The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-20-17 CCMP NOTICE OF MEETING City Council Meeting Tuesday, June 20, 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. June 6, 2017 D. Public Comments/Inquiries E. Presentations F. Consent Agenda 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. Accept May 2017 Assessor’s Report 4. Accept May 2017 Building Department Report 5. Accept May 2017 Fire Department Report 6. Accept May 2017 Public Works Department Report 7. Approve Public Works Hires 8. Approve 2017 Staff Wage Increases 9. Approve Integrated Pest Management Plan 10. Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) – Approve Pay Request No. 10. 11. I-94 Lift Station and Sanitary Sewer Improvements – Approve Change Order No. 1. 12. Approve Hazardous Building Resolution 13. Approve Ordinance 08-177 Amending the City’s Provisions Related to the Keeping of Chickens G. Regular Agenda 14. Planning Commission Appointment 15. Summer Sewer Rates –Resolution 2017-064 16. 9359 Jane Rd. N. Shoreland Variance – Resolution 2017-062 17. Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans – Resolution 2017-063 18. Fence Ordinance 19. Inwood 5th Addition Development Agreement Amendment 20. Janero Avenue North Street Improvement – Receive and Consider Petition. 21. Assistant City Administrator 22. Remaining Parks 2017 CIP Items-50th St Trail and Pebble Park 23. Paperless Council Packet Policy – Resolution 2017-065 H. Council Reports I. Staff Reports and Announcements J. Adjourn Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner While Preserving the City’s Open Space Character CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 6, 2017 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pearson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. PRESENT: Mayor Mike Pearson and Councilmembers Julie Fliflet, Jill Lundgren and Christine Nelson. ABSENT: Councilmember Justin Bloyer. Staff present: Administrator Handt, City Attorney Sonsalla, City Engineer Griffin, Planning Director Wensman, and City Clerk Johnson. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Item 4, “Approve Inwood 5th Development Agreement” was moved to the Regular Agenda. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. Motion passed 4 – 0. ACCEPT MINUTES Minutes of the May 16, 2016 Special Meeting were accepted as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES A moment of silence was observed in memory of Public Works employee Mark Duddeck. PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT AGENDA 2. Approve Payment of Disbursements 3. Approve Resolution Congratulating the Lake Elmo Inn 5. Downtown Phase 2 Improvements – Approve Cooperative Agreement Payment No. 2 6. Approve Inwood Booster Station Change Order No. 4 7. Downtown Phase 3 Improvements – Approve Declaration of Easement on City Hall Property 8. MnDOT Master 2018-2022 Contract – Approve Agreement 9. Approve LDO Lake Improvement Matching Grant 10. Accept Resignation of Public Works Operator 11. Approve City Representative on Friends of Sunfish Lake Park Board 12. Approve Easton Village 2nd Addition Development Agreement LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 6, 2017 Page 2 of 5 Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Motion passed 4 - 0. ITEM 4: Approve Inwood 5th Development Agreement Discussion was held regarding the trail along 10th Street that was included in previous plans. Developer John Rask explained that east to west connection will be provided through the development on streets and sidewalks. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-059 APPROVING THE DEVELOPER AGREEMETN FOR INWOOD 5TH ADDITION PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. Councilmember Fliflet stated she would not support the motion without a trail along 10th Street. Councilmember Lundgren agree. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO AMEND THE PRIMARY MOTION TO TABLE THE ITEM TO A FUTURE MEETING. Motion withdrawn. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO AMEND THE PRIMARY MOTION TO ADD REMOVAL OF LANGUAGE IN PARAGRAPH 7 REFERRING TO THE TRAIL REQUIREMENT AND REMOVING PARAGRAPH 29.G. Motion passed 4 – 0. Primary motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM 14: Hammes 1st Addition Drainage and Utility Easement Vacation – Public Hearing Planning Director Wensman explained that an outlot in the Hammes 1st Addition has been replatted and the easement is no longer needed as it has been replaced with a new easement. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 4 – 0. There was no public comment. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Motion passed 4 – 0. Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2017-050 VACATING THE DRAINAGE AND UTILTIY EASEMENT OVER OUTLOT E, HAMMES ESTATES 1ST ADDITION. Motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM 15: MS4 Program – Public Meeting and Approve Annual Report City Engineer Griffin presented the Annual Report for the MS4 program. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 6, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Councilmember Lundgren, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ACCEPT THE ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2016 AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO SUBMIT THE REPORT TO THE MPCA. Motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM 16: Wildflower PUD Amendment Planning Director Wensman stated that he has met with the developer, Bob Engstrom, to negotiate the issues discussed at a previous Council meeting. Wensman presented amended requests from Mr. Engstrom regarding setbacks and noted that the HOA would take over plowing snow in the alleys. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-048 APPROVING WILDFLOWER AT LAKE ELMO PUD AMENDMENTS. Motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM 17: Royal Golf Preliminary Plat and PUD Planning Director Wensman presented an overview of the main site elements and the PUD overlay. Discussion held concerning tree replacement, signs, park dedication and lift stations. Ann Bucheck, 2301 Legion Avenue N, read a letter she prepared into the public record that offered comments on the proposed development. Tim Mandel, 2479 Lisbon Avenue N., spoke against the PUD development and encouraged the city to require the golf course to be open to the public. Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33rd St. N, spoke against dense development and asked for the review of the letter from the DNR. Rick Packer, Royal Golf Club, clarified that all pedestrian related improvements in the development will be open to the public, including trails and sidewalks. Packer also discussed tree preservation and clubhouse lighting. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-047 APPROVING THE ROYAL GOLF CLUB AT LAKE ELMO PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PUD WITH THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS AND WITH A CHANGE TO CONDITION #30 THAT REMOVES “AND THAT A PHOTOMETRIC ANALYSIS BE DONE” AND ADD THE ADDITION OF LANGUAGE REFERRING TO A $1,000,000 DONATION TO THE CITY FOR BALL FIELDS WILL BE DUE WITH THE PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT CAUSES THE CURRENT BALLFIELDS TO NO LONGER BE USED. Motion passed 4 – 0. ITEM 18: Parcel A – Schiltgen Property Concept PUD Planning Director Wensman presented concept plan details and analysis of the plan. Wensman also reviewed PUD objectives and density bonus points. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 6, 2017 Page 4 of 5 Joe Chavez, 3505 Kelvin Avenue N., asked to be included in the planning process, as the proposed development would impact a landlocked parcel he owns adjacent to the site. Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33rd Street N., encouraged the Council to drive through the area to see if the proposed density makes sense. Ann Bucheck, 2301 Legion Avenue N., commented on housing types, density, buffers and other issues. Craig Allen spoke on behalf of the developer, addressing questions regarding setbacks. Allen also spoke about market demands and affordability. Mark Skeie, 4156 Kindred Way, stated that residents of Hamlet on Sunfish Lake would like a buffer on the west side of the proposed development and noted that they are working with the developer regarding the sewer connection. Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Mayor Pearson, moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2017-061 APPROVING THE PUD CONCEPT PLAN FOR PARCEL A – SCHILTGEN PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AND BASED ON FINDINGS. Motion passed 3 – 1. (Lundgren – nay) Councilmember Lundgren expressed concerns regarding density of the proposed development. ITEM 19: Planning Commission Appointments Administrator Handt reported that due to Commissioner Fields’ resignation, Commissioner Hartley would move to a voting member position and Commissioner Emerson would move to 1st Alternate, creating a vacancy in the second alternate position. Councilmember Fliflet, seconded by Councilmember Lundgren, moved TO APPOINT TUCKER PEARCE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS SECOND ALTERNATE. Motion failed 2 – 2. (Pearson, Nelson – nay) Councilmember Nelson stated that she didn’t support the motion as Mr. Pearce is currently a valuable member of the Parks Commission. Mayor Pearson, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, moved TO APPOINT STUART JOHNSON TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS SECOND ALTERNATE. Motion failed 2 – 2. (Fliflet, Lundgren – nay) COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Pearson: Attended Hamlet on Sunfish Lake HOA meeting, Parks Commission meeting and EDA meeting. Met with Parks Commissioner, met with Washington County regarding the 30th Street intersection, met with Hunters Crossing residents. Addressed resident concerns regarding construction projects. Councilmember Nelson: No report. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 6, 2017 Page 5 of 5 Councilmember Lundgren: Lake Elmo Farmer’s Market starts on Saturday, June 24th at Lake Elmo Elementary School. Councilmember Bloyer: Absent. Councilmember Fliflet: Announced Lake Elmo Library summer reading program and disagreed with the decision to lock the Valley Friendship Club out of the Arts Center. STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Administrator Handt: Working on the space needs study, interviewing public works operator candidates, preparing for Finance Committee meeting on June 8th, attended a number of meetings with Washington County regarding roads, attended the Environmental Committee meeting. City Clerk Johnson: Thanked resident Virginia Pleban for her donation of pots and flowers for the City Hall front entrance. City Attorney Sonsalla: Working on a hazardous building issue and Easton Village 2nd Addition. Planning Director Wensman: Working on various plan reviews. City Engineer Griffin: Working on plan reviews, pre-construction meetings. 2017 Street Improvements project will be starting up soon. Meeting adjourned at 10:48 pm. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ATTEST: ______________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION -- page 1 -- DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 2 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Approve Disbursements in the amount of $412,962.97 SUBMITTED BY: Brian Swanson, Finance Director THROUGH: Kristina Handt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator FISCAL IMPACT: $412,962.97 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to approve disbursements in the amount of $412,962.97. No specific motion is needed as this is recommended to be part of the Consent Agenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION/STAFF REPORT: The City of Lake Elmo has the fiduciary responsibility to conduct normal business operations. Below is a summary of current claims to be disbursed and paid in accordance with State law and City policies and procedures. Claim # Amount Description ACH $ 18,885.92 Payroll Taxes to IRS & MN Dept. of Revenue 06/06/17 ACH $ 8,335.75 Payroll Retirement to PERA 06/06/17 ACH $ 1,000.00 Payroll Retirement to MDCP 06/06/17 n/a $ 0.00 Payroll Checks (none) Direct Deposits $ 45,085.00 Payroll Deposits 06/06/17 46050-46095 $ 339,596.30 Accounts Payable 06/20/17 2835 $ 60.00 Accounts Payable 06/20/17 (Library Checks) TOTAL $ 412,962.97 City Council Meeting [Consent Agenda Item 2] June 20, 2017 -- page 2 -- RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, the staff recommends the City Council approve as part of the Consent Agenda the aforementioned disbursements in the amount of $412,962.97. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Accounts Payable – check register STAFF REPORT -- page 1 -- DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM: 3 TO: Lake Elmo City Council FROM: Dan Raboin, City Assessor 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 May 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 – 0 Sales collected and viewed – 21 Taxpayer inquiries – 6 Miscellaneous inquiries - 3 Inspections – Residential – 62 Inspections – Commercial - 1 Building permit reviews – 3 Pictures taken – 65 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 May 2017 monthly assessor report. STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 4 TO: Lake Elmo City Council FROM: Mike Bent, Building Official AGENDA ITEM: Monthly Building Department Report – May 2017 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: 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. MONTHLY REPORT: Below is a snapshot of the monthly statistics for May 2017. Comparison data is also include from prior years for May for new home single family construction and total permitting activity for the month. Attached are the system summary reports breaking out this information further, including the statistics related to the inspection activity. 2017 2016 2015 New homes 19/4* 22 13/6* Total valuation $6,896,000/$810,000 $8,057,000 $4,655,511/$1,176,000 Average home value $362,947/$202,500 $424,052 $358,116/$196,000 Total Permit Valuation YTD $50,802,333** $43,478,797 $16,987,858 *Single Family Home/Townhouse ** (Includes) Lake Elmo Elementary School Remodel Permit Issued: Valuation $2,582,079 RECOMMENDATION: Based on the aforementioned, staff recommends the City Council accept the May 2017 monthly building permit report. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Valuation Report 2. Permits Issued & Fees Report 3. Inspection statistic report for May 2017 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 5 TO: City Council FROM: Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief AGENDA ITEM: Month End Fire Department Update for May 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 a total of 44 Calls for May. 1 Cooking Fire (Grill) 1 Structure fire 5 Dispatched and cancelled en route 27 Medicals 1 Gasoline or flammable liquid spill 2 Grass fire 7 Car accidents with injuries 44 Total A Command vehicle did not respond on 6 of the calls for the month for a response rate of 88%. Average response time for the month was just over 7 minutes. 18 calls had 3 or less responders minus the Duty Officer. Department drills for the month: #1 – CEU (Ladders) #2 – Hydrant pumping #3 – Quarterly EMS Points of interest: - Staffing level continues to be a great concern and to that point: 1 FF continues to be on a long term Leave of Absence. 1 prospective new recruit dropped out due to other obligations. Station 2 is struggling to fill night time Duty Crews and will not be able to as of next month. (personnel are unable to continue covering extra days) 2 call responses this month had only 1 personnel respond and it took 31 minutes to arrive from the time of alarm for one of those. 1 grass fire had 1 personnel on the initial engine requiring mutual aid assistance that normally would not have been necessary. 1 daytime responder is changing jobs ending their availability during the daytime hours effective 6/2/17. One good staffing item was that our personnel on medical leave has returned to full duty. - 4 personnel completed FAO training and took the state certification test - Results pending. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: June 20, 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 May 2017. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: • Space Needs Meetings • Old Village Phase 3 Bid opening • 2017 Street Improvements Bid Opening • APWA Spring Conference • Submit WINS Sewer Survey • Inwood Water Tower progress meeting • Spring Clean-up Day • Prep for Nature Day • Village Preserve Pre-wear walk through • Washington Cty. Public Works Comp. Plan Mtg. • Pre-Con Mtgs for 2017 Street Improvements and Old Village Phase 3 • Meet with Ziegler for Generator Maint. proposal • Meet with contractors for Discovery Crossing retaining wall repairs • Bids for water meter replacement • Bids for hydrant flushing • Interviews for Public Works Maint. position • Crack filling completed • 5 Staff attended MN DNR Tree Inspector class • Well #2 re-installed • Submit 2016 Consumer Confidence Report • 25.5 tons of asphalt for pothole patching • Park mowing RECOMMENDATION: Base on the activities listed above, City Council is respectfully asked to accept the May 2017 Public Works Report. STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 7 AGENDA ITEM: Approve Public Works Hiring SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Julie Johnson, City Clerk BACKGROUND: In April the City Council authorized staff to advertise for a Public Works Operator to add one FTE to the Public Works staff as budgeted for in 2017. In May the City lost a Public Works Operator who passed away and in June the City accepted the resignation of another Public Works Operator. Interviews and equipment testing were conducted on May 31st and June 1st and as a result, staff has extended offers to three individuals for full time Public Works Operator positions. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Who should the Council hire as Public Works Operators? PROPOSAL: Staff recommends hiring Mike Coleman, Matt Paulson and Tim Strong as Public Works Operators. FISCAL IMPACT: In the 2017 budget, Council planned to add a public works employee beginning in April. The pay rate offered to the three prospective hires is within the range approved by the City Council at the April 18, 2017 Council meeting. RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda: “Move to hire Mike Coleman, Matt Paulson and Tim Strong as Public Works Operators at an hourly wage of $20.60 contingent upon passing a background check.” STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 8 AGENDA ITEM: 2017 Staff Wage Adjustments TO: Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: Last year, the City began the practice of adjusting staff wages annually in July of each year. All staff expected to complete their orientation (probationary) period in July, received a performance review from their supervisor. The HR Committee heard the presentation from Tessia Melvin of David Drown and Associates, similar to Council, and will be continuing to work on defining a pay philosophy and compensation plan. For the time being, they are agreeable to moving forward with a step and range plan that gets everyone at least above the market minimum and moves employees to the next step in their range. This approach will provide most employees with an increase of 2-5%. Two public works employees are also receiving a step increase per the wage plan adopted in 2014. Historically, Lake Elmo has provided annual increases in the range of 2-5.5%. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the proposed wages be effective July 3, 2017? PROPOSAL: The following wage adjustments are recommended effective with the July 3, 2017 pay period. Employee Current Proposed Frequency Emily Becker $27.10 $28.22 hourly Mike Bent $3,346.40 $3,365.60 bi-weekly Joe Effinger $20.00 $22.00 hourly Julie Johnson $2,400.00 $2,469.60 bi-weekly Miles Johnson $32.00 $32.63 hourly Toni Liljedahl $31.20 $31.75 hourly Greg Malmquist $3,145.60 $3,208.00 bi-weekly Matt Nicklay $20.00 $22.00 hourly Tanya Nuss $20.00 $21.06 hourly Nick Witter $19.79 $21.75 hourly Rob Weldon $3,268.80 $3,398.40 bi-weekly Stephen Wensman $2,967.20 $3,022.40 bi-weekly Joan Ziertman $21.63 $22.41 hourly In addition to our regular full and part time staff, the City has also considered adjustments to the paid on call pay structure for the fire department. Attached is a list of the different pay types and proposed rates effective in July. The proposal represents a 2% increase. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated fiscal impact for the remainder of 2017 is $17,337. This includes wages, taxes and benefits. OPTIONS: 1) Approve the wage adjustments as presented 2) Approve the wage adjustments with a different effective date 3) Approve different wage adjustments 4) Do not approve any wage adjustments RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda: Motion to approve the 2017 staff wage adjustments as presented. ATTACHMENTS: • Paid on Call Firefighter Pay Plan RATES OF PAY • CALL PAY = $13.07/hr o Certified EMT’s shall receive an additional $1.13 per hour. o Certified ENGINEERS shall receive an additional $1.13 per hour. o Officers shall receive an additional $1.13 per hour. • TRAINING and MEETING PAY = $11.93/hr. o Probationary Incentive Pay = $562.53 • OFFICERS PAY = o ASSISTANT CHIEF (1) - $2396.83/year o CAPTAINS (4) - $1599.35/year o LIEUTENANTS (2) - $799.68/year • DUTY CREW/STANDBY PAY - $2.24 per hour. YEAR END INCENTIVE PAY BASED ON YEAREND PERCENTAGE TOTALS 26% - Less than 31% = $451.02 51% - Less than 61% = $647.47 31% - Less than 41% = $506.29 61% - Less than 71% = $731.30 41% - Less than 51% = $591.21 71% & ABOVE = $843.81 PAY RATES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2017 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 9 AGENDA ITEM: Integrated Pest Management Plan TO: Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: In 2015, the City Council adopted a Bee Safe City Resolution that listed the following actions: 1. The City shall undertake its best efforts to become a Bee-Safe City by undertaking the best management practices in the use of plantings and pesticides in all public places within the City. 2. The City shall refrain from the use of systemic pesticides and systemic insecticides on City owned property including pesticides from the neonicotinoid family. 3. The City shall undertake its best efforts to plant flowers favorable to bees and other pollinators in the City’s public spaces. 4. The City shall designate Bee-Safe areas in which future City plantings are free from systemic pesticides including neonicotinoids. 5. The City shall undertake its best efforts to communicate to Lake Elmo residents the importance of creating and maintaining a pollinator-friendly habitat. 6. The City shall publish a Bee-Safe City Progress Report on an annual basis. Last year the Environmental Committee began discussing things they could do to meet those actions listed in the resolution. At their April and May meetings, the Environmental Committee heard about pollinator friendly practices and began work on developing an Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM). They reviewed IPMs from the Pollinator Friendly Alliance and Washington County. They also did additional research on their own and in consultation with University of Minnesota staff. ISSUE BEFORE COMMITTEE: Should the Council adopt an Integrated Pest Management Plan? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The IPM as recommended by the Environmental Committee is included in your packet. The objective of the IPM plan is to: • Identify cultural, mechanical, physical, biological and chemical control methods to manage noxious plants and pests. • Identify cultural, mechanical, physical, biological and chemical control methods for maintenance practices including: parking lot and pavement preservation, trail maintenance, ROW maintenance and ecological restoration practices. The IPM coordinators are the Planning Director (for new developments) and the Public Works Director (for existing city facilities). The decision-making strategy involves seven steps: 1. Identify noxious plant/pest species 2. Monitor and assess the action levels of pests 3. Select the appropriate management methods based on current on-site information 4. Record keeping 5. Assess effectiveness of pest management 6. Tactics for future prevention 7. Further evaluation Control methods are described and listed in the most desirable order: 1. Cultural Control 2. Mechanical Control 3. Physical Control 4. Biological Control 5. Chemical Control Plant specific strategies are listed as well. The list of eradicate, controlled, restricted, and specifically regulated plants were updated from the MN Dept. of Agriculture’s website. Strategies for specific Site types are also included in the IPM plan. Lastly, the committee through its research developed a list of alternative pesticides and insecticides according to their toxicity to bees. The Environmental Committee will review the IPM plan annually in conjunction with staff and help prepare the annual Bee-Safe City Progress report. Staff from the U of M Extension have also offered to work with the City on the review of the plan. FISCAL IMPACT: NA OPTIONS: 1) Approve the IPM Plan 2) Amend and then Approve the IPM Plan 3) Do not approve the IPM Plan RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda: Motion to approve the City of Lake Elmo IPM Plan ATTACHMENTS: • Lake Elmo IPM Integrated Pest Management Plan 2 Table of Contents Introduction 3 IPM Coordinator 3 Pest Definition 3 IPM Decision Making Strategy 3 Control Methods 5 Pesticide Application and Training 6 Plant-specifc Strategies for Minnesota noxious weeds 6 1. Eradicate List 6 2. Controlled List 7 3. Restricted List 7 4. Specifically regulated Plant List 8 Pest Specifc Strategies for Site Types 9 Parking Lot and Pavement Preservation 9 Trail Maintenance 11 ROW Maintenance 11 Alternative Pesticide List 12 Insecticide List 14 3 Introduction As of March 3, 2015 the City of Lake Elmo has been declared a Bee-Safe City. The use of any pesticide that adversely affects pollinators is prohibited in any of the city’s land including parks, roadways, and facility grounds. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a system that establishes a sustainable approach to managing pests by combining cultural, mechanical, physical, biological and chemical tools to eliminate or mitigate economic, environmental and health damage caused by pests. IPM minimizes the use of pesticides and the risk to human health and the environment associated with pesticide applications. This system uses integrated methods, site or pest inspections, pest population monitoring, evaluations of the need for pest control, plus one or more pest control methods such as sanitation, structural repairs, both mechanical and living biological controls, and many other non-chemical methods. If nontoxic options are deemed unreasonable and have been exhausted, then resort to the least toxic pesticides. The objective of this IPM plan is to: • Identify cultural, mechanical, physical, biological and chemical control methods to manage noxious plants and pests. • Identify cultural, mechanical, physical, biological and chemical control methods for maintenance practices including: parking lot and pavement preservation, trail maintenance, ROW maintenance and ecological restoration practices. IPM Coordinator The IPM Coordinators are the Planning Director for new developments and the Public Works Director for existing city facilities. The IPM Coordinators are responsible to implement the IPM plan and to coordinate pest management-related communications. The IPM Coordinators will review annually and update the IPM program. Pest Definition The primary focus of the IPM is an integrated approach for managing pests. For our purposes, a pest is an organism considered injurious or unwanted by humans. This can include, but not limited to groups, including animals, plants, fungi, and viruses. IPM Decision Making Strategy An Integrated Pest Management decision shall consist of the following steps: 1. Identify noxious plant/pest species 2. Monitor and assess the action levels of pests 3. Select the appropriate management methods based on current on-site information 4 4. Record keeping 5. Assess effectiveness of pest management 6. Tactics for future prevention 7. Further evaluation 1. Identify noxious plant/pest species Proper and accurate ID of pests is essential for choosing the appropriate control method. 2. Monitor and asses action levels of pests Some pests and plants can be tolerated at low levels. Monitoring on a regular basis ensures staff is taking action when an action threshold has been reached. 3. Select the appropriate management methods based on current on-site information Decisions concerning whether or not pesticides should be applied in a given situation will be based on a review of all available options. Efforts will be made to avoid the use of pesticides by adequate pest proofing of facilities, beneficial sanitation practices, selection of pest-resistant plant materials, and appropriate horticultural practices. When it is determined that a pesticide must be used in order to meet pest management objectives, the least-hazardous material will be chosen. The types of control methods are listed in the next section. No person shall apply, store, or dispose of any pesticide on without being trained with the Public Works Department’s Pesticide/Herbicide Safety training. 4. Record keeping A record keeping system is essential to establish trends, patterns, and thresholds in pest outbreaks. Information recorded at every inspection or treatment should include pest identification, population size, distribution, recommendations for future prevention, and complete information on the treatment action. Records will be maintained for two years. 5. Assess effectiveness of pest management Using the records kept by Park staff, and recent monitoring feedback, the IPM coordinator will review the management method used and decide if the method is producing the wanted outcome. If not, the IPM coordinator and staff will develop a new strategy to combat the pest at hand. Only after all IPM methods are expelled will the use of pesticide be necessary. 6. Tactics for future prevention Prevention is the primary means of this, and any IPM program. Weed and pest problems can be largely avoided by careful design, soil preparation, proper planting/irrigation, and mulching practices. Park staff will use preventative actions to reduce conditions that attract pests to both the facility grounds and buildings. Finalized preventative measures will be incorporated into future and existing structures and designs. 5 7. Further evaluation The Environmental Committee will review the IPM program annually to gauge the effectiveness and efficiency of the program. Updates and renovations will be added to the preceding year’s IPM. Control Methods Once the decision making strategies have been considered and a pest has reached an action threshold, below are types of control methods to consider. These control methods are listed in order of most desirable #1 cultural control, to least desirable #5 chemical control. 1. Cultural control: -Selecting resistant species -Proper planting and watering techniques -Ensure healthy soil by using organic soil amendments such as compost -Habitat modification 2. Mechanical control: -Mowing, cutting and pruning -Mulching -Hand pulling -Hand torches/Flamers -Sanitation practices 3. Physical control: -Over-seeding -Thinning plant canopy -Tree tubes for young trees 4. Biological control: -Enhancement of favorable environment for natural enemies of pests -Introduction of native predators -Use of natural grazers such as goats, sheep, cattle and bison 5. Chemical control: -Only after exhausting non-chemical control methods -IPM coordinator must approve and decide on the least toxic chemical to be used Pesticide Application and Training The Public Works Director shall be responsible for distributing a pesticide application training document and record keeping documents for staff using pesticides on public 6 property. Applicators must have the appropriate Minnesota Department of Agriculture pesticide license. Plant-specific strategies for Minnesota noxious weeds Minnesota State Statute 18.75 provides a list of plant species that required to be controlled due to their aggressive nature, and potential to cause economic damage to landowners. The City of Lake Elmo uses this list to prioritize control efforts throughout the parks. A description of each species and control methods are described below. 1. Eradicate List Prohibited noxious weeds that are listed to be eradicated are plants that are not currently known to be present in Minnesota or are not widely established. These species must be eradicated, meaning all of the above and below ground parts of the plant must be destroyed, as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.78. Additionally, no transportation, propagation, or sale of these plants is allowed. Measures must also be taken to prevent and exclude these species from being introduced into Minnesota. a. Common teasel (Dipsacus fullonum) b. Cut-leaved teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus) c. Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) d. Giant hogweed (Heracleum Mantegazzianum Sommier and Levier) e. Grecian foxglove (Digitalis lanata) f. Japanese hops (Humulus japonicas Siebold and Zucc.) g. Oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus) Mechanical Control: Small infestations can be hand-pulled, but the entire plant and roots should be removed. Biological Control: Goats can be used to suppress re-growth of plants which have been cut. Chemical Control: Foliar treatment of Bittersweet can be done with a 2% solution of triclopyr amine (Garlon 3a) mixed in water with a non-ionic surfactant (.5%) to the leaves. (8 oz per 3 gal. mix). Cut –stem treatment can be done with a 25% mix of triclopyr amine (Garlon 3a) and applied to the stem. h. Yellow starthistle (Centurea solstitialis) 7 2. Controlled List: Prohibited noxious weeds listed to be controlled are plants established throughout Minnesota or regions of the state. Species on this list must be controlled, meaning efforts must be made to prevent the spread, maturation and dispersal of any propagating parts, thereby reducing established populations and preventing reproduction and spread as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.78. Additionally, transportation, propagation, or sale of these plants is prohibited. a. Common Barberry, Berberis vulgaris L. b. Narrowleaf Bittercress, Cardamine impatiens L. c. Plumeless Thistle, Carduus acanthoides (L.) d. Spotted Knapweed, Centaurea stoebe spp. micranthos e. Canada Thistle, Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. f. Leafy Spurge, Euphorbia esula (L.) g. Purple Loosestrife, Lythrum salicaria, virgatum (L.) h. Wild Parsnip, Pastinaca sativa L. (Except for non-wild cultivated varieties) i. Common Tansy, Tanacetum vulgare (L.) 3. Restricted List: Restricted noxious weeds are plants that are widely distributed in Minnesota and are detrimental to human or animal health, the environment, public roads, crops, livestock or other property, but whose only feasible means of control is to prevent their spread by prohibiting the importation, sale, and transportation of their propagating parts in the state except as allowed by Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.82. Plants designated as Restricted Noxious Weeds may be reclassified if effective means of control are developed. a. Tree of Heaven, Ailanthus altissima (Mill.) Swingle b. Garlic Mustard, Alliaria petiolata (Bieb.) c. Porcelain Berry, Ampelopsis brevipedunculata (Maxim.) Trautv. d. Crown Vetch, Securigera varia (L.) Lassen - formerly Coronilla varia L. e. Wild Carrot / Queen Anne's Lace, Daucus carota L. f. Glossy Buckthorn (and all cultivars), Frangula alnus Mill. (columnaris, tallcole, asplenifolia and all other cultivars) g. Amur Honeysuckle, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder h. Morrow's Honeysuckle, Lonicera morrowii A. Gray i. Bell's Honeysuckle, Lonicera x bella Zabel j. Common Reed - non-native subspecies, Phragmites australis subspecies australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud. k. Common or European Buckthorn, Rhamnus cathartica (L.) l. Black Locust, Robinia pseudoacacia L. m. Multiflora Rose, Rosa multiflora Thunb. n. Tatarian Honeysuckle, Lonicera tatarica L. 8 * For photos of noxious weeds visit: https://www.mda.state.mn.us/plants/pestmanagement/weedcontrol/noxiouslist.aspx 4. Specially Regulated Plant List: Specially regulated plants are plants that may be native species or have demonstrated economic value, but also have the potential to cause harm in non- controlled environments. Plants designated as specially regulated have been determined to pose ecological, economical, or human or animal health concerns. Plant specific management plans and or rules that define the use and management requirements for these plants will be developed by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture for each plant designated as specially regulated. Measures must also be taken to minimize the potential for harm caused by these plants. a. Poison Ivy, Toxicodendron radicans (L.) Kuntze & T. radicans (Small) Green Must be eradicated or controlled for public safety along rights-of-ways, trails, public accesses, business properties open to the public or on parts of lands where public access for business or commerce is granted. Must also be eradicated or controlled along property boarders when requested by adjoining landowners. b. Japanese Knotweed, Polygonum cuspidatum Seib. & Zucc. Synonym as Fallopia japonica (Houttuyn) Ronse-Decraene c. Giant Knotweed, Polygonum sachalinense F. Schmidt ex Maxim. Synonym: Fallopia sachalinensis (F. Schmidt) Ronse-Decraene Any person, corporation, business or other retail entity distributing Japanese and/or giant knotweeds for sale within the state, must have information directly affixed to the plant or container packaging that it is being sold with, indicating that it is unadvisable to plant this species within 100 feet of a water body or its designated flood plain as defined by Minnesota Statute 103F.111, Subdivision 4. d. Japanese Barberry, Berberis thunbergii DC. Phase-out of seediest varieties listed below: These cultivars average greater than 600 seeds per plant and will begin a three-year phase-out period in Minnesota beginning January 1, 2015. ‘Anderson’ (Lustre Green™); ‘Angel Wings’; ‘Antares’; ‘Bailgreen’ (Jade Carousel®);‘Bailone’ (Ruby Carousel®); ‘Bailsel’ (Golden Carousel® - B. koreana × B. thunbergii hybrid); ‘Bailtwo’ (Burgundy Carousel®); B. thunbergii var. atropurpurea; ‘Crimson Velvet’; ‘Erecta’; ‘Gold Ring’; ‘Inermis’; ‘JN Redleaf’ (Ruby Jewel™); ‘JN Variegated’ (Stardust™); ‘Kelleris’; ‘Kobold’; ‘Marshall Upright’; ‘Monomb’ (Cherry Bomb™); ‘Painter’s Palette’; ‘Pow Wow’; ‘Red Rocket’; ‘Rose Glow’; ‘Silver Mile’; ‘Sparkle’; ‘Tara’ (Emerald Carousel® - B. koreana × B. thunbergii hybrid); Wild Type (parent species – green barberry) At the end of the phase-out period (December 31, 2017), these species will become Restricted Noxious Weeds in Minnesota and will be illegal to sell and propagate. e. Amur Maple, Acer ginnala Maxim Sellers shall affix a label that advises buyers to only plant Amur maple and its cultivars in landscapes where the seedlings will be controlled by mowing or other means. Amur maple should be planted at least 100 yards from natural areas. Pest-Specific Strategies for Site Types Sites types differ throughout the city and therefore require various control methods to suit their specific needs. Listed below are the site types. 