HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-21-15 CCMPTI I1 CITV OF
LAKE ELMO
Ottr Alission j to Pimide Oita lit a Fiscally Ropousib
Alanner Irhile Preserviq the City()pen Space
.40.111114
NOTICE OF MEETING
City Council Workshop/Meeting
Tuesday, July 21, 2015 6:00 P.M.
City of Lake Elmo I 3800 Laverne Avenue North
Agenda
6:00 p.m. City Council Workshop
Manning Avenue Project Presentation - Washington County
7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting
E Call to Order
C, Pledge of Allegiance
. Roll Call / Order of Business
. Approval of Agenda
Accept Minutes
firs so v' ,
5 Spcia1
5 Ci
nCil Itc*orts
s' T. Presentations /Public Comments/Inquiries
... Finance Consent Agenda
k5. Approval of Interim City Administrator Contract
Approve Payment of Disbursements
77/. Accept Building Report dated June 30, 2015
Accept CO Assessor Report dated June 30, 2015
J. Ot er Conseirt Agenda
Zoning Text Amendment - Subdivision Identification Signs, Ordinifee-08-/21)
Zoning Text Amendment - Accessory Building Setbacks in UrbarcResidential Districts, Ordinance 08-125,
olutinn 2015-58
J1/.5 A0prove Cable Commission Updated Policies and Procedures
K. Reki Aenda
u
g
u e
..)
entation of 2015ABond Issuance Results; Resolution No. 2015-5
6rmwater Drainage Improvements - ApproVe-Ditch-Cleaningat '8-690 and 8702 Ironwood Trail
TH36 and Highlands Trail - Request for Street Light Safety Improvemerg „
Lennar Twin Home Preliminary Plat (Diedrich ProperWResolution No. 2015-56
ast Village Trunk Sewer Update
ce No. 08421,
Resolution -No. 201545
17. Preliminary and Final Plat - Halcyon Cemetery Resolution No. 2015-59
18. Final Plat, Final PUD Plan and Zoning Map Amendment - Wildflower at Lake Elmo Ordinance No. 08-
126
19. Council Driven Workshop Follow Up (LH)* ell request'
L. Staff Reports and Announcements
M. Adjourn
THE CITY ')F
LAKE ELMO
City mfLake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of July 13, 2015
Chairman Dodson called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dodson, Dorschner,VViUiarns, Fields, Larson, and Kre|mner
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Griffin and Haggard
STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Johnson & Planning Program Assistant Ziartnnan
Approve Agenda:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
Approve Minutes: June 22, 2015
M/S/P: Williams/Kriemer, move to approve minutes as presented, Vote: 6-0, motion
carried unanimously.
Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat and Final Plat — Cemetery
Johnson started his presentation summarizing the final plat request for acemetery at
1105O5O,oStreet. The staff isrecommending approval subject to8conditions. The site
issurrounded byother rural residential properties. This property )scurrently zoned
rural residential and isused asasingle family home. According tothe Lake Elmo Zoning
[ode, cemeteries are considered a permitted use in the AG & RR zones. The Valley
Branch reviewed this application and approved apermit.
The access for the site would come inoff of5Om street. This site would beserved with
City water, and anew septic system would need tobeconstructed. Asfar asthe
platting goes, there will be an additional amount of road right of way of 25 feet needed
on Lake Elmo Avenue. Along 5«m street, an additional 5 feet of right ofway will be
required bythe City.
nm
The engineer connnnents)nc|udetherequiredadd�iona|hohtofvvayfor5o Street. In
addition, the private stormwater management system must be privately owned and
operated, and amaintenance agreement isrequired with the City. There were also
some construction plan revisions identified bythe Engineer.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15
Z
Washington County comments include the additional right of way on Lake Elmo Ave.
and the need for a county right of way permit to remove the existing driveway and
conduct grading in the right-of-way.
The review comments of the Fire Chief include the need for a proposed hydrant
location, fire suppression equipment, proper turning radii and emergency vehicle
movements, and height of proposed entrance canopy on the structure to allow for
emergency vehicles.
Concerns that staff heard from surrounding property owners regarding the application
are increased traffic, effect on property values and permanent care of the cemetery.
Dorschnerasked what this lot could bedeveloped at. Johnson stated that itisa1Oacre
minimum, so it is at the maximum residential use.
Williams asked about the crematory. The [it«sdefinition includes the ability tohave a
crearnatory. Williams asked ifthat mean that ata future date this use could be added.
Johnson stated that yes they could ifthe current definition ofcemeteries did not
change.
Kriemer asked about the areas planned for future phases on the plan, specifically asking
about setbacks. Johnson stated that beyond the 5foot setback, there isnoother
setbacks in place. Kreirner asked if the fence was on the property line. Johnson stated
fences can beput nnthe property line.
Dodson asked who enforces the private drainage. Johnson stated that the City falls
under the M54 program and the property owner is required to submit annual reports.
Fields asked how much this property currently pays jntaxes. Johnson stated that once
this property becomes a cemetery, it becomes tax exempt,
LeeAossovv applicant, stated that there would benormal hours ofoperation, 7days a
week. Rossovvstated it\salow impact use and takes along time toramp up. There isa
permanent trust fund for maintenance that isstatutorily required.
Williams asked if Rossow would enter into an agreement not to build a crematorium on
this site. Kossovvstated that putting one onthe site would bealmost impossible. He
stated hewould bewilling losign adocument saying hewould not Joso.
Dodson asked where the future gravesiteswould stop, Rossovvstated that hewould be
surprised ifthey reached l0DOgrovesitesin3Oyears, sothey left that future site alittle
vague snitcould bere-evaluated inthe future. Dodson asked how the transfer of
ownership worked from generation togeneration. Rossovvstated that presently there \s
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15
anassociation planned with 3committed members. After about 8years, heplans toQo
to a non-profit with a board of 8, which should should sustain itself.
Kreirner asked about hnvv many burials are shown right now. Qossovvstated that there
isclose to2OUOshown and when itisbuilt out itisaround 45OO.
Public Hearing opened at7:45prn
Jean Madrinich, 11420 5 Oth Street N, she stated that when the well house went in, they
had a/ot ofproblems with the floodp|ainsand she iswondering how this will be
addressed. Rossovvstated that the V8VVDstated that noone can beburied below the
10Oyear flood plain. K4adrinichisalso very concerned with the traffic onthe road and
there isanother property that wants todoacommercial endeavor, She was also
wondering about signaOa Rossuvvstated that there would beanidentifying sign that
will probably bgmade out ofgranite.
Deb Krieger, 4552 Lake Elmo Ave, she is wondering about the parkland dedication. She
believes that ifbisRRthere should ben4Y6park land dedication. Johnson noted that
the subdivision ordinance calls for land dedication for residential subdivisions, whereas
the proposed project isapub|ic/civicuseundertheOt/sZoning[ode. She isalso
wondering about the board and the trust fund. Rossovxstated that they will follow the
state statute. Krieger asked if fence is required around a cemetery. Johnson stated
that our code does not require it or exclude it. Krieger stated that she would like to see
no fencing. She |sworried about the traffic, especially with afuneral procession. She is
wondering about setbacks, 50-8D%ofdeaths are cremations and she iswondering
where those will happen. She reiterated the need for apermanent care fun and
following state statutes asthey relate tocemeteries.
Dodson asked Rossnxv how they handle winter burials. Rossowvstated that there is
equipment that is used to prepare the ground. He stated that the bodies would be
stored inamausoleum until the ground isthawed, Rossovxstated that afence isamust
for security and todeter vandalism.
Janet Thompson, 11491 50th Street, stated that she believes this use to be a large
commercial venue placed within their residential area. They purchased their property in
arural area, not tobeplaced next tomausoleums.
Rebecca Tenpas, 11330 5 Oth Street, ask the Planning Commission to think about the
rural areas and what people think about for that type ofenvironment. She thinks this
commercial venue does not fit inwith the rural character. She is concerned about the
traffic. 50f» street has become a very busy road. The surrounding uses around this are
all single family homes and this should be a single family home aSwell.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15
4
Rich Day, property owner on5«mStreet, i5wandering )fthere is anenvironment impact
statement with this request, The storm water from the Rossovvproperty runs tohis
property to the south. He wanted to ensure that this project would nt increase the
water flow to his property. Johnson noted that the Valley Branch Watershed District did
review the proposed storm water facilities and found them to be in compliance with
watershed rules, State requirement do not allow post development water volume and
velocity toincrease from the existing condition. Johnson also stated that the proposed
use would likely not meet the threshold for an environmental assessnnentvvorksheet,
but the City has the discretion to require one.
Jeffrey Saffle, 11180 5 01h Street, noted that they have an easement that runs to the east
ofthis property. Hcisconcerned about the LED lights and would like assurance that this
will conform tnthe dark sky ordinance. Rossovvstated that the only LED Lights would
b2inthe parking lot. Atnight they will godown tualmost off when the day isover and
they will all have hoods onthem.
Saxe Roberts, 111655nmStreet, did research about property values and it isthe results
are mixed or inconclusive as staff suggested. However, some people just don't like
cemeteries. They put a significant investment into their property and feel that it will
affect the value. Heisalso concerned about the traffic and especially with funeral
processions.
The City received no written or electronic correspondence.
Public Hearing closed at8:25prn
Williams heard 4major cmncerns. Traffic, property values, commercial inresidential and
storm water. VBVVDisthe custodian ofstorm water. They are the experts, so if they
issued the permit, itmust beontrack.
Dorschner stated that usually the funeral processions are during business hours and not
during rush orpeak travel hours.
Kreinnerwould like toadd atree transplant warranty, hewould like tosee trees planted
around the property line, odd something regarding the crematorium and would like to
stipulate that the trust fund be governed by the Minnesota cemetery association.
Dodson feels that this should be split between preliminary plat and final plat with more
detailed plans. Johnson stated that applications that proposed toproceed with
preliminary and final plat concurrently are accepted when there is little to no public
infrastructure. 1naddition, the scope orsize ofthe plat also determines ifthe process
can be expedited.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15
O
by the Planning Commission and based on the findings of fact listed in the Staff Report
and amended by the Planning Commission Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
Public Hearing: Final Plat and Final PUD Plan — Wildflower at Lake Elmo
Johnson started his presentation regarding the Final Plat and PUD submitted by Robert
Engstrom Companies. The Final Plat application represents Phase lofthe Wildflower
development, which includes 60 single family residential lots. This project will have
access to sanitary sewer and City water. This property will be zoned MDR with a PUD
designation. The zoning map amendment isrecommended tobeinitiated bystaff once
the east village trunk sewer iustarted.
Staff has reviewed the final plat and found it to be consistent with the approved
preliminary plat. This has been reviewed bythe City Engineer, Fire Chief and Landscape
Architect. The City attorney will be reviewing all of the conservation easements being
proposed. The City is requesting the attorney to review the easements to make sure it
does not impede the future connection of Fields of St. Croix to sanitary sewer. This
development has anextensive trail system. There must bepublic easements over all
city owned trails. Staff is recommending an additional condition to require a trail
connection along Lake Elmo Avenue toconnect tothe Gmnyeadevelopment.
Due to the joint improvement between the Wildflower and Village Preserve
development, either Gonyea must record their plat first or Engstrom must secure
easements before development can occur. There are l3conditions ofapproval,
including the trail connection to Village Preserve. There are 9 draft findings in the staff
report.
Williams asked about the names ofthe streets. The Planning Commission asked that it
match the County naming system. Johnson stated that the City Council determined that
the street names presented in the preliminary plat were acceptba|a
Dodson asked about the eyebrow cul-de-»acswith medians o/islands. Johnson stated
that the design is easier to address snow than the open cul-de-sacs because there is a
more defined area to store the snow.
Bob Engstrom, stated he was under the impression that the County was going to install
atrail along Lake Elmo Avenue. Johnson stated that there are plans toadd them to
Manning, but not Lake Elmo Avenue.
Public Hearing opened at 10:00pm
Richard Smith, 11104 Stillwater Blvd N, stated he is concerned that the critical issues
#l/\mentioned inthe staff report isnot included asacondition ofapprocai It talks
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15
7
about the developer having a binding agreement to prevent further subdivision of
out/ots for residential or commercial development. In addition, Mr. Smith noted that
there is a gap between Blazing Star Land and his driveway. The street stops short by
about lOUfeet to connect to his property in phase l. Engstrom stated that they are
committed togiving the Smith's driveway access.
Robert Eischen, 11674StiUvvater Blvd N, stated that onthe Western and Southeastern
property line there should be foliage between them and the new residents. He would
like assurance that the foliage that was agreed to would be done in writing. Engstrom
stated that it is no problem and they are committed to what was agreed upon.
The City received no written or electronic correspondence.
Public Hearing closed at10.15prn
M/S/P: Dorsch n e r/Wil liams move to add condition 1A from the preliminary plat back in
tnthe final plat conditions, Vote: 6-0,motion carried unanimously.
K4/5/P:Dorschner/FicNs,move toadd acondition toadd blacktop for the smiths
driveway, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dorsch n e r/Dodson, move that the agreement between the Eischen5 and
Engstrom regarding plantings bememorialized and completed during phase |'Vote: 6-0,
motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P:DndBzn/DorschUer,move that the street names follow the County naming
system sothat it is not burden tothe safety personnel, Vota:4-2. motion carried
unanimously
K4/S/P:VViUiamns/DndaJn, move tVrecommend approval o{the requested Zoning Map
Amendment for the Wildflower planned development based unthe findings of fact
listed in the Staff Report, Vote: 6'0, motion carried unanimously
M/S/P:Will ian1s/Lara20,move torecommend approva(0fthe Final Plat and Final
Development Plans for Wildflower with the 17 conditions of approval as listed in the
Staff report and amended by Planning Commission and the 9 findings of fact, Vote: 6-0,
motion carried unanimously.
Public Hearing: Zoning Text/krnendrnent—AccessorVBui|ding Setbacks
Johnson started his presentation 6«stating that in LDR. MDR and HDR-the rear yard
setback is not differentiated between accessory buildings and principal buildings and is
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15
O
feet for rear yard setback for accessory structures inurban districts. This setback would
beconsistent with other Cities that were researched. These structures are typically not
very large and are sometimes regulated further by covenant.
Public Hearing opened otlO:I8pnn
Noone spoke.
The City received nowritten o/electronic correspondence.
Public Hearing closed otlO:Z9pnn
M/S/P:DorschUe'/Fie|ds,move torecommend approval ofaZoning Text Amendment to
change the rear yard setback for accessory structures in urban residential districts from
20 feet to 10 feet, Vote: 6-0 motion carried unanimously.
Public Hearing: Zoning Text Amendment — Subdivision Identification Signs
Johnson presented the proposed Zoning Text Amendment for subdivision identification
signs. Henoted that staff |srecommending amaximum oftwo signs located at
entrances ofdevelopments. |naddition, there would beanallowance for Zsub-
monuments, smaller signage that is incorporated into landscape features.
Williams asked about variable message signs and copy signs and would like to see a
definition. Johnson stated they are both inour code and either orboth could be
excluded.
M/S/P: Fields/Williams, Move to add variable message and copy signs as an exclusion,
Vote: 6-0 motion carried unanimously.
Kreinnerasked what the definition ofasubdivision is. Would all ofInwood count asa
subdivision. Inwood would count asa subdivision a6each part isbrought forward.
Johnson stated that itdepends how itisbrought forward. |fitbbrought together as
one subdivision, max number would apply.
Public Hearing opened at1O:45pnn
NVone spoke.
The City received nowritten orelectronic correspondence.
Public Hearing closed at10:45pnn
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15
9
M/S/P: Willi am s/Larson, move to recommend approval of the Zoning Text Amendment
tnadd greater detail tnthe subdivision identification sign provisions inthe [itv'sSign
Ordinance, Vote: 6-0 motion carried unanimously.
Cound|Updates—Ju|y 7, 2015K0eeting
1. Lenna[Beider/DeidrichTwin Home Preliminary Plat —Tabled
2. Interim Ordinance 'Passed
Staff Updates
. Upcoming Meetings
a. July 27,ZOl5
b. August 1l,2O15
This is Planner Johnsons last meeting and he thanked the Commission for all of their
kindness Chair Dodson thanked Planner Johnson for all his hard work and dedication to
the City.
Commission Concerns
Dorschner would like to have Village Workshop meetings noticed to members of the
Planning Commission.
M/S/P: Dorsch ner/Williams, would like staff to draft a text amendment to remove
crematorium from the definition of cemetery. Vote: 6-0 motion carried unanimously.
K4/S/P: DOrschner/Dodson, vvVu|d like to make a motion to examine the cemetery issue
city wide. Vote: 6-0motion carried unanimously,
Fields would like tolook atthe capacity that xxehave and what the demand isfor
cemeteries. He would also like to know acreage for scale.
Meeting adjourned atlI:U5pno
Respectfully submitted,
]oanZ\er1rnan
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
ENGINEER'S REPORT
RE: July 20, 2015
ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara Geheren, P.E.
Jack Griffin, P.E.
Ryan Stempski, P.E.
Chad Isakson, P.E.
651.300.4261
651.300.4264
651.300.4267
651.300.4283
This Engineering Report is an overview of the primary work items being handled by the City Engineering Staff over
the past reporting period. Please contact Jack Griffin at 651.300.4264 with any questions or concerns.
ENGINEERING SUPPORT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS
• Boulder Ponds: Grading, street and utility construction is in progress. Plan revisions are pending final 5ch Street
Landscape plans. Engineering is providing ongoing construction administration and observation. Erosion control
corrections and site repairs were necessary following the July 6 rainfall to correct erosion control violations.
• Inwood PUD: Grading, street and utility construction is in progress. Plan revisions are pending final 5th Street
Landscape plans. Engineering is providing ongoing construction administration and observation. Erosion control
corrections and site repairs were also necessary following the July 6 rainfall to correct erosion control violations.
Staff is working with the developer on the proposed HOA operated irrigation system.
• Hammes Estates: Mass grading is essentially complete. Final construction plans for street and utilities are not
complete. City staff remains on HOLD at developer's request. Engineering provided assistance to the planning
staffto address erosion control violations following July 6 rain event.
Savona 1st, 2nd and 3rd Additions [Lennart Providing ongoing construction administration and observation
for 1s' Addition and 2nd Addition street and utility work. Reviewing trail design revisions. Second Addition trunk
utility extensions to Hudson Boulevard are in progress. Conducted grading preconstruction meeting for the 3'd
Addition on 07.17. Working with Planners in reviewing 3rd Addition final plat and construction plans.
• Eagle Point Medical Center: No activity this month. Work being handled by Building Department.
• Lakewood Crossing—Kwik Trip: Providing construction review of Hudson Blvd pavement and stripping work.
• Hunters Crossing 1st and 2nd Additions [Ryland Homes]: Providing ongoing construction administration and
observation for 1' Addition Street and Utility work. Conducted preconstruction meeting on 07.13 for 2nd
Addition Street and Utility work. Reviewing Final construction plans for Sth Street.
• Diedrich Property [Lennar]: Completed review dated 06.17 for Preliminary Plan application for 06.22 planning
commission and 07.21 council meeting.
• Wildflower at Lake Elmo [Engstrom Village]: Grading operations are in progress. Completed review of revised
grading plans. Completed review dated 07.09 for Phase 1 Final Plat application for 07.13 planning commission
and 07.21 council meeting.
• Village Preserve 1Gonyea Parcel BP Completed construction plan review dated 07.06. Phase 1 Construction
Plans ready for construction pending developer request to hold preconstruction meeting,
• Village Park Preserve (Gonyea Parcel El: No activity this month. Pending revised Preliminary Plan submittal.
• Easton Village: Phase 1 Construction Pions and Village East Trunk Sewer Construction Plans ready for
construction pending developer request to hold preconstruction meeting.
• Legends (Goetschel OP): No activity this month. Pending developer pion submittal.
• Halcyon Cemetery: Completed preliminary and final plat review, memo dated 07.08 for 07.13 PC and 07.21 CC.
• LSD 916: No activity this month, Pending developer preliminary and final plan submittal.
• Auto Owners: Received preliminary and final plan submittal on 07.13. Review in progress. Due 08.06.
• Misc. Planning Assistance: Assisted planning staff to prepare 5' Street Landscape Plan workshop on 07.14.
Attended meeting on Lynskey Senior Building. Attended meeting with Durow property owners.
• Next Steps/Priorities: Continue to support planning staff in Development review processes.
ENGINEER'S REPORT PAGE 1 of 4
JULY 20, 2015
GENERAL ENGINEERING SUPPORT/RESPONSE ITEMS
• Maintained and updated City website write-ups for Engineering Projects.
• Provided record drawings and as -built information as requested.
• Provided support to building official as requested for building permit grading plans and site issues regarding
retaining walls, porous pavers and drainage concerns.
• Processed R/W permits for Xcel energy, Centurylink and Comcast and reviewed R/W permit requirements for
water service connections with no service stub.
ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS
(STREET SYSTEM; MSA STREET SYSTEM; DRINKING WATER; SANITARY SEWER; SURFACE WATER & M54 PERMIT)
• CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING:
• Initiated review of 5-year revolving street CIP to identify 2016 Street Improvement project.
• ASSET MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION [BEEHIVE INDUSTRIES]:
a No activity this month.
• STREET SYSTEM:
• Assisted Public Works with Spray Patch preparation for seal coat areas and maintenance questions
along 30th Street.
• Assisted Public Works with sign request and driveway maintenance issue on DeMontreville TraiL
• Conducted 2015 Seal Coat project preconstruction meeting, noticed property owners and provided
construction administration and observation for the work. Reviewed project quantities for payment
and performed sweeping inspection.
• MUNICIPAL STATE AID SYSTEM (MSAS)
• Coordinated MSA 2015 traffic count data, sequencing and mapping for Public Works implementation.
Received and reviewed initial data.
• MUNICIPAL WATER:
• Continued to assist 4517 Lake Elmo Avenue with water connection permit.
8 Followed up on Water Tower #4 site closing documentation and title work for grant application.
• Worked with DNR to obtain the Well #4 water appropriations permit.
• MUNICIPAL SEWER / WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT:
• Coordinated training for Public Works regarding the Reid Park lift station odor control unit.
• Responded to property owner calls regarding septic system issues at 8200 Hill Trail.
• Initiated cost estimate review for additional sewer service stubs for potential fee schedule addition,
• Assisted City Clerk with notification letter to property owners able to connect to new sewer.
• SURFACE WATER:
• Attended monthly coordination meeting with V8WD.
• Assisted Planning staff with review and preparation of Stormwater Maintenance Agreements.
• Worked with property owners at 8690 and 8702 Ironwood Trail to resolve drainage issue. Obtained
contractor's quote, property owner ROE agreements and prepared agenda report for council
consideration on 07.21.
• MS4 Program work: Attended TMDL workshop and prepared TMDL annual report and mapping for the
City; Processed annual EMWREP contract; initiated 2015 MS4 work plan.
• Responded to drainage complaint at 8709 27th Street N.
• Next Steps: Continue Beehive rollout and implementation; continue Water System master planning and Water
Tower #4 preliminary design; preparation of the 2015 MS4 Work Plan; and Street CIP updates, including
shouldering program.
DEED INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS
• City engineering staff is administering the City's MN -DEED Infrastructure Grants.
• Corresponded with Mn-DEED regarding grant agreement application requirements.
• Next Steps: Coordinate meeting with MMB and MN -DEED to review specifics of Inwood water system grant
eligibility. Finalize grant application and submit to MN -DEED.
ENGINEER'S REPORT PAGE 2 of 4
JULY 20, 2015
PRODUCTION WELL NO. 4; PUMPHOUSE NO. 4; AND CONNECTING WATERMAIN [CONSTRUCTION PHASE]
• Production Well No.4 is complete; Pumphouse No. 4 is complete; Connecting Watermain is complete.
m Well No. 4: Project close-out subject to claim resolution by City Attorney. Processed Pay Request to
100% work less 5% retainage.
mi Pumphouse No. 4: Continued working with Public Works to address issues to close out work on air -
release valve and final payment. Reviewed and processed record drawings.
Next Steps: Finalize Well #4 operations permit to initiate well use. Provide close-out and warranty services for
Production Well #4, Pumphouse #4 and Connecting Watermain Improvements.
LAKE ELMO AVENUE TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS [CONSTRUCTION PHASE]
• Substantial completion was 10.17.2014. Final completion to take place in spring 2015.
a Providing construction administration and observation far Contractor's punchlist work, including
pressure test coordination, meter issue, and valve replacement.
• Responded to property owner inquiries regarding service connections.
Next Steps: Provide ongoing construction administration and observation services. Close out project in 2015.
39TH STREET: STREET AND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS [CONSTRUCTION PHASE]
• Substantial Completion date is 06.30.2015. Final Completion is 08.15.2015.
• Provided ongoing construction administration and observation services for remaining street
reconstruction work. Processed contractor payments.
• Responded to property owner complaints and inquiries.
• Coordinated and conducted site walk through to generate list of work remaining to be completed.
• Next Steps: Continue to monitor progress of work and maintain punch list until completion. Project close-out.
EAGLE POINT BOULEVARD STREET IMPROVEMENTS [CONSTRUCTION PHASE]
• The Feasibility Report was authorized on 01.20.2015 and Approved on 03.03. P&S approved on 06.02.
• Answered contractor questions regarding project bids. Received contractor bids on 06.30. Evaluated
bids and prepared award recommendation and presentation for council consideration on 07.07.
• Processed contracts, obtained project permits, updated website and readied the project for
construction start.
• Scheduling preconstruction meeting for a construction start at the end of July.
• Next Steps: Schedule and conduct preconstruction meeting. Once it is received, notice property owners
regarding contractor's schedule. Provide ongoing construction administration and observation services.
INWOOD BOOSTER STATION AND TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS [SITE ACQUISITION AND DESIGN PHASE]
• Trunk Watermain plans are complete. Booster Station design work pending site acquisition closing.
• Worked with property owner to review site and landscaping plans. Received and reviewed property owner
concepts. Conducted property owner meetings to continue site acquisition negotiations.
• Revised terms and conditions for site acquisition including two acquisition options. Prepared council report and
presentation for council review on 07.07.
• Following council direction, initiated attorney closing proceedings and forwarded purchase agreement to
property owner. Held 07.20 meeting to review land purchase agreement with attorney and property owner.
• Next Steps: Assist City attorney's office as requested for site acquisition. Re -initiate Booster Station design
work including revised site plan.
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION [GENERAL ISSUES COORDINATION]
• Attended Quarterly Washington County/City Engineer's meeting on 06.17.
• Attended monthly transportation meeting on 07.16.
• Responded to correspondence and information requests regarding right turn lone at Manning Trail and TH36.
• Obtained Xcel Energy Street Light quote for the intersection of TH36 and Highlands Trail in response to property
owner request and prepared council report for consideration on 07.21.
• Next Steps: Next monthly MnDOT/Washington County/City Transportation meeting is AUGUST 20.
ENGINEER'S REPORT PAGE 3 of 4
JULY 20, 2015
STATE HIGHWAY 3GSOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD STUDY [INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING)
� Collaborating with MnDOT/Washington County to achieve approved layout. Funded 80% Federal Grant,
~ Noactivity this month. JRFworking onrevised concept plans.
* Next Steps: Review updated concept plans asprepared bySRFwhen submitted. Provide council update at
Transportation Workshop. Provide direction to SRF to proceed with a DRAFT preferred alternative layout,
STATE HIGHWAY STRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS [[ONSTRUCT|ON]—COUNTY LED PROJECT
* Includes Traffic Signals at CSAH17 and right turn lanes at CSAH 17 and Laverne Avenue North.
° Responding to County as needed during project construction (property owner notice, utility conflicts, etc.)
° Nest Steps: Continue monitoring County project status.
CSAH 13 (IDEAL AVENUE) INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT [PLANNING] — COUNTY LED PROJECT
° County/edpruject:Nooctivdy/hbmonth.FirstPMTnneetingschedu6cdfbr073(l
° Next Steps: Work with Planning staff and Washington County to define scope of improvements throughout the
corridor including the Olson Lake Trail Sanitary Sewer extension. Attend first PMT meeting on 07.30.
CS&H%5(MANNING AVENUE) CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT [PRELIMINARY DESIGN)
* County led project: Attended a meeting as requested by Washington County to review the TH5 realignment and
[SAH 20 intersection improvements, Encouraged County topresent cost data and City ownership obligations
with any requests for City preliminary design plan approvals.
* Attended monthly PMTmeet/ngƒbrproject onO7.U1.
w Next Steps: Provide engineering recommendations as requested for TH5 Realignment options.
CSAH 17 (LAKE ELMO AVENUE) IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PHASE I — CONSTRUCTION / PHASE 2 — FINAL DESIGN]
� County led project with City Downtown supplemental initiatives:
• Attended PMT meetings to coordinate progress of work including weekly conference calls.
° Assisted with wybs/&scommunication strategy and setup.
= Attended preconstruction meeting and project walk through with Contractor and utility companies.
= Reviewed and updated Braun precondition survey scope ofwork.
" Rev/ewing3O1h Street RIW needs and coordinated prescriptive easement review by City Attorney.
• Working with Xcel Energy to coordinate street lighting design to incorporate into the project.
= Coordinated meeting with Fire Deportment toprepare emergency access strategy.
m Assisted with VBWD permit conditions of approval including drainage outlet easements.
� Reviewed temporary water supply plan with Public works.
� Reviewed Ar6onistreport and tree removal pion,
w Worked with Washington County regarding storm wmterƒ6cilitymaintenance responsibilities.
� Next Steps: Provide Construction Administration support as City representative and assist with issue resolution
to keep project on schedule, Continue infrastructure planning in support of Phase Z project. Assist with
easement acquisition and assist planning staff with 08.11 Council workshop on streetscape plan.
PROJECTS |NWARRANTY
0 WHISTLING VALLEY; l5"'3xvADDITIONS: 2-yr Warranty Period Ends 11.14'2014. . Warranty review completed,
Letter prepared and sent to Bond Agency (Travelers) itemizing warranty work to be addressed,
0 LAKE ELx4O AVENUE SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS: 1'Yr Warranty Period Ends 07'25'2815.
Completed 2'yeorwalk through with Public Works onO6.2l.
° SECTION 34WATER AND SEWER UTILITY EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS: 1'yrWarranty Period Ends O7.15.2015.
° SECTION 34PRESSURE REDUCTION VALVE STATION: 1'yrWarranty Period Ends O7.n7.2V16.
° 2014STREET IMPROVEMENTS: 1'yrWarranty Period Ends 10.31.2O15.
° 2013 SEAL COAT PROJECT: 2'yrWarranty Period Ends D8.2Q.2015.
° 2013[RA[K SEAL PROJECT: 2'yrWarranty Period Ends 12'0G.201S.
° 2Q14SEAL COAT PROJECT: 1'yrWarranty Period Ends 08.05'2015.
ENGINEER'S REPORT P4GE4nf4
]ULYJO,J0l5
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
Consultant Budget Summary Report
PERIOD END JUNE 27, 2015
F C
SENGINEERING, inc.
BUDGET
CONSULTANT- FORM OF CONTRACT DATE APPROVED PROJECT -SERVICE DESCRIPTION JTD INVOICED AMOUNT %COMPLETE %BUDGET
TKDA, Inc. Agreement Continuing Basis 2015 General Engineering - Records 8516.70 Mapping & NA NA
Records
Hydromethods General Services 7/1/2014 2015 Water Resources Support - $1,530.00 Development NA NA
Agreement Development Reviews Escrows
Bolton and Menk, Inc. Task Order No. 1 March 20, 2013 Section 34 (Lennar Area) Water and Sewer $180,868,50 $188,266.00 96%
Utility Extension Improvements
SRF Consulting, Inc. Task Order No. 1 April 3, 2013 State Highway 36 South Frontage Road Study 510,436.17 564,500.00 16%
Bolton and Menk, Inc. Task Order No. 2 August 8, 2013 Purriphouse No. 4 improvements $61,357.08 562,062..00 99%
Bolton and Menk, Inc. Task Order No. 2 August 8, 2013 Connecting Watermain improvements $21,075.00 522,457.00 94%
TKDA, Inc. Auth. No. 3 January 24. 2014 Lake Elmo Avenue Trunk Watermain $55,806.25 $66,500.00 84%
Improvements
MIA Professional Services, Inc. Task Order No. 1A January 21, 2014 Inwood Booster Station Improvements $23,672.27 $112,382.00 21%
MSA Professional Services, Inc. Task Order No, 1B January 21, 2014 Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements $37,979.46 563,800.00 60%
Bolton and Menk, Inc. Task Order No.3 February 10, 2014 2014 Street Improvements $84,813.50 $83,685.00 101%
Bolton and Menk, Inc. Task Order No. 4 May 7, 2014 39th Street North: Street and Sanitary Sewer 581.696.50 573,557.00 111%
Improvements
Bolton and Menk, Inc. Task Order No. 6 August 28, 2014 39th Street North: Street and Sanitary Sewer 568,514,00 $70,000.00 9e%
Imp.: Construction Observation
SEH, Inc. Task Order No. 1 August 20, 2014 Old Village Phase 1 Street and Utility $9,499.75 $9,500.00 10051 100%
Improvements: Exhibits and Cost Estimate
EG Rud May 1, 2015 Water Tower 44 Site Acquisition - Sketch and 5680.00 5180.00 100% 100%
Description
TKDA, Inc. Auth. No.4 April 7, 2015 Eagle Point Boulevard Street and Utility $29,431.20 $42,150,00 70%
Improvements
TOTAL CONTRACTED SERVICES:
$668,080,38 $859,739,00 78%
Fees Remaining: $191,659
r
PURPOSE:
City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota
$2,815,000
General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A
Bond Sale Summary
July 21, 2015
To finance a portion of the City's 2015 infrastructure improvement
projects including street improvements, water and sewer projects, and
purchase equipment.
FINANCE PLAN: To structure the Water and Sewer portions over a term of fifteen year,
Improvement over a term of ten years, and seven years on the Equipment
with each portion having level debt service. Special assessments of
$1,418,090 for a term. of ten years at a rate of 4.50% (two percent over
average coupon) to the repayment of the debt service on the Bonds.
Water and Sewer revenues will cover the remaining debt service on those
portions and tax levies will cover the debt service for the equipment.
RESULTS:
- Moody's confirmed the City's "Aa2"/Stable credit rating
- Eight bids were received. Lowest bid was Piper Jaffray,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
- True Interest Cost (TIC) of 2.25%
- Average Coupon of 2.47%
- All Inclusive Cost of 2.47%
RECOMMENDATION: The interest rates are reflective of current market rates for
tax exempt, bank qualified securities. Therefore, Northland
Securities recommends the City adopt the Bond Resolution
and award the Bonds to Piper Jaffray.
NORTHLAND
SECURITIES
TABULATION OF BIDS
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
$2,815,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015A
AWARD: PIPER JAFFRAY
DATE OF SALE: TUESDAY, JULY 21, 2015
MOODY'S UNDERLYING RATING: Aa2
BIDDER
PIPER JAFFRAY
Kansas City, MO
UNITED BANKERSBANK
Bloomington, MN
CITY SECURITIES CORP.
Indianapolis, IN
FTN FINANCIAL CAPITAL MARKETS
Memphis, TN
ROBERT W. BAIRD & CO., INC.
Milwaukee, WI
BMO CAPITAL mARKErs
Chicago, IL
BOSC, INC.
Dallas, TX
BERNARDI SECURITIES, INC.
Chicago, IL
',molt/Sr NET
PRICE INTEREST COST
TRUE
INTEREST
COST (TIC)
$2,851,057.65 $466.260.82 2.2489540%
$2,875,484.22 $469,686.50 2.2613314%
$2,821,197.00 $-185,788.42 2.3597762(1/o
$2.845,707.69 $490,676.89 2,3652714%
$2,849,060.20 $49 1,699.80 2,3677982%
$2,866,907.15 $505.198,96 2.4187073%
$2,924,423.23 5507,773.78 2.4196654%
$2,825,051.40 $507,044,54 2.4634406%
Main Office 45 South 7th Street, Suite 2000, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Main Office Toll Free I -800-851 -2920
www.northlandsectuities.com
Member FINRA and SIPC
Julie Johnson
From: KylnKlatt
Sent: Tuesday, July 21.2U154:OOPK3
To: Julie Johnson
Subject: FVV:
Attachments: Halcyondoox
From: impetunia Pgmaiicom [mai|tojm0etunia@gmaiicoml
Sent: Monday, July IU,201E11:31PM
To: anneismithpmsn.coni; Nick Johnson; Kyle Natt;]u|ie F|i0et; ib|oerCcD|akeel mo.org; Mike Pearson;
dsnyder@|akee|mo.ore
8ubject:
Dear City LuLUICI|Members and Concerned Persons,
Please read [hcuftoclicd regarding Halcyon Cemetery Proposal before the Tuce,July 2| City CnunoIIMeeting.
Thank YOU,
JcuuMadroich
7/2U15
Re: HALCYON CEMETERY PROPOSAL
To: Lake Elmo City Council members and other concerned Lake Elmo staff
Dear Council Members:
Myname is JeanK8adhnich. | reside at1124Q5«wStNo, Lake Elmo. 4portion wf,nyland abuts the
proposed Halcyon Cemetery at11OG0SO~'StN.
Ihave concerns regarding this proposed cemetery. | always try tpbefair and mindful. 4asuch, |
reviewed this project from the perspective of asking myself, "What is beneficial about this project for
our community". And truthfully, | could not come upwith anything. Then Iasked myself, "Who does
this project benefit?" You could argue people looking for afinal resting place. But really, there's only
one that benefits, the owners. Because regardless mfhow old, outdated land use allowances phrase
this venture, |tisstrictly acommercial enterprise. /knenterprise that does not have twpay real estate
taxes. How a person chooses to make money is their business, until it infringes on someone else's
rights byallowing acommercial endeavor ina rural residential area.
| also asked myself, "Are there other non -beneficial results byallowing this cemetery project be
approved? Here's what | came upowith-
• As already stated, Lake Elmo gets no monetary benefit thru real estate taxes. AyabV'|ine,|dm
remember years back when the applicant's father applied for his home to be considered as
church, again, smhedidn't have tppay real estate taxes.
• However you want to phrase it, this is strictly a commercial enterprise in a rural residential
area.
• Flood plains and drainage. Already | am riddled with guilt as | sold a piece of my property to
the City pfLake Elmo for a back-up municipal vxe||, not knowing it created flooding problems
for nnVneighbor tmthe south. What further problems isthe cemetery going tocause
regardless mfa"pmn6"tohold extra water? This area has several low areas that water collects
—vxhereuvil|thisxmatergn?
• Property value with a cemetery nearby seems to be an area there a few answers to. Does it
decrease property value? |doknow this. |tcertainly doesn't increase them. K8ydaughter and
her family were considering buying rnyplace infuture years. They said, "No wvayV"[fthere's a
cemetery there. | guess |fyou were toask aperson, would you rather live next toacemetery
prnot, which would you choose?
• Aesthetics ofthe area. The fenced in, granite filled cemetery does not coincide with the area.
And with signaQeand lights toboot.
• Traffic isalready anissue on50mStreet. What started out asadirt road, with ahandful of
vehicles 35 years ago when I first moved here, is now a hustling, busy, busy road. Progress
happens, roads are needed, but this road is becoming overburdened and dangerous. To add
even more traffic, when itcould beavoided bynot allowing this venture, and with poor
accessibility by allowing entry only from 501h adds to the peril of this road.
~ Dowxehave aguarantee there will never beacrematorium?
I understand the Planning Commission felt they had to approve the Halycon Cemetery proposal
because, mainly, it's under land use allowance. They stated they can't domuch about it. |anmnot a
city planner, or an expert, but it seems to me, if something is outdated there must be a way to change
it. | can only surmise that the land use was written way back when, for small family plots. Can we
take astep back and take amoment tostudy this?
A8yconcern is, this |saforever deal. Once aproperty isdeemed acemetery there isnogoing back. It
stays acemetery always and forever. |fyou speak toexperts, the general consensus iscemeteries are
dying Wcouldn't resist the punl People are choosing cremation over burial. How can xvebeassured
this property will bemaintained?
Thank you for your consideration.
Jean Madrinich
Julie Johnson
From: Kyle Klatt
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 4:00 PM
To: Julie Johnson
Subject: FW: City Council Meeting
Attachments: Scan0073.pdf
From: Mary Jean Dupuis rmailto:dupuismi@aol.coml
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:27 PM
To: Kyle Klatt
Cc: rsrnith53@rne.com
Subject: City Council Meeting
I cannot be at the meeting tonight but I would like this request presented.
Thank you Kyle.
Mary Jean Dupuis
MJ's Contract Appliance. Inc.
dupuismiaol.com
651-747-1230 Direct Dial
651-770-9316 Direct Fax
651-777-8915 Oakdale Main Office
651-777-6235 Oakdale Main Fax
www.misappliance.com
To: Lake Elmo City Council & Kyle Klatt
From: Mary Jean Dupuis
Subject: Wildflower Development — grass walking path
Date: July 21, 2015
1 reside at 11676 Stillwater Blvd North and have lived at this location for 42
years. This request has been made before but 1 would like to present it again.
1 am requesting the proposed grass trail behind my house (west) on Outlot H be
eliminated. This request stems from the fact that during the FOSC 11
development we were assured that the approximately 16 acres of property
between me and Richard Smith and south to MN 5 would never be developed.
Now there wi!l be houses on a portion of this property. The grass walking path
that we want eliminated pertains only to the area between our 2 homes of
Richard Smith and me on Outlot H.
Mr. Engstrom has stated a few times that hardly any one uses grass paths. 1
think that is further support to eliminate it
However, neither Richard or I want people walking between our homes but
since Richard is out of town I'll speak for myself here and say — i am not at all in
favor of people walking adjacent to the western portion of my property line
especially since the information was clear for many years that no one was ever
going to occupy or use this section of property. I don't think this is an
unreasonable request.
Thank you for reviewing this request.
Mary Jean Dupuis
651-747-1230
To: Lake Elmo City Council & Kyle Klatt
From: Mary Jean Dupuis
Subject: Wildflower Development — grass walking path
Date: July 21, 2015
I reside at 11676 Stillwater Blvd North and have lived at this location for 42
years. This request has been made before but I would like to present it again.
i am requesting the proposed grass trail behind my house (west) on Outlot H be
eliminated. This request stems from the fact that during the FOSC 11
development we were assured that the approximately 16 acres of property
between me and Richard Smith and south to MN 5 would never be developed.
Now there will be houses on a portion of this property. The grass walking path
that we want eliminated pertains only to the area between our 2 homes of
Richard Smith and me on Outlot H.
Mr. Engstrom has stated a few ti es that hardly any one uses grass paths. 1
think that is further support to eliminate it
However, neither Richard or I want people walking between our homes but
since Richard is out of town 1'll speak for myself here and say —1 am not at all in
favor of people walking adjacent to the western portion of my property line
especially since the information was clear for many years that no one was ever
going to occupy or use this section of property. 1 don't think this is an
unreasonable request.
Thank you for reviewing this request.
Mary Jean Dupuis
651-747-1230
Julie Johnson
From: Kyle Klatt
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 4:00 PM
To: Julie Johnson
Subject: FW: City Council Meeting
Attachments: Scan0073.pdf
From: Mary Jean Dupuis fmailto:duouismiPaol.coml
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:27 PM
To: Kyle Klatt
Cc: rsmith53@me.com
Subject: City Council Meeting
I cannot be at the meeting tonight but I would like this request presented.
Thank you Kyle.
Mary Jean Dupuis
MJ's Contract Appliance. Inc.
dupuism 1 aol.com
651-747-1230 Direct Dial
651-770-9316 Direct Fax
651-777-8915 Oakdale Main Office
651-777-6235 Oakdale Main Fax
www.misappliance.com
This letter serves as a request from the following 4 property owners
regarding the TH 5 Realignment.
ary Jean Dupuis —11676 Stillwater Blvd North
arcy & Robert Eischen —11674 Stillwater Blvd North
Richard Smith -- 1514 Stillwater Blvd North
Leona Jacobson —11685 Stillwater Blvd North
e have all reviewed the three Concept Plans. Since this proposed
project is adjacent to our properties access we are requesting Concept
B be put in place and we would like to see Concept A & C deleted.
Mary Jean Dupuis & Richard Smith cannot be at the meeting tonight
but Leona Jacobson and Marcy Eischen will be there to represent us.
They will have a fully signed copy of this request from everyone
except Richard Smith who is out of town.
Thank you for reviewing this request
Mary Jean Dupuis
Marcy & Robert Eischen
Leona Jacobson
TH 5/Manning Avenue Realignment Alternatives Comparison
Draw peak hour traffic to Manning
Improve overall network efficiency
Allow for future development
Improve safety
C
New Local Road Construction
co
Right of Way Acquisition
Maintenance ngth of new City Street)
Overall protect
Travel from Fields of St Croix to Village'
ire Truck response time'
Local property owners
Concept B
Concept C Concept C2
0.2 miles
0.8 acres
0.7 miles
Per County Policy
1.4 rnile$
9.2 minutes
1
For discussion
0 miles 0 miles
0 rrie 0 miles
0.5 miles 05 miles
Per County Policy Per County Policy
1.3 miles 2.5 miles
8.9 minutes 12.5 minutes
For discussion For discussion
Notes
1 Distance measured along existing/proposed roadways from Lake Elmo Fire Department to approximate center of Fields of St Croix
neighborhood.
2 Assumes 5 minutes prep for fire truck to begin travel, and then travels an average speed of 20 MPH (must go through several intersections).
`1- SE C,
PILE
„
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 7, 2015
Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:00 prn.
PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Council Members Julie Fliflet, Anne Smith, Justin Bloyer, and Jill
Lundgren.
Staff present: City Attorney Snyder, City Engineer Griffin, Finance Director Bendel, Community
Development Director Klan and Planning Program Assistant Ziertman.
PLEDGE OF ALLIGENCE
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
APPROVE THE JULY 7, 2015 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AS AMENDED - NO OBJECTIONS.
ACCEPT MINUTESTHE MAY 5, 2015 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES PASSED WITH
NO OBJECTIONS.
COUNCIL REPORTS:
Mayor Pearson: Met with Torre Pines HOA, participated on Moody's Bonding Call, Met with Tony
Good wishes to Dean Zuleger and thanked him for his hard work and efforts, will be at Fan-ners
Market for meet the Mayor on Saturday.
Council Member Lundgren: Farmers Market signs are similar to garage sale signs, met with Tony Manzara,
attended Gateway Workshop, thanks to Public Works for installing AED's, talked to Citizens about Lake
Elmo Ave, thanks to Dean Zuleger for all of his work.
Council Member Bloyer: thank you to staff, talked to Danielle Hecker about Wedding Venue, Resident
Complaints about farmers market signs.
Council Member Smith: met with Tony Manzara, met with Nate Landucci, need to keep businesses on 39,1,
street aware of progress on construction
Council Member Fliflet: went to 4tti of July Parade and Farmers Market, thank you to staff, sat in on
Moody's bonding call, met Nate Landucci, Praise to Dean Zuleger
PUBLIC COMMENTS/INOLJIRIES
Terry Emerson, 2204 Legion Circle N, expressing disappointment in the Council's decision regarding the
signage for Rihm Kenworth.
Matt Frisbie, Ayers Associates has a project with Mike Lynskey on the 26 acres along 39,I, Street. Part of the
project would be a senior living with memory care.
Nate Deprey, Lake Elmo Librarian, June was the busiest month to date. Attendance has been strong with
lots of fun kids' activities planned for summer.
PRESENTATIONS
Sunfish Lake Park Nature Center — Tony Manzara Gave a presentation regarding the possible Nature Center
in Sunfish Lake Park. This proposal has gone to the Park Commission and Planning Commission. Council
has interest in this Nature Center. They would like to see this go back to the Park Commission for Vetting
and then have it come back. Attorney Snyder suggested a Council representative to work with Park
Commission and Council member Smith volunteered.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
July 7, 2015
FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA
2. Approve Payment of Disbursements
3. Accept Finance Report dated May 31,2015
4. Accept Building Report dated May31, 2015
5. Section 34 Pressure Reduction Valve Station — Compensating change Order No.
6. Section 34 Pressure Reduction Valve Station — Compensating Change Order No 1
7. Production Well No 4-Pay request No. 9
8. Pumphouse No.4 — Pay Request No. 8 (Final)
9. Deputy Clerk PTO Payout
MOTION: Member B/03er moved TO APPROVE THE FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA AS
PRESENTED. Count/ AlemberFlfflet feconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
OTHER CONSENT AGENDA
10. Ownership and Maintenance Agreement — 11732 58' ST N
11. Encroachment Agreement -528 Juniper Court N
MOTION: Council A /ember Lundffen moved TO APPROVE THE FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA AS
PRESENTED. Coun,i1 Member Smith feconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
REGULAR AGENDA
ITEM 12: Appointment of City Clerk — Julie Johnson
Council expressed their confidence in the decision to hire Ms. Johnson as City Clerk.
MOTION: Cow ncil Member 1-7 liflet moved TO APPROVE THE APPOINTMENT OF JULI E JOHNSON
TO THE POSITION OF CITY CLERK. Coumil Member Smith seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-
0.
ITEM 13: Eagle Point Boulevard Street Improvements Accept Bids and Award Contract;
Engineer Griffin gave a presentation regarding the estimated improvement costs post bid. Griffin felt that
the bids were competitive. There could be a value on the drain tile for the project. There could also be cost
savings for restoration. There is some potential for reducing overages.
MOTION: Mayor Pearson moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION No. 2015-55 ACCEPTING BIDS
AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO MILLER EXCAVATION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$1,249, 494.09 FOR THE EAGLE POINT BOULEVARD STREETAND UTILITY
IMPROVEMENTS. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-55 Council Member Smith seconded the motion, MOTION
PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 14: Water booster Station — Approve Land Purchase
Engineer Griffin discussed the history of finding property for the booster station. This is being revisited
from October because the County has been taken out of the equation. Purchase price is $27,000 for the
smaller section or $32,000 for the larger site.
Fliflet asked about using a rural theme for the building facade. Griffin stated that there is extra cost
associated with that.
Al Eberhard talked about the aesthetic tradeoffs and costs associated with them. Council seemed in favor of
option 1.
Pane 2 of 7
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
July 7, 2015
Griffin talked about the costs involved with the aesthetics of the building. It could cost as much as $30,000,
but landscaping could also be used. Eberhard stated that there would be less landscaping required if the
aesthetics of the building are better.
Mayor Pearson offered that $30,000 for aesthetic improvements seemed a bit excessive for that size building.
MOTION: Couthil Alember Smith MOVED TO APPROVE THE INWOOD WATER BOOSTER
STATION LAND PURCHASE AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE A 90 FOOT BY 75 FOOT
PARCEL FROM THE CAROLINE MARY EBERHARD LIVING TRUST, (OPTION 1) Council
Member Boyer seconded The motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 15: 2015 Bond Rating Report - Moodv's
Finance Director Bendel gave an update about the Moody's Bond Rating Report. The City maintained the
Aa2 bond rating.
ITEM 16: Request from Verizon Wireless to Formally Address the Council - Ideal Ave. and Langley
Ct Sites -Lease
Verizon is looking for approval from the Council to be able to build a new tower on the Langley court site
and would like to be able to negotiate with staff for lease agreements. Would possibly like to be able to build
a new tower and lease to others or the City owning it and leasing it out.
Council supported looking to site these towers on City land so that they did not end up on private land.
Andrea Albright - Concerned about a 125 foot tower like this going up when telephone poles are being taken
down for aesthetic reasons.
Paul Pallmeyer, Lake Jane Trail, a number of years ago T-rnobile wanted to put up a tower by lake Jane.
What is different about the proposal now? Smith stated that it came to them on the 90,1. day and they had to
make a decision that night. She was opposed to putting it on private property vs. public land.
MOTION: Council Member Pearson moved TO authorize staff to negotiate lease agreements with Verizon
Wireless Communications for the Ideal Avenue and Langley Court water tower sites with
consideration of City owned tower. Council Member FVet seconded the /110110N. MOTION PASSED 5-0
ITEM 17: Request to Fund Services for Code Enforcement Case
Staff is asking for approval for a survey to be done to determine if code enforcement is warranted on a
property in the Tri-lake area.
MOTION: Council Member Lundgen moved TO. Authorize the requested survey work related to ongoing
code enforcement activities in an amount not to exceed $1500 Pearson seconded the motion. MOTION
PASSED 5-0.
ITEM 18: CITY CLERK SEVERENCE REOUEST
MOTION: Council Member B/ger moped TO APPROVE CITY CLERK SEVERENCE REQUEST.
Couna7 Member Pearson seconded the motion. MOTION FAILS 2-3. (FL:Wet, Lundgren, Smith -Nay)
ITEM 19: COUNCIL MEETING DECORUM
This would give the City Council, Commissioners, Staff and Residents guidelines for meeting decorum.
There was opposition to some of the wording.
Dale Dorschner, 3150 Lake Elmo Ave, feels this is ironic after the first meeting when Speak your Peace was
taken down. He feels that when decisions are made, reasons should be given.
Page 3 of 7
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
July 7, 2015
Attorney Snyder stated that the bottom line is if we want to have a policy or not.
Stuart Johnson, thinks that this can be simplified by saying that people need to adhere to behavior determined
by the mayor.
MOTION: Council Member Pecm-on MOVE TO TABLE THIS ITEM FOR FURTHER
REFINEMENT. Council Member Bloyer sec-onded the motion. FAILED 3-2 (Fliflet, Smith — nay)
MOTION: Council Member Fliflet MOVE TO ADOPT THE LAKE ELMO MINNESOTA
GUIDELINES OF PUBLIC MEETING DECORUM PROTOCOL WITH CHANGES TO #3
UNDER CITIZEN BEHAVIOR TO STRIKE "OR RELEVANT" AND THE FIRST SENTENCE
OF #5 TO STATE "WHEN A GROUP OF PERSONS WISHES TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL
ON THE SAME SUBJECT MATTER, THEY MAY CHOOSE A SPOKESPERSON". Council
Member Liindgren seconded the motion. APPROVED 4-1 (Bloyer — Nay)
ITEM 20: Interim Ordinance: Ordinance 08-123
Community Development Director Klatt stated that this Ordinance was prepared at the direction of the
Council to establish a moratorium on new development in the community. There has been limited
development in stage 2 and no development in stage 3. Staff also feels that there should be language that
pertains to the gateway corridor.
Lundgren asked about the vague wording about the benefit to the City. Feels that is too vague and might
open up too much area. Fliflet stated that the wording should be changed to narrow it down to
environmental issues.
Fliflet feels that we just need time to assess and see where we are. This interim ordinance is just for a year
and just because they have paid advance water fees, does not automatically mean they are allowed to move
forward. Klatt stated that there are areas that the City did a public project in the Village area and they were
assessed for it and are not able to develop under this ordinance.
Snyder stated that care should be given for those parcels that assessments are in place for. There is potential
for problems with those that have already been assessed.
Fliflet would like Section 1 item b removed as it is only for a year. There should also be something regarding
the BRT Line. Klatt went through his recommendation in regards to the BRT.
Mayor Pearson suggested that this Ordinance addressed the excess residential development to some degree
while allowing for commercial tax base to occur.
MOTION: Council Member Pearson mope TO ADOPT AN INTERIM ORDINANCE FOR THE 3
HIGHER DENSITY PARCELS. Council Member Bloyer Avoided the motion. MOTION FAILED 2-3
(Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith — Nay)
Deb Krueger, Lake Elmo Ave, stated that she agrees with the moratorium and feels that we need to slow
down and reassess and see where we are at and figure out what we want to do. A year is not that long of a
time.
Bob Durow, NE intersection of 94 and Keats, they have a purchase agreement in place and a 1 year
moratorium will kill the sale.
Terry Emerson, 2204 Legion Lane Circle, was concerned that the commercial area would be affected.
MOTION: Council Member Fl{flet moped TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 08-123. DECLARING A
MORATORIUM FOR A PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS ON CERTAIN TYPES OF
DEVELOPMENT AS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDINANCE WITH THE FOLLOWNIG
CHANGES: REMOVE ITEM B IN SECTION 1 & SECTION 2; REMOVE "BENEFIT
COMMUNITY OR" FROM ITEM C IN SECTION 1; AND INCORPORATE THE WHEREAS
STATEMENT STAFF PROVIDED REGARDING THE GATEWAY CORRIDOR COMMISSION
INVOLVEMENT. Council Member Lundgren seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 3-2. (Pearson, Bloyer
— Nay)
Page 4 of 7
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
July 7, 2015
ITEM 21: Discussion Old Village Work Grout?
