HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-21-17 Full Meeting Packet
NOTICE OF MEETING
City Council Meeting
Tuesday, November 21, 2017 7:00 P.M.
City of Lake Elmo | 3800 Laverne Avenue North
Agenda
A. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance
B. Approval of Agenda
C. Approval of Minutes
1. October 17, 2017; November 7, 2017
D. Public Comments/Inquiries
E. Presentations
F. Consent Agenda
2. Approve Payment of Disbursements
3. Accept October 2017 Assessor’s Report
4. Accept October 2017 Building Department Report
5. Accept October 2017 Fire Department Report
6. Accept October 2017 Public Works Department Report
7. I-94 Lift Station and Sanitary Sewer Improvements – Approve Pay Request No. 1
8. Old Village Phase 3 Street & Utility Improvements – Approve Pay Request No. 5
9. 2017 Street Improvements – Approve Pay Request No. 5
10. Accept Resignation of Building Inspector
11. Approve Appointment to Finance Committee
12. Approve 2018 Liquor License Renewals
13. Approve Lake Elmo Sod Farm Interim Use Permit – Resolution 2017-129
G. Regular Agenda
14. 2018 LMCIT Renewal
15. Wyndham Village Subdivision Sketch Plan Review & Comprehensive Plan Amendment
16. Debt Management Policy
17. Fund Balance Policy
H. Council Reports
I. Staff Reports and Announcements
J. Adjourn
Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible
Manner While Preserving the City’s Open Space Character
CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 17, 2017
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Councilmembers Justin Bloyer, Julie Fliflet, Jill Lundgren
and Christine Nelson Staff present: Administrator Handt, City Attorney Sonsalla, City Engineer Griffin, Planning Director Becker, and City Clerk Johnson. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Item 11, “Approve Increase to Lake Elmo Fire Relief Benefit” was moved to the beginning of the Regular Agenda. Item 7, “Approve Fall Newsletter” and Item 13, “Approve Conditional Use Permit for Increased Accessory Structures, 11459 60th St. N.” were moved to the Regular Agenda.
Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPROVE THE
AGENDA AS AMENDED. Motion passed 5 – 0. ACCEPT MINUTES Minutes of the September 19, 2017 and October 3, 2017 Regular Meetings were accepted as presented. Councilmember Lundgren abstained from approval of the October 3, 2017 minutes due to her absence from the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES
None
PRESENTATIONS None
CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements
3. Accept September 2017 Assessor’s Report
4. Accept September 2017 Building Department Report
5. Accept September 2017 Fire Department Report
6. Accept September 2017 Public Works Department Report
7. Approve Fall Newsletter (moved to the Regular Agenda)
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 17, 2017
Page 2 of 7
8. Authorize Issuance of Request for Proposals for Engineering Services
9. Authorize Issuance of Request for Proposals for Landscape Architecture Services
10. Accept Resignation of Public Works Operator Paulson and Authorize Advertising for the
position
11. Approve Increase to Lake Elmo Fire Relief Benefit (moved to the Regular Agenda)
12. Adopt Firefighter Declaration Resolution – Resolution 2017-108
13. Approve Conditional Use Permit for Increased Accessory Structures, 11459 60th St N –
Resolution 2017-116 (moved to the Regular Agenda)
14. Approve Lake Elmo Lake Improvement Matching Grant
15. Approve Private Development Security Reductions – Village Preserve 2nd Addition and
Easton Village 2nd Addition
16. I-94 Lift Station and Sanitary Sewer Improvements – Approve Change Order No. 1
17. Old Village Ph3 Street & Utility Improvements – Approve Change Order 3
18. Old Village Ph3 Street & Utility Improvements – Approve Pay Request No. 4
19. 2017 Mill and Overlay – Approve Compensating Change Order No. 2
20. 2017 Mill and Overlay – Approve Pay Request No. 1 (FINAL)
21. Approve Lions Park Change Order No. 2
Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Motion passed 5 - 0.
ITEM 7: Approve Fall Newsletter Councilmember Fliflet commented on the winter parking, library and budget articles in the
newsletter.
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved THAT THE CITY BE FULLY TRANSPARENT WITH THE RESIDENTS OF LAKE ELMO REGARDING THEIR TAX LEVY INCREASE, AND REPORT THA THE 2018 PRELMINIARY TAX LEVY WITHOUT TAKING CREDIT FOR A LIBRARY TAX REDUCTION AND ETHICALLY
STATE THE TRUE LEVY INCREASE IN TOTAL FOR RESIDENTS WHICH IS OVER 30%. Motion failed 2 – 3. (Pearson, Bloyer, Nelson – nay) Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED DRAFT AND TO AUTHORIZE PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE
SOURCE NEWSLETTER FOR THE WINTER OF 2017-2018. Motion passed 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay) ITEM 13: Approve Conditional Use Permit for Increased Accessory Structures, 11459 60th St. N.
City Planner Becker provided a brief overview of the request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the continued use of existing accessory structures on a parcel.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 17, 2017
Page 3 of 7
Councilmember Fliflet moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-116 APPROVING THE REQUEST FROM RICHARD, EILEEN AND CHAD BERGMANN FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN EXCESS OF THE PERMITTED TWO ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SIZE REQUIREMENTS IN THE RURAL
RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11459 60TH STREET NORTH SUBJECT TO RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL AND WAIVING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FEE. Motion died – no second.
Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
2017-116 APPROVING THE REQUEST FROM RICHARD, EILEEN AND CHAD BERGMANN FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN EXCESS OF THE PERMITTED TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SIZE REQUIREMENTS IN THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11459 60TH STREET NORTH SUBJECT TO RECOMMENDED
CONDITION OF APPROVAL. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 22: Zoning Text Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment and a Request for CUP to Allow Commercial Boarding Facility as an Accessory Use at 10880 Stillwater Blvd. N.
Planning Director Becker reviewed the details of the proposal and points for Council consideration.
Richard Rothstein spoke on behalf of the applicant, requesting clarification on points in the staff
report prepared for the Council Meeting. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO ALLOW DISCUSSION PRIOR TO A MOTION ON THIS MATTER. Motion withdrawn.
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 08-188 APPROVING A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL BOARDING FACILITY AS A CONDITIONAL ACCESSORY USE WITHIN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT. Motion failed 2 – 3. (Pearson,
Bloyer, Nelson – nay) Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-117 DENYING A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT TO REZONE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10880 STILLWATER BLVD N FROM RURAL DEVELOPMENT
TRANSITIONAL TO AGRICULTURAL. Motion passed 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren - nay) Councilmember Boyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-118 DENYING A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL BOARDING FACILITY AS A CONDITIONAL ACCESSORY USE
WITHIN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT. Motion passed 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay)
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 17, 2017
Page 4 of 7
Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-106 DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A COMMERCIAL BOARDING FACILITY AS AN ACCESSORY USE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
10880 STILLWATER BLVD. N. Motion passed 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay) Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-105 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING FEEDLOT WITHIN THE SHORELAND FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
10880 STILLWATER BLVD. N. SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL. Motion passed 2 – 1 -2. (Bloyer – nay; Fliflet, Lundgren – nay) Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-105. Motion passed 5 – 0.
Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-105 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING FEEDLOT WITHIN THE SHORELAND FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10880 STILLWATER BLVD. N. SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL. Motion passed 3 – 0 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – abstain) ITEM 23: 2017 Street Improvements - Assessment Hearing, Adoption of Final Assessment Roll
City Engineer Griffin reviewed the project details, reported on the final project cost and funding sources. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 5 – 0.
No public comments were submitted. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 5 – 0.
Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-109, ADOPTING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE 2017 STREET IMPROVEMENTS. Motion passed 5 – 0.
ITEM 24: Inwood Trunk Watermain Improvements – Assessment Hearing, Adoption of Final Assessment Roll City Engineer Griffin reviewed the improvement project and reported on final project costs and
funding sources.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 17, 2017
Page 5 of 7
Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 5 – 0. No public comments were submitted.
Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 5 – 0. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT
RESOLUTION 2017-110, ADOPTING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE
INWOOD TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 25: Old Village Phase 2 Improvements – Assessment Hearing, Adoption of Final Assessment Roll
City Engineer Griffin reviewed the scope of the improvements and assessment methodology. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 5 – 0.
Barbara Swanson, 11316 30th Street North, stated that residents were told in the past that if farmers developed land residents wouldn’t have to pay for sewer improvements.
City Administrator Handt noted two other assessment objections were received by the City prior
to the hearing. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 5 – 0.
Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT
RESOLUTION 2017-111, ADOPTING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE OLD VILLAGE PHASE 2 IMPROVEMENTS. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 26: Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concept Plan for Continental Properties
City Planner Becker provided information on the applicant and the proposal for a 300 unit multi-family development. Becker reviewed the comments held at the public hearing and the Planning Commission recommendations and also reported on comments from the Parks Commission and
Engineering.
Gwen Wheeler, Continental Properties, reviewed the site location, building designs, lighting, neighborhood amenities, resident profile and community benefits to the City.
Tucker Pearce, 9811 7th Street North, urged the Council to deny the request and stick to the
comprehensive plan.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 17, 2017
Page 6 of 7
Stefany Lorang, 9918 7th Street North, spoke in opposition of the comp plan amendment to increase density.
Mike Kobe, 9616 Junco Road North, spoke in opposition of the proposal, stating town homes
would be a better fit for the area. Kourtney Bryan, 618 Juniper Court North, asked the Council to follow the comp plan.
Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO SUSPEND THE RULES
REGARDING TIME ALLOWED FOR COUNCILMEMBERS TO SPEAK. Motion failed 3 – 1 – 1. (Fliflet - nay; Lundgren – abstain.) Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO REFER THE CURRENT AGENDA ITEM BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Motion passed 5 – 0.
ITEM 27: Variance for 8130 Hill Trail Planning Director Becker presented the request for a variance to allow an addition to an existing
home and relocation of the septic system. Becker reported on Planning Commission
recommendations and conditions of approval. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-115 APPROVING THE REQUEST FROM PETER AND ADRIENNE PAVEK FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE NOT
MEETING THE REQUIRED SETBACK FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER LEVEL
OR MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIRED WITHIN THE RURAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. Motion passed 5 – 0.
Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
2017-114 APPROVING THE REQUEST FROM PETER AND ADRIENNE PAVEK FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED SETBACKS FOR A SEPTIC SYSTEM FROM PROPERTY LINES, SHORELAND BLUFFLINE, ORDINARY HIGH WATER LEVEL AND NON-OCCUPIED STRUCTURE, SUBJECT TO RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL. Motion passed 5 – 0. COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Pearson: No report.
Councilmember Nelson: No report.
Councilmember Lundgren: Provided a reminder of the Lake Elmo Jaycees Halloween party.
Councilmember Bloyer: No report.
Councilmember Fliflet: No report.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 17, 2017
Page 7 of 7
STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Administrator Handt: Ribbon cutting for the Olson Lake Trail project will be held on
Saturday, October 21st.
City Clerk Johnson: No report.
City Attorney Sonsalla: Working on Hidden Meadows plat opinion.
Planning Director Becker: No report.
City Engineer Griffin: Working on review of three large plats.
Meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ATTEST: ______________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk
CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
NOVEMBER 7, 2017
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, Jill Lundgren and Christine
Nelson. ABSENT: Councilmember Bloyer. Staff present: Administrator Handt, City Attorney Sonsalla, City Engineer Griffin, Planning Director Becker, and City Clerk Johnson. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Item 2, “Approve Payment of Disbursements and Payroll”; Item 3, “Approve Job Description and Authorize Advertising for Finance Director”; Item 12, “Approve US Solar Subscription”; and Item 14, “Approve Massage Therapy License Renewals” were moved from Consent to the Regular
Agenda.
Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. Motion passed 4 – 0. ACCEPT MINUTES
Minutes of the October 17, 2017 Regular Meeting were tabled to the next meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES Virginia Pleban, 8245 59th Street North, encouraged residents to attend a holiday fundraiser at
the historic courthouse in Stillwater November 17 – 19.
Bill & Ceil Wicker, 11079 35th Street North, stated concerns regarding storm water draining
from the Shiltgen Farms to their property and asked the Council to consider correcting drainage
in conjunction with development of the property.
Mary Ann Beers, 3235 Lake Elmo Avenue North, requested a public forum to discuss the
Shiltgen Farm proposal to build an equestrian center.
Frank Squadrito, 3570 Laverne Avenue North, encouraged the City to look at solutions for the
flooding at the Wicker’s property.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
NOVEMBER 7, 2017
Page 2 of 5
Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33rd Street North, encouraged reconsideration of storm water
management in the downtown area and asked the Council to look at the Shiltgen proposal again.
PRESENTATIONS
None CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements and Payroll
3. Approve Job Description and Authorize Advertising for Finance Director
4. Accept Third Quarter Financials
5. Accept Donation from Lake Elmo Baseball – Resolution 2017-128
6. Authorize Certification of Delinquent Storm Water Utility Bills – Resolution 2017-119
7. Approve Annual Public Service Recognition Event, January 2018
8. Approve Master Joint Powers Agreement Authorized Agency and Court Data Services
Subscriber Amendment – Resolution 2017-120
9. Approve Appointment to Central Greenway Regional Trail Technical Advisory Committee
10. CSAH 15 & CSAH 14 Realignment – Approve Resolution of Support for the Local Road
Improvement Program Grant Application – Resolution 2017-121
11. Washington County DRAFT 2018-2022 Capital Improvement Plan – City Review and
Comments
12. Approve US Solar Subscription
13. Approve Zoning Map Amendment Rezoning City Parks – Ordinance 08-190
14. Approve Massage Therapy License Renewals – Renew/Recover Massage Therapy, Body &
Soul
15. Authorize Advertising and Hiring of Warming House Attendants
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Motion passed 4 - 0. ITEM 2: Approve Payment of Disbursements and Payroll
Brief discussion was held concerning an error in the cover memo. Administrator Handt clarified that the correct total for disbursements and payroll to be approved was $899,522.62.
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE
DISBURSEMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $899,522.62. Motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM 3: Approve Job Description and Authorize Advertising for Finance Director
Fiscal impacts were discussed briefly. Administrator Handt explained that the future use of the
current consulting firm will be determined after the pool of applicants is reviewed.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
NOVEMBER 7, 2017
Page 3 of 5
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO REMOVE BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AS APPROPRIATE EDUCATION ON THE JOB DESCRIPTION. Motion failed 2 – 2. (Pearson, Nelson – nay)
Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPROVE THE JOB DESCRIPTION AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING FOR THE FINANCE DIRECTOR POSITION. Motion failed 2 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay)
ITEM 12: Approve US Solar Subscription Peter Schmidt, US Solar, explained the program and potential cost savings to the City. Discussion was held concerning rates and length of the contract.
Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE THE US SOLAR
FLAT RATE SUNSCRIPTION AGREEMENT SUBJECT TO US SOLAR ASSIGNING IT TO A PROJECT FOR WHICH XCEL ENERGY HAS ALREADY GRANTED INTERCONNECTION APPROVAL. Motion passed 3 – 0 – 1. (Lundgren – abstain)
ITEM 14: Approve Massage Therapy License Renewals – Renew/Recover Massage Therapy, Body & Soul City Clerk Johnson reported that the applicants are both long standing businesses in Lake Elmo
with no known violations or issues.
Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPROVE MASSAGE THERAPY LICENSE RENEWALS FOR RENEW & RECOVER MASSAGE THERAPY AND BODY & SOUL MASSAGE THERAPY. Motion passed 4 – 0.
ITEM 16: Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment to Amend Language Regarding Allowable Density for Open Space Preservation Developments City Planner Becker presented background information on the application for a comprehensive
plan amendment and zoning text amendment
Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO POSTPONE THE CURRENT ITEM TO THE DECEMBER 5, 2017 MEETING AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT. Motion passed 3 – 1. (Nelson – nay)
ITEM 17: 2018 Street Improvements – Accept Feasibility Report, Call Public Improvement Hearing City Engineer Griffin presented findings of the 2018 Street Improvements feasibility report and
reviewed the scope of the proposed improvements and estimated project costs.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
NOVEMBER 7, 2017
Page 4 of 5
Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2017-125, RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE 2018 STREET IMPROVEMENTS. Motion passed 4 – 0.
ITEM 18: 2018 Health Insurance Plan and Rates Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-122. Motion failed 2- 1 – 1. (Fliflet - nay; Lundgren – abstain)
Councilmembers Fliflet and Lundgren stated that staff members have expressed concern to them regarding the plan and increased cost to the employees. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO BRING THE CURRENT ITEM TO A SPECIAL MEETING PRIOR TO THE NOVEMBER 14TH
COUNCIL WORKSHOP. Motion failed 2 – 2. (Pearson, Nelson- nay) ITEM 19: Easton Village 2nd and 3rd Addition Development Agreement Amendment Request
City Planner Becker presented the request from Chase Development for amendments to the Easton Village 2nd and 3rd Addition Development Agreements to all issuance of building permits prior to the installation of sidewalks.
Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, MOVED TO ADOPT
RESOLUTION NO 2017-126 AND 2017-127 DENYING THE REQUESTS TO AMEND
EASTON VILLAGE 2ND AND 3RD ADDITION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS TO ALLOW BUILDING PERMITS TO BE RELEASED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS. Motion passed 3 – 1. (Pearson – nay)
COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Pearson: Held conversations with residents and Washington County regarding joint projects. Attended the Library Board meeting and addressed the parking lot issue. Attended LMC insurance board meeting, Fields of St. Croix 2 HOA meeting and IEMC training. Thanked
individuals for donating their labor for the improvements at Lions Park.
Councilmember Nelson: Attended 3 day IEMC training, fielded calls and emails from residents.
Councilmember Lundgren: Attended the Planning Commission workshop and Comp Plan Advisory Board meeting.
Councilmember Fliflet: Spoke with residents upset about the denial of the application for the
Schiltgen property.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
NOVEMBER 7, 2017
Page 5 of 5
STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Administrator Handt: Held Q & A for landscaping RFQ, attended a meeting with the DNR regarding White Bear Lake litigation and noted it could impact irrigation rules in Lake Elmo.
Noted that the space needs study findings will be presented at a meeting in December.
City Clerk Johnson: No report.
City Attorney Sonsalla: Reviewed the draft personnel policy and other agreements.
Planning Director Becker: No report.
City Engineer Griffin: Working with contractors regarding paving projects, working on a grant
application and plan reviews.
Meeting adjourned at 9:03 pm.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ATTEST:
______________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 3 TO: Lake Elmo City Council FROM: Dan Raboin AGENDA ITEM: Monthly Assessor Report
REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the monthly assessor report for October 2017 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.
