HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-15-15 City Council Packet 3 of 3
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: December 15, 2015
REGULAR
ITEM # 21
AGENDA ITEM: Development Agreement Security Reductions – Approve Policy
Revisions.
SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer
THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, City Planner Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item .........................................................................................City Staff
- Report/Presentation………………………………………… .........................City 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
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Administration/Finance/Engineering are presenting a policy revision for Council consideration.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving revisions to the “Summary of Security
Requirements” and “Reduction of Security” provisions for the City’s Master Development Agreement as presented or amended at the meeting.
If revisions are approved, the City Council is respectfully requested to consider authorizing staff to apply the amended provisions to the active development projects in the City, thereby allowing for security
reductions to be processed for council approval in advance of what is currently allowed in the respective signed development agreements.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the December 1, 2015 Council meeting, City staff was directed to review the Security Reduction
process from the City’s Master Development Agreement to determine if additional security reductions
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item X]
December 15, 2015
-- page 2 --
could be accommodated as requested by several developers while maintaining the City’s security interests
and goals.
The key issue with the current security reduction procedures, as explained by the developers, is that the
City potentially may retain 80% to 100% of the initial security until the improvements are roughly 75% to
85% complete. If the developer reaches this milestone during the construction season the timeframe for this discrepancy is relatively short if the development project is well managed. However, if this milestone
is reached at the end of the construction season, due to weather conditions, the developer may end up with this discrepancy over the winter months without the opportunity to gain additional reductions for some time.
The City’s primary goal is to retain at all times during the subdivision improvements a security amount that is adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the improvements as protection to the City tax
payers against the potential of developer default. Additional City goals include: (1) the desire to retain sufficient security to provide the developer the incentive to complete all improvements on schedule, (2) to provide an incentive to maintain timely and responsive progress with the restoration, landscaping,
corrective actions and other minor improvement items that would otherwise become a nuisance to surrounding properties and the City, and (3) to keep the number of security reduction requests
manageable for City staff.
With these principals in mind, City staff has prepared revisions to the “Summary of Security
Requirements” and “Reduction of Security” provisions for the City’s Master Development Agreement for
council consideration. The revised provisions are attached for review. Staff will review these provisions in greater detail with Council as part of the staff report at the meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve revisions to the “Summary of Security Requirements” and “Reduction of Security” provisions for the City’s Master Development Agreement as presented or amended at the meeting. The recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve revisions to the “Summary of Security Requirements” and “Reduction of Security” provisions for the City’s Master Development Agreement (as presented) or (as amended).”
If revisions are approved, staff is recommending that the City Council authorize staff to apply the amended provisions to the active development projects in the City, thereby allowing for security
reductions to be processed for council approval in advance of what is currently allowed in the respective signed development agreements. The recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to authorize staff to apply the amended provisions to the active development projects in the City, thereby allowing for security reductions to be processed for council approval in advance of what is currently allowed in the respective signed development agreements.”
ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Proposed Revisions including Pages 18-21 of the Master Development Agreement.
REV1: 05/28/2015 18
from the date of final written acceptance, unless the wearing course is placed during the same construction
season as the bituminous base course. In those instances, the Developer shall guarantee all work,
including street construction, concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, material and equipment for a
period of two (2) years from the date of final written City acceptance of the work.
C. The required warranty period for sod, trees, and landscaping is two growing seasons
following installation.
34. SUMMARY OF SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. To guarantee compliance with the
terms of this agreement, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements,
and construction of all public improvements, the Developer shall furnish the City with an irrevocable letter of
credit, in the form attached hereto, from a bank, cash escrow or a combination cash escrow and Letter of
Credit ("security") for $ . The amount of the security was calculated as follows:
CONSTRUCTION CATEGORY: COST 125%
1. Grading
2. Sanitary Sewer
3. Watermain
4. Storm Sewer (includes pond structures and outfall pipes)
4.5. Streets (includes Sidewalks)
5.6. Trails
7. Surface Water Facilities (pipe, ponds,infiltration basins,
6. bio retention basins, rain gardens, etc.)
7. Erosion Control
8. Street Lighting
9. Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs
9.10. Private Utilities (electricity, natural gas,
telephone, and cable)
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.3", No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Indent: Left: -0.01", Hanging: 0.31",Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … +
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at 0.92"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.3", No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0", Tab stops: Not at
0.92"
Formatted: Indent: Left: -0.01", Hanging: 0.31",
Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … +
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" +Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.3", No bullets or numbering
REV1: 05/28/2015 19
10.11. Landscaping
11.12. Tree Preservation and Restoration
12.13. Wetland Mitigation and Buffers
13.14. Monuments
15. Erosion and Sedimentation Control
14.16. Miscellaneous Facilities
15. Developer’s Record Drawings
17.
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $ N/A TOTAL PROJECT SECURITIES (at 125%
Construction Costs)
N/A $
This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. The bank shall be
subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for
any violation of the terms of this Contract or if the security is allowed to lapse prior to the end of the
required term. If the required public improvements are not completed at least thirty (30) days prior to the
expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the security is drawn down, the proceeds shall
be used to cure the default.
