HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-16-04 LE CCMPMayor:
Lee Hunt
Councilmembers:
Steve DeLapp
Susan Dunn
Dean Johnston
Wyn John
Please read:
Lake. Elino City Council
Tuesday \.
November 16, 21004
3800 Laverne Avenue No.
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
777-5510 777-9615 (fax)
Since the City Council does not havq 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. City Hall Option
4. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Parks Commission Appointment
B. Holiday Lights -Donation by Lake Elmo
Jaycees
C. Application for Delayed Payment of
Special Assessment
D. Resolution No. 2004-098:Approve claims
5. FINANCE:
A. Fee Schedule Amendment
(WAC):Resolution/Ordinance will be
distributed at meeting
B. Monthly Operating Report -Informational
November 3, 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.
6. NEW BUSINESS:
7. MAINTENANCE/PARK/FIREBUILDING:
A. Update on Fire Dept. Activities: Chief
Malmquist
B. Update on Building Dept. Activities:Jim
McNamara
8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: Tom Prew
A. Feasibility Study — Old Village Water
Expansion Project. Report will be distributed
at meeting
9. PLANNING. LAND USE & ZONING: C. Dillerud
A. Resolution No. 2004-099:Family
Entertainment Center CUP
B. Hearing: Board of Adjustment and
Appeals:Rod and Diane Sessing
10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT:
A.
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
A. Mayor Hunt
B. Council Member DeLapp
C. Council Member Dunn
D. Council Member Johnston
E. Council Member John
Council Workshop:November 20t, 9-11
a.m.: Old Village Systems Study
Lake Elmo City Council Agenda
November 16, 2004
Page 2
CIC Meeting, December 1st, 7 p.m.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
NOVEMBER 3, 2004
1. AGENDA
2. MINUTES: October 19, 2004
3. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL:
A. Public Inquiries
B. Public Informational: Don Theisen, Washington County; Resolution No.
2004-092:Supporting Traffic Signal at Keats/I-94 N. Ramps
C. Resolution No. 2004-093:Canvass Results of General Election
4. CONSENT AGENDA:
A. Resolution No. 2004-094:Approve claims
B. Resolution No. 2004-095:Certify Hill Trail/50th Street Reconstruction
Assessments to Washington County.
Resolution No. 2004-096:Certify 2004 Overlay Street Assessments to
Washington County
5. FINANCE:
A. Resolution No. 2004-097:Brokerage Investment Account Corporate
Resolution
6. NEW BUSINESS:
7. MAINTENANCE/PARK/FIRE/BUILDING:
A. Update on Fire Department Aetivities:Chief Malmquist
8. CITY ENGIEER'S REPORT:
9. PLANNING, LAND USE & ZONING:
A. CDBG Sub -recipient Contract — 2004-2005
B. Fence Ordinance Amendments — Continued Consideration
10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT:
A. Recycling Ordinance
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
13. CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP:
a. Highway 5 Study
b. City Hall — Old Village
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, City Planner Dillerud, Finance Director Tom Bouthilet and Administrator Rafferty.
1. AGENDA
Add: 4B. Modified Exhibit A handed out to Council; PI: Information of temporary
facilities for LE Library; 6A. Method of replacement for council member
M/S/P Dunn/Johnston—to approve the November 3, 2004 City Council agenda, as
amended. (Motion passed 5-0,)
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 2004 1
2. MINUTES: October 19, 2004.
M/S/P John/Dunn — to approve the October 19, 2004 City Council minutes, as amended.
(Motion passed 5-0).
3. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL:
A. PUBLIC INQUIRIES•
B. Public Informational: Don Theisen, Washington County: Resolution No.
2004-092: Sunoorting Traffic Signal at Keats/I-94 N. Ramos
Don Theisen and Wayne Sandberg, Washington County Transportation, answered the
question as to why this project was selected and explained how the costs for respective
signal lights have been shared with Woodbury, Oakdale, Oak Park Heights. The County
was asking for community support of the traffic signal project.
Mayor Hunt acknowledged a letter from Sally I-Iammes, Woodbury, indicating her
support of the traffic light because she travels east on 94 and wishes to go south on 19 to
return to her home in Woodbury. She has witnessed long waits to turn south and many
near accidents.
M/S/P John/DeLapp — to adopt Resolution No. 2004-092 as amended, ADD:
WHEREAS, Lake Elmo recognizes that Lake Elmo residents contribute a minimal
amount of traffic to the CSAH19/I-94 intersection and that most of the traffic is generated
by the residents of the City of Woodbury. WHEREAS, Lake Elmo's support is tempered
by the City Council's belief that there are other intersections within Lake Elmo that
should be given a higher priority.. (Motion passed 5-0).
C. Resolution No. 2004-093: Canvass' Results of General Election
M/S/P DeLapp/Dunn — to adopt Resolution No. 2004-093, A Resolution Canvassing
Returns and Declaring Dean A. Johnston elected as Mayor for a 2-year term and Liz
Johnson and Anne Smith elected as Council members for 4-year terms by a majority of
the registered voters of the City of Lake Elmo. (Motion passed 5-0).
D. Temnorary Library relocation.
Council member John asked that a member of the Council or the City Administrator put
together a budget level of City support and meet with Pat Conley. The Council member
stated the City has to get the library reopen and should inquire to what has happened to
the $200,000 cost participation that hasn't been spent in two years. The City
Administrator said he has had discussions with Pat Conley in reopening the Lake Elmo
library.
M/S/P John/Dunn — to contact the Washington County Library Director establishing
degree of flexibility of funding for reopening a library in Lake Elmo. (Motion carried 5-
0.)
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 2004 2
4. CONSENT AGENDA:
A. Resolution No. 2004-094: Approve Claims
M/S/P Mum/John - to approve Resolution No. 2004-094 approving claim numbers 224,
225, DD265 through DD273, 26356 through 26368 that were used for staff payroll dated
October 28, 2004, claim numbers 26369 through 26414 in the total amount of
$85,160.38. (Motion passed 5-0).
B. Resolution No. 2004-095: Certify Hill Trail/50th Street Reconstruction
Assessments to Washineton County
Resolution No. 2004-096:Certifv 2004 Overlay Street Assessments to
Washineton County
The Council received two draft Resolutions certifying the assessment roll for the Hill
Trail/50th Street Reconstruction and the 2004 Street Overlay Project. Such assessments
shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten years and
shall bear a rate of 5.75 percent interest for Hill TraiU50th-Street and five years for the
2004 Overlay project and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.25 percent per annum from
the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution.
M/S/P Dunn/John to adopt Resolution No. 2004-095 for the assessment certification of
the Hill Trail/50th Street Reconstruction, as modified in Exhibit A. (Motion passed 5-0).
M/S/P Dunn/John — to adopt Resolution No. 2004-096 for the assessment certification of
the 2004 Street Overlay Project, as sated in Exhibit A. (Motion passed 5-0).
5. FINANCE:
A. Resolution No. 2004-097: Brokerage Investment Account Corporate
Resolution
The Finance Director provided a draft resolution which authorizes the City to open an
investment account with Pershing LLC through Northland Securities, Inc. He said the
City would like to consider the option of utilizing Pershing LLC/Northland Securities
Inc. for the purpose of investing the Bond proceeds. This resolution only authorizes the
use of the investment company and should be noted the City has not made a final
determination on the financial investment company that will be utilized.
M/S/P Dunn/John — to approve Corporate Resolution No. 2004-097 authorizing an
investment account with Pershing LLC. (Motion passed 5-0.)
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Replacement of Council Seat.
Council member DeLapp asked for discussion on replacing the vacated Council seat left
by Dean Johnston win of the Mayor seat for 2005 and suggested the City hold a special
election versus appointment
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 2004 3
Council member John said that previously there has been no problem with the
appointment process and that he has not approached anyone for the appointment. Council
member Johnston said he has not picked anyone. Council member DeLapp said then the
rumor of a promised appointment is not correct. Mayor Hunt said the appointment
process is an open and honest process. Any action of a council member without open
Council discussion is against the open meeting law.
M/S/F DeLapp/Dunn — to require a special election for the vacated Council member
position to serve a two year term or more. (Motion failed:2-3:John, Johnston,
DeLapp:Based on Council members assurance that no one has been promised the
appointment to the City Council.)
7. MAINTENANCE/PARK/FIREBUILDING:
A. Update on Fire Department Activities: Fire Chief Malmquist - NOT IN
ATTENDANCE
8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT:
9. PLANNING. LAND USE & ZONING:
A. CDBG Sub -recipient Contract — 2004/2005
The City Planner reported the City has received the draft contract covering the $48,200
CDBG grant to the City for CDBG fiscal year 2004/2005. These grant funds will be
utilized to provide City grants to income qualified Cimarron Neighborhood residents for
total replacement of natural gas services from the meter in. The 2004 Gas Service
Inspection Project detected numerous cases both deteriorating and improperly installed
gas service piping/valving from the sample of units inspected (the oldest 40% pf the 505
units at Cimarron). Based on those inspection,outcomes, the Community Improvement
Commission has recommended redirection of the program from continued inspections of
the remaining (newer) units to immediate correction of the issues detected in the units
already inspected. ..-
M/S/P DeLapp/John — to approve the 2004/2005 CDBG sub -recipient contact with
Washington County, as amended by staff, and to authorize the Mayor and City
Administrator to execute the same. (Motion passed 5-0.)
B. Fence Ordinance Amendments — Continued Consideration
The City Planner explained that he researched questions raised by the Council regarding
the practicality and resulting cost to homeowners of the City's existing fence standards.
He provided availability and costs of fencing that would meet the present City standards
from two perspectives: pre -built fence panels that can be purchased from Menards, Ha
Depot or any lumber yard; and, custom built fencing available from several firms that
specialize in that product/service.
Council member Johnston asked what percentage of recent fence applications wer
custom fences versus standard fences. Dillerud answered that all recent fence
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 2004
applications were custom, but that might be the reflection of our ordinance. Johnston said
he strongly objects to fences sold over 42", noting that fences cut up lots and children
tend to run around fences into streets and cause safety concerns.. He said he also strongly
objects to fences solid over 42". He suggested that the screening provisions of the current
ordinance might be an avenue by which the higher fences using structure setbacks for
location.. He suggested asked the Planning Commission to look for definitions for fences
and screening.
Council member DeLapp said neighborhoods chopped up by fence like California is not
what Lake Elmo is all about.
Nancy Bielenberg read a statement explaining fence companies can build a fence to code
and prefab fences do not come in measurements to our code. She said she encourages
low fences and erecting trees and shrubbery as an alternative to high fencing. She
pointed out there is no fencing at all in Fields of St Croix.
Anne Smith passed out pictures of fences that she observed have chopped up her
neighborhood in Carriage Station and information on fences from Arrow Bldg Center and
Menards. Anne suggested leave the code "as is" and go with the variance process.
Council Member Johnston suggested that the City might wish to modify the screening
section of the Code to place a restriction on the lineal feet of solid 72" fence that would
be allowed when the fence is located at the property setback lines. Then the requirement
that screening fence be only permitted where the Code mandates screening of some item
could be broadened to allow 72" fence for non -screening applications.
Administrator Rafferty advised the Council that at this point City Staff had provided
Council with insight regarding the practical issues involving our present fence ordinance,
and has suggested potential solutions. He noted that whatever modifications the Council
desires to see — if differing from that provided in the present draft — would be required to
return to the Planning Commission for Hearing. He suggested that the remaining issue
regarding the percentage of opening to be required above 42" (50% or 57%) be referred
to the appropriate Council Committee for further discussion and recommendation.
M/S Delapp/John - to keep the ordinance above 42" or 48" and no more than 50% closed,
(top 30") 50% open be kept the same, and invite the Planning Commission to come to us
with any additional problems
Ben Roth said that it appears from the draft before the Council that the City would allow
a 6' high, 50% closed picket fence.
Council member John withdrew his second to the motion.
The amendments to the fence ordinance will be placed on the November 9 Legislative
Council Committee agenda.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 2004 5
10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
Attorney Filla reported he did get a phone call from the attorney representing Steve and
Joan Ziertman stated they do not want to be on the November 9th Council Committee
agenda. Filla will send a copy of the letter to the city.
11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT:
A. Recycling Ordinance
The City Administrator reported that the Environmental Commission at its meeting on
October 27th voted to recommend to the City that Ordinance 97-128 amending section
800.02 of the City Code authorizing license haulers to modify their pick-up schedule for
recycling only, from weekly to bi-weekly if single sort collection was provided be
implemented..
M/S/P DunnlDeLapp - to accept the Environmental Commission's recommendation to
implement Ordinance 97-128. (Motion passed 5-0.)
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
Council Member Dunn will submit an application for the Met Council Parks and Open
Space vacancy. She noted how very effective the rumble strips have been to deter passing
on Highway 5 and asked as the resurfacing continues on Hwy 5 that MnDOT incorporate
the rumble strips.
Council member John commended staff and election judges on the smooth running of the
November 2 General Election.
Council Member DeLapp pointed out how much better the lighting is at the City
maintenance shop since the lighting has been brought into compliance with the City code.
13. Adjourn Council Meeting at 9:00 pm.
The City Council held a Workshop to discuss the following items:
1. Highway 5 Study €
2. City Hall — Old Village
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 2004 6
MINUTES APPROVED: NOVEMBER 3, 2004
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 19, 2004
1. AGENDA
2. MINUTES: October 5, 2004
3. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL:
A. Cable Commission: Jennie Holder
4. CONSENT AGENDA:
A. Resolution No. 2004-089: Approve Claims
5. FINANCE:
A. Resolution No. 2004-090:Bond Sales
B. Monthly Operating Report -Informational
C. City Audit
6. NEW BUSINESS
7. MAINTENANCE/PARK/FIRE/BUILDING:
8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT:
9. PLANNING, LAND USE & ZONING:
A. Leave of Absence Request: Planning Commission Member
B. Resolution No. 2004-091:Lot Area Variances/Minor Subdivision —
Tauer/Pechan
C. Fence Ordinance Amendments
D. Traffic Signal — Keats/I-94 N. Ramps
10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT:
A. Holiday Lights
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
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 Planner
Dillerud, City Attorney Filla, Finance Director Tom Bouthilet, Building Official Jim
McNamara and Administrator Rafferty.
1. AGENDA
M/S/P Dunn/Johnston - to approve the October 19, 2004 City Council agenda, as
amended. (Motion passed 5-0).
2. MINUTES: October 5, 2004
M/S/P Johnston/Dunn - to approve the October 5, 2004 City Council minutes, as
amended. (Motion passed 4-1Abstain John).
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 19, 2004 1
6. NEW BUSINESS:
7. MAINTENANCE/PARK/FIRE/BUILDING:
A. Update on Building Department Activities: Building Official
The Building Official reported there were two new residential building permits and two
new commercial building permits issued in September, 2004. He alerted the residents to
have their chimneys serviced by a licensed chimney sweep and to not burn logs in a gas
fireplace. Carbon monoxide detectors should be placed in the lowest level of the house
and to check batteries of your smoke detector.
8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT:
9. PLANNING. LAND USE & ZONING:
A. Leave of Absence Reauest — Planning Commission Member
Planning Commission Member Jennifer Pelletier has requested a Leave of Absence from
her Commission duties until the end of January, 2005 for medical reasons. The Council
has previously approved requested Leaves of Absence of similar duration. The City
Planner noted that making a quorum should not be a problem with a full complement of
commissioners now in place.
M/S/P DeLapp/Dunn - to approve the Leave of Absence requested by Jennifer Pelletier
for medical reasons from the Planning Commission until the end of January 2005.
(Motion passed 5-0).
B. Lot Area Variances/Minor Subdivision — Tauer/Pechan:Resolution No.
2004-091
Donald Tauer of the Animal Inn and Walter Pechan has made application to the City for a
variance to lot size for a minor subdivision to rearrange metes and bounds property lines
with the Animal Inn complex to combine two existing tax parcels into one; and, then
detach .63 acres of the combined (new) parcel and add that detached portion to a third
adjoining parcel (Pechan). Mr. Tauer advised that he has been allowing Mr. Pechan to
use the .63 acres for truck turning, but now intends to sell his Animal Inn real estate and
has reached an agreement for Pechan to purchase the land that has been used over the
years.
The City Planner reported the zoning variances relate only to the fact that all three parcels
involved in the Minor Subdivision action are non -conforming as to parcel area; and the
resulting two parcels will be as well. At its October 13, 2004 meeting, the Planning
Commission unanimously adopted a recommendation to grant a variance to lot area and a
minor subdivision to Donald Tauer.
M/S/P DeLapp/Dunn — to adopt Resolution No. 2004-091 approving a Minor Subdivision
and lot area variance for Donald Tauer and Walter Pechan based on the recommendation
of the Planning Commission. (Motion passed 5-0).
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 19, 2004 3
11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT:
A. Holiday Lights
The City Administrator reported the City has the responsibility to maintain, store and
install holiday lights in the Old Village area. Several years ago the Jaycees purchased
new lights and donated the lights to the City. The Public Works Department has had the
responsibility to maintain and store the lights and the Fire Department has installed the
lights. At today's standards related to safety practices suggest the need for the
appropriate equipment and experienced personnel to utilize that equipment. The
Administrator indicated the Public Works and Fire Department do not have the
appropriate equipment to install the holiday lighting. Staff identified Noble Seasonal
Lighting, Inc. as a company that specializes in this service and has provided the city with
a proposal to install, remove and store the city's seasonal lighting for a price of $2,500
for the existing inventory of holiday lights.
M/S/P DeLapp/John — to authorize the Administrator to contract with Noble Seasonal
Lighting, Inc. to install, remove and store the city's seasonal lighting for a price of $2,500
for the existing inventory of holiday lights. (Motion passed 5-0.)
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
Mayor Hunt reported on the sessions he attended at the MN League Conference in
Duluth. He gave an update on the Saturday, Old Village Master Concept Plan workshop
where staff, Planning Commission members, public, potential developers attended to
listen to a master developer and discuss if there should be a master developer or a master
plan or a combination of both. There will be a series of several workshops to work on
component parts of the plan. He said with all work done we are within 6 to 9 months to
put together a plan so people can react.
Council member Dunn noted that the VBWD hopes to adopt a new management plan for
2005-2015 and will be discussing this plan at its October meetings.
Council member Johnston endorsed attendance at the League Conference. He talked to
suppliers of wetland treatment vendors, talked to planning firms. He encourages
everyone to exercise their right to vote.
Adjourn the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by Sharon Lumby, City Clerk
Resolution No. 2004-089 Claims
Resolution No. 2004-090 Bond Sales
Resolution No. 2004-091 Tauer/Pechan Lot Area Variance/Minor Subdivision
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 19, 2004 6
Lake Elmo
City Council
November 16,
2004
Agenda Section: Public Inquires/Informational No. 3A
Agenda Item: City Hall Options
Background Information for November 16. 2004:
The Council has previously considered a proposal to locate a new City Hall/Public Works and (potentially)
Fire Station on the site of the present Lions Park. The proposal included a relocation of the Lions Ball Field
to an alternative site in the Old Village. Neighboring residents were invited to comment on that proposal at
a Workshop meeting of the City Council several week's ago, Those attending the Workshop expressed
concerns and objections to the proposal. Those concerns/objections appeared to focus as follows:
1. Concerns/objections to the introduction of truck/equipment traffic related to the Public Works (and
possibly Fire) facility.
2. Concern and objection to the loss of the ball field and park facilities at the present Lions Park
location.
In response to those concerns/objectives staff has been working toward an alternative City facilities location
strategy. This proposal would again place City Hall on the Lions Park site, but also retain the present park
facilities (including a ball field). The ball field would be re -oriented from the present southwest/northeast
axis to a new axis of northwest/south east, but other wise be reconstructed in an identical configuration as it
is today. The tennis court and volleyball courts would remain in their present locations under this revision.
Under this proposal the Public Works facility would likely be located in the open field area of Sunfish Park;
and, the fire station location would be deferred until the on -going fire facilities/organizational study is
completed late in 2004.
Three very basic concept sketches of this revised plan at Lions Park were prepared by staff and introduced
at a recent Council Workshop. The Council directed invitation to the Lions Park neighbors to review and
comment on an enhanced version of one of those concepts at the November 16 Council meeting. The City's
architect has been asked to prepare an enlarged and expanded graphic of the "courtyard" concept of the
"only City Hall" and rearranged Lions Park proposal, which will be available for viewing and commentary
at the November 16 Council meeting.
