciates it.
M/S/P, Ptacelo`Sessing, To recommend approval to allow reconstruction of a deck at 48'
from OHW in accordance with applicants' plans staff dated July 8, 2004 and the three
Findings in the Staff Report. VOTE: 8:0.
LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
Date: July 8, 2004 for the Meeting of July 12, 2004
Applicant: Thomas and Jeneal Olsen
Location: 2225 Legion Lane
Requested Action: Variance to Shoreland OHW Set Back
Land Use Plan Guiding: SRD
Existing Zoning: R-1
Site History and Existing Conditions:
A building permit was issued to construct a home on this 60,000 sf lot fronting Downs Lake in
1978. The original house plans did include a deck on the Downs Lake side of the house. That deck
design differs somewhat from a later deck design now proposed to be replaced. We note a permit
for extensive home remodeling in 1988 as well. It may be that this remodeling resulted in
modification of the deck design from 1978 — or, the 1978 deck was constructed in a different
configuration than the 1978 plan depicted. In either case, it does not appear that the actual 2004
deck design modified the OHW encroachment that was created with the original house
construction.
The Building Department reports that the existing deck on the house was removed recently due to
deterioration of the wood structure. The applicant applied for permit to reconstruct the deck
essentially as it had appeared prior to the recent removal, but with 2 feet less OHW setback
encroachment. Because the pre-existing deck became a non -conforming structure (due to the 48
foot OHW setback), no permit could be issued to replace the deck.
Discussion and Analysis:
City aerial photography confirms that the principal house structure (ex deck) is located 56 feet
from the Downs Lake OHW. A strict (non -varied) application of the Shoreland setback standards
would preclude construction of a lakeward deck of any size. This does not appear to be a practical
solution to the issue, given the g\fact that the house is "set up" for a lake front deck based on pre-
Shoreland zoning standards. We do not believe that the non -conformity provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance are intended to produce the results we find in this case — no replacement deck. By the
DNR review letter of July 8, it appears that the Shoreland Regulation oversight agency essentially
concurs with this observation.
Findings and Recommendations:
Based on the foregoing Staff suggests the following Findings in this case:
1. The property can not be put to reasonable use without the granting of the variance requested.
Reasonable use must be defined in the context of pre-existing conditions related to the layout of
1. The property can not be put to reasonable use without the granting of the variance
requested. Reasonable use must be defined in the context of pre-existing conditions
related to the layout of the house, and the need to reconstruct a deteriorated deck
constructed prior to Shoreland Standards.
2. The variance requested results from circumstances unique to properties where
principal structures were constructed prior to adoption of current zoning regulations;
and, the circumstances of the variance were not solely created by the applicant. Also,
that the applicant proposes to reconstruct the deck at 2 feet less encroachment to the
OHW setback than the previously existing deck.
3. Granting of the variance will not change the essential character of the neighborhood.
the house, and the need to reconstruct a deteriorated deck constructed prior to Shoreland
Standards.
2. The variance requested results from circumstances unique to properties where principal
structures were constructed prior to adoption of current zoning regulations; and, the
circumstances of the variance were not solely created by the applicant. Also, that the applicant
proposes to reconstruct the deck at 2 feet less encroachment to the OHW setback than the
previously existing deck.
3. Granting of the variance will not change the essential character of the neighborhood.
Based on the foregoing Finds staff recommends approval of the variance as applied for.
Planning Commission Actions Requested:
Motion to recommend approval of a variance at 2225 Legion Lane to allow reconstruction of a
pre-existing deck at 48 feet from the OHW of Downs Lake based on a plan staff -dated July 8,
2004, and on the Findings of the Planning Staff Report dated July 8, 2004.
Charles E. Dillerud, City Planner
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Aerial Photo
3. DNR Review
4. Applicants' Documentation and Graphics
Location Map
It22W R21W R2OW
Vicinity Map
0 100
Scale in Feet
and op� 000n otiad (mullof
compilation
m:eiendo:mm nnoa.alm various
p
fond any as only, WOY�reticounly le not
respanes
Rn50. Waohllnoloo02�nty Surveyor's ollkn
Paul data Eased on Male Inbimnlwo
Deck Proposal — 2225 Legion Lane
Situation.
I am in the process of selling my house and expect to close on the
sale on August 15th 2004. As part of the sales contract I have with
the seller I must repair the existing deck on the house due to the
poor condition of the ledger board and adjacent rim joist on the
existing deck. To comply with this requirement I agreed to replace
the deck. My contractor applied for a building permit and learned
that since the house is within 100' of Downs lake it may be
necessary to apply for a special permit.
Request
I am requesting permission to have the contractor replace the
current deck with a deck that is the same size as the existing deck
with the exception of a 2' foot reduction in the length of the North
cantilever.
Diagram
I have attached two drawings. The first is an overall site view of
the home and how it is situated on the lot. The second drawing
shows the proposed size of the deck.
Tom Olsen
(w) 737-8456
(h) 436-3216
- -c
i
_.1
r
C
'
,
1
i
I
1 ....y
i
I
r
t
Ccit
Lake Elmo
City Council
July 20, 2004
Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9B
Agenda Item: Administrative Determination Appeal — Anderson/Sorenson
Background Information for July 20. 2004:
The home builders in the Whistling Valley OP have appealed administrative determination by the Building
Official (concurred in by the City Planner) regarding the application of the definition of "Building Height"
in Section 150 of the City Code (the 2001 version of that definition — the older version is still there, but
should have been repealed concurrently with adopting the new version). The attached graphics depict the
issue at hand: With an architectural feature such as proposed for the roof of this home, is the "mean height"
of the gable roof measured from the first roof level or the second (upper) roof level?
The appellant contends that the measurement of gable roof mid point should be taken from the eaves and
the top most ridge (the top of the "second" roof in this case). With that interpretation, this home would meet
the 35 foot max height. With the Building Official's more conservative interpretation, the calculated
building height of this home would be 38 feet — too much.
While staff has taken an interpretative position in this matter, we have no problems with the applicant's
interpretation should the Council agree with the applicant's logic.
In this matter the City Council is acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, responsive to Section
200.01, Subd. 11 of the City Code. The decision of the Board is in the form of an Order, not a City Council
Resolution. Since this is not a variance matter, no specific Findings need be made to support the
interpretation adopted by the Board.
Action items:
Motion to adopt a Board of Adjustments and Appeals Order
directing the Building Official to interpret the definition of
Building Height for a hip roof to use the upper -most ridge line of
any structure as the upper point from which to measure the
average height of a structure with a gable roof and multiple ridge
lines.
Attachments:
1. Section 150 "Definitions"
2. Applicant's Documentation and Graphics
Person esaonsible:
C'.
