HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Packet 12-02-14 pt 4 TI LE CITY OF
LAKE ELMO MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: December 2, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 14
AGENDA ITEM: 2835 Legion Avenue—Request to Connect to Legion Avenue 201 Wastewater
System (Old Village Remote A)
SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Stempski,Assistant City 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:
- Introduction of Item..................................................................................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 Facilitates
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering/Public Works
FISCAL IMPACT: None
The property owner at 2835 Legion Avenue will be required to pay an up-front system buy-in cost of
$7,520; will need to obtain a sewer connection permit and pay the permit fee; and will be required to
extend and connect to the City 201 Wastewater System at their own cost. Upon connection, the property
owner will be billed the applicable wastewater system user charges.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider a request from Scott and Cindy Baerman at 2835
Legion Avenue to connect to the City's 201 Wastewater System located along Legion Avenue. The
recommended motion for the action is as follows:
--page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 14]
December 2,2014
"Move to approve an Assessment Agreement for 2835 Legion Avenue to Connect to the 201
Wastewater System (Old Village Remote A)."
LEGISLATIVE HISTORYBACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The City was recently contacted by Scott Baerman, property owner at 2835 Legion Avenue, regarding
ongoing performance issues with his septic system. The property owner referenced a non-compliant
Septic System Compliance Report by Inspect Minnesota&Midwest Soil Testing dated May 6,2009.This
report identified issues with bottomless tanks, a lack of three foot separation between the bottom of the
seepage bed and seasonally saturated soils. The system is referenced as an imminent threat to public
health and safety because of the unsafe manhole covers.
The property owner was given the following three options by Washington County:
1. Replace the system in its entirety.
2. Abandon the current system and install holding tanks. The holding tanks will be a temporary
measure until City sewer becomes available in the future.
3. Hook up to the City 201 Wastewater System.
An Assessment Agreement to connect the City 201 Wastewater System was drafted and provided to the
property owner. The system buy-in cost was determined by staff by using the assessment costs charge to
current system users at the time the system was constructed and indexing those costs to today's dollar
amounts. Upon review of this agreement, the property owner has formally requested permission to
connect to this system pursuant the terms of the Assessment Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending the City Council approve an Assessment Agreement for 2835 Legion Avenue to
connect to the City 201 Wastewater System.The recommended motion for the action is as follows:
"Move to approve an Assessment Agreement for 2835 Legion Avenue to Connect to the 201
Wastewater System(Old Village Remote A)."
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Legion Avenue 201 Wastewater System (Old Village Remote A)Record Drawing.
2. Assessment Agreement
3. Septic System Compliance Report by Inspect Minnesota & Midwest Soil Testing, dated May 6,
2009.
--page 2--
v
u�
I� 00
LU
—___ _ -•` .�{ _�....., � i ��� Utf•LLigN-DN NOMJ3l I �(rnn
VLL
S
I"
O
f
- I I cc
w
• i I -- - £ rl d c=n
L_-
.. few [yQ j I 2 0U a s
f A s w�c
a
lit
i
Z— fit
2 •!YE Ea M -g6y+ -, yat8 R4� E�
8$8d Ar E?y s ': t3r to
co L
I
-a� «Y - _
O eqG eYs
'Y$
#alp
�'= s•: $-'�'• She„ I�-3i- �
15o
z per.
` m
�s 30 TH Si NORTH a!,
� 44--
i
_._T__—T
I 1 _
Return To:
David K.Snyder,Esq.
JOHNSON/TURNER ATTORNEYS AT LAW
56 East Broadway Avenue,Suite 206
Forest Lake,MN 55025
DRAFT-NO VEMBER 143, 2014
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY,MINNESOTA
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 2014, by and
between the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota municipality organized under the laws of the State of
Minnesota(hereinafter referred to as "City"); and Scott and Cindy Baerman, owners of the property
located at 2832 Legion Avenue N.,Lake Elmo MN, 55042(hereinafter referred to as "Applicant").
WITNESS:
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City has,by council action taken on
approved a request by Applicant to connect to the City's 201 Wastewater Treatment System,
Remote A located on Legion Avenue North due to a noncompliant system located on their property;
and,
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City to enter into development contracts as contemplated
in Minnesota Statutes §462.358, Subd. 2(a); and,
WHEREAS,the parties hereto desire to set forth their respective rights and obligations.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual promises and
conditions contained herein, it is agreed by the parties hereto as follows:
1. The Council has approved the Applicant's request to connect to the Remote A 201
wastewater treatment system for a treatment system buy-in cost of$7,520 to be paid before the
connection is made.
2. The applicant is responsible for performing the work and incurring all costs for
constructing their sanitary sewer service line and connecting to the City's 2.5-inch low pressure
forcemain located within the right of way of Legion Avenue North.
3. The applicant must retain a licensed contractor and obtain a sewer connection permit
before commencing the work. The sewer connection permit must include a scaled drawing showing
the work to be performed in accordance with the state building code requirements, including curb
stop and valve locations,to be reviewed and approved by the City Building Official.
4. At the time that the City notifies the Applicant that the public sanitary sewer is or
was made available, then the Applicant shall, within six (6) months, connect to public sanitary
sewer. Applicant agrees that in connection with any assessment proceeding, the value conferred on
the Applicant's property by the availability of public sewer shall be determined based upon the fact
that no permanent septic system serves the property and that the 201 wastewater treatment system
connection is temporary and would no longer be useable once sanitary sewer is furnished to the
property.
5. Warranty of Title. Applicant warrants and represents to the City that it is the fee
owner(s) of the Subject Parcel described herein and that it has authority to execute this Assessment
Agreement and agree to the conditions hereof.
6. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be deemed to be a restrictive covenant and the
terms and conditions hereof shall run with the lands described herein. and be binding on and inure
to the benefit of the heirs, representatives and assigns of the parties hereto, and shall be binding
upon all future owners of all or any part of the subject property, and shall be deemed covenants
running with the land. Reference herein to the Applicant, if there be more than one, shall mean each
and all of them.
This Agreement shall be placed of record so as to give notice hereof to subsequent
purchasers, the cost of said recording shall be borne by the Applicant and charged against the
escrow account.
7. Notices. Any notice or other communication that either party wishes or must give to
the other shall be deemed duly given: (i) on the date of personal delivery or (ii) two (2) days
following mailing by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the following
addresses of the parties or to such other address as either party shall designate to the other:
City of Lake Elmo:
Adam Bell, City Clerk
City of Lake Elmo
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo,MN 55042
Applicant:
Scott and Cindy Baerman
2832 Legion Avenue North
Lake Elmo,MN 55042
8. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with and be
governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota.
9. Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth the entire agreement of the parties
hereto and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings between the parties with respect to
the matters contained herein.
10. Amendment, Modification or Waiver. No amendment, modification or waiver of
any condition,provision or term herein shall be valid or of any effect unless made in writing, signed
by the party or parties to be bound or by a duly authorized representative thereof and specifying
with particularity the extent and nature of such amendment,modification and waiver.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Applicant have caused this Agreement to be duly
executed on the day and year first above written.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE(S)]
APPLICANT
Scott Baerman
Cindy Baerman
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON )
On this day of ,2014,before me,a Notary Public,within and for said County
and State, personally appeared Scott Baerman and Cindy Baerman,husband and wife,who signed
the foregoing instrument and acknowledged said instrument to be their free act and deed.
Notary Public
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
By: By:
Mike Pearson Adam Bell
Its: Mayor Its: Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day
of , 2014, by Mike Pearson, the Mayor of the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota
municipal corporation,on behalf of said City with full authority so to do.
OFFICIAL SEAL OFNOTARYPUBLIC SIGNATURE OF NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day
of , 2014, by Adam Bell, the Clerk of the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota
municipal corporation, on behalf of said City with full authority so to do.
OFFICIAL SEAL OFNOTARYPUBLIC SIGNATURE OI.,NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
David K.Snyder,Esq.
JOIiNsoN/TURNER ATTORNEys AT LAW
56 East Broadway Avenue,Suite 206
Forest Lake,MN 55025
(65I)464-7292
Inspect Minnesota & Midwest Soil Testing
Brian Humpal - President - MPCA Licensed Designer,Inspector,Installer,and Pumper
May 7, 2009
Mr. Brad Hetlund
Keller Williams Realty
659 Bielenberg Drive Suite 100
Woodbury,MN 55125
Subject: Septic System at 2832 Legion Ave, Lake Elmo, MN
Dear Brad:
Please find attached septic system report for subject property.
I am sending a copy of the enclosed septic report to your client who has paid for our services at
the time of the inspection.
Thank you very much for allowing me to do this work. Please contact me should you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
X"'X
Brian Humpal
Copies: Mr. Scott Baerman -Buyer
Mr. Karl Horning- City of Lake Elmo
P.O. Box 383 - Hugo, MN 55038 -Phone (651)493-2682-Fax (651)493-2683
Inspect Minnesota & Midwest Soil Testing
P.O. Box 383 Hugo,MN 55038 Brian Humpal
651-493-2682 MPCA Licensed Designer&Inspector
SEPTIC SYSTEM COMPLIANCE REPORT
Date: May 6, 2009 Time: 10:00 AM Owner: Elizabeth &Theodore Olson
Inspection Address: 2832 Legion Ave, Lake Elmo, MN 55042
REPORT SUMMARY
I have performed an "MPCA Compliance Inspection" on this septic system, have
reviewed the sellers "private sewer system disclosure" statement, and have reviewed the limited
design/permit records on file at the City of Lake Elmo. This system consists of a bottomless
septic tank, a bottomless lift tank, and a gravity seepage bed (bottomless septic tanks are
considered to be cesspools by the MPCA). The septic tanks were most likely installed in 1970
when the house was built and the seepage bed was installed in 1981, with an addition to the bed
in 1996.
My inspection indicates that this system is presently "non-compliant" in accordance with
MPCA rules 7080.1500 Subp.4(B)(D) because of the bottomless tanks (cesspools) and also the
lack of the required three foot separation between the bottom of the seepage bed and seasonally
saturated soils. This system is also an imminent threat to public health and safety per MPCA
rule 7080.1500 Subp.4(A)because of the unsafe manhole covers.
In accordance with MPCA rules, I am sending a copy of this complete report to the City
of Lake Elmo. I am not sure of the City's requirements on the upgrading of these non-compliant
systems and cannot officially speak on behalf of the City. Please contact City of Lake Elmo
Building Inspector,Mr.Karl Horning,(651-777-5510)to verify the City's position.
