Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12-19-17 full council meeting packet
NOTICE OF MEETING City Council Meeting Tuesday, December 19, 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. December 5, 2017 D. Public Comments/Inquiries E. Presentations F. Consent Agenda 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. Accept November 2017 Assessor’s Report 4. Accept November 2017 Building Department Report 5. Accept November 2017 Fire Department Report 6. Accept November 2017 Public Works Department Report 7. Approve Withdrawal from Gateway Corridor Commission-Resolution No 2017-139 8. Inwood Booster Station – Approve Change Order No. 5 & Compensating Change Order No. 6 9. Inwood Booster Station – Accept Improvements and Approve Pay Request No. 9 (FINAL) 10. Village Preserve 1st and 2nd Additions – Accept Improvements and Approve Reduction of Security 11. Approve Hiring of Public Works Operator 12. Approve Century College Customized Training Contract for Lake Elmo Fire 13. Approve Amendment to MNDOT Agreement 03330-Resolution 2017-140 G. Regular Agenda 14. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, and Zoning Map Amendment for Closed Landfill – Ordinance 08-192 & 08-193; Resolution 2017-143 15. Sign Ordinance Revisions-Ordinance No 08-192, Resolution 2017-141 16. Easton Village 3rd Addition Developer Agreement Amendment – Resolution 2017-142 17. 2018-2022 Capital Improvement Plan 18. 2018 Regular Meeting Schedule 19. Prosecution Services H. Council Reports I. Staff Reports and Announcements J. Closed Session The council will enter a closed session pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13.D.05 Subd. 3, in order to develop or consider offers and/or counteroffers for the purchase of real property located at 3880 Laverne Ave in Lake Elmo, Minnesota K. 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 DECEMBER 5, 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 12, “Accept Planning Director Resignation” was removed from the agenda. Item 8, “Approve Personnel & FMLA Policies” and Item 9, “Approve Compensation Policy” were moved to the Regular Agenda. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. Motion passed 5 – 0. ACCEPT MINUTES Minutes of the November 21, 2017 Regular Meeting were accepted as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES Virginia Pleban, 8245 59th Street North, commented on the sound system in the Council chambers and stated that it is difficult to hear what is being said. Susan Saffle, 11180 50th Street North, presented concerns over the proposed cemetery on 50th Street. Jean Mandrinich, 11240 50th Street North, commented on a recent court decision on the cemetery proposal Yvette Oldendorf, 5408 Lake Elmo Avenue North, commented on a recent court decision on the cemetery proposal. PRESENTATIONS None LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 5, 2017 Page 2 of 6 CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements and Payroll 3. Approve Liquor License Renewal – Elmo Liquor 4. Adopt Resolution 2017-132 Declaring Polling Locations for 2018 5. Approve Holding Local Board of Appeals - Resolution 2017-133 6. Approve 2018 Contract with Animal Humane Society 7. Wildflower 1st Addition – Accept Improvements and Approve Reduction of Security #5 and Wildflower 2nd Addition Approve Reduction of Security #1 8. Approve Personnel & FMLA Policies 9. Approve Compensation Policy 10. Approve Environmental Awards Program 11. Accept Paid on Call Firefighter Resignation 12. Accept Planning Director Resignation Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Motion passed 5 - 0. ITEM 8: Approve Personnel & FMLA Policies City Administrator Handt provided a brief update on the proposed policies, noting updates made since the Council reviewed the document at the November 14, 2017 Council Workshop. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED PERSONNEL POLICTY AND FMLA POLICY EFFECTIVE 1/1/18. Motion passed 4 – 0 - 1. (Fliflet – abstain) ITEM 9: Approve Compensation Policy Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPROVE THE COMPENSATION POLICY, POSITION GRADES AND 2018 NON-REPRESENTED PAY RANGES. Motion passed 4 – 1. (Fliflet – nay) Councilmember Fliflet stated that she supports a policy that is commensurate with experience and abilities. ITEM 13: 2018 Street and Drainage Improvements – Public Hearing, Order Plans and Specifications City Engineer Griffin presented the proposed scope of improvements, estimated cost and number of assessable properties, findings and recommendations for 2018 street and drainage improvements. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 5 – 0. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 5, 2017 Page 3 of 6 No comments were received during the public hearing. 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 2017-134 ORDERING THE 2018 STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. Motion passed 5 – 0. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES CONTRACT TO BOLTON AND MENK IN THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $59,961. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 14: Continental Properties Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concept Plan Planning Director Becker presented updates to the original staff presentation and presented findings of fact from the Planning Commission. Erik Hahn, Continental Properties, reported on supply and demand for rental properties and the benefits of the proposed site for potential tenants. Gwen Wheeler, Continental Properties, reviewed planned contributions to City infrastructure and parkland contribution and reported on neighborhood meetings held. Robert Tufty, 6365 Jasmine Avenue North, Grant, spoke in support of the development. Jacob Hafdahl, 9562 Junco Road North, presented a video he prepared opposing the proposal. Stuart Johnson, 3603 Lake Elmo Avenue, spoke about positive aspects of the proposal. Stephany Laramy, 9918 7th Street North, spoke in opposition of the plan. Mike Kobe, 9616 Junco Road North, spoke in opposition of the proposed comp plan amendments. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-112 APPROVING A COMPRESENTIVE PLAN AMENDMENT RE-GUIDING A PORTION OF PID 34.029.21.43.0003 FROM URBAN MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO URBAN HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AS REQUESTED BY CONTINENTAL 419 FUND LLC. Motion failed 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay) Councilmember Lundgren stated she doesn’t feel the proposed development is a good fit for Lake Elmo and added that the neighboring property owners oppose the proposal and single family residential provides a greater tax benefit. Councilmember Fliflet stated that urban medium density is the correct zoning for the area. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 5, 2017 Page 4 of 6 Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-112 DENYING A COMPRESENTIVE PLAN AMENDMENT RE-GUIDING A PORTION OF PID 34.029.21.43.0003 FROM URBAN MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO URBAN HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AS REQUESTED BY CONTINENTAL 419 FUND LLC. Motion passed 5 – 0. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-113 DENYING THE PUD CONCEPT PLAN AS REQUESTED BY CONTINENTAL 419 FUND LLC FOR PID# 34.029.21.43.0003. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 15: Public Hearing for 2018 General Fund Budget and 2018 Final Property Levy Certification Finance Director Swanson presented an overview of the proposed 2018 general fund budget and property tax levy. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 5 – 0. Stuart Johnson, 3603 Lake Elmo Avenue North, noted that earlier in the meeting the Council denied a proposed development that would have brought a lot of tax revenue to the City. Janice Green, 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North, commented on high taxes on her property and minimum lot requirements and limit her ability to subdivide it. Barry Weeks, 3647 Lake Elmo Avenue North, commented on the denial of the Continental Properties proposal that would have contributed property taxes and asked about the City’s current cost for legal fees. 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 2017-133 ADOPTING THE 2018 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND AUTHORIZING THE 2018 FINAL PROPERTY TAX LEVY. Motion passed 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay) ITEM 16: 2018 Utility Budgets Finance Director Swanson presented the proposed 2018 Utility Budgets. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-136 ADOPTING THE 2018 WATER, SEWER AND STORM WATER FUND BUDGETS. Motion passed 4 – 1. (Fliflet – nay) Councilmember Fliflet stated that the increased rates are premature. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 5, 2017 Page 5 of 6 ITEM 17: 2018 Fee Schedule Finance Director Swanson presented fee schedule updates proposed for 2018. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 08-191 ADOPTING THE 2018 FEE SCHEDULE. Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO AMEND THE PRIMARY MOTION TO REMOVE THE SOD CREDIT FROM THE FEE SCHEDULE. Motion passed 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay) Primary motion passed 4 – 1. (Fliflet – nay) Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-137 AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-191 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 18: Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment to Amend Language Regarding Allowable Density for Open Space Preservation Developments Planning Director Becker reviewed the request from Landucci Homes to amend the language regarding allowable density for open space preservation developments within the City. Nathan Landucci, Landucci Homes, discussed the site and the challenges presented due to the terrain and wetlands. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Bloyer, moved TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT DENSITY FOR OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENTS. Motion failed 3 – 2. (Pearson, Nelson – nay) Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-123 DENYING THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REGARDING DENSITY FOR OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENTS. Motion passed 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay) Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-124 DENYING THE PROPOSED ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING DENSITY FOR OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENTS. Motion passed 3 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay) ITEM 19: Hidden Meadows 2nd Addition Development Agreement Planning Director Becker provided an update on the process, noting that the developer has met all conditions of the final plat approval with the exception of executing a development agreement. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 5, 2017 Page 6 of 6 Councilmember Bloyer, seconded by Councilmember Fliflet, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-138 APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR HIDDEN MEADOWS AT LAKE ELMO 2ND ADDITION FINAL PLAT. Motion passed 4 – 1. (Lundgren – nay) COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Pearson: No report Councilmember Nelson: No report Councilmember Lundgren: Fielded calls from residents. Councilmember Bloyer: No report Councilmember Fliflet: Requested a future workshop agenda item for discussion of calculation of density on development applications. Meeting adjourned at 11:14 pm. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ATTEST: ______________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk THE CITY OF U\KEELMO STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: AGENDA ITEM: REVIEWED BY: Mayor and City Council Amy La Belle, Accountant Approve Disbursements Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND INFORMATION/STAFF REPORT: DATE: December19,2017 CONSENT #2 The City of Lake Elmo has the fiduciary responsibility to conduct normal business operations. Below is a summary of current claims to be disbursed and paid in accordance with State law and City policies and procedures. FISCAL IMPACT: Claim# Amount Description ACH $ 62,352.96 Payroll 12/07/17 46787-46854 $ 2,382,435.73 Accounts Payable 12/19/17 2877-2878 $ 493.80 Accounts Payable (Library Checks) 12/19/17 TOTAL $ 2,445,282.49 RECOMMENDATION: Ifremoved from the consent agenda, the recommended motion is as follows: "Motion to approve the aforementioned disbursements in the amount of $2,445,282.49. n ATTACHMENTS: 1.Accounts Payable -check register --page 1 -- STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 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 November 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 Split/merge, 1 Plats Sales collected and viewed – 33 Taxpayer inquiries – 3 Miscellaneous inquiries - 8 Inspections – Residential – 151 Inspections – Commercial - 4 Building permit reviews – 74 Pictures taken – 159 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 November 2017 monthly assessor report. STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: City Council FROM: Michael Bent, Building Official REGULAR #4 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Approve Monthly Building Department Report for November 2017 REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to accept the monthly Building Department report. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ ANALYSIS: Below is a snapshot of the monthly statistics for November 2017. Comparison data is also include from prior years for November for new home single family construction and total pe1mitting activity for the month. Attached are the system summary reports breaking out this infonnation fmiher, including the statistics related to the inspection activity. New Homes Total Valuation Average Home Value Total Permit Valuation YTD Total Residential Units YTD FISCAL IMPACT: None OPTIONS: RECOMMENDATION: 2017 30 $8,712,708 $290,423 $123,749,646 289 2016 20 $7,354,396 $367,719 $117,000,166 239 Motion to accept the November 2017 monthly building permit report as presented. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Valuation Rep01i 2.Permits Issued & Fees Report 3.Inspection statistic report for November 2017 4.YTD Building Department Revenue Rep01i 2015 12 $4,638,911 $386,575 $45,917,328 125 STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 5 TO: City Council FROM: Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief AGENDA ITEM: Month End Fire Department Update for November 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 40 calls in November: 1 Fire Alarm 2 Structure Fires 6 Dispatched and cancelled en route 23 Medicals 1 Fire- (rekindle) 1 Good intent call 4 Car accident with injuries 1 Special outside fire (port-a-potty arson) 1 Steam mistaken for smoke (reported as car fire) 40 Total A Command Vehicle did not respond on 6 calls for a response rate of 85%. Average response time was 7.4 minutes. 9 calls had 3 or less responders minus the Duty Officer with with 6 calls having only 1 personnel on the apparatus. Department drills for the month: #1- CEU – Incident Safety Officer #2- SCBA quarterly #3- Quarterly Region’s EMS Points of Interest: • One Fire fighter resigned/retired in November. • Both Chief’s attended VCOS training this month and brought back valuable training and concepts as usual. • Bids are out to printers for Safe Haven project booklets • A lot of hydrants have been flushed by part time staff and several problems have already been found are being fixed by Public Works. During this process, we are also discovering many hydrants that are new to the system and not currently logged on our book. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 12/19/2017 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 November 2017. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: • 4 Public Works Staff to Smart Salt Certification Training • Meeting with FOCUS and Bolton & Menk regarding 32nd St. sewer options • Sentence to Serve at Ridge Park Playground • Northport utility pre-con mtg. • Update Water Supply Plan • Public Works Operator Interviews • Rob and Jamie to Winter Maint. Supervisor Class • Rob to MN-APWA Fall Conf. • Easton Village grading pre-con • Final walk through @ Arbor Glen, Auto Owners, and Pankalo School • Meetings with Rachel Contracting regarding Lions Park Project • Submit Trail Benchmark Reimbursement for Sunfish Lake Ski Trails • Savona Irrigation Walk through • I-94 Lift Station Start-up • Storm Pond Inspection • Safety Training • Meter replacements • Install Hockey Boards at Lions Park • Build road Pre-Treating Tank • 1 – snow event RECOMMENDATION: Base on the activities listed above, City Council is respectfully asked to accept the November 2017 Public Works Report. STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 CONSENT #7 AGENDA ITEM: Withdrawal from Gateway Corridor Commission SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: The City of Lake Elmo has been a member of the Gateway Corridor Commission since 2010 when a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) was in place for the rail authorities in Ramsey and Washington counties as well as the cities of St. Paul, Maplewood, Landfall, Oakdale, Woodbury, Lake Elmo, Afton, Lakeland and the town of West Lakeland. In 2016, the City Council did not approve a locally preferred alternative through Lake Elmo. Since that time the city has not participated in many meetings of the commission. The Commission has not had quorum since June because many of the cities are not coming. The county has reached out to those communities not attending to see if they are still interested in being a part of the commission. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council withdraw from the Gateway Corridor Commission? PROPOSAL: Included in your packet is a resolution for the council to withdraw from the Gateway Corridor Commission. The JPA requires a 90 day notice. Once approved by Council, staff will send a notarized copy to the commission. FISCAL IMPACT: NA OPTIONS: 1) Approve the attached resolution 2) Do not approve a resolution to withdraw from the Gateway Corridor Commission RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda: “Motion to approve Resolution No 2017-139 ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution No. 2017-139 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-139 A RESOLUTION TO WITHDRAW FROM THE GATEWAY CORRIDOR COMMISSION WHEREAS, the Gateway Corridor Commission (“Commission”) was established in March of 2009 by joint powers agreement among the county regional railroad authorities and cities along the Gateway Corridor, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §471.59; and WHEREAS, the Gateway Corridor is defined as the transitway corridor originating at the Union Depot in downtown Saint Paul in Ramsey County, and traveling east along Interstate 94 (I-94) through Washington County with connections to other multi-modal transportation options; and WHEREAS, Commission members are elected officials from the Washington and Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authorities and the cities of Afton, Lake Elmo, Lakeland, Maplewood, Oakdale, St. Paul, Woodbury, and West Lakeland Township; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the Commission is to collaboratively plan for multi-modal transportation improvements to the Gateway Corridor and for the related land use and development impacts; and WHEREAS, the Locally Preferred Alternative for the Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project in the Gateway Corridor was adopted in December 2016; and WHEREAS, the Gold Line BRT Project is a planned 9-mile transitway running generally parallel to I-94, connecting downtown Saint Paul with its east side neighborhoods and the suburbs of Maplewood, Landfall, Oakdale, and Woodbury; and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo entered into the Gateway Corridor Commission Joint Powers Agreement (the “Agreement”) and is a member of the Commission; and WHEREAS, Article 10, Section A of the Agreement provides that any party to the Agreement may withdraw upon giving 90 days written notice to the Commission, evidenced by a resolution of the party’s governing body to the Commission; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby gives notice of withdrawal from the Commission. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is directed to prepare a certified copy of this Resolution and deliver it to the Chair of the Commission. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of December, 2017. By: __________________________ Mike Pearson Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson City Clerk STAFF REPORT DATE: December 5, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Booster Station Improvements - Change Order No. 5 and Compensating Change Order No. 6 SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Chad Isakson, Project Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve Change Order No. 5 and Compensating Change Order No. 6 for the Inwood Booster Station Improvements? BACKGROUND: Magney Construction, Inc. was awarded a construction contract to complete the Inwood Booster Station Improvements on April 5, 2016. The booster station construction work is now complete. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Magney Construction, Inc. has submitted Change Order No. 5 to decrease the contract by $1,285.50 as a credit for not providing the chlorine breathing apparatus included in the contract. City Staff reviewed the equipment needs and response procedure and determined this equipment was not necessary. Compensating Change Order No. 6 is also included to revise the estimated quantities for each work item listed in the bid schedule to the actual quantities installed on the project at the unit bid prices. This change order reflects a net decrease to the contract amount by $14,135.20. This decrease is due to payment on actual quantities installed and a lower cost to install utility services to the building than originally planned. FISCAL IMPACT: Change Order No. 5 will decrease the contract in the amount of $1,285.50 bringing the revised construction contract to $1,314,148.95. Compensating Change Order No. 6 will decrease the contract in the amount of $14,135.20 bringing the revised construction contract to $1,300,013.75. With approval of these change orders the project remains within the authorized project budget and contingencies. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Change Order No. 5 and Compensating Change Order No. 6 for the Inwood Booster Station Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Change Order No. 5, thereby decreasing the contract amount by $1,285.50, and Compensating Change Order No. 6, thereby decreasing the contract amount by $14,135.20 for the Inwood Booster Station Improvements” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Change Order No. 5. 2. Compensating Change Order No. 6. CHANGE ORDER NO.5 INWOOD BOOSTER STATION IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. 2014.129 QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT CO4-1 LS 1 -$ -$ CO4-2 LS 1 -$1,285.50 -$1,285.50 TOTALS - CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 -$1,285.50 See attached submittal Extend substantial completion from 6/30/17 to 8/23/17 to minimize punchlist items and better coincide with tower schedule Start-up Extention until 6/30/17 DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATIONITEMDESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT CHANGE ORDER Chlorine Breathing Apparatus (Emergency eqp.) removal Proposal SEND TO Company name FromPeter Aldritt Attention Date 3/1/2017 Fax Phone Proposal # Urgent Please comment X Please review For your information Total pages, including cover:2 COMMENTS RE: Credit for Returned Breathing Apparatus Lucas, Material:Vessco Breathing Unit (1,285.50)$ -$ Subtotal -$ General Contractor's Overhead -$ Bond & Insurance premiums Total (1,285.50)$ Thank you, Peter Aldritt Project Manager Accepted By Date Please review this proposal and feel free to contact me with any questions, comments or concerns. We are offering the following deduct for the Chlorine Breathing Apparatus. Subcontractor: Labor: MSA Lucas Jones MC-P6 Page 1 of 1 Ordered (952) 474-1674 Cust Account # Cust PO # Terms Ship Via Ship Info. FOB Order # Rep Customer Phone 04/15/16 011588 491-11240 43977 150 BEST SHIPPING POINT MAGNEY CONSTRUCTION, INC.1401 PARK ROADCHANHASSEN, MN 55317 GARY DISCH (612)801-3416MAGNEY CONSTRUCTION, INC.INWOOD BOOSTER STATION2576 INWOOD AVE. NLAKE ELMO, MN 55042 Net 30 Bill To: Ship To: 68855 03/01/17Date TAX ID MNT Job # 201629 8217 Upland CircleChanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 941-2678FAX (952) 941-0796 Shipped 2/28/2017 Accounts Payable Item Num Description Order Ship Unit Price Ext PriceB/O 243838 Airhawk w/ hd Case AA2LA01A00C11AA1 -1 1,200.00 -1,200.00-1 0 CR-Tax CR-Freight (85.50) 0.00 (1,285.50)Credit Total (1,200.00)CREDIT FOR RETURNED BREATHING APPARATUS FROM LAKE ELMO PROJECT.Credit CHANGE ORDER NO.6 INWOOD BOOSTER STATION IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. 2014.129 QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT NET CHANGE AMOUNT 1 LS 1 55,000.00$ $55,000.00 1.00 $55,000.00 0 $0.00 2 LS 1 700.00$ $700.00 1.00 $700.00 0 $0.00 3 LF 240 3.00$ $720.00 240 $720.00 0 $0.00 4 LS 1 2,000.00$ $2,000.00 1 $2,000.00 0 $0.00 5 EA 1 1,000.00$ $1,000.00 1 $1,000.00 0 $0.00 6 HR 10 105.00$ $1,050.00 0 $0.00 -10 -$1,050.00 7 LS 1 4,800.00$ $4,800.00 1 $4,800.00 0 $0.00 $65,270.00 $64,220.00 -$1,050.00 8 EA 3 1,500.00$ $4,500.00 3 $4,500.00 0 $0.00 9 LF 65 50.00$ $3,250.00 65 $3,250.00 0 $0.00 10 LF 100 120.00$ $12,000.00 100 $12,000.00 0 $0.00 11 LB 344 16.00$ $5,504.00 344 $5,504.00 0 $0.00 $25,254.00 $25,254.00 $0.00 12 LF 15 50.00$ $750.00 0 $0.00 -15 -$750.00 13 LF 130 50.00$ $6,500.00 121 $6,050.00 -9 -$450.00 14 EA 1 1,500.00$ $1,500.00 1 $1,500.00 0 $0.00 15 EA 2 3,000.00$ $6,000.00 2 $6,000.00 0 $0.00 16 CY 10 160.00$ $1,600.00 10 $1,600.00 0 $0.00 $16,350.00 $15,150.00 -$1,200.00 17 CY 690 20.00$ $13,800.00 690 $13,800.00 0 $0.00 18 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (P)CY 110 25.00$ $2,750.00 110 $2,750.00 0 $0.00 19 SUBGRADE PREPARATION LS 1 1,400.00$ $1,400.00 1.00 $1,400.00 0 $0.00 20 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TON 140 22.00$ $3,080.00 118 $2,596.00 -22 -$484.00 21 TYPE SP 9.5 WEAR COURSE MIX (2,B)TON 50 95.00$ $4,750.00 51 $4,825.05 1 $75.05 22 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 41 70.00$ $2,870.00 31 $2,170.00 -10 -$700.00 23 SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALL FF 480 23.00$ $11,040.00 438 $10,074.00 -42 -$966.00 24 SPLIT RAIL FENCE LF 120 17.00$ $2,040.00 120 $2,040.00 0 $0.00 25 GUARD POST EA 3 350.00$ $1,050.00 3 $1,050.00 0 $0.00 26 6" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN LF 140 40.00$ $5,600.00 140 $5,600.00 0 $0.00 27 8" INLINE DRAIN EA 5 900.00$ $4,500.00 5 $4,500.00 0 $0.00 28 ROOF DRAIN COLLECTION EA 5 900.00$ $4,500.00 5 $4,500.00 0 $0.00 29 EA 1 900.00$ $900.00 1 $900.00 0 $0.00 $58,280.00 $56,205.05 -$2,074.95 30 31 LS 1 18,550.00$ $18,550.00 1.00 $18,550.00 0.00 $0.00 32 LS 1 19,620.00$ $19,620.00 1.00 $19,620.00 0.00 $0.00 31000 LS 1 58,760.00$ $58,760.00 1.00 $58,760.00 0.00 $0.00 32000 LS 1 5,100.00$ $5,100.00 1.00 $5,100.00 0.00 $0.00 33516 LS 1 1,860.00$ $1,860.00 1.00 $1,860.00 0.00 $0.00 42000 LS 1 70,480.00$ $70,480.00 1.00 $70,480.00 0.00 $0.00 55000 LS 1 3,350.00$ $3,350.00 1.00 $3,350.00 0.00 $0.00 61000 LS 1 25,500.00$ $25,500.00 1.00 $25,500.00 0.00 $0.00 62210 LS 1 1,170.00$ $1,170.00 1.00 $1,170.00 0.00 $0.00 71113 LS 1 670.00$ $670.00 1.00 $670.00 0.00 $0.00 72113 LS 1 1,250.00$ $1,250.00 1.00 $1,250.00 0.00 $0.00 72126 LS 1 2,700.00$ $2,700.00 1.00 $2,700.00 0.00 $0.00 72726 LS 1 4,000.00$ $4,000.00 1.00 $4,000.00 0.00 $0.00 DIVISION 1 - GENERAL TRAFFIC CONTROL COMPENSATING CHANGE ORDER NO. 6ITEMDESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT MOBILIZATION SILT FENCE CLEARING AND GRUBBING TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE STREET SWEEPING SITE RESTORATION SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 1 DIVISION 2 - WATER MAIN CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN AND SERVICE 1.5" COPPER WATER SERVICE PIPE 12" DUCTILE IRON WATERMAIN PIPE, CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 2 DIVISION 3 - STORM SEWER 10" PVC DRAIN 18" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE, CLASS 5 18" RCP FLARED END SECTION CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III (CV) SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 3 DIVISION 4 - DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION COMMON EXCAVATION (P) DRAINTILE CLEANOUT SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 4 DIVISION 5 - BOOSTER FACILITY Supervision Bond & Insurance Concrete Work Rebar Heavy Duty Concrete Floor Finish Masonry Work Misc. Metals Rough Carpentry Plastic Trim Bituminous Damproofing Insulation (below grade) Blown Fiberglass Insulation Fluid Applied Membrane Air Barrier CONTRACT TOTAL TO DATE 73113 LS 1 6,600.00$ $6,600.00 1.00 $6,600.00 0.00 $0.00 74618 LS 1 6,550.00$ $6,550.00 1.00 $6,550.00 0.00 $0.00 74646 LS 1 10,600.00$ $10,600.00 1.00 $10,600.00 0.00 $0.00 79200 LS 1 3,210.00$ $3,210.00 1.00 $3,210.00 0.00 $0.00 81600 LS 1 11,950.00$ $11,950.00 1.00 $11,950.00 0.00 $0.00 88100 LS 1 500.00$ $500.00 1.00 $500.00 0.00 $0.00 88410 LS 1 9,960.00$ $9,960.00 1.00 $9,960.00 0.00 $0.00 97750 LS 1 9,640.00$ $9,640.00 1.00 $9,640.00 0.00 $0.00 99600 LS 1 13,400.00$ $13,400.00 1.00 $13,400.00 0.00 $0.00 101469 LS 1 200.00$ $200.00 1.00 $200.00 0.00 $0.00 104416 LS 1 350.00$ $350.00 1.00 $350.00 0.00 $0.00 220000 LS 1 22,500.00$ $22,500.00 1.00 $22,500.00 0.00 $0.00 230000 LS 1 46,400.00$ $46,400.00 1.00 $46,400.00 0.00 $0.00 260500 LS 1 79,800.00$ $79,800.00 1.00 $79,800.00 0.00 $0.00 312305 LS 1 7,880.00$ $7,880.00 1.00 $7,880.00 0.00 $0.00 331300 LS 1 950.00$ $950.00 1.00 $950.00 0.00 $0.00 402323 LS 1 111,400.00$ $111,400.00 1.00 $111,400.00 0.00 $0.00 412223 LS 1 1,200.00$ $1,200.00 1.00 $1,200.00 0.00 $0.00 444200 LS 1 26,200.00$ $26,200.00 1.00 $26,200.00 0.00 $0.00 444256 LS 1 78,200.00$ $78,200.00 1.00 $78,200.00 0.00 $0.00 444416 LS 1 101,500.00$ $101,500.00 1.00 $101,500.00 0.00 $0.00 33 LS 1 30,000.00$ $30,000.00 1.00 $30,000.00 0.00 $0.00 34 LS 1 215,000.00$ $215,000.00 1.00 $215,000.00 0.00 $0.00 35 LS 1 105,000.00$ $105,000.00 1.00 $105,000.00 0.00 $0.00 36 LS 1 10,000.00$ $10,000.00 0.02 $189.75 -0.98 -$9,810.25 37 LS 1 20,000.00$ $20,000.00 1.00 $20,000.00 0.00 $0.00 38 SY 625 2.00$ $1,250.00 625.00 $1,250.00 0.00 $0.00 $1,143,250.00 $1,133,439.75 -$9,810.25 TOTALS - BASE CONTRACT $1,308,404.00 $1,294,268.80 -$14,135.20 CO1 LS 1 (5,048.49)$ -$5,048.49 1.00 -$5,048.49 0.00 $0.00 CO2 LS 1 2,754.96$ $2,754.96 1.00 $2,754.96 0.00 $0.00 CO3 LS 1 6,236.98$ $6,236.98 1.00 $6,236.98 0.00 $0.00 CO4 LS 1 3,087.00$ $3,087.00 1.00 $3,087.00 0.00 $0.00 CO5 LS 1 (1,285.50)$ -$1,285.50 1.00 -$1,285.50 0.00 $0.00 $5,744.95 $5,744.95 $0.00 TOTALS - DIFFERENCE IN CONTRACT AND ACTUAL WORK COMPLETED $1,314,148.95 $1,300,013.75 -$14,135.20 Asphalt Shingles Metal Soffit & Fascia, gutters & downspouts Mineral Fiber Siding Joint Sealants FRP Doors Glass & Glazing Translucent Windows FRP Surface laminated panels High performance Coating Warning Signs Fire Extinguishers Plumbing HVAC Electircal PROCESS INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL (SYSTEM INTEGRATOR) 230 KW GENERATOR SET Earthwork Disinfection of Water Storage Structures Process Piping Portable Hand Chain Hoist & Trolley Water System Storage Tanks SUBTOTAL - CHANGE ORDER(S) Change Order #1 (Items 1-7) Change Order #2 (Item 1) Change Order #3 (Item 1) Change Order #4 (Item 1) Change Order #5 (Item 1) UTILITY ALLOWANCE (ELECTRIC, NATURAL GAS, TELECOMMUNICATION/DATA) HOLDING TANK AND ASSOCIATED PIPING EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 5 CHANGE ORDER(S) Vertical Split Case Booster Pumps Gas Chlorination Sytem SCADA INTEGRATION AND SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (SCADA CONTRACTOR) ALLOWANCE STAFF REPORT DATE: December 5, 2017 CONSENT #9 ITEM #: AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Booster Station Improvements – Accept Improvements and Approve Pay Request No. 9 (Final) SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council accept the improvements and approve Pay Request No. 9 (Final)? BACKGROUND: Magney Construction, Inc. was awarded a construction contract on April 5, 2016 to complete the Inwood Booster Station Improvements. The work has been completed in accordance with the Contract, Specifications, and Change Orders. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The Project Engineer, along with the Public Works Director, have reviewed the work completed for the Inwood Booster Station Improvements and have found the work to be complete and in accordance with the Contract Plans and Specifications dated April 5, 2016. Staff is therefore recommending acceptance of the improvements and start of the 1-year warranty period as of December 5, 2017. In addition, Magney Construction, Inc., has submitted a request for final payment on the project, Partial Pay Request No. 9 (Final), in the amount of $67,866.41. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents all retainage is released with this payment. A breakdown of the project costs compared with the previously approved budget is shown below. Inwood Booster Station Improvements – Final Project Cost Summary Final Costs Authorized Costs Total Project Costs: $1,647,000 $1,743,000 Breakdown: Construction: $1,361,000 $1,428,000 Contingency: $0 $36,000 Engineering: $207,000 $199,000 Easement and Right-of-Way Acquisition: $39,000 $45,000 Landscaping $5,000 $0 Budget for Legal, Fiscal, and Administration: $35,000 $35,000 FISCAL IMPACT: None. Final payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. The project has been completed within the authorized scope and budget. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council, as part of the Consent Agenda, accept the improvements and approve Pay Request No. 9 (Final) for the Inwood Booster Station Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to accept the improvements and approve Pay Request No. 9 (final) to Magney Construction, Inc. in the amount of $67,866.41 for the Inwood Booster Station Improvements”. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Engineers Certificate of Acceptance. 2. Partial Pay Estimate No. 9 (Final). PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE NO.9 (Final) INWOOD BOOSTER STATION IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. 2014.129 QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 LS 1 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $55,000.00 2 LS 1 $700.00 $700.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $700.00 3 LF 240 $3.00 $720.00 0.00 $0.00 240 $720.00 4 LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 0.00 $0.00 1 $2,000.00 5 EA 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 0.00 $0.00 1 $1,000.00 6 HR 10 $105.00 $1,050.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 7 LS 1 $4,800.00 $4,800.00 0.00 $0.00 1 $4,800.00 $65,270.00 $0.00 $64,220.00 8 EA 3 $1,500.00 $4,500.00 0.00 $0.00 3 $4,500.00 9 LF 65 $50.00 $3,250.00 0.00 $0.00 65 $3,250.00 10 LF 100 $120.00 $12,000.00 0.00 $0.00 100 $12,000.00 11 LB 344 $16.00 $5,504.00 0.00 $0.00 344 $5,504.00 $25,254.00 $0.00 $25,254.00 12 LF 15 $50.00 $750.00 0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 13 LF 130 $50.00 $6,500.00 0.00 $0.00 121 $6,050.00 14 EA 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 0.00 $0.00 1 $1,500.00 15 EA 2 $3,000.00 $6,000.00 0.00 $0.00 2 $6,000.00 16 CY 10 $160.00 $1,600.00 0.00 $0.00 10 $1,600.00 $16,350.00 $0.00 $15,150.00 17 CY 690 $20.00 $13,800.00 0.00 $0.00 690 $13,800.00 18 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (P)CY 110 $25.00 $2,750.00 0.00 $0.00 110 $2,750.00 19 SUBGRADE PREPARATION LS 1 $1,400.00 $1,400.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,400.00 20 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 TON 140 $22.00 $3,080.00 0.00 $0.00 118 $2,596.00 21 TYPE SP 9.5 WEAR COURSE MIX (2,B)TON 50 $95.00 $4,750.00 12.79 $1,215.05 51 $4,825.05 22 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 41 $70.00 $2,870.00 0.00 $0.00 31 $2,170.00 23 SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALL FF 480 $23.00 $11,040.00 0.00 $0.00 438 $10,074.00 24 SPLIT RAIL FENCE LF 120 $17.00 $2,040.00 0.00 $0.00 120 $2,040.00 25 GUARD POST EA 3 $350.00 $1,050.00 0.00 $0.00 3 $1,050.00 26 6" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN LF 140 $40.00 $5,600.00 0.00 $0.00 140 $5,600.00 27 8" INLINE DRAIN EA 5 $900.00 $4,500.00 0.00 $0.00 5 $4,500.00 28 ROOF DRAIN COLLECTION EA 5 $900.00 $4,500.00 0.00 $0.00 5 $4,500.00 29 EA 1 $900.00 $900.00 0.00 $0.00 1 $900.00 $58,280.00 $1,215.05 $56,205.05 30 31 LS 1 $18,550.00 $18,550.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $18,550.00 32 LS 1 $19,620.00 $19,620.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $19,620.00 31000 LS 1 $58,760.00 $58,760.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $58,760.00 32000 LS 1 $5,100.00 $5,100.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $5,100.00 33516 LS 1 $1,860.00 $1,860.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,860.00 42000 LS 1 $70,480.00 $70,480.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $70,480.00 55000 LS 1 $3,350.00 $3,350.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $3,350.00 61000 LS 1 $25,500.00 $25,500.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $25,500.00 62210 LS 1 $1,170.00 $1,170.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,170.00 71113 LS 1 $670.00 $670.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $670.00 72113 LS 1 $1,250.00 $1,250.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,250.00 72126 LS 1 $2,700.00 $2,700.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $2,700.00 72726 LS 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $4,000.00 73113 LS 1 $6,600.00 $6,600.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $6,600.00 74618 LS 1 $6,550.00 $6,550.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $6,550.00 74646 LS 1 $10,600.00 $10,600.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $10,600.00 79200 LS 1 $3,210.00 $3,210.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $3,210.00 81600 LS 1 $11,950.00 $11,950.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $11,950.00 88100 LS 1 $500.00 $500.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $500.00 88410 LS 1 $9,960.00 $9,960.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $9,960.00 97750 LS 1 $9,640.00 $9,640.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $9,640.00 99600 LS 1 $13,400.00 $13,400.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $13,400.00 101469 LS 1 $200.00 $200.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $200.00 18" RCP FLARED END SECTION STREET SWEEPING SITE RESTORATION SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 1 DIVISION 2 - WATER MAIN CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN AND SERVICE 1.5" COPPER WATER SERVICE PIPE DIVISION 3 - STORM SEWER 18" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE, CLASS 5 12" DUCTILE IRON WATERMAIN PIPE, CLASS 52 SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 2 10" PVC DRAIN Supervision Bond & Insurance Plastic Trim Bituminous Damproofing Insulation (below grade) Blown Fiberglass Insulation Fluid Applied Membrane Air Barrier DIVISION 1 - GENERAL MOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL SILT FENCE DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS CLEARING AND GRUBBING TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III (CV) SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 3 Rough Carpentry DIVISION 5 - BOOSTER FACILITY DIVISION 4 - DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION COMMON EXCAVATION (P) DRAINTILE CLEANOUT Misc. Metals SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 4 Concrete Work Rebar Heavy Duty Concrete Floor Finish Masonry Work Glass & Glazing Translucent Windows FRP Surface laminated panels High performance Coating Warning Signs Asphalt Shingles Metal Soffit & Fascia, gutters & downspouts Mineral Fiber Siding Joint Sealants FRP Doors QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNTITEMDESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT CONTRACT THIS PERIOD TOTAL TO DATE 104416 LS 1 $350.00 $350.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $350.00 220000 LS 1 $22,500.00 $22,500.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $22,500.00 230000 LS 1 $46,400.00 $46,400.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $46,400.00 260500 LS 1 $79,800.00 $79,800.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $79,800.00 312305 LS 1 $7,880.00 $7,880.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $7,880.00 331300 LS 1 $950.00 $950.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $950.00 402323 LS 1 $111,400.00 $111,400.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $111,400.00 412223 LS 1 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,200.00 444200 LS 1 $26,200.00 $26,200.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $26,200.00 444256 LS 1 $78,200.00 $78,200.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $78,200.00 444416 LS 1 $101,500.00 $101,500.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $101,500.00 33 LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $30,000.00 34 LS 1 $215,000.00 $215,000.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $215,000.00 35 LS 1 $105,000.00 $105,000.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $105,000.00 36 LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 0.00 $0.00 0.02 $189.75 37 LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $20,000.00 38 SY 625 $2.00 $1,250.00 0.00 $0.00 625.00 $1,250.00 $1,143,250.00 $0.00 $1,133,439.75 TOTALS - BASE CONTRACT $1,308,404.00 $1,215.05 $1,294,268.80 CO1 LS 1 ($5,048.49)-$5,048.49 0.00 $0.00 1.00 -$5,048.49 CO2 LS 1 $2,754.96 $2,754.96 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $2,754.96 CO3 LS 1 $6,236.98 $6,236.98 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $6,236.98 CO4 LS 1 $3,087.00 $3,087.00 1.00 $3,087.00 1.00 $3,087.00 CO5 LS 1 ($1,285.50)-$1,285.50 1.00 -$1,285.50 1.00 -$1,285.50 CO6 LS 1 ($14,135.20)-$14,135.20 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 -$8,390.25 $1,801.50 $5,744.95 TOTALS - REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT $1,300,013.75 $3,016.55 $1,300,013.75 Disinfection of Water Storage Structures Process Piping Portable Hand Chain Hoist & Trolley Water System Storage Tanks Vertical Split Case Booster Pumps Fire Extinguishers Plumbing HVAC Electircal Earthwork HOLDING TANK AND ASSOCIATED PIPING EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 5 Gas Chlorination Sytem SCADA INTEGRATION AND SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (SCADA CONTRACTOR) ALLOWANCE PROCESS INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL (SYSTEM INTEGRATOR) 230 KW GENERATOR SET UTILITY ALLOWANCE (ELECTRIC, NATURAL GAS, TELECOMMUNICATION/DATA) Change Order #1 (Items 1-7) SUBTOTAL - CHANGE ORDER(S) CHANGE ORDER(S) Change Order #2 (Item 1) Change Order #3 (Item 1) Change Order #4 (Item 1) Change Order #5 (Item 1) Compensating Change Order #6 (Item 1) COMPLETED ITEMS BY PAY PERIOD INWOOD BOOSTER STATION IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. 2014.129 QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT DIVISION 1 - GENERAL 1 LS 55,000.00$ 0.50 $27,500.00 0.50 $27,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $55,000.00 2 LS 700.00$ 0.60 $420.00 $0.00 0.20 $140.00 $0.00 0.10 $70.00 $0.00 0.10 $70.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $700.00 3 LF 3.00$ 120.00 $360.00 $0.00 120.00 $360.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 240 $720.00 4 CLEARING AND GRUBBING LS 2,000.00$ 1.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $2,000.00 5 TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA 1,000.00$ 1.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,000.00 6 HR 105.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 7 LS 4,800.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.90 $4,320.00 $0.00 0.10 $480.00 $0.00 1.00 $4,800.00 SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 1 $31,280.00 $27,500.00 $500.00 $0.00 $70.00 $4,320.00 $70.00 $480.00 $0.00 $64,220.00 DIVISION 2 - WATER MAIN 8 EA 1,500.00$ 3.00 $4,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 3 $4,500.00 9 LF 50.00$ 65.00 $3,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 65 $3,250.00 10 LF 120.00$ 100.00 $12,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 100 $12,000.00 11 LB 16.00$ 344.00 $5,504.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 344 $5,504.00 $25,254.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $25,254.00 12 LF 50.