The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-04-2010 packetCity of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota May 4, 2010 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 April 20, 2010 City Council minutes H. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES: 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, 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. CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) from TH 5 to 50th Street - Resolution No. 2010-018, Supporting an Engineering and Traffic Investigation to Determine the Reasonable and Safe Speed Limit 4. Authorize City Administrator Professional Development 5, Appointments to the Park Commission 6, Authorize Temporary On -Call Building Inspection Services for May -June 2010 7. 2010 Seal Coat Project — Accepting bids, awarding contract and approval of Change Order No, 1 U AR AGENDA: 8 Keats Avenue Street and Watermain Improvements — Authorization for Geotechnical Services, 9. Street Capital Improvement Program — Authorization to Conduct the Annual Pavement Management Street Rating Services 10. South Washington Watershed District — Request for Resolution of Concurrence for Boundary Adjustment Petition 11, Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Senior Living and Farm School — Resolution No, 2010-017 K. REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: (These are verbal updates and do not have to be formally added to the agenda.) • Mayor and City Council • Administrator • City Engineer • Planning Director L. Adjourn **A social gathering may or may not be held at the Lake Elmo Inn following the meeting.** City of Lake Elmo City Council Meeting Minutes April 20, 2010 Mayor Johnston called the meeting to order at 7:04 p,m. PRESENT: Mayor Johnston and Council Members DeLapp, Smith and Park Absent: Council Member Emmons Also Present: Administrator Messelt, City Engineers Griffin and Stempski, Attorney Eid, Planning Director Klatt, Finance Director Bouthilet, and City Clerk Lumby APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION; Council Member Park moved to approve the A. 20;. 2010 City Council agenda as presented Council .Member DeLapp secondedthe motiork 7he motion passed 4-0. GROUND RULES: APPROVED MINUTES; The April 6, 2010 City Council minutes were,appr(Wediti consensus, The February 16, 2010 City Couneil. 'Minute§ Were approved by consensus. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQVIRIES-None CONSENT AGENDA: MOTION Council Member-SM,ith nied to approve the Consent Agenda as presented Council Member Park second.itithe motion. The motion passed 4-0. • Approve payment of disbursements and payroll in the amount of $123,218.24 • Approve the purchase of approximately 245 new water meters at a total price not to exceed $70,000,00 • Approve donation from the City's General Fund in the amount of $1,000,00 to the Firefighters' Relief Association and to authorize the Mayor and direct City staff to prepare and execute the necessary Budget Adjustment • Approve Resolution No. 2010-016 support Bond Referendum Resolution Supporting the Mahtomedi Public Schools LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 20, 2010 REGULAR AGENDA Promotion of Andrea Friedrich and Tom Steinman from probation member to Firefighter Chief Malmquist requested the City Council approve the promotion of two probationary members to Firefighters. MOTION: Council Member DeLapp moved to promote probationary members Andrea Friedrich and Torn Steinman from probation to Firefighter status, Council Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0. Presentation of CSAH13 (Ideal Ave./Olson Lake Trail) Driver feedback sign and roadway study Joe Gustafson, Washington County Traffic Engineer, provided airbsentation on the Driver Feedback sign and Roadway Study for CSAH 13 (Ideal. Menue/OlsonLake Trail) completed by Washington County. Bob VanZandt, 8110 Hidden Bay Trail, Tri-Lakes Assoc, rep, statedlie,thought more than 3,000 cars a day travelled on this road with PINS and Target located off of Highway 5, He pointed out how unsafe it was for the homeowners backing out of their driveways onto Ideal Avenue due to the speed of the trayellingearS'and the inability to see the cars -,„ coming up the hill. The Council discussed the results of the speed studY'and,safety issues. The Council asked the City Administrator to prepare a resolution requesting a speed study with the support of the:City ofOakdale and requested the temporary speed sign be left in place as long as possibte,,pprlittps eYeri:until the time of the study. Eder's Century Pines DielfriiinarVaiid final plat: Resolution No. 2010-014 The City Counei*being asked to review a preliminary and final plat for a subdivision to be called Eder's Century PineS:.On Keats Avenue, Staff has found that the subdivision complies with all appliCableTZ6ning and subdivision requirements, and is recommending approval of both the preliniinary plat and final plat as submitted, MOTION: Mayor .Johnston moved to adopt Resolution No, 2010-014 approving a Preliminary and Final Plat for Eder's Century Pines subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. Council Member Park seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0. Approval of proposed encroachment easement agreements The City Council is being asked to authorize the execution of four easement encroachment agreements allowing residents to construct improvements (in these case fences) within drainage and utility easements on private property. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 20, 2010 2 MOTION: Council Member DeLapp moved to authorize the execution of Easement Encroachment Agreements for: Mendez Property - 5650 57th Street Circle N. -- fence Koepke Property - 3435 Isle Court N. — fence Myers Property - 11711 5611' Street N. —fence Hoagland Property - 10024 Tapestry Road —fence Council Member Park seconded the motion, The motion passed 4-0. Amending Chapters 94, 150, 151, 152, 153 and 154 of the City Code to bring them into conformance with the Storm Water and Erosion Sediment Control ordinance; Ordinance 08-024, Resolution No 2010-013 The City Council is being asked to review and approve proposed nor amendments to Chapters 94, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154 of the City Code to incorporate references go and improve consistency with Chapter 150. Chapter 150 regulates storm water and erosion and sediment control throughout the City, The proposed changes are not intended to alter regulations,4ut instead to consolidate the information, as applicable, into one area of the code,. je MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to approve Ordinance 08-024 approving the code amendments and Resolution No. 2010,01i: authorizinesummary publication of this Ordinance. Council Member DeLapp secoridedthe motion. The motion passed 4-0. 2010 Street and Water Ouality-Itnorovernents-t Approval of Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Resolution N& 2010-015 Ryan Stempski, Assistance City.Engineer, reported the City Council is being asked to approve the plan and-sPeCificationSfor the 2010 Street and Water Quality Improvements and order advertisement for bids. There are six rainWater:gardenS.proposed for the 2010 Street and Water Quality Improvements. At the -'-Apri1r8th Valley Branch Watershed District Board meeting the City received approval of the VBWD Community Grant and will receive 50% reimbursement for these water quality improvements. MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to approve Resolution No. 2010-015 Approving the Plans and Specifications for the 2010 Street and Water Quality Improvements and Ordering the Advertisement for Bids. Council Member Park seconded the motion. The motionpassed 4-0, LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 20, 2010 Minnesota State Building Permit Surcharge The Building Dept, is requesting the City Council prepare a change to the surcharge fee schedule for one year in response to recent state of Minnesota Action, The temporary fee would increase effective July 1s1, 2010 from the fixed rate of $0.50 for permits based on fixed fees, to an increase of $5.00 for "Permits based on fixed fees". MOTION: Council Member Smith moved to direct staff to prepare an amendment to the current fee schedule for permits based on fixed Fees from $0, 50 to $5, 00, effective July lxt, 2010, forced upon by State of Minnesota Council Member Park seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0, The Council adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m, Respectfully submitted by Sharon Lumby, City Clcrk LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 20, 2010 4 cirToi" LAKE ELMO AYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 5/04/2010 CONSENT ITEM #: 2 MOTION as part of Consent Agenda AGENDA ITEM: Approve Disbursements and Payroll in the Amount of .$ 169,394.16 SUBMITTED BY: Tom Bouthilet, Finance Director THROUGH: Bruce Messelt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: City Staff SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to approve disbursements and payroll in the amount of S 169,394.16. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo has fiduciary authority and responsibility to conduct normal business operation. Below is a summary of current claims to be disbursed and payroll to be paid in accordance with State law and City policies and procedures. Claim # ACH ACH DD 2713 —DD 2747 35540 - 35550 35551 - 35587 Amount S 7,333.55 $ 1,111.27 $ 24,713.08 $ 7,867.15 $ 128,369.11 TOTAL $ 169,394.16 Descijption Payroll Taxes to IRS 04/22/2010 Payroll Taxes to MN Dept. of Revenue 04/22/2010 Payroll Dated 04/22/2010 (Direct Deposit) Payroll Dated 04/22/2010 Accounts Payable Dated 05/04/2010 -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting Approval of Disbursements and Payroll May 4th, 2010 Consent Agenda Item # 2 STAFF REPORT: City staff has complied and reviewed the attached set of claims. All appears to be in order and consistent with City budgetary and fiscal policies and Council direction RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve as part of the Consent Agenda proposed disbursements in the amount of $ 169,394.16. Alternatively, the City Council does have the authority to remove this item from the Consent Agenda or a particular claim from this item and further discuss and deliberate prior to taking action, If done so, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would be: "Move to approve the April 20th, 2010 Disbursement and Payroll, as Presented [and modified] herein." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Accounts Payable Dated 05/04/2010 SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS (if removed from the Consent Acenda): Questions from Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion .......... ............. ....... . ........... ...... Mayor & City Council Discussion ................... ..... ........ .................... . .................. Mayor & City Council Action on Motion Mayor Facilitates page 2 -- Accounts Payable To Be Paid Proof List User: joan Z Printed: 04/28/2010 - 1:36 PM Batch: 004-04-2010 Invoice # Inv Date ACS Animal Control Services 614 04/24/2010 101-420-2700-43150 Contract Services 614 Total: ACS Total: ARAM Aramark, 629-6972893 04/15/2010 101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms 629-6972893 Total: 629-6974717 04/26/2010 I 01-410-1940-44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg 629-6974717 Total: 629-6974718 04/19/2010 101-410-1940 44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg 629-6974718 Total: 629-6974719 04/26/2010 101-410-1940-44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg 629-6974719 Total: 629-6977723 04/22/2010 101-430-3100-44170 Uniforms 629-6977723 Total: 629-6979612 04/26/2010 101-410-1940-44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg 629-6979612 Total: ARAM Total: 13ATTYPL Batteries Plus Woodbury, Corp 032-704368 04/09/2010 101-430-3120-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 032-704368 Total: 032-704588 04/12/2010 101-450-5200-42210 Equipment Parts AP - To Be Paid Proof List (04/28/10 - 1:36 PM) Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference 700.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Animal Control Services 3/29- 4/25/2010 700.00 700.00 57.33 0.00 04/06/2010 Uniforms 54.29 0.00 04/06/2010 Monthly Rug Service Station #2 79.36 0.00 04/06/2010 Linen City Hall 52.14 0.00 04/06/2010 Monthly Rug Service Station #1 22.97 0.00 04/06/2010 Uniforms 38.57 0.00 04/06/2010 Linen City Hall - Annex 57.33 54.29 79.36 52.14 22.97 38.57 304.66 71.60 0.00 04/06/2010 Patching Trailer Battery 71.60 87.10 0.00 04/06/2010 Cushman B artery Task Type PO # Close POLine # No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 Page 1 Invoice # Inv Date 032-704588 Total: BATTYPL Total: Amount Quantity PIM Date Description Reference 87.10 158.70 Task Type PO # Close POLine # BOUTHMI Bouthilet Michael 717484 04/26/2010 394.20 0.00 04/06/2010 Reimbursement for Arbor Day Trees No 0000 101-410-1940-44300 Miscellaneous 717484 Total: 394.20 BOUTHMI Total: 394.20 CENTPOW Century Power Equipment 481294 04/13(2010 7.70 0.00 04/06/2010 Blower Repair Parts No 0000 101-430-3120-42210 Equipment Parts 481294 Total: 7.70 CENTPOW Total: 7.70 CTYOAKDA City of Oakdale 10000460-01 04/30/2010 3,056.72 0.00 04/06/2010 Water Service 194 No 0000 601-494-9400-43820 Water Utility 10000460-01 Total: 3,056.72 CTYOAKDA Total: 3,056.72 DERRICK Derrick Custom Homes Chk Req 04/20/2010 2,000.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Escrow Rfd 3572 Kelvin Ct Permit 803-000-0000-22900 Deposits Payable 6852 Chk Req Total: 2,000.00 DERRICK Total: 2,000.00 DONALDSA Donald Salverda & Associates P-1012-3 04/20/2010 875.09 0.00 04/06/2010 Effective Management Program 101-430-3100-44370 Conferences & Training P-1012-3 Total: 875.09 DONALDSA Total: 875.09 FXL FXL, Inc. May 2010 05/01/2010 2,000.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Assessing Services - May 2010 101-410-1320-4-3100 Assessing Services May 2010 Total: 2,000.00 FXL Total: 2,000.00 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (04/28/10 - 1:36 PM) No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 Page 2 Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference Task Type PO # Close POLine # GRACZYK Graczyk Kevin 04/20/2010 04/20/2010 101-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations 04/20/2010 Total: GRACZYK Total: HUMANRIG League of MN Human Rights Com 12/31/2009 12/31/2009 101-410-1110 44330 Dues & Subscriptions 12/31/2009 Total: HUMANRIG Total: 55.00 0.00 04/06/2010 CC Cabled Meeting 4/20/2010 55.00 55.00 55.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Annual Membership Dues 55.00 55.00 No 0000 No 0000 ICC-M International Code Council 2769548 03/02/2010 100.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Membership Dues No 0000 101-420-2400-44330 Dues & Subscriptions 2769548 Total: 100.00 ICC-M Total: 100.00 KAISER Kaiser Manufacturing, Inc 74779 04/08/2010 64.61 0.00 04/06/2010 2 Hydrant Bags - No 0000 101-420-2220-42400 Small Tools & Equipment 74779 Total: 64.61 KAISER Total: 64.61 McPhilli Mike McPhillips Inc 36518 04/19/2010 8,023.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Street Sweeping (Surface Water No 0000 603-496-9500-44010 Street Sweeping Protect) 36518 Total: 8,023.00 McPhilli Total: 8,023.00 MENARDSO Menards - Oakdale 56399 04/26/2010 42.71 0.00 04/06/2010 Bulbs - Outdoor fixtures for well II 601-494-9400-45200 Building and Structures 56399 Total: 42.71 MENARDSO Total: 42.71 MNHWYSAF MN Highway Safety Ctr 629430-1776 04/09/2010 984.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Emergency Apparatus Driving Class X - 101-420-2220-44370 Conferences & Training 4 629430-1776 Total: 984.00 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (04/28/10 - 1:36 PM) No 0000 No 0000 Page 3 Invoice # Inv Date MNHWYSAF Total: NEWMAN Newman Signs, Inc. T1-0220214 04/19/2010 101-420-2220-44010 Repairs/Maint Bldg TI-0220214 Total: NEWMAN Total: NEXTEL Nextel Communications 761950227-085 04/18/20I0 101-410-1940-43210 Telephone 761950227-085 04/18/2010 101-420-2220-43210 Telephone 761950227-085 04/18/2010 101-420-2400-43210 Telephone 761950227-085 04/18/2010 101-430-3100-43210 Telephone 761950227-085 04/18/2010 101-450-5200-432I0 Telephone 761950227-085 Total: NEXTEL Total: NORTHL Northland Trust Services, Inc. LKELO5A 04/08/2010 601-494-9400-46110 Bond Interest LKELO5A Total: LKELO9A 04/08/2010 315-470-7000-46110 Bond Interest LKELO9A 04/08/2010 315-470-7000-46200 Fiscal Agent Fees LKELO9A Total: NORTHL Total: PRESS Press Steven 04/26/2010 04/26/2010 101-410-1450-43620 Cable Operations 04/26/2010 Total: PRESS Total: AP - To Be Paid Proof List (04/28/10 - 1:36 PM) Amount Qu 984.00 187.76 187.76 187.76 102.00 92.96 34.96 60.24 19.24 309.40 309.40 87,512.50 87,512.50 15,452.50 425.00 15,877.50 103,390.00 58,88 58.88 58.88 Pmt Date Description Reference 0,00 04/06/2010 Police and Fire Parking Signs 0,00 04/06/2010 0.00 04/06/2010 0.00 04/06/2010 0.00 04/06/2010 0.00 04/06/2010 Cell Phone Service - Administration Cell Phone Service - Fire Dept Cell Phone Service - Building Dept Cell Phone Service - Public Works Dept Cell Phone Service - Parks Dept 0.00 04/06/2010 Interest Bond Series 2005A 0.00 04/06/2010 Interest on Bond Series 2009A 0.00 04/06/2010 Agent Fee 0.00 04/06/2010 PZ Meeting Cabled 4/26/10 Task Type PO # Close POLine # No No No No No No No No No No 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 Page 4 Invoice # Inv Date Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference REED Reed Business Information 4363636 04/14/2010 167.28 0.00 04/06/2010 2010 Seal Coat Project 101-410-1450-43510 Public Notices 4368636 Total: 167.28 REED Total: 167.28 RIVRCOOP River Country Cooperative 04/16/2010 04/16/2010 6.42 0_00 04/06/2010 Car Wash 101-420-2400-44040 Repairs/Maint Eqpt 04/16/2010 Total: 6.42 RIVRCOOP Total: 6.42 ROBERTSC ROBERTS COMAPNY INC. 223364A 04/14/2010 22.50 0.00 04/06/2010 Service Awards X 4 101-420-2220-44300 Miscellaneous 223364A Total: 22.50 ROBERTSC Total: 27.50 ROTARYLE Lake Elmo Rotary Club 1st Quarter 04/22/2010 101-410-1320-44330 Dues & Subscriptions 1st Quarter Total: ROTARYLE Total: 225.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Membership Dues - City Administrator 225.00 225.00 Task Type PO # Close POLine # No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 No 0000 RUD Prince-Rud Diane 05/04/2010 05/04/2010 320.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Cleaning City Hall & Annex No 0000 101-410-1940-44010 Repairs/Maint Contractual Bldg 05/04/2010 05/04/2010 240.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Cleaning Fire Hall No 0000 101-420-2220-44010 Repairs/Maint Bldg 05/04/2010 Total: 560.00 RUD Total: 560.00 SAMSCLUB Sarn's Club 000786 04/26/2010 120.85 0.00 04/06/2010 Food for Arbor Day Celebration No 0000 101-410-1940-44300 Miscellaneous 000786 Total: 120.85 SAMSCLUB Total: 120.85 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (04/28/10 - 1:36 PM) Page 5 Invoice # Inv Date SCHLOMKA Schlomka 10100 02/18/2010 101-430-3100-44010 Repairs/Maint Bldg 10100 Total: SCHLOMKA Total: SPRINT Sprint 837908817-029 04/18/2010 101-420-222043210 Telephone 837908817-029 Total: SPRINT Total: STDELANO State Bank of Delano 05/01/2010 05/01/2010 314-480-8000-46110 Bond Interest 05/01/2010 Total: STDELANO Total: TASCH T.A. Schifsky & Sons Inc 49086 04/15/2010 101-430-3120-42240 Street Maintenance Materials 49086 Total: TASCH Total: TDS TDS METROCOM - LLC 651-7798882 04/13/2010 101-420-2220-43210 Telephone 651-7798882 04/13/2010 101-430-3100-43210 Telephone 651-7798882 04/13/2010 602-495-9450-43210 Telephone 651-7798882 04/13/2010 601-494-9400-43210 Telephone 651-7798882 Total: TDS Total: WASH-REC Washington County 1009571 04/26/2010 101-410-1910-44300 Miscellaneous 1009571 Total: AP - To Be Paid Proof List (04/28/10 - 1:36 PM) Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference 210.00 0.00 04/06/2010 Pump Holding Tank 79.98 0.00 04/06/2010 Phone Cards for Laptops 210.00 210.00 79.98 79.98 1,587.75 0.00 04/06/2010 G.O. Equip of Certificate 2006A Interest 1,587.75 1,587.75 100.09 0.00 04/06/2010 Asphalt 100.09 100.09 163.95 155.68 104.76 42.24 466.63 466.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 04/06/2010 04/06/2010 04/06/2010 04/06/2010 Analog Lines - Fire Analog Lines - Public Works Analog Lines - Lift Station Alarms Analog Lines - Well House ta 8.57 0.00 04/06/2010 Copies - Boundry of Lake Elmo 8.57 Task Type PO # Close POLine # No No No No No No No No 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 No 0000 Page 6 Invoice # Inv Date WASH -RFC Total: WASHACC Washington County 66108 04/20/2010 101410-1520-44300 Miscellaneous 66108 Total: WASHACC Total: WASHCONS Washington Conservation Dist 1828 03/31/2010 603-496-9500-44370 Conferences & Training 1828 Total: WASHCONS Total: YOCUM Yocum Oil Company, Inc_ 187010 04/22/2010 101-430-3100 14010 Repairs/Maint Bldg 187010 Total: YOCUM Total: ZACK Zack's, Inc. 25795 04/23/2010 101-410-1940-42110 Cleaning Supplies 25795 04/23/2010 601-494-9400-42270 Utility System Maintenance 25795 04/23/2010 101-430-3120-42240 Street Maintenance Materials 25795 04/23/2010 101-430-3100-42150 Shop Materials 25795 Total: ZACK Total: Report Total: Amount Quantity Pmt Date Description Reference 8.57 1,027.00 1,027.00 1,027.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 160.69 160.69 160.69 93.98 80.16 94.95 89.83 358.92 358.92 128,369.11 0.00 04/06/2010 Special Assessment Billing 0.00 04/06/2010 1st Qtr - Shared Educator Program 0.00 04/06/2010 Bulk Oil Tanks 0.00 04/06/2010 0.00 04/06/2010 0.00 04/06/2010 0.00 04/06/2010 Flat Towels ( City Hall) Blue Marking Paint Asphalt Remover Shop Towels Task Type PO # Close POLine # No No No No No No No 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 AP - To Be Paid Proof List (04/28/10 - 1:36 PM) Page 7 0 wino ' LAKE ELMO MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION, _ = AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: DATE: 5/04/2010 CONSENT ITEM #: 3 MOTION as part of Consent Agenda CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) from TH 5 to 50111 Street — Resolution No. 2010-018, Supporting an Engineering and Traffic Investigation to Determine the Reasonable and Safe Speed Limit Ryan Sternpski, Assistant City Engineer Bruce A. Messelt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: At the April 20th, 2010, City Council Meeting, Washington County presented the results of their Driver Feedback Sign and Roadway Study for CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail), This Study is now posted on the City's Website. As a follow-up to the County presentation, the City Council directed that a speed study be requested for this road segment. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda, BACKGROUND INFORMATION: - County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) within this proposed study area is a two-lane north -south County highway with a posted speed ranging from 40 to 50 miles per hour (mph). CSAH 13 currently carries approximately 2,500 to 3,500 vehicles per day (vpd) in the study area and has narrow, 0' to 4' paved shoulders. The current roadway was constructed in 1945 south of Hidden Bay Trail, and in 1960 north of Hidden Bay Trail. Both sections of roadway were last repaved in 1986. On April 20th, The City Council received an update from Washington County on an ongoing Driver Feedback Sign and Roadway Study. At that time, it was directed that the City request Washington County seek a formal MNDOT Speed Study. As this roadway serves as the Oakdale — Lake Elmo municipal boundary, the City of Oakdale has been contacted and will affirmatively consider the same resolution at its May llth, 2010 meeting, STAFF REPORT: An Engineering and Traffic Investigation to Determine the Reasonable and Safe Speed Limit at CSAH 13 was recommend by Washington County on April 20th. The Lake Elmo City Council expressed support of this recommendation. Per MN Statute 169.14, the -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting CSAH 13 Speed Study Request — Resolution No. 2010-018 May 4th, 2010 Consent Agenda Item # 3 authority to determine the safe and reasonable speed on a County Highway resides with the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. For Washington County to proceed with this request, a resolution of support must be provided by the City of Lake Elmo and by the City of Oakdale. The City of Oakdale will discuss their resolution of support at their May 11, 2010, City Council Meeting. The proposed resolution of support for Lake Elmo will include the condition that the investigation occur after the I-494 and 1-694 projects are completed and traffic volumes return to normal along CSAH 13. It should also be noted that the conclusions of the investigation performed by Mn/DOT must be supported by the City of Lake Elmo for the investigation to be conducted. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended that the City Council approve as part of the Consent Agenda the following motion: "Move to Approve Resolution No. 2010-018 seeking Washington County action to Support the Authorization of the Commissioner of Transportation to Perform an Engineering and Traffic Investigation to Determine the Reasonable and Safe Speed Limit at CSAH 13 (Ideal Avenue/Olson Lake Trail) Between Trunk Highway 5 and CSAH 35 (50th Street IV)." Alternatively, the City Council does have the authority to remove this item from the Consent Agenda and further discuss and deliberate this recommendation prior to taking action, The Council may table this item at its discretion, take no action (in essence denying the recommendation), or amend the recommended action. If the latter is done so, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would be: "Move to Approve Resolution. No. 2010-018, as amended at tonight's meeting." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Resolution 2010-018 2. Driver Feedback Sign and Roadway Study (previously distributed and on-line SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS (ifremoved from the Consent Auenda): Questions from Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion .........,....„ ............ . .......................... ........ Mayor & City Council Discussion Mayor & City Council Action on Motion Mayor Facilitates -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2010-018 RESOLUTION TO WASHINGTON COUNTY IN SUPPORT OF THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION TO PERFORM AN ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE THE REASONABLE AND SAFE SPEED LIMIT AT THE FOLLOWING LOCATION: CITY OF LAKE ELMO County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 13 (Ideal Ave) between Trunk Highway 5 and CSAH 35 (50th Street North) including the boundary between the City of Lake Elmo and the City of Oakdale. WHEREAS, per MN Statute 169.14, the authority to determine the safe and reasonable speed on a County Highway resides with the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and; WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of all parties to have reasonable and safe speeds posted on County Highways and City Streets, and; WHEREAS, the accepted method to determine the reasonable and safe speed limit(s) is through an engineering and traffic investigation, as required by statute; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 1. That the City of Lake Elmo hereby approves this resolution to Washington County in support of the authorization of the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation to perform an engineering and traffic investigation to determine the reasonable and safe speed limit(s) at the above referenced location. 2, That the City of Lake Elmo agrees to support the conclusions of the engineering and traffic investigation, and the implementation of such conclusions. 3. That the Investigation be conducted after the 1-494 and 1-694 Construction Project has been completed, and when it is determined that traffic volumes have returned to normal, non -construction related conditions, Date: , 2010 CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Dean A. Johnston ATTEST: Mayor Bruce A. Messelt City Administrator Resolution No. 2010-018 CITY OF LAKE ELMO MAYOR & C0(1NC14 CPAIMUNICATIQIN AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: DATE: 5/04/2010 CONSENT ITEM #: 4 MOTION as part of Consent Agenda Authorize City Administrator Professional Development Tom Bouthilet, Finance Director Bruce Messelt, City Administrator J - NA - SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to authorize the City Administrator's participation in the Minnesota City Management Association's annual conference, to be held May 5th-7th. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo provides for Professional Development opportunities for elected and appointed officials and City staff, as is both financially feasible and appropriate. In the City Administrator's Contract, the following applies: l 1. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. Subject to the City's adopted budget, Employer shall pay the travel and subsistence expenses of Employee for professional and official travel, meetings and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of Employee ... Professional development includes but is not limited to the International City/County Management Association annual conference, the Minnesota City Management Association annual conference, and the League of Minnesota Cities annual conference. STAFF REPORT: The City's adopted 2010 budget provides for sufficient funds for Administrator participation in the upcoming MCMA annual conference and the LMNC annual conference in June in St. Cloud. However, due to ongoing budgetary constraints, the City Administrator is recommending at this time NOT attending the annual conference of the International City/County Management Association, to be held in October in San Jose, California. -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting Authorize City Administrator Professional Development May 4th, 2010 Consent Agenda Item # 4 Attendance is estimated to cost approximately $663.10 USD ($199 for Conference and $464.10 for lodging arid meals), plus mileage reimbursement for approximately 300 miles round-trip, if carpooling is not available. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Administrator's participation in the Minnesota City Management Association's annual conference, to be held May 5th-7th. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. Alternatively, the City Council does have the authority to remove this item from the Consent Agenda and further discuss and deliberate prior to taking action. The City Council may deny such recommendation by simply not taking any action on this item. It may also amend this recommendation, as appropriate. If the latter is done so, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would be: "Move to authorize the City Administrator's participation in the 2010 MCMA annual conference, as recommended land amended] at tonight's meeting." ATTACHMENTS; None SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS at removed from the Consent Affenda): - Questions from Council to Staff ......... ...... ....... ...... . ..... . ....... Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ..... ........ ............ ............. ...... Mayor & City Council Discussion Mayor & City Council - Action on Motion Mayor Facilitates -- page 2 -- CtTYDF LAKE ELMO A YOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 5/04/2010 CONSENT ITEM #: 5 MOTION as part of Consent Agenda AGENDA ITEM: Appointments to the Park Commission SUBMITTED BY: Sharon Lumby, City Clerk THROUGH: Bruce A. Messelt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: - NA - SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: There currently exist two vacancies on the Park Commission. The City Council is asked to appoint Judith Blackford for a second term on the Parks Commission and move David Steele from Alternate to Full Voting Member. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: There are currently two vacancies on the Park Commission, The Park Commission consists of the following members: Park Con -mission Member Term Expires John Ames 2 12/31/2010 Judith Blackford 1 11/08/2009 John Booher 1 12/31/2010 Todd Bruchu 2 12/31/2011 Marty Dobbs 1 12/31/2012 Susan Dunn 1 12/31/2011 Rolf Larson 2 12/31/2011 David Steele First Alternate 08/05/2009 Mike Zeno 1 12/31/2011 STAFF REPORT: The City has advertised these vacancies pursuant to City policy. There are no applications on file and no new applications have been received, Ms, Blackford has indicated an interest in serving as a Full Voting Member for a 3-year term on the Park Commission. -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting Appointments to the Park Commission May 4th, 2010 Consent Agenda Item # 5 Mr. Steele was appointed to the Park Commission as an Alternate on August 5, 2009. Past practice has been, when there is an opening, the First Alternate should be moved to a Full Voting Member for a 3-year term. As such, staff is recommending the re -appointment of Ms. Blackford and moving of Mr. Steele from Alternate to Full Voting Member. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended that the City Council Appoint Ms. Blackford and Mr. Steele to the Park Commission. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. Alternatively, the City Council does have the authority to remove this item from the Consent Agenda and further discuss and deliberate prior to taking action. The City Council may table this decision until another time or may deny such recommendation by simply not taking any action on this item. It may also amend this recommendation, as appropriate. If the latter is done so, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would be: "Move to appoint [and I as Member[s] for a 3-year term on the Park Commission, as agreed to at tonight's meeting." ATTACHMENTS: None SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS (if removed from the Consent ileenda): Questions from Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion Mayor & City Council Discussion Mayor & City Council Action on Motion.., ........ ..... ....„ ........ ....... . .......... ..... , Mayor Facilitates page 2 -- CITYOF AEO MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 5/04/2010 CONSENT ITEM #: 6 MOTION as part of Consent Agenda AGENDA ITEM: Authorize Temporary On -Call Building Inspection Services for May -June 2010 SUBMITTED BY: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director THROUGH: Bruce Messelt, City.Administrator REVIEWED BY: Tom Bouthilet, Finance Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: As part of its Consent Agenda, the City Council is asked to authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to enter into a temporary services contract with a neighboring community for on -call Building Inspection Services for Fridays during May and June 2010. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Lake Elmo desires to provide a full complement of municipal services, especially during the busy spring and early construction season. However, with limited City staff and current City polices regarding use or lose of accrued Paid -Time -Off (PTO), accommodations are recommended to be made for the Acting Building Official to take Fridays off during May and June 2010. The City has approached both Woodbury and Bayport for potential interim on -call services for time - sensitive building inspections and construction services for Fridays during May and June 2010. Both organizations are amenable to this suggested arrangement. STAFF REPORT: The City's current Human Resource policies and both state and federal regulations presume reasonable accommodation of requests for leave can and should be made. The City's current Acting Building Official has accrued significant PTO that must be utilized by June 30th or would be "lost," according to City policies. The Planning Director and City Administrator have worked to minimize potential customer service reductions by directing the all sanitary sewer inspections and non -building related inspection and enforcement efforts are undertaken on Monday — Thursday during the May -June timeframe. Moreover, only time sensitive inspections that cannot be accommodated Monday — Thursday will be scheduled for Fridays. -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting Authorize Temporary On -Call Building Inspection Services May 4th, 2010 Consent Agenda Item # 6 On Fridays, the contracted Building Department will make an inspector available on an hourly basis to cover such time -sensitive inspections and related requests for information. All official activities and record -keeping will remain the responsibility of the Lake Elmo Acting Building Official. Attached for Council information is a Letter of Interest from Bayport and a sample Agreement provided by the City of Woodbury. The City of Woodbury has indicated by telephone an interest in support Lake Elmo's request. As these costs will be incurred on a per -inspection basis, no significant budgetary impact is anticipated. However, it should be noted that the City is equally obligated to provide budgetary capacity to cover accrued benefits. As such, utilization of such benefits would effectively result in a reduction in the City's future financial obligations, thereby offsetting the additional contract costs. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to enter into a temporary On -Call Building Inspection Services agreement for May — June 2010. The specific provider will be selected based upon best capacity and fit for the City's overall inspection needs. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. Alternatively, the City Council does have the authority to remove this item from the Consent Agenda and further discuss and deliberate prior to taking action. The City Council may deny such recommendation by simply not taking any action on this item. It may also amend this recommendation, as appropriate. If the latter is done so, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would be: "Move to authorize the Mayor and Administrator to proceed, as recommended [and amended] at tonight's meeting." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Letter of Interest from Bayport 2, Sample Agreement SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUS SS (if removed from the Consent Aeenda): Questions from Council to Staff ...„...., ...................... , ............. ,..........Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion .......... ........ ..... .,...... ................. ........ ...... ......,Mayor & City Council Discussion Mayor & City Council Action on Motion. ..... ........,..........., ..... . .......... ....... ....... ..... .Mayor Facilitates page 2 -- CITY OF BAYPORT 294 NORTH THIRD STREET BAYPORT, MINNESOTA 55003 PHONE 651-275-4404 FAX 651-275-4411 April 28, 2010 Bruce Messelt City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Dear Mr. Messelt, 46E176 APR 3 0 2010 L. CITY OF LAKE Thank you for meeting with both I and John on the opportunity to provide contracted building inspections services to the City of Lake Elmo. Based on our conversation and subject to Lake Elmo City Council approval, the City of Bayport understands the City of Lake Elmo is requesting inspection services on the Fridays the Lake Elmo Building Official is out of the office. The City of Bayport also understands the City of Lake Elmo will only need the services of the City of Bayport through the end of June, with the possibility of a few more Friday's in July, The City of Bayport will bill the City of Lake Elmo an hourly rate of services of the building official. 50.00 for the The City of Lake Elmo also agrees to reimburse for mileage based on the current IRS reimbursement rate. Please let me know how this is received by your City Council. Should you have any questions, please call me at 651-275-4414. Sincerpl Mit9Pfell Berg City of Bayport DRAFT BUILDING INSPECTION SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this day of March, 2010, by and between the City of Newport hereinafter referred to as "Newport') and the City of Cottage Grove (hereinafter referred to as "Cottage Grove"). WHEREAS, Newport is authorized and empowered to provide for various types of building inspections and code enforcement to ensure the public health, welfare and safety; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the parties and the purpose of this Agreement that certain of such services be performed by Cottage Grove on behalf of Newport; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth below, the above parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The term of this agreement shall be from May 1, 2010 through May 1, 2011, and shall automatically renew for an additional one year term on May 1, 2011 and on May 1, 2012, unless either party to the Agreement provides notice to the other party that they shall teiininate the contract at the end of the current term, and further subject to termination as provided in paragraph 9. 2. For the term of this Agreement, Cottage Grove shall provide Newport with the following services, in and on behalf of Newport and at the direction of Newport's City Administrator: a. Building inspections and code enforcement, as necessary. b. Property inspections for structural integrity for purposes of exercising eminent domain powers or protection of life. c. Planning and zoning reviews required for building permits. d. Issuing building permits (plumbing & mechanical included). e. Preparation of all reporting required by the State of Minnesota or any state agency. f. Preparation of an annual written report of work completed for the City Council of Newport. g. Provide copies of all permits issued and inspections made on a monthly basis. The services Cottage Grove will provide under this Agreement do not include property maintenance inspections and do not include planning or zoning review unless such review is specifically related to a building permit request for a structure permitted under the Newport Code. 3. Cottage Grove shall consult with and abide by the manner in which the inspections, plan review and activities are conducted and over the determination of what enforcement action is appropriate and consistent with Newport City Code Chapter 18, Article II (Building Code) and Article III (Housing Code) and Article IV (Swimming Pools) and other policies as established by Newport. Cottage Grove shall confer with Newport staff regarding interpretation of the Code. Newport shall have a duty to inform Cottage Grove of any and all updates or changes to the Newport Code, 4, Cottage Grove is not required to maintain office hours at Newport's City Hall. However, if Cottage Grove finds it necessary to meet with citizens at Newport's City Hall, Newport will arrange for a work area for such meetings. Cottage Grove's main contact at Newport shall be Newport's City Administrator and Cottage Grove shall take direction from Newport's City Administrator for all work performed under this Agreement. 5. Cottage Grove shall assume the expense of performing the inspections and code enforcement. 6. Newport will pay Cottage Grove 25% of the total permit and plan review fee. Such permit and plan review fees shall be separate from, and in addition to, the payment provided for by Paragraph 8 of this agreement. All other provisions of this agreement shall remain applicable with respect to the plan review and inspection services being provided. 7. In addition to the above fees Newport will pay Cottage Grove for services performed by Cottage Grove outside those contemplated by this agreement but only as specifically requested by Newport. These additional fees will be billed to Newport on a time and material basis. Services performed by the Cottage Grove Chief Building Official will be at the rate of $60/hour plus expenses. Services performed by Cottage Grove Building Inspector(s) will be at the rate of $45 plus expenses. This agreement shall terminate as follows: a. Upon the expiration of 90 days after service of written notice upon the other party; or b. At any time, upon agreement of the parties; or c. In any event on May 1, 2012. 