Action items:
Attachments:
1.
Perso s�on�ible:
City
Time Allocated:
Mayor
Lee Hunt
Councilmembers
Steve DeLapp
Susan Dunn
Dean Johnston
Wyn John
No. 4A
Agenda Section: Consent Agenda
Agenda Item: Parks Commission Appointment
Date: November 16, 2004
Background Information for November 16. 2004.
The Parks Commission has been without a full complement of Commissioners for two years.
Mr. Rolf Larson has applied for an appointment to the Parks Commission; his application is attached.
Motion . Second , to appoint Rolf Larson as 2"d Alternate Member of
the Parks Commission.
11/07/2004
Rolf Larson
11720 Little Bluestem Court
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
Phone:w) 651.556.6629 / h) 651.777.9184
City of Lake Elmo
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042
RE: Application for Lake Elmo Parks Commission Appointment
Please accept this application for the City of Lake Elmo Parks Commission. I look
forward to hearing from you.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
City of Lake Elmo
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042
651.777.5510 Fax 777.9615
APPLICATION FOR PARKS COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
Date: 11/07/2004
Name: Rolf Larson
Address: 11720 Little Bluestem Court
Phone: w) 651.556.6629 / h) 651.777.9184
1. What do you consider to be the major park planning development and policy issues
confronting the City of Lake Ehno? What is your position on these matters?
Major issues. I) Accelerated growth of suburban development and 2) pressure from the
Met Council to develop along models that have not been embraced by Lake Elmo in the
past.
Position. Win or lose with the Metropolitan Council, Lake Elmo is going to develop at a
more rapid pace. We need to be thoughtful and creative in dealing with these challenges,
taking advantage of opportunities, working creatively with existing resources and finances,
finding ways of increasing recreation opportunities in a responsible manner, and always
seeking out additional sources of funding and expertise outside the community.
On a broader level, one of the goals of the Park Commission should be that parks and
facilities are available in sufficient quantity as to not negatively affect the value of residential
property in the future.
2. What do you see as the role and function of the Parks Commission? How does this
relate to the role and responsibility of the City Council in Park matters?
Function. Plan for existing park space (budget, maintenance and programs) and to
responsibly plan for future development of the parks system as the city expands. If we
settle on just maintaining what we have, we will find our city to be short of open space and
facilities down the road. That will affect the quality of life impacting everything from crime
levels to property values. If we have adequate (well conceived and managed) spaces for
children to play and develop, it will go a long way to maintaining a positive community
reputation.
City Council. The Parks Commission's role is to offer expertise and leadership to the
City Council to help them in their decision -malting role. The role of the City Council is to
work with the recommendations to create law and budgets.
3. What experience and qualifications do you have which you feel will contribute to the
Parks Commission work, and which will enable you to provide a service in this regard?
a) Earned a Masters of Education/Recreation-Outdoor Education from the University of
Minnesota.
b) Worked with both the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Trails and
Waterways & Parks) and the National Park Service (Seasonal Ranger in resource
management), so I have an understanding of the relation between government and
managed resources.
c) Past member of the Board of Directors of a recreation user group and current member
of the board of directors of a resource -based foundation.
4. How much time do you have or are willing to devote to Park Commission Activities?
If I am offered and accept this appointment, I will expect to spend as much time as needed
to effectively serve the community. That time needs to be reasonable and flexible since l
have a full time job, a family and already serve on the board of a non-profit organization.
2
Lake Elmo Agenda Section: NEW BUSINESS No 4B,
City Council
November 16,
2004
Agenda Item: Holiday Lights — Donation by Lake Elmo Jaycees
Background Information for November 16. 2004:
The Lake Elmo Jaycees have donated $1,900 to purchase additional holiday lights. The holiday lights are
three stands of lights with garland and red ribbon. The lights will be located on Lake Elmo Avenue at the
three locations: Hwy 5 and CSAH17 (power pole to power pole); Bush Bldg. (power pole to bldg); and Old
Library Bldg. (power pole to bldg).
Action Items:
Motion Second - to accept the donation from the Lake
Elmo Jaycees in the amount of $1,900 to purchase additonal
holiday lights
Attachments:
Person responsible:
M.Bouthilet
Lake Elmo Agenda Section: CONSENT No . 4C
City Council
11-16-2004
Agenda Item: Application for Delayed Payment of Special Assessment
Backeround Information for November 16. 2004:
Attached, Please find an application and authorization for delayed payment of tax on special assessment and
a copy of the City Policy pertaining to hardship deferrals for special assessment. The resident is applying for
deferral of the Hill Trail/501 Street reconstruction special assessment based on the age provision as outlined in
the policy.
Action Items:
1) Motion to approve the application and
Authorization for delayed payment of
tax on Special Assessment.
Attachments: 1) Application and authorization for delayed
Payment of tax on Special Assessments.
2) Section VI. Hardship Deferrals for Special
Assessments of the Public Improvement and
Assessment Policy.
Person resnonsible:
Tom Bouthilet
APPLICATION AND AUTHORIZATION FOR DELAYED PAYMENT OF TAX
ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS (M.S. 435.193)
M� / )
County of WAS /',/ j Date SEPT 1'�ry
T 1 20 b 9
To: Air'fi gic ar y Administrator, City of LWashington County,
I
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minnesota.
I, the undersigned, declare under penaltiesal7eof perjury:
That I reside at i 61 0 FI t 1' / ra
ovaK That I azn kza than 65 years of age and that the date of my birth is A 4
//n0,,
16. (1 z9
That I am the owner of the property legally described as: Qt l 60 tj t ( ( / 4 4 / At
That my interest in the ownership of the above property was acquired
And is as follows: . /
1. Sole ownership (Enter yes, if applicable) y E5
2. Joint tenancy, held with
3. Other undivided interest (Specify)
That on January 2, 20 6(1 or June 1, 20 try I owned and occupied the above property as my homestead
and such occupancy began an s
IgSS NM/DIVVY)
That the taxes for improvements on the special assessments duly adopted in ordinance by the
Of the City of
as of 20
Which have bean allocated against the subject property would create undue personal hardship on my behalf
and I respectfully request that payment be delayed and that such taxes be so deferred for the years 20 05 to
20
SignedX
Signed
I, Snwno.s G.v@.(v Clerk of the City of LA.rf Etas-'
i
In (ylasn.gGtart County, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that the application of
�• t tn...c 4#n..1al.tabove named, has been duly reviewed and that in accordance with the minutes
of the official record in said chambers was duly APPROVED DENIED as of 20 .
That in accordance with approval granted, that the local assessments on the affiants subject property levied
For annual collection in the amount of $ for the year (s) thru
Should be deferred with interest at the annual rate of %, until such time as it is deemed the
Applicant no longer qualifies or the property loses its eligibility.
Dated IF Sr— 20 O '(
Owner
(Clerk or Authorized Deputy)
City of Lake Elmo
Public Improvement and Assessment Policy
Page 6
VI. HARDSHIP DEFERRALS FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
The City Council will consider a deferment for the payment of special assessments on any
homestead property, owned by a person 65 years of age or older or retired by virtue of permanent
and total disability for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments.
A hardship shall be deemed to exist when the annual principle installment of all assessments
levied against the property exceeds two percent (2%) of the adjusted gross income of the
applicant as evidenced by the applicant's most recent federal income tax return, and total assets
(excluding the homestead property) do not exceed six times the adjusted gross income.
The City Council may also determine, on a case by case basis, the existence of a hardship on the
basis of exceptional and unusual circumstances not covered by these standards and guidelines, if
done in a non-discriminatory manner and without giving the applicant an unreasonable
preference or advantage over other property owners.
All assessments will continue to bear interest on the unpaid principle balance at the rate
established on the original special assessment.
The deferment shall terminate and all principle and interest becomes due and payable upon the
occurrence of any of the following events:
1. The death of the owner when there is no spouse whom is eligible for deferment.
2. The sale, transfer or subdivision of the property or any part thereof.
3. The property should lose its homestead status.
4. The City Council should determine that the hardship no longer exists. A review of
the hardship will be conducted every three to five years.
6
Adopted by the City Council on 5-21-96
qD,
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-098
RESOLUTION APPROVING CLAIMS
BE IT RESOLVED THAT Claim Numbers 226, 227, DD274 through DD284,
26415 through 26441, were used for Staff payroll dated November 10, 2004 , Claim
26442 through 26495 in the total amount of $120,880.65 are hereby approved.
ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 16th day of November, 2004.
Lee Hunt
Mayor
ATTEST:
Martin J. Rafferty
City Administrator
MONTH
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
11135
Administration
$1,320.75
$1,353.00
$2,721.92
$2, 346.98
$2,029.36
$2,388.61
$1,600.00
$4,501.98
$4,218.80
$2,153.83
11140
Criminal Pros
$2,548.83
$2,845.88
$4,762.74
$3,964.04
$3,528.77
$5,051.95
$3,447.04
$3,633,89
$3,480.88
$3,488.66
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
2002 BILLING SUMMARY
11145
Public Imp. Prol
$66.00
$88.00
$33.66
$66.00
$77.00
$99.00
11150
Community Dev
$330.21
$187.00
$286.00
11155
Civil Litigation
$2,196.75
$125.28
$692.76
$654.43
$111.61
$341.00
$720.00
$253.43
$473.00 $702.43
$564.00 $410.11
11161
Auto Forfeiture
$109.00
$99.00
$92.50
$59.00
Totals $24,635.23 $36,752.68 $429.66 $3,266.25 $4,781.76 $359.50
TOTAL
$6,462.54
$4,511.16
$8,463.42
$7,162.45
$5,802.40
$7,940.06
$5,826.04
$8,466.30
$8,974.11
$6,616.60
$0,00
$0.00
$70,225.08
1 11/10/2004
Suite 100
50 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-I197
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo MN 55042
P3ERSON.
FRAM&BERGMAN
tlt�tai®AMaL; b �EHV,�`IteYaM�YdlEtNi!�
FEES EXPENSES
11135-030008 SIMICH FENCE
33.00 0.00
11135-040002 2004 RECODIFICATION
792.00 0.00
1115-040009 PURCHASE OF SIEDOW PROPERTY
44.00 1.07
11135-040010 VACATION OF 55TH STREET
44.00 0.00
11135-920001 Administration
1,220.50 5,46
2,133.50 6.53
ACCOUNT NO:
16511291-8955
(6511 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41-0991098
Page: 1
10/31/2004
11135M
ADVANCES BALANCE
0.00 $33.00
0.00 $792.00
13.80 $58.87
0.00 $44.00
0.00 $1,225.96
13.80 $2,153.83
THIS STATEMENT IS DBE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OP 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
PETERSON
FRAMO-BERGMAN
011:411two11.'F-7Ra t.f
11140-030001 Misc Prosecutions
ACCOUNT NO:
(6511 291-8955
1651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID 841-0991098
Page: 1
10/31/2004
11140M
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE
2,520.00 37.02 0.00 $2,557.02
11140-030004 Haider, Heather Lynn
Gross Mis-false info to police,
no MN DL, no license plate light
52.50
11140-030087 Leggett, Mark
• driving after suspension, no
proof of insurance
0.00
22.50 0.00
11140-030204 Rebenold, Kathy Lee
GM -test refusal, 4th degree DUI
15.00
11140-030219 Zafft, Marsha Ann
criminal damage to property
0.00
11140-040035 Van Kampen, Christopher John
3rd degree DUI
0.00
0.00
10.00 0.00
11140-040104 Rodriguez, Ramon James
Violation of Protection Order
5.00
11140-040137 Rodriguez, Ramon J.
Violate OFP
0.00
5.00 0.00
0.00 $52.50
0.00 $22.50
0.00 $15.00
366.84 $366.84
71.60 $81.60
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $5.00
THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYADLE TO THE END OP THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OP THE MONTH WILL RE 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
PE I ERSON.
FRAMCIBERGMAN
la relit at issoljeW.10000:Inster ma 10 Kw
11140-040138 Rodriguez, Ramon J.
Violate OFP
11140-040151 Norring, Thomas Lida
Violate OFP
11140-040169 Kurimay, Nicholas
DAR
11140-040184 Thole, Wayne
theft
11140-040198 Carroll, John Patrick
under 21 not a drop
11140-040205 Berrisford, James Robert
domestic assault
11140-040208 Slater, Torry Deron
doc
11140-040211 Yang, Dow
domestic assault
11140-040218 Feely, Eric Patrick
DAS
ACCOUNT NO:
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES
5.00 0.00 0.00
5.00
5.00
10.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
22.50
11140-040233 Cheatham, David Ezra
domestic assault, assault, doc
35.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
41.60
0.00
101.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16511 291-8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID 1141-0991098
Page: 2
10/31/2004
11140M
BALANCE
$5.00
$46.60
$5.00
$111.60
$5.00
$5.00
$5.00
$5,00
$22.50
0.00 $35.00
THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAV OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT.
PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT.
Suite 300
50 East Fltth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-1197
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
PETERSON.
FRAMCIBERGMAN
®Hd M'xW
ACCOUNT NO:
1651) 291-8955
1651) 228-1753 Facsimile
Federal Tax ID it4 I-0991098
Page: 3
10/31/2004
11140M
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE
11140-040234 Bartone, Justin Michael
no insurance, FDCP, fail to
transfer title
11140-040235 Anderson, Diana Lynn
DAR
11140-040236 Wilson, Jarrid Michael
2nd degree DUI
10.00 0.00
5.00 0.00
62.50 0.00
11140-040237 Ballentine, Jonathan Glen
no DL in possession, possess
drug para, mj in my
11140-040238 Galatovich, Ryan Jacob
no insurance
11140-040239 Cassidy, Alan Gray
2nd degree DUI
10.00 0.00
5.00 0.00
10.00 0.00
11140-040240 Rangel, Meraclio Rivera
DAR, no insurance, no seatbelt
10.00
11140-040241 Aldridge, Johnny Ray, Jr.
DAR
11140-040242 Lamfromboise, Vanesa J.
DAS
0.00
5.00 0.00
10.00 0.00
0.00 $10.00
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $62.50
0.00 $10.00
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $10.00
0.00 $10.00
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $10.00
THIS STATEMENT IS DUE AND PAYAULE TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST ➢AY OF THE MONTH WILL UE 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
PtiT ERSQN,_-___
FRAM IBERGMAN
ACCOUNT NO:
(6511 291-8955
1651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41-0991098
Page: 4
10/31/2004
11140M
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE
11140-040245 Ross, Andrew James
no medical card, no my registration
no proof of insurance
11140-040248 Xiong, Jimmy
domestic assault
5.00 0.00
5.00 0.00
2,870.00 37.02
0.00 $5.00
0.00 $5.00
581.64 $3,488.66
THIS STATEMENT 1S DUE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAY OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT.
PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT.
Sulte 300
50 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-1197
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH
LAKE ELMO MN 55042
11150-040007
11150-040013
PFTERSON,
FRAMCIBERGMAN
FEES
TAPESTRY O.P. DEVELOPMENT
462.00
SMITH/HOLM AMATEUR RADIO TOWER
99.00
561.00
EXPENSES
0.00
3.00
3.00
ACCOUNT NO:
ADVANCES
0.00
0.00
0,00
(6511 291-8955
(6511 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #4 1-0991098
Page: 1
10/31/2004
11150M
BALANCE
$462.00
$102.00
$564.00
THIS STATEMENT IS DDE AND PAYABLE TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THE LAST DAV OF THE MONTH WILL BE CREDITED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S STATEMENT.
PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH PAYMENT.
Suite 300
50 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-1 197
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH
LAKE ELMO MN 55042
PFTERSON
FRAMBERGVIAN
ACCOUNT N0:
(651) 291-8955
(651) 228-1753 facsimile
Federal Tax ID #41.0991098
Page: 1
10/31/2004
11155M
FEES EXPENSES ADVANCES BALANCE
11155-030004 LAKE ELMO VS. HILYAR
67.50 0.00 0.00 $67.50
11155-040002 ZIERTMAN/SESSING PROPERTY
341.00 1.61 0.00 $342.61
408.50 1.61
0.00 $410.11
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 WITII PAYMENT.
Accounts Payable
To Be Paid Proof List
User: administrator
Printed: 11/12/2004 - 12:14 PM
Batch: 003-11-2004
Invoice # Inv Date
PFIN'13
so r ARE
Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference
ACEHARD Ace Hardware
02118185 11/01/2004 15.20 0.00 11/16/2004 Foam, Adhesive
101-430-3100-42230 Building Repair Supplies
02118185 Total: 15.20
02118445 11/02/2004 11.47 0.00 11/16/2004 Starting Fluid, Drill bits
101-430-3100-42150 Shop Materials
02118445 Total: 11.47
ACEHARD Total: 26.67
Task Type PO # Close POLine #
No 0000
No 0000
AIRGAS Airgas North Central
105056581 10/31/2004 19.60 0.00 11/16/2004 1 year maint - Air tanks No 0000
101-430-3100 44040 Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
105056581 Total: 19.60
AIRGAS Total: 19.60
ARAM Aramark
629-5586164 11/09/2004 46.68 0.00 11/16/2004 Linen - City Hall - No 0000
101-410-1940-44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg
629-5586164 Total: 46.68
ARAM Total: 46.68
BEEFS Biffs Inc.
W236I22 09/29/2004 70.26 0.00 11/16/2004 Sunfish Lake Park - Sanitation - No 0000
101-450-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings
W236122 Total: 70.26
W236123 09/29/2004 -30.11 0.00 11/16/2004 Lions Park -Deposit Refund - No 0000
101-450-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings
W236123 Total: -30.11
W236124 09/29/2004 -15.06 0.00 11/16/2004 Lions Park - Deposit Refund - No 0000
101-450-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings
W236124 Total: -15.06
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM) Page 1
Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine #
W236125 09/29/2004 -15.06 0.00 11/16/2004 DeMontreville Park - Deposit Refund - No 0000
101-450-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings
W236125 Total: -15.06
W236126 09/29/2004 -15.06 0.00 11/16/2004 Reid Park - Deposit Refund - No 0000
101-450-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings
W236126 Total: -15.06
W236127 09/29/2004 -15.06 0.00 11/16/2004 Tablyn Park - Deposit Refund No 0000
101-50-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings
W236127 Total: -15.06
W236128 09/29/2004 -15.06 0.00 11/16/2004 Pebble Park - Deposit Refund No 0000
101-450-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings
W236128 Total: -15.06
W239174 10/27/2004 70.26 0.00 11/16/2004 Sunfish Lake Park - Sanitation No 0000
101-450-5200-44120 Rentals - Buildings
W239174 Total: 70.26
B11PS Total: 35.11
BRINES Brine's Market
56257 11/02/2004 173.01 0.00 11/16/2004 Bagged Lunches - Ellection Judges - No 0000
101-410-1410-44300 Miscellaneous
56257 Total: 173.01
BRINES Total: 173.01
CITRIX Citrix
20061809-1003 10/08/2004 958.50 0.00 11/16/2004 Subscription Renewal - Citrix No 0000
101-410-1320-43090 Newsletter/Website
20061809-1003 Total: 958.50
CITRIX Total: 958.50
COPYIMAG Copy Images, Inc.
53612 11/04/2004 255.60 0.00 11/16/2004 CopierMaint. - No 0000
101-410-1940-44040 Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
53612 Total: 255.60
COPYIMAG Total: 255.60
EARLANDE Earl F. Andersen, Inc.
0063123-IN 11/09/2004 590.03 0.00 11/16/2004 Street Signs - No 0000
101-430-3100-42260 Sign Repair Materials
0063123-IN Total: 590.03
EARLANDE Total: 590.03
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM) Page 2
Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine #
EMERGAPP Emergency Apparatus Maint.