Time Allocated:
Lake Elmo Municipal Code
Chapter 1
Section 150 - Definitions
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD5)
Block
Bluff
Bluff Impact Zone
Boarding House
Boathouse
BOD
Bona Fide Club
Boulevard
Buildable Land Area
Building
Building Code
Building Drain
Building Height
JJ III IIII 1111111l IIII I 111
Building Height'
,„i .1 ,1 1 n rut HI I11
Building Line
Building Official
Building Setback
Building Setback Line
1 Added 97-90 on 10-2-01
2/18/97
7/28/98 Updated
3/19//02 Updated
The quantity of oxygen utilized in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter under standard laboratory
procedure in five (5) days at 20° C., expressed in milligrams per liter.
An area of land within a subdivision that.is entirely bounded by streets, or by streets and the exterior,
boundary or boundaries of the subdivision, or a combination of the above with a river or lake.
A topographic feature such as a hill, cliff, or embankment having the following characteristics. (. I n area
a rtb an damage data of less than fB fierean1 near a &rAwce (50, fen! or more shall not be innddered part of'the b/u/j) A.
Part or all of the feature is in a Shoreland area; B. The slope rises at (east twenty-five (25) feet above the
ordinary high water level. of the water body; C. The grade of the slope from the toe of the bluff to a point
twenty-five (25) feet or more above the ordinary high water level averages thirty percent (30%) or greater,
and D. The slope must drain toward the water body.
A bluff and land located within 20 feet from the top of a bluff.
A building other than a motel or hotel where, for compensation and by pre -arrangement for definite
periods, meals or lodging are provided for three (3) or more unrelated persons, but not to exceed eight (8)
Persons.
A structure designed and used solely for the storage of boats and boating equipment
Biochemical Oxygen Demand shall mean the quantity of oxygen utilized in the biochemical oxidation of
organic matter under standard laboratory procedure in five (5) days at 20 C expressed in milligrams per
liter - laboratory procedures shall be in accordance with the latest edition of Standards Methods for the
Examination of Water and Waste Water.
A club organized for social or business purposes, for intellectual improvement, or for the promotion of
sports, where the serving of non -intoxicating malt liquor is incidental to and not a major purpose of the
club.
The portion of the street right-of-way between the curb line and the property line,
The gross land area less the unbuildable land area that includes hydric and restrictive soils, land with slopes
over twenty-five (25) percent, wetlands and areas that cannot accommodate septic systems,
Any structure either temporary or permanent, having a roof and used or built for the shelter or enclosure
of any person, animal, or movable property of any kind. When any portion of a building is completely
separated from every other part of a building by area separation, each portion of the building shall be
deemed as a separate building.
Minnesota State Building Code.
That part of the lowest piping of the drainage system which receives the sewage discharge inside the walls
of the building and conveys it to the building sewer which begins at least one foot outside the building line.
The vertical distance between the lowest grade level at the building line and the uppermost point on the
II I l l u1111 IC JII III II 1 III 1 11ls !111I I1 IIV!II 1111 IIIII IIII III II 1 till 111
The vertical distance from the average of the highest and lowest point of grade for that portion of the lot
covered by building to the highest point of the roof for Bat roofs; to the roof deck line of mansard roofs;
e mean h t b een eaves and rid a fos ble hi and hnmbrel roaft
A line para8 to a o or a or tnary g vetlevelat a require seta o one which la structure
may not extend. (See Section 325)
The officer or other designated authority, certified by the state, charged with the administration and
enforcement of the State Building Code, or affrcea's duly authorized representative.
The minimum horizontal distance between one building and the lot line.
A line within a lot parallel to a public right-of-way line, a side or rear lot line, a bluff line, or a high water
mark or line, behind which buildings or structures must be placed.
150-3
M E M 0
DATE:
PROJECT:
SUBJECT:
BY:
R A N D U M
June 16, 2004
Hippie Residence
Lake Elmo Maximum Height Requirements
Peter Stafford MacDonald:
MacDonald and Company
Residential Design Group
Re: Hippie Residence Maximum Height Requirement
Honorable City Council Members,
The Lake Elmo zoning ordinance describes maximum height as -
"The vertical distance from the average of the highest and lowest points of grade for that portion of the
lot covered by building to the highest point of the rooffor flat roof to the roof deck line of mansard roofs;
and to the mean height between eaves and ridge for gable, hip and gambrel roofs."
In the case of a very simple home with a single roof form this description is very straight forward. Many
homes however, have multiple roof forms of varying size, shape, and dominance. This reality can
complicate the process of measuring maximum height. To help with this issue many municipalities have
added clarifying language to their ordinances.
Typically the language references the "dominant" or "primary" roof form as the element of the home to be
measured for maximum height. This is done in order to distinguish those elements which significantly
define the mass of the house from those minor roof elements which tend to break up, or minimize, that
mass. This distinction is frequently codified in an explicit height exemption for dormers, cupolas,
ornamental towers, skylights, and clerestories, etc.
This type of clarification to the ordinance recognizes how an extremely literal interpretation might indeed
be contrary the very intent of the ordinance. Such an interpretation creates a hardship for homeowners as
well as result in more massive and boxy structures. Secondary roof elements add interest and variety to a
primary roof form without adding significant mass to the home itself. In fact, they usually reduce the
apparent and perceived size of the home by introducing smaller scale elements.
Attached please fmd several scaled drawings, which help illustrate the points discussed above ank which
we believe, show how the maximum height of the Hipple residence might reasonably be analyzed. We
hope they will illustrate how the Dr. and Mrs. Hippie's home in fact complies with the intent Lake Elmo's
height restrictions.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this matter.
-END OF MEMO-
MACDONALD AND COMPANY rev 5.5.03
1641 Hennepin Avenue Minneapolis, Minnesota 5540 (612) 333-1822 Fax (612) 333-5468
Lake Elmo
City Council
July 20, 2004
Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9C
Agenda Item: Amended Fence Ordinance
Background Information for .Tuly 20. 2004:
On June 28, 2004 the Planning Commission conducted a Hearing to consider amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance to add a new section (to the Zoning Ordinance) regulating fences. Following the Hearing the
subject was tabled due to the late hour. The matter was again addressed by the Commission on July 12,
resulting in a recommendation and referral to the Council. The June 28 Hearing Notice was so structured to
include two separate versions of the draft fence regulations:
1. A version developed by the Planning Commission over several meetings earlier this year, and;
2. A version responsive to the guidance provided by the City Council as to fence standards, following
the Workshop on May 10.
Both versions assume that fence standards now found in Section 1360 of the City Code would be repealed
entirely.
Following discussion of both fence ordinance versions, the Commission adopted Motion (7:1:1 with
Pelletier opposed and Deziel abstaining) to recommend the Planning Commission -drafted version of the
fence standards. A draft of the July 12 Planning Commission Minutes is attached where the basis for this
recommendation (supported by a significant majority of the Commission) is provided.
