HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-05-16 City Council Meeting Packet
NOTICE OF MEETING
City Council Meeting
Tuesday, July 5, 2016 7:00 P.M.
City of Lake Elmo | 3800 Laverne Avenue North
Agenda
A. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance
B. Approval of Agenda
C. Approval of Minutes
1. May 17, 2016; June 28, 2016
D. Public Comments/Inquiries
E. Presentations
F. Consent Agenda
2. Approve Payment of Disbursements
3. Accept Fire Department Report
4. Approve Vacating Watermain Easements on Property Located at 8574 Eagle Point Circle N, Lake Elmo,
Washington County, MN PID #33.029.21.43.0004
5. Approve Ordinance to Amend Article XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Section 205: Fencing
Regulations; Subd. 6.: Easement Encroachment of the Lake Elmo Code of Ordinances to Allow
Administrative Approval of Encroachment Agreements – Ordinance 08-140; Resolution 2016-57
6. Approve Ordinance to Amend Section 10.99 Penalties of the Lake Elmo Code of Ordinances –
Ordinance 08-141
7. Approve Renaming of Layton Ave to Wildflower Drive – Ordinance 08-145
8. Approve Hunting Ordinance and Summary Publication – Ordinance 08-142; Resolution 2016-55
9. Approve Appointment of Election Judges for 2016 Primary and General Elections – Resolution 2016-52
10. Approve Resolution Declaring the PT Fire Department Administrative Assistant Position a Firefighter
Position – Resolution 2016-56
11. 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements – Change Order No. 1
12. Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements – Change Order No. 1
13. Approve Amending the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Planned Land Use Category for Rural Single Family
Such That The City Council Can Allow Connection To The Sanitary Sewer System Where Practical –
Resolution 2016-50
14. Adopt Street Naming Policy – Ordinance #08-144
G. Regular Agenda
15. Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension
16. Funding Request for Fishing with Deputies Event
17. Stormwater Ordinance Amendment – Consideration to Reinstate 1% Rule Provisions
18. Ordinance No. 08-143, An Ordinance Amending The Lake Elmo City Code of Ordinance by Amending the
City’s Provisions Related to the City Council and Summary Publication – Resolution 2016-54
19. Direct Parks Commission to Work On Plans For a Neighborhood Park In The Savona Neighborhood And
Include This Project in the 2017 CIP
20. Consideration Regarding Whether Any Action Needs To Be Taken Regarding Employee Complaint Against
Council Member Bloyer That Was Found To Be Unsustained By The City Attorney
H. Council Reports
I. Staff Reports and Announcements
J. 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
MAY 17, 2016
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Councilmembers Julie Fliflet, Anne Smith, Justin Bloyer,
and Jill Lundgren.
Staff present: Administrator Handt, City Attorney Sonsalla, City Engineer Griffin, Finance
Director Bendel, Planning Director Wensman, Fire Chief Malmquist and City Clerk Johnson.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Item 16 was removed from the Agenda and a Closed Session was added. Items 18, 19, 21 and 22
were moved to the Regular Agenda. Item 20 was postponed to the next meeting.
Agenda approved as amended by unanimous consent.
ACCEPT MINUTES
Minutes of the March 15, 2016 and April 19, 2016 meeting were approved as amended. Minutes
of the April 5, 2016 meeting were approved as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES
Mike Reeves, 10347 Grand Valley Ln., Woodbury, MN provided context for the comments
made at the May 3, 2016 meeting regarding actions of past City Councils regarding
infrastructure projects.
Barry Weeks, 3647 Lake Elmo Avenue, referred to the City Organizational Chart, noting
residents are the bosses of the City Council and stated he does not support the decision to hire a
parliamentarian.
Wally Nelson, 4582 Lilac Lane N., responded to statements made at the May 3, 2016 City
Council meeting related to actions of the former City Council related to infrastructure.
PRESENTATIONS
Huff N’ Puff Days Proclamation
Casey Block, Lake Elmo Jaycees President, received the Proclamation and reported that the Lake
Elmo Chapter recently received the honor of being named top chapter in the state at the Jaycees
spring convention.
CONSENT AGENDA
2. Approve Payment of Disbursements
3. Accept April 2016 Financial Statements
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
May 17, 2016
Page 2 of 6
4. Approve Mutual Aid Agreement with the City of Woodbury
5. Accept April 2016 Assessor’s Report
6. Accept April 2016 Building Department Report
7. Approval to Abate a 2016 Special Assessment –Resolution 2016-45
8. Approve Valley Branch Watershed District Boundary Update –Resolution 2016-38
9. Approve Temporary Liquor License for Lake Elmo Jaycees Huff n’ Puff Days
10. Approve Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements – Pay Request No. 1
11. Approve Inwood Water Tower – Pay Request No. 1
12. Approve Eagle Point Boulevard Street Improvements – Change Order No. 3
13. 2016 Seal Coat Project – Approve West Lakeland Township Joint Services Agreement
14. 2016 Seal Coat Project – Accept Bids and Award Contract – Resolution 2016-40
15. 2016 Street Full Depth Patching – Accept Bids and Award Contract
Consent agenda approved as presented by unanimous consensus.
ITEM 18: Approve Boulder Ponds 2nd Addition Final Plat
Planning Director Wensman confirmed that the plat does meet the City’s street naming
convention and Phase 1 is in compliance with the conditions of approval.
Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION
2016-41 APPROVING THE FINAL PUD AND FINAL PLAT FOR BOULDER PONDS 2ND
ADDITION WITH 5 CONDITIONS. Motion passed 3 – 1 – 1. (Lundgren – nay; Fliflet –
present/not voting)
ITEM 19: Approve Boulder Ponds 2nd Addition Developers Agreement
Planning Director Wensman provided a brief overview of the Developers Agreement.
Councilmember Smith, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2016-
42 APPROVING THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT FOR THE BOULDER PONDS 2ND
ADDITION PLANED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. Motion passed 4 – 1. (Lundgren –
nay)
ITEM 21: Approve Planning Department Plan of Work
Planning Director Wensman stated he would add a study of rural density north of 10th Street at
the request of Councilmember Smith.
Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO ADOPT THE 2016
PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORK PLAN AS AMENDED.
Mayor Pearson requested the addition of multi tenant discussion general performance standards
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
May 17, 2016
Page 3 of 6
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADD SPECIFICITY TO THE
GENERAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS TO ADD MULTI TENANT TO THE PLAN.
Motion passed 5 – 0.
Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO ADD SPECIFICITY
TO LOOK INTO MINIMUM LOT SIZE NORTH OF 10TH STREET TO THE WORK PLAN.
Motion passed 5 – 0.
Primary motion as amended passed 5 – 0.
ITEM 22: Adopt Resolution Supporting Washington County HRA
City Administrator Handt provided an overview of the Washington County request for support
authorizing Washington County to create a Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION
2016-39 SUPPORTING PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY OF
WASHINGTON TO CONFER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POWERS UPON THE
WASHINGTON COUNTY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. Motion
passed 3 – 1- 1. (Lundgren – nay; Fliflet – abstain)
ITEM 23: Presentation of 2016A Bond Issuance Results
Tammy Omdahl, Northland Securities, reviewed six bids received and noted that due to the
strong interest and low rates, the total amount of the bonds was reduced.
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO ADOPT
RESOLUTION 2016-44 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE,
PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF
$9,860,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2016A. Motion passed 5 – 0.
ITEM 24: Lions Park RFP
City Administrator Handt and Parks Commission Chair Shane Weis presented an overview of
the Request for Proposal process the Parks Commission has followed to create the RFP
document to be used by bidders.
Mayor Pearson moved TO AMEND THE APPROVAL OF THE LIONS PARK RFP TO
INCLUDE REMOVAL OF THE PARKS BUILDING. Motion died – no second.
ITEM 25: Library Parking Lot
Brett Emmons, Library Board President, reviewed the project and design options and explained
the conceptual costs to date. Landscape architect Brad Aldrich also presented concepts for the
parking lot.
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved FOR THE CITY TO
COST SHARE 50% ON THE ENTIRE PROJECT NET OF GRANT FUNDS APPLIED
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
May 17, 2016
Page 4 of 6
AND APPROVE OPTION B INCLUDING THE WALKWAY, WITH THE USE SHARING
OF THE PARKING LOT TO BE NEGOTIATED.
Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO AMEND THE MOTION TO
STRIKE THE PERCENTAGE OF COST SHARE. Motion withdrawn.
Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved to amend the primary
motion to limit the cost to $113,000. Motion withdrawn.
Primary motion passed 3 – 2. (Pearson, Bloyer – nay). Councilmember Bloyer stated he
could not support the project without hard numbers and given his concerns about the cost to
residents for other projects currently under construction. Mayor Pearson expressed concerns
over cost of maintenance and cost of improvements when similar features were removed from
the downtown plan.
ITEM 26: Clarification on Zoning Code Amendment for Rural Districts
Planning Director Wensman reviewed the staff memo explaining the need to review the motion
made at the December 15, 2015 Council meeting regarding Article IX, Section 154.401 of the
zoning code. Councilmember Fliflet added that the intent of her motion in December was to
remove the newly created permitted uses, not to disallow renewal of the existing uses.
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO RESCIND THE
MOTION MADE AT THE DECEMBER 15, 2015 COUNCIL MEETING AND TO AMEND
THE EXISTING ARTICLE IX TO REVERT TO LAND USES IN 2013 PER THE TABLE
IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT. Motion passed 3 – 2. (Pearson, Bloyer – nay)
ITEM 27: Shared Services and Fire Department Staffing
Administrator Handt requested direction from the Council prior to spending a large amount of
staff time exploring options.
Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO DIRECT STAFF TO
RESEARCH SHARED SERVICES OR OTHER AGREEMENTS AND STAFFING
OPTIONS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO AMEND THE PRIMARY
MOTION TO ADD A REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER TWO COUNCIL
MEETINGS. Motion failed 2 – 3. (Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith – nay)
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO AMEND THE
PRIMARY MOTION TO ADD THAT INFORMATION WILL BE SHA RED AT A CITY
COUNCIL WORKSHOP TO INCLUDE THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE AND FIRE
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL. Motion passed 5 – 0.
Primary motion passed 5 – 0.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
May 17, 2016
Page 5 of 6
ITEM 28: June 7, 2016 City Council Meeting
Administrator Handt stated that there will not be a quorum available for the regularly scheduled
June 7, 2016 Council Meeting and offered alternate dates to meet to address time sensitive
matters.
Council agreed by consensus to meet on May 27, 2016 at 8:00 a.m. for a Closed Session and
9:00 a.m. for a Special Meeting and that the Parliamentarian does not need to preside.
COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Pearson: Applauded first responders; attended meetings with Met Council, State
representatives and business representatives; attended Fire Department Appreciation Dinner,
Parks Commission meeting, union meeting, Lake Elmo Elementary School Fundraiser; hosted
Visit with the Mayor at Family Means; warned that taxpayers will be paying for the cost of
Clean-up Day and recognized individuals important in establishing parks in Lake Elmo.
Councilmember Fliflet: Attended Environmental Committee meeting, Finance Committee
meeting, Human Resources Committee Meeting, union meeting, Library Board meeting, Fire
Department Appreciation Dinner.
Councilmember Smith: Received calls regarding the library; thanked the Lake Elmo Jaycees
for their contributions, the Environmental Committee, and Rolf Larsen for his contributions to
the City’s weekly email newsletter.
Councilmember Lundgren: Attended Fire Relief meeting, Environmental Committee meeting;
spoke with Met Council regarding WAC and SAC fees; hosting Farmers Market vendor meeting
May 25th.
Councilmember Bloyer: Assisted residents with concerns regarding city signs and neighbor
issues.
STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
City Administrator Handt: Attended meetings with Met Council and local businesses to
discuss deferrals for business and residential hookups, funds for business disruption and other
programs. Reported on the Finance Committee meeting, Human Resources Committee and
Parks Commission.
City Clerk Johnson: Working on equipment upgrades for recording meetings and providing a
monitor in the lobby and thanked Cable Commission Representative Ginny Holder for her
assistance, summer interns start next week.
Finance Director Bendel: Working on bonding and audit, anticipate audit report coming soon,
hired a summer intern who is from the community.
City Attorney Sonsalla: Drafting easements; noted all five Councilmembers need to be in
attendance at the May 27th meetings.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
May 17, 2016
Page 6 of 6
Planning Director Wensman: Working on a new railroad crossing at Village Parkway.
City Engineer Griffin: Managing heavy construction activity, addressing issue with MNDOT
Meeting adjourned at 11:09 pm.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
ATTEST:
______________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
_______________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
June 29, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 29, 2016
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:32 pm.
PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Councilmembers Julie Fliflet, Anne Smith, and Jill Lundgren.
ABSENT: Councilmember Bloyer
Staff present: Administrator Handt, City Attorney Sonsalla, and City Clerk Johnson.
Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA
WITH THE ADDITION OF PUBLIC COMMENT. Motion passed 4 – 0.
DISCUSSION OF LIBRARY BOARD DECISION WITH REGARD TO JOINING THE
WASHINGTON COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM
Councilmember Fliflet reviewed the process the Library Board has followed to explore options for
future library operations and presented the terms of the Library Board recommendations.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Barry Weeks, 3647 Lake Elmo Avenue North, spoke about the history of the library and questioned the
City Council not utilizing Commissioner Kriesel for assistance with the library process.
Sarah Linder, 11108 12th Street North, Library Board Vice President, encouraged the City Council to
support the Library Board recommendations.