Please advise buyer, agents, lender, etc. to contact me at any time should they have any
questions regarding this system.
Brian Humpal
NOTE. "this report is not complete without the inclusion/attachment of the additional pages which consist of up to five(5)MPCA drafted
Compliance Inspection Documents,one(1)HomeownedUccupant Information Sheet(when obtainable),one(1)site diagram,one(1)log of soil
horing(s).one(I)Arian L Iiumpal,Inc.Disclaimer Sheet,and one(1)MPCA License.
Page 1 of 10
Minnesota Pollution Compliance Inspection Form
Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road North Existing Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS)
St.Paul,MN 55155-4194 Instructions on page 7
Parcel number: For Local Tracking Purposes:
System status: ❑Compliant ®Noncompliant
(based on all compliance requirements)
Summary Form
Property Information
Property owner name(s): Elizabeth&Theodore Olson
Property address: 2832 Legion Ave,Lake Elmo,MN 55042
Property owner's address(if different): Unknown
County: Washington Property owner phone: Unknown Permitting authority: Lake Elmo —
Date system constructed: 70,81.96 Reason for inspection: Property Sale
System Description
Brief system description: Bottomless septic&lift tank,gravity seepage bed(bottomless tanks are considered cesspools by the MPCA)
Local permit number: 96-165 Number of bedrooms: 3 Design Flow rate: Unknown
Is the system:
In Shoreland area? ❑ Yes ® No In Wellhead Protection Area? ❑Yes ® No
An U.S. Environmental Protection System serving a Minnesota Department
Agency(EPA)Class V Injection Well?❑ Yes ® No of Heath(MDH)licensed facility? ❑Yes ® No
Compliance Status(Based on state requirements—additional local requirements may also apply.)
Based on the information gathered and reported on attached forms, the compliance status of this system is(check one):
❑Certificate of Compliance—valid until(3 years from date of report):
® Notice of Noncompliance-For Noncompliant systems:
Bottomless septic tank,bottomless lift tank,lack of the required three foot separation between
The reason for noncompliance is: the bottom of the seepage bed and seasonally saturated soils,unsafe manhole covers
This noncompliant system is classified as(check one below):
® Imminent threat to public health&safety ®Failing to protect ground water ❑ Not in compliance with operating permit
Certification (Completed form must be submitted to the local unit of government within 15 days.)
I hereby certify that all the necessary information has been gathered to determine the compliance status of this system. No
determination of future system performance has been nor can be made due to unknown conditions during system construction,
possible abuse of the system,inadequate maintenance, or future water usage.
Name: Brian Humpal Certification number: C5342
Business license name and number: Inspect Minnesota,Midwest Soil Testing_L2896 _ or
Name of local unit of government:Signature: X"' p_p Date: 5/7/09
Required Attachments Inspector Complete: This Inspection Report is 10 pages long.
Check compliance forms attached: ®Hydraulic Performance ®Tank Integrity ®Soil Separation ❑Operating Permit Form(if
applicable) ®System drawing/As-built drawing ❑An assessment of any local requirements that are different from what is required on this
form ®Soil Boring Logs ❑Abandonment form(if appropriate) ®Other information(list):
Report Summary Property Information,Disclaimer,License
Upgrade Requirements (derived from Minn.Stat.§115.55)An imminent threat to public health and safety(ITPHS)must be upgraded,replaced,or
its use discontinued within ten months of receipt of this notice or within a shorter period if required by local ordinance.If the system is failing to protect ground
water,the system must be upgraded,replaced,or its use discontinued within the time required by local ordinance.If an existing system is not failing as defined in
law,and has at least two feet of design soil separation,then the system need not be upgraded,repaired,replaced,or its use discontinued,notwithstanding any
local ordinance that is more strict.This provision does not apply to systems in shoreland areas,Wellhead Protection Areas,or those used in connection with food,
beverage.and lodging establishments as defined in law.
wq-wwists4-31 Page 2 of i0 Compliance Inspection Form for Existing SSTS
414108
Parcel number: System status: ❑ Compliant ® Noncompliant
(as determined by this form)
Hydraulic Performance and Other Compliance
Compliance Issue #1 of 4
Date of observation: 5/6/09 Reason for observation: Property Sale
This form expires upon next inspection or in three years,whichever occurs first: 5/6/2012
Compliance questionsicriteria: (Required) Verification Method*: (Optional)
(Check the appropriate box) (Check the appropriate box)
Does the system discharge sewage to the ❑Yes ® No ® Searched for surface outlet
round surface?
❑ Performed hydraulic test
Does the system discharge sewage to drain ❑Yes ® No
tile or surface waters? ® Searched for seeping in yard
Does the system cause sewage backup ❑Yes ® No ® Checked for backup in home
into dwelling or establishment?
❑ Excessive ponding in soil system/D-boxes
Do other situations exist that have the ❑Yes ® No ® Homeowner testimony
potential to immediately and adversely
impact or threaten public health or safety ® Examined for surging in tank
electrical,unsafe covers,etc.)?
❑ "Black soil"above soil dispersal system
Any"yes"answer indicates that the system is an imminent
threat to public health and safety. ❑ System requires"emergency"pumping
❑ Performed dye test
Does the system pose a threat to ground ®Yes ❑ No
water for any conditions deemed non-
protective as determined by the inspector?
"Yes"indicates that the system is failing to protect
ground water.if`yes", describe the condition noted:
*No standard protocol exists. This list is not exhaustive,
Bottomless tanks(cesspools) in sequential order,nor does it indicate which
Lack of the required three foot separation between the bottom of the combinations are necessary to make this determination.
drainfield and seasonally saturated soils
Certification
This form is to be completed and attached to the Summary Form of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's(MPCA)Compliance
Inspection Form for Existing Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems.Observations, interpretations,and conclusions must be
completed by an inspector. Completed form must be submitted to the local unit of government within 15 days.
Property owner name(s): Elizabeth&Theodore Olson
Property address: 2832 Legion Ave,Lake Elmo,MN 55042
Property owner's address(if different): Unknown
County: Washington Phone: Unknown
l hereby certify that 1 personally made the observations, interpretations, and conclusions reported on this form and that they are
correct.
Name: Brian Humpal Certification number: C5342
Business license name and number: Inspect Minnesota, Midwest Soil Testing-L2896 or
Name of local unit of government: -p
Signature: �` `"'Y'� Date: 5/7/09
wq-wwists4-3i Page 3 of 10 Compliance Inspection Form for Existing SSTS
414108
Parcel number: System status: ❑Compliant ® Noncompliant
(as determined by this form)
Tank Integrity and Safety Compliance
Compliance Issue #2 of 4
Date of observation: 5/6/09 Reason for observation: Property Sale
This form expires on(three years): 5/6/2012
Compliance questions/criteria: (Required) Verification Method'": (Optional)
Check the appropriate box (Check the appropriate box)
Does the system consist of a seepage pit*, ®Yes ❑ No ® Probed tank bottom
cesspool,drywell,or leaching it?
® Observed low liquid level
Do any sewage tank(s)leak below their ® Yes ❑ No
designed operating depth? ❑ Examined construction records
If yes, identify which sewage All Tanks ❑ Examined empty(pumped)tank
tank leaks.
❑ Probed outside tank for"black soil"
Any"yes"answer indicates that the system is failing to protect
ground water. ❑ Pressure/vacuum check
❑ Other:
* Seepage pits meeting 7080.2550 may be compliant if allowed
in ordinance by local permitting authority.
**No standard protocol exists. This list is not exhaustive,in
sequential order,nor does it indicate which combinations
are necessary to make this determination.
Safety Check
1. Are any maintenance hole covers damaged, cracked,or appeared to be structurally unsound? ® Yes* ❑ No
2. Were all maintenance hole covers replaced in a secured manner(e.g.,all screws replaced)? ❑Yes ® No*
3. Was secondary access restraint present(safety pan,second cover,or safety netting)—highly recommended. ❑ Yes ® No
4. Was any other safety/health issue present? ®Yes* ❑ No
Explain: Manhole covers are unsafe and can easily be removed
"System is an imminent threat to public health and safety.
Certification
This form is to be completed and attached to the Summary Form of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's(MPCA)Compliance
Inspection Form for Existing Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems.Observations, interpretations, and conclusions must be
completed by an inspector, maintainer,or service provider. Completed form must be submitted to the local unit of government within
15 days.
Property owner name(s): Elizabeth&Theodore Olson
Property address: 2832 Legion Ave,Lake Elmo,MN 55042
Property owner's address(if different): Unknown
County: _Washington Phone: Unknown
1 hereby certify that i personally made the observations, interpretations, and conclusions reported on this form and that they are
correct.
Name: Brian Humpal Certification number: C5342
Business license name and number: Inspect Minnesota, Midwest Soil Testing-L2896 or
Name of localunit of-g_overnment,:: -o
Signature: Date:Dale: 5/7/09
wq-wwists4-31 Page 4 of 10 Compliance inspection Form for Existing SSTS
414108
Parcel number: System status: ❑ Compliant ® Noncompliant
(as determined by this form)
Soil Separation Compliance and Other Compliance
Compliance Issue #3 of 4
Date of observation: 5/6/09 Reason for observation: Property Sale
This information on this form does not expire.
Compliance questions/criteria: (Required) Verification Method**: (Optional)
Check the appropriate box (Check the appropriate box)
For systems built prior to April 1, 1996,and not ❑ Conducted soil observation(s)(attach boring logs)
located in Shoreland or Wellhead Protection
Area or not serving a food,beverage or ❑ Two previous verifications(attach boring logs)
lodging establishment: ❑ Other:
Does the system have at least a two-foot
vertical separation distance from periodically
saturated soil or bedrock? ❑Yes ❑ No
For non-performance systems built April 1,
1996, or later or for non-performance systems
located in Shoreland or Wellhead Protection Soil observation does not expire. Previous observations
Areas or serving a food, beverage or lodging by two independent parties are sufficient, unless site
establishment: conditions have been altered.
Does the system have a three-foot vertical
separation distance from periodically saturated
soil or bedrock?* ❑Yes ® No
For reduced separation distance systems(i.e.,
"performance"systems under old 7080.0179 or " May be reduced by up to 15 percent if allowed in local
Type IV or V system under new 7080.2350 or ordinance.
7080.2400): **No standard protocol exists. This list is not exhaustive,
Does the system meet the designed vertical in sequential order, nor does it indicate which
separation distance from periodically saturated combinations are necessary to make this
soil or bedrock?* ❑Yes ❑ No determination.