We have attached both versions of the fence ordinance amendment. The Council -originated version is in
standard City Code ordinance format — including the "repealer" of Section 1360. The Planning
Commission- drafted (and recommended) version remains in the format of the new (draft) zoning
ordinance. After review of the status of this matter with the appropriate Council Committee on July 14, it
was determined best to relay the Commission's recommendation to the Council and ask for direction. We
are advised that, in any case, there may be additional fence -related issues that may need to be addressed by
whatever ordinance is finally adopted by the Council. Therefore, we do not expect ordinance adoption by
the Council on July 21, but rather specific direction to staff as to which ordinance version to pursue, and
what additional regulatory subjects need to be addressed in that version.
Action items:
Motion providing direction to staff regarding which fence
ordinance version to pursue, and what additional regulatory
subjects need to be addressed in that version.
Attachments:
1. Draft Fence Ordnances
2. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of July 12, 2004
Person resi ntislble:
Time Allocated:
AS Vet) nav%clod bi \Os%%hi esri► «M«
nft, toffy MISoo y
C. Fences. Fences or walls , not to exceed 6 feet in height measured from adjacent grade, may be
permitted to enclose rear yards subject to the provisions of this section. In addition, fences or
walls that comply with the specific design standards found below may be permitted in street
front yards and street side yards
1. When fence materials and structure present differing degrees of finish and quality one -
side -to -the -other, the side of the fence presenting the highest degree of finish and quality
shall face all neighboring property and public streets. Fences exceeding three feet in
height shall be of a design that is not less than 75% open to air and light for that portion
of the fence in excess of 3 feet in height, but not in excess of 6 feet, above the adjacent
grade. (Figure 03.210 A and B).
2. Fences along street yards that are also rear yards shall be permitted only if specified in
the landscaping plan and final plat in subdivisions subject to this Code.
3. No fence less than 75% open to air and light shall be allowed in the sight triangle of a
corner lot. The sight triangle is defined as the area of the lot encompassed by a triangle
with 2 legs not less than 30 feet in length, measured from the intersection of the street
right-of-way line in each direction from the intersection; and, a third leg connecting the
two first described legs. (Figure 03.210C)
3. Atrium and Patio parcels are exempt from sub -sections 1.and 2. above since they must
have walls. In atrium houses, the maximum wall height shall not exceed the lowest point
on the roof. Patio houses shall have the wall heights specifically approved as part of the
site plan review in conjunction with architectural drawings if the wall or fence is to
exceed six feet in height. The review should ensure that the yards that can be shaded by
a higher wall will not lack for light and air.
4. Maintenance. Where fences are mandatory, the maintenance requirements of the fence
materials shall be reviewed and the homeowners association shall have the responsibility
of maintaining all the fences and be required to repair all damaged fences. The
developer shall be responsible for creating a fence maintenance fund so that funds will be
available when fence maintenance is needed. This fund should be funded in the first
years of the homeowners association's existence.
5. Chain link fencing, not to exceed 6 feet in height from adjacent grade, is permitted in rear
yards and interior side yards. Chain link fencing may be permitted in street side yards,
and street front yards only by Special Use Permit. (Figure 03.210D)
(Insert Figures 03.210 A,B,C and D)
SECTION 15.240 PATIO AND ATRIUM DWELLING UNITS
The wall enclosing these lots may be eliminated or reduced in height or opacity where the unit
faces open space. The street yard should be varied to avoid monotony. The following rules
govern wall modulation:
A. Where the wall abuts open space within the development, it may be reduced in height,
length, or opacity in accordance with Table 15.240.
,
u •
B. A patio or atrium dwelling unit's street face (where applicable) may be articulated to avoid
monotony. The wall requirement shall be eliminated in favor of some combination of the wall
and one or more of the following techniques shown in Figure 15.240: evergreen hedges,
privet hedges, landscaped berm, ornamental fences (wrought iron and masonry, for
example), or a combination of these types.
0
EDTJQTIO
Vlitsfoisk iisimga
Alin ] ratimmeiliteutabtrem c
#ir],'S.%°Wighve:P:3li,°(ot`a5
fotdra,daal*���i-Il;;iswa„ot raommlremoda.em
'4 8£.tJd ur js'oun�'�i*'d6il7antla� P�i>%�i, , 5��n_ �i • 1 sAo('cr:
itleiwis ianll - •
FIGURE 15.240
TECHNIQUES FOR ARTICULATING PATIO AND
ATRIUM STREET FACE WALLS
Curb Liu,/
Property Line—►
6
Figure 03.210A
SOLID WALL FENCING
STREET SIDE YARD
0
3 ft. Solid & 75% Open above 3 ft. f '•
Solid Wall to
6 ft. Permitted
H
0
U
E
i.
3
_L_
S
T
R
E
E
T
F
R
0
T
A
R
D
Figure 03.210B
SOLID WALL FENCING
REAR YARD TO SIDE YARD NEIGHBORS
STREET FRONT YARD
HOUSE
3
6
Curb Line
Property Line
STREET SIDE YARD
1 3 ft. Solid & 75% Open above 3 ft. i '•\
L—A
Solid Wall to
6 ft. Permitted
r
H
0
E
6
6 3
S
T
R
E
s� T
F
R
0
N
3
Y
A
R
D
v, A` 30'
Po.
0
30'
Figure 03.210C
SIGHT TRIANGLE
Denotes:
Sight Triangle
Street Right -of -Way
Street Right -of -Way
Curb Line
Property Line --Ow I-- • • — • • — • • —
Figure 03.210D
CHAIN LINK FENCING
STREET SIDE YARD
Chain Link Permitted
Chain Link to
6 ft. Permitted
Chain Link Permitted
H
0
U
S
E
Chain Link by Special Exception Only I
R
0
N
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
Y
A
R
D
ORDINANCE NO. 97-
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE REGULATIONOF FENCES IN THE
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
Section 1. Amendment: Section 302 Fence Regulations is hereby added to the Lake
Elmo Municipal Code, to wit:
302 — Regulation of Fences
302.01 Fence Heiaht
Subd. 1 - Fence Heiaht in Street Setbacks
No fence shall exceed 42 inches in height measured from grade within any front
side or rear street setback (See Figure 302.1)
Subd. 2 — Fence Heiaht in Interior Yards
No fence shall exceed 72 inches in height measured from grade in interior yards;
and, any portion of such fence above 42 inches measured from grade shall be
open to light and air over 75% of the surface area. (See Figure 302.1)
Subd. 3 — Grade Defined
The grade from which fence measurements are calculated shall not include the
height of berms or introduced increases in ground elevation that would raise the
effective fence height over that which would be otherwise permitted by this
Section, except that a combination of raised grade and fence that would exceed in
sum the fence height permitted by this section may be specifically approved by
the City Council as an element of a subdivision plat or commercial site plan
approval.
