Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAug 8th 2009 Council Packet City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo,Minnesota August 18, 2009 7:00 p.m, A. CALL TO ORDER B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C. ATTENDANCE: Johnston DeLapp Emmons Park Smith D`. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: (The approved agenda is the order in which the City Council will do its business.) E. ORDER OF BUSINESS: (This is the way that the City Council runs its meetings so everyone attending the meeting or watching the meeting understands how the City Council does its public business.) F GROUND RULES: (These are the rules of behavior that the City Council adopted for doing its public business.) G, APPROVE MINUTES: 1. Approval of the August 4,2009 City Council minutes H. PUBLIC COMMENTSANQUIRIES: In order to be sure that anyone.wishing to speak to the City Council is treated the same way, meeting attendees wishing to address the City Council on any items NOT on the regular agenda may speak for up to three minutes. I. CONSENT AGENDA: (Items are placed on the consent agenda by city staff and the Mayor because they are not anticipated to generate discussion. Items may be removed at City Council's request.) 2. Approve payment of disbursements and payroll 3. Approve Declaration of default in development agreement -Farms of Lake Elmo 4. Truck replacement upgrade --Public Works 5. Award contract of 2009 Crack Seal Project J.. REGULAR AGENDA: 6. Resolution No. 2009-035 Setting date for sale of bonds for 2009 Street Improvements i 7. Consider an application to allow construction of a covered porch five feet into the required 30 foot front yard setback at 8618 Ironwood Trail N.; Resolution No. 2009-03 6 S. Lanes DeMontreville Country Club Addition—Request to order the preparation of feasibility report for sanitary sewer and water improvements; Resolution No. 2009-037 9. Project Agreement with the VBWD to repair an eroding ravine and to prevent sediment from washing into Lake DeMontreville 10. MAC recommendation on further investigation to purchase 100' ladder truck K. -REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: (These are verbal updates and do not have to be formally added to the agenda.) • Mayor and City Council • Administrator • Planning Director L. Adjourn "'RAFT City of Lake Elmo City Council Minutes August 4,2009 Mayor Johnston called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor Johnston and Council Members DeLapp, Park and Smith Absent: Council Member Emmons Also Present: Interim City Administrator Dawson,Planning Director Klatt, City Engineer Griffin, City Attorney Snyder,Finance Director Bouthilet and City Clerk Lumby APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION.- Council Member DeLapp moved to approve the August 4, 2009 City Council agenda as presented. Council Member Park seconded the motion. The motion passed 4- 0. ORDER OF BUSINESS: GROUND RULES: APPROVED MINUTES: The July 21,2009 City Council minutes were approved by consensus. PUBi IC COMMENTSANQUIRIES:None CONSENT AGENDA: MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to approve Items#345 on the Consent agenda as presented. Council Member Park seconded the motion. The motion passed 4- 0. • Award bid to Sun Ray Plumbing and hearing Inc for the CDBG Gas Line replacement project in the Cimarron neighborhood; Resolution No. 2009-034 •. Authorize the expenditure of$4,950 (plus tax)to expand parking lot in Reid park • Appoint David Steele, 9576 55fl' Street, as First Alternate,Parks Commission REGULAR AGENDA: Ap rove payment of disbursements and payroll in the amount of$167 569.54 Council Member DeLapp asked for a clarification of a disbursement. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 21, 2009 1 MOTION: Council Member DeLapp moved to approve payment of disbursements and payroll in the amount of S167,569.54. Council Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0. Approve temporary liquor license required by Lake Elmo Rotary to sell beer at the Fall Festival Council Member Smith, Fall Festival member, asked that this item be continued until the August 18th Council agenda so that the Fall Festival Committee can discuss this request. MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to continue consideration of the request by Lake.Elmo Rotary to sell beer at the Fall Festival until the August 18 Council Meeting. Motion failed 2-2 (Mayor Johnston and Council Member DeLapp voting against.) MOTION: Council Member DeLapp moved to conditionally approve the temporary liquor license requested by the Lake Elmo Rotary upon a positive decision from the Fall Festival Committee to include this activity, Mayor Johnston seconded the motion. The motion passed 34 (Council Member Smith voting against.) MPCA Update on Lake Jane/Washington County Landfill Remediation Project Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator, related the City Council requested that MPCA provide an update on the remediation project at the Lake Jane/Washington County Landfill. Pat Hanson and Peter Tiffany,MPCA, explained that construction on the Lake Jane/Washington County Landfill remediation project began in early June with project duration of 3+ years. As the contractor, Enebak Construction,began work, it proposed a different phasing plan than what had been anticipated in the plans developed by the MPCA's engineering consultant, The MPCA is in agreement with the contractor's approach and the duration of the project is now anticipated to be 2+years. Council Member DeLapp questioned whether the MPCA activities at the Lake Elmo landfill site constitute"mining" as defined by the City Code; and noted that the City Code includes specific provisions and permitting related mining. He believed that MPCA is therefore in violation of the City Code by its activities at the Lake Elmo Landfill site. Peter Tiffany responded that State Attorney General Office advised that MPCA was not subject to the mining regulations. The MPCA has pledge their cooperation with the City for completion of this project. The City website has a link to the MPCA website for weekly updates. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 21, 2009 2 Authorize Enforcement Action re:5699 Keats Avenue North Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator,reported in December, 2008 the City Council, acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, ordered several code violations at 5699 Keats Avenue N. be remedied by June 30, 2009. A compliance review was made on July 11, 2009 found that only one item had been completed satisfactorily. The remaining violations continue. 1. Removal of proper storage of personal property items including,but not limited to, piles of brick,piles of wood, a large tank,etc. 2: Removal of the small cabin or proper changes to the structure necessary to meet the definition of"tool shed". 3: Landscaping to the east of the house between the garage door and the rear entry door, including required construction of a retaining wall. In a review by the acting building official, with the assistance of a TKDA structural _ engineer, it was determined that the retaining wall as constructed required a building permit and an engineer's certification; the property owner did not apply for a permit nor provided the engineer's certification. Rod Sessing, 5699 Keats Avenue, believed that many of the issues were now in compliance or would be shortly. With regard to the retaining wall, Mr. Sessing was not aware, until now,that it had to meet structural engineer's regulations and required a permit. In response to Mr. Sessing's complaint regarding another property,Attorney Snyder pointed out that a resident should come into the City and files their complaint and the City staff will make its review. MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to authorize commencement of legal proceedings for enforcement of the Order of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals regarding property at 5699 Keats Avenue N. Mayor Johnston second the motion. The motion passed 3-1 (Council Member voting against.) Budget Discussion Council Member Smith requested a committee be formed comprised of two council members, for the purpose of providing recommendations and options on the budget. _ Mayor Johnston and Council Members DeLapp and Smith volunteered to serve on the budget committee. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 21, 2009 3 MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to form a committee of two Council Members to review the budget with the staff and provide recommendations and possible options. Council Member DeLapp seconded the motion. The motion passed 3-1 (Mayor Johnston voted against.) MOTION: Council Member Park moved to amend the motion by including the nomination of Council Member Smith and Emmons to serve on the budget committee. If Council Member Emmons cannot make the meeting, Mayor Johnston will serve on the committee. Council Member DeLopp seconded the motion. The motion as amended passed 3-1 (Mayor Johnston voted against.) The Council meeting was adjourned at 8:36 p.m.. Respectfully submitted by Sharon Lumby, City Clerk LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 21, 2009 4 City Council 8/18/2009 CONSENT Item: 2 ITEM: Approve disbursements in the amount of $ 141,031.13 SUBMITTED BY: Tom Bouthilet, Finance Director Claim# Amount Description ACH $ 8,016.06 Payroll Taxes to IRS 08/13/09 ACH $ 1,202.71 Payroll Taxes to Mn Dept.of Revenue 08/13/09 DD2323 - DD2359 $ 22,754.06 Payroll Dated 08/13/2009 (Direct Deposit) 34537 - 34546 $ 19,222.06 Payroll Dated 08/13/2009 (Payroll) 34547 - 34596 $ 89,836.24 Accounts Payable Dated 08184/2009 Total: $ 141,031.13 SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to approve disbursements in the total amount of $141,031.13 V M O. oO �n oo 00 G ry O� Vn vi F ^ cT In 0 0 00 0 v t 0 0 0— 0 0 .0 0 m In r,1 ' C> 00 M 00011-- N `. 2 a0 Wn In n 3. O+ O ov)�D rn ao o r- N -- M V1 M v'1 I� O 00 N e} 7' O N ^F 7 W' M ^ O N 1D ^ W N t G V' F V1 I� F F � 00 — 00 W M\D O� 00 F ^ rn V1 00 T C N M (V S n CJ M V O tit v1 N O� M -- Vr O\ m 00 .. N W) F — C 1 41 M N fY V1 N M CV N w --M ^ rn ai C 3 O = U U = a 'u uya L ti V , C. L L_ ci ci ci ci ci ci v v ci ci ci ci ci ci tj ci n o eJ u O O N v rSS S = 55 � r = = _ cry u u o o = � � o _ y � c cCO 3 c a _ OW 504 � l� Q ❑ QOO � gO ^ f] d „Lv2!- w_ LF^�r � bG� ]G F 1 L� e•CLF�- FY- Ex- E-+ P � C/) M 2 J f aOOatn cn. En _ u n U ` a1 ceI J rJ N . N N . 77 67 N 67 N y y aJ a`3 U L L 0 N N O y V V U U U _U U U U U V U V L L7.• •v W L •L V } L V •L •� U UUN C: O .V U C rJ U U L U U U d L U U E v+ cn cn cn cn Ln to tX a; In'In vVJ vJ "no v9 w7J , o v�i Z cn ^oCIO wouoow0000mona0coou omrnan� ,�, .=caves ,^ ` o COC 0. C. s g — n — N rJ U U L U d G V L U U U U N N J U � v u ry u u u v u v v cJ u v u v u v v co � v rn tr] co. � •c ,c •c •c c .c .5 .c c.= ._.c.5 5 .c .c .c •E E �. u u - �'� 'h "' " u +- oo ca eo 00 op Sri aJ on'^o m on on on'en no en fir, a� `o c _ r= w a c aJ .c u U C Q C C C =4 rC rC .^ ; 0 0 9 7 G N U H 7 07 vJu7W wctu; [�. cc7u: ti?:u .�: t� c°7 .LCJ. .= UOOOtI- c_ a ccuDU V y+ > � > > a c v v = u 5 5 u u v o moo ? xx _ 13 E = E E E 3 0. ci L. u " r c s 3 c o 5 5 3 c 5 9 - 5 a Z o. co. cc 3 � 3yy i � ` .t. �1.. LL'-, LLt:-. G+. L•. ', � � � N L O O O O O N N V 0 4 L vy pt"E, q ti t7 '� , U y E] v W N A U 7) ^ '3 yj LO N V !>? Cl iE j V V aC� Q7r1n t7VU 21 V/ N r-1 Ol y •� RS a a+ � c a 01 Cm a as a O.a` a o+ON a a% 01 a o� o1 rn a a a rn C, C',C, o, a � o. c� oc 000go 00000 00 . ovn0000coo 000 0 0 ✓10 oov o `S ( oC o •oo ^- oo a000 oo � 000 � � og _ �y Y N fV fV N N N N ` N N [i =i N N N �V N N N N N N fH N N N N N N NI N (V\ \ \ \ \ \ \ i \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ cd C V o0 0o x oo x oo ac oG o0 0o x 00 oc o0 0o as oo x oo x ao , Q-d x x o0 00 00 ao s � � � � ;47 � � � R o O O� � � O O C O �� � a � E� w �� w � soww ww00 a Q en v O O C C 0 0 0 0 0 C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O C 0 N \ M N N N C`1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N F F ? In v) w 00 N t X eJ• 7 0 p v x � r- ON C+ O, O+ T TO (2. On ON O+ O\ O+ 17, 1T O% In Y1�n vi v�O. xo0 �0 �0 o0 OC o0x00 xx 1 U u U O 2 h h n rn v) v, In In In In vi Inkn �n v, v) vi In n In In In In n In In In -7 d v '7 R a "r C' of 7 st e} 7 t It t 7 d' � 7 -et Q d• 7 1* "V U U U M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M U 4 � U C O e-� r ao o. v, tit 0 0 C? Q In O O Sp O•O m 00 O ��y.1 p M N M N O O O NN�� C7 pp ao O M Cr 00 M O+ 4 QO� L'�CO + .++OOO V'1 CeprOO r-+rt CO W, 13, O�� v100W OOh^ OCf Ci Ci C! ^ O ^ Oin V' — OpM00opdp1� h Vjr viN •7 C] etti . tYN � W% r' p •� Q1 � � vlQi .D000? Ovi � s Mr nl h4+ d00M •tl' N O � OhN -- "o fn nN VSMri1 M N ^ � V� r .- r• C? MN Intl) ri W M z •C z� 08 qq 41 G •rd r •� :i cC6 C o O 2 r'�, 4 .: a F C. VI � � O O V C u C) o d . c C S o o. uUU SR S U a' Q u to;cn 00 ci o a 000bptp oo" oo :� ms'b � o"o"oo "fie C� ' " + .� ^ c p > �, ii � w> nS[iy, aue'd ' GIG � Uao o � a0000 �i Erava a CIA. 2 c c � C°Jt� � o a U E £ si� Wa, x= `'A9Wr � or T�� s o ¢ a u �G �)0uw � av wwww � � yc>t� � ° u Fi '^ r:taralsl�+aws� rac� wr' wwW `T, U d }_,� y ..'AE :AA .aG A C' �' Ll a te}+ c SE'� d 0 A U N .,—CL p„ O y •�O � +aw � a a •'CD � 'L7 TJ O. �, C � q � •C�3 ov�a � &3a � G3a � �abu" L." gp , g � • tv' S S � c � r _S " a �'•y u 0 3 .5 - ,c'.: s- M c as w � S `] 000 �F ro =' `,,� �� en e„n� � 07 W � OOOC) ` =, ., y 0000 u vW];.] u u U 0 0 0 o� � 7 e", dl y � .�.. y v l'>6> N L 41 G lJ u. ct v� � �UOc Las , vi �'. aa, i ;� lar� v�iwWviW tn c 0 0 _ a, TI a a a v a 2+ v a G. G a 10 •c,� v g a o tl ct ro b a o v y zs ti C ZI C b b O C C O a o O � 7 a a a O a ¢ A a a a cL C sa W �i t c� w 4. 1.-C,Uri ',, 4 ci ti M IL w L•. w c:, W. cI u, C. [:. L+y C:, 1:. �:. c;. �L. LL, !'_ > a 'R — C cc 'w^L., c� a G. K c�6 c~J Q U iu v 4.1 � ` G C C P w � �c� � 33c� wacacc� c�t�v �c�� a 0 a w OSO p pp pp 0 pp QQQQ��QQpp.. pp pp QQpp� aa�py�� �p�p11 pp qp pppp�� pp� pp OOS0001 SOS 8S00005 6000t� S OOgSC7SOpG?00 SOC�] SOCJ CJOS N!\+1 !`lNN�YNN NNnYt .�`1LVNN ^�J\D0000�0 \0�4 \00 - -O\0- - -_ 0000000\O— OD � ttaaOUU��D�I *I t I N0-0 _�0VO - -NN- -S�1 —�V— �0+01 -1 Q w oo 00 0o ad o0 03 od oa aD x w o0 00 03 eo ao 00 00 00 ao oo ao 0o ao 00 0o ad 00� g—D0 g 00 0`0 eo 00 g 00 U o 000°sa° Cc> 0 0 o © 00000va0000co000000c� 0090 oc000 d ry a CN 'ci' V d C'� O 00 00 00 00 M 00 00 rn O, .•• 00 00 M t�� 1D V� ^ M� O x o0 ao 00 +D W CO V �G+ �C ,p Irhr- In r-P vs+o %0 %000 00 .r '0 V? 'o '0 'n +o roo 00 �fl v +n t� a.wo.r cab �o do�a O, a, Cr c� a, O+ C; o� U n +n +n+n+n+n v,+n +n v� n vi +n vl �n v�v �n v i �n vi In In �n +n �n �n �n v, ve va +n �n n v u �n �n +n +n +n In +n �n vi O viva trv. � Anry d �rd Krvvro• vvvd er �x � �ta , * "T 'rv � tr � aer �raIr u MMMMMMMMMM MMMMMMMmMMm MmMMMn'f ++ nmmmmmmtnmMMMM M en Mm ar � C? d C N N x M M h D7 N M O' O G o o o CJ In In M Ih J Ill a N 00 N O �D 01 n1 1, C. vl q O - y? N N •-+ N O N 'n - 0 O N In (5 In O Q ,n In o0 O N 'n O O t+ 00 • d M Ch In %Z) In m In O O O f] W !1 O N 4 � qO 4 �} d oo N t-- !+ fh t, N P W In V os q t G M 00 m 0 M N t'� N r^ O, 't 't d• V M �v M N a M m"? N m In m N d' -t f`I N 4 m N 7 ^ 'r,0D 00 d N In d - en M pNQ C3 � a i i I 0- Ol u a 9 o �U U ? 