Any"no"answer indicates that the system is failing to protect
ground water.
Certification
This form is to be completed and attached to the Summary Form of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's(MPCA)Compliance
Inspection Form for Existing Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems.Observations,interpretations,and conclusions must be
completed by an inspector or designer. Completed form must be submitted to the local unit of government within 15 days.
Property owner name(s): Elizabeth&Theodore Olson
Property address: 2832 Legion Ave,Lake Elmo,NIN 55042
Property owner's address(i(different): Unknown
County: Washington Phone: Unknown
1 hereby certify that I personally made the observations, interpretations, and conclusions reported on this form and that they are
correct.
Name: Brian Humpal Certification number: C5342
Business license name and number: Inspect Minnesota, Midwest Soil Testing-L2896 or
Name of local unit of government: p
Signature: `""N""' Date: 5/7/09
wq-wwists4-31 Page 5 of 10 Compliance Inspection Form for Existing SSTS
414108
Inspect Minnesota & Midwest Soil Testine
Septic System Owner/Occupant Information
The following information must be provided by the legal Owner or authorized representative.
The information will be used for the purpose of conducting an MPCA Compliance Inspection.
Date of
Inspection S-t; -05 Time 1 Q, b n AA,1
Property
Address 2g32 Ltg atn At- -
L.c4k.c_ Elw,.o_ AAA zip S!TO42
Property
Owner Ekt'Lo.6,e—* . Otso--� Phone
(Check appropriate sewer system component and indicate on site sketch on back of form).
T s Tank(s)Material Soil Treatment System Other
XSeptic fiberglass _rock trench _alternative system
_Aerobic —plastic _gravelless trench experimental system
)CPump _metal _chamber trench _drywell system
_Holding concrete kseepage bed G" other system
Wbtock —mound
2(otherbQAoµW,y. __.at-grade
Have any other compliance inspections been done on this system?. When/why/who?
Year house built la'i o Year septic installed 10.$1,9 to Tank size_qpo e5,4 gals.
How long has seller lived in home? Number of residents in home?
More than one system (laundry, etc.)? Aj Number of bedrooms?
Garbage disposal?A/ Whirlpool bath? Are all floors drained by gravity?
Does this property have any footing drain tiles connected to the septic system?_ A/
Do any buildings on this property such as garages,workshops, etc. have floor drains connected
to the septic system? A)
Location of septic system on lot? Te» %, C
Location of water well on lot? C nt t„!a k-rr Is the well a deep well?,6L�A
Have you ever experienced any problems with the system such as tree roots, sewage back-ups in
floor drains, sinks, toilets, etc.; sewage odors inside/outside of property, surfacing of sewage onto
the ground, septic tank overflowing,etc., or have any repairs been made to the system?
If yes, explain
When was the system last pumped? 2oa-1 Name of pumper
How often pumped in previous years?c .3,' Is system on a monitoring plan?
Have you received notices from any government agency concerning this system?
Is your property located in a shoreland management area? A/
Do you have any additional information that should be given to the new owner?
1 hereby certify that the above information is correct to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that if the
system is considered"failing"per MPCA rules,that the inspector must by law submit a copy of this report to the
local unit of government within 30 days of the date of inspection completion. I also agree that unless otherwise
noted in this report,that Uwe are ultimately responsible for payment of all fees for all work performed relative to
this inspection by Inspect Minnesota and Midwest Soil Testing,
Owner/Occupant Vti C f�n�` Date
Page 6 of 10
- '
Page/m1n
Log Of Soil Borings
Location of Project: 2832 Legion Ave Lake Elmo MN 55042
Borings Made By: Inspect Minnesota I Date: 5/6/09
Auger Used: Hand/Bucket Classification System: USDA
Boring Number: 1 Boring Number:
Surface Same as ground surface at Surface
Elevation of seepage bed Elevation of
Boring Boring
Depth In Soils Encountered Depth In Soils Encountered
Inches Inches
0-6 7.5YR 2.5/2 Silt Loam (Fill)
6-20 7.5YR 3/4 Loamy Sand (Fill)
20-33 7.5YR 3/4 Loamy Sand W/Silt Loam Layers
And 5YR 5/8 & 7.5YR 5/2 Fill Mottles
33-46 7.5YR 4/4 Loamy Sand (Fill) With
7.5YR 5/8 & 7.5YR 5/3 Mottles/Redox
46-54 10YR 3/2 Sandy Loam Native Soil
With 5YR 4/6 & 7.5YR 4/1 Mottles/Redox
54-66 10YR 3/2 Loam Sand Saturated
66-72 10YR 3/1 Sandy Loam Saturated
20" Depth To End Of Boring Or Mottled Soils Depth To End Of Boring Or Mottled Soils
Same Elevation Of Boring Relative To System Elevation Of Boring Relative To System
-33" Depth To Bottom Of System Depth To Bottom Of System
=0" Of Separation Of Separation
End Of Boring At: 72" End Of Boring At:
Mottled Soil Present At: 20" Mottled Soil Present At:
Standing Water Present At: None Standing Water Present At:
Bottom Of Distribution Medium At: 33 Inches
Page 8 of 10
Brian L. Humpal, Inc. dba. Inspect Minnesota,
Midwest Soil Testing DISCLAIMER SHEET
Relative to Septic System Compliance Inspections
1. This inspection/report is being performed for only the seller/owner of the property on which the
septic system is located; there is no contract between Brian L. Humpal, Inc. and any other party
except the seller/owner unless otherwise noted. In such case that the buyer of the property is
paying for the inspection, the contract is between only the buyer of the property and Brian L.
Humpal, Inc., there is no contract with any other party unless otherwise noted.
2. Brian L. Humpal, Inc. has not been retained to warrant, guarantee, or certify the proper functioning
of the system for any period of time beyond the date of inspection or the future. Because of the
numerous factors (usage, maintenance, tank pumping, soil characteristics, previous failures, etc.)
which may affect the proper operation of a septic system, as well as the inability of Brian L.
Humpal, Inc. to supervise or monitor the use or maintenance of the system, the report shall not be
construed as a warranty by Brian L. Humpal, Inc. that the system will function properly for any
particular person for any period of time.
3. Minimum Compliance Inspection requirements relative to this inspection and this report include
only verification that the septic system has a water tight septic tank(s) and lift tank, the required
separation from the bottom of the drainfield/mound distribution medium and saturated soils, no
back-ups of sewage into the dwelling, and no discharge of sewage/effluent onto the ground surface
or surface water (lakes, streams, etc.) Brian L. Humpal, Inc. does not inspect basement ejector
pumps or exterior lift tank pumps as they are considered to be a "maintenance item". Sewage back-
up verification is limited to observing the floor drain area and/or the information supplied by the
last occupants of the dwelling prior to inspection. Brian L. Humpal, Inc. cannot guarantee that the
information given to them by the last occupants of the dwelling prior to inspection relative to back-
ups is accurate. Some persons may attempt to hide or conceal signs of previous back-ups.
4. Certification of this system does not warranty future use beyond the date of the inspection. Any
system, old or new, can be hydraulically overloaded as a result of more people moving into the
house than were previously occupying the house, improper maintenance and/or heavy usage, tree
roots, freezing conditions, surface drainage problems, or the system can simply stop working
because of it's age. The average life expectancy of a properly maintained septic system is twenty
to twenty five years.
5. A Compliance Inspection is not meant to be a test or inspection for longevity of the septic system,
a Compliance Inspection is strictly for the purpose of determining if the septic system is polluting
the environment at the date and time the inspection is performed. This inspection is not intended to
determine if the septic system was originally designed or installed to past or present MPCA or
Local Unit of Government code requirements.
6. WINTER WORK: Client (person paying for inspection) understands that inspections conducted
during winter weather(approximately November I"through April V)are more difficult to perform
because of the possible snow cover and ground frost. Septic system components such as tanks /
tank covers and drop boxes / drop box covers and soil treatment areas are more difficult to locate
because of snow cover and ground frost. Soil borings and locating drainfields are more difficult to
perform because of ground frost. Brian L. Humpal, Inc. will attempt to use the same level of
standards when performing winter work as when performing non-winter work. However, Client
understands that because of aforementioned considerations, the same level of standards may not be
possible.
Page 9 of 10
oocoo
0000c
c`) Nf`1fV N
\i ccli clJ Cl N O
QQQ � � G Ln
Ln
z +�
D �n
•
ir
Q
� �'.t7 �G C•y �I � C
J C y y h C
Vtr
~ m
(y 7 v cU
In in LLJ
..
U V U U
O O O p
►1 O
rj
Q)
F==4 L� •cis � _� c C1
t14.0
O u° ,
L �
Ln Y
ti
� U r c1 c� cs ••
cu
Cu 4=j
LM
� G
C
`� z `
THE CITY OF
LAKE ELMO MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: December 2, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 15
AGENDA ITEM: EN Properties, LLC Trucking Terminal Interim Use Permit Renewal
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: 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: Terry Emerson (EN Properties, LLC) is requesting that the City
Council renew the interim use permit that has previously been issued for his property at 11530
Hudson Boulevard in Lake Elmo. Staff is recommending approval of a two-year extension for
the interim use for this property.
FISCAL IMPACT: None—the City's Interim Use Ordinance specifies that the operation of the
interim use will not add additional costs to the City concerning future public improvements in
this area.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a
request by Terry Emerson of EN Properties for the renewal of an Interim Use Permit related to
his truck terminal facility located at 11530 Hudson Boulevard. The Interim Use Permit for this
property was originally approved by the Council on December 9, 2008 and was reviewed little
more than a year after the approval date. The applicant has received a subsequent extension for
the interim use that technically expired at the end of 2012. Because there have been no changes
to the site since the previous extension and because Staff is not aware of any issues or concerns
associated with the operation of the facility, Staff is recommending that the City process the
renewal request in accordance with the requirements for renewal of an interim use permit as
specified in the Zoning Ordinance (as opposed to requiring an entirely new application).
--page 1 --
City Council Meeting Regular Agenda hen 15
December 2,2014
Staff has previously conducted an on-site review of the site with the applicant, and has not
observed any changes to the site since this review was conducted. Staff is recommending that
the City grant a two-year renewal to allow the trucking terminal to continue operating on this
location. Should the Council decide to approve the renewal request, the original Interim Use
Permit agreement will need to be revised and updated to reflect the new termination date. A
revised agreement is attached to this report and referenced in the draft resolution of approval.