MONTHLY ACTIVITY:
Property splits/plats – 3 Splits, 3 Plats
Sales collected and viewed – 16
Taxpayer inquiries – 10
Miscellaneous inquiries - 3
Inspections – Residential – 144
Inspections – Commercial - 3
Building permit reviews – 73
Pictures taken – 149
Other work performed included:
• Monthly meeting with County residential and commercial supervisors.
• When not working in the field/inspections: Computer work includes but not limited to; data entry for all properties inspected, permit information, sales verification using MLS and other resources, and telephone inquiries.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council accept the October 2017 monthly assessor report.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017
CONSENT
ITEM #: 5
TO: City Council
FROM: Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief
AGENDA ITEM: Month End Fire Department Update for October 2017 REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Review month end activity update from fire department. Advise on any additional information requested.
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
We had 39 calls in October:
4 Fire Alarms
4 Dispatched and cancelled en route
21 Medicals
3 Gas leaks
1 Grass fire
3 Car accidents with injuries
1 Power line down
1 Smoke in the home
1 Vehicle accident (requested by law enforcement for road clean-up)
39 Total
A command vehicle did not respond on 7 calls for a response rate of 84%. Average response time was
8.25 minutes. 17 calls had 3 or less responders minus the Duty Officer with 8 calls having only 1
personnel on the apparatus.
Department drills for the Month:
#1 - CEU – RIT
#2 - Water Rescue
#3 - Arbor Glen tour (building construction)
Points of interest:
• The part time shifts are up and running. Scheduling is proving to be a challenge as people’s
schedules at their full time lives are constantly changing. This is creating a huge burden to
ensure coverage during the part time hours. The good news however, is that while the average
response time appears to have increased, it is actually a bit deceiving. While shifts are running,
we have a truck in service besides the duty vehicle within 2 minutes of the page. Sometimes
within seconds of the page. Many of the calls this past month have been at the far reaches of
the city making it look like we are responding slower than we actually are.
• Along with the shift work, we have managed to discover maintenance issues on our fleet much
quicker and mitigate them to reduce the chance of failures on the emergency scene.
• Both Chiefs attended the State Chief’s Association Conference this month.
• Hydrant flushing has begun. It is unlikely that we will be able to get them all done prior to the
winter freeze but we are fighting against the clock to get as many flushed as possible.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE: 11/21/2017
CONSENT
ITEM #: 6
AGENDA ITEM: Public Works Director Report
SUBMITTED BY: Rob Weldon, Public Works Director
REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
City Council is asked to review and accept, as part of Consent Agenda, a brief description of activities
that have taken place in the Public Works Department in the month of October 2017.
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
• Meeting w/ MN Land Trust
• Inwood Ave. Water Tower Progress Meeting
• Inwood Booster Station meeting
• Meet w/ Sgt. Osterman to discuss winter parking approach
• Discuss hydrant flushing w/ Fire Dept
• Public Works Pre-Snow Plow Meeting
• Continue work on Wellhead Protection Plan
• Loader in for radiator and exhaust repair
• Snow and Ice Chemical Training through MN Street Supt. Association
• Old Village Phase 1 warranty walk through
• Staff attended MnDOT Fall Maint. Expo
• Mulch installed at Easton Village Park
• Grading and playground installation at Savona Park
• Tree trimming on Klondike Ave.
• Work began on I-94 Lift Station
• 34th St Lift Station cleaning
• SCADA Computer Maint.
• Snow equipment installed on vehicles
• Booster Station Trees Planted
• Continued work on Lions Park
• Yard lights repaired at Public Works
• Culvert cleaning
RECOMMENDATION:
Base on the activities listed above, City Council is respectfully asked to accept the October 2017 Public
Works Report.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017
CONSENT #7
AGENDA ITEM: I-94 Lift Station (No. 1) & Sanitary Sewer Imp. – Pay Request No. 1
SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Jack Griffin, City Engineer
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve Pay Request No. 1 for the I-94 Lift Station
(No. 1) and Sanitary Sewer Improvements? BACKGROUND: RL Larson Excavating, Inc. was awarded a construction contract to complete the I-94
Lift Station (No. 1) and Sanitary Sewer Improvements on May 2, 2017. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: RL Larson Excavating, Inc. has submitted Partial Pay Request No.
1 in the amount of $696,280.74. 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 $36,646.35.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 1 for the I-94 Lift Station (No. 1) and Sanitary Sewer Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows:
“Move to approve Pay Request No. 1 to RL Larson Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $696,280.74 for
the I-94 Lift Station (No. 1) and Sanitary Sewer Improvements project”. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Partial Pay Estimate No. 1.
PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 1
I‐94 LIFT STATION (NO. 1) AND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
PROJECT NO. 2016.134
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT
1 LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1.00 $30,000.00 1.00 $30,000.00
2 LS 1 $6,300.00 $6,300.00 0.90 $5,670.00 0.90 $5,670.00
3 LS 1 $33,000.00 $33,000.00 1.00 $33,000.00 1.00 $33,000.00
4 EA 5 $315.00 $1,575.00 5.00 $1,575.00 5.00 $1,575.00
5 SY 1,500 $4.00 $6,000.00 1,510.00 $6,040.00 1,510.00 $6,040.00
6 SY 30 $10.00 $300.00 9.10 $91.00 9.10 $91.00
7 LF 80 $10.00 $800.00 83.00 $830.00 83.00 $830.00
8 LF 180 $10.00 $1,800.00 180.00 $1,800.00 180.00 $1,800.00
9 LF 1,770 $4.00 $7,080.00 1,767.00 $7,068.00 1,767.00 $7,068.00
10 LF 175 $10.00 $1,750.00 173.00 $1,730.00 173.00 $1,730.00
11 EA 7 $500.00 $3,500.00 7.00 $3,500.00 7.00 $3,500.00
12 LF 20 $10.00 $200.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
13 EA 1 $55.00 $55.00 1.00 $55.00 1.00 $55.00
14 EA 1 $130.00 $130.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
15 EA 4 $160.00 $640.00 1.00 $160.00 1.00 $160.00
16 LF 1,300 $2.50 $3,250.00 1,469.00 $3,672.50 1,469.00 $3,672.50
17 EA 2 $4,200.00 $8,400.00 3.00 $12,600.00 3.00 $12,600.00
18 EA 5 $1,500.00 $7,500.00 5.00 $7,500.00 5.00 $7,500.00
19 EA 2 $1,605.00 $3,210.00 2.00 $3,210.00 2.00 $3,210.00
20 LF 445 $45.00 $20,025.00 443.00 $19,935.00 443.00 $19,935.00
21 LF 920 $46.00 $42,320.00 920.00 $42,320.00 920.00 $42,320.00
22 LF 55 $117.00 $6,435.00 28.00 $3,276.00 28.00 $3,276.00
23 LF 356 $56.00 $19,936.00 356.00 $19,936.00 356.00 $19,936.00
24 LF 20 $93.00 $1,860.00 55.00 $5,115.00 55.00 $5,115.00
25 EA 1 $3,317.00 $3,317.00 1.00 $3,317.00 1.00 $3,317.00
26 EA 5 $1,025.00 $5,125.00 5.00 $5,125.00 5.00 $5,125.00
27 EA 7 $3,500.00 $24,500.00 8.00 $28,000.00 8.00 $28,000.00
28 VF 12 $120.00 $1,440.00 20.66 $2,479.20 20.66 $2,479.20
29 EA 1 $4,200.00 $4,200.00 0.80 $3,360.00 0.80 $3,360.00
30 CY 50 $20.00 $1,000.00 50.00 $1,000.00 50.00 $1,000.00
31 CY 50 $50.00 $2,500.00 50.00 $2,500.00 50.00 $2,500.00
32 LF 1,792 $1.35 $2,419.20 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
33 LS 1 $350,000.00 $350,000.00 0.90 $315,000.00 0.90 $315,000.00
34 LS 1 $53,000.00 $53,000.00 1.00 $53,000.00 1.00 $53,000.00
35 LS 1 $28,000.00 $28,000.00 1.00 $28,000.00 1.00 $28,000.00
36 EA 3 $750.00 $2,250.00 3.00 $2,250.00 3.00 $2,250.00
37 EA 2 $1,650.00 $3,300.00 2.00 $3,300.00 2.00 $3,300.00
38 LF 60 $44.00 $2,640.00 24.00 $1,056.00 24.00 $1,056.00
39 LF 20 $20.00 $400.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
40 LF 32 $47.00 $1,504.00 32.00 $1,504.00 32.00 $1,504.00
41 EA 2 $1,064.00 $2,128.00 2.00 $2,128.00 2.00 $2,128.00
42 LF 120 $33.00 $3,960.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
43 EA 4 $350.00 $1,400.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
44 CY 6 $70.00 $420.00 6.00 $420.00 6.00 $420.00
45 LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 1.00 $5,000.00 1.00 $5,000.00
46 SY 450 $15.75 $7,087.50 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
47 CY 450 $35.00 $15,750.00 562.21 $19,677.35 562.21 $19,677.35
48 SY 130 $2.00 $260.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
49 CY 125 $12.00 $1,500.00 89.96 $1,079.52 89.96 $1,079.52
50 TON 700 $20.00 $14,000.00 1,125.59 $22,511.80 1,125.59 $22,511.80
51 TON 450 $89.00 $40,050.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
52 LF 80 $37.00 $2,960.00 83.00 $3,071.00 83.00 $3,071.00
53 SF 130 $10.50 $1,365.00 62.00 $651.00 62.00 $651.00
54 EA 1 $800.00 $800.00 0.25 $200.00 0.25 $200.00
55 SF 12 $51.00 $612.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
56 EA 1 $500.00 $500.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
57 EA 1 $350.00 $350.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
58 LF 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 1.00 $1,000.00 1.00 $1,000.00
59 EA 1 $360.00 $360.00 1.00 $360.00 1.00 $360.00
60 SF 9 $55.00 $495.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
61 EA 6 $100.00 $600.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
62 LF 1,000 $1.26 $1,260.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
63 EA 2 $500.00 $1,000.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
64 HR 5 $140.00 $700.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
65 SY 6,600 $1.74 $11,484.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
66 SY 100 $2.60 $260.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
67 AC 1.3 $210.00 $273.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
68 EA 5 $180.00 $900.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
69 EA 7 $52.00 $364.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
70 LF 200 $3.15 $630.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
$809,129.70 $715,073.37 $715,073.37
TOTALS ‐ BASE CONTRACT $809,129.70 $715,073.37 $715,073.37
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
CO1‐1 EA 3 5,951.24$ $17,853.72 3 $17,853.72 3 $17,853.72
TOTALS ‐ CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 $17,853.72 $17,853.72 $17,853.72
TOTALS ‐ REVISED CONTRACT $826,983.42 $732,927.09 $732,927.09
HYDRANT EXTENSION
EXTEND VALVE BOX
SIGN PANEL, TYPE C
OFF ROAD STRUCTURE MARKER
4" CONCRETE MEDIAN
6" CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN RAMP
TRUNCATED DOME PANELS
ADJUST MANHOLE CASTING
ADJUST GATE VALVE BOX
AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 6
TYPE SP 9.5 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B)
B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
18" CM APRON
RIPRAP CLASS III
LIFT STATION SITE GRADING
BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT (LIFT STATION)
COMMON EXCAVATION (DRIVEWAY AND STREET PATCHES)
BYPASS PUMPING
SALVAGE AND REINSTALL APRON
SALVAGE AND REINSTALL STORM SEWER STRUCTURE
GEOTEXTILE FOR ROAD STABILIZATION
SELECT GRANULAR BORROW
TELEVISING
CONNECT EXISTING PIPE TO NEW MANHOLE
SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 1 SANITARY SEWER
STREET SWEEPING
PAVEMENT MESSAGE, RIGHT TURN ARROW THERMOPLASTIC (GROUND IN)
TEMPORARY HYDROMULCH
SEEDING
INLET PROTECTION
DITCH CHECK
SALVAGE AND REINSTALL STORM SEWER PIPE
PERFORATED PVC EDGE DRAIN
18" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS V
18" RCP FLARED END SECTION WITH TRASH GUARD
18" CM DRIVEWAY CULVERT
LIFT STATION
STANDBY GENERATOR
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
ROCK FOUNDATION BORROW
4" SOLID LINE WHITE EPOXY
REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING GUARDRAIL
REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PIPE
REMOVE AND DIPSOSE OF EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE
REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER SERVICE
REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING EDGE DRAIN
SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAILBOX
SALVAGE AND REINSTALL SIGN
CORE DRILL CONNECTION TO EXISTING STRUCTURE
4' DIAMETER SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
4' DIAMETER EXCESS MANHOLE DEPTH
MANHOLE LINER
REMOVAL OF UNSTABLE FOUNDATION MATERIAL
16" PVC, C900 SANITARY SEWER PIPE, 0' ‐ 10' DEEP
16" DIP, CL 50 SANITARY SEWER PIPE, 0' ‐ 10' DEEP
16" SANITARY SEWER OUTSIDE DROP
15" X 6" WYE BRANCH
ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT
CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE
DIVISION 1 ‐ SANITARY SEWER
MOBILIZATION
TREE REMOVAL
REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
TRAFFIC CONTROL
PRECAST CONCRETE JERSEY BARRIERS
15" PVC, SDR 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE, 0' ‐ 10' DEEP
15" PVC, SDR 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE, 10' ‐ 15' DEEP
15" PVC, SDR 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE, 15' ‐ 20' DEEP
REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE PAVEMENT
REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING SIGN
SILT FENCE
REVISE PUMP DESIGN
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017
CONSENT #8
AGENDA ITEM: Old Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements – Pay
Request No. 5
SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve Pay Request No. 5 for the Old Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements?
BACKGROUND: Douglas-Kerr Underground, LLC was awarded a construction contract on May 16, 2017 to complete the Old Village Phase 4: Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Douglas-Kerr Underground, LLC, has submitted Partial Pay Request No. 5 in the amount of $335,189.56. 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 $68,946.42. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 5 for the Old Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements project.
If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Pay Request No. 5 to Douglas-Kerr Underground, LLC in the amount of $335,189.56 for the Old Village Phase 3: Street, Drainage and Utility Improvements project”. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Partial Pay Estimate No. 5.
PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 5
OLD VILLAGE PHASE 3 IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
PROJECT NO. 2016.133
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT
1 LS 1 $58,045.95 $58,045.95 0.00 $0.00 0.75 $43,534.46
2 ACRE 1.15 $6,000.00 $6,900.00 0.00 $0.00 1.20 $7,200.00
3 TREE 42 $200.00 $8,400.00 0.00 $0.00 43.00 $8,600.00
4 LF 2884 $1.20 $3,460.80 0.00 $0.00 2,552.00 $3,062.40
5 LF 144 $11.45 $1,648.80 0.00 $0.00 101.00 $1,156.45
6 LF 440 $3.00 $1,320.00 38.00 $114.00 345.00 $1,035.00
7 EACH 1 $450.00 $450.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $450.00
8 SY 10246 $1.10 $11,270.60 0.00 $0.00 10,246.00 $11,270.60
9 SY 765 $3.75 $2,868.75 56.00 $210.00 1,013.80 $3,801.75
10 SY 300 $6.25 $1,875.00 47.94 $299.63 405.44 $2,534.00
11 EACH 3 $260.00 $780.00 0.00 $0.00 3.00 $780.00
12 EACH 14 $90.00 $1,260.00 0.00 $0.00 4.00 $360.00
13 EACH 6 $450.00 $2,700.00 0.00 $0.00 6.00 $2,700.00
14 LF 240 $3.50 $840.00 0.00 $0.00 248.50 $869.75
15 LF 610 $2.75 $1,677.50 18.00 $49.50 18.00 $49.50
16 LF 200 $27.00 $5,400.00 0.00 $0.00 165.00 $4,455.00
17 LF 100 $24.00 $2,400.00 0.00 $0.00 90.00 $2,160.00
18 EACH 8 $35.00 $280.00 3.00 $105.00 3.00 $105.00
19 EACH 5 $160.00 $800.00 5.00 $800.00 5.00 $800.00
20 EACH 26 $90.00 $2,340.00 0.00 $0.00 13.50 $1,215.00
21 SF 200 $23.00 $4,600.00 0.00 $0.00 35.00 $805.00
22 CY 12605 $10.85 $136,764.25 7,437.00 $80,691.45 12,605.00 $136,764.25
23 CY 467 $32.50 $15,177.50 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
24 CY 400 $29.85 $11,940.00 0.00 $0.00 21.60 $644.76
25 CY 7764 $19.00 $147,516.00 5,144.00 $97,736.00 7,764.00 $147,516.00
26 SY 1000 $1.50 $1,500.00 0.00 $0.00 4,791.30 $7,186.95
27 CY 2288 $31.95 $73,101.60 1,355.00 $43,292.25 2,288.00 $73,101.60
28 HOUR 40 $150.00 $6,000.00 0.00 $0.00 21.25 $3,187.50
29 GAL 501 $1.40 $701.40 0.00 $0.00 30.00 $42.00
30 TON 230 $101.00 $23,230.00 0.00 $0.00 149.72 $15,121.72
31 TON 590 $54.50 $32,155.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
32 TON 315 $63.00 $19,845.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
33 TON 790 $48.75 $38,512.50 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
34 TON 420 $56.25 $23,625.00 0.00 $0.00 420.85 $23,672.81
35 TON 170 $0.01 $1.70 0.00 $0.00 82.37 $0.82
36 LF 1400 $3.25 $4,550.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
37 LF 1600 $0.01 $16.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
38 EACH 1 $1,024.05 $1,024.05 1.00 $1,024.05 1.00 $1,024.05
39 EACH 1 $1,095.10 $1,095.10 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
40 EACH 2 $1,470.00 $2,940.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
41 EACH 2 $2,466.45 $4,932.90 0.00 $0.00 2.00 $4,932.90
42 LF 410 $0.01 $4.10 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
43 LF 1300 $10.50 $13,650.00 560.00 $5,880.00 960.00 $10,080.00
44 EACH 20 $175.00 $3,500.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
45 LF 3236 $35.10 $113,583.60 0.00 $0.00 3,230.00 $113,373.00
46 LF 125 $36.55 $4,568.75 0.00 $0.00 125.00 $4,568.75
47 LF 741 $32.60 $24,156.60 52.00 $1,695.20 678.00 $22,102.80
48 LF 350 $30.35 $10,622.50 0.00 $0.00 279.00 $8,467.65
49 LF 178 $37.85 $6,737.30 0.00 $0.00 116.00 $4,390.60
50 LF 101 $100.90 $10,190.90 0.00 $0.00 109.00 $10,998.10
51 EACH 2 $2,939.55 $5,879.10 0.00 $0.00 2.00 $5,879.10
52 EACH 7 $1,580.75 $11,065.25 1.00 $1,580.75 6.00 $9,484.50
53 EACH 8 $2,432.30 $19,458.40 1.00 $2,432.30 10.00 $24,323.00
54 EACH 2 $3,484.05 $6,968.10 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $3,484.05
55 EACH 1 $3,940.80 $3,940.80 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
56 EACH 1 $4,945.05 $4,945.05 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $4,945.05
57 EACH 21 $500.75 $10,515.75 0.00 $0.00 21.00 $10,515.75
58 EACH 9 $1,004.55 $9,040.95 0.00 $0.00 6.00 $6,027.30
59 EACH 4 $324.60 $1,298.40 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
60 EACH 1 $986.40 $986.40 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $986.40
61 EACH 4 $254.20 $1,016.80 3.00 $762.60 4.00 $1,016.80
62 EACH 5 $429.50 $2,147.50 3.00 $1,288.50 5.00 $2,147.50
63 LF 815 $11.05 $9,005.75 73.00 $806.65 869.00 $9,602.45
64 LF 760 $20.45 $15,542.00 0.00 $0.00 340.00 $6,953.00
65 LF 250 $9.70 $2,425.00 131.00 $1,270.70 254.00 $2,463.80
66 LF 290 $14.15 $4,103.50 0.00 $0.00 463.00 $6,551.45
67 EACH 36 $167.60 $6,033.60 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
68 EACH 14 $3,175.50 $44,457.00 0.00 $0.00 15.00 $47,632.50
69 LF 48 $137.15 $6,583.20 0.00 $0.00 49.18 $6,745.04
70 LF 3236 $1.25 $4,045.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
71 SY 120 $14.30 $1,716.00 28.44 $406.69 147.09 $2,103.39
72 LS 1 $25,028.00 $25,028.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $25,028.00
73 EACH 27 $279.20 $7,538.40 5.00 $1,396.00 27.00 $7,538.40
74 EACH 3 $726.45 $2,179.35 0.00 $0.00 2.00 $1,452.90
75 EACH 27 $362.85 $9,796.95 5.00 $1,814.25 27.00 $9,796.95
76 EACH 3 $839.00 $2,517.00 0.00 $0.00 3.00 $2,517.00
77 EACH 1 $390.95 $390.95 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $390.95
78 EACH 3 $1,025.40 $3,076.20 0.00 $0.00 3.00 $3,076.20
2" Rigid Insulation
Temporary Water Service
1" Corporation Stop
2" Corporation Stop
1" Curb Stop & Box
2" Curb Stop & Box
8" x 1 ‐1/4" Saddle Tap
Connect to Existing Water Main
15" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard
18" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard
21" RC Pipe Apron w/Trash Guard
36" Span RC Pipe‐Arch Apron w/Trash Guard
Infiltration Basin Underdrain System
18" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V
21" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL III
36" Span RC Pipe‐Arch Sewer CL IIA
Connect to Existing Sanitary Sewer
Sewer Televising
Construct Drainage Structure 2'x3' (w/ CasƟng)
4" PVC Perf. Edge Drain w/ Backfill & Wrap
Draintile Cleanout
8" PVC Pipe Sewer (SDR 26)
12" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V
15" RC Pipe Sewer, Des 3006 CL V
8"X6" PVC Wye, SDR 26
6" Clean‐Out Assembly (SCH 40)
2" Pressure Cleanout & CurbstopAssembly
Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC ‐ 48" (w/ CasƟng)
Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC ‐ 60" (w/ CasƟng)
Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC ‐ 72" (w/ CasƟng)
Construct Drainage Structure Des. CC ‐ 84" (w/ CasƟng)
8"X4" PVC Wye, SDR 26
6" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe ‐ Sch40
4" PVC Sanitary Service Pipe ‐ Sch40
2" HDPE Pressure Pipe
Tracer Wire Box ‐ (at property line)
Sanitary Sewer Manhole (10' Deep)
Sanitary Sewer Manhole Extra Depth
2"x1‐1/4" Fused Tee
Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B)
Type SP 12.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,.C)
Bituminous Wedge Paving
Saw & Seal Joint (40' Intervals)
Pipe Foundation Rock
1‐1/4" HDPE Service Pipe
Sawing Bit Pavement (Full Depth)
Salvage Retaining Wall
Agg. Base, Cl. 6 (CV) (P)
Street Sweeping
Bit. Material for Tack Coat
Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (2,C) (Parking Lots, Driveways & Bike Trails
Remove Hydrant
Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,C)
Salvage & Install Sign Type C
ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT
CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE
DIVISION 1
Mobilization
Clearing & Grubbing
Clearing & Grubbing
Salvage & Install Mailbox Assembly
Salvage & Install Pavers (Incl. Flagstone Steps & Wall)
Common Excavation (P)
Infiltration Basin Excavation (EV)
Subgrade Correction (EV)(Includes Select Granular Borrow ‐ Mod 5%)
Select Granular Borrow ‐ Mod. 5% (CV)(P)
Geotextile Fabric, Type V
Remove Water Main Pipe
Remove Sewer Pipe (Storm)
Remove Backstop Fence
Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter
Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mix (3,B)
1‐1/4" Curb Stop & Box
Pulverize Bituminous Pavement (P)
Remove Bituminous Driveway & Parking Lot Pavement
Remove Concrete Driveway Pavement
Remove Catch Basin or Manhole (Storm)
Salvage and Install Fence
Salvage Sign (Type C or Street Name Sign)
Remove Gate Valve & Box
Sawing Concrete Pavement (Full Depth)
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT
ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT
CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE
79 EACH 34 $382.35 $12,999.90 5.00 $1,911.75 32.00 $12,235.20
80 EACH 8 $4,199.10 $33,592.80 0.00 $0.00 11.00 $46,190.10
81 EACH 14 $1,586.10 $22,205.40 0.00 $0.00 15.00 $23,791.50
82 EACH 8 $2,036.45 $16,291.60 0.00 $0.00 8.00 $16,291.60
83 EACH 4 $3,023.65 $12,094.60 0.00 $0.00 4.00 $12,094.60
84 LF 1095 $9.20 $10,074.00 291.00 $2,677.20 1,181.00 $10,865.20
85 LF 90 $22.95 $2,065.50 0.00 $0.00 60.00 $1,377.00
86 LF 394 $24.45 $9,633.30 0.00 $0.00 267.00 $6,528.15
87 LF 2424 $32.30 $78,295.20 0.00 $0.00 2,441.00 $78,844.30
88 LF 892 $60.95 $54,367.40 0.00 $0.00 892.00 $54,367.40
89 LB 3606 $3.25 $11,719.50 0.00 $0.00 3,726.00 $12,109.50
90 CY 40 $115.00 $4,600.00 5.00 $575.00 33.00 $3,795.00
91 SF 5100 $4.90 $24,990.00 0.00 $0.00 5,083.00 $24,906.70
92 SF 480 $6.10 $2,928.00 0.00 $0.00 709.90 $4,330.39
93 LF 365 $19.00 $6,935.00 0.00 $0.00 159.50 $3,030.50
94 LF 5525 $12.25 $67,681.25 3,650.00 $44,712.50 5,518.00 $67,595.50
95 SY 300 $47.75 $14,325.00 421.30 $20,117.08 421.30 $20,117.08
96 SY 125 $55.75 $6,968.75 0.00 $0.00 108.80 $6,065.60
97 SF 72 $30.00 $2,160.00 0.00 $0.00 92.50 $2,775.00
98 LS 1 $2,300.00 $2,300.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
99 SF 21 $43.50 $913.50 21.00 $913.50 21.00 $913.50
100 EACH 3 $495.00 $1,485.00 1.00 $495.00 1.00 $495.00
101 LF 2400 $1.25 $3,000.00 0.00 $0.00 715.00 $893.75
102 EACH 23 $125.00 $2,875.00 11.00 $1,375.00 30.00 $3,750.00
103 CY 125 $39.50 $4,937.50 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
104 CY 1500 $24.75 $37,125.00 0.00 $0.00 178.33 $4,413.67
105 SY 6300 $5.25 $33,075.00 5,190.00 $27,247.50 5,190.00 $27,247.50
106 ACRE 2 $1,108.00 $2,216.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
107 ACRE 0.2 $777.00 $155.40 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
108 SY 2400 $1.35 $3,240.00 100.00 $135.00 2,200.00 $2,970.00
109 LF 800 $2.10 $1,680.00 0.00 $0.00 160.00 $336.00
110 LF 700 $15.50 $10,850.00 0.00 $0.00 630.00 $9,765.00
111 EACH 4 $1,400.00 $5,600.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
$1,576,039.15 $343,815.04 $1,342,876.39
TOTALS ‐ BASE CONTRACT $1,576,039.15 $343,815.04 $1,342,876.39
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
CO1‐1 CY ‐467.0 $32.50 ‐$15,177.50 0.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00
CO1‐2 EACH ‐1.0 $1,024.05 ‐$1,024.05 0.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00
CO1‐3 EACH ‐1.0 $1,470.00 ‐$1,470.00 0.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00
CO1‐4 LF ‐410.0 $0.01 ‐$4.10 0.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00
CO1‐5 CY ‐125.0 $39.50 ‐$4,937.50 0.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00
CO1‐6 LF 230.0 $68.90 $15,847.00 0.00 $0.00 236.0 $16,260.40
CO1‐7 EACH 3.0 $1,299.50 $3,898.50 0.00 $0.00 3.0 $3,898.50
CO1‐8 EACH ‐3.0 $1,004.55 ‐$3,013.65 0.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00
CO1‐9 EACH ‐4.0 $324.60 ‐$1,298.40 0.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00
CO1‐10 LF ‐460.0 $20.45 ‐$9,407.00 0.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00
TOTALS ‐ CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 ‐$16,586.70 $0.00 $20,158.90
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2
CO2‐1 AC 2.0 $3,450.00 $6,900.00 0.00 $0.00 1.07 $3,691.50
CO2‐2 LS 1.0 $650.00 $650.00 0.00 $0.00 1.0 $650.00
CO2‐3 CY 20.0 $88.00 $1,760.00 0.00 $0.00 20.0 $1,760.00
CO2‐4 LF 15.0 $51.70 $775.50 0.00 $0.00 15.0 $775.50
TOTALS ‐ CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 $10,085.50 $0.00 $6,877.00
CHANGE ORDER NO. 3
CO3‐1 HR 9.0 $900.00 $8,100.00 9.00 $8,100.00 9.00 $8,100.00
CO3‐2 LS 1.0 $391.15 $391.15 1.00 $391.15 1.0 $391.15
CO3‐3 EA 1.0 $524.92 $524.92 1.00 $524.92 1.0 $524.92
TOTALS ‐ CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 $9,016.07 $9,016.07 $9,016.07
TOTALS ‐ REVISED CONTRACT $1,578,554.02 $352,831.11 $1,378,928.36
Hydrant
6" Gate Valve & Box
8" Gate Valve & Box
16" Butterfly Valve & Box
1" Type K Copper Pipe
2" Type K Copper Pipe
6" Water Main DIP ‐ CL 52 (Poly Encased)
Connect to Existing Water Service
REMOVE 15" RC PIPE APRON W/TRASH GUARD
SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 1
REMOVE 6" CLEAN‐OUT ASSEMBLY (SCH 40)
REMOVE 21" RC PIPE APRON W/TRASH GUARD
REMOVE SHED
REMOVE 8"X6" PVC WYE, SDR 26
8" Water Main DIP ‐ CL 52 (Poly Encased)
16" Water Main DIP ‐ CL 52 (Poly Encased)
Water Main Fittings
Random Rip‐Rap, Class III (includes Geotextile Fabric)
5" Concrete Walk
6" Concrete Walk ‐ Pedestrian Ramp
B612 Concrete Curb & Gutter
BONDED FIBER MATRIX MULCH
REMOVE INFILTRATION BASIN UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
REMOVE FILTER TOPSOIL BORROW (PULVERIZED) (LV)
REMOVE 6" PVC SANITARY SERVICE PIPE ‐ SCH 40
8"X6" C900 WYE
REMOVE INFILTRATION BASIN EXCAVATION (EV)
CONTRACTOR CREW TIME
SERVICE PIPE MATERIALS
HYDRANT EXTENSION
MULCH
BLACK VINYL COATED FENCE
B618 Concrete Curb & Gutter
6" Concrete Driveway Pavement
8" Concrete Driveway Pavement
Seeding (Seed Mixture Type 25‐131)
Seeding (Seed Mixture Type Basin)
Erosion Control Blanket Category 3N
Sediment Control Log
6' Wide Agg. Lime Walking Trail
Temporary Rock Construction Entrance
Truncated Domes
Traffic Control
Sign Panels, Type C
Sign, Type Special (Street Name)
Silt Fence, Preassembled
Storm Drain Inlet Protection
Filter Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV)
Common Topsoil Borrow (Pulverized) (LV)
Sodding, Type Mineral
8" C900 PIPE SEWER
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017
CONSENT #9
AGENDA ITEM: 2017 Street Improvements – Pay Request No. 4
SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve Pay Request No. 4 for the 2017 Street Improvements?
BACKGROUND: Hardrives, Inc. was awarded a construction contract on May 16, 2017 to complete the 2017 Street Improvements project.
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Hardrives, Inc., has submitted Partial Pay Request No. 4 in the amount of $240,289.56. 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 $49,260.93. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 4 for the 2017 Street Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Pay Request No. 4 to Hardrives, Inc. in the amount of $240,289.56 for the 2017 Street Improvements project”. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Partial Pay Estimate No. 4.
PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO. 4
2017 STREET IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA
PROJECT NO. 2016.135
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT
1 LS 1 $4,226.26 $4,226.26 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $4,226.26
2 LS 1 $1,890.12 $1,890.12 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,890.12
3 LF 180 $2.63 $473.40 0.00 $0.00 220.00 $578.60
4 EA 39 $90.00 $3,510.00 1.00 $90.00 37.00 $3,330.00
5 EA 11 $231.01 $2,541.11 0.00 $0.00 15.00 $3,465.15
6 EA 11 $126.01 $1,386.11 0.00 $0.00 15.00 $1,890.15
7 CY 2,080 $10.00 $20,800.00 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
8 SY 10,330 $4.40 $45,452.00 7,175.00 $31,570.00 7,175.00 $31,570.00
9 SY 2,140 $1.95 $4,173.00 2,851.00 $5,559.45 2,851.00 $5,559.45
10 EA 10 $472.53 $4,725.30 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
$89,177.30 $37,219.45 $52,509.73
1 LF 281 $5.25 $1,475.25 0.00 $0.00 273.00 $1,433.25
2 EA 12 $420.02 $5,040.24 0.00 $0.00 13.00 $5,460.26
3 EA 1 $420.02 $420.02 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $420.02
4 EA 13 $159.82 $2,077.66 0.00 $0.00 13.00 $2,077.66
5 EA 13 $659.11 $8,568.43 0.00 $0.00 13.00 $8,568.43
6 LF 66 $31.50 $2,079.00 0.00 $0.00 98.00 $3,087.00
7 LF 1,773 $32.55 $57,711.15 0.00 $0.00 1,772.00 $57,678.60
8 LF 20 $60.90 $1,218.00 0.00 $0.00 16.00 $974.40
9 EA 5 $945.06 $4,725.30 0.00 $0.00 4.00 $3,780.24
10 EA 1 $2,205.12 $2,205.12 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $2,205.12
11 EA 4 $1,732.60 $6,930.40 0.00 $0.00 6.00 $10,395.60
12 EA 17 $2,058.11 $34,987.87 0.00 $0.00 18.00 $37,045.98
13 CY 39 $89.25 $3,480.75 0.00 $0.00 38.30 $3,418.28
14 LF 220 $17.85 $3,927.00 50.00 $892.50 335.00 $5,979.75
$134,846.19 $892.50 $142,524.59
1 LF 310 $1.00 $310.00 0.00 $0.00 310.00 $310.00
2 LF 130 $1.65 $214.50 0.00 $0.00 161.00 $265.65
3 SY 680 $4.12 $2,801.60 0.00 $0.00 630.00 $2,595.60
4 SY 220 $7.49 $1,647.80 0.00 $0.00 196.00 $1,468.04
5 SY 41,776 $1.35 $56,397.60 0.00 $0.00 41,776.00 $56,397.60
6 CY 4,062 $9.47 $38,467.14 0.00 $0.00 3,721.00 $35,237.87
7 LF 3,174 $1.01 $3,205.74 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
8 CY 370 $0.01 $3.70 0.00 $0.00 349.00 $3.49
9 RS 121 $250.00 $30,250.00 0.00 $0.00 121.00 $30,250.00
10 SY 893 $18.00 $16,074.00 630.00 $11,340.00 630.00 $11,340.00
11 TN 4,380 $48.75 $213,525.00 387.75 $18,902.81 4,127.71 $201,225.86
12 TN 3,290 $51.45 $169,270.50 2,837.39 $145,983.72 2,837.39 $145,983.72
13 GAL 2,020 $1.25 $2,525.00 0.00 $0.00 200.00 $250.00
14 LF 9,560 $2.60 $24,856.00 9,560.00 $24,856.00 9,560.00 $24,856.00
15 LF 20,997 $10.25 $215,219.25 0.00 $0.00 20,939.00 $214,624.75
16 EA 3 $523.98 $1,571.94 3.00 $1,571.94 3.00 $1,571.94
17 SY 220 $50.61 $11,134.20 0.00 $0.00 222.78 $11,274.90
18 LF 2,000 $9.60 $19,200.00 0.00 $0.00 1,830.00 $17,568.00
19 EA 20 $230.00 $4,600.00 0.00 $0.00 18.00 $4,140.00
20 EA 2 $1,454.34 $2,908.68 0.00 $0.00 2.00 $2,908.68
$814,182.65 $202,654.47 $762,272.09
TOTALS ‐ BASE CONTRACT $1,038,206.14 $240,766.42 $957,306.41
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
CO1‐1 LS 1.0 $2,400.00 $2,400.00 0.00 $0.00 1.0 $2,400.00
CO1‐2 LF 54.0 $5.25 $283.50 0.00 $0.00 54.0 $283.50
CO1‐3 LF 54.0 $60.90 $3,288.60 0.00 $0.00 54.0 $3,288.60
CO1‐4 EA 1.0 $2,205.15 $2,205.15 0.00 $0.00 1.0 $2,205.15
CO1‐5 EA 1.0 $700.00 $700.00 0.00 $0.00 1.0 $700.00
CO1‐6 LS 1.0 $3,150.00 $3,150.00 0.00 $0.00 1.0 $3,150.00
CO1‐7 LS 1.0 $3,715.00 $3,715.00 0.00 $0.00 1.0 $3,715.00
GRADE TO DRAIN
BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT
REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, ALL TYPES
REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (DRIVEWAY)
SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 2
REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (DRIVEWAY)
RECLAIM EXISTING BITUMINOUS AND BASE MATERIALS (8" DEPTH INCL. BIT. CURB) (P)
DIVISION 3 ‐ STREET IMPROVEMENTS
SAWCUT BITUMINOUS OR CONCRETE
HAUL OUT EXCESS RECLAIMED MATERIAL (LV)
2' AGGREGATE SHOULDERING
15" FLARED END SECTION
18" FLARED END SECTION
CATCH BASIN TYPE 404
CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE TYPE 406
RIP RAP INCL. GEOTEXTILE
ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT
CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE
DIVISION 1 ‐ GENERAL
MOBILIZATION
REMOVE & DISPOSE OF ENERGY DISSIPATION STRUCTURE
REMOVE CATCH BASIN CASTING
R‐3067 CATCH BASIN CASTING
12" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE
15" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE
18" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE
TRAFFIC CONTROL
SILT FENCE
INLET PROTECTION
CLEAR TREE
GRUB TREE
IMPORT AND PLACE TOPSOIL BORROW
SODDING
SEED, MULCH, & FERTILIZER
REINSTALL PROPERTY CORNER
DIVISION 2 ‐ STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING STORM SEWER (ALL SIZES AND TYPES, INCL. END SECT
REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING STORM SEWER STRUCTURE
SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 1
SUBTOTAL ‐ DIVISION 3
SUBGRADE CORRECTION
SUBGRADE PREPARATION OF RECLAIMED SURFACE (P)
BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT
MANHOLE UPPER SECTION REHABILITATION
SAW AND SEAL STREET (40' INTERVALS)
BITUMINOUS NON‐WEARING COURSE
BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE
CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, ALL TYPES
6" CONCRETE FLUME (ALL TYPES)
6" CONCRETE DIRVEWAY PAVEMENT
4" PERFORATED PVC EDGE DRAIN
DRAINTILE CLEANOUT
MOBILIZATION
REMOVE STORM SEWER
18‐INCH RCP STORM SEWER
18‐INCH FES W/ TRASHGUARD
CONNECT TO EXISTING STRUCTURE
CULVERT 305‐1 EXTENSION
CULVERT 306‐1 EXTENSION
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT
ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT
CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE
TOTALS ‐ CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 $15,742.25 $0.00 $15,742.25
TOTALS ‐ REVISED CONTRACT
CO2‐1 HR 64.0 $90.64 $5,800.96 64.00 $5,800.96 64.0 $5,800.96
CO2‐2 SF 300.0 $6.88 $2,064.00 300.00 $2,064.00 300.0 $2,064.00
CO2‐3 HR 20.5 $210.00 $4,305.00 20.50 $4,305.00 20.5 $4,305.00
0 $12,169.96 $12,169.96 $12,169.96
TOTALS ‐ REVISED CONTRACT $1,066,118.35 $252,936.38 $985,218.62
CONCRETE CURB STRING LINE ADJUSTMENTS
CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER
STOCKPILE EXCESS RECLAIM AT PUBLIC WORKS
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017
CONSENT
ITEM #: 10
AGENDA ITEM: Accept resignation of Miles Johnson SUBMITTED BY: Jake Foster, Assistant City Administrator
BACKGROUND: Building Inspector, Miles Johnson submitted his resignation on November 7th. His last day with the City will be November 21st. Staff will be reevaluating options for filling the position and will bring a request back to the Council at a later date.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council accept Miles Johnson’s resignation? PROPOSAL: Staff recommends accepting Miles Johnson’s resignation. RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda: “Move to accept Miles Johnson’s resignation.” ATTACHMENTS: None
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017
CONSENT
ITEM #: 11
AGENDA ITEM: Finance Committee Appointments
SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
BACKGROUND: As has been our practice this year, staff is presenting an application for appointment to the Finance Committee
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council appoint Thomas Wall to the Finance Committee?