Councilmember Fliflet started the discussion about the work group and expressed her intent to have a
discussion about what the work group is, how it was formed and what it does. She thanked Community
Development Director Klatt for the memo he prepared and stated that it is a very accurate summaiy. Fliflet
stated that the Park Commission has referred to this group as the Village Green group which is not accurate
as the Lake Elmo Avenue project has nothing to do with this group. Fliflet stated that if there are any
questions regarding the group, please ask
Mayor Pearson identified the "Village Work Group Consensus Proposal" and expressed his reservations
regarding it.
Barry Weeks, 3647 Lake Elmo Ave, had never heard about the Old Village Work Group. He found out
about it last fall and felt it was difficult to find on the City's website.
Dale Dorschner, Lake Elmo Ave, would like to know the cost of the Old Village Work Group. There is a
rumor out there that there is a million dollar bill. Klatt stated that the cost out there is due to planning
efforts. Mr. Dorshner would like to see citizens in the area on the group and would like accountability.
Councilmember Bloyer discussed history of the group, citing past discussion and notes concerning the size
and specific location of the area in the Old Village Work Group plan.
Klatt stated that there were two plans brought forward. The Village Work Group never had any decision
making authority, but was a recommending body. If the City Council would like to continue, that plan might
need to be brought out. If the group continues, the participation should be broadened out.
Klatt would like to come back to Council with some specifics regarding the group and get some specific
direction from the Council.
Motion to recess until 10:00 tomorrow.
STAFF REPORTS & ANNOUNCEMENTS:
CUT Finance Director Bendel: None
City Attorney Snyder: None
Community Development Director Klatt: None
City Engineer Griffin: None
Mayor Pearson Recessed the meeting at 11:55 pm.
July 8, 2015
Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Councilmembers Julie Fliflet, Justin Bloyer and Jill Lundgren.
ABSENT: Councilmember Anne Smith.
MOTION: Ma):or Pearson moved TO RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Councitmember
Lundgren seAnciecl the motion. MOTION PASSED 4-0
Mayor Pearson stated that one applicant for the Interim City Administrator position was unintentionally
omitted from the process and suggested 9:00 p.m. on July 9‘ 2015 for a thirty minute interview.
Councilmember Bloyer suggested scheduling another time after the interview to discuss the candidates due to
the late evening timing of the interview.
MOTION: Ma jor Pearson moved TO RECONVENE THE MEETING THURSDAY, JULY 9 2015 AT
9:00 PM. Cottncilmemberbtndgren seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 4-0
Page 5 of 7
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
July 7, 2015
MOTION: Councilmember FliAt moved TO RECESS THE MEETING UNTIL 9:00 PM, THURSDAY,
JULY 9, 2015. Colman!member Lundgren seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 4-0
Mayor Pearson Recessed the meeting at 10:15 a.m.
July 9, 2015
Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 9:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Councilmembers Fliflet and Lundgren.
ABSENT: Councilmembers Bloyer and Smith.
MOTION: Councilmember Lundgren moved TO RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
Aiayo?' Pearson seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 3-0
Mayor Pearson noted that because the full Council was not able to attend the meeting, the meeting would be
recessed and reconvened Friday, July 106 at 8:00 a.m.
MOTION: Comic/ lmember Lundgren moved TO RECESS THE MEETING UNTIL 8:00 A.M. FRIDAY,
JULY 10, 2015. CouncilmemberF Vet seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 3-0
Mayor Pearson Recessed the meeting at 9:02 p.m.
July 10, 2015
Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 8:00 a..m.
PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Councilmembers Julie Fliflet, Anne Smith, Justin Bloyer, and Jill
Lundgren.
MOTION: Councilmember Lundgren moved TO RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
Coundlmember Smith seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0
Mayor Pearson stated that the purpose of the meeting was to conduct the final interview for the Interim City
Administrator position. One candidate was interviewed and provided with a list of questions the other
candidates had answered in writing. Discussion held concerning allowing the final candidate time to provide
written answers as the other candidates had. Discussion held concerning potential times to reconvene the
meeting for the purpose of discussing the candidates and interviews.
MOTION: Counc.ilmember1-741let moved TO RECONVENE THE MEETING AT 3:00 ON FRIDAY,
JULY 10, 2015 AT 3:00 PM. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0
Mayor Pearson recessed the meeting at 9:06 a.m.
July 10, 2015
Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 3:06 p.m.
MOTION: Mayor Pearson moved TO RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Councilmember
Bloyer seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0
Discussion was held concerning the five candidates for the Interim City Administrator position. Applicants
were randomly assigned a number for reference during discussion. Strengths and weaknesses of each
candidate were discussed.
MOTION: Councilmember 174'Ilet moved TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND FINANCE
COMMITTEE CHAIR TO WORK WITH CITY ATTOR1VEY S1VYDER TO NEGOTIATE WITH
CA1VDIDATE C3, OFFERING HIM/HER THE POSITION OF INTERIM CITY
Page 6 of 7
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
July 7, 2015
ADMINISTRATOR IN A RANGE OF 75-85% OF THE CURRENT CITY ADMINISTRATOR
POSITION SALARY Omntilmember Smith seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Bloyer — Nay)
Councilmember Bloyer stated that although he did not support the motion, he hopes the candidate is
successful in the Interim City Administrator position.
MOTION: A Lgor Pearson moved TO INITIATE THE SEARCH FOR A PERMANENT
CITYADMINISTRATOR BY DECEMBER 1, 2015. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. MOTION
PASSED 5-0
MOTION: CouncilmemberWlet moved TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. Mcgor Peen:roll seconded the motion.
MOTION PASSED 5-0
Mayor Pearson adjourned the meeting at 4:08 p.m.
ATTEST:
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
Mike Pearson, Mayor
Page 7 of 7
INTERIM CITY ADMISTRATOR EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT,
THIS AGREEMENT made this 21st day of July, 2015 by and between the CITY OF
LAKE ELMO, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Employer"), and Clark Schroeder
("Employee").
The parties agree as follows:
1 POSITION. Employer agrees to employ Employee as its Interim Full Time City
Administrator. Employee agrees to serve as Interim City Administrator in accordance with state
statutes and City ordinances and to perform such other legally permissible and proper duties and
functions as the City Council shall from time to time assign.
2. TE Employee is retained as the City's Interim City Administrator until such
time as a regular City Administrator is appointed, which is anticipated to be no longer than 6
(six) months. The City may terminate the Employee with or without cause at any time with
fourteen days prior notice to the Employee and the Employee may terminate his employment at
any time with fourteen working days prior notice to the Employer.
3 PENSION PLAN. Employer shall contribute to PERA as required by State law.
4. SALARY. Employer shall pay Employee a salary of $1,650.00 per week
($41.25/hour), subject to withholding required by State and Federal law for taxes, FICA,
Medicare, PERA and the like. Both parties recognize this amount is not equivalent to the full -
current salary for the City Administrator position, and if the Employee is selected as the
permanent City Administrator the wages and benefits negotiated will be equivalent to the full
current salary for the City Administrator position, or commensurate with those paid by other
local cities of similar size and scope.
5 BENEFITS. Employee shall receive benefits of the same type and kind offered
routinely to other employees.
6. HOLIDAYS. Employer shall provide Employee the same paid holidays observed
by other non -union employees.
7. AUTOMOBILE. Employee shall be reimbursed on a per mile basis at the IRS
allowed deduction rate for the use of his personal automobile for Employer business.
8. GENERAL EXPENSES. Employer shall reimburse Employee miscellaneous
job related expenses which it is anticipated Employee will incur from time to time when
provided appropriate documentation.
9. HOURS OF WORK. It is understood that the position of Interim City
Administrator requires attendance at evening meetings and occasionally at weekend meetings. It
is understood by Employee that additional compensation and compensatory time shall not be
allowed for such additional expenditures of time. It is further understood that Employee will
absent himself from the office to a reasonable extent in consideration of extraordinary time
expenditures for evening and weekend meetings at other than normal working hours.
10. INDEMNIFICATION. Employer shall defend and indemnify Employee to the
extent required by Minn. Stat. § 466.07 and § 465.76.
11. PAID TIME OFF. Employee shall be allowed five (5) days of paid time off
taken periodically, not as 5 consecutive days.
This agreement shall supersede any previous agreements and oral understandings between
the parties and may not be amended except in writing, signed by both parties. In the event of any
conflict between this agreement and the Employee Handbook, this agreement shall take
precedence.
2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Employer has caused this Agreement to be signed and
executed on its behalf by its Mayor and City Clerk, and Employee has signed this Agreement, in
duplicate, the day and year first written above.
EMPLOYER:
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
Dated: By:
Dated: By:
Dated:
Its Mayor
Its City Clerk
EMPLOYEE:
Interim City Administrator
1.t,ITV )!:
\KE FL \1
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
THROUGH:
REVIEWED BY:
DATE: July 21, 2015
CONSENT
ITEM #6
MOTION
Approve Disbursements in the amount of $273,965.36
Patty Baker. Accountant
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
littroduction of Item ..... Administrator
..... Administrator
()tiestions from Council to f\layor Facilitates
(;:all liar Motion ............... .... ........................................... 'Mayor & City Council
Discussion ....................... .... ...... tvlayor & ('it y Council
Action on ........ 1\layor Facilitates
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance
FISCAL IMPACT: $273,965.36
SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council
is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of $273,965.36. No specific motion is needed
as this is recommended to be part of the C'onsent Agenda.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: NA
-- page
City Council Meeting IC-wise/7i .1gencla Item 6J
July 21, 2015
BACKGROUND INFORMATION/STAFF REPORT: The City of Lake Elmo has the
fiduciary responsibility to conduct normal business operations. Below is a summary of current
claims to be disbursed and paid in accordance with State law and City policies and procedures.
Claim # Amount Description
ACH $ 12,966.80 Payroll Taxes to IRS & MN Dept of Revenue 7/09/15
ACH $ 5.802.63 Payroll Retirement to PERA 7/09/15
DD6429-DD6477 $ 36.092.79 Payroll Dated (Direct Deposits) 7/09/15
43059-43127 $ 218,923.14 Accounts Payable 7/21/15
2738-2740 $ 180.00 Library Card Reimbursement 7/21/15
TOTAL $ 273,965.36
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council
approve as part of the Consent Agenda the aforementioned disbursements in the amount of
$273,965.36.
ATTACHMENTS:
Accounts Payable — check registers
-- page 2 --
Accounts Payable
To Be Paid Proof List -
User: Pa)yB
Primed: 07/15/7015 - 2:13 PM
Batch-. 005-07-2015
Invoice ft'
iov Date
Amount Onantif y Plitt Date Description Reference Task Type PO 4 Close POLine
AMDAHL Chris Amdahl Locksmith, Inc
11647 07/01/2015 293.80 0.00 0712112015 Rekey North Buikling No 0000
101-410-194(1-4431)0 Miscellaneous
11642 Total! 293.80
AMDAHL Total: 293,80
13A1(ER PAT Baker Patricia
2015-06 07/02/2015 042.19 0.00 07/21/2015 Contract Services - June No 0000
101-410-1520-43150 Contract Services
2015-06 07/02/2015 1,284,37 0.00 07/21/2015 Contract Services - June No 0000
601-494-9400-43 150 Contract Services
2015-06 07/02./2015 250,87 (1.00 07/21/2015 Contract Services - June No 0000
602-495-9450-43150 Contract Services
2015-06 07/02/20 I 5 385.37 0,00 07/21/2015 Contract Services - June No 0000
603-490-9500-43150 Contract Services
2015-06 Total; 2.568.75
BAKERPAT Total: 2,568.75
BRAUN Braun Intertee Corporation
B030653 06/23/2015 1,143.12 0.00 07/21/2015 39th Street No 0000
409-480-8000-43(130 Engineering Services
6030653 00/23/2015 1,143.13 0,00 07/21/2015 39th Street No 0000
602-495-9450-43030 Engineering Services
13030653 Total: 2,286.25
BRAUN Total: 2,286.25
CAMPION Campion Barrows & Assoc., Corp
13765 06/30/2015 1,245.00 0.00 07/21/2015 Psych Evaluations No 0000
101-420-2220-43050 Physicals
13765 Total: I .245.00
AP To Be Pak! Proof' List (07/15/15 - 2:13 PM) Page 1
Invoice #
IJIV Date
CAMPION Total:
Amount
I ,245.00
Pint Date Desc rip rim, 12.eference Task- Type PO it Close POLitte
No 0000
COLDWELL Caldwell Banker Commercial
40389 06/2212015 240.00 0.00 07/21120 i 5 Water leak and cleaning AC unit
206-450-5300-44010 Repairs/M aim Bldg
40389 Total: 240.00
COLDWELL Total: 240.00
CONi CAST Comcast
06/27/2015
101-420-2220-44300 Miscellaneous
Total:
COMCAST Total:
7.90 0.00 07/21/2015 Monthly Service
7.90
7,90
No 0000
CTYBLOOM City of Blootnington
June- 15 07/01/2015 31.50 0.00 07/21;2015 Lab bacteria testing No 0000
601-494-9400-42270 Utility System Maintenance
June- 15 Total: 31.50
CTYBLOOM Total: 31.50
CTYOAKDA City of Oakdale
June 07/01/2015 3,000.00 0.00 07/71/2015 New Connections - June WAC fees No 0000
601-000-0000-20303 WAC due Oakdale
June Total: 3,000.00
CTYOAKDA Total: 3,000.00
CTYOAKDP City of Oakdale
10000460-01 07/01/2015
601-494-9400-4382.0 Water Utility
10000460-01 Total:
CTYOAKDP Total:
8,954.87 0.00 07/21/2015 Water Services - South Pb
8,954.87
8,954.87
No 0000
DPCIN'OUS DPC Industries, Inc.
827001023-15 07/08/2015 99.00 0.00 07121/2015 Chlorine No 0000
601-494-9400-42160 Chemicals
8270(11.028-15 Total: 99.00
DPC1NDUS Total: 99.00
AP - To Be Paid Proof Lis; 4,07./15/15 - 2:13 PM)
Page 2
invoice
' Dal e AmnIMI Q11:1)Itity Pint Date Descript ion Reference Task
Type iO if Close POLifte
DREAM Dream Structures Design
2014-224 07/07/201.5 5,000.00 0,00 07/2112015 Escrow R elease 10966 571h St No 0000
803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable
2014-224 1ora': 5,000.00
DREAM Total: 5,000.00
LCONO The Economist
07/08/2015 117.00 0.00 07/21/2015 Subscription No 0000
206-450-5300-42500 Library Collection Maintenance
Total: 1 I 7,00
ECONO Tom!: 117.00
Enright Enright Robert
Cable 07/13/2015 55.00 0.00 07/2112015 PC 7/13/15 No 0000
101-410-1450-43620 Coble Operations
Cable 07/130015 25.00 0.00 07/21/2015 PC 7/13,15 - Bonus No 0000
101-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations
Cable Total: 80.00
Enright Total: 80.00
FERGUSON Ferguson Waterworks, Inc 12516
143553 06/25/2015 5.063.02 0.00 07/21/2015 Water meters No 0000
601-494-9400-42300 Water Meters & Supplies
143553 Total: 5,063.02
FERGUSON Total: 5,063.02
FIRECRET Firc Craft Safety Producrs
15-1531 Revised 07/08/2015
i 01-420-2220-42400 Small Tools & Equipment
15-153 I Revised Total:
El R ECRET Total:
4,378.95 0.00 07/21/2015 Gas Monitors
4,378,95
4,3 78.95
No 0000
FOCUS Focus _Engineering, Inc.
1998-2002 06/27/2015 668.75 0.00 07/21/2015 Building No 0000
101-420-2400-43030 Engineering
1998-2002 06/2712015 294,75 0.00 07/21/2015 1"X No 0000
101-430-3100-43030 Engineering Sei-viecs
1998-2002 06/27/2015 2,259.80 0.00 07/21/2015 General - No 0000
101-410-1930-43030 Engineeritia Services
I 998-2002 06/2712015 1,361.15 0.00 07121/2015 Planning, No 0000
101-.410-1910-43030 Engineering Services
60 - To 13e Paid Pool List r07715/15 - 2:12 11‘,.1-) raze 3
# Inv Date
1998-2002 06/27/2015
101-430-3100-43030 Engineering Services
1998-2002 Total:
2003 06/27/20 I 5
601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services
2003 06/27/2015
602-495-9/150-43030 Engineering Services
2003 06/27/2015
603-496-9500-43030 Engineering Services
2003 Total:
2004 06/27/2015
409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services
2004 06/27/2015
409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services
2004 06/27/2015
409-4SO-8000-43030 Engineering Services
2004 Total:
2005 06/27/2015
601-494-940(1-43030 Engineering Services
2005 Total:
2006 06/27/2015
601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services
2006 06/27/2015
602-495-9450-45030 Engineering Services
2006 Total:
2007 06/27/2015
602.495-9450-43030 Engineering Services
2007 Total:
2008 06/27/2015
601-494-9400-43030 Enr,,ineering Services
2008 Total:
2009 06/27/2015
60 I -494-9400-43030 Engineering Services
2009 Total:
2010 06/27/2015
409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services
2010 Total:
2011 06/27/2015
409-480-800(1-43030 Engineering Services
2011 Total:
2012 06/27/2015
601-494-9400-4303(1 Engineering Services
2012 Total:
20 I „3 06/27/2015
601-494-940(1-43(130 Engineering Services
AP - To Re Paid Proof List (07/15i15 - 2:13 ('lvI)
„Aorionri Qtran I ity Pint Date Description Beferptire, 'l'ask Type 1'0 # Close P01.ine
287.00
4,871.75
1,322,00
1, I 08.98
2,779.95
5,210.93
430.00
353.25
191.25
974,50
0.00 07/21/2015 ROW
0,00 07/2112015 Water
0,00 07/21/2015 Sewer
0,00 07/21/2015 Surface Water
0.00 07/21/2015
0.00 07/21/2015
0,00 07/21/2015
2015,113 Transportation & Traffic
2015,114 Municpal Aid
2015, 116 Capital linprovernent
181,25 0,00 07/21/2015 2013.125 Production Well 4
181.25
818,30
0,00 07/21/20 I 5 2013,126 Section 34 Water
1,227.45 0.00 07/21/2015 2013.126 Section 34 Sewer
413.00 0.00 07/21/2015 2(113,127 CS,AH 15
1,229,50 0.00 07/21./2015 2013432 Pumphouse 4
2,956.71 0.00 07/21/2015 2013,133 LE Ave Taiuk Waterinain
6,638,35 0,00 07/21/2015 2013,134 LE Ave Corridor
2,045,75
413,00
1,229,50
2,956,71
6,638.35
88,50 0,00 07/21/2015 2014.121 State Highway 5 Traffic
Mgrunt
88.50
I ,023.00
I ,023.00
0.00
07/2117015 2014,129 Inwood Booster Station
260,00 0,00 07/21/2015 2014, 130 Inwood Trunk Waterman)
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
000o
0000
(1(10(1
0000
0000
0000
0011(1
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
Pau_ 4
Invoice #
Inv Date
2(11.3 Total:
2014 060 7,r)015
409-480-8000-43030 Engineering services
2014 Total:
7015 06/27/2015
409-480-8000-43030 Engineering. Services
2015 Total:
2016 06/27/2015
409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services
2016 Total:
2017 06/27/2015
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2017 Total:
2018 06/27/2015
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2018 Total:
2010 06/27/2015
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2019 Total:
2070 06/27/2015
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2(120 Total:
2021 06/27/2015
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2021 Total:
2022 06/27/2015
803-0011-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2022 Total:
2023 06/2712015
8034000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2023 Total:
2024 06/27/2015
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2074 Total:
7025 06/27/2015
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2025 Total:
2026 06/27/20 I 5
803-000-0000-2291 C) Developer Payments
2026 Total:
2027 06/27/20 15
803-000-11000-22910 Developer Payments
2027 Total:
2028 0612717015
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
monnt Quail lity Nut Dote 1:h.,!tcrip Lion Reference
760.00
1,144.25 0.00 07/2112015 2014,131 39t1) Street
1,144,25
1,232.00 0,00 07() 10015 '015.117 2015 Seal coat
1,232,00
2,6041.25 0.00 07/21/2015 -70 15,120 Eagle Point Blvd
2,604.25
865.00 0.00 07/21/2015 2(112.130A Lcimar 1-94 corridor
865.00
8,121.11 0.00 07/21/20 15 Boulder roods
8,121.11
118.00 0,00 07/21/2015 2014,122 Goctseltel OP
118.00
4,581.93 0.00 07/21/20 I 5 Wildflower
4,581.93
I ,003.00 0.00 07121/2015 Village Preserve
1,003.00
1,609.50 0.00 07/2112015 Easton Village
1,609.50
I ,026,99 0.00 07/21/2015 Kwik Trip
1,026,99
I 1,476.70 0.00 07/21/2015 Savonna 21141
11,476.70
13,162,74 0.00 07/21'2015 Inwood - Hans liagen
[3,162.74
104.75 0.00 07/21/2015 Halcyon Cemetery
[04.75
2,339.50 0.00 07/2]/201 5 Diedrich -Rieder - Lennar
2,339.50
2,793.24 0.00 07/21/2015 Hunters Crossing
I'a/d Type
1)() 1/ Chno2 l'()Line
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
AP - To Be Pala Proof' List 07115/15 - 2:13 Pi',V) Page 5
Invoice ft
lug Date
Amount Qiututity Plitt Date 13escriptimt R oferciiee "nisk TYPe 1'0 /- Close l'OLifie
2028 Total: 2,793.24
2029 06/27/2015 429.50 0.00 07/21/20 15 Hunter Crossing 2nd No 0000
803-000-0000-229 I 0 Developer Payinents
2029 Total 429.50
2030 06/27/2015 2,849.00 0.00 07/2 117,015 Leimar - 3rd No 0000
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2030 Toml: 2,849.00
2031 06/27/2015 399.00 0,00 07/21/2015 /Nino Owner Building No 0000
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
2031 Total: 399.00
FOCUS Total: 81,753.70
FONTANA Fontana Dan
07/08/2015 550.00 0.00 07/21/2015 Refund Security Deposit No 0000
206-000-0000-20600 Contracts Payable
Total: 550.00
FONTANA Total: 550.00
FRANCOTY Francotyp-Postalia, Inc
RI 102477021 06/29/2015
10.1-4 I 0-1320-42000 Office Supplies
RI) 02477021 Total:
FRANCOTY Total:
GKSERV1C G&K Services
1102166043 06/24/2015
101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms
1182166043 Total:
1182177421 07/01/2015
101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms
I 18217742 I Total:
1182189019 07/08/20 15
I 01-430-3100-44170 Uniforms
1182189019 Total:
G KS ERV IC Total:
119.30 0.00 07/21/2015 Ink tor postage meter No 0000
11 9 . 30
119.30
36.84 0.00 07/21/2015 Uniforms No 0000
36,84
36.84 0.00 07/2117015 UM fon us No 0000
36.84
30.84 0.00 07121/2015 uniforms No 0000
36,84
110,52
GRAPH ICR Graphic Resources Inc
52621 07/10/2015 1,275.00 0.00 07/21./2015 Newsletter
101-410-1450-43090 Newsletter
52621 Total: 1,275.00
AP - To Be 0aid Proof' (07./15/I 5 - 2: i3
No 0000
Page 6
Invoice tf'
ittv Pate
Amount QtrAttiity Pm( [Date 1).cscrip Reference
Task TYPe
Close POLine
GRAPH ICR Total: 1.275.00
HAIIZE Haire Kevin
2013-650 07/07/2015 5,000.00 0,00 07/2 S2015 Escrow Release - 8160 Hill Trail No 0000
803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable
2013-65() Total: 5,000.00
1-1AlIZE Total: 5,000,00
HUGOPLUM Hugo Plumbing & Pump Se r Inc
6146 07/07/2015
I 01-410-1940-44:100 Miscellaneous
6146 Total:
HUGOPLUM Total:
265,00 000 07/71/7015 Install drinking fountains
265,00
265,00
No 0000
INNOVAT Innovative Office Solutions
835936 07/07/2015 174.50 0.00 07/21/2(1)5 Paper No 000(1
101-4 10- 1320-42000 Oitice Supplies
835936 Total: 124,50
INNOVAT Total: 124,5(1
I NSITE lnsite, Inc
2015-19:1 07/07/2015 1,200,00 0,00 07/21/2015 Escrow Release 901 LE. Ave No 000(1
S03-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable
2015-194 Total: 1,200.00
1NSITE Total: 1,200.00
JANIKING Juni-King of Minnesota, Inc
MIN07150417 07101/2015 326.00 0.00 07/2 1 /2015 Cleaning Services - City Hall No 0000
101-410-1940-4401(1 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bklg
M1N07150417 Total: 326.00
JANIKING 326.00
JARDINE Jardine, Logan & OBricn PLLP
103833 0,3/18/2015 987.00 0,00 07/21/7015 Legal Services No 0000
101-410-1320-43040 Legal Services
103833 Total: 987.00
JARDINE Total: 987,00
AP - To Re Paid Proof List (07/15/15 - 2: 13 PM ) Page 7
invoiee Date
A inciill1( II a 11 ti Cy Plitt Date Pest' riptinn
Reference
Tac, Type PO tt Close POLioe
JFL1FLET Flillet Julio
06128/2015 27.60 0,00 07/2112015 Mileage No 0000
101-410-1110-43310 Mileage
06/28/2015 7,50 0,00 07/21/2015 Parking No 0000
101-410-11 I 0-44300 M iseellaneous
Total: 35.10
JFLIFLET Total: 35,10
JOHNSON& Johnson & Turner Altonicvs
43427 07/08/2015 4,512,50 0.00 07/21/2015 Prosecution No 0000
101-420-2150-43045 Attorney Criminal
43427 Total: 4,512,50
43566 07/08/2015 600,00 0,00 07/21/2015 Wildflower No 0000
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
43566 Total. 600.00
43569 07/08/2015 65.00 0,00 (17/21/2(115 Burgess Matter No 0000
101-4 0- 320-43040 Legal Services
43569 Total; 65.00
43750-751 07108/2015 762.50 0,00 (17/21/2015 Library Matters No 0000
206-450-5300-43040 Legal Services
43750-751 "fatal: 762.50
43754 07/08/2015 2,915.00 0.00 07/21/2015 Easton Village No 0000
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
43754 0710812015 2,620.00 0.00 07/21/2015 Hans Hagen No 0000
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
43754 Total: 5,535.00
43759 07/08/2015 1(1,342.0(1 0,00 07/21/2015 Civil Matters No 0000
101-410-1320-43040 Legal Services
43759 Total: 10,342,00
43760 07/08/2015 220,0(1 0,00 07/2112015 Village Preserve No 0000
803-000-0000-22910 Developer Payments
43760 Total: 220.00
JOHNSON& Total: 72.037,00
kath fuel Ka th Fuel Oil Service Co
5 i 5973 06/23/2015 1,049,03 0.00 07121/2015 Fuel No 0000
101-430-3100-42120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids
515923 Total: 1,049.03
kali] fuel Total: 1,049.03
KINGK King Kassidy
Cable 07/13/2015 55.0(1 0,00 07121/2015 PC 7/13/15 No 0000
I 01-4 I 0-1450-13620 Cable Operations
AP - Be Paid Proof List 017/15/15 - 2:13 PM) rage
inVOiee Inv i)n Le
A 111011t1 111311. Dote Description Iioforcnce Tasl
Type .1)() t! Close POUne ft-
Cable 07,11312015 25,00 0,00 07/2112015 PC 7/13115 Bonus No 0001)
101-410-14150-43620 Cable Operations
Cable Total: 80300
IKJNCIK, 'Fotal: 8.0.00
LANG RON Ron's Inspection Services, LLC
14 0/30/2015 2,849,25 0,011 0712112015 Building Inspector Services No 0000
I 01-420-2400-43150 Inspector Contract Services
14 06,13012015 45022 0,00 07/2 IPO 15 Building Inspector Mileage - No 0000
I 01-420-2100-43310 Mileage
14 Total; 3,299,47
LANG RON Total: 3,299.47
LEO L Lake Elmo Oil, Inc,
06/30/2015 575,41 0,00 07/21/2015 Fuel No 0000
101-420-2220-42120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids
06/30/2015 28.02 0,00 07/21/2015 Fuel No 0000
101-430-3100-12120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids
Total, 603.43
1_ EDI L 603.43
LibraryI Library Ideas
46534 06/30(2015 1,00 0.00 07/21/2015 Freading as you go No 0000
206-450-5300-42500 Library Collection Nil aintenance
46534 Total: 1.00
Libraryt Total: 1,00
Lillie Newspapers Inc. L111 le Suburban
Acct 7148 06,130)0215 161,83 0,00 07121/7015 Notices No 0000
101-410-1320-43510 Legal Publishing
Acct 7148 Total: 161,83
Lillie Total: 161.83
LOFF Loffler Cninpa les, Inc,
2015487 07/01/2015
101-410-1940-44040 Repairs/Maint Contractual F.opt
2015487 Total:
LOFT Total:
382.36 0.00 07171/7015 Copy machine base and overage
382.36
382.36
No 0000
- To Be Paid Proof' List (07/15/15 - 2:13 0M Page 9
yOiee Inv Date
...Amount Quantity Nut Date Description .11-fercacc
Task Type PO tt Close POLine
MARONEYS Maroney's Sanitation, Inc
580746 06/26/2015 112.94 0.00 07/21/2015 City Hall No 0000
101 -410-1940-43840 Refuse
580746 06126/2015 49.7 l 0.00 0701/2015 Fire No 0000
101-420-2220-43840 Refuse
580746 06/26/2015, 216.67 0.00 07/21/2015 P\V No 0000
101-430-3100-43840 Refuse
580746 06/26/2015 216,67 0.00 07/21/2015 Fire - No 0000
101-420-2220-43840 Refuse
580746 06/26/2015 49,89 0.00 07/21/2015 Library No 0000
206-450-5300-43840 Refuse
580746 Total: 645.88
MARONEIS Total: 645.88
MCCARTFIY McCarthy Well Company
26144 06/23/2015 675.00 0.00 07/21/2015 Annual inspections Nu 0000
601-494-9400-42270 Utility System Maintenance
26144 Total: 675.00
MCCARTHY Total: 675,00
MENARDSO Menards - Oakdale
80921 06/23/2015 9.99 0.00 07/2 I/2.015 Equip-m:1a for new ladder No 0000
410-480-8000-45500 Vehicles
80221 Total: 9.99
80124 06/25/2015 89.87 0,00 07/2112015 Landscape No 0000
101-450-5200-42250 Landscaping Materials
80424 Total: 89.87
80784 06/29/2015 152.93 0.00 07/21/2015 Landscape No 0000
101-450-5200-42250 landscaping Materials
80784 Total: 152.93
81599 07/09/2015 59,45 0.00 07/21/2015 Sanctuary No 0000
404-480-8000-44030 Repairs/Maint Imp Not Bldgs
81599 Total: 59.45
MENARDSO Total: 312.24
METCOU Metropolitan Council
1046159 07/02/20,15
602-495-9450-43820 Sewer Utility - Met Council
1046159 Total:
METCOU Total:
AP - To Bc raid Proof List (07/15/15 - 2:13 PM)
1,466,00 0.00 07/21/2015 Waste Water Services No 0000
1,466,00
1.466,00
Page 10
invoke At
Inv Date
A.toinint Quantity Pint Date 1-;(rip eference
-.`
11 ETSAC Metropolitan Council
JUI11:' 2015 07,101/2015 14,910.00
602-000-0000-20802 SAC due Met Council
June 2015 07.'01/2015. -149.10
602-000-0000-37220 SAC Early Pay discount/revenue
June 2015 Total: 14,760,90
METSAC Total: 14,760,90
Task' Type PO A! Close P(OLine
0.00 07/21/2015 SAC Charges - June 2015
0.00 07/2112015 SAC Charges - Timely Reporting
Discount
No 0000
No 0000
MILLERI/X Miller Excavating, Inc.
19525 06/29/2015 880.28 0.00 07/21/2015 Street Materials No 0000
101 -430-3 120-42240 Street Maintenance Materials
19525 06/2912015 2,082.50 0.00 07/21/20 15 Grader Services No 0000
101-430-3 1 20-13 150 Contract Services
19525 Total: 2,962.78
MI LLF.iR EX Total: 2,962.78
MINITEX Minitex
87890 /2015 738.00 0.00 07/21/2015 Patron Counters No 000(1
706-450-5300-45800 Other Equipment
S7890 Total: 738.00
MINI'FEX Total: 738.1)0
MNPIPE Minnesota Pipe & Equipment
337699 07/06./2015 510.00 0.00 07/21/201 5 Covers No 0000
601-494-9400-42300 Water Meters (Kt. Supplies
337699 Total: 510_00
NP1PE Total: 510,00
NORDIC Nordic Electric
2015-579 06/30/20 I 5 57.75 0:00 07/2 20 15 Refund Duplicate Fee No 0000
101-000-0000-20802 Electrical Permit Fees Payable
2015-579 06/30/2015 19.25 0,00 07/21/2015 IZefund Duplicate Fee No 0000
101-000-0000-32280 Electrical Permit Revenue
2015-579 06/30/2015 5.00 0.00 07/21.12015 Refund Duplicate Fee No 0000
101-000-0000-20801 Building Permit Surcharge
2015-579 "fotal.. 82:00
NORDIC Total: 823)0
ON ECA LL Gopher State One Cali
137999 06/3072015 363,95 0.00 07/21/2015 Tickets No 0000
101-430-3 100-43 150 Contract Services
AP To Be Paid Proof List (07/)5/15 - 2:13 FM)
Page 1 1
Invoice 4
v Dale
A mount Quantity Pint Date Description Ref cren co Task Tvpe # Ouse P0L,iii#
137999 Total:
ONECALL Total:
363.95
363.95
PERA PERA
96468 00129/2015 363.73 0,00 07/21/2015 PERA Deductions - Riley
101-410-1910-41210 PERA Contributions
96468 Total: 363.73
90580 06/29/2015 234.83 OM 07/21/2015 PERA Deductions - Schaffer
101-430-3100-41210 PERA Contributions
96580 Total: 234,33
PERA. Total: 598,56
PIONEERP Pioneer Press
61520397 06/30/2015
101-410-1320-43510 Legal Publishing
61520397 Total:
P1ONEERP Total:
754.80 0.00 07/71/2(115 Notices'
254,80
254.80
No
No
0000
0000
No 0000
P 10PRESS Pioneer Press
3791545 06/12/2015 483.60 0.00 07/21/2015 Subscription No 0000
206-450-5300-42500 Library Collection Maintenance
3791545 Total: 483.60
plOPRESS Total: 483.60
PUMPS Pomp's Tire Service, Inc.
21(1180982 07/01/2015 117,75 0.00 07/21/2015 Tire No 0000
101-450-5200-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt
210180982 Total: 117,75
PONIPS Total: 1(7.75
RCM RCM Specialties, Inc
4979 06/30/2015 267.75 0.00 07/21/2015 Emulsion No 0000
101-430-3120-42240 Street Maintenance M a te ri a I s
4979 Total: 267.75
4985 06/3072015 281.50 0.00 07/21/2015 Emulsion No 0000
101-430-3120-42240 Street Maintenance Materials
4985 Total: 281.50
4937 07101/2015 296.75 0.011 07721.'2015 Emulsion No 0000
i 01-430-3120-42240 Street Maintenance Materials
4987 Toial: 296.75
Al' - To Re Paid Proof List t07115./15 - 2:13 PM ) Page 1 2
Invoice /
Ihte
:Amount Qoantity Pint Date nrceriptiou Refescnrc Task Type P() t Close PO iit //
RCM Total: 846:00
RIVRCOOP River Country Cooperative
06;30/2015 109.07 0.00 07121/2015 Fuel No 0000
01-420-2220-42 I 20 Fuel, Oil and Fluids
Tota 109.07
RIVRCOOP Total: 109,07
RCS EN BAU Rosenbatier - General Division
66130-1 06/30/2015 1,688.00 0,01) 07/21.72015 Final inspection change order No 0000
410-430-8000-45500 Vehicles
66130-1 Total: 1,688.1)0
ROSFNBAU Total: 1.688,00
SAM SCLUB Sam's Club
(17/09/2015 63.68 0.00 07.'21/2015 Rehab supplies No 0000
I 01-420-2220-44300 Miscellaneous
Total: 63.68
SANISCLUB Total: 63.68
SM1THSCH Smith Schafer & Associates,LT1)
29537 06/30/7015 950.00 0.00 07/21/2015 rvIN Annual Financial Reporting 0000
101-410-1520-43010 Audit Services
29537 Total: 950.00
SMITHSCF1 Total: 950,00
STLIBRAR Stillwater Public Library
0770S/2015 I ,200.00 0.00 0772112015 Library Curd Reimbursement No 000(1
206-450-5300-44300 Miscellaneous
Total: 1,200,00
STLIBRAR Total; 1200.00
TASCH T. A. Schifsky & Sons Inc
58243 06/30/2015 515.20 0,00 07/21/2015 Asphalt - No 0000
101-430-3120-4224(1 Street Maintenance Materials
58243 Total: 515.70
58288 07/07/2015 701.25 0.00 07/21/2015 Asphalt No 0000
101-430-3120-42240 Street Maintenance Materials
58288 Total: 701.75
20 - To Be Paid Prnoll„isr. (07/15/15 - 2:13 PIvi) Page 13
Invoice # Inv Date
Amount (litarility Pint Date Description Reference
TASCH Total: 716,45
Task Type PO # Close POLitle #
TDS TDS Mctrocom - LLC
06/29/2015 89.57 0,00 07/21/2015 Analog lines - Fire No 0000
101-420-2220-43210 Telephone
06/29/20 15 209.42 0.00 07/21;2015 Analog lines - PW No 0000
101-430-3100-43210 Telephone
06/29/2015 82.62 0.00 07/21/2015 Analog lines - Li0 Stations No 0000
602-495-9450-43210 Telephone
06/29/2015 43.31 0.00 07/110015 Alarni - Well House 2 No 0000
601-494-9400-4-3210 Telephone
Total. 424,92
TDS Total: 424.92
TEILANDM TE1 Landmark Audio
33319 06/25/2015
206-450-5300-42500 Library Collection Maintenance
33319 Total:
TEILANDM Total:
182.15 0.00 07/21/2015 New Audio Cds No 0000
182.15
182.15
TKDA TKDA, Inc,
002015001962 07/08/2015 159,60 0.00 07/21/2015 General Engineering Services No 00(10
101-410-1930-43030 Engineering Services
002015001962 Total: 159.60
TKDA 159.60
TOWNCTRY Town & Country Cleaning Co
715659 07401 /2015 215.00 0,00 07/21/2015 June Cleaning Service - Library No 0000
206-450-5300-44010 Repairs/Maim 131dg
715659 Total: 215.00
TOWNCTRY Total: 215,00
VALLEYTR Valley Trophy Inc.
46725 00/09/2015 30,00 0.00 07/21/2015 Signs No 0000
I () -410-1940-44300 Miscellaneous
46725 Total: 30.0(1
VALLEYTR Total: 30.00
Al' - To Pc Paid Proof List 07115/15 - 2:13 PM)
Page 14
Inviiley JOV Date
Amount f.)nala Pmt Lilac Deccript inn Reference
'1'as k Type PO tt Close POLine //
VANZA N DT Van Zan& Distributing line
7075 06130/2015 323.49 0.00 (17/2 I f20 [5 Restock_ medical supplies No 0000
101-420-2220-420S0 EMS Supplies
7075 Total: 373.49
VANZAN DT Total-, 323,49
WASH-R EC Washington County
07/01/2015 1,058.00 0,00 07/2112015 Various No 0000
101-4 I 0-1320-42030 Printed Forms
Total: 1,058.00
WASH-REC Total: 1,058.00
WASH LIB Washington County library
07/08/2015 1,635.00 0,00 07/21/2015 Library Card IZeitubursement No 0000
206-450-5300-44300 Miscellaneous
Total: 1,635.00
WASH LIB Total; 1,635.00
WASRADIO Washington County
81481 06/30/2015
101-420-2220-43230 Radio
81481 Total:
8 [502 06/30/2015
101-430-3100-43230 Radio
81502 Total:
WASRADIO Total:
WHEATON Wheaton Joseph
20150705 07706/2015
101-000-0000-20802 Electrical Permit Fees Payable
20150705 Total:
WHEATON Total:
Whiteani White Anita
Cable 07/07P0 I 5
101-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations
Cable 07/07/2015
lei -410-1450-43620 Cable Operations
Cable Total:
3,914.76 0,00 07/21/2015 1/4 yearly fee
3,914.76
309,06 0.00 07/21/2015 2nd quarter radio
309.06
4,223.82
3.'708.35
3,208,35
3,208.35
0.00 07/21/2015 Electrical Inspections - June
55.00 0,00 07/21/7015 CC meeting 7/07/15
25.00 0.00 07/21/2015 CC meeting 7/07/15 - Bonus
80.00
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
AP - • Paid Po -List (07/15/15 - 2:13 PiN11 Page 15
Invoice r hi,' Date
1Vhiteani Total:
XCEL Xcel Energy
06262015 06726/2015
101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
602-495-9450-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting
06762015 06/26/2015
101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting
06262015 06/26/2015
I 01-420-2220-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
101-410-1940-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting
06262015 06/26/2015
101-4505200-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
1(11-450-5200-4381(1 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
601-494-9400-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
I 01-420-2220-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/20 15
101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting
06262015 06/26/2015
101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 0612612015
602-495-9450-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
602-495-9450-4381(1 Electric: Utility
06262015 06/26/2015
101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility
06202015 06/26/2(115
101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting
062620 15 06/26/2015
I 01-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting
06262015 06/26/2015
101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility
AO -To 1-3c Paid Proof List (07115/15 - 2:13 1'M)
Amami': Quail tily rtitt 1)eccript
80.00
126.08 0,00
95.68 0.00
34.11 0.00
26.86 0,00
415.63 0.00
316.98 0.00
32,48 0,00
11.93 0,00
42,43 0.00
37.48 0,00
2,050.91 0.00
271.17 0.00
42.62 0.00
73.01 0.00
39. 1 S 0.00
35.51 0.00
46.24 0.00
1,841.11 0.00
29.82 0.00
14.26 0,00
07/2112(115
07/21/2015
07/21/2015
07/21(7015
07/21/2015
07121/2015
07/21/2015
07121/2015
07121/2015
07/21/2015
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
Utility Charges.
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
1 ltility Charges
07/21/2015 Utility Charges
07/21/2015 Utility Charges
07/21/2015
07/21/2015
07/2112015
07/71/7015
07/21/2015
07/21/2015
07/2112015
07/21/2015
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
Charges
Utility Charges
Utility Charges
Utility. Charges
Reference
Task. Type PO 0 ('lore POLine tt
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0(100
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
No 0000
rage 16
;nvoiee # 1 t v Ali-1mm( Quantity lint Da le Pr-wriptioo Reference Task Type
IC)# Close POLine
06262015 06/26/2015 372.60 0,00 07/2112015 Utility Charges No 0000
101-450-5200-13810 Electric Utility
00262015 06/26/2015 596,60 0.00 0721/2015 Utility Charges No 0000
101-430-3100-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015 27,76 0.00 07.'2112(115 Utility Charges No 0000
601-494-9400-43810 Electric, Utility
06262015 00126/2015 12.88 0.00 07121/2015 1 'Aility Charges No 0000
101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting
06262015 06/26/2015 641.25 0.00 07/2112015 Utility Charges No 0000
206-450-5300-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015 169.89 0_00 07121/2015 Utility Charges No 0000
602-495-9450-4381(1 Electric Utility
06262015 06/2612015 1 13_82 0.00 07/21/2015 Utility Charges No 0000
601-494-9400-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06/26/2015 14.03 0,00 07[2112015 Utility Charges No 0000
101 -450-5200-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 06126(2015 334.96 0.00 07/21/2015 Utility Charges No 0000
001-494-9400-43810 Electric Utility
06262015 Total: 7,866.87
XCEL Total: 7,866.87
Report Total: 201,678.14
To Be Paid Proof List (07/15/15 - 2:13 PM) Page 17
Accounts Payable
To Be Paid Proof List
1.1ser: PaltyB
Printed: 07/15/2015 - 2:24 PM
I3atch: 006-07-2015
Invoice tt
IIIV Date
S\V/WC SW/WC Service Cooperatives
C1210-20 7 06/25/2015
I 0 -000-0000-21706 Medical Insurance
C1210-20 7 Total:
SW/WC Total:
Rcporl Total:
Al' - To Be Paid Proof List (07115/15 - 2:24 PM)
7110119 t Quantity Pint Date Description Nclerence Tank Type PO ft Close POI,ine #
17,245.00 0:00 07.121/2015 August Preiiiiuiii
17,24500
17,245:00
I 7,245.00
--a
No 0000
Page 1
THE CITY OF
LAKE ELNI
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
THROUGH:
REVIEWED BY:
AYOR & COUNCIL CO UNICATION
DATE: July21, 2015
CONSENT
ITEM 7
MOTION
New Single Family Home Permit Report
Rick Chase, Building Official
Rick Chase, Building Official
Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
St1(;(;ESTE1) ORDF R OF BUSINESS;
Introduction ..... City Administrator
Report/l)resentation... ...... Administrator
uestions front Council to Facilitates
Call for Motion ..... Mayor & City Council
Mayor & City Council
Act ion on .Motion,............ ...... ..... ........Mayor 17aci I i talcs
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is
asked to accept the monthly new single family home permit report through June, 2015. No specific
motion is needed as this is recommended as part of the Consent Agenda.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
New Homes
Total valuation
Average home value
Total Valuation YTD
2015
46
$16,281,000
353,000
20,093,527
2014
12
$7,380,282
615,000
9,953,075
2013
17
$7,269, 742
427,631
9,228,053
One new home rebuilt in 2015 due to fire.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council
accept the June, 2015 monthly new home building permit report.
-- page
T1 IE my or
LAKE ELMO
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
THROUGH:
REVIEWED BY:
AyOR 8, COUNCIL CO
Monthly Assessor Report
Dan Raboin, City Assessor
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
UNICATION
DATE: July 21, 2015
CONSENT
ITEM #8
SUGGESTED ORDER OF -BUSINESS:
- Introduction of City Administrator
- Report/Presentation„.......„..„...„........._._„.,..........City Administrator
Questions from Council to Facilitates
CaiI fbr 'Motion ...... Mayor & City Council
'Discussion__ ...... ...... ..... Mayor & City Council
Action on Motion........... ..... ..... ....... ..... Mayor Facilitates
SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is
asked to accept the monthly assessor report for through June 2015 outlining work perfbn-ned on behalf
of the City of Lake Elmo. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended as part of the Consent
Agenda.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Property splits/plats — 1
Sales collected and viewed — 8
Taxpayer inquiries — 11
Miscellaneous inquiries - 3
Inspections — Residential — 62; Commercial —
Building permit reviews — 29
Pictures taken — 67
Other work performed included:
• Monthly meeting with County residential and commercial supervisors
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Itena#9]
July 21, 2015
• Input of all inspection and permit work
• Perform sales verifications and land value analysis using MLS and other resources
• Field telephone inquiries
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council
accept the June 2015 monthly assessor report.
-- page 2 --
111E CITY OF
KE ELMO
A yor3 & COUNCIL CO UNICATION
DATE: July 21, 2015
CONSENT
ITEM #9
ORDINANCE 08-124
AGENDA ITEM: Zoning Text Amendment — Subdivision Identification Signs
SUBMITTED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner
THROUGH: Julie Johnson, City Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission
Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS (if removed from the Consent A
end
Introduction of Item _____________ ..... __Community Development Director
IZeport/Presentation__....„.. „ ..... __Community Development Director
Questions Iiiii Council to Staff ____________________ Mayor Facilitates
Call for Motion Mayor & City Council
... ________________ ..... ...1Vlayor & City Council
Action on Motion........... ..... Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECCOMENDER: Planning Commission
FISCAL IMPACT: None
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City has received inquiries from the
residential development community about subdivision identification signage. In reviewing the
City's regulations with signage, staff determined that adding greater clarity about what type of
signage is allowed and where would be beneficial to the City moving forward. To address the
situation staff conducted research and ultimately drafted a Zoning Text Amendment to add
language to the ordinance. The Planning Commission reviewed the research at their 6/22/15
meeting, held a public hearing on 7/13/15, and is recommending approval of the Zoning Text
Amendment. If removed from the Consent Agenda, the motion to take the recommended action
is the following:
"Move to adopt Ordinance 08-124, amending the Sign Ordinance to provide greater clarity in
the regulations or subdivision identification signage."
-- page
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 91
July 21, 2015
BACKGROUND INFORMATION/STAFF REPORT:
Staffhas received multiple inquiries from residential developers, as well as HOAs in the past, as
to what the regulations are for subdivision identification signage. In reviewing the City's
regulations when compared to other cities in the Metro Area, it was found that the ordinance
could be improved by adding additional provisions to regulate the location, number and type of
signage allowed. Staff presented these findings at the 6/22/15 Planning Commission meeting.
Upon review of the information, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Zoning
Text Amendment and schedule a public hearing. The ordinance as proposed reflects the Zoning
Text Amendment prepared by staff with input from the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT:
The Planning Commission reviewed the subdivision identification signage provisions at their
meeting on 6/22/15, where they directed staff to schedule a public hearing and prepare a Zoning
Text Amendment. The public hearing was held on July 13, 2015. No one spoke during the
public hearing and no written correspondence was received. During the meeting, the Planning
Commission requested that provisions be added to not allow changeable copy or electronic
variable message signage for subdivision identification signs. The Planning Commission
unanimously recommended approval of the zoning text amendment to add additional provisions
to provide clarity for subdivision identification signs (Vote: 6-0).
STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS:
Strengths: The addition provisions proposed for subdivision identification signs add
greater clarity to what is allowed for this type of signage. The provisions include more
specificity with regards to the number, location and type of signage that is allowed. These
provisions will set clear expectations for the developers and HOAs who are interested in
installing such signage.
Weaknesses: None
Opportunities: Providing greater clarity in the regulations of subdivision signage should
remove some of the confusion that developer and HOAs have encountered with the
existing provisions.
Threats: None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the aforementioned, the Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the
City Council approve the proposed amendment to the Sign Ordinance to add provisions related
to subdivision identification signage. Should the item be removed from the Consent Agenda, the
motion to take the recommended action on the request is as follows:
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agendo Item 9J
July 21, 2015
"Move to adopt Ordinance 08-124, amending the Sign. Ordinance to provide greater clarity in
the regulations or subdivision identification signage."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance 08-124
2. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, dated 7-13-15
3. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, dated 6-22-15
4. Existing Subdivision Signage Provisions
5. Comparison Chart of Signage of Metro Cities
6. Signage Examples from Other Metro Cities
-- page 3 --
CITY OFLAKE ELWO
COUNTY C]FWASH|N0TON
STATE (JF0\|NNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 88'124
ANORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELk8OZONING CODE BYAMENDING THE SIGN
ORDINANCE BY ADDING ADDITIONAL REGULATION AND CLARIFICAITON WITH REGARDS TO
SUBDIVISION IDENTIFICATION SIGNS
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land
Usage; Chapter 154:Zoning Code; Section 213; Subsection G.1.ctmread the following:
c. Subdivision Identification Signs
i. Number. Each residential subdivision is aibzvved uptuamaximum Vftwo (Z)
subdivision identification signs. For the purposes 0fthis section, residential
subdivisions shall include all phases ofapproved staged developments.
ii. Location. Subdivision identification signs shall belocated near entrances to
the subdivision, except that one sign may belocated along anabutting
arterial ormajor collector roadway,
iii. Size. The maximum size for asubdivision identification sign isthirty-two
(]Z) square feet.
iv. Sub -Monuments. Each residential subdivision may have two (Z) Sub -
monument identification signs in addition to two (2) subdivision
identification signs. Sub -monument identification signs may not exceed
four (4)square feet insize.
v. Changeable copy signs, including electronic variable message signs' are not
apermitted sign type for subdivision identification signage.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo.
SECTION3' AdoptionDate. This Ordinance 08'124was adopted on this twenty first day of
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
-----
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
This Ordinance OD'1Z4was published on the day of , 2015.
2
BACKGROUND
With the recent residential development activity in the corrununity, staff has received some inquiries
from developers regarding the allowance of subdivision identification sigs. In researching the City's
provisions, staff found the regulations to be somewhat limited in comparison with other
communities. Staff presented these findings to the Planning Commission on 6/22/15. After review
and discussion of various ways to improve the ordinance, the Planning Commission directed staff to
prepare Zoning Text Amendment and schedule a public hearing on proposed changes to the Sign
Ordinance with regards to subdivision identification signs.
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS:
Staff has prepared a Zoning Text Amendment proposing changes to the City's Sign Ordinance
related to subdivision identification signs. The proposed changes can be found in the draft ordinance
in Attachment #1. The proposed changes included in the draft ordinance are the following:
The number of total subdivision identification signs allowed was changed to two signs.
• Clarification was added to note that the entirety of the subdivision, regardless of the number
of phases, is allowed two signs.
• Clarification with regards to location was added to note that signs are only allowed at
neighborhood entrances, with the exception that one sign can be located along an abutting
arterial or collector road.
• Provisions were added to allow for two sub-monwnents within each residential subdivision.
These sub -monuments are not allowed to exceed 4 square feet in size. The addition of sub -
monuments to the ordinance are in response to requests from developers to allow for smaller
signage incorporated into landscape features such as columns or fencing. Staff recommends
that this type of signage be allowed as long as it is limited in size.
In addition to these changes, it should also be noted that staff did reach out to various parties to get
questions posed by the Planning Commission answered. Staff conducted the following outreach:
• Staff contacted the Fire Chief to ask if subdivision identification signs are helpful for public
safety personnel to locate homes in emergency situations. Be noted that the address is
always the most important factor. However, in situations where an emergency make be
taking place outside of a specific home but within a subdivision, the sign can be helpful for
police, fire or medical services to find the correct location. Overall, in the opinion of the Fire
Chief', the subdivision signs do provide a public safety improvement, but the benefit is
minimal.
Staff asked a number of residential developers who are working in the community about the
value and importance of permanent neighborhood signage. Unfortunately, none of the
developers responded with definite feedback regarding the need for permanent signage. In
the experience of staff, these signs can be utilized initially as a marketing tool, but also as
community or neighborhood identity once the neighborhood is built out.
PLJBL1C HEARING ITEM 4D — ACTION ITEM
It should be noted that the proposed Zoning Text Amendment was drafted utilizing best practices
from other communities in the judgment of staff. Example of other sign ordinances researched can
be found in Attachment #2.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Zoning Text
Amendment to the Sign Ordinance to provide clarity with regards to subdivision identification signs.
The suggested motion is the following:
"Move to recommend approval of the Zoning Text Amendment to add greater detail to the
subdivision identification sign provisions in the City's Sign Ordinance."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. DRAFT 154.212 — Proposed Zoning Text Amendment
2. Sign Ordinances from Other Metro Communities — Subdivision Signs
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ....... ....... .........................................Community Development Director
- Report by Staff ..... ..... ......... ............. ........ .......... City Planner
Questions from the Commission .................. ....... Chair & Commission Members
Open the Public ring..................................................................................Chair
...
- Close the Public Hearing................. ..... ...... ......... ........... ....Chair
- Discussion by the Commission ..... ..... ................. Chair & Commission Members
Action by the Commission......... ...... ........... ..... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4D — ACTION ITEM
ITEM:
1°111,: CITY OF
AKE ELMO
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 6/22/15
AGENDA ITEM: 5B — BUSINESS ITEM
CASE # 2015-23
Zoning Text Amendment — Subdivision Identification Signs
SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
REVIEWED BY:
Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
Joan Ziertman, Planning Program Assistant
Casey Riley, Planning Intern
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider advancing an effort to complete a Zoning Text
Amendment to provide greater clarity with regards to what type of signage is allowed for residential
subdivision identification. The City has been contacted by Lennar Homes to inquire about the
possibility of installing additional neighborhood identification signs. City staff has reviewed the
City's Sign Ordinance to determine if additional signage is allowed. Upon review of the ordinance,
it is Staffs opinion that the section that pertains to subdivision identification signs could benefit from
additional regulations to establish clearer expectations about what type and quantity of signage is
allowed. Staff is recommend the Planning Commission discuss potential changes to the ordinance
and, if in agreement with the proposed changes, direct staff to draft an ordinance amendment.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City of Lake Ehno
Property Owners: N/A
Location: N/A — Proposed zoning text amendment would apply to existing and future
residential subdivisions throughout the community.
Request: The Planning Commission is respectfully asked to discuss potential changes to the
Sign Ordinance with regards to subdivision identification signs.
Existing Land Use: N/A
Existing Zoning: N/A
Surrounding Land Use: N/A
Surrounding Zoning: N/A
Comprehensive Plan: N/A
Proposed Zoning: N/A
Histoty: The City updated the Sign Ordinance in 2013 as part of the Zoning Code Update
Project. The provisions that regulate subdivision identification signs were included in
the 2013 update.
