Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09-20-16 CCMP
T111'. CITY OF LAKE ELMO Our Alisfion is to Provicle Puality Public Services in a Fiscal/y ,Responsib. A/fanner Presen,in the City's Open Spice NOTICE OF MEETING City Council Meeting Tuesday, September 20, 2016 7:00 P.M. City of Lake Elmo I 3800 Laverne Avenue North Agenda Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance 1. Approval of Agenda 4 Approval of Minutes 1. August 16, 2016 ci Public Comments/Inquiries E. Presentations F. Consent Agenda z Approve Payment of Disbursements r Accept August 2016 Financial Statements Accept August 2016 Assessor's Report .5/. Accept August 2016 Building Department Report ff. Accept August 2016 Fire Department Report Accept August 2016 Public Works Department Report g. 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements — Approve Pay Request No. 4 xi. 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements — Approve Change Order No. 2 Inwood Trunk Watennain Improvements — Approve Pay Request No. 5 d Inwood Booster Station — Approve Pay Request No. 4 i. Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) — Approve Pay Request No. 4 jx. Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) — Approve Change Order No. 2 1,4. Approve Repairs to Well #2 Roof K. Approve Payoff of Existing Building Vehicle Loan Approve Safe Assure Contract Renewal . Approve Lions Park Design Services -Miller Architecture zg'. Approve Tablyn Park Upgrades /6. Accept LMCIT New Special Endorsements 20. Approve Concrete Work in front of City Hall G. egular Agenda n rng Map Artiailinen iOP Ordinance — Ordinance 08-152; Resolution 2016-75 3/Ordinance Amendment: Exemption from Platting for Subdivision of Property — Ordinance 08-153; Resolution 2016-76 . Financing Matters Related to Downtown Project ?'. Easton Village Park Additional Cost ??3'. Fence Ordinance- Ordinance 08-154; Resolution 2016-79 . Old Village Phase 1 Street and Utility Improvements — Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed, Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessments, and Calling for Hearing on Proposed Assessment - 2 Ui & -VI . Old -Village Phase 3 Street & Utility Improvements — Accept Petitions and Authorize FR and Borings — s2,1 esolution 2016-80 ' . 2016 Street Improvements — Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed, Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessments, and Calling for Hearing on Proposed Assessment -Resolution 2016-78 $! reliminary 2017 General Fund and Library Fund Annual Budget and Tax Levy — Resolution 2016-77 Job Classification and Compensation Study 4(City Administrator Review Process H. Staff Reports and Announcements I. Adjourn CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 16, 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, and City Clerk Johnson. APPROVAL OF AGENDA City Council Reports were removed from the Agenda. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5 — O. ACCEPT MINUTES A clarification was added to the Approval of the Agenda to reflect that an item was removed from the Consent Agenda. Minutes of the August 2, 2016 Regular Meeting were accepted by unanimous consent as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES Nadine Obermueller, 8696 42nd Street North, commented on growing layers of government and cautioned against too much government growth. Virginia Pleban, 8245 59u1Street North, spoke about communication and encouraged listening with an open mind. PRESENTATIONS Promotion of Two Probationary Firefighters Councihnember Flifiet, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO APPROVE THE PROMOTION OF JEREMY PENMAN AND BRANDAN PELTIER FROM PROBATIONARY STATUS TO FIREFIGHTER WITH BACK PAY TO ELIGIBILITY DATE. Motion passed 5 — O. Fire Chief Malmquist conducted the swearing in of Firefighters Jeremy Penman and Brandan Peltier. CONSENT AGENDA 3. Approve Payment of Disbursements 4. Accept July 2016 Financial Statements 5. Accept July 2016 Assessor's Report 6. Accept July 2016 Building Department Report 7. Accept July Fire Chiefs Report 8. Accept July Public Works Department Report 9. Approve Special Assessment Abatement Requested by Washington County — Resolution 2016-66 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 16, 2016 10. Approve 2016 Seal Coat Project — Pay Request No. 1 11. Approve 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements — Pay Request No. 3 12. Approve Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements — Pay Request No. 4. 13. Approve Inwood Booster Station — Pay Request No. 3 14. Approve Inwood Booster Station — Change Order No. 1 15. Approve Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) — Pay Request No. 3 Consent Agenda approved by unanimous consent. ITEM 16: Dan Greensweig, LMCIT Assistant Administrator Mr. Greensweig reported that the City's insurance coverage is up for renewal and will be reviewed by the LMCIT Board of Directors. Greensweig outlined reasons for concern over the risk level and stated LMCIT staff is considering recommending a higher deductible. ITEM 17: CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) — Approve Feasibility Report City Engineer Griffin reviewed the request for the Council to order a feasibility report for the CSAH 13 project so the costs can be assessed to the benefitting properties. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO 2016-67, ORDERING PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY REPORT BY FOCUS ENGINEERING FOR THE CSAH 13PHASE 1 IMPROVEMENTS IN A NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $7,000. Motion passed 5 — 0. ITEM 18: OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC Zoning Map Amendment/PUD Amendment Planning Director Wensman reviewed the application to rezone two outlots and adjust the density. Discussion was held concerning the density that was approved with the final plat and the need for the applicant to join the two outlots in one zoning classification. Ben Schmidt of the Excelsior Group provided background on the zoning and stated that the group plans to construct senior housing on the combined outlots. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO THE SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Motion passed 5 — O. ITEM 19: Title XV, Chapter 154 of the Lake Elmo City Code Related to Temporary Health Care Dwellings City Planner Wensman reported on a new state law that allows for permitting and use of temporary health care dwellings. Wensman explained that the City can pass an ordinance to opt out of the law and not allow temporary health care dwellings as recommended by the Planning Commission. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 08-151 OPTING OUT OF MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 462.3593. Motion passed 5 — O. Page 2 of 6 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 16, 2016 ITEM 20: Pigeon Ordinance Planning Director Wensman reviewed the proposed ordinance that would regulate the keeping of pigeons. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 08-148 REGULATING THE KEEPING AND MAINTAINING OF PIGEONS. Discussion was held concerning the need for an ordinance and the current status of pigeons kept in the City. Resident Barry Weeks commented that his dad had an average of about 150 pigeons on a one acre lot in the past with no issues. Staff was directed by Council consensus to allow the keeping of pigeons without regulation. Motion withdrawn. ITEM 21: Fence Ordinance Revisions Planning Director Wensman reviewed the fence ordinance relating to solid fences over four feet high. Wensman provided background information and requested the Council consider repealing Subd. (E)(3) and direct the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on the repeal. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO DIRECT CITY STAFF AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE CITY'S FENCING REGULATIONS THAT REPEALS SUBD. (E)(3) OF SECTION 154.205: FENCING REGULATIONS OF THE CITY CODE. Motion passed 4 — 0 — 1. (Smith — abstain) ITEM 22: Village Preserve 2nd Addition Developer Agreement City Planner Wensman reviewed changes to the Developer Agreement that deviate from the template in the areas of phasing, security release for landscaping, landscaping and tree replacement, title policy, street signs and special assessments. Discussion was held concerning some of the changes. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2016-70 APPROVING THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT FOR VILLAGE PRESERVE 2" ADDITION WITH A CHANGE FROM ONE YEAR TO TWO YEARS IN SECTION 35B. Motion passed 5 — O. (Motion reconsidered later in the meeting) ITEM 23: Hammes Estates Development Agreement City Planner Wensman summarized the history and current status of the project. Wensman noted that the developer has agreed to install the tot lot as an HOA amenity to be installed at the developer's expense and owned by the HOA. City Attorney Sonsalla read suggested changes to paragraph 22, "Park Dedication". Chuck Alcon spoke on behalf of the developer and confirmed the commitment to installing the tot lot. Page 3 of 6 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 16, 2016 Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2016-71 AS AMENDED TO INCLUDE THE LANGUAGE SUGGESTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO POSTPONE FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF ITEM 23 TO FOLLOW ITEM 24. Motion passed 5 — O. ITEM 24: RFP for Job Classification and Compensation Study City Administrator Handt presented information and recommendations from the Human Resources Committee for a job classification and compensation study, noting that the information would also be utilized in the pay equity report due to the state in January 2017. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR A JOB CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY. Motion passed 5 — O. ITEM 23 continued Discussion held concerning the street installation warranty period in Section 35B of the Developers Agreement. Primary motion on item 23 passed 5 — O. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION MADE ON ITEM 22, VILLAGE PRESERVE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. Motion passed 5 — O. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO AMEND THE APPROVAL OF THE VILLAGE PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT TO REMOVE THE CHANGE TO SECTION 35B. Motion passed 5 — O. ITEM 25: An Ordinance Amendin2 the Lake Elmo City Code of Ordinance by Amending the Citv's Provisions Related to the City Council and Summary Publication Administrator Handt reported that this item is a follow up from the August 10, 2016 workshop discussion regarding changes to section 31.04 of the City Code. Councilmember Smith, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 08- 150. Friendly amendment accepted to add "from Council" after "All requests" in paragraph 2a on page 10; strike "by roll call vote" on page 9, paragraph C4; and to add that Council Meeting packets will be delivered 4 days prior to the meeting. Motion passed 5 — O. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2016- 69 APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-150. Page 4 of 6 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 16, 2016 ITEM 26: No -Wake Hith Water Elevation Level for Lake Demontreville and Olson Lake Administrator Handt reviewed her staff report regarding possible review of the no wake threshold on Lake Demontreville and Olson Lake. Councilmember Lundgren stated that her intent was for all four lakes to be reviewed, not just Demontreville and Olson. Terry Boczek, 8110 Demontreville Trail, stated that a compromise was reached on this issue a few years ago and it is working. Patrick Dean, 8028 Hill Trail, reviewed the history of the no wake ordinance and stated that lake owners are losing property rights. Debbie Dean, 8028 Hill Trail, stated that the Lake Demontreville & Olson Association is a small group of residents trying to restrict lake usage. Cory Boudreau, 8382 Hidden Bay Trail, spoke against lowering the no wake level, stating that boat traffic is very low and not causing an erosion issue. Dave Carlson, 8554 Hidden Bay Trail, stated opposition to any further restrictions on the lakes and added that he disagrees with the facts in the LDO letter. Dan Stoudt, 8012 Hill Trail, stated that further lake restrictions will prevent him from being able to utilize the lake with his daughters. Roger Johnson, 8048 Hill Trail, stated that the LDO's purpose is to protect the shore of these two lakes that are small, shallow, narrow and busy. Jim Arkell, 8131 Hidden Bay Trail, stated that the current lake level is working and he enjoys being able to use the lake with his granddaughters. Tom Burns, 7962 Hill Trail, reported that he has no issues with erosion on his property and does not want additional restrictions. Brenda Jo Carlson, 8554 N. Hidden Bay Trail, presented historic information on lake levels and stated that additional restrictions reduce property values. Steve Schleicher, 4774 Olson Lake Trail, stated there is no evidence the current level is not working and there is no need for the Environmental Committee to review it. Karen Slakey, 7872 Demontreville Trail, asked for the current level to remain in place and allow residents to use the lake. Gary Fields, 4751 Olson Lake Trail, stated that he sees erosion on his property and others and supports sending the lake level to the Environmental Committee for review. Trevor Judd, 7920 Hill Trail N., stated he moved to Lake Elmo to enjoy the lakes and opposes any changes. Page 5 of 6 LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 16, 2016 Anne Judd, 7920 Hill Trail N., stated that she bought her home on the lake so she could train for waterskiing competitions and teach kids to water ski, adding she is opposed to any further restrictions. Link Lavey, 8510 Hidden Bay Trail, paddle boards on both lakes and supports sending lake levels to the Environmental Committee for review. Dale Dorschner, 3150 Lake Elmo Avenue N., expressed disappointment that the Lake Elmo Association was not notified and asked that lake level matters be left to the DNR and watershed districts. Tony Nelson, 4535 Lake Jane Trail, stated he has noticed a lot of erosion during ice out and heavy rain, but boat damage is very small. David Offord, 9369 Lake Jane Trail, stated there is a lack of data from experts and asked that the city not reconsider lake levels without data. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councihnember Smith, moved TO REFER THE NO WAKE HIGH WATER ELEVATION LEVEL FOR LAKE DEMONTREVILLE AND OLSON TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT EVERY MEETING AND SUBCOMMITTEE BE VIDEOTAPED. Motion failed 0 — 3 — 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren, Smith — nay) Councihnember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Smith, 'flayed TO REFER THE NO WAKE HIGH WATER ELEVATION LEVEL FOR ALL FOUR LAKES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE. Friendly amendment accepted to add that the meetings will be videotaped. Motion passed 3 — 1 — 1. (Pearson, Bloyer — nay) STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Administrator Handt: Reported on upcoming road closures City Clerk Johnson: Announced that the candidate filing period for City offices closed and candidate names are posted on the City's website. Finance Director Bendel: Working on finalizing the budget and stomiwater assessments City Attorney Sonsalla: Working on nuisance ordinance update. Meeting adjourned at 11:53 pm. ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor Page 6 of 6 11IN 11( 1_,L\KE ELN( 0 AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: AYO& COU C L CO U CA DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #2 MOTION Approve Disbursements in the amount of $885,357.66 Patty Baker, Accountant Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Cathy Bendel, Finance Director ;(„;ESTED ORDER OF USINESS: 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: $885,357.66 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of $885,357.66. No specific motion is needed as this is recorruriended to be part of the Consent Agenda. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: NA -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 2] September 20, 2016 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 ACH $ 15,030.95 ACH S 7,297.40 ACH $ 1,200.00 DD7426-DD7477 $ 39,183.59 44858-44921 822,645.72 TOTAL $ 8S5,357.66 Description Payroll Taxes to IRS & MN Dept of Revenue 09/15/16 Payroll Retirement to PERA 09/15/16 Payroll Retirement to ICMA 09/15/16 Payroll (Direct Deposits) 09/15/16 Accounts Payable 09/20/16 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 $885,357.66. ATTACHMENTS: Accounts Payable — check registers -- page 2 -- Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List User: Panyb Printed: 09/15/2016 - I 0:30 AM Batch: 004-09-2016 Invoice Inv Dale Amount Quantity Pint Date Description Reference Task Type 1'0 II Close POI,ine Al IgenPo Allgen Power Services 12340 08/31/2016 123.35 0,00 09/20/2016 Station 1 Repairs 1(11-420-2220-44010 Repairs/Maint Bldg 12340 Iola': 123.35 Allgen Pn Total: 123.35 No 0000 ANIERICAN American Eng and Testing. Inc. 93141 08/31/2016 1,231.08 0.00 09/20/2016 Inwood Booster Station No 0000 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 93242 Total: 1,23 t.n8 AMERICAN Total: 1,231,08 AM ERWATE Works Association American Water 701/1226565 07/30/2016 79.00 0.00 09/20/2016 Membership renewal No 0000 601-494-9400-44300 Miscellaneous 7(101226565 Tolak 79,00 AM ERWATE Tu(al: 79.00 EiAKERTAY Baker 84, Taylor 2032164135 (17/19/2016 1,295.37 0.00 09/20/2016 Books No 0000 206-450-5300-12500 Library Collection Maintenance 2(132164135 Total: 1,295.37 BA I< ERTAY Total: 1,295,37 BUB ERE Buller' Black Dirt, Inc 18821 09/06/20E6 324.00 0.00 09/20/2016 Landscape materials No 101-430-3100-42250 Landscaping Materials 18821 Total: 324.00 BUBERL Total: 324,00 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (09/15/16 - 10:3(1 AM 1 Page 1 Invoice # lin Dale Amount Quantity [Nut Date Description Reference Task Type 111 # Uk,sc l'(111.111 e 11 CALATLAN Cal Atlantic Group Inc 2016-112 09113/2016 8034000_0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2016-112 Total', 2016-249 09/13/2016 303-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2016-249 Total: 2(1[6-498 09/13/2016 803-01.10-1/000-22900 Deposits Payable 2016-498 Total: CALATLAN Total: C'AIW4IFST Car Quest Atari Parts /055-383771 08/31/2016 101-430-3100-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 2055-388221 Total: 2055-383728 09/07/2016 101-430-3100-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 2055-388728 "Folal: 2055-388787 09/07/2016 101-430-3100-44040 Repairs/Main( Eqpt 2055-383787 Total: 7055-389707 09/12/2(116 101-430-3100-44040 Repairs/Nlaint Eqpt 2055-389207 Total: 6971-594819 08./2512016 101-430-3100-44040 Repairs/TM aint Eqpt 6971-594819 08/25/2016 101-430-3100-42150 Shop Materials 6971-594819 Total: CA RQUEST Total; ('E3 & 1 CE3 & 1 Constructors, Inc, Pay Rcq 4 09/06/2016 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services Pay Req 4 Total: C13 & 1 Tula!: CENCOLLE Century College 624042 (18/79170 I 6 101-420-2220-4437(1 Conlerenees & Training 624042 Tolaf: A p - To 13, p))),) proo), co (09/15/16 10:30 AM 1 5,000,00 0.00 1)9/2(1/2()16 Escrow Release 395 Laverne Ave 5,00)).00 5,000.00 0,00 09/20/2016 Escrow Release 11078 3rd Street 5,000,00 5,000,00 0.00 09/20/2016 Escrow Release I 1135 3rd Street 5,000.00 15,000.00 35.63 0,00 09/20/2016 Repair 98-1 35.63 64.82 0.00 09/20/2016 Repair 64,82 274.53 0.00 09/20/2016 Repair 274.53 220. 14 0.00 09/20/2016 Repair S 10 00-2 220.14 29,75 0.00 09/20/2016 Repairs (16-2 27,43 0.00 09/20/2016 Shop Supplies 57.23 652.35 176,905,20 0.00 09/20/2016 IN wood Water Tower 176,905.20 176,905.20 825.00 0.00 09/20/2016 C171..1 Training Program 325,00 No 0000 No 0000 No 00110 Ni 11000 No 0000 No 0000 No 00011 No 00110 No 0000 No 0000 No (1(1(11) Page 2 Date Amount: Quantity Putt I)a, Description Reference CENCOLLE Total: S25.00 °Task Type PO 11 (/ COM C'AST Conicast 08'27/2016 7.93 0.011 09/20/20 16 Monthly Service No 0000 101-420-2220-44300 Miscellaneous -Think 7.93 CONK:AST 'Votal: 7.93 COMPASS Compass Minerals 71521347 08/31/2016 3,117.78 0,00 09/20/2016 Road Salt No 01)110 101-430-3125-12290 Sand/Salt 715213417 Total: 3,1 I 7,78 COMPASS Total: 3,1 17.78 CREATIIIAI Creative Home Conslruction 2015-1091 09/15/2016 5,000.00 0.00 09/20/2016 Escrow Release 9057 Jade Circle No 000 803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2015-1(191 Total: 5,0(10,00 2015-942 09/15/2016 5,000,00 0.00 09/2012016 Escrow Release 9069 Jade Circle No 0000 803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payahle 2015-942 Tolal: 5,000,00 CR EATIFION1 Total: 10,000,00 CTVB LOOM City of Bloomington Aug 16 08/3 1 /2016 42,00 0.00 09/20/2016 Lab Bacteria Testing - August No (WOO 60 1 -494-94011-42270 Utility System Maintenance Aug 16 Tolal: 42,00 CTYBLOOM 42.00 CTVOAKDA City of Oakdale Aug, 2016 08/31/2016 6,000.00 0.00 09/20/2016 New connections - Water Aug 20 16 No MOO 001-001141000-20803 WAC due Oakdale Aug 2016 Total: 6,000,00 CIVOAKDA Total: 6,000,00 CIV()AKDP City of Oakdale 10000460-01 08/31/2016 28,290.58 0,00 09/20/2016 Water meter - South Pit 8/2-9/1 /16 0000 60 1 —194 -94100A 3 S211 Water Utility 10000460-01 Total'. 28,290,58 AP - To 13e ('id Proof List (09/15/16 - 10:30 ANI Page 3 Invoice Inv Date Amount Quantity Pm( Date Description Reference Task Type PO II Clitse POL,ine11 201608315356 08/31/2(116 101-420-2220-441040 Repairs/Main( Eqpt 1(11608315356 Total: CIYOAK DP Total: C tl"ROSEV City of Roseville 221911 09/13/2016 101-410-1450-13180 Information TechnologyiWeb 221911 Total.: 221937 09/13/1016 101-410-1320-43210 'telephone 221937 09/13/2016 101-420-2400-43210 Telephone 221937 09/13;2016 101-410-1450-13210 Telephone 221937 09/13/2(116 101-410-1930-43210 Telephone 221937 (19/13/2(116 101-41(1-152(1-43210 Telephone 721937 09/13/2016 101-410-1910-432111 Telephone 221937 09/11/2016 101-430-3100-43210 Telephone 221937 Total: CTY I1()S EV Total: ELAM IM FRS Eckberg Lammers, (18 2(116 0S/31/2016 101-4211-2150-43045 Ationtey Criminal (IS 2016 Total: ELAM M ER.S Total: FIRECA1T Fire CATT, LLC MN-5367 (.18/08/2016 1 I/1-420-2220-14040 Repairs/Maim Eqpt M N-5367 Total: IR ECATT Total: CrIKS FR V IC G&K. Services 1182861791 08/24/21116 101-430-3100-1117() Ini Forms 1182861791 Total: AP - To Be Paid Trout List (09/15/10 - 10:30 AM) 104,0(1 (L00 09/20/2016 CV2, Rotate Tires, Oil, seat belt 1(14.0)1 28,394.58 No (1000 4,166.25 0,00 09/20/2016 Monthly IT Services - Sept No WWI 4,166.25 I 12,53 0.00 09:2012016 Monthly Phone - Sept No 0000 17.77 0.00 09/20/21/16 Monthly Plume - Sept No 101(1)1 I 7.77 0,00 09/2072016 Monthly Phone - Sept No 00011 17.77 (400 09/20/2016 [Monthly Phone - Sept No 1)000 35.55 0.00 09/20/2016 Monthly Phone - Sept No (1000 49,30 0.00 09/20/2016 Monthly Phone - Sept No 0000 234.87 0.0(1 (19/20/2016 Monthly Phone - Sept No (1001) 485.56 4,651.81 3,505.8I 0.00 1)9/2(1/2016 PI osectnion 3,505.81 3,505.81 2,486.75 0.00 09/20/2016 A11111131 I lose Testing 1,186..75 '1,186.75 32,05 0,1(0 09/70/2016 lin 'Forms 32,05 N o 0000 No (11100 No 01100 Page 4 111‘ o v Dal e Amount Quantity lint Da Deseriplioti Reference 'last( '1)pe PO if e N nine tt I 182873057 0S/31/2016 37.05 0,00 09/20/2016 Uniforms Nu 0000 101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms I I 82873057 Total: 32,05 1182884312 09/07/7016 32_115 0,00 09/20/2016 Uniforms No 0000 1111 -430-310(1-44170 Uniforms 1182884312 Total: 32,05 CiKSFRVIC Total: 96.15 C.30N YEA Cionyea Homes 2015-313 119/130016 5.000.00 0.00 09/20/2016 Escorw Release 11079 4 di Street No 0000 003-000-0000-229110 Deposits Payable 2015-313 Total: 5,0(10,00 GONY EA Total: 5,000.00 ((ANSI IACE Ilans Ilagen Homes 2015-1091 09/13/2016 5,000.00 0.00 09/20/2016 Escrow Release 9057 Jade Circle No 0000 803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 7015-1091 Total: 5,000.00 ['ANSI I AGE Total: 5,000,00 I 1 A RLJ UR I V Hardrives, Inc. Pay Reg 4 09/07;20 I 6 794,815.59 0,00 09/20/2016 2016 Street, Drainage & Utility No 0000 409-480-8000-43030 Engineering Services Pay Reg •I 09/07/2016 3,795,30 0.00 09/20/2016 2016 Street, Drainage & Utility No 00(10 6(1)-494-9400-43030 EA igineering Services Pay Rey 4 Total: 798,610.89 1-IARDDRI V Tolal: 298,610.89 111'1)R0 Ilydrometliods 10 160950d 09/08/2016 810,00 0.00 00/20/20 1 6 IN'asatcli Storage No 0000 803-000-0000-2291(1 Developer Payments 201609504 Total: 810.00 HYDRO Total: 810,00 INNOVAT Innovative Office Solutions 1297,137 08/29/2(116 141.110 0.00 09/20/2016 Supplies No 0000 101-410-1320-4200(1 Office Supplies 1297437 Total: 141.00 1307657 09/07/2016 49,51 0.00 09/20/201 6 Supplies No 61100 101-410-1320-42000 Office Supplies 1307657 Total.. 49,51 Al' - To Ile Paid Proof. List (09115116 - 111:30 AM) Pe 5 Invoice Inc Date Amount Quantity Pint Date Description Reference Type 1'0 ft Close ft INNOV AT Total: 190.51 JANII<ING Jani-1(ing of Nlinnesola, lue NI I N09 I 603S0 09/0112(116 329.26 0.00 09/20/2016 Cleaning Services - City Hall No 0000 101-410-1940-44010 tier/airs/Maim Contractual Bldg NH1\109160380 Total: 379.26 JANIKING Total; 379.76 kathluel Kath Fuel Oil Service (2o 566826 09/06/7016 939,97 (MI 09/20/2016 Fuel No 0000 101-430-3100-42120 Fuel. Oil and Fluids 566826 Total: 939.97 Icallifitcl Total; 939.97 K INOK King Kassidy 13onus 08/22/2016 25,00 0,00 09/20/2016 Operations 8/22/16 No 0000 101-410.1450-43620 Cable Operations Bonus Total: 75.00 Cable 08/22/2016 55.00 0.00 09/20/2016 Planning Comm 8/22/16 Nn 0000 101-410- 14511-4362(1 Cable Operations Cable Total: 55.00 1(.1N.1(3K Total: 80.00 [MIK 1,',wik Trip Inc (19/(12/2(116 57,34 0.00 09/20/2016 Fuel No 0000 1(1-4711-77)0-4212(1 Fuel. Oil and Fluids Total; 57,34 V,/ 1.1( Total: 57.34 LE/WNW Lague of NI N Cities 2391(17 09/01/2(116 706.58 0,00 09/20/2016 Membership Dues No 00011 I 01-410-11 1(1-41433(1 Dues & Subscriptions 239107 09/01/2016 7,772.412 0.00 09/20/2016 Annual Dues No 00110 101-000-0000-15500 Prepaid Hems 239107 Total; 8,479.00 Mayor Member 09/0112016 311.00 0.00 09/20/2016 Association Due - Pearson No 0000 101-41(1-1 I I 0-4433(1 Dues & Subseripl ions Mayor Member Tow,: 30,00 LE.:AGNIN Total; 8,509.0(1 Al' - To Ile raid Proof List (09/15/1(i - 10:30 AM) Page 6 I nvoik Inv Date Amount Quaillity Pint Oct Desei Reference Task .1 ype ()Line LFNNA R Lennar Family or 13 uilders 01-4030-6 09/14/2016 593,79 0.00 09/20/2016 Refund overpayment 721 Juniper N10 0000 101 4100-0000-11500 Accounts Receivable 01-4030-6 Total: 543,79 I.ENN AR Total: 593:29 l_FOIL Lake Elmo Oil, Inc. OS/31/2016 91.50 0.00 09/20/2016 Fuel 0000 101-420-2220-42120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids 91,50 LEOIL Total: 91.50 Lillie Newspapers Inc. Lillie Suburban Acct 1/07148 OS/31/20 I 6 I 56,.75 0,00 09/20/2016 Notices No 0000 101-410-1320-43510 Leval Publishing Acer 007148 Total: 156.75 Acct 007148 07131/2016 178,47 0.00 09720/2016 Notices No 0((110 11)1-110-1320-135 Legal Publishing Acct 007148 Total: 178.97 Lillie Total: 335.72 LOFT 1_0111er Companies. Inc. 2315905 09/01/2016 616.82 ((.00 09/20/20 I 6 Copy machine overage & base No 0000 101-410-19,10-44040 Repairs/IMaint Contractual Eqpt 231591)5 Total: 616,82 LOH' Total: 616.82 AGN EN' Mogilev Construction, Inc Pay Req 4 09/07120 I 6 132,045.73 0.00 09/20/20 I 6 Inwood Booster Station No 0000 601-494-940U-43030 Engineering Services Pay Rcq 4 Total: 132,045,73 MAGNEY Total: 137.045.73 MA RON EYS Manntey's Sanitation, Inc 6411430 0910872016 1 12,94 0.00 09120/2016 Waste Removal - City Hall No 00011 101-4 I0-1940-43840 Reluse 610430 1/9/08/2016 49.71 0.00 09/20/2016 Waste Removal - Fire No NMI 101-420-2220-43840 Refuse 640430 09/0812016 216,67 0.00 09/20/2016 Waste Removal - PW No 0000 101-430-3 100-43840 Refuse AP - Fo Ile Paid Pro0F1.ka (09115/16 10:30 Pave 7 uvoice # Inv Date /11114)1111( Quantity Pm( Dale Description Reference Task Type IVO ft Chose ,t 040430 09/08/21116 716,67 0,00 09/20/2016 Waste Removal - Fire I 01-420-2220-43840 Refuse 640430 09/0817016 49.89 0.00 09/2(1/2016 Wasle Removal - Library 206-450-53011-43840 Refuse 640430 Total: 645.88 ARONENS Total: 645.8S f14 EN A R DSO NI enarcls - Oakdale 11)734 08/22/2016 37.27 0.00 09/20/2016 Garage dour repair 101-420-2220-44.01 0 Repairs/Maint Bldg 10784 08/22/2016 11.76 (1.1)0 09/20/2016 Station I Repair 101-420-2220-44010 Repairs/Main( Bldg 1(1784 08/77/2016 25.5 I 0.00 09/20/2016 Repair tools 101-420-722(1-42400 Small Tools & Equipment I 0784 Toial: 74.54 I 0802 08/22/2016 53.57 0,00 09/20/2016 Station 1 101-421)-2220-44010 Repairs/Nlaint Bldg 108112 Total: 53.57 10995 08/22/2016 76,97 0.00 09/20/2016 Station 1 101-4211-2220-44010 Repairs/Main( Bldg 11)995 Total: 26,97 11(101 08/22/2016 -37,67 0.00 09/20/2016 Renini item 101-420-2220-441110 12epairs/Maint Bldg 11001 Total: -37.67 11810 09/07/2016 27.4.5 0.00 09/20/2016 Water - City Hall 101-4 I 0-1940-44300 kliscellancous 11810 Total: 27.45 MENA RDSO Towl; 144.86 MENARDS 1 Nlenards - Stillwater 93598 09/06;2016 101-450-5200-42150 Shop Nlalerials 93598 Total: 03900 09/12/2016 101-450-5200-43840 Refuse 93900 Total: IVIENARDST 39.93 0.00 09/20/2016 Supplies 39.98 19.98 19.98 59.96 NIFICOU Metropolilan Council 1(159196 09/07/2016 1,789.58 602-495-9450-43820 Sewer Utility - Met Council 1059196 Total: 1,289.58 AP - To Ile Paid Prot1114st (09/15,1 6 - 10:30 AIM (WO 09/2(1/2016 Trash bags 0.00 09170170 I 6 Waste water services No 11000 No 0000 (1000 MA) No (WOO 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No Ol)(1() No 00(qt No 000) No 111100 Page 3 I [wok Inc Date Ainoun 1 Quantity Putt On Description Reference Task Type 1'0 ft lit/Line it NI Frcou )oial: 1,289,58 NIILLEIEX 1\1 Hier Excar,athig. Inc. 21037 08/31/2016 517.50 (1,00 (J9/20/2)116 Orader Services No 0000 101-430-3120-43150 Contract Services 21(137 Total: 517.50 M I I_ I.,EREX Fond: 517.50 NAPA NAPA Auto Parts 892897 09/07/2016 52.99 0.00 09/20/2016 Tools No 0000 101-430-31(10-42400 Small Tools& Minor Equipment 892897 'Fotal: NAI'A Total: 52,99 NORTHDA L NortIniale Construction Co, INC Pay R eq 5 09/07/2016 26,997,19 (1.00 09/20/2016 Inwood Tuunk Watertnain No 0000 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services Pay Req 5 Total: 26,997,19 NORTI 11)AI, Total: 26,997.I9 NORTVISEC Northland Securities, Inc. 4492 (16/09/2016 512,00 0,00 09/20/2016 Utility fund Management Plan No 0000 60 I -494-94(10-43150 C'ontracl Services 4492 06/09/2016 512.00 (1.00 09/20/2016 Utility fund Management Plan No 0000 601-495-9450-43150 Contract Services 4497 06/09/2016 256.00 (1.00 09/20/2016 Utility fund Management Plan No UMW 603-496-9500-43 150 Contract Services 4492 Total: 1,280.00 NORT1ISFC Tutal: 1,280.00 NtISS NUNS Truck & Equipment 44890531' 08/0912016 133,85 0.00 (19/2(1/2016 Repairs I\M MOP 1)1 -43(1-3 I 00-44040 IZepairsiMaint Eqpt 44890531' Total: 133.85 44890591' 08/09/2016 10.1 I 0.00 09/20/2016 Repairs No (000 1 (11-430-3100-44040 Repairs/M anti Eqpt 4489059P `fowl: 10,11 NUSS 143,96 Al' - To 13e Paid Proof List (09115/16 - 10:30 AIM) Page Invoice # Inv I)Hie Amount Quantity Pint hate 1)eseription Reference Task Type 1'0 t/ Close 11Thine # ON ECALL Gopher State One Call 6081)488 08/31/2016 1111-430-3100-43150 C:oniract Services 6080488 Total: ON ECALI., Totok OSWALD Oswald I lose & Adapters 11243 (18/3 1 /2016 101-420-2220-440410 RepairsiMainl Eqpt 11743 Total: OSWALD Total: PEIt11.11Two PermitWorks LLC 7016-0070 07/08/20 16 1(11-410-240(1-43 ISO Information Technology/Web 70 1 6-01170 (17108/2016 I 1 -4 20-2400-4 3 180 Information Technology/Web 2016-0070 Toni!: 2016-0077 09;01/2016 101-420-2400-43 I 80 It Conflation Technology/Web 2016-0077 Total: PERM !TWO Total; PINKY Pinky's Sewer Service, Inc. 69173 09(1)1 /20 16 206-150-53011-44(110 Repairs/Nlaint Bldg 69273 Total: PINKY Total: P NiKE-rr Plunkett's Pest Control Inc 5503505 08104/2016 101-430-3100-44010 Repairs/Nlaint Bldg 5503505 Total: I'LLJNIKEIT Total: PRAXAIR Praxair Distribution Inc. 71.131595 08/31/2016 1 1-4311-3 1 00-44330 Dues & Subscriptions 7423159.5 'T'ota Ar - To Be Paid Proof Lim 109,1511(3 - 10:30 AM) 576.45 0.00 09/20/2016 Monthly tickets 576.45 576.45 30.34 0.00 09/20/2016 Hose repair 30,34 30.34 170.00 C)05.00 1,165.00 170.00 170.00 1,335.0 100,00 10(1.00 100.0(1 118.55 128.55 128.55 45,01) 45,00 0.00 09/20/2016 Remote Inspector Monthly Access 0.00 09/20/2016 Training & Implcinentrilion Charge 0.00 09/20/2016 Reinole Inspector Monthly Access 0.00 09/20/2016 Pumped septic tanks 0.00 (19120/2016 Pest Control - PW 0.00 09/20/2016 5 year maintenance Ni No No No No Nn No 0011(i 0001) (WOO 0000 0000 (1110(1 (101)0 l'age 10 I livois 1 it Date Amount Quantity Putt DL Description Reference Task Type PO Mine tt PR AXA1R otal: 45 00 RIVRCOOP Rk•er Country Cooperative 08/310016 263.18 0.00 09/20/2016 Fuel 1•4o Mon 10 I -470-)7)0-42 1 20 Fuel. Oil and Fluids Total: 263.1S R1VRCOOP Total: 163,18 121'1...AND Is.land Homes 21115-267 09/08/201 6 5,000.00 0.0(1 09/20/2111 6 Escrow Release 343 Langley No 00011 803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2015-267 Total: 5,0011,00 7015-313 091080016 5,000,00 0,011 09/20/2016 Escrow Release 1 11)79 ,1(11 St - No 0000 SO3 -0110-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2015-313 Total: 5,0(1100 2015-371 09/08/2016 4,950.01) 0,00 09/20/2016 Escrow Release 1 1 104 4th St No 0000 803_000.0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2015-371 To1.L 4,950.00 21115-474 09/08/20 1 6 5 „000.01.1 0.00 09/20/2016 Escrow Release 1 I 162 4(1 St N'o 0000 503-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2015-474 Total; 5,11110410 7015-683 09/08/2010 5,000.00 ((.0(1 09/20/2016 Escrow Release 1 I 185 4111 St No (100(1 8113-/00-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2111.5-683 Total: 5,000,00 2015-684 09/08/2016 5,000.00 0.00 09,00/2016 Escrow Release 368 Langly No 0000 803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 2015-684 Total: 5,000.00 /016-66 09/0R/2016 5,000.00 0.00 09/2072016 Escrow Release 1 I 1 14 3rd St No 0000 S03-000-110110-22900 Deposits Payable 2016-66 Tomit 5,000.00 RYLAND Total: 34,950.00 SAFEASSU Safe Assure Consultants Inc. 1075 09106/7016 3,148.74 0.00 0900/2016 Safety Trainim..! 1,10 0000 101-430-3100-44370 Coolerences & Training 1075 Total: 3,148.74 SAFEASSU 3,148,74 SAM SCL403 Sam's Club r)/7/16 1t9/07/2016 29,99 0,00 09/70/21116 Annual membership fees Ni' 0000 101-4 10-1940-44300 M iseellaneous 917116 •Futal: 794,94.1 AP 'Fi De Paid Proof List W9/15/16 - I 0:30 AND Page 1 1 Invoice n. Inv Amount Quantity Volt Date Description Reference Task Type PO ft Close 1)01.ine it SAMSCLUR Total: SEH Short Elliot I lendriekson, Inc 319428 09/1072016 1.,,i9.t..0400_43030 Engineering Services 319,128 Total: SEI-1 To(al: 29.9) 2.471.16 (1,00 09/20/2016 Inwood Water Tower 2,471,16 2,47 I 16 TDS TOS Meirocom - L LC 651-779-8882 (19/1312016 90.93 0.00 09/20/2016 Analog lines - Fire 101-420-2220-43210 Telephone 651-779-8882 (19/13/2016 218.87 0.00 09/20/2016 Analog lines - PW 101-430-3100-4321(1 -releplione 651-779-8882 09/13/2016 83.98 (00 09/20/2016 Analog lines - LiUt Station alarms 601-495-9450-43210 Telephone 651-779-8882 09/13/2(116 45.19 100 09/2(1/2016 A hum - Well House t/2 601-494-9400-43210 Telephone 651-779-8882 Total: 438.97 TI)S Total: 438.97 TITAN Titan Machinery 8188718 08/17/2016 10 I -43(1-3100-44040 ttepairs/Nlaint Eqp( 8188718 To(al: 8734962 08/22/2016 101-430-3100-44040 Repairs/Nlaint Eqpt 8234962 Total: TITAN Total: TK OA TKDA, Inc. 011201 6002779 09/06/2016 601-494-9400-43030 Engineering Services 002016002779 Total: TK DA Total: WNC'T121` Town & C'otiiiiry Cleaning Co 916286 09/01/20 I 6 206-450-5300-441110 Repairs/Maint 13kIg 916286 Total: Al - To 13e Paid Proof 1,1st 019/15/16 - I 0:311 411.86 0,00 09/20/2016 Parts 411,86 202. I 1 102, II 613.97 0.110 09/20/2016 Parts 5,817.10 0,00 09/20/20 f 6 Section 34 Water Pressure Investigation 5,817,10 5,817.1(1 370.0(1 370.00 0.00 09/20/2016 September cleaning No 000(1 No 0000 No 0000 0000 No 0000 No No MOO ( Hal No 0000 00110 Page 12 I it 'Yoh. Inv Dale OWNCTRY Total: TWINP1PE Twin Pipeworks 8540 08/29/20 1 6 I 1 -4 1 0-1 940-440 I 0 Repairs/N laint Conn -actual Rlclg 8540 Total: TWINPIPE Total: \VAS11-R EC Washington County M9;010016 101-4 10-1320-43150 Contract Services 09/01/2016 803-0110-000(1-229 I() Developer Payments 09,411/2(116 803-000-41000-229 1 0 Developer Payments 09/01/2016 803-000-0000-229 11) Developer Payments Torok WAS I 1-R EC Total: WENSIVIAN Weitsman Stephen 09/07/2016 I 0 I -41(1-19111-44370 Conferences & Training; Tifial: WENSIVrAN Whiteatii White Anita Finturs 01016/2016 1()1-4 10-1,150-43620 Cable Operations Bonus Total: Cable 09/06/2010 I 01-4 111- 1450-43620 Cable Operations Cable 'loud: Whileani XCEL Xcel Energy (19072(116 OW07/2016 1 01-450-5200-438 I 0 Electric Utility 09072016 09/07/2016 607-195-9450-438 r 0 rlecl.rie Amount. Qmintity Pipit Da, lieseription Reference Task Type 1'0 1)()Litie 4 370,00 273.00 273.00 273.00 46,00 46.00 184.00 46.00 3,2.00 32?.00 50.00 50,00 50.00 25.00 25.00 55.00 55.00 80,00 39.09 267.64 11.00 09/2(1/20 16 Men's room repair 0,00 09/20/2016 Recordings 0.1,10 0.00 14(11./ (19P01201 6 09/1000 I 6 09/20/2016 Village Prewrve Arbor Glen Lennar 0.00 09/20/2016 Sensible Land Ilse 0,00 09/20/2016 CC meeting 9/6/16 0.00 09/20/2016 CC meeting 9/6/16 0.00 09/2(1/20 6 (Wilily Services 0.00 09/20/2016 Utility Services Nii Ni No Ni No No No No No No 0000 0000 (MOO 0000 (11)00 ()I)0O Al' - 13 Ile Paid Proof List (09/15/16 - 0:30 AM) Page 13 Invoice Inv Dale Amount Quantity Pon Dine Description Reference 'task Type l'() it Close 11)1,ine ?'t (19072016 09/(17/2016 I (11-430-3 I 60-4381(1 Street Lighting (10072016 09/07/2016 101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting 09(177016 09/07/2016 101-420-2220-43810 Electric Utility (19(172(116 09/07/2016 I 01-410-1940-438 I Electric Utility 09(172016 09107/2016 101-430-3160-438 I 0 Street Lighting 09077(116 09/07/2016 10 I -450-5700-43S 10 Electric 1 Itility 090720 I 6 09/07/2016 I 01-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility 09072016 09/07/2016 I 0 1 -450-520(1-43810 Electric Utility 09(172016 09/07/2016 601-494-9400-4381(1 Electric Utility 09072016 09/07/20 I C, 101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting 09072016 1)9/07/2(116 101-450-5. 200-43810 Electric Utility 09072016 09/07/2016 007-495-9450-43810 Electric Utility 090720 I fi 09/0772016 607-495-9450-43810 Electric Utility 09072016 (19/07/20 I 6 101-470-2220-43810 Electric t !Why 09072016 09/07/2016 101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility 09072016 09/07/20 I C, 101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting 09072016 09/07/2016 101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting 09072(116 09/07/20 )6 101-450-5200-43810 Electric Utility 09077016 09/1)7/2010 101-450-5200-13810 Electric Utility 09072016 09/07/2016 101-430-3100.-613810 Electric Utility 09072016 09/07/2016 601 -494-9400-438 I 0 Electric Utility 09072016 09/07/2016 101-430-3160-43810 Street Lighting AI' - To l3c Paid Proof List (119/15/16 - 103( AM) 38.17 (1.00 26.74 0,00 3(12.13 0.00 437.28 0.00 34.28 0.00 I 1.98 0.0)) 43.66 0.00 29.44 0.00 2,254.96 0.0)) 41.48 0.00 103,80 OLIO I S.27 16.90 0.00 394,93 (IMO 92.54 0.00 1,984.47 0.00 31.86 0,00 12.87 0,00 50.32 0,00 662.43 0,00 75.37 0.00 13.12 0,141 09/20/20 I 6 Utility Services 09/20/2016 Utility Services 09/20/2016 Utility Services 09/20/2016 Utility Services 09/2012016 09/20/2016 09/20/2016 09/20/2016 09/70/20 16 09720001 6 09/20/2016 Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utitity Services 0.00 09/20/2016 Utility Services 09/20/2016 Utility Services 09/20/2016 09/70/2016 (1900/20)6 09/700016 09/70/20(6 09120/2(116 09/20/21)16 09/20/2016 09/20/2016 Utility Services Utility Services Utility Service. Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services Utility Services No 0(1(0) No 0000 0000 No (1000 0000 No 0000 0000 No 00141 No 00(10 0000 DOM 00110 No 0000 No 0001/ No 00(4) No 0000 No 0000 No (1)00 No (((11)1) No 0000 No 0(100 No 0000 Page I 4 Iiivui v t e 09072016 04/07/20 1 0 206-150-5300-438 10 Electric Utility 09072010 09117i2111 6 007-495-0450-d 3S 111 Electric Lltility 09072010 09/(171)016 494-9-100-438 10 Electric Utility 09(172016 09/07(2016 -450-5200-438 10 Electric Utility 091172016 09/070016 101_430-3100-43810 Street Lighting 00072016 09/07/2010 101-4,10-3 60-43810 Street Lighting 09072016 09/07/2010 00 1-494-94110-,138 1 0 Electric 09072016 Total: ,XCEL Total: Report Total: - l Be Paid Proof I is( 109, 15/16 - 10:30 Al) Antonini Quantity Vint It:, Description Reference Type l'() ic l't /Hoe II 699,87 195.47 1(12.93 14.18 48,0S 39.65 1,711.30 9,748.16 9,7,18.16 799,87 I .72 0.00 09/20/2016 Utility Services 0.00 (19/20/2016 Utility Services 0.00 0912012016 Utility Services 0,011 09/20/2016 Utility Services 0.00 09/2D/2016 Utility Services 0100 09/20/2111 6 Utility Services (1,00 09"20/20 1 6 Utility SerVICCS No 0000 NI() 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 110(10 rage 15 Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List User: Pattyb Prinied: 1/9/15/2016 - 11:06 Afrl Balch; 005-0Q-2016 lovoice it lor Dole Amount Qomilily Plot Date !Description Reference S\V/WC SW/\VC Service Cooperatives C1210-20 7 08/79201 ID Medical Insurance C1210-20 7 Total: SW/WC Total: Report Total: P - To 13e Paid 010011-i31 109/15/16 - 11:06 AM 22,774.00 11.00 0Q/20/2016 October 2016 Premium 22,774.00 22,77401) 22,774.00 'task Type PO ti Close POLine // No 0000 Page 1 KE ELM() AY0 COUNCIL CO UNICATIO DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #3 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: August 2016 Financial Reporting SUBMITTED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Finance Committee SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item................................................City Administrator Report/Presentation................ ...... ..........................City Administrator Questions from Council to Staff .................. ........... ............ Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ......... ...... ............. ..... ....... ........ ...... Mayor & City Council Discussion .............. ........... ................. ...... ...... ...... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion................... .......... ..... ..... ....... ........... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Finance FISCAL IMPACT: NA SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the August 2016 Financial Reporting Packet. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo has fiduciary authority and responsibility to conduct nonnal business operations and report the financial (unaudited) statement to the City Council. City guidelines suggest the Council be updated on a regular basis. STAFF REPORT: Attached please find the comparative financial statements for the month of August 2016 reflecting the monthly and year to date detail, comparing the actual results to the 2016 Budget. -- page City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item #3] September 20, 2016 GENERAL FUND: Revenues: Total revenue for the month was 20,9% above budget for the month of August bringing the year to date to 26.8% better than budget. The most significant budget to actual revenue variances are as follows: Building permits were $54.2k better than budget for the month bringing the year to date to $244.5k better than budget. This is primarily due to $47.3k in building permit revenue in the month of August for the Arbor Glen build out. Plan review fees for the month were $40.9k better than budget brining the year to date to $121.4k better than budget. This too was primarily due to the plan review of the Arbor Glen facility in August. Expenses: Total expenses for the month were 173.3% above budget for August bringing the year to date expenses to 1.1% higher than budget. The following summarizes variances of note: General: • General Government expenses were 98.9% higher than budget for the month bringing the year to date expenses to 33.6% higher than budget. This was primarily due to legal expenses far exceeding budget, the majority being related to the 3M litigation. • Total Public Safety expenses were 2.0% higher than budget for the month bringing the year to date expenses to 10.9% lower than budget. • Public Works — The total Public Works expenses were 627.6% higher than budget for the month bringing year to date expenses to 16.48% better than budget. This is primarily due to the timing of paying the Seal Coating and Cracking filling vendors as mentioned last month. The project is on schedule and costs will be within the budgeted amounts. This is just a timing issue. In summary, the August revenues were 98.9% better than budget and the expenses were 173.3% higher than budget resulting in a net income of far below budget due to a timing issue related to payment of the seal coat and crack filling vendors. On a year to date basis, the revenues are 33.63% above budget and the expenses were 1.1°/0 less than budget resulting in a net income of 186.6% better than budget year to date. -- page 2 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda hem #3J September 20, 2016 LIBRARY FUND: The net income for the Library Fund for the month of August was $3.2k below budget (21.8%) bringing the year to date to $41.9k better than budget. The cash balance at the end of August was $235.8k. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council accept the attached August Financial Report. ATTACHMENT: I. August Financial Reports -- page 3 -- City of 1,4e Elmo Budeel to Actual Comnarnivq For the moral, oi0iiit Aue 31. 7016 101-General Fund Summary Ity_Dennineni Full Year DEPT 410 - GEN'L GOA"T BUDGET 2016 REVENUE Total Revenue 3,485,514.32 '0 to date 9/20/2016 moNTit YTD BUDGET ACTUAL Variance (S) Variana (%) BUDGET ACTUAL Variance (S) Valiance(%) Month 1,.1orith 1N-lna0l Month YTD YTD YTD YTD 72,56% 179,613,00 217,109.98 37,496.98 20.88% 1,995,362.31 2,529,091,11 533,7211.80 26,75% EXPENSE Total Mayor & Council 45,955.32 511.2796 1,000.110 817.02 182,98 18.30% 27,877.66 23,1(13,44 4,774,22 17.1337 Total Administration 360,997.511 128.57% 24,918,66 70,51,2.60 (45,643.94) -183.17% 246,961.07 464,118.24 (217,157.17) -87,9396 Total Elections 15.800.00 32.26% 0.00 3,896.90 (3,896,90) -100.011A 950.00 5,1)96,90 (4,146.90) -436,52% Total F10911CC 124,835,30 73.2896 7,123,28 9,139.88 (2,016.60) -28.31% 88,660.35 91,475.60 (7.,815.25) -3.11196 Total Planning & Zoning 284.682.35 58.4496 17,806,72 22,721.19 (4,914.47) -27.60"/o 179,464.61 166,365.72 13,098,89 7.3096 Total Engineering Services 48,000,00 54.8796 4,0110.011 4,475.27 (475.27) -11,88% 32,0(111,00 26,336,82 5,663.18 17.7096 Total City Hall 55,082.00 75,6896 4,461.00 6.342.22 (1,881,22) -42,1796 36,463,00 41,685.97 (5,222.97) -14,3296 Tulul General Government 935,352.47 87A7% 59,309.66 1173396,08 (58,645.42) -98.88% 612,376.69 818,182,69 (205,806A)0) -33,61% DEPT 420 - PUBLIC SAFETY' Total Police 527,1160.47 48.1296 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.0096 263,53(1.24 Z53,612,02 9,918.22 3,76% Total Prosecution 54,7011.00 54.43°A 4,500.00 3,620,47 879.53 19.5596 36,300,011 29,771.70 6,5211.30 17.9896 Tolal Fire 377,231,71 58,60% 25.497.07 30,153,69 (4,656.62) -1/42696 254,1434.97 221,067.39 33,767.58 13,25% Total Fire Retie( 37,323,00 0,00% 0110 0.110 000 0.043% 0.00 0.00 0.011 0110% Total Ituilding Inspections 260,765,91 53.42% 19,810.118 17.059.70 2,750,38 13./1896 170,675.59 139,306.27 31,369,32 18.38% Total Emergency Continunicaliuns 7,400.00 50,610/, 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00% 3,701100 3,745„00 (45.00) -1.22% Total Animal Control 7,550.1111 81.1396 6511.110 650.00 0.00 0.00% 4,9511.00 6,125.00 (1,175.00) -23.74 ^A Tulal Public Safety 1,272,031,09 51,38% 50,457,15 51,483,86 (1,026.71)-2.0396 733,990,80 653,627.38 8(1,363,42 10.9596 Summary. DEPT 430 - PUBLIC WORKS Iola! Public Works 411.284.53 75.75% Total Streets 413,0110.00 66.94% Total lee & Snow Removal 87,250.00 32.45% 1 (Mil Street Lighting 26,4110.00 64.33% TOIIII RcyIiui 5,91)0,00 0.0016. Total Tree Program 1,0011.00 61.45% Toted Public 1Vorks 944,834.53 67.10%., DEPT 451) - CULTURE, RECREATION Total Parks & Recreation 231,32(1.23 55.32% IT & Telephone 81,976.00 64.76% GRAND TOTAL. ALL EXPENSES 3,465,514.32 04,46°/ SUB TOTAL NET INC OVER ESP 20.0110.00 1476.88% DEPT 460 - CONIP ADJ 20,0110,00 0,011% DEPT 490 -CONTINGENCY FUND 0,00 0.011*/ Debt Service increase 11,00 0,00% DEPT 493 - OTII FINANCING 03111 OM% GRAND TOTAL ALL DEP IS 3,485,514_32 64.09% Net Income over Expenses 0.00 0.00% MONT)-I YTD BUDGET ACTUAL Variance iS) Variance (%) BUDGET AcTuAL Variance ($) Variance (%) Alciiill kloiali Nlonth Month YTD YTD YTD YTD 28,296,51i 35,469.71 (7,173.2)) -25.35% 287,787.77 311,551.55 (23,763.78) -8,26% 5.760,011 217,809.00 (212,0493)0) -3681,410/, 403,580.00 270,479.65 127,1011.35 31.49% 1,000.00 17,035.95 (16,035.95) -16113,60% 45,750310 28,311.111 17,438,99 38.121b, 2,2110310 2,226,50 (26,50) -1.20% 17,61/0.00 16,982.59 617.41 3.51% 2110,011 11310 2011.110 100.00% 3,350.110 0,00 3.350301 100.00% (I4)0 0,110 0,110 0.00% 1,000.110 014.50 385,50 38.5514, 37,456,50 272,541.36 (235,084.66) -627,620/o 759,1)67,77 633,939.30 125,128.47 16.48% 17,299.09 17,935.5 I (636,42) -3.68% 154,274.311 127,965.05 20,309.25 17.05% 5,9110„00 5,910,92 (10.92) 4,19% 56,856.00 53,090.09 3,765,91 6.62% 170,422.40 465,826.53 (295,404.13) -173.34% 2,316,565,56 2,233,714,42 25,995,14 1,12% 9,190.60 248,716.55 (257.907.15) 2806.210/o (321,203.25) 295,376,69 559,723,94 -174,26% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06% 70011.00 0.00 20,000.011 100,00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.009'. 0.1111 0.00 1).00 0.00% 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00% 0.1111 0.00 0.00 0.00% 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00% 1711,422.40 465,826.53 (2 5,4 4_ -173.340/o 2,336,565,56 2,733,714.42 45,995.14 I „971/o 9,190.60 248,716.55 (257,907.15) 2806.21% (341,203,25) 295,376.69 636.579,94 1)16.57% Summary L'itv Loke Clow 5udgqt to AC111,11 C01111,01-.16,C for the month eudinv AMIUS1 31. 2016 1111-(1uneral l'u4411),Lid 13, f)emu Linen( Y/2012016 I-411 V or NIONTI I l'i I) DEPT 4111- (82N`1, GOV'T 14111/GET I 11,111)CiET ACTUAL Va1141110.: (S) VKi.111CC Old 131,10(iE1' ACTUAL Voriance (S) Variance CO 2(116 .., to dale Nloriili 314o11, 1\1,1106 Ntuntli WI/ (510 vn) vri) rri) Vari:100:11012, RUNE:NUE Current Ad Valorem Taxes 2,033,198,00 52.22% 0.00 0,05 o 00 0.00", 1,016,565.81 1,061,321.33 45,222.52 4,45"o Pint from WA Cly relaled to a tax forfeit uarel Delinquent Ad Valonun Taxes 15,11110.00 45.66% 11.011 0.00 0,00 11.11023 7,30.0U 0,89159 (6(1611) -8.091, Mobile [Ion: Tax 12,11(10,00 21.29°/0 0.1111 OP? (1,4)11 0.00°, 6000,00 7,54453 (3.4.15,31, -57.43./.„ lineal OuTanile3 157,5(18.0U 59,47% 0.01 0.00 0119 0,0073 7.5,754.00 93,676.47 14,922.117 113.95". Penally ,c,, 'Wrest. 011 To.,,, 7011.011 75,81100 0.09 0,00 0101 0.001 ,, 330,00 53040 1161,60 51.601,, Liquor license 11,0110.00 62.05% 0,00 25,30) 25.00 1110,00') 0,0110,00 0,S25,0,1 (1 I 73.(10) .11,6974 WaStdtauter License 1,6811,1111 92.8600 11,110 (1.00 0110 0,00'0 3-10,00 1,560.00 720.00 /15.7110 Cleneral Contra:3°r License 0,00 1110,0000 00,1 0,0/ own n.mr, omo 15o.16o 1 5omo wo.no".,, i-k,iong coniwin_, Lice°, 2,500,113 104.011% 730.00 45i500 250.00 123.004-o 1,700.01 2.614400 600.00 52,64% 13uilding Perrnils 508,200-1111 117,57% 58,000,00 112.179.05 5.1,179,05 93 4173 353,000.00 567,476,39 244.476,811 69.210)'D Rellee(i leo kun 12917eW humus and 11 new commercial tinui Building tte4nspcni, Vet, 0.00 0.00% 9.00 0,110 11.00 0.110";, 0,011 ,I.0113(0 (1.011.°., (Iiily includes .$701; in revenue fnr 1SL) 616 110[ burtgued) Healing Permits 38,000,00 739,/19./ 5.414/.00 15,711,60 10.711.60 214,737) 26,0110.01 01,159.32 65.159,32 2.50.617, Plumbing l'e0ns1s 46,800,011 114.81% 5,600.01 6.842.00 9.12,W 15.9710 32,700.110 53.733.110 211033.00 64.32";, Animil I iceme 2.500,011 67,80% 40110 1S$.00 145.0n 362 5(19., 2,340.00 1,695.001 1643,I173 -27.5h", Utility Permit, (R1)04) 25,000,00 181.38.4 5,000.01 5,6241.20 620,20 12.407,;, 10,5(10,011 45,344,60 25,1114,63 132.54°0 11urning Ninth 2,750.00 61/.1411% 500.00 45.00 (455,007 -6 Lull% 2.000.00 1,641100 1,3300.110) -17.507, 611135age Therapy Licenses 150,011 0.011% 0.00 0.00 0110 0_00.11, 75,00 0,011 (75.00) - illi).0ir, MS A.N.lainteitnnec 101„696,00 60.69% 50.348.67 4,60 (50.548,00) -1109.003) 101,690.00 61,716.50 39,979,50) -39.319. Monthly variance is just a inning issue on reveirt of IAISA funds Slat Fite Aid 41,5110,00 0.00% 0.00 0,60 0.00 0.000., 0,110 11,017 (min 11,0471, 3E0641 Aid 2,749.011 .50.0000 0,310 0.00 0.011 0,001, 1.374,50 1,374.50 0.00 11003,, Recycling Grant I3.5011,01) 101.2.1% I 5,500.uil 0,01r 115.560M) -100 00% 15,5110.041 I 5"0.(10 I SS.nfl 1.21''0 Mise SPIC GruivSuichall;e Ro, 5,064.00 85.84% (1.00 3.00 U (JO 0.011".1, 4,564.00 4.347.01 1216,991 -4.757) Coble Flanclas'e Revenue 45,000.110 218.26% 0,09 0.00 0,00 11,0040 45,1100.00 90,210.41 53.218.41 118,160) Actual greaier ihu44 budgc1 due to an inaen.w.1.511are Orrili1r1,1 7,111111g 10 Subilivkion 3e30 27,3110,011 61.2400 5%003,00 1.745.10 (3,2)5.001 4410'1. 20,000 00 16,840.00 11,160 01/1 -15.80% Plan ('trek Fees 2711,129.))11 1 1 1.60% 26,000.00 69.971.54 40.97 LS4 141.282ii 1 au,00;,,,10 3I0,3S3.11S 121,105.I1 6.4 2.2" kelleut5130 rroni 151 R05'11111110 and 11 new coin inure fa! units Sole of Cuplor„ Flunks, Maps 175.00 67.05%1 2.5,00 0110 (25,00) -100,0111-,, 1110.00 117.34 17.'14 17.14'6 Aisyssulent Sureties 1,215,00 246,91001 .1011.011 705.11(1 405,00 135330"; 970.00 3.000,00 2.030.00 2.06,.287 Clean Up 1)49.; 2,000,011 0,0(100; 0.00 0,00 0 00 14.00., 2,011.00 11,101 12,000.001 -10(1,1109') Cable Opeialion Itointhuisenient 4,000,00 27.6300 0.00 0.00 11,00 11031,, /001,00 1,105.011 1165.110) -44,75"0 hues' 45,000,011 77.19% 4,11011.00 3„555,29 (444.7)) .11.121. 30,5410.161 34,733,00 4,215.00 118600 Aliseellaneuus l'ciniit,, 0,00 0,00% 0 01 25.110 2i.00 100 01.1"A 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00% Ilie Billable Ite‘enue 500.00 0.00% 0 00 0,110 0,10 0.00'. 0,00 0.00 05111 0.00°1, 0i.sccIlanmo511c6',utue 3,500,00 111„14". 300.1)[i 11.00 (31l1/0.11 .100.033, 2,301110 3,893.57 1,563.57 69,29"`o lutere0 Eoi mugs 53.0110.00 0.00", 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00e, 25.030.11n 0.10 (3i,1100Alu I -100 ou" a 1/011M6nrii 0.0)) lird,00,. 0.110 ,-,....- = n,no,. _-., , I 0.0011 ,-, ni.000 Ali i oo 00,4 fatal Revenue I 3,485,514,110 23336'"," 179,613.0U :17J50,48 3'.,4%3(.9 2101(000 I .49,F,,I,231 2,5:9,071„1 I 533.720.90 26.75% Detaki PENS5: 1110 5 Mayor & Councit PI Sa FICA Coulrludivns Medicare Contribioiuns 51'6155r$ C0111Pe0511109 &tile:05.r Miseellane6n, 01)4551 Subscrignons Cnnfeiences & 11ainine Tula( &loyor & Council Full Year 511151T11 - 1.1111/61 T 1341DGE I 511711151 Valionve (51 Variance 00 2106 % to date Mond( Month Mona Slonill 25.6911110 0310% 0.00 0.00 0 On 0 00% 1,591.78 0,11090 0,00 0.00 0,00 11,0041'.. 372,54 11,0090 0110 0.017 0110 11.00% 3011110 2,6390 0,00 0,01/ 0 011 0.00% 5110.119 0.11090 il 00 0.00 0.60 0110% 5,000.110 185.339) QUO 134.44 (134.44) ..100.01r; 11.5110.00 120.25% 1.001.00 652.75 117 42 31.74% 1.0110.011 11.11090 11.1111 0.00 0 00 11.0,0f 45,955,32 6052790 1,9011,00 817.02 182.99 18.30% 132115 A(IrninIsirolinn 1-1 Salaries 143,0011.110 156.809', 11,153,53 13.108..19 11.954,64) 17.52.5,, PT Salaries 1.1.011 0,011% 018.1 1,617.00 (1,617.00) ,.100.005, 41151405 Contribultons 19,875.1111 85.8590 816.54 1,20,15 (37151) .44,45,, 07N1,5 Comriburions 0.00 0.110% 0,00 0.00 °Mil 0.003o FICA C:(niribminn, 8,990110 89.98% 601.54 1.042.33 (3)0.79) 550 73% 91edieare Com ribul ions 2,102.511 89.9600 161,73 243.76 (82,03) 4172% Ile,11111:0en171 losurince 30,550.110 59.30% 2,3511.00 1,79520 554.00 23,015, llneinpin,ment flenelik 0.00 0,00% 0.00 0,00 0,00 0.009, \0'0,15,r5C91111-1501711,0 1,140,00 548.44% 0.00 0011 0.00 0007, Olfice 5uppliv, 5,800.1111 62.6990 475110 2110,19 254,81 53 64., Printed For, -is 010 100.00% 0.00 0,00 5.4)2 0.005, Legal Senic,55 611,11110,110 365.2190 5,0110.041 47,014.39 (411)14,391 -840.29% Novsiciler/Websile 8,000.00 0.119% 7,00 0.00 6110 OA", Assessing Semees 38,01111,1111 69.1990 1_300.00 2,504100 0.00 01905, CoMract Service, 0.00 0,110% 0.00 92.00 (92.00) 510000% Posinge 2,000,00 99.5490 0,00 2110.00 (2011.00) 5100,005, Miloge 550,00 51.8490 50,011 101,56 (51.56) .103.1.190 Legal Publishing 10,040,00 58.93% 900 00 1,385,00 (485.00) .53,595 a Insurance 28,000.011 9329% 0.00 0110 0.00 0.0090 Cable Operation 1,-5.1nic 4.800.00 47.81% 41)0,1111 155,00 265.00 (6.7.5'4 Miscellaneous 600.00 6.8990 50,011 (127.91) 177,91 355.8253 Dues & 8 uh,cription. 1,1110,00 156.4490 100.00 0.00 100.00 100.011°.', Buuks (1,00 0,00% 0.00 0.0,1 0,00 0.11000 Con kwuces s'vz Training 3,350.06 20.8/5/0 250.00 27.24 222.76 89.105., Shill Ocvelopment 0,00 0,00% 0.110 1100 0.00 0.09% 11101 Adniio11lroli6n I 360.997.50 125,33790 24,918.66 70,562,00 (45,043,94) -183.17% LiLJDGE1' 1-11-) 12.5=15.01 796.39 1 tin.2.7 300,00 150.00 5,04)41281 5,000.0f/ 500,0(1 27,877.06 04,807.70 0,00 7,110,58 0.011 5.878,04 1,374.71 19,975.00 0.00) 1,140,00 3,800.00 0,00 40,000.1k) 4,000.00 26.0011.00 0.00 1,001100 375.00 6,750.00 28.0011,00 3,200.00 400,00 800.00 0.00 2.350.110 0.00 246,90i .07 1-1C/ AC1I1A L Varian:41(5) 911) v-rn 0151 12,645.00 0.00 706.30 11,151 1156.27 7.,10 292.10 0110 250.00 9,266.50 (4,266.511) 13,829514 (31021041 ILO') 501100 23,1113.44 4,774.22 125,4314.03 5,064.00 9,115.91 0,00 11087.35 1,891,.0/ 13,113.20 0.00 6,252 24 3.635 97 771.32 219,121.5(1 0.041 26.2,12 95 460.00 i .990.75 2Q0.6-1 5.916.32 79.121.100 2.2954111 41.35 1.871,32 11.181 607.24 0 00 464,118.24 Variance i",) 5-11) 100.01J% 10(1.0094 97.37e, 100.00°, .115.335, -72.865, 21116 share IIILNIC animal Nil made in Sein 2015 010, Morn 1011 00% C,Il115 annul(' rucuaer,lup of 53,70 & 01SI3 for vos 17,13./0 hudgeled 131er in the yeer (31,041.91) 537_75% (5,0642)0) -100.0111, (2.225.33) 531.305, 000 0.01/8:1 12,211.27) 537.6254 1516.75) -37 593, 1,830.80 5,319, 11.110 0.0111; 15,112.241 -146.4.15, 164,03 .1.32% (771.321 5100 01/5, (179,121.361 -417.8175 4.0011.00 100,0055 (192,93) 51,(370 1460.011) 5100.0050 (990.75) .99.0816 84.36 72,504) 83.3.68 12.355, 1.879110 6.71% 9115,00 23.235:: 355,65 39-669, (1,077.32) 5134.675:: 0110 11.115]; 1,052.7o 70.33% 0,00 0.00% (217,157.17) -87.93% Intern pr,sann (canon,' In Admin VTD 10c10.145 arprnAimaicly 140541 related in 151 lilintion '57(7,)') MONTH 0T[, 1410- Cleclinns 11111)(1ET ACT1I,11. Vatlance (51 Variance(°°) liutx;CI' AC'13/A1, Vxnsnce t59 Month Wnnlh Month 610111) V ID VT14 I'1 Salaries 12,00141111 0,011% 0,110 3503,50 13,503.501-010,00"° 9,015 3,50)30 (3,50.501 Ofliev Supplies soo.00 16u086 00n 11,00 11,60 0.00°° o,00 11n0 0,01) Legal robb531(o,s.74uli 0c31 ion 50001 U 0I1% 0,00 0.00 11310 0,00% 0,00 0.00 0.00 Cynipmcnl Re(elir 500.00 0,00% 0 00 OAO 0,00 0.00°° 0.00 0.00 0,011 county Cleoion Gees 9511,00 126.32% 01.0 0311) (1.00 1100"° 950.00 I,.'.011.00 11511.001 Printed Forms 350,00 0.00% 0-00 0.011 0.00 0,00°-0 gnu 0 n0 ono Miscellaneous 1.0(10.00 3'134% 0,00 393,40 (793.I0)-100,00% 0,00 Jai 40 (191.401 1'1)101 Elections I 15,111111.011 32 26°!° 0,1111 34046,90 (3,896911)-100,00% 950,00 53196.90 (4,146.90) ..100,11', (I.00% 0,00% 0.0U° 0 -26,32° 000 -u1.uhlen -436 5 j % 1520 - rminee FI Salalics 60,630,46 67,1396 4,653.35 4.837 04 (2)3.691-5,025', 39,333.13 40,702.17 11.148,72)-2,90°.n PT Salanes 4,5511.00 206.86"/ 350,00 2.41.1.0 13,(161.671-550.9196 2,975.00 9,41232 (6.437.321 -21638n0 'C)LA Conlnbudgns 4.41841.53 69,06% 37535 419,37 (44,12) -I1,76% 3,159.133 3,376,10 (186,47)-5,83°, FICA C0l011066613,- 4,041.19 73,71% 310,21 437,61) (127,39)-1,07'.° 2,636.76 2,97,5.70 (142,031-12,97)3 61edosarc Cunlnbulions 945,12 73,71% 72.55 102,3J (29,791 -01.06°0 61666 696,6' (79.961 -177,97% I Leal Millemal Insurance 10,8130,00 68.00% 83692 y70,40 (33.45) -4,00% 7,113.05 7,398.40 (2284.35)-4,00n-,i Ilnempluyancro [iellehlo 0,011 0,00% 0.00 0.13I 0.011 0q0°, 0,00 0_00 000 0,00"0 Workers Compensation 550,0(1 43.12% 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00°0 550.00 237.113 312,84 56.955, Office Supplies 1,1100.011 I7,159, 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00", 00.0(I 171.57 678 -18 79,82°a Painted Form; 500,00 0-00% C.00 11,00 0.00 0.00"s 750.00 0.00 250.11(1 100.01P10 Audit Scnlces 28,650,01) 91,43% 0.06 1).00 000 0,00"0 26,150110 26,193.00 143A01 41,17'9 1'nn0r3cl Seniccs 6,7110,00 1,01°5 525.00 5.44 516.36 98.393, 4,425,00 67,52 4,357.48 98,4700 Mileage 50,00 0,00% 0,00 0,011 0.011 0,110'3, 0.00 0.00 11,1111 0,110°° 7119s011519enu; 200,00 35,00% 0.00 0,00 9,00 11.900, 100.00 70,00 30,.00 30J10", Duos c suh?criplln is 750,0(1 22,67 r 0,00 0.00 (Ltd) 0.000', 250.00 170,00 80.00 32.00°0 Conferences S Tr,rininc 500.110 0,00% 0.00 0,00 0,00 1300"" 0.011 0,00 0,00 0,01(03 Tnlal Finoncc 124,83530 7328141 7,123,28 9,139,88 (2,016,611)-28.31% 88,66035 91,475,611 (2,8(5.25) 0etaIV Pull Year UUD(11'.T (IU DC; ET ACT(4\ 19111- P tanning ,ia Zoning 2016 ', to ...tilt, A10I1111 Pr 5,Ia1 ie. 137,098,00 72.23% (054000 El' Solarits 4,8110.161 110.4466 1,200.00 PURA Contributions 10,282.35 72,27 % 790.95 IICA Con ribo0, ns 3,500.03 72,118% 653115 Medicare Connihuu our; 1,987.9E 72,1111% 152.92 IIcu1 ill/Dental Insurance 34.314.00 39,65% 2,6711,00 Wnrkns Compensation 800,00 60.24% 0.110 Ucsololrczcro,s'oll'srl oat recovery 0,111)-1110.00°%% 000 Unice Supplier 1,800,00 31_33.5 150.00 PnWed roans 750,00 0.0011/,, 1).00 Engineering Senirc; 20,1100,00 64,68% 1,5611110 Contract Services 60,11110,00 44.26% 0,00 Postage 200,00 3.23% 0.00 Alilcago 250.0U 118.35% 211.110 MlsecIlaneou,s 5110.011 1,211°6 40.00 Dues & Suhsc0p16un3 6110.011 3.33% 511,00 Hooks 300,00 40,6790 25.00 Confelencs & Training 2,000.011 33.09 % 0.00 Taal Planning 6 Zoning D34,641.35 58.466 171106.72 rt115911I I.76 E.00 912.72 610,351 191.63 1.65n I)0 0,00 973,17 000 0110 3.731 25 577,31 0,00 240.30 0 I10 0,00 0,0(I n00 22,721,19 \'m,anre(51 Variance l',"I IIVD(ilfi AITILA I. l'anance IS) \'nrianco l°"I Month AlonU1 VTD YID 5'7 D YID YTO rarianre nntas (1,391,13) -LS '10, 69,64 100 n9.1146 S9 (9,105.69) .40,190. (563.00) -49006 4,8130.00 5,3011111 (5111,00)-10rW9, (121,77)-15.4171, 6,723.03 7,430,9.1 (707.66)-1165361 (165.53)-23.319, 5,557,74 6,127011 1360.261-01,2411 418,711 25,31°, 1299,79 1.-13 911 (133,111-111,24^ 626.00 3)11920, 21.764.00 13,673 00 F 539.17U 39,05", 0,00 0.007, 6110.00 43191 3)7.i7;1 39,76"', (973,47)-1111009, 0.00 (3,193.491 3.493.49 100.01)", 1511.0(1 100,001'. 1,7181.011 563,99 63601 33,0(17, n.nn 1011.n0"B 50u.o0 two 5001)0 1016t819, (1,731,251 415.12°% i4-17007H1 12.93(6111 1.063,99 7,6011 (577,311-I00,00°6 3000000 26,531,23 3,446,73 11.49% 3'1-U iodide, Gut Alcun SIroo anal)sisc 000 0,0o11 100,00 6.15 93.55 93.55', 1220.310-1111.50", 16000 295.87 1133.87)-84,92'-, 40.00 1110,00), 320,00 6,00 314111) 95,)3", 5400 1011.00"--e 401100 20.09 360.0)1 95,01176 25.10) 100.00°6 200.00 122,00 76410 39.19711 0,110 0.1)11 " 1 00000 660,110 340011 34 (10)7 (4.114.471-27.60%, 129,464,61 166,365.22 13,098.89 7 30"/, 1930 • Engineering Seri Ices Engineering Services 48,0110110 54,8790 4.00000 4,475,27 073,271 -11.8E11 32,00000 70,336.32 5,643,16 17,7011 Iola! EngIncering Srrslccs 48,0110,00 54,8790 4,01111.110 4,475.27 (475-271 •11,88 % 32,0011.00 26,336,82 5,663,18 17,70% 1940 - City 1ia11 Cleaning Snpplico- 50,00 0.00 / 0 00 11.00 0.00 O.0119b 25,00 0.00 25,(10 1011.00% Building Repair Supplied 300.00 0110% 25.110 0,00 25,011 100.00% 2011.00 (1,1(0 20n,097 100.904, UliliIio; 7,50600 43.129 5000 570,19 (76.191-15.2416 4,757r0 3_23.1.33 I.51597 31.91`u Rcik5v 609,00 131.76% 50.OP 112!.1 16"141 -125.88% 40000 79156 (390.36)-97.65".6 Rrpaiecnlaml Cnn0ac1ual (11dc 610000 136,01 % 500,n0 2.1102.45 (I S(12,45) -300.49'16 4,000.01 9.360.64 153611.64)-131,0'_:, 'CM 'wind.' S3.26 hill In Capri for Eire Slaiinn al Scw9r 000000t(nn work Rcpa'rz1Alainl Cnnlraclual Gqu(p 10,800,00 65,01 % 900.110 857,11) 42.97 4,770, 7.200110 7,1120 44 179.06 2.49°, Foci* Lease 29.532,0(1 66,67% 2,461.00 2.461.0n 7,710 00111.. 19,60810 19,633.90 9.00 0.00T, Miscellaneous 30111111 530,50"/, 25 00 312,61 0P,17,611-1230,4490 200.00 1,591,49 11,391,491 •695 75s, Tnlnl City 11.11 551182,00 75.6090 4,461110 6,342,12 (1,881,22) -12,17 % 36,463,00 41,685,97 05,222.97) -1432 Tolnl Grnerul Gnrernrnent 9351252.47 87.1790, 599111,66 117,055.06 (53,645.42)-98,10890 612,376.61 818,182.69 (2115.806,00)-33,61%, 7Ctad a I/120T 410 - 01141,10, SAFLTN) Von Vein I 101101111 UUDGET 31124141117 ACTUAL. Vinmove IS) VaTtaitee 0201 131/1.1G1.1 21110 - Polk() 2016 "-nu, rime Month Mouth 64001 Month 'el 11 Law Enforcement Conner 527,11611.47 4)1.12% 0210 0110 0.00 0,9020 263.511Q-1 Torill Police 527,060.47 48,1213 0.011 11,110 0.00 0,00% 263,530.24 AC 1 VAL Vdriance Varianit: 11 01 ‘111 31111) VIP 253,612.02 0.910 22 1,76)10 Jim -lune billed on in July, budgeted in 1101k% 253.612,112 9,918.22 3.76% 2150 - Prosecution Amine.) Crintinid 54,7002111 54.43% 4,5010.00 16211;17 879 53 I 9,f 5". 34,,3191 00 79,171 70 6.528.30 17.081,, "Ifu1111 Proceullun 54,700,01.1 54,4311 4,5110.119 3,620.47 879,53 I 9.55.110 36,3011.00 29,771.70 6,52830 17,911% 12711- Fire (1' Salarieq 711,300.00 65.84% 5.407 6)1 5,613 05 (205,361 -3 91(110 45.965.30 40.297.22 l321.84) 41,705, PI Saliirie0 110,000.110 50,6713 9,166.07 9.153,35 1,913,32 1 .95",) 73,133.13 55,731,67 17,501 4 24.1117'0 pi:AA (,,ii,„,i,, 11.388.60 75.923', 876.05 1,133.74 12572,91 .29,41'0 7415. ‘c) SAM 711 (1.739/.37) -16.122, FICA Contribulion.0 7,388.33 53.5413, 569,33 505253 62,S0 11.0521, 4.330 83 32)56.04 674,79 13.21". Medicare Unritributions 2,747.27 56.41% 211.33 192256 IS.77 8.810 o 1,796,29 1,549,84 746.45 13 72^ i Ilealth/Deindl Insmariec 14,846,00 62,2913, 1,142.101 1,038.00 54.011 41,73'n 9,707.00 9.245.00 ,150.00 4.73;, Hudgei ini:66137 502; of split employee insurance pi:11110,1i Ilnemployment 13cnol 00 0.110 0,110% 0,110 0300 0.90 0,0071 0 00 0.00 11.00 0.9013 Wotkers l'orrinensa iron 18,5911.00 1111,39'/. 0.90 0.00 0.09 0.00)10 I5,600.00 14,90,5o 3.53450 19,1 ro Office Surplici 8511,00 131.35% 70.00 S3,69 ((169) )19367'0 .560.09 (.116217 1556 47) )99,371),i 12MS Soppliei 3.400.90 2.1.24% 2841.09 237,52 42.48 15.179, 2,240.00 756.08 1,483.92 66.25110 Vire l'rt‘ention 3,000,11U 4,15% 250.011 68,38 18 I „he! 72.659, 2,000,90 130.36 1.869.62 93.49'0 Friel. Oil & Fluids 13,01111.00 33.61% 1,075.00 601.90 173.10 44.0192, 8,6110110 4.363,93 4231.07 19.203; Swill fool'. 19(3110)12 12,001/.00 20.53% 1,000.90 0.00 1,01121.00 1110.0013 8,000.00 2,463.44 5,536.56 69.210', rhysi0,11s 3,904.00 29.8213 300.00 450.00 (150,110) -50.003; 2,700.00 1.101.00 1,536.00 56.507, 81000 18,097.51 61.2713 0.00 0.00 11.110 02/1/12, 9,045.75 11,00.52 122133.771 -22.53% Mileagc 500,00 128.84% 40.00 0.70 40 00 100.001), 340.00 644.22 1304.72) -89.411% Insurance 8,307.09 87.76%, 0,00 0.011 0.00 0,00199 8,307.00 7,290,00 1,017,00 12.24)0 Eleetrie thiltly 15.500.00 50,41197, 1.100.00 650.0.1 519.06 43,267, 10,400.09 7.924.59 2,575.42 24.763', 11e160e 1,290.00 163.72% 100.00 26938 1160,331 )166.3341 800.017 1,964.66 (1,164,66) 445,589, Rep.6r/Ma i ni 111dg 15.250.09 45.25°,1, 12910.11) 2.393,54 (1,393,541 -1373519 11,000.01 6,901.35 4.099.65 37 2.11`i, 0er001510ini Equip 25,650,00 83.77% 2,1941.09 8,281,57 16,201 571 -3 11.0.8% 17.400,00 21,487,97 (4,1187 97) )23219', 11311004011 4,11105111 15,64% 3011.00 531 35 1231.351 )77.12% 2,700.00 6-11_25 2,958.75 76,25°,0 Aliscellnneons 2,11002111 90.7613 150,00 72,19 77,51 51.970 1,300.181 1,315.16 (515.161 )39.63'0 344le> & Subscriptions 3,863.00 67.6913 320.110 0.011 320.00 190,11070 2,56E1,00 2,615,90 (55.00) -2.157,, 00ii10, 440.00 11,00./. 40,90 0.00 40.00 190.001; 3110.00 0.00 31/0,01) 100,0013 Con lerenecs & training 17,000.00 73,01% 1).00 610.011 (600.001 )190.0100 9,000.00 12,41 1.35 (4,411.351 55.14% Conferd)ces & Trlinirig (Reimb) (6,000,001 0.00% 0,00 (300.001 S07.00 I 00.110') (3,000210) 14,000,001 1,00028) .33.33% Tutul lArt I 377,231,71 58.61113 25,497)07 311,153.69 14,656,621 )18,1013, 209,834.97 211,067,39 33,767.59 13.25% 22.50 ) Fire Relief 1 ire Stine Art1 37323.09 0,1111% 0.110 11.04 0.00 0,410% (LTV (00 0.00 0.40", T().31 Fire Relief 37.323.00 9,111.1%.1 0.00 than 0,01) timeA, 0.1111 0.00 11,1111 0,011% Oet.L5 241111 - Building Inspeniun Ff Salaries PERA Contuhulions 11CA CV,tluhulrnni Medicare C'ontrihvlints Health?11eI,,I luau,ance Unemployment llenellla )Yorker, Compensation Wilier Supplies i'rinled forms Fuel, Oil & Hotels \liscellanenus Duet S Su6,Criptious B„al,g Neu Truck Conferences St "laming Tutu! Building Inspecllans 2500- Emerttencp Contmunlculitms Contract Senlccs Total Emergency CommunicAlnas 2700 - Animal Conlrol Printed farts C'ontncl 5cniccs Miscellaneous (Impound 'Total Animal Cuul rut Tull Year I Nit 1N T1-1 V ID BGUGL'1' MIDGET At`7 C<11. i'nriarcc{S) Variance (",) (30431i1.T ACT IIAI. Variance (31 V,niaace l"-,1 1016 7, to d;ne Month 9)0)0t _ hirintlr Mond, Y1T1 VTI.) 1"1'1) 1'11 168,171,1111 58.51% 12.73623 !2.»i_'7..70 5[5.53 3977, (09,93790 98,399.33 11.358.63 10.512.., 12,612.83 54.86J9 970.77 031 71 38.51 3.97' 8246.85 6,919,26 1, 27,50 1610'„ 10,426,60 56.7599 802 05 743 , 4 50.71 7.329,0,317 39 5.917.11 900_20 13.21', 2,438,48 56,75 b, 187,59 173,1,6 13 72 7.31"6 0394.39 I iO3.93 210.50 11212, 12, 29,692,110 47,90% 2 25300 2,35.1_00 30 00 1.31°, 19,414.00 14,222.00 5,192,01) 2.6,747. 0,1111 11.110% 0011 01)0 '.1011 0.1111°° (Lull 0000 0A0 0.01I'n 5,0110,00 29,28% 11,00 0.(0 O.00 0-01°, 2,51921)7 1.463.51 1,030.19 41.4574 2,1110,00 54.59% 173.00 39,09 133,91 77.6'2°b 1,400.011 1,1-1629 253,71 1112'1. 7110,00 0,00% 0,00 0.00 0.0u 0.1195; 350.00 Oro 3501w7 100007', 6,500,00 8.01 % 600100 11.00 600.00 100.0072 4,400510 ,520 61 3,879.17 83 177, 14,0(10,00 18,86% 1.500.00 I80,10) 1,120011 88.009, 9,800,011 2,639.73 7,160.25 73,116 4 0.011 100,1111'! 