302.02 Fence Materials
Sud. 1 — Permitted Fence Materials
Permitted fence materials shall be limited to brick, stone, wood planks, split rail,
wrought iron, and as regulated by Section 302.04. Vinyl or composite material
fences shall also be permitted other than those white in color.
Subd. 2 — Finished Face of Fence
That side of the fence considered to be the face (finished side as opposed to
structural supports and frame) shall face abutting property and Public Streets.
Subd. 3 — Chain Link or Cyclone Fences
Chain Link, and wire mesh fences are permitted to a maximum height of 72
inches measured from grade; and shall be black or green in color. No chain link,
cyclone or wire mesh fence shall be permitted in any front, side, or rear setback.
(See Figure 302.2)
302.03 — Fences in the Shoreland Overlay District
No fence shall be permitted in the OHW setback of any parcel located in
Shoreland, as defined by Section 150 of the City Code.
302.04 Temporary Fences
Subd. 1— Defined
For the purposes of this ordinance Temporary Fences are those that are installed
and removed on a seasonal basis, such as snow fences and garden fences.
Temporary Fences shall be open to light and air over not less than 50% of the
fence surface area.
Subd. 2 — Duration and Limitation
Permits for Temporary Fences may be issued for periods not to exceed 6 months.
No permit for a temporary fence shall be issued by the City until at least 6 months
following expiration of any prior permit for a temporary fence on the same parcel
of land. No snow fence shall or posts therefore shall be installed prior to
November 1, and must be removed prior to April 15.
Subd. 3 — Heiaht and Location
Temporary Fences shall comply with the fence and fence location standards of
Section 302.01, except that snow fences shall be set back at least 50 feet from any
south or east property line, or such additional distance as may be required to
prevent the accumulation of snow on public streets or adjoining property, as
determined by the Building Official.
302.05 Auricultural Exemption
Fences constructed of parcels in excess of 5 acres for the keeping of horses; and
fences constructed on parcels in excess of 10 acres for the keeping of other
livestock, as defined by Section 150 the City Code, are specifically exempted
from the provisions of this section.
302.06 Fence Permits Required
Except as noted herein, installation of all fences require a fence permit issued by
the City of Lake Elmo. Said permit shall be applied for on such forms, include
such documentation, and include such fees to the City for processing as may be
prescribed from time -to -time by the City Council. Fences exempt from requiring
an installation permit are limited to the following:
1. Fences of any type installed for the sole purpose of the keeping of
Domestic Farm Animals, as defined by Section 150 of the City Code, and
regulated by Section 300.13, Subdivision 15E of the City Code.
2. Fences of any type installed by Municipal, County or State governments
for facility security or the delineation and/or protection of Public Rights -
of -Way.
Failure to obtain a City Fence Permit prior to the installation of any fence subject
to this regulation shall result in an automatic double permit fee, in addition to any
corrective measures to bring said fence into compliance with the standards for
fences prescribed by the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance.
302.07 — Fences as Non-conformine/Hazardous Structures
Fences shall be considered to be structures for the purposes of applying the terms
of the Non -conforming structure provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, and the
Hazardous Structures provisions of City Code and State Statute.
Section 2. Repealer
Section 1360 of the City Code is hereby repealed in its entirety.
Section 3. Effective Date: This ordinance shall become effective upon its passage and
publication according to law.
ADOP 1'ED by the Lake Elmo City Council this day of 2004.
Lee Hunt, Mayor
AI ZEST:
Martin Rafferty, City Administrator
Excerpt Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of July 12, 2004
Zoning Code Amendment — Fences 1
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT: FENCES CONTINUED
The Planner reminded the Commission of their options — they can recommend their own draft
ordinance, the Council's draft, some combination, some modification, or nothing.
Commissioner Deziel said he felt the Commission did a good job on their ordinance. He thought
the Council did not give good guidance. The City Planner did a good job of bringing it forward.
He said the comments of Charles Dennis were excellent and mature, and he thinks that is what
should be sent to the Council because that is what the Council is missing.
Commissioner Sedro said the points raised by the Council were all discussed by the Planning
Commission at length. She would add only the Shoreland Overlay, Section 302.03.
Commissioner Ptacek said that many Commission hours went into the fence ordinance. He said
the Commission's draft allows adequate screening, and the Council's version would ruin the
screening.
M/S/P, Sedro/Ptacek, To recommend the Planning Commission's Draft Fence Ordinance with the
addition of Section 302.03, Shoreland Overlay District from the other ordinance draft.
Commissioner Sessing said the City's exterior storage code does not screen anything (like
trailers) without a solid wall fence or with the berm options we have in our Code. 75% open to
air and light will not screen anything. He said residents will not be able to screen AG equipment
unless we build more buildings. He said the Council never answered the question at the
Workshop: now we allow a higher fence on a larger lot in the buildable lot area. Their ordinance
allows a building but not a fence.
Commissioner Sedro said the Planning Commission reviewed the issues of function and that Lake
Elmo is trying to hold onto vestiges of being rural. She said the Council was addressing
aesthetics, and their draft does not allow people to do what needs to be done in rural and AG
Districts. She said if the Commission has to choose, we should choose functionality.
Commissioner Deziel asked if fences would be allowed within 100 feet of OHW with the
Shoreland Overlay, because there are a lot of fences in there now.
The Planner said in some cases, OHW is 150 feet. Existing fences would continue until they are
damaged but no new ones would be allowed. It is not addressed in our current ordinance.
Commissioner Deziel remembered one lot where the entire house was within 100 feet of OHW.
Those residents would have to demonstrate a hardship to get a variance. His inclination would be
to pull it back to one-half of OHW setback. 50 feet off a lake should be enough.
Commissioner Pelletier said she has changed her mind, and now believes one -size -fits -all does
not work. Six feet fences take away from the sense of community. She wants to preserve rural
character. Large lots should be allowed higher fences.
The Planner said the Council did discuss fences as architectural extensions of homes. A separate
section could be added that addresses screening. Fencing and screening should be addressed
separately according to the City Attorney.
VOTE: 7:1:1 (Nay: Pelletier, Abstain: Deziel).
RECEIVED Cc_
JUN 0 s 2004
CHARLES L. DENNIS II
9385 Lake Jane Trail North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
651-777-2343
June 5, 2004
Open letter to the Lake Elmo City Council
Dear Councilors:
The proposed fence ordinance you will be considering shortly is a bad fit for Lake
Elmo. This ordinance attempts to "solve" a purported aesthetic problem. In fact,
it will create as many aesthetic problems as it solves. Worse, it does so in a
highly intrusive, controlling and expensive manner, which is inconsistent with the
concept of Lake Elmo as a rural -oriented community.