The recommended motion to take action on the request is as follows:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-95 granting a renewal for an Interim Use Permit to allow
a bus/truck terminal at 11530 Hudson Boulevard and approving a revised consent agreement
for the interim use renewal time period."
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/STAFF REPORT: Because the Interim Use Permit is not
operating under circumstances that are different than originally described in the initial permit
request, Staff will not be providing the Planning Commission and City Council with a new Staff
report or additional information concerning this use. The original report filed with the Council in
December of 2008 is available for review, along with any of the subsequent City reviews. The
City's regulations pertaining to Interim Uses has been updated since the applicant's permit was
granted; however, the general findings and conclusions from the original report and as references
in the Interim Use Agreement are still valid.
The trucking terminal currently operating from 11530 Hudson Boulevard is allowed as an
Interim Use subject to the standards for a non-agricultural low impact use, and has been in
operation since early 2009. If the permit is renewed by the City Council, the applicant has
indicated that he is working with the Kenworth Trucking company to move into this site and
operate under the requirements of the existing permit and ordinance requirements.
The City's Interim Use Ordinance includes special requirements for the review of a renewal
request that requires notification of the renewal be sent to surrounding property owners. If there
are no objections to the interim use permit renewal expressed within 10 days of this notice, the
City Council can approve the request by resolution. Should any objections be filed with the City,
the permit must be reviewed as a new application. Staff has sent out notices in accordance with
this ordinance, and the 10 day comment period will end on November 28, 2014. Staff has not
received any comments to date, and will be preparing a resolution of approval for consideration
by the City Council at its December 2, 2014 meeting.
As noted in previous reviews of the interim use, Staff has observed the following:
• Traff c: The non-agricultural low impact use standards specify that the daily vehicle trips
from the site cannot exceed 6 trips per acre of agricultural land. Because the agricultural
area owned by the applicant is 70 acres in size, the total number of vehicle trips cannot
exceed 420 per day. The applicant has estimated that there are no more than 120 trips in
and out of the site every day by trucks and employee vehicles. Staffs own observations
--page 2--
City Council Meeting Regular Agenda Item 15
December 2,2014
during visits to the site since it began operations, in addition to daily trips along Manning
Avenue, have supported this estimate.
• Site Operation. The daily use of the site has not changed substantially from the way it
was originally run as a bus garage. Although the semi-trailers being parked on the site
are generally larger than the school buses that previously were stored and serviced here,
the number of daily trips is substantially lower now than in the recent past. The overall
site activities, including exterior storage, light maintenance/servicing of vehicles, and
refueling are very similar to past activities, but with fewer vehicles and trips into and
outside of the property.
• Landscaping. One of the conditions of Interim Use approval stated "that additional
screening be provided in all locations recommended by the City Forester in order to
replace vegetation that has either died or been removed". The applicant did plant some
additional trees on the site in early 2009, and has previously replaced more trees along
the northern and eastern site boundaries. Given the replanting that has occurred since the
Interim Use Permit was issued, the applicant has been demonstrating a clear intent to
comply with the original landscape plan since the issuance of the Interim Use Permit
• Interim Use Permit/Consent Agreement. The Interim Use provisions in the Zoning
Ordinance (and the resolution of approval) require that an applicant for an interim use
permit enter into a consent agreement with the City that clarifies the terms and
requirements under which the interim use can operate. With the request for renewal, the
City will need to consider and approve a revised consent agreement, which at a
minimum, should reference the new termination date for the interim use.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT):
Strengths: The proposed IUP renewal will allow the continued operation of a business in
the community that has had a limited impact in this area.
Weaknesses: The City will need to continue monitoring the interim use as future
development projects come forward.
Opportunities: The interim use allows a limited use of agricultural land in advance of
future development in this portion of the City.
Threats: The user of this site will need to be taken into account as part of future
development proposals.
RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and Staff report, it is
recommended that the City Council renew the Interim Use Permit concerning the EN Properties,
LLC Trucking Terminal facility operating at 11530 Hudson Boulevard by undertaking the
following action:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-95 granting a renewal for an Interim Use Permit to allow
a bus/truck terminal at 11530 Hudson Boulevard and approving a revised consent agreement
for the interim use renewal time period."
--page 3 --
City Council Meeting Regular Agenda Item 15
December 2,2014
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 2014-95
2. Location Map
3. Updated Consent Agreement
--page 4 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-95
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A RENEWAL FOR AN INTERIM USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW A BUS/TRUCK TREMINAL AT 11530 HUDSON BOULEVARD SOUTH AND
APPROVING A REVISED CONSENT AGREEMENT FOR THE INTERIM USE
RENEWAL TIME PERIOD
WHEREAS, Terry Emerson, E & E Properties, 11530 Hudson Boulevard South,
has submitted a request to renew an Interim Use Permit related to a non-agricultural low
impact use at 11530 Hudson Boulevard South establishing a bus/truck terminal in a HD-
A-BP zoning district.
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on
November 10, 2008, and reviewed and recommended approval of the Interim Use
Permit for a bus/truck terminal on the site based on the following findings:
1) That the applicant has demonstrated compliance with all of the standards for a non-
agricultural low impact use; and
2) That the applicant has demonstrated compliance with all applicable City Code
standards for the issuance of an interim use.
WHEREAS, Section 154.019, Subd. (B, 5) of the City Code requires the applicant to
enter into a consent agreement with the City the specifies the terms and conditions of
the interim use; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council reviewed the Interim Use Permit request
and consent agreement at its December 1 and December 9, 2008 meetings and
approved the Interim Use Permit and consent agreement at its December 9, 2008
meeting;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on December 13,
2010, and reviewed and recommended approval of the renewal request concerning the
Interim Use Permit for a bus/truck terminal on the site based on the findings that were
included in the City original approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered a request for an additional renewal of the
interim use permit at its December 2, 2014 meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council reviewed the renewal request concerning
the Interim Use Permit request and revised consent agreement at its December 2, 2014
meeting;
NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lake Elmo City Council hereby
approves the renewal of the Interim Use Permit at 11530 Hudson Boulevard South to
establish a bus/truck terminal as a non-agricultural low impact use and authorizes the
execution of the revised consent agreement for this interim use subject to the following
conditions:
Resolution No. 2014-95
1) That the applicant signs the approved consent agreement with the City in
accordance with Section 154.019, Subd. (B, 5) of the City Code.
2) That the interim use will be valid for a period of two years from the date of the
renewal of the Interim Use Permit(December 2, 2016).
3) That the interim use shall be subject to a review by the City Council after two
years; and that neighboring property owners will be notified of the date when said
review is conducted by the City.
4) That the interim use will terminate when any portion of the property is rezoned or
when public sanitary sewer is provided to the site.
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo on the 2"d day
of December 2014, by a vote of_Ayes and _ Nays.
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Adam Bell, City Clerk
(SEAL)
Resolution No. 2014-95
MANNING AVE S
•t
ar-
-F
2
0
� � f
ll.l
-W
Z
I � r
-
E i
I
LL F r
W
�7 1'
a-
Z g f
O �
�F/7F Ff�(tr crp t
s _ � `.• � '� -- lnaws3i.Mrall?i1lYn1 '
a1
CONSENT AGREEMENT
INTERIM USE PERMIT
1.0 Parties. This Consent Agreement/Interim Use Permit ("Agreement")
is entered into by and between the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota
statutory ("City"); and E & E Properties, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability
corporation ("Applicant').
2.0 Recitals.
A. Applicant is the record fee owner of the following described
property situated in Lake Elmo, MN ("Property").-
That part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter
of Section 36, Township 29 North, Range 21 West,
Washington County, Minnesota lying easterly of the
West 33.00 feet (2 rods) thereof, EXCEPT that part
designated as Parcel 44 on Minnesota Department of
Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 82-35, State
Project No. 8292 (94-392) 904, recorded as
Document No. 424557 in the office of the County
recorder, Washington County, Minnesota.
Subject to highway easements in favor of Washington
County described in Book 258 of Deeds, page 91 and
Book 309 of Deeds, page 831, of record, and on file in
said office of the County Recorder.
Also, subject to highway easements in favor of the
State of Minnesota as described in Book 109 of
Deeds, page 622, Book 109 of Deeds, page 638, and
Book 220 of Deeds, page 11, of record and on file in
said office of the County Recorder.
B. The Property is zoned HD-A-BP.
C. Interim uses are allowed in the HD-A-BP zoning district subject to
the regulations contained in Lake Elmo City Code Section 154.019.
D. Applicant has requested that the City allow a portion of the Property
to be used as a bus/truck terminal as illustrated on the Site Plan
attached as Exhibit A (Site Plan):
E. On the 30th day of October 2008, Applicant submitted a completed
application for an Interim Use Permit.
F. On the 10th day of November, 2008, the Lake Elmo Planning
Commission, at a public hearing, reviewed the Interim Use Permit
application, city staff comments and reports, Applicant's comments
and reports, public comments, and recommended approval of the
interim bus/truck terminal use subject to certain conditions.
G. On the 1st day of December, 2008, and on the 9th day of
December, 2008, the Lake Elmo City Council reviewed the Interim
Use Permit application, city staff comments and reports, Applicant's
comments and reports, public comments, and the
recommendations of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission, and
agreed to authorize the interim use subject to the terms and
conditions as specified in Section 154.019 of the Zoning Ordinance
and Resolution 2008-056 approving the interim use permit.
H. On the 2"d day of February, 2010, the Lake Elmo City Council
completed a one-year review of the interim use permit and granted
an extension of the Interim Use.
I. On the 2"d day of December 2014 the Lake Elmo City Council
considered a request to renew the interim us permit and authorized
the Mayor to execute a consent agreement with the Applicant.
3.0 Terms and Conditions. The Lake Elmo City Council hereby authorizes
and Applicant, for itself, and its successors and assigns, agree that the
interim bus/truck terminal use shall be subject to the following conditions:
A. The Applicant, and its successors and assigns, shall have no
entitlement to future re-approval of the Interim Use Permit.
B. Applicant and its successors and assigns, agree that in the
event of a full or partial taking of the Property by a
governmental unit that the value of the Property taken will be
based on its highest and best use as it existed prior to the
approval of the Interim Use Permit.
C. The interim use shall be located on that portion of the
Applicant's Property illustrated on the Site Plan. The
remainder of Applicant's Property shall continue to be used
for agricultural purposes.
D. Applicant shall replace any trees that have died or been
removed from the site in order to maintain the site
landscaping as depicted on the original Site Plan for the
property.