0111) 0,60) 0,01 11.007, 0,00 4,586.41 (4.536.411 400,007, 20030) (1,00% 0.00 0.01i 0,011 0.01r, °.till 0,On 0.00 (3.00),, 900.011 19,78% 0,I10 0.00 0.00 0.0U4, 900.00 173.00 722.00 S0,221, 1.800.00 1.9999 150.00 0,00 150.00 10(1.0924 1,200,00 35.53 1,164.17 97,011, 850.00 11,00% 70,00 0,011 70.110 1104'rrl°o 5(v0.(I() 000 56).?)) 100,00°, 725410 45.37/, 75.00 0,00 75,00 100002; 450.110 323,94 13106 37.17], 700,00 26.43 % 60,011 95 Ihl (35 00) -58.5324 480 CO 185.00 295.00 61.46", 725,01/ 120.01% 0.00 000 0.011 0.001% 725.1)11 070.05 (1453401 »211OP. 0,00 0.00! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00") 7911 0,10) 0.00 0.002 3,225.011 15.81V 0,00 220,00 (220.0:) -IO0.00°6 I,850.09 510.00 1,34CCOn 72.33''', 2611,765,91 55,42Y, 19,810.08 11,059,70 2,75108 13,88% 1711,675 59 1391116.27 31,369,32 10,39 o 7,41)11.00 511,61°, 0r11 0.00 0;}0 fl,t)1i°, 3.700.1)U 3.743.00 (451101-1.32n, 7,400,00 50,6199 0,00 0.00 0.t10 i7.001 3,700.110 3,745.00 (45.00) -1.2299 0.00 IIAIP%, 11,00 0.00 0.00 0003', 0.00 7.550011 81,13% 650.00 150.00 (ISM 0r1144 4,950,00 0.00 0d111°,1., 0.00 0,00 0,00 0.110114 0.00 7,5511.00 8€ 93% 651/.1111 650.00 0,00 907(99 4,9511,011 0.01) 0,1111 11.1109, 6,113.00 (1.17500)-23,7472 0 00 0,1111 11,00`° 6,125,00 (1,175.00)-23,74% 4olal Public Safety [ 772,031.09 5i.30"/ 50,457.15 51,483.86 11.026,711-2,t):t% _,. 733,*9'7q,50 653,627.3E 80,36?,42 DEPT 420 - 111111.11: WORKS r,iiVcar 1411145p-r .31110 Puldie k.s 2016 a Salaries 169,779.00 93.82% PT Salaries 7,000,011 0,00% l'ERA Conlrihntions 12,733.11 89,87% FICA Contrit1111:0115 10,526.30 9(1.2106 Medicare Contribmions 2,461.80 90,22% Ilea1411Dvntal lawfance 44,759.110 66.9706 thiemplopnero. Benefit, 11.00 0,00% Wolker3 Cum ponsgion 1 /1,0011.011 77.6506 0110, Supplies 2.000m0 52,65°/, Shop Materials 2,0110,1111 115-28% 130114ing Repair Supplies 5410011 319,49% Small 'Innis aod Minor Equip 1,200.00 217.257/, EmOncering Service: 12.00000 35,10% Coniract 3onicc4 1,0011,011 248.1906 Radio 1,30000 47.55% klileago 0,00 0.1111% 1.43.10In10e 16,1406.00 94,41% Clectric 28,1100.140 47.23% Refuse 2,500.00 68.67% Furl, Oil. Fluids (Alt del -Hi) 42,000.00 36.84% Repair/Main( 111.1g 4,00000 162.71% Repair/1913ml 140T 1111do 500,499 31.007/. Rear/Ali Equip (0) 2,41111.01) 127,85% Repair/Maini Equip (out) 5,110000 10.311% E91111411104n l'ans L000.on 4.41% Uniforms 3,600.011 89.68% keella neoisf 1.1100.00 76.41.1"/, landscaping Mateital 50000 11,0014 flues10 Subscriptions 200.00 49.50%, Conlerences Training 4,425.0P 2.15% Personal Protection Equipment 2,400.00 Imo% Clean up Days 5,5110.911 161.05% :Total Piddle Works I 411,28-1,21 79.7506 31211- Streets Equipment Paris Short Mammon., Materials Seal Cualinc,'Crack M11111 and Overlay Program Sign Repair Mateiials Cuniroct 505i ces Cieneral Contract Serices - ROW Repairs164ain1 Erillip111011 TuinlS1rrels 340:4 I H iTI) 131.10.31-,E ACTUAL Variance (5) VarilC,= r./ 1111012.17 ACTUAL V30,01‘, C51 Variance l' .3 Month Month Alonill Alouil. N Tli YID 1-114 rill 11,05902 20,373.88 (7,3 (3.961 -56.01°., I I 1,1409.35 159,292.71 (45.283„101 -4 3.492, July re(leets Flynt). Of PrlOr Dircoor PTO (Want.: I51210 1,750011 0.00 1,75000 1 l81,10(% I 2,250,1i0 0.1.61 12,25000 1014007. 929,49 1.528,4 I 0.15,921 -561140, 8,325.70 (1,443.44 0,117,74) -37.45`7. S09,72 1,211.1,19 (194.47) -43,72% 0,852.59 9.495.72 12,613.14i -37.9706 130.37 231,64 192.271 -48.72°, 1,609 1,4 2.220-93 011-7.91 .37.98% 3.443,90 3.61000 i 197.004 -4.85% 26,265.50 29,974.00 003.510 .221.206 14,181 0 00 17400 .2.111, 0.09 0,181 0,00 (1.009. 0 00 0210 0,00 0.009, 1506000 13,977_59 42122.-(1 22 35", 16500 105.16 59.34 36.27°,1 1,320.00 1,052.92 26708 21.1.239. 16500 369.17 1204.17) ,123.7401 1.32000 2-105.51 0852511 -74.66% 40,00 283,79 1243,791 -6119,487, 320210 1,597.47 {1,277,471 -3902)% 100,01 43,62 51 33 51.381 500011 2:6417,01 t1,807.041 -275.83'4 1,00000 1.131.00 (151.00) -1,5,10; 8.01)0 00 -1,305,51, 3,694.50 46.1306 0.00 596.70 1596 70) -100009. 500210 3,481_85 12.931.351 ..596.37% 0.00 0,18) 11.00 0,1101 650.00 618.12 31.85 4.909. 000 0281 000 0,1104. 0.00 0,00 0 00 0.11006 °MCI 11,00 0 00 1),p12, 16,0014440 15,105,00 39500 5.59,,, 1,500.11 629.26 070.74 53,0506 17,5(11).00 13.225.33 4,274,67 24,43°.4, 225.00 216.67 5 31 3-707, I .675.00 1,716_69 (41,691 -2.49F 4 2.500.00 3.473_211 (973.701 .38.9.306 27,51)112kt 15,474,12 12-025.88 .13.73". 330.00 633 42 (303.42) -9 1.95% 2.640-00 6,508.56 (3,368,56) -146.547, 40,00 0.1.10 411,00 100.0(190 32000 16499 155,01 18.4475 20000 114,57 85.43 .12,7291 1,600,00 3,069,314 (1,465,361 911.770, 400.00 OM 400.00 1 oo.on^; 3.411000 518.83 2,581,17 84.74% 62.3.00 0,00 625.00 10021010 5,300,00 152252 4.947.45 92.3511 300,110 3115,03 (505.03) -165.34% 2,400.00 3.228.62 1(126,62) .34.532. I .5050) 10,011 Homo 93.3391 750,00 763.95 113.95} , 1.36`', 12500 0,00 12500 100011% 50000 000 5(40.0) I 00310% 0,00 17,10 13 00 0.09-', 100,00 9000 1.00 424006 1.1.00 1000 0 011 0.000., 750461 .45m11 655.014 87.219,, 200,00 11.00 20000 1000095 1,60000 0.00 1.600.00 101100% 000 0.00 0,011 0.00% 5.500.00 5,857,78 (3,357.78) -61.05% 28,296.50 35,469,71 17,173.11) .2 5.35"/. 287,787.77 311,551.55 (23,763.711) -8.25Vo 3,000.00 0.66"/, 250.00 0.00 250.1.8.1 1000015 20000.00 59.93% 2,000.00 7.30615 (5-806. 181 .290.31°) 210,000.110 123.7206 000 200594.31 (209,894.3 11 -100 11075 1611,00010 11.007/, 0110 0.110 0.00 0.0111,, 2,500011 85.07./, 301.00 0.00 300.00 1011.11006 10,01)0.00 18.10% 2,0110211) 14011 2,000.00 1116.00% 5,000,011 0190% 1,1100,00 0 il0 1,001400 100,1)(14,4 2,500,011 29,21% 210.00 105,51 101.49 43.33".. 413,00000 66*94%i 5,760.410 217,8090l1 0(2,1149.00) .3681,41% 2,000.00 15,000,00 2100110,00 160000210 1,90.1.00 3.000210 5.11(01,(8) 1,68000 401.5811.00 19.94 1,930,06 99,0074, 11,985.93 1,014.10 241.104. 255,301,23 (49,3117,25i ...23.72 VTD v.orimicel i. (primp i,,,00 0.00 110,(11111,110 10000% VTI) famine.: is a timing issue 2,126.67 (22 6 671 -11.93% 1.50071 6,190,29 77.387.1 0011 5,00000 10000% 739. 1 x 949.32 56.549i, 276,479.65 127,1011.35 314931, 05444(7 3123 Ice & Snow 111,11(11.31 1.ati05capillt!Ma ial 36nd(Salt Conitaci Ser ices Nepali sPvittini Lquirmi.-nt Total lee & Snot,' Removal 3166 Street Lighting lived Lighting Total Street Lighting 3200 Recycling Ree)cling Styptics hliscellanernet Total Recycling 3250 Tree Program 011111i1CI Serniee Total 'Vree Program Ill Veor I MONTH LILILX7E. IL I ill IDGCT ACTUAL Variance (SI Variance Cc) 13411)(1PT 2016 qc to dote I Mouth (Lomb Month %krill) 1 ID 750,00 0.111/Ye 0.00 419.(3 (409.131 -100.002,, 500012 70.01111.011 35.37% 0310 13,5,5735 (13,537.351 .1110),0(3, 35,0,81.0 4,000.011 11.111090 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00% 2,000.011 12,500.00 25.16% 1,000,00 11139.47 (2.039.47) 203,9535 9.250.00 67,250,110 32.451,), 1,1100.00 17,1135,95 (16,035,95) -1603.60% 45,750,00 26,4110,00 64.335/0 2,.700.11 7,226.50 176.501 205t, 17.600.00 26.4110.00 64-3.3% 2,20114111 2,226.50 (2331)1) -1.211% 17,6110.00 (6,982.59 v-rn ACI UAL Variance (.5) Once 180) VTD YIP VT() 50,57 18.173,, 24,757.27 10.242.73 29.267, 0.00 7,000.00 100.01113 3.144,61 3,105 .3q 61,585, 26,311.01 17,438.99 39.120/, 3,500h00 o,on^A, 0 03 0,161 0 00 ORO% 1,7511.00 2.400.110 0.011% 200 00 0.00 200.00 100,50174 1.600.00 .5,900.00 0.00% 2110.011 OLIO 2011,101 100.005/0 3,350.00 1.11011,1141 61,455,-; 0.00 1101 0.00 0,000, 1,000.1111 1.1100.00 41.45"/. 0.00 0.00 0.110 0.00% 1.0011.00 Total Public Wnrks I 944,834.21 67.111%( 37,456.50 272,541.16 235,084,66) -62162% 16,982.50 0.161 00 0.110 614.50 61-1.311 617 41 3.515 617.41 3.51°Ie 1„750.00 100015; i,(1011 un.onl, 3,3511.00 1011.00% 383.50 38.553-, 385.3U 38.55% 759.067.17 333,939,311 125,128.47 16.4803- Rcquiro.I contrac0s.1 sal( ticticcr,, Credit tbr mailtienancc cqutpment return Detett_h DEPT 4.511- CULTUrIte, 11E011:ATM ELJ11 1',,tt MONTI I 1' Ill 17112, LICE l' WIDGET A( TUAL Valiance (Sl V4rio no: (2) 11)413GET ACTUAL Variance (5) V4riaucc 1%) 5200 - Parks & Reercalloti 21113 % 10 dote P.10601 31(0011 Monil) 610001 1-11.1 '.1' 1 L) 1-11.1 1-1-13 51' Salarics 115,254,1111 47.01% 0,765 bq 7,111075 03-1.04 20.925, 75,358.38 5.1.176.96 21,181.42 28.1 17,, PT Satan es 32,500,00 70.01% 2,50,4301 4,760,00 (2.2 bo.00) .90,4155 21,250,00 22.754 .23 0,504,25 -7.0955 VERA C'oorrihntions 8,644.05 .0488 /., 664.9.3 4011.54 264.39 39,76",, 5,051,83 4.225.63 1,426,25 25.237, FICA C ontributions 9,140.75 48,1 X% 704.67 525.24 1 79.43 45,44^ i 5,989.72 4,41 1.63 1,576.09 2133 l% Aledtcate Coollibuiions 2,142,43 -13.18% 164.3(/ 122,34 41.)6 25 •Iroi, 1;100,82 1.1-132 20 368.62 26.11% 1ivu1113/101000 101.0c,ince 19,019,00 64.8455 1,463.1141 1,450.30 14.20 0.3313 12.435.50 12,331.30 1113.7(1 0,335, 1.1ncrnplc3mcn1 ilcnclils 0,00 0-00% 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00°. i 0.00 0330 0.00 0.110= Workers Cot:Tens:Ilion 4,701),(111 92,34% 0.00 0.00 0 00 (1.11(77 4.7110,00 4,340.16 359.84 7.61 N'TE) rollect, con cc 1i0o to anorak, 1'101 NT billing io all clqns Shop 3110.4641i 1,01.10,011 135.85% 75.00 0.00 75.00 100.00% 700 00 1,353.47 (653.47) „9-1,0755 Chcmical, 1,500310 711.49% 12.5.00 423.57 (208.57) -7.33,86% 1,440.00 1,057.42 57.42) -3,7,06 Equoprnent Pans 4,000,00 35.8355 330,00 266.63 63.37 19,20., 2,640.110 1,355 35 1,084,45 4141955 Building Repair Surpli(75 500.00 123.77% 40.00 33,22 6.78 16.93% 320510 618 86 (298.8,0 -93.39% Landscaping NI pieria Is. 2,0)10,110 68.959', 160.00 0.047 146 00 100.1102; 1,328410 1,371397 (30.07) .3.0455 Small luLds And 31:60r Equip 2,000.00 44.481/4 150.00 65.96 84 0-1 56.031, 3,4o4)3o S39.53 510.42 26.461)7) Alilea,,,4e 0.90 03111% 1300 000 0.00 0,01r, 0.00 0.00 0110 03105! Insurancc 3,2110.011 96.22% o.on 11.00 .0.00 0,00.; 3,200.00 3.079,00 121,011 3,732., Electr,, utility 9,5119,00 62,31% 7)51,0)) 701A0 (IASI .0.2)3D 0,100.00 5,966,94 133,06 .2,1355 R4111,34 1.900,00 6.67% 125.410 0,00 125.110 100.047,'0 1,767(1.1)o 11)1)261 9011.00 90.00% Repo iriMai ol Bldg 1,300.00 3 ,53 % 150.00 6.3.48 86.52 57.68°. 1,5100.01 63.43 1.136.52 94 71°.i, Ilcpail /4)ann NOT 1310g. 3,000,011 88,64% 250,00 1,131 53 1381 53) -352.61°i, 23100.00 2,659.27 (659,27) -32.911°.7) Rcpair/0Ial in Equip 1,500.011 1.39,11255 125.00 78.51 46 49 37.1955 1,009.00 4,035,34 (13185.34) .103.53",, 14511031 0nilt4ow. 6,000,011 59,09% 50(1(10 846.60 (346,00) .69,40^,. 4301000 3,545 40 454.52 11.36", Persvnal t3olt0iun butipment 1,200,101 25.82% 10,00 0,041 100.00 100.002 800,00 309.84 090.16 61.27% Nitscallancous 1,2002D3 1.417% 100,00 54.96 43 04 45.0.49, 300 431 22:12 777.58 97.211,f,, Totol Parks & Recreation 1 2343111-23 5532751 17,299,119 17,935.51 (636.42) ,3.6851) 154,274.30 127,965.05 26.30925 17,05% IT & Telephone I1',Ilar01wArc 3,0011,00 43.835', 0 00 11.011 0,00 0.1111% 1,510101) 1,465.00 35.00 2.33.3, IT-3011,1re 8,156.00 62.637, omo 170.00 1711.11)1) -100.007,, 8,151,00 5,107.83 3.048.17 37,377-, 1 1-.3N-wort Seroc, 50,1100,00 67.39% 4,165,00 4, ,..1 1.25 (46,25) 4.11% 33*320.0n 33,693.00 1175.0111 1.137- IT-N0m,kio7) 0.00 0.0119'0 0.00 000 0.00 0.90° 0.0 0,011 0.00 0,0E114 1NET Conlingcn,y 0,00 0,00% omo 000 0.00 11,01)5! lulu 0.00 0,110 nAito, Tdcpbone 20,820,00 61.5951, 1.7.15.110 1,529.67 205.33 11.83% 13.881010 11,822.26 1.937.74 7 42R-, Total IT & Telephone 81,976.011 64.74./ 5,901011 5,9111.92 (10,92) -9,199). 56,856,00 53,090.09 3,765,91 6.62% Grand Totol all E65e1(105 3,465,514,0U 64A67', 170,422,40 465,826,53 (295,41)4.13) .1 7.3,34 .% 2,316,561456 7,233,714.42 25,995.14 1.12% Subtotal No Income over Expenses 1 20,1111.011 1476,88% 9,19(1.611 (2413716.55) (257,907.15) 2806.21% (3.11.293,251 295,376.69 559,723.94 .174.26% 1/1;,,PT 460 . CI)31P -113.1 20,0110,119 0,00% 0.011 0,00 0110 0.00% 20.010,00 0.00 203100 011 100.00% MI,( So, lec Increase 0.011 0,00% 0,1t0 0.011 0,0) 0.41ra 0.110 100 1)110 RUIN Transco' to City Pr./Jo:1, (titreos) 11.00 11.110% 0,00 0 (11)' 11,0)1 0 00% 0,00 0.00 0,11t1 0.U1l'1, 1/F.PT 493 - OTI1 FINANCING 0.011 11,00% 0.110 0.041 111)31 iloir', 0.00 140o ().00 11,00% GRAND TOTAL ENI. ALL I) EriS 1 3,485,314-00 44.0455 170,421,49 465,826,53 (295,4114,13) - 173.34 % 2,336,565.56 2,233,714.42 45,995.14 1.97% NO income oVcr Expenws , 001 0.001)', 3,199.611 (2401,7)6,551 1.257,9117.15) 2/016.2101, 041,2113,25) 295,376.69 634,579.94 136,5755 (-iry of Lake Elmo_ Nalco to Acinal 2016 Ely_Mluli As of AIIMISI 3 I. 2016 206-Library hind Deourrinciit 9/20,2016 Full Year Nlount YID 13111/GET 2016 2016 Liver 2016 2016 (her! 2016 % irt date HI !Doll' ACTUALS (linden 111.1116FT ACTUA LS moiler) Nines It EV ENUE Current Ad Valorem Taxes 25(1,957.0(1 50,00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 128,478.50 128,478.50 0.00 Funds received from WA Cry July and December Ronal Income 0.00 0.00% 0.011 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 !mews' 17.imin0(s 0.00 0.0000 0.181 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 Miscellaneous Revenue 0,00 0,00% 0,00 2.50 2.50 0.0(3 15(1 2.50 Donato irs 0,00 100,00% 0.00 0,110 0.00 0.00 10,970.00 10,970.00 Includes grant proceeds ofS10k rrour Bremer EMI lartal Revenue 256,957.00 .54,2790 0.00 2.50 2.50 123,4711.50 139,451.00 10.972.50 EXPENSE (Over)/ (Over), under under FT Salaries 46,311.07 67,6490 3,680.34 3,307.85 (127.01) 30,077.34 31.325.50 (1,2418. i cq 1,1' Salaries 26,260.00 59.2656 2,020,00 1,490.93 529.07 17,170.00 15,562.81 1,607.19 PERA Contributions 4,277,55 82,2190 368.54 397,41 (28.87) 2,743,73 3516.64 (772,91) FICA Contribtifions 3,479.51 80.4390 315,17 315.95 (0.711) 2,201.42 2,798.68 (595,26) Medicare Contributions 813.78 80.44% 73.71 73,90 (0,19) 515.31 654,58 (139.271 Health/Denial Insurance 14,144.00 45.381' 1,083.00 1,088.110 0.00 9,248.00 9,248.3/0 0,00 Unemployment 13caelits 0.00 0,00% 0.00 0.110 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Workers Compensation 0,00 0.00% 0,00 0.00 0,00 0,00 0.00 0.00 Library svcs supplies 1,100.01 0,00% 91.67 0,00 91.67 733.36 0,00 733,36 Office Supplies 3,601100 49.8795 300,1(1) 235.29 64.71 2.400.00 1,795.18 604,82 Lihnny Collection Maintenance 42.811,08 1091100 2,500.00 4,681,20 (2,)83.201 34,1)00,00 46,795,33 (12,795.381 Legal Services 1,5(1(131(1 223,88% (1,00 0.00 0.00 1,250,00 3,358.25 (7.108.25) Contract Services 6,000.00 0.00% 500,00 0,00 500,00 4,000.00 (ton 4,000.00 Engineering Services 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0(1 0.00 Telephone 1,560,00 33.46% 130.00 182.89 (52.39) 1,040.00 1,302,02 (262.02) Internet 1,800.00 40.3890 150,00 50.64 99,36 1.200.00 726.92 473.08 Information Technology (Equine 3,100.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.100,00 0,167 .4,100.00 Soil wa iv 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.110 0.00 Insular ice 2,000.00 8 1,3551i 0.00 0.00 0,00 2,000,00 1,637.00 163,00 Utilities 7,501100 49.69% 500.011 497.61 2.39 4,900,00 3,726.55 1,173.45 Refuse 600.00 103.2 I% 50.00 49.39 0.11 400.00 619.23 12(9.23) Repair/Maim Bldg 12,000.00 153,31% 1,000,00 470.00 530.00 3,000.00 18,396,75 ( 10,396.75) Libtar:s Renovations RcpairiMaini NOT Bldg 0.00 100.0090 0.00 0.00 0.00 11110 94.42 (94.42) Repair/Maim Egon, (oul-LH 11111 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0,00 0.0(1 0.00 0.00 0.00 Library Cnrd Reimbursements 12.000,00 183.6490 1100 4,032.00 (4,032.00) ;2,000,00 22,036.67 (1(1,1136,67) WA Co, Svc Fee 9,300.00 0.00% 1,000,00 0.00 1.000.00 5,000.00 (1.00 5,000.00 Library Service Improvements 46,000.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 46,000.00 0.00 46,000,00 Miscellaneous 13)00.00 20.5590 150.00 URI 150.00 1,200,00 369.94 830.06 building Purchase [Um( 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0,110 Buildingropcity Tax 1,000 00 0,00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 5(10.00 0.00 500,00 Odier Equipmetti 0.00 0.0090 0.00 0.00 (100 0.00 0.00 0.00 Subscriptions 0.00 0.00% (1.1)0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conferenecs & Training 3,500.00 0.00% 0.00 314,00 (3)4.00) 2.250.00 314.00 1,936,00 Programs 4,500.00 0.0090 600.00 0.00 000.00 3.300,00 0.00 3,100.00 Internal charges 0.00 100,00% 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 10.00 110.00) Tidal Libra ry 256,957.00 63.9470 14,517.9,1 17.00.56 (3,171.63) 195,231.16 164,29&52 30,942,64 Net Inentne/(Evirense) 00 4, El 73-0.061 (3,169.13) 166,752.661 (24,837.52) 41,915.14 21.83% -62.79l% 12131/15 Cash 11a lance 232,917.24 260,688.75 21 locome,(Emwrve) 0.00 Ace 'lied AP C1P (self Minted) Contingencies 2014 Al' accitta 1 (24,837.521 (87.27) 130,000.001 0.00 Ending Cash 1 202,917,24 235,761.96 IL LAKE ELN/ 0 AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: AY C•U Monthly Assessor Report Dan Raboin, City Assessor Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Cathy Bendel, Finance Director CIL CO U ICATIO DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #4 SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item City Administrator Report/Presenta ..... .....................City Administrator Questions from Council to Staff ....... ........ ..... . ...... ...................Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ........ ................ ..... .............. ..... ............. Mayor & City Council Discussion........ ......... ....... .......... ........ .......... ....... ......... .. Mayor & City Council Action on Motion........................ ..... ..... ................... ....... ......Mayor Facilitates SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the monthly assessor report for through August 2016 outlining work performed on behalf of the City of Lake Elmo. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended as part of the Consent Agenda. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Property splits/plats — 0 Sales collected and viewed — 17 Taxpayer inquiries — 7 Miscellaneous inquiries - 2 Inspections — Residential — 1 05; Commercial — Building permit reviews — 31 Pictures taken — 109 Other work performed included: • Monthly meeting with County residential and commercial supervisors Input of all inspection and permit work City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item #4.1 September 20, 2016 Perform sales verifications and land value analysis using MLS and other resources Field telephone inquiries RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council accept the August 2016 monthly assessor report. -- page 2 -- IF CITY OF LAKE ELMO MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: CONSENT ITEM #: AGENDA ITEM: Building Department Report SUBMITTED BY: Mike Bent, Building Official THROUGH: Mike Bent, Building Official REVIEWED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director 09/20/2016 5 SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the monthly building department report. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the ConsentAgenda. STAFF REPORT: Below is a snapshot of the year to date statistics through August 2016. Comparison data is also include from prior years for new home single family construction and total permitting activity. Attached are the system summary reports breaking out this information further, including the statistics related to the inspection activity. 2016 2015* 2014 New homes 151 72 17 Total valuation $48,080,098 $24,296,699 $.10,018,471 Average home value $318,411 $337,454 $589,322 Total Permit Valuation YTD $87,533,825** *Includes one home rebuild due to fire **Includes ISD 916; SIOM valuation $29,282,750 $15,169,150 RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council accept the August 2016 monthly building permit report. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Valuation Report 2. Permits Issued & Fees Report 3. Inspection statistic report for August 2016 Permit Kind CITY OF LAKE ELMO Valuation Report - Summary Issued Date Front: 8/1/2016 To: 8/31/2016 Permit Type: All Property Type: All Construction Type: All Include YTD: Yes Permit Count Valuation Dwell Units Perinit Type: BUILDING COMMERCIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION I $ I 0,028,022.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY ACCESSORY BUILDING 1 $3,600.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY ADDITION 1 $26,000,00 0 SINGLE FAMILY ALTERATION 1 $2,150.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED NEW CONSTRUCTION 6 $1,243,000.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY BASEMENT FINISH 4 $124,500.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY DECK 9 $130,800.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY GARAGE 2 570,000.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY NEW CONSTRUCTION 16 $5,098,324.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY POOL I $15,000.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY REMODEL 2 $20,200.00 0 SINGLE FAMILY WINDOWS 4 S33,466.00 0 Permit Type: BUILDING - Total Report Total: Period 48 $16,805,062.00 0 YTD 278 S87.533,825.11 Period 48 $16,805,062.00 0 YTD 278 $87,533,825.11 0 9/12/2016 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF E ELMO Permits Issued & Fees tixvort - Detail by Address Issued Date From: 8/1/2016 To: 8/31/2016 Permit Type: All Property Type: All Construction Type: All Include YTD: Yes Status: Not Voided PermitDate Site Address Permit Dwell Valuation Revenue Plan Cheek State Park SAC SAC WAC Total Fees Issued Count Units Surcharge Fees Units Fees Fees Permit Type: BUILDING Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL ALTERATION Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL DEMOLITION Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL FIRE ALARM Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL FIRE SUPPRESSION 201(00682 08/03/2016 820 MANNING AVE N 0 71.60 7,15 178.75 Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL GRADING Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL HVAC Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION 2016-00951 03/03/2016 11020 39T1I ST N 0 10,028,022.00 143,552.15 30,723.65 1,751,40 5,000.00 -18 263,280.00 144,000.00 607,997.20 Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL ROOFING Permit kind: COMMERCIAL SIGN Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL TANK REMOVAL Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL 'TENNANT BUILDOUT Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL TENNANT SPACE REMODEL Permit Kind: COMMERCLAL WATER TOWER Permit Kind: MANUFACTURED HOME ROOFING Permit Kind: PUBLIC ALTERATION Permit Kind: PUBLIC GRADING Permit Kind: PUBLIC NEV CONSTRUCTION Permit Kind: PUBLIC REMODEL Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY ACCESSORY BUILDING 9112/2016 Page I 01.7 Permith Date Site Address Permit Dwell Valuation Revenue Plan Check State Park SAC SAC VC Total Fees Issued Count Units Surcharge Fees Units Fees Fees . . .. . Permit Type: BUILDING Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY ACCESSORY BUILDING 2016-01049 08/22/2016 9386 9T11 ST N 0 3,600.00 116.60 75,79 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY ADDITION 2016-00930 08/08/2016 11280 30T1) ST N 0 26,000.00 536.00 309,40 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY ALTERATION 2016-010.11 08/22/2016 10847 3RD STREET PLACE. N 0 2,150,00 100.05 65.03 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED FIRE SUPPRESSION 1.80 13,00 1.07 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED NEW' CONSTRUCTION 2016-00958 08/24/2016 9751 5T11 ST LANE N 0 210,000.00 2,604.15 1,253.95 105.00 5,000,00 I 3,485.00 1,000.00 2016-00992 08/24/20 I 6 9753 5T11 ST LANE N 0 204,000.00 2,563.65 1,227.62 102.00 5,000.00 I 3,485,00 1,000.00 2016-00993 08/24/2016 9755 51'H ST LANE N 0 210,000.00 2,604,15 1,253.95 105.00 5,000.00 I 3,485.00 1,000.00 2016-00959 08/24/2016 9757 5-11-1 ST LANE N 0 210,000.00 2,604.15 1,253,95 105.00 5,000.00 1 1,485.00 1,000,00 2016-00989 08/24/2016 9759 5TH ST LANE N 0 204,000.00 2,563.65 1,227,62 102.00 5,000.00 I 3,485.00 1,000,00 2016410990 08/24/2016 9761 5TH ST LANE N 0 210.000.00 2,604.15 1,253.95 105.00 5,000.00 1 3,485,00 1,000.00 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY BASEMENT FINISH 2016411007 08/22/2016 1636 IVORY AVE N 0 24.000.00 567.60 290.94 12.00 2016-00954 08/10/2016 781 JEWEL AVE N 0 72,000.00 1,070.05 617.53 36,00 2016-00941 08/03/2016 4088 LADY SLIPPER RD N 0 13,500.00 402.10 183.37 6.75 2016-00871 08/02/21116 382 LANGLV AVE N (1 15.000,00 298.65 194.12 7.50 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY DECK 2016-00859 08/01/2016 11171 4T11 ST N 0 6.000.00 149.70 97,31 3.110 2016-00909 08/01/2016 9771 5IST ST N 0 60,000.00 848.65 551.62 30.00 2016-01034 08/241/2016 195 CINIARRON 0 3,000.00 100.05 65.03 1,50 2016-01009 08/22/2016 8195 I IILL *MI. N 0 12,800.00 265.55 172,61 6.40 2016-00900 08/03/2016 959.1 JUNCO RD N 0 20,000.00 381.40 247.91 10.00 2016410967 08/08/2016 4088 LADY SLIPPER RD N 0 12,000.0(1 249.00 161.85 6,00 2016-00976 08/11/2016 326 LANGLY AVE N 0 10.000,00 215,90 140,34 5.00 2016-01044 08/19/2016 3115 LAVERNE CT N 0 2 , 0 Oa GO 83.50 54.28 1.00 2016-010.16 08/26/2016 12154 MARQUESS LN N 11 5,000.00 133.15 86,55 2.50 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY DEMOLITION Permit kind: SINGLE FAMILY DOOR Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY DRAIN TILE, WATERPROOFING Permit Kind: SINGLE, FAMILY GARAGE 9/12/2016 194.19 858.4)) 166.15 13,798.10 13.728.27 13,798.10 13;798.10 13,728.27 13,798.10 870.54 1,723,58 592.22 500,27 250.01 1,430.27 166.58 444.56 639.31 416.85 :361.24 138.78 222,2)) Page 2 of 7 Permit# Date Site Address Permit Dwell Valuation Revenue Plan Cheek State Park SAC SAC WA C Total Fees Issued Count Units Surcharge Fees Units Fees Fees Permit Type: I3UILDING Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY GARAGE 2016-00929 08/08/2016 11280 30T11 ST N 0 30.000.00 524 00 340,60 15.00 879 60 2016400888 08/26/2016 7821 DEN1ONTREVILLE TRI, N 0 40,000.00 644 00 418,60 20.00 1.082 60 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY MANUFACTURED HOME 7016-00973 08/12/2016 649 CIMARRON 0 200.00 1.00 250.00 45 I .00 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY NEW CONSTRUCTION 201 6-00700 08/03/2016 I 1525 32ND ST N 0 295,574,00 3,174.65 1,631.27 147.79 5,000.00 1 3,485.00 1,000.00 14,738.71 2016-00661 08/03/2016 I 1776 32ND sT N 0 282,750.00 3,096.90 1,574.24 141,37 5,000.00 1 3,485.00 1,000.00 14,647.51 2016-00926 08/10/2016 11095 3RD ST N 0 289,001),(10 3,137.40 1,600.56 144.50 5,000,00 1 3,485.00 1,000.00 14,717.46 2016-00693 08/10/2016 11177 3RD sT N 0 336,000.00 3,454.65 1,806.77 168.00 5,000.00 I 3,485.00 1,000.00 1.5.764,47 2016-01002 08/25/2016 11149 3RD ST N (1 284.000.00 3,103.65 I „578.62 142.00 5:000,00 1 3,485,00 1,000.00 14,659.27 2016-00974 08/18/2016 I 1199 40T11 sT N 0 300,000.00 3,271.65 1,648.82 150.00 5,000.00 1 3,485.00 1,000.00 14.905.47 2016-01036 08/24/2016 9085 JADE CT N 0 312,000.00 3,292.65 1,701.47 156.00 5,000.00 1 3.485.1)0 1,000.00 14,985.12 2016-00960 08/08/2016 9124 JAD[/ CT N 0 250,000.00 2.874.15 1,429.45 125,00 5,000.00 1 3,485,00 1,000.00 1,1,263.6(1 2016-01037 08/24/2016 585 JADE TRL N 0 305,000.00 3,245.-10 1,670.76 152.50 .5,000,00 1 3.485,00 I ,000.00 14.903.66 2016-00963 08/17/2016 9660 JUNCO RI) N 0 324,000.00 3,373.65 1,754.12 162.00 5,000.00 1 3,485.00 1,000.00 15,124.77 2016-00940 08/03/2016 40.53 LADY SLIPPER RD N 0 363,000.00 3,636.90 1,925.24 181.50 5,000.00 1 3,485.00 1,000.00 15,578.64 2016-00979 08/18/2016 4096 LADY SLIPPER RD N 0 380,000.0(4 3,751.65 I .099.82 190,00 5,000,00 1 3,485.00 1,000.00 15,776,47 20 I 6-00664 08/02/2016 382 LANCIA AVE N 0 338,000.00 3.468,15 1.815,55 169.00 5,000.00 1 3.485.00 I ,000.00 15,287.70 2016-00964 08/25/2016 315 LAVERNE AVE N 0 266,000.00 2.982.15 1.499.65 133.00 5,000,00 1 3,485.00 1,000,00 14,449.80 2016-00944 08/04/2016 3248 LINDEN LN N 0 373,000.00 3,366.90 1.749.74 16 I .50 5,000.00 1 3,485.00 I ,000.00 15,113.14 2016-00953 08/17/2016 I (332 SUNFLOWER LN N 0 450,000.00 4,224.15 2,306.95 225.00 5,000.00 1 3,485.01) 1.000,00 16,591.10 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY POOL 2016-00970 08/09/2016 10059 TAPESTRY RD N Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY PORCH 15,000.00 298,65 194.12. 7.50 500.27 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY REMODEL 2016-00932 08/01/2016 9280 55TH ST N 0 14.000.00 342.10 7.00 349.10 2016-01010 08/16/2016 8455 LAKE JANE TRL N ll 6,200.00 166.25 108.06 3.10 277.41 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY REPLACE/REPAIR Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY ROOFING 2016-00946 08/02/2016 8875 27TH sT N 0 150.00 1.00 151.00 2016-01056 08/23/2016 3735 37111 ST N 0 150.00 1.00 151.00 2016-01082 08/31/2016 3829 IRONWOOD TR1. N 0 150.00 1.00 151,00 2016-01001 08/11/2016 3109 LAKE EL11.40 AVE N 0 150.00 1.00 151.00 2016-00971 08/05/7016 3338 LANGLY CT N 0 150.00 1.00 151.00 9/12/2016 l'age 3 of 7 PermitN Date Site Address Permit Dwell Valuation Revenue Plan Check State Park SAC SAC WAC Total Fees Issued Count Units Surcharge Fees Units Fees Fees Permit Type: BUILDING Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY ROOFING 2016-01057 08/24/2016 11051 STILLWATER BLVD N 0 150.00 1.00 151.00 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY SIDING Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY TANK REMOVAL 21)16-00943 08/05/2016 9555 60TH ST N 0 250.00 1.00 251.00 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY WINDOWS 2016-00977 08/08/2016 8735 271'1I ST N 0 2,100.00 100.05 1.05 101,10 2016-00985 08/08/20 16 9902 59T1 I STREET CI N 0 25,1 16.00 476.00 12.56 488,56 2016-01062 08/24/2016 8 110 HIDDEN I3AY TRL N 0 11,000.00 232,45 5.50 237,95 2016-00972 08/05/2016 9030 JANE RD N 0 250.00 29.50 1.00 30.50 Permit Type: BUILDING - Totals Period 57 0 16,805,062.00 rrn 364 0 87,533.825.11 Permit 'Fype: MECHANICAL Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL ALTERATION 222,353.25 70,262.78 5.155.94 115.250.0(1 70 339,950.00 166,000.011 745,170.10 312,551.11 35,066.04 778,940.00 203 836,455.00 3-11,000.00 946,361.97 3,123,522,25 Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL IIVAC 2016-00998 013/19/20 16 8568 EAGLE. POINT BLVD N 0 8,000.00 400.00 8,400.00 2016-00945 08/01/2016 8980 HUDSON BLVD N 0 278.00 1.00 279.00 Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION Permit Kind: MANUFACTURED HOME HVAC Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY BASEMENT FINISH Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY FIREPLACE Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY IIVAC 2016-00982 08/08/20 16 11075 14TH ST N 2016-01077 08/30/2016 8955 1511-1 ST N 2(116-01054 08/22/2016 8310 27TH ST N 2016-01047 08/19r2016 11098 34TH ST N 20 16-00984 08/08/2016 8271 39T1I ST N 2016-00999 08/11/2016 9287 53RD ST N 9112/2016 0 0 0 0 0 0 60.00 1.00 61,00 60.00 1.00 61.00 120.00 1.00 121.00 60.00 1.00 61 .00 60,00 1.00 61.00 60.0(1 1.00 61.00 PaLfe 4 of 7 Permitii Date Issued Site Address Permit Type: MECHANICAL Permit kind: 2016-0105 I 08/22/2016 2016-00983 08/08/2016 2016-00978 08/08/20 I 6 2016-011176 08/30/20 I 6 2016-01064 08/25/2016 2016-00981 08/08/2016 2016-00907 08/ I 1/2016 2016-00961 08/03/2016 2016.00995 08/11/2016 2016-01053 08/22/2016 2016-00962 08/03/20 16 2016-01039 08/17/2016 2016-01085 08/31/2016 Permit Kind: 201 64/0966 08/04/20 16 2016-00996 MI 1/2016 SINC;LE FAMILY IIVAC 8400 DEMONTREVILLE TRL N 8620 DEN,IONTREVILLE TIL N 8021 HIDDEN BAY TRL N 5260 HILLTOP AVE N 5730 HYTRAIL AVE N 3929 INNSDALE AVE N 1517 IVORY CT N 5385 JAMACA BLVD N 2950 JANFRO AVE N 781 JEWEL AVE N 2993 JONQUIL N 2430 LANSING AVE N 2932 LEGION AVE N Permit Uwell Count Units 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1 0 0 0 0 SINGLE FAMILY NEW CONSTRUCTION 8758 LOWER 8TH PLACE N 0 8784 UPPER 7T14 PLACE N (1 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY REPLACE/REPAIR Permit Type: MECHANICAL - Totals Period 23 1"I'D 317 Valuation Revenue Plan Cheek State Surcharge Permit Type: PLUMBING Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL FIXTURE INSTALLATION / APPLIANCE 2016-00980 08/08/2016 I 1465 39T1-1 sT N 0 Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL SEWER CONNECTION Permit Kind: MANUFACTURED HOME FIXTURE INSTALLATION / APPLIANCE Permit kind: PUBLIC FIXTURE INSTALLATION / APPLIANCE Permit Kind: PUBLIC SEWER CONNECTION 9/12/20 I 6 18(1.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60,00 120.00 120.00 60.00 60.00 120.00 60.00 120.00 120.00 60.00 60.00 10,018.00 74,691.92 60.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.011 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 422.00 1,783.71 1.00 Park SAC SAC Fees Units Fees VVAC Total Fees Fees 181 00 61.00 61,00 61.00 61.00 121.00 121.00 61,00 61.00 121,00 GI 00 121 00 121.00 61,00 () 1 .00 19,440.00 76,475.63 61.00 Pagc 5 ols 7 Permit# Date Site Address Permit Dwell Issued Count Units Permit Type: PLUMBING Permit kind: SINGLE FAMILY BASEMENT FINISH Valuation Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY FIXTURE INSTALLATION / APPLIANCE 2016-01043 08/18/2016 1636 IVORY AVE N 0 2016-00975 08/08/2016 2337 LAKE ELMO AVE N 2016-01045 08/19/2016 3650 LAVERNE AVE N 0 2016-01008 08/15/2016 3673 LAVERNE, AVE N 0 2.016-01084 08/31/2.016 1135.5 WILDFLOWER D11, N 0 Permit Kind: 2016-01066 08/25/2016 2016-01065 08/25/2016 SINGLE FAMILY NEW CONSTRUCTION 9618 THI STN 0 168-1 IVY AVE N 0 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY REMODEL Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY REPLACE/REPAIR 2016-00968 08/04/2016 8281 DEER POND TRL N 0 Permit Kind: Permit 1:.ind: Permit Kind: Permit kind: 2016-01005 08/12/2016 2016-00965 08/30/2016 Permit Icon!: 2016-00947 2016-00949 2016-00950 2016-01011 2016-01074 2016-00948 2016-01012 08/02/2016 08/02/2016 08/02/2016 08/16/2016 08/30/2016 08/02/2016 08/16/2016 SINGLE FAMILY SEWER & WATER CONNECTION SINGLE FAMILY SEWER CONNECTION SINGLE FAMILY WATER CONNECTION SINGLE FAMILY WATER HEATER 2907 JONQUIL TRL N 1095 LEEWARD AVE N SINGLE FAMILY WATER SOVI'NER 8682 LOWER 8111 PLACE N 8700 LOWER 8TH PLACE N 8709 LOWER 8TH PLACE N 8719 LOWER. 8T1-1 PLACE N 8750 LOWER sm PLACE N 8757 LOWER 8TH PLACE N 8697 UPPER 7TFI PLACE N Permit Type: PLUMBING - Totals 9/12/2016 Period 18 YTD 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Revenue Plan Check l80,00 60,00 60.00 60.00 1,210,00 60.00 60.00 180 00 60.00 120.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 State Surcharge 1,00 1,00 I 00 I ,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Park SAC SAC Fees Units Fees WAC Total Fees Fees 2,530,00 18.00 38,3-10.09 462.00 12,000.00 181,01) 61.00 61 00 61 00 1.211 00 61.00 61.00 181 00 61.00 121.00 61,00 61.00 61,00 61,00 61.00 6 IMO 6 1.011 2.548.1111 50,802.18) Page 6 of 7 Permit* Date Site Address Permit Dwell Valuation Revenue Plan Cheek State Park SAC SAC WAC Total Fees Issued Count Units Surcharge Fees Units Fees Fees Permit Type: ZONING Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL FENCE Permit Kind: COMMERCIAL SIGN 7016-01000 08/11 /2016 9242 1111DSON 131,VD N 180.00 Permit kind: PUBLIC ALTERATION 2016-01013 08/16/2.016 1515 KEATS AVE N 75.00 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY ACCESSORY BUILDING 2016-00988 08/11/2016 8784 LAKE JANE TRL N 0 75.00 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY DRIVEWAY 2016-01069 08/26/2016 8720 42ND ST N 0 70.00 2016-01042 08/19/2016 2950 JANERO AVE N 0 70.00 20 I 6-0 I ObS 08/26/2016 8909 LAKE JANE TRL N 0 70.00 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY FENCE 2016-01081 08/30/2016 3736 KINDRED CF N 0 225.00 2016-00878 ((8/08/2016 12245 MARQUESS LN N 0 2.2.5.00 2016-00987 08/09/2016 10059 TAPESTRY RD N 0 75.00 201 6-00994 08/16/2016 8725 UPPER 7TI I PLACE N 0 75.00 Permit Kind: SINGLE FAMILY PATIO 180,00 75.00 75.00 7048) 70.00 70.00 225.00 225.00 75.00 75.00 Permit Type: ZONING - Totals Period 10 0 t,140.00 1,140,00 1TD 33 0 3,395.00 3,305.00 Report Total Period 108 0 S16,8115.062,00 236,041.25 70,262.78 5,595.94 115,250.011 711 339,950,011 166,000.00 9611,489.97 1'1'D 1,004 0 887,533,825.11 861,507.112 312,551.11 37,311,75 778,940.00 2(13 836,455.1)1) 353,0110.00 3,254,104.88 W12/2016 Page 7 or 7 CITY OF' LAKE ELMO Inspection Statistics Report - Detail Actual Date From: 8/1/2016 To: 8/31/2016 Permit Type: All Property Type: All Construction Type: All Inspection Type Pass Fail No Status Reinsp Period Total YTD Total ABOVE CEILING 1 1 0 1 3 3 ACCESSIBILITY 0 0 0 0 0 2 ACCESSORY BLDG FINAL I 0 0 0 1 1 ENGINEER ACCEPTANCE LETTER 0 0 0 0 0 2 ACCESSORY FRAMING 1 0 0 0 1 1 ADDITION FINAL 0 0 0 0 0 1 AS BUILT 16 0 0 1 17 91 AIRTEST 4 0 0 0 4 12 BUILDING FINAL 30 2 1 3 36 215 DECK FINAL 10 1 0 2 13 29 DECK FOOTING 1 0 0 0 1 5 DEMOLITION FINAL I 1 0 I 3 4 DECK FRAMING 1 0 0 1 2 3 DRAINT1LE 0 0 0 0 0 I ELECTRICAL FINAL 6 0 0 0 6 138 ELECTRICAL ROUGH IN 2 0 0 0 2 68 EMERGENCY LIGHTING 0 0 0 0 0 3 ESCROW FINAL 18 0 0 0 18 95 FIRE ALARM FINAL 0 0 0 0 0 1 FIRE ALARNI ROUGH 0 I 0 0 1 1 FOUNDATION INSULATION 0 0 0 0 0 12 FENCE FINAL 13 0 0 0 13 U FINAL 4 0 0 0 4 36 FIREPLACE ROUGH IN 15 0 0 0 15 141 FIRE 0 0 0 0 0 3 FOUNDATION 23 0 0 0 23 167 FOOTINGS/SLAB 23 4 0 2 29 242 FIREPLACE FINAL 0 0 0 0 0 3 FOUNDATION PRIOR TO BACKFILL 0 0 0 0 0 5 FRAMING 2 2 1 0 0 3 8 FRAMING 36 1 I I 39 259 FRAMING ROUGH IN 0 0 0 0 0 7 FIRE RATED WALL ASSEMBLY 0 0 I 0 1 2 FIRE SEPERATION WALL 2 0 0 0 2 45 FIRE SUPPRESSION FINAL 5 0 0 2 7 35 FIRE SUPPRESSION ROUGH TN 1 I 0 0 2 2 FOUNDATION / WATERPROOF / DRAIN 17 1 0 I 19 144 GASLINE / PRESSURE TEST 16 0 0 0 16 177 GRADING 0 0 0 0 0 2 HEATING ROUGH 2 2 0 0 0 2 14 HOUSE WRAP 2 0 0 0 2 8 HYDRONIC PIPE AIR TEST 1 0 0 0 1 I IN FLOOR HEAT AIR TEST 1 0 0 0 I 7 INSULATION 23 3 0 I 27 194 KLMA ACCEPTANCE REPORT 0 0 0 0 0 1 LATH 14 1 0 0 15 117 HEATING FINAL 31 3 0 2 36 207 HEATING ROUGH IN 39 1 0 2 42 236 FIRE SPRINKLER ROUGH 1 0 0 0 1 20 OCCUPANCY FINAL 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 9/12/2016 Page 1 of 2 Inspection Type Pass Fail No Status Reiusp Period Total N'TD Total PIER FOOTINGS 0 0 0 0 0 1 PLUMBING BASEMENT ROUGH 0 0 0 0 0 3 PLUMBING FINAL 22 I 0 1 24 223 POOL FINAL 7 0 0 0 7 8 PLUMBING ROUGH IN 34 2 0 2 _ 38 214 PLUMBING ROUGH 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 PLUMBING UNDERGROUND 21 0 0 0 21 160 PLUMBING VISUAL 1 0 0 0 1 1 RADON POLY 10 2 0 0 12 147 RE1NSPECTION 0 0 0 0 0 I REMODEL FINAL 0 0 0 0 0 5 ROOFING FINAL 5 0 0 0 5 i_' -2 ICE & WATER 5 0 0 0 5 34 ROUGH 0 0 0 0 0 5 SEWER & WATER 16 I 0 1 18 144 SEWER 0 0 0 0 0 I SHEATHING 0 0 0 0 0 2 SIDING FINAL 2 0 0 0 2 9 FOOTINGS SIGN 0 0 0 0 0 1 SILT FENCE 2 1 0 0 3 42 SITE MEETING 0 0 0 0 0 1 SPRINKLER FINAL 0 0 0 0 0 2 SPRINKLER ROUGH IN 2 0 0 0 2 4 STRUCTURAL STEEL 0 0 10 0 10 16 STORM SEWER 0 0 0 0 0 10 15" Buoy per ordinance 0 0 0 0 0 2 TANK REMOVAL 0 0 0 0 0 2 UNDERGROUND 1 0 0 0 1 9 \TB WD PERMIT 0 0 0 0 0 1 VISUAL 0 0 0 0 0 1 WATER SOFTNER 0 0 0 0 0 4 WINDOW REPLACEMENT 4 0 0 0 4 "r _, Report Totals 495 29 13 24 561 3,904 9112/2016 Page 2 of 2 IL: (ATV OF LAKE ELN 0 AY() c U qi CO AGENDA ITENI: Monthly Fire Department Update SUBMITTED BY: Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief THROUGH: City Administrator REVIEWED BY: U CATIO DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #6 MOTION SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item City Administrator Report/Presentation ..... .......................... ..... .................... Fire Chief Questions from Council to Staff ....... Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ..................... ........... ................ ..... ........ Mayor & City Council Discussion ...................... ..... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion..... ....... ...... . ....... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Fire Chief Greg Malmquist FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Review monthly activity update from fire department. Advice on any additional information requested. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: As a result of infon-nation 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. 28 calls for the month of August. -- page City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item #6 September 20, 2016 Fire alarm — 1 Cancelled en route — EMS — 19 Gas leak — 1 Accident with injuries — 4 Car Fire — 1 Good intent call — 1 = 28 10 of the 28 calls had 3 or less responders on apparatus and one of those included the Chief as the only responder Our average response time was 6.5 minutes. Department drills for the month were: #1 — National Night Out #2 — Annual Fit testing and Station clean up from Huff n' Puff #3 — Quarterly EMS Training with Regions We also had 3 additional Fire Prevention events that personnel participated in. BACKGROUND INFORMATION (SWOT): Strengths Council is kept up to date on activities, training and any significant items within the fire department. Weaknesses None Opportunities Better understanding of fire department. Threats None RECOMMENDATION: Review monthly update. ATTACHMENTS: Monthly Report August 2016 Below is a brief list of activities taking place over the past month within the Public Works Dept. Meet w/ Planning Dept. and Easton Village Developer on Easton Village Park Village Pond Restoration Review w/ FOCUS, SEH and Washington County ROW Permit Mtg with FOCUS Pressure Logger Installation (Low/High Pressure Zone) Re-coinmissioning and training on Lisbon Lift Station Chem. Feed System Meet w/ Washington Conservation District on Rain Garden Maint. Inwood Water Tower Progress Mtg. Safety Mtg. w/ SafeAssure Meet w/ resident on Klondike Ave regarding drainage and re -grading Inspection of Savona Is' and 2'd Additions Installation of No Trespassing Signs on walking trail in Tapestry. New Backstop Netting installed at Lion's Park Storm damage clean-up 8/11 (trees down and washouts) Mowing trails at Sunfish Lake Park Shouldering on Jamley Ave. Paving/Patching o 56 Tons for Month of August Foxfire, Tamarac, 30th St., Heritage, Layton Ave Landscaping at Public Works Vehicle Maint. o Repairs to ditch mower o Maint. to Tool Cat and Case Back Hoe o Oxygen sensor and timing repairs to 1998 GMC pick-up. Continuous items — Park Mowing, Ditch Mowing, Ball Field Maint. Submitted by: Rob Weldon Public Works Director AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS if/ vnurred fiwm consqd A YO COU CIL CO U ICATIO DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM # 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements — Pay Request No. 4 Chad Isakson, Project Engineer Kristina Handt, City Administrator Questions from Council to 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. 8 FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget, SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Pay Request No. 4 for the 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements project. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Hardrives, Inc., the Contractor for the project, has submitted Partial Pay Estimate No. 4 in the amount of $298,610.89. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5% of the total work completed. The amount retained is $54,673.62. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 4 for the 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: -- page City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 8] September 20, 2016 "Move to approve Pay Request No. 4 to Hardrives, Inc. in the amount of $298,610.89 for the 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements". ATTACHMENT(S): Partial Pay Estimate No. 4. -- page 2 -- PROJECT PAY FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 4 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2015.129 PROJECT OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 ATTN: JACK GRIFFIN, CITY ENGINEER I: C S ENGINEERING, inc. PERIOD OF ESTIMATE FROM 8/1/2016 TO 8/31/2016 CONTRACTOR: HARDRIVES, INC. 14475 QUIRAM DRIVE ROGERS, MN 55374 ATTN: MICHAEL LEUER, PROJECT MANAGER Nc) Approval Amount Date 1 7/5/2016 TOTALS L . NET CHANGE. START DATE: SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION: FINAL COMPLETION: Additions Deductions $32,976.55 $32,976,55 $32,976.55 4/18/2016 8/12/2016 9/30/2016 PAY ESTIMATE SUMN41,,,, 1. Original Contract Amount 2, Net Change Order Sum 3, Revised Contract (1+2) 4. *Work Completed 5. *Stored Materials 6. Subtotal (4+5) 7. Retainage* 5.0% 8. Previous Payments $0.00 9. Amount Due (6-7-8) *Detailed Breakdown Attached QNTRACT TME ORIGINAL DAYS REVISED DAYS REMAINING $1,189,610.33 $32,976.55 $1,222,586.88 $1,093,472.33 $0.00 $1,093,472.33 $54,673.62 $740,187.82 $298,610.89 165 ON SCHEDULE YES 30 NO ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION: FOCUS Engineering, inc. The undersigned certifies that the work has been reviewed and to the ca best of their knowledge and belief, the quantities shown in this estimate are correct and the work has been performed in accordance ENGINEER with the contract documents. 9/7/2016 DATE CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATION: The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of their knowledge, information and belief the work covered by this paymen estimate has been completed in accordance with the contract documents, that all amounts have been paid by the contractor for /7/6. work for whic'n previous payment estimates was issued and payments_ -DATE received from the owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA BY = DATE FOCUS Engineering, inc. BY DATE PROJECT PAYMENT FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 4 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO, 2015.129 CONTRACT ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT , I QUANTITY UNIT PRICE DIVISION ',KIRKWOOD AVENUE NORTH MOBILIZATION 15 59.000.00 TRAFFIC CONTROL Ls 1 51,284.35 SILT FENCE IS 4,428 51.00 BIOROLL DITCH CHECK EA 20 564.22 5 SALVAGE MAILBOX EA 11 $26.75 6 SALVAGE SIGN EA 3 516.05 7 SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT lF 97 $3.18 8 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXIST. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (ORR/EWAN SY 29 $3,24 9 COMMON EXCAVATION (EV) (PI CY 2,854 513,73 10 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (RECONSTRUCT AIREASI (EV) CY 400 57.57 11 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RS 19 554.06 12 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (STREETS) (CV) (P) CY 2,035 $14.60 13 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (SUBGRADE EXCAV.)IEVI CY 400 514.60 14 CLASS 6 AGGREGATE BASE (cvi (P) Cy 65; $27.03 15 PATCH GRAVEL DRIVEWAY TN 53 519 45 16 AGGREGATE SHOULDERING TN 164 522.49 17 TYPE sP 9.5 BITUMINOUS WEARING COuRsE miX1 uRE (2.51 TN 511 552,65 18 TYPE SP 12.5 BITUMINOUS NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B) TN 680 547.40 19 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 301 51 96 70 TYPE SP 9,5 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B) (ORNEWAY) SY 29 515.00 21 SAW & SEAL STREET (40INTERVALS) LF 1,265 52 A8 22 STREET SWEEPING EIR 15 50.01 23 TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA 1 5540.55 24 CLEAN CULVERT EA 5 5324.33 25 4' PVC PERE EDGE DRAIN 1.V/ BACKFILL& WRAP LF 1,025 57 57 26 ORAINTtLE CLEANOUT EA 10 5216.22 27 PRECAST CONCRETE HEADWALL (DRAIN TILE) EA 6 62.15.22 28 DITCH GRADING LF 196 55.41 29 IMPORT ANO PLACE TOPSOIL (LV) CY 543 515.00 30 SEEDING, FERTILIZER AND WOOD FIBER BLANKET SY 3,163 51.55 31 INSTALL SALVAGED MAILBOX EA 11 542.81 32 INSTALL SALVAGED SIGN EA 3 532.11 SUBTOTAL -DIVISION 1 FS C S ENGINEERING, inc. AMOUNT 59.000.00 51.284.36 $9,428.00 51,284.40 5294,36 548.15 5337 56 $93.96 539,185.42 53,028.00 51,027.19 S29,711.00 $5,890 00 517,704.65 51,031 38 53,688.36 526,904 15 $32,232.00 5589.95 5435 00 53,137.20 SO 15 5540,55 51,621.65 57,759 25 $2,162 20 $1,297.32 51,060 36 $8,146.00 $4,902 65 5470.91 596.33 5209,341.42 THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT (1.50 0.50 0.00 0 00 0.00 2.00 97.00 24.70 2,859.00 0,00 19E10 2,035.00 0,00 0.00 53.00 164.00 514.7G 0,00 300 00 122.30 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 1,025.00 10.00 6.00 196.00 1400 3,700.00 7.00 2 00 DIVISION 2...KELVIN AvENuE NORTH ,STREET5 33 MOBILIZATION Ls 59,000.00 59,000.00 0.00 34 TRAFFIC CONT51,284.36 ROL LS 1 51,284.36 DOD 35 SILT FENCE LF 4,775 L.°2°2 5449.54 54,775.00 0 00 $4 36 BIOROLL DITCH CHECK EA 560.00 37 CLEARING EA 3 5”77782.9491 0.00 $324.33 38 GRuBSONG EA 30.00 5259.47 39 SALvAGE MAILBOX EA 18 $26.76 5481.68 0.00 40 SALVAGE SIGN EA 10 0.00 4,, SALVAGE WOODEN FENCE LF 30 51605 5(60.50 5389 To 0,00 9: SALvAGE BRICK PAVERS SF 124 $12.97 0.00 43 SAWCUT BITUM4N0u5 PAVEMENT LF 305 0.00 5267 El 44 SAWCUT CONCRETE PAVEMENT LF 97 $2.16 5561.21I 0.00 51 84 52.32 4S REMOVE & MSPOSE OF EXIST, CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LF 480 5225.04 0.00 5$31.:: 46 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXIST. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 0.00 5,224 47 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXIST, BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (DRIVEWAYS) SY 230 OM $56'(4565'2.2B°5 $496.60 98 REMOVE & DISPOSE oF EXIST. CONCRETE PAVEMENT (DRIVEWAYS) SY 47 0.00 $2.16 5254,27 49 COMMON EXCAVATION (EVI (P) CY 0.00 S47,206.02 55.41 50 SUOGRADE EXCAVATION (RECONSTRUCT AREAS) (EV) CY 33, 077: 52,833_75 0.00 $13.73 51 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RS 19 $7.57 0.00 52 SELECT GRANDLAR BORROW (STREETS) (CVI (P) cy 51,027.14 0.00 1,962 5$5194 0687529,174.94 53 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (51469RADE ExCAV.I ICVI Cy 3750.00 55,576.25 54 CLASS 6 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) (P) CY 630 517,028.90 0.00 $551977...054Q73 55 tyPE SP 9,5 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B) TN 490 55 TYPE SP 12.5 BITUMINOUS NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,8) TN 653 552.65 $25,798.50 47B,B1 $30.952.20 7E9 57 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 290 5565 40 150.00 56 TYPE SP 9 5 BITUMINOUS WEARING COuRSE MIXTURE(2,B1 (DRIVEN/ATI SY 230 0.00 51.96 $3,450 00 59 SAW & SEAL STREET (40' INTERVALS' LF 515.00 0.00 1,150 60 6'" CONCRETE DRIvELVAY PAVEMENT Sy 62 $2,852.00 0.00 S4562.0428 61 CONCRETE RIBBON CURB LF 3,740 $7,853 24 0.00 $21,513.60 62 SURMOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB. & GUTTER LF 345 0.00 56.64 510.17 $3,508.65 54,509.00 $642 18 S0.00 50.00 50.00 $32 10 $337.56 580.03 S39,185.42 50.00 $1,027.14 $29,711.00 50 00 $0.00 51,031.38 53,588.36 527,102.11 SO 00 5568 CO 51,834.50 $0,00 SO 00 50 00 50 00 57,759 25 52.152,20 51.297 32 51,060.36 $210.00 55.735,00 5299.67 S64.22 5128.347,80 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 50 00 50.00 50.00 50,00 $0.00 50.00 $0 00 50 CM 50.00 50,00 $0.00 $0.00 5000 50.00 5000 525,209.35 50.00 5294.00 SO 00 50.00 SO OD $0.00 50.00 1.00 1.00 3,825.00 0.00 7.00 2.00 97 00 24.70 2.854.00 0.00 19.00 2,035.00 0 00 0.00 53.00 164.00 514.76 509,21 300.00 122,30 0.00 3 00 0.00 0.00 1,025.00 5000 6 00 196 00 1.1.00 3.700.00 7,00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.019.00 0.00 9,00 6 00 21.00 2.00 20.00 245.00 210.00 62.00 480 00 5,224.00 230,00 47.00 3,074.00 216.00 19.00 1,952.00 215.00 630.00 478.81. 567 90 220.00 297.00 0.00 68.00 3,150.00 333.00 59,000 00 51,264 36 53,825.00 SO 00 $167 32 532 10 5337.56 580.03 589,585.42 50.00 $1,027.14 529,711.00 50.00 SO CO 51.031_38 $3,588 36 527,102.11 527,690.53 558520 SE.1334 50 50 00 $0.03 SO 00 50.00 50,759.25 $2,162.20 51,297.32 $1,060.36 S210.00 55,735.00 $293.67 $6422 S165,392.37 59,000.00 51.284.36 $3,019.00 50 00 S1,297.32 $1,556.92 5'561.96 $32.10 $2.59.40 5529.20 5386 AO $143 84 $1,555.20 $8,462.88 S496.80 $259 27 542.206.02 51.635 12 $1.027.14 $29,174.94 53,211.02 517,025,90 525,209 35 $26,913.46 $431.20 $4,455.00 50 00 53.129.36 $20,916.00 53,386.61 CONTRACT I THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE i ITEM DESCRIPT ION OF PAY ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT I QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT _ . 63 6618 CONCRETE CURB & GOOIER LF 56 512,84 3719.04 0.00 5000 MOO 51,386,72 54 STREET SWEEPING FIR 20 50 01 50.20 MOO 50 00 0 00 50.00 65 TEMPQRAR ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA 2 5540.56 01001,00 0.00 50.00 0.00 50.00 66 CLEAN CULVERT EA 1 $324.33 5124 33 000 $0.00 1,00 5324 33 67 4" PvC PERE EDGE DRAIN IN/ BACKEILL & WRAP LF 061 07 57 56,517.77 0 00 $0 00 850.0D 56.434.50 68 12" CORRUGATED STEEL PIPE CULVERT LF 36 528.11 51,011.96 000 SO 00 36.00 51,011.96 59 12" CORRUGATED STEEL PIPE APRON EA 2 5259 47 $519.94 000 50 00 2.00 5318 94 70 DRAINT(LE (LFANOUT EA 5216 1.2 51,729.7G 000 50.00 8.00 $1,729./6 71 PRECAST CONCRETE HEA0vVALL (DRAIN TILE) EA 4 5270.28 51,081 12 0,00 50 00 4.00 01,383 12 7Z DITCH GRADING IF 12 55 41 564,92 000 SOO 12.00 $64.92 73 IMPORT AND PLACE TOPSOIL (I.V) CY 702 $15 00 $10,530,00 000 50.00 308.00 54,620.00 74 SEEDING, FERTILIZER AND WOOD FIRER BLANKET 5r 929 51.65 $1,439.95 2*00000 53,100 00 2000,00 53,100.00 75 SODDING SY 2,300 53.00 56,900 00 2,720,00 58,160 00 2,720.00 58.150.00 76 INSTALL SALvAGED MAILBOX EA 1B $42.81 5770.58 0.00 50.1/0 14.00 5399 34 77 INSTALL SALVAGED SIGN EA 10 532 11 San. io floc 5000 2.00 554.27 78 INSTALL WOODEN FENCE LE 10 $82.25 5822.50 0.0(3 50.00 0.00 50 00 79 INSTALL SALVAGED BR(CK PAvERS SF 124 54.42 5548 08 245,00 51,082 00 245.00 51,082.90 SUBTOTAL- DIVISION 2 5253,844.77 537,846,25 5237,748.28 1 01111$100 3 ,. KELVIN AVENUE NORTH , TRUNK WATER MAIN .1 80 CONNECT TO EXISTIPIG WATERMAN EA 1 51,059.49 $1,059.49 0.00 50 00 1.00 51,059.49 81 HYDRANT EXTENSION IF 3 $1,097.33 53,291.99 0.00 50 00 0.00 SO 00 82 12" 0.70, CL. 52 WATERMAN LF 892 553 42 S47,550.54 0.00 50 00 874.50 546,715.79 93 6" DIP, CL 02 WATERMAIN LF 53 553,95 52,859.35 0.00 $0.00 47 50 52562 63 54 12 TYPE DO COPPER WATER SERVICE IF 221 542,54 59,401 34 0 00 $0,00 136 00 $5,785.44 85 1" CORPORATION STOP EA 5 $ 265.95 51,329,75 0.00 SD 00 5.00 51,329.75 86 1" CURE STOP WITH 500 EA 5 5344.47 $1,724,35 0.00 $0.00 500 51,724.35 87 6" HYDRANT ASSEMBLY 18'..6" BURY) BA 2 54,492.02 54,984,04 0.00 $0,00 2.00 53,584.04 88 6" RES. SEAT GATE VALVE & BOX EA 2. 51,291.93 52,583.86 0 00 50.00 2.00 $2,583.86 39 12" RES SEAT GATE VALVE & 500 EA 2 53,027.12 56,054 24 ODD SO OU 2.00 56,054,24 90 E,41 DIP COMPACT EITFINGS LB 1,104 5366 $4,062.72 0,00 50 00 842.00 53,098.56 SUBTOTAL ., DIVISION 3 I $89,001.77 50.00 $79,698,15 I DIVISION 4 - KELVIN AVENUE NORTH - LATERAL WATER MAIN 91 12"x8" WET TAP EA 1 $3,481.19 53,181,18 0 00 50 00 1.00 53,481. 13 92 HYDRANT EXTENSION IF 3 51.189.22 $3,667.56 0.00 5000 0,00 50 00 93 8" DIP, CI_ 52 WATERMAN LE 53S $38 06 $20.362,10 000 50,00 535,00 520,362.10 94 6" DIP, CL. 52 WATERNIAIN LE 70 $53.95 $1,079,00 0.00 50.00 20.00 51,079.00 95 1" TYPE "K" COPPEa WATER SERVICE LF 266 542.64 511,315.64 0.00 50,00 216.00 59,188.64 96 1" (ORPORATiON STOP EA 6 5265.95 51,595.70 0.00 $0.00 6,00 51,595.70 97 1" CURB STOP WITH BOX Eh 6 $344,87 $2,069.22 0.00 $0,00 6.00 $2,069.22 98 6" HYDRANT ASSEMBLY (13".6" BURY) EA 1 54,492.02 54,492.02 0.00 50 00 1,00 $4,492.02 99 5" RES, SEAT GATE VALVE & BOX EA 1 51,291.93 S1,291.93 000 50.00 1,00 $1,291.93 100 ml DIP COMPACT EITTINGS LB 315 54.37 $1,360 80 0,00 $0.00 172.00 5743.04 SUBTOTAL - ENVISION 4 550.615.25 $0.00 544,302.83 DIVISION 5 STONEGATE 1ST ADDITION -STREETS 101 MOM( IZATION 102 TRAFFiC CONTRoL 103 SILT FENCE 104 INLET PROTECTION 105 CLEARING 106 47,11113ING 107 SALvAGE MAILBOX 108 SALVAGE SIGN 109 SALVAGE LANDSCAPE ROCK (ISLANDS) (P) 110 SAWCuT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT 111 sAwCLIT CONCRETE PAVEMENT 117 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN CASTING 113 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXIST B)TUMINOUS PAVE81ENT (0IHVEWAY5) 114 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXIST CONCRETE PAVEMENT (DRIVEWAYS) 115 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (RECLAIM AREAS) (EV) 116 RECLAIM Ex. BIT AND BASE MATERIALS, ir DEPTH (P1 1 I 7 HAUL OUT EXCESS RECLAIMED 810900101,7107101 118 5110000DE PREPARATION OE RECLAIMED SURFACE 119 TYPE SB 9,5 BITUMiNOUS WEARING COURSE MATURE (2,B) 120 TYPE SP 12,S BITUMINOUS NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE IZ,B) 121 BiTumiNOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 122 TYPE SP 9.5 Bil UMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE I2,81 (DRIVEWAY) 123 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT LS $15,000.00 S15,000.00 0.50 $7,500,00 1.00 516,000.00 LS 1 51,926.54 51,926.54 000 50,00 1.00 51,926.54 LF 207 51 00 5207.00 0,00 50 00 0,00 50.00 EA 23 590.98 52,092.54 24.00 02,1133 52 24 Ott $2,163,52 EA 1 5324.33 5324 33 0270 50,00 1 00 5324 33 EA 1 9259,46 5259.46 0.00 50.00 1.00 5259.46 EA 31 $26.75 5829.56 0 00 5000 31,00 5829 56 EA 5 316,05 580.25 000 50.00 000 $0.00 IF 750 50.29 5717..50 750,00 5217.50 750,,03 5217.50 LF 435 52.07 5900 45 143.00 $290.01 595 50 $1,232,69 LF 152 52 22 $337.44 0.00 WOO 150 00 5333.00 EA 27 5162,46 54,386,42 0,00 50.00 27,00 54.366.42 Sr 377 55.55 $2,092 35 0.00 30,00 357.19 51,982.40 5r 137 57 7(1 51,054_90 0,00 5000 127.39 9980,90 CY 500 57 00 $3,500,00 4800 5336,00 73,00 $511.00 SY 18,800 52.89 554,332.00 0,00 50-80 06.900.00 554,332.00 CY 909 55 65 65.135 85 555.00 53=570 25 1,594.00 $9,006.10 R5 55 5310 00 $17,050 00 0.00 50 00 55.00 $17,050,00 TN 1,610 $50,07 085)662 77 220,44 511.035.9.1 L550,35 579,578.75 TN 1,611 545,94 574,073,28 0,00 5020 1,410.00 56,1,877 78 GAL 951 51.96 51,863_95 55.00 5107 80 405.00 5793.80 SY 357 510.00 $5,505.00 000 50.00 363.00 55,445.00 50 91 546.02 $4,187.82 0.00 50,2e 308.00 54,970.16 ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM 1:4 SAW & SEAL STREET (40INTERVALS) 125 RIPRAP 126 SEDIMENT REMOVAL (LVI 127 MODIFY STORM STRU(7URE 104 128 CATCH BASIN CASTING R-3067-V 129 MANHOLE CASTING R-1542-8 130 SOLID (2iX3IX1 0' HP CONCRETE CB SECTION 131 MINOR STRUCTURE REPAIR 137 RECONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE 133 8913 CONCRETE CURB 8 GUTTER 134 STREET SWEEPING 135 IMPORT AND PLACE TOPSOIL (LV) 136 SODDING 137 INSTALL SALVAGED MAIIBOX 138 INSTALL SALVAGED SIGN 139 1951901 SALVAGED LANDSCAPE ROCK (ISLANDS) 1P1 SUBTOTAL- DIVISION 5 DIVISION 6 7 HIGHLAND TRAIL NORTH -STREETS 140 MOBILIZATiON 141 TRAFFIC CONTROL 142 INLET -PROTECTION 143 REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EMI. CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER 144 REMOVE 51ANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN CASTING 145 MILL OF EXISTII-IG BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (P) 146 REMOVE & REPAVE BITUMINOUS FLUME 147 SPOT BITUMINOUS CURB REPLACEMENT 148 TYPE SP 9.$ BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,C1 149 Billl;MiNOLTS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 150 CATCH BASIN CASTING 6-3067-V 151 CATCH BASIN CASING R..3250-1 152 CATCH BASIN CASTING R-3501-1R 153 STREET SWEEPING 154 IMPORT AND PLACE TOPSOIL (01) 155 1000136 SUBTOTAL- DivISION 5 CONTRACT UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE LT 4,025 52,43 CY 15 586.49 CY 57 527.03 LS 8 53,596 04 EA 23 $627.69 EA 4 $474.07 EA 8 5$60,1S SA 15 5172.81 LF 10 1000 LE 12,140 510..65 HR 30 $0.01 CY 1,456 1I1.00 SY 7.007 53.00 EA 31 $42 81 EA 5 $32 11 LF 750 51.58 LS 53,560.00 LS 51,070 30 EA 8 590.98 LF 80 $4,55 EA G $114 23 SY 4,900 51.60 L5 1 51,214 34 IF 136 510.48 TN 637 $51.01 GA1 202 $1.96 EA 1 5677.69 EA 4 $760.91 EA 1 $740.51. HR 4 $0.01 CY 30 $24 65 SY 138 $5.30 OlvISION 7 - LAMELY AVENUE NORTH -STREETS 156 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $3,500.00 157 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 S1,070 30 153 Mill 2' OF EXISTING BIT.JMIN0U5 PAVEMENT iP) SY 4,090 51,60 159 ACHUST VALVE BOX (WATER) EA 5 $214.15 160 TYPE 5? 9.5 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,C) TN 531 951.48 161 BITUNNNOUS 51ATERIA1 FOR TACK COAT GAL 236 51.96 162 STREET SWEE.PING 11R 4 50.01 SUBTOTAL -DIVISION 7 THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT 59,982 00 $1.297.35 51,540.71 53,546.04 $14,438 87 $1,895 28 54,481.20 $2,592./5 $0.10 S179,291.00 $0.30 521,990.20 $21.021,00 $1,327 11 5160 55 51,185,20 5490,767.58 $3,500.00 $1,070.30 5727.89 5354.00 5685 38 $7,840.00 51,214.34 $1.42S-28 532,493,37 5552.72 4627 69 43,043,64 $740.51 50_04 5739.50 5731AU 555.755.01 43,500 00 51.070 30 56,544 00 51,370 75 527,335 68 5462 56 SO 04 540,283 53 TOTALS 7 BASE CONTRACT $1,189,610,33 0.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 23.0e 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60.00 0.00 0.00 4,880.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0,75 8.00 24.00 4 00 4,900.00 1,00 0.00 602.25 250.00 1.00 -1,00 2.00 0.00 30.00 0.00 1.00 I 00 4,09000 5 00 564 41 230 00 0.00 50.00 50.00 $0.00 50.00 519,436 87 50.00 50.00 $0.00 50.00 5639.00 50.00 00.00 514.540 00 $0.00 SO OD SO 00 $55,252.80 $2,625 00 5802,73 5727,84 5109 20 $456 92 $7,84000 $1,214.34 50 DO 53D,720.77 $190 00 $627.69 $3,013 61 51,481.02 SO OD $739.50 $0.00 $50,873.65 53,500 00 51,070,30 56,544.00 $1,370.75 579,055 93 5450.80 50.00 541,991.68 0,00 13.50 28.00 1.00 23.00 4.00 2.00 0 00 0.00 11,607,00 6 00 667.00 4,880.00 30 00 0,00 0.00 1.00 1,00 8 OD 48,00 7,00 4,900.00 1.00 0.00 602.25 250.00 1.00 4 00 2 00 0,00 30 00 0 00 1 00 1,00 4,090.00 500 564.41 230,00 000 5000 51,157.62 5756.84 53,54604 519,436.87 41,996.28 $1,120 30 SU 00 50.00 5123,614.55 50.66 510,005.00 514,610.00 51,284.30 1000 50.00 5438,6.89 77 53,500.00 51,070.30 $7,27.84 $218 40 5799.61 57,84000 51,214.34 50.00 $30.720.77 5490.00 5627,65 53,043 64 $1,481.02 $0.00 5739.50 50.00 $52,473.11 53,500.00 51,070.30 56,544,00 41.370.75 $29,05S 83 5450.80 50.00 541,99166 4 $314.327.25 $1,060,495.78 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 000.2 REMOBILIZATION LS 1.0 $1,000 00 51,0on.o7 0.00 5000 ro 51,000,00 C01-2 -IT PERFORATE() EDGE DRAIN WITH. BACKFILL & WRAP LF 1,179 0 $19.1$ $22,931,05 000 50.00 1,179.0 $22,931 55 C01-3 DRAINTILECLEANOUT EA 11.0 5330.00 53,630.00 000 50.00 11.0 $3,630,00 C01-4 PRECAST CONCRETE HEADWALL EA 2_0 5295.00 5590_00 0.00 50.043 2.0 5590 00 C01-5 CORE DRILL INTO EXISTING STORM SEWER E-A 5.0 SUS DO 54,125 DO 0.00 50.00 10 $4,125 DO C01-6 CONNECT TO EXISTING DRAINTITE EA 2.0 535000 5700 00 0.00 $0.00 2.0 5700,00 TOTALS - CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 $32,976.55 $0.00 S32,976.55 TOTALS' REVISED CONTRACT $1,222,586,88 $314,327.25 $1,093,472.33 1111'. C111 LAKE ELMO AYOR COU CIL CO DATE: CONSENT ITEM # U CATIO September 20, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements — Change Order No. 2 SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director S UGG ES TILD OR DER OF BUSINESS if rppnycq..„fivin the Questions from Council to Public Input, if Appropriate.................. ........... ('all for 'Motion .... Discussion.......... ..... ........ ...... ....... ..... Action on Motion.................. ...... ................. ...... ..... POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: $22,187.40. Consent At;entla): ...............Mayor Facil Facilitates ...........Mayor Facilitates .. Mayor & City Council ..... . Mayor & City Council .............. Mayor Facilitates 9 This change order increases the contract amount for the project by $22,157.40 bringing the revised construction contract to $1,244,774.28. With these change order items the project remains within the authorized project budget and contingency amount. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTE D: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Change Order No. 2 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 to address additional construction items needing to be completed as part of the street and drainage improvements to maintain the integrity of the infrastructure being built. Additional costs in the amount of $11,445 was needed to replace three catch basin structures along Highland Trail that were discovered in the field to be structurally -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting[Consent Agenda Item 9J September 20, 2016 damaged. If they had not been replaced they would have eventually failed structurally which would have resulted in early pavement failure to the newly constructed street. 2. Additional costs in the amount of $9,303.50 was needed to install 155 linear feet of draintile to address subsurface water that was discovered upon excavation of the street in several locations in the Stonegate neighborhood. The saturated conditions needed to be drained to prevent undermining of the street subgrade. 3. A 6%-unit price deduct was accepted for the installation of material meeting Class 5 aggregate base specifications instead of Class 6 aggregate base specifications. This resulted in a contract deduct in the amount of $1,061.10 for the Kirkwood Avenue neighborhood. 4. Additional costs in the amount of $2,500 was needed to complete a full depth patch to a section of roadway along Jamley Avenue to replace poor subgrade material that was causing pavement to breakup and crack. RECOMNIENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Change Order No. 2 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. 2 for the 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements thereby increasing the contract amount by $22,187.40." ATTACHMENT(j: 1. Change Order No. 2. -- page 2 -- CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER FORM CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2015.129 CHANGE ORDER NO. S ENGINEERING, inc. 2 DATE: September 12, 2016 TO: HARDRIVES, INC. 14475 QUIRAM DRIVE ROGERS, MN 55374 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, CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION: This change order is being processed to amend the Contract for the following reasons: 1) Items CO2-1 and CO2-2: Replacement of three catch basins on Highlands Trail that were discovered to be damaged and would cause future pavement failure if left in place. 2) Items CO2-3 to CO2-8: Installation of draintile, cleanouts, and connection of the draintile to existing storm sewer to drain a saturated subgrade between storm sewer structures 111 and 108 on Jasmine Avenue, 3) Items CO2-9 to CO2-10): 6% unit price deduct for the installation of material meeting Class 5 gravel specifications instead of Class 6 along Kirkwood Avenue, 4) Item CO2-11: Complete a full depth patch on Jamley Avenue due to poor subgrade material causing pavement to breakup and crack. Attachments (list documents supporting change): Itemization of Materials ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM "See attached itemization Amount of Original Contract Sum of Additions/Deductions approved to date (CO Nos, 1 Contract Amount to date Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (DEDUCT) (NO CHANC Revised Contract Amount The Contract Period for Completion will be (UNCHANGED) APPROVED BY ENGINEER: FOCUS Engineering, inc. ENGINEER 9/12/2016 DATE APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA BY DATE UNIT QTY UNIT PRICE INCREASE/(DECREASE) $22,187.40 NET CONTRACT CHANGE $22,187.40 1,189,610.33 32,976,55 1,222,586.88 22,187,40 1,244,774,28 DECREASED) 0 days APPROVED BY CONTRACTOR BY DATE BY DATE FOCUS Enginccring, inc. CHANGE ORDER FORM CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. 2015.129 ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM CO2-1 REMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASIN CO2-2 2'X3' CATCH BASIN WITH INVERTS CO2-3 IT PVC PERFORATED EDGE DRAIN WITH BACKFILL & WRAP CO2-4 TYPE SP 9.5 BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE FOR PATCHING CO2-5 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER STRUCTURE CO2-6 MOBILIZATION (02-7 EXPLORATORY DIGGING (STROM SEWER STRUCTURE 111) CO2-8 YARD GRADING CO2-9 CLASS 6 AGGREGATE BASE iCkO CO2-10 CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE ((V) (PI CO2-11 FULL DEPTH PATCH UNIT EA EA LF TN EA LS HR HR CY CY LS QUANTITY 3.0 3.0 155.0 13.0 2,0 1.0 3.0 6.0 -655.0 655,0 CHANGE ORDER UNIT PRICE 5715,00 53,100,00 $22.50 $125.00 5825.00 51,200.00 5245.00 5101.00 $27.03 525.41 1.0 52,500.00 AMOUNT 52,14500 59,300.00 53,487.50 $1,625.00 51,650,00 51,200.00 5235.00 $605.00 -517,70a 65 516,643.55 $2,500,00 TOTALS- CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 $22,187,40 ENGINEERING, inc. DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION This change order is beg processed to amend the Contract for the following reasons: 1) Items CO2-1 and CO2-2: Replacement of three catch basins on Highlands Trail that were discovered to be damaged and would cause future pavement failure if left in place. 2) Items CO2-3 to CO2-8) Installation of draintile, nouts, and connection of the draintile to existing storm sewer to drain a saturated subgrade between storm sewer structures 111 and 108 on Jasmine Avenue. 3) Items CO2-9 to CO2-10): 6% unit price deduct for tre installation of matertal meeting Class 5 gravel specifications instead of Class 6 along Kirkwood Avenue. al Rem CO2-11) Complete a full depth patch on Jamley Avenue due to poor subgrade material causing pavement to breakup and crack. KE ELMO AYO COU CILCO U ICATIO DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM # AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements — Pay Request No. 5 SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director suGGEserFD ORDER OF BUSINESS if removed from the Consent 4genda): Questions from Council to Staff.............. ........ ..... IVIayor Facilitates Public Input. i f Appropriate ..... ......... Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ..... ........ .....,........................................ Mayor & City Council Discussion .................................. ....... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion... ...... ............. .......... ...... ....... ...... ....... ..... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. 10 FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Pay Request No, 5 for the Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements project. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION,: Northdale Construction Company, Inc., the Contractor for the project, has submitted Partial Pay Estimate No. 5 in the amount of $26,997.19. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5% or the total work completed. The amount retained is $70,900.86. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 5 for the Inwood Trunk Watennain Improvements project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: "Move to approve Pay Request No. 4 to Northdale Construction Company, Inc. in the amount of $26,997.19 for the Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements". -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agena'a Item 101 September 20, 2016 ATTACHMENT(S): Partial Pay Estimate No. 5. -- page 2 -- PROJECT PAY FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO, INWOOD AVENUE TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2014.130 PROJECT OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 ATTN: JACK GRIFFIN, CITY ENGINEER No, CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY Approval Date 1 7/5/2016 $2,200,00 Amount TOTALS $2,200,00 NET CHANGE $2,200,00 START DATE: SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION: FINAL COMPLETION: 3/23/2016 8/26/2016 9/30/2016 1 Additions , Deductions I ENGINEERING, inc. PERIOD OF ESTIMATE FROM 8/1/2016 TO 8/31/2016 CONTRACTOR: NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. 9760 71ST STREET NE ALBERTVILLE, MN 55301 ATTN: PHILIP LESNAR PAY ESTIMATE SUMMARY 1. Original Contract Amount 2, Net Change Order Sum 3, Revised Contract (1+2) 4. *Work Completed 5. *Stored Materials 6. Subtotal (4+5) 7. Retainage* 8. Previous Payments $0.00 I 9. Amount Due (6-7-8) 1 *Detailed Breakdown Attached CONTRACT TIME ORIGINAL DAYS REVISED DAYS REMAINING $1,411,737.31 $2,200.00 $1,413,937.31 $1,418,017,17 $0.00 $1,418,017.17 $70,900.86 $1,320,119.12 $26,997.19 191 ON SCHEDULE 0 YES 30 NO ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION: FOCUS Engineering, inc. The undersigned certifies that the work has been reviewed and to the ,J best of their knowledge and belief, the quantities shown in this estimate are correct and the work has been performed in accordance ENGINEER with the contract documents. 9/7/2016 DATE CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATION: CONT The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of their knowledge, information and belief the work covered by this paym n estimate has been completed in accordance with the contract documents, that all amounts have been paid by the contractor for work for which previous payment estimates was issued and payments DATE received from the owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due, APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA BY BY DATE DATE FOCUS Engineering, inc. Ri2LCD3R PROJECT PAYMENT FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO, 5 INWOOD AVENUE TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. 2014.13D F C S ENGINEERING, inc. ITEM DESCRIPTION OE PAY ITEM DIVISION 1 -GENERAL 1 MOBILIZATION TRAFVIC CONTROL 3 50.2 FENCE, MACHINE SLICED 4 CLEAR AND GRUB TREE 5 DiTal CHECK SUBTOTAL DIVISION 1 DIVISION 2 05ATERMA1N 1 CONNECT TO EXISTING V" WAtERMAIN 2 CONNECTTO EXISTING 16" WATERMAIN 3 HYDRANT 4 HYDRANT EVENSION 5 6" GATE VALVE AND 80X 6 8' GATE VALvE AND BOX 7 12" GATE VALVE AND BOX 8 16" BUTTERFLY VALVE AND BOX 9 1" CORPORATION STOP WITH R1S[BLE SADDLE 10 1" CURB STOP AND CURB BOX 11 1" COPPER WATER SERVICE RIPE 12 DUCTILE IRON WATERMA1N NPR, CLASS 52 13 8' DUCTM. +RON WATERMAIN 5156, CLASS 5? 14 12" DUCTILE tRON WATERMAIN PIPE, CLASS 52 IS 16" DUCTILE :RON WATERMASN PtPE, CLASS 52 16 16" HOPE DIPS 6513 WATERMAN, DIRECTIONAL DRILL 17 DUCTFLE MON FITTINGS 18 HORIZONTAL DIRECrIONAL DRILLING BORE PITS 19 WATER ssvia CONNECTION PITS 20 TRINPEW T EST STAI ION MARKER SUBTOTAL DIVISION 2 DIVISION 3., STORM SEWER SALVAGE CONCRETE PPE CULVERT 2 INSTALL SALVAGED PIPE CULVERT SUBTOTAL DIVISION 3 DIVISION 4 -STREET CONSTRUCTION SALVAGE AND RiINSTAiL MAILBOX 2 SALVAGE AND REiNSTALL SIGN SUBTOTAL 81510054 TOTALS - BASE CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 CO 4-3 8Y0RAN1 OFFSET C01.2 13' FLARED END srcrioN TOTALS - CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TOTALS- REVISED CONTRACT CONTR003 71115 P64100TOTAL 70047 um-1 QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT LS 1 164,800 CO S64,800.00 0.00 50,00 1.00 564,800.00 4 1 322.945 co 522,935.00 0.05 91,147.25 1.00 $22,9,15.00 LE 600 54.13 32,477200 0.00 50 OU 200 $82600 FA 6 575000 54.500Oc 0.00 50.00 0 SO 00 EA JO SJ 04.50 61,045.00 0.00 60,00 0 5000 596,769 al 51,147,25 688,571.00 EA 1 57,483 75 57,483.75 4 60.00 0 50 00 EA 2 513,187 67 526,375.22 1 513,287.61 2 526,375.22 EA 11 54,431.40 $48,745A0 0 50.00 10 544,324.00 LP 6 52,628.80 59,772.80 0 50.00 3.5 $5,700.80 EA ID 52,476.08 524,760 BO 0 10,00 10 $24,760.80 EA 3 $2,920 05 54,760.26 0 $0.00 2 55,840 10 EA 2 54,127.60 68,235.20 0 50.00 2 58,235 20 EA 19 510,711,88 5203577.62 0 50.00 ig 0203,527.62 EA 3 570863 $7,128.89 0 5000 3 57,228 69 EA a 5775.22 57,325.60 0 50.00 3 52,325,60 LF 100 560 97 55097 DO 0 50 00 81 54,128 57 LP 75 $63.87 54,79025 0 50231 1410 $9,005.67 LF 96 570.32 $6,750.77 0 1050 42 51,963 44 LF 28 61138.70 53.043.60 0 50.00 25 75 52,799 03 LF 25 5126,98 63,274 50 0 50.00 55 56.983 ou LE 11,055 574 75 5823,371.25 45 63,363 75 10,985 $321,228.75 Ls 5,800 57074 562,399.40 258 52,770,92 9.034 $97,075 25 Ls i 549,462.20 549,462.20 0 54,926.22 1.00 549,462 20 15 1 54.000.00 57,000.00 0 6350.00 1.00 5761120 QC EA 18 6156,02 52,808.36 17 52,652.34 17 52,652,34 51,320,012.71 $27,270 64 51.326,347 29 LF 60 516 CO 590000 0 00.00 14 521200 LP 60 531.12 51,866.60 0 $0.00 8 5248 85 52,766,60 50 00 5453 33 EA 2 316500 6330.00 0 50o0 0 $0.00 EA 14 6220.00 57,860230 0 $0.00 2 5440.00 03.1.90027 60.00 5340 as 51,911,737.31 $28,418.09 31.415,817.17 EA 2 $S00.00 51.000.00 D 00.00 2 61,000.00 EA 1 31,200.00 51,200 00 0 30 00 1 51,200.60 52,200.00 5000 52.200.00 62,423,937.31 828,418.09 51,418,017,17 (Try NKE ELM() YOR & COU CIL CO U ICATIO DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM # AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Booster Station Improvements — Pay Request No. 4 SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director SUG(;ESTE1) ORDER OF BUSINESS fit' removed from the Consent Aeendat. 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. 11 FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED,: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Pay Request No. 4 for the Inwood Booster Station Improvements project. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION,: Magney Construction, Inc., the Contractor for the project, has submitted Partial Pay Estimate No. 4 in the amount of $132,045.73. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5% of the total work completed. The amount retained is $20,997.06. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 4 for the Inwood Booster Station Improvements project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: "Move to approve Pay Request No. 4 to Magney Construction, Inc. in the amount of $132,045.73 for the Inwood Booster Station Improvements". -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item I 1] September 20, 2016 ATTACHMENT(j: Partial Pay Estimate No. 4 -- page 2 -- PROJECT PAY FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO, 4 INWOOD BOOSTER STATION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2014.129 PROJECT OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 ATTN: JACK GRIFFIN, CITY ENGINEER No. Approval Date 1 tfiLi/i› TOTALS NET CHANGE START DATE: SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION: FINAL COMPLETION: CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY Amount Additions Deductions $5,048,49 $0.00 ($5,048.49 4/28/2016 10/28/2016 11/25/2016 F•C ENGINEERING, inc. PERIOD OF ESTIMATE FROM 8/1/2016 TO 8/31/2016 CONTRACTOR: MAGNEY CONSTRUCTION, INC, 1401 PARK ROAD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 PAY ESTIMATE SUMMARY 1. Original Contract Amount 2. Net Change Order Sum 3, Revised Contract (1+2) 4. *Work Completed 5. *Stored Materials 6. Subtotal (4+5) 7, Retainage* 5.0% 8. Previous Payments 5,048.49 9. Amount Due (6-7-8) *Detailed Breakdown Attached CONTRACT TIME ORIGINAL DAYS REVISED DAYS REMAINING ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION: The undersigned certifies that the work has been reviewed and to the best of their knowledge and belief, the quantities shown in this estimate are correct and the work has been performed in accordance E with the contract documents. CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATION: The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of their knowledge, information and belief the work covered by this payment estimate has been completed in accordance with the contract documents, that ail amounts have been paid by the contractor for work for which previous payment estimates was issued and payments DATE received from the owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due, APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA BY BY DATE FOCUS Engineering, inc. DATE 211 213 86 $1,308,404.00 -$5,048.49 $1,303,355.51 $419,941.25 $0.00 $419,941.25 $20,997.06 $266,898.46 $132,045.73 ON SCHEDULE YES NO MSA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES G1NEER DATE CONTRACTOR PROJECT PAYMENT FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 4 INWOOD BOOSTER STATION IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. 2014.129 ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITE M UNIT DIVISION 1- GENERAL moaiezAitorq 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL 3 010 FENCE 4 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 5 TEMpORAR, ROCK CONSTRUMON ENTRANCE 6 STREET SWEEPING 7 SITE RESTORAT,ON SUBTOTAL . DivISION 1 CONTRACT 15144811171 UNIT PRICE ENGINEERING, inc. THIS PER100 TOTAL TO DATE 1 AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNTI L5 1 555000.00 555,000.00 0 00 50 00 1.00 555,000,00 LS 1 5700.00 5/00.00 0,00 50,00 0.80 5560.00 LE 240 53.00 $720.00 0.00 50.00 240 572000 LS 1 52,000 Oa 02000 00 0.00 50.00 1 52,00000 EA 51,000 00 51,000 00 000 50.00 1 51,000.00 918 10 5105.00 51,050 ile 000 5000 0 50 00 LS 0 54,800.00 54,600 00 0.00 50.00 0 50 00 565.270.00 50 00 559,28000 DiviSION 2 . WATER MAIN 8 CONNECT TO EXIST:NG WATERMAN AND SERVICE EA 3 5.1,500.00 $4,500,00 0,00 5000 3 54,500.0C 9 1.5" COPPER WATER SERvICE PtPE L; 65 550.00 53.250.00 0.00 $0.00 65 53,250.00 10 12" DUCTILE IRON WATERmAN PIPE, CLASS 52 is- 100 Sizo OD $12,000.00 0,00 50.00 IOC, 512.00000 11 DUCTILE iRON FIRINGS LB 344 $16.00 55,504.00 0.00 50.00 344 55,504.00 SUBTOTAL .. DivISION 2 525,254.00 50.00 525,25-1 00 0I0I0ION 3 -STORNI SEWER 12 10" PvC DRAIN 13 18" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE. CLASS 5 14 18' RCP FLARED END SECTION 15 CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE 16 RANDOM R1PRAP CLASS (CV) SUBTOTAL DIVISION 3 LE 15 550 00 0260 00 0.00 50.00 0 50.00 LF 130 550.00 56,500.00 0 00 5000 121 56,050.00 EA 1 $1,500.00 51,500.00 0 00 50.00 1 51,50000 EA 2 53,000.00 55,000.00 0,00 50.0 2 56,000 00 CV 10 5150.00 51,000.00 0.00 50.00 0 50,00 516,35000 50.00 513,550.00 DIVISiON 4.. DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION 17 COMNiON FXCAvATION (P) CY 690 $20.00 513,600.00 000 5000 690 513,070.07 18 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW ill CV 110 52500 52,750 00 20.00 5500.00 20 5500.00 19 SUBGRADE PREPARATION LS 1 51400.00 51,400,90 0,30 5420.00 0,30 3420,00 20 AGGREGATE RASE CLASS 5 TON 140 522.00 $3,080,00 000 50.00 0 $0.00 21 TOPE SP 9.5 wEAR COURSE MIX (2,13) TON SO 595,00 $4,750.00 0.00 50.00 0 5000 22 4" CoNCRETE SIDEWALK SY 41 $70.00 02,370,00 0.00 50.00 0 50 00 23 SEGNIENTAL RETAINING V,,ALL Fe 480 $21.00 $11.040.00 0 00 $0.00 0 50,00 24 SPLIT RAIL FENCE LF 120 $17.00 52,040.00 0.00 50,00 0 50.00 25 GUARD POST EA 3 535000 51,050,00 0,00 5000 0 5000 26 6" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN LF 140 540.00 55,600 00 80.00 $3,200.00 140 55,600.00 27 8" INLINE DRA,N EA 5 5900.00 $4,500.00 100 5900.00 5 54,500 OC 23 ROOF DRAIN COLLECTION EA 5 5900 GO 54,500.00 0 00 50.00 0 50.00 29 DRAINTILE CLEANOuT EA 1 590000 $900.00 0.00 50 00 a So a SUBTOTAL . DivISION 4 558,280,00 55,020.00 524,820.00 30 DIVISON 5 800STER FACILITY 3 I SupecuitIon LS 518,550.00 513,550.00 0.70 51,855,00 0.50 59,275 00 32 ERAti & Insurance LS 1 519,620,00 519,620 00 0.00 50 00 100 519,62000 31000 Concrete Work LS 1 S58,760.00 558,760.00 0.20 511.75200 0,95 555,822.00 32000 Robot 75 1 $5,100.00 $5,100,00 0 3,0 51,020.00 0 95 $4,845,0C 33516 Heavy Doty Concroto Floor Foesh LS 1 51,85000 51.860.00 000 50.00 000 50.00 42000 Masonry Wock LS 1 $70,480 00 570,480.00 0.10 57,048.00 0.63 545,812.00 55000 Moo Metals LS 0 53,330,00 53,350 00 000 50.00 1.00 53,350 00 61000 Rough Carpentry LS 525,500.00 525,500.00 1.00 325,50000 1.00 525,500.00 62210 Plastic Tcisto LS 1 51,170,00 $1,170.00 0.00 50 00 0 00 So oo 71113 BiturolnousDaroprooting LS I 5670,00 5670 00 100 $670.00 1,00 5670.00 72113 InstaaCon tbeiow grade) 15 I 51,250 00 51,250,00 0,00 $0.00 100 51,250_00 72126 Woven FiltergIass lusuIatuto L5 1 52,700.00 $2,700.00 0.00 50,00 0.00 $0,00 72726 Fluid Apolwd Membrane Ao Bottlet LS S4,000.00 54,00000 1.00 54,000.00 1,00 54.000,00 73113 Atphatt Shotgles 15 56,60000 55.600.00 1.00 56,600.00 1.00 56,600 00 74613 Metal Soffit & F400+3, gutters & downspouts LS 56,550.00 $6,550.00 0.39 $2,292,50 0.35 52,292.30 74646 Mineral Hoer Soling LS S10,600.00 010,601.02 0.00 50.00 0.00 50.00 79200 Joint Sealants LS 53,210.00 $3,210.00 000 50.02 0.00 10,07 81600 FRP Doors 15 511,950,00 911.950.00 0.00 50.00 0..00 50.00 88100 GIast & Gl40ing L.9 550000 5500.00 0 Oa $0,00 0 00 5000 88410 TransIocont Watdouts 15 1 59,95000 59,960.D0 000 $0.00 0 00 $0.00 97750 FRP Suctoce laminated panels LS 1 59,640.00 $9,640.00 0 Do 50.00 000 $0 00 99600 High ourformanco Coating LS 513,40000 513,400.00 0.20 52,680 00 0 20 52,680 00 101469 Warning SIgto I 1 0 520000 520000 0.00 50.00 700 50.00 CONTRA°. THIS 065101) I TOTAL TO DATE ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT P/CCE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AN10UN f 104416 Fire Extingut$hers LS 5350.00 $350 DO 000 50,00 0,00 50.00 220000 P80mb,ng LS 522,500.00 522,500 00 0.00 10 00 035 $7,675,00 230000 HVAC LS $46,400.00 546,90000 0.20 59.280.00 0,20 $9.280.00 260500 Eettircar LS $79,800,00 579,300.00 0,17 513,566.00 0.32 025,535.1)0 IT 2305 Earthwolt 10 57,880 00 $7,880.00 0 90 $3,152 00 1 00 $7.880 00 331300 Dow:ft:Mon rst Water Storage 5114774004 LS 5950,00 $950 00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0,00 402323 Process Piping LS 5111.400 00 5111,90000 0.40 394.560 00 0,40 544,560 00 412223 Portable Hard Chain Horst & Trolley LS 51,200.00 $1,200 00 0.00 0000 000 50.00 444200 W41er System Storage Tanks LS 1 $26,200OU 526,200 00 000 $0.00 0.00 5100 444256 Vertmal $0ht Case Booster Pamps LS 1 $78,200 00 S78,200.00 000 SO 00 0.00 5000 444416 GdS ChlOttnatIOn SVelit LS I 51.01,500 00 S101,500,00 0.00 $0 00 000 $0.00 33 SCAN, INTEGRATION AND SYSTEM IMPROVEMENrs tSCADA CONTRACTORt LS 1 530.000.00 35000000 000 S0.00 000 0000 34 PROCESS INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL 1SYSTEM INTEGRATOR) t5 1 5215000.00 5215,000 00 000 50,00 000 $0.00 35 230 KW GENERATOR SET L5 1 5105,000 00 5105,000.00 000 $0.00 000 $0.00 36 UTILITY ALLOWANCE tELECTRtC, NATURAL GAS, TELECOMMUNICAT1ON/DA 15 1 $10000.00 510000.00 0.00 SD 00 0.02 5189 75 37 HOLDING TANK ANO ASSOCIATED PIPING LS 1 020,000.00 520000,00 0.00 $0 00 1,00 520,000.00 33 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SY 625 52.00 $1,250.00 0.00 $0,00 0.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL • DIVISION 5 $1,143,250.00 $133,975,50 5297,037.25 CHANGE 0ROE8f5) I COI Change Order 01 Iltcrns 1,7) SUBTOTAL CHANGE 080E8(5) LS 0 (55,048 49} 50.001 0.00 50,001 0.00 50,00 50.00 50.00 Sam I TOTALS $1,300,404 co $138,995 so 5419.741 Z5 THF cry, L\KE ELN- AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: AY0 COU C Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) — Pay Chad Isakson, Project Engineer Kristina Handt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director CO DATE: CONSENT ITEM # Request No. 4 U 1CATION September 20, 2016 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 .......... ...... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. 12 FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Pay Request No. 4 for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) project. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: CB&I, Inc., the Contractor for the project, has submitted Partial Pay Estimate No. 4 in the amount of $176,905.20. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5% of the total work completed. The amount retained is $32,818.30. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No, 4 for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: "Move to approve Pay Request No. 4 to CB&I, Inc. in the amount of $176,905.20 for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) Project". page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 12] September 20, 2016 ATTACHMENT: Partial Pay Estimate No. 4. -- page 2 -- PROJECT PAY FORM PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. INWOOD WATER TOWER NO. 4 PROJECT NO. znzs.zsu PROJECT OWNER: CITY OFLAKE EUwO 34VOiAVERNEAVENUE NORTH LAKE ELKxo'N1NS5U42 A7Tm: JACK GRIFFIN, CITY ENGINEER No. 4 ENGINEERING, inc. ! PERIOD OFESTIMATE � FROM 7/30/2016 TO 8/20/2016 CONTRACTOR. CQ&||nc. z41n9S.ROUTE 59 PLA|NF|ELD,|L60544 AlTN:,N|CHAELALUSON CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY — ' Approval Amount Date Additions Deductions TOTALS NET[HANGE START DATE: SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION: FINAL COMPLETION: sOl0| $lOQ $0.O0 PAY ESTIMATE 0 l.Original Contract Amount 2.Net Change Order Sum 3,Revised Contract (1+2) 4, *Work Completed I*Stored Materials 6.IuLtuta| (4+5) 7. Retainage~ 5,Dyo & Previous Payments 9.4mount Due(6'7'8) [DNTRACTTIME ORIGINAL DAYS REVISED DAYS nswA|m|wG ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION: The undersigned certifies that the work has been reviewed and mthe best oftheir knowledge and belief, the quantities shown inthis estimate are correct and the work has been performed inaccordance with the contract documents, CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATION: The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of their knowledge, information and belief the work covered w/this payment estimate has been completed inaccordance with the contract BY documents, that all amounts have been paid hythe contractor for work for which previous payment estimates was issued and pvymcnts-- uurE received from the owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due, APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA BY - FOCUS Engineering, inc. BY SEH,|nc` 439 CONTRACTOR 06 9/1/2016 ApY $2'395'000.00 $0.00 $2,395'000.00 $656'355.80 $0.00 $G56'36&8O $3Z'818.3O $446,642.50 $176,905.20 X ' DATE PROJECT PAYMENT FORM PARTIAL. PAY ESTIMATE NO. 4 INWOOD WATER TOWER NO. 4 CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO, 2015.130 ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT FS C S ENGINEERING, inc. CONTRACT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUN r ODANTITY AMOUNT DIVISION 1-SITE & UTILITY WORK . .. . . 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $16,000.00 016,000.06 1.00 516.000.00 1.00 5E6,000.00 2 ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA 1 $3,822.00 53,822.00 LOD $3,822,00 1.D0 53,822 00 3 TRAFf ic cONTRoL LS 1 52,068 00 $2,068.00 0.50 51,034.00 0.50 51,034.00 4 5110GRADE EXCAVATION Cy 120 $10.00 51,200 00 50.00 0.00 SO 00 5 GEM-ENTRE FABRIC TYPE V Sy 200 56.00 51,200,00 50,00 000 50.00 6 oRGANic TO psoa. BOPROW CY 100 530.00 53,000.00 50.00 0.00 50.00 7 SEILCT GRANULAR BORROW CY ISO 516.00 $2,400.00 $0.00 0,00 SO 00 8 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 6 TON 1,250 52200 527.500.00 $0.00 0,00 50.00 9 air WEARING COD RSE MIX (WEA2400) MN 65 599,00 56,435 00 $0.00 000 50.00 to BIT NONSNEARING COuRSE Mix IWEB24013} TON 65 $99.00 56,43500 50.00 0,00 50.00 LI TARK cOAT GAL 35 $20.00 $350.00 50.00 0.00 50,00 12 to CONCRETE APRoN 5F 350 $25.00 58,750.00 50.00 0.00 50.00 13 e CONCRETE WALK sF 100 520 00 52,000.00 50,00 0,00 50,00 14 CONNECT To DosTING wAIERMAIN EA 2 $2,300.00 52,300,00 50.00 0.00 50,00 IS 6" DIP WATER ALAIN RINE, a. 52 LE JO $110 oo S 2.100 00 50.00 0.00 50,00 16 16" DIP WATER MAIN PIPE, CL. 52 LF 120 5140 Go 516.800.00 50.00 0,00 SO 00 27 6"GATE VALVE & 130X EA 1 $1,980.00 51,980,00 $0.00 0.00 50 00 28 HyDRAIPT EA 1 $4,864.00 $4,864.00 50,00 0,00 $0.00 19 MP FITTINGS La 700 52,50 51.750.00 50.00 000 50.00 20 POLYETHYLENE ENCASEmENT LE 140 $2 00 5280,00 5000 0.00 50.00 21 4' X E0 CATCH BASIN %MTH GRATING LA 1 $2,618.00 $2,61800 50.00 0,00 50 00 22 1.5" CLEAR TOCK CY 16 576,00 51,216,00 80,00 0.00 $0.00 23 GEOTEKTNE FABRIC TYPE 1 sY 30 55.00 5180.00 50.00 0.00 $0.00 24 18" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE, CL V LI 90 568.00 56,120 00 50.00 000 50E30 25 2.87 APRON WATRASH GUARD EA 1 $1,700.00 51,700.00 50.00 0.00 50.00 26 HAND PLAcED RIP RAP, Ct. IR 00 10 $92.00 5920.00 50.00 0.00 $0 00 27 GEOTEXT ILE FABRIC TYPE N SY 37 $3.00 5111„00 $0.00 0.00 50.00 28 PREASSEMBLED SILT FENCE LF 500 $2.25 51,125,00 $0.00 0,00 $0.00 27 STRAW 810ROLL IF 1,000 52.00 52.000.00 50.00 0,00 $0.00 30 1 EmPORARy SEEDING Hvits 22-121 WITH TYPE I 00IELCH1 AC Ls 54,000 CO $6,000.00 50.00 0.00 $0 00 31 SEEDING (MIX 25.131 WITH ELR1 012ER & HYDROMULCH1 AC 1,5 $3,500,00 $5,250.00 $0,00 0,00 50.00 SuBTOTAL . DIVINON 1 5137,474 00 520,856 co 520.856.00 DIVISION 2 , EtEvATED sTORAGE TANK 1 INSuRANcE AND BONDS 2 ENGINEERING APPROvAL 3 TANK MATERIALS 4 TANK FABRIcAnalv & sHIP 5 EOUNOATIoN CONSTRUCTION 6 CONCRETE sHART CONSTRUCHON 7 LANK ERECTION (oN GRouNN 8 TANK PALNT 10N GROUND) 9 HOLsr TANK 10 TANK PAINT ([N Affq 11 STERILIZE AND TEsT 12 ELECTRICAL 13 WATER TOWER CONTROL pANEL AND RILL SuBTOTAL DIVISION 2 LS 1 $47,900.00 547,900.00 50,00 1,00 547,900.00 Ls 1 5239,500.00 5239,500.00 50.00 0.00 5215,550.00 LS 1 5316.100.00 $316,100.00 50.00 0,00 50.00 LS 1 5287.700.0o 5287,700 Do 50.00 0,00 50 00 LS 1 5413,400,00 5413,400.00 0.40 S165,380.00 0,90 5372,060.00 LS 1 5372,200.00 5372,100.00 50.00 0,00 50 OC, ts 1 5214.600.08 $714,600.00 51100 0.00 50.00 Ls 1 $142,300.00 $142,300 00 50.00 0.00 50,00 LS 1 $43,450,00 $43,45020 50.00 0.00 $0.00 LS 1 574.200.00 074.200.00 50.00 0,00 $0.00 LS 1 $975.00 $976.00 50,00 0,00 50 Ou LS 1 589,60000 089,800.00 10,00 000 50 00 LS 1 515.500.00 515,500.00 5000 0,00 50.00 52,257,526.00 5165,360.00 5635,520.00 rolA Ls 52.395,000.00 5186,216,00 5656,366 00 111F..1:111 IF LAKE ELN 0 AYOR&COUC1 AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) - Chan SUBMITTED BY: Chad isakson, Project Engineer THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director CO UNICATION DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM # 13 Order No. 2 SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS (if removed from the Consent itzenda): - Questions from Council to Staff ............................. ..... . Public Input, if Appropriate.. ...... Call for Motion ...... ..... - Discussion...................... ..... ............................................ Action on Motion. ........... ........ ....... ......................... POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: $8,744.00. ....... Mayor Facilitates ......Mayor Facilitates Mayor & City Council Mayor & City Council ....... Mayor Facilitates This change order increases the contract amount for the project by $8,744.00 bringing the revised construction contract to $2,403,744.00. 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, as part of the consent agenda, Change Order No. 2 for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) Improvements. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This change order is being processed at the City's request to furnish and install a new 16-inch butterfly valve at the location of connection to the trunk watenriain on Inwood Avenue. This valve was added to allow the water tower to be isolated from the distribution system to better facilitate maintenance activities. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the consent agenda, Change Order No. 2 for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 13J September 20, 2016 "Move to approve Change Order No. 2 for the in vood Water Tower (No. 4) hnprovements thereby increasing the contract amount by $8,744.00." ATTACHMENT: . Change Order No. 2 -- page 2 -- CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER FORM CITY OFLAKE ELM[1 M|pdPAGSOTA |NVVOQOWATER TOWER (NO.4) PROJECT NO. 2DlS.130 FOC ENGINEERING, inc. � CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 DATE: September 7'2OI6 TO: [8&||nc,I4lO9IRoute 59,Plainfield, |L5O544 This Document will become a supplement to the Contract and all provisions will apply hereto, The Contract Documents are modified asfollows upon execution nfthis Change Order. CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION /JUSTIFICATION: Furnish and Install new 16 -inch butterfly valve at location of connection to trunk main. Attachments (list documents supporting change): - ITEM DESCRIPTION OFPAY ITEM [02a z6^BUTTERFLY VALVE AND BOX email dated 8/24/2016 from CB&I UNIT CITY UNITE PRICE INCREASE (DECREASE) NET CONTRACT CHANGE Amount ofOriginal Contract Sum ofAdditions/Deductions approved todate (CO Nos.I Contract Amount to date Amount ofthis Change Order (ADD) (ocoucT} <mo[yxmac> Revised Contract Amount $8,744.00 � 2,395i000.00 � 0.00 � 2,395'000.00 $ 8,74400 The Contract Period for Completion will be (UNCHANGED) (INCREASED) (DECREASED) 0 days / APPROVEOBYENGINEER: SEH'|nc ' ~' APPROVED BYCONTRACTOR pmmw�m ' zy »/ BY , ~ Q/O/201O APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA . o«rc DATE .'' 9/7/20l6 FOCUS Engineering, inc. cxAwGconoExFomw i9375\-Project Umdoteund\/a|vcCnnt- -` Bill Pc l to: Chad Katzcnkovr 00/24/201607:04AM Hide Details From: Bill Pcgcl<Bi|iPcge\(Dt CBLcom> To: Chad Katzenhcrgor<ckatzcnbergcr(Di nchinc.cono> History: This nncosu�chas been replied toand forwarded.I Attachment i9975|'LukcElmo-Monthly Update 8-24-]6od/ Chad. Please see attached update and also cost below for valve supply and install, If approved | will put on hzmna| change order, | / Furnish and Install Crispin 1G^ Butterfly Valve, 1G^MU.AJEi*i Accessories 5 7.241 T&TMark-Up 1596 5 1.086 5ubJ\tm| S 8327 CB&|Mark-Up 5q/6 $ 416 Tnxa|CU#0Z 5 8741 � omPegel Project Manager Central Operations Fabrication Services Steel Plate Structures To|i+1e1u^zossnr cel/~1 8152101676 Fax: +1815*393130 Bill, pooelr@co/corn 1wossRoute 59 Plainfield, /Lsnmw'ooe4 United States /�uGreen Cross . n�Safet� This e-mail and any attached files may contain CB&I (or its affiliates) confidential and privileged information. This information is protected by law and/or u�rocrneni bctwccnCB��l (or its of�|iatcs) and either you, Your employer or any contract provider with which You or Your employer are associated. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-omui|and delete all copies of this e-mail; further, You are notified that disclosing, copying, dixkihudngortaking any action in relianceon the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. fi|c:///C:/Qseru/ckutzonbu Duia/Loca|/Tnnno/no(cu9944D&/~wcb3499.htnl 9/2/2016 HP Ify LA K E ELMO AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: AYOR & COUNCIL C UNICATIO DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #14 MOTION Approve Well #2 Roof Repairs Rob Weldon, Director of Public Works Kristina Handt, City Administrator Finance Committee Cathy Bendel, Finance Director SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item City Administrator Report/Presentation Director of Public Works Questions from Council to Staff ...... ..... ..... ........ Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ........ ...... ....... ...... ..... ..... ..... ...... Mayor & City Council .......... ..... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion................... ........ ............. ...... ......... ..... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Director of Public Works FISCAL IMPACT: $7,700 — Water Fund (not to exceed) The repairs to Well #2's roof were budgeted in 2015 for $7,500. It was anticipated that these repairs would be completed by the end of 2015 and as such, nothing was budgeted in 2016. As a result, this is being brought back for approval since not in the current budget. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: Public Works is requesting the approval of funds to remove and replace the current shingles on Well House #2. In its current condition the roof is in extreme need of repair due to dried and missing shingles. If the problem is not correct in the very near future the building will be subject to water damage from exterior exposure to the elements. -- page 1 -- City Council Meetin2. (Consent Agenda Item #I4) September 20, 2016 RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, staff recommends APEX be hired to do the proposed repairs be approved to be made to the roof on Well #2 as soon as it can be scheduled for the not to exceed amount of $7,700 ATTACHMENT: 1. APEX Construction Inc.repair quote dated 7/8/16 2. MNPRO LLC repair quote dated 6/10/16 -- page 2 -- Pete Ziemer: Apex Construction Inc. 12136 Marquess Lane North PO Box 218 Lake Elmo. MN 55042 612-242-7883 Adam Khnkhamer: 651-295-8459 peter'MyApexInc.com adam«MyApexlnc.com Fax: 651.765-0208 www.MyApexInc.com MN LIC#20511607 WI LIC#1094440 CUSTOMER INFORMATION: Name: City of Lake Elmo Address: Lake Elmo Public Works Building- 5S°^ street City, State, and Zip: Job Location ("Property"): ROOFING CONTRACT Phone: SHINGLES ARCHITECHURAL COLOR HOUSE AND GARAGE HOUSE ONLY GARAGE ONLY GUTTERS OTHER REMOVE AND HAUL EXISTING ROOFING MATERIAL INSTALL MATCHING RIDGE Date: 7-8-16 INSPECT ROOFING SURFACE FOR DAMAGE NEW SHINGLES TIN WILL BE USED, IF NEEDED, REPAIR AS NEEDED AT A RATE OF_45_HR PLUS MATL ALONG ALL WALLS AND CHIMNEY APPLY ICE AND WATER SHEILD AS PER CITY CODE 6FT UP PLYWOOD AND TARPS WILL BE USED TO AND ALONG ALL VALLEYS PROTECT THE PROPERTY, SIDING, AND YARD COVER THE REMAINING ROOFING SURFACE WITH 15LB FELT NAIL DRIP EDGE INSTALLED UPON REQUEST INSTALL 24' GALVINIZED VALLEY AND PIPE FLASHINGS EXTERIOR DEBRIS FROM OUR WORK WILL BE AND STANDARD METAL ROOF VENTS CLEANED AND MAGNETICALLY SWEPT DAILY INSTALL NEW OWENS CORNING DURATION SHINGLES OTHER CUSTOMER (ALSO REFERRED TO AS "YOU" or "CUSTOMER") and APEX CONSTRUCTION, INC., A MINNESOTA CORPORATION (REFERRED TO AS CONTRACTOR, "US" OR "WE") AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. CONTRACTOR WORK. Contractor agrees to perform Contractor agrees to perform the work listed above and as set forth on the attached plans and specifications, if any, and _INCLUDES PERMIT/DUMPSTER/ PLASTIC RIDGE VENT AND REPLACING DRIP EDGE. ALSO INCLUDES OPTION TO REPLACE 2 FURNACE PIPES AND FLASHING IF NEEDED (the "Work"). All plans and specifications remain the property of the Contractor and are not sold to Customer under this Agreement. 2. CUSTOMER WORK. Customer and Contractor agree that Customer must obtain written permission from Contractor prior to performing any Work. Customer agrees to pay the Contractor all costs for any delay caused by Customer not completing Customer's work. All work not specified in this Section 2 will be performed by the Contractor or Contractor's subcontractors. Customer may not hire outside contractors or suppliers to do any Work, unless Contractor first agrees in writing. Contractor is not responsible for any work provided by Customer or Customer's suppliers, and Contractor will not warranty any work done by Customer or Customer hired contractors or subcontractors. Customer agrees to indemnify and hold Contractor harmless with regard to any claims or liabilities arising from any work provided by Customer or Customer's subcontractors. Customer understands that any subcontractors that are hired by Customer must qualify as independent contractors. Any subcontractor and its employees hired by Customer are not entitled to any insurance or benefits that Contractor provides for Contractor's employees. Any subcontractor hired by Customer shall provide all materials, supplies and tools necessary to the performance of the Work, other than the materials to be provided by Contractor as specified. If any subcontractors are hired by Customer, those subcontractors must represent that they are fully experienced and properly qualified and equipped to perform the services under this Agreement, and Customer shall be responsible for ensuring that: (1) They are a business entity, (corporation, LLC or partnership); (2) They have obtained an Independent Contractor Exemption Certificate ("ICEC") from the Department of Labor and Industry as required under Minnesota Statute 181.723; or (3) They are exempt from the ICEC requirements under Minn. Stat. 181.723 subd. 2, If Customer's subcontractor is not a business entity as described in this section, Customer acknowledges that Customer shall be responsible for any obligations of Minn. Stet, 181.723, with regard to Customer's subcontractors. Prior to Contractor's commencement of the Work, Customer agrees to remove any items off walls, Including but not limited to, pictures, paintings, art work and wall hangings, which may interfere with the Work or be damaged during the course of the Work. Customer acknowledges and agrees that Contractor shall not be liable for any and all damages to such items or for any damage to sheetrock, plaster, or other interior damage as a result of Contractors Work. 3, PAYMENT TERMS. Option A: Regular Remodel Contract (initial here if selecting this Option — Contractor APEX CONSTRUCTION INC. Customer Customer shall pay Contractor $7,050.00/_$325.00 for each furnace stack for the Work performed under this Agreement (the "Price"). Payment of the Price shall be made as follows: The entire Price for Contractor's Work shall be paid in full upon completion of the Work as determined at Contractor's sole discretion. Contractor shall provide Customer with an invoice upon completion of the Work for the entire Price (the "Invoice"), Customer shall pay the full amount listed in the Invoice upon receipt of the Invoice. Any Invoice that is not paid within that time period will be grounds for the remedies set forth in this Agreement. Option B: Insurance Contract (initial here if selecting this Option —Contractor Customer The amount due for the Work under this Agreement shall be equal to the total insurance claim amount as authorized by your insurance company (the "Price"). This Agreement does not obligate Contractor in any way unless your claim is approved by your insurance company and then accepted by Contractor. By signing this Agreement, you authorize and agree that Contractor may correspond with your insurance provider regarding the scope of Work and shall complete the Work upon approval by your insurance company and acceptance by Contractor with no additional cost to you except for the insurance deductible of $ . Under no circumstance shall this Agreement be construed to require Contractor to renegotiate Customer's insurance coverage as Customer's agent; or otherwise fulfill the duties of a public adjuster. Customer authorizes its insurance company to issue all insurance proceed checks in the Contractor's name. Customer acknowledges it shall have no right to terminate this Agreement except as contained herein. In the event Customer receives checks for payment for the Work from Customer's insurance company, Customer shall promptly make such payments for the Work in the same amounts as the insurance payments to Contractor as Customer receives the insurance checks. Payment of the Price should be due in full upon completion of the Work as determined by Contractor. 4. DOWN PAYMENTS/DEPOSITS. Any money paid to Contractor as a deposit is considered a non-refundable construction deposit to be applied to Contractor's cost to complete the Work ("Contractor Deposit"). Customer understands that should Customer terminate this Agreement for any reason, or otherwise fail to complete the Work, all funds deposited will be forfeited to Contractor, and Customer shall have no right to compel Contractor to return any part of the Contractor Deposit. Customer shall also be responsible for all costs or expenses incurred by or owing to Contractor for work up through the date of such termination. 5. CHANGES TO THE WORK (CHANGE ORDERS). Contractor's obligations under this Agreement cannot be changed unless they are changed in writing on a separate Change Order form signed by Customer and Contractor and the insurance company as necessary and applicable ("Change Order"). If there is a discrepancy between documents, the written Change Orders shall take precedence over this Agreement. Preparation of such anticipated change shall not impose an obligation on the part of Contractor to undertake such change; however, in the event the Customer elects to proceed with any changes prior to the signing of a written Change Order, Customer shall be deemed to have consented to the change and shall be responsible for any and all increases in the cost related to the change or the preparation thereof including administrative costs, overhead and profit margin. In the event the Price is to be paid out of insurance proceeds pursuant to this Agreement, Customer acknowledges that it shall be personally responsible for any changes which are not included in the insurance settlement. Contractor shall have the right to stop all Work at such time as a change is requested or required until such time as Customer executes the Change Order. Because the range of possible changes you may request is unlimited, Contractor does not agree to accept all proposed Change Orders. In each case Contractor will review the requested Change Order and inform you whether Contractor will accept the Change Order, and if so, Contractor will inform you of the amount of the Change Order cost. Contractor has an absolute right to reject any requested Change Order for any reason. Contractor may, in Contractor's sole discretion, require Customer to provide an additional deposit towards increased costs associated with the Change Order. 6. REMEDIES. In the event of a default of this Agreement by Customer, interest will accrue on unpaid amounts at the rate of 1.5% per month (or the highest amount allowed by law, whichever is less). In the event that Contractor is required to incur costs or attorneys' fees to enforce the terms of this Agreement, such amounts will be in addition to any amounts owed by Customer to Contractor. If Contractor does not receive any payments due under this Agreement's terms, Contractor may stop Work without further notice and seek all available remedies, Contractor shall be entitled to all payments due up to the time Work is stopped, and for all losses sustained by the Contractor, including but not limited to, materials, machinery, equipment or tools, overhead, lost profits, soft costs and damages. Contractor will retain title to all machinery and materials if this Agreement is cancelled, this includes a situation in which Customer attempts to improperly terminate the Agreement after the insurance proceeds have been determined but construction has not commenced. Contractor is hereby granted a license to enter the Property to remove such items upon termination of this Agreement. If Work has stopped for any reason, including delays by Customer's insurance company, for more than 30 days, Contractor may terminate this Agreement and recover pursuant to this Agreement. If Customer defaults in any manner under the terms of this Agreement, Contractor will have the right to (1) terminate this Agreement, and (2) retain all deposits, fee and progress payments Customer has made, and (3) take legal action to recover from Customer payment for all Work completed, and for all losses sustained by Contractor on all materials, machinery, equipment or tools, overhead, soft costs, profit and damages, and (4) place liens upon the Property for payment of any amounts owed, and (5) foreclose any liens placed on the Property if the amounts due including costs and interest, are not paid in full. Contractor's exercise of any remedy shall not preclude the exercise of the other remedies available to Contractor. The remedies contained in this Agreement may be used concurrently and are in addition to any other remedy which may be available to Contractor at law or equity. 7. TIME DELAYS/FORCE MAJEURE. The Contractor anticipates that Work will begin on or before _Summer 2016 and the Work will be completed within approximately _1-2 DAYS weeks after construction is begun, except for delays caused beyond Contractor's control or as set forth in this Agreement. Customer will not be entitled to any compensation or remedy for Contractor's failure to start or complete the Work by the time established, Customer agrees that Contractor is not responsible for delays in completion of the Work or damage to the Work due to weather, strikes, war, terrorist attacks, shortage or delay in getting materials, shortage or delay in labor or subcontracting, government regulations, court actions or any other cause beyond Contractor's control, If the cost of materials or labor increases during any such delays, Contractor may require that Customer or Customer's insurance company pay such increased costs or terminate this Agreement after paying Contractor for all Work completed to the date of termination and for all materials which cannot be returned. Customer understands that delays caused by Customer, Customer's lender or Customer's insurance company may cause additional delays on the part of Contractor due to unavailability of labor or subcontractors. 8. CONCEALED CONDITIONS. This Agreement and the Price are based solely on the observations of Contractor at the time of entering into this Agreement. If additional concealed conditions are discovered once the Work has commenced, which conditions were not visible at the time of entering into this Agreement, Contractor will identify the unforeseen conditions, and Customer and Contractor will execute a Change Order for any additional work (which, if applicable, must be approved by the insurance company), Customer agrees that if the Price is paid from insurance proceeds as provided within this Agreement, if the insurance company does not agree to pay far unexpected or unanticipated extra costs, then Contractor may terminate this Agreement and Contractor shall be entitled to payment for all Work completed through the date of termination. Customer will be responsible for all additional costs and time for work due to concealed conditions. Such conditions may also extend the time for completion of Contractor's Work under this Agreement. CUSTOMER SITE VISITS. Because of hazards which may be on the construction site during construction and the potential to interfere with the Work, Customer is encouraged to enter into the construction area only after first consulting with Contractor. Customer and Customer's family, friends and guests are encouraged to refrain from visiting the construction area. During the time of construction on the Property, conditions will exist that will be hazardous to Customer and Customer's family, friends, and guests which conditions include, without limitation, trip hazards, slip hazards, open excavation, open windows, exposed nails, exposed wiring, debris and other hazards on or around the construction site. Customer waives all claims against Contractor and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Contractor harmless for injuries or damages that Customer or any member of Customer's family, friends, or guests may suffer while on or around the Property during construction due to these and other hazards. In addition to the waiver contained in this Section, Customer shall hold Contractor harmless and shall indemnify Contractor from any and all claims, liabilities, costs, expenses, or causes of action resulting from Customer and/or Customer's family, friends or guests visiting the construction site, with the indemnity to include reimbursement of all attorney's fees incurred by Contractor. Customer acknowledges and agrees that Contractor may enter onto the Property and perform Work at times when Customer is not present. 10, CUSTOMER'S INSURANCE. Prior to beginning the Work, upon Contractor's request, Customer will provide Contractor with a copy of Customer's Property insurance policy showing coverage for property damage and liability claims. Contractor will continue to carry comprehensive general liability and property damage insurance to protect the Contractor. Customer will be responsible for losses which occur during construction not covered by Contractor's insurance, including any deductible. 11. MATERIALS. For those materials which the Contractor provides, Contractor has the right in its sole discretion to substitute and replace materials or fixtures with other materials or fixtures provided the substituted materials or fixtures are of similar quality and are acceptable under the applicable building code. Customer will not be notified of substitutions unless the materials were specifically specified by Customer in an agreed upon Change Order, or the substitution will affect the exterior appearance of the Work. Contractor will have the sole authority to select all sources and suppliers of materials, If Customer provides any materials, Customer warrants and represents to Contractor that the materials are of good quality and meet all requirements of Minnesota Statutes, building codes, local ordinances, and any other governmental regulations. Customer shall be solely responsible for, and agrees to promptly pay for, all materials which it provides in connection with Contractor's performance of this Agreement. Customer agrees to provide proof of lien waiver by the supplier of such materials. In the case that Customer is responsible for providing the materials for completion of the Work, Contractor shall have no obligation for the liabilities associated with the materials, and Customer agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Contractor for any liabilities, claims, liens, or costs associated with such materials. Anytime you are required to pay Contractor for materials and work to date in order to terminate this Agreement, payment for materials shall include materials which are ordered by Contractor specifically for the Work and which are not returnable by Contractor without charge to Contractor. All unused materials after the completion of the Work are the property of Contractor and are not to be used or disposed of by Customer. 12, USE OF DUMPSTER. While Contractor shall consult with Customer regarding the best location to place a dumpster on the Property, Customer acknowledges and agrees that Contractor may place a dumpster on the Property for collection of construction waste materials (the "Dumpster") in any location on the Property that Contractor chooses in its sole and absolute discretion. Customer agrees that Customer and Customer's family, friends, or guests will not place any materials in the Dumpster whatsoever or otherwise interfere with, enter into or move the Dumpster. Customer waives all claims against Contractor (and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Contractor harmless) for property damage or injuries or other damages that Customer or any number of Customer's family, friends, or guests may suffer as a result of the Dumpster. Should Customer or any member of Customer's family, friends, or guests place any materials in the Dumpster, Customer agrees that it shall be responsible for any increased costs associated with such actions and the increased cost shall be due at the time it is incurred. 13. WAIVER REGARDING ICE DAMS. Customer is solely responsible to maintain roof drainage on its Property in all weather conditions. Customer acknowledges and agrees that due to melting snow and ice on its roof, ice dams may occur which could cause considerable Property damage. It is important that Customer monitor the build-up of snow and ice on Customer's roof and maintain Customer's roof to prevent damage. Under no circumstance does Contractor make any warranty or representation to Customer that ice dams or ice build-up will not occur. Customer acknowledges and agrees that Contractor shall not be responsible or liable for any damage Customer incurs as a result of ice build- up or ice dams occurring on Customer's Property. 14. SUBCONTRACTORS. Contractor may use subcontractors and suppliers to complete the Work. Subcontractors will be chosen by the Contractor only. Customer agrees not to hire any of Contractor's subcontractors or suppliers to do any work or supply any materials, except upon written agreement signed by the Contractor, Customer agrees not to interfere with, discuss with, interrupt or provide instructions to any contractor or subcontractor working on the Property, If you have an objection to a contractor or subcontractor or the work they are performing, you must contact Contractor. Contractor will then consider your objection, but will not have any obligation to remove or replace the contractor or subcontractor based solely upon your objection. 15. WAIVER FOR DEFECTS/LIMITATION OF WARRANTIES/WAIVER REGARDING TREES AND SHRUBS. Customer agrees that Contractor is not liable for losses, injuries or damages caused by any failure or defect in any door, lock or window installed on the Property. Customer acknowledges and agrees that with regard to any such items, including but not limited to, the burglar alarm, smoke detector, carbon monoxide detector, gas meter, water meter, or deadbolts, the Customer shall be entitled only to assignment by Contractor of the warranties provided by the manufacturer of such item, provided that such warranty may be assigned to Customer by Contractor. CUSTOMER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT THE WARRANTIES UNDER THIS SECTION ARE LIMITED TO THOSE WARRANTIES PROVIDED BY THE MANUFACTURER. CONTRACTOR DOES NOT MAKE ANY WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THE QUALITY OR FITNESS OF ANY OF THE ITEMS SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION, EXCEPT FOR THE WARRANTIES EXPRESSLY PROVIDED FOR IN THIS AGREEMENT, CUSTOMER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT CONTRACTOR HAD MADE NO OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, HABITABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE), WITH RESPECT TO THE WORK, CUSTOMER AGREES THAT CONTRACTOR HAS NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONDITION OF TREES, SHRUBS OR GROUND COVER. If any trees or shrubs suffer damage, become diseased or die before, during or after completion of the Work, Contractor will have no obligation to remove, treat, or replace any tree or shrub, to compensate you in any way or to reimburse any expense you may incur. Trees and shrubs which interfere with access to the construction site will be trimmed or removed at the Contractor's discretion, and any trees or shrubs that are located in areas that must be excavated, filled or graded or which interfere with drainage of the Property will be removed. 16. WAIVER REGARDING DRIVEWAY. Customer acknowledges and agrees that the performance of Contractor's Work may require using heavy machinery and equipment on Customer's Property, including Customer's driveway, sidewalks, and walkways. Customer shall be responsible for preparing his or her Property for the use of such dumpsters, heavy machinery and equipment. As such, Customer waives any and all claims, liabilities and/or damages against Contractor as a result of the use of such machinery, dumpsters and/or equipment on the Property by Contractor or Contractor's subcontractors, including, but not limited to damages arising from stains, markings, cracks, or other alterations. Contractor is not responsible for any damage to Customer's Property, including damage to Customer's driveway, walkway and/or sidewalk due to the placement and/or use of Contractor's machinery, dumpsters and/or equipment on the Property. 17. WAIVER REGARDING MATERIALS. Existing materials incorporated within your home are subject to natural variation in grains, colors and patterns due to weathering, aging, and natural wear and tear, The finished color, texture, and pattern of materials Contractor uses to complete the Work may vary considerably from the existing materials even when the materials Contractor uses are of the same type and original style, pattern, and color. While Contractor will use its best efforts to match its materials to the existing materials, Contractor makes no representations or warranties regarding the materials conformity, including, but not limited to, the finished color, uniformity, grain or pattern to the existing materials. 18. PRE -LIEN NOTICE TO OWNER. GENERAL CONTRACTOR PRE -LIEN NOTICE TO OWNER (A) ANY PERSON OR COMPANY SUPPLYING LABOR OR MATERIALS FOR THIS IMPROVEMENT TO YOUR PROPERTY MAY FILE A LIEN AGAINST YOUR PROPERTY IF THAT PERSON OR COMPANY IS NOT PAID FOR THE CONTRIBUTIONS. (B) UNDER MINNESOTA LAW, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO PAY PERSONS WHO SUPPLIED LABOR OR MATERIALS FOR THIS IMPROVEMENT DIRECTLY AND DEDUCT THIS AMOUNT FROM OUR AGREEMENT PRICE, OR WITHHOLD THE AMOUNTS DUE THEM FROM US UNTIL 120 DAYS AFTER COMPLETION OF THE IMPROVEMENT UNLESS WE GIVE YOU A LIEN WAIVER SIGNED BY PERSONS WHO SUPPLIED ANY LABOR OR MATERIAL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT AND WHO GAVE YOU TIMELY NOTICE. 19. LEGAL NOTICES. Customer acknowledges reviewing the following attached or incorporated legal notices. General Contractor Pre -Lien Notice to Owner, Building Performance Guidelines, Urea Formaldehyde Notice, Warranty Addendum, Notice of Right of Rescission (if applicable), a Lead Paint Pamphlet and Addendum (if applicable), Water Intrusion and Mold Growth Notice, and if applicable, the Notice Regarding Cancellation Rights and the Notice of Cancellation which shall be incorporated herein by reference, 20. ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY. Customer warrants and represents that Customer has fee title to (owns) the Property and has full right and authority to and shall grant Contractor access to the Property and authorize the Work. Customer shall, at all times provide Contractor with access to a power source on the Property at all times In order to complete the Work. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. Except as otherwise provided herein, any claim by Customer or Contractor in any way arising out of this Agreement, any and all other agreements between Customer and Contractor and/or in any way arising out of or relating to the physical condition of the Property shall be settled by binding arbitration. Customer agrees that any arbitration and/or mediation between Customer and Contractor shall take place in St. Cloud, Minnesota, under the Construction Industry Rules of the American Arbitration Association. A request for arbitration must be filed within one (1) year of the date when the relevant facts regarding the claim were discovered or could reasonably have been discovered. In no case may any arbitration or Court action be brought after the expiration of the applicable Statute of Limitations or Statute of Repose. Contractor retains the right to file, perfect and start a lawsuit to enforce Mechanic's Lien rights. The parties agree that the Court may refer the matter to arbitration, but retain jurisdiction for enforcement of the Mechanic's Lien. If Contractor is required to retain an attorney to collect any money from Customer, Customer agrees to pay all of Contractor's attorney fees, costs and disbursements. 22. MISCELLANEOUS. Time is of the essence with regard to all of the terms of this Agreement. The invalidity, illegality or unenforceability of any provision, restriction, condition, reservation or any other part of this Agreement, in its entirety or as applied to particular circumstances shall not impair or affect in any manner the validity, legality, enforceability or effect of the remainder of this Agreement. Minnesota law shall govern all the terms of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be assigned by Customer, except with Contractor's prior written consent. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument signed by both parties. The captions contained in this Agreement are for convenience only. Any number of counterparts of this Agreement may be executed and each such executed counterpart shall be deemed an original, but all such counterparts together shall constitute one Agreement. The electronic signature of any party to this Agreement shall be sufficient for all purposes. CUSTOMER AGREES THAT THIS AGEEMENT IS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF A CORPORATE OFFICER OF APEX CONSTRUCTION, INC., AND UPON REVIEW OF THE DETAILS OF THE AGREEMENT, INCLUDING THE PRICE, MEASUREMENTS OR ANY OTHER FACTORS, APEX CONSTRUCTION, INC. MAY DECLINE TO APPROVE THIS AGREEMENT, AND DECLARE THE AGREEMENT NULL AND VOID AT ITS OPTION, AT WHICH TIME ANY DEPOSIT MADE BY CUSTOMER WILL BE PAID IN FULL TO CUSTOMER. Dated this 11TH day of JULY . 2016 Customer Pete Ziemer Sales Representative Customer APEX CONSTRUCTION, INC. By Pete Ziemer Its OFFICER License No. 20511607 7529 Aldrich AvuS. F|i~hAc|d, MN 53423 /612\978-5944 MN#B(-66977l Proposal Client: City of Lake Elmo Location: Pomphouoclocated at the south end of Manning Ave North job: New Roof including a venting solution for the Zdoub\e walls job Details: i Remove and haul away all current shingle applications, pipe booL, felt, and the two cap and uollar/frcoh air intake stacks 2. Remove cur -rent drip rd--e and install new drip edge to match. Client to approve the color Frorn a swatch 3. Remove and install new cobra style ridge vent. The rigid plastic ridge vcnt(Cobra Style) is far superior to the rolled options. 4. Install Ice and Water Shield § feet up all goLLcr lines, through all valleys, around the 2 large vento. the pipe boot, and around the two cap and collars 5. Install -new synthetic style onderlaynncnL Synthetic ondcrlaymcntiu far superior to tile -usual 15 oreven 3Opound felt. 6. Install new architectural style silingles and ridge cap. &4N Pro uses Owens Corning Duration as a standard but many otbcrchoiceo are available at this price point. On acceptance of this proposal vveNvill have an addendum for the exact shingle selection. 7. Rurnnvo current double venting/ fresh air intake sYxtcrn. We will reinstall as a single exhaust through the same extrusion with new standard cap and collar oyotenn. In addition to this we will install a new MN Standard Building Code PVC fresh air intake nysLcrn t-iaLvents out through the exterior wall, See Addendum A for alternate venting plan 8. Grounds protection and cleanup including nunning magnets [ornullo g. Permit From the City of Lake Elmo Total cost of project $l|,SgO.DO Proposal submitted by: Ryan Guttormson, [.E(} MN Pro /612\978-5944 Addendum A �\l��rn�t� �^-�� �'r intake/exhaust 8D8L -Jan '° Fresh . . �`/`^./ P/ The current double pipe nyotcrn that is already in place has cap and collar system that allows for both a fresh air intake and an exhaust system through the xnrnuexcrosinn. The can and collar on the top of this system has been dented over the years. The alternate plan would be to leave tile pipes in place and install a ncw cap and collar xYstc/n similar to what is in place. MN Pro would warranty against any leaking through the new cop and collar orthe flashing but not against condcnxabon issues from the fresh air intake. If tile client opts to use the alternate fresh air intake detailed in Addendum /\ there will be a $500 reduction in the contract price cc THE (Try or LAKE ELN/ 0 AY0 COU CIL CO CATIO DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #I5 MOTION AGENDA ITENI: Approve Payoff of Existing Building Department Vehicle Loan SUBMITTED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Finance Committee SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of ..... .....................................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: Interest savings of approximately $800 plus staff time savings SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to approve paying in full the loan on the 2015 Jeep Cherokee (Loan #22830) with Lake Elmo Bank. This has been discussed with the Finance Committee who agrees with this recommendation. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND STAFF REPORT: In 2015, staff proposed taking out a loan to purchase the 2015 Jeep Cherokee for the Building Department. The Finance Committee recently proposed spending down and discontinuing the use of the Vehicle Reserve fund. The current balance in the fund is approximately $65k. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends using $18.5k of the vehicle replacement fund to pay off the remaining principal balance on Loan #22830 with Lake Elmo Bank. -- page LAKE ELMO STAFF REPORT DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #: 16 MOTION TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: Safe Assure Contract BACKGROUND: The City has been contracting with Safe Assure for a number of years to provide safety training for staff and other OSHA compliance activities. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council approve a contract with Safe Assure for Oct.1, 2016-Sept 30, 2017? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS; A copy of the contract is included in your packet. FISCAL IMPACT: Safe Assure has kept their rates tlat for a number of years but are requesting a 2% increase for the coming contract year. This increase ($61.74) will not be an issue given our current budget surplus projections. OPTIONS: 1) Approve 2016-2017 Safe Assure Contract 2) Do not approve 216-2017 Safe Assure Contract RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda: Motion to approve the 2016-2017 contract with Safe Assure. The United States Department of Labor, Division of Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Minnesota Department of Labor, Division of Occupational Safety and Health Administration require employers to have documented proof of employee training and written procedures for certain specific standards. The attached addendum and training sch ule clarifies written and training requirements. The required standards that apply to The City of Lake Elmo are listed below: A.W.A.I.FL MN Statute 182.653 "An employer covered by this section must establish a written Work -place Accident &Injufy program that promotes safe & healthful working conditions". EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN 29 CFR 1910.35 THRU .38 'The emergency action plan shall be in writina and shall cover the designated actions employers & employees must take to insure employee safety from fire & other emergencies' CONTROL OF H RDOUS ENERGY 29 CFR 1910.147 & MN Statute 5207.0600 "Procedures shall be developed. documented & utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees are engaged in the activities covered by this section". H RD COMMUNICATIONS 29 CFR 1910.1200 & MN Statute 5206.0100 thru 5206.1200 "Evaluating the potential hazards of chemicals, and communicating information concerning hazards and appropriate protective measures to employees may include, but is not limited to, provision for: development & maintaining a written hazard communication program for the work -place,.." RECORDING AND REPORTING OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES 29 CFR 1904 "Each employer shall maintain in each establishment a log and summary of all occupational injuries and illnesses for that establishment........ CONFINED SPACE 29 CFR 1910.146 If the employer decides that its employees will enter permit spaces, the employer shall develop and implement a written permit space program........ RESPI TORY PROTECTION 29 CFR 1910.134 Written standard operating procedures governing the selection and use of respirators shall be established. OCCUPATIONAL NOISE EXPOSURE 29 CFR 1910.95 The employer shall institute a training program for all employees who are exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour time weighted average of 85 decibels, and shall ensure employee participation in such a program. BLOODBORNE PATHOGENS 29 CFR 1910.1030 Each employer having an employee(s) with occupational exposure as defined by paragraph (b) of this section shall establish a written Exposure Control Plan designed to eliminate or minimize employee exposure. '1' Of 7 POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCKS 29 CFR 1910.178 "Only trained and authorized operators shall be permitted to operate a powered industrial truck. Methods shall be devised to train operators in the safe operation of Powered Industrial Trucks': GENERAL DUTY CLAUSE PL91-596 "Hazardous conditions or practices not covered in an 0.5.H.A. Standard may be covered under section 5(a)(1) of the act, which states: Each employer shall furnish to each of {their} employees employment and a place of employment which is free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to {their) employees." PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT 1926.95 a) 'Application." Protective equipment, including personal protective equipment for eyes, face, head, and extremities, protective clothing, respiratory devices, and protective shields and barriers, shall be provided, used, and maintained in a sanitary and reliable condition wherever it is necessary by reason of hazards of processes or environment, chemical hazards, radiological hazards, or mechanical irritants encountered in a manner capable of causing injury or impairment in the function of any part of the body through absorption, inhalation or physical contact. OVERHEAD C NES 1910.179(j)(3) Periodic inspection. Complete inspections of the crane shall be performed at intervals as generally defined in paragraph (j)(1)(10(b) of this section, depending upon its activity.. ....... ........... ERGONOMICS 29 CFR PART 1910.900 THRU 1910.944 "Training required for each employee and their supervisors must address signs and symptoms of MSD's, MSD hazards and controls used to address MSD hazards." MOBILE EARTHMOVING EQUIPMENT MN RULES 5207.1000 Mobile earth -moving equipment operators and all other employees working on the ground exposed to mobile earth -moving equipment shall be trained in the safe work procedures pertaining to mobile earth -moving equipment and in the recognition of unsafe or hazardous conditions. In the interest of Quality Safety Management, it may be recommended that written procedures and documented employee training also be provided for the following Subparts. (Subparts represent multiple standards) 1910 Subparts Subpart D - Walking - Working Surfaces Subpart E - Means of Egress Subpart F - Powered Platforms, Man -lifts, and Vehicle -Mounted Work Platforms Subpart G - Occupational Health and Environmental Control Subpart H - Hazardous Materials Subpart I - Personal Protective Equipment Subpart J - General Environmental Controls Subpart K - Medical and First Aid Subpart L - Fire Protection Subpart M - Compressed Gas and Compressed Air Equipment Subpart N - Materials Handling and Storage Subpart 0 - Machinery and Machine Guarding Subpart P - Hand and Portable Powered Tools and Other Hand -Held Equipment. Subpart Q - Welding, Cutting, and Brazing. Subpart S - Electrical Subpart Z - Toxic and Hazardous Substances 1926 Subparts Subpart C - General Safety and Health Provisions Subpart D - Occupational Health and Environmental Controls Subpart E - Personal Protective and Life Saving Equipment Subpart F - Fire Protection and Prevention Subpart G - Signs, Signals, and Barricades Subpart H - Materials Handling, Storage, Use, and Disposal Subpart I - Tools - Hand and Power Subpart J - Welding and Cutting Subpart K - Electrical Subpart L - Scaffolds Subpart M - Fall Protection Subpart N - Cranes, Derricks, Hoists, Elevators, and Conveyors Subpart 0 - Motor Vehicles, Mechanized Equipment, and Marine Operations Subpart P - Excavations Subpart V - Power Transmission and Distribution Subpart W - Rollover Protective Structures; Overhead Protection Subpart X - Stairways and Ladders Subpart Z - Toxic and Hazardous Substances Applicable MN OSHA 5205 Rules Applicable MN OSHA 5207 Rules Applicable MN OSHA 5206 Rules (Employee Right to Know) 3Of7 All training on the programs written by SafeAssure Consultants, Inc. will meet or exceed State and/or Federal OSHA requirements. These programs/policies and procedures listed on the addendum do not include the cost of hardware such as labels, signs, etc. and will be the responsibility of The City of Lake Elmo to obtain as required to comply with OSHA standards. Our contract year will begin on the signing of this proposal/contract. Classroom training will be accomplished at a time convenient to most employees/management and so selected as to disrupt the workday as little as possible. All documents and classroom training produced by Saf- sure Consultants for The Ci of Lake Elmo are for the sole and press use by The Ci of Lake Elmo and its employees and not to be shared, copied, recorded, filmed or us by any division, department, subsidiary, or parent organization or any entity whatsoever, without prior written approval of SafeAssure Consultants. It is always the practice of SafeAssure Consultants to make modifications and/or additions to your program when necessa to comply with changing OSHA standards/statutes. These changes or additions, when made during a contract year, will be made at no additional cost to The Ci of Lake Elmo. All written programs/services that are produced by Saf ssure Consultants, Inc. are to meet the r- uirements set forth by OSHA/OSHA. SafeAssure Consultants, Inc. will reimburse The Ci of Lake Elmo should NOSHA/OSHA assess a fine for a deficient or inadequate written program that was produc by Saf ssure Consultants, Inc. Saf ssure Consultants, Inc. does not take responsibility for financial loss due to OSHA/OSHA fines that are unrelated to written programs mentioned above. 