PROPOSAL: Council members were emailed a copy of Mr. Wall’s application and resume. He is open to serving on any committee. Staff spoke with him about serving on the Finance Committee where there is currently the
greatest need for membership and he is willing to accept that position if approved. FISCAL IMPACT: NA OPTIONS: 1) Appoint Thomas Wall to the Finance Committee 2) Appoint Thomas Wall to the Human Resources Committee 3) Do not make an appointment at this time RECOMMENDATION: “Motion to appoint Thomas Wall to the Finance Committee”
ATTACHMENTS:
• None
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017
CONSENT #12
AGENDA ITEM: Approve 2018 Liquor License Renewals TO: Mayor and City Council
SUBMITTED BY: Julie Johnson, City Clerk
BACKGROUND: According to State Statute and City Code, each year, all Liquor Licenses must
be renewed. All renewals are contingent upon approval by the Washington County Sheriff’s
Department and review by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Alcohol and Gambling
Enforcement.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should Council approve the requested license renewals?
PROPOSAL: The City has received liquor license renewal applications for 2018 from the following establishments:
• Kwik Trip
• Lake Elmo Inn
• Lake Elmo Inn Event Center
• Machine Shed
• T&B Given, Inc. (Royal Golf)
• Twin Point Tavern
• Village Wine and Spirits The appropriate fees have been paid and all required documentation has been provided. Staff is
not aware of any violations at any of the aforementioned establishments.
FISCAL IMPACT: Renewal fee for each license been received totaling $5,850. OPTIONS: 1) Approve license renewals 2) Deny license renewals RECOMMENDATION: If removed from Consent Agenda: “Motion to approve 2018 Liquor License Renewals as presented.”
STAFF REPORT
DATE: 11/21/17 CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM #: 13 TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director ITEM: Lake Elmo Sod Farm Interim Use Permit REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner
BACKGROUND:
The Lake Elmo Sod Farm has submitted an application for an Interim Use Permit (IUP) to continue operation of a seasonal sales lot from which to sell Christmas Trees that are grown off-site at the
property located at 456 Manning Avenue North.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL:
The Council is being asked to review the request by Lake Elmo Sod Farm for the property located at 456 Manning Avenue North for the continued operation of a seasonal sales lot from which to sell Christmas Trees that are grown off-site.
REVIEW/ANALYSIS:
• Property Owner: Yik Chi Lo Living Trs, 6422 Crackleberry Trl, Woodbury, MN 55129
• Applicant: John Myhra, PO Box 216, Lake Elmo, MN 55042
• Location: West of Manning Avenue, one parcel in north of I-94 and three parcels in south of 10th Street.
• Current Site Area: 39.38 acres
• Land Use Guidance: Urban High Density Residential
• Zoning: Rural Development Transitional
• Surrounding Land Use Guidance: Commercial Mixed Use to the South, Urban High Density Residential to the North, Urban High Density Residential to the West.
• Applicable Regulations: 154.107: Interim Use Permits; 154.401: Permitted, Conditional, and Interim Uses [within the Rural Districts]; 154.913: Agricultural Sales Businesses
History. Lake Elmo Sod Farm has been in operation for over 25 years, and Staff is not aware of any significant issues of problems that have arisen regarding this operation. The property was first issued
an Interim Use Permit in 2011 by Resolution 2011-053, but that Interim Use Permit expired as of January 1, 2017.
Need for New Interim Use Permit. Active Interim Use Permits may only be renewed only if the Director of Planning receives an application for and approves a 1-time 30-day extension to continue
the processing of the renewal application. The renewal process involves mailings to property owners within 350 feet, and, if no objection is received within 10 days of said mailings, Council may adopt a
2
resolution of approval outlining the conditions and stipulations of the renewal. The Council, at its discretion may approve or deny the renewal request with findings.
The City received this IUP renewal application on October 13, 2017, well after the IUP issued in
2011 expired. Therefore, the Applicant must follow the same process required as a new application.
Standards for Agricultural Sales Business as an Interim Use. Agricultural Sales Businesses are allowed as upon the issuance of an interim use permit in Agricultural and Rural areas that are guided for rural agricultural density or future sewered development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The property is currently zoned Rural Development Transitional Agricultural sales businesses
are subject to the performance standards as outlined below. Staff has provided comment on how these criteria have been met.
A. Activities shall be limited to those listed within the definition for Agricultural Sales Business.
• The definition of Agricultural Sales Business as per the Zoning Code is as follows:
“Agricultural Sales Business. The retail sale of fresh fruits, vegetables, flowers,
herbs, trees, or other agricultural, floricultural, or horticultural products. The operation may be indoors or outdoors, include pick-your-own or cut-your-own opportunities, and may involve the ancillary sale of items considered accessory to the agricultural products being sold or accessory sales of unprocessed foodstuffs; home
processed food products such as jams, jellies, pickles, sauces; or baked goods and homemade handicrafts. The floor area devoted to the sale of accessory items shall not exceed 25% of the total floor area. No commercially packaged handicrafts or commercially processed or packaged foodstuffs shall be sold as accessory items. No
activities other than the sale of goods as outlined above shall be allowed as part of the agricultural sales business.”
The definition clearly states that the retail of trees is allowed, and so Staff has found that
this criteria has been met.
B. The agricultural sales business shall be located on land owned or leased by the producer or
the operator of the business, and not within or on any public right-of-ways or easements.
• The Applicant leases land from the property owner.
C. The operator must be able to demonstrate at all times to the city that there is sufficient access, parking and maneuvering space, that the location and adequacy of approaches are sufficient,
that there is suitable and safe access for pedestrians, and that customer parking is away from the
travel way and in close proximity to the agricultural sales business.
• This was a condition of approval for the initially granted IUP, and it is a recommended condition of approval for the new Interim Use Permit.
D. All waste materials shall be enclosed in containers provided on the site, and shall not
generate any nuisance impacts on adjacent properties.
• This was a condition of approval for the initially granted IUP, and it is a recommended condition of approval for the new Interim Use Permit.
E. All sidewalks, roadways, and parking areas shall be treated as necessary to eliminate dust nuisance impacts on adjacent properties.
• This was a condition of approval for the initially granted IUP, and it is a recommended condition of approval for the new Interim Use Permit.
F. The maximum gross floor area that can be devoted to sales activities is limited to 20,000 square feet.
3
• The Christmas Tree sales office is located within an existing building approximately 3,200 square feet in size. Since all sales are conducted in an outside lot, the applicant will fall well below the maximum allowed building size for the sales activity.
G. Parking shall be provided in accordance with the parking requirements for other commercial uses, as per § 154.051(C). All parking must occur on-site, be on a primary surface such as class 5 gravel or pavement: and must be set back at least 30 feet from all property lines.
• Staff finds this criteria is met. Although parking stalls are not delimitated on the site
plan or marked on the property, there is room for a least 20 cars in front of the office, and room for many more on the driveway and around other outbuildings surrounding the lot. H. The minimum lot size shall be 40 acres for any agricultural sales business.
• Because minimum lot size requirements in Agricultural zones can include rigt-of-way areas, this standard is met by the applicant.
I. On-site wastewater handling system shall be planned and designed by a licensed
professional and approved by the city or its designated responsible authority. Usable
primary and alternate well and septic sites sized for the maximum anticipated usage of the property shall be identified on the property. Alternate sites shall be protected in the site plan design, and will only need to be used upon failure of a primary site.
• The proposed Christmas Tree sales lot will not impact the existing well or septic systems on the site since no bathrooms are available for public use.
J. Any structures constructed for the agricultural sales business shall be consistent on design and
appearance with other agricultural buildings in the area.
• The applicant is not proposing any additional buildings at this time. Staff finds this criteria is met.
K. Trip generation shall be limited to the yearly average daily trips calculated for the underlying zoning, with no daily trip generation to exceed twice the daily calculation rate for the underlying zoning. The base daily trip generation is established at 180 vehicle trips per day for even 40 acres.
• The Christmas Tree sales lot will fall well under the maximum trip generation required under the code.
L. The maximum impervious coverage for the buildings, parking areas and other uses devoted to
the agricultural sales business shall not exceed 40,000 square feet and the remainder shall be suitably landscaped.
• The maximum area devoted to Christmas Tree sales is under 20,000 square feet, and
will therefore comply with this provision.
M. Any activities that are defined as an agricultural entertainment business shall require a separate interim use permit.
• This criteria does not apply to the applicant.
N. Any exterior storage of equipment and materials other than the display of products being sold or agricultural equipment currently in use on the property shall be prohibited, unless otherwise exempted in accordance with §§ 150.001 through § 150.003 of this code.
• This was a condition of approval for the initially granted IUP, and it is a recommended condition of approval for the new Interim Use Permit.
4
O. There shall be a minimum buffer of 100 feet between any sales areas or sales buildings and any adjacent residential property lines.
• There are no residential properties within 100 feet of the applicant’s sales lot.
P. Roof top or outside building mechanical equipment must be screened from view from adjacent properties and rights-of-way with an opaque material architecturally compatible with the building(s).
• This was a condition of approval for the initially granted IUP, and it is a recommended
condition of approval for the new Interim Use Permit.
Q. Trash containers must be located inside or screened in an acceptable manner.
• This was a condition of approval for the initially granted IUP, and it is a recommended condition of approval for the new Interim Use Permit.
R. The operator shall adhere to the general review criteria applicable to all interim use permit applications.
• This is identified in the review criteria below.
S. No activities or structures beyond those specified in the interim use permit.
• The applicant is not requesting any additional structures at this time.
Agreement. As part of the Interim Use Permit application requirements, the Applicant is required to consent to an agreement as outlined below. Attached for review is a draft of the agreement. a. A signed consent agreement, subject to review and approval by the City Council
documenting: i. That the applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/or user has no entitlement to future approval or reapproval of the interim use permit;
ii. That the interim use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to fully or partially take the property in the future; and
iii. That the applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/or user will abide by conditions of approval that the City Council attaches to the interim use permit. Requested Renewal Date. The previous renewal period for the Interim Use Permit was five years.
The Applicant has requested a renewal period of 10 years from the date of the last termination of January 1, 2017 in this case. Renewal periods of Interim Use Permits in the City generally range from two to ten, even twenty years. Recommended Findings. Interim Use Permits may only be granted if the City Council finds the
following. Staff recommends the following findings in regards to the proposed Interim Use Permit.
1. The use is allowed as an interim use in the respective zoning district and conforms to standard zoning regulations.
• Agricultural sales businesses are an allowed use within the RT zoning district with an Interim Use Permit. Section 154.913 lays out conditions which the proposed use is subject to.
2. The use will not adversely impact nearby properties through nuisance, noise, traffic, dust, or unsightliness and will not otherwise adversely impact the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
5
• Because the site meets necessary lot standards and is in a rural district, staff feel that nearby properties will not be negatively affected in either of the categories above. The surrounding properties are also agricultural in nature.
3. The use will not adversely impact implementation of the Comprehensive Plan.
• The applicant is requesting to sell an agricultural product on the site. The
comprehensive plan makes mention of Lake Elmo’s history of agricultural character. The sale of Christmas trees will not pose an impact on implementing the comprehensive plan as it is written. 4. The user agrees to all conditions that the City Council deems appropriate to establish the
interim use. This may include the requirement of appropriate financial surety such as a letter of credit or other security acceptable to the City to cover the cost of removing the interim use and any interim structures not currently existing on the site, upon the
termination of the interim use permit.
• Per the Consent Agreement the applicant must adhere to all conditions laid out by the permit.
5. There are no delinquent property taxes, special assessments, interest, or city utility fees due upon the subject parcel.
• There are no delinquent property taxes, no levied assessments, no pending assessments, and the site does not connect to City utilities so there are no outstanding utility bills.
6. The date or event terminating the interim use shall be set by the City Council at the time of approval.
• Assuming none of the other sceneries cause termination of the permit staff recommends that the termination date be set for January 1, 2027. 7. The interim use includes a display area for Christmas trees, off street parking area, and the
use of an existing office within on the premises. The terms and conditions associated with the interim use will not apply to any portion of the site that is already used for the permitted activities, including the sod farm.
• The IUP being applied for is not associated with the current sod farm which the property has also been used for. This permit is will not grant any different/further
use towards the property other than what is in the IUP. 8. The sales of Christmas trees occurs from the day after Thanksgiving Day through December 31st.
• The timeline listed above is what was adhered to on the previous IUP and is recommended by staff.
9. Termination of the IUP shall be dependent upon the recommendations listed below;
• The beginning of the new year January 1, 2027.
• Sale or transfer of the land/business ownership to an outside party.
• The property is reduced below 40 acres.
• A violation of the conditions of this Consent Agreement.
• The redevelopment of the Property for a permitted or conditional use as allowed by the City’s zoning regulations. Recommended Conditions of Approval. Staff recommends the following conditions in regards to the proposed Interim Use Permit:
1. The applicant first sign the approved consent agreement with the City.
6
2. Items being sold with this IUP may not be sold prior to the day after Thanksgiving Day
and may not be sold beyond the end of the year.
3. The operator must be able to demonstrate at all times that there is sufficient access, parking, and maneuvering space, suitable and safe access for motorists and pedestrians, and that parking is away from the travel way and within close proximity to the agricultural sales business. Also all sidewalks, roadways, and parking areas shall be maintained properly to
eliminate dust as a nuisance to adjacent properties.
4. All waste materials shall be enclosed in containers provided on the site and properly screened, and shall not generate any nuisance impacts on adjacent properties. 5. Trip generation shall be limited to the yearly average daily trips calculated for the underlying zoning, with no daily trip generation to exceed twice the daily calculation rate
for the underlying zone. The base daily trip generation is established at 180 vehicle trips
per day for every 40 acres. 6. Any exterior storage of equipment and materials other than the display of products being sold or agricultural equipment currently in use on the property shall be prohibited. 7. The Interim Use Permit is to allow the sale of agricultural products that are grown off site
– specifically Christmas trees. Any other items that are not ancillary or grown on site shall
require an amendment to the Interim Use Permit. 8. The signing of this document by the applicant also assumes their adherence to the items below; a. The applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/or user has no entitlement to future
approval or reapprove of the interim use permit;
b. That the interim use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to fully or partially take the property in the future; and c. That the applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/ or user will abide by conditions of approval that the City Council attaches to the interim use permit.