Dick Weir, 3645 Laverne Avenue North, reviewed discussion from the December 15, 2015 City
Council meeting and Commissioner Kriesel’s comments as a member of the County Board and
MELSA.
Mike Reeves, former and future Lake Elmo resident, reviewed the guiding principles found on the
City’s website and stated the City has deviated from those principles during this process.
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE
RESOLUTION REGARDING LIBRARY SERVICES IN LAKE ELMO AND DIRECT STAFF TO
PROVIDE NOTICE OF THE SIGNED RESOLUTION TO THE WASHINGTON COUNTY
AUDITOR AND WASHINGTON COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TODAY.
Mayor Pearson moved TO REMOVE THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FROM THE
RESOLUTION. Motion died – no second.
Primary motion passed 3 – 0 – 1. (Pearson – present/not voting)
June 29, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2
Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADJOURN AT 9:30 A.M.
Motion passed 4 – 0.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
ATTEST:
______________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
_______________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: July 5, 2016
CONSENT
ITEM #2
MOTION
AGENDA ITEM: Approve Disbursements in the amount of $277,328.96
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: $277,328.96
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council
is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of $277,328.96. 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]
July 5, 2016
-- 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 $ 14,818.51 Payroll Taxes to IRS & MN Dept of Revenue 06/23/16
ACH $ 7,248.34 Payroll Retirement to PERA 06/23/16
ACH $ 1,200.00 Payroll Retirement to ICMA 06/23/16
DD7242-DD7272 $ 35,476.84 Payroll (Direct Deposits) 06/23/16
44491-44532 $ 217,745.27 Accounts Payable 07/05/16
2761-2774 $ 840.00 Library Card Reimbursement 07/05/16
TOTAL $ 277,328.96
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
$277,328.96.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Accounts Payable – check registers
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: July 5, 2016
CONSENT
ITEM #3
MOTION
AGENDA ITEM: Monthly Fire Department Update
SUBMITTED BY: Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
THROUGH: City Administrator
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Review monthly activity update from fire
department. Advise on any additional information requested.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: As a result of information requested by and provided to Council
in the past, City Administrator Kristina Handt directed Chief Malmquist to provide month end
updates. Information in the past was received very positively and appreciated by Council.
STAFF REPORT:
32 calls for the month of June.
Fire – 4
EMS-17
Hazardous-4
Good intent call-6
False alarm-1
8 of the 32 calls had 3 or less total responders on apparatus.
Department drills for the month were:
#1 – Communication and initial response
#2 – CEU Hands on for Flammable liquid response, at EMPSTF (East Metro Public Safety
Training Facility) see photos
#3 – Basic fire ground functions and communication, at EMPSTF, see photos
One staff attended a make-up quarterly EMS training drill.
One call this month involved a 10 y/o girl that fell off of her bike in front of Station One
receiving minor injuries. The event ended with the need for an ambulance. She would not
have received the level of care and maybe no care at all if it weren’t for Captain Witter
working in the station at the time and hearing her crying after the fall.
481111v1 SJS LA515-4
CITY COUNCIL
DATE: 07/05/2016
CONSENT
ITEM #: 6
AGENDA ITEM: Amending Section 10.99 of the City Code regarding Penalties
SUBMITTED BY: Emily Becker, Planner
REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director
Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney
BACKGROUND:
Paragraphs C-K, Administrative citations and civil penalties of Section 10.99 (Penalties) of the Lake
Elmo City Code of Ordinances was created as an alternative method to criminal citations for enforcement
of the City Code. The rationales for such penalties were that there is inherent delay in the criminal
citation system that does not ensure prompt resolution; that citizens resent being labeled as criminals for
violations of administrative regulations; and that the higher burden of proof and the potential of
incarceration do not appear appropriate for most administrative violations.
City Attorney Sonsalla, upon review of these provisions, recommended that the City consider repealing
them. She stated that in recent years, the Legislature has proclaimed that statutory cities such as Lake
Elmo are not authorized by state law to have these types of penalties with the exception of such penalties
for certain types of traffic citations that have a specific process set forth in state law.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
The City Council is respectfully requested to adopt Ordinance No. 08-141, An Ordinance Amending the
Lake Elmo City Code of Ordinances Pertaining to Administrative Citations and Civil Penalties.
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
The penalties section of the City Code (Section 10.99) currently outlines prohibited acts and penalties for
violations. The enforcement options the Section provides include:
- Charge the violator with a misdemeanor and criminally prosecute (up to $1000 fine or up to 90
days in jail).
- Deny pending City applications if applicable.
- Bring a civil action to stop the violations from occurring.
- Administrative citations/civil penalties.
A flow chart is attached to outline the administrative citation process along with Section as further
explanation of the process.
City Council meeting July 5, 2016 Consent Agenda Item #6
481111v1 SJS LA515-4
FISCAL IMPACT:
According to research performed by Staff, recorded by former Staff, since June of 2013, there have been
31 citations issued totaling an amount of $3900.00, $500 of which was eventually waived.
OPTIONS:
1. Adopt Ordinance No. 08-141 and repeal the administrative penalties provisions of the City Code;
2. Not Adopt Ordinance No. 08-141. The administrative citations and civil penalties provisions will
remain in the City Code; or
3. Suggest changes to Ordinance No. 08-141.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfully requests that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 08-141 by consent on the Consent
Agenda. If the item is removed from the Consent Agenda, then by making the following motion:
“Move to adopt Ordinance No. 08-141, An Ordinance Amending the Lake Elmo City Code of
Ordinances Pertaining to Administrative Citations and Civil Penalties.”
ATTACHMENTS:
Section 10.99: Penalties.
Flow chart outlining paragraphs C-K of Section 10.99 of the City Code.
Ordinance 08-141
1
481116v1 SJS LA515-4
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 08-141
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES PERTAINING
TO ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS AND CIVIL PENALTIES
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title I: General
Provisions; Chapter 10: Rules of Code Construction; Section 10.99: Penalties; paragraphs
(C) through (K) by repealing these paragraphs in their entirety.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo.
SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-141 was adopted on this _____ day of
________, 2016, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
______________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
This Ordinance 08-141 was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2016.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: 7/05/2016
CONSENT
ITEM #: 7
AGENDA ITEM: Rename Layton Avenue North to Wildflower Drive North
SUBMITTED BY: Emily Becker, City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director
BACKGROUND:
Layton Avenue North, as designated on the Brookman 3rd Addition Plat, now extends to Wildflower
Drive North, as designated on the Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition Plat. It has been requested to
change the name of Layton Avenue North to Wildflower Drive North. The aforementioned street is the
only street named Layton Avenue North in the city currently.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
The Council should decide if renaming the street Layton Avenue North as designated on the Brookman
3rd Addition Plat to Wildflower Drive North is appropriate or not.
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
The proposal was made to create continuity and avoid confusion for drivers. The Wildflower Drive North
was an approved street name on the Wildflower at Lake Elmo 1st Addition plat, and this street connects to
Layton Avenue North directly.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
OPTIONS:
The Council may approve the renaming of Layton Avenue North as designated on the Brookman 1 st
Addition Plat to Wildflower Drive North or deny the renaming.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfully requests, as part of tonight’s consent agenda, Council approve renaming Layton Ave
North to Wildflower Drive North by adoption of Ordinance 08-145. If removed from the Consent
Agenda, the recommended action can be completed through the following motion:
City Council Meeting July 5, 2016 Consent Agenda Item #7
2
“Move to approve the renaming of Layton Avenue North as designated on the Brookman 1st Addition
Plat to Wildflower Drive North.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Ordinance 08-145
2) Snapshot of Wildflower at Lake Elmo Final Plat showing location of Layton Avenue North as it
relates to Wildflower Drive North.
1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 08-145
AN ORDINANCE RENAMING A STREET IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO.
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby renames Layton Avenue
North as platted in the Brookman 3rd Addition Plat:
SECTION 2.
Subd. 1. For the purpose of this ordinance, the terms defined in this section shall have
the meanings ascribed to them.
Subd. 2. Existing Street Name. The term existing street name shall mean the name by
which a street is designated on the Brookman 3rd Addition Plat.
Subd. 3. New Street Name. The term new street name shall mean the name by which
a street shall be known from and after the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 3. The Existing Street Name of Layton Avenue North as designated on the Brookman
3rd Addition Plat shall have a New Street Name of Wildflower Drive North.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo.
SECTION 5. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-145 was adopted on this ___ day of
_________ 2016, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
_________________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
This Ordinance 08-___ was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2016.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: 7/5/2016
CONSENT
ITEM #: 7
AGENDA ITEM: Hunting Ordinance
SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director
THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney
Washington County Sheriff’s Department
BACKGROUND:
In fall of 2015, City staff receive numerous complaint calls about illegal or perceived illegal hunting. In
response, Planning Staff drafted an amendment to the Weapons Ordinance, Section 130.15 and held a
public hearing at the January 11, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. No member of the public spoke at
that public hearing, but the Planning Commission raised a number of issues including wanting to know
how the changes related to the MN conceal and carry legislation. Because of the complexities of this
Statute, Planning Staff had the City Attorney draft the Ordinance Amendment attached to this report.
The City Attorney has informed Planning Staff that the public hearing was not necessary because the
Ordinance is not part of the City’s zoning code.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
The Council should consider approval of the new hunting ordinance and map.
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
Hunting is presently addressed by the Weapons Ordinance, Section 130.15. Section 130.15 prohibits
hunting as follows:
(B) Unlawful acts. Except as otherwise provided in this section, it shall be unlawful for
any person:
(1) To fire, discharge, release, throw, or in any other manner propel a
weapon within 500 feet of a residence, whether or not inhabited, or any other
structure or building or within 500 feet of any platted area in the city and , except
on an approved target range;
The average resident is not likely to know the differences between platted and unplatted property, making
self-enforcement difficult.
City Council Meeting July 5, 2016 Consent Agenda Item #7
Page 2
The new Hunting Ordinance is an amendment of the Weapons Ordinance, Section 130.15. The ordinance
allows hunting in areas designated on a hunting map established by Council Resolution each year. This
allows the City to adjust allowed hunting areas as the City grows and develops. The ordinance references a
hunting map which will be updated by City staff from time to time as needed. The hunting map will be
posted on the City’s website and at City Hall and will enable residents a greater ability to determine where
hunting is allowed and prohibited.
In addition to hunting, the amendment also amends Section 130.15B to align with conceal and carry law,
MN Statute 624.714. Since the enactment of this statute, the City Attorney believes it is unlawful for the
City of Lake Elmo to require a person carrying a loaded weapon to obtain written permission from a
property owner in order to carry the weapon on the property. The Statute does allow the city to require
written permission from a property owner for another to hunting on the property.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed hunting ordinance will likely lessen the number of complaints taken by City Staff pertaining
to illegal hunting and may eliminate costs associated to enforcement.
OPTIONS:
The City Council may approve or deny approval to the hunting ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfully requests, as part of tonight’s consent agenda, that the Council approve the Ordinance 08-
__ as it pertains to hunting in the City of Lake Elmo, Section 300.15, and Resolution 2016-__approving
summary publishing of the ordinance. If removed from the Consent Agenda, the recommended action can
be completed through the following motions:
1. “Move to approve Ordinance 08-__ as it pertains to hunting in the City of Lake Elmo, Section
300.15.”
2. “move to approve Resolution 2016-__ approving the summary publishing of Ordinance 08-__”
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Ordinance 08-142.
2) Draft Hunting Map.
3) Resolution 2016-55 approving the summary publishing of ordinance 08-142.
479514v2 AMB LA515-1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. ________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY
AMENDING SECTION 130 OF THE CITY CODE WHICH REGULATES WEAPONS
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Section 130.15,
paragraph (B) of the City Code by adding the double underlined language and deleting the stricken
language as follows:
§ 130.15 POSSESION, DISCHARGE, OR SALE OF WEAPONS
(B) Unlawful acts. Except as otherwise provided in this section, it shall be unlawful for
any person:
(1) To fire, discharge, release, throw, or in any other manner propel a weapon within
500 feet of any residence, whether or not inhabited, or any other structure or building or within
500 feet of any platted area in the city, except on an approved target range;
(2) To wear or carry a loaded weapon for hunting or other purposes hunt on land not
owned by the person wearing or carrying the weapon, hunting in the city, without specific written
and dated permission of the owner of the land. The writing containing the permission shall also
describe with reasonable accuracy the boundaries of the land owned by the owner giving the
permission except on an approved target range.
SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends the City Code by
inserting the following new sections in Section 130 of the Code as follows:
§ 130.16 RESTRICTIONS ON THE DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS; HUNTING.
No person may discharge any firearm or bow and arrow, or engage in hunting of any game
birds or other animals by any means within the corporate limits of the city:
(A) Except as otherwise provided in this section;
(B) Unless discharged in lawful defense of person or property; or
(C) Unless the person is a duly authorized law enforcement officer engaged in the
performance of his or her official duties.
§ 130.17 HUNTING REGULATIONS.
(A) Hunting with a shotgun or with a bow and arrow as authorized by the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources, state laws pertaining to trespass, and by landowner permission,
is allowed but only in the areas established by the city council. No other firearms, including long
479514v2 AMB LA515-1
guns or hand guns, or any other weapon, except a bow and arrow, are permitted to be used for
hunting within the city.
(B) The city council shall, by resolution, establish by map or other means the areas in
which the discharge of shotguns and the use of a bow and arrow are allowed for hunting and the
areas in which only the use of a bow and arrow is allowed for hunting. No hunting shall be allowed
in other areas of the city.
