Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Agenda Packet 1-21-14 '11-IF, CI'I3' OF Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a LAKE ELMO Fiscally Responsible Manner While Preserving the City's Open Space Character NOTICE OF MEETING City Council Meeting Tuesday,January 21, 2014 7:00 P.M. City of Lake Elmo 13800 Laverne Avenue North AGENDA A. Call to Order 7:00 B. Pledge of Allegiance C. Roll Call D. Order of Business E. Approval of Agenda F. Accept Minutes 1. Accept January 06, 2014 City Council Meeting Minutes G. Council Reports ® Mayor o Appointment of Cullen Case to Public Safety Committee ® Council 7.10 H. Public Comments/Inquiries L Board of Adjustment hearing 2. Case 2014-01 Richie and Beth Springborn vs. City of Lake Elmo;Resolution 2014-06 7:30 j. Consent Agenda 3. Approve Payment of Disbursements and Payroll 4. Accept Financial Report dated December 31, 2013 5. Accept 2013 Year-End Building Report dated December 31, 2013 6. Section 34 Water and Sewer Utility Extension Improvements- Pay Request No. 3 7. Lake Elmo Sewer Infrastructure Improvements: I-94 to Mtn St.- Pay Request No.4 8. Approve Predictive Index Hiring Too] 7:35 K. Regular Agenda 9. Council Meeting Date Change 10. Inwood Booster Station and Trunk Watermain Improvements - Public Hearing;Authorize Plans and Specifications;Award Engineering Contract; Resolution 2014-07 7:55 11. Well No. 4 Connecting Watermain Improvements -Approve Plans and Specifications; Resolution 2014-08 12. hake Elmo Avenue Trunk Watermain Improvements-Approve Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract 8:30 13. Comprehensive Plan Amendment- RAD-Alt to RAD - 9434 Stillwater Blvd.;Resolution 2014-09 14. Community Development Department 2014 Plan of Work L. Staff Reports and Announcements • City Administrator ® City Attorney ® Planning Director ® City Engineer ® Finance Director • City Clerk 9.20 M. Adjourn ****Items tunes are estimates and subject to change**** LAKE EJLM0 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 06, 208 CITE' OF LADE ELMO CITE'COUNCIL MINUTES S .JANUARY 06,2014 Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7.00 pimp, PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson, Council Members Wally Nelson, Justin Bloyer, and Mike Reeves. ABSENT: Council Member Anne Smith Also Present: City Administrator Zuleger,City Engineer Griffin, Finance Director Bendel,and City Clerk Bell. PLEDGE OF ALLIGENCE APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council Member Nelson requested that ITEM 12 be pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion and placed at the beginning of Regular Agenda. City Engineer Griffin noted that ITEM 16's title was corrected. MOTION.• Council Member Nelson moved TO APPROVE THE JANUARY 06, 2014 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AS AMENDED. Council Member Bloyer seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 4-0. ITEM 1: ACCEPT MINUTES TTIE DECEMBER 17, 2013 CITY COUNCIL MINITTt;S IVERE:1PPR0VED AS PRESENTED BY CONSENSUS OF TITE CITY COUNCIL. COUNCIL,REPORTS: Mayor Pearson: Appointed Terry Forrest to Finance Committee; attended Library Board meeting; attended full staff meeting. Council Member Reeves: attended Lake Elmo Regional Trail Committee meeting where they discussed regional trail concept plan: Washington County is very excited to work with the City. Commended Planner Nick Johnson for his work done on the trail plans. Council Member Bloyer: no report. Council Member Nelson: no report. PUBLIC IN UIR'Y'/COMMENTS: ® Beth & Richie Sprin;born—Driveway Ordinance Beth Springborn 8970 55"' St. spoke about her driveway permit. Building Official Rick Chase informed her that their driveway needed to be paved at the end. Explained her understanding of the definition of "bitumen."They used crushed Hwy 36 millings. Over 6 inches thick on entire driveway. Mr. Chase said it needed to be hot mix asphalt. City Administrator Zuleger explained the rationale for requiring the hot mix. He showed the examples of each type of material to Council. The city ordinance does not specifically further define the term "bitumen"with enough specificity. The City has returned $4000 of$5000 escrow. Mr. Zuleger explained the options for the council. It was stated that the Ordinance would be brought back with a technical amendment. City Engineer Griffin explained the technical details of how the apron is required and desired to be a hard surface: 1) hold edge of road together. 2) prevent tracking of mud on road; and 3) loose gravel needs to be cleaned out of ditches and culverts, so increased maintenance would be required. The specific driveway dimensions and requirements were discussed. It was determined that Page I of 5 LAKE E MO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUA Y Of, 201 the apron must cover the Right of Way. Council Member Nelson asked if instead of EEsing a variable term Iike ROW, use a specific distance. Ms. Springborn stated her position is that they have already met the code requirements. Staff s preference is to proceed through the appeal process if the Springborns choose. Mr. Bloyer asked if the appeal process costs money. Mr. Zuleger stated that it does, but the City could waive it. The definition of"bitumen"was discussed. Mr. Griffin stated his professional opinion was pretty clear that is included the binder aspect and not simply loose millings. Mayor Pearson stated his preference that Council and staff study the issue before taking action. He also explained that the code language would not make any sense if interpreted as allowing loose material. The consensus of the Council is that the text may be vague and should be examined. The Council was supportive of staff s recommendation of abiding to the formal appeal process, It was noted that the City has given.the Springborns a one-year extension on the completion deadline. No formal action taken. SPEAK YOUR PEACE:REEVES Reeves spoke on the Speak Your Peace tenet of repair damaged relationships. Everyone has been in situation of saying or doing the wrong thing. In a perfect world that wouldn't happen, but it does. To make it right one must apologize. Admit your mistake, move on. Is the apology sincere? Does it keep occurring? There must be a commitment to change behavior. Actions speak louder than words. Where you develop trust, it is easier to accept apology. CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements and Payroll in the amount of$269,770,91 3. Designate Official Publication Newspaper of Record 4. Designate Official Depositories of Funds;Res. No. 2014-01 5. Resolution Designating Data Practice Officials and Approving City's Data Practices Policy;Res. No. 20I4-02 6. Appoint City Engineer and City Attorney 7. Approve 2014. Plan of Work 8. Storm water abatement;Res.No. 2014-03 9. Production Well No.4—Pay Request No. 5 10. Lake Elmo Avenue Sewer frnprovem.ents—Change Order No. 3 11.. Section 34 Utility Extension Improvements—Change Order No. 2 12. 201.2 Rain Gar-dens Pay Request No. 2(Final) MOTION. Council Member Bloyer moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDER, Council Member Reeves seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 4-0. ITEM 112: 2012 RAIN GARDENS—PAY REQUEST NO.2 (FINAL) City Engineer Griffin explained the item. Contractor is requesting payment in full. Staff does not agree with full payment due to several issues, so is recommending a prorated payment. Contractor did not perforin completely and there have been several garden failures. Six of the 17 rain gardens were not functioning for the year. Council Member Bloyer asked if this was same contractor that built the garden at end of Jane Road. It is not known at this time. Griffin explained how at tunes the City is required to install rain gardens, but currently has discontinued the voluntary installation for the time being. Rain gardens do work when installed correctly and maintained properly. Page 2 of 5 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARV 06, 2014 MOTION.° Mayor Pearson moved TO APPROVE PAY REQUEST NO. 2 (FINAL) TO ST. CROIX VALLEY LANDSCAPING IN THE AMOUNT OF$3,560 FOR THE ONE YEAR MAINTENANCE CONTRACT FOR THE 2012 RAIN GARDEN PROJECT, UPON CONTRACTOR'S RECOGNITION THAT THIS IS PAYMENT IN FULL. Council Member Nelson seconded the motion. Council Member Nelson wants city to look at the rain gardens on larger scale. He has heard.nothing but problems from residents. He applauded Mr. Griffin for getting away from the voluntary ones. It was noted by Mr. Griffin that the first year is critical in maintaining. Professional maintenance is recommended for the first year. After that the residents can do it themselves much more easily. Council consensus is that further policy discussion is warranted. MOTIONPASSED 4-0. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM 13: APPOINT 2014 ACTING MAYOR City Clerk Bell explained the statutory requirement to appoint an Acting Mayor. He noted that in 2013, Councilman Bloyer was appointed. Mayor Pearson nominated Councilman Bloyer to serve as Acting Mayor for 2014. MOTION: Mayor Pearson moved TO APPOINT COUNCIL MEMBER JUSTIN BLOYER AS ACTING MAYOR FOR 2014, TO COMPLY WITH AND FULFILL ALL DUTIES ENUMERATED IN MINN. STATUTE § 412.121 RELATING TO SELECTION OF AN ACTING MAYOR. Council Member Nelson seconded the motion. Council Member.Reeves asked if Councilman Bloyer accepts the nomination. Mr.Bloyer stated he does. MOTION PASSED 4-0. ITEM 14: APPOINT REOUIRE.D OFFICIALS TO FIZZ 4 RELIEF ASSOCIATION BOARD OF TRUE TEES City Clerk Bell explained the statutory requirement to appoint officials to the Fire Relief Association Board of Trustees. He noted that in 2013, Fire Chief Greg Malmquist, Councilman Wally Nelson and Finance Director Cathy Bendel were appointed. MOTION. Mayor Pearson moved TO APPOINT FIRE CHIEF MALMQUIST, FINANCE DIRECTOR BENDEL, AND COUNCIL MEMBER WALLY NELSON TO THE FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR 2014. Council Member Peeves seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 4-0. ITEM 15: WATER SURFACE USE ORDINANCE REVIEW City Administrator Zuleger explained the reason for the review. The ordinance was not effective until 9/25/13. Mr.Zuleger explained the limitations of the study data. One limitation was due to the high water on 7/4/13. There were very few incidents. Lake is mostly used by bass fishermen. Staff spent 150-1.80 hours examining lakes. Mayor Pearson explained that the council said they would review the findings and so that is what they are doing tonight. Council Member Bloyer recounted his experience. Council Member Nelson recounted his as well. Both officials saw no issues and very little use in general. Mr. Zuleger affirmed their findings. Mayor Pearson recounted his findings in line with the rest. Council members video recorded much of their findings. Some video evidence was played. Mayor Pearson was glad that not much of an issue had materialized. He noted that the past DNR grant request was denied due to low use. Mr. Bloyer noted that 40% of 2013 park survey responses supported an increased.time; 28% were in favor of no change; more than 30%didn't care. ITEM 16: 2014 STREET IMPROVEMENTS—RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT; CALLING FOR HEARING, IaES NO. 2014-04 Page 3 of 5 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARC' 06, 2014 City Engineer Griffin explained the 2014 improvement projects. Two main locations and three main types of improvements. Packard Park neighborhood/20"' St/Manning Trail. Packard Park neighborhood will consist of street reclaim, 20"' Street consists of micro-surfacing. Manning trail,Deer Pond Trail and Court consist of reconstruction. The differences between road types and how each project area would be done were explained. 40-50 year roads are being constructed. Higher cost up front, but much longer lasting and saves costs later. Mr. Griffin went through each project and explained the proposed assessments as well. Manning Trail is a collector road, so there is a lower assessment. Tartan Park is 100% because it is non-residential. Assessment is based on front footage. There is a strategy with West Lakeland Township to extend the unimproved 370 ft on Manning Trail located in their town and have them fully reimburse and also pay for properties accessing Manning Trail situated in West Lakeland Township. Total cost is about $1.8 million. The summary of the assessments for the various projects was further explained. Mr. Griffin gave overview of the project schedule. Council Member Reeves asked about the front footage rationale. He asked. about Tartan Park and if they have access. Mr. Griffin explained that non-residential includes all abutting roads. They do not have access. Council Member Bloyer asked about cost if city forwent concrete curb and gutter. The figure is not known off hand. Lower cost in maintenance. Concerned about residents being able to afford it. Council Member Nelson asked about 70-30 assessment ratio. Mr. Griffin explained that many cities started out at 20:80%. As legal challenges have increased, the percentage had been reduced. It was noted that bonding requires that assessment cannot go below 20%. Mr. Nelson questioned the benefit of the concrete gutter.Grading is much more difficult to perfect without concrete. Mr. Reeves suggests taking a longer view of the benefits. Noted all council members are sensitive to costs. Mayor Pearson asked Mr. Griffin to make a guess on the cost difference. Mr. Griffin estimated it may be 10-20 percent. Mr. Nelson asked why 10 years assessments. City Administrator Zuleger stated that 10 year term to retire debt is standard_ Longer roads may allow for longer terms, but it is unknown at this time. Modifying policy for 50 year roads was discussed. Mr. Bloyer asked about Deer Pond's initial construction. The specific date is unknown. Mr.Nelson noted that residents may have different expectation now than 10-20 years ago. He wants City to reexamine assessment term policy. The financing options were discussed. Mayor Pearson wants the three non-resident properties on Manning Trail to be assessed. He directed staff to pursue assessing them regardless of what West Lakeland Township does in regards to the unimproved 370 foot portion. MOTION, Council Member Nelson moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2014-04, RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING A NEARING FOR THE 2014 STREET IMPROVEMENTS Council Member Reeves seconded the motion. MOTIONP9SSES 4-0. ITEM 17: PUMPHOUSE NO. 4 IMPROVEMENTS — APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS{RES.NO. .2014-OS City Engineer Griffin explained the project. Part of the 2013-14 Water System CIP. Consists of a municipal building, housing the city well and related chemical feed equipment. Mr. Griffin explained the specific details of the improvements. Paid through a combination of MN-DEED grant funds and water enterprise funds.Total cost is$885,000. The construction schedule was explained. Page 4 of 5 LAKE LLI1 O CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANI ARY 06, 2014 MOTION.- Council Member Reeves moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2014-05,APPROVIA'G THE PLANSAND SPECIFICATIONSAND ORDERING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE PUMPHOUSE NO. 4 IMPROVEMENTS. Mayor Pearson seconded the motion. MOTION PASSES 4-0. SUMMARY RE,PORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Zuleger: explained the workshop schedule. There will be a few joint workshops with the commissions; performance based budgeting: commended Alyssa MacLeod for her work on the newsletter; east metro groundwater meeting; attended the Met Council meeting on MOU; working on securing water security agreements; expecting Lennar final plat end of month. Preliminary plat from Amaris and Ryland is expected in February; noted the Gonyea water and sewer changes. New proposal starting in the north should help the City with cost of sewer lines; gave summary of the departmental progress.He commended the departments that were the highest developing in 2013. Council Member Reeves noted the positive comments received on the accountability portion of the newsletter. Mayor Pearson asked about Lake Elmo Days and a private entity taking it over. Mr. Zuleger said that the Jaycees may be the entity, but it is unknown at this time. City Engineer Griffin:No report. Finance Director Bendel: final levy certification sent to county; 3,200 storm water bills were sent out. City Clerk Bell: reported livestock ordinance is expected to be heard at the Planning Commission meeting on 1/27/14, Mayor Pearson adjourned the meeting at 8.48pm LASE ELMC CB T�' COUNCIL ATTEST: Mike Pearson, Mayor Adam R. Bell, City Clerk Page 5 of 5 ��•i le c�rrti E:s�:. DATE: January 21, 2014 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING ITEM #2 Case 2014-01 AGENDA ITEM: Richie and Beth Springborn vs. City of Lake Elmo SUBMITTED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director Rick Chase, Building Official .lack Griffin, City Engineer St, -CCES'rED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item..............................................................City Administrator Report/Presentation.......... ...................Community Development Director Questions from Council to Staff........................................... ..Mayor Facilitates - Open the Public Hearing..............................................Mayor Facilitates - Close the Public Hearing.............................................Mayor.Facilitates - Call for Motion ...............................................................Mayor& City Council - Discussion.......................................................................Mayor&City Council - Action on Motion.................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: The City's current and former driveway ordinance require that the portion of a driveway located within the public right-of-way of an improved street be constructed.of bituminous or concrete material. This policy is established to protect City streets and storm water infrastructure. It is recommended that the City Council uphold this policy in order to maintain City infrastructure and ensure the maximum life of the assets. FISCAL IMPACT: The $1.50.00 appeal fee was waived at the last City Council meeting on 1/06/2014. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQEESTED- The Board of Appeals is respectfully requested to determine whether staff is correctly interpreting the City Code in order to determine if a --page l -- City Council Meeting [Board gfAdjustment Hearing-Item 2] Is January 21,2014 i t driveway constructed at 8970 551" Street North is in conformance with the City Driveway s Ordinance. The property owners, Richie and Beth Springborn, have built a compacted reclaimed. asphalt or millings driveway all the way to the City street (55" Street), whereas the City's . ordinance requires that the portion of the driveway located in the City's right-of--way be constructed of bitumen or. concrete. The applicants ask that the Board of Appeals consider Staff s interpretation of §93.26 Driveway Standards. More specifically, the applicants are challenging staffs interpretation of the definition of"bitumen". I Staff is recommending that the City Council cor?,firm the staffs interpretation of§93.26 through F the following motion: "Move to adopt Resolution 2014-06, Corr firming crud upholding straf f,s interpretation of the Driveway ordinance, thereby denying the appeal." LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: F On September 3, 2013, the City of Lake Elmo issued a building permit for a new single family home at 8970 551" Street North to Richie and Beth Springborn. On November 21, 201.3, the City's Building Official conducted.a final escrow inspection for the project, which is the last step before issuing the Certificate of Occupancy (CO). During the inspection, the City Building - Official, Rick Chase, required a correction to make the portion of the residential driveway in the public right-of-way bituminous or concrete. As opposed to using bituminous or concrete in the right-of.--way, the applicants constructed the entire driveway up to the i7liproved street with reclaimed millings or asphalt from the TH-36 project. The applicants are appealing the staffs interpretation of the City's Driveway Ordinance based on the argument that the reclaimed - k: asphalt meets the definition of "bitumen". City staff does not agree with this argument, and recommends that the Council confirm staffs interpretation of the City Code. Prior to December of 2013, when the City adopted new driveway provisions, the City's previous Driveway Ordinance (Attachment #3) included the following language regarding required surface materials: "§93.25 General :Requirements Driveway surface. Whenever a driveway is constructed, all that portion of the boulevard designated as driveway shall be surfaced with a plant-mixed machine laid bituminous material conforming to standards approved by the City Engineer and in accordance with - plans approved by the City Engineer." k It should be noted that this ordinance was in effect at the time the building permit for the single family home at 8970 551" Street N.was issued. When the permit was issued,the ordinance called for"plant-mixed machine laid bituminous material" in the portion of the boulevard (public right- of-way). Given this language, there is no way to confuse reclaimed or crushed asphalt with plant-mixed bituminous material. The main point is that under the previous driveway provisions, i f } --page 2-- pavwaewewmsw�wrroro.wurww.wxm.i..w.«r wrwrru�mwiinr.-m .rrw....w.www®wn..ww.wuw... iir.u..ww e:v+wv:n.-.wmmenwwrer..v —._ue+we.arrow•xnwruw..rm.n.rsnmmwww:vrua. City Council.Meeting [Board gfAdjusiment Hearing-Item 2] January 21,2014 � - s 3 ' { which were active when the building permit was issued, the applicants would not have been able to use reclaimed asphalt or millings as the approved driveway material in the public right-of-way 3 or boulevard. 1 In December of 2013,the City adopted a new Driveway Ordinance (Ordinance 08-096— Attachment#4)to prepare the community for additional residential development, particularly in urban districts. As part of the new.Driveway Ordinance, the following language was included in relation to acceptable surface materials: "§93.26 Driveway Standards 4 i I� Driveway Materials. 1 i' t 1. Urban Districts. All driveways shall be constructed of bitumen,concrete or a durable material approved by the City Engineer. I. 2. Rural Districts. Driveways may be constructed of crushed rock or equivalent crushed material provided that the portion of the driveway within the road right-of-way shall be } constructed of bitumen or concrete when accessing an improved street." l: As part of the new ordinance,the required or acceptable driveway material within the road right- of.-way in rural zoning districts is bitumen or concrete. In seeking to appeal the City staff s interpretation of the ordinance,the applicants are challenging the definition of bitumen., stating that reclaimed asphalt or millings meets the definition of bitumen. However, staff disagrees with this argument. When examining the context of the driveway materials portion of the ordinance, _ it is clear that in the rural district,there is a clear delineation between what materials can be used on the private lot and what materials must be used in the public right-of--way. The ordinance ° states that"crushed rock or equivalent crushed material"that can be used on the private lot, r whereas the right-of-way must be bitumen or concrete. In staffs professional judgment, recycled or reclaimed asphalt or millings is an equivalent crushed material,not bitumen. On the = other hand, bituminous or bitumen is a petroleum based product that is bound and laid at high temperatures. Crushed or recycled asphalt does not include the petroleum based binder. Regarding the expertise level of City staff, the City's Building Official, Rick Chase, has both Bituminous I and Bituminous II MnDOT Certifications. In addition,the City Engineer,Tack Griffin, is extremely experienced and knowledgeable about bituminous products. In the expertise = of both the Building Official and City.Engineer,.reclaimed asphalt does not qualify as bitumen. C' �. finally; with regards to the definition of bitumen not being clear enough in the City Code, it should be noted that City staff drafted the current Driveway Ordinance based upon researching several other local communities. Staff researched the driveway provisions of eight communities (Woodbury,Apple Valley, :Eagan, .Inver Grove Heights, Shoreview,Eden Prairie, Minnetonka and Cottage Grove). Of the communities that specified.bituminous or bitumen as an acceptable or required driveway material (3 cities—Inver Grove Heights, Apple Valley and Eden Prairie) f not one of them specifically defined what constitutes bituminous in their codes. Staff believes r that the reason for this is that what constitutes bitumen or bituminous is a well-known and ;r established standard. In other words, if the definition of bituminous was less clear cut, other cities would define the tenm to establish what method and material is acceptable. --page 3-- City Council Meeting Board q Acl urtfnent Hearin f i • -Ilem 21 January 21,2014 is Finally, it should be noted that the City has established an engineering design standard for residential driveways. The standard was adopted by the City Council along with the Engineering Design Standards Manual on February 19,201.3 (Resolution 2013-09). The established driveway f; standard calls for bituminous material at a specification consistent with MnDOT 2360. In other k words, contrary to the position that the City has not defined what constitutes bitumen,from staffs perspective,the City has defined what is acceptable by adopting this standard. It should also be noted that reclaimed asphalt that is simply compacted does not meet this standard. The City's driveway standard from the Engineering Design Standards Manual is found in attachment tt5. L )BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT): Strengths: Confirming the staffs interpretation of the Driveway Ordinance demonstrates i a commitment to the protection and maintenance of City streets and other infrastructure. In cases of installing new or improved residential driveways, requiring the public right- of-way to be constructed of bitumen or concrete helps reduce cracking and degradation of the City streets. In. addition, it also helps reduce the trailing or tracking of loose rock or F other material or debris onto City Streets. Minimizing this debris helps maximize safety and protect stone sewer and other Cit y ty infrastructure. Weaknesses:N/A i Opportunities:N/A Threats: If the appeal is granted, the action sets a negative precedent to allow crushed I rock or an equivalent crushed material as an acceptable material in the public right-of- way for new residential driveways in rural zoning districts. This scenario presents a threat to the ongoing maintenance and protection of City streets. RECOMMENDATION: i Based on the aforementioned, Staff is recommending that the City Council confirm the staff's interpretation of§93.26 Driveway Standards through the following motion: t "Move to adopt Resolution 2014-06,confirming and"pholding staffs ir8terprretrdion o the Driveway Ordinance, thereby denying the appeal," 1 4 ATTACHMENTS: is 1. Resolution 2014-06 2. Zoning Appeal Application—Richie and Beth Springborn 3. City's Previous Driveway Ordinance 4. City's Current Driveway Ordinance is 5. City's Residential Driveway Engineering Design Standard --page 4-- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WAS INGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS RESOLUTION NO. 2014-06 RESOL UTION STATING FINDINGS OF FACT REALTED TO ANAPPEAL OF THE STAFF INTERPRETATION OF THE CITY'S DRIVEWAY ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THE COATSTRUCTION OFA RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYAT 8970 55TH STREET NORTH WHEREAS,the property owners at 8970 55th Street North, Richie and Beth Springborn, have constructed a new residential driveway as part of a building permit for a single family home; and WHEREAS,the City staff determined that the constructed driveway was not compliant with Section 93.26 of the City Code for the following reasons: 1) The Driveway Ordinance requires that any portion of a driveway in the public right- of-way accessing an improved street must be constructed of bitumen or concrete. 2) 55t' Street is an improved street, requiring that any new or improved driveway accessing the street be constructed of bitumen or concrete in the area of the public right-of-way. 3) The portion of the applicants' driveway in the public right-of-way is constructed of reclaimed asphalt or millings,which does not meet the City's standard for bitumen or concrete. WHEREAS, the applicants submitted an appeal to the.Board.of Adjustments and Appeals regarding the staff s interpretation of the Driveway Ordinance and the definition of bitumen, and request that the Board find that the requirement to install bound bitumen or concrete in the public right-of-way be waived; and WHERE,AS,on January 21,2014,the Board heard the applicants and the City's staff and counsel and considered the facts of this case; and NOW,THEREFORE,the.Board of Appeals and Adjustments of the City of Lake Elmo makes the following findings related to the appeal by Richie and. Beth Springborn of City staffs interpretation of the Driveway Ordinance in connection to the construction of a.new residential driveway at 8970 55t' Street North: Resolution 2014-06 2 FINDINGS 1) That the City requires the portion of the right-of-way for all residential driveways accessing improved streets to be constructed of bitumen or concrete for the purpose of protecting the integrity of the street and ensuring the maximum life of the asset. 2) That the City strives to reduce the occurrence of trailing rock or other loose material onto improved City streets for the purpose of keeping the street clear of debris to maximize safety and minimize potential darnage to storm sewer and other City infrastructure. 3) That the City Council has adopted and established an engineering design standard for residential.driveways that calls for a bituminous specification of MnDOT 2360 TYPE SP,a hot,plant-mixed,machine laid and bounded bituminous product. 4) That the material used by the applicants to construct the portion of the residential driveway in the public right-of-way, reclaimed compacted asphalt or millings, is not consistent with the City's engineering standard or definition of bitumen. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Based on the foregoing,the City Council confirms and upholds City staff s interpretation of the City Code, and thereby denies the application of appeal. Passed and duly adopted this 21 sf day of January, 2014 by the City Council of the City of lake Elmo, Minnesota. Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: Adam Bell,City Clerk Resolution 2014-06 f3afs fiecei�ted T13] c Ty cat' f351 847-�3.Cf} flecelved�Y ,: MA $ uerhe Avsriae 1>7oitii 4LA Pe t�i(tll. :Uicis Etuax,MN:ti5.a42 LAND USEAPPLICATION inpreC ensiiie Pfa'rl :honing sfrict:Airteb :': ?oruri Texf Rmend ❑.Vaflanoe_.is tbblow} M zoning Appest Ctiiuiitioiisl.ties Peiiiiit( ;[J.F:. O.. i :ta1n.C::i11. D.: term useeii:{> .t?)' I cauatirSglGCading :Loi:.i�ins; i s(iilertt: ;.Mina. tbdiyiston ARpl�s�. R ed e and -Bath Spri naborn : Address: 8970 55.th St lv.-..Lake..Elmo ?.... phore#. R= 65.1334-84.28. I B-. 651-59.2-9944 Emaii Address:-r.s pr i nclborn@msn.com Fee turner: $Q..00 - F e's are waived rier Dean v E j` Address.,_ Phone#. -- - f maa 11,411.M. ftpeityLocation(Rddress:and.GOrTlpl6t&'(It1 8970. 55th 5t. N'.. Lake.. Elmo MN 55042 t3etait iReas'oriidz:Request we are reguesti nq vie be waived froLn having to put "3ic;t ix or concrete", as identified by city staf , at he end of our driv wa .r.i. t-of-way) Kp >61.ieve .dire..,t.o. tfle ..yacuenes's of she ctrrrenL City Cgd,e, a.nd..th . Code during out final inspection or 11/21/13, we have complied with the code by usin& compacted as;� a t nip i rTcs, , rcrl rl� hsruv 36, and il�e compacted asphalt rrli 11 i nas are 8-12"thick rougigt our entire driveway. Me Materfal vie used falls under the City Code word M tumer ..._ Sce. atttOmen ts for . t rot `c�.c.ume.te�ti.oil.. Variance Re*tls: As nutkned in Sedion,3fll.fl6t):�.Ni e Cake . rrso urttt�pal 0. 1 e,f .�.ap iican Musf deti asp : practical dif€ctribos-before a`uaaance.•can be granted. The practical diftiddifies re"afe'd tc. is:app ication*t-as:gllOVs; In signirrg this appticaf%vai.,.Aete y acdrrrpuifedg that.tl aye:r, ad. nd itylly urt erstar o€tine appi�cal3fe.pCovisions of the arcing or .ioance aad.currsnt admin�trative:pracedares. Ffurttier ackncwlec3r ff fee expianatiosi as outlined:irr tnc apiiEication proceciirss and:tiereby agree to pay<.ai;stateinet%tsrs rve'ca from the City pertair'rng to adti©nai'applicafiarr expense: ,z jj` :�- . ,,.. Signature of aplai""ma�at;• �s �� -. - .Bate:_ f�-`�T, cit, '.Use:Only Ptannhiq.Zanirig Disfr t' _--- &Mectto:the foltowltig conaifions:` _ s Eiiginee not Reviewed by. Dafe:. . .. i Subject to the following conditrfs; s are appealing the Lity Code, Section 93.26. H, which real as follows: Driaveway Materials Dural Districts. Driveways ray be constructed of crushed rock or equivalent crushed material °ovided that the portion of the dti`veway within the road right-of-way shrill hr, r`nnct+ i,,+_,-, IIrnfan nr rrir,rrr_tca —4— ..�....�rv•,�r, �,_ _ ...