E. The Interim Use Permit is valid until the first occurring
following event:
2
1. For two (2) years from the date of the renewal of the
Interim Use Permit (December 2, 2014);
2. Until a violation of the conditions of this Consent
Agreement;
3. Until a change in the City's zoning regulations, which
renders the interim use non-conforming; or
4. Until the redevelopment of the Property for a
permitted or conditional use as allowed by the City's
zoning regulations.
4.0 Rescission of the Conditional Use. The Conditional Use Permit, which
was previously issued for the Property is hereby rescinded and replaced
by this Consent Agreement/Interim Use Permit.
5.0 Acknowledgement and Consent. Applicant acknowledges that this is a
legally binding agreement and that Applicant has had an opportunity to
review the Agreement with legal counsel. Applicant consents to the terms
of this Agreement and its restrictions on the use of the Property and the
Interim Use Area.
6.0 Effective Date. This Consent Agreement/Interim Use Permit shall be
effective upon execution by all parties.
Date: 12/2/14
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
By:
Mike Pearson
Mayor
E and E Properties, LLC
By:
Terry Emerson
Its:
3
sass ! r,e 9E
b i d 1 n!e
o
C 1 4r ,tom
I J �
W
All--19P
4 1
� - ._� yy.• W C ` �
p
Ap
_!e;4
k 1
It
ANNO FIT
----------------
■�
5 \ 1
I I I I ; 111_L
-----------------
M�Ia a yr I.c DO B DAU
u �
THE CITY OF
LAKE ELMO MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: December 2, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 16
AGENDA ITEM: Halcyon Cemetery Sketch Plan Review
SUBMITTED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission
Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
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: Mr. Lee Rossow has submitted a Sketch Plan for a proposed
cemetery to be located on a 10-acre parcel located at 11050 50`h Street North. The sketch plan
review provides the applicant the opportunity to receive initial feedback on a development
concept from the City Council, Planning Commission and staff. The sketch plan review is
intended to assist the applicant in the preparation of a Preliminary Plat application.
FISCAL IMPACT: None— City costs related to the review of the sketch plan are reimbursed by
an application fee and a development review escrow.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to review a
Sketch Plan submitted by Mr. Lee Rossow for a proposed cemetery at 11050 501h Street North.
The Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan for the cemetery, to be called Halcyon, at
the 11/24/14 meeting. As the sketch plan review requires no formal action, the City Council is
asked to provide preliminary feedback and high level review of the proposed development. In
order for the cemetery to be properly filed with Washington County, a required step per State
Statutes, the City ultimately needs to approve the plat. The Sketch Plan allows the City to
provide initial feedback in advance of preliminary/final plat application.
--page I --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 16]
December 2,2014
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Attached is the original detailed Staff Report that was provided to the Planning Commission on
11/24/14 regarding the Halcyon Cemetery. The Staff Report includes general information about
the proposed cemetery, a summary of the relevant planning and zoning issues, as well as a
review of the proposed design. In terms of the specifics of the review, greater details are found in
the Staff Report dated 11/24/14, as well as the attachments.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT:
The Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan at its November 24,2014 meeting. In
reviewing the Halcyon Cemetery Sketch Plan,the Planning Commission provided high level
review and initial feedback to the applicant regarding the proposal. Greater detail of the Planning
Commission's review comments can be found in the Planning Commission minutes (DRAFT).
However, staff wanted to highlight the following items that were identified during the Planning
Commission review:
• The Planning Commission asked why the proposed cemetery is subject to the plat review
process of the City's subdivision ordinance. In order for use of the property as a
cemetery to proceed, it must be properly filed with Washington County as a plat. In
order for this to occur, the City must approve the plat.
• There was general discussion about the use of the existing buildings on site. The existing
home would be used for administrative purposes, as a greeting or gathering space, and as
a full-time caretaker's residence. The existing accessory building on the site would be
used as a maintenance building or garage.
• There was discussion about the location of the access with regards to access spacing to
nearby Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17). Staff will contact Washington County to get
their input on the location of the driveway on 50`h Street.
• The proposed activities of the cemetery were discussed. The applicants noted that the
site will not perform the same services as a funeral home. Cremation services or other
services for the dead will not be performed on-site.
• The security of the site was also discussed. The applicant is planning for a tall security
fence to secure the site. A gate will also be employed when the site is closed at night. In
addition to security, screening using landscaping or trees was also discussed adjacent to
residential properties.
• The neighboring property owner, Deb Downing,provided the Planning Commission with
a list of questions for the applicant. Ms. Downing's email is provided as Attachment#6.
The applicant and staff addressed several of the neighbor's questions.
In providing feedback directly to the applicant,the Planning Commission was able to
communicate the areas of future focus and review. The applicant noted that after review by the
City Council, they will likely start preparing a preliminary plat application.
--page 2--
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 16]
December 2,2014
STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS:
Strengths: Providing a review of a sketch or concept plan allows for initial review of a
development plan in advance of preliminary/final plat application. This process allows
the City to identify critical issues and set expectations before the applicant has expended
significant resources in preparing a preliminary plat.
Weaknesses: Transitioning the use from a single family home to a cemetery will take the
property off the property tax rolls, as cemeteries under 300 acres are exempt. However,
per current zoning ordinance, cemeteries are a permitted use in Agricultural and Rural
Residential zones.
Opportunities: The applicant has noted that there are few opportunities for non-
denominational burials and similar services in the area. They view the potential market
for such use in the coming years as strong.
Threats: None
RECOMMENDATION:
No formal action is required as part of the sketch plan review. The City Council is asked to
provide high-level review and feedback regarding the proposed cemetery. The review comments
and issues identified in this stage of review are utilized to inform a future preliminary/final plat
application.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, 11/24/14
2. Location Map
3. Application Form
4. Existing Conditions Plan
5. Cemetery Sketch Plan
6. Email from Deb Downing, 5135 Lake Elmo Ave. N.
--page 3 --
'I'1 it: CITY ()I- PLANNING COMMISSION
LAKE ELMO DATE: 11/24/2014
AGENDA ITEM: 5A—BUSINESS ITEM
CASE#2014-50
ITEM: Halcyon Cemetery- Sketch Plan Review
SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson,City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to review a Sketch Plan for a proposed cemetery within the
Rural Planning Area submitted by Mr.Lee Rossow. The proposed cemetery would be located at
11050 50"' Street North, on the northeast corner of 50thth Street and Lake Elmo Avenue(CSAH 17).
The Sketch Plan includes three main areas for in-ground burials, space for columbarium,and a
parking area. The existing home and accessory building would be repurposed to serve as
administration and maintenance of the cemetery. Because this is a Sketch Plan review,there is no
formal action required by the Planning Commission.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Lee Rossow, 11050 501h Street North,Lake Ehno,MN 55042
Property Owners: Lee Rossow, 11050 50`h Street North,Lake Elmo,MN 55042
Location: Part of Section 01,Township 29 North,Range 21 West in Lake Elmo,
immediately north of 50`h Street and immediately east of Lake Elmo Avenue
(CSAH 17). PID Number: 01.029.21.33.0003
Request: Sketch Plan Review
Existing Land Use: Single Family Detached
Existing Zoning. RR—Rural Residential
Surrounding Land Use: North—single family home(RR); west—single family home(RR); south
—Agricultural(RR); east—single family residential(RR)and Municipal
Well Site#4.
Surrounding Zoning: RR—Rural Residential;PF—Public Facilities
Comprehensive Plan: Rural Area Development
Proposed Zoning: RR—Rural Residential
History: The 10-acre site has historically been used for a single family home. According to
County records,the existing home was built in 1984.
Deadline,for Action: N/A—No action required by City
BUSINESS ITEM 5A
2
Applicable Regulations: Article IX—Rural Districts
REQUEST DETAILS
The City of Lake Elmo is in receipt of a Sketch Plan from Mr. Lee Rossow for a proposed cemetery
that would be located within the Rural Planning Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The
proposed cemetery would be located at the northeast corner of the intersection of 501h Street North
and Lake Elmo Avenue North. Under the City's Zoning Code, cemeteries are a permitted use in the
Rural Residential(RR)and Agricultural(A)zoning districts.The subject property is zoned Rural
Residential. However,in order to sell burial plots,the property must go through a formal platting
process.
Per State Statues, cemeteries must be formally platted under the appropriate regulation of the State
and local jurisdiction.The Lake Elmo Subdivision Ordinance specifies that as part of the pre-
application process for a subdivision of land,the applicant must first submit a Sketch Plan for review
by the Planning Commission. The Ordinance notes that the purpose of the Sketch Plan review is as
follows:
Sketch plan. In order to ensure that all applicants are informed of the procedural
requirements and minimum standards of this chapter and the requirements or limitations
imposed by other city ordinances or plans,prior to the development of a preliminary plat, the
subdivider shall meet with the Planning Commission and prepare a sketch plan which
explains or illustrates the proposed subdivision and its purpose. The Planning Commission
shall accept the information received, but take no.formal or informal action which could be
construed as approval or denial of the proposed plat.
Based on this wording,the Planning Commission is not being asked to take any formal action as part
of its review other than to accept the information received. Staff has completed an internal review of
the Sketch Plan,and general comments from Staff are included in this memorandum and applicable
attachment.
BACKGROUND
The proposed Sketch Plan is located in the north-central portion of the Rural Planning Area at the
intersection of 50'h Street North and Lake Elmo Avenue North(CSAH 17).
The applicant's submission to the City includes the following components:
• Application Forms
• Existing Conditions. The applicants have submitted an existing conditions plan, showing an
aerial image of the property and the existing single family detached residential use. As
shown in the existing conditions plan,the house and accessory building are currently existing
on the property. These structure would be repurposed as part of the proposed cemetery as an
administration/caretaker building and maintenance garage.
• Sketch Plan. The Sketch Plan for the proposed cemetery shows three larger in-ground burial
areas, several sites for columbaria,a gathering space,a parking lot,a network of private drive
lanes or driveways to access the various sites,and the existing buildings and drainfield.
BUSINESS ITEM 5A
3
The Staff review comments that follow are all based on conducting a very high level review of the
Sketch Plan since there is not a lot of detailed information that is required at this stage in the
subdivision process. Staff has focused its review on the elements of the site plan that
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS:
Staff has reviewed the proposed Sketch Plan and provided comments in the following areas:
• Land Use: The proposed Sketch Plan does conform to the City's Land Use Plan in that the
site is guided for Rural Area Development. Under this designation, Rural Residential is a
typical zoning for sites of this size and character.