§ 130.18 HUNTING TO MANAGE WILDLIFE
Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the city’s law enforcement agency shall
be entitled to issue permits to hunt in any area of the city to manage wildlife populations upon
evidence that all required state permits have been secured and a determination by law enforcement
that such hunting will not pose an undue risk to public health and safety.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption
and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo.
SECTION 5. Adoption Date. This Ordinance No. ____ was adopted on this _____ day of
_____________, 2016, by a vote of __ Ayes and __ Nays.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
___________________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
This Ordinance ________ was published on the _____ day of _________________, 2016.
Long
Lake
Sunnybrook
Long
Lake
Cle
ar
L
a
k
e
LakeJane
Sunfish
Lake
LakeElmo
E
a
g
l
e
P
o
i
n
t
L
a
k
e
Downs
Lake
HorseshoeLake
A
r
m
s
tr
o
n
g
L
a
k
e
Goose
Lake
Rose
Lake
Marksgraf
Lake
W
il
m
e
s
LakeOlson
L
a
k
e
D
e
M
o
ntre
ville
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Legend
Ap proved Hunting Areas*
Propo sed Approved Hunting Areas
The following map outlines where hunting is allowed. Hunting is not allowed w ithin 500' of any residence, structure or platted area in the city unlss in an approved target range.Hunting ordinance and trespassing laws apply.
*Map is updated from time to time but may not reflect structures recently erected. Hunting is prohibited within 500 ft of a structure regardless if this map shows the area to be an approved hunting area.
0 21
Miles
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-__
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-___ BY TITLE
AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-___,
an ordinance to amend Section 130 of the Lake Elmo City Code which regulates weapons; and
WHEREAS, the ordinance is lengthy; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and
summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform
the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo,
that the City Clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 08-___ to be published in
the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance:
Public Notice
The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-___, which amends the
Chapter 130: General Offenses:
• By amending Section 15: Possession, discharge, or sale of weapons, to replacing language
that makes it unlawful to wear or carry a loaded weapon with language that makes it
unlawful to hunt on land not owned by the person or without specific written and dated
permission of the owner.
• By inserting Section 16: Restrictions on the discharge of firearms; that restricts hunting
of any game birds or other animals.
• By inserting Section 17: Hunting regulations, that establishes restrictions on hunting by
establishing a map that designates areas in which the discharge of shotguns and the use of
a bow and arrow are allowed for hunting.
• By inserting Section 18: Hunting to manage wildlife, that entitles law enforcement to
issue permits to hunt in any area of the city to manage wildlife populations.
The full text of Ordinance No. 08-___ is available for inspection at Lake Elmo city hall during
regular business hours.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo that the
City Administrator keep a copy of the ordinance at City Hall for public inspection and that a full
copy of the ordinance be placed in a public location within the City.
Dated: July 5, 2016
___________________________________
Mayor Mike Pearson
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
(SEAL)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
_________________________ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:____________________________________and the following voted against
same:________________________________________
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: 07/05/2016
CONSENT
ITEM # 9
AGENDA ITEM: Appointing 2016 Election Judges
SUBMITTED BY: Julie Johnson, City Clerk
THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: City Administrator, Administrative Intern
BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Section 204B.21 of the Minnesota Election Laws, election
judges shall be appointed by the municipality. The appointments shall be made at least 25 days
before the election at which the judges will serve. The election judges are required to receive
compensation equal to at least the prevailing Minnesota minimum wage for each hour spent
carrying out duties at the polling place and attending training.
Staff is requesting the individuals listed on the attached Election Judges List be appointed to
serve as election judges for the August 9, 2016 Primary Election and November 8, 2016 General
and City Election at the hourly rate of $10.00 for election judges and $11.00 for head election
judges.
The attached list of Election Judges is not conclusive and may be amended as needed by the City
Clerk up to 25 days prior to the Primary and General elections.
FISCAL IMPACT: There will be a cost for paying election judges, $10.00 per hour for
election judges and $11.00 per hour for head judges. These expenses are included in the 2016
Budget.
RECOMMENDATION: As part of its consent agenda, no specific motion is required. If
removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion is as follows:
“Move to approve Resolution No. 2016-52, Appointing 2016 Election Judges.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 2016-52
2. List of 2016 Election Judges
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-52
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE 2016 PRIMARY AND
GENERAL ELECTION
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2014B.21 of the Minnesota Election Laws, Election
judges shall be appointed by the municipality; and
WHEREAS, the appointments shall be made at least 25 days before the election at which
the judges will serve; and
WHEREAS, election judges and election judge trainees shall receive at least the prevailing
Minnesota minimum wage for each hour spent carrying out duties at the polling place and attending
training.
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is dependent upon and appreciative of citizen
assistance for its election process and,
WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo 2016 Primary and General Election Judge appointments
consist of individuals recommended by the City Clerk with the approval by majority of the City
Council and,
WHEREAS, the list of Election Judges may be amended by the City Clerk as needed up to
25 days prior to the Primary or General Election.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo
that the individuals listed on the attached Election Judges List are appointed to serve as election
judges for the August 9, 2016 Primary Election and the November 8, 2016 General and City
Election at the hourly rate of $10.00 for election judges and $11.00 for head election judges.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO THIS 5th DAY OF
JULY, 2016.
By: _________________________________
Mike Pearson
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Julie Johnson,
City Clerk
(SEAL)
2016 Election Judges
Barb Kiesling
Barbra Bjorkman
Bill Wacker
Dan O'Connor
Diane Allen
Donald Slinger
Gail M Olson
Jackie Pierre
James Roth
Jan Kiefner
Jan Krueger
Janet Carlson
Janice Roth
Jean Olinger
Jim Allen
Jim Carlson
JoAnne Meyer
Linda Wagner
Lisa Quinn
Michael Burress
Patricia O'Donnell
Phyllis Paulson
Robert Schumacher
Sallyann Wacker
Sharon Simpson
Shirley Durand
Tom O'Donnell
Wendy Tait Loos
Mary Grundeen
Susan Dunn
Margot Rheinberger
Joe Rheinberger
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: July 5, 2016
CONSENT
ITEM #: 10
MOTION Resolution 2016-56
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Julie Johnson, City Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
AGENDA ITEM: Job Classification for PERA purposes; Part-time Fire Department Administrative
Assistant
____________________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND:
State statute 353.64 permits governments to allow non full-time employees to participate in the
Police and Fire PERA defined benefit Plan, provided the fire service position regularly engages
the employee in the hazards of fire-fighting as an employee of a designated fire department.
In 2013 when the part-time Fire Department Administrative Assistant position was proposed and
approved, the recommendation from PERA was that this position should be eligible to participate
in the Police and Fire PERA defined benefit Plan. This was based on the fact that this position
was filled by a fire-fighter who can be called to respond to a fire anytime, in addition to
performing many firefighter specific functions as listed in the job description.
As a result, the part-time Fire Department Admin was set up as eligible to participate in the Fire-
fighter PERA Plan.
Anytime a non-full-time employee is added to the Police and Fire PERA benefit plan, PERA
requires that a resolution must be passed by the City Council and provided to them to initialize
the PERA account for the employee.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
Should the City make a declaration and approve a resolution which allows for the employee in this part-
time Fire Department Administrative position to be eligible to participate in the Police and Fire PERA
Benefit plan (EE = 10.8%, ER = 16.2%) rather than the Basic PERA benefit Plan (EE = 6.5%, ER
= 7.5%).
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
Staff recommends that this part-time fire department position continue to be eligible to participate in the
Police and Fire PERA Benefit plan.
FISCAL IMPACT: None – position was budgeted to be participating in the Police and Fire PERA
benefit Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
“Move to approve Resolution 2016-56 declaring that the part-time Fire Department Administrative
Assistant, Nick Witter, be eligible to participate in the Police and Fire PERA Benefit Plan effective as
of 4/20/16.”
477630v1 AMB LA515-1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-56
FIREFIGHTER DECLARATION
WHEREAS, the policy of the State of Minnesota as declared in Minnesota Statutes
353.63 is to give special consideration to employees who perform hazardous work and devote
their time and skills to protecting the property and personal safety of others; and
WHEREAS Minnesota Statutes Section 353.64 permits governmental subdivisions to
request coverage in the Public Employees Police and Fire plan for a non -full-time fire fighter
provided the fire service position regularly engages the employee in the hazards of fire fighting
as an employee of a designated fire department.
BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of City of Lake Elmo hereby declares that the
position of Part Time Fire Assistant currently held by Nick Witter is, for primary services
provided, that of a firefighter engaged in the hazards of fire fighting; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this governing body hereby requests that the named
employee be accepted as a member of the Public Employees Police and Fire Plan effective the
date of this employee’s initial Police and Fire Plan salary deduction by the governmental
subdivision
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: July 5, 2016
CONSENT
ITEM # 11
AGENDA ITEM: 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements – Change Order No. 1
SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer
THROUGH: Kristina Handt, 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: $32,976.55.
This change order increases the contract amount for the project by $32,976.55 bringing the
revised construction contract to $1,222,586.88. With this change order the project remains
within the authorized project budget and contingencies.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Change Order No. 1 for the
2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements project.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
This change order is being processed at the request of the City for additional roadway drainage
improvements within the Stonegate neighborhood, including roughly 1,200 feet of draintile to
protect the new street. During the construction process there were two areas along the street
improvement corridor that showed standing water within the subgrade once the street surface
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 11]
July 5, 2016
-- page 2 --
was excavated. Draintile was installed in each of these areas to drain the roadway section to
mitigate premature failure of the roadway due to inadequate drainage during the freeze/thaw
cycles. In a third area, after exposing the str eet subgrade, a draintile was discovered that was
discharging directly into the street, again saturating the subgrade. Draintile was routed and
connected into the storm sewer system to prevent damage to the new pavement and protect the
integrity of the concrete curb.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Change
Order No. 1 for the 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements project. If removed from
the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve Change Order No. 1 for the 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility
Improvements thereby increasing the contract amount by $32,976.55”.
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Change Order No. 1.
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER FORM
CHANGE ORDER NO. DATE:
TO:
UNIT
Amount of Original Contract $
Sum of Additions/Deductions approved to date (CO Nos. )$
Contract Amount to date $
Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (DEDUCT) (NO CHANGE)$
Revised Contract Amount $
The Contract Period for Completion will be (UNCHANGED) (INCREASED) (DECREASED)days
APPROVED BY ENGINEER: FOCUS Engineering, inc. APPROVED BY CONTRACTOR
DATE DATE
APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
DATE DATE
0
This Document will become a supplement to the Contract and all provisions will apply hereto. The Contract Documents are
modified as follows upon execution of this Change Order.
BYENGINEER
1,189,610.33
0.00
1,189,610.33
32,976.55
1,222,586.88
INCREASE/(DECREASE)
HARDRIVES, INC. 14475 QUIRAM DRIVE ROGERS, MN 55374
2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NO. 2015.129
1 June 27, 2016
ITEM
$32,976.55
NET CONTRACT CHANGE $32,976.55
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
BYBY
CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION:
This change order is being processed to amend the Contract for the installation of draintile, cleanouts, concrete headwalls, and connection of
the draintile to the existing storm sewer at the following locations:
1) On each side of Jasmine Ave North (Station 51+40 to 53+40).
2) Around the outer edge and inner landscape area of the 9th Street N cul de sac.
3) The north side of Jasime Ave North located (Station 44+40 to 46+00).
Attachments (list documents supporting change):Itemization of Items
DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM QTY UNIT PRICE
**See attached itemization
6/27/2016
FOCUS Engineering, inc.CHANGE ORDER FORM
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
PROJECT NO. 2015.129
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
CO1‐1 LS 1.0 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
CO1‐2 LF 1,179.0 $19.45 $22,931.55
CO1‐3 EA 11.0 $330.00 $3,630.00
CO1‐4 EA 2.0 $295.00 $590.00
CO1‐5 EA 5.0 $825.00 $4,125.00
CO1‐6 EA 2.0 $350.00 $700.00
TOTALS ‐ CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 $32,976.55
MOBILIZATION
4" PVC PERFORATED EDGE DRAIN WITH BACKFILL & WRAP
CONNECT TO EXISTING DRAINTILE
DRAINTILE CLEANOUT
PRECAST CONCRETE HEADWALL
CORE DRILL INTO EXISTING STORM SEWER
This change order is being processed to amend the Contract for the
installation of draintile, cleanouts, concrete headwalls, and connection
of the draintile to the existing storm sewer at the following locations:
1) On each side of Jasmine Ave North (Station 51+40 to 53+40).
2) Around the outer edge and inner landscape area of the 9th Street N
cul de sac.
3) The north side of Jasime Ave North located (Station 44+40 to 46+00).
DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATIONITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT
CHANGE ORDER
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: July 5, 2016
CONSENT
ITEM # 12
AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements – Change Order No. 1
SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer
THROUGH: Kristina Handt, 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: $2,200.
This change order increases the contract amount for the project by $2,200 bringing the revised
construction contract to $1,413,937.31. With this change order the project remains within the
authorized project budget and contingencies.
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Change Order No. 1 for the
Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvement project.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
This change order is being processed at the request of the City for two additional items. Two fire
hydrants installed in the ditch along Inwood Avenue needed to be raised in order to maintain
proper cover on the pipe to prevent freezing. A field change to use fittings instead of the planned
hydrant extension was determined to be the most cost effective way to address the change.