__.._ _r Beth & Rich Springborn 8970 S5"at, Lake Elmo,MN 55042 651-592-9944 January 6, 2014 Mayor and City Council Members: We have finished building our home on 9.58 acres and during the final inspection on 11/21/2013,completed by Rick Chase to obtain our occupancy permit, Rick noted that the end of our driveway needed to be asphaked. We were confused by Rick's staternent as the end of our driveway is asphalted. We looked up the City Code which reads"(Rural Districts)Oriveways maybe constructed of crushed rock or equivalent crushed material provided that the portion of the driveway wfthin the road fight-of-way shall be constructed of bitumen or Concrete when accessing an improved street." Attached is a copy of the City Code that was given to us by Rick Chase. We are questioning why we are required to have the end of our driveway asphalted since that is not what is stated in the City code, To better understand the terminology in the city code we did some additional research: So what does the word bitumen mean? The definition in the dictionary states- ("bitumen'-any of various natural substances,as asphalt, maltha, or gilsonite, consisting mainly of hydrocarbons. (See attached) We then received a letter from Joan Ziertman, dated 12/23/2013, (see attached)stating that we are to have an asphalt access for the driveway. To better understand the word"asphalt'we looked up the definition and it states'. "Asphalt"-Any of various dark-colored,solid,bituminous substances, native in various areas of the earth and composed mainly of hydrocarbon mixtures. 1. A similarsubstance that is the by-product or petroleum-cracking operations. Z. A mixture of such substances with grovel, crushed rock, or the like, Used for paving. in regards to these definitions we feet that we comply with the City Code as we have crushed asphalt on our full driveway, including the portion of the driveway within the road right-of-way. We have had multiple conversations with staff related to this and during one conversation Rick stated that we are required by City Code to have Hot mix asphalt 3"thick at the end of our driveway and based on his email he state that we were not in compliance with the City ordinance.We disagree as that is not what is stated in the City Code. We do not understand why we are being asked to do one thing and the City Code states another. We are requesting the council's clarification related to the materials needed for the end of driveways in `rural districts' and for the release of the remaining escrow funds. We believe we have met the requirements of the City Code and especially as it relates to rural districts. Thank you for your time and we greatly appreciate an expedient response in order to complete this process. Sincerely, Beth Springborr. Rich.Sprik.gborn ,_j iFiJUtJO IRON E'i ? i 11 a E N58°51`2fJ"�0.84" �• - 4 48 W 221 �a;. ~, S89°1 ;48 418 4.2 \ _ — •__ - �� _' —71 MONUTAENTEt3.l+iORTT FtIa{�t[CF __. Mtn 49232+ �HE 5; bF THE NW�0F SEC.4� / � - -.._. � �..�,,-.�� .+.._ \.., "' �Yy'at',�,�}'�, \ `� - ��._ � � �•-.�.-•.- _. — fiery. ..� -• \ ? ',: 4. �` \ CUNSTRUCTEC3 \\ \ ., - HOUSES _ N, II LOCATION _ `� t�4 IMPERVI:.3i1$Afi:A \ Q ` l N, `. xF; i �I t44C0 SQ.FT. sp ` '� .,:✓ . I ASaUILTSPOT \, ELEVATION.TYPICAL `l I .N \ 9.58 AGES TOTAL �. ` � � \, (417,410 SQ. FT,) �, $ 9.15 \ 9,05 EX. RIGHT OF 1IVAY"' , \ (394,218 SQ. FT ' "2E MAX GRAL1 CONSTr2UCi�Q` wV'L-TLANpiSWfiibiP .7 X_! thIP Nt i �' ''``�� ~��•\`L\. 1 ; t \�\ WP.-I-LANWSWAMP11 f x. oo INV(SE;=974.2 INV{NW)=874..8 ir' _j (;C}it;S-,RUCT`c.-D I DRIVEWAY ;��S�?' n �1 t w\ P i LOCATION 1 0.9 _ , WETE.ANL)fSL�,IAMP w AST IRON HARRISON CO11N1Y 4 CORNER MONUMENT f -,, \FG; �T 90 Al. J� STONE MONUMENT '� \\ ''Ili k \���\ \ �\f a 0., .Q il � � f i \'O , '779��E: 314"OUTSIDE DIAMETER 3 - "• E-CAP t�11F�ifitFt AS NOTED `\~ I��i 1UTSIDE DIAMETER BY 18"LONG IRON 1GHING 1.13 L BS.PER LINEAR FOOT CAR DODGE RLS 45351 \' i >ONARY NAiL N • ,� r t !i `4I ,1.� i:. 1. � Y SLY RECORDED / i1 )N IN ROC.;r 47621? � 1 j ,.} i 1 41 'THAT THIS SURVEY,PLAN OR REPORT\/NV-NS o I- 1 OR UNDER,MY DIREC 1 SUPERVISION AND THAT I AMA URVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF"f HF STAT Or• s Distance from Intersection. No driveway or curb cut shalt be less than 20 feet from+ any right-of-way line of any street intersection, except that in high density residential, commercial and mixed-use zoning districts, the minimum distance shall be 50 feet. F. Driveway Angle. All driveways shall connect to the public street at 90 degree angles, or must be approved by the City Engineer. Exceptions must demonstrate an inability to meet the 90 degree angle due to extenuating circumstances. G. Driveway Grade. Driveways exceeding a grade of 10% must be approved by the City Engineer. Exceptions must demonstrate an inability to meet. the 10% maximum grade due to extenuatin;circumstances. H. Driveway Materials. 1. Urban Distracts. All driveways shall be constructed of bitumen, concrete or a durable material approved by the City Engineer. 2. Rural Districts. Driveways may be constructed of crushed rock or equivalent crushed material provided that the portion of the driveway within the road right- of-way shad be constructed of bitumen or concrete when accessing an improved street. 1. Curb Box, Residential Districts. Curb boxes located within driveway shall be protected with an Al Ford Lid or approved equal. J. Control of Traffic. 1. Where other" alternatives exist, commerciat sites should not be accessed from local residential streets. 2. Traffic shalt be controlled to erasure that the location of driveways shalt not constitute a hazard nor be injurious to adjacent residential uses. K. Access to Major Streets(Thoroughfares). On properties having frontage on both thoroughfares and minor roads, access shaU be provided via the minor road unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Access may be restricted on any non- residential. local road. The number and types of access drives onto major streets may be controlled and limited in the interests of public safety and efficient traffic flow. �. State and County highway Requirements. Driveways constructed to access any street designated as a state or county highway shall meet all additional specifications of the appropriate jurisdiction. Access drives onto state and county roads shall require a review by the road authority and the City Engineer. The state, county and City Engineer shalt determine the appropriate location, size and design of such access drives and may Limit the number of access drives in the interest of pubtic safety and efficient traffic flow. M. Distance from Driveways to Side Lot Line. A driveway must be at Least 5 feet from any side tot tine. N, Ent ergency Vehicle Access. Driveways to principal structures that traverse wooded, steep or open field areas shalt be constructed and maintained to a width and base materiat depth sufficient to support access by emergency vehicles. 99-3.27 Parking Areas, 3 Lake Limo City Hall THE crry OF, 651-747-3800 LAKE ELMO 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Decernber 23, 2013 Hartman Homes 744 Ryan Drive,Suite 102 Hudson, WI 54016 Attn:Jeff Mears Re: 8970 55rh Street Dear Mr. Mears: Attached please find the rejection comments for the as-built survey that was submitted. in addition, please not that per City Code,an asphalt access is required for the driveway. A copy of the City Code is provided. Please make the corrections and resubmit the as-built. Please have the corrections to the driveway access completed by June 1, 2014. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact myself or Rick Chase, the Building Official at 651-747-3910, -thank you. Sincerely, Joan Zie0man Planning Program Assistant 651-747-3918 Cc. Beth&Richie Springborn Tl­iLz CITY OF A Kx E F--.,LMO January 3,2014 Rich and Beth Springborn 8970 55ti Street North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Dear Mr.and Mrs.Springborn: I am writing in response to your December 31,2013 letter in which you state your concern that the Lake Elmo City Code concerning driveways is not being property applied to your recent building permit for a new home at 8970 551 Street Forth. The specific provisions that have been questioned are found in Section 93.26.H,which reads as follows: H. Driveway Materials. 1. Urban Districts.All driveways shall be constructed of bitumen,concrete or a durable material approved by the City Engineer. Z, Rural Districts. Driveways rnay be constructed of crulshed rock or equikfalent crushed material provided that the portion of the driveway within the road right-of-way shall be constructed of bitumen or concrete when accessing an improved street. After reviewing this matter with our Staff-, I have found that the Code is being interpreted properly,and specifically,that the miRings you have used for your driveway do not meet the City's requirements for an allowed driveway material within a boulevard adjacent to an improved street. Please note that for all other portions of the driveway outside of the public boulevard area (within 15 feet from the edge of the pavement)the millings are deemed acceptable as a crushed rock or equivalent material. If you do not agree with this interpretation of the Code,you may file an appeal of the decision with the Board of Adjustment consistent with the appeal procedures outlined in Section IS4.108(attached). This does require a formal request to the City Council as specified in,the ordinance. if you decide not to file a formal appeal,you witl need to modify that portion of the driveway that is located within the public boulevard area (from the edge of the existing pavement to a depth of at least 15 back from the edge)consistent with the City's review comments concerning your as-built survey, i understand that you have had recent conversations with the City Administrator regarding the escrow deposit submitted by Hartman Homes for this building permit,and at this point,the City is willing to consider a partial release of the escrow payment based on substantial completion of your building permit. i have also reviewed the three outstanding items for escrow release as indicated by the Building Official in an email to you dated December 31, 2013 and we have agreed to eliminate ail but 3800 1,avcrne Avemat Norrhi , 1,,Ae F-h-no -.Mtianusota SS042 Phont: (651.) 747-3900 - F,,LN: (651) 747-3901 --wwwdakeelmo.org requirement number 3 (pertaining to the driveway surface within the City boulevard). Furthermore,the City is willing to grant you additional time to install the driveway,and will extend the deadline for compliance with the boulevard surfacing requirement out to Jane 1,2015. The City will therefore adjust the escrow to cover only the estimated value of the outstanding driveway improvements and will consider all other matters resolved. Please contact me if you have any questions about the City's appeal submittal and review process, or if you would like to further discuss the City's driveway requirements. Sincerely, Kyle Eclat€ Community Development Director cc: Bean Zuleger, City Administrator Nick Johnson, City Planner Rick Chase, Building OfFiciai Mike Hartman,Hartman Homes 3800 Laveriie Avenue INoYtIn -Lake. Eit-no a M.imiesota 55042 ',?hone: ((51) 747-3900 m Fax: (051) 747-5901 a www.iakeelrno.org b 154.100 Appeals and the Board of Adjustment The Board of Adjustment is hereby established pursuant to this chapter and Minnesota law. The Board of Adjustment (which is the City Council in accordance with 531.10 of the City Cade) shall have those powers and authority as provided by Minnesota law and as hereinafter provided for. The Board of Adjustment shall be formed and operate in conformance with Chapter 31 of this Cade and specifically with S,31.10. A. Powers of the Board of adjustment. 1. Review of Administrative Decisions. The Board of Adjustment shall act upon all questions as they may arise in the administration of this chapter, including the interpretation of zoning reaps, and it shalt hear and decide appeals from and review any order, requirement, decision or determination made by such an administrative official charged with enforcing this chapter. Such appeal may be made by any person, firm or corporation aggrieved by an officer, department, board or bureau of the city. 2. Variances. The Board of Adjustment shalt also have the power to grant variances to the provisions of this chapter under certain conditions. The conditions for the issuance of a variance are as indicated in 91 54A09 of this Article. No use variances (uses different than those allowed in the district) shall be issued by the Board of Adjustment. B, Procedures for Appeals. 1. Filing of Appeals, All appeals to the Board of Adjustment shall be in writing and filed with the office of the City Clerk within 14 calendar days of the date of mailing of the notice of the order, requirement, decision or determiinat', "thich the appeal is made.�� Z. Hearings, The Board of Adjustment shall conduct a tearing regarding all appeals in accordance with�154,i 02.C.?of this Article. 3. Notice. Written notice of the hearing shall be provided to the parties to the hearing and mailed not less than 14 days prior to the hearing. 4. Orders, The Board shall, within a reasonable time, make its order'deciding the matter and shall serve a copy of such order upon the appettant or petitioner by mail. The Board of Adjustment may reverse or affirm,whotly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or determination as in its opinion ought to be made. The reasons for the decision of the Board of Adjustment shall be stated in the order. A majority vote of the Board of Adjustment shall be necessary to reverse any decisions of an administrative office of the city or to decide in favor of the appticant. 3900 ,avex e''-enue Noj!th m ?_akc Elt xo - Minne,;otR 5504.2 Pkront-, (€-51) 747-3900 � Fay,. (051) 747-3901 - timer-w.laktelino.org DEPARTWINI�,OF SPEC CITY OF LAKE EL 71 r__t ol- -391 (651) 747 DATE TIME ADDRESS CONTRACTOR ,..-, �pmp/�� O+`S.P'1V 8RACS�O r.,� �.'f• YN�''.-F�f PHONE NUMBED n PASS M FAIL � MAKE CORRECTIONS&CONTEN D E t lea-ve dais clay Made the inspection called for at tite address€isted above,you Y011 make corrections as listed below before proceeding with any work that would cover up or effect the listed correction. you will call for arnother juspection before corrections have been covered up. f< s, i 1f no violatiom of Hie ordinance are listed above,approval is hereby givese to proceed with the worn:cosaapleted as of the?1me and state listed below,You wUl be in violation of the ordia nee, if Y,aan do#lot call for the iaroPer inspecttara and make�d orreetiong as called for., x Date ' Time Inspector � - CHAPTER 93: STREETS AND SIDEWALKS Page 1. of 3 Print Lake]Elmo, MN Code of Ordinances DRIVEWAYS §93.20 PURPOSE. The purpose of§§ 93.20 et seq. is to control the location of driveways and curb cuts in order that traffic hazards be reduced,adequate street drainage be maintained, and that ingress and egress from properties shall not constitute a hazard or impair the health, safety, or general welfare of the residents of the city. (1997 Code, § 1405,01) § 93.21 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. No driveway shall be constructed in any location where motor vehicles will be provided with access to any public right-of-way without first obtaining a permit for the construction from the property designated city employee, who shall require a grade to establish the driveway. Prior to the issuance of the permit,the provisions of§§ 93.20 et seq. shall be complied with. (1997 Code, § 1405.02) Penalty, see § 10.99 §93.22 APPLICATION. Any person desiring the permit shall present written application to the city describing the project along with a site plan that indicates that the requirements of§§ 93.20 et seq. is net. For new residential developments,these site plans shall be reviewed by the City Building Inspector. In commercial districts, driveways shall be reviewed as part of the site plan review by the City Planner (1997 Code, § 1405.03) §93.23 PERMIT FEES. The permit fees shall be set, from time to time,by ordinance by the Council. (1997 Code. § 1405,04) § 93.24 PERMIT REVOCATION. http://www.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx 11/6/2013 CHAPTER 93: STREETS AND SIDEWALKS Page 2 of 3 The permit issued may be revoked by the city at any time after its issuance for failure to comply with the conditions of the permit or the directions of the city relative to the work covered by the pen-nit. (1997 Code, § 1405.05) QU-MEMEM.S. (A) Licensed contractor. All work done within the right-of-way of the street shall be done by a regularly licensed contractor under the supeivision of the proper city employee,who will see that all regulations are rigidly followed. V is constructed all that.0.6ftion of 0**bd.V.10. rd.a _Y �' .'% ­.. ... ., . . .iever.a:designated s..*.iV6W. shall:be .s.4fa6'e4*:.-w co standards approved by C 1hy.Engjhee rmand"im accoranQe:wi h. 9M.eer..:�.:. nainee .may also bused gy r. the 'A e.. ATY,E n wd.po.06 0 City property s W §hDuld4t. Ntq MT.. 41s; s a,y..to.pair: ce-the X f 6 e hole or.in par n :or crs�o prciperty sts . f. h-11 :611: airsior seryieed by. .: r' ,rep .1concrete1� iveways S a 1. d co o.the (C) Scope. The requirements of§§ 93.20 etseq. apply to all new construction and to repairs and changes to old driveways which do not conform to present requirements. (D) Notification qfconsiruction. The city is to be notified at least 24 hours in advance of the date the construction will start. (E) Plot plan. Prior to the construction of a driveway, a plop must be submitted which indicates the location and specifications for driveways and curb cuts in accordance with §§ 93.20 elseq. The plat plan submitted shall be approved prior to the issuance of a permit far driveway. (1997 Code, § 1405.06) Penalty, see § 10.99 §93.26 STANDARDS. The following regulations shall apply to all driveways, curb cuts and aisles. (A) Width. The width of driveways in any zoning district shall provide adequate egress and ingress to the site for the safety of residents, and provide access for emergency vehicles. The maximum width of driveways in residential districts is 22 feet, except that in the Residential Estates (RE)Zoning District, the maximum width at a lot line shall be 12 feet and the maximum width at the public street shall be 18 feet. The maximum width of driveways in commercial districts is 34 feet. Driveways shall be included on all site plans for new residential permits for review by the Building Official. In commercial districts, driveways shall be reviewed as part of the site plan review by the City Planner. (Am. Ord. 97-18, passed 9-16-1997) http://www.amlegal.com/alpsc,ripts/get-content.aspx 11/6/2013 CHAPTER 93: STREETS AND SIDEWALKS Page 3 of 3 (.B) Distance between driveways. The minimum distance between curbs of driveways at right-of-way line shall be 10 feet in any residential district. In all other districts,the minimum distance shall be 20 feet. (C) Width of aisles. Any aisle in any parking lot in a zoning district other than a residential district shall be a minimum of 24 feet. Any aisle in a parking lot in any residential district serving a building containing 3 or more dwelling units shall also be a minimum of 24 feet. (D) Distance from intersection. No driveway or curb cut shall be less than 20 feet from any right-of-way line of any street intersection, except that in retail, business,and industrial zoning districts, the minimum distance shall be 50 feet. (E) Driveway angle. The minimum driveway angle from a 2-way access street shall be 90 degrees. The minimum driveway angle from a 1-way street shall be 30 degrees. (F) Control of traffic. (1) Where commercial land uses are adjacent to residential districts, ingress and egress from the commercial uses on streets leading to or through the residential districts shall not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that adequate access to public right-of-way is thereby denied. (2) In this manner, traffic shall be controlled to ensure that the location of driveways shall not constitute a hazard nor be injurious to adjacent residential uses. (G) Access to thoroughfares. On properties having frontage on both thoroughfares and minor roads, access shall be provided via the minor road wherever feasible in order to reduce the number of curb cuts on thoroughfares. (H) State and county highway requirements. The proposed driveway is to be constructed so that if it opens into any street designated as a state or county highway, all additional specifications of the appropriate highway departments will apply. (1) Distance from driveways to side lot line. A driveway must be at least 5 feet from any side lot line, except that in the Residential Estates(RE)Zoning District, a driveway must be at least 10 feet from any side lot line. (1997 Code, § 1405.07) Penalty, see § 10.99 § 93.27 PARKING AREAS, The parking restrictions applicable to driveways are stated in the zoning code and §§ 150.001 et seq. (1997 Code, § 1405.08) http://www.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx 1.1/6/2013 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-096 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING THE CITY'S DRIVEWAY REQUIREMENTS. SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title IX: General Regulations; Chapter 93: Streets and Sidewalks; Sections 20 through 27 to read the following: DRIVEWAYS S 93.20 Purpose The purpose of§§ 93.20 et seq. is to control the location of driveways and curb cuts in order that traffic hazards be reduced, adequate street drainage be maintained, and that ingress and egress from properties shalt not constitute a hazard or impair the health, safety, or genet-at welfare of the residents of the city, S93.21 Permit Requirements No driveway shalt be constructed in any location where motor vehicles will be provided with access to any public right-of-way without first obtaining a permit for construction. Prior to the issuance of the permit, the provisions of this Ordinance shalt be comptied with. § 93.22 Application Applications for permits shalt be made in writing upon printed forms furnished by the City. Each application for a permit shalt have thereon the correct legal description of the property and a drawing of the land showing the Location of the proposed driveway with respect to the boundary lines of the property, The written application shalt describe the project along with a site plan that indicates that the requirements of this Ordinance are met. § 93.23 Permit Fees The permit fees shalt be set in the City's Fee Schedule by ordinance by the City Council, 993.24 Permit Revocation The permit issued may be revoked by the City at any time after its issuance for failure to comply with the conditions of the permit or the directions of the City relative to the work covered by the permit. § 93.25 General Requirements A. Licensed Contractor. All work done within the right-of-way of the street shalt be done by a City licensed contractor as specified in Chapter 115 of the City Code. B. Site Plan. Prior to the construction of a driveway, a scaled plan must be submitted which indicates the location and specifications for driveways and curb cuts, the widths and dimensions at the street, property line and building structure, the slope of the driveway, and the location of the curb box as applicable in accordance with §§ 93.20 et seq. The site plan submitted shalt be approved prior to the issuance of a permit for a driveway. § 93.26 Driveway Standards The following regulations shall apply to all driveways and curb cuts. Alt driveway work shall be constructed in accordance with the approved site plan. No deviations or changes shall be made in the field without first obtaining permission from the City. A. Driveway Width. All driveways shalt conform to the following requirements: 1. Residential Districts a. Minimum Width. Alt driveways shalt have a minimum width of ten (10) feet. b. Maximum Width. All driveways shall have a maximum width of twenty-two (22) feet at the point it intersects the right-of-way line. In the absence of platted right-of-way, the setback at which point the driveway width is measured shalt be established by the prescriptive easement as determined by the City Engineer. c. Curb Cut. A curb cut must not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property line by more than ten (10) feet, 2. Commercial and Mixed-Use Districts a. Minimum Width. All driveways shall have a minimum width of twenty (20) feet. b. Maximum Width. All driveways shall have a maximum width of thirty-four (34) feet at the point it intersects the right-of-way tine. c. Curb Cut, A curb cut must not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property line by more than ten (10) feet. B. Vertical Clearance. There must be fourteen (14) feet of vertical clearance above all driveways. C. Number of Curb Cuts. In Residential Districts, each property shall be limited to one curb cut per dwelling unit. Exceptions may be allowed when neither access is onto a major street, and when the lot exceeds one hundred and fifty (150) feet in width or is a corner lot. Alt requests for a second curb cut shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. D. Distance between Driveways. The minimum distance between curbs of driveways at right-of-way line shalt be 10 feet in any residentiat district. Lots that have been developed with zero lot line setbacks may be exempt from this provision. In all other districts, the minimum distance shalt be 20 feet. 2 E. Distance from intersection. No driveway or curb cut shall be less than 20 feet from any right-of-way line of any street intersection, except that in high density residential, commercial and mixed-use zoning districts, the minimum distance shalt be 50 feet. F. Driveway Angle. All driveways shall connect to the public street at 90 degree angles, or must be approved by the City Engineer. Exceptions must demonstrate an inability to meet the 90 degree angle due to extenuating circumstances. G. Driveway Grade. Driveways exceeding a grade of 10% must be approved by the City Engineer. Exceptions must demonstrate an inability to meet the 10% maximum grade due to extenuating circumstances. H. Driveway Materials: 1. Urban Districts. All driveways shall be constructed;of bitumen, concrete or a durable material approved by the City Engineer. 2 Rural Districts. Driveways,may be constructed of crushed rock or equivalent crushed material provided that the,portion of the driveway within the road right- of-way shall be constructed of bitumen or concrete when accessing an improved street, L Curb Box, Residential Districts. Curb boxes located within driveway shall be protected with an Al Ford Lid or approved equal. J. Control of Traffic. 1. Where other alternatives exist, commercial sites should not be accessed from local residential streets, 2. Traffic shalt be controlled to ensure that the location of driveways shall not - --t� ate a hn rd nor h iniitrt IS to adjacent rP enfia!ttt� .,za e , o _ d �__.._ sid_--- -. saws, K. Access to Major Streets (Thoroughfares). On properties having frontage on both thoroughfares and minor roads, access shall be provided via the minor road unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Access may be restricted on any non- residential local road. The number and types of access drives onto major streets may be controlled and limited in the interests of public safety and efficient traffic flow. L. State and County Highway Requirements. driveways constructed to access any street designated as a state or county highway shall meet all additional specifications of the appropriate jurisdiction. Access drives onto state and county roads shall require a review by the road authority and the City Engineer. The state, county and City Engineer shalt determine the appropriate location, size and design of such access drives and may limit the number-of access drives in the interest of public safety and efficient traffic flow. M. Distance from Driveways to .Side Lot Line. A driveway must be at least 5 feet from any side lot line. N. Emergency Vehicle Access. Driveways to principal structures that traverse wooded, steep or open field areas shall be constructed and maintained to a width and base material depth sufficient to support access by emergency vehicles. 93.27 Parking Areas 3 The parking restrictions applicable to driveways are stated in the zoning code and H 150,001 et Seq. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shat( become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo, SECTION 3, Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-096 was adopted on this third day of December 2013, by a vote of Ayes and 0 Nays. LAKE EL MO CITY COUNCIL Ilk ike Pearson, ayor ATTEST-. Adam Bell, City Clerk This Ordinance 08-096 was published on the — day of 2013. 4 WIDTH (MAX. VARIES) A MATCH TO EXIS SING SAW CUT EDGE (1/2" EXP. JOINT If CONCRETE) 1/2" EXP. JOINT CONTRACTION IF CONCRETE BITU.N41NOUS 6R CONCRETE JOINT IF (PAVEMENT TYPE TO 0 REPLACE EXISTING) CONCRETE T (PANEL, WIDTH NOT TO 4 EXCEED TRANSITION— 3' CURB f FLOW LINE* 1/2" EXP. JOINT A CONC. CURB (Typ-) PLAN & GUTTER CURB & VARIABLE VARIABLE: GUTTER F__1/2" EXP. JOINT DRIVEWAY GRARE MATCH BIT. SURF. Oil' LIP AppCyN GRADE (2'0% W11EyISTING (12% MAX-) PAVEMENT MATERIAL BASE* MATERIAL SECTION A-A aIV� -Y 1',I" ES2 EmE;,..,TmCKI4 tITUMINOUt 3 "ES. CONCRETE 6 INCHES 4 INCHES 140TES DITIVIVIINPOVS L.Eg S.P*__6*.,*A -A M. , . !M�OOT ...IT . --1 Q, ­ E: O.R.N.0 COURSE, ONO 7.ypt ..� ,R N.�, MM. M. �N WtA AGGREGATE BASE SHALL BE MnDbT 313E CL 5, 1007. CRUSHED STONE. R­ X DIRWNW; FEBRUARY 2013 STANDARD DRAWING NO. CITE T'lls"T ELMr' 504 LAKE ELIVIO 'ITI l:CITY I'Y 0 E ELMO BATE: January 21, 2014 CONSENT ITEM #3 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Approve Disbursements in the amount of$1,282,261.76 SUBMITTED BY: Cathy Bendel,Finance Director THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director :REVIEWED BY: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item..............................................................City Administrator - Report/Presentation................................................City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff..............................................:Mayor Facilitates - Call for Lotion....................................................4..........Mayor&City Council i - Discussion........................................:..............................Mayor&City Council. - Action on.Motion..................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance FISCAL IMPACT: $1,282,261.76 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of$1,282,261.76. No specific motion.is needed as this is recommended to be part of the Consent Agenda. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY. NA --page I -- City Council Meeting .... _.,....ti. m..,:.,� [Consent Agenda Item 31 January 21,2014 BACKGROUND INFORMATION/STAFF REPORT: The City of Lake Elmo has the fiduciary responsibility to conduct normal business operations. Below is a summary of current claims to be disbursed and aid in accordance with State law and City y policies and procedures. z t r Claim# nt:. ....:.. - ACH $ 14,275.20 Payroll Taxes to IRS &MN Dept of Revenue 1/9/14 ACH $ 6,359.56 Payroll Retirement to PERA 1/9/14 ` x DD5225-DD5274 $ 41,848.34 Payroll Dated(Direct Deposits) 1/9/14 B 4' 40826-40827 $ 8,768.50 Accounts Payable Manual. 1/3/14 & 1./10/14 = 40828 -40900 $ 1,206,150.16 Accounts Payable 1/21/14 >: 2146-2226 $ 4,860.00 Library Card Reimbursement 1/21/14 .. - OT1"L-iJ 2 Yr 2 RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council approve as part of the Consent Agenda the aforementioned disbursements in the amount of $1,282,261.76 A.TTACHIMENTS. _ 1. Accounts Payable—check registers i --page 2— \ \ � 4 � \ ° � \ ° \ ! t , \ _ \ 3 ( a � i 2 : � \ \ ' z � « 3 ƒ $ y \ / ® | A � . { / � a _ \ \ � \ « » \ 2 \ � � S � ® \ � � } � _ \ vt 7 \7 2 o = S k \ - »$ # 3 Cn \ �ƒ \_ ƒ \ e 4-4 & Q co i k U � 4a / err y = kk � o " c� � o �s u� c., 'U 4� U U 42, � U R4 0 O C 00 oc x �4 CT. GA d O tn ol � 7:3 N N N h y z L yy v r ! F 5 Cn .N.. L "' ?C X p w Lti y tn 3 r v L- U 3 Vi m Q N G, v rr• � � b- <t tn a a o o a ^ N N N N ni N N S a o ,n !n or, r �r ,fy !n !n rry en .� o � o !n !n {j U z N 40 W ,� r- In or _ � " � � IT dN <C � or, 'G r da ? u w OG ^�, :.id y O flA 'G^' WJ. W O ✓: ts"t i 11 N Li.3 �_ LZi .« �_ �.J N :1J N LL! C\I 01-4 3 u O O O 4 O O o X ell. In N — �„4 N _ 5 p y} y a u J r v '�' � � " r •se- oY � � U�J N �� ...., � ICJ -K � �_• � N � N C G a � m Mai oZo i_) - - 4t O O fi C-A .rr.) 00 00 `n C4 CA r4 Do C-4 05, o o C4 S'g C'I 49 cq C-4 q C-4 yJ xn 0 0 ct o c oC> 9 cn V G , t c � o rr a M o • �m m � J u - .d. d tr ry N N _ O O � v O O ` O O 00 C> O p O •`" O P r O '' C0 00 rid' Q O O G 0a 6 06 C. O m :.e m Q O O N W � eri r vJ aC 00 00 00 M `!1 V1 •cY' 00 !— qto C C oNc ta. p C Cr u c L 00 co M � � m pmG " u00 OmOc3 N c a [ o v „� ° _ � _ S w F o •� cot z W C » •� 72 c�1 M 72 m r IT x N fn `" U N Z ra c i o W O J CLI ZNq 7: r,- E o �- � et 7-, - _ rn C «r ..- o ca F (> y C C O � C N d O O O O O O d O cd� A v A ✓�f ? o a 0 o c 0 a a 0 z z z z z z z z z f 1 f 1 f k 1 1 1 t 02 L V in Y m °° tr 1 1 1 1 � a a ' 'J 0 Vl C!2 T/1 V} r„ p °J CS o c .3 N U U µ �: N N `! C G ^� C N N N •.J .� ,..� M O G O CG -R V) Vsd 00� M r+SM C> C? d CD OO N No„ ocp O 00 knn V) 7 oNo O• C' rn 00 a o,, oGo oc er �t ri .y. �h rn ci — to co kn N r• to :+� M E-) cp o a: M � ap M c 4) M ^J• .y 7 y d- .v m Liu M r"f M ai M mcj NLt.I v '� tl Q r� G� VJ N tV [V � c o G Cm� ri f 1 7- tom? N � O 1 N is N � •i C� 6 c QC` DO L: N U M M ,.,,a N r% in ti• "Ch vNi 'T 1!I -I.' :.- '�' Z N �' L�LI r "�" �:. �, v `J• S F � o ,cc +d+ M N M --• erg ^.F M '� � «.+ ��.. <+) — � N -- � — v1 — V'� - S o c a o pop 0 o C> „y O O O 4:5 G CD O O O R G+ O tl O O O G O G tl G O C z z z z z z z z z z z � d 0 w 8] v y m o3 3 r' a � o U y � w •� � m i G O G G O v + G '~ U v � 0e N Rom. m o cl, N a cc. fV N C�F C`V NNE-. N fV N N N N N N f`V 4V N N N N N P a O a b o O CC7 O b p c o ca c o c a o o ca o 0 o c G1 O G^ C ... O C? O C7,•� .. O u O 0 ON C q c a 7 IN 00 N N N r 00 G�. S. M V 00 00 D M M V06 M' •-` 00 00 N N a f^ O — N N c J W 04 Cl In ,n f..., c7nOC. N N N N m nF 2 r N id i N w tV v. CV N r N p N Q N J U.�d 'a Z. N w a — .� .; y'c o c a 4 c r c — a a o as " .. .., .