35.36. REDUCTION OF SECURITY. Upon written request by the Developer to the City Engineer
and upon receipt of proof satisfactory to the City Engineer that work has been completed in accordance
with the approved plans and specifications, and terms of this Agreement, and that all financial
obligations to the City have been satisfied, with the City Engineer may approveal reductions in the security
may be reduced as follows:
A. Upon completion of grading operations, including temporary site restoration,
Developer shall submit an as-built grading survey to the City that at a minimum establishes the as-built
grades at all lot corners and downstream drainage conveyance systems and storm water ponds. Upon
inspection of the site and approval of the as-built survey, 100%, or $_________________________, of the
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.3", No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Indent: Left: -0.01", Hanging: 0.31",
Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … +
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" +Indent at: 0.5"
REV1: 05/28/2015 20
grading security mayshall be released. This security reduction does not include amounts related to erosion
and sedimentation control.
B. Up to 75% of the security provided in accordance with paragraph 34 may be
released upon completion of the following key milestones of the project as determined by the City
Engineer.at the following stages of construction and project approvals by the City.
C. Construction Categories 2 and 3: The amount of $_____________ may be released
when all sanitary sewer and watermain utilities have been installed, all testing and televising has been
successfully completed, sanitary sewer as-built inverts utility record drawings have been verified, and the
utilities are considered ready for use by the City Engineer.
D. Construction Categories 4 and 5-6: The amount of $________________ may be
released when all streets, sidewalks, trails, and storm sewer, and storm water facilities have been installed
and tested, and have been found to be complete to the satisfaction of the City Engineer including all
corrective work for any identified punch list items and including verification of storm sewer as-built inverts,
but not including the final wear course.
E. Construction Categories 67-185: The amount of $_______________ may be
released when all remaining Developer’s obligations under this Agreement have been completed and the
Public Improvements have been found to be complete to the satisfaction of the City including all corrective
work for any identified punch list items, but not including the final wear course. including: (1) bituminous
wear course, (2) street lighting and private utilities, (3) trails, (4) bio retention facilities, (5) iron monuments
for lot corners have been installed, (3) all financial obligations to the City satisfied, (4) the required "record"
plans in the form of the City standards have been received and approved by the City, and (5) the public
improvements are accepted by the City Engineer and City Council.
F. At no point may the Security be reduced below Ttwenty-five percent (25%) of the
original security amounts in paragraph 34 shall be retained as security until: (1) the warranty period has
expiredall improvements have been completed, including bituminous wear course, (2) all improvements
have been fully completed and excepted by the City, including all corrective work and identified punch list
itemsiron monuments for lot corners have been installed, and (3) all financial obligations to the City have
Formatted: Indent: First line: 1", Numbered + Level: 2+ Numbering Style: A, B, C, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment:
Left + Aligned at: -0.5" + Indent at: 0"
REV1: 05/28/2015 21
been satisfied., (4) the required "record" plans have been received and approved by the City, (5) a warranty
security is provided, and (6) the public improvements are accepted by the City.
G. In addition to the above project milestone based security reductions, the Developer
may submit written request to the City Engineer and upon receipt of proof satisfactory to the City
Engineer that work is progressing in accordance with the approved plans and specifications,
and terms of this Agreement, and that all financial obligations to the City have been satisfied, the City
Engineer may approve a one-time reduction in the security for Construction Categories 2-5 in an amount not to
exceed fifty percent (50%) of the initial security amounts.
A.H. It is the intention of the parties that the City at all times have available to it a Letter
of Credit in an amount adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the Subdivision Improvements
and other obligations of the Developer under this Agreement, including fees or costs due to the City by the
Developer. To that end and notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, all requests by the Developer
for a reduction or release of the Letter of Credit shall be evaluated by the City in light of that principle.
36. SUMMARY OF CASH REQUIREMENTS. The following is a summary of the cash
requirements under this Contract which must be furnished to the City at the time of final plat approval:
Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) $
Water Availability Charge (WAC)
Erosion Control
Park Dedication
Street Light Operating Fee
City Base Map Upgrading
City Engineering Administration Escrow
TOTAL CASH REQUIREMENTS $
37. NOTICES. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand
delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the
following address: . Notices to the
City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by
certified mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address: Lake Elmo City Hall, 3800 Laverne
Avenue N. Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042.
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: December 15, 2015
REGULAR
ITEM # 21.a
AGENDA ITEM: Boulder Ponds – Approve Security Reduction #1.
SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer
THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, City Planner
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item .........................................................................................City Staff
- Report/Presentation………………………………………… .........................City 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
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Administration/Finance/Planning/Engineering.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is the City’s goal to retain at all times during the subdivision improvements a security amount that is adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the improvements as protection to the City tax payers
against the potential of developer default. With this reduction the remaining security amount held by the City will be $1,565,229 which remains over and above the estimate to completion for the remaining subdivision improvements.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving a reduction in the security amount for the Boulder Ponds 1st Addition.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Boulder Ponds 1st Addition developer installed improvements have been substantially completed
including the installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, residential streets, 5th Street, trails
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item X]
December 15, 2015
-- page 2 --
and sidewalks, and partial landscaping consisting of over $2.7 million in construction costs. In accordance
with Section 36 of the Boulder Ponds Development Contract, the progress for the improvements have
been satisfied for the sanitary sewer and watermain but have not reached the threshold necessary to be edible for a security reduction at this time for the remaining improvements. Due to the end of the
construction season the developer will not have an opportunity to reach the necessary thresholds until
next spring.