4 Of 7 ADDENDUM SAFETY PROG RECO MENDATIONS The City of Lake Elmo en Programs & Training A. .A.I.R. (A orkplace Accident and Injury Reduction Act) • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel • accident investigation • simulated OSHA inspection Employee Right to Know/Hazard Communication • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel (general and specific training) • various labeling requirements • assist with installing and initiating DAMARCO Solutions, LLC, MSDS and data base program Lock Out/Tag Out (Control of Hazardous Energy) • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel Emergency Action Plan • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel Respiratory Protection • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel Bloodborne Pathogens • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel Cranes -Chains -Slings • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel (inspections) Hearing Conservation (Occupational Noise Exposure) • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel • decibel testing and documentation Personal Prot ive Equipment • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel Confined Space • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personal 511 Of 7 Powered Industrial Trucks/Forkli • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel • testing and licensing Ergonomics • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel o job hazards -recognition o control steps o reporting o management leadership requirements o employee participation requirements obile Earthmoving Equipment • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personal General Safety Requirements • review/modify or write site specific program • documented training of all personnel The "SafeAssure Advantage" • C)rLine trrnc A\NAIR„ E RG C3odbor • Safety Committee Advisor • Employee Safety Progress Analysis • Sal0ASS',,tre: Dis-coulit i" rF; oco ( 1. 5% 011' • Job Hazard Analysis (JHA for more hazardous tasks/jobs) • Training manual maintenance • Safety manual maintenance • Documented decibel testing • Documented air quality readings-(CO2 testing in shops with 5 or more vehicle capacity) • Documented foot-candle readings (if needed) • OSHA recordkeeping • General Duty Clause • Assistance during an actual OSHA inspection • General safety recommendations • "ALERT" data base • Unlimited consulting services r r THIS AGREEMENT is made this first day of October, 2016 between The City of Lake Elmo, Lake Elmo, Minnesota, herein referred to as The City of Lake Elmo and SafeAssure Consultants, Inc. 200 S.W. Fourth Street, Willmar, Minnesota, herein referred to as SafeAssure. SafeAssure agrees to abide by all applicable federal and state laws including, but not limited to, OSHA regulations and local/state/national building codes. Additionally, SafeAssure will practice all reasonable and appropriate safety and loss control practices. SafeAssure agrees to provide, at the time of execution of this contract/agreement, The City of Lake Elmo (upon request) with a current Certificate of Insurance with proper coverage lines and a minimum of $2,000,000.00 in insurance limits of general liability and statutory for workers' compensation insurance. SafeAssure is insured by "The Hartford" insurance companies. SafeAssure further agrees that The City of Lake Elmo will not be held liable for any claims, injuries, or damages of whatever nature due to negligence, alleged negligence, acts or omissions of SafeAssure to third parties. SafeAssure expressly forever releases and discharges The City of Lake Elmo, its agents, members, officers, employees, heirs and assigns from any such claims, injuries, or damages. SafeAssure will also agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless The City of Lake Elmo, its agents, members and heirs from any and all claims, injuries, or damages of whatever nature pursuant to the provisions of this agreement. SafeAssure and its employees is an independent contractor of The City of Lake Elmo, and nothing in this agreement shall be considered to create the relationship of an employer/employee. In consideration of this signed agreement/contract, for the period of Twelve Months from the signing month, SafeAssure Consultants, Inc. agrees to provide The City of Lake Elmo, the aforementioned features and services. These features and services include but are not limited to OSHA compliance recommendations and consultations, providing scheduled classroom -training sessions, writing and maintaining mandatory OSHA programs. These features and services will be prepared to meet the specific needs of The City of Lake Elmo. ANNUAL CONTRACT $ 3148.74 MSDS/SDS ON-LINE SERVICES s Included ANNUAL $3,148.74 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, we agree to the day and year first above written and, if representing an organization or similar entity, further certify the undersigned are a duly authorized agent of said entity and authorized to sign on behalf of identified entity. ELVE MONTH CONT X SafeAssure Consultants, Inc. Date 090216 7 Of 7 X The City of Lake Elmo X The City of Lake Elmo STAFF REPORT DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #: 17 MOTION TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: Lions Park Design Services BACKGROUND: At the May 17th Council meeting, there was discussion of amending the RFP for Lions Park to include the removal of the parks storage building. This amendment failed. Staff therefore issued the RFP on May 18, 2016 with previously discussed improvements from November 2015. At the joint meeting between Council and Parks on September 13, the options of just grading the field or securing design services to better develop the proposal were discussed. ISSUE FOR:DISCUSSION; Who should the City contract with for design services for Lions Park? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Proposals were due to the City on June 15, 2016. At that time we received proposals from five firms. Only one firm, Anderson Engineering, had submitted a complete proposal that included cost estimates for the construction phase. Since that time, staff was able to obtain complete proposals from two additional firms. A summary of the proposals submitted is provided in the chart below. FIRM Anderson Engineering DESIGN CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ESTIMATES $33,200 $546,000 Total *$396,500 field *$80,000 con bldg. *$37,500 con imp *$10,500 vb ct, rink Busch Architect $85,000 $950,000 $650,000 $150,000 INCLUDED IN CONSTRUCTION Field improvements, fencing, dugout, backstop, concession bldg. improvements, concourse improvements, relocate sand volleyball court, grading and turf for hockey rink Field imp, rink in outfield, seating, backstop, dugouts, bull pens & batting cages, scorer's booth, ticket stand & storage, lighting New building for restrooms, concessions, warming room, etc Regrade & surface field, dugouts, Clever Miller S22,500- Quality Vision $45,000-Field of Dreams $78,500- Regional Recreation Center Vision $27,500 Not submitted $137,950 292 Design Group $98,500 Not submitted fencing, irrigation Field imp, dugouts, fencing, batting cages, irrigation, bleachers, new announcers booth, update exterior of concession stand FISCAL IMPACT: The 2016-2020 CIP included $40,000 for grading the field at Lions Park. The Parks Commission 2017-2021 CEP recommendations include $150,000 for improvements to Lions Park. The total request therefore was $190,000. The Park Dedication Fund has a projected balance of $885,000 by the end of 2016, assuming Tablyn improvements are completed. Miller's not to exceed cost is $27,500. This included both the design phase and the construction bid phase as that is how the RFP was originally issued. The scope definition, schematic design and master planning tasks would cost $7,500. A site survey could cost an additional $1,000- 2,000. Staff did this break down of phases for the next lower bidder as well and found that Miller is still the lowest bidder. 9PTIONS:, 1) Approve contracting for design services for Lions Park from Miller Architecture, Inc 2) Approve contracting for design services for Lions Park from another firm 3) Do not pursue design services at this time RECOMMENDATION: Based on the discussion from the joint meeting on September 13th, staff would recominend pursuing a contract with Miller Architecture Inc. If removed from the consent agenda the motion would be: Motion to approve contracting for design services for Lions Park from Miller Architecture Inc. in a not to exceed amount of $27,500 and authorize Mayor and Clerk to sign the contract. OPTION ONE: FIELD IMPROVEMENTS OPTION TWO: ALL UPGRADES RE-,GRAOE FIELD 516 500 HYDRO -SEED OUTFIELD 51Z100 NEW DUGOUTS 524,750 HYDRO -SEED OUTFIELD 512,100 PERIMETER FENCE INFILL 55,000 SOD INFIELD PERIMETER 55,500 558,350- NEW DUGOUTS . 524,750 PERIMETER FENC. 522 000 BATTING CAGES ..... . ...... ,.........„„ ........ . ................... —.45,500 IRRIGATION 56,600 BLEACHEFiS , 519,800 ANNOUNCER BOOTH 511,000 tc, CONCESSION STAND 51,000 5137,950 NEW PERIMETER FENCE 174S (FI CHA)Nttmet &NE* 55LFI CXAMINN FENCE kV RACKSIOR1 : NEW HYDRO -SEED OUTFIELD p6.000 S.F,NYRDO.SE 0 TURF -I NEW SOO 1, FM S.F NEW SOO tRFIELD PERIMETER) 2 NEW DUGOUTS (CONCR ere OLOCX (Cdffi) WALLS WICONCRETE FLOOR. WOOD SHEINES, 4NO WOOD BENCH, WOOD FRAME k MAUL ROOF rYX367 3 NEW BLEACHERS fafiF 54101V Az 01,,Klell NEW :ANNOUNCER (PIA) BOOTH (CONCRETE BLOCK (CAW! WALLS W/ CONCRETE FLOOR, WOOD FRAMED 2NO FLOOR STRUCTURE AND $rAtR3 METAL ROLL-TOP SHUTTER W/ WINDOW WOOD FRAME mem. ;war vrxm - - t 00500557 EXISTING CONCESSION STAND 1UP0AT£ E.RERIOR FINISHES AND INTERIOR FINISMEs.- PNATI7 51775.73 LIONS PARK BASEBALL FIELD FIELD RENOVATION & UPGRADES LAKE ELMO, MN P-101 05 RE.GRADE FIELD ifie.a,ovE ENT1P£ 'YEW ANA SURACIUNWIVO PERIATETEN FOR PROPER DRAINAOE NEW INFIELD, WARNING TRACK, BAT7ING CAGE GRAVEUDIFIT '10.000 S.£ G0114ILVIRr WATURFT BATTING CAGES 'STRUCTURE AND NE rsi IRRIGATION SYSTEM ""•COST ESTIMATES BASED ON SIMILAR PROJECT COMPLETED IN CENTRAL MINNESOTA. ACTUAL COSTS MAY VARY 80550 ON LOCATION, ENGINEERING & CONSULTATION FEES NOT INCLUOED'"" il .1111.0 E..11 -11 IF, CITY ( LAKE ELMO AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Tablyn Park Pricing Emily Becker, City Planner Kristina Handt, City Administrator Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director DATE: 09/20/2016 Consent Agenda ITEM #: 18 At its meeting on June 21, 2016, the City Council made a motion to approve an expenditure of up to $46,000 for improvements to Tablyn Park that included stairs to the parking lot, ADA-compliant switchback trail, and entrance lighting. Staff has since received bids for the aforementioned and is asking Council to approve these costs. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council is requested to approve the expenditure of a total of $41,257.84 for the construction of stairs to the parking lot, accessibility trail, and entrance lighting. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYS1S: The table below provides a summary of the quotes gathered. Attached are details of the quotes: Amenity Steps to Parking Lot Option #1 — Jim Weber General Contracting, Inc. • Removal/disposal of existing wood steps • Broom finished • 4500 PSI, 6% air entrained concrete • #3 rebar throughout • Cured and sealed #2 St. Croix Concrete • Removal/disposal of existing wood steps • New class 5 base, 4" thick • 4"-10" thick concrete with 1/2" rebar every 2 feet on center • 4500 PSI concrete w/air entrained agent • Proper control joints to reduce risk of cracking • Cured and sealed 1 Bid Price $19,250.00 $16,904.84 City Council Meeting 09/06/2016 Regular Agenda Item #21 Lighting #1 — Xcel Energy Standard Service Underground • LED cobra fixtures yt is appieci3 3ard ',ha; contiribii:es tc, Zhe aria COLC`iiR333 S- A' #2 - Xcel Energy Pre -Pay Option • LED cobra fixtures (reference photo above) #3 - Xcel Energy Pre -Pay Option • Evans fixtures R n Gfar,C7.7;Ut v;IU revtzatize comiriuni rcnach',3y %,;111 styte CO,_ORS. R;RON7R, BLAGY.,, AND GREEN ai on polesi 'D." 011ty -$3,572.00 upfront installation cost -$18.92 monthly under- ground rate per luminaire -$9,503.00 upfront installation cost -$4.89 monthly under- ground rate per luminaire -$22,460.10 upfront installation cost -$6.94 monthly under- ground rate per luminaire Repaving #1- Brochman Blacktopping Co $19,900 trail from • Remove existing trail and replace to 8 feet wide parking lot • Does not have a machine to replace 6 foot wide trails and adding new trail #2-T.A. Schifsky $20,000 connecting • Remove existing trail and replace to 8 feet wide stairs to parking lot #3-T.A. Schifsky $14,850 and • Remove existing trail and replace to 6 feet wide connecting looping trail to playground Page 2 City Council Meeting 09/20/2016 Consent Agenda Item #18 Note about Trail Quotes. It should be noted that the quotes provided are not for an ADA-compliant switchback trail. Staff has further evaluated the site, and creating an accessible switchback trail that would be ADA-compliant would require a significant amount of grading, a very large amount of fill, possible disturbance of wetland and drainage area, and a substantial number of trees removed (attached photos are provided showing this). Therefore, the quote provided is to redo the existing trail that connects the parking lot to the area below. The existing looping trail connects to 27' Street Court N, so with the addition of trails that connect to the playground area, access is provided to the playground area. Recommended Options. Staff would recommend Option #2 of the stairs to the parking lot based on the lower price. Option #2 of the lighting would also be recommended based on the lower monthly cost and the existence of park dedication funds that can cover this upfront cost. Option #3 for the trail improvements is recommended as staff feels the 6-foot wide trail that exists is an adequate width. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost from the Parks Fund will be $41,257.84, which is $4,742.16 less than the amount Council directed Staff to not exceed of $46,000. OPTIONS: The Council may choose to accept any combination of the aforementioned bids. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council approve the following bids: • Steps to parking lot: Option #2 • Lighting: Option #2 • Accessibility trail improvements: Option #3 "Move to approve the following bids for improvements to Tablyn Park, totaling an expenditure of $41,257.84: Steps to the parking lot: Option #2; lighting: Option #2; Trail improvements: Option# ATTACHMENTS: • Quotes • Tablyn Park Plan 3.,, Page 3 Tablyn Park Plan 4/13/16 Entrance Gate ÷ Nev Fl(iwtringl.`reei; Lighcing 1)011in:tut) _Lighting ' 1 xtenclecl Parkin Arc: New- Trail Head Switchback Trail jed Trail not be sNvItdibackas ....„ Looping Trail Approved Concrete Steps to Parking Lot Skating rink parking and driveway (gravel) Pleasure skating rink Warming House/ Res trooms Trail Convert Rasebal to Soccer N Playground Featurc,i Sangs Enclose Equipment Together 0 50 100 1 200 Feet From: Jay Weber To; Emily Becker Subject: Concrete (Jim Weber General Contracting, Inc) Date: rx"rsuor'June so' 20165,53z7pn Hello Emily, [ apologize for taking so long to send this over. I thought l had sent it earlier this week but just came my bid sheet (and it wasn't in nnysent folder ... ) VVeappreciate your interest inour companies services. Below isour bid for the work discussed atTob|yn Park. Let me know ifyou have any questions. *Emily you had asked for a recommendation of the railing... I think that the existing railing is just fine, but it is missing a section at the top. If that is replaced l think that we could put the concrete steps close enough to the railing (as the current steps are) so that there is not need toreplace it. *Let me know if you'd like to have us send over a W-9 and a Cert. of insurance, Removal & disposal of existing wooden steps. Install ~45 new concrete steps to the same dimensions of the previous wooden steps (4' Wide steps running ~104' @6" high each). Broom Finished. Cured &Sea|ed. 450OPSl, 696 Air Entrained Concrete. #3 Rebar throughout. 0id.$19,250 All labor, materials, and tax included. Work completed in atinne|y manner. The work site kept orderly throughout the project and cleaned afterward, Proper barricades (caution tape, cones, safety fence, etc) will be in place any time that is appropriate. Payment terms are Net]8. We accept Cash, [heck, &[ord (396 is added for the use of In our 36 years in business we have learned what ittakes to create lasting concrete products. We continue tneducate ourselves in the industry through certifications like our American Concrete Institute -F|atwork Finisher &Technician certification. It is our promise to our customers that we use all of our knowledge, not skipping any steps, to provide only the highest quality concrete products, I hope that you've had a nice day. We look forward to working with you. -Jay Weber Jim Weber General Contracting, Inc. 1918Greeley Street South Stillwater, MN55O82 (651)468'106SCell (651)439-3237Office (651)439'6169Fax jayPfimweberqccomEmaU MNLlC#:BC603O81 Company Name Address City, State ZIP Phone Email Date City of Lake Etmo Emily Becker Tablyn Park, Stillwater Blvd Lake Elmo, MN 55042 651-747-3912 7/5/16 1) New Concrete Steps: T Company Name Address City, State ZIP Phone Email - - C1:3 NCRET- t t' T St, Croix Concrete, Inc. Dustin Dahlblom 3303 Lake Elmo Ave, N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 612-213-9637 dustindstcroixconcretemn.com PO N/A Demo, remove and properly dispose of existing wood steps. Sub cut current base and make way for new class 5 base roughly 4" thick as needed, Grade and compact new class 5 base. Form and pour new steps. Concrete will consist of. 4" to 10- thick concrete with 1/2- rebar every 2 feet on center, 4500 PSI concrete with air entrained agent. Proper control joints to reduce risk of cracking. Seal with a coat of cure and seal. Based on 516 sq. ft. at $9.99 per square foot — Total: $5,154.84 43 — 6" X 4wide steps at $250 each — Total: $10,750.00 Concrete pump truck to place the concrete - $1,000.00 Total: $16.904.84 1 - Additional square feet above and beyond what is quoted in this proposal will be billed out at the same price - Although St. Croix Concrete does our best not to disturb our customer's property too much while working to place our concrete, sometimes additional landscaping is needed to compliment the new concrete and to repair any wear that occurs by our machines. Landscaping is not included in this bid. Notice to property owner. Any person or company supplying labor or materials for this improvement to your property may file a lien against your property if that ')erson or company is not paid for the contributions. Under Minnesota law you have the right to pay persons who supplied labor or naterials for this improvement directly and deduct this amount from our contract price, or withhold the amounts due them from us until 120 days after completion of the improvement unless we give you a lien waiver signed by persons k,vho supplied any labor or materials for St. Croix Concrete, Inc. I 649 Schilling Circle NW. I Forest Lake, MN 55025 I 651.204.9044 Thank you for your business! the improvement and who gave you timely notice, All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements are contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Projects are bid at normal wage rates unless specified as prevailing wage or other on this proposal. Due to climate, soil conditions, shrinkage and other relative issues, cracking of concrete is common and typically not a structural concern. Control joints are placed within industry standards to help control cracking but may not prevent it; therefore, cracking is not a warrantable item. If cracks of over 3/8in width occur, they will be addressed per circumstance and warranted as applicable. Furthermore, cracking or displacement due to settling of soils whether from lack of compaction or presence of frost is also not a warrantable item, From time to time, SCC may sub some of their work to qualified and experienced Subcontractors. The work performed by the Subcontractor shall be at the risk of the Subcontractor exclusively. Customer hereby indemnifies and holds SCC, its parent and affiliates and their respective officers, directors, employees and agents, harmless from and against any and all claims, actions, losses, judgments, or expenses, including reasonable attorneys fees, arising from or in any way connected with the work performed, materials furnished, or services provided to SCC during the term of this Agreement. SCC recommends sealing all concrete with approved sealers to help prevent damage and to keep concrete looking it's best, SCC does not recommend the use of deicers on concrete whether the manufacturer states that it is safe to use or not. Damage to concrete from direct use of deicers or indirect tracking of deicers onto concrete (by a vehicle, etc.) is considered to be beyond our control and is not warrantable. Color, whether integral or not. may differ in appearance from truck to truck and pour to pour. Heated ready -mix material charges to be applied to all pricing between November lst and April 15th and will be above and beyond the proposal pricing (typically 7°/-, additional) unless stated as included or specified differently in this bid on the previous pages. Protection of concrete from freezing temperatures is recommended by SCC per ACI specifications and is to be the contractors responsibility unless noted otherwise in this bid. Furthermore, SCC does not recommend the use of un-vented heaters due to the probability of dusting occurring. Dusting or damage due to freezing are not warrantable items. Road postings begin in the spring of each year dependent upon temperatures and ground thaw. Due to the volatility in beginning and ending dates. charges for additional trucks during road postings will be billed at the current rate and will be above and beyond the proposal price unless stated as included in this bid on the previous pages. We hereby propose to furnish mate al and labor — complete in accordance with these specifications, for the sum of Dollars (per square footage above) Payable as follows: 501'i, paid up front, balance paid upon completion. 10% interest thereafter, Legal fees to be additional if applicable. This Proposal / Contract become binding by acceptance on signature page or scheduling of work. It may be withdrawn by SCC if not accepted within 30 days. SCC may require this Proposal / Contract to be signed, dated and returned prior to commencement of work. E EPT . . • E ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL BY CUSTOMER: Signature: Date: The prices. specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above, SCC AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: Signature: Date: St. Croix Concrete, Inc. I 649 Schilling Circle NW. I Forest Lake, MN 55025 I 651,204.9044 Thank you for your business! oc BLAC TOPPING CO. www.brocbmanpaving.com 12770 McKusick Rd. N., Stillwater, MN 55082 MN: (651) 439-5379 WI: (715) 294-1622 Service Contract NAME: rbriO ADDRESS: mot., CITY: _ STATE: E-MAIL: --X 6121--Cfri ZAJ er--//40 JOB TYPE: 32 ii? Toe trc,.—(1 Er<rHALT WORK $ 0 CEMENT WORK $ 0 SURFACE SEAL $ JOB SKETCH: CI CRACK SEAL $ 0 TRUCKING 0 SNOWPLOWING $ 0 OTHER TOTAL COST: CONTRACTOR AGREES TO SUPPLY LABOR,plATERIALS, AND E 40_1' — Ci; go_4e_01-- PAc1_ awe_ 01-1-eP filfood4 DATE: TELEPHONE: FAX: ASPHALT AND CEMENT WARRANTY One (1) year on workmanship excluding damage caused by freezing or winter activity. ENT FO THE FO LOWING JOB DESCRIPTION: de6,4-te-4.) iieeeeev LL _ e CUSTOMER SIGNATURE CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE Customer agrees to make full payment upon completion of job. Late foes of 1.5% per month will be charged on past due accounts over 30 days PLEASE SEND PAYMENT TO: BROCHMAN BLACKTOPPING CO, 12770 McKUSICK Rd, N., STILLWATER, MN 55062 ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL (651) 439-5379 OR E-MAIL US AT brochmanpaving@msn.com. original - White Customer Copy - Yellow Office - Pink NAME: ADDRESS: CITY: E-MAIL: 490 swviv BLAC TOPP 1 G CO www.brochmanpaving.com 12770 MeKusick Rd.N., Stillwater, MN 55082 MN: (651) 439-5379 WI: (715) 294-1622 Service Contract s LAIR_ L'brze, JOB SKETCH: DATE: TELEPHONE: STATE: FAX: JOB TYPE: Ergl"HALT WORK $ D CEMENT WORK $ DSURFACESEAL $ El CRACK SEAL $ D 'TRUCKING ID SNOWPLOWING $ 0 OTHER OTAL COST: ASPHALTAND CEMENT WARRANTY I One (1) year on workmanship excluding damage caused by freezing or winter activity. CTOR AGREES TO SUPPLYBOR, MATERIALS, AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE FQ4LOWIN1q JOB DESCRIPTION: pr eu#04-.4WO avid. V-P cita ,viu-L-54,-.1cf- teeve 10-1-) 4.47 A L hays $r CUSTOMER SIGNATURE CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE Customer agrees to make full payment upon completion of job. Late fees of 1.5% per month wilt be charged on past due accounts over 30 days PLEASE SEND PAYMENT TO: BROCHMAN BLACKTOPPING CO., 12770 McKUSICK R. N., STILLWATER, MN 55062 ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL (651) 439-5379 OR E-MAIL US AT brochmanpaving@msn.com. Original - White Customer Copy - Yellow Office - Pink T ScitilAy 1.1,t L.; ow; 1 4_4.1 0 ig vi 6 1:l 10 Si.. Paul, iVit\i 551.09 Phone (651) 777-1313 Fax (631) '777-78;13 n,1% Nv.tiischifslo..cuni Bid To: ): Location: Addendums: City OfLake Elmo Blacktop Trail Lake Elmo - Tablyn Park NA Attention: ]Rob Weldon Address: Phone: 631.747.3941 Fax: Date: 8.19.16 tNvelckinifi!lakeelino.oro PA &AIM MCA, A !NV ose r the aboN c referenced 'vet: Blacktop Trails 8' Wick Remove Existing Black -top And Excess Fill Add Class 5 Base As Needed Install 3" Mat Of (Dura-Drive) Bituminous Contractor's Guarantee SF Ou 6,92() S20,000.00 Lump Sum Total = We guarantee all material used in this contract to be as specified above and the entire job to be clone in a neat, workmanlike manner. Bid is based on quantities stated Any variation s from the plan or alterations requiring extra labor or material will be petformed only upon written order and billed in uddition to the sum covered by this contract. Prices arcJr 2016 unless otherwise specified Thank you for the opportunity to quote. ff you have any questions please do not hesitate to call. T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. (Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer) 13y: Nick Schikky - Project ManageriEstUnator Acceptccl By: (Bid must be signed and returned) Date 8.19.16 Dare Due to the rising cost ofasphah oil fuel, we can only honor Offr quotes1M 30(ktys, flftcr 30 days bids/quotes are subject, to our review and possible. cost increase Payment due upon completion. 1".-U'ropusols20 1 6 Propavals1Trails-C'ourts-Tracks11,ctke Elmo T. A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. 2370 Highway 36 East North St. Paul, MN 55109 Phone (651) 777-1313 Fax (651) 777-7843 www.taschifskv.com St 5°17S Inc. OPOSAL Bid To: City Of Lake Elmo Job: Blacktop Trail Location: Lake Elmo - Tablyn Park Addendums: NA Date: 7.26.16 'Attention: Jamie Address: Phone: 651.248,1688 - Fax: Email: icoIemerIakeeImoorq We propose the following for the above referencedproject: Blacktop Trails move Existing Blacktop And Excess Fill Add Class 5 Base As Needed tall 3" Nlat Of (Dora -Drive) Bituminous Notes: Contractor's Guarantee SF 5,200 Unit Price 1 AnloLint 4,850. 0 Lump Sum Total = SI 4,850.00 1,1`e guarantee all material usecl in this contract to be as spec ,d above and the entire job to be done in a near, workmanlike 117(11717er, Bid is based on quantities stared. Any varicritonsJi•uni the plan or alterations requiring extra labor or material will be performed 01/17 upon VITiriell order and hided 117 eld(1itiOn 10 the Sun, covered by, this contract Prices are fur 20 1 5 unless otherwise si.iecifik,,d, Thank you for the opportunity to quote. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call. T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. (Affirirnative Action, Equal Opportunity Emplo)er) By: Nick Sc skv c a at4erlEstimator Accepted By: (Bid must be signed and returned) Date 7.26, I 6 Date Due In the rising cost asphalr nil file!, -we can only honor our quotes .for 30days. 411er 30 days bids/cmores are subjeci to our review and possible cost increase. Payment due upon completion. F,'Wroposals',20 6 Proposals!Trails-Courts-Tracks‘Lake Elmo Energy - OUTDOOR LIGHTING August 22, 2016 City of Lake Elmo Attn: Emily Becker 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 825 Rice Street St. Paul, MN 55117 Xcel Energy Outdoor Lighting is pleased to have an opportunity to submit a proposal for the City of Lake Elmo street light project. Our goal is to provide you with the necessary information to assist you in your decision making process. We are confident we can provide you with a comprehensive package that will meet all your needs. Please find below styles of product and the estimated project costs. This proposal includes all underground facilities installed using the plowing or boring method for conduit and wire and the installation of each of the following material. If successful in acquiring the identified project, delivery of the specified product could take 8 to 10 weeks: Tablvn Park Street Light Project: 1. The Standard Service Underground upfront installation cost is - $3,572.00. The monthly underground rate (A30) 50-75W LED per luminaire is - $18.92. :i1,53.tal 2-33-75W (6,000 Lumcrra) LED cora fhOnras or) brad pc)!nas. Install 3 ovaThaari spinaai y rAc,v; pp o373' of AL DX. in I 7327 2. The Pre -Pay Option upfront installation cost is - $9,503.00. The monthly pre -pay option rate (A30) 50-75W LED per luminaire is - $4.89, 2-30,75V! (e,o,yo Lums) LED cobra ibitacs on '3) Oftact burisci fibencicza,: IF4Std1 3 c:Nir',YaEv_i s:r 1F4c,,,'? appn:r,„L 375'o AL DX in 1 The Pre -Pay Option upfront installation cost is - $22,460.10. The monthly pre -pay option rate (A30) 150W HPS per luminaire is - $6.94. 2.. •". b::a;,, ;nr:v,Tdc-f inszg 3 ovanne,,ad sp.ans and ftista'j by rAcm aivrox. 375' of .t.zfl, CU wires in 1 1/20' Included in the monthly street light rate is full maintenance of the street light system. Maintenance of the system covers the pole, fixture, conduit and wiring, as well as facilitation of any locating and damage administration for 25 years under our Pre -Pay Option. If you have any questions please call me at 651.229,2255. Sincerely, Angela Adesoro Project Coordinator, Xcel Energy TI II', CITY ()I, LAKEELMO STAFF REPORT DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #: 19 MOTION TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: LMCIT Insurance Coverage BACKGROUND: On September 7, 2016 the LMCIT Board of Trustees voted to raise the City's deductible to $200,000 for liability claims except those for property damage and bodily injury to begin as soon as reasonably possible under the terms of the covenant and to have a review in June 2017. Under the tenns of the current coverage they must give the City a 30 day notice of any change in terms. The City received the notice of change on September 8, 2016. A copy of the letter is included in your packet. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: How should the City respond to the change in coverage terms from LMCIT? PROPOSAL DETA1LS/ANALYSIS: Effective at the end of October 9, 2016 the City's current coverage for municipal liability and land use and special risk litigation will be canceled. The LMC1T is offering coverage for those two areas with a $200,000 per occurrence deductible (increase from current deductible of $500). Only the deductible would change; the City would not see a change in premiums at this time. If the City is interested in the new terms (higher deductible) they will need to notify LMCIT before October 10, 2016 that they accept the endorsement changes. FISCAL IMPACT: Since no increase in premiums is proposed, there is no irnmediate fiscal impact. Increased costs would only be incurred if there was a claim. At their September 13th meeting, the Finance Committee began discussing the possibility of setting fund balance aside in a designated account to cover the possible $200,000 cost. OPTIONS: 1) Direct staff to notify LMCIT of acceptance of new terms 2) Direct staff to solicit bids from other insurance carriers 3) Direct staff not to pursue new terms/coverage RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda, Motion to direct staff to notify LMCIT of acceptance of new terms 0 0 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES September 8, 2016 Kristina 1landt City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Ave N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042-9629 Re: City of Lake Elmo - CMC 38652 Dear Ms. Handt: CONNECTING &L. INNOVATING SINCE 1913 Pursuant to action of the LMCIT Board of Trustees at their meeting on September 7, 2016, and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Common Conditions of the City's Comprehensive Municipal Property and Casualty Coverage, this letter is formal notification to the City of Lake Elrno that these coverages which the City currently has with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) are cancelled effective at the end of the day on October 9, 2016: • Comprehensive Municipal Coverage - Coverage A. Municipal Liability; and • Comprehensive Municipal Coverage - Coverage D. Land Use and Special Risk Litigation. These coverages which the City currently has with LMCIT are NOT affected by this notice of cancellation, and will remain in effect unless the City of Lake Elmo notifies LMCIT that it wishes to cancel these coverages: • Municipal Property, Crime, Bond, and Petrofund Coverage; • Comprehensive Municipal Coverage - Coverage B. Medical and Related Expense • Comprehensive Municipal Coverage - Coverage C. Automobile Liability; • Comprehensive Municipal Coverage - Coverage E. Uninsured and 'Underinsured Motorists; • Comprehensive Municipal Coverage - Coverage F. Basic Economic Loss Benefits; and • Automobile Physical Damage Coverage. LMCIT will rescind the cancellation of coverages described above if the City o to the following conditions: a e Elmo agrees The attached endorsement modifying the City of Lake Elmo's Comprehensive Municipal Coverage will be issued and will take effect at 12:01 a.m. October 10, 2016. This endorsement provides for a $200,000 per occurrence deductible applicable to all liability claims, except claims for property damage or bodily injury. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INSURANCE TRUST 145 UNIVEMITY AVE, WEST PHONE: (651) 281-1200 FAX (651) 261-1298 St PAUL, MN 55103-2044 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 WEB: WWWLMCORG Page 2 There will be no additional premium charge and no premium refund for this new endorsement. lithe City of Lake Elmo agrees to accept this endorsement, you must notify LMCIT in writing prior to 12:01 a.m. October 10, 2016. If .LMCIT does not receive notification from the City of Lake Elmo that the City accepts this endorsement, the City's liability coverage will terminate as of end of the day on October 9, 2016, with no further notice. In that event, LMCIT will return to the City a pro-rata portion of the premiums paid by the City for liability coverage for the City's January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016 coverage year. Sincerely, Daniel J. Greensweig LMCIT Assistant Administrator Cc Mayor Mike Pearson Sarah Sonsalla, Kennedy and Graven Rusty Zignego, Zignego Agency, Inc. Comprehensive Municipal Coverage Special Deductible Endorsement This endorsement modifies coverage provided under the Comprehensive Municipal Coverage, Item 5, Municipal Liability Deductible of LMCIT Dec-13 (11/86) (Rev.11/15) is amended to read $200,000 All other terms and conditions remain unchanged. TI ( IAKE El MO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kristina 1Iandt, City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: Replace Concrete in Front of City Hall STAFF REPORT DATE: September 20, 2016 CONSENT ITEM #: 20 MOTION BACKGROUND: There are some sections of the sidewalk in front of City Hall that are unsafe and may become tripping hazards. ISSUE FOR DISCUSSION:, Should Council approve bid to replace concrete in front of City Hall? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Staff obtained two quotes for replacement of sidewalk sections in front of City Hall. Frank Zainora's Concrete: $9,800 George Siegfried Construction Company: $19,651 Copies of the quotes are included in your packet. FISCAL IMPACT: As of September 9th, end of year budget projections included over $400,000 in excess revenues so this fund balance could be used to cover the $9,800 cost. OPTIONS: 1) Award concrete bid to Frank Zamora's Concrete for $9,800 2) Solicit additional bids 3) Do not complete the concrete work at this time RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda the motion would be: Motion to approve contracting for concrete replacement at City Hall from Frank Zamora's Concrete in an amount not to exceed $9,800. FFANK3AMOFNS CONCRETE 7172ndSt. St. Paul Park, K4N 55071 (651)458'8461 [ L T { [ T | L- AQDRESS City ofLake Elmo Attn: Rob Weldon 38UOLaverne Ave N Lake Elmo, &1N 55042 AC TIViTY q� CONCRETE INC. SL Paul Park M" 651-458-9461 ESTIMATE #1525 DATE 07/26/2016 Services 8.800.00 0.800.08 Remove and replace 9'x17'ertry/sidewa|kinto city hall, Remove and replace 8'x146'3^sidewalk onthe north and west side ofcity hall. Remove and replace 4' 4^ x B'oecbon ofsidewalk leading into police station. 4'41/2in.concrete, deeper around the edges. Mix design: Xdhve FO3/4and 3/4granite with field stone. 3/8in. neharfo, reinforcement, 3'4ft. on center. Class 5orlimestone base. Tool cuts for control joints. Light broom finish. Slope for proper drainage, Surface sealer applied when complete. Note: Verecommend that you cure the concrete with water 3days following the pour. References are available, Call Uyou have any questions. �� "����K��� .����� �� Accepted By Accepted Date ° CONSTRUCnON COMPANY Commercial , Industrial �, Residential PROPOSAL O5/24/2O1O TO: City ofLake Elmo 3800 Laverne Ave. N Lake Elmo, MN 55042 ATTN: Mike Bouthi|et PROJECT. Sidewalk Replacement DOCUMENTS: Site Visit Addendunns,None Mike. We submit our scope of work and cost as follows: ~ Remove and replace concrete sidewalk along the north and west side of the building. New concrete walk to be standard gray with broom finish and have an approximant 6'X6' joint pattern. = Area #1 is 144'-0^ X 5'-0^ /m|nng the parking area on the north and west okje of the building with a curb face) ° Area #2in1U''O~)(4''6~(from the west parking area hJthe back door) ° Area#3 is 17''0''X8''0" (front eOtnBone area) ° Total area ofreplacement ofconcrete is1.008square feet. * Haul old concrete off site Labor and Material --------------------------------------------------------------$19.851.00. Excludes: landscape restoration, import of any sand or other fill, blacktop patch i ng/repai r, any city or county permit fees Submitted by: ScottVVi|ka Accepted by: Contact Info: Scott VViUe 510Parno Creek Drive POBox 84 Bayport, K4N55OD3 551'275'1112office O51-491-7O75cell Date: 06/2412016 Date: TI 1F. K E AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: TIIROUGH: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 9/20/2016 REGULAR ITEM #: 21 Boulder Ponds PUD Amendment/Rezoning Stephen Wensman, Planning Director Kristina Handt, City Administrator Ben Gozola, Consultant Senior Planner Emily Becker, City Planner OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC is requesting approval of a rezoning/PUD amendment to the Boulder Ponds PUD to rezone Outlots B (PID#34.029.21.33.0023) and C (PID# 34.029.21.33.0024), Boulder Ponds from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR-PUD.. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on 7/25/16 and recommended approval. The City Council discussed the request at its meeting on 8/16/2016 and tabled it until the 9/16/2016 meeting in order to further research the issues. Staff sent a letter to the developer extending the 60 day review to 120 days. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council shall detennine whether to approve the rezoning/PUD amendment. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC believes the MDR/PUD was the incorrectly zoning for the proposed 64-unit senior facility proposed for Outlot C. The existing zoning is MDR/PUD whereas the desired zoning is HDR/PUD. Boulder Ponds would also like to add the adjacent Commercial/PUD outlot, Outlot C, to the development site with the same HDR/PUD zoning. The zoning for Boulder Ponds occurred on 4/21/15 and was based on a density analysis presented during the Concept PUD process. The area guided for Medium Density Residential, which is approximately 10.1 acres, contains 17 single family dwellings and a planned 64 senior facility, which has a planned gross density of 7.98 units per acre; the appropriate density for Medium Density Residential land use guide. The norther portion of the area was developed into 17 single family dwellings and was zoned LDR/PUD. The southern portion of the area was platted as Outlot C (2.24 acres) and zoned MDR/PUD for the planned 64-unit senior residential use. With MDR zoning, the maximum allowed density is only 7 units per acre, whereas with HDR, the maximum allowed density is 15 units per acre. City Council Meeting 916116 Con5ent/RegulorAgenda Item #14 Correction from the Pquoukg Commission Report. A04unitresidential development on Ou8oiCwould have udensity nfZ5.91units per acre which exceeds the allowed HDR density. However, after consultation with Consultant Planner, Ben Gozo|a, Staff now understands that this density, 64 dwelling units on 2.24 acres was approved as part of the concept plan and anticipated at preliminary plat. By adding the 1.44uccc-Oudnt B,othe development site, rezoning it from Coini-nercial/PUD to HDR/PUD, an additional density of 26 additional dwelling units could beallowed based oothe BD8zoning, nc3l additional dwelling units if 20% density bonus was applied through the PUD (for a total potential density of 90 dwelling units over both Oultots B and C together, or 95 if density bonus is applicable through the PUD>. No additional density would be allowed, as suggested by the Developer, for unused density in the other portions of the development, north north of Street. The Developer has suggested that they might want to be allowed additional density if providing senior congregate care facilities with services, as was done with the Arbor Glen project in the Village area. If you recall, the memory care units were not counted towards the overall density count because these units are recognized as being different from standard multi -family residential development. |naddition, the City Council slightly increased the maximum allowed density up to a maximum oflG units per acre within theVK4X District area, These provisions required a comprehensive plan amendment and did not include any other areas besides the VMX Zoning District. Without a similar comprehensive plan amendment, any memory care units would be considered as dwelling units. PLANNING COMMISSION/PUBLIC I8EARING COMMENTS: at the Public Hearing, no one spoke from the public and there was no written correspondence. The Planning Commission expressed concern about approving the rezoning to HDR/PUD without a specific plan and was concerned that the senior living project could end up as a market rate high density multi -family rental housing. The Planning Commission made a motion that they are in support of congregate care with services not counting as dwelling units as was approved in the VMX District. Todd Williams and Tom Kreimer are in support of more high density residential and that the Boulder Ponds site is an appropriate location. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning/PUD amendment with a 7-0 vote. FISCAL IMPACT: There would be no direct fiscal impact by the rezoning/PUD Amendment, however, it will improve the marketability of Outlots B and C, which will provide development fees and building permit fees tothe City when developed. Page City Council Meeting 9/6/16 Consent/Regular Agenda Item #14 OPTIONS: The City Council should consider whether to approve the Rezoning/PUD Amendment from MDR/PUD and Commercial/PUD to HDRJPUD for Outlots C and B, respectively, RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of Ordinance 08-149 Rezonino D Amendment with the following motion: "Move to approve a zoning map amendment/PUD Amendment, Ordinance 08-149, to rezone Outlots B (PID 34.029.21.33.0023) and C (PID 34.029.21.33.0024), Bolder Ponds from Commercial/PUD and MDR/PUD respectively to HDR/PUD". ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Minutes 7-25-16 Planning Commission Report Packet Ordinance 08-149 Page 3 .,/ .//`� ^ | |�|\' ^^^~ City mfLake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes pfJuly 26,2D16 Chairman Kreimer called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dunn, Larson, Griffin, Fields, Dodson, Kreinoer,Lundquist and Williams. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director VVensrnan Approve Agenda: M/S/P: Dodson/Griffin, move to approve the agenda as amended, Vote: 7-0, motion Approve Minutes: June 27'2OlG M/S/P: Williams/Griffin, move to approve the June 27, 2016 minutes as amended, Vote: 7-0, motion carried. Public Hearing — Zoning Map Amendment/PUD Amendment OP4 Boulder Ponds Wensman started his presentation regarding the Boulder Ponds PUD amendment which isprocessed 8s an2zoninR. They would like torezone qut|gtsB&[from Commercial PUDand K4QR'PUOtnHDR'PUD. VVensnnonwent through some ofthe history ofthe site and explained what the developer istrying to do. VVensnnanprovided draft findings as follows 1) The rezoning/PUD amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject property 2)The proposed land use, Senior Housing isa conditional use in both the Commercial and HDR zoning districts, so the underlying land use will remain unchanged 3) The proposed HDR/PUD zoning is appropriate for the proposed senior housing density. 4\The proposed PUD/Arnendrnentisconsistent with the Boulder Ponds PUDConcept Plan and Preliminary PUDPlans. Wensman stated that in order to develop the site as senior living, the area would need final plat/final PUD plan approval, oudot 8 8'[would need to be combined into a single lot and a conditional use permit approval is required for congregate housing. Dodson iswondering why the CUP application bnot with this, VVensrnanstated that they are trying tomarket the property, but there isnoplan. Dodson iswondering if Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 3 they rezone the property, what would stop them from putting in a differnet type nfHigh density housing. VVensnnanstated that there would benoguarantee that adiffernet plan wouldn't come forward. Fields asked if the senior housing is the motivation for rezoning this property, why wouldn't we wait until there is plan for CUP for the senior housing. Fields feels that making the change could have the City end upwith something that is unintended. Larson is wondering if there could be a condition attached to this request stating that it isfor Senior Housing. VVensnnanstated that hodoes not believe there can beconditions on a rezoning. Deb Ridgeway, Excelsior Group, stated that they do not have a buyer yet for the property. She feels itiotoclean upthe zoning for the marketing ofthe property. She said that they need a larger lot in order to market this as smaller lots are not desirable. They are currently marketing the site asasenior housing project. Williams asked about the combined parcels and how many units they need to make it viable. Deb Ridgeway stated that they feel they need 10Ounits for it tnbeaviable senior housing project. Williams stated that it isonly approximately 4 acres and at lS units/acne maximum, that still only gives them approximately GO units. Ridgewaystated that based on it being a PUD and looking at the entire site, they would be allowed 210 units They would be platting 98 units atthis time with a difference of 11I units. VVen3nnandoes not agree with Ridoewayscalculations. The underlying zoningisthetno| toenforce the comprehensive plan. There are bonuses allowed, however, once the zoning isset for aparcel, that ishow itneeds tobedeveloped. The LDRcould have been developed more dense, and just because it wasn't, doesn't mean that it can be shifted toanother area. The PUDisnot anopen door for density. Williams wanted to confirm the allowed density for this site for HDR zoning, VVensnnan stated that itwould be64units for this project or76unitsiftheyachieve theZO96 bonus. He asked Ridgeway if that is the case, would they still want to proceed with the rezoning request, Ridgeway confirmed that they would. Dunn asked what qualified for aZ0Y6bonus. VVensrnanstated that there isthe base zoning and then with oPUDthere are highlights that qualify for bonuses. Dunn stated that it is very hard to keep track of these issues if the developer keeps changing things asthey Ooalong. VVensnnanstated that the deviations are spelled out atthe time of preliminary plat. Fields thinks that rezoning this now without aproject opensthedoorforrna,ketrate multi -family rental housing. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 Public hearing opened at7:3Oprn No one spoke and there was nowritten correspondence. Public hearing closed nt738pnn M/S/P: Will imans/Dodson, move to add finding number 5 that there is disagreement between the applicant and staff astohow many units would be allowed with the new zoning, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Fields/Williams, move to add finding number 6 that to change the zoning to HDR would allow the site to be marketed as a market rate mulit-family housing site, Vote: 7- 0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Williams/, move to add finding number 7 that unit counts for the congregate care as found in the senior housing in the Old Village area, should also be applied City wide. There was nosecond and this was added tothe approval motion. Ridgeway wanted to clarify that the preliminary plat was approved to have a 64 unit senior facility, but the zoning was not put into place correctly. They would just like to expand the acreage sothat they can market this better. The existing residents know that this isintended tobeasenior living project. Ben Schmidt, Excelsior Group, their understanding based on the original PUD is that they could do a 64 unit senior facility on the I4acres but they would not be able to do it under the MDR zoning. This needs tochange toHDRtoget tVwhat was approved with the PUD. Based onthe original density Vfthe 2.4acre parcel, byadding the additional acreage, lOOunits iseasy toget to. Heagrees with using the same language that was used inthe Old Village. M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to recommend approval of the rezoning/PUD Amendment for Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds, rezoning from Commercial/PUD and IVIDR/PUD, respectively, to HDR/PUD based onthe findings in the staff report and the additional findings voted on and further recommend that the counts that apply to senior housing in the Old Village, be applied to this site, Vote: 7-0, motion carried Williams stated that the City needs more HDR in the City as we have virtually none right now. Hefeels this isanappropriate place for HDR. Kreinneralso agrees that this was Public Hearing — Zoning Text Amendment Open Space Development Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 4 VVensrnan started his presentation regarding the Open Space ordinance, He went through the recommendations that the Planning Commission had, There was also recommendations from the City Council. This version takes into consideration the Comments of the City Council. This ordinance iscurrently not inthe Zoning Code, and this will move itback tnthe zoning Code. VVensnnanwent through the specifics ofthe changes inthis version. This version articulates what the City islooking for in these PUD's. One significant change is eliminating the super majority votefordeviationstoaUoxvrnoreflexibUity. The Comprehensive Plan isvery clear that the density islQ/4Oacres. The Buffer language was updated, septic sites need to be identified first, roadway standards were eliminated in favor nfCity Standards, lot sizes were left at 1 acre and B acre, building area was clarified and open space configuration can be reduced on a case by case basis. The City attorney added language regarding failing septic systems so that the City does not incur costs for failure. Individual septic systems must be on the individual lots and are not allowed inVudots. There will nolonger beapublic hearing atthe concept phase. Now there will heapublic hearing atthe final plat tnmemorialize the agreement via ordinance so that it is a lot cleaner and easier to track. VVensnnan also stated that the City Engineer did not put a number on the number of homes that would be needed to support acommunity septic. V0Uiarnsvv4u|d|ikethel54.65OpurposotobennodifiedtVGyy"vv|d|ifecorhdor"or "natural corridor" instead ofjust corridor. Williams is concerned about the number of homes necessary to support a community drainhe|d. Dodson feels that the critical language isthat the City beable to dothe work and bill back the affected residents, rather than relying on the HOA to do the work and collect. Williams pointed out some grammer issues on page 8 item 4 and Dunn would like the (as much as possible) removed. Leaves too much room for interpretation. Would also like to change "strive to" to°shaU". Williams is wondering about on page 9 (6) v,, the association owned stormwater management facilities. He thought that the engineer isinsisting that the City own these in other subdivisions. VVensnnansaid that hewill discuss with contract planner and City Engineer. Williams iswondering why the code issilent regarding si nageanddoesn't just refer to the City sign code. Wensnnanstated that city sign code would apply and would not need to beput inthis section. The Planning Commission is not comfortable with page 111 (b) 2, the City holding the conservation easements and would like them to be held by an outside agency. Williams is wondering if there is a list of purposes that the open space can be set aside for. He thinks that it is not clear enough what the purposes should be. VVensnnan stated that it does talk about agriculture and natural habitat, but it does not say that those are Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 the only 2things itcan beused for. Kneinmeriswondering iflanguage could beadded if the land trust doesn't accept the land, the City may consider it. Williams stated that he believes the IVIN land trust typically wants open space that is 10 acres and this could be problematic with the reduction to 20acres. Dunn feels that there seems to be unintended consequences for coming down toa20acre minimum. Williams iswondering ifthere should beasetback for trails when there isawetland. Wensman stated that VBWD reviews the plans when a wetland is present and the review process protects that. Williams thinks that 154.66O(3)for deviations, there should be the word "and" after a Q b so that all 3 criteria need to be met to get the deviations. Williams thinks that on page 18 (3) is left over from the cmnnnoenja| PUD and should be taken out. Williams suggested some other changes that were dean up items that applied more to commercial PUD's. Public hearing opened at9:I5pnn Noone spoke and there was nowritten correspondence Public hearing closed at9:Z5prn M/S/P: Williams/Griffin, move to postpone consideration ofthe OPOrdinance until staff can return a cleaned up copy for consideration, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing — Zoning Text Amendment to opt out of requirements for Temporary Health Care Dwellings Wensman started his presentation by giving an overview of the Temporary Health Care Dwelling legislation. Staff drafted anordinance toopt out ofthe state statute. The Building Official had a number of concerns such asseptic systems, anchoring, vvate, access, insulation, etc. Staff drafted an ordinance to opt out of the state statute based onthe recommendation ofthe Planning Commission. Public hearing opened at9:3Opnn Noone spoke and there was nowritten correspondence Public hearing closed at9:3Opnn M/S/P: Dunn/Williams, move to recommend approval of the ordinance to opt out of the requirements of Minnesoat Statutes Section 462.3593 , Vote: 7-0, motion carried Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 6 Dodson isconcerned that ifthe state felt strongly enough toenact this, should vxebe willing toprovide amechanism for people toprovide for loved ones, Larson feels that this legislation does not seem to fit in our community. VVen5nnan stated that this is really to care for on aging population which is a valid concern, but is not sure that this isthe best solution. This has been talked about inmany different states. VVensnnan knows of at least a dozen cities around us that have opted out and only 1that heknows ofthat have opted in. Business Item — Ordinance amendment for the keeping of pigeons VVensnnangave abrief update onthe pigeon ordinance. This item was talked about a while back and hehas incorporated the suggestions of the Planning Commission from previous discussions. This isnot anitem that isinthe zoning code, soapublic hearing would not be required. This item will move forward to the City Council at a future date. City Council Updates — July S`201GMeeting U Vacation Vfxvaterrnaineasement for Auto Owners —passed. ii\ Amend Fence regulations in regards to encroachment agreements — passed. ii|\ HundngOrdinance—Tab|ed. iv) CPA for Rural Single Family inregards tVsanitary sewer —passed. v) Moratorium extension —passed. vi) Neighborhood park inSavona neighborhood — request for Park Commission to review, City Council Updates — July 19,2U1G Meeting i) Hunting Ordinance — Input given to Planning Director to bring back to future meeting. Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. August 8,2Ol6 b. August 2%,2OlO Commission Concerns Dunn iswondering ifthere isany way tnget afeel for what the costs will betothe City for these additional developments that come forward. Beitfor police, fire, lighting, etc. Dunn also mentioned that Baytown and West Lakeland are really concerned about Lake Elmo not taking astand against the airport expansion. She would like ittobetaken to the City Council for resolution. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 7 M/S/P: Dunn/Larson, move to bring a request to the City Council to support Baytown and West Lakeland intheir opposition tothe airport expansion ,Vote: 6-1,mnotion carried unanimously. Williams stated that the current design has no impact on the Neal ave and 30' o Street intersection. Larson stated that the last set ofmeetings that they had come 1oan agreement with Baytown. Kneinnerstated that hejust doesn't feel that hehas enough information tovote onthis issue. Fields was wondering if there was any update on the land purchased by Prairie Island and put into trust. VVensnnan stated that he can check with KrisLina. Dunn iswondering when discussions will start regarding lowering the forecast population numbers. VVensnnanstated that hehas not gotten further direction from the City Council. Meeting adjourned at957prn Respectfully submitted, ]oanZi*rtrnan Planning Program Assistant Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7'25-16 ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 7/25/16 AGENDA ITEM: 4b- PUBLIC HEAR ITEM CASE # 2016-24 Rezoning/PUD Amendment — Boulder Ponds Stephen Wensman, Planning Director Emily Becker, City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC is requesting approval of a rezoning/PUD amendment to the Boulder Ponds PUD to rezone Outlots B (PID#34.029.21.33.0023) and C (PID# 34.029.21.33.0024), Boulder Ponds from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR-PLTD. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Property Owners: Location: Request: Existing Land Use Surrounding Land OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC Jade Trail North, South of 5th Street rezoning/PUD amendment to the Boulder Ponds PUD to rezone Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR-PUD and Zoning: Undeveloped outlots - Commercial PUD/MDR PUD Use and Zoning: LDR to the north, vacant - Commercial PUD outlot to the east, BP to the west, vacant Commercial PUD outlot to the south Comprehensive Plan: MDR/Commercial Histog: Boulder Ponds Preliminary Plat was approved on 7/28/14. The subject parcels were rezoned from RT to Commercial PUD/MDR PUD on 4/21/15. Deadline for Action: Application Complete — 6/27/16 60 Day Deadline — 8/26/16 Extension Letter Mailed — N/A 120 Day Deadline — N/A Applicable Regulations: Article XVI, Chapter 154, Sections 750-760, PUD Regulations Article X — Urban Residential Districts Planning Commission Meth 7/25/16 Page 2 REQUEST DETAILS: OP4 Boulder Ponds is requesting a Rezoning/PUD Amendment of two parcels, Outlot B and C, from Corrunerical/PUD and MDR/PUD respectively, to HDRIPUD in order to better market the parcels for a future Senior Housing Development. Outlet B is presently zoned for Commercial/PUD and is 1.44 acres in size. Outlot C is presently zoned for MDR/PUD and is 2.24 acres in size. The applicant would like to rezone both parcels to HDR/PUD and market them together for a proposed senior housing project. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS: According to Article XVI, Chapter 15, Section 757, Subd C of the Planned Unit Development Code, PUD Amendments shall be authorized by an amendment of the final development plan under the procedures for zoning amendment in Article IJI of the City Code of Ordinances. The rationale for the housing density in the MDR portion of Boulder Ponds was described in the 12/09/13 Planning Report for the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan: The medium density area, which is approximately 10.1 acres, contains 81 residential units (17 single family, 64 multi -family), resulting in a gross density of 7.98 units per acre. It should be noted that this density figure is slightly higher than what is guided by the Comprehensive Plan, However, given that the proposed development is a PUD, and that the amount of land guided for medium density residential development on these parcels by the Comprehensive Plan is much greater, Staff has determined that the proposed Concept Plan meets the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. To explain Staff's reasoning for this determination in another way, the proposed Concept Plan decreases the amount of total land guided for medium density development by over 20 acres by moving the collector road south. The slight increase in density above the allowed range per the Comp Plan is balanced by the significant reduction in the amount of land guided medium density. To put it in simple terms, by using the low end of gross density ranges in the Comp Plan, these parcels were guided to have 195 total residential units (not accounting for road right-of-way), whereas the proposed PUD Concept Plan includes 157 total units. Overall, the proposed PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the intent of the land use and density requirernents as guided by the City's Comprehensive Plan. The rationale for the density is sound, however, when it recommending subsequent zoning for the sites, Staff had recommended LDR/PUD for the single family cul-de-sac, Jade Circle North, and MDR/PUD for the senior housing parcel (Outlot C). Outlot B was zoned Commercial PUD. The LDR/PUD zoning is the correct zoning for the single family housing on Jade Circle North just south of 5th Street, but the remaining 2.240 acre parcel (Outlot C) was zoned MDR/PUD for a planned 64 unit Senior Housing project. The zoning code, Section 154.453, Subdivision A, allows: Averaging of Lot Area. When lots are clustered within a development to provide common open space, the open space may be used to calculate an average density per lot to determine compliance with the individual lot area requirements. To determine the allowed density for Outlot C, A 64-unit project on a 2.240 acres site (and 0.23 acres of corresponding open space) would have a density of 25.91 units per acre, exceeding the 7- unit per acres allowed by the underlying MDR zoning, or 8.4-units per acre if 20% density bonus PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b — ACTION ITEM Planning Commission Meeting 7/25/16 Page 3 was applied through the RID. The HDR zoning would provide a 15-units per acre base density, or 18-units per acre if 20% density bonus was applied through the PUD. Even with HDR/PUD zoning, the 64-unit project would exceed the density allowable on the 2.47 acre site (.23 acres of open space). Therefore, OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC is proposing to rezone Outlot B (1.44 acres) from Commercial/PUD to HDR/PUD to add to the Senior Housing project area. With the addition of Outlot B, the 64-unit senior housing project be 4.18 acres (3.68 acres outlot area + .5 acres of open space) in size with a density of 15-units per acre. HDR/PUD is the appropriate zoning district for the proposed use on Outlots B and C combined. Senior housing (congregate housing) is a conditional use in both the Commercial and HDR Zoning Districts, so although the request is for a rezoning from Commercial/PUD to HDR/PLTD, the proposed underlying land use remains essentially the same. In order to proceed with a senior housing project on the Oulots B and C the following would be required: • Final PUD Plans and Final Plat (combining the two outlots into a single lot) • Conditional Use Permit DRAFT FINDINGS: In order to approve a rezoning, the Planning Commission shall consider findings are shall submit the same with its recommendation to the City Council. Staffsuggests the following findings: 1. The Rezoning/PUD Amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject property. 2. The proposed land use, Senior Housing, is a conditional use in both the Commercial and HDR zoning districts, so the underlying land use will remain unchanged. 3. The proposed HDR/PUD zoning is appropriate for the proposed senior housing density, 4. The proposed PUD/Amendment is consistent with the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan and Preliminary PUD Plans. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Rezoning/PUD Amendment for Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds, rezoning from Commercial/PUD and MDR/PUD, respectively, to HDR/PUD with the following motion: "Move to recommend approval of the Rezoning/PUD Amendment for Outlets B and C, Boulder Ponds from Commercial/PUD and MDR/PUD, respectively, to HDR/PUD with the following motion based on the findings in the Staff report." ATTACHMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b — ACTION ITEM Planning Commission Meeting 7/25/16 Page 4 • Application and Narrative • Planning Cornmission Report — Boulder Ponds PUD — Concept Plan 12/09/16 • Housing Density Analysis (from 12/09/16 Concept Plan) 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 ......... ............... ... ......Chair - Discussion by the Commission ...................... ........ Chair & Commission Members - Action by the Commission ....... ......... ..... ......... Chair & Commission Members PUBLIC HEARING ITEM — ACTION ITEM Date Received, Received By: Permit #: Ili E crry f AKE ELMO 651-747-3900 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 LAND USE APPLICATION EJ Comprehensive Plan 2 Zoning District Amend E Zoning Text Amend LI Variance*(see below) El Zoning Appeal El Conditional Use Permit (C,U,R) Ell Flood Plain C.U.P. E.] Interim Use Permit (I.U,P.) El Excavating/Grading E1 Lot Line Adjustment El Minor Subdivision L] Residential Subdivision Sketch/Concept Plan LJ PUD Concept Ran LI PUD Preliminary Plan El PUD Final Plan Applicant 0P4 Boulder Ponds, LLC (Contact: Deb Ridgeway) Address: 1660 Highway 100 S, Suite 400, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Phone # 952.525.3223 Email Address: deb.ridaewayeExcelsiorLLC.com Fee Owner: Same as Applicant Address: Phone # Email Address: Property Location (Address and Complete (long) Legal Description° xxxx Jade Trail Outlots B & C, Boulder Ponds Detailed Reason for Request: Rezone Outlots B & C from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR - PUD. Please refer to proiect narrative for a detailed explanation, 'Variance Requests: As outlined in Section 301.060 C. of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code, the applicant must demonstrate practical difficulties before a variance can be granted. The practical difficulties related to this application are as follows: In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zoning ordinance and current administrative procedures. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional application expense. OP4 Boulder,Ponds, LLC Signature of applicant By - OP4 Bo Date: 6/24/16 Signature of fee owner: BV te: 6/24/16 Zoning Amendment & Preliminary PUD Amendment Project Representatives and Contact Information. LANDOWNER/ 0P4 Boulder Ponds, LLC DEVELOPER c/o The Excelsior Group, LLC 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Ben Schmidt, Vice President 952.525.3225 Ben.Schmidt@ExcelsiroLLC.com Deb Ridgeway, Asset Manager 952.525.3223 Deb.Ride.ewavftExelsiorLLC.com Property Address, Zoning, Parcel Size, PID and LegalDescription ADDRESS CURRENT ZONING PARCEL SIZE Outlot B, Boulder Ponds Outlot C, Boulder Ponds XXXX Hudson Blvd MX Hudson Blvd Commercial - PUD MDR - PUD Acres 1.72 Sq. Ft 2,591,320.2 PIDs 34-029-21-33-0023 Boulder Ponds Preliminary PUD Amendment & Zoning Amendment Application 1 2,46 6,098.4 34-029-21-33-0024 Boulder Ponds is a Planned Unit Development that was approved to include a variety of land uses, including single family residential, multifamily residential and commercial. The first phase of street and utility installation is complete to serve 20 Villa lots, 27 single family lots and 10 acres of commercial and multifamily. During the preliminary plat process, the 2.42 multifamily site (Oudot C) was presented as a 64-unit multifamily building. Based on the current zoning of medium density residential (7 units per acre), Outlot C is allowed only 15.4 units, which is inconsistent with the PUD approval. In addition to remedying this inconsistency, there is a desire to rezone Outlot B to allow multifamily on the entire 4.18 acres. Therefore, this application requests approval to amend the zoning of Outlots B & C, Boulders Ponds from Commercial and MDR-PUD to HDR-PUD and allow for a maximum 112 multifamily units. This is based on the analysis of the current approved plan with 98 units versus the 210.4 units that could be allowed per the zoning code. The accompanying plan further illustrates this. There is no proposed layout at this time, but when a plan is created, Final Plat, Final PUD and Conditional Use Permit approvals will be required providing adequate oversight of the specific site plans. In conclusion, Boulder Ponds offers a uniquely planned mixed -use neighborhood where the land uses provide a seamless transition from commercial to low density residential. The high density use between the commercial and lower density homes creates a complementary buffer and generally a more desirable and overall more viable neighborhood for Lake Elmo, Boulder Ponds Preliminary MD ztwendmenr& Zoning Amendment Application 2 PROPOSED ZONING EXHIBIT FOR: p. OWNER/DEVELOPER OP4 BOULDER PONDS, LLC 11455 VIKING DRIVE SUITE 350 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 ROL= Density Residential 84 Units Approved (Outiol C) PROPOSED High Density Residential Units per Acre allowed 4,18 Acres (Out(ots 8 C) 4,18 Ac x15 OUA 82,7 Igornmercial LQL4tIp_t Multifamily Residential allowed Law Density Residential 20 Units Approved 4 Units per Acre allowed 7,98 Acres 7.98 Ac x 4 DUA x 31.9 Units allowed Oil I 0 A ht.03CIVEOCC.MIAPO •,22, L G. RIM a SONS, INC. Professional Land Surveyors 6776 Lake Drive NE, Sulte 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tet (651)341-3200 Pon (65I) 3414701 Low Density. Residential 78 Units Approved 4 Units per Acre allowed 28,95 Acres 23.95 Ac x 4 DUA m118.8 Units allowed setfnx>er Ol211222' MR cancer SUMMARY OF ALLOWED UNITS 115.80 31.90 +62,70 210.40 Total Allowed Units - 98 platted Units 112.4 Pr opcs4 Units on Aq s.t., (Outlets B C) MOM PART 20. MC. 24, 'MP, 29, 226,. 3 WAS-2+420N cc..nrl. 240 SC,22322 NORTH NOT TO SCALE Zoning Amendment & Preliminary PUD Amendment Project Representatives and Contact Information. LANDOWNER/ OP4 Boulder Ponds, LLC DEVELOPER c/o The Excelsior Group, LLC 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Ben Schmidt, Vice President 952.525.3225 Ben.SchinidtPExcelsiroLLC.coni Deb Ridgeway, Asset Manager 952.525.3223 DebRicip,eway6DExelsiorLLC.conl, Property Address, Zoning, Parcel Size, PID and Legal Description Outlot B, Boulder Ponds ADDRESS XXXX Hudson Blvd CURRENT ZONING PARCEL SIZE Acres 1.72 Sq. Ft 2,591,320.2 PIDs 34-029-21-33-0023 Boulder Ponds Preliminary PUD Amendment & Zoning Amendment Application 1 Outlot C, Boulder Ponds XXXX Hudson Blvd Commercial - PUD MDR - PUD 2.46 6,098.4 34-029-21-33-0024 Boulder Ponds is a Planned Unit Development that was approved to include a variety of land uses, including single family residential, multifamily residential and commercial. The first phase of street and utility installation is complete to serve 20 Villa lots, 27 single family lots and 10 acres of commercial and multifamily. During the preliminary plat process, the 2.42 multifamily site (Outlot C) was presented as a 64-unit multifamily building. Based on the current zoning of medium density residential (7 units per acre), Outlot C is allowed only 15.4 units, which is inconsistent with the PUD approval. In addition to remedying this inconsistency, there is a desire to rezone Outlot B to allow multifamily on the entire 4.18 acres. Therefore, this application requests approval to amend the zoning of Outlots B & C, Boulders Ponds from Commercial and MDR-PUD to HDR-PUD and allow for a maximum 112 multifamily units. This is based on the analysis of the current approved plan with 98 units versus the 210.4 units that could be allowed per the zoning code. The accompanying plan further illustrates this. There is no proposed layout at this time, but when a plan is created, Final Plat, Final PUD and Conditional Use Permit approvals will be required providing adequate oversight of the specific site plans. In conclusion, Boulder Ponds offers a uniquely planned mixed -use neighborhood where the land uses provide a seamless transition from commercial to low density residential. The high density use between the commercial and lower density homes creates a complementary buffer and generally a more desirable and overall more viable neighborhood for Lake Elmo. Boulder Ponds Preliminary PUD Amendment & Zoning Amendment Application 2 T1 (-11 ( K F ELM() ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: Nick Johnson, City Planner PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 12/09/13 AGENDA ITEM: 4A PUBLIC HEARING CASE # 2013-29 Boulder Ponds Planned Unit Development (PUD) — Concept Plan REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer Mike Bouthilet, Public Works Superintendent Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief Rick Chase, Building Official Matt Moore, South Washington Watershed District SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing for a request from Amaris Company LLC for a residential Planned Unit Development Concept Plan with 93 single family residential homes and a 64-unit multifamily dwelling to be located on approximately 58 acres immediately east of the Eagle Point Business Park and within the City's 1-94 Corridor Planning Area. Staff is recommending approval of the PUD Concept Plan with 11 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff Report. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Amaris Company, LLC, P.O. Box 10811, White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Property Owners: Louis Damiani Trust, c/o Security Bank & Trust Co., William C. Kuhlmann, 2202 1 1th Street East, Glencoe, MN 55336 Tim Montgomery, 6211 Upper 51sIStreet North, Oakdale, MN 55128 Locution: Part of Section 34 in Lake Elmo, north of 1-94 and Hudson Boulevard, south of Stonegate residential subdivision, and east of Eagle Point Business Park. PINs: 34.029.21.33.0001; 34.029.21.32.0001; 34.029.21.33.0002. Request: Application for Concept Plan approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) containing 93 single family homes and a 64-unit senior housing multi -family residential building to be named Boulder Ponds of Lake Elmo. Existing Land Use and Zoning: Agricultural land with one single family home (9120 Hudson Blvd. N.). Current Zoning: RT — Rural Transitional Zoning District; Proposed Zoning: LDR and MDR PUD Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Residential Estates subdivision (Stonegate) — RE zoning and Park (Stonegate Park) — PF zoning; West: Offices (Eagle Point Town Office Park) — BP zoning; PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM South: Retail Trade (Lampert Lumber) — C zoning and Sales and Storage Lots (Cranky Ape) — C zoning; and East: future proposed Lennar urban low density residential subdivision (Savona) — current zoning: RT, future zoning: LDR. Comprehensive Plan: Urban Low Density Residential (2.5 — 4 units per acre), Urban Medium Density Residential (4.5 — 7 units per acre), and Commercial. History: Applicants are participating in the Section 34 Utility Project under a Statute 429 area - wide assessment. The utility project is expected to be completed in December of 2013. Deadlinefor Action: Applicable Regulations: Application Complete — 11/7/13 60 Day Deadline — 1/6/14 Extension Letter Mailed — No 120 Day Deadline — 3/7/13 Chapter 153 — Subdivision Regulations Article 10 — Urban Residential Districts (154.450) Article 16 — Planned Unit Development (*154.800) REQUEST DETAILS The City of Lake Elmo has received an application from Amaris Company, LLC for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan on approximately 58 acres of land located within the I-94 Corridor Planning Area, The Concept Plan includes 93 single family homes on the northern and central portion of the site, as well as a proposed 64-unit senior housing multi -family residential building. In addition, the Concept Plan includes vacant land along the Hudson Blvd that is planned for future Commercial land uses per the City's Comprehensive Plan. It is the applicant's intention to plat the Commercial areas as outlots until Commercial users are identified. The proposed PUD, to be called Boulder Ponds of Lake Elmo, would be located on property currently owned by the Louis Damiani Trust, currently managed by Security Bank & Trust Co., and Mr. Tim Montgomery. The Concept Plan has been developed in response to the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan for the 1-94 Corridor, which guide the applicant's land as a mix of Urban Low Density Residential — LDR, Urban Medium Density Residential — MDR and Commercial. The plan incorporates 93 single family lots, most of which are designed with a width of approximately 65 feet. The majority (76) of the single family lots are located north of the future minor collector road, 5th Street, whereas 17 single family lots are located south of the minor collector. In addition, the 64-unit senior housing multi- family building is also located south of the minor collector road adjacent to the areas that are guided for future Commercial land uses. As opposed to following the City's normal subdivision procedures, the applicants have determined that a planned development approach offers the best method to achieve their development vision for their property. The purpose of the City's PUD ordinance is to provide flexibility in development and zoning standards for large parcels under unified control with the goal of achieving higher quality development. More specifically, the General Concept Plan phase of the PUD procedure allows the applicant to submit a general plan to the City demonstrating his or her basic intent of the development, including general density ranges, location of residential and nonresidential land uses, and location of streets, paths and open space. The purpose of approving the Concept Plan is to PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM provide the applicant with conceptual approval related to the requested flexibilities or variations from the City Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, or other City standards, before incurring substantial costs related to submitting a full Preliminary Plat application. In terms of procedure, the planned development path is similar to the normal subdivision process in that Preliminary and Final PUD Plan approvals must follow parallel track to Preliminary and Final Plat. However, one critical difference between the planned development process and standard subdivision process is that the PUD Concept Plan phase requires a public hearing and the approval of the City Council. Alternatively, the Sketch Plan review phase, the first step in the standard subdivision process, does not require a public hearing and City approval. The reason that the PUD Concept Plan requires a public hearing and City approval is due to the requested flexibility and variation from the City's standard zoning and subdivision procedures. Regarding variation from the City's Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan, the applicants have requested minor flexibility in a couple of areas, hence justifying the planned development approach. The requested variances or flexibilities will be further discussed and analyzed in the Planning and Zoning section of the Staff Report. The Boulder Ponds Concept Plan also includes a significant portion of the proposed 5' Street minor collector road as planned in the City's Transportation Plan. Once completed, the minor collector road will serve as the primary access for the Boulder Ponds planned development. The segment of the minor collector road included in the Concept Plan is part of the lst phase of the 5" Street collector road, from Inwood Avenue (CSAH 13) to Keats Avenue (CSAH 19). Eventually, the 5" Street minor collector road is planned to serve the entire 1-94 Corridor from west to east (Inwood Ave_ to Manning Ave.). As shown in the Concept Plan, the design of the minor collector road as part of the Boulder Ponds development is consistent with the City's specifications for this roadway segment. The applicant has provided for a 120-foot wide right-of-way, which will provide sufficient room for the construction of a parkway with turning lanes, 10-foot bituminous trail, sidewalk, trees, lighting, and other design elements as planned by the City. It should also be noted that the applicants and other interested landowners in the area have recently met with City staff to discuss the possibility of petitioning the City for a 429 area -wide assessment project to complete the 5' Street minor collector road from Keats Ave. (CSAH 19) to the western boundary of the Boulder Pond project next year. Finally, to achieve the desired vision of development for their project, as well as address difficult grade issues on the site, the applicants are proposing to move the alignment of the minor collector road to the south. The applicants are currently working with the adjacent property owners to the east, US Homes Corp. (Lennar Homes) and DPS-Lake Elmo LLC (Dale Properties), to come to terms on an agreed alignment of the 5" Street minor collector road. The proposed alignment of the minor collector road will be further discussed in the Review and Analysis section of the Staff Report. In terms of utilities, the applicants are currently participating in the Section 34 Utility Project, which is extending sewer and water throughout Stage 1 of the 1-94 Corridor Planning Area. With the improvements associated with the Section 34 project, the applicants will have access to both sewer and water from the south (Hudson Blvd.) and west (Eagle Point Business Park). Currently, sewer and water service are being provided by the City of Oakdale via a Joint Services Agreement. There is currently enough capacity in the Oakdale system to provide sewer and water service to the Boulder Ponds development. As the build -out of the Stage 1 Area of the 1-94 Corridor progresses, the City will need to transition water services to the Lake Elmo municipal water system via the Inwood Ave Trunk Watermain Extension Project, as well as transition sewer flows to the Met Council W.O.N.E interceptor station along Hudson Blvd. The City will work with the applicants to plan for adequate utility infrastructure with the submission of the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat. Other major features of the proposed planned development include outlot areas that will provide for open space, trails, and storm water management throughout the development area. The development PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 4 also incorporates a bufferigreenway area along the northern boundary of the plat adjacent to an existing RE - Residential Estates subdivision as required in the City's Comprehensive Plan, All outlots that are planned for park land or storm water use will be deeded to the City, while the future home owner's association will retain ownership of the remaining outlots. Regarding next steps, the applicant is proposing to bring forward a Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat application upon approval of the Concept Plan. Per the PUD Ordinance, the final approval of the proposed planned unit development will result in a zoning change to a specific PUD zoning district, with specific requirements and standards that are specific to the development. If the application moves forward, the change in the base zoning (LDR, MDR, C) of the property would occur at the time of Preliminary Plan approval, and the final PUD zoning with approved flexibility that is specific to the development would be established at Final Plan approval. PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES The Boulder Ponds site is guided for Urban Low Density Residential, Urban Medium Density Residential and Commercial land uses in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Density Analysis sheet within the Boulder Ponds Concept Plan delineates the low density, medium density and commercial areas respectively within the proposed planned development. The realignment of the 5ur' Street minor collector road to the south allows the applicant to maximize the single family residential area to the north, creating a larger distinct single family neighborhood as opposed to having the parcels bisected in half by the collector road. Regarding the design of the planned development, the single family residential area to the north of the minor collector street is defined by one curvilinear residential through street that allows for ease of travel through the neighborhood. The remaining portions of the single family neighborhood are served by three cul-de-sacs, none exceeding 500 feet in length. Also, the applicants are proposing to include several landscaped medians and islands within the proposed City streets, the highlights of which are three medians in the middle of the single family neighborhood. In relation to the lots and blocks, the arrangement follow a curvilinear pattern, which allows the vast majority of the lots to back up to common open space of some form. The northern portion of the single family area north of the minor collector street also contains the 100' greenbelt buffer between the new growth areas and the Stonegate residential estates subdivision as guided by the City's Comprehensive Plan. The greenbelt buffer contains a trail that connects to the trail provided by the Lennar urban low density subdivision to the east and connects with the trail within the 5th Street corridor to the west. This area is also the location of a power line easernent owned by Xcel Energy, On the southern half of the minor collector road, a local street connects the medium density residential commercial areas from .5th Street to Hudson Boulevard. South of the collector road, the plan include one small area of 17 single family lots, as well as a 64-unit multi -family building intended for senior housing. Regarding the commercial areas (approximately 9 acres) to the south of the medium density residential area, it is the applicant's intention to plat these areas as outlots until prospective users are identified. For pedestrian circulation and recreation, sidewalks and trails are planned throughout the Boulder Ponds planned development. Consistent with City Design Standards, the applicants have included sidewalks to be installed on at least one side of all streets. Also, the greenbelt buffer trail included on the northern portion of the site is consistent with the guidance of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition to the internal trails and sidewalks that are proposed by the developer, the 5'h Street Corridor include a 10-foot bituminous trail on the north side ofthe road and a six-foot sidewalk on the south PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A - ACTION ITEM 5 side. The internal trails and sidewalks provide good circulation to the 5th Street trail, which is intended to provide a regional transportation and recreation purpose. Regarding the single family lots within the Boulder Ponds Concept Plan, the vast majority of the lots meet the minimum size requirements for the City's Urban Low Density Residential — LDR zoning district. The minimum lot size per the City's LDR zoning district is 8,000 square feet, and the minimum lot width at building setback line is 60'. Of the 93 single family lots, all but five lots (Lot 59, 69, 72, 73 and 75) meet or exceed the minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet as required under LDR zoning. Overall, the average single family lot size in the planned development is approximately 10,495 square feet. In addition, the vast majority of the single family lots meet or exceed the minimum 60lot width. The applicants have noted that allowing for minor flexibility in lot area and width is one of the key reasons for proceeding with a planned development. Also pertaining to the single family residential lots, the applicants are requesting that the City consider reduced side yard and front yard setbacks to accommodate the unique design of the single family residential portion of the planned development. Reduced setbacks allow for greater clustering, which promotes high levels of open space. According to §154.802.E-F, planned developments may allow for reduced setbacks and reductions in area and width of individual lots. It is Staff s understanding that the applicants are seeking to allow 5' side yard setbacks on both sides of the principal structure. In addition, the applicants may be seeking reduced front yard setbacks. Any reductions in front yard setback must be approved with the understanding that adequate separation is provided between parking areas (driveways) and sidewalks, so that any potential obstacles, such as parked vehicles or trailers, do not encroach on residential sidewalks. Overall, reductions in all residential lot sizes and setbacks must be clearly identified, reviewed and approved at time of PUD Preliminary Plan phase. Also related to single family lots, the applicants have included five residential lots that are partially or almost entirely on a small triangular piece of property owned by Dale Properties. The applicants are proposing to acquire this land from Dale Properties in order to facilitate the platting of these five additional lots and realign the minor collector road to the south. Dale Properties has submitted a letter (Attachment #5) indicating that general agreement has been reached on the land acquisition. For the purposes of the Concept Plan, the applicants have "ghost platted" the five lots, Lots 14-18 on the PUD Lot Areas sheet, with the intention of acquiring the land prior to Preliminary Plat submission. If these lots are to he included in the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat, the applicants must submit evidence demonstrating control or consent of this area being included in the plat. If this is not possible, plans must be revised accordingly. Regarding the proposed multi -family residential building, the applicant has noted that it is likely intended for a senior living facility. Given that the application is currently at Concept Plan phase, it is not required that significant detail be provided. However, it should be noted that within the Urban Medium Density Residential — MDR zoning district, multi -family dwellings are considered a conditional use. At the time of Final Plat and PUD Final Plan approval for the phase that includes the 64-unit multi -family dwelling, the applicant will be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Further review of the multi -family dwelling should occur at the time of review for the required CUP. On the topic of housing density, the applicants have submitted a density analysis worksheet to present the gross densities associated with the low density and medium density areas. Due to the fact that the minor collector road has been moved to the south, the proposed Boulder Ponds planned development would include more single family residential development than is currently planned for in the Comprehensive Plan. However, it is important to note that per the Comp Plan, the 5'1' Street PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 6 minor collector road serves as the boundary between low density and medium density areas in the Stage 1 Area (Inwood Ave. to Keats Ave.) of the 1-94 Corridor. The gross density of the single family area to the north of the collector road, which is approximately 28.5 acres, is calculated to be 2.66 units per acre. The medium density area, which is approximately 10.1 acres, contains 81 residential units (17 single family, 64 multi -family), resulting in a gross density of 7.98 units per acre. It should be noted that this density figure is slightly higher than what is guided by the Comprehensive Plan. However, given that the proposed development is a PUD, and that the amount of land guided for medium density residential development on these parcels by the Comprehensive Plan is much greater, Staff has determined that the proposed Concept Plan meets the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. To explain Staff's reasoning for this determination in another way, the proposed Concept Plan decreases the amount of total land guided for medium density development by over 20 acres by moving the collector road south. The slight increase in density above the allowed range per the Comp Plan is balanced by the significant reduction in the amount of land guided medium density. To put it in simple terms, by using the low end of gross density ranges in the Comp Plan, these parcels were guided to have 195 total residential units (not accounting for road right-of- way), whereas the proposed PUD Concept Plan includes 157 total units. Overall, the proposed PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the intent of the land use and density requirements as guided by the City's Comprehensive Plan. In terms of parkland dedication requirements, the Subdivision Ordinance requires that 10% of the land in urban residential districts to be dedicated for park purposes. Alternatively, fees may be submitted to the City in lieu of land dedication at a rate equal to the market value of the land. It is at the discretion of the City Council how parkland/fees are accepted to meet this requirement. The Boulder Ponds site is approximately 58 acres in size. Therefore, under the approach of a pure land dedication, the applicants would be required to dedicate approximately 5.8 acres of land for parkland purposes. In the application narrative, the applicants note that within the proposed Plan Concept Plan, 11.8 acres are devoted as park space. However, it must be noted that to be accepted as parkland for dedication puiposes, the land must be able to serve an active recreation purpose. In addition, if linear land dedications are accepted, a trail that provides effective connectivity in the community must be provided and constructed_ Also, it should be noted that the City cannot accept land that is subject to private easement for public parkland dedication. This consideration relates to the location of the Xcel Energy power line easement in the greenbelt buffer area in the northern portion of the site. It is the recommendation of Staff that further discussions be had with the applicants regarding which areas are eligible for parkland dedication. Greater clarity regarding parkland dedication requirements and eligibility should be reached in advance of Preliminary Plat. Regarding available or future park facilities, the applicants are proposing to continue the greenbelt/buffer trail along the northern portion of the property. This trail provides connections to the 5th Street regional trail and Stonegate Park from the east. Given it proximity, it makes logical sense that Stonegate Park, in addition to other City parks, will serve the future residents of the Boulder Ponds planned development. It is recommended by Staff that the City works with the applicants and property owners to the west of Stonegate Park, Azure Properties, to investigate possible expansions or improvements to Stonegate Park, In addition Staff will work with the Park Commission to evaluate if any additional facilities or programs should he offered at Stonegate Park. Evaluating the facilities and programing of Stonegate Park should inforni future planning or expansion efforts. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 7 City Staff has reviewed the proposed Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan, which has gone through multiple iterations in advance of the formal application being accepted as complete by the City. During the course of these reviews, several of the issues and concerns that were previously raised by Staff have been addressed by the applicant with updated submission documents. However, it is important to note that there are other elements of the plan that still require additional attention in advance of a PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat submittal. In general, the proposed plan will meet all applicable City requirements for PUD Concept Plan approval, and any deficiencies or additional work that is needed is noted for the purpose of inclusion in the review record. In addition there are several things happening in and around the Boulder Ponds planned development that will have an impact on the project, including the possible petition for a 429 area -wide assessment project to construct the 5th Street minor collector road, as well as the final alignment of said road. Given that some of these efforts are still underway, Staff recognizes that some minor modifications may be necessary from PUD Concept Plan phase to PUD Preliminary Plan phase. The City has received a detailed list ofcomments from the City Engineer, in addition to general comments by the South Washington Watershed District, all of which are attached for consideration by the Commission. In addition to the general comments that have been provided in the preceding sections of this report, Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the issues and comments related to the following discussion areas as well: Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan for this area and with the densities that were approved as part of this plan. The gross densities for the development generally are consistent with the ranges allowed for the urban low density and urban medium density land use categories. Other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan relate to the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan as follows: o Transportation. The City's transportation plan calls for the construction of a minor collector road that will connect the eastern and western portions of the I-94 Corridor. Staff views this road as a critical piece of the transportation infrastructure that is needed to serve the densities that have been planned for this area. The applicant has incorporated the right-of-way at the width necessary to construct the minor collector as part of its PUD Concept Plan. o Parks. The greenbelt trail provided on the northern portion of the site is consistent with the City's Land Use Plan in the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the City's Park Plan in the Comprehensive Plan does not identify this area as a future location of a neighborhood park due to its proximity to Stonegate Park. o Water. Water will eventually be provided to this area via a future extension of the municipal system along Inwood Avenue. The Boulder Ponds planned development will be able to be served under the City's current agreement with the City of Oakdale until the Inwood waterrnain extension is completed. o Sanitar-y Sewer. The Boulder Ponds planned development will be required to connect to the sewer main being constructed as part of the Section 34 area wide assessment project. In this case, all of the property owners that are planned to be served by sanitary sewer have petitioned the City to construct the required sewer and water mains to serve the area, PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM o Phasing. The Boulder Ponds planned development is located within the Stage 1 phasing area for the 1-94 Corridor and therefore the proposed development is consistent with the City's anticipated phasing of growth. Zoning. The proposed base zoning for the Boulder Ponds site will be split between the Urban Low Density Residential — LDR, the Urban Medium Density Residential — MDR, and Commercial — C zoning districts. However, approval of PUD Final Plan will result in a zoning change to a specific PUD Zoning District, recording all of the permitted variations, such as minimurn lot size and setbacks, from the Zoning requirements of the base zoning district. Subdivision Requirements. The City's Subdivision Ordinance includes a fairly lengthy list of standards that must be met by all new subdivisions, and include requirements for blocks, lots, easements, erosion and sediment control, drainage systems, monuments, sanitary sewer and water facilities, streets, and other aspects of the plans. The City will work with the applicant to ensure that all standards specified in the Subdivision Ordinance are met, or that the appropriate variation is requested through the PUD Preliminary Plan, Concept Phasing. The applicants have also submitted a Concept Phasing Plan, indicating how they intend to proceed with construction and build -out of the proposed planned development. As proposed by the applicants, the Phasing Plan indicates that Phase I includes construction of the access road to Hudson Blvd. and the southern portion of the northern single family residential area. Phase II includes construction of the medium density residential area. Finally, Phase III includes the construction of the remaining single family area in the northern portion of the site, as well the 5th Street minor collector road. Staff is recommending that the Phasing Plan be revised so that all public infrastructure is constructed adjacent to any areas being platted. More specifically, the minor collector road should be constructed adjacent to any areas of residential homes that are being platted. It is critical that the city ensures that all public improvements needed to serve development in the 1-94 Corridor are installed as growth occurs. Infrastructure. The developer will be required to construct all streets, sewer, water, storm water ponds, and other infrastructure necessary to serve the development. Storm water facilities should be platted as outlots and deeded to the city for maintenance purposes. Adequate access to storm water facilities must be provided. Tree Preservation and Protection. Based upon the existing tree cover of the site, it is possible that the applicant may not be required to complete a Tree Preservation Plan. If the applicant can demonstrate that significant trees on the site will not be negatively impacted by development activity, they would be allowed to submit a Woodland Evaluation Report in lieu of a Tree Preservation Plan. Green Belt/Buffer, The Comprehensive Plan identifies an area north of the Boulder Ponds planned development and south of the Stonegate subdivision as a green belt/buffer space with a minimum width of 100 feet. In the case of the subject property, this area is also the location for a significant power line easement held by Xcel Energy. As proposed in the PUD Concept Plan, the applicant is utilizing this space for the continuation of trail corridor from the east. Design of the greenbelt trail is consistent with City planning efforts to date. Staff believes that that green belt/buffer requirements of the Comprehensive Plan have been met by the applicant. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A - ACTION ITEM 9 Streets and Transportation. The proposed street system has been designed to comply with all applicable subdivision requirements and City engineering standards, with the exception of the requested variance as noted in the City Engineer's report. Staff does have some concerns related to the landscape medians and island in term of acceptable turning radii, emergency vehicle access, snow removal, general maintenance, and safe turning movements More specifically, the central intersection of the northern single family area contains three large medians/island that present difficult turning movements and safety concerns related to limited turning radii, potential limited visibility due to plantings, and, in multiple instances, direct driveway access that intersects with this unique central intersection. The applicant will be directed to provide significant geometric detail of these areas and work with staff to ensure that all islands and medians allows for safe travel movements and efficient maintenance. Finally, further clarification must be provided regarding proposed plantings in these medians/islands, as well as the responsible party for the maintenance of these plantings. 5gh Street Alignment and Design. Staff has the following comments regarding the proposed alignment of the 51h Street minor collector road and design: o The applicants have proposed to relocate the alignment of the 5`h Street minor collector road to the south in order to maximize the potential for a single family neighborhood to the north, as well as mitigate difficult grade issues that exist on the site. From meeting with the applicants on multiple occasions regarding the proposed aligrunent of the minor collector road, staff has found the existing grade challenges to be accurate, and the alignment proposed in the Concept Plan to work in the context of meeting Municipal State Aid (MSA) road design requirements. To make the proposed alignment feasible, the applicants are working with the property owners to the east, Lennar and Dale Properties, to negotiate realigning the road to the south. All indications that the City has received indicate that general agreement has been reached, and the realignment will move forward. Evidence of these negotiations is documented in Attachment #5, a letter from Mr. Alan Dale of Dale Properties. o In addition to the eastern alignment, the applicants have also been working with Bremer Bank regarding the alignment of the minor collector road in the northwestern portion of the site. As proposed, the 5th Street right-of-way would encroach on the Bremer Bank property, and the road would encroach ever so slightly on the very northeast corner of the Bremer property. It is the City's understanding that discussion regarding the alignment of the collector in the northwest corner are moving forward in a positive direction. As a condition of seeking PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat approval, Staff is recommending that both alignment areas. the northwestern and eastern alignments, are resolved or agreed upon by all interested parties in advance of future application submittals. • Regarding the proposed alignment of the collector road, as well as the alignment of the local access road connecting Hudson Blvd., the properties to the south and east (Cranky Ape and Lampert Lumber) of the subject property do not currently have access provided. It is Staffs recommendation that right-of-way be platted to these adjacent parcels in a location that is acceptable to the City Engineer. o Finally. as part of the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat application submission, Staff' is requesting that the plans for 5'h Street include all design elements as requested by the City, including the street trees, landscaping, lighting, median plantings, and other elements as proposed by the Damon Farber design work. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION [TEM 10 o Sidewalks and Trails. As noted in the City Engineer's report, there are several instances where sidewalks and trails are located within either private outlots or on individual residential single family lots. The Subdivision Ordinance requires that all front property lines include 10' drainage and utility easements. The placement of sidewalks within these easements would impact the City's ability to use these easements for utility or maintenance purposes. In addition, having the sidewalks located on private property hinders the City's ability to maintain these public improvements. Also, it is important to maintain appropriate clear zones for all sidewalks and trails. Staff is recommending that all sidewalks and trails be located in City right-of-way. o City Engineer Review. The City Engineer has provided the Planning Department with a detailed comment letter dated November 20, 2013 as a summary of his PUD Concept Plan review. Staff has incorporated the more significant issues identified by the Engineer as part of the recommended conditions of approval, and has also included a general condition that all issues identified by the City Engineer must be addressed by the applicant prior to approval of a the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat. The Engineer does note that the proposed Concept Plan complies with the City's standards, with one exception related to base material of City streets. • Watershed Districts. The project area lies within the South Washington Watershed District. Comments have been provided (Attachment #4) by the SWWD Engineer, Matt Moore. Environmental Review. Based upon the proposed scope of the Concept Plan, the City does not believe that the planned development will individually trigger further environmental review. Based on the above Staff Report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan with multiple conditions intended to address future considerations related to the submission of a PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat application. The recommended conditions are as follows: Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1) The applicant must obtain pennission and consent from the adjoining property owner, Bremer Bank, related to the right-of-way and alignment of the 5th Street minor collector road in the northwest corner of the site. The final alignment must be determined prior to the submittal of PLTD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat applications. 2) The applicant must resolve the alignment of the 5th Street minor collector road in the southeast portion of the site with adjoining property owners, specifically Lennar and Dale Properties. The final alignment must be determined prior to the submittal of PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat applications. 3) Access must be provided to the adjacent parcels owned by Star River Holdings LLC (Cranky Ape) and Lampert Yards Inc (Lampert Lumber) via either the 5th Street minor collector road or the access road to Hudson Boulevard. The access location must meet the approval of the City Engineer. 4) The applicant must acquire additional land in the eastern portion of the site to plat single family residential Lots 14-18 as part of the Preliminary Plat application, or revise their plan accordingly. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 11 5) Request for flexibilities related to lot size, width, setbacks and all other requirements per the City's Zoning Ordinance or Design Standards must be clarified and documented as part of the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat submission. 6) The applicant must revise the Phasing Plan to accommodate the construction of all public infrastructure adjacent to any proposed areas to be platted within said phase per the City Engineer's report dated November 20, 2013. 7) All street and median geometries must accommodate emergency vehicle access and maintenance. Applicants must demonstrate acceptable turning radii for all uniquely shaped landscape medians and cul-de-sacs. 8) All sidewalks must be located in dedicated public right-of-way. All trails must be located within dedicated right-of-way, City parkland, or a 30-foot wide dedicated easement at a minimum. 9) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland Conservation Act, and shall acquire the needed permits from the appropriate watershed district prior to the commencement of any grading or development activity on the site. 10) Any land under which public trails are located will be accepted as park land provided the developer constructs said trails as part of the public improvements for the subdivision, and the land is located outside of any restrictive easements. 11) The applicant shall observe all comments and recommendations from the City Engineer documented on the Engineer's report dated November 20_ 2013. DRAFT FINDINGS Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to the proposed Boulder Ponds Concept Plan: 1) That the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. 2) That the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan complies with the general intent of the City's Urban Low Density Residential and Urban Medium Density Residential zoning districts. 3) That the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan complies with the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 4) That the Boulder Ponds PUD complies with the City's PUD Ordinance. 5) That the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the City's engineering standards with one exception as noted by the City Engineer in his review comments to the City dated November 20, 2013. RECCOMENDAT1ON: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan with the 11 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff Report. Suggested motion: "Move to recommend approval of the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan with the findings offact and conditions of approval as drafted in the Staff Report." PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM (*.c Density Analysis Mediurn Lens 442 rj07 *;) .141) *art, 1 =80 Stet ### 14.-or Chart thy, > #.14 rood Aeo. 4.11.5// • e4 late Otto, INN oLI '4u.be flofs 93 Average Lot Sac 10.489 so h Min mum lot 5,7i 7 703 $n h Mentor CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-149 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo ordains that Lake Elmo City Code, Section 154.032 Zoning District Map, of the Municipal Code, shall be amended by adding Ordinance No. 08-149, as follows: Section 1: Zoning Map Amendment. The following properties, Outlot B, Boulder Ponds (PID#34.029.21.33.0023) and Outlot C, Boulder Ponds (PID#34.029.21.33.0024) are hereby rezoned from C-Commercial/PUD and MDR -Medium Density Residential/PUD, respectively, to HDR-High Density Residential/PUD. Section 2: The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo also hereby ordains that the Zoning Administrator shall make the applicable changes to the official zoning map of the City of Lake Elmo. Section 3: Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. This Ordinance No. 08-149 was adopted on this 19th day of August 2016, by a vote of Ayes and _ Nays. ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk Mike Pearson, Mayor ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 7/25/16 AGENDA ITEM: 4b- PUBLIC HEAR ITEM CASE # 2016-24 Rezoning/PUD Amendment - Boulder Ponds Stephen Wensman, Planning Director Emily Becker, City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC is requesting approval of a rezoning/PUD amendment to the Boulder Ponds PUD to rezone Outlots B (PID#34.029.21.33.0023) and C (PID# 34.029.21.33.0024), Boulder Ponds from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR-PUD. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Property Owners: Location: Request: Existing Land Use Surrounding Land OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC Jade Trail North, South of 5th Street rezoning/PUD amendment to the Boulder Ponds PUD to rezone Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR-PUD and Zoning: Undeveloped outlots - Commercial PUD/MDR PUD Use and Zoning: LDR to the north, vacant - Commercial PUD outlot to the east, BP to the west, vacant Commercial PUD outlot to the south Comprehensive Plan: MDR/Commercial History: Boulder Ponds Preliminary Plat was approved on 7/28/14. The subject parcels were rezoned from RT to Commercial PUD/MDR PUD on 4/21/15. Deadline for Action: Application Complete - 6/27/16 60 Day Deadline - 8/26/16 Extension Letter Mailed - N/A 120 Day Deadline - N/A Applicable Regulations: Article XVI, Chapter 154, Sections 750-760, PUD Regulations Article X - Urban Residential Districts Planning Commission Meeting 7/25/16 Page 2 REQUEST DETAILS: OP4 Boulder Ponds is requesting a Rezoning/PUT) Amendment of two parcels, Outlot B and C, from Commerical/PUD and MDR/PUD respectively, to HDR/PUD in order to better market the parcels for a future Senior Housing Development. Outlot B is presently zoned for Cornmercial/PUD and is 1.44 acres in size. Outlot C is presently zoned for MDR/PUD and is 2.24 acres in size. The applicant would like to rezone both parcels to HDR/PUD and market them together for a proposed senior housing project. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS: According to Article XVI, Chapter 15, Section 757, Subd C of the Planned Unit Development Code, PUD Amendments shall be authorized by an amendment of the final development plan under the procedures for zoning amendment in Article III of the City Code of Ordinances. The rationale for the housing density in the MDR portion of Boulder Ponds was described in the 12/09/13 Planning Report for the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan: The medium density area, which is approximately 10.1 acres, contains 81 residential units (17 single family, 64 multi -family), resulting in a gross density of 7.98 units per acre. It should be noted that this density figure is slightly higher than what is guided by the Comprehensive Plan. However, given that the proposed development is a PUD, and that the amount of land guided for medium density residential development on these parcels by the Comprehensive Plan is much greater, Staff has determined that the proposed Concept Plan meets the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. To explain Staff s reasoning for this determination in another way, the proposed Concept Plan decreases the amount of total land guided for medium density development by over 20 acres by moving the collector road south. The slight increase in density above the allowed range per the Comp Plan is balanced by the significant reduction in the amount of land guided medium density. To put it in simple terms, by using the low end of gross density ranges in the Comp Plan, these parcels were guided to have 195 total residential units (not accounting for road right-of-way), whereas the proposed PUD Concept Plan includes 157 total units. Overall, the proposed PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the intent of the land use and density requirements as guided by the City's Comprehensive Plan. The rationale for the density is sound, however, when it recommending subsequent zoning for the sites, Staff had recommended LDR/PUD for the single family cul-de-sac, Jade Circle North, and MDR/PUD for the senior housing parcel (Outlot C). Outlot B was zoned Commercial PUD. The LDR/PUD zoning is the correct zoning for the single family housing on Jade Circle North just south of 5th Street, but the remaining 2.240 acre parcel (Outlot C) was zoned MDR/PUD for a planned 64 unit Senior Housing project. The zoning code, Section 154.453, Subdivision A, allows: Averaging of Lot Area. When lots are clustered within a development to provide common open space, the open space may be used to calculate an average density per lot to determine compliance with the individual lot area requirements. To determine the allowed density for Outlot C, A 64-unit project on a 2.240 acres site (and 0.23 acres of corresponding open space) would have a density of 25.91 units per acre, exceeding the 7- unit per acres allowed by the underlying MDR zoning, or 8.4-units per acre if 20`)/0 density bonus PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b — ACTION ITEM Planning Commission Meeting 7/25/16 Page was applied through the PUD. The HDR zoning would provide a 15-units per acre base density, or 18-units per acre if 20% density bonus was applied through the PUD. Even with HDR/PUD zoning, the 64-unit project would exceed the density allowable on the 2.47 acre site (.23 acres of open space). Therefore, OP4 Boulder Ponds LLC is proposing to rezone Outlot B (1.44 acres) from Commercial/PUD to HDR/PUD to add to the Senior Housing project area. With the addition of Outlot B, the 64-unit senior housing project be 4.18 acres (3.68 acres outlot area + .5 acres of open space) in size with a density of 15-units per acre. HDRJPUD is the appropriate zoning district for the proposed use on Outlots B and C combined. Senior housing (congregate housing) is a conditional use in both the Commercial and HDR Zoning Districts, so although the request is for a rezoning from Commercial/PUD to HDR/PUD, the proposed underlying land use remains essentially the same. In order to proceed with a senior housing project on the Oulots B and C the following would be required: • Final PUD Plans and Final Plat (combining the two outlots into a single lot) * Conditional Use Permit DRAFT FINDINGS: In order to approve a rezoning, the Planning Commission shall consider findings are shall submit the same with its recommendation to the City Council. Staff suggests the following findings: 1. The Rezoning/PUD Amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject property. 2. The proposed land use, Senior Housing, is a conditional use in both the Commercial and HDR zoning districts, so the underlying land use will remain unchanged. 3. The proposed HDR/PUD zoning is appropriate for the proposed senior housing density. 4. The proposed PUD/Amendment is consistent with the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan and Preliminary PUD Plans. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Rezoning/PUD Amendment for Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds, rezoning from CommerciaUPUD and MDR/PUD, respectively, to HDR/PUD with the following motion: "Move to recommend approval of the Rezoning/PUD Amendment for Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds from Commercial/PUD and MDR/PUD, respectively, to HDR/PUD with the following motion based on the findings in the Staff report." ATTACHMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b — ACTION ITEM Planning Commission Meeting 7/25/16 Page 4 • Application and Narrative • Planning Commission Report — Boulder Ponds PIM — Concept Plan 12/09/16 • Housing Density Analysis (from 12/09/16 Concept Plan) 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 ..... ............. Chair & Commission Members PUBLIC HEARING ITEM — ACTION ITEM Date Received: Received By: Permit 4, TI11.1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 651-747 3900 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo. MN 55042 LAND USE APPLICATION 0 Comprehensive Plan l Zoning District Amend 0 Zoning Text Amend El Variance(see below) Zoning Appeal 0 Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) 0 Flood Plain C.U.P. 0 Interim Use Permit (I.U.P.) 0 Excavating/Grading El Lot Line Adjustment El Minor Subdivision 0 Residential Subdivision Sketch/Concept Plan LI PUD Concept Plan 0 PUD Preliminary Plan El PUD Final Plan Applicant: OP4 Boulder Ponds, LLC (Contact: Deb Ridgeway) Address: 1660 Highway 100 S, Suite 400, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Phone # 952.525.3223 Email Address. deb.ridaewav@ExcelsiorLLC.com Fee Owner: Same as Applicant Address: Phone # Email Address: Property Location (Address and Complete (long) Legal Description: xxxx Jade Trail Outlots B & C, Boulder Ponds Detailed Reason for Request: Rezone Outlots B & C from Commercial PUD and MDR-PUD, respectively to HDR - PUD. Please refer to protect narrative for a detailed explanation, *Variance Requests: As outlined in Section 301,060 C. of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code. the applicant must demonstrate practical difficulties before a variance can be granted. The practical difficulties related to this application are as follows: In signing this application, I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the applicable provisions of the Zoning ordinance and current administrative procedures. I further acknowledge the fee explanation as outlined in the application procedures and hereby agree to pay all statements received from the City pertaining to additional application expense. OP4 Boulder Ponds, LLC Signature of applicant:BY Date: 6/24/16 OP4 Bou Signature of fee owner: Bv ..,6/24/16 Zoning Amendment & Preliminary PUD Amendment Project Representatives and Contact Information. LANDOWNER/ 0P4 Boulder Ponds, LLC DEVELOPER c/o The Excelsior Group, LLC 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Ben Schmidt, Vice President 952.525.3225 Ben,SchmidtftExcelsiroLLC.com Deb Ridgeway, Asset Manager 952.525.3223 Deb.RidFewavaz)ExelsioraCcorn Property Address, Zoning, Parcel Size, PID and Legal Description Outlot B, Boulder Ponds Outlot C, Boulder Ponds ADDRESS XXXX Hudson Blvd XXXX Hudson Blvd CURRENT Commercial - PUD MDR - PUD ZONING PARCEL SIZE Acres 172 2.46 Sq, Ft 2,591,320.2 6,098.4 PIDs 34-029-21-33-0023 34-029-21-33-0024 Boulder Ponds Preliminary PUD Amendment & Zoning Amendment Application 1 Boulder Ponds is a Planned Unit Development that was approved to include a variety of land uses, including single family residential, multifamily residential and commercial. The first phase of street and utility installation is complete to serve 20 Villa lots, 27 single family lots and 10 acres of commercial and multifamily. During the preliminary plat process, the 2.42 multifamily site [Outlot C) was presented as a 64-unit multifamily building. Based on the current zoning of mediutn density residential (7 units per acre), Outlot C is allowed only 15.4 units, which is inconsistent with the PUD approval. In addition to remedying this inconsistency, there is a desire to rezone Outlot B to allow multifamily on the entire 4.18 acres. Therefore, this application requests approval to amend the zoning of Outlots B & C, Boulders Ponds from Commercial and MDR-PUD to HDR-PUD and allow for a maximum 112 multifamily units. This is based on the analysis of the current approved plan with 98 units versus the 210.4 units that could be allowed per the zoning code. The accompanying plan further illustrates this. There is no proposed layout at this time, but when a plan is created, Final Plat, Final PUD and Conditional Use Permit approvals will be required providing adequate oversight of the specific site plans. In conclusion, Boulder Ponds offers a uniquely planned mixed -use neighborhood where the land uses provide a seamless transition from commercial to low density residential. The high density use between the commercial and lower density homes creates a complementary buffer and generally a more desirable and overall more viahle neighborhood for Lake Elmo, Boulder Ponds Preliminary Pill-) Amendment & Zoning Amendment Application 2 PROPOSED ZONING EXHIBIT FOR: J. OWNER/DEVELOPER OP4 BOULDER PONDS, LLC 11455 VIKING DRIVE SUITE 350 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 Kenna Density Residential 84 Units Approved (Outlot C) PROPOSED Elgin Density Residential 15 Units per Acre allowed 4,18 Acres (Outlets 8 & C) 4,18 Ac x15 DUA 62.7 Commercial fOutlot131 Meltitarnily Residential allowed Low Density Residential 20 Units Approved 4 Units per Acre allowed 7.98 Acres 7.98 Ac x4 DUA e 31.9 Units allowed ()VIIu r 144383V1301.LEVA93 0'47, E C. RUG a SONS, INC. Professional Land Surveyors ,.,„,„„ 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 t651) 3414203 F.(6503614701 Low Density FtesIdantlal 78 Units Approved 4 Units par Acre allowed 28.95 Acres 28.95 Ac x 4 DUA • 115.8 Units allowed 645-11#1V STH sawEr SUMMARY OF ALLOWED UNITS 115.80 31.90 +62.70 210.40 Total Allowed Units - 98 Platted Units 112.4 Proposed Ur,l,o Off site (Outlets II & VICINITY MAP PART CP SEC. 34. TWP. 39, L. WAS44GTE34 CCILINTT, MT4eSOTA NO SCALE:, NORTH NOT TO SCALE Zoning Amendment & Preliminary PUD Amendment Project Representatives and Contact Information. LANDOWNER/ OP4 Boulder Ponds, LLC DEVELOPER c/o The Excelsior Group, LLC 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 400 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Ben Schmidt, Vice President 952.525.3225 Ben.Schmidt@ExcelsiroLLC.corn Deb Ridgeway, Asset Manager 952.525.3223 Deb.Ridgeway0ExelsiorLLC.com Property Address, Zoning, Parcel Size, P1D and Legal Description Outlot B, Boulder Ponds Outlot C, Boulder Ponds ADDRESS XXXX Hudson Blvd XXXX Hudson Blvd CURRENT Commercial - PUD MDR - PUD ZONING PARCEL SIZE Acres 1.72 2.46 Sq. Ft 2,591,320.2 6,098.4 PIDs 34-029-21-33-0023 34-029-21-33-0024 Boulder Ponds Preliminary PUD Amendment & Zoning Amendment Application 1 Boulder Ponds is a Planned Unit Development that was approved to include a variety of land uses, including single family residential, multifamily residential and commercial. The first phase of street and utility installation is complete to serve 20 Villa lots, 27 single family lots and 10 acres of commercial and multifamily. During the preliminary plat process, the 2.42 multifamily site (Outlot C) was presented as a 64-unit multifamily building. Based on the current zoning of medium density residential (7 units per acre), Outlot C is allowed only 15.4 units, which is inconsistent with the PUD approval. In addition to remedying this inconsistency, there is a desire to rezone Outlot B to allow multifamily on the entire 4.18 acres. Therefore, this application requests approval to amend the zoning of Outlots B & C, Boulders Ponds from Commercial and MDR-PUD to HDR-PUD and allow for a maximum 112 multifamily units. This is based on the analysis of the current approved plan with 98 units versus the 210.4 units that could be allowed per the zoning code. The accompanying plan further illustrates this. There is no proposed layout at this time, but when a plan is created, Final Plat, Final PUD and Conditional Use Permit approvals will be required providing adequate oversight of the specific site plans. In conclusion, Boulder Ponds offers a uniquely planned mixed -use neighborhood where the land uses provide a seamless transition from commercial to low density residential. The high density use between the commercial and lower density homes creates a complementary buffer and generally a more desirable and overall more viable neighborhood for Lake Elmo. Boulder Ponds Preliminary PUD Amendment & Zoning Amendment Application 2 h ELMO ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 12/09/13 AGENDA ITEM: 4A —PUBLIC HEARING CASE # 2013-29 Boulder Ponds Planned Unit Development (PUD) - Concept Plan Nick Johnson, City Planner Kyle Klatt, Community Development Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer Mike Bouthilet, Public Works Superintendent Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief Rick Chase, Building Official Matt Moore, South Washington Watershed District SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing for a request from Amaris Company LLC for a residential Planned Unit Development Concept Plan with 93 single family residential homes and a 64-unit multifamily dwelling to be located on approximately 58 acres immediately east of the Eagle Point Business Park and within the City's 1-94 Corridor Planning Area. Staffis recommending approval of the PUD Concept Plan with 11 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff Report. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Properly OW/zers: Location: Request: Amaris Company, LLC, P.O. Box 10811, White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Louis Damiani Trust, c/o Security Bank & Trust Co., William C. Kuhlmann, 2202 Street East, Glencoe, MN 55336 Tim Montgomery, 6211 Upper 51' Street North, Oakdale, MN 55128 Part of Section 34 in Lake Elmo, north of I-94 and Hudson Boulevard, south of Stonegate residential subdivision, and east of Eagle Point Business Park. PINs: 34.029.21.33.0001; 34.029.21.32.0001; 34.029.21.33.0002. Application for Concept Plan approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) containing 93 single family homes and a 64-unit senior housing multi -family residential building to be named Boulder Ponds of Lake Elmo. Existing Land Use and Zoning: Agricultural land with one single family home (9120 Hudson Blvd. N.). Current Zoning: RT - Rural Transitional Zoning District; Proposed Zoning: LDR and MDR PUD Surrounding Lancl Use and Zoning: North: Residential Estates subdivision (Stonegate) - RE zoning and Park (Stonegate Park) - PF zoning; West: Offices (Eagle Point Town Office Park) - BP zoning; PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A - ACTION ITEM 7 South: Retail Trade (Lampert Lumber) — C zoning and Sales and Storage Lots (Cranky Ape) — C zoning; and East: future proposed Lermar urban low density residential subdivision (Savona) — current zoning: RT, future zoning: LDR. Coiiiprehensive Plan: Urban Low Density Residential (2.5 — 4 units per acre), Urban Medium Density Residential (4.5 — 7 units per acre), and Commercial. Histoty: Applicants are participating in the Section 34 Utility Project under a Statute 429 area - wide assessment. The utility project is expected to be completed in December of 2013. Deadline,for Action: Application Complete — 11/7/13 60 Day Deadline — 1/6/14 Extension Letter Mailed —No 120 Day Deadline — 3/7/13 Applicable Regulations: Chapter 153 — Subdivision Regulations Article 10 — Urban Residential Districts (154.450) Article 16 — Planned Unit Development (*154_800) REQUEST DETAILS The City of Lake Elmo has received an application from Amaris Company, LLC for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan on approximately 58 acres of land located within the 1-94 Corridor Planning Area, The Concept Plan includes 93 single family homes on the northern and central portion of the site, as well as a proposed 64-unit senior housing multi -family residential building. In addition, the Concept Plan includes vacant land along the Hudson Blvd that is planned for future Commercial land uses per the City's Comprehensive Plan. It is the applicant's intention to plat the Commercial areas as outlots until Commercial users are identified. The proposed PUD, to be called Boulder Ponds of Lake Elmo, would be located on property currently owned by the Louis Damiani Trust, currently managed by Security Bank & Trust Co., and Mr. Tim Montgomery. The Concept Plan has been developed in response to the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan for the 1-94 Corridor, which guide the applicant's land as a mix of Urban Low Density Residential — LDR, Urban Medium Density Residential — MDR and Commercial. The plan incorporates 93 single family lots, most of which are designed with a width of approximately 65 feet. The majority (76) of the single family lots are located north of the future minor collector road, 5th Street, whereas 17 single family lots are located south of the minor collector. In addition, the 64-unit senior housing multi- family building is also located south of the minor collector road adjacent to the areas that are guided for future Commercial land uses. As opposed to following the City's nonnal subdivision procedures, the applicants have detennined that a planned development approach offers the best method to achieve their development vision for their property. The purpose of the City's PUD ordinance is to provide flexibility in development and zoning standards for large parcels under unified control with the goal of achieving higher quality development. More specifically, the General Concept Plan phase of the PUD procedure allows the applicant to submit a general plan to the City demonstrating his or her basic intent of the development, including general density ranges, location of residential and nonresidential land uses, and location of streets, paths and open space. The purpose of approving the Concept Plan is to PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM provide the applicant with conceptual approval related to the requested flexibilities or variations from the City Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, or other City standards, before incurring substantial costs related to submitting a full Preliminary Plat application. In terms of procedure, the planned development path is similar to the normal subdivision process in that Preliminary and Final PUD Plan approvals must follow parallel track to Preliminary and Final Plat. However, one critical difference between the planned development process and standard subdivision process is that the PUD Concept Plan phase requires a public hearing and the approval of the City Council. Alternatively, the Sketch Plan review phase, the first step in the standard subdivision process, does not require a public hearing and City approval. The reason that the PUD Concept Plan requires a public hearing and City approval is due to the requested flexibility and variation from the City's standard zoning and subdivision procedures. Regarding variation from the City's Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan, the applicants have requested minor flexibility in a couple of areas, hence justifying the planned development approach. The requested variances or flexibilities will be further discussed and analyzed in the Planning and Zoning section of the Staff Report. The Boulder Ponds Concept Plan also includes a significant portion of the proposed 5Street minor collector road as planned in the City's Transportation Plan. Once completed, the minor collector road will serve as the primary access for the Boulder Ponds planned development. The segment of the minor collector road included in the Concept Plan is part of the 1' phase of the 5' Street collector road, from Inwood Avenue (CSAH 13) to Keats Avenue (CSAH 19). Eventually, the 5" Street minor collector road is planned to serve the entire 1-94 Corridor from west to east (Inwood Ave. to Manning Ave.). As shown in the Concept Plan, the design of the nainor collector road as part of the Boulder Ponds development is consistent with the City's specifications for this roadway segment. The applicant has provided for a 120-foot wide right-of-way, which will provide sufficient room for thc construction of a parkway with turning lanes, 10-foot bituminous trail, sidewalk, trees, lighting, and other design elements as planned by the City. It should also be noted that the applicants and other interested landowners in the area have recently met with City staff to discuss the possibility of petitioning the City for a 429 area -wide assessment project to complete the 5" Street minor collector road from Keats Ave. (CSAH 19) to the western boundary of the Boulder Pond project next year. Finally, to achieve the desired vision of development for their project, as well as address difficult grade issues on the site, the applicants are proposing to move the alignment of the minor collector road to the south. The applicants are currently working with the adjacent property owners to the east, US Homes Corp. (Lennar Homes) and DPS-Lake Elmo LLC (Dale Properties), to come to terms on an agreed alignment of the 5" Street minor collector road. The proposed alignment of the minor collector road will be further discussed in the Review and Analysis section of the Staff Report. In terms °futilities, the applicants are currently participating in the Section 34 Utility Project, which is extending sewer and water throughout Stage 1 of the 1-94 Corridor Planning Area. With the improvements associated with the Section 34 project, the applicants will have access to both sewer and water from the south (Hudson Blvd.) and west (Eagle Point Business Park). Currently, sewer and water service are being provided by the City of Oakdale via a Joint Services Agreement. There is currently enough capacity in the Oakdale system to provide sewer and water service to the Boulder Ponds development. As the build -out of the Stage 1 Area of the 1-94 Corridor progresses, the City will need to transition water services to the Lake Elmo municipal water system via the Inwood Ave Trunk Watermain Extension Project, as well as transition sewer flows to the Met Council W.O.N.E interceptor station along Hudson Blvd. The City will work with the applicants to plan for adequate utility infrastructure with the submission of the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat. Other major features of the proposed planned development include outlot areas that will provide for open space, trails, and storm water management throughout the development area. The development PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 4 also incorporates a buffer/greenway area along the northern boundary of the plat adjacent to an existing RE — Residential Estates subdivision as required in the City's Comprehensive Plan, All outlots that are planned for park land or storm water use will be deeded to the City, while the future home owner's association will retain ownership of the remaining outlets. Regarding next steps, the applicant is proposing to bring forward a Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat application upon approval of the Concept Plan. Per the PUD Ordinance, the final approval of the proposed planned unit development will result in a zoning change to a specific PUD zoning district, with specific requirements and standards that are specific to the development. If the application moves forward, the change in the base zoning (LDR, MDR, C) of the property would occur at the time of Preliminary Plan approval, and the final PUD zoning with approved flexibility that is specific to the development would be established at Final Plan approval. PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES The Boulder Ponds site is guided for Urban Low Density Residential, Urban Medium Density Residential and Commercial land uses in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Density Analysis sheet within the Boulder Ponds Concept Plan delineates the low density, medium density and commercial areas respectively within the proposed planned development. The realignment of the 5d1 Street minor collector road to the south allows the applicant to maximize the single family residential area to the north, creating a larger distinct single family neighborhood as opposed to having the parcels bisected in half by the collector road. Regarding the design of the planned development, the single family residential area to the north of the minor collector street is defined by one curvilinear residential through street that allows for ease of travel through the neighborhood. The remaining portions of the single family neighborhood are served by three cul-de-sacs, none exceeding 500 feet in length. Also, the applicants are proposing to include several landscaped medians and islands within the proposed City streets, the highlights of which are three medians in the middle of the single family neighborhood. In relation to the lots and blocks, the arrangement follow a curvilinear pattern, which allows the vast majority of the lots to back up to common open space of some form. The northern portion of the single family area north of the minor collector street also contains the 100' greenbelt buffer between the new growth areas and the Stonegate residential estates subdivision as guided by the City's Comprehensive Plan. The greenbelt buffer contains a trail that connects to the trail provided by the Lennar urban low density subdivision to the east and connects with the trail within the 5' Street corridor to the west. This area is also the location of a power Line easement owned by Xcel Energy. On the southern half of the minor collector road, a local street connects the medium density residential commercial areas from 5'1' Street to Hudson Boulevard. South of the collector road, the plan include one small area of 17 single family lots, as well as a 64-unit multi -family building intended for senior housing. Regarding the commercial areas (approximately 9 acres) to the south of the medium density residential area, it is the applicant's intention to plat these areas as outlots until prospective users are identified. For pedestrian circulation and recreation, sidewalks and trails are planned throughout the Boulder Ponds planned development. Consistent with City Design Standards, the applicants have included sidewalks to be installed on at least one side of all streets. Also, the greenbelt buffer trail included on the northern portion of the site is consistent with the guidance of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition to the internal trails and sidewalks that are proposed by the developer, the .5111 Street Corridor include a 10-foot bituminous trail on the north side of the road and a six-foot sidewalk on the south PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 5 side. The internal trails and sidewalks provide good circulation to the 5Street trail, which is intended to provide a regional transportation and recreation purpose. Regarding the single family lots within the Boulder Ponds Concept Plan, the vast majority of the lots meet the minimum size requirements for the City's Urban Low Density Residential — LDR zoning district. The minimum lot size per the City's LDR zoning district is 8,000 square feet, and the minimum lot width at building setback line is 60'. Of the 93 single family lots, all but five lots (Lot 59, 69, 72, 73 and 75) meet or exceed the minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet as required under LDR zoning. Overall, the average single family lot size in the planned development is approximately 10,495 square feet. In addition, the vast majority of the single family lots meet or exceed the minimum 60' lot width, The applicants have noted that allowing for minor flexibility in lot area and width is one of the key reasons for proceeding with a planned development. Also pertaining to the single family residential lots, the applicants are requesting that the City consider reduced side yard and front yard setbacks to accommodate the unique design of the single family residential portion of the planned development. Reduced setbacks allow for greater clustering, which promotes high levels of open space. According to §154.802.E-F, planned developments may allow for reduced setbacks and reductions in area and width of individual lots. It is Staffs understanding that the applicants are seeking to allow 5' side yard setbacks on both sides of the principal structure. In addition, the applicants may be seeking reduced front yard setbacks. Any reductions in front yard setback must be approved with the understanding that adequate separation is provided between parking areas (driveways) and sidewalks, so that any potential obstacles, such as parked vehicles or trailers, do not encroach on residential sidewalks, Overall, reductions in all residential lot sizes and setbacks must be clearly identified, reviewed and approved at time of PUD Preliminary Plan phase. Also related to single family lots, the applicants have included five residential lots that are partially or almost entirely on a small triangular piece of property owned by Dale Properties. The applicants are proposing to acquire this land from Dale Properties in order to facilitate the platting of these five additional lots and realign the minor collector road to the south, Dale Properties has submitted a letter (Attachment #5) indicating that general agreement has been reached on the land acquisition. For the purposes of the Concept Plan, the applicants have "ghost platted" the five lots, Lots 14-18 on the PUD Lot Areas sheet, with the intention of acquiring the land prior to Preliminary Plat submission. If these lots are to be included in the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat, the applicants must submit evidence demonstrating control or consent of this area being included in the plat, If this is not possible, plans must be revised accordingly. Regarding the proposed multi -family residential building, the applicant has noted that it is likely intended for a senior living facility. Given that the application is currently at Concept Plan phase, it is not required that significant detail be provided. However, it should be noted that within the Urban Medium Density Residential — MDR zoning district, multi -family dwellings are considered a conditional use. At the time of Final Plat and PUD Final Plan approval for the phase that includes the 64-unit multi -family dwelling, the applicant will be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Further review of the multi -family dwelling should occur at the time of review for the required CUP. On the topic of housing density, the applicants have submitted a density analysis worksheet to present the gross densities associated with the low density and medium density areas. Due to the fact that the minor collector road has been moved to the south, the proposed Boulder Ponds planned development would include more single family residential development than is currently planned for in the Comprehensive Plan. However, it is important to note that per the Comp Plan, the 5th Street PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 6 minor collector road serves as the boundary between low density and medium density areas in the Stage 1 Area (Inwood Ave, to Keats Ave.) of the 1-94 Corridor. The gross density of the single family area to the north of the collector road, which is approximately 28.5 acres, is calculated to be 2.66 units per acre. The medium density area, which is approximately 10.1 acres, contains 81 residential units (17 single family, 64 multi -family), resulting in a gross density of 7.98 units per acre. It should be noted that this density figure is slightly higher than what is guided by the Comprehensive Plan. However, given that the proposed development is a PUD, and that the amount of land guided for medium density residential development on these parcels by the Comprehensive Plan is much greater, Staff has determined that the proposed Concept Plan meets the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. To explain Staff's reasoning for this determination in another way, the proposed Concept Plan decreases the amount of total land guided for medium density development by over 20 acres by moving the collector road south. The slight increase in density above the allowed range per the Comp Plan is balanced by the significant reduction in the amount of land guided medium density. To put it in simple terms, by using the low end of gross density ranges in the Comp Plan, these parcels were guided to have 195 total residential units (not accounting for road right-of- way), whereas the proposed PUD Concept Plan includes 157 total units. Overall, the proposed PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the intent of the land use and density requirements as guided by the City's Comprehensive Plan. In terms of parkland dedication requirements, the Subdivision Ordinance requires that 10% of the land in urban residential districts to be dedicated for park purposes. Alternatively, fees may be submitted to the City in lieu of land dedication at a rate equal to the market value of the land. It is at the discretion of the City Council how parkland/fees are accepted to meet this requirement. The Boulder Ponds site is approximately 58 acres in size. Therefore, under the approach of a pure land dedication, the applicants would be required to dedicate approximately 5.8 acres of land for parkland purposes. In the application narrative, the applicants note that within the proposed Plan Concept Plan, 11.8 acres are devoted as park space. However, it must be noted that to be accepted as parkland for dedication purposes, the land must be able to serve an active recreation purpose. In addition, if linear land dedications are accepted, a trail that provides effective connectivity in the community must be provided and constructed. Also, it should be noted that the City cannot accept land that is subject to private easement for public park -land dedication. This consideration relates to the location of the Xcel Energy power line easement in the greenbelt buffer area in the northern portion of the site. It is the recommendation of Staff that further discussions be had with the applicants regarding which areas are eligible for parkland dedication. Greater clarity regarding parkland dedication requirements and eligibility should be reached in advance of Preliminary Plat. Regarding available or future park facilities, the applicants are proposing to continue the greenbelt/buffer trail along the northern portion ofthe property. This trail provides connections to the 511' Street regional trail and Stonegate Park from the east. Given it proximity, it makes logical sense that Stonegate Park, in addition to other City parks, will serve the future residents of the Boulder Ponds planned development. It is recommended by Staff that the City works with the applicants and property owners to the west of Stonegate Park, Azure Properties, to investigate possible expansions or improvements to Stonegate Park. In addition Staff will work with the Park Commission to evaluate if any additional facilities or programs should be offered at Stonegate Park. Evaluating thc facilities and programing of Stonegate Park should inform future planning or expansion efforts. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 7 City Staff has reviewed the proposed Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan, which has gone through multiple iterations in advance of the formal application being accepted as complete by the City. During the course of these reviews, several of the issues and concerns that were previously raised by Staff have been addressed by the applicant with updated submission documents. However, it is important to note that there are other elements of the plan that still require additional attention in advance of a PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat submittal. In general, the proposed plan will meet all applicable City requirements for PUD Concept Plan approval, and any deficiencies or additional work that is needed is noted for the purpose of inclusion in the review record. In addition there are several things happening in and around the Boulder Ponds planned development that will have an impact on the project, including the possible petition for a 429 area -wide assessment project to construct the 5th Street minor collector road, as well as the final alignment of said road. Given that some of these efforts are still underway, Staff recognizes that some minor modifications may be necessary from PUD Concept Plan phase to PUD Preliminary Plan phase. The City has received a detailed list of comments from the City Engineer, in addition to general comments by the South Washington Watershed District, all of which are attached for consideration by the Commission. In addition to the general comments that have been provided in the preceding sections of this report, Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the issues and comments related to the following discussion areas as well: Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan for this area and with the densities that were approved as part of this plan. The gross densities for the development generally are consistent with the ranges allowed for the urban low density and urban medium density land use categories. Other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan relate to the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan as follows: o Transportation. The City's transportation plan calls for the construction of a minor collector road that will connect the eastern and western portions of the 1-94 Corridor. Staff views this road as a critical piece of the transportation infrastructure that is needed to serve the densities that have been planned for this area. The applicant has incorporated the right-of-way at the width necessary to construct the minor collector as part of its PUD Concept Plan, o Parks. The greenbelt trail provided on the northern portion of the site is consistent with the City's Land Use Plan in the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the City's Park Plan in the Comprehensive Plan does not identify this area as a future location of a neighborhood park due to its proximity to Stonegate Park. o Water. Water will eventually be provided to this area via a future extension of the municipal system along Inwood Avenue. The Boulder Ponds planned development will be able to be served under the City's current agreement with the City of Oakdale until the Inwood watermain extension is completed. o Sanitary Sewer, The Boulder Ponds planned development will be required to connect to the sewer main being constructed as part of the Section 34 area wide assessment project. In this case, all of the property owners that are planned to be served by sanitary sewer have petitioned the City to construct the required sewer and water mains to serve the area. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM o Phasing. The Boulder Ponds planned development is located within the Stage 1 phasing area for the 1-94 Corridor and therefore the proposed development is consistent with the City's anticipated phasing of growth. Zoning. The proposed base zoning for the Boulder Ponds site will be split between the Urban Low Density Residential — LDR, the Urban Medium Density Residential — MDR, and Commercial — C zoning districts. However, approval of PUD Final Plan will result in a zoning change to a specific PUD Zoning District, recording all of the permitted variations, such as minimum lot size and setbacks, from the Zoning requirements of the base zoning district. Subdivision Requirements. The City's Subdivision Ordinance includes a fairly lengthy list of standards that must be met by all new subdivisions, and include requirements for blocks, lots, easements, erosion and sediment control, drainage systems, monuments, sanitary sewer and water facilities, streets, and other aspects of the plans. The City will work with the applicant to ensure that all standards specified in the Subdivision Ordinance are met, or that the appropriate variation is requested through the PUD Preliminary Plan. Concept Phasing. The applicants have also submitted a Concept Phasing Plan, indicating how they intend to proceed with construction and build -out of the proposed planned development. As proposed by the applicants, the Phasing Plan indicates that Phase 1 includes construction of the access road to Hudson Blvd, and the southern portion of the northern single family residential area. Phase II includes construction of the medium density residential area. Finally, Phase III includes the construction of the remaining single family area in the northern portion of the site, as well the 5th Street minor collector road. Staff is recommending that the Phasing Plan be revised so that all public infrastructure is constructed adjacent to any areas being platted, More specifically, the minor collector road should be constructed adjacent to any areas of residential homes that are being platted. It is critical that the city ensures that all public improvements needed to serve development in the 1-94 Corridor are installed as growth occurs. infrastructure. The developer will be required to construct all streets, sewer, water, storm water ponds, and other infrastructure necessary to serve the development. Storm water facilities should be platted as outlots and deeded to the city for maintenance purposes. Adequate access to storm water facilities must be provided. Tree Preservation and Protection. Based upon the existing tree cover of the site, it is possible that the applicant may not be required to complete a Tree Preservation Plan. If the applicant can demonstrate that significant trees on the site will not be negatively impacted by development activity, they would be allowed to submit a Woodland Evaluation Report in lieu of a Tree Preservation Plan. Green Belt/Buffer. The Comprehensive Plan identifies an area north of the Boulder Ponds planned development and south of the Stonegate subdivision as a green belt/buffer space with a minimum width of 100 feet. In the case of the subject property, this area is also the location for a significant power line easement held by Xcel Energy. As proposed in the PUD Concept Plan, the applicant is utilizing this space for the continuation of trail corridor from the east. Design of the greenbelt trail is consistent with City planning efforts to date. Staff believes that that green belt/buffer requirements of the Comprehensive Plan have been met by the applicant. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A ACTION ITEM 9 Streets and Transportation. The proposed street system has been designed to comply with all applicable subdivision requirements and City engineering standards, with the exception of the requested variance as noted in the City Engineer's report. Staff does have some concerns related to the landscape medians and island in term of acceptable turning radii, emergency vehicle access, snow removal, general maintenance, and safe turning movements. More specifically, the central intersection of the northern single family area contains three large medians/island that present difficult turning movements and safety concerns related to limited turning radii, potential limited visibility due to plantings, and, in multiple instances, direct driveway access that intersects with this unique central intersection. The applicant will be directed to provide significant geometric detail of these areas and work with staff to ensure that all islands and medians allows for safe travel movements and efficient maintenance. Filially, further clarification must be provided regarding proposed plantings in these medians/islands, as well as the responsible party for the maintenance of these plantings. .511a Street Alignment and Design. Staff has the following comments regarding the proposed alignment of the 51b Street minor collector road and design: o The applicants have proposed to relocate the alignment of the 5th Street minor collector road to the south in order to maximize the potential for a single family neighborhood to the north, as well as mitigate difficult grade issues that exist on the site. From meeting with the applicants on multiple occasions regarding the proposed alignment of the minor collector road, staff has found the existing grade challenges to be accurate, and the alignment proposed in the Concept Plan to work in the context of meeting Municipal State Aid (MSA) road design requirements. To make the proposed alignment feasible, the applicants are working with the property owners to the east, Lennar and Dale Properties, to negotiate realigning the road to the south. All indications that the City has received indicate that general agreement has been reached, and the realignment will move forward. Evidence of these negotiations is documented in Attachment #5, a letter from Mr. Alan Dale of Dale Properties. o In addition to the eastern alignment, the applicants have also been working with Bremer Bank regarding the alignment of the minor collector road in the northwestern portion of the site. As proposed, the 5'11 Street right-of-way would encroach on the Bremer Bank property, and the road would encroach ever so slightly on the very northeast corner of the Bremer property. It is the City's understanding that discussion regarding the alignment of the collector in the northwest corner are moving forward in a positive direction. As a condition of seeking PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat approval, Staff is recommending that both alignment areas, the northwestern and eastern alignments, are resolved or agreed upon by all interested parties in advance of future application submittals. o Regarding the proposed alignment of the collector road, as well as the alignment of the local access road connecting Hudson Blvd., the properties to the south and east (Cranky Ape and Lampert Lumber) of the subject property do not currently have access provided. It is Staffs recommendation that right-of-way be platted to these adjacent parcels in a location that is acceptable to the City Engineer. o Finally, as part of the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat application submission, Staff is requesting that the plans for 5`h Street include all design elements as requested by the City, including the street trees, landscaping, lighting, median plantings, and other elements as proposed by the Damon Farber design work. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 10 Sidewalks and Trails. As noted in the City Engineer's report, there are several instances where sidewalks and trails are located within either private outlots or on individual residential single family lots. The Subdivision Ordinance requires that all front property lines include 10' drainage and utility easements. The placement of sidewalks within these easements would impact the City's ability to use these easements for utility or maintenance purposes. In addition, having the sidewalks located on private property hinders the City's ability to maintain these public improvements. Also, it is important to maintain appropriate clear zones for all sidewalks and trails. Staff is recommending that all sidewalks and trails be located in City right-of-way. City Engineer Review. The City Engineer has provided the Planning Department with a detailed comment letter dated November 20, 2013 as a summary of his PUD Concept Plan review. Staff has incorporated the more significant issues identified by the Engineer as part of the recommended conditions of approval, and has also included a general condition that all issues identified by the City Engineer must be addressed by the applicant prior to approval of a the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat. The Engineer does note that the proposed Concept Plan complies with the City's standards, with one exception related to base material of City streets. Watershed Districts. The project area lies within the South Washington Watershed District. Comments have been provided (Attachment #4) by the SWWD Engineer, Matt Moore. Environmental Review. Based upon the proposed scope of the Concept Plan, the City does not believe that the planned development will individually trigger further environmental review. Based on the above Staff Report and analysis, Staff is recommending approval of the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan with multiple conditions intended to address future considerations related to the submission of a PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat application. The reconunended conditions are as follows: Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1) The applicant must obtain permission and consent from the adjoining property owner, Bremer Bank, related to the right-of-way and alignment of the 5th Street minor collector road in the northwest comer of the site. The final alignment must be determined prior to the submittal of PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat applications. 2) The applicant must resolve the alignment of the 5th Street minor collector road in the southeast portion of the site with adjoining property owners, specifically Lennar and Dale Properties. The final alignment must be determined prior to the submittal of PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat applications. 3) Access must be provided to the adjacent parcels owned by Star River Holdings LLC (Cranky Ape) and Lampert Yards Inc (Lampert Lumber) via either the 5th Street minor collector road or the access road to Hudson Boulevard. The access location must meet the approval of the City Engineer. 4) The applicant must acquire additional land in the eastern portion of the site to plat single family residential Lots 14-18 as part of the Preliminary Plat application, or revise their plan accordingly. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM 11 5) Request for flexibilities related to lot size, width, setbacks and all other requirements per the City's Zoning Ordinance or Design Standards must be clarified and documented as part of the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat submission. 6) The applicant must revise the Phasing Plan to accommodate the construction of all public infrastructure adjacent to any proposed areas to be platted within said phase per the City Engineer's report dated November 20, 2013. 7) All street and median geometries must accommodate emergency vehicle access and maintenance. Applicants must demonstrate acceptable turning radii for all uniquely shaped landscape medians and cul-de-sacs. 8) All sidewalks must be located in dedicated public right-of-way. All trails must be located within dedicated right-of-way, City parkland, or a 30-foot wide dedicated easement at a minimum. 9) The developer shall follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the Wetland Conservation Act, and shall acquire the needed permits from the appropriate watershed district prior to the commencement of any grading or development activity on the site. 10) Any land under which public trails are located will be accepted as park land provided the developer constructs said trails as part of the public improvements for the subdivision, and the land is located outside of any restrictive easements. 11) The applicant shall observe all comments and recomrnendations from the City Engineer documented on the Engineer's report dated November 20. 2013. DRAFT FINDINGS Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to the proposed Boulder Ponds Concept Plan: I) That the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. 2) That the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan complies with the general intent of the City's Urban Low Density Residential and Urban Medium Density Residential zoning districts. 3) That the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan complies with the City's Subdivision Ordinance, 4) That the Boulder Ponds PUD complies with the City's PUD Ordinance. 5) That the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan is consistent with the City's engineering standards with one exception as noted by the City Engineer in his review comments to the City dated November 20, 2013. RECCOMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan with the 11 conditions of approval as listed in the Staff Report. Suggested motion: "Move to recommend approval of the Boulder Ponds PUD Concept Plan with the findings offact and conditions of approval as drafted in the Staff Report," PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A — ACTION ITEM Density Analysis I = 88 led ,A A Atv et 0101 VAIrri Art, u8,sn 4 os iNtS c4 LAre Orem, WiN "'Mel NJrnher el lots Average Lot 5,te !num 101, 5.0 *a.ArrAAA, !rob tars* riArr£Aror.rrIrrAr A: 0, Ale r AAA, 93 1G,489 so fl 7 703 uz Mentor CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-149 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo ordains that Lake Elmo City Code, Section 154.032 Zoning District Map, of the Municipal Code, shall be amended by adding Ordinance No. 08-149, as follows: Section 1: Zoning Map Amendment. The following properties, Outlot B, Boulder Ponds (PID#34.029.21.33.0023) and Outlot C, Boulder Ponds (PID#34.029.21.33.0024) are hereby rezoned from C-Commercial/PUD and MDR -Medium Density Residential/PUD, respectively, to HDR-High Density Residential/PUD. Section 2: The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo also hereby ordains that the Zoning Administrator shall make the applicable changes to the official zoning map of the City of Lake Elmo. Section 3: Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. This Ordinance No. 08-149 was adopted on this 19th day of August 2016, by a vote of _ Ayes and _ Nays. Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk //" ./o ''i l\|'|`l�l \|() /�`^`^- �~^_^^°, City ofLake Elmo Planning Cwnnnm/usimn Meeting Minutes of July 25, 2816 Chairman Kreimer called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Dunn' Larson, Griffin, Fields, Dodson, Kreinner, Lundquist and Williams. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director VVensnnan Approve Agenda: K4/S/P� Dodson/Griffin, move to approve the agenda as amended, Vote: J-O, motion Approve Minutes: June 27, 2016 M/S/P: Williams/Griffin, move to approve the June 27, I016 minutes as amended,i blzte/ 7-0,nnwtion carried. Public Hearing — Zoning Map Amendment/PUD Amendment OP4 Boulder Ponds Wensman started his presentation regarding the Boulder Ponds PUD amendment which isprocessed asarezoning. They would like tnrezone out|VtsB&[from Commercial PUD and K4DR'PUD to HDR-PUD. VVensnnan went through some of the history of the site and explained what the developer istrying todo. VVensnmanprovided draft findings as follows 1) The rezoning/PUD amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject property 2\The proposed land use, Senior Housing is a conditional use in both the Commercial and HDR zoning districts, so the underlying land use will remain unchanged 3) The proposed HDR/PUD zoning is appropriate for the proposed senior housing density. 4)The proposed PUD/Annendnoent|sconsistent with the Boulder Ponds PUDConcept Plan and Preliminary PUDPlans. Wensman stated that in order to develop the site as senior living, the area would need final plat/final PUD plan approval, outlot B & C would need to be combined into a single lot and a conditional use permit approval is required for congregate housing. Dodson iswondering why the CUP application isnot with this. VVensnmanstated that Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 3 they rezone the property, what would stop them from putting in a differnet type of High density housing. VVenurnanstated that there would bcnoguarantee that adiffernct plan wouldn't come forward, Fields asked if the senior housing is the motivation for rezoning this property, why wouldn't vvewait until there is a plan for CUP for the senior housing. Fields feels that making the change could have the City end up with something that is unintended. Larson is wondering if there could be a condition attached to this request stating that it isfor Senior Housing, VVensrnanstated that hedoes not believe there can beconditions on a rezoning. Deb Ridgeway, Excelsior Group, stated that they donot have abuyer yet for the property. She feels itistoclean upthe zoning for the marketing ufthe property. She said that they need a larger lot in order to market this as smaller lots are not desirable. They are currently marketing the site asasenior housing project. Williams asked about the combined parcels and how many units they need to make it viable. Deb Ridgeway stated that they feel they need IO0units for ittobeaviable senior housing project. Williams stated that itisonly approximately 4acres and atl5 units/acre maximum, that still only gives them approxirnate|y6O units. Ridgeway stated that based on it being a PUD and looking at the entire site, they would be allowed 210 units. They would be platting 98 units at this time with a difference of 112 units. VVensnnandoes not agree with Ridoevvayscalculations. The underlying zoning isthe tool toenforce the comprehensive plan. There are bonuses allowed, however, once the zoning i\set for aparcel, that ishow itneeds t0bedeveloped. The LDRcould have been developed more dense, and just because it wasn't, doesn't mean that it can be shifted toanother area. The PUDisnot anopen door for density. Williams wanted to confirm the allowed density for this site for HDR zoning. VVensrnan stated that itwould be64units for this project nr7Gunits ifthey achieve the ZOY6 bonus. Heasked Ridgeway if that isthe case, would they still want toproceed with the rezoning request. Ridgeway confirmed that they would. Dunn asked what qualified for aIUY6bonus. Wensnnanstated that there isthe base zoning and then with a PUDthena are highlights that qualify for bonuses. Dunn stated that it is very hard to keep track of these issues if the developer keeps changing things asthey goalong. VVensnnanstated that the deviations are spelled out atthe time of preliminary plat. Fields thinks that rezoning this now without a project opens the door for market rate Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 Public hearing opened at7:38pnn Noone spoke and there was nowritten correspondence. Public hearing closed at7:38pnn M/S/P: Willimans/Dodson, move to add finding number 5 that there is disagreement between the applicant and staff as to how many units would be allowed with the new zoning, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Fields/Williams, move to add finding number 6 that to change the zoning tVHDR xvnu|d allow the site to be marketed as a market rate nnu|it'fanni|y housing site, Vote; J- 0, motion carried unanimously, M/S/P: Wilhams/, move to add finding number 7 that unit counts for the congregate care asfound inthe senior housing inthe Old Village area, should also beapplied City wide. There was nosecond and this was added tothe approval motion, Ridgeway wanted to clarify that the preliminary plat was approved to have a 64 unit senior facility, but the zoning was not put into place correctly. They would just like tn expand the acreage sothat they can market this better. The existing residents know that this isintended tobeasenior living project. Ben Schmidt, Excelsior Group, their understanding based on the original PUD is that they could doa64unit senior facility onthe 2.4acres, but they would not beable todo itunder the MDR zoning. This needs tochange toHDRtoget towhat was approved with the PUD. Based 0nthe original density 0fthe 2.4acre parcel, byadding the additional acreage, lOUunits iseasy toget to. Heagrees with using the same language that was used inthe Old Village, M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to recommend approval of the rezoning/PUD Amendment for Outlots B and C, Boulder Ponds, rezoning from Commercial/PUD and MDR/PUD, respectively, to HDR/PUD based on the findings in the staff report and the additional findings voted on and further recommend that the counts that apply to senior housing in the Old Village, be applied to this site, Vote: 7-0, motion carried Williams stated that the City needs more HDR in the City as we have virtually none right now, Hefeels this isanappropriate place for HDH. Kreinneralso agrees that this was always shown as multi -family building, Public Hearing — Zoning Text Amendment Open Space Development Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 4 VVensnlanstarted his presentation regarding the Open Space ordinance. He went through the recommendations that the Planning Commission had. There was also recommendations from the City Council. This version takes into consideration the Comments ofthe City Council. This ordinance iscurrently not inthe Zoning Code, and this will move itback tothe zoning Code. VVen5noanwent through the specifics ofthe changes inthis version. This version articulates what the City islooking for \nthese PUD'5. One significant change is eliminating the super majority votefordeviadons toallow more flexibility. The Comprehensive Plan isvery clear that the density is18/4Oacres, The Buffer language was updated, septic sites need to be identified first, roadway standards were eliminated in favor of City Standards, lot sizes were left at I acre and Y2 acre, building area was clarified and open space configuration can be reduced on a case by case basis. The City attorney added language regarding failing septic systems sVthat the City does not incur costs for failure. Individual septic systems must beonthe individual lots and are not allowed inout|ots. There will nolonger beapublic hearing atthe concept phase. Now there will be a public hearing atthe final plat to memorialize the agreement via ordinance sOthat itis alot cleaner and easier t0track. VVensnnanalso stated that the City Engineer did not put a number on the number of homes that would be needed to support acommunity septic. VViUiannswou|d|ikcthe154.65UpurposetobennodiMedtosay^wi|d|i{ecnrhdor"or " natural corridor" instead ofjust corridor. Williams isconcerned about the number ofhomes necessary tosupport acommunity drainfie|d. Dodson feels that the critical language isthat the City beable tOduthe work and bill back the affected residents, rather than relying on the HOA to do the work and collect. Williams pointed out some grammer issues on page 8 item 4 and Dunn would like the (as much aspossible) removed. Leaves too much room for interpretation. Would also like tochange "strive to" to"shaU". Williams is wondering about on page 9 (6) v., the association owned stormwater management facilities. Hethought that the engineer isinsisting that the City own these in other subdivisions. VVensrnansaid that howill discuss with contract planner and City Engineer. Williams is wondering why the code is silent regarding signage and doesn't just refer tothe City sign code. VVensnnanstated that city sign code would apply and would not need to he put in this section. The Planning Commission is not comfortable with page 11 l(b) 2,the City holding the conservation easements and would like them to be held by an outside agency. Williams i5wondering ifthere isalist ofpurposes that the open space can beset aside for. Hethinks that itionot clear enough what the purposes should be. VVensnnanstated that it does talk about agriculture and natural habitat, but it does not say that those are Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-2S-16 5 the only 2things |tcan b*used for. Kreinnerbwondering iflanguage could beadded if the land trust doesn't accept the land, the City may consider it. Williams stated that he believes the K4Nland trust typically wants open space that islOacres and this could be problematic with the reduction Uo2Oacres. Dunn feels that there seems tobe unintended consequences for coming down toa20acre minimum. Williams is wondering if there should be a setback for trails when there is a wetland. Wensman stated that VBWD reviews the plans when a wetland is present and the review process protects that. Williams thinks that l54.6G0(3) for deviations, there shVuNbethewon]"and"afteraQ'bsothataU3criterianeedtobernettoQetthe deviatipns. Williams thinks that onpage 18(3)isleft over from the commercial PUDand should be taken out. Williams suggested some other changes that were clean upitems that applied more to commercial PUD's. Public hearing opened at9:2Spnn Noone spoke and there was nowritten correspondence Public hearing closed at9:2Spnn M/S/P:VVi||ianns/GrifOn,move topostpone consideration ofthe OPOrdinance until staff can return acleaned upcopy for consideration, Vote: 7-0,motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing — Zoning Text Amendment to opt out of requirements for Temporary Health Care Dvvak|imgs Wensman started his presentation by giving an overview of the Temporary Health Care Dwelling legislation. Staff drafted an ordinance to opt out of the state statute. The Building Official had a number of concerns such as septic systems, anchoring, water access, insulation, etc. Staff drafted an ordinance to opt out of the state statute based Vnthe recommendation Ofthe Planning Commission. Public hearing opened at9:3Uprn Noone spoke and there was nowritten correspondence Public hearing closed at9:30prn M/S/P: Dunn/Williams, move to recommend approval of the ordinance to opt out of the requirements of Minnesoat Statutes Section 462.3593 , Vote: 7-0, motion carried Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 6 Dodson is concerned that if the state felt strongly enough to enact this, should we be willing toprovide amechanism for people toprovide for loved ones. Larson feels that this legislation does not seem to fit in our community. \Nensrnon stated that this is really to care for an aging population which is a valid concern, but is not sure that this |sthe best solution. This has been talked about inmany different states. VVensnnanknows ofatleast adozen cities around usthat have opted out and only Ithat heknows nfthat have opted in. Business Item — Ordinance amendment for the keeping of pigeons VVensrnangave abrief update onthe pigeon ordinance. This item was talked about a while back and he has incorporated the suggestions of the Planning Commission from previous discussions. This isnot anitem that isinthe zoning code, soapublic hearing would not be required. This item will move forward to the City Council at a future date. City Council Updates — July S,3O16 Meeting i) Vacadonofvvaternnaineasennenth)rAutoOvvners—paxsed. ii\ Amend Fence regulations in regards to encroachment agreements — passed. iii\ HuntinQOrdinance—Tab|ed. iv) CPA for Rural Single Family inregards tosanitary sewer —passed. v\ Moratorium extension —passed. vi\ Neighborhood park inSavona neighborhood — request for Park Commission to review. City Council Updates —]uly 19, 2016 Meeting i\ Hunting Ordinance — Input given tVPlanning Director tobring back tofuture meeting. Staff Updates l. Upcoming Meetings a. August 8,2Ol6 b. August ZZ,ZO1G Commission Concerns Dunn is wondering if there is any way to get a feel for what the costs will be to the City for these additional developments that come forward. Be it for police, fire, lighting, etc. Dunn also mentioned that Baytown and West Lakeland are really concerned about Lake Elmo not taking astand against the airport expansion. She would like ittobe taken to the City Council for resolution. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 7 M/S/P: Dunn/Larson, move to bring a request to the City Council to support Baytown and West Lakeland in their opposition to the airport expansion , Vote: 6-1, motion carried unanimously. Williams stated that the current design has no impact on the Neal ave and 30th Street intersection. Larson stated that the last set ofmeetings that they had come toan agreement with Baytown. K/einnerstated that hejust doesn't feel that hehas enough information tovote onthis issue. Fields was wondering if there was any update on the land purchased by Prairie Island and put into trust. Wensman stated that he can check with Kristina. Dunn iswondering when discussions will start regarding lowering the forecast population numbers. VVensrnanstated that hehas not gotten further direction from the City Council. Meeting adjourned at9:57pnn Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertnnan Planning Program Assistant Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 7-25-16 IF CITY OF KE ELMO AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Exemption from Platting for Subdivision by Governmental Agencies Emily Becker, City Planner Kristina Handt, City Administrator Stephen Wensman, Planning Director Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney DATE: 09/20/2016 REGULAR ITEM #: 23 of Property Resulting from Acquisition Recent agreement between the City and a property owner was made to have property owners convey fee title to a portion of their property to the City for a recently constructed roadway, instead of the property owners granting the City an easement. The City Attorney advised Staff to approve the lot split (following whatever process is required) and record the deed. Upon review of Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations, Staff was unable to determine the process that is required, as the foregoing situation does not fit neatly in to the situations described where platting is required, nor does it meet the definitions or conditions of any exceptions to platting, as outlined in this Chapter. Because the Ordinance was unclear, Staff consulted the City Attorney to determine the correct process. After review of Section 153.09: Exceptions to Platting, of Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations, of the City Code, the City Attorney determined that the subdivision of property resulting from acquisition by governmental agencies for public improvement or uses does not apply to any exceptions set forth in the aforementioned Section, as it does not meet the definitions or conditions set forth for a minor subdivision or lot line adjustment. She suggested this Ordinance be brought forth to amend the City's subdivisions regulations to allow this type of situation as an exception and to then follow the process set forth by this exception so this lot split can be processed. The subdivision ordinance is not within the zoning code and therefore, the amendment does not require a public hearing. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: In order to expedite the aforementioned subdivision of a property for public purpose, the Council is respectfully requested to consider, as part of tonight's consent agenda, whether or not an amendment to Section 153.09 should be made that would add this exemption from the platting process. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: City Council Meeting September 20, 2016 [Regular Agenda Item #231 The current exceptions to platting, as provided forth in Section 153.09, are as follows: (A) Minor subdivision. A minor subdivision is a division of land which results in no more than 4 parcels wherein each resultant parcel complies with the city's minimum lot dimension and public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the land is located. (B) Lot line adjustment. A lot line adjustment is a division of land which results in no more than 4 parcels wherein each resultant parcel does not comply with the city's minimum lot dimension and/or public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the land is located. The City Council hereby waives compliance with the city's platting regulations for lot line adjustments which satisfy 1 of the following conditions: (1) Each resultant parcel, when combined with an abutting parcel through a Tax Parcel Consolidation Procedure approved by Washington County, equals or exceeds the minimum lot dimension requirements and public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the property is located; (2) In those cases where the City Administrator determines that it is not reasonably possible for each resultant parcel to comply with the provisions of division (B)(1) above, each resultant parcel, when combined with an abutting parcel through a Tax Parcel Consolidation Procedure approved by Washington County, is less non -conforming after the lot consolidation than it was before the lot consolidation; or (3) In those cases where, in regard to property which is zoned agricultural or rural residential, the City Administrator determines that each resultant parcel will equal or exceed minimum lot dimensions for the zoning district in which the property is located, but that 1 of the resultant parcels cannot satisfy the minimum public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the property is located, access to the noncomplying parcel is protected by a restrictive covenant approved by the City Attorney which includes the city as a beneficiary. As previously mentioned, subdivision of property resulting from the acquisition of land by governmental agencies for the purpose of public use or acquisition does not apply to any definition or condition listed above. Because the subdivision of property resulting from the acquisition of land by governmental agencies for the purpose of public use or acquisition does not meet the definitions or conditions of neither a minor subdivision nor a lot line adjustment, and because platting is only required for the subdivision of a tract of land which is to be divided into 3 or more lots or parcels, there is no clear direction on what process to follow for such a subdivision. Minor subdivisions and platting require a public hearing and Council approval. Generally, when land is being acquired for public acquisition or use, it is for the purpose of a project, like a street improvement project, which has already been approved by Council. Therefore, it would be redundant for Council to hear and approve such a subdivision of property. Furthermore, the platting process takes a significant amount of time and Staff resources, and would delay public projects. Due to the aforementioned, Staff is recommending that property that is being subdivided due to governmental agency acquisition for public improvement or uses be added as an exception to the platting Page 2 City Council Meeting September 20, 2016 [Regular Agenda Item #23] process as a separate item and be approved administratively. This would greatly facilitate and speed up the acquisition process. FISCAL IMPACT: Less Staff time would be spent in preparing reports and going before Planning Commission and Council to go through the platting process for such lot splits. Additionally, clearly outlining this exception to platting would ensure that such process is being done legally and correctly. OPTIONS: The Council may either approve or deny the proposed amendment to Section 153.09 of Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the proposed amendments to Section 153.09: Exceptions to Platting by adding "a subdivision of property resulting from acquisition by governmental agencies for public improvements or uses" as an exception to platting and the summary publication of the ordinance with the following motion: "Move to approve Ordinance Amendment 08-153 amending Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations; Section 153.09: Exceptions to Platting, by inserting, as an additional exception to platting, a subdivision of property resulting from acquisition by governmental agencies for public improvements or uses, and Resolution 2016-76 for its summary publication." ATTACHMENTS: • Draft Ord. 08-153 (redlined version and edited version) • Resolution 2016-76 approving summary publication of Ord. 08-153 • Email from City Attorney Sonsalla Page 3 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2016- 76 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-153 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-153 amending the City's subdivision regulations by adding subdivision ofproperty resulting from acquisition by governmental agencies for public improvement or uses as an exception to platting; 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 infonn 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. 08-153, which amends Section 153.09: Exceptions to Platting, of Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations, by inserting subdivision of property for public purposes as an exception to platting, The ordinance amendment allows such a subdivision of property to be approved administratively by the City Administrator. The full text of Ordinance No. 08-153 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: September 20, 2016 ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk Mayor Mike Pearson (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. CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-153 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY EXEMPTING SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY RESULTING FROM ACQUISITION BY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS OR USES FROM THE PLATTING PROCESS. SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations, Section 153.09: Exceptions to Platting, by inserting the following: (A) Minor subdivision. A minor subdivision is a division of land which results in no more than 4 parcels wherein each resultant parcel complies with the city's minimum lot dimension and public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the land is located. (B) Lot line adjustment. A lot line adjustment is a division of land which results in no more than 4 parcels wherein each resultant parcel does not comply with the city's minimum lot dimension and/or public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the land is located. The City Council hereby waives compliance with the city's platting regulations for lot line adjustments which satisfy of the following conditions: (1) Each resultant parcel, when combined with an abutting parcel through a Tax Parcel Consolidation Procedure approved by Washington County, equals or exceeds the minimum lot dimension requirements and public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the property is located; (2) In those cases where the City Administrator determines that it is not reasonably possible for each resultant parcel to comply with the provisions of division (B)(1) above, each resultant parcel, when combined with an abutting parcel through a Tax Parcel Consolidation Procedure approved by Washington County, is less non -conforming after the lot consolidation than it was before the lot consolidation; or (3) In those cases where, in regard to property which is zoned agricultural or rural residential, the City Administrator determines that each resultant parcel will equal or exceed minimum lot dimensions for the zoning district in which the property is located, but that 1 of the resultant parcels cannot satisfy the minimum public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the property is located, access to the noncomplying parcel is protected by a restrictive covenant approved by the City Attorney which includes the city as a beneficiary. (C) Subdivision qf Property for Public Purpose. The subdivision of property resulting from acquisition by governmental agencies for public improvements or uses. (D) Applicationfor minor subdivision/lot line adjustment. An application for a minor subdivision or a lot line adjustment shall be submitted on forms provided by the City 4846710 SJS LA515-4 Administrator. The applicant will be responsible for all expenses incurred in obtaining the required information, which includes the following: (1) Name, address, and telephone number of the property owner/applicant and evidence of title; (2) A legal description of the parcel which is being subdivided and legal descriptions for each of the resulting parcels; and, in regard to lot line adjustments, legal descriptions for the consolidated parcels; (3) A written description stating the reason for the request; and (4) A land survey prepared by and signed by a registered land surveyor describing the minor subdivision and/or lot line adjustment and showing all buildings, driveways, easements, setbacks, and other pertinent information including the legal descriptions herein required. (E) Review ofininor subdivision. (1) A completed application shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation to the City Council. (2) The City Council may attach reasonable conditions to its approval and shall require the conveyance of necessary street, utility, and drainage easements on forms approved by the City Attorney; and shall require the payment of a public use dedication fee. (F) Review of lot line adjustment. A completed application shall be reviewed administratively by the City Administrator who shall make a written finding in regard to the provisions of division (B) above. The City Administrator's approval shall be conditioned upon tax parcel consolidation. Prior to the issuance of any development perrnits, and no later than 60 days after administrative review and approval, the applicant shall provide the City Administrator with the verifications listed below. Failure to provide the required verifications shall invalidate the City Administrator's approval: (1) Recorded documents or recorded document numbers for the deeds of conveyance which effectuate the lot line adjustment; and/or (2) Proof that the Washington County Assessor has approved a Tax Parcel Consolidation and has assigned a new tax parcel number for the consolidated parcel or parcels. (G) Review of Subdivision of Property for Public Purpose. A completed application, accompanied by a fully executed deed that designates a governmental agency as a grantee, shall be reviewed administratively by the City Administrator who shall make a written finding in regard to the provisions of paragraph (C) above and if the conveyance falls within the definition of paragraph (C), the City Administrator shall approve the subdivision. The City Administrator's approval shall be conditioned upon receipt of a copy of the recorded deed. Failure to provide a copy of the recorded deed shall invalidate the City Administrator's approval. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. 2 484671v1 S.IS LA515-4 SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-153 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. 4846710 SJS LA515-4 Ernill Becker rom: SonsaUaSarah 1<SSonsaUa@Kennedy-Grawen.corn> Sent Thursday, August 04,2Ol6Z:40PK4 To: Emily Becker Cc: StephenVVensmao; Chad bakson;KhstinaHandt; Sonsa||a'Sarah 1 Subject: RE: 3592Kelvin Lot Split Dear Emily, | reviewed this issue, First, | ,ev|e*ed the O/y's subdivision ego|ohoru and it appears that all subdkision ofpiopenY {with a few winor exceptions, none of odiich apply here) rnu5t either be done by plat or meet the definition ofa"minor suhdivbion^o/a^|n{Uneadjustment''vode/thecodc(andapprnvedassuch). From nv/review cfthe definitions ef"lot line adjustment" and "minor subdivision,` (Section 153.09 of the Code)' | don't think that this parj,�co|a/sitoadon would meet either definition. Cities are authorized byMinnesota Statutes Chapter 5OStofile what 'is caUh eda^ght-nf-wayp)a\'^ that shows the locations of rights -of -way within the city as you had suggested, however, this plat is just f0( informational purposes (see Minnesota Statutes Section 505l79Z)and does not have any legal si�n\hcanceinterms nfsubdiv\d\ngthe poope�ynr conveViog it to the city, These things need to happen regardless ofwhether or not there is a hQ|t-of'*ay p}at fi\ed� Therefore, ( think that the best option would p(obabiv be for the City to amend its ordinance to allavv this as ar, exception. ( would suggest that the City either include this type of situation in the definition of lot line adjustment o/ ininor subdivision (and then that process would need to be followed), or that it just be rnade a general exception that zes not require there tV be plat, lot line adjustment or minor subdivision approval by the City. The exception would be ,,oniething similar to " a subdivision of property resulting from acquisition by governmental agencies for public improvements or uses,` in most cases' the City will he aware of when it happens' because it vviU be the City that would he cousina it to happen for its projects' but | suppose there could be situations that involve the Couo�y or another � overnmenta|ageocyandtheCitymaywant tobemade aware ofitorherequired toapprove b Kthat hthe case, the City could require administrative approva!(and not have itgoto[ouncU). Even though vvewould bechanging the code for this rircvmstance' it is myopinion that this may come up again inthe future. 4ssumin8that the City changes the code and makes this an exception that does nor reqoireihe/e uzbeapproval ofa minor subdivision application or lot line adjustment, then once the ordinance is adopted, the deed couid be recorded. If the City decides to include this exception in eithec the minor subdivision or lot hne adjustment, then that process would need to Wed (an application WOLfld need to be sub;,nitted and the COLM61 would need to approve it). Let meknmV.i ifYOU have any questions. Thankz! Keone�y�cavenCcaeo`�d 1470U�.Bank Plaza 1200 SuuthSixth Street I Minneapolis, MN 56402 1direct: 612337.9284 fax:612.337.931O 1 e'mai|:ssnnsaUaPkenoedv'rmven.00n! From: Emily Becker [moi|to:E8eckar@lakeemo.org] Sent: Thursday, August 04 2816 10:24AM o, Sonsm|ky, Sarahl Cc: Stephen VVensman; ChadIsaksnn Emily Becker From: 5onsaUa. Sarah1 ^SSoncaUa@Kennedy'Grm/en.00m> Sent; Thursday, August 04,20l6Z/Y8PIM To; Emily Becker Cc Stephen Wensman, Chad lsakson;KhstinaHandt;3onsaUa.Sarah 1 Subject: RE: 3592 Kelvin - Lot Split Dear EmUy' | reviewed this issue, First. I reviewed the City's SUbdivision regulations and it appears that all subdivision of property (with a few minor exceptions, none of which apply here) must either be done by plat or meet the definition of a "i-ninor Subdivis)on`orp"\o\line adjustment" under the code (and app(ovedas Such) From .nyreview nfthe definitions of"lot line adIustment" and "winor subdivision," (Section li53,09 of the Code), I don't think that this particular situation WOL[id meet eitherdefinition, Cities are authorized by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 505 to file what is called a "right -of -*ay plat," that shows the locations ofriah1s'of+maywithin the city asyou had suggested, however, this plat isjust for informational purposes (See Minnesota Statutes Section S05l792)and does not have any legal s�oMcanceinterms nf subdividing the p/ope�ynr conveying ittothe city, These thi^�sneed tohappen regardless Ww/hetherornot there �ah§h�o�wayplat 0ed, Therefore, I think that the best option would probably be for the City to amend its ordinance to allow this as an exception. | vvou|6 suggest that the City either include this type of situation in the definition of a lot hoe adjustment or minorSuhdivis\on(and then that process would need to be followed), or that it just be made a general exception that does not require there to be plat, lot line adjustment or rninor subdivision approval by the City. The exception would be something similar to " a subdivision of property resulting [now acquisition by governmental agencies for public improve me, ntsoruses.