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 13 LF 50.00$ $0.00 $0.00 121.00 $6,050.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 121 $6,050.00 14 EA 1,500.00$ $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 $1,500.00 15 EA 3,000.00$ $0.00 $0.00 2.00 $6,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 2 $6,000.00 16 CY 160.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 10 $1,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 10 $1,600.00 SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 3 $0.00 $0.00 $13,550.00 $0.00 $1,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $15,150.00 DIVISION 4 - DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION 17 CY 20.00$ 690.00 $13,800.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 690 $13,800.00 18 CY 25.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 20.00 $500.00 90 $2,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 110 $2,750.00 19 LS 1,400.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.30 $420.00 0.70 $980.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,400.00 20 TON 22.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 118 $2,596.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 118 $2,596.00 21 TON 95.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 38 $3,610.00 $0.00 12.79 $1,215.05 51 $4,825.05 22 SY 70.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 31 $2,170.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 31 $2,170.00 23 FF 23.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 421 $9,683.00 $0.00 $0.00 17 $391.00 $0.00 438 $10,074.00 24 LF 17.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 120 $2,040.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 120 $2,040.00 25 EA 350.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 3 $1,050.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 3 $1,050.00 26 LF 40.00$ $0.00 $0.00 60.00 $2,400.00 80.00 $3,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 140 $5,600.00 27 EA 900.00$ $0.00 $0.00 4.00 $3,600.00 1.00 $900.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 5 $4,500.00 28 EA 900.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 5 $4,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 5 $4,500.00 29 EA 900.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 $900.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 $900.00 SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 4 $13,800.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 $5,020.00 $19,629.00 $6,540.00 $3,610.00 $391.00 $1,215.05 $56,205.05 30 DIVISION 5 - BOOSTER FACILITY 31 Supervision LS 18,550.00$ 0.20 $3,710.00 0.10 $1,855.00 0.10 $1,855.00 0.10 $1,855.00 0.10 $1,855.00 0.10 $1,855.00 0.10 $1,855.00 0.20 $3,710.00 $0.00 1.00 $18,550.00 32 Bond & Insurance LS 19,620.00$ 1.00 $19,620.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $19,620.00 31000 Concrete Work LS 58,760.00$ $0.00 0.50 $29,380.00 0.25 $14,690.00 0.20 $11,752.00 0.05 $2,938.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $58,760.00 32000 Rebar LS 5,100.00$ $0.00 0.50 $2,550.00 0.25 $1,275.00 0.20 $1,020.00 0.05 $255.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $5,100.00 33516 Heavy Duty Concrete Floor Finish LS 1,860.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,860.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,860.00 42000 Masonry Work LS 70,480.00$ $0.00 $0.00 0.55 $38,764.00 0.10 $7,048.00 $0.00 0.35 $24,668.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $70,480.00 55000 Misc. Metals LS 3,350.00$ $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $3,350.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $3,350.00 61000 Rough Carpentry LS 25,500.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $25,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $25,500.00 62210 Plastic Trim LS 1,170.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 $1,170.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,170.00 71113 Bituminous Damproofing LS 670.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $670.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $670.00 72113 Insulation (below grade)LS 1,250.00$ $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,250.00 72126 Blown Fiberglass Insulation LS 2,700.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $2,700.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $2,700.00 72726 Fluid Applied Membrane Air Barrier LS 4,000.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $4,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $4,000.00 73113 Asphalt Shingles LS 6,600.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $6,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $6,600.00 74618 Metal Soffit & Fascia, gutters & downspouts LS 6,550.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.35 $2,292.50 0.45 $2,947.50 0.10 $655.00 0.10 $655.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $6,550.00 74646 Mineral Fiber Siding LS 10,600.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.85 $9,010.00 0.15 $1,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $10,600.00 TYPE SP 9.5 WEAR COURSE MIX (2,B) COMMON EXCAVATION (P) DRAINTILE CLEANOUT SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (P) SUBGRADE PREPARATION AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 DIVISION 3 - STORM SEWER 10" PVC DRAIN 18" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE, CLASS 5 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALL SPLIT RAIL FENCE GUARD POST 6" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN 8" INLINE DRAIN ROOF DRAIN COLLECTION ITEM DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 1 TOTAL TO DATEUNIT PRICE PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 2 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 3 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 4 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 5 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 6 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 7 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 8 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 9 MOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL SILT FENCE STREET SWEEPING SITE RESTORATION CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN AND SERVICE 1.5" COPPER WATER SERVICE PIPE 12" DUCTILE IRON WATERMAIN PIPE, CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS 18" RCP FLARED END SECTION CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III (CV) SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 2 QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNTITEMDESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM UNIT PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 1 TOTAL TO DATEUNIT PRICE PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 2 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 3 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 4 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 5 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 6 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 7 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 8 PARTIAL PAY ESTIMATE 9 79200 Joint Sealants LS 3,210.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $3,210.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $3,210.00 81600 FRP Doors LS 11,950.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 $11,950.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $11,950.00 88100 Glass & Glazing LS 500.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $500.00 88410 Translucent Windows LS 9,960.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $9,960.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $9,960.00 97750 FRP Surface laminated panels LS 9,640.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $9,640.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $9,640.00 99600 High performance Coating LS 13,400.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.20 $2,680.00 $0.00 0.60 $8,040.00 0.20 $2,680.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $13,400.00 101469 Warning Signs LS 200.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $200.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $200.00 104416 Fire Extinguishers LS 350.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $350.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $350.00 220000 Plumbing LS 22,500.00$ $0.00 0.05 $1,125.00 0.30 $6,750.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.65 $14,625.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $22,500.00 230000 HVAC LS 46,400.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.20 $9,280.00 0.70 $32,480.00 0.10 $4,640.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $46,400.00 260500 Electircal LS 79,800.00$ $0.00 0.05 $3,990.00 0.10 $7,980.00 0.17 $13,566.00 0.58 $46,284.00 0.10 $7,980.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $79,800.00 312305 Earthwork LS 7,880.00$ $0.00 0.50 $3,940.00 0.10 $788.00 0.40 $3,152.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $7,880.00 331300 Disinfection of Water Storage Structures LS 950.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $950.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $950.00 402323 Process Piping LS 111,400.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.40 $44,560.00 $0.00 0.60 $66,840.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $111,400.00 412223 Portable Hand Chain Hoist & Trolley LS 1,200.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.50 $600.00 0.50 $600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $1,200.00 444200 Water System Storage Tanks LS 26,200.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 $26,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $26,200.00 444256 Vertical Split Case Booster Pumps LS 78,200.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $78,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $78,200.00 444416 Gas Chlorination Sytem LS 101,500.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.90 $91,350.00 0.10 $10,150.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $101,500.00 33 LS 30,000.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.50 $15,000.00 0.50 $15,000.00 $0.00 1.00 $30,000.00 34 LS 215,000.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.90 $193,500.00 0.05 $10,750.00 0.05 $10,750.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $215,000.00 35 LS 105,000.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.90 $94,500.00 0.10 $10,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $105,000.00 36 LS 10,000.00$ $0.00 $0.00 0.02 $189.75 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.02 $189.75 37 LS 20,000.00$ $0.00 1.00 $20,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $20,000.00 38 SY 2.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 575 $1,150.00 50 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 625.00 $1,250.00 $23,330.00 $62,840.00 $76,891.75 $133,975.50 $515,039.50 $262,343.00 $40,310.00 $18,710.00 $0.00 $1,133,439.75 CHANGE ORDER(S) CO1 LS (5,048.49)$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 -$5,048.49 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 -$5,048.49 CO2 Change Order #2 (Item 1)LS 2,754.96$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $2,754.96 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $2,754.96 CO3 Change Order #3 (Item 1)LS 6,236.98$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 $6,236.98 $0.00 1.00 $6,236.98 CO4 Change Order #4 (Item 1)LS 3,087.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 $3,087.00 1.00 $3,087.00 CO5 Change Order #5 (Item 1)LS (1,285.50)$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 -$1,285.50 1.00 -$1,285.50 CO6 Compensating Change Order #6 (Item 1)LS (14,135.20)$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 -$2,293.53 $0.00 $6,236.98 $1,801.50 $5,744.95 TOTALS $93,664.00 $90,340.00 $96,941.75 $138,995.50 $536,338.50 $270,909.47 $43,990.00 $25,817.98 $3,016.55 $1,300,013.75 HOLDING TANK AND ASSOCIATED PIPING EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SCADA INTEGRATION AND SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (SCADA CONTRACTOR) ALLOWANCE PROCESS INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL (SYSTEM INTEGRATOR) 230 KW GENERATOR SET UTILITY ALLOWANCE (ELECTRIC, NATURAL GAS, TELECOMMUNICATION/DATA) Change Order #1 (Items 1-7) SUBTOTAL - CHANGE ORDER(S) SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 5 STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 10 AGENDA ITEM: Village Preserve 1st and 2nd Additions – Accept Improvements and Approve Reduction of Security SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Emily Becker, Planning Director Rob Weldon, Public Works Director ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council accept the improvements and approve security reductions for Village Preserve 1st and 2nd Additions? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Staff has received and processed a request to accept the improvements and to reduce the development security for Village Preserve 1st and 2nd Addition. These requests have been reviewed and the following reductions are being recommended: Current Security Amount Proposed Security Amount 1.Village Preserve 1st Addition: $ 619,323 $ 583,070 2.Village Preserve 2nd Addition: $ 324,935 $ 210,007 The Village Preserve 1st and 2nd Addition public improvements have been completed in accordance with their respective development agreements dated August 24, 2015 and August 19, 2016 with the exception of Landscaping. The improvements are in the warranty period per the attached Certificates of Completion. A security amount of 25% of the original security will be retained until the warranty period has expired. Landscaping Improvements will be accepted separately and with different warranty dates. FISCAL IMPACT: It is the City’s goal to retain at all times during the subdivision improvements a security amount that is adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the improvements as protection to the City tax payers against the potential of developer default. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council, as part of the Consent Agenda, accept the improvements and approve the security reductions for Village Preserve 1st and 2nd Additions as detailed in the respective reports. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to accept the improvements and approve security reduction for Village Preserve 1st and 2nd Addition as detailed in the respective Security Reduction Worksheets”. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Village Preserve 1st Addition – Engineers Certificate of Acceptance. 2.Village Preserve 2nd Addition – Engineers Certificate of Acceptance. 3.Security Reduction Worksheets – Village Preserve 1st and 2nd Additions. VILLAGE PRESERVE 1ST ADDITION Time of Performance: October 31, 2016DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMOUNTSCATEGORY CONSTRUCTION 125% REMARKS #1 #2 #3 #4 #5Grading $79,860 NAShared Wildflower Improvements $255,801 $319,751.25Grading $456,502 $570,627.50 $570,628100%Sanitary Sewer $227,849 $284,811.25 $213,60875%Watermain $224,251 $280,313.75 $210,23575%Streets (includes sidewalks/trails) $727,995 $909,993.75 $163,79918%$518,69675%Surface Water Facilities $225,248 $281,560.00 $140,78050%$70,39075%Erosion Control $27,970 $34,962.50$26,222Sidewalks/Trails NA NAIncluded in StreetsStreet Lighting NA NABy Xcel EnergyStreet Signs and Traffic Control Signs $3,600 $4,500.00$3,375Landscaping $105,453 $131,816.25Tree Preservation and Restoration NA NAincluded in Erosion ControlWetland Mitigation and Buffers NA NALOC Through VBWDMonuments $4,600 $5,750.00$4,313Miscellaneous Facilities NA NANoneRecord Drawings + PL $2,500 $3,125.00$2,344TOTALS $2,005,968 $2,507,460.00RELEASED AMOUNTS:$728,423 $589,086 $570,628 $36,253$484,208CUMMULATIVE AMOUNTS:$728,423 $1,317,509 $1,888,137 $1,924,390SECURITY AMOUNT REMAINING:$1,779,037 $1,189,951 $619,323 $583,070DATE:3/15/2016 8/2/2016 9/6/2016 12/19/2017REDUCTIONSSite Grading Agrmt: Assumed ReplacedNever Received: Provided by Wildflower VILLAGE PRESERVE 2ND ADDITION Time of Performance: October 31, 2016DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMOUNTSCATEGORY CONSTRUCTION 125% REMARKS #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6Grading $60,786 $75,983 $75,983Sanitary Sewer $60,734 $75,918 $56,938Watermain $120,071 $150,089 $112,567Storm Sewer (w/pond structures) $41,671 $52,089 $26,044 $13,022Streets $219,972 $274,965 $137,483 $68,741Sidewalks/Trails $58,525 $73,156 $54,867Surface Water Facilities NA NAStreet Lighting $36,000 $45,000 $33,750Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs $2,540 $3,175 $2,381Private Utilities (electricity, natural gas, telephone, and cable)Landscaping $26,745 $33,431Tree Preservation and Restoration NA NAWetland Mitigation and Buffers NA NAMonuments $4,500 $5,625 $4,219Erosion Control $18,525 $23,156 $17,367Miscellaneous Facilities NA NARecord Drawings $2,500 $3,125 $2,344TOTALS $652,569 $815,712RELEASED AMOUNTS:$333,032 $75,983 $81,763 $114,928$184,932CUMMULATIVE AMOUNTS:$333,032 $409,014 $490,778 $605,706SECURITY AMOUNT REMAINING:$482,681 $406,698 $324,935 $210,007DATE: 2/21/2017 5/16/2017 10/17/2017 12/19/2017REDUCTIONS STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 11 AGENDA ITEM: Hiring Public Works Operator SUBMITTED BY: Jake Foster, Assistant City Administrator BACKGROUND: The City advertised for applications for the Public Works Operator position from October 18th to November 2nd, 2017. On November 14th, staff interviewed seven applicants. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should Matt Leko be hired as the Public Works Operator at the terms described below? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Staff recommends hiring Matt Leko as the Public Works Operator. Staff is further recommending a starting wage of $23.27/hour which is the pay rate offered for a probationary Public Works Operator III per the union contract. Mr. Leko has experience working in a public works capacity which he attained while working for Washington County. He has experience in operating heavy equipment, and a background as a heavy equipment mechanic. He also has a Class A Commercial Driver’s License with a tanker endorsement. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost to the City for the hiring the Public Work Operator at this wage would be approximately $75,000 including wages, taxes, and benefits. This cost has been budgeted for in 2018. RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda: “Move to hire Matt Leko as the Public Works Operator at a starting wage of $23.27/hour.” ATTACHMENTS: None STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 12 TO: City Council FROM: Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief AGENDA ITEM: Renewal of 2018 “STATE OF MINNESOTA, MINNESOTA STATE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, Century College, CUSTOMIZED TRAINING INCOME CONTRACT” REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: All personnel on the Lake Elmo FD are required to maintain their State Certification for Firefighter II. Part of this requirement is 24 hours of annual firefighter training per NFPA 1001. We have been utilizing Century College for our required annual Firefighting CEU’s since 2014. We participate in the program with 5 other FD’s in the area. This allows our personnel multipule dates, times and locations to attend each of the 8-3 hour training session. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Renewal of one year, “STATE OF MINNESOTA, MINNESOTA STATE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, Century College, CUSTOMIZED TRAINING INCOME CONTRACT” for 2018. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: FISCAL IMPACT: $2,755.00, ($2,475.00 had been budgetd for 2018) to be billed quarterly in the amount of $688.75. OPTIONS: 1) Approval renewal of one year contract. 2) Deny approval RECOMMENDATION: Approve renewal of annual contract. ATTACHMENTS: Copy of agreement STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 CONSENT 13 AGENDA ITEM: Amendment to MNDOT Agreement for TH 36 SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: The deadline for the completing the study work on TH 36 is currently April 2018. MNDOT has provided an amendment and resolution language to extend that to the end of 2018 to allow the City extra time if needed. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council approve the amendment to the MNDOT Agreement 03330? PROPOSAL: Included in your packet is a resolution and a copy of the amendment to the agreement. The amendment updates the City Administrator information and extends the termination until 12/31/18. FISCAL IMPACT: NA OPTIONS: 1) Approve the attached resolution 2) Do not approve a resolution and the termination date will remain in April 2018 RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda: “Motion to approve Resolution No 2017-140 ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution No. 2017-140 • Agreement Amendment CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-140 A RESOLUTION AMEND MNDOT GRANT AGREEMENT #03330 WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo received an $80,000 grant to study roadway approach alternatives along TH 36 between Hilton Trail and Manning Ave leading up to the St. Croix River Crossing in April 2013; and WHEREAS, said grant funds expire in April 2018; and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is requesting an extension until December 31, 2018. NOW THERFORE, IT IS RESOLVED, that pursuant to Minnesota Statute Sec. 161.36, the Commissioner of Transportation be appointed as Agent of the City of Lake Elmo to accept as its agent, federal aid funds which may be made available for eligible transportation related projects. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed for and on behalf of the City to execute and enter into an agreement with the Commissioner of Transportation prescribing the terms and conditions of said federal aid participation as set forth and contained in “Minnesota Department of Transportation Agency Agreement No. 03330”, a copy of which said agreement was before the City Council and which is made part hereof by reference. APPROVED by the Lake Elmo City Council on this 19TH day of December, 2017. By: __________________________ Mike Pearson Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson City Clerk PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4b – ACTION ITEM STAFF REPORT DATE: 12/19/2017 REGULAR AGENDA ITEM# 14 TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director ITEM: Creation of new Landfill Land Use Category within the Comprehensive Plan Re-guiding Land Management Area of Washington County Landfill to Landfill Land Use Category REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Minnesota Legislature, in 1994, adopted a Landfill Cleanup Act (LCA) (M.S. 115B.39-115B.45) which created the Closed Landfill Program (CLP), designating the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) responsible for clean and long term care of 112 closed, municipal, solid waste landfills throughout the state, making it responsible for managing risk to public health and environment associated with landfills. M.S. 115B.412, Subd. 9 requires the MPCA to develop a Land Use Plan for each landfill and that local government units (LGUs) make their land use plans consistent with the MPCA’s plan for the site. The Washington County Landfill within the City of Lake Elmo is subject to the statute that requires the MPCA develop a land use plan with which the governing body’s land use plan must be consistent. There are four actions being requested. The Council is being asked to review the following: 1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment creating a new Closed Landfill Restricted Land Use Category. 2) Comprehensive Plan Amendment re-guiding the property designated by the MPCA as the Closed Landfill Restricted area. 3) Zoning Text Amendment creating a new zoning district corresponding to the new Closed Landfill Restricted Land Use Category of the Comprehensive Plan. 4) Zoning Map Amendment rezoning the area designated by the MPCA as the Closed Landfill Restricted area. GENERAL INFORMATION Property: PID#s 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003, 15-292-12-20-0001 Property Owners: 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003: City of Lake Elmo 15-292-12-10-20-001: State of Minnesota – Pollution Control Agency Location: Washington County Landfill Park 2 Request: 1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment creating a new Closed Landfill Management Land Use Category. 2) Comprehensive Plan Amendment re-guiding the property designated by the MPCA as the Closed Landfill Management area. 3) Zoning Text Amendment creating a new zoning district corresponding to the new Closed Landfill Management Land Use Category of the Comprehensive Plan. 4) Zoning Map Amendment rezoning the area designated by the MPCA as the Closed Landfill Management area. Existing Land 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003: Public and Quasi Use and Zoning Public Open Space (PF). 15-292-12-10-20-001: Agricultural (A). Comprehensive Public/Park Plan: History: See attached timeline. Applicable M.S. 115B.39-115B.45 Regulations: DNR Conversions of Use – Guidelines and Requirements REQUEST DETAILS: Background. In 1994, the Minnesota Legislature adopted a Landfill Cleanup Act (LCA) (M.S. 115B.39-115B.45) which created the Closed Landfill Program (CLP), designating the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) responsible for clean and long term care of 112 closed, municipal, solid waste landfills throughout the state. In 2013, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) drafted a Closed Landfill Use Plan that identified future land uses that are acceptable to the MPCA for the site. This Closed Landfill Use Plan is attached for review and summarized below. • Areas of Concern. There are the following areas of concern on the subject parcels: o Groundwater Areas of Concern. The presence of activities that require use of groundwater may be impacted or precluded by contamination from the landfill or may cause groundwater flow direction to change thereby impacting the user or others nearby. o Methane Gas Areas of Concern. Methane gas is an odorless gas produced when municipal solid waste decomposes, and can be explosive in confined spaces such as basements when mixed with air. Presence of certain activities, such as construction of enclosed structures, may be impacted or precluded by subsurface migration of methane gas. • Current Restrictions to Subject Parcels. The MPCA used proceeds from the sale of State general obligation bonds for capital costs of environmental response actions that MPCA undertook at the Landfill, and as a result the property became “State Bond Financed Property,” as that term is defined by Minn. Stat. § 16A.695. In order to assure that the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 16A.695 and the Order are carried out with respect to all State Bond Financed Property, the 3 MMB Commissioner requires that a Declaration be recorded on the property records indicating that any sale of the property may be subject to the MMB Commissioner’s approval. Such Declaration, pertaining to LCA parcel B, was signed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and filed with the Office of the County Recorder, Washington County, on February 8, 2011 as document no. 3830248. These documents were recorded in April of 2015 on parcels A, C, and D (as shown as Appendix E in the attached Closed Landfill Use Plan (CLUP) Report). Declarations of Restrictions and Covenants already restrict the following: • MPCA’s Land Use Plan for the Landfill. The MPCA has found the following uses acceptable on the entire landfill management area or portions thereof are as follows: o Closed Landfill Management o Civic o Parks and Open Space o Solar Energy Farm Appendices H through J of the CLUP Report show where these uses would be allowed. Reason for Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment. While the restrictive covenants restrict the property in regards to well installation and the construction of buildings, the MPCA also requires a Land Use Plan to be developed that identifies uses that commensurate with the MPCA’s obligations to take care of the landfill and manage risks the landfill poses to the public, as well as to protect the remedial infrastructure the state has invested, including equipment, landfill cover, etc. Public access or recreation is not allowed on its landfills. Designating the entire Land Management Area as Parks and Open Space would give the impression that all of the site was accessible to the public as park, which is exactly what cannot be allowed. Further, Minn. Stat. § 115B.412, Subd. 9 requires all local land-use plans be consistent with the MPCA’s land-use plan for the landfill management area. The MPCA’s future obligations for the landfill management area conflict with the current local land-use plan; specifically the City’s Public and Quasi-Public Open Space and Agriculture zoning ordinances for this property. The MPCA believes that most of the uses within the current zoning for the landfill management area are not compatible with the MPCA’s future responsibilities for the site as well as the risks associated with the Landfill. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT – CREATING CLOSED LANDFILL MANAGEMENT AREA LAND USE CATEGORY Need for Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Because the Comprehensive Plan does not currently have a Closed Landfill Restricted Land Use Category, an amendment to include such a land use category will be required in order to re-guide the area. Proposed Amendment. Staff proposes that the Closed Landfill Restricted Land Use Category be added to Chapter III – Land Use Plan. The proposed amendment is attached for reference and would include the following amendments: Parcel Constructing, excavating, placing any structure, material, personal property, equipment without prior written approval from MPCA Commissioner Installing drinking water wells on parcel without prior written approval of MPCA and MDH Commissioners A X – entire parcel X – entire parcel B X – entire parcel X – entire parcel C X – area 125 feet S of N prop. line X – entire parcel D X – west 200 ft X – entire parcel 4 • The addition of a Closed Landfill Restricted category to Existing Land Use Definitions. • Amendment of the Existing and Planned Land Use Table, adding acreage to the Closed Landfill Restricted category and removing the same amount of acreage from the Public/Park land use category. • Updating the Planned Land Use Map to re-guide landfill management area to Closed Landfill Restricted (see attached updated Planned Land Use). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT – REGUIDING CLOSED LANDFILL MANAGEMENT AREA Lot Line Adjustment. In order to re-guide only portions that are restricted due to the above- mentioned areas of concern, the City has had a survey done which will adjust the lot lines of three city-owned parcels. This survey is attached. The City will only be re-guiding Parcel A as shown in this attached survey and PID# 15.029.21.22.0001 (3855 Jamaca Ave, owned by the State of MN – Pollution Control Agency) to Closed Landfill Restricted. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT – CREATING CLOSED LANDFILL MANAGEMENT ZONING DISTRICT Creation of Zoning District. Because there is not a zoning district to reflect the Closed Landfill Restricted Land Use category, a separate zoning district will need to be created. Attached is a draft ordinance which creates this zoning district. Allowed Uses. Allowed uses within the proposed zoning district correspond to those as outlined in the CLUP report and include: • Closed Landfill Management • Solar Energy Farms (conditional use) Definition of Closed Landfill Management. The definition of Closed Landfill Management (a proposed permitted use in the CLR district) is proposed to be added to Article II: Definitions. Standards for Solar Energy Farms. The standard for a Solar Energy Farm is that location and plans be approved by the MPCA and City. The City is currently in the process of amending its solar energy systems standards but is waiting on input from the Building Official and Fire Chief. Because the standards for these systems are currently undergoing amendments, Staff recommends that the Council focus solely on the use and setbacks required for solar energy systems. The Commission may wish to recommend that the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance not be adopted until the City has updated its solar energy systems standards. The draft ordinance and current standards for solar energy systems require that solar energy systems adhere to the setback standards for the zoning district in which they are located. Additionally, a Conditional Use Permit would allow further regulations of screening, etc. Proposed Setback Requirements. The proposed setback requirements for solar farms within this zoning district are consistent with those of the required setbacks of the previous zoning district in which the Closed Landfill Restricted area were located. A required buffer of 150 feet from residential zones was added in order to protect adjacent residential areas from any glare or potential nuisance caused. Screening Requirements? The Commission may wish to add screening requirements to proposed solar farms. Alternatively, this may be done with any conditional use permit application so that screening is required where appropriate. 5 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT – REZONING CLOSED LANDFILL MANAGEMENT AREA Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. If the Commission wishes to recommend updating the Comprehensive Plan, re-guiding Parcel A as shown in this attached survey and PID# 15.029.21.22.0001, the proposed Zoning Map Amendment would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission Review. The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Zoning Text Amendment, and Zoning Map Amendment at its October 23, 2017 meeting. A number of inquiries regarding the requests were received looking for clarification regarding the requests prior to the public hearing, but ultimately no concern was expressed. Shaun Ruotsinoja of the MPCA, who helped draft the Closed Landfill Use Plan in 2013, spoke during the public hearing to answer questions. The Planning Commission had expressed desire that the proposed requests be sent to the Parks Commission for review before being considered by Council and ultimately recommended approval of the proposed requests with a vote of 7-0. Parks Commission Review. The Parks Commission considered the proposed requests at its November 20, 2017 meeting. Staff explained to the Parks Commission that the proposed land use and zoning changes would only affect the fenced in areas of the affected parcels and would have no impact on those areas outside of the fence. The Parks Commission unanimously recommended approval of the re-guiding and rezoning of the area within the fence as delineated in the attached survey to Closed Landfill Restricted in order to adhere to State Statute requirements as long as it had no impact on Sunfish Lake Park. NEXT STEPS Parkland Conversion. There are four parcels that make up the Washington County Landfill site located in the City of Lake Elmo. In 1978, these properties received a Land and Water Conversion Fund (LAWCON) grant, which is a federal grant used for the development of outdoor recreation facilities. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is responsible for tracking compliance of the conditions to which this grant was given. In 1990, the DNR determined the Landfill Park was unavailable for public outdoor recreation use because of landfill remediation systems, specifically spray irrigation system. The City then began with the required conversion process to convert the land to non-recreational uses to find other land to replace it, but the City has yet to complete this process. The City will need to complete this conversion process, and this may be done with future parkland dedicated with development or through a different process (purchasing parkland, designating donated parkland, etc.). The dedicated land must be equal in value to the land that is no longer usable for recreation purposes. The next step in this conversion process will be to have a federal appraisal completed for Parcel A which will no longer be available for public recreation use. If the expected value is under $25,000, a waiver valuation can be submitted, but the appraiser preparing the waiver must have sufficient understanding of the local real estate market to be qualified. Staff has received a quote of $3,000 to perform the appraisal provided the expected value is under $25,000. Additional Cost for Survey. E.G. Rud and Sons, the surveyor of the three parcels, had originally quoted $4,640 for completion of the survey. This amount was approved by Council in March of 6 2017. The amount of time that this survey took, however, was longer than anticipated, and E.G. Ruds and Sons has communicated that the amount of time it took to complete the survey has amounted to $8,075.30 but would be willing to meet in the middle between the approved amount and amount it actually took at $6,350. The City has already paid the additional amount and is recommending that Council approve the additional cost of $1,710 to complete the survey. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, adding a Closed Landfill Restricted Land Use Category and re-guiding portions of PID#s 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003 as shown in the survey dated August 18, 2017 from Public/Park to Closed Landfill Restricted and all of PID# 15-292-12-10-20-001 from Rural Area Development to Closed Landfill Restricted. “Move to recommend approval of an amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use Plan, adding a Closed Landfill Restricted Land Use Category as proposed by Staff and re-guiding portions of PID#s 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003 as shown in the survey dated August 18, 2017 from Public/Park to Closed Landfill Restricted and all of PID# 15-292-12-10-20-001 from Agricultural to Closed Landfill Restricted..” Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed Zoning Text Amendment, adding a Closed Landfill Restricted zoning district to the City’s Zoning Code, as proposed by Staff. “Move to recommend approval of a Zoning Text Amendment to the City’s Code, adding a definition to Section 154.012 of Closed Landfill Management and adding Article XIX: Closed Landfill Restricted as proposed by Staff.” Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed Zoning Map Amendment rezoning portions of PID#s 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003 as shown in the survey dated August 18, 2017 from Public and Quasi Public Open Spaces to Closed Landfill Restricted and all of PID# 15-292-12-10-20-001 from Agricultural to Closed Landfill Restricted. “Move to recommend approval of the proposed Zoning Map Amendment rezoning portions of PID#s 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003 as shown in the survey dated August 18, 2017 from Public/Park to Closed Landfill Restricted and all of PID# 15-292-12-10-20-001 from Agricultural to Closed Landfill Restricted.” Finally, Staff recommends that the City Council move to approve to additional payment of $1,710 to E.G. Rud and Sons for additional costs incurred for preparing the survey. “Move to approve payment of additional cost of $1,710 for completion of the survey for a lot line adjustment for PID#s 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003.” ATTACHMENTS: • Timeline • CLUP Report • Survey showing lot line adjustments of the parcels • Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment • Ord. 08-193 Creation of the Closed Landfill Restricted Zoning District 7 • Resolution 2017-143 approving a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide portions of PID#s 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003 as shown in the survey dated August 18, 2017 from Public/Park to Closed Landfill Restricted and all of PID# 15-292-12-10-20-001 from Rural Area Development to Closed Landfill Restricted. • Ord 08-194 approving a Zoning Text Amendment to re-zone portions of PID#s 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003 as shown in the survey dated August 18, 2017 from Public and Quasi Public Open Spaces to Closed Landfill Restricted and all of PID# 15-292-12-10-20-001 from Agricultural to Closed Landfill Restricted. • Request by E.G. Rud and Sons for additional payment for completion of survey for PID#s 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003 • Invoice showing time spent by E.G. Rud and Sons for completion of above-mentioned survey Washington County Landfill Timeline Year Event Details 1969 Landfill permitted. 1975 Landfill closed. 1978 & 1979 Land and Water Conversion Fund (LAWCON) grant agreements signed by City and State. LAWCON is a federal grant that is used for the development of outdoor recreation facilities. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is responsible for tracking compliance. 1990 DNR determines Landfill Park unavailable for public outdoor recreation use because of landfill remediation systems, specifically spray irrigation system. DNR informs City of this determination and recommends the City begin with the required conversion process to convert the land to non-recreational uses and to find other land to replace it. 1993 City Council accepts this determination. City informs DNR the City will begin appraising new land to replace the Landfill Park. 1994 MN Legislature adopts the Landfill Cleanup Act (LCA) (M.S. 115B.39-115B.45) which created the Closed Landfill Program (CLP), designating the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) responsible for clean and long term care of 112 closed, municipal, solid waste landfills throughout the state. • Mission: Manage risk to public health and environment associated with landfills. • Strategy: M.S. 115B.412, Subd. 9 requires the MPCA to develop a Land Use Plan for each landfill and that local government units (LGUs) make their land use plans consistent with the MPCA’s plan for the site. • Issue: Current City of Lake Elmo local land use plan conflicts with MPCA’s land use plan. 1995 MPCA takes over responsibility of the Landfill. An agreement is made with MPCA, Washington County, Ramsey County, and the City entered in to a Landfill Cleanup Agreement (LCA). 1995 DNR informs City the required conversion process is not complete. Informs the City no further funds will be received until the process is completed. 2010 DNR again requests the City to complete the conversion process. 2011 City informs the MPCA of the issue for the first time and meeting is held between City Administrator, Engineer, Attorney, Special Projects Assistant and a Parks Board Member, representative from DNR and representative from MPCA. • City claimed the property would remain designated public outdoor recreation use except for the fact that the MPCA has determined a portion of it to be unsuitable for public recreation/use. • MPCA argues that the DNR’s determination that the land was unsuitable for public outdoor recreation, as well as City’s acceptance of this and its early willingness to begin the conversion, had nothing to do with MPCA’s determination and that this determination was made before the Landfill Cleanup Act was enacted. 2013 MPCA drafts a Closed Landfill Use Plan that identifies future land uses that are acceptable to MPCA for the site, or parts of the site. In addition to closed landfill management, certain areas may be suitable for certain civic uses related to city maintenance, parks or open space, or use as a solar energy farm. Today The City has yet to adopt the MPCA land use plan nor has it had the land recently appraised or replaced with other suitable public outdoor recreation use to meet DNR requirements. Next Action Steps for City of Lake Elmo: Washington County Landfill PID#s: 10-029-21-33-0001, 10-029-21-34-0001, 15-292-12-10-0003, 15-292-12-20-0001 City creates revised map showing property boundary that will be maintained for public outdoor recreation use and the portion that is no longer suitable for public outdoor recreation use. City verifies with the MPCA that these boundaries properly reflect the area that is no longer suitable for public outdoor recreation use. City gives the revised map to the DNR for review. City replats parcels, creating one parcel that delineates land no longer suitable for public outdoor recreation use. City amends Comprehensive Plan by creating a new land use category and re-guiding the property no longer suitable for public outdoor recreation use and rezones properties with a newly created zoning district consistent with MPCA's land-use plan for the site, as is required by State Statute. City contacts certified or professional appraisal firm to determine if property value is expected to be $25,000 or less. If appraisal firm determines property to be $25,000 or less, a property vlauation can be submitted to the DNR. If the property is determined to be more than $25,000, City must have an appraisal completed to federal "yellow book" standards. Exact costs of these are unknown, but the appraisal could be around $5,000. City replaces land for public outdoor recreation use elsewhere in the city. The value of this land must be equal to the value of the landfill area parcel that has been deemed no longer suitable for public outdoor recreation use. This land must be property not currently owned by the City or identified for recreational use. It can be future parkland dedication land and would be owned and operated by the City as parkland. Until the City proceeds with the replacement of the landfill area land deemed unsuitable for public outdoor recreation use, the DNR cannot provide additional grants. Additionally, the State could be held responsible by the National Park Service to satisfy the contract requirements. The efforts to have the City comply with their contract between the City and State are unknown. CLOSED LANDFILL USE PLAN WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL SEPTEMBER 17, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 2 GROUNDWATER AND METHANE GAS AREAS OF CONCERN ........................................................................ 