19897 10/13/2004 366.63 0.00 11/16/2004 Rescue 3187 cutting off
101-420-2220-44040 Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
19897 Total: 366.63
EMERGAPP Total: 366.63
F.LRE. Rescue Education Inc Fire Instruct
04130 07/26/2004 960.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Fire Apparatus Basic (12 Hours)
101-420-2220-44370 Conferences & Training
04130 Total: 960.00
F.I.R.E. Total: 960.00
No 0000
No 0000
FARMERS Farmers Union Co -Op Oil
Acc.141372 10/31/2004 31.40 0.00 11/16/2004 Fuel - Bldg. Dept - No 0000
101-420-2400-42120 Fuel
Acc.141372 10/31/2004 9.19 0.00 11/16/2004 Car Washes - Bldg. Dept. No 0000
101-420-2400-44040 Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
Acc.141372 Total: 40.59
FARMERS Total: 40.59
FEDOR Fedorowski Richard
Permit 3674 11/09/2004 1,000.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Return Road Escrow No 0000
803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable
Permit 3674 Total: 1,000.00
FEDOR Total: 1,000.00
FIREEQUI Fire Equipment Specialties
3823 10/26/2004 1,329.82 0.00 11/16/2004 FD Suits - No 0000
101-420-2220-45800 Equipment
3823 Total: 1,329.82
FIREEQUI Total: 1,329.82
FOUR Four Seasons Service
23-037871 11/09/2004 47.05 0.00 11/16/2004 Supplies - City Hall - No 0000
101-410-1940-44300 Miscellaneous
23-037871 Total: 47.05
FOUR Total: 47.05
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM) Page 3
Invoice # Inv Date
Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine #
FXL FXL, Inc.
December 2004 11/10/2004
101-410-1550-43100 Assessing Services
December 2004 Total:
FXL Total:
GENESIS Next Genesis Productions
IVC00166 10/26/2004
101-420-2400-44370 Conferences & Training
IVC00166 10/26/2004
101-410-1520-43180 Software Support
IVC00166 10/26/2004
101-410-1320-44300 Miscellaneous
1VC00166 Total:
GENESIS Total:
HAGBERGS Hagbergs Country Market
00031026 10/26/2004
101-410-1410-44300 Miscellaneous
00031026 Total:
00101005 10/05/2004
101- 410-1410-44300 Miscellaneous
00101005 Total:
HAGBERGS Total:
HAGER HAGER MECHANICAL, INC.
1030-Bill 10/30/2004
101-430-3100-42230 Building Repair Supplies
1030-Bill Total:
HAGER Total:
LARKHOFF Larkin Hoffman, Daly & Lindgr
NOV 30 SEMINAR 11/12/2004
101-410-1320-44370 Conferences & Training
NOV 30 SEMINAR Total:
LARKHOFF Total:
LEOIL Lake Elmo Oil, Inc.
22357 10/20/2004
101-430-3100-42120 Fuel
22357 Total:
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/ 12/04 - 12:14 PM)
1,700.00
1,700.00
1,700.00
225.00
225.00
75.00
525.00
525.00
39.12
39.12
7.99
7.99
47.11
0.00 11/16/2004 Assessing Services
0.00 11/16/2004
0.00 11/16/2004
0.00 11/16/2004
Blgd. Dept. - Printers Handling
Updates
Kim's computer problem solving
0.00 11/16/2004 El. Judges Training
0.00 11/16/2004 El. Judges Training
300.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Light Covers
300.00
300.00
90.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Seminar Registration for 3
90.00
90.00
1,013.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Fuel - Public Works
1,013.00
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
Page 4
Invoice # Inv Date
262606 10/21/2004
101-450-5200-42120 Fuel
262606 Total:
S01203 10/31/2004
101-420-2220-42120 Fuel
S01203 Total:
LEOIL Total:
LEREPAIR Lake Elmo Repair, Inc
140209 11/03/2004
101-430-3100-44040 Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
140209 Total:
LEREPAIR Total:
LINNER Linner Electric Company, Inc.
16959 11/05/2004
101-430-3100-44300 Miscellaneous
16959 Total:
16960 11/05/2004
101-430-3100-44300 Miscellaneous
16960 Total:
LINNER Total:
LUMBY Lumby Sharon
Emp. Claim 11/04/2004
101-410-1110-44370 Conferences & Training
Emp. Claim 11/04/2004
101-410-1410-44300 Miscellaneous
Emp. Claim Total:
LUMBY Total:
MARONEYS Maroney's Sanitation, Inc
071976 10/29/2004
101-410-1940-43840 Refuse
071976 10/29/2004
101-430-3100-43840 Refuse
071976 10/29/2004
101-450-5200-43840 Refuse
071976 Total:
MARONEYS Total:
Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference
11.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Fuel - Parks
327.19 0.00 11/16/2004 Fuel - FD
11.00
327.19
1,351.19
300.01 0.00 11/16/2004 Repair Chevy Truck - Public Works
300.01
300.01
768.85 0.00 11/16/2004 Chrismas Lights Set-up
768.85
2,600.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Chrismas Lights Set-up
2,600.00
3,368.85
14.97 0.00 11/16/2004 Workshop Supplies
142.12 0.00 11/16/2004 Election Supplies
157.09
157.09
95.89
95.89
183.96
375.74
375.74
0.00 11/16/2004
0.00 11/16/2004
0.00 11/16/2004
Refuse - City Hall
Refuse - Public Works
Refuse - Parks
Task Type PO # Close POLine #
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM) Page 5
Invoice # Inv Date
Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine #
MCLEOD McLeod USA
7352591 10/28/2004 269.04 0.00 11/16/2004 Telephone service - City Hall No 0000
101-410-1940-43210 Telephone
7352591 10/28/2004 163.42 0.00 11/16/2004 Telephone service - Fire Hall #1 & 2 - No 0000
101-420-2220-43210 Telephone
7352591 10/28/2004 129.02 0.00 11/16/2004 Telephone service - Pulic Works No 0000
101-430-3100-43210 Telephone
7352591 10/28/2004 107.80 0.00 11/16/2004 Telephone service No 0000
601-494-9400-43210 Telephone
7352591 10/28/2004 119.20 0.00 11/16/2004 Telephone service No 0000
602-495-9450-43210 Telephone
7352591 10/28/2004 82.96 0.00 11/16/2004 Telephone service - Parks - No 0000
101-450-5200-43210 Telephone
7352591 Total: 871.44
MCLEOD Total: 871.44
MENARDSO Menards - Oakdale
66566 11/03/2004 88.82 0.00 11/16/2004 Furring Strip
101-430-3100-42240 Street Maintenance Materials
66566 Total: 88.82
MENARDSO Total: 88.82
No 0000
MENARDST Menards - Stillwater
26373 11/01/2004 5.36 0.00 11/16/2004 Light bulbs -City Hall - No 0000
101-410-1940-42230 Building Repair Supplies
26373 11/01/2004 42.59 0.00 11/16/2004 Conf. Table No 0000
101-410-1940-44300 Miscellaneous
26373 Total: 47.95
28215 11/09/2004 35.11 0.00 11/16/2004 Ext. cords anf power strip - Council Ch - No 0000
101-410-1940-42230 Building Repair Supplies
28215 Total: 35.11
MENARDST Total: 83.06
MILLEREX Miller Excavating, Inc.
10045 10/29/2004 628.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Grading No 0000
101-430-3100-43150 Contract Services
10045 Total: 628.00
MILLEREX Total: 628.00
MOODYS Moodys Investors Service
F1484612-000 10/22/2004 6,500.00 0.00 11/16/2004 CEP Bonds, Series 2004A - No 0000
410-480-8000-46200 Fiscal Agent Fees -New Faciliti
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM) Page 6
Invoice # Inv Date
Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description
Reference
Task Type PO # Close POLine #
F1484612-000 Total:
MOODYS Total:
NORTHL Northland Trust Services, Inc.
139 11/10/2004
410-480-8000-46200 Fiscal Agent Fees -New Faciliti
139 Total:
NORTHL Total:
PELNAR Pelnar Kathi
October 11/01/2004
101-420-2700-43150 Contract Services
October Total:
PELNAR Total:
PETERSO Peterson Fram & Bergman
11135M 10/31/2004
101-410-1610-43040 Legal Services
11135M Total:
11140M 10/31/2004
101-410-1610-43045 Civil Attorney Criminal
11140M Total:
11150M 10/31/2004
803-490-9070-43040 Legal Services
11150M Total:
11155M 10/31/2004
101-410-1610-43040 Legal Services
I1155M Total:
PETERSO Total:
PETTYFIR Petty Cash
October 11/01/2004
101-420-2220-44300 Miscellaneous
October Total:
PETTYPIR Total:
POSTOFFI POSTMASTER
Newsletter 11/12/2004
101-410-1320-43220 Postage
Newsletter Total:
6,500.00
6,500.00
4,650.00 0.00 11/16/2004 CIP Bonds, Series 2004A
4,650.00
4,650.00
1,070.01 0.00 11/16/2004 Impounding
1,070.01
1,070.01
2,153.83 0.00 11/16/2004 Legal Services - Administration
2,153.83
3,488.66
3,488.66
0.00 11/16/2004 Legal Services
- Criminal Pros.
564.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Legal Services -
564.00
Community Dev.
410.11 0.00 11/16/2004 Legal Services - Civil Litigation
410.11
6,616.60
106.26 0.00 11/16/2004 Petty Cash
106.26
106.26
500.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Newsletter
500.00
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM) Page 7
Invoice # Inv Date
Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference
Task Type PO # Close POLine #
POSTOFFI Total:
PRESS Press Steven
11/03-11/08 11/10/2004
101-410-1320-43620 Cable Operation Expense
11/03-11/08 Total:
PRESS Total:
QUALAIR Quality Air
7887 11/03/2004
101-410-1940 44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg
7887 Total:
QUALAJR Total:
ROGERS Rogers Printing Services
12037 11/05/2004
101-410-1320-42030 Printed Forms
12037 Total:
12041 11/09/2004
101-450-5200-42000 Office Supplies
12041 Total:
ROGERS Total:
RUD Prince-Rud Diane
11/01-11/11 11/10/2004
101-410-1940-44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg
11/01-11/11 11/10/2004
101-420-2220-44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg
11 /01-11 /11 11/10/2004
101-410-1940-42110 Cleaning Supplies
11/01-11/11 Total:
RUD Total:
S&T S&T Office Products, Inc.
01.)1.2022 10/28/2004
101-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies
01JL2022 Total:
01JL5039 11/01/2004
101-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies
01.I1.5039 Total:
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM)
500.00
80.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Cable Operator- 11/03, 11/08
180.00 0.00 11/16/2004 System check
80.00
80.00
180.00
180.00
128.48 0.00 11/16/2004 Business Cards
0.00 11/16/2004 Forestry Forms
128.48
66.03
66.03
194.51
240.00 0.00 11/16/2004
240.00 0.00 11/16/2004
8.42 0.00 11/16/2004
488.42
488.42
Cleaning - City Hall
Cleaning - Fire Hall
Cleaning Supplies
14058 0.00 11/16/2004 Cartridge, paper
140.58
132.38 0.00 11/16/2004 Office Supplies
132.38
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
Page 8
Invoice #
Inv Date Amount Quantity Pm)" Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine #
S&T Total: 272.96
SEH Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc
0122673 11/10/2004 1,600.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Comp. Trail Plan - No 0000
404-480-8000-43050 Other Park Ded Prof Services
0122673 Total: 1,600.00
SEH Total: 1,600.00
SOUNDCAP Sound Capital Mgnrt Inc
11102004 11/10/2004 1,500.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Indep. Adv. Opinion Fee-2004A CIP Bonds No 0000
410-480-8000-46200 Fiscal Agent Fees -New Faciliti
11102004 Total: 1,500.00
SOUNDCAP Total: 1,500.00
STILLFOR Stillwater Ford
274141 10/28/2004 436.38 0.00 11/16/2004 Ford Crown Vic. - Flush, Oil, Engine Dia - No 0000
101-420-2220-44040 Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
274141 Total: 436.38
STILLFOR Total: 436.38
STILLGAZ Stillwater Gazette
00003846 10/14/2004 25.20 0.00 11/16/2004 Legal Publishing - Utilities - No 0000
101-410-1320-43510 Legal Publishing
00003846 Total: 25.20
00003857 10/14/2004 67.20 0.00 11/16/2004 Legal Publishing - Ord. 97-142 - No 0000
101-410-1320-43510 Legal Publishing
00003857 Total: 67.20
00003875 10/26/2004 10.50 0.00 11/16/2004 Legal Publishing - Notice - No 0000
101-410-1320-43510 Legal Publishing
00003875 Total: 10.50
00003879 10/26/2004 42.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Legal Publishing - Notice -Elections - No 0000
101-410-1320-43510 Legal Publishing
00003879 Total: 42.00
00003889 10/26/2004 37.80 0.00 11/16/2004 Legal Publishing - Sweeper Sale - No 0000
101-410-1320-43510 Legal Publishing
00003889 Total: 37.80
STILLGAZ Total: 182.70
TRUITI Truck Utilities
0133885 11/02/2004 885.02 0.00 11/16/2004 Aerial Bucket Rental and Repair - No 0000
101-430-3100-44040 Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM) Page 9
Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine #
0133885 Total:
TRKUTI Total:
885.02
885.02
TWINCIT Twin City Water Clinic, Inc.
861 11/05/2004 20.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Bacteria Analysis - October 2004 - No 0000
601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services
861 Total: 20.00
TWINCIT Total: 20.00
USBANK US Bank Trust N.A.
33404800 11/10/2004 25,000.00 0.00 11/16/2004 Bond Series 2002B -Principal - No 0000
601-000-0000-23110 Bond Principal
33404800 11/10/2004 14,783.75 0.00 11/16/2004 Bond Series 2002B - Interest - No 0000
601-494-9400-46110 Bond Interest
33404800 Total: 39,783.75
USBANK Total: 39,783.75
VISALE VISA
4400-8032 10/28/2004 21.41 0.00 11/16/2004 Travel Exp. - Duluth Conf. - No 0000
101-410-1910-43310 Travel Expense
4400-8032 Total: 21.41
VISALE Total: 21.41
WAS -LAND Washington County Surveyor
1004925 11/09/2004 2,662.50 0.00 11/16/2004 2' Contour No 0000
101-410-I910-44350 Books
1004925 Total: 2,662.50
WAS -LAND Total: 2,662.50
WAS-REC Washington County Recorder
1188 10/31/2004 33.25 0.00 11/16/2004 Resolution 2004-091 No 0000
101-410-1320-44300 Miscellaneous
1188 Total: 33.25
WAS-REC Total: 33.25
WASCTY Washington County
25433 11/10/2004 344.20 0.00 11/16/2004 Tax 750 Jasmine Ave No 0000
101-410-1320-44330 Dues & Subscriptions
25433 Total: 344.20
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM)
Page 10
Invoice #
Inv Date
Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine #
94572 11/10/2004
101-410-1320-44330 Dues & Subscriptions
94572 Total:
WASCTY Total:
XCEL Xcel Energy
0041 145 749300
101-450-5200-43810
0084-044-646299
101-430-3100-43810
0176-825-022299
101-430-3160-43810
0417-949-252300
101-410-1940-43810
0446-544-592299
101-430-3160-43810
0573-240-678299
101-450-5200-43810
0592-147-254300
101-450-5200-43810
0614-943-270299
101-430-3160-43810
0777-146-175299
101-450-5200-43810
1278-842-757300
601-494-9400-43810
1427-822-590300
602-495-9450-3810
1577-643-354299
101-420-2220-43810
1684-846-045298
602-495-9450-43810
10/26/2004
Electric Utility
0044-445-749300 Total:
10/27/2004
Electric Utility
0084-044-646299 Total:
10/26/2004
Street Lighting
0176-825-022299 Total:
10/26/2004
Electric Utility
0417-949-252300 Total:
10/26/2004
Street Lighting
0446-544-592299 Total:
10/26/2004
Electric Utility
0573-240-678299 Total:
10/27/2004
Electric Utility
0592-147-254300 Total:
10/26/2004
Street Lighting
0614-943-270299 Total:
10/26/2004
Electric Utility
0777-146-175299 Total:
10/26/2004
Electric Utility
1278-842-757300 Total:
10/26/2004
Electric Utility
1427-822-590300 Total:
10/26/2004
Electric Utility
1577-643-354299 Total:
10/25/2004
Electric Utility
52.88 0.00 11/16/2004 Tax Eagle Point
52.88
397.08
40.99 0.00 11/16/2004 Softball Field
203.34 0.00 11/16/2004 4259 Jamaca
20.52 0.00 11/16/2004 Traffic Lights - Hwy 94 & Inwood
304.52 0.00 11/16/2004 City Hall
19.84 0.00 11/16/2004 Traffic Lights- Manning & Stillwater
49.19 0.00 11/16/2004 11194 Upper 33rd Street N
7.43 0.00 11/16/2004 Pebble Park
25.89 0.00 11/16/2004 Traffic Lights - 998 Inwood
10.36 0.00 11/16/2004 Tennis Courts
427.65 0.00 11/16/2004 3303 Langly Ct N
38.83 0.00 11/16/2004 8860 Hudson Blvd
153.45 0.00 11/16/2004 Fire Hall
11.74 0.00 11/16%2004 2759 Legion Ave
40.99
203.34
20.52
304.52
19.84
49.19
7.43
25.89
10.36
427.65
38.83
153.45
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14PM) Page 11
Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine #
1684-846-045298 Total:
1808-181-287299 10/26/2004
101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility
1808-181-287299 Total:
1957-348-187299 10/26/2004
602-495-9450-43810 Electric Utility
1957-348-187299 Total:
2045-967-139301 10/27/2004
601-494-9400-43810 Electric Utility
2045-967-139301 Total:
2175-049-940299 10/27/2004
101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility
2175-049-940299 Total:
2332-806-007306 11/01/2004
101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting
2332-806-007306 Total:
XCEL Total:
11.74
7.43 0.00 11/16/2004 3675 Layton Ave - No 0000
7.43
13.08 0.00 11/16/2004 11062 34th Street N - No 0000
13.08
341.34 0.00 11/16/2004 11975 55th St - No 0000
341.34
25.21 0.00 11/16/2004 3511 Laveme - No 0000
25.21
1,553.05 0.00 11/16/2004 City Lights No 0000
1,553.05
3,253.86
Report Total: 87,170.31
AP - To Be Paid Proof List (11/12/04 - 12:14 PM) Page 12
Lake Elmo Agenda Section: FINANCE No . 5A
City Council
11-16-2004
Agenda Item: FEE SCHEDULE AMENDMENT (WAC )
Background Information for November 16. 2004:
Attached, Please find a revised fee schedule reflecting an increase in the Water Availability Charge (WAC).
WAC fees are designed to provide funding to Water Infrastructure such as lines, storage and pumping facilities.
With the rising costs in construction materials i.e. steel, it has become apparent that the City will need to continue
A close review of the fees charged. As outlined in the Water Systems Interconnection Feasibility Report, the
new WAC rate is $ 3,000.00 from the current $1700.00 and is line with most of what other communities are
currently charging. The Public Works Council Committee has reviewed and approved the proposed fee schedule
amendment and recommended it be presented to the Council for consideration. The City Attorney is preparing an
Ordinance and Resolution to be presented at the Council Meeting.
Action Items: Motion to adopt the revised City of Lake Person resnonsible:
Elmo Fee schedule dated 11-16-2004 Tom Bouthilet
Attachments: City of Lake Fee Schedule dated 11-16-2004
Development, Service,
Building, Etc.
Amateur Radio Antenna
Appeal (to Board of Adjustment
and Appeals)
Building Demolition
First 1000 Square Feet
Each Additional 1000 square
feet or portion thereof
Burning Permits
Residential
Commercial
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
<new or amended>
Culverts in Developments with
Rural Section
Dog License
Unlicensed dog (first impound)
Licensed dog (first impound)
Cat Impound (first impound)
Subsequent dog/cat impound
Duplicate License or Tag
Driveway
' Residential
Commercial
Excavating and Grading
Fireplace
Flood Plain Management Permit
Fuel Tank (Underground)
Heating
New Residential
' Addition to Residential
Commercial (New or Addition)
Lawn Sprinklers
Liquor
Club On -Sale Intoxicating
Off -Sale Intoxicating
Off -Sale Non -Intoxicating
On -Sale Intoxicating
On -Sale Investigation
On -Sale Non -Intoxicating
On -Sale Sunday Intoxicating
Temporary Non -Intoxicating
Wine
Lot Line Adjustment
Manufactured Home Parks
New
Move home out of City
Move into City
Minor Subdivision
2004 Proposed Fee Schedule
Fee Escrow or Additional
Charge
$825.00
$25.00
$50.00
$10.00
$35.00
$70.00
$1,100.00
$875.00
$50.00
$10.00
$50.00
$25.00
$25.00
$25.00
$1.00
$50.00
$150.00
$100.00
Per 1997 UBC
$750.00
$50.00
$100.00
$50.00
Minimum 150.00
or one percent of
total cost of
$100.00
$100.00 per year
$200.00 per year
$150.00 per year
$1500.00 per year
$350.00
$100.00 per year
$200.00 per year
$25.00 per event
$300.00 pet year
$50.00
$1,000.00
$50,00
$75.00
$825.00
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
Erosion Control Bond,
Escrow, of Letter of
Credit: 1500.00 per acre.