9 1. Trails and Pathways 2. Waterways 3. Right-of-Ways 4. Landscape Beds 5. Turf Areas 6. Hard Surface Areas 7. Playgrounds 8. Natural Areas 9. No pesticide Zones Parking lot and pavement preservation Flame technology Flame technology for home gardens have been around since the 1940s, and can be used on parking lot and pavement preservations to suppress vegetation growth within the cracks. Portable gas torches that produce heat above 2,000°F and can harm the vegetation structure within seconds. As the flame comes into contact with the vegetation, the heat boils the water within the plants’ cells, causing the cells to burst and destroying the cell and foliage. Portable torches should be used in early spring and summer as the annual and perennial weed emerges. Controlling the vegetation at an early stage will save on time and fuel. Proper personal protective equipment should always be worn and the manufacturer’s instructions should be well understood. Torches should never be used during extreme dry periods and the area should be clear of any unwanted debris. Torches should only be used with wind speeds below 5-miles-per-hour and outside of vehicles including Kubota™, Gator™, etc. Torch control works best when the vegetation is one to two inches tall. Warning signs should be placed at least 100 feet away from the beginning and end of the area of flame work. Flame tanks can range from 14-16oz tanks to five gallon tanks; using a larger tank does increase the time and area that can be burned. While pavement and parking lot protocols are being conducted a fire extinguisher should be within the vicinity in case the fire gets out of comfort. The operator should be wearing fire resistant gloves, long sleeve cotton shirt, long pants, and closed-toes boots. The tank hoses will vary by model. If the tank hose has a “torch bell” a hand lighter with a long neck should be used to light the torch. Do not use matches or a small lighter. Hands should not go near the end of the hose during the ignition process. Review all safety data sheets and company product protocols before going out into the field. Safety and Protocols 10 Propane tanks can range from 14-16oz to five gallons using a larger tank increases the time and area that can be burned. While pavement and parking lot protocols are being conducted, a fire extinguisher should be within the vicinity in case the fire gets out of comfort. The operator should be wearing fire resistant gloves, long sleeve cotton shirt, long pants, and closed-toes boots. The tank hoses will vary by model. If the tank hose has a “torch bell” a hand lighter with a long neck should be used to light the torch. Hands should not go near the end of the hose during the ignition process. Organic herbicide SummerSet Alldown Concentrate is a non-selective broadcast leaf and grass herbicide with the primary active ingredients of acetic acid and citric acid. Mixing should be done away from human and vehicle traffic. Alldown should be mixed two part of chemical to one part water (2:1 ratio). Rubber gloves, protective glasses, and long sleeves should be worn while the chemical is being handled. Pour the designated amount of chemical into the backpack sprayer, use water from the nearest hose to fill the tanks to the desired amount. The hose should NOT be placed in the tank to fill. The hose mouth should be held six to twelve inches away from the sprayer. Spraying should only occur when the temperature is between 65ºF - 90ºF for effective vegetation degradation. Spraying should be conducted with a wind speed of less than 10 miles-per-hour. Material safety data sheets should be reviewed before using the chemical. Proper safety equipment should be worn while cleaning; i.e. safety glasses, gloves, long sleeves, and long pants. Rinsing the spraying containers, wands and nozzles should be done away from vehicle traffic, human traffic, and natural water sources. Fill the container ¼ full with water and replace cap to prime pressure. Spray diluted chemical into ground for ten seconds. All containers should be properly labelled. Chemical Herbicide Rodeo herbicide can be used to eradicate a broad range of invasive and native vegetation. Rodeo can be mixed in variety sizes of herbicide backpack sprayers and tank sprayers with the correct ration of Rodeo to water. It is necessary to record the; date, applier, chemical used, location; and if there was an excess amount remaining in the backpack, if a label was created for the backpack, or the backpack was rinsed three times at the end of the use in the Pesticide Application Records three ringed-binder located in the chemical room of its designated park. Spraying should be conducted with a wind speed of less than 10 miles-per-hour and should be conducted between 65ºF - 90ºF. Material safety data sheets should be reviewed before using the chemical The chemical and water should be mixed away from human and vehicle traffic. Rubber gloves, protective glasses, and long sleeves should be worn while the chemical is being handled. Pore the designated amount of chemical into the backpack sprayer, use water 11 from the nearest hose to fill the tanks to the desired amount. The hose should NOT be placed in the tank to fill. The hose mouth should be held six to twelve inches away from the sprayer. Rinsing the spraying containers, wands and nozzles should be done away from vehicle traffic, human traffic, and natural water sources. Fill the container ¼ full with water and replace cap to prime pressure. Spray diluted chemical into ground for ten seconds. Dispose of excess chemical and refill and repeat actions two more times creating a, “triple rinse”. All containers should be properly labelled as “clean”. If the chemical was not used or cleaned and is still in the container, a label should be placed on top of the container that has the date, chemical, and percent of chemicals (i.e. mmdd rodeo @5%). Trail maintenance Management of trails in regards to IPM primarily involves the removal of invasive species, unwanted native species, pesky insects, problematic small mammals, and to ensure the structural integrity of the trail itself. Park staff identify the plant in question and then assess the population at hand. Once an IPM method has been decided on and implicated, further monitoring must be done to ensure the pest is under control or eradicated. Removal of either invasive or unwanted native species can be done by hand pulling or by using machinery. To prevent vegetative pests on trails, the depth of the trail material is monitored. Thinning trails receive new surface material to combat weed penetration. Insects and small mammal pests are deterred by introducing natural predators or the pest’s natural enemies; this can be done by shaping the infected area to the wanted animal’s preferred habitat. Eroding trails receive new surface material and may need plant species with extensive root systems planted along them to prevent future deterioration. ROW maintenance Lake Elmo’s Ordinance for the Management of Right of Ways states: “To provide for the health, safety, and well-being of its citizens, and to ensure the structural integrity of its streets and the appropriate use of the rights-of-way, the city strives to keep its rights-of-way in a state of good repair and free from unnecessary encumbrances.” Right of ways (ROW) include medians, curbsides, ditches, and landscape beds within the right of way. Since the City of Lake Elmo is a Bee-Safe City, the goal of the ROW maintenance is to provide suitable habitat for pollinators, with special emphasis on bees and monarch butterflies. This includes planting native plants in diverse and dense amounts, reducing mowing, and limiting herbicide use. 12 Alternative Pesticide List – 2017 PESTICIDE OR BEST PRACTICE USED FOR Phydura – Organic (Soil Tech Corp) citric acid, malic acid, clove oil HERBICIDE: non-selective herbicide for herbaceous broadleaf and grass weeds including garlic mustard and leafy spurge. Scythe – Organic (DOW AgroSciences) Perlargonic acid HERBICIDE: removes or burns waxy cuticle of green vegetation. Will not translocate. Non- selective, post-emergence for grasses and broadleaf weeds, perennial herbaceous plants. Alternative to glysophate. White Vinegar or acetic acid (Final Stop by Dr. Earth) HERBICIDE: Broad spectrum for weeds and grasses including poison ivy. Apply during hot sunny months. AllDown – Organic (Summerset) HERBICIDE: Non-selective annual broadleaf, perennial weeds and grass herbicide including Canada Thistle. Acetic acid, citric acid. Will not translocate. Alternative to glysophate. Burn-out / Bonide – Organic (Bayer Cropscience) clove oils, citric acid HERBICIDE: post defoliant on annual, perennial and grassy weeds. Non selective. Will kill most roots, will not translocate. Alternative to glysophate. Corn gluten – Organic HERBICIDE: pre-emergent herbicide for germinating weed seeds for broadleaf and grassy weeds. Often used for landscapes and gardens. Integrated Pest Management Practices Monitoring, identification and long term planning for insects and plants. Ground covers, biological controls, hedgerows, beetle banks, wind blocks, and hand pulling weeds. Improving soil health. Carefully planned mowing, brush hogging and management. Fire: Flameweeding, blow torch, controlled burns Used for weeds in crevices, along roadsides, trails. Annual controlled burns to encourage diversity and soil health. Plant Identification charts and education: for example: Thistle (Natives: Hills, Tall, Field, Flodmans, Swamp) (Non-native: Canada, Bull, Plumeless, Musk) Field staff may mistake native thistle for non-native. Visual field charts plus education can cut down on maintenance (State of Ohio uses this practice) Shade cloth smother Leave shade cloth in place for 1-2 years, remove and reseed in nutrient rich soil (State of Oregon uses for knapweed control) 13 Goats or sheep For large areas that are hard to manage, wooded areas with bushes and invasives like buckthorn. Fencing can be a challenge for goats. (Washington County used for buckthorn) Soil testing Make soil inhospitable for undesirable plants by augmenting soil with nutrients contrary to what non native plant requires (such as magnesium) Surround WP (Novasource) Kaolin clay INSECTICIDE: for fruit trees, bushes and plants. Sprayed on plants, leaves a protective powdery film on surface of leaves, stems and fruit. Controls long list of insect pests on fruit trees and ornamentals. Avoid spraying on blooming flowers and pollinators. (Used extensively in South America and Africa) Bacillus Thuringiensis (BT bacteria) INSECTICIDE: Naturally occurring soil bacterium kills specific insect larvae like cabbage worm larvae. Can be used to target mosquito and black fly larvae. Beneficial Insects (like hover flies, braconid wasps, tachinid flies, lacewings, lady beetles) When scouting plants for pests, check for both pest and beneficial insects such as lady beetles and bees. If beneficial insects are present, wait to treat and see if the beneficial insects can control the pest insects. Roadside mowing practices Reduce mowing of roadside beyond clear zone to benefit pollinators and reduce maintenance costs. Reduce frequency of mowing (one side per year), or timing (October or later). Restore remnant habitat and existing native vegetation. Protect pollinators. Use pesticides only when absolutely necessary. Least toxic insecticides include: boric acid, diatomaceous earth, neem oil, horticulture soap, and kaolin clay. If pesticides are necessary, use spot treatments. Do not use systemic insecticides which are highly toxic to pollinators and stay in the plant, soil or tree. Never spray flowers or buds. Do not apply while plants are in full bloom. Spray in the evening when bees are not foraging. Swarm Catchers: 651-436-7915 Statewide swarm rescue. Identify the insect species first if possible. Catchers will rescue and relocate honeybees, bumblebees and some native bees. Resources: Compiled by Pollinatorfriendly.org 1/2017 www.omri.org (Organic Materials Review Institute) www.beyondpesticides.org (Pesticide Gateway found under Resources) www.pesticideinfo.org (PAN Pesticide Database) www.cdms.net/label-database (Data Logic Database) 14 Insecticide Toxicity to Bees: By Active Ingredient • For a list of bee safe herbicides visit: http://www.medinabeekeepers.com/index.php?title=Pesticide_toxicity • Plants and Grasses: http://cues.cfans.umn.edu/old/gervais/keytable.htm • Additional resources: https://www.pesticideresearch.com/site/?page_id=9990 http://pollinatorstewardship.org/?page_id=1994 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 10 AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) – Pay Request No. 10 SUBMITTED BY: Chad Isakson, Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Krintina Handt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve Pay Request No. 10? BACKGROUND: CB&I, Inc. was awarded a construction contract on March 15, 2016 to complete the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) project. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: CB&I, Inc., has submitted Partial Pay Request No. 10 in the amount of $135,185.00. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5% of the total work completed. The amount retained is $102,240.43. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Partial payment is proposed in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the Consent Agenda, Pay Request No. 10 for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4) project. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Pay Request No. 10 to CB&I, Inc. in the amount of $135,185.00 for the Inwood Water Tower (No. 4)”. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Partial Pay Estimate No. 10. PROJECTPAYFORM PARTIALPAYESTIMATENO. PERIODOFESTIMATE TO PROJECTOWNER: CONTRACTOR: 1.OriginalContractAmount 2.NetChangeOrderSum 3.RevisedContract(1+2) 4.*WorkCompleted 5.*StoredMaterials 6.Subtotal(4+5) 7.Retainage* 8.PreviousPayments 9.AmountDue(6Ͳ7Ͳ8) *DetailedBreakdownAttached STARTDATE:ONSCHEDULE SUBSTANTIALCOMPLETION:X FINALCOMPLETION: ENGINEER'SCERTIFICATION: SEH,Inc. DATE CONTRACTOR'SCERTIFICATION: CONTRACTOR DATE APPROVEDBYOWNER:CITYOFLAKEELMO,MINNESOTA DATE DATE No.Approval Date Amount $2,395,000.00 Additions Deductions $8,744.00 2 9/20/2016 $8,744.00 $0.00 $2,044,808.50 1 5/3/2016 $0.00 $0.00 $2,403,744.00 $2,044,808.50 $0.00 $1,807,383.08 $102,240.435.0% CONTRACTTIME TOTALS $8,744.00 $0.00 $135,185.00 NETCHANGE $8,744.00 CONTRACTCHANGEORDERSUMMARY PAYESTIMATESUMMARY 10 5/26/20172/1/2017FROM INWOODWATERTOWERNO.4 PROJECTNO.2015.130 CITYOFLAKEELMO 3800LAVERNEAVENUENORTH LAKEELMO,MN55042 ATTN:JACKGRIFFIN,CITYENGINEER CB&IInc. 14109S.ROUTE59 PLAINFIELD,IL60544 ATTN:MICHAELALLISON 4/7/2016 11/2/2017 REVISEDDAYS REMAINING 574 0 160 9/28/2017 ORIGINALDAYS BY BY YES NO TheundersignedContractorcertifiesthattothebestoftheir knowledge,informationandbelieftheworkcoveredbythispayment estimatehasbeencompletedinaccordancewiththecontract documents,thatallamountshavebeenpaidbythecontractorfor workforwhichpreviouspaymentestimateswasissuedandpayments receivedfromtheowner,andthatcurrentpaymentshownhereinis nowdue. Theundersignedcertifiesthattheworkhasbeenreviewedandtothe bestoftheirknowledgeandbelief,thequantitiesshowninthis estimatearecorrectandtheworkhasbeenperformedinaccordance withthecontractdocuments. ENGINEER BY 6/7/2017 FOCUSEngineering,inc.PROJECTPAYMENTFORM H,Innnnnnc. GINEER PARTIALPAYESTIMATENO. 10 INWOODWATERTOWERNO.4 8 CITYOFLAKEELMO,MINNESOTA PROJECTNO.2015.130 QUANTITY UNITPRICE AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 LS 1$16,000.00 $16,000.00 $0.00 1.00 $16,000.00 2 EA 1$3,822.00 $3,822.00 $0.00 1.00 $3,822.00 3 LS 1$2,068.00 $2,068.00 $0.00 0.50 $1,034.00 4 CY 120$10.00 $1,200.00 $0.00 60.00 $600.00 5 SY 200$6.00 $1,200.00 $0.00 150.00 $900.00 6 CY 100$30.00 $3,000.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 7 CY 150$16.00 $2,400.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 8 TON 1,250$22.00 $27,500.00 $0.00 625.00 $13,750.00 9 TON 65$99.00 $6,435.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 10 TON 65$99.00 $6,435.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 11 GAL 35$10.00 $350.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 12 SF 350$25.00 $8,750.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 13 SF 100$20.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 14 EA 1$2,300.00 $2,300.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 15 LF 10$110.00 $1,100.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 16 LF 120$140.00 $16,800.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 17 EA 1$1,980.00 $1,980.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 18 EA 1$4,864.00 $4,864.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 19 LB 700$2.50 $1,750.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 20 LF 140$2.00 $280.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 21 EA 1$2,618.00 $2,618.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 22 CY 16$76.00 $1,216.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 23 SY 30$6.00 $180.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 24 LF 90$68.00 $6,120.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 25 EA 1$1,700.00 $1,700.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 26 CY 10$92.00 $920.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 27 SY 37$3.00 $111.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 28 LF 500$2.25 $1,125.00 $0.00 250.00 $562.50 29 LF 1,000$2.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 30 AC 1.5$4,000.00 $6,000.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 31 AC 1.5$3,500.00 $5,250.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $137,474.00 $0.00 $36,668.50 1 LS 1$47,900.00 $47,900.00 $0.00 1.00 $47,900.00 2 LS 1$239,500.00 $239,500.00 $0.00 0.98 $234,710.00 3 LS 1$316,100.00 $316,100.00 $0.00 1.00 $316,100.00 4 LS 1$287,700.00 $287,700.00 $0.00 1.00 $287,700.00 5 LS 1$413,400.00 $413,400.00 $0.00 0.95 $392,730.00 6 LS 1$372,100.00 $372,100.00 $0.00 1.00 $372,100.00 7 LS 1$214,600.00 $214,600.00 $0.00 1.00 $214,600.00 8 LS 1$142,300.00 $142,300.00 1.00 $142,300.00 1.00 $142,300.00 9 LS 1$43,450.00 $43,450.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 10 LS 1$74,200.00 $74,200.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 11 LS 1$976.00 $976.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 12 LS 1$89,800.00 $89,800.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 13 LS 1$15,500.00 $15,500.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $2,257,526.00 $142,300.00 $2,008,140.00 $2,395,000.00 $142,300.00 $2,044,808.50 TOTALCHANGEORDERNO.1 0 1$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 TOTALCHANGEORDERNO.2 0 1$8,744.00 $8,744.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $2,403,744.00 $142,300.00 $2,044,808.50 INSURANCEANDBONDS STERILIZEANDTEST ELECTRICAL TOTALSͲBASECONTRACT SEEDING(MIX25Ͳ131WITHFERTILIZER&HYDROMULCH) SUBTOTALͲDIVISION1 AGGREGATEBASE,CLASS6 BITWEARINGCOURSEMIX(WEA240B) BITNONͲWEARINGCOURSEMIX(WEB240B) TACKCOAT 16"DIPWATERMAINPIPE,CL.52 HYDRANT 8"CONCRETEAPRON CONNECTTOEXISTINGWATERMAIN 6"DIPWATERMAINPIPE,CL.52 6"GATEVALVE&BOX 4"CONCRETEWALK DIPFITTINGS 4'X4'CATCHBASINWITHGRATING 1.5"CLEARTOCK ITEM DESCRIPTIONOFPAYITEM UNIT CONTRACT THISPERIOD TOTALTODATE DIVISION1ͲSITE&UTILITYWORK MOBILIZATION ROCKCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCE TRAFFICCONTROL POLYETHYLENEENCASEMENT SUBGRADEEXCAVATION GEOTEXTILEFABRICTYPEV SELECTGRANULARBORROW ORGANICTOPSOILBORROW GEOTEXTILEFABRICTYPEI 18"RCPSTORMSEWERPIPE,CL.V 18"APRONW/TRASHGUARD HANDPLACEDRIPRAP,CL.III GEOTEXTILEFABRICTYPEIV PREASSEMBLEDSILTFENCE STRAWBIOROLL TEMPORARYSEEDING(MIX22Ͳ111WITHTYPEIMULCH) SUBTOTALͲDIVISION2 DIVISION2ͲELEVATEDSTORAGETANK WATERTOWERCONTROLPANELANDRTU ENGINEERING&APPROVAL TANKMATERIALS TANKFABRICATION&SHIP FOUNDATIONCONSTRUCTION CONCRETESHAFTCONSTRUCTION TANKERECTION(ONGROUND) TANKPAINT(ONGROUND) HOISTTANK TANKPAINT(INAIR) TOTALSͲREVISEDCONTRACT STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 11 AGENDA ITEM: I-94 Lift Station (No. 1) and Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Change Order No. 1 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. 1 for the I-94 Lift Station (No. 1) and Sanitary Sewer Improvements? BACKGROUND: RL Larson Excavating, Inc. was awarded a construction contract to complete the I-94 Lift Station (No. 1) and Sanitary Sewer Improvements on May 2, 2017. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: RL Larson Excavating, Inc. has submitted a change order to furnish and install lift station pumps (3) that were redesigned in response to revised pumping conditions required by Met Council. All City sanitary sewer permit applications are subject to Met Council review prior to MPCA review and approval. To approve the permit, Met Council required revised pumping conditions to meet long term discharge rates and location for the Lake Elmo sewage that is generated in the southwest sewer area. FISCAL IMPACT: This change order will increase the contract in the amount of $17,853.72 bringing the revised construction contract to $826,983.42. With this change order 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. 1 for the I-94 Lift Station (No. 1) and Sanitary Sewer Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Change Order No. 1 for the I-94 Lift Station (No. 1) and Sanitary Sewer Improvements, thereby increasing the contract amount by $17,853.72”. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Change Order No. 1. CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER FORM CHANGE ORDER NO. DATE: TO: UNIT EA Amount of Original Contract $ Sum of Additions/Deductions approved to date (CO Nos. )$ Contract Amount to date $ Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (DEDUCT) (NO CHANGE)$ Revised Contract Amount $ The Contract Period for Completion will be (UNCHANGED) (INCREASED) (DECREASED)days APPROVED BY ENGINEER: FOCUS ENGINEERING APPROVED BY CONTRACTOR DATE DATE APPROVED BY OWNER: CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA DATE DATE 0 This Document will become a supplement to the Contract and all provisions will apply hereto. The Contract Documents are modified as follows upon execution of this Change Order. BYENGINEER 809,129.70 0.00 809,129.70 17,853.72 826,983.42 INCREASE/(DECREASE) $17,853.72CO1‐1 $5,951.243 RL Larson Excavating, Inc., 2255 12th Street SE, St. Cloud, MN 56304 I‐94 LIFT STATION (NO. 1) AND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 2016.134 1 June 13, 2017 Revise Pump Design ITEM NET CONTRACT CHANGE $17,853.72 CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA BYBY CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION: The lift station pumps (3 pumps) were redesigned in response to revised pumping conditions required by Met Council after receiving contractor bids. Met Council reviews all City sanitary sewer permit applications prior to MPCA review and approval. To approve the permit, Met Council required revised pumping conditions to meet long term discharge rates and location for the Lake Elmo sewage that is generated in the southwest sewer sevice area. Attachments (list documents supporting change):None DESCRIPTION OF PAY ITEM QTY UNITE PRICE 6/13/2017 FOCUS Engineering, inc.CHANGE ORDER FORM STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2107 REGULAR ITEM #: 12 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Mike Bent, Building Official AGENDA ITEM: Hazardous Building Abatement Order, 9224 and 9240 31st St N – Adopt Resolution REVIEWED BY: Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney/Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: The property located at 9224 and 9240 31st St. N. has received multiple complaints from nearby neighbors. The property has been found to be in disrepair and hazardous to the occupant and surrounding properties. Multiple attempts have been made to work with the property owner to make the necessary repairs and clean up the property, but conditions have continued to deteriorate. The property has been found to be a public nuisance per city ordinance and state statute. The Abatement Order and the resolution have been prepared by the city attorney based on the information gathered during the investigation of this case. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to approve Resolution No. 2017-66 and the Hazardous Building Abatement Order for the property at 9224 and 9240 31st St N. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the Consent Agenda. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Approve Resolution No. 2017-66 and the Hazardous Building Abatement Order for the property at 9224 and 9240 31st St N. based on the attached supporting documents and lengthy investigation outlining the attempts to gain voluntary compliance. The property clearly falls within the definition of a public nuisance as defined by city ordinance and state statute. All attempts to gain voluntary compliance have failed. FISCAL IMPACT: All necessary costs incurred by the City in taking the corrective action will be assessed against the property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 463.21. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: Approve Resolution No. 2017-66 ordering the abatement of the properties listed. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit A Resolution 2017-66 2. Exhibit B Hardy Notice 3. Exhibit C Photos 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 066 A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE ABATEMENT OF CONDITIONS CREATING A HAZARDOUS BUILDING, HAZARDOUS PROPERTY, AND NUISANCE EXISTING AT 9224 AND 9240 31st STREET NORTH, LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA 55042 WHEREAS, the property located at 9224 and 9240 31st Street North, legally described on Exhibit A, attached hereto, which contains single-family dwelling, detached garage, and approximately 0.74 acres of land (the “Subject Property”); and WHEREAS, the City has received multiple complaints regarding property maintenance violations at the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, Linda L. Hardy is the owner (“Owner”) of the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 2016, the Lake Elmo Building Official sent the Owner a Notice to Vacate the dwelling on the Subject Property due to lack of a required utility (water), accumulation of rubbish or garbage including unlicensed inoperable motor vehicles, missing or decayed wood siding and trim on the dwelling, improperly flashed siding and roofing, and piles of dried brush, tree trimmings, parts of dead trees and timber susceptible to fire; and WHEREAS, on August 12, 2016, the Lake Elmo Building Official sent the Owner a Notice to Vacate the dwelling for identical reasons to the April 25, 2016 Notice via certified mail; and WHEREAS, the August 12 Notice was returned because the Owner failed to pick it up from the post office; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Building Official posted a copy of the August 12 Notice on the door of the dwelling at the Subject Property on September 19, 2016; and WHEREAS, the Owner was convicted of a misdemeanor for storing inoperable, junk, and unlicensed vehicles on the Subject Property on November 21, 2016; and WHEREAS, as part of the Disposition Agreement from the misdemeanor case the Owner is required to remove junk vehicles and garbage from the Subject Property by June 15, 2017; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Building Official inspected the Subject Property from the right of way on March 30, 2017 and observed accumulation of rubbish or garbage, multiple motor vehicles which appeared inoperable and in disrepair, decayed wood siding and trim on 2 structures which was falling off in places, peeling and flaking paint on structures, rotten windows which were not properly flashed, foundation of one of the structures was caving in, siding was missing from parts of the structures, piles of dried brush, tree trimmings, fallen leaves, parts of dead trees and timber causing a fire hazard; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Building Official made numerous attempt to obtain the Owner’s consent to further investigate the Subject Property by calling the Owner on four different days in April 2017 (April 10, 14,17, and 19) and sending the Owner a letter on April 19, 2017; and WHEREAS, the Owner did not respond to the Lake Elmo Building Official; and WHEREAS, on May 9, 2017, a Washington County Circuit Court judge approved an application by the Lake Elmo Building Official for an administrative search warrant for the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, on May 11, 2017, the Lake Elmo Building Official along with deputies from the Washington County Sherriff’s Office served the Owner with the administrative search warrant and inspected the dwelling and detached garage on the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, during the May 11, 2017 inspection of the Subject Property, the Lake Elmo Building Official observed multiple violations of the property maintenance and building codes including foundation caving in, missing exterior trim, missing exterior flashing, a rotten window that is falling into the dwelling, a missing window where the opening is covered by plywood, rotten siding and trim boards on the exterior of the dwelling, debris and garbage strewn throughout interior of dwelling such that there are no discernable walking areas or paths, walls in dwelling lack insulation and interior finish such as sheetrock, exposed high voltage electrical wiring throughout the dwelling, no bathroom facility or plumbing fixtures in the dwelling, lack of a required water service, lack of required sewage service, lack of a required heating system, main floor beam that supports the second floor framing is bowed and shows signs of structural failure, the floor joists to the second floor are bowed or cracked due to excessive load, and the detached garage is dilapidated and structurally unsafe to enter, as described in further detail in the May 16, 2017 inspection report addressed to the Owner attached as Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Building Official took photographs of the Subject Property during the May 11, 2017 inspection, as shown in Exhibit C; and WHEREAS, as a result of the May 11, 2017 inspection, the Lake Elmo Building Official determined the Subject Property constituted a hazardous property under Minn. Stat. § 463.15 due to the multiple life-safety and health issues and deemed the dwelling unfit for human habitation; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Buidling Official attempted to hand-deliver the May 16, 2017 inspection report to the Owner on two different days, however, the Owner did not answer the door so the Lake Elmo Building Official posted the report on the Owner’s front door; and 3 WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Building Official drove by the Subject Property the day after posting the report and observed it was no longer posted on the front door; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Building Official viewed the Subject Property from the right of way on June 16, 2017 and observed no changes or improvements to the amount of debris in the yard of the Subject Property including the numerous inoperable vehicles; and WHEREAS, the Owner of the Subject Property has taken no steps to abate the hazardous conditions of the structures on the Subject Property or the surrounding land which was subject to the Disposition Agreement; and WHEREAS, Lake Elmo City Code Section 96.03 provides that a public nuisance affecting peace and safety includes the failure to maintain improvements and any fire hazard caused by a building in poor condition and the accumulation of brush or fallen leaves; and WHEREAS, Lake Elmo City Code Section 96.04 provides that a public nuisance affecting health, comfort, or repose includes the accumulation of refuse, rubbish, or garbage; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.161 authorizes the governing body of any city or town to order the owners of any hazardous building or property within the municipality to correct or remove the hazardous condition; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.15, subdivision 3 defines a “hazardous building or hazardous property” as “any building or property, which because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, physical damage, unsanitary condition or abandonment, constitutes a fire hazard or a hazard to public safety or health;” and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.161 et seq. authorizes a city to correct or remove a hazardous condition of any hazardous building or hazardous property if the owner of record fails to do so after a reasonable time and the district court enters a judgment sustaining the city’s order; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo as follows: 1. The dwelling and detached garage located on the Subject Property are hazardous as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.15. 2. The Subject Property is hazardous as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.15. 3. The Subject Property also constitutes a public nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 609.74 and Lake Elmo City Code Sections 96.03 and 96.04. 4 4. An Abatement Order substantially similar to that attached hereto as Exhibit D shall be served upon all parties with an interest or a purported interest in the Subject Property to effectuate this Resolution. 5. The City Attorney and City staff are authorized to take all necessary legal steps to secure compliance with the Order and to obtain authority to remove and abate the hazardous conditions on the Subject Property by court order or consent and assess the costs thereof against the Subject Property. Passed and duly adopted this 20th day of June, 2017, by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk A-1 EXHIBIT A Legal Description That part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), Township Twenty-nine (29) North, Range Twenty-One (21) West, described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Section Fifteen (15), thence North Four Hundred Forty-Five and Two-Tenths (445.2) feet to intersection of the West line of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of said Section and the center line of road (Old Stillwater and St. Paul road); thence Easterly along said center line of road Twelve Hundred Twenty-eight and Nine-Tenths (1228.9) feet to the point of beginning of this description; thence North and parallel by Eleven Hundred Seventy-Five (1175) feet with the said West line of Section Fifteen (15) for a distance of One Hundred Eighty-Seven and Four-Tenths (187.4) feet to the South right-of-way line of C. St. Paul, Minneapolis and Omaha Ry. Company; thence Westerly along said right-of-way line One Hundred Five and Four-Tenths (105.4) feet; thence South and parallel by One Thousand Seventy (1070) feet with the said West line of Section Fifteen (15) to the center line of said road, thence Easterly along said center line of road to the point of beginning. and The West Sixty-Three (63) feet of that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), Township Twenty-Nine (29) North, Range Twenty-One (21) West, described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Section Fifteen (15), thence North 445.2 feet to the intersection in the West line of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of said Section, and the center line of road (Old Stillwater and St. Paul road); thence Easterly along said center line of road, 1228.09 feet to the point of beginning of this description; thence North and parallel by 1175 feet with the said West line of Section Fifteen (15), for a distance of 187.4 feet to the South right-of- way line of C. St. P.M.C.R.R. Company; thence Easterly along said right-of-way line 225.7 feet; thence South and parallel by 1400 feet with the said West line of Section Fifteen (15) to the center line of said road, 130.5 feet; thence Westerly along said center line of road, 235.5 feet to the point of beginning, Washington County, Minnesota. D-1 EXHIBIT D STATE OF MINNNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF WASHINGTON TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT __________________________________________ Case Type: Other Civil In the Matter of the Hazardous ORDER FOR ABATEMENT OF Building and Property Located at 9224 and 9240 HAZARDOUS BUILDINGS AND 31st Street North, Lake Elmo, Minnesota HAZARDOUS PROPERTY AND NUISANCE TO: All owners, occupants, and all lienholders of record. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo orders that within 20 days of service of this Order that you abate the hazardous conditions which exist on the property located at: 9224 and 9240 31st Street North, in the City of Lake Elmo, which property is legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto. The City of Lake Elmo, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 463.15 to 463.261, finds the buildings, a dwelling and a detached garage, located at the above-referenced address constitute hazardous buildings within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15 subdivision 3, specifically due to the structural deficiencies and defects, lack of required utilities including water, sewer, and heat, lack of any plumbing fixtures, significant amount of garbage and debris throughout, hazardous electrical issues including exposed high voltage wiring, and overall condition of the structures. The City of Lake Elmo, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 463.15 to 463.261, finds the property located at the above-referenced address constitutes a hazardous property within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15 subdivision 3, specifically due to the numerous D-2 inoperable motor vehicles, significant amount of garbage and debris throughout the property, and piles of leaves and timber. The City of Lake Elmo finds the property located at the above-referenced address constitutes a public nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 609.74 and City Code Sections 96.03 and 96.04. Pursuant to the above-referenced statutes, it is hereby ORDERED that you abate the hazardous property conditions within 20 days of the date of service of this Order by either removing the structures and the hazardous conditions on the property or completing the following: 1. Install water service, sewage disposal facilities, and heating facilities, including a working bathroom, kitchen sink, and heating source; 2. Remove all excess junk, garbage, and unnecessary articles from inside and outside the dwelling and the detached garage; 3. Ensure proper ingress and egress exists throughout the dwelling; 4. Clean and sanitize the dwelling and the detached garage; 5. Obtain an assessment from a licensed structural engineer to determine what needs to be done to remedy the numerous structural deficiencies throughout the dwelling and the detached garage; 6. Obtain permits and begin work on needed structural repairs according to structural engineer’s assessment; 7. Interior walls of the dwelling need to be finished including but not limited to adding proper insulation and interior finish; D-3 8. Stairs to the second floor must be repaired including adding stair treads where missing and adding handrail or guards and make the stairs structurally sound; 9. Repair rotten windows and install window in opening where window is currently missing and ensure all windows are operable; 10. Install a door where the current opening has plywood nailed over it; 11. Test for mold and remediate any mold present in the dwelling; 12. Ensure safe access to all rooms in the dwelling including the basement which is presently inaccessible due to garbage accumulation; 13. Install doors to interior rooms; 14. Repair and cover high voltage wiring and electrical boxes currently exposed in the dwelling and detached garage in accordance with the Minnesota Electrical Code; 15. Install working smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors throughout the dwelling; and 16. Properly dispose of all junk, garbage, debris, and yard waste from the property, including but not limited to the inoperable vehicles, piles of junk and garbage, and piles of leaves and tree debris. You must apply for and obtain any appropriate permit(s), if applicable, for the work you intend to perform from the appropriate City offices before abating the hazardous conditions. This Order is not a permit. Further, all work completed is subject to inspection by the City’s building inspector, Fire inspector, and other staff as required to ensure compliance with applicable rules and law. You are further advised that unless such corrective action is taken or an Answer is served on the City and filed with the Washington County District Court Administrator within 20 days of D-4 the date of service of this Order upon you, a motion for summary enforcement of this Order will be made to the Washington County District Court. You are further advised that if you do not comply with this Order and the City is compelled to take any corrective action, all necessary costs incurred by the City in taking the corrective action will be assessed against the property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 463.21. In connection thereto, the City intends to recover all its expenses incurred in carrying out this Order, including specifically but not exclusively, filing fees, service fees, publication fees, attorneys’ fees, appraisers’ fees, witness fees, including expert witness fees and traveling expenses incurred by the City from the time this Order was originally made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 463.22. Dated June ___, 2017. KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED By: Sarah J. Sonsalla (#0313464) Elizabeth Brodeen-Kuo (#0391949) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 ATTORNEYS FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO D-5 EXHIBIT A Legal Description That part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), Township Twenty-nine (29) North, Range Twenty-One (21) West, described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Section Fifteen (15), thence North Four Hundred Forty-Five and Two-Tenths (445.2) feet to intersection of the West line of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of said Section and the center line of road (Old Stillwater and St. Paul road); thence Easterly along said center line of road Twelve Hundred Twenty-eight and Nine-Tenths (1228.9) feet to the point of beginning of this description; thence North and parallel by Eleven Hundred Seventy-Five (1175) feet with the said West line of Section Fifteen (15) for a distance of One Hundred Eighty-Seven and Four-Tenths (187.4) feet to the South right-of-way line of C. St. Paul, Minneapolis and Omaha Ry. Company; thence Westerly along said right-of-way line One Hundred Five and Four-Tenths (105.4) feet; thence South and parallel by One Thousand Seventy (1070) feet with the said West line of Section Fifteen (15) to the center line of said road, thence Easterly along said center line of road to the point of beginning. and The West Sixty-Three (63) feet of that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), Township Twenty-Nine (29) North, Range Twenty-One (21) West, described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Section Fifteen (15), thence North 445.2 feet to the intersection in the West line of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of said Section, and the center line of road (Old Stillwater and St. Paul road); thence Easterly along said center line of road, 1228.09 feet to the point of beginning of this description; thence North and parallel by 1175 feet with the said West line of Section Fifteen (15), for a distance of 187.4 feet to the South right-of- way line of C. St. P.M.C.R.R. Company; thence Easterly along said right-of-way line 225.7 feet; thence South and parallel by 1400 feet with the said West line of Section Fifteen (15) to the center line of said road, 130.5 feet; thence Westerly along said center line of road, 235.5 feet to the point of beginning, Washington County, Minnesota. May 16, 2017 Linda Hardy 9224 31st St N Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Re: Property Maintenance –IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED Dear Ms. Hardy, My office has received multiple complaints regarding property maintenance violations that exist at your property located at 9224 31st St N and 8240 31st N in the City of Lake Elmo. On April 19th, 2017, I sent you a request via the United States Postal Service to inspect your property. The notice requested you contact my office to schedule an inspection by April 30th, 2017. I received no response from you regarding the request to inspect. On May 9th, 2017, I submitted an application for an administrative search warrant to the court of Tenth Judicial District in Washington County and was granted an Administrative Search Warrant for your property by Judge Ellen L. Maas. On May 11th, 2017, along with deputies from the Washington County Sheriffs office, I served you with the administrative search warrant and executed the search of your home and other structures on your property to inspect interior and exterior condition as it relates to property maintenance, building code compliance, and compliance with the Lake Elmo Property Maintenance Code. The following violations were cited during my inspection of your property: Main House East Side Exterior: 1. East entry door is rotted and not secured in opening to home, exterior trim and flashing is missing, sill is rotted and the opening is not weather tight. (Exhibit 1, Exhibit 7) 2. Foundation is caving in east side of home below grade. Block foundation grout is missing at the concrete block foundation, block is cracked and is caving in along the east wall. (Exhibit 2, Exhibit 3, Exhibit 4 & Exhibit 5) 3. The sill and floor joist area of the main floor east wall is exposed to the weather, no siding or protective weather barrier nor is flashing present in any area along the east wall. The main floor system rim and joists are rotted and structural integrity is compromised on the east exterior wall. (See Exhibit 3 & Exhibit 5) 4. The double hung window to the north of the electric meter on the east wall is rotted and falling into the house. There is no flashing present, the wood is rotted and not weather tight. (See Exhibit 6, Exhibit 8 & Exhibit 9) 5. The siding and trim boards on the east wall of the house is rotted and does not extend to the top of the wall. (See Exhibit 10 & Exhibit 11) North Side Exterior 1. Foundation grout is missing at the concrete block foundation, block is cracked and is separating along the length of the north wall. (See Exhibit 12) 2. Structural framing of the wood frame floor system and walls above foundation is not flashed or weather tight.