First, the proposed ordinance will be expensive and will not achieve its primary
objective, which is to improve aesthetics. The proposed ordinance would limit
fences to very low heights in many locations, and would require that any part of
the fence over a.few feet tall be essentially see -through. Run over to a building
supply store — you will•find that there are no pre-fab fence components that fit
these requirements; This means that any fence will, have to be custom built,
which is much more expensive than using pre-fab modules..
While professionally installed custom fences are likely to be attractive,
homemade custom-built ones are not. Pre-fab modules are designed to be
reasonably attractive. Homemade custom built fences may or may not be
attractive, depending on the design and construction capabilities of whoever
builds the fence. My experience is that most people are not very good at either
design or construction. So, by passing an ordinance that effectively bans the use
of pre-fab fence modules, you will actually increase the number of aesthetically
bad fences in Lake Elmo.
In addition, one of the common reasons people install fences is to hide ugly
things. I built a shed next to my house last summer, and planned to install a
fence around it this summer to hide the garden implements and materials stored
next to it, both for security and 'aesthetics. Under the new ordinance, that would
be pointless — the fence would not hide the tools. So, again, the ordinance would
decrease aesthetics, not improve them.
Second, the ordinance is highly intrusive,.: Fences are, used for many things:
They may secure an area against intrusion,, they may, secure pets or children
from wandering, they may provide privacy, they may hide things. Aesthetics can
be a plus, but aesthetics are not usually the main reason people install a fence.
The ordinance effectively destroys the ability of a fence to do any of these
functional things in many situations: an intruder can easily climb a 3-4' fence, my
dog can easily jump one, it provides no privacy and does not effectively hide
anything. This is not an ordinance to control fences — it is an ordinance to
prevent fences by ensuring that no fence meeting the requirements of the
ordinance will be worth building.
Finally, this ordinance is entirely inconsistent with the concept of Lake Elmo as a
rural community. Part of the essence of a rural community is allowing more
freedom in what we can and cannot build on our land. We have no other building
ordinances focused on aesthetics — so I can have a house that is just shy of
being condemned, but if I wanted to put up a fence, it would have to be
aesthetically pleasing? That makes no sense. Any fence ordinance in Lake
Elmo should focus on a reasonable set back from the road to ensure driving
safety, perhaps some requirements on fence post depth or spacing to ensure
building safety, and stop there.
This ordinance was designed for Woodbury, not Lake Elmo. I urge you to vote it
down.
Best re. a
4
arles L. Dennis II
C: Martin Rafferty
Lake Elmo Leader
Lake Elmo
City Council
July 20, 2004
Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9D
Agenda Item: Fence Moratorium Exemption Request — 55th Street
Background Information for July 20. 2004:
By a letter of July 6, 2004 four residents of Carriage Station whose homes back to 55th Street North have
requested removal of their properties from the Fence Moratorium to allow construction of fencing along
their combined north property lines (also the south right of way line of 55th Street North). The fence
proposed would mirror that which exists on the property at the southwest corner of Marquess Trail and 55th
Street North — 6 feet in height of a picket design.
The Moratorium provides for amendment to remove specific properties, "...if proposed fences will comply
with anticipated new regulations...". Review of the both of the proposed fence ordinance amendment drafts
finds the fence proposed by these property owners would not comply with either "anticipated" ordinance.
By both ordinance drafts the 55th Street side of these properties is a "rear street yard". Fences in rear street
yards are permitted (up to six feet solid) by the Planning Commission draft, "...only if specified in the
landscaping plan and final plat in subdivisions...". Not the case here, In the City Council version, no fence
may exceed 42 inches in height (regardless of percentage open to air/light) in a rear street yard. The
property owners specify 72 inches.
While we have attached a draft ordinance to remove these properties from the Moratorium, it does not
appear that the terms of the Moratorium would permit the adoption of the removal ordinance based on either
of the "anticipated" ordinance drafts.
Person rejpbnsible:
Action items: c1'-1-13
Motion regarding adoption of an ordinance to remove 4 properties City
along 55th Street North from the Fence Moratorium
Attachments:
1. Draft Ordinance to Remove Properties
2. Location Map
3. Applicant's Letter of July 6, 2004
4. Adopted Fence Moratorium Ordinance
Time Allocated:
July 6, 2004
Dear Lake Ehno City Council:
We have all spoken with Tom McCormick regarding a six-foot tall fence that will line the north end
of our properties, along 55th street and we have authorized Tom to pursue a fence permit for the
project even though we know there is a temporary moratorium on fences.
Our intention is to have a fence built that is identical to Eric Hayes' fence at 12260 Marquess Way N.
The Hayes fence is NOT a solid wall fence, is constructed of cedar posts and 3 inch, dog-eared
vertical boards with a two-inch split between boards. Hayes' property and fence is adjacent to
McCormick's property on the west side of his lot and the fence was built by Midwest Fence, a South
St. Paul company that has been an upstanding member of the Better Business Bureau since 1976. We
have obtained a quote from Midwest and would like to pursue using them to build this fence also.
The east side of the fence would end where the NE corner of Mark Larson's property meets the
Carriage Station Business Park.
Our objective is to obtain some separation and privacy from the traffic on 55`s street, including the
post office annex that resides on the other side of the street. As a secondary objective, we realize our
four lots control the loolc of the development for the traffic that travels down 55`s to enter the
development through the back entrance and we felt it was important for our fences to have a
consistent look.
We ask that the city council reviews our request and the properties, if they wish, during the next two
weeks. At the next city council meeting, we would like tb be an included agenda item, as
consideration for an exception to the moratorium, and to be granted a fence permit. Midwest Fence is
already scheduled out for the next four weeks and our fear is that the new fence ordinance might not
be in place in time for us to have our project completed this summer.
Sincerely,
Eric Hades
12260 Marquess Way N
Tom McCormic
12276 Marquess Way N
Terry Shuman
12288 Marquess Way N
at' filder)
Mark Larson
12300 Marquess Way N
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 97-129
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT MORATORIUM
RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF FENCES
The Lake Elmo City Council hereby ordains that Section 1360.07 and its
subdivisions shall be added to the Lake Elmo Municipal Code to read as follows:
"Section 1360.07
A. Recently the City has become aware that its current fence
regulations have required an unusual amount of interpretation. The City
has undertaken a study to determine whether new fence regulations
should be adopted.
B. The Lake Elmo City Council has requested its Planner and
Planning Commission to review current fence regulations and propose
revisions. New regulations have been drafted and are being reviewed.
C. Pending the completion of the review process, the Lake Elmo City
Council has determined that it would be in the public's interest to impose a
development moratorium on the issuance of new fence permits.
D. In order to achieve the above objective, a development moratorium
is hereby imposed prohibiting the construction of all fences on property
within the City of Lake Elmo, except for those fences required by the State
Building Code for safety purposes.
