The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10-20-15 City Council Meeting Packet 1 of 3 NOTICE OF MEETING City Council Meeting Tuesday, October 20, 2015 7:00 P.M. City of Lake Elmo | 3800 Laverne Avenue North Agenda A. Call to Order B. Pledge of Allegiance C. Roll Call/Order of Business D. Approval of Agenda E. Accept Minutes 1. a. Approve September 15, 2015 Minutes b. Approve October 6, 2015 Minutes F. Council Reports G. Presentations/Public Comments/Inquiries H. Finance Consent Agenda 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. Approve Finance Report Dated 9/30/15 4. Approve Quote to Seal and Abandon Test Well No. 4 5. Approve Eagle Pt. Blvd. Street and Utility Improvements Pay Request No. 2 6. Accept September 2015 Assessor Report I. Other Consent Agenda 7. Approve Request for Public Works Operator Position 8. Manning Avenue Phase 1 Municipal Consent J. Regular Agenda 9. Lake Elmo Airport Realignment - Resolution 2015-80 10. Hammes Plat Extension 11. Practice for Adding Committee/Commission members 12. Human Resources Committee Applications 13. Planning Commission Application 14. Community Development Director Position Vacancy 15. Proforma Update 16. Lake Elmo Water Rate Reduction Analysis (Fliflet request) K. Staff Reports and Announcements L. Adjourn Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner While Preserving the City’s Open Space Character CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 A. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Council Members Julie Fliflet, Anne Smith, Justin Bloyer, and Jill Lundgren. Staff present: Interim Administrator Schroeder, City Attorney Snyder, City Engineer Griffin, City Engineer Stempski, Finance Director Bendel, Community Development Director Klatt, and City Clerk Johnson. B. PLEDGE OF ALLIGENCE C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Fliflet removed items 8 and 9 and added item 19, Finance Committee Membership and item 20, City Council Workshop Agenda. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 4 – 1. (Bloyer – nay) D. ACCEPT MINUTES Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO TABLE THE SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 MINUTES TO THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION PASSED 5 – 0. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Pearson: Attended meetings with East Metro Strong, Washington County and the school district regarding road issues, and Public Safety Committee. Toured the Arts Center. Stated he would like the Council to hold a budget workshop. Encouraged residents to attend Volksmarch on Saturday, October 10th from 10:00 am to 3:00 pm at Sunfish Lake Park. Councilmember Fliflet: Addressed many small issues with residents and a workshop with BMS. Councilmember Smith: Toured the Arts Center with the City Administrator and noted it needs to be cleaned up. Attended training with BMS. Stated that she would like to step down from the HR committee and re-join the Finance Committee. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPOINT COUNCILMEMBER SMITH TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND COUNCILMEMBER LUNDGREN TO THE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE. MOTION PASSED 3 – 2. (Pearson, Bloyer – nay) Councilmember Bloyer: Discussions with residents regarding the dog park proposal, met with a resident who commented that Sunfish Lake Park is in the best shape it’s ever been in. Walked through the Arts Center and feels it is not safe for use. Also noted that document requested from staff has been released. Councilmember Lundgren: Discussed the cemetery proposal, dog park proposal and other issues with residents, walked through the Arts Center and agrees it needs work; and attended the quarterly Fire Relief meeting. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Page 2 of 7 PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES None PRESENTATIONS None FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. 2015 Stormwater Assessments 4. 39th St. N. Street & Sanitary Sewer Improvements – Pay Request No. 7 Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE FINANCE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. OTHER CONSENT AGENDA 5. Administrative Position Request 6. Approve Animal Humane Society 2016 Letter of Understanding for Impound Services 7. Approve Building Inspector Hiring Recommendation Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. ITEM 10: KLEIS MINOR SUBDIVISION: Community Development Director Klatt presented the planning report on the request to divide a 54.29 acre parcel into three lots. Klatt reviewed the layout of the new lots, noting that the layout was designed to preserve the original farmstead and farm operations while creating two ten acre lots that can be sold. Klatt also reviewed the Planning Commission recommendation for approval with four conditions. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-79 WITH AN ADDED CONDITION THAT THE ASSESSMENTS BE PAID OFF. MOTION PASSED 5 – 0. ITEM 11: PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT – HALCYON CEMETERY Community Development Director Klatt presented a summary of the request previously reviewed by the Council to plat a cemetery at 11050 50th Street North with changes and new information. Site plan was reviewed, noting parking, existing structures and proposed future structures and burial sites. Klatt also reviewed a summary of questions and concerns from the neighboring property owners. Klatt provided a review of the zoning code update in 2013 that added cemeteries as an allowed use, noting the distinction between a church and cemetery and that funeral homes are not permitted. Klatt identified four options for Council action with two alternatives for further discussion, one option for approval and one option for denial. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Page 3 of 7 Jean Mandrinich, 11240 50th Street N., spoke in opposition, noting that her property is adjacent to the proposed site and she feels the proposed cemetery would disrupt the rural residential character of the area. Jeff Saffle, 11180 50th Street N., spoke in opposition, stating that he and his wife chose to live in Lake Elmo because of the rural character and stated the proposed cemetery as described is not a cemetery. Susan Saffle, 11180 50th Street N., spoke in opposition, stating that the proposed cemetery is a large, for profit venture and does not fit the rural residential area. Saxe Roberts, 11165 50th Street N., spoke in opposition, stating that he has water quality and runoff concerns, concerns about property values and feels the proposal is much more than a cemetery. Christy Roberts, 11165 50th Street N., spoke in opposition, expressing concerns over traffic across the road from her young children and water runoff. Joe Fleming, 5040 Lake Elmo Avenue N., spoke in opposition, stating that a mature cemetery without a mausoleum wouldn’t impact property values much but the proposed project would. Richard Day, 11049 50th Street N., spoke in opposition regarding the impact the project would have on his property that has been in his family since 1847, listing concerns over traffic and water runoff. Stated this proposal is a privately owned business and should not be allowed in a rural residential district. Margaret Schmidt, 4525 Lake Elmo Avenue N., spoke in opposition stating concern that the proposed cemetery would affect the entire city. Mrs. Schmidt noted that she and other volunteers collected signatures on a petition requesting denial of the application from residents and asked the Council to consider public opinion along with facts. Robert Williams, attorney representing concerned residents, reiterated that the intent of the rural residential zoning is not for commercial use and parking, and requested denial of the application. Yvette Oldendorf, 5418 Lake Elmo Avenue N., spoke in opposition, noting this is a permanent decision that cannot be reversed once a cemetery is built. Dean Dodson, 2915 Jonquil Tr. N., spoke as a Planning Commissioner and stated he would have voted against the proposal if he had known there was a legal basis to do so. Lee Rossow, applicant, stated he wanted to design something special and worked to design the parking to avoid on street parking that would disrupt the neighbors. Mr. Rossow stated he was not proposing this project to make money, but was doing it for the greater good. Councilmember Fliflet stated this proposal is not what the zoning code allows for, as it is a large scale business and has overwhelming citizen opposition. Mayor Pearson stated that a cemetery is a reasonable use and could be an asset but the funeral home component of this proposal doesn’t fit. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Page 4 of 7 Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-59A DENYING THE HALCYON CEMETERY PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT. MOTION PASSED 5 – 0. ITEM 13: 2014 STREET IMPROVEMENTS – ASSESSMENT HEARING ON IMPROVMENTS & ADOPT FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL Item 13 was moved up on the agenda in consideration of residents in attendance. City Engineer Stempski reviewed the project areas, work done to the streets, gutters and road shoulders and street signs replaced to meet current standards. Stempski explained the process and criteria used to assess property owners. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved to open the public hearing at 9:20 p.m. MOTION PASSED 5 – 0. Finance Director Bendel reported that she met with Jean Durand regarding her property at 1332 20th Street. The property was assessed in the past for four units versus five in the current project. Bendel stated that staff is recommending the current assessment be changed to four units. Joan Richert spoke on behalf of her sister, Jean Durand, explaining there is 15 acres of water on the property due to runoff and that leaves only three buildable lots. Ms. Richert requested a reduction to 3 units for assessment on the property. Linda Bernier, 2257 Legion Lane, stated her street did not have curb and gutter installed but another area did and both areas are being assessed the same amount. City Engineer Griffin explained that there some drainage improvements included in the Eden Park portion of the project and the reclaim process makes the cost for the two areas very close to the equal. Griffin added that completing the projected together saves cost. Ann Bucheck, 2301 Legion Avenue N., presented a written objection to the assessment on her property and requested a recalculation due to Packard Park having curb and gutter installed and Eden Park did not. Dave Bucheck, 2301 Legion Avenue N., stated that about a mile of curb and gutter was installed in Packard Park and feels Eden Park should not be combined with Packard Park for computing the assessment. Paul Bultman, 8243 Deer Pond Ct., stated that the rebuilt street in front of his house does not increase his property value and feels the assessment is an unconstitutional tax as it is not applied to all residents. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:44 P.M. MOTION PASSED 5 – 0. Discussion held concerning the resident objections to the assessment cost distribution and amount of the assessment relative to the benefit to the property. Discussion also held concerning the number of units to assess the Durand property. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Page 5 of 7 Councilmember Bloyer moved TO TABLE ITEM 13. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2015-78 ADOPTING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE 2014 STREET IMPROVEMENTS. MOTION FAILED 2 – 3. (Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith – Nay) Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-78 ADOPTING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE 2014 STREET IMPROVEMENTS WITH AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE DURAND PROPERTY AT 11332 2OTH ST. FROM 5 UNITS TO 3 UNITS. MOTION PASSED 5 – 0. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO CONSIDER ITEM 17 NEXT ON THE AGENDA. MOTION FAILED 2 – 3. (Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith – Nay) ITEM 12: PLAT APPROVAL PROCESS/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Councilmember Fliflet stated concerns over the number of conditions on approvals and the follow up on compliance with the conditions. Discussion was held with Community Development Director Klatt explaining that the sixty day rule limits the amount of work that can be done prior to approval. Klatt added that the number of conditions typically found on approvals is in line with other cities. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved THAT RELEASE/REALLOCTION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND LIENS WITH THE COUNTY NEED CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. MOTION WITHDRAWN. Finance Director Bendel stated she will provide a draft policy for conditions of approval for collection and reallocation of special assessments. ITEM 14: 2016 STREET IMPROVEMENTS – APPROVE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ORDER PUBLIC HEARING City Engineer Stempski reviewed the project area and schedule, noting that the Kirkwood residents submitted a petition to the pave their gravel road and staff was directed to include that area in the project. Stempski also reviewed the planned improvements and estimated cost per unit for each area. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2015-79, RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING A HEARING FOR THE 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS. MOTION PASSED 5 – 0. ITEM 15: INWOOD BOOSTER STATION IMPROVEMENTS & ADOPT FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL City Engineer Griffin reported on the process and costs for the booster station building and asked for direction on the final design. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Page 6 of 7 Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE THE PRAIRIE STYLE BUILDING FOR THE INWOOD WATER BOOSTER STATION. MOTION FAILED 2 – 3. (Bloyer, Fliflet, Smith – Nay) Councilmember Fliflet stated the building should have unique rural character, such as a barn style. Councilmember Smith asked about removing stone from the back of the building and applying it on the front where it is more visible. Engineer Griffin stated he would seek the input of the adjacent land owner on the final design. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS MOTION. MOTION PASSED 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Smith – Nay) ITEM 16: WATER TOWER NO. 4 – APPROVE ENGINEERING SERVICES TASK ORDER FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION City Engineer Griffin reported this is the third component in the project. RFPs were sent to five engineering firms and the bids were analyzed for completeness and quality of work. Griffin discussed the design and materials to be used. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES CONTRACT WITH SHE FOR THE INWOOD WATER TOWER NO 4 PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $108,500. MOTION PASSED 5 – 0. ITEM 17: 10:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL MEETING TIME LIMIT Interim Administrator Schroeder introduced the item, and noted that the Ordinance proposed is based on information collected from other cities that have passed a similar Ordinance. Discussion held. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 08-127. MOTION FAILED 1 – 4. (Bloyer, Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith – Nay) ITEM 18: COUNCILMEMBER/STAFF COMMUNICATIONS Interim Administrator Schroeder stated that an individual has filed a complaint that a Councilmember was communicating in an unprofessional manner. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved THAT IF COUNCILMEMBER BLOYER WANTS TO COMMUNICATE WITH STAFF IT WILL BE VIA EMAIL OR WITH ANOTHER COUNCILMEMBER PRESENT. QUESTIONS FOR MEETINGS WILL BE GIVEN AHEAD OF TIME OR QUESTIONS WILL BE DIRECTED TO THE CHAIR. MOTION PASSED 3 – 2. (Pearson, Bloyer – Nay) Wally Nelson, 4582 Lilac, stated he has known Councilmember Bloyer for two years and has never seen him threaten or accost anyone. ITEM 19: FINANCE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Councilmember Fliflet reported that Finance Committee members are currently being recruited and noted that the Finance Director and City Administrator are considered members of the Committee. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2015 Page 7 of 7 ITEM 20: CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA Councilmember Fliflet reported that the entire budget will be reviewed at the next Finance Committee meeting and suggested the budget be removed from the October 13th workshop agenda and invited Councilmembers to attend the Finance Committee meeting to discuss the budget. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO CONDUCT THE BUDGET WORKSHOP IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 14TH AT 4:30 P.M. MOTION PASSED 5 – 0. STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Interim City Administrator Schroeder: Report to be provided via email due to the hour City Clerk Johnson: No report Finance Director Bendel: Stormwater assessments went out to residents for a final reminder, 3rd quarter water bills will be going out, finishing financial reports for the Finance Committee meeting, working on budget updates, working through CIP updates. City Attorney Snyder: No report. Community Development Director Klatt: No report. City Engineer Griffin: No report. Meeting adjourned at 12:50 a.m. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ATTEST: ______________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION -- page 1 -- DATE: October 20, 2015 CONSENT ITEM #2 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Approve Disbursements in the amount of $487,340.18 SUBMITTED BY: Patty Baker, Accountant THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item .............................................................. City Administrator - Report/Presentation…………………………………………City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council - Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance FISCAL IMPACT: $487,340.18 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of $487,340.18. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended to be part of the Consent Agenda. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: NA City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 2] October 20, 2015 -- page 2 -- 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 $ 12,035.41 Payroll Taxes to IRS & MN Dept of Revenue 10/15/15 ACH $ 5,449.41 Payroll Retirement to PERA 10/15/15 DD6682-DD6731 $ 33,033.02 Payroll Dated (Direct Deposits) 10/15/15 43440-43496 $ 436,822.34 Accounts Payable 10/20/15 TOTAL $ 487,340.18 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 $487,340.18. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Accounts Payable – check registers MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION -- page 1 -- DATE: October 20, 2015 CONSENT ITEM #3 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: September 2015 Financial Reporting SUBMITTED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Finance Committee SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item .............................................................. City Administrator - Report/Presentation…………………………………………City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council - Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance FISCAL IMPACT: NA SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the September 2015 Financial Reporting Packet. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo has fiduciary authority and responsibility to conduct normal business operations and report the financial (unaudited) statement to the City Council. City guidelines suggest the Council be updated on a regular basis. STAFF REPORT: Attached please find the comparative financial statements for the month of September 2015 reflecting the monthly and year to date detail, comparing the actual results to the 2015 Budget. City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item #3] October 20, 2015 -- page 2 -- GENERAL FUND: Revenues: Total revenue for the month was 80.5% above budget for the month bringing the year to date total revenue to 0.7% below budget. The most significant budget to actual revenue variances are as follows: • Building Permit revenue was 15.3% below budget for the month bringing the year to date to 28.5% below budget. In September there were 13 new home starts compared to the budgeted 11 new home starts per month. Although more homes than budgeted for the month, the fee revenue is slightly lower due to the average home values being lower than anticipated in the budget, which results in lower fees. The year to date new home starts is at 88, of which 10 were open space new homes. The 2015 budget did not include any open space new homes. • The State Fire Aid proceeds were received in September. The base aid was $46.7k and supplement State Fire Aid proceeds were also received in September for $11.4k. In the budget it was planned that these proceeds would be received in October as in previous years, however the proceeds were received on September 30th so this variance is just a timing issue. • Recycling grant proceeds have not yet been received and as a result there continues to be a year to date variance due to this timing issue. Expenses: Total expenses for the month were 22.6% above budget bringing the year to date expenses to 2.7% less than budget. This was primarily a result of the receipt of the supplemental State Fire Aid received in September. Although a pass through expense, it is still reported within the operating expenses. All departments continue to manage to the bottom line. The following summarizes variances of note: General: • Planning & Zoning – The developer escrow offset expenses for August and September have not yet been booked. These expenses will be booked in October. • Engineering services continue to be below budget due to their primary focus in 2015 being on development activity for which their fees are 100% recoverable from the developer escrows. • Fire Relief – The 2015 annual State Aid funds were received on September 30th. The budget anticipated that these funds would be received in the first week of October as City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item #3] October 20, 2015 -- page 3 -- they have been in the past so this variance is a timing issue. The base State Aid received was $46.7k and Supplemental State Aid funds of $11.4 were also received resulting in a total received which was 55.8% greater than budget. These funds are remitted to the Fire Relief fund as this is the State Funding for Fire Relief pensions. • Animal Control – Contract services for the month were 332% of budget. The 1st quarter billing from the Animal Humane Society was received and paid in September. The City Clerk is looking into the cause of the delay and why this bill was so high. • Public Works – The total Public Works expenses were 0.3% below budget for the month and 12.1% below budget year to date. Although expending funds to prepare for winter (tires etc), the budget is being closely followed. In summary, year to date actual expenses continue to be less than budgeted and the net income through September is 33.2% better than budget. LIBRARY FUND: Revenues: Revenues on a year to date basis far exceeded budget as a result of recovering the delinquent rent from a prior tenant of $20.6k. The library will no longer be renting out space due to the continued collection expansion and the need for the space by the Library. Expenses: Expenses for the month of September were 43% below budget for the month. This was primarily due to spending less than anticipated on repairs and maintenance during the month. On a year to date basis the actual expenses are 21.2% below budget. On a net income basis, the September results are 40.6% below budget primarily due to the previously mentioned collection of delinquent rent mentioned in prior months. The ending September cash balance in the library fund is $212.9k. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council accept the attached September Financial Report. ATTACHMENT: 1. September Financial Reports MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION -- page 1 -- DATE: October 20, 2015 CONSENT ITEM # 4 AGENDA ITEM: Test Well No. 4 – Approve Quote to Seal and Abandon Test Well SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Mike Bouthilet, Public Works SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS if removed from the Consent Agenda): - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Public Input, if Appropriate………………………………….Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council - Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: $2,515.00. The estimated amount of $2,515 to be paid from the Water Enterprise Fund. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving a contract with Kimmes-Bauer Well Drilling, Inc. to seal Test Well No. 4. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve the quote provided by Kimmes-Bauer Well Drilling, Inc. to permanently seal Test Well No. 4 for $2,515.00”. City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 4] October 20, 2015 -- page 2 -- LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Test Well No. 4 was constructed in 2012 as part of the site planning and acquisition process for the City’s municipal Well No. 4. A smaller test well was constructed to verify the aquifer water quality and capacity in the location of Well No. 4 prior to purchasing the site and proceeding with the construction of the much more expensive well construction. With Well No. 4 completed and in service the test well is no longer in use and must be sealed and abandoned per the Minnesota Department of Health Well Code. Staff recently obtained a quote from Kimmes-Bauer Well Drilling, Inc. in the estimated amount of $2,515.00 to seal Test Well No. 4. Kimmes Bauer Well Drilling is a licensed well contractor and was the contractor that constructed the test well in 2012. The quote is based on the unit price per cubic yard of grout required to successfully seal the well. Payment will be made for the actual quantities of grout installed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council consider approving, as part of the Consent Agenda, a contract with Kimmes-Bauer Well Drilling, Inc. to seal Test Well No. 4. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve the quote provided by Kimmes-Bauer Well Drilling, Inc. to permanently seal Test Well No. 4 for $2,515.00”. ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Kimmes-Bauer Well Drilling, Inc. Quote. MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION -- page 1 -- DATE: October 20, 2015 CONSENT ITEM # 5 AGENDA ITEM: Eagle Point Blvd Street and Utility Improvements – Pay Request No. 2 SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Stempski, Project Engineer THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS if removed from the Consent Agenda): - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Public Input, if Appropriate………………………………….Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council - Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Pay Request No. 2 for the Eagle Point Boulevard Street and Utility Improvements project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Pay Request No. 2 to Miller Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $268,768.06 for the Eagle Point Boulevard Street and Utility Improvements”. City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 5] October 20, 2015 -- page 2 -- LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Miller Excavating, Inc., the Contractor for the project, has submitted Partial Pay Estimate No. 2 in the amount of $268,768.06. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5% of the total work completed. The amount retained is $19,544.78. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council consider approving, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 2 for the Eagle Point Boulevard Street and Utility Improvements project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Pay Request No. 2 to Miller Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $268,768.06 for the Eagle Point Boulevard Street and Utility Improvements”. ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Partial Pay Estimate No. 2 PROJECT PAY FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. PERIOD OF ESTIMATE TO PROJECT OWNER: CONTRACTOR: 1. Original Contract Amount 2. Net Change Order Sum 3. Revised Contract (1+2) 4. *Work Completed 5. *Stored Materials 6. Subtotal (4+5) 7. Retainage* 8. Previous Payments 9. Amount Due (6‐7‐8) *Detailed Breakdown Attached START DATE:ON SCHEDULE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION: FINAL COMPLETION:X ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION: FOCUS Engineering, inc. DATE CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATION: CONTRACTOR DATE APPROVED BY OWNER:CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA DATE DATE No.Approval Date Amount $1,249,494.09 Additions Deductions ‐$28,500.00 $390,895.65 1 8/4/2015 $28,500.00 $1,220,994.09 $390,895.65 $0.00 $102,582.81 $19,544.785.0% CONTRACT TIME TOTALS $0.00 $28,500.00 $268,768.06 NET CHANGE ($28,500.00) CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY PAY ESTIMATE SUMMARY 2 9/30/20159/1/2015FROM EAGLE POINT BLVD STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2015.120 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 ATTN: JACK GRIFFIN, CITY ENGINEER MILLER EXCAVATING, INC. 3636 STAGECOACH TRAIL NORTH STILLWATER, MN 55082 ATTN: STEVE ST. CLAIRE, PROJECT MANAGER 7/31/2015 6/15/2016 REVISED DAYS REMAINING 320 0 259 10/15/2015 ORIGINAL DAYS BY BY YES NO The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of their knowledge, information and belief the work covered by this payment estimate has been completed in accordance with the contract documents, that all amounts have been paid by the contractor for work for which previous payment estimates was issued and payments received from the owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. The undersigned certifies that the work has been reviewed and to the best of their knowledge and belief, the quantities shown in this estimate are correct and the work has been performed in accordance with the contract documents. ENGINEER BY FOCUS Engineering, inc.PROJECT PAYMENT FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 2 EAGLE POINT BLVD STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. 2015.120 QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 LS 1 $29,900.00 $29,900.00 0.00 $0.00 0.50 $14,950.00 2 LS 1 $6,850.00 $6,850.00 0.00 $0.00 0.50 $3,425.00 3 LF 3,100 $2.00 $6,200.00 0.00 $0.00 1,550.00 $3,100.00 4 EA 17 $200.00 $3,400.00 0.00 $0.00 8.00 $1,600.00 5 EA 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 1.00 $1,000.00 1.00 $1,000.00 6 HR 20 $100.00 $2,000.00 4.00 $400.00 4.00 $400.00 7 SY 5,145 $10.50 $54,022.50 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 8 SY 2,575 $1.15 $2,961.25 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $107,333.75 $1,400.00 $24,475.00 9 EA 2 $2,800.00 $5,600.00 0.00 $0.00 2 $5,600.00 10 LF 764 $33.60 $25,670.40 0.00 $0.00 764 $25,670.40 11 EA 3 $3,400.00 $10,200.00 0.00 $0.00 3 $10,200.00 12 LF 12 $240.00 $2,880.00 0.00 $0.00 12 $2,880.00 13 CY 42 $52.00 $2,184.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 14 CY 42 $68.00 $2,856.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 15 LF 764 $3.50 $2,674.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $52,064.40 $0.00 $44,350.40 16 EA 1 $2,650.00 $2,650.00 1.00 $2,650.00 1 $2,650.00 17 EA 1 $1,990.00 $1,990.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 18 EA 2 $4,770.00 $9,540.00 2.00 $9,540.00 2 $9,540.00 19 EA 1 $4,990.00 $4,990.00 1.00 $4,990.00 1 $4,990.00 20 EA 1 $4,560.00 $4,560.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 21 LF 209 $108.00 $22,572.00 31.00 $3,348.00 31 $3,348.00 22 EA 2 $985.00 $1,970.00 1.00 $985.00 1 $985.00 23 EA 1 $1,560.00 $1,560.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 24 EA 1 $2,190.00 $2,190.00 1.00 $2,190.00 1 $2,190.00 25 EA 2 $1,380.00 $2,760.00 2.00 $2,760.00 2 $2,760.00 26 EA 1 $1,270.00 $1,270.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 27 SF 32 $10.00 $320.00 32.00 $320.00 32 $320.00 $56,372.00 $26,783.00 $26,783.00 28 EA 2 $400.00 $800.00 2.00 $800.00 2 $800.00 29 LF 65 $15.00 $975.00 65.00 $975.00 65.00 $975.00 30 EA 2 $890.00 $1,780.00 1.00 $890.00 1.00 $890.00 31 LF 117 $33.00 $3,861.00 39.00 $1,287.00 39.00 $1,287.00 32 LF 971 $34.50 $33,499.50 584.00 $20,148.00 584.00 $20,148.00 33 EA 3 $1,695.00 $5,085.00 1.00 $1,695.00 1.00 $1,695.00 34 EA 7 $2,665.00 $18,655.00 5.00 $13,325.00 5.00 $13,325.00 35 EA 2 $475.00 $950.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 36 SF 27 $36.00 $972.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $66,577.50 $39,120.00 $39,120.00 37 EA 11.00 $60.00 $660.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 38 EA 1.00 $60.00 $60.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 39 LF 553.00 $3.00 $1,659.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 40 SY 266.00 $5.00 $1,330.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 41 SY 380.00 $6.00 $2,280.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 42 LF 7,036.00 $2.00 $14,072.00 1,520.00 $3,040.00 3,570 $7,140.00 43 LS 1.00 $214,450.00 $214,450.00 0.31 $66,479.50 0.48 $102,936.00 44 CY 12,000.00 $11.95 $143,400.00 5,760.00 $68,832.00 5,760 $68,832.00 45 SY 2,700.00 $9.00 $24,300.00 350.00 $3,150.00 350 $3,150.00 46 RS 34.00 $150.00 $5,100.00 17.00 $2,550.00 17 $2,550.00 47 TN 9,850.00 $12.65 $124,602.50 3,625.00 $45,856.25 3,625 $45,856.25 48 TN 9.00 $80.00 $720.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 49 TN 1,825.00 $62.00 $113,150.