(See Exhibit 12) 3. Door opening on the north wall is missing the door, plywood pieces nailed over opening from the interior. Opening is not weather tight. Structural framing at the floor framing is rotted at the door opening. (See Exhibit 12) 4. Window opening on the north wall is missing the window, plywood has been nailed over the opening from the interior. Opening is not weather tight. (See Exhibit 12) 5. Exterior sheathing is missing along the north wall near the window opening. (See Exhibit 12) 6. Siding and trim missing from the north wall, sheathing is exposed to the weather and approx. top half of the exterior wall is not flashed or protected from the weather or weather tight.(See Exhibit 12) 7. Window at the top of the wall is not flashed or weather tight.(See Exhibit 12) West Side Exterior 1. West patio door is not weather tight in opening, exterior siding, trim and flashing is missing, the opening is not weather tight. (See Exhibit 13 & Exhibit 14) 2. Foundation grout is missing at the concrete block foundation, block is cracked and is separating along the length of the north wall. Multiple location block is broken and missing at the foundation. (See Exhibit 15, Exhibit 16, Exhibit 17 & Exhibit 18) 3. The siding and trim boards on the west wall of the house is rotted and does not extend to the top of the wall. (See Exhibit 13) South Side Exterior 1. Foundation grout is missing at the concrete block foundation, block is cracked and is separating along the length of the south wall. Multiple location block is broken and missing at the foundation. (See Exhibit 18) 2. The siding and trim boards on the west wall of the house is rotted and does not extend to the top of the wall. (See Exhibit 11) 3. South entry door is rotted and not secured in opening to home, exterior trim and flashing is missing, sill is rotted and the opening is not weather tight. (See Exhibit 19) 4. Window opening on the south wall is rotted and not secure in opening. Opening is not weather tight.(See Exhibit 20) Interior 1. Debris and garbage is stacked throughout the main floor at all floor/walking areas. There is no discernable walking area or paths on the main floor. The arear where the floor was found and visible, there is no finish flooring and multiple areas had sub flooring missing and plywood sitting over floor opening. (See Exhibit 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 34, 38, 45,48, 49) 2. House has a definitive odor from feces, urine and garbage throughout. Household garbage is strewn throughout. 3. Homeowner has a dog present, Sherriff Deputy required owner put dog away inside kennel in bedroom area. (See Exhibit 29) 4. Exterior walls throughout do not have interior finish. Approximately half of the exterior walls have kraft faced fiberglass insulation installed. Approximately half of the exterior walls including the areas where plywood has been nailed over door and window openings have no insulation. (See Exhibits 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 43) 5. Room on the south side of the main floor has polyethylene sheet plastic draped over the door opening. The interior of the room has some kraft faced fiberglass insulation in the exterior walls and the windows have cloth draped over the openings. Polyethylene sheet plastic has been installed over all of the interior surfaces, walls and ceiling of this room creating a double vapor barrier over all of the wall and ceiling surface areas. High voltage electrical wiring is exposed in multiple areas throughout the room. This room has a bed and as confirmed by the property owner, this is the bedroom. There is no smoke alarm or carbon monoxide detector present. (See Exhibits 25, 26, 27, 28 29) 6. There is no identifiable bathroom facility or plumbing fixtures present in the home. There is no kitchen sink nor any food preparation area in the home. Homeowner stated she does not have running water nor is there a sewage system connection present. The natural gas meter is shut off, homeowner stated she heats with a portable electric heater. 7. The main floor beam that runs north and south in the center of the home and supports the second floor framing is bowing in the center from excessive load. Beam is showing signs of structural failure and requires verification of sizing, additional support needed and verification of support through to the footings in the basement. (See Exhibits 22, 23, 36) 8. The floor joists to the second floor are bowing uniformly from the front to back due to excessive load. Multiple joist have split and broken and have had sister 2 x 4 framing added incorrectly along the side but have not been added full length and add little additional support. The second floor system is unsafe and should be evaluated by a structural engineer for the required additional structural support needed. The same floor joists are rotted on the ends in multiple areas along the east wall at the plate due to the lack of a weather tight exterior. (See Exhibits 21, 22, 23, 32, 33, 46, 47, 50) 9. Stair to the second floor area is loose and not secure. No handrails or guards are present and top stair treads are broken off. (See Exhibits 34, 36, 40, 41) 10. Second floor is unfinished. Kraft faced fiberglass insulation has been partially installed in the rafters and polyethylene sheet plastic has been installed over the top creating a double vapor barrier. There are multiple signs of areas where trapped moisture is present between the paper face of the insulation and the polyethylene sheeting and blackened areas that appear to be mold is present throughout. Verification should be made to determine mold presence throughout the second floor area. (See Exhibits 38, 39, 43) 11. Guard is missing along the stair opening. (See Exhibits 40, 41) 12. High voltage electrical wiring is present and exposed throughout the second floor. There are open and exposed wires and electrical boxes throughout. (See Exhibits 37, 42, 43) 13. The basement was inaccessible. Debris and garbage was blocking the path to the basement stairs, upon crawling over the garbage to get to the basement stairs, garbage and debris is blocking the stairway to the basement (It appears that garbage has been thrown down the basement stairway, filled the stairway and beyond and is stacked shoulder high on the main floor preventing access to the basement. Further inspection and evaluation was not possible. (See Exhibit 34) Detached Garage The detached garage located to the north of the house is dilapidated and structurally unsafe to enter. The following observations were completed from the exterior and from looking inside the service door located on the east side of the structure: 1. The bottom chord of the roof trusses are bowing and near breaking in several locations, likely due to the large amount of storage placed in the roof system. Trusses are spaced 4’ on center and are not designed for storage. Sills and framing near the bottom plates are rotted and structurally unsound. 2. High Voltage Electrical wiring and open electrical boxes throughout the building. 3. Siding is rotted and decayed. 4. Door and window openings are not flashed and rotted allowing weather inside the structure further creating damage and rot to the framing structure. 5. (See Exhibits 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 81, 82) The above detailed and cited items are in violation of the following sections of the City of Lake Elmo Property Maintenance Code (Also known as the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code, which the City of Lake Elmo adopted per City Code § 150.325): 1. LEPMC 108.1.3 Structure unfit for human occupancy. A structure is unfit for human occupancy whenever the code official finds that such structure is unsafe, unlawful or, because of the degree to which the structure is in disrepair or lacks maintenance, is unsanitary, vermin or rat infested, contains filth and contamination, or lacks ventilation, illumination, sanitary or heating facilities or other essential equipment required by this code, or because the location of the structure constitutes a hazard to the occupants of the structure or the public. The property does not have water service, sewage disposal, heating facilities, a working bathroom or kitchen sink and is structurally unsafe, is in disrepair, lacks maintenance, is unsanitary and constitutes a hazard to the occupants. 2. LEPMC 305 Interior Structure 305.1 General. The interior of a structure and equipment therein shall be maintained in good repair, structurally sound and in a sanitary condition. Occupants shall keep that part of the structure which they occupy or control in a clean and sanitary condition, every owner of a structure containing a rooming house, housekeeping units, a hotel, a dormitory, two or more dwelling units or two or more nonresidential occupancies, shall maintain, in a clean and sanitary condition, the shared or public areas of the structure and exterior property. The interior of the property is not maintained in good repair, it is not structurally sound and is unsanitary. 3. 305.2 Structural members. All structural members shall be maintained structurally sound; and be capable of supporting the imposed loads. The property is not being maintained structurally sound or capable of supporting imposed loads. 4. 305.3 Interior Surfaces. All interior surfaces, including windows and doors, shall be maintained in good, clean and sanitary condition. Peeling, chipping, flaking or abraded paint shall be repaired, removed or covered. Cracked or loose plaster, decayed wood and other defective surface conditions shall be corrected. Interior surfaces, windows, doors, interior walls and finishes are not being maintained in clean and sanitary condition. 5. 305.4 Stairs and walking surfaces. Every stair, ramp; landing, balcony, porch, deck or other walking surface shall be maintained in sound condition and good repair. Stairs to the second floor are not maintained in sound condition and good repair. The stairs to the basement level are inaccessible, the stairway is filled with debris making the area inaccessible. 6. 305.5 Handrails and guards. Every handrail and guard shall be firmly fastened and capable of supporting normally imposed loads and shall be maintained in good condition. 306.1 General. Every exterior and interior flight of stairs having more than four risers shall have a handrail on one side of the stair and every open portion of a stair, landing, balcony, porch, deck, ramp or other walking surface which is more than 30 inches (762 nun) above the floor or grade below shall have guards. Handrails shall not be less than 30 inches (762 mm) high or more than 42 inches (1067 mm) high measured vertically above the nosing of the tread or above the finished floor of the landing or walking surfaces. Guards shall not be less than 30 inches (762 mm) high above the floor of the landing, balcony, porch, deck, or ramp or other walking surface. Handrails and guardrails are missing where required. 7. 305.6 Interior doors. Every interior door shall fit reasonably well within its frame and shall be capable of being opened and closed by being properly and securely attached to jambs, headers or tracks as intended by the manufacturer of the attachment hardware. There are no doors to any rooms, the bedroom has polyethylene sheeting hung between the rooms. 8. 307.1 Accumulation of rubbish or garbage. All exterior property and premises, and the interior of every structure, shall be free from any accumulation of rubbish or garbage. Garbage is strewn about the interior of the structure and piled in multiple locations throughout the house. 9. 402.1 Habitable spaces. Every habitable space shall have at least one window of approved size facing directly to the outdoors or to a court. The minimum total glazed area for every habitable space shall be 8 percent of the floor area of such room. Wherever walls or other portions of a structure face a window of any room and such obstructions are located less than 3 feet (914 rom) from the window and extend to a level above that of the ceiling of the room, such window shall not be deemed to face directly to the outdoors nor to a court and shall not be included as contributing to the required minimum total window area for the room. All of the windows in the home are boarded over or covered with fabric or polyethylene plastic sheeting and do not open or ventilate. 10. 502.1 Dwelling units. Every dwelling unit shall contain its own bathtub or shower, lavatory, water closet and kitchen sink which shall be maintained in a sanitary, safe working condition. The lavatory shall be placed in the same room as the water closet or located in close proximity to the door leading directly into the room in which such water closet is located. A kitchen sink shall not be used as a substitute for the required lavatory. The home does not have a bathroom or kitchen sink. 11. 505.1 General. Every sink, lavatory, bathtub or shower, drinking fountain; water closet or other plumbing fixture shall be properly connected to either a public water system or to an approved private water system. All kitchen sinks, lavatories, laundry facilities, bathtubs and showers shall be supplied with hot or tempered and cold running water in accordance with the International Plumbing Code. 505.3 Supply. The water supply system shall be installed and maintained to provide a supply of water to plumbing fixtures, devices and appurtenances in sufficient volume and at pressures adequate to enable the fixtures to function properly, safely, and free from defects and leaks. 505.4 Water heating facilities. Water heating facilities shall be properly installed, maintained and capable of providing an adequate amount of water to be drawn at every required sink, lavatory, bathtub, shower and laundry facility at a temperature of not less than 11oop (43°C). A gas-burning water heater shall not be located in any bathroom, toilet room, bedroom or other occupied room normally kept closed, unless adequate combustion air is provided. An approved combination temperature and pressure-relief valve and relief valve discharge pipe shall be properly installed and maintained on water heaters. The home does not have running water, plumbing, heated water or fixtures. 12. 506.1 General. All plumbing fixtures shall be properly connected to either a public sewer system or to an approved private sewage disposal system. The home is not connected to a sewage system. 13. 602.2 Residential occupancies. Dwellings shall be provided with heating facilities capable of maintaining a room temperature of68°F (20°C) in all habitable rooms, bathrooms and toilet rooms based on the winter outdoor design temperature for the locality indicated in Appendix D of the International Plumbing Code. Cooking appliances shall not be used to provide space heating to meet the requirements of this section. 602.5 Room temperature measurement. The required room temperatures shall be measured 3 feet (914 rom) above the floor near the center of the room and 2 feet (610 rom) inward from the center of each exterior wall. The home does not have heating facilities capable of maintaining the required temperature as required. 14. 604.1 Facilities required. Every occupied building shall be provided with an electrical system in compliance with the requirements of this section and Section 605. 604.3 Electrical system' hazards. Where it is' found that the electrical system in a structure constitutes a hazard to the occupants or the structure by reason of inadequate service, improper fusing, insufficient receptacle and lighting outlets, improper wiring or installation, deterioration or damage, or for similar reasons, the code official shall require the defects to be corrected to eliminate the hazard. 605.1 Installation. All electrical equipment, wiring and appliances shall be properly installed and maintained in a safe and approved manner. 605.2 Receptacles. Every habitable space in a dwelling shall contain at least two separate' and· remote receptacle outlets. Every laundry area shall contain at least one grounded-type receptacle or a receptacle with a. ground fault circuit interrupter. Every bathroom shall contain at least one receptacle. Any new bathroom receptacle outlet shall have ground fault circuit interrupter protection. The property has high voltage wiring and electrical boxes exposed in multiple locations throughout the property. 15. 702.1 General. A safe, continuous and unobstructed path of travel shall be provided from any point in a building or structure to the public way. Means of egress shall comply with the International Fire Code. 702.4 Emergency escape openings. Required emergency escape openings shall be maintained in accordance with the code in effect at the time of construction, and the f0llowing. Required emergency escape and rescue openings shall be operational from the inside of the room without the use of keys or tools, Bars, grilles, grates or similar devices are permitted to be placed over 'emergency escape and rescue openings provided the minimum net clear opening size complies with the code that was in effect at the time of construction and such devices shall be releasable or removable from the inside without the use of a key, tool or force greater than that which is required for normal operation of the escape and rescue opening. 704.2 Smoke alarms. Single or multiple-station smoke alarms shall be installed and maintained in Groups R-Z, R-3, R-4 and in dwellings not regulated in Group R occupancies, regardless of occupant load at all of the following locations: 1. On the ceiling or wall outside of each separate sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of bedrooms. 2. In each room used for sleeping purposes. 3. In each story within a dwelling unit, including basements and cellars but not including crawl spaces and uninhabitable attics. In dwellings or dwelling units with split levels and without an intervening door between the adjacent levels, a smoke alarm installed on the upper level shall suffice for the adjacent lower level provided that the lower level is less than one full story below the upper level. Single or multiple-station smoke alarms shall be installed in other groups in accordance with the International Fire Code. The property does not have any openable/egress windows/emergency escape windows, the home does not have working smoke alarms or carbon monoxide detectors. In addition to the above referenced Lake Elmo Property Maintenance Code Sections, your property is in violation of the following city ordinances: § 96.04 PUBLIC NUISANCES AFFECTING HEALTH, COMFORT, OR REPOSE. (11) An accumulation of refuse, rubbish, or garbage (as defined in § 96.05) or debris of any nature or description. § 96.03 PUBLIC NUISANCES AFFECTING PEACE AND SAFETY. Failure to maintain improvements. In all zoning districts it is hereby declared necessary that all structures, landscaping, and fences be reasonably maintained so as to avoid health or safety hazards and prevent a degradation in the value of adjacent property. Failure to so maintain the improvements is declared to be a nuisance; § 150.325 The Property Maintenance Code of Lake Elmo Section 307.1 requires all exterior property and premises, and the interior of every structure, shall be free from any accumulation of rubbish or garbage. § 96.03 PUBLIC NUISANCES AFFECTING PEACE AND SAFETY. Fire hazards. Any building or structure which, by reason of age, dilapidated condition, defective chimneys or stove pipes, defective electric wiring, defective gas connections, defective heating apparatus, or other defect, is susceptible to fire, and which thus endangers life or limb or other buildings or property within the city; and any accumulations of brush, tree trimming, fallen leaves, parts of dead trees, timber, or other materials or substances on either vacant or improved property, which accumulations are susceptible to fire or capable of spreading fire to adjacent property; Based on my inspection, I have determined this property constitutes a hazardous property under Minn. Stat. § 463.15. This property has multiple life-safety and health concerns. Most importantly, the primary structure is not fit for human habitation. If the conditions outlined above are not corrected by June 15th 2017 the city will proceed with corrective actions including but not limited to a hazardous property abatement order to have the structures on the property demolished. If you dispute any of the violations listed in this notice, please contact me as soon as possible. Also, if you correct the conditions above, please contact me with evidence demonstrating the corrections. Per the Property Maintenance Code of Lake Elmo Section 106.3, any action taken by the authority having jurisdiction on such premises shall be charged against the real estate upon which the structure is located and shall be a lien upon such real estate. Please contact me with any questions regarding this correspondence. I can be reached at (651) 747-3910. Respectfully, Michael Bent Building Official City of Lake Elmo C-1 EXHIBIT C C-2 C-3 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 CONSENT ITEM #: 13 AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Ordinance No. 08-177 amending the city’s provisions related to the keeping of chickens. SUBMITTED BY: Julie Johnson, City Clerk Adam Huesman, Administration Intern ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve Ordinance No. 08-177. BACKGROUND: The city clerk has been informed by residents on multiple occasions that the minimum height requirement for chicken coops as currently outlined in parts I and J of Section 95.111 of the City Code limits residents’ ability to utilize prefabricated chicken coop kits. The current minimum height requirement is six feet, but the prefabricated coops generally range between four to six feet in height. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: In contrast to The City of Lake Elmo’s minimum height requirement of six feet, the cities of Golden Valley and Shakopee code state that coops may not exceed six feet in height. Rather than dictating a minimum height, they set a height limit. Additionally, the City of Stillwater’s chicken keeping code does not mention height requirements. The minimum height of six feet was established by The City of Lake Elmo to allow for ease of cleaning and maintenance. Staff believes that a minimum height of 4 feet would allow adequate room for cleaning, maintenance, and free movement of the chickens, while greatly expanding residents’ options for purchasing prefabricated chicken coop kits. We find that prefabricated chicken coop kits are an esthetically pleasing, and sound alternative to resident designed and built coops. FISCAL IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve Ordinance No. 08-177 as part of the consent agenda. The recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Ordinance No. 08-177 amending Section 95.111 related to the keeping of chickens.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance No. 08-177 2. Prefabricated Chicken Coop Examples CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-177 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING THE CITY’S PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE KEEPING OF CHICKENS SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Section 95.111 of the City Code by adding the underlined language and deleting the stricken language as follows: § 95.111 PERMIT CONDITIONS. Each person keeping chickens within the City of Lake Elmo shall comply with the following: (A) No person may keep a rooster or crowing hen. (B) No person may allow chickens to range freely without fencing or without a mobile pen. (C) No person may keep chickens inside the house or attached garage. (D) Chickens must be provided a secure and well ventilated roofed structure (“chicken coop”). (E) The roofed structure and required fencing for the chickens may only be located in a rear yard and must meet setback and building separations as established in city zoning and building codes, except that the roofed structure and fencing must maintain a 20 foot separation from dwellings on adjacent properties. (F) The roofed structure shall be fully enclosed, wind proof, and have sufficient windows for natural light. (G) Chickens, coops, and/or runs shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance. (H) The chicken coop and run shall be kept in good repair as to be in compliance with the property maintenance regulations elsewhere in the code. (I) All chicken coops must have a minimum size of 4 square feet per bird and must be at least 6 feet in height to allow access for cleaning and maintenance. 4 feet in height. (J) Fenced in chicken runs must have a minimum of 10 square feet per bird and must be at least 6 feet in height to allow access for cleaning and maintenance. 4 feet in height. (K) All butchering waste shall be disposed of in a sanitary manner. (L) Dead chickens must be disposed of according to the Minnesota Board of Animal Health rules which require chicken carcasses to be disposed of as soon as possible after death, usually within 48 to 72 hours. Legal forms of chicken carcass disposal include burial, off-site incineration or rendering, or composting. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance No. 08-177 was adopted on this 20th day of June 2017. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ___________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance ________ was published on the _____ day of _________________, 2017. STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 14 AGENDA ITEM: Planning Commission Appointment TO: Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: On May 17, 2017, Commissioner Gary Fields submitted his resignation effective immediately from the Planning Commission. As a result, Jesse Hartley is moved to a voting member and will serve out the remainder of Fields’ term (expiring 12/31/19) and Terry Emerson moves from 2nd Alternate to 1st Alternate. This leave the position of 2nd Alternate open. The Council failed to fill the position at the June 6, 2017 meeting so it is being brought back before Council again for consideration. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Who should Council appoint as 2nd alternate to the Planning Commission? PROPOSAL: Tucker Pearce and Stuart Johnson have submitted applications. Applications were emailed to Council for their review prior to the meeting. Pearce currently serves as the 2nd alternate on the Parks Commission. He is more interested in serving on the Planning Commission and would resign his Parks Commission seat if appointed to Planning. OPTIONS: 1) Appoint Tucker Pearce as 2nd alternate to the Planning Commission 2) Appoint Stuart Johnson as 2nd alternate to the Planning Commission 3) Appoint someone else as 2nd alternate to the Planning Commission RECOMMENDATION: Motion to appoint _____________ as 2nd alternate to the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS: None STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 REGULAR ITEM # 15 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Brian A. Swanson – Finance Director AGENDA ITEM: Summer Sewer Rate Discussion REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt – City Administrator BACKGROUND: Staff was directed to analyze the sewer rate structure as it pertains to charging properties for watering in the summer months. Information was presented to Finance Committee on June 8, 2017 resulting in the information being presented for the City Council to consider this evening. Further, illustrative information from four other cities and the City of Lake Elmo data are included as attachments to this report. ISSUE BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL: Based upon the recommendation of the Finance Committee and staff, the City Council is being asked to consider the following: 1) Approve Ordinance 08-179, amending the 2017 City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule to establish a base sewer charge for residential customers who are not on the 201 system. 2) Adopt Resolution 2017-064 Authorizing Publication of Ordinance 08-179 By Title and Summary. PROPOSAL/ANALYSIS: The Finance Committee and Staff are proposing establishing a base sewer charge of $52.50 per quarter with an allowance of 10,000 gallons (10 units), with a variable charge of $4.50 per partial or full additional unit thereafter on residential properties. Summer sewer charge would be calculated on the winter quarter consumption, as well as for the other two quarters. If no winter quarter is available such as with new properties, then the $52.50 fixed fee per quarter would apply, until a winter quarter water consumption reading is available. Further, for those properties not on City water service, but on City sewer service, such as the 201 systems, the existing $75.00 fixed fee per quarter would still apply. This proposed residential base sewer charge would not apply to properties that have a separate meter for an irrigation system, as those meters are charged for water consumption only. Staff analyzed several different aspects when recommending the sewer rate structure. First, how sewer rates were determined, meaning based on winter quarter water consumption, current quarter, or lowest quarter of the last four. Of the four cities included in the chart, three used the winter quarter and Oakdale uses the minimum quarter. With the City of Oakdale, staff stated that the lowest quarter is essentially the winter quarter in most cases. Next, staff reviewed if there are a base charge and if so, is a consumption allowance included in this base charge. The allowance amount is noted for each city on the tables. Mahtomedi was the only one that did not include an allowance in their base charge. Further staff analyzed if no allowance was provided, are a minimum number of units billed. Staff also reviewed existing consumption with the existing customer base in proposing an allowance and base charge. In addition, information was compiled on the rate per unit that cities were using. Finally, sample sewer bills were calculated to show comparisons, based on existing structure for the City of Lake Elmo, a recommended quarterly fixed fee with the same sample consumption, and a higher volume consumption sample. FISCAL IMPACT: This would be contingent upon the number of users connecting to the system and consumption during the warmer months when sewer was determined by the current quarter water usage. With sewer charges starting in the third quarter of 2015 and adding more users each quarter, which currently is at 359 customers, there is not significant historical data to compile information from that would be meaningful. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve the following: Motion to approve: 1) Approve Ordinance 08-179, amending the 2017 City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule to establish a base sewer charge for residential customers who are not on the 201 system of $52.50 per quarter, which includes an allowance of 10,000 gallons (10 units) per quarter, then a variable charge of $4.50 per partial or full additional unit thereafter, based on the winter quarter water consumption. And 2) Adopt Resolution 2017-064 Authorizing Publication of Ordinance 08-179 By Title and Summary. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Comparisons of sample cities with existing, recommended and higher volume sewer bills. 4 - worksheets 2) Ordinance 08-179 3) Resolution 2017-064 4) 2017 Amended City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule CITY OF LAKE ELMO Sewer Rate Comparisons to Assist Summer Rate Discussion EXISTING STRUCTURE CITY LAKE ELMO*HUGO#MAHTOMEDI^OAKDALE~WOODBURY+ BILLING FREQUENCY Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly WATER USAGE QTR. TO DETERMINE SEWER Current Current Current Minimum Average BASE CHARGE -$ 47.00$ 14.37$ 18.00$ 44.29$ RATE PER 1000 GALLONS (UNIT)4.50$ 1.85$ 7.25$ 3.50$ 3.00$ UNITS 10.00 1.00 10.00 12.00 6.00 CHARGE FOR UNITS 45.00$ 1.85$ 72.46$ 42.00$ 18.00$ BILL 45.00$ 48.85$ 86.83$ 60.00$ 62.29$ * Correlates directly to water units used in current quarter. # Includes first 9 units in minimum bill. Therefore need to bill 1 additional unit in example. ^ Measures in cubic feet instead of gallons, so converted to gallons for comparison. Uses current quarter. ~ Requires billing for 12 units per quarter minimum. + Base rate includes 8 units per quarter and then bills on city average of 14 units for new residential customer. SEWER BILL - NEW RESIDENTIAL WATER/SEWER CUSTOMER AND 10 UNITS OF WATER CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-179 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo ordains: SECTION I. Schedule Adopted. The attached fee schedule is hereby adopted. SECTION II. Not Codified. This ordinance is transitory in nature and shall not be codified in the City Code. This ordinance and the fee schedule established hereby shall be placed on file and available for public inspection at City Hall. SECTION III. Effect. The fees set out in the attached fee schedule apply notwithstanding any other fees the City has established which may be inconsistent. Any other fees imposed by the City which do not appear on the attached fee schedule remain in full force and effect. SECTION IV. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective for all billings rendered after June 30, 2017, and upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION V. Adoption Date. This Ordinance No. 08-179 was adopted on this 20th day of June, 2017, by a vote of Ayes and Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance was published on the day of , 2017. 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-064 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 08-179 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-179, an ordinance amending the City Code of Ordinances by amending the City’s provisions related to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Ordinance includes a chart 8 pages in length; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 412.191, subdivision 4, allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the Ordinance; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, that the City Clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 08-179 to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance: Public Notice The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-179, which amends the City’s 2017 Fee Schedule to clarify the City Sewer Base charge and when payments are due. The full text of Ordinance No. 08-179 is available for inspection at Lake Elmo city hall during regular business hours. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo that the City Administrator keep a copy of the Ordinance at City Hall for public inspection and that a copy be placed for public inspection at the Lake Elmo Public Library. Dated: June 20, 2017. Mike Pearson, Mayor 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. City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule 2017 1 APPLICATION/FEE/PERMIT TYPE 2017 FEE ESCROW OR ADDITIONAL CHARGE DEPARTMENT Amateur Radio Antenna $875.00 Planning Appeal (to Board of Adjustment and Appeals) $250.00 Administration Bee Keeping Permit $25.00 Valid for 2 years from issuance Administration Building Demolition Administration Residential $200.00 Plus Surcharge (State Mandated) Building Commercial $300.00 Building Burning Permit Fire Residential $45.00 Fire Commercial $80.00 Fire Illegal Burn see notes → Additional fees may be incurred based on Wash. Cty. Chief's fee schedule and # of responding units Fire Chicken Keeping Permit $25.00 Initial permit expires on 12/31 of 2nd year. Administration Comprehensive Plan Amendment $1,300.00 Land Use Escrow $2500 Planning Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Wireless Communication Facilities Fee Escrow $6,000.00. Flood Plain Ordinance Fee Escrow $500.00 Land Use Escrow $2500 Planning New $1,050.00 Planning Amended $500.00 Planning Contractor License Fees Licensing Demolition $50.00 Licensing Driveway $50.00 Licensing Excavator $50.00 Licensing HVAC $50.00 Licensing Irrigation $50.00 Licensing Sewer/Water Line Installer $50.00 Licensing Sign Installer $50.00 Licensing Solid Waste Hauler $120.00 Licensing Copy Services (Paper/Electronic) Administration Copies (B&W) $0.25 per page 100 pages or more are charged at actual cost of production Administration Copies (Color) $0.50 per page 100 pages or more are charged at actual cost of production Administration Copies (B&W) 11x17 $1.00 per page 100 pages or more are charged at actual cost of production Administration Copies (Color) 11x17 $2.00 per page 100 pages or more are charged at actual cost of production Administration Data DVD Fee $15.00 Administration GIS Scaled Aerial $25.00 Administration Existing Maps $5.00 Administration Custom (Per Hour Rate) $70.00 Administration Plan Size Maps (Larger than 11x17) $15.00 Administration City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule 2017 2 APPLICATION/FEE/PERMIT TYPE 2017 FEE ESCROW OR ADDITIONAL CHARGE DEPARTMENT Development Standards Specs/Details $55.00 Administration Video reproduction $10.00 Administration Culverts in Developments with Rural Section $160.00 Administration Daycare Inspection Fee $50.00 Building Dog License- altered $20.00 Licensing Dog License- unaltered $25.00 Licensing Dog License- late fee $2.50 per month Maximum $10 Licensing Service Dog License No Charge Licensing Duplicate License or Tag $1.00 Licensing First Impound- Unlicensed Dog $60.00 All Impound Fees plus $20/day Boarding Fee Licensing First Impound- Licensed Dog $42.00 Licensing First Impound- Cat $42.00 Licensing Subsequent dog/ cat impound $85.00 Licensing Driveway Planning Residential $70.00 Planning Commercial $160.00 Planning Easement Encroachment $100.00 Staff & Recording Fee Planning Electronic Fund Withdrawl/Bill Payment Fee + Trans. Charge Administration Environmental Review (EAW/EIS) $1,500.00 Village Area AUAR Fee $230.00 Per REC Unit. To be charged to development applications that increase the number of REC units above existing conditions within the Village AUAR Area. The fee will be based on the difference between the proposed and existing REC units. Fee to be paid as part of a developer’s agreement for larger projects or at the time a building permit is issued for smaller projects. Once paid, the same land will not be charged again. Planning Erosion Control Building Re-inspection Fee (portal to portal from City Hall: 1 Hr. min) $50.00 per hour $5,000.00 Security Building Excavating & Grading ≥ 50 cubic yards, up to 400 cubic yds $125.00 Security $500.00 Building Excavating & Grading ≥ 400 cubic yards/acre of site area $500.00 $500.00 fee escrow plus security $1,500.00 per acre with $1,500 minimum. Engineering False Alarms (12 Month Period)* (*1-3 no charge) Fire Residential Fire City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule 2017 3 APPLICATION/FEE/PERMIT TYPE 2017 FEE ESCROW OR ADDITIONAL CHARGE DEPARTMENT 4-6 False Alarms $110.00 Fire In Excess of 6 False Alarms $185.00 Fire Commercial Fire 4-6 False Alarms $315.00 Fire In Excess of 6 False Alarms $520.00 Fire Fire Alarm Permit 2% of value plus surcharge; Minimum $100 Building Fire Suppression Permit 2% of value plus surcharge; Minimum $100 Building Flood Plain District Delineation $500.00 Planning Fuel Tank Removal (Underground) $250.00 Plus Surcharge (State Mandated) Administration Fuel Tank Install 2% of value of work Minimum $100.00 Administration HVAC Building Residential $60.00/unit Up to 3 units, max fee $180.00 plus Surcharge (State Mandated) Building Commercial $60.00/unit Up to 3 units or 1% of total valuation, whichever is greater. Plus Surcharge (State Mandated) Building Fireplace Permit $60.00/unit Plus State surcharge (State Mandated) Building Interim Use Permit (IUP) Planning Fee $1,050.00 $2,500.00 Escrow Planning Renewal $300.00 Planning Liquor License Licensing Club On-Sale Intoxicating $100.00 Licensing On-Sale Intoxicating $1,500.00 Licensing Off-Sale Intoxicating $200.00 Licensing Off-Sale Non-Intoxicating $150.00 Licensing On-Sale Intoxicating- 2nd Building $750.00 Licensing On-Sale Non-Intoxicating $100.00 Licensing Investigation $350.00 Licensing On-Sale Sunday Intoxicating $200.00 Licensing Temporary Intoxicating $25.00 Licensing Wine $300.00 Licensing Lot Line Adjustment $325.00 None Planning Manufactured Home Parks Planning Move home out of the city $200.00 Plus Surcharge (State Mandated) Building Move home into the city $200.00 Plus Surcharge (State Mandated) Building City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule 2017 4 APPLICATION/FEE/PERMIT TYPE 2017 FEE ESCROW OR ADDITIONAL CHARGE DEPARTMENT Annual License for retail sales of consumer fireworks $100.00 Massage Therapy Premises License Licensing Application Fee $100.00 Fee includes one Therapist Licensing Investigation Fee $100.00 Licensing Massage Therapy Practitioner License Licensing Application Fee $50.00 Licensing Investigation Fee $25.00 Licensing Massage Therapy Premises License Renewal $50.00 Fee includes one Therapist Licensing Massage Therapy Practitioner License Renewal $25.00 Licensing Massage Therapy License Amendment $25.00 Licensing Minor Subdivision $525.00 $1,000.00 escrow Planning Moving House or Primary Structure into City $520.00 Plus security w/amount to be determined by the City w/recommendation from building official Administration Moving Accessory Structure into City $305.00 Plus security to be determined by the City w/recommendation from building official Administration Other Inspections and Fees Building Inspection outside of business hours $100.00 (2 Hr. Min.) Building Re-inspection Fees Assessed $50.00 per hour Building Inspections with no fee assigned $50.00 per hour Building Construction Escrow $2,000.00 Or determined by Building Official Building Construction Escrow Administrative Fee $100.00 Building Cancelled or Refunded Permits $25.00 Building Work without Permit see notes Investigative fee to equal permit fee Building Duplicate Inspection Card $25.00 Building Park Dedication Planning Residential - Up to three lots $3,600.00 per lot Four or more lots per §153.14 Planning Commercial $4,500.00 per acre Planning Parking Lots Planning New Commercial $175.00 $500 Fee Escrow. Security $1,500.00 per acre with $1,500.00 minimum. Planning Existing Commercial $200.00 Planning Platting Sketch Plan Review (Subdivision) $500.00 $3,500.00 Fee Escrow Planning Preliminary Plat (Subdivision) $1,850.00 $10,000.00 Fee Escrow Planning Final Plat (Subdivision) $1,250.00 $8,000.00 Fee Escrow Planning $5,000.00 (<100 units) Fee Escrow City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule 2017 5 APPLICATION/FEE/PERMIT TYPE 2017 FEE ESCROW OR ADDITIONAL CHARGE DEPARTMENT $7,500.00 (>100 units) Fee Escrow Preliminary Plat Review (OP Development) $1,850.00 $5,000.00 (<100 units) Fee Escrow Planning $7,500.00 (>100 units) Fee Escrow Final Plat (OP Development) $1,250.00 $5,000.00 (<100 units) Fee Escrow Planning $7,500.00 (>100 units) Fee Escrow (City will retain escrows to reimburse review costs for each stage of development review) Planning Planned Unit Development Planning General Concept Plan $1,250.00 $7,500.00 Fee Escrow (Waive Subdivision Escrow) Planning Development Stage Plan $1,850.00 $10,000.00 Fee Escrow (Waive Subdivision Escrow) Planning Final Plan $1,250.00 $8,000.00 Fee Escrow (Waive Subdivision Escrow) Planning (City will retain escrows to reimburse review costs for each stage of development review) Planning Plumbing Administration Residential $60.00/unit Up to 3 units, max fee $180.00 plus Surcharge (State Mandated) Building Commercial $60.00/unit Up to 3 units or 1.5% of total valuation, whichever is greater. Plus Surcharge (State Mandated) Building Private Roads (Permitted only in AG zone) $150.00 Planning Restrictive Soils and Wetland Restoration Protection and Preservation Permit $800.00 $1,500.00 Fee Escrow Planning Retaining Walls over 4' $150.00 Plus State Surcharge Building Returned Check (NSF) $25.00 Administration Right-of-Way Permit Engineering Annual Registration $200.00 $5,000.00 Security Engineering Excavation Permit $275.00 + $.60/foot Engineering Joint Trench Permit (per lot per utility) $275.00 + $.60/foot Engineering Obstruction Permit $275.00 Engineering Permit Extension $100.00 Engineering Delay Penalty (per calendar day) $25.00 Engineering Roofing Building Residential see notes Based on valuation + state surcharge Building Commercial see notes Based on valuation + state surcharge Building SAC Charge (City) (Sewer Availability Charge) $3,000.00 Per REC Unit: collected at time of plat for new lot. This fee may be deferred through special assessment for parcels with existing structures. Engineering City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule 2017 6 APPLICATION/FEE/PERMIT TYPE 2017 FEE ESCROW OR ADDITIONAL CHARGE DEPARTMENT SAC Charge (Met Council) (Sewer Availability Charge) $2,485.00 Per REC Unit: $2,485.00 to Met Council at time of connection. Engineering Sewer Connection Charge $1,000.00 Per REC Unit collected at time of plat for new lot. This fee may be deferred through special assessment for parcels with existing structures. Engineering Sewer Lateral Benefit Charge $11,000.00 Per REC Unit connecting to a Trunk Sewer Main and that has never been assessed Engineering Sewer Base Charge – Residential – Non 201 Off Site $52.50 per quarter Allowance of 10,000 gallons (10 Units) per quarter Administration Sewer Rate $4.50/1,000 Gal Administration 201 Off-Site Maintenance Fee $75.00/unit/quarter Administration Real Estate Searches $15.00/Search For special assessment or utility search Administration Siding Building Residential see notes Based on valuation + state surcharge Building Commercial see notes Based on valuation + state surcharge Building Signs - Permanent $180.00 Planning Signs - Temporary $75.00 Planning Temporary Renewal $25.00 Planning Re-inspection Fee $25.00 Planning Special Event Permit $75.00 City must be listed as additional insured Planning Fire Suppression Permit 2% of value plus state surcharge; Minimum $100 Building Sprinkler System (Re-Inspection Fee) $50.00 Building Surface Water Administration Residential $50.00 Administration Non-Residential (Commercial etc.) $50.00 Utility rate factor per code Administration Review Fee $125.00 $75 Review/$50 Storm Water Fund Administration Vacations (Streets or Easements) Planning Easements $515.00 $500.00 Fee Escrow Planning Streets $515.00 $500.00 Fee Escrow Planning Variance $750.00 $500.00 Fee Escrow Planning Shoreland Variance $1,500.00 $500.00 Fee Escrow Planning Water Availability Charge (WAC) $3,000.00 Per REC Unit; collected at time of plat for new lot. This fee may be deferred through special assessment for parcels with existing structures. Engineering Water Connection Charge $1,000.00 Per REC Unit, collected at time of plat for new lot. This fee may be deferred through special assessment for parcels with existing structures. Administration City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule 2017 7 APPLICATION/FEE/PERMIT TYPE 2017 FEE ESCROW OR ADDITIONAL CHARGE DEPARTMENT Water Equipment/Set up Administration Meter (3/4" or less) $350.00 Additional fees apply to larger sized meters Administration Driveway Curb Stop Lid $100.00 Administration Disconnect Service $80.00 Administration Reconnect Service $80.00 Administration Water Lateral Benefit Charge $5,800.00 Per REC Unit connecting to a Trunk Water Main and that has never been assessed Engineering Water Usage Administration Residential - Quarterly Rate $20.00 Base Administration Residential - Plus Rate per 1,000 Gallons Administration Plus Rate for 0-15,000 Gallons $2.00 Administration Plus Rate for 15,001-30,000 Gallons $2.40 Administration Plus Rate for 30,001-50,000 Gallons $2.88 Administration Plus Rate for 50,001-80,000 Gallons $3.46 Administration Plus Rate for 80,001 + Gallons $4.15 Administration Water Usage Administration Commercial - Quarterly Rate $25.00 Base Administration Commercial - Plus Rate Per 1,000 Gallons Administration Plus Rate for 0 - 15,000 Gallons $3.11 Administration Plus Rate for 15,001 - 30,000 Gallons $3.26 Administration Plus Rate for 30,001 - 50,000 Gallon $3.77 Administration Plus Rate for 50,001 - 80,000 Gallons $5.00 Administration Plus Rate for 80,001 + Gallons $6.63 Administration Water Usage For metered non-irrigation (domestic) consumption Administration Hotel / Motel - Quarterly Rate $25.00 Base Administration Hotel / Motel - Plus Rate Per 1,000 Gallons Administration Plus Rate for 0 -30,000 Gallons $3.11 Administration Plus Rate for 30,001 - 50,000 Gallons $3.26 Administration Plus Rate for 50,001 + Gallons $4.00 Administration Water Usage Delinquent Accounts Administration Regular 6% per quarter Plus $25.00 or 8%, whichever is greater, if certified to County for collection with taxes Administration City of Lake Elmo Fee Schedule 2017 8 APPLICATION/FEE/PERMIT TYPE 2017 FEE ESCROW OR ADDITIONAL CHARGE DEPARTMENT Storm Water 10% per year Plus $25.00 or 8%, whichever is greater, if certified to County for collection with taxes Administration Bulk Water Purchase Administration Water from Hydrant $100.00 minimum Plus $3.26/additional 1,000 gallons Administration Sod Installation (New Construction) $100.00 minimum Plus $3.26 per 1,000 gallons. Good for up to 45 days from sod install. Residents must contact the City in advance. Administration Swimming Pool Fill $100.00 minimum Plus $3.26 per 1,000 gallons. Good for up to 45 days from sod ins Administration Wind Generator $850.00 $2,000.00 Fee Escrow Planning Wireless Communication Permit $500.00 $6,000.00 Fee Escrow Planning Zoning Amendment (Text or Map) $1,245.00 $2,500.00 Escrow Planning Zoning Certification Letter $25.00 Planning Zoning Permit - Certificate of Zoning Compliance Planning Accessory Structures < 200 SF $75.00 Planning Fence (less than 6') $75.00 Planning Swimming Pool $75.00 Planning Other $75.00 Definition of Terms * Fee Escrow: City will maintain a fee escrow to cover all City review costs. Application fees include all professional fees and expenses incurred by the City. ** Security: City will retain a security escrow to ensure completion of work as directed by the approved permit/application and compliance with the State Building Code and the City of Lake Elmo Municipal Code. Approved by CC 6.20.17; effective 7.1.17 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 16 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Shoreland Variance Request to Allow Expansion of an Existing Non-Conforming Structure Which Does Not Meet Minimum Structure Setback from Ordinary High Water Level and Maximum Impervious Surface Standards - 9359 Jane Road North REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: The City has received application from Scott and Julie Drommerhausen of 9359 Jane Road North for variances to allow expansion of a non-conforming structure which does not meet the required minimum structure setback from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) and maximum impervious surface standards of the City’s shoreland district. ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION: The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing and make recommendation on the above-mentioned variance requests. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Applicant: Scott and Julie Drommerhausen Property Owners: Scott and Julie Drommerhausen Location: 9359 Jane Road North, PID# 10.029.21.24.0006, Lots 9 & 10, Berschen’s Shores, Washington County, Minnesota Request: Variance from Shoreland Standards – Expansion of a Non-Conforming Structure and Maximum Impervious Surface Existing Land Use: Single-Family Detached Residential Dwelling Surrounding Land Use: Surrounded by other single-family detached residential dwellings and abuts Lake Jane on the westerly side of the property Existing Zoning: Rural Single Family/Shoreland Overlay District Comprehensive Plan: Rural Single Family History: A number of variance requests have been made for this property in the past: 1987: Permit for restoration and remodeling of home and install riprap to control shoreline erosion and floodproof home by raising home above 100 year issued by Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Permit included a letter clarifying that a deck cannot be constructed so that it encroaches toward Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL). 1988: Permit transferred to new owner. New garage and lateral expansions not part of review for variance to raise home. City Council 6/20/2017 Regular Agenda Item # 17 Page 2 1988: Application for variance to build double garage, denied by City Council. 1989: Numerous MNDNR permit violations documented regarding unpermitted deck. 1990: Application for variance to build a deck not meeting OHWL setbacks. First approved by City Council, then appealed, then denied. 1991: Application for variance for emergency exit to lake. 1991: Agreement reached with MNDNR for four foot deck on side of the house, provided no more variances are allowed for any additional construction or development of any type. 2001: Valley Branch Watershed District permit for fill and grading to restore lot and raise above flood plain. Variance Appeal: June 5, 2001 (denied June 19, 2001) Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 5/9/2017 60 Day Deadline – 7/8/2017 Extension Letter Mailed – N/A 120 Day Deadline – N/A Applicable Regulations: Article V – Zoning Administration and Enforcement Article XIX – Shoreland Management Overlay District Request Details. The applicant is proposing to construct an addition to his home which will allow all bedrooms to be on one level. There currently exists an 18’ X 32’ (576 square feet) deck on the southeast side of the house that will be removed, along with a tree as indicated in the attached survey. This will be replaced by an approximate 24’ X 26’ (685 square feet) addition. The deck was allowed to be built through the variance process, explained in further detail later in this report. Staff cannot find the Resolution granting this variance; the meeting minutes do not indicate that a Resolution was passed. These minutes are attached to this report. The proposed addition is setback 45.4 feet from the OHWL, and the required setback within the City’s shoreland district for an unsewered property on Lake Jane, a Recreational Development lake, is 100 feet. The proposed addition is also within the Shore Impact Zone, which is defined as the land located between the OHWL of a public water and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50% of the structure setback (50 foot setback from the OHWL of a Recreational Development lake). Additionally, the lot currently has an impervious surface percentage of 26.9%. The proposed addition increases the lot’s impervious surface to 29.7%. The maximum impervious surface allowed within the City’s shoreland district per the Zoning Code is 15% for unsewered properties within a Recreational Development shoreland. City Council 6/20/2017 Regular Agenda Item # 17 Page 3 Lot Details. The property meets all setbacks for the Rural Single Family Zoning district but does not meet the minimum lot size requirement of 1.5 acres. • Area: 23,025 square feet (0.52 acres) • Front yard setback: 41.5 feet • Proposed front yard setback: 39.8 feet (30 feet required) • Side yard setback (west): 13.7 feet (10 feet required) • Existing side yard setback (east): Approximately 96 feet (10 feet required) Shore Impact Zone 100’ Required Structure Setback City Council 6/20/2017 Regular Agenda Item # 17 Page 4 • Proposed side yard setback (east): Approximately 72 feet (10 feet required) • Proposed septic setbacks: 17.2 from septic equipment and 20.6 feet from drainfield (10 and 20 feet required, respectively) • Septic Permit Needs. The proposed addition will allow for all bedrooms to be on one level, but current downstairs bedrooms will be converted to living space and therefore no septic permit or inspection is required. Nonconformities within a Shoreland. The City’s Shoreland Ordinance states that all additions or expansions to the outside dimensions of an existing nonconforming structure must meet the setback, height, and other requirements of the Shoreland Ordinance. Any deviation from these requirements must be authorized by a variance. There is an additional provision that states that where structures exist on the adjoining lots on both sides of a proposed building site, structure setbacks may be altered without a variance to conform to the adjoining setbacks from the OHWL, provided the proposed structure is not located in a shore impact zone or bluff impact zone. It should be noted that this provision in the ordinance was not drastically changed in the 2017 amendment to the Shoreland Section of the Zoning Code, as previously an improvement to a riparian substandard structure was allowed to extend laterally by a conditional use permit (as opposed to a variance), provided it was in compliance with all other dimensional standard. The proposed addition is within a shore impact zone, and so this provision may not be applied towards this expansion. As stated later on in this report, two properties adjacent to the subject property were granted variances to allow structures to be located nearer to the OHWL than is permitted by the Shoreland Ordinance. Both of these structures are setback around 40 feet from the OHWL. Previous Variance Requests. In 1989, the Council denied a variance request by a previous property owner of the subject property. The variance request was for a deck that would further extend in to the OHWL than the home currently was. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) recommended denying this request based on lack of hardship. The Council had originally approved the variance, and then received an appeal from the MNDNR and denied the requested variance for a deck based on the following findings of fact: 1. The applicant had no hardship. 2. The applicant had a reasonable use of the property without a deck. 3. There were alternative locations for the deck which would not increase the substandard setback of the house. 4. The MNDNR stated in a permit issued to allow shoreland fill that no deck would be allowed. Later, the property owner at the time had negotiated an agreement with the MNDNR that a portion of the deck could be constructed if this property owner at that time would never again seek an OHWL setback variance for this parcel. Based on this agreement, the City Council approved the variance, and a deck was constructed. This is the deck that now exists on the lake/southeast side of the home. In 2001, that same property owner requested another variance to enlarge his home and again requested 550 more square feet of decking that further extended in to the OHWL (22 feet from the OHWL). The Planning Commission had approved the variance request originally, but then the Board of Adjustment and Appeals received a notice of appeal to the Planning Commission’s decision from then City Administrator Kueffner. The basis for that appeal was insufficient findings by the Planning Commission to support the variance approval decision. The request was denied based on the following findings (in summary): 1. The literal interpretation of the zoning ordinance would not deprive the applicant of reasonable rights. 2. The degree of OHWL departure was more than what was previously granted. 3. No hardship had been demonstrated. 4. Since no hardship was demonstrated, granting the variance would not alleviate the hardship. 5. The area of OHWL was artificially created from lakebed in years past. City Council 6/20/2017 Regular Agenda Item # 17 Page 5 It should be noted that this (2017) variance request differs from the previously-denied variance requests in that the applicant is requesting an addition to the home that does not further encroach on the required setback from the OHWL than the existing home already does. Adjacent Property Variances. The City granted similar variances to adjacent properties. This should not be a basis for granting an additional variance for the subject property, but it does show that the granting of the variance may not change the character of the surrounding area. • In 2000, 9369 Jane Road North was granted a variance to place a structure 44.2 feet to 52.7 feet from the OHWL and to allow a lot width of 103.34 feet. • 9287 Jane Road North was granted a variance, also in the year 2000, to permit two additions to the primary structure consisting of a 16’ X 26’ garage addition to the north side; and a 14’ X 24’ addition to the south side; both additions less than the required 100 foot setback from the OHWL. Engineering Review. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed variance and has indicated that he does not readily see any engineering matters to comment on regarding this application. It is not one of the original properties connected to the City 201 system, but it is adjacent to a property that is connected to a city system. MNDNR Review. The Applicant’s variance requests were sent to the MNDNR for review. The City received the MNDNR’s comments on June 9, 2017. The MNDNR recommended denial of the variance request based on its proposed increase in impervious surface. The applicant is proposing an impervious surface coverage of almost twice that allowed within this shoreland district for an unsewered property, and the MNDNR stated that there is a strong correlation between increased impervious surface coverage and water quality degradation. PLANNING COMMISSION/PUBLIC HEARING: The Planning Commission held a public hearing and made recommendation on the proposed variance requests at its June 12, 2017 meeting. Prior to the public hearing, a resident of 9417 Jane Court North inquired about the variance request, raising no concern. As previously noted, the MNDNR was sent the public hearing notice and recommended denial or, at the very least, conditioning approval on mitigation of the increase in impervious surface. No one from the public spoke at the public hearing. The Planning Commission recommended the following amendments (in red, underlined text) be made to the Staff- recommended conditions of approval: 1) The Applicant shall secure any required permits and plan approvals from the City and other applicable jurisdictions. 2) The Applicant shall direct appropriate rain gutter discharges into a rain garden (infiltration basin designed to capture and infiltrate runoff) designed by a professional engineer or landscape architect and installed under their direction. The rain garden should mitigate the increased impervious surface of the entire addition to the home (685 square feet). 3) The Applicant shall identify an area for a secondary (backup) drainfield, in the event the existing drainfield fails. If it is identified that a mound system constructed on top of the existing drainfield is an option, this would be an acceptable alternative. The rain garden installed to mitigate the increased impervious surface shall not encroach the secondary (backup) drainfield area. City Council 6/20/2017 Regular Agenda Item # 17 Page 6 The Commission made a motion to recommend approval of the proposed variance requests to allow construction of the proposed addition to the home, with amended conditions of approval, with an affirmative vote of 5-0. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS: Recommended findings are outlined in the attached Resolution 2017-062. FISCAL IMPACT: None. OPTIONS: The Council may: • Approve Resolution 2017-062, approving the variance requests, subject to conditions of approval as recommended by Staff and the Planning Commission. • Amend conditions of approval as recommended by Staff and the Planning Commission and approve Resolution 2017-062, approving the variance requests, subject to amended conditions of approval. • Deny the variance requests. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that Council adopt Resolution 2017-062, approving shoreland requests by Scott and Julie Drommerhausen of 9359 Jane Road North for expansion of a non- conforming structure not meeting the minimum structure setback from the Ordinary High Water Level and maximum impervious surface standards for the property located at 9359 Jane Road North, subject to recommended conditions of approval. The suggestion motion for the recommended action is as follows: “Move to adopt Resolution 2017-062, approving requests for shoreland variances from the minimum structure setback from the Ordinary High Water Level and maximum impervious surface standards, subject to conditions of approval as recommended by Staff and the Planning Commission.” ATTACHMENTS: • Application with narrative and survey • Minutes approving the 1991 variance • Past agreement with MNDNR • 2001 Resolution denying variance request • MNDNR review letter Resolution 2017-062 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2017-062 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM MINIMUM STRUCTURE SETBACK FROM ORDINARY HIGH WATER LEVEL AND MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE STANDARDS OF THE CITY’S SHORELAND DISTRICT WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Scott and Julie Drommerhausen, 9359 Jane Road North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (“Applicant”), has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (the “City”) for variances to allow construction of an approximately 685 square-foot addition, which will replace an existing deck, to the east of an existing home currently setback 45.4 feet from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) and maximum impervious surface standards to increase the current impervious surface percentage from 26.9% to 29.7%. WHEREAS, notice has been published, mailed and posted pursuant to the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.109; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on said matter on June 12, 2017; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendation to the City Council as part of a Staff Memorandum dated June 12, 2017; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered said matter at its June 20, 2017 meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1) That the procedures for obtaining said Variance are found in the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.109. 2) That all the submission requirements of said Section 154.109 have been met by the Applicant. 3) That the proposed variance includes the following components: Resolution 2017-062 2 a) A variance to allow for an addition to an existing single-family detached home that does not meet the minimum setback from the OHWL or maximum impervious surface requirements. 4) That the Variance will be located on property legally described as follows: Lots 9 & 10, Berschen’s Shores, Washington County, Minnesota. PID# 10.029.21.24.0006. 5) That the strict enforcement of Zoning Ordinance would cause practical difficulties and that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. Specific findings: The subject property was platted prior to adjustment of the Ordinary High Water of Lake Jane and the adoption of Shoreland standards by the City, and therefore the lot is much wider than it is long. Because of the shape of the lot, the Applicant is proposing to expand the home laterally rather than further encroaching on the current setback of the Ordinary High Water Level. Additionally, the addition will not expand much more of the footprint of the principal structure, as a slightly smaller deck that will be torn down exists where the addition is being proposed. Additionally, although the City’s ordinance does not treat decks as impervious, many do. If decks were considered impervious, the addition would only add 109 square feet of impervious surface, or an increase of about 0.46%. 6) That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Specific findings: The property is unique in that it is much wider than it is long, and the Applicant was not involved in the platting process of this property nor the adoption of the City’s shoreland standards. The Applicant also was not involved in any previous variance requests for the subject property. 7) That the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. Specific findings: The proposed addition is in place of an existing deck and only slightly increases the footprint of the existing principal structure, including the existing deck, by 109 square feet. Additionally, the proposed addition does not further encroach on the existing setback of the principal structure from the OHWL of the property and has a setback from the OHWL similar to those of adjacent principal structures. 8) That the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to properties adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Specific findings: The proposed addition will not further encroach on the setback of the existing structure from the OHWL and therefore will not further impair lake views of neighboring properties and will not impair an adequate supply of light and air. It also will not increase congestion of public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Adjacent properties, including the subject property, have been granted similar variances and are setback a similar distance from the OHWL. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Resolution 2017-062 3 Based on the foregoing, the Applicant’s application for a Variance is granted, subject to the following conditions. 1) The Applicant shall secure any required permits and plan approvals from the City and other applicable jurisdictions. 2) The Applicant shall direct appropriate rain gutter discharges into a rain garden (infiltration basin designed to capture and infiltrate runoff) designed by a professional engineer or landscape architect and installed under their direction. The rain garden should mitigate the increased impervious surface of the entire addition to the home (685 square feet). 3) The Applicant shall identify an area for a secondary (backup) drainfield. If it is identified that a mound system constructed on top of the existing drainfield is an option, this would be an acceptable alternative. The rain garden installed to mitigate the increased impervious surface shall not encroach the secondary (backup) drainfield area. Passed and duly adopted this 20th day of June 2017 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. __________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk J a n e R o a d L a k e J a n e S1Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345 Phone (952) 474-7964 17917 Highway 7 Web: www.advsur.com SHEET 1 OF 1 40200 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 9 and 10, BERSCHEN'S SHORES, Washington County, Minnesota. SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS: 1.Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the legal description listed above. The scope of our services does not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter. Please check the legal description with your records or consult with competent legal counsel, if necessary, to make sure that it is correct and that any matters of record, such as easements, that you wish to be included on the survey have been shown. 2.Showing the location of observed existing improvements we deem necessary for the survey. 3.Setting survey markers or verifying existing survey markers to establish the corners of the property. 4.Showing and tabulating impervious surface coverage of the lot for your review and for the review of such governmental agencies that may have jurisdiction over these requirements to verify they are correctly shown before proceeding with construction. 5.Showing elevations on the site at selected locations to give some indication of the topography of the site. We have also provided a benchmark for your use in determining elevations for construction on this site. The elevations shown relate only to the benchmark provided on this survey. Use that benchmark and check at least one other feature shown on the survey when determining other elevations for use on this site or before beginning construction. 6.Note that all building dimensions and building tie dimensions to the property lines, are taken from the siding and or stucco of the building. 7.While we show a proposed location for this home or addition, we are not as familiar with your proposed plans as you, your architect, or the builder are. Review our proposed location of the improvements and proposed yard grades carefully to verify that they match your plans before construction begins. Also, we are not as familiar with local codes and minimum requirements as the local building and zoning officials in this community are. Be sure to show this survey to said officials, or any other officials that may have jurisdiction over the proposed improvements and obtain their approvals before beginning construction or planning improvements to the property. 8.While we show the building setback lines per the City of Lake Elmo web site, we suggest you show this survey to the appropriate city officials to be sure that the setback lines are shown correctly. Do this BEFORE you use this survey to design anything for this site. STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS: "භ" Denotes iron survey marker, set, unless otherwise noted. EXISTING HARDCOVER House 1,953 Sq. Ft. Existing Decks 628 Sq. Ft. Shed 176 Sq. Ft. Concrete Surfaces 3,197 Sq. Ft. Ret. Walls 237 Sq. Ft. TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER 6,191 Sq. Ft. AREA OF LOT TO OHW 23,025 Sq. Ft. PERCENTAGE OF HARDCOVER TO LOT 26.9% # LICENSE NO. DATE MAY 4, 2017 MAY 4, 2017# 52716 Joshua S. Rinke MAY 3, 2017DATE SURVEYED: SURVEYED BY ADVANCED SURVEYING. & ENG., CO. GRADING & EROSION CONTROL NOTES: BEFORE DEMOLITION AND GRADING BEGIN x Install silt fence/bio roll around the perimeter of the construction area. x Sediment control measures must remain in place until final stabilization has been established and then shall be removed. Sediment controls may be removed to accommodate short term construction activity but must be replaced before the next rain. x A temporary rock construction entrance shall be established at each access point to the site and a 6 inch layer of 1 to 2 inch rock extending at least 50 feet from the street into the site and shall be underlain with permeable geotextile fabric. The entrance shall be maintained during construction by top dressing or washing to prevent tracking or flow of sediments onto public streets, walks or alleys. Potential entrances that are not so protected shall be closed by fencing to prevent unprotected exit from the site. DURING CONSTRUCTION: x When dirt stockpiles have been created, a double row of silt fence shall be placed to prevent escape of sediment laden runoff and if the piles or other disturbed areas are to remain in place for more than 14 days, they shall be seeded with Minnesota Department of Transportation Seed Mixture 22-111 at 100 lb/acre followed by covering with spray mulch. x A dumpster shall be placed on the site for prompt disposal of construction debris. These dumpsters shall be serviced regularly to prevent overflowing and blowing onto adjacent properties. Disposal of solid wastes from the site shall in accordance with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements. x A separate container shall be placed for disposal of hazardous waste. Hazardous wastes shall be disposed of in accordance with MPCA requirements. x Concrete truck washout shall be in the plastic lined ditch and dispose of washings as solid waste. x Sediment control devices shall be regularly inspected and after major rainfall events and shall be cleaned and repaired as necessary to provide downstream protection. x Streets and other public ways shall be inspected daily and if litter or soils has been deposited it shall promptly be removed. x If necessary, vehicles, that have mud on their wheels, shall be cleaned before exiting the site in the rock entrance areas x Moisture shall be applied to disturbed areas to control dust as needed. x Portable toilet facilities shall be placed on site for use by workers and shall be properly maintained. x If it becomes necessary to pump the excavation during construction, pump discharge shall be into the stockpile areas so that the double silt fence around these areas can filter the water before it leaves the site. x Temporary erosion control shall be installed no later than 14 days after the site is first disturbed and shall consist of broadcast seeding with Minnesota Department of Transportation Seed Mixture 22-111 at 100 lb/acre followed by covering with spray mulch. SITE WORK COMPLETION: x :KHQILQDOJUDGLQJKDVEHHQFRPSOHWHGEXWEHIRUHSODFHPHQWRIVHHGRUVRGDQ³DVEXLOW´ survey shall be done per City of Lake Elmo requirements to insure that grading was properly done. x When any remedial grading has been completed, sod or seeding shall be completed including any erosion control blankets for steep areas. x When turf is established, silt fence and inlet protection and other erosion control devices shall be disposed of and adjacent streets, alleys and walks shall be cleaned as needed to deliver a site that is erosion resistant and clean. PROPOSED HARDCOVER House 2,609 Sq. Ft. Existing Decks 628 Sq. Ft. Shed 176 Sq. Ft. Concrete Surfaces 3,197 Sq. Ft. Ret. Walls 237 Sq. Ft. TOTAL PROPOSED HARDCOVER 6,847 Sq. Ft. AREA OF LOT TO OHW 23,025 Sq. Ft. PERCENTAGE OF HARDCOVER TO LOT 29.7% CENTRAL REGION 1200 WARNER ROAD SAINT PAUL, MN 55106 651-259-5800 6/9/2017 Emily Becker Lake Elmo City Planner 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 RE: Shoreland Variance Request at 9359 Jane Road North, Lake Elmo (Lake Jane - 82010400) Emily – The primary goal of limiting impervious surfaces within shoreland districts is to reduce the amount of runoff directed into Minnesota waters. Runoff from impervious surfaces travels over the land and carries pollutants such as nutrients, sediment, bacteria, pesticides, heavy metals, and organic wastes. Studies have consistently shown a strong, direct connection between the percentage of impervious surface in a watershed and water quality degradation. As impervious surface area expands, so does the volume of runoff, phosphorus, and sediment entering waters, causing nuisance algae blooms, reducing public enjoyment, and harming aquatic plants and animals. Please use the attached MNDNR guidance on variances to maximum impervious surface in shoreland districts when evaluating this variance request against statutory criteria and developing a findings of fact. If findings support granting the variance, impacts to Lake Jane should be considered in developing appropriate conditions to mitigate those impacts. This project would increase impervious surface from 26.9% to 29.7%, where the maximum impervious surface allowed is 15% for unsewered properties within the shoreland district of a recreational development lake. MNDNR recommends denial of this variance request because this additional increase in impervious surface would result in a percent impervious that would be nearly double the City’s standard and because the proposed addition is within the shore impact zone (SIZ). If a variance is granted for this project, MNDNR recommends that the City of Lake Elmo include conditions on the variance that mitigate for this increase in percent impervious surface. Examples of appropriate mitigation conditions include: • Modify construction design (to minimize impact). • Direct rain gutter discharges into a rain garden (infiltration basin designed to capture and infiltrate runoff). • Restore shoreline vegetation to natural state (to intercept and filter runoff coming from the structure). Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this variance request. Sincerely, Jenifer Sorensen MNDNR, East Metro Area Hydrologist 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 651-259-5754 | jenifer.sorensen@state.mn.us Page 1 Page 1 of 2 Variance Guidance Series – ISC, Updated 10/10/2012 Shoreland & Floodplain Variance Guidance Series This is one of a series of examples developed as guidance for considering variance requests along lakes and rivers. Consult your local shoreland and floodplain ordinances. Why are impervious surface coverage limits important? In the protection of water quality, the management of rainwater on individual lots is one of our most important tasks. Rainwater that does not infiltrate into the ground or evaporate runs downhill to lakes, wetlands, or rivers. As impervious surface coverage increases, the rate and amount of runoff and pollutants entering public waters increases. When runoff from impervious surface coverage is not addressed, pollution increases and the diversity of aquatic life is reduced. Local governments have limited discretion to deviate from - or grant a variance to - impervious surface limits. They may do so only if all of the variance criteria established in state statutes and their local ordinances are met. In evaluating such requests, local governments must examine the facts, determine whether all statutory and local criteria are satisfied, and develop findings to support the decision. If granted, local governments may impose conditions to protect resources. An example impervious surface variance request, with considerations, is provided below. Example Impervious Surface Variance Request A property owner wishes to build a large lakehome on a conforming lot. The lake lot includes a private driveway with a spur to the neighbor’s lot, which was placed to avoid an adjacent wetland. The building plans for the new construction plus the existing private road spur to the neighbor’s property would exceed the impervious surface limit provision in the local ordinance. Considerations for Findings A good record and findings help keep communities out of lawsuits and help them prevail if they find themselves in one. In evaluating the facts and developing findings for this variance request, all of the following statutory criteria must be satisfied, in addition to any local criteria:  Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? Considering a variance request is a balancing test that requires weighing the need of an individual property owner against the purposes of the shoreland regulations for protecting the public interest. These purposes are derived from Minnesota Shoreland Rules, which established impervious surface caps to prevent excessive runoff from constructed surfaces. Such excessive runoff causes erosion, transport of pollutants to public waters thereby degrading water quality. Considerations: Will deviating from the required limit on this property undermine the purposes and intent of the ordinance? Why or why not? Is it possible to mitigate the consequences of additional impervious surface on-site such that additional runoff will not be produced? Would this mitigation be in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? Why or why not?  Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan? The local comprehensive plan establishes a framework for achieving a community’s vision for the future. Most plans contain goals and policies for protecting natural resources and shorelands, as well as maps that identify areas of high risk or with high ecological value where development should be avoided. The variance request must be considered with these goals and policies in mind. Maps should be consulted to determine if the property is within any areas identified for protection. Considerations: Which goals and policies apply? Is allowing additional impervious surface and runoff consistent with these goals and policies? Why or why not? Impervious Surfaces Page 2 of 2 Variance Guidance Series – ISC, Updated 10/10/2012  Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner? Unique circumstances relate to physical characteristics of the land - such as lot dimensions, steep slopes, poor soils, wetlands, and trees. These do not include physical limitations or personal circumstances created by the property owner that prevent compliance with the impervious surface provision, such as size of home or design preferences. Consider what distinguishes this property from other shoreland properties to justify why the applicant should be able to deviate from the provision when others must comply. Considerations: What physical characteristics are unique to this property that prevent compliance with the requirement? Were any difficulties in meeting the impervious surface limit created by some action of the applicant? Has the applicant demonstrated no other feasible alternatives exist that would not require a variance, such as increasing the setback to reduce driveway length or reducing the lakehome’s footprint?  Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? Consider the size of the proposed structure, the extent of encroachment, and how it relates to the shoreline and hydrology of the riparian area. A large addition located close to the shoreline can detract from the natural appearance and character of the lake and its riparian areas and degrade water quality by altering topography, drainage, and vegetation in the riparian area, negatively affecting recreational, natural, and economic values. Considerations: Does the variance provide minimal relief or a substantial deviation from the required setback? Does it affect the natural appearance of the shore from the lake? Does it affect the hydrology of the riparian area?  Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? Examine the reasons that the variance is requested and evaluate them in light of the purposes of the local shoreland ordinance and the public water resource at stake. Since the impervious surface cap is generally intended to reduce runoff to public waters, it may not be appropriate to allow large areas of constructed surfaces so close to the water. Considerations: Has the applicant demonstrated that the proposed construction is reasonable in this location given the sensitive nature of the area and the purposes of the regulations? Why or why not? Note: The last three criteria address practical difficulties. Economic considerations alone cannot create practical difficulties Range of Outcomes Based on the findings, several outcomes can occur:  If the applicant fails to prove that all criteria above are met, then the variance must be denied. For example, the local government could find that the building plans itself created the circumstances necessary for a variance rather than the any unique physical characteristics of the property.  If the applicant demonstrates that all criteria are met, then the variance may be granted. For example, the local government could find that the construction footprint is reasonable, the circumstances are unique given the adjacent wetland, and the minor deviation in the impervious surface coverage does not alter the hydrology of the area (as determined through runoff calculations).  If the variance is granted and the impervious surface in any way alters the hydrology of the area, then conditions may be imposed, such as to increase the structure setback from the lake by 15 feet to reduce the extent of the driveway and minimize the amount of impervious surface coverage over the limit. Conditions on Variances If findings support granting the variance, consideration must be given to the impacts on the public water and the riparian area and appropriate conditions to mitigate them. Conditions must be directly related and roughly proportional to the impacts created by the variance. Several examples are provided below:  Modify construction designs (to minimize impact);  Use permeable pavement systems for walkways, driveways, or parking areas (to reduce effective impervious surface area and infiltrate runoff);  Direct rain gutter discharges away from the public waters and into infiltration basins (to reduce connected impervious coverage to allow additional areas for infiltration);  Preserve and restore shoreline vegetation in a natural state (to intercept and filter runoff coming from structures and driveways); and/or  Increase setbacks from the ordinary high water level (to provide infiltration near public waters). More information at: www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/shoreland/variances.html 1 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 17 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plans REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: CM Properties 94, LP has submitted application to the City for a Preliminary and Final Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plans for Outlot A of Lakewood Crossing 1st Addition. The proposal will subdivide the existing 3.82 acre parcel in to three separate parcels. These parcels will include a full service restaurant with outdoor patio; quick service restaurants with drive-throughs; and other retail activities. Applicant and Property Owner: CM Properties 94, LP c/o MFL Properties Corp., 3460 Washington Dr., Ste 100 Eagan, MN 55122 Location: Southwest of Kwik Trip Gas Station (9955 Hudson Blvd N), PID# 3402921440015 Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant land, Commercial (C) Comprehensive Plan: Commercial History: The property has been under the ownership of CM Properties 94, LP for over 45 years, and it is the intent that this company will continue to own the property for years to come. Lakewood Crossing Preliminary Plat, Final Plat and Conditional Use Permit for a gasoline station (Kwik Trip) Approval: 7/22/2014 Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition PUD Concept Plan Approval: 3/21/2017 Deadline for Action: Application Complete: 5/30/2017 60 Day Deadline: 7/28/2017 Extension Letter Mailed: N/A 120 Day Deadline: N/A Applicable Regulations: Article XVI – Planned Unit Developments Article XII – Commercial Districts Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council is respectfully being requested to review the proposed Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans and either approve or deny the request. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: 2 PUD and Plat Process. The applicant has submitted application for both Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans concurrently. The applicant received PUD Concept Plan approval by Council on March 21, 2017. Approval of the PUD Concept Plan alone did not afford the developer/applicant any rights but did provide feedback to the applicant regarding the proposed development. Identified PUD Objectives. The PUD process is appropriate for the proposed development to allow flexibility in the location, design, and mix of commercial uses on a single large site. The City should consider whether one or more of the objectives listed in Section 154.751 are met when reviewing requests for approval of planned unit developments. It is of Staff opinion that the following objectives are met with this request: A. Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than conventional approaches. Note: The parcel is an irregularly-shaped parcel and so meeting all of the lot dimension requirements of the Commercial zoning district would be a hardship. F. Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within the development and surrounding land uses. Note: The development will include additional retail and service businesses which will supplement the gas station. PUD Flexibility. The following outlines PUD flexibility the applicant seeks. In summary, the applicant is requesting flexibility from the following zoning standards: • Medical facilities, drive-throughs, and outdoor dining as a permitted, rather than conditional, use. • Minimum lot width • Impervious surface allowance • Parking lot setback • Certain Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual • Certain landscape requirements • Waive off-street loading requirements • Required 20% protected open space within a PUD • Signage Permitted and Conditional Uses. The proposed development will include a full service restaurant with outdoor patio; quick service restaurants with drive-throughs; chiropractic care, and other retail activities. General retail sales and restaurants are permitted uses within the Commercial zoning district, while medical facilities (chiropractic care), drive-through facilities, and outdoor dining are conditional uses. • Conditional Use to Permitted Use. Because the applicant is proposing a Planned Unit Development, the applicant is requesting that uses that would normally be conditional become permitted uses within this development. This is to prevent new tenants from having to go the Conditional Use Permit process. It should be noted that if plans are significantly amended (i.e. an additional drive through is requested after the PUD is approved), the PUD would also need to be amended. If the Commission wishes to recommend that these uses be allowed as permitted, rather than conditional, uses within this PUD, the Commission should thoroughly review the proposal, requesting more information if needed, in order to properly ensure that standards are being met and that the proposed uses will not be detrimental to the development or surrounding area Medical Facilities. The Code mandates that medical facilities have access to an arterial or collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate generated traffic and that two access points are granted. Currently, the site plan only indicates one access. Therefore, this standard is not met. However, it should be noted that the proposed medical facility would be a chiropractic office, which is a less intense use than other medical facilities such as urgent care or an emergency room is, and the two access points would likely not be needed. 3 Drive-Throughs. The applicant had previously proposed four drive-throughs in the Concept PUD Plan. The applicant hired Spack Consulting to perform a Drive-Through Analysis to review information of these different drive-through types to determine whether sufficient stacking was provided. Due to feedback from this report and subsequent discussions regarding potential circulation conflicts, the previously-proposed high volume drive-through located on the east end of the Lot 2 building was eliminated, reducing the number of proposed drive-throughs to three. • Recommendations from Report. Summarily, the drive-through report recommends the following to improve drive-through operations. It is a recommended condition of approval that the Applicant adhere to all recommendations made in this report: o Locate drive-through windows in buildings to maximum vehicle stacking. o Offset median islands and parking lot driving lanes from the drive-throughs between Lots 1 and 2 to avoid driver confusion.  Note: The Applicant has offset the landscape medians to address this comment. o Provide one-way eastbound circulation around the west, south, and east sides of Lots 1 and 2 to avoid unnecessary conflicts with drive-through vehicles at the windows.  Note: The updated Site Plan does not indicate one-way traffic along the south of Lots 1 and 2 nor the east side of Lot 1. It should be noted that these aisles are wide enough by City standards for a 2-way aisle driveway in a parking lot. Lines clearly delineating the two aisles should be provided on the site plan if the City is to allow two-way traffic along these aisles. o Provide appropriate signage and pavement markings for all drive-through lanes to inform drivers of expected operations. A convex mirror may be necessary in select areas to improve sight distance and see other approaching vehicles. • Explanation of Low-Volume and High-Volume Drive-Throughs. Spack included reports that looked at drive-through lane usage of five different land uses in Minnesota: banks, car washes, coffee shops, fast food restaurants, dry cleaners and pharmacies. o Proposed Low-Volume Drive Throughs provide enough storage space for approximately four vehicles before they begin to spill out into the drive-through and block drive aisles. Based on the maximum number of cars observed in queue at any one time in Spack’s report, land uses with low-volume drive-throughs include: car wash, pharmacy, dry cleaner, and sit-down takeaway restaurant. o Proposed High-Volume Drive Throughs provide enough storage space for approximately twelve stacked vehicles. Based on the maximum number of cars observed in queue at any one time in Spack’s report, land uses with high-volume drive-throughs include: fast food restaurant, coffee shop, donut/bakery shop, and bank. o It is a recommended condition of approval that uses utilizing these drive-throughs be limited to those which the drive-through can support. • Adherence to Standards. The Applicant has still not provided enough detail for Staff to analyze if adherence to all standards for restaurants with drive-throughs have been met. It is a recommended condition of approval that the Applicant provide this information. Standard Required Proposed Sec. 154.304: Standards for Food Services Restaurant with Drive- Through 1. Drive-through elements shall not be located between the front façade of the principal building and the street. No service shall be rendered, deliveries made or sales conducted within the required front yard, although tables may be provided for customer use. 2. Site design shall accommodate a 1. The drive-through elements are not outlined. One of the elements appears to be in front yard of Lot 3. 2. This is hard to determine without knowing exact locations of speakers and service windows, however the applicant has provided a report prepared by a traffic consultant which analyzes the site design and has made necessary changes. 3. Canopy detail and other structure detail 4 logical and safe vehicle and pedestrian circulation pattern. Adequate queuing lane space shall be provided, without interfering with on-site parking/circulation. 3. Drive-through canopies and other structures, where present, shall be constructed from the same materials as the primary building, and with a similar level of architectural quality and detailing. 4. Sound from any speakers used on the premises shall not be audible above a level of normal conversation at the boundary of any surrounding residential district or on any residential property. 5. Each food or beverage drive- through business shall place refuse receptacles at all exits. not provided. 4. Unable to determine. 5. Information not provided. Outdoor Dining. The standard set forth in Section 154.554 of the Zoning Code for outdoor dining is that tables cannot block a public sidewalk or other walkway needed for pedestrian circulation. Minimum of 5 ft. of sidewalk must remain open. There is only one small sidewalk in front of the building located on Lot 3 which provides access from the parking lot to the building. Because the exact placement of the tables will likely be up to the occupant of the building, which may change from time to time, this standard has been added as a recommended condition of approval. Lot Dimensions and Bulk Requirements. Generally, the proposed development meets lot dimension and bulk requirement standards. Flexibility is being requested on: • Lot width minimum. The parcel that is being developed is a uniquely-shaped parcel, and so the manner in which the parcel is being subdivided is unique. • Impervious surface for Lot 2. The overall impervious surface of the three parcels averages 75%, which meets the Commercial zoning district’s maximum impervious surface requirement. Lot 2 individually, however, exceeds this maximum requirement at 80%. • Parking setback on Lot 1. The parking lot will cover all three lots, so there is a 0 ft. setback between the three newly-created parcels. Also, the parking lot is connected to a through lane on the east side of the property with an 8.7 ft. setback. Setbacks from the south and west of the parcel are met. Driveway Standards. Flexibility is being requested for the following on driveway standards: • Distance from driveway to side lot line (5 feet required). Lot 3 will share a driveway access with Kwik Trip, to the east of the property, and so will not meet this standard with a 0 ft. setback. Commercial District Design Standards. The following details significant design standards set forth by the City of Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards that have not been met in the proposal. The Commission should consider whether or not flexibility should be allowed for the following standards: • Orientation of buildings. The unique shape of the parcel that is being developed resulted in a unique shape of Lot 3. As a result, the building is oriented according to the shape of the parcel and to accommodate better traffic circulation and proximity to the parking lot. 5 • Landscaped open or gathering spaces. Being that this a small commercial development located in close proximity to the highway that will likely serve quick visits, Staff does not feel it necessary to provide this open space. An outdoor dining area is being proposed, and the restaurants will likely provide adequate seating for guests. • Sidewalks. No sidewalk is provided along Hudson Blvd. However, there are no other sidewalks along Hudson Blvd. to which it could connect. There is an on-road bike lane on Hudson Blvd that will accommodate bikers. • Streetscape Lighting. No lighting is provided along Hudson Blvd. Lighting is provided within the interior of the parking lot. • Fencing of Outdoor Dining Areas. The applicant has not indicated on the site plan where the outdoor dining will be located. • Site furnishings. The manual details that furnishings such as decorative fencing, trash receptacles, planters, bicycle racks, and benches are recommended – design elements from Branding & Theming Study encouraged. The Applicant has indicated that the site will include decorative fencing, lighting, trash enclosures, and benches. • Parking. There is minimal exterior parking lot landscaping and screening provided. Also, the parking lot is located in the front of 2 buildings and exceeds 60% of street frontage. Landscape Requirements. The applicant has amended the landscape plans to comply with some of the deviations from City standards that were outlined during the Concept PUD Plan review. However, there are still standards to which the proposed plans do not adhere. The proposed Landscape Plan does not meet the following standards of the Zoning Code. The Commission should consider whether flexibility should be provided via the PUD process or if these standards should be met. • There are only five trees proposed along Hudson Blvd, and six are required. • Thornless Hawthorn (deciduous ornamental) are required to be 2” caliper, not 1.5” as proposed. • There is no screening consisting of masonry wall, fence, berm, or hedge provided along Hudson Blvd that is 3.5-4’ in height and less than 50% opaque as required, but the drive-through lane is screened with a spire hedge. Tree Preservation Requirements. There are no trees currently on the site, and so a tree preservation plan is not required. Off-Street Parking. The applicant meets general parking space size and aisle width standards. The applicant has provided a narrative that explains that adequate parking has been provided. • Specific Minimum Off-Street Parking Requirements. The applicant is unsure exactly what the final tenant mix will be, but has shown that assuming 19,000 square feet of the buildings are retail and 8,700 square feet are restaurants, that a total of 164 parking spaces would be required. The applicant is providing 165 parking stalls, or 5.92 stalls per 1,000 square feet, so the proposed parking is more than adequate. • Shared Parking. The applicant has indicated in a narrative that a Reciprocal Easement and Operating Agreement has been drafted and will be recorded to account for shared parking and access. This is a recommended condition of approval. Off-Street Loading Areas. Section 154.211 of the Zoning Code requires that off-street loading areas be provided in all districts for any nonresidential use which involves the receipt or distribution of materials or merchandise by trucks or similar vehicles and has a gross floor area of 5,000 square feet of more. The proposed site plan does not provide an off-street loading area. The applicant has provided a narrative that indicates that deliveries to Lake Elmo Shoppes will occur behind the buildings and will utilize the service door in the back of each tenant space and that no dock doors or drive-in doors are needed for the types of tenants that occupy Lake Elmo Shoppes. Staff is supportive of waiving the off-street loading requirement. Sign Regulations. 6 • Comprehensive Sign Plan. A Comprehensive Sign Plan is required of any applicant for all planned developments and commercial or industrial multi-tenant developments where different occupancies will compete for permitted square footage on a single lot. The Applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Sign Plan, attached to this report, detailing proposed wall signage and two ground signs. The Applicant states in the narrative that an increased amount of signage is being requested in order to be seen by the vast number of commuters and the local traffic patterns. Their signs will provide consistency in size and construction materials, while allowing each tenant the flexibility and square footage to showcase building storefronts, brand names, and individual site locations as best as possible. • Wall signs. The current standard for wall signs is 1 square footage per 1 lineal foot of storefront. The Applicant has submitted an exhibit which shows what signs of this size would look like on the proposed building, stating that this ratio looks quite small on the façade. The applicant has submitted the request for 2.5 square feet of signage for every one lineal foot of building on the front and rear façades and 1.5 square feet of signage for every one lineal foot of building on the east and west elevations. • Ground Signs. One ground sign per street frontage is allowed per lot, and ground signs on lots that front streets with the number of traffic lanes and speed limit of these lots are allowed to be a maximum height of 12 feet and 80 square feet. The applicant has proposed two ground signs: one 12 feet, 4 inches in height and 80 square feet, and one 30 feet in height and 273 square feet. The proposed signs meet the setback requirement of 15 feet of a crosswalk, or within 15 feet of the intersection of any circulation lane, driveway, or alley. Because the property abuts the Keats Ave N to WB I-94 ramp and Hudson Blvd, the Applicant is looking for visibility from both frontages. Open Space. The City’s PUD ordinance sets forth the requirement that at least 20% of the project area within a PUD be preserved as protected open space. This requirement appears to be more appropriate or applicable to residential development. However, other public and site amenities may be approved as an alternative to this requirement. The proposed PUD does not meet the open space requirement. The applicant has provided a narrative that proposes that this development enhances the site and retail shopping and dining experience with enhanced architectural materials and site furnishings through natural colors, textures, and shapes; flanking that offers a three-dimensional quality and skyline interest; mixture of materials; unique cornices; variety of awnings; ornamental light fixtures; and four-sided architecture. Lighting. The applicant has stated that a photometric plan has been ordered and will be forwarded to the City once received. It is a recommended condition of approval that a lighting plan be submitted meeting Sections 150.035-150.038 of the City Code. Engineering Comments. Attached is a memorandum from the City Engineer dated May 31, 2017, which details a number of comments that will need to be addressed. A condition of approval has been added that requires that the Applicant address all of the comments outlined in this memo. Outlined comments include the following: • No construction for Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition may begin until the applicant has received Engineer approval for Final Construction Plans; all applicable permit approvals; easements and permissions for the project; and a preconstruction meeting has been held. • Preliminary plans must be updated and the final construction plans must include a right turn lane along eastbound Hudson Boulevard and any additional fire hydrants as required by the Fire Chief/Building Official. • Preliminary and final construction plans and plat must be updated to include all necessary drainage and utility easements as required for the public sanitary sewer and watermain/hydrants. Traffic. The applications have been sent to Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT), as the development abuts the Keats Ave N to WB I-94 ramp, and Washington County, as the County has indicated a study will be done on the Keats Ave N and Hudson Blvd N intersection, to which this project is near. MNDOT had made comments that the grading should stay within the limits of the development; 7 the Hudson Blvd right-of-way should be shown as City of Lake Elmo rather than MNDOT; and MNDOT drainage permit will be required. Access Management. Hudson Blvd is planned as a major collector road. The Comprehensive Plan’s access management guidelines limit full commercial driveway access to 660 ft spacing. The PUD Concept Plan had shown a second access on the site approximately 240 ft away from the access to Kwik Trip. It was a recommended condition of approval of the PUD Concept Plan that the Applicant work to include PID# 34.292.1440004 (Ebertz Property – the small property to the west) as part of the Preliminary Plat and PUD Plans or work with the owner of this property to provide shared access. The Applicant details in the narrative that because CM Properties 94, LP does not own or control this property, access was not able to be shifted. The Applicant eliminated the second access on the Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans application as a result, and Staff recommends the developer continue to work with the Ebertz’s to gain access to a secondary access to Hudson Blvd on the Ebertz property in the future. A future access driveway connection to the adjacent westerly property has been shown on this site plan. There are currently no plans for a raised center median along Hudson Boulevard, and so right-in/right-out access locations cannot be allowed along Hudson Boulevard. A right turn lane should be required on Hudson Boulevard. There is an existing westbound turn lane on Hudson Boulevard at the existing access location to this development. However, an eastbound right turn should be required as part of this project to handle increased traffic volumes. Hudson Boulevard is expected to receive significant growth in traffic volume as the I-94 corridor develops. It is the goal of the City to maintain Hudson Boulevard as a two-lane road. Therefore, left and right turn lanes will need to be implemented throughout the corridor to facilitate the turning movements for the developing areas while maintaining mobility of the through traffic. Fire Chief and Building Official Comments. The Fire Chief and Building Official have reviewed the proposed site plan and have the following comments as they relate to the Utility Plan: • The drive-through aisle and lane to the west of the drive-through are 12 and 16 feet in width. The drive-through aisle on Lot 3 also indicates a width of 12 feet. These should be at least 20 feet in width to allow for required apparatus access around the perimeter of the buildings. • Additional fire hydrants will be needed on the northwest end of the building on Lot 2, the northeast end of the building on Lot 1, and the southwest end of the building on Lot 3. • Additional watermain and fire hydrant easements will be required over the additional fire hydrant locations and watermains. Circulation. In addition to issues raised in the drive-through section of this report, there is a bit of concern about circulation on the site. The shared access with Kwik Trip could prove to be confusing to site visitors, as the existing median is essentially where the right turn lane for the Kwik Trip portion of the access is. Additionally, drivers accessing Kwik Trip from the proposed development may or may not know to stop for oncoming traffic from those exiting back portion of Kwik Trip. Additional striping may improve this situation. A recommended condition of approval is that the Applicant provide additional striping and/or a stop sign in this area to facilitate proper traffic circulation. Municipal Sanitary Sewer and Water Supply. The proposed site is located within the Stage 1 Regional Sewer area. The property is currently served with municipal sewer and water, and no phasing is required for infrastructure improvements. The Applicant has indicated in the submitted narrative that sanitary sewer and water service be extended to the property to the west, provided the owner is willing to pay the cost to extend. The owner at this time appears willing, but no agreement has been reached. The Applicant has suggested as an alternative that the property access utilities under Hudson Blvd from the North. This, however, is a business decision that should ultimately be made by Council. The City should only accept one boring under Hudson Blvd. A boring was made for Kwik Trip, so Staff recommends that no additional borings be allowed. As such, the Applicant should be made to extend sanitary sewer and water 8 service to the westerly parcel regardless of whether or not the owner of the aforementioned parcel agrees to help pay for it. Stormwater. An infiltration basin is provided on the east side of the property. Stormwater runoff will be routed through two underground parking lot storm chamber systems that will provide infiltration and retention in addition to one above ground infiltration basin. The above ground infiltration basin will be obtained by converting an existing storm water pond to an infiltration basin. Pretreatment for the infiltration basins will be provided by oversized sump manholes equipped with scour prevention devices. Due to proximity to the Kwik Trip site, the MPCA should be consulted to verify infiltration practices will be allowed. Written landowner permission may be required for any off-site storm water discharges to adjacent properties to avoid negative impacts to downstream properties. Phasing. The Applicant has requested to plat all three lots at this time, but construction will occur in three phases: Three phases: 1st: 14,700 sf building on Lot 1 2nd: 10,120 sf building on Lot 2 3rd: 3,192 sf building on Lot 3. The Applicant should submit construction plans for approval by the City which will detail phasing of utilities and grading and site improvements. Existing Easements. The Applicant has indicated the need to vacate existing easements over the property. The Applicant will need to submit a separate application for this, and the public hearing may be held at the City Council meeting concurrently with Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plan approval. Comprehensive Plan. The property is guided for and zoned Commercial. The proposed development is commercial in nature. Commercial development is guided for 4.5-7 residential equivalency units (REU) per acre. Residential Equivalency Units (REU). Because the development is within the beginning stages, the Met Council has not yet made a determination for WAC/SAC Charges. However, the following outlines REU information for the proposed uses within the development: Restaurant Fixed Seating (actual number of seats) 10 seats 1 Non-Fixed Seating (the greater of the square feet of dining area @ 15 square feet/seat or number of seats shown on the plan) 10 seats 1 Outdoor patios and sidewalk seating are counted same as inside seating. (See Section 5.2.1.7.1 for discount) - - Drive-in (See Section 5.2.1.7 for discount) 9 parking 1 Take-out (no seating) 3,000 square feet 1 Outpatient clinic *17 fixture units 1 Sterilizer (4 hours x gallons per minute x 60 minutes) 274 gallons 1 X-ray film processor (4 hours x gallons per minute x 60 minutes) 274 gallons 1 Retail Store (deduct mechanical rooms, elevator shafts, stairwells, escalators, restrooms and unfinished storage areas) (for remainder use other criteria) (i.e. Gas Pumping) 3,000 square feet 1 Shower (if lockers are included use Locker Room criteria) *17 fixture units 1 Park Dedication/Parks and Trails. The parkland dedication requirement for the proposed commercial development is presently $4,500 per acre in lieu of dedicated land. The proposed development area is 3.82 acres in size, and so the required parkland dedication based on the present fee schedule would total $17,190. The Parks Commission was informed of the proposed development at the March 20, 2017 meeting. 