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
Applicable Regulations: §154.212 — Sign Regulations
BACKGROUND
Lennar Homes is currently in process ofconstructing the 2"d phase of the Savona residential
subdivision. They have contacted the City to inquire about the possibility of installing additional
identification signage and other landscape features at separate entrances to the development. In
responding to the request, City staff referenced the Sign Ordinance to determine how much signage
is permitted. With regards to subdivision identification signs, the Sign Ordinance states that in
residential districts, the following is allowed:
A subdivision identification sign not exceeding thirty-two (32) squarefeet in sign area as
approved by the City.
Under this language, staff would interpret the ordinance to allow a single neighborhood identification
sign up to thirty-two square feet in area. While the ordinance is simple and uncomplicated, it also
does not take different locational circumstances or sign types into much consideration. Based on the
simplicity of this provision in the Sign Ordinance, staff thought it would be beneficial to research
other ordinance in the Metro Area to see if Lake Elmo's ordinance could be improved to add greater
direction and detail to set clear expectations. The general results of the staffs research can be found
in Attachment #1, Subdivision Signs from Metro Cities. Further detail of staff s research will be
presented at the Planning Commission meeting.
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS:
Building off the research conducted of other metro cities, staffasks the Planning Commission to
consider the following with regards to neighborhood identification signs:
Number. The typical allowance for subdivision identifications signs varies between 1 and 2
signs. However, some communities allow one sign per entrance to the development. In these
instances, cities typically qualify that the only neighborhood entrances that are allowed
signage are entrances off arterial or collector roads.
• Content. Some cities do not allow any text on neighborhood identification signs other than
the name of the subdivision. This provision would preclude any builder names or other
commercial messages.
• Sub -Monuments. Staff would ask the Planning Commission if there should be any allowance
for sub -monuments within residential subdivisions. Sub -monuments are sometimes
incorporated into landscape features or community gathering spaces. This type of signage
would be significantly less in size.
• Definition of Subdivision. For the purposes of clarity, staff would ask the Planning
Commission to confirm whether or not "subdivision" refers to the totality of the residential
development, or if individual phases or different hosing types inform the allowed amount of
signage.
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
These items represent some of the areas of further clarification that were included in the signage
provisions of other communities. With additional residential subdivisions being planned and
constructed in the community, staff anticipates the number of requests for subdivision identification
signage to increase. Providing greater clarification in advance of these requests would assist in the
interpretation of what is allowed for subdivision identification signs.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff reconunends that the Planning Commission discuss areas of potential improvement based on
the staff report and presentation. Should the Planning Commission reach consensus on potential
changes, they can direct staff to prepare a Zoning Text Amendment,
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Subdivision Signs from Metro Cities
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction.. ........ ....... ..... .
Report by Staff. ...... ....... .
- Questions from the Commission
- Discussion by the Commission ..
- Action by the Commission
...... ..... ...Community Development Director
........... ...... .............. .......... ................. City Planner
..... Chair & Commission Members
..... .............. Chair & Commission Members
............. ............. Chair & Commission Members
BUSINESS ITEM 5B
granted for any premises more than four (4) times in any calendar year; or more
than once in any three month period.
10. Lots having Multiple Street Frontages. Business occupying comer lots, or
multiple frontages adjacent to more than one public right-of-way, may display up
to one additional ground or building -mounted sign for each additional frontage
provided that such additional sign may not exceed 50% of the area allowed by the
primary frontage and is oriented toward the additional frontage. For purposes of
this code, the primary frontage shall be presumed to be the frontage upon which
the main entrance to the building is located. The applicant, however, may identify
a different frontage as the primary frontage to maximize the effectiveness of the
signage.
IL Resemblance to Traffic Signs. No sign shall contain or resemble any sign
resembling in size, shape, message, or color any traffic control devices compliant
with the Minnesota State Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
G. Limitations According to the 7:1pe of Land Use. Unless exempt under §154.212.K or as
expressly provided elsewhere, no permanent or temporary signs shall be displayed except
in conformity with the following regulations as they colTespond to the type of land use
and districts in which the sign is to be displayed.
I. Residential Uses in Residential Districts
a. In connection with legal home occupations, a single sign which is limited in
content to the name, address and legal home occupation of the owner or
occupant of the premises, and which does not exceed two (2) square feet in
area. Signs under this paragraph shall be wall signs only.
b. A residential condominium or multi -family apartment complex may display
signs identifying the name of the condominium or apartment complex if the
total acreage of the lot is one (1) acre or more and the condominium or
apartment includes eight (8) or more units. One (1) wall sign and one (1)
ground sign per street frontage may be displayed, with a maximum of two (2)
wall signs and two (2) ground signs per lot. No identification sign shall exceed
thirty-two (32) square feet in area, and the maximum height is one (1) story or
twelve (12) feet above curb level, whichever is lower. For purposes of this
paragraph, the term "lot," when used in reference to a condominium means all
property within a common interest community.
A subdivision identification sign not exceeding thirty-two (32) square feet in
sign area as approved by the City.
2. Institutional Uses in Residential Districts. Non-residential uses located in
residential districts, such as churches and schools, located in residential districts
may erect signs as follows;
a. Wall and Ground Signs
i. Area and Number. One (1) wall sign and one (1) ground sign per street
frontage may be displayed, identifying the entity, with a maximum of
two (2) wall signs and two (2) ground signs per lot. Additional wall or
c.
V - 25
Residential Entry/Identification Sign Requirements from Metro Cities
City
Bloomington
Inver Grove Heights
Lino Lakes
Maple Grove
Minnetrista
Minnetonka
Osseo
Plymouth
Shoreview
Number
Two signs permitted
One sign per entrance
from a public street,
there must be 3
dwelling units.
One
One sign per entrance
street
Two permitted at
each entrance to
subdivision.
One per unified
development
entrance. Maximum
two signs total.
One sign per 6
dwelling units
Two per subdivision,
at entrances
One sign per entry,
up to two signs total.
Must have 20
dwelling units for SF,
6 DU for MF
Dimensions
Max area: 40 sq ft
Per neighborhood
Max area: 32 sq ft
Max area: 50 sq ft
Max height: 8 ft
Max area: 35 sq ft
Max height: 8 ft
Max area: 24 sq ft
Max height: 6 ft
50 sq ft max copy
and graphic area.
100 sq ft max
monument size
Max height: 10 ft
Max area: 6 sq ft,
only one surface, not
double sided.
Max area: 32 sq ft per
sign
Max height: 10 ft
Max area: 32 ft
Max height: 12 ft
Setback
10 ft from any
property line
10 ft from any
property line
14
Table 2 Pernumen Sign Requirements.All permanent signs shall be subject to the following requirements:
(a) Rural and Residential Zoning Districts
R Rural
R-X Rural Executive
Sign Type R-BR Rural Business Reserve Districts
Requirements
Identification or
Nameplate Signs
Area
Identification
Signs
Ground Signs
Building Wall
Signs
R-1, R-I X,
R-2, R-3, R-4, R-6 Residential Districts
Requirements
One per residence.
Maximum sign area of 2 square feet
No sign permit is required
Can be placed at entrances to neighborhood: the nurnber of the signs per neighborhood
shall be determined by the city, with consideration to die number of entrances to the
neighborhood,
Maximum sign area of 24 square feet.
Maximum height of 6 feet.
Each property with a residence may have one freestanding sign, temporary or
permanent, without a permit: the maximum size is 6 square feet, placed at least 10 feet
from the property line. This sign shall not advertise commercial activity that is not
allowed or conducted on the same property as the sign. There is no time limit for such a
sign.
In addition, non-residential uses and
licensed residential care facilities that are
allowed by the Zoning Ordinance may have:
In addition, non-residential uses and
licensed residential care facilities that are
allowed by the Zoning Ordinance, and
manufactured home parks in R-6 zones,
may have:
One ground sign.
Maximum sign area of 50 square feet.
Maximum height of 8 feet.
Non-residential uses and licensed residential
care facilities that are allowed by the Zoning
Ordinance may have one wall sign on one
building, maximum 80 square feet.
Non-residential uses and licensed
residential care facilities that are allowed
by the Zoning Ordinance, and
manufactured home parks in R-6 zones,
may have one wall sign on one building,
maximum 80 square feet,
Property Setback No sign shall be closer than 10 feet to any property line,
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
the respective building wall.
(d) Area Identification Signs,
(\) Area ideoliOooimo sigmgc uhuU be pcnnk\o] For each muki-
usidcn\iu| p j(:u\orosiJcoha|suhdivi^imn. For purposes ofthis 3xoiml.
oxidcuhx| Subdivisions xhoU }no|ude all phases of approved staged
devebpoen\s,
(Z) The area identification sigoo8c ohnU be located near cmrunccm \o
the project or subdivision, except that one area identification sign does not
xocd to be located near an entrance tnthe project or subdivision provided
it is located Wmog all abutting arterial or major collector roudwuy.
(3) Two area identification signs. not exceeding 32
square feet in surface area per sign, or 10 feet in hcight,
may be permitted per project or subdivision. An area
identification sign ohnU be located at |euyi 10 tec( from
|cu lines. �
m
Max
w"`aziq-n
Area
mamvcat ~"
xw"
(4) When such signs are proposed and constructed by an individual or
firm other than the individual or association who will be responsible for
the maintenance, [hen: ahu|\ be w covenant prepared by the proponent
establishing responsibility for the maintenance of the sign or signs over
the entire project orsuhdivision. to be approved by the City Attorney, and
to he recorded on the properly tide(o) prior to issuance of the sign permit,
Furthcr, appropriate easements sbuU be provided for the approved signs on
the |o\ or lots »vhoru the signs are to be located; the easements ohu|| be
recorded prior to the is000noo of the sign pcnniL (An/ended br 0ru! Alu�
(5) Noarea identification sign shall contain uchangeable copy sign, all
electronic changeable copy sign, or a time and temperature sign.
(o) Temporary Signs,
(U Special Event Signs.
One temporary sign may be
mounted on u portable stand,
with u maximum surface area
not exceeding 3Z xqouru [uo(, or
may he u vvaU sign subject to
the same size standards as the
permanent wall signmQonUon/ed
for the use, Such signs must be
located on the subject property
and shall hcset back at least 50
Fuc( from any side or real- lot
Z\i55'lZ
J-,-
Mx
/' /\ /yHeM'�—
Subdivision |. The following Signs are permitted upon obtaining a Sign permit:
'xoropnrmktodupnnobtaningu3ignpormit:
(u)
M,momcni Signs: Up to two Monument Signs are pcnniUcd at cmd/
cntmn# 10umsiduUix1 subdivision i[upprovud bv|hCCity Council as part
of u comprehensive sign p|uo (hv |hc subdivision. No individual
K1onmouU Si-n may exceed 24square f'Cc| in Display Surface Area nor he
six feg uhorcgodo in }/ciuh|. Lighting shall be downcast and oNddod.
Dxovmlc |)isp|nysare not permitted.
(b) Home occupation Signs: & Sign permit shall be reviewed by the city
council in conjunction with a conditional use pen -nit for u home
occupation. Such Sign shall not exceed four square feet in area nor six feet
above grade inheight,
(o) Temporary Signs on Residential Project Sites. No more than one
Temporary Sign per street frontage may be erected on the site of m
residential subdivision or project that has more than |O dwelling units,
These Temporary Signs are subject to the following requirements:
(|) The total number must not exceed two per project, even if the
project has more than two street frontages;
(2) Shall only be located along streets that provide primary uncexx to
the project oitu;
Must be set back at least 10 feet from any property line;
(4) Must be firmly anchored into the ground;
(5) K4vu| not be located closer than 100 feet from an existing
residential dwelling unit orother building which bnot apart ofthe
project;
(b) Must not he located c|mmr than 100 feet from any other Sign
located onthe same side o[the street;
(7) The Display Surface Area shall not exceed 32 square feet;
(8) The height uhwU not exceed 10 feet above grade;
(V) Must be removed when units in the project are 75 percent sold or
|eased, or after t\xV ycum from the date of (lie sign permit,
whichever occurs first; and
(|O) Must not bc illuminated.
246
Sterling Codifiers, Inc.
_11/1u-e-% G-rOue-
Page 1 of 4
10-15E-7: SIGNS IN A, E AND R DISTRICTS:
Within the A, E and R districts, the following signs are permitted:
A. One nameplate sign for each dwelling which shall not exceed two (2) square feet in area
per surface and shall not have more than two (2) surfaces.
B. One nameplate sign for each dwelling group of six (6) or more units which shall not
exceed six (6) square feet in area per surface, and no sign shall have more than two (2)
surfaces,
C. One nameplate sign for each permitted use or use by conditional permit other than
residential, and such sign shall not exceed twelve (12) square feet in area per surface.
D One business sign up to sixty four (64) square feet in area per surface shall be permitted
for a stand for the sale of agricultural products in the A zoning district. In addition, up to
two (2) off site directional signs may be allowed for a stand for agricultural products if
deemed necessary by the city council for traffic safety reasons. The directional signs
shall be located outside of the public right of way and shall maintain a ten foot (10')
setback from all property lines. The directional signs shall only be permitted during the
season when the stand is open for business and shall be of a size as determined by the
city council.
E. Any sign with over one square foot of surface shall be set back at least ten feet (10') from
any property line. No sign shall exceed ten feet (10') in height above the average grade
level. Signs may be illuminated, but such lighting shall be diffused or indirect and not
illuminate beyond any lot line,
F. In the R-3A, R-3B and R-3C zoning districts, one development identification sign shall be
permitted per entrance from a public street to said development, provided that the
development consists of a minimum of one principal structure containing no fewer than
three (3) dwelling units. Identification signs permitted herein shall not exceed thirty two
(32) square feet in surface area,
G. Within the A and E districts, commercial greenhouses and nurseries are listed as
permitted uses. Signage for these uses shall conform to the provisions for B-3 districts,
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php 6/15/2015
City of Shoreview Municipal Code
Chapter 200. Development Regulations
(c) All freestanding signs associated with approved Pub|io/Qluaxi'Pub|ic
uses and residential developments shall be ground ormonumcnt-xLy|c.
|fnsign for such a facility will face property planned for residential
use, the sign area xhuU not exceed {bdy (4[) square h:c( and the height
o[the sign face shall not exceed six feet.
(D Freestanding signs may bcsingle oodoub|c`faced. [fsing|c-faced,^nd
the backside will bcvisible, the backside must hcconstructed o[a
material and/or painted 0o be nou(m| color that is compatible with the
principal structure.
(g) |[vvuUaignagcionot ho6cinstalled, the area for uxyallowable
freestanding area may be increased by25 percent and vice versa
by approval ofaComprehensive Sign Plan.
(h) Advertisement on a freestanding sign for single or multi -tenant
building shall holimited tnthe following items o[infonnnhon�the
huUd/no/ocn¢xnane,addreooyrheproperty,undlcnun{numeo.
'[onuntnumrx may be listed on freestanding business sign for multi -
tenant center/development, provided an individual letter -style sign is
used, The building nrproject namoshuUbcthcdomivan(diyp|oyon
all freestanding signs.
(i)
Amaximum o/25Y6ofthe sign area may be used for leasing
ink/rmnhon, provided the sign copy, graphics, and structure shall be
architecturally designed to accommodate u leasing message within its
(/]) ProiccilIdooUDcuhon'idonh5rsthenumcofnn6ghbnrhnodor
residential subdivision consisting n[atleast 2Odwelling units; oru
multiple -family dwelling with 5 or more units; oracommercial, offior,
high tech, industrial, orpub|ic/ouusi-pub|icdevelopment consisting of two
(2)ormore principal structures. Project Identification signs shall be
limited |o[lie Following i\un»o[in/bmmduo�development nunne,Site
uddrcrx oud major tenant numcs6ruohicx. The development oumc must
be dominantly displayed on all project identification signs.
(w) One project identification sign is permitted per development site,
unless (lie site aJjoins two ormoma�criu| nmJnays, III Such instance,oyccond project iduViDcuhonsign may, be permitted by
Comprehensive Sign Plan approval,
(h) Where permitted. project identification signs shall hclimited 1othe
fhUo*in�hcmxo[in[orn��knn:development name, shcaddress, and
major tenant oomcs/eruphico. The development numumusi be
Gectmn20O. Signs 208-22
TI IE CITY or
KE EL\1O
AYOR & COUNCIL CO UNICATION
DATE: July 21, 2015
CONSENT
ITEM 10
ORDINANCE 08-125
RESOLUTION 2015-58
AGENDA ITEM: Zoning Text Amendment — Accessory Building Setbacks in Urban
Residential Districts
SUBMITTED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner
THROUGH: Julie Johnson, City Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission
Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
ER OF BUSINESS tif removed front, the Consent Agenda):
- Introduction of hem ..... Development Director
- Report/Presentation.... „ ..... ....Community Development Director
)itestions from Council to Mayor Facilitates
- Call for Motion Mayor &. City Council
........ ........ .... Mayor & City Council
- Action on Motion.......... ...... Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECCOMENDER: Planning Commission
FISCAL IMPACT: None
SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City has received inquiries from residents
within the Savona subdivision about the required setbacks for detached accessory buildings. In
reviewing the setback requirements for accessory buildings in the Urban Low Density
Residential (LDR) zoning district, the existing rear -yard setback requirement is 20 feet. For this
type of zoning district, 20 feet is a large setback requirement for accessory buildings. To address
the situation staff conducted research and ultimately drafted a Zoning Text Amendment to
reduce the rear -yard setback to 10 feet. The Planning Commission reviewed the research at their
6/22/15 meeting, held a public hearing on 7/13/15, and is recommending approval of the Zoning
Text Amendment. If removed from the Consent Agenda, the motion to take the recommended
action is the following:
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item ,A7
July 21, 2015
"Move to adopt Ordinance 08-125, reducing the rear yard setback for detached accessory
buildings in the urban residential districts on! 20 feet to 10 feet."
In addition, due to the fact that the ordinance contains charts, staff is recommending that the City
Council authorize summary publication to explain the ordinance amendment through
publication. The suggested motion is as follows:
"Move to adopt Resolution 2015-58, authorizing summary publication of Ordinance 08-125."
BACKGROUND INFORMATION/STAFF REPORT:
As families have begun to move into the Savona subdivision, City staff has begun receiving
inquiries from residents about standards related to accessory buildings and other zoning
provisions. One specific inquiry was made about the rear -yard setback for accessory buildings in
the LDR zoning district. In reviewing the City's regulations it was discovered that the existing
rear -yard setback requirement for these structures is 20 feet. For lots that are smaller in size in
comparison to most signal family neighborhoods in the City, a 20-foot rear yard setback is larger
than what is typical in other communities. In fact, the rear -yard setback for accessory building in
the Rural Single Family (RS) district is 10 feet. It should be noted that when a City adopts new
zoning districts, it is very common that amendments or tweaks to the district standards occur
once the districts are adopted and being utilized by property owners. Staff views this process as
a natural evolution of the zoning district standards. Following up on the research conducted, staff
presented these findings at the 6/22/15 Planning Commission meeting. Upon review of the
inforrnation, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Zoning Text Amendment and
schedule a public hearing. The ordinance as proposed reflects the Zoning Text Amendment
prepared by staff with input from the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT:
The Planning Commission reviewed the setback requirements for detached accessory buildings
in the urban residential district at their meeting on 6/22/15, where they directed staff to schedule
a public hearing and prepare a Zoning Text Amendment. The public hearing was held on July
13, 2015. No one spoke during the public hearing and no written correspondence was received.
There was very little discussion on the proposed ordinance amendment at the 7/13/15 meeting.
The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the zoning text amendment to
reduce the rear -yard setback for detached accessory buildings in the urban residential districts
from 20 feet to 10 feet (Vote: 6-0).
STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS:
Strengths: Reducing the rear -yard setback for accessory buildings will bring the standard
into conformance with what is more typical or common amongst urban residential
standards in the surrounding communities. Placing these small structures closer to the
rear property line will give residents more usable back yard area for use of their property.
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item A7
July 21, 2015
At the same time, a 10-foot setback will keep these structures outside of the City's
standard drainage and utility easements.
Weaknesses: None
Opportunities: Amending the rear -yard setback for accessory structures at this time prior
to many more residents moving into these neighborhood types will help alleviate issues
or concerns about the placement of accessory buildings.
Threats: None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the aforementioned, the Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the
City Council approve the proposed amendment to the rear yard setback for accessory structures
in the urban residential zoning districts. Should the item be removed from the Consent Agenda,
the motion to take the recommended action on the request is as follows:
"Move to adopt Ordinance 08-125, reducing the rear yard setback fir detached accessory
buildings in the urban residential districts front 20 feet to 10 feet."
In addition, due to the fact that the ordinance contains charts, staff is recommending that the City
Council authorize summary publication to explain the ordinance amendment through
publication. The suggested motion is as follows:
"Move to adopt Resolution 2015-58, authorizing summary publication of Ordinance 08-125."
ATTACHMENTS:
1, Ordinance 08-125
2. Resolution 2015-58
3. Staff Report to the Planning Conunission, dated 7-13-15
4. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, dated 6-22-15
5. Accessory Structure Regulations - Comparison
CITY OFLAKE ELMO
COUNTY OFWASH|NGTON
STATE OFAA|MNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. O8-1I5
ANORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMOZONING CODE BYAMENDING THE REAR YARD
SETBACK FOR DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES |NTHE URBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING
DISTRICTS
SECTION 1.The City Council ofthe City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Ti0eXV. Land
Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Section 452 to read the following:
§ 154/452 LOT DIMENSIONS AND BUILDING BULK REQUIREMENTS.
Lot area and setback requirements shall he as specified in Table 10-I, Lot Dimension and
Setback Requirements.
Table 10-2: Lot Dimension and Setback Requirements, Residential Districts
_
Minimum Lot Area (sq.ft.)
Single family detached dwelling
Two-family dwelling (per unit) o
v
Single-family attached (per unit)
Multi -family dwelling (per unit)
Secondary dwelling
Live -work unit
Congregate housing
Manufactured home park
Minimum Lot Width (feet)
Single family detached dwelling
Two-family dwelling (per unit) '
'
Single-family attached (per unit)
~
60
35
MDR
HDR
7,000 5,00
4,000 3,000
4,000 2'500
4,000 1'800
-
seel5SlO2
3,600
see155.lQ2 seeI55.IO2
see1SS.1OZ
50 SO
30 IO
25 20
Multi -family dwelling (per building)
Live -work unit
Maximum Height (feet)
Maximum Impervious Coverage
Minimum Building Setbacks (feet)
Front yard
Minimum Building Setbacks (feet)
interior side yard e
Principal Buildings
Attached Garage or Accessory Structures
f,g
Corner side yard g'h
Rear yard
Principal Buildings
Detached Accessory Buildings
LDR
35
40%
25
10
5
15
20
10
MDR HDR
75 60
25
35 50
50% 75%
25
10
15
20
10
20
10d
od
15
20
10
Notes to Urban Residential Districts Table
a. Common open space areas may be used in the detennining whether or not the
minimum lot areas within a development are met, when provided as part of an
overall development plan.
b. Two-family units may be side -by -side with a party wall between them
("twin") or located on separate floors in a building on a single lot ("duplex").
The per -unit measurements in this table apply to "twin" units, whether on a
single lot or separate lots. The standards for single-family detached dwelling
shall apply to a "duplex" containing two vertically -separated units on a single
lot.
c. In the case of single-family attached dwellings that are not situated on
individual lots, minimum lot size shall be applied to each unit as a measure of
density; i.e. 1 unit per 2,500 square feet. This standard is also used for
multifamily dwellings.
2
d. Single family dwellings (both attached and detached) and two-family
dwellings may use the side yard setbacks within MDR zoning districts.
e. In a block where the majority of the block face has been developed with the
same or similar setbacks, the front setback for the remaining lots on that block
face shall fall within the range established by the existing setbacks.
f In situations where a garage or accessory building is set back less than 7 feet
from a side property line, the maximum permitted encroachment for anything
attached to said building (including eaves, overhangs, steps, chimneys, and
other appurtenances as described in Section 154.081) will be two (2) feet.
g. Side yards setbacks shall apply to the ends of attached or two-family
dwellings.
h. Corner properties: The side facade of a corner building adjoining a public
street shall maintain the front setback of the adjacent property fronting upon
the same public street, or the required front yard setback, whichever is less. If
no structure exists on the adjacent property, the setback shall be as shown in
the table.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo.
SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-125 was adopted on this twenty first day of
July 2015, by a vote of Ayes and _ Nays.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julie Johnson, City C erk
This Ordinance 08-125 was published on the day of , 2015.
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-58
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-125 BY TITLE
AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-125, an
ordinance to the City's regulations pertaining to setbacks for accessory structures in the urban
residential zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, the ordinance is lengthy; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.1 91, subd. 4, allows publication by title and
summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform
the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo,
that the City Clerk shall cause the following sununary of Ordinance No. 08-125 to be published in
the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance:
Public Notice
The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-125, which reduces
the rear -yard setback for detached accessory buildings in the urban residential districts from 20
feet to 10 feet.
The hall text of Ordinance No. 08-125 is available for inspection at Lake Elmo city hall during
regular business hours.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo that the
City Administrator keep a copy of the ordinance at City Hall for public inspection and that a full
copy of the ordinance be placed in a public location within the City.
Dated: July 21, 2015.
ATTEST:
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
Resolution 2015-58
Mike Pearson, Mayor
Page 1 of 2
(SEAL)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution 2015-58 Page 2 of 2
ITEM:
•111E. CITY (..iP
AIDE ELMO
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 7/13/15
AGENDA ITEM: 4c — PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2015-22
Zoning Text Amendment — Accessory Building Setbacks in the Urban
Residential Districts
SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
Casey Riley, Planning Intern
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing to consider a Zoning Text
Amendment to reduce the rear yard setback for accessory buildings in the urban residential zoning
districts. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed change to the setback at their meeting on
June 22, 2015. After reviewing the proposed change, the Planning Commission directed staff to
schedule a public hearing and prepare the Zoning Text Amendment. Staff is recommending that the
Planning Commission recommend approval of the Zoning Text Amendment through the following
motion:
"Move to recommend approval of the Zoning Text Amendment to reduce the rear yard setback for
accessory buildings in the urban residential zoning districts rom 20 feet to 10 feet."
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City of Lake Elmo
Property Owners: N/A
Location: N/A — Proposed zoning text amendment would apply to residential properties in
the urban residential zoning districts (LDR, MDR and HDR)
Request: City staff is recommending that the City consider a minor amendment to the rear -yard
setback requirements for accessory buildings in urban residential zoning districts. The
Planning Commission is asked to hold a public hearing on the proposed amendment.
Existing Land Use: N/A
Existing Zoning: N/A
Surrounding Land Use: N/A
S'iirmunding Zoning: N/A
Comprehensive Plan: N/A
Proposed Zoning: N/A
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4C — ACTION ITEM
History: The urban residential zoning districts were adopted as part of the Zoning Code
Update Project in 2012/13. As part of this effort, the City adopted three residential
zoning districts intended to be utilized in the City's urban planning areas (1-94
Corridor and Village Area). These zoning districts include lot dimension and
building bulk requirements that include the setback requirements for both principal
and accessory structures.
Applicable Regulations: Article X — Urban Residential Districts (154.452 Lot Dimensions and
Building Bulk Requirements)
BACKGROUND
City staff has recently received an inquiry about the required setbacks for accessory buildings in the
Urban Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning districts. Upon review of the setback requirements as
found in §154.452 for accessory buildings, it was discovered that the required rear -yard setback for
accessory buildings is 20 feet. Staff has researched multiple other cities and found that typical rear
yard setbacks for these structures in urban residential districts are between 5 and ten feet. In
addition, the City's Rural Single Family (RS) zoning district also has a 10-foot rear yard setback fro
accessory buildings.
It should be noted that there are several hoines that have been issued Certificates of Occupancy in the
Savona LDR subdivision. As more of these neighborhoods are constructed and new residents move
in, the City is likely to receive more inquiries about tool sheds and other small accessory structures.
Staff recommends addressing the rear -yard setback issue prior to more inquiries coming into the
City.
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS:
Based on the research conducted by Staff, it is recommended that the rear yard setback for accessory
buildings in urban residential districts be reduced to 10 feet. A setback of 10 feet allows for a
substantial enough setback from adjoining properties while at the same time keeping these structures
outside of the City's standard drainage and utility easements. Finally, a separation of 10 feet should
be significant enough to mitigate potential drainage or surface water challenges that may arise from
locating accessory buildings in these areas.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed Zoning
Text Amendment through the following motion:
"Move to recommend approval of the Zoning Text Amendment to reduce the rear yard setback for
accessory buildings in the urban residential zoning districtsfrom 20 feet to 10 feet."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. DRAFT 154.452 Lot Dimensions and Building Bulk Requirements
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4C — ACTION ITEM
2. Accessory Structure Regulations Comparison
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction .............. ........ Development Director
- Report by Staff ............... ....... ..... ............ ............. ......... City Planner
Questions from the Commission..................Chair & Commission Members
- Open the Public Hearing ....... ......... ........ ........ .....................Chair
- Close the Public Hearing.. ...... ............ ........... ..... ..................Chair
- Discussion by the Commission • ..... Chair & Commission Members
Action by the Commission Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4C — ACTION ITEM
§854.452 LOT DIMENSIONS AND BUILDING BULK REQUIREMENTS,
Lot area and setback requirements shall be as specified in Table 10'2, Lot Dimension and
Setback Requirements.
Table 10-2/ Lot Dimension and Setback Requirements, Residential Districts
\
`
Minimum Lot Area (sq.ft.)
Single family detached dwelling
Two-family dwelling (per unit )"
Single-family attached (per unit) u
Multi -family dwelling (per unit)
Secondary dwelling
Live+vorkunit
Congregate housing
Manufactured home park
Minimum Lot Width (feet)
Single family detached dwelling
Two-family dwelling (per unit) "
Single-family attached (per unit) b
Multi -family dwelling (per building)
Uve+workunit
Maximum Height (feet)
Maximum Impervious Coverage
Minimum Building Setbacks (feet)
Front yard
' iDR | MDR
GO
35
35
25'
HDR
7,000 5,000
4,000 3,00
4,00 2,500
4,000 1,800
seel55IOl
3'6OO
seel5SlO2 seel55.101
see1S5.IO2
50 50
]V ZO
JS ZO
75 60
ZS
35 SO
25'
20"
Minimum Building Setbacks (feet)
Interior side yard e
Principal Buildings f'g
Attached Garage or Accessory Structures
1,g
Corner side yard g'h
Rear yard
Principal Building
Detached Accessory Buildings
LDR
10
5
15
20
10
MDR
10
5
15
20
0
HDR
10d
iod
15
20
10
Notes to Urban Residential Districts Table
a. Common open space areas may be used in the determining whether or not the
minimum lot areas within a development are met, when provided as part of an
overall development plan.
b. Two-family units may be side -by -side with a party wall between them
("twin") or located on separate floors in a building on a single lot (-duplex").
The per -unit measurements in this table apply to "twin" units, whether on a
single lot or separate lots. The standards for single-family detached dwelling
shall apply to a "duplex- containing two vertically -separated units on a single
lot.
c. In the case of single-family attached dwellings that are not situated on
individual lots, minimum lot size shall be applied to each unit as a measure of
density; i.e. 1 unit per 2,500 square feet. This standard is also used for
multifamily dwellings.
d. Single family dwellings (both attached and detached) and two-family
dwellings may use the side yard setbacks within MDR zoning districts.
e. In a block where the majority of the block face has been developed with the
same or similar setbacks, the front setback for the remaining lots on that block
face shall fall within the range established by the existing setbacks.
f In situations where a garage or accessory building is set back less than 7 feet
from a side property line, the maximum permitted encroachment for anything
attached to said building (including eaves, overhangs, steps, chimneys, and
other appurtenances as described in Section 154.081) will be two (2) feet.
g-
Side yards setbacks shall apply to the ends of attached or two-family
dwellings.
h. Corner properties: The side facade of a corner building adjoining a public
street shall maintain the front setback of the adjacent property fronting upon
the same public street, or the required front yard setback, whichever is less. If
no structure exists on the adjacent property, the setback shall be as shown in
the table.
(Ord. 2012-062, passed 9-18-2012; Am. Ord. 08-071, passed 3-5-2013)
Accessory Structure Regulations — Comparison Chart
Cottage Grove
Inver Grove Heights
Maplewood
Oakdale
Stillwater
White Bear
Woodbury
Maximum Max Number Setbacks
Size
26OSFfor
|rtsx 1.5
acre
l,000SF
Lot area
under
8,OOOSF:
76D3F
l
Combo of
Detached
and Attached
Garage
Building:
1188SF
5UOSF 1
_
l'Q0OSF 2
for
garage,
l20SIP for
2�
accessory
structure
40OSF 1
S^ Side, 1/
Rear
If accessory
building is
less than 12U
SF, 10'near,
6' side.
30' F,ont,S'
Side'8' Rear
5'Rear, 5'
Side
30'Front, 20'
Corner Side,
5'Side, S'
Rear
5'Side, lO'
Rear
5' Rear, 5~
Side
5 ft. rear and
side
Other
3O'height maximum, Residents have toprovide 4OOSFnf
usable open space ontheir lot. |nnocases can more than 30%
oflot becovered with structures,
Lots> 15 acres but< 2.99 acres, Max size for all accessory
buildings is1,5OOSF
Max Height: IS'
|fthe lot area is greater than 8'8O8SFand less than 16000SF,
the accessory structure can beI,0OOSF. The Combination of
both can bel,420SF.
The minimum distance between buildings atany point shall be
equal tvthe height mfthe exterior wall orl5feet, whichever is
greater.
ZUft max building height
Must be in rear or side yard.
Cannot beoneasement, cannot beinfront ofprinciple
building, wall cannot exceed l2ftinheight, shall not occupy
more than 2S%ofrear yard
DATE: 07/21/2015
CONSENT
ITEM #: 10.5
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
THROUGH:
REVIEWED BY:
10.5
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
Mayor Pearson
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Approval on Consent Agenda
PUBLIC POLICY STATEMENT (IF APPLICABLE)
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
BACKGROUND AND STAFF REPORT:
The Ramsey/Washington County Cable Commission has requested City approval of the attached Policy
to allow Century Link to apply for a franchise license to compete with Comcast to provide cable service
in communities within the Ramsey/Washington County Cable Commission area. Executive Director 'fim
Finnerty stated that at least eight of the twelve communities in our area have approved the Policy as of the
writin,, of this memo and none have declined.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve this request.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Ramsey/Washington Counties Suburban Cable Commission Policies and Procedures Governing
Application, Review and Recommendations Regarding Grant of Competitive Cable Franchises.
May 11, 2000
Updated May, 2015
THE RAMSEY/WASHINGTON COUNTIES SUBURBAN
CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION II
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
GOVERNING APPLICATION, REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
REGARDING GRANT OF COMPETITIVE CABLE FRANCHISES
Preamble
The Ramsey/Washington Counties Suburban Cable Communications
Commission II (the "Commission"), on behalf of White Bear Township and the Cities of
Birchwood Village, Dellwood, Grant, Lake Elmo, Mahtomedi, Maplewood, North St.
Paul, Oakdale, Vadnais Heights, White Bear Lake, and Willernie (collectively, the
Member Cities"), administers the cable television Franchises between the Member Cities
and the current cable franchisee. The Commission, acting pursuant to a Joint and
Cooperative Agreement and authority delegated by the Member Cities thereunder, is
responsible for receiving and reviewing cable Franchise applications and for making
recommendations to its Member Cities. Only the Member Cities may grant a Franchise.
Modern telecommunications policy, law and regulations encourage the emergence of
competition in all telecommunications markets, including competition in the provision of
cable services. The emergence of such competition could increase the quality and availability
of enhanced telecommunications and video services via Cable Systems, encourage lower
rates, encourage better customer service, and generally benefit consumers. Policies and
procedures regarding application for and review of applications for competitive cable
Franchises will streamline the processing of requests to construct broadband Cable Systems.
In view of the foregoing, the Commission has formulated policies and procedures
that govern the submission and review of cable Franchise applications submitted by
Applicants seeking to provide Cable Service in all the Member Cities. Pursuant to these
Policies and Procedures the Commission has delineated the information which must be
provided in an application for a competitive Franchise, detailed a process for review of
such application and negotiation of the terms of a Franchise agreement, and provided for
the presentation of a formal recommendation regarding the grant of such Franchises to the
Member Cities.
Section 1. Definitions
"Applicant'' shall mean a Cable Company that files an Application with the
Commission.
"Application" shall mean the information, documentation, and data, of the form and substance
required herein, filed by a Cable Company with the Commission requesting the Conainission's
consideration regarding any recommendation to grant competitive Franchises in the Member
Cities.
-2-
"Application Fee" shall mean a fee which is intended to cover all costs incurred by the
Commission and the Member Cities related to processing Applications up to and including the
grant of a Franchise (if any) including, but not limited to, staff and attorney's time in reviewing
and considering an Application and related information, negotiating the terms and conditions of
Franchises, and preparing recommendations, Franchises and other documentation related to such
Applications.
"Cable Company" shall mean any person or entity owning a significant interest in, controlling,
operating, managing or leasing a Cable System or any components thereof in the Public Rights -
of -Way within the state or any person seeking a Franchise to do so.
"Cable Service" shall mean (1) the one-way transmission to Subscribers of video
programming or other programming services; and (2) Subscriber interaction, if any, which is
required for the selection or use of such video programming or other programming services;
and shall also include any video programming service for which a franchise from a local
government is required under state law.
"Cable System" shall refers to a facility that is a "cable system" under federal law or a cable
communications system under state law. The foregoing definition shall not be deemed to
circumscribe or limit the valid authority of the Member Cities to regulate or franchise the
activities of any other communications system or provider of communications service to the full
extent permitted by law.
"Franchise" shall mean any nonexclusive authorization granted by each of the Member Cities in
the form of a Franchise, privilege, permit, license or other municipal authorization to construct,
own, control, operate, maintain, or manage a Cable System within the Public Rights -of -Way to
provide Cable Service within a Member City.
"Institutional Network" shall mean a communications network constructed or operated by the
cable operator and which is generally available only to subscribers who are not residential
subscribers.
"Policies and Procedures" shall mean these policies and procedures governing the
Commission's processing of Applications for Franchises. "Public Rights -of -Way" shall
mean the surface, the air space above the surface, and the area below the surface of
any public street, highway, lane, path, alley, sidewalk, avenue, boulevard, drive,
concourse, bridge, tunnel, park, parkway, waterway, dock, bulkhead, wharf, pier,
easement or similar property or waters within a Member City in which the Member
City now or hereafter holds any property interest, including, but not limited to, any
riparian right, which, consistent with the purposes for which it was created, obtained
or dedicated, may be used for the purpose of installing, operating and maintaining a
Cable System. No reference in these Policies and Procedures to a "Public Right -of -
Way" shall be deemed to be a representation or guarantee by a Member City that its
interest in or other right to control the use of such property is sufficient to permit use
of the property for the purpose of installing, operating and maintaining a Cable
System.
"Subscriber" shall mean any person or entity who receives cable service via a Cable System.
Section 2. Applicability of Policies and Procedures
These Policies and Procedures apply to every Cable System and every Cable Company,
including a Cable Company which constructs, operates and/or maintains a Cable System or
provides Cable Service in whole or in part through facilities owned, controlled, managed or
operated by another provider, that seeks to operate within the territorial limits of one or more
Member Cities.
Authority: Minn. Stat. § 238.03
Section 3. Franchise Requirement
Subd. In accordance with state and federal law, each of the Member Cities requires
a Franchise of any Cable Company or Cable System providing Cable Service within its
territorial limits.
Subd. 2. Nothing in these Policies and Procedures shall be construed to limit the
Member Cities' or the Commission's authority to construct, purchase, and operate a Cable
System or otherwise provide any telecommunications or Cable Services either for internal
purposes or for sale to the public. Rather, these policies are meant to govern the process for
issuing a franchise for Member Cities so long as they are part of the Commission.
Authority: Minn. Stat. § 238.08
Section 4. Application for Franchise
Subd. 1. On its own initiative, should the Commission determine it is in the interests
of Member Cities to seek Franchise Applications, or in the event a Member City or the
Commission receives notice that a Cable Company is interested in applying for a Franchise
in a Member City, the Commission shall publish a notice of intent to Franchise within a
reasonable time and in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 238.081, Subd. 1, which requires
publishing notice of intent to Franchise each week for two successive weeks, allowance of
20 days from initial publication for submission of Applications and a public hearing at least
seven days before introduction of the Franchise into proceedings of a Member City.
Subd. 2. Review of Applications. Applications for a competitive Franchise shall
contain such information as is required below in these Policies and Procedures and shall be
submitted to the Commission. Review by the Commission of any Applications pursuant to
these Policies and Procedures and final determination by the Member Cities regarding
whether to Franchise such Applicant(s) may be based on any relevant factors. Such relevant
factors include any factor that the Commission is required to consider under state or federal
law, and may include any other factor the Commission is permitted to consider, including the
quality and capabilities of the Cable System that will be constructed; whether the application
satisfies cable -related needs and interests of the community, as identified by the Member
Cities and the Commission, whether the application adequately provides for capacity,
facilities, equipment or financial support for public, educational and government (PEG) use
of the system (including institutional network use); whether the applicant is financially,
technically and legally able to perform; whether the application evinces an intent to
improperly discriminate or deny service to any person, group or persons; and whether the
grant is otherwise in the interest of the public.
Subd. 3. Public Hearing on Applications. A public hearing before the Commission
affording reasonable notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard with respect to an
Application shall be scheduled in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 238.081, Subd. 6. The
Commission may schedule additional hearings as may be appropriate prior to action on an
application.
Subd. 4. Negotiation of Franchise Terms. During the period prior to the public hearing
on the Application(s), the responsible Commission employee(s) and Applicant(s) may
negotiate specific Franchise terms and conditions for recommendation and presentation to the
Commission and ultimately the Member Cities. In addition, during this period the responsible
Commission employee(s) shall review the Application(s) and may request such additional
information necessary to make final recommendations to the Commission and ultimately the
Member Cities.
Subd. 5. Determinations. Determinations by the responsible Commission employee(s)
regarding the qualifications of Applicant(s) and recommendations to the Member Cities
regarding grant of a Franchise shall be made based on information provided by the Applicant(s)
as required herein and such other information relevant to consideration of the Application. The
responsible Commission employee(s) may, in their sole discretion, consider information
developed during any negotiations with the Applicant(s) and any information or evidence
adduced by the incumbent Cable Company. After the public hearing referenced in Subd. 3, the
responsible Commission employee(s) shall issue written recommendations to the Commission
for review and possible transmittal to the Member Cities. These recommendations may include
Franchise documents to be potentially recommended to the Member Cities for adoption. If
Franchise documents have not been negotiated, or the Commission determines that additional or
different terms and conditions are appropriate, Commission may direct responsible employees to
engage in further negotiations, and to require preparation of revised recommendations and
reports. The Commission will adopt final recommendations for transmittal to Member Cities.
Subd. 6. Award of Franchise. A Franchise may be awarded only by an ordinance adopted
by each Member City.
Subd. 7. Costs of Reviewing Application and Issuing Franchise. The Applicant shall pay
the Application Fee required below. The Application Fee is required for the purpose of
reimbursing the Member Cities and the Commission for all costs associated with processing
Applications pursuant to these Policies and Procedures through and including any granting of a
Franchise. Any portion of the Application Fee which remains after payment of all the Member
Citiesand the Commission's costs will be reimbursed to the Applicant. Should the Application
Fee not cover the expenses of the Member Cities and the Commission, those unreimbursed
expenses shall be reimbursed prior to any consideration of the Franchises by the Member Cities.
A successful Applicant shall be fully responsible to reimburse the Member Cities and the
Commission for all costs of awarding the competitive Franchises(s).
Subd. 8. Franchising Nonprofit or Municipally -owned System. Nothing contained in this
Section prohibits the Member Cities from franchising a nonprofit or municipally -owned system.
The municipality or nonprofit entity shall be considered an Applicant subject to these Policies
and Procedures.
Subd. 9. Time for Action. The Commission shall conduct proceedings in a manner that
comports with state and federal law, as may be applicable.
Authority: Minn. Stat. § 238.081
Section 5. Information Required in Application
An Application for a competitive Franchise must be signed by an authorized officer or
principle of the Cable Company and be notarized and must include at least the following. To
the extent that an Application includes a proposed Franchise and other proposed agreements
that provide the information requested, the Application may reference the relevant portion of
those documents:
(1)
A statement that the Applicant seeks to construct a Cable System and to provide
Cable Services within specifically identified Member Cities;
(2) The name, street address, e-mail address and telephone number of the individuals
who are authorized to provide and certify information on behalf of the Applicant;
a description of the technology that will be utilized by the Cable System to
deliver Cable Services; the total bandwidth that initially will be used for delivery
of Cable Services from the curb to the home; the total activated channel numbers
that will be available to subscribers initially; the number of unique linear
programming services that will be available in each format offered (e.g., SD,
UHD, HD, 3D) (and whether there are limits as to the number of channels that
may be viewed simultaneously); and to the extent relevant, plans for analog and
digital channel capacity, including both the total number of analog and digital
channels capable of being energized in the system and the number of analog and
digital channels to be energized immediately;
(4) a statement of the television and radio signals for which permission to carry will
be requested from the Federal Communications Commission, or any other
required regulatory agency;
to the extent not included in response to Subdivision 5(3), a description of the
proposed system design and planned operation, including at least the following
items:
(3)
(5)
( ) the general area for location of antennae and the head end, or description
of programming delivery plan if otherwise;
(ii) the schedule for activating two-way capacity and any other system capacity
to be activated in conjunction with the Cable System;
the type of automated services to be provided;
(iv) the minimum number of video channels, other Cable Services, and
other kinds of services to be made available to residents;
(v) the number and type of channels and services to be made available
for community/access programming including a description of
differences in the quality, accessibility, recordability or functionality
of PEG channels as compared to linear broadcast channels; whether
the channels would be available to every subscriber, or only
subscribers to certain packages; whether any special equipment is
required to view the PEG channels; and whether there are any
charges to PEG programmers or Member Cities proposed with
respect to PEG; whether signals would be carried in HD or SD or
simulcast; and any video on demand provided; and
(vi) a plan for provision of facilities and equipment for PEG (including
transport paths from points of signal origination to the subscriber), and
funding of PEG and/or a plan for interconnection and provision of
such programming in cooperation with the incumbent Cable Company;
(6) plans for the provision of an Institutional Network and capacity for public,
educational and government use of an Institutional Network, or an alternative
proposed method for providing for the same;
(7) any other facilities, services, equipment or financial support that applicant
proposes to provide (such as courtesy service drops to schools or public
buildings) in addition to the support described above and the franchise fee
described below;
(8) a comparison of the Applicant's proposal for PEG use (including institutional
network use) as compared to requirements in existing franchises regarding PEG
use; and whether (and why) Applicant contends that its proposal, if accepted
would be no more favorable, or less burdensome than the requirements in the
existing franchise.
(9) a schedule of proposed rates in relation to the services to be provided, and a
proposed policy regarding unusual or difficult connection of services;
(10) a time schedule for construction of the system with the time sequence for wiring
the various parts of the areas to be served. This information should be shown on a
map, and the map should clearly show any area identified in the request for
proposals for which the applicant does not seek a franchise. Conditions or
limitations on the construction of the system to serve the entire proposed franchise
area should be rioted;
(1 I ) information supporting and indicating the Applicant's financial, technical and iegal
qualifications and experience in the cable communications field, if any;
(12) an identification of the municipalities in which the Applicant either owns or
operates a Cable System, directly or indirectly, or has outstanding Franchises for
which no system has been built;
(13) detailed plans for financing of the proposed system, which must indicate every
significant anticipated source of capital and significant limitations or conditions
with respect to the availability of the indicated sources of capital;
(14) a statement of ownership detailing the corporate organization of the Applicant, if
any, including the names and addresses of officers and directors and the number
of shares held by each officer or director, and intracompany relationship including
a parent, subsidiary or affiliated company;
(15) a statement of a form and substance acceptable to the Member Cities and the
Commission indemnifying the Member Cities and the Commission fully against
any claims or liabilities alleged as the result of the Member Citiesand the
Commission's exercise of these Policies and Procedures, including any such
claims or liabilities alleged or asserted by the incumbent Cable Company;
(16) an agreement to pay the Member Cities and/or the Commission a Franchise fee in
the same percentage of gross revenues as the incumbent providers, and on the
same base;
(17) the proposed Franchise term;
(18) whether Applicant is willing to agree to terms required under state law, and if not,
the terms to which it objects, the basis for the objection, and how it proposes to
address the state law requirement, if at all;
(19) a notation and explanation of omissions or other variations with respect to the
requirements of the Application; and
(20) submission of an Application Fee in the amount of $40,000.
(21) Such other information as may be required under state law.
(22) If the Applicant claims that the Application is submitted pursuant to, and is
subject to the deadlines for action under FCC regulations governing issuance of
competitive franchises, the Application must so state clearly, and shall also
include all information required by federal law.
Authority: Minn. Stat. § 238,081, Subd. 2 and 4.
al,- 01,
LAKE ELMO
AYOR & COUNCIL CO UNICATION
DATE: 7/21/2015
REGULAR $$
ITEM # 11
AGENDA ITEM: Authorization for sale of $2,815,000 General Obligation Improvement
Bond Series 2015A
SUBMITTED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
THROUGH: Tammy Omdal, Senior Vice President, Northland Securities
REVIEWED BY: Tammy Omdal, Northland Securities
Finance Committee
SU(;GESTE1)ORI)ER OF BUSINESS:
Questions Irom Council to Stalf.......... .......... Mayor Facilitates
Report/Presentations ..... ..... .................City Stall; Northland Securities
Questions from Council to Facilitates
Public'Input, if Appropriate., ...... Facilitates
Call lin. Motion ..... ... Mayor & City Council_
..... ..... ...... Mayor & City Council
Action on Motion ..... ..... Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance Committee
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City will have the responsibility for the debt service on the issuance of $2,815,000 of new
debt as presented in the Financing Plan.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED:
On June 9, 2015, the City authorized the issuance and sale of $2,815,000 in General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 2015A. Resolution No. 2015-57 awards the sale, prescribes the
forms and details and provides for the payment of $2,815,000 to the City of Lake Elmo. The
recommended motion for this action is as follows:
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 12]
July 21, 2015
"Move to approve Resolution No. 2015-57 awarding the sale, prescribing the form and details
and providing for the payment of $2,815,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A"
STAFF REPORT: Tammy Orndal, Senior Vice President with Northland Securities will
present the report and respond to inquiries.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT):
Strengths
Provides funding for infrastructure projects at a low rate. Projects
included are the 39th Street Project costs (additional funding needs
due to approved project scope changes after 2014 bonding cycle),
the Inwood Booster Station Project, the Eagle Point Street
Reconstruction Project (100°/0 assessment project) and some
equipment purchases.
Weaknesses None identified.
Opportunities Ability to complete the Inwood Line of the water "loop- in 2015
and provide water and sewer to new development areas of the City.
Threats
RECOMMENDATION:
If developments are delayed or do not materialize, the enterprise
fund may not be able to independently fund the debt service
payments on the infrastructure bonding.
It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution 2015-57 authorizing the issuance
and sale of $2,815,000 in General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A.
"Move to approve Resolution No. 2015-57 awarding the sale, prescribing the form and details
and providing for the payment of $2,815,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A"
ATTACHMENT(:
1 Resolution No. 2015-57
-- page 2 --
CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO
$2,815,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015A
Issuer: City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota
Governing Body: City Council
Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on July 21, 2015, at 7:00 p.m., at
the City Hall.
Members present:
Members absent:
Documents Attached:
Minutes of said meeting (including):
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-57
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE,
PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE
PAYMENT OF $2,815,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015A
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public
corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents
attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of
said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said
documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing
body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions
taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate
to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place
and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such
meeting given as required by law.
WITNESS my hand officially as such recordi
0 e
City Clerk
st day of July, 2015.
It was reported that ( ) proposals for the purchase of $2,815,000 General
Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A were received prior to 10:30 A.M., Central Time, pursuant to
the Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds by Northland Securities,
Inc., municipal advisor to the City. The proposals have been publicly opened, read and tabulated
and were found to be as follows:
See Attached
Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption, which motion was seconded by Councilmember
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE,
PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE
PAYMENT OF $2,815,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015A
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council, City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota (the "City"), as
follows:
SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND SALE.
1.01, Authorization. This City Council, by resolution duly adopted on June 9, 2015,
authorized the issuance and sale of its General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A (the "Bonds"),
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.301 and Chapters 429, 444 and 475, for the purpose
of (a) financing various street improvements in the City (the "Street Project"), (b) financing
various water and sewer improvement in the City (the "Utility Project"), (c) financing various
items of capital equipment (the "Equipment"), and (d) funding costs of issuance of the Bonds
(collectively, the "Project"). The principal amount of the portion of the Bonds, $
allocable to the Equipment (the "Equipment Bonds") does not exceed 0.25 percent of the market
value of the taxable property in the City.
1.02. Sale. Pursuant to the Notice of Sale and the Preliminary Official Statement
prepared on behalf of the City by Northland Securities, Inc., municipal advisors to the City,
sealed or electronic proposals for the purchase of the Bonds were received at or before the time
specified for receipt of proposals. The proposals have been opened, publicly read and considered
and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have
been determined. The most favorable proposal received is that of , in
(the "Purchaser"), to purchase the Bonds in the principal amount
of $2,815,000, at a price of $ plus accrued interest, if any, on all Bonds to the day
of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. The principal
amount of the portion of the Bonds, $ allocable to the Street Project shall be
designated as the "Street Bonds," and the principal amount of the portion of the Bonds allocable
to the Utility, $ , shall be designated as the "Utility Bonds."
1.03. Award. The sale of the Bonds is hereby awarded to the Purchaser, and the Mayor
and City Finance Director are hereby authorized and directed on behalf of the City to execute a
contract for the sale of the Bonds with the Purchaser in accordance with the Preliminary Official
Statement. The good faith deposit of the Purchaser shall be retained and deposited by the City
until the Bonds have been delivered, and shall be deducted from the purchase price paid at
settlement.
SECTION 2. BOND TERMS; REGISTRATION; EXECUTION AND DELIVERY.
2.01, Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the
Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be
performed precedent to and in the valid issuance of the Bonds having been done, now existing,
having happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for the Council to establish the
form and terms of the Bonds, to provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith.
2.02. Maturities; Interest Rates; Denominations and Payment. The Bonds shall be
originally dated as of the date of issuance thereof, shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, or
any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities, shall mature on January 15 in the years and
amounts stated below, and shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for
redemption, at the annual rates set forth opposite such years and amounts, as follows:
Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Maturity
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
Street Bonds
2025 A
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
Utility Bonds Equipment Bonds
[REVISE MATURITY SCHEDULE FOR ANY TERM BONDS]
The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon
surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof shall be payable by check or draft issued by
the Registrar described herein, provided that so long as the Bonds are registered in the name of a
securities depository, or a nominee thereof, in accordance with Section 2.08 hereof, principal and
2
interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities
depository.
2.03. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon initial delivery of the Bonds pursuant to
Section 2.07 and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 2.06, the date of
authentication shall be noted on each Bond so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on
the Bonds shall be payable on January 15 and July 15 in each year, commencing July 15, 2016,
each such date being referred to herein as an Interest Payment Date, to the persons in whose
names the Bonds are registered on the Bond Register, as hereinafter defined, at the Registrar's
close of business on the first day of the calendar month in which such Interest Payment Date
occurs, whether or not such day is a business day. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a
360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months.
2.04. Redemption. Bonds maturing on January 15, 2024 and later years shall be subject
to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of
maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot as selected by the Registrar
(or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) in
integral multiples of $5,000, on January 15, 2023, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to
the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. The City Finance
Director shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published if and as required
by law, and at least thirty (30) and not more than sixty (60) days prior to the designated
redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the
Registrar and registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear
on the Bond Register described in Section 2.06 hereof, provided that notice shall be given to any
securities depository in accordance with its operational arrangements. No defect in or failure to
give such notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any
Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as
aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date,
become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date
(unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of
Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds
will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount
outstanding.
[COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS -
ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS]
[Bonds maturing on January 15, 20 and 20 (the "Term Bonds") shall be subject
to mandatory redemption prior to maturity pursuant to the sinking fund requirements of this
Section 2.04 at a redemption price equal to the stated principal amount thereof plus interest
accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium. The Registrar shall select for
redemption, by lot or other manner deemed fair, on January 15 in each of the following years the
following stated principal amounts of such Bonds:
Year Principal Amount
The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at
maturity on January 15, 20
Year Principal Amount
The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at
maturity on January 15, 20
Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.]