9. Cottage Grove agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Newport, and its officials, agents and employees from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses and expenses arising out of or resulting from Cottage Grove's perfoitnance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death or to the injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Cottage Grove. This provision shall not be construed as a waiver by either party of any defenses, immunities or limitators on liability with respect to claims made by third parties. 10. Newport agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Cottage Grove, and its officials, agents and employees from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses and expenses arising out of or resulting from Newport's performance of the duties required under this Agreement, 2 provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death or to the injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Newport. This provision shall not be construed as a waiver by either party of any defenses, immunities or 'imitators on liability with respect to claims made by third parties. 11. Cottage Grove shall cany liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 in the aggregate for both Bodily Injury and Property Damage. Newport shall be named as an additional insured, and a certificate of said insurance shall be provided to Newport. Cottage Grove shall carry Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 176.181, Subd. 2 and further agrees to provide a certificate of said insurance to the Newport. 12. Any employee assigned by Cottage Grove to perfoun its obligations hereunder shall remain the exclusive employee of Cottage Grove for all purposes including, but not limited to, wages, salary and employee benefits. 13. In addition to the services listed in Paragraph 2 above, Cottage Grove shall, upon request, also provide for and on behalf of Newport: a. Collecting fees for issuing building permits and inspections. b. Inspection of all rental property once every two years. Newport will provide Cottage Grove with a current list of rental property owners Cottage Grove shall notify Newport rental property owners of upcoming rental inspections via letter and application and collect an inspection fee of $40.00 per unit. Fees must be paid before inspections can be performed. Cottage Grove shall receive $25.00 for each unit inspected and Newport shall receive $15.00 Newport rental property owners shall apply for Certificate of Occupancy renewal no later than 60 days prior to the April 1 expiration date of the previously issued certificate. Cottage Grove shall collect $40.00 per unit for reinspections. Cottage Grove shall receive $25.00 for each reinspection and Newport shall receive $15.00 Cottage Grove shall provide copies of inspections as well as Certificate of Occupancy for each building c. Clerical and other office duties related to building inspections and review of building permits. 14. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties hereto or as constituting the persons employed by Cottage Grove as the agent, representative or employee of Newport for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. Cottage Grove is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this contract. Cottage Grove represents that it has, or will secure at -its own expense, all personnel and equipment required in performing services under this contract. Any and all personnel of Cottage Grove or other persons, 3 while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by Cottage Grove under this contract, and shall not be considered employees of Newport and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against Cottage Grove, its officers, agents contracts or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of Newport; and Cottage Grove shall defend, indemnify and hold Newport, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from Newport, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, WorkersCompensations, Unemployment Compensation, disability, severance pay and PERA. 15. The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures of Cottage Grove relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by Newport and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 16C.05, Subd, 5. 16. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between Cottage Grove and. Newport and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof, any amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. 17. Cottage Grove and Newport agree to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act and not to discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of employment in its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all services, programs, and activities. Cottage Grove has designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), as required by Section 35.107 of the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. For information contact the City Administrator, City of Cottage Grove, 7516 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016; telephone: 651-458-2800; TDD: 641-458-2880. Newport agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Cottage Grove from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorneys fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of ADA by Newport. Cottage Grove agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Newport from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of ADA by Cottage Grove. 18. Both parties agree to comply with all applicable state, federal and local laws, rules and regulations. 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set forth their hands on the day and year first written above. CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE CITY OF NEWPORT By: By: Its Mayor Its Mayor Date Date By: By: . Its City Administrator Its City Administrator Date Date CT155-4(JAE) 345957v.2 5 CITY OF LAKE ELMO MAYOR & COUNCIL COA4MUN/CATION DATE; 5/04/2010 CONSENT ITEM #: 7 MOTION as part qf Consent Agenda AGENDA ITEM: 2010 Seal Coat Project — Accepting Bids, Awarding Contract, and Approval of Change Order No. 1 SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer THROUGH: Bruce Messelt, City Administrator REVIEWED BY: Jack Griffin, City Engineer Mike Bouthilet, Public Works Superintendent Tom Bouthilet, Finance Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is asked to accept bids, award a contract, and approve Change Order No. 1 for the 2010 Seal Coat Project. Bids were received, publicly opened, and read aloud on April 28th, 2010. TKDA has prepared and attached the Bid Tabulation worksheet and a Letter of Recommendation for the Award of the Contract. No specific motion is needed, as this is recommended to be part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda, BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On February 3rd, 2010, the City Council ordered the preparation of plans and specifications. On March 23rd, 2010, the City Council approved the plans and specifications for the 2010 Seal Coat Project, and ordered advertisement for bids. STAFF REPORT: The proposed streets to be seal coated are a combination of the 2009 and 2010 Street Capital Improvement Plan, with the exception of 2 road segments. Jamaca Avenue and 42nd Street will not be included in this proposed project. (Refer to the attached location map.) The crack seal and seal coat maintenance for Jamaca Avenue has been deferred until the year following the completion of the MPCA Landfill Project. 42nd Street (Jamaca Avenue to Irish Court) was included in the project as bid. However recent investigations have identified additional pavement distresses experienced over the winter months. As such, it has been determined that a seal coat is no longer the recommended improvement for this street segment. Due to the increased amount of road surface peeling up, the recommended improvements for this segment has now changed from a seal coat to a mill and overlay. (Refer to the attached example photo of 42nd Street.) Therefore, it is recommended that 42nd Street be page 1 -- City Council Meeting 2010 Seal Coat —Receive Bids, Award Contract, Approve Change Order May 4th, 2010 Consent Agenda Item # 7 removed from this contract by approval of Change Order No. 1. The lowest responsible bidder, Pearson Brothers, Inc., has provided a bid in the amount of $177,614.65, which is $21,579.35 below the Engineer's Estimate of S199,194.00. With the approval of Change Order No. 1, the proposed contract amount will be $168,365.57. The biannual budget for these improvements was $250,000 ($125,000 per year) with $28,214,00 being expended in 2009 for the crack seal preparation work. Staff will evaluate whether to perform the mill and overlay of 42" Street or perform additional seal coating with the savings of $53,420.43 of the minor maintenance budget RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended that the City Council accept the lowest responsible bid and approve Change Order #1, as part of the overall approval of the Consent Agenda. Alternatively, the City Council does have the authority to remove this item from the Consent Agenda and further discuss and deliberate prior to taking action. The City Council may deny such recommendation outright by simply not taking any action on this item or rejecting the bids. It may also amend this recommendation, as appropriate. If the latter is done, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would be: "Move to Approve Resolution No. 2010-020 Accepting the Bids, Awarding a Contract, and Approval of Change Order No. 1 for the 2010 Seal Coat Project per the Engineer's Letter of Recommendation for the Award of Contract [ as amended at tonight's meeting J." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2010-020 2. Project Schedule 3. Engineers Letter of Recommendation for Award of Contract 4. Change Order No. 1 5. Updated 2010 Seal Coat Project Location Map (Removal of 42" Street) 6, Example Photo of 42 Street SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS (if removed from the Consent Aeenda): Questions from Council to Staff ....... ...... .................... ........ Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion Mayor & City Council Discussion ...... ...... ................ ........ ............. ..... Mayor & City Council Public Input, if Appropriate ............... ....„ ...... „ ..... „ ..... Mayor Facilitates Action on Motion Mayor Facilitates page 2 — CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2010-020 A RESOLUIION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE 2010 SEAL COAT PROJECT AND APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement ,for bids for the 2010 Seal Coat Project, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and bids were received complying with the advertisement,. WHEREAS, bids were tabulated, checked and summarized to verify that all requirements of the submittals were met; WHEREAS, the City Engineer reviewed the bids and has provided a letter recommending the award of the contract to the lowest responsible bidder; WI-IEREAS, the City Engineer and Public Works staff have identified that the proposed sealcoat is no longer the recommended improvement fur that part of the work that includes 4.2ud Street, due to the identification of additional pavement stresses experienced over the winter; AND WHEREAS, the City Engineer is further recommending the approval of Change Order No. 1, removing 42" Street from the Project, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED, 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a Contract in the accordance with the above ordered Project, in the amount of the Contractor's lowest responsible bid, and according to the plans and specifications thereof approved by the City Council. 2. That Change Order No. 1 is approved, thereby removing 42"d Street from the project and decreasing the contract amount by $9,249.08 to a total contract amount of $168,365.57. 3 The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next two lowest bidders shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Date: , 2010 CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: Dean A. Johnston Al I EST: Mayor Bruce A. Messelt City Administrator Resolution No. 2010-020 February 3, 2010 March 16, 2010 CITY OF LAKE ELMO 2010 SEAL COAT PROJECT PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE Council orders TKDA to prepare Plans and Specs Presentation of Plans and Specs to the City Council. Council approves Plans and Specifications and orders advertisement for Bids March 26, 2010 Placement of Advertisement for Bids - Construction Bulletin. Publication date of March 31 and April 7 March 30, 2010 Placement of Advertisement for Bids — Oakdale -Lake Elmo Review, Publication date of April 5 and April 12 April 28, 2010 Receive and review Contractor bids May 4, 2010 City Council accepts bids and awards contract May 7, 2010 Process and send out Contract Documents. May 21, 2010 Receipt of Contractor's Bonds / Legal Review & Issue Notice to Proceed. June 8, 2010 Conduct Pre -construction Meeting July 30, 2010 Substantial Completion August 18, 2010 Final Completion (Includes sweeping and clean up) Page 1 of 1 TKDA E IGINEER1NG:ftJCHffEC The right time. The right people. The right company. April 29, 2010 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Lake Elrno, Minnesota Re: 2010 Seal Coat Project City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota TKDA Project No. 14575.005 Dear Mayor and City Council: 444 Cedar Street, Suite 1500 Saint Paul, MN 55101-2140 (651) 292-4400 (651) 292-0083 Fax wwwilida.corn Bids for the referenced project were received on April 28, 2010, at 2:00 pm with the following results, A complete Tabulation of Bids is enclosed for your information. Contractor Base Bid Pearson Bros Inc, $177,614,65 Allied Blacktop inc. S182,594.50 ASTECH Corp. $190,894.25 Fahrner Asphalt Sealers S213,801.56 Engineer's Estimate $199,194.00 Recommendation We recommend that you award the Contract to the lowest bidder, Pearson Bros Inc., for their base bid of $177,614.65, and execute Change Order No. 1, which removes 42nd Street from the project for a reduced total Contract amount of 168,365,57. Please do not hesitate to call me with any questions or comments you may have, Sincerely, Ryan W. Stempski, P.E. Project Manager DMK:lbb Enclosure An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity TABULATION OF BIDS 2010 SEAL GOAT PROJECT CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA TKDA PROJECT NO. 14575.005 BIDS OPENED: APRIL 28. 2010, AT 2:00 PM *DENOTES ERROR IN BIDDERS CALCULATION TEM NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT 1 I BITUMINLIS SEALCOAT WITH 1/8" DRESSER TRAPaROCK , 165,995 SY 2 3 4 5 1 6 7 a 9 10! ;TOTAL i$ ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE UNIT TOTAL PRICE AMOUNT 1.20 $ 199,194.00 $ 199,194.00 UNIT PRICE $ 1.07 $ $ 1 $ TKDA 112S4DVIMMUSJIGilliMARMSZLIrdileillil "non& talc Iltrighigeoptellcnel.maywr{a PEARSON BROS INC. ALLIED BLACKTOP GO. TOTAL UNIT TOTAL AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT 177,614.65 $ 1 1.10 $ 182.594.50 - $ i $ $ 177,614.65 is $ is $ $ $ $ 182,594.50 Page 1 Period Ending April 29 To Pearson Bros.. Inc. for 2010 Seal Coat Proiect for City of Lake Elmo. Minnesota CHANGE ORDER TKDA Engineers -Architects -Planners Saint Paul, MN 20 10 Proj, No. 14575,005 Change Order No. You are hereby directed to make the following change to your contract dated . 20 10 . The change and the work affected thereby is subject to all contract stipulations and covenants. This Change Order will (increase) (decrease) (not change) the contract sum by Nine Thousand Two Hundred Forty Nine Dollars and 08/1 00. „ , .„ ,„..,„„,„., „.,.... ...... ......... „..($9,249,08 ), This change order provides for changes in the work of this contract according to the attached itemization. NET CHANGE= (9,249.08) Amount of Original Contract Additions approved to date (Nos. Deductions approved to date (Nos. Conlract amount to date Amount of this Change Order (Add) (Deduct Revised Contract Amount Approved City of Lake Elmo TKDA Owner $ By By Ryan Stempski, P.E. Approved Pearson Bros,. Inc. White - Owner Contractor Pink - Contractor Blue - TKDA 177,614.65 177,614.65 (9,249.08) 168,365.57 CHANGE ORDER NO.1 2010 SEAL COAT PROJECT CITY OF LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA TKDA PROJECT NO. 14575.005 PERIOD ENDING: April 29, 2010 ITEM QUANTITY +/- UNIT AMOUNT NET CONTRACT NO. ITEM UNIT QUANTITY TO DATE DIFFERENCE PRICE TO DATE CHANGE AMOUNT 1 REMOVE QUANTITY FOR BITUMINOUS SEALCOAT WITH 1/5" DRESSER TRAP ROCK DUE TO REMOVAL SY (5,644) - $ 1.07 $ • $ (9,249,00) OF 42ND STREET (JAMACA TO IRISH CT) FROM PROJECT SCOPE TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO, 1 $ (9,249 08) 3, 00 4 E - 3,3 Tx *133'13031.00 0 - _ * — . I;; 4233413 STREET N - FROM JAMACA AVENUE TO IRISH COURT N- SEGMENT REMOVED FROM PROJECT DUE TO THE CONDITION .' OF THE ROAD SURFACE ...._ .....pj i --3 ,, ..._ ..., f et' 113 Tz vi;v3-_ 3Nj3 , - 3 elementary, 1 ' - Sky. view Community EJementery Skyview Comm 1 Legend 444N A Ili kJ 011 I 4 1,1 WY 1., 41414 4 4.4 414 IA IA 1 11 OW Al 4 1 A 41 4 AA I 4 4 AR A 4 E t 33 '3.PE rrf = 00 . - - - .----,,i-- -- - * frit II, -* If ff , * I 00* fre N.3-43.33,33_ " 3 - tor1,-N• n 3" 33 I EXISTING STRIPING SHALL BE MARKED PRIOR TO SEAL COATING ON KIMBRO AVENUE AND 43RD STREET N 1 1 3 "3 jII3* Lake Elm 1 Efemenrary -,-, *02 4.3 4432322 '3,70 _ 3 03331)..31333.3.- 1 != w3l 1 f rf',n , - A rtjfil jf fAeifn..r?fte, 333 343434-P 3347 Ff' „ ffnf P4k2 13 V t AtAntIPPN 3 33 PIE - EN - *-, 'f-rf 43-333-5234 3331-.PI 2010 SEAL COAT PROJECT LOCATION MAP 2010 Seal Coat Project City Hall ISM Laverne Avenue N U51/7774510 -3334,31313eelmo.orn Public Works Building 3-145 Ideal Ave N Ott335414 Fire Stations itatIon No 3530interne Ave tr 0$1770-50433 %Mon No. 2 312Set1anta03Ann 21 5513772-2002 Schools Parcels Subdivisions City Parks Golf Course Lake Elmo Regional Park Reserve Paris °Ince 6513430-8.168 Lakes alic-Lanci Juntor 1 s 0.15 0.3 0.6 1111.111•1_1111111111111111111111011Mil5 Map Date: March 2010 Created By TKDA ENGINEERS'' ARCHITECTS ..PLANNERS AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: /"",,, DATE: 5/04/2010 REGULAR ITEM: ,8 MOTION Keats Avenue Street and Watermain Improvements — Authorization for Geotechnical Services Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer Bruce A. Messelt, City Administrator'. Jack Griffin, City Engineer Toni Bouthilet, Finance Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: Keats Avenue is scheduled to be improved in the 2011 construction season, as per the Street Capital Improvement Program. Additionally. the installation of a trunk waterniain along Keats Avenue is seen as a critical loop connection in the water system, to be considered in conjunction with the planned street improvements. To provide an engineering recommendation of street and watennain improvements, and whether these improvements will be better completed together or separately. a geotechnical evaluation (soil borings) should be obtained so as to determine the subsurface condition of the roadway. City staff will briefly review this proposal during tonight's meeting. The recommended motion to act on this is as follows: `Move to Authorize American Engineering Testing, Inc. to Perform Geotechnical Services the Keats Avenue Street and Pf 'atermain improvements in the Amount of $7,700.00." BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Keats Avenue is a road segment on Lake Elmo's Municipal State Aid System that is scheduled for improvements in the 2011 construction season. Additionally. Lake Elmo has received state grant money in the amount of 51 million to be used towards general water system improvements. The construction of Well No. 4 and the trunk watermain connection along Keats Avenue have both been identified as immediate high -priority needs to improve the current water supply system. STAFF REPORT: Geotechnical services are necessary at this time to obtain the existing in place subsurface conditions along the Keats Avenue corridor, so that a preliminary project scoping, study can he completed. The scoping study is necessary to evaluate how these two -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting Keats Avenue — Authorization for Geotechnical Services May 4th, 2010 Regular Agenda Item # 8 projects will best be completed. If the existing in place subsurface soils and pavement condition allows for a lower cost reclaim -type street improvement for Keats Avenue, then the trunk watermain improvements may best be completed separately, one year prior to the street improvements, and using directional type drilling. If, however, a complete reconstruction -type street improvement is necessary, then the trunk watermain improvements may best be completed concurrently, using an open trench installation method. To obtain the necessary subsurface investigation, 17 standard penetration test borings to a depth of 11 feet will be needed. The scope of services is further detailed in the attached Proposal provided by AET, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $7,700. The geotechnical services will be funded out of the Infrastructure Reserve Fund. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended that the City Council move to approve the motion by undertaking the following action: 'Move to Authorize American Engineering Testing, Inc. to Perform Geotechnical Services the Keats Avenue Street and Watermain Improvements in the Amount of $7,700.00." ATTACHMENTS: American Engineering Testing, Inc. Proposal for Geotechnical Services SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS; - Introduction of hem „.......... ........... ....... ,.................. ...... City Administrator Report/Presentation City Engineer Questions from Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates Public Input, if Appropriate Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion .............. . ........... ........ ..... .............. Mayor & City Council Discussion Mayor & City Council Action on .............. . ...... ............. Mayor Facilitates -- page 2 -- A MERI CAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC, April 23, 2009 City of Lake Elmo c/o TKDA 444 Cedar Street, Suite 1500 St. Paul, MN 55101-2140 Attn: Ryan W. Stempski, PE RE: Proposal for Geotechnical Services Keats Avenue Street Improvements, Lake Elmo, Minnesota Dear Mr, Stempski: CONSULTANTS • ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL • MATERIALS • FORENSICS Per your April 22 request and our follow-up discussion, we are submitting this proposal to conduct the following scope: Scope: Fieldwork • Drill 17 standard penetration test borings to depths of 11 feet along Keats Avenue. Most borings will be on the paved surface, with the reminder being on the east shoulder or ditch. • Clear underground public utilities through the Gopher State One Call system. • Measure in -place bituminous and apparent aggregate base thicknesses. • Measure and document the boring locations, No measuring of the surface elevations is planned. Laboratory • Classify the soils per the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). • Conduct water content tests on cohesive samples retrieved. • Conduct unit price soil index testing ($350 unit price budget, allowing for 4 sieve analysis tests). Report • Logs of the test borings, including pavement thicknesses and lab test results. • Descriptions of the drilling, sampling, test, and classification methods. Review of soil and groundwater conditions encountered, • Geotechnical opinions/recommendations pertaining to the planned street improvements (rehabilitation or reconstruction), including estimate of subgrade R-value; and watermain support, bedding, and backfilling. The scope of work defined in this proposal is intended for geotechnical purposes only, and not to explore for the presence or extent of environmental contamination at the site. However, we will note obvious contamination encountered. 550 Cleveland Avenue North 1St. Paul, MN 55114 Phone 651-659-9001 'Toll Free 800-972-6364 l Fax 651-659-1379 I www.amengtest.com JAAIEEO This document shall not be reproduced, except In full, without written approval from American Engineering Testing, Inc. City of Lake Elmo April 23, 2010 Page 2 of 2 Fee: Our services will be performed on a time -and -materials basis per the attached fee schedule, For the scope described, we will establish $7700 as a not -to -exceed fee, In the event the scope of our work needs to be revised, we will review such scope adjustments and the associated fees with you, and receive your approval before proceeding, Schedule: Based on our current backlog, we anticipate drilling can be performed within about 1 to 11/2 weeks after receiving authorization to proceed. The borings should take two days to complete in the field, Verbal results can be provided shortly after drilling. The report should follow the fieldwork by about two weeks. Terms/Conditions: Our services will be performed per the attached two -page Service Agreement and the one -page Subsurface Boring Supplement. Acceptance: Please indicate your acceptance of this proposal by endorsing the enclosed copy and returning it to us. The original proposal is intended for your records. Sircere1y, PROPOSAL ACCEPTANCE BY: effery K. Voyen, PE Signature: Vice President, Geotechnical Division Phone #651-659-1305 Printed Name: Cell #612-961-9186 jvoyen@kunengtest.com Date: Attachments: 2009 Geotechnical Fee Schedule Service Agreement (2 pages), Subsurface Boring Supplement 2009 GEOTECHNICAL FEE SCHEDULE Personnel Hourly Rates A. Word Processing Specialist B. Drill Technician/Lab Technician C. Senior Engineering Technician D. Engineering Assistant E. Engineer 1/Geologist I F. Engineer II/Geologist II/Sr. Engr, Assistant G. Senior Engineer/Geologist H. Principal Engineer/Geologist II, Vehicle MHeaa A. B. C. D. E, F. G. H. Personal Automobile/Truck Auxiliary Truck Vehicle Truck with Coring Equipment Truck with Warning Sign/Crash Trailer 1-ton Truck with Drill Rig 1-1/2 to 2-1/2-ton Truck with Drill Rig CPT Truck Rig (20-ton push capacity) Tractor/Lowboy Trailer 56.00/hr 82.00/hr 87.00/hr 98.00/hr 105.00/hr 120.00/hr 133,00/hr 160,00/hr 0.70/mile 0.90/mile 1.00/mile 1.10/mile 1,10/mile 1.25/mile 1.50/mi le 1.70/mi le 111. oment Rental A. Drill Rig Rental 1. Rotary Drill on 1-ton Truck 62.00/hr 2. Rotary Drill on 11/2 to 21/2-ton Truck 72.00/hr 3. Rotary Drill on All -Terrain Vehicle I 02,00/hr 4. Portable, Non -rotary Rig 72.00/hr B. Auxiliary/Specialty Vehicle Rental 1. Auxiliary Truck Vehicle 15.50/hr 2. Truk with Warning Sign/Crash Trailer 25.00/hr 3. Truck with Coring Equipment 40.00/hr C. Cone (CPT) Rig/Equipment Rental 1. CPT Rig (Truck or ATV) 128.00/hr 2. Electronic Cone w/Computer 37.00/hr 3. Soil Sampler 3.00/hr 4. Water Sampler 20.00/hr D. Miscellaneous Equipment Rental 1. Field Vane Shear 300.00/day 2, Field Electrical Resistivity 210.00/day 3. Field Seismic Refraction (ReMi) 370,00/day 4. Inclinometer Reading Equipment 300.00/day 5. Pneumatic Transducer Reading 150.00/day 6. Bore Hole Permeability a, Open End Casing Method 120.00/day b. HQ Wireline Packer 300.00/day 7. Borehole Pressuremeter 55.00/hr 8. Iowa Borehole Shear Tester 310,00/day 9. Double Ring Inflltrometer 23 5.00/day 10. Photoionization Detector (PID) 110.00/day I 1. GPS Mapping System 13.00/hr 12. Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) 680,00/day 13, Calibrated SPT Rod 175.00/day 14. Portable Concrete Coring Equipment 35,00/hr 15. Pavement Testing (FWD includes Truck) a. Falling Weight Deflectometer 150.00/hr b. Light Weight Dellectometer 50.00/hr E. Geotechnical Software Rental 1. Geo Studio Finite Element 55.00/hr 2. CAPWAP 30.00/hr 3. AutoCAD 25.00/hr 4. Wave Equation (WEAP) 15.00/hr 5. LPILE or GROUP 15,00/hr 6. Slope Stability (ReSSA) 15.00/hr oirivroo21.O10i/0 7, Stabilized Earth Slopes & Walls 15,00/hr 8. Settlement (FoSSA) 15.00/hr 9. SHAFT 15,00/hr F. Bit Wear- Rock Coring 1. Diamond Bit - Sedimentary Rock a) B, NQ 10.00/foot b) HQ 12.00/foot 2. Diamond Bit - Metamorphic & Igneous a) B, NQ 17.00/foot b) HQ 20,00/foot Laboratory Tests of Soil A. Water Content hourly B. Dry Density (includes water content) 50,00/test C. Atterberg Limits (ASTM:D4318) I, Plasticity Index 100.00/test 2. Liquid Limit or Plastic Limit 75.00/test Separately D. Shrinkage Limit (ASTM:D427) 95.00/test E. Sieve Analysis (includes 4200) 88.00/test F. Hydrometer Analysis (sieve included) 235.00/test G. Thermal Resistivity w/Proctor (ASTM:D5334) 1. As Received and Oven Dried (2 pts) 910.00/test 2. Dry Out Curve (4 pts) 1130.00/test H. Electrical Resistivity (ASTM:G57-Soil Box) 85,00/test 1. Unconfined Compression (ASTM:D2166) 76.00/test J. Hand Penetrometer 10.00/test K. Organic Content of Soil 55.00/test L. Topsoil Borrow Test (Mn/DOT 3877) 340.00/test M. R-value (Hveem Stabilometer) 360.00/test N. California Bearing Ratio 1. Granular 560.00/test 2. Cohesive 630,00/test O. Proctor Tests (Methods A or B) 1. Standard I15,00/test 2, Modified 130.00/test V. Expenses A. Direct Project Expenses: includes out -of- Cost + 15% town per diem; plowing & towing; special materials & supplies; special travel, transportation & freight; subcontracted services, and miscellaneous costs B. Equipment Replacement (when abandonment Cost is more feasible than recovery) C. Equipment Recovery (when required by Cost + 15% regulatory agencies or project specifications) VI, Exnert Witness Service Rates A, Litigation Preparation B, Deposition or Court Time (4-hour minimum) 210.00/hr 265.00/hr The rates presented are portal-to-portal with vehicle mileage, expenses and equipment rentals being additional, Overtime for personnel charged at above cost plus 25% for over 8 hours per day or Saturday; and at above cost plus 50% for Sundays or Holidays. Hazardous work charged at an additional 25%. Night time shift work will include a premium charge of $30.00 per person per shift ""' ''AmErnoirsi ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SERVICE AGREEMENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 1 of 2 SECTION 1- RESPONSIBILITIES 1.1 - The party to whom the proposal/contract is addressed is considered the Client of American Engineering Testing, Inc, (AET), The terms and conditions stated are binding, upon acceptance, on the Client, its successors, assignees, joint ventures and third -party beneficiaries. Oral proposal acceptance or authorizing purchase orders from the Client are considered formal acceptance of AET's terms and conditions. 1.2 - Prior to AET performing work, Client will provide AET with all information that may affect the cost, progress, safety and performance of the work. This includes, but is not limited to, information on proposed and existing construction, all pertinent sections of contracts between Client and property owner, site safety plans or other documents which may control or affect AET's work, If new information becomes available during AET's work, Client will provide such information to AET in a timely manner. Failure of client to timely notify AET of changes to the project including, but not limited to, location, elevation, loading, or configuration of the structure or improvement will constitute a release of any liability of AET. Client will provide a representative for timely answers to project -related questions by AET. 1.3 - Work by AET will not relieve other persons of their responsibility to perform work according to the contract documents or specifications, and AET will not be held responsible for work or omissions by Client and other persons. AET does not perform construction management, general contracting or surveying services and our presence on site does not constitute any assumption of those responsibilities. AET will not be responsible for directing or supervising the work of others, unless specifically authorized and agreed to in writing. 1.4 - Work by AET often includes sampling at specific locations. Inherent with such sampling is variation of conditions between sampling locations. Client recognizes this uncertainty and the associated risk, and acknowledges that opinions developed by AET, based on the samples, are qualified to that extent. 1.5 - AET is not responsible for interpretations or modifications of AET's recommendations by other persons. 1.6 - Should changed conditions be alleged, Client agrees to notify AET before evidence of alleged change Is no longer accessible for evaluation. SECTION 2- SITE ACCESS AND RESTORATION 2.1 - Client will furnish AET safe and legal site access. 2.2 - It is understood by Client that in the normal course of the work, some damage to the site or materials may occur. AET will take reasonable precautions to minimize such damage. Restoration of the site is the responsibility of the Client. SECTION 3 - SAFETY 3.1 - Client shall inform AET of any known or suspected hazardous materials or unsafe conditions at the work site. If, during the course of AET's work, such materials or conditions are discovered, AET reserves the right to take measures to protect AET personnel and equipment or to immediately terminate services. Client shall be responsible for payment of such additional protection costs. 3.2 - AET shall only be responsible for safety of AET employees at the work site, The Client or other persons shall be responsible for the safety of all other persons at the site. SECTION 4 - SAMPLES 4.1 - Client is responsible for informing AET of any known or suspected hazardous materials prior to submittal to AET. All samples obtained by, or submitted to, AET remain the property of the Client during and after the work. Any known or suspected hazardous material samples will be returned to the Client at AET's discretion. 4.2 - Non -hazardous samples will be held for 30 days and then discarded unless, within 30 days' of the report date, the Client provides a written request that AET store or ship the samples, at the Client's expense. SECTION 5 - PROJECT RECORDS The original project records prepared by AET will remain the property of AET. AET shall retain these original records for a period of three years following submission of the report, during which period the project records can be made available to Client at AET's office at reasonable times. SECTION 6 - STANDARD OF CARE AET will perform services consistent with the level of care and skill normally performed by other firms in the profession at the time of this service and in this geographic area, under similar budgetary constraints. No other warranty is implied or intended. SECTION 7 - INSURANCE AET carries Worker's Compensation, Comprehensive General Liability, Automobile Liability and Professional Liability insurance. AET will furnish certificates of insurance to Client upon request. ACS401 (10/02) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SERVICE AGREEMENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 2 of 2 SECTION 8 - DELAYS If AET work delays are caused by Client, work of others, strikes, natural causes, weather, or other items beyond AET's control, a reasonable time extension for performance of work shall be granted, and AET shall receive an equitable fee adjustment, SECTION 9 - PAYMENT. INTEREST AND BREACH, 9.1 - Invoices are due on receipt. Client will inform AET of invoice questions or disagreements within 15 days of invoice date; unless so informed, invoices are deemed correct. 9.2 - Client agrees to pay interest on unpaid invoice balances at a rate of 1.5% per month, or the maximum allowed by law, whichever is less, beginning 30 days after invoice date. 9.3 - If any invoke remains unpaid for 60 days, such non-payment shall be a material breach of this agreement. As a result of such material breach, AET may, at its sole option, terminate all duties to the Client or other persons, without liability. 9.4 - Client will pay all AET collection expenses and attorney fees relating to past due fees which the Client owes under this agreement. SECTION 10 - MEDIATION 10.1 - Client and AET agree that any claim, dispute or other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to arbitration or the institution of legal or equitable proceedings by either party. 10.2 - Unless Client and AET mutually agree otherwise, mediation shall be in accordance with the Construction Industry Mediation Rules of the American Arbitration Association, Request for mediation shall be in writing and the parties shall share the mediator's fee and any filing fees equitably. The mediator shall be acceptable to both parties and shall have experience in commercial construction matters. SECTION 11 - LITIGATION REIMBURSEMENT Payment of AET costs for Client lawsuits against AET which are dismissed or are judged substantially in AErs favor will be the Client's responsibility, Applicable costs include, but are not limited to, attorney and expert witness fees, court costs, and AET costs. SECTION 12 - MUTUAL INDEMNIFICATION 12.1 - AET agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Client from and against liability arising out of AETs negligent performance of the work, subject to Section 13 and any other limitations, other indemnifications or other provisions Client and AET have agreed to in writing. 12.2 - Client agrees to hold harmless and indemnify AET from and against liability arising out of Client's negligent conduct, subject to any limitations, other indemnifications or other provisions Client and AET have agreed to in writing. 12.3 - If Client has indemnity agreement with other persons, the Client shall include AET as a beneficiary. SECTION 13 - LIMITATION OF LIABILITY Client agrees to limit AET's liability to Client arising from negligent acts, errors or omissions, such that the total liability of AET shall not exceed $1,000,000, SECTION 14 - TERMINATION After 7 days written notice, either party may elect to terminate work for justifiable reasons, In this event, the Client shall pay for all work performed, including demobilization and reporting costs to complete the file. SECTION 15 - SEVERABILITY Any provisions of this agreement later held to violate a law or regulation shall be deemed void, and all remaining provisions shall continue in force. However, Client and AET will in good faith attempt to replace an invalid or unenforceable provision with one that is valid and enforceable, and which comes as close as possible to expressing the intent of the original provision. SECTION 16 - GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be construed, and the rights of the parties shall be determined, in accordance with the Laws of the State of Minnesota. SECTION 17 - ENTIRE AGREEMENT This agreement, including attached appendices, is the entire agreement between AET and Client. This agreement nullifies any previous written or oral agreements, including purchase/work orders. Any modifications to this agreement must be in writing. ACS40 1 (1 0/02) AMER1CAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING SUPPLEMENT Page I of 1 TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS SECTION 1- UNDERGROUND UTILITY AND STRUCTURE CLEARANCE 1.1 - It is necessary that borings, excavations and other penetrations be located such that they maintain a minimum safe distance from underground utilities or other man-made objects. Client shall advise AET of all utilities that service or are located on the site, as well as any underground improvements located on the site. AET will contact state notification centers, where available, or individual utility owners where a state notification center is not available prior to drilling. 1.2 - Public utility owners may not provide the locating service on private property. In such situations, the Client is responsible for location of such utilities prior to drilling. 1.3 - The property owner may have private underground improvements which cannot be cleared through the state notification center or public utility owners. The Client is responsible for location of these improvements. 1.4 - AET will not be responsible for any damages to "non -located" or incorrectly located underground utilities or other man- made improvements. SECTION 2 - SITE RESTORATION 2.1 - Client accepts that in the normal course of field exploration work, certain types of damage to the site may occur which are inherent with this type of work, such as tire indentations to lawns and landscape areas. It is the responsibility of AET to take reasonable precautions to minimize such damage. It is also AET's responsibility to patch boreholes placed through pavement or slab areas after performance of borings. Otherwise, restoration of the site is the responsibility of the client. SECTION 3 - CONTAMINATION 3.1 - Client acknowledges and accepts that unavoidable contamination risks may be associated with AET's subsurface drilling, sampling and installation of monitoring devices. Risks include, but are not limited to, cross contamination created by linking contaminated zones to uncontaminated zones during the drilling process; containment and proper disposal of known or suspected hazardous materials, drill cuttings and drill fluids; and decontamination of equipment and disposal and replacement of contaminated consumables. Client and AET agree that the discovery of unanticipated actual or suspected hazardous materials may make it necessary for AET to take immediate measures, including regulatory notification, to protect human health and safety, and/or the environment. Client and AET also agree that the discovery of such materials constitutes a changed condition which may result in added costs to the Client, and may require a renegotiation of work scope or termination of services. 3.2 - Pursuant to risks set forth in Section 3.1, which are inherent with AET's work performed on the Client's behalf, Client agrees to bold harmless and indemnify AET from and against liability associated with contamination resulting therefrom. SECTION 4 - LOST EOUIPMENT Equipment lost in bore holes may be required to be retrieved or properly abandoned by government agencies. Client agrees to pay AET all costs related to retrieving and/or abandoning such equipment at AET fee schedule rates, unless agreed otherwise. SECTION 5 - LIMITATIONS OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client recognizes that unavoidable risks occur whenever engineering or related disciplines are applied to identify subsurface conditions. Variations in soil conditions usually occur between and beyond sampled/tested locations. Even a comprehensive sampling and testing program performed in accordance with a professional standard of care may fail to detect certain conditions, because the variability of conditions cannot be seen, For similar reasons, actual environmental, geologic and geotechnical conditions that AET characterizes to exist between sampling points may differ significantly from those that actually exist. The passage of time also must be considered, and Client recognizes that, due to natural occurrences or direct or indirect human activities at the site or distant from it, actual conditions discovered may change. Client recognizes that nothing can be done to eliminate the risks associated with these limitations. ACS402(1 0/02) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. OF LAKE ELMO AYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: THROUGH: REVIEWED BY: DATE: 5/04/2010 REGULAR ITEM #: 9 MOTION Street Capital Improvement Program — Authorization to Conduct the Annual Pavement Management Street Rating Services Ryan Stempski, Assistant City Engineer Bruce A. Messelt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer Tom Bouthilet, Finance Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: As part of the City's Street Capital Improvement Program, the street inventory and condition assessment data needs to be updated and maintained. This data is important in that it is one of the underlying factors supporting the recommendations of the annual street maintenance and reconstruction program. To maintain the street rating data, the hest practice is to re -rate 25% of the street and roadway network each year so that the street condition assessment for any given street is completed every 4 years. The street segments are chosen consistent with the streets most likely to require maintenance or improvements in the next few years. The recommended motion to act on this is as follows: SUGGESTED: "Move to Authorize TKDA to Complete an Update of Street Ratings for MOTION 25% of the Street Network in the Amount of $5,700.00." BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 2007, a Pavement Management Program was completed for the City of Lake Elmo street network. Street condition assessments were completed for the entire street network and this data was stored in a software program called CarteGraph, which is maintained by TKDA. Engineering and Public Works utilized this relative comparison data to prepare the street Capital Improvement Program. No updates have been completed to the street rating data since this 2007 Pavement Management Report. STAFF REPORT: TKDA will identify and measure distresses in the exposed street surface of 25% of the street network, focusing first on the streets programmed for maintenance and improvements in 2011 and 2012. The updated data will be entered into the CarteGraph database and the condition assessments will be used to confirm the Street Capital Improvement Program, or to support amendments as necessary. -- page 1 — City Council Meeting Street CIP — Authorization for Street Re -Ratings May 4, 2010 Regular Agenda Item # 9 A review of the proposed 2011 Street Improvements will need to be completed and confirmed within the next two months in order to initiate the 2011 Street Improvements Feasibility Study on schedule (Feasibility Study's need to be initiated during the summer of the year prior to construction to ensure that the resident meetings, survey work and investigations can be completed prior to snowfall). This practice will result in the most effective use of the City's street maintenance and improvement expenditures. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended that the City Council move to approve the motion by undertaking the following action: "Move to Authorize TKDA to Complete an Update of Street Ratings for 25% of the Street Network in the Amount of $5,700.00." Alternatively, the City Council may deny such recommendation by simply not taking any action on this item or tabling this item for future consideration. It may also amend this recommendation, as appropriate. If the latter is done so, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would be: Move to Authorize TKDA to Complete an Update of Street Ratings, as amended and approved at tonight's meeting." ATTACHMENTS: None SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item City Administrator Report/Presentation ............ ........................ ........ ..... ........... City Engineer Questions from Council to Staff .............. ............ ............ Mayor Facilitates Public Input, if Appropriate Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion ....... ........ ....„...........,..... ............... ...... Mayor & City Council Discussion Mayor & City Council Action on Motion Mayor Facilitates -- page 2 -- TY OF LAKE E MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 5/04/2010 REGULAR ITEM #: 10 MOTION AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of Concurrence with South Washington Watershed District Petition for a Boundary Change SUBMITTED BY: Matt Moore, SWWD Administrator THROUGH: Bruce A. Messelt, City Administrato REVIEWED BY: - NA - SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: Attached is a draft Resolution of Concurrence and related petition for a boundary change requested by the South Washington Watershed District. (SWWD) The proposed boundary change follows several weeks of mediation among Washington County and interested parties and represents the consensus opinion and recommendation of the parties involved. The SWWD requests affirmative consideration of the Resolution of Concurrence from all of its member municipalities. A motion to act upon this is as follows: SUGGESTED: "Move to Approve Resolution 2010-021 providing Concurrence by the MOTION City of Lake Elmo with the proposed Boundary Chances to the South Washington Watershed District." BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The SWWD boundary change petition is requesting transfer of territory from the Valley Branch Watershed District, which was formerly governed by the Lower St, Croix WMO. Upon dissolution of the Lower St. Croix WMO, a dispute ensued over which entity or entities should govern its territory. Litigation involving several government entities and private citizens ensued and Washington County sought, through mediation, to resolve this dispute. Tonight's requested action represents the consensus resolution of this issue and is purportedly supported by all involved parties. As part of its formal petition, the SWWD is requesting a statement of concurrence from all Cities and Townships in the watershed district. Attached is a draft resolution for consideration by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo. -- page 1 -- City Council Meeting SWWD Boundary Change - Concurrence Resolution May 4, 2010 Regular Agenda Item # 10 STAFF REPORT: In discussion with the SWWD, Valley Branch Watershed District and Washington County, it was reported that this action represents the consensus settlement of the mediation process. As such, it is recommended by these bodies that the City of Lake Elmo offer its support. Of note, part of the settlement affords the City of Woodbury two of five seats on the SWWD Board of Managers. This is a change from current practice but, according to Washington County, is not without legal justification and some modicum of de facto, if not de jure, precedent. With the now -expanded sub -management districts and the little amount of Lake Elmo territory located within the SWWD, appointment by the County of the remaining three Managers will be an important task, given the automatic appointment of two Managers from the City of Woodbury. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information and staff report, it is recommended that the City Council approve the motion by undertaking the following action: "Move to Approve Resolution 2010-021 providing Concurrence by the City of Lake Elmo with the proposed Boundary Chances to the South Washington Watershed District." Alternatively, the City Council may deny such recommendation by simply not taking any action on this item or tabling this item for future consideration. It may also amend this recommendation, as appropriate. If the latter is done so, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would be: "Move to Approve Resolution 2010-021, as amended at tonight's meeting." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Resolution of Concurrence 2. SWWD Petition for Boundary Change SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: Introduction of Item .....,.......... ............... ........................,...... City Administrator Report/Presentation ........ ..... . .............. .........„ ........... ......., ..... City Administrator Questions from Council to Staff Mayor Facilitates Public Input, if Appropriate Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion .................. .............. Mayor & City Council Discussion Mayor & City Council Action on Motion ........... ..... . ............. ....„ .... ......... ...,........ Mayor Facilitates -- page 2 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO SOUTH WASHINGTON WATERSHED DISTRICT PETITION FOR BOUNDARY CHANGE RESOLUTION NO, 2010-021 A Resolution by the City of Lake Elmo concurring with the petition to add or transfer territory to the South Washington Watershed District. RECITALS: The City of Lake Elmo is a statutory or home rule charter city with jurisdiction over area wholly or partially within the South Washington Watershed District, 2, That the Boundary Change Petition prepared by the South Washington Watershed District has been reviewed by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, and subject to the terms and conditions of paragraph 4 (a-i) of said Petition, the City of Lake Elmo concurs with said Petition, NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo is in concurrence with the Boundary Change Petition of the South Washington Watershed District to be submitted to the Board of Water and Soil Resources, ADOPTED this 4th day of May, 2010. Dean A. Johnston, Mayor Attest: Bruce A. Messelt, City Administrator JACK W. CLINTON* MARY K. KUEHLWEIN PAKOU L. YANG -LEGAL ASSISTANTS April 26, 2010 JACK W. CLINTON, PA. ATTORNEY AT LAW 539 BlELENBERO DRIVE TELEPlioNE: 651-389-9923 Surrs 200 FAX: 651-389-9924 WOODBURY, MmiNESOTA 55125 JWCLINTON@USINTERNET.COM Matt Moore, Administrator South Washington Watershed District 2302 Tower Drive Woodbury, MN 55125 Re: Mediation Agreement and Boundary Change Petition Dear Matt: VIA E-MAIL am enclosing new versions of the Petition for the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, and the agreement between the various municipalities and watershed districts. Based on the most recent events and discussions from the week of April 19th, the revisions can be Summarized as follows: Petiticrn The Watershed District is now the petitioner, substituting for Washington County. The operative terns of the Petition remain the same, and there is no change to the substantive agreernasits that were reached thvongh the mediation process. AgeeMent The operative terms of the Agreement remain those that were following two exceptions: 1. The South Washington Watershed District, rather than the County, is the petitioner. 2. The County and South Washington will seek letters of concurrence from any municipality or township that is required to concur in the submission of the Petition. The revisions are not being submitted in redline since the earlier versions had so many redlines that it became very difficult to read, and the document would not allow removal of all of the redlining. in ntediation, with the For purposes of references for the attorneys who will be reviewing this, the Petition would be an amendment under 103B.215, subd. 2, adding new territory to a district or by transferring territory that is within the jurisdiction of another watershed district *BOARD CERTIFIED REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY MINNESOTA_ STATE BAR ASSOCIATION Re: Mediation Agreement and Boundary Change Petition April 26, 2010 Page Two Under Minn, Stat. 103B.225, there is authority granted to BWSR to place conditions upon a transfer of territory under 103B.215. We believe that the conditions can be added based on the work done to date by South Washington, including land acquisitions for the Central Draw Project. The obligations/responsibility for financing can be incorporated in the Petition and adopted by reference in the BWSR order. This is consistent with and follows the same process when the East Mississippi WMO was added to South Washington. The Petition in the EastMississippi proceeding was conditioned upon: (1) the East Mississippi territory being treated as a subwaterthed taxing district; (2) that the East Mississippi territory would pay 100% of the costs of any projects within the territory of East Mississippi; and (3) costs of projects that were outside of the territory of East Mississippi (and within the then existing watershed district) were to be paid for by the territory within the existing district, and none of those costs would be charged to the East Mississippi territory, The Order approved by BWSR in 2003 stated in its conclusions that the boundary change "should be approved per the Petition." If they are consistent, the BWSR board should approve this petition. My letter, the two attachments and the resolutions of support that you prepared should be forwarded to the county for distribution. Please call me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, JAC Attachments STATE OF MINNESOTA BOARD OF WATER AND SOIL RESOURCES 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 ',Yr" ----- ------ In the Matter of the Petition of the South Washington Watershed District BOUNThJY CHANGE PETITION for Boundary Change TO: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil ReSoUrces, 520 Lafayette Road North, St Paul, MN 55155 = Petitioner, South Washington Wat ishe 'strict, a bo Washington Watershed District Board • elittion No. 2 Minnesota Board of WateVan Washington Watershe4;:pistrict pursuant to,Minnesota Statute 4-03 , c and corporate, pursuant to South does hereby petition the .1 Resources (J3w tochangetbe boundaries of the South and --the -Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) the Mewing reasons: Both the SWWD,and VBWD •are -existing watershed districts located entirely within the metropolitati,area, and Minnesota Statute 103B215, subd. 1 allows the bOUndaries of a*atershed district wholly within the metropolitan area to be • changett,:-•:,•TheSWWD is requesting the transfer of territory currently within the jurisdiction of the VBWD to the SWWD. The areas being transferred are contiguous to the existing SWWD. 2. The boundary change proposed and the areas to be transferred are described on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A. The proposed SWWD consists of a total of 110.38 square miles, of which 4.82 square miles are located within the City of Afton 36.56 square miles are located within the City of Cottage Grove 30.14 square miles are located within Denmark Township 2.71 square miles are located within Grey Cloud Island Township 0.40 square miles are located within the City of Hastings 0.98 square miles are located within the City of Lake Elmo 3.89 square miles are located within thepity of Newport 1.02 square miles are located withinthefOity of Oakdale 3.61 square miles are located withitilltecity of St. Paul Park 26.25 square miles are located within thelcity of Woodbury The proposed VBWD consists of, total of 71.33 square miles, of which 21.01 square miles are Witted within the City ofAfto 4.44 square miles are locatetlyithin Baytown Towns 4.33 square miles, are located WithjiyktheiCity of Grant 22.93 squareriii1e4tre located Witliiifthe City of Lake Elmo 0.87 square mileS-4feJocated withiiiihercity of Mahtomedi 5.55 square miles ire located within the Oity of Oakdale 0.39..square miles aiglocated*itiO the City of Oak Park Heights 090square miles areAocated*ifiliitithe CitY,Pf Pine Springs 0f08 square4niles are 1o*O4ithin flt6Gity of St. Mary's Point 7-47 square miles are loPated within West Lakeland Township 2.'75iNuare,inilesare located within the City of Woodbury 0.10 kitial*ifileS:iiiteJocated:*ithin the City of Maplewood 30 square iniles arROCated within the City of North St. Paul 30 square miles are located within the City of White Bear Lake he following 4re supporting reasons for the boundary change between the ,p and the VBWD described in Exhibit A. a. The boti4ary change will be conducive to the public health and public welfare and for the purposes of Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103. b. The boundary change will provide long term protection for surface and groundwater resources. 2 c. The boundary change will ensure efficiency and effectiveness of water resource management in this area. d. The boundary change is consistent with the purposes and requirements of Minnesota Statute 103B.205 to 103B.255. e. Certain properties under the jurisdictionof the SWWD are subject to protection under Minnesota Sta subject to conditions in the pet1t1on, is coipIiant with Minnesota Statute The petitioner has receive' a 111ILn-stateinent af concurrence in the petition frorti.',ih governiig 'boc of each statutory or home rule 103B.225. B.225. The boundary change, charter city and town and each watershed management organization having i.trisdiction, over the territory proposed to be added or •Z• 17- 144psferred.;''', „ „ = Th. I,iitii change willAaecomplish the objectives that were agreed -:'- tiP'en thrtnih4tlie watershed 'boundary mediation process which involved ashington County, SWWD, VBWD, City of Cottage Grove, De K.:Township, and City of Woodbury in accordance with the ement(Exhibit B) adopted by Washington County, SWWD, VBWD, City cif Cottage Grove, Denmark Township, and City of Woodbury. 4. Representatives of the City of Cottage Grove, Denmark Township, City of Woodbury, SWWD, VBWD and Washington County have developed recommendations for key issues related to the proposed boundary change between the SWWD and the VBWD; such as financing policies, implementation of water management plans, and board representation. The local governments have approved an Agreement (Exhibit B) to specifically address these key issues to be in full force upon approval of this petition. The following are the conditions for changing the boundaries of the SWWD to be compliant with Minnesota Statute 103B.225: a. The SWWD will amend its s.watershed anagement plan pursuant to s:‘ Minnesota Statute 103BI 5-10313,255 to inehide the Lower St Croix subwatershed area within bne,ss.ye . ,,s0 SWWD i1Hnitially adopt the s s Lower St. Cirtiii Water Managerne t Organization (LSCWMO) 2009 :z Water Management P -ss,s,the plan lOr this subwatershed pursuant to inieSOta:Statute 10313.205-031425 . ss: sss b. The S -Will apply resource based water quality standards defined by the St and the Mississippi River and based on discrete geographialocations defined by hydrologic boundaries, The SWWD will the Central Draw Overflow Project as follows: ss.. the'SWWD will complete acquisition of lands necessary to control the outlet for the Central Draw Overflow Project to the Mississippi River by June 30, 2014. As part of the Central Draw Overflow Project, the SWWD will 4 construct improvements to the Cottage Grove Central Ravine by December 31, 2014 to accommodate interim watershed overflows. The SWWD will complete construction of ,the Central Draw Overflow Project by January 1, 2020 unless otherwise agreed to by the City of Cottage Grove, City :Woodbury and SWWD. d. For the purpose of collecting revenueS*nd paying the costs of projects in • the former LSCWMO territory, the SWWD will establish a water g. - - • management district P00:;4;t1::to Minnesota Statute403D,729. The •.,..• • former LSCWMO territorY-4411pay 1.90*reent of the costs of any Funding ;should be determined on a project -by -project basis, based on projectThinefits, costs (including administrative costs of the financing options), and equity. The SWWD will finance projects on a subwatershed basis through revenue collected using a stormwater utility fee according to Minnesota Rules Chapter 444. Administrative services and related general services that are provided 5 throughout the new areas of the watershed districts will be funded using a district wide ad valorem tax, collected by Washington County as a part of property tax collection. For the SWWD, the former LSCWMO territory will pay its costs of the annual administrative budget and proportional costs of annual SWWD operational programs based on the ad valorem tax rate. h. Currently the SWWD consists of five;Ananagers. The SWWD is requesting the SWWD board of managers remainratfive. i. The appointment of managers in Minnesota Statutel303D.311, stihd. wilbte consistent with which states that managers must 103D.314, subet;:3(a) the county will appoint managers from a list of persons nominated by the townships and municipalities located within the watershed district The list must contain at least three nominees for each •=3„ managers position to be filled. The list must be submitted to the county at least 60 days before the managers term of office expires. If a list of 6 nominees is not received 60 days prior to the managers term of office expiring or if a city or town fails to submit a list of nominees, the county may appoint any managers that they so choose. THEREFORE, the SWWD requests that the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, after giving notice as required by law, and for the public wOlfare and public interest and to further Minnesota Statute 103, the SWWD requests that,the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources issue its order granting the following r That the boundaries of the Schanged as set forth on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A pursuant to Minnesota Statule 103B.215. 