0 2 0 0 u U, 0, u a a w o o 4 `� U U C3 Gal �! V Cl-- tj u ci ci ti' ci bo a GUO © p� QOOQO '� � .a +� � • o 0 0 o a U � � �' �j a 3 w m w ui w u u u w w rq u u o qq o dd p ❑ c a a a c a a c c m c ` '� rci v U U V V U = U >x ,� U C 11 w31L2C Wtt] S=? WWtiW W WUQ sil A w cr v as ns a� u a� c c eac R E E [ ?- �i a > �' '� ?CX>Cx ° d � < au V) C4ixi� ¢ O � c� C7n rncnri n bill cn � to w o Car � Ug FQ66 U U W �.I a ? .; a y ' w a u .� b' W :.4 I3•i f.Z.6 C C tj fcis � pb r- cn u a u u u v 1 �1 y u u.-1 �1 O r� w ,� y E c° r 00 � OOCi00 aQ u O b +`� u C c5 •o ca RR ro as •R o. a. s� 'fv o u u w u N to U f� d y u V U a 0. L>. L1•r• O.•- °? w ❑. O Y N V G, 5�, 61 U N 4J U �i w w b w aI A u u w a w a u u w u w a a o Q u] uda nWr� wrilGACn nr;�wWVn P6 CID 'a -0 ^z 'a 'O 'a 7�6 'a 'II ro a 'c7 'd 'c3 7 o •a b 'a 'a 'O 'a 'a T7 'a M 'LI 'a 'a t7 'a 'z7 'o 'O 2 li, G:, 11, L=, LL la.. {�, W w 1L LI. 7s, �:�, (1,Li, Gs+ U. r^.=�. tf Zrr L:. {t. LL c:d. (:, U,. P- U, I� Li, LL, 4. L•.,G. w w urs u �. C? OCaC7cnc� C7C7C� VC7C3rt7C�C7C7C7C7C7C7C7 C� C7C7C7C7C7C7c�C7C7C7C7C7C7fJC7C7C� fn . UC7 0 0 N fi u ca rnO rnC71 ChCT qt 0% Q~ a, a, 0) 0,as fT CA O, rn a rn q, O, O, 01 o\O, T q, a, oN Oti ?, mc+ 4, ah O, a, O, O` C�, C, rnTC, 0!0 A OOOCoo oo 0 C) 00 ;z 0 O C> o o C. o o 0 C? fJ OOo 00000000 © G7 Ca Goppo 00o 0 o000DOC7 CP 0000000JCDCDC O000C] OOOOD OOCGOOQ 005 0C, 00 vCvcvN41 Nc� t! "�I �1 ' �' c�' N1N � � � � � �! 4' f' y�' �' ' �I � ' � � xvs�' r' �+ 0`0 00 Go 00 000 00 00 00 GQ Oo 00 oO 06 06 o0 00 oa 00 00 00 0'0 00 ew 00 00 00 00 00 06 00 00 oO DO r 00 00 W o0 0o ae C� OO ^ — — — — — — — _ _ _ ^ - _ � - cc 00 00 00 00 00 ^✓`� 0o oo 00 Oo o0 oo a0 00 00 00 Oo opop 00 op o0 o`0 oa oO OO 00 U 00 00 00 oo n OOOOOQo 000O00G 00m000OJQ Cy G � ,p e� C, ,D ID V V 00 C. as a, ON ,D 0 co 00 00 O, 00 0o 04 00 D0 00 00 W f�• M I0 yy a, 0, Q•, Q\ Q, 04 b\ b1 In in In Q, CA 41 a1 In In In In In In In In In In N In In CO G7 In Cf In In �O � w V) oa In n W.co 00 m IC.. In In 4n Y1 V'1 In In In In In In Y•1 In In Vl In Vl In Vl y, In In Vl In In In n V� Y1 V•l In Ih In In In In n Vl In V••1 In In•�n Vl In a *7 e1• ^3• st Y' - d• 'H' d' �t d' C' `�}' � d' d• d - -It � m tt C' � It d' eY tY eh v A � m rh M f'1 m M m f+1 M m M M M M M m M M m M M M m M M m m m M m m M M M M M M fn M m m W U '� C CTG70App00p NgtOrh etqq fhfnO� h• 4� C� O�.oNas C',m � ON V1 C7 dc70C�Je1C 4'['•; — V� d' --� N V� (�IM NhtNNh} (�; N r! n V'' OOG �n h1G lD Oi CT Cr�T P� f`+ (y � 14 ... ,� C O "' •--�C Vp er O © tT P�1 V N �D 00 \A V V^ %O 00\O fn oM0 !J W a a o F � C� b ap C� fG C4 f4 on M a W> �U� o a o a 9 g e gA g � e � c C — 0 A A A ., .... U 03 � y o N �. CI �I GI . W li? I CI I C4 C V!)U c!j W ;q �J w to ar M b y CO w rn m m A R�t� F• � 00 0q:� �41 � � G 70. 'O co � 4ie p�, 14 f� Li- a k. L k, :c. [L ,� C xc3 is T C� i ogia85i ° vca0b0i53a6 tZui U333c�c7c�t` 3c7c�c� c� vvot7c7c�c� c7;' �vc7 0 A � QQ�� p� a p� M ccpppp��QO ON OOTpCp1 OQOGppI OI o• 0p1,Gl 0% QpO� Ct.fr o O O O � O O C G7 G7 0 0 6 p O 0 0 0 Q Q 0 0 A P P O Q NN �1 00 00 00 00 o� od o0 00 op p3 a_o 03 00 00 00 0�0 0`3 coo oo 0� 00 00 00 00 ad e0 00 ai o0 o`o C0 C) 00 00 00 0� 00 00 0D a0 oo 00 00 U O O g Q O q o o d o 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 n L. Q O k N N Vt W iry In 4k [� t•1 M M In M fh M M M Pl y to to �n � �oIn V,'nInIn %>, .r) In +V V" nNvtih� w T tA V1 �n Y1 V1 V)v 1n Yl Vl 4 h vt It h Vl V1 v7 Vt �n Vl w Yt VIN A In In ' mM InICP ZY er et of eP +t m en el d' It m 'Itm cr � �} fl' 7er e} � M M M M M M M M en M M M M M M+ f+7 M M M M M M M M M M U °� City Council Date: August 18, 2009 CONSENT Item: 3 Motion ITEM: Declaration of Default in Development Agreement—Farms of Lake Elmo SUBMITTED BY: Craig W. Dawson, Interim City Administrator Dave Snyder, City Attorney REVIEWED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: M&K Development, LLC, has not completed performance satisfactorily on several items in the development agreement for the Farms of Lake Elmo subdivision. Staff has been persistent in its pursuit to have the developer fulfill all of the requirements in the agreement, with the latest written notification sent July 6, 2009. Due to the lack of responsiveness over a prolonged period of time, staff believes it is appropriate to declare M&K Development, LLC, in default and thus give the City pursue remedies to gain completion. BACKGROUND: The development agreement with M&K Development, LLC, dates from November 2005. The City Attorney has prepared a memorandum (attached) providing details of unfinished items. SUGGESTED MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION: Move to declare M&K Development, LLC, in default of in the development agreement for the Farms of Lake Elmo subdivision, and to authorize all available remedies to cure the default. ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum from City Attorney dated August 4, 2009 ECKBER� • LAMMERS RRECEIVED ATTORNEYS AT LAW Writer's Direct Dial: Stillwater Office: (651)351-2131 — 5 1809 Northwestern Avenue Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Writer's E-mail: der eckber lammers.com (651)439-2878 dsn Y @ g CITY OF LAKE ELM-D Fax(651)439-2923 Hudson Office: August 4, 2009 2417 Monetary Boulevard Hudson,Wisconsin 54016 (715)386-3733 Craig W. Dawson Fax(651)439-2923 Interim City Administrator www.eckberglammers.com City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo,MN 55042 Re: Farms of Lake Elmo Development Punch List Items City of Lake Elmo Our File No.: 22702-18960 Dear Craig: Attached is a July 6, 2009 letter from you to Jack Krongard at M&K Development regarding incomplete items of the Farms of Lake Elmo. This letter followed discussions between staff wherein it was observed that the remaining development items that the Farms of Lake Elmo had not been completed for a long, long time and it was necessary to bring this matter to a conclusion one way or the other. Accordingly, this letter asked that Mr. Krongard complete action on the major outstanding issues which are: 1) conveyance of easements; 2) submission of MPCA permits for the waste water treatment system; 3)disposal of debris and adjustment of sanitary curb stops; 4)replacement of dead or dying trees; 5)provision of record drawings; and 6)provision of a schedule for completion of all these things. None of the above happened and accordingly, I recommend that the City Council declare the developer in default of the development agreement between the City of Lake Elmo and M&K Development, LLC. Said development agreement dated November 21, 2005. Among other things,this development agreement required: 1) completion of street improvements by November 30, 2005; 2) completion of the waste water treatment systems/drain field prior to the issuance of any certifications of occupancy; 3) completion of water main and all pipes and appurtenances by November 30, 2005; 4) provision of an open space and conservation easement covering the out lots; and 5) completion of landscaping by September 30, 2006 in accordance with the plans and ECKBERG. LAMMERS. BRIGGS. WOLFF G VIERLING, PLLP Family Law/ Divorce * Business and Commercial Law . Criminal Law • Personal Injury l Wrongful death Estate Planning/Probate • Real Estate • Land Use Law • Mediation Municipal Law o Civil Litigation specifications reviewed and approved by the City. The remedies available to the City include drawing on the Letter of Credit, withholding of building permits, and bringing an action for specific performance or breach of contract against the development. I request that the Council authorize all available remedies including the withholding of building permits, collection on the Letter of Credit and an action to direct the developer to complete the improvements. I will be available to answer any questions should they arise. Thank you. Sincere /�'_ David K. Sny er DKS/nwnl Enclosure CITY OF LAKE ELMO ity of Lake Elmo 6511777-5510 3800 Laverne Avenue North / Lake Elmo, MN 55042 3 , July 6, 2009 Mr. Jack Krongard M&K Development, LLC 14791 both Street North Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Re: Farms of Lake Elmo Development Punch List Items i Dear Mr. Krongard: The intent of this letter is to provide the outstanding punch list items that must be addressed to complete the Farms of Lake Elmo development. Finalization of all development:items must occur at this time. 1. Evidence of all recording requirements per Section 4.07 B1-4, C, D, and E must be provided to the City of Lake Elmo. Please note this includes all easements that have not been recorded to cover storm water facilities in the development. Since these are presumably in your files, please forward them within 10 days. 2. Waste Water Treatment System a. An approved MPCA Permit must be provided for the 33.lot subdivision. Currently,the MPCA only has approved a Waste Water Treatment Facility for 30 lots. The 3 additional lots will not be issued a building permit until this is resolved. b. As homes are coming on the system, blockage has occurred within the collection system. Please provide the design specifications for the collection system and a written response from the design engineer explaining-the reasons for the issues experienced with the system. Final acceptance of the system cannot be given until the system is and will be functional. c. During correction of the collection system, any street patches must be sawcut full depth to the centerline of the road and replaced to the existing road section. d. The Wastewater Treatment System O&M Manual references a Collection System O&M Manual. Please provide this document. rn e. The diainfield area must be treated for weeds and seeded to establish vegetation. 3. Restoration, additional concrete debris disposal,rising of valves to finished grade, and correction of a sanitary curb stop per the attached marked up plan set. 4%,printed on recycled paper MTY OF LAKE _AJtEL0 AM City of Lake Elmo 651/777-5510 3800 Laverne.Avenue North / Lake Elmo, M N 55042 4. The most recent inspection for Farms of Lake Elmo indicated that there were 74 trees that were dead or dying and need to be replaced, In addition,because a large portion of the ornamental and fruit trees planted on the site do not meet the minimum size requirement of the Zoning Ordinance,there will need to be additional plantings to make up for this size deficit. The City Forester has requested that an additional 50 trees be planted on the site. All replacement and additional trees must meet the size requirement of the Zoning Ordinance (not less than 1.5 inch in caliper measured at 54 inches above grade level) and should be native species or improved cultivars of native species. The replacement trees should be planted near sites where trees are removed and a plan should be submitted for review and approval by the City Forester for the planting of the 50 additional trees on the site. All tree plantings should conform to the City Forester's report dated 12/16/08. 5. Final Record Drawing comments to complete the submittal sent to FFE,Inc. on June 18, 2009. To avoid default of the Development Agreement, please provide a written schedule by July 24, 2009 that ensures that the work itemized above will be fully completed. We MUST be notified 48 hours in advance of any construction activity, so we can schedule a City field representative onsite for all work, Any work done without City observation is subject to rejection. The development has not been accepted by the City of Lake Elmo. All work has past the completion dates specified in the Development Agreement. If the items listed above are not completed and confirmed as completed per the City's-standard requirements by August 21, 2009, the development will be considered in default and subject to all available remedies listed in the Development Agreement. If you have any questions,please contact Kyle Klatt at(651)233-5402. 1 can also be reached at (651) 233-5401. Sincerely, Craig W. Dawson Interim City Administrator Enclosure cc: Dave Snyder, City Attorney Jack Griffin, City Engineer Kyle Matt, Planning Director printed on recycled paper i CITY Of LAKE City of Lake Elmo 651/777-55)0 3800 Laverne Avenue North / Lal<e Elmo, MN 55042 i August 13, 2009 Jack Krongard M&K Development,LLC 14791 600' Street North Stillwater,MN 55082 RE: Farms of Lake Elmo Developer's Agreement Dear Mr.Krongard: Thank you for providing the City of Lake Elmo with the information that has been received to date regarding the Farms of Lake Elmo development. Our office, in conjunction with the City Engineer, is currently reviewing the submitted documents. Asa follow-up to your email dated August 5,2009 (attached),I would like to note the current status of each item as follows: 1. The City.is in receipt of the requested easement descriptions,however,our office has not been provided with any evidence that these easements have been recorded (or a schedule of when this will be accomplished). The other documents that have been submitted to show that the recording requirements per Section 4.07 B1-4, C, D, and E of the developer's agreement have been met are currently being reviewed by our office. 2. a) The City has received the report submitted to MPCA, but to date has not been provided with a response or permit from MPCA. b) Your engineer has submitted design specifications for the collection system which are presently being reviewing by the City Engineer. The information submitted does not include an explanation for the issues experience with the system, which will be a vital component to clarify before the system will be accepted by the City. c) The corrective measures needed cannot be determined until the City Engineer has completed his review of the Collection System O&M Manual. d) The City is in receipt of the Collection System O&M Manual and is in the process of reviewing this document. As noted in heading(c) above, corrective work may be necessary to ensure proper functioning of the system in he future. e)Your email indicates that cutting and seeding will be performed the week of August 20`h. In addition to this maintenance work,please be advised that the weeds currently in this area must be property treated. The City Forester will be able to provide you with some recommended treatment options. printed on recycled_paper 3. It is my understanding that your engineer has contacted F&K Excavating to finish the outstanding corrective work identified by the City Engineer. The City has not received a schedule for the completion of this work. Please note that the City Engineer should be contacted prior to construction and will need to observe the work being performed. 4. The City has previously requested a revised landscape plan that complies with the recommendations of the City Forester in an inspection report fled in late 2008. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to any plantings taking place. Your proposed schedule indicates that a revised plan will be submitted during the week of August 20th with the plantings to be completed in the late fall. 5. The City is in receipt of final record drawings and these drawings are being reviewed by the City Engineer, As noted in my comments above,not all of the requested information has been received to date,and a schedule for completion has been provided for only a few of the outstanding items. Because these issues have not been resolved in full,the City Attorney will be recommending that the City Council declare the development in default of the developer's agreement at the Council's August 18,2009 meeting. This action will allow the Attorney's office to seek any and all available remedies. Never-the-less, I would invite you to advise us about whether or not you can and will comply with the remaining requirements needed to close out this project. We acknowledge the progress that has been made to date and would expect that a timely response to the remaining issues will allow the City to continue moving towards final acceptance of this project. Feel free to contact the City Engineer or me at any time to discuss these outstanding issues. Sincer ly, Kyle Klatt Planning Director cc: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator 1 Kyle Klatt i i From: jackkrongard@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 5:02 PM To: Kyle Klatt ' Cc: bob mcdonald; todd erickson Subject: Fwd: M & K Dev. Attachments: Letter regarding M&K recd Aug 5.pdf To: jackkrongard(c),comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2009 4:29:46 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: M & K Dev. Attached is a letter received in today's mail. karal klatt, update on the progress and schedule to close out the farms of lake elmo. letter dated 7/06/09 1.emaii was forwarded to you today with easements for your fiie,scott mcdonald is finishing the recording of these. 2.a. todd erickson have forwarded calculations to the mnpca ,this was also forwarded to you for your file,i will forward eric blasings ,of ayres associates, report when i receive it late next week. b.i forwarded you emails on this issue with the engineers ,myself, and the home oweners reguarding this . i hope to have an answer next week as to how we are going to proceed, c, ok d.this was emailed to you. e. will schedule the cutting ,seeding for week of 8/20/09 when i will be in mn. 3.todd erickson of ffe engineering has contacted f&k excavating to finsh the valve raising,and will get a schedule from todd monday a.m. 4. i have contracted aberhanson nursery for the 124 trees and will mark the remaining trees to be planted on the landscape plan when i am in mn the week of 8/20/09 the planting will be done in late fall after the hot weather season has past. 5.todd erickson will have this delevered to the city by the end of next week. jack krongard 612 750 6436 City Council Date: August 18'h e , 2009 Consent Agenda Item: ITEM: Truck Replacement/Upgrade REQUESTED BY: Public Works Department SUBMITTED BY: Michael Bouthilet, Public Works Superintendent Presented by Rick Gustafson/Bud Talcott MAC Chairman (Mike Bouthilet at waste water training for license re-certification) REVIEWED BY: Craig Dawson, City Administrator Tom Bouthilet, Finance Director Maintenance Advisory Commission PURPOSE. The Public Works Department in conjunction with the MAC has researched the purchase a new truck to replace the 1998 truck that was totaled in an accident earlier this summer. This truck was scheduled for replacement in the GIP for 2008, but all CIP equipment replacement schedules were revamped to address priority purchases. Under the revamped priority purchases, this truck replacement/upgrade was on the top of the Public Works list, even prior to the accident. The Public Works and MAC met three times for this proposal including a meeting where the MAC was able to inspect a new Ford,Dodge, and two competitve hook lift systems. Upgrades to this truck include: • Higher gross vehicle weight. • A hook lift for exchanging multiple body components. • Body components include a municipal box, flat bed, and wood chip/garbage container. • Salt spreader for snow and ice control. • A scoop style snow plows for cul-de-sacs and parking lots. Explanation of upgrades: Higher gross vehicle weight is going to allow this truck to be utilized for snow plow operations with the capacity to carry salt for ice control. This truck will be utilized during all 2 inch or less snow events, and would also be an important asset if any other plow equipment has a breakdown during significant snowfalls. Although our equipment is in maintained and in good condition, the overall age of the fleet dictates that we do have the capability to continue snow removal operations in the event of a break down, albeit at reduced capacity. During the rest of the year the extra capacity enable the Public Works to haul more amounts of old asphalt out, new asphalt in, gravel, dirt, sod, wood chips, etc. Hook Lift is a system that municipalities and counties are starting to utilize instead of a straight hoist dump box. A hook lifts allows you to switch the box, bed or container on a truck for multiple operations or tasks. This is accomplished by a hydraulic controlled hook that will roll off any component and place it on the ground. It is similar to the system seen on garbage container trucks, but put on a smaller truck designed for municipal applications. Washington County has recently bought two hook trucks and there are other municipalities exploring this option. Hook Lift cont: The City of Delano purchased a hook and one function they employ is to load all their mowers and park maintenance supplies on and then drop the box off with seasonal help freeing the truck to be utilized in the street department for the rest of the day. They can then go back and pick up the re-loaded box at the end of the day. Ourselves and neighboring Public Works Departments have been developing a mutually beneficial relationship where we can share services and equipment to save from purchasing inventory that is used infrequently. Currently both North Saint Paul and Oakdale have provided sewer jetting and emergency pumping services to Lake Elmo. We recently developed a program for the City of Maplewood to produce street signs for a significant cost savings. Currently North Saint Paul and Maplewood have hook lift systems on their large tandem dump trucks and have interchanged components as needed_ Although our proposed hook lift is on a smaller municipal truck, the trend for these units is established and opportunities for future sharing are available. Body Components include a municipal (contractor) box which with the hook lift can be either utilized as a straight dump box or dropped for loading, unloading, and switching. This box would have the sander and carry salt for snow falls. During the summer it would be a basic material hauler. The flat bed would be utilized to transport equipment, palleted materials, and misc items that are difficult to load in boxes i.e. playground equipment and components. The wood chip container/garbage container would be used for tree trimming and storm debris removal. If purchased we recommend selling the 1989 truck with the chipper box. This truck is only used for these operations and has had numerous mechanical failures recently. It is not prudent to spend any significant money on this old truck, but it is believed it will fail at a time when needed. This unit can also be utilized for garbage collection during City events. Salt spreader for ice control is new and was not on truck being replaced. Scoop Style Plow is an upgrade from the plow that was on the 1998 truck. The 1998 plow is now being used on the 2003 truck. A new plow for this truck would be larger and have a "scoop" capability to carry snow through cul-de-sacs or parking lots. It also can be used as a conventional plow on the streets. Summary: To replace the 1998 truck and plow only with a similar unit would be approximately $30,000.00. Although the proposed replacement/upgrade is significantly more money, it can haul more, be used as a dump truck, has hook/transfer component capability, eliminates 1989 chipper truck, has the snow plowing and salt spreading capability, and would have the capacity to do several functions with one cab and chassis for both winter and summer operations. Price below includes all lights and accessories. Pricing was solicited from four cab and chassis dealers and the components were priced from four equipment supply companies. All prices are at state contract or lower. This is a CIP identified purchase and would be funded from the equipment CIP. This truck and equipment is expected to last at least 15 years. RECOMMENDATION: To approve the purchase of a 2009 Dodge 550 cab/chassis and components not to exceed $84,375.00 (plus tax and license) SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Attachments: MAC Minutes, Truck and Hook Lift Pictures Draft Copy CITY of LAKE ELMO MAINTENANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of August 12, 2009 Present : Chuck Stanley, George Dege, Steve Ziertman, Dick Gustafson Bud Talcott, Mike Bouthilet, Rick Gustafson, GT Magnuson, and Brad Winkel Absent: Steve Gurney The meeting was called to order at 6:30pm at the Public Works Building by Bud Talcott. The Fire Dept trip approval to view used Ladder Truck was added. The agenda was accepted with changes, Brad.made a presentation on the need of a 100ft ladder truck and reviewed the used.2000 (9yr old) unit that was found in Kansas, which is in very good condition. The cost of this truck is $ 475,000.00 and Greg would like to go down and look it over. He would take three others with him at a total cost for the trip of $ 2,4:75. The council passed this along to us at their August 11t" workshop and asked that we review it and make a recommendation. The comments made at the workshop were discussed regarding funding of this truck. It would have to be bonded and a dollar figure of around $60,000 per year was stated. It would be the same amount per year for a new truck at twice the initial cost as it would be spread over a longer period of time. The cost of a new unit built to our specs was discussed. Brad confirmed it would probably be in the area of twice the cost of this used unit, which is what Greg indicated in his cover letter. A new unit would have a life twice as long or more and would have a warranty, as well as the exact equipment we want on it. George Dege stated it would be a bad business decision to invest in a used vehicle now and again in about 10 years when we can purchase a new unit now for the same overall investment cost. Used units would most likely require some sort of repairs where a new unit would have about a 2yr warranty period and over the 2.0 years would actually cost less. Everyone agreed with some additional comments as to possible weak points in a used:unit such as hydraulics, hidden rust, etc. George asked Brad what time frame we would be looking at for a new truck. Brad said about 1yr. George commented with the slow economy now it might be good timing to get a new unit on order, both price and delivery could be better. We would then have it when things pick up and our population begins to grow. Page 2 MAC Meeting August 12, 2009 ` A MOTION was made by Chuck Stanley and seconded by Steve Ziertman to recommend NOT traveling to Kansas to review the used 100ft ladder Truck, being it is only half the cost of a new unit and had no warranty. ! i The motion passed. ! A MOTION was made by Bud Talcott and seconded by Dick Gustafson to recommend the Fire Department get specifications and preliminary pricing for a new 100ft ladder truck with bucket for review. The motion passed. NOTE TO COUNCIL Comments were made that some homes in the city have driveways that our trucks cannot access because of trees, other growth and obstacles. It was commented we should approach the homeowners and inform them they must remove these obstacles if they want to have full fire protection. If not, they should sign a release form or something stating they agree not to have full protection. This would release the city from any liability but hopefully would cause people to clear their driveways. Someone but who? should look into this. The Hook-Lift truck is on the CIP for 2009. It is a vehicle that will be capable of being used for many duties, including but not limited to snow plowing, sanding, material hauling, wood chipper, transport of equipment to parks, etc. It is a vehicle that can be used year around simply by hooking up a different box to the back of it. It was decided a few years ago to replace vehicles with this unit when ever possible. At our last meeting there were a few questions regarding the differences in the truck chassis and type of fuel required, If we should standardize on a truck color. Mike review new updated information on the vehicles. The main concern of fuel will not be an issue. The color of this truck as with the other trucks will be white; the very large snow plows will be Green. We again discussed the differences and the Dodge is the best choice for us with a better engine and a 6 speed transmission. We reviewed the list of equipment Mike will need for the truck. A MOTION was made by George Dege and seconded by Dick Gustafson, to recommend the purchase of the Dodge model 5500 4X4 Cab and Chassis per the 2.009 state contract, and body components of Hook Lift, Salt Spreader, and Plow at a total price not to exceed $84,375.00 plus tax and license. The motion passed Hearing no objections the meeting was adjourned at 8:20pm. Respectfully submitted, Bud Talcott, Chairman/ Secretary a _.t v ! l.y�•�ilf,k� f � • A a-� 0-N `F-'0' 0 z 1. Aj WE, 2TJ; �.N !N­�, 4yt-, '., --,,ht7 -, g'�"., �K�R -11 .11M, V, V 0�11 .-.i) .61��'.- ..,- - URI on- q W,D� 3 R N �k44 ' N. ....... M jj A . re, �Kl The key word is"simple."The operator backs the truck toward the container.With in-cab mounted controls,the operator switches on the power take off,lowers the hydraulic boom and engages the container with the hook.He then activates the hydraulic lift, which pulls the container onto the chassis and locks it in position. r. The operator then turns off the power take off and drives away. Less than one minute from the time the operator shifted the truck into reverse. Ampliroll®has one major purpose!To kelp you pick-up,drop-off, transport,and unload your containers—safer and faster—and that means larger profits. IR61 —With a container it is a roll-off yi� j —With a platform it is a flatbed truck With a dump body it is c dump truck I! About this truly unique system The driver never leaves the cab...this saves time and is safer. —Maximum durnp angle is almost 20%greater than izI. U;,;,,.i conventional roll-offs. —The operator can pick-up or set-dawn a container at dock heights, —Container can be pushed and spotted more accurately,with no chance of damaging the container front. Z —Truck alignment is not necessary,The operator may approach from any angle within cr 60'arc. —The Ampliroll is virtually maintenance free. ki: C 0 R P 0 R A T 1 0 N .......... City Council Date: August 18, 2009 CONSENT Motion 15 ITEM: 2009 Crack Seal Project—Consideration of Quotes and Awarding a Contract. SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Mike Bouthilet, Public Works Superintendent Tom Bouthilet, Finance Director Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Council is being asked to accept the quotes and award a contract for the 2009 Crack Sealing Project. Please see the attached map for the streets to be crack sealed with this project. The 2009 Crack Seal Project does not include Jamaca Avenue, which will not be addressed until the MPCA Landfill Project has been completed. Also, crack sealing of the streets in the Sanctuary development have been added to the 2009 Crack Seal Project to address timely maintenance of the streets. Quotes were received on August 7, 2009. Five competitive quotes were received for the project. The lowest responsible quote was submitted by Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc.for the total amount of$25,200. This equates out to $1.26 per pound of crack sealant material, which is a competitive price based on similar previous projects. Funds for the 2009 Crack Seal Project would be paid from the Infrastructure Fund. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Historically, we have seen the best pavement management results when crack sealing is performed the season prior to sealcoating (which allows the crack sealing to fully adhere prior to the sealcoat cover). Also, Public Works performs minor patching and leveling to streets prior to sealcoating. Per the 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan (see attachment no. 3), sealcoating and crack sealing were to be budgeted at$125,000 per year to implement the plan. The 5-Year CIP was presented and approved at the January 20, 2009 City Council Meeting. At this point in the year, the sealcoating for 2009 was moved to 2010. Therefore, to keep the 5- Year CIP on track, crack sealing of the 2009 and 2010 streets is proposed for 2009 street maintenance. The 2009 and 2010 streets to be sealcoated would be completed in 2010, along with the crack sealing for 2011. This would allow the 5-Year CIP to be back on the annual cycle in 2011, with the 2011 sealcoat. Due to budgetary constraints (currently the Infrastructure Fund balance is approximately $200.000) the 5-Year CIP cannot be completed as presented. Future street maintenance will be performed as funding allows. Crack sealing alone does proactively prevent surface moisture from further distressing a road, but does not seal the entire road and provide a wearing surface as a sealcoat does. It is recommended that timely maintenance continue to be completed as scheduled in the 5-Year CIP. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council accept the quotes and award a contract for the 2009 Crack Seal to Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc. in the amount of$25,200. SUGGESTED MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION Move to Award a Contract for the 2009 Crack Sealing Project per the Engineer's Letter of Recommendation for the Award of Contract. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Engineer's Letter of Recommendation for Award of Contract 2. 2009 Crack Sealing Location Map 3. 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Project Location Map TWKDA ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 444 Cedar Street,Suite 1500 Saint Paul,MN 55101-2140 (651)2924400 August 12, 2009 (651)292-0083 Fax www.tkda.com Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 Re: 2009 Crack Sealing Project City of Lake Elmo,Minnesota TKDA Project No. 14290,003 Dear Mayor and City Council: Quotes for the above referenced Project were received on August 7, 2009 at 4:00pm via fax, with the following results. A complete'Tabulation of Quotes is enclosed for your information. Contractor Quote Amount Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc $ 25,200 ASTECH Corp. $ 26,600 Asphalt Associates Inc. $ 28,400 Allied Blacktop Company $ 31,800 Fahrner Asphalt Sealers, Inc. $ 32,000 Engineers Estimate $ 32;000 Recommendation We recommend that you award to the Contract to the lowest responsible quoter, Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc., in the amount of$25,200. Please do not hesitate to call me with any questions or comments you may have. Sincere, Ryan W. m sli, Assistant City Engineer DMK:cme Enclosure An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity : \ @ »_ 00 ko ® \ \ cn » e k4 0 »5 $ %/o $J) to CD / / ¥ \ 5 G ek # J{o _ » J0 ®_ \/� \ �0 ^ f / w \fir % . \ . \& \ o OR . \r f5 % �\ % 0 zoo � %\ 4 CC\ \\ * 61 Q 7��- 9 ` � . I.hie Q11 —J lm=I- 4 ............— A, YRi h. LIZ It ............ 110 L M FI 77. e MWI Ar. f—,4,11 ia1Yllld AI IT A(Anr U, 2 E Oakdale P 17 14 5- 5 P- 22 23 To wirsh .Vf L Rii X; M11, 2630 --,M-1 i--'rlNl mli —_LuY, 12 sv 34, 31 ai m Cit 77 T of'Ffioodbuyy 2009 CRACK SEALING PROJECT LOCATION MAP =rfy OF City Hall LAKE -i ELVID Legend Public Works Building Subdivision. uYs ox Clity Parks mp'. 2005 Crack Sealing Fire Stations Project Go"C.Um. Lake Ebro Regional Map Date:July 2009 Park Reserve -om SchoolsixnonN creased By Lakes r" IRDA L ENG11WG-AWHTFm-P City Council Date: August 18, 2009 REGULAR Item: Motion ITEM: Resolution Setting Date for Sale of Bonds for 2009 Street Improvements SUBMITTED BY: Craig W. Dawson, Interim City Administrator Tom Bouthilet, Finance Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Construction will begin by the last week of August for the City's 2009 Street Improvement Program and the reconstruction of the entry and parking lot at Tablyn Park. The City needs to issue bonds in order to have funds to pay the contractor as invoices are submitted this fall. The Council needs to take formal action by Resolution to set the sale of the bonds, which would be scheduled for action at the October 6, 2009, Council meeting. BACKGROUND: The City Council has followed the process in Chapter 429 of Minnesota Statutes for these public improvement projects. When the Council ordered the improvements, it set 30 percent as the amount that owners of abutting properties would be assessed for these improvements. Bids were very favorable, and it is expected that property owners will be assessed less than was projected for their street improvements. These assessments would be payable over 10 years at 5 percent interest. The reconstruction of the entry and parking lot to Tablyn Park is also included with the proposed bond issue, and is under the same contract as the street improvements. With the inclusion of the Tablyn Park project, the amount of revenue from special assessments for the overall bond issue is approximately 25 percent, which is above the minimum of 20 percent to issue these types of bonds. With approval of the Resolution by the Council tonight, the bonds can be sold on October 6, with closing and receipt of proceeds taking place a few weeks later. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council adopt the proposed resolution (attached). SUGGESTED MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION Move to adopt the Resolution setting the date of sale for General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009B. ATTACHMENTS: • Proposed Resolution • Summary of Proposed Bond Issue prepared by Northland Securities, Inc. ORDER OF BUSINESS: • Introduction Craig Dawson • Report by presenter Paul Donna, Northland Securities • Questions from City Council members to the presenter Mayor facilitates • Questions/comments from the public to the City Council Mayor facilitates • Action on motion City Council City of Lake Elmo Washington County, Minnesota Resolution No. 2009-035 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2009B BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the Council) of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota(the City), as follows: SECTION 1. PURPOSE. It is hereby determined to be in the best interests of the City to issue its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009B, in the approximate principal amount of$575,000 (the Bonds), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475, to finance various improvements projects in the City. SECTION 2. PROPOSALS FOR SALE. The Bonds are exempt from the public sale requirements of Chapter 475 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, subdivision 2, paragraph(2). Northland Securities, Inc. (Northland) is hereby authorized to solicit proposals for the Bonds on behalf of the City on a negotiated basis or to present a proposal for the purchase of the Bonds by Northland, in each case based upon such terms as shall be approved by the City Finance Director. The Bonds may be offered on either a tax-exempt or taxable basis, or both. SECTION 3. SALE MEETING. This Council shall meet at the time and place shown in the offering materials for the Bonds for the purpose of considering proposals for the purchase of the Bonds and of taking such action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City. Upon vote being taken thereon, the following members voted in favor thereof: and the following members voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted by the Lake Elmo City Council on August 18, 2009. Dean A. Johnston, Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson City Administrator 2 " '-A1`fiCER LAN SUYVI AR City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota $575,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009A Prepared by: NORTHLAND loSECURITIES 45 South 7th Street Suite 2000 Minneapolis, MN 55402 612-851-5900 800-851-2920 August 17, 2009 ' 1 City of LakeElmo, Minnesota $575,000 i General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009A Financing Overview: Proceeds from this bond issue will be used to fund the City's 2009 Street Improvement Project and improvements to the Tablyn Park entrance road. The cost of the projects total$539,083 plus financing costs and capitalized interest on the street improvement portion result in a financing requirement of$575,000. A detailed illustration of the sources and uses of funds is as follows: Total Issue Sources And Uses Dated 10/01/20091 Delivered 1010112009 T Tablyn Street Park Issue Improvements Entrance Summary Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $505,000.00 $70,000.00 $675,000.00 Total Sources $605,000.00 $70,000.00 $675,000.00 Uses Of Funds Costs of Issuance 26,289.52 3,505,48 28,795.00 Deposit to Capitalized Interest(CIF)Fund _ _4,963,84 _ 4,963.84 Deposit to Project Construction Fund _ 474,588.00 _ 64,495.00 _ 539,083.00 Rounding Amount 158.64 1,999.62 2,158.16 Total Uses $506,000.00 $70,000.00 $576,000.00 The estimated principal and 'interest is illustrated as Exhibit A, The debt is scheduled to be repaid 2011 — 2020. The interest estimate is based on an assumed average rate of 2.80%. The principal payment structure is based on the City's expectations of revenues to be received over the term of the Bonds. The City expects to fund debt service on the street improvement portion from a combination of special assessments against benefited properties and property tax collections. The special assessment revenue stream assumes the City will file $156,000 of assessments in 2010 over a term of ten years at a rate of 5.00%. The Tablyn Park portion of the debt will be paid from a tax levy. The estimated average annual tax levy for the combined projects will be approximately $50,991 at the 105% required level. The capitalized interest on NORTHLAND SRCURITIBS Page 2 the street improvement portion in the amount of $4,964 will be used to fund the assessed portion of the interest due on the Bonds thru July 15, 2011 because the first collection of the assessments will not be available until the January 15, 2011 payment on the street improvement portion of the Bonds. In addition, because the City has budgeted for a debt levy payable in 2010 of approximately $50,000, the debt service schedule for the Tablyn Park portion has been accelerated to blend with the balance of the debt. The summary cash flow analysis detailing the revenues, capitalized interest and tax levy component is illustrated in Exhibit B. Related Considerations: • Bank Qualified - We understand the City (in combination with any subordinate taxing jurisdictions or debt issued in the City's name by 5016 corporations) does not anticipate issuing more than a total of $30,000,000 in tax-exempt debt during this calendar year. Therefore the bonds will be designated as "bank qualified" obligations pursuant to Federal Tax Law if the Bonds are sold as Tax Exempt securities. • Arbitrage and Rebate—We understand the City anticipates issuing$5,000,000 or less in tax-exempt bonds in calendar year 2009 and therefore any arbitrage earnings in the construction fund will be exempt from rebate. This exemption from rebate does not eliminate the need to comply with other arbitrage regulations governing the investment of bond proceeds and debt service funds. In particular, the City should become familiar with the requirements for maintaining a "bona fide" debt service fund. These requirements will be explained in the bond transcript following closing. • The Bonds will be global book entry with a bank designated as the paying agent. As "paperless" bonds, you will avoid the cots of bond printing and annual registrar charges. The Paying Agent will invoice you for the interest semiannually and on an annual basis for the principal coming due. You will be charged only for paying agent/transfer agent services provided by the bank. This cost of services has been capitalized into the bond issue. • Because the City's outstanding debt is less than $10.0M, and this issue is less than $1.OK it is not subject to continuing disclosure requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission. NORTHLAND SHCUR1TIES Page 3 , I S animary of Recommended Terms: 1. Type of Bond Sale To Be Determined 2. Proposal(s)Received Tuesday, October 6,2009 3. Council Consideration Tuesday, October 6,2009 at 7:00 p.m. 4. Statutory Authority The Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429 and 475. 4. Repayment Term The Bonds will mature annually each January 15, 2011 -2020. Interest on the Bonds will be payable on July 15,2010 and semiannually thereafter on each January 15 and July 15. 5. Security General obligation pledge of the City. The City expects to fund debt service from a combination of special assessments and property tax collections as previously discussed. 6. Prepayment Feature The Bonds maturing January 15,2018—2020 will be subject to prepayment on January 15,2017 at a price of par plus accrued interest. 