2.05. Appointment of Registrar. The City hereby appoints Northland Trust Services,
Inc., in Minneapolis, Minnesota, as the initial Bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent
(the "Registrar"). The Mayor and City Finance Director are authorized to execute and deliver,
on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the
Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company
organized under the laws of the United States or one of the states of the United States and
authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as
successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the
Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar,
effective upon not less than thirty days' written notice and upon the appointment and acceptance
of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and
Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the Bond Register to the
successor Registrar.
2.06. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the
Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows:
(a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a
register (the "Bond Register") in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of
ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to
be registered, transferred or exchanged. The term Holder or Bondholder as used herein
shall mean the person (whether a natural person, corporation, association, partnership,
trust, governmental unit, or other legal entity) in whose name a Bond is registered in the
Bond Register.
(b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by
the Holder thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form
satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the Holder thereof or by an attorney duly
authorized by the Holder in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the
name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like
aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar
may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the first day of the
month in which the interest payment date occurs and until such interest payment date.
4
(c) ExchanE4e of Bonds. At the option of the Holder of any Bond in a
denomination greater than $5,000, such Bond may be exchanged for other Bonds of
authorized denominations, of the same maturity and a like aggregate principal amount,
upon surrender of the Bond to be exchanged at the office of the Registrar. Whenever any
Bond is so surrendered for exchange the City shall execute and the Registrar shall
authenticate and deliver the Bonds which the Bondholder making the exchange is entitled
to receive.
(d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered for payment, transfer or exchange shall
be promptly canceled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City.
(e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the
Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that
the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and
that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for
the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or
unauthorized.
(I) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in
whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the Bond Register as the absolute
owner of the Bond, whether the Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of
receiving payment of or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for
all other purposes; and all payments made to or upon the order of such Holder shall be
valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of
the sum or sums so paid.
(g) Taxes, Fees and Charaes. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds (except
for an exchange upon a partial redemption of a Bond), the Registrar may impose a charge
upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other
governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange.
(h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become
mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like
amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon
cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond
destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the
Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost,
upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed,
stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an
appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which
both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to
the Registrar shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to
the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been
called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new
Bond prior to payment.
5
(i) Authenticating Agent. The Registrar is hereby designated authenticating
agent for the Bonds, within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55,
Subdivision 1, as amended.
(j) Valid Obligations. All Bonds issued upon any transfer or exchange of Bonds
shall be the valid obligations of the City, evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the
same benefits under this Resolution as the Bonds surrendered upon such transfer or
exchange.
2.07. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the
direction of the City Finance Director and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the
signatures of the Mayor and the City Finance Director, provided that the signatures may be
printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer whose signature
or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on any Bond shall cease to be such officer before
the delivery of such Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient
for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until the date of delivery of
such Bond. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any
purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this Resolution unless and until a certificate
of authentication on the Bond, substantially in the form provided in Section 2.09, has been
executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of
authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed
certificate of authentication on any Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been duly
authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Bonds have been prepared,
executed and authenticated, the City Finance Director shall deliver them to the Purchaser upon
payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale theretofore executed, and
the Purchaser shall not be obligated to see to the application of the purchase price.
2.08. Securities Denository_. (a) For purposes of this section the following terms shall
have the following meanings:
"Beneficial Owner" shall mean, whenever used with respect to a Bond, the person in
whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner of such Bond by a Participant on the
records of such Participant, or such person's subrogee.
"Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee of DTC, and any successor nominee
of DTC with respect to the Bonds.
"DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York.
"Participant" shall mean any broker -dealer, bank or other financial institution for which
DTC holds bonds as securities depository.
"Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter pursuant to which the City
agrees to comply with DTC's Operational Arrangements.
(b) The Bonds shall be initially issued as separately authenticated fully registered bonds,
and one Bond shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of the Bonds. Upon
initial issuance, the ownership of such Bonds shall be registered in the Bond Register in the
6
name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. The Registrar and the City may treat DTC (or its
nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Bonds registered in its name for the purposes of
payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions thereof to be
redeemed, if any, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of
Bonds under this resolution, registering the transfer of Bonds, and for all other purposes
whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the City shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.
Neither the Registrar nor the City shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant,
any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Bonds under or through DTC or any
Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the Bond Register as being a registered
owner of any Bonds, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or any
Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with respect to
the principal of or interest on the Bonds, with respect to any notice which is permitted or
required to be given to owners of Bonds under this resolution, with respect to the selection by
DTC or any Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of
the Bonds, or with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner
of the Bonds. So long as any Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC,
the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on such Bond, and shall give all notices with
respect to such Bond, only to Cede & Co. in accordance with DTC's Operational Arrangements,
and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City's
obligations with respect to the principal of and interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or
sums so paid. No person other than DTC shall receive an authenticated Bond for each separate
stated maturity evidencing the obligation of the City to make payments of principal and interest.
Upon delivery by DTC to the Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to
substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the Bonds will be transferable to such new
nominee in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof.
(c) In the event the City determines that it is in the best interest of the Beneficial Owners
that they be able to obtain Bonds in the form of physical certificates, the City may notify DTC
and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants of the availability through DTC
of Bonds in the form of certificates. In such event, the Bonds will be transferable in accordance
with paragraph (e) hereof. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect
to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and the Registrar and discharging its
responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event the Bonds will he
transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof.
(d) The execution and delivery of the Representation Letter to DTC, if not previously
filed with DTC, by the Mayor or City Finance Director is hereby authorized and directed.
(e) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Bonds is permitted under paragraph (b)
or (c) hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the Registrar of
the Bonds to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments of transfer to the permitted
transferee in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. In the event Bonds in the form of
certificates are issued to owners other than Cede & Co., its successor as nominee for DTC as
owner of all the Bonds, or another securities depository as owner of all the Bonds, the provisions
of this resolution shall also apply to all matters relating thereto, including, without limitation, the
printing of such Bonds in the form of physical certificates and the method of payment of
principal of and interest on such Bonds in the form of physical certificates.
7
Section 3. USE OF PROCEEDS; PROJECT FUND.
3.01. Project Fund
There is hereby created a special bookkeeping fund to be designated as the "General
Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A Project Fund" (the "Project Fund"), to be held and administered
by the City Finance Director separate and apart from all other funds of the City. Within the
Project Fund are established the following accounts:
(a) Street Project Account. The Street Project Account shall be credited with
(i) $ from the proceeds from the Bonds and (ii) all special assessments
collected with respect to the Street Project until all costs of such improvements have been
fully paid. The City Finance Director shall maintain the Street Project Account until
payment of all costs and expenses incurred in connection with the construction of the
Street Project have been paid.
(b) Utility Project Account. The Utility Project Account shall be credited
with $ from the proceeds of the Bonds. The City Finance Director shall
maintain the Utility Project Account until all costs and expenses incurred by the City in
connection with the construction of the Utility Project have been paid.
(c) Equipment Account. The Equipment Account shall be credited with
from the proceeds of the Bonds. The City Finance Director shall maintain
the Equipment Account until all costs and expenses incurred by the City in connection
with the Equipment have been paid.
From the Project Fund there shall be paid all costs and expenses related to the
construction and acquisition of the Project. After payment of all such costs and expenses, the
Project Fund shall be terminated. All funds on hand in the Project Fund when terminated shall
be credited to the Bond Fund described in Section 4 hereof, unless and except as such proceeds
may be transferred to some other fund or account as to which the City has received from bond
counsel an opinion that such other transfer is permitted by applicable laws arid does not impair
the exemption of interest on the Bonds from federal income taxes.
SECTION 4. GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015A BOND FUND. The Bonds
shall be payable from a separate General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A Bond Fund (the "Bond
Fund") of the City, which shall be created and maintained on the books of the City as a separate
debt redemption fund until the Bonds, and all interest thereon, are fully paid. Into the Bond Fund
shall be paid (a) any funds received from the Purchaser upon delivery of the Bonds in excess of
the amounts specified in Section 3 above; (b) special assessments levied and collected in
accordance with this Resolution except as otherwise provided in Section 3.01, clause (a) hereof;
(c) net revenues of the municipal water and sewer systems, such revenues to be distributed
ratably with respect to the portion of the Bonds payable therefrom and any other obligations of
the City payable from the same source; (d) any taxes collected pursuant to Section 7 hereof; and
(e) any other funds appropriated by this Council for the payment of the Bonds. The principal of
and interest on the Bonds shall be payable from the Bond Fund, and the money on hand in the
Bond Fund from time to time shall be used only to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds.
On or before each principal and interest payment date for the Bonds, the City Finance Director is
directed to remit to the Registrar from funds on deposit in the Bond Fund the amount needed to
pay principal and interest on the Bonds on the next succeeding principal and interest payment
date,
There are hereby established two accounts in the Bond Fund, designated as the "Debt
Service Account" and the "Surplus Account." There shall initially be deposited into the Debt
Service Account upon the issuance of the Bonds the amount set forth in clause (a) above.
Thereafter, during each bond year (each twelve month period commencing on January 16 and
ending on the following January 15, a "Bond Year"), as monies are received into the Bond Fund,
the City Finance Director shall first deposit such monies into the Debt Service Account until an
amount has been appropriated thereto sufficient to pay all principal and interest due on the Bonds
through the end of the Bond Year. All subsequent monies received in the Bond Fund during the
Bond Year shall be appropriated to the Surplus Account. If at any time the amount on hand in
the Debt Service Account is insufficient for the payrnent of principal and interest then due, the
City Finance Director shall transfer to the Debt Service Account amounts on hand in the Surplus
Account to the extent necessary to cure such deficiency. Investment earnings (and losses) on
amounts from time to time held in the Debt Service Account and Surplus Account shall be
credited or charged to said accounts.
If the balance in the Bond Fund is at any time insufficient to pay all interest and principal
then due on all Bonds payable therefrom, the payment shall be made from any fund of the City
which is available for that purpose, subject to reimbursement from the Surplus Account when the
balance therein is sufficient, and the City covenants and agrees that it will each year levy a
sufficient amount of ad valorem taxes to take care of any accumulated or anticipated deficiency,
which levy is not subject to any constitutional or statutory limitation.
SECTION 5. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. The City hereby covenants and agrees that, for the
payment of the costs of the Street Project, the City has done or will do and perform all acts and
things necessary for the final and valid levy of special assessments in the principal amount of
$1,490,000, which is not less than 20% of the cost of the Street Project. The principal of and
interest on such special assessments are estimated to be levied and collected in the years and
amounts shown on EXHIBIT B attached hereto. The principal of the assessments shall be made
payable in annual installments, with interest as established by this Council in accordance with
law on unpaid installments thereof from time to time remaining unpaid. In the event any special
assessment shall at any time be held invalid with respect to any lot or tract of land, due to any
error, defect or irregularity in any action or proceeding taken or to be taken by the City or by this
Council or by any of the officers or employees of the City, either in the making of such special
assessment or in the performance of any condition precedent thereto, the City hereby covenants
and agrees that it will forthwith do all such further things and take all such further proceedings as
shall be required by law to make such special assessment a valid and binding lien upon said
property.
SECTION 6. PLEDGE OF NET REVENUES. It is hereby found, determined and declared that
the City owns and operates its municipal water and sewer systems as revenue -producing utilities
and as a convenience, and that the net operating revenues of the systems, after deducting from
the gross receipts derived from charges for the service, use and availability of the systems the
9
normal, current and reasonable expenses of operation and maintenance thereof, will be sufficient,
together with any other pledged funds, for the payment when due of the principal of and interest
on the Utility Bonds and on any other bonds to which such revenues are pledged.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 444.075, the City hereby covenants and agrees
with the registered owners from time to time of the Bonds that until the Bonds and the interest
thereon are discharged as provided in Section 8 or paid in full, the City will impose and collect
reasonable charges in accordance with said Section 444.075 for the service, use and availability
of its municipal water and sewer systems according to schedules sufficient to produce net
revenues sufficient, with other funds pledged to payment of the Utility Bonds, to pay the Utility
Bonds and any other bonds to which said net revenues have been pledged; and the net revenues,
to the extent necessary, are hereby irrevocably pledged and appropriated to the payment of the
Bonds and interest thereon when due. Nothing herein shall preclude the City from hereafter
making further pledges and appropriations of the net revenues of its municipal water and sewer
systems for payment of additional obligations of the City hereafter authorized if the Council
determines before the authorization of such additional obligations that the estimated net revenues
of the systems will be sufficient, together with any other sources pledged to the payment of the
outstanding and additional obligations, for payment of the outstanding bonds and such additional
obligations. Such further pledges and appropriations of net revenues may be made superior or
subordinate to or on a parity with, the pledge and appropriation herein made.
SECTION 7. PLEDGE OF TAXING POWERS. For the prompt and full payment of the
principal of and interest on the Bonds as such payments respectively become due, the full faith,
credit and unlimited taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. In
order to produce aggregate amounts which, together with the collections of other amounts as set
forth in Section 4, will produce amounts not less than 5% in excess of the amounts needed to
meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds, ad valorem taxes are hereby
levied on all taxable property in the City, the taxes to be levied and collected in the following
years and amounts:
Levy Years
Collection Years Amount
See attached schedules
The taxes shall be irrepealable as long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid,
provided that the City reserves the right and power to reduce the tax levies from other legally
available funds, in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61.
SECTION 8. DEFEASANCE. When all of the Bonds have been discharged as provided in this
Section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this Resolution to the Holders of the
Bonds shall cease. The City may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds which are
due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the
payment thereof in full; or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be
discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with
interest accrued from the due date to the date of such deposit. The City may also discharge its
obligations with respect to any prepayable Bonds called for redemption on any date when they
10
are prepayable according to their teens by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date an
amount equal to the principal, redemption premium, if any, and interest then due, provided that
notice of such redemption has been duly given as provided herein. The City may also at any
time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now or
hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing in-evocably in escrow, with the
Registrar or with a bank or trust company qualified by law to act as an escrow agent for this
purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited for such purpose,
bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and maturing or callable at the holder's
option on such dates as shall be required to pay all principal and interest to become due thereon
to maturity or, if notice of redemption as herein required has been irrevocably provided for, to an
earlier designated redemption date. If such deposit is made more than ninety days before the
maturity date or specified redemption date of the Bonds to be discharged, the City must have
received a written opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that such deposit does not adversely
affect the exemption of interest on any Bonds from federal income taxation and a written report
of an accountant or investment banking firm verifying that the deposit is sufficient to pay when
due all of the principal and interest on the Bonds to be discharged on and before their maturity
dates or earlier designated redemption date.
SECTION 8. TAX COVENANTS; ARBITRAGE MATTERS AND CONTINUING
DISCLOSURE.
8.01. General Tax Covenant. The City agrees with the registered owners from time to
time of the Bonds that it will not take, or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or
agents, any action that would cause interest on the Bonds to become includable in gross income
of the recipient under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") and
applicable Treasury Regulations (the "Regulations"), and agrees to take any and all actions
within its powers to ensure that the interest on the Bonds will not become includable in gross
income of the recipient under the Code and the Regulations. All proceeds of the Bonds
deposited in the Project Fund will be expended solely for the payment of the costs of the Project.
The Project is and will be owned and maintained by the City and available for use by members
of the general public on a substantially equal basis. The City shall not enter into any lease,
management contract, use agreement, capacity agreement or other agreement with any non-
governmental person relating to the use of the Project, or any portion thereof, or security for the
payment of the Bonds which might cause the Bonds to be considered "private activity bonds" or
"private loan bonds" pursuant to Section 141 of the Code.
8.02. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and City Finance Director being the officers of
the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this Resolution, are
authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certificate in accordance with
Section 148 of the Code, and applicable Regulations, stating the facts, estimates and
circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Bonds which make it
reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used in a manner that would
cause the Bonds to be "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of the Code and Regulations.
8.03. Arbitrage Rebate. (a) It is hereby found that the City has general taxing powers,
that no Bond is a "private activity bond" within the meaning of Section 141 of the Code, that
95% or more of the net proceeds of the Bonds are to be used for local governmental activities of
11
the City, and that the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt obligations (other than private
activity bonds) issued by the City and all subordinate entities thereof during the year 2015 is not
reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000. Therefore, pursuant to Section 148(f)(4)(D) of the
Code, the City shall not be required to comply with the arbitrage rebate requirements of
paragraphs (2) and (3) of Section 148(f) of the Code.
(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this Section 8.03, if the arbitrage
rebate provisions of Section 148(t) of the Code apply to the Bonds, the City hereby covenants
and agrees to make the determinations, retain records and rebate to the United States the amounts
at the times and in the manner required by said Section 148(f) and applicable Regulations.
8.04. Qualified Tax -Exempt Obligations, The City Council hereby designates the Bonds
as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code relating to
the disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions, and hereby finds that the
reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (within the meaning of Section
265(b)(3) of the Code) which will be issued by the City and all subordinate entities during
calendar year 2015 does not exceed $10,000,000.
8.05. Reimbursement. The City certifies that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used
by the City to reimburse itself for any expenditure with respect to the Projects which the City
paid or will have paid more than 60 days prior to the issuance of the Bonds unless, with respect
to such prior expenditures, the City shall have made a declaration of official intent which
complies with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Regulations, provided that this
certification shall not apply (i) with respect to certain de minimis expenditures, if any, with
respect to the Projects meeting the requirements of Section 1.150-2(0(1) of the Regulations, or
(ii) with respect to "preliminary expenditures" for the Projects as defined in Section 1.150-2(f)(2)
of the Regulations, including engineering or architectural expenses and similar preparatory
expenses, which in the aggregate do not exceed 20% of the "issue price" of the Bonds.
8.06. Continuing Disclosure (a) Purpose and Beneficiaries. To provide for the public
availability of certain information relating to the Bonds and the security therefor and to permit
the Purchaser and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to
comply with amendments to Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the SEC under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.R. § 240.15c2-12), relating to continuing disclosure (as in effect
and interpreted from time to time, the Rule), which will enhance the marketability of the Bonds,
the City hereby makes the following covenants and agreements for the benefit of the Owners (as
hereinafter defined) from time to time of the outstanding Bonds. The City is the only obligated
person in respect of the Bonds within the meaning of the Rule for purposes of identifying the
entities in respect of which continuing disclosure must be made. If the City fails to comply with
any provisions of this section, any person aggrieved thereby, including the Owners of any
outstanding Bonds, may take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or
appropriate to enforce performance and observance of any agreement or covenant contained in
this section, including an action for a writ of mandamus or specific performance. Direct,
indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall not be recoverable for any default hereunder
to the extent permitted by law. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in no
event shall a default under this section constitute a default under the Bonds or under any other
provision of this resolution. As used in this section, Owner or Bondowner owner means, in
12
respect of the Bonds, the registered owner or owners thereof appearing in the bond register
maintained by the Registrar or any Beneficial Owner (as hereinafter defined) thereof, if such
Beneficial Owner provides to the Registrar evidence of such beneficial ownership in form and
substance reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar. As used herein, Beneficial Owner means, in
respect of the Bonds, any person or entity which (a) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote
or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, such Bonds (including persons or
entities holding Certificates through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is
treated as the owner of the Bonds for federal income tax purposes.
(b) Information To Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth in subsection
(c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City, the following
information at the following times:
(1)
On or before 12 months after the end of each fiscal year of the City, commencing
with the fiscal year ending December 31, 2015, the following financial
information and operating data in respect of the City (the Disclosure Information):
(A) the audited financial statements of the City for such fiscal year, prepared
in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in accordance
with the governmental accounting standards promulgated by the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board or as otherwise provided
under Minnesota law, as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent
such financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with such
generally accepted accounting principles for reasons beyond the
reasonable control of the City, noting the discrepancies therefrom and the
effect thereof, and certified as to accuracy and completeness in all material
respects by the fiscal officer of the City; and
(B) to the extent not included in the financial statements referred to in
paragraph (A) hereof, the information for such fiscal year or for the period
most recently available of the type contained in the Official Statement
under the headings: "Economic and Financial Information Valuations";
"--Tax Capacity Rates" and " Tax Levies and Collections" and
"Summary of Debt and Debt Statistics."
Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if the audited financial statements are not available by
the date specified, the City shall provide on or before such date unaudited financial statements in
the format required for the audited financial statements as part of the Disclosure Information and,
within 10 days after the receipt thereof, the City shall provide the audited financial statements.
Any or all of the Disclosure Information may be incorporated by reference, if it is updated as
required hereby, from other documents, including official statements, which have been filed with
the SEC or have been made available to the public by the Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board (the "MSRB") through its Electronic Municipal Market Access System (EMMA). The
City shall clearly identify in the Disclosure Information each document so incorporated by
reference. if any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the
operations of the City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure
13
Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a
statement to such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other City
operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City
determines that certain specified data regarding such replacement operations would be a Material
Fact (as defined in paragraph (2) hereof), then, from and after such determination, the Disclosure
Information shall include such additional specified data regarding the replacement operations. If
the Disclosure Information is changed or this section is amended as permitted by this paragraph
(b)(1) or subsection (d), then the City shall include in the next Disclosure Information to be
delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment
and the effect of any change in the type of financial information or operating data provided.
In a timely manner, not in excess of 10 business days, to the MSRB through
EMMA, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events (each a "Material
Fact," as hereinafter defined):
(A) principal and interest payment delinquencies;
(B) non-payment related defaults;
(C) unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial
difficulties;
(D) unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial
difficulties;
(E) substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform;
(F) adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the
security;
(G) modifications to rights of security holders;
(H) bond calls;
(I) defeasances;
(J) release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the
securities;
(K) rating changes;
(L) bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership, or similar event of the obligated
person;
(M) the consummation of a merger, consolidation, or acquisition involving an
obligated person or the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of an
obligated person, other than in the ordinary course of business, the entry
into a definitive agreement to undertake such an action or the termination
of a definitive agreement relating to any such actions, other than pursuant
to its ten-ns, if material; and
(N) appointment of a successor or additional trustee or the change of name of
a trustee, if material.
As used herein, for those events that must be reported if material, a "Material Fact" is a fact as to
which a substantial likelihood exists that a reasonably prudent investor would attach importance
thereto in deciding to buy, hold or sell the Bonds or, if not disclosed, would significantly alter the
total information otherwise available to an investor from the Official Statement, information
disclosed hereunder or information generally available to the public. Notwithstanding the
14
foregoing sentence, a Material Fact is also a fact that would be deemed material for purposes of
the purchase, holding or sale of the Bonds within the meaning of applicable federal securities
laws, as interpreted at the time of discovery of the occurrence of the event.
For the purposes of the event identified in (L) hereinabove, the event is considered to occur when
any of the following occur: the appointment of a receiver, fiscal agent or similar officer for an
obligated person in a proceeding under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code or in any other proceeding
under state or federal law in which a court or governmental authority has assumed jurisdiction
over substantially all of the assets or business of the obligated person, or if such jurisdiction has
been assumed by leaving the existing governing body and officials or officers in possession but
subject to the supervision and orders of a court or governmental authority, or the entry of an
order confirming a plan of reorganization, arrangement or liquidation by a court or governmental
authority having supervision or jurisdiction over substantially all of the assets or business of the
obligated person.
(3) In a timely manner, to the MSRB through EMMA, notice of the occurrence of any
of the following events or conditions:
(A) the failure of the City to provide the Disclosure Information required
under paragraph (b)(1) at the time specified thereunder;
(B) the amendment or supplementing of this section pursuant to subsection
(d), together with a copy of such amendment or supplement and any
explanation provided by the City under subsection (d)(2);
(C) the termination of the obligations of the City under this section pursuant to
subsection (d);
(D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial
statements constituting a portion of the Disclosure Information are
prepared; and
(E) any change in the fiscal year of the City.
(c) Manner of Disclosure.
(1)
The City agrees to make available to the MSRB through EMMA, in an electronic
format as prescribed by the MSRB, the information described in subsection (b).
(2) All documents provided to the MSRB pursuant to this subsection (c) shall be
accompanied by identifying information as prescribed by the MSRB from time to
time.
(d) Term; Amendments: Interpretation.
(1) The covenants of the City in this section shall remain in effect so long as any
Bonds are outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the
obligations of the City under this section shall terminate and be without further
effect as of any date on which the City delivers to the Registrar an opinion of
Bond Counsel to the effect that, because of legislative action or final judicial or
administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the City to comply with the
15
requirements of this section will not cause participating underwriters in the
primary offering of the Bonds to be in violation of the Rule or other applicable
requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or any statutes
or laws successory thereto or amendatory thereof.
(2) This section (and the form and requirements of the Disclosure Information) may
be amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to
(except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) hereof) or the consent of the Owners of
any Bonds, by a resolution of this Council filed in the office of the recording
officer of the City accompanied by an opinion of Bond Counsel, who may rely on
certificates of the City and others and the opinion may be subject to customary
qualifications, to the effect that: (i) such amendment or supplement (a) is made in
connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in law or
regulation or a change in the identity, nature or status of the City or the type of
operations conducted by the City, or (b) is required by, or better complies with,
the provisions of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule; (ii) this section as so amended or
supplemented would have complied with the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of
the Rule at the time of the primary offering of the Bonds, giving effect to any
change in circumstances applicable under clause (i)(a) and assuming that the Rule
as in effect and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in
effect at the time of the primary offering; and (iii) such amendment or supplement
does not materially impair the interests of the Bondowners under the Rule.
(3)
If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide,
contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of
the reasons for the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of
financial information or operating data being provided hereunder.
This section is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of
the Rule and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of paragraph
(b)(5) of the Rule.
SECTION 9. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS.
9.01. Registration of Bonds. The City Finance Director is hereby authorized and
directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Washington County,
together with such additional information as is required, and to obtain a certificate that the Bonds
and the taxes levied pursuant hereto have been duly entered upon the County Auditor's Bond
register.
9.02. Authentication of Transcript. The officers of the City and the County Auditor are
hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney
LLP, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to the Bonds and
such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to
the legality and marketability of the Bonds, as the same appear from the books and records in
their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, affidavits
16
and certificates, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City
as to the correctness of all statements contained therein.
9.03. Official Statement. The Preliminary Official Statement relating to the Bonds,
dated as of , 2015 prepared and distributed by Northland Securities, Inc., is hereby
approved. Northland Securities, Inc., is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and
distribute to the Purchaser within seven business days from the date hereof, a Final Official
Statement listing the offering price, the interest rates, selling compensation, delivery date, the
underwriters and such other information relating to the Bonds required to be included in the
Official Statement by Rule 15c2-12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed
to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and
sufficiency of the Official Statement.
9.04. Authorization of Payment of Certain Costs of Issuance of the Bonds. The City
authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of
issuance expenses to the Registrar on the closing date for further distribution as directed by
Northland Securities, Inc.
9.05. Effective Date. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its
passage.
Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
17
EXHIBIT A
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS,
SERIES 2015A
Interest Rate Maturity Date
Date of Original Issue CUSIP No.
January 15, 20 ,2015
REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO.
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: THOUSAND DOLLARS
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, State of Minnesota (the "City") acknowledges itself to be
indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the registered owner specified above,
or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above on the maturity date specified above
and promises to pay interest thereon from the date of original issue specified above or from the
most recent Interest Payment Date (as hereinafter defined) to which interest has been paid or
duly provided for, at the annual interest rate specified above, payable on January 15 and July 15
in each year, commencing July 15, 2016 (each such date, an "Interest Payment Date"), all subject
to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this Bond
before maturity. The interest so payable on any Interest Payment Date shall be paid to the person
in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the first day (whether or not a
business day) of the calendar month in which such Interest Payment Date occurs. Interest hereon
shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months. The
interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof at the principal office of the agent of
the Registrar described below, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United
States of America by check or draft drawn on Northland Trust Services, Inc., Minneapolis,
Minnesota, as Bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent, or its successor designated under
the Resolution described herein (the "Registrar") or other agreed -upon means of payment by the
Registrar or its designated successor. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and
interest as the same respectively come due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City
have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged.
This Bond is one of an issue (the "Bonds") in the aggregate principal amount of
$2,815,000 issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on July21, 2015 (the
"Resolution"), to finance various street improvement projects in the City, improvements to the
City's water and sewer systems, and various items of capital equipment and to fund the costs of
issuance of the Bonds. This Bond issued by authority of and in strict accordance with the
provisions of the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including
Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.301 and Chapters 429, 444 and 475. For the full and prompt
payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as the same become due, the full faith,
credit and taxing power of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. The Bonds
are issuable only in fully registered form, in the denomination of $5,000 or any integral multiple
thereof, of single maturities.
Bonds maturing on January 15, 2024 and later years shall be subject to redemption and
prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the
City may select and, within a maturity, by lot as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by
the Bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) in multiples of $5,000, on
January 15, 2023, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and
accrued interest to the date of redemption. The City shall cause notice of the call for redemption
thereof to be published if and to the extent required by law, and at least thirty (30) and not more
than sixty (60) days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for
redemption to be mailed, by first class mail (or, if applicable, provided in accordance with the
operational arrangements of the securities depository), to the registered holders of any Bonds, at
the holders' addresses as they appear on the Bond register maintained by the Bond Registrar, but
no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of
proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official
notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be
redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein
specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the
redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial
redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge,
representing the remaining principal amount outstanding.
[COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS -
ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS]
[Bonds maturing in the years 20 and 20 shall be subject to mandatory
redemption, at a redemption price equal to their principal amount plus interest accrued thereon to
the redemption date, without premium, on January 15 in each of the years shown below, in an
amount equal to the following principal amounts:
2
Term Bonds Maturingin 20 Term Bonds Maturing in 20
Sinking Fund
Payment Date
Aggregate Sinking Fund
Principal Amount Payment Date
(final maturity) (final maturity)
Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.]
Aggregate
Principal Amount
As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this
Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Registrar, by the
registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon
surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly
executed by the registered owner or the owner's attomey, and may also be surrendered in
exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City
will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the designated transferee or
registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and
maturing on the same date; subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governrnental charge
required to be paid with respect to any such transfer or exchange.
The Bonds have been designated by the City as "qualified tax-exempt obligations"
pursuant to Section 265(b)(3) of the internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
The City and the Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is
registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of
receiving payment as herein provided and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the
Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Bond, so long as this Bond is registered in
the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, or in the name of any
other nominee of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository, the Registrar
shall pay all principal of and interest on this Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to this
Bond, only to Cede & Co. or other nominee in accordance with the operational arrangements of
The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository as agreed to by the City.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts,
conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done,
to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order
to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have
been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required; that, prior to the
issuance hereof, the City Council has by the Resolution covenanted and agreed to collect and
apply to payment of the bonds ad valorem taxes levied on all taxable property in the City, certain
net revenues of its municipal water and sewer systems and special assessments upon property
specially benefited by the local improvements financed with the Bonds, which taxes, revenues
and assessments are estimated to be collectible in years and amounts sufficient to produce sums
not less than 5% in excess of the principal of and interest on the Bonds when due, and has
appropriated such assessments, revenues and taxes to its General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015
Bond Fund for the payment of such principal and interest; that if necessary for the payment of
such principal and interest, additional ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable
property in the City, without limitation as to rate or amount; that all proceedings relative to the
projects financed by this Bond have been or will be taken according to law and that the issuance
of this Bond, together with all other indebtedness of the City outstanding on the date hereof and
on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness of the City to
exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness.
This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any
security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have
been executed by the Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by
the facsimile signatures of its Mayor and City Finance Director and has caused this Bond to be
dated as of the date set forth below.
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
(facsimile signature — City Finance Director) (facsimile signature — Mayor)
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within.
Date of Authentication:
NORTHLAND TRUST SERVICES, INC.,
as Registrar
By
4
Authorized Representative
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall
be construed as though they were written out in full according to the applicable laws or
regulations:
TEN COM --as tenants in common UTMA .............as Custodian for
(Cust) (Minor)
TEN ENT --as tenants by the entireties under Uniform Transfers to Minors Act
(State)
JT TEN --as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common
Additional abbreviations may also be used.
AS
For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto
the
within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
attorney
to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of
substitution in the premises.
Dated:
NOTICE: The assignor's signature to this assignment must
correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the
within Bond in every particular, without alteration or
enlargement or any change whatsoever.
Signature Guaranteed:
Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an "eligible guarantor institution" meeting the requirements
of the Registrar, which requirements include membership or participation in STAMP or such
other "signature guaranty program" as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to or in
substitution for STAMP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.
PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR
OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF
ASSIGNEE:
5
EXHIBIT B
Special Assessments and Tax Levies
WASHINGTON COUNTY AUDITOR'S
CERTIFICATE AS TO REGISTRATION AND TAX LEVY
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting County Auditor of Washington
County, Minnesota, hereby certifies that there has been filed in my office a certified copy of a
resolution duly adopted on July 21, 2015, by the City Council of Lake Elmo, Minnesota, setting
forth the form and details of an issue of S2,815,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A
dated the date of issuance thereof.
I further certify that the issue has been entered on my bond register and the taxes required
by law have been levied as required by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.61 to 475.63.
WITNESS my hand and official seal on the day of , 2015.
Washington County Auditor
(SEAL)
TI crn
KE ELMO
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
THROUGH:
REVIEWED BY:
A YOR & COUNCIL CO UNICATION
DATE:
REGULAR
ITEM #
July 21, 2015
12
Stormwater Drainage Improvements — Approve Ditch Cleaning at 8690 and 8702
Ironwood Trail N
Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
Mike Bouthilet, Public Works
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Introduction of Item City Engineer
Report/Presen Ia0on .City Engineer
- Questions from Council to Staff hlavor Facilitates
- Public Input, i Appropriate. Mayor Facilitates
- (7all for 'Motion .... Mayor & City Council
..... ....... ..... Mayor L'<'_ City Council
Action on Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering Public Works.
FISCAL IMPACT: $5,962.50.
The City obtained a quote from Miller Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $5,962.50 to remove sediment
that is blocking drainage of the ditch along the property line of 8690 and 8702 Ironwood Trai] N. Ditch
cleaning/restoration is funded through Surface Water Management Fund.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving the ditch cleaning at 8690 and 8702
Ironwood Trail N and awarding a construction contract to Miller Excavating, Inc. in the amount of
S5,962.50 to complete the work. The recommended motion for this action is as follows:
"i'Iove to approve ditch cleaning at 8690 and 8702 Ironwood Trail N and award a construction
contract to Miller Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $5,962.50."
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item Ag
July 21, 2015
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
A culvert under Ironwood Trail N collects drainage from a portion of the Tablyn Park Neighborhood
including the public street right-of-way and discharges along the property line of 8690 and 8702
Ironwood Trail N. A 10-foot wide drainage and utility easement exists along this property line to facilitate
drainage. Sediment deposit over time has filled in the ditch restricting the intended drainage path and
creating standing water within the easement and adjacent properties. The sediment needs to be removed to
restore a positive grade. The ditch grading work would consist of approximately 100 feet of sediment
removal blending into the existing grades and re-establishing turf in the disturbed area.
Public Works did not have time and equipment available to complete the work and requested Engineering
to obtain a contractor for this improvement. Due to the small size of the project it was a challenge to get
contractors to provide a quote, therefore only one quote has been obtained. Miller Excavating, Inc. was
recently awarded a street reconstruction project in Lake Elmo, therefore they will have crews mobilized in
the area and were willing to take on the added work.
Attached are right of entry forms signed by each property owner to allow the work to be completed and
restored as necessary to facilitate drainage along their shared property line. Both property owners have
requested the work to be completed for several years and are concerned about the standing water along
the ditch that is currently blocked by excess sediment. We have detailed the scope of work to be
completed in the right of entry forms and have communicated with the property owners.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the ditch cleaning at 8690 and 8702 Ironwood Trail
N and award a construction contract to Miller Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $5,962.50 to complete
the work. The recommended motion for this action is as follows:
"Move to approve ditch cleaning at 8690 and 8702 Ironwood Trail N and award a construction
contract to Miller Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $5,962.50."
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Construction Contract with Miller Excavating, Inc.
2. Waiver of Trespass / Right of Entry Agreement for 8690 Ironwood Trail N.
3. Waiver of Trespass / Right of Entry Agreement for 8702 Ironwood Trail N.
-- page 2 --
This Contract, made this
(hehnaftercalled the "Owner^)and
State of Minnesota
Washington County
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR DITCH
CLEANING AT8G9O&Q7Q3IRONWOOD TRAIL N
day of 2015' by the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota
Miller Excavating, Inc. (hereinafter called the "Contnactor^).
WITNESSETH that the parties hereto agree as follows:
The Contractor shall provide all labor, services, materials, equipment and machinery, transportation, tools, fuel, power,
light, heat telephone, water, sanitary facilities, temporary facilities, and all other facilities and incidentals, including
profit and overhead, necessary for the performance, testing, start-up'and completion ofthe work asdescribed herein:
DESCRIPTION OF WORK:
The Contractor shall remove sediment within the existing drainage ditch along 8690 and 8702 Ironwood Trail N to
provide aminimum Z96slope from the existing 24-inch culvert end to daylight (approximately 100 feet in length). The
Contractor shall match into the existing side slopes to create a 4:1 slope that can be mowed, The existing ripmp in the
ditch bottom shall be salvaged and placed at the 24-inch outlet for energy dissipation. Geotextile fabric and
additional class III riprap is to be furnished and installed as necessary to finish the culvert end. A minimum of 4 inches
of topsoil, seed and wood fiber blanket must be provided to establish turf for all disturbed areas.
All work shall be completed within the specified time frame and under the terms and conditions provided within this
Construction Contract, and in accordance with the "General Conditions" shown in this contract. The contractor shall
complete the proposed work by AUGUST 21, 2015
The Owner will make payment for the whole contract on a lump sum basis upon acceptance by the Owner of all work
required hereunder and in compliance with all the terms and conditions of this contract.
TOTAL AMOUNT: $5,962.50
|NWITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this contract as of the date first above written,
(Contractor) (City of Lake Elmo)
Project No. 2015.112
General Conditions for Ditch Cleaning Page 1 of 2
GENERAL CONDITIONS
CHANGES IN WORK. - The Owner may at any time, make changes in the drawings and specifications, within the general scope thereof. If
such changes cause an increase or decrease in the amount due under this contract or in the time required for its performance, an
equitable adjustment will be made, and this contract will be modified accordingly by a "Contract Change Order". No charge for any extra
work or material will be allowed unless the same has been ordered on such contract change order by the Owner and the price therefore
stated in the order.
INSPECTION OF WORK, - All materials and workmanship will be subject to inspection, examination, and test, by the Owner, who will have
the right to reject defective material and workmanship or require its correction.
11. COMPLETION OF WORK. - If the Contractor refuses or fails to complete the work within the time specified in this contract, or any
extension thereof, the Owner may terminate the Contractor's rights to proceed. In such event the Owner may take over the work and
prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise, and the Contractor will be liable for any excess cost occasioned the Owner
thereby; and the Owner may take possession of and utilize in completing the work such materials and equipment as may be on the site of
the work and necessary therefore. If the Owner does not terminate the right of the Contract to proceed, the Contractor will continue the
work, in which event, actual damages for delay will be impossible to determine, and in lieu thereof, the Contractor may be required to
pay to the Owner the sum of $100 as liquidated damages for each calendar day of delay, and the Contractor will be liable for the amount
thereof: Provided, however, that the right of the Contractor to proceed will not be terminated because of delays in the completion of the
completion of the work due to unforeseeable causes beyond the Contractor's control and without Contractor's fault or negligence.
IV, RELEASES. - Prior to final payment, the Contractor will submit evidence that all payrolls, material bills, and other indebtedness connected
with the work have been paid as required by the Owner.
V. OBLIGATION TO DISCHARGE LIENS. - Acceptance by the Owner of the completed work performed by the Contractor and payment
therefore by the Owner will not relieve the Contractor of obligation to the Owner (which obligation is hereby acknowledged) to discharge
any and all liens for the benefit of subcontractors, laborers, material -person, or any other persons performing labor upon the work or
furnishing material or machinery for the work covered by this contract, which have attached to or may subsequently attach to the
property, or interest of the Owner.
VI. NOTICES AND APPROVAL IN WRITING. - Any notice, consent, or other act to be given or done hereunder will be valid only if in writing.
VII„ CLEANING UP. - The Contractor shall keep the premises free from accumulation of waste material and rubbish and at the completion of
the work shall remove from the premises all rubbish, implements and surplus materials.
VIII. WARRANTY. - Contractor warrants and guarantees that title to all work, materials, and equipment covered by any Application for
Payment, whether incorporated in the Project or not, will pass to Owner no later than the time of payment free and clear of all Liens. If
within one year after completion of the work, any work is found to be defective, Contractor shall promptly, without cost to the Owner,
correct such defective work as approved by the Owner.
IX. IDEMNIFICATION. - Contractor shall defend and indemnify the city against claims brought or actions filed against the city or any of its
officers, employees or agents for property damage, bodily injury or death to third persons, arising out of or relating to contractors work
under the contract.
X. WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE. - Contractor shall provide a certificate of insurance showing evidence of workers' compensation
coverage or provide evidence of qualification as a self -insurer of workers' compensation.
XI. LIABILITY INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. — A certificate of insurance acceptable to the City shall be filed with the City prior to the
commencement of the work. The certificate and the required insurance policies shall contain a provision that the coverage afforded
under the contract will not be canceled or allowed to expire until at least 30 days prior written notice has been given to the city.
Contractor shall maintain commercial general liability (CGL) insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence and an
aggregate limit of not less than $2,000,000. The CGL insurance shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent
contractors, subcontractors, products -completed operations, personal injury and advertising injury, and contractually -assumed liability.
The city shall be named as an additional insured under the CGL. Contractor shall maintain automobile liability insurance, and if necessary,
umbrella liability insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000 each accident and an aggregate limit of riot less than $2,000,000. The
insurance shall cover liability arising out of any auto, including owned, hired, and non -owned autos.
Project No, 2015.112
General Conditions for Ditch Cleaning Page 2 of 2
City of Lake Elmo
3800Laverne Ave. N.
Lake Elmo, K4N55O42
Phone: 851'770'2537
Far: 651-777'6530
Cell:
Email: dmklocker@gmail.com
Project: Drainage Swale
Ironwood TrN
Lake Elmo, yWW
A. SWALE GRADING
ITEM DESCRIPTION
2
3
4
Grade Swale from Culvert toDayli(
CLIII Rip Rap v/G otexh|eFobhc
Import & Place 4" Topsoil
Seed & Blanket Disturbed Area
Miller Excavating, Inc
3030Stagecoach Trail North
Stillwater, &4N558O2
Phone:651'43O'1837
Fax: 651'351'7210
Web: www,millerexc.com
Date: July 12.2O15
Estimator: Steve St. Claire
Est.
Quantity Unit Rate Amount
PROJECT NOTES
1. Payment due within 3Odays ofinitial invoice. Balances over 3Odays will accrue a1.5%per month
charge.
2, Estimate price valid for 3Odays.
3, Swale k/begraded about 4feet wide atbottom
4, Seed & blanket disturbed area during work.
Page 1 of
WAIVER OF TRESPASS/RIGHT OF ENTRY
THE UNDERSIGNED, ovmer, tenant, or contract for deed vendee of certain land in the City of
Lake Elmo, who is a person(s) with right to grant entry to the affected property, do(es) hereby
consent and grant unto the City of Lake Elmo, its agents and assigns, the right to enter upon and
commence construction and all activities required in connection with the removal of sediment
within an existing drainage ditch, including grading the ditch to a minimum 2% slope and
matching into the existing side slopes and completion of related work over, under, on, and across
the property located at:
(8690 Ironwood Trail N) -4- "7 0.-a. v---rnorvocci Tt.t t•-3 0 v-itA
Upon completion of the grading, activity, the City, its agents and assigns, will restore the
disturbed area.
It is further understood that this Waiver constitutes as a waiver on behalf of the owner or persons
of interest in the property to any claim for damages or compensation for the acquisition of
temporary easements over the above described property for the purposes of the public
improvements herein described by the City of Lake Elmo, its agents and assigns, and by the
general contractor.
Dated this 1 TL day o
TRESPASS_WA1VER
, 2015.
Pioperty Owners:
\r\—LL
WAIVER OF TRESPASS/RIGHT OF ENTRY
THE UNDERSIGNED, owner, tenant, or contract for deed vendee of certain land in the City of
Lake Ehno, who is a person(s) with right to grant entry to the affected property, do(es) hereby
consent and grant unto the City of Lake Elmo, its agents and assigns, the right to enter upon and
commence construction and all activities required in connection with the removal of sediment
within an existing drainage ditch, including grading the ditch to a minimum 2% slope and
matching into the existing side slopes and completion of related work over, under, on, and across
the property located at:
'
(8702 Ironwood Trail N)
Upon completion of the grading activity, the City, its agents and assigns, \Nil] restore the
disturbed area.
It is further understood that this Waiver constitutes as a waiver on behalf of the owner or persons
of interest in the property to any claim I'm damages or compensation for the acquisition of
temporary easements over the above described property for the purposes of the public
improvements herein described by the City of Lake Elmo, its agents and assigns, and by the
general contractor.
-7 A
Dated this -t day of
TRESPASSWAIVER
, 2015.
Property Owners:
lE
CITY
AKE- ELM()
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
THROUGH:
REVIEWED BY:
A YOR & COUNCIL CO
DATE:
REGULAR
ITEM #
TH36 and Highlands Trail - Request for Street Lig
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
Ju]ie Johnson, City Clerk
Mike Bouthilet, Public Works
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer
UNICATION
July 21, 2015
safety improvement
SU(;CESTEI) ()PDF:R. OF BUSINESS:
Introduction of ltem City Engineer
Report/Presentation City Engineer
•stions from Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates
Public input, if Appropriate Mayor Facilitates
Call lint Motion Mayor & City Council
Discussion Mayor & City Council
Action on ..... ...... ..... ....... Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering / Public Works.
FISCAL IMPACT: $2,200.
13
The installation of a street light at the intersection of TH36 and Highlands Trail would cost approximately
$2,200; $1,906 to Xcel Energy for the supply and installation of the street light plus public works
restoration costs. The street light would be funded through the Infrastructure Reserve Fund,
SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving the installation of a street light at the
intersection of TH36 and Highlands Trail in the amount of $2,200; $1,906 to Xcel Energy plus public
works restoration costs. The recommended motion for this action is as follows:
"Move to approve the installation ofa street light at the intersection of TH36 and Highlands Trail in
the amount of $2,200."
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 217
July 21, 2015
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In March, 2015 staff received a request to install a street light at the intersection of TEI36 and Highlands
Trail. The request was made by Barbara Thill residing at 8330 59th Street North (see attached
correspondence). The request was made to Adam Josephson, MnDOT who forwarded the request to City
staff since the installation would be the City's responsibility. The request was made to address a safety
concern to assist in identifying the intersection location to allow vehicles sufficient braking distances
along TH36.
Both Public Works and the Fire Chief have reviewed the intersection and support the installation request.
City staff contacted Xcel Energy and received a proposal to complete the installation should the council
choose to order the street light. An installation cost of $1 ,906.00 was quoted by Xcel Energy in a proposal
dated May 28, 2015. The proposed installation includes a cobra cutoff fixture on a 30 foot direct buried
fiberglass pole and includes all underground facilities, wiring and conduit. In addition the City would pay
a monthly underground rate of $18.86 which includes full maintenance for a period of 25 years (see
attached proposal).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the installation of a street light at the intersection of
TH36 and Highlands Trail in the amount of $2,200; $1,906 to Xcel Energy plus public works restoration.
The recommended motion for this action is as follows:
"Move to approve the installation of a street light at the intersection of TH36 and Highlands Trail in
the amount of $2,200."
ATTACHMENT(S1:
1. Xcel Energy outdoor lighting proposal dated May 28, 2015.
2. Email correspondence including resident request and MnDOT response.
-- page 2 --
Energy'
OUTDOOR LIGHTING
May 28, 2015
Focus Engineering Inc.
Attn: Frank Borich
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
Dear Mr, Frank Borich:
825 Rice Street
St, Paul, MN 55117
Xcel Energy Outdoor Lighting is pleased to have an opportunity to submit a proposal for the City of Lake
Elmo street light project. Our goal is to provide you with the necessary information to assist you in your
decision making process. We are confident we can provide you with a comprehensive package that will
meet all your needs.
Please find below styles of product and the estimated project costs. This proposal includes all underground
facilities installed using the plowing or boring method for conduit and wire and the installation of each of the
following material. If successful in acquiring the identified project, delivery of the specified product could
take 4 to 6 weeks:
fry 36 & Highlands Street Light Project:
1. The Standard Service upfront installation cost is - $1,906,00,
The monthly underground rate (A30) 150VV High Pressure Sodium per luminaire is - $18.86.
inst.[I 'I. -150"A' 310' diisact t)';,"
cP.rec7. F;p21.)'4, .A.L. DX.
2. The Pre -Pay Option upfront installation cost is - $5,197.40.
The monthly pre -pay option rate (A30) 150W High Pressure Sodium per luminaire is - $6.94.
fitar,21,99.5
ac,1 born 170AL DX in 1 tn-,!" conduit_
Restoration is not part of this bid.
Included in the monthly street light rate is full maintenance of the street light system. Maintenance of the
street light system covers the pole, fixture, conduit and wiring, as well as facilitation of any locating and
damage administration. Operations and Maintenance for the proposed street light system will be for 25
years from the date of installation. If you have any questions regarding the proposal, please feel free to
contact me at 651.229.2255.
Sincerely,
Angela Adesoro
Project Coordinator, Xcel Energy
3123/2015 Focus Engineering, Inc, Mail 'rvV: Hwy 3omHighlands Trail
�
K�
Kk
"*
FIN: Hwy 36 at Highlands Trail
3 messages
Jack Griffin <jack.griffin@focusengineeringinc.com>
Josephson, Adam (DOT)<adamjosephson@sbaha.mnuo> Fri, Mar 2U.2O15st4:0OP[N
To: "Jack Griffin Uaok.ghffin@focusengineehnginc.00mY'^gaok.grifDn@hzcunenQineennginc.00m>
hyi
From: Josephson, Adam (DOT)
Sent: Friday, March 2O,IO153:59Py4
To:ho1dago2@gmoiiuom
Subject: Hwy 36 at Highlands Trail
/\ street light edthe Highlands Trmi|/Hwy3GinberseodnnwouNhavehobeinsta|ledandmainbanedbyMheCbvcf
Lake Elmo. I contact the City Engineer (Jack Griffin) about your request. Please contact him directly ifyou want
topursue further.
Adam Josephson, P.E.
East Area Manager
MnOOT—Metro District
051/234'7719
aoam1ooepnson @staos,nnnus
From. Barbra ThU|knniNzhotdago2@gmail.com0
Sent: Monday, March 2.201511:18AK8
To: Henkel, Timothy (DOT)
Subject Hwy 36 Light
I have submitted a question 2 times on email already to the DOT regarding the construction on
Hwy 36this past year and have not got ananswer yet. |tsays they will respond within 3
weeks. | was requesting astreet light/highway light et the corner mf3Oand Highlands Trail. It is
very hared h)see atnight when approaching the corner bomake the turn. Several people have
^npvmnwenoo/e,cvmvrna|vum/?ui=zmx=annnonuusyuwew--pm,earch~inooxam=14"xnmzloz:xouuuxim/~l*oxnmzlnanJsuu6u/m|~1*,*n*euonc. 1/2
3/23/2015 FoctioEngineering, Inc. Mail 'FVV:Hwy 36 at Highlands Trail
also said they were almost hit when acar had bzsuddenly brake tomake the turn. | hope an
accident doesn't happen before alight can beinstalled. You would have thought that olight
would have been installed atthe time ofconstruction. Please ifyou are not the person towhom
I should address this question, please forward this on to the appropriate person,
Thank you for your time and help with this matter, | would really appreciate ananswer b)this
question and if need to do anything more to get this light, please let me
know. Barb
Barbra ThiUxhobdoon2@gmail. com> Mon, Mar 23.2O15st 6:05AM
To:jack.Qriffin@focusengineeringinc.com
Hello Mr, Griffin,
---------- Forwarded message -----
From:Josephson, Adam (DC}T)<adamjouephson@otatemnuy>
Oate� Fh, W1ar20. 2015 at 3:58 PM
Subject: Hwy 36 at Highlands Trail
[Quoted text muxen)
Barbra ThiU<hotdaQo2@QmaULcorn>
To: jook.Qhfhn@focusengineehnginc.nom
HeUo. Qoups, sorry for the massage that was just sent. | hit the enter key by mistake. | was given your name by
Adam Josephson from the DOT. |. along with several others are concerned about not having astreet light on
Hwy 38and Highlands Trail, When the project was completed on Hwy 36 last year, we had assumed they would
have installed mlight there. It is very hard at night to see exactly where to turn onto Highlands Trail coming off
the highway. You have to break rather quickly when approaching the turn especially for the people not familiar
with the turn. Honestly, I came pretty close a few times when I was on Highlands Trail waiting to enter the
highway when almost got hit from someone who did not slow down to make the turn. Granted, there iasign on
36 saying Highlands Trail is coming, but until it is too late you are on the intersection needing to turn. P/eaae,
could someone check the area of concern out (hopefully after dark) to see how important this iafor alight, If
there ioanything | could dotohelp pursue this light, let meknow and iwill try mybest, |fthere issomeone else |
need to be talking to, please provide me with a name or forward this message to them. |fsignatures from
concerned people will help, | will gladly get them for you. | sure hope we do not have to have an accident or two
hzmake this happen. Thank you inadvance for your time inchecking onthis for me. | would really appreciate an
answer when you find anything out. Ba,bThiU
[Quoted text hidden]
Mon, Mar 23.2O15atS:25AM
h8pu�llnoUgougle.comhma0u0l?ui=28ik=8850NUbd5S&vien=p*aemrcx=inbom&th=wc38fd2182S3omu&xim|=14c30fd218233ohd&dm|=1uc454eucor' 2/2
TI if: CM OF
LAKE ELM
'AY
R
COU CIL CO UNICATION
DATE: July 21, 2015
REGULAR
ITEM # 14
RESOLUTION 2015-056
AGENDA ITEM: Diedrich Property Townhouses (Lennar) — Preliminary Plat
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
THROUGH: Julie Johnson, City Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission
Nick Johnson, City Planner
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
1 nt roduction of ltem ..... .........................Community Development Director
Development Director
Questions from Council to Staff ...... ....... Mayor Facilitates
Call tbr Motion ..... Mayor & City Council
Discussion Mayor & City Council
Action on Motion........... ....... Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECCOMENDER: The Planning Commission is recommending approval of a
preliminary plat for a new subdivision as requested by Lennar Corporation. The Subdivision
Ordinance requires that the City Council review and approval a preliminary plat before an
applicant may proceed with the preparation and recording of a final plat. The subdivision
request is being made by Lennar for property presently owned by Tammy Diedrich and Gerhard
Rieder within the 1-94 Corridor planning area.
FISCAL IMPACT: TBD — The City will require that the applicant enter into a developer's
agreement with the City to specify the financial responsibilities for various aspects of the
subdivision and related public improvements. The developer is expected to pay the Water
Availability Charge for the entire development at the time a final plat is approved (currently
$3,000 per unit) similar to other developments that are connecting to the Lake Elrno Avenue
water main.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a
request for approval of a Preliminary Plat from Lennar Corporation for a 46-unit singled family
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 14]
July 21, 2015
attached (townhouse) development to be located on slightly over 15 acres of land immediately
east of Lake Elmo Avenue and north of the Hunters Crossing development. The proposed
development site is located within the City's 1-94 corridor planning area, and is in an area guided
for public sewer and water services. The preliminary plat has been prepared in response to the
City's Comprehensive Plan for the corridor, which guides this site for medium density urban
residential development. The Staff report to the Planning Commission concerning this request is
attached to this memorandum, and includes a detailed summary of the request in addition to the
detailed Staff review and recommendation. The City Council was scheduled to review this
request at the 7/7/15 meeting, but consideration was postponed at request of the applicant. The
applicant has now requested that consideration be placed back on the agenda
The Planning Commission is recommending approval of the preliminary plat with several
conditions of approval. The suggested motion to adopt the Planning Commission
recommendation is as follows:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-056 approving the Lennar Diedrich Townhouses
preliminary plat with 16 conditions of approval."
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: The attached staff
report to the Planning Commission provides an overview of the request and a list of comrnents
and recommendations from Staff. In order to address the initial set of comments from the City,
the developer prepared an updated site plan prior to the Planning Commission meeting that
reduced the overall number of units by two and that changed the originally planned private street
to a public street meeting City specifications. Although the construction plans have not yet been
updated, the Planning Commission's review focused on the updated site plan. The City will still
need to review updated construction plans, and all previous review comments from the City
Engineer and County Engineer will need to be addressed by the applicant. Since the Planning
Commission meeting the developer has updated the landscape plan to provide a better overview
of how the site will look when completed.