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 16"X6" REDUCER MJ DUCTILE IRON COMPACT FITTING 4" POLYSTYRENE INSULATION 16" DIP CL. 52 WATERMAIN SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 2 DIVISION 3 ‐ WATERMAIN 16" BUTTERFLY VALVE & BOX 16"X45° BEND MJ DUCTILE IRON COMPACT FITTING 16"x16" TEE MJ DUCTILE IRON COMPACT FITTING CONNECT TO EXISITING WATERMAIN 12" GATE VALVE REMOVE AND REPLACE VALVE BOX HYDRANT TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE STREET SWEEPING 6" TOPSOIL AND SOD HYDRAULIC MULCH (TEMPORARY) 16"X12" REDUCER MJ DUCTILE IRON COMPACT FITTING SANITARY SEWER PIPE ‐ 8" SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE ‐ TYPE 301 SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 1 EXCESS MANHOLE DEPTH REMOVAL OF UNSTABLE FOUNDATION MATERIAL DIVISION 2 ‐ SANITARY SEWER CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE STABILIZING AGGREGATE BORROW TELEVISING 6" GATE VALVE & BOX DIVISION 1 ‐ GENERAL MOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL SILT FENCE INLET PROTECTION ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT CONTRACT AMOUNT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 3 DIVISION 4 ‐ STORM SEWER REMOVE EXISTING STORM SEWER STRUCTURE CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE ‐ TYPE 406 RESET EXISTING CATCH BASIN CASTING REPAIR EXISTING CATCH BASIN CONCRETE REMOVE EXISTING STORM SEWER (ALL TYPES AND SIZES) CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER STRUCTURE STORM SEWER PIPE ‐ 12" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE ‐ 15" RCP CATCH BASIN ‐ TYPE 404 AGGREGATE TRAIL RESTORATION BITUMINOUS NON‐WEAR COURSE CLASS 6 AGGREGATE BASE SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 4 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (DRIVEWAY) REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE CURB COMMON EXCAVATION SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV) (P) SUBGRADE CORRECTION SUBGRADE PREPARATION DIVISION 5 ‐ STREETS SALVAGE POST AND SIGN REMOVE POST AND SIGN SAWCUT BITUMINOUS OR CONCRETE REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (DRIVEWAY) QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT CONTRACT AMOUNT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE 50 TN 1,825.00 $62.00 $113,150.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 51 GA 842.00 $3.00 $2,526.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 52 LF 6,596.00 $12.00 $79,152.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 53 EA 4.00 $2,970.00 $11,880.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 54 SY 40.00 $55.00 $2,200.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 55 SY 295.00 $27.00 $7,965.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 56 LF 6,660.00 $9.00 $59,940.00 2,297.00 $20,673.00 2,297 $20,673.00 57 EA 50.00 $150.00 $7,500.00 16.00 $2,400.00 16 $2,400.00 58 EA 8.00 $400.00 $3,200.00 4.00 $1,600.00 4 $1,600.00 59 EA 6.00 $515.00 $3,090.00 2.00 $1,030.00 2 $1,030.00 60 EA 4.00 $600.00 $2,400.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 61 EA 18.00 $350.00 $6,300.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 62 SF 15.00 $45.00 $675.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 63 EA 2.00 $200.00 $400.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 64 LF 7,116.00 $0.53 $3,771.48 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 65 LF 1,524.00 $0.53 $807.72 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 66 LF 2,558.00 $0.53 $1,355.74 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 67 EA 2.00 $1,200.00 $2,400.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 68 LS 1.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 69 EA 10.00 $815.00 $8,150.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $967,146.44 $215,610.75 $256,167.25 TOTALS ‐ BASE CONTRACT $1,249,494.09 $282,913.75 $390,895.65 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 CO1‐1 LF (2,850.00)$9.00 ‐$25,650.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 CO1‐2 EA (19.00)$150.00 ‐$2,850.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 TOTALS ‐ CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 ‐$28,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTALS ‐ REVISED CONTRACT $1,220,994.09 $282,913.75 $390,895.65 PERFORATED PVC EDGE DRAIN DRAINTILE CLEANOUT PERFORATED PVC EDGE DRAIN DRAINTILE CLEANOUT DRAINTILE CONNECTION INTO CATCH BASIN PRECAST CONCRETE HEADWALL FOR DRAINTILE BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DRIVEWAY VALLEY GUTTER 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE PAVEMENT MARKINGS ‐ POLY PREFORMED SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 5 ADJUST MANHOLE CASTING ADJUST GATE VALVE BOX FURNISH SIGN PANEL INSTALL SIGN PANELS 4" SOLID LINE WHITE EPOXY 4" SOLID LINE YELLOW EPOXY 4" BROKEN LINE YELLOW EPOXY STOP BAR ‐ POLY PREFORMED TEMPORARY PAVEMENT STRIPING MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION -- page 1 -- DATE: October 20, 2015 CONSENT ITEM #6 AGENDA ITEM: Monthly Assessor Report SUBMITTED BY: Dan Raboin, City Assessor THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item .............................................................. City Administrator - Report/Presentation…………………………………………City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff .............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council - Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion ..................................................................... Mayor Facilitates SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the monthly assessor report for through September 2015 outlining work performed 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 – 9 Taxpayer inquiries – 11 Miscellaneous inquiries - 4 Inspections – Residential – 34; Commercial – 3 Building permit reviews – 24 Pictures taken – 41 Other work performed included: • Completion of residential and commercial quintile data entry. City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item#6] October 20, 2015 -- page 2 -- • Monthly meeting with County residential and commercial supervisors • 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 September 2015 monthly assessor report. MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION -- page 1 -- DATE: October 20, 2015 CONSENT ITEM #8 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Request to fill budgeted Public Works Operator position SUBMITTED BY: Mike Bouthilet, Public Works Superintendent THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Finance Director and City Clerk SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item .............................................................. City Administrator - Report/Presentation…………………………………………City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council - Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Public Works Superintendent FISCAL IMPACT: Recommended salary of $20 per hour during probationary period; increase to $22 per hour after successful completion of probationary period (6 months). SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: With the increased work load as a result of growth in the City, a staff addition was budgeted for 2015 effective 7/1/15. It is being requested that this position be filled at this time in order to fully train the new employee in winter operations. BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT): Strengths – Additional staff to primarily support street improvements and winter operations. Due to resource shifts to utility functions, the street staff has become lean. Weaknesses – Slower response time to resident services. Limited resources for annual street patching operations. City Council Meeting Consent #8 October 20, 2015 -- page 2 -- Opportunities – The City will have an additional resource which will primarily support street functions and support utility functions. Threats – None identified. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council authorize the hiring of a public works operator. “Move to authorize the City Administrator to advertise, recruit, interview, and present for employment a Public Works Operator.” MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION -- page 1 -- DATE: October 20, 2015 CONSENT ITEM # 8 AGENDA ITEM: CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) Phase 1 Improvements – Resolution for Municipal Consent SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator REVIEWED BY: SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS if removed from the Consent Agenda): - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Public Input, if Appropriate………………………………….Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council - Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: $36,930. The County intends to require cost participation from the City in the amount of $36,930 per the County Cost participation Policy for County Improvements. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving, as part of the Consent Agenda, a Resolution for Municipal Consent for the Phase 1 CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Resolution No. 2015-80 approving County State Aid Highway 15 (Manning Avenue) Phase 1 Improvements within Municipal Corporate Limits.” LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 9] October 20, 2015 -- page 2 -- The County is requesting from the City of Lake Elmo a resolution of support for the Phase 1 CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) Improvements, as described by the attached County memorandum and layout exhibit. The improvements include a signalized intersection at CSAH 10 and at the south entrance of the Oakland Jr. High School, associated intersection turn lane improvements, drainage provisions, and a bituminous trail along the boulevard adjacent to Oakland Jr. High School. In accordance with the County Cost Participation Policy, the County is requesting City cost participation for these improvements in the amount of $36,930. This includes $12,610 for 55% share for right-of-way acquisition at the northwest intersection of CSAH 10 and CSAH 15; $13,200 for 50% share for a bituminous trail and concrete pedestrian ramps adjacent to Oakland Jr. High School and at the intersection of CSAH 10; and $11,120 for 50% share for concrete curb and gutter along the west side of Manning Avenue. Municipal Consent expresses the City’s support for the project and more specifically for the preliminary design layout as presented. Municipal Consent allows the County to proceed with the final project design and property acquisition with the intention to begin construction in 2016. Upon completion of the final design the County will request the City to enter into a Cooperative Agreement for the Project outlining the City’s cost obligations and other provisions as may be deemed appropriate. Upon review by City staff, it should be noted that the preliminary layout provides for a signalized intersection at the south school entrance. This intersection is near the required future City street access location based upon CSAH 15 access spacing guidelines. However, at the time that a development or other purpose requires a City street connection to Manning Avenue in this vicinity, it is highly probable that the entire intersection, including the traffic signals proposed by this project will need to be relocated at City cost or at the cost of a prospective developer. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council consider approving, as part of the Consent Agenda, Resolution No. 2015-80 providing Municipal Consent for the Phase 1 CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Resolution No. 2015-80 approving County State Aid Highway 15 (Manning Avenue) Phase 1 Improvements within Municipal Corporate Limits.” ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Resolution No. 2015-80 Approving County State Aid Highway 15 (Manning Avenue) Phase 1 Improvements within Municipal Corporate Limits. 2. County Project Memorandum and Request, dated October 15, 2015. 3. Exhibit – County State Aid Highway 15 (Manning Avenue) Phase 1 Improvements. Resolution No. 2015-XX 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-81 A RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY 15 (MANNING AVENUE) PHASE 1 IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN MUNICIPAL CORPORATE LIMITS WHEREAS, a County Recommended Layout for County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 15 Phase 1 Improvements, as shown on the attached exhibit to the County Memorandum dated October 15, 2015, within the limits of the City of Lake Elmo has been prepared and presented to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 1. That said County Recommended Layout be in all things approved. 2. That the City of Lake Elmo supports the County continuing with the development of final plans necessary for the construction of the project. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2015. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________ Mike Pearson Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson City Clerk 11660 Myeron Road North, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-9573 Phone: 651-430-4300 • Fax: 651-430-4350 • TTY: 651-430-6246 www.co.washington.mn.us Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action MEMORANDUM Date: October 15, 2015 To: City of Lake Elmo From: Frank Ticknor, Washington County Project Manager Re: County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 15 (Manning Avenue); CSAH 10 (10th Street) to southern access to Oak-Land Junior High – Phase 1 of the CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue): I-94 to TH 5 Corridor Study CSAH 15 from I-94 to Trunk Highway (TH) 5 is an important north-south arterial roadway in this region of Washington County. Traffic volumes on this road range from 10,500 to 13,600 vehicles per day. This corridor is included in the 5-year Capital Improvement Plan as a Priority 1: critical. Therefore, Washington County issued a Request for Proposals for preliminary design and environmental documentation services in March of 2013. The corridor study is now complete and the first phase of identified improvements is ready to proceed to final design: Intersection improvements at CSAH 15 (Manning Avenue) at CSAH 10 (10th Street) and at the two access points to Oak-Land Junior High. The intersection at CSAH 10 is currently very wide and is controlled by an existing 4-way stop and the intersection crash rate is above the statewide average. Oak-Land Junior High currently provides access to users via two driveways; one for school buses and one for staff and parent/student drop-off. These two driveways pose safety concerns for all users who exit or enter Manning Avenue due to the high volume of traffic. Also, there are no pedestrian facilities along the corridor although there are residential neighborhoods in the area and the emergency evacuation location for the school is St. Lucas Community Church which is north along Manning Avenue. The proposed improvements include a traffic signal at CSAH 10 and at the southern access to the school as well as access modification at the northern access to the school that eliminate left turn movements but allow for left turn access from Manning Avenue. The scope also includes pedestrian facilities and improved storm drainage facilities that limit impacts to adjacent properties. We feel the scope of this project significantly improves safety, increases capacity, provides improved pedestrian accommodations including compliance with ADA guidelines, and provides improved pavement and drainage conditions. The proposed design will match into the existing roadway system while considerations will be made for the identified future expansion of the corridor. Public Works Department Donald J. Theisen, P.E. Director Wayne H. Sandberg, P.E. Deputy Director/County Engineer This project has been developed with the coordination of the Cities of Lake Elmo and West Lakeland Township as well as with the Stillwater School District, Oak-Land Junior High, and private residents along the project limits. Besides the design of these safety improvements, there are cost considerations coordinated with the City of Lake Elmo. All cost participation items are established by the current cost participation policy between the County and Cities. The items that are the responsibility of the City of Lake Elmo are as follows: • Construction Items (50% share) – Curb and gutter ($11,120) – 6” concrete walk for ped ramps ($4,040) – 3” bituminous walk ($9,160) • Right of way & Temporary Easements (55% share) – Northwest corner of Manning and 10th Street ($12,610) • Total City cost = $36,930 The project schedule is to have final design complete this fall with the project being bid over the winter of 2016 in preparation for construction starting in the spring of 2016. The construction schedule will include the requirement to be complete by the end of August 2016 to accommodate the beginning of school. The County is requesting from the City of Lake Elmo a resolution of support for this project, Manning Avenue Phase 1, as described by the attached layout exhibit including the commitment of the total city costs of $36,930 as summarized above. It is the County’s intent that once final design is complete the County will work with the City of Lake Elmo to draft a Cooperative Agreement for this project. Thank you for your consideration of this very important safety improvement project. Frank Ticknor Washington County Project Manager R:\11505\Consultant\Phase 1 Final Design\Consultant Selection Memo 02-03-15.docx 10TH STREET NORTHSTOP12TH STREET NORTHMARK A V EN U E NORTH JR. HIGH SCHOOL OAK-LAND M ANNING TRAIL NORTHC.S.A.H. 10MA N N IN G AVEN UE (C.S.A.H. 15) COMMUNITY CHURCH ST. LUCAS LAKE HORSESHOE STOPSTOP 2000100 scale in feet LEGEND RAISED MEDIANS & CURBS PAVED SHOULDERS PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY BITUMINOUS TRAILS & BIKEWAYS PROPOSED PERMANENT EASEMENT PAVED ROADWAY FUTURE CONSTRUCTION PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PROPOSED TEMPORARY EASEMENT1 010101510201025103055 60 65 70 7580 85 90 95 100105 110 1 5 5 135 140 145 1 50 160 165 17 0 17 5 180535 540 545 55 05 5 5 560 565 570 575 MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 10/20/15 REGULAR ITEM #: 9 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Lake Elmo Airport realignment SUBMITTED BY: Clark Schroeder THROUGH: Clark Schroeder REVIEWED BY: Clark Schroeder SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item .................................................................................................... Staff - Report/Presentation .................................................................................................... Staff - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................................ Mayor Facilitates - Public Input, if Appropriate ................................................................... Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion .............................................................................. Mayor & City Council - Discussion ..................................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................................. Mayor Facilitates PUBLIC POLICY STATEMENT EITHER SUPPORT OR DENY SUPPORT FOR THE LAKE ELMO RUNWAY REALIGNMENT. BACKGROUND AND STAFF REPORT: The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) has completed a draft version of the 2035 Long-Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP) for Lake Elmo Airport. The purpose of the LTCP is to identify facility needs at Lake Elmo Airport for the 20-year period between 2015 and 2035. Lake Elmo Airport is located in Washington County approximately 12 miles east of the downtown district, one mile east of downtown Lake Elmo, within Baytown Township, and is bordered by portions of West Lakeland Township and the City of Lake Elmo. During 2014, Lake Elmo Airport had just over 200 based aircraft and accommodated approximately 26,000 total aircraft operations. It encompasses approximately 640 acres of land and has two paved runways. The primary runway (Runway 14-32) is 2,849 feet long by 75 feet wide, and the crosswind runway (Runway 04-22) is 2,496 feet long by 75 feet wide. There have been a number of previous planning studies completed for the airport. The MAC prepared the first Long-Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP) for Lake Elmo Airport in 1966, and updated it in 1976 and 1992. These plans included a recommendation for a relocated and extended primary runway (Runway 14-32) and an extension to the crosswind runway (Runway 04-22). The most recent LTCP for Lake Elmo Airport prepared by the MAC and approved by the Metropolitan Council is dated December 2008. The 2008 LTCP recommended a plan to first extend crosswind Runway 04-22 to a length of 3,200 feet, along with development of a new hangar area on the east side of the airport. The relocation and extension of Runway 14-32 to 3,900 feet was identified as a viable ultimate configuration beyond the 20-year planning horizon to remain on the Airport Layout Plan The draft LTCP considers replacing the primary northwest/southeast Runway 14-32 with a runway that is relocated approximately 700 feet parallel to, and northeast of, the existing primary runway alignment and extended to a length of 3,600 feet. The relocated primary runway would require realignment of a portion of 30th Street North. An extension to the crosswind northeast/southwest Runway 04-22 to a length of 2,750 feet is also proposed. These improvements are intended to enhance the airport’s ability to fulfill its existing role of accommodating propeller-driven airplanes with fewer than 10 passenger seats. ES.4 FACILITY REQUIREMENTS The existing runways at Lake Elmo Airport are short. In comparison to the other MACowned Reliever Airports, both the primary and crosswind runways at Lake Elmo Airport are the shortest in the system. Based on the aviation activity forecasts, the future critical design aircraft for Lake Elmo Airport will continue to be represented by the family of propeller-driven aircraft with fewer than 10 passenger seats. This family of aircraft includes a diverse range of equipment types, ranging from small single-engine piston aircraft used primarily for recreational and personal flying, up to larger single- and twin-engine turboprop aircraft that are used more predominantly for business aviation. Typical aircraft in the latter category include the single-engine turboprop Pilatus PC-12 and the twin- engine turboprop Beechcraft King Air 200/250. Runway Length Based on runway length guidance provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the primary runway length at Lake Elmo Airport should be between 3,300 feet and 3,900 feet to accommodate 95 percent and 100 percent of the aircraft types in the design aircraft family, respectively. While the guidance from the FAA serves as a good baseline, more detailed information related to runway length requirements can be derived from manufacturer performance charts published for specific aircraft types. Based on a deeper assessment of runway length requirements for several representative aircraft types in the design aircraft family for Lake Elmo Airport, the optimal primary runway length is approximately 3,600 feet. This length fits into the range predicted by the FAA and will accommodate the majority of small turboprop and multi-engine piston aircraft departing at an operationally-feasible weight. Meanwhile, a future length of 2,750 feet is recommended for the crosswind runway to better accommodate lower crosswind capable aircraft during periods of gusty conditions. Also, based on user input, development of a new non-precision GPS- type instrument approach for Runway 14 and a GPS overlay of the existing non-precision approach for Runway 04 would enhance the operational capabilities of the airport. Planning for the establishment of these non-precision approaches is recommended for consideration. Runway Protection Zones The Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) is an area at ground level prior to the threshold or beyond the departure runway end to enhance the safety and protection of people and property on the ground. According to the FAA, this is best achieved through airport owner control over RPZs. Control is preferably exercised through the acquisition of sufficient property interest in the RPZ and includes clearing of RPZ areas and maintaining them clear of incompatible objects and activities. In 2012, the FAA issued Interim Guidance to clarify its policy on what constitutes a compatible land use within an RPZ and how to evaluate proposed land uses that would reside in an RPZ. Based on this guidance, the following existing land uses are not considered to be compatible within an existing RPZ at Lake Elmo Airport: x Existing Runway 14 End: County Road 15/Manning Avenue, the north Airport Entrance Driveway, the Union Pacific Railroad, and non-owned property on the west side of Manning Avenue x Existing Runway 32 End: 30th Street North x Existing Runway 04 End: 30th Street North Coordination with the FAA in the form of an RPZ Alternatives Analysis is required when an incompatible land use would enter the limits of the RPZ due to a triggering airfield project, an off-airport development proposal, or other operational change at the airport. Achieving compliance with the FAA’s current RPZ compatibility criteria is a primary objective of this LTCP. The MAC held numerous public hearings/open houses about their draft plan, including two in Lake Elmo. The public comment period August 26th. In staff’s conversation with the MAC on October 12th, they will acknowledge any direction that comes from the Lake Elmo City Council, but will note that it was past the public comment period. RECOMMENDATION: If Council so moves “Move to adopt resolution 2015-80 opposing Lake Elmo Runway realignment and extension” ATTACHMENT(S): 1 Resolution 2015-80 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-80 A RESOLUTION IN OPPOSTION TO THE REALIGNMENT AND EXTENETION OF THE LAKE ELMO AIRPORT WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, The Lake Elmo Airport is in Baytown Township; and WHEREAS, The Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC) has a draft proposal moving one runway further east and extending its length; and WHEREAS, The MAC proposal also calls for adding length to the crosswind runway; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby oppose any realignment or extension of runways at the Lake Elmo Airport Passed and duly adopted this 20th day of October, 2015 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. ___________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 10/20/15 REGULAR ITEM #: 10 AGENDA ITEM: Hammes plat extension SUBMITTED BY: Clark Schroeder THROUGH: Clark Schroeder REVIEWED BY: Clark Schroeder SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item .................................................................................................... Staff - Report/Presentation .................................................................................................... Staff - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................................ Mayor Facilitates - Public Input, if Appropriate ................................................................... Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion .............................................................................. Mayor & City Council - Discussion ..................................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................................. Mayor Facilitates SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Hammes Estates final plat was approved by the city council on Oct 7th 2014. Eleanor Hammes is requesting a two year extension to record the plat. The concerns which precluded the plat from being recorded have been mitigated and they are ready to put the property on the market to sell. RECOMMENDATION: “Move to extend the final plat approval and development contract for two years till Oct 7th 2016. ATTACHMENT(S): Letter from Eleanor Hammes MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 10/20/15 REGULAR ITEM #: 11 AGENDA ITEM: Appointment of Committee/Commission members SUBMITTED BY: Clark Schroeder THROUGH: Clark Schroeder REVIEWED BY: Clark Schroeder SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item ................................................................................. Clark Schroeder - Report/Presentation .................................................................................................... Staff - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................................ Mayor Facilitates - Public Input, if Appropriate ................................................................... Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion .............................................................................. Mayor & City Council - Discussion ..................................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................................. Mayor Facilitates PUBLIC POLICY BEING MADE: COUNCIL IS BEING ASKED TO SET POLICY FOR APPOINTING COMMITTEE/COMMISSION MEMBERS BACKGROUND AND STAFF REPORT: The city has a couple citizens that wish to serve on the HR. committee and one individual that wishes to serve on the Planning Commission. The Administrator has received conflicting accounts as to what the standard practice is for appointment members for Lake Elmo. One method is to have commission/committees vet candidates and recommend to the full council for appointment. The other method is for the council to vet candidates and appoint without consideration from the committees/commissions. The League of Minnesota Cities does not have overall specific guidance that would apply to all committees, boards, or commissions. For the planning Commission their handbooks states: State statute does not establish a process for the appointment of planning commissioners. As a result, the city ordinance or charter provisions should specify who has the authority to appoint commission members. Generally, appointing authority is vested in the city council as a whole. In the alternative, cities may vest appointment power in the mayor exclusively, or may vest in the mayor the power to appoint commissioners, subject to council approval. Some city charters may already contain provisions related to general appointments to city boards and commissions. In these cities, the charter provisions preempt local ordinance. Cities also should consider adopting a policy for the recruitment and retention of commission members. The policy may be adopted as a resolution and need not be in ordinance form. Adopting the policy via resolution will allow more flexibility in developing and amending the ordinance. Although state law does not require the following, the policy may wish to include information regarding: Sample Advertisement. Sample City Application Forms. Sample Interview Questions. • The advertisement period for open positions. • The submission of letters of interest and a statement of qualifications for board positions, or a city application form. • An interview process prior to appointment. More information can be found at the web site below. http://www.lmc.org/media/document/1/planning_commission_guide.pdf?inline=true For the HR committee and any other committee’s state statue allows cities the authority to have discretionary committees created to lessen the work load of the council members. 412.111 DEPARTMENTS, BOARDS. The council may create departments and advisory boards and appoint officers, employees, and agents for the city as deemed necessary for the proper management and operation of city affairs. The council may prescribe the duties and fix the compensation of all officers, both appointive and elective, employees, and agents, when not otherwise prescribed by law. The council may require any officer or employee to furnish a bond conditioned for the faithful exercise of duties and the proper application of, and payment upon demand of, all moneys officially received. Unless otherwise prescribed by law, the amount of the bonds shall be fixed by the council. The bonds furnished by the clerk and treasurer shall be corporate surety bonds. The council may provide for the payment from city funds of the premium on the official bond of any officer or employee of the city. The council may, except as otherwise provided, remove any appointive officer or employee when in its judgment the public welfare will be promoted by the removal. This provision does not modify the laws relating to veterans preference or to members of a city police or fire civil service commission or public utilities commission. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=412.111 In conversation with the LMC they say it is allowable for cities to review applicants at the committee level, but they have never seen it. They see council first and only as the method of appointment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend the City Council follow precedent set by other cities and recommended by the LMC. All committee/commission members shall be appointed by the council without committee/commission review. MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION -- page 1 -- DATE: October 20, 2015 REGULAR ITEM #13 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Planning Commission Application SUBMITTED BY: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator THROUGH: Julie Johnson, City Clerk REVIEWED BY: Interim Administrator and City Clerk SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction of Item .............................................................. City Administrator - Report/Presentation…………………………………………City Administrator - Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates - Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council - Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Interim Administrator FISCAL IMPACT: None SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission has a vacancy for a second alternate and one application has been received for consideration. BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT): Strengths – The 2nd alternate vacancy could be filled Weaknesses – None Opportunities – One candidate has applied to serve on the Commission Threats – None identified. City Council Meeting Regular Agenda #13 October 20, 2015 -- page 2 -- RECOMMENDATION: Based on the outcome of the discussion concerning the process for considering committee and commission appointments, the Council may choose to appoint the application or refer the applicant to the commission for further discussion.