City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 12]
July 5, 2016
-- page 2 --
The plans required the contractor to salvage and re-install a storm sewer flared end section at
21st Street North. While excavating the existing flared end it was discovered to be in poor
condition and could not be salvaged. A new section was installed to maintain proper stormwater
drainage once the watermain improvements were installed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Change
Order No. 1 for the Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements project. If removed from the
consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve Change Order No. 1 for the Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements,
thereby increasing the contract amount by $2,200”.
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Change Order No. 1.
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER FORM
CHANGE ORDER NO. DATE:
TO:
UNIT
EA
EA
Amount of Original Contract $
Sum of Additions/Deductions approved to date (CO Nos. )$
Contract Amount to date $
Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (DEDUCT) (NO CHANGE)$
Revised Contract Amount $
The Contract Period for Completion will be (UNCHANGED) (INCREASED) (DECREASED)days
APPROVED BY ENGINEER: FOCUS Engineering, inc. APPROVED BY CONTRACTOR
DATE DATE
APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
DATE DATE
$2,200.00
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
BYBY
CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION:
This change order is being processed to provide compensation for the time and materials to install offsets on two hydrants. This was
completed to maintain cover over pipe in the County ditches. Additionally this change order provides compensation for the installation of an
18‐inch flared end section at 21st Street North. The existing flared end was found to be is poor condition and could not be salvaged as
planned.
Attachments (list documents supporting change):None
DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM QTY UNIT PRICE
CO1‐2 18" FLARED END SECTION
NET CONTRACT CHANGE
HYDRANT OFFSET
ITEM
$1,200.001$1,200.00
NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. 9760 71ST STREET NE ALBERTVILLE, MN 55301
INWOOD TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NO. 2014.130
1 June 27, 2016
0
This Document will become a supplement to the Contract and all provisions will apply hereto. The Contract Documents are
modified as follows upon execution of this Change Order.
BYENGINEER
1,411,737.31
0.00
1,411,737.31
2,200.00
1,413,937.31
INCREASE/(DECREASE)
$1,000.00CO1‐1 $500.002
6/27/2016
FOCUS Engineering, inc.CHANGE ORDER FORM
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: 7/5/16
CONSENT
ITEM #: 13
AGENDA ITEM: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to Rural Single Family Land Use
Designation
SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director
THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Emily Becker, City Planner
BACKGROUND:
On April 19, 2016, the Lake Elmo City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to the
City’s Wastewater Facilities Plan by adding three properties to the Village MUSA. The Metropolitan
Council, upon reviewing the amendment, requested that the Rural Single Family land use designation be
amended to be in compliance with areas guided for sewer. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan
designation is defined as being served by private on-site well and septic systems. Staff originally
proposed an amendment to the current Rural Single Family land use designation to allow for sewer in a
MUSA. After the public hearing held on June 13, 2016, and prior to the 6/21/16 City Council meeting, it
was suggested that it might be better to create a new land use category similar to the Rural Single Family
category, but for areas within the MUSA that will remain served by private on-site septic systems except
where the City Council deems connection to municipal sanitary sewer practical. This proposed
amendment will also re-guide all properties currently guided for Rural Single Family within a MUSA
area to Rural Single Family – Sewered. These proposed amendments will have no impact on current or
future density. While amending the category descriptions, Staff proposes to fix the incorrect reference to
corresponding zoning districts. These corresponding districts are no longer R1 and R2, but rather RS –
Rural Single Family. The two areas proposed to be reguided to Rural Single Family-Sewered are the
MUSA areas in the Old Village and in the Tri-Lakes.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
The Council is respectfully being asked to consider a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment:
to correct the reference to corresponding zoning districts in the existing Rural Single Family land
use category description; and
to create a new Rural Single Family – Sewered land use category that will allow municipal
sanitary sewer where deemed practical by the City Council in MUSA areas; and
to guide the properties currently guided for Rural Single Family within a MUSA area to Rural
Single Family – Sewered.
City Council Meeting July 5, 2016 Consent Agenda Item #13
Page 2
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
The current Rural Single Family planned land use category description reads:
RURAL SINGLE FAMILY – This category defines a large portion of the City that was
historically platted for conventional subdivision prior to 2005, but has been and will continue to
be serviced by private on-site well and septic systems. Limited locations within this classification
are allowed to have two-family dwellings based on zoning. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): R-
1, R-2]
The category as defined is served by private on-site well and septic systems. In addition, the description
references zoning districts that are no longer in existence. The amended land use description will
reference the RS – Rural Single Family as the corresponding zoning district (deleted text is crossed out
and inserted text is underlined):
RURAL SINGLE FAMILY – This category defines a large portion of the City that was
historically platted for conventional subdivision prior to 2005, but has been and will continue to
be serviced by private on-site well and septic systems. Limited locations within this classification
are allowed to have two-family dwellings based on zoning. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): R-
1, R-2 RS – Rural Single Family].
The proposed new land use category, Rural Single Family – Sewered, will allow on-site well and septic
systems, unless the City Council considers connection to the sanitary sewer where practical. As amended
above, the corresponding zoning district is RS - Rural Single Family. The proposed Rural Single Family-
Sewered land use category is described as (inserted text is underlined):
RURAL SINGLE FAMILY- SEWERED – This category defines a portion of the City that was
historically platted for conventional subdivision prior to 2005 that has historically been serviced
by private on-site well and septic systems, located within a MUSA area, and may continue to be
serviced by private on-site well and septic systems unless the City Council deems connection to
the sanitary sewer system practical. Limited locations within this classification are allowed to
have two-family dwellings based on zoning. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): RS – Rural
Single Family].
The areas currently guided as Rural Single Family in the Old Village MUSA and the Tri-Lakes MUSA
are proposed to be reguided to Rural Single Family – Sewered. Maps depicting the affected properties
have been attached to this report.
This proposed amendment has been reviewed by the Metropolitan Council Staff and will require formal
Metropolitan Council approval.
PUBLIC HEARING:
A public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment was held on June 13, 2016. Nobody from
the public spoke for or against the amendment. During the Planning Commission discussion,
Commissioner Dunn opposed the amendment, stating that residents should have a choice whether or not
to connect to municipal sanitary sewer. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the
Amendment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
City Council Meeting July 5, 2016 Consent Agenda Item #13
Page 3
None.
OPTIONS:
The City Council should consider whether the amended land use category description is acceptable or not.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff and the Planning Commission respectfully request, as part of tonight’s consent agenda, that the City
Council approve the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment amending the Rural Single Family land use
category to fix incorrect zoning code references, creating a new land use category called Rural Single
Family – Sewered, and reguiding of areas currently guided as Rural Single Family that are within a
MUSA to Rural Single Family – Sewered. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments require a 4/5
affirmative vote of the City Council and Metropolitan Council approval.
If removed from the Consent Agenda, the recommended action can be completed through the following
motion:
“Move to approve Resolution 2016-50 Amending the City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Land Use
Plan amending the Rural Single Family land use category to fix incorrect zoning code references,
creating a new land use category called Rural Single Family – Sewered, and reguiding of areas
currently guided as Rural Single Family that are within a MUSA to Rural Single Family – Sewered.”
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Resolution 2016-50
2) Planning Commission Report
3) June 13, 2016 Planning Commission Minutes
4) Tri-lakes MUSA area
5) Old Village MUSA area
Resolution 2016-50
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2016- 50
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN RURAL SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION, ADDING A NEW RURAL SINGLE FAMILY – SEWERED LAND USE
CATEGORY; AND REGUIDING AREAS WITH RURAL SINGLE FAMILY DESIGNATION IN
MUSA AREAS TO RURAL SINGLE FAMILY – SEWERED.
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, The City of Lake Elmo has established a Comprehensive Plan that provides
complication of background data, policy statements, standards, and maps, which help to guide
the future physical, social, and economic development of the City; and
WHEREAS, The City Council has approved the Old Village Phase 2 Street and Utility
Improvement Project which will extend municipal sanitary sewer to some properties within the
Old Village MUSA ; and
WHEREAS, the City has approved projects to connect properties within the Tri-Lakes
Sewer Service Area to sanitary sewer;
WHEREAS, many of the properties within these areas have the land use designation of
Rural Single Family in the City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Rural Single Family land use definition states these properties have
been and will continue to be serviced by private on-site well and septic systems; and
WHEREAS, the Rural Single Family land use definition should be amended to allow for
municipal sanitary sewer connection consistent with the City’s practice; and
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the testimony elicited and the information received, the
City makes the following:
Findings
1. The text amendment will not impact lot density or any other standards for the affected
properties.
2. The Metropolitan Council has administratively reviewed the text amendment has
appeared to have no objection and had waived adjacent jurisdictional review.
Resolution 2016-50
3. The expansion of the MUSA is consistent with improving the health, safety and
welfare of the City of Lake Elmo residents.
4. The text amendment will remove an inconsistency between the MUSA designation
and Land Use category definition in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based on the foregoing, the Lake Elmo City
Council does hereby approve the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment amending
the Rural Single Family Land Use category description, creation of a new Rural Single Family –
Sewered category and reguiding areas with Rural Single Family designation in MUSA areas to
the Rural Single Family - Sewered, subject to and contingent upon the following:
1. The Metropolitan Council’s approval of the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment.
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo on this 5th day of
July, 2016.
_____________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
1
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 6/13/16
AGENDA ITEM: 4D – PUBLIC HEARING
CASE # 2016-19
ITEM: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to Rural Single Family Land Use
Designation
SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director
REVIEWED BY: Emily Becker, City Planner
Lisa Barajas, Metropolitan Council
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is requested to review a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to bring
the planned official land use plan category, Rural Single Family, into compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan’s Wastewater Facilities Plan as recently amended. Staff is recommending the
Planning Commission recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: City of Lake Elmo
Location: Areas guided as Rural Single Family
Request: A Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to bring the planned official land use
plan category, Rural Single Family, into compliance with the Comprehensive
Plan’s Wastewater Facilities Plan as recently amended.
History: On 4/19/16, the City Council approved an amendment to the Village MUSA to
add three properties. The Metropolitan Council requested that the Rural Single
Family land use designation be amended to be in compliance with areas guided
for sewer.
REQUEST DETAILS:
The Lake Elmo City Council, on April 19, 2016, approved a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment
to the City’s Wastewater Facilities Plan by adding three properties to the Village MUSA. The
Metropolitan Council, upon reviewing the amendment, requested that the Rural Single Family land
use designation be amended to be in compliance with areas guided for sewer. Presently, there are two
areas where properties guided for Rural Single Family are within a MUSA area; the Old Village and
in the Tri-Lakes area near Oakdale.
Planning Commission Meeting June 13, 2016 Public Hearing Item 4d-Action Item
2
The current Rural Single Family planned land use category reads:
RURAL SINGLE FAMILY – This category defines a large portion of the City that was
historically platted for conventional subdivision prior to 2005, but has been and will continue to
be serviced by private on-site well and septic systems. Limited locations within this classification
are allowed to have two-family dwellings based on zoning. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): R-
1, R-2]
The category as defined is served by private on-site well and septic systems. In addition, the
definition references zoning districts that are no longer in existence. The corresponding zoning
district is RS - Rural Single Family. The proposed definition will allow on-site well and septic
systems, unless the City Council considers connection to the sanitary sewer practicable. The
corresponding zoning district is RS - Rural Single Family. The proposed Rural Single Family
planned land use category reads (inserted text is underlined):
RURAL SINGLE FAMILY – This category defines a large portion of the City that was historically
platted for conventional subdivision prior to 2005, but has been and will continue to be serviced
by private on-site well and septic systems unless within a Metropolitan Urban Service Area
(MUSA). If within a MUSA, the City Council may consider connection to the sanitary sewer
system where practical. Limited locations within this classification are allowed to have two-
family dwellings based on zoning. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): RS – Rural Single Family]
ANALYSIS:
The RS-Zoning District as defined in City Code Section 154.400, D. reads:
RS Rural Single Family District. The RS District is established for lands that have
already been platted as conventional residential subdivisions prior to the 2005 adoption of
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. This district provides an environment of
predominantly single-family detached dwellings on moderately sized lots in areas that
have typically not been provided with public sanitary sewer services.
Staff believes the definition of RS - Rural Single Family suggests on-site septic systems, but does not
preclude them from connecting to public sewer. No change to the RS Rural Single Family definition
is needed and the proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment will bring the Land Use Plan in
compliance with the Wastewater Facilities Plan without changing existing densities, setbacks, etc.
DRAFT FINDINGS:
The City Code does not require specific findings for comprehensive plan amendments, however,
Staff is suggesting the following findings in support of the amendment:
1. The comprehensive plan text amendment will bring the Lake Elmo Comprehensive
Land Use Plan into conformity with the Comprehensive Wastewater Facilities Plan.
2. The comprehensive plan text amendment will not affect underlying density or zoning
code regulations.
Planning Commission Meeting June 13, 2016 Public Hearing Item 4d-Action Item
3
3. The Metropolitan Council has administratively reviewed the amendment, has no
objection, and had waived adjacent jurisdictional review.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan
Text Amendment with the following motion:
“Move to recommend the City Council approve the comprehensive plan text amendment to amend
the planned land use category in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan to read:
RURAL SINGLE FAMILY – This category defines a large portion of the City that was historically
platted for conventional subdivision prior to 2005, but has been and will continue to be serviced
by private on-site well and septic systems unless within a Metropolitan Urban Service Area
(MUSA). If within a MUSA, the City Council may consider connection to the sanitary sewer
system where practical. Limited locations within this classification are allowed to have two-
family dwellings based on zoning. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): RS – Rural Single Family]
ATTACHMENTS:
None
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction ........................................................................................ Planning Staff
- Report by Staff ................................................................................... Planning Staff
- Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members
- Open the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Close the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair
- Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members
- Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of June 13, 2016
Chairman Williams called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at
7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dunn, Fields, Larson, Griffin, Dodson, and Williams.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Haggard, Kreimer, & Lundquist
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Wensman & City Planner Becker
Approve Agenda:
Agenda is approved as presented.