2 CURRENT ZONING/LAND USE PLAN FOR THE LMA ...................................................................................... 4 DECLARATIONS OF RESTRICTIONS AND COVENANTS ................................................................................... 4 STATE BOND FINANCED PROPERTY .............................................................................................................. 5 MPCA’S LAND USE PLAN FOR THE LMA ........................................................................................................ 6 DISCUSSION / CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................ 6 DISCLAIMER................................................................................................................................................... 7 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: MINN. STAT. §§ 115B.412, SUBD. 4 AND 9 APPENDIX B: SITE LOCATION MAP – WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL APPENDIX C: LAND MANAGEMENT AREA – WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL APPENDIX D: LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL LAND MANAGEMENT AREA (LCA PARCELS) APPENDIX E: LCA PARCELS – WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL APPENDIX F: GWAOC – WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL APPENDIX G: MGAOC – WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL APPENDIX H: CLOSED LANDFILL MANAGEMENT USE – WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL APPENDIX I: CIVIC AND PARKS & OPEN SPACE USE – WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL APPENDIX J: SOLAR ENERGY FARM USE – WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL APPENDIX K: CLOSED LANDFILL RESTRICTED ZONING ORDINANCE TEMPLATE 1 CLOSED LANDFILL USE PLAN WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL INTRODUCTION In 1994, the Minnesota Legislature adopted the Landfill Cleanup Act (LCA) (Minn. Stat. 115B.39 - 115B.45) which created the Closed Landfill Program (CLP). Under the CLP, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is responsible for the cleanup and long term care of 112 closed, municipal, solid waste landfills throughout the State. The mission of the CLP is to manage the risk to public health and the environment that is associated with these landfills. Landfill gas migration and groundwater contamination can be serious issues at some landfills. These problems can pose a threat to the health and safety of those living or occupying land nearby. In addition, chemicals leaching from landfills can degrade groundwater and surface water resources surrounding them. The MPCA addresses the risk to public health and the environment at the closed landfills by undertaking cleanup actions, operating and maintaining remediation systems (engineered covers, gas-collection and groundwater-treatment systems) and by monitoring groundwater, surface water, and landfill gas. The risk to public health and safety is also mitigated by implementing land-use controls that minimize public exposure to landfill hazards and protect the state’s response action equipment. In other words, future use of land at and around closed landfills needs to be planned carefully and responsibly. Minnesota Statutes 115B.412, Subd. 9 of the LCA requires the MPCA to develop a Land Use Plan for each of these landfills and for local government units (LGUs) to make their local land use plans consistent with the MPCA’s plan for the site. Minnesota Statutes 115B.412, Subd. 4 requires the MPCA to provide LGUs certain information about the landfill and to incorporate this information in to their local land use planning. These statutes are provided in Appendix A. The MPCA considers these statutory requirements, when put together, as a Closed Landfill Use Plan (CLUP). The purpose, then, for preparing a CLUP for each landfill is to: protect the integrity of the landfill’s remediation and monitoring systems; protect human health and public safety at each landfill; and accommodate local government needs and desires for land use at the qualified facility with consideration for health and safety requirements. To meet the requirements of subdivision 9 of the statute, LGUs that have land-use authority must make their land-use plans for the landfill consistent with the MPCA’s plan for future use of, and obligations for, the facility. One way to accomplish this is for LGUs to make certain that their land-use designations and/or zoning ordinances are compatible with the MPCA’s future responsibilities and uses for the Land Management Area. To meet the requirements of subdivision 4 of the statute, LGUs must consider the information about the landfill’s contamination and methane gas migration in its land-use planning and also make this information available to those that want to develop the affected property. Also, LGUs may wish to adopt certain land-use controls in order to better protect public health and safety. 2 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Washington County Landfill (Landfill) is located in the city limits of Lake Elmo (City), Washington County, Minnesota (Appendix B). A landfill’s Land Management Area (LMA) includes the property described in the Landfill Cleanup Agreement between the MPCA and the landfill owner/operator, and may include adjacent property that contains waste, adjacent buffer property (land acquired for the purpose of restricting use by the public due to landfill gas or groundwater concerns), and adjacent property where response action equipment is located. At a minimum, the LMA will be comprised of the property in the Landfill Cleanup Agreement. In addition, the LMA is the property that is subject to Minnesota Statutes 115B.412, Subd. 9 of the LCA that requires the MPCA to develop a Land Use Plan for the landfill and with which the LGU’s land use plan must be consistent. The LMA for the Landfill consists of approximately 129 acres as shown in Appendix C and legally described in Appendix D. The waste footprint is about 24 acres. The Landfill was permitted in 1969 and closed in 1975. The MPCA took over responsibility of the Landfill in 1995 when the MPCA, Washington County, Ramsey County, and the City entered into a Landfill Cleanup Agreement (LCA) and the MPCA issued the Notice of Compliance. The LMA is divided into four parcels (A, B, C, and D) in the LCA for purposes of describing certain and required remedial response actions (Appendix E shows the location of the LCA parcels). These parcels, in terms of their shape and legal description, are not necessarily the same as the parcels identified by Washington County’s property records (i.e. tax parcels). Currently, LCA parcels A, C, and D are owned by the City and parcel B is owned by the State of Minnesota, MPCA. GROUNDWATER AND METHANE GAS AREAS OF CONCERN Groundwater Area of Concern The Groundwater Area of Concern (GWAOC) is defined as the area of land surrounding a landfill where the presence of activities that require the use of groundwater may be impacted or precluded by contamination from the landfill, or may cause the groundwater flow direction to change thereby impacting the user or others nearby. The GWAOC is used to inform the public about the current and potential risks to users of groundwater contaminated by the landfill. In most circumstances this area is not equidistant around the site. The GWAOC is shown in Appendix F. The surficial aquifer beneath the Landfill consists of glacial sand and gravel. Depth to the water table at the site is approximately 50 feet below the ground surface. The surficial aquifer is contaminated with perfluorochemicals (PFCs) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including tetrachloroethene, trichloroethene, and vinyl chloride. The plume of VOCs extends south to the railroad track that is north of Highway 5. The groundwater area of concern around the Landfill is the Special Well Construction Area (SWCA) established by the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). The area is defined by the environmental monitoring system that includes 40 monitoring wells and 253 residential wells. This area was expanded by MDH on March 8, 2007 in response to PFC contamination and is approximately 5.3 million square meters. The SWCA includes the plume of mounded groundwater from the Landfill that travels to the 3 south and southeast and the co-mingled plume to the southwest that includes a plume from the Oakdale Disposal Site through Raleigh Creek and a former plume from the Landfill that discharged to Raleigh Creek from a Tri-Lakes outlet in the early 1990s. The contaminant plume from the Oakdale Disposal Site is identified by PFOS (a type of PFC) that has impacted areas south and west of Raleigh Creek, Eagle Point Lake, the area between Eagle Point Lake and Lake Elmo that is in the Lake Elmo Park Reserve and residential developments that are south of this area to I-94. The bedrock aquifer of the Prairie du Chien and St. Peter Formation are impacted with PFCs to a depth of 200 feet below the ground surface. Methane Gas Area of Concern The Methane Gas Area of Concern (MGAOC) is defined as the area of land surrounding a landfill waste footprint where the presence of certain activities, such as construction of enclosed structures, may be impacted or precluded by subsurface migration of methane gas. Methane gas is an odorless gas produced when municipal solid waste decomposes, and can be explosive in confined spaces such as basements when mixed in air. The MGAOC is used to inform the public about the risks to current and future land owners regarding certain uses they may want to consider. The MGAOC is shown in Appendix G. Soils in the vicinity of the Landfill are generally very well drained sands and gravel with some silty sand. The Landfill waste footprint is about 24 acres and contains approximately 2,000,000 cubic yards of waste. The closest enclosed structure off the LMA is approximately 350 feet west of the waste footprint. The Landfill has been reconstructed by building a triple lined system to segregate contaminants present in the waste from direct contact with the environment. A geosynthetic cover has been installed and welded to the top of the liner to seal landfill gas and leachate in the waste mass. An active gas extraction system and a leachate collection system have been installed to manage gas and leachate. The active gas extraction system has 20 vertical gas extraction wells connected to an enclosed blower/flare unit. There are two gas monitoring probe nests currently located on the west side of Jamaca Avenue west of the Landfill. Monitoring of these gas probes has shown non-detectable concentrations of methane before and during the Landfill reconstruction. Additional gas probes are anticipated to be installed during the latter half of 2013 to gather additional methane data. Based on the waste being sealed within the liner/cover system, but also recognizing the permeable soils in the area, the large mass of waste present in the Landfill, and the potential for gas to migrate under seasonal low permeable (frozen) conditions, the MGAOC extends 200 feet beyond the waste footprint. The MGAOC is within the LMA property boundary except for a small area on adjacent property southeast of the Landfill. It is important to note that these Areas of Concern can change over time. Therefore, updated information will be provided to the County when the existing information becomes obsolete or misleading. 4 CURRENT ZONING/LAND USE PLAN FOR THE LMA LCA parcels A, C, and D are zoned Public and Quasi-Public Open Space (PF) while LCA parcel B is zoned Agricultural (A). Permitted uses in the Public and Quasi-Public Open Space (PF) district include uses allowed in the zoning code that are in existence within the City at the effective date of the zoning code. Conditional uses in the PF district include: cemeteries, places of worship, government facilities, libraries and museums, public and private schools, and historic sites and interpretative centers. Interim uses in the PF district include: keeping of horses in conjunction with churches. Permitted uses in the Agricultural (A) district include: agriculture, farm, poultry facilities, farm buildings, farm drainage and irrigation systems, forestry, one farm dwelling per 40 acres not already containing a farm or non-farm dwelling, wayside stands, and joint ownership of property or by association or rental for the purpose of providing private gardens and forest plots. Conditional uses in the A district include: greenhouses, kennels, stables, commercial recreation, agricultural service establishments, open space development projects, and non-agricultural low-impact uses. Interim uses in the A district include: agricultural sales businesses, and agricultural entertainment businesses. DECLARATIONS OF RESTRICTIONS AND COVENANTS Three Declarations of Restrictions and Covenants were signed by the City and one by both Washington and Ramsey Counties that restrict certain uses on the four LCA parcels. Each Declaration was recorded with the Office of the County Recorder, Washington County, on December 14, 1995. The Declarations run with the land and are described below. Document No. 866616; prohibits the City from the following on LCA Parcel A: constructing, excavating, or placing any structure, material, personal property, equipment, or any other items on the parcel without the written approval of the Commissioner of the MPCA; and installing any drinking water wells on the parcel without the prior written approval of the Commissioner of the MPCA and the MDH. Document No. 866617; prohibits Washington and Ramsey Counties from the following on LCA Parcel B: constructing, excavating, or placing any structure, material, personal property, or equipment on the parcel without the written approval of the Commissioner of the MPCA; and installing any drinking water wells on the parcel without the prior written approval of the Commissioner of the MPCA and the MDH. Document No. 866618; prohibits the City from the following on LCA Parcel C: 5 constructing or placing any structure on the portion of the parcel that lies south of a line that is 125 feet south of the north boundary of the parcel without the written approval of the Commissioner of the MPCA; and installing any drinking water wells on the parcel without the prior written approval of the Commissioner of the MPCA and the MDH (any approved well installation must follow Minn. Rules 4725.4450). Document No. 866619; prohibits the City from the following on LCA Parcel D: constructing or placing any structure on the portion of the parcel that lies approximately within the west 200 feet of the parcel without the written approval of the Commissioner of the MPCA; and installing any drinking water wells on the parcel without the prior written approval of the Commissioner of the MPCA and the MDH (any approved well installation must follow Minn. Rules 4725.4450). STATE BOND FINANCED PROPERTY The MPCA used proceeds from the sale of State general obligation bonds for capital costs of environmental response actions that MPCA undertook at the Landfill. As a result of this expenditure of State bond proceeds, the publicly owned property where the environmental response actions were taken became “State Bond Financed Property” as that term is defined by Minn. Stat. § 16A.695. As the owner this State Bond Financed Property, the City and the MPCA are subject to the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 16A.695 and any orders or rules adopted by the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB) under that statute. Minn. Stat. § 16A.695 and the MMB Commissioner’s Fourth Amended Order Relating to the Use and Sale of State Bond Financed Property (the Order) impose certain requirements on any sale, mortgage, or other disposition of State Bond Financed Property, or any lease or contract for the use or management of the property entered into by the City or the MPCA Commissioner. The statutory requirements include, but are not limited to, obtaining the approval of the Commissioner of MMB before the City or the MPCA Commissioner enters into any such transaction (sale, lease, etc.) with respect to the property. In order to assure that the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 16A.695 and the Order are carried out with respect to all State Bond Financed Property, the MMB Commissioner requires that a Declaration be recorded on the property records indicating that any sale of the property may be subject to the MMB Commissioner’s approval. Such Declaration, pertaining to LCA parcel B, was signed by the MPCA and filed with the Office of the County Recorder, Washington County, on February 8, 2011 as document no. 3830248. However, two other Declarations, pertaining to LCA parcels A, C, and D, were sent to the City for signature but have not yet been signed or recorded against the corresponding property. 6 MPCA’S LAND USE PLAN FOR THE LMA The MPCA’s first and foremost responsibility regarding the Landfill is to manage the risk to public health and safety. It does this by taking response actions, maintaining the Landfill, and working with local governments to assure land use is commensurate with landfill conditions and MPCA’s obligations on the LMA, as well as the conditions on the affected land off the LMA. Therefore, land uses associated with the MPCA’s obligation to protect public health and safety take precedence over other possible land uses. The MPCA has identified land uses for the LMA. It has done so by considering the methane gas and groundwater areas of concern, the types and locations of response actions and associated equipment, the amount of the LMA occupied by landfill waste, and local land-use desires. The land uses on either the entire LMA or portions thereof that are acceptable to the MPCA are: Closed Landfill Management; Civic; Parks and Open Space; and Solar Energy Farm. Appendices H through J show where these uses would be allowed within the LMA. Closed Landfill Management is the use associated with the MPCA’s responsibility and obligation to take necessary response actions on the property as provided in Minn. Stat. §§ 115B.39-43. Civic is the use associated with the City’s need for building infrastructure related to city maintenance, fire service, public safety, etc. DISCUSSION / CONCLUSIONS Land Uses on the LMA Minn. Stat. § 115B.412, Subd. 9 requires all local land-use plans be consistent with the MPCA’s land-use plan for the LMA. The MPCA’s future obligations for the LMA conflict with the current local land-use plan; specifically the City’s Public and Quasi-Public Open Space and Agriculture zoning ordinances for this property. The MPCA believes that most of the uses within the current zoning for the LMA are not compatible with the MPCA’s future responsibilities for the site as well as the risks associated with the Landfill. As a result, the MPCA recommends that the City adopt a new zoning district and ordinance for the LMA. The MPCA recommends the City adopt a zoning district called Closed Landfill Restricted (CLR) with an ordinance similar in form to the one included in Appendix K. The new zoning, however, should reflect the land uses identified above – Closed Landfill Management, Civic, Parks and Open Space, Solar Energy Farm – and as shown in Appendices H through J. The City may want to consider Closed Landfill Management, Civic, and Parks and Open Space uses as permitted uses 7 for portions of the LMA while Solar Energy Farm be considered a conditional use (conditioned upon location and plans approved by the MPCA and the City). Regardless of future land use on the LMA, provisions within the Declarations of Restrictions and Covenants prohibit the construction and placement of structures and other materials as well as the installation of drinking water wells on certain portions of the LMA without prior written approval of the MPCA and/or MDH. Affected Property off the LMA Minn. Stat. § 115B.412, Subd. 4(b) requires local units of government to incorporate information about the landfill and associated groundwater contamination and landfill gas migration into any land-use plans and to notify persons applying for a permit to develop affected property of the existence of this information and, on request, to provide them with the information. Certain land-use controls pertinent to groundwater use and well construction within the GWAOC currently exist to protect public health and safety. First, Minn. Rules Chapter 4725.4450 requires that a water supply well cannot be constructed within 600 feet of the Landfill. Second, MDH has established a Special Well Construction Area south and east of the Landfill that prohibits the installation of wells in this area unless approved by MDH to be constructed in certain aquifers and following certain construction methods. A majority of the MGAOC is contained within the LMA except for a small portion that is on adjacent property southeast of the Landfill. However, the City’s existing zoning ordinance for the adjacent property, upon which the off-LMA MGAOC is present, prohibits structures from being built within 200 feet of the property line. Therefore, based on the monitoring data collected by the MPCA, no specific land-use controls are being recommended for properties outside