9. The Interim Use Permit as well as the Consent Agreement shall expire on the scenario
which occurs first: a. The beginning of the new year January 1, 2027. b. Sale or transfer of the land/business ownership to an outside party. c. The property is reduced below 40 acres.
d. A violation of the conditions of this Consent Agreement.
e. The redevelopment of the Property for a permitted or conditional use as allowed by the City’s zoning regulations. Planning Commission Review. The Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the request at its November 13, 2017 meeting. No one from the public spoke at the public hearing and no comments from the public were received prior to the meeting. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the request with a vote of 7-0.
OPTIONS:
The Council has the following options:
A) Approve the Interim Use Permit request with recommended findings of fact and
conditions;
B) Amend recommended findings of fact and conditions and approve the Interim Use Permit request with amended findings of fact and conditions;
7
C) Deny the Interim Use Permit request, citing findings of fact for denial;
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff and the Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposed Interim Use Permit request, based on the recommended findings and conditions of approval.
“Move adopt Resolution 2017- approving the proposed Interim Use Permit allowing PID#
36.029.21.41.0001 to allow the sale of agricultural products that are grown off site – specifically
Christmas trees, based on the recommended findings and conditions of approval.”
(456 MANNING AVE N, CITY OF LAKE ELMO)
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Form 2. Aerial of Property showing Site Plan 3. Proposed Consent Agreement
4. Resolution 2017- approving the proposed IUP
CONSENT AGREEMENT
INTERIM USE PERMIT 1.0 Parties. This Consent Agreement/Interim Use Permit is entered into by and between the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota City; and Lake Elmo Sod Farm, The Applicant.
2.0 Recitals. A. Applicant is the record fee owner of the following described property situated in Lake Elmo, MN (“Property”): 456 Manning Ave N, Lake Elmo, MN 55042
That part of the NE1/4-SE1/4 EXC HWY PARCEL 43 MN DOT
R/W PLAT #82-35 &EXC PARCEL #1 WASH CO HWY R/W #36 SECTION 36 TOWNSHIP 029 RANGE 021 as recorded by Washington County Minnesota.
B. The Property is zoned RT by the City of Lake Elmo.
C. Interim uses are allowed in the RT zoning district subject to the regulations
contained in Lake Elmo City Code Section 154.401 – more specifically agricultural Sales Business, which is being requested through the Interim Use Permit (IUP).
D. Applicant has requested that the City allow for the renewal of the IUP:
E. On the 13th day of October 2017, Applicant submitted a completed application for
an Interim Use Permit.
F. On the 13th day of November, 2017, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission, at a public hearing, reviewed the Interim Use Permit application, city staff comments and reports, Applicant’s comments and reports, public comments, and
recommended approval of the Interim Use Permit subject to the conditions of the
resolution.
G. On the 21st day of November 2017 the Lake Elmo City Council reviewed the Interim Use Permit application, city staff comments and reports, Applicant’s comments and reports, public comments, and the recommendations of the Lake
Elmo Planning Commission, and agreed to authorize the interim use subject to the
terms and conditions as specified in Section 154.401 of the Zoning Ordinance and Resolution 2012-073 approving the interim use permit.
H. On November 21, 2017, the Lake Elmo City Council approved a request to renew the Interim Use Permit for an additional five years (seasons), and authorized the
Mayor to execute a consent agreement with the Applicant that includes the new
termination date.
2
3.0 Terms and Conditions. The Lake Elmo City Council hereby authorizes and
Applicant, for itself, and its successors and assigns, agree that the applied Interim Use
Permit shall be subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant first sign the approved consent agreement with the City. 2. Items being sold with this IUP may not be sold before the day after Thanksgiving Day and may not be sold beyond the end of the year.
3. The operator must be able to demonstrate at all times that there is sufficient access,
parking, and maneuvering space, suitable and safe access for motorists and pedestrians, and that parking is away from the travel way and within close proximity to the agricultural sales business. Also all sidewalks, roadways, and parking areas shall be maintained properly to eliminate dust as a nuisance to adjacent properties.
4. All waste materials shall be enclosed in containers provided on the site and properly
screened, and shall not generate any nuisance impacts on adjacent properties. 5. Trip generation shall be limited to the yearly average daily trips calculated for the underlying zoning, with no daily trip generation to exceed twice the daily calculation rate for the underlying zone. The base daily trip generation is established at 180 vehicle trips
per day for every 40 acres.
6. Any exterior storage of equipment and materials other than the display of products being sold or agricultural equipment currently in use on the property shall be prohibited. 7. The Interim Use Permit is to allow the sale of agricultural products that are grown off site – specifically Christmas trees. Any other items that are not ancillary or grown on site
shall require an amendment to the Interim User Permit.
8. The signing of this document by the applicant also assumes their adherence to the items below; a. The applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/or user has no entitlement to future approval or reapprove of the interim use permit;
b. That the interim use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is
necessary for the public to fully or partially take the property in the future; and c. That the applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/ or user will abide by conditions of approval that the City Council attaches to the interim use permit. 9. The Interim Use Permit as well as the Consent Agreement shall expire on the scenario
which occurs first:
a. The beginning of the new year January 1, 2027. b. Sale or transfer of the land/business ownership to an outside party. c. The property is reduced below 40 acres. d. A violation of the conditions of this Consent Agreement.
e. The redevelopment of the Property for a permitted or conditional use as allowed
by the City’s zoning regulations. 4.0 Rescission of the Previous Interim Use Permit. The previous Interim Use Permit, which was previously issued for the Property has been rescinded and replaced by this most
recent Consent Agreement/Interim Use Permit.
5.0 Acknowledgement and Consent. Applicant acknowledges that this is a legally binding agreement and that Applicant has had an opportunity to review the Agreement with legal
3
counsel. Applicant consents to the terms of this Agreement and its restrictions on the use
of the Property and the Interim Use Area.
6.0 Effective Date. This Consent Agreement/Interim Use Permit shall be effective upon signature execution of all parties.
Date: 11/21/2017
CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: _______________________
Mike Pearson
Mayor
Lake Elmo Sod Farm
By: _______________________ John Myhna Its: _____________________
S:\Land Use\Interim Use\11530 Hudson Blvd N\Interim Use Agreement Renewal 11-21-17.doc
1 Resolution 2017-129
CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-129
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR AN AGRICULTURAL
SALES BUSINESS AT 456 MANNING AVENUE FOR A CHRISTMAS TREE SALES LOT WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Sod Farm, 456 Manning Avenue, has submitted an application for an Interim Use Permit to continue the operation of a seasonal sales lot from which to sell Christmas Trees that are grown off-site; and
WHEREAS, notice has been published, mailed and posted pursuant to the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.102; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on
November, 13, 2017 and reviewed and recommended approval of the Interim Use Permit for a seasonal Christmas tree sales lot; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendation to the City Council as part of a Staff Memorandum dated November 21, 2017;
and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council reviewed the interim use permit request and consent agreement at its November 21, 2017 meeting.
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following findings: 1. That the procedures for obtaining said Interim Use Permit are found in the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.107.
2. That all the submission requirements of said Section 154.107 have been met by the applicant. 3. That the proposed Interim Use Permit is to continue the operation of a seasonal
sales lot from which to sell Christmas trees that are grown off-site in an RT – Rural Zoning District. 4. The Christmas trees sales will not occur before the day after Thanksgiving Day and may not be sold beyond the end of the year.
2 Resolution 2017-129
5. That the interim use includes a display area for Christmas trees, off street parking
area adjacent to the sales lot, and the use of an existing office within the
southernmost pole barn on the premises. The terms and conditions associated with the interim use will not apply to any portion of the site that is already used for permitted activities, including the sod farm.
6. That the proposed use will be located on property legally described as: NE1/4-
SE1/4 EXC HWY PARCEL 43 MN DOT R/W PLAT #82-35 &EXC PARCEL #1 WASH CO HWY R/W #36 SECTION 36 TOWNSHIP 029 RANGE 021. More commonly known as 456 Manning Ave, Lake Elmo MN.
7. That the use is allowed as an interim use in the respective zoning district and
conforms to standard zoning regulations. The RT – Rural district allows for
agricultural sales business, more specifically the sale of Christmas trees. 8. That the use will not adversely impact nearby properties through nuisance, noise,
traffic, dust, or unsightliness and will not otherwise adversely impact the health,
safety, and welfare of the community. The sales lot is located amongst several
agricultural buildings, and is set back from Manning Avenue. The surrounding uses are agricultural in nature, and the projected traffic levels will not be significant enough to negatively impact adjacent properties.
9. The use will not adversely impact implementation of the Comprehensive Plan.
The applicant is requesting to sell an agricultural product on the site. The comprehensive plan makes mention of Lake Elmo’s history of agricultural character. The sale of Christmas trees will not pose an impact on implementing
the comprehensive plan as it is written.
10. That the date or event that will terminate the use is subject to the conditions below: a. The beginning of the new year January 1, 2027.
b. Sale or transfer of the land/business ownership to an outside party.
c. The property is reduced below 40 acres.
d. A violation of the conditions of this Consent Agreement. e. The redevelopment of the Property for a permitted or conditional use as allowed by the City’s zoning regulations.
11. That the interim use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to fully or partially take the property in the future. The applicant is not requesting to add any additional structures.
12. That there are no delinquent property taxes, special assessments, interest, or city
utility fees due upon the subject parcel. At the time of approval there were no
delinquent property taxes, special assessments, interest, or city utility fees due upon the parcel.
3 Resolution 2017-129
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby approve the
Interim Use Permit subject to the following conditions; 1. That the applicant signs the approved consent agreement with the City in accordance with Section 154.107, Subd. (C((1)(b) of the City Code.
2. Items being sold with this IUP may not be sold before the day after Thanksgiving Day and may not be sold beyond the end of the year. 3. The operator must be able to demonstrate at all times that there is sufficient access, parking,
and maneuvering space, suitable and safe access for motorists and pedestrians, and that
parking is away from the travel way and within close proximity to the agricultural sales business. Also all sidewalks, roadways, and parking areas shall be maintained properly to eliminate dust as a nuisance to adjacent properties.
4. All waste materials shall be enclosed in containers provided on the site and properly
screened, and shall not generate any nuisance impacts on adjacent properties. 5. Trip generation shall be limited to the yearly average daily trips calculated for the underlying zoning, with no daily trip generation to exceed twice the daily calculation rate
for the underlying zone. The base daily trip generation is established at 180 vehicle trips
per day for every 40 acres. 6. Any exterior storage of equipment and materials other than the display of products being
sold or agricultural equipment currently in use on the property shall be prohibited.
7. The Interim Use Permit is to allow the sale of agricultural products that are grown off site
– specifically Christmas trees. Any other items that are not ancillary or grown on site shall
require an amendment to the Interim User Permit.
8. The signing of this document by the applicant also assumes their adherence to the items
below;
a. The applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/or user has no entitlement to future
approval or reapprove of the interim use permit;
b. That the interim use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary
for the public to fully or partially take the property in the future; and
c. That the applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/ or user will abide by conditions of
approval that the City Council attaches to the interim use permit.
9. The Interim Use Permit as well as the Consent Agreement shall expire on the scenario
which occurs first:
a. The beginning of the new year January 1, 2027.
b. Sale or transfer of the land/business ownership to an outside party.
4 Resolution 2017-129
c. The property is reduced below 40 acres.
d. A violation of the conditions of this Consent Agreement.
e. The redevelopment of the Property for a permitted or conditional use as allowed by
the City’s zoning regulations.
Passed and duly adopted this 21st day of November, 2017 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota.
___________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST:
____________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
REGULAR
ITEM #:
November 21, 2017
14
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jake Foster, Assistant City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: Approve Property and Liability Deductible Change and Authorize Decision for Liability Coverage Waiver Form
BACKGROUND: The decision to waive, or not waive the statutory municipal tort limits for LMCIT members is typically required to be made by the members governing body. The City of Lake Elmo has not done so in recent history, but it is standard practice for other municipalities.
If the member does not waive the statutory tort limits, an individual claimant would be able to recover no more than $500,000 on any claim to which the statutory tort limits apply. The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would be limited to
$1,500,000. These statutory tort limits apply regardless of whether the city purchases the optional excess liability coverage.
If the member waives the statutory tort limits and does not purchase excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover up to $2,000,000 for a single occurrence. (Under this option, the tort cap liability limits are waived to the extent of the member's liability coverage limits, and the LMCIT per occurrence limit is $2 million.) The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to $2,000,000, regardless of the number of claimants.
If the member waives the statutory tort limits and purchases excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover an amount up to the limit of the coverage purchased. The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to the amount of coverage purchased, regardless of the number of claimants.
Additionally, in order to offset some of the cost of increased premiums, the City can elect to raise the LMCIT property and liability deductible to offset the cost of increased premiums for 2018. Lake Elmo is
one of three metro-area cities of similar population to still have a $500 deductible.
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council approve the deductible increase for the City’s property and liability insurance, and provide authorization for the City to not waive the municipal tort limits for liability coverage from LCMIT?
PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS:
Staff recommends that Council elect not to waive the statutory municipal tort limits, and approve the
Liability Coverage Waiver From as such. Staff also recommends increasing the deductible for the LCMIT property and liability coverage.
FISCAL IMPACT: The city’s expiring bottom line premium is $65,397. This bottom line premium includes the excess
liability. The savings referenced are off the entire $65,397 premium.
$1,000 deductible: approximate savings of $3,000 from the current $500 deductible level premium;
$2,500 deductible: approximate savings of $6,000 from the current $500 deductible level premium;
$5,000 deductible: approximate savings of $9,500 from the current $500 deductible level premium;
$10,000 deductible: approximate savings of $13,500 from the current $500 deductible level premium.
OPTIONS: Liability Coverage – Waiver Form: 1) Waive statutory municipal tort limits 2) Do not waive statutory municipal tort limits
Property/Liability Deductible: 1) Increase deductible for property/liability coverage
2) Maintain current deductible for property/liability coverage RECOMMENDATION:
“Motion to approve the deductible increase for the City’s property and liability insurance, and authorize election to not waive the statutory tort limits.” ATTACHMENTS:
• LMCIT deductible analysis of similar-sized cities as provided by Zignego Agency Inc.
• LMCIT’s Liability Coverage – Waiver Form
BUSINESS ITEM 4D – Public Hearing
STAFF REPORT
DATE: 11/21/17 REGULAR
AGENDA ITEM: 15 TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director ITEM: Wyndham Village Subdivision Sketch Plan Review and Comprehensive Plan Amendment
REVIEWED BY: Ben Gozola, Consultant City Planner Jack Griffin, City Engineer
BACKGROUND:
The Council is being asked to review a Sketch Plan for a proposed residential subdivision to the southwest of Northport (formerly known as Village Park Preserve) and immediately north of the Heritage Farm. The sketch plan includes 13 single-family residential detached homes on a total site
area of 5.97 acres. A Sketch Plan review requires no formal action by the Planning Commission. The applicant is also requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide the proposed development area from Rural Single Family to Urban Low Density. The aforementioned request requires review, a public hearing and recommendation to the Council.
General Information
Applicant: JP Bush Homes, 1980 Quasar Ave S, Lakeland, MN 55043
Property Owners: James McLeod, 11580 30th St N, Lake Elmo, MN 55042
Location: Part of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 13, Township 29 North, Range 21West
PID: 13-029-21-43-0001
Request: Sketch Plan Review
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Existing Zoning: RS – Rural Single Family
Surrounding Area: North – Northport (Urban Low Density Residential); East – Northport
(Urban Low Density Residential); West – Rural Single Family Residential; South – the Homestead (Open Space Preservation Development)
Comprehensive Plan: Rural Single Family Density Residential (0.66-2 units per acre)
Proposed Zoning: LDR – Urban Low Density Residential (2.5 - 4 units per acre)
History: The property has long been used as a single family detached dwelling unit
2
Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 10/20/2017 60 Day Timeline – 12/19/2017 Extension Sent – N/A
Applicable Regulations: Article XII – Urban Residential Districts (LDR) Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations
REVIEW/ANALYSIS:
SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW
Sketch Plan Review Process. The Lake Elmo Subdivision Ordinance specifies that as part of the pre-application process for a new subdivision, the applicant must first submit a Sketch Plan for review by the City. The Ordinance notes that the purpose of the Sketch Plan review is as follows:
Sketch plan. In order to ensure that all applicants are informed of the procedural
requirements and minimum standards of this chapter and the requirements or limitations imposed by other city ordinances or plans, prior to the development of a preliminary plat, the subdivider shall meet with the Planning Commission and prepare a sketch plan which
explains or illustrates the proposed subdivision and its purpose. The Planning Commission
shall accept the information received, but take no formal or informal action which could be construed as approval or denial of the proposed plat.
Based on this wording, the Council is not being asked to take any formal action as part of the Sketch Plan Review other than to accept the information received. Staff has completed an internal review of the Sketch Plan, and general comments from Staff are included in this memorandum and applicable
attachment.
Sketch Plan Review. The Staff review comments that follow are all based on conducting a very high level review of the Sketch Plan since there is not a lot of detailed information that is required at this stage in the subdivision process. Staff has instead focused on the bigger picture items and those
things that would otherwise not allow the development to move forward if they contrasted with elements from the Comprehensive Plan or the City Code.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Required. The Property is currently guided for the Rural Single Family land use, which allows a density of 0.66-2 units per acre. Because the Applicant is proposing
a density of 2.17 units per acre, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment would be required in order to
allow for a higher density. The Applicant has submitted a formal application, and this request is discussed later in this report.
Zoning Map Amendment. If the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is approved, the property will need to be rezoned during Preliminary Plat approval. The properties to the north and
east of the subject parcel are guided for Village Urban Low Density (V-LDR) and have been re-zoned to Urban Low Density Residential. This was because when these properties received Preliminary Plat approval, there did not exist a Village Urban Low Density zoning district. The V-LDR ordinance was created on 5/26/17, and so while this property could be rezoned to V-LDR, Staff
would recommend that the property be re-zoned similarly to those of adjacent properties in order to avoid spot zoning. The Zoning Code states that densities within the Urban Low Density Zoning District shall range from two 2 to 4 units per acre; however, the overall density for a specific development area must be consistent with the net densities specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
3
Because the proposed density of the development is consistent with both the Comprehensive Plan and is within 2 to 4 units per acre, it would be appropriate to rezone the development area to Urban Low Density Residential.
Land Use. The proposed land use within the development are single family detached homes, which are a permitted use within the Urban Low Density Residential zoning district.
Greenbelt Corridor. As previously mentioned, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that a greenbelt corridor should be established on the southern border of the proposed development. The greenbelt corridor is meant to serve as a transitional area between future sewered growth within the Village and
existing rural development. The Comprehensive Plan states the following in regards to the greenbelt corridor.