E. This moratorium shall be in effect for six (6) months from the date
of publication of this Ordinance, unless terminated by prior action of the
Lake Elmo City Council.
F. The Lake Elmo City Council may, by amendment to this Ordinance,
remove specific parcels from the moratorium if proposed fences will
comply with anticipated new regulations, or repeal the moratorium in its
entirety.
ADOPTION DATE: Passed by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 18th day of May,
2004.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This Ordinance shall be effective the day following its publication.
Dated: 5- I8" , 2004
Lee Hunt, Mayor
ATTEST:
Martin J. Rafferty, City Administrator
PUBLICATION DATE: Published on the 2 day of e-- , 2004.
F:tuseraUanice\erry\LE\Fence Ordlnance.doc
Lake Elmo
City Council
July 20, 2004
Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9E
Agenda Item: Limited Business Zoning District — Add Family Entertainment Center
Background Information for July 20. 2004:
The Planning Commission, at its July 12 meeting, conducted a Public Hearing , and adopted a
recommendation to not amend the Limited Business text of the Zoning Ordinance to add the use "Family
Entertainment Centers". The Commission had previously directed staff to schedule the Public Hearing
based on a proposal by a prospective business owner to establish such a use in the Dolan Marine complex
on Hudson Blvd. The ordinance amendment was structured in a manner that accommodate that use in that
location, but would, of course, be applicable (if adopted) in any LB zoned site in the City.
It appeared that the primary concerns of the Commission — leading to the recommendation to not add the
use as proposed — related to the allowable floor area that would result at the site that served as the initiative
(immediate reason) for the proposed amendment (47,000 square feet). The Commission determined that, at
that scale, the proposed use would substantially exceed the intended intensity of uses in the LB district that
are otherwise limited to 20,000 square feet.
We have attached the draft ordinances considered by the Commission should the Council not agree with the
Commission recommendation, and choose to instead amend the Code in this regard in some fashion.
Action items:
Either a Motion to adopt/confirm the Planning Commission
recommendation to not amend to the zoning ordinance to include
"Family Entertainment Center" as an LB use; or, to adopt
Ordinance # 97- and Ordinance #97 — amending the zoning
ordinance to include the new use and definition.
Attachments: i3t13�
1. Draft Ordinances #97- and #97 — Amending the City Code
2. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of July 12, 2004
3. Planning Staff memo
4. Proponents' Letter of July 4, 2004
Person uesnonsible:
et
Time Allocated:
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 97- \ 39
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 150
OF THE LAKE ELMO MUNICIPAL CODE
TO INCLUDE A DEFINITION OF A FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT CENTER
Section 1. Amendment: Section 150 "Definitions" of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code is hereby amended
to include the definition of Family Entertainment Center, to wit:
Family Entertainment Center
Amusement facilities that may include indoor miniature golf, child play areas, arcade games, batting
cages, indoor paint ball, birthday party and family celebration rooms, indoor soccer/field hockey,
children's adventure play gardens and laser tag. Also typically included are a small food and beverage
area and a small retail area. All facilities are non-alcoholic and smoke free.
Section 2. Effective Date: This ordinance shall become effective upon its passage and publication
according to law.
ADOP 1'ED by the Lake Elmo City Council this day of 2004.
Lee Hunt, Mayor
Al 'EST:
Martin Rafferty, City Administrator
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE 97 — I3
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 307.07 SUBDIVISION 4.K.3. AND 4.
RELATING TO CONDITIONAL 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
Family Entertainment Center
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
Medical, Dental and Research Laboratories
Motorcycle Sales
Pre- School Facilities
Beauty Salons
Skiing Equipment
Snowmobile Sales and Service
Sporting Goods
Transmission Facilities for Teleconferencing
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
47.000 Sauare Feet Maximum Floor Area Where Site
Fronts Hudson Blvd: and. 20.000 Sauare Feet
Maximum Floor Area in All Other Locations
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
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
Veterinary Clinics
Vineyard and Winery Produce and Sales
No crematorium, outdoor kennels or storage. 20,000
Square Feet Maximum Floor Area
20,000 Square Feet Maximum Floor Area
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 of July 12, 2004
Public Hearing — Amend LB Conditional Uses 1
PUBLIC HEARING: AMEND CONDITIONAL USES IN LB ZONE
The Planner reminded the Commission of their direction to staff to publish Notice to include Family
Entertainment Centers as a Conditional Use in the Limited Business Zone. He reported that a prospective
purchaser of the Dolan Marine site had provided a definition of "Family Entertainment Center", and how
they would address such a use on the Dolan site. The Planner reported that he had modified the definition
by one clause, and provided a section of the LB District Table to include that use as conditional with a
maximum square foot building area reflective of the Dolan site. He observed that the resulting maximum
building area for this use is larger than all other Limited Business conditional uses.
The proposed definition is not subject to this hearing.
Commissioner Ptacek said the code was just amended for a Conditional Uses for the Limited Business.
He said his cautiousness was the size of the resultant Family Entertainment Center facility and the
intensity of activities of the use for day trips and septic use.
The Planner explained that if and when the Family Entertainment amendment is added to the Code,
questions will be asked by the City at that time about impacts of the CUP request.
THE CHAIRMAN OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:59 P.M.
No testimony was offered.
THE CHAIRMAN CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:00 P.M.
Commissioner Sedro asked at what point the Commission should consider the wording of the proposed
Family Entertainment Center definition.
The Planner said it is okay to consider and talk about the definition at any time since the definition was a
key element under consideration, but the definition was not the subject of the Public Hearing since it
would not be a part of the Zoning Ordinance.
Commissioner Sessing noted that "paint ball" is in the definition, and that activity jumps out as a safety
and welfare issue when compared with otherwise safe activities and uses.
Commissioner Pelletier said paint ball is a concern, and she would be against it.
The Planner said this use would be indoor paintball versus outdoor.
Commissioner Ptacek said this area was intended by the Comprehensive Plan to remain Limited Business.
Through square footage the City is trying to make Limited Business low impact, low volume, and low
activity. He observed that the maximum building area of 50,000 square feet for a Family Entertainment
Center sticks out when compared to all the other uses that are maximized at 20,000 square feet. He also
recalled that 110 parties per week at such a facility was mentioned at the last meeting, and that he
thought that is much too intense for an LB Zone.
M/S/P, Ptacek/Sessing, To recommend denial of an amendment to add Family Entertainment Center to
the Conditional Uses in the Limited Business Zoning District.
The Planner said he considered a geographic limitation — even within the LB Zone. For instance, the PF
section prescribes certain uses on only on collector streets. The Commission could do the same with
something like this — just as he had drafted the ordinance.