9 PUD Agreement. A PUD agreement that clearly articulates permitted and conditional uses, placement of structures, development intensity, density, setbacks, building requirements, lot requirements, signage, or other elements of the plan that deviate from the Commercial Zoning District standards will be incorporated into the Findings of the Resolution if the PUD is approved. The PUD Agreement will provide the development regulations that prevail for the site. Those items not addressed by the PUD Agreement will default to the underlying Commercial Zoning standards. PLANNING COMMISSION/PUBLIC HEARING: The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this request at its June 12, 2017 meeting. No public inquiries or comments were received prior to the public hearing, and no one from the public spoke at the public hearing. Amended Findings of Fact. The Planning Commission recommended adding the following finding of fact to the Staff-recommended findings of fact: 12. The Applicant will be extending municipal sewer and water to the westerly property (PID# 34.029.21.44.0004), providing benefit to the City. Amended Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission also recommended the following amendments to the Staff-recommended conditions of approval (in red, underlined text): 9. The Applicant shall amend the proposed Landscape Plan to comply with City standards and obtain approval by the City. The Landscape Plan shall include additional landscaping along the Keats Ave N to WB I-94 ramp. • Staff Comment: This motion was made with an affirmative vote of 3-2. The reasoning for this is to keep headlights of cars in the parking lot and drive-throughs from shining towards cars on the ramp. Because the ramp does not constitute as street frontage, landscaping standards that apply to street frontage do not apply. 21. Permitted medical facilities shall be limited to non-urgent facilities, including but not limited to clinics, eye doctors, and dental facilities. 22. The Applicant shall add site amenities such as benches, trash receptacles, decorative lighting, and signage compliant with the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual to the site plan. 23. Fencing shall be provided enclosing all outdoor dining areas. The Planning Commission also discussed concern about the traffic flow near the shared entrance to Kwik Trip, specifically that which may be caused by the median that blocks the approach to the right-hand turn lane exit. Additionally, the Planning Commission wanted to see the two-lane drive through lanes on the southern portion of the site both be one-way. The Planning Commission recommended approval with the amended findings of fact and conditions of approval with an affirmative vote of 5-0. RECOMMMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Findings of fact and conditions of approval as recommended by Staff and the Planning Commission are outlined in the attached Resolution 2017-063. FISCAL IMPACT: 10 The development of this currently vacant site will create three taxable parcels. Additionally, it will contribute SAC/WAC fees and park dedication fees of $17,190. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the Council adopt Resolution 2017-063 approving the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans with the 23 conditions of approval as recommended by Staff and the Planning Commission. Suggested motion: “Move to adopt Resolution 2017-063 approving Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans with the 23 conditions of approval as drafted by Staff and the Planning Commission based on the findings of fact listed in the Staff Report.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans application. 2. Engineering Review Memo dated May 31, 2017. 3. Comprehensive Sign Plan 4. Fire Chief and Building Official Comments 5. MNDOT Review Comments 6. Resolution 2017-063 granting Preliminary and Final Preliminary Plat and PUD Plans Approval Written Statements: The following are answers to Questions 2a thru 2m on the Preliminary Plat Application form: a. Record Owner Engineer / Surveyor CM Properties 94, L.P. Carlson McCain, Inc. 3460 Washington Drive, Suite 100 3890 Pheasant Ridge Drive NE, Suite 100 Eagan, MN 55122 Blaine, MN 55449 Attn: Bruce Miller Attn: Joe Radach, PE (651) 452-3303 (763) 489-7912 Architect Architectural Consortium, LLC 901 No. Third Street, Suite 220 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Attn: Kathy Anderson (612) 436-4030 b. The property has an unassigned address but is currently legally described as Outlot A, Lakewood Crossing, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, MN. PID #34.029.21.44.0015 Zoning – Commercial Parcel Size – 3.82 Acres / 166,449 Sq.Ft. c. Subdivision Name: Lakewood Crossing Number of Lots: Three (3) d. N/A e. The intent of this 3 lot, 3 building project is to create a successful retail project providing a warm and inviting place for residents in the area to shop and dine. Our goal is to have a quality, sit down, full service restaurant on the east side of the project including a large outdoor patio to accommodate outside seating for restaurant patrons. In addition to a sit down restaurant, we are targeting fast casual restaurants with drive thru, coffee with drive thru, a hair salon, dry cleaner, chiropractor, bank or credit union with drive thru and other similar services and retail businesses. Our intention is to build the project in three (3) phases with the initial plan to construct at 14,700 square foot retail building and follow up with a 10,120 square foot and 3,440 square foot building as the market dictates. Our firm has owned this property for over 45 years and we intend to continue to own it for years to come. Our intention is to build something both we and the City can be proud of and that meets what the market is looking for and stands the test of time architecturally. f. N/A Written Statements Page 2 g. The property is currently served with municipal sewer and water. No phasing is required for infrastructure improvements. h. There are only 3 non-related, non-public property owners within 350’ and they are also excited about the prospect of additional development occurring on this corner. This development will have positive impact on property values in this area by providing much needed retail and service businesses. i. This development should not conflict with nearby land uses. As a matter of fact, it is our intent to get tenants who enhance our neighbors property values and provide goods and services to the residential areas in and around this intersection. j. In the grand scheme of development occurring in Lake Elmo, this project is relatively minor in terms of city services required and will not create a burden on the City. As a matter of fact, commercial tax rates are significantly higher than residential and therefore this project will only help the budgets of the City, County and School District. k. N/A l. As this is a small commercial development, we are intending on providing a park dedication fee in lieu of dedication which the City will be able to utilize to enhance its overall parks / open space plan. m. Our intention is to commence construction in July or August with the first phase 14,300 square foot building to be complete by year end. The Phase II and Phase III building will be constructed as the market dictates. Narrative Answering Questions / Concerns Raised for Concept Approval and Outlined in Resolution 2017-026: 1. Regarding the City Engineer comments from that March 8th Memorandum, the plans have been revised to address most of the comments. To address the second access to the west, as we do not own or control the property to the west, we are not able to shift the access. However, we are willing to provide an access easement to the property owner to the west to provide them access so they won’t need to request a third access. In addition, when the City determines the traffic counts warrant it, we will install a median on Hudson Boulevard to restrict access to right in and right out only. Regarding the turn lanes, our intention is not to build the secondary (westerly) access with Phase I and therefore will only utilize the existing shared access with Kwik Trip. When we build Phase II we will construct the turn lanes as needed. Regarding the extension of water and sanitary sewer to the property to the west, we will accommodate provided that owner is willing to pay the cost to extend. We have had discussions with them and they appear willing however no agreement has been reached. If we are not able to reach an agreement, the property still can be served with utilities by jacking them under Hudson Blvd. from the North. As a reminder, this is what we had to do with the water when we developed Kwik Trip. 2. It is acknowledged and we shall obtain all other necessary permits. Attached find VBWD Permit #2017-08 Permit dated March 27, 2017. 3. As mentioned above, we will extend sanitary sewer and water to the westerly property provided we can come to an agreement with the property owner. In the alternative, they can extend the utilities from the property they own to the north. 4. It is acknowledged a storm water maintenance agreement will be required. Please provide City standard form or if you don’t have one, we can prepare. 5. The Landscape Plan has been revised to provide four (4) more parking islands, landscaping on north side of driveway as well as other modifications to comply with City standards. 6. Acknowledge a Letter of Credit / Financial Guaranty is required for landscape materials. 7. Attached is a Comprehensive Sign Plan along with a narrative detailing the flexibility being requested. 8. The three (3) buildings will be a mix of retail, service and restaurant uses. Section 154.2 of the Code for General Retail is 1 space per 250 square feet or 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet. Lake Elmo Shoppes will have a total of 27,860 square feet. Based on general retail of 4 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft., this results in 111 required stalls. We are providing 165 stalls or 5.92 per 1,000 sq.ft. which is significantly over what is required by code. Some uses, such as restaurants require more parking (1 stall per 100 sq.ft. = 10 stalls per 1,000 sq.ft.) and others require less than general retail such as personal services at 3.33 per 1,000 sq.ft. Although we are not sure what the final tenant mix will be, if 19,000 sq.ft. were retail that would require 77 stalls and 8,700 sq.ft. of restaurants which would require 87 stalls for a total of 164 parking stalls Based on our experience in owning and developing retails centers, we are confident we have more than adequate parking. Narrative – Page 2 Lake Elmo Shoppes 9. To address the site amenity as alternate to 20% open space, we are offering to enhance the site and retail shopping and dining experience with enhanced architectural materials and site furnishings. The Lake Elmo Shoppes architecture is upgraded and features a variety of warm, natural colors, textures and shapes. The corner towers flanking each end features standing seam metal roofs and offer a 3-dimensional quality as well as skyline interest. A mixture of stone, brick and glass combine to help provide individuality to the various tenants. Unique cornices project above the signage band for added interest. A variety of both canvas and metal awnings create pedestrian scale interest. Ornamental light fixtures repeat intermittently for nighttime attraction. The architecture is four-sided being that is visible from both the highway and internal. Signage is limited to designated areas within each tenant lease lines and design controls of individually lit channel letters will ensure quality. The overall development sets an up-scale environment with the attention to details within the streetscape. Coordinated benches, trash receptacles and bike racks, outdoor dining patios with wrought iron fencing, pedestrian scale ornamental light fixtures and landscaping all combine to enhance the shopping experience. 10. The plans detail the location of the drive-thru elements. Based on questions at the Planning Commission and City Council, we commissioned a drive thru analysis which will be addressed in further detail in 19 below. 11. A photometric plan has been ordered and will be forwarded to the City once received. It is acknowledged, an acceptable photometric plan is a condition of final approval. 12. It is understood the final plan showing location of fire hydrants, no parking and fire lanes need approval from the building official and fire chief. 13. The adjacent property owner to the west will not be a party of the Preliminary Plat or PUD however, we will work with them to provide shared access in the location noted on the site plan. 14. Although we are not proposing to construct any new access points with the first phase of the development, it is acknowledged turn lanes will need to be constructed with the new access. 15. It is our position, current traffic doesn’t warrant widening Hudson Blvd., but depending on future development to the north and west, future road improvements may be necessary. 16. Lake Elmo Shoppes deliveries will occur behind the buildings and will utilize the service door in the back of each tenant space. No dock doors or drive-in doors are needed for the types of tenants we will be pursuing. 17. A Reciprocal Easement and Operating Agreement drafted and will be recorded to account for shared parking and access. Narrative – Page 3 Lake Elmo Shoppes 18. All mechanical rooftop equipment will be screened by the high parapet walls provided in the design of Lake Elmo Shoppes. 19. Attached is the drive-thru analysis prepared by Spark Consulting Engineers. As you will see the report, Spark states the two high volume and two low volume drive-thru locations have sufficient stacking and circulation. However, based on some of the comments in the report and subsequent discussions regarding potential circulation conflicts, we did decide to eliminate the “high volume” drive-thru located on the east end of the Lot 2 building. Therefore, the request for drive-thru’s has been revised to three (3). f: \ j o b s \ 4 9 6 1 - 4 9 8 0 \ 4 9 7 6 - l a k e e l m o r e t a i l \ p h a s e 2 \ c a d \ e n g i n e e r i n g \ 4 9 7 6 _ d e t a i l s . d w g Sa v e D a t e : 04 / 2 6 / 1 7 C7 of 11 DE T A I L S REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: ISSUE DATE: JTR JTR 02/03/17 Joseph T. Radach, P.E.Name: Signature: Date:02/03/17 License #:45889 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota 38 9 0 P h e a s a n t R i d g e D r . N E # 1 0 0 , B l a i n e , M N Ph o n e : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 0 0 F a x : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 5 9 EN V I R O N M E N T A L ◦ E N G I N E E R I N G ◦ S U R V E Y I N G MF C P R O P E R T I E S C O R P . 34 6 0 W a s h i n g t o n D r i v e , S u i t e 1 0 0 Ea g a n , M N 5 5 1 2 2 1. 04/26/17 Per City comments. 2. 05/24/17 Per City Comments. 3. 4. 5. 6. LA K E E L M O S H O P P E S La k e E l m o , M i n n e s o t a f: \ j o b s \ 4 9 6 1 - 4 9 8 0 \ 4 9 7 6 - l a k e e l m o r e t a i l \ p h a s e 2 \ c a d \ e n g i n e e r i n g \ 4 9 7 6 _ d e t a i l s . d w g Sa v e D a t e : 04 / 2 6 / 1 7 C8 of 11 DE T A I L S REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: ISSUE DATE: JTR JTR 02/03/17 Joseph T. Radach, P.E.Name: Signature: Date:02/03/17 License #:45889 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota 38 9 0 P h e a s a n t R i d g e D r . N E # 1 0 0 , B l a i n e , M N Ph o n e : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 0 0 F a x : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 5 9 EN V I R O N M E N T A L ◦ E N G I N E E R I N G ◦ S U R V E Y I N G MF C P R O P E R T I E S C O R P . 34 6 0 W a s h i n g t o n D r i v e , S u i t e 1 0 0 Ea g a n , M N 5 5 1 2 2 1. 04/26/17 Per City comments. 2. 05/24/17 Per City Comments. 3. 4. 5. 6. LA K E E L M O S H O P P E S La k e E l m o , M i n n e s o t a f: \ j o b s \ 4 9 6 1 - 4 9 8 0 \ 4 9 7 6 - l a k e e l m o r e t a i l \ p h a s e 2 \ c a d \ e n g i n e e r i n g \ 4 9 7 6 _ d e t a i l s . d w g Sa v e D a t e : 04 / 2 6 / 1 7 C9 of 11 DE T A I L S REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: ISSUE DATE: JTR JTR 02/03/17 Joseph T. Radach, P.E.Name: Signature: Date:02/03/17 License #:45889 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota 38 9 0 P h e a s a n t R i d g e D r . N E # 1 0 0 , B l a i n e , M N Ph o n e : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 0 0 F a x : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 5 9 EN V I R O N M E N T A L ◦ E N G I N E E R I N G ◦ S U R V E Y I N G MF C P R O P E R T I E S C O R P . 34 6 0 W a s h i n g t o n D r i v e , S u i t e 1 0 0 Ea g a n , M N 5 5 1 2 2 1. 04/26/17 Per City comments. 2. 05/24/17 Per City Comments. 3. 4. 5. 6. LA K E E L M O S H O P P E S La k e E l m o , M i n n e s o t a f: \ j o b s \ 4 9 6 1 - 4 9 8 0 \ 4 9 7 6 - l a k e e l m o r e t a i l \ p h a s e 2 \ c a d \ e n g i n e e r i n g \ 4 9 7 6 _ d e t a i l s . d w g Sa v e D a t e : 04 / 2 6 / 1 7 C10 of 11 DE T A I L S (C M P S Y S T E M ) REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: ISSUE DATE: JTR JTR 02/03/17 Joseph T. Radach, P.E.Name: Signature: Date:02/03/17 License #:45889 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota 38 9 0 P h e a s a n t R i d g e D r . N E # 1 0 0 , B l a i n e , M N Ph o n e : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 0 0 F a x : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 5 9 EN V I R O N M E N T A L ◦ E N G I N E E R I N G ◦ S U R V E Y I N G MF C P R O P E R T I E S C O R P . 34 6 0 W a s h i n g t o n D r i v e , S u i t e 1 0 0 Ea g a n , M N 5 5 1 2 2 LA K E E L M O S H O P P E S La k e E l m o , M i n n e s o t a 1. 04/26/17 Per City comments. 2. 05/24/17 Per City Comments. 3. 4. 5. 6. f: \ j o b s \ 4 9 6 1 - 4 9 8 0 \ 4 9 7 6 - l a k e e l m o r e t a i l \ p h a s e 2 \ c a d \ e n g i n e e r i n g \ 4 9 7 6 _ d e t a i l s . d w g Sa v e D a t e : 04 / 2 6 / 1 7 C11 of 11 DE T A I L S (C M P S Y S T E M ) REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: ISSUE DATE: JTR JTR 02/03/17 Joseph T. Radach, P.E.Name: Signature: Date:02/03/17 License #:45889 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota 38 9 0 P h e a s a n t R i d g e D r . N E # 1 0 0 , B l a i n e , M N Ph o n e : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 0 0 F a x : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 5 9 EN V I R O N M E N T A L ◦ E N G I N E E R I N G ◦ S U R V E Y I N G MF C P R O P E R T I E S C O R P . 34 6 0 W a s h i n g t o n D r i v e , S u i t e 1 0 0 Ea g a n , M N 5 5 1 2 2 1. 04/26/17 Per City comments. 2. 05/24/17 Per City Comments. 3. 4. 5. 6. LA K E E L M O S H O P P E S La k e E l m o , M i n n e s o t a ROCK MULCH, TYP. IN ALL ISLANDS SOD SOD SOD SOD SOD SOD see d ROCK MULCH ALL ISLANDS, typ. SOD SOD SEE D SEED DISTURBED AREA BEHIND BACK OF WALL poly edger, typ. shredded hardwood mulch G 17 C 1 D 1 G 8 G 8 F 2 C 1 D 1 D 1 A 1 G 27 G 7 A 1 D 1 G 15 A 1 J 14 K 6 H 3 G 4 mndot 33-261 seed mix see d poly edger poly edger J 10 SEED DISTURBED AREA BEHIND BACK OF WALL SoD AREA in front OF WALL sod (3) rows in back of curb B 6 poly edger rock mulch H 24 E 1 C 3 I 19A 2 G 8 E 2 E 3 E 1 poly edger SOD f: \ j o b s \ 4 9 6 1 - 4 9 8 0 \ 4 9 7 6 - l a k e e l m o r e t a i l \ p h a s e 2 \ c a d \ e n g i n e e r i n g \ 4 9 7 6 _ l s c p . d w g Sa v e D a t e : 05 / 2 4 / 1 7 L1 of 2 LA N D S C A P E P L A N REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: ISSUE DATE: SDB SDB 02/03/17 James A. Kalkes RLAName: Signature: Date:05/24/17 License #:45071 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 38 9 0 P h e a s a n t R i d g e D r . N E # 1 0 0 , B l a i n e , M N Ph o n e : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 0 0 F a x : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 5 9 EN V I R O N M E N T A L ◦ E N G I N E E R I N G ◦ S U R V E Y I N G Know what's below. before you dig.Call R MF C P R O P E R T I E S C O R P . 34 6 0 W a s h i n g t o n D r i v e , S u i t e 1 0 0 Ea g a n , M N 5 5 1 2 2 1. 04/26/17 PER CITY COMMENT 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. landscape notes 1.iRRIGATION SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL SOD AND LANDSCAPE AREAS. 2.sOD AND IRRIGATE ALL DISTURBED AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3.landscape beds to receive 3" of shredded hardwood mulch unless otherwise noted. 4.rOCK mULCH = 1-1/2" DRESSER tRAP rOCK @ 3" depth WHERE NOTED. 5.hEAVY COMMERCIAL GRADE POLY EDGER SHALL BE USED AROUND THE PERIMETER OF LANDSCAPE BEDS NOTED ON PLAN. 6.REFER TO DETAIL SHEET L2 FOR GENERAL NOTES, PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS, PLANTING NOTES, IRRIGATION NOTES, AND PLANTING DETAILS. 7.REFER TO GRADING PLAN FOR GRADES AND EROSION CONTROL. 8.REMOVE ANY BURLAP, TWINE, ROPES AND/OR WIRING FROM THE TOP AND SIDES OF ROOTBALL FOR ALL BALLED AND BURLAPPED PLANTS. 9.rEMOVE CONTAINERS AND CUT CIRCLING ROOTS IF PLANTS ARE CONTAINER GROWN. 10.ALL PLANTINGS SHALL RECEIVE FERTILIZER AS FOLLOWS: 11.0-20-20 GRANULAR FERTIZER APPLIED AT THE TIME OF PLANTING AT A RATE OF 12 OZ. PER 2.5 CALIPER INCHES OF TREE AND 6 OZ. PER SHRUB. 12.PLACE LANDSCAPE FILTER FABRIC UNDER ALL MULCHED AREAS. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE 100% INTERWOVEN 5.1oz NEEDLE PUNCHED POLYPROPYLENE FABRIC MANUFACTURED BY DEWITT. USE PRO 5 "WEED BARRIER" OR APPROVED EQUAL. landscape REQUIREMENTS 1.a Minimum of (1) tree per 50 LF of Street frontage. 2.Additionally, (5) trees shall be planted per (1) acre of developed Land or disturbed by development activity landscape notes mndot 33-261 seed mix TOTAL STREET FRONTAGE = 296 LF. 6 TREES REQUIRED OVERALL SITE ACREAGE = 3.82. 19 TREES REQUIRED. TOTAL TREES REQUIRED = 25 TOTAL TREES PROVIDED = 25 LA K E E L M O S H O P P E S La k e E l m o , M i n n e s o t a f: \ j o b s \ 4 9 6 1 - 4 9 8 0 \ 4 9 7 6 - l a k e e l m o r e t a i l \ p h a s e 2 \ c a d \ e n g i n e e r i n g \ 4 9 7 6 _ l s c p . d w g Sa v e D a t e : 05 / 2 4 / 1 7 L2 of 2 LA N D S C A P E D E T A I L S REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: ISSUE DATE: SDB SDB 02/03/17 James A. KalkesName: Signature: Date:License #:45071 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 38 9 0 P h e a s a n t R i d g e D r . N E # 1 0 0 , B l a i n e , M N Ph o n e : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 0 0 F a x : 7 6 3 - 4 8 9 - 7 9 5 9 EN V I R O N M E N T A L ◦ E N G I N E E R I N G ◦ S U R V E Y I N G MF C P R O P E R T I E S C O R P . 34 6 0 W a s h i n g t o n D r i v e , S u i t e 1 0 0 Ea g a n , M N 5 5 1 2 2 1. 04/26/17 PER CITY COMMENT 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. IRRIGATION NOTES: 1.Landscape Contractor shall be responsible for providing shop drawings illustrating irrigation plans and specifications as part of the scope of work when bidding. These shall be approved by the landscape architect prior to order. 2.Verify existing/proposed system location. 3.unless otherwise noted, all sod/seed and planting areas indicated on the plan shall be 100% irrigated. the irrigation shall include the public right of way between the property line and back of curb where new landscape improvements are proposed. 4.it shall be the landscape contractors responsibility to insure that all sodded/seeded and planted areas are irrigated properly, including those areas directly around and abutting building foundation. 5.the landscape contractor shall provide the owner with a watering/lawn irrigation schedule appropriate to the project site conditions and to plant material growth requirements. GENERAL NOTES: 1.LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND BY GOPHER STATE ONE CALL PRIOR TO STAKING PLANT LOCATIONS. 2.COORDINATE THE PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING INSTALLATION WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS WORKING ON THE SITE. 3.WHERE EXISTING TREES AND/OR SIGNIFICANT SHRUB MASSINGS ARE FOUND ON THE SITE WHETHER SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS OR NOT, THEY SHALL BE PROTECTED AND SAVED UNLESS NOTED TO BE REMOVED AND/OR ARE WITHIN THE GRADING LIMITS. ANY QUESTION REGARDING WHETHER PLANT MATERIAL SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT REMAIN SHOULD BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO REMOVAL. 4.ALL EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN SHALL BE FERTILIZED AND PRUNED TO REMOVE DEAD WOOD AND DAMAGED OR RUBBING BRANCHES. 5.BB TREES AND SHRUBS ARE BALLED AND BURLAPPED. 6.NO PLANT MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED UNLESS APPROVAL IS REQUESTED OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF BID AND/OR QUOTATION. 7.ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST ADDITION OF THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN. 8.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ON-GOING MAINTENANCE OF ALL NEWLY INSTALLED MATERIALS UNTIL TIME OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE. ANY ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO OWNER ACCEPTANCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. 9.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THE OWNER ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION. 10.WARRANTY FOR THE LANDSCAPE MATERIALS SHALL BEGIN ON THE DATE OF ACCEPTANCE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AFTER THE COMPLETION OF PLANTING ALL LANDSCAPE MATERIALS. NO PARTIAL ACCEPTANCE WILL BE CONSIDERED. 11.CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE NEW PLANT MATERIAL THROUGH ONE CALENDAR YEAR FROM THE DATE OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE WITH ALL REPLACEMENTS TO BE PROVIDED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS: 1.PLANTING BED PREPARATION: ALL MASS PLANTING BEDS SHALL BE TILLED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 10". AMENDMENTS SHALL BE APPLIED AFTER CULTIVATION. 2.BACKFILL SOIL: USE SOIL EXCAVATED FROM PLANTING HOLES & PROVIDE AMENDMENTS. REMOVE ALL DEBRIS AND ROCKS LARGER THAN 3" IN Dia. 9.FERTILIZATION: iT IS RECOMMENDED THAT Newly planted trees and shrubs should NOT be fertilized the first year. If necessary, begin fertilizing TREES and shrubs the second year after establishment AT A RATIO AND RATE BASED ON A SOIL TEST. 10.MULCH MATERIAL: AS SPECIFIED ON LANDSCAPE PLANS. MASS MULCH ALL PLANTING BEDS TO 3" DEPTH OVER FIBER MAT WEED BARRIER. ALL PERRENIAL PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE 3" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH WITH NO FIBER WEED MAT BARRIER. ALL DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN TREES TO RECEIVE 6" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH WITH NO MULCH IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK. 11.TREE STAKING: IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO STAKE AND/OR GUY THE TREES ACCORDING TO THE DETAILS. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE EVERY STEP NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE TREES AND SHRUBS OIN AN UPRIGHT AND PLUMB CONDITION AT ALL TIMES UNTIL THE END OF THE PLANT GUARANTEE PERIOD, ESPECIALLY WHERE VANDALISM, SOIL OR WIND CONDITIONS ARE A PROBLEM. 12.TREE WRAPPING: WRAPPING MATERIAL SHALL BE QUALITY, HEAVY WATERPROOF CREPE PAPER MANUFACTURED FOR THIS PURPOSE. WRAP ALL DECIDUOUS TREES IN THE FALL PRIOR TO 12-1 AND REMOVE ALL WRAPPING BY 5-1. 13.RODENT PROTECTION: PROVIDE ON ALL TREES, EXCEPT SPRUCE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 14.PLANTING PLAN: ALL PROPOSED PLANTS SHALL BE LOCATED CAREFULLY AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. THE PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE NOTES. RESPECT STATED DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. 15.EDGING: EDGING SHALL BE 4: P.V.C COMMERCIAL GRADE EDGING WITH THREE (3) METAL ANCHOR STAKES PER 20 FOOT SECTION, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLAN. ALL MASS PLANTING BEDS SHALL HAVE EDGING PLACED BETWEEN MULCH AND ANY ADJACENT TURF AREAS. LA K E E L M O S H O P P E S La k e E l m o , M i n n e s o t a PLANTING NOTES: 1.No planting to be installed until grading and construction has been completed in the immediate area. 2.All plant material locations must be reviewed and approved by the landscape architect prior to any and all digging. 3.If the landscape contractor perceives and deficiencies in the plant selections, soil conditions, or any other site condition which might negatively affect plant material establishment, survival or guarantee, they shall bring these deficiencies to the attention of the landscape architect prior to installation. 4.Adjustments in the location of proposed plant material may be needed in the field. Should an adjustment be advised, the landscape architect must be notified. 5.All plants to be installed per planting details. 6.One shrub per type and size in each planting bed and every tree should be clearly identified (common or latin nomenclature) with a plastic tag which shall not be removed prior to owner acceptance. 7.Where sod/seed abuts paved surfaces, finished grade of seed/sod shall be held 1” below surface elevation of trail, slab, curb, etc. 8.Sod shall be laid parallel to the contours and shall have staggered joints. On slopes steeper than 3 : 1 or in drainage swales, the sod shall be staked to the ground. 9.Seed all areas disturbed due to grading other than those to receive sod. 10.Repair all damage to property from planting operators at no cost to the owner. 05/24/17 PAGE 1 of 3 MEMORANDUM Date: May 31, 2017 To: Emily Becker, City Planner Re: Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Cc: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director Preliminary/Final Plat Review From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer An engineering review has been completed for the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary/Final Plat. The submittal consisted of the following documentation received on May 30, 2017 and prepared by Carlson McCain:  Lake Elmo Shoppes Site Improvement Plans dated May 24, 2017.  Lake Elmo Shoppes Stormwater Management Plans dated April 26, 2017.  Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Plat dated April 26, 2017.  Narrative, not dated. STATUS/FINDINGS: Following comments should be incorporated as conditions of Preliminary/Final Plat approval. FINAL PLAT: LAKEWOOD CROSSING 2ND ADDITION  The Final Plat shall not be recorded until final construction plan approval is granted and all easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works department are documented on the Final Plat.  No construction for Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition may begin until the applicant has received City Engineer approval for the Final Construction Plans; the applicant has obtained and submitted to the City all applicable permits, easements and permissions needed for the project; and a preconstruction meeting has been held by the City’s engineering department.  Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be prepared for any phased site improvements and submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to construction. The Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be prepared in accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual using City details, plan notes and specifications and meeting City Engineering Design Guidelines.  The preliminary plans must be updated and the final construction plans must include a right turn lane along eastbound Hudson Boulevard and any additional fire hydrants as required the Fire Chief/Building Official.  The preliminary/final construction plans must be updated to include all necessary drainage and utility easements as required for the public sanitary sewer and watermain/hydrants.  There are no Outlots as part of this Plat to be dedicated to the City.  Prior to the start of construction a Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement in the City’s standard form must be executed and recorded with the County. Traffic and Access Management Requirements:  Primary access. The shared access location with Kwik Trip has been approved for this site.  Right turn lane should be required on Hudson Boulevard. There is an existing westbound left turn lane on Hudson Boulevard at the existing access location to this development. However an eastbound right turn should be required as part of this project to handle the increa sed traffic volumes. Hudson Boulevard is a local FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc. Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261 Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264 Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267 Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4285 PAGE 2 of 3 collector roadway and Municipal State Aid route. Hudson Boulevard is expected to receive significant growth in traffic volume as the I94 corridor develops. The road is considered to be a major collector for serving the area but it is the goal of the City to maintain the road as 2‐lanes. In order to achieve that goal left and right turn lanes will need to be implemented throughout the corridor to facilitate the turning movements for the developing areas while maintaining the mobility of the through traffic.  Secondary access. The site does not have sufficient frontage along Hudson Boulevard to accommodate a secondary access. The secondary access shown on the concept plans approximately 250 feet to the west of the shared access has therefore been eliminated as required by staff. The Access Management Guidelines per the City’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan requires access spacing of 1/8 mile (660 feet) for full access intersections and commercial driveways along Hudson Boulevard. A shared access driveway was planned as part of the Lakewood Crossing 1st Addition to allow access to the proposed development area while maintaining the required access spacing guidelines.  Future secondary access potential. A second access location cou ld be planned along the south side of Hudson Boulevard that would align with the property to the west of Lakewood 2 Addition with this parcel (PID No. 3402921440004) coordinating and sharing access with Lakewood 2nd Addition. A potential future access connection to the adjacent westerly property has been shown on the site plan.  Right‐in/Right‐out access locations cannot be allowed along Hudson Boulevard since the roadway does not include raised center medians to prohibit left turning movements from the site. There currently are no plans for a center raised median along Hudson Boulevard. Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan:  Governing Specifications and Plan Details for grading and erosion control must be in accordance with the City of Lake Elmo standard specifications.  Retaining walls that exceed 4 feet in height must have a design submitted and certified by an engineer licensed in the state of Minnesota. Utility Plans:  Connection to existing sanitary sewer stub. The project proposes to connect to the existing sanitary sewer stub located in the northeast corner of the property and is extended throughout the development to connect 3 commercial buildings. Sanitary sewer is extended along the northwest property line and stubbed to the westerly adjacent plat limits as required by City policy. A drainage and utility easement is shown on the plat over the portion of sanitary sewer to be owned and maintained by the City.  Connection to existing watermain stub. The project proposes to connect to an existing 8‐inch watermain located in the northeast corner of the property and is extended along the northwest property line and stubbed to the westerly adjacent plat limits as required by City policy. A service stub is shown for connection for Lot 3. A lateral 6‐inch watermain to the south of the development is also proposed for the placement of a fire hydrant and the connection of two additional buildings. A drainage and utility easement is shown on the plat over the portion of watermain/hydrant to be owned and maintained by the City.  Fire Hydrant locations. Additional fire hydrants may be required based on review by the Fire Chief/Building Official. All watermain and fire hydrants required for the project are to be owned and maintained by the City and will require the necessary easements outlined below.  Drainage and utility easements are required over all public sanitary sewer and watermain not located on City Outlots and right‐of‐way, minimum 30‐feet in width, 15 feet from centerline on each side of pipe (including 15 feet from all sides of a fire hydrant). Drainage and utility easements must be provided on the plat or in the City’s standard form of easement agreement. Stormwater Management:  The site plan is subject to a storm water management plan meeting State, VBWD and City rules and regulations. A VBWD permit has been obtained for the improvements.  Stormwater runoff will be routed through two underground parking lot storm chamber systems that will provide infiltration and retention in addition to one above ground infiltration basin. The above ground infiltration basin will be obtained by converting an existing storm water pond to an infiltration basin. PAGE 3 of 3 Pretreatment for the infiltration systems will be provided by oversized sump manholes equipped with scour prevention devices.  Due to the proximity of the site to the Kwik Trip Service Station the applicant should review with MPCA if infiltration practices will be allowed, in particular the planned conversion of the existing storm water pond to a storm water infiltration basin directly east and adjacent to the service station.  The proposed storm water facilities will be privately owned and maintained. Prior to the start of onsite construction a Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement in the City’s standard form must be executed and recorded with the County. The agreement shall provide a maintenance plan defining the maintenance responsibilities for the private owner, the type of maintenance and the maintenance intervals.  