The Planning Commission considered the preliminary plat at its June 22, 2015 meeting and
conducted a public hearing on the applicant's request at this time. No one spoke at the public
hearing.
The Planning Commission discussed the request and specifically issues associated with the
timing of improvements to 5th Street, the updated site plan, and potential issues associated with
the new configuration of lots. The Commission also noted that the developer would need to
address an ownership issue in the extreme southwestern portion of the plat. Specifically. Ryland
Homes owns a small remnant of land that is sandwiched between 5ffi Street and the Lennar
property. This property is shown as part of the Lennar plat, but it may be excluded from the
subdivision based on the developers' comments at the meeting. If this is the case, four of the lots
need be adjusted in order to provide adequate rear yard setbacks. This is not a major plat
concern, but will need to be addressed as part of a final plat submission. The Commission
adopted a finding of fact to document their concerns over this issue.
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 14]
July 21. 2015
The Commission further discussed the status of parks in this area and the developer's request to
pay a fee in lieu of land dedication. Commissioners adopted a motion to include a finding that
there are no City parks within 1/2 mile of the subdivision site. The Commission also requested
one additional condition of approval to clarify that the developer must secure a written
agreement from Xcel Energy to perform the planned grading work within the existing power line
easement. The conditions of approval as amended by the Planning Commission are incorporated
into the draft resolution.
The Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat with
the findings and conditions as noted in the attached Resolution 2015-056. The motion passed
unanimously (7-0).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT):
Strengths • The preliminary plat is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
and specifically the Urban Medium Density Residential land use
classification.
The project will connect to the Cottage Grove sewer interceptor
via a connection to the gravity line constructed across the project
site late last year.
The project will connect to the Lake Elmo Avenue water main
recently installed in this area.
Weaknesses • The two developers adjacent to 5th Street have not yet agreed to
build this road as a joint project.
Opportunities • The development will include 46 REC units and will pay
connection fees for sewer and water service. The developer has
committed to paying the water availably charge for the entire
development ($138,000 based on the current fee schedule) with
the first phase of the final plat.
The project will include the construction of the initial segment of
5th Street to the east of Lake Elmo (which must either be
constructed as a public project or privately by the developer).
Threats • None identified.
RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information, Staff report and
Planning Commission recommendation, it is recommended that the City Council approve the
Lennar Diedrich Townhouses preliminary plat with the 16 conditions of approval as documented
in the resolution of approval by taking the following action / with the following motion:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-056 approving the Lennar Diedrich Townhouses
preliminary plat with 16 conditions of approval."
— page 3 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda hem 14.1
July 21, 2015
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 2015-056
2. Planning Commission Report (6/22/15)
3. Application Forms
4. Application Narrative and Information
5. Location Map
6. Tree Inventory
7. Review Comments:
a. City Engineer
b. Washington County
8 Preliminary Plat and Plans (20 sheets)
a. Revised Site Plan (Dated 6/19/15)
b. Revised Landscape Plan (Dated 6/25/15)
c. Cover Sheet
d. Legend Sheet
e. Existing Conditions
f. Preliminary Plat
g. Preliminary Site Plan
h. Preliminary Utility Plan
i. Preliminary Grading Plan
j. Erosion Control Plan
k. Preliminary Seeding Plan
1. Preliminary Street Profiles
m. Details
n. Landscape Plan
o. Tree Preservation Plan
-- page 4 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-056
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
THE LENNAR DIEDRICH TOWNHOUSES
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Lennar Corporation, 16305 36th Avenue North, Plymouth, MN (Applicant)
has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (City) for a Preliminary Plat for the
Lennar Diedrich Townhouses subdivision, a copy of which is on file in the City of Lake Elmo
Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held public hearing on June 22, 2015
to consider the Preliminary Plat request; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and
recommendation concerning the Preliminary Plat as part of a memorandum to the City Council
from Community Development Director Kyle Klatt for the July 7, 2015 Council Meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion recommending
approval of the Preliminary Plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Preliminary Plat at its meeting held on July
7, 2014 and made the following findings of fact:
1) That the preliminary plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the
Future Land Use Map for this area.
2) That the preliminary plat complies with the City's Urban Medium Density Residential
zoning district regulations.
3) That the preliminary plat complies with all other applicable zoning requirements,
including the City's landscaping, storm water, sediment and erosion control and other
ordinances with the plan revisions as requested by City Staff and consultants.
4) That the preliminary plat complies with the City's subdivision ordinance.
5) That the preliminary plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards provided the
plans are updated to address the City Engineer's comments documented in a letter dated
June 17, 2014.
6) That there are no City parks located within 'A mile of the proposed subdivision.
7) That the updated development plans indicate that proposed structures on Lots 29-32 are
located too close to the property line and that the development plans must be updated to
move these structures to the required setbacks prior to the submission of a final plat.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby
approve the preliminary plat for the Lennar Diedrich Townhouses subdivision subject to the
following conditions:
1) The landscape plan and tree preservation plan shall be reviewed and approved by an
independent forester or landscape architect in advance of the approval of a final plat and
final construction plans.
2) The final landscape plan shall incorporate additional plantings where feasible adjacent to
the shared property lines with parcel at 11490 Hudson Boulevard.
3) The applicant shall be responsible for updating the final construction plans to include the
construction of all improvements within the Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) right-of-way
as required by Washington County and further described in the review letter received
from the County dated March 3, 2015. The required improvements shall include, but not
be limited to the construction of a northbound right turn lane and southbound center turn
lane.
4) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland
Conservation Act. and shall acquire the needed permits from the Valley Branch
Watershed District prior to the commencement of any grading or development activity on
the site.
5) The applicant shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the City that clarifies the
individuals or entities responsible for any landscaping installed in areas outside of land
dedicated as public park and open space on the final plat.
6) The developer shall be required to pay a fee in lieu of park land dedication equivalent to
the fair market value for the amount of land that is required to be dedicated for such
purposes in the City's Subdivision Ordinance. A cash payment in lieu of land dedication
shall be paid by the applicant prior to the release of the final plat for recording.
7) The applicant must enter into a separate grading agreement with the City prior to the
commencement of any grading activity in advance of final plat and plan approval. The
City Engineer shall review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat,
and said plan shall document extent of any proposed grading on the site.
8) All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in a review
letter dated June 17, 2015 shall be incorporated into the plans prior to consideration of a
final plat.
9) The applicant shall update all of the landscaping and construction plans to reflect the
updated site plan that includes a public right-of-way within the project area. These
updated plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
10) Although the updated site plan does not incorporate a private street, any request for
flexibility from City regulations and standards must be considered and addressed as part
of the final plat submission.
11) The final construction plans for the Diedrich Townhouses subdivision shall include, at a
minimum, the northern portion of 5th Street if a joint construction project between the
applicant and Ryland Homes does not proceed in advance of a final plat submission for
the applicant's site.
12) The architectural covenants for the homeowner's association shall include provisions that
discourage blank garage doors. All garage doors shall incorporate windows or decorative
trim to minimize the visual impact of the garage -forward home design.
13)Prior to recording the Final Plat for any portion of the area shown in the Preliminary Plat,
the Developer shall enter into a Developers Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney
that delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of public
improvements.
14) The site plan and construction plans shall be revised to include a sidewalk along at least
one side of all streets within the subdivision.
15) The applicant shall pay a Water Availability Charge consistent with the Lake Elmo Fee
Schedule for the entire development prior to the release of the final plat for recording,
regardless of project phasing.
16) The developer shall secure a written grading agreement from Excel Energy concerning
the proposed grading activity underneath an existing power line easement across the
property prior to submission of a final plat.
Passed and duly adopted this 21st day of July 20] 5 by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elmo, Minnesota.
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
KF ELM()
ITEM;
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 6/22/15
AGENDA ITEM: 4A - PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2015-19
Diedrich Properly Townhouses (Lennar) - Preliminary Plat and Conditional
Use Permit
Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
Nick Johnson, City Planner
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a Preliminary Plat request from Lennar
Corporation for a 46-unit single-family attached (townhouse) development to be located on slightly
over 15 acres of land immediately east of Lake Elmo Avenue and north of the Hunters Crossing
development. The site is located within the 1-94 Corridor Planning Area and is therefore on property
that has been guided for public sewer and water services. The application as originally submitted
included a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the use of a private street to serve the
individual townhouse units, The applicant has since updated the proposed site plan and plat to
incorporate a public street within the development, which will eliminate the need for a conditional
use permit. Staff is recommending approval of the request with conditions as listed in the below
report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
Property Otrner:
Location:
Request:
Lennar Corporation (Paul Tabone); 16305 36'h Avenue North, Suite 600,
Plymouth MN 55446
Tammy Diedrich and Gerhard Rieder, 7401 Wyndham Way, Woodbury, MN
55125
Part of Section 36 in Lake Elmo, north of1-94, east of Lake Elrno Avenue, and
south of the Cimarron Golf Course property. biunediately north of 404 Lake
Elmo Avenue North. Pll): 36.029.21.32.0002
Application for a preliminary plat related to a 46-unit townhouse subdivision. A
request for a conditional use permit is no longer need based on the submission of
an updated site plan with a public street.
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use:
Vacant with fairly heavy tree cover. Current Zoning: RT -
Rural Transitional; Proposed Zoning: MDR - Medium Density
Residential
North - Cimarron Manufactured Horne Park and golf course;
East -Trans-City industrial building; West - Rural Residential
property and The Forest residential subdivision; South -
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a - ACTION ITEM
Hunters Crossing single family residential development; also
one existing home site adjacent to Lake Elmo Avenue.
Surrounding Zoning: MDR — Medium Density Residential, RT — Rural Development
Transitional; LDR — Low Density Residential
Comprehensive Phut: Urban Medium Density Residential (4 - 7,5 units per acre)
Histoty: No history on file with the City. Site has been vacant or used for agricultural
purposes for a long period of time. The sketch plan was reviewed by the City in
February and March of 2015. Staff did not find any information in the City'sland
use files for the site that would impact the proposed subdivision.
Deadline for Action: Application Complete — 6/3/15
60 Day Deadline — 8/2/15
Extension Letter Mailed — No
120 Day Deadline — 10/1/15
Applicable Regulations: Chapter I 53 — Subdivision Regulations
Article 10 — Urban Residential Districts (MDR)
§150.270 Storm Water, Erosion, and Sediment Control
REQUEST DETAILS
The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Lennar Corporation for a preliminary plat for a
46 unit townhouse development tentatively called the Diedrich Property Preliminary Plat. Please
note that the original application and all of the construction plans as submitted were for a 48-unit
project utilizing a private street. Due to several issues concerning the original configuration of lots
and in order to address City; County, and watershed district comments and concerns, the applicant
has submitted a revised site plan that now includes a public street and a reduced number of lots. The
applicant may still be seeking some variation from City standards in order to plat a public street, and
Staff is suggesting that any variations from the City's zoning and subdivision regulations be
addressed at the final plat stage.
The City previously reviewed a sketch plan for the property earlier in the spring of this year, and the
current application has been preceded by a Comprehensive Plan amendment that changed the future
land use designation of this parcel from HDR — High Density Residential to MDR — Medium Density
Residential.
The site under consideration is situated between the Cimarron Golf Course and the Hunters Crossing
development north of the planned 5'h Street corridor and west of Lake Elmo Avenue. The property is
currently vacant, and there is no record of any buildings or structures being constructed on the site.
When the City was initially planning the trunk sewer line project to serve the Village Area, the
original alignment of the trunk sewer through this property followed the northern and eastern
property boundaries. After subsequent discussions with the property owners, this alignment was
changed to the southern boundary of the site, within what eventually become the planned right-of-
way for 51h Street. The City has acquired easements for both 5th Street and the sewer and water main
serving this area that cross the southern property boundary of the applicant's property. These
easements may eventually be vacated since the preliminary plat will formally dedicate the required
right-of-way for the road, sewer, water, and other utilities as 5th Street. A similar dedication of the
road and utility right-of-way was provided with Hunters Crossing to the South.
PUBLIC HEAR ENG ITEM 4a - ACTION ITEM
The proposed access into the development is now proposed to occur via a new public road
immediately across from the entrance to Hunters Crossing (Lavern Avenue North), The City has
previously approved the use of private roads to serve the townhouse units with Lennar's Savona
subdivision, and the plan as originally drawn out called for a private road to he used to access the
proposed townhouses, The road as originally planned would have been located within a 30-foot wide
Outlot, however, the City Engineer expressed concern that this outlet was not wide enough to
accommodate all necessary infrastructure (both private and public) to serve the development. In
order to address these (and other) concerns, the applicant has propose a modified plan that
accorrunodates a public street meeting all City standards. This updated plan has been submitted as a
supplement to the original application materials that still include a 30-foot outiot with a private street.
Any future plan submissions and reviews will need to address revised review comments from Staff,
and specifically, the City Engineer, prior to approval of a final plat.
The overall site plan is generally consistent with sketch plan submitted earlier this year. The two
notable exceptions are that the (now revised) preliminary plat reduced the overall number of units
from 50 to 46. The developer is proposing to construct a sidewalk along the main entrance into the
development in addition to a sidewalk connecting the western cul-de-sac with the planned ?Street
trail. There are no interior sidewalks depicted on the preliminary development plans, and the
applicant has stated that thcy believe that interior sidewalks will not be necessary given the low
traffic volumes expected on the interior streets. Staff is recommending that if the project does
includes a public street and right-of-way meeting City standards that a sidewalk on one sidc of all
street be included in the tinal development plans.
One of the reasons that the applicant originally requested the use of a private street is that it would
allow them to slightly vary the setbacks of the townhouse units in order to help minimize the visual
impact of a row of townhouses all at the same setback. The developer is still looking for ways to add
some variation to the setbacks, and will be seeking some minor modifications as part of the final plat
submission in order to address this issue.
Consistent with the City's specifications for the 5` Street roadway segment, the applicant has
provided for a 100-foot wide right-of-way, which will provide sufficient room for the construction of
a parkway with turning lanes, 10-foot bituminous trail, sidewalk, trees, lighting, and other design
elements as planned by the City. in this case, the applicant is retaining the existing easement width
of 110 feet at the intersection of 5th Street and Lake Elmo Avenue and narrowing the right-of-way
down to match the 100 foot right-of-way platting within Hunters Crossing. Both Ryland Homes and
Lennar are still working towards a joint project to build 511' Street at one time verses splitting the
construction up into northern and southern segments.
The preliminary plat has been developed in response to the City's recently adopted Comprehensive
Plan, which identifies all of the applicant's property for urban medium density residential
development. The plat incorporates 46 single family attached lots, most of which are designed with
widths around 40 feet each. Given the limited access to the site and relatively small nature of the
property, the applicant has worked to incorporate some variety into the arrangement of lots as is
possible given these restrictions.
Public sanitary sewer service is presently available on the site, which was constructed as part of the
Village trunk line project completed late last year. Water was extended to the site as part of the 2014
Lake Elmo Avenue water main project. Like other developments along this line, the developer will
be expected to pay the full water availability charges for each planned lot ($3,000) at the time of the
final plat, even if the project is broken up into different stages.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a — ACTION ITEM
4
PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES
The Diedrich Townhouse site is guided for urban medium density development in the City's
Comprehensive Plan, and the appropriate zoning for the site will be MDR — Medium Density
Residential, The actual rezoning of the property is a necessary step prior to development of this sitc
that will need to be completed prior to approval of the final plat. The overall subdivision plan has
therefore been prepared in order to comply with the district standards for the MDR districts in terms
of lot size, lot widths, building setbacks, and other design criteria, Within the MDR district,
townhouses are allowed that do not meet minimum frontage requirements or that are located along a
private street as a conditional use permit.
The planned road serving the townhouse lots extends due north from 5'h Street and then splits east
and west through the middle of the property to provide access to thc townhouses. There are no
planned connections to the east, west, or north of the property because these sites have previously
been developed or will connect into 5' Street once on either side of the site under consideration.
Given the site characteristics and the immediately adjacent land uses (which are all different than
single family), the applicant has had to design the site as an isolated island that is impractical to
connect to adjacent properties. The streets as originally planned and later updated will meet the
City's minimum standards for construction.
The sidewalks within the subdivision are limited to those mentioned in the previous section of this
report, and there are no sidewalks planned along the east/west private road, Please note that the plat
as originally submitted did not dedicate the amount of right-of-way that has been requested by
Washington County, The County has previously requested that the developer dedicate an additional
42 feet of right-of-way along Lake Elmo Avenue, and that this right-of-way width be incorporated
into the final plat. The additional right-of-way does impact the location of the planned storrn water
pond over Outlet A, and this pond and associated grading work will need to be adjusted in order to
account for the expanded right-of-way. Updated plans must be reviewed and approved by the City,
County, and Watershed District prior to the City's approval of a final plat for this subdivision.
As noted in the preceding section, the developer has submitted an updated site plan that retains thc
same general layout, and configuration of lots, but changes the proposed private street outlet of 30
feet to a public right-of-way 60 feet in width. The additional right-of-way has been requested by the
City Engineer to help ensure that there is adequate room for future maintenance and upkeep of public
utilities (sewer, water, and other private utilities) within this subdivision. All final construction plans
will need to be updated to reflect the public right-of-way and reconfiguration of lots.
The preliminary site plan included as part of the application materials includes a description of the lot
size, dimensions, and all required setbacks for the development. All of the lots meet the City's
minimum area requirement of 4,000 for single-family attached lots in a MDR district, with the
smallest lot proposed at 5,527 square feet. The site plans further illustrate that throughout the
subdivision the lots will average 8,782 square feet, which exceeds the minimum requirements by a
fairly wide margin.
The following is a general summary, of the subdivision design elements that have proposed as part of
the Diedrich Townhouses preliminary plat and plans:
Zoning and Site haforrnation:
• Existing Zoning: RT Rural Transitional
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a - ACTION ITEM
• Proposed Zoning:
• Total Site Area:
• Total Residential Units:
• Proposed Density (Net):
• REC Units from Comp Plan:
MDR — Medium Density Residential
15.11 acres (includes Outlot D of Hunters Crossing)
48
4 units per acre
57 (based on a gross calculation)
Proposed Lot Dimensional Standards:
• Min. Lot Width: 40 ft.
• Lot Depth:
• Lot Area:
• Front Yard Setback:
• Side Yard Setback:
• Rear Yard Setback:
Proposed Street Standards:
• ROW Width — Local
• ROW Width — Minor Collector
• Street Widths — Local:
• Street Width — Minor Collector
134 ft. (140 ft. typical)
4,000 sq. ft. (8,000 typical)
25 fi.
10 ft.
20
60 ft. (potentially could be reduced to 50 ft, for a
limited access road)
I I 0-100 feet
28 ft.(per City standard)
'Varies — parkway design proposed
The standards listed above are all in compliance with the applicable requirements from the City's
zoning and subdivision regulations, including the revised public street and associated right-of-way.
Based on Staffs review of the preliminary plat, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with all
applicable code requirements at the level of detail that is required for a preliminary plat. The
applicant will need to address the review comments from the City and County, and the final plat and
final construction plans will specifically need to be updated to reflect the wider public street right-of-
way and expanded Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) right-of-way. Any variations from setbacks and
other standards because of the amended road section will need to be addressed with the final plat.
As with any new subdivision the City Code requires that a portion of the plat be set aside for public
park use. in this case, the applicant is not proposing to dedicate any land specifically for a public
park, and is 'instead asking to pay a fee in lieu of land dedication, This is not a site or general
location that would suitable for a public park or any specific trail connections; therefore, Staff is
supportive of the applicant's request to pay a fee instead of dedicating any public land with the
subdivision. The required dedication for the 15.11 acre site would be 1.51 acres, or a cash payment
of approximately $90,000 based on previous appraisals of land in this area.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
City Staff has reviewed the proposed preliminary plat, and has forwarded the plans to appropriate
reviewing agencies in advance of the Planning Commission meeting. In general, the proposed plat
will meet all applicable City requirements for approval, and any deficiencies or additional work that
is needed is noted as part of the review record and can be imported in the final plat and final
construction plans. The City has received a detailed list of comments from the City Engineer
concerning the proposed subdivision; these comments are attached to this report for consideration by
the Planning Commission.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a — ACTION ITEM
6
In addition to the general comments that have been provided in the preceding sections of this report,
Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the issues and comments related to the
following discussion areas as well:
• Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan for this area and with the densities that were approved as part of this
plan (as recently amended). The net densities for the development fall within the low end of
the range allowed for the urban medium density, and depending on the specific amount of
land that will be dedicated for 5'1' Street and Lake Elmo Avenue, this density will be
somewhere in the 3.8 to 4.0 units per acre range. Given the site constraints and need to
accommodate additional right-of-way within the plat, Staff has found that the proposed
density is in keeping the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan for this area. Other
aspects of the Comprehensive Plan relate to the Hunter's Crossing subdivision as follows:
• Transportation. The City's transportation plan calls for the construction of a minor
collector road that will connect the eastern and western portions of the I-94 Corridor.
Staff views this road as a critical piece of the transportation infrastructure that is
needed to serve the densities that have been planned for this area. The City's
previous acquisition of easements through this area anticipated the future alignment
of 5th Street through the southern portion of the applicant's property and the proposed
subdivision will officially plat this right-of-way with the final plat. Both Lennar and
Ryland are still worlcing towards a joint project to build all of 561 Street between their
properties later this sununcr, and regardless of whether or not a joint project occurs,
Lennar will need to build at least its half of 5'1Street in order to provide access to the
proposed townhouses. Staff will continue to work with both parties to work towards
a joint project that addresses the needs of the private developers and the City for
access.
o Parks. The City's park plan identifies proposed locations for neighborhood parks
based on the anticipated population that should be served by each park. This
subdivision is located at the periphery of a park search area for the area east of Lake
Elmo Avenue. During its review of the sketch plan for this subdivision, the Park
Commission did not recommend the dedication of land within the subdivision for a
new park, and instead agreed with the developer's request to submit a cash payment
in lieu of land dedication. Staff anticipates that a larger park that could be designed
in conjunction with the School District near Oakland Junior High would better serve
existing and future residents in this portion of the City,
o Water, Public water service has been extended to this area via the public
improvement project that installed a new water main along Lake Elmo Avenue last
year. The final construction plans will need to abide by any recommendations of the
City Engineer concerning the extension of water service through this site to service
other adjacent sites (which will likely not be required given the exiting development
on either side of the applicant's site),
o Sanitaty Sewer. The developer will be required to connect to the gravity sewer main
that has been installed under the 5th Street right-of-way, The utility plans provided by
the applicant document this connection.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a — ACTION ITEM
7
o Phasing. The Lennar townhouse subdivision is located within the Stage 2 phasing
area for the I-94 Corridor. The City's Comprehensive Plan allows the City to
consider accelerating development stages when adequate public services are
available. In this case, the sewer and water projects already completed help this
project meet this threshold. The developer will also be required to pay all water
availability charges thr the project at the time of platting regardless of project staging.
• Zoning. The proposed zoning for the site is MDR — Low Density Residential and the
subdivision has been designed to comply with all applicable requirements of this zoning
district,
• Subdivision Requirements. The City's Subdivision Ordinance includes a fairly lengthy list
of standards that must be met by all new subdivisions, and include requirements for blocks,
lots, easements, erosion and sediment control, drainage systems, monuments, sanitary sewer
and water facilities, streets, and other aspects of the plans. The majority of these
requirements have been addressed as part of the City Engineer's comments (which are
detailed in the Engineer's comment letter) or have been reviewed as part of Staffs ongoing
communications with the applicant regarding the project. The elimination of the private
street will help the project comply with several of the concerns previously expressed by the
City Engineer and other Staff.
Wrastructure. The developer will be required to construct all streets, sewer, water, storm
water ponds, and other infrastructure necessary to serve the development.
• Landscaping. The applicant has provided a landscape plan for the development that is
intended to comply with the City's requirements for number, size and spacing of trees along
the public streets. This plan should be reviewed by the City's consulting landscape architect
prior to the submission of a final plat. The applicant has also submitted a tree inventory that
documents the type and size of all trees on the property and all those that will be impacted by
construction to determine compliance with the City's tree preservation and protection plan as
described below.
• Tree Preservation and Protection. The City recently adopted a tree preservation and
protection ordinance, and the applicant has prepared a tree inventory and tree preservation
plan for the site. Overall, there are 1,387 caliper inches of trees on the subject property, and
all of these trees will be removed in order to build the subdivision as planned. This means
the developer will need to mitigate for 485 caliper inches (the amount that exceeds the
allowed 30% removal) in accordance with the ordinance replacement schedule. The species
and mix of replacement plantings should be also be reviewed by the City's consulting
landscape architect.
Green Belt/Bnffer/Screening. There are no planned green belts or buffers on or around the
site under consideration. The proposed landscape plan incorporates plantings along all edges
of the property and within the internal outlots.
• Streets and Transportation. The proposed street system, as revised, has been designed to
comply with all applicable subdivision requirements and City engineering standards. The
developer must also commit to the construction of at least the northern portion of 5th Street in
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a — ACTION ITEM
order for the project to move forward as a final plat. The timing of this road will be
somewhat dependent on whether or not Ryland and Lennar are able to come to an agreement
to build .5th Street as a joint project. The final construction plans should reflect how 5`h Street
will be built, and must include the northern portion if a join project does not move forward.
The City has received and reviewed a complete set of construction plans for .5.th Street as part
of the Hunters Crossing development.
o County Comments. Comments received form Washington County during the
concept plan review, which focus on needed improvements to Lake Elmo Avenue
(CSAH 17) to serve the development, are included in an attached letter from the
County's Senior Planner dated March 3, 2015. Staffis recommending that
compliance with the County's comments be added as a condition of approval for the
plat.
Trails. The Planning Commission comments during the sketch plan review encouraged the
developer to incorporate a trail connection between 5") Street and the eastern cul-de-sac. The
developer has indicated that given the tight constraints on the site (even with the elimination
of four units) that there is not sufficient room to provide for this trail connection. Staff would
also like to note that the overall distance from the cul-de-sac to 5th Street is not a large
distance even without a direct trail connection.
Street Names. Staff has forwarded its reconunendation for street names to Lennar, and these
names should be included on the final plat documents,
• Adjacent Parcels. The proposed landscape plan includes additional plantings between the
proposed townhouses and the industrial facility to the east. The landscape plan will need to
be updated to reflect the revised site plan, and in particular, the plan should continue to
provide for screening between the eastem-most townhouses and the adjacent industrial land.
• City Engineer Review. The City Engineer has provided the Planning Department with a
detailed comment letter as a summary of his preliminary plat review. Staff has incorporated
the more significant issues identified by the Engineer as part of the recommended conditions
of approval, and has also included a general condition that all issues identified by the City
Engineer must be addressed by the applicant prior to approval of a final plat for any portion
of the Diedrich townhouses. With the general site plan revisions that have been proposed by
the applicant, the construction plans will need to be updated to reflect this revisions. Any
additional comments or concerns from the City Engineer that arise from the plan updates will
need to be addressed as part of a final plat submission.
• Watershed District. The project area lies within the Valley. Branch Watershed District and
the developer will need to secure permits from the watershed district in order to proceed with
the development as planned. One of the recommended conditions of approval is that the
applicant receive plan approval from the watershed district prior to submission of a final plat
for the subdivision.
• Storm Water Management. In order to accommodate the County's requirement for
additional right-of-way along Lake Elmo Avenue, the developer has had to readjust the size
and configuration of the planned storm water basin over Outlot A. The County will not allow
any portion of the storm water facility to be located within its right-of-way; therefore, the
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a — ACTION ITEM
9
plans will need to be updated to reconfigure and adjust the location and size of this pond.
These updated plans will be subject to review by the City Engineer and Valley Branch
Watershed District. The developer is also requesting to use the proposed pond as part of a
water re -use system through lawn irrigation. The City Engineer is seeking additional details
concerning this system prior to making any reconunendations concerning the viability of the
system as proposed.
• Washington County Review. County Staff has previously provided review comments to the
City concerning the sketch plan for the Diedrich townhouses subdivision to the City in a
letter dated March 5, 2015. The most significant of the County's concerns is that the
applicant will need to make improvements to the County road system in order to provide the
necessary access to the subdivision. As a condition of approval, Staff has noted that the
applicant will be responsible for including all improvements to T1117 as required by the
County as part of the construction plans for the development. In addition, the County has
noted that the required right-of-way dedication for Lake Elmo Avenue should be 92 feet as
opposed to the 90 feet shown. This request does impact the proposed storm water plan as
noted above.
Based on the above Staff report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat
with several conditions intended to address the outstanding issues noted above and to further clarify
the (ityls-expmations-iii-orderi.or the developer to move forward with a final plat. The
recommended conditions are as
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
ptai, dud lc t; preservation plan shall he reviewed and approved by an
independent forester or landscape architect in advance of the approval of a final plat and final
construction plans.
2) The final landscape plan shall incorporate additional plantings where feasible adjacent to the
shared property lines with parcel at 11490 Hudson Boulevard,
3) The applicant shall be responsible for updating the final constructioc plans to include the
construction of all improvements within the Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) right-of-way as
requircd by Washington County and further described in the review letter received from the
County dated March 3, 2015, The required improvements shall include, but not be limited to
the construction era northbound right turn lane and southbound center turn lane.
4) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland
Conservation Act, and shall acquire the needed permits from the Valley Branch Watershed
District prior to the commencement of any grading or development activity on the site.
5) The applicant shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the City that clarifies the
individuals or entities responsible for any landscaping installed in areas outside of land
dedicated as public park and open space on the final plat.
6) The developer shall be requiredlio pay a fee in lieu of park d dedication equivalent to the
fair market value for the amount 01-1 -be dedicated for such purposes in
PUBLIC ITEARING ITEM 4a — ACTION ITEM
10
the City's Subdivision Ordinance. A cash payment in lieu of land dedication shall be paid by
the applicant prior to the release of the final plat for recording.
7) The applicant must enter into a separate grading agreement with the City prior to the
commencement of any grading activity in advance of final plat and plan approval. Thc City
Engineer shall review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat, and said
plan shall document extent of any proposed grading on the site,
8) All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in a review letter
dated June 17, 2015 shall he incorporated into the plans prior to consideration of a final plat.
9) The applicant shall update all of the landscaping and construction plans to reflect the updated
site plan that includes a public right-of-way within the project area. These updated plan shall
be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
10) Although the updated site plan does not incorporate a private street, any request for flexibility
from City regulations and standards must be considered and addressed as part of the final plat
submission.
11) The final construction plans for the Diedrich Townhouses subdivision shall include, at a
minimum, the northern portion of 5th Street if a joint construction project between the
applicant and Ryland Homes does not proceed in advance of a final plat submission for the
applicant's site.
12) The architectural covenants for the homeowner's association shall include provisions that
discourage blank garage doors. All garage doors shall incorporate windows or decorative
trim to minimize the visual impact of the garage -forward home design.
13) Prior to recording the Final Plat for any portion of the area shown in the Preliminary Plat, the
Developer shall enter into a Developers Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney that
delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of public
improvements.
14) The site plan and construction plans shall be revised to include a sidewalk along at least one
side of all streets within the subdivision.
DRAFT FINDINGS
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to
the proposed Lennar/Diedrich Townhouses preliminary plat:
• That the preliminary plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the
Future Land Use Map for this area.
• That the preliminary plat complies with the City's Urban Medium Density Residential zoning
district regulations.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a - ACTION ITEM
1 I
• That the preliminary plat complies ‘vith all other applicable zoning requirements, including
the City's landscaping, storm water, sediment and erosion control and other ordinances with
the plan revisions as requested by City Staff and consultants
• That the preliminary plat complies with the City's subdivision ordinance.
That the preliminary plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards provided the
plans are updated to address the City Engineer's comments documented in a letter dated June
17, 201
RECCOMENDAT1ON:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Lennar/Diedrich
preliminary plat with the 14 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff report. Suggested motion:
1,...c.k.; • —
"Move to recommend approvqt_ortne ennar/inearich preliminary plat With the, conditions of
approval a by Staff"
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Fomis
2. Application Narrative and Information
3. Location Map
4, Tree Inventory
5, Review Comments:
a. City Engineer
b. Washington County
6. Preliminary Plat and Plans (20 sheets)
a, Revised Site Plan (Dated 6/19/15)
b. Cover Sheet
c. Legend Sheet
d. Existing Conditions
e. Preliminay Plat
f. Preliminary Site Plan
g. Preliminary Utility Plan
h. Preliminary Grading Plan
i. Erosion Control Plan
j. Preliminary Seeding Plan
k. Preliminary Street Profiles
I. Details
m. Landscape Plan
n. Tree Preservation Plan
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction Planning Staff
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a — ACTION ITEM
12
Report by Staff. .Planning Staff
Questions from the Commission Chair & Commission Members
Open the Public Hearing Chair
Close the Public Hearing Chair
Discussion by the Commission. Chair & Cotrunission Members
Action by the Commission. Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4a — ACTION ITEM
THE CITY OF
LAKE ELMO
PRELIMINARY PLA T A PPL ICA TION
Applican . L- _ , w
.., ....—
Address: 125c.S" _ t;
Phone 4: 7s-2, - 245
Email Address: _----rite)Oci CP'
Fee Owner:
Address:
Phone 4:
Email Address:
Property Location (Address and
Jiw ta.,(4-0 MJ
(0
cription:
(plc)
651-747-3900
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
General hiformacn of proposed subdivision: Acig 114.74 htburS k) a.*
1?-15FEY- 170 PL--ttr Ft-441.5
Conducted pre -application meeting with Staff?
No
In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the appUcable provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance and current adminfsb-ative procedures. I further acknowledge tiler:: explanation as outlined in the application
procedures and hereby av to pay all statement z received from the City pertaining to additional application expense.
Signature of appbcant20.--e .
Signature of Fee Owner
cibitL,t
Date:
Date:
S:\ FORMS \Planning Dept Forms - Permit! - Form:- Current1Preliminary Plat Application only 10.7.13Aocx Revt,ed
a/10/2014 2:31PM
Dale Received:
Received Br _
Parmilt
LAND USE APPLICATION
THE CJTY OF
LAKE ELMO
651-747-3900
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
0 Comprehensive Plan 0 Zoning District Amend 0 Zoning Text Arnend Variancels=4: below) 0 Zoning Appeal
2/C-onditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) 0 Flood Plain C.U.P. 0 Interim Use Permit (1,U.P.) Excavating/Grading
0 Lot Line Adjustmen 0 Minor Subdivision 0 Residential Subdivision Sketch/Concept Plan
PUD Concept Plan 0 PUD Preliminary Plan 0 PUD Final Plan
Applicant 5141L4.6—1-noLIE CIX--)P14-77cyLi
Address:
Phone #
Email Address:
Fee Owner.
Address:
Phone #
Email Address:
Property Location (Address and Complete (long) Legal De-scription:
Detailed Reason for Request F-6F-a-- r-13
Pv-404-re
ftoaaj: {gat/4404i fri
Variance Requests: As outlined in Section 301.060 C. of the Lake Brno Municipal Code, the applicant must demonstrate
practical difficulties before a variance can be granted. The practical difficulties related to this application are as follows:
In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that 1 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 • Dat
Signature of fee owner. Dale: -2-41
/2!") /2G1P--,
THE: CITY OF
AKE ELMO
AFFIRMATION OF SUFFICIENT INTEREST
Lake Elmo City Hall
651-747-3900
3000 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
I hereby affirm that I am the fee title owner of the below described property or that I have written
authorization from the owner to pursue the described action.
Name of applicant G‹ lea {M (
Please Print)
Street address/legal description of subject property
If you are not the fee owner, attach another copy of this form 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.
RI* ed 9111/1013 IN PM
1 I IL ( :I 1 )" )1'
LAKE ELA 0
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY
Lake Elmo City Hall
651-747-3900
31300 Laverne Avenue Ncrth
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible
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 and/or
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<a"k-NA Date
-2-- 2-442
Name of applicant Phone 9S
(Please Print)
Name and address of Contact (if other than applicant)
Revised 9/11/281.3 3.04 PM
Mr, Kyle Klatt
Community Development Director
City of Lake Elmo, MN
Dear Kyle:
Lennar Corporation is pleased to submit the preliminary plat application for a twin home community
located on the Diedrich property (PIN 36.029.21.32.0002) along Lake Elmo Avenue. The proposed
preliminary plat is in substantial conformance with the sketch plat for the property that was reviewed by
the City during February. There are some modifications we wish to acknowledge with this submittal.
In finalizing the design and layout, it was determined that homes were too close when private walks were
added; private sidewalks were overlapping each other, especially when homes were located around the
curves of both cul-de-sacs that were shown in the sketch plat. The wider public rights of way were
overdcsigned, and also resulted in tight spacing around each cul-de-sac. Additionally, units 38-23 all had
fronts located along the same setback line, resulting in a stretch of homes that had no variation in
placement, To remedy these issues and open up the design a bit more, 2 units were eliminated to allow
more space between the twin homes, resulting in a total of 48 units. The easterly cul-de-sac has also been
modified into a loop road with an outlot in a center island. This allowed us to space out the layout of the
homes while providing an open space area for residents. Side setbacks have &so been modified to a
minim= of 7.5 feet.
Because the entire interior street system is now set up as a private street, and side setbacks have been
slightly modified to achieve a better fit between units, we are requesting that a CUP be processed as a
master plan of development for this site primarily for the private roads, as was done in the townhome area
for Savona. It should be noted that the width of the paved area is still 28' back to back; only the right of
way has been reduced. The remainder of the site meets the minimum design requirements for the MDR
District, with the exception of thc modified setback, which can be governed by a CUP. The transition of
the interior streets from public to private roads results in the opportunity for a BOA to maintain the streets,
and the MDR District Density of 4 to 7 dwelling units per acre can still be achieved when right of way and
pond areas are excluded.
16305 36th Avenue N, Suite 600 • Plymouth, MN 55446
.0
Enclosed you will find the following project documents:
• 5 sets of full-size plans, 1 digital set, 10 reductions size 11x17
• Signed and dated application & escrow deposit check
• Current title commitment
• Mailing labels — 750' radius
a Vacation Exhibit tbr a portion of 5 Street
We are confident that this layout enhances the site design from what was initially presented in the sketch
plat, and are excited about a new prospective community in the City of Lake Elmo.
Please contact me with any questions, and I look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
Paul J. Tabone
Land Entitlement Mgr
Lennar Minnesota
4, •
• ''"'",*
41,1. • ,
• .„ ?t,
„SGS4 'X ' Ge
e""reSti".47:57FITOrs.V.71rM7-irniiitt"retS' e dntt.
DigitalGlobe GeoEYe, ecobect USD
Location Map: Diedrich Property (PIN: 36.029.21.32.0002)
(„:1T1'
LAKE ELMO
Data Scource: Washington County, MN
10-22-2013
Diedrich Property
0 250 500
1"=500'
Diedrich Property Tree Inventory
Lake Elmo, Minnesota
April 29, 2015
Tree Inventory by:
Ken Arndt
Forest Ecologist/Wetland Specialist
Midwest Natural Resources, Inc.
1032 West Seventh St. #150
St. Paul, MN 55102
(651)-788-0641
Tree Preservation Plans provided by:
engineering
2422 Enterprise Drive
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
651-681-1914
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Tree Tag ft: Size (DBH ") Common Name
1701 12/10 Siberian EIm
1702 15 Honey Locust
1703 15 SIberian EIm
1704 16/10 Siberian Elm
1705 8 lack Pine
1706 8 Jack Pine
1707 9 Red Pine
1708 8 Jack Pine
1709 8 Jack Pine
1710 8 Jack Pine
1711 8 Jack Pine
1712 8 Jack Pine
1713 10 Jack Pine
1714 8 Jack Pine
1715 9 Jack Pine
1716 8 IJack Pine
1717 8 IJack Pine
1718 8 -Jack Pine
1719 8 -Jack Pine
1720 I 8 Ja ck Pine
1721 10 Jack Pine
1722 8 Jack Pine
1723 8 Jack Pine
...
1724 8 Red Pine
1725 8 Red Pine
726 12
727
1728 9
1729 12 Scotch Pine
1730 8 Jack Pine
1731 11 Scotch Pine
1732 10 pack Pine.
1733 8 pack Pine
1734 8 Jack Pine
1735 9 Jack Pine
1736 10 Jack Pine
1737 9 Red Pine
1738 9 -Red Pine
1739 10 Jack Pine
1740 8 -Jack Pine
1741 8 'lack Pine
1742 10 !Scotch Pine
1743 9....lack Pine
1744 8 Jack Plne
1745 9 Scotch Pine
1746 8 Jack Pine
1747 8 Jack Pine
1748 8 Jack Pine
1749 8 Red Pine
1750 a Jack Pine
._ ..
1751 9 Jack Pine
.
1752 8 ;Red Pine
1753 8 !Red Pine
1754 10 Red Pine
1755 10 Red Pine
1756 I 8 Red Pine
33
34
4
4
SO
51
52
53
54
SS
56
Stlentiflc Name
Ulmus pumila
Gleditsio triaconthos
Ulmus pumila
Ulmus pumila
Pinus banksiano
Pinus banksiona
Pinus resInosa
Pinus banksiono
Pinus banksiano
IPinus bonksiona
Pinus panksiona
Pinus bankslono
Pinus banksiona
Pinus banksiana
_,Pinus banksiano
Pinus banksiana
IPinus banksiano
IPinus banksiono
Pinus banksiona
Pinus banksiano
Pinus banksiono
Pinus banksiano
Pinus banksiana
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Quaking Aspen Populus tremuloides
Jack Pine Pinus bankstano
Jack Pine Pinus banksiana
Pinus sylvestris
Pinus banksiono
Pinus sylvestris
Pinus bonksiono
Pinus banksiono
Pinus banksiana
dPinus banksiano
Pinus banksiana
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus banksiana
Pinus banksiona
Pinus bankstana
Pinus sylvestris
' us banksiana
Pinus bonksiana
v
Pinus bQmk
Pinus banksiono
Pinus bankslona
Pinus resinoso
Pinus bankslano
Pinus bonksiono
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinasa
IPinus resinoso
Notes
offsite
offsite
offsite
heavy sapsucker damage
Total
Remove
8
8
9
8
8
8
8
8
Conifer Common
emove Remove
8
8
9
8
8
8
8
ng trunk
heavy sapsucker damage along trunk
Ps
10
8
9
8
8
8
8
10
8
8
8
8
12
8
10
8
9
10
10
8
8
10
9
8
10
8
9
8
8
8
8
10
8
8
8
8
12
8
9
10
8
8
9
8
er damage along trunk
8
8
8
8
9
9
8
10
10
8
8
8
8
9
9
8
8
10
10
8
# Tree Tag #
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
1
122
124
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
1351
135
137
138
139
40
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
1833
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1624
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
Size (DBH ")
8
8
8
8
9
15
20
12
14
12
13
8
8
8
8/8
B/6
8
8
9
10
8
9
8
8/8/8
B/8
9/9
8
8
9
8
9/8
9
8
Common Name Scientific Name
Red Pine Pinus resinaso
Red Pine Pinus resinosa
Red Pine Pinus resinosa
Red Pine Pinus resinoso
Red Pine Pinus resinoso
Siberian EIm Litmus pumlla
Siberian Elm Ulm us pumlla
Siberian Elm Ulm us pumlla
Siberian EIm Ulmus pumilo
Siberian Elm Ulmus pumlla
Siberian Elm Ulmus pumilo
Red Pine Pinus resinaso
Red Pine Pinus resinosa
Red Pine Pinus resinosa
Red Pine Pinus resinaso
Red Pine Pin us resinosa
Red Pine Pinus resinoso
Jack Pine Pinus banksiana
Red Pine Pin us resinosa
Red Pine Pinus resinoso
d Pine lPlnusresinosa
cotch Pine Plnus sylvestris
Red Pine Pinus resinoso
Red Pine Pinus resinaso
Scotch Pine Pinus srivestris
Scotch Pine Pinus sylvestris
Red Pine
Scotch Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Scotch Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Siberian EIm
Red Pine
Red Pine
Jack Pine
Red Pine
cotchPirie
ite Spruce
8 jWbte Spruce
Trees that arc toppled or have heavy sapsucker
damage are not included in totals
Pinus resinoso
Onus sylvestris
Pinus resinosa
Pinus resinosa
Pinus sylvestris
Pinus resinosa
Pinus resinosa
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinosa
Pinus resinoso
Ulmus pumllo
Pinus resinaso
Pinta resinaso
Pinus banksiano
Pinus resinosa
Pinus sylvestris
Pkersalba
Picea alba
Notes
offsite
!Totals:
Total Inches:
Allowable removal: 30%
'Total Removal;
!Removal over threshold:
Mitigation for conifers: 50%
486" required mitigation
Total
Remove
8
8
8
15
20
12
14
8
8
8
15
14
8
9
10
8
9
8
8
24
16
18
8
9
a
17
9
8
8
14
14
14
Conifer Common
Remove Remove
8
8
8
8
18
8
9
17
9
8
8 8
8 8
8
1387 1263
1387
416,1
1387
970.9
485.45
4
124
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
92
93
94
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
Tree Tag R Size (DBH ") Common Name
1757 8 Red Pine
1758 13 ScOthPine
1759 8/6 Red Pine
1760 10 Red Pine
1761 10 Jack Pine
1762 8 Jack Pine
1763 10 Red Pine
1764 8 Scotch Pine
1765 8 Jack Pine
1766 8 Jack Pine
1767 9 Red Pine
1768
1769 9 iack Pine
1770 9 Jack Pine
1771 10 Scotch Pine
1772 8 Red Pine
1773 9 Red Pine
1774 8 Red Pine
1775 8 Red Pine
1776 8/6/6 Red Pine
1777 8 Red Pine
1778 6 Red Pine
1779 8 Red Pine
1780 8 Red Pine
1781 9 Red Pine
1782 9 Red Pine
1783 8 Red Pine
1784 9 Red Pine
1785 8/7 Red Pine
1786 12 Scotch Pine
1787 9 Red Pine
1788 8 Red Pine
1789 8 Red Pine
1790 9 Red Pine
1791 8 Red Pine
1792 8 Red Pine
1793 8 Red Pine
8
9/8
8
12
8
8
9
8/7
9
9/7
12
13
8
9
8
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
Red Pine
Jack Pine
Scotch Pine
15cotch Pine
Cottonwood
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Siberian Elm
Box Elder
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
Red Pine
1Red Pine
5Cientific Name
Pinus reslnoso
Pinus sylvestris
Pinus reslnoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus bonksiona
Pinus banksiono
Pinus reslnoso
Pinus sylvestris
Pinus bankslana
Pinus bonksiono
Pinus resinoso
Pinus banksiona
Pinus banksiona
Pinus bonksiann
Pinus sylvestris
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resThosa
Pinus resinoso
iPinus reslnoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus rednosa
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
jPinus resinoso
Pinus resinosa
Pinus sylvestris
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus reslnoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
PInus resInoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus banksiana
Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris
Populus deltoides
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinasa
resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus reslnoso
tarnus pumila
ricer negundo
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
Pinus resinoso
!Pint's resinosa
Notes
heavy sapsucker damage along trunk
ed but allve
Total
Remove
8
4
10
10
8
10
8
8
8
9
8
9
9
10
8
8
8
20
8
8
8
8
9
8
9
15
9
8
8
9
8
9
17
8
12
8
8
9
15
9
16
12
13
8
9
8
8
Conifer Common
Remove Remove
4
10
8
9
9
10
15
9
8
8
9
8
9
8
12
13
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 17,ZOl6
To: Kyle NattPlanning Director
[rnnn: Jack Griffin, P.E.'City Engineer
ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara s,*ereo.pa.
Jack Griffin, pE.
Ryan stempom'pc.
Chad Isakspn,p.e.
651.3oV.4261
651.300.4264
65z300AZ67
651.300.4283
Re: Diedrich Property— Preliminary Plan Review
An engineering review has been completed for the Preliminary Plat submittal for the Diedrich Property. The
submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Pioneer Engineering:
~ Diedrich Property Preliminary Plan Set, Sheets 1-14, Ll and T1, dated June 17, 2015�
• Stormwater Management Plan dated June 3, 2015.
STATUS/FIND|NG6'Engineer\ng has prepared the following neVim=comments:
PRELIMINARY PLAT
/
° OudotA is proposed as City owned tu accommodate the storm water pond with an MOAownod and
operated water re -use irrigation system, See comments below under Stormwater Management.
= Out|ct B is proposed as HOA owned to accommodate a "Private Street", See comments below under
residential streets,
The applicant must submit tothe City written correspondence from the County indicating that adequate
[5AH 17 R/VV is being dedicated as part of this Plat. If additional R/VV is required by the County the Plat
must berevised and resubmitted.
w The plat must be revised toinclude the Kce}Energy Transmission Easement along the north property line,
w Permanent grading and drainage easements are required to implement the improvements as proposed.
These easements must be obtained prior to grading activities and prior to the City accepting an application
for final plat.
All public improvements constructed to support the development must be designed and constructed in accordance
with the City Engineeriniz Desivn Standards Manual available on the Citv website and dated February 2015.
GRADING PLAN, ITO0MWATE8MANAGEMENT AND STORM SEWER SYSTEM
m The site plan b subject to storm water management plan meeting5ta{c. V@VVD and City rules and
regulations. Storm water facilities proposed as part of the she plan to meet State and V8VVQ permitting
requirements must be constructed in accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual
available on the City web5ite. A finalized storm water management plan must be approved by the City and
the V8\*Dpermit must bpobtained prior 10grading activities.
• The GonnvvaterManagement Plan incorporates storm water re -use through lawn irrigation. The re -use
system is necessary for the applicant's plan to meet State and Watershed permit requirements for water
quality treatment (volume control), Du\|otA is proposed as [kv owned to accommodate the storm water
PAGE I of 4
pond. The water re -use irrigation system is proposed to be HOA operated and maintained on City property.
Details of this plan are limited in the application, The following considerations should benoted.
� 3torm=aterne-ume, when implemented correctly can bean effective method to reduce reliance of
potable water use while educing storm water discharges. It would help to reduce peak demands on
the potable water system that typically occurs during the summer irrigation and landscape watering
season. These benefits make storm water re -use worth consideration.
� However, the City has no design standards or guidelines for implementation and currently has no
experience with storm water reuse operations.
� The two most notable concerns for storm vva\e, reuse includes the pollutants in the storm water
(addressing treatment needs) and designing n system that provides a properly balanced hydraulic
system (sizing the storage, and balancing the drawdown to the projected use in a variable climate).
� Pollutants in the storm water reuse system may be a concern for three basic reasons: 1) the health risks
associated with human contact; 2) the impact on the environment given the various Uses (i.e. bacteria
or chlorides from salts); 3) issues for the system equipment and operational impacts.
� PmUnnina,vPlat should beconditioned unonthe following:
• The developer must sign an operation and maintenance agreement for the storm water reuse
system in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, The agreement must indemnify and hold harmless
the City from any and all activities related to the developer and HOA's operation of this system.
= The storm water pond must be designed with a hydraulic capacity acceptable to the City Engineer
that ensures adequate flood protection without accounting for any water reuse from the system.
• The storm "*me, pond must be designed and constructed in accordance with the City Engineering
Design Standards.
• A detailed design of the irrigation system together with a detailed operations and maintenance plan
must besubmitted prior toany grading urconstruction activity onthe site.
• Per City requirements, all storm water facilities, including infiltration badns, must be placed in Oudots
deeded to the City for maintenance purposes. The Stormwater Facility Outlots must fully incorporate the
1OO'yca,HvVL,10foot maintenance bench and all maintenance access roads.
� The pond grading must be revised to add a 10-foot maintenance bench around the entire pond, per the
standard pond detail.
� The maintenance access mad must be revised toaccess the pond from SmStreet North, nnx(3xH 17,
° Overland emergency overflows oroutlets will be required as part ofthe site plan and must be located within
drainage easements, must be in Bold Type on the plans, and must provide lfoot ofvertical separation tu
the low opening of any building structure, Lot information details must include the lowest opening in
addition tothe lowest floor elevation.
w The ubirna,n discharge rate and location is an important consideration to avoid negative impacts to
downstream properties. The storm water management plan indicates the pond outfall pipe to discharge to
the northerly property, The plan as proposed cannot he implemented without permanent drainage and
utility easements from the adjacent property. Permission should be provided to the City prior to accepting
efinal plat application orallowing grading activities.
• Significant grading is proposed along the northerly property to accommodate many of the proposed
building pads, Without written permission to permanently alter grades on the adjacent property, the site
would require a redesign. Property owner permission or easements should be provided to the City p,iortm
accepting afinal plat application orallowing grading activities,
w The storm sewer system shall be designed to maintain the City standard minimum pipe cover of 3.0 feet.
• Per City requirements all storm sewer pipe easements must be a minimum 30-feet in width.
° The maximum allowable curb run along streets without catch basins is 350fea. Catch basins should be
added along Street B, easterly cul-de-sac to maintain maximum curb run of 350 ft�
° Sump manholes are required prior to all discharge points, located at the last manhole or catch basin prior
tuleaving apaved area, All sumpmanholes must be4-fon,deep.
° It ispreferable that Public Streets beconstructed *oserve this development and designed to
Engineering Design Standards including R/W width, street width and cul-de-sac radii.
° It the streets remain HOA Privately owned, the Ulowing recommendations appl-y:
,i- The street/boulevard section must be widened to allow for adequate ownership and maintenance by
the City for the public utilities (watermain, sanitary sewer and storm sewer).
� The street Dutlot should beaminimum width of40 feet (l4feet pavement +6foot boulevard) with 5'
(ocnminimummU}tyeasementoneachdde. This will enable any future construction activity toremain
100% within the Street Ovt|ot plus the vh|ky easement. No additional encroachment on the
properties/sidewalks should benecessary during future construction.
)o The typical section should be updated to include storm sewer and should show the small utilities,
demonstrating the 3-footseparation between gas and joint trench.
° Street A vertical alignment should be revised to provide a K = 37 minimum at STA 0+71.00,
PAGE 4 of 4
MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER
° Municipal sanitary sewer service is readily available within the 5"' Street R/W located adjacent to the plat.
* The applicant is responsible to emend the municipal sanitary sewer to the development to serve the
proposed properties.
~ No trunk sewer oversizing is anticipated. The area can be served without a lift station.
* Sanitary sewer must be realigned to better maintain street centerline alignment.
° The sanitary sewer b proposed to be placed whhinOu/ot 8to be HOA owned and maintained as private
street. The Oudct width must be a minimum of 40 feet with a 5 (oat drainage and utility easement along
each side of the street forthe corridorto be acceptable forthe placement of publicly owned and maintained
MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY
* Municipal water service breadily available within the S*Street R/VVlocated adjacent tothe plat.
m The applicant is neporo@b|e no extend municipal water into the development to oene the proposed
properties.
~ Two connection points tothe existing City system should be required.
~ Notrunk wate,mainoveniongisanticipated for this development.
� Additional hydrants and system valves will be required as part of the final design.
~ VVauermain must be realigned \omaintain 10-footsepamhun from the sanitary sewer once the sanitary
sewer isrealigned aspreviously noted,
m Thewaterma|n is proposed to be placed within Ou(ct 8to be HOAmwned and maintained as a private
street. The Ovdot width must be a minimum of 40 feet with a 5 foot drainage and utility easement along
each side of the street for the corridor to be acceptable for the placement of publicly owned and maintained
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
* Access uathe development must be from 5m6tneet as shm°n, directly across from the Hunters [nedng
access roadway.
* The applicant will be responsible to construct the north half of 5" Street from CSAH 17 to the east plat edge
of the Hunters Crossing development, This improvement must be completed at the developer's cost.
• The plat must dedicate the existing 5h Street roadway easement as City K/VV.The plan indicates the
minimum 100 foot R/W as required, A ten (10) foot utility easement must be provided along the north side
ofthe 6*Street R/VV.
• The proposed 2-lane collector parkway street (5th Street) design and geometrics must meet all Municipal
State Aid design standards for urban streets (8820.9936) for ADT > 10,000; 40 mph design speed; and must
beconsistent with the detailed parkway cross section installed throughout the remaining corridor segments
and as outlined in the 5th Street Collector Design Guidelines as prepared by City staff,
= Right and left turn lanes must be incorporated along 5thStreet North per the City design standards \u
maintain mobility along the Parkway since there isonly one travel lane ineach direction,
° Additional stree\scape amenities are required along 5th Street consistent with the remaining corridor
segments, Sth Street Amenities include a north side off -road bituminous trail, minimum 10 foot width with
5 foot clear zone; a south side concrete sidewalk, minimum 6 foot width with 2 foot clear zone; landscaping
elements including acenter landscape median; and street lighting.