-. o N C LL. G 'd dT 'I ^ ct -T O rn rr, ,h In a w a 00 00 00 o0 00 9L. IN en M, r M rY r.. v '�' �' b' !. •'C Qf a ? .� .^ram 'tl- N CL(r N r- N N N ':9' N K[- N ^J 'L" ^�i U OO a G4 J Q m aMi ^ In NM M M �' L cfi N N N N C' N d. N d. V . i � 00 v1 00 00 or, 00 OO U � U U 0 �:. � '� NC � Oa p00aG00 ^� Cl. P Q C a a � � o CD G C C z z z r. tq r ' x o tZ c� R v. r 1 O m M � R fa ..� G, d• N O � C C G G gpt P � C O P C P C C f i N to O -Yoo�p •G M � � �r1`'� :.� �C �: M� aa� � tl0 to to M ® V cl 00 GO V N N N00tr L G, ood in O 0 n y v'bb oc G en U a'r° � c v 0oM � tJ Ck� a4 d ?� v LLI `w z� ? N1' RG G G W cn W u�G rr, O j M c4 ell C G N N p aJ" G U d V Kl • �.. t""z N v crt rdn V] •d' LZl '.�.� _ .d a o a � a o 0 0 o 0 a - a� a o o 0 0 o a o .114 C; w G O C O ^ O O C O G O O z z z Z z z z z z z z A a pse 6r Oh Y >: T T Qn. U Ln Irr. CA m uj " ..'". G. •�. . +. w {I] .C-+ N CC C O C O C O O C) C O O .� N N N N N N N N N N N i N N N N N N N N N N N C) C> c d c o c o c o o c� 00 N N 06 aC CO Ci �O N N N N #P N N N X xr) k [O+1 M t,.� p k. M r SM .y. R N r•, ti v, O ics LT.' r^, x17 Lt) C oA eft W F 'rry F O 'ti p.N I! U r� ti _ 1y c BO O O JO eu z GoONp c oFr3 :r , o c o y N 00 f`Vl_V N U T :J CI Cl " s en CD 0 4 cq O M N ew) t4 M, N t+t N r.1 N M .MU P z G\ N N 0 N V, �r wl -w N .... M < a c. N N N N LLI m 'r, � C' �!' ^C-4 O ti' O N.�q� C '�F' F' �-z �t LLILi- r 2 M IyV r r '- _ i- ^' 'Z' cC^ �' I'�' �F C 'S O rV ^� O CV O (V C r�F5- N O � � Gt v � O r r U � + + � r r � N N v � y co M O Ln ° n 2 p �C x ] CA C7 V t) M "J ON G N N N cj � F4 o O O cz ':s P 0 N C+l M O` �. a? e't d' L*. Mwl �G .N b r17 � G .d: Ct' O M G 00 V �� N M M M r!'r w M 7J pop � '."" to Kl e*1 00 W O+J � M G? bA - C0-- O O � •U M '�' �' � d .. O IV `a R ti m M� ;J ^ .. .b rry U y rn = mil T �... O r" �- Q c c %"-° .� cnto ` o r o tt tr c C 3 K c CO M <t a o .� as k _ m Q 6 G O G G O y •�� Q a P O C C O O r� .2. J z z z z z z z z C m E � v L40 a ;� •a na 3 C e ri J cu w d v Q °i (GV N N N N CCV N N Qq 0 C I-R p �O C 1� n C w `^ V M N fV N 'd W M C C J O v N N r \D ''D N tn may" V7 +- p r^ N7 O i � v, � � r 00 U h C d' 'ct Get p et t U OG z ?�M_ .,�, M {� N M L N M L:. N M � N v M C z 0 7 its .- Z. LLr - _ O _ cJ u y c a < � � 6 � � c � G- x oo i U W CJ c p ell V C (V (`4 N �' Cr N N u _ cn _ h G K U O .`. C: d. M 1" M, M U n = C y N nl en -� O C O r en C. It � CVY cCv uj a '�'° v�'5 O h — o R. d 0 o c c o 0 o c c 0 0 0 0 0 V z z z Z z z z z z z z z z, z z z z at b N m V N r� a .4. 3 Ln cn = :a r, a oa 3 v .� cp h o ON o n6 00 M 'e} 6 M 00 p M a\ C h `:e C 00 s N a Oa0 ~ , M 00 4 m� In "�" J ram" Vt U _� En ccU11 .�+ •.�".. CF W U U V U U :J U U W w v ct �r 'c✓• •ei- d <r _ c � �t �_ '�h �fr d- v_ ti' O P O O C C C C O C C O C N N N N N N N N N N C`V N N [V N N (V N N N fJ N C`V N N N C`d C_V N N N N N N N N C C o r O G O C Cl C O O © O O O C o O i N M to ,ri M Cl '.7 M N '�' M 00 W) 00 CT. rx r� "1v C cy; ST N M 00 'v'> `7 4— =ra tV 00 c.i -r 00 r CV 00 kn -- � h c r �: v' N — v � M M N , G. 00 R. r*t .°0 M fYl M rs m M r = M rr rs co rrl 'n N N WJJ N p� N y CC`t N N yy N +�+ N in m. f:.7 W ri y t n v S(; n J W !��• W N n 4J r nU.l !� .2 v. ra N N N N N N LV N N N CG1 W LL) W rn LU W V) Lcl W iJ W s u t W U :.r.7 ? C7 N N N N N N N N N N N N fV N hl N T c.- O — _b N N C .. O _C> O ... CO — _O CEO E _ .--.0 _ _ _ o_C D 00 O C- c-, M M M t7 M M M M rJ; M !+1 M R7 M M O IT IT 17 C) O 0 O P O ClO C ^ C O O b O b x C t!t 1-0 hl 'k �o O C N I�D O irs v', 'U _ M N =n- - rr1 — .--, V; .._ to en tn a0, N gC'400 IT W 1 N nF N N N „„„ [`2 N N N — N N N ,,,,, N N N rV ,lam! t h! w" 00 _C tad N N v N N Q N c"3 G n! b ( C N O N O N � N ^J N fV O N \ N v O C-11 O C = O O O O Co O a o a � Ltt CIO rn 0 z z z° z z z z z z z z u Ol N -hL � .X .. LL � � ✓ C C/) M o 0 0 0 c o 0 0 O t O O O G O O P ^:.� •"' O CD C7 O C) 0 O O C> .j O CS 00 t/1 N C o7 to ^J yl et M 00 tM a. _1 00 C tr) a 00 �? Q r, P bc, 4 O M M M K1 ��M M M J C"i ^✓ M 7fi m, 'M l _ N G G U N y N CV r w � air- v !- � i � � un wn �' a• � � � f= — a N t4 N N f`I tom, N N N N N U, Cam! w ,r N CV C"V v 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 co 00 00 00 M M M M M M M M h"; M M m p oo _ o o C, o o Cl � In N M N N to to ... ull _. fry ^ O` ... M M tr L N ^ N O N C N ^ N O N O N d (C�t =5 ,O N l O Cif O Lr1 N it M M tr, to M M -� M !") 6.. r d nl� ver � �* r v "' CV CV N G CV G !V f�f G N 2 N O N N ^J N O '!— O(3 y V i� G i'r• a N w w V M' t'J a �W t � r7wE V iwe d y � Gi N ^` N � a 0 r � N N Ln - N N N N ct E � kpppp �\ Cq .aE � N C� rJ' C w"7 C C C> C C C C --' W C C C O v, O C G C O O O O O z z z z z z z z c� cs U eS A N cq c14 O N N N N a 'L' N N �7 (`V O d o en o o c o rr oo 01. NN � ,n N n � `^� M om_, en rl N N N 'L ,.` .. ^yJ O O vti p .7r O y �S y -t00 oo , C to O cc ^� E-: v m `� O O O 0 cr,. Bch n d O mom o Q NO � NC ^NO � � o bo � Ow C` Ito ov Z ^ c° o �211 oo < R y ¢ U� VO : ^ oo 00 N N ~ ca N N �' f*� '.' e�j- M -T mot' 72 v, In c c o wIn vi rt c u � � o mo 0o t 0 � 'Jo_ Oo - �7 ^h 00 ooN +y- y 'C A 'T A CY ' A 'TO oNC t oNo �• oNo Q O O C O C: Cl -, UN — N — N — UC�; •� U ^ CJ C✓ O ^ C] — C it :v C p C, G' o a o o c p o o c 0 o a o o c o c ca O O O ^. •, O O ^ O O z z z z z z z z z z w v � � C "•" C Z r .4. 3 o,. c c c a Q 0 � gZE; 0 0 aN ru rr- N N N N N N N N N N o 0 0 o ca o a o c c r c o 0 0 0 o v c c o o c c c o 0 �a oo en O o o C ca to W)i W) c do M C O •D �o 1 — �, M VI kn �.'j M M 1 _ cl bA a r 4 : co a N O N aoc! C M O d d cd Cam' c "�" � N ;;] d v. ni qj �• Cti^JEn tY = � � LM.— — Gov c P N ¢N O_cq Cs.N ^0.N a. O .a`w. N O .'7 'R N w.. N 2 V Zvz � o � = yCY C C C p O LJ p L: LU U oo N d a n O 0. M M In f+N", M CV j .a. M 7 i v d N d d d is .... IT ;B � ii. N� N� � � u <. oc p o �lp� M N O N !LT N vl p clA CII 'Tc' �? N '�' � 3 rq �? z � v > J ? NONONC� NC y4c � � In - - � occ o " W MN tiU = d � O G O � O C ..� O •Y•• 6� C z z z z z z z ^W r'> i.v iw k Z, rn ra Ni w 0 ca p y L Lto Z > > > Cj co G CJ 0 1C LL. m a _7 C3 � 43 O N 0 vJi G p G G C C5 O ^ O O C N N N fV N N N N N N c c� o c c d a o 0 o a c ctY i 00 0 oc o 0 0 0 or n c O 0 0 0 ,n o �n o M M M C .7. O C. O ir'1 Vl C O 00 N N N N N N M M Ci N N en m M M � C d w w z •• F^ y t F mot" E— CL �V 0 M to 'Z r C 4 G e C N .. vi " �2- .- :d U Q F-" ^ N 7 (`1 p., C !/7 «- C ,�. O cc C Q U vs ,. N d xr". N N ,.v M M —" N ""'. C Cl O O MCt � Ny O N i d y <i F O O �m J' as p _ C ti O ONIn 000 = O N12 U N 5- C v " I C Lnlzr ram+ 'ncl� N tY` ~ N > N > N g (N — CV sue' O Q C 0 j 7_ 7 Z Z z 7 C r. w 4 � o y N J � y U N y c w N > 7r � o In Ul Y m N c o u o cq e It IT It " c N N cV 6" b �P "It 00 cc 00 C• C 0 tiU 00 00 00 O O C cc CO oo C O O r r` r O = h r; ao V vi O O rn IM rn V o v1 � ° o 0 0 C u m ON O , N .. U � O ,,, oc 0 �i In 00 Ln ra vtn a, a p cs r- o U � : LI) cq o erg — crk � rn a bo F a v c C G. r 3 ao, .F U c LT., Y N ':C N .7 N_ 'C7 N y m Q N cC 01. m c = GL� pq 1:J C cn [tl � o o � o Ln a o M r � N r14 Ctj IT Q' b• � G •�• '� QOcY' p qt ce'd < C C C ON q�.. i�J.� _ � dCrl C M CJ In r O r,4 C. ^w C C C v^` ^. C " Ul G. s z z z z z z z z z o •s• v, N m o S C14 0 m y � w c oo 2:1 U. o U c U O d d n 6 N G �t � � <r � � e• � v rN N C14 CV !�4 N N N N N N N N N N (V C O v O O G C C C G C O O d C G C O O C r^I er C> CC C d '"� 00 N Nn r- r- Q M C ce) Mrn 00 .,. N V•1 Vl CO '7 cn 7 L yC o"i In 000 �r 00 67 N c.0000 000 v .R v U r �-' 7 C v v w v r > W N 00N y N 00 N U O •^ N 'eC IT I:t N Lc, C/] `�... Q. p O N N C`2 tit 5 O •v � M N U M M M M � d' '�• � M vl O° C7 y N C N O N O C-4 t4 00 CV 00 O 00 V7 00 ^ C LJ C .� 00 " 0000 d' 00 y M vl /2 °= Nm "IC? F N w o Ica gc� oaco trlcc �t U .� o co ca M 00 �., nNn M !- Q. ['- �7% V^ C. hIn �, � p � t` vn � � q• nv � srq vlb• ✓ � `� SvcCe^ yvlG c � � � \ \ * \ t � > � \ \ / � &� » \ y \ � \ k ` \ \ � . « \ � \ 7 \ ƒ % ±f » � ƒ � & _ @ « � a k = $ . � > % - � *& k& > & . r & A # >aM 4 / ¥ � � THE CITY OF LA K E F:�L M 0 A4A YCIR & COD UM COMMUMCA, 7 DATE: January 21, 2014 CONSENT ITEM 94 mo'noN AGENDA ITEM: December 2013 Financial Reporting SI-IP-MITTED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director REVIE'%N"ED BY: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS, - Introduction of item............................ ......................... ..........City Administrator - Report/Presentation.................................................City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff............_....................................Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion.............................................01.:...... Mayor& City Council - Discussion............................. ..........................................Mayor& City Council - Action on Motion..................... .........................*.4...*.............Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance FISCAL IMPACT. NA SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the December 2013 Financial Reporting Packet. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo has fiduciary authority and responsibility to conduct normal business operations and report the financial. (unaudited) statement to the City Council. City guidelines suggest the Council be updated on a regular basis. STAFF REPORT: Attached please find a summary of what is currently projected to be the 2013 year end surplus. In addition is the comparative report for December reflecting the monthly and year to date detail, comparing the actual results to the 2013 Budget. Please note that some minor adjustments will be necessary as part of the normal year end close process but the numbers should be substantially complete. --page I -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 3] January 21,2014 6 The most significant variances are highlighted below. Revenues: • Building Permit revenue for the month was 4% above budget. On a year to date basis actual activity continues to be above plan by 12%. • Utility Permit revenue for the month and year to date continues to be well above budget due to the extensive development work along Hudson Boulevard and the need to relocate numerous utilities. These amounts represent the ROW permit fees. • As a reminder, although the state fire aid revenue is above budget, the net impact to the General Fund is zero due 100% of those funds being forwarded on to the Fire Relief Fund. m Y • Plan review fees for the month were 50% above budget bringing the year to date revenue ' Y to 40% above budget. • Fines for the month were 46% above budget due to accruing the January funds received for December fines into the year-end number. On a year to date basis the fine revenue was under budget due to the decrease in number of fines issued which is a good trend. • Interest earnings have not been calculated as all of the year end investment statements have yet to be received. Expenses: v Most departments continue to be below budget for the month and on a year to date basis as all Departments continue to be very cost conscious. A few key items to note: • The membership with the Greater MSP was recently renewed for 2013 and is included in the Mayor and Council department expenses. This expense was not included in the 2013 budget. i • Assessor costs under the Administration department for the month were above plan as the t budget did not include the final true up for the year in it projections. Currently the assessor is paid a flat $2k per month with the balance due in December based on the parcels in the City. • Legal Publishing costs for the Administration department are higher than budget for the month and on a year to date basis due to the increased codification activity related to the initiative to update the City Code. • On a year to date basis the elections expenses are below plan due to the decision to not add the new precincts which were budgeted for. It is anticipated that these precincts will l r be added in the 2015-2016 election season. t --page 2-- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 3] January 21,2014 r 3: k • On a year to date basis, the newsletter expenses in the Communication department are $7.5k below plan due to strategic issuance of the newsletter and some significant cost savings with the vendor. ® The Planning Department has incurred expenses above the amounts budgeted for many expense items due to the City expansion initiative. The majority of the expenses were related to additional staffing needs, external Engineering support and Contractor expenses. F • For the 2013 budget all of the telephone expense was budgeted under the City Hail department. r. p rtment. In 2013 it was decided to track actual expenses within each department. As a result, the telephone expenses reported under City Hall look under budget while the other departments look over budget. Overall,the total expense was very close to budget. t p. • The law enforcement contracted costs were budget at $560k for the year for support from f' Washington County. The actual costs incurred were $497k resulting in a savings of $63k. ® Conferences and training for the Fire Department for the year appear to be under budget by$9.1 k but this is a result of booking the receipt of county reimbursements back to the departmental expense rather than reporting it as income. l • Engineering costs are above budget in the Building Inspection department on a year to date basis by$8.1k due to all the additional work necessary due to the growth initiative. • Inspector contract services were not budgeted in 2013 resulting in a variance to budget of $7.1k. These costs are to ensure there is no interruption of service when the City Inspector is out of the office as well as to assist when volumes necessitate more help. • The Cost for the Permit Works software and licenses of$16.3k is reflected in the year to X date Info technology costs for the Building Inspection department. This expense was not budgeted. 1 • Personnel costs in the Public Works department were above budget for the year due to a large number of unforeseen weather events. ® On a year to date basis the street maintenance material costs were $11.8k above budget due to the street repair initiative in 2013. i; r. • Sand and salt for the month came in over budget by $34.4k due to the constant snow and t ice in December. Also impacted were the fuel costs and the repairs and maintenance on the equipment. i' --page 3 -- _ City Council Meeting � [Consent Agenda Item 3] January 21,2014 G I 6 • Under repairs and maintenance under the Parks and Recreation department there is a$1k €' credit for the insurance funds received toward the repairs made related to the storm a damage last summer. h • The $200k loan repayment is reflected under other financing for the month of December. This represents the second of three installments toward paying back the internal loan. • Please note that the salary and benefit expenses are based on more accurate departmental h. z allocations than we had in August 2012 when the 2013 budget was initially compiled. As f a result, some departments are above budget, while others are under but overall, ; personnel expenses are below budget. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council. r accept the attached December Financial Report. x 3. ATTACHMENT: 1. December Financial Reports Ir G r k K f { r x_ - x E: T --page 4-- w U 0 > U oA 4=? > � N O .N 48 U = rn M W C4-O a crt c ? r O LU O of r J C f--, N Q ^d © U� U roc, Qzz O M 00 d' O I: � G1 O> C) :S, d d" d -� �t I� O 00 rV 00 t� 1- d M {� M © O M. C7 �t7 ON C71 Y1 •- O O tz O. N M ON. N N O d' "Se N G3 ,.J O O U ^• C .�+ -g o o e o o� o c o o g o 0 0 0 0 0 - e C M g p G b C N O e1• m C M ^^^ oo b C C V) 0 0 0 N © M oo �• M C p �D ti 0 M ac h 6 6 6 0 0 0 6 t` tri G1 6 trs ❑ F"` oo CD � ^ M ao a try � P � !` d• N C•� M O N N '.0 00 c3 .•-, M q tt t•. to O C O O "f P g C b C M 0 0 G� p m O cJ• N p N b C O N O O O !� O M C) OC O C C C> CC V) G O O C C m C P a M ... C O 0, C q P 00 C W) 6 to h O m C_ V) o b x 6 O 00 C o0 00 oC Oo O r- '.6 p m tr) tV 4 3_O ^ M y A -V a. N i N P o t'- t- W W) t- m 00 to 00 00 -w M C>p eh V C m 't lr l N r- V N l� 00 O a � � to 00 V)-t K1 r- oo r- �O C> .--� 1-- C - 'Q m �T •"' ^"' �t G I'1 7 co tr Cl Vc N 00 C V) 1C d• .� `� 'eh v G\ N d' O yr h- A D` ^ r1• n V) 6 0 0 0 0 d' C P p p m 00 C O O C O oo g N g p q G 10 cV 0 0 0 M oo Vv M C`. oo C O O Q O In C O C Q M O O O m C? P p V) 0' O O O tr) C+. C Q C M d C 00 q 6 6 Vi O O m 6 h tri 6 6 ao 6 N 00 C� O oc oc .--� C n vi O t- 6 r- C 00 V) C tiD to tl' 00 (= � try N t'- V) to 00 00 M M => M ct V� 00 "C N N t/'� N d' -� VF Ci 00 C r l� V) O 00 t n - O C M t'n 'V 00 - C P F� 7 a0 0 N 00 trj N 00 : N __. N 00\C N V) 01 G M tt N u N V try •-^• m G Z` d N. ? M �D O O pp p g G G O C O O O C p O G C 0 M O C) O O CO C C�7 O g G q G C C CT •^•- p C O b 0 0 0 0 p P O g q .� 0 0 0 O C O Q ''o C O g p O O O O O C C O 00 pj 00 6 6 6 6 V1 Ca 6 V: 6 P 6 ^ O O pp 6 6 6 N 6 a. 00 0 6 ^ 6 ^ D;. C pp V) 6 6 6 6 6 — 0o 0 N O t-- C Cl O �o q V) N C C 00 O pp C Cf' p b 00 0 0 0 0 0 a, �-, C --� N p N V) C N - O P r In S C C � O e¢ C C 0 }i M 00 (V t- '-" C+ 0 N V1 (n .� l� d" �-. h.. O 1- p p N tvj o o d C o C C o 0 0 oO C o o c o D p o o a o o O o 0 0 o C o O o O p O p�-•+ P p g m C Q` O O Q m C p p g C C b O (D C C t~ O C pp ^ V^ V' q G a3 a O O p p ^J O O C> M O C O C C C) 00 C C O O O O C C P C q t- g p b o 00 W 0 0 0 o 6 o 6 6 6 6 p M 6 N 0 6 6 ^^ 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 C,. 6 6 O Ur 6 0c 6 6 nj M N N tC M "# 00 00 d• 00 7 N O N O O C O g q C C O C C O Q C ^.- C> O � C> b C Co C t- tl C C Op C Op _ N un tx O N C m C O CP O m O O C O C o 4 © O b C O O M O O N C C Cl C l w^• q o G .r 00 6 tri C+ 6 P O 6 0 6 Vi c6 G 6 6 tr> 6 Q v v 6 6 6 C; 6 6 •� 06 6 C> 6 h, t� N trl 00 M C P q N G -'o 00 r M 00 C{• 0, v C Ct C a N O0 M t- �6 l� .^7 — M t/) fy C .•^ ^ 'C N 0 `V N r -W M N 000 co > N 0 C•. O N C pp P g G 0 0 ^ O O O Q Op p b p G C dt G O O C ^ C tl- n P b g N .-a 00 O tV G rry g p C C C M C O C P G C q o C O h O O M O C N P G C? q O C O Q CV b try C, O C C C C P try --+ 6 G 6 V) C O O O C 'r g CD r- o G N 6 0 0 t'V t- %C C C wt N to 00 m C 0 q - N O o 00 N t- m 00 eq N 00 m Z• to •T LV - V1 7 M to rp N to N to CJ N .a ^ tr- - o s`to 4 d � in 0o q p C7 C G O C O C O C C P g q o 0 0 0 C ^ C Cl O C C q q o G O C O C Cl 00 O G C O O C O O C p p g o b 0 0 0 0 C C P in g q G O C C 0 0 0 C O 0 0 C C � 0 6 6 Cj 6 0 0 Cl 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 :.7• C of 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 w P P p G G to t� ^ V) C O V) G N V) `: M O C P q fn N > r V.> A O c W nJ 0 � � C] L, ° A •� W m 3 o a > •o x o U > 5 o o d W W o w m -o W v u o o o a r [i7 44o W. c V > .. �l F3 y w ° o m -, v � �,o t* _r C As o o . a, C7 a c to o A 8 .a U U Ll 04 3 'cs e� ° oG :� cv e2 a Q v t op � A y W U- 0U w � O ti ox ° tU. o > W ° m 5• ° ;d p rn 9 V w o ° em ::F rr d' .) o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c c o o a o o c o a o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O ••�c�-- a. h d 0p v'r 00 O --� �--� N G N 'V' G N C N O p p C er O•. N O O O O yr C C? . r. EO d; pry M a 000a �roo - .� ,r c; r ori CIA �ocr - ori o CIA o dc � - 000 � rri odv "- e r cc ca cvG � NO M -It 4= rn� pp cv� rnaGc �'10N110Tr •: G r O b N N ef• V1 Cs. C, M O (mil v'r Vt ,t r t— C) ON v1 a. 7 M Q; C C7 O a t? 10 O G'l Q+ Oi O l-- 0i O+ CV S� � c �B tn' i WO� 01 MN OC; N a ao N V a. V3 G O hl v: CIA t� VN C 00 C M — O 'md00� rn O 00 d' ^ N b O r M ^ C 'a O r a N 0 h 'm O N 10 V) M O O c}' K: N a �G n O r � 00 00 C In In 7 rn -+ C a � [n d N In In Vl to O a a a O r h r O a C N V) NM M 1- tl' M 00 N %D a n tI"r h. �O V1 O M 00 Yrl m 00 t- 00 V) M N �D rO�r M_ N M r N % N V) �O N �G C: .-, M M a CIA M V" tel rn ,� t j cn `-• .� M N M O Cl 00 C O t" p C] 1p M r C M ^ O G C? .-+ G O C O O C G 't O C O O O M N C r V] o d ri C in a q ^ 09 I O C C G r C O = g q a. G 00 N O ; C L? 00 M d b O O O O O O t- d d G G O h O r O\ a r m o tip ^,J1 h O Vt r M a M O O C d VS O O C r r C% a V M1 v1 crl N M O h tip 0C 00 N N •-+ 00 N •--' 00 N M OQ N CD N M 00 In ...• 00 — ^; Cy' M d O O Cl CD C c 0 0 C Op 0D a0 00 O '�h V't N O g r d rt b O C O g O d d V1 O O Cl C 00 O O C7 C C O C O M CV hJ C> 00 00 10 C� 0 t- G � ^J' kf) G C O N C O Q G � G^ Cj O O m � r O G N d G a 0 0 w r N d M r 0 0 0 0 .•-. q C�6 O r�C v� O qp ^ d �O O Vt C, 0 a. r d C� I: O N 0 '.O 00 Cl C:) CD W" C) ovi I-DG 'nu� v� Goeiv c: -0 oob o ac aCaO ^^ vi 00 0 00 o N o <n b o 00 `rn V) :T v) c O a. Cl - � — - N V7 V� .." .N_. G a. r G q Q\ d G +n M 00 d r M O c C ^ ^ O o In 0 - o .o r O M N C O V) q G " V) (V C M — C G C r d �D O N C rn O C? a. r o v C N O yr -r d46 .So C C V) O O e' 00 \o O C M C c, N O O 00 d 00 O r 'G C, 00 C MC-- a 00 00 C) .a M 7 r — V7 er C C 00 M C) Vy 10 r b 00 r --� d D� tD a r — "0 G u ^.. O — M V) 'n r 00 — m 00 nr � C a In g O d C '@' C C C O ^ d d b 0 0 0 O ^ O G O C G C O O O O g G d G M N G O O O O `. O O O O C G G O G C g C In V C O ' C> 0 t- G (V C '1 00 tl- Q d C Cj 0 0 0 C> C q C? 6 6 C; 'T Gh oo P3 C C 00 fV C O G ^ CV M M M �t fV Vcc W � r ei .o F" � m '� •� •� � � � � `� � y c�i ou � •fi H � v 3 G, n G • U ' o °J 4 G �s to va lu IV o rn 'v c o N oG U s ti o w ao r v v -Se o .=� a3LAU � :; f�i � ti � � � 4a zdJ �^- gip y1C} � Ga ^� C✓ v5E o c c o e G o o e o C o p o 0 o C C - c Oo 0 o p o e p p o 0 o O - D o 0 0 p o o p o ppdbooM � rnM ad "no v, Ch — ooa � C, c � MooMo MdddNafor. d S 0 0 0 0 0C� �e cn M O N Ct d Cl V'r N O � T. �f; Q h O p i- d S op O O O N O M � C C O C O C M 06 I-- r- O1 C1 C N Vl m C O e4 Cl0% .••, ^ O C N O O O P O C •-- C O 00 v N ..,, � Env, �nve i C O O S C] S S d ON -r Cl) v CD t-- 0% ©14D 7 O. O C 00 l O � ^"` d �O O O N •ct O C. oo d N M 0 0o M o r- p v; � O v ^ .10 d — G. C C O �n a N O C S O d b 0 0 0 0 0 O N M ao CA vi V l b to M in N l N C. a`. O v) N O O M 06 b 4 00 kn vi 'n ^� h oo O �c �R N r- 1, M �o er 1'- V1 M M oo V1 O M d 00 O 00 N N r- 00 In kn N C N N `'-'N [- V) co O p P kn A c" M r- w't 'd' ^ kn �' .--� w"-' .O n O O d b O C V� O O M M C, Q 't ddC C CCs O4^ OO C CC 7 7F i . Vvs M O C 0 . �c C-) O Int NC) 00 " OSa O � Cp �DC O� vl � 00 kn vi y t+ m C� vi O C vi N O C m oc C v, kn kn a ep en t- M O to) v cc 00 n [n L) to l� Vi a, to 10 v) C Vl p 00 CD 00 N N Y 04 00 N C1 ^' 6� M v M •--� N N r- ON V7 — M kn v1 ^ 7 00 m -- cV O tl' Y1 I eF ^ C- ^ W) CIO N .ti O d S O�h C O OO SSS ^ 00 SS S S tn S tn O oc 00 N N S S S C C C p C O C+ O0 S O C OSC; O t l D o b kn V ©© C . C-- C, .+C kn ^ to d cY O O 1- M N 0�. a 't C d v1 kl V) N N N M N M V1 �r M M 00kn N p ^ G o c C o o C o o o 0 0 0 c o 0 o C o \ \ o o c o 0 0 0 o c o o o a p O O O p d b b C p ^ Od h 6 0 0 0 00 ^ a~ d b N a 00 r- M O O0 O C O O p O a b b O� C O d S 0 0 0 0 p �--1 1� O O C- Cln rt N Wn O O M 0� oG 00 to O O O p d O d O O O C O O O C C O C �^..• C p C C ^ C C C C vi b m �c .y O C O ^ O C O C C C C C kn V) to Wn fn kn N m i 6 0 0 0 O C d O� C'A. V'1 OC op p Q d d n G1 N M O� q/j DO 00 M m w O d O O C a n 09 O O O O �+ I0 S S v� o0 0o I- 6+. O O oo C O G C O C C C C M M M O m N n C b V01 v • vry V) ke) O v G� 'r, `- 0, C C "- V C' N Y ^ V US O M vT a. Oo 9 M y M O CQ y✓ N re• ^ N ww O C O p O d C.l. O. N vi to M p d 0 00 C- S p d d tn O 1+O N p M C d Ch O C B O O M M, T M N �- a 0 0 0 00 vr .C� C, 1 U'1 O C O OC O -C, a+. O �^^• S 00 O O r4 C C C O C C O of ON N kn I� C N C C C 00 *,^. C vi C v1 C (V �7 00 ."� C O C C to O C C a. O C `7 cn M en ,n a 00 N O a O O r- 00 C O+. 00 kn M a1 0\ O ON Sd d b a 00 0 (m l- 1. M of 0 N 0 ^ p p d b C 0 0 to O (71 � Ko C C) O C p O d d b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 d 0 �1; 00 N p O Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N [h [� l� cn C p d b C) 0 0 C O O � p d M C C C ti^-• O O C C © V'• C N C C C O eli "16 x C C C C G d C 00 C kn tn O !-- M 00 'o d C (� .^+• N O O N N N ew V1 M N 3� O O tV en 00 C a a v 0 o c o A aci o n r a c uz a�zol ., to y o = ¢ _ Q Cc v c o u o c a c5 0 -o � o oa O w o c U aci U a c°3i a a ai o v z o ac o W o f W �. W r ° a S? o o o a a o a � v� 0. 0 y �s U UU y � o p � U iz 'Cu 0 2 U. y yao a y(n Q Q wcd a. Ouc �i Zm o 0ao JeU� ls0; 0 0 0 g o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \ o \ \ \ \ -e \ \ \ e o 0 o e o 0 0 0 0 0 0• e ^• Ch G1 'C t- ^ O V3 G d d O O N O .� m M 2 •xy" to N M O V1 � N In lC M o. N ^ d r O C O Q C oc d v $ a C� 1 . a m ^ M 01 DD a .� 00 C N C7 %D C l- C ,-� C C C C> O eI• C C ,� n; r OG Vj !� N 00 �G t- h N r '•o 00 N M t� N N N V) et d' a. M p Vl 00 r- et ^ N t- Ct a N N V) C ^ P ^ p It 00 00 N M N w 00 CS a. �o t- o, a m M h r 'm V1 0o CM�o M M V t- kn N a �D InN C n m V) •�[ 00 t r- l� N 00 of — m I+ M l- r- v1 00 N •^ v1 M 00 t- c .M.�.N..rw�+vwN� C'F w y N N N w et Ct 00 7 O et r 00 M 00 \C ^ 'v: t- �r Q' N CD O m � Cr. N O W, � O V) d M (�i O e� t� V) h .� ul 'et f! t h l� Ob N — N t- S N N kn O C ^ C,. N Gam . "• C M N t• a. W1 'IT t- kn � rl .••� "P 'n 00 a t- r- .•. M R' ,T "T M •S N O t- m �r 00 H M C' --� 00 r- V) V) OG CT -- CR. N N It N N " O �r C, M ^^-• a N a N N tn tl' CV rZ t- ,� 00 �o G1 to rn to •-• N C, oocamNCOop ^ docc000 .. oo � o �oao�oo � o � 00 00 00 Q^ •� P d C? G O d p Q d p d Oo C IZ \C cV ti? et' C O C C C . O CT 00 0 0 p O C 0 a. O O C O•. �o �C. v1 O m N iC N ^ 00 N T wC7 M 00 G r N aN O oo O--�Oo �t M rM00 e c o 0 0 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e o o c c o 0 0 0 o \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ c p \ \ e \ e \ \ \ \ \ \ \ c \ \° ^ V) p ^ O N O [� P d d 0 0 C> O c c •-� •- Q: ao O a Q �t C G O O C Ci G M Qi oo M O O O M M M � O O O p p d d M10 00 tn C•. v1 N N O C O O et w C d d d O V�1 O C M O `�^e a r ^ V1 v 1 a O. M O O l� 00 O O O O O O1 I Cl O - .0 Op 00 a C N O�. lV O C t C v: N ,'h' Ot;+ e0*] M Clw�. wcc l� O Q kn M O w w u kn v"T v y T q Q P d 4G C) O O Cl 00 P p O C) Cm •9^ IV C C t tl• 'IT •--� O I- � o c a M Q C; 00 O C O m a .10 00 ^ C 0o V7 V1 a M V' C> N Cl G C O C> C C O O+ v; h O O l� C.1 \:. Vi �•-� C C lz CT. n m tr) 00 N t- b b N O N N - n ^ N ^ tM tV N � ti V7 N a M OC C O O '"+ p d C O O C O G G Qo O C O O C C N O O N C C. N N 00 O d d O C O C 0 C? G d O C? [+ C? o O O C O m p d p e+ a 00 C M �oC C C C:) C C C C C) C C C C:) C O Cy C> Vi C d o0 C C ^ m 00 r c ^ 00 00 V) p M N G O C> V) r O O Q G M M N � V1 00 N -4 C? = t-- 00 -^ V) Vi M 0000• to :9G G m. w cntw a to ^> i• '� a s c c .w U Y rn c£i c� c w w a ::] k2 U tU to m U m as En �`-' c '�o c of y e o o 'cc � y a o \ o e c o 0 0 0 0 o a o e o o e o o o 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 h L- r t` 00 tT ^+ 00 Vi 6 N C a 0, M O C7 00 kn 00 lD N 10 ON 00 10 I-- kn .Zr N ...i vl � C. C* d; 'D 'Vq P 1- -�-• N d I' M N M 00 V' W� P M .,+ M 00 N N d• -T =n [! Oc Ca N m C7 O n ^ oo - -� N O t- CV O +O l� d• h d• (V P€ PI O, O d• .� .-. ,-- 'v:. � M l cn � V'i V'! •� -� l i �^+ m �O � C{^ ,:�; M C'°y a ' N N r C O N 1-- �c n O d' C 0, N qroo v1 %0 O N O w ^00 N . O� C� tD lC N V7 N d• M P Oti ^ h It! M L?�• Y: 10 m N W1 O (,- Wj Vr M f^, v1 S 1� 00 M f+� O^0 N f V P 'at M Vn M 00 O r- oo N N M Oc d' �p d- p M Ch kn �D r- h C1 � Cr, W PI o0 07 •-+ O �D M 0% N Oc M W) lzr v1 It h h N [� O ZD kn t- W) r- 00 d• = '.Q O (~ t` Gam. C� V) Clo0 � m V') C v^d' (V '�D 10 M rU .--� M ••• l� CV CV tiC •-- •-- N — M 1� h \✓ d' f� N Y: N `� CJ+. try .� w mN..+v M iC1 M M 00 oc CDp Dt oo O C p \D O N '.D N Wn .-+ Ol C N �D N O N N O d' 'r, 0C CT d CJ �Q b � � Q. V1 O O O .--+ � �D V� O 'S. "� M V1 d• C l� 'v: O� M ^ � G d. N `7 M eP'i N N C ,n �D o0 00 fV O N 00 to N OC l: d• to O? n ON 1` 00 d• r- C% O — -a 00 GO O O kn to ON CT. rh N M G". d'• m C d• t- h �^ V1 NV) a, M It M ch N co d• or, C� O ✓, ON V) Cn N d' v (� O C? Ot N O+. d 10 �fF (� f M N W N d• 00 M M N N N V• \D kn M � M M N M ^ C� kn In G G C O C C t+ G O Oo R 0 0 00 C? 00 (V a en C O O C P O O C M O O O yr C 0 C7 M p p b a C7 C C C Oi 2 �M O © 0 d 00 O rq C •D 0 6 4 O C7 ('l 'r, r-. (V O O ^ O to o O c7 O 'J G O G Vn N M C kn O M O 00 O O C 1� M C� C� O Q !� C✓ O O l N C or� a, C to t^ .. O oo en cq IT w) inM �n N r i kn Cl N M M ^ (-- M V') N Q� N N 4 p q d. O O E O 0 C O C o o C o G O O O O O o O O O C P 0 O O O O O p C C g0 od 00 c� Ml: ^ aG acoo rno c -� M4= c10 %Q o �? re a Nu> et �noo gcoo coaca - > > od; o cooen000� �a � � Q C p o d' �. 00 M O P O o 0 00 O O C M A Q C 00 N N 00 Wl 00 00 n[� N N d• D\ 00 C O C O Cp G Oc d o N O O b 0�0 Ih �n O O O_ O - II Iri O Il O r .00 w oti �$ �[i :xJ © °1 C v^ '-� v O 00 d' c w- v. to C� C '^ '^ N M ^. �•' kn to 6 O O� 00 10 10 N O N kn C d O ^ 00 rp N M G — C N [� i� (� v'� V� N V N d' N M N •--� '•✓'J• Of: M M I U. oc N .N.. w C,m lL N N t- t, 00 00 �D N O O '0 '0 O. «-« O 0 0 W1 0C ^ M m tC �R d: Oc 00 d• V') G O 0 0 0 C.. r� O O l� ('- CD O Of) M C U1 C O O O ^ N J C✓ (V N 00 4 s M1 W) V'1 v1 �D C C C P C? ^ tt 66 � C 66 vi v� fV cV C7 00 © G \D U> C O d' of C �(' O ^ V' 00 N 00 d• d• V^ C . Cif O m 00 N �C N, N 00 00 ( M 'a\ kn N It) of dw m 00 d� W ON C, N .- r-i o0 00 Le O N M Man N (i 0 0 C P G G C c O O C O C c O "" O 00 d 0 0 x ^ C O P C> O ® P C O C to O In (- C C C P G O O C C O O O C O 141 cn G O O C 0 0 C O O C? 0 0 G O nl d' Cl h 0 Co 0 CD C P 0 10 0 G C r- b C W) C O op O C O }n sn G G M W) d• 1l- C 'V' t- O Ch O N 00 O M or, c+R M t~ N en 00 OD N N to r W Lea r cn A N Nd N c tip � � OLU 'U. " (i� t H M � >i > � � p. a Ci f4 O O O O D O 8 0 0 o p O O tl p o o O O O tl o p O p O O O O o O O o \ \ \ \ � \ o \ \ a c \ \ \ \ � � c \ \ \ o o \ o� o � o o� n e d' O C d O O C� C C) OD C C� 10 O a. M rh O p,, oc 00 C �c C� a, wl N C a) 00 O C? �^. O 00 O O C, O oo � �f; N`? .� O oC C? 14 :. en 00 N CJ -zr O O O C d 4 0 O C O ^.^ v C C C C N C C ,6 C W� C� M N s fV EV N 00 ^A M M Q Ln Cit N V7 M M ��• M 00 N M C P C M NOCr d n P or t!: C 6 N �A C C O a 00 00 cc Oc c}' L^ rU �O C� N 00 N O N OO \O [ CA N r- C N C> O ^+ t M lc N [� v v .J �O .lam✓l� ... ..r _" 00 N N N v d' d CT C C o0 C l- M O O ON O d' C 00 kn 0 -Tr d t- O O O M O1 C4 ^� o � x -� 0000rn o c o �n �000ro cm o aor nits kn IT tr ooms- o00 v i cGcivS cr. o o01000c V- N C M O ay a d 00 OD S C am • V `y :o M t` m r N N Qn NCC� cn t 10 0000 .-i 00 C M Vn a. C O O Pp C7 C O O C O O C d O C O C O d C C P d O C O v^' 'D N 00 G d C O O C O O O O C G C C Q C C C 0 P in C1 N G� v 0 0 0 C+ C7 O C 0 0 0 C? A Q O Q� C G G C3 O O P In 9 N c Cl o P N ^ N P Cl C? CO N gg �o op gz otl � � O o0 0 � � a a. 00 l- etOa) Od C C Opa-, � O 0tl Cao Co0 \0 O tel COC C C pM CVN MOO O ep pO kn O m dac x00000 � ocaooa000a000 �ryea � r•.ram..-. ram. i+•. r�.-� r�i+..-. r-. N a 00 N C? C 00 O O O pp d 0 V'l O Q n 0, O C C l� aNv O O C7 J NOO C CT CR O O C A C Cm l- Q M � GGO dP N 0 0 Ci 0 C' � O G � Q .� G O i^- 'ev�'p� O G 0 0 � � � u 00 l� 10 C� O C d C C Vn C� d CI- kn C� cz. QP C7 ;7 :J O N C d C ... O C 0 i� . C? 701 O O d �' C ® C O C M-G c. 4c� �00 00 00 ON _ oci000cooco 61 a o6— 4 Q6 of r oP oocoao c� N M M 00 p 00 N N M d d O C 0 C O d d O 0 0 C O d 0 0 O G C C O C3 W O O d C O O O C C O C O O O N O P Q C> d O CA OMO O C; C) 0 0 = O' C C O oo C� O O C O O c'? d bM�'. C O C C)tn O � N [� �t In m r r N v'> to N In M C � LID v u U w c Q 4A iv - al ua c. E^ tt cC C £�., y }3 C b-� taw v) a vs e ' �j o 1 cn a oar c csi L o U c ^� ' 5l. R• F^ fi ' G 'i ^A =G p 00 0 O Nu a ti � � � 0au ti� cn � mG- � �:) Acnu " U e�e � CJ o c C o - o 0 0 0 o e o o c o 4 0 0 0 o o e p o 0 0 0 0 0 o p o a o O o l� O r- C o N 00 C M o M cM N h O -- '-C C� tT-- •-+ y C� M a 00 O �t• N C 00 oa N O M O G C O O Q; v1 C Ct C M C m IC- O V1 % CT cn C N tD Cl. C t`j O •-� M m CD 00 r-* C t` M C cri W�M 10 a. C kn ON m f! o O pp V1 M V) Cl C cr v7 V1 -,t o o M 10 10 C pp p o0 M N r 0 -:1- Nrl- C C t` to M �o 10 Y,9 ttt C t- W, It M O N •-- et N M C MG� t" d C O h C•. yr N G M CJ op O tC rV N Ch 00 C 00 r. M v TrV) C O O V1 M Ct -- — N O C 00 N C ON C �c C+ a• Qi Vi of 00 00 v) m l� N C+ o •d• v O G vt t-- N m F/'1 00 V3 � C., N 00 M � Vl O CT. v M V1 7 M S? 00 N N O� P, M OC 01 d L'1 Cl. v N --� M G 00 M N .?lam i— M M 00 C Ci. M V: CQ � r- wl' to N [^ N N V7 M l� V G d C �i.` V1 V7 O d M dr ,T 0 0 to T W M 00 M C do N M pp G M C'+ M V^ V In �,: \o C? ',t tD O O Wy CN O rl1 O (V C G M 00 Vl P. M r­ O o G w�.. G C M W Cr r+ •••• d 00 M r M as C Ci Vy `. G'l 00 t'- ,V-• t� CT O N t� M Oi C M C C O yr O •--i ;.y N r-.: 0, Oc V• M w 00 C. V t) N N > v) 00 p V1 O r- 0' m v) O t� V1 V 00 © 00 t- N ol C3� d N 00 M l� M C]OG CJ r-:,CZ _ O � N f� 0 7 t+ M --� C� C7 N eE• f+ t- t- I• (- N p� � ,-: t'- to --� r- .� C�oo" N ON 10 "• W ., M .�-•i •-^ �'-• M ..., ,w fir; ^ M 0 0 h C v1 C ^ O o C ^ C o 0p 0 0 C C O et p .^"3 C C o 0 o C C 0 p a C O C C pp o C G tr- l� O C O O O a d O C) a O C Q G 00 C7 ... O O O O O G �? o et C G C C C O t4 O 0 C7 C C C C C Q C C O a M C C Q O C^.• C 0 0 0 0 O rm t- to O a C 0 C O O O o 0 OQ. O d C O O C 00 09 C b C O O C In O O C C> N N 00 G^. t- •- tt N M 00 M N N tC M tD t.'J�N •- --• t'J M N M O to en o 0 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 0 0 �g 0 0 o a c o 0 0 0 0 M oO 0 0 0 000 -g \ a o o a oCt SOd 00 m O a 0 00 Nt fVoC CN C a d00 O a O C 0 00 C G1 O ,tM O a a �oOW N V; > An O O C C� N C tp ••-r C7 0 �t et C C C C 0c C o to M Q tC G C C7 N C T+ t-- C C pp 00 C L O C O j CJ r- Im M O O O\O G kn 00 V) C C O O G C C O a r t• [� er N o0 G d N G` O O N m V7 d O t, OC [+ m O C C o 0 0 0 0 0 aM0 ^ M m 00 C7 C7 t- O C? 0 rii -It C � C :7 C3 t` of n C C, c M ^ C C7 C 'eY �i '7 O 6 C`. 'A N .. It O O n d op �D ni l� V) O O N N .... ..�cl W to V) •--• ,-e O N M M %0 C %0 O C O O oo M O O 4n C Cl O 't0 C C V) 7 N V1 0 0 C ^ C� C� O C� a En o 0 v1 O [- t_ 00 m d 7 0 0 C N t` C h C� O O r 'O N m d C 0 0 M ci 10 M 01 C C t- t- C> C 00 vi O N O O Ci Vl Vi M C C C N 0 C C C O qr et O C C1 oc 00 V1 N „`�.. D\ 7 V 00 N C d• 1~ O•. CA O C 00 00 Vl 00 M T 00 M �+ tz N ^ O V) C W C O O c CD p C d o O C O C O N d o ^ 0 0 0 0 a C C C w C C C d C? 0C 0 0 0 O C7 G d C O C O N C C G O O CCvimViMCCkn0CCo0 66CC6t- caoCoviC0' 6 k'', CC (DCoo c to :o �n C+ N �n kn vs o yr o G d o to a o G oo a p W) kn o r t- ND •-+ 00 N It �o M O N O N kn N 00 r-t C.. N N M e i •� py N r� lid 41 � n p 'N .O G p '"j O m •C y Gn a ` C. pC.Cy c o o o 0 w m awn o o y p G v. r'; U; Coi v a C c N cf c 2 a C� uCi M :vvavav � � o 0 O 0 C O o C 0 O O O b � M 00 per,, 4 q 7 0 0- M 00 00 i i � L? •_, `� V N N � 0 v to 0 h O O N M M N M N OO O0 N O O t- 0 0 f+ c lD 't c O 't (= c tf3 V1 in .