Per Statute
1500.00 escrow
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
2500.00 Escrow
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
Revised November 16, 2004
Comments
1
Development, Service,
Building, Etc.
Mining Permit
Moving House or Primacy Structure into
City
Moving Garage or Accessory Building
into City
New Constriction Plan Review
Park Dedication (up to 3 lots)
Parking Lots
I New Commercial
Existing Commercial
Platting
Concept (PUD or OP)
Preliminary Plat (and Development
Stage)
Final Plat (and Final Plan)
!Plumbing
New Residential
Addition to Residential
Commercial (New or Addition)
Private Roads (permitted only in AG zone)
Restrictive Soils and Wetland Restoration
Protection and Preservation Permit
Right -of -Way Permits
I Annual Registration (1415.05 Subd.1)
Excavation (1415.11 Subd. 1)
Each Additional Excavation
Trench Fee (boring or open cut)
Overhead Installation Fee
New Subdivisions (Alternate to per
foot feet)
Street Obstruction Fee (1415.11 (Sub 2,)
Permit Extension
Delay Penalty
Sewage Disposal
On -Site Septic Systems
New
Alterations or Repairs
Inspection of Existing System
Less than 1 year old
Over 1 but less than 5 years
Over 5 years
Sewer Availability Charge (SAC)
(Metro System)
Sewer
Fee
$500.00
$250.00
$100.00
Per 1997 UBC
(65% of building
$1500.00 for each
newly created lot
$150.00
$75.00
$1,050.00
$1,550.00
$1,050.00
$100.00
$50.00
Minimum $150.00
or l% of total job
cost
$50.00
$750.00
$50.00
$200.00
$30.00
.50 per foot
.50 per foot
50.00 per lot per
utility
$50.00
$50.00
10.00 per day
$75.00
$50.00
NC
$50.00
$100.00
$1,775.00
$2.40 per 1,000 gallons
Escrow or Additional
Charge
2500.00 Escrow plus bond
Plus bond with amount to be
determined by City
iv/recommendation from
Building Official
Plus bond with amount to be
determined by City
iv/recommendation from
Building Official
Per Statute
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
Plus 2% Administrative Pee
Development Agreement
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
1500.00 escrow
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
1350.00 Met. Council
425.00 to City
Comments
Development, Service,
Building, Etc.
Wetland Treatment
Hookup to Existing System
Alteration/Repair
201 Off -Site Maintenance Fee
Signs (not requiring CUP)
Site Plan Review (Chapter 520)
Street Cleaning Erosion Control
Escrow
Re -inspection
Processing Fee
Swimming Pools
Telecommunications Tower
Tennis Courts
Vacations (Streets or Easements)
Variance
Water
Residential — Quarterly Rate
Commercial
All Connection Permits
Meters, MIU & Meter Installation Sets
Eire Sprinkler System (Inspection pee)
Delinquent Accounts
Disconnect Service
Reconnect Service
Water Stotage Violation
Bulk Water from Hydrant
Water Availability Charge (WAC)
Existing Structures within Old Village
New Development
Zoning Amendment ( Text or Map)
Fee
$75.00
$50.00
45.00 per unit per
quarter
$75.00
$825.00
$30.00 per hour
Per 1997 UBC
$825.00
Per 1997 UBC
$50.00
$620.00
$21.50 Base plus
1.70 per 1,000
gallons
$21.50 Base plus
2.44 per
1,000 gallons
$125.00
$275.00
$50,00
6 %0 per quarter
$50.00
$50.00
$10.00 per day
$50.00 for first 5,000
gallons
$2.50 per 1,000 gallons
over 5,000 gallons
$800.00
$3,000.00
$1,050.00
Escrow or Additional
Charge Comments
.50 surcharge
.50 surcharge
1,000.00 Escrow
Portal to Portal from City
Hall. Minimum: 1 hour
10% of Contractor's
Invoice to City
Plus surcharge
2,000.00 Escrow
Plus surcharge
100.00 Escrow
Plus 25,00 or 8%, whichever is
greater, if certified to County for
collection with taxes
...,...n...1 .r .,....y.. M .•
As of 11/16/04 (Periods 1 - 11)
I Budget Amount Variance Comments
Mayor & Council
Part-time Salaries 12,100 5,667 6,433
FICA Contributions 750 584 166
Medicare Contributions 176 137 39
Travel Expense 450 3,750 -3,300
Miscellaneous 4,000 14,884 -10,884
Dues & Subscriptions 5,500 7,894 -2,394
Conferences & Training 5,000 2,371 2,629
Sub Total 27,976 35,286 -7,310
Administration
Full-time Salaries 124,020 92,097 31,923
PERA Contributions 6,858 4,123 2,735
FICA Contributions 7,689 5,932 1,757
Medicare Contributions 1,798 1,387 411
Health/Dental Insurance 21,834 16,000 5,834
Workers Compensation 1,688 0 1,688
Office Supplies 7,000 5,105 1,895
Printed Forms 800 489 311
Newsletter/Website 14,000 5,488 8,512
Postage 9,500 7,423 2,077
Travel Expense 1,500 650 850
Legal Publishing 6,000 3,592 2,408
Insurance 27,360 29,581 -2,221 Annual Premiums Paid
Cable Operation Expense 1,200 400 800
Miscellaneous 6,000 11,048 -5,048 Reclass by City Auditor (Revenue offset) $4241
Dues & Subscriptions 1,500 2,232 -732
Books 500 0 500
Conferences & Training 2,500 380 2,120
Transfer Out 70,500 0 70,500
Sub Total 312,247 185,926 126,321
Elections
Part-time Salaries 7,000 192 6,808
Office Supplies 100 0 100
Printed Forms 300 0 300
Travel Expense 50 0 50
1 Miscellaneous 800 884 -84
Conferences & Training 0 38 -38
Sub Total 8,250 1,113 7,137
p
-1-
Finance
Full-time Salaries 41,432 26,390
PERA Contributions 2,569 1,435
FICA Contributions 2,291 1,703
Medicare Contributions 601 398
Health/Dental Insurance 7,318 4,353
Office Supplies 800 0
Printed Forms 1,000 28
Software Support 4,000 2,994
Hardware Support 2,000 1,664
Software Programs 3,000 950
Travel Expense 1,000 47
Miscellaneous 200 298
Books 200 0
Conferences & Training 1,000 815
Sub Total 67,411 41,076
Accounting Services 24,000 20,574
Assessing Services 35,000 18,700
i
Legal Services 15,000 29,687
Civil Attorney Criminal 45,000 37,053
15,042
1,134
588
203I
2,965
800
972
1,006
336
2,050
953
-98
200
185
26,335
3,426
16,300
-14,687
7,947
Sub Total 60,000 66,741 -6,741
Planning & Zoning
Full-time Salaries
PERA Contributions
FICA Contributions
Medicare Contributions
Health/Dental Insurance
Workers Compensation
Office Supplies
Printed Forms
Zoning Ordinance Dev - CDBG
Cimarron Study - CDBG
Comprehensive Planning
Engineering Services
Legal Services
Infiltration Project
Old Village Tax Abatement
Travel Expense
Miscellaneous
Dues & Subscriptions
Books
Conferences & Training
75,586' 58,136 17,450
4,180 5,051 -871
4,686 3,742 944
1,096 875 221
11,686 10,629 1,057
847 0 847
500 243 257
500 0 500
0 8,777 -8,777 Expense offset by Grant received from Washington County $ 49,666
10,000 10,035 -35
10,000 0 10,000
2,500 11,347 -8,847
1,000 341 659
0 14,363 -14,363 Expense offset by Grant received $29,501.00
73,148 15,309 57,839
2,000 869 1,131
200 114 86
500 710 -210
200 2,691 -2,491
2,500 241 2,259
Sub Total 201,129 143,474
57,655
- L -
1
1
Engineering Services 26,000 17,009 8,991
Attorney Fees
100,000 107,298 -7,298
Gov't Buildings
1CleaningSupplies 500 205 295
Building Repair Supplies 500 175 325
Telephone 6,500 3,691 2,809
Electric Utility 5,000 4,104 896
Refuse 2,040 993 1,047
I Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg 8,000 9,376 -1,376
Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt 6,000 4,866 1,134
Miscellaneous 400 625 -225
Sub Totals 28,940 24,035 4,905
Law Enforcement Contract 322,000 160,718 161,282
Transfer Out 15,000 0 15,000
Sub Total 337,000 160,718 176,282
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
Uniforms
17,434 10,606 6,828
93,850 65,989 27,861
964 689 275
5,583 6,330 -747
1,306 1,480 -174
3,127 2,290 837
2,469 0 2,469
1,500 464 1,036
750 35 715
2,000 0 2,000
4,000 2,168 1,832
4,500 2,307 2,193
0 313 -313
1,000 270 730
1,200 1,769 -569
2,000 3,969 -1,969
4,600 3,038 1,562
7,500 5,763 1,737
2,000 1,783 217
11,792 12,908 -1,116 Annual Premiums Paid
4,400 3,333 1,067
7,000 5,160 1,840
23,000 28,466 -5,466 Expense related to Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance
1,080 900 180
9,500 3,107 6,393
-3-
IbMiscellaneous
Dues & Subscriptions
Books
Conferences & Training
Pension Contribution
Fire State Aid
Equipment
Transfer Out
1,300 4,455 -3,155
2,300 3,155 -855
200 0 200
15,000 6,947 8,053
41,000 0 41,000
25,000 0 25,000
10,000 5,906 4,094
60,000 0 60,000
Sub Total 367,355 183,601 183,754
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
113,365 95,408 17,957
6,292 4,738 1,554
7,029 6,098 931
1,644 1,426 218
23,588 15,629 7,959
616 0 616
1,000 371 629
1,500 436 1,064
3,000 183 2,817
3,000 0 3,000
5,000 0 5,000
13,500 2,947 10,553
0 871 -871
1,000 258 742
877 872 5
500 2,431 -1,931 Repair to Building Vehicles
4,000 3,515 486
600 157 443
200 2,513 -2,313
300 879 -579
300 0 300
2,500 660 1,840
5,000 0 5,000
Sub Total 194,811 139,391
Civil Defense 9,000 0
55,420
9,000
Animal Control
Printed Forms 500 0 500
Contract Services 5,600 7,434 -1,834
Impounding 6,000 7,758 -1,758
Miscellaneous 400 OL 400
Sub Total 12,500 15,192 -2,692
-4-
\#UI OIpen Lb
Public Works
Full-time Salaries 106,087 78,6651 27,422
Part-time Salaries 0 900 -900
PERAContributions 5,867 4,112' 1,755
FICA Contributions 6,577 5,060 1,517
(Medicare Contributions 1,538 1,183 355
Health/Dental Insurance 24,607 14,335 10,272
Workers Compensation 3,773 0 3,773
Office Supplies 300 28 272
Fuel 8,500 10,113 -1,613 Fuel Pricing Exceeding Budgeted projections - Reclassify expense see Building &
I Shop Materials 2,500 1,203 1,297 Parks Fuel Budgets
Equipment Parts 10,000 5,647 4,353
Building Repair Supplies 1,000 986 14
Street Maintenance Materials 22,500 6,266 16,234
Landscaping Materials 2,500 359 2,141
Sign Repair Materials 4,000 2,403 1,597
Sand/Salt 20,000 4,808 15,192
Small Tools & Minor Equipment 1,500 770 731
Engineering Services 2,000 0 2,000
Contract Services 22,500 29,031 -6,531 Street Sweeping=$14,482 Gravel Road Graded= $5761 Snow Plowing $8160 (Last Season)
Telephone 3,750 2,241 1,509
Radio 200 0 200
Travel Expense 500 36 464
Insurance 11,265 13,603 -2,338 Annual Premiums Paid
Electric Utility 6,500 4,583 1,917
Refuse 250 1,038 -788
Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg 2,000 1,028 972
Repairs/Maint Imp Not Bldgs 1,500 3,047 -1,547 En -or in coding $ 1843.00 belongs in Contract Services- $ 1049.00 belongs in Water Account
Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt 4,500 6,369 -1,869
Rentals - Buildings 1,500 0 1,500
Uniforms 900 761 139
Miscellaneous 2,000 5,208 -3,208
Dues & Subscriptions 500 150 350
Conferences & Training 500 100 400
Clean-up Days 9,500 11,283 -1,783
Other Equipment 12,250 21 12,229
Transfer Out 78,693 0 78,693
Sub Total 382,057 215,336 166,721
Street Lighting
16,800 14,961 1,839
-5-
VVI IIIIIGI ILa
Sanitation
Recycling Supplies
{Newsletter
Miscellaneous
6,000 0 6,000
5,000 0 5,000
7,100 1,613 5,487!
Sub Total 18,100 1,613 16,487
Parks
Full-time Salaries
Part-time Salaries
PERA Contributions
FICA Contributions
Medicare Contributions
Health/Dental Insurance
Workers Compensation
Office Supplies
Fuel
Shop Materials
Chemicals
Equipment Parts
Building Repair Supplies
Landscaping Materials
Small Tools & Minor Equipment
{ Telephone
Travel Expense
{Insurance
Electric Utility
Refuse
Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg
Repairs/Maint Imp Not Bldgs
Repairs/Maint Contractual Eqpt
Rentals - Buildings
Uniforms
Miscellaneous
Dues & Subscriptions
Conferences & Training
Transfer Out
Sub Total
58,215 39,133 19,082
23,550 19,763 3,787
3,219 2,502 717
5,069 3,770 1,299
1,186 882 304
9,916 5,343 4,573
2,819 0, 2,819
250 66 184
2,200 385 1,815
1,000 456 514
500 338 162
4,000 1,197 2,803
1,000 1831 817
10,000 3,920 6,080
1,000 203 797
1,500 1,009 491
0 91 -91
2,900 3,084' -184
6,050 3,816 2,234
2,400 1,840 560'
2,000 1,061 939
5,000 1,224I 3,776
1,000 600 400
2,500 3,408 -908
400 52, 348
100 128 -28
100 50 50
400 0 400
16,500 0 16,500
164,774 94,505 70,269
General Fund Total 2,393,350 1,486,549'I 906,801
-6-
Water Enterprise Operating
Full-time Salaries
PERA Contributions
FICA Contributions
Medicare Contributions
Health\Dental Insurance
1 Workers Compensation
Office Supplies
Printed Forms
Chemicals
Utility System Maintenance
l Water Meters & Supplies
Small Tools & Minor Equipment
Engineering Services
Software Support
Telephone
Postage
Travel Expense
Insurance
Electric Utility
Water Utility
Repairs\Maint Imp Not Bldgs
Miscellaneous
Conferences & Training
Other Equipment
61,939 64,526 -2,5871
3,425 3,297 128
3,840 4,115 -275
898 962 -64
9,171 9,185 -14
890 0 890
100 0 100
1,050 403 647
2,000 765 1,235
1,200 1,043 157
16,000 5,562 10,438
197 255 -58
2,500 6,033 -3,533
4,000 379 3,621
2,000 1,073 927
650 0 650
600 474 126
2,380 2,985 -605
12,000 11,410 590
35,000 71,675 -36,675 City of Oakdale Water - Revenue offset
1,000 3,861 -2,861
5,000 2,999 2,001
500 380 120
1,8001 0 1,800
Sub -Total 168,140 191,382 -23,242
Sewer Enterprise Operating
Full-time Salaries 17,594 15,631 1,963
PERA Contributions 973 779 194
FICA Contributions 1,091 987 104
Medicare Contributions 255 231 24
Health/Dental Insurance 2,375 2,029 346
Workers Compensation 328 0 328
Utility System Maint Supplies 524 59 465
Small Tools & Minor Equipment 200 0 200
Engineering Services 1,500 6,685 -5,185
Telephone 1,150 1,381 -231
Travel Expense 0 58 -58
Electric Utility 1,225 1,149 76
Repairs\Maint Imp Not Bldgs 1,000 2,511 -1,511
Miscellaneous Expenses 0 9,358 -9,358 Metro Sewer Fee 1-94 Corridor
Conferences & Training 0 491 -491
Sub -Total 28,2151 41,349-13,131
1
-7-
vlllll '10
I Surface Water Utility
!Full-time Salaries 24,751 0, 24,751
IPERA Contributions 1,369 0 1,369
1FICAContributions 1,535 0 1,535
(Medicare Contributions 359 0' 359
'rHealth/Dental Insurance 4,771 0 4,771
[Workers' Compensation 340 0, 340
'Office Supplies 500 0 500
Utility System Maint Supplies 2,162 0 2,162
Small Tools & Minor Equipment 1,000 0 1,000
Engineering Services 4,500 19,550 -15,050
Erosion Control 2,100 0 2,100
Software Support 1,000 4,050 -3,050
Postage 1,576 515 1,061
Contract Services 2,000 0 2,000
Repairs/Maint Not Bldg 2,000 0 2,000
Miscellaneous Expenses 0 348 -348
Transfer Out 30,315 0 30,315
Sub -Total 80,278 24,464 55,814
Total Enterprise Funds 276,633 257,195 19,438
Grand Total 2,669,983 1,743,744 926,239
-8-
New Residential
New Commercial
Other Residential
Other Commercial
UctoDer-2uu4
Permits
Issued
0
0
Summary Building Report
tear to uate
Permits
Valuation Issued
$0.00 liNew Residential 12
$0.00 ;iNew Commercial 8
36 $701,850.00 Other Residential
2 $100,000.00 # Other Commercial
Total 38
Total Building Fees Collected
$801,850.00
$11,300.05
Summary Plumbing Report
Plumbing 5
$17,500.00
Total Plumbing Fees Collected I $302.00
Summary HVAC Report
HVAC 8
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
$14,681.00
$453.30
$12,055.35
$381.51
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
335
25
Total 380
Valuation
$7,406,468.00
$1,800,000.00
$4,292,225.00
$1,153,263.00
$14,651,956.00
1
Total Building Fees Collected I $187,746.20 I
Plumbing
Summary Plumbing Report
93 $830,254.00
Total Plumbing Fees Collected ! $6,291.25 I
Summary HVAC Report
HVAC 107
$518,054,00
Total HVAC Fees Collected I $7,256.05
Summary Grand Total Fees
Surcharge Fee Paid to State
SAC Fees Paid to Met Council
WAC Fees Paid to Oakdale
Misc. Expenses
$11,673.84 p Total Fees Retained
$11,673.84
$0.00
$0.00
Credit Fees to Bldg
Credit Fees to Water
Credit Fees to Sewer
$201,293.50
$7,196.48
$9,058.40
$0.00
$0.00
I $185,038.62
$184,263.12
$400.00
$375.50
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Building Permit Detail Summary
October 01, 2004 Through October 31, 2004
�:..Occupancy¢X__,.s..�_.���
Class Of Work: Demolition
Permit#
4361 demolition
Totals for Class Of Work: Demolition Number of Perrmits = 1
Totals for Occupancy:
Occupancy B
Class Of Work: Remodel
Description of Work
Number of Permits = 1
Permit # Description of Work
4342 Remodel
Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
10/15/2004 Commercial 30,000
Sum of Valuation = 30,000
Sum of Valuation = 30,000
Date Issued Use of Building
Valuation
Totals for Class Of Work: Remodel Number of Permits = 1
Totals for Occupancy: B Number of Permits = 1
Occupancy U-1
10/5/2004 Commercial
70,000
Sum of Valuation = 70,000
Sum of Valuation = 70,000
Tuesday, November 02, 2004 Page 1 of 5
Class Of Work: Add
Valuation
Permit # Description of Work Date Issued Use of Building
4349 deck/ porch 10/6/2004 Single Family Dwelling 30,000
4375 Garage
4335 accessory structure
4372 Other
Totals for Class Of Work: Add
Class Of Work: Remodel
Permit #
4355 window replacement
Number of Permits = 4
Description of Work
Totals for Class Of Work: Remodel Number ofPemnits = 1
Totals for Occupancy: U-1
Occupancy R-3
Number of Permits = 5
10/26/2004 Accessory Building 25,000
10/1/2004 Accessory Building 9,000
10/20/2004 Accessory Building 850
Sum of Valuation = 64,850
Valuation
Date Issued Use of Building
10/12/2004 Single Family Dwelling 7,000
Sum of Valuation = 7,000
Sum of Valuation =
71,850
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Page 2 of 5
Class Of Work: Add
Permit # Description of Work
4353 Porch
4351 heating
4350 accessory structure
4379 Deck
4347 Deck
4346 addition & remodel (Incld plmg & hvac)
4340 Porch
4339 mobile home setup
4348 lawn Sprinkler
4366 fence
4374 Fireplace
4376 Garage
4378 Fireplace
4367 other
4373 mobile home setup
4364 Fireplace
4363 Deck
4362 driveway
Totals for Class Of Work: Add Number of Perrmits =18
Date Issued Use of Building Valuation
10/8/2004 Single Family Dwelling 6,000
10/7/2004 Single Family Dwelling 2,638
10/7/2004 Single Family Dwelling 51,000
10/29/2004 Single Family Dwelling 4,000
10/6/2004 Mobile Horne 4,000
10/6/2004 Single Family Dwelling 155,600
10/5/2004 Single Family Dwelling 8,000
10/5/2004 Single Family Dwelling 2,500
10/6/2004 Single Family Dwelling 3,300
10/18/2004 Single Family Dwelling 9,800
10/26/2004 Single Family Dwelling 1,100
10/26/2004 Single Family Dwelling 20,000
10/29/2004 Single Family Dwelling 1,100
10/18/2004 Single Family Dwelling 800
10/21/2004 Mobile Home 5,000
10/15/2004 Single Family Dwelling 2,300
10/15/2004 Single Family Dwelling 4,000
10/15/2004 Single Family Dwelling 5,500
Sum of Valuation = 286,638
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Page 3 of 5
Class Of Work: Remodel
Permit # Description of Work Date Issued Use of Building
Valuation
4337 Siding 10/5/2004 Single Family Dwelling 700
4341 Fireplace 10/5/2004 Single Family Dwelling 2,300
4359 window replacement 10/14/2004 Single Family Dwelling 14,000
4338 reroof 10/5/2004 Single Family Dwelling 800
4360 Siding & Window Replacement 10/14/2004 Single Family Dwelling 30,000
4343 Remodel 10/6/2004 Single Family Dwelling 25,000
4356 stucco 10/12/2004 Single Family Dwelling 227,770
4365 Remodel (including plmg&Htg) 10/18/2004 Single Family Dwelling 8,400
Totals for Class Of Work: Remodel Number of Permits = 8 Sum of Valuation = 308,970
Class Of Work: Repair
Valuation
Permit # Description of Work Date Issued Use of Building
4371 stucco 10/19/2004 Single Family Dwelling 14,520
4352 reroof 10/8/2004 Single Family Dwelling 10,000
4345 reroof 10/6/2004 Single Family Dwelling 6,364
Totals for Class Of Work: Repair Number of Perrmits = 3 Sum of Valuation = 30,884
Class Of Work: Alter
Valuation
Permit # Description of Work Date Issued Use of Building
4354 Other 10/12/2004 Single Family Dwelling 3,508
Totals for Class Of Work: Alter Number of Perrmits = 1 Sum of Valuation = 3,508
Totals for Occupancy: R-3 Number of Permits = 30
Sum of Valuation = 630,000
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Page 4 of 5
Occupancy A-3
Class Of Work: Add
Permit #
4344 other
Totals for Class Of Work: Add Number ofPerrnits = 1
Description of Work
Totals for Occupancy: A-3 Number of Permits = 1
Grand Total for All Permits Issued:
Date Issued Use of Building
10/6/2004 Church
Sum of Valuation =
Sum of Valuation =
Number of Permits 38 Total Valuation = 801,850
Valuation
0
0
Tuesday, November 02, 2004 Page 5 of 5
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Plumbing Permit Detail Summary
October 01, 2004 Through October 31, 2004
Permit # Description of Work
4342 commercial plumbing alter
4346 alter resd plmg
4358 alter resd plmg
4368 alter septic
4377 alter resd plmg
Date Issued
10/5/2004
10/6/2004
10/12/2004
10/19/2004
10/27/2004
Number of Permits 5 Total Valuation = 17,500
w emir:
Valuation
0
Tuesday, November 02, 2004 Page 1 of 1
6,000
500
8,000
3,000
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
HVAC Permit Detail Summary
October 01, 2004 Through October 31, 2004
Permit # Description of Work Date issued Valuation
4342 alter commercial 10/5/2004 0
4346 alter resd hvac 10/6/2004 3,000
4351 Install Heating Units 10/7/2004 2,638
4354 air conditioning 10/12/2004 3,508
4357 alter resd hvac 10/12/2004 2,500