RECOMMENDATION:
If the City Council adopts a revised security reduction policy to be presented by staff at the December 15,
2015 council meeting, and further directs staff to apply the revised policy to all active developments in the City, then staff is recommending that the City Council approve a reduction in the security amount for the Boulder Ponds 1st Addition. The recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve a reduction of the Letter of Credit for the Boulder Ponds 1st Addition from $3,610,726 down to $1,565,229.”
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Engineer’s Letter Recommending Security Reduction #1 for the Boulder Ponds 1st Addition.
3800 Laverne Avenue North • Lake Elmo • Minnesota 55042
Phone: (651) 747-3900 • Fax: (651) 747-3901 • www.lakeelmo.org
December 11, 2015
Ms. Deb Ridgeway
The Excelsior Goup, LLC
1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Re: Boulder Ponds
Security Reduction #1
Dear Ms. Ridgeway:
We have reviewed your request for a reduction in the security for Boulder Ponds. In accordance with
Section 36 of the Boulder Ponds Development Contract, the progress for the improvements have been
satisfied for sanitary sewer and watermain but have not reached the threshold necessary to be edible
for a security reduction at this time for the remaining improvements.
However, should the City Council adopt a revised policy to be presented by staff at the December 15,
2015 council meeting, and direct staff to apply the revised policy to all active developments in the City,
then the security amount of $3,610,726 may be reduced to $1,565,229.
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call me 651.300.4264.
Sincerely,
John (Jack) W. Griffin, P.E.
City Engineer
cc: Clark Shroeder, Interim City Administrator
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
Stephen Wensman, City Planner
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: December 15, 2015
REGULAR
ITEM # 21.b.
AGENDA ITEM: Hunters Crossing 1st Addition – Approve Security Reduction #1.
SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer
THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, City Planner
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item .........................................................................................City Staff
- Report/Presentation………………………………………… .........................City 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
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Administration/Finance/Planning/Engineering.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is the City’s goal to retain at all times during the subdivision improvements a security amount
that is adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the improvements as protection to the
City tax payers against the potential of developer default. With this reduction the remaining security amount held by the City will be $894,649 which remains well over and above the
estimate to completion for the remaining subdivision improvements.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving a reduction in the security
amount for the Hunters Crossing 1st Addition.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item X]
December 15, 2015
-- page 2 --
The Hunters Crossing 1st Addition developer installed improvements have been substantially
completed including the installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, streets and
sidewalks consisting of over $1.3 million in construction costs. However, in accordance with
Section 37 of the Hunters Crossing 1st Addition Development Contract, the progress for the improvements have not reached the threshold necessary to be eligible for a security reduction at
this time. Due to the end of the construction season the developer will not have an opportunity to
reach the necessary thresholds until next spring.
RECOMMENDATION:
If the City Council adopts a revised security reduction policy to be presented by staff at the
December 15, 2015 council meeting, and further directs staff to apply the revised policy to all
active developments in the City, then staff is recommending that the City Council approve a
reduction in the security amount for the Hunters Crossing 1st Addition. The recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve a reduction of the Letter of Credit for the Hunters Crossing 1st Addition
from $1,619,769 down to $894,649.”
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Engineer’s Letter Recommending Security Reduction #2 for the Hunters Crossing 1st Addition.
2. Developer's Letter Requesting Reduction of Security for the Hunters Crossing 1st Addition.
Twin Cities
7599 Anagram Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-229-6000 Tel
www.calatlantichomes.com
December 3, 2015
Ryan Stempski, P.E.
Focus Engineering, Inc.
3800 Laverne Ave. N.
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
RE: Request for Letter of Credit Reduction – Hunters Crossing
Dear Mr. Stempski:
CalAtlantic Homes currently has two LOCs with the City of Lake Elmo. This letter is
intended to be a summary of CalAtlantic’s requests to have both LOCs reduced according
to the Development Contracts. A spreadsheet detailing the reductions is attached.
Hunters Crossing 1st Addition
LOC #IS0252285U for $1,619,768.00
This addition was substantially completed this past summer, final street improvements,
pond filtration, and landscaping remain. Per the DA, section 37 A., CalAtlantic requests
this LOC be reduced down to $869,335.
Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition
LOC #IS0305143U for $1,145,404.00
This addition was significantly completed this past summer, sidewalks, final street
improvements, and landscaping remain. Per the DA, section 37 A., CalAtlantic requests
this LOC be reduced down to $601,976.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions at (952) 229-6034.
Sincerely,
CalAtlantic Group, Inc.
Shawn Wenzel, P.E.
Land Coordinator
Enclosure: LOC Reduction Request Spreadsheet
Cc: Mark Sonstegard, VP Land Development – CalAtlantic Homes
Jack Griffin, City Engineer – Focus Engineering
3800 Laverne Avenue North • Lake Elmo • Minnesota 55042
Phone: (651) 747-3900 • Fax: (651) 747-3901 • www.lakeelmo.org
December 11, 2015
Mr. Shawn Wenzel
CalAtlantic Group, Inc.