° The applicant will also be partially responsible for the improvements required by Washington County at the
intersection ofS'^Street and [3AH17.
RESIDENTIAL STREETS
• Street Amust include 50foot tangent per City standards at the intersection with S`h Street before
initiating the proposed horizontal curve,
* Street B, east cul-de-sac geometrics must be revised to eliminate turns greater than 90-clegrees.
Public Works Department
Donald J. Theisen, r.E.
Director
Wayne H. Sandberg, P.E.
Deputy Director/County Engineer
March 3, 2015
Kyle Klatt
Community Development Director
City of Lake Elmo
3600 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
RE: Washington County comments on the concept plan for the Diedrich property by
Lennar Homes, City of Lake Elmo
Dear Mr, Klatt:
Thank you for providing the county with the concept plan for the Lennar subdivision on the
Diedrich property, in Section 36 ,Township 29N , Range 21W along County Road (CR) 17B/Lake
Elmo Avenue in the City of Lake Elmo, The project consists of 50 attached single family
residential dwelling units on 12 acres of land, Based on the plan provided, we have the following
comments:
• There is currently 50 feet of right-of-way from the center line of County Road (CR)
17B therefore, an additional 42 feet should be dedicated on the plat which should
include the existing home site south of 5th Street.
• According to the Trip Generation Manua!, 7rn Addition 1TE, 2003, this development
will generate 478 Average Vehicle Trips (AVT) per day.
• In the future, there will be a traffic signal at the intersection of CR 17B and 5th
Street and since 5th Street will be a collector roadway, a center left turn lane should
be provided on 5th Street for access to the development.
• Access control must be dedicated to Washington County along the CSAH 17/Lake
Elmo Avenue frontage. This should be denoted on the final plat.
• Improvements to County Road (CR) 17B will be completed at the new 5th Street
section. Washington County is working with the City of Lake Elmo on the planned
improvements. The cost of these improvements will be the responsibility of the city,
• The developer or the city must submit the drainage report and calculations to our
office for review of any downstream impacts to the county drainage system. Along
with the drainage calculations, we will request written conclusions that the volume
and rate of stormwater run-off into the county right -of way will not increase as part of
the project.
11660 Myeron Road North, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-9573
Phone: 651-430-4300 • Fax: 651-430-4350 • TTY651-430-6246
www,comashingtormn,us
Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action
March 3.2O15
Diedrich Property
Concept Plan
m All stonnwoterponds should belocated outside the county hght-of-wmy,
� Washington County'opolicy isVoassist local governments |npromoting
compatibility between land use and highways, Residential uses located mdjaoork
tohighways often result incomplaints about traffic noise. Traffic noise from this
highway could exceed noise standards established bythe [N)nnenntm Pollution
Control Agency (KAPCA). the U.S. Department ofHousing and Urban Development,
and the U.S. Department of Transportation. N1inneov1e Rule 7030,0030 states that
municipalities are responsible for taking all reasonable measures to prevent land
use activities listed in the MPCA's Noise Area Classification (NAC) where the
establishment of the land use would result in violations of established noise
stpndaodo. Minnesota Statute 11G.07.Subpart 2a exempts County Roads and
County State Aid Highways from noise thresholds. County policy regarding
development adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of highway
funds for noise mitigation measures insuch areas. The developer should assess
the noise situation and take any action outside of County right of way deemed
necessary tominimize the impact ofany highway noise,
* Any grading within County right ofway will require oWashington County Right of
Way Permit.
All utility connections for the development require VVeshington County Right of Way
permits. Typically, these are the responsibility of the utility companies.
Thank you for the opportunity hocomment onthis concept plan. Ifyou have any questions,
please contact me at 651-4304362 or ann.punq-terwedo(cDco.washinalon.mn.us
AnnPunQ-Tenwedo
Senior Planner
Cc: Carol Hanson, Office Specialist
wplat Rwvie*wmv*lake sknmoiemm`property
KE ELMO
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
THROUGH:
COU :j CO
Zoning Text Amendment —
Ordinance
Nick Johnson, City Planner
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
CAT
DATE: July 21, 2015
REGULAR
ITEM #16
ORDINANCE 08-121
RESOLUTION 2015-045
Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue
REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
Planning Commission
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Introduction of Item ..... .................C'ommunity Development Director
Report/Presentation „ ...............Community Development Director
Questions from Council to Staff._ ...... . ......... ..... Mayor Facilitates
Call for Motion ...... ..... ..... Mayor & City Council
..... Mayor & City Council
Action on Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECCOMENDER: The Planning Commission is recommending approval of a
zoning text amendment to expand the opportunities to conduct Commercial Wedding Ceremony
Venues within the community.
FISCAL IMPACT: None — The City's review of the requested Zoning Text Amendment is
reimbursed through the submitted application fee.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City has received a request from Danielle
Hecker, 11658 50th Street North, to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial
Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR — Rural Residential
zoning districts. The City Council discussed the matter at their June 2, 2015 meeting, and
requested that additional opportunities for public engagement be provided. The Planning
Commission and Staff are recommending approval of the requested amendment with further
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Agenda hen) 16]
July 21, 2015
restrictions on the application of the ordinance as noted on June 2nd. The motion to take the
recommended action on the request is as follows:
"Move to adopt Ordinance 08-121, amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial
Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR — Rural Residential
zoning districts and to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at each eventfrom
150 to 200"
In addition, Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize summary publication of the
approved ordinance through the following motion:
"Move to adopt Resolution 2015-045, authorizing summary publication of Ordinance 08-121."
BACKGROUND INFORMATION/STAFF REPORT: The City of Lake Elmo has received a
petition from Danielle Hecker, 11658 50th Street North, to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance
to allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use perrnit within the City's RR
— Rural Residential zoning districts. The City Code presently restricts such uses to the A —
Agriculture and RT — Rural Transitional Districts. The City Council reviewed this request at the
6/2/15 meeting. The City Council postponed consideration of the Zoning Text Amendment to
seek additional public feedback, as well as a map of potential sites the proposed ordinance would
activate.
To follow up on this discussion, staff has attached a map that identifies the Rural Residential
parcels that would be able to be utilized as wedding venues. There are 6 such parcels in the
community. The map can be found in Attachment #4. In addition, the City has received
additional feedback about the proposal to amend the wedding venue ordinance. The feedback is
collected and attached to this report in Attachment #5.
STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS:
Strengths: The Planning Commission found that the ordinance amendment would help
preserve historic agricultural buildings within the City.
The ordinance expands upon the existing ordinance that allows additional opportunities
for use of agricultural properties that may no longer be viable as farmland.
Weaknesses: The ordinance would allow the expansion of a more commercial -type of
activity into rural residential areas.
Wedding ceremony venues will generate additional traffic at peak times immediately
prior to and after each event. The venues could potentially generate other negative
impacts that need to be managed on the site (noise, trash, parking, etc.).
Opportunities: The potential for re -use of historic buildings that would otherwise have
limited use.
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Agenda lion 16]
July 21,2015
Threats: Wedding venues by their nature will result in the gathering of larger numbers
of people at one location, which can result in some impacts to surrounding properties.
The ordinance establishes standards in order to contain or limit any negative impacts.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the Planning Commission and staff are
recommending that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
to allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR
— Rural Residential zoning districts and to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at
each event from 150 to 200 with the additional restrictions as documented in the attached
Ordinance 08-121. The recommended motion to take action on the request is as follows:
"Move to adopt Ordinance 08-121, amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial
Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR — Rural Residential
zoning districts and to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at each event from
150 to 200"
In addition, Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize summary publication of the
approved ordinance through the following motion:
"Move to adopt Resolution 2015-045, authorizing summary publication of Ordinance 08-121."
ATTACHMENTS:,
1. Staff Report dated June 2, 2015
2. Ordinance 08-121
3. Resolution 2015-047
4. Map of Possible Rural Residential Wedding Venue Locations
5. Additional Public Feedback Since 6/2/15 Meeting
-- page 3 --
Tiff', CITY OF
LAKE ELMO
AYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE:
REGULAR
TTEM #
June 2, 2015
7
AGENDA ITEM: Zoning Text Amendment - Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue
Ordinance
SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
THROUGH: Dean Zuleger, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner
Planning Commission
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS (if removed from the Consent Agenda):
Introduction of Item .Community Development Director
Report/Presentation........ ..... .................Cornmunity Development Director
Questions from Council to Staff. Mayor Facilitates
Call for Motion . Mayor & City Council
Discussion Mayor & City Council
Action on Motion Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECCOMENDER: The Planning Commission is recommending approval of a
zoning text amendment to expand the opportunities to conduct Commercial Wedding Ceremony
Venues within the community.
FISCAL IMPACT: None - The City's review of the requested Zoning Text Amendment is
reimbursed through the submitted application fee.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City has received a request from Danielle
Hecker, 11658 50th Street North, to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial
Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR - Rural Residential
zoning districts. The City Code presently restricts such uses to the A - Agriculture and RT -
Rural Transitional Districts. The applicant is also asking to increase the maximum number of
guests allowed at each event from 150 to 200. After reviewing the request and conducting a
public hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission and Staff are recommending approval of
the requested amendment with further restrictions on the application of the ordinance as noted
below. The motion to take the recommended action on the request is as follows:
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting / Regular Agenda Item 7]
June 2,2015
"Move to adopt Ordinance 08-121, amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial
Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR - Rural Residential
zoning districts and to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at each event rom
150 to 200"
In addition, Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize summary publication of the
approved ordinance through the following motion:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-45, authorizing summary publication of Ordinance 08-
.121."
BACKGROUND INFORMATION/STAFF REPORT: The City of Lake Elmo has received a
petition from Danielle Hecker, 11658 50th Street North, to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance
to allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR
- Rural Residential zoning districts. The City Code presently restricts such uses to the A -
Agriculture and RT - Rural Transitional Districts. The applicant is also asking to increase thc
maximum number of guests allowed at each event from 150 to 200. The Planning Commission
conducted a public hearing on the request consistent with the review requirements for ordinance
amendments. The applicant currently resides at the above address, and should the zoning
amendment be approved by the City, intends to submit an applicant for an interim use permit in
accordance with the Commercial Wedding Ceremony Ordinance to operate such a use from this
property.
The attached report to the Planning Commission contains additional information concealing the
request, in addition to the Staff recommendation to the Commission. Staff recommended
approval of the request with additional restrictions concerning sites within RR zoning districts
that would be suitable for such uses.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: The Planning Commission reviewed the applicant's
request at a public hearing on May 27, 2015. The Commission heard testimony concerning the
zoning amendment from two neighboring property owners as documented in the draft minutes
from the meeting, and also received written comments from three additional individuals (these
comments are attached to this memorandum). The City has also received one more email
concerning the request since the Planning Commission meeting, and this email has also been
copied for consideration by the Council. In general, the comments that have been received
express the following concerns about the request:
• The increased traffic on 501h Street from the applicant's site.
• The safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non -motorized corrunuters along 50th
Street due to an increase in traffic and narrow travel lanes on the road.
• The lack of a trail along the western portion of 50`h Street for pedestrians and bicyclists,
• The potential queuing of vehicles at Highway 5 and Highway 17 after events.
— page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 7J
June 2, 2015
• That the proposed commercial use is not consistent with a residential area and is not
consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
• The ability of 50th Street to handle additional traffic.
• Potential conflicts due to noise and other nuisances from the wedding venue site that is
not compatible with rural uses and activities.
• That the proposed change does not take into account the desires of the entire corrununity,
• The compatibility of larger parking area with surrounding residential uses.
• The potential disruptions to residents that live along a quiet street in the community.
• The risk that the use of alcohol may be served and that reception -type activities would
take place on the premises.
• Potential conflicts with the proposed residential development around the site.
The Commission generally debated the merits of the proposed amendment, and spent time
discussing whether or not the ordinance change was consistent with the City's Comprehensive
Plan. It was noted that preserving an older, historic barn was in line with the City's Plan, and
that protecting this type of historic building should be the primary objective of the ordinance and
not specifically preserving farm land. The Commission also debated the maximum number of
guests that should be allowed under the ordinance, and ultimately voted to increase this number
to 200 as per the applicant's request. The applicant pointed out that the average wedding size
through the nation is around 150, but that this number has been decreasing according to recent
trends. The Commission also noted that thc interim use ordinance process offers additional
control for the City if any problems arise from the operation of the facility.
The Commission supported the Staff recommendation to further restrict the applicability of the
ordinance to sites that have served as the farmstead for the surrounding agricultural land and that
involve the re -use of a historic building on the site that is at least 75 years old.
The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the zoning text amendment to
allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR -
Rural Residential zoning districts and to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at each
event from ]50 to 200 with the additional restrictions as recommended by Staff (Vote: 5-0).
STRENGTHS, WEAMSESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS:
Strengths: The Planning Commission found that the ordinance amendment would help
preserve historic agricultural buildings within the City.
The ordinance expands upon the existing ordinance that allows additional opportunities
for use of agricultural properties that may no longer be viable as farmland.
Weaknesses: The ordinance would allow the expansion of a more commercial -type of
activity into rural residential areas.
Wedding ceremony venues will generate additional traffic at peak times immediately
prior to and after each event. The venues could potentially generate other negative
impacts that need to be managed on the site (noise, trash, parking, etc.).
-- page 3 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda hem 7J
June 2. 2015
Opportunities: The potential for re -use of historic buildings that would otherwise have
limited use.
Threats: Wedding venues by their nature will result in the gathering of larger numbers
of people at one location, which can result in some impacts to surrounding properties.
The ordinance establishes standards in order to contain or limit any negative impacts.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the Planning Commission and staff are
recommending that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
to allow Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR
— Rural Residential zoning districts and to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at
each event from 150 to 200 with the additional restrictions as documented in the attached
Ordinance 08-121. The recommended motion to take action on the request is as follows:
"Mom to adopt Ordinance 08-121, amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow Commercial
Wedding Ceremony Venues as in interim use permit within the City's RR — Rural Residential
zoning districts and to increase the maximum number of guests allowed at each event from
150 to 200"
In addition, Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize summary publication of the
approved ordinance through the following motion:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-45, authorizing sunzmary publication of Ordinance 08-
121."
AFI ACHMENTS:
I . Ordinance 08-121
2. Resolution No. 2015-45
3. Planning Commission Report — 5/27/15
4. Application Forrn
5. Application Narrative
6. Proposed Ordinance Amendment (as requested by applicant)
7. Location Map (applicant's property in red)
8. Aerial Photograph of Site with Property Measurements
9. Propose Site Layout with Parking
I 0. Ordinance No. 08-107 (Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue)
11. Public Comments:
a. Rebecca Tenpas
b. Laurel Drevlow
c. Jennifer Pelletier
d. AIII1 Heimerman
-- page 4 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 08-121
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES
CONCERNING COMMERCIAL WEDDING CEREMONY VENUES AND ALLOWING SUCH
USES AS AN INTERIM USE IN RR ZONING DISTRICTS
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that Title XV:
Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, is hereby amended by adding the
following:
5154.400 Permitted and Conditional Uses.
Table 9-1 lists all permitted and conditional uses allowed in the rural districts. "P" indicates a
permitted use, "C" a conditional use, and "I" an interim use. Uses not so indicated shall be considered
prohibited. Cross-references listed in the table under "Standards" indicate the location within this
Ordinance of specific development standards that apply to the listed use.
Table 9-1: Permitted and Conditional Uses, Rural Districts
Accessory Uses
RT A RR RS RE
Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue
Standard
154.310.D
SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby ordains that Title XV:
Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code, is hereby amended by adding the
following:
5 154. 310 Standards for Accessory Uses
D. Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue. A commercial wedding venue is allowed as an
accessory use with an interim use permit in the A - Agriculture, aPcl-RT - Rural Transitional, and
RR - Rural Residential zoning districts on parcels greater than 10 acres size. The establishment
of a Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue on RR parcels is limited to those sites meeting the
following criteria: 1) the site has historically been used as a farmstead for the surrounding
agricultural land; and 2) the use will incorporate a barn or other historical agricultural building
over 75 years of age for the wedding ceremonies.
The suitability of a parcel for a wedding venue shall be determined by the characteristics of
the site and by the unique capacity of the parcel to accommodate the use while preserving the
essential rural character of the neighborhood and the site on which the use is located, by the
ability of the parcel to accommodate the use without negative impact on the general health,
safety, and welfare of the community, and by other factors the City may deem appropriate for
consideration. The use must adhere to the following standards:
1. Ownership. The property will be the primary residence of the venue operator(s). The
operator must be on the premises for the duration of each event.
2. Maximum Number of Guests. The maximum numbers of guests is limited to 1-58-200 for
each event.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo.
SECTION 4. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-121 was adopted on this 21st day of
July 2015, by a vote of Ayes and Nays.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
,M1
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
This Ordinance 08-121 was published on the day of , 2015.
2
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-45
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-121 BY TITLE
AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-121, an
ordinance to amend the City's regulations pertaining to Corrunercial Wedding Ceremony Venues;
and
WHEREAS, the ordinance is lengthy; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and
summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform
the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo,
that the City Clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 08-121 to be published in
the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance:
Public Notice
The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-121, which amends
the Zoning Ordinance provisions pertaining to Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues. The
revised ordinance amends the standards for such uses as follows:
Allowing a Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venue as an interim use within the RR —
Rural Residential Zoning Districts.
Increasing the maximum number of guests allowed for each ceremony from 150 to 200.
Adding standards that limit Commercial Wedding Ceremony Venues to sites in RR
Districts that served as the farmstead for larger agricultural parcels and that would be
conducted in historic buildings over 75 years of age.
The full text of Ordinance No. 08-121 is available for inspection at Lake Elmo city hall during
regular business hours.
BE 1T FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo that the
City Administrator keep a copy of the ordinance at City Hall for public inspection and that a full
copy of the ordinance be placed in a public location within the City.
Dated: July 21, 2015.
Resolution 2015-045 Page 1 of 2
Mayor Mike Pearson
ATTEST:
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
(SEAL)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against saine:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution 2015-045 Page 2 of 2
ParceK������U� �������^�K� ��^��^����=�N�� K�����UU'���������
ls o�n~°~,�n..�� ."~°^�~~...�� ~~~,.~~,~ Requirements
Area: Greater than 1Oacres
Zoning: Rural Residential
Setback Requirements'.
Parking: 100 FT from residential property lines; 200 FT from neighboring houses.
Outdoor Activity Spaces- 3OOFTfrom residential property lines; 4UUFTfrom neighboring houses.
Indoor Activity Spaces. 300 FT from residential property lines; 400 FIF from neighboring houses-
LAND _A HOMES
Di.,/t4P17 nil if', 1(1111;,i' fil EVib7(01111(1!r //mn,
June 18, 2015
Kyle Klatt
Community Development Director
City of Lake Elmo
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
Dear Kyle:
RE: Danielle Hecker's Barn Wedding Ceremony Venue (no receptions)
This letter is to inform Lake Elmo city staff, city council and local residents that I support Danielle
Hecker's request to host wedding ceremonies on her property which borders my property in Lake
Elmo. Her property consists of 10 acres which includes a historic farmhouse and barn and several
smaller outbuildings that make up the original Goetschel farm homestead of past. The Hecker
property is one of Lake Elmo's great historical landmarks; the property is very quaint and the
homestead is well taken care of. I own the 110 acres which encompasses the north, east and west
sides of the Hecker's property.
As the Hecker's most impacted neighbor, I continue to support their venue on their 10 acres. It has
been joy to meet and chat with Danielle Hecker. The Hecker's have demonstrated a great sense of
pride in their property with the continued improvements they have made to the property. When I first
spoke with Danielle, I suggested that both parties (Hecker and myself) plant trees on the borders of
the properties which would provide more privacy and buffering. Danielle was very understanding and
agreed to plant trees along their north and east property lines in the future. I was very impressed with
her immediate cooperation and goodwill; key ingredients in a great neighbor.
The proposed business venture would be a complimentary venue to the neighborhood and the barn
restoration would improve the surrounding property values and foster a sense of pride for the
community. This venue is consistent with the "rural feel" of the surrounding O.P. developments.
I sincerely hope Danielle Hecker is granted permission to move forward with her wedding ceremony
business on her property. The Hecker's property in Lake Elmo is a historical gem and is an asset that
should be shared by others on their special occasions.
Best Regards,
Nathan Landucci; Landucci Homes, Inc.
13230 20th St. N. I Stillwater, MN 55082 I (P.) 650.894,2582 i (F) 651.342.1049
nat
a
citioines.com wwwlanclucciltom es.corn
yIeKb
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
kmlohmer@comcastnet
Monday, July 06, 2015 3:29 PM
Kyle Klatt
Hecker property citizen input
41114,4144,41.4.61.41..1.1.1.1141111.1.
Dear Kyle,
I was told that the City of Lake Elmo and council members were looking for feedback regarding the
Hecker property and the conditional use permit. I would appreciate if you could share my letter with
the mayor and council members. Thanks so much.
Thank you for taking the time to read our letter regarding the proposed renovation and wedding
site on the Hecker family's property. The Heckers are friends of my daughter in law and I was told of
the upcoming decision regarding the conditional use permit they are seeking. I did stop by and
observed a most beautiful location for what they are planning to do.
I wanted to write with some thoughts on the upcoming decision. Our family lived in Lake Elmo for 23
years, and 2-1/2 years ago moved into the Audubon development in Baytown Township. We are at
the very back side of the development with woods in the back yard and less than 1/4 mile from 30th
street - and very close to the Camrose Hill wedding event site.
On weekend evenings in the summer it is not uncommon for us to hear music playing from weddings
and I have to say that it is a very pleasant sound. It is always quiet by 10 p.m. and it makes me happy
thinking that such a "joyfilled event" is taking place there. I have never heard any complaints since
we've lived here. Because 30th street is the border between Baytown Township and West Lakeland
Township, I made calls to the township chairs, Kent Granulard and Dan Kyllo. (Mr. Granulard's
brother actually lives directly across from Camrose Hill.) They both confirmed that there has never
been any issues or complaints and that there is a positive impact to the local community by having
the wedding site there. They have never had any traffic incidents and the event center is for weddings
and receptions as well. I know that the Heckers are only planning on doing the wedding ceremonies
on their property.
I wish you well as you make your decision, and would encourage you allow for this zoning text
amendment and conditional use permit. I think it would add greatly to the Lake Elmo community and
I know that the Hecker family will be very respectful and will take very seriously the terms of the
agreement.
Best,
Greg and Kathy Lohmer
Baytown Township
Kyle Klatt
1,1111111,11111,11111,1h1111,14111/.,114,111111l14,111i 4,11101111111,1141,11111,1111A1111111,1,114101111,1y11.11111W41/11411114/11141.1W1111110111,1,1.11111i111111144,41.111411Wild.,1111141,1111.1111Y141101.11111111Y114,4141,114111,1.11,111,1141 1,11111:M111110 W14.11/,1:11aLL1,111,11111141,11101,111,1141,1W1.11111111111,11i11111o110,1,11.1.41/114011.1116M,11141olo11,111 /11111414111111,11W1111411,i111,1.11,1411111111,10,11411111111,1,1J1,111 11 61,4i
From: Marlene <marlenedyer@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 10:04 PM
To: Kyle Klatt
Cc: Jeremy Dyer
Subject: In Response to Lake Elmo Weddings
Hello Kyle,
I wanted to reach out to you as a Lake Elmo resident to let you know that I am in support of rural setting
weddings in Lake Elmo. I read in a recent Lake Elmo publication that this topic would be coming up for
consideration soon so 1 wanted to reach out to you.
As you already know, Lake Elmo is beautiful. The farms and rolling hills are picture perfect as a backdrop for
weddings to take place. Recently my youngest sister got married on such a farm, but had to go across the river
to Holton, Wisconsin for her nuptials. Outdoor rustic weddings are a growing trend. Wouldn't it be great if
Lake Elmo were the place to get married?
1 am specifically in favor of Danielle Hecker, as she and her husband seek to restore and preserve the historic
buildings on their property and use them to better the community. Inviting people onto their property for
wedding ceremonies would encourage the support of other Lake Elmo business through reception venues,
flowers, catering, etc. What a great way to bring more business into our city.
If our city can set up very specific perimeters regarding parking, traffic flow, times of day, and other
requirements that would ensure safely and meet resident's concerns, I am certain that allowing for rural
wedding venues could benefit our city in a positive way.
Not to point out the obvious, but there is not a lot of pleasant publicity in news about Lake Elmo right
now. This is a great opportunity to show our guests the true beauty and history of Lake Elmo.
Thank you,
Jeremy & Marlene Dyer
10316 Tapestry Bend
2
K e Klatt
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
PAUL H+REV PALLMEYER <pallmeyer@msn.corn>
Saturday, June 13, 2015 10:09 AM
Kyle Klatt
Proposed Wedding Ordinance
We feel that residents should be able to have weddings and receptions in any size and area of their choosing.
While the proposed change expands wedding venues to -rural residential- zones, the limits on the size of both
weddings and receptions should be dropped. Paul and Ruth Pallmeyer, 8989 Lake Jane Trail N.
Sent from Windows Mail
Kyle Klatt
ILIKAY.01.1.0111.11,011,,,,1010.1,1J 4141,114.11.1114.4041p11011,11.1a11,114.14.1,14:1111101.0.1A11,0,111.1.....,1141111,11.01,141.1:14,4,1.0.u.111i.:1.10,14.41,1,11111,111.1111.1111....,i1J1J.W.11111.411141,,,,11114..i141.1.41414,111141.1.1.11.4.1.1. .1,.1141.14:1.110114.1111141,0404111L,....M.11W11011..J.,:u5,4111.1.41.1111i1.1.1,..lohlo..41,1,11141.1.,,,Lpika
From: Barb Miller <bkm.miller@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 8:24 AM
To: Kyle Klatt
Subject: Lake Elmo Wedding Proposal
I live at 9240 55th St N and just read the article in the "Review", looking for public opinion on the wedding
proposal. I support the right of individuals to have a wedding AND reception in the area zoned rural
residential. 1 would increase the maximum guest limit to 300.
Barbara Miller
From; Backbeng. Benjamin ^BBadkbero@fred|aw.com>
Sent: Monday, June 0&20I52:07PK4
To: Mike Pearson; Justin B|oyer Julie F|i0et)iU Lundgren; annejsmith@ms^.mmnn; Dean
Zu|eger; Kyle K|att
Subject: RE: Lake Elmo- Wedding Venue Ordinance Change
| have had achance toreview the playback cf the council meeting on6/2/l5that discussed this topic. | have also been
receiving more ennai|sinopposition tothis ordinance change. People are also calling foul onthe 75Oftnotice. Notice
seems to be a reoccurring theme for meetings, which should be very simple tofix. Is this topic going to come in front of
the council tomorrow night? Pleooclet mneknow nson. Great ifhcould bedelayed sopeople can have additional time
todigest the proposal.
I was also very surprised to hear that barn owner plans to book the barn out 2-3 years in advance —this will not be 10-20
per year. She is going tntry her best tohave asmany weddings aspossible (for her benefit tothe detriment ofeveryone
else around hor). This will have a big change on the area, especially on the weekend (when families are out the
must), 50`^Street isalso set upvervpoor|yfor commercial activity ofany type, Not tomention, almost all wedding
patrons will not know where they are going, which heightens safety concerns greatly (looking at phones for directions,
etc). We get countless people lost in our neighborhood because they think Linden goes through.
Happy to discuss this with any of you, but think my view has changed. | no longer think this will be a harmless business
and could be very dangerous, especially for young kids who will venture over there frorn Sanctuary once the new
development isbuilt out tothe south,
Thanks'
Ben
612'492'7232
From: Backberg, Benjamin
Sent: Tuesday, June O2,ZO1S0:58AM
To: 'mpea rson@|akeel mnorg'; 'jb|nyer@|akee|nxo.org'; 'jO\Met@lakeel mo.org'; ]|undgnen@|akee|mo.ong';
'annejsmith@msn.com';dzu|eger@kokeemn.ong
Subject: Lake Elmo- Wedding Venue Ordinance Change
Importance: High
Council Members,
I have not had a chance to look at the materials in detail on the proposed wedding ordinance change,but was
wondering where you all were falling onthe proposal? Seems like aslippery slope. Great ifyou could let moknow your
thoughts ausoon aspossible. The Sanctuary HOA Board is looking into this matter now and it also looks like it would
directly impact the Gotoha\land plat. Noon\nthe Sanctuary neighborhood was aware ofthis until this morning.
Thanks,
Ben
612'492'7232
5
Kyle Watt
From: Wally Nelson /waUy@mornowpartnensincrum`
Sent Sunday, June 07,20l5(tl6AK4
To: Kyle K|att
Subject: Wedding Venues
Mr.Kbtt
| think itbawonderful idea toallow weddings |nthese zoning districts.
It is a great way to keep the rural character of Lake Elmo in place and this will allow the old barns with character to be
preserved.
Thanks
o
K
le Klatt
.01,14.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
JIMM ulu.µ...4.1lAaM.M1,aiolW1.1AAYN.44.1.14a.u.....Y.I.MuMukihMMAN,WILNN.M.,IuM.l.waAlai.J.MWWI.4WtaWY...tl,uMLL:u1.4.4LV.,11Miol11.Y.M4,414W1AU41V
guswilt24@comcastnet
Friday, June 05, 2015 6:56 PM
Kyle Klatt
Weddings
I enjoyed the presentation given by Danielle Hecker (sp?) and her idea to craft her barn into a
wedding chapel/area. I think it would be a great venue to host such a beautiful event. I also think it
would be OK to host weddings at other sites as well.
Thanks for tossing this idea out to the public.
Dana Nelson
2871 Legion Ave N
7
From: Pau|Huot <phuot@phuot.00m`
Sent: Friday, June 05'Z0lSl:l]PK4
To: 0yleK|att
Subject: weddings
| think it's sad that wecan't legally hold a small (100 people or less) wedding and reception in our homes. |amgood
with having a permit for weddings and reception over 100 people up to 200.
Pau/Huot
49SS]amacaAve N
IT! Klatt
From: jenniferpelletier@comcast.net
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 12:47 PM
To: mike pearson; Anne Smith; Justin Bloyer; jfliflet@freshwater.org; Jill Lundgren
Cc: Dean Zuleger; Kyle Klatt
Subject: Fwd: Tonight's agenda item / wedding facility in RR / resend
Hello,
I sent this to the planning commission last week, but I thought I'd send it to the council prior to
tonight's meeting as well. I have been in communication with the applicant and she knows what my
thoughts are; she's a good neighbor and it is not my mission to prevent them from starting a business.
MOST of this note below has to do with the next phase: the interim use permit
discussions. Regarding a zoning change, I am not opposed to adding a wedding facility in the RR
district as long as it does not include receptions.
Thank you for taking the time to read my comments before/during tonight's meeting. It is not
necessary to read it aloud; like I said the applicant and I have chatted quite a bit about it.
Have a great day,
Jennifer Pelletier
From: jenniferpelletier@comcast.net
To: "Kyle Klatt" <kyle.klatt@lakeelmo.org>
Cc: "Dean Zuleger" <DZuleger@lakeelmo.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 12:13:33 PM
Subject: Fwd: Tonight's agenda item / wedding facility in RR
Dear Planner Klatt and members of the Planning Commission,
I'm writing to you regarding tonight's agenda item: the proposed code change in the RR zoning district
to add wedding ceremonies. Initially, I had no questions or concerns. However, after thinking
through this request (and realizing that we're dealing with a city wide code change), I do wish to
express some thoughts for consideration. I am a previous planning commissioner myself, and live
across the street.
Comment/Concern:
1) The ingress and egress — 50th street. This road has no shoulder for pedestrian and/or bike
traffic. There are many children in the area that use the road, and it has become not only busier due
to through traffic heading to Hwy. 5 or CSAH 17, those who use the road frequently drive well over
the 40MPR limit. In fact, there is a speed indicator sign out on the road as we speak. QUESTION for
the commission: what would adding multiple wedding ceremonies add to this growing
problem? Again, there is no shoulder on this road.
9
2) Regarding the overall change in the zoning code: I'm not opposed to this type of business. In
fact, I think it's a wonderful use of space. However, my concern is that a wedding facility in one area
of the zoning district RR could look very different in another area. I'm hoping that the Planning
Commission does its due diligence and not only addresses all areas affected, but considers adjacent
parcels that may be affected as well.
3) New development: the land immediately next to this parcel is slated for a new
development. Where will this traffic flow? Consider this in addition to a wedding facility, on a road
with no shoulder. This is another important question that I'd like the PZ to address.
4) Possible solutions:
a) limited the maximum # of visitors (issue: how would the city monitor this?)
b) discuss/limit the number of ceremonies allowed per day
c) discuss a time of day with which all visitors need to off the premises (i.e.: nothing past 6pm, etc)
To be clear, it is not my intent to come across as though I am against the project. However, as a
previous planning commissioner, these are important questions/concerns that I think deserve to be
addressed. This could have a significant impact on current adjacent parcels, and the future
development that will be coming in right next door.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Pelletier
4884 Lily Ave. North
10
Nick Johnson
~
From: Danielle Dankel|eHecker ^dnhecker@gma|.com^
Sent: Monday, July I3.Z0l5I:49PK4
To: Kyle K|att;Nick Johnson
Subject: Fwd:SOthStreet Wedding Venue
Follow UpFlag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Thank you Kyle ... Nick just Wing you on one that I received too (along with the council members).
---------- Forwarded message --'--
From:Jim Hansen <h.wood86@QmaU.com«maiho:h.vvnnd86@8maiicom>»
Date: Mon, Jun Z9,ZO1Sat10:37PM
Subject: SOthStreet Wedding Venue
To: mpeamon@|akoe|mo.nrK<moi|to:mpeamon@|akee|mo.org>']b|oyer@|akee|mmo.onQ<maUtojNoyer@|akee|nno.or8>
'jf|if|et@bkeel mu.o,Q<nnai|tojf|iOet@|nkee|mu.or8>'j|undgren@p|akee|mnurg <mai|tnj|und0rpn@o|akee|mo.nrg>,
annejsmith@msnzn,n«mai|to:annejsmith@msn.com>
Cc: dnhecker@Dmaiicom<mai|1o:dnhecker@gmaiicom^
I am writing to the council in regard to the issue of a Wedding Venue on 50th Street North that was discussed at the 6-2-
15mound/meetinQ.||keat11I6OSCth3treetNorth,whichhasaspectacu|arviewnfthepnoposedweddingvenue^as
evidenced by this photo from my home:
I concur with the Mayor that issues like this tend to bring out the passionate opposition rather than supporters. In fact,
the notification that I had received about this proposal really only asked for concerns to be voiced. Having no concerns, I
did not respond. However, after hearing claims that "everyone with surrounding property is opposed", I felt compelled
to respond.
|be|ieve that the wedding venue can besomething that actually helps preserve the rural nature of the street—meeing
the old barn(s) preserved and restored — as opposed to the "open space" developments that have popped up since we
moved in 25 years ago. I (fondly?) recall spending many mornings and evenings in the old barn helping Martin milk the
cows after hebecame too short to reach the milk lines. I would hate to see this building removed or run down for lack of
purpose. |nfact, seeing the numerous improvements that have already been made to the property over the past few
years has been very encouraging.
During the council discussions I heard numerous concerns about the increased traffic that would be on 50th Street,
While this venue may add periodic increases before and after aceremony, it isnegligible compared tnthe increase that
the housing developments (and the inevitable future developments), which feed onto 50th Street, have had (and will
have). | would also like to remind (or inform) the council that SLthStrpet North is a `State Aid" street, This means that it
had tobedesignated and designed according tothe "state-aid"criteria in8820.O70USubpart 3:
8D2O.O7U0SELECTION CRITERIA
Subpart l. Basis. 'Astate aid route must be selected on the basis of all criteria in either subpart Z url
Subp.ICounty state -aid highway. Acounty state -aid highway may beselected ifit:
A. is projected to carry a relatively heavier traffic volume or is functionally classified as collector or arterial as
identified on the county'sfunctional classification plan;
8.connects towns, communities, shipping points, and markets within acounty orinadjacent counties; provides
access to rural churches, schools, community meeting halls, industrial areas, state institutions, and recreational areas;
or, serves asaprincipal rural mail route and school bus route; and
C. provides an integrated and coordinated highway system affording, within practical limits, a state -aid highway
network consistent with projected traffic demands.
Subp. 3. Municipal state -aid street. A municipal state -aid street may beselected if it:
A. is projected to carry relatively heavier traffic volume or isfunctionally classified as collector orarterial as
identified oothe urban municipality's functional classification plan;
B. connects the points ofmajor traffic interest, parks' parkways, or recreational areas within an urban
municipality; and
C. provides an integrated street system affording, vvhh)n practical limits, a state -aid street network consistent
with projected traffic demands.
The periodic traffic from weddings will certainly not create serious traffic issues in regard to the street's design capacity.
Issues in regard to the intersection of 50th Street and Highway 5 are primarily due to the volume (and timing) of traffic
on Hwy 5, not so much 50th St. This is an important issue to be addressed, but it is a separate issue and a distraction
from the Wedding Venue discussion.
Finally, a few commented about noise, I am unaware of wedding ceremonies that produce "noise"; beautiful music, yes!
So, in short, I am very much in favor of this use for the property and urge passing of the tabled motion.
Jim Hansen
2
TI CII
K E ELM()
DATE: July 21, 2015
REGULAR
ITEM #17
RESOLUTION 2015-59
AGENDA ITEM: Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat
SUBMITTED BY: Nick M. Johnson, City Planner
THROUGH: Julie Johnson, City Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission
Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
Washington County Public Works
T
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
introduction of item Development Director
Report/Presentation....... ..... ..................Community Development Director
Qu-stions from Council to Staff.. ........ ...„. ..... ........ Mayor Facilitates
Call for Motion ...... Mayor & City Council
Discussion ..... ......... Mayor & City Council
Action on ..... ... ..... ..... Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECCOMENDER: Planning Commission
FISCAL IMPACT: None, all of the review activities on the part of the City are reimbursed by
application and escrow fees submitted by the developer. All of the improvements to the site are
private.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a
request from Mr. Lee Rossow for approval of a preliminary and final plat for a cemetery to be
called Halcyon located at 11050 50th Street North. The Planning Commission held a public
hearing to consider the matter at its July 13, 2015 meeting and unanimously recommended
approval of the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat subject to 14 conditions of
approval. The suggested motions to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation is as
follows:
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17'
July 21,2015
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-59, approving the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and
Final Plat."
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Attached is the original detailed Staff report that was provided to the Planning Commission
regarding the applicant's request for preliminary and final plat approval. The staff report
includes general information about the application, a summary of the relevant planning and
zoning issues, a thorough review and analysis of the final plat (including a draft list of
recommended conditions of approval), draft findings, and the Staff recommendation to the
Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the preliminary and final plat
application at its July 13, 2015 meeting. During the public hearing, the Planning Commission
received the following testimony:
• Jean Madrinich, 1 1420 50th Street N., noted that there are multiple flood plains in the
area. She asked how the flood plains are being addressed. Lee Rossow noted that they
have worked through those issues with the watershed district. Ms. Madrinich also noted
concern about additional traffic that would be generated on 50th Street.
• Deb Kreuger, 4552 Lake Elmo Ave. N., asked questions about the need for parkland
dedication associated with this property. In addition, she referenced several State
Statutes that relate to cemeteries. She wanted to ensure that the statutory requirements
are being followed with the project, especially the establishment of a permanent care trust
fund for the cemetery association. The applicant noted that a trust fund is being
established with the project.
• Janet Thompson, 11491 50thStreet N., noted that she is concerned about a commercial
venue being placed in a residential area. She stated that her family moved here to live in
a rural area, and this use is not in keeping with that goal.
• Rebecca Tenpas, 11330 50th Street N., stated that she does not believe the proposed use is
consistent with the rural character that the City desires. She also stated that the traffic on
5011' Street is a concern, and the use will add to the existing problem.
• Rich Day, owner of a property to the south of the proposed cemetery, asked if the project
has undergone an environmental review, such as an E1S. Johnson noted that the project
did not meet the threshold to trigger an environmental review, but that the City does have
the discretion to request environmental review. Mr. Day also voice his concern about the
storm water on the site that travels to his property. The applicant noted that they have
received permit approval from the Valley Branch Watershed District for the proposed
storm water management design.
— page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17]
July 21, 2015
• Jeffrey Saffle, 11180 50th Street N., asked if the lights on the site would be compliant
with dark skies standards. He noted that is important to follow the City's dark skies
ordinance.
• Saxe Roberts, 1165 50th Street N., noted his concern about the effect of cemeteries on
property values. Mr. Roberts agreed with staff that research is inconclusive on the matter,
but he worried that the presence of the cemetery would eliminate some buyers for his
property in the future.
The full account of the testimony can be reviewed in the draft Planning Commission minutes
dated 7/13/15.
The Planning Commission discussed a variety of topics in considering the preliminary and final
plat application for the cemetery. In discussing the project, the Planning Commission added the
following conditions:
• A condition was added that any future expansions for the cemetery use would need City
review and approval.
• A condition was added to ensure that dark skies ordinances were followed.
• A condition was added that any expansion of the home meet design criteria contained in
the City's design standards.
• A condition was added to add a warranty period for the transplanted trees on the site.
• A condition was added to provide additional screening along the east and north property
lines.
• Finally, a condition was added that the cemetery association provide copies of all annual
minutes and financial reporting of the permanent care trust fund to the City on an annual
basis.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and
Final Plat with 14 conditions of approval. The vote to recommend approval of the preliminary
and final plat was unanimous (Vote: 6-0).
STRENGTHS,WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS (SWOT):
Strengths: The proposed preliminary and final plat are compliant with the City's
subdivision ordinance, as well as other ordinances found in the zoning code.
Weaknesses: Neighboring property owners have expressed concerns about traffic
generated by the use.
Opportunities: N/A
Threats: N/A
RECOMMENDATION:
page 3 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 17]
July 21, 2015
Based on the aforementioned, the Planning Commission and Stuff are recommending that the
City Council approve the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat through the following
motion:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-59, approving the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and
Final Plat."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 2015-59
2. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, 7/13/15
3. Location Map
4. Application Forms and Project Narrative
5. Preliminary and Final Plat and Plans
6. City Engineer Review Memorandum, dated 7/8/15
7. Fire Chief Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15
8. Washington County Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15
9, Valley Branch Watershed District Permit
10. Lake Elmo Transportation Plan, Existing and Projected Traffic Volumes
11. Cemetery Proximity and Single Family Home Price Report (1 Half)
INCLUDED IN THE ELECTRONIC PACKET BUT NOT PROVIDED IN HARD COPY:
1. 2"d Half of Cemetery Proximity and Single Family Home Price Report — Supporting Data
2, Information Handout from League of MN Cities on Cemeteries
-- page 4 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-59
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT FOR THE HALCYON
CEMETERY
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Lee Rossow, 11050 50" Street North, Lake Elmo MN 55042 has
submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (-City-) for a Preliminary and Final Plat for a
cemetery to be called Halcyon, a copy of which is on file in the City of Lake Elmo Community
Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Final Plat includes a cemetery on one parcel of land (P1D:
01.029.21.33.0003) in the Rural Planning Area; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public healing on July 13,
2015 to consider the Preliminary and Final Plat application; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion recommending
approval of the Final Plat subject to 14 conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and
recommendation concerning the Preliminary and Final Plat as part of a memorandum to the City
Council for the July 21, 2015 Council Meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final
Plat at its meeting held on July 21, 2015 and made the following findings of fact:
I) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive
Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area.
2) That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's RR - Rural Residential zoning
district.
3) That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's subdivision ordinance.
4) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat meets other City zoning ordinances, such as
landscaping, tree preservation, erosion and sediment control, off-street parking and other
ordinances, except where noted in this report herein.
5) That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards.
except where noted, provided the plans are updated to address the City Engineer's
Resolution 2015-59
continents documented in a letter dated July 8, 2015 and the Fire ChieFs comments
documented in a letter dated July 7, 2015.
6) The applicant has committed to establishing a permanent care trust fund consistent with
the requirements established under State Statute.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby
approve the Halcyon Cemetery Preliminary and Final Plat subject to the following conditions:
1) The applicant shall revise the Final Plat to accommodate all required right-of-way on
Lake Elmo Avenue and 50th Street North as documented in review memorandums
submitted by Washington County and the City Engineer.
2) All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in a review
letter dated July 8, 2015 shall be incorporated into the plans prior to the City's execution
of the Final Plat.
3) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland
Conservation Act, and abide by all conditions of approval established in the approved
Valley Branch Watershed District permit.
4) The applicant shall be responsible to address all review comments submitted by
Washington County described in the review memorandum received from the County
dated July 7, 2015. In addition, the applicant shall obtain all necessary right-of-way
permitting from Washington County.
5) The Landscape Plan shall be revised to include 6 additional trees to fulfill the City's
Landscaping Requirements. In addition, the plant material that is on top of utilities shall
be moved to comply with the direction of the City Engineer per his memorandum dated
July 8, 2015. Finally, prior to installation of plant material, the plan shall be reviewed by
the City's Landscape Consultant for final approval.
6) The applicant must enter into an agreement with the City to own, operate and maintain
the private storm water facilities on the property. The storm water maintenance
agreement must be recorded with the Final Plat.
7) Prior to the issuance of grading/building permits, all review comments of the Fire Chief
must be addressed by the applicant.
8) The applicant shall obtain the necessary permitting from Washington County to install a
new septic system to serve the property prior to the City issuing and building permits for
the remodel of the home.
9) Any future expansion of the site, including plans to install a crematorium, shall be
reviewed and approved by the City.
10) All lighting installed on the Halcyon Cemetery site must comply with the City's dark
skies ordinance.
2
Resolution 2015-59
11) Any alterations to the existing single family home shall be reviewed for conformance to
the City's design standards.
12) All transplanted trees transplanted on the site shall include a 2-year warranty period to
ensure survival. Any trees that do not survive the two-year period shall be replaced.
13) The Landscape Plan shall be amended to add plantings along the Eastern and Northern
property lines consistent with screening requirements specified in 154.258.F of the City
Code.
14) Annual meeting minutes, including annual financial reporting and status of the permanent
care trust fund, shall be submitted to the City on an annual basis.
Passed and duly adopted this 21' day of July, 2015 by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elmo, Minnesota.
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
Resolution 2015-59
MEMORANDUM
Date: ]uk/8,2015
ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara Gehe,en,�E.
Jack Griffin, P.E.
Ryan StempskiP.[
Chad Isakson, P.E.
651.300.4261
651.300.4264
651.300.4267
651.300.4283
To: Nick Johnson, City Planner Re: Halcyon Cemetery
Preliminary and Final Plan Review
[c: Ky|eK|att Planning Director
From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer
An engineering review has been completed forthe Halcyon Cemetery Prelim inary-FinalMaLand[onstnuctionP|anx.
The submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Loucks Associates, dated January 5, 2015:
° Site Plan and Preliminary Plat dated June D\lU1S.
° Construction Plans for Parking, Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control and Utilities dated June 17, 2015.
° Tree Preservation Plandand Landscape Plan dated June 17,2OlS.
^ StormvvaterManagement Plan dated May 14'IO1S.
STATUS/FINDINGS: Engineering has prepared the following review comments and conditions for Final Plat:
PRELIMINARY/ FINAL PLAT
• The Final Plat must be revised toinclude an additional ZSfeet R/VValong [5AH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) as
required by Washington County (7Sfeet from [SAH 17centedine).
• An 80 foot R/W with 10 foot utility easements immediately outside of the R/W is the recommended
minimum corridor plan for S[y" Street as a Municipal State Aid major collector roadway,
� The Final Plat must include an additional S feet R/VValong 50*Street so that the 50`^5treet R/VV
/satotal of8Ofeet. The proposed plat of3Sfeet must berevised tu4Ofeet.
� The Final Plat must include a 10 foot utility easement along the full length of the south property
line, located just outside of the 50t» Street R/VV.
• The Final Plat must include additional R/W at the intersection of CSAH 17 and 501h Street to accommodate
a sight line triangle similar to the sight triangle at the southeast corner of this intersection.
• The Final Plat must be contingent upon the applicant providing written documentation demonstrating
adequate wastewater management facilities for the proposed land use. Minimum documentation must
include:
� If the existing system is to continue in use, submit to the City a compliance inspection report that
has been reviewed and approved by Washington County.
~ Provide water use data used to size the current and secondary ISTS systems for the property,
� Provide percolation testing indicating that the proposed locations are suitable for the proposed
use.
� Provide to the City a copy ofWashington [uunty's /ST3system approvals, including conditions,
PAGE 1 of 2
� The storm water ponds, infiltration basins and all storm sewer are to be privately owned and maintained
by the property owner with this responsibility recorded to run with the property ownership, These
facilities have not been designed tomeet City design standards for storm sewer orstorm water
management facilities. The Final Plat must be conditioned upon the applicant executing an agreement to
own, operate and maintain the storm sewer and storm water facilities proposed on the site and recording
this agreement with the property.
CONSTRUCTION PLANS: The following engineering review comments must be addressed priortoany construction
work nnthe property,
° Provide plan notes on Sheet 0-1, C3-2 and C4-1 calling out measures to protect both the existing and
proposed dminf|phd sites throughout the construction process.
• Sheet [4'1' Utility Plan: Add note that all storm sewer pipe and storm water facilities are to be privately
owned and maintained.
• Sheet C4-1, Utility Plan: Update all Plan Notes to be pertinent and consistent with the proposed Utility
Plan. Generic notes appear tubeinconsistent orirrelevant tothis project.
• Replace all City Standard Details and Plan Notes with the updated Details and Plan Notes dated February
2015.
• Sheet C8-1' [k/i| Details: Remove details 3003 and 3013. The City Standard Detail No. 605 and 604
respectively must beused asshown onSheet [8'I
• The Construction Plans must be updated with field verified utility locations with the plans resubmitted for
engineering review and approval prior to the start of construction. The applicant must complete a Gopher
State One call and utility locate and field survey all utilities to finalize the construction plans. All notes
referring to utility information being provided by others must be removed from the plans.
° The Tree Protection detail on Sheet C1-1 and Sheet 1-1-0 must be replaced with the City standard detail 904.
LANDSCAPE PLANS: This engineering review does not include a review of the proposed Landscape Plans, however
the following comments are noted.
* The landscape plan must be revised to provide maintenance access for the storm water pond adjacent to
the entrance driveway.
• The landscape plan must be revised to relocate trees planted directly over the proposed utilities.
Revisions must bemade toaddress these conflicts tomaintain aminimum Sfoot separation.
PAGE 2 of 2
Station #1
'510 Laverne Ave. No.
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
651-770-5006
LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT
July 7, 2015
Review of the PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT — CEMETARY
Station #2
4259 Jamaca Ave. No.
Lake Elmo, MN. 55042
651-779-8882
Following a review of the packet provided, I have questions and concerns related to the following:
• Hydrant placement/spacing. This being a commercial property, we must adhere to the 350' spacing. I
did not see any indication of hydrants on the drawings I had.
FD will also need to approve the placement of the FDC (Fire Department Cormection) as it relates to the
fire sprinkler suppression system.
• Designation of "Fire Lanes" and possibly "No Parking" arca to ensure proper access for emergency
vehicles to all areas at all times.
• Adequate overhead clearance of driveway canopy for ambulance and fire vehicles.
• Proper turning radius's at all corners to allow emergency vehicles to access all areas of the facility.
Sincerely,
Greg Malmquist, Fi e Chief
"Proudly Serving Neighbors & Friends"
Public Works Department
Donald J, Theisen, P.E.
Director
Wayne *. Sandberg, P.s
ouptyowector/muntyEngineer
July 7, 2015
Nick Johnson
City Planner
City ofLake Elmo
38O0Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, K8N55O42
RE: Washington County comments on the plans and plat for Halcyon
Dear Mr, Johnson,
Thank you for providing VVmshnobxn County with the plans and plat for Halcyon. Based on
review of the plans, we offer the following comments and recommendations to consider as you
process this application through the City n{Lake Elmo:
The plans identify a retaining vvaU at the west edge of the parking lot along the future
hgNt-of-wayline ofCOAH1T/LakmElmo Avenue. |norder toconstruct the retaining
wall, work from the county road right-of-waymAUbeneoennmry./\iso.theretainin0waU
must be located outside the road right-of-way so it will be necessary to stake the
property line to verify the location.
8detailed construction plan set ofthe wall should be prepared and submitted with o
Washington County Righd'Vf-WayPermit application.
The existing driveway access onLake Elmo Avenue should beremoved 000condition
ofapproval. The plan toremove the driveway can beincluded inthe permit application
noted above.
The Plat ofHalcyon isincluded inthe application package,The final plat should
include the additional 25 feet required for C8AM 17/Lmke Elmo Avenue. Currently,
there io1OOfeet of right-of-way (5Ofeet from the centedine).The Washington County
Comprehensive Plan 2030, Right -of -Way requirement is 150 feet (75 feet from the
Or The developer mthe city must submit the drainage report and calculations to our office
for review of any downstream impacts to the county drainage system. Along with the
drainage calculations, wowill request written conclusions that the volume and rate of
stormwater run-off into the county right of way will not increase as part of the project,
Acopy ofthe Valley Branch Watershed Permit shall besubmitted hmour office,
11U0UMyemnRoad North, Sti|kwater, Minnesota 55082-9573
Phone� 651-4304300 ^ Fax" 851430-4350 ^ TTY 651430-6246
vmwwzo.wmnhmO1onmn.uo
Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action
Halcyon
July 7, 2015
Page 2
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this plan If you have any questions, please contact
me at 651-430-4362 or ann pung-tervvedo(E0co.wasliinqtoil,tutl us For permit applications,
please contact Carol Hanson at Carol.hansonaco.washingtonoin.us.
S' cerely,
Ann Pung-Terwedo
Senior Planner
C: Carol Hanson, Office Specialist
R/Plat Reviews/City of Lake Elmo/Halcyon 7-7-2015
VALLEY BRANCH ATERSHED DISTRICT
PERMIT APPLICATION
TO Be COMPLETED BY VBWD:
PERMIT NUMBER 2015-04
PERMIT FEE RECEIVED $1,000 (2,347 still
DATE RECEIVED December 30, 2014 required)
Return application to
John Hanson
Barr Engineering Company
Engineers for the Valley Branch Watershed District
4700 West 77"' Street
Edina, MN 55435-4803
A permit fee shall accompany this permit, unless waived by the Board of Managers,
(Governmental Bodies are not required to pay a fee.)
Project information
Name of Project:
Purpose of Project:
1-4 C %/ Ai
Project Location (street address, if known; otherwise,
major intersection):
/ 0 --
3'0 45%)
City or Township: .4 04.4 ic 0
Legal Description (proof of ownership required):
PID:
Section: Township: Range:
Project Timeline: Start Date: 2
Completion Date: et-i,
Authorized Agent Information
Name:
I Business Name:
Address:
Fax:
f Email:
City, State, Zip:
Phone:
Applicant Information
Name:
C 4C 0- PRoPtre ES
Address:
1 89 0
R
City, State, Zip:
Sr to 41
Phone: 6 07 3 0 8,
Fax:
Email;
3.3 9 ct .4 /4 CN Nee
Owner Information
(it different than Applicant)
Name: LE 0 3 0 4.41
Address:
44140 Rits)LR —S
City, State, Zip:
"re 41 Mill (11.5790 /
Phone: ja 4.1
Fax:
Email:
Once a Valley Branch Watershed District permit has been approved, the permit conditions will attached to the back of this form.
By signing this permit application, the permit applicant, his/her agent, and owner (hereinafter "Permittee")
shall abide by all the conditions set by the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD). All work which
violates the terms of the permit by reason of presenting a serious threat of soil erosion, sedimentation, or an
adverse effect upon water quality or quantity, or violating any rule of the VBWD may result in the VBWD
issuing a Stop Work Order which shall immediately cause the work on the project related to the permit to
cease and desist, All work on the project shall cease until the permit conditions are met and approved by the
VBWD representatives. In the event Permittee contests the Stop Work Order issued by the VBWD,
Permittee shall attend a VBWD Board of Managers meeting and discuss the project. Any attorney fees,
costs, or other expenses incurred on behalf of the VBWD in enforcing the terms of the permit shall be the
sole expense of the permit applicant. Costs shall be payable from the permit applicant's permit fee. If said
fees exceed the permit amount, the Permittee shall have ten (10) days from the date of receipt of the invoice
from the VBWD to pay for the cost incurred in enforcing the permit, by which to pay the VBWD for said
costs. If costs are not paid within the ten (10) days, the VBWD will draw on the permit applicant's surety,
The Permittee agrees to be bound by the terms of the final permit and conditions required by the VBWD for
approval of the permit. The permit applicant further acknowledges that he/she has the authority to bind the
owner of the property and/or any entity performing the work on the property pursuant to the terms of the
VBWD permit, and shall be responsible for complying with the terms of the VBWD permit.