Excerpt of Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of July 12, 2004
Public Hearing — Amend LB Conditional Uses 2
Commissioner Ptacek said he still has a problem with the use scale - even if limited to a Hudson
Boulevard location. He stated that he continues to believe that, if the Comprehensive Plan policy is
Limited Business in the Hudson Boulevard corridor, the scale of the proposed Family Entertainment
Center use is too intense.
Commissioner Sessing said he didn't realize the prospective owners of the Family Entertainment Center
were working with a facility of that building area scale.
Commissioner Sedro said she considers properties along Hudson as being different because they are on
the perimeter of the City and on the interstate.
Commissioner Pelletier said she is not in favor of that scale of the 50,000 square foot Family
Entertainment Center. Limited Business should be just that — Limited in scale.
Commissioner Deziel said that a use like a Family Entertainment Center on Hudson Road will not have a
big impact on the rest of the community since the bulk of traffic to it will not be coming through the City.
He stated that he would not see the use as a major problem if it were structured similar to the description
in the proponents' July 4 letter.
Commissioner Johnson suggested a friendly amendment to focus just on Hudson Road only.
Commission Sedro asked if we set a precedent for other LB uses that could include "big box" uses by
allowing as much as 50,000 square feet of building area.
The Planner answered that could be argued by another LB user.
Commissioner Deziel said that "big box" uses are retail versus the amusement use a Family
Entertainment Center would be. The sheer size of the Family Entertainment Center may be as large as a
"big box" by the proposed ordinance , but there is not as much traffic with the amusement use as with an
equivalent size retail use..
The Planner reminded the Commissioners that their responsibility is to recommend to the City Council
their best advice. They can limit the scale to what is closer to what they believe is acceptable. He
reminded the Commission that the 50,000 square foot maximum proposed is only a reflection of the
proponents' prospective location.
Commissioner Johnson asked if a friendly amendment about size would be possible.
Commissioner Ptacek said he would like his motion to remain as stated.
CALL THE QUESTION. VOTE: 6:2:1 (Nay: Johnson/Sedro, Abstain: Deziel).
MEMO
(July 8, 2004 for the Meeting of July 12, 2004)
To: Lake Elmo Planning Commission
From: Chuc
Subject: Amend Limited Business Uses to Include Family Entertainment
On June 14 the Commission was presented with a proposal by a prospective purchaser of
the Dolan Marine property to amend the Zoning Ordinance to include what was described
as an in -door family entertainment center. Staff advised the Commission that such a use
was not anticipated by the Zoning Ordinance as an allowable use in any zoning district.
An amendment to the Ordinance would be necessary if the use was to be considered by
the City at the Dolan (or any other) site.
The Commission adopted direction to Staff to publish Notice of a Public Hearing to
consider amending the Limited Business Zone (LB) to include a family entertainment
center as a Conditional Use. That action was in recognition of the present General
Business (GB) zoning of the Dolan site, but also in recognition that the proper zoning for
that site (for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan) is Limited Business (LB). Should
the zoning text amendment proposed by adopted, the prospective purchasers of the Dolan
site would apply for their Conditional Use Permit and rezoning from GB to LB
concurrently.
As directed, Staff has published a Public Hearing Notice for a Hearing on this matter July
8. The prospective purchaser of the Dolan site has provided a July 4 Memo that suggests
a general definition for Family Entertainment Center, as well as a description as to how
this party would apply that definition to the Dolan site. This second portion of the Memo
is not a matter for Commission discussion or action at this point, however. That
discussions/action should await a Commission/Council decision regarding the Code
amendments and a formal CUP application (if allowable).
The Hearing is to consider amendment to the list of LB Conditional Uses to allow Family
Entertainment Centers. Note that I have set up the building area maximum to
accommodate what could be an application by the prospective purchasers of Dolan —
50,000 square feet. I have also prepared an amendment to Section 150 of the City Code
(Definitions) that provides a definition of Family Entertainment Center that parallels that
provided by the Mr. Larson by his July 4 Memo. While the definition is not technically a
subject of the Public Hearing, it is critical to the issue at hand and must be considered in
concert with the LB use amendment.
The Commission's action will be to adopt a recommendation to the City Council as to
whether or not to amend, the zoning ordinance and Section 150 of the City Code as here
suggested — or in another form.
To: Mr. Chuck Dillerud
City Planner, City of Lake Ehno
and
Mr. Martin Rafferty
City Administrator, City of Lake Elmo
3800 Laveme Ave. North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
From: Doug Larson
Owner, Family Entertainment Center
Subject: Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance Change Request
Chuck & Martin,
July 4, 2004
RECEIVED
JUL 0 6 2004
Per our conversation last week, I am sending you the official description of a proposed business
for the Lake Elmo property, currently doing business as Dolan's Marine. As we discussed, I am
requesting that this new business type be added to the current allowed uses under the Lake Elmo
Municipal Code, Limited Business section. The property would be re -zoned LB (currently GB),
to reflect the overall plan designated for this area.
Per conversations with Lake Elmo city council members, this corridor area has long term plans
for a business park environment. The use I am requesting will fit into those plans. This facility
will give people a place to come in and eat a quick lunch, relax by hitting a few baseballs or even
play a quick round of mini golf or a video game. It will also serve as a great place for parents to
bring their children for an hour or two while they go into the office on evenings or weekends.
Traffic concerns will be nullified by this facility as the peak hours for use would be evenings and
weekends so as not to effect notntal business traffic on Hudson Road as other businesses locate
and develop along the corridor. While the facility would be open for business during the day,
traffic flow into and out of the business would be light.
The new business type is categorized as a Family Entertainment Center (FEC). The official
description is as follows:
"A new generation of amusement facilities that may include indoor miniature golf, child play
areas, arcade games, batting cages, indoor paint ball, birthday party and family celebration
rooms, indoor soccer/field hockey, children's adventure play gardens and laser tag. Also
typically included are a small food and beverage area and a small retail area. These facilities
are non-alcoholic and smoke free Family Entertainment Centers are referred to in the
industry as EEC's."
The exact uses for this particular property would be as follows:
Building 1 - 70' x 475' (main building)
a. Indoor miniature golf (not to exceed 10 holes).
b. Small child play area to include child safe entertaimnent/activities and arcade
games/rides.
c. Small retail area not to exceed 750sf.
d. Snack bar/kitchen. Menu items may be: Hot dogs, hamburgers, chips, ice cream, cotton
candy, pizza, candy items, drinks (non-alcoholic only), misc. snack food items.
e. Birthday party rooms for private birthday celebrations.
f. General arcade area with arcade games to include air hockey, pool tables, video games,
ticket redemption games, etc.
g. Indoor soccer/field hockey arena.
h. Indoor batting cages and pitching tunnel.
Building 2 - 70' x 200' (secondary building)
a. Indoor, controlled paint ball to include league play.
b. Storage garage
c. (2) 25' x 70' rental areas currently occupied by boat repair/maintenance.