Written landowner permission may be required for any off‐site storm water discharges to adjacent properties to avoid negative impacts to downstream properties. COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN NARRATIVE Lake Elmo Shoppes is proposed to be an upscale neighborhood shopping and dining experience. Signage for Lake Elmo Shoppes should be allocated and designed to encompass a professional, first class look and feel. When potential tenants deliberate on signing leases and joining the Lake Elmo business community, they must also have the confidence that their brand will be properly showcased and seen by the vast numbers of commuters and the local traffic patterns. Our signage goals are to provide consistency in size and construction materials, while allowing each tenant the flexibility and square footage to showcase their building storefronts, brand names, and individual site locations as best as possible. Lake Elmo Shoppes is proposing wall signage and two (2) ground signs. Wall Signs: As we began to develop the sign criteria for the various buildings at the Lake Elmo Shoppes, we reviewed what the current sign code allows, which is 1 square foot of signage per 1 lineal foot of storefront on the front elevations and .5 square foot of signage per 1 lineal foot of frontage for the rear elevation. Wall signs sized to code are represented on the attached Exhibit 1 “Sign Per Code”. As you can see on Exhibit 1, at these ratio’s the signs look small on the storefront and do not “fit” the façade. The signs look dwarfed on these elevations and certainly do not give the look or exposure that tenants would consider adequate. Regarding the even smaller signs on the back, the Tenants would pass on adding signage on the rear of the property as the cost and readability would make for an unworthy investment. Exhibit 2 “Comprehensive Sign Plan” represents a 2.5 square feet of signage per 1 lineal foot of storefront on the front and rear elevations, and a 1.5 square feet of signage per 1 lineal foot on the west and east elevations. As you will see, these signs look much more proportional and “fit” the elevations much better. These ratios will also create consistency with any size proportion issues that arise with future tenants and their short and long business names. The north elevation will now be visible from Hudson Blvd., and tenant’s will be able to showcase their place of business. The rear signage is really designed to capture the traffic from the westbound on-ramp traffic to I-94. With this increased size, it will now be readable and will help in the promotion and success of the Lake Elmo Shoppes retail and restaurant businesses. The 1.5 square feet of signage per 1 lineal foot on the west and east elevations will allow those tenants the opportunity to capture additional angles of east and west traffic and stop light patterns as commuters enter the freeway as well as from the adjacent Kwik Trip. The intention of the increased ratios is to develop a uniform criteria that creates a fair amount of square footage allowance for all tenants. Since there is uncertainty of what new businesses will occupy each space at this time, utilizing this new ratio implements tenant fairness while ensuring a professional look. This will also address the variety and length of actual store names, their corporate sign regulations, and desired letter sizes that tenants will be required or want to achieve with their space. This provides flexibility and approval to enhance their investment with the specified ratio, provided that their identity and look is approved by the Landlord. Ground Sign #1: Ground Sign #1 is an attractive 10’x12’ multi-tenant, sign to be located in the northeastern access and will face Hudson Boulevard. As the two main retail buildings are set back up to 400’ from Hudson Boulevard, this monument will allow potential customers to know which businesses are in the shopping center. Ground Sign #1 will help in the promotion and success of these Lake Elmo businesses. Ground Sign #2: Ground Sign #2 is an attractive 14’x30’ multi-tenant sign located in the southwest corner of the development and is intended to provide a signage opportunity to the over 100,000 VPD on I-94. Ground Sign #2 will have print that is large enough for the traveling public to be able to notice what businesses are in Lake Elmo Shoppes which will further enhance the promotion and success of these Lake Elmo businesses. Lake Elmo Shoppes has 22’ high, prominent storefronts and proportionate signage on these storefronts is necessary both from the tenants branding perspective as well as the building look. We believe this Comprehensive Sign Plan overall enhances the quality and effectiveness of the shopping and dining experience. EXHIBIT A SIGN CRITERIA Lake Elmo Shoppes, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Tenant agrees to be bound and comply with the Sign Criteria as follows: 1. EXTERIOR SIGNAGE: A. Tenant shall be required to identify its Leased Premises with an exterior sign. B. Tenant’s signs shall be retail store identity signs only with restricted copy to designate the Tenant’s name, product, or service. C. Each Tenant will be allocated an area on the exterior sign band of the building. D. Sign size and placement will be restricted to the sign band. The beginning and end of the Tenant’s sign shall not be nearer than 18” to outside edges of the Tenant’s allocated sign area, and determined by Lessor as per Exhibit G. All signs shall contain individual letters. All signs shall be lighted, and all transformers will be installed inside the Tenant’s Leased Premises. All exterior signs shall be located within the designated signing area. Any drilling or boring to be done through the exterior wall of the building shall be performed in accordance with all architecturally accepted methods and every precaution shall be taken to assure that these areas be sufficiently waterproofed. All illuminated sign letters shall be channel type construction, plastic faces attached with trim cap. All illuminated sign letters must be LED lit. Colors need to be approved by the Landlord, raceways behind the parapet wall are required on all signage above the roof line and must be installed in a manner as to not void the roof warranty. E. Each Tenant is allowed (1) sign on the Front of the Building (North Elevation) and (1) on the Back of the Building (South Elevation). F. The total sign surface area of all wall signs on a façade shall not exceed 2.5 square feet of sign area per 1 lineal feet of storefront leased on the front elevation. G. Each end cap Tenant is allowed (1) additional signage area that will be utilized to face the west or east elevations for a maximum total of (3) signs for those Tenant’s only. End cap tenants are allowed (1) added sign that is 1.5 sf per lf of leased frontage on that elevation. H. Awnings are acceptable with Landlord approval. Awnings cannot include logos or copy. I. The use of predominantly decorative sculpture, coat of arms, shields or other such logos requires special approval by Landlord J. Landlord expressly reserves the right to deviate from this sign criteria when dealing with other tenants. 2. GROUND SIGN #1: A. (1) freestanding multi-tenant ground sign shall be allowed in the northeast corner of the development providing signage to Hudson Boulevard. B. Ground sign is limited to a maximum height of 12.5’. C. Landlord will allocate which tenants shall be on the ground sign and allocate the amount of space to the individual tenants. D. Landlord expressly reserves the right to deviate from this sign criteria when dealing with other tenants. E. Freestanding sign will incorporate colors and/or decorative design similarities to building façade as determined by Landlord. SIGN CRITERIA PAGE 2 3. GROUND SIGN #2: A. (1) freestanding multi-tenant ground sign shall be allowed in the southwest corner of the development providing signage to I-94. B. Freestanding sign is limited to a maximum height of 30’ C. Landlord will allocate which tenants shall be on the ground sign and allocate the amount of space to the individual tenants. D. Landlord expressly reserves the right to deviate from this sign criteria when dealing with other tenants. E. Freestanding sign will incorporate colors and/or decorative design similarities to building façade as determined by Landlord. 4. PROHIBITED SIGNS: The following types of signs or sign components shall be PROHIBITED. A. Signs employing exposed raceways, ballast boxes or transformers. B. Signs employing moving of flashing lights. C. Signs, letters, symbols, or identification of any nature painted directly on the surface of the exterior to Leased Premises. D. Signs employing unedged or uncapped plastic letters or letters with no returns or expose d fastenings. E. Cloth, wood, paper or cardboard signs, stickers, decals or painted signs around or on exterior surfaces (doors and/or windows of the Leased Premises. F. Rooftop signs. G. Signs employing noise-making devices or components. H. Signs exhibiting the names, stamps, or decals of the sign manufacturer or installer. I. Signs prohibited by city ordinance. 5. SIGN APPROVALS: Procedure for obtaining Landlord’s approval of sign drawings A. Tenant shall submit one (1) set in electronic format (.pdf or .jpg) including a c olor photo rendering and specifications to Landlord for all proposed sign work. B. The drawings shall clearly show location of sign onto fascia of building, graphics, color and construction and attachment details C. The Landlord shall reply to Tenant with “Approved”, “Approved as Noted” or “Disapproved”. In no event shall erection of any sign take place without the written approval of the Landlord. Sign drawings that have been disapproved are to be redesigned and resubmitted to Landlord for approval within (7) days of receipt by Tenant. After the sign has been approved by Landlord, Tenant shall also require the approval of the City of Lake Elmo prior to the erecting said sign if said approval is required or requested by said City. Tenant is responsible for receiving and paying for all fees associated with the installation of this sign, including ALL permits. D. Approval of store design drawings or working drawings and specifications for Tenant’s Leased Premises does not constitute approval of any sign work SIGN CRITERIA PAGE 3 6. GENERAL TENANT REQUIREMENTS A. The furnishing and installation of signage and all expense incurred shall be the sole responsibility of the Tenant. B. Sign construction is to be completed according to the instructions contained w ithin this criteria C. All exterior signage installation must be performed utilizing mechanical platforms on the outside of the building. No ladders may be used in connection with said installation D. A representative of Landlord must be present prior to the installation of any exterior signage in order to supervise same E. Tenant shall, at its own expense, install and maintain a time clock that will cause its exterior signage to be fully illuminated at times provided in the Lease. From:Michael Bent To:Emily Becker Cc:Greg Malmquist Subject:Lake Elmo Shoppes Site Plan Review - Revisions Date:Thursday, May 11, 2017 9:10:20 AM Hey Emily Greg and I have reviewed the utility plan for the Lake Elmo Shoppes project. Below are revisions to the comments I sent to you previously and refer specifically to page C6: 1. The apparatus access roads look pretty good around the entire site with the following exceptions: a. The west end of the proposed building on Lot 2 indicates a Drive Thru lane and then a lane to the west of the drive thu lane, the plan does show a width for this lane, but it indicates a 16’ width (I missed it), please have the developer widen this to 20’ as the apparatus access width is set at a minimum 20’ wide. It doesn’t make any sense to choke the width down to 16’ and then widen it to the required width beyond and behind the buildings. 2. The fire protection water service is shown on the south side of both buildings. The Fire Department Connections for both of the proposed buildings will be installed on the north (front) of the buildings. A fire hydrant will need to be located on the west end island of the building on lot 2 and the east end island of the building on lot 1, in line with the proposed hydrant in the island at the northwest corner of lot 1. (totaling 3 hydrants on the north side of both buildings.) 3. No other hydrants are shown on the plans, another fire hydrant needs to be added in the vicinity of the west end of the building proposed to the north, my previous comment regarding the addition of a hydrant on the east end of the building to the north can be removed, there is an existing hydrant on the Kwik Trip property that will suffice for coverage. Let me know if you have any questions. Michael Bent Building Official City of Lake Elmo 651-747-3910 mbent@lakeelmo.org Resolution No. 2017-063 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-063 A RESOLUTION APPROVING LAKEWOOD CROSSING 2ND ADDITION PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLANS WHEREAS, CM Properties 94 LP, c/o MFC Properties, 3460 Washington Drive, Suite 100, Eagan, MN 55112 (“Applicant”) has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (“City”) for approval of Preliminary and Final Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plans for Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on March 13, 2017 to consider the PUD Concept Plan for Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council approved the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Concept Plan on March 21, 2017, and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans on June 12, 2017 and recommended approval subject to a number of conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the proposed Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans at a meeting on June 20, 2017; and NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1. That the Applicant has submitted all application requirements outlined in Sections 153.07; 153.08; and 154.759 for Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans. 2. That the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary Plat and PUD Plans meets at least one or more of the objectives outlined in Section 154.751 of the Zoning Code. 3. That the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans propose to enhance the site and retail shopping and dining experience with enhanced architectural materials and site furnishings. 2 Resolution No. 2017-063 4. That the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. 5. That the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans generally comply with the City’s Commercial zoning district. 6. That the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans complies with the City’s Subdivision Ordinance. 7. That the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat meets other City zoning ordinances, such as landscaping, tree preservation, erosion and sediment control, and other ordinances, except where noted in the conditions of approval, Staff report to the Planning Commission dated June 12, 2017 or attachments thereto. 8. That the Applicant has requested the following PUD flexibility from the City’s Zoning Code: a. Allowing medical facilities, drive-throughs, and outdoor dining as a permitted, rather than conditional, use. b. Allowing a minimum lot width of 18 feet for Lot 2. c. Allowing a maximum impervious surface of 80% for Lot 2, with a total of 75% impervious surface. d. Allowing flexibility from the minimum parking lot setbacks from property lines, allowing a zero foot setback between three lots and an 8.7 foot setback from the lot to the east. e. Allowing flexibility from certain Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual as detailed in the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated June 12, 2017. f. To waive off-street loading requirements. g. To waive requirement PUD requirement for 20% protected open space, as other site amenities are provided within the development. h. Approval of a Comprehensive Sign Plan which allows 2.5 square feet of wall signage per one (1) lineal foot of store front on the front and rear elevations; 1.5 square feet of wall signage per one (1) lineal foot on building on the west and east elevations; a 10’ X 12’ multi-tenant ground sign near the northeastern corner of the site; and a 14’ X 30’ multi-tenant monument sign located in the southwest corner of the site. 9. That the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans is consistent with the City’s engineering standards provided the plans are updated to address the City Engineer’s comments documented in a letter dated May 31, 2017. The Landscape Plan shall include additional landscaping along the Keats Ave N to WB I-94 ramp. 10. That the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans will require a relatively minor amount of city services and will not create a significant burden on the City. 11. That the Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans will not conflict with nearby land uses. 3 Resolution No. 2017-063 12. The Applicant will be extending municipal sewer and water to the westerly property (PID# 34.029.21.44.0004), providing benefit to the City. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Based on the foregoing, the Applicants’ application for Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD Plans, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. The Applicant shall address all of the comments outlined in the City Engineer memorandum dated May 31, 2017. 2. The Final Plat shall not be recorded until final construction plan approval is granted and all easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works department are recorded on the Final Plat. 3. The Applicant shall obtain all necessary permits including but not limited to all applicable city permits (building, grading, sign, etc.), NPDES/SWPPP permits, and Valley Branch Watershed District approval. 4. The Applicant should review with the MPCA if infiltration practices will be allowed, in particular the planned conversion of the existing storm water pond to a storm water infiltration basin directly east and adjacent to the service station. 5. The Applicant shall address all comments outlined in the Minnesota Department of Transportation memorandum dated June 1, 2017. 6. The Applicant shall be required to extend sanitary sewer and municipal water service to the westerly adjacent property. 7. Stormwater facilities shall be privately owned and maintained. A Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement in the City’s standard form must be executed and recorded. 8. A right turn lane on Hudson Boulevard shall be constructed at the Applicant to handle increased traffic volumes. 9. The Applicant shall amend the proposed Landscape Plan to comply with City standards and obtain approval by the City. 10. The Applicant shall provide financial security for 125% of landscaping materials with a Site Work Agreement. 11. The Applicant shall provide further information on the proposed drive-through locations including but not limited to exact location of speakers, windows, and refuse receptacles as well as drive-through canopy detail. 12. The Applicant shall address all of the recommendations to improve the drive-through operations as outlined in the Technical Memorandum prepared by Spack Consulting dated April 12, 2017. 13. The Applicant shall submit a photometric plan, and all lighting must meet requirements of Sections 150.035-150.038 of the City Code. 14. The Applicant shall pay a park dedication fee of $4500 per acre, totaling $17,190, in lieu of required parkland. 4 Resolution No. 2017-063 15. The Applicant shall address all comments outlined in the Fire Chief and Building Official email memos dated May 10, 2017 and May 11, 2017. Specifically, the building on Lot 3 shall be sprinklered; fire hydrant locations shall be added according to comments; and the drive aisle width to the west of the drive-through lane on Lot 2 shall be widened to 20 feet. The Applicant shall submit a plan and obtain approval from the Building Official and Fire Chief for the location of hydrants and No Parking and Fire Lane signs. 16. A Reciprocal Easement and Operating Agreement provided shared parking access across all lots shall be provided, approved by the City, and recorded. 17. Tables cannot block a public sidewalk or other walkway needed for pedestrian circulation. Minimum of 5 ft. of sidewalk must remain open 18. Mechanical rooftop equipment must be screened. 19. The Site Plan shall be updated to include lines that clearly delineate two aisles on the lanes to the south of Lots 1 and 2 and the east side of Lot 1. 20. The Applicant shall provide additional striping and/or a stop sign to facilitate traffic circulation in the area where access is shared with Kwik Trip. 21. Permitted medical facilities shall be limited to non-urgent facilities, including but not limited to clinics, eye doctors, and dental facilities. 22. The Applicant shall add site amenities such as benches, trash receptacles, decorative lighting, and signage compliant with the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual to the site plan. 23. Fencing shall be provided enclosing all outdoor dining areas. Passed and duly adopted this 20th day of June, 2017 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. __________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk STAFF REPORT DATE: 6/20/2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 18 TO: City Council FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Fence Ordinance REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director BACKGROUND: The City’s Zoning Code prohibits solid wall fences over four feet in height on lots under ½ acre in size. Any portion of a fence over four feet in height on such lots is to be at least 75% open to air and light, with certain provisions. A solid wall fence six feet in height was erroneously permitted on a lot within the Hunter’s Crossing development on a lot under half an acre in size. The fence permit application was not signed by the Planning department, yet the permit was erroneously issued. There are a number of issues with what transpired with this particular fence permit application, yet the ordinance that a solid wall fence that is over four feet in height is prohibited except under certain provisions still governs. The City has recently received a complaint by a property owner who has observed the aforementioned fence, also owns a lot that is under one half acre in size within the Hunter’s Crossing development, and believes that he should be able to have a solid wall fence six feet in height or that the aforesaid fence should be required to be removed. The City Council reviewed the City’s fence ordinance at its May 9, 2017 workshop and recommended that the Planning Commission review Section 154.205 of the City’s Zoning Code. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 12, 2017 and considered amendments to this Section and made recommendation to Council. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The Council is being asked to review proposed amendments to Section 154.205: Fencing Regulations of the City’s Zoning Code. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Ordinance Review. The City’s fence ordinance has been reviewed multiple times over the years. In 2013, a number of amendments were made to this Section. These amendments were thoroughly vetted over a number of meetings. While Council has asked that the Planning Commission review the City’s Fencing Regulations, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission specifically focus on Subd. (E), and specifically Subsection (3), which requires any portion of a fence over four feet in height on a yard that is less than half an acre to be at least 75% open to air and light. The most recent version of this section of the ordinance is below: 3. Residential Fence Design Requirements. Solid wall fences over four (4) feet in height shall be prohibited on any lot under ½ acre (21,780 square feet) in size. Any portion of a fence over four (4) feet on such lots shall be at least 75% open to light and air, except under one of the following circumstances: a. When a residential property abuts a district or use of a higher classification, and specifically, when an A, RR, RS, RE, or LDR district abuts any other district or a single family residential use abuts a multi-family residential use or a non-residential use. b. When a property is a through lot and abuts a street that is a higher functional classification than the street abutting the front yard of the property. c. For screening of outdoor living space subject to the following criteria: i. The area enclosed by outdoor extended living area fencing shall not exceed an enclosed area of 500 square feet. ii. A fence utilized to enclose an outdoor extended living area shall be extended to a point not more than 6 inches from the principal structure at 1 fence termination point. iii.A fence utilized to enclose an outdoor extended living area shall not extend into side yard of a lot beyond the existing building line of the existing principal structure, nor shall such fences be located in any side or front street yard. d. For screening or privacy purposes when the lineal measurement of the fence does not exceed one-fourth (¼) of the linear distance of the perimeter of a lot. Recent Amendments to Fencing Regulations. The Council re-reviewed this requirement in September and October of 2016 and made certain amendments to these provisions, striking the following. The Council at that time was not amenable to removing the prohibition of solid wall fences over four feet in height on lots less than half an acre in size entirely. d. For screening or privacy purposes when the lineal measurement of the fence does not exceed one-fourth (¼) of the linear distance of the perimeter of a lot. Such fences may only be installed with the written consent of the adjacent property owner. e. Under other circumstances when a solid fence is warranted due to safety, health, animal containment. or a similar purposes subject to review and approval by the City Council and with the written consent of the adjacent property owner. Planning Analysis. When lot sizes decrease, so does privacy from abutting lots. With narrower lots and houses closer together, there are not as many opportunities to provide adequate privacy and separation between homes and yards through site design alone. Fence Ordinances of Other Cities. Attached is a table that outlines fence ordinances of other cities. These cities were selected, as they were the cities used in the market analysis of the Job Classification and Compensation Study. This table shows that these cities generally allow a solid wall fence of up to six feet in height in side and rear yards. Current Code Limitations on Fences within Front and Side (Corner) Yards. The Fence Height and Design Section currently already limits fences on any lot to be over 42 inches in height within front or side (corner) yards and mandates that they be at least 50% open to air and light. This is consistent with other cities’ requirements and promotes public safety so as not to limit sight lines for drivers and pedestrians on streets. However, it should be considered that a rear yard may abut a public right-of-way, so it may be beneficial to change the language aforementioned language to the following: Fences within Front and Side (Corner) Yards. Any fence within a front or side (corner) yard setback or any required setback from a public right-of-way may not exceed forty-two (42) inches in height and must be 50% open to air and light. Additional Amendment Regarding Fences on Property Lines. There is currently a provision that requires that property owners wishing to erect a fence on a property line obtain permission from the adjacent property owner. The purpose of this provision is that typically erecting a fence on a property line will require access to a neighboring property for erection and maintenance of said fence. However, the provision only specifies that this permission is required if the fence is erected directly on the property line. This could mean that a fence that is erected even one inch off the property line would not require permission from the adjacent property owner. However, erecting and maintaining a fence set such a distance from the neighboring property line would still require access to the adjacent property. In order to provide clarification on this, Staff is recommending that language be amended to mandate that fences erected up to one foot off the property line require permission from the adjacent property owner. PLANNING COMMISSION/PUBLIC HEARING: The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this request at its June 12, 2017 meeting. No comments were received prior to the public hearing, and no one from the public spoke during the public hearing. The Planning Commission recommended that Staff-recommended amendments to Subd. (D) (5) and (E) (1) be made as well as striking Subd. (E) (3) of 154.205. The Planning Commission made this recommendation with an affirmative vote of 3-2. Affirmative comments included the following: • Smaller lots increase the need for privacy, and so the need for taller solid wall fences is greater. Dissenting comments included the following: • There are already exceptions to the prohibition of solid wall fences within the Zoning Code. • Seeing a wall of solid wall fences on smaller lots is not aesthetically pleasing. FISCAL IMPACT: None. OPTIONS: • Recommend adoption of Ord. 08-178, Staff and Planning Commission- recommended amendments to Section 154.205 of the Zoning Code. • Make alternative amendments to Section 154.205 of the Zoning Code, and adopt Ord. 08-178 as amended. • Not adopt Ord. 08-178. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend adoption of Ord. 08-178, amending Section 154.205 of the City’s Zoning Code. The recommended amendments can may be adopted with the following motion: “Move to recommend adoption of Ord. 08-178, amending Section 154.205: Fencing Regulations of the City’s Zoning Code.” If Council adopts the recommended Ordinance, Staff also recommends that Council adopt Resolution 2017-064, authorizing summary publication of Ord. 08-178 with the following motion: “Move to recommend adoption of Resolution 2017-064 authorizing summary publication of Ord. 08- 178.” ATTACHMENTS: • Ord. 08-178 • Fence Ordinance Comparison Table City 6 Foot Solid Wall Fence Allowed? Ham Lake Yes, but not in front yard Little Canada Yes, but not in front yard or in visibility triangle Mounds View Yes (up to 8 feet), except within 30 feet of an intersection Rogers Yes, but not in front or corner side yards Victoria Yes, but not in front or corner side yards Vadnais Heights Yes, but must meet accessory structure setback requirements if less than 25% open Orono Yes, but not within shoreland setback or rear or side yard facing a street Mound Yes, but not in the front or side corner yard Mahtomedi Yes, but not in front yards Albertville Yes, but not in front yards Waconia Yes, but not in front yards CITY OF LAKE ELMO RESOLUTION NO. 2017-064 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 08-178 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-178, an ordinance amending Section 154.205: Fencing Regulations of the Lake Elmo City Code; and WHEREAS, the ordinance is lengthy; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by t he City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, that the City Administrator shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 08-178 to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance: Public Notice The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo has adopted Ordinance No. 08-178, which: • Clarifies that fences may be installed with written permission from the adjacent property owner on or within one foot (12 inches) of property lines. • Restricts fences within required setbacks from any public right-of-way to 42 inches in height and at least 50% open to air and light. • Strikes residential fence design requirements prohibiting solid wall fences over four feet in height on properties under one-half acre in size or less. 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: June 20, 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: June 20, 2017 Consent ITEM #: 19 MOTION TO: City Council FROM: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Inwood 5th Addition Developers Agreement REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney Brian Swanson, Finance Director BACKGROUND: On April 4, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution 2017-029 approving the Final Plat and Final PUD for Inwood 5th Addition. An executed Developers Agreement is a condition of final plat approval and is required prior to recording the final plat with Washington County. At its last meeting, the Council considered the Inwood 5th Addition Developers Agreement. Discussion was held regarding the trail along 10th Street that was included in previous plans. The draft Developers Agreement previously presented to Council did not mandate the developer to construct this trail. The Council motioned to remove language which allowed this exception, and the Developer Agreement was recorded without this language. A First Amendment to Development Agreement has now been drafted. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The City Council is being asked to adopt Resolution 2017-067 approving an amendment to the Developer Agreement for Inwood 5th Addition. REVIEW/ANALYSIS: The Amendment to Development Agreement amends the following: • The Developer agrees to develop the Property in accordance with City approvals with the exception of requiring a multi-purpose trail to be constructed along 10th Street. This is due to the City and County determining that a trail along 10th Street between Island Trail and Inwood Avenue is not needed and therefore not required. FISCAL IMPACT: None. City Council – Staff Report Regular Item #19 Meeting date: 6/20/2017 Page 2 OPTIONS: The City Council is being asked to consider the approval of the Developer’s Agreement: 1) Adopt Resolution 2017-067 approving the Developer Agreement for Inwood 5th Addition. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution 2017-067 approving an amendment to the Developer’s Agreement for Inwood 5th Addition Planned Unit Development. Staff recommends the following motion: “Move to adopt Resolution 2017-067 approving the 1st amendment to the developer’s agreement for Inwood 5th Addition Planned Unit Development” ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution 2017-067 • 1st Amendment to Inwood 5th Addition Developer’s Agreement 1 Resolution 2017-067 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2017-067 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPER’S AGREEMENT FOR THE INWOOD 5TH ADDITION PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Hans Hagen Homes, 941 NE Hillwind Road, Suite 300, Fridley, MN (“applicant”) has previously submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (“City”) for a Final Plat for Inwood 5th Addition Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council considered and approved the Inwood PUD General Concept Plan on September 16, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council approved the Inwood Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan on December 2, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo City Council adopted Resolution 2017-029 on April 4, 2017 approving the Final Plat and Final PUD for Inwood 5th Addition; and WHEREAS, a condition of approval of said Resolution 2016-090, establishes that prior to execution of the Final Plat by City officials, the Applicant shall enter into a Developer’s Agreement with the City; and WHEREAS, the Applicant and the City have agreed to enter into such a contract and a copy of the Developer’s Agreement was submitted to the City Council for consideration at its June 6, 2017 meeting; WHEREAS, after further study, it has been determined by the City and Washington County that a trail along 10th Street between Island Trail and Inwood Avenue is not needed and is not being required; WHEREAS, the City acknowledges that this condition of City Council Resolution 2017-029 approving the Final Plat is no longer a condition of approval and agrees that the Developer shall not be required to construct, dedicate, or convey an easement for a trail along 10th Street between Island Trail and Inwood Avenue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby approve an amendment to the Developer’s Agreement for Inwood 5th Addition PUD and authorizes the mayor and city Clerk to execute the document. Passed and duly adopted this 20th day of June, 2017 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. ________________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor 2 Resolution 2017-067 ATTEST: ____________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk 501558v1 SJS LA515-30 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 M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Developer”). RECITALS: A. The City and the Developer have entered into a Development Agreement dated June 6, 2017 and recorded with Washington County on June ____, 2017 as Document No. ________ (the “Development Agreement”). B. The Development Agreement relates to that subdivision located in Lake Elmo, Minnesota known as Inwood 5th Addition and the property is legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto. C. The Development Agreement required a multi-purpose trail to be constructed by the Developer along 10th Street between Island Trail and Inwood Avenue (the “Trail”). This was a requirement of Washington County. D. Washington County is no longer requiring the Trail to be constructed. E. The City and the Developer desire to amend the Development Agreement to reflect this change. 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: 501558v1 SJS LA515-30 2 1. Section 7 of the Development Agreement shall be changed to read as follows: 7. DEVELOPMENT PLANS. The Developer agrees to develop the Property in accordance with the City approvals, including the terms and conditions of approval of the final plat as detailed in City Council Resolution No. 2017-29 (with the exception of requiring a multi-purpose trail to be constructed along 10th Street between Island Trail and Inwood Avenue, as detailed in Section 29 (G) of this Agreement), and to construct all improvements in accordance with the approved construction plans and specifications (collectively, the “Plans”) prepared by a professional engineer registered in the State of Minnesota at its sole expense. All terms and conditions of the City approvals are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement. The documents which constitute the Plans are those on file with and approved by the City and are listed on Exhibit B attached hereto. The Plans may not be modified by the Developer without the prior written approval of the City. 2. A new paragraph (G) shall be added to Section 29 of the Development Agreement which shall read as follows: G. After further study, it has been determined by the City and Washington County that a trail along 10th Street between Island Trail and Inwood Avenue is not needed and is not being required. Therefore, the City acknowledges that this condition of City Council Resolution No. 2017-29 approving the final plat is no longer a condition of approval and agrees that the Developer shall not be required to construct, dedicate, or convey an easement for a trail along 10th Street between Island Trail and Inwood Avenue. 3. All other terms and conditions of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 501558v1 SJS LA515-30 3 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 501558v1 SJS LA515-30 4 M/I HOMES OF MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL, LLC By:________________________________ Its: _______________________________ STATE OF _________ ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _________, 2017, by ___________________, the _______________ of M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, on behalf of the company. ___________________________________ 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 501558v1 SJS LA515-30 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: Outlots A, B, F and G, Inwood 3rd Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Washington County, Minnesota. STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 20 AGENDA ITEM: Janero Avenue North – Accept Petition and Consider Improvements SUBMITTED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director Chad Isakson, Assistance City Engineer ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council accept a petition to complete street improvements along Janero Avenue North and to accept the improved street as publically owned and maintained? BACKGROUND: Janero Avenue North, from 31st Street to the south dead end, is an unimproved gravel roadway with no defined drainage system and is privately owned and maintained. There are 6 residential properties with direct driveway access to Janero Avenue along with one vacant platted property. The street is largely single sided on the west with a 20 acre Outlot along the east side that is owned by the Farms of Lake Elmo homeowners association. The Outlot contains the Farms of Lake Elmo community drainfield and the HOA gains maintenance access to the drainfield from Janero Avenue. In 2006, the City extended municipal water service along Janero Avenue as part of the Tablyn Park-Lake Elmo Heights Watermain Extension Improvements. The City has a drainage and utility easement for the purpose of maintaining the 8-inch diameter public watermain. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: In May 2017, the City received a petition requesting Janero Avenue to be paved and for the City to assume the road as a publically owned street. The petition is dated April 31, 2017 and is signed by 4 property owners, consisting of 50% of the abutting parcels. The petition requests a simple blacktop road, no extra curbing/gutters, and within a reasonable price. Engineering and Public Works have completed a field review of the existing roadway conditions to determine the minimum scope of improvements necessary for staff to recommend City ownership. The minimum recommended improvements are outlined below and a high level cost estimate for these improvements was determined to be approximately $170,000 excluding easement/right-of-way acquisition. • Janero Avenue should be reconstructed to provide a minimum aggregate roadway base supported by a 12-inch granular subbase; then paved with 3.5-inches of bituminous. • The street would be constructed to a 24-foot width with a 45-foot cul-de-sac to support emergency vehicle and maintenance access. • Concrete curb and gutter is recommended to minimize adjacent property impacts and to direct roadway runoff to two separate discharge locations, one on the north end and one at 31st Street. • The improvements would likely trigger City ordinance and VBWD rules for storm water treatment and retention requiring infiltration basins, however minimal storm sewer appears to be needed due to the roadway topography. • Staff recommends that the improvements only be considered under the condition that all easement and right-of-way acquisition needed for the project be dedicated at no cost to the City. Easements would likely be required from the Farms of Lake Elmo HOA. Should the City Council wish to accept the petition and to consider accepting the street as publically owned and maintained, it is recommended that Council direct staff to meet with the impacted property owners to present the City’s position regarding the minimum scope of improvements and expected level of assessment should the project go forward. If the property owners are agreeable to the City’s position then staff would further recommend that any such project be scheduled in the Capital Improvement Program to be constructed in 2019. This would defer the completion of the feasibility report for the Janero Avenue improvements until the 2019 Street Improvement feasibility report is authorized. It should be noted that more detailed analysis completed for the feasibility report may present information that would change the City’s or property owner’s support for the project at that time. Staff would respectfully request Council direction in regards to the following areas: • Affirm staff recommendations for the minimal scope of improvements for a City owned and maintained street, or amend as desired. • Provide direction regarding the proposed property assessments that should be levied for these improvements. Staff can present a few example assessment calculations at the meeting for discussion. • Provided direction regarding any additional considerations regarding this proposal. FISCAL IMPACT: Unknown at this time. Capital cost participation by the City and ongoing maintenance costs have not yet been estimated and are dependent on the scope of work to be completed and assessment methodology selected. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council direct staff to meet with the property owners along Janero Avenue and the Farms of Lake Elmo HOA to present the City’s position regarding the scope of improvements, expected assessments, and other considerations to proceed with the improvement of Janero Avenue North and acceptance as a Public street. The recommended motion for this action is as follows: Move to direct staff to meet with the impacted property owners to present the City’s position regarding the scope of improvements, expected assessments, and other considerations to proceed with the improvement of Janero Avenue North and acceptance as a Public street.” ATTACHMENTS: 1. Petition for Local Improvements from Janero Avenue North, dated April 31, 2017. 2. Project Location Map. 3045 9941 9495 94479 3 4 5 9521 9 3 4 3 9434 9018 2850 9078 9517 9523 9098 91819038 3 0 5 2 9046 9095 9350 9141 9148 3023 9077 3014 2955 2 9 9 8 2877 2 9 7 8 2 9 8 4 9066 2971 2972 2 9 8 7 2 9 9 5 2962 2 9 9 2 2965 2959 2 9 4 9 2 9 7 9 2970 2950 9 0 5 1 3010 3030 2966 3053 2940 2904 9519 2990 9224 95 24 2909 3004 2994 9198 2991 2935 8866 9260 9240 9202 Created on 6/13/2017 This drawing is the result of the compilation and reproductionof land records as they appear in various Washington Countyoffices. The drawing should be used for reference purposes only. Washington County is not responsible for anyinaccuracies. MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLYNOT A LEGAL DO CUMENT 0 450 900225 Feet STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 21 AGENDA ITEM: Administration Department Staffing TO: Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: In 2015, the city had 20 regular employees, excluding library staff and paid on call firefighters. Today there are 22 positions filled or in the process of recruitment. The increase has been in the building department (+2) and public works department (+2) with a reduction in administration department (-2). At the May work session, staff shared with Council some of the challenges with the reduction of administration staffing such as some activities that are no longer being done. For example, there is less communication from the city to the public with the elimination of the taxpayer relations position. The Source Quarterly newsletter has not been issued since 2015. Also, with the four positions (clerk, deputy clerk, taxpayer relations, and admin assist) being essentially combined into two positions (clerk and admin assist) other functions are suffering such as human resources and record keeping. With the unionization of public works and the growth in staffing in other areas, human resources is becoming a bigger need in the city. With the growth in the city, there are more documents to track and manage according to the retention schedule and data practice provisions. The Council was asked to have a discussion on adding one additional staff position to the Administration Department, Assistant Administrator. The primary objective of the position would be to perform a variety of administrative responsibilities and interact routinely with the public and other agencies. This position would assist primarily in the areas of Human Resources, Communications and General Administration. The position would report to the City Administrator and supervise the cable casting staff. The Human Resources Committee reviewed the job description and discussed the need for additional staffing in the Administration Department at their recent meeting. They are recommending Council approve the job description and advertise for the position. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council approve the job description for an Assistant Administrator and authorize staff to advertise the position? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: A copy of the proposed job description for an Assistant Administrator is included in your packet. I used the job description from Waconia (one of the comparable cities used in the recent job classification and compensation study) as the starting point and modified it to best meet the needs in Lake Elmo. I have also included proposed job descriptions for the Clerk and Deputy Clerk so you can see how the duties are divided. Human Resource functions were moved from the Clerk to the Assist Admin. The Clerk and the Deputy Clerk would provide back up in the areas of communication such as website maintenance and newsletters. Using the Job Evaluation Tool (JET) recently created in the study completed by David Drown Associates, this position is proposed to be a level 11, with a hiring pay range of $55,000 to $60,550. This is an exempt position due to its handling of confidential data and supervisory duties. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated annual cost of the position (salary, taxes and benefits) is estimated at $85,000. Impact to the 2017 budget would be about $35,500 if the position were filled in August. OPTIONS: 1) Approve the Assistant Administrator job description and advertising for the position 2) Amend and then approve the Assistant Administrator job description and advertising for the position 3) Approve the addition of a different position for the Administration Department 4) Approve no additional staff for the Administration Department RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve the Assistant Administrator, Clerk and Deputy Clerk job descriptions and authorize advertising for an Assistant Administrator. ATTACHMENTS: • Assistant Administrator Job Description • Clerk Job Description • Deputy Clerk Job Description City of Lake Elmo Job Title: Assistant City Administrator Department: Administration Status: Full-time regular position Benefits: Qualifies for full-time benefits Reporting Relationship: Reports to City Administrator Supervisory Duties: Cable Casting staff Position Details: This position performs a wide variety of administrative responsibilities and interacts routinely with the public and other agencies. This position assists primarily in the areas of Human Resources, Communications, and General Administration. With the wide variety of work, this position works with all departments to carry out the work of the City. Human Resources:  Manage recruitment process for all departments. Assemble employment application information, post and publish advertisements, assist in development of selection procedures, assist in evaluating qualifications of candidates, develop interview questions, and participate in interviews as requested.  Evaluate and administer benefit programs, including health, dental, life, long- term disability, and supplemental insurance plans. Manage employee health coverage enrollment and termination.  Prepare and process routine payroll and benefit forms. Maintain confidential employee personnel files. Research and respond to employee inquiries, employment verifications, and draft routine correspondence.  Perform and coordinate employee orientation and training.  Coordinate drug and medical testing.  Comply with all federal and state reporting standards (Worker’s Compensation, COBRA, HIPAA, etc.).  Communicate policies and procedures as adopted by the City Council to employees in written and verbal format.  Participates in union negotiations  Coordinate and research all personnel issues necessary to properly administer municipal employment.  Assist with pay plan administration, pay equity, and job analysis.  Participate in the development of operations policies, practices, procedures, and recommendations to the City Administrator and City Council.  Assist in development and oversight of wellness programs.  Assist with Data Practices policy development and implementation.  Facilitate the city’s Human Resources Committee including but not limited to agenda preparation, research, committee minutes, etc. Communications:  Assist and serve as an online editor of the City’s social media profiles and website.  Write, edit, proofread, and approve content to be posted on www.lakeelmo.org.  Review, propose, manage, and coordinate with the City Administrator new and improved website enhancements.  Monitor communication efforts and user trends in the organization.  Assist all departments in public involvement and education by identifying target areas and means of communication.  Assist with the City’s public information programs, using all of the City’s tools.  Write, edit, proofread, and coordinate publication of the City’s newsletters both electronically and in print  Assist with internal communication initiatives.  Work with other agencies from time to time on communication programs.  Manage and schedule cable casting staff  Responds to data request inquiries  Establish and maintain effective relationships with other organizations, associations, businesses, and departments. General Administration:  Communicate and recommend measures to improve operations and employee performance both within the department and the organization as a whole.  Coordinate contract management for the City on general contracts (including but not limited to: prosecution contract, law enforcement contract, cellular antenna contracts, etc.)  Oversee the City’s general liability and workers compensation insurance programs.  Facilitate the city’s Environmental Committee including but not limited to agenda preparation, research, committee minutes, etc.  Assist with the maintenance of the City’s records management system.  Serve as liaison with state, county, and local officials to exchange information and coordinate activities associated with this position. While these areas are the primary focus of the position, we believe strongly in teamwork and employees will be called upon to perform a variety of duties as a part of their role with the City. Position Requirements Knowledge, Skills and Abilities:  Knowledge of federal and state statutes, city codes, and other requirements affecting municipal government operations.  Thorough knowledge in the areas of public sector personnel/human resources administration, principles, practices, and techniques including legal requirements.  Write clear and interesting articles, stories, social media posts, and other education and promotional material.  Considerable ability to interpret policy decisions and guidelines and to develop practical solutions and programs.  Considerable ability to resolve conflicts and negotiate solutions.  Considerable ability to maintain confidential or proprietary information within the bounds of the law.  Skill in analyzing facts, organizational procedures, and operational considerations.  Ability to work independently, determine priorities, work collaboratively, and make appropriate decisions.  Demonstrates a working knowledge of records management and MN data practices  Demonstrates a working knowledge of advanced office practices, procedures, equipment and Microsoft Office  Commitment to exceptional customer service and positive attitude  Demonstrates a team player approach and high level of professionalism in assisting staff  Demonstrates initiative in process improvement opportunities  Ability to perform successfully with minimal supervision  Ability to maintain effective and positive working relationships with staff and the public Education: Bachelor’s Degree in public administration, business administration, human resources or related field. Requirements: Minimum of three years’ experience working in local government. Specific requirements for this job include: • Valid MN Driver’s License Process basic computers skills, including a good knowledge of and experience using: • E-mail and Microsoft Outlook • Web Browsing • Basic Computer Mapping (Google Maps, Bing) • Adobe PDF Viewer • Microsoft Office Products • Desktop Publishing Desired Qualifications:  Master’s degree in public administration, business administration, human resources or related field.  Five years practical experience in personnel administration, business administration or local government  Knowledge of records management and MN data practices  Experience in the fundamentals of human resources  Initiative to look for continual improvement opportunities  Ability to exercise independent judgement and discretion in decision-making  Ability to effectively problem solve using analytical and strategic thinking Physical and Mental Requirements: Positions in this job typically require: sitting, feeling, manual dexterity, grasping, talking, hearing, typing, and seeing. This position encounters unexpected and prolonged workdays and stress and pressure from dealing with emotional issues and conflicts. There is also sustained exposure to computer keyboards and video screens. This positon is generally light-duty and may require the exertion up to 20 pounds of force on occasion and the ability to lift, carry, push, pull and move objects. The individual may encounter unexpected and prolonged workdays and stress and pressure from dealing with emotional issues and conflicts. **The physical demands described here are representative to those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of the job. Reasonable accommodations can be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Working Conditions: Most work is performed in an office setting **The work environment characteristics described here are representative to those an employee encounters while performing essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations can be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Competencies Common to All City Positions: • Develop, maintain a thorough working knowledge of, and comply with all departmental and applicable City policies and procedures • Demonstration by personal example the spirit of service, excellence, and integrity expected from all staff. • Develop respectful and cooperative working relationships with co-workers, including willing assistance to newer staff so job responsibilities can be performed with confidence as quickly as possible. • Confer regularly with and keep immediate supervisor informed of all important matters which pertain to the applicable job functions and responsibilities. • Represent the City of Lake Elmo in a professional manner to the general public, outside contacts and constituencies. City of Lake Elmo Job Title: City Clerk Department: Administration Status: Full-time regular position Benefits: Qualifies for full-time benefits Reporting Relationship: Reports to City Administrator Supervisory Duties: This position supervises Deputy Clerk, administrative assistants, and interns Position Details: The City Clerk performs moderate to complex technical duties and responsibilities of the City Clerk under the direction of the City Administrator. This position is responsible for all statutory functions and legal requirements of the Office of City Clerk; serves as Clerk to the City Council; responsible for state and local elections, municipal licensing, records management, public notices, and serves as the City’s Data Practices Responsible Authority. This position serves as Deputy Treasurer for the City and provides administration support to the City Administrator. A primary function of this position is to develop and maintain positive relationships with staff, council, citizens, and other groups and agencies. Clerk Duties:  Responsible for processing accounts payable  Responsible for Department filing and reporting  Coordinate with Departments to ensure vouchers are properly coded and approved for payment  Serves as Clerk to City Council: coordinates the recording of all meetings and official proceedings; supervises the preparation of minutes and other important documents of the City Council. Signs deeds, agreements and other official documents on behalf of the City Election:  Accept affidavits of filing of city council candidates  Obtain judges and supervise polls, preparation/posting/printing of notices/ballets/results.  Preparation of canvassing of board report of election results  Responsible for reporting results to County  Coordinate and supervise any special joint election between the school district and City  Stay abreast of any state election law change  Organizes and administers absentee voting Record Keeping:  Oversees the preparation and distribution of City Council packets and agendas  Attends all City Council meetings  Directs and manages official recordkeeping and notification requirements for the City, ensuring that all notices, ordinances, resolutions and other documents are posted, recorded, and published in accordance to law  Develops and administers a comprehensive records management system  Coordinate with American Legal for updating and maintaining the City’s online City Code Communications:  Back up for updates to the City’s website, Facebook and weekly email newsletter  Back up for front desk coverage  Back up for phones when busy to assist callers with setting up building inspections and other building department inquiries  Coordinate with vendors for the repair and replacement of current equipment (computers, laptops, tablets, desk phones, cell phones and copiers)  Responds to data request inquiries Finance:  Responsible for City licensing of liquor, animals, massage therapy, waste haulers, etc. While these areas are the primary focus of the position, we believe strongly in teamwork and employees will be called upon to perform a variety of duties as a part of their role with the City. Position Requirements Knowledge, Skills and Abilities:  Demonstrates a working knowledge in public elections  Demonstrates a working knowledge of records management and MN data practices  Demonstrates a working knowledge of management of the City’s legal documents  Demonstrates a working knowledge of finance and budgeting methods, reporting and practices  Demonstrates a working knowledge of advanced office practices, procedures, equipment and Microsoft Office  Commitment to exceptional customer service and positive attitude  Demonstrates a team player approach and high level of professionalism in assisting staff  Demonstrates initiative in process improvement opportunities  Ability to perform successfully with minimal supervision  Ability to maintain effective and positive working relationships with staff and the public Education: two-year degree or associates degree in business, accounting, public administration, urban and regional studies or related field Requirements: Minimum of five years’ experience working in local government or an equivalent of work experience and education. Specific requirements for this job include: • Minnesota Municipal Clerks Certification or the ability to acquire it within three years of employment • Valid MN Driver’s License Process basic computers skills, including a good knowledge of and experience using: • E-mail and Microsoft Outlook • Web Browsing • Basic Computer Mapping (Google Maps, Bing) • Adobe PDF Viewer • Microsoft Office Products Desired Qualifications:  Previous experience as a Municipal Clerk  Knowledge of principles and practices of local government  Knowledge of records management and MN data practices  Knowledge and experience in the public elections process  Experience in the fundamentals of finance and budgeting  Initiative to look for continual improvement opportunities  Ability to exercise independent judgement and discretion in decision-making  Ability to effectively problem solve using analytical and strategic thinking  Four-year degree in business, public administration, management or accounting Physical and Mental Requirements: Positions in this job typically require: sitting, feeling, manual dexterity, grasping, talking, hearing, typing, and seeing. This position encounters unexpected and prolonged workdays and stress and pressure from dealing with emotional issues and conflicts. There is also sustained exposure to computer keyboards and video screens. This positon is generally light-duty and may require the exertion up to 20 pounds of force on occasion and the ability to lift, carry, push, pull and move objects. The individual may encounter unexpected and prolonged workdays and stress and pressure from dealing with emotional issues and conflicts. **The physical demands described here are representative to those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of the job. Reasonable accommodations can be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Working Conditions: Most work is performed in an office setting **The work environment characteristics described here are representative to those an employee encounters while performing essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations can be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Competencies Common to All City Positions: • Develop, maintain a thorough working knowledge of, and comply with all departmental and applicable City policies and procedures • Demonstration by personal example the spirit of service, excellence, and integrity expected from all staff. • Develop respectful and cooperative working relationships with co-workers, including willing assistance to newer staff so job responsibilities can be performed with confidence as quickly as possible. • Confer regularly with and keep immediate supervisor informed of all important matters which pertain to the applicable job functions and responsibilities. • Represent the City of Lake Elmo in a professional manner to the general public, outside contacts and constituencies. City of Lake Elmo Job Title: Deputy Clerk Department: Administration Status: Full-time regular position Benefits: Qualifies for full-time benefits Reporting Relationship: Reports to City Clerk Supervisory Duties: This position has no supervision responsibilities Position Details: The Deputy Clerk performs various types of skills including front office customer service, support the Administration Department, support City Clerk and other duties as assigned. Performs statutory clerk duties in the absence of the City Clerk. Customer Service:  Fields all incoming phone calls  Greets and assists visitors at front counter  Provides general assistance to the public  Receives, distributes and handles incoming and outgoing mail  Schedules park reservations, conference rooms and council chambers  Issues and tracks licensing programs Administrative Support:  Responsible for opening and closing of City Hall  Assists with administrative mailings, publications, management of social media and community communications  Assists with records management and data practices requests  Assists with elections and serves as an election judge  Assists with the preparation and distribution of Council and Parks Commission packets  Responsible for minute taking for the Parks Commission  Assists with scheduling building inspections  Assist with Right of Way permits  Assist with alcohol, tobacco, dog and other city licenses Financial Support:  Responsible for ordering offices supplies and maintaining inventory  Assists with utility billing inquiries and mailings  Responsible for preparation of bank deposits  Responsible for petty cash reconciliation While these areas are the primary focus of the position, we believe strongly in teamwork and employees will be called upon to perform a variety of duties as a part of their role with the City. Position Requirements Knowledge, Skills and Abilities:  Commitment to exceptional customer service and positive attitude  Demonstrate poise, tact, and diplomacy with strong focus on delivering superior customer service to internal and external customers  Demonstrate a working knowledge of Microsoft Office software and office equipment  Demonstrate initiative in process improvement opportunities  Strong attention to detail in reporting, accounting, and official city record keeping  Ability to maintain effective and positive working relationships with associates and the public  Possess excellent written and verbal communications skills  Possess excellent phone etiquette, with the ability to relate effectively with diverse individuals  Ability and willingness to work in a fast-paced environment While these areas are the primary focus of the position, we believe strongly in teamwork and employees will be called upon to perform a variety of duties as a part of their role with the City. Education: High School Diploma or GED Requirements: Minimum of five years’ experience working in local government or an equivalent of work experience and education. Desired Qualifications:  Knowledge of principles and practices of local government  Knowledge or experience in permitting and licensing  Advanced computer software knowledge  Ability to exercise independent judgement and discretion in decision-making  Ability to effectively problem solve using analytical and strategic thinking  Knowledge of City and State regulations related to building, housing and zoning Physical and Mental Requirements: Positions in this job typically require: sitting, feeling, manual dexterity, grasping, talking, hearing, typing, and seeing. This position encounters unexpected and prolonged workdays and stress and pressure from dealing with emotional issues and conflicts. There is also sustained exposure to computer keyboards and video screens. This positon is generally light-duty and may require the exertion up to 20 pounds of force on occasion and the ability to lift, carry, push, pull and move objects. The individual may encounter unexpected and prolonged workdays and stress and pressure from dealing with emotional issues and conflicts. **The physical demands described here are representative to those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of the job. Reasonable accommodations can be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Working Conditions: Most work is performed in an office setting **The work environment characteristics described here are representative to those an employee encounters while performing essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations can be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Competencies Common to All City Positions: • Develop, maintain a thorough working knowledge of, and comply with all departmental and applicable City policies and procedures • Demonstration by personal example the spirit of service, excellence, and integrity expected from all staff. • Develop respectful and cooperative working relationships with co-workers, including willing assistance to newer staff so job responsibilities can be performed with confidence as quickly as possible. • Confer regularly with and keep immediate supervisor informed of all important matters which pertain to the applicable job functions and responsibilities. • Represent the City of Lake Elmo in a professional manner to the general public, outside contacts and constituencies. STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 22 AGENDA ITEM: Remaining Parks 2017 CIP Items TO: Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: The 2017-2021 CIP included five projects in the parks department for this year. Three of them have been approved for purchase of bids. The two projects yet to be started are improvements at Pebble Park and a trail along 50th Street. At their special meeting to work on the CIP on May 30th, the Parks Commission is recommending the Council not complete the 50th St trail and Pebble Park improvements in 2017 because of exceeding planned spending in 2017 and the establishment of new priorities. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should Council direct staff to proceed with remaining Parks CIP items for 2017? PROPOSAL: The Parks Commission is recommending the following items not be completed this year: PR-002, 50th Street Trail for $140,000; PR-005, Pebble Park Improvements for $80,000 (restrooms, lighting and security features). If Council still wants to proceed with these items this year, they should direct staff to obtain quotes for the Pebble Park Improvements. Further direction would need to be given to authorize the City Engineer to complete a feasibility study of the 50th St trail as is the typical process with any work in the right of way. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated cost of these projects is $220,000. This number, as noted in the CIP last year, does not include right of way acquisition for the trail on 50th St. OPTIONS: 1) Direct staff to proceed with the Pebble Park Improvements and 50th St Trail 2) Direct staff to proceed with either the Pebble Park Improvements or the 50th St Trail 3) Support Parks Commission recommendation of not completing these projects in 2017 RECOMMENDATION: Motion to support Parks Commission recommendation to not complete Pebble Park and 50th St Trail improvements in 2017. ATTACHMENTS: None STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20, 2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 23 AGENDA ITEM: Paperless Council Packets and Computer Reimbursement TO: Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: At the April, work session Council discussed going to a paperless packet model. Council positions were mixed but since at least two members were supportive of the idea staff has drafted a resolution and set of guidelines for Council to consider adopting at this meeting. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council adopt the Guidelines for Paperless Council Packets? If so, should the City reimburse Council for the purchase of a computer or other electronic device for use in reading the packets? PROPOSAL: Included in your packet are proposed Guidelines for Paperless Council Packets. It lays out the purpose of the policy, how meeting materials would be distributed to Council, staff and the public, provides a reminder on the classification and retention of electronic data and outlines security protocols. These guidelines are proposed to be adopted as an appendix to the resolution laying out how Council may be reimbursed for the purchase of a computer to use for this purpose. The resolution provides for a $1,000 per term reimbursement for each member of the Council. Since there were different opinions from Council about whether or not the City should purchase laptops or other electronic devices for members if the City chose to go paperless, staff is proposing this option to provide flexibility for each member. This will also allow members to get the device that works best for them. The effective date of the guidelines would be the first meeting in August to allow time for Council to obtain electronic device if they wish to. FISCAL IMPACT: The City Clerk spends about 5 hours for each Council meeting packet in preparation-copying, stapling, assembling, etc.-and delivery-driving packets to each member’s house. An additional $1,800 per year is spent on supplies such as paper, copies, staples, binders, etc. OPTIONS: 1) Approve Resolution No-2017-65 2) Amend and then Approve Resolution No 2017-65 3) Do not adopt Resolution No 2017-65 RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve Resolution No 2017-65 ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution • Guidelines CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2017-65 RESOLUTION APPROVING PAPERLESS PACKETS FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS AND REIMBURSEMENT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR THE PURCHASING OF COMPUTER AND COMPUTER RELATED EQUIPMENT. WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo can cut costs incurred by the continuous purchasing of paper, preparation of City Council agendas, delivery of City Council agendas and use the paper- related products used during meetings; and WHEREAS, the City currently budgets approximately $6,400 per year for paper, equipment, and staff time for preparation for delivery of City Council agendas; and WHEREAS, a reimbursement program for electronic equipment for Council members is anticipated to cost an average of $1,000 per year; and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo can become more environmentally friendly by cutting back on the use of paper and instead focus on using modern technology. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the attached Guidelines for Paperless Council Meeting Packets in the City of Lake Elmo is hereby adopted. 2. That the Mayor and City Council members of the City of Lake Elmo will be provided reimbursement by the City for a computer, tablet or other electronic device purchased for use in their official capacity as Lake Elmo City Council members in a maximum amount of $1,000 with receipt for proof of purchase. 3. That the reimbursement will be done once per member per four-year Council term. The computer or electronic device must be purchased within twelve (12) months of the member’s term to be eligible for reimbursement as provided in this Resolution. 4. That the computer or electronic device purchases reimbursed under this Resolution are the personal property of the Mayor and Council member. Individual Council members may refuse this benefit. 5. That only those councilmembers in office on January 1, 2017 and thereafter will be eligible for this reimbursement. Notwithstanding the preceding provision, a Mayor elect and Council members elect who will take office effective January 1 of any year may be reimbursed after January 1 of any year, for their computer equipment purchased prior to the effective date of the commencement of their term in office. Also, any Mayor or Council member in office at the time of the effective date of this resolution may receive said reimbursement for purchases made within twelve (12) months of the effective date. 6. The Guidelines for Paperless Council Meeting Packets will be effective with the August 1, 2017 Council meeting packet. APPROVED by the Lake Elmo City Council on this 20th day of June, 2017. By: __________________________ Mike Pearson Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Julie Johnson City Clerk Updated 11/19/13 Guidelines for Paperless Council Meeting Packets in the City of Lake Elmo These guidelines apply to all members of the city council and mayor in the City of Lake Elmo. For purposes of these guidelines, “city clerk” means the city clerk, manager, administrator or his / her designee. These guidelines apply regardless of whether the council member is using a city-provided email address and account, his/her personal email address or account, or one provided by his/her employer. The purpose of the paperless meeting packet guidelines is to use technologies to save City Funds, Staff time, better communicate with the public and allow for a more eco-way of providing government through the use of innovative technologies. The City has committed itself to more efficient, greener, innovative procedures using technologies. Paperless agendas and the related devices is one tool to help the City of Lake Elmo accomplish these goals. Additionally, these guidelines will set out the proper procedures the City Council will follow when using electronic media and the City’s electronic communication system. These guidelines will also insure that the use of electronic media complies with applicable law, including but not limited to the Minnesota Open Meetings Law and Government Data Practices Act. MEETING MATERIALS Electronic communication of meeting materials should generally be conducted in a one-way communication from the city clerk to the council. • Council members may receive agenda materials, background information, and other meeting materials via email attachment or other electronic means (such as file sharing) from the city clerk. • If a council member has questions or comments about materials received, s/he should inquire via electronic means directly back to the city clerk or appropriate staff member. A council member should not copy other council members on his/her inquiry. • If the clarification is one of value to other council members, the city staff may send follow-up materials or information to the council. PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING PAPERLESS MEETING PACKTES • The Mayor and City Council members of the City of Lake Elmo will be provided reimbursement by the City for an electronic device purchased for use in their official capacity as Lake Elmo City Council members in a maximum amount of $1,000 with receipt for proof of purchase • Information pertaining to one or more scheduled meetings items (i.e. meeting “packets”) shall be regularly available on Google Docs, Dropbox (or similar file sharing program) or via Email Transmission. Updated 11/19/13 • All City Council members will be required to use an electronic device to read and download information at meetings. Materials will be available in electronic format only. Paper copies will not be mailed but available for pickup at City offices at the time agendas are posted for meetings for those needing ADA provisions. Upon receipt of an email from the City Clerk’s office, City Council shall be individually responsible for viewing the meeting’s packet and to review their packet in advance of the scheduled meeting. • Meeting information will be available for City Council members and Staff by 4:00 p.m. the Thursday prior to the meeting or equivalent day. Special meetings packet will be available 72 hours ahead of time. On the day of the meeting the most current packet will be available by the start of the meeting. • Council Packets will be posted online for the public no later than 2:00 p.m. the Friday prior to the Council Meeting. • The media will be required to go online to access information on the City Council Meeting as the public will. • All Consultants, Vendors and the Public must submit reports, or requests in a PDF or MS Word digital format or other format requested by the City. • The City of Lake Elmo will accept limited copies of reports or studies from the various Consultants, Vendors and the Public. • Materials relating to agenda items of a meeting must also be made available to the public at the meeting. One paper copy of the meeting packet will be made available at the meeting to comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. CLASSIFICATION AND RETENTION OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS • Regardless of whether electronic communication by a council member is taking place on a city-provided computer, home computer or other computer system, classification of information as public, private or other is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (Minn. Stat. Chapt. 13) and should be treated accordingly. • Council members should retain electronic communications in keeping with city policies and procedures, whether such communication takes place on a city-provided computer, home computer or other computer system. • City Council members may occasionally receive private or non-public electronic information. Some examples of non-public information are: personnel records, internal investigations, information relating to litigation or potential litigation, attorney-client communication, information relating to labor negotiations, or information relating to confidential real estate negotiations. When Council members receive private or non-public information, it should be marked “Private Information” or “Non-Public Data” so that Council members are alerted to the nature of the information. Updated 11/19/13 • Private or non-public information should not be sent or forwarded to individuals or entities not authorized to receive that information and should not be sent or forwarded to City employees not authorized to view such information. • The City Attorney should be contacted concerning any questions about whether a communication is private or non-public data. SECURITY • City Council and Staff members are encouraged to take appropriate steps to protect the security of networks and files by the use of passwords and by taking all necessary steps to maintain the integrity of passwords. While the City Clerk shall have the right to know all passwords, passwords should not otherwise be shared, nor should they be posted. • Any suspected breach of security, damage, destruction, or theft of any computer or other device owned by the City should be reported to the City Administrator as soon as possible.