4369 alter resd hvac 10/19/2004 2,400
4370 alter resd hvac 10/19/2004 450
4373 Gasline 10/21/2004 185
Number of Permits 8 Total Valuation = 14,681
Tuesday, November 02, 2004 Page 1 of 1
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Building Permit Fees
October 01, 2004 Through October 31, 2004
Date Permit # Permit Fee Surcharge Plan RevieW3ther InvestigatiouSACFee Sewer Fee WACFee Meter Sales Tax
10/1/2004 4335 $167.25 $4.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00•
10/5/2004 4337 $29.60 $0.35 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/5/2004 4338 $32.65 $0.40 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/5/2004 4339 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $75.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/5/2004 4340 $153.25 $4.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00
10/5/2004 4341 $83.25 $1.15 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/5/2004 4342 $783.75 $35.00 $509.44 $0.00 $783.75 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/6/2004 4343 $391.25 $12.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/6/2004 4344 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/6/2004 4345 $139.25 $3.18 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/6/2004 4346 $1,307.35 $77.80 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/6/2004 4347 $97.25 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/6/2004 4348 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/6/2004 4349 $442.25 $15.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/7/2004 4350 $650.75 $25.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/7/2004 4351 $83.25 $1.32 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/8/2004 4352 $181.25 $5.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/8/2004 4353 $125.25 $3.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/12/2004 4354 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/12/2004 4355 $13925 53.50 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00
10/12/2004 4356 $1,710.55 $113.88 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/12/2004 4357 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Page 1 of 3
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Building Permit Fees
October 01, 2004 Through October 31, 2004
Date Permit # Permit Fee Surcharge Plan ReviemOther InvestigationSAC Fee Sewer Fee WAC Fee Meter Sales Tax
10/12/2004 4358 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/14/2004 4359 $237.25 $7.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/14/2004 4360 $442.25 $15.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/15/2004 4361 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $314.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/15/2004 4362 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/15/2004 4363 $97.25 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/15/2004 4364 $8325 $1.15 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/18/2004 4365 $16725 $4.20 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/18/2004 4366 $181.25 $4.90 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/18/2004 4367 $32.65 $0.40 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/19/2004 4368 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/19/2004 4369 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/19/2004 4370 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/19/2004 4371 $251.25 $726 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/20/2004 4372 $35.70 $0.42 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/21/2004 4373 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/26/2004 4374 $41.80 $0.55 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/26/2004 4375 $39125 $12.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/26/2004 4376 $321.25 $10.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/28/2004 4377 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/29/2004 4378 $41.80 $0.55 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
10/29/2004 4379 $97.25 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Page2of 3
City of Lake Elmo
Building Department
Building Permit Fees
October 01, 2004 Through October 31, 2004
Date Permit # Permit Fee Surcharge Plan RevielsOther InvestigatiorSAC Fee Sewer Fee WAC Fee Meter Sales Tax
Totals:
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
$8,938.85 $376.01 $509.44 $692.00 $783.75 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Grand Total of Building Related Fees Collected: $11,300.05
Page 3 of 3
Lake Elmo
City Council
November, 2004
Agenda Section: City Engineer's Report No. 8A
Agenda Item: Feasibility Study — Old Village Water Expansion Project
Background Information for November 16. 2004:
The Council has previously ordered a Feasibility Study to address the expansion of the Old Village water
system west to Jamaca; construction of new elevated storage; connection of the Lake Jane system; and
updates of Well #1. An early draft of the report was presented to the Public Works Committee on November
9, resulting in direction from the Committee regarding the proposal contained in the report for an increase in
the City's Water Availability Charge (WAC). Since Phase 1 of the project (extending water service to the
Tapestry OP) is time sensitive, we are bringing the complete Feasibility Report to the Council for
acceptance and/or further direction.
The City Engineer was modifying some sections of the report as this agenda went to press. The amended
report will be provided, along with any required Resolutions addressing next steps, at the November 16
meeting.
Action items:
Motion to accept the Old Village Water Expansion Engineer's
Feasibility Study; and Motion(s) regarding the next steps in the
process, as recommended by the City Engineer.
Attachments:
None
Person eMao u ible:
Time Allocated:
Lake Elmo
City Council
November 16,
2004
Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9A
Agenda Item: Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan — Family Entertainment Center
Background Information for November 16. 2004:
On September 27, 2004 the Planning Commission conducted a properly Noticed Public Hearing to consider
an application by Doug Larson for a Conditional Use Permit to convert the Dolan Marine site (9200 Hudson
Blvd.) to a Family Entertainment Center. Earlier this year the Council adopted amendments to the City
Code that both define "Family Entertainment Center", and allow the use with a CUP in the General
Business zone.
Following the Hearing, the Commission concluded that the application was incomplete, and the applicant
agreed to a tabling of the application and an extension of the 60 day City review period. On October 29 the
applicant submitted documentation and graphics to both support the Conditional Use Permit application and
an application for a Section 520 Site Plan, which was considered by the Commission at its November 8,
2004 meeting.
Following review of the new application materials and extensive discussion, the Commission unanimously
(9-0) adopted a recommendation for approval of both the CUP and the Site Plan based on the mandatory
Findings (CUP) and subject to several conditions — all of which are reflected in the attached Draft
Resolution of approval. The Commission discussion focused on the issues of off-street parking, fire
sprinkling of the structures and the proposed new exterior surface treatments to the south building
elevations. All three issues are addressed by recommended conditions of approval.
Action items:
�99
Motion to adopt Resolution 2004 - , approving a Conditional Use
Permit and Section 520 Site Plan for a Family Entertainment
Center at 9200 Hudson Blvd. per plans Staff Dated October 29,
2004, based on the Findings and subject to the conditions
recommended by the Planning Commission.
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution 2004 - Approving CUP/Site Plan
2. Draft Commission Minutes of November 8, 2004
3. Planning Staff Memo of November 2, 2004
4. Planning Commission Minutes of September 27, 2004
5. Planning Staff Report of September 23, 2004
6. Applicant's Documentation and Graphics
Person resuonsible:
C
Time Allocated:
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHIGNTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 0 S'j
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A FAMILY ENTERTAIMENT CENTER
WHEREAS, Doug Larson has requested a Conditional Use Permit for a Family
Entertainment Center located at 9200 Hudson Boulevard.
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on
September 27, 2004 and reviewed and recommended approval of the Conditional Use
Permit based on the following findings:
1. The use, as proposed and conditioned, will have no negative effect on
the health, safety, morals, convenience, and general welfare of
occupants of surrounding lands.
2. The use, as proposed and conditioned, will not adversely impact
existing and anticipated conditions on adjacent streets and land.
3. The use, as proposed and conditioned, will not have an adverse effect
on utility and school capabilities.
4. The use, as proposed and conditioned, will have no adverse effect on
property values of property in the surrounding area.
5. The use, as proposed and conditioned, will have no adverse effect on
the Comprehensive Plan.
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council on November 16, 2004, reviewed the
application and the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Lake Elmo City Council that a
Conditional Use Permit is hereby approved for a family entertainment center subject to
the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Building Code or other codes regulations regarding building
modifications to meet occupancy health/safety.
2. Submission by the applicant, and approval by the City Planer of an exterior
illumination plan compliant with the lighting standards of the City Code (Chapter
1600).
3. Compliance with the signage standards of the City Code (Chapter 500)
4. Submission of an amended Site Plan demonstrating such off-street parking
modifications (together with required landscape islands) as required. Substitution
of Proof of Parking may be permitted if said proof of parking will be converted to
permanent paved parking upon written Notice by the City at the City's sole
discretion.
5. Subject to a 90-day safety review regarding any reported injuries to customers
related to the activities offered to the Public.
6. Only parking lot and building illumination for security and safety in accordance
with City Code will be allowed; and, lighting of the sign letters must be in
accordance with the code, with no exposed neon. Additional lighting of the
facade, including any "wash" lighting must meet the City Code requirements.
ADOPTED, by the City Council this 16`h day of November, 2004.
Lee Hunt, Mayor
ATTEST:
Martin J. Rafferty
DRAFT
City of Lake Elmo
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes of November 8, 2004
Chairman Helwig called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 pm
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Armstrong, Schneider, Deziel, Sedro, Sessing, Ptacek, and
Roth. STAFF PRESENT: Chuck Dillerud, City Planner and Kimberly Schaffel, Recording
Secretary.
AGENDA
Chairman Helwig added Item 2a, Minutes. M/S/P, Sessing/Sedro, To accept the Agenda as
amended. VOTE: 9:0.
MINUTES
M/S/P, Sedro/Sessing, To accept the Minutes of October 13, 2004 as presented. VOTE: 9:0.
Chairman Helwig said only 8 commissioners were present at the October 25, 2004 meeting so
the vote on page 4 after Legal Opinion should be 8:0. M/S/P, Sessing/Sedro, To accept the
Minutes of October 25, 2004 as amended. VOTE: 8:0:1 (Armstrong: Abstain).
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — Family Entertainment Center
The Planner said he brought this back from a continuance a few weeks ago. He reminded the
Commission that the site is the Dolan's Marine parcel at 9200 Hudson Boulevard.; and, that
the Applicant proposes to modify the site to accommodate a Family Entertainment Center. He
reported that the applicant had now submitted a Section 520 Site Plan to accompany the CUP
application which featured the following site/building improvements/modifications:
1. Paved parking would replace the storage area on the west side of the parcel.
2. An extensive landscape treatment would be added along the south (Hudson Road)
frontage.
3. Exterior graphics and signage would be added to the south elevations of both buildings.
4. A determination had been made by the applicant's architect that fire suppression
sprinkling must be installed to comply with code for the new occupancy type proposed.
The Planner stated that that it is not impossible to do with a private well for fire sprinklers but
could be expensive and difficult. The City water main could be extended from the west ; and,
he noted that property owners to the east of this site had requested City water too. . An
amendment to the City's Water Service Agreement would need approval from the City of
Oakdale. He noted also that the city has drilled a new well in Eagle Point Business Park but
there are no pumping or storage facilities there yet. He said that the City Engineer is
investigating a way to provide some manner of water service and pressure to these properties
from the new well. He said that the City Administrator will be discussing extension of the
Oakdale water service to the site — at least temporarily — with Oakdale officials shortly He
concluded that there is no firm solution for proving City water to the site as yet..
The Planner said That the new application materials reveal no recognized formula for the
determination for the necessity of parking for a Family Entertainment Center. However, he
advised that substantially more parking has been added in the plans. He noted that as many as
234 parking spaces would be required for an equivalent floor area of retaillservice business, but
he is not sure of what might be actually needed for this type of use He also noted that the
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Nov. 8, 2004 1
DRAFT
applicant's proposed grass overflow parking could become mud overflow, and that may not be a
good solution. The Planner suggested that "proof of parking" could be demonstrated beyond the
paved parking proposed and added paved parking where the applicant proposes "grass overflow
parking". He further suggested that the CUP can provide for conversion of the "proof of
parking" to constructed parking if the City finds a parking shortage problem once the facility is
in operation.
The Planner said that he questions whether the graphic exterior additions to the buildings are
building facade or signage; and, if they are found to be building facade, are they exterior
surfacing that complies with City exterior surfacing standards.
The Planner noted that no exterior lighting plans were provided; and that the applicant must meet
the City's outdoor lighting standards.
The Planner pointed out that this is a unique proposal with unique components and unique
questions.
Commissioner Schneider asked if Splat Ball is it in or out.
The Planner said it is not excluded by the definition of Family Entertainment Center. Therefore
he concludes that it would be permitted unless removed as a use by the City as a part of the CUP
process.
Commissioner Deziel asked if Well No. 3 is a solution for the fire sprinklers, when could that go
on line?
The Planner replied that there would be no water available until next construction season, even if
the issues of water source can be resolved promptly, since several hundred feet of trunk water
main would need to be constructed.
Chairman Helwig asked if the sizable billboard is on that property.
The Planner said the billboard is on the applicant's site, and he understand it to be legal though
perhaps non -conforming.
Commissioner Armstrong said he recalled that the Court of Appeals decided the city could
determine the size of the billboard, and the City decided to reduce the allowable area by half.
Hence only half of the billboard area can be used for the message.
Chris Wichser and Dave Herreid, Wichser and Herreid Architects
Ms. Wichser said this much square footage requires fire suppression. So that is their intent.
She continued that the off-street parking formula used for the number of spaces came from a
breakdown of activities like a pool or golf course with participants, people watching and waiting,
and employees. She reported that 341 people is the figure they arrived at; and, that a study of
recreational facilities showed 2.5 people per car.
Ms. Wichser said the City Code specifies no more than 25% impervious surface and the site
exceeds that figure now. It is currently Class 5 gravel. Overflow parking would be pervious.
They could do overflow parking in Class 5 or they could pave the whole thing along with the
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Nov. 8, 2004 2
DRAFT
area to the west of the building but then the 25% is exceeded again. She said they would be
willing to show how parking could work in the northern area of the site along with landscaping.
Ms. Wichser added that the lot is currently all Class 5 now.
Ms. Wichser said that both buildings are orange now. Their plan was to apply something on the
outside to reflect the use of the building. Their intent makes it appear something fun is going on
there. She said this is similar to treatments in the Old Village. They suggested metal panels
because both buildings are metal paneled. The colors chosen are orange, green, and purple
because those are lazer tag colors and aimed at a child. Existing standards of City Code are
meant to maintain as much of and original building as possible. In the 2002 updated standard,
this design meets the 30% accent material standard.
Commissioner Deziel said that if the gravel is deep, it probably is already impervious.
Ms. Wichser said the Applicants' concern is getting through the approval process in order to
meet their funding and financing schedule. Spring might be actual construction. The parking lot
would have to be done during the construction season but interior remodeling could progress all
winter long.
The Planner said water would have to wait until spring because the cost would be too high in the
winter.
Jeff Wyman, Applicant
He said their plan was to be ready to open by February 1, provided the fire suppression issue is
rectified.
Commissioner Schneider asked where the site drains.
Mr. Herreid said about 20% drains west but most drains sloping gradually to the north.
Commissioner Deziel asked if the billboard is staying or going.
Mr. Wyman said the billboard will stay.
Ms. Wichser said the septic drainfield is south near Hudson Boulevard; they would relocate the
tanks south toward the drainfield. They provide a landscape island around the well and it will be
used for irrigation on the site.
Commissioner Roth asked the hours of operation.
Ms. Wichser said the operating hours will be Monday —Thursday 10 to 9pm, 10 to 11 pm on
Saturday ., and Sundays until 6 p.m.
Chairman Helwig asked whether the facade materials meet what materials currently exist?
Ms. Wichser explained it meets the 30% of the total accent surface area standard. She said the
side of the building is 16 feet high. Sign would be 35 square feet to meet the code.
Commissioner Sedro suggested that if the city is not precluding splat ball, a safety review period
would be appropriate.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Nov. 8, 2004 3
DRAFT
Commissioner Ptacek said the surfacing is similar steel siding like it looks now.
Ms. Wichser explained that the corrugated steel siding which exists is not allowed in the code.
She said it is a different metal and not corrugated.
Commissioner Ptacek asked about using something more modern like stucco.
Ms. Wichser said there is also a percentage limit on that material too. Metal panels are more
modern and lively. That is her initial reaction.
Mr. Herreid showed a sample of the steel product. He said stucco is more likely to fade and
color fades rapidly. This product is more colorfast. It has a honeycombed backing and it is used
on more modern high rises. It is specifically designed to look like aluminum but it is steel.