Approve Minutes: May 23, 2016
M/S/P:Dunn/Fields, move to approve the May 23, 2016 minutes as amended, Vote: 4-0,
motion carried with Griffin and Dodson not voting.
Public Hearing – Easement Vacation 8574 Eagle Point circle
Becker started her presentation regarding the easements related to Auto Owners water
mains and hydrants. The city moved the location of the water mains and hydrants, so
new easements were recorded. Auto Owners is requesting the old easments be
vacated.
Public hearing opened at 7:07 pm
No one spoke
There was written comment from Machine Shed, but once the application was
explained to them, they were fine with the item.
Public hearing closed at 7:08 pm
Dunn stated it was straight forward and she has no issue with it.
M/S/P: Dunn/Griffin, move to recommend approval of the request to vacate the
easement as outlined in Exhibit B-2/2138129 Water Main Easement as recorded, Vote:
6-0, motion carried unanimoulsy.
2
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16
Public Hearing – Zoning Text Amendment – To amend the fencing regulations to allow
administrative approval of encroachment agreements.
Becker stated that the current code the way it is written requires any easement
encroachment agreement be approved by the City Council. This change would allow for
those agreements to be approved administratively by staff. The current process is time
consuming for staff as well as the resident and delays the issuing of the permit. The fee
for this agreement is $150.00, making a fence permit $225.00. In the future, we might
be able to reduce the fee with the reduced staff time.
Dunn is wondering why this was added in 2011 and how often this happens. Becker
stated that it has happened quite a bit since she has been here. The new developments
all have the utility easements located on the properties.
Larson asked what happens if there is conflicting rules between the City and the HOA.
Becker stated that this change doesn’t in effect change any of the rules other than who
is allowed to make the approval. Wensman stated that the City does not regulate HOA
covenants between property owners.
Public hearing opened at 7:20 pm
No one spoke and there was no written comments received.
Public hearing closed at 7:21 pm
M/S/: Fields/Dunn, would like to add a sentence at the end of the suggested motion to
read that the fee be reduced to $50 when the city Council considers the fee schedule.
M/S/P: Williams/Dunn, would like to make an amendment to the motion that the fee
not be specified, but only that it be reduced. Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
Oringinal motion as amended to add “that the fee be reduced when the City Council
considers the fee schedule”, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dodson/Griffin, move to recommend approval of an ordinance to amend
Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Section 205: Fencing Regulation; Subp. (D) (6) to allow
approval of a fence easement encroachment agreement by the Planning Director or
his/her designee after review and approval and furthermore recommends that the fee
be reduced when the City Council considers the fee schedule, Vote: 6-0, motion carried
unanimously.
3
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16
Public Hearing – Zoning Text Amendment – To amend the accessory Structure
Regulations
Becker stated that staff is bringing forward 3 suggested changes to the accessory
structure ordinance. The first is to exempt fish houses to the requirement that a
primary structure not be required prior to a fish house being located on the lot. The
second is removing the portion of the code that allows an accessory structure to be
located closer to the front lot line by resolution. Staff would like this removed because
it is essentially granting a variance without the requirement to go through the variance
process. The third change is to change the size of a tool shed from a maximum of 160
square feet to 200 square feet and move that to the exempted section with one being
allowed on a residential lot.
Dodson is wondering why a fishhouse would be any different than something like a
camper trailer. Wensman stated that the concern was that there would be storage on
vacant lots if there are not specific standards.
Williams was wondering if the tool shed size is calculated into the overall size of
accessory structure. Becker stated that no it would not be included for size or number.
Dodson thinks it might be beneficial to have the 120 square feet in the definition.
Becker stated that there are fish houses that are larger. The size limit only applies if
there is no primary structure.
Public hearing opened at 7:47 pm
No one spoke and there was no written comments received.
Public hearing closed at 7:48 pm
Williams is not in favor of exempting the tool shed from size and number in all districts
and thinks it should adhere to the limitations of the district. Wensman stated that if
that is the direction the Planning Commission wants to go, there should be some
language added in the old “F” and would specify one.
M/S/P: Williams/Fields, move to change the wording of the definition for storage or tool
sheds to be: Storage or Tool sheds: One storage or tool shed as defined in this section
may be placed on any lot in addition to the permited number of accessory buildings,
provided it complies with the maximum area requirements of the zoning district,
providing a principal structure exists on the lot. Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
Williams is wondering about separate lots of record owned by the person who lives next
door. This might open up the door for someone to have a fishhouse on both lots.
4
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16
Becker stated as it is written, that could happen. Williams is uncomfortable with this
possibility because it could create a lot of clutter for the neighbors.
Dodson thinks that this seems like a really small problem and that there is n ot a lot of
lots this would pertain to. Dodson wants the 3 proposals to be separate motions.
Williams would like to separate out the fishhouse portion and know how many parcels
this would apply to.
M/S/P:Dodson/Williams, Move to recommend approval of Ordinance 08- the exception
to 154.406, subd D, and the definition of “storage or tool shed” as amended, Vote: 6-0,
motion carried unanimously.
Becker stated that there is roughly 50 parcels that are adjacent to the lake and could
potentially put a fishhouse on the lot without a primary structure. Fields is comfortable
with the language written as this is not a permanent structure.
M/S/P:Williams/Dodson, move to recommend the following finding of fact that there is
some concern that if every one of these lots had a fishhouse, it may lead to complaints
by the neighbors. Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Dunn/Griffin, Move to recommend approval of the accessory structure
ordinance as it pertains to fishhouses as amended, Vote: 6-0, motion carried
unanimously.
Public Hearing – Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to allow connection to
sanitary sewer in Rural Single Family zoning where practical.
Wensman stated that the Met Council suggested that we amend the definition of the
rural single family definition in the Comprehensive Plan so that it would allow
connections to sanitary sewer where reasonable.
Dodson would like it to also read to municipal water where practical. Wensman stated
that we are really just talking about areas in the MUSA and the water system extends
outside the MUSA.
Williams is wondering about the term practical. Wensman stated that it was what was
suggested by Lisa Barajas at the Met Council. Williams asked what if the resident did
not want to connect. Wensman stated that the connection would be determined by the
City Council.
Dunn would like the “when practical” changed to “when requested”, which gives the
resident much more control. Wensman stated that the MUSA dictates where the sewer
can go, but this basically allows for Rural Single Family to connect.
5
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16
Public hearing opened at 8:34 pm
No one spoke and there was no written comments received.
Public hearing closed at 8:35 pm
Dunn would like to see the option of sewer or private septic. She doesn’t think that
they should be forced to connect to sewer. Wensman stated that the comprehensive
Plan is not in compliance with the projects that we are doing. If we don’t do this
amendment, the land use designation would need to be changed.
M/S/P: Fields/Dodson, Move to recommend the City Council approve the
comprehensive plan text amendment to amend the planned land use category in the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan to read as written, Vote: 5-1, motion carried. Dunn
voted no because she feels it is important that people have an option regarding
connection.
Business Item – Zoning Text Amendment to discuss the VMX Zoning Text .
Wensman began his presentation by showing the areas that are zoned as general
business, but guided as VMX in the Comprehensive Plan. To bring the zoning into
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, Wensman would like to see these properties
rezoned. Wensman believes by rezoning, it would actually eliminate some non
conformities. The area that would change the most, would be in the Northern area by
39th Street. Wensman stated that this was intended to bring the district more in
conformance than it is now and should be done as a district vs. one at a time. If there
are things about the district that the Commission does not like, then changes should be
made to the district.
Dunn feels that the premise is based on the Village Master Plan. Where is the master
plan? Wensman stated that the plan was based on transfer of density and he is not sure
what happened to that plan. Dunn did a rough calculation on what could be done if the
maximum densities were used. With her calculation, there is potential for upwards of
3000 people. She feels it is quite intense and not appropriate for this target area. She
would like to see more work done on the reductions for the comprehensive plan and
possibly look at form based code. Dunn would like to see the Comprehensive Plan
revisited as soon as possible for population reductions. She thinks we should take our
time and do this right.
Dunn pointed out some of the differences between GB and VMX. She feels one of the
biggest differences is the impervious surface coverage maximum goes from 40% based
on acreage in GB to 75% in VMX.
6
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16
Fields is confused because if the comprehensive plan is guided the way we want it, the
rezoning should happen. If we are considering if the guiding is correct, then it should
not be rezoned, but should be discussed what the guiding should be.
Larson thinks that what brings the guiding for VMX into question is that the density of
this area is in transition. Larson understands the feeling of discomfort as this zone is
less restrictive. There are still a lot of questions that make it uncomfortable for peo ple
to buy into this zone.
Williams thinks it would be good to ask the City Council if past projections of population
in this area are still valid.
Dodson is wondering how big a project form based code is. Wensman stated that it is
something that takes some technical skill to do and it would need to be contracted out.
Williams thinks it would help facilitate the vision, but would not be necessary to do the
rezone.
M/:Dunn/, Move to recommend not rezoning the parcels to VMX until the City Council
can review the target numbers and there is a form based code, motion dies for lack of
second.
M/S/P: Williams/Dunn, Move to ask the City Council to give the Planning Commission
guidance on updated population and development projections for the areas guided for
VMX in the Old Village, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously.
Fields would like to know what the driving force was for the VMX. If it was to bring
more people to the downtown to make it more vibrant, or if it was to meet the Met
Council mandates for housing population. Williams recollection was that it was for both
of those reasons in addition to form based code to make it a more picturesque
downtown and to incorporate business and residential in the same building, which
general business does not do.
M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, Move to ask the City Council to approve funds for a consultant
to work on a form based code for the downtown Old Village, Vote: 6-0, motion carried
unanimously.
Fields would like any information that he could get on form based code. Williams
believes that the City has a couple of videos on this topic.
Staff Updates
1. Upcoming Meetings
a. June 27, 2016
b. July 11, 2016
7
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 6-13-16
Commission Concerns
Dunn asked about the AUAR. Wensman stated that the City is overdue for the update
and it is in the City Engineers hands right now.
Meeting adjourned at 9:28 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Joan Ziertman
Planning Program Assistant
Lake DeMontreville
Lake Olson
OL
S
O
N
L
A
K
E
T
R
L
N
H
I
L
L
T
R
L
N
50TH ST N
HIDDEN BAY TRL
N
H
I
L
L
T
O
P
A
V
E
N
HI
G
H
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
L
N
DEER POND TRL N
JA
C
K
P
I
N
E
T
R
L
N
WINDBREAK TRL N
53RD ST N
HILL TRAIL CT N
Sewer Service Area - Tri Lakes
Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan Update
Map Date:
April 22, 2013
E
0 250 500 750 1,000125Feet
Future Public
Sewer Service Area
Map 6-2
456717
456717
456715
Lake Elmo
Sunfish Lake
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GISUser Community
Source: Washington County & Metro GIS6/22/20165
Proposed Village MUSA Amendment
Villa ge MU SA Bo undary
Pa rce ls Zoned RS in th e Villa ge MUSA
482291v1 SJS LA515-1
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: 7/5/2016
REGULAR
ITEM #:
AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of an Interim Ordinance Extending the Moratorium on
Development
SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director
THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney
BACKGROUND:
On July 7, 2017, the City Council adopted Interim Ordinance No. 08-123 declaring a moratorium pertaining
to development in the Stage 1, 2 and 3 development areas for a 12 month period. The ordinance went into
effect upon its publication on July 22, 2015. It is due to expire on July 22nd of this year.
After conducting a public hearing, the City may extend an interim ordinance for up to an additional 120
days following the receipt of the final approval or review by a federal, state, or metropolitan agency when
the approval is required by law and the review or approval has not been completed and received by the City
at least 30 days before the expiration of the interim ordinance.
The City’s shoreland regulations affect the use and development of property in the Stage 1, 2 and 3 Staging
Areas. The City recently revised its shoreland regulations in order to bring them into compliance with the
state law. The City sent its revised shoreland regulations to the Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”)
for the DNR’s review. The shoreland regulations are required by law to be reviewed by the Department of
Natural Resources (“DNR”). The City has not received notification from the DNR that the DNR’s review
has been completed. Therefore, the City could extend the interim ordinance on this basis.
At its June 21, 2016 meeting the City Council called for a public hearing on the extension. Notice of the
public hearing was published in the City’s official newspaper on June 22, 2016.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
Whether to adopt an interim ordinance extending the moratorium on residential development within the
Stage One Development Area and all development activity within Stage Two and Three Development
Areas as described by the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan.
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
After conducting the public hearing on the extension of the interim ordinance, the City Council will need
to decide whether or not to extend the interim ordinance.
PROCEDURE:
City Council Meeting July 5, 2016 Regular Agenda Item #15
2
482291v1 SJS LA515-1
The City Council should conduct the public hearing on the extension of the interim ordinance. The
following motion should be made:
“Motion to open the public hearing on the extension of the moratorium.”
After the public hearing is held, the City Council should close the public hearing. The following motion
should be made:
“Motion to close the public hearing on the extension of the moratorium.”
If the City Council wishes to adopt the interim ordinance extending the moratorium, the following motion
should be made:
“Motion to adopt Ordinance No. _____, An Interim Ordinance Extending the Moratorium on
Residential Development within the Stage One Development Area and All Development Activity within
the Stage Two and Three Development Areas as Described by the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan.”