“Greenbelt Corridors. Greenbelt Corridors run along the perimeter of proposed
development and serve as transitional areas between future sewered growth within the
Village and existing rural development. The corridor may be reduced if the design of the development includes the following: (1) a design that is mindful of the landscape features of the site, providing enhanced environmental benefit, (2) a design that is consistent with
overall goals for the Village Land Use Plan, and (3) a design that meets the requirements of
the underlying land use category of the parcel. At a minimum, the corridor shall be established and provided for by performance standards within the Zoning Code based upon the locations of the existing Village Boundary and area guided for commercial use in the northeastern portion of the Village. Not only will this provide a significant physical and
visual amenity, but it will also encourage more residential development closer to the Village
Center. Uses within the Greenbelt Corridor may include trails, passive recreation, public gathering spaces, natural areas, storm water management systems, natural water courses, small-scale or community oriented agricultural activities and other amenities intended for
aesthetic enjoyment.”
The above language does not indicate an exact width requirement for the corridor, though it appears through using a scale on the land use map that the width of the corridor is 200 feet. The proposed width of the buffer at its narrowest for this development is 40 feet. The proposed buffer’s proposed use consists of a water treatment swale, which is an approved use as outlined above. Northport, to the
east of the proposed development, had a buffer width of approximately 125 feet from the southern
edge of the plat. The exhibit below shows how the lots within the proposed development extend further south than the Northport development.
4
It should be noted, however, that the Urban Residential Districts Article of the Zoning Code indicates the following in regards to required setbacks for lots within this area:
“C. Lots Adjacent to Public Greenway Corridors. On any lot that abuts a public greenway as depicted in the Comprehensive Plan the minimum setback for all structures, including
accessory buildings, shall be the required rear yard setback for the district in which said structure is located.”
Additional Buffer/Screening Recommended. Because the buffer appears to encroach half way up the development as shown below, this requirement would not be able to be met with the proposed design. The southern boundary of the subdivision is along the north boulevard of 30th Street North
and proposes two storm water ponds connected by a drainage swale. It is recommended that additional space be allocated at elevations higher than 30th Street to create a vegetative buffer between the lots and this collector street.
5
Lake Elmo Theming Study. The proposed development is within the Old Village Area. As the applicant prepares Preliminary Plans for the proposed subdivision, staff would recommend that various elements from the Lake Elmo Theming Study be included in the proposed plans.
Park Dedication. The proposed development is to the east of Reid Park. With recording of the
Northport plat, the City received approximately an additional 12.5 acres of parkland for an extension of Reid Park. The Neighborhood Park Search Area map of the Comprehensive Plan’s Parks and Recreation Plan does not identify this area for a neighborhood park. Therefore, Staff would not recommend that parkland be dedicated within this development and that the City accept fees in lieu of parkland dedication. Per the City’s Subdivision Ordinance, 10% of the fair market value of the
land will need to be paid as the parkland dedication fee. The fair market value of the land is determined by current market data, if available, or by obtaining an appraisal from a licensed real estate appraiser, and the subdivider is required to pay for the appraisal. In this case, if the owner of the property will be selling the land to the Applicant to be developed, there will be current market
data available. If the owner is not selling the land, an appraisal to determine the fair market value will likely be required in order to determine the amount of parkland dedication the City will receive. The Parks Commission will review the proposed sketch plan on November 20, 2017.
Trails. No trails are being proposed within the development, only a sidewalk on the west side of
Liberty Court North. There is already a trail along the south of 30th Street, and the developers of
Northport will be constructing a segment of a trail from the southern edge of that development off Liberty Court North. This trail segment will not connect to the existing trails in Reid Park, however, as approved by Council. The City may extend this trail through to the existing trails in Reid Park in
Subject property
6
the future. The City’s trail plan indicates a trail along 30th Street North, which already exists on the south side of the street.
Access. Access to the proposed lots will be provided from Lower 31st Street North to the north of the subject property (part of the Northport development). Access to this parcel was pre-planned with the adjacent subdivision in order to preserve the proper access management along 30th Street North. The existing driveway will be eliminated as suggested by Staff. Access to the new Lot 8 is proposed to be
provided via a 20 foot wide driveway easement off the cul-de-sac of Liberty Court North. The City Engineer is recommending this be changed to a 30 foot wide Outlot to be owned by Lot 8. This change will impact the configuration of Lots 7 and 9.
Streets. The proposed streets appear to be meeting the City’s minimum standards:
• Liberty Court is proposed to be 28-feet wide within a 60-foot right-of-way;
Trail Plan
Existing Trail
Proposed sidewalk
7
• A 60 foot cul-de-sac right-of-way width is provided with a 45 foot pavement radius;
• The cul-de-sac length is proposed to be 510 feet long;
• There is a proposed sidewalk to the west of this street. The residential maximum longitudinal grade is 6% with a sidewalk which appears to be feasible. Potential connections to this sidewalk should be considered moving forward.
• Surmountable concrete curb and gutter needs to be installed in single family areas with future
driveways.
The biggest issue of concern regarding streets is the fact that additional right-of-way must be dedicated along 30th Street North to ensure a minimum boulevard width of 16 feet is provided along the entire length of the plat. In addition to the right-of-way, a 10 foot utility corridor must also be
reserved for small utilities. The proposed stormwater facilities cannot encroach into this utility corridor.
Utilities – Municipal Water Supply and Municipal Sanitary Sewer. Public water and sanitary sewer service will be extended to the site with the development of Northport. The preliminary plans will need to include detailed utility construction plans that meet City engineering standards.
Environmental Review. The proposed development is within the Village Alternative Urban Area Wide Review (AUAR), which was completed in order to address the expected cumulative environmental impacts associated with the anticipated growth and development within the Village.
Storm Water Management. The general drainage system should mimic the natural topography of the site in order to ensure a drainage system that provides positive stormwater drainage across the
development. The proposed development area resides within the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD). City staff recommends early planning/coordination meetings with VBWD. The design of the storm water management systems must be compliant with the requirements of the State, VBWD, the City of Lake Elmo Storm Water Management Ordinance, and the City of Lake Elmo design
standards manual. The applicant is advised to fully read and comprehend the City’s storm water and erosion control ordinance since these standards are different, and in some cases more stringent, than the watershed district.
The storm water facilities must be platted as Outlots and deeded to the City for maintenance purposes
and must fully incorporate the 100-year High Water Level, 10 foot maintenance bench and all maintenance access roads. The storm water ponds will not be allowed to encroach on to adjacent private lots. The storm sewer system shall be designed to maintain the City standard minimum pipe cover of 3.0 feet, and drain tile is required as part of the City standard street section at all localized low points in the street. All storm sewer pipe easements must be a minimum of 30 feet in width. No
drainage and utility easement is shown for the storm sewer pipe along the Lot 5 and Lot 6 property line. It is likely that more land will need to be allocated for stormwater management. The preliminary grading plan shows pond encroachment on Lots 6 and 7, and additional pond depth will be required to meet City standards.
Grading restrictions along the Northern Natural Gas easement must be adhered to, and it is unclear how drainage within the Northern Natural Gas easement will be captured and conveyed to stormwater facilities. Additionally, Liberty Court drainage must be captured and treated on-site. Currently, a significant portion of the drainage is shown to be draining to the Northport subdivision,
8
and the stormwater management plan of this subdivision does not account for this additional impervious surface.
The ultimate discharge rate and location will be an important consideration. The stormwater
management plan will need to address changes to the downstream drainage system to the extent alterations are proposed. Written permission from properties that are impacted and submitted will be required as part of the development application.
City Engineer Review. The City Engineer’s review comments are found as part of the attachments to this report and are incorporated throughout the report.
Airport. The proposed development is not within the Lake Elmo Airport Existing Runway Protection Zones; however, the Metropolitan Airports Commission will be given the opportunity to review the proposed development with the Preliminary Plat application. Staff has distributed adjacent review to the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) as part of the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment request, but has not yet heard back from the MAC.
Lot Dimensions and Bulk Requirements. The proposed sketch plan appears to the meet the lot dimensions and bulk requirements for the Urban Low Density Residential zoning district, as shown below:
Standard Required Proposed
Minimum Lot Area 8,000 square feet 9,600 square feet – 36,460 square feet (average of 13,225 square feet)
Minimum Lot Width 60 feet 60-205.5 feet*, **
*See the Access portion of this report – lot widths of
Lots 7 and 9 may need to be reduced, possibly not meeting the 60 foot minimum standard.
** Lot 8 will have a lot width of approximately 205.5 feet of street frontage as the lot abuts 30th Street North, even though access will be
provided through the cul-de-sac of Liberty Court North.
Maximum Impervious Surface
40% Unknown
Minimum Front Yard Setback
25 feet Appears to be 25 feet
(grading plan scale not provided)
9
Minimum Interior Sideyard Setback (principal buildings)
10 feet Appears to be 8 feet on both
sides in northerly lots (grading plan scale not provided); sideyard setback averaging has been allowed in
the past
Minimum Interior Sideyard Setback (accessory structures)
5 feet N/A
Minimum Corner Sideyard Setback
15 feet N/A
Minimum Rear Yard Setback
20 feet All required rear yard
setbacks appear to be met (grading plan scale not provided)
Lot Easements. Lot easements (front, rear and side yard) need to be shown on the plan meeting
City requirements.
Northern Natural Gas Easement. A Northern Natural Gas easement runs along the western side of lots 9 through 13, and bisects lot 8 before getting to 30th Street North. As two large diameter gas mains are located in the easement, there are heavy restrictions on what can be done in this area (i.e. no building, creating, constructing, or allowing to be built any hard surface road,
building, or other structure; and no grading or other work without the written consent of
Northern). The City has no ordinance that requires a buildable or even usable backyard, but it is a fact that should be disclosed to future buyers should this development move forward. Owners of these lots will likely not be able to have decks, pools, accessory structures, or even landscaping without prior written consent of Northern. The Applicant should consider the value
of these lots and how they will communicate these restrictions, and will need to demonstrate how
the easement will be delineated within the yards to prevent homeowners from encroaching into the easement.
Landscaping. The applicant has not provided any details concerning landscaping for the site, which must be submitted at the time of Preliminary Plat submission and will need to adhere to
the City’s Landscape Requirements. There are a number of existing trees on the property, and the
project will be subject to the City’s tree protection and replacement ordinance. Additionally, it is recommended that the Applicant provide sufficient landscaping along 30th Street North to provide a sufficient buffer
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
Current Land Use. The property is currently used as a single family detached dwelling and is currently guided for Rural Single Family Zoning with a Village Open Space Overlay greenbelt
corridor on the southern border of the parcel. This land use has a guided density of 0.66-2 units
10
per acre. The Applicant and owner of the property would like to move the existing house to a lot
to the west of the proposed development, and subdivide the remaining portion of the parcel in to
12 additional parcels.
Proposed Land Use and Density. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposes to re-guide the property to Village Urban Low Density, which will allow a density of 1.5-2-49 units per acre. The development site is 5.97 acres, and a total of 13 residential lots are being proposed, totaling
a gross density of 2.17 units per acre. There are no wetlands, wetland buffers, public waters, or
other areas that are protected from development by local ordinance on the property, and because there is no public parkland or protected open space proposed nor arterial road right-of-way, the net density of the development is expected to also be 2.17 units per acre.
MUSA and Rural Single Family Sewered Land Use Option. The proposed development is
within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA), and sewer will be made available through
Northport, the development to the north and east of the proposed development. Areas within the City that are included in the MUSA must be developed at an average of three units per acre. In 2016, the City created a new land use that is called Rural Single Family – Sewered. This land use is intended for properties that were platted for conventional subdivision prior to 2005 that have
been (and will continue to be) serviced by private on-site well and septic systems, unless within
the MUSA area. If within a MUSA, the City Council may consider connection to the sanitary sewer system where practical. While the property does have the option of being re-guided to this land use category, the density of the proposed development is higher than the allowed density within the Rural Single Family land use category (0.66-2 units per acre), and so this land use
would be inappropriate for this proposed development. If the property were to re-guide to Rural
Single Family Sewered, the smallest the lot sizes allowed would be 24,000 square feet, which equates to a density of 1.8 units per acre.
Adjacent Land Use. Northport (the development to the north and east of the proposed development) is guided for Village Urban Low Density. This proposal would essentially be an
extension of the Village Urban Low Density land use that currently exists. Properties to the west
of the proposed development would remain guided for Rural Single Family and are also within the greenbelt buffer.
Recommended Findings. Staff recommends the following findings in regards to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment:
1. That the Applicant has submitted a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan in
accordance with the procedures as established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department and Lake Elmo Planning Commission; and
2. That the request is to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan:
a. On page III-11, updating Table 3-B to reflect proposed increased acreage of Village
Urban Low Density Residential and decreased acreage of Rural Single Family.
b. Updating Map 3-3 – the planned land use map.
3. That the proposed amendments are consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan in that the Property is within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area.
11
Recommended Conditions of Approval. Staff recommends the following conditions in regards
to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment:
1. Submission of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Metropolitan Council and the receipt of formal notification from the Metropolitan Council that its review has been completed and approved.
2. That the Applicant obtain Preliminary Plat approval from the City that meets the following:
a. Required densities of the Village Urban Low Density land use category.
b. Provides a sufficient Greenbelt Corridor as indicated in the Comprehensive Plan and
approved by the City.
c. Provides a usable rear yard for lots in which the Northern Natural Gas Company
Easement (Document 384029) (“Northern Easement”) is located, as determined by the
City; or receives approval from the City for required rear yards for lots in which the
Northern Easement is located, in which building, creating, constructing, or allowing to
be built any hard surface road, building, or other structure as well as altering the grade
or permitting such alteration upon which Northern Natural Gas Company has reserved
its Easement rights without the written consent of Northern.
d. All other applicable standards including but not limited to City Engineer Design
Standards, Valley Branch Watershed District requirements, and zoning standards.
Planning Commission Review. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Subdivision Sketch Plan and Comprehensive Plan Amendment at its meeting on November 13, 2017 and had the following comments in regards to the proposed subdivision sketch plan:
• They saw issues with the proposed greenbelt corridor and felt that additional width or
extensive landscaping was needed for the proposed subdivision.
• They saw definite issues with proposed location of the lots on the west of Liberty Court that are in conflict with the Northern Natural Gas Easement. They wished to see these lots have a usable backyard.
• The Comprehensive Plan Amendment made sense in that the subject property is adjacent to the V-LDR district and in the MUSA.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment with a vote of 7-0.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There would be no fiscal impact to the City at this time, as the developer would be required to pay for any amendments needed to accommodate the increase in REC units. Concept Plan approval
does not afford the applicant development rights. When the property develops, it will have urban
services and will pay sewer and water connection charges, building permit fees and the like.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide PID# 13.029.21.43.0001 from Rural Single Family to Village Urban Low Density, based on the recommended findings and conditions of approval.
12
“Move to recommend approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide PID# 13.029.21.43.0001 from Rural Single Family to Village Urban Low Density, based on the
recommended findings and conditions of approval.”
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission accept the Sketch Plan provided by JP Bush Homes for a 13 unit single family detached residential development of PID#13.029.21.43.0001.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Forms 2. Narrative
3. Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan 4. Subdivision Sketch Plan 5. City Engineer Review Memorandum 10/20/2017 6. Resolution 2017- Approving the Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment
PAGE 1 of 2
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 20, 2017
To: Emily Becker, Planning Director Re: McLeod Residential Subdivision
Cc: Chad Isakson, Assistant City Engineer Concept Plan Review
From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer
An engineering review has been completed for the McLeod Residential Subdivision Concept Plan. The submittal
consisted of the following documentation received on October 13, 2017.
Residential Concept Subdivision dated October 11, 2017 and prepared by Landmark Surveying, Inc.
Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan dated October 13, 2017 and prepared by PLOWE Engineering.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Narrative dated September 15, 2017.
We have the following review comments:
All public improvements constructed to support the development must be designed and constructed in accordance
with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual available on the City website dated March, 2017.
SITE PLAN AND TRANSPORTATION
Access Management. The Concept plan shows access to the plat from the Northport subdivision along
Liberty Court. This access was pre‐planned with the adjacent subdivision and preserves the proper access
management along 30th Street North.
Right‐of‐way dedication. The Plat must dedicate additional right‐of‐way along 30th Street North to ensure
a minimum 30th Street boulevard of 16 ft. along the entire length of the plat. In addition a 10 ft. utility
corridor must be reserved (at boulevard grades) for small utilities. The proposed Stormwater facilities
(including the 100‐year HWL) cannot encroach the 10 ft. utility corridor.
Screening along 30th Street is recommended. The south boundary of the subdivision is along the north
boulevard of 30th Street North and proposes two storm water ponds connected by a drainage swale. It is
recommended that additional space be allocated at elevations higher than 30th Street to create a
vegetative buffer between the lots and this collector street.
More land area is likely needed to be allocated for storm water management. The preliminary grading plan
already shows pond encroachment onto Lots 6 and 7. Also, additional pond depth must be provided to
meet City pond construction requirements.
Lots 9‐13 include large areas of gas main easement with 2 large diameter gas mains. There is no useable
rear yard along these lots.
Lot Easements (front, rear and side yard) should be shown on the plans meeting City requirements.
RESIDENTIAL STREETS
Lot 8 is proposed to access Liberty Court with a 20 ft. driveway easement on Lots 7 and 9. It is recommended
that this easement be revised as a 30 ft. minimum width Outlot to be owned by Lot 8.
FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261
Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264
Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267
Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4283
PAGE 2 of 2
Public street standards. Liberty Court must be designed to meet the City’s Engineering Design Standards. A
60 ft. right‐of‐way width with 28 ft. wide street has been shown as required; and a 60 ft. cul‐de‐sac R/W
radius with 45 ft. cul‐de‐sac pavement radius has been shown as required.
Liberty Court will result in a 510 ft. long cul‐de‐sac, meeting City standards.
The residential maximum longitudinal grade is 6% with a sidewalk.
Surmountable concrete curb and gutter shall be installed in single family residential areas with future
driveways.
Pedestrian facilities: A 6 ft. wide sidewalk has been shown along Liberty Court as required. The City should
review any potential connections to this sidewalk.
Ten (10) foot utility easements are required on either side of all right‐of‐ways.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
The site plan is subject to a storm water management plan meeting State, VBWD and City rules.
Storm water facilities proposed as part of the site plan to meet State and VBWD permitting requirements
must be constructed in accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual.
The general drainage system should mimic the natural topography of the site in order to ensure a drainage
system that provides positive storm water drainage across the development.
Overland emergency overflows or outlets will be required as part of the site plan.