Commissioner Schneider said he thinks the panels are signs. He would like to see no lighting on
that surface at all. He particularly did not want those jagged edges outlined with lights.
Ms. Wichser said the building is lit and there are parking lights. There are no lights on the back
building. They are looking to light just the portion for the sign.
Mr. Herreid said the words would be backlit and they would like to keep the lighting on the
building. He said it cannot be seen by driving by it.
Commissioner Armstrong said we can make these issues subject to later review or deal with
them now and define what we mean now.
Commissioner Ptacek observed that it was clear to him that fire sprinklers would be mandatory
for this use in these buildings. He also noted that the building and site would need to comply
with City Code lighting standards. He stated that he considers the proposed metal graphics to be
building facade, and that only the lettering on the facade to be actual signage. He stated that he is
comfortable with the metal facade proposal size if it fits lighting and sign code. He noted that
the site appears to have ample area in the rear for the additional parking that may be required and
asked if the applicant had approached the neighboring business to the east regarding shared
parking arrangements.
Ms. Wichser reported that since the applicant had determined that there was enough room on -site
for off street parking they had not approached the neighboring business in that regard.
Commissioner Schneider stated that he had a concern with the size and intent of the facade
graphics proposed. He indicated that he would not wish to see neon lighted outlines or similar
additions to the graphics that would turn a new facade totally into a sign. At a minimum he
would want to see a condition that would preclude any such facade lighting.
Commissioner Sedro stated that she sees the graphics as more of a sign than a facade. She noted,
however, that if the Commission finds the graphics to be a facade addition, she agrees that the
facade material proposed (metal) may meet the City Code exemption standard for new exterior
surfacing of an existing building, since the existing building is primarily surfaced with metal -
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Nov. 8, 2004 4
DRAFT
even though it may be hard to call the new facade "identical" as the Code states it must be for the
exemption.
Ms. Wichser suggested that the facade could be considered to be "exterior surfacing accent"
materials, which are allowable by Code to be up to 30% of the exterior surface. "Architectural
Metal" is one of the allowable accent materials and the area of the proposed graphics/facade
would be well under the 30% maximum allowed.
The City Planner noted that even if it is the consensus of the Commission that the proposed
graphics are allowable facade and not totally signage, the lettering on the graphics is still signage
and cannot be higher than the building parapet or more than 20 feet above grade — whichever is
lower. He observed that the location of the lettering as proposed would likely not be totally in
compliance with that requirement.
Commissioner Schneider asked if the site is still zoned General Business.
The City Planner responded that the site is zoned General Business.
M/S/P, Ptacek/Deziel, To recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a Family
Entertainment Center based upon Findings and recommendations as described in the Staff Report
along with Planning Commission interpretations regarding proposed building graphics after
discussion tonight, and adding the following conditions to those proposed by the Planning Staff
Report:
1. That the CUP be subject to subject to a 90 day safety review regarding any reported
injuries to customers related to activities offered to the Public.
2. Only parking lot and building illumination for security and safety in accordance with City
Code will be allowed, and lighting of the sign letters must be in accordance with the
code, with no exposed neon. Additional lighting of the facade, including any `wash'
lighting must meet the City Code requirements.
Commissioner Roth said he likes the concept and the proposed improvement of the existing
structure. He noted, however, that he hopes other similar businesses will not consider this to be
an invitation to locate in this area of the city.
VOTE: 9:0.
90 day safety review not harmed by splatball.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Nov. 8, 2004 5
MEMO
(November 2, 2004 for the Meeting of November 8, 2004)
To: Lake Elmo P
From: Chu
ing Commission
Subject: Conditional Use Permit for a Family Entertainment Center
The Commission tabled this application at its September 27 meeting — with the specific
and stated concession by the applicant that the application was incomplete, and that the
applicant needed additional time to address application details and issues raised by the
September 23 Planning Staff Report (copy attached hereto).
On October 29, 2004 the applicant submitted additional application documentation. That
documentation is sufficient as to detail and content to qualify as a Section 520 Site Plan,
and this application has therefore been amended to include a concurrent Site Plan
application — as was suggested by the prior Planning Staff Report.
Staff review of the documentation submitted on October 29 leads to the following
observations and findings:
Building Occupancy
Staff has suggested that conversion of the existing marine sales/service use to a Family
Entertainment Center would require significant structure modifications to ensure
compliance with applicable life/safety codes. The applicant's architect has addressed the
code occupancy issues. While the details of the structural modifications proposed to
address those codes is not pertinent to this review, it should be noted that the architect
has determined fire suppression sprinklers are required. While fire sprinkler operation is
technically possible with a private well (which now serves this site with potable water),
properly equipping a private well for fire service is both complex and costly.
Both the applicant and the new owner of the "White Wolf' building 400 feet east of the
Dolan site have informally requested extension of City water service to their sites — both
requests to accommodate a retrofit of fire sprinkler systems to the existing buildings. City
water (the Eagle Point system) now terminates along Hudson Blvd. about 900 feet west
of the Dolan site. While the water main along Hudson is over -sized sufficiently for City
water service a significant distance east and north; and, while the City has drilled a new
well (#3) within the Eagle Point Business Park, the Eagle Point water system continues to
use Oakdale water (by interconnection agreement) pending the addition of pumping and
pressurization equipment to Well #3.
To provide City water service to the Dolan (and White Wolf) site would require either
amendment to the Oakdale water agreement to expand the service area, or the completion
of the Well #3 facility by the City. City Staff is investigation both service strategies.
Off -Street Parkin
By the Section 520 Site Plan now submitted, the applicant proposes to convert the present
outdoor storage area to a paved off-street parking area for 107 cars; and, an unsurfaced
"overflow" parking area for 29 cars. The calculates to an off-street parking ratio of 1
space per 450 square feet building area on the paved parking and 1 space per 350 square
feet building area when the unpaved "over -flow" is added. While the Lake Elmo City
Code does not address parking for Family Entertainment Centers (nor does any other
city's that we are aware of), a point of reference from the Lake Elmo Code would be that
retail uses are required to provide one off-street parking space for each 150 square feet of
gross building floor area (averaged over a descending scale based building area); and one
space for each 200 square feet of gross building floor area for "other commercial sues
(excluding wholesale)" (Page 300-37 of the Lake Elmo City Code).
Applying the more liberal of those ratios (200) to the 46,860 gross square feet proposed
for Family Entertainment Center use would result in a requirement for 234 off-street
parking spaces. How does the PLC use compare with "other commercial uses (excluding
wholesale)"? There would appear to be ample site area north of the buildings to
accommodate additional off-street parking. It appears prudent to require the Site Plan to,
at a minimum, designate areas north of the building as "proof of parking" up to the 234
space level; and, for the Conditional Use Permit to clearly specify that the City may at its
sole discretion mandate construction of additional parking (without the normal CUP
violation "due process") should parking problems surface. hi addition, "grass area"
overflow parking will likely become "mud area" — if utilized as the parking ratios suggest
it may be. It appears prudent for the City to require the "over flow" parking area to be
permanent, paved, and designed with landscape islands as required by Code.
The off-street parking now proposed by the Site Plan (except the "grass area") appears to
comply with the design standards specified by City Code — including the required
landscape islands.
Site Improvement
The City Code requires a minimum expenditure for site landscaping as a component of
new commercial construction — but not for site/structure rehabilitation, as is proposed by
this Site Plan. The applicant has, however, proposed by his Site Plan to significantly
enhance the site appearance with new landscape treatment of the Hudson Blvd. frontage —
together with the required parking area island landscaping.
Exterior Structure Treatment/Sienaee/Liehting
The applicant proposes significant modifications to the exterior appearance of both
existing structures on the Dolan site. The south elevations of both buildings, and a small
portion to the west elevation of Building A would be refaced with "pre -finished
architectural panels" (probably metal) with a combination graphic design and signage. In
addition, the applicant proposes to repaint the existing metal exterior of at least the west
elevation of the east building (Building A). By the graphics color pallet provided
(unfortunately not reproducible, but purple -on -orange on Building A, and orange -on -
purple on Building B) it certainly appears that the graphics are intended to be a form of
signage.
If the south/west elevation wall graphics are determined to actually be signage, the wall
graphics (now as totally "signage") both significantly exceed the City's allowable wall
signage area, and also exceed the maximum allowable signage height (building parapet
height or 20 feet from grade, whichever is lower).
Should the proposed south/west elevation exterior wall treatment not be defined as
signage, the 2002 amendments to all commercial zoning districts regarding exterior
surfacing may then apply. Compliance with those standards is exempted if a existing
building is enlarged (over 100%) or existing exterior surfacing is replaced — but only if
any surfacing additions or replacements are "...identical to that of the existing structure".
While it should be apparent what that clause was intended to preclude (radically different
exterior treatments on the same structure), Staff questions whether what is here proposed
does or does not meet the Code exemption standard. The exterior surface of the building
is really not being replaced — just covered with the graphics.
The Commission's guidance and recommendation in this matter is requested. Most of the
same commissioners that crafted the 2002 architectural standards for commercial zones
remain on the Commission.
The applicant has not proposed exterior lighting of building, parking lot or signage. It is
logical to assume that some or all of those site features will include lighting. With respect
to any building security lighting and parking area lighting, the City Code prescribes strict
technical standards responsive to both the "Good Neighbor Lighting" and "Dark Sky"
initiatives.
Summary
The applicant has made substantial efforts toward addressing both the lack of application
documentation and engaging the issues that raised by the earlier Planning Staff Report
and the Commission. Three issues of significance remain:
1. Will a solution to the water/fire sprinkler matter be forthcoming? Should the
Conditional Use Permit, if otherwise approved, include a condition that fire
suppression sprinklers be installed — regardless of the outcome of the request to
extend City water service to the site?
2. Will the off-street parking now proposed be sufficient, even though the City' s
standards may suggest that it may not be?
3. Are the south/west building elevation treatments proposed actually signage, and
therefore non -compliant?
4. If it is determined that the proposed south/west elevation treatments are not totally
signage, do those exterior treatments then comply with the 2002 exterior surfacing
standards of the City Code — or, are they exempt? Even if it is found that the
overall graphics are Code compliant by interpretation, it will still be necessary for
the symbols and lettering on those graphics to be lowered if they are to be Code
compliant as signage.
Assuming the applicant does not modify his plans responsive to the issues that are here
raised prior to the November 8 meeting, Staff respectfully requests the Commission
initially address those four issues regarding this application. The Commission's
recommendations regarding those issues would either become findings supporting a
CUP/Site Plan denial, or conditions/findings supporting a CUP/Site Plan approval.
As with any Conditional Use Permit application, the Planning Commission is directed by
the City Code to consider such application with respect to the following:
1. Effect on the health, safety, morals, convenience, and general welfare of
occupants of surrounding lands.
2. Existing and anticipated conditions on adjacent streets and lands.
3. Effect on utility and school capacities.
4. Effect on property values of property in the surrounding area.
5. Effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan.
The Commission may recommend conditions of approval (in addition to those that may
be mandatory for the specific use in the Zoning Ordinance — in this case, none) to assure
the earlier -listed any concerns are addressed. Positive Findings by the Commission
regarding at least #1 and #2 and #3 above may be impacted by the parking and water
service issues.
A Section 520 Site Plan is reviewed by the Commission for compliance with
submission/documentation requirements of the City Code as well as for compliance with
design standards prescribed by the Zoning Ordinance and pertinent other provisions of
the City Code. No variances from those standards have been applied for even though
non-compliance with several zoning provisions may be implied by the plans submitted —
which can not be waived by the Conditional Use Permit. Depending on the
determinations of the Commission regarding the issues raised above, it may be necessary
to again table this application pending appropriate zoning variance application, Notice
and Hearing.
Pending the applicant's and Commission's disposition of the issues Staff has raised here,
a firm staff recommendation regarding the Site Plan or the Conditional Use Permit is
premature. The Site Plan does not comply with zoning standards (to what degree depends
on how the Commission decides to interpret issues raised here); and, as a result, the
proposal may not affirmatively respond to some of the required CUP findings.
Once the Commission has rendered the necessary interpretations of Code compliance, the
Conditional Use Permit/Site Plan recommendation (if for approval) should include at
least the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Building Code or other codes regulations regarding building
modifications to meet occupancy health/safety.
2. Submission by the applicant, and approval by the City Planner of an exterior
illumination plan compliant with the lighting standards of the City Code (Chapter
1600).
3. Compliance with the signage standards of the City Code (Chapter 500).
4. Submission of an amended Site Plan demonstrating such off-street parking
modifications (together with required landscape islands) as required. Substitution
of Proof of Parking may be permitted if said proof of parking will be converted to
permanent paved parking upon written Notice by the City at the City's sole
discretion.
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Minutes of September 27, 2004
2. Planning Staff Report of September 23, 2004
3. Applicant's Documentation and Graphics
APPkQVED: OCT. 1'd, 2C404
.nmmissioners will consider it.
Commissioner c 01"itdtee the nerg or gets in and out by baclting out onto County Road
17.
Mr. Brookman said that is dangerous and traffic is getting worse.
Commissioner Ptacek asked if the speed limit is 30 there. He asked if a Lot Line Adjustmen
with the neighbor to the south (perhaps resulting in both garage locations becoming confo
to setbacks) would be a better solution.
Mr. Brookman said it would be easier to grant the variance.
THE CHAIRMAN OPENED PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:49 P.M.
Nobody offered testimony.
THE CHAIR CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:
Commissioner Ptacek said he appreciates the need .r garages but that they should be built at the
setback. He said it was a black and white issue at the variance is not needed,
M/S/P, PtaceldSessing, To recommend ial of a sideyard setback variance based on Findings
and recommendations in the Staff R ,rt
Commissioner Deziel said w ould think of these situations when we make those setback laws.
This is a good example o ,.'need to build flexibility into our zoning laws.
Commissioner Se• said building on a lot line puts undo burden on a neighbor.
Mr. Broo an pointed out that his neighbor has the same situation.
PUBLIC HEARING: CUP - Family Entertainment Center
He did not find reference in the application that they still wanted to use the building B for
paintball. However, he understands the applicant does intend to use that building for paintball.
Cleanup of that site would be a positive for the city. The commission could make that a
condition. Five findings for a CUP to be addressed by PZ. Four of the five have been addressed.
Hours of operation have been supplied that indicate after school and on weekends primarily.
Question is compatibility with abutting businesses. Lumberyard is closed would the use here
spill over onto that empty property. Basic sketch of parking. No standards to apply a parking
formula because we have no experience with it. Will parking be sufficient, if not? Where will
they park? Compatibility of Building A with respect to occupancy for building code
requirements and ADA? BO required to review application and use for CO and ADA
requirements. Suggest we are not prepared to make a recommendation, we need more detail.
Site plan as rendered by a professional that addresses parking, paving, landscaping, and ada and
CO standards. Specific detail of building B. Thinks it could function at he proposed use but not
without more information. Error in the staff report The application is dated September 7, 2004.
This has to be decided by November 3 by the City Council.
APPROVED: OCT. 13, 2004
Schneider lighting exterior addressed in the site plan detail? Planner yes. Process like a 520 site
plan. That will answer many of the questions.
Deziel off-street parking requirements if operational hours of neighbors? jOINT use of parking
allowed by the code. That has to be specific. Possible. Planner.
Doug Larson, Applicant
He agrees with Planner that his information was rather sparse. David Herreid has been hired and
will look into codes, fire, and ADA. Full site plans with landscape plans. Will draw it up that
way. He will abide by the rules.
Parking spoke with Lamberts they can use it and can get it in writing. Will move the fence back
for the boat storage. There is plenty of parking available. One of the reasons has not done this
before. Not a developer or realtor. It is a good location and the building will work just fine. Did
not want to spend a fortune to get it going. Now that they know it is feasible, they are going with
the architect.
Indoor paintball in Building B. Safe and controlled under constant supervision, uniformed, a
waiver notarized before you can even get into the place. Well run and clean facility is the only
way it can be operated. Would like to table his application until October 13 and David will have
preliminary drawings done. Can do a better presentation done and will get it sooner so you have
copies in advance.
Sessing boat storage back. Yes boat and ry storage. There have been people coming there
forever that want to continue to park there. Planner if it needed a CUP, it is a current use. If
reducing the scale, we can do little about it. Unless he agreed, we would have a hard time
removing it. Larson will move it back because of appearance.
Sedro paintball safety concern. Is there some way to write in safety record provisional timeline?
Problem if you don't put a timeline, stuck with it. Planner will speak to Herreid about timeline.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:17 p.m. and closed at 9:18 p.m.
M/S/P, PtaceldSedro, To table the application VOTE: 6:0 PASSED.
Ptacek concerns had been about the paintball.
Approved sideyard setback for Price. Approved CUP for salon/day spa. Both witho r-.,'ges
from your recommendations. One set of interviews of potential planning con oners
continued for a couple of interviewees. Two openings on the PZ. T sizable group of
applicants.
Consider a new moratorium for the Old Villas es it will be extended coming up at next
meeting. Surface water will be ready . n.
Authorized a plannin, - or fire services for the community. Equipment, staffing, locations
of stations, . - .a others including a look at regional fire service instead of local fire service.
ullli,mitemirstifetTr*
LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
Date: September 23, 2004 for the Meeting of September 27, 2004
Applicant: Doug Larson
Location: 9200 Hudson Blvd.
Requested Action: Conditional Use Permit for a Family Entertainment Center
Land Use Plan Guiding: Limited Business
Existing Zoning: General Business
Site History and Existing Conditions:
City records regarding this 9.5 acre site begin in 1971 and are extensive. It appears that the
existing 33,000 square foot structure was constructed in 1972, and the existing 13,000 square foot
structure (referred to as a cold storage "pole barn") was constructed in 1978. There also appears to
have been a Special Use Permit (similar to a CUP) issued in about 1975 for gravel mining in the
rear portion of the site. That permit was annually renewed until about 1980, and not thereafter.
The site contains the aforementioned structures (separated by 60 feet) in the southeast one -quarter
(closest to Hudson Blvd.), and an exterior storage yard exists in the southwest one quarter. The
north one half of the site (the portion that was previously "mined") remains vacant. It appears that
the 33,000 square foot structure is now used for boat/motor/trailer sales and service. It also
appears that a franchised truck/trailer rental operation is operated out of the same structure. Both
uses are Permitted in the General Business District.. Staff has no information regarding the present
use of the 13,000 square foot accessory building, but we assume it is now used for boat storage
only, based on the design of the structure.
The 1990 and 2000 Comprehensive Plans classify this site as Limited Business, while the zoning
of the site has been and continues to be General Business. In 2002 the Planning Commission
recommended that this site, along with 4 other sites with similar non -conforming zoning be
rezoned for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan (which is required by State Statute). The
City Council decided not to proceed with the Commissions recommendation pending the
completion of a new City zoning ordinance that may provide a measure of flexibility in zoning
classification based on use performance.
Discussion and Analysis:
The applicant proposes a Conditional Use Permit to permit conversion of the 33,000 square foot
building ("Building A" on the applicant's graphics) from marine sales/service to a Family
Entertainment Center (FEC) responsive the recent amendments to both the General Business zone
text, and the Definition section of the City Code. The applicant has provided a generic description
of a "Family Entertainment Center" that appears to have been prepared by an industry
organization, as well as sketch floor plans of the 33,000 square foot building that depict the
proposed Family Entertainment uses. Finally, the applicant has provided a sketch plan of the site
on which very generalized site improvements ("landscape" and "new blacktop") are depicted.
We note that no floor plans or uses are specified for "Building B" (the 13,000 square foot cold
storage pole building). Staff had previously understood that the applicant intended to use that
structure for "indoor paintball". While specific reference to that use was deleted from the "Family
Entertainment" definition adopted by the City Council, that action does not necessarily preclude
indoor paintball as a potentially allowable function of "Family Entertainment" — but it must be
specifically declared with the CUP application to be included in the annroval.
The Zoning Ordinance prescribes that the Commission must consider and report to the City
Council regarding several Findings regarding any Conditional Use Permit application, generally as
follows:
1. Effect on the health, safety, morals, convenience, and general welfare of occupants of
surrounding lands.