7. Tax Status Dorsey&Whitney,LLP 8, Credit Rating The City's general obligation debt is currently rated AA by Standard & Poor's rating service. We believe a credit rating will be cost effective for this issue and we will pursue a rating with S&P for the Bonds. NORTHLAND SECURITIES Page 4 EXHIBIT A Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 10/0112009 - - - - 07/15/2010 - - 11,127.28 11,127.28 01/16/2011 30,000,00 1,050% 7,062.50 37,052.50 48,179.78 07/1512011 _ - - 6,895.00 6,896,01) - 01/1512012 55,000.00 1.3009% 6,895.00 61,896.00 68.790.00 07/15/2012 - 6,637.50 6,537.5D - 01/15/2013 60,000.00 1,600% 6,537.50 66,537.50 73,075,00 07/16/2013 - - 6,057.50 6,057.60 - 01/15/2014 60,000.00 1,900% 6,057.50 66,057.60 72,115.00 07/16/2014 - - 5,487.60 6.487.60 - 01/1512015 60,000.00 2.260% 8.487.50 65,487.50 70,975.00 07/1512015 - - _ 4,a1x.50 4,812.50 - 01/15/2016 60,DDD.00 2.600% _ 4,812.50 64,812.60 69,625.00 07/1612016 - - 4,032.50 4,032.50 - 01/15/2017 60,000.00 2.900% 4,032.50 64,032.50 68,065.00 07/15/2017 - - 3,162.50 3,162,5D 01/1512018 65,000.00 3,150% 3,162.60 68,162.00 71,325,00 07/1512018 - - 2,138.75 2,138.75 - 0111512019 66,000.00 3.3500/V 2,138.75 67,138.75 69,277.50 0711612019 _ _ - _- 1,050.00 1,050.00 - 01/15/2020 60,000.00 3.600% �1,050.00 61,050.00 62,100,60 10/01/2020 - - - - Total $675,000.00 $98,527,28 $673,527.28 - Date And Term Structure Dated _ 10/01/2009 Delivery Date _10/0112009 First Coupon Date 7/15/2010 First available call date 01/15/17 Cail Price _ __ _ I D0.00% Yield Statistics Average Coupon _ 2.8061566% Net lnterest Cost(NIC) _ _ _ 2.8061566% True Interest Cost(TIC� 2.7832940% NORTHLAND SI,CUR IT] .E.S Page � I I i C� W a O rNM 71 !7 T ODM w } 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t) v N N N N N N N N N N A&- `a c� Q L I CA O r N M V N z 113 y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C� I M to N M Ih M to h O N w r� Lq 0) O OR (D O N tC) O It .O.I tO ti (b of to OJ (�7 h OD OD ti rW � N m t9 T M oD M M 1� G 'NV N Lr) U to jr) l() ''t to O T VA O N O. N T m M Lo 4) Q Lo O O O O r O> 9 O' M llt q ' : (R O q O> M OR (C to I�t M m 0) 0) O) 0) - ti;' N J r tO OD It 0) M O) to M ma N 'q r� (A V N O GNGi� 1� O) O I� ll}c� (6 CO r 'V' 'd tQ 117 tL"J v In a UY � O) T Cr T c000000000o M o Ql (L r+ 0 0 g q q C Oq n O N r 7 q 'c7 cu - �00 CO trat+y� r C (No o M (t1 �) •C 'fi O h h ti t0O (MD CNO ti v Fes{ C Y) .t r� to O IC) 0 0 0 0 0 (o d OD co In 7 O co O N to n 0) r) .y^. O Cl) LQ LD V) ui LO CD to If) tri tO o W F- c MNNN NNNNNNN tV Q) G! ci M Ili M M M M M M C') c*7 N .'t �0 4 0 g p 0 0 t)C)C) Co N N N N N N N N N N N 70 Vl O. a E w coto m of w S1r � O) OS N C 0 h to Q) O ti) 0 0 0 O O N O G! tU (D to It CD a) O n (D 1- 0) In trj to ICJ Q') Q7 (D to to tt)* to W, A y c M M M M M M M M M N w C VJ d O to o o o o o o O O N N N N N N N N N N N N Q E co N ^I O N m v to (0 I- OD 0) O (Np Iyl 0o0000a000 00 0 r P 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl0 0 0 0 0 s $575,000.00 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009E Current Tax Exempt Bank Qualified Rates Table of Contents Report ISSUE SUMMARY Total Issue Sources And Uses Debt Service Schedule 2 Revenue vs DIS 3 STREET IMPROVEMENTS Debt Service Schedule q Revenue vs DIS W 5 TABLYN PARK ENTRANCE Debt Service Schedule g J GO Improvement 200913 Set I lssue Summary 1811312009 1 IDA3 AM Northland Securities Inc. Public finance I $575,000.00 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009B Current Tax Exempt Bank Qualified Rates Total Issue Sources And Uses Dated 10101/2009 1 Delivered 10101/2009 Tablyn Street Park Issue Improvements Entrance Summary Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $506,000.00 $70,000.00 $575,000.00 Total Sources $506,000.00 $70A00.00 $575,000.00 Uses Of Funds Costs of Issuance 25,289.62 3,605.48 28,796.00 Deposit to Capitalized interest(CIF)Fund 4,963.84 - 4,963.84 Deposit to Project Construction Fund 474,588.00 64,495.00 539,083.00 Rounding Amount 158.64 1,999,52 2,158.16 Total Uses $505,000.00 $70,000.00 $576,000.00 GO lmprovemen12009BSel I Issue Summery I W312009 110:43AM Northland Securities Inc. Public Finance Page 1 $575,000.00 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota General Obligation Improvement Bonds,Series 2009B Current Tax Exempt Bank Qualified Rates Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 10/0112009 - - _ 07/16/2010 - - 11,127.28 11,127.28 - 01/15/2011 30,000.00 1.050% 7,052.50 37,052.50 48,179.78 07/15/201'1 - - 6,895.00 6,895.00 - 01/1512012 56,000.00 1.300% 6,895.00 61,895.00 68,790.00 07/15/2012 - - 6,537.60 6,537.60 - 01/15/2013 60,000.00 1.600% 6,537.50 60,537.50 73,075.00 07/15/2013 - _ 6,057.60 6,057.60 01/16/2014 60,000.00 _ 1.900% 6,057.50 66,057.50 72,115.00 07/15/2014 - - 5,487.50 5,487.60 - 01/15/2015 60,000.00 2.250% 5,487.60 65,487.60 70,975.00 07/15/2015 - - 4,812.60 4,812.60 - 01/15/2016 60,000.00 2.600% 4,812.50 64,812.60 69,625.00 07/1512016 - - 4,032.60 4,032.50 - 01/15/2017 60,000.00 2,900% 4,032.60 64,032.60 68,065,00 07/15/2017 - 3,162.60 3,162.60 - 01/15/2018 66,000.00 3.150% 3,162.60 68,102.50 71,325.00 07/16/2018 - - 2,138.75 2,138.76 01/15/2019 65,000.00 3.350% 2,138.76 67,138.75 69,277,50 0711512019 - - _ 1,050.00 1,060.00 01/15/2020 60,000.00 3.500% 1,050.00 61.050.00 62,100.00 Total $576,000.00 - $98,627.28 $673,527.28 Date And Term Structure Dated _ _ �__ T—_ 10/0112009 Delivery Date 10/01/2009 First Coupon Date _------ ._ — _ A�-- —--- 711512010 First available call date Cali Price Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars _ $3,511.11 Average Life 6.106- — 6.106 Years Average Coupon _ -- � —_� - - _^ 2.8061566% Net Interest Cost(NIC) _ 2.8061566% e In Truterest Cost(TIC)_ _ -� 2.7832940% All Inclusive Cost(AIC) _ 3.7192800% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost __ -- __ 2.8061566% Weighted_Average Maturity __- 6.106 Years Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes --,- — — -- W� 2.7832940% GO Improvement 2009E Set I Issue Summary 1 811312009 1 10:43 AM Northland Securities Inc. Public Finance Page 2 $575,000.00 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009B Current Tax Exempt Bank Qualified Rates Revenue vs D/S Assessment Capitalized Total Scheduled Equals: Levy Collection Date Revenues* Interest Revenues P+i City Levy 145% Levy Year Year - 0111512011 - 4,963.84 4,963.84 48,179,78 43,215.93 45,376.73 2009 2010 0111512012 20,326.67 - 20,325.67 68,790,00 48,464.33 50,887.55 2010 2011 0111512013 20,325.55 20,325.55 73,076,00 52,749.45 55,386.92 2011 2012 0111512014 20,325.45 20,325,45 72,115.00 51,789.55 54,379.03 2012 2013 0111512015 20,325.60 20,325.60 70,975.00 5_0,649,4_0 53,181,87 2013 2014 01/1512016 20,326,36 - 20,32525 69,625.00 49,299.65 51,764.63 2014 2016 01116/2017 20,326.00 - 20,326.00 68,065.00 47,739.00 50,125.95 2016 2016 01/15/2018 20,325,70 - 20.325,70 71,325.00 50,999.30 63,549,27 2016 2017 01115/2019 20,325.60 - 20,325.60 69,277,50 48,951.90 61,399.50 2017 2018 01115/2020 20,325.70 20,325.70 62,100.00 41,774.30 43,863,02 2018 2019 01/15/2021 20,325.90 - 20,326.90 _ - - Total $203,256.52 $4,963.84 $208,220.36 $673,527.28 $485,632.81 $509,914.46 *Assumes assessments of$156,000(30%of street improvements)for a term of 10 years at a rate of 5.00%. GO Improvement 20090 Set i New Summary 1 8(1=009 i 10:43 AM Northland Securities Inc. Public Finance Page 3 lr$5059000.00 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009B Street Improvement Portion Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 10/01/2009 - - _ 07/16/2010 10,127.36 10,127.36 - 01/15/2011 - - 6,418.76 6,418.75 16,546.11 07/15/2011 - - 6,418.75 6,418.75 - 01/15/2012 50,000.00 1.300% 6,418.75 56,418.75 62,837.50 07/15/2012 - - 6,093.75 6,093.75 - 01/15/2013 65,000.00 1.600% w 6,093.75 61,093.75 67,187.50 07/15/2013 - - 5,653.75 5,653.75 - 01/15/2014 65,000.00 1.900% 5,653.75 60,653.75 66.307.50 07/1512014 - - 5,131.25 5,131.25 - 01/15l2015 55,000.00 2.250% 6,131.26 60,131.25 65,262.50 07/15/2015 - - 4,512.50 4,612.50 01/15/2016 56,000.00 2.600% 4,512.50 59,612.50 64,026.00 07/16/2016 - - 3,797.50 3,797.50 01/16/2017 65,000.00 2.900% 3,797.50 58,797.50 62,695.00 07/15/2017 - - 3,000.00 3,000.00 - 01/1512018 60,000.00 3.150% 3,000.00 63,000.00 66,000.00 07/15/2018 - -- - 2,055.00 2,055.00 - 01/15/2019 60,000.00 3.350% 2,055.00 62,055.00 64,110.00 07/15/2019 - - 1,050.00 1.050.00 - 01/15/2020 60,000.00 3.500% 1,050,00 61,050,00 62,100.00 Total $606,000.00 - $91,971.11 $596,971.11 - Date And Term Structure Dated _ 10/01/2009 Delivery Date T _ _ _ - - 10/01/2009 First Coupon 7/1 512 01 0 First available call date Call Price - — — Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $3,240.89 Average Life T 6.418 Years Average Coupon —_ � __ _ 2.8378360% Net Interest Cost NIC) 2.8378360% True Interest Cost(TIC) 2.8161131% Al Inclusive Cost(A1C) _ _ _ 3.7086963% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost _ _ 2.8378360% Weighted Average Maturity _ Y 6.418 Years Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes -_--_.._W _A_ 2 7832940% GO Improvement 2009E Set I Street Improvements 18113r2099 110:43 AM Northland Securities Inc. Public Finance Page 4 $5059000.00 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota General Obligation Improvement Bonds,Series 2009B Street Improvement Portion Revenue vs D/S Assessment Capitalized Total Scheduled Equals: Collection Date Revenues' Interest Revenues P+l City Levy 105%levy Levy Year Year 01/15/2010 - - - - - 01/15/2011 - 4,96184 4,963,64 16,646.11 11,58227 12,161,38 2009 2010 01/15/2012 20,123.80 - 20,123.80 62,837.50 42,713.70 44,849.39 2010 2011 01/15/2013 20,124.40 - 20,124.40 67,187.50 47,063,10 49,415,25 2011 2012 01/15/2014 20,123.96 20,123.96 66,307.50 46,183.64 48.492.72 2012 2013 01/1512015 20,124.12 20,124.12 65,262.50 45,138.38 47,395.00 2013 2014 01/1512016 20,124.40 - 20,124.40 64,025.00 43,900,60 46,095.63 2014 2015 01116/2017 20,124.28 - 20,124.28 62,595.00 42,470.72 44,694.26 2015 2016 01/1512018 20,124.16 20,124,16 66,000.00 46,875.84 48,169.63 2016 2017 01/1512019 20,123,38 20,123.38 64,110.00 43,986.62 46,185.95 2017 2018 01115/2020 20,124,20 20,124.20 62,100,00 41,975.80 44,074.69 2018 2019 01116/2021 20,123.70 20,123,70 - Total $201,240.40 $4,96184 $206,204.24 $696,971.11 $410,890.57 $431,436.10 GO Improvement 20098 Set�Street Improvements 18l1312009 � 10:43 AM Northland Securities Inc. Public Finance Page 6 VS70,000.00 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009B Tablyn Park Entrance Portion Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 10/01/2009 - - - - 07/15/2010 - - 999.92 999.92 - 01/15/2011 30,000.00 1.050% 633.75 30,633.76 31,633.67 07/15/2011 - 476.26 476.26 - 01/15/2012 6,000,00 1.300% 476.25 6,476.25 5.952.50 07/15/2012 - - 443.76 443.75 - 01/15/2013 5,000.00 1.600% 443.75 5,443.75 6,887,50 07/151201$ - - 403.75 403.75 - 01/15/2014 5,000.00 1.900% 403.75 5,403.76 5,807.50 07/15/2014 - - 366.25 366.26 - 01115/2015 5,000.00 2.250% 366.25 5,366.25 5,712.50 07116/2016 - - Mom 300.00 - 01/15/2016 6,D00.00 2,600% 300.00 5.300.00 5,600.00 07/15/2016 - - 235.00 235.00 - 01/15/2017 5,D00.00 2.900% 235.00 5,235.00 5,470.00 07/15/2017 - 162.50 162.60 - 01/15/2018 6,000.00 3.150% 162.50 5,162.50 6,325.00 07/16/2018 - - 83.76 83.75 01/1512019 5,000.00 3.350% 83.75 5,083.75 5,167.50 Total $70,000.00 - $6,566.17 $76,656.17 Date And Term Structure Date 10/01120G9 Delivery Date ___ _ 10/0112009 First Coupon Date _ 7/1512010 First available call date Call Price Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars _ - $270.22 Average Life _ 3.860 Years Average Coupon W _ 2.4262130% Net Interest Cost(NIC) _� 2.4262130% True Interest Cost(TIC) - __._-.__�--.--�_..___----- ___.__.-_- 2.3991143% All Inclusive Cost(AIC) _ -T^- --- _-�.`---- -T_ 3.6436162% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 2.4262130% Weighted Average Maturity _.. -.W 4 3.860 Years Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes - 2.7832940% GO Empmvement 20099 Set I Tablyn Park Entrance 1 8/13/2009 1 1 OA3 AM Northland Securities Inc. Public Finance Page 6 City Council Date: 8/18/09 Regular Item: 7 ITEM: Consider an application to allow construction of a covered porch five feet into the required 30 foot front yard setback at 8618 Ironwood Trail North— R-1 zoning—PID 21-029-21-12-0028. SUBMITTED BY: Kelli Matzek, City Planner REVIEWED BY: Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator Kyle Klatt, Planning Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is being asked to consider a variance request from Vernon and Vicky Reichow to allow the construction of a covered porch five feet into the required 30 foot front yard setback at 8618 Ironwood Trail North. The existing house currently is located eight feet from the setback line, but the attached garage extends to the setback line. The applicants are proposing to add a foyer to the house which would be eight feet deep and would abut the setback line. This would be a permitted addition to the house without a variance. However, the property owner is also interested in building an additional five foot covered front porch onto the foyer, which would then encroach into the setback. The covered porch would encroach five feet into the front yard setback. Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending denial of the variance application as the applicants have eight feet in which to construct a permitted addition to their house. In addition, the applicants have the option, should they choose to maintain the size and layout of the proposed foyer and porch, of removing the cover to the porch, which would then be permitted under Section 154.081 Permitted Encroachments on Required Yards. The applicant has stated that the variance is justified due to the following (applicant's full narrative is attached to this report): y The property owners desire to live the remainder of their lives in their home and believe it a necessity to have a foyer deep enough for a wheelchair to turn around and maneuver. They contend that the covered porch would need to be covered to prevent any injuries caused by the elements such as snow and ice and would need to be a depth of five feet to again allow a wheelchair to maneuver safely without accident. For variance applications, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate why this situation is unique and necessitates flexibility to code requirements. To make this case, a variance can only be granted by the city when strict enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship on a property owner. "Hardship" is broken down into the following three components: a. The proposed use of the property and associated structures in question cannot be established under the conditions allowed by the city's zoning regulations and no other reasonable alternative use exists; b. The plight of the landowner is due to the physical conditions unique to the land, structure, or building involved and are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district; The unique conditions of the site were not caused or accepted by the landowner after the effective date of the city's zoning regulations; c. And the approval of the variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. In reviewing the request against the three criteria listed above, staff determined aH criteria were not met, as more completely explained in the attached full staff report. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ■ The Planning Commission reviewed the application and held a public hearing at the August 10th meeting. One neighbor spoke in favor of granting the variance during the public hearing. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the application by failure of a motion to approve with a vote of 4:5. ■ The existing house is currently built eight feet from the eastern side property line where there is a ten foot side yard setback. This was approved by a variance in 1982 and the home is otherwise in a conforming location. RECOMMENDATION: In following a strict review of the variance criteria outlined in city code, Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that the City Council deny the proposed variance for Vernon and Vicky Reichow to allow construction of a covered porch five feet within the 30 foot front yard setback at 8618 Ironwood Trail North. ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction................................................................Craig Dawson, City Administrator - Report by staff...................................................................................Kyle Klatt, Planner - Questions from the Council..................................................Mayor& Council Members - Questions/Comments from the applicant.............................................Mayor facilitates - Questions/Comments from the public..................................................Mayor facilitates - Call for a Motion (required for further discussion; does not imply approval of the motion ................................................................Mayor facilitates - Discussion ...........................................................................................Mayor facilitates - Action on motion.................................................................................................Council ATTACHMENTS (5): 1. Staff Report 2. Applicant's Narrative 3. Area Map 4. Proposed Site Plan 5. Resolution 2009 -02; �p City of Lake Elmo Planning Department Variance Report To: City Council Froni: Kelli Matzek, City Planner Meeting Date: 8-18-09 Applicant., Vernon and Vicky Reichow Owner: Same Location: 8618 Ironwood Trail North Zoning: R-1 Introductory Information Proposed The applicant is seeking to construct a covered porch five feet into the required thirty- Project: foot front yard setback at 8618 Ironwood Trail North. The resulting structure, if approved,would be twenty-five feet from the front property line. Variance I A 5-foot variance from the required 30' setback from the front yard property line. Request(s): Applicable Section 154.041 Zoning Districts (R-1). Codes: Subd. C--Minimum district requirements. Requires that all structures be setback a minimum of 30 feet from a front property line. Section 154.081 Permitted Encroachments on Required Yards. The following shall be permitted encroachments into setback and height requirements, except as restricted by other sections of this chapter. (A) In any yards. Posts, off-street open parking, flutes, leaders, sills,pilasters, lintels, cornices, eaves (up to 3 feet), gutters, awnings, open terraces, steps, chimneys, flag poles, open fire escapes, sidewalks, fences, essential services exposed ramps (wheelchair), uncovered porches, stoops, or similar features, provided they do not extend above the height of the ground floor level of the principal structure or to a distance less than 5 feet from any lot line nor less than 1 foot from any existing or proposed driveway;yard lights and nameplate signs; trees, shrubs,plants, floodlights or other sources of light Veirirance Rec uav: 8618 Ironwood Trail Plannin,;Commission Repon; 8-10-09 illuminating authorized illuminated signs, or light standards for illuminating parking areas, loading areas, or yards for safety and security reasons; provided the direct source of light is not visible from the public right-of-way or adjacent residential property. Findings & General Site Overview Site Data: Lot Size: 0.92 acres (40,273 square feet) Existing Use: Single Family Dwelling Existing Zoning: R-1 Property)Identification Number(PID): 21-029-21-12-0028 Legal Description: Lot 8, Block 3, Tab lyn Park,Washington County, Minnesota A lication Review: Applicable BUILDING LINE. A line parallel to a lot line or the ordinary high water level at Definitions: the required setback beyond which a structure may not extend. BUILDING SETSACKLINE. Aline within a lot parallel to a public right-of-way line, a side or rear lot line, a bluff line, or a high water mark or line,behind which buildings or structures must be placed, DWELLING, SINGLE-FAMILY. A residential structure designed for or used exclusively as 1 dwelling unit of permanent occupancy. HARDSHIP. The proposed use of the property and associated structures in question cannot be established under the conditions allowed by the city's zoning regulations and no other reasonable alternative use exists; that the plight of the landowner is due to the physical conditions unique to the land, structure, or building involved and are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district; and that these unique conditions of the site were not caused or accepted by the landowner after the effective date of the city's zoning regulations. Property/ The existing house at 8618 Ironwood Trail North is currently located an additional Application eight feet beyond the required 30 foot front yard setback in the location the applicant Info: is proposing an addition. The applicant is proposing to add an eight foot by eighteen foot foyer to the front of the house in a conforming location. In addition to the foyer, the applicant is proposing to add a five foot by eighteen foot covered porch in front of the foyer, which would extend into the front yard setback by five feet, thus requiring a S:\Land Use\Variances\8618 Ironwood Trl\Rep--Reichow Variance—CC 8-18-09.doc P4kge=2 Metrimic a Request;861817-vinbood!WO Planning Commission Resort;8-10-09 variance. Variance An applicant must establish and demonstrate compliance with the variance criteria set Criteria: forth in Lake Elmo City Code Section 154.017 before an exception or modification to city code requirements can be granted. For ease of review, staff provides a three-part breakdown of the definition of "hardship" in Lake Elmo City code to ensure the requests are meeting the spirit and intent of the ordinance. 1. The proposed use of the property and associated structures in question cannot be established under the conditions allowed by the city's zoning regulations and no other reasonable alternative use exists; Staff finds the addition of a five foot covered porch within the front yard setback is not essential to continue a reasonable use of the property. The homeowners can continue to use the dwelling for residential purposes without the granting of the requested variance. The applicants have written in a narrative (attached to this report) that the size of both the proposed (conforming) foyer and the proposed non-conforming covered porch is necessary for future use of the property to ensure adequate space to maneuver a wheelchair, should that come to be needed for those inhabiting the home. However, an exposed wheelchair ramp and/or an uncovered porch would both be permitted to be built within the setback without the need of a variance. Staff finds this criterion is NOT met. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to the physical conditions unique to the land, structure, or building involved and is not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district. The unique conditions of the site were not caused or accepted by the landowner after the .effective date of the city's zoning regulations. The applicants' house (in the proposed addition location) is currently eight feet from the 30 foot front yard setback line. The applicants' are proposing to add an eight foot foyer which would be located within a conforming location and then a five foot covered porch beyond the foyer, which would then extend into the required setback. Because the applicants' have eight feet in which to construct a revised configuration of a conforming foyer and covered porch, staff would' suggest the. site is not unique, and in fact, offers more opportunities for a conforming addition than other homes in that neighborhood which are currently built up to the setback. In addition, the city code has a list of pennitted exceptions to encroachments for setback requirements which includes uncovered porches, stoops, or other similar SALand Use\Variances18618 Ironwood Tr11Rep--Reichow Variance CC._8-18-09.doe B� Variance Rerlu t: 8618 Jivni-wod Trail Planning,Conmission Report;8-10-09 features. If the applicants were interested in maintaining the proposed size of both (c 12t.) the foyer and porch and the applicants were to remove the cover from the porch, a variance would not be needed. As such, staff finds this criterion is NOT met. 3. The approval of a variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. A foyer and covered porch would not be out of character for the neighborhood as it is entirely single family dwellings. Staff finds this criterion is met. Variance Based on our analysis of the review criteria in City Code, staff would recommend Conclusions: denial of the variance request to allow construction of a covered porch five feet into the thirty foot front yard setback at 8618 Ironwood Trail. Resident Staff is not aware of any resident concerns surrounding the requested variances. Staff Concerns: has received a phone call from a neighbor who was unable to attend the public hearing that was in support of the application. Additional ■ The existing house is currently built eight feet from the eastern side property line Information: where there is a ten foot side yard setback. This was approved by a variance in 1982 and the home is otherwise in a conforming location. Planning The Planning Commission reviewed the application and held a public hearing at the Commission August 10"'meeting. The commission recommended denial of the application by Review failure of a motion to approve. The vote was 4:5. Conclusion: The applicans are seeking approval of the following variance: A 5-foot variance from the required 30' setback from the front yard. Council The City Council has the following options: Options: A) Approve the variance requested; B) Deny the variance requested; C) Table the item and request additional information. The 60-day review period for this application expires on 9-21-09,but can be extended S:1Land UselVariances18618 Ironwood TrMep--Reichow Variance CC_8-18-09.doc Page 4 i Variance Ilequaw:8()1 lFunisv)d Trail Plannin4 C'onindssion Repo";840-.09 an additional 60 days if more time is needed. Staff'Rec: Staff-'is recommending denial of the variance request to allow construction of a covered porch five feet into the 30 foot front yard setback at 8618 Ironwood Trail based on the following: ■ Denial of the request would not deny the owners reasonable use of the property as the home could continue to be used for residential purposes; ■ The applicants have eight feet in which to construct an addition in a conforming location on the property in the proposed location; ■ The applicants could build the proposed foyer and porch in the size and shape requested if the porch were to be uncovered; ■ A wheelchair ramp and an uncovered porch are permitted encroachments into the setback should the applicants choose to alter their plans and eliminate the need for a variance. Decrial To deny the request, you may use the following motion as a guider Motion Template: I move we deny the requested variance based on the findings of fact provided by staff. (use staff"s fndings provided or cite your own) Approval To approve the requested variance, you may use the following motion as a guide: Motion Template: I move we approve the requested variance based on the following findings of fact...(please site reasons for the recommendation) ...with the following condition: 1. The variance shall expire one year from the date of resolution if not acted upon; City Council approval will be required for any subsequent extension. cc: Vern and Vicky Reichow,Applicant Joe Kurle, Applicants' Contractor SALand UseWariances18618 Ironwood TrhRep--Reichow Variance CC 8-18-09.doc To whom this may concern: Vern and Vicky Reichow,property owners of 8618 Ironwood Trail, are seeking a variance to the front setback of there property. They are working with R.P. Vogel Remodeling as the builder, along with Joe Kurle from Joe's Drafting and Design. The legal description of the property is: 8618 Ironwood Trail N.,Lake Elmo,MN 55042 Tablyn Park,Lot 8, Block 3 Parcel lD4 2102921120028 Parcel size: 40,2.73 sq. ft. (0.92 acres) Residential use and zoned Residential We are proposing to change the front setback requirement of 30'-0" for a covered porch to 25'-0". Currently, an uncovered porch can exceed the 30'-0"requirement,but a covered porch cannot. The application for a variance came up during the design phase of a functional foyer addition with a covered porch. The front garage wall currently is at the required setback and the house wall is 8'-0" behind the garage. It quickly became clear that for a functional foyer with a covered porch to work, a variance was required. Explanation for request of variance: Vern and Vicky Reichow, life long residence of Lake Elmo, desire to live the remainder of their lives in their home on 8618 Ironwood Trail. Because they are retirement age, planning ahead is a good idea. While they hope never to be in a wheelchair,Vern's family has experience with being in a wheelchair. Having a foyer that is deep enough for a wheelchair to turn around and maneuver in was essential in the design. The covered porch,the reason for the request of the variance,was also a necessity to prevent any injuries caused by the elements,like snow and ice. The depth of the porch, 5'-0",was needed to allow a wheelchair to maneuver safely without accident. They also like the neighborhood and not wanting to change the look of it have kept with the design and character similar to other houses in the area. Because they,wish to live their later years in this house,they want to enter it safely,without injury. Since there are no nursing homes in Lake Elmo,the Reichows' are faced with few options without the variance. They are asking to allow the covered porch to extend into the setback by only 5'4". I The Reichows',R.P.Vogel Remodeling and Joe's Drafting and Design would like to thank you for considering this request and are willing to assist in anyway possible. Thanks, Joe Kurle Joe's Drafting and Design, LLC -On behalf of Vern and Vicky Reichow i I d" Li7055 NW 'OW 13'E>Vl � � -11'yZll dOCfill�Ozli 8198 � � B�� s : I I }a h- 3 OIL LLJ a P . � 1 ............ x ! Qa gla { _ O ZI •' 0.g R U a E IIVIZ-1 C]OOmNONt SE9S N �xczs s _iONSIatsAN morl�a�j Hal 1(Jx01Q Cl H F '1L ---------- I--------------------- �UF ��•� � $ F ,gyp F � Q I I � - _____________________ a o a of °� j � I Ili I I Q p � f OILW § 3 I HN fail �s z o z 4�r a I I I• I I • I `i f•`I LfM _.�—J I r-- ---- �e47 Zil-OSSS NW 'OW-13 W e+l it RUH IL MPH Egg HUH . q �LL 0 YOM 31Tnd FFF j zi U � .NF•,DI .a•F ml z a 9 4 m y� tl Y�4 p Rpil ra S •q',c ,9-,4 ,PF Q a 1 Q � 4::"A—•e a }ry{Q v ............... . S ll!ml.11..IIIW 141-,A-,2ii0T U.-r. .---t.-- --- "�f-.....I.:-�.... -%-..;:.r VP .5 rM n 1 41. pl. 2, 31, F1,211111 T w 4. M ­r 5 W*I 4. 14 6� 9: 7i r V1,jr, 4U, —F k- 7��- il!