ATTACHMENTS:
Interim Ordinance
482228v1 SJS LA515-1 1
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. ________
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE EXTENDING
THE MORATORIUM ON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE STAGE
ONE DEVELOPMENT AREA AND ALL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY WITHIN THE
STAGE TWO AND THREE DEVELOPMENT AREAS AS DESCRIBED BY THE LAKE
ELMO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, on July 7, 2015, the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of Lake Elmo
(the “City”) adopted Ordinance No. 08-123, pursuant to its authority under Minnesota Statutes,
Section 462.355, subdivision 4, which established a 12 month moratorium on the consideration
and/or or approval of any residential and related use or mixed-use subdivision or residential and
related use or mixed-use development project within the Stage 1, 2 or 3 Staging Areas as
identified in the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan with certain exceptions (the “Ordinance”); and
WHEREAS, the Ordinance was effective upon its publication on July 22, 2015 and
expires 12 months thereafter, unless further extended by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Rules Part 6120.2800, subpart 1 requires cities to adopt the
minimum standards and criteria set forth in Minnesota Rules Part 6120.2500 – 6120.3900 for
shorelands of public waters of the state which are subject to local government land use controls
and are to be incorporated into local government shoreland management controls; and
WHEREAS, the City’s shoreland regulations were not in conformance with the
minimum standards and criteria set forth in Minnesota Rules Part 6120.2500 – 6120.3900; and
WHEREAS, the City has revised its shoreland regulations to bring them into compliance
with Minnesota Rules Part 6120.2500 – 6120.3900; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 103F.221, subdivision 1 requires a city having
shorelands within its boundaries to submit ordinances or rules affecting the use and development
of its shorelands to the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”) for
review; and
WHEREAS, the City sent its revised shoreland regulations to the DNR for review and
on June 21, 2016 and has not received notification from the DNR that the DNR’s review has
been completed; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355, subdivision 4 (c)(1) permits a
municipality to extend an interim ordinance for up to an additional 120 days following the
receipt of the final approval or review by a federal, state, or metropolitan agency when the
482228v1 SJS LA515-1 2
approval is required by law and the review or approval has not been completed and received by
the municipality at least 30 days before the expiration of the interim ordinance; and
WHEREAS, since review by the DNR of the City’s shoreland regulations is required by
law and the review has not been completed and received by the City at least 30 days before the
expiration of the Ordinance, the City is authorized to extend the Ordinance pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355, subdivision 4 (c)(1) if it deems necessary; and
WHEREAS, the Stage 1, 2 and 3 Staging Areas all contain areas that are within the
City’s shoreland district, including Sunfish Lake, Kramer Lake, Goose Lake, Rose Lake and
Armstrong Lake; and
WHEREAS, because City’s shoreland regulations affect the use and development of
property in the Stage 1, 2 and 3 Staging areas, the Council finds it necessary to extend the
moratorium in order to allow the City to receive the DNR’s review of the City’s shoreland
regulations; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on the extension of the moratorium was
published in the City’s official newspaper on July 5, 2016; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the extension of the moratorium was held on June 22,
2016; and
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the foregoing, the City Council of the City of Lake
Elmo does ordain:
SECTION 1. MORATORIUM ON STAGE 1, 2 AND 3 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
EXTENDED. The moratorium period established in Sections 1 and 2 of Ordinance No. 08-123 is
hereby extended for an additional 120 days following the receipt of the DNR’s review of the City’s
shoreland regulations.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its legal passage
and publication.
SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance ______ was adopted on this 5th day of July,
2016, by a vote of ____ Ayes and ____ Nays.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
____________________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
482228v1 SJS LA515-1 3
_________________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
This Ordinance _______ was published on the ______ day of ______________, 2016.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 5, 2016
REGULAR
ITEM #: 16
MOTION
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director
AGENDA ITEM: Funding for Fishing with Deputies Event
BACKGROUND:
Washington County Sherriff’s Office is interested in working with the City of Lake Elmo to put
together a community event or two this summer/fall. In the past they have done events in several
cities within the county. During and after those events they found that it brings the community
closer together and also creates positive interaction with law enforcement, the citizens, and the
city. It also strengthens relationships and enhances the overall appeal of the city.
Last year the deputies hosted “Safe Summer Nights” in Cimarron. That event was well received.
It was essentially a community BBQ. There were Sheriff’s Office vehicles on display and several
representatives from the Sheriff’s Office interacting with the citizens that attended the event.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
Should the City contribute $1,000 towards a kids fishing event with the Washington County Deputies?
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
This year Deputy Ostertag has proposed doing a kids fishing event at Lake Elmo Park Reserve. This
would be a 3-4 hour event geared towards kids that live in Lake Elmo. Last year a similar event was held
in Landfall and the kids/parent’s loved it. The request is for $1000 from the city to help cover fishing
poles, tackle, bait, food, drinks, raffle prizes, etc. The event would be planned for August or September.
Since this is an unbudgeted expense, Council approval is requested.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$1,200 was budgeted for Parks and Recreation Events. Up to $500 was approved for Nature Day at
Sunfish Lake Park. The remaining funds could be used for this expense as well as a small amount of fund
balance.
OPTIONS:
1) Approve up to $1,000 for the Washington County Sherriff’s Office Kids Fishing Event
2) Approve up to a different amount for the Washington County Sherriff’s Office Kids Fishing
Event
3) Do not approve funding for the Washington County Sherriff’s Office Kids Fishing Event
RECOMMENDATION:
Motion to approve up to $1,000 for the Washington County Sherriff’s Office Kids Fishing Event
MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
-- page 1 --
DATE: July 5, 2016
REGULAR
ITEM 17
AGENDA ITEM: Stormwater Ordinance Amendment – Consideration to Reinstate the “One
Percent” Rule.
SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer
THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director
SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS:
- Introduction of Item ...................................................................... City Engineer
- Report/Presentation ....................................................................... City Engineer
- Questions from Council to Staff ............................................. Mayor Facilitates
- Call for Motion ............................................................... Mayor & City Council
- Discussion ....................................................................... Mayor & City Council
- Action on Motion .................................................................... Mayor Facilitates
POLICY RECOMMENDER: Environmental Committee. Council Members Fliflet and
Lundgren requested this item be placed on the agenda.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council amend the City Code to reinstate the “One
Percent” Rule? The rule refers to storm water volume control provisions that were previously
within the City Subdivision Ordinance before the City adopted a Storm Water and Erosion
Control Ordinance.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Storm Water and
Erosion Control Ordinance was adopted and incorporated into the City Code on June 16, 2009 to
comply with the City’s MS4 Permit requirements. On July 15, 2008, the City of Lake Elmo was
issued a mandatory permit by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) establishing the
conditions for discharging storm water under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Permit Program. The permit required that a Storm
Water and Erosion Control Ordinance be implemented within six months of MPCA issuance of
coverage. The City was granted an extension to June 30, 2009 due to the fact that the City was in
the process of completing the Village Area AUAR and the Local Surface Water Management
Plan.
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item X]
July 5, 2016
-- page 2 --
Prior to the adoption of the Storm Water and Erosion Control Ordinance, storm water was
regulated by the City through the partner watershed districts (VBWD, BCWD, and SWWD), and
through various provisions addressing storm water and erosion control requirements that were
scattered throughout the City Code. The “One Percent” Rule for instance was a storm water
volume control standard found in the City’s Subdivision Ordinance.
The 2009 Ordinance addressed volume control standards by carrying forward provisions
necessary to meet the intent of the “One Percent” Rule which states “the volume of storm water
runoff discharging from a proposed site shall not be greater than the volume of storm water
discharging prior to the site alteration”.
Minor revisions were then made to the Storm Water and Erosion Control Ordinance on May 3,
2011 to better clarify the intent of the City Code due to alternative interpretations by the
applicants, City and VBWD. The 2011 revisions did not change the intent of the Code.
Between January 2010 and June of 2013 the Minnesota Stormwater Steering Committee
workgroup was formed to research and develop Minimal Impact Design Standards, or MIDS
based on low impact development (LID), an approach to storm water management that mimics
a site’s natural hydrology. The Minnesota Stormwater Steering Committee was made up of a
large diverse group of storm water professionals, watershed districts, state agencies and
stakeholders, and Co-chaired by Jay Riggs from the Washington County Conservation District.
The Minnesota Legislature allocated funds to the workgroup to “develop performance standards,
design standards and other tools to enable and promote the implementation of low impact
development and other storm water management techniques”.
In June, 2013, the MIDS work group members agreed on a performance goal that essentially
requires projects that create one or more acres of new and/or fully reconstructed impervious
surfaces to capture and retain on site 1.1 inches of runoff. This performance goal was found
match native runoff volume conditions on an average annual basis while being highly effective
in improving water quality. It represents a low impact development approach, where storm water
is managed on site and the rate and volume of predevelopment storm water reaching receiving
waters is unchanged. The calculation of predevelopment hydrology is based on native soil and
vegetation.
Therefore, in October 2013 the City adopted what is now the current Storm Water Ordinance
provisions (through Ordinance 08-090) to better align the regulation of storm water management
in the City with the new MIDS performance goals and standards. The Ordinance amended the
storm water volume control standard to meet the new volume control standards that wer e
adopted by MIDS and the VBWD as part of their 2013 Rule changes.
Ordinance 08-090 revises Section 150.277 Performance and Design Standards to;
Eliminate the requirement by applicants to prepare and submit for approval by the City a
Storm Water Management Plan using storm water modeling design criteria that is
different from the State and/or local Watershed District(s). Instead the Stormwater
City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item X]
July 5, 2016
-- page 3 --
Management Plan must be submitted to the City, but will be the same Stormwater
Management Plan already prepared for watershed district and/or State approvals.
Align the storm water rate control requirements by the city with the rate control
requirements of the State and local Watershed(s).
Align the water quality control (volume) requirements by the city with the water quality
control (volume) requirements of the State and local Watershed(s), both of whom have
adopted MIDS.
OPTIONS:
1. Take no action. The current City Storm Water and Erosion Control Ordinance, VBWD
Rules, and MPCA Storm Water Rules adequately addresses the issues of both rate and
volume control for storm water management.
2. Direct staff to conduct further research and analysis in preparation of a future council
workshop to present specific findings and recommendations regarding the purpose and
effectiveness of the “One Percent” Rule; and to provide recommended language for how
the “One Percent” Rule could be reinstated within the context of the new state, watershed
and City storm water regulations.
FISCAL IMPACT: Unknown. At a minimum, reinstatement of the “One Percent” Rule will
result in duplication of detailed engineering design, modeling and review efforts on all projects
where the rule is made applicable. The fiscal impact is unknown for each project in regards to
whether the requirement results in increased or decreased construction and maintenance costs.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council take no action. Staff
believes that storm water volume control is being sufficiently addressed by the City’s current
Storm Water and Erosion Control Ordinance adopted in 2013, following the MIDS Workgroup
performance goals and the new storm water management rules adopted by the VBWD and the
MPCA. The new rules are supported by research and development of criteria by a diverse group
of storm water professionals.
Should the City Council wish to continue pursuing the potential reinstatement of the “One
Percent” Rule, staff is recommending that the City Council direct staff to retain a Professional
Water Resource Engineer to assist staff with conducting further research and analysis in
preparation of a future council workshop to present specific findings and recommendations
regarding the purpose and effectiveness of the “One Percent” Rule; and to provide recommended
language for how the “One Percent” Rule could be reinstated within the context of the new state,
watershed and City storm water regulations. The recommended motion for this action would be
as follows:
“Move to direct staff to retain Professional Services, as deemed necessary, and to conduct
additional research and analysis in preparation of a future council workshop to assist the
Council with reviewing the potential reinstatement of the “One Percent” Rule to further
regulate storm water volume control.”
ATTACHMENT(S): None.
§ 153.01 REGULATIONS ESTABLISHED.
No land shall be subdivided, nor shall any land be platted, in the city except as provided by this chapter.
(1997 Code, § 400.02) Penalty, see § 10.99
§ 153.02 GENERALLY.
(A) Purpose. In order to provide for orderly, economic, and safe development of land, necessary urban services and facilities, and to
promote the public health, safety, morals as to the urban services and facilities, the following subdivision regulations are adopted by the Council
of the city. It is the intent of the city to protect the right of landowners to put their land to its highest and best use and protect each owner's right
to full beneficial use of his or her land insofar as the use and enjoyment may be accomplished without detriment to the public interest and within
the minimum standards established by this chapter.
(B) Scope. The provisions of this chapter apply to any division of a tract of land into 2 or more parcels for the purpose of transfer of
ownership, building development, or tax assessment purposes by platting, re-platting, registered land survey, conveyance, sale, contract for sale
or any other means by which a beneficial interest in land is transferred or any means by which a tract of land is divided into 2 or more parcels for
tax assessment purposes.
(C) Approval necessary for acceptance of subdivision plats. Before any plat or subdivision shall be recorded or be of any validity, it shall
be referred to the Planning Commission and approved by the Council as having fulfilled the requirements of this chapter.
(D) Building permits. No building permits shall be issued for the construction of any building, structure, or improvement to any land or lot
in a subdivision, as defused in this chapter, until all requirements of this chapter have been satisfied, with the following exceptions.
§ 153.07 PRELIMINARY PLAT.
(A) Filing. Twenty copies of the preliminary plat and certified list of property owners located within 350 feet of the subject property
obtained from and certified by a licensed abstractor, shall be filed with the Administrator. The required filing fee as established by Council
resolution shall be paid and any necessary applications for variances from the provisions of this chapter shall be submitted with the required fee.