• Zoning. The current zoning for the parcel is Rural Residential. Under this zoning
designation, a cemetery is a permitted use. In the Zoning Code,cemetery is defined as the
following:
Land used or intended to be used for the burial of the dead and dedicated for
cemetery purposes, including columbarium s, crematories, mausoleums, and
mortuaries when operated in cot junction with and within the boundaries of such
cemetery.
Under this definition, it is staffs interpretation that the proposed use would be permitted
under the City's ordinance. It should also be noted that the Zoning Code does not include any
specific development standards for cemeteries at this time. The only other reference to
cemeteries in the Zoning Code is in the PF—Public Facilities zoning district,where
cemeteries are identified as a conditional use.
• Public Utilities. The site is currently not hooked up to City water,but does have access via a
watermain extension from Well#4 and down Lake Elmo Avenue North. Should the proposed
use require City water,it does have access to service.
• Private Utilities.It should be noted that an existing septic system serves the site. The
property is not in the City's Public Sanitary Sewer Service Area. If any expansion of the
septic system is required for the cemetery use,the applicant will need to secure the applicable
permits from the Washington County Dept. of Health.
• Access. The applicants are proposing to reduce the total accesses to the property from 2 to 1,
accessing the site off of 501h Street North.The current driveway configuration includes
accesses on both Lake Elmo Ave.and 501h Street North. The proposed access on 501h Street
would be move to the west,while the access on Lake Elmo Ave.would be eliminated. As
proposed,the access on 501h Street would be located approximately 150 feet from Lake Elmo
Ave. Staff recommends that the proposed access be reviewed by the City Engineer in
consultation with Washington County in order to ensure that the proposed access spacing is
appropriate for the conditions on 50`h Street and Lake Elmo Avenue.
• Landscaping and Tree ProtectionlPreservation. The applicant has not provided any details
concerning landscaping for the site,which must be submitted at the time of Preliminary Plat
submission. In addition,a tree preservation plan or woodland evaluation report must be
submitted with preliminary plat to document any impacts to significant trees on the site. The
City's landscaping provisions require 5 trees for every one acre of land that is developed,as
BUSINESS ITEM 5A
4
well as 1 tree per 50 feet of street frontage. These requirements should infonn the landscape
plan for the site.
• Screening and Fencing. The Sketch Plan also includes fencing around all four boundaries of
the property. The north and east sides of the property include a regular fence,whereas the
west and south sides include ornamental fencing. Significant detail of the fencing is not
provided with this submittal,but Staff would assume that the northern and eastern fencing is
provided for screening purposes for the adjacent residential properties. The ornamental
fencing is likely provided for aesthetic purposes along the street frontage sides of the
property. In addition to fencing, staff would recommend that some landscaping and trees be
utilized to add additional screening along the property boundaries.
• Park Dedication. The City's subdivision ordinance requires parkland dedication for
subdivisions. Residential subdivision require a land dedication as a percentage depending on
the zoning or land use,whereas commercial projects are required to post a fee in lieu of land
dedication. For example, subdivisions on Rural Residential land require a 4%dedication,or
equal market value in fees thereof.The current commercial rate for park dedication is$4,500
per acre. Staff is still conducting some research to determine if and how much parkland
dedication would be appropriate for this type of use. Staff will consult with the City Attorney
in determining what the appropriate precedents are for a similar case such as the present
application. If any dedication were appropriate, staff would recommend a fee in lieu of land
dedication.
• Subdivision Review Process. In order to proceed with the subdivision of the land included in
the Sketch Plan,the applicant will need to next prepare a Preliminary Plat application. At the
Preliminary Plat stage,there is more information required as part of the submission process,
which also requires a public hearing.
RECCOMENDATION:
No formal action is required at this time. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission
accept the Sketch Plan provided by Mr. Lee Rossow for a cemetery at 11050 50`h Street North and
provide feedback.
ATTACHMENTS:
I. Location Map
2. Application Form
3. Existing Conditions Plan
4. Cemetery Sketch Plan
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction.......................................................Community Development Director
- Report by Staff.....................................................................................City Planner
- Questions from the Commission............................Chair&Commission Members
- Discussion by the Commission..............................Chair&Commission Members
BUSINESS ITEM 5A
«�
s
—
n
L I -
---
I I
4
i
rn
Im
17
o r sr, y Ea � obe, of e,i-c 6ed, = -•G , ES �et ppi
e d IG .lop,s s •po t o Q@ Lk&mom ni
Location Map: Proposed Halcyon Cemetery
'111L Cr1 Y OF
LAKE FLMO
11050 50th Street N. 0 150 300 600 Feet
Data Source:Washington County, MN I I i i I
11-17-2014 1"=300'
a
1 I
Date Received: T_t== �= '1' ' )F 651-747-3900 @
Received By: � E � '�� 3800 Laverne Avenue Norlh
LU Riot: Lake Elmo,MN 55042 i
i
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION E
Applicant_4 a E Q c S 5 0
Address: _ ! 10 5 0 .5-Q ' S 7-R,E
Phone#:
Email Address: 3'3 Q A c gy /�! F i
Fee Owner: Am �
Address: p,c,�5: c 1 je d tR e -c e ,S T'. S T PA 4Jc-,IWAI
Phone P {3
Email Address:
Property Location(Address and Complete(long) Legal Description:
/l O 7 D c? Z!y .5 i g a te—' A,1
2—
General information of proposed subdivision:
4 .,.► �
u
Conducted pre-application meeting with Staff? Yes No
In signing this application,I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance and current administrative procedures. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application
procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional application expense.
Signature of applicant: t�`_LP� � Date: 0 C 7-0 43,C 4 3 C4 701 y
Signature of Fee Owner S V/,I Date:
S:\KAM,5\P:onninG❑eot tomy,-Permi;;.;orm� CLlrreritq-reiirriinai'� Plat r,.pplicatioii on]v 10. ?_.;.doc?; r,,(m cr
M0120i2 2.3i pho
Lake Elmo City Hall
j - L "'-` 651-747-3900
L�.1 ` E L.1, O 3800 Laverne Avenue Notch
--
Lake Elmo.MN 55042
.. N.-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible i
for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in
my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this
application.
I have read and understand the instructions supplied for processing this application. The documents andlor
information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I will keep myself informed
of the deadlines for submission-of material and of the progress of this application.
I understand that this application may be reviewed by City staff and consultants. I further understand that
additional information,including,but not limited to, traffic analysis and expert testimony may be required for
review of this application. I agree to pay to the City upon demand, expenses, determined by the City, that
the City incurs in reviewing this application and shall provide an escrow deposit to the City in an amount to
be determined by the City. Said expenses shall include,but are not limited to,staff time, engineering,legal
expenses and other consultant expenses.
I agree to allow access by City personnel to the property for purposes of review of my application.
Signature of applicant,—LT? C�Date �c 7-0 r5
Name of applicant A. E= o S °�..t Phone 3 0
(Please Print)
Name and address of Contact(if other than applicant)
,rz - .pl /0fC 33 2 67 -4 15
Lake Elmo City Hail
651-747-3900 �
LAIN E 'E'L M O 3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo.MN 55042
AFFIRMATION OF SUFFICIENT INTEREST
I hereby affirm that l am the fee titte owner of the below described property or that I have written
authorization from the owner to pursue the described action.
AI
Name of applicant T e O S S D "1
(Please Print)
Street address/legal description of subject property
O10 f Ss>� EF i 1LJ
i
I
i
I
I I
Signature Date
If you are not the fee owner,attach another copy of this fom}which has been completed by the fee owner
or a copy of your authorization to pursue this action.
If a corporation is fee title holder,attach a copy of the resolution of the Board of Directors authorizing this
action.
If a joint venture or partnership is the fee owner,attach a copy of agreement authorizing this action on
behalf of the joint venture or partnership.
of `fit;.:Tj tlf'
;.:..;
LU
i I 1 i•t�+ � ;< � t7
cs
i 2 ; a#`� -� ��'. etc,i•I� f "; Z
�` ' iallllllllll '''' l IIIIII '
wow 41
Ir
� � - �r•ir. o�d
- 3
4
W
- - -
- - - - - - _-1,-
$hV�OW13 3)lVl
La
I. l
pt
............ -- --- --- - --- ---
Al
Nick Johnson
I
From: Deb <deb4135@aol.com>
Sent: Friday, November 21,2014 1:11 PM
To: Nick Johnson
Subject: Questions for Planning Commission
Attachments: Planning_Commission_questions.docx
Nick,
It's been a crazy week but I've gotten the questions done and have attached them to this e-mail.Thanks for taking the
time to talk to me about this proposed project in our neighborhood.
I've also put the questions below in case the attachment doesn't work.
1.
1. When will the property be open and will it be locked after hours? Will there be on site staff and if so what will the
hours of that staff be?
2. What will the lighting be and will there be lighting all night? if so,will it be localized and facing downward or will it
be illuminating into adjacent properties?
3. What will the security be to help keep vandals and unauthorized persons from gaining entry orgoing into adjacent
properties?
4. What is the height and type of the fencing that is not street side, i.e. chain link,solid wood?
5. The property is zoned residential.Since this appears to be a for profit business venture,if it fails who will be
responsible for the property or removing the bodies?Also,since it will have been used for a business purpose,will it
then be eligible to continue as a commercial property vs.a residential property?
6. Is there a potential impact to the ground water due to the in ground burial feature of the plan?There is a new city
well that has just been placed to the east of the property. In addition,most homes in the area have private wells.There
have been studies done that the decaying bodies of the dead can impact water quality.
These questions are being submitted by adjacent property owner, Debra Downing, 5135 Lake Elmo Av.
Deb Downing
5135 Lake Elmo Av N
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
612-867-7014
deb4135@aol.com
Tl it CITY OF
LAKE ELMO MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: December 2, 2014
REGULAR
ITEM # 17
AGENDA ITEM: Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) Project Cooperative Agreement with
Washington County for Right of Way Acquisition
SUBMITTED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
David Snyder, City Attorney
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 is recommending that the City enter into a cooperative
agreement with Washington County to contract right-of-way and temporary easement acquisition
services related to the Lake Elmo Avenue Street and Utility Project.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not to exceed $597,950. The City would be required to pay the County for
all services rendered related to the acquisition of temporary easements or permanent right of
way. The costs for easement and right-of-way acquisition should be considered part of the total
project costs and funded in accordance with a council approved project funding plan, yet to be
fully determined. The project is planned for in the 2015 and 2016 CIP.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider
entering a cooperative agreement with Washington County to contract services for the
acquisition of permanent right-of-way and temporary construction easements for the Lake Elmo
Avenue Downtown Street and Utility Project. Contracting these services through Washington
County would be advantageous for the City for a number of reasons. Foremost, following the
County's right-of-way acquisition process would help to ensure that the project will proceed as
--page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17]
December 2,2014
planned in 2015 and 2016. The acquisition of easements and right-of-way is extremely time
sensitive. Failure to acquire the necessary easements could result in the bidding of the project in
a less favorable bidding environment, or the delay of the project to the following year.