[ O a0 O g V', N N 00 O O cq 00 P M � M M M N M N GD 00 N O O N O p ado N 4-400 tn 00 tr. 00 00 vi eti CT. M r^+ C Q p 0 0 O O O p p O O ey p 0 0 © O O C o o 0 0 © COD o o CD cr^ to to o O N " U-) O 00 M 00 N N cn M eY W °�� kri O rP o e o o \ o \ o 0 0 \ \ \ e occn � r- r c c c 0 G7 0 00 O v1 O NIA N N 0 0 0 0 p 0 NI C� vi ri M w: vi tP; v c G7 v O MMN aci• CD M v c^i u ti In to O N 1- N N 0 0 0 0 O O CIOO Q� In d oq '*11J IG p p 0 v O otnc'im -; knM ccec o 0 M lc�b ; Cc oc 4 p O O O O O p O O p ^ Irl 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 O O O O O C N c O C tn 00 C O O O NN in _ .•r O �Y tY �' �' M of %O a Qa _ d CA �^ •� i ,� T v, L L X J ; a W o o c � c w eq o o c-. o en :�: U n M Cl) f-,, C4 Z en U E� 0 o n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o \ \ \ \ c n \ o \ \ a o \ \ c \ o \ % \ to o \ \ e 00 ON 00 h oC b 10 O C N O V) C*. M V) M O O C C C O kA O M M O�. V O N O a O O op G 6 N M C7 6 6 V1 Nr,k b h r) C� O O O C O O 00 r, 00 N N 'd' S. '0 O -�•� N tom) G M M C d `�' N G O CV v N O O V7 �o o0 N C h h O oa •et tl: d' �D W'l O� tr1 C O v) 00 0o i•- o �a •-• 00 O P 7 C: C� 0 0, N Vi h O Vi V1 C M O 6 �o 00 6 l� en i- v1 M 6 fV M G� C 4n` 6 �^-" •� O� N oo N 00 00 P M 'T N 00 [� M ^-• b v � ID a C v t� P O M 00 tV N N ov0 v i '-'m M M '•O (N+ M (N v rti �O O Q N C W � 00 -- •-- ri C O E^• N �✓ v �'� 'v N N � N N v v O N Cl) N O OC N M 4 M ['� O O �G .'o 'a S O N V) 00 C, <t C P tl' 14� oo [^- C 1: M M N C fn d' N ^• oo i- V 00 V) O a, �r CA C*. O C Ct 0� �t 'CV I V) h OC lam- n1 [� CIF O tp M 1� M 'J+ N •^ �O P C'i K: LV M 00 N N V1 OC 00 r, M 00 O tn V) V) w a 0 0 ^ O O P M0� N 00 O C O O c) O O G O a O P oo d O C 0 tr) 0 0 an M d' 0 6 0 C 0 6 6 0 C7 6 6 6 M G O G 6 b C; h •••• O l` 00 O O � 0Q '� C, N O C � M '�O fV 00 h O OG G ^-, N O D O O O O C O O O O C O O O O O O O o o o o 0 0• � o c op :n 00 qt 00 V) P O G O O C O P CT. 0 C. h L^. N d 0 0 .� a C 00 o0 N N O C O O � P C77 O Q O O cr C? M 0C B O O Q O N as N M M M 6 6 C) 6 0 C) 6 6 oo 0 6 tV 6 0+ N i h O P O �• O w l C M tR b b N t C O •-•• t� O C O 00 �C O O tT b N ct .'7 +"> 'o O O O d: O OC 0o M 6+. P C7 C C"S O vl Oo C Q h i� cV vi O O I:: CIOC v^ v v ~ v L? U 00 h N N v v C O O '`O Q. CA N O� M •-•+ O O �D O O O G O d ^J• O OG C> CV 6 V 0 6 6 0 c 6 6 6 6 G G` l- vi Cat to 6 6 .� O v O 6 t!: '•G C kl) yl N .D CT O d, ^ rn C 00 C G N H" 00 V) CD P 0d 0 0 ^.,. C op O 0 C O O C\ C t� C-- 4 6 6 6 6 6 C7 6 Vi 0 0 0 6 1-4 V1 6 666 00 C 'J� O M tf, 00 P 00 W) M Cl h C V) C N V) O C O m ^1• 00 N l43 V) ^ Q N _ O 00 t- t(i L®c � 7 •� C Lbl n u 0 c s) a0 cr v r ti )3 ❑ c U c c ID -,od cr W o U o a -S = m m u � c c�. a r� � x � 3v� Uw ar� E' � w � rx � r4 0� HFCII-i'OF LAKE '�,LMO Z� L& DATE: January 211, 2014 CONSENT ITEM 5 AGENDA ITEM: New Single Family Home Pen-nit Report SUBMITTED BY: Rick Chase,Building Official THROUGH: Rick Chase, Building Official REVIEWED BY- Kyle Klatt,Planning Director SUGGESTED ORDER Of BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item...........................................................—City Administrator - Report/Presentation................................................City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff.............................................Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion..................................................................Mayor&City Council - Discussion.......................................................................Mayor&City Council - Action on Motion.................................................................... Mayor Facilitates SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the monthly new single family home permit report through December of 2013. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended as part of the Consent Agenda. LEGISLATIVE HIS INFORMATION: Included in the monthly report is an annual summary for new homes as well as the total valuation for all construction activity in. 2013. The figures below compare the current year activity-to the two previous year's activity. 2013 2012 2011 New homes 36 34 23 Total valuation $16,966,169 $15,156,112 $10,214,000 Average home value $471,282 $445,768 $439,752 tn Total Valuation $20,944,966 $22,671,178 $18,723,663 (New homes included) page 1 -- [Consent Agenda Item 51 City Council Meeting January 21,2014 r; Please note that in 2013, the roof and siding permits were converted to a at xate fee stricture and as such are no longer included in the valuation numbers. Also note that these numbers represent the incremental valuation which will increase the Cities Taxable property tax base beginning with the 2015 tax roll. k RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned,the staff recommends the City Council accept the monthly new single family home permit report. C f t r R. r is ir€ I I�: 1: I, i 's f I i __page 2_ T1 E C TY0 1.,AKE ELN110 I Yt%'--';,R & '-'KLL0AhVUNf1CA DATE: January 21, 2014 CONSENT ITEM#-. 6 AGENDA ITEM: Section 34 Water and Sewer Utility Extension Improvements—Pay Request No. 3 SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Stempski, Project Engineer THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Mike Bouthilet,Public Works SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS (ifremoved eoin the Consent Agendal: - Questions from Council to Staff............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Public Input,if Appropriate.....................................:..Mayor Facilitates - CL111 for Motion ...............................................................Mayor&City Council - Discussion.......................................................................Mayor&City Council - Action on Motion..................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. SUMMARY AND ACTION REaLLSTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Pay Request No. 3 for the Section 34 Water and Sewer Utility Extension Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda,the recommended motion for this action is as follows: "Move to approve Pay Request No. 3 to Redstone Construction Company, Inc. in the amount of$315,528.49,.for the Section 34 Water and Sewer Utility Extension Improvements. --page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 6] January 21.2014 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Redstone Construction Company, Inc. (the Contractor for the project) has submitted Partial Pay Estimate No. 3 in the amount of $315,528.49. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5%of the total work completed. The amount retained is $71,443.89. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council consider approving, as part of'the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 3 for the Section 34 Water and Sewer Utility Extension Improvements. If k removed from the consent agenda,the recommended motion for this action is as follows: I "Move to approve Pay Request No. 3 to Redstone Construction Company, Inc. in the alnount j of$315,528.49,for the Section 34 Water and Sever Utilitt,Extension linprovelnents" ATTACHMENT S : 1. Partial Pay Estimate No. 3 . 4' V F e' c t' C f` G F f t f: k, I; pr: i h R' S E' k 4 --page 2-- PROJECT PAY FORM PARTIAL PAYSTIMATE NO. 3 CUS ENGINEERI N. G, inc. SECTION.34 WATER ASEIVER UTILITY EXTENSION,I N11PROVEMENTS PERIOD OF ESTIMATE PROJECT-NO.2013,226 FROM 12/2/2013 TO 1/1/2014 PROJECT OWNER: CONTRACTOR: CITY OF LAKE ELMO 1 REDSTONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. 3800 LAVERNE-AVENUE NORTH PO BOX 218 LAKE ELMO,MN 55042 MORA,MN 55051 ATTN:JACK GRIFFIN,CITY ENGINEER ATTN;DALE*MANS,PROJECT MANAGER ST 1VIA I E -`z§UM MARY':` .......... No. Approval Amount !.Original Contract Amount $1,701j884.50 Date Additions Deductions .2.Net Charige Order Sum $11,162.82 1 1IJ6/2013 $11,162.82 $0.00 3.Revised Contratt(1+2) $11,713,047,32 . 2 1/612014 $0.00 $0.00 4.,*Work.Completed $1i428,877.81 5.*.Stored Materials $0.00 :6.Subtotal.(4+5) $1,428,877.81 7.Rettainage* S.00% $71,443.89 I 8.Previous Payments $1,041,905.4.3 TOTALS $11,16222 f 50.001 9.Amount Due NET CHANGE -Detailed Breakdown Attached HIV START DATE: 10/7/201.3 ORIGINAL-DAYS 235 ON SCHEDULE 'SUBSTANTIAL COMPLE-RON: 5119/2014 REVISED DAYS YES L FINAL COMPLETION; 5/3012014 REMAINING 149 NO F7 -ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION: TOCUS+Enginq ng,inc. The undersigned certifies thatthe work has.been reviewed and to the best of their knowledge and belief,the quantities shown in this :estimate are correct and the work has been performed In•-accordance ENGINEER with the contract++documents. DATE CONTRAcTbR'S-CERTIFicAmON: CONTRACTOR The undersigned Contractor certifies-thatto the best of their + knowledge,+informatior and belief the workcovered by this payment estimate has been-completed'in accordance with the contract + By documents;that all amounts have been paid bythe contractor for ++ work-forwhich previous payment estimates was-issued and-payments — received from the owner,and that current.payment shown herein Is DATE now due. APPROVED BY OWNER: CM OF LAKE ELMO,MINNESOTA 13Y BY DATE DATE FOCUS Engineering,iric. PROJECT PAYMENT FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 3 SECTION 34 WATER&SEWER UTILITY EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc. CITY Of LAKE ELMO,MINNESOTA PROJECT NO.2013.126 ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY IFEM UNITCONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE QUANTITY UNITPRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT DIVISION 1-GENERAL 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1.00 $48.000.00 $48,000.OD 0.00 $0.00 0.90 $43,200.00 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL SS 1 S6,300.00 5600.00 Ip0 $6,300.00 _ $6,300.00 3 CLEAR AND GRUB'3REES 15 I S19,000.00 519,00D.00 OA0 $0.01) 1 $19,000.00 4 TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRTUCTION ENTRANCE EA 2 $1,SOODo $2200.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $O,DD 5 STREETSWEEPING HR 40 S17S.00 $7,000.00 O,OO $0.00 p $0.00 SUBTOTAL-DIVISION I S82,S00.00 $6,300.00 $68,500.00 DIVISION 2-SANITARY SEWER(GRAVITY SEWER-HUDSON BIVD.} 6 CONCRETE JERSEY BARRIERS LT 900 $23.DC $18,900A0 U.W $0.00 900 $18,900.a0 7 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY $Y WD $2.20 $1,100.00 0.00 $0,00 0 $0.00 a REMOVE PIPE CULVERT LF 245 $5.50 $1,347.50 79100 5434.50 79 $434.50 9 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER PIPE LF 13 $6.5S $aS.15 13M $85.15 13 $85.15 i0 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL 32"JICP,INCL APRONS LF 50 $22.10 S3,105.00 50D0 S2.10540 SO $11105.00 11 PATCH BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 500 $35.00 $17.500.00 0.00 f0.00 0 SODO 12 PATCH GRAVEL DRIVEWAY TN 100 $15.00 $I,SOEI.00 0.00 SD.011 204 $3,335.00 13 29'X42"ARCH CMP CULVERT Lf 69 $S3.90 $3,582.10 64,00 $3,321.60 64 $3.32I.60 14 30"CMPCULVER'T LF 73 $44.20 $3,13&20 15,00 S663.00 IS $663.00 i5 36'CUP CULVERT LF 35 $51.90 $1,816.SO ODD $ODD 0 $0-o0 Is 42"CMP CULVERT LP 64 $76.20 $4,876.80 0.00 $0.00 O $D.OD 17 29"X 42"ARCH CMP CULVERT EA 2 $498.00 $996.00 2.00 S996.00 2 $996.00 18 30"CMP APRON EA 3 $380.00 $I,167.00 1.00 $399.00 1 $389DO 19 36"CMP APRON EA 2 $573.00 S1,146.DO Opp $ODD 0 Saw 20 42"CMP APRON EA 2 $1,110.00 $2.220.00 0.06 $0.00 0 $DAD 21 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MH EA 1 $993.00 $993.00 D.LA} $0.00 1, $993.00 22 8"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 35,V 10'DEEP LF 25 $38.90 $972,50 0.00 $O,DD 28 $1A89.20 23 40"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 26,25'-30'DEEP LF 20 51S4.00 $3,080.00 0.00 S0•o0 20 S3480.00 24 12'PVC SANITARY SEWER SDR 35,0'-IVDEEP IF ass S36,20 $32,037.00 D.00 $O.Iq a60 $31,152.00 25 12"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SOR 35,IV-15'DEEP LF 675 $40.00 $27,000,00 0.00 50.00 700 $28pO0A0 26 12"PVC SANITARYSEWER,SUR 35.IS'-20'DEEP LF 290 $71.40 $20,706DD 93.00 $6,640.20 Z97 $20.491.80 27 12"PVC SANITARY SEWER.SDR 35,15'-20'DEEP LF 65 $33.60 $S,43440 0.00 $000 63 $S,266.80 28 I2"PVC SANITARY SEWER SDR 26,20'•ZVOEEP LF 200 $91.20 $18,240A0 0.00 $0.00 200 $18240.00 29 12"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SOB 26,25'-30'DEEP LF $60 $103.00 557,580.00 ODD 50.00 516 $53,148.00 30 JACK 12"PVC SANITARY SEWER LF 40 W0.00 $16,400,00 ODD $000 40 5ISAO040 31 ROCK FOUNDATION BORROW - LF 1,300 SOD1 $13.00 DIM SOAR 0 $0.00 32 INSULATION,2-THICK SY ISO 519.90 $2,985.00 95,30 $3.697.47 18&3 $3,747.17 33 PLACE FILL OVER SANITARY SEWER PB"E(LV) CY ISO S7.75 $1,162.50 100,00 S715,00 100 $775.OD 34 CROSS HIGH PRESSURE GAS PIPE LINE LS 1 $2,760.00 $2,760.00 I.OD s7.,760.00 1 $2,760.00 35 SANITARY SEWER MH,4'DIAMETER EA 8 $2,530D0 S20,240.00 OA0 SOAO g $20,240.00 36 EXCESS MANHOLE DEPTH,4'DIAMETER LF 56 $97.20 $5,443.20 2-09 S2031S 45.98 S4,469.26 37 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER IF 2,672 $1.75 $4,67/6.00 DAO S0.00 O $0.fM] 38 OFF ROAD STRUCTURE MARKER EA 7 $55.70 $3B6,40 7.00 $386,10 7 S386.40 39 SEED MIX 250&BLANKET SY 5,000 $1.20 $5,500,00 ODD $0.IX1 D $O00 40 SEED MIX 270&BLANKET SY 5,200 SL24 $5,928,00 0.00 $O.OD 0 SO.00 41 SEED MIX 250&HYDROMULCH SY 5,000 $0.42.. $2,100.00 17,000,OD $7,140.00 17,0W $7,140.00 42 SEED MIX 270&HYDROMULCH SY 5.200 $0.46 $2,392.00 ODD $OAO 0 $ODD 43 EROSION STABILIZATION MAT SY ISO 59,90 51,485.OD 0.00 SODD 0 SO.00 44 TEMPORARY SEED MIX IODAND MULCH AC 4 $696.01) $2,744,00 0.00 $D.OQ p $0.00 45 DITCH CHECK EA 8 $97.50 $780,00 0.00 $0.00 p $0.00 46 CULVERT INLET PROTECTION EA 8 $200.00 $1,6DO.00 0.00 $OAO 0 $0.00 47 SILT FENCE LF 1,500 $1.7I 52,555.00 676.00 $1,I55.96 ].,352 $2,311.92 SUBTOTAL-DIVISION2 $305,781.85 $27,7S2.43 S248,699.80 ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT cONTRACr THIS PERIOD TOTALTO DATE QUAN1'rrY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT DIVISION 3-SANITARY SEWER(LIFT STATION SYSTEM) 48 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 570 $2.75 $1,567.50 0,pp $0.00 345 $948.75 49 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 40 $8.75 $5$0.00 0.00 Sao3 0 $0.00 50 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER €F 30 $4.35 $130.50 30,00 $13050 30 $130,50 51 REMOVE PIPE CULVERT LF 165 $S.w $907,50 178A0 5979.00 178 $979.00 57 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL 18"RCP,INCL APRONS LF 60 Mao 51,458.00 24.00 $588.20 24 $583.20 53 PATCH BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 200 $35.00 $1,0DDA0 0.00 50,00 0 $0.00 54 PATCH GRAVEL ORIVEWAY TN 2w $15.00 $3,7w.00 U.00 $0.00 04 SL,41o.00 55 8619 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LF 30 $30.00 $900A0 0.00 $0.00 0 50,00 56 12"CMP CULVERT LF 30 $20.50 5515A0 40.60 $820.00 40 $820-0 57 28"CMP CULVERT LF 52 $26.30 $1,393.60 92.00 52,465.60 92 52,465.60 58 21"CMP CULVERT IF 40 $31.00 $1,240.00 418X1 $3,271.00 41 $1,271.00 59 12"CMP APRON EA 1 $131.00 $131.00 im $131.00 1 $131.00 BID 18"CMP APRON EA 2 $157.00 $314A0 3,00 $47100 3 $47100 61 21"CMP APRON EA 2 $187.00 $374.00 2,00 $374.00 2 5374.00 62 8"DIP SANITARY SEWER,CLASS$7,10'-IV DEEP LF 40 $44.30 $2.772.O11 OAO $aAo qp $2,772.00 63 B"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 35,0'-10'DEEP U 700 $25.70 51.7,990.00 640M $16,448.00 699 $I7.964.30 64 8'PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 35,ICY-15'DEEP LF 1,275 $28A0 5351700.00 357,00 $9,996A0 9%7 $26.796.00 65 8'PVC SAWTARY SEWER,SDR 35,IV-20'DEEP L 425 $59,00 $25.075.00 0.00 50.00 744 $43,896.00 66 8"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SM 3%,7.0'-25'DEEP LF SO 574.30 9749.00 0A0 50.00 0 $0.00 67 8"PVC SANITARY SEWER.SDR 26.0'-10'DEEP LF 50 $28.10 $2,405.00 0A0 $040 0 $0.00 fie 8"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SOR 26,10'-IS-DEEP LF 806 534.50 $27,807.00 0.00 SOAO 747 $25.771.50 69 8"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 26,IV 20'DEEP LF 435 $69.90 $30,406.50 a00 $IDAO 391 $26,631-90 70 8'PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDA 26,20'-25-DEEP LF 71S $82.90 559,273.50 OAD $040 896 $74.279.40 71 8"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 26,25'-30'DEEP LF 85 $94.20 $8,007.00 0.00 $OAO 70 $6.594.01) 72 10"PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 26,IT-70'Dr.EP LF 70 $80,10 $5,607,00 0m $0A0 0 73 10'PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 26,20'-25'DEEP OF 32 $51.50 $1.648.00 0.00 50.00 102 55,253A0 74 10'PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 26,25'-30'DEEP IF 0 $I09.00 $0.00 0.00 $DIED 0 SO= 75 10'PVC SANITARY SEWER,SDR 26,30'-3V DEEP LF 0 S337A0 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0100 76 ROCK FOUNOATKIN BORROW LF 5,000 SO101 550.00 0.00 $0A0 0 $0.00 77 8"DIP SANITARY SEWER OUTSIDE DROP OF 27 $162A0 $4,374,00 0.30 $16.20 12.1 $1,96020 78 S'DIP SANITARY SEWER BLIND OUTSIDE DROP LF 29 SISLOD 54,379.00 0.00 $aw 29.3 $4,424,30 79 SANITARY SEWER VIA,4'DIAMETER EA 27 $2,460.00 $66,420.00 7.00 $17,220.00 27 566,420.03 80 EXCESS MANHOLE DEPTH,4'DIAMETER LF 168 $97.20 $16,368,48 42,50 ,$4131.00 387.52 $18226.94 81 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER LF 4,733 $1,75 $829275 0.00 $0.00 0 W.00 82 OFF ROAD STRUCTURE MARKER EA 29 $55.20 $1,600.80 27.00 $1,490.40 27 $1.A90.40 83 8"PVC FORCE MAIN LF 5,960 $24.90 $148,404.00 0.00 $0,00 5,940 $147,906.00 84 AIR RELEASE MIA EA 2 55,410.00 $10,820.00 o-oD so.aa 2 $10,B20.0c 85 DIP FrnNGs 1.6 196 55.95 $1,106.70 I".00 $1,106.70 186 $Y,S06,70 86 LIFT STATION LS 1 $22DAM100 5220,000.00 0.17 $37,400.00 0.57 $125A00.00 87 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY(LIFT STATION) SY 317 $33.00 510,461.00 000 $OA0 0 $O40 88 SEED MIX 2SO&BLANKET 5Y 24,600 SLID 527,060.00 z.soo.ao 52,750.00 2,wo 52,750.00 89 SEED MIX 250&HYDROMULCH SY 24,000 $0.42 $10,080.00 23,799.00 $9,953.48 23.7% $9,993.48 90 EROSION STABILQATION MAT SY w $9.90 S495JW 0,00 50.00 o s0.00 91 SEED MIX 250,MULCH,&DISC ANO40R AC 5 $929.00 54,645A0 4.50 $4,180.SO 4-5 54.1.80.50 92 TEMPORARY SEED MIX 100 AND MULCH AC 15 5666.00 $10,290A0 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 93 WETLAND RESTORATION WITH BWSR MIX 34-181 SY 80 $9.91 $792.80 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 94 DITCH CHECK EA 17 $97.50 $1,657,50 0.00 $0,00 a $0.00 95 CULVERT INLET PROTECTION EA 9 $200A0 $1,800.00 4,00 $800,00 4 saw.00 96 SILTFENCE LF 5,310 $1.71 $9,080.10 1,315.00 $2,248,55 2,630 $4,497.30 SUBTOTAL-DIVISION 3 5793,732.23 $115pO5,21 $638,516A7 DIVISION 4-SANITARY SEWER(SERVICE TO CM PROPERTIES) 97 8"PVCSANITARY SEWER,SDR 35,0'-I&DEEP OF 45 533.20 $1,494.00 4S,W 51,494A0 45 $1,494.00 98 JACK B"PVC SANITARY SEWER LF 60 $405.00 524,300.00 60.00 $24,300.00 60 $24,300.40 99 SEED MIX 250&BLANKET SY 300 SLAG $330.00 0.00 $OAO 0 50.011 100 SILT FENCE LF 50 $1.71 595.50 25.00 $42.75 $0 $85.50 SUBTOTAL-DIVISION 4 525,209.50 $25.836.75 $25.879.50 DIVISION 5-SANITARY SEWER(LENNAR AREA SERVICES) 101 8'X4"PVCWYE,SDR 26 EA 13 $127.00 $1,397.00 0.00 $0.00 11 $1,397.00 102 4"PVC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE RISER OF 13O 57.75 $1,007,50 0.00 50100 148 $1,147.00 SUBTOTAL-DIVISION S 52,404.50 SOAO S2,544.00 DIVISION 6-WATERMAIN 103 CONNECT TO EXISTING 12'WATER MAIN EA 1 $704.00 $404.00 1,00 $404.00 1 $404A0 104 6"DIP,CL 52 WATER MAIN lF 215 S2&50 $G,127.50 93,LYi $2,650.50 155 $4,417,50 105 8"DIP,CL.52 WATER MAIN LF 40 $35.90 $2.436.00 15.00 $538.50 44 $1,579.60 106 12"DIP,CL.52 WATER MAIN LF '7,305 $48.90 $357.214.50 1,945.w $951110.5D 5,541 $319,SS4.90 107 CROSS HIGH PRESSURE GAS PIPE LINE LS 1 5882.00 $082.00 ],00 $882.00 1 $882A0 309 6"GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 14 51,220100 $17AM-00 3.00 $3,65000 10 $12,200-00 109 9'GATE.VALVE AND BOX EA 4 $1,830.00 $7,320.00 1,00 57,830,00 4 $7,320.00 130 12"GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 12 $3970,00 536,840A0 6.00 $18,420.00 12 536,840.00 Ili VALVE BOX EXTENSION LF 15 $55.40 $831A0 2,00 $110.80 2 $11050 112 VALVE NUT EXTENSION LF 15 537.70 $565.50 0,00 $0.00 0 $OAO 113 HYDRANT EA 13 54,000A0 $44.990.00 3.00 912,270.00 i0 $40,900.00 CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL.TO DATE ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNITPRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT 214 HYDRANT EXTENSION LF 6 $666.00 $3,996.00 2.00 $1,332.00 2 $1,332.00 115 OFF ROAD STRUCTURE MARKER EA 17 $55.20 $938A0 t2.00 566140 12 $662.40 116 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS LO 3,000 $4.95 $14,850.00 2.335.00 $11,563.20 2,500 $12,375.00 SUBTOTAL-DIVISION 6 5493,474.90 $149,433.90 $438,876,20 TOTALS-BASE CONTRACT $1,704,202.99 $324,329,31 $1,423,018.47 CHANGE ORDER NO.1 col-1 CLEARR GRUSTREES;LR-F STATION SITE ON CRY PROPERTY) L5 1.0 $3,500.00 $3,500-00 0.00 $0.00 0.71 $2.485,00 C01-2 EXTRA V OF DEPTH AT VALVE MR LS 1.0 $2,631.94 $1,631.94 IAO $1,631.94 1.0 $1.631.94 COI-3 EXTRA DEPTH OF FORCEMAIN LF 300.0 $20.58 $6.174,00 30o.00 $6,174.00 300.0 $6,174.00 003.4 LIFT STATION GRAVEL DRIVEWAY TN 23810 $SS.00 $2,070.00 OAO $0.00 0.0 $o.00 001-5 bEDUCF FOR GRAVITY SANITARY SEWER TRACER WIRE LF 7386.0 -SO.60 44,431.60 0.00 Moo 7,386.0 -S4,431.60 TOTALS-CHANGE ORDER NO.1 $8,944.34 $7,805.94 $5,859.34 TOTALS-REVISED CONTRACT $1,713,04732 $332,135.25 $1,428,877.81 THE CITY OF YA Lmo L.f,IKE E R� & C JNCkf L C Of-/" (D N DATE: January 21, 2014 CONSENT ITEM# 7 AGENDA ITEM: Lake Elmo Avenue Sewer Infrastructure Improvements: 1-94 to 301h Street —Pay Request No. 4 SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Stempski, Project Engineer THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Mike Bouthilet,Public Works SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS LiLreffloved Lroni the Consentj=n a Questions from Council to Staff............................................. Mayor Facilitates Public Input, if Appropriate........................................Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion...............................................................Mayor& City Council Discussion.......................................................................Mayor&City-Council Action on Motion....................................................................Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Pay Request No. 4 for the Lake Elmo Avenue Sewer Infrastructure Improvements: 1-94 to 301h Street. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for this action is as follows: "Move to approve Pay Request No. 4 to Minger Construction, Inc. in the awoullf of $486,505.26for the Lake Elmo A ven ue Sewer Infrastructure 1inpro vem 194 to 30'Street. --page 1 -- t City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 7] January 21,2014 f § 4' k Y LEGISLATIVE HISTORYBACKGROUND INFORMATION: f Minger Construction Inc., the Contractor for the project, has submitted. Partial Pay Estimate No. 4 in the amount of$486,505.26. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5% of the total work completed. The amount retained is $113,843.23. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council consider approving, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 4 for the Lake Elmo Avenue Sewer Infrastructure Improvements: I-94 to 3o' Street. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for this action is as follows: "Move to approve Pays.Request No. 4 to Manger Construction, Inc. in the amount off` S486,505.26 for•the Lake Elrno Avenue Sew>ee^Infrastructure Improvements: 194 to .fie,street" I k ATTACHMENTfSI: r. p. 1. Partial Pay Estimate No. 4 Is l r i } E. �. _ r f f --page 2-- PRIOIJECT PAY FORW` PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE tr,,,51'-, FOCUSENGINEERING, inc. LAKE ELMO AVENUE SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PERIOD OF ESTIMATE PROJECT NO.2013,123 FROM I2/2/2013 TO 1/1/2014 PROJECT OWNER: CONTRACTOR: CITY OF LAKE ELMO MINDER CONSTRUCTION,INC, 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE FORTH 2471 GALPIN COURT,SUITE 110,PO BOX 236 LAKE ELMO MN 55042 CHANHASSEN,MR 55317-0236 ATTN:JACK GRIFFIN,CITY ENGINEER ATTN.AARON HOEFS,PROJECT MANAGER CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY i PAY ESTIMATE SUMMARY Approval Amount j 1.Original Contract Amount $3,463,201.60 No, Date Additions Deductions 2.Net Change Order Sum -$10,533.70 1 10/15/2013 $0.0o $19,603.70 3.Revised Contract,(1+2) $3,452,667.% 2 111/6/2013 I "'9,070-00 i $0.00 4.*Work Completed $2,276,864.53 3 1/6/2014 $()00 $0.001. 5.*Stored Materials $0.00 1 6.Subtotal (4+5) $2,276,864.53 1 7.Retainage* 5.0% $113,843.23 9.Previous Payments $1,676,516.04 TOTALS $cSpt370.Od S-19.60S.70 9.Amount Due(6-7 8) $486,505.26 NET CHANGE 1 ($10,533.70)1-. *Detailed Breakdown Attached C(`)NTFA.CT TIME START DATE: 9/9/2013 ORIGINAL DAYS 265 1 ON SCHEDULE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION- 21114/2014 REVISED DAYS YES FINAL COMPLETION: 6/1/2014 REMAINING 151 a NO ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION: FOCUS Engineering,inc The undersigned certifies that the work has been reviewed and to the best of their knowledge and belief,the quantities shown in this estimate are correct.and the work has been performed in accordance ENGINEER with the contract documents. I — Pj— 144 DATE CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATION: CONTRACTOR The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of their knowledge,information and belief the work covered by this payment estimate has been completed in accordance with the contract %Y documents,that all amounts have been paid by the contractor for work for which previous payment estimates was issued and payments receiveciftom, the owner,and that current payment shown herein is DATE now due. APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO,MINNESOTA BY BY LE k DATE FOCUS Er�gineenng,inc. R ,;;-*TFPAYN,,E NIT FORM ........... ............ ...... .......... ........................... .......... PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO, 4 LAKE ELMO"ENUE SEWER INIFnASTRUCICRE IMMOVEMEWS FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc. CrfY OF LAKE ELMO,MINNESOTA PROTECT NO.2023.125 ITEM DESCMIPTION Of PAY iTEftt, UNr l(F.A�,10 DA''E QUANTl7Y UMITIRMCE AMOUNT QuANrrry AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT IS W.D0 i. 5,11'Coomo 11 2 TpowpicOOK"'Ral L-S om .Slk7 Ilk.F H:Na- LF 3654 5145 wx*cofImuc-HON cmikmc. fitff C'00 SO on WATS q)R CUM C04TROL MGAL w" OW taoo so.ao 6 TREF RFMOVAL EA 44 S 2-E,11 W k.m 5256j)(1 209 CLEAN ING&GRUPaINQ AC $4,1150 oo D.W (l.M 3.9 p.%v,Go 8 RA V ProTiinlow EA 51.4v),m 1 am 50ao 9 NVERO Allu"CH,W/SEED&fEATMIZIP, AC $1s;11.3.w i 1.30 S41,ajO.QO 10 SEEDING 1 Wf-1!Al"D hol IXi AC oil 1 lov.i $0.00 EROWW"CONTROL ELANV�.T(WWO HOER) SY 61-M. %)AN) $am 0 sumn 12 To-soil.W- PROW ty 5DC a."Vu .16'500tp 1;OV $010 NTCR 04ECY, LF 6.43 5, $3'n To W.a U 5"'m14 i i MOWL-AA PLOCY,4-TAfNING WALL Sp " ss'lr sll'ifaavl St'on 15 SAWAGEA-41-VAC4 AND REINSTALL 4 4G A ki.Got7ION;mrip, FOUSE,I LS D 5A60.00 $ozo Erl on RAINV00,A .........--- Si:�T0TA0-OIVFSEtl14Y -1 amsm 2 - RARY SMR I CD N.N rr.T 71,1:X:."N 1-1 mvefc,Lfi. Eta L $11,600m sacra 7.. SA3.l'Ar,F.1-,R E I k VA k L EA S'?x G 5 A f I!rA RY S E"A,R M AN 110 1.F. EA a salm= $3,760.w 3 LF aua "4,00 5k:Aop'(X; 4 UFl,TATK)1 5TIZI fl-RPR�'VA i V`VA U1.1,AND I'lPiNG I ' mr it 6 7,CXX Or, " $197=40 5 Un STATION PUW.P5 AND ACCC k., L 550,05250 6 i H WTAKAL AND COKROLS is 0 6.3.5eo-ao i N Lft AT OP. LS 5-8,250m samno.00 0 $4.417'-�ft p4a,womo 52r*,(W40 Mold If -,I'M—:If--11-- 9 IC"HI-PI FOKEMAIN,M.TALLEO RY OD IS640 1- 0 20,119 $91mOc,� - 10 161 HOPE FOOCEMAIN'INSTALLED BY O"N CUT' .11, 399 51 2"74 9,00 436 11 %,WERflO`I5'F)EpnH) if $2-lum F 12 Ar SDR 35 SlitirrAlty SEWER(I 5`20-00-1 W iF I$ $155M a on $LIAM 15 SZ32.5-00 E Ll V`PVC Sl"R-15$ANiARY SEW-It(20-211"OEF!Hi L r 0 r,.5.w Su W sollf) 0 84 12"rlVk-EOkk 26SANI'MRYSEWER 115-LS'43EFII-Hl 213 $p1,OfS 53"3 .0(10 = 211 13 23-FVR;,SDR 26$AM 9ARY SEWER(35,='Op.PTHJ IF I iaa S91.wl $' Wm Wyll 193 S27,56340 1 14 Alk"Vc. LF 51hy.W w 000 50 W) ss.w.'(:xa IL7 14,SAN,rAlky-itwEll 14 1w Dull-0 '.r 4S ".00 1 36:00 $4'17r'0x0 El V'076.00 -JWER 110,WEIVITH) I if) 24'SANITARY K 0" SX16.01) n 4 AX I 19 y D.00 15:1� 5175,5O&OD is W WfIFTATV SEVIM(15•2D-DEPTHI 1353 s1.x5.011 r,.5s,94Gw p 534 -V.)a"344JV 20 2.4-SANITARY SEWER 720,?5 W FIH) sa3 5116.LYi G-W 486 $56,3'8W 21 M""AN91ARY NEVER?25-W DEPTH) 16.01) O'Do sim 1 102 S.I3A32.oa 22 24,SklirlArtyl SEWER 1501W I)F.PTH) 51P.474-W OOG $Ojao i 53 siz-mom) n Z4'5.ANITARVSRWR J35-4 160'OE-TW Ll� i 9 w 6m I 24 C-1r.SIX.25 SOL4ENTW-1.0 SERVICI-I;li: LF puk) W)r' 12L 59,040.00 1 2.S 15"ON IW WE WCANCH EA 140XV) Q.00 Zr 49:'Ol'AW`ER SA14:MANHOLE.TYPE nJ'.V.W i)zPFHI L4 12 �4.900'w SS(k,wluoo 00 4.901L0D 27 W'DIAN"iEll SAIC MANHOLE,IYN,301 CA f 4 PAGO.00 S.;.,,U)'W, 9.&3 $0.0fF s SQ.(W.00 26 4Jy'-)fAMETF9 SAR MAN,-fOk C,TYPE 1101 EX YRA MF ff! s4I vi: 1 $73.00 tl"?f,7 n Rk'17A.09 A, TRA 25 $uv'a) 1;6 2 sc. .4-, 91) 72'CLEANOUT MANHOLE 5 si.0.4mAx, sl'�P? "naftoo 31 72"AIR FtF.lEA.5E.!WfWOl-.- fA 4 sn'saaw �'�"'Oxaw I s',fe'5moo 32 VDIP CLAJilS50SAN'TARYMWEf! tg som 35 10*DIP CLAD..,54 SWARYSEWR 5138.00 U p"mm-O 34 W DIF WSS 50 SANITARY SEWER LF 36 53DIX $10193"..W 40 35 ---,f.ANAl.MAKK0(35 DROP EA 59'l-Off.00 900i* 15,kE.l .GA.E VE sox 1, 37 E X C.A.V AT':.Sy,t V A(�.„AN 1) 0 C K!'1 I'M A N 0 SOIL(WI W3 $IAM 300 391 I?LAc-SAI.VAC',i+'b WFTI A-4.)S09(?.-Vj cy W.1 r1l.00 MD. $1"rmn 11 ag TINAV"-H 15I.11a1iAZA;ioN ROO 301i 02.00 $14,cmoo 6.0c, "iaw Q45.�1 qO-or, j 41 I+O'L!tONqtl"-VIMCTIOWA-L 3RILUNG 60RE FTS ww'GL- SMTOTAk--DIV6V6N ............. RfM f,9:.SCPFPT*r4 CtF PAY I MM UN'T IfIiIS MOM, QUAN'TRY AM-)U,117 OUAN'My 21t;L- A -1mo(INT DIVISION 3-WAY.-KMAIN i S'n'WETvo, 0KCWDE SLEEFA A WVALVE; FA p ss.loom $0,'x 0,00 Imo • S,3,u4 j 2 6"DIP,CL 52 W/,cP-:AMpj.ki U: wc "'3,3o sGraw Si 3 V VJFL.VF&DCW I EA mo 00 0.00 50 00 i 1 $-300,ot" Fsk _2 $Q.fiF10.00 SMOTAL-DiVISIGH 3 DIVISION 4 SMEM AND ftns-roRAMM 1. SAWIVI :,A fl.fy;) m.w NH CULVERT(ALL IlfnS 6 4MS) i4 I JtR $cM ssoUpa 0X0 $Fo,w :1 VlivAcp K Rul,,STAu WOOD vjiEn FA $1,4Ymw (WID $0.00 4 PFV,.,JVF&o:";pEzf.*OF fj.-.s'T,Ell j kjf'JINE)k3S pwcmm,rxtivFs Sf 320 $240 $3421'lle. F moo so'co 13, $791-50 5 F-%R'A'F,&DtSPCAa VE'FnST.VA RIMIIEIOU5 PAVEM M- 1,MET-7S �� SY 25 S 2.W $72-�r ROW)VE&DISPO59:OF EX%T,01MICRM CUR13&GUITEEI E, ?.Q 52.50 0:00 so DID 2s 7 LFFT!"TANOR 54TI;GRAMNr is 521 GA15 8 CLSAGGAE E.-GATF W.—F.. TM 3 9 SVW EX2 03 9 0 IT11 W N OU s YA;A 9 r.M I R DIM V CIS vi W. 10 SPNWE2300 COURSE,STRESs sisur 51'aw.W SEPWLAd40 VEUMINECUS V-,F.P-R C.01ME.,STF,_.FS TIN 1 17$ son-, i MATERIA,f09 69 4f"25 SIT3.25 I Soto T I-B CONOtElf.con Lialrin LF DIX! 1 14 tL5 AGGPE�60'E SAS4E.S"OMOEA Ell S5 (X,) IS 15'CMP NPECULVERYWJAPHOr, mu, M, C,'E OTEXTU:FAMIC CY fjo i 17 OFF ROAD 2RUCTURf KAARKFx �A Z5 qam Vz�*mw DIViSPON 4 $120,1915.25, i TOTALS-BASF.CONTRACT r P4­011 LE "zm'm s8A.,r)"I"ry) 0 Cr0 U4 ?NSVI,Anm SLY !0.5 W, '_492,S0 42'5 TOTALS-CHANGE ORDER NO.1 59,167.s0 $%497.50 CHANGE ORDER NOS 2 �7 C 43,500.00 5xv OD 65,5o0,w $5,F00.00 02 T7'0l7r:L-i2WtTERMAM S75 DO LF $2.1,22540 TOTALS-CHANGE ORDER NO.2 $0.00 $23,225.00 TOTALS-REVMED CONTRACT $3,45266790 $548,802.40 $2,276,964M .............. THE CITY 01" I.AKEELMO MAYOR & COUNCILL ................. DATE: Januaryll , 2014 CONSENT SS ITEM#: 8 AGENDA ITEM: Approve Predictive Ind-ex.Hiring Tool SUBMITTED BY: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator THROUGH: Mayor Mike Pearson REVIEWED BY: Adam Bell,Asst. Administrator HR, Cathy Bendel, Finance Director, Mike Reeves,HR Committee SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item..............................................................City.Administrator Report/Presentation.................................................City Administrator Questions from Council to Staff...... ....... ............. May(..)r Facilitates Public Input, -if Appropriate ..........................................Mayor Facilitates Gall. k M ay. & pwicl or cityc I ................ . . Eii Cus a.................. y .......... .. ........ . fi;M4yor:F aciifit., ction:on Motion.A ........ .................. POLICY RECCOMENDER: City Administrator FISCAL, IMPACT: $3100 (Small Organization Discount) SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: Use the Predictive Index Diagnostic Tool to place current employees in the most productive working environments, improve HR management efficiency, and improve hiring by evaluating compatibility in the screening process. As part of its consent agenda, no specific motion is required. Should Council remove this item from Consent, the recommended motion would be as follows: "Move to approve the expenditure qf'S3100for the subscription to the Predictive Employee Evaluation Program with the./unds coming from the 2014 Contingency Fund LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: None—the City has used traditional hiring practices in.the past. --page 1 -- fi City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 8] January 21,2014 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: With growth imminent, it is important for the City to employ the best Hiring practices to ensure that the right employees are brought into the organization. In addition, recent staff interviews have revealed that as many as 25% of our employees are not in a "good fit" for their own edification and organizational efficiency. F. Predictive Index is an EEOC approved tool that measures employment characteristics that: a 1. Tells the organization how an individual likes to work; f 2. Evaluates how the individual feels the organization wants them to work: _ 3. Measures how the individual synthesizes the two points above to create a work style. The attached material roes provided into p b greater detail on methodology and applicability. Y; BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT): Strengths: Provides objective, empirical methodology for the selection and assignment of City employees. Methodology sanctioned by the EEOC. I� City Administrator is certified in the system. Weakness: Removes "intangibles"and nuance of personality in the selection process. Opportunities: Allows City to increase workplace productivity and efficiency by _ placing employees in roles that maximize their effectiveness. Threats: May cause organizational disruption p p -- - :ru ton with the re lac einent,release or reassignment of tasks with the current employee pool. RECOMMENDATION: To stabilize the hiring and assignment process in the staffing of the City of Lake Elmo, the City Administrator recommends the following: P "Alove to approve the expenditure of$3100 for the vu&Cripti®rz to the Predictive Employee Evaluation Program with the funds coming from the 2014 Contingency Fund tF. f. ATTACHMENTS: 1. What is the Predictive Index? s. I - f --page 2-- ME PI Worldwide What is The Predictive Index®(PI®)? Predictive Index®(PI®)is a scientifically validated assessment that accurately predicts workplace behaviors and tendencies. Who is PI Worldwide?www.PlWorldwide.com PI Worldwide and its global consulting network combine the power of predictive data with business expertise to help organizations worldwide achieve a competitive advantage.Trusted advisors since 1955,we help organizations align their people with their strategy to create long-term sustainable results. Our Methodology Data Driven Science-based assessments are the foundation of our methodology- everything starts with the data.Our assessments measure critical dimensions of behaviors and skills in the workplace.The Predictive Index assessment,developed in 1.955,was among the first to quantify the importance of behavioral drives and needs in the workplace.Since then, we've added additional assessments that continue the tradition of providing you with unprecedented insight into your leaders,employees,and candidates. Knowledge Transfer Education and knowledge transfer are essential elements of our partnering strategy with our clients.For more than 50 years,we have helped our clients develop subject matter experts to interpret and apply their own data within the context of their own organizations.Our powerful programs,combined with ongoing complimentary support,ensure competence is developed inside your organization.Our clients cite our education programs as transformational in their ability to manage and lead others and to better understand themselves. Technology In today's fast-paced organizations,our clients require on-demand access to our tools and data.To support this need, we offer a variety,of web-based solutions that allow you to collect,analyze,and apply assessment data to your most critical business challenges. We also offer robust integrations to industry-leading HRiS and ATS platforms to automate the process of applying workforce analytics more easily. .Expertise Our global consulting network consists of 45 Mt tuber I'LLnLs,representing 400 professional consultants.These experts provide the highest levels of applied experience,industry knowledge,and service. As part of the Pl. Worldwide community,each consultant brings a unique combination of global experience and local presence.They serve as trusted business advisors and have earned a client retention rate of more than 90%. Our consultants can engage with your organization for strategy planning sessions,group analytics work,team optimization,leadership development,succession planning,and strategic workforce planning. THr CITYOF KE L M 0 'Ch C)PA 4 DATE: January 21, 2014 REGULAR ITEM # 9 No SWOT Analysis AGENDA ITEM: Council Meeting Date Change SUBMITTED BY: Beckie Gumatz, Deputy Clerk THROL-GH: Dean Zuleger,City Administrator Ri,--VIEWED BY- Adam Bell, Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk St"GGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item..............................................................City Administrator - Report/Presentation......................................... .....City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff...............................................Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion...............................................................Mayor&City Council - Discussion................................. .......................................Mayor&City Council - Action on Motion....................................................................Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: State Law FISCAL IMPACT: NA SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: City Council is respectfully requested to move the City Council meeting from Tuesday, February 4, 2014 to Wednesday, February 5, 2014 due to Precinct Caucuses. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: "Move to approve moving the Tuesday, February 4, 2014 Council Meeting to Wednesday, February 5, 2014, due to Precinct-Caucuses." LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: When the 2014 Meeting calendar was presented and approved at the December 17, 2013 meeting, the date of Precinct Caucuses was overlooked. State law prohibits cities from holding meetings after 6:00pm on the date of Precinct Caucuses. By moving the meeting to Wednesday,the City will be better able to conduct its business. page City Council Meeting Regular Agenda Item 9] January 21,2014 s I: 2 RECOMMENDATION: City Council is respectfully requested to move the City Council meeting from Tuesday, February 4, 2014 to Wednesday, February 5, 2014 due to Precinct - Caucuses. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: "Move to approve moving the Tuesday, February 4, 2014 Council Meeting to fedraesday, Febr uar.y i, 2014, due to Precinct Caucuses." r - x = = E --page 2-- THE C)TY OF I A L.J'�.KE ELMO MA YOR & COUNC/t COMV� DATE: January 21, 2014 REGULAR ITEM 10 AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Booster Station and Trunk Watermain Improvements—Public Improvement Hearing;Resolution Ordering the Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications;Motion to Approve Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract SUBMITTED BY: Jack Giiffin, City Engineer THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleger, City Administrator REN71EWED BY: Adam Bell, City Clerk Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Chad Isakson, Project Engineer SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUISINESS: - Introduction of Item......................................................................City Engineer - Reportu"Presentation,.......................................................................City Engineer - Questions from Council to Staff.............................................Mayor Facilitates - Open Public Improvement Hearing; Public Input ..................Mayor Facilitates - Call f6r Motion...............................................................Mayor&City Council - Discussion........................................................................Mayor&City Council - Action on Motion.........................................................4.......... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering FISCAL IMPACT: $1,66,000 for preparation of plans and specifications which includes geotechnical investigations for design. The Inwood Booster Station and Trunk Watermain Improvement project is a$3.84 million water system infrastructure project that is programmed for construction in the 2014 Capital Improvement Plan. The Capital Improvement Plan is funded as detailed in the city financial.pro forma previously presented and accepted by the city council. More specifically this project will be funded through the water enterprise fund and special assessments as identified in the feasibility report. --page 1 -- ;..anwinryrwrws..ue� _ wrmawao�.rw®+ewx +u:+.'.-.nar�m�nawnw.w+-.ne®�rroe' :.w..:teen.+�wrwuwsv..rmwnwwFu�nH.rr+ivwinmwx.®imC City Cowxcil Meeting (Regular Agenda.Item.101 s P. January 21,2014 _ r Approving the Plans and Specifications and entering into a professional services contract a commits the city to incur the engineering and geotechnical costs necessary to complete detailed. x design and receive contractor bids to ready the project for construction in April 2014. The ' F council will be asked to award a contract for watermain construction in May 2014 and the booster station construction in June 2014, at which tune the city would commit to the remaining t project costs. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to open the Public Improvement Hearing for the , Inwood Booster Station and Trunk Watermain. Improvements; and following the Hearing, �. consider adopting Resolution No. 2414-06 Ordering the Improvement and the Preparation of k, Plans and Specifications; and. awarding a Professional Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract. The recommended motions for these actions are as follows: t; f "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-07 Ordering the Inwood Rooster Station and Trunk Watermain Improvements and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications. G and l "Move to approve the updated Professional Engineering Support Services Consulting Pool, thereby adding MSA Professional Services, Inc. in the area of General Municipal Services." t and i:. 'Move to approve a Professional Engineering Design: and Construction Support Services Contract to IIIS 4 Professional.Services,Ina in the not to exceed amount of$200,77 2. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.01.1 to 429.111, a.Public Improvement Hearing was II{ noticed for January 21,201.4,to consider making the following improvements: . f r. • Extension of trunk watennain facilities along Inwood Avenue from 20" Street North to Eagle Point Boulevard,passing through the Parkview Estates neighborhood. • Construction of a water booster station to increase water pressures in the southen-1 part of the city. } The attached notice was published in the official newspaper and individual notifications were sent to each address that potentially will be assessed a portion of the project costs. In addition a resident meeting was held on January 15, 2014 to present the information to the benefitting property owners identified in the report. This project is programmed for construction in the 2014 Capital Improvement Plan. The feasibility report was authorized by the city council on August 6, 2013 in order to ready this project for 2014 construction. The report identified the necessary improvements, estimated project costs, assessment methodology and preliminary assessment amounts to be levied against properties adjacent to and benefiting from the improvements. --page 2-- s. City Council Meeting [Regular 4bencln.Item1l1J r; January 21,2014 The proposed improvements include the extension of trunk watermain facilities along Inwood Avenue from 26'h Street North to Eagle Point Boulevard, connecting to the existing water system in the Eagle Point Business Park. The feasibility report recommended that water service be extended into the Parkview Estates neighborhood to provide a more efficient water distribution k network that includes additional properties along the selected route. F A water booster station has been identified as part of this in to increase water jpressures in the southern part of the city due to higher topography. These improvements are is consistent with the 2030 Water System Comprehensive Plan which identifies the southwestern part of the city as the high water pressure zone. Property acquisition is necessary in the vicinity f of 261h Street North and Inwood Avenue to accommodate the water booster station facility. . Individual home service stubs and fire hydrants will be installed as watermain is extended past = F existing residential properties. There are properties adjacent to this improvement project that will gain direct access to connect to the water system,without being assessed for a lateral we in the future. Two properties have been identified along Inwood Avenue to be assessed a$5.800 lateral benefit assessment since the trunk watermain will be placed adjacent to their residence. In addition, there are twenty-five (25) properties located in the Parkview Estates neighborhood that will be served by the project. The city has the option to install the trunk watermain on Inwood Avenue and bypass this neighborhood altogether. Therefore, the added costs to include the r Parkview Estates neighborhood were determined. Applying the Special Assessment Policy, ° e added costs should be assessed to the 25 properties, resulting in a preliminary unit 100/o of the P p assessment amount of$16,500. t To complete the engineering design, the city engineer prepared and sent out a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Engineering Support Services that includes a full topographic survey, the preparation of plans and specifications; plan printing, distribution and bidding services; construction administration support to the city engineer, and construction staking. FOCUS Engineering will provide resident and council communication, conduct public meetings, project is management, coordinate the project permitting, and will provide construction administration k. services for the project. FOCUS will also oversee the project design and quality control review, lead site acquisition for the booster station, and provide city design standards and documents to be incorporated with the project plans. Construction observation services will be retained at a �. rp p 3 p _ later date once the project has been bid and awarded for construction. The RFP was sent to five firms from the city's Engineering Consultant Pool, including AE2S, Bolton and Menk, TKDA, MSA and SEH. The proposals were received on January 10, 2014 and were reviewed and ranked on the following basis: �. Project Team Qualifications withh a focus on a Project Manager capable of leading and j delivering a utility extension project using directional drilling installation techniques; Demonstrated understanding and experience with the project and understanding of the critical success factors; m Understanding the scope of work and roles and responsibilities of the Consultant: --page 3-- City Council Meeting [Regular agenda Item 10] E January 21,20I4 + Collaboration skills and responsiveness demonstrated during the RFP submittal process: t. and + Engineering Fees, indicating a detailed breakdown that is consistent with the Consultant's written proposal. z° The attached exhibit provides the Proposal Fee Summary as received by the responding . consultants, together with staff adjustments needed to reconcile the requested work scope for the k: = project. The Proposal Fees ranged from $128,935 to $353,030. Enl�ineering Fees are subtotaled for each project phase including project management, plans and specifications, bidding, and construction support services including construction staking. Full construction phase services including construction observation is included in the consultant's fee for the booster station. The city engineer is recommending a contract be awarded to MSA Professional Services, Inc. f: MSA has assigned a qualified project manager and a highly qualified team to handle both the watermain utility work and the complex design work needed for the booster station. While the MSA fee is higher than several other proposals, we believe that they have submitted the best work plan that proposes the appropriate level of hours necessary by the various level of technical expertise to successfully implement this improvement project. Their proposal identifies a thorough understanding of the work to be performed and they are aware of key issues related to the corridor. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2014-06 Ordering the - Improvements and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Inwood Booster Station and Trunk Watermain Improvements. Ordering a 429 Public Improvement project without a resident-petition requires a super majority 4/5 vote. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-07 Ordering the Inivood Boaster,Station and Trunk _ Watermain Improvements and the Preparation of Playas and Specifications." Staff is also recommending that the City Council consider approving the updated Professional. Engineering Support Services Consulting Pool., thereby adding MSA Professional Services, Inc, (MSA) in the area of General Municipal Services. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: _ "Move to approve the updated Prq/ ssional Engineering Support Services Consulting Pool, therebi>adding MSA Professional S'er vices, lrte. in the area of Getter°al Mu icipal,Services" Staff is also recommending that the City Council award a. Professional Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract for the Inwood Booster Station and Trunk Watermain Improvements. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: --page 4-- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda..Item 10] January 21-2014 � is "Move to approve a Professional Engineering Design and Construction Support Services r. Contract to MSA Professional Services, Inc. in the not to exceed amount of$200,772." F rg� AT ffi ACHMEN T1 Sl` t is 1. Resolution 2014-07 Ordering the Improvements and Preparation of Plans and Specifications. G 2. Notice of Hearing on Improvement. 3. Preliminary Assessment Roll. 4. Project Schedule. S. Location Map. 6. Professional Engineering Support Services Consulting Pool;updated January 21,2014. E. 7. Proposal Fee Summary'Worksheet. S. Feasibility Report (available for review at City Hall) E. k Y e' kk t� fi 'z E k e' f s: i t F k f 'FFt' I. l tt --page 5-- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OIL MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2014-07 A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATION FOR THE 1NWOOD BOOSTER STATION AND TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS,pursuant a resolution of the city council adopted the 3rd day of December, 2013,the council ordered a hearing on Improvement for the Inwood.Booster Station and Trunk Waterm.ain Improvements;and WHEREAS, ten.days' mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 21st day of January,201.4,at which all persons desiring to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard thereon;and WHEREAS,the feasibility report prepared by FOCUS.Engineering,Inc.,and dated November 2013 states that the project is necessary,cost-effective,and feasible;and WHEREAS,in order to provide municipal water to developing properties located south of.10t"Street N the city needs to design and construct a booster station and a trunk watermain along Inwood Avenue North from 26d, Street North to Eagle Point Boulevard. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, 1. Such improvement is deemed necessary, cost-effective, and feasible as detailed in the Feasibility Report dated November 201.3. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the council resolution adopted this 21 st day of January, 2014. 3. The city council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the improvement from the proceeds of tax exempt bonds. 4. The city engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for making this improvement.The engineer,and his consultants, shall oversee the preparation of the Plans and Specifications for the snaking of such improvement. 5. The city engineer shall retain the services of a consulting engineering firm to assist, where needed, to prepare Plans and Specifications for the making of such improvement and to assist the city engineer during the construction phase of the improvement as requested. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY, 2014. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Mike Pearson Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: Adam Bell T City Clerk Resolution No. 2014-07 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO NOTICE OF HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT I.NWOOD BOOSTER STATION AND TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Lake Elmo will meet in. the council chambers of the city hall at or approximately after 7:00 P.M. on Tuesday, January 21, 2014, to consider the making of the following improvements, pursuant to Minnesota. Statutes, Sections 429.011 to 429.111: The improvement will consist of extending the water system approximately 2.8 miles south along Inwood Avenue beginning at 26th Street North, deviating into Parkview Estates along Ivory Avenue North, and back along Inwood Avenue south to and along future 5th Street, to provide municipal water service to developing properties in the southwest part of the City. Individual service stubs will be installed to properties with existing homes that are.located adjacent to the watermain improvements. Fire hydrants will be installed along the corridor, providing increased fire suppression capabilities in the extended service area. The area proposed to be assessed for these improvements include the properties with existing residences and. located along Inwood Avenue and Ivory Avenue North, directly abutting the location of the proposed watermain improvements. The estimated total cost of the improvements is $3,840,000. A reasonable estimate of the impact of the assessment will be available at the hearing. Such persons as desire to be.heard with reference to the proposed improvements will be heard at this meeting. DATED: December 3,2013 BY ORDER OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor (Published in the Oakdale-Lake Elmo Review on December 11,2013 and December 18, 20.13) CITY OF LAKE ELMO,MN, INWOOD BOOSTER STATION AND TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS PAGE 1 of NOVEMBER 2013 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. NAME ADDRESS PID UNITS 1 EBERHARD CAROLINE M TRS&ATTN AL EBERHARD 2298 INWOOD AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2102921310001 $ 5,800 2 MEEHAN FAMILY LLC 2038 INWOOD AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2102921340013 $ 5,800 1 HANSON KENNETH L&ANNETTE M C 1873 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120023 $ 16,500 2 SAULSBURY KIM B&THERESA D 1849 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120022 $ 16,500 3 KLOSNER MARK S&BARBARA F 1927 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120021 $ 16,500 4 WILLIAMS JAMES M&SUSAN T 1805 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55D42 2802922120020 $ 16,500 5 HANGGE JOSEPH P&MICHELE L 1779 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120019 $ 16,500 6 NELSON DAVID F&LESLIE R 1757 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120018 $ 16,500 7 FOR.ITI EDWARD J&CYNTHIA J 1743 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120017 $ 16,500 8 KNUTSON BRANDON J&JODI F FISH 1727 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120016 $ 16,500 9 AXSERG CHARY T&JEANETTE 1709 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120015 $ 16,500 10 BARTOSH PETER T&SANDRA K 1697 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120014 $ 16,500 11 YOCUM TIMOTHY C&SHANNON C S 1694 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120009 $ 16,500 12 BEAM GREGORY A&MELISSA A 1681 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120013 $ 16,500 1.3 DEEBTIFFNI&DANIEL L 1680 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120008 $ 16,500 14 WORTMAN STEPHEN D&CHERYL L 1668 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2902921120007 $ 16,500 15 IVERSON JEFFREY S&JULI A 1663 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120012 $ 16,500 16 BATTAH ABDALLA M&DEBRA J 1654 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120006 $ 16,500 17 ANDERSON DAVID M&MARIAV 1645 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120011 $ 16,500 18 SNIDER BERT W&TERRI L 1636 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921120005 $ 16,500 19 ANDERSON LAMES L&KARIN L 1627 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2902921120010 $ 16,500 20 HAUGE ROBERT JR&LAIS MONICA 1615 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2902921130018 $ 16,500 21 JACOBS PHILLIP 1584 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921130017 $ 16,500 22 ROLANDO RICHARD J&JEAN M 1583 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921130014 $ 16,500 23 HENEHAN THOMAS A&MARY L 1570 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921130016 $ 16,500 24 RICKERT BRENDA 1567 IVORY AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921130015 $ 16,500 25 KUMP SUZANNE&JOHN 1539 IVORY CT N LAKE ELMO 55042 2802921130008 $ 16,500 TOTAL $ 424,100 FOCUS PROJECT SCHEDULE ENGINEERING, inc. CITY OF LAKE ELMO Cara Geheren,P.E. 651.300,4261 Jack Griffin,P.E. 651.300.4264 INWOOD BOOSTER STATION AND Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267 TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS Chad lsakson,P.E. 651.300.4283 PROJECT NO, 2012.126 JANUARY 2014 TRUNK WATERMAIN PROJECT SCHEDULE January 21, 2014 Public Improvement Hearing. Council Orders Improvement and Preparation of plans and specifications. April 15, 2014 Council approves Plans and Specifications; Orders Advertisement for Bids. May 13, 2014 Receive Contractor Bids. May 20, 2014 Council accepts bids and awards Contract. June 9, 2014 Conduct Pre-construction Meeting and Issue Notice to Proceed. September, 2014 Substantial completion. October, 2014 Final completion. ROOSTER STATION PROJECT SCHEDULE January 21, 2014 Public Improvement Hearing. Council Orders Improvement and Preparation of plans and specifications. May 20, 2014 Council approves Plans and Specifications; Orders Advertisement for Bids. June 12, 2014 Receive Contractor Bids. June 17, 2014 Council accepts bids and awards Contract. June 30, 2014 Conduct Pre-construction Meeting and Issue Notice to Proceed. Engineer Recommendation - Substantial and Final completion. e 1 LB m JECT TION 0 1.OTH TREET s a 2000 4000 Feet - v FIGURE NO. 1 FO1'RaJ.TvO.2012.12fiCUS LAKE ELMO>MINNESOTA ' LOCATION MAP � ��E ��'� INwoar�BOOSTER STATION AND TRUNK NOVEMBER,2013 WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS C Q C U 'N 1A N C � � J }� H E Vo O CL tLo z]� d S c J V s.iT -a m Z ® zp u LLI r u m u t.t€ m O y Y ILI) R .S v m c 4 O -- _ E c a ac '..� to o O o W m j LL C ` ti w 2 V) m (7 � V V C as W Z . m o0 LU Q a �- Z_ } LU v Lf). e z m LU u Q y C C Eb LL _ :4 W N W uj LL m N ¢ Y og F_ b0 c ci I c a oS LLI v c c LLI o c O LL 4 D C U L C u 4.i� iI sue. C 0 F— N N `— A L W T O rr u 43 N N L Q N N C U N i� J m 6 C 7 C 'Q Y C tC0 c O 8 c G R W al ` Z ti m aU v Tc : c °� N o z a z a % 3 w u0. G �O 0 Ol C 4- t3 v�i H ham- t7 v�i T n. ti O O n v i M1 00 Ln LCt QD O Q O C tY Nr1l re) 00fN It a) C!' N m 00 O p1 O a+ p N N MCQ O Lu M vi o 0 0 m V) p m DO C1' 00 lD L 00 -f 00 Co C c V (0 Co 00 Dt N O lD 00 m N O b0 d" Ln to m b.0 U1 U1 !, lD M m v a m N I� N M N rV m m f� LLJLLJ m u puj Q, O r- c-I LEJ Aim lfl_ m � LI) m LL. Lh m U1 M fV CD 00 M Lr LL, lD 00 Ut M Lr uj ® A O p 00 .--� O O 00 N N Qa1 M O Q CD Ci rr O O O �y N Ln m l0 ++ to '® w '0 t LjLLJ a a c ro uj LLJ � LL M Awn eq Ln 0 M Arn n M d CL v a 00 r. w Ln v ® 00 N m Ln bb m � N � q �- W m � N N 00 c of Vi. +rA � yr c vn• v� in � � w w qzr �® ac LLJ z z z LL' T-1 LLJhe Q _ `" ca u �- - LL 0 u uj u 0 w �3 C � C 7 C CLLU r LJ Q c ZA Fes- V Q m F- THE.-'CITY OF I A LAKE ELMO MA YC R & C 'NC..,',' .....'N DATE: January 21, 2014 REGULAR ITEM# I I AGENDA.ITEM: Well No.4 Connectinla-,Watermain Improvements—Approve Plans and Specifications and Order Advertisement for Bids SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin,City Engineer THROUGH: Dean A. Zuleger,City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Chad.Isakson,Project Engineer Cathy Bendel,Finance Director Mike Bouthilet,Public Works SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of I.tem..... ............................................................................City Engineer Report/Presentation...................................................................City Engineer Questions from Council to Staff...............:..........................................Mayor Facilitates Public Input,if Appropriate................................:...................Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion................... ..................................... .................Mayor&City Council Discussion.......................................................................Mayor&City Council Action on Motion...................................................... ........... Mayor Facilitat6s POLICY RE,COMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IIN/IPACT: The total estimated project cost for Well No. 4 Connecting Watermain Improvements is $617,000. The project is scheduled to be paid through a combination of DEED (grant money ($260,000) and water enterprise funds ($357,000). The city cost share, or water enterprise funds, will be financed through the issuance of bonds with the bond payments paid with the collection of water availability and water connection charges. Approval of this resolution does not commit the council to the project costs. Once contractor bids are received, the actual construction costs will be known and the council will be asked to consider entering into a contact to complete the work. --page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda.Item H] Y January 21,2014 II 1 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The city council is respectfully requested to consider approving the plans and specifications and ordering the advertisement for bids for the Well No. 4 Connecting Watermain Improvements. The recommended ' r I. motion for this action is as follows: "Move to approve Resolution No. 2014-08, approving the plans and specaflcatioras and ordering the l: advertisement for bids for the Well No. 4 Connecting fl"aterin ain lrnprovernents.' LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: 1 In accordance with the 2013-2014 Capital Improvement Plan, the city is pursuing the addition of a new water su l well, Well No. 4, to support the current and future growth and development water supply pp Y Pp p Pp Y }. needs for the city. The project is being completed under three separate contracts to align with the various #. required contractor specialties including a well driller; a building contractor with electrical, controls, and HVAC specialties; and a directional drilling utility contractor. All three contracts, along with the Feats Trunk Watermain Improvements, are part of the city's water system DEED grant, whereby the city must expend $1.0 million in local matching funds to receive the $1.0 million state bond grant. Per the Grant . Agreement,all grant funds must be fully expended by December 31,2014.The well drilling for Well No. ;. = 4 is near completion. : On August 6,2013,the council authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for the Well No. 4 Connecting Watennain Improvements.. In accordance with the project schedule, the plans and specifications for the Pumphouse have been completed and are ready to be advertised faz contractor bids. p BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Plans and Specifications have been completed for the Well No. 4 Connecting Watermain Improvements. The Engineer's opinion of probable construction cost is $447,860.The improvements include: ' • Construction of a approximately 4,400 LF of 12-inch watermain to connect Well No. 4 to the existing distribution system. • Installation of 10 service stubs to existing properties to provide property owners the opportunity to hook up to municipal water. • Erosion control,cleanup and site restoration. ILECOMMENDATION: f Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the plans and specifications and order the advertisement for bids for the Well No. 4 Connecting Watermain Improvements. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: 1; "Move to approve Resolution NO. 2014-08, approving the plates sand specifications and ordering the advertisement )r°bids for the Well No. 4 Connecting Watermain Improvements." = ATTACHMENT(S>: - 4 r 1. Resolution 2014-08 Approving Plans and Specifications and.Ordering Advertisement for Bids. 2. Location Map. 3. Project Schedule. 4. Well No.4 Connecting Watermain flans and Specifications (available for review at City Hall). r f' --.page 2 - CITE' OF LADE ELMO WA.S INGTON COUNTY STATE OF 11-'[INNESOTA SOLUTION NOo 20I4- 8 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIBS FOR THE WELL NO. 4 CONNECTING WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution passed by the city council on the 60' day of August, 2013, the city engineer, together with Bolton and Menk, Inc. has prepared plans and specifications for the Well No. 4 Connecting Watermain Improvements and has presented such plans and specifications to the council for approval. NOW,THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, L Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file at Lake Elmo City Hall and made a part hereof, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and posted online with Quest Construction Data Network(QuestCDN.com) an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for at least 21 days, shall specify the work to be done, and shall state that sealed bids provided to the City Clerk prior to the specified bid date and time and accompanied by a bid bond or cashier's check made IT payable to the City of Lake Elmo in an amount not less than 5%of the amount of such bid will be considered. ADOPTED BY THE LADE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE TWENTY-FIRST DAY OF JANUARY 21014. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Mike Pearson Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: Adam Bell City Clerk Resolution No. 2014-08 1 s � l e r . e fi �u. LEGEND PROPOSED WATERMAIN PROPOSED WATERMAIN SERVICE STUB U PROPOSED HYDRANT 0 500 1000 X� ASSESSABLE PROPERTY Feet FIGURE NO.2 PROD.NO.2013,131 1911:0 c u S LAKE ELMO,MINNESOTA PROPOSED WATERMATN IMPROVEMENTS ENGINEERING SEPTEMBER,2013 WELL NO.4 CONNECTING WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS FOCUS PROJECT SCHEDULE ENGINEERING, inc. CITY OF LAKE ELMO Cara Geheren,P.E. 651.300,4261 Jack Griffin,P.E. 651.300.4264 WELL NO. 4 CONNECTING WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS Reran Stempskk,P.E. 651.300.4267 PROJECT NO. 2013.131 Chad Isakson,R.E. 651.300.4283 JANUARY 2014 August 6, 2013 Presenttion of Preliminary Study Findings. Council authorizes Feasibility Report. September 3, 2013 Presentation of Feasibility Report. Council accepts Report and Calls Nearing. September 19, 2013 Property owner meeting. Presentation of Report findings and recommendations. October 1, 2013 Public Improvement Hearing, Council orders Preparation of plans and specifications. January 21, 2014 Council approves Plans and Specifications; Orders Advertisement for Bids. February 20, 2014 Receive Contractor Bids. March 4, 2014 Council accepts bids and awards Contract. April 1, 2014 Conduct Pre-construction Meeting and Issue Notice to Proceed. June 20, 2014 Substantial completion (estimated 12 weeks). July 18, 2014 Final Completion. THE CITY OF LAKE LMO - - 1,1A R & COUNCh C DATE: Jan uary 21, 2014 REGULAR ITEM# 12 AGENDA ITEM: Lake Elmo Avenue Trunk Watermain Improvements--Approve Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin,City Engineer THROUGH: Dean A.Z,uleger,City Administrator IZE VI1;.NAT:D BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer M-'GGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS i removed$i oin the Consent jgenda): - Introduction of Item.............:..................................... ............................City Engineer - Report/Presentation...................................................................City Engineer Questions from Council to Staff...........................................................Mayor Facilitates Public Innput,if Appropriate.................................................Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion............................................................................Mayor&City Council I - Discussion....................................................................................Mayor&City Council Action on Motion................................................................................Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: $80,000 for preparation of plans and specifications which includes geotechni.cal investigations for design. The Lake. Elmo Avenue Trunk Watermain Improvement project is a $3.0 million water system infrastructure project that is programmed for construction in the 2014 Capital Improvement Plan. The Capital Improvement Plan is funded as detailed in the city financial pro forma previously presented and accepted by the city council. More specifically this project will be funded through the water enterprise fund and special assessments as identified.in.the feasibility report. Entering into a professional services contract commits the city to incur the engineering and geoteclmical costs necessary to complete detailed design and receive contractor bids to ready the project for construction in 2014. The council will be asked to award a contract for construction in April 2014, at which time the city would commit to the remaining project costs. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider awarding a Professional Engineering Design and. Construction Support Services Contract for the Lake Elmo Avenue Trunk Watermain Improvements to --page I -- r City Council Meeting [.Regcclar Agenda Item 121 January 21,2014 ` TKDA, Inc. in the estimated not to exceed amount of$66,500. The recommended motion for this action C is as follows: "Move to approve a Professional Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract for the Lake Elmo Avenue Trunk Watermain Improvements to TKDA.,Inc. inn the estimated not to exceed amount of$66,500." LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On December 3, 2013, following a public improvement hearing, the City Council authorized. the - preparation of plans and specifications for the Lake Elmo Avenue Trunk Watermain Improvements. The proposed improvements include the extension of trunk watermain along Lake Elmo Avenue, from the existing Village water system, south approximately 2.5 miles to the future intersection location of Lake Elmo Avenue and 50' Street. The improvements are identified for construction in 2014 and are consistent € with the capital improvement plan. To complete the engineering design,the city engineer prepared and sent out a Request for Proposal(RFP) for Engineering Support Services that includes a design survey, the preparation of plans and =. specifications; plan printing, distribution and bidding services; construction administration support to the city engineer, and construction staking. FOCUS Engineering will provide resident and council communication,conduct public meetings,project management, coordinate the project permitting,and will i provide construction administration services for the project. FOCUS will also oversee the project design and quality control review, and provide city design standards and documents to be incorporated with the project plans. Cons-ruction observation services will be retained at a later date once the project has been z bid and awarded for construction. { The RFP was sent to four firms from the city's Engineering Consultant Pool, including AE2S, Bolton & Menk, TKDA, and SEH. Three proposals were received on December 6, 2013 and were reviewed and } ranked on the following basis: • Project Team Qualifications with a focus on.a Project Manager capable of leading and delivering i a utility extension project using directional drilling installation techniques; ® Demonstrated understanding and experience with the project and understanding of the critical success factors; f k Understanding the scope of work and robes and responsibilities of the Consultant; ® Collaboration skills and responsiveness demonstrated during the RFP submittal process; and r • Engineering Fees,indicating a detailed breakdown that is consistent with the Consultant's written a proposal. f The attached exhibit provides the Pro osal Fee Summary as received b the responding P p •' ty y p �, consultants, together with staff adjustments needed to reconcile the requested work scope for the project.The Proposal Fees ranged from $66,500 to $71,560. Engineering Fees are subtotaled for each project phase including project mana�gement, Plans and specifications, topographic survey, bidding, and construction support services including construction staking. r The city engineer is recommending a contract be awarded to TKDA, Inc. TKDA has assigned a qualified. team appropriate for the level of work required for this project. In particular, TKDA has dedicated significantly more hours to the project for a senior level engineer experienced in directional drilling = technology. TKDA also identified a thorough understanding of the work to be performed and they are aware of key issues related to the corridor.The engineering fees from all firms were relatively close and all proposed fees are below the project budget. Staff is recommending TKDA's team for their senior level project experience with directional drilling combined with their existing knowledge of the corridor. __page 2-- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 12] Januaiy 21,2014 f RECOMMENDATION: { I Staff is recommending that the City Council award a Professional Engineering Design and Construction I Support Services Contract for the Lake Elmo Avenue Trunk Watenmain Improvements to TKDA- Inc. in the estimated not to exceed amount of$66,500. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: E' "Move to approve a Professional Engineering Design and Construction Support Services Contract for the Lake Elmo Avenue Trunk Watermain Improvements to F TKDA,Inc. inn the estimated not to exceed amount of$66,500." G' ATTACHMENT(S): t 1. Proposal Fee Summary Worksheet s is g k' L X f l` ff � E G f 1' I k k f F rE i. C P: f k. I. f i` --page 3 r N m r-I t I -4 if} O Lk i). O. . O O m O ® O r14 It 00 +' O li m 3 Ln N 1-4 Lt1 zD fV' W N N in tf} th th cm U V C) m d O m d bl) O O 0 C Ln O O li m m LLI °oLLJ m O mrn O d d N O 00 Ln LL 00 CD W Ln d- c1' 06 m m M ! O C) N lz cY :. ` 41i t/'r »r ..r LW $p th$ O A LL LLI ems_ bA -j G�} O s 0 a) p 41 LM LP9 LA Ln iP4- iSh il9- bo iA4 - LU 0 w I w u �. LLJ C ora C a 0 LU aLLJ ply THE CITY of //g�� A S B.._.t F 11�}'s*'h.. i.. I`°`""t R d`�2 I` �°'°'¢ � 1 Y, s= �P . T e t � BATE: January 21, 2014 REGULAR ITEM# 1.3 AGENDA ITEM: Friedrich Property Comprehensive Plan Amendment (RAD-ALT to RAD) St.?BMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director THROt1GD: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission Nick Johnson, City Planner SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item........:............................Community Development Director - Report/Presentation..............................Community Development Director - Questions from Council to Staff............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ...................::::.:......................................Mayor&City Council - Discussion.......................................................................Mayor& City Council - Action on Motion....................................................................Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: The City Council has previously asked the Planning Commission for its recommendation concerning an amendment to the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan that would change the future land use designation of property located at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North (the "Friedrich Property") from RAD-ALT to RAD. In accordance with City Code and State Law,the City Council may only amend the Comprehensive Plan only after the Planning Commission has conducted a review of the proposed changes and after the Commission's has conducted a public hearing concerning the amendment. The Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment at its January 13, 2414 meeting and a summary of the Commission's report and recommendation are included below. FISCAL, IMPACT: There are no direct fiscal impacts to the City associated with the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Staff has spent time preparing for the meeting and following proper hearing notification procedures. As a Council-initiated agenda item, the City will not receive any application fees to offset the hearing publication and mailing costs. --page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 1.3] January 21,2014 t SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: At its December 3, 2013 meeting, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing to consider a Comprehensive Plan amendment that would revise the future land use map for property at 9434 S Stillwater Boulevard North. Specifically the Council asked that the Planning Commission t consider changing the future land use designation of this property from RAD-ALT (Rural Area Development Alternate Density) to RAD (Rural Area Development). The difference between f these land use categories is that the RAD-ALT designation would allow residential densities on the site up to 2 units per acre while the RAD designation would limit this number to 0.45 units f per acre. r' z The Planning Commission considered this matter at its January 13, 2014 meeting and recommended approval of the amendment to change the future land use designation for the subject property from RAD-ALT to RAD. t � Y 0., Y The suggested motion to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation is as follows: s "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-09 amending the Comprehensive Plan to change the 3 .future land use designation o f 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD-AL T to RAD." LEGISLATIVE IIISTORY/PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: The attached Staff r report to the Planning Commission includes general inforination regarding the subject property in addition to a summary of the planning and zoning issues pertaining to the site. Also attached kfor consideration by the Council is the Staff report concerning a request to change the future land use designation of this site that was prepared in early 2010. These two documents provide good 3. synopsis of recent action taken by the City for this property,with relevant dates noted as follows: Date Action 3/22/10 Application for Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Text Amendment and PUD/OP Concept Plan accepted as complete by the City 6/1/10 City Council approval of Comprehensive Plan amendment for subject property(RAD to RAD-2 7/20/10 City Council approval of OP/PUD Concept Plan for senior living/farm- based preschool development z 4 7/19/11 Granting of one-year extension for preliminary plan submission S 9/21/12 Granting of additional one-year extension for preliminary plan submission 3/14/13 Expiration of OP/PUD Concept Plan 1/21/14 City Council consideration of Comprehensive Plan amendment (RAD- ALT to RAD) The Planning Commission considered the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment at its January 13, 2014 meeting and conducted a public hearing concerning the amendment at this time. The following individuals addressed the Commission during the course of the public hearing: t --page 2-- ': p City Council Meeting %Regular Agenda Item 131 t ` Januaiy 21,2014 4 • Janice Green spoke to the Commission as the owner of theproperty. She ex explained that p p �. her father was strongly supportive of the farm school concept and that this project was intended to help preserve the agricultural buildings and activity on the site. She stated that the land owners are requesting that the land use designation remain RAD-ALT. C • Larry Weiss, 9302 Stillwater Boulevard North, explained that he was originally in support of the proposed development on this site, but that he changed his mind when the density increased. He asked that that land use designation be changed back to RAD. • Ed Nielson, 9498 Stillwater Boulevard North, expressed concern over the information e that was presented about the senior living and farm school project when it was initially proposed. He explained that senior living projects are typically located along larger roads. He commented that 98% of the surrounding neighbors are opposed to the previous development proposal. • Stewart Helgeson, 11150 120' Street North, stated that it would not make sense to change 1 the land use plan back to RAD because the City may need to make yet another change if , an acceptable project were to come forward. z 1 ' S The Planning Commission generally discussed the City's long range plans for rural areas and the OP zoning regulations that would apply to this site. Commissioners supported the findings for r approval of the amendment as drafted by Staff, and recommended five additional findings to support its recommendation to the City Council. The Commission further noted that the City is 1 still operating under older population and household forecast numbers that will be valid until the updated regional forecast is finalized by the Met Council.. 'z Y The Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD-ALT to RAD consistent with the findings as noted in the attached Resolution No. 2014- 109. The vote on the motion unanimous at 7-0. a f i BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT). a Stn'engtlns • The proposed amendment provides clarity for the City and neighbors regarding the maximum amount of development for the site. • The Commission noted that the amendment would alleviate a potential "spot zoning"situation in this area. Weaknesses • An amendment would prohibit a unique development from P; moving forward that would combine senior living, a preschool, and agricultural activities on the site. • Any new application for multi-family living and/or a farm-based preschool on the site could only move forward with another . Comprehensive Plana amendment. k G, --page 3 -- x City Council Meeting } Y $ [Regular Agenda Item 13.1 € January 21,2014 t� 1 Opportunities Future development proposals could be approved by the City that are consistent with the OP zoning regulations. • The property owner/developer may still pursue a Comprehensive Plan amendment as part of a future development proposal. • The City will be able to fiu.-ther evaluate the used and densities allowed in rural development areas once the regional forecast has been finalized. C; Threats • The City is still operating under the forecasts approved under the MOU and 2013 Land Use Plan (additional density in rural development would be needed to reach these forecast numbers). x V RECOMMENDATION. The Planning Commission is recommending that the City Council i approve the amendment to change the future land use designation for the subject property from F b o J P p Y P r RAD-ALT to RAD. The suggested motion to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation is as follows: z "Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-09 amending the Comprehensive Plan to change the future land use designation of'9434 Stillwater Boulevard North fi-o a RAD-ALT to RAD." t k Please note that this action requires a 4/5ths majority vote of the City Council. if there are fewer 1. than four votes to approve the resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan, the future land use designation for the subject will not be changed. 'r x' a ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2014-09 2. 2. Planning Commission Staff Report_. 1/13/1.4 3. Location Map R. 4. Proposed Map Amendment 5. Staff Report to City Council Dated 5/4/10 . 6. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes— 1/13/14 j Tr I r u Y. B F G I. M1 . page 4 CITE' OF LAKE EL MO 'ASL INGTON COUNTS', MINNESOTA. RESOLUTION NO. 2014-09 RESOLUTIONAPPROVING ANAMENDMENT TO TIIE CITY OF LAKE ELMO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS,the City of Lake Elmo has established a Comprehensive Plan that provides a compilation of background data,policy statements, standards, and maps, which help to guide the future physical, social, and economic development of the City; and WHEREAS,The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo ("City")has directed the Lake Elmo Planning Commission to consider an amendment the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan that would change the future land use designation of property located at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard. North from RAD-ALT to RAD, a description of which is on file in the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS,the City previously amended the Comprehensive Plan for the subject property on June 1, 2010 to allow for an increase in density on the site in conjunction with a proposed development that is no longer-valid; and WHEREAS,the Lake Elmo Planning Commission.held a public hearing on January 13, 2014 to consider said Comprehensive Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, on January 13,2014 the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion.to recommend that the City Council approve said Comprehensive Plan amendment; and WHEREAS,the City Council reviewed the recoinmendation of the Planning Commission and the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan at a meeting on January 21, 2014; and. NOW, THEREFORE,based upon the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1.) That the Planning Commission has reviewed said Comprehensive Plan Amendment in accordance with the procedures as established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department and Lake Elmo Planning Commission. 1 Resolution No. 2014-09 2) That the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 13, 2014 consistent with these procedures. 3) That the proposed amendment is to is to revise the Future Land Use Map (Map 3-3 in Chapter III—Land Use Plan) in the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, and to specifically change the future land use designation a parcel of land commonly known as 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North (PID 15.029.2 1.3)1.0001) from RAD-ALT Rural Area Development Alternate Density to RAD Rural Area Development. 4) That the Comprehensive Plan Amendment will apply to property legally described in the attached Exhibit"A". 5) That there have been no changes in circumstances since the Land Use Section of the Comprehensive Plan.was updated in 2006 that warrant revisions to increase or transfer density to the subject site. 6) That I-Agher density residential development is encouraged in areas that will be served by public sanitary sewer where the provision of these services is more cost-effective and where the City will receive credit towards the REC unit counts mandated under its Memorandum of Understanding with the Metropolitan Council. 7) That the Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan specifically states that any fixture senior-specific housing in Lake Elmo will be best accommodated within the Old Village Area due to proximity to goods, services; and public facilities. 8) That the subject site does not demonstrate any characteristics that are substantially different from other areas guided for RAD development in the City of Lake Elmo or that would indicate that higher density development is more appropriate in this area than any other site within the City. 9) That the City is has recently adopted major Comprehensive Plan amendment related to development in the Old Village Area and the I-94 corridor. Given the current market conditions,the City encourages higher density development in areas that would help off-set the significant infrastructure costs required to serve these areas. 10)That higher density housing is not consistent with the City's stated goals to preserve and enhance its rural character, especially when planned in areas that are guided for Rural Agricultural Density. 1.1)That build-out of existing empty lots in platted and developed OP developments is encouraged over the creation of new development and service areas in the community 12)That new access that would be needed to support development on the subject site does not conform to the City's Transportation Plan that encourages limited access to major collector roads and is inconsistent with the City's access spacing guidelines. 2 Resolution No. 2014-09 13)That the 2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendment was designed to accommodate a specific development proposal which no longer exists. 14)That recent Met Council projections of population and household growth indicate less overall population growth than was expected in 2010. 15)That the support of local neighbors for the 2010 development proposal was based on a misunderstanding of the details of the proposal. The 2010 Planning Commission recommendation was significantly driven by the support of neighbors, which support no longer exists. 16)That the Planning Commission and City Council have become more educated and experienced in considering higher density development. Such development should not be considered for land not guided for sewer before 2030. 17)That the 2010 action could be considered spot zoning based on later information and training received by the Planning Commission. NOW,TIIEREEORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that based on the foregoing, the Lake Elmo City Council hereby approves the Comprehensive Plan amendment, subject to and contingent upon the following: 1) Submission of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Metropolitan Council and the receipt of forma!notification from the Metropolitan Council that its review has been completed and approved. Passed and duly adopted this 2 1' day of January 2104 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: Adam Bell, City Clerk 3 Resolution No. 2014-09 Exhibit cuss PT OF SW 1/4 OF SD SEC 15 LYING NLY OF NLY R/W OF RR DESC AS FOLL. COM AT NELY COR S:D SW1/4 THN SOODEG51'44"E BRG ORIENTED TO WACO SYS ALG ELY LN SD SWI/4 DIST 1067.20FT THN S89DEG13'16"W DIST 289.50FT THN S48DEG14'16"W ALG A LN HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS LN "A" DIST 36.58FT TO PT HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS PT "C" THN S05DEG16'16"W ALG A LN HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS LN "B" DIST 194.90FT MIL TO PT OF INTER WITH NLY R/W LN OF HWY 5 AKA STILLWATER BLVD N SD PT OF INTER BEING THE POB THN N05DEG 16'1 6"E ALG SD LN "B" DIST 194.90FT M/L TO BEFORE DESC PT "C" THN N48DEG14'16"E ALG SD LN "A" DIST 35.69FT M/L TO INTER.WITH SLY LN OF N 1067.20FT OF SD SWI/4 THN S89DEG06'21"W ALG SD SLY LN DIST 24.33FT M/L TO WLY LN OF E 314.50FT OF SD SWIA THN N00DEG51'44"W ALG SD WLY LN DIST 1067.20FT M/L TO NLY LN OF SD SW 1/4 THN S89DEG06'21"W ALG SD NLY LN DIST 995.27FT M/L TO ELY LN OF W 1312.FT OF SD SW1/4 THN SOODEG41'24"E ALG SD ELY LN DIST 460.FT M/L TO SLY LN OF N 4601T OF SD SW1/4 THN S89DEG06'21"W ALG SD SLY LN DIST 404.01FT M/L TO DESC ELY LN OF FRIEDRICH HGTS PLAT THN SOODEG41'24"E ALG SD ELY LN DIST 1.41.48FT THN S80DEG54'36"W ALG SLY LN SD PLAT DIST 59.61.FT THN SOODEG41'24"E ALG SD ELY LN SD PLAT DIST 661T THN N80DEG54"36"E ALG SD NLY LN SD PLAT DIST 164.77FT THN SOODEG41'24"E ALG SD ELY LN SD PLAT DIST 5.07FT M/L TO INTER WITH LN DRAWN PARL WITH SD NLY LN OF SWI/4 &EXT WLY FROM IPM ON WLY LN OF E1/2 SD SWI/4 SD WLY LN HAVING BRG OF S00DEG46'34"E SD IPM DIST 657.56FT SLY FROM NWLY COR OF SD EI/2—SW1/4 THN N89DEG06'21"E ALG SD PARL LN DIST 299.85FT MI/I,TO SD IPM THN N89DEG24'43"E ALG NLY LN TRACT DESC Il`-4 DOC#714370 &ALG NLY LN OF PARCEL DESC IN DOC#3408380 DIST 309.19FT M/L TO IPM AT THE NELY COR THEREOF THN S01DEGOO'08"E ALG ELY LN SD PARCEL DESC IN DOC#3408380 DIST 386.67FT M/L TO INTER WITH A LN HERINAFTER REFERRED AS LN "C" DRAWN AT RT ANG & ELY FROM A PT IN SD WLY LN OF E1/2—SW1/4 SD PT BEING HERINAFTER REFERRED AS PT "A" SD PT ALSO DIST 11.8.20FT NLY AS MEAS ALG SD WLY LN OF E1 Resolution No. 2014-09 [i f" ClTY OF PLANNING COMMISSION JAKE MO DATE: 1/13/14 AGENDA ITEM: 5A—PUBLIC HEARING CASE#2014-01 ITEM: Friedrich Property Comprehensive Plan Amendment SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director REVIEWED BY: Nick Johnson,City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED- The Planning Commission has been directed by the City Council to conduct a public hearing to consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that would revise the future land use map for property at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. The Council has specifically asked that the Planning Commission consider changing the future land use designation of this property from RAD-ALT(Rural Area Development Alternate Density)to RAD(Rural Area Development). The primary difference between these two land use categories is that the RAD-ALT designation would allow residential densities on the site of up to 2.0 units per acre while the RAD designation would limit this number to 0.45 units per acre. Because the Planning Commission has spent a significant amount of time over the last two months reviewing and discussing the,City's rural development areas in a fair amount of detail, Staff will be providing a more basic summary of the City's past action on this property within the present report and will ask that the Commission refer to the previous meeting packets for additional information concerning the history and current issues associated with the rural development areas in the community. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: City Council initiated action Property Owners: Irvin Friedrich,9434 Stillwater Boulevard North Location: 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North(part of Section 15 Township 029 Range 021). PID Number 15.029.21.31.0001 Request: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of the subject property from RAD-ALT to RAD Existing Land Use: Single Family Residential/Agricultural/Agricultural Outbuildings Existing Zoning: RR—Rural Residential Surrounding Land Use: Single Family Residential,Agricultural,Park Surrounding Zoning. RS—Rural Single Family; RR--Rural Residential;A—Agriculture Comprehensive Plan: RAD-ALT(Rural Agricultural Density Alternate Density); 2.0 units per acre PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a—PUBLIC HEARING 2 Proposed Comp Plan: RAD(Rural Agricultural Density); 0.45 units per acre History: The subject property has been used as an agricultural farmstead for decades. The future land use designation for the property was changed in 2010 in response to a. request for a senior living/farm school development proposal that has since been rendered void due to the passing of City submittal deadlines for further review. There are no active development proposals pending on the property. Upon receipt of a Planning Conunission recommendation to establish a moratorium on all RAD-ALT properties,the City Council did not adopt such a moratorium and instead directed the Commission to consider a land use change to the subject property. Deadline,for Action: None Applicable Regulations: Comprehensive Plan—Chapter III: Land Use Plan Zoning Ordinance—Article 9: Rural District Standards Section 154.067—OP2 Zoning Regulations REQUEST DETAILS The Planning Commission has devoted time at two of its recent meetings to discuss the City's rural development areas,and has asked that these conversations continue as part of the Commission's work plan for 2014. The Commission will specifically be looking at potential changes to the Comprehensive Plan that will study the following issues: • Potential population and household forecast reductions associated with the Met Council's revised 2040 regional forecasts. • Elimination of the RAD-ALT future land use category. • Amendments to the rural development areas that will allow for additional development opportunities on parcels less than 40 acres in size. • Consideration of the benefits and drawbacks of allowing additional development in rural areas in terms of public service costs, impacts on rural character, and other factors. In anticipation of potential changes to the City's Comprehensive Plan related to the above discussions,the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt a moratorium on all RAD-ALT development for a period of nine months. This time period was chosen to allow time for the 2040 Regional Forecast(and related projections for cities within the metro area)to be finalized before the City made any long-term decisions concerning the population and household numbers used in the land use plan. The City Council ultimately did not support the recommended moratorium concerning RAD-ALT development, but did ask the Planning Commission to consider a more immediate change on one of the City's properties that is guided in this manner. The specific request from the City Council was that the Commission consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of the property at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD-ALT to RAD. The Council's rationale for choosing only this parcel for a change includes the following: • The City created the RAD-ALT(which was initially called RAD-2) land use category as part of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan amendment after an extensive study and review of the City's obligations under the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Met Council. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a--PUBLIC HEARING 3 • Based on an analysis of these obligations,it was decided that the City would need to increase densities in the rural development areas in order to achieve the household and population requirements by 2030. • The sites chosen for the increased density(RAD-2 land use classification)were selected for specific reasons, including proximately to sewered development, isolation from other rural parcels, and locations along municipal boundaries or adjacent sewered communities. • The land use designation for the subject parcel at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard was changed based on a specific development proposal that has not materialized and is no longer valid. Under state statutes, the City Council cannot take action to amend the Comprehensive Plan without a recommendation from the Planning Commission and until after a public hearing has been conducted as part of the Commission's review. The Commission is therefore being asked to conduct this public hearing at its next meeting to gather additional feedback on this matter and to make a formal recommendation to the City Council concerning the appropriate land use designation for the subject property. BACKGROUND/PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES The City received a land use application from Tammy Malmquist, 8549 Ironwood.Trail in the spring of 2010 to change the fixture land use designation of the Friedrich property at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD to RAD-2 (which is the same as the current RAD-ALT land use category). This application was made in order to allow a concurrent request for a senior living, townhouse, and farm-based preschool Planned Unit Development project to move forward. The applicant further requested an amendment to the City's zoning regulation in order to create new OP-2 Open Space Preservation Zoning regulations that was also drafted in.order support the proposed development. In the period of time since the Comprehensive Plan amendment for the subject property was approved, the project applicant has not submitted a preliminary development plan and the timeframe for submitting such a plan has expired. There is therefore no pending application moving forward on this property, and any previous or new request for development would need to go back through a concept plan review(with a new application,hearing, etc.). In order to aid the Planning Commission's deliberation on the current Comprehensive Plan Amendment under review, Staff has attached the previous Staff Report that was prepared for the City Council when the 2010 request was initially reviewed by the City. Although over three years has passed since this review was conducted by the City,the information specific to the Comprehensive Plan and the applicant's site is still relevant and should be useful for the Planning Commission to consider with the present request. Please note the following important points from this report: • The City split up its review of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and project development (PUD) applications and dealt with these matters at separate meetings. • Planning Staff recommended denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for reasons that are spelled out in greater detail in the report. • The Planning Commission unanimously(all nine members at the time)recommended approval of the request to the City Council. • The City Council, after several meetings and a workshop session,voted 4-1 to approve the Comprehensive Plan amendment. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a—PUBLIC HEARING 4 Since 2010,the City has adopted two major amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and adopted a new future land use map for the entire community. There were no changes made,however,to any of the land uses outside of the Village Planning Area and 1-94 Corridor Planning Area with the exception of minor corrections and adjustments to fir the new map. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS Because this matter is being directed to the Planning Commission from the City Council, Staff will not be presenting a formal recommendation to the Commission other than to review the findings that have been.previously proposed or adopted. The Commission should consider its recent discussions concerning rural area development as part of its review, and Staff would be happy to make any of these past reports available to individual Commissioners(these reports are also available on the City's website). Staff would like to suggest the following parameters as the Commission deliberates on the present request: 1. The Planning Commission has been asked to consider a specific Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a specific property in the community. 2. A public hearing notice has been mailed to all properties within 350 feet of the subject parcel and this hearing has been scheduled for January 13, 2014. 3. Comments and discussion concerning a specific development are not appropriate and are irrelevant to the Coun.cil's specific request. 4. Discussion and comments concerning general land uses are appropriate, especially those that relate to uses and densities allowed under the RAD-ALT land use designation. 5. The zoning that correlates to the RAD-ALT category(OP-2 zoning regulations)allows senior living multi-family buildings,townhouses, and single family residential structures at a density of up to 2 dwelling units per acre. The RAD category and corresponding OP zoning allow single family homes and a very limited number of townhouses at a density of 0.45 units per acre(18 houses per 40 acres). 6. The Council is seeking public feedback on the proposed change and will be considering this feedback along with the Planning Commission's recommendation prior to taking action.on the proposed amendment. Using the previous staff recommendation and City Council action as a guide, the Plamung Commission should consider the following potential findings as the basis for a recommendation to the City Council. All of these findings are based on the information that was presented or drafted during the 2010 City reviews: Findings that Support No Change to the Comprehensive Plata (Leave Subject Properly as RAD): 1) The current use of this site as a working farm is unique compared to other properties designated for RAD development in the Comprehensive Plan. 2) The proposed amendment will help provide opportunities for senior housing within the community. 3) Recent subdivisions in areas guided for RAD development have been approved at a density below the unit levels anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed density increase will be offset by reductions that have previously been approved or acknowledged by the City. PUBLIC FEARING ITEM 5a—PUBLIC HEARING 5 4) The subject site is located in close proximity to public transportation along State Highway 5, and specifically, a bus route that could provide alternate transportation options for a residential development. 5) The applicant's site is located immediately adjacent to existing R-1 Single Family Residential zoning districts along its southern, eastern, and western boundaries. Other areas guided for RAD development are primarily surrounded by rural residential,agricultural, or public open space uses. Findings that Support a Comprehensive Plan Amendment(Change Subject Property from RAD-ALT to RAD): 1) There have been no changes in circumstances since the Land Use Section of the Comprehensive Plan was updated in 2006 that warrant revisions to increase or transfer density to the subject site. 2) Higher density residential development is encouraged in areas that will be served by public sanitary sewer where the provision of these services is more cost-effective and where the City will receive credit towards the REC unit counts mandated under its Memorandum of Understanding with the Metropolitan Council. 3) The Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan specifically states that any future senior- specific housing in Lake Elmo will be best accommodated within the Old Village Area due to proximity to goods, services, and public facilities. 4) The subject site does not demonstrate any characteristics that are substantially different from other areas guided for RAD development in the City of Lake Elmo or that would indicate that higher density development is more appropriate in this area than any other site within the City. 5) The City is has recently adopted major Comprehensive Plan amendment related to development in the Old Village Area and the I-94 corridor. Given the current market conditions, the City encourages higher density development in areas that would help off set the significant infrastructure costs required to serve these areas. b) Higher density housing is not consistent with the City's stated goals to preserve and enhance its rural character,especially when planned in areas that are guided for Rural Agricultural Density, 7) Build-out of existing empty lots in platted and developed OP developments is encouraged over the creation of new development and service areas in the community 8) New access that would be needed to support development on the subject site does not conform to the City's Transportation Plan that encourages limited access to major collector roads and is inconsistent with the City's access spacing guidelines. DRAFT FINDINGS Please refer to the comments in the previous section. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a—PUBLIC HEARING 6 RECCOMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission review the materials present above, attached to this report, and previously considered by the Commission during its deliberations regarding the City's rural development areas and make a recommendation to the City Council to either: a) approve an amendment to the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan to change the future land use designation of property at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD-ALT to RAD based on the"Findings that Support a Comprehensive Plan Amendment"as presented above or as otherwise modified by the Planning Commission; or b) make no changes to the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan based on the"Findings that Support No Change to the Comprehensive Plan'' as presented above or as otherwise modified by the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report-- 5/4/10 City Council Meeting ?. Location Map 3. Proposed Map Amendment ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction...................................................... Community Development Director - Report by Staff................................................. Community Development Director - Questions from the Commission............................Chair&Commission Members - Public Hearing Comments............................................................................... Chair - Discussion by the Commission..............................Chair&Commission Members - Action by the Commission.....................................Chair&Commission Members PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 5a—PUBLIC HEARING S � , 9 x e' • ' � "®•, °�'• �. � } � i i � ... is � _ r*j. 31S 6Location Mape 90434 Stillwater Blvd. N. z THE CITY OP LAKE ,!34 1 250 500 1,000 Feet Stillwater Blvd. N. Data •urce: Washin ton Count � I i _ Map 3-3 z. v s , s —._.—...�...i..... :1 — --- c 3 , l 9414 i ( , y Stillwaterdv , L�.--.—._—__.� ""*:.•' 'c r 1 / .. �...! E .—e...�.e w ,I ......... ........................ , E i ............. if �- - �S u__ o--; M x _._._ t ? Proposedn e t= RAD-Aft to RAD Planned Land Uses NO Business Park L-?Urban Medium Density OffiCommercial 1101 Urban High Density F Limited Business =Rural Single Family � 90 Village Mixed Use 0 Residential Estate E ®Village Urban Low Density =Rural Area Development I Village Urban Medium Density n Rural Area Development Alt s L�Urban Low Density Public/Park Sources:Washington.County&Metro GIs l-tU-2014 Proposed CPA: 9434 Stillwater Blvd® N. LAKEELMS Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan.2030 City of lake Elmo Planning Department Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendment To: City Council Froin: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director Meeting Date: 5/4/10 Applicant: Tammy Malmquist Owner: Tammy Malmquist; Marlene Friedrich Location: 9434 Stillwater Blvd N Zoning: RR- Rural Residential fntroductoij, Information Application The City of Lake Elmo has received an application from Tammy Malmquist, 8549 Summary.- Ironwood Trail North, for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, Open Space Preservation (OP) Development Concept Plan, and Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan. T he individual elements of this request have been made to allow the establishment of a 40-unit senior living multi-family building, 10 townhouse units, and a fann-themed preschool on a 30.9 acres parcel at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. The request would incorporate the existing family care facility that is located adjacent to this property at 9442 Stillwater Boulevard North. As the current owner of the 30.9-acre parcel, Marlene Friedrich has signed as a co- applicant to this request. Given the complex nature of this application, Staff has recommended that the City review focus first on the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning amendments before proceeding with a discussion of the OP Development and PUD Concept Plans. To facilitate this two-tiered review, separate public hearings and agenda items have been scheduled at different times with the Planning Commission as follows: ® April 26: Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendments ® May 10: OP Development and PUD Concept Plans The primary reason for the staged review is to take the bigger picture items first, and then advance with the detailed plan reviews if warranted. This process will save time and effort if there is no support by the City Council to move forward with the Comprehensive PIan and Rezoning. If these elements of the application are approved, it would allow the required Met Council review to proceed while the City is considering the development Concept Plans. c!}171)il'[Phensive 1 Flan Anw1uhne5vs:Senior L.Ivin"and C41:'7i S'-hool Oily Council Report; /11110 The Planning Commission reviewed and conducted a public hearing on both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendments, and made a recommendation. to the City Council on the first issue at its meeting on April 26`11. The Commission tabled its discussion on the latter issue and directed staff to prepare an alternate ordinance to consider in addition to the amendments requested by the applicant. The ordinance will be brought back before the Planning Commission at its next meeting, prior to discussion on the OP Development and PUD Concept Plans, Application As noted above,there are four distinct components of the applicants request,which Details. include the following: Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The proposed amendment would change the future land use designation of the parcel located at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD (Rural Agricultural Density—0.45 dwelling units per acre)to RAD2 (Rural Agricultural Density—2 dwelling units per acre). This change is necessary to move forward with the proposed development because the current designation as RAD would limit the overall number of units on the site to 14 units and the project that has been requested is for 51 units (1.7 units per acre), in addition to the existing single family residential site and proposed farm school. The applicant has proposed shifting density from an area guided for RAD2 west of the applicant's property to this site in order to avoid any impacts to the overall population projections in the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Text Antendment,S. The applicant has requested an amendment to the OP Open Space Preservation Ordinance to add requirements for development in areas that are guided RAD2, and more specifically,to amend the OP District to allow for the proposed multi-family senior living facility and farm-based preschool. The current OP Ordinance does not contain any provisions that would allow residential development to exceed a density of 0.45 units per acre(or 18 units per 40 acres), and although one section ties the maximum allowed density to the Comprehensive Plan, another section very specifically limits densities in OP developments to 18 units per 40 gross acres of buildable land. The other proposed amendments to this section include the following: • Adding Multi-Family Senior Housing buildings (only in areas guided for RAD2) and Farm Schools for preschool and school-aged children to the list of allowable uses in an OP development. • Reducing the minimum land area for an OP development from 40 to 20 acres in areas guided RAD2. • Reducing the amount of contiguous land required in open areas from 10 to 5 acres for land guided RAD2. • Reducing the required buffer setback in areas guided RAD2 to 50 feet from 200 feet. • Adding standards for Senior Housing Buildings in the OP minimum district ...'.li:!l1+-'1?:,'_1>i•.iii'1r'75.:if.'j:tli',i;e'iii!._.'ll!(1 :i�Y'`�;.;1;:111t`ii'!�I'i11=,!:'llri[.[e r;lrit,.`:f•lii;11 !�%!'./;S„�.:i'-.'!::11�:��.�[,: �i[?:r:'ll.i7l11,'?i!'!'i!:.1'1l�f)?Tlt: Pn ge 2 i 1 1 f a 9a 1 1 1 �'.Clil,tii'i7('.i.l�li,Crr'i.�': s�E.11lCiT LZ"77: [1T.!'� 117':i7��(.'liOLl requirements table. OP—Open Space Preservation (Op) Development Concept Plan. The ultimate objective of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendments described above is to allow the development of a 40-unit senior housing building, 10-unit townhouse development, and farm-based preschool on a 30.9-acre property located. at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. Should the City adopt the requested OP District changes,the applicant would be able to submit a request for the proposed development in accordance with the requirements for new OP Open Space Preservation projects. The first step in this process is the submission of a concept plan for review, and all plans and information required as part of this submission have been included as part of the overall application. A few of the details of this proposal include the following: • The Wunder Years day care would remain in its current location, and would be updated along with the existing house at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North to match the proposed townhouses. ® A community septic system is planned to serve the development. • One access is planned off Stillwater Boulevard to serve the project area in the general location now used for access to the existing home and daycare. • 50%of the project site area would be set aside as permanent open space in accordance with the OP district requirements. An open green area is planned within the center of the development area and a common architectural theme is planned throughout the development area consistent with the past agricultural use of the property. A more detailed description and complete staff review of the proposed OP Development Concept Plan ivill be provided at the nest Planning Commission meeting when this aspect of the request is considered. This request may only proceed if the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning amendments are approved.by the City Council, Planned Unit Development(PUD)—Concept Plan. In addition to the OP Development concept plan submission,the application also includes a request for a Planned Unit Development concept plan. A PUD is necessary to move forward with the applicant's request since the project includes a mix of uses and activities that would otherwise not be possible under current zoning regulations. The PUD portion of the request will be considered by the City in conjunction with the review schedule for the OP Development concept plan. The pending staff review will group the concept plans together for the purpose of providing an analysis of the request in a future report. Property The applicant's property is located near the intersection of Jamaca Avenue North and Information: Stillwater Boulevard North(Highway 5). The current uses consist of the original Friederich family farmstead and related outbuildings and the Wunder Years day care .i;. 'iri! 1.c'fir! 'i7.i•! '1,<:i r1�� � `f. �t�.. 1, .� i'_;. i�_ ..7a,., ! - .:. MIN; •-l?i;ifr 1 ;! + ;i 7 ��i.' "[. -lil.!?7;>:';ri."1 ,,;! i.':li�IJ is I'lI l':. 1�(riiliit:+�;i•�rl.;;;tii;7 ti•!�.-!)?ll;i COm,)I'P1�7i'nA-ive A,(In r.uler"'1 III IiC171.S'_.�'!:.'] 0I—1..,iI.;17"and Far.'":�choO! (VI..C'ouncii 141)orf: 14110 facility. Other than the agricultural fields, each of these uses would be considered a permitted residential and/or agricultural use of the property. The 30.9 acre farmstead is zoned RR—Rural Residential while the day care site is zoned R-1 Single Family Residential and is 29,670 square feet(0.68 acres) in size. Each property currently has its own access to Stillwater Boulevard via two driveways that are approximately 25 feet apart. Other notable features of the farm property include a larger wooded area in the northeast portion of the site (referred to as the"Oak Savanna"on the concept plans) and gently rolling topography throughout the proposed project area. The 30.9-acre parcel extends westward to Jamaca Court North, and connects to this street via a narrow connection point between two existing homes. The surrounding property uses include single family homes zoned R-1 to the south and east along Stillwater Boulevard, and agricultural uses located to the north and east that are zoned A— Agriculture and RR—Rural Residential. The Washington County Landfill and Sunfish Lake Park is located further to the north and northwest for the latter. Applicable Section 150.175 through 150.189 OP Open Space Preservation Codes, Describes the process and requirements associated with an OP Open Space Preservation development. The applicant has requested an amendment to this section of the City Code in order to allow a multi-family senior living building and. farm-based preschool as part of an OP development. Section 154.020 Amendments Outlines the process and requirements for requesting an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. Of particular interest,please note Subsection(J)which reads: "Conformance with Comprehensive Plan. In granting or recommending any rezoning or other permit provided for in this chapter,the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Commission,or Council shall find that the proposed development conforms substantially to the policies,goals, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan." Section 154.036 RR —Rural Residential Outlines the general requirements for the RR Rural Residential Zoning District in Lake Elmo. Section 154.070 through 154.075. Planned Unit Development Describes the process and requirements for submitting an application for a Planned Unit Development. Flndh!gs & General Site Overview Site Data: Lot Sizes: 30.9 acres and 0.68 acres .Existing Uses: Single Family Residences/Agricultural/Agricultural Outbuildings •..'.17i!11ii;l -1:,!�rli1_ l�< 7;:1!i'7.•.'ti%':1.i7;Iri /'i�Y!•;'f.�l•' ril71!..!7+.'ir7 ri;�!ri. 7; , -;�'i. ! '+"l ;Y' 'fir l:l S'!�.;I!I�:'r Phin Amend,,ueifu: Senior Oving mul Form S(..-hool C.'it-v,-Cowy,:d RePort: 5,*/4/10 Existing Zoning: RR—Rural Residential and R-1 Single Family Residential Future Land Use: RAD—Rural Agricultural Density and Neighborhood Conservation Property ldentification Numbers (PID): 15-029-21-3 1-0001 and 15-029-21-31-0003 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendment Review Conip Plan Of all the land use requests that are considered by a Planning Commission, a City has Analysis the most discretion to approve or deny proposals to amend the Comprehensive Plan. staff For communities within the Twin Cities metropolitan area,this discretion is limited Comments: somewhat by the Metropolitan Council, which requires cities to update their plans every ten years and has the authority to review all requests to amend an approved Comprehensive Plan. In this case, if the City decides to move forward with the proposed amendment, the proposed change will need to be reviewed by the Metropolitan Council before it can be officially adopted by the City. The update must also be submitted to adjacent communities for review and comment before the Met Council will take action on.the proposal, and once accepted, there is a 60 day review period that can be extended an additional 60 days if needed. In general, Cities may consider an amendment to a Comprehensive Plan for several reasons. Below are some specific examples as listed in the Met Council's Local Planning Handbook: 0 Changes resulting from interim planning activities such as master plans, redevelopment plans or annexation ® A need to change a land use designation to allow a proposed development. 0 Routine update of a public facilities element, such as a parks plan * A text amendment to revise a land use category,policy or other description ® A routine update to incorporate new information such as census figures The applicant's request clearly falls under the category of a land use designation change to allow a proposed development; however, there is much more to the Comprehensive Plan than just the simple designation of future land uses on a map. In Lake Elmo's situation,the City's Comprehensive Plan includes many other sections devoted to housing, provision of water service, transportation, and other elements that form a unified set of goals and objectives for the City. Any proposed land use changes should remain consistent with the other policies within the Comprehensive Plan or may otherwise need to be considered in the context of a larger update to the plan. In order to support an amendment to a Comprehensive Plan, planners will typically try to identify circumstances that may have changed since the plan was last updated to support a change in the future land use designation or other components of a plan. For instance,market conditions may have led to assumptions concerning the rate of growth that are incorrect or a transportation improvement may have opened up new areas for development that were otherwise inaccessible. In Lake Elmo's case, certain sections of the plan will be updated this year, while the land use section was last h- Odd .1 ol- 0 ',xI I'f ,A-I'V 1'.,s' P.I."Uhoolcwy. '7J161*PhIn e 5 j'QP7F111"itfl'eavi}Y:'f>rJ!?P:7id1(3rlG1fJP('741'.S':8(!17ilJJ'!?1%??'? !7iR(:�["(11'!PP.5i'fPC,'G7; updated in 2006. It is staff s opinion that, if anything, conditions have changed during this period of time in a manner that is not conducive to the request being considered by the Planning Commission. Specifically: • The economic downturn has led to a very slow rate of build out in the more recent OP developments. It is in the best interest of the City and each affected neighborhood to encourage new building to take place on lots that are currently vacant and served with water,roads, sewer, and other services and not in new areas with no or limited existing services. • The City is lagging well behind the development phasing planned for urban service areas (with no growth in these areas to date) while OP development have only in the past few years begun experiencing the severe downtown in building activity. A multi-family project is more typical of the type of development planned for the urban service areas. • The City's Comprehensive Plan and the Memorandum of Understanding between Lake Elmo and the Met Council includes provisions that will allow the Council to assess penalties against the City for failure to reach target population figures in sewered residential areas. Given the potential for penalties associated with a slow rate of build-out, larger projects should be directed to the urban service areas where they would help meet the development milestones in the Plan. • Although it appears that the overall pattern of development in areas guided for RAD density in the Comprehensive Plan will result in a lower overall population living in these areas than previously estimated, the overall impacts to the City's infrastructure and planning policies will be much lower if the current trend is followed than by increasing the allowed densities by over four times the amounts projected in some of these areas. On the applicant's site, the current zoning would permit a density of three dwelling units(or up to 14 units if combined with adjacent parcels)verses the 51 units that have been requested. • The re-allocation of densities throughout areas guided for RAD and RAD2 should be considered within the larger context of where these densities may best be integrated with surrounding land uses and where they can best be provided with public services (even if these services are somewhat limited in OP developments). There has been no substantial change since the land use plan was updated to indicate why the applicant's site would be better-suited for additional density verses the areas currently guided RAD2. Other general comments from Staff: • The applicant has proposed to re-allocate densities from an existing RAD2 property in order to permit the proposed 50-unit project without increasing the overall population projections for the City. In order to keep the overall population projections level for the City, this would reduce the density of an existing RAD2 areas to accommodate this change. There are currently around 1.'trljr!fJf.'1fJ<r_f}:i?ir'/:ff:��,Sr.�3:11'1i7i:•.'f.':`.t./!i?.. ...`(`i�'t'1�, :llif111... i!)ii7:jrf..r rrr%IJ'�ll'1f'1"'.r-,'Lf1:411 i'�)ir..:r..'l.r.:frlilii!ji'71.1'J� 17f11ri' C3Tr711J'C'/�f'i'T•S1;'i'' Senior I. and Farm.�C'.'ilJl}! ;1 0 i.`r;tt?c.;r RepoI-t.; 5.14V 140 total acres guided RAD2 which could theoretically accommodate up to 280 new housing units. if the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved, a net transfer of 37 units in excess of the current OP standards would be required (14 allow at.45 units per acre compared to 51 requested units). This transfer would reduce the overall density on the 140 acre sites to approximately 1.75 units per acre(or less if borrowed from just one property). • There has been no discussions with the current property owner of the 103 acre parcels that are guided RAD2 to the west of the applicant's site that the overall density on this site may change (or any of the RAD2 guided property owners). • Although the land use description for RAD2 notes that"limited life cycle housing"would be appropriate in these areas,there are no other references to such housing in RAD or RAD2 guided land. In fact, the housing section of the current plan states very specifically that"Any future senior-specific housing in Lake Elmo will be best accommodated within the Old Village Area due to proximity to goods, services, and public facilities. The combination of senior housing needs and village scale housing density may result in attached housing of some description". • The Comprehensive Plan calls for the City to make some fairly substantial investments in public sanitary sewer services, and Staff recommends that any developments that exceed the base densities allowed in rural areas be directed to the urban service areas where such developments can help support the provision of these services. • The applicant's plan would place additional traffic directly on to Stillwater Boulevard at a new intersection that is not consistent with the recently- prepared Transportation Plan. The Plan specifically encourages the use of collector streets and limiting access to major roads The proposed project also does not comply with MnDOT's or the City's access spacing guidelines. Based on the reasons provided above, Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the future land use designation of the applicant's site from RAD to RAD2. Draft findings were also presented to the Planning Commission consistent with the review comments noted above. The Commission ultimately did not support the position taken by Staff and developed a revised list of findings that are included in the Planning Commission report that follows. The second part of the request that was considered by the Planning Commission Zoning concerns the proposed amendments to the OP Open Space Preservation District as Amendment detailed in the applicant's submission materials and summarized by Staff in this Staff report. Many of the changes proposed would apply on to areas designated as RAD2, Analysis: and in particular, senior-living dwellings would not be permitted outside of land so designated. If approved, the proposed changes would apply to all portions of the City guided for RAD2 development, which includes 103 acres at the western edge of the City along Stillwater Boulevard and a smaller 36-acre area immediately north of 10th Street at its intersection with Manning Avenue. This would open up these parcels for ,.. l?1r:!:��= ..'.'i:/7171'fillr'!i:`,....;;t?1.`:',"/�'/.�?..'ti 1'l;i:r7!•.. r:t1 r%:i•i l•1.'i;i�J:"�_,. _<.1!'.,j'l:�l i'��; r .:)I1;1(� .��l is r`fl!!i71 i.5�1!.l:lil,r; id . f'-IN; A RI CIM/PWRIS:Senior a similar senior-living or school project. Looking at the proposed zoning amendments in.a general sense, Staff offered the following comments for consideration by the Planning Commission: • The current OP Ordinance does not contain provisions that would allow densities to exceed the 0.45 units per acre maximum in the code even in areas guided RAD2. At some point,this discrepancy should be addressed so that the densities allowed in the Zoning Ordinance are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • If approved, the proposed amendments would not alter the maximum permitted density in areas guided RAD2, and would primarily amend the types of uses that would be permitted in such areas. • Rather than amending the current OP Ordinance provisions, Staff would recommend that an overlay zoning district be created for RAD2 that would require compliance with all OP development standards with specific exceptions that would allow higher densities in RAD areas. This approach would leave the current OP Ordinance as-is while focusing a new overlay district only in specific areas to accommodate higher densities. • The proposed language in 150.180 (13, 2, g) should read "per gross acres of buildable land"to be consistent with the current OP requirements. • Given the allowance for larger buildings up to three stories in height, Staff recommend.- that the buffer setbacks (Section 150.180 B, 2, d) be left ass, currently written since a larger buffer should be provided in cases where there is greater potential for dissimilar uses to be located next to each other. • The Planning Commission may want to consider whether or not Farm Schools should be permitted in all OP developments as the proposed draft would allow. • The Zoning Ordinance only permits buildings over 35 feet in the BP Business Park and PF Public Facility zoning districts. The maximum height for Senior Housing Buildings as proposed would be 48 feet. • The OP district standards table should include setbacks from side and rear property lines for Senior Housing Buildings. The Planning Commission chose to table taking action on the Zoning Amendment, and requested that Staff prepare an alternate to the applicant's proposal that would create an overlay zoning district instead of amending the existing OP Ordinance. The Commission requested that the same standards proposed by the applicant be used to draft overlay regulations. With the separation of the concept plan review from the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments, Staff will not be providing a detailed analysis of the submitted concept plans at this time. These plans were been provided, however, as part of the Commission's review materials since the application was submitted at one time. The project narratives and required submissions are also intertwined and are being (onlpP'ithL'P1Ehv Phil?r"rnIo7diP1Z'f"!!"J':Senior L11'tnl anal Fi.N 1;`,�Ci!ovl presented in one package of information rather than splitting up certain pieces of information between the two scheduled meeting and hearing dates. Also,the Planning Department has asked for all comments from other agencies and internal staff on the entire application, and all comments that have been submitted to date are included as part of the Council meeting material. In order to give the City Council, and the applicant, a quick overview of the major Concept Plan issues associated with the concept plans that have been identified to date,please Issues: consider the following: • The Minnesota Department of Transportation has indicated that it will require certain improvements to Highway 5 if access is provided as shown on the concept plan. Specifically, a right turn lane and escape lane for eastbound traffic will be required at the new entrance road. • The City Engineer has recommended that the concept plan be revised to provide road connectivity to the east and north with the development proposal. • The water plan does not appear to meet fire flow requirements for the proposed improvements since the new eight-inch pipe as shown on the utility plan connects to an existing four-inch water pipe at the edges of the development. • The storm water management and drainage and erosion control plan will need to address the City's recently adopted storm water quantity and quality standards. • A small portion of the site is located..xrithin a shoreland district and will need to comply with any applicable shoreland ordinance requirements. • The City of Oakdale's Fire Chief has been asked to review the plans from a public safety perspective since the applicant is married to Lake Elmo's Fire Chief. • The proposed landscape plan does not accommodate the minimum number of trees required under the OP Ordinance. • The community septic system and a portion of the trail system are shown within and power line easement. The City should receive an acknowledgement and consent from the easement holder in order to permit these encroachments. • Staff would suggest a greater amount of spacing between the proposed tree preservation area and the buildings and roads on the site. The City should evaluate whether or not it is appropriate to use the required open space areas for storm water retention ponds. A more thorough review and analysis of the proposed concept plans will be forthcoming from Staff should the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments be approved by the City Council. Should approvals be granted, the City will need to discuss the review schedule with the applicant since no action may be finalized with regards to the Comprehensive Plan until the Met Council has completed its review. +_�67i l.weflc-�shle Plan A"I"'iir'i7[meni. S.C'm,01,Z.