the LMA. DISCLAIMER The MPCA makes no representations or warranties to the user of the accuracy, currency, suitability, or reliability of the data presented in this report. Any recommendations made by the MPCA in this report are based solely on the data it has, or its contractors have, collected, and only from data collected at specific locations and times. Other sources of contamination or methane, unknown to the MPCA, could exist off the Landfill property. The MPCA recommends that any person interested in developing property near the Landfill first consult with an environmental consulting or engineering firm, and/or an environmental attorney, regarding the possible risks associated with the Landfill. APPENDIX A Minnesota Statutes 115B.412 Subd. 4. Affected real property; notice. (a) The commissioner shall provide to affected local government units, to be available as public information, and shall make available to others, on request, a description of the real property described in the original and any revised permits for a qualified facility, along with a description of activities that will be or have been taken on the property under sections 115B.39 to 115B.43 and a reasonably accurate description of the types, locations, and potential movement of hazardous substances, pollutants and contaminants, or decomposition gases related to the facility. The commissioner shall provide and make this information available at the time the facility is placed on the priority list under section 115B.40, subdivision 2; shall revise, provide, and make the information available when response actions, other than long-term maintenance actions, have been completed; and shall revise the information over time if significant changes occur that make the information obsolete or misleading. (b) A local government unit that receives information from the commissioner under paragraph (a) shall incorporate that information in any land use plan that includes the affected property and shall notify any person who applies for a permit related to development of the affected property of the existence of the information and, on request, provide a copy of the information. Subd. 9. Land management plans. The commissioner shall develop a land use plan for each qualified facility. All local land use plans must be consistent with a land use plan developed under this subdivision. Plans developed under this subdivision must include provisions to prevent any use that disturbs the integrity of the final cover, liners, any other components of any containment system, or the function of any monitoring systems unless the commissioner finds that the disturbance: (1) is necessary to the proposed use of the property, and will not increase the potential hazard to human health or the environment; or (2) is necessary to reduce a threat to human health or the environment. Before completing any plan under this subdivision, the commissioner shall consult with the commissioner of management and budget regarding any restrictions that the commissioner of management and budget deems necessary on the disposition of property resulting from the use of bond proceeds to pay for response actions on the property, and shall incorporate the restrictions in the plan. APPENDIX D Legal Description of the Washington County Landfill Land Management Area (LCA Parcels) Parcel A: All that part of the South 40 acres of Government Lot 5, Section 10, and the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 10, and the North 30 acres of the North One-Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 15, all in Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of said Section 15, thence South 00 degrees, 18 minutes, 30 seconds West, bearings are based on the Washington County Coordinate System NAD83, along the west line of said Section 15, a distance of 501.27 feet to the south line of said North 30 acres of the North One-Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 15, thence North 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds East, along said south line, a distance of 1808.59 feet, thence North 00 degrees, 02 minutes, 32 seconds West and parallel with the east line of said Northwest Quarter of Section 15, a distance of 501.26 feet to the north line of said Section 15, thence South 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds West, along said north line a distance of 105.52 feet, thence North 00 degrees, 53 minutes, 21 seconds West and parallel with the west line of said Section 10, a distance of 650.00 feet, thence South 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds West and parallel with the south line of said Section 10, a distance of 200.00 feet, thence North 00 degrees, 53 minutes, 21 seconds West and parallel with the west line of said Section 10, a distance of 656.24 feet, to a point on the north line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 10, thence South 89 degrees, 45 minutes, 24 seconds West, along said north line, a distance of 193.17 feet to the northwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, thence North 00 degrees, 42 minutes, 39 seconds West, along the east line of said Government Lot 5, a distance of 29.52 feet to the northeast corner of said South 40 acres of Government Lot 5, thence South 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds West, along the north line of said South 40 of Government Lot 5, a distance of 706.92 feet, thence South 00 degrees, 53 minutes, 21 seconds East and parallel with the west line of said Section 10, a distance of 200.00 feet, thence South 50 degrees, 54 minutes, 08 seconds West, a distance of 127.25 feet, thence South 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds West and parallel with the north line of said South 40 acres of Government Lot 5, a distance 0f 500.00 feet to the west line of said Section 10, thence South 00 degrees, 53 minutes, 21 seconds East along the west line of said Section 10, a distance of 1055.45 feet to the point of beginning, containing 65.9 acres, more or less. Parcel B: The Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (NW ¼ of NW ¼) of Section 15, Township 29, Range 21, except the following described parcels: EXCEPTION 1: The North 501.5 feet of the NW ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 15, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, being the northerly 15 acres thereof. EXCEPTION 2: The North 220.0 feet of the South 396.00 feet of the West 330.00 feet of the NW ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 15, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, containing 1.33 acres, more or less. All subject to a road easement for Jamaca Avenue over the West 33.00 feet thereof. EXCEPTION 3: The South 176.00 feet of the west 330.00 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (NW ¼ of NW ¼) of Section 15 (15), Township Twenty-nine (29) North, Range Twenty-one (21) West, containing 1.33 acres, more or less. Parcel C: All that part of the South 40 acres of Government Lot 5, Section 10, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 10, thence North 00 degrees, 53 minutes, 21 seconds West along the west line of said Section 10, a distance of 1055.45 feet to the point of beginning, thence continuing North 00 degrees, 53 minutes, 21 seconds West along the west line of said Section 10, a distance of 280.00 feet to the northwest corner of said South 40 acres of Government Lot 5, thence North 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds East along the north line of said South 40 acres of Government Lot 5, a distance of 600.00 feet, thence South 00 degrees, 53 minutes, 21 seconds East and parallel with the west line of said Section 10, a distance of 200.00 feet, thence South 50 degrees, 54 minutes, 08 seconds West, a distance of 127.25 feet, thence South 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds West and parallel with the north line of said South 40 acres of Government Lot 5, a distance of 500.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 3.8 acres, more or less. Parcel D: All that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 10, and the North 30 acres of the North One-Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 15, all in Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Section 15, thence South 00 degrees, 18 minutes, 30 seconds West, bearings are based on the Washington County Coordinate System NAD83, along the west line of said Section 15, a distance of 501.27 feet to the south line of said North 30 acres of the North One-Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 15, thence North 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds East, along said south line, a distance of 1808.59 feet to the point of beginning, thence North 00 degrees, 02 minutes, 32 seconds West and parallel with the east line of said Northwest Quarter of Section 15, a distance of 501.26 feet to the north line of said Section 15, thence South 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds West, along said north line a distance of 105.52 feet, thence North 00 degrees, 53 minutes 21 seconds West and parallel with the west line of said Section 10, a distance of 650.00 feet, thence South 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds West and parallel with the south line of said Section 10, a distance of 200.00 feet, thence North 00 degrees, 53 minutes, 21 seconds West and parallel with the west line of said Section 10, a distance of 656.24 feet, to a point on the north line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 10, thence North 89 degrees, 45 minutes, 24 seconds East along said north line, a distance of 1113.64 feet to the northeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, thence South 00 degrees, 31 minutes, 57 seconds East, along the east line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 1307.98 feet to the southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, thence South 00 degrees, 02 minutes, 32 seconds East, along the east line of said Northwest Quarter of Section 15 a distance of 501.26 feet to the south line of said North 30 acres of the North One-Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 15, thence South 89 degrees, 51 minutes, 00 seconds West, along said south line, a distance of 800.00 feet to the point of beginning, containing 39.5 acres, more or less. APPENDIX K District CLR – Closed Landfill Restricted A. Purpose The Closed Landfill Restricted (CLR) District is intended to apply to former landfills that are qualified to be under the Closed Landfill Program of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The purpose of the district is to limit uses of land within the closed landfill, both actively filled and related lands, to minimal uses in order to protect the land from human activity where response action systems are in place and, at the same time, are protective of human health and safety. This district shall only apply to the closed landfill’s Land Management Area, the limits of which are defined by the MPCA. This district shall apply whether the landfill is in public (MPCA, County, City, Township), Indian tribal, or private ownership. For purposes of this ordinance, the Land Management Area for the _________ Landfill, a qualified facility under the MPCA’s Closed Landfill Program, is described as: B. Permitted Uses The following uses are permitted within the CLR District: ___________. C. Accessory Uses Accessory uses allowed in this district include outdoor equipment or small buildings used in concert with gas extraction systems, other response action systems, monitoring wells or any other equipment designed to protect, monitor or otherwise ensure the integrity of the landfill monitoring or improvement systems. Fences and gates shall apply under these provisions. D. Conditional Uses Conditional uses shall be limited to uses that do not damage the integrity of the Land Management Area and that continue to protect any person from hazards associated with the landfill. Any application for a conditional use must be approved by the Commissioner of the MPCA and the ___(LGU)____. Such approved use shall not disturb or threaten to disturb, the integrity of the landfill cover, liners, any other components of any containment system, the function of any monitoring system that exists upon the described property, or other areas of the Land Management Area that the Commissioner of the MPCA deems necessary for future response actions. The following conditional uses are permitted within the CLR District: E. Prohibited Uses and Structures All other uses and structures not specifically allowed as conditional uses, or that cannot be considered as accessory uses, shall be prohibited in the CLR District. F. General Regulations Requirements for __(parking, signs, area, height)__ and other regulations are set forth in _______________. G. Any amendment to this ordinance must be approved by the Commissioner of the MPCA and the ___(LGU)___. Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan Chapter III – Land Use Plan PUBLIC/PARK – This category defines lands that include publicly owned facilities, places of worship, public parks, and privately owned recreational facilities. The scale and types of uses allowable on public/park lands are controlled by the city’s conditional use permit process. No new areas of public/park space are currently designated by the new land use plan, but it is recognized that such areas will be created during the development process, and the land use map will need to be updated accordingly. [Corresponding Zoning District(s): P, OSP] CLOSED LANDFILL RESTRICTED – This category is intended to apply to former landfills that are qualified to be under the Closed Landfill Program of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The purpose of this category is to limit uses of land within the closed landfill, both actively filled and related lands, to minimal uses in order to protect the land from human activity where response action systems are in place and, at the same time, are protective of human health and safety. [Corresponding Zoning District: CLR] ROAD R.O.W.s – This category encompasses all areas dedicated specifically for use as road right-of-way. It should be noted that not all roads in Lake Elmo are on platted right-of-way, but are rather accommodated by easements over other land use categories. Accordingly, there is more land dedicated to use by roads than is depicted on the existing/planned land use table. New development will be required to dedicate right-of-way to accommodate the proposed road network. OPEN WATER – This category includes all land area in Lake Elmo covered by open water lakes and ponds as identified in the DNR Public Waters Inventory. No new areas of open water are by the official land use plan. The distribution of planned land uses on the official Future Land Use Map is shown on Map 3-3 and is summarized in Table 3-B: Mixed Uses Within the Old Village and in areas south of 10th Street, specific areas are targeted for potential mixed- use development; however, this designation means different things in both districts. Mixed Uses within the Old Village The mixed use designation on property within the Old Village indicates development must adhere to the specific zoning requirements established for mixed use development within the City Code. This type of development will typically see residential, commercial, office, and/or similar uses combined in complimentary ways within the same building. Mixed Uses south of 10th Street The mixed use designation on property south of 10th Street is intended to spur development by providing maximum flexibility on future land uses, thereby allowing a development proposal to cater to existing market conditions. In the areas designated as possible mixed-use on the Future Land Use Map (Map 3-3), the City’s planning process has identified that either the base land use or the adjacent land use designation would be appropriate for the site. These mixed-use areas may be zoned in accordance with the base land use category, or the adjacent land use category provided that: • Any such zoning will only be allowed if it is contiguous to property in an adjacent land use category; and • The Urban Low Density Residential land use category will not allowed as an alternative land use within mixed-use areas. III – 10 Alternatively, a combination of the uses allowed within the base land use category and future land uses adjacent to a mixed use area may be allowed through a planned unit development process. 1 Residential uses within the “Business Park” and “Commercial” land use designations can only occur in areas specifically designated for mixed use on the planned land use map 2 It is recognized that both park and road ROW areas will expand as new development occurs, but such acreage is accounted for in the respective development land use types as such land areas must contribute towards required development densities. 3 The staging plan for future development is fluid and will allow development to occur as market conditions dictate. Because of this, specific timing for development of any specific land use category is not possible. For the purposes of this table, the anticipated acreage changes are incrementally broken down into four periods of time showing a consistent rate of change between now and 2030. 4 The acreage of the greenbelt corridor areas, which are portions of the Village Open Space Overlay, that are adjacent to urban zoning districts were calculated to account for the remaining acreage in the Village. The other portions of the Village Open Space Overlay are accounted for through the base land use guidance (i.e. Rural Area Development or Rural Single Family). III – 11 As part of this amendment, Map 3-3 would be updated to guide the Tartan Park Golf Course area and the Emerson property as “Golf Course Community” Because we are adding a Land Use Category, the Existing and Planned Land Use Table must be updated accordingly. Table 3-B Existing and Planned Land Use Table Land Use Residential Density (units/acre) Existing Land Use () Planned Land Use (acres) Planned Land Use Changes (anticipated acreages in 5 year increments)3 Change (acres) Min Max City wide (Village)1 2012 to 2015 2015 to 2020 2020 to 2025 2025 to 2030 R E S I D E N T I A L Rural Area Development n/a 0.1 7094.24 5249.9 6640.66 6157.06 5703.53 5249.9 ‐1844.32 Residential Estates 0.1 0.4 771.26 793.71 776.87 782.49 788.10 793.71 22.45 Rural Single Family 0.66 2.0 1665.92 1666.41 1666.04 1666.16 1666.28 1666.41 0.49 Urban Low Density 2.5 4 0.00 496.39 124.10 248.20 372.29 496.39 496.39 Urban Medium Density 4.5 7 176.08 390.49 229.68 283.29 336.89 390.49 214.41 Urban High Density 7.5 15 0.00 157.67 39.42 78.84 118.25 157.67 157.67 Village Urban Low Density 1.5 2.49 0.00 244.11 61.03 122.06 183.09 244.11 244.11 Village Urban Medium Density 2.5 4.99 0.00 119.11 29.78 59.56 89.33 119.11 119.11 Golf Course 1.5 2.49 0.00 424.39 0 424.39 424.39 424.39 424.39 Community C O M M E R C I A L 2 Business Park 7.5 15 120.65 329.69 172.91 225.17 277.43 329.69 209.04 Commercial 4.5 7 99.86 208.33 126.98 154.10 181.22 208.33 108.47 Limited Business – – 111.41 66.16 100.09 88.78 77.47 66.16 ‐45.25 Village Mixed Use 5.0 10.0 0.00 164.40 41.10 82.20 123.30 164.40 164.40 P U B L I C / S E M I P U B L I C / O P E N S P A C E 3 Public/Park – – 3298.94 2877.4 3309.04 2857.19 2867.25 2877.4 -421.54 Closed Landfill Restricted _ _ 67.53 67.53 67.53 67.53 67.53 67.53 Greenbelt Corridor4 – – 0.00 82.67 20.66 41.34 62.01 82.67 82.67 Road ROWs – – 890.93 890.93 890.93 890.93 890.93 890.93 0.0 U N D E V E L O P E D Open Water – – 1355.29 1355.29 1355.29 1355.29 1355.29 1355.29 0.0 TOTALS: – – 15,584.58 15,584.58 15,584.5 15,584.5 15,584.5 15,584.5 0.0 “Golf Course Community” added to the leg 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-193 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING ADDING A CLOSED LANDFILL RESTRICTED ZONING DISTRICT. SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Article II: Definitions, Section 154.012 (B) (10) by adding the following: Closed Landfill Management. The use associated with the responsibility and obligation of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to take necessary response actions on the property as provided in Minnesota Statutes § 115B.412, Subd. 115B.39-43. SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Title XV: Land Usage; Chapter 154: Zoning Code; by adding the following: ARTICLE XIX: CLOSED LANDFILL RESTRICTED § 154.801 CLOSED LANDFILL RESTRICTED A. Purpose. The ordinance is adopted pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota Statutes § 115B.412, Subd. 9. The purpose of the CLR zoning district is to protect the integrity of the landfill’s remediation and monitoring systems; protect human healthy and public safety at each landfill; and accommodate local government needs and desires for land use at the qualified facility with consideration for health and safety requirements. § 154.802 PERMITTED, CONDITIONAL, AND INTERIM USES. Table 18-1 lists all permitted, conditional, and interim uses allowed in the Closed Landfill Restricted zoning district. “P” indicates a permitted use, “C” a conditional use, and “I” an interim use. Uses not so indicated shall be considered prohibited. Cross-references listed in the table under “Standards” indicate the location within this Ordinance of specific development standards that apply to the listed use. CLR Standard Closed Landfill Management P 154.012 (B) (10) Solar Farms C 154.802, 154.803 (A), 154.915 § 154.802 LOT DIMENSIONS AND BUILDING BULK REQUIREMENTS. 2 CLR Structure setback requirements (feet) Front yard 50 Side yard 50 Rear yard 25 Residential zones 150 § 154.803 SITE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. A. Solar Farms. Proposed locations and plans for Solar Farms must be approved by both the City and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Required buffer width may be waived through conditional use permit approval SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 4. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-193 was adopted on this ______ day of ___ 2017, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL _________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance 08-____ was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2017. City Council Resolution 2017-143 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-143 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR A PORTION OF PID#S 10.029.21.33.001, 10.029.21.34.001, AND 15.292.12.10.003 AS SHOWN ON THE SURVEY DATED AUGUST 18, 2017 FROM PUBLIC/PARK TO CLOSED LANDFILL RESTRICTED AND ALL OF PID# 15.292.12.10.20.0001 FROM RURAL AREA DEVELOPMENT TO CLOSED LANDFILL RESTRICTED AND AUTHORIZES 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, The City of Lake Elmo, 3800 Laverne Avenue North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (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 requests for a Zoning Text Amendment to create a new Closed Landfill Restricted Zoning District and Zoning Map Amendment to rezone a portion of PID#S 10.029.21.33.001, 10.029.21.34.001, and 15.292.12.10.003 from Public and Quasi-Public Open Space to Closed Landfill Restricted and all of PID# 15.292.12.10.20.0001 from Agricultural to Closed Landfill Restricted; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 23, 2017 to review the 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 regarding the Applicant’s requests at its meeting on December 19, 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 and beneficial for public safety. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED based upon the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following findings: FINDINGS City Council Resolution 2017-143 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 Closed Landfill Restricted and decreased acreage of Public/Park. b. Updating Map 3-3 – the planned land use map to re-guide the land use of portions of PID#s 10.029.21.33.001, 10.029.21.34.001, and 15.292.12.10.003 as shown on the survey dated August 18, 2017 from Public and Quasi-Public Open Space to Closed Landfill Restricted and all of PID# 15.292.12.10.20.0001 from Agricultural to Closed Landfill Restricted. 3. That the proposed amendments are consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based on the above findings, the Lake Elmo City Council hereby approves the Applicant’s request to amend the Comprehensive Plan as follows: c. On page III-11, updating Table 3-B to reflect proposed increased acreage of Closed Landfill Restricted and decreased acreage of Public/Park. d. Updating Map 3-3 – the planned land use map to re-guide the land use of portions of PID#s 10.029.21.33.001, 10.029.21.34.001, and 15.292.12.10.003 as shown on the survey dated August 18, 2017 from Public and Quasi-Public Open Space to Closed Landfill Restricted and all of PID# 15.292.12.10.20.0001 from Agricultural to Closed Landfill Restricted. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Lake Elmo City Council hereby authorizes and directs staff to submit a Comprehensive Plan amendment consistent herewith to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval. Passed and duly adopted this 19th day of December 2017, by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. ______________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-194 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo ordains that the following shall be added to I. Zoning Map Changes of the Table of Special Ordinances of the Municipal Code: Section 1: Zoning Map Amendment. The following property (portions of PID#S 10.029.21.33.001, 10.029.21.34.001, and 15.292.12.10.003 as shown on the survey dated August 18, 2017) is hereby rezoned from Public and Quasi-Public Open Space to Closed Landfill Restricted: All that part of the South Fort y (40) acres of Government Lot Five ( 5) , Sect ion Ten (10), and the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SE1/4 of SWl / 4) , of Sec t ion Ten (10): The North Thirty (30) acres of the North One- Hal f of the North west Quarter (N1/2 of NW1/4) of Sect ion (15), all in Town ship Twenty- nine (29) North of Range Twenty- one (21) West. Washington County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning on the southwest corner of said Section 10 ; thence on an assumed bearing of North 00 degrees 53 minutes 21 seconds West along the west line of said Government Lo t 5, a distance of 10 5 2. 31 feet; thence North 89 degrees 51 minutes 00 seconds East a distance of 38 8. 00 feet; thence South 02 degrees 33 minutes 06 seconds East a distance of 41.15 feet; thence South 52 degrees 54 minutes 34 seconds East a distance of 6 5. 60 feet;t hence South 00 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds East a distance of 140 . 35 feet; thence South 33 degrees 55 minutes 33 seconds East a distance of 10 4. 10 feet; thence South 83 degrees 00 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 211.40 fee t; t hence North 89 degrees 02 minutes 22 seconds East a distance of 246.40 feet; t hence South 52 degrees 55 minutes 47 seconds East a distance of 8 7 . 86 feet; t hence North 88 degrees 59 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 296 65 feet; t hence South 46 degrees 54 minutes 35 seconds East a distance of 14 9.90 feet; t hence South 23 degrees 40 minutes 1 2 seconds East a distance of 117.00 feet; thence South 13 degrees 25 minutes 51 seconds East a distance of 30 9. 95 feet; thence South 17 degrees 22 minutes 20 seconds East a distance of 13 2. 47 feet; thence South 41 degrees 02 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 74. 73 feet; thence South 7 4 degrees 53 minutes 05 seconds East a distance of 166.14 feet; thence South 2 4 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 8 2. 40 feet;t hence South 19 degrees 20 minutes 10 seconds West a distance of 290. 90 feet; t hence South 53 degrees 35 minutes 08 seconds West a distance of 91.68 feet; t hence South 77 degrees 36 minutes 42 seconds West a distance of 133.6 2 feet; thence South 8 7 degrees 42 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 272.90 feet t a the south line of said North 30 Acres; t hence South 89 degrees 51 minutes 00 seconds West along said south line of \he North 30 Acres a distance of 130 4. 28 feet to the west line of the Northwest Quarter of said Sect ion 15: t hence Nor th 00 degrees 18 minutes 30 seconds East along \he west line of said Section 15, a distance of 501.52 feet to \he point of beginning. Subject to all easements of record Section 2: Zoning Map Amendment. The following property (PID# 15.292.12.10.20.0001) is hereby rezoned from Agricultural to Closed Landfill Restricted: NW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 EXC N 30 ACRES & EXC S 176FT OF W 330 FT EXC 15.029.21.22.0005 EXC BEING N 220FT OF S 396 FT OF W 330FT OF NW1/4-NW1/4 OF SEC 15 SUBJ TO RD EASE FOR JAMACA AVE OVER W 33FT THEREOF & N 50FT OF S 446FT OF W 436.33FT & ALSO N 220FT OF S 396FT OF E 106.33FT OF W 436.33FT OF NW1/4-NW1/4 OF SEC 15 EXC 15.029.21.22.0002 & 15.029.21.22.0003 SECTION 15 TOWNSHIP 029 RANGE 021 Section 3: The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo also hereby ordains that the Zoning Administrator shall make the applicable changes to the official zoning map of the City of Lake Elmo. Section 4: Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. This Ordinance No. 08-194 was adopted on this 19th day of December 2017, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. _____________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk From:Jason Rud To:Emily Becker Subject:RE: Completed Survey: Washington County Landfill Date:Thursday, September 21, 2017 9:20:06 AM Attachments:doc20170921093449.pdf Good morning Emily, I have not received an update, since we sent over this survey in August. Was this approved? Has the split been finalized? As promised earlier, I am sending over a breakdown of the time incurred to complete the survey work. I fully acknowledge this a great departure from our original estimate of $4,640, and I do not anticipate we would invoice our full amount. I am hoping though that we could possibly meet in the middle, at a price of $6,350.00. If this is acceptable, I will prepare a final invoice. Please feel free to inquire with any questions you may have. We appreciate your business. Jason Rud E.G. Rud and Sons 651-361-8200 From: Jason Rud Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 10:01 AM To: 'Emily Becker' <EBecker@lakeelmo.org> Subject: Completed Survey: Washington County Landfill Good morning Emily, Attached is the completed survey for your land fill parcel in a PDF format. We are providing the following: Existing parcel boundary and legal description per latest deed of record. Existing contours per Lidar data, supplemented by existing improvements (buildings, bituminous, fence line, gravel) located by our field crew. Proposed parcel division line based upon last week’s field work. The existing fence is generally 1-3 feet westerly and southwesterly of our division line as noted. Proposed legal descriptions, areas, and dimensions for Parcels A and B. These are larger format drawings, so I will also mail paper copies today. Thank you very much for your trust in our service. Please inquire with any other questions or needs you may have. Jason Rud E.G. Rud and Sons 651-361-8200 From: Emily Becker [mailto:EBecker@lakeelmo.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 1:52 PM To: Jason Rud <jrud@egrud.com> Subject: RE: Update Ok thank you. Emily BeckerCity PlannerCity of Lake Elmo 651-747-3912 ebecker@lakeelmo.org From: Jason Rud [mailto:jrud@egrud.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 1:30 PM To: Emily Becker <EBecker@lakeelmo.org> Subject: Update Emily, Just letting you know that we completed the field work last week to stake the new division line. We have imported this information and drafted your proposed legal descriptions. I anticipate your survey will be completed and disturbed this week. Thank you, JASON E. RUD, P.L.S. #41578PRESIDENT www.egrud.com MAIN: (651) 361-8200FAX: (651) 361-8701DIRECT: (651) 361-8225 ADDRESS: 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110Lino Lakes, MN 55014 The electric data is transmitted for your convenience and is the sole property of E. G. Rud & Sons, Inc. By accepting, the recipient agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend E. G. Rud & Sons, Inc., from andagainst any and all damages, liabilities, claims, losses and expenses (including attorney's fees) arisingfrom the use of this data. This electronic data is subject to change and updates are the responsibility ofthe recipient. E. G. Rud & Sons, Inc., is not responsible for updating the data or for compatibility withrecipient's hardware and / or software. Please check this file for virus contamination prior to use. STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 15 TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Sign Regulations REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner BACKGROUND: The City Council discussed the Sign Ordinance at its June 13, 2017 workshop. Areas of concern included the area allowed for signs along the freeway (10th Street to the I-94 area) and monument signs in development (the size and number allowed). The Planning Commission then reviewed the City’s Sign Ordinance at its August 14, 2017 and November 27th, 2017 meetings. A public hearing was held on December 11, 2017. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL: The Council is being asked to review proposed ordinance amendments and adopt Ord. 08-192 approving amendments as well as Resolution 2017-141 authorizing summary publication of Ord. 08-192. REVIEW/ANALYSIS: The proposed ordinance amendment includes the following changes: • Allows subdivision signs to be located within a public right-of-way provided an encroachment and license agreement is obtained. • Allows direction signs to places of worship, schools, parks, and public buildings to be located within the right-of-way provided they do not exceed four feet in size and approval from the road authority is obtained. • Subdivisions are allowed up to one subdivision identification sign per entrance instead of two as previously allowed. • The maximum size allowed for subdivision identification signs has been changed from 24 square feet to 32 square feet for the main entrance and 24 square feet for all other signs. • The table indicating allowable sign square footage has been reformatted slightly to classify the allowable size of signs by the street type to which the sign is adjacent (local, collector, minor arterial, or principal arterial street) instead of the speed limit and number of lanes on the street. City Council – Staff Report Item #15 Meeting date: 12/19/2017 Page 2 • In lieu of a ground sign meeting underlying zoning requirements, properties located south of 5th Street and north of I-94 may have one ground sign up to 30 feet in height and up to 250 square feet in size when within 50 feet of the property line nearest I-94. The base of the sign shall be constructed of materials that match those used on the building for which the sign is installed. • Allows pylon signs by allowing signs erected on properties south of 5th Street and north of I-94 to be exempt from the requirement that pole signs are prohibited unless the pole portion is enclosed in a shroud causing sign to appear to have a monolithic base. Public Hearing. During the public hearing that was held on December 11, 2017, one member from the public spoke. She explained that billboard signs are generally 600-700 square feet, and so the Commission should consider recommending a larger size for signs along I-94 in order to increase business visibility, thereby encouraging business prosperity within Lake Elmo. FISCAL IMPACT: A number of variance requests have been made for larger signs in the area south of 10th Street to I-94, and requests have been made by some developers to have more subdivision identification signs. These variance requests or requested flexibility through the Planned Unit Development process generate revenue but also take up a significant amount of Staff time. Further, allowing better visibility from I-94 for businesses may attract a better business base in this corridor. OPTIONS: The Council may: - Make amendments to Ord. 08-192 and adopt Ord. 08-192 as amended as well as Summary Publication Resolution 2017-141. - Adopt Ord. 08-192 as presented by staff and Summary Publication Resolution 2017-141. - Do not adopt Ord. 08-192 or Summary Publication Resolution 2017-141. - Table the item for a future meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that Council adopt Ord. 08- approving proposed amendments to the City Sign Regulations. “Move to adopt Ord. 08-192 approving proposed amendments to the City’s Sign Regulations.” Additionally, Staff also recommends that Council adopt Resolution 2017- authorizing Summary Publication of Ord. 08-. “Move to adopt Resolution 2017-141 authorizing summary publication of Ord. 08-.” ATTACHMENTS: • Ord. 08-192 • Resolution 2017-141 Authorizing Summary Publication of Ord. 08-192 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-192 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING THE CITY’S SIGN REGULATIONS SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Article VII: General Regulations; Section 154.212: Sign Regulations; Subd. (F) (2) (b) by amending the following: b. Signs on Public Property. No sign shall be located within or across any public right-of-way, or on any public property, easement, or utility pole, except for: i. A sign erected by, or required by, a government agency or temporarily erected to protect the health and safety of the general public; ii. A sign erected in conformity with subparagraph (a.ii) of this subsection. iii. Subdivision identification signs, provided an encroachment and license agreement is obtained from the appropriate jurisdiction. iv. Directional signs to places of worship, schools, parks and public buildings within the City not to exceed four square feet subject to the approval of the road authority. Not more than three directional signs are allowed for each building location. SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Article VII: General Regulations; Section 154.212: Sign Regulations; Subd. (G) (1) (c) by amending the following: c. Subdivision Identification Signs i. Number. Each residential subdivision is allowed up to a maximum of two (2) one subdivision identification signs per subdivision entrance. For the purposes of this section, residential subdivision shall include all phases of approved staged developments. ii. Location. Subdivision identification signs shall be located near entrances to the subdivision, except that one sign may be located along an abutting arterial or major collector roadway. iii. Size. The maximum size for a subdivision identification sign is 32 square feet at a subdivision’s main entrance and twenty four (24) square feet for all other locations. iv. Setback. Subdivision identification signs and support structure shall maintain a setback of at least ten feet from any street right-of-way. Signs as well as support structures within a center island shall maintain a setback of at least five feet from the curb and are subject to regulations set forth by 154.212 (F) (2) (b) of this Chapter. 2 SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Article VII: General Regulations; Section 154.212: Sign Regulations; Subd. (H) (2) by amending the following: Table 5-3 Ground Signs Table 5-3 describes the zoning districts in which ground signs may be displayed, and the maximum height and area of the signs, as determined by street classification (as designated in the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan) of the closest street to which each free standing sign is located. For ground signs on zoning lots with more than one street frontage, use the higher street classification to determine the maximum height and area allowed. Businesses that are located on a road designed to provide safe access to minor arterials and principal arterials shall be permitted to erect a freestanding sign up to the determined maximum height and size allowable for a freestanding sign on said minor arterial or principal arterial road to which it is adjacent. Table 5-3 Ground Signs Zoning District Aa, LDR, OP, RE, RS, RRa, RTa MDR, HDR BP, C, CC, GB, LC, VMX No. of Total Traffic Lanes Speed Limit (MPH) Max Height/Area (Sq. Ft.) Max Height/Area (Sq. Ft.) Max Height/Area (Sq. Ft.) 1-3 Local Street 0-34 - 6’/32 10’/32 40 35-44 - 6’/32 10’/50 Collector Street 45+ - 6’/32 10’/72 50 4-5 Minor Arterial 0-34 - 6’/32 10’/40 64 35-44 - 6’/32 10’/64 Principal Arterialb 45+ - 6’/32b 12’/80b Notes to Table 5-3: a. Ground signs are only permitted in the A, RR, and RT districts in conjunction with agricultural sales business. b. In lieu of a ground sign meeting underlying zoning requirements, properties located south of 5th Street and north of I-94 may have one ground sign up to 30 feet in height and up to 250 square feet in size when within 50 feet of the property line nearest I-94. The base of the sign shall be constructed of materials similar to those used on the building for which the sign is installed. SECTION 4. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Article VII: General Regulations; Section 154.212: Sign Regulations; Subd. (D) (1) by amending the following: 1. Permit Required. Except as provided in this Section, it shall be unlawful for any person to place, erect, alter or relocate within the city, any sign without first obtaining a permit from the Planning Director Planning Department and making payment of all fees as required by the City’s Fee Schedule. This subsection shall not be interpreted to require a permit for a change of copy on a changeable copy sign, changing occupant sign panels on a directory sign, repainting, cleaning, or other normal maintenance and repair of any existing sign or its structure as long as the sign copy does not change. 3 SECTION 5. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Chapter 154: Zoning Code; Article VII: General Regulations; Section 154.212: Sign Regulations; Subd. (H) (c) by amending the following: c. Type of Sign. Any permanent ground sign shall be erected as a monument sign. Pole signs are prohibited unless the pole portion of the sign is enclosed in a shroud that causes the sign to appear to have a monolithic base or support structure of any material measuring no less than one-third (1/3) of the greatest width of the sign at any point or unless the height is no greater than three (3) feet. This provision does not apply to signs erected on properties located south of 5th Street and north of I-94. The base of the monument sign shall not exceed the width of the widest portion of the sign face by more than twenty-five percent (25%). SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 6. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-192 was adopted on this 19th day of December 2017, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL _________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance 08-____ was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2017. CITY OF LAKE ELMO RESOLUTION NO. 2017-141 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 08-192 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-192, an ordinance amending the Lake Elmo City Code of Ordinances by amending the City’s Sign Regulations; and WHEREAS, the ordinance is lengthy; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, that the City Administrator shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 08-192 to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance: Public Notice The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted the following changes Section 154.212: Sign Regulations; of Article VII: General Regulations; of Chapter 154: Zoning Code, of the City Code of the City of Lake Elmo: • Subdivision signs may be located within a public right-of-way provided an encroachment and license agreement is obtained. • Direction signs to places of worship, schools, parks, and public buildings may be located within the right-of-way provided they do not exceed four feet in size and approval from the road authority is obtained. • Subdivisions are allowed up to one subdivision identification sign per entrance. • The maximum size allowed for subdivision identification signs is 32 square feet for the main entrance and 24 square feet for all other signs. • The table indicating allowable sign square footage has been reformatted slightly to classify the allowable size of signs by the street type to which the sign is adjacent (local, collector, minor arterial, or principal arterial street). • In lieu of a ground sign meeting underlying zoning requirements, properties located south of 5th Street and north of I-94 may have one ground sign up to 30 feet in height and up to 250 square feet in size when within 50 feet of the property line nearest I-94. The base of the sign shall be constructed of materials that match those used on the building for which the sign is installed. • Signs erected on properties south of 5th Street and north of I-94 are exempt from the requirement that pole signs are prohibited unless the pole portion is enclosed in a shroud causing sign to appear to have a monolithic base. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo that the City Administrator keep a copy of the ordinance at City Hall for public inspection and that a full copy of the ordinance be placed in a public location within the City. Dated: December 19, 2017. ___________________________________ Mayor Mike Pearson ATTEST: ____________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk (SEAL) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _____________________ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against same: ______________________ Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 REGULAR #16 AGENDA ITEM: Easton Village 3rd Addition Development Agreement Amendment Request TO: Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: Emily Becker, Planning Director REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney BACKGROUND: The City has received a request by Chase Development, Inc. to amend the Development Agreements for Easton Village 3rd Addition to allow building permits prior to installation of sidewalks. Council had previously reviewed the request at its November 7, 2017 meeting and denied the request at Staff’s recommendation but directed Staff to work with the developer on an amenable agreement. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Development Agreement for Easton Village 3rd Addition be amended to allow the City to release building permits prior to installation of sidewalks? PROPOSAL: The City adopted a new Developer Agreement Template in January of 2016 and has continued to make updates. The latest version of the template states that no building permit shall be issued for any lot until sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, curbing and one lift of asphalt has been installed and tested for all public streets; sidewalks have been installed; street and traffic control signs are installed; property monuments have been installed and grading as-built plans have been submitted and approved by the City. Therefore, the requirement that sidewalks are installed prior to building permits has been established for a number of developments. The Royal Golf Club at Lake Elmo Development Agreement was amended to allow sidewalks to be installed as a requirement of issuance of certificates of occupancy. This exception was made due the unique nature of the development requiring lift stations and significant utility work that was necessary before the winter season. The City requires sidewalks to be installed prior to issuance of building permits in order to prevent builders from changing established grades required for sidewalks. This policy generally results in better infrastructure. However, preventing the issuance of building permits prior to installation of sidewalks inhibits construction of homes in the winter and can result in sidewalks being damaged during construction. Staff and the Developer have come to an agreement on amendments to the Development Agreement that included the following: • Section 27 (A): Removal of the requirement that sidewalks be installed prior to issuance of building permits and the provision that boulevard grading must be completed within the entire right-of-way (without holding down grading for the future sidewalk or any other improvements). • Section 27 (F): The provision that if building permits are issued prior to the construction of front yard sidewalks or trails, the Developer assumes all responsibility for the coordination, liability and costs to; 1) ensure that the sidewalks and trails are constructed prior to any driveways for any lots with sidewalks or trails; 2) that the sidewalks and trails are constructed continuously from end of street to end of street without exceptions or gaps in the sidewalk or trail; 3) that there is a stop work order on all building construction for impacted lots during the sidewalk and trail construction and curing periods to prohibit traffic prior to City approval; and, 4) that all boulevard grading and restoration re-work is completed immediately following the sidewalk or trail construction. • Section 38 (E): That the one-time, 50% security reduction for categories 4-5 of the security amount may not be released until sidewalks or trails have been installed. If Council does wish to allow this change, the Council should consider amending the Developer Agreement Template so that in the future all developers are treated equally in this regard. FISCAL IMPACT: Requiring sidewalks to be installed prior to the release of building permits could result in better infrastructure, thereby possibly reducing future maintenance and repair costs. However, Staff feels that the proposed conditions to which building permits may be released prior to issuance of building permits will protect such infrastructure. OPTIONS: 1) Approve Resolution No 2017-142 approving Easton Village 3rd Addition Development Agreements amendment 2) Do not approve Resolution No 2017-142 approving Easton Village 3rd Addition Development Agreement amendment 3) Amend and then Approve either Resolutions RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council approve the proposed amendments to the Easton Village 3rd Addition Development Agreement. “Motion to adopt Resolution No 2017-142 approving the request to amend Easton Village 3rd Addition Development Agreement to allow building permits to be released prior to installation of sidewalks.” If the Council approves the amendments, Staff should also be directed to include this provision in the Development Agreement template to be used for future Development Agreements. “Move to amend the Development Agreement template with edits regarding building permit release prior to the installation of sidewalks as proposed to the Easton Village 3rd Addition Development Agreement.” ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution 2017-142 approving amendments to Easton Village 3rd Addition Development Agreement • Amended Development Agreement for Easton Village 3rd Additions 1 Resolution 2017 513372v1 SJS LA515-36 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-142 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR EASTON VILLAGE 3RD ADDITION WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Chase Development Inc., 2140 County Rd 42 W, Burnsville, MN 55337 (the “Applicant”) has previously submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (the “City”) for a final plat for Easton Village 3rd Addition; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council adopted Resolution No. 2017-076 on July 18, 2017 approving the final plat for Easton Village 3rd Addition; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council adopted Resolution No. 2017-081 on July 18, 2017, approving the Development Agreement for Easton Village 3rd Addition; and WHEREAS, the Applicant and City have agreed to amend the approved Development Agreement in order to allow building permits to be released prior to installation of sidewalks with the conditions that the Applicant must grade the boulevards up to the curb; that no reduction in security will be released until sidewalks are installed; and that certificates of occupancy will be released until sidewalks and driveways are installed. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the information received, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo does hereby approve the First Amendment to Development Agreement for Easton Village 3rd Addition and authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement. Passed and duly adopted this 19th day of December 2017 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. __________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk 513361v1 SJS LA515-36 FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This First Amendment to Development Agreement (Amendment) is made and entered into this _____ day of ___________, 2017, by and between the City of Lake Elmo, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota (the “City”) and Chase Development Inc., a Minnesota corporation (the “Developer”). RECITALS: A. The City and the Developer have entered into a Development Agreement dated August 31, 2017 and recorded with Washington County on September 5, 2017 as Document No. 4126518 (the “Development Agreement”). B. The Development Agreement relates to that subdivision located in Lake Elmo, Minnesota known as Easton Village 3rd Addition and the property is legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto. C. The Development Agreement required that sidewalks be installed prior to issuance of building permits. D. The City and the Developer have agreed to amend the Development Agreement to issue building permits prior to installation of sidewalks. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, which are expressly incorporated herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency which is hereby acknowledged, the City and the Developer agree to amend the Development Agreement as follows: 513361v1 SJS LA515-36 2 1. Section 27 (A) of the Development Agreement shall be changed to read as follows: A. No building permit shall be issued for any lot within the Subdivision, or within a completed phase of the Subdivision in a City preapproved phasing plan, until such time that sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, curbing and one lift of asphalt has been installed and tested for all public streets; boulevard grading has been completed within the entire right-of-way (without hold down grading for the future sidewalk or any other improvements), street and traffic control signs have been installed; property monuments have been installed and grading as-built plans have been submitted and approved by the City. A “preapproved phasing plan” is defined as a phased construction plan that has been submitted by the Developer and approved by the City in advance of the preconstruction meeting for the Subdivision. Once the construction has started, the City will not consider revisions to the phasing plan for the purpose of issuing building permits. 2. A new paragraph (F) shall be added to Section 27 of the Development Agreement which shall read as follows: F. If building permits are issued prior to the construction of front yard sidewalks or trails, the Developer assumes all responsibility for the coordination, liability, and costs to: 1) ensure that the sidewalks and trails are constructed prior to any driveways for any lots with sidewalks or trails; 2) that the sidewalks and trails are constructed continuously from end of street to end of street without exceptions or gaps in the sidewalk or trail; 3) that there is a stop work order on all building construction for impacted lots during the sidewalk and trail construction and curing periods to prohibit traffic prior to City approval; and 4) that all boulevard grading and restoration re-work is completed immediately following the sidewalk or trail construction. 3. Paragraph (F) of Section 27of the Development Agreement shall be re-lettered as paragraph (G). 4. Section 38 (E) of the Development Agreement shall be changed to read as follows: E. In addition to the above project milestone based Security reductions, the Developer may submit a written request and upon receipt of proof satisfactory to the City Engineer that work is progressing in accordance with the approved Plans and the terms of this Agreement and that all financial obligations to the City have been satisfied, the City Engineer may approve a one-time reduction in the Security for Construction Categories 2-5 in an amount not to exceed fifty (50) percent of the initial 513361v1 SJS LA515-36 3 Security amount. This one-time Security reduction does not apply to Categories 4-5 if boulevard sidewalks or trails have not been installed. 5. All other terms and conditions of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Developer have executed this First Amendment to the Development Agreement as of the date first written above. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By:_________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor By:_________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ___________________, 2017, by Mike Pearson and Julie Johnson, the Mayor and the City Clerk, respectively of the City of Lake Elmo, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the City. __________________________________ Notary Public 513361v1 SJS LA515-36 4 CHASE DEVELOPMENT INC. By:________________________________ Its: _______________________________ STATE OF _________ ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _________, 2017, by ___________________, the _______________ of Chase Development Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. ___________________________________ Notary Public This document was drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered (SJS) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 513361v1 SJS LA515-36 A-1 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property The property subject to the foregoing First Amendment to Development Agreement is legally described as follows: All property contained within the plat of Easton Village 3rd Addition, Washington County, Minnesota. STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 REGULAR 17 AGENDA ITEM: 2018-2022 CIP TO: Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: In May staff developed recommendations for updates to the 2018-2022 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) working in consultation with the Public Safety Committee, Maintenance Advisory Committee and the Parks Commission. Beginning in July, the Finance Committee began reviewing the plan and made a recommendation to the Council at their October meeting. The Planning Commission held the public hearing in November. There were no members from the public at the meeting and no written comments received prior to the public hearing. Some residents in Village Preserve contacted council about a park following the public hearing. The Parks Commission is planning for a new park in 2020. The Planning Commission passed a motion recommending the 2018-2022 CIP is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan after making one change. Their change was to increase the priority of the UP Railroad Crossing projects from a 3 to a 2 in recognition of the role they will play in allowing development to occur in the Old Village area. Staff had no concerns with the change and the draft has been updated to reflect this. ISSUE BEFORE COMMISSION: Should the Council adopt the proposed 2018-2022 Capital Improvement Plan? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: A copy of the 2018-2022 CIP is included in your packet. It includes projects that cost at least $25,000 and have a useful life span of five years or longer. Projects are prioritized and funding sources are identified. The 2018-2022 CIP includes 82 separate projects with a total estimated cost of about $49 million. These projects include street work, new facilities (city hall and fire station), equipment (fire, public works, parks and utilities), park and trail improvements, and utility infrastructure. Since the December 12th work session, staff updated the new facilities costs to be in line with the November report from BKV. The sequencing of projects remains the same as recommended by Finance Committee. Depending on which option the Council would like to plan for, the timing and sequence could change. The Finance Committee is also recommending the discontinuance of the city facilities fund and that the funds be transferred back to the general fund. There are plans to use some of the funds to pay for paving the library parking lot in 2018. Staff would recommend the remaining funds be used for the new facilities currently under review. If Council wanted to draw that down in 2018 staff would recommend the funds be applied toward the expanded salt shed at public works. FISCAL IMPACT: The total estimated costs of all the projects is about $49 million. Funding sources are identified for each project with a summary included on page 15. The city facilities fund is projected to have a balance of approximately $258,500 at 12/31/17 The park dedication fund is projected to have a balance of approximately $620,500 at 12/31/17 The vehicle replacement fund is projected to have a balance of less than $7,000 at 12/31/17 OPTIONS: 1) Approve the 2018-2022 CIP as presented 2) Amend and then Approve the 2018-2022 CIP RECOMMENDATION: “Motion to approve the 2018-2022 CIP” ATTACHMENT: • Draft 2018-2022 Capital Improvement Plan STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 18 AGENDA ITEM: Approve 2018 Meeting Calendar SUBMITTED BY: Julie Johnson, City Clerk BACKGROUND: Adopting a meeting calendar serves as the official notice for the year of all upcoming meetings; thereby, satisfying legal requirements and increasing transparency to the general public. If approved, the meeting calendar will be posted at City Hall and on the City’s website. PROPOSAL: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is respectfully requested to approve the proposed 2018 City Meeting Calendar or amend as necessary. Meetings that proposed on a day other than the regular Tuesday meeting date due to the elections in August and November have been highlighted on the attached list. The August workshop was moved to the end of the month and will be a budget workshop. Also, the Board of Appeal and Equalization was added in April. RECOMMENDATION: “Move to approve the proposed 2018 Meeting Calendar.” FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 2018 Meeting Calendar City Council Meetings are held at 7:00 p.m. & Workshops are held at 6:30 p.m. Planning Commission Meetings are held at 7:00 p.m. Parks Commission Meetings are held at 6:30 p.m. Board of Appeal and Equalization held 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. All meetings are held in the Council Chambers unless otherwise noted 2018 REGULAR MEETING DATES January 2 City Council July 3 City Council January 8 January 9 January 16 January 17 January 22 February 6 February 12 February 13 February 20 February 21 February 26 March 6 March 12 March 13 March 19 March 20 March 26 April 3 April 9 April 10 April 16 April 17 April 23 April 25 May 1 May 7 May 8 May 14 May 15 May 21 June 4 June 5 June 11 June 12 June 18 June 19 Planning Commission City Council Workshop City Council Parks Commission Planning Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council Workshop City Council Parks Commission Planning Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council Workshop Parks Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council Workshop Parks Commission City Council Planning Commission Board of Appeal and Equalization City Council Planning Commission City Council Workshop Parks Commission City Council Planning Commission Planning Commission City Council Parks Commission City Council Workshop Planning Commission City Council July 9 July 10 July 16 July 17 July 23 August 7 August 15 August 20 August 21 August 20 August 28 September 4 September 10 September 11 September 17 September 18 September 24 October 2 October 9 October 10 October 15 October 16 October 22 November 7 November 13 November 14 November 19 November 20 November 26 December 4 December 10 December 11 December 17 December 18 Planning Commission City Council Workshop Parks Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council Planning Commission Parks Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council Workshop City Council Planning Commission City Council Workshop Parks Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council City Council Workshop Planning Commission Parks Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council City Council Workshop Planning Commission Parks Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council Planning Commission City Council Workshop Parks Commission City Council Blank Calendar © calendarlabs.com 2018 Proposed Council Meeting dates are highlighted January S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 February S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 March S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 April S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 May S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 June S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 July S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 August S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 September S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 October S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 November S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 December S M T W Th F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 STAFF REPORT DATE: December 19, 2017 REGULAR #19 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Proposal for Prosecution Services SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: Earlier this year the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for prosecution services. Proposals from seven firms were received and the City Council selected Johnson and Turner in March. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council issue a Request for Proposals for Prosecution Services? PROPOSAL: Council Members Fliflet and Lundgren requested this item be discussed at the work session. Concerns have been raised about continuing with Johnson and Turner in light of the fact that one of their partners is also a partner in Agincourt LLC who contested their assessment for sewer and streets as part of the downtown project. City code allows two council members to bring an item to a regular meeting after it been to a work session so that is why it is before the Council again. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff time to issue the RFP and review proposals. Johnson and Turner monthly retainer for 2018 is $3,708 and is included in the 2018 budget. Legal fees for the defense of the special assessment were at $16,652.84 as of the end of September. The League has not received the final billing from the attorney but rough estimates would be in the $20,000+ range. The city will have to cover all of that cost since the deductible was raised to $200,000. OPTIONS: 1) Direct Staff to Issue the RFP for Prosecution Services as was done earlier this year. 2) Direct Staff to contact the proposers from the last RFP posting to see if their proposals are still valid 3) Don’t make any changes to prosecution ATTACHMENTS: None