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the Cooperative Agreement with
Washington County through the following motion:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-96, approving the Cooperative Agreement with
Washington County to facilitate right of way acquisition associated with the Lake Elmo
Avenue Downtown Street and Utility Project."
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The City and County have been working collaboratively over the past year on the Lake Elmo
Avenue Downtown Street and Utility Project. The project includes the installation of sanitary
sewer, replacement of watermain, stormwater improvements, and street reconstruction for Lake
Elmo Ave. from 30`h Street to Trunk Highway(TH) 5, 30`h Street North, Upper 33`d Street North,
30h Street North and Laverne Avenue North. The ability to work on the downtown street and
utility project resulted from Washington County moving the project up to 2015 in their Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) at the request of the City. In addition to the development of preliminary
plans for the project, the City and County have engaged in significant efforts in community
engagement, finance and planning. The project is planned to proceed in two phases over 2015
and 2016 (See Phasing Map for Downtown Street and Utility Improvements — Attachment #5).
In order for the project to proceed on the planned schedule, the City and County must begin
acquisition of permanent right of way,permanent easements and temporary easements.
To acquire the necessary right of way and easements for the project, the City has been presented
two options: 1) The City can acquire all right of way associated with City streets without the
assistance of the County, or 2) The County has offered the City the opportunity to utilize the
County's right of way acquisition services for the total project at cost. If the City were to
perform the acquisition services for the City streets independently of the County, the City would
likely need to contract these services to an outside right-of-way agent and have staff manage this
contract. Conversely, if the County were to perform these services, they have the staff in place
to complete the acquisition for the entire project, not just Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17 —
County facility). Staff has evaluated both options and, after careful consideration, has determined
that contracting the service to Washington County is the superior and more prudent option for
the following reasons:
• The County right-of-way acquisition process is a tried and true method that will leave no
doubt to the acquisition of the necessary right-of-way and easements to proceed with the
project. For more detail on the County process, see Attachments #3 and #4. In the
judgment of staff, there is a tremendous amount of value in ensuring that the project
proceeds in 2015, as the City and County have expended significant resources in
preparing for the project to commence in 2015. In other words, ensuring that the
--page 2--
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17]
December 2,2014
necessary right-of-way is acquired for the process to commence is critical in mitigating
potential risk to the project.
• Following the County's acquisition process provides a concrete timeframe in which the
final construction plans can be prepared and the project can go out for public bid. One of
the critical goals for both the County and the City is to ensure that the public construction
project is bid within a favorable bidding timeframe. If the project gets delayed due to
right-of-way and easement acquisition, the project could be bid during a less favorable
bidding environment, leading to an escalation of costs. Once again, following the
County's acquisition process minimizes the risk associated with project delays that can
result in escalating costs.
• Completing the necessary acquisition work under the County contract will ensure that all
property owners are treated in a fair and equitable manner within the same process. The
County will contract all acquisition work through one appraiser and agent, allowing for
fair treatment for all property owners, as well as one point of contact for the entirety of
the project. Staff believes that there is value in having all property owner's work within
the same process so no property owner gains favor or additional compensation over
another through the acquisition process.
• Contracting these services to the County provides value to the City in minimizing the
amount of resources necessary for management of the acquisition process. Given the
magnitude of the project (number of property owners, amount of right-of-way/easements)
and the amount of planning, design, construction and public engagement tasks associated
with it , staff is concerned with not having sufficient time and resources to adequately
manage the acquisition process.
In terms of the costs associated with the right-of-way acquisition, it is important to note that the
City will only be responsible for the actual costs incurred within the acquisition process. Within
the Cooperative Agreement (Attachment #2), this critical point is outlined in subsection CA. In
other words, if the design of the project as it stands today were to change, and some of the
easement or right-of-way acquisition were unnecessary, these services would not be rendered. In
other words, the estimate cost figure of$597,950 is a not-to-exceed worst case scenario figure.
In addition, please note that the agreement contains $121,500 in contingency second-appraisal
costs. Under state law, any government must offer a second appraisal if the landowner requests
it. However, the request for second appraisal is not common within such public projects. Given
the required contingencies in the agreement, staff is confident that the overall cost of right-of-
way and easement acquisition will go down as the process unfolds. The County has provided a
conservative and safe estimate in order to ensure that the proposed agreement covers all
contingencies and scenarios through the acquisition process.
STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS:
Strengths: The County provides greater certainty to maintain a timely project schedule
and control of design and construction costs. The County also provides a process that will
result in a fair and equitable treatment for all property owners. Finally, utilizing the
--page 3--
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17]
December 2,2014
County's services will allow City staff to focus resources on design, planning,
construction, and community engagement efforts.
Weaknesses: If staff had significant time and resources to pursue easement acquisitions
in house, acquisition costs may be able to be reduced. However, the ability to reduce
acquisition costs likely results in non-equitable treatment between property owners.
Opportunities: The County process offers cost-effective and proven methods and the
resources to assist the City with maintaining the project schedule. Keeping the project on
schedule will result in bidding the project in a more favorable bidding environment.
Threats: All acquisition processes risk the threat of dispute. The County process helps
ensure statutory process is followed to mitigate the risk of dispute.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the aforementioned, Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the
cooperative agreement with Washington County through the_following motion:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2014-96, approving the Cooperative Agreement with
Washington County to facilitate right of way acquisition associated with the Lake Elmo
Avenue Downtown Street and Utility Project."
ATTACHMENTS:
1, Resolution No. 2014-96
2. Cooperative Agreement for Right of Way Cost of CSAH 17
3. Cooperative Agreement Memorandum
4. County Right of Way Acquisition Schedule
5. Phasing Map for Downtown Street and Utility Improvements
--page 4--
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-96
A RESOL UTIONAPPROVING A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY TO
FACILITATE ALL RIGHT OF WA Y A CQ UISITION FOR THE LAKE ELMO AVE DOWNTOWN
STREET AND UTILITY PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the City and Washington County intend to reconstruct County State Aid Highway
(CSAH) 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) from Trunk Highway(TH) 5 to 30"'Street North in the City of Lake
Elmo; and
WHEREAS,the City and County intend to reconstruct 30`h Street North, Upper 33'd Street North,
36`h Street North and Laverne Avenue North, all local streets in the City of Lake Elmo, as part of the
project; and
WHEREAS,the construction of streets and utilities associated with the project will require the
acquisition of permanent right of way, permanent easements, and temporary easements; and
WHEREAS, the preliminary right of way cost estimate has been prepared by the County and the
City will participate in the right of way costs in accordance with the Revised Draft County Cost
Participation Policy for Projects Constructed in Washington County Using State Aid Funds or Local Tax
Levy Dollars dated September 30,2014; and
WHEREAS,a cooperative agreement between the City and County is the appropriate method to
facilitate the right of way acquisition; and
NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby approve the
Cooperative Agreement Between the City of Lake Elmo and Washington County for Right of Way Cost
for the Lake Elmo Avenue Downtown Street and Utility Project.
Passed and duly adopted this 2"d day of December 2014 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo,
Minnesota.
Mike Pearson,Mayor
ATTEST:
Adam Bell, City Clerk
Resolution No. 2014-96
WASHINGTON COUNTY
CONTRACT NO. 9155
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DEPT. PUBLIC WORKS
LAKE ELMO AND WASHINGTON COUNTY FOR RIGHT OF WAY DIVISION TRANSPORTATION
COST OF COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY (CSAH) 17 TERM SIGNATURE-COMPLETION
THIS AGREEMENT, by and between the City of Lake Elmo, a municipal corporation, herein after
referred to as the "City", and Washington County, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota,
hereinafter referred to as the "County", shall consist of this agreement and Exhibit A (Project Location
Map).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the County intends to reconstruct County State Aid Highway(CSAH) 17 (Lake Elmo
Avenue)from Trunk Highway (TH) 5 to 30th Street North in the City of Lake Elmo; and
WHEREAS, the County intends to reconstruct, as a part of this project, a portion of the City streets: 301h
Street North, Upper 33rd Street North, 361h Street North, and Laverne Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the preliminary right of way cost estimate has been prepared by the County and the City
will participate in the right of way costs in accordance with the County Cost Participation Policy as
summarized in Section C of this agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to use local funds for these improvements; and
WHEREAS, a cooperative effort between the City and County is the appropriate method to facilitate the
right of way acquisition; and
WHEREAS, this Agreement is made pursuant to statutory authority contained in Minnesota Statute
162.17 sub.1 and Minnesota Statute 471.59.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
A. PURPOSE
The purpose of this agreement is set forth in the above whereas clauses which are all
incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
B. RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENTS
1. The County shall acquire all permanent right-of-way, permanent easements, and temporary
slope easements. All permanent rights-of-way, permanent easements, and temporary
easements will be acquired in the name of the County.
2. Any rights-of-way, permanent easements, and temporary slope easements that cannot be
obtained through negotiation will be acquired by the County through eminent domain
proceedings.
3. Upon completion of the project, title to permanent right-of-way for and adjacent to City streets
and permanent easements for storm water storage and water quality treatment within the City
will be conveyed to the City.
C. COST PARTICIPATION ITEMS AND ESTIMATED COSTS
1. The estimated cost participation breakdown is in accordance with the REVISED DRAFT"Cost
Participation Policy for Projects Constructed in Washington County Using State Aid Funds or
Local Tax Levy Dollars" dated September 30, 2014.
2. The City shall pay to the County 55 percent of the cost of all permanent right-of-way, permanent
Page 1 of 3
utility and/or drainage easements, temporary slope easements, title work costs, appraisal costs,
relocation specialist costs, relocation costs, condemnation commissioner costs, and all related
acquisition costs along CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue), from 301h Street North to MN Highway 5.
The City cost is ESTIMATED in the table below.