2. Existing and anticipated conditions on adjacent streets and lands.
3. Effect on utility and school capacities.
4. Effect on property values of property in the surrounding area.
5. Effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan.
The FEC application for a CUP, as described by the applicant, suggests a use that differs in
operations and the scale/timing of Public visitation from the existing marine dealership use on the
site, adjacent businesses, and the type of business use that the Limited Business Comprehensive
Plan guiding of the site contemplates. In this context, the City must carefully consider Conditional
Use Permit Findings #1, #2, #3 and #4.
By its nature, (and the applicant's proposed hours/days of operation) it is reasonable to expect that
during most of a year the highest concentration of Public visitors to the FEC facility would occur
after normal business during the evening and on weekends. Will this result in a negative impact on
business neighbors to the east that are not open to the Public during what will become the FEC's
busiest time frame?
The applicant has provided a very basic sketch of proposed off-street parking and an estimate of
the number of employees. Can the scale of off street parking suggested actually be accommodated
within the area of the site so designated? What will be the maximum amount of parking required?
If that amount exceeds the capacity of the applicant's off-street parking, where will the surplus
vehicles end up — on the Public street (impacting safety and the ability of the street to carry
traffic), or in the parking areas of the adjacent business?
The proposed change of occupancy for the 33,000 square foot structure from marine dealership to
FEC will surely result in a requirement to comply with both ADA and building/fire code access
and occupant loading standards for that building. The Public's health and safety are critical issues
with such a facility. The applicant has not conversed with the City Fire Chief of Building Official
regarding those issues to date, nor has he advised the City that any other responsible parties have
been consulted. Is it even feasible to convert that structure for the proposed occupancy type and
loading?
Findings and Recommendations:
The Zoning Ordinance is not specific as to the degree of detail an applicant must provide with
checklist submission requirements. As such Staff normally provides an applicant "due process' by
moving an application to the Planning Commission once the minimal submission requirements
appear to be complied with. That does not preclude the Commission from requiring additional
application documentation prior to adopting a recommnendation to the City Council. Staff suggest
that this may be the circumstance with this application. We suggest that firm Planning
Commission Findings regarding this CUP application without additional applicant documentation
would not be in the City's best interests. Such additional applicant documentation could (should)
include:
1. A detailed site plan prepared by a registered professional (City staff can not do the design)
that:
a. Calculates the actual number of off-street parking spaces that are required based on
reliable third party information.
b. Lays out an off-street parking plan in detail that accommodates the scale of off
street parking that is required;, and complies with the parking landscape
requirements of the City Code.
c. Details such other landscaping and screening of the site that the applicant proposes.
d. Details any architectural modifications to the structure(s) proposed by the applicant
and all Code compliant signage of the business the applicant proposes.
2. A specific declaration by the applicant regarding uses proposed for Building B.
3. Documentation by the applicant — based on a careful review of applicable fire/building
codes — as to the modifications to Building A required for the proposed Public occupancy.
Staff believes that this site could function as an FEC with appropriate design/conditions to protect
adjacent property owners, the Public health/safety, and the Public street. We do not, however,
believe, that a determination can be rendered on the basis of the minimal information that has been
provided by the applicant to date.
Planning Commission Actions Requested:
This application is dated August 15, 2004. State Statute requires that a decision be completed by a
city on a Planning/Zoning application within 60 days of the application date unless the applicant
specifically waives that time line. The time line for this application would require Council action
on or before November 3 should no waiver be agreed to by the applicant. Commission action on
this application must therefore be completed by the October 26 meeting upon the same
assumption. Staff suggests that the application be tabled until no later than October 26, 2004 with
direction to the applicant to provide the additional application documentation outlined above.
Should sufficient documentation not be provided the City (or a written 60 day review waiver from
the applicant), the Commission should adopt a recommendation to the Council on October 26
based on whatever docume tanon is then available.
'[
Charles E. DiiTerud, City Planner
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Ordinances 97-139 and 97-138
3. Planning Commission Minutes of August 23, 2004
4. Applicant's Documentation
WHAT EXACTI IS A FAMILY ENTER` \INMENT
CENTER?
What exactly is a family entertainment center (FEC)'? The term serves I designate an
industry as a whole, as well as to define a specific segment within that industry. The
FEC industry consists of for -profit leisure centers that range from 10,000 S.F. Indoor
children's play centers to outdoor Fun Centers, large •
category -killer indoor family entertainment centers to
multi -acre outdoor mega -centers, and encompasses
centers that target families with children, teenagers
and/or adults.
The term "industry" didn't really apply to the FEC
market until about 1990. Before then most FECs
were mainly outdoor miniature golf -anchored family
Fun Centers. Today's rapidly growing FEC industry
now encompasses many new and different categories
of centers in both outdoor and indoor configurations,
including children's entertainment centers (CFCs),
children's edutainment centers (CEdCs), FECs, adult
entertainment centers (AECs), and urban -based
location -based entertainment (LBEs) centers.
Although many pioneering and early generation
indoor FECs, such as the Discovery Zone chain (not
technically an FEC), experienced difficulty or failed,
the industry has matured with successful formulas and with the entry of many
corporate players. A number of indoor FECs have now stood the test of time with long
term, successful operation. Examples include Sports' & Games in Hanover, NJ;
American Adventures in Atlanta, GA and probably the oldest operating indoor FEC,
Enchanted Castle in Chicago, IL.
Family entertainment centers are generally defined as having these characteristics:
• Unlike theme and amusement parks, their markets are community -based.
• Locations are in or near residential areas rather than In downtown or tourist
locations (urban and tourist equivalents of FECs are often referred to as urban
entertainment centers, UECs, or location -based entertainment centers. LSE's).
• Success depends on repeat visits of six or more times per year.
• Length of stay averages two to two and one-half hours.
• Per -capita expenditure per visit are in the US$B-US$14 range.
• FECs have mail into anrhnr attrartinnc. This is what differentiates FECs from
single anchored leisure attractions such as bowling centers, skating centers, laser
tag facilities, miniature golf only facilities and pay -for -play centers using soft
contained play equipment such as Discovery Zone. It Is the multiple anchors that
create an EEC's image and critical mass and create its appeal and draw.
• Although not considered an anchor draw to FECs, a significant percentage of
Income (25th percent) comes from token -operated games.
A significant percentage of income also comes from food and beverages, birthday
parties and other celebrations.
FECs range in size from 15,000 to 200,000 square
feet for indoor facilities and up to 15 acres for
outdoor facilities. Types of anchor attractions often
found in FECs include for the indoors3Arldes, soft -
contained play, laser tag, children's edutainment
events and skating; and for the outdoors -miniature
golf, go-karts, bumper boats, children's adventure
play gardens and batting cages.
Code Review
Site: 9200 Hudson Boulevard North
Code used: 2000 IBC, Minnesota State Building Code, MN State Accessiblity Code.
Occupancy classification: A-3 Assembly.
Maximum Occupancy: 350 (based on activity centers with maximum usage- see
attached document). '
Construction Type:
II-B (non combustible)
Insulation with flame spread less than 25 is permitted in this type
(sec. 603), exception of less that 100 is allowed is insulation is
between (2) layers of noncombustible materials (sec. 603).
Building height: 1 story.
Automatic Sprinkler System: NFPA 13.
Allowable area for type 11-B: 9500 S.F. (table 503)
Allowable increase:
• Frontage increase: (506.1) If = 100 (1630/1630 — 0.25) x 2 = 1.5 (506.2)
1.5 x 9500 = 14,250 s.f.
• Automatic sprinkler increase (506.10): = 9500s.f. x 3 = 28,500 s.f.
• Total Allowable with above increases:
9,500 s.f. (Table 503)
+ 14,250 s.f. (506.1)
+ 28,500 s.f. (506.3)
= 52,250 s.f. buildings A & B
• Actual Building A & B area = 46,860 s.f.
Occupant load: 341 (see attached breakdown)
Parking based on traffic study of Family Entertainment Centers: 341 / 2.5 = 136
• Parking provided 136
October 29, 2004 "The Rec" Activity Occupancies
!ACTIVITY
ILAZER TAG
BATTING CAGES
SMALL CAGE
PITCHING CAGES
MINI -GOLF
REAL SPORTS
SMALL CHILD PLAY
SMALL CHILD RIDES
ARCADE AREA
PARENTS ROOM 20x25
PARTY AREA
CONFERENCE ROOMS 15 x25
RETAIL SPACE
FRONT DESK
SNACKS
SQ FT # PLAYERS/ NOTES
GAMES
350 20 Players
20 Waiting
4
1
EATING
REST ROOMS
LOCKERS
OFFICE
EMPLOYEE AREA
STORAGE
IUTILITIES
ITOKEN MACHU':ES
ATTENDANTS
ISPLAT BALL
TOTAL
3000-
4000
20x
10x10
1
9
HOLES
1
3
70
4 TABLES
10' wl PORTABLE MOUNDS-48', 54', 60'
CAN SNAKE AROUND OTHER ACTIVITIES
OUT IN OPEN, REALLY COOL
(3) INFLATABLES-EA. @ ABOUT 16x20
SMALL ARCADE AND RIDES
NO WALLS
GAS FP, WORK STNS, COUCHES, CHAIRS,
GLASS WINDOWS OUT TO ACTIVITIES
NO WALLS, PICNIC TABLES
2 CAN BE RENTED BY COMPANIES OR FOR
LOCK -INS LOCKABLE
PIZZA OVEN, GREASELESS FRYER,
POPCORN MACHINE
SMALL WALK-IN REFRIG, FREEZER,
STORAGE FOR SUPPLIES
NEAR SNACKS + OTHERS SCATTERED
2 WC(M), 4 WC(W), 2 LAVS/EA, 1 DF,
1 SERV SINK
250 SQUARE LOCKERS LIKE AT AIRPORT
11
GOOD VIEW OF ACTIVITIES
OVER 15 EMPL. REQ SEPARATE FACILITIES
ELECTRICAL ROOM
SCATTERED THROUGHOUT FACILITY
SEVERAL AROUND FACILITY TO KEEP
EYES ON GAME AREAS
BLDG B
Wichser Remold Architects, Inc.
MAX NO I
VIS EMPLI
40 2
10
3
6
27
5
10
10
90
10
35
20
4
20
1
1
1
2
1
40 3
330 11
Preliminary Landscape Construction Cost Estimate based on .
Landscape Plan dated October 29,2004
The Rec Center
October 29, 2004
Item
A Red Maple 2.5" cal.
B Marshall's Seedless Ash 2.5" cal.
C Quaking Aspen 1.5" cal.
D Red Pine 6'-8'
---------- -------- - -------
E - Pagoda Dogwood #7
American Hjghbush Cranberry #2
Glossy Black Chokeberry #2
H Miss Kim Lilac #2
- - ------------
I Compact Am. Cranberry Bush #2
J Dwf Winged Euonymus #2
K Arcadia Juniper _ #2_
L Creeping Emeral Pink Phlox 4"
M Black Eyed Susan #1
_N_ ,_Stella De Oro Dayllly #1
O Autumn joy Sedum #1
Poly Ed_ging _
shredded bark mulch w/ mat
I I-2" Bryan Red Rock mulch
sod
topsoil
pruning / clean up existing
turf improvements / overseedin
Total
Unit
b & b ea.
b& b ea.
b&b ea.
ea.
cont. ea.
cont ea.
cont ea.
cont ea.
-T
cont i ea.
cont
cont
pot
cont
cont
cont
-
ea.
ea
ea.
Qty. Unit {' Installed
Price Total
3 $350.00 $I,050.00
10 $300.00 $3,000.00
$200.00 $1,600.00
$350.00 $700.00
$75.00 $225.00
$38.00 $228.00
$29.00 $203.00
13 $38.00 $494.00
5 $38.00 $ 190.00
5 $29.00 $145.00
26 $49.00 $1,274.00
30 $7.00 $210.00
ea. 26 $15.00 $390.00
ea. 63 $15.00 $945,00
ea. 59 $ 15.00 $885.00
If
sf
SY
sy
ry_
Is
acre
Paul Miller Design, Inc
7533 Paul Road
Woodbury,MN
651) 731 - 9659
500 $3.50 $I,750.00
4,000 $0.75 $3,000.00
185 $9.00 $1,665.00
265 $3.00 $795.00
15 $30.00 $450.00
I $1,500.00 $1,500.00
0.5 $3,000.00 $ I ,500.00
T $22,199.00
A ISSAGE TO COMMUNITY PLANNEK.,I
FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT CENTERS ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS!
By Peter F. Olesen P.E.
Introduction:
This article is addressed to the community leaders, administrators and citizens of any community considering
an application to construct and operate a family entertainment center. Its purpose is to present realistic
information concerning the realities of a facility proposed to become a fixture in your community.
Many people have never visited a modern family entertainment center and therefore may have formed
misguided opinions as to the impact a family entertainment center (FEC) will have on the local neighborhood
in which it is proposed to be built. It is hoped that the information presented in this article is read with an open
mind. Once you have had the opportunity to read and evaluate the information presented herein, you should
have a better understanding as to what an FEC is and what it is not.
FECs may consist of a concession go-kart track and arcade building, a miniature golf course and arcade
building or a combination of these attractions plus bumper boats, additional go-kart tracks, miniature golf
courses, Laser tag, batting cages, soft play and other attractions. In other situations, the facility may be a
building containing a variety of attractions, birthday party and or corporate meeting rooms, and minor food
services. The mixes may vary, but the underlying concept of providing family oriented entertainment remains
the same.
An FEC can only succeed if the local community accepts it and finds it to be a positive addition. Most
potential developers of FECs are people with a strong desire to be a positive factor in the life and
development of their local community. Those who do not have this approach will be setting a course toward
failure. Properly designed, constructed and operated, family entertainment centers will be positive additions
to any community, not only in providing clean entertaining recreation for a wide segment of the community for
many years to come. As the name implies, they provide family, entertainment for a broad cross section of the
American family, from toddlers to seniors.
This article is based on factual technical information as well as experience with numerous new and existing
FECS around the country. Most facilities are properly operated, do not accept rowdy or anti -social behavior
by guests and are positive factors in their communities. .They are- not the dingy facilities of twenty or thirty
years ago that attracted the less socially adjusted individuals: The great majority are well received and
supported by their local communities. ;, .o e; I.;t , .. t.:
We ask that this article be read with an open mind. Once youhave read the information contained herein,
visited existing facilities or contacted other communities to find out their experiences, we feel you will have a
positive attitude toward the concept and an open mind with respect to the local developer's proposed project.
Unfortunately, there are times when "the fear of the unknown'.' generates opposition to one of the potentially
best family oriented attractions that 'can be developed within your. community. Properly conceived, designed,
constructed and operated facilities will provide positive experiences for the entire community, including
families, youths, adults and senior citizens.
In every community there exists a desire for family entertainment and recreation beyond the local theaters,
fast food outlets, organized sports, school and church activities. While some communities are fortunate to
have available a wide range of such activities, both publicly funded. and private, this is not the usual situation.
Most communities lack outside activities for almost every age group, especially pre -teens and teenagers.
This is reflected in the difficulties in accommodating these age groups in family outings. It also results in the
individual or peer group activities they partake in when not part of family units. Without wholesome outlets,
these activities may result in antisocial activities.
Of course, it is possible to make family outings to regional and destination theme parks and related facilities.
The problems with this solution include the following:
1. It requires a major time commitment.
2. The cost per family unit is very high for both travel and admission costs.
3. For destination facilities, food, lodging and travel costs must be added.
1
For many families, these visits are riot economically feasible. Even for those families that can afford them,
such trips are usually taken on an annual or' longer spacing. Therefore, the shorter, less costly visits on a
more frequent basis provide a benefit to everyone.
The development of FECs over the years has provided the public in many communities to have an alternative
to doing nothing, hanging out at the mall, becoming couch potatoes or becoming involved in antisocial
activities (this is especially true for the teen age segment of the community). They take many forms and
provide countless numbers of family and other group activities governed by time constraints, economics,
personal preference and physical limitations.
Outdoor or combined indoor/outdoor facilities offer the potential of providing the greatest variety of activities.
Properly conceived, they can provide entertainment opportunities over the complete age range from toddler to
grandparent. Proper conception, design and construction enable FECs to become valuable assets to any
community. By their nature, they are happy places where people enjoy themselves. Integral to their success
is becoming attractive additions to their neighborhood.
Careful selection of attractions assures that they appeal to both individuals and groups, providing
opportunities to observe or participate as they choose. Enjoyment can be gained from both approaches.
Success of the FEC also depends on acceptance by the local community. As a result, planning must include
consideration of its impact on the surrounding community. This includes consideration of appearance, the
people attracted, traffic on adjacent streets, noise, lighting, drainage and related issues.
in developing an FEC in any community, both the developer and the designer seek to create an appealing,
comfortable and entertaining environment for families. To be successful, the facility must attract repeat
attendance. These characteristics are the same ones that will generate a good neighbor image for the
surrounding community. Often, people associate FECs with the old time amusement parks that came into
being more than a hundred years ago. These facilities were usually a collection of hard rides and a midway
consisting of individual games and rides managed 'by separate owners. Often they were staffed by and
attracted unsavory people. Most were not well maintained or policed. The lack of coordinated efforts to make
the facilities more attractive to families contributed to the closing of many.
FECs, on the other hand, follow the example of the modern theme park industry in seeking to provide clean,
wholesome, family oriented entertainment in an attractive environment. They also seek to discourage
attendance by troublemakers and gangs. The goal of creating a comfortable and enjoyable facility spans
assembling attractions that provide entertainment for the whole family and presenting an appealing physical
environment, to controlling noise and lighting levels. .k,.�zs'int eat: :
Impact on the Community -6,6r
A properly designed FEC will have a positive impact on the community it serves. This includes providing an
elective activity, generating additional revenue for other businesses in the area, increasing tax revenue,
providing jobs for residents and related benefits. `+ '"' " - -
Obviously an FEC will generate more traffic, but not in the concentrated volumes that would result from many
other businesses allowed under the existing zoning classification for the site. Further, the traffic it does
generate will not be concentrated during peak hour traffic periods on the adjacent highway system.
As the site has certain capacity constraints due to the number of attractions, available parking and related
elements, people attending the FEC will vary their times to avoid overcrowding. This will, in effect, reduce
peak period traffic volumes.
Having an FEC in the community will keep many younger members of the community closer to home. This
will also result in more of the community's available disposal income being spent in the community, as well as
attracting revenue from neighboring communities.
Appearance of Facility
There is no single formula for creating an attractive facility that will appeal to everyone. This is equally true in
terms of homes, schools, churches, shopping centers, offices, municipal buildings, stores, parks and so on.
In recognition of this, most communities have established guidelines, ordinances or other controls to assure
acceptable designs.
2
It' is important, however, that the FEC be attractive to the vast majority of its guests, or it will not be
successful. Therefore, appearance must be an integral part in the development of the concept plan, which
includes the individual attractions and related facilities. Consideration must also be given to what is visible
from off -site, as this contributes to the generation of attendance.
On -site design must include the development of attractive looking facilities, the synergism of each attraction in
terms of its relationship to other attractions and the ability to maximize usage. Landscaping plays a major
element in creating visually attractive facilities and is, therefore, an integral part of any concept planning. In
today's environmentally concerned community, the use of green space, planting of trees and shrubs and the
use of water in the total site configuration can help gain community support. Proper planning will result in the
visual enhancement of both the overall site and its individual components.
Modern Lighting of Family Entertainment Centers
Proper lighting is an integral part of the design of any FEC. It affects the safety and operation of the individual
attractions and the total facility. Lighting also has an impact on the facility's acceptance by the local
community.
It is unfortunate that many misconceptions exist in the average community with respect to the lighting
proposed by individual FEC developments. Lighting can be both friend and foe of everyone, depending upon
how it is being considered. We all want our personal environment to have sufficient light for comfort and
security, but none of us want to feel imposed on by light generated by others. This difference must be an
important consideration of both designer and developer in the creation of a successful FEC concept. The
sense of security at any given FEC is enhanced by provision of sufficient levels of lighting throughout the
facility. This is true in the parking lot, arcade building, go-kart track, bumper boat pond, miniature golf course,
walkways, etc.. -
Obviously, it is impossible to create a facility with lights that cannot be seen from the surrounding area. Even
a single 100-watt light bulb can be seen for miles when there are no physical obstructions. What can be
controlled are the number of tall light standards that are installed and the method of light distribution.
r
Whenever luminaires are mounted at significant heights, sharp cut-off units (lighting units with shrouds to
control the direction of the light distribution) are recommended. In this manner it is possible to reduce light
"spill" at the boundaries of the site to zero foot-candles, if required. Wherever practical, from both safety and
operational viewpoints, shorter light standards with lower wattage luminaires should be installed.