- 'I/ f1i7Gj rfir119 schoo.) "'ity Council lir.;7ori; 5/4/10 Stgff Based on the report and analysis provided above, Staff recommended that the Planning R[xtmynauk&v?. Commission recommend denial of the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the future land use designation of 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD to RAD2. Consistent with this recommendation, Staff further recommended that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the proposed text amendments to the OP Open Space Preservation Ordinance, Pending Council action on these items, a separate recommendation from Staff concerning the OP Development and PUD concept plans will presented at the next Planning Commission meeting. Additional Comments have been received for all four aspects of the applicant's request from In formation: MnDOT, Valley Branch Watershed District, the City of Oakdale Fire Department, and the City Engineer are attached for consideration by the City Council. In addition to the applicant's submission materials, staff has also attached an aerial image of the site and Future Land Use Map from the Comprehensive Plan identifying the applicant's site and the two areas currently guided as RAD2. Planning Coolmission Report Planning The planning Commission reviewed the request for a Comprehensive Plan Commission , Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment and conducted a public hearing on each of RQIJY UYA7 and Public ; these items at its April 26, 2010 meeting. At the meeting, the following feedback was .Hearing: provided to the Commission: • Tammy Malmquist explained her overall goals and objectives behind the proposed senior living and farm school project. She also introduced Jan Friedrich, who talked about her father's discussions with Mrs. Malmquist concerning the future of this property. • Tim Freeman with Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. suggested alternative findings in support of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. • Seven people spoke in favor of the amendments needed to support the project. • Councilmember Ann Smith addressed the Commission and reviewed some of the history behind the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan, and in particular, the creation of a separate RAD2 land use designation. • Eight letters of support were submitted and distributed at the meeting. These letters are included as part of the Council agenda packet. • One additional letter of support was submitted by a resident who also spoke during the public hearing. • Staff noted that Ed Nielsen, 9498 Stillwater Boulevard North, had contacted the City via telephone earlier in the week to express his support for the project. ,.;. l;rr!!?... ?:, hr,: �,.,.,,.,%c 7h7(::•• r. ...11iiii C.:..i i•,i�•+,f'!%1'77?,.,.::!iUl r;;,•':1.�Ci;rtJ1 ;.r., ?£.',�'-.l- ;j?sli,,);..uY,;;,•ij ai':�iiili!!1`:i i"�iii,•'i pir::i ` ! rrl ifrr' s �ftr Co ih(?77S7.1'€' r 1(U'I.'.'l:iC'fiffJit(�;'i1+': ('17 ill.)I- .,'iY7?Y ii:if, "fl]'!i s(fJUU: • The project consultant submitted a list of neighbors that had attended a March 31, 201.0 meeting conducted by the applicant to discuss the project (seven neighbors were in attendance of this meeting). The Commission reviewed the Staff recommendation and considered the comments submitted in writing and verbally at the meeting. The Planning Commission developed findings of fact to support the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and by a unanimous vote of 9-0, recommended that the City Council approve the request to change the future land use designation of the applicant's property from RAD to RAD2. The Planning Commission tabled taking any action regarding the proposed amendments to the OP Open Space Preservation Ordinance; however, and instead directed Staff to prepare an alternate to the applicant's request that would create a separate overlay district with the same standards. The overlay district to be considered by the Planning Commission would include the following as specific exceptions to the existing OP Ordinance: • Allowing a density of 2 units per acre. • Adding Multi-Family Senior Housing buildings and Farm Schools for preschool and school-aged children as allowable uses. • Reducing the minimum land area required from 40 to 20 acres. • Reducing the amount of contiguous land required in open areas from 10 to 5 acres. • Reducing the required buffer setback to 50 feet. • Adding standards for Senior Housing Buildings. In developing its findings of fact, the Planning Commission was concerned about setting precedent with the approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. The Commission's findings describe some aspects of this site that that the Commission has indicated set it apart from other properties that are guided for RAD development. A complete record of the Planning Commission's findings is listed as part of the formal recommendation below. Planning The Planning Commission Recommends that the City Council approve the Commission Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of the RecammitkAw.- parcel located at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD (Rural Agricultural Density—0.45 dwelling units per acre) to RAD2 (Rural Agricultural Density—2 dwelling units per acre). The Planning Commission further offers the following findings to support this recommendation: 1) The current use of this site as a working farm is unique compared to other properties designated for RAD development in the Comprehensive Plan. 2) The proposed request will help fulfill a need for senior housing within the community. .. .. 1; ":�t'i:i:. .. . .'-!'::1%:i[;r:1 iti;;i;'il ..1:7r,•il;ill.1'1 F.l)ili�> "onip— lr.':?.S!)'r%'i'i!!1:•lt;? t?tC'f?it':,.S'C'nior L.?1i7?`•;ell?al Fell nI Schoo i:''ii_i:'C.'ntr;?cif 1„-%Ivi't; ,`%•i/.l fl 3) Recent subdivisions in areas guided for RAD development have been approved at a density below the unit levels anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed density increase will.be offset by reductions that have previously been approved or acknowledged by the City. 4) The applicant's site is located in close proximity to public transportation along State Highway 5, and specifically, a bus route that could provide alternate transportation options for seniors. 5) The applicant's site is located immediately adjacent to existing R-1 Single Family Residential zoning districts along its southern, eastern,and western boundaries. Other areas guided for RAD development are primarily surrounded by rural residential, agricultural, or public open space uses. 6) There has been broad public support for the proposed project and no objections from neighboring property owners have been filed.with the City. cc: Tammy Malmquist, 8549 Ironwood Trail Fo1z, Freeman, Erickson, Inc.; 12445 55 b Street N ,...°!',':r,,;�i14'-•rFi:ir!r+r: irt7rt;r;1!,ii 'i:.::;;r!;.:`;c .:' :':'.)c;1;`r;?,,,....!':r,:;';,,;I:Si'l:r;•i1'r. p ir!r!•.`1%+ irr!:;;frri.ti;C'r)!iij; TI IF CITY OF LAKE EL.MO City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 13, 2014 Chairman Williams called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Williams, Lundgren, Dodson, Haggard, Dorschner, Kreimer and Larson; COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Yocum and Morreale; and STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Klatt and City Planner Johnson. Elections: M/S/P: Dodson/Lundgren: move to nominate Williams Chairperson, vote 7:0 M/S/P: Dorschner/Haggard: move to nominate Dodson as Vice Chairperson, vote: 7-0. M/S/P: Haggard/Dodson, move to nominate Dorschner as Secretary, vote 7-0. Approve Agenda: Agenda accepted as published. Approve Minutes: December 9, 2013 M/S/P: Dodson/Kreimer, move to accept the minutes as presented, vote: 7-0, with Haggard and Dorschner not voting. Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Amendment--9434 Stillwater Blvd. Klatt began his presentation by explaining important terminology in the Comprehensive Plan related to rural areas. More specifically, he explained the significance of Rural Area Development (RAD), Rural Area Development—Alternate Density (RAD-Alt), Open Space Preservation District (OP) and Open Space Preservation Overlay District (OP-2). RAD-Alt allows for open space project with an increased density than what is allowed in the rural areas under the standard OP Ordinance. Providing purpose of tonight's hearing, Klatt noted that the City Council has directed the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing to reconsider the appropriate future land Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-14 2 use designation for the property at 9434 Stillwater Blvd. (TH-5). He noted that the City Council asked the Planning Commission to consider the specific property at 9434 Stillwater Blvd. because the subject property was not included in the City's original comprehensive planning process. While other properties were designated with the RAD-Alt classification to meet the City's required growth forecasts, the subject property was changed from RAD to RAD-Alt through a separate comprehensive plan amendment related to a senior living/farm school development. To put it simply,the Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation to the City Council on what is the best future land use category for the subject property. Klatt moved on to explain further history about the site, including the various iterations of proposed development on the site. Currently, there is no active development application that is valid for the site. Klatt also provided a description of general site characteristics. The site is immediately north of TH-5. The site is bounded by active farms to the north, with Sunfish Lake Park to the northeast. To the west, the site is adjacent to multiple single family lots that are guided rural single family. In addition to showing an aerial map, Klatt presented the future land use map of the Comprehensive Plan, specifically zooming in on the area surrounding 9434 Stillwater Blvd. N. To aid the discussion, Klatt added that the Planning Commission has reviewed the rural development areas of the City at previous meetings. More specifically, the Planning Commission has discussed 1) a desire to look at development options for smaller rural parcels. 2)the growth forecast will likely be lowered and less growth is anticipated in these rural development areas. 3)the RAD alt category could be eliminated as it was initially created to accommodate the Cities 2030 forecast numbers. 4) part of the Planning Commission 2014 work plan is to look at rural development areas on a City wide basis. Klatt retraced the history of the original comprehensive plan amendment action. The staff recommended denial of the comp plan amendment and provided findings related to denial. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended the comp plan amendment for approval. The City Council affirmed the Planning Commission's recommendation with a 4-1 vote. Klatt highlighted the role of the planning commission in holding public hearing on land use items. In addition, Klatt provided a list of what is appropriate for the public hearing before the Planning Commission. For example, the action before the Planning Commission is focused on the appropriate land use category (RAD or RAD-Alt) for the subject property, and not focused on specific development proposals. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-14 3 Finally, Klatt presented two sets of draft findings for consideration by the Planning Commission. Klatt presented the draft findings from the original staff report that recommended denial. He also presented the draft findings that the City Council made when approving the comp plan amendment in 2010. He noted that staff is not making a specific recommendation at this time. He presented the Planning Commission with two options. 1) Amend the Comprehensive plan to change the subject property from RAD- alt to RAD 2) flake no change to the Comprehensive Plan and leave the subject property as RAD-alt. Dorschner asked if the site is planned for future sewer service. Klatt noted that the site is not currently guided for sewer per the comprehensive plan but there is City water. Haggard asked about the land uses that are allowed in RAD. Klatt noted that it is primarily single family homes, with a small allowance for townhomes. Williams invited the landowner to speak. Janice Green provided background regarding the history of the site. She noted that the original landowner was presented with the idea of making the original farm into a farm school. The idea of a farm was strongly supported by the land owners and their father. She wanted it on the record that the landowners are requesting the land use guidance remain RAD-Alt. Public Hearing opened at 7:47pm. Larry Weiss, 9302 Stillwater Blvd. N., stated that he moved to Lake Elmo to enjoy open space and rural lifestyle. He noted that he originally supported the farm school, but soon changed his mind when the density of the senior living component increased. He also noted that the original development proposal has fallen through. Due to this status, the land use guidance should be changed back to RAD. He stated that he is willing to work with the property owner on other development projects, but not higher density. He also highlighted some polls or surveys that indicated that the surrounding neighbors were strongly opposed to RAD-Alt and the senior living component. Ed Nielson, 9498 Stillwater Blvd. N., stated that he moved to a property adjacent to the Friedrich farm in 1997. Nielson provided background information of how the farm school and senior living proposal developed. He also presented a comparison chart of some analysis he completed of surrounding senior living developments. He commented that 98%of the surrounding neighbors are against the previous development proposal. Stewart Helgeson, 11150 121h Street N, stated he has lived in Lake Elmo for 15 years. He commented that it makes no sense to change the land use guidance back to RAD until a project is on the table. If a development proposal comes forward,then the camp plan would have to be amended once again. Procedurally, this does not make a lot of sense. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-14 4 Public hearing closed at 7:56pm. Haggard stated that it was previously explained that the RAD-Alt designation was necessary on this site due to the numbers for the Met Council. The projections have decreased so there is no need for the RAD-Aft designation on this property. Williams stated he supports the motion but would like to add the following findings of fact. 1) the 2010 Camp Plan amendment was in part based on a specific development that no longer exists 2)the action in 2010 is very similar to a spot zoning, 3) the RAD-Alt designation is no longer needed to meet the Met Council projections 4) the neighbors supported the change at the time based on a misunderstanding of the information and their support no longer exists 5) higher density development should be provided with public utilities. M/S/P: Haggard/Dorschner, move to recommend an amendment to the Comp Plan to change the land use designation from RAD-Alt to RAD at 9434 Stillwater Blvd. N. based on the findings in the Staff Report, Vote: 7-0, motion carries unanimously. Larson asked if farm school can be an allowed use in RAD, Klatt stated that there would have to be an amendment to the zoning code to specifically make it an allowed use. Haggard asked if the farm school could be done by CUP. Klatt stated that it would need to be specified as a conditionally allowed use. Lundgren asked if there was currently a farm school in Lake Elmo. Klatt stated that there is one in West Lakeland. M/S/P: Williams/Dorschner, move to amend the motion to include 5 additional findings of fact as provided by Chairman Williams to staff, Vote: 7-0, motion carries unanimously. Kreimer noted that he supports both motions, but wanted to add that the City still has to meet certain amount of development as guided by the MOU. Dodson stated that having a similar plan locate here does not make sense so it is important to change it back. Dorschner stated that without changing the zoning back, the City is basically saying that the higher density is appropriate here. Business Item: 2014 Planning Commission Work Plan Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-14 5 Klatt talked about the work plan and stated that they come up with an aggressive plan and then prioritize the items on the plan with the knowledge that not everything will probably get done. Business Item: 2013 and 2014 Work Plan Klatt presented the 2014 Work Plan and stated that there a number of large scale items. Those include general comprehensive Plan initiatives, reducing or eliminating the MOU, updating the Village AUAR which is due every 5 years, updating the airport zone, becoming more active with the Parks Commission and it will be a busy year for platting and development reviews. Haggard asked if the Planning Commission could be provided with the City Council Work Plan to better understand the big picture. He stated Larson noted that he is the liaison with the Parks Commission. He is available as a resource, and is willing to help with the communication between the Commissions. The Planning commission reviewed the Work Plan Williams asked that specific development ordinances and general performance standards should be a higher priority. Dorschner noted that outdoor wood burning furnaces can present a real problem if unaddressed by the City's ordinances. He suggested raising the priority. Dodson asked about the permit works planning software. He asked if there is a public component. Klatt noted that the City at this time is only using the Building Permit Module. However, there may be opportunities in the future to allow for more external user interaction with the website and software. Dodson asked what kind of impact the volume of development applications that are on the horizon can have on the staff. Klatt stated that it is hard to prioritize because there are time constraints on applications. The staff has put policies in place so the applications are processed more timely. Dodson asked about a market study for downtown. Klatt explained that the market study will be used to determine what types of uses and businesses we want to see in downtown. Dodson would like to see this sooner than later and would like the priority tobea2. Williams asked about the Lake Elmo Ave Village surface water study with Washington County. Johnson stated that this has started so should be listed as in process. The crux Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-14 6 of this is a drainage study and to plan for the reconstruction of the road from 30th to TH5 and includes some theming elements. Dodson asked about the newspaper article indicating that the trend is to move back to the City. Could some of that data help with getting rid of the MOU? Klatt stated that it could and that is probably why the forecast numbers went down. Williams wants to see the village parkway of the railroad crossing solved. Klatt has been working with the Engineers on this issue. The next step will be the application to create a new opening and have public meetings. Dodson would like to see the review of public community septic systems policy be a higher priority. He would suggest a 2 or 3. Klatt stated that this refers to the 201 systems which we haven't put good policies in place for. Dodson would like to add an item for private community septic systems to the list. Klatt stated that part of the oversight has turned the compliance of these systems over to the County. Dodson asked about the disaster plan. Johnson stated that it is something the Planning Staff is working on in conjunction with the Building Official. Business Item:Zoning District Cleanup Amendment _Johnson talked about the cleanup to remove all outdated and unnecessary zoning districts. This cleanup will improve the organization of the document. The cleanup will remove 26 zoning districts, 19 of which are holding districts. Johnson went through which ones are being removed and which ones are being kept and why. Updates and Concerns Council Updates 1. The City Council confirmed the findings for the District 916 CUP at the December 17, 2013 meeting. 2. The City Council adopted the Village Land Use Plan at the December 17, 2013 meeting. 3. The City Council approved the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan at the December 17, 2013 meeting. Staff Updates 1. Planning Commissioner Terms 2. Planning Commissioner Journal Articles 3. Upcoming Meetings Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-14 7 a. January 27, 2014-2 public hearings and one sketch plan b. February 10, 2014 c. February 24, 2014 Commission Concerns- None Meeting adjourned at 9:40 pm Respectfully submitted, Nick Johnson City Planner Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 1-13-14• THE CITY OF I A LMO L11KE E A/2 Y13F [L ---------- DATE: January 21, 2014 REGULAR ITEM# 14 AGENDA ITEM: Community Development Department 2014 Work Plan SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator REN71EWED BY: Plaiming Commission Nick Johnson, City Planner SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item.....................................Community Development Director Report/Presentation...............................Community Development Director Questions from Council to Staff.............................................Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ..............................................................Mayor&City Council Discussion.......................................................................Mayor&City Council Action on Motion.................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECCOMENDER: Staff and Planning Commission FISCAL IMPACT: Not yet specified. Certain items on the work plan may require outside assistance. Staff will seek Council direction as appropriate prior to utilizing such assistance. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to review and accept the Community Development Department's annual work plan for 2014 that has been prepared with input from the Planning Commission. Tb-e Council is asked to review the plan and comment on it so that the Planning Commission and Council are communicating about priorities at the start of the year. The primary intent of the work plan is to help prioritize the projects the Planning Commission will be reviewing over the course of 2014, and to also help keep the Commission informed about the internal planning related activities and projects that will be undertaken by the Staff over the coming year. This is a working document that provides guidance to the Commission and Council yet has the flexibility to respond to priorities as they emerge. It will also help the Commission gauge its progress at achieving some of its goals for the year. --page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 141 January 21,2014 } r. I The plan has been drafted in a format similar to the one used for previous years,using the format g and codes that were include in last year's work plan. Please note that this document is intended to augment the City-wide work plan recently adopted by the Council, and all land use items on i the Council's work plan have been assigned a high-priority designation in the attached document. a a r' The recommended motion to act on this is as follows: # ti "Move to accept the 2014 Community Development Department fi'or°k Plan" F G LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: The work plan as recommended b the Planning Commission was prepared using the previous ear's plan as a 1 Y g P P g p Y template and tracking any changes (deletions and additions) that were used to create the new document. The version that is attached for consideration by the Council has had all revisions z made in order to present a final, clean document for review. The Planning Commission reviewed the work plan at its January 13, 2014 meeting and 1 recommended approval with a minor modifications that have since been made to tine document. BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT): Adoption of a work plan helps provide for an increased level of accountability within the department and also helps to ensure that the Planning Commission and City Council are in agreement concerning the overall priorities for the 1 Community Development Department for the year. The one drawback to the plan that has been recommended is that it is fairly extensive, and not all items are likely to be completed by the end of the year. hi addition, there is potential for the Planning Commission to receive a much higher t number of land use applications this year than has been submitted in previous years, which would make achieving some of the broader goals somewhat difficult. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information, Staff report, and a Planning Commission recommendation,it is recommended that the City Council. accept the 2014 1 Community Development Department Work Plan by undertaking the following action - k ".Move to accept the 2014.Planning Commission Work Plan" f a Alternatively, the City Council may make modifications to the Plan as it deems necessary and adopt the work plan with modifications. r Y 4[4 t' ATTACHMENTS: �. 1. 2014 Community Development Department Work Plan l F S - _ y --page 2 -- 2014 Community Development Work Plan T] i,w (11T), ()[-- Prepared by the Lake Elmo Planning Commission: 1/13/14 LAKE L MO Accepted by the City Council: 1121/14 Key: Status: C — Complete IP — In Progress Date: A — 0 to 3 months (Completion B — 3 to 6 months Goal) C — 6 to 9 months D — 9 to 12 months Admin: Staff Pro'ects/Initiatives PL: Priority Level 1-5 with 1 being the highest priority Project and Description Date PL Status (Months) ZONING INITIATIVES Zoning Map Updates ® Adopt map changes necessary to implement Comprehensive A 1 IP Plan amendments for Village ® General map updates and corrections C 3 ® Implement zoning map changes for specific developments in B 2 the Village and 1-94 Corridor. Zoning Permit Tracking ® Develop system for tracking of planning and zoning permits, D 3 including Conditional Use Permits, Interim Use Permits, Variances, Planned Developments, and other applications Zoning Text Amendments (Zoning Code Update) ® Accessory buildings A 1 IP ® Exterior storage B 2 General performance standards C 1 Specific development standards C 1 ® Open Space Ordinance update (OP and OP-2) D 3 Public Facilities ordinance amendments D 4 Zoning Text Amendments (General) ® Outdoor Lighting Ordinance Revisions A 1 w Animal ordinance A 1 IP ® Outdoor Wood Burning Furnaces D 5 1 Form-based Code ® Prepare a scope of work to be accomplished including the A 1 need for outside assistance ® Draft a form-based code to supplement the Village Mixed-Use C 2 zoning district based on the scope of work ® Incorporate design standards from the Design Standards C 2 Manual as part of a form-based code Airport Zoning ® Resolve zoning conflicts with the Metropolitan Airports D 1 Commission, Met Council, MnDOT, and Washington County • Implement City airport zoning regulations for the airport safety D 2 zones within the Village Planning Area Permit Software Implementation ® Complete PermitWorks database for City parcels B 4 ® Add Planning Module from PermitWorks to track planning and B 1 zoning applications Sign Code Update ® Review sign code for consistency with new zoning districts D 3 and economic development goals and objectives Subdivision Ordinance ® Review ordinance for consistency with ongoing zoning B 2 amendments Development Reviews ® Savona Final Plat and Developer's Agreement A 2 IP ® Boulder Ponds Preliminary and Final Development plans B 2 IP • Landucci Goetschel Property development B 2 IP ® Ryland/Pratt Homes Landucci Property development B 2 IP ® Hammes Property development C 2 ® Chase Easton Village (Village) sketch plan review C 2 IP ® Engstrom Village development C 2 ® Gonyea Homes Village development C 2 ® 1-94 Commercial development C 2 PLANNING INITIATIVES Village Area Planning • Prepare Village Area AUAR five-year update A 1 ® Participate in Lake Elmo Avenue/Village Storm Water study C 2 IP with Washington County 2 ® Conduct Village Area market area study through U of MN B 2 Extension Service ® Submit application for new Village Parkway railroad crossing D 1 IP ® Develop street design and cross section for Village Parkway A 1 IP I-94/10th Street Corridor Planning Develop street design and cross section for 5t" Street minor A 1 IP collector road General Comprehensive Planning ® Reduce the population expectations to 18,000 by 2040 A 1 IP ® Eliminate the Memorandum of Understanding with the Met B 1 IP Council ® Review Comp Plan for consistency with 1-94 Corridor and D 4 Village land use plan amendments ® Prepare rural development area study to consider future C 2 development options for rural areas ® Review Waste Water chapter of Comprehensive Plan in D 3 conjunction with rural areas review • Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment for "Friedrich A 1 IP Property" on Stillwater Boulevard • Consider Comprehensive Plan amendments to eliminate C 2 remaining RAD-ALT land use parcels ® Review individual projects for compliance with the C 3 Comprehensive Plan Park Planning ® Create a master plan for selected City parks, provide D 3 assistance to Parks Commission as needed ® Review park plans for individual developments with the Park D 2 IP Commission ® Conduct comprehensive mapping of existing private and D 4 public trail systems (using GPS where appropriate) ® Work with the Trail Sub-Committee to identify alignments and C 2 IP funding for future priority trail segments, including the Lake Elmo Regional Trail ® Update Park Plan in City's Comprehensive Plan D 2 ® Update Trail Plan in City's Comprehensive Plan D 2 Capital Improvement Plan Planning Commission review of 2014-2018 Capital D 2 Improvement Plan for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan 3 General Planning Studies ® Conduct review of 201 (community) septic system policies D 3 IP and management practices. Develop system for proper oversight, billing, and maintenance of community systems- * Develop list of contacts and resources for private community D 3 septic systems Economic Development Support ® Provide support and assistance to City Administrator and D 3 Economic Development Authority (EDA) as needed for economic development activities • Maintain list of business in Lake Elmo on City web site D 5 A DMINIS TRA T1 VE INITIATIVES Developer's Agreements and Escrows ® Fully implement developer's agreement and escrow process A 1 IP Building Division ® Monitor status of staffing within building inspection C 3 department; consider staffing needs in 2014 and beyond ® Develop disaster preparedness manual for Lake Elmo D 3 Gateway Corridor Commission ® Act as City representative for Technical Advisory Commission A 3 ® Provide support for environmental study and alternatives analysis review for Lake Elmo/Woodbury alignment Permit Tracking Software ® Complete move of planning file system to PermitWorks A 3 software Code Enforcement ® Follow updated code enforcement program with the Building B 3 Inspector as the City's code enforcement officer File Archiving and Management ® Scan Planning and Building Department files into the City D 3 laserfische system Engineering Projects Provide planning assistance as needed for regional trunk A 2 IP sewer project 4 Policy and Procedures Review Streamline and improve policies and procedures for the C 1 IP handling of routine matters (variances, site plan review, setbacks, etc...) TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROJECTS ® Participate in lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) study with C 2 IP Washington County. ® Participate in Manning Avenue (CSAH 15) study with B 2 IP Washington County. ® Study Village/TH-5 pedestrian facilities and connections, C 3 including potential Stillwater High School trail 5