7699 Anagram Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Re: Hunters Crossing 1st Addition
Security Reduction #1
Dear Mr. Wenzel:
We have reviewed your request dated December 3, 2015 for a reduction in the security for the Hunters
Crossing 1st Addition. In accordance with Section 37 of the Hunters Crossing 1st Addition Development
Contract, the progress for the improvements have not reached the threshold necessary to be edible for
a security reduction at this time.
However, should the City Council adopt a revised policy to be presented by staff at the December 15,
2015 council meeting, and direct staff to apply the revised policy to all active developments in the City,
then the security amount of $1,619,769 may be reduced to $894,649.
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call me 651.300.4264.
Sincerely,
John (Jack) W. Griffin, P.E.
City Engineer
cc: Clark Shroeder, Interim City Administrator
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
Stephen Wensman, City Planner
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: December 15, 2015
REGULAR
ITEM # 21.c
AGENDA ITEM: Wildflower at Lake Elmo – Approve Security Reduction #2.
SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer
THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, City Planner
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item .........................................................................................City Staff
- Report/Presentation………………………………………… .........................City 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
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Administration/Finance/Planning/Engineering.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is the City’s goal to retain at all times during the subdivision improvements a security amount
that is adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the improvements as protection to the
City tax payers against the potential of developer default. With this reduction the remaining security amount held by the City will be $2,310,740 which remains over and above the estimate
to completion for the remaining subdivision improvements.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving a reduction in the security
amount for the Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 21.c]
December 15, 2015
-- page 2 --
The developer has completed a substantial portion of the required development improvements
for the Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition including the installation of sanitary sewer,
installation of watermain, a substantial portion of storm sewer and about 35% of the required
public street improvements consisting of over $2.5 million in construction costs. However, in accordance with Section 35 of the Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition Development Contract,
the progress for the improvements have not reached the threshold necessary to be eligible for a
security reduction at this time. Due to the end of the construction season the developer will not
have an opportunity to reach the necessary thresholds until next spring.
RECOMMENDATION:
If the City Council adopts a revised security reduction policy to be presented by staff at the
December 15, 2015 council meeting, and further directs staff to apply the revised policy to all
active developments in the City, then staff is recommending that the City Council approve a reduction in the security amount for the Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition. The
recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve a reduction of the Letter of Credit for the Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st
Addition from $3,440,831 down to $2,310,740.”
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Engineer’s Letter Recommending Security Reduction #2 for the Wildflower at Lake 1st Addition. 2. Developer's Letter Requesting Reduction of Security for the Wildflower at Lake 1st Addition.
3800 Laverne Avenue North • Lake Elmo • Minnesota 55042
Phone: (651) 747-3900 • Fax: (651) 747-3901 • www.lakeelmo.org
December 11, 2015
Mr. Robert Engstrom
Robert Engstrom Companies
4801 West 81st Street, Suite 101
Minneapolis, MN 55437
Re: Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition
Security Reduction #2
Dear Mr. Engstrom:
We have reviewed your request dated December 10, 2015 for a reduction in the security for the
Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition. In accordance with Section 35 of the Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st
Addition Development Contract, the progress for the improvements have not reached the threshold
necessary to be edible for a security reduction at this time.
However, should the City Council adopt a revised policy to be presented by staff at the December 15,
2015 council meeting, and direct staff to apply the revised policy to all active developments in the City,
then the security amount of $3,440,831 may be reduced to $2,310,740.
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call me 651.300.4264.
Sincerely,
John (Jack) W. Griffin, P.E.
City Engineer
cc: Clark Shroeder, Interim City Administrator
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
Stephen Wensman, City Planner
12/11/2015 FOCUS Engineering, Inc. Mail Wildflower at Lake Elmo LOC
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=885060bd59&view=pt&search=inbox&th=1518d4d7ad7b3dc7&siml=1518d4d7ad7b3dc7 1/2
Jack Griffin <jack.griffin@focusengineeringinc.com>
Wildflower at Lake Elmo LOC
1 message
Robert Engstrom <bob@engstromco.com>Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 1:07 PM
To: "John (Jack) Griffin, PE" <jack.griffin@focusengineeringinc.com>
December 10, 2015
Jack Griffin
Focus Engineering
Dear Jack,
Robert Engstrom Companies is requesting the City of Lake Elmo to reduce the
Letter of Credit for site improvements at Wildflower at Lake Elmo. The
reduction is based on the proposed reduction policy discussed in our meeting
on December 9, 2015. I understand that this policy will be presented to the City
Council on December 15, 2015. If approved, we are requesting the City
Council take action on our request at the same meeting.
Improvements completed are, sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer.
Improvements partially complete are, streets and trails. As agreed, attached
is the latest pay request to assist in the calculation of the reduction.
If you have question, please contact me.
Kind Regards,
Bob Engstrom
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: December 15, 2015
REGULAR
ITEM # 21.d
AGENDA ITEM: Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition – Approve Security Reduction #1.
SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer
THROUGH: Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, City Planner
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item .........................................................................................City Staff
- Report/Presentation………………………………………… .........................City 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
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Administration/Finance/Planning/Engineering.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is the City’s goal to retain at all times during the subdivision improvements a security amount that is adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the improvements as protection to the City tax payers
against the potential of developer default. With this reduction the remaining security amount held by the City will be $591,726 which remains well over and above the estimate to completion for the remaining subdivision improvements.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving a reduction in the security amount for the Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition developer installed improvements have been substantially completed
including the installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, residential streets, 5th Street (south
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 21.d]
December 15, 2015
-- page 2 --
half) and sidewalks consisting of over $900,000 in construction costs. However, in accordance with
Section 36 of the Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition Development Contract, the progress for the
improvements have not reached the threshold necessary to be eligible for a security reduction at this time. Due to the end of the construction season the developer will not have an opportunity to reach the
necessary thresholds until next spring.
RECOMMENDATION:
If the City Council adopts a revised security reduction policy to be presented by staff at the December 15, 2015 council meeting, and further directs staff to apply the revised policy to all active developments in
the City, then staff is recommending that the City Council approve a reduction in the security amount for the Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition. The recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve a reduction of the Letter of Credit for the Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition from $1,145,404 down to $591,726.”
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Engineer’s Letter Recommending Security Reduction #1 for the Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition.
2. Developer's Letter Requesting Reduction of Security for the Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition.
Twin Cities
7599 Anagram Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-229-6000 Tel
www.calatlantichomes.com
December 3, 2015
Ryan Stempski, P.E.
Focus Engineering, Inc.
3800 Laverne Ave. N.
Lake Elmo, MN 55042
RE: Request for Letter of Credit Reduction – Hunters Crossing
Dear Mr. Stempski:
CalAtlantic Homes currently has two LOCs with the City of Lake Elmo. This letter is
intended to be a summary of CalAtlantic’s requests to have both LOCs reduced according
to the Development Contracts. A spreadsheet detailing the reductions is attached.
Hunters Crossing 1st Addition
LOC #IS0252285U for $1,619,768.00
This addition was substantially completed this past summer, final street improvements,
pond filtration, and landscaping remain. Per the DA, section 37 A., CalAtlantic requests
this LOC be reduced down to $869,335.
Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition
LOC #IS0305143U for $1,145,404.00
This addition was significantly completed this past summer, sidewalks, final street
improvements, and landscaping remain. Per the DA, section 37 A., CalAtlantic requests
this LOC be reduced down to $601,976.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions at (952) 229-6034.
Sincerely,
CalAtlantic Group, Inc.
Shawn Wenzel, P.E.
Land Coordinator
Enclosure: LOC Reduction Request Spreadsheet
Cc: Mark Sonstegard, VP Land Development – CalAtlantic Homes
Jack Griffin, City Engineer – Focus Engineering
3800 Laverne Avenue North • Lake Elmo • Minnesota 55042
Phone: (651) 747-3900 • Fax: (651) 747-3901 • www.lakeelmo.org
December 11, 2015
Mr. Shawn Wenzel
CalAtlantic Group, Inc.
7699 Anagram Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Re: Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition
Security Reduction #1
Dear Mr. Wenzel:
We have reviewed your request dated December 3, 2015 for a reduction in the security for the Hunters
Crossing 2nd Addition. In accordance with Section 36 of the Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition
Development Contract, the progress for the improvements have not reached the threshold necessary to
be eligible for a security reduction at this time.
However, should the City Council adopt a revised policy to be presented by staff at the December 15,
2015 council meeting, and direct staff to apply the revised policy to all active developments in the City,
then the security amount of $1,145,404 may be reduced to $591,726.
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call me 651.300.4264.
Sincerely,
John (Jack) W. Griffin, P.E.
City Engineer
cc: Clark Shroeder, Interim City Administrator
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
Stephen Wensman, City Planner
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: 12/15/2015
REGULAR
ITEM #: 22
MOTION
AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance Amendments to Article IX of the Zoning Ordinance – Rural Districts
as it pertains to Permitted, Conditional, and Interim Uses
SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Wensman
THROUGH: Clark Schroeder
REVIEWED BY: Joan Ziertman
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:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 23, 2015 to discuss and take testimony on
possible changes to Article IX of the Zoning Ordinance – Rural Districts, as it pertains to the following
permitted, conditional, and interim uses: secondary dwellings, cemetery, commercial kennel, commercial
stable, golf courses, restricted recreation, and agricultural sales business uses in the rural districts. Staff
has been asked to hold off on any further discussion or action related to cemeteries due to pending
litigation. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council take action to approve the
ordinance text amendments to Article IX of the Zoning Ordinance – Rural Districts with the following
motion:
The Planning commission recommends the City Council accept the proposed amendment to Article IX of
the Zoning Ordinance – Rural Districts and Article II-Definitions by approving the following motion:
“Move to approve an ordinance amendment, amending Article IX of the Zoning Ordinance making
secondary dwellings a permitted use in the Rural Residential District, removing commercial kennels as
a conditional use in the RT -Rural Development Transitional District and RR -Rural Residential
District, removing restricted recreation as conditional use in the Agriculture District, and amending
Article II, striking, “or, within a detached structure”, from the definition of secondary dwelling.”