Average light levels of 20 foot-candles at the surface level should be provided on go-kart tracks and bumper
boat ponds to permit safe operation. This does not mean that the light has to spill over on adjacent property.
Light spill -over can be avoided through the use of sharp cut off luminaires, such as described above, to
reduce resulting light levels to zero foot-candles at the property lines. Other exterior and interior attractions
and related site elements require varying Tight levels and should be designed to comply with local codes.
Relative Noise Levels at Family Entertainment Centers ',"
Every facility generates noise, as does every vehicle, person, pet, appliance and machine in the surrounding
community. They do so over a wide range of sound levels. Recognizing this, each well -designed FEC will
give consideration of the impact individual attractions will have on the surrounding neighborhood, in
developing the best configuration of attractions.
As attractions go, FECs are low-level noise generators. The noise levels at sporting events, carnivals, fairs
and other outdoor activities are much higher, as are the ambient noise levels of most adjacent streets and
highways.
Most FECs use music as a muted background and use loudspeakers judiciously. These can be set at levels
acceptable to the neighbors. As a comparison, even the lowly lawn mower generates a much higher noise
level than the concession go-kart.
Available noise studies for Honda go-kart engines, which to this writer's knowledge are used by all current
concession go-kart manufacturers, show that their generated noise levels do not result in levels that could be
considered unacceptable when compared to other noise generators.
3
One of the most detailed sound studies we have seen was based on the Honda GX 160, the most widely
used concession go-kart engine. This study 'found that the sound level generated by 10 go-karts running at
full -throttle, projected to a distance of 150 feet from the source, was 61 decibels. This is equivalent to the
sound level of normal conversation in a room with several people.
It is unfortunate that the studies we have seen are based on projections of sound at various distances from
the point of noise measurement rather than actual measurements taken at the distances referred -to in the
study. Most studies we have seen are based on the projection of sound measurements taken at a point 10
feet from the kart, with the engine running at full throttle. The projected sound levels were then computed,
assuming a flat surface with no obstructions. These conditions would not occur, other than on an empty
airport runway. Any obstructions, including vegetation, which interrupt the direct movement of sound, reduce
its level.
Under actual site conditions, sound levels are further reduced or mitigated by a variety of existing conditions
and site elements, including the following:
1. Existing natural and landscaped vegetation.
2. Ambient noise levels from nearby streets and highways.
3. Physical features such as buildings, berms, fences, automobiles and countless other features that
may stand in the line of generated noise.
Site Generated Traffic
There will, of course, be additional traffic generated by an FEC. Without additional traffic, there would be no
facility. This is equally true for any commercial or residential development developed on the property. The
total volume of traffic, as well as the peak hour volumes, will not be as heavy as the volumes generated by
most other uses permitted under the specific zoning classification. This includes commercial, business or
industrial zoning classifications that govern the specific site being developed: Due to the nature of FECs,
including long hours of operation, restricted total 'capacity, wide range of visitor preference in terms of
attendance times and related factors, site generated traffic will be distributed over a longer period of tinie than
most other uses.
To illustrate the volumes of traffic that could impact on the local flow of traffic, we have developed the
information presented in the table below for a typical facility in an average community; It assumes 60,000
visits during a summer season that spans Memorial Day through Labor Day at an outdoor FEC located in a
small to medium city area. The representative facility consists of an arcade, point of sales and snack bar
building, go-kart track, miniature golf course and either a bumper boat pond or batting cage Peak hours of
operation for FECs normally occur in the evenings from 7:00 PM till 9:00 PM and on weekend days from 1:00
PM till 3:00 PM and from 7:00 PM till 9:00 P.M..
r�Fhr
We arbitrarily adjusted the assumed total days of full operation during this period to 80, to allow for inclement
weather. Using these numbers we arrive at 750 visitors per day. Assuming 2.5 visitors per automobile, we
compute 300 vehicles arriving at the site on an average day. As peak attendance varies by day and hour, we
have developed the tabulation below to present the projected peak number of vehicles arriving at the FEC at
different times. Projected peak attendance occurs Friday evenings and on weekends.
For communities, the existing afternoon peak traffic volumes on community streets would occur in the time
range from 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. and on Saturdays from 11:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M.. Peak hours on Sundays
can vary greatly depending on the specific highway or street adjacent to the site. The specific adjacent
roadway network serving the facility and the location of the primary market population, will dictate the
directional distribution of the peak hour volumes shown above
During the non -summer months, peak hour and daily traffic movements will be lower than those projected
above. This will occur due to the impact of school functions, high school, college and professional sports,
homework and related events.
4
REPRESENTATIVE TRAFFIC FLOW CHARACTERISTICS
FOR
TYPICAL FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT CENTER
Day of Week Daily Daily Vehicle Peak Hour Peak Hour
Percentage Movements Percentage Vehicle
of Entering Facility of Movements
Weekly Traffic Daily Traffic Entering Facility
Monday Thru 11 230 20 46
Thursday
Friday 16 336 20 67
Saturday and 20 420 15 63
Sunday
The above table demonstrates the anticipated peak hour traffic movements for the FEC. These historically do
not occur concurrently with the peak hour traffic periods that occur on the adjacent street system. In most
situations, they are different. For most communities, the peak hour traffic flows occur between 7:00 AM and
9:00 AM in the morning and between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM in the evenings
Check Them out:
Visit several existing FECs to see for yourself how the facilities serve family units, teens and adults alike.
Take note of the relaxed and enjoyable attitudes of the guests and staff. The employees and guests alike
reflect the overall atmosphere the owner wishes to create for his/her guests.
Conclusions:
FECs are a beneficial addition to the community, providing the local equivalent of a small theme park, in
terms of operations and atmosphere. They attract a cross section of the local residents and provide a San,
happy and entertaining form of family and individual recreation. They are not the reincarnation of the old
amusement parks or freestanding go-kart facility of years gone by.
The impact of a well -conceived, constructed and operated FEC on its neighboring community will be positive.
It increases the number of jobs available to local residents, provides an attractive, clean and wholesome
outlet for the entire age range within the community and will blend into the community landscape.
•
Peter is a registered Professional Engineer in eight states and President of Peter F. Olesen and Associates,
inc., 500 West Central Road, Suite 205, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056. The firm provides consulting
services to Concession Go -Kart and Family Entertainment Center clients. Projects span 37 states, Puerto
Rico, Canada, Mexico and Brunei: Services range from preliminary site evaluations, feasibility studies,
concept development, master planning, design and construction engineering services for projects that include
concession go-kart tracks, miniature golf courses, indoor and outdoor family entertainment centers and theme
parks. These services apply to new facilities as well as renovation or expansion of existing facilities. Mr.
Olesen has written many magazine articles on the industry and has made presentations at numerous industry
seminars. For more information on the firm and the services it offers, see their web page at www. olesen.com,
contact them at pfolesen@flash.net, telephone at 847-253-1515 or fax them at 847-253-1532.
Copyright: Peter F. Olesen
5
3i
II
II
II
II
I
Vr1 IV . PLAN
1" = 8D•-0"
U
3476 LANE ELMO AVENUE NORTH
P.O.BOX 187 LAKE ELMO MN. 56042
Phone BB1-f77 1OM
Fax 651-31 -5931
a-n,01 deelgnankhorM5e2M.00m
LANDSCAPE DESIGN
PAUL MILLER DESIGN INC
T33 PAUL ROAD
WO0DBURY, MINNESOTA55126
Phone e51-731-n969
e-mail peolmrk tlbianGrOo.Wm
OWNER.
DOUG LMSON
5771 SMRH FIELD CURVE
WOODBURY. MN. 66120
Pbonea12-24&B036
emer:
µaabaaebn8Omen.mn
I Pignut mummer
I Dare
I Drawn BY
CnoakS by
PrmJect Number I
Issue Dalai
Author]
Checked 'w
01
amne ,' = BOLD"
EXIS11N08ION
TS-T V
SEE VERIFY DIM. '/
its
remove mitred
— e.menp vu:ven to
mmeln
73'-T
SITE VERIFY DIM,
C
PARKING PLAN ' 1/3Z'=11-0'
Zee'-6'
EXERTING G8AVEL _
ROAD -TONE
DISCARDED
� V
•
lc&
>b New Bl umirinu9 PT# Ong Loft;
RELOCATE SEPRD - - -
TANKS
b
NEW FENCE WI GATE
cPre \I \
Overflow Parking Area <)
( grass area)
8
oen
:0"20'-0' 1d'-tl'.�D:O'L: 2<':.P,'''2b"-O'^2V'e" ;24r. tl", 26"K6'. r071 GARAGE
6'.P
LK.i"1.,1��1'.I tli. I•.i'J'-I'1;1 �. I'l��l �.{'. I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ��,.T
i'
OVERALL SITE PLAN
�� 1" = 00'-O-1"
( < ')"--
_ Dvom
I pab
•
�aa�o,g,F:.0-NEE'�.i PO Pduy-:;:
13113.11711.
8P70 LAKE ELMO AVENUE NORM
P.0.00% 1ID LAKE ELMO MN. 55042
Phone BE1-Tr7-7064
Fax 881-Y17-5031
o-mon tleebNIw.hmGtlkotoaom
LANDSCAPE DESIGN
PAUL MILLER DESIGN INC.
7613 PAUL ROAD
W0006URY, MINNESOTA 85128
Mono e61-731-66lO
mall poulmlllaNeetramon4mm
OWNER:
DOUO LARSON
3711 SMITH FIELD CURVE
WOODBURY. MN. 66129
I Phone612-215-0030
bmell:
4 woabonebell5m oacm
OVERALL LOT 813E =1072048.F.
NUMBER OP 10e20' PARKING STALLS=103
NUMBER OF H.C. STALLS = 4 STALLS -
PARKING LOT AND DRIVE= 48.887 SF.
PARKING ISLANDS B GREEN AREAS3,648 S.F.
P MENTOPG GREEN
A EA® PARKINOLOT= 10%
POLE BARN BUILDING = 14.0186.F.
N SIDEWALJ1=3405 S.F.
PERCENT LOT COVERAGE.23 %
f!
I Ha
eeellptbll
Dele
Owner
REC CENTER
SITE PLAN
IProleol number
Oslo
Drown Ly
Checked by
Basle
Project Number
Issue Dole
Author 3
//�
CheckerI
02
As Indicated
.SOUTH 60ILPIN0 V, CokfuEGTorz.
Veil_ P-ol
U I U
w&r 'JA-no - DO I L q1N o 4
V#.i1_ o„
r�aVT+i E.L5VATIoN- e:Vu-.DiINcoAA-
%#•`II-o^
MOLI-Ow METAL STEEL Poch CA EM ER,ENOy EX 75
ALUM I NUM.STORE FRONT 6LflI NS 1 bvWRS @MAIN E.NTIEy,
h1LW 61121N(n- pIMFIS-115+1ED Ak'OHITECIURAL I,pµELs
EX IfTINfn BTtz&L PANEL- pgFNtED
Ap
Lake Elmo
City Council
November 16,
2004
Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use & Zoning No. 9B
Agenda Item: Appeal — Rodney & Diane Sessing (Board of Adjustments and Appeals)
Background Information for November 16.2004:
Rodney & Diane Sessing have appealed a determination of Zoning Ordinance violation and resulting Order
by Building Official Jim McNamara regarding the conduct of a Home Occupation at the Sessing residence
(5699 Keats Avenue). As required by Section 200.01 Subd. 11 of the City Code, the City Council, acting as
the Board of Adjustments and Appeals is empowered to Hear and decide such appeals. Proper Notices
regarding this Hearing have been provided as specified by the City Code. The issue of the alleged non-
compliant Home Occupation is the only subject of this Hearing.
Based on a report from a neighboring property owner that commercial deliveries were regularly being made
to this address, the City Planner directed a letter to the Sessings on October 1, 2004 requesting information
regarding the alleged Home Occupation. Rodney Sessing responded to that letter on October 6, 2004. Based
on Mr. Sessing's responses to the Planners specific questions Mr. McNamara advised the Sessings in
writing that the conduct of any Home Occupation is not permitted by the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance
within the RR zoning district in which 5699 Keats Avenue is located. The Sessings were accorded 60 days
from October 20, 2004 to bring their property into compliance.
The Board of Adjustments and Appeals is required to support and decision, order, requirement or
determination regarding an Appeal with specific Findings. Decisions of the Board may be appealed to the
District Court (only).
Action items:
Board of Appeals Motion providing for an interpretation,
determination, decision or order regarding the Sessing Appeal,
including Findings in support of the action.
Attachments:
1. Sessing Appeal Letter
2. McNamara Violation Notice and Order
3. Sessing Letter Responding to City Planner
4. City Planner Letter of Inquiry
Person : nonsible:
Time Allocated:
October 27, 2004
Rod & Diane Sessing
5699 Keats Avenue
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
By Certified Return Receipt Mail
Dear Rod & Diane:
RE: Home Business Zoning Ordinance Violation
Appeal of Administrative Determination
By your letter of October 26, 2004 you have filed an Appeal to the October 21,
2004 Notice of Violation letter from Lake Elmo Building Official Jim McNamara
regarding the conduct of an illegal business at your residence located at 5699 Keats
Avenue, Lake Elmo. Your Appeal is filed responsive to the terms of Section 200.01,
Subd. 11 of the Lake Elmo City Code.
This letter is to advise you of the following:
1. Your appeal has been filed in a timely manner — within 5 days of the date of the
Notice of Violation.
2. Your Appeal hereby stays all proceedings in the furtherance of the October 21,
2004 Notice of Violation, as required by Section 200.01 Subd.11B of the City
Code.
3. I will advise the Board of Adjustments and Appeals (the City Council) of your
Appeal application, and I will notify you, the Chairman of the Planning
Commission, the Building Official, the abutting property owner(s) and the officer
from whom the Appeal is taken (the Building Official) by mail 10 days prior to
the date established for a hearing before the Board of Adjustments and Appeals
(the City Council).
Sincerely yours,
City of Lake Elmo
Charles E. Dillerud
Zoning Administrator
CC: Martin Rafferty, City Administrator
Jerry Filla, City Attorney
Jim McNamara, Building Off cial
,c-26-04;10:57AM:Andeisen R and T
;6512642878 a 2/ 2
City of Lake Elmo
Jim McNamara
Hello Jim, October 26, 2004
I received you letter yesterday. I wanted to write this letter to you to appeal staff decision
on the Business that we are running in the RR zoning district of our City out of our home. I know
that this is how the staff has to rule, but I believe that it should be an allowed use in the RR
district and also it should be allowed to have storage of Product to run the business. We have
been running this business for over 3 years now and there have not been any issues as far as
neighbors or City until now when my Brother in Law and his wife (Steve and Joan Ziertman) are
complaining about everything I am doing. But what is ironic is that the complainers are running
two different businesses out of their home. One Is the Wholesale and Retail sales for the
pumpkins and -various items other items which creates more traffic in the one month or month and
a half (depending on the year how long they sell) than our business has all year long. Then the
second business Is a snow plowing business. I believe that both of these should be allowed, but
as our code Is now neither of their businesses would be allowed, but why they think they can do it
and we can not I have not figured out yet.
I have talked to a lot of my other neighbors and they did not even know that we had a
business going. We load a trailer up and take it to a county fair or Pet show and unload, sell the
product and then load up and return home. We do not have traffic issues at all. It is a very low
impact business. Our UPS delivery person says there are over 100 businesses that he delivers to
in Lake Elmo all the time and most of them have storage of product on site in their home. It does
not seem to bother many people because there have not been complaints about what Is
happening in the City.
I believe that all residential districts should be treated the same and allow a small low
Impact business to operate. The size of operation can be controlled with setting the limit of
storage depending on the size of lot (Performance Type Zoning) plus if it is stored inside what's
the harm or impact, really none.
I think that our code is out dated and our life styles are pushing for people to have home
occupations and businesses. Less traffic over all, less time wasted traveling it is a Win, Win,
Situation for alil
Please let me know what the next step is. Thank You
Rod Sessing
i
October 20, 2004
Rod & Diane Sessing
5699 Keats Avenue
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
By Certified Return Receipt Mail
Dear Rod & Diane:
RE: Home Business Zoning Ordinance Violation
I have reviewed your letter to City Planner Dillerud of October 6, 2004, and
discussed the facts that you have presented with the City Attorney. I sincerely
appreciate your honesty and candor. Based on the facts you have provided, it is clear
that you are engaged in either a commercial business or a Home Occupation in the
RR Zoning District where no such use is permitted. You are hereby directed to
cease any and all business activity at 5699 Keats Avenue within 60 days of the
date of this Notice.
I can not explain why "Home Occupation" is not allowed as an Accessory Use
in the RR District, while allowed as such in the AG, RE, R-1, and R-2 Districts. That
circumstance does not seem logical at this point — never -the -less it is the current local
law.
I intend to inquire of the Planning Commission and City Council whether the Zoning
Ordinance should be amended to remove what appears to be an oversight. I will be
including your October 6 letter with that inquiry to ascertain whether the City desires
to also address some of the Home Occupation definitional issues that you have raised.
My intentions should not be construed as a waiver of the 60 day compliance window
I have specified above.
Sincerely yours,
City of Lake Elmo
Jim McNamara
Building Official
CC: Martin Rafferty, City Administrator
Jerry Filla, City Attorney
City of Lake Elmo, RE: Home Business 10-6-2004
Dear Chuck, I received your letter dated October 1, 2004, I will respond to your questions
with the answers to correspond with the letters.
A. We are conducting a business out of our home for over 3 years. We thought and
were told that home occupations could be run out of your home as long as you did
not have retail sales on the property and have employees which we abide by both
of those items.
B. We have a pet product business. We take a trailer to a county fair or pet show and
set up an area and then take down and come back home.
C. I do make a few items cat scratchers and some cat furniture we do ship a few
items to customers but drop the orders off at the UPS store for deliveries( we have
very few of these shipments).
D. Yes we do store some product or merchandise on the premises. I did not realize
that Stock for Trade was merchandise for sale. I believe that this Code should
change because Avon, Tupperware, Mary Kay, Crafts, Party Light or Jewelry
shows and may others. We have heard from our UPS driver that there are over
100 homes running businesses out of their home with merchandise storage. I
would suggest that the City change the code to allow a small business would store
some product on site and allow people would be able to have a business. Zones
R-1 and R-2 should be allowed to store 500 square feet of product storage. Zone
RE should have 750 square feet of storage and RR should have 1500 square feet
of storage. This would control size and also make things allowable to run
businesses out of your home.
E. We do not have any customers come to the home.
F. We do not have any employees. This is run by Diane and myself.
G. As far as deliveries on an average we get one delivery every other or every third
week over a year's time. We get more deliveries in the summer than the winter
due to the amount of shows we do in the summer but this is not a traffic problem
by any means. We know we are under 26 deliveries over a years time.
I will apply for a conditional use permit if needed. I do not see the issue if things are
being stored in my home it does not bother any person in the city as long as the scale is
low like ours.
Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions.
Thanks Rod Sessiafg
ii;iitl tcive'1if1 I\VettUf
October 1, 2004
Rod & Diane Sessing
5699 Keats Avenue
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
By Certified Return Receipt Mail
Dear Rod & Diane:
RE: Home Business
The City has recently received a report that a business is being conducted
from your home at 5699 Keats Avenue, Lake Elmo. Your residence is located in the
RR Zoning District where conducting of business is not permitted, nor are Home
Occupations. To aid in the City's investigation of the report referred to please advise
the City in writing of the following:
a. Are you conducting a business on the premises out of your home
and/or out of your accessory storage building?
b. What is the nature of the business?
c. Do you manufacture, assemble or repackage merchandise or materials
on the premises?
d. Do you store inventory on the premises?
e. Do customers come to the premises and, if so, how many per
day/week/month?
f. How many people do you employ on the premises
and are they family members who reside on the
premises?
g. How many business related deliveries do you
receive at the premises per day/week/month?
We would sincerely appreciate your cooperation in t is matter by your written
response by October 15, 2004.
Sincerely yours,
Cit,g. .a 1
C
City Planner
erud
CC: Martin Rafferty, City Administrator
Jerry Filla, City Attorney