Signatures (Required):
Applicant/Date Owner (If different than Applicantgtiate'
e 's Authorized Agent/Date
tAlcoL•1 F-ElcHER • LlAVD ',,ICHECK • DONALD 1EEL • DALE. e0Er..!,.,! • HAT' LL,7.-K•51r.IC,R
VALLEY BRANCH ;NACTERSHEO DISTRIC1 • I' 0 E0X 80, • AKE Et. MO, 1.,W4NES.01.4 55042-0536
vewo,v1J';',1:1010
Plans shall be revised amPor calculations shall be updated to show the site will conform to VBWD storniwater runoff -
rate control standards on the west side,
2. Specifications for the needed soil corrections at the proposed infiltration basin shall be provided for VBWD approval
prior to construction. The hiofiltration detail on Sheet C8-3 should not allow the use of native soil that is clayey in the
planting medium.
3. The plans should be updated to include details of OSA, and the elevations should he consistent with the HydroCAD
model for Pond 10P.
4. This pennit is not valid until a maintenance agreement in the general format of Appendix B of the VBWD Rules is
submitted to and approved by the VBWD Attorney.
5. The required surety and fees shall be submitted prior to construction.
61. This permit is not transferabfe, 4
7. This permit is subject to obtaining all other permits required by governmental agencies havrng jurisdiction (including an
NIPDES permit). ,
8. The VBWD Engineer and Inspector shall be notified at least 3 days prior to commencement of work.
9. Erosion controls shall be installed prior to the commencement of grading operations and must be maintained throughout
the construction period until turf is established. Additional erosion controls may be required, as directed by the VBWD
Inspector or VBWD Engineer.
10. The folloWing additional erosion controls shall be implemented on the site:
a. All proposed slopes 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (3H: I V) should be covered with erosion -control blanket.
b. Silt fence should follow existing contours as closely as feasible to limit the potential for gully erosion along the
edges.
c. Any sediment that collects in storni sewers, ponds, or other water management features shall be removed,
d. Street sweeping shall he performed if sediment collects on streets.
11. To prevent soil compaction, the proposed infiltration areas shall he staked off and marked during construction to prevent
heavy equipment and traffic from traveling over it. If infiltration facilities are in place during construction activities,
sediment and runoff shall be kept away from the facility, using practices such as diversion berms and vegetation around
the facility's perimeter. Infiltration facilities shall not be excavated to final grade until the contributing drainage area has
been constructed and fully stabilized. The final phase of excavation shall remove al] accumulated sediment and be done
by light, tracked equipment to avoid compaction of the basin floor. To provide a well-acrated, highly porous surface, the
soils of the basin floor shall be loosened to a depth of at least 5 feet to a maximum compaction of 85% standard proctor
density prior to planting. The upper 10 inches of soil shall be tilled prior to planting.
12. All disturbed areas shall be vegetated within 14 days of final grading.
13. The applicant is responsible for removal of all temporary erosion -control measures, including silt fence, upon
establishment of permanent vegetation at the project site as determined by the VBWD Engineer and/or Inspector.
14, Valley Branch Watershed District shall be granted drainage easements which Cover land adjacent to stormwater
management facilities, wetlands, and lowlands up to their 100-year flood elevations and all ditches, storm sewers. and
maintenance access to the stormwater management facilities.
15. The required drainage easements and access easements shall be recorded with the Washington County Recorder's Office.
16. Return or allowed expiration of any remaining surety and permit closeout is dependent on the permit holder providing
proof that all required documents have been recorded (including but not limited to easements) and providing as -built
drawings that show that the project was constructed as approved by the Managers and in conformance with the VBWD
Rules and Regulations.
Approved: June 25, 2015
Signatpn
Vaky Branch Watershed District
Note; The grant of this permit in no way purports to permit acts, which may be prohibited by other governmental agencies.
Title
Pine
040!
..„
127pp
t. 4
4
' ,1309
759
WoiPdtitiry
eenee eene""
FIGURE 3:
EXISTING AADT
Transportation Plan
2030 Comprehensive Plan
City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota
Map date: April 2009
Prepared by:
LNOrruLERS- ARCH I ECTS • Pl. ANNEt
lge
210 .509
9900 4799
1300'
1.4.1 d I ION L1,4111111,
Mfdddythrdrddd mar, en vele n dda dot
Nur .td, Th. ,d,d, dualpIdIrdd
and Iniendabotr on vixdads Ode couldw add My oThdod and
Odd ,der.«
d:
77000
Oak
/ Park
Heights
Baytown
Twp.
6070
Afton
LEGEND
City Boundary - Roadways
Parcels Lakes
EXISTING AADT
< 5,000
5,000 - 9,999
50,000 - 99,999
10,000 - 24,999 ,i,'"*" 100,000 OR >
FIGURE 8:
2030 PROJECTED VOLUMES
IMPROVED SCENARIO
Transportation Plan
2030 Comprehensive Plan
City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota
Map date: April 2009
Prepared by:
LEGEND
City Boundary -
Parcels
Roadways
Lakes
2030 PROJECTED VOLUMES
IMPROVED SCENARIO
< 5,000
5,000 - 9,999
10,000 - 24,999 c°,,..:cars,;;::....,
25,000 - 49,999
000 - 99,999
00,000 OR >
.1su+ nnwn,o»t. n„t .,,,V, ,a,xi
,nGrnil„d Ion ..I ae nnr, fM»mul, �sucon,Mt„fi�n a[nrrv,hir.
A!,LL ihk,,mJ4pn hcri, rvrw:,+4 L,, un,ntr unJ ata,.Hkri+.�mi �"'1'a tTusi„Nil,n,wr,.n,r�u„nll.fluio t..,niw�yv, nct r.,rtexti!/stt {,L,.
OSIO?nrr,utrm
'ffir ciTy (A=
ME Et MO
ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 7/13/2015
AGENDA ITEM: 4A — PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2015-06
Halcyon Cemetery — Preliminary and Final Plat
Nick Johnson, City Planner
Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
Ann Pung-Terwedo, Washington County
Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing to consider a Preliminary and Final
Plat application request from Mr. Lee Rossow for a cemetery to be platted on a 10-acre parcel
located at the northeast corner of Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) and 50th Street North. Staff is
recommending approval of the request subject to compliance with 8 conditions as noted in this
report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Lee Rossow, 11050 50" Street North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042
Property Owners: Lee Rossow, 11050 50th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042
Location: Part of Section 01, Township 29 North, Range 21 West in Lake Elmo,
immediately north of 50th Street and immediately east of Lake Elmo Avenue
(CSAH 17). PID Number: 01.029.21.33.0003
Request: Application for preliminary and final plat approval of a cemetery to be called
Halcyon.
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Single Family Detached, Rural Residential (RR) zoning
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North — single family home (RR); west — single family home
(RR); south — Agricultural (RR); east — single family residential
(RR) and Municipal Well Site #4.
Comprehensive Plan: Rural Area Development
History: Sketch Plan review by Planning Commission on 11/24/2014,
Deadlinelbr Action:
Application Complete — 6/17/2015
60 Day Deadline — 8/17/2015
Extension Letter Mailed — No
120 Day Deadline — 10/16/2015
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM
Applicable Regulations:
Chapter 153 — Subdivision Regulations
Article IX — Rural Districts
Article V — Off Street Parking
Article VI — Landscaping and Tree Preservation
§150.270 Storm Water, Erosion, and Sediment
REQUEST DETAILS
The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Mr. Lee Rossow to plat a 10-acre cemetery at
11050 501" Street North to be called Halcyon. Under State Law, cemeteries must be filed and
recorded with the County. In order for the cemetery plat to be filed and recorded at the County, the
City must approve a final plat for the cemetery. The Planning Commission is asked to hold a public
hearing on the proposed cemetery plat. The proposed cemetery would be located at the northeast
corner of Lake Elmo Ave. and 501" St. North. The 10-acre parcel has historically been used as a
single family residential home.
It should be noted that a Sketch Plan of the Halcyon Cemetery was reviewed by the Planning
Commission on November 24th of 2014. At the Sketch Plan review level, the City completed a high-
level review of the proposal to inform a future preliminary/final plat application. There is no formal
approval issued by the City at the time of Sketch Plan review. According to standard subdivision
procedures, a typical plat will go through both a preliminary and final plat review process. However,
it is possible to proceed with preliminary and final plat review concurrently for plats of more limited
scope and size. In the judgment of staff, the review of the Halcyon Cemetery represents such an
application of more limited scope/size where the review of preliminary and final plans should be
permitted to proceed in a concurrent fashion. Therefore, the applicant has prepared a final plat and
construction plans for consideration by the City.
The existing condition of the property is that of a single family residential home with an accessory
building on the eastern side of the property. It should be noted that the existing home has access off
both 50th Street and Lake Elmo Avenue. The proposed cemetery would eliminate the access on Lake
Elmo Ave., improving the access spacing related to driveways on the County arterial road. Access to
the proposed cemetery would be accommodated off of 501" Street North approximately 270 feet east
of Lake Elmo Ave. (CSAH 17). As part of the proposed cemetery use, the existing home and
accessory building would be repurposed to support the cemetery use. The home would be used as an
administrative office, caretaker quarters and gathering space for the bereaved. The existing accessory
building would be utilized as a maintenance garage. In addition to these existing improvements, the
applicant is planning to construct private storm water management facilities along the eastern portion
of the site to address the additional impervious surface. It should be noted that these facilities have
been designed to comply with the rules of the City of Lake Elmo and the Valley Branch Watershed
District. With regards to the cemetery, the applicant is planning a total of 5 sections or areas to serve
as burial sites or columbarium/mausoleums. Sections 1, 2 and 5 are within the planned Phase 1 area
of the cemetery, while Sections 3 and 4 are in the planned Phase 2 area of the cemetery. The options
for burial or interment include in -ground burials, mausoleums, columbarium, in -ground cremation
and estate lots. At full capacity, the 5 sections could host the remains of 1,995 persons according to
the site plan. Finally, there is also a 58-stall parking area planned for the cemetery. The parking lot
would be utilized to accommodate larger parties for various burial ceremonies or rituals.
As far as utilities are concerned, the existing building will be served by a private septic system. The
applicant has completed a compliance inspection and submitted to Washington County. The
inspection revealed that the existing system is not compliant per Washington County ordinance.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM
Therefore, the applicant will need to construct a new septic system in consultation with Washington
County Health Department (Condition #8). With regards to water, the site does have access to the
City's municipal water system within 50th Street. Water service will be extended to the site to
provide proper fire suppression for the home once it is converted to serve the cemetery use. It should
also be noted that there is an existing well on the site. It is the understanding of the City that the well
is to be protected and maintained for irrigation purposes.
PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES
The Halcyon Cemetery parcel is guided Rural Area Development (RAD) according to the City's
Comprehensive Plan. The existing zoning of the parcel is Rural Residential (RR). According to
Article XI — Rural Districts of the Zoning Code, cemeteries are considered a permitted use within the
Agricultural (A) and Rural Residential (RR) zoning districts. Therefore, the proposed use of a
cemetery on this property is in compliance with the City's Zoning Code. It should also be noted that
the Zoning Code does not contain any specific development standards for the cemetery use.
Based on Staffs review of the preliminary and final plat, the applicant has demonstrated compliance
with all applicable code requirements at the level of detail that is required for a plat, As noted
previously, the plat approval from the City is not required as a result of splitting the parcel into 4 or
more lots, but rather as an approval of the proposed use prior to the filing of the property as a
cemetery with Washington County. However, the platting procedures do allow the City and County
to obtain the necessary right-of-way to serve both Lake Elmo Avenue and 50th Street.
With regards to parkland dedication, the Subdivision Ordinance does require that residential and
commercial plats provide parkland dedication based upon a percentage or fee set under the City's Fee
Schedule. Residential developments typically require a dedication percentage in between 7-10%,
whereas the City's Fee Schedule require $4,500/acre for commercial development be provided for
parkland fees. In researching the cemetery use, staff has determined that the use is technically
defined as a public cemetery association, meaning that the cemetery is owned privately but is open to
the public. As a result of this definition and the fact that private cemeteries are considered a quasi -
public use, staff does not believe that the City can require parkland dedication fees for the proposed
use. The cemetery use is neither residential nor commercial, and thus staff is not recommending to
impose any parkland dedication fees.
Finally, it should be noted that City staff has received some inquiries of concern from some
surrounding property owners about the cemetery use. In speaking with the surrounding property
owners, the general concerns staff has received relate to traffic, the effect on property values and the
means to maintain the cemetery into perpetuity. Staff has completed some general research to look
into these concerns:
• Traffic. With regards to increased traffic generated by the cemetery, the property is located
at the intersection of a County arterial road and City major collector road. These facilities, as
opposed to local residential streets, should be able to accommodate any increased traffic
generated from the cemetery use. According to the City's Transportation Plan, the average
daily traffic of 50th Street in 2009 was 500 trips, whereas the projected volume on 50111 Street
in 2030 is 1500 trips per day. Given this lower average daily traffic as of 2009, it is unlikely
that the cemetery use would generate the amount of traffic that would come within any
proximity of the available capacity. Lake Elmo average daily traffic as of 2009 was 3100
vehicle trips per day. The projected traffic volume for 2030 is 9200 vehicle trips per day. The
applicant has estimated that daily travel to the cemetery will be extremely limited, with peak
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM
4
travel resulting from scheduled funerals on an infrequent basis. While staff understands the
concern over additional traffic generated by the proposed cetnetery, the fact that the subject
property is located at the intersection of an arterial road and major collector provides
assurance to staff that the use would be ideally located. In the judgment of staff, there is
adequate capacity on Lake Elmo Ave. and 50th Street.
Property Values. Staff has received two concerns about reduced property values as a result
of the proposed cemetery. Staff has conducted some research into this concern. Based on the
limited research conducted, staff is not confident that there is a documented or proven
correlation between property values and cemeteries. In researching the matter, the
connection between cemeteries and property values remains inconclusive. There are
academic studies and anecdotal articles that fall on both sides of the argument. For the
benefit of the Planning Commission, staff has attached the article (Attachment #9) that
presented the most comprehensive look at the effect of cemeteries on property values based
on the research conducted.
Permanent Care of the Cemetery. One resident that contact staff inquired about how the
cemetery would be well maintained into the future. In researching this question, staff found
that some cemeteries depending on location and population are required to maintain a
Pernianent Care and Improvement Fund. Whether or not the Halcyon Cemetery is required
to establish this fund is undetennined at this time. However, the applicant has noted in their
narrative that they intend to utilize a percentage of funds from every burial and interment to
pay a permanent care and maintenance fund, which would be established and run by the
cemetery association. The narrative notes that this fund will be in compliance with State
Statutes. According to the applicant, this fund would be utilized to care for the grounds and
complete capital projects and improvements to the cemetery.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
City Staff has reviewed the proposed preliminary and final plat for the Halcyon Cemetery. It should
be noted that the applicant chose to wait to submit the plat application until the Valley Branch
Watershed Permit was approved and issued, which occurred on June 25, 2015. During the course of
these review, staff has evaluated the proposed plans according to City ordinances and engineering
standards. In completing the review, there are some elements of the plat that remain in conflict with
City, County or Valley Branch Watershed District standards, which must still be addressed or
corrected by the applicant. In general, the proposed plat will meet all applicable City requirements
for conditional approval, and any deficiencies or additional work that is needed is noted as part of the
review record.
The City has received a detailed list of comments from the City Engineer, Fire Chief and Washington
County concerning the proposed cemetery, all of which are attached for consideration by the
Commission.
In addition to the general comments that have been provided in the preceding sections of this report,
Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the issues and comments related to the
following discussion areas as well:
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan for this area. The subject property is guided Rural Area Development
(RAD), which correlates to Agricultural and Rural Residential land uses. Under the
Comprehensive Plan, cemetery use is not in conflict with this land use guidance.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM
5
Zoning. The zoning of the subject property is Rural Residential (RR). Under this zoning
designation, cemeteries are a permitted use according to the Zoning Code.
Subdivision Requirements. The City's Subdivision Ordinance details the process for platting
and other pertinent design standards. The majority of the standards are not applicable as the
parcel is not being subdivided in the manner that is typical of other development. Staff, as
well as the City Engineer, have not identified any existing conflicts with the City's
Subdivision Ordinance. However, staff has found that additional public right-of-way may
need to be provided on both 50th Street and Lake Elmo Avenue. The requirements to provide
public right-of-way is found in the Subdivision Ordinance.
Infrastructure. No public infrastructure is proposed to be constructed as part of the cemetery
use. The wastewater facilities will be private. The existing home will be connected to the
City water system via a water service. In addition, the Fire Chief will be requesting a hydrant
to be located on the property. Nevertheless, the water line and hydrant will be privately
owned and maintained. Finally, the storm water management facilities will also be privately
owned and maintained. The City will require the landowner or association to enter into a
maintenance agreement for the stonn water facilities.
Wetlands. The landowner has completed a wetland delineation as part of the permitting
process for the Valley Branch Watershed. The applicant will be required to meet all the rules
and regulations of the Wetland Conservation Act and Valley Branch Watershed District
(Condition #3).
Landscaping. Staff has reviewed the landscape plan submitted by the applicant and found the
plan to be in general conformance with the City's ordinance. However, the applicant must
provide 6 additional new trees to meet the City's quantity standards. Aside from this issue,
the plant material provided meets the City standards for variety and plant size. It should also
be noted that the applicant is proposing to transplant many of the existing trees on the site. In
combination with the new plant material, there should be a fairly significant amount of
landscaping on the 10-acre site. Staff was unable to have the plan reviewed by a registered
Landscape Architect prior to consideration by the City. Therefore, Staff would recommend
that the plan be reviewed for final approval prior to the installation of the plant material on
the site. Finally, it should be noted that the City Engineer has identified some areas where
plant material or trees are located on top of proposed utilities. The Landscape Plan should be
revised to provide separation between the proposed utilities and plant material. These
recommendations are included in a recommended condition of approval (Condition #5).
Tree Preservation Plan. Staff has reviewed the Tree Preservation Plan and found it to be in
conformance with the City's regulations pertaining to tree preservation for sites undergoing
development activity. The total number of caliper inches on the site according to the survey is
1,550 caliper inches of significant trees. According to the Tree Preservation Ordinance, an
applicant is allowed to remove 30% of significant trees on the site before tree replacement
schedule is initiated. 30% of 1,550 total caliper inches is 465 caliper inches. The applicant is
proposing to remove 340 caliper inches of significant trees, which is below the threshold for
tree replacement. It should be noted that the applicant is proposing to transplant a significant
amount of existing trees on the site to install mature plantings from an early point. Under the
Tree Preservation Ordinance, transplanted trees do not count towards the total tree removals.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM
6
Staff finds the submitted tree preservation plan to be in conformance with the City's
ordinance.
Off -Street Parking. The proposed site plan for the cemetery shows 58 parking stalls. The
City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance (§154.210) includes the required number of off-street
parking stalls for various uses. As for cemeteries, the ordinance does not provide concrete
direction, but rather states that parking should be provided in an amount determined by the
Planning Director. Planning staff has reviewed the overall amount of parking on the plan and
found it to be more than adequate. The amount of parking provided in the southern parking
lot should prevent cars from parking on 50th Street or Lake Elmo Ave., both of which are
currently designated no parking. Should an overflow parking be necessary, it is likely it could
be accommodated within the various drive lanes that circulate the cemetery. In the judgment
of staff, the amount of parking provided is more than adequate. Finally, it should be noted
that the parking stall dimensions meet the City's minimum standards per the ordinance.
City Engineer Review. The City Engineer has completed a review of the proposed cemetery
and submitted his review comments in a memorandum dated July 8, 2015. With regards to
the plat, he notes that 50th Street North is a major collector road, requiring 80 total feet of
right-of-way. The plat currently shows 35 feet granted on the north side of 50th Street. He is
requesting an additional 5 feet to establish the correct amount of right-of-way for collector
roads. In addition, he is requesting additional right-of-way at the intersection to
accommodate the sight line triangle. Finally, he is also requesting that a 10-foot drainage and
utility easement be provided on the southern property line. This additional right-of-way and
easement should not impact the proposed improvements on the site. Should any
improvement be located in the drainage and utility easement, an easement encroachment
agreement may be approved to allow fencing and other such improvements to be located
there. In addition to the review comments on right-of-way, the engineer is requiring that the
storm water management system be owned and maintained privately. The storm water
facilities have not been designed to meet City standard. These facilities must be owned,
operated and maintained privately. The City will expect a maintenance agreement to ensure
proper operation of the facilities. Finally, the City Engineer has also noted several revisions
and additions to the Construction Plan sheets. These review comments are mostly detail and
plan notes that provide greater accuracy and clarity on the plans. Staff is recommending that
the Engineer's review comments be adopted as a condition of approval (Condition #2).
These modifications should be completed prior to the City executing the Final Plat.
Fire Department Review. The Fire Chief has reviewed the proposed cemetery and identified
some areas of further review. One request included additional information about the location
of hydrants on the property. In addition, the Fire Chief is requesting additional information
related to the movement of emergency vehicle on the site. Staff is recommending that the
concerns identified by the Fire Chief be addressed prior to the issuance of grading or building
permits (Condition #7)
Washington County Review. County Staff has reviewed the cemetery plat and responded
with a review memorandum dated July 7, 2015. Within the memo, County staff correctly
notes that the amount of public right-of-way for Lake Elmo Ave. shown on the final plat is
insufficient. In order to address this deficiency, an additional 25 feet must be provided. Staff
is confident that the additional amount of right-of-way requested can be accommodated, as
the Final Construction Plans include the correct amount of right-of-way, while the plat does
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM
7
not. In other words, the additional right-of-way should not result in redesign of the site. In
addition to the right-of-way issue, County staff notes that a right-of-way permit will be
needed for the removal of the driveway and grading work associated with the retaining wall.
In addition, the applicant must submit drainage calculations to review downstream impacts in
the County ditch. Staff is recommending that all requirements and modifications identified in
the County review memorandum be adopted as a condition of approval (Condition #4).
Watershed District Review. The project area lies within the Valley Branch Watershed
District (VBWD). The Valley Branch Watershed District reviewed the proposed cemetery at
their June 2.5th meeting. At the meeting, the Valley Branch Board of Managers approved the
permit for the cemetery with several conditions (see Attachment #7). It should be noted that
the applicant must meet all the rules of the Wetland Conservation Act and the conditions of
the VBWD permit. Staff is recommending a condition of approval (Condition #3) that these
requirements be fulfilled.
Based on the above Staff report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat
with 8 conditions intended to address the outstanding issues noted above and to further clarify the
City's expectations in order for the developer to move forward with a final plat. The recommended
conditions are as follows:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1) The applicant shall revise the Final Plat to accommodate all required right-of-way on Lake
Elmo Avenue and 50'1' Street North as documented in review memorandums submitted by
Washington County and the City Engineer.
2) All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in a review letter
dated July 8, 2015 shall be incorporated into the plans prior to the City's execution of the
Final Plat.
3) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland
Conservation Act, and abide by all conditions of approval established in the approved Valley
Branch Watershed District permit.
4) The applicant shall be responsible to address all review comments submitted by Washington
County described in the review memorandum received from the County dated July 7, 2015.
In addition, the applicant shall obtain all necessary right-of-way pennitting from Washington
County.
5) The Landscape Plan shall be revised to include 6 additional trees to fulfill the City's
Landscaping Requirements. In addition, the plant material that is on top of utilities shall be
moved to comply with the direction of the City Engineer per his memorandum dated July 8,
2015. Filially, prior to installation of plant material, the plan shall be reviewed by the City's
Landscape Consultant for final approval.
6) The applicant must enter into an agreement with the City to own, operate and maintain the
private storm water facilities on the property. The storm water maintenance agreement must
be recorded with the Final Plat.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM
7) Prior to the issuance of grading/building permits, all review comments of the Fire Chief must
be addressed by the applicant.
8) The applicant shall obtain the necessary permitting from Washington County to install a new
septic system to serve the property prior to the City issuing and building permits for the
remodel of the home.
DRAFT FINDINGS
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to
the proposed Halcyon Cemetery Final P1at:
• That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan
and the Future Land Use Map for this area.
• That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's RR — Rural Residential zoning district.
• That the Halcyon Cemetery complies with the City's subdivision ordinance.
• That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat meets other City zoning ordinances, such as
landscaping, tree preservation, erosion and sediment control, off-street parking and other
ordinances, except where noted in this report herein.
• That the Halcyon Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards,
except where noted, provided the plans are updated to address the City Engineer's comments
documented in a letter dated July 8, 2015.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Halcyon Cemetery
Final Plat with the 8 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff report. Suggested motion:
"Move to recomniend approval of the Halcyon Cemetery Final P1at with the 8 conditions o
approval as drafted by Staff based on the findings offact listed in the Staff Report."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
7. Application Forms and Narrative
3. Preliminary and Final Plat and Plans
4. City Engineer Review Memorandum, dated 7/8/15
5. Fire Chief Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15
6. Washington County Review Memorandum, dated 7/7/15
7. Valley Branch Watershed District Permit
8. Lake Elmo Transportation Plan, Existing and Projected Traffic Volumes
9. Cemetery Proximity and Single Family Home Price Report (V Half)
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM
9
INCLUDED IN THE ELECTRONIC PACKET BUT NOT PROVIDED IN HARD COPY:
1. 2nd Half of Cemetery Proximity and Single Family lime Price Report — Supporting Data
2. Information Handout About Cemeteries from League of Minnesota Cities
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Introduction ....... ..... Staff
- Report by Staff ...... ....... Staff
- Questions from the Commission ................ ........ Chair & Commission Members
- Open the Public Hearing .......... ..... ..... Chair
- Close the Public Hearing..................................................................................Chair
- Discussion by the Commission ..............................Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission..................................... Chair & Commission Members
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM
Location Map: Proposed Halcyon Cemetery
11050 50th Street N.
Data Source: Washington County, MN
11-17-2014
0 150 300 600 Feet
11 II I i 1 i
1 "=300'
Date Received:
Received by:
LU File
ir (7.1'1'1"
LAKE ELMO
PRELI INARYP T APPLICATION
Applicant: Lac
Address: 9 0 Rice. ..57-R04F
Phone #: G5-7. -•e - 9 sr
Email Address: 33 9 a.. 2 A<•// 41,e.
Fee Owner:
Address:
Phone #:
Email Address:
5
Property Location (Address and Complete (long) Legal Description:
06-0�o r,# right r
General information of proposed subdivision:
C 7— AL PC „V
Conducted pre -application meeting with Staff?
Yes 0 No
651-747-3900
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that 1 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:
Signature of Fee Owner
Date: F 47/5-
siame Date:
S:\ FORMS \Plorning Dept Forms - Permls - Forms - Current\Preliminary Plat Application only 10.7.13.docx Revised
311012014 2;31 PM
Date Received:
Received By
LU Filet
P1
Applicant:
Address:
Phone #:
Email Address:
Fee Owner:
Address:
Phone #:
Email Address:
AL PLA T APPLICAT 0
44,4E. Rip5ec-0
5120 Rice
63/ - 3or
729 cr,_ A 4 ovit.
THE CITY Of
LAKE ELMO
651-747-3900
3800 Laveme Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
SA) in
Property Location (Address and Complete (long) Legal Description:
0.6- o 77"
General information of proposed subdivision:
cd
7-Igy
TRCE A)
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. 1 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:
Fee Owner Signature
Date: .? 0 /
Date:
Revised 3/1212014 11:36 AM
ITL
A,KE ELMO
AFFIRMATION OF SUFFICIENT INTEREST
Lake Elmo City Hall
651-747-3900
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Brno, MN 55042
I hereby affirm that I am the fee title owner of the below described property or that I have written
authorization from the owner to pursue the described action.
Name of applicant
ROSSOG,./
(Please Print)
Street addressllegal description of subject property
/ /0 0
5iroe
Date
If you are not the fee owner, attach another copy of this form 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 anch 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.
Reviled 911'17013 3:04 PLI
Lake Elmo City Hall
651-747-3900
3600 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
ACK 0 LEDGE ENT OF RESPONSIBILITY
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that am responsible
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 and/or
information 1 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
Name of applicant g
(Please Print)
Name and address of Contact (if other than applicant)_
a i(.
Date
Phone
c H
-.2fr9
Revises 911 /120'3 1:04 PM
LeeRussow
Halcyon, GU]Properties, LL[ Rossow\/N[
l87ORice Street
St. Paul, K8N55113
Nick Johnson
City ofLake Elmo
3&OULaverne Ave North
Lake Elmo, MN. 5SO42
Dear Nick Johnson,
The following narrative is in response to the Final Plat Application Requirements.
Item l: Submitted with the proper fees onJanuary 9,3O15.
Item2: Sub a.Contact. Lee Rosxow\l87ORice Street. (651)308-2999, email —337(CD|achoec
Architect. William Sanders at LOUCKS
Sub b. Halcyon at 11050 50 th Street North, 10 acres, Rural Residential, 435,600 sq. feet.
Sub ci.HALCYON
iv. Wetland cannot be exactly determined until May, 2015. The area where the proposed wetland
is located is in the phase 11 construction area which will not be touched until after the exact delineation
is completed.
v. There are no dedicated rights of way within the property boundaries. There is a discussion with
the County and right ofway along Lake Elmo Ave. ZSfeet
vi. The general legal descriptions of the burial locations are listed an the plans.
Sub d. Issues discussed after the sketch plan review: Park dedication and water assessment. Open
issues are right of Way on Lake Elmo Ave. and the wetland delineation. Discussed in iv. v.
5ubf. All ofthe site work during the first building season, except that which isdeemed necessary bythe
\iB.VKD. will be confined to the western 400 feet of the parcel. including parking, sidewalks, storm
sewer, mausoleums, columbariums, structure modifications and landscaping.
Sub g. Issues raised by one of the neighbors were addressed at the sketch plan meetings.
Sub h. At this time I am unaware of any issues with the neighbors.
Sub i, Halcyon will develop into a serine park like setting with minimal impact the community. Traffic will
be accommodated entirely an site. Any funeral processions will enter the property and be
accommodated onthe property.
Subi we intend to start as soon asour plans are approved. 0ewill work onphase 1during this
building season and phase 11 probably in 2016. Target date to be operational is August 2015.
item 1.Administrative Information.
Sub14. Labels with addresses of adjacent property owners were secured from Washington County and
delivered to you on January 12, 2015.
Item IFinal grading. Signed copies. Once the Engineers and the Watershed agree onthe details,
freshly signed plans will be resubmitted to your office.
Item 12. Spot elevations. I talked to Bill Sanders about including this on the plan if not already there.
Item l7.Phasing plan. Axdiscussed the phase 1and phase 2areas nnthe erosion control plan will be
clearly identified.
Other topics:
Care and Improvement: |ncompliance with Minnesota Statute 3O637,386/41,306731,JD%ofevery
burial lot and 10% of every mausoleum or columbarium space shall be paid to a permanent trust fund
for the care, maintenance and improvement of the cemetery,
Public Service Agreement, I'm ataloss tomake asu: --estionbecause the City doesn't currently have any
HALCYON F C 12 c NGRETE Posrs
2- 244 aI55PH SrEEL SicriONS
LtE Rosso*);
Cernetery proximity and single-family house price.-Frcc(}nHncLihrury Page | o[20
�~l 984
Like Share "I�/
Ot Periodicals 0Literature
Search
Cemetery ' '�v, ,� ' � ��� '� �� '
���������v.��' K������������ ����^x �������v��—xo���|/�� house price.
bmaAum view /- �
LuxurV Aparimenis in xunnvcnien
Like ShareABSTRACT
o
|nthis article, the potential impact of cemeteries on value is addressed empirically using regression analysis on data
from 575 transactions of single-family houses in the vicinity of four cemeteries.Consistent with the limited previous
research on this topic, when all observations are analyzed simultaneously no price effectisdiscovered. However,
when each cemetery is investigated separately, the results vary. In two cases, cemetery view is not significantly
related to price. In a third case. cemetery view is associated with higher prices (equal to 8.8% of mean house price),
and in a fourth case, cemetery view is associated With lower prices (equal to 10, 1 % of mean house price).
The real estate literature is replete with papers reporting the influence ofexternalities onresidential property values.
Studies appearing in The Appraisal Journal, for example, observe positive price effects given a house's proximity to
o golf course, (1) or an ocean, (2) and negative effects for proximity to freight rail lines, (8) a cell phone tower, (4) o
ruptured oil pipeline, (5) highway noise barriers, (6) and the residence of a registered sex offender. (7)
It is intuitive that price premiums should apply when an externality adds to an owner's enjoyment of his or her
property and that discounts should apply when a property is located close to an externality that poses either a
nuisance orpotential danger, Not all market participants, however, immediately adopt this view, aoindicated by
Hansen, Benson, and Hagen (8) who report significant price discounts for houses located close to a major fuel
pipeline after, but not before, dexploded.
i-U|i-|exI unin
ummeiiDraryvvmoKs.mumais,e
uo
�{>
The impact of open space property uses on nearby residential property values has been subjectUmsome empirical
investigation, The results, in general, are not surprising. Golf courses, parks, and green spaces tend tobepositive
externalities for surrounding properties, and |andfiUotend tnbenegative externalities. Ofthe various types ofopen
space property uses, cemeteries have been the least studied. Asearch ofthe literature reveals only two published
studies on this topic and both of these examine the same Portland, Oregon, database to report an insignificant price
Cemetery proximity and single-family house price. - Free Online Library Pnoc 2 of2O
The purpose of the current study, therefore, is to direct some additional attention to this little -examined
this study, regression analysis is applied to transaction data from 575 single-family houses located in relatively close
proximity to four cemeteries in Greene County, Ohio. Grouping cemeteries for analysis, as was done in previous
analyses, may mask the impact of a cemetery on the transaction price of nearby houses.
Because some cf the advantages and disadvantages associated with close cemetery proximity depend upon
whether nrnot the cemetery is within sight ofthe subject property, the present study also improves upon the
previous research by simultaneously investigating the price effect resulting from both the distance from, and view of,
a cemetery. This article describes the characteristics of cemeteries that may impact the value of nearby properties,
reviews the pertinent literature, and explains the data and methodology used in the research, The results of the
analysis are then presented.
Cemetery Characteristics That May Influence Value
The effect of proximity to a cemetery on nearby residential property value is uncertain. On the positive side,
cemeteries offer a place to walk, jog, exercise, or otherwise enjoy the outdoors safe from speeding traffic. In effect,
some people may view acemetery aaepark, and the tombstones omincidental,
A view of a relatively open vista that includes some tombstones may be preferable to one that is limited to the back
of the neighbor's garage or house. Further, a person who wishes to regularly visit the final resting place ofaloved
one may value a house located conveniently close to the loved one's grave, To the extent that any ofthese
advantages apply, purchasers may be willing to pay a premium for a house located in close proximity toecemetery,
and the premium may be enhanced to the degree that market participants believe the future use of the cemetery will
notchange.
First Hume Buyer Programs[�
Very Low Rates and Fees Guaranteed. Free Quotes, ^maew.wn
cmu9*tipn,
Historically, there has been considerable reluctance, especially in rural areas, to disturb land used as a cemetery,
Therefore, owners ofhouses inclose proximity to such cemeteries can befairly certain that their properties will not
subsequently be squeezed in by additional houses or less desirable property uses. On the other hand, there is no
guarantee that the use ofcemetery property iufixed.Cemeteries are occasionally relocated and the property put 0o
an alternative use, which residential neighbors may find objectionable, Kay (10) observed that the probability of
cemetery relocation may be positively related to the rate at which an area is becoming urbanized.
There are also potential disadvantages associated with close proximity to a cemetery.Cemetery workers, visitors, or
trespassers create noise disturbances. The relatively pleasing vista previously mentioned may becompromised
if the cemetery falls into disrepair or if trespassers vandalize it,
Potential physical dangers to people residing in close proximity to a cemetery include poisoning and disease.
Spongberg and Becks (11) reported that cemeteries may release hazardous chemicals and metals into surrounding
soil and ground water. Possible contaminants include arsenic and meruury, which were used in past embalming
practices, urformaldehyde used incurrent embalming practices; and varnishes, sealers, and preservatives used un
wood coffins, orlead, zinc, and copper from metal coffins.
Vezzani(12)asserts that mosquitoes are the most medically important insect vectors ofdisease. Hnalso concludes
that cemeteries are highly suitable habitats for artificial container -breeding mosquitoes due to the greatavailability of
the different resources that they need (i.e., sugar substances, shelter, and water -filled containers).
Finally, there are psychological factors associated with cemeteries that may negatively impactsome people. The
sight of a grave being dug or an internment service can put a damper on a party being held at a residence with
cemetery view. For some, the sight of a cemetery or of tombstones may be upsetting, and for others, knowing that
the cemetery ioclose may bedisconcerting.
Each of these factors may influence potential purchasers who may lower their bids mrefuse to make offers on
properties with cemetery views. Larsen and Coleman (13) report moderate, but statistically significant selling price
effects for residential properties that were classified as psychologically impacted for reasons other than the
property's proximity toecemetery.
Cemetery proximity and single-family house price. 'Free Online Library Page 3of2O
ViUanovoUniv. Online [>
Advance Your Human Resources Skills uPrep for Certification. Get Info!
OO
Casual examination ofcemeteries inthe U.S,Midwest results inseveral observations that are consistent with the
notion that cemeteries may negatively impact the value ofnearby single-family houses. First, cemeteries tend habe
initially situated remotely from residential properties. Second, in recent years when residential development has
occurred in close proximity to a cemetery, developers have shown a propensity, where possible, to leave a wooded
buffer zone between the cemetery and the residential development. Finally, houses constructed in close proximity to
anexisting cemetery are rarely, ifever, high -end properties.
Even if the disadvantages enumerated are significant in the transaction process, their impactmay not beobservable
in transaction prices as long as the search for a buyer routinely continues until a buyer is located who does not care
about or is ignorant of the physical risks or is not psychologically impacted by the proximity of a cemetery to the
subject property, It may, however, take more time to locate such a purchaser and this would be revealed by a
significantly longer time on market for houses located in close proximity to a cemetery.
The fact that the only relevant database previously studied did not contain time on market data may help explain
why it yielded no significant market effects attributable to cemetery proximity. Also, there are other factors that may
have contributed to the previous findings. Unfortunately, time on market is not available in the present database.
The addition of a time on market variable would be a valuable addition to any extensions of this research.
Literature Review
Bo|itzerand NeUusi|(14)employ regression analysis tostudy how single-family house selling price isinfluenced by
the proximity ofthe house 0mavariety ofopen space property uses, including cemeteries. They analyze transactions
that occurred in 1990-1992 in Portland, Oregon, Selling prices of 662 houses located within 1,500 feet of one of
fifteen cemeteries are compared to prices of 6,005 houses that are not located within 1,500 feet of any type of open
space (e.g., ceme$ary, golf course, public park). No significant differences in prices attributable to cemetery
proximity are discovered,
Lutzenhiser and Netusil(15)analyze the same database and employ basically the same methodology as Bolitzer
and Netusil. Again, selling price is found not to differ significantly between houses located on either side of the
1.500-hoo demarcation, In addition, a variable to account for cemetery size is included in this model, and house
prices are found tobeinsignificantly related 0oit.
These studies are noteworthy because they were pioneering efforts, but both suffer from problematic methodological
issues. For instance, the 1,500-foot demarcation point appears a bit arbitrary; Bolitzer and Netusil state it "was
selected after consulting with park specialists at Metro." (16) It is unclear what expertise metropolitan park
specialists possessed concerning setting this kind of criteria. No tests were conducted to determine if price effects
are present within 1,500 feet of each cemetery or whether 1,500 feet is an appropriate demarcation point. It is
possible that in some cases local price effects do not occur, but for other cases the local price effects exist and are
exhausted before 1,500 feet, while for still other properties, local price effects extend farther. The exact solution is
unique to each situation and dependent upon factors such as topography, foliage, housing density, and cemetery
Another methodological problem is that neither one of the studies compares properties with a cemetery view to
those without a view to investigate whether view might represent a better demarcation point. Also, although the
model employed in these studies includes binary variables to control for the area of the city in which a particular
house is located, a number of factors not included in the model could compromise the validity of the comparison
(e.g,, the extent to which other externalities affect properties on both sides of the demarcation line). Further, the data
for houses surrounding the fifteen cemeteries is incorporated into a single model, which may have exacerbated the
issue if the variables that significantly influence nearby residential property values are not identical for all
cemeteries, This possibility is demonstrated in the current study by first estimating a single model that includes all
four study areas, and then comparing this result to results obtained by estimating separate models for each
cemetery and restricting the analysis to houses located in the same neighborhood.
This article analyzes transactions of 575 single-family houses in the vicinity of four cemeteries, all located in Greene
Cernetery proximity and single-family house price. - Free Online Library Page 4 of 20
County, Ohio. Greene County, located in southwestern Ohio, was established at its present boundaries in 1819,
Historically, Greene was an agricultural county, and today it remains predominantly rural, Only 4% of the county's
421 square miles consists of urban areas. Its total population is about 148,000 residents. After World War 11, parts of
Greene County became a bedroom community for the city of Dayton in adjacent Montgomery County. In more
recent years, the county has undergone substantial commercial development.
According hothe Greene County Auditor's office, G5cemeteries are located inthe county. Several are small family
plots and most of the 65 are located remotely enough that measuring their effect on nearby houses is problematic
because there are not many houses close by. This article focuses on four locations where residential development
has extended 0oanactive (ie..burials are still taking place) cemetery border: BoUbmnk.Fairborn, Beavercreek.and
Xenia. All four study areas were personally inspected to determine whether each property currently has a cemetery
view. A definition of variables used in studying the four locations can be found in Table 1 �
BaUbruokArea
The first study location iosituated nn1G,8acres inthe northeastern corner ofthe city of8eUbvook(population
7,009), Residential development reached this cemetery in 1961, when the first of five houses that abut the cemetery
was constructed. The last house toabut the cemetery was built \n1QGS.All houses inthe sample were constructed
in 1951-2003. There are 157 houses located to the east and southeast and within 1,513 feet of the well -maintained
cemetery, The sample \n|imihedVuUhm122huuumowhenomnann'a_|engMhtranouohoncfen)mpmved|otoou|dbe
identified, Transactions inthis study area occurred in1S58'2UUB.
There is no buffer zone between the Bellbrook cemetery and the residential development, but trees, houses, and
structures in the development block a cemetery view for most houses in the BeUbnookstudy area. However, 18 of
the sample properties do have a full or partial view of this cemetery. It was assumed that the view from each
property was the same at the time of each transaction. Data limitations prevent determination of property quality and
condition at the time of each transaction, but at the time of the study, it was observed that property quality and
condition tended to improve with distance from the cemetery. The Bellbrook area is limited to 1,513 feet by default
because the neighborhood ends a1that distance,
Property characteristic and transaction information analyzed in this study were obtained from the office of the
Greene County Tax Assessor and the office ofthe Greene County Recorder. Tobke2ahuwsdeoohpdvostaUmdosfox
houses in the Bellbrook study area, The mean transaction price (PRICE) for these houses is $97,012- The mean
house age at the time of the transaction (AGE) is 27.4 years. The mean living space (SQFT) is 1,408 feet, and the
mean parcel size (LOT)in13.42Tsquare feet.
Fairborn Area
The second cemetery in the study is situated on 22.3 acres near the eastern edge of Greene County's second
largest city, Fairborn (population 51,390). The residential development is located south of the cemetery. The first
house in the development, constructed on the southern boundary of the development, sold in 1996. Development
proceeded to the north (toward the cemetery), with all the houses closest to the south side of the cemetery being
sold between 2UO3and 20OG,
Transaction data could not be obtained for 28 houses (these lots were purchased unimproved from the developer),
so the sample is restricted to the 244 observations that are arm's-length transactions of improved lots. The Fairborn
area is the newest development of the study areas, and the developer dedicated a buffer zone between the
development and cemetery that ioapproximately 20U-feetwide (187feet ot the narrowest point) and fairly heavily
wooded.
The deciduous trees in the buffer zone eliminate any view of the well -maintained cemetery from all but a few houses
for approximately seven months ofthe year, but when the trees are bare, 48houses have afull orpartial view ofthe
cemetery, There is no discernable difference in the house quality and condition in this study area; all are currently in
above -average condition due, in no small part, to their relatively young age,
Table 3shows that PRICE inthis area is the highest of the four study areas. More houses inthis area, 85.9%.have
a basement (BASE) than the other study areas and all houses in this development have central air conditioning
BeovercrmekAnea
proximity and single-family house price. - Free Online Library Page 5of20
The third cemetery investigated is situated onOJacres near the southern edge cfGreene County'ulargest city.
Reavercreek (population 40,014). There are 103 houses located to the south and southwest and within 1,215 feet of
the cemetery. The study is restricted to the 77 houses for which an arm's-length transaction of an improved lot could
be identified,
The oldest house in the sample was built in 1800All but three houses have been constructed since 1950. with the
newest built in 2005, Residential development reached the western and southern border of this cemetery in 1956,
when the first two of twelve houses that abut the cemetery were built. Transactions included in the sample occurred
in1BG2'20U8.
There is no buffer zone between the residential development and this well -maintained cemetery, but only 18 of the
sample houses have a full or partial view of the cemetery. Similar to the Bellbrook study area, house quality and
condition in this area tend to improve with distance from the cemetery, Table 4 shows that the mean lot size in the
Bmavmrcreokarea iothe largest ofthe four study areas,
Xenia Area
The fourth cemetery is situated on 9.9 acres in the southwestern portion of Xenia, the county seat and the county's
third -largest city (population 27,557). Two hundred houses, located north and east of the cemetery, are within 1,594
feet ofthe cemetery, The study isrestricted tothe 1S1 houses where anann'o'|wn[thtransaction ofthe improved lot
could beidentified, 28ofwhich have afull orpartial cemetery view.
Similar Vothe Fairborn study area, there is little difference in house quality within this study area, Almost all the
houses inthis sample are oing|e-uVory.tract houses constructed in 1956'1858: none has obasement. Although
house quality and condition at the time sale could not be ascertained, almost all houses in this sample were rated
average at the time ofthe study. The oldest house was built in1851 and the newest in20OU.Transactions included
)nthe sample occurred in 1967'2008.
The maintenance condition of this cemetery can be generously described as moderate/ave rage. There is no buffer
zone between the resk1anho| development and this cemetery. The nominal transaction prices shown in Tables 2, 5,
4, and 5 are partially a function of the year in which the transactions occurred, Table 5 shows that the Xenia study
area involves the lowest -valued houses of the four study areas.
Correlation ofVariables
Table 6 contains the simple correlation of model variables for all four cemetery areas and shows that most of the
explanatory variables are highly correlated with transaction price. There is high correlation among many of the
independent variables (e.g., square footage, bathrooms, bedrooms, and basement),
What is surprising is the significant correlation between distance from a cemetery (DISTANCE) and every other
variable, The correlations indicate that house size increases with distance from the cemetery. Houses located
farther from the cemetery tend to have more garage space, bathrooms, and bedrooms, but lot size tends to
decrease with distance from the cemetery.
The correlations also indicate that the farther a house is located from a cemetery in the sample, the greater the
probability that the house has air conditioning and a basement. On the other hand, a significant simple correlation
between whether a cemetery view is available from the house and the other explanatory variables does not exist,
The appendix section of this article provides the correlation coefficients for the individual study areas.
Methodology
In studies of the impact of externalities on real property values, regression analysis isfrequently referred 0oea
hedonicregression. This well-known and often -used technique facilitates the effective unbundling of the implicit
value attributable to the physical and location -specific characteristics of a property from the sale price.
The methodology in this study has two basic parts. First, the data for all four study areas is combined and the
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1)
Cemetery proximity and single-family house price. - Free Online Library Page 6 of 20
where.
PRICE = the transaction price
[alpha] = the intercept
(beta)=the estimators
SALBR=avariable equal tothe year inwhich the house sold
e=the error term
All the other independent variables are avdefined inTable 1
Based on the resultsofprevious studies positive sign is expected on the estimator for SQFT, LOT GAR
BATH, BED, AIR, and BASE, and a negative sign is expected for AGE, The expected sign for GAS is positive
because it was the most affordable form of heat in the area over the study period and should be capitalized in house
Preliminary analysis reveals that three variables designed to detect seasonality in selling prices are highly
insignificant and they were dropped from the model, The REG Procedure (19) was used toestimate Equation 1 with
the COLLIN option specified, The results of the COLLIN option indicate a moderate amount of mu Iticol linearity is
present. (20)
For the second part of the methodology in this article, Equation |is estimated separately for each cemetery, The
estimate of the Fairborn data does not include AIR or GAS because each of the sample houses in this area has
central air conditioning and gas heat, The estimate of the Xenia data does not include GAS or BASE because all
houses inthis area have gas heat and none has mbasement. (21)
The results ofthe present study are similar to the two previous cemetery proximity studies when, as was the case in
the previous studies, all cemeteries are analyzed with a single estimate, Table 7 shows summarized estimation
results nfthe full model; the data fits the model well,
The F'vu|uaiohighly significant and the independent variables explain 92.29% of the variation in the dependent
variable. Seven ofthe ten control variables are significant ottheSAY6confidenoe|evo| Focusing the two
variables of interest, the estimators for both VIEW and DISTANCE are highly insignificant, indicating that neither a
cemetery view nor distance from a cemetery has a significant effect on nearby house price.
To investigate the possibility that the results may vary by cemetery, this study estimates Equation 1 separately for
each area. The results for the Fairborn cemetery area are consistent with the full model results, Table 8shows the
summarized estimation results for the Fairborn cemetery area; the data fits the model well, the F-valueiohigh|y
significant. The adjusted [R.sup.2]indicates that the model explains 78,1496ofthe variation inthe dependent
This figure is low compared to the [R.sup.2] reported for the full model, but recall that AIR and GAS have been
dropped from this model because they are constants. Five of the eight control variables are significant at the 99%
confidence level, Regarding the variables of interest, the estimators for both VIEW and DISTANCE are highly
insignificant in this estimation, indicating that no price effect can be attributed to cemetery proximity.
A different result occurs when the analysis is limited to the Xenia cemetery area. Examination of the results, which
are summarized in Table 9, shows that the data fits the model fairly well; the F-value is highly significant, and the
model explains 7O.11%ofthe variation inthe dependent variable.
This isthe lowest adjusted [R,sup%]ofany nfthe estimates, but this estimate does not include BASE orGAS
because each is constant. Only one ofthe control variables insignificant a1the Q896confidence |ewe|�two more are
significant at the 90% level, and the sign of the estimator for each of these variables is in the anticipated direction.
Recall that almost all the houses in this sample are nearly identical tract houses. It is interesting, therefore, that the
Cenneteryproximity and sino|e-fani|yhouse price.-F,ce{]n|incLihrury Page 7of20
house when the sale occurred, garage size, and whether the house has a cemetery view-
TheeadmmtorfonVIEVVienegativnandsignificertedtheQO96ounhdenuoleve and indicates thekhouseswhho
cemetery view in this area sold, on average, at a discount of $6,291.89 compared to those without a cemetery view.
For the mean -priced house i this m | this represents adiscount of10.1Y6($8.2S1.80/sG%.531,30).The variable
DISTANCE ianot significant inthis estimate.
Tab!e1O where the esdmobonveaukfits the
wel
l. —`U The F-value is highly yignihoont, and the adjusted [R.aup.2] indicates that the model explains 80.71Y4 of
the variation inthedependontvariwb|e.Fuurofthetencontro|variab|ooerenignifioantattheAS94con8donne1ave|.
and three are significant at the 95% level. Focusing on the variables of interest, VIEW is insignificant, indicating no
price effect can be attributed to this variable, but DISTANCE is significant at the Q09klevel.
The positive estimator for DISTANCE indicates that transaction price in this area increased by $29.58, on average,
for each additional foot the lot is removed from the cemetery, This result should occur if market participants
systematically deem the negative factors associated with close cemetery proximity to dominate the positive factors,
but this may not bethe case here and there may beanalternative explanation.
Recall that casual observation indicated that property quality and condition in this study area improved with distance
from the cemetery, so DISTANCE may actually be serving as a proxy for quality and condition. If this explanation is
correct, there is a cemetery proximity effect associated with distance, but it is occurring not because market
participants judged the disadvantages of close proximity to the cemetery to outweigh the advantages; it occurred
because the original homeowners and/ or developers/builders constructed better -quality houses farther from, rather
than closer to, the cemetery.
Table 11, where the estimation results of Equation 1 for the Bellbrook cemetery area are summarized, reveals that
the data fits the model well. The F'vm|um of 124.4 is highly significant and the adjusted [R.oup.2] indicates that the
model explains 82.4596ofthe variation inthe dependent variable.
Four of the ten property characteristic variables are significant at the 99% confidence level and four are significant at
the 95% level. The sign of each of the significant explanatory variables is in the expected direcfion, and each
appears reasonable in amount. Both of the variables of interest are significant-, VIEW at the 90% confidence level,
and DISTANCE at the 95% level.
The results indicate that buyers in this area value the po,k'hhe view. Ao*me$ary view added $8.521.46on average
to the transaction price for houses with a cemetery view, For the mean priced house in this sample, this represents a
premium of8,8Y6 ($8.521A6/$97.012.30)�
The estimator for DISTANCE indicates that residential property values increased by $8.10 for each foot the lot was
removed from the cemetery, As was the case for the Beavercreek cemetery area, casual observation indicates that
property quality and condition in this study area improve with distance from the cemetery; here again it is believed
that DISTANCE is acting as a proxy for house quality and condition and the effect is occurring because the original
homeowners and/or developers/builders constructed better quality houses farther from rather than closer to the
cemetery,
Conclusion
The characteristics of cemeteries that may influence value are presented in this article and suggest that the
influence of a particular cemetery on nearby residential properties is uncertain. To empirically test this issue, data
from 575 sale transactions of houses in relatively close proximity to one of four cemeteries is subjected to regression
analysis,
|nfive iterations, transaction price \oregressed against abattery nf propertycharacteristic variables hmcontrol for
price differences, Transaction price is also regressed against two variables of interest, DISTANCE, specified as the
shortest straight-line distance between the cemetery and the lot on which the subject house is located; and VIEW,
specified anthe ability toview the cemetery from the subject property.
When all observations are tested inasingle model, the results are consistent with the limited previous studies on
this topic --no significant price effect attributable to cemetery proximity is discovered, When each cemetery is tested
individua||y, however, the neuu|$vary, For two uometehen.nophcoeffo��can bea��butedtuV|EVKFor athird
cemetery, the endma'orfor VIEW iaanegative $8.2Q1.88.but for afourth cemetery, the estimator for VIEW iuo
proximity and single-family house price.-Free()nUncLJr»ry Page Qnf20
positive $8.521,46, For the mean priced house ineach sample, the former represents a 101Y6 discount and the
latter represents on8.896premium,
The sign of the estimator in each of these two instances is intuitively appealing because the positive estimator is
associated with a well -maintained cemetery, and the negative estimator is associated with a less well -maintained
cemetery, The fact that the results vary bycemetery suggest the possibility that previous studies might have arrived
akdifferent conclusions if they had not grouped all cemeteries into a single model, The fact that VIEW iosignificant
in two of the four samples investigated here suggests that previous models may have used the wrong criteria in
testing for market effects due to cemetery proximity; VIEW may be more important than DISTANCE.
DISTANCE isinsignificant intwo cf the four study areas. |nboth ofthese cases, almost all sample houses are
constructed within a relatively compact Lime frame and house quality and condition do notvary within the study
area. In the other two samples, house construction took place over a protracted period of time and it is observed that
property quality and condition tend to improve with distance from the cemetery.
|nthese two cases, the estimator for DISTANCE isapositive $81Oper foot inone case and $29.58per foot inthe
other. The interpretations of these findings is that DISTANCE is actually serving as a proxy for house quality and
condition inthese two cases. This suggests that the effect occurred not because market participants judged the
disadvantages cfclose proximity tooutweigh tbeodvantagoo.butbecauoeNhoohgina|homeownemand/n,
developers/builders constructed better quality houses farther from rather than closer to the cemetery.
Cemetery proximity should not be ignored by residential appraisers in arriving at value estimate, It is possible
cemete9 proximity will have no significant impact on nearby residential property values, but as the presentstudy
indicates, dmay. |t is recommended, therefore, that appraisers test their local area to determine if cemetery
proximity market effects are present.