2. That the area in each watershed district', be guided and managed consistent „ with the current management Plan ,of the waterked management organizations in accordance,,AX4 esota 'Statute 1,03L That ttie:',cQnditions'.,'srtated in iteM4 (a. — i.) of this petition be incorporated in the ard.'s Dateddie day Of, 20 10. By: By: Don Pereira, Pereira, SWWD Secretary 7 riltiN Exhibit A larprmait o,f Soli di Irawhiing ;rawOrd,Ainrirt WRillillett[31411114=1-'1,1/Nt PliVITI4linsuchny Clguiza it-§ittval fiedrmln.rr rekotea 1:41110 till a' ara 4101 . ,CIASIVolit I. I I min, 11110111111.11 Mum „ 411,11.104.114.11,46ilearanQemmEylt46dravigintaatatx:Ms. 8 :41%61a ' : littexik4 t'.! .6 CITY OF LAKE EL 0 MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION DATE: 5/04/2010 REGULAR ITEM #: 11 MOTION Resolution 2010-017 AGENDA ITEM: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Senior Living and Farm School Project at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North — PID' s: 15-029-21-31-0001 and 15-029-21-31-0003 SUBMITTED BY: Tammy Malmquist, Applicant Lake Elmo Planning Commission Kyle Klatt, Planning Director THROUGH: Bruce A. Messelt, City Administrato REVIEWED BY: Dave Snyder, City Attorney SUMMARY AND ACTION REOUESTED: The City Council is asked to review a act upon a proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, requested from Mrs. Tammy Malmquist, 8549 Ironwood Trail North. Assuming affirmative action by the City Council, forthcoming will be separate requests for Zoning Text or Map Amendments, an OP Open Space Preservation Concept Plan, and a Planned Unit Development concept plan. In their totality, these actions will allow the establishment of a 40-unit senior living multi -family building, 10 townhouse units, and a farm-themed preschool on a 30.9 acre parcel at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. The unanimous recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is reflected in the following motion: SUGGESTED "Move to Approve Resolution 2010-017 Amending the City of Lake MOTION: Elmo Comprehensive Plan to change future land use designation for the identified parcel from RAD to RAD2, as reflected in the specific findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission." BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Given the complex nature of this application, Staff has recommending that the Planning Commission and City Council review focus first on the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning amendments before proceeding with a discussion of the OP Development and PUD Concept Plans. The primary reason for the staged review was to take the bigger picture items first, and then advance with the detailed plan reviews, if warranted. City Council Meeting Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Senior Living and Farm School May 4th, 2010 Regular Agenda Item # 11 This process was designed to save time, resources and effort, should support not exist within the Planning Commission and City Council to move forward with the Comprehensive Plan and Rezoning. However, the Planning Commission elected to only consider and forward at this time for Council consideration the recommended Comprehensive Plan Amendment. A summary of this item follows: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: A request to amend the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, and specifically the Future Land Use Map, to change the future use of the applicant's 30.9 acre parcel from RAD Rural Agriculture Density (.45 dwelling units per acre) to RAD2 Rural Agricultural Density/2 (2 dwelling units per acre). The applicant has requested a transfer of some density from an existing RAD2 area located west of the applicant's site along Stillwater Boulevard to the project site. STAFF REPORT: The attached Staff report from the Planning Department includes detailed information concerning the application and the review and recommendation concerning the first two portions of the request: the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendments. As the Planning Commission did not act upon the requested Zoning Text Amendments, these will be scheduled for Planning Commission review and consideration on May 10th, assuming affirmative Council action tonight on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The staff report also includes a brief summarization of the initial issues that have been identified concerning the specific concept plans, which are to be presented in greater detail to the Planning Commission on May 10th. Please note, however, that the City Council is not being asked to review the concept plans at this time, and should focus its attention on the positive or negative aspects of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment being requested. Should the City Council decide to not move forward with the requested revisions to the Comprehensive Plan, the latter decisions will not require a significant amount of additional discussion and review, since the concept plans and Zoning changes would not be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (and therefore could not be approved). Planning Staff recommended denial of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment, as requested by the applicant. Findings of fact for denial were included in Planning Commission Report and are available tonight, if requested. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission unanimously supported the applicant's requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment and developed a revised list of findings, included in the Planning Commission report. The findings have been incorporated by the Planning Director and City Attorney into the attached draft Resolution for Council Consideration, -- page 2 -- City Council Meeting May 4th, 2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Senior Living and Farm School Regular Agenda Item # 11 Of note, the Planning Commission chose to table taking action on the Zoning Amendment, and requested that Staff prepare an alternate to the applicant's proposal that would create an overlay zoning district instead of amending the existing OP Ordinance. The Commission requested that the same standards proposed by the applicant be used to draft overlay regulations. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above background information, staff report and recommendation of the Planning Commission, it is recommended that the City Council discuss and consider the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, as delineated in the attached drat Resolution. Affirmative action can be undertaken by the following motion: "Move to Approve Resolution. 2010-017 Amending the City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan to change future land use designation for the identified parcel from RAD to RAD2, as reflected in the specific findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission." Of note: The City Council will not be able to formally adopt the Comprehensive Plan Amendment until after Met Council review is complete. It appears that this amendment would be classified as a "minor plan amendment" by the Met Council and, therefore, not subject to adjacent review. However, staff is still researching this requirement (noted in the Resolution). It should also be noted that final approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is contingent upon approval by the City Council of the other aspects of this project. This contingency obviates the necessity or taking action to reverse tonight's decision, should the proposed development not move forward. Language to this effect has been crafted by the City Attorney and is also included in the draft Resolution. Alternatively, the City Council does have the authority to deny the recommendation of the Planning Commission at tonight's meeting. However, tabling action tonight would likely require the concurrence of the applicant, given state statutes governing timely responses to land use applications. The City Council may also elect to amend this recommendation, as appropriate. If the latter is done, the appropriate action of the Council following such discussion would be: "Move to Approve Resolution No. 2010-017 [ as amended at tonight's meeting J. Future Considerations: Should this initial step in this development proposal be affirmed at tonight's meeting, the following "future considerations" specific to this proposal are noted for Council information: The feasibility of the site and proposed development to comply with all aspects of the City Code remains to be determined. Of critical importance will be compliance with the City's new storm water regulations, and the resulting impact to site. The City and applicant will need to take into consideration potential future local, collector and arterial transportation improvements, above those already noted, directly or -- page 3 -- City Council Meeting Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Senior Living and Farm School May 4th, 2010 Regular Agenda Item # 11 indirectly resulting from the development, as well as anticipated financial participation of the applicant in such future improvements. The City and the applicant will need to take into consideration current and potential future provision of municipal utility services, including water and wastewater, as these services are improved and/or become available, consistent with state law and the best long-term interests of the City and development. The City and applicant may need to decide if the housing on the site should be age restricted and/or develop language that restricts future uses to those proposed by the applicant may prove problematic. Finally, the City and applicant will need to evaluate current and future park and recreation issues relating to the site, including such issues as trails and trail access, private and public access and amenities, and the like. With respect to more general "future considerations;" the City Council may wish to consider future review of the Comprehensive Plan, which is currently devoid of any language addressing senior housing outside of the Village or multi -family buildings in rural development areas. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 201 0-017 2. Planning Staff Report 3. Copies of Written Correspondence 4. Concept Plan Narrative & Zoning Text Amendment (previously provided) 5, Farm School and Senior Living Concept Plans (previously provided) 6. Development Application Form (previously provided) 7. Response to Incompletion Letter (previously provided) 8. Review Comments: reviously provided) o Minnesota Department of Transportation o Valley Branch Watershed District o Oakdale Fire Department (Public Safety) o City Engineer 9. Future Land Use Map (Applicant's Site and RAD2 Areas) (previously provided) 10. Aerial image of Site (previously provided) page 4 -- City Council Meeting Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Senior Living and Farm School May 4th, 2010 Regular Agenda Item # 11 SUGGESTED ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction.............. ................. .......... ........ . ................... City Administrator Report by City Staff/Planning Commission Planning Director Questions from the City Council ............ ....... ...„.... Mayor & City Council Presentation of Applicant. ........ . ............. ..... ........... Mayor Facilitates Questions from the City Council Mayor & City Council Public Comments Mayor Facilitates Call for Motion Mayor & City Council Discussion ......... ..... ....... ........... ............. ................... Mayor & City Council Action on Motion Mayor Facilitates -- page 5 -- CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2010-017 RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO COMP.REHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo has established a Comprehensive Plan that provides a compilation of background data, policy statements, standards, and maps, which help to guide the future physical, social, and economic development of the City; and WHEREAS, Tammy Malmquist, 8549 Ironwood Trail North, ("Applicant") has submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo ("City") to amend the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, a copy of which is on file in the City Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan was submitted along with multiple zoning requests necessary for the Applicant to move forward with a proposed multi -family senior living facility and farm -based preschool project; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 26, 2010 to consider the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on April 26, 2010 the Lake Elmo Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend that the City Council approve the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan at a meeting held on May 4, 2010. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the testimony elicited and information received, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1) That the Applicant has submitted a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with the procedures as established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department and Lake Elmo Planning Commission. 2) That the request to is to amend the Future Land Use Map (Map 1 in Chapter HI — Land Use Plan) in the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, and to specifically change the future land use designation of the parcel located at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD (Rural Agricultural Density — 0,45 dwelling units per acre) to RAD2 (Rural Agricultural Density — 2 dwelling units per acre). 3) That the Comprehensive Plan Amendment will apply to property legally described in the attached Exhibit "A". 4) That the current use of the site as a working farm is unique compared to other properties designated for RAD development in the Comprehensive Plan, 5) That the proposed project associated with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment will help fulfill a need for senior housing within the community. 6) That recent subdivisions in areas guided for RAD development have been approved at a density below the unit levels anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed density increase will be offset by reductions that have previously been approved or acknowledged by the City. 7) That the site is located in close proximity to public transportation along State Highway 5, and specifically, a bus route that could provide alternate transportation options for seniors. 8) That the site is located immediately adjacent to existing R-1 Single Family Residential zoning districts along its southern, eastern, and western boundaries, Other areas guided for RAD development are primarily surrounded by rural residential, agricultural, or public open space uses, NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based on the foregoing, the Lake Elmo City Council hereby approves the Applicant's request to amend the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, subject to and contingent upon the following: 1) Submission of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Metropolitan Council and the receipt of formal notification from the Metropolitan Council that its review has been completed and approved. Acknowledgement of these comments and final adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment will require formal action by the City Council. 2) City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Text or Map Amendments necessary for the Applicant's project to be satisfactorily considered by the City. 3) City Council approval of a satisfactory Final Open Space Preservation (OP) Development Plan associated with the Applicant's request to amend the Comprehensive Plan. 4) City Council approval of a satisfactory Planned Unit Development (PUD) Final Plan and associated documentation associated with the Applicant's request to amend the Comprehensive Plan and execution of same by the Applicant. 5) City Council approval of site development and details. Passed and duly adopted this 41h day of May 2010 by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota. ATTEST; Dean A. Johnston, Mayor Bruce Messelt, City Administrator City of Lake Elmo Planning Department Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendment To: City Council From: Kyle Klatt, Planning Director Meeting Date: 5/04/2010 Applicant: Tammy Malmquist Owner: Tammy Malmquist; Marlene Friedrich Location: 9434 Stillwater Blvd N Zoning.. RR — Rural Residential Introductory Information Application The City of Lake Elmo has received an application from Tammy Malmquist, 8549 Summary: Ironwood Trail North, for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, Open Space Preservation (OP) Development Concept Plan, and Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan. The individual elements of this request have been made to allow the establishment of a 40-unit senior living multi -family building, 0 townhouse units, and a farm-themed preschool on a 30.9 acres parcel at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. The request would incorporate the existing family care facility that is located adjacent to this property at 9442 Stillwater Boulevard North, As the current owner of the 30.9-acre parcel, Marlene Friedrich has signed as a co - applicant to this request. Given the complex nature of this application, Staff has recommended that the City review focus first on the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning amendments before proceeding with a discussion of the OP Development and PUD Concept Plans. To facilitate this two -tiered review, separate public hearings and agenda items have been scheduled at different times with the Planning Commission as follows: • April 26: Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendments • May 10: OP Development and PUD Concept Plans The primary reason for the staged review is to take the bigger picture items first, and then advance with the detailed plan reviews if warranted. This process will save time and effort if there is no support by the City Council to move forward with the Comprehensive Plan and Rezoning. If these elements of the application are approved, it would allow the required Met Council review to proceed while the City is considering the development Concept Plans. (..nprv,hensive 1lon..4inendmenrs: Scniov Living and Farm School elly Council Report; 5/04/2010 The Planning Commission reviewed and conducted a public hearing on both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendments, and made a recommendation to the City Council on the first issue at its meeting on April 26th. The Commission tabled its discussion on the latter issue and directed staff to prepare an alternate ordinance to consider in addition to the amendments requested by the applicant. The ordinance will be brought back before the Planning Commission at its next meeting, prior to discussion on the OP Development and PUD Concept Plans. Application As noted above, there are four distinct components of the applicants request, which Details: include the following: Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The proposed amendment would change the future land use designation of the parcel located at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD (Rural Agricultural Density — 0.45 dwelling units per acre) to RAD2 (Rural Agricultural Density — 2 dwelling units per. acre). This change is necessary to move forward with the proposed development because the current designation as RAD would limit the overall number of units on the site to 14 units and the project that has been requested is for 51 units (1.7 units per acre), in addition to the existing single family residential site and proposed farm school. The applicant has proposed shifting density from an area guided for RAD2 west of the applicant's property to this site in order to avoid any impacts to the overall population projections in the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Text Amendments, The applicant has requested an amendment to the OP Open Space Preservation Ordinance to add requirements for development in areas that are guided RAD2, and more specifically, to amend the OP District to allow for the proposed multi -family senior living facility and farm -based preschool. The current OP Ordinance does not contain any provisions that would allow residential development to exceed a density of 0.45 units per acre (or 18 units per 40 acres), and although one section ties the maximum allowed density to the Comprehensive Plan, another section very specifically limits densities in OP developments to 18 units per 40 gross acres of buildable land. The other proposed amendments to this section include the following: • Adding Multi -Family Senior Housing buildings (only in areas guided for RAD2) and Farm Schools for preschool and school -aged children to the list of allowable uses in an OP development. • Reducing the minimum land area for an OP development from 40 to 20 acres in areas guided RAD2. Reducing the amount of contiguous land required in open areas from 10 to 5 acres for land guided RAD2. • Reducing the required buffer setback in areas guided RAD2 to 50 feet from 200 feet. Adding standards for Senior Housing Buildings in the OP minimum district (1:`.(isci.Abrwe.ines.velADocunicitt.s:ICorlizcil 2(1iTAR.,1 )%:.c5-04-20 Carr, School Stqll'Rerorr.doc e Comprehensive Plan Amendments: Senior Living and Farm School" Cio' Council Report; 5/04s2010 requirements table. OP Open Space Preservation (OP) Development Concept Plan, The ultimate objective of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendments described above is to allow the development of a 40-unit senior housing building, 10-unit townhouse development, and farm -based preschool on a 30.9-acre property located at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. Should the City adopt the requested OP District changes, the applicant would be able to submit a request for the proposed development in accordance with the requirements for new OP Open Space Preservation projects. The first step in this process is the submission of a concept plan for review, and all plans and information required as part of this submission have been included as part of the overall application. A few of the details of this proposal include the following: • The Wunder Years day care would remain in its current location, and would be updated along with the existing house at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North to match the proposed townhouses. • A community septic system is planned to serve the development. • One access is planned off Stillwater Boulevard to serve the project area in the general location now used for access to the existing home and daycare. • 50% of the project site area would be set aside as permanent open space in accordance with the OP district requirements. • An open green area is planned within the center of the development area and a common architectural theme is planned throughout the development area consistent with the past agricultural use of the property. A more detailed description and complete staff review of the proposed OP Development Concept Plan will be provided at the next Planning Commission meeting when this aspect of the request is considered. This request may only proceed if the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning amendments are approved by the City Council. Planned Unit Development (PUD) — Concept Plan. In addition to the OP Development concept plan submission, the application also includes a request for a Planned Unit Development concept plan. A PUD is necessary to move forward with the applicant's request since the project includes a mix of uses and activities that would otherwise not be possible under current zoning regulations. The PUD portion of the request will be considered by the City in conjunction with the review schedule for the OP Development concept plan. The pending staff review will group the concept plans together for the purpose of providing an analysis of the request in a future report. Property The applicant's property is located near the intersection of Jamaca Avenue North and Information: Stillwater Boulevard North (Highway 5). The current uses consist of the original Friederich family farmstead and related outbuildings and the Wunder Years day care C:',Uver,O,ruce.truyell-.1)ocuinem,6CouncW ,igendas 20 UP.3.14 roc5,, 04-20 1 0 1:aPhr Si441Rpor't doe Page 3 Comprehensive Plan Annmdments: Senior living and FOrtn &hoot City Co un(11 Report; 5/0/2010 facility. Other than the agricultural fields, each of these uses would be