3. The City shall pay to the County 100 percent of the cost of all permanent right-of-way,
permanent utility and/or drainage easements, temporary slope easements, title work costs,
appraisal costs, relocation specialist costs, relocation costs, condemnation commissioner costs,
and all related acquisition costs on 30th Street North, Upper 33`d Street North, 361h Street North,
and Laverne Avenue. The City cost is ESTIMATED in the table below.
Table 1
City of Lake Elmo Cost Summary
ITEM CITY COST
ESTIMATE
CITY STREET(30 ST N, UPPER 33 ST N, 36 THST N, LAVERNE AVE)
ACQUISITION NEEDS:
TITLE WORK COSTS (100%) $6,450
APPRAISAL COSTS (100%) $43,000
LANDOWNER SECOND APPRAISAL COSTS (100%) $64,500
PERMANENT RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION (100%) $100,000
TEMPORARY EASEMENT ACQUISITION (100%) $75,000
TREE AND LANDSCAPING COST TO CURE(100%) $30,000
LAKE ELMO AVENUE (CSAH 17)ACQUISITION NEEDS:
TITLE WORK COSTS(55%) $6,000
APPRAISAL COSTS(55%) $40,000
LANDOWNER SECOND APPRAISAL COSTS (55%) $57,000
PERMANENT RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION (55%) $70,000
TEMPORARY EASEMENT ACQUISITION (55%) $80,000
TREE AND LANDSCAPING COST TO CURE(55%) $26,000
TOTAL COSTS $597,950
4. Actual right of way costs shall be determined at the conclusion of the acquisition process. The
City shall be responsible to pay for the actual costs of the aforementioned acquisition costs.
D. PAYMENT
Right of way costs shall be due a payable by the City to the County immediately and will be
invoiced to the City by the County as incurred during the project. The City shall pay 100 percent
of the invoiced amount within 35 days of its receipt.
E. CIVIL RIGHTS AND NON-DISCRIMINATION
The provisions of Minn. Stat. 181.59 and of any applicable ordinance relating to civil rights and
discrimination shall be considered part of this Agreement as if fully set further herein, and shall
be part of any Agreement entered into by the parties with any contractor subcontractor, or
material suppliers.
Page 2 of 3
F. INDEMNIFICATION
1. The City agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County against any and all
liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the County may hereafter sustain, incur or be
required to pay by reason of any negligent act by the City, its agents, officers or employees
during the performance of this agreement.
2. The County agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City against any and all
liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the City may hereafter sustain, incur or be
required to pay by reason of any negligent act by the County, its agents, officers or employees
during the performance of this agreement.
3. To the fullest extent permitted by law, actions by the parties to this Agreement are intended to
be and shall be construed as a "cooperative activity" and it is the intent of the parties that they
shall be deemed a "single governmental unit"for the purposes of liability, as set forth in
Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, subd. 1a(b). The parties to this Agreement are not liable for
the acts or omissions of another party to this Agreement except to the extent they have agreed
in writing to be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other parties as provided for in
Section 471.59, subd. la.
4. Each party's liability shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466
and other applicable law. The parties agree that liability under this Agreement is controlled by
Minnesota Statute 471.59, subdivision 1 a and that the total liability for the parties shall not exceed
the limits on governmental liability for a single unit of government as specified in 466.04,
subdivision 1(a).
G. DATA PRIVACY
All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated, or used for any purposes in
the course of this Agreement is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,
Minnesota Statutes 1984, Section 13.01, et seq. or any other applicable state statutes and state
rules adopted to implement the Act, as well as state statutes and federal regulations on data
privacy.
H. CONDITIONS
The City shall not assess or otherwise recover any portion of its cost for this project through levy
on County-owned property.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have duly executed this agreement by their duly authorized
officers.
WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY OF LAKE ELMO
Chair Date Mayor Date
Board of Commissioners
Molly O'Rourke Date City Administrator Date
County Administrator
Approved as to form: Approved as to form:
Assistant County Attorney Date City Attorney Date
RA117031Right of Way\City Cost Share Agree(row only)V4.docx
Page 3 of 3
WashingtonPublic Works Department
Donald J.Theisen,P.E.
4 Count Director
y Wayne H.Sandberg,P.E.
Deputy Director/County Engineer
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 25, 2014
To: City of Lake Elmo
From: Washington County Public Works
Re: Cooperative Agreement between the City of Lake Elmo and Washington
County for Right of Way Cost of County State Aid Highway(CSAH) 17
Below is a brief description of how the estimated costs were calculated for the anticipated right
of way acquisition associated with the Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) Corridor Management and
Safety Improvement Project. The items described below are associated with the standard right
of way acquisition process the County follows.
TITLE WORK COSTS
• Necessary to verify ownership and any encumbrances on the property.
• Cost is $150/parcel
APPRAISAL COSTS
• Appraiser will value the acquisition area needed for each parcel
• The appraised value will be used as the offer to the property owners for the necessary
acquisition.
• Appraisal costs vary depending on the complexity of the parcel; but average
$1000/parcel
LANDOWNER SECOND APPRAISAL COSTS
• After the initial offer is made, property owners have a right(by Minnesota State Law)to
hire a different appraiser to value the acquisition area. This is usually done only if a
property owner is not satisfied with the initial offer.
• By Minnesota State Law, property owners are entitled reasonable reimbursement for a
second appraisal up to $1500 for single family residential, two-family residential, and
agricultural property and $5000 for commercial and other types of property.
• Costs for this in the cooperative agreement were assuming a majority of property owners
would get a second appraisal; which is unlikely.
PERMANENT RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION COSTS
• The appraiser will determine the value of the property based on recent sales of similar
property
11660 Myeron Road North, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-9573
Phone: 651-430-4300 • Fax: 651-430-4350 • TTY: 651-430-6246
www.co.washingion.mn.us
Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action
• This project will necessitate several small permanent acquisitions; with the majority of
permanent acquisitions on 301 Street.
TEMPORARY EASEMENT ACQUISITION COSTS
• The majority of property along Lake Elmo Avenue, 301h Street, Upper 331 Street, 361
Street North, and Laverne Avenue will require temporary easements
• Temporary Easement costs are essentially "rental costs" for the necessary area.
• Temporary Easement costs usually range between 8-10% of the land value/year
• Temporary Easements are normally purchased for at least two construction seasons
(For example: April 1, 2015—September 30, 2016) even if the project is designed to be
completed in one season. This allows for any schedule delays, turf establishment in the
easement area, and clean-up work.
TREE AND LANDSCAPING COST TO CURE
• There will be an estimated 46 trees removed on private property as a part of the project.
• Full grown tree value averages $1000/tree
• The appraiser will include any tree compensation in the appraised value of the overall
acquisition amount.
• Estimated costs in the table on the cooperative agreement allow for these 46 trees; and
in addition, any trees that may have been missed or additional shrubs and/or
landscaping items that would also be reimbursed to the property owners in the
appraisals.
CONDEMNATION COSTS
• These costs are not listed on the table in the cooperative agreement; as there is no way
to estimate them
• For any parcel that does not settle; the County will begin eminent domain proceedings
• Costs associated with these proceedings include (but are not limited to): condemnation
commissioner, attorney, updated appraisal, and testimony fees.
• If this step is needed, the city will be responsible for 100% of these costs on acquisitions
along city streets and 55% of these costs on acquisitions along Lake Elmo Avenue
(CSAH 17)
(n
CD 0 0
N r Q N ON N L V-
O C7� O O
N Co O (17 � Ct7 N — Q N
N N O (p N (0 _ O
N p (D E O O N N O N t— r N O � � ? U
N r N N N U m W L < ) N � C O
� �= O O O N N M E: Q d M „Q m � Li-
(D .0 c' C n C
0 n L E m (D c a) E a> M E c o ro
o E v u07 c a Q o
> o Q) a� m a) ca CD Z o Ccc� �, z
O Z U .fl Q LL a) g (D fn (D C
z Q @ 0 Q
� o
o
z
O (n N T
� N d .,! C
O y Q
`o Q N U o d
U ° 4) U N
ro s cn m
co
m
_ M a
C° a 3
to CO
N (D C d
n m ° y O - m o c
c C] a
Cl) ° c�a m N o
° ^O c U Q C o 0
a c o
v
o z" > c ($ ca "' ai a�i c a
(3 c a
N Q_°LsU.1 Q> :4a+ QL>3 Q>N Q;3 .N,.r JO+U� +N rofQ2 NQN •cm(@ND :O�fQ3'`OQU`Nc `([!6�,msC1 GGy� Q(V!d� �Q°m' ONmn ZN nn 7� O3aNCOai
�
G(!OMn7SO O C CD> � Z O . U? a) a� N o o CllO
d o (D a o
> o '
ON NC N Dco C O
a) CD @ E
p En L.CO rLm N5 j a) N C0 cu NDOU (D M Q N
j Cl) U O DQ Vco oc a) 1° o ca o o m .
(Y o ao4 Cl.a c o
O o ro Q o mL O �( d
0 N (D 4tT )r
'
Zi -
caro aN3c J(vO p
CW W )O U ac o ' Qs [0
r0-0cOu�i
U �QO a) .
E m C a 4) a) o
> o U
O (n U
Q o C v0
�V U QJ U
Op
O (ACn
UC O A
U LL
CO E oQ
CO O a)i U CD N C
cDO Q)
1 N O O d G
m �] E a
2- L ul ro LitI—
C 0 G.:
#16
39TH STREETLu
SqP
a
z
g
1
�
a
o
J '
W
g 32ND STREET '
32ND STREET 31STSTREET ,
REID
PARK
30TH STREET LI FT
STATI O N
w
a
Z
O
W
J
LEGEND
�0 2014 CONSTRUCTION: 39TH STREET IMPROVEMENTS (CITY PROJECT)
2015 CONSTRUCTION: VILLAGE EAST SEWER IMPROVEMENTS (PRIVATE PROJECT)
2015 CONSTRUCTION: VILLAGE STREET,SANITARY SEWER,AND
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS (CITY PROJECT)
2016 CONSTRUCTION: VILLAGE STREET,SANITARY SEWER,AND
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS (COUNTY PROJECT)
® FUTURE:TENTATIVE 2017-2019 CONSTRUCTION: VILLAGE STREET
AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS (CITY PROJECTS)
N
TI II3 CITY OF CITY OF
LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO
EXHIBIT NO. 1
OLD VILLAGE STREET AND FOCUS
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS LOCATION MAP
ENGINEERING PROJECT NO.2014.137 OLD VILLAGE STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
OCTOBER,2014