BACKGROUND AND STAFF REPORT:
On October 26, 2015 Kyle Klatt, the former Community Development Director, reviewed Zoning
Ordinance Use Classifications generally with the Planning Commission and after which it was suggested
that a public hearing be held to take public testimony and to specifically consider amending the following
permitted, conditional and interim uses in the rural districts: secondary dwellings, cemetery, commercial
kennel, commercial stable, golf courses, restricted recreation, and agricultural sales business uses. The
Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 23, 2015 to discuss and take testimony on the
uses with respect to their fit with:
1. The Purpose of the individual zoning districts; 2. The intent and purpose consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
3. The likely impact of the uses on the individual rural zoning districts considering the typical lot
sizes and densities of the neighborhoods; and 4. The site design and development standards.
The public hearing comments were only in response to cemeteries which is not being considered at this
time. The Planning Commission discussed the uses and recommended the following changes:
Article IX, Section 154.401, Table 9-1 Permitted and Conditional Uses, Rural Districts
RT A RR RS RE
Residential District Uses
Secondary dwelling - P P - -
Commercial Kennel C C C - -
Commercial Stable - C - - -
Golf Course - C - - -
Restricted Recreation - C - - -
Agricultural Sales
Business
I I I - -
ARTICLE II, Section 154.012, Subd. B1a.
DEFINITIONS:
Secondary Dwelling. A residential dwelling unit, but not a manufactured home, located on the same lot
as a single family dwelling unit, either within the principal structure, above a detached garage, or within
a detached structure.
In addition to the above mentioned changes, the Planning Commission directed staff to research
strengthening the standards for commercial kennels and stables and to come back with a draft ordinance
amendment in the future.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning commission recommends the City Council accept the proposed amendment to Article IX of
the Zoning Ordinance – Rural Districts and Article II-Definitions by approving the following motion:
“Move to approve an ordinance amendment, amending Article IX of the Zoning Ordinance making
secondary dwellings a permitted use in the Rural Residential District, removing commercial kennels as
a conditional use in the RT -Rural Development Transitional District and RR -Rural Residential
District, removing restricted recreation as conditional use in the Agriculture District, and amending
Article II, striking, “or, within a detached structure”, from the definition of secondary dwelling.”
ATTACHMENT(S):
• Planning Commission Staff Report dated 10/12/15.
• Planning Commission Staff Report dated 11/23/15.
• Planning Commission Minutes dated 10/12/15.
• Planning Commission Minutes dated 11/23/15.
• Article IX of the Lake Elmo Code of Ordinances.
• Article II of the Lake Elmo Code of Ordinances.
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-12-15
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of October 12, 2015
Chairman Dodson called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at
7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dodson, Dorschner, Fields, Haggard, Larson, Williams,
Griffin and Kreimer
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Klatt and Interim Administrator
Schroeder
Approve Agenda:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
Approve Minutes: September 28, 2015
M/S/P: Williams/Dorschner, move to approve minutes as presented, Vote: 7-0, motion
carried unanimously.
Zoning Ordinance Use Classification Review
Klatt started the discussion by stating that the City Council wanted to review the
Cemetery use, and it was a good time to take a comprehensive look at all uses.
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission look at the Cemetery use and that
it not be an allowed or conditional use in AG or RR. Staff is recommending that the
Cemetery use only be allowed as a conditional use in the Public Facility zone.
Klatt stated that he hoped the Commission had time to review the chart and will bring
forward items for discussion. Klatt explained the differences between allowed,
conditional and interim uses.
Kreimer asked about the discretion of approving CUP’s. Klatt stated that it is somewhat
difficult to deny those uses. There was a general discussion of CUP’s.
Williams asked why Public Facility and mixed use along I94 were not in the chart. Klatt
responded that mixed use along I94 is handled via a PUD overlay and the Public Facility
has not been revised yet and is in a different table.
2
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-12-15
Haggard would like to see the changes from 2013 taken back out until such time as the
public has a chance to weigh back in. Klatt stated that it would be difficult to notice
people as it potentially affects every property in the City.
Williams asked if it might be a good idea to deal with the cemetery issue and then
possibly schedule a workshop.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Griffin: move to recommend that a public hearing be scheduled to
eliminate the cemetery use in AG and RR zones. Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously.
Williams is against the motion as presented. He thinks that the definition can be
changed and cemeteries could be allowed in a limited way. Fields agreed and asked if it
could be changed to be conditional. Klatt stated that if it is made conditional, it is
subject to Council approval.
M/S/P: Williams/Dodson: move to make a friendly amendment to change the definition
of cemetery to read “ Land used or intended to be used for the burial of the dead and
dedicated for cemetery purposes, including columbariums, and mausoleums not over 8
feet in height”. He would also like the use category to be revised to conditional in AG
and RR. Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously, after amendment.
Yvette Oldendorff, 5418 Lake Elmo Ave, There is no public demand for a local cemetery.
They circulated a petition and 147 people signed who feel that a cemetery is a poor use
of property. Also, on another note, should there be any of these commercial uses such
as commercial Kennels and commercial stables in a residential district?
Saxe Roberts, there is no demand for cemeteries. Cremations are on the rise. There is
60% more land for cemeteries than is needed. They are already allowed in the public
facility zone.
Dodson withdrew his second to Williams friendly amendment. Haggard decided to
second the friendly amendment.