considered a permitted residential and/or agricultural use of the property. The 30.9 acre farmstead is zoned RR — Rural Residential while the day care site is zoned R-I Single Family Residential and is 29,670 square feet (0.68 acres) in size. Each property currently has its own access to Stillwater Boulevard via two driveways that are approximately 25 feet apart. Other notable features of the farm property include a larger wooded area in the northeast portion of the site (referred to as the "Oak Savanna" on the concept plans) and gently rolling topography throughout the proposed project area. The 30,9-acre parcel extends westward to Jamaca Court North, and connects to this street via a narrow connection point between two existing homes. The surrounding property uses include single family homes zoned R-1 to the south and east along Stillwater Boulevard, and agricultural uses located to the north and east that are zoned A — Agriculture and RR — Rural Residential. The Washington County Landfill and Sunfish Lake Park is located further to the north and northwest for the latter. Applicable. Section 150.175 through 150.189 OP Open Space Preservation Codes: Describes the process and requirements associated with an OP Open Space Preservation development. The applicant has requested an amendment to this section of the City Code in order to allow a multi -family senior living building and farm -based preschool as part of an OP development. Section 154.020 Amendments Outlines the process and requirements for requesting an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. Of particular interest, please note Subsection (J) which reads: "Conforniance with Comprehensive Plan. In granting or recommending any rezoning or other permit provided for in this chapter, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Commission, or Council shall find that the proposed development conforms substantially to the policies, goals, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan." Section 154.036 RR — Rural Residential Outlines the general requirements for the RR Rural Residential Zoning District in Lake Elmo. Section 154.070 through 154.075. Planned Unit Development Describes the process and requirements for submitting an application for a Planned Unit Development. Findings & General Site Overview Site Data: Lot Sizes: 30.9 acres and 0.68 acres Existing Uses: Single Family Residences/Agricultural/Agricultural Outbuildings C.':'•User.c'itirtic.c.awsse://':Dricuatontsk(7orineil ri,las 20 1 0'. ilf.1 -04-20 10 lartii .S'el tool Staff Re or t. doe !'age 4 Comprehensive Nan Amendments: Senior Living and 1:arm School City Council Report; .5,704/2010 Existing Zoning: RR — Rural Residential and R-1 Single Family Residential Future Land Use: RAD — Rural Agricultural Density and Neighborhood Conservation Property Identification Numbers (PID): 15-029-21-31-0001 and 15-029-21-31-0003 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Text Amendment Review: Comp Plan Analysis Staff Comments: Of all the land use requests that are considered by a Planning Commission, a City has the most discretion to approve or deny proposals to amend the Comprehensive Plan. For communities within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, this discretion is limited somewhat by the Metropolitan Council, which requires cities to update their plans every ten years and has the authority to review all requests to amend an approved Comprehensive Plan. In this case, if the City decides to move forward with the proposed amendment, the proposed change will need to be reviewed by the Metropolitan Council before it can be officially adopted by the City. The update must also be submitted to adjacent communities for review and comment before the Met Council will take action on the proposal, and once accepted, there is a 60 day review period that can be extended an additional 60 days if needed. In general, Cities may consider an amendment to a Comprehensive Plan for several reasons. Below are some specific examples as listed in the Met Council's Local Planning Handbook: • Changes resulting from interim planning activities such as master plans, redevelopment plans or annexation • A need to change a land use designation to allow a proposed development, • Routine update of a public facilities element, such as a parks plan • A text amendment to revise a land use category, policy or other description • A routine update to incorporate new information such as census figures The applicant's request clearly falls under the category of a land use designation change to allow a proposed development; however, there is much more to the Comprehensive Plan than just the simple designation of future land uses on a map. In Lake Elmo's situation, the City's Comprehensive Plan includes many other sections devoted to housing, provision of water service, transportation, and other elements that form a unified set of goals and objectives for the City. Any proposed land use changes should remain consistent with the other policies within the Comprehensive Plan or may otherwise need to be considered in the context of a larger update to the plan. In order to support an amendment to a Comprehensive Plan, planners will typically try to identify circumstances that may have changed since the plan was last updated to support a change in the future land use designation or other components of a plan. For instance, market conditions may have led to assumptions concerning the rate of growth that are incorrect or a transportation improvement may have opened up new areas for development that were otherwise inaccessible, In Lake Elmo's case, certain sections of the plan will be updated this year, while the land use section was last (.::11:,iser,OtorucoanesseThDoculiNnits'.Council ,igen,10,,i 20 UP.(11/1 Ilec5-04-20 I Earns School Sto.07641ort.(14k: Comprehensive Plan Amendments: Senior Living and f'arm School City Council .R.c.pol; 5/04/20.10 updated in 2006. It is staff s opinion that, if anything, conditions have changed during this period of time in a manner that is not conducive to the request being considered by the Planning Commission, Specifically: The economic downturn has led to a very slow rate of build out in the more recent OP developments. It is in the best interest of the City and each affected neighborhood to encourage new building to take place on lots that are currently vacant and served with water, roads, sewer, and other services and not in new areas with no or limited existing services. • The City is lagging well behind the development phasing planned for urban service areas (with no growth in these areas to date) while OP development have only in the past few years begun experiencing the severe downtown in building activity. A multi -family project is more typical of the type of development planned for the urban service areas. • The City's Comprehensive Plan and the Memorandum of Understanding between Lake Elmo and the Met Council includes provisions that will allow the Council to assess penalties against the City for failure to reach target population figures in sewered residential areas. Given the potential for penalties associated with a slow rate of build -out, larger projects should be directed to the urban service areas where they would help meet the development milestones in the Plan. • Although it appears that the overall pattern of development in areas guided for RAD density in the Comprehensive Plan will result in a lower overall population living in these areas than previously estimated, the overall impacts to the City's infrastructure and planning policies will be much lower if the current trend is followed than by increasing the allowed densities by over four times the amounts projected in some of these areas. On the applicant's site, the current zoning would permit a density of time dwelling units (or up to 14 units if combined with adjacent parcels) verses the 51 units that have been requested. • The re -allocation of densities throughout areas guided for RAD and RAD2 should be considered within the larger context of where these densities may best be integrated with surrounding land uses and where they can best be provided with public services (even if these services are somewhat limited in OP developments). There has been no substantial change since the land use plan was updated to indicate why the applicant's site would be better -suited for additional density verses the areas currently guided RAD2. Other general comments from Staff: • The applicant has proposed to re -allocate densities from an existing RAD2 property in order to permit the proposed 50-unit project without increasing the overall population projections for the City. In order to keep the overall population projections level for the City, this would reduce the density of an existing RAD2 areas to accommodate this change. There are currently around Cr.-1-IsersItiruce.messellIDocumein,OCouncil ,lgendos 21,10,i1/1ric c5-04-20 10 Favar School Stqff liscromeloc Page 6 Comprehensive Pion Alnendments: Senior Living and _Farm School City ,::'ouncil Report: 5,104/2010 Zoning Amendment Staff Analysis: 140 total acres guided RAD2 which could theoretically accommodate up to 280 new housing units. If the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved, a net transfer of 37 units in excess of the current OP standards would be required (14 allow at .45 units per acre compared to 51 requested units). This transfer would reduce the overall density on the 140 acre sites to approximately 1.75 units per acre (or less if borrowed from just one property). • There have been no discussions with the current property owner of the 103 acre parcels that are guided RAD2 to the west of the applicant's site that the overall density on this site may change (or any of the RAD2 guided property owners). • Although the land use description for RAD2 notes that "limited life cycle housing" would be appropriate in these areas, there are no other references to such housing in RAD or RAD2 guided land. In fact, the housing section of the current plan states very specifically that "Any fitture senior -specific housing in Lake Elmo will be best accommodated within the Old Village Area due to proximity to goods, services, and public facilities. The combination of senior housing needs and village scale housing density may result in attached housing of some description". • The Comprehensive Plan calls for the City to make some fairly substantial investments in public sanitary sewer services, and Staff recommends that any developments that exceed the base densities allowed in rural areas be directed to the urban service areas where such developments can help support the provision of these services. • The applicant's plan would place additional traffic directly on to Stillwater Boulevard at a new intersection that is not consistent with the recently - prepared Transportation Plan. The Plan specifically encourages the use of collector streets and limiting access to major roads. The proposed project also does not comply with MnDOT's or the City's access spacing guidelines. Based on the reasons provided above, Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the future land use designation of the applicant's site from RAD to RAD2. Draft findings were also presented to the Planning Commission consistent with the review comments noted above. The Planning Commission did not support the recommendations of Staff and, rather, developed a revised list of findings supporting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment that are included in the Planning Commission report that follows. The second part of the request that was considered by the Planning Commission concerns the proposed amendments to the OP Open Space Preservation District as detailed in the applicant's submission materials and summarized by Staff in this report. Many of the changes proposed would apply on to areas designated as RAD2, and in particular, senior -living dwellings would not be permitted outside of land so designated. If approved, the proposed changes would apply to all portions of the City guided for RAD2 development, which includes 103 acres at the western edge of the vj:1)(4.7unicta.•,-Conacii ,c-,::!:-().;•:(ilt." 17 (WIT: Sf.:ido,11 5za1:1Re.norLeloc e 7 Cornpreheraive Plan ,lart?flurnients: Sevior Living atd Farts Shoo/ City Council .fhpart: 5/04/201 0 City along Stillwater Boulevard and a smaller 36-acre area immediately north of 10th Street at its intersection with Manning Avenue. This would open up these parcels for a similar senior -living or school project. Looking at the proposed zoning amendments in a general sense, Staff offered the following comments for consideration by the Planning Commission: • The current OP Ordinance does not contain provisions that would allow densities to exceed the 0.45 units per acre maximum in the code even in areas guided RAD2. At some point, this discrepancy should be addressed so that the densities allowed in the Zoning Ordinance are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • If approved, the proposed amendments would not alter the maximum permitted density in areas guided RAD2, and would primarily amend the types of uses that would be permitted in such areas. • Rather than amending the current OP Ordinance provisions, Staff would recommend that an overlay zoning district be created for RAD2 that would require compliance with all OP development standards with specific exceptions that would allow higher densities in RAD areas. This approach would leave the current OP Ordinance as -is while focusing a new overlay district only in specific areas to accommodate higher densities. • The proposed language in 150.180 (B, 2, g) should read "per gross acres of buildable land" to be consistent with the current OP requirements. • Given the allowance for larger buildings up to three stories in height, Staff recommends that the buffer setbacks (Section 150.180 B, 2, d) be left as currently written since a larger buffer should be provided in cases where there is greater potential for dissimilar uses to be located next to each other. • The Planning Commission may want to consider whether or not Farm Schools should be permitted in all OP developments as the proposed draft would allow. • The Zoning Ordinance only permits buildings over 35 feet in the BP Business Park and PF Public Facility zoning districts. The maximum height for Senior Housing Buildings as proposed would be 48 feet. • The OP district standards table should include setbacks from side and rear property lines for Senior Housing Buildings. The Planning Commission chose to table taking action on the Zoning Amendment, and requested that Staffprepare an alternate to the applicant's proposal that would create an overlay zoning district instead of amending the existing OP Ordinance. The Commission requested that the same standards proposed by the applicant be used to draft overlay regulations. With the separation of the concept plan review from the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments, Staffwill not be providing a detailed analysis of the submitted concept plans at this time. These plans were been provided, however, as part of the mem el4,00,-,,i,fm(rns,Coir ;wit Ago Lela,c 2010 :AV ITy'c5-ai-.7, o SGhool Staff Compnthensive Phin Anwiitiments: Senior Living and Farm School Council ,Roporl: .5704:2010 Concept Plan Issues: Commission's review materials since the application was submitted at one time. The project narratives and required submissions are also intertwined and are being presented in one package of information rather than splitting up certain pieces of information between the two scheduled meeting and hearing dates. Also, the Planning Department has asked for all comments from other agencies and internal staff on the entire application, and all comments that have been submitted to date are included as part of the Council meeting material. In order to give the City Council, and the applicant, a quick overview of the major issues associated with the concept plans that have been identified to date, please consider the following: • The Minnesota Department of Transportation has indicated that it will require certain improvements to Highway 5 if access is provided as shown on the concept plan. Specifically, a right turn lane and escape lane for eastbound traffic will be required at the new entrance road. • The City Engineer has recommended that the concept plan be revised to provide road connectivity to the east and north with the development proposal. • The water plan does not appear to meet fire flow requirements for the proposed improvements since the new eight -inch pipe as shown on the utility plan connects to an existing four -inch water pipe at the edges of the development. • The storm water management and drainage and erosion control plan will need to address the City's recently adopted storm water quantity and quality standards. • A small portion of the site is located within a shoreland district and will need to comply with any applicable shoreland ordinance requirements. The City of Oakdale's Fire Chief has been asked to review the plans from a public safety perspective since the applicant is married to Lake Elmo's Fire Chief. • The proposed landscape plan does not accommodate the minimum number of trees required under the OP Ordinance. • The community septic system and a portion of the trail system are shown within and power line easement. The City should receive an acknowledgement and consent from the easement holder in order to permit these encroachments. • Staff would suggest a greater amount of spacing between the proposed tree preservation area and the buildings and roads on the site. The City should evaluate whether or not it is appropriate to use the required open space areas for storm water retention ponds. A more thorough review and analysis of the proposed concept plans will be forthcoming from Staff should the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments be approved by the City Council. Should approvals be granted, the City will need to discuss the review schedule with the applicant since no action may be finalized with C.- , .1.) c:c.. frressr:.11 1.)Nounien C7(+1, n )1.c:.:!;-0.;'--2(i I 0 arr7: Pc7Jor:., Page9 Comprchansire Elun Amendments: Senior Living and Farm School City Council 14pori: 5/04/2010 regards to the Comprehensive Plan until the Met Council has completed its review. Staff Based on the report and analysis provided above, Staffrecorrnnended that the Planning Recommendadon: Commission recommend denial of the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the future land use designation of 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD to RAD2. Consistent with this recommendation, Staff further recommended that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the proposed text amendments to the OP Open Space Preservation Ordinance. Pending Council action on these items, a separate recommendation from Staff concerning the OP Development and PUD concept plans will presented at the next Planning Commission meeting. Additional Comments have been received for all four aspects of the applicant's request from Information: MnDOT, Valley Branch Watershed District, the City of Oakdale Fire Department, and the City Engineer is attached for consideration by the City Council. In addition to the applicant's submission materials, staff has also attached an aerial image of the site and Future Land Use Map from the Comprehensive Plan identifying the applicant's site and the two areas currently guided as RAD2. Planning Commission Report: Planning The Planning Commission reviewed the request for a Comprehensive Plan Commission Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment and conducted a public hearing on each of Review and these items at its April 26, 2010 meeting. At the meeting, the following feedback was Public provided to the Commission: Hearing: Tammy Malmquist explained her overall goals and objectives behind the proposed senior living and farm school project. She also introduced Jan Friedrich, who talked about her father's discussions with Mrs. Malmquist concerning the future of this property. Tim Freeman with Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc, suggested alternative findings in support of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Seven people spoke in favor of the amendments needed to support the project. Councilmember Ann Smith addressed the Commission and reviewed some of the history behind the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan, and in particular, the creation of a separate RAD2 land use designation. Eight letters of support were submitted and distributed at the meeting. These letters are included as part of the Council agenda packet. One additional letter of support was submitted by a resident who also spoke during the public hearing. C:(...;!••,-`1.7;11/71.Ct'..11-itselilDoCiVIIIIIS'IC.61111C11 .1,,:01,1 Ni; 11; Ytc\.:5-0,.