Current Fenced Outdoor Space
Continue to use and maintain as outdoor storage for boats and RV's. Current fenced space does
not exceed 50,000sf. This property will be in compliance with the Lake Elmo ordinance
pertaining to maximum area to be covered and will not exceed 25% of lot size.
Chuck and Martin, I strongly believe that this type of business can and will be enjoyed by the
entire commwrity. As you see, these facilities are not a "pool hall/hang-out" setting. They are
designed for family fun. Please let me know if you have any further questions and when this
proposal can be submitted to the City Planning Commission and City Council for approval. I
look forward to working with you and your Lake Elmo staff on this project.
Doug Larson
(H) 651-731-5858 / (C) 612-245-6038
L
1 I
L---,
\ L.
/
■ ■■
11111' i 1111111111
III' it! IIlIiI II II
a
um
•
11111 1116\
1-
111111111
HH
Ii
\
A
\ p /
\ / -
-, -t off, ' 1
(2- EAST ELEVATION
7 jell = ii-mil
fi
1 I JJ
r r
L- y
H •'
mum
w
MEAN HEIGHT
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
HIGHEST POINT ,
OF GRADE
w
d
Lit
LOWEST POINT,�,
OF GRAPE p-
r-•
fl
I 'I
•
0000
T _ H
14•
-
i
i
tiri
.
•
.
'1
_r 4_
SOME
0,01,00
U
IS ■M
00001
Et
T_ rra 1 1_ ,
-Tr--;__-
i \
1`
�\ \
` LJL1
L_1 1
L.
+ SOUTH ELEVATION „ A`
K46 / 7/5II _ I1_0
II
1a171-
II II II
r
ELF Hi _IT �I I1 ; 1 i111lTfS1\
'U-_l .i-r I •1 i i LI i1?+SILr � i.I
�:JJ,_iJ 11
1:
L
J
1I
J
L
r-,
L
7
L__J
7
MEAN HEIGHT
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
HIGHEST POINT
OF GRADE
LOWEST POINT*
W,
OF GRADE
•I
r2Th EAST ELEVATION IS"
FI
1111 I,ii!ll !!il 1111 11111.
MEAN HEIGHT
EETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
HIGHEST POINT
OF GRAPE
d
a
LOWEST POINT,,
OF GRAPE
II
ti i 7FiT-M��n II
Lei }
11-;
_ i
riTh SOUTH ELEVATION Ui«
,Ad van
1 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
7 I
0
W
IIIIIIII 1111
, MEAN HEIGHT
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
in
HIGHEST POINT ,
OF GRADE
atat
LOWEST POINT,s
OF GRADE
k_ — I
-\L
v_
Li
SCISOMIEMEle
-7
/
Cl
/ \
IA
zalL
!bl
1111
I;Ili,lliiill Il lid 1116 IIIEIIY,�
I II111 iIIII�IIIII 'ill, I'll
1
^
\%=�c
-_L
Ji
\ /-'-S 7-1 _
II F
EAST ELEVATION a�l
KA1) 1/s' = 1 -0'
=1-
■I■M
I
a
w
1I11I If!niiIIP 11II1 i1ll11111.I
MEAN HEIGHT efrt
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
HIGHEST POINTS'
OF GRADE
a
w
LOIUEST POINT, ,
OF GRAPE 41'
L
r
rTL .'��77Ilj]`
SOUTH ELEVATION ‘x
1/8" = I'-0"
r, n r,
II I II I
MINIM
sin
l'r���
�rtLr111��r1r.f7LC" -T'
11 ,L ULL1_
li
d
W
d
, MEAN HEIGHT
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
HIGHEST POINT
OP GRADE
LOWEST POINT
OP GRADE
tc
EE
j_I II II I
(2 EAST ELEv4TION
KA-11/S" = 11
fC I
I I
11-1L
Co
MEAN HEIGHT 4
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
HIGHEST POINT L
OF GRAPE
d
w
d
LOWEST POINT S
OF GRAPE
u
i
l �:�1
Ill ,lpnl r' i L, 11
TT
r iIF /1 IUDI -H
gig--E 1- I -J I_��--�1 "- � - 1 - I-. rI 1 - -1 - r!-�1-�--- it
i_ -- -k- r -iJ-1 '- p - .-- L
,
- _�A.
SOUTH ELEVATION
I/a" = 11-0"
2
d
W
d
w
, MEAN HEIGHT
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
HIGHEST POINT
OF GRADE
d
W
d
LOWEST POINT,
OF GRAPE
NIPPLE !RESIDENCE MODEL HOME
I 11 Ii II II II i I II
■A■
Omni' lill if i!1ililili l��� I ti ��
ihniniuuiunn
— I I
TL
EAST ELEVATION
1/8" = 1' - 0"
NIPPLE ES[DNCF
L'
1 =jam
r =.
\/
/ \ / \
• \ / \
• / \ /
\ / \ /
1 11 11 11 11 11 1 II
EAST ELEvATION
1/8"=1'-0"
1111111E 111 I.
f-�`l
I f- _!
I -J
'
r
f—
J
1— IL zl_ -li J
•
a
♦
MEAN HEIGHT
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
HIGHEST POINT,
OF GRADE • HIGHEST POINT
OF GRADE
ji -. MEAN I-IEIGHT
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
w d
w
w
LOWEST POINT cok LOWEST POINT
OF GRADE V OF GRADE
11I
MEAN HEIGHT
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
HIGHEST POINTfI
OF GRADE V ♦ jet HIGHEST POINT — L�
OF GRADE
MEAN HEIGHT
BETWEEN
EAVE 4 RIDGE
a
w
♦
tl I
1-1
EAST ELEVATION
1,-011
TOGESON ESIDENCE
w
0
♦ — I I
LU
I
LOWEST POINT ♦ LOWEST POINT I
OF GRADE OF GRADE C l J
•
III LII'.I ' li
r_l ; 111 yI 1I-i.1,.1.1_
!_a L —
1 ! 1 Ii l l r t r
a
I1
Tr1
t,,1 '
E III
l
I 7 L1 I 1 \ 1 � _� 1' !
I _z� s� / I r T- 1�
! =1 _ ++ r _r:
I I
�L �C IL
i, ii-
TI
\ / 1.1 t 1.7,l
Nil
1
- f1 III — -Lt. 1
11j1
I
.I +111111(I 11,1
11I� L:=1
II I 1 1IIL ]I —LILL.LIC—J--1 L
1 NO%Tk ELEVATION
L
L,1II' 1:
lI �- ilil -t I,
I
I II
L----ICJ
1_
III =IIi
z 11
_ I
11 I I 1 Tit-.
`L_t1 Li., �+, 1 it
II
l 1 I
1=T C:si
I.1
11`1 1 ,t l
_L.C= LJ
, �t1,