The proposed plat shall be placed on the agenda of the Planning Commission meeting no later than the second regularly scheduled meeting
following the date of filing. No application shall be accepted by the Administrator for filing unless all application information required by this
chapter is submitted with the application.
(B) Submission requirements. The applicant shall prepare and submit a preliminary plat, together with any necessary supplementary
information. The preliminary plat shall contain the following information.
(C) General provision (preliminary plat).
(1) Proposed name of subdivision; names shall not duplicate or too closely resemble names of existing subdivisions; in any case, the
name must be approved by the County Recorder;
(2) Location of boundary lines in relation to a known section, quarter section, or quarter quarter section lines comprising a legal
description of the property;
(3) Names and addresses of all persons having any interest in the property, the developer, designer, and surveyor together with the
interested person's registration number;
(4) Graphic scale of plat, not less than 1 inch to 100 feet;
(5) Data and north point; and
(6) Date of preparation.
(D) Existing conditions.
(1) Boundary line of proposed subdivision, clearly indicated;
(2) Existing zoning classifications for land within and abutting the subdivision;
(3) A general statement on the approximate acreage and dimensions of the lots;
(4) Location, widths, and names of all existing or previously platted streets or other public ways, showing type, width, and condition of
improvements if any, railroad and utility rights-of-way, parks and other public open spaces, permanent buildings and structures, easements and
section and corporate lines within the tract and to a distance of 350 feet beyond the tract;
(5) Location and size of existing sewers, water mains, culverts, or other underground facilities within the tract and to a distance of 350
feet beyond the tract; the data as grades, invert elevations, and locations of catch basins, manholes, shall also be shown;
(6) Boundary lines of adjoining unsubdivided or subdivided land, within 350 feet, identified by name and ownership, including all
contiguous land owned or controlled by the subdivider;
(7) Topographic data, including contours at vertical intervals of not more than 2 feet; water courses, marshes, rock outcrops, power
transmission poles and lines, and other significant feature shall also be shown; N.G.V.D. shall be used for all topographic mapping; and
(8) In plats where public water and sewer are not available, the City Engineer may require the subdivider to file a report prepared by a
soil scientist or a registered civil engineer on the feasibility of individual on-site sewer and water systems on each lot. The report shall include a
soil boring analysis and percolation tests to verify conclusions.
(E) Proposed design features.
(1) Layout of proposed streets showing the right-of-way widths, center line gradients, typical cross sections, and proposed names of
streets in conformance with all applicable city ordinances and policies. The name of any street used in the city or its environs shall not be used
unless the proposed street is a logical extension of an already named street, in which event the same name shall be used. The street names and
numbering system shall comply with the County Uniform Street Numbering System;
(2) Locations and widths of proposed alleys and pedestrian ways;
(3) Locations and size of proposed sewer lines and water mains;
(4) Layout, numbers, lot areas, and preliminary dimensions of lots and blocks;
(5) Minimum front and side street building setback lines;
(6) When lots are located on a curve, the width of the lot at the building setback line shall be shown;
(7) Areas, other than streets, alleys, pedestrian ways, and utility easements intended to be dedicated or reserved for public use, including
the size of the area or areas in acres;
(8) Water mains shall be provided to serve the subdivision by extension of any existing community system wherever feasible. Service
connections shall be stubbed into the property line and all necessary fire hydrants shall also be provided. Extensions of the public water supply
system shall be designed so as to provide public water in accordance with the standards of the city. In areas where public water supply is not
available, well plans must comply with applicable state regulations and shall be submitted for the approval of the City Building Official;
(9) Sanitary sewer mains and service connections shall be installed in accordance with the standards established by the city;
(10) All private sewage treatment systems shall be installed in accordance with standards established by the city;
(11) (a) Surface water disposal, drainage, and flood control shall be provided within the boundaries of the proposed property division:
(b) The rate and volume of surface volume runoff within the boundaries of a proposed property subdivision shall not, in any event, be
greater than the rate and volume of runoff existing on the proposed property division prior to the proposed development. Surface volume runoff
is water leaving the property on or very near the surface. To the extent possible, provisions shall be made for controlling runoff by construction
or enhancement of ponding facilities on the site of and within the boundaries of the proposed property division, which ponding facilities should
provide for both permanent and temporary storage of runoff waters.
(c) The increased runoff volume from new development shall be calculated at 0.35 acre feet for each acre of impervious surface
proposed in the development. Impervious surface shall be all streets, parking lots, roofs, walks, driveways or other hard surface materials
proposed in any development. For residential developments, each lot shall be assumed to contain 3,000 square feet of impervious surface for the
house, garage, and driveway. Existing ponds or other facilities may be used for runoff volume control. Any storage ponds shall be designed to
retain the volume of runoff calculated under this provision below its outlet or overflow point and above the water table.
(d) The Soil Conservation Service method of analysis shall be used to calculate the runoff rate prior to development. The pre-
development land use shall be considered permanent meadow with a soil conservation curve number of 58. The 100-year, 24-hour storm of 5.9
inches of precipitation shall serve as the basis of the analysis.
(e) This chapter shall apply to all areas of the city exclusive of that portion for the city within the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed
District.
(12) A plan for soil erosion and sediment control both during construction and after development has been completed. The plan shall
include gradients of waterways, design of velocity and erosion control measures, and landscaping of the erosion and sediment control system.
(F) Supplementary information. The following supplementary information shall be submitted when deemed necessary by the Planning
Commission:
(1) Proposed protective covenants;
(2) An accurate soil survey of the subdivision prepared by a qualified person. In areas of questionable soil conditions, percolation tests
may be required on a lot-by-lot basis to determine the suitability of any particular site for building;
(3) A statement prepared by a qualified person identifying tree coverage in the proposed subdivision in terms of type, weakness,
maturity, potential hazard, infestation, vigor, density, and spacing;
(4) Statement of the proposed use of lots stating type of residential buildings with number of proposed dwelling units and type of
business or industry, so as to reveal the effect of the development on traffic, fire hazards, and congestion of population;
(5) If any zoning changes are contemplated, the proposed zoning plat for the areas, including dimensions, shall be shown;
(6) Where the subdivider owns property adjacent to that which is being proposed for the subdivision, the Planning Commission may
require that the subdivider submit a sketch plan of the remainder of the property so as to show the possible relationships between the proposed
subdivision and the future subdivision. All subdivisions shall be shown to relate well with existing or potential adjacent subdivisions;
(7) Where structures are to be placed on large or excessively deep lots which are subject to potential replat, the subdivider shall provide
in the preliminary plat, a sketch plan which indicates minimum building setback lines and future roadway alignments which would not interfere
with structural placement at the time of future subdivision; and
(8) A vegetation preservation and protection plat that shows those trees proposed to be removed, those to remain, the types and locations
of trees and other vegetation that are to be planted;
(a) Developer shall provide a landscape plan which shows how a subdivision will assume a rural character through the placement of
ponding, berms, trees, and tree seedlings, shrubs, and shrub seedlings and native grasses;
(b) Developer shall plant a minimum of 6 trees, 1 inch caliper deciduous, or coniferous trees; 3 feet in height per acre unless a lot
within the subdivision is determined by the Zoning Administrator to be naturally wooded which would, at a minimum, consist of the caliper and
height of trees required by this chapter; and
(c) Developer shall provide spaced or clustered plantings of 1 and 1/2 inch caliper deciduous trees at a rate of 2 per 100 lineal feet on
both sides of the street, between 0 feet and 5 feet to the inside of the right-of-way for rural sections and between 5 feet and 10 feet to the inside of
right-of-way for urban sections. Four foot conifers may be substituted.
(G) Other information. Other information shall be provided as may be reasonably requested by the city staff. Planning Commission, or
Council.
(H) Review by staff and other commissions or jurisdictions.
(1) The city shall refer copies of the preliminary plat to the City Engineer, Planner, and Attorney, the Park Commission, and the
appropriate county, state, or other public agencies for their review and comment.
(2) Comment must be received within 30 days or it will be assumed there are no objections.
(I) Hearing.
(1) The Planning Commission, upon receipt of the application shall instruct Administrator to set a public hearing on the proposed
preliminary plat no later than 45 days from the date of filing of the application. The Planning Commission shall conduct the hearing and report
its findings and recommendations to the Council. The Administrator shall give notice of the hearing. The notice shall consist of a property
description and a description of the request. The notice shall be published in the official newspaper at least 10 days prior to the date of the
hearing and written notification of the hearing shall be mailed at least 10 days prior to all owners of land within 350 feet of the boundary of the
property in question. The Planning Commission, at its discretion, may direct that notification be sent to property owners at distances of greater
than 350 feet.
(2) The failure of any property owner to receive notice shall not invalidate the proceedings.
(J) Planning Commission action. The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council within 30 days following the
close of the public hearing. If the recommendations of the Planning Commission are not received within that time, the Council may act on the
preliminary plat without the recommendations.
(K) City Council Action.
(1) The Council shall act upon the preliminary plat and may impose the conditions and restrictions as are deemed necessary by the
Council in view of the purpose of this section and the recommendations of the Planning Commission within 30 days after receiving the
recommendations of the Planning Commission or within 60 days after the close of the public hearing on the preliminary plat should the Planning
Commission fail to forward recommendations.
(2) If the preliminary plat is not approved by the Council, the reasons for the action shall be recorded in the proceedings of the council
and transmitted to the applicant. If the preliminary plat is approved, the approval shall not constitute final acceptance of the layout. Subsequent
approval will be required of the engineering proposals and other features and requirements as specified by this chapter to be indicated on the final
plat. The Council may require revisions in the preliminary plat and final plat as it deems necessary for the public health, safety, general welfare,
and convenience.
(L) Submission of final plat; request for extension. If the preliminary plat is approved by the Council, the subdivider must submit the final
plat within 180 days after the approval, or approval of the preliminary plat shall be considered void, unless a request for time extension is
submitted in writing and approved by the council.
(1997 Code, § 400.08) Penalty, see § 10.99
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 5, 2016
REGULAR
ITEM #: 18
MOTION
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney
AGENDA ITEM: Amend Chap 31 of City Code
BACKGROUND:
The Council last updated Chapter 31 of the City Code related to the City Council at their April 5,
2016 meeting. After adoption Parliamentarian Wendt noted some conflicting provisions about
how many times a member may speak. In addition, after learning about state statute related to
presiding officer duties, updates are proposed for section 31.02 Presiding Officer
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
Should the City amend Chapter 31 of the City Code?
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
A redlined version of the proposed changes is included in your packet.
FISCAL IMPACT:
NA
OPTIONS:
1) Approve Ordinance No 08-143
2) Amend and then Approve Ordinance No 08-143
3) Do not approve Ordinance No 08-143
RECOMMENDATION:
Motion to approve Ordinance No. 08-143
Motion to adopt Resolution No 2016-54 Approving Summary Publication of Ordinance No 08-143
1
482411v1 SJS LA515-4
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 08-143
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 31 OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF
ORDINANCES REGARDING THE PRESIDING OFFICER AND THE ORDER OF
BUSINESS AT REGULAR MEETINGS
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Section 31.02 of the
City Code by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined language as follows:
§ 31.02 PRESIDING OFFICER.
(A) Presiding Officer. The mayor, or in the mayor’s absence the acting mayor, shall
preside at all meetings of the Council.
(1) Role of the presiding officer. The presiding officer shall preserve order, enforce
the Council Rules of Order and Procedure as adopted, and determine, without
debate, all questions of procedure and order, subject to the final decision of the
Council on appeal as provided in this Section. The presiding officer shall
determine which member has the right to speak and may move matters to a vote
once the officer has determined that all members have spoken. The presiding
officer may determine whether a motion or proposed amendment is in order and
may call members to order. Except as otherwise provided by statute or by the
provisions of this Chapter, the proceedings of the Council shall be conducted in
accordance with the latest edition of Roberts Rules of Order.
(2) Adjourning a meeting. If considered necessary, because of grave disorder as
determined by the presiding officer, the presiding officer may adjourn or continue
any meeting to another time or suspend the meeting for a specified period of time.
(3) Designation of a sergeant-at-arms. The presiding officer may request that local
law enforcement designate a member to serve as a sergeant-at-arms at Council
meetings. The sergeant-at-arms shall carry out all orders or instructions given by
the presiding officer for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum at
meetings.
(4) Motions and voting. The presiding officer may make motions, second motion,
speak on any questions, and vote on any matter properly before the Council.
(5) Absences of presiding officer. In the absence of the mayor, the acting mayor shall
preside. In the absence of both the mayor and the acting mayor, the city
clerk/administrator shall call the meeting to order. The first order of business
2
482411v1 SJS LA515-4
shall be to select a presiding officer for the meeting from the members present.
The city clerk/administrator shall preside until the Council members present
choose a member to act as presiding officer.
(6) Appeals and ruling of the presiding officer. Any member of the Council may
appeal to the full Council a ruling on order or procedure made by the presiding
officer.
(7) Procedure for appeals. An appeal is made by motion. No second is needed for
the motion of appeal. The member making the motion may speak once solely on
the question involved, and the presiding officer may speak once solely to explain
their ruling, but no other Council member may participate in the discussion.
(8) Once both the maker of the motion and the presiding officer has spoken, the
matter must be voted upon by the Council as a whole.
(9) The appeal shall be sustained if it is approved by a majority of the members
present, exclusive of the presiding officer.