Williams stated that there is already a provision in the code to allow it in public facility,
so he doesn’t feel it needs to be in AG & RR.
M/S/P: Williams/Dodson: motion to amend his amendment to just change the definition
of cemetery and leave the original motion to remove the use from AG and RR would
stand. Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Dodson: motion to amend the amendment to strike “not to exceed 8
feet in height”. Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously.
3
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-12-15
The complete action taken, including amendments, was to recommend that a public
hearing be scheduled to remove cemetery as an allowed use from AG & RR and to
change the definition to: “Land used or intended to be used for the burial of the dead
and dedicated for cemetery purposes, including columbariums, and mausoleums”.
The Commission continued discussion regarding the use chart. Dodson asked about the
manufactured home park use in MDR. The Commission had some discussion regarding
this. There was some discussion regarding secondary dwellings and if those are located
in the most reasonable zones.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Williams: move to make secondary dwelling an allowed use in RT, AG,
RR, RS, RE, LDR, MDR, HDR & VMX, Vote: 6-1, motion carried with Haggard voting no.
Reason given was that she is not clear on the definition and the discussion of attached
vs detached was not fully finalized.
Schroeder stated that with this being the last meeting with Klatt and that the
Commission might want to consider a deeper discussion once the new staff is on board.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Fields: motion to table this discussion until such time as new staff is
available. Vote: 4-3, motion failed.
Fields asked if there were any other areas that might be of urgency. Larson feels that
the public assembly and religious institutions should be dealt with.
M/S/P: Dodson/Haggard: motion to remove public assembly as a use from the Business
Park Zoning. Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously
Williams and Haggard would like to go through and highlight areas that others are
concerned with so that they can all be thinking about them.
Williams would like to look at agricultural sales, garden center and Building supply sales.
He thinks commercial vehicle repair should be allowed somewhere. Wondering why
adult establishment is allowed in Business Park. Williams thinks the drive through item
should be looked at further. Motor Freight and Warehousing seems similar to
commercial vehicle repair. Research and testing is only allowed in Business Park and he
feels it should be allowed in other business. OP-alt was removed from the comp plan
and should also be removed from the zoning code.
Klatt stated that we currently don’t have an industrial zone for more intense uses, and
that might be something we might want to look at as we re-do the comp plan. Williams
thought we might want to consider an industrial park.
4
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-12-15
Haggard would like to look at group home as a use. Klatt stated that this is something
regulated by state law and it has to be allowed anywhere we allow single family homes.
Klatt stated that we may also need to add that use to the other residential zones as well.
Haggard is concerned about any commercial type uses in the AG & RR zones. She is not
sure why a golf course would be allowed in LDR.
Kreimer would like to look at funeral homes in MDR. He is not sure they belong there.
Would like to discuss the greenhouses non-retail in RR and what it is we are allowing
with solar equipment which is permitted across the board.
Williams brought up changes for the definitions section. The Commission discussed
those possible changes.
Comprehensive Plan Update Discussion
Klatt started his discussion with a map south of 10th street showing the current land use
map of what went into the comprehensive plan. This map has changed a little bit as the
alignment of 5th street has changed. 5th street was going to be the dividing line between
low density and more intense densities. It has been discussed to possibly eliminate the
high density housing and possibly add a business park in that spot. It was also discussed
to possibly change some of the medium density to either low density or expanding the
commercial.
Klatt presented an analysis of what these changes would be in regards to numbers. This
would make the City very close to what the Met Council is looking for. Klatt is looking
for feedback from the Met Council and also from the general public as this will impact
property owners. Klatt stated that he is focusing on I94 because of the moratorium.
The Bus Rapid Transit line will also have an impact. There are certain standards for what
needs to develop around the transit stations.
Klatt discussed what the opportunities are for development in the rural areas. It is
limited by the amount of land that is available. The Commission should start thinking
about what they want that area to look like, what types of developments we want to
allow and what size of lots should be allowed to subdivide.
Kreimer pointed out that this does not take into consideration what might happen with
Tartan Park. If it was developed into residential units, that would be a significant
amount.
Council Updates – September 15, 2015 Meeting
1. Kleis Minor Subdivision – Passed with an additional condition that the
assessments will need to be paid in full.
5
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-12-15
2. Halcyon Cemetery – Denied.
Staff Updates
Schroeder gave an update regarding staffing. There has been a new building inspector
hired and a new truck will be purchased or leased. The City Planner and Community
Development jobs will be filled and there will be one admin position upgraded and
another admin position will be hired.
Tartan Park has been sold, but the purchaser has not been made public knowledge yet.
They will bring that back once it is known.
1. Upcoming Meetings
a. October 26, 2015
b. November 9, 2015
Commission Concerns
Williams stated that the Planning Commission members received a letter from the
Bradley family asking to be removed from the moratorium restrictions. This property is
actually in phase III. Schroeder stated that they would actually have to come forward
and petition the City to be removed from the moratorium restrictions, so no action has
been taken.
Dorschner thanked Kyle for his service and is concerned that we will not have a City
Planner or Community Development Director. Klatt stated that as part of the transition
Ben Gozola will be working on projects and the City has asked him to be at the City as
much as he can.