-Ii: W -A Wt L 17 X 0 :2 A klit 5, A L. Ne. lt t s4f MR. A.6 j Cttt,l-JO7,z' IY 2 A iz, T re IT,— mvn� L -4. pjall b J- ,'1k: 4t 04,1; A. I-N :j, a S' —.dd� REM moo M, ig t� R.F. VOGEL REMODELING 8618 IRONWOOD TRA L, LAKE EL.MO, MN 55042 l 1 b, I F-Xl673NG HOUSE 1� 1a 860 IRONWOOt?TRAIL I LAKE KLMO,MIN 95042 3~XI6TINCu GARAGE �4 PARCEL 100 r 210M120026 TABI.,YN PARK LOT B,BLOCK 8 e,STgAGK �I cp- . A75 b, b, b_ n " 100 51TE PLAN - 1/4" � 1i4Otl ]OE'S DRAFTING&DESIGN PHONE: (952) 237-3436 14835 CAMBRTAN AVE.W. EMAIL: joc@joesirafting.com ROSI=MOUNT,MN 55068 WEBSITE, www.joesdmfting,com i CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2009-03-ro A RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE FROM THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIRED FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A COVERED PORCHAT 8618IRONWOOD TRAIL NORTH. WHEREAS,the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS,Vernon and Vicky Reichow, 8618 Ironwood Trail North(the "Applicants"), have submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo (the "City") for a five foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback from the property line at 8618 Ironwood Trail North to allow the construction of a covered porch as depicted in a site plan dated July 22, 2009, a copy of which is on file with the City; and WHEREAS, notice has been published, mailed and posted pursuant to the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.017; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on said matter on August 10, 2009; and WHEREAS,the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its recommendation to the City Council as part of a Staff Memorandum dated August 18, 2009; and WHEREAS,the City Council discussed the application on August 18th. NOW, THEREFORE,based on the testimony elicited and information received, the Lake Elmo City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1) That the procedures for obtaining said Variance are found in the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, Section 154.017. 2) That all the submission requirements of said 154.017 have been met by the Applicant. 3) That the proposed setback_variance of five feet is to allow the construction of a covered porch at 8618 Ironwood Trail North. 4) The proposed covered porch can be established under the conditions allowed by the city's zoning regulations and other reasonable alternatives exist. The applicant has a reasonable use of the property as it is currently used for residential purposes. Given the setback requirement set forth in the R-1 Zoning District, there remains area available for an addition to the home. The existing house on the property could continue to be put to reasonable use as a single family dwelling without the construction of a covered porch. 5) The plight of the landowner is not due to the physical conditions unique to the land and are applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district. The Tablyn Park neighborhood, in which the applicants live, has houses built at or near the front yard setback. The house on the applicant's property is currently located eight feet from the required setback, allowing the property owners area in which to build a conforming addition to the home. The proposed foyer and porch could be built as shown in the applicant's site plan if the porch were to be uncovered. An uncovered porch is a permitted encroachment as identified in Section 154.081 Permitted Encroachments on Required Yards, as outlined in the Lake Elmo City Code. 6) The variance will not change the essential character of the neighborhood. The proposed covered porch would not detract from or be out of character of the neighborhood. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION Based on the foregoing,the Applicants' application for a Variance is denied. Passed and duly adopted this 181" day of August 2009 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. Dean A. Johnston,Mayor ATTEST: Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator City Council Date: August 18, 2009 REGULAR Motion g ITEM: Lanes DeMontreville Country Club Addition—Request To Order the Preparation of Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer and Water Improvements SUBMITTED BY: Craig W. Dawson, Interim City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City has received a request from Roger Johnson, 8048 Hill Trail North, that the City Council order a feasibility report for sewer and water improvements to the Lanes DeMontreville Country Club Addition. A Resolution Ordering the Preparation of Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer and Water Improvements to this area has been prepared for Council's consideration.. BACKGROUND: In November 2008, staff received a petition from owners of more than 70% in frontage of the real property located in the Lanes DeMontreville Country Club Addition, and they are requesting the City of Lake Elmo to develop a sewer and water improvement plan for the area together with an estimate of the cost to implement the plan. In the petition, they asked that the City prepare a report and estimate costs, with the condition that the project"would not proceed without the approval of the required number of property owners." The City Council considered this petition on March 17, and chose not to pay for a report that the residents could veto; rather, the residents should pay for the cost estimate. The Council also asked for evidence that septic systems were failing or that the quality of water in the lakes was being impaired by septic seepage. The properties in question are located outside of the planned municipal service boundary for sanitary sewer services per the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, there is no current plan by the City to extend municipal water to this area. The petition area is about 1,500 feet from the Oakdale City limits, and about 3/4 of a mile from the nearest Oakdale sewer connection point. As provided in statute,with a petition having more than "35% in frontage of the real property abutting the streets named in the petition", the project may be ordered by a 3/5'hs vote of the Council. That is not the case with this request, and consequently would require a 4/5ths vote of the Council to proceed. Comprehensive Plan Issues: As stated above, the area affected is one where the City's Comprehensive Plan does not anticipate that public sewer service will be provided. However, the 2005 Memorandum of Understanding with the Metropolitan Council anticipates that sewer use may be extended to existing neighborhoods, if and when there are failing septic systems that need to be mitigated to protect the environment. The City has not yet articulated or adopted a policy on this scenario. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, which will likely be needed, would require a 2/3rds vote of the Council. Policy Consideration regarding FeasibilityRepo eport: In following the"429 process" (i.e., the one in Chapter 429 of Minnesota Statutes, relating to public improvements and the possibility of special assessments), an improvement project may not proceed without the preparation of a feasibility report. The cost for the feasibility report may be assessed if the Council orders the improvement. If the improvement is not ordered, then the City (in this case, its sewer and water funds,) will bear the cost of the feasibility study. As recommended below, a very general (or"high-level") feasibility study could be undertaken to provide a wide range of probable cost, and become the basis for a more refined feasibility study if the Council so desired. This very general, and much less expensive, initial Report may satisfy the statutory requirement. Lanes DeMontreville Sanitary Sewer &Water Improvement Petition August 18, 2009, City Council Meeting Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that if the City Council concurs with the resident's request, that it order a preliminary feasibility eport by the City Engineer to develop a preliminary project cost estimate to determine an order of magnitude of the proposed assessments to the benefitting properties for sanitary sewer only. This order of magnitude study would be a quick cost estimate using aerial mapping and scaled drawings without in depth investigation of the properties, utilities, rights-of-way, topography, or identification of issues impacting the feasibility of a potential project. The high-level study would assume a sewer connection to the City of Oakdale and would assume a low-pressure gravity sewer system with individual grinder pumping stations at each property. The City Engineer would complete this study for an amount not to exceed $2,000. Staff recommends that a study not include water at this time, as a hook-up to the Oakdale system appears difficult for Oakdale to accommodate, and the City's system is too far away to be feasible at this time. By authorizing this preliminary study, the Council will receive a Report by the City Engineer estimating the potential assessment of a project of this scope. This estimate may then be used to determine if the project is worth further investigation. It is recommended that the initial study include only sanitary sewer service. Upon receipt of the initial study information, should the Council wish to proceed further with this project, a detailed feasibility report meeting Chapter 429 requirements could then be authorized for sanitary sewer and, if desired, water improvements. SUGGESTED MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION If the Council is inclined to approve the request, and for sanitary sewer only, Move to adopt the Resolution Ordering the Preparation of preliminary Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer to the properties of the Lanes Demontreville Country Club Addition. The initial study would be completed in an amount not to exceed$2,000. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Resolution 2. Letter from Roger Johnson, 8048 Hill Trail North (dated August 4, 2009) ORDER OF BUSINESS: • Introduction Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator • Report by staff Jack Griffin, City Engineer • Questions from city council members to the presenter Mayor facilitates • Questions/comments from the public to the City Council Mayor facilitates (a maximum of three minutes per question/statement) • Action on motion City Council CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2009- O-S A RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT WHEREAS, the City has received a Petition for Local Improvements to complete a feasibility report to provide municipal sewer and water service for the properties in the Lanes DeMontreville Country Club Addition; and WHEREAS, the City follows the provisions of Chapter 429 Minnesota Statutes relating to public improvements, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, that 1. A request has been made to the City Council sanitary sewer and water improvements to the properties in the Lanes DeMontreville Country Club Addition, and that the City Council proceed with the project as one initiated by the City Council in accordance with Minn. Stat. Section 429.031, 2. The City Engineer is hereby instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement for sanitary sewer service is cost-effective and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement. 3. The preliminary cost estimate will be developed for sanitary sewer service for an amount not to exceed $2,000. Should the project appear to be cost-effective the Council may authorize further Feasibility Studies to pursue the necessity and feasibility of sanitary sewer and/or water improvements as initially requested by petition. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo this 18th day of August, 2009 Dean A. Johnston Mayor ATTEST: Craig W. Dawson Interim City Administrator Resolution No. 09-V 1 August 4, 2009 City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue N. Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 Attn: Craig Dawson, City Administrator Subject: Sewer and Water Feasibility Study for Lanes Demontreville Country Club addition abutting on 50th Street, Hill Trail, Hill Trail Court, and Argyle-Bennett Street Dear Craig: Last November 3, 1 provided the city staff with a sewer petition for the Lanes Demontreville Country Club Addition. It was signed by 70% of the property owners. At it's March 17,2009 meeting, the council acted on the petition by rejecting the cost estimate request. Since that council meeting, I further discussed this matter with my neighbors and with several city representatives. At their urging, I am hereby requesting that the matter of Sewer and Water for Lanes Demontreville Country Club addition again be put on the councils agenda for the August 18 council meeting. My specific request at this time is for the council to order a feasibility study for sewering the Lanes Demontreville Country Club Addition. The feasibility study would include a cost estimate and required comp plan changes to facilitate the project. Thanks again for your consultation on this matter. Call me at the numbers listed below if you need anything more to proceed with this request. Since ...-.� I�.w. er ,Johnson 8048 Hill Trail North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Home... 651-777-7766 Cell...... 651-402-8541 City Council Date: 8-18-09 Regular Item: C1 ITEM: Consider authorizing the Interim City Administrator to enter into a Project Agreement with the Valley Branch Watershed District to repair an eroding ravine and to prevent sediment from washing into Lake DeMontreville. REQUESTED BY: Valley Branch Watershed District, Applicant SUBMITTED BY: Kelli Matzek, City Planner REVIEWED BY: Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator Kyle Klatt, Planning Director Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer Mike Bouthilet, Public Works Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is being asked to authorize the Interim City Administrator to enter into a Project Agreement with the Valley Branch Watershed District to repair an eroding ravine and to prevent sediment from washing into Lake DeMontreville. The Project Agreement is necessary to identify various project related details such as access, maintenance, and restoration responsibilities and has been reviewed by the City Attorney. The project will take place entirely within the City-owned DeMontreville Wildlife Park to address erosion issues that occur largely due to the intermittent stream at the site. A grading permit has been received and reviewed administratively as it considered a public improvement project. The Assistant City Engineer has reviewed the proposed grading and found the project and resulting grades to be acceptable. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION o The City Forester reviewed the construction documents and made a site visit to the project area with the applicant. Dr. W idin found the plans for tree removal, tree protection, and re-vegetation and tree replacement appropriate for the project and the ravine restoration may help to prevent more damage to root systems of existing trees and vegetation. o Two of the three bridges crossing the intermittent stream will be removed for the restoration work. The bridges will be reinstalled by the City at appropriate locations after the work is complete. o The Assistant City Engineer has recommended four additional conditions be listed on the grading permit as outlined further in the full staff report. o This item will be presented to the Park Commission on Monday, August 17th as the project is located within the City-owned park, DeMontreville Wildlife Park. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending approval of the authorization for the Interim City Administrator to enter into the Project Agreement. r s SUGGESTED MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION: Motion: Move to authorize the Interim City Administrator to enter into the ,Project Agreement with the Valley Branch Watershed District to perform ravine restoration work at DeMontreville Wildlife Park. ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction....................................................Craig Dawson, Interim City Administrator - Report by staff...................................................................Kyle Klatt, Planning Director - Questions from the Council..................................................Mayor& Council Members - Questions/Comments from the applicant.............................................Mayor facilitates - Call for a Motion (required for further discussion; does not imply approval of the motion ................................................................Mayor facilitates - Discussion ...........................................................................................Mayor facilitates - Action on motion.................................................................................................Council ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Detailed Staff Report 3. Project Agreement 4. City Forester Report 5. Engineer Report �iE 4r� ` l_' ra reU1 fitr Q ytr Yk f +i n !f t�.. � ' - JtC G' '7 r.+ 1 ,e• u•�� - 'y� �.1, f r :u r.x � J,Ir{ i r fib. yi � „srr��ar�"L, v ,, r t s ,� � ,�za 1, �N•� „�. 1" tL V W 1 �t ra'# Urfa i yY o zK+� 1 lytr�lyI j M. r yy ! � y: �'Iln! Lf" �� � ��',.I���? JN 7� 1 t� rye.•" F. _ e-n � r F VI,Y ��' °k+> i sr P r �+ i� }l x ��a 1 r •��°'�`�- ,p !''� '' vv ��'" �+ r -r $ ' Spa�f J�� q7�� _�y��?`.i 'S_{1S s� '.. "'r`' _ i ! r, 7�}r•s i ti k �i ,J,y�-- fig• r iy - � , '. -I - ia��� � � # ay � rGi '� l� lj � � �� t:"v F F_ �t � �"� °'?' x1�4 S._.� bar :;-v c} �7;,,�" Yi.:r�k�'ry F�_ � �� ��r• ..`�SLI�s:�_ ��,�•e�L4'"'""-, =._3 x`�'. AM;, uy!IK ' �r ��� '' s: t � � , „ ,I ��,� ��.•T. ,r � ���""r�f � r�..�r� ! 1��s y - v,'rlik i-, - a-F � -� � r� � t �=•a:"�. _.�.'.L.-.._ter ��.:Su�= f ri 4} �.. � 04 vim. ' �" :.:•r-y r° 2-r -�Y r E--_ ,g Il f ���s µ4..W� �`j r t10. rtl} ,ya a1y ! - t 'r _ 1 -.a.� .n s .,*,h0 M�' , .; a r�y,�- �, 'k3'C-"t N'r b '' "v X y _ 4 n`h 5 .G dk 7 We t. - e �� �.7'. � �� r y 2d�rar.t y •�v��+'' , '� ,4 �` t :3 �`t a s3 r '. ''`r�,`'"``,,,- x'�'s`r•,+��� a-5--. � ��_.- t'�.�- a`refF" rw�s�4 `a i3 r r°, ", 'z ° +-'�, rs, q'r' .f1•' "� '' �t ��l s, rSM '- �„y- � r €+ d• e�E« }i�h z.,.fa 1 r,r - �-. 1 r p � �1 �� �tr�': �-i.,r �1 4 e+ !- ry,r s pT}i' �1- _E. F•,+ c, +�. � ���7 Y .t�, y +, `s^� fi�.q••-� S; r _y t4`�s.n� +' ..'aF�$jFa''•4- �` t�rq _j77 t�°��j e�fe -a.-.-3v-. 'kF,'�'z`"�'Er � ��;'i '�i��'''�'�F�, � �' S l' � L a a" t 1 :I .:9.g�C{ _ +i i - !�•£hw..f i , �T��r'��x S�� '3r�r' %e r" r, .rg�',�•rF,�:.. { y „� '�i r { `-�jTl�s. as N 4 �y, 11+�;s z. �i5�'"'S' '€ r f i:. S , w` +C�+r, 'i✓i , E Y am•'-e'`7 "a+� - I F °'4 ;r6w •c4: t - r ,x ? � �k-. Ea -_t_ {j4 „t.A atf�i V�1���s� r � }-J l 6 R faF'1�� r �•a�f __� r. City of Lake Elmo Planning Department Project Agreement Review To: City Council From: Kelli Matzek, City Planner Meeting Date: 10/18/09 Applicant. Valley Branch Watershed District(VBWD) Owners and City of Lake Elmo, DeMontreville Wildlife Park Location Zoning: PF—Public Facilities Introductory Information Request The Valley Branch Watershed District is requesting the City of Lake Elmo enter into the attached Project Agreement allowing grading work for a ravine stabilization project on an intermittent creek flowing through DeMontreville Wildlife Park. This project would repair and stabilize an eroding ravine and prevent sediment from washing into Lake DeMontreville. Site Data: Property Identification No. Address Use 05-029-21-13-0005 7950 DeMontreville Trl N Community Park Project A g,reement and Grading Review Background The property on which the work is proposed to be undertaken is currently owned by Information: the City of Lake Elmo and functions as a public community park. There is a natural intermittent creek that flows through DeMontreville Wildlife Park to Lake DeMontreville. The intent of the project is to repair and stabilize an eroding ravine and prevent sediment from washing into Lake DeMontreville. The Valley Branch Watershed District is projecting to begin the project on September 15th with a substantial completion date of November 15th. The watershed district believes additional vegetation work will need to be performed in the spring of 2010. Review Comments: Planning Grading Permit Issues: The project will require more, than 600 cubic yards of grading as identified by the Valley Branch Watershed District. A grading permit has been submitted and reviewed administratively. The Assistant City Engineer has reviewed the proposed grading and found the project and resulting grades to be acceptable. He has provided four conditions of approval, which are outlined later in this staff report. Y 7�'.1��'L7A)�1�liccttiors;r78f11prlti'cViJle b�'ilrilife Parlr On Comicil Report;8-18-09 ( ni A public hearing at the city is not being required as this is considered a public improvement project and as outlined by city code, is exempt from the permit requirements. The entire project is located on city owned property and would have minimal impacts to adjacent neighbors. However, the City Council must authorize the Interim City Administrator to enter into the Project Agreement with the Valley Branch Watershed District before the project may commence. The Valley Branch Watershed District held a public hearing on the project on Thursday, August 13d' at their regularly scheduled meeting. Although no individual notices are required for neighbors of the property, a notice was published in the Lake Elmo-Oakdale Review. Project Agreement A Project Agreement is necessary to identify various project related details such as access,maintenance, and restoration responsibilities. The Valley Branch Watershed District has developed a Project Agreement which was then reviewed by the City's Attorney. The agreement, as attached to this report, was found to be adequate for the project. Tree Removal The City Forester has reviewed the construction documents and done a site visit with a representative from the Valley Branch Watershed District. They discussed the planned tree and vegetation removal as well as the proposed re-vegetation plan. Her full report is attached. Dr. Widin has found that the plans for tree removal, tree protection, and re-vegetation and tree replacement is appropriate for the project and the ravine restoration may help to prevent more damage to root systems of existing trees and vegetation, Existing Trails Currently there are no plans or specifications in the Park CIP to alter, expand, or relocate the existing dirt trails in the park. The Valley Branch Watershed District has agreed to replace any damaged portions of the dirt trail with another dirt trail during the time of the project. This is outlined in the Project Agreement. Bridges There are currently three bridges that cross the creek within the DeMontreville Wildlife Park. The bridges are owned by the City of Lake Elmo and maintained by the City's Public Works Department. As a part of the restoration, project, the Valley Branch Watershed District will remove two of the three bridges as it is necessary for the work being proposed. The Public Works Department will reinstall the bridges in the appropriate locations after the work is complete. The bridge locations may be slightly altered due to changes in the width of the creek from the grading and stabilization efforts. The relocation of the bridges will be determined by the Public Works staff at the time the project is substantially completed this fall. S:iLrand !selGractingPrnnitxll 31iT1: 79.01?e.i4:lurrrrrvilleTil.h;Admin%strudveV?elrC.CPrgka.4greenieni:Grading: 8-18-09(Z).rtx gage 2 � T' 7 i G'13'PH)Application,,Delldonly-eville. 'Mltllffe,1 cark cifv Council Report;8-18-09 (coat,) If improvements to the bridge are deemed necessary due to the height of the bridge above the waterline, Lake Elmo's Public Works Department will provide the necessary upgrade. Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize the Interim City Administrator to enter into the Project Agreement for the Ravine Stabilization Project in DeMontreville Wildlife Park for the following reasons: • . The project is intended to fix existing erosion issues through ravine restoration and associated grading work to prevent sediment from washing into local water bodies. There is a public benefit associated with the repair and the improvements of the ravines. The work proposed will stabilize the slopes of the creek and prevent sediment from washing into Lake DeMontreville. Engineer The City Engineer has reviewed the application and supports staff s recommendation Comments: of approval with four conditions to be added: 1) Any changes in the construction start and finish date must be provided to the City. 2) The City of Lake Elmo must be notified 48 hours prior to any construction activity. 3) . Any changes from the proposed plan dated June 26, 2009 must be provided to the City. 4) City Staff must be notified prior to any tree removal, trail impacts, or removal of wooden footbridges. Conclusion: Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize the Interim City Administrator to enter into the Project. Agreement based on the findings cited above and with conditions. Conclusion: The Valley Branch Watershed District is requesting the City of Lake Elmo enter into the attached Project Agreement allowing grading work for a ravine stabilization project on an intermittent creek flowing through DeMontreville Wildlife Park, This project would repair and stabilize an eroding ravine and prevent sediment from washing into Lake DeMontreville. Council The City Council may consider the following options for taking action on this request: Options: A) Authorize the Interim City Administrator to enter into the Project Agreement based on the findings drafted by Staff or other additional information that is presented at the meeting; B) Deny the Project Agreement based on findings provided by the Council. S.-IL,rarad Usc1C';rodin,r Purrni[slx'L3PD: 79 0.DeMantreville D-1,N;AoininistrxativeORep CC'Prolecl Agreement, GrarlinEE. 8--18-09(2).eicx; �'13is'1):4.�trrticatio»;Lic�hlotatreville�'r.'ldlifi:+Park Cite Corrm.tl,fie purl;8-I8-0 Staff Rec: Staff recommends the City Council approve entering into the Project Agreement in order to perform the ravine restoration and grading requested based on the following: 1) The project is intended to fix existing erosion issues through ravine restoration and associated grading work will prevent sediment from washing into local water bodies. 2) There is a public benefit associated with the repair and the improvements of the ravines. The work proposed will stabilize the slopes of the creeks and prevent sediment from washing into Lake DeMontreville. Provided the following conditions are met 1) Any changes in the construction start and finish date must be provided to the City. 2) The City of Lake Elmo must be notified 48 hours prior to any construction activity. 3) Any changes from the proposed plan dated June 26, 2009 must be provided to the City. 4) City Staff must be notified prior to any tree removal, trail impacts, or removal of wooden footbridges. Approval To approve the request,the City Council is asked to use the following motion as a Motion guide: Template: Move to approve authorize the Interim City Administrator to enter into the Project Agreement with the Valley Branch Watershed District to repair eroding ravines and prevent sediment from washing into Lake DeMontreville...(use staffs findings provided above or cite your own) ...with the conditions outlined by staff. cc: Lincoln Fetcher, Valley Branch Watershed District John Hanson, Valley Branch Watershed District S:iLancl UselGradins;PermRsIVRTED, 7950 DeAdonrreville TWA';AdministrarivelRep CC Project Agm.,plent:Gyvdhnsr- &18-09(2)A?c agc 4 I PROJECT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made the day of July, 2D09, by and between the Valley Branch Watershed District, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation (hereinafter "District") and the City of Lake Elmo, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter "Landowner"). 1 . RECITALS 1.1 The City is the fee Owner of certain real property situated in the city of Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota, legally described as follows: Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 98, Washington County, Minnesota. 1.2 The District has included in its annual budget funds to implement repair and maintenance of stormwater management features within the watershed district. 1.3 Landowner has property to repair or maintain for stormwater management located on the property listed above. 1 A The District is willing to provide some funds for the maintenance of the Project dealing with stormwater. Landowner is willing to provide access inside the construction limits as shown on Exhibit "A" in accordance with the terms of this Agreement as well as funds for maintaining trails, bridges, fences. Landowner is willing to provide temporary access outside of the construction limits in areas to be agreed upon prior to construction and maintenance activities. 2. TERMS 2.1 The District will complete and maintain the Project described in Exhibit "A" in accordance with the terms, scope and schedule set forth therein. 2.2 The Landowner will provide access to the District for the purpose of maintaining the stormwater management features and such access shall inure to and run with the land until this Agreement is cancelled by either party upon thirty (30) days advance written notice. 2.3 The District or its successors shall maintain the boulder cross vanes, boulder straight vanes, boulder spreaders, and sedimentation basin features of the Project until otherwise agreed between the parties. The District will not disturb the trails in any future maintenance activities, without prior approval from the Landowner. The Landowner shall not modify the project unless agreed upon by the District. 2.4 The Landowner or its successor shall maintain the bridges and trails within the Project to keep them in reasonably good condition as determined by Landowner. The District will restore trails during the Project, but not the bridges or fences. 2.5 The District is not responsible for any injuries caused from, or within, the Project after the Project is constructed. The District's contractor shall provide liability insurance in a form and amount satisfactory to the District and Landowner naming both as insureds during constuction. 3, GENERAL TERMS 3.1 This Agreement shall remain in effect and run with the land unless canceled by the District. 3.2 Landowner agrees to allow the District access to the premises for evaluation and promotion of the Project. 3.3 This Agreement may be cancelled by either party upon thirty (30) days advance written notice to the other party. VALLEY BRANCH WATERSHED LANDOWNER(S) DISTRICT CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: By: Its: Its: Date: Date: P.O. Box 838 Property Address: Lake Elmo, MN 55042 PID 0502921130005 Signed and sworn to before me on Signed and sworn to before me on , 2009 , 2009 by by the the Notary Public Notary Public instrument Drafted by: Lawson, Marshall, McDonald, Galowitz & Wo(le, P.A. Lawyers 10390 39th Street North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Telephone: (651)777-6960 BW .