(10) Temporary designation of a presiding officer. The presiding officer may choose
to designate a temporary presiding officer before participating in debate on a
given matter. The presiding officer shall resume presiding as soon as action on
the matter is concluded.
SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Section 31.04 of the
City Code by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined language as follows:
§ 31.04 ORDER OF BUSINESS AT REGULAR MEETINGS.
(A) Order established. Each meeting of the Council shall convene at the time and place
appointed for the meeting. Council business shall be conducted in the order determined by the
Council at its first annual meeting or as thereafter amended by the majority vote of the Council.
(1) Order of Business. The standard order of business for Council meetings shall be
the following:
(a) Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance;
(b) Approval of Agenda;
(c) Approval of Minutes from Past Meeting(s);
(d) Public Comment;
(e) Presentations;
3
482411v1 SJS LA515-4
(f) Consent Agenda;
(g) Regular Agenda;
(h) Report of the Council;
(i) Reports from City Staff; and
(j) Adjourn.
(B) Agenda. An agenda will be prepared for all regular Council meetings by the city
clerk/administrator or their designee. Agenda items may be placed on the agenda by the Mayor
and a Council member, two Council members or staff. Members of the public wishing to place
an item on the agenda must do so by contacting city staff or Council members, or by speaking
during the public comment period. No member of the general public may add any items to the
agenda.
(1) Special Meetings. When a special meeting is called pursuant to applicable law,
the agenda for the special meeting must be included in the request for the meeting
and in the publication of the notice of the meeting pursuant to Minn. Stat. §
13D.04, subd. 2.
(2) Agenda Procedures. Any Staff member or Mayor and Council member or two
Council members wishing to add an item to any agenda pursuant to this Section
shall do so by complying with the following:
(a) All requests to place an item on the posted agenda must be received by the
city clerk/administrator by 10 a.m. five days prior to the next Council
meeting. For a regularly scheduled Tuesday meeting, the deadline for
agenda items would be 10 a.m. on the preceding Thursday.
(b) All requests to place an item on the posted agenda must be on the form
prescribed by the city clerk/administrator. The form shall be completed
with the goal of clearly describing the subject matter to be considered by the
Council and any action requested or required. Supporting information may
be attached to the form as necessary.
(c) All requests to place an item on the posted agenda by city staff or Council
members must be reviewed by the city clerk/administrator or their designee
prior to being included in the agenda.
(d) The agenda, along with all related information materials, will be provided to
all City Council members and the city attorney at least three days prior to
the Council meeting for which it applies. For a regularly scheduled Tuesday
meeting, the packet will be provided by 5 p.m. the Friday preceding.
4
482411v1 SJS LA515-4
(C) Consent Agenda. A consent agenda may be used to improve the efficiency of meetings.
The consent agenda allows the Council to consider several items at one time. Only one motion is
necessary to approve all items on the consent agenda.
(1) Items that require findings of fact or an explanation of Council actions, such as
land use matters and the consideration of licensing requests, should not be placed
on the consent agenda.
(2) An item on the consent agenda may be removed from such agenda for full
consideration by the Council upon request made by any member of the Council.
Items removed from the consent agenda will be placed on the regular agenda for
discussion and consideration.
(D) Presentation, discussion and agenda item decisions. The following is the order of
business for presenting and discussing items on Council agendas:
(1) Introduction of item;
(2) Report by staff or other presenter;
(3) Questions from Council members to the presenter in a round robin manner. The
presiding officer will facilitate the round robin process by asking each individual
Council member for one question and allowing for a response to the individual
question. Then the presiding officer will ask the next Council member, in
sequence, until all Council members have asked and received responses to a
question. No Council member shall take more than three minutes to ask a
question or comment on an item which is being presented before another Council
member has a turn to question and comment on the same item;
(4) Receive questions/comments from the applicant/requesting party to the Council,
and allow each Council member to respond in the round robin process;
(5) Allow questions from Council members to the applicant/requesting party, if
applicable, using the round robin process;
(6) Allow questions/comments from the public to Council members. Each member of
the public shall state his or her comments in six minutes. Council shall not
interrupt or interact until all public comments are completed;
(7) At the conclusion of the round robin process, the presiding officer calls for a
motion or discussion among the Council. Discussion on any presentation shall be
kept to a minimum, and each Council member shall only speak twice on the issue.
This action is not an indication that the motion on the table is the motion that will
be approved in its current form. It is purely for discussion purposes;
(8) Discussion among Council members using the round robin process with each
5
482411v1 SJS LA515-4
members speaking no more than twice on a motion;
(9) Action by the Council on the motion.
(E) Meeting Schedule.
(1) Each meeting of the Council shall convene at the time and place appointed. All
public hearings shall commence at the advertised time.
(2) Council business shall be conducted in the order of the prepared agenda, unless an
alteration is approved by a majority of the Council.
(3) The last item on the agenda will be commenced no later than 12 a.m.
(4) If all business has not been completed by 12 a.m., the meeting shall be continued
to another date and time following the notice provisions contained herein.
(F) Public participation and comment at council meetings. Council meetings are the forum
for the Council to conduct the city’s business. While Council meetings are open to the public
pursuant to the Minnesota Open Meeting Law, they are not a forum for public expression. As
such, members of the public are not allowed to participate in Council discussion and debate
without a specific invitation and/or formal recognition by the presiding officer. Members of the
public shall not applaud, engage in conversation, or engage in other behavior through words or
actions that may disrupt the proceedings of the Council.
(G) Members of the public shall follow the direction of the presiding officer. Members of
the public who do not follow the direction of the presiding officer will be warned that further
disruptive conduct will result in removal from the meeting. After such warning, if the conduct
continues, the presiding officer may ask the member of the public to leave the meeting room. If
the member of the public refuses to follow the direction of the presiding officer, the presiding
officer may direct the sergeant-at-arms to remove the person through any lawful means. In
emergency situations, or where the conduct is an egregious threat to the safety of the public or
the Council, a warning is not necessary before the sergeant-at-arms is directed to remove the
person.
(H) Public comment period. A limited forum for members of the public to speak with the
Council is provided on each agenda. Public comments during the public comment period are
subject to the following limitations:
(1) Speakers must be recognized by the presiding officer before speaking and are
limited to six minutes for comment;
(2) When multiple speakers appear to speak on the same topic, comments should not
be repetitive. The presiding officer may request speakers to appoint a
spokesperson;
6
482411v1 SJS LA515-4
(3) The presiding officer may place a time limit on the public comment period if
necessary to allow for the conduct of city business. If there is not sufficient time
at the meeting to hear all public comments, the comment period may be deferred
to the next regular Council meeting or at a continued meeting;
(4) Speakers must sign up prior to speaking and provide their name, address, and a
brief summary of the subject matter which they wish to address. The sign-up
sheet will be available at the start of the City Council meeting;
(5) Speakers must direct their remarks toward the presiding officer;
(6) Speakers shall not use obscene, profane, insulting, or threatening language, nor
conduct themselves in a threatening, loud, or boisterous manner that disrupts the
conduct of the meeting or the security of the public;
(7) Speakers are required to follow the direction of the presiding officer; and
(8) The Council will generally not respond at the same meeting where an issue is
initially raised by a member of the public. Generally, the matter will be referred
to staff for further research and possible report or action at a future Council
meeting.
(I) Public Hearings. Public hearings are sometimes required by law to allow the public to
offer input on Council decisions. Unlike public comment periods, public hearings allow the
public to speak on a matter currently before the Council. When public hearings are required by
law, notice shall be provided as required by state statute. Public hearings shall be commenced at
the time advertised in any notice required by law.
(1) General procedure for public hearings. The order of business for all public
hearings conducted by the Council shall be:
(a) Opening comments by the presiding officer announcing the purpose of the
public hearing;
(b) The presiding officer opens the public hearing portion of the meeting;
(c) Staff presentation, if any (i.e. administrator/clerk, attorney, engineer etc.);
(d) Developer/other presentation, if any;
(e) Public comment (all individual comments limited to six minute maximum);
(f) The clerk/administrator shall make note of any submitted written testimony;
and
(g) The presiding officer formally closes the public hearing portion of the
7
482411v1 SJS LA515-4
meeting.
(2) Speakers who wish to address the Council at a public hearing must follow the
same rules as contained herein for public comment periods. The presiding officer
may allow more time, where appropriate.
(3) Speakers may also provide written comments to the Council before or at the
meeting. Written comments shall be noted and provided to the Council and to
anyone else as required by law.
(4) The presiding officer may continue the hearing, if necessary, following the
procedures for continuing a meeting contained in this Section.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo.
SECTION 4. Adoption Date. This Ordinance No. 08-143 was adopted on this _____ day of
July, 2016, by a vote of __ Ayes and __ Nays.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
___________________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
This Ordinance ________ was published on the _____ day of _________________, 2016.
Resolution 2016-54 Page 1 of 2
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-54
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-143 BY TITLE
AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-143,
an ordinance amending the City Code of Ordinances by amending the City’s provisions related to
the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Ordinance is 7 pages in length; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 412.191, subdivision 4, allows publication by title
and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform
the public of the intent and effect of the Ordinance; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo,
that the City Clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 08-143 to be published in
the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance:
Public Notice
The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-143, which amends
Chapter 31 of the City Code by deleting sections 31.02 and 31.04 in their entirety and replacing
them with new sections 31.02 and 31.04. The Ordinance clarifies the duties of the presiding
officer and how many times a council member may speak to a motion.
The full text of Ordinance No. 08-143 is available for inspection at Lake Elmo city hall during
regular business hours.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo that the
City Administrator keep a copy of the Ordinance at City Hall for public inspection and that a copy
be placed for public inspection at the Lake Elmo Public Library.
Dated: July 5, 2016.
___________________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
Resolution 2016-54 Page 2 of 2
(SEAL)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
_____________________ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 5, 2016
REGULAR
ITEM #: 19
MOTION
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
AGENDA ITEM: Direction to Parks Commission Regarding Savona
BACKGROUND:
Council members Fliflet and Lundgren were down in Savona meeting some of our newest
residents and letting them know about the Farmers Market. They have found out that there is a
desire from residents in Savona for a neighborhood park and Council member Fliflet supports
this 100%.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
Should the Council direct the Parks Commission to work on plans for a neighborhood park in the Savona
neighborhood and include this project in the 2017 CIP?
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
Fliflet would like the Parks Commission to put together a work group to meet together with residents in
this neighborhood to get their input and direction on what they would like to see in the park, and where
they think the best location would be. Tucker Pearce, a resident of Savona has offered to take the lead on
getting a group of residents together to work with the Parks Commission on this.
Staff Comments:
Parks Commission previously agreed with having a smaller “pocket/neighborhood” park that
serves the development along with a series of trails providing connections to the Stonegate Park
and other local and regional parks.
Mr. Pearce had also been in contact with the Parks Commission Chair about their interest in a
park in Savona. The Parks Commission Chair was planning to put this on a future agenda for
continued discussion. Generally, the Parks Commission has been looking at parks in new
developments once at least a third of the homes are in. Savona will likely meet that threshold
within the next few months.
Directing an outcome (placing the project in the 2017 CIP) is not following appropriate process
or procedure. It’s perfectly appropriate to ask the Parks Commission to work with the residents
of Savona on a plan but directing them to place it in the 2017 CIP in problematic for a couple
reasons. First, the Parks Commission has already held two meetings and passed out their
recommendations for the 2017-2021 CIP. The Council should receive them at the appropriate
time and then can make whatever changes the Council desires before final adoption. Secondly, it
doesn’t make sense for the Council to direct an outcome from a recommending body when the
Council has the final authority anyways. This just creates more work and inefficiencies.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Unknown without specific plans yet however, the Parks Commission has generally used $500 per house
in determining how to plan for parks in new developments. There are 309 houses planned in Savona with
78 certificates of occupancy issued as of June 30, 2016.
OPTIONS:
1) Direct the Parks Commission to work on plans for a neighborhood park in the Savona
neighborhood and include this project in the 2017 CIP
2) Direct the Parks Commission to work on plans for a neighborhood park in the Savona
neighborhood.
3) Do not direct this item to Parks Commission
RECOMMENDATION:
Council Members Fliflet and Lundgren would recommend option 1.
“Motion to direct the Parks Commission to work on plans for a neighborhood park in the Savona
neighborhood and include this project in the 2017 CIP”
482301v1 SJS LA515-1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 5, 2016
REGULAR
ITEM #: 20
MOTION
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney
AGENDA ITEM: Unsustained Complaint Against Council Member Bloyer
BACKGROUND:
Pursuant to the Special Reporting Requirements in the City of Lake Elmo Personnel Policy and Employee
Handbook, an employee filed a complaint against Council Member Bloyer on June 2, 2016. The
complaint was filed with the City Attorney who undertook the necessary investigation and responded to
the employee. The City Attorney found the complaint to be unsustained. The Council was made aware
of the complaint, that the City Attorney found it to be unsustained, and that Council members could
review a copy of the complaint and the City Attorney’s response to the complaint in the City
Administrator’s office.
Council members Fliflet and Smith requested that this item be placed on the July 5, 2016 Council agenda.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
What actions, if any, would the Council like to take with regards to this issue?
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
Council may discuss what, if any, action should be taken with regards to the complaint.
Even though the complaint and the City Attorney’s response is not public data, the Council may discuss
not public data at an open meeting, provided that the disclosure is related to a matter within the scope of
the Council’s authority and is reasonably necessary to conduct the business or agenda item before the
Council. However, the Council must refrain from using the complainant’s name or otherwise identifying
the complainant.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff’s recommendation was that the complaint was unsustained so no further action is being
recommended.