Unfortunately, data restrictions prevented the testing for another important market effect--timeonmorhet.Tlmeon
market ismore likely tobeinfluenced bycemetery proximity than price. Extensions of this research, therefore, could
examine not only whether the results reported here apply in other markets, but also whether cemetery proximity
impacts time unmarket
�u5 »wt 2 2 4 3m i��
.ono, `.roo1 mn
.�m� ��c4 .ss*�
LOT 509 .1mcIz;'� o11y/
09^1 .�,cs .0c2 Z.z6 3� "I
�G E Ocn 3u69 w_i ns��
.m94 :i w szor
w.2« o:� 4 f .m4�
�z�� 1�1751
�r zn4 -
4«
paIc7 0 1o5 4 i 7z^s npms
�ms
.1 6 �oe .vu��
TIU (--J-ry
LAKE ELMO
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
THROUGH:
REVIEWED BY:
DATE: July 21, 2015
REGULAR
ITEM #18
0 INANCE 08-126
RESOLUTION 2015-60
Wildflower at Lake Elmo Zoning Map Amendment, Final Plat and Final
PUD Plan
Nick M. Johnson, City Planner
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
Planning Commission
Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of "tern ..............„.....................Community Development Director
- Report/Presentation........ ....... ...... ...Comm unity Development Director
- Questions from Council to Mayor Facilitates
- lbr Motion Mayor & City (..'ouneil
- Discussion Mayor & City Council
- Action on Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECCOMENDER: Planning Commission
FISCAL IMPACT: TBD — the City will be asked to review a developer's agreement concerning
the final plat at a future meeting. The agreement will include a detailed accounting of any
development costs that will be the responsibility of the City.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is being asked to consider a
request from Robert Engstrom Company for approval of a zoning map amendment, final plat and
final PUD plan for the first phase of the Wildflower at Lake Elmo planned residential
development. The final plat includes 60 single-family residential lots, and the related
construction plans for the improvements necessary to serve these homes. The City approved the
Wildflower Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan on April 7, 2015, which covered
approximately 117 acres of land within the Village Planning Area. There are 145 single family
-- page 1 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 18]
July 21, 2015
residential lots planned within the entire subdivision, and the final plat covers only a portion of
the overall total of units that will eventually be platted.
The Planning Commission considered this matter at its July 13, 2015 meeting and unanimously
recommended approval of the requested zoning map amendment. The suggested motion to adopt
the Planning Commission recommendation is as follows:
"Move to adopt Ordinance 08-126, approving the Zoning Map Amendment for the Wildflower
at Lake Elmo planned residential development."
C"-11-1 (
In addition, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Wildfloiveat
Lake Elmo Final Plat and Final PUD Plan subject to 17 conditions of approval. The suggested
motions to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation is as follows:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-60, approving the Final Plat and Final PUD Plan for the
Wildflower at Lake Elmo planned residential development."
BACKGROUND INFO s ATION:
Attached is the original detailed Staff report that was provided to the Planning Commission
regarding the applicant's request for a zoning map amendment, final plat and final PUD plan.
The staff report includes general information about the application, a summary of the relevant
planning and zoning issues, a thorough review and analysis of the final plat (including a draft list
of recommended conditions of approval), draft findings, and the Staff recommendation to the
Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT:
The Planning Commission reviewed the final plat application at its July 13, 2015 meeting. At the
meeting, a public hearing was held, necessitated by the zoning map amendment and final PUD
plan actions. During the public hearing, the Planning Commission received the following
testimony:
• Richard Smith, 11104 Stillwater Blvd. N., requested that a condition of approval be
added to formalize the expectation that no further residential or commercial development
would be allowed on outlots planned for open space or conservation. In addition, Mr.
Smith noted that there is presently a gap in the connection of his driveway to Blazingstar
Lane. He requests that this connection be completed during the phase 1 improvements.
Mr. Engstrom did not have any concerns with either request.
• Robert Eischen, 11674 Stillwater Blvd. N., asked if the activities included in a private
landscape agreement between his family and Robert Engstrom would be completed as
part of the phase 1 improvements. Engstrom noted that these plantings and removals
would be included in phase 1. Mr. Eischen asked that these activities be included as a
condition of approval. Mr. Engstrom did not have a problem accommodating the request.
-- page 2 --
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda berry 18]
July 21, 2015
Full detail of the Planning Commission meeting and testimony received can be found in the
Draft Planning Commission minutes dated 7/13/15.
In reviewing the proposed zoning map amendment, the Planning Commission unanimously
recommended approval.
With regards to the review of the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Final Plat and Final PUD Plan, the
Planning Commission discussed four additional conditions to add to the approval of the
application:
1) The Planning Commission recommended a condition to require the applicant to enter into
a legally binding agreement to prevent future residential or commercial development on
outlots planned for open space or conservation.
2) The Planning Commission recommended a condition to require that the driveway
connection for Mr. Smith be completed as part of the phase 1 improvements of
Wildflower.
3) The Planning Commission recommended a condition that requires the applicant to
complete the private planting agreement with the Eischen family as part of the phase 1
improvements.
4) Finally, the Planning Commission recommended that the Final Plat be revised to
incorporate street names that are consistent with the Washington County Street Naming
System.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD
Plan with 17 conditions of approval. The vote to recommend approval of the Wildflower Final
Plat was unanimous (Vote: 6-0).
STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, THREATS:
Strengths: The proposed final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat
subject to the conditions being recommended by Staff and the Planning Commission.
Weaknesses: Several conditions of approval must be met by the applicant, including
revisions to the final construction plans to address comments from the City Engineer.
Opportunities: Approval of the plat application allows the development plans for the
Wildflower at Lake Elmo planned development to proceed as planned in the
Comprehensive Plan. Moving forward with sewered single family growth should allow
the City to add additional users to the City's public sanitary sewer system, helping to
finance the City's investments in sanitary sewer.
Threats: None
RECOMMENDATION:
-- page 3 --
City Council Meeting
July 21, 2015
[Regular Agenda Item 18]
Based on the aforementioned, the Planning Commission and Staff are recommending that the
City Council approve the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Zoning Map Amendment through the
following motion:
"Move to adopt Ordinance 08-126, approving the Zoning Map Amendment for the Wildflower.
at Lake Elmo planned residential development."
In addition, the Planning Commission and Staff are recommending that the City Council approve
the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Final Plat and Final PUD Plan subject to 17 conditions of
approval through the following motion.:
"Move to adopt Resolution No. 2015-60, approving the Final Plat and Final PUD Plan for the
Wildflower at Lake Elmo planned residential development."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance 08-126
2. Resolution 2015-60
3. Staff Report to the Planning Commission, 7/13/15
4. Application Form
5. Project Narrative
6. Contact Information
7. Developer Acknowledgements
8. Neighborhood Park Concept
9. Wildflower Lot Development Summary
10. City Engineer Review Comments — 7/8/15
1 I. Fire Chief Comments — 7/7/15
12. Final Plat
13. Final Plat Supplemental Plans
14. Final Grading Plans
15. Final Landscape Plans
-- page 4 --
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 08-126
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 154 OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF
ORDINANCES BY ADOPTIONG A REVISED OFFICIAL ZONING DISTRICT MAP RELATED
TO THE WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
SECTION 1. Zoning Map Amendment. The following property is hereby rezoned from
RT - Rural Development Transitional, to MDR-PUD - Urban Medium Density Residential -
Planned Unit Development and Rural Residential:
The North Half of the Southwest Quarter and the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section
12, Township 29, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota, save and except the following described part
thereof:
All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 29, Range 21,
Washington County, Minnesota described as follows:
Beginning at the center of said Section 12; thence due South along the East line of said Northeast
Quarter of Southwest Quarter a distance of 1240.5 feet; thence at right angles due West a distance
of 200 feet; thence North 55 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 270 feet; thence due
North a distance of 617 feet; thence at right angles due East a distance of 147 feet; thence at right
angles due North a distance of 466 feet more or less to the North line of said Northeast Quarter of
Southwest Quarter; thence Easterly along the North line of said Northeast Quarter of Southwest
Quarter a distance of 274.17 feet to the place of beginning.
AND
That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 13, Township 29, Range 21,
Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter of said Section
13, thence West on the North line thereof 35 feet to a point, thence South and parallel to the East
line of said quarter section to the North line of Trunk Highway No. 212; thence Northeast on the
North line of said Highway to the East line of said quarter section; thence North on the East line of
said quarter section to the place of beginning.
Excepting therefrom all of the following described real property:
The North 330.88 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 12, Township
29, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota.
Together with
Outlots 0 and P THE FIELDS OF SAINT CROIX 2ND ADDITION according to the plat thereof, Washington
County, Minnesota.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo.
SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-126 was adopted on this 215t day of July
2015, by a vote of Ayes and Nays.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julie Johnson, City C erk
This Ordinance 08-126 was published on the day of , 2015.
2
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-60
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL PLAT AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(PUD) PLAN FOR THE WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO PLANNED RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Robert Engstrom Companies, 4801 West 81' Street, #101, Bloomington,
MN has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo ("City") for a Final Plat and Final
PUD Plan for the Wildflower at Lake Elmo planned residential development, a copy of which is
on file in the City of Lake Elmo Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the City approved the Wildflower at Lake Elmo General Concept Plan on
June 17, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the City approved the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Preliminary Plat and
Preliminary PUD Plan on April 7, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Wildflower at Lake Elmo Final Plat and Final PUD Plan
includes 60 single family residential lots within a planned development on two parcels of land
(PIDs: 12.029.21.32.0001 and 12.029.21.43.0013) in the Village Planning Area; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held public hearing on July 13, 2015
to consider the Final Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan request; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion recommending
approval of the Final Plat and Final PUD Plan subject to XX conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and
recommendation concerning the Final Plat and Final PUD Plan as part of a memorandum to the
City Council for the July 21, 2015 Council Meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Final Plat and
Final PUD Plan at its meeting held on July 21, 2015 and made the following findings of fact:
1) That all the requirements of City Code Section 153.07 related to the Final Plan and Final
Plat have been met by the Applicant, with the exceptions noted in the staff report.
2) That the proposed Final Plat for Wildwood consists of the creation of 60 single-family
detached residential structures and an open space/nature conservation area.
1
Resolution 2015-60
3) That the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plan is consistent with the Preliminary Plat
and Plans as approved by the City of Lake Elmo on April 7, 2014.
4) That the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plan is consistent with the Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area.
5) That the Wildflower Final Plat generally complies with the City's Urban Medium
Density Residential zoning district, with the exceptions as noted in the approved
Preliminary PUD Plans.
6) That the Wildflower Final Plat complies with all other applicable zoning requirements,
including the City's landscaping, ston-n water, sediment and erosion control and other
ordinances, except as noted in this report or attachment thereof
7) That the Wildflower Final Plat complies with the City's subdivision ordinance.
8) That the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plan complies with the City's Planned
Unit Development Ordinance.
9) That the Wildflower Final Plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards with
the exceptions noted by the City Engineer in his review comments to the City dated July
8, 2015 and as otherwise identified in future reviews.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby
approve the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Final Plat and Final PUD Plan subject to the following
conditions:
1) The City Attorney shall review all proposed and existing conservation easements within
the development area to ensure these easements will not encumber the City from
installing and maintaining and the proposed public infrastructure (including storm water
pons and related improvements) over the City -owned outlots.
2) The developer shall provide easements for public access to all public trails and sidewalks
that are not otherwise constructed within a public right-of-way. Any such easements
shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.
3) The developer shall dedicate additional right-of-way associated with the future extension
of Prairieview Trail to accommodate the planned storm water improvements include with
the first addition public improvements. This right-of-way shall extend to the
westernmost limits of Outlot F.
4) The developer shall dedicate additional right-of-way associated with the future extension
of Blazingstar Lane to accommodate the planned private driveway that will provide
access to the exception parcel located north of Outlot G. The developer shall provide any
2
Resolution 2015-60
easements necessary to ensure that this access may be accommodated once the plat has
been recorded.
5) Final grading, drainage, and erosion control plans, sanitary and storm water management
plans, landscape plans, and street and utility construction plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to the recording of the Final Plat. All changes and
modifications to the plans requested by the City Engineer in a memorandum dated July 8,
2015 and any future reviews shall be incorporated into these documents before they are
approved.
6) All recommended conditions of approval as requested by the City Engineer in his July 8,
2015 comment letter shall be incorporated by reference into the City's approval of the
final plat and PUD plans.
7) Prior to the execution of the Final Plat by City officials, the Developer shall enter into a
Developer's Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney and approved by the City
Council that delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of
the required improvements for the Wildflower Final Plat and Final Development Plans
with financial guarantees therefore.
8) All easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works Department shall be
documented on the Final Plat prior to the execution of the final plat by City Officials.
9) A Common Interest Agreement concerning management of the common areas of
Wildflower and establishing a homeowner's association shall be submitted in final form
to the Community Development Director before a building permit may be issued for any
structure within this subdivision. The applicant shall also enter into a maintenance
agreement with the City that clarifies the individuals or entities responsible for any
landscaping installed in areas outside of land dedicated as public park and open space on
the final plat.
10) The developer is encouraged to incorporate elements from the Lake Elmo Theming Study
into the final design of the community mailboxes within Wildflower.
11) The applicant shall deed Outlots B, C, J, and K to the City upon recording of the final
plat.
12) The final landscape plan shall be updated to address the review comments from the City's
landscape architecture consultant.
13) The final construction plans shall be updated to include a trail connection along Lake
Elmo Avenue between the existing trail outlet to Lake Elmo Avenue and the boundary
between the Wildflower development and the property south of Wildflower.
14) The developer shall establish a legally binding agreement to prevent further residential or
commercial development of all outlots planned for open space or conservation uses.
Resolution 2015-60
15) The developer shall provide a completed bituminous driveway connection to the Smith
property at 11514 Stillwater Boulevard North as part of the improvements associated
with Phase 1 of the development.
16) The developer shall complete the planting and removal work at the Eischen property at
11647 Stillwater Boulevard North as described in a private agreement between the
developer and Eischen family as part of Phase 1 of the development.
17) The final plat shall be revised to incorporate street names that are consistent with the
Washington County Street Naming System.
Passed and duly adopted this 21 day of July, 2015 by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elmo, Minnesota.
ATTEST:
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
4
Mike Pearson, Mayor
Resolution 2015-60
(;!I'Y OE
AKE ELM()
ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 7/13/15
AGENDA ITEM: 4B — PUBLIC HEARING
CASE #2015-2I
Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plans (Phase 1)
Kyle Klatt, Planning Director
Nick Johnson, City Planner
Jack Griffin, City Engineer
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a request to approve a final plat, final PUD
development plans, and related zoning map amendments associated with the first phase of the
Wildflower PUD development. The final plat includes 60 single family residential lots that will be
located within the western portion of the overall development area. Staff is recommending approval
of the request subject to compliance with the conditions listed in this report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Robert Engstrom Companies; 4801 West 81" Street, #101, Bloomington, MN
Property Owners: Robert Engstrom Companies; 4801 West 81Street, #101, Bloomington, MN
Location: Part of Sections 12 and 13, Township 29 North, Range 21 West in Lake Elrno,
north of 39th Street, west of Lake Elmo Avenue, and south of the northern
Village Planning Area boundary line. PID Numbers 13.029.21.32.00001,
12.029.21.34.0001, 13.029.21.21.0001 and 12.029.21.43.0013.
Request: Application for Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan
approval for the first phase of a residential development to be named Wildflower.
The final plat includes 60 single-family residential lots, while the remainder of
the site will be platted as outlots for either public dedication, cominon open
space, or to be reserved for future development.
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Agriculture, Woods/Natural Vegetation, Wetlands, Open Space.
Current Zoning: RT — Rural Transitional.
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North — vacant/agricultural land, rural residential — RR zoning;
west — agricultural land (fiiture Village residential) — A, RT, and
RR zoning; south — offices, business park land — C zoning; east
open space/Field of St. Croix II subdivision — RR and OP
zoning.
Comprehensive Plan: Village Medium Density Residential (3-4 units per acre)/Village Open
Space Overlay
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
Historr: The property was included in Village Planning Area boundary and municipal sewer
service area as defined in the 2013 Village Land Use Plan. The site has historically
been used for faming activities, including the growing of agricultural crops. A large
portion of the site is located in a FEM A Flood District. The City approved a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment last year that removed portions of the site from the
open space land category. The City also approved a PUD Concept Plan for the
property on June 17, 2014, and a preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plans on
April 7, 2015.
Deadline far Action:
Applicahle Regitlations:
Application Complete — 7/2/15
60 Day Deadline — 9/1/15
Extension Letter Mailed — No
120 Day Deadline — 10/31/15
Chapter 153 — Subdivision Regulations
Article 10 — Urban Residential Districts (MDR)
Article 16 — Planned Unit Development Regulations
§150.270 Storni Water, Erosion, and Sediment Control
REQUEST DETAILS
The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from Robert Engstrom Companies for approval of a
final plat and final PUD plan associated with the first phase of the Wildflower Planned Unit
Development (PUD). The final plat will include the platting of 60 single-family residential lots, of
which 22 will be the "garden villa" homes while the remainder will be the general single family
homes located north of Wildflower Drive. The final plat includes the platting of a connection to the
existing Layton Avenue right-of-way that will be shared between the Wildflower development and
the adjacent Village Preserve single family neighborhood. As discussed during the concept and
preliminary plat review, the subdivision will include a large amount of open space that will be owned
and managed by the homeowner's association along with a series of City -owned outlets that will
serve as storm water infiltration and retention areas.
Please note that the attached application materials provided by the applicant include the final plat,
final grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for the entire site, a set of supplemental plans that
provide a complete set of plans that have been updated from the preliminary plat, and utility and
street construction plans for the first phase public improvements. After an initial City review, the
developer submitted updated documents for all of the plans listed above with the exception of the
construction plans. The City Engineer will need to review a final set of construction plans as a
condition of approval. Due to the larger amount of materials already included in the packet, Staff is
not including the submitted construction plans with this report (these are available for viewing at City
Hall).
Since the City's approval of a preliminary plat, the developer has begun grading the site under a
separate grading agreement with the City. The overall grading plans provided with the final plat
therefore reflect the work that is currently taking place on the property. The initial construction
access to the site has been provided via an existing private driveway from Highway 5, and this access
will be eliminated once the new road off of 39th Street is completed. The final plans do show a
driveway connection to the Richard Smith property north of Outlot G from the end of Blazingstar
Lane as platted in the first addition. A portion of the driveway will be located over what will be the
future extension of this road.
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
In advance of submitting an application for a final plat, the developer worked with the City and other
external agencies to address the conditions attached to the City's approval of the preliminary plat.
The end result of this process are the plans that have been labeled "Final Plan Supplemental Plans"
that have been deemed compliant with the previous conditions of approval by the City. This includes
the revising of several streets to meet the City's minimum requirements for width and other
inodifications from the preliminary plans. There are a few minor issues that need to be addressed as
noted in the City Engineer's review memorandum, but none significant enough that they cannot be
resolved through revisions to the final development plans or further review by the City Attorney.
Staff has provided an update concerning the preliminary plat conditions in the latter sections of this
report.
The applicant has submitted an updated plat and PUD development plan narrative and related
submissions to the City, including a concept park layout for the shared park with the Village Preserve
along with a lot profile sheet for the various types of lots that are planned. The overall project
follows the preliminary plat very closely, and any modifications have been made in order to address
the previous conditions of approval. Given the extensive reviews that have been performed on this
development to date, Staff is not going to provide a detailed overview of the project as part of this
report but would be happy to provide copies of any previous Staff reports on this matter upon
request.
The final plat and supplemental plans address other review comments as noted in the following
section of this report. As the applicant has worked to address the previous review comments and
conditions of approval, there have been some minor modifications to the configuration of some lots
within the subdivision to accommodate these revisions. These changes directly address preliminary
plat review comments, and more specifically respond to the following:
All roads have been designed to meet the City's minimum standards for width. both for
streets that will have parking and those that will not.
All outlots that will be owned by the City, the developer for future subdivision, and by the
homeowner's association are all clearly labeled on the plans.
The plans now include a sanitary sewer service stub that extends roughly halfway through
Outlet H. This stub will be available for a future connection of sewer service to serve
existing development to the north and east.
The cul-de-sac widths, street design, and any street corners have been designed to comply
with minimum City requirements and to accommodate emergency and public works vehicles.
The City's subdivision ordinance establishes the procedure for obtaining final subdivision approval,
in which case a final plat may only be reviewed after the City takes action on a preliminary plat. As
long as the final plat is consistent with the preliminary approval, it must be approved by the City.
Please note that the City's approval of the Wildflower Preliminary Plat and Plans did include a series
of conditions that must be met by the applicant, which are addressed in the "Review and Analysis"
section below. Because the application is for approval of a final PUD plan, the request does require a
public hearing to establish the final PUD zoning for the first phase of the development.
At this time, Staff is not recommended that the City establish a base zoning district for the
development area. The three developers that have agreed to build the needed sanitary sewer
connection south of the railroad tracks have yet to formally execute the required agreements to build
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
4
this line. Once these agreements have been executed, Staff will prepare the necessary map
ainendments to support the proposed Wildflower development. One of the conditions of approval
notes that no permits (beyond model homes) may be issued until the new zoning for the area
becomes effective. Staff has previously recommended a base zoning of MDR — Medium Density
Residential for the residential portions of the subdivision and RR — rural residential for the open
space and natural preservation areas.
Staff has reviewed the final plat and found that it is consistent with the preliminary plat that was
approved by the City with the exceptions as noted below and as listed in the City Engineer's report.
These exceptions can be addressed with the submission of revised final plans, and primarily relate to
details that need to be worked out before final approval of the construction plans. The City's
Landscape Architect has previously reviewed the landscape plan, and his comments have been used
in the preparation of the final plan. Staff is recommending that the landscape plans be subject to final
review by a landscape architect to address any plan modifications that are necessitated by the City
Engineering comments. Although final construction plans still need to be reviewed and approved by
the City, it is expected that any required modification can be accommodated by the developer
without changing the final plat, and that these minor revisions may be made before the City releases
the final plat for recording.
PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES
The Wildflower development includes a request for a Planned Unit Development and some related
flexibility as permitted under this ordinance. In order to grant a PUD, an applicant is required to
demonstrate compliance with the City's PUD applicant requirements and PUD Objectives. These
requirements and objectives were previously detailed with the applicantspreliminary plan
submissions. For the most part, all portions of the development will be consistent with the zoning
requirements for the City's MDR— Medium Density Residential Zoning District, with the exceptions
that were discussed during the concept and preliminary plan review and are summarized as follows:
Setback MDR Zoning District (Min.) Courtyard Homes (Min.)
Front Yard 25 feet 20 feet
Interior Side Yard 10 Feet Principal Structure Same or 7.5 both sides
Side / 5 Feet Garage Side
Corner Side Yard 15 10
Rear Yard 20 feet 20 feet
Lot Area 7,000 square feet 5,865 square feet
Lot Depth N/A 100 feet
Lot Width 50 feet 50 feet
Street Widths City Standard Wildflower
Alley/Rear Access Not Allowed 18 feet
Cul-de-sac City Standard Prairie View Trail
Maximum Length 1,000 feet 1,300 feet
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
5
An other requirements for the City's MDR zoning district will apply, including the allowed uses and
other site and development standards.
Please note that the above table does not include any modifications from the numbers originally
proposed by the developer. The purpose of this table is to document the minimum expectation for
lots and homes in the development, and is otherwise consistent with the development plans. Other
than the extended cul-de-sac length for Prairieview Trail, there have been no exceptions requested for
the single family homes outside of the courtyard home area.
The overall site plan for the property follows the adopted concept plan very closely, and the final plat
and plans are consistent with preliminary plat as well. The following is a general summary of the
subdivision design elements that have proposed as part of the Wildflower final plat and plans:
Zoning and Site Information:
• Existing Zoning:
• Proposed Zoning:
• Total Site Area:
• Total Residential Units:
Proposed Density (Net):
RT — Rural Development Transitional District
MDR — Lot Area; RR — Conservation/Buffer Areas
119.28 acres
145 (78 single family, 67 courtyard homes)
60 with Final Plat (38 single family; 22 courtyard)
4.0 Units per acre (per developer)
Proposed Lot Dimensional Standards (Single Family Lots):
• Min. Lot Width: 80 ft.
• Lot Depth: 130 ft. (135 ft. typical)
• Lot Area: 8,000 sq. ft. (10,298 min.)
• Front Yard Setback: 25 ft.
• Side Yard Setback: 10 ft. living space; 5 ft. garage
• Rear Yard Setback: 20 ft.
Proposed Lot Dimensional Standards through Planned Unit Development Process (courtyard
homes):
• As listed above
Proposed Street Standards:
• Per development plans with modifications as requested by the City Engineer
Proposed Street Standards:
• ROW Width — Local
• Street Widths — Local:
• Street Widths — Other:
Alley/Rear Access
60 ft. (per Subdivision Ordinance)
28 ft. (per City standard)
24 ft. (two way with parking one side)
20 ft. (one way with parking)
18ft. (one way with no parking)
18ft. (proposed PUD standard)
The standards listed above are all either in compliance with the applicable requirements from the
City's zoning and subdivision regulations, or are consistent with requested modifications through the
proposed planned unit development (PUD). Based on Staffs review of the Preliminary Plat and
Preliminary PUD Plan, the applicant has generally demonstrated compliance with the majority of the
applicable codes, and the requested modifications or flexibilities as allowed under the City's PUD
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
Ordinance represent a reasonable request given the various design goals the applicant it trying to
achieve.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
6
The preliminary plat and plans tbr Wildflower were approved with several conditions, which are
indicated below along with Staffs comments on the status of each. Staff is recommending approval
of the final plat and plans with conditions intended to address the outstanding issues that will require
additional review and/or documentation. In order to assist the Planning Commission with its review,
Staff is also including a summary the critical issues that need to be resolved for the subdivision to
move forward.
Critical Issues Summary:
1) Conservation Easements. The developer is either proposing to implement new conservation
easements over the common open space areas within the development, or will be keeping in
place the conservation easements that were modified for Outlots J, 1, and H. These new
easements will need to be drafted and submitted to the City for formal adoption for the new
areas, while the older easements must be formally executed and recorded one the final plat is
also recorder with the County. There are two issues that Staff is has identified with the
proposed or existing easements that must be subject to final review and approval by the City
Attorney, including the following:
a. One of the preliminary plat conditions requires that a -legally binding agreement to
prevent further residential or commercial development of all outlots planned for open
space or conservation uses" be established by the developer. The City Attorney will
need to review any proposed conservation easements for consistency with this
condition.
b. The City Engineer has requested clarification that any existing or proposed
conservation easements will not prohibit or impeded the City from installing and
maintaining the proposed public infrastructure (including storm water ponds, sanitary
sewer pipes, and storm water swales) over portions of these outlots. Staff is again
asking that the City Attorney review these easement documents to ensure that the
final language will not encumber the City in any manner.
2) Trail Construction and Easements. The developer has proposed an extensive system of
public trails throughout the development. Prior to acceptance of these trails for public use,
the developer will need to construct them to meet City specifications and will need to submit
easements granting public use of the trails to the City for approval. The developer is asking
that the proposed trail dedication and granting of conservation easement suffice for the park
land dedication requirements. Staff is asking to see the final calculations for land and trail
dedication in order to accurately account for the equivalent dedication that would have
otherwise been provided.
3) Platting of Adjacent Property. The final plat and development plans include improvements
that extend into the adjacent Village Preserve development, and specifically, portions of
Wildflower Drive, Prairieview Trail, and storm water improvements. Should the Village
Preserve Final Plat be recorded prior to Wildflower, this issue will no longer be relevant.
Should Engstrotn Companies wish to record its plat prior to Village Preserve, the developer
will need to, at a minimum, secure the appropriate easements from the current land owner of
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
7
the Village Preserve (Gonyea) before the Wildflower final plat may be recorded. The
applicant has demonstrated that there is an agreement in place between both parties, and has
stated that this is a timing issue that will be satisfactorily resolved between the two
developers.
4) General Review Comments. All other recommended conditions of approval relate to final
details that must be addressed by the applicant and can be handled prior to release of the final
plat for recording.
In order to provide the Planning Commission with an update concerning the conditions associated
with the preliminary plat and plans for Wildflower, Staff has prepared the following:
Preliminary Plat Conditions — With Staff Update Comments (updated information in bold
italics):
1) No lots within a FEMA flood zone shall be approved as part of a final plat until such time that
the City's Floodplain Management Map has been amended to remove these lots. As an
alternative to amending this inap, the developer must provide documentation that all structures
will be built above the regulatory flood protection elevation, that any public infrastructure will
also meet Floodplain Ordinance requirements, and that the proposed stonn water ponds may be
constructed within the floodplain area. Comments: This condition will apply to the final plat
and all subsequent stages. The Valley Branch Watershed District has indicated that it will
undertake a study to amend the FEMA flood delineations to lower the flood levels in this area
to match those identified in the Goetschel Pond study. There are no buildable lots depicted on
the final plat that are located in a flood district.
Prior to any grading activity, the developer shall submit to the City temporary grading easements
from the owner of the lots adjacent to Layton Avenue within the Brookman Addition in order to
construct the improvements within this right-of-way as documented in the preliminary
construction plans. Comments: These easements have been secured and grading has
commenced within this area.
3) The developer has requested the inclusion of public art within common areas and public property
throughout Wildflower development. Prior to the placement of any art on publicly owned
property or public rights -of -way, the developer and City shall enter into an agreement that
clarifies the individuals or entities responsible for maintenance, upkeep and removal of any
public art. No public art shall be lit in a manner that conflicts with the City's Lighting
Ordinance. Comments: This is a condition that will apply to the future placement ofpublic art
within the development To date, the developer has not provided the City with a specific plan
or details concerning public art.
4) Prior to the submission of a final plat for any portion of the Wildflower PUD, the developer shall
work with the City to determine the appropriate park dedication calculations for the entire
development area. Comments: The developer is asking that the City accept the park land,
trail, and open space conservation (nature preserve) areas as meeting the spirit and intent of
the Cio,'s park land dedication requirements. If the City were to assign a specific amount of
land dedication to the plat, the developer would be required to provide at least five acres of
parkland. Staff is asking that he developer provide a total calculation for the trail and other
park areas to help assess the specific trade-off between park land and common open space.
Staff is recommending that the developer not be required to dedicate any additional land, and
that the larger nature preserve account for any land dedication shortfall.
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
8
5) The applicant must enter into a separate grading agreement with the City prior to the
commencement of any grading activity in advance of final plat and plan approval. The City
Engineer shall review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat, and said plan
shall document extent of any proposed grading on the site. Comments: The applicant has
entered into a grading agreement with the City and grading work is presently occurring on the
site.
6) The utility construction plans shall be updated to incorporate the recommendations of the City
Engineer as described in a February 18, 2015 memorandum to the City concerning the
appropriate location and size of sewer services through the PUD planning area, including any
requested oversizing of these facilities to service adjacent properties, prior to the submission of a
final plat. Comments: The supplemental plans included in the final plat submission address
the previous review comments. The City Engineer must still review and approve the final,
detailed construction plans for the project.
7) The developer shall minimize the number of rain gardens within public rights -of -way consistent
with the review comments from the City Engineer. Any such storm water infiltration features
shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Comments: All rain gardens as
previously proposed have been eliminated from the plans.
8) The preliminary development plans must be revised to comply with City Street standards as
referenced in the City Engineer's review memorandum dated February 18, 2015. Comments:
The plans have been updated to meet City standards.
9) The City approves all requests for flexibility from City Zoning and Subdivision requirements
with the exception of the street standards noted in the preceding condition. Comments: The
revised plans address this condition.
10) The applicant is encouraged to incorporate elements from the Lake Elmo Theming Study into the
open space areas within the subdivision. Comments: The final plans do not include any specific
references to the City's theming study. This condition was not a mandatory requirement.
1 1 ) The preliminary landscape plan shall be updated to address the review comments from the City's
landscape architecture consultant as noted in a review letter dated February 4, 2015. Comments:
The Ciry's consultant has reviewed the preliminary plans and offered comments that have
been incorporated into the final plans. Staff is recommending that a landscape architect
perform a final review and approval of these plans, and to specifically review any landscape
elements that are impacted by the final construction plan review.
12) All center median planting areas as depicted on the preliminary plat and plans shall be owned by
the City of Lake Elmo and maintained by the Homeowners Association. The applicant shall
enter into a maintenance agreement with the City that clarifies the individuals or entities
responsible for any landscaping installed in areas outside of land dedicated as public park, trails,
or open space on the final plat. Comments: The maintenance agreement will be incorporated
into the developer's agreement.
13) The Final Plat and Plans must address the requested modifications outlined in the City Engineer's
review memorandum dated February 18, 2015. Comments: The final plans have addressed
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
9
these comments except as noted by the City Engineer. A final review of the construction plans
is pending and is recommended as a condition of approval.
14) Prior to recording the Final Plat for any portion of the area shown in the Preliminary Plat, the
Developer shall enter into a Developers Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney that
delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of public improvements.
Comments: A developer's agreement will be submitted to the City Council either with or
shortly after the final plat is approved.
15) The developer shall provide an easement over or dedicate in a separate outlot all trails to be
dedicated for public use. Any such trails shall be considered a park land dedication provide said
trails are constructed by the developer with other public improvements within the subdivision.
Comments: Staff is asking that the developer provide an overall calculation for the land to be
dedicated as trail easements or public park land. The developer must provide easements for
these trails in a manner that will be approved by the City Attorney. These easements must be
completed before the City will accept the any, of the public improvements within Wildflower.
16) The City will not approve a final plat for any portion of Wildflower until such time that the City
has approved construction plans and received financial security related to the construction of the
public improvement project to connect the 39th Street Sewer to the 30th Street lift station.
Comments: The City has approved a development contract for the Eastern Village Trunk
Sewer project, and all parries are close to executing this agreement. Because Engstrom
Companies has been one of the three private parties that will be funding the trunk sewer
project, Staff is recommending that this condition be revised to state that no building permits
(including model homes) will be issues within Wildflower until such time that an executed and
funded development contract has been submitted to the (ity.
17) The developer must follow all the rules and regulations of the Wetland Conservation Act, and
adhere to the conditions of approval for the Valley Branch Watershed District Permit.
Comments: The developers plan have been reviewed and approved by the Watershed District
and grading work has commenced on this site in accordance with this permit.
1 8) The developer shall maintain access to the Smith property (11514 Stillwater Boulevard North)
during construction of the first development phase. Said access shall, at a minimum, be capable
of supporting emergency management vehicles and be consistent with City access driveway
standards. The existing driveway easement shall be vacated prior to the recording of the final
plat. Comments: The developer has been maintaining the existing private drive to the Smith
residence during the grading work. This condition will continue to apply to the development
until such time that the temporary connection to Blazingstar Lane is made. Upon the City's
acceptance of the public improvements within Wildflower, the existing driveway access must
be eliminated.
19) The developer shall establish a legally binding agreement to prevent further residential or
commercial development of all outlots that are planned for open space or conservation uses
within the preliminary plat. Comments: The developer is proposing to place a conservation
easement over all open space outlots within the development. The City Attorney should review
any such easements for consistency with this condition.
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
10
Staff is recommending certain conditions that been specifically identified as part of the final plat
review, and that have not otherwise been addressed by the applicant, be addressed as part of the
Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council. The City Engineer's review letter does
identify several issues that need to be addressed by the developer in order for the City to deem the
final plans complete. Of particular concern to the City Engineer is ensuring that the City has
adequate easements or right-of-way in place to support the proposed infrastructure. Staff is
recommending that two of the planned rights -of -way be extended (but not otherwise improved) in
order to address this matter.
Based on the above Staff report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the final plat and
final development plans for phase one with several conditions intended to address the outstanding
issues noted above and to further clarify the City's expectations in order for the developer to proceed
with the recording of the final plat.
The recommended conditions are as follows:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1) The City Attorney shall review all proposed and existing conservation easements within the
development area to ensure these easements will not encumber the City from installing and
maintaining and the proposed public infrastructure (including storm water pons and related
improvements) over the City -owned outlots.
2) The developer shall provide easements for public access to all public trails and sidewalks that
are not otherwise constructed within a public right-of-way. Any such easements shall be
subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.
3) The developer shall dedicate additional right-of-way associated with the future extension of
Prairieview Trail to accommodate the planned storm water improvements include with the
first addition public improvements. This right-of-way shall extend to the westernmost limits
of Outlot F.
4) The developer shall dedicate additional right-of-way associated with the future extension of
Blazingstar Lane to accommodate the planned private driveway that will provide access to
the exception parcel located north of Outlot G. The developer shall provide any easements
necessary to ensure that this access may be accommodated once the plat has been recorded.
5) Final grading, drainage, and erosion control plans, sanitary and stonn water management
plans, landscape plans, and street and utility construction plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to the recording of the Final Plat. All changes and
modifications to the plans requested by the City Engineer in a memorandum dated July 8,
2015 and any future reviews shall be incorporated into these documents before they are
approved.
6) All recommended conditions of approval as requested by the City Engineer in his July 8,
2015 comment letter shall be incorporated by reference into the City's approval of the final
plat and PUD plans.
7) Prior to the execution of the Final Plat by City officials, the Developer shall enter into a
Developer's Agreement acceptable to the City Attorney and approved by the City Council
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
11
that delineates who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of the required
improvements for the Wildflower Final Plat and Final Development Plans with financial
guarantees therefore.
8) All easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works Department shall be
documented on the Final Plat prior to the execution of the final plat by City Officials.
9) A Common Interest Agreement concerning management of the common areas of Wildflower
and establishing a homeowner's association shall be submitted in final form to the
Community Development Director before a building permit may be issued for any structure
within this subdivision. The applicant shall also enter into a maintenance agreement with the
City that clarifies the individuals or entities responsible for any landscaping installed in areas
outside of land dedicated as public park and open space on the final plat.
10) The developer is encouraged to incorporate elements from the Lake Elmo Theming Study
into the final design of the community mailboxes within Wildflower.
11) The applicant shall deed Outlets B, C, J, and K to the City upon recording of the final plat.
12) The final landscape plan shall be updated to address the review comments from the City's
landscape architecture consultant.
DRAFT FINDINGS
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to
the proposed Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plans
• That all the requirements of City Code Section 153.07 related to the Final Plan and Final Plat
have been met by the Applicant.
That the proposed Final Plat for Wildwood consists of the creation of 60 single-family
detached residential structures and an open space/nature conservation area.
That the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plan is consistent with the Preliminary Plat
and Plans as approved by the City of Lake Elmo on April 7, 2014.
That the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plan is consistent with the Lake Elmo
Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area.
That the Wildflower Final Plat generally complies with the City's Urban Medium Density
Residential zoning district, with the exceptions as noted in the approved Preliminary PUD
Plans.
That the Wildflower Final Plat complies with all other applicable zoning requirements,
including the City's landscaping, storm water, sediment and erosion control and other
ordinances, except as noted in this report or attaclunent thereof.
That the Wildflower Final Plat complies with the City's subdivision ordinance.
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
That the Wildflower Final Plat and Final PUD Plan complies with the City's Planned Unit
Development Ordinance.
That the Wildflower Final Plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards with the
exceptions noted by the City Engineer in his review comments to the City dated July 8, 2015
and as otherwise identified in future reviews.
RECCOMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Final Plat and Final
Development Plans for Wildflower with the 12 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff report.
Suggested motion:
"Move to reconunend approval of the requested Zoning Map Amendment for the Wildflower
planned development based on the findings of fact listed in the Staff Report."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Form
7. Project Narrative
3. Contact Information
4. Developer Acknowledgements
5. Neighborhood Park Concept
6. Wildflower Lot Development Summary
7. City Engineer Review Comments — 7/8/15
8, Fire Chief Comments — 7/7/15
9. Final Plat
10. Final Plat Supplemental Plans
11. Final Grading Plans
12. Final Landscape Plans
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
introduction.............„....... .......... ...... ..... . ....... ...... ......................Planning Staff
- Report by Staff ........ . .............. „......... ...... ........ ............Planning Staff
Questions from the Commission ........... ...... ..... Chair & Commission Members
- Open the Public Hearing ..... . ..... ....... ................ Chair
- Close the Public Hearing..................................................................................Chair
- Discussion by the Commission ............ ..... . ....... Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission... .......... ..... Chair & Coinmission Members
BUSINESS ITEM 4B
Date Received.
Received By:
ill File #:
1111E1 CITY
AKE ELMO
651-747-3900
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo MN 55042
FINAL PLAT APPLICATION
Applicant: Robert Engstrom Companies
Address: _1801 West 81st Street, Ste 101, Minneapolis, MN 55437
Phone#: 952-893-1001
Email Address: bob@engstromco.com
Fee Owner: Robert Engstrom Companies
Address: 4801 West 81st Street, Ste 101, Minneapolis, MN 55437
Phone #: 952-893-1001
Email Address: bob@engstromco.com
Property Location (Address and Complete (long) Legal Description:
NE Quadrant of the intersection of Stillwater Blvd. & Lake Elmo Ave.
The North Half of the SW Quarter and the SE Quarter of the SW Quarter
of Section 12, Township 29, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota
General information of proposed subdivision:
60 lot residential subdivision & Entire Development Grading
Prcale c.0 heo,..14toi
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:
Fee Owner Signature
Date:
Date:
c 2 1
iz) /1 s —
Revise,d 3/12/2014 11 36AM
e E
o Su
Robert Engstrom Companies (REC) has acquired and has fee title to a 101-acre site,
and also owns 16 acres for Outlots 0 & P, The Fields of St. Croix, Second Addition.
The sites are immediately west of The Fields of St. Croix, Second Addition, and near
the Village Center of Lake Elmo.
The overall land plan has 145 lots, planned in a manner that is organized within a
context that has a structural relationship to the City of Lake Elmo, Village Center.
Approximately 60 acres will be converted to native habitat of Pollinator Prairie,
native trees and shrubs, along with Association -owned parks. A mile and a half of
bituminous trails will be installed on an easement to the City of Lake Elmo, thereby
permitting the trails to be open to the public. The trails will be owned and
maintained by the City. The native habitat open space will be owned by the
Wildflower at Lake Elmo Community Association. The trails and open space will be
developed and paid by REC. It is deemed that combination of the open space land,
habitat installation and the trail expense more than exceeds any reasonable park
dedication requirement. In addition, REC has prepared a Concept Park Plan for the
adjoining Gonyea development and is donating an extra 8,737 square feet of land to
add to the Gonyea park dedication. The schematic plan is attached.
The First Addition includes 60 home -sites, of which 22 are for the Garden Villa
Homes. The Garden Villa Homes are primarily single -level homes, with Association
maintenance of the grounds and a heavily landscaped, private interior park. The
other home -sites are somewhat larger than offered in the marketplace, in order to
provide more flexibility for architectural designs.
The homes will be built by individual builders, thereby providing more architectural
diversity and personal service. REC will maintain architectural control of all homes
and landscaping plans. Front -yard sidewalks will serve most of the homes.
The landscaping plan, which conforms to the City standards, will be enhanced by
more interesting designs, and including more pollinator -friendly trees and shrubs.
In addition, individual homeowners will be required to plant at least 100 square feet
of native plants, as part of their landscaping plan. A Native Plant Trail is planned
along a portion of the Promenade to provide educational value for homeowners and
others.
Public Art will include some distinctive landscape designs such as benches and
freestanding sculptural features. Any sculptures located on City ROWs will be
approved in advance by the City.
The PUD flexibility should be an incentive to provide some unique designs for
landscape details and also provide for a variety of lot line setbacks. [see attached
exhibit]
A separate application for a development sign will be submitted for the access
easement adjoining State Highway 5.
The stormwater design provides for a maximum amount of surface water to be
retained on site.
Initial concerns/issues of the affected neighbors regarding proximity and view
buffers have been addressed and agreed to by neighbors (Smith, Dupuis & Eischen
and the Wildflower developer.
Specific provisions are:
• Provide buffer and view screening plantings of selected deciduous,
coniferous and shrub materials to the above mentioned properties.
• Remove/clear existing dead and invasive plant materials, and
intersperse new plant materials.
• Remove planned lots and convert area to open space with berms and
plantings. Provide new road access. Extend utilities and services to
existing homestead. (Smith property).
Current status:
• Large tree plantings installed Fall, 2014 (Dupuis property).
• Shrubs planned for 2015.
• Other properties will be completed as appropriate to construction progress
and access.
We do not anticipate any other issues, weather dependent.
A Conservation Easement will be executed in favor of the City of Lake Elmo for the
open space areas that are owned by the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Community
Association.
Directory
Developer: Robert Engstrom Companies
4801 W 81s, Street, Suite 101
Bloomington, MN 55437
952-893-1001
Bob Engstrom
Paul Engstrom
Engineering & Surveying:
Pioneer Engineering
2422 Enterprise Drive
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
651-681-1914
Paul Thomas
John Molinaro
Architect: Design Forum
4801 W 81st Street, Suite 101
Bloomington, MN 55437
612-618-7406
Jerry Mazarra
Soils: Haugo GeoTechnical Services
13570 Grove Drive, #278
Maple Grove, MN 55311
612-554-4829
Paul Haugo
General Contractor:
S. M. Hentges & Sons, Inc.
650 Quaker Avenue
Jordan, MN 55352
952-492-5700
Gary Zajac
11lFT ( TIN (
LAKE ELMO
Lake Elmo City Hall
651-747-3900
3800 Laveme Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
ACKNO LEDGEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible
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.
have read and understand the instructions supplied for processing this application. The documents and/or
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
Name of applicant 0 e
(Please Print)
Name and address of Contact (if other than applicant)
Date
Phone 6-2
se s
/z)//s
Revi5103/301,1911M
TI II: (Try of,
K E ELMO
Lake Elmo City Hall
651-747-3900
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
AFFIR AT ON OF SUFFICIENT INTEREST
I hereby affirm that I am the fee title owner of the below described property or that I have written
authorization from the owner to pursue the described action.
Name of applicant 0 12 C 11-1— tv Sine C a iv, r, ivite S
(Please *rit)
Street address/legal description of subject property
NE Quadrant of the intersection of Stillwater Blvd. & Lake Elmo Ave.
Date
If you are not the fee owner, attach another copy of this form 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.
Revised 311:12014 912 AM
,
LOT_PROFI
QUANTITY
AVG DIMENSION
AVG SIZE (S.F.)
SE Apcs
FRONT YD.
SIDE YD.
HOUSE:
GARAGE:
STREET:
REAR YD.
SFD )
DGE LOTS
9 ,
VARIABLE
18,585
RIDGE LOTS
-25'
!CONSERVANCY
LOTS
13
VARIABLE
21,
R E LOTS
54
85'x145' +/-
12,325 +/-
CONSERVANCY IP RIELOTS
LOTS
15 25'
15' 15
10' 10'
25 25'
VARIABLE VARIABLE
Tom
veg s
erosion
(25' Mirsimum)
10'
5.
so'
COURTYARD LOTS
67
&MOW +/-
7,015 +I-
COURTYA LOTS
10' (OR 7.5')
5' (OR 7.5')
15'
20'+
COUR ARD LOTS:
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS FOR SE ACK DESIGN FEATURES, FRONT, REAR & SIDE YARDS,
TO ALLOW FOR OVERLAPPING ARCHITECTU L AND LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS IN S ;ACK AREAS.
A. FIREPLACE BUILD OUTS (CHIMNEY & VENT BOXES) I 2'-0" MAX.
B. WINDOW BAYS OR BOX OUT FEATURES (C LEVERED) I 2'-0" MAX,
C. CANTILEVERED FLOOR AREAS (1 & 2 STORIES) 2'-0" MAX.
D. FRONT PORCHES 10"-0" MAX. PAST HOUSE FRONT
!FACE
3-6' AX.
E. ROOF OVERHANGS, ALL SIDES
HIGH FENCES — NOT ATTACHED TO HOUSE (MAX. HT. 6' ) SIDE YARD SETBACK 34-0" MAX. DISTANCE FROM
UNE
•
TENT
G. LOW FENCES (30"- 41" HT.) — FRONT & REAR YD - ALLOWED, C
H SIZE OF PRIVATE PATIOS, DECKS AND GARDEN AREAS.
H. , DECKS & PATIOS — FRONT YD.
I. DECKS & PATIOS — SIDE YD.
J.
DECKS & PATIOS — REAR YD.
TRELUS, ARBORS, GATEWAYS & FEATURES
8-21-2014
8-26-2014
11-5-2014 - TOTAL LOTS: 143
s 5 2 2.inis
* ,
FRONT YD - 5-0" INSIDE FR
YARD P.L.
REAR YD: NOT TO EXCEED 12.-0"
PAST GARAGE DOOR L FACE
6'4" INSIDE FRONT PA.
' " MAX. DISTANCE FROM
ACK LINE
NOT TO EXCEED 12'-0" PAST
, -
GE DOOR WALL FACE
LOCATION & SIZE TO BE
CONSISTENT SIZE OF P
PATIOS, DE R. GARDEN AR
EXACT FEATURE DESIGN AND
LOCATION TO BE
APPROVED BY R.E.C. QN
REVIEW PROCEDURE,
• *
AT
���N������J��U�n�
.°,�-/a/^�,^r�.p��~�/v/
Date: July D'JUlS
To: NyleNatt, Planning Director
From: Jack Griffin, P.E, City Engineer
ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara Geheen,�E.
Jack Griffin, PE.
Ryan Stempski,pE.
Chad |sakson,P.E.
Re: Wildflower atLake Elmo
Phase 1 Final Plat Review
651.300.4261
651.300.4I64
e51.300.4267
651.300.4283
An engineering review has been completed for the revised Final Plat Supplemental Plans and Wildflower at Lake
Elmo 1st Addition Final Plat. The submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Pioneer
Engineering, Inc. and received onJuly 6,ZUlS:
* Response memorandum dated July J'2O15.
° Final Plat Supplemental Plans dated July Z, 201I
° Revised Final Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plans dated July 2, 2015,
Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1" Addition Final Plat.
STATUS/FINDINGS: An engineering review has been separated for Final Plat conditional approval and Final
Construction Plan approval. Please see the following review comments relating to the Final Plat application.
FINAL PLAT —15TADDITION
= Final Plat approval must be contingent upon the Village Preserve Final Plat being recorded with
Washington County tuensure adequate R/VVis platted for PraiheviewTrail and Wildflower Drive. The
entire street R/VVfor PrairieviewTrail and Wildflower Drive must be platted and recorded otthe County,
or executed roadway and utility easements in the [ity's standard easement form must be provided to the
City, prior to the start ufstreet and utility construction.
40 A6mina8e and utility easement must be provided overOudot Oto accommodate the storm sewer pipe
proposed as part of the Phase 1 construction along Lots 3-5 and 21-23, Block 5.
• Final Plat approval must be contingent upon a revised Final Plat that includes additional Prairieview R/VV
(approx. 140feet) to include the street K/VV necessary to accommodate the Phase 1 stn,nn sewer pipe
being constructed from Pond 3N to the OuUot [sturm water pond (Pond IUO).
° As required, Outlots B, C, J and K are proposed to be dedicated to the City as part of the Plat,
° Final Plat approval must be contingent upon Oudot] being dedicated to the City free from any and all
restrictions from third party easements to ensure that the City has no restrictions going forward in
regards tooperation, maintenance and replacement ofthe storm water infrastructure,
° Final Plat approval must be contingent upon the Out|o{ H drainage and utility easement being fully
available to the City for the ongoing ownership, maintenance and replacement of the City sanitary sewer
pipe' free from any restrictions by third party easements.
w The Qut|otA is shown as HUA owned with a drainage and utility easement over the Oudot. This easement
must berevised asatrail, drainage and utility easement.
PAGE 1 of 2
The Outlot F is shown as HOA owned with a drainage and utility easement over the Outlot. This easement
must berevised asatrail, drainage and utility easement.
The Ou\|ot L is shown as HOA owned with a drainage and utility easement over the OuUot. This easement
must berevised asasidewalk, drainage and utility easement.
The Final Plat must be contingent upon the completion of the Village East Trunk Sanitary Sewer from the
Reid Park Lift Station to the UPRR. The conditional approval should include provisions to not allow
building permits, including model homes, until construction of the Village East Trunk Sanitary Sewer from
the Reid Park Lift Station to the UPRR has commenced, a letter of credit to secure the construction is in
place, and oschedule for completion has been determined.
FINAL PLAT SUPPLEMENTAL PLANS: Final Plat approval must be contingent upon the Final Plat Supplemental
Plans being revised and resubmitted per the following review comments:
° Revise Out|ntH\oinclude ablanket drainage and utility easement.
* Revise Outlot A drainage and utility easement to include trail, drainage and utility easement.
° Revise DudctFdrainage and utility easement toinclude trail, drainage and utility easement.
• Revise OudotLdrainage and utility easement toinclude sidewalk, drainage and utility easement.
FINAL CONSTRUCTION PLANS
• No construction, except for grading operations may occur an the site until the applicant has received City
Engineer approval for the final street and utility construction plans and has obtained all applicable permits
for the Subdivision.
* The Final Plat shall not be recorded until final construction plan approval is granted.
° Final construction plan review comments will be provided separately to assist the applicant with the
completion of Final Construction Plans.
PAGE 2 of 2
Station #1
3510 Laverne Ave. No.
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
651-770-5006
LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT
July 7, 2015
Station #2
4259 Jamaca Ave. No.
Lake Elmo, MN. 55042
651-779-8882
Review of the FINAL PLAT AND FINAL PUD PLAN — WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO
Following a review of the packet provided, I have concerns related to the following:
February 13, 2015 — "Hydrant placement/spacing. Hydrants need to he placed at intersections to he
most advantageous fbr emergency response and spaced per our requirements, with spacing of hydrants
not to exceed 500 ".
There are still areas that do not meet our minimum requirement of hydrant spacing not to exceed 500.
This spacing is measured via travel distance, (roadway) between hydrants. Please resubmit drawing
showing corrections.
I also have concerns regarding the placement of hydrants along what is currently named
WILDFLOWER DRIVE. With hydrants located only on one side of the roadway, it may become
necessary for us to shut down this main access road when using these hydrants for fire suppression to the
north.
Street naming to remain consistent with current program as adopted by City Council. This matter was
addressed in my review letter dated February 13, 2015 and based on the current drawings, this
development is not in compliance.
1 am concerned with the name of the development being "WILDFLOWER" as we already have a
WILDFLOWER SHORES development located on Hwy5 on the West end of Lake Elmo. As with our
previous discussion with Council regarding street naming and our goal of avoiding "confusion" for
emergency responders, the name similarity could create problems as well.
This item was identified in February and I don't know if it has been addressed?
1 have concerns with the turning radius of islands shown. especially the "tear drop design as this
presents problems for us getting several large apparatus into these areas, even more so in the winter.
This item was identified in February and I don't know if it has been addressed?
Road widths must comply with current standards. Narrow roads createprohlenzsfor us. When there is a
structure lire we need to get several apparatus to the scene. There 17101) he alternatives offered up such
as "one way " or "no parking'', which experience has shown us that these are easily disregarded and
iilien voutictoi in narrowing due to snowbanks, this creates difficulty in responding.
Sincerely,
Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
"Proudly Serving Neighbors & Friends"
Williams iswondering ifacondition could be added that ifany design changes occur tu
the main structure, that it complies with the Cities design standards.
M/S/P: Field s/Dorsch n er, Move to add a condition that development of a crematorium
is excluded from use on this property. Motion withdrawn
M/S/P: Williams/Fields, move that any future expansion of the site, including plans to
install a crematorium, must be reviewed and approved by the Oty. Vote: 6'0. motion
carried unanimously.
M/3/P: VViUianns/Kreinner, move to add condition that the Cities dark sky ordinance will
be followed, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
K4/\/P: VVi)lianos/Dorschner, move that any alterations to existing building conform to
the Cim/sdesign standards. Vote: 6-0.motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Will iams/Dorschner, move that draft finding number 5 read "That the Halcyon
Cemetery Final Plat is consistent with the City's engineering standards, except where
noted, provided the plans are updated to address the City Engineer's comments
documented in a letter dated July 8, 2015 and the Fire Chiefs letter dated July 7, 2015.
Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
K3/S/P,VViUianls/Dorschner,move toadd draft finding number Gthat the applicant has
committed to a permanent trust fund according to state statute. Vote: 6-8, motion
carried unanimously,
M/S/P: Kreinner/Larson, move that iftrees that are transplanted die within two years,
they will bereplaced, Vote: 6-0.motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Kreimer/Williams: Landscape plan shall be amended to add plantings along the
Eastern and Northern property lines consistent with screening requirements specified in
l54.258.Fofthe City Code, Vote: 6-0motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Fields/Dodson Move that any annual financial reporting regarding the
permanent care trust fund that is sent to state or federal authorities also be submitted
tothe City, Withdrawn
M/S/P: Dorsch n er/Wil I iams, move that minutes from annual meetings, including the
annual financial reporting, besubmitted tothe City, Vote: 6-0,motion carried
K4/S/P: VViUianns/Dorschner, Move to recommend approval o{the Halcyon Cemetery
Preliminary & Final Plat with the conditions of approval as drafted by Staff and amended
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-13-15