Dodson also thanked Kyle for his service and professionalism with the Planning
Commission. Klatt stated that he has enjoyed working with the present and past
Planning Commissions and appreciates all the hard work that people put into the
volunteer position.
Meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Joan Ziertman
Planning Program Assistant
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: 12/15/15
REGULAR
ITEM #: 23
MOTION
AGENDA ITEM: Village Mixed Use Zoning discussion
SUBMITTED BY: Justin Bloyer
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: NONE
BACKGROUND AND STAFF REPORT:
Council Member Bloyer has requested that the VMX ordinance be reviewed and discussed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff have no recommendation
ATTACHMENT(S):
VMX ordinance no. 08-091
Lake Elmo STILLWATER BLVD N30TH ST N
33RD ST N
32ND ST NLAKE ELMO AVE NLAVERNE AVE NUPPER 33RD
S
T
N LAYTON AVE NLAMPERT AVE N31ST ST NLANGLY CT
N
34TH ST N
LAYTON CT NLAVERNE CT N35TH ST N
LAKE ELMO AVE N32ND ST N
Proposed VMX District Boundary
Watershed Districts
Browns Creek
Valley Branch
General
E
Legend
Lakes
Lake Elmo Boundary
Shoreland District Boundary
Data Disclaimer:
This map is not a boundary
survey and is not intended
to be used as such. The
City of Lake Elmo assumes
no liability for the
completeness of this map
or responsibility for any
associated direct, indirect,
or consequential damages
that may result from its use
or misuse.
Map Updated May 2013
Map created by the Lake Elmo PlanningDepartment - May 2013
South Washington
Village Area VMX Zoning Area
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: 12/15/15
REGULAR
ITEM #: 25
MOTION
AGENDA ITEM: Agenda Order- Council Reports
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 NO POLICY STATEMENT
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
… Staff recommends the City Council… take the following action / with the following motion:
Move to place Council Reports at the end of the agenda
BACKGROUND AND STAFF REPORT: In conversation between the Bureau of Mediation Services
(BMS) and the Interim City Administrator we are recommending to move Council Reports to the end of
the agenda. In addition, council reports should be brief listing of meetings attended while representing
the city as a Council Member without editorializing or comments.
RECOMMENDATION:
Interim City Administrator recommends:
“Move to place Council Reports at the end of the agenda”
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: 12/15/2015
REGULAR
ITEM #: 27
MOTION
AGENDA ITEM: Draft Agreement for Library Services
SUBMITTED BY: Mayor Pearson
THROUGH: Julie Johnson, City Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Mayor Pearson
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item ................................................................................................. Mayor
- Report/Presentation ................................................................................................. Mayor - 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 (IF APPLICABLE: Lake Elmo seeks to reestablish library
services via the Washington county library system, commencing no later than 1/1/17. To that
end, Lake Elmo would defer 2017 library levy decisions and collections to Washington County.
BACKGROUND: Lake Elmo understands that any agreement will involve several discussions,
with several parties, over several months.
Some critical discussion points:
• It is Lake Elmo's expectation that library services would be provided uninterrupted, at
Lake Elmo's existing library facility, located at 3537 Lake Elmo Ave.
• Lake Elmo understands that the county uses a data driven process to establish services
and hours of operation at each of its facilities. We'd expect the same process to be used
for the Lake Elmo Avenue facility, however the county will supplement it's own data
with Lake Elmo data.
• As in any successful agreement between distinct parties, commitments are to be made.
Lake Elmo commits to a 10 year release of its library levy, while the county commits to a
5 year commitment of a Lake Elmo library facility.
• The Lake Elmo facility maintenance costs and all reasonable facility improvement costs,
shall be reimbursed to Lake Elmo by Washington County or covered directly by
Washington County.
3800 Laverne Avenue North • Lake Elmo • Minnesota 55042
Phone: (651) 747-3900 • Fax: (651) 747-3901 • www.lakeelmo.org
December 11, 2015
Mr. Shawn Wenzel
CalAtlantic Group, Inc.
7699 Anagram Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Re: Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition
Security Reduction #1
Dear Mr. Wenzel:
We have reviewed your request dated December 3, 2015 for a reduction in the security for the Hunters
Crossing 2nd Addition. In accordance with Section 36 of the Hunters Crossing 2nd Addition
Development Contract, the progress for the improvements have not reached the threshold necessary to
be edible for a security reduction at this time.
However, should the City Council adopt a revised policy to be presented by staff at the December 15,
2015 council meeting, and direct staff to apply the revised policy to all active developments in the City,
then the security amount of $1,145,404 may be reduced to $591,726.
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call me 651.300.4264.
Sincerely,
John (Jack) W. Griffin, P.E.
City Engineer
cc: Clark Shroeder, Interim City Administrator
Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
Stephen Wensman, City Planner
• Lake Elmo has a long history of volunteerism and while we recognize data privacy
concerns must be provided for, maintaining those volunteer opportunities are paramount
to any collaborative agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
“Move that the Lake Elmo city council directs this draft agreement be sent to the Lake Elmo
Library Board in order that the board will offer the Council input that aligns with the LELB's
mission statement:"the mission of the LELB is to enhance access to library services,
information and resources for Lake Elmo residents”
The council expects this motion to come before it again at its 1/19/2016 meeting.