Grading restrictions along the Northern Natural Gas easement must be adhered to as part of the
development plans. It is unclear how drainage within the NNG easement will be captured and conveyed to
the storm water facilities.
Liberty Court drainage must be captured and treated on‐site. A significant portion of the street is shown
draining to the Northport subdivision. The Northport storm water management plan does not account for
this additional impervious areas.
The ultimate discharge rate and location will be an important consideration. The storm water management
plan will need to address changes to the downstream drainage system to the extent alterations are
proposed. To the extent adjacent properties are impacted, written permission from those properties must
be submitted as part of the development applications.
It appears that all storm water facilities (ponds and infiltration basins) have been placed in Outlots. These
Outlots will be deeded to the City for maintenance purposes. The Stormwater Facility Outlots must fully
incorporate the 100‐year HWL, 10 foot maintenance bench and all maintenance access roads.
Maintenance access roads meeting City standards must be provided for all storm water facilities and must
be within Outlots dedicated to the City.
The storm sewer system shall be designed to maintain the City standard minimum pipe cover of 3.0 feet.
Drain tile is required as part of the City standard street section at all localized low points in the street. Drain
tile considerations may impact the storm sewer design and depth requirements at low points.
Per City requirements all storm sewer pipe easements must be a minimum 30‐feet in width. No drainage
and utility easement is shown for the storm sewer pipe along the Lot 5 and Lot 6 property line.
MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY
Municipal water supply is available immediately adjacent to the proposed development along Liberty Court.
The applicant is responsible to extend the municipal water into the development site at developer’s cost.
No trunk watermain oversizing is anticipated for this development.
MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER
Municipal sanitary sewer is available immediately adjacent to the proposed development along Liberty
Court. The applicant is responsible to extend sanitary sewer into the development site at developer’s cost.
No trunk sewer oversizing is anticipated.
City Council Resolution 2017-130 493203v1 SJS LA515-23
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
WASHINGTON COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-130
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE
LAND USE DESIGNATION OF PID# 13.029.21.43.0001 FROM RURAL SINGLE FAMILY TO
URBAN LOWDENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO SUBMIT A
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR SAME TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo (the “City”) has established a Comprehensive Plan that
provides a compilation of background data, policy statements, standards, and maps, which help to
guide the future physical, social, and economic development of the City; and
WHEREAS, JP Bush Homes, 1980 Quasar Avenue South, Lakeland, MN 55043 (the
“Applicant”) has submitted an application to the City to amend the Comprehensive Plan, a copy
of which is on file in the City Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan was submitted by the Applicant
along with a Subdivision Sketch Plan Review which includes 13 single-family residential detached
homes on 5.97 acres, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 13, 2017 to
consider the Applicant’s requests; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend approval to the City
Council on the Applicant’s requests; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Planning Commission and public comments
regarding the Applicant’s requests at its meeting on November 21, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan amendment and
believes that it is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED based upon the testimony elicited and information
received, the City Council makes the following findings of fact:
FINDINGS
City Council Resolution 2017-130 493203v1 SJS LA515-23
1. That the Applicant has submitted a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan in accordance
with the procedures as established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department and Lake Elmo
Planning Commission; and
2. That the request is to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan:
a. On page III-11, updating Table 3-B to reflect proposed increased acreage of Village
Urban Low Density Residential and decreased acreage of Rural Single Family.
b. Updating Map 3-3 – the planned land use map.
3. That the proposed amendments are consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan in that the Property is within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based on the above findings of fact, the
Lake Elmo City Council hereby approves the Applicant’s request to amend the Comprehensive
Plan as follows:
1. Submission of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Metropolitan Council and the receipt
of formal notification from the Metropolitan Council that its review has been completed and
approved.
2. That the Applicant obtain Preliminary Plat approval from the City that meets the following:
a. Required densities of the Village Urban Low Density land use category.
b. Provides a sufficient Greenbelt Corridor as indicated in the Comprehensive Plan and
approved by the City.
c. Provides a usable rear yard for lots in which the Northern Natural Gas Company
Easement (Document 384029) (“Northern Easement”) is located, as determined by the
City; or receives approval from the City for required rear yards for lots in which the
Northern Easement is located, in which building, creating, constructing, or allowing to
be built any hard surface road, building, or other structure as well as altering the grade or
permitting such alteration upon which Northern Natural Gas Company has reserved its
Easement rights without the written consent of Northern.
d. All other applicable standards including but not limited to City Engineer Design
Standards, Valley Branch Watershed District requirements, and zoning standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Lake Elmo City Council
hereby authorizes and directs staff to submit a Comprehensive Plan amendment and MUSA
expansion request consistent herewith to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval,
contingent upon the City’s preliminary approval of the plat based on the Concept Planned Unit
Development Plan as proposed by the Applicant.
Passed and duly adopted this 21st day of November 2017, by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elmo, Minnesota.
______________________________
Mike Pearson, Mayor
City Council Resolution 2017-130 493203v1 SJS LA515-23
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Julie Johnson, City Clerk
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017
REGULAR
ITEM: #16
MOTION
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brian A. Swanson – Finance Director AGENDA ITEM: Debt Management Policy Discussion
REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
BACKGROUND: Per several Finance Committee meetings, staff presented information regarding the original Debt
Management Policy and a revised Debt Management Policy for review and discussion. Based on these discussions, the Finance Committee provided clarity to the revised policy, subsequently approved it, and recommended it be considered by the City Council for approval. Therefore, staff wanted to provide the
City Council with the opportunity to review the revised debt management policies, and consider adoption of the revised Debt Management Policy this evening.
ITEMS OR QUESTIONS BEFORE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE: 1) Should the Council approve the attached Debt Management Policy approved by the Finance
Committee on November 9, 2017? DISCUSSION: Staff thought it would be useful to provide the City Council with some context regarding the original Debt Management Policy as well as the revised Debt Management Policy for review, comment and consideration. The main differences between the original policy, which was adopted on April 2, 2013, and the revised policy for consideration are as follows:
1) Enhanced discussion on key areas such as Credit Ratings, Financial Disclosure, Purposes and Uses of Debt, and Refunding of Debt.
2) New sections on Debt Administration and Practices, and Post Issuance Debt Compliance Policy are the result of new regulations that took effect after approval of the last policy, and are related to internal record keeping and external reporting.
By regularly analyzing, discussing and updating the policy as needed helps to ensure sound financial management concerning debt issuance and management. Further, review of governing and oversight bodies helps to ensure the policies and procedures are in congruence with the goals of those entities. FISCAL IMPACT: Monetarily, the impact will be absorbed by the appropriate City fund(s) as part of the legal and external administration, which occurs for each debt issuance and is usually consolidated into the issuance costs of
each bond issue. From a staffing perspective, it is opportunity cost as they prepare information for each
bond issue, perform operational work over the duration of the issue, and comply with related regulations. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Motion to approve the attached City of Lake Elmo Debt Management Policy – Revised - November 21, 2017.
ATTACHMENT: 1) City of Lake Elmo Debt Management Policy – Revised – November 21, 2017
Page 1 of 8
CITY OF LAKE ELMO DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
PURPOSE
The use of borrowing and the issuance of debt is an important and flexible financing mechanism available to the City of Lake Elmo. The issuance of debt allows capital improvements to proceed
when necessary and in advance of when it may otherwise be feasible. It can reduce long-term costs due to inflation, potentially reduce opportunity cost, and equalize the costs of improvements to present and future property owners and customers of the City. POLICY STATEMENT It is the policy of the City of Lake Elmo to establish guidelines for the use of debt in financing capital acquisitions, repayment of debt, and management of the overall level of debt in the city. A. Credit Ratings: The City of Lake Elmo seeks to maintain the highest possible credit ratings
for all categories of short-term and long-term General Obligation debt that can be achieved without compromising delivery of basic City services and achievement of adopted City policy objectives.
The City recognizes that external economic, natural, or other events may from time to time
affect the creditworthiness of its debt. Nevertheless, the Mayor, City Council, and Finance Committee are committed to ensuring that actions within their control are prudent and consistent with the highest standards of public financial management, and supportive of the creditworthiness objectives defined herein.
B. Financial Disclosure: The City is committed to full and complete financial disclosure, and to cooperating fully with rating agencies, institutional and individual investors, City departments and agencies, other levels of government, and the general public to share clear, comprehensible, and accurate financial information. The City is committed to meeting disclosure requirements on a timely and comprehensive basis.
Official statements accompanying debt issues, Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, and continuing disclosure statements will meet (at a minimum) the standards articulated by the Municipal Standards Rulemaking Board (MSRB), the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB), the National Federation of Municipal Analysts, the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC), and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The Finance Department shall be responsible for ongoing disclosure to established nationally recognized municipal securities information repositories (NRMSIRs) and for maintaining compliance with disclosure standards promulgated by state and national regulatory bodies.
Page 2 of 8
C. Debt Capacity: The City will keep outstanding debt within the limits prescribed by State statute and at levels consistent with its creditworthiness objectives. D. Purposes and Uses of Debt: The City will normally rely on existing funds, project revenues,
and grants from other governments to finance capital projects such as major maintenance,
small equipment acquisition, and small development projects. Debt may be used for purchases of large equipment, and for capital projects, which may generate revenues over time that are used to retire the debt entirely, have a property tax levy contribution and project revenue component, or are fully supported by a property tax levy. It is the intent to determine
which financing mechanism(s) are the most beneficial to the City, while also considering the
appropriate means to achieve a fair allocation of costs between current and future beneficiaries. a. Asset Life: The City will consider the use of debt for the acquisition, development,
replacement, maintenance, or expansion of an asset only if it has a useful life of at
least five years. Debt will not be issued for periods exceeding the useful life or average useful lives of the project or projects to be financed. b. Project Financing: If possible, the City’s goal is to make a cash contribution to
any project with an expected useful life of less than 10 years, rather than relying
on 100% debt financing. c. Debt Standards and Structure: Debt will be structured for the shortest period consistent with a fair allocation of costs to current and future beneficiaries or users.
Debt will be structured to achieve the lowest possible net cost to the City given market conditions, the urgency of the capital project, net revenues expected from the project (if any), and the nature and type of security provided. Moreover, to the extent possible, the City will design the repayment of its overall debt so as to recapture rapidly its credit capacity for future use. The City shall strive to repay
at least 50 percent within ten years. d. Backloading: The City will seek to structure debt with reasonably consistent principal and interest costs over the life of the debt. "Backloading" of costs will be considered only when natural disasters or extraordinary or unanticipated
external factors make the short- term cost of the debt prohibitive, when the benefits derived from the debt issuance can clearly be demonstrated to be greater in the future than in the present, when such structuring is beneficial to the City’s overall amortization schedule, or when such structuring will allow debt service to more closely match project revenues during the early years of the project’s operation.
E. Refunding of Debt: a. Advance refunding bonds shall not be utilized unless present value savings of 4% to 5% of refunded principal is achieved and unless the call date is within 3 years. The state law minimum is 3% of refunded principal. Bonds shall not be advance
refunded if there is a reasonable chance that revenues will be sufficient to pre-pay the debt at the call date.
Page 3 of 8
b. Current refunding bonds shall be utilized when present value savings of 3% of
refunded principal is achieved or in concert with other bond issues to save costs of issuance. c. Special assessment or revenue debt will not be refunded unless the Finance Director determines that special assessments or other sufficient revenues will not be collected soon enough to pay off the debt fully at that call date.
F. Debt Administration and Practices: In general, City debt will be issued through a competitive bidding process. Bids will be awarded on a true interest cost basis (TIC), providing other bidding requirements are satisfied. In the event that the City receives more than one bid with identical TICs, the tie may be broken by a flip of a coin.
a. Municipal Advisor: The City will retain an external municipal advisor, selected by the City’s Finance Department. The utilization of the municipal advisor for particular bond sales will be at the discretion of the Finance Director on a case by case basis and pursuant to the municipal advisory services contract. The municipal
advisors will have comprehensive municipal debt issuance experience with diverse financial structuring requirements and pricing of municipal securities. b. Bond Counsel: The City will retain external bond counsel for all debt issues. No
debt will be issued by the City without a written opinion by bond counsel affirming
that the City is authorized to issue the debt, stating that the City has met all state constitutional and statutory requirements necessary for issuance, and determining the debt’s federal income tax status.
c. Fiscal Agents: The Finance Department will utilize a fiscal agent on all City indebtedness. Fiscal agent fees for outstanding bonds will be paid from the Bond Interest and Redemption Fund, unless specified otherwise by the Finance Director. d. Disclosure: The city shall comply with SEC rule 15(c)2(12) on primary and
continuing disclosure. Continuing disclosure reports shall be filed no later than
180 days after receipt of the city’s annual financial report. e. Arbitrage: The city shall complete an arbitrage rebate report for each issue no less than every five years after its date of issuance.
f. Communication: The city will maintain frequent and regular communications with bond rating agencies about its financial condition and will follow a policy of full disclosure in every financial report and bond prospectus. The city will comply with Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) reporting requirements.
g. Reporting: The City will report at least annually the outstanding bonds to the City Council and Finance Committee. G. Post Issuance Debt Compliance Policy: The City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota (the “Issuer”)
issues tax-exempt governmental bonds (“TEBs”) to finance various public projects. As an issuer of TEBs, the Issuer is required by the terms of Sections 103 and 141-150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated
Page 4 of 8
thereunder (the “Treasury Regulations”), to take certain actions after the issuance of TEBs
to ensure the continuing tax- exempt status of such bonds. In addition, Section 6001 of the Code and Section 1.6001-1(a) of the Treasury Regulations impose record retention requirements on the Issuer with respect to its TEBs. This Post-Issuance Compliance Procedure and Policy for Tax-Exempt Governmental Bonds (the “Policy”) has been
approved and adopted by the Issuer to ensure that the Issuer complies with its post-issuance
compliance obligations under applicable provisions of the Code and Treasury Regulations. 1. Effective Date and Term. The effective date of this Policy is the date of approval by the City Council of the Issuer and this Policy shall remain in effect until superseded or
terminated by action of the City Council of the Issuer.
2. Responsible Parties. The City’s Finance Director of the Issuer (the “Compliance Officer”) shall be the party primarily responsible for ensuring that the Issuer successfully carries out its post-issuance compliance requirements under applicable provisions of the Code and Treasury Regulations. The Compliance Officer will be assisted by the staff of the
Issuer and other officials when appropriate. The Compliance Officer of the Issuer will also be assisted in carrying out post-issuance compliance requirements by the following organizations:
(a) Bond Counsel (as of the date of approval of this Policy, bond counsel for the Issuer is Dorsey & Whitney, LLP); (b) Municipal Advisor (as of the date of approval of this Policy, the municipal advisor of the Issuer is Northland Securities, Inc.);
(c) Paying Agent (the person, organization, or officer of the Issuer primarily responsible for providing paying agent services for the Issuer); and (d) Rebate Analyst (the organization primarily responsible for providing rebate analyst
services for the Issuer).
The Compliance Officer shall be responsible for assigning post-issuance compliance responsibilities to members of the Finance Department and other staff of the Issuer, Bond Counsel, Paying Agent, and Rebate Analyst. The Compliance Officer shall utilize such
other professional service organizations as are necessary to ensure compliance with the post-
issuance compliance requirements of the Issuer. The Compliance Officer shall provide training and educational resources to Issuer staff responsible for ensuring compliance with any portion of the post-issuance compliance requirements of this Policy.
3. Post-Issuance Compliance Actions. The Compliance Officer shall take the following post-issuance compliance actions or shall verify that the following post-issuance compliance actions have been taken on behalf of the Issuer with respect to each issue of TEBs:
(a) The Compliance Officer shall prepare a transcript of principal documents (this
action will be the primary responsibility of Bond Counsel).
Page 5 of 8
(b) The Compliance Officer shall file with the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”),
within the time limit imposed by Section 149(e) of the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, an Information Return for Tax-Exempt Governmental Obligations, Form 8038- G (this action will be the primary responsibility of Bond Counsel).
(c) The Compliance Officer shall prepare an “allocation memorandum” for each issue
of TEBs in accordance with the provisions of Treasury Regulations, Section 1.148-6(d)(1), that accounts for the allocation of the proceeds of the tax-exempt bonds to expenditures not later than the earlier of:
(i) eighteen (18) months after the later of (A) the date the expenditure is paid,
or (B) the date the project, if any, that is financed by the tax-exempt bond issue is placed in service; or (ii) the date sixty (60) days after the earlier of (A) the fifth anniversary of the
issue date of the tax-exempt bond issue, or (B) the date sixty (60) days after the
retirement of the tax- exempt bond issue. Preparation of the allocation memorandum will be the primary responsibility of the Compliance Officer (in consultation with the Municipal Advisor and Bond Counsel).
(d) The Compliance Officer, in consultation with Bond Counsel, shall identify proceeds of TEBs that must be yield-restricted and shall monitor the investments of any yield-restricted funds to ensure that the yield on such investments does not exceed the yield to which such investments are restricted.
(e) In consultation with Bond Counsel, the Compliance Officer shall determine whether the Issuer is subject to the rebate requirements of Section 148(f) of the Code with respect to each issue of TEBs. In consultation with Bond Counsel, the Compliance Officer shall determine, with respect to each issue of TEBs of the Issuer, whether the Issuer is
eligible for any of the temporary periods for unrestricted investments and is eligible for any
of the spending exceptions to the rebate requirements. The Compliance Officer shall contact the Rebate Analyst (and, if appropriate, Bond Counsel) prior to the fifth anniversary of the date of issuance of each issue of TEBs of the Issuer and each fifth anniversary thereafter to arrange for calculations of the rebate requirements with respect to such TEBs. If a rebate
payment is required to be paid by the Issuer, the Compliance Officer shall prepare or cause
to be prepared the Arbitrage Rebate, Yield Reduction and Penalty in Lieu of Arbitrage Rebate, Form 8038-T, and submit such Form 8038-T to the IRS with the required rebate payment. If the Issuer is authorized to recover a rebate payment previously paid, the Compliance Officer shall prepare or cause to be prepared the Request for Recovery of
Overpayments Under Arbitrage Rebate Provisions, Form 8038-R, with respect to such
rebate recovery, and submit such Form 8038-R to the IRS. 4. Procedures for Monitoring, Verification, and Inspections. The Compliance Officer shall institute such procedures as the Compliance Officer shall deem necessary and
appropriate to monitor the use of the proceeds of TEBs issued by the Issuer, to verify that certain post-issuance compliance actions have been taken by the Issuer, and to provide for
Page 6 of 8
the inspection of the facilities financed with the proceeds of such bonds. At a minimum, the
Compliance Officer shall establish the following procedures: (a) The Compliance Officer shall monitor the use of the proceeds of TEBs to: (i) ensure compliance with the expenditure and investment requirements under the temporary period provisions set forth in Treasury Regulations, Section 1.148-2(e);
(ii) ensure compliance with the safe harbor restrictions on the acquisition of investments set forth in Treasury Regulations, Section 1.148-5(d); (iii) ensure that the investments of any yield- restricted funds do not exceed the yield to which such investments are restricted; and (iv) determine whether there has been compliance with the spend-down requirements under the spending exceptions to the rebate
requirements set forth in Treasury Regulations, Section 1.148-7. (b) The Compliance Officer shall monitor the use of all bond-financed facilities in order to: (i) determine whether private business uses of bond-financed facilities have exceeded the de minimis limits set forth in Section 141(b) of the Code as a
result of leases and subleases, licenses, management contracts, research contracts, naming rights agreements, or other arrangements that provide special legal entitlements to nongovernmental persons; and (ii) determine whether private security or payments that exceed the de minimis limits set forth in Section 141(b)
of the Code have been provided by nongovernmental persons with respect to such
bond-financed facilities. The Compliance Officer shall provide training and educational resources to any Issuer staff who have the primary responsibility for the operation, maintenance, or inspection of bond-financed facilities with regard to the limitations on the private business use of bond-financed facilities and as to the
limitations on the private security or payments with respect to bond-financed
facilities. (c) The Compliance Officer shall undertake the following with respect to each outstanding issue of TEBs of the Issuer: (i) an annual review of the books and
records maintained by the Issuer with respect to such bonds; and (ii) an annual physical inspection of the facilities financed with the proceeds of such bonds, conducted by the Compliance Officer with the assistance with any Issuer staff who have the primary responsibility for the operation, maintenance, or inspection of such bond-financed facilities.