` In most cases, the City will be aware of whet) it happens, because it will be the City that would be causing it to happen for its projects, but I suppose there could be situations that involve the County or, another governmental agency and the City may want to be made aware of it or be required to approve it. |[ that isthe case, the City could require administrative approval (and not have it�oto[oondU, Even though vvevvou|dbechanging the code,or this CirCUMstance, it is my opinion that this may come up again in the future. ASSumin8that the [tychanges the code and makes this anexception that does not require there toheapproval ofa minor subdivision application orlot line adjustment, then once the ordinance /sadopted, the deed could berecorded. If the City clecides to include this exception it) either the minor subdivision or lot line adjUstment, then that proces-s would oeed to filed (an application would need to besubmitic-cl and the Council would need to approve iV, Let meknuwJYou have any questions. Thanks'. \amh �arz�/, 47OU.S.Bank Plaza 1Z00South Sixth Street I Minneapolis, MN From: Emily Becker [mniho:EBecker@|akeemo.org] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 10:24AM To: 5onsaUa,Sarah l Cc: Stephen VVensman; Chad Isakson CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-153 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY EXEMPTING SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY RESULTING FROM ACQUISITION BY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS OR USES FROM THE PLATTING PROCESS. SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations, Section 153.09: Exceptions to Platting, by inserting the following: (A) Mirror subdivision. A minor subdivision is a division of land which results in no more than 4 parcels wherein each resultant parcel complies with the city's minimum lot dimension and public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the land is located. (B) Lot line adjustment. A lot line adjustment is a division of land which results in no more than 4 parcels wherein each resultant parcel does not comply with the city's minimum lot dimension and/or public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the land is located. The City Council hereby waives compliance with the city's platting regulations for lot line adjustments which satisfy 1 of the following conditions: (1) Each resultant parcel, when combined with an abutting parcel through a Tax Parcel Consolidation Procedure approved by Washington County, equals or exceeds the minimum lot dimension requirements and public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the property is located; (2) In those cases where the City Administrator deteimines that it is not reasonably possible for each resultant parcel to comply with the provisions of division (B)(1) above, each resultant parcel, when combined with an abutting parcel through a Tax Parcel Consolidation Procedure approved by Washington County, is less non -conforming after the lot consolidation than it was before the lot consolidation; or (3) In those cases where, in regard to property which is zoned agricultural or rural residential, the City Administrator determines that each resultant parcel will equal or exceed minimum lot dimensions for the zoning district in which the property is located, but that 1 of the resultant parcels cannot satisfy the minimum public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the property is located, access to the noncomplying parcel is protected by a restrictive covenant approved by the City Attorney which includes the city as a beneficiary. (C) Subdivision of Property for Public Purpose. The subdivision of property resulting from acquisition by governmental agencies for public improvements or uses. (D) Application or minor subdivision/lot line adjustment. An application for a minor subdivision or a lot line adjustment shall be submitted on forms provided by the City 484671 v I SJS LA5 I 5-4 Administrator. The applicant will be responsible for all expenses incurred in obtaining the required information, which includes the following: (1) Name, address, and telephone number of the property owner/applicant and evidence of title; (2) A legal description of the parcel which is being subdivided and legal descriptions for each of the resulting parcels; and, in regard to lot line adjustments, legal descriptions for the consolidated parcels; A written description stating the reason for the request; and (4) A land survey prepared by and signed by a registered land surveyor describing the minor subdivision and/or lot line adjustment and showing all buildings, driveways, easements, setbacks, and other pertinent information including the legal descriptions herein required. (E) Review o or subdivision. (1) A completed application shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation to the City Council. (2) The City Council may attach reasonable conditions to its approval and shall require the conveyance of necessary street, utility, and drainage easements on forms approved by the City Attorney; and shall require the payment of a public use dedication fee. (F) Review °Pot line adjustment. A completed application shall be reviewed administratively by the City Administrator who shall make a written finding in regard to the provisions of division (B) above. The City Administrator's approval shall be conditioned upon tax parcel consolidation. Prior to the issuance of any development permits, and no later than 60 days after administrative review and approval, the applicant shall provide the City Administrator with the verifications listed below. Failure to provide the required verifications shall invalidate the City Administrator's approval: (1) Recorded documents or recorded document numbers for the deeds of conveyance which effectuate the lot line adjustment; and/or (2) Proof that the Washington County Assessor has approved a Tax Parcel Consolidation and has assigned a new tax parcel number for the consolidated parcel or parcels. (G) Review of Subdivision of Property for Public Purpose. A completed application, accompanied by a fully executed deed that designates a governmental agency as a grantee, shall be reviewed administratively by the City Administrator who shall make a written finding in regard to the provisions of paragraph (C) above and if the conveyance falls within the definition of paragraph (C), the City Administrator shall approve the subdivision. The City Administrator's approval shall be conditioned upon receipt of a copy of the recorded deed. Failure to provide a copy of the recorded deed shall invalidate the City Administrator's approval. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. 2 484671%1 SJS LA515-4 SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-153 was adopted on this day of , 2016, by a vote of Ayes and Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor Al I EST: Julie Johnson, City C erk This Ordinance 08-153 was published on the day of 2016. 484671 v 1 SJS LA515-4 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-153 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY EXEMPTING SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY RESULTING FROM ACQUISITION BY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS OR USES FROM THE PLATTING PROCESS. SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations, Section 153.09: Exceptions to Platting, by inserting the following: (A) Minor subdivision. A minor subdivision is a division of land which results in no more than 4 parcels wherein each resultant parcel complies with the city's minimum lot dimension and public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the land is located. (B) Lot line adjustment. A lot line adjustment is a division of land which results in no more than 4 parcels wherein each resultant parcel does not comply with the city's minimum lot dimension and/or public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the land is located. The City Council hereby waives compliance with the city's platting regulations for lot line adjustments which satisfy 1 of the following conditions: (1) Each resultant parcel, when combined with an abutting parcel through a Tax Parcel Consolidation Procedure approved by Washington County, equals or exceeds the minimum lot dimension requirements and public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the property is located; (2) In those cases where the City Administrator determines that it is not reasonably possible for each resultant parcel to comply with the provisions of division (B)(1) above, each resultant parcel, when combined with an abutting parcel through a Tax Parcel Consolidation Procedure approved by Washington County, is less non-confonning after the lot consolidation than it was before the lot consolidation; or (3) In those cases where, in regard to property which is zoned agricultural or rural residential, the City Administrator deten-nines that each resultant parcel will equal or exceed minimum lot dimensions for the zoning district in which the property is located, but that 1 of the resultant parcels cannot satisfy the minimum public road frontage requirements for the zoning district in which the property is located, access to the noncomplying parcel is protected by a restrictive covenant approved by the City Attorney which includes the city as a beneficiary. \ °Ir 7H6lik ,717 (;) Application for minor subdivision/lot line adjustment. An application for a minor subdivision or a lot line adjustment shall be submitted on forms provided by the City 484671v1 SJS LA515-4 Administrator. The applicant will be responsible for all expenses incurred in obtaining the required information, which includes the following: (1) Name, address, and telephone number of the property owner/applicant and evidence of title; (2) A legal description of the parcel which is being subdivided and legal descriptions for each of the resulting parcels; and, in regard to lot line adjustments, legal descriptions for the consolidated parcels; (3) A written description stating the reason for the request; and (4) A land survey prepared by and signed by a registered land surveyor describing the minor subdivision and/or lot line adjustment and showing all buildings, driveways, easements, setbacks, and other pertinent information including the legal descriptions herein required. Review of minor subdivision. (1) A completed application shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation to the City Council. (2) The City Council may attach reasonable conditions to its approval and shall require the conveyance of necessary street, utility, and drainage easements on forms approved by the City Attorney; and shall require the payment of a public use dedication fee. Review oflot line adjustment. A completed application shall be reviewed administratively by the City Administrator who shall make a written finding in regard to the provisions of division (B) above. The City Administrator's approval shall be conditioned upon tax parcel consolidation. Prior to the issuance of any development permits, and no later than 60 days after administrative review and approval, the applicant shall provide the City Administrator with the verifications listed below. Failure to provide the required verifications shall invalidate the City Administrator's approval: (1) Recorded documents or recorded document numbers for the deeds of conveyance which effectuate the lot line adjustment; and/or (2) Proof that the Washington County Assessor has approved a Tax Parcel Consolidation and has assigned a new tax parcel number for the consolidated parcel or parcels. ;., H.. theLi -dinilaraiHT mak-c riHdiirL. aud Ar,tn1 civ‘. 11N.: pyo,. 1.:00,,. 1'60 1. 11 AdniiniArwr ;„1;)1)1Aty°.,„.„ SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. 2 43-1671 1 SJS LA515-1 SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-153 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 08-153 was published on the day of 2016. 484671vI S.IS LA5I54 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2016-76 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-153BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-153 amending the City's subdivision regulations by adding subdivision of property resulting from acquisition by governmental agencies for public improvement or uses as an exception to platting; 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. 08-153 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. 08-153, which amends Section 153.09: Exceptions to Platting, of Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations, by inserting subdivision of property for public purposes as an exception to platting. The ordinance amendment allows such a subdivision of property to be approved administratively by the City Administrator. The full text of Ordinance No. 08-153 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 ftill copy of the ordinance be placed in a public location within the City. Dated: September 20, 2016 ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk Mayor Mike Pearson (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. PIIN ( I KE FL\1O AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: A Y•& COU CILCO CA T/O DATE: September 20 2016 REGULAR ITEM #24 MOTION Financing Matters Related to the Downtown Project Lake Elmo Finance Committee Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Kristina Handt, City Administrator Finance Committee Chair Fliflet 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: Lake Elmo Finance Committee FISCAL IMPACT: TBD SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is being asked to approve the recommendations proposed by the Finance Committee related to the downtown project fees and assessments and to direct staff to update the special assessment policy to reflect these changes. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: For a number of months, the City Finance Committee has been viewing and discussing a number of avenues to alleviate the financial burden to the taxpayers who are part of the Lake Elmo Avenue Downtown Project. The following summarizes the recommendations that came out of those meetings. -- page City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item #24.1 September 20, 2016 The following two items have already be approved by the City Council: All costs and assessments for Phase I and Phase II were treated as one project for calculating assessments An early connection incentive was recommended and approved for those properties connection to the sewer system within one year of being made available. The following still need review and approval by the City Council: Decrease the interest rate being charged on special assessments from 2% over the bond rate to 1% over the bond rate. Allow special assessments to be financed for 5 years longer than the City bonding cycle (streets for up to 15 years and utilities for up to 20 years) Allow existing residents to be allowed to defer through special assessment the City Connection fees Approve that the City participate in the Met Council deferral program which will allow residents and businesses to participate in this Met Council program with the Met Council. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, staff recommends the City Council approve the recommendations from the Lake Elmo Finance Committee as follows: "Move to approve the four recommendations listed and updated the special assessment policy to reflect those changes" OR "Move to approve the following recommendations; and update the special assessment policy to reflect those changes" ATTACHMENT: . Detailed recommendation listing from the 8/10/16 Finance Committee meeting -- page 2 -- City of Lake Elmo Summary of Financing Matters Related to the Downtown Project Finance Committee — 8/10/16 Recommending to CC 9/20/16 (carry over from 9/6/16 CC niecting The Finance Committee has been discussing and reviewing many items related to the financing of the downtown project. The focus of these discussions has been to make recommendations to the city council focused on reducing the financial burden for residents that will be faced with assessments for both roads and sewer. Below is a summary of the items considered and discussed. Assessment Policies for Phases 1 & 2 All costs and assessments for Phase 1 & 2 were combined into one project for the purposes of calculating the special assessments. This approach was deemed to be the most fair and equitable means for assessing residents for this project. This also allowed the state aid funding to be allocated equitably and applied to the project as a whole. This was recommended by the Finance Committee and adopted by the City Council. Connection Charge Reduction for Existing Residents Incentives could be offered to properties with existing on -site sewage treatment systems that will be required to hook up to municipal sewer in the future. Currently the fees charged are $3,000 per SAC and $1,000 per connection charge for a total of $4,000 for each REC. The Finance Committee discussed options, including the amount of the incentive reduction, the possibility of lowering assessments rather than lowering SAC and connection charges, and also how this may or may not apply to those properties currently served by the city owned community sewage treatment systems commonly referred to as the 201 systems within the MUSA area. The Finance Committee felt that it was important to have the upfront SAC and Connection charges be where the discount applied to make it more visible, to allow all to benefit from the incentive equally, and to not muddle up the assessments with such an incentive. The Finance Committee recommended a reduction in the SAC and Connection Fee of 50% (currently $2,000 per REC unit) for properties with existing on -site sewage treatment systems if those properties are connected to the inunicipal sewer within 1 year, and this was adopted by the City Council June 215t, 2016. Decrease Interest Rate Add -On Charged to Residents that Elect to Defer Assessments Currently the city policy is to charge 2% over the city's bonding rate to those residents that chose to defer payment of their assessments. This interest rate add -on is meant to cover the costs associated with the administrative functions of that deferral process. The City can decide to reduce or eliminate the additional rate of +2%. It was noted that since this add -on is a percentage of the total assessment, when the project costs and associated assessments are larger, the city receives more from this interest rate add -on to cover administrative costs than when the assessments are smaller, even though the administrative work of accounting for and tracking those assessments would be the same. The Finance Committee did not favor adjusting this rate with each project, and having the rate set differently for each project. They thought a discussion and change in policy could be brought fonvard, but that it should be considered a change in policy for all future projects, and should not be related solely to the old village improvements. 4 The Finance Committee is recommendingspecial assessment policy be updated for current residents. The recommendation proposed to be effective 9/20/16 is to charge interest at one percent above the current bonding rate rather than the two percent currently being added to thc current year bonding interest rate. One member of the Finance Committee did not agree with this recommendation. Allow Longer Special Assessment Deferral Periods The 2016A bond terms were 10 years for streets and 15 years for utilities. The length of the special assessment terms could be longer to help residents manage the payment of these large assessments over time. Options discussed included extending both to 20 years, or extending each +5 years which would equate to a deferral period of 15 years for streets and 20 years for utilities. The city engineer expressed some problems that could occur if the street assessments were extended to 20 years, specifically that he felt property owners could possibly be hit with another street assessment before the previous one was paid off, which would then create a situation where they would be paying off two assessments for streets at the same time. The Finance Committee consensus was to recommend that the special assessment ter-ns be extended 5 years beyond the bond terns for the downtown project assessments which would be 15 years for streets and 20 years for utilities. The Finance Committee is recommending that the special assessment policy be updated for current residents to extend the special assessment terms. This recommendation is being proposed effective 9/20/16. Initiating a City Loan Program Some Cities offer loan programs to help residents finance various upfront costs that residents are faced with in projects such as these. Examples like city hookup costs, costs of hiring a contractor to extend sewer lines to the house, and other costs driven by City projects to the residents. The Finance Committee discussed starting a city loan program but consensus was not to recommend this program. The Finance Committee noted that the city would incur a lot of administrative and legal costs to setup a new program like this because it would entail a thorough review of other loan programs and discussions of what would work best for Lake Elmo, drafting of loan policy documents, drafting of actual loan agreement documents, and a lot of review and work throughout the process by attorneys. The Finance Committee also did not think it was in the best interest of the city to become a bank for residents, and that many other problems with defaults and other circumstances could arise that would he problematic and costly for the city. This is was not recommended by the Finance Committee. Assessment Policy for Deferral of WAC & Water Connection Charges, SAC and Sewer Connection Charges The city's current special assessment policy allows the deferral of WAC and SAC fees through special assessment for a period of 15 years. The policy does not allow the deferral of the water and sewer connection charges but those could be included as well by modifications to the policy. The WAC and SAC fees are S3,000 each and the water and sewer connection charges are $1,000 each. The Finance Committee is recommending that effective 9/20/16, existing residents will be allowed to defer any connection fees due to the City. The special assessment policy will need to be updated to reflect this change. 4 Assessment Policy for Deferral of Met Council Sewer Connection Fees The Met -Council currently has a program which allows Commercial properties to defer up to SO% of their Met -Council SAC fees over 10 years if their SAC determination is 25 or fewer units. They have recently approved a new program 1,vhich would allow a similar program for residents. If the City chooses to participate in one or both of these programs, the City Council will need to approve applying to participate in the program. The Finance Committee is recommending that the City complete whatever paperwork necessary to participate in this Met Council Program for businesses and residents. There was discussion as to whether the City provide this service to the residents to keep all fee deferrals together. Since this is a Met Council program, the recommendation from the Finance Committee is to leave this component with the Met Council since this is their program to administer. Assessment Policies for Future Downtown Sewer Project 'Phases The City Engineer brought forward an option of combining the project costs for Phase 1 and Phase 2 with all/or most of the future phases to provide sanitary sewer to existing residential and commercial properties to create 1 REC unit assessment amount for all properties. Based on high level cost estimating it appears that the single unit assessment amount would be several thousand less than the Phase 1 and Phase 2 unit assessment of $13,000/REC; thereby reducing the assessment burden on the Phase 1 and Phase 2 properties. This policy would have the benefit of equalizing the sewer costs to all downtown properties rather than creating unit assessments on a project by project basis which will vary greatly (from 56,000/REC to $18,000/REC). The potential issue with this method is that once all properties are finally serviced the final project costs may be different than the estimates produced today. To the extent the single unit assessment does not generate sufficient funds to cover all costs, the Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund would need to subsidize this program. The City would need to be comfortable with this potential subsidy. As was the case in Phases l&2, completing future phases of the sewer would also entail street reconstruction together with street assessments. The street assessments would continue to follow the City Assessment Policy. Staff recorrunencled going fonvard with this only if all future phases can be done in within a reasonable time frame to not risk large project cost changes. The Finance Committee recommended that all phases of the Sanitary Sewer assessments be based on the total cost for all phases of the overall extension of sanitary sewer improvements in the Old Village area. This was brought forward to the City Council for discussion and it was approved on September 6, 2016 to move forward. On September 20, the City Engineer will be bringing forward a request to accept petitions and authorize the preparation of a Feasibility Report. Met -Council Decision to Grandfather City 201 Systems and Not Charge the Met Council SAC Fee There are 4 City Septic systems (201 systems) in the old village that were built in the 70's and 80's. The majority were built with grant proceeds and the city maintains these systems, and charges the residents supported by these systems a flat monthly charge fOr sewer. In looking at the history of these systems and charges, those served by these systems did not pay a hookup fee to the city when they were installed, and they pay a flat monthly rate to the city for their sewer service (currently 575 per rec unit per quarter). The Met -Council has indicated that they will waive the Met -Council SAC fee for existing 201 systems. 4 Based on earlier discussions between staff and the Met -Council, it was believed that the fees could be reapportioned over the project area, however, this is not the case. Per the Met Council, 201 exemptions remain with the property (by parcel ID) on which they were initially paid. As a result, no further action or recommendation was needed by the Finance Committee on this item. 4 ri IF CITY (AT, AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 09/20/2016 Regular ITEM #: 25 Easton Village Additional Cost Approval Request Emily Becker, City Planner Kristina Flandt, City Administrator Stephen Wensman, Planning Director At the April 5, 2016 City Council meeting, the Council directed Staff to coordinate with Easton Village developer to grade the park pad and to install concrete curbing while Easton Village crews on site, to purchase proposed large park amenities and have amenities installed this summer. The estimated cost for this project was $75,000, which included installation, rubber mulch, curbing, and grading. The actual cost of the playground equipment, including rubber mulch and installation, came in to be S71,927.52. The staff report from the April 5, 2016 City Council meeting stated the estimated cost of installation of concrete curbing would be $2970. On August 3, 2016, the Easton Village developer met with Staff to discuss the poor drainage underneath the swings of the playground area and the need for draintile. Public Works Staff suggested that the developer install the draintile along with the concrete curbing. The developer was asked to provide a quote for the draintile so the cost could be approved by Council. A few weeks later, Staff was made aware that draintile had been installed without a Council approved quote. Staff contacted the developer regarding the installation, and the developer communicated that it was felt that the lack of drainage was creating a safety issue, so their contractor was directed to install the draintile (the concrete curbing has not yet been installed). The developer then provided a quote of $7241.50 for the installation of concrete curbing and $3475.00 for the draintile, totaling $10,716.50. It should be noted that the quote does not include site surveying/staking, soil conditionaing, testing, bonds, pennits or turf restoration. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council is requested to approve the additional cost for the installation of draintile for Easton Village Park. With the installation of the playground equipment, the revised, total cost of the project will be closer to $82,644.02, as compared to the $75,000 budgeted for this project. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: City Council Meeting 09/20/2016 Regular- Agenda Item #25 The first attached photo shows what the playground had looked like without the draintile. The water had nowhere to drain, and the playground could not be safely utilized as a result. The second photo shows that the draintile properly drained the playground area. Staff asked the developer why the quote for the concrete curbing was so much more than what was quoted in the April 5, 2016 City Council Staff Report, and the developer replied that he believes that quote was for the plastic curbing, which Staff did not recommend installing due to its inferior durability. Staff has confirmed that the quote provided for concrete curbing, though higher than the cost estimate provided at the April 5, 2016 Council meeting, is reasonable; the seemingly high per square foot cost could be attributable to the smaller size of the park's perimeter. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the playground will be $82,644.02, $7644.02 more than what was budgeted for the park. OPTIONS: • Approve reimbursement of draintile cost and increased cost estimate for concrete curbing. • Deny reimbursement of draintile cost and increased cost estimate for concrete curbing. • Approve reimbursement of draintile and direct Staff to gather bids for concrete curbing. • Approve reimbursement of draintile and direct that the developer install plastic curbing, decreasing the cost. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve, as part of tonight's consent agenda, the additional cost for installation of concrete curbing and draintile in Easton Village Park. The base bid given for the installation of draintile and concrete curbing is $10,716.50. Utile Council chooses to remove this item from the Consent Agenda, the recommended action can be take through the following motion: "Move to approve reimbursement of $.10,7l6.50, plus possible necessary excluded costs listed on the bid, to Easton Village developer for the installation of draintile and concrete curb once all )vork on the aforementioned is complete. ATTACHMENTS: • Quote from Easton Village • Photos of playground before and after draintile was installed. • Easton Village playground equipment invoice Page 2 City Council Meeting 09/06/2016 Consent Agenda Item #22 Photos of Easton Villa2e Park Without Draintile Installed Page 3 City Council Meeting 09/06/2016 Consent Agenda Item #22 Photos o Easton Vi11age Park nth Draintile Installed Page 4 City Council Meeting Page 5 Consent Ace;da Item#22 Job: Lake Elmo Playground STREET CITY, STATE and ZIP CODE Lake Elmo, MN ARCHITECT PROPOSAL FRIEDGES, INC. Landscaping • Excavating Contractors 9380 202nd Street West, Lakeville, MN 55044 (952) 469-2996 • Fax: (952) 469-1755 Date 8/19/16 JOB LOCATION DATE OF PLANS JOB PHONE [[re Propose hereby to furnish material and labor — complete in accordance with specifications below, for the sum of: * ** See Below *** All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a Authorized workmanlike manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation Signature from specifications below involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Note: This proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted Owner to carry fire, tornado, and other necessary insurance. Our workers are within 30 (thirty) days. fully covered by Workman's Compensation Insurance. Work for Playground We hereby submit the following: 350LF of Playground Curb Furnished and Installed @ $20.69/LF Total: 7,241.50 • Includes base work Core Drill Drain Tile into existing Structure and 316LF of 4" Drain Tile, Fabric and Rock running from structure to city's specified location @ $3,475.00 Grand Total: $10,716.50 Excludes: *Site Survey/ Staking *Soil Conditioning/ Testing j *Bonds *Permits *Turf Restoration PLEASE CALL IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS Acceptance of Proposal — The above prices; specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above, By signing you have read and are familiar with the Minnesota Mechanic's Lien Law. Signature Date PLEASE REMIT TO PlayPower LT Farmington, Inc. PO Box 204713 Dallas, TX 75320-4713 Billing, & A/R Inquiries - (866) 544-0348 Opt 2 Cust. Service and Order Dept - (800) 325-8828 Fax 1D# 34-1725366 Tracking 4: Innovative 16-0476 B ci07816 1 MIKE BOUTH1LET 1, LAKE ELMO, CITY OF L 3800 LAVERNE AVE NORTH LAKE ELMO MN 55042 T United States 0 Go to www.littletilseseommercial.comiwarraniv to register your product online, To access your CPSIA General Certiticate, of Coninnuance please go to www.littictikescommercial.com/CPSIA„ Order EM00150610 I ,ine/R el Purchase Order (Packages KB STRUCTURE 1 Qty Ordered Qty Shipped 0 1 00 Item: Description: Playground Equipment 5 I 1.00 Item: 600000001 Description: PBO (PRODUCT BY OTHER) 52 Back Order 1 00 1,00 Prepaid Weight Ship Date Invoice Number: Page: Date: Salesperson: Registration iN uni ber: 1400200336 1 of 1 05/17/2016 NORTHLAND RECREATION LTC Regular Invoice Currency: USD US Dollars TERMS AND CONDITIONS TP.KAIA AND DO01 /1/41:6 Ar(P, AN Al I'D IN 0117t CI IRRENT PRICI;1.1N1 1,11)!‘ 'II I:Al ALOG S 11 PUBLIC WORKS - CITY OF LAKE ELMO I 3445 IDEAL AVE N E/EASTON VILLAGE LAKE ELMO MN 55042 T United States 0 Terms 0. - 7/2016 Net 30 Days Unit Price 1 Extended Price 0.00 40,646,53 0.00 18,027.47 1.00 1.00 0.00 9,073.00 Item: 600000003 PXTPP.NAI„ 11\1S'r,4,1.1..ATION 1 Sales Amount Misc Charges Freight Sales Tax Prepaid Amount Total 40,646.53 18,027.47 9,073,0(1 Ci P 67,747.00 0.00 0.00 4,180.52 0.00 0.00 71,927.52 . 1 MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 9/20/2016 REGULAR ITEM #:21,- AGENDA ITEM: Amending Solid Wall Fence Regulations SUBMITTED BY: Emily Becker, City Planner THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: On August 16, 2016, City Council directed Staff to bring to the Planning Commission for discussion a text amendment to the City's fencing regulations that would amend the restrictions of solid wall fences over four feet in height on properties under half an acre. On September 12, 2016, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and discussed the removal of this restriction and recommended approval of an amendment to the ordinance. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council is respectfully requested to review and approve an amendment to solid wall fence restrictions. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: There are two Subdivisions within the City Code that are being proposed to be amended: First, Section 154.205: Fencing Regulations (E) (3) prohibits solid wall fences over four feet in height on lots under 'A and acre, except under certain circumstances, listed below: a. When a residential property abuts a district or use of a higher clas 't tuition, and specifically, vhen an A, RR, RS, RE, or LDR district abuts any other district or a single family residential use abuts a multifamily residential use or a non-residential use. b. When a property is a through lot and abuts a street that is a higher fUnctional classification than the street abutting the front yard of the property. c. For screening of outdoor living space subject to the following criteria: i. The area enclosed by outdoor extended living area fencing shall not exceed an enclosed area of 500 square feet. ii. A fence utilized to enclose and outdoor living area shal/be extended to a point not more than 6 inches from the principal structure at 1 fence termination point. iii. A fence utilized to enclose an outdoor extended living area shall not extend into side yard of a lot beyond the existing building line of the existing principal structure, nor shall such fences he located in any side or front street yard. City Council Meeting 9/20/2016 Regular Agenda Item #27 d. For screening or privacy purposes when the lineal measurement qf the fence does' not exceed one-lburth (VI) of the linear distance of the perimeter of a lot. SuchJnces may only be installed with the written consent of the adjacent property owner. e. Under other circumstances when a solid fence is warranted due to safety, health, animal containment or similar purposes subject to review and approval by the City Council and with the written consent of the adjacent property owner. The proposed amendment specifically addresses the aforementioned exceptions "d." and "e." for the following reasons: Exception d. requires written consent of the adjacent property owner for fences erected for screening and privacy purposes. Privacy fences are so named because they provide concealment and sanctuary, and it should be considered that neighbors do not always get along. Whether or not a certain type of fence can be erected should not be the sole decision of an adjacent property owner. As such. this reouirement is eliminated in the proposed amendment. • Exception e. is subjective. Allowing one property owner to do this and not another could be considered discriminatory. As such, this exception is eliminated in the proposed amendment. Second. it is being recommended that the provision set forth in Section 154.081: Permitted Encroaclunents on Required Yards that requires that fences in side and rear yards need to be 30% open to air and light be eliminated for the following reasons: • Requiring a fence to be 30% open when erected in side and rear yard setbacks does not allow a property owner to adequately screen a certain portion of property. • This requirement is set forth in a completely different Section of the Code than other fencing regulations. This creates confusion. • Openness requirements would still be set forth for front and side (corner) yard setbacks so traffic sight lines are not inhibited. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed amendment is not expected to create significant fiscal impact aside from a possible decrease in Staff time enforcing issues created by violations of this ordinance or preparing requests by property owners who request their properties to be considered as exceptions. PLANNING COMMISSION/PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing was held on the proposed amendment on the 12th of September, 2016. Staff had presented to the Commission two options for this ordinance amendment. The first option considered eliminated the prohibition of solid wall fences over four feet in height on lots under half an acre altogether, as well as eliminating the 30% openness requirement for fences existing in the side and rear. The second proposed amendment is what is being proposed to be adopted herein. The proposed amendment was recommended by 4-3 vote. Reasons for dissenting votes included that the proposed amendment is too coinplicated, and the first option was easier to understand (noted by 2 City Council Meeting 9/20/2016 Regular Agenda Item #27 Commissioner Dodson). Additionally, the restriction of the fence being allowed to be erected on only 1/4th of the perimeter of the property was too restrictive (noted by Commissioner Williams). The reasons stated for recommending the ordinance amendment proposed herein included that it was a smaller change to an ordinance that has had a lot of history and changes over the years and would preserve site lines (noted by Commissioners Kraemer, Larson and Fields). OPTIONS: The Council may: Approve the recommended ordinance amendment. Make changes to and approve the ordinance amendment. Deny the recommended ordinance amendment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff respectfully requests that the Council approve, as recommended by the Planning Commission, the proposed ordinance amendment to the City's Fencing Regulations. "Move to approve Ord. 08-154 amending the City's Fencing Regulations regulating solid wall fences over four feet in height on properties less than half an acre by: removing the requirement of pemission from an adjacent property owner to erect such a fence on 'A the lineal measurement of the perimeter of the property; and removing the exception that allows such a fence be erected ;viten warranted due to safety, health, animal containment or similar purposes subject to review and approval by the City Council and with the written consent of the adjacent property owner." En addition, Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize summary publication of the approved ordinance through the following resolution: "Move to adopt Resolution 2016-79, authorizing summary publication of Ordinance 08-154" ATTACHMENTS: Ord. 08-154 Resolution 2016-79 Planning Commission meeting minutes, 9/12/16 Ord. 08- Option #2 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY C]FVVASH|NGTO@ STATE OFN\|NNESOTA ORDINANCE NO,00-154 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OFORDINANCES BY REPEALING THE PROHIBITION OF SOLID WALL FENCES IN THE LAKE EUMO ZONING CODE, SECTION 1,The City Council of the City ofLake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Section 154,205: Fencing Regulations; Subd, (E) (3): Residential Design Requirements, by amending the following: E. Fence Height and Design 1. Fences within Front and Side (Corner) Yards. Any fence within a front or side (corner) yard setback may not exceed forty-two (42)inches in height and must be 5O0open toair and Light. Z. Residential ond/Ntved'Use Districts. No fence or wall shalt exceed six feet (6') in height, and shall besubject tnthe design requirements of5154.Z05.E.3. 3. Residential Fence Design Requirements. SObdwatt fences over four (4)feet in height shalt beprohibited onany tot under 1/7acre (Z1'780square feet) insize. Any portion of a fence over four (4) feet on such Lots shalt be at (east 75% open to light and air, except under one 0fthe following circumstances: a. When residential property abuts adistrict nr use ofa higher classification, and specifically, when On 4, RR' R5, RE' UrLDR district abuts any other district orosingle family residential use abuts a nnu|ti'farniiv residential use ora non- residential use. b. When a property 1sa through tot and abuts astreet that isa higher functional classification than the street abutting the front yard ufthe property. For screening ofoutdoor living space subject tothe following criteria: i. The area enclosed bmoutdoor extended living area fencing shall not exceed an enclosed area of 5O0square feet. ii. 4fence utilized toenclose aD outdoor extended living area shalt be extended to a point not more than h inches from the principal structure at 1 fence termination point. iii. 4fen[e utilized toenclose nn Outdoor extended living area shalt not extend into side yard nfatot beyond the existing building tine ofthe existing principal structure, nor shall such fences helocated in any side n[front street yard. d. For screening or privacy purposes when the lineal measurement Ofthe fence does not exceed one-fourth (1/4) of the Linear distance of the perimeter of a Lot C. Ord. 08- Option #2 p-c-45- 44; .`.4: e. ::., f 0-,c-a-4...,-i-i14-7,.'(4)-141:PrOV-4-S,-.'17 444. 4. Commercial and Industrial Districts. No fence or wall shall exceed eight feet (8') in height. Fences that exceed eight feet (8') in height require a conditional use permit. SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Section 154.081: Permitted Encroachments on Required Yards, Subd. (B), by repealing the following: (B) Side and rear yards. Fences opP44; walls and hedges 6 feet in height or less; bays not to exceed a depth of 3 feet or containing an area of more than 30 square feet; fire escapes not to exceed a width of 3 feet. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 4. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-154was adopted on this , 2016, by a vote of Ayes and Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor Al I EST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk th day of This Ordinance 08-154 was published on the day of , 2016. 2 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2016-76 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-154 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-154, an ordinance to amend Section 154.205: Fencing Regulations, Subd. (E) (3); and Section 154.081: Permitted Encroachments on Required Yards, Subd. (B), of the City Code; 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. 08-154 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. 08-154, which amends the Chapter 154: Zoning Code: By amending the following exceptions to Fencing Regulations Section 154.205 (E) (3) that prohibits solid wall fences over four feet in height on properties less than Y2 acre by: o Removing the requirement to obtain permission from an adjacent property owner in order to erect such a fence on 1/4 the lineal measurement of the perimeter of the property. o Removing the exception that allows such fencing under other circumstances due to safety, health, animal containment, or similar purposes. • By removing the requirement that fences in side and rear yard setbacks to be 30% open. The full text of Ordinance No. 08-154 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 fufl copy of the ordinance be placed in a public location within the City. Dated: September 20, 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. subject to the conditions of approval as recommended by staff and the additional condition recommended by the Planning Commission, Vote: 7-0,motion carried Public Hearing — Zoning Text Amendment — Solid Wall Fences Becker started her presentation by explaining the current fence code regulations as it relates to solid wall fencing on lots under Yz acre and what the exceptions are. Becker went through some ofthe history nnthe fence code, Anticipated higher density residential development was cited as the reason for the recommendation for allowing privacy fencing. After discussion over the course offive meetings, the current ordinance amendment was adopted. Section 154.081 requires that fences in side and rear yards need to be at least 30% open otair and light. Even |fthe prohibition Vfsolid wall fences over four feet nnlots under Y2 acre is removed, fences would still need to adhere to this requirement unless this requirement isremoved. Staff researched other Cities that allow solid wall fences over 4' and there were quite afevv. Staff presented two different options to the Planning Commission for discussion. Option #1 eliminates the prohibition of solid vvaU fences on lots under Yz acre altogether and also eliminates requirement of permitted encroachments onrequired yards. Option #2eliminates the requirement for adjacent property owner togive permission, |talso exempts fences that dVnot exceed one- fourth of the linear distance of the pernn|nneterof a lot from the SO% openness requirement. |talso eliminates the exception which allows fences that are erected under other circumstances when a solid wall fence is warranted due to safety, etc. which could beconsidered subjective and discriminatory. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt option #I. Fields asked if this aUovv» privacy from one neighbor, but not three. Williams is wondering why we would not want to allow it on 3 sides of the lot, but not in the front yard. Becker stated that there is already a provision on front and side on corner lots. Option #2 is much more restrictive and there is only exceptions for when solid wall fences can be erected. Public Hearing opened at7:S1pnn Denise Thompson, 9077 Jane Road N, tried to get a fence permit for their dog and they were not able toget the neighbor signature. They feel that they are not able tnhave enough privacy. She also did some research and she was not able tofind another City in Minnesota that does not allow the 6foot high privacy fence. There were no other written or electronic comments received Public Hearing closed at7:S7pnn Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 9-1.2-16 4 Dodson prefers option #1 because it is easier to understand and option #2 is too much in the design area of the fence. Williams agrees, but is struggling with why we would restrict ittoNofthe pernninneter. They should beallowed anywhere behind the front of the house nnany lot. Kre|nnervvouN prefer to take the smaller step and go for option #2. Larson likes the simplicity ofoption #l. Hedoesn't think the difference between 4'and Gmakes that much difference. Heiswondering ifitshould bedone different for urban vs. rural. This isShore|and which might be different also. Fields prefers the step of option #2 because the City has not been inundated with requests, but this is based on one circumstance. Williams )sthinking that the O[have their own restrictions on fences. Dodson doesn't see aneed torestrict fences inother areas asother Cities donot duit, Kreinnerfee|s that there was a lot of discussion a few years ago and is not in favor of changing it much because ofone circumstance. M/S/F:Williams /Dodson, move to recommend approval of option 41, Vote: 3-4, motion Foiled Larson is wondering if the Planning Commission picks option #1 if the City Council won't accept it. Becker stated that staff has recommended option #2because they felt that out of respect for previous work done on the code, it might be better received. Williams asked K4/S/P: Fields/Dunn, move to recommend approval of Ord. 08' (Option #2), which amends Sec. 154.205: Fencing Regulations; Subd. (E) (3), by repealing language nfSubp. D that requires permission from and adjacent property owner to erect a solid wall fence up to six feet in height for screening or privacy purposes when the lineal measurement of the fence does not exceed one-fourth of the linear distiance of the permimeter of the lot on a lot under half an acne; and which repeals subp. e, Voter4-3, motion carried. Dodson voted nnbecause hefeels option #2isjust alittle too complicated, Business Item — Conditional Use Permit — 9200 Hudson Blvd City Council Updates — September 6,2O1G Meeting U Royal Golf Course atLake Elmo Concept PUDPlan ii) OP Ordinance |ii) Boulder Ponds LLC—Zoning Map Annendnne»t/PUDAmendment —Ordinance O8'l49 Staff Updates Upcoming Meetings a. September 2G'lU16 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 9-12-16 b. October 1Q,IOl6 CornmnissionConcerns Meeting adjourned at9:1Ipno Respectfully submitted, JoanZiertnnan Planning Program Assistant Lobe Elmo Planning Commission Minuteu;9'l3'16 MAY, -COU L COWICATiON DATE: September 20, 2016 REGULAR ITEM # 2-7 AGENDA ITEM: Old Village Phase 1: Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements — Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed, Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessments, and Calling for Hearing on Proposed Assessment SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Assistant City Engineer THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item Report/Presentation.................... Questions from Council to Staff Public Input. if Appropriate. ..... Call for Motion Discussion.. ....... .................. ....... Action on Motion .......... ..... ..... City Engineer ..... „.............. ..... ......„............... City Engineer ..... ........ ......... ..... Mayor Facilitates ....... ........Mayor Facilitates ..... ...... ............. Mayor & City Council Mayor & City Council Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering/Finance. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider declaring costs to be assessed and calling for the final assessment hearing for the Old Village Phase 1 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improveinents. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Old Village Phase I Street, Drainage and Utility Project has been completed and the total project costs are known. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429 the Council must declare the amount to be assessed against the benefitting properties and Call the Hearing on the Proposed Assessment for these improvements. The Assessment Hearing is proposed for October 18, 2016. The Final Assessment Roll must he certified to the County Auditor by November 30, 2016. The final total project cost is $6,600,000 with the County cost share contribution of $1,047,000. The final total cost of the street and landscape improvements is $1,456,000; sanitary sewer improvements are -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting September 20, 2016 [Regular Agenda Ron 26] -1 S826,000; regional drainage improvements are $2,719,000; and water system improvements are $552,000. The watermain replacement and regional storm sewer system are not being assessed. The final street assessments have been calculated based on the final project costs resulting in a residential per unit assessment of $8,300, down from the preliminary unit assessment of $9,200; and a commercial per lineal foot assessment of 8230, down from $255. The street and landscape improvements are being assessed at 30% of the total costs for residential properties using an average residential front footage, and 100% for commercial properties based upon the actual front footage. The final per REC unit sanitary sewer assessment is $11,000 with some commercial properties being assigned multiple REC units, down from $14,000 per REC unit. The Feasibility Reports for both Old Village sanitary sewer project phases presented the preliminary assessment amounts to be based on the total cost for the extension of sanitary sewer for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the improvements, divided by the total number of REC's (or SAC's) connecting to the sewer main. The Final Assessment Roll for sanitary sewer improvements have been prepared based on council direction provided at the September 6, 2016 council meeting, to assess for sanitary sewer improvements based on the total cost for the overall extension of sanitary sewer improvements needed to replace all (or substantially all) existing private wastewater systems in the Old Village area, including the Phase 1 and Phase 2 sewer improvement projects and future sewer extension projects planned for the Old Village service area. Assessments for street improvements are being levied over 15 years (increased from 10 years) while the sanitary sewer improvements will be levied over a 20 year period (increased from 15 years). RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2016-78, thereby declaring the costs to be assessed to be $471,460 for street improvements and $561,000 for sanitary sewer improvements; ordering the preparation of the proposed assessments and calling for the hearing on the proposed assessments for October 18, 2016 at or around 7:00 pm. The recommended motion for the action is as follows; "Move to approve Resolution No. 2016-78; A Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed, Orderin g Preparation of Proposed Assessment, and Calling for the Hearing on the Proposed Assessment for the Old Village Phase 1 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements." ATTACIIMENT(S): 1. Resolution No. 2016-78 Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed, Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessment, and Calling for Hearing on Proposed Assessment. 2, Notice of Hearing on Proposed Assessment. 3. Final Assessment Rolls. -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2016-78 A RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED, O ERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS, AND CALLING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR THE OLD VILLAGE PHASE 1 STREET, DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the Old Village Phase 1 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements including street drainage and utility improvements of Upper 33rd Street N, 36th Street N from Laverne Ave N to west end, and Laverne Avenue North from CSAH 14 to Upper 33rd Street N; and WHEREAS, the total cost of the improvements will be $6,599,686. WHEREAS, the City Clerk and City Engineer have prepared the proposed assessment roll and will maintain said assessment roll on file in the City offices for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, The portion of the cost of such street and landscaping improvements to be paid by the City is hereby declared to be $984,411, and the portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $471,460. The portion of the cost of such sanitary sewer improvements to be paid by the City is hereby declared to be $265,254, and the portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $561,000. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer, has calculated the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvements against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land to be benefited by the improvements, and the Clerk has filed a copy of such proposed assessment in the City offices for public inspection. 4. Assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over 15 years for streets and 20 years for sanitary sewer, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2017, and shall bear interest at the rate of 2.68 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of the assessment resolution. 5. A public hearing shall be held on the 18th day of October, 2016, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at or approximately after 7.00 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessment. All persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 6. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and she shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. She shall also cause mailed notice to be Resolution No. 2016-78 given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearings. 7. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the entire assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Clerk. No interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the assessment. A property owner may at any time thereafter, pay to the City Clerk the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be tnade before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE TWENTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Mike Pearson Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: Julie Johnson City Clerk Resolution No. 2016-78 CITY OF LAKE ELMO NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT OLD VILLAGE PHASE I: STREET, DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Lake Elmo will meet in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at or approximately after 7:00 P.M. on Tuesday, October 18, 2016, to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment against abutting property for the Old Village Phase 1: Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvement. Adoption by the Council of the proposed assessment may occur at the hearing. The following describes the area proposed to be assessed: Street, landscape, and streetscape improvements along Upper 33`d Street from Lake Elmo Avenue to Laverne Avenue, Laverne Avenue from Upper 33"I Street to CSAH 14, 36th Street from Lake Elmo Avenue to Laverne Avenue, and the Alley between Laverne Avenue and Lake Elmo Avenue from Upper 33r d Street to 36th Street. Sanitary sewer improvements along Upper 33td Street from where it crosses the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks to Lake Elmo Avenue, along Laverne Avenue from Upper 33`d Street to CSAH 14, 36th Street from Lake Elmo Avenue to Laverne Avenue, and the Alley between Laverne Avenue and Lake Elmo Avenue from Upper 33rd Street to 200-feet south of 36th Street. You may at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor on November 18, 2016, pay the entire assessment on such property to the City Clerk with interest accrued to the date of payment. No interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid to the City Clerk 30 days from the adoption of this assessment. You may at any time thereafter, pay to the City Clerk the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 (date assessment certified to County Auditor) or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. If you decide not to prepay the assessment before the date given above the rate of interest that will apply is 2.68 percent per year. Once assessments are certified to the County, the assessments are payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years for street improvements and 20 years for sanitary sewer improvements, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2017, and will bear interest at the rate of 2.68 percent per annum from the date of adoption of the assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of the assessment resolution until December 31, 2016. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the City Clerk's office. The total amount of the proposed street improvement assessment is $471,460. The total amount of the proposed sanitary sewer improvement assessment is $561,000. The City contributionfor the overall improvement project is $4,519,898 and Washington County's contribution for the overall improvement project is SI,047,328. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with the municipal clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The Council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the district court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City Council is authorized in its discretion to defer the payment of an assessment for any homestead property owned by a person for whom it would be a hardship to make payment if the owner is 65 years of age or older and/or the owner is a person retired by virtue of a permanent and total disability or by a person who is a member of the Minnesota National Guard or other military reserves who is ordered into active military service, as defined in section 190.05 subdivision 5b or 5c, as stated in the person's military orders, for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments. The owner must request a defennent of the assessment at or before the public hearing at which the assessment is adopted and make application on forms prescribed by thc City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption. Notwithstanding the standards and guidelines established by the City for detennining a hardship, a deferment of an assessment may be obtained pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 435.193. DATED: September 20, 2016 BY ORDER OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor (Published in the Oakdale -Lake Elmo Review on September 28, 2016) CIT , LAKE ELMO, MN. SEPTEMBER, 2016 OLD VILLAGE PHASE 1: STI , AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FINAL SANITARY SEWER ASSESSMENT ROLL ,E1of1 ASSESSMENT NO. NAME ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS PID AMOUNT SAC 1 AGINCOURT LLC 3459 LAKE ELMO AVE N 8602 NEAL AVE N STILLWATER MN 55082 2302921320041 $ 33,000.00 3— 2 LENZMEIER JOHN & REHAK VICKY 11178 UPPER 33RD 5T N PO BOX 18 LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921320042 $ 11,000.00 1 3 CHEEE LLC 7250 HUDSON BLVD N OAKDALE MN 55128 1302921310017 $ 11,000,00 1 4 CHEEE LLC 11320 UPPER 33RD ST N 7250 HUDSON BLVD N OAKDALE MN 55128 1302921240024 $ 22,000.00 2 5 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230028 $ 11,000,00 1 6 JUDITH I MOHAR TRS 3520 LAVERNE AVE N 299 COUNTY RD C2 W ROSEVILLE MN 55113 1302921230027 $ 11,000.00 1 7 SQUADRITO FRANK & BARBARA N 3570 LAVERNE AVE N PO BOX 74 LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230072 $ 11,000.00 1 8 BUETEL BRUCE W & ARLINE V 3590 LAVERNE AVE N PO BOX 124 LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230073 $ 11,000.00 1 9 GERMAN EVANG LUTHERAN CHURCH 11194 36TH ST N 11194 36TH 5T N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230060 $ 33,000.00 3 10 BJORKMAN BARBARA E 3650 LAVERNE AVE N 3650 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230019 $ 11,000.00 1 11 PERLTIER GENE M & ANN E PO BOX 455 LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230018 5 11,000.00 1 12 TRACY R LACRIOX TRS 11199 STILLWATER BLVD N 7485 GRANADA BAY S COTTAGE GROVE MN 55016 1302921230065 $ 88,000.00 8 13 LAKE ELMO CREAMERY BLDG LLC 3481 LAVERNE AVE N 7250 HUDSON BLVD N SUITE 160 OAKDALE MN 55)28 1302921310016 $ 44,000.00 4 14 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3800 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230030 $ 11,000.00 1 15 WACKER WILLIAM G & SALLANN 3603 LAVERNE AVE N PO BOX 167 LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230017 $ 11,000.00 1 16 FAINT DAVID 5 & KAREN L KOHL 3617 LAVERNE AVE N 3617 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230075 $ 11,000.00 1 17 BUTLER BRYAN C & MOLLY K BRENDMOEN 3631 LAVERNE AVE N 3631 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230014 $ 11,000,00 1 18 WIER RICHARD R & ANNE M 3645 LAVERNE AVE N 3645 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230013 $ 11,000.00 1 19 SELDEN TERI G 3673 LAVERNE AVE N 3673 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230012 $ 11,000.00 1 20 BUETEL DOUGLAS J 3693 LAVERNE AVE N 3693 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230009 $ 11,000.00 1 21 GUERIN KRYSTLE M 3699 LAVERNE AVE N 1171 MANNING AVE 5 AFTON MN 55001 1302921230008 $ 11,000.00 1 22 KOSMAN RICHARD 1 & CYNTHIA A 11227 STILLWATER BLVD N 20286 ST CROIX TRL N SCANDIA MN 55073 1302921230007 5 22,000.00 2 23 CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH LAKE ELMO 3549 LAKE ELMO AVE N PO BOX 310 LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230053 $ 22,000.00 2 24 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 3537 LAKE ELMO AVE N 3800 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230054 $ 11,000.00 1 25 DALE AND LINDA QUAST TRS 3251 LAKE ELMO AVE N 14664 57TH ST N STILLWATER MN 55082 1302921230058 $ 11,000.00 1 26 KROMSCHROEDER JERRY R 3517 LAKE ELMO AVE N 360 RIVER RD HUDSON WI 54016 1302921230057 $ 11,000.00 1 27 LAKE ELMO REAL ESTATE GROUP LLC 3515 LAKE ELMO AVE N 2001 OAK GLEN LN STILLWATER MN 55082 1302921230056 $ 11,000,00 1 28 RE HAGSTROM PROP LLC 3511 LAKE ELMO AVE N 15 DELLWOOD AVE WHITE BEAR LAKE MN 55110 1302921230059 $ 22,000.00 2 29 RDWAGS LLC 3479 LAKE ELMO AVE N 14 KINNUNEN RD ESKO MN 55733 1302921320026 $ 22,000.00 2 30 JR5C LLC 3469 LAKE ELMO AVE N PO BOX 818 STILLWATER MN 55082 1302921320027 $ 11,000.00 1 31 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 11200 UPPER 33RD ST N 3800 LAVERNE AVE N LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921320044 $ 11,000.00 1 32 PELTIER GENE M & ANN E 11179 STILLWATER BLVD N PO BOX 455 LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921230046 $ 11,000.00 1 TOTAL $ 561,000.00 CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MN. SEPTEMBER 2016 NO, 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NAME LENZMEIER JOHN & REHAK VICKY JOHNSON STEPHEN D CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY OF LAKE ELMO SQUADRITO FRANK & BARBARA N BUETEL BRUCE W & ARLINE V BJORKMAN BARBARA E PERLTIER GENE M & ANN E CITY OF LAKE ELMO FAINT DAVID 5 & KAREN L KOHL BUTLER BRYAN C & MOLLY K BRENDMOE WIER RICHARD R & ANNE M SELDEN TERI G BUETEL DOUGLASJ GUERIN KRYSTLE M ALBRECHT ANDREA ADDRESS OLD VILLAGE PHASE 1: STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FINAL STREET, DRAINAGE, LANDSCAPE, AND STREETSCAPE ASSESSMENT ROLL PAGE 1 of 1 ASSESSMENT STREET FRONT MAILING ADDRESS RID AMOUNT FOOTAGE 11178 UPPER 33RD 5T N PO BOX 18 11320 UPPER 33RD ST N 2915 LAKE ELMO AVE N 3800 LAVERNE AVEN 3510 LAVERNE AVE N 3800 LAVERNE AVE N 3800 LAVERNE AVEN 3570 LAVERNE AVE N PO BOX 74 3590 LAVERNE AVE N PO BOX 124 3650 LAVERNE AVE N 3650 LAVERNE AVE N PO BOX 455 3800 LAVERNE AVE N 3617 LAVERNE AVE N 3617 LAVERNE AVE N 3631 LAVERNE AVE N 3631 LAVERNE AVE N 3645 LAVERNE AVEN 3645 LAVERNE AVEN 3673 LAVERNE AVE N 3673 LAVERNE AVE N 3693 LAVERNE AVE N 3693 LAVERNE AVE N 3699 LAVERNE AVE N 1171 MANNING AVE 3603 LAKE ELMO AVE N 3603 LAKE ELMO AVE N 'Properties in Red represent Commercial properties. **Properties in Black represent Residential properties, LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN LAKE ELMO MN AFTON MN LAKE ELMO MN 55042 1302921320042 5 8,300.00 55042 1302921320088 $ 8,300.00 55042 1302921320044 $ 16,600,00 55042 1302921320031 $ 8,300,00 55042 1302921230025 $ 8,300.00 55042 1302921230072 $ 8,300.00 55042 1302921230073 5 8,300,00 55042 1302921230019 $ 8,300.00 55042 1302921230018 $ 8,300.00 55042 1302921230030 $ 33,200.00 55042 1302921230075 5 8,300.00 55042 1302921230014 $ 8,300,00 55042 1302921230013 $ 8,300,00 55042 1302921230012 $ 8,300.00 55042 1302921230009 5 8,300,00 55001 1302921230008 $ 8,300.00 55042 130292123005C $ 8,300.00 TOTAL $ 471,460,00 100 390 50 83 80 125 205 100 40 260 65 95 120 90 75 60 147 AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: (6°6 \66, 1,66"1.666, 666 66616 .4A ("-"' 1 1, DATE: September 20, 2016 REGULAR ITEM # 28 Old Village Phase 3 Street and Utility Improvements — Accept Petitions and Authorize Preparation of a Feasibility Report Jack Griffin, City Engineer Kristina Handt, City Administrator Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Rob Wellen, Public Works Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney Chad Isakson, Assistant City Engineer SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item ..... ...... ..... ..... .......... ..... ........ ....... City Engineer Report/Presentation County Public Works Questions from Council to Staff .............. .............. ................. Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ........................... ..... ........ ....... ...... ....... Mayor & City Council Discussion ................... ...... . ..... ........................................ Mayor & City Council Action on Motion. ....... ............. .......... ...... ........... Mayor Facilitates POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. FISCAL IMPACT: $12,800. If authorized, FOCUS Engineering Inc., will prepare a feasibility report in a not to exceed amount of $12,800 for the Old Village Phase 3 Street and Utility Improvements. If the improvements are ordered, the report costs will be charged against the project fund and become assessable to the benefitting properties. Should the project not be constructed, the report costs cannot be assessed. SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider approving Resolution No. 2016-80, Declaring Adequacy of Petition and Ordering Preparation of a Feasibility Report for the Old Village Phase 3 Street and Utility Improvements. STAFF REPORT/PROJECT BACKGROUND: The City of Lake Elmo is extending sanitary sewer to serve the existing properties in the Old Village area to replace the use of private on -site sewage treatment systems. The project also includes regional drainage improvements to begin addressing historic flooding -- page City Council Meeting [Regular Agencla Item 28] September 20, 2016 issues in the Downtown area, the replacement of aged watennain pipes and reconstructing the public streets that are disturbed during the work. The Improvements are being constructed in phases and through separate projects with the initial project being constructed in 2015 and the Phase 2 project being constructed in 2016. Additional project phases are necessary to extend lateral sanitary sewer mains along local street corridors from the main line located in Lake Elmo Avenue and Laverne Avenue. As the Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects near completion no specific schedule or priority has been determined or set by the council for the future lateral sanitary sewer extensions. At the September 6, 2016 council meeting, staff presented an Old Village Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to address the future sewer extension phasing plan which identified local neighborhood areas to receive sewer in 2017 through 2020. As with all Capital Improvement Plans, the CIP program serves as a guide for staff for planning and budgeting purposes and for bringing improvements forward for council consideration for the program year, however the C1P phasing plan should not be considered a firm schedule or commitment by the city that the improvement will be completed in that program year, or completed at all. On April 1, 2016, the City of Lake Elmo received a Petition, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429, requesting sanitary sewer service for the Lake Elmo Elementary School (Independent School District #834) at 11030 Stillwater Boulevard. Then on June 8, 2016, the city received a second Petition, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429, requesting sanitary sewer service along 31st Street North, from CSAH 17 to the east end, Laverne Court North, from 31st Street North to south cul-de-sac, and Layton Court North, from 3lst Street North to south cul-de-sac. A third petition was received, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429, requesting sanitary sewer service along 32"d Street, east of Lake Elmo Avenue. The petitions (see attached Petition for Local Improvements) have been reviewed and certified by the City Clerk. Over the years, staff has communicated with property owners that the City will likely prioritize future project phases based on property owner request and need. Therefore the Old Village CIP was presented with the Phase 3 Improvements to be completed in 2017 to include the Lake Elmo Elementary School area and the 315' Street/Laverne Ct/Layton Ct neighborhood. The 32"d Street area was then scheduled to be completed in 2018, being delayed one additional year due to the added complexity of casement/right- of-way acquisition needs. In order to initiate the Old Village Phase 3 Street and Utility Improvements and to maintain special assessments as a viable funding alternative, the City Council must direct the preparation of a feasibility report meeting the statutory process for public improvements that are specially assessed. The report will address the necessary lateral sanitary sewer extensions to replace individual on -site treatment systems as identified below. The improvements will also include the replacement of existing watennain lines and the reconstruction of streets disturbed during the work along with drainage improvements necessary to meet storm water permitting requirements: • 31st Street North, from CSAH 17 to the east end. • Laverne Court North, from 31st Street North to south cul-de-sac. • Layton Court North, from 31st Street North to south cul-de-sac. • Sanitary sewer extension to serve Lake Elmo Elementary School, including sewer service to other properties as may be recommended to be completed in conjunction with the school sewer project, and including street, drainage and utility improvements as may be recommended to be completed in conjunction with the school sewer extension project. The report will advise on the scope of recommended improvements along each corridor, provide estimated project costs, identify easement and right-of-way, permits, and other requirements of other local -- page 2 -- City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Item 28] September 20, 2016 agencies needed to implement the improvements, recommend whether the improvements are necessary, cost effective, and feasible. The Report will also provide a proposed preliminary assessment roll for each of the benetitting properties based upon the City's Special Assessment Policy for Local Improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize FOCUS Engineering, Inc. to prepare a Feasibility Report for the Old Village Phase 3 Street and Utility Improvements in the not to exceed amount of $12,500. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: "Move to approve Resolution No. 2016-80, Declaring Adequacy of Petition and Ordering preparation of a Feasibility Report for the Old Village Phase 3 Street and Utility Improvements to be completed by FOCUS Engineering, Inc. in the not to exceed amount of 812,500." ATTACHMENT(: 1. Resolution No. 2016-80, Ordering Preparation of a Feasibility Report. 2. Petition for Local Improvements from 31Street, Laverne Ct., and Layton Ct. 3. Petition for Local Improvements from Independent School District 834 for the Lake Elmo Elementary School. 4. Project Location Map. 5. Project Schedule. -- page 3 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2016-80 A RESOLUTION DECLARING ADEQUACY OF PETITIONS AND ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE OLD VILLAGE PHASE 3 STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, a petition was received from the owners of real property abutting 31st Street North, from CSAH 17 to the east end, Laverne Court North, from 31st Street North to south cul-de-sac, and Layton Court North, from 31st Street North to south cul-de-sac, requesting municipal sanitary sewer service; and WHEREAS, a petition was also received from the owners of real property (Independent School District #834) at 11030 Stillwater Boulevard (the Lake Elmo Elementary School), requesting municipal sanitary sewer service; and WHEREAS, it is proposed to assess all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to the City's Special Assessment Policy and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, 1. The Petition requesting the improvements is hereby declared to be signed by the required percentage of owners of property affected thereby. This declaration is made in conformity to Minnesota Statutes 429.035. 2. The Petition for the proposed improvements are hereby referred to the City Engineer and FOCUS Engineering, Inc., to complete a feasibility report in accordance with Minnesota Statues, Chapter 429 for the proposed improvements, and to report to the council with all convenient speed advising the council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible; whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement; the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended; and a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for affected parcels. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE TWENTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Mike Pearson Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: Julie Johnson City Clerk Resolution No. 2016-80 4/2o016 FOCUS Engineering, Inc. Mail - Lake Elmo Elementary School ' Petition for Local Improvement (Sanitary Sewer) Jack Griffin <jack.griffin@focusengineeringinc.com> Lake Elmo Elementary School .Petition for Local Improvement (Sanitary Hamilton, Heidi <haidi.homUhon@krousanderoon.conn^ Fri, Apr 1.2O1GatS:28AM To: Jack Griffin `lack.griffin@focusengineehngino.com> Cc: Stephen VVenaman<SVVensman@|akeel mo.orgx.Clark Schroeder <CGnhnoeder@|akeel mo.or8> TbnyVNUge, <wiUgert@odUvvabanaohoo|a.org> Good morning Jack, I have attached a petition for local improvement signed by the Stillwater School District requesting that sanitary sewer be constructed to serve Lake Elmo Elementary School. We were unable to find support for the Option B sewer (per attached). I understand that this signed petition will result in the city considering completion ofafeasibility study for the Option Asewer, Please me know if there is anything more that must be done by the School District to move forward on this request, Thank you, Heidi Hamilton Heidi Hamilton | Project Monu8o Kraus -Anderson Construction Company |8§25Rondova Street NE, PO Box 1581 Circle Pines, MN 55014 main 7G37887711 /fax703,786.26501wvnwknausandarson.00m x/aos,4ndersonis awE0E AA MIFIVetlDisability Employer h»pu:llmuUgunQle.com/mmUm0/?ui=2&ik=885060bd58&view--pt&saanh=inbux&mo ~153d2Jao8U8830300siml=153d23aaVb803O3U 1/2 4/2u016 FOCUS Engineering, Inc. Mail ' Lake Elmo Elementary School Petition for Local Improvement (Sanitary Sewer) IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is privileged and confidential within the meaning of applicable law- Accordingly dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this message or any of this contents by any person other than the Intended Recipient may constitute abreach ofcivil nrcriminal law and isstrictly prohibited. |fyou are not the Intended Recipient, please contact the sender as soon as possible. All information or opinions expressed in this message and/or any attachments are those ofthe author, and are not necessarily those nfour organization. All reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses are present in this E-mail, As our organization accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of this E-mail or attachments, we recommend that you subject these h)your virus checking procedures prior toopening. KA and Kraus -Anderson are registered trademarks 2 attachments �� LmkeEYmmPmUt�n_4_1_2016.mdf ��U3K Elementary School Sewer Cmnnection.pdf 2GgK mipsm=ai|govole,co~xmuomml?ui=2mx oaonno»unnuview~pt&ueanm~mbo*&m,g~153d23aaeunoaono&s|ml=^nxuzoaaouou000n 212 ITY OF Lake Elrn© PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DATE: April 1, 2016 TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA; We the undersigned, being the owners of teal property in the City of Lake Elmo and representing at least 35% of the affected properties abutting or receiving benefit from the requested improvements, hereby petition the City to extend to our properties municipal sanitary sewer service pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and that the City assess the cost of the improvement against our property described below and hereby agree to pay the entire cost as apportioned by the City. We understand that if the City Council orders the improvements, we may be assessed for these improvements in accordance with the City's Special Assessment Policy and State Statutes, we understand that the City Council has full authority to authorize improvements to be made, and assessments to be levied against my property, and that any decision to order the improvements is NOT subject to vote by the abutting properties. (To allow for proper City notifications, each signature must be accompanied by a legibly printed name and address) SIG AT URE OF PROPERTY 0 ER(S) NAME (printed) ADDRESS (printed) kfl o30 2. 4, 5. 6. 7. 8. 12. 13. WaRAMMUZUM LAKE ELMO AVENUE Option E3 extension to school Option A extension1 Ito school 39T 1,,.,11111,11.111,11,1,41,0 Sewer sernent (in BLACK) is !comp(ete [ET 2,000 Lk' 15-INCH TRUNK SEWER wer sement (in GREEN) 'complete.. 2921120001 LEGEND VILLAGE EASTERN TRUNK SEWER IMPROVEMENTS (PUBLIC) VILI.AGE EASTERN TRUNK SEWER IMPROVEMENTS (PRIVATE) .39TH STRaT - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS (PUBLIC) T1 IF. CITY OF LAKE ELMO ENGINEERING I FAS1 SANFIARY Si-WI-R 1N1P1(0‘ EMI -A lIZI NI\ 111(10‘ I. MO\ PA(II-itRAH 1(0 NI) PROJE(.1 \U.2014 '27 JUN1:. 2(11-1 1302,4121 LA1.11102 Lut Sewer sement REd) to be completed by 11,01,2015, cur( oF LAKE ELM() riouRr. LOCATION MAP VILLAGE LAST TRUNK SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT SCHEDULE CITY OF LAKE ELMO OLD VILLAGE PHASE 3:STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ENGINEERING, inc. Cara Gehemn,P.E. Jack Griffin, P.E. Ryan Stempski'P.E. Chad |sakaon,P.[. 651.300/261 651.308.4264 651.300.4267 651.300.4283 SEP7EMBER2O26 5EPTEK4BERZO,ZO1D Council authorizes the preparation of the Phase 3Feasibility Report, NOVEM8ER1,3Ol6 Presentation of Feasibility Report. Council accepts Report and calls Hearing. DE[EKUBER[i2016 Public Improvement Hearing. Council Orders the Improvement and orders the preparation ofPlans and Specifications (Requires 4/5,'vote). MARCH21,2O17 APR|L2[L2UI7 MAY Z,ZOl7 Council approves Plans and Specifications and orders Advertisement for Bids. Receive Contractor Bids. Council accepts Bids and awards Contract. Conduct Pre -Construction Meeting and issue Notice tuProceed, * OCTO8EK27,2O16 Substantial Completion. * N0VEMBER24,2017 Final Completion. Old Village Capital Improvement Plan Phasing Plan; Schedule and Assessment 1Vlethodology PHASE 6 PHASE 5 NOT INCLUDED SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 32ND STREET „HASE 6 FFT NOT INCLUDED NOT INCLUDED1, -REID 30Tti STRFFT PHASE 7 NO PARK INCLUDEQ LIFT STATION CITY OF Lake Elmo PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DATE: TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA: We the undersigned, being the owners of real property in the City of Lake Elmo and representing at least 35% of the affected properties abutting or receiving benefit from the requested improvements, hereby petition the City to extend to our properties, along 31 Street North, Layton Court, and Laverne Court west of Lake Elmo Avenue, municipal sanitary sewer service pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and that the City assess the cost of the improvement against our property described below and hereby agree to pay the entire cost as apportioned by the City. We understand that if the City Council orders the improvements, we may be assessed for these improvements in accordance with the City's Special Assessment Policy and State Statutes, we understand that the City Council has full authority to authorize improvements to be made, and assessments to be levied against my property, and that any decision to order the improvements is NOT subject to vote by the abutting properties. (To allow for proper City notifications-, each signature must be accompanied by a legibly printed name and address) OF ROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME (printed) ADDRESS (printed) /eitik ill e..cce_1) V.;1) r,2 LC\VC-111 7 ciM v L PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT Page 14. 15. 16 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 99, 23. 24. ,•6Z4 )1 4- _CR:vie—Da ct 3 c*.) y Oci 2,/- 4,-1.1\) c) 7 I A.5 I LF-,c. Examined, checked, and found to be in proper form and to be signed by the required number of owners of property affected by the making of the improvement petitioned for. Julie Johnson, City Clerk (Seal) 41/>, T1 LAKE ELM() AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: A YO & COUNCIL CO UNICATION, DATE: September 20, 2016 REGULAR ITEM # 29 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements — Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed, Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessments, and Calling for Hearing on Proposed Assessment Chad Isakson, Assistant City Engineer Kristina Handt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item .... Report/Presentation............. ...... Questions from Council to Staff Public input, i f Appropriate • Call for Motion Discussion .................. ..... .......... Action on Motion...................... POLICY RECOMMENDER: Engineering. ..... . ...... ............. ..... ....... Engineer .... .......... City Engineer ......... Mayor Facilitates ........ , „ .............Mayor Facilitates ......................... ...... ....... Mayor & City Council ..... . ....... .............. ..... Mayor & City Council . ........ ............... ....... ....•••.• Mayor Facilitates SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is respectfully requested to consider declaring costs to be assessed and calling for the final assessment hearing for the 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY/BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements are substantially complete and the total project costs are known. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429 the Council must declare the amount to be assessed against the benefitting properties and Call the Hearing on the Proposed Assessment for these improvements. The Assessment Hearing is proposed for October 18, 2016. The Final Assessment Roll must be certified to the County Auditor by November 30, 2016. -- page 1 -- Kirkwood Neighborhood (Streets) Kelvin Neighborhood (Streets) Kelvin Neighborhood (Lateral Watermain) Kelvin Neighborhood (Trunk Watennain) Stonegate Neighborhood (Streets) City Council Meeting [Regular Agewda Item 29] September 20, 2016 The final total project cost is $1,285,400; down from the feasibility report total project cost of $1,359,800, The final total cost of the street improvements are $1,119,200 and water system improvements are $166,200. The final assessments have been calculated based on the final project costs. The summary table below outlines changes when compared with the feasibility report for a standard residential property. There are select properties that are non-residential or were assigned higher equivalent values. The proposed assessment for these parcels can be reviewed on the attached assessment rolls. Table 1: Assessment Comparison Feasibility Report Proposed Final Assessment $13,800 $11,700 $5,200 $5,100 $12,000 $11,900 $2,900 $2,900 $6,000 $5,600 Assessments for street improvements are being levied over 10 years and the water system improvements will be levied over a 15-year period. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2016-78, thereby declaring the total street improveinent costs to be assessed to be $401,700 and water system costs to be assessed to be $82,700; ordering the preparation of the proposed assessments and Calling for the Hearing on the proposed Assessments for October 18, 2016 at or around 7:00 pin. The recommended motion for the action is as follows: "Move to approve Resolution No. 2016-78; A Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed, Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessment, and Calling for the Hearing on the Proposed Assessment for the 2016 Street, Drainage and Utah), Improvements." ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Resolution No. 2016-78 Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed, Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessment, and Calling for Hearing on Proposed Assessment. 2. Notice of Hearing on Proposed Assessment. 3. Final Assessment Rolls. -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2016-78 A RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED, ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT, AND CALLING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the 2016 Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements including street, drainage and utility improvements of Kelvin Avenue North from CSAH 14 to north cul- de-sac, Kirkwood Avenue North from 50th Street to north cul-de-sac, 9th Street North, Jasmine Avenue Place North, and Jasmine Avenue North form CSAH 10 to Stonegate 1st Addition limits; and WHEREAS, the total cost of the improvements will be $1,285,400; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk and City Engineer have prepared the proposed assessment roll and will maintain said assessment roll on file in the City offices for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 1. The portion of the cost of such street it to be paid by the City is hereby declared to be $717,500, and the portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $401,700. 2. The portion of the cost of such watermain improvements to be paid by the City is hereby declared to be $83,500, and the portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $82,700. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer, has calculated the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvements against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land to be benefited by the improvements, and the Clerk has filed a copy of such proposed assessment in the City offices for public inspection. 4. Assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over 10 years for streets and 15 years for watennain, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2017, and shall bear interest at the rate of 2.68 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of the assessment resolution. 5. A public hearing shall be held on the 18th day of October, 2016, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at or approximately after 7:00 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessment. All persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 6. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and she shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. She shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Resolution No. 2016-XX 7. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the entire assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Clerk. No interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the assessment. A property owner may at any time thereafter, pay to the City Clerk the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year ADOPTED BY TIIE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE TWENTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016. (Seal) ATTEST: Julie Johnson City Clerk Resolution No. 2016-XX CITY OE LAKE ELMO By: Mike Pearson Mayor CITY OF LAKE ELMO NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT 2016 STREET, DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Lake Elmo will meet in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at or approximately after 7:00 P.M. on Tuesday, October 18, 2016, to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment against abutting property for the 2016 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvement. Adoption by the Council of the proposed assessment may occur at the healing. The following describes the area proposed to be assessed: Street Improvements: Kirkwood Avenue North road reconstruction from 50th Street North to the north cul-de-sac. Street Improvements: Kelvin Avenue North road reconstruction from CSAH 14 to the north cul-de-sac. Street Improvements: Resurfacing the street through a street reclaim within the Stonegate Ist Addition consisting of 9th Street North; Jasmine Avenue Place North; and Jasmine Avenue North from 10th Street (CSAH 10) to Julep Avenue North. Water System Improvements: Extension of a trunk municipal water system along Kelvin Avenue North from Stillwater Lane North to Kelvin Court North. Water System Improvements: Extension of a lateral municipal water system along Kelvin Avenue North from Kelvin Court North to the northern cul-de-sac. You may at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor on November 18, 2016, pay the entire assessment on such property to the City Clerk with interest accrued to the date of payment. No interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid to the City Clerk 30 days from the adoption of this assessment, You may at any time thereafter, pay to the City Clerk the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 (date assessment certified to County Auditor) or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. If you decide not to prepay the assessment before the date given above the rate of interest that will apply is 2.68 percent per year. Once assessments are certified to the County, the assessments are payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 10 years for street improvements and 15 years for wateimain improvements, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2017, and will bear interest at the rate of 2.68 percent per annum from the date of adoption of the assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of the assessment resolution until December 31, 2016. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the City Clerk's office. The total amount of the proposed street improvement assessment is $401,700. The total amount of the proposed water system improvement assessment is $82.700. The City contributionfor the overall improvement project is $801,000. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with the municipal clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The Council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the district court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City Council is authorized in its discretion to defer the payment of an assessment for any homestead property owned by a person for whom it would be a hardship to make payment if the owner is 65 years of age or older andfor the owner is a person retired by virtue of a permanent and total disability or by a person who is a member of the Minnesota National Guard or other military reserves who is ordered into active military service, as defined in section 190.05 subdivision 5b or 5c, as stated in the person's military orders, for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments. The owner must request a deferment of the assessment at or before the public healing at which the assessment is adopted and make application on forms prescribed by the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption. Notwithstanding the standards and guidelines established by the City for determining a hardship, a deferment of an assessment may be obtained pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 435.193. DATED: September 20, 2016 BY ORDER OF THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor (Published in the Oakdale -Lake Elmo Review on September 28, 2016) CITt LAKE ELMO, MN. SEPTEMBER 2016 NO. NAME 1 COMMON GROUND CHURCH 2 FRENIER ANTOINE & ANDREA MEYER 3 HEDQUIST RICHARD A & PATRICI 4 CHRISTENSEN CYNDIE 5 ROGERS WILLIAM J & JUDY D 6 RICCARDI JOHN L & HEATHER A 7 RICCARDI JOHN L & HEATHER A 8 CHAVEZ JOSE & JOAN 5 9 LINDER ALBERT R & JUDITH A 10 SCHILTGREN ROBERT J TRS & MARY J HOGAN-SCHILTGREN TR 11 PAULSON DONALD V & PHYLLIS K 12 KASK EARLE L & FREYA L 13 L005 DAVID 5 & WENDY 14 GROPPOLI JUSTIN 15 CURRAN PATRICK A & DIANE J 16 CURRAN PATRICK A & DIANE J 17 FRIEDERICH WILLIAM & CHRISTIN 18 GIBBONS JAMES C & JEANNE M BEAUBIEN STREET IN. .OVEMENTS KELVIN AVENUE NORTH FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL 10240 10240 3440 3464 3490 3503 3503 3505 3508 3509 3533 3551 3567 3597 3607 3607 3691 3681 STILLWATER STILLWATER KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN ADDRESS BLVD N LN N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 PID 1402921320024 1402921320016 1402921320014 1402921320013 1402921320012 1402921240002 1402921240006 1402921240005 1402921320019 1402921240011 1402921240007 1402921240009 1402921240010 1402921240008 1402921240012 1402921240013 1402921230003 2 292140003........ TOTAL 1 of 1 AMOUNT 13,200.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100, 00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100.00 5,100,00 5,100.00 5,100.00 99,900,00 CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MN. SEPTEMBER 2016 NO. NAME 1 COMMON GROUND CHURCH 2 FRENIER ANTOINE & ANDREA MEYER 3 HEDQUIST RICHARD A & PATRICI 4 CHRISTENSEN CYNDIE 5 ROGERS WILLIAM] & JUDY D 6 LINDER ALBERT R & JUDITH A 7 SCHILTGREN ROBERT! TRS & MARY J HOGAN-SCHILTGREN TR 8 PAULSON DONALD V & PHYLLIS K 9 KASK EARLE L & FREYA L 10 LOOS DAVID 5 & WENDY 11 GROPPOLI JUSTIN 12 CURRAN PATRICK A & DIANE J WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS KELVIN AVENUE NORTH FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL 10240 10240 3440 3464 3490 3508 3509 3533 3551 3567 3597 3607 STILLWATER STILLWATER KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN KELVIN ADDRESS BLVD N LAKE ELMO LN N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO AVE N LAKE ELMO 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 PID 1402921320024 1402921320016 1402921320014 1402921320013 1402921320012 1402921320019 1402921240011 1402921240007 1402921240009 1402921240010 1402921240008 1402921240012 TOTAL PAGE 1 of 1 AMOUNT 5,800.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 2,900,00 11,900.00 11,900.00 11,900.00 11,900.00 11,900.00 82,700.00 C11 , ..iF LAKE ELMO, MN, SEPTEMBER 2016 NO. NAME TRS ANTHONY P MANZARA 2 WAYNE MAURICE HECTOR TR5 ETAL 3 THOMPSON CARMEN M 4 KRISTENSON ALLAN J & JACQUEL 5 HESSE RICHARD D & ROSALIE M 6 BASARA DOUGLAS 1 & ELIZABETH J 7 LAATSCH JOHN M & MARY CANE LAATSCH STREET li,,. MOVEMENTS KIRKWOOD AVENUE NORTH FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL 5050 5110 5170 5230 5235 5300 5760 KiRKWOOD KIRKWOOD KIRKWOOD KIRKWOOD KIRKWOOD KIRKWOOD KIRKWOOD ADDRESS AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 PID 0202921430002 0202921430003 0202921430004 0202921430005 0202921420001 0202921420002 0202921420003 TOTAL 1of1 AMOUNT 11,700,00 11,700,00 11,700,00 11,700.00 46,800.00 11, 700,00 11,700.00 17,000.00 CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MN. SEPTEMBER 2016 NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NAME MONTEITH CURTIS & DEBRA BETZ DOUG M & AMY M CITY OF LAKE ELMO HOHENWALD MARK YANG KAY MORREALE JAY B & PAMELA J PETER WALLRICH TIMOTHY W & MARILEE A HENDERSON RANDALL T & GLORIA A INTIHAR KEVIN & WINDY LANCETTE MICHAEL & KATHLEEN BONFE ANTHONY W & MARY E SKARDAJAMES R & PATRICIA L YANG DAO G & NALY T JOHNSON GEORGE N & MARY JAN LARSON SEAN D & LINDA M KOLLER DANIEL G & BARBARA M JOHN M & KRISTINA W HEILI TRS FITZGERALD THOMAS & MARY OLSON ROBBI J & JILL M 2015-3 IHA BORROWER LP LEARN JAMES W JR & JOAN E SHERRITT BRUCE C & MICHELLE M STADICK DANIEL P & JEANNE M MILNAR GREGORY B & BEVERLY B VU MAIXI & TCHUNENG NELSON DAVID M & MARYBETH H TAYLOR KRISTINAJ MONICO GINO A & PEGGI A ISRAELSON RONALD J & COLLEEN A SMORCH TERRANCE M MITCHELL SMISEK SUPP NEEDS TRS MEYER DALE J & GERNES-MEYER & BERNIECE L GERNES-ME MOREY DARRELL W & CHARLOTTE STREET IMPROVEMENTS STONEGATE 1ST ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL 331 JULEP 371 JULEP 750 JASMINE 755 JASMINE 770 JASMINE 785 JASMINE 790 JASMINE 820 JASMINE 829 JASMINE 832 JASMINE 854 JASMINE 868 JASMINE 974 JASMINE 867 JASMINE 871 JASMINE 873 JASMINE 875 JASMINE 877 JASMINE 881 JASMINE 883 JASMINE 887 JASMINE 9023 9TH 9034 9TH 9073 9TH 9106 9TH 9123 9TH 9179 9TH 9251 9TH 9314 9TH 9323 9TH 9386 9TH 9391 9TH 2749 HENSLOG ADDRESS AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE N AVE PL N AVE PL N AVE PL N AVE PL N AVE PL N AVE PL N AVE PL N AVE PL N ST N ST N ST N 5T N ST N ST N ST N ST N ST N ST N ST N AVE LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO LAKE ELMO OAKDALE 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55042 55128 PID 3402921230012 3402921230013 3402921230002 3402921230010 3402921230005 3402921230009 3402921230016 3402921230015 3402921230006 3402921220010 3402921220009 3402921220008 3402921220001 3402921220011 3402921230007 3402921230008 3402921240002 3402921240001 3402921210003 3402921210010 3402921210009 3402921220004 3402921220003 3402921220005 3402921220002 3402921220006 3402921220007 3402921210008 3402921210004 3402921210007 3402921210005 3402921210006 3402921220012 TOTAL PAGE 1 of 1 AMOUNT 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600,00 5,600,00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600,00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600,00 5,600.00 5,600.013 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600,00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 5,600,00 5,600.00 184, 800.00 DATE: September 20, 2016 REGULAR ITEM #30 RESOLUTION #2016-77 AGENDA ITEM: Approve 2017 Preliminary General Fund & Library Fund Annual Budge and Tax Levy SUBMITTED BY: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director THROUGH: Cathy Bendel, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Finance Committee SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item Finance Director Report/Presentation...................Finance Director/Finance Cotrunittee Chair 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 Director and Finance Committee FISCAL IMPACT: NA SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Pursuant to State law regarding the adoption of the Preliminary 2017 General Fund and Library Fund Levy, the City Council is asked to approve the Preliminary 2017 Annual Budget and Levy for these two funds. It is recommended that the City Council pass Resolution 2016-77, thereby approving the Prelimincny 2017 General Fund and Library Fund Annual Budget's and Levies by undertaking the following motion: "Move to approve Resolution No. 2016-77 adopting thepreliininaiy 2017 General Fund and Library Fund Annual Budget's and Levies" -- page City Council Meeting [Regular Agenda Rem #27J September 20, 2016 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo has both the legal and fiduciary authority and responsibility under Minnesota State Statute to adopt a Preliminary 2017 General Levy. Typically the City Council adopts a Preliminary Annual Budget at the same time. Following such adoption, the City Council may lower, but not raise the General and Library Levies and a final Levy and Budget must be adopted by December 28t1), 2016. STAFF REPORT: There were two joint meetings with the Finance Committee and the City Council on July 19, 2016 and August 10, 2016 to review the 2017 budget for the City of Lake Elmo General Fund. The Finance Committee met on September 13, 2016 and made additional recorrunendations. At the September 14, 2016 Library Board meeting, the Library Board will be reviewing an in-depth budget and Levy presentation for 2017 related to the Library Fund. As a result of those meetings, the Finance Committee is recommending that the City Council approve the attached Preliminary Annual Budget for the General Fund and adopt the 2017 Levies as summarized in Resolution 2016-77. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council pass Resolution 2016-77, thereby approving the Preliminary 2017 General Fund and Library Fund Annual Budget's and Levies by undertaking the following motion: "Move to approve Resolution No. 2016-77 adopting the preliminary 2017 General Fund and Library Fund Annual Budget's and Levies" ATTACHMENT: 1. Resolution No. 2016-77 2. Preliminary 2017 General Fund Budget 3. Preliminary 2017 Library Fund Budget 4. Tax Impact Work Sheet -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2016-77 RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED 2016 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 2017 AND PROPOSED 2017 BUDGET WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted budget workshops and meetings to review the 2016 Tax Levy, collectible in 2017, and the proposed 2017 General Fund and 2017 Library Fund Budgets; and WHEREAS, the City is required to adopt a proposed budget for payable 2017 and certify its proposed property tax levy payable in 2017. BE IT RESOLVED that the City adopts the proposed 2017 General Fund and Library Fund Budgets, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Lake Elmo, County of Washington, Minnesota that the following proposed sums of money be levied for the current year, collectible in 2017, upon taxable property in the City of Lake Elmo, for the following purposes: Total General Fund Levy $1,998,847 Total G.O. Debt Levy $ 824,622 Library Levy $ 256,957 Total Levy $3,080,426 BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Washington County, Minnesota. ADOPTED, by the Lake Elmo City Council on the 20th day of September, 2016. Mike Pearson Mayor ATTEST: Julie Johnson City Clerk City of Lake Elnto Budget 21117 'Based on 244 new homes) Account Number GENERAL-1-1,1ND Revenues Property Taxes/Franchise Fees 101-000.0000-31010 101-000-0000-31 020 101-000,0000-31030 101-000-0000-31040 101-000 G000-31910 101-000-0000-33622 Description Current Ad Valorem Taxes Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes Mobile Home Tax Fiscal Disparities Penalty & Interest on Taxes Cable Franchise Revenue Total Property Taxes/Franchise Fccs Licenses and Permits 101-0004.1000-32110 101-000-0000-32180 101-000-0000-32181 101-000-0000-32183 101-000-0000-32210 101-000-0000-32220 101-000-0000-32230 101-000-0000-32240 101-000-0000-32250 101-000-0000-32260 101-000-0000-32270 101-000-0000-322S0 101-000-0000-34104 Liquor License Wastehauler License General Contractor License Heating Contractor License Building Permits Healing Permits Plumbing Permits Animal License Utility Permits Burning Permit Massage Thentpy Electrical Permits Plan Check Fees Total Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental 101-000-0000-33418 101-000-0000-33420 101-000-0000-33422 1014)00-0000-33426 101-000-0000-33621 Total Inlergovernmental Charges for Services 1014/004/000-34103 101-000-0000-34105 101-000-0000-34107 10 I-00041000-34109 101-000-0000-3411 I MSA - Maintenance State Fire Aid PERA Aid Miscellaneous State Grants Recycling Grant Zoning .& Subdivision Fees Sale of Copies, Books, Maps Assessment Searches Clean Up Days Cable Operation Reimbursement Total Charges for Services 2014 Actual 2015 2016 Actual Budget 62,237,110 52 /04,429 $14,986 $30,473 $15,708 $113,874 $140,432 $179,607 $9,002 5725 S41,602 $68,129 2016 Projected Actual 2016 2017 to 2017 13ut18ct Change $2,033,198 $2,078,420 $1,809,875 -12.9% 515,000 $14,394 $15,000 4.2% $12,000 515,054 612,000 -20.3% $157,508 $157,508 5161,272 2.4% $700 5881 $700 -20.5% 545,000 598,218 67,2,000 -26,7% $2,458.841 $2,502,237 52,263,406 $2,364,475 52,070,847 -12.4% $150 $8,350 511.000 $9,825 $2,400 $-480 51,680 $2,400 $100 $0 SO $150 $4,920 $3,950 $2,500 $3,400 $225,801 $422,316 6508,200 $752,677 523,004 634,359 538,000 5108,159 S21.914 S42,662 646,800 572,833 52,569 52,116 62.500 $1,855 $26,427 559,033 525,000 $50,845 $1,650 .S1,530 52.,750 $2,400 $200 $200 5I50 675 $6,109 $9,257 SO 631 $135,816 $242,970 $278,129 $399,305 $9.000 -8,4% $1,000 -58,3% $150 0.9% $2.850 -16,2% $808,157 7.455 $44,820 -58.6% $44,820 -38.5% S1,720 -7,3% S33,000 -35.1% $3,750 56.3% $100 33.3% SO -100.0% $513,002 23.5% 6451,119 227.222 $916,709 51,403,955 $1,462.369 4.2% $101,696 $119,464 S53,446 $58,166 $2,749 $2,749 517,692 527,864 S15,500 $15.688 S101,696 5I23,433 $41,500 $47,000 $2,749 $2,749 $5,064 $4,401 $15,500 515,688 5191.083 $223.931 5166,509 $193.271 528,69I $29,035 $301 St 16 51.200 $3,030 $0 $3,615 $2.500 $3,783 S27,500 S20,340 5175 $192 $1,215 $3,245 $2,000 SO $4,000 54,000 $130,838 -6.055 $47.000 0.0% $2,749 0.0% $4,820 -9.5% $15,688 0.055 5201,095 4.05' S23,000 11 1 '14i 5280 45.6% $1,395 -57„0% SO 0.0% $4,000 0,095 S32.692 $39.579 534,890 627,777 528.675 3.2% Fines 101-000-0000-35100 Fines Total Fines Other 101-000-0000-36200 NEW NEW Moved from seater timd 101-000-0000-36201 101-000-0000-36204 10 1-000-0000-36210 101-000-0000-36230 Miscellaneous Revenue ISD Service Fee in lieu of Taxes Fire Sprinkler Alarm Revenue Water Tower Revenue Internal Charges (Libraty proc fee) Fire Billable Revenue Interest Earnings Donations Total Other Total Revenues Other Financine Sources 10 I-000-0000-39200 Translir In Total Other Financing Sources Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources 548.739 545,000 $49,235 S46,500 -$ $45.647 548.739 $45.000 549..235 546.500 -5.6% $125,050 82,875 53.500 54,552 $4,000 - Ill% NA NA NA NA $31,500 100.011/o NA NA NA NA $15,000 100,0% NA NA NA NA $46,000 100,0% 5818 $422 50 $10 SO -I00.09,5 511,285 5500 $500 5500 $500 0 PA 571,813 523,501 555,000 555,000 $40,000 -77.3% 5I 1,000 50 50 510,000 510,000 0.0% $219,966 527.298 $59,000 570,062 5147,000 109.8% $3,402,347 $3,669.007 53,485.514 54,108,776 53,956.486 -3.78/0 50 SO SO 50 50 N/A $0 SO SO $0 $0 N/A 53,402,347 $3,669,007 53,485,514 S4,108,776 $3.956,486 -3.7% 77,5% 7.45' 41.795 7.8% City of Lake Elmo Bud,2et 2017 (Base(I on 244 new homes) Dept Number Description GENERAL FUND Etpenditures lw Procram & Department General Governineni 1110 Mayor & Council 1320 ,Administration 1410 Elections 1520 Finance 1910 Planning & Zoning 1930 Engineering Services 1940 City Hall Total General Government Public Safety 2100 Police 2150 Prosecution 2220 Fire 2250 Fire Relief 241X/ Building Inspection 2500 Etnergency Communications 2700 Animal Control TOW! Public Sifly l'ublic Works 3100 l'ublic Works 3120 Streets 3125 Ice & Snow Rcrnosal 3160 Street Lighting 3200 Recycling 3250 Tree Program Total Public Works Culture & Recreation 5200 Parks & Recreation Total Culture & Recreation 2016 2016 2014 21115 2016 Projected 2017 ilu 2017 Actual Actual Budget Actual Budget Change S39,896 $49,196 $45,955 555,797 $46,893 -1 5,96% $456,912 6533,0-13 3360,998 3592,720 5508,168 -14.27% $9,875 51,880 615,800 315,947 $1,200 -92,48% $161,541 $119,300 $124,835 5130,771 $124,837 -4.5490 $252,799 $231,199 $284,632 $276,623 6375,503 17,67`!4, S36,312 S32,942 548,000 $36,024 $36,000 -0.07% 62.6,355 561,000 355,082 $67,122 $63,654 -5.175i, $983,691 $1,028.560 5935.353 31,175,004 $1.106,256 -5.85% $515,604 $527,462 $527,060 $527,695 $642,433 21.74% $54,-166 $55,710 $54,700 $44,151 643,200 -2,15% 3400,709 5368,658 $377,232 5377,966 3368.824 -7,47% 353,446 358,166 537,323 347,000 347,000 0,00% 5143,283 5183,079 3260,766 6209,897 $335,984 60.07% S3.373 $3,745 57,400 $5,595 65,395 -3,57% $10,086 511,415 $7,550 58.200 S7,725 -5,795'. S1,180,968 51,208,235 $1,272,031 $1,220,504 51,450,561 18.85% 5386,213 3337,440 3411,285 $478.609 3474,595 -0.845', $49,978 $228.735 $413,000 5409,622 $467,500 14.1351, 5104.346 $87,170 687250 $74,402 376,250 2,185', 372.614 $25,910 326,400 $25,783 326.400 2.39% 35,224 S568 35,900 $3,165 SO -100.00% 35,350 $1,500 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 0.0051, 3573.727 $681,373 $944,835 $992,560 $1.045,745 5.36% $207,178 5219.277 5231.320 $198,827 3251.529 26.51% $207,178 $719,272 32.31.320 3198,827 $25 L.529 26.5151, IT & Telephone S4S,., .,, $66,819 581,976 $83,310 567,396 -19,10% 9000 Compensation Adjustment SO SU 520.000 S20.000 $35,000 75.00% Debt Service Increase 521,632 $247,115 SO SO SO 100,00% Transrer to Cily Projects (streets) 5130,000 50 SO SO SO 0,00% Other Financing 5200,000 5200,000 $0 50 SO 0.00% Total Expenditures S3,345,709 $3,651,377 S3,455,515 51690,225 $3,956,456 722% 2016 Full Year Budget 2016 Year To Date as of 7/31 2016 Projections 2017 Draft Budget Notes REVENUE Current Ad Valorem Taxes 5256,957,00 $128,478.00 $256,957,00 5256,957.00 Rental Income $0,00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 Interest Earning $0.00 $0,00 $0.00 $0.00 Miscellaneous Revenue 50,00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Donation $0.00 $10,970.00 515,000.00 $4,000.00 Total Revenue $256,957.00 5139,448.00 $271,957.00 $260,957,00 EXPENSE FT Salaries $46,311.00 $27,517.65 549,500,00 PT Salaries $26,260.00 $14,071,88 $26,000 00 PERA Contributions 54,277.00 $3,119.23 $4,700,00 FICA Contributions $3,479.00 52,482.73 $3,800.00 Medicare Contributions $814.00 $580.68 $850.00 Health/Dental Insurance 514,144.00 $8,160.00 514,351.60 Unemployment Benefits 50.00 $0,00 50.00 Workers Compensation 50.00 $0.00 50,00 library Service Supplies 51,100.00 $0.00 5600.00 Office Supplies 53,600.00 51,592.02 $2,500k0 library Collection Maintenance $42,811.00 542,157,56 555,000.00 Legal Services $1,500.00 53,358.00 $3,800.00 Contract Services 56,000.00 $0.00 $1,200.00 Telephone 51,560.00 $1,119.13 $1,800.00 Internet 51,800.00 5676.28 $1,800.00 Information Technology (Equinox) 53,100.00 $0,00 53,100.00 Information Technology Network Maintenance 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 Software 50,00 50.00 50.00 Insurance $2,000.00 $1,637.00 $2.000.00 Utilities 57,500,00 53,344.08 58,000.00 Refuse 5600.00 $569,34 $1,000,00 Repair/Maint Bldg 512,000,00 $17,926.75 522,000.00 Repair/Maint NOT Bldg $0.00 $94.42 51.00.00 Repair/Maint Eqlp (out-tH Imp 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 library Card Reimbursements $12,000.00 $18,004.67 $28,000.00 WA Cty service fee 59,300.00 $0.00 $0.00 Library service improvements 546,000.00 $0.00 50.00 Miscellaneous $1,800.00 $369.94 $800,00 Building Purchase Repayment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Building Property Tax $1,000.00 $0,00 $1,000.00 Other Equipment $0,00 50.00 $0.00 Subscriptions $0.00 50.00 Sam Conferences &Training 53,500.00 50.00 $700,00 Programs 54,500.00 $0.00 $4,000,00 Internal Charges 50,00 $10.00 5100.00 Associate Library Charges Equipment $0.00 $0.00 ? ? Associate Library Charges Service Charges $0.00 $0.00 ? 7 Total library 5256,956,00 5146,791.36 $237,011.60 $49,995.00 111 pay increase 527,047,80 311 pay increase $4,555.00 53,895.00 5910,00 $14,500,00 50.00 5350.00 $1,500.00 $3,500.00 555,000.00 includes new computers and added database 54,000,50 $6,000.00 $1,800,00 $2,000.00 53,200.00 $0,00 $0.00 52,700,00 58,000,00 5600.00 $30,000.00 includes $15000 in building improvements $0.00 $0.00 $32,000.00 $0 00 $0.00 51,00000 50.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 56,000.00 $500 00 5261,052.80 Restroorn and parking lot costs not included in 2016 projections Proposed Pay 2017 Property Tax Impact Worksheet Taxing District: STEP 1 - Calculate the Taxing District's Tax Rate: Item 1. Levy before reduction for state aids 2. State Aids 3. Certifed Property Tax Levy 4. Fiscal Disparity Portion of Levy 5. Local Portion of Levy 6. Local Taxable Value 7. Local Tax Rate 8. Market Value Referenda Levy 9, Fiscal Disparity Portion of Levy (SD only) 10. Local Portion of Levy 11. Referenda Market Value 12. Market Value Referenda Rate 2017 is ESTIMATE 2017 f.TS firv7A 0800 Lake Elmo 1 Actual Pay 2016 (A) $3,112,204 $0 $3,112,204 $157,509 $2,954,695 12,7/9,339 23.121% $0 so $0 1,175.046,100 0.00000% Proposed Pay 2017 (B) $3,080,426 $0 $3,080,426 $101,2777 $2,919,154, 13,995,905 20.857% $0, $0 $0 1,278,432,400 0.00000% STEP 2 - Calculate the Impact of the Taxing District's Rate on Residential Homestead Taxes: 13. Assumes a 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. ID) 2 1% (Et change in market value from 2016 to 2017, which is the city median change. IF) Market Homestead Tax ng Value Market Taxable District Before Value Market Tax Portion of Exclusion Exclusion_ Value Capacity Tax Pay 2016 MV 368,100 97,900 146,900 244,900 391,800 Actual Pay 2016 76,000 @40% 500,000@1.0% - rem @ 9% (D)- (E) 1 rem @ 1.25% 4,100 I 364,000 3,640 28,400 I 69,500 695 24,000 I 122,900 1,229 15,200 I 229,700 2,297 2,000 I 389,800 . 3,898 Pay 2017 MV X 1.021 375,800 100.000 I 150,000 I 250,000 I 400.000 Proposed Pay2017 76,000 @40% - rem (it) 9% 3,400 28,200 23,700 14,700 1,200 (D) - (E) 372,400 71,800 126,300 235,300 398,800 (A7 x G) (Al2 X D) $841,60 $160.69 $284,16 $531.09 $901,26 500,000@1.0% (B7 x G) + Tax Increase rem @ 1.25% (B12 x D) (Decrease) 3,724 1 5776.71 ($64,89) 718 $149.75 1,263 I $263,42 2,353 I $490.77 3,988 $831.78 Percentage Change from 2016 to 2017 2.3% 2.3% 3 . 3°/0 3.3% 2.8% 2.8% 2.4% 2.4% 2.3% 2.3% 7 0.0%, 2.4% 9.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0°/. 8,7% Instructions for Calculating a Residential Homestead Property Tax: D. Market Value of Residential Homestead Assumes that the Pay 2U17market value changed from Pay 2018by21"& Countywide, the median change in market value from Pay 2016 to Pay 2017 is 1A E. Calculate the Homestead Market Value Exclusion, 40%ufthe first 78.O0Oofmarket value (D).reduced by8%onthe market value over 7O.O00 The exclusion decreases as the market value over 76,000 increases, until a 413,300 home receives 0 exclusion, F. Calculate Taxable Market Value Market Value before Exclusion (D) - Homestead Market Value Exclusion (E). G. Calculate the Net Tax Capuciu/vfaResidential Homestead Pay2V16: 1o,500.00Ouf(F)Taxable Market Value &y1.00%.remainder @125% Pay2O17: 1at5O0.00Oof(F)Taxable Market Value @ 1.80%. nemoinder@ 1.25.& H. Calculate the TaxnpDistrict's Portion nfthe Tax Poy2U10: multiply the Pay 2O1Onet tax capacity (G)bythe Pay 2016 tax capacity local tax rate (A7).p|un multiply the Pay 2U16market value before exclusion (D)bythe Pay 2O1Gmarket value tax rate (Al2) Pay2U17: multiply the Pay 2017net tax capacity (G)bythe Pay 2017tax capacity local tax rate (B7).plus multiply the Pay 2017market value before exclusion (D)bythe Pay 2Q17market value tax rate (B12) 19-21 Line 19 will default to the median residential homestead value for the taxing authority for taxes payable in 2016. 24-28. Calculate the %inunoaoo@ocmasefrom 2V16to2017 There isnolonger ahomestead credit. The c, ditvvaedon-nawdutartingwitktaxespeyable in 2O12and was ep|axJ*Uhani?,k^t value exclusion for xnmeu(oadpropexy. TI11 CITY OF LAKE ELMO STAFF REPORT DATE: September 20, 2016 REGULAR ITEM #: 31 MOTION TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kristina Handt, City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: Job Classification and Compensation Study BACKGROUND: At the August 16, 2016 meeting, Council approved issuing a Request for Proposals for a Job Classification and Compensation Study. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Who should the City contract with for a Job Classification and Compensation Study? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The City received proposals from six firms. Springsted: $9,395 David Drown Associates, Inc: $11,250 Bjorklund Compensation Consulting: $12,350 Flaherty & Hood: 13, 800 Paypoint $15,000 Arthur J. Gallagher: $22,000 Staff reviewed the proposals and would recommend David Drown Associates, Inc. While they are not the lowest bidder, they would be able to complete the project by the end of January 2017. Springsted's timeline was 5 months and they would not be able to start until 3 weeks after notification. Staff feels it is important to have the study done by the end ofJanuary in order to timely file the Pay Equity Report with the state. Additionally, out of pocket expenses ($750) and possible additional meetings ($750) included in the Springsted proposal could make the difference in cost negligible. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost for the David Drown Associates Inc proposal would be $11,250. As of September 911, end of year budget projections included over $400,000 in excess revenues. Any fund balance not spent in 2016 will carry over into 2017 so staff is not asking for additional tax levy to complete this project. OPTIONS: I) Contract with David Drown Associates Inc for a Job Classification and Compensation Study 2) Contract with Springsted for a Job Classification and Compensation Study 3) Contract with another vendor for a Job Classification and Compensation Study 4) Do not contract with any vendor for a Job Classification and Compensation Study RECOMM ENDATION: Motion to contract with David Drown Associates Inc for a Job Classification and Compensation Study in an amount not to exceed 511,250 and authorize Mayor and Clerk to sign the contract. TI (TIV LAKE ELMO MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: September 20, 2016 REGULAR ITEM #: 32 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Process for City Administrator Review SUBMITTED BY: Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney REVIEWED BY: Julie Johnson, City Clerk BACKGROUND: The City's personnel policy and employee handbook sets forth a schedule for completing performance evaluations that requires City employees to be evaluated during the six month orientation period twice; once after three months and approximately one week prior to the end of the orientation period depending on scheduling. It is unclear whether or not this policy is intended to apply to the City Administrator as it calls for performance reviews to be conducted by the department head or the City Administrator and does not speak to the process with respect to situations where the City Administrator is being reviewed. It was mentioned in the minutes of the March 8, 2016 City Council meeting when the City approved the City Administrator's contract that a performance review after six months was suggested by one of the council members. The City Administrator's contract references that "[Ole Council will strive to review and evaluate the performance of [the City Administrator] annually." The contract language does not otherwise prohibit the City Council from conducting performance reviews at other times. A copy of the contract is included in the Council packet. As of September 28, 2016, the City Administrator will have been with the City for six months, ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Does the City Council wish to conduct a performance review of the City Administrator at this time? If so, when would the City Council like to conduct the performance review? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The decision whether or not the Council would like to conduct a performance review of the City Administrator is a decision that can be made by the Council in its sole discretion. RECOMMENDATION: If the Council would like to conduct a performance review, the date and time of the performance review should be scheduled by the Council at the meeting. A copy of a form that can be used to facilitate the review has been included in the Council packet. If the Council does not wish to conduct the performance review at this time, it may want to discuss when it thinks would be the appropriate time for it to conduct the performance review in the future. 48641 Ivl SJS LA515-I CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION This form should be completed by each member of the Council to evaluate the City Administrator's performance in each of the areas noted below. The City Administrator should also complete a self -evaluation utilizing the same form. Performance levels can be noted, based on the following scale: 1 = Poor (rarely meets expectations). 2 = Below Average (usually does not meet expectations). 3 = Satisfactory (meets performance expectations). 4 = Above Average (generally exceeds performance expectations). 5 = Excellent (almost always exceeds expectations and performs at very high standard). Each member of the Council should complete this document and forward it to the City Attorney, Sarah Sonsalla, by . The City Attorney will prepare a summary of the results that will be provided at the meeting that the Council can use to conduct the performance evaluation. Evaluation Period: March 28, 2016 TO: 1. PERSONAL Invests sufficient effort toward being diligent and thorough in the discharge of the duties of the City Administrator. Composure, appearance, and attitude fitting for an individual in this executive position. 2. PROFESSIONAL SKILLS AND STATUS Knowledgeable of current developments affecting the management field and affecting city governments. Has a capacity for and encourages innovation. Anticipates problems and develops effective approaches for solving them. RELATIONS WITH MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Carries out directives of the Council as a whole rather than those of any one Council member. Assists the Council on resolving problems at the administrative level to avoid unnecessary Council action. Responds to requests for information or assistance by the Council. Informs the Council of administrative developments. There is a relationship of trust between member of the Council and the 4861380 SJS LA515-I 4. POLICY EXECUTION Implements Council action in accordance with the intent of the Council. Supports the actions of the Council after a decision has been reached. Enforces City policies. Understands City's laws and ordinances. Reviews enforcement procedures periodically to improve effectiveness. Offers workable alternatives to the Council for changes in the law when an ordinance or policy proves impractical in actual administration. . REPORTING Provides the Council with reports concerning matters of importance to the City. Reports are accurate and comprehensive. Reports are generally produced through own initiative rather than when requested by the Council. Prepares a sound agenda which, prevents trivial administrative matters from being reviewed by the Council. 6. CITIZEN RELATIONS Responsive to complaints from citizens. Dedicated to the community and its citizens. Skillful with the news media, avoiding political positions and partisanship. Has the capacity to listen to others and to recognize their interests. Works well with others. Willing to meet with members of the community to discuss their concerns. Cooperates with neighboring communities. Cooperates with the County, State, and Federal governments. Cooperates with other organizations within the City. 7. STAFFING Recruits and retains competent personnel for City positions. Aware of staff weaknesses and works to improve their performance. Accurately informed and concerned about employee relations. SUPERVISION Encourages department heads to make decisions within their own jurisdictions without City Administrator approval, yet maintains general control of administrative operations. Instills confidence and initiative in subordinates and emphasizes support rather than restrictive controls for their programs. Has developed a friendly and informal relationship with City staff as a whole, yet maintains the prestige and dignity of the City Administrator's office. 486138v1 SJS LA515-I Evaluates personnel periodically, and points out management weaknesses and strengths. 9. FISCAL MANAGEMENT Makes the best possible use of available funds, conscious of the need to operate the City efficiently and effectively. Possesses awareness of the importance of financial planning and control. 10. What performance areas would you identify as areas where the City Administrator excels? Are there certain things that have impressed you about the City Administrator's performance? What were they? 11. What performance areas would you identify as needing improvement? Why? What constructive, positive ideas can you offer the City Administrator to improve these areas? 486138v1 SJS LA515-I 12. (Administrator Only) What goals for the upcoming year are to be accomplished? 13. Other Comments? 4S6138vl SJS LA515-I EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 2016, by and between the City of Lake Elmo, State of Minnesota, a municipal corporation, ("Employer"), and Kristina Handt, ("Employee"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Employer desires to employ the services of Employee as City Administrator of the City of Lake Elmo; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council (the "Council"), to provide certain benefits, establish certain conditions of employment and to set working conditions of the Employee; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Council to: (1) secure and retain the services of Employee and to provide inducement for Employee to remain in such employment; (2) to make possible full work productivity to assuring Employee's morale and peace of mind with respect to future security; (3) to act as a deterrent against malfeasance or dishonesty for personal gain on the part of Employee; and (4) to provide a just means for terminating Employee's services at such time as she may be Linable to fully discharge her duties or when Employer may otherwise desire to terminate her employment; and WHEREAS, Employee desires to accept employment as City Administrator of the City: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained in this Agreement, Employer and Employee agree as follows: Section 1. Duties. Employer agrees to employ Employee as City Administrator to perform the functions and duties specified in the City Code, and Minnesota Statutes Chapter 412, as amended, and to perform other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the Council may from time to time assign to Employee. Section 2. Term. A. The term of this Agreement is from March 28, 2016 to March 28, 2019 (the "Term"). For the convenience of Employer, Employee may hold over Employee's employment subsequent to the expiration of the Term until this Agreement is modified or superseded by a new employment agreement approved by Employee and the Council. During any holdover period, any such holding over shall also be subject to all other terms of this Agreement. if this contract is not renewed and Employee's employment is terminated as a result, Employee shall be entitled to Severance Pay as described in Section 3, paragraph A of this Agreement. B. Employee will serve at the will of the Council. Nothing in this Agreement prevents, limits or otherwise interferes with the right of the Council to terminate the services of Employee at any time, subject only to the provisions set forth in Section 3, paragraph A of this Agreement. C. Nothing in this Agreement prevents, limits or otherwise interferes with the right of the Employee to resign at any time, subject only to the provisions of Section 3, paragraph B, of this Agreement. D. Employee agrees to remain in the exclusive employ of Employer and neither to accept other employment nor to become employed by any other employer during the term of Employee's employment. The tens "employed" is not to be construed to include occasional teaching, writing, consulting or military reserve service performed on Employee's time off. Section 3. Termination and Severance Pay. A. To the extent- permitted by law, during the term of this Agreement, if the Employee is terminated by the Council and at that time Employee is willing and able to perform Employee's duties under this Agreement, then Employer agrees to pay Employee a lump sum cash payment equal to six months aggregate salary and to continue to provide and pay for the benefits described in Section 9. for a period of six months and in addition, Employee shall receive the cash equivalent of Employee's accumulated PTO pursuant to the City's Personnel Policy and Employee Handbook (collectively "Severance Pay"). If Employee is convicted of a crime involving theft or fraud as defined in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 169, as amended, or terminated for other conduct involving malfeasance or nonfeasance in office, gross misconduct. Employee's breach of any material obligations under this Agreement or any other agreement with Employer, Employee's willful or repeated failure or refusal to perform or observe Employee's duties, responsibilities and obligations to Employer, Employee's use of alcohol or drugs in a manner which affects the performance of the Employee's duties, responsibilities and obligations to Employer, or commission by Employee of any willful or intentional act which could reasonably be expected to injure the reputation of Employer or Employee, Employer shall have no obligation to pay Severance Pay. The Iump sum cash payment included in Severance Pay shall be paid in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 465.722, if applicable. B. Employee Vill give Employer 45 days' notice in advance of resignation. unless the parties agree to waive this notice. In the event that Employee resigns, Employer shall have no obligation to pay Severance Pay. C. In the event of the death of Employee, this Agreement shall terminate. Employee's heirs shall be only paid Employee's earned salary and accrued PTO not paid; any unpaid expense reimbursements; and any benefits payable under any life insurance policy maintained by Employer for the benefit of Employee, subject to the terms and conditions of such policy, Section 4. Availability for Duties. Employer and Employee acknowledge that it is critical for Employee to be available to perform Employee's duties on behalf of' Employer at Employer's principal place of business and other City job sites as necessary. Section 5. Salary. Employer agrees to pay Employee for Employee's services rendered pursuant hereto an annual salary of S107,500 payable in installments at the same time as other employees of the Employer are paid, effective as of March 28, 2016. Upon completion of the orientation period outlined in the City's Personnel Policy and Employee Handbook, September 28, 2016, Employee's annual salary will be $112,500. Employer agrees to increase the salary and other benefits of Employee in such amounts and to such extent as the Council may determine that it is desirable to do so on the basis of an annual performance evaluation of Employee. Section 6. Performance Evaluation. A. The Council will strive to review and evaluate the performance of Employee annually. The review and evaluation will be in accordance with specific criteria developed jointly by Employer and Employee. The criteria may be modified as the Council may from time to time determine in consultation with the Employee. B. The Council and Employee will annually define in writing the goals and performance objectives they jointly determine necessary for the proper operation of the City and the attainment of the Council's policy objectives and will further establish a relative priority among those various goals and objectives. The goals and objectives will generally be attainable within the time limitations as specified and the annual operating and capital budgets and appropriations provided. C. In carrying out the provisions of this Section, Council and Employee mutually agree to abide by the provisions of applicable state and federal law. Section 7. Outside Activities. Employee must not spend more than 10 hours per week in teaching, counseling or other non -Employer, non-military reserve connected business without prior approval of the Council. Section 8. PTO and Military Leave. A. Employee will accrue, and have credited to Employee's personal account, paid time off ("PTO") at the same rate and under the same conditions as other general employees of the Employer. Solely for the purposes of calculating PTO benefits, the Employee will be deemed to have completed her 5'1' year of employment as March 28, 2016. B. Employee shall be entitled to military reserve leave time pursuant to federal and state law and City policy. C. Employee's PTO account shall begin with a balance of 10 days at the time of hire. Section 9. Dental, Health and Life Insurance. Employer agrees to provide a benefits package that includes health, dental and life insurance along with other benefits as outlined in the City's Personnel Policy and Employee Handbook, Employee may use accumulated PTO for leave for Employee's self, and for any member of Employee's household regardless of marital status, for any of the events and circumstances stated in the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 C.F.R. Part 825). Such leave shall be administered pursuant to the applicable language of the City's Personnel Policy and Employee Handbook. Section 10. Dues, Subscriptions and Professional Development. Employer will pay for Employee's dues and related membership costs to the League of Minnesota Cities, MCMA and ICMA. In addition, the Employer will pay for Employee to attend the annual League of Minnesota Cities and MCMA conferences. In addition, the city will pay dues for one local service club, provided that routine attendance is made. Any out of state travel must be approved in advance by the City Council. Other dues, subscriptions, or conference attendance deemed desirable for Employees professional participation, growth and development may be paid if preapproved by the Council. 4 Section 11. Indemnification. Employer will defend, hold harmless and indemnify Employee against any tort, professional liability claim or demand or other legal action arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of Employee's duties as City Administrator. Employer will compromise and settle any claim or suit and pay the amount of any settlement, judgment or reasonable attorneys' fees rendered thereon consistent with Minnesota Statutes Section 466.07, as amended. Employer shall pay any costs and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the Employee to defend charges of a criminal nature brought against Employee that arose out of the reasonable and lawful performance of duties for the City as provided in Minnesota Statutes Section 465.76, as amended, Section 12. Bonding. Employer will bear the full cost of any fidelity or other bonds required of the Employee under any law or ordinance. Section 13. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment. A. The Council, in consultation with Employee, may fix such other terms and conditions of employment as it may determine from time to time relating to the performance of Employee, provided those terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provisions of this Agreement, the City Code or any other law, B. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, all provisions of the City Code, and regulations and rules of the Employer relating to PTO, retirement and pension system contributions, holidays and other fringe benefits and working conditions as they now exist or hereafter may be amended, apply to Employee as they would to other employees of Employer. Section 14. Notices Notices pursuant to the agreement are given by deposit in the custody of the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: (1) EMPLOYER: (2) EMPLOYEE: City of Lake Elmo Attn: City Clerk 3800 Laverne Avenue N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Kristina Handt 1314 Island Drive Forest Lake, MN 55025 Alternatively, notices required pursuant to this Agreement may be personally served in the same manner as is applicable to process in a civil action, Notice shall be deemed given as of the date of personal service or as of the date of deposit of such written notice in the United States mail. Section 15. General Provisions. A. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior written and oral agreements between the parties. B. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of Employee. C. This Agreement may be amended at any time by mutual consent. of Employer and Employee. D. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts. E. This Agreement shall be interpreted pursuant to Minnesota law. F. The rights of Employee hereunder are personal and may not be assigned or transferred unless consented thereto in writing by Employer. G. The invalidity of any portion of this Agreement will not and shall not be deemed to affect the validity of any other provision. In the event that any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, the parties agree that the remaining provisions shall be deemed to be in full force and effect as if they had been executed by both parties subsequent to the expungement of the invalid provisions. H. The failure of either party to complain of any default by the other party or to enforce any of such party's rights, no matter how long such failure may continue, will not constitute a waiver of the party's rights under this Agreetnent. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of any other provision or a waiver of the same provision at any later time. 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Lake Elmo by its City Council has caused this Agreement to be executed and delivered in its behalf by its Mayor and duly attested by its City Clerk, and Employee has executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. Attest: Julie Jol on) Cit}, Clerk THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA EMPLOYER By MH Pear Its: Mayor EMPLOYEE 7