5. Record Retention Requirements. The Compliance Officer shall collect and retain the following records with respect to each issue of TEBs of the Issuer and with respect to the facilities financed with the proceeds of such bonds: (i) audited financial statements of the Issuer; (ii) appraisals, demand surveys, or feasibility studies with respect to the facilities
to be financed with the proceeds of such bonds; (iii) publications, brochures, and newspaper articles related to the bond financing; (iv) trustee or paying agent statements; (v) records of all investments and the gains (or losses) from such investments; (vi) paying agent or trustee statements regarding investments and investment earnings; (vii) reimbursement resolutions and expenditures reimbursed with the proceeds of such bonds; (viii) allocations of proceeds
to expenditures (including costs of issuance) and the dates and amounts of such expenditures (including requisitions, draw schedules, draw requests, invoices, bills, and cancelled checks with respect to such expenditures); (ix) contracts entered into for the construction,
Page 7 of 8
renovation, or purchase of bond-financed facilities; (x) an asset list or schedule of all bond-
financed depreciable property and any depreciation schedules with respect to such assets or property; (xi) records of the purchases and sales of bond-financed assets; (xii) private business uses of bond-financed facilities that arise subsequent to the date of issue through leases and subleases, licenses, management contracts, research contracts, naming rights
agreements, or other arrangements that provide special legal entitlements to
nongovernmental persons and copies of any such agreements or instruments; (xiii) arbitrage rebate reports and records of rebate and yield reduction payments; (xiv) resolutions or other actions taken by the governing body subsequent to the date of issue with respect to such bonds; (xv) formal elections authorized by the Code or Treasury Regulations that are taken
with respect to such bonds; (xvi) relevant correspondence relating to such bonds; (xvii)
documents related to guaranteed investment contracts or certificates of deposit, credit enhancement transactions, and financial derivatives entered into subsequent to the date of issue; (xviii) copies of all Form 8038-Ts and Form 8038-Rs filed with the IRS; and (xix) the transcript prepared with respect to such TEBs. The records collected by the Issuer shall
be stored in any format deemed appropriate by the Compliance Officer and shall be retained
for a period equal to the life of the TEBs with respect to which the records are collected (which shall include the life of any bonds issued to refund any portion of such TEBs or to refund any refunding bonds) plus three (3) years.
6. Remedies. In consultation with Bond Counsel, the Compliance Officer shall
become acquainted with the remedial actions under Treasury Regulations, Section 1.141-12, to be utilized in the event that private business use of bond-financed facilities exceeds the de minimis limits under Section 141(b)(1) of the Code. In consultation with Bond Counsel, the Compliance Officer shall become acquainted with the Tax Exempt Bonds
Voluntary Closing Agreement Program described in Notice 2008-31, 2008-11 I.R.B. 592,
to be utilized as a means for an issuer to correct any post-issuance infractions of the Code and Treasury Regulations with respect to outstanding tax-exempt bonds. 7. Continuing Disclosure Obligations. In addition to its post-issuance compliance
requirements under applicable provisions of the Code and Treasury Regulations, the Issuer has agreed to provide continuing disclosure, such as annual financial information and material event notices, pursuant to a continuing disclosure certificate or similar document (the “Continuing Disclosure Document”) prepared by Bond Counsel and made a part of the transcript with respect to each issue of bonds of the Issuer that is subject to such continuing
disclosure requirements. The Continuing Disclosure Documents are executed by the Issuer to assist the underwriters of the Issuer’s bonds in meeting their obligations under Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation, 17 C.F.R. Section 240.15c2-12, as in effect and interpreted from time to time (“Rule 15c2-12”). The continuing disclosure obligations of the Issuer are governed by the Continuing Disclosure Documents and by the terms of Rule
15c2-12. The Compliance Officer is primarily responsible for undertaking such continuing disclosure obligations and to monitor compliance with such obligations. 8. Other Post-Issuance Actions. If, in consultation with Bond Counsel, Municipal Advisor, Paying Agent, Rebate Analyst, or the City Council, the Compliance Officer
determines that any additional action not identified in this Policy must be taken by the Compliance Officer to ensure the continuing tax-exempt status of any issue of governmental bonds of the Issuer, the Compliance Officer shall take such action if the Compliance Officer
Page 8 of 8
has the authority to do so. If, after consultation with Bond Counsel, Municipal Advisor,
Paying Agent, Rebate Analyst, or the City Council, the Compliance Officer determines that this Policy must be amended or supplemented to ensure the continuing tax-exempt status of any issue of governmental bonds of the Issuer, the Compliance Officer shall recommend to the City Council that this Policy be so amended or supplemented.
9. Taxable Governmental Bonds. Most of the provisions of this Policy, other than the provisions of Section 7, are not applicable to governmental bonds the interest on which is includable in gross income for federal income tax purposes. On the other hand, if an issue of taxable governmental bonds is later refunded with the proceeds of an issue of tax-exempt governmental refunding bonds, then the uses of the proceeds of the taxable governmental
bonds and the uses of the facilities financed with the proceeds of the taxable governmental bonds will be relevant to the tax-exempt status of the governmental refunding bonds. Therefore, if there is any reasonable possibility that an issue of taxable governmental bonds may be refunded, in whole or in part, with the proceeds of an issue of TEBs, then for purposes of this Policy, the Compliance Officer shall treat the issue of taxable governmental
bonds as if such issue were an issue of TEBs and shall carry out and comply with the requirements of this Policy with respect to such taxable governmental bonds. The Compliance Officer shall seek the advice of Bond Counsel as to whether there is any reasonable possibility of issuing TEBs to refund an issue of taxable governmental bonds.
10. Qualified 501(c)(3) Bonds. If the City issues bonds to finance a facility to be owned by the City but which may be used, in whole or in substantial part, by a nongovernmental organization that is exempt from federal income taxation under Section 501(a) of the Code as a result of the application of Section 501(c)(3) of the Code (a “501(c)(3) Organization”),
the City may elect to issue the bonds as “qualified 501(c)(3) bonds” the interest on which is exempt from federal income taxation under Sections 103 and 145 of the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations. Although such qualified 501(c)(3) bonds are not governmental bonds, at the election of the Compliance Officer, for purposes of this Policy, the Compliance Officer shall treat such issue of qualified 501(c)(3) bonds as if such issue
were an issue of tax-exempt governmental bonds and shall carry out and comply with the requirements of this Policy with respect to such qualified 501(c)(3) bonds. Alternatively, in cases where compliance activities are reasonably within the control of the relevant 501(c)(3) Organization, the Compliance Officer may determine that all or some portion of compliance responsibilities described in this Policy shall be assigned to the relevant organization.
ROLE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, FINANCE COMMITTEE AND STAFF Relevant information will be brought to the City Council and Finance Committee when applicable to aid in policy, procedure and other key decision or direction regarding City business. As such,
staff will provide applicable debt service information and where appropriate, suggest revisions to the policy for consideration. In addition, as the business needs and vision of the City Council and Finance Committee change, this policy can be reviewed and updated as necessary.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: November 21, 2017
REGULAR
ITEM: #17
MOTION
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brian A. Swanson – Finance Director AGENDA ITEM: Fund Balance/Net Position Policy Discussion
REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator
BACKGROUND: Per several Finance Committee meetings, staff presented information regarding the original Fund
Balance/Net Assets Policy and a revised Fund Balance/Net Position Policy for review and discussion. Based on these discussions, the Finance Committee provided clarity to the revised policy, subsequently approved it, and recommended it be considered by the City Council for approval. Therefore, staff wanted
provide the City Council with the opportunity discuss the policy, and consider adoption of the revised Fund Balance/Net Position Policy this evening.
ITEMS OR QUESTIONS BEFORE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE: 1) Should the Council approve the attached Fund Balance/Net Position Policy recommended by the
Finance Committee on November 9, 2017? DISCUSSION: Staff thought it would be useful to provide the City Council with some context regarding the original Fund Balance/Net Assets Policy as well as the revised Fund Balance/Net Position Policy for review, comment and consideration. The main differences between the original policy, which was adopted on April 2, 2013, and the revised policy for consideration are as follows:
1) Updated language to reflect Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement Number 54 (GASB 54) for classifications of Fund Balance within Governmental Funds.
2) Updated Unassigned Fund Balance Percentage in the General Fund moving it from 35-50% to a target floor of 50-60% of the subsequent budgeted fiscal year expenditures. 3) Additional language regarding the General Fund in terms of appropriations and commitment of fund balance. 4) Removal of language that is not directly under the City’s control regarding maintaining its bond rating. 5) Addition of a brief Debt Service section to capture all of the City’s Governmental Funds. 6) Additional language regarding Proprietary Funds, such as Water, Sewer and Storm Water, including suggestions on unrestricted net position percentage targets.
By regularly analyzing, discussing and updating the policy as needed helps to ensure sound financial
management concerning fund balance/net position. In addition, working to achieve adequate cash flow allows the City to be nimble and proactive if an opportunity arises that makes sound business sense. Finally, review of governing and oversight bodies helps to ensure the policies and procedures are in congruence
with the goals of those entities. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact would be contingent upon the 2018 Proposed Budget that is adopted and the results of each fiscal year in terms of revenues and expenditures. As such, as of 12/31/16, the unassigned fund balance in the General Fund is $3,279,815. Based on the 2017 Adopted Budget, expenditures are budgeted at $3,915,386, which would result in an unassigned fund balance percentage in the General Fund of approximately 83% at 12/31/17. As of the most recent 2018 Proposed General Fund Budget the City Council received on November 14, 2017, expenditures are budgeted to be $4,701,452, resulting in an unassigned fund balance percentage of 67% in the General Fund at 12/31/18. RECOMMENDATION:
1) Motion to approve the attached City of Lake Elmo Fund Balance/Net Position Policy – Revised - November 21, 2017. ATTACHMENT: 1) City of Lake Elmo Fund Balance/Net Position Policy – Revised – November 21, 2017
Page 1 of 4
CITY OF LAKE ELMO
FUND BALANCE/NET POSITION POLICY
PURPOSE
It is important for the financial stability of the City of Lake Elmo to maintain fund balance/net
position for unanticipated expenditures or unforeseen emergencies, as well as to provide adequate working capital for current operating needs so as to avoid short-term borrowing. The purpose of this policy is to establish appropriate fund balance/net position levels for each fund that is primarily supported by property tax revenues or user fees. This policy will help ensure that adequate
resources are available to meet cash flow needs for carrying out the regular operations of the City,
as well as to meet the fund balance/net position requirements that may be externally or internally imposed.
POLICY STATEMENT
The City Council authorizes the City Administrator and/or the Finance Director to assign fund
balance that reflects the City’s intended use of those funds. When both restricted and unrestricted
resources are available for use, it is the City’s policy to first use restricted resources, and then use unrestricted resources as they are needed. When unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City’s policy to use resources in the following order; 1) committed 2) assigned 3) unassigned.
The fund balance classifications below apply only to Governmental Funds, not Proprietary Funds.
Classification of Fund Balance/Procedures 1. Nonspendable Amounts that cannot be spent because they are not in a spendable form or are
legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. Examples are inventory or prepaid items. 2. Restricted Amounts subject to externally enforceable legal restrictions. Examples include
bond proceeds and grants.
3. Unrestricted The total of committed fund balance, assigned fund balance, and unassigned
fund balance:
Committed fund balance – amounts that can be used only for the specific
Page 2 of 4
purposes determined by a formal action of the government’s highest level of
decision-making authority. Commitments may be changed or lifted only by
the government taking the same formal action that imposed the constraint originally.
Assigned fund balance – amounts intended to be used for a specific
purpose; intent can be expressed by the government body or by an official
or body to which the governing body delegates the authority.
Unassigned fund balance – residual amounts that are available for any purpose in the general fund. The General Fund should be the only fund that
reports a positive unassigned fund balance amount. This classification is also
used to account for deficit fund balances in other governmental funds. Governmental Funds A. General Fund
The city will maintain unassigned fund balance in the General Fund with a target floor of 50-60% of the subsequent budgeted fiscal year expenditures, with any additional percentage point(s) be able to be set aside for approved capital
purchases, or for reduction in debt service via defeasance or refunding; however, this need could fluctuate with each year’s budget objectives.
Annual proposed General Fund budgets shall include this benchmark policy. The City Council and Finance Committee shall review the amounts in fund balance in conjunction with the annual budget approval, and make adjustments
as necessary to meet expected cash-flow needs.
In the event the unassigned fund balance in the General Fund is determined to be less than the minimum requirement at the completion of any fiscal year, the city shall plan to adjust budget resources in the subsequent fiscal years to bring the fund balance into compliance with this policy, which could include increasing the
property tax levy.
The City Council may consider appropriating (for authorized purposes) year-end fund balance in excess of the policy level or increasing the minimum fund balance. An example of preferred use of excess fund balance would be for expenditures, such as:
1. to fund capital items 2. to fund a one-time (non-recurring) expenditure or grant match opportunity 3. to provide for funding of obligations not previously recognized 4. to fund a one-time unplanned revenue shortfall
5. to fund an unplanned expenditure due to an emergency or disaster 6. to retire existing debt
7. to fund policy shifts by other governmental entities having
a negative impact on the city
Appropriation from the minimum fund balance shall require the approval of the City Council and shall be used only for non-recurring expenditures, unforeseen emergencies or immediate capital needs that cannot be
Page 3 of 4
accommodated through current year savings. Replenishment
recommendations will accompany the decision to utilize fund balance.
At the discretion of the City Council, fund balance may be committed for specific purposes by resolution designating the specific use of fund balance and the amount. The resolution would need to be approved no later than the close of the reporting period and will remain binding unless removed in the same manner.
B. Special Revenue Funds The city will maintain reserves in the Special Revenue funds at levels sufficient to provide working capital for current expenditure needs plus an amount that is estimated to be needed to meet legal restrictions, requirements by external funding sources
and/or pay for future capital projects. Future capital projects must be identified and
quantified in a written plan for the fund, which shall be included in the city’s annual Capital Improvement Plan. C. Debt Service Funds The city will maintain reserves in the Debt Service funds at levels sufficient to provide
working capital for current debt service expenditure needs plus an amount that is estimated to be needed to meet legal restrictions and requirements by external funding sources. D. Capital Project Funds The city will maintain reserves in the Capital Project funds at levels sufficient to
provide working capital for current expenditure needs plus an amount that is estimated to be needed to meet legal restrictions, requirements by external funding sources and/or pay for future capital projects. Future capital projects must be identified and quantified in a written finance plan for the fund, which shall be included in the city’s
annual Capital Improvement Plan.
Proprietary Funds
A. Enterprise Funds These funds were established to account for the operation of Water, Sewer, and Storm
Water operations which are designed to be self-supporting from user charges.
1) Water Utility
This fund is used to account for the provision of water services to the customers of
the City related to administration, operations, maintenance, billing and collection. This fund is financed predominantly through user charges.
Unrestricted net position - The City will strive to maintain an unrestricted net
position in the Water Utility Fund of at least 50% of the subsequent budgeted fiscal
year operating expenses. Since a significant source of revenue in the Water Utility Fund comes from user charges, maintaining an unrestricted net position that is equal to at least 50% of the budgeted fiscal year operating expenses ensures that sufficient resources are available to fund basic City functions between receipts of user charges.
Page 4 of 4
Restricted net position – The City will restrict Water Availability Charges (WAC)
for the purpose of infrastructure and capital expenses, and/or debt service.
2) Sewer Utility
This fund is used to account for the provisions of sewer services to the customers of
the City. All activities necessary to provide this utility to the customers are administration, operations, maintenance, billing and collection. This fund is financed predominantly through user charges. Unrestricted net position - The City will strive to maintain an unrestricted net position in the Sewer Utility Fund of at least 50% of the subsequent budgeted fiscal year operating expenses. Since a significant source of revenue in the Sewer Utility Fund comes from user charges, maintaining an unrestricted net position that is equal
to at least 50% of the budgeted fiscal year operating expenses ensures that sufficient
resources are available to fund basic City functions between receipts of user charges. Restricted net position – The City will restrict Sewer Availability Charges (SAC) for the purpose of infrastructure and capital expenses, and/or debt service.
3) Storm Water Utility
This fund is used to account for the provision of storm water to the customers of the City related to administration, operations, maintenance, billing and collection. This fund is financed predominantly through user charges.
The City will strive to maintain an unrestricted net position in the Storm Water Utility Fund in the range of at least 50–65% of the subsequent budgeted fiscal year expenses. This will ensure that sufficient resources are available to fund basic Storm Water activities since user charges are billed annually.
ROLE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, FINANCE COMMITTEE AND STAFF Relevant information will be brought to the City Council and Finance Committee when applicable to aid in policy, procedure and other key decision or direction regarding City business. As such, staff will provide applicable fund balance or net position information and where appropriate,
suggest revisions to the policy for consideration. In addition, as the business needs and vision of
the City Council and Finance Committee change, this policy can be reviewed and updated as necessary.