- 20 1 0 Form ,S'dlo 61 Sluff k;:pori.e1,e( Pape I Comprohensive .Plan Amendments: Seniol• Living and ,Fm School Council Rion; 5/04/2010 • Staff noted that Ed Nielsen, 9498 Stillwater Boulevard North, had contacted the City via telephone earlier in the week to express his support for the proj ect. • The project consultant submitted a list of neighbors that had attended a March 31, 2010 meeting conducted by the applicant to discuss the project (seven neighbors were in attendance of this meeting). The Commission reviewed the Staff recommendation and considered the comments submitted in writing and verbally at the meeting. The Planning Commission developed findings of fact to support the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and by a unanimous vote of 9-0, recommended that the City Council approve the request to change the future land use designation of the applicant's property from RAD to RAD2. The Planning Commission tabled taking any action regarding the proposed amendments to the OP Open Space Preservation Ordinance; however, and instead directed Staff to prepare an alternate to the applicant's request that would create a separate overlay district witlythe same standards. The overlay district to be considered by the Planning Commission would include the following as specific exceptions to the existing OP Ordinance: • Allowing a density of 2 units per acre. • Adding Multi -Family Senior Housing buildings and Farm Schools for preschool and school -aged children as allowable uses. • Reducing the minimum land area required from 40 to 20 acres. • Reducing the amount of contiguous land required in open areas from 10 to 5 acres. • Reducing the required buffer setback to 50 feet. • Adding standards for Senior Housing Buildings. In developing its findings of fact, the Planning Commission was concerned about setting precedent with the approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. The Commission's findings describe some aspects of this site that that the Commission has indicated set it apart from other properties that are guided for RAD development. A complete record of the Planning Commission's findings is listed as part of the formal recommendation below. Planning The Planning Commission Recommends that the City Council approve the Commission Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of the Recommendtgon• parcel located at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North from RAD (Rural Agricultural Density — 0.45 dwelling units per acre) to RAD2 (Rural Agricultural Density — 2 dwelling units per acre). The Planning Commission further offers the following findings to support this recommendation: 1) The current use of this site as a working farm is unique compared to other . rl Li cu nren ul 17 rl ,-*ger dry, 201 (»i14rc::::;-(,J,L. 20 ;f F , ::;cijo„ Slap 'flei„ AX trq.;07: Comprehensive P!an Amenthnents: Senior Living and ,Farm School City Council Rkport: 5/04120,10 properties designated for RAD development in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed request will help fulfill a need for senior housing within the community. 3) Recent subdivisions in areas guided for RAD development have been approved at a density below the unit levels anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed density increase will be offset by reductions that have previously been approved or acknowledged by the City. 4) The applicant's site is located in close proximity to public transportation along State Highway 5, and specifically, a bus route that could provide alternate transportation options for seniors. 5) The applicant's site is located immediately adjacent to existing R-1 Single Family Residential zoning districts along its southern, eastern, and western boundaries. Other areas guided for RAD development are primarily surrounded by rural residential, agricultural, or public open space uses. 6) There has been broad public support for the proposed project and no objections from neighboring property owners have been filed with the City. cc: Tammy Malmquist, 8549 Ironwood Trail Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc.; 12445 55" Street N ri! co I ,:!Ceninc ,1 / a (17, SC1100( Stair kenor.,..doc Pape12 RECEIVED APR 2 2 Z010 CITY OF LAKE E Lake Elmo Planning Commission Lake Elmo City Council 3800 Laverne Avenue Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Dear Lake Elmo City Leaders, C C e'N 11,01, 0 9402 Stillwater Blvd Lake Elmo, MN 55042 April 20, 2010 We are writing to you in support of the Farm School and Senior Living Proposal that is currently being reviewed. Our property is adjacent on the south and west of the proposed development. We have met with Tammy on several occasions, she is and has been very interested, concerned and has addressed all concerns that we have had regarding the project. We feel this project is beneficial to the community by meeting the housing needs of seniors living in Lake Elmo, and offering the children an opportunity to work with the seniors in a positive rewarding and learning environment, Please contact us with any questions or concerns you may have @651-592-8566, Sincerely, April 26, 2010 Dear Planning Commission, My name is Sharon Bernardy I live at 8352 27th St N. I have lived in Lake Elmo since 1988. I would prefer to not publicly speak so I am writing to you with my support and desire for the senior housing and farm preschool. I will be selling my house in the next 2 years and would love to know that I could still stay in Lake Elmo. I feel that this will be an affordable option for me. I love the location which is not far from where I live now. I'm 52 and like the concept of living in a neighborhood situation with a farm preschool as opposed to a "Senior Complex". I know that Lake Elmo has talked about a complex for years and that it would be downtown. Nothing has come forward with this idea and more over I would prefer to stay out of downtown. I realize that this may be preferred for some, but not me! I hope that the planning commission will take into consideration the different viewpoints of it's current residents, I realize that there are other places in the town for possible senior housing. I would like my voice to be counted as a very positive vote for the senior housing and farm preschool proposal. Respectively, Sharon Bernardy 8352 27th St N Lake Elmo April 26, 2010 Dear Chairman and Planning Commission Members: My name is Mary Skon and I have been a resident of Lake Elmo for 8 years. I recently heard about the Senior Housing and Farm Preschool project that you will be voting on. I am uncomfortable standing up to speak at the public hearing but I want you to know that as a resident I am in full support of this concept and the location being proposed. As a mother, I believe the farm preschool would be a wonderful experience for children, We moved to Lake Elmo because of the community and "farm atmosphere" ...having horses, cows and fields planted/harvested. I also- know the success this project would reap having an 84 year father in a nursery home. The entire home adores the sight of my 5 year old daughter and her Grandpa playing games together. My words cannot express the feeling I get when I see this setting of elderly and young children coming together. I would like to say I feel our community would benefit and become a very 'prestigious' spot on the map if you would support the Farm School and Senior Housing proposal, Sincerely, Mary Siton 2965 lnnsdale Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (651) 779-6363 January 26, 2010 Mr. Robert Van Zandt Planning Conunission Chair Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Dear Mr. Van Zandt: It was with great interest and excitement that we listened to an Adult Forum presentation at our church a few weeks ago. At the request of several Christ Lutheranmem.bers, Tammy Malmquist explained her vision for the "Main Street" development she proposes to create on her property just off Highway 5. Having entered the retirement years some time ago, we have begun to deal with the unwelcome, but very real, future when we can no longer maintain the home and acreage we have enjoyed for nearly 40 years. In the past several years, we have explored many of the options becoming available in the St. Croix Valley, but we did not uncover anything the really "spoke" to us. What we heard from Ms Malmquist DID! Although our current residence is in West Lakeland Township, our community connections (through the bank, church, grocery store, hair salon, library, etc. etc.) have been in lovely Lake Elmo. Having the opportunity to maintain that connection, live alongside neighbors who are already our friends and acquaintances, AND live in an area that offered the rural feel that has been our lifelong preference would be a perfect solution for us. In addition, we were good friends with the Friedrich family who owned part of this property and residing in a complex that honored their memory would be a wonderful "PLUS!" We encourage you to look with great favor on this proposed development and give it the guidance that would bring it to early fruition inour wonderful community. Sincerely, Cleone Pritchard 13851 23rd Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 April 25, 2010 Mr. Chairman and members of the Planning Commission: I have been a resident of Lake Elmo for 24 years. The idea of remaining in Lake Elmo during my retirement years is very appealing to me. The proposed farm school and senior housing is very desirable and would greatly enhance our community. I feel the proposed location off Highway 5 is better suited for me than in the village or along 1-94. I urge the Planning Commission to approve the current proposal to insure our citizens will have this wonderful senior housing option. Sincerely, Pat Weyandt 8772 Ironwood Trail N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 13851 23rd St N. Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 January 26,2010 Deer Mr. Van Zandt, We have lived at this address for over 35 years, but now are realizing that we need to move to a retirement home that means less work and upkeep. We know that this will not be easy for us. We feel very connected with the Lake Elmo community. 0ur banking is done at the Lake Elmo Bank. i get my hair cut at the Lake Elmo Barber Shop. Our church that we attend is Christ Lutheran Church in Lake Elmo. We have looked at several locations in the Stillwater area', but none seemed quite right. We didn't want to move out of the Lake Elmo community. We are very interested in the development of the "Main Street" community and would like to see it developed into our retirement home. Please help make this possible. Yours,truiy, Donald Pritchard April 26 2010 Proposed Senior Housing/Farm Preschool Dear Chairman and members ofthe Planning Commission, Our names are Paul and Jill Mitchell and we have lived in Lake Elmo for 19 years. We have seen the plans for the proposed senior housing / farm preschool that you will be voting mninthe near future, VVe feel this is a well thought out plan and would fit the rural look of the Lake Elmo community. Anacouple who will beapproaching retirement age inthe next several years this would bethe type nf setting vvewould enjoy |iv(ng|n.Theconceptofchi|drenandoeniorsinteract|ngtmgetheriovery appealing to us. We like this plan because it offers the opportunity to still enjoy outdoor activities such as gardening, recreation areas to spent time with family and friends and walking paths. VVeknow there has been talk ofsenior living being developed inthe OldVillage oralong the |94corridor but have not seen plans moving either project forvvand.Gixenachoicemf|ucetimnto|ive,xvewvou|d choose the proposed senior housing and farm preschool over those other locations. Pau|§L ' w» 281lIrish 8VeN Lake Elmo 651-779-9671 February 1, 2010 TO: Mr. Bob Vanzandt FROM: Joan Beutel Dear Mr Vanzandt I think we shared a table together when Tammy had a meeting at the Lake Elmo Bank about Main Street. I am very excited about Main Street development. I am one of the people who had to leave Lake Elmo area because of lack of housing for the seniors. I was so sony about that and wished someone had put together a plan for a development for seniors. Tammy Malmquist has done just that. The "Main Street" development is in an area that is a bit in the country and not too far from shopping. I think it is a very unique and favorable area for this development. I now live in Stillwater in the hub bub of lots of noise and business's. I am looking forward to the peace and a quiet gentle community with trees instead of buses and lots of traffic. I sincerely hope that her ideas of this development called "Main Street" is met with a favorable attitude from all the council members. Please vote for me. Thank you Joane 6351 St Croix Trail Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 April 26, 2010 Lake Elmo Planning Commission City Hall 3800 Laverne Avenue Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a Farm School and Senior Living Project at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North Members of the Planning Commission: Please accept the following letter IN SUPPORT of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a Farm School and Senior Living Project at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North. While I have included detailed comments on the proposed Findings, below, in summary, my view is that the project is: (1) needed; (2) completely consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; and, (3) in the best, long-term interest of the City of Lake Elmo. Please revise the Planning Director's proposed Findings and approve the requested Amendments. For More Than a Decade City Officials Have Proclaimed Their Commitment to the Development Life -Cycle Housing As the members of this Commission know, it is has long been the hope of City officials to establish a wide -range of housing options within Lake Elmo. In fact, City policy and City officials have both been quite explicit on this point. We have said that we want Lake Elmo residents to have a genuine opportunity to live, work, raise families and reside here throughout their lives.1 This project represents a needed, and overdue, step toward fulfilling this promise by developing housing stock for Lake Elmo's senior citizens. See, Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, Housing Element — Chapter IV at IV-5, IV-6 (January 31, 2006). If the requested Amendments are not approved, the Planning Commission should detail for taxpayers (and the Metropolitan Council) how, where and when these types of units will be developed. The Comprehensive Plan Amendments are needed and should be approved. II. The Proposed Findings in the Commission's Memorandum Misstate the Underlying Record and Will Lead the City into Error I strongly disagree with the Planning Director's proposed Findings. For the reasons outlined below, they misstate the submissions on this project and undermine the City's commitments on orderly development. The proposed Findings are wrong and they put the City at risk. (1) Draft Finding Number 1 asserts that there has been no "change in circumstances" since 2006. This is plainly not true. Since the latest version of the Comprehensive Plan was adopted, the real estate market locally, and across the nation, has collapsed. In fact, as detailed in a January article in the Saint Paul Pioneer Press, the downturn in the housing and real estate development markets has adversely impacted Lake Elmo's ability to meet the housing numbers it agreed to (with the Metropolitan Council) in 2005. While Lake Elmo was accustomed to adding approximately 100 homes each year, it added just 18 homes in 2009. Further, as City Manager Bruce Messelt explained to the Pioneer Press "And we were pleased to have those [18].,..2 If, in 2010, City Officials are "pleased" to have less than 20 percent of the development rates that we had in 2006, it is clear that there has been a significant "change in circumstances." The Amendments are needed and should be approved. (2) Draft Finding Number 2 implies that only sewer -connected homes — Residential Equivalent Connections (or RECs) — make progress toward the City of Lake Elmo's housing goals. This is likewise untrue. The City of Lake Elmo pledged to the Metropolitan Council in 2005 that it would move toward a local population of 24,000 — independent of its commitment to add more sewer -connected units. Moreover, the Metropolitan 2 See, Attachment 1 to this letter, "Lake Elmo's controversial growth still on hold," St. Paul Pioneer Press, 1A (January 11, 2010). Council understands our pledge as being broader than simply an agreement on sewers, As the Chairman of the Metropolitan Council, Peter Bell, explained after the accord with the City was reached: "State and regional taxpayers have made significant investments to keep pace with growth in Lake Elmo and the surrounding area — including three major highways [and] a 2,200-acre regional park .... The compromise plan will ensure that these investments are used in a cost-effective manner."3 For the Metropolitan Council, moving toward more efficient use of the parks and transportation system are likewise part of our 2005 bargain. The proposed project moves us toward greater population numbers and a more efficient use of one of the three major highways referenced by Chairman Bell (Highway 5). Likewise, to the extent that regional sewer systems will one -day travel down Highway 5, this development will be within easy reach of those systems. This development is needed to show our good faith to the Metropolitan Council. (3) Draft Findings 3, 5 and 7 imply that senior housing is only appropriate in either the Old Village or along the 1-94 Corridor. This is not true. As detailed above, rejecting the kind 'of development plans that will help us to meet our commitments to the Metropolitan Council, simply because the units are not in the Old Village or along the 1-94 corridor, is foolish. Moreover, such a stance is at odds with the commitments that the City has made in its Comprehensive Plan. Not only does the City's Comprehensive Plan urge a move to more "older age groupings" in its housing stock, it argues that our lack of progress in developing these opportunities so far has followed from "forces of the market place."4 In this case, a private developer is willing to address some of our needs for life - cycle housing. A long-time resident of this community is willing to develop the kind of housing that is sought by our residents and our Comprehensive Plan. At long last, we have both a willing developer and interested buyers. Moreover, this project does not interfere with any wished -for development in the Old Village or the 1-94 Corridor. If there is a developer interested in creating senior housing inside of the Old Village that should be approved as well. In fact, the Metropolitan Council would rightly regard any "de facto" rule strictly limiting senior housing to the Old Village and the 1-94 Corridor as an attempt to break the 2005 agreement on total housing numbers. Such a view puts the City, and taxpayers, at risk for future penalties. 3 See, "Met Council approves Lake Elmo comp plan, Action ends protracted dispute over growth issues" (htto://www.metrocouncil.oraidirectionsfolannina/planninci2006/LakeElmoAprO6.htm), 4 See, Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, Housing Element Chapter IV at IV-5, IV-6 (January 31, 2006). The Amendments are needed and should be approved. (4) Draft Finding Number 4 implies that the characteristics of the Stillwater Boulevard site are indistinguishable from any of the other parcels that are guided Rural Agricultural Density — or RAD. The Finding is wrong. The project site is adjacent to Highway 5 and one of three bus routes serving Lake Elmo — Bus Route 294.5 For a senior housing development, easy access to this important transportation route is a critical feature and a major benefit of this plan. Particularly if the City is genuinely interested in "encouraging and advocating" "transit alternatives to automobile travel,"6 the project site is simply not interchangeable with the more than 7,000 other acres of RAD-guided land in the City of Lake Elmo.7 This site is distinct and especially well -suited for both the proposed use and the other goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The Amendments are needed and should be approved. (5) Draft Finding Number 6 asserts that the proposed project is inconsistent with maintaining Lake Elmo's rural character and a Rural Agricultural Density guiding. The draft Finding is both silly and wrong. It is important to emphasize that the 50 percent of the proposed project site would be set aside as permanent open space, it would include an open green area at its center and include a working Farm School. Plainly, if such large tracts of open, green space and a "Farm School" do not constitute development of a "rural character," these words of the Comprehensive Plan have no meaning whatsoever. They will have been reduced to gibberish. Worse still, if the terms "Rural Character" do not mean projects like this one, not only will they cheat the City of Lake Elmo out of needed property tax base, but sooner or later they will be recognized by the Metropolitan Council as a stalling tactic. The Amendments are needed and should be approved. 5 See, Route 294 (htto://vvww.metrotransit.ord/Schedules/WebSchedules.aspx?route=294); Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Plan — Chapter VIII, at VIII-26 (January 31, 2006) 6 See, Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Plan — Chapter VIII, at VIII-26 (January 31, 2006). 7 See, Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Plan — Chapter III, at III-7 (January 31, 2006). III. Conclusion For these reasons, please revise the Planning Director's proposed Findings and approve the requested Amendments. The Farm School and Senior Living Project at 9434 Stillwater Boulevard North is very much needed, consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, and in the best, long-term interest of the City of Lake Elmo. Sincerely, er y A. Lipman oIShaw 1trmaI1y aunrwed later, hinoOkiess.,thi#,:1; .-..has been- LAcefdi 1*e Elmo ':.doesn't have to grow time iiecfty after all *Yet inthe.SuPralle Couttcase, ti*ilvia`A The 6 potpn fought against growth, saying•;"*4tifig Mkt,,Q1unOli •that that it would clestrOy, the " will charm of Lakeftln: yeat Met Council- op4ia1s argI&d.t avoid pay- the real issue waS fairness. „. for not 411.nther metro cities e IyIt Coun--. ing their the of the area's neVT,r, dents. They wereadding intis the latest twist in n.ecti'ona.to help pay for the:- .' MOSt celebrated anti- lion -dollar inetrowide sewer . . ,The • t-ye,F7 _dispute — so WO shouldn't Lake E1 ::andtheMetCound1 After the Supreme Court;., : .004 w1t1i:Supreme the enahOldened Met aline , — • ' ' the growtk.targets for Lake g ',. '.:." o to 2 - city agreed to add 515 sog .,.... connections by 2O10; 1,9304pre Bruce Mes elt is relieved by the 2015; and so forthjhe effeet;,,,j,-. delay. As city rtianstor, he is hoping add 17,000 residents by.: to 40,..t. for 4.1 even longer e*tensiOn. tripluigthesi7:,e ofihe cityc- . e ilid 04 de everytJiitby The iirogre..5,q-Agr five: reyear, if.,4 can demonstrate onenew connedkUnD tliat*ear0ng,i7 l*Said. TI,Inrs because, .Messelt -.'sa4, ,,,, , The ., delay has been tentatively city - hasn't completed the .pipe worW. out by 0 cialSnn both sides, necting to the Met council S, 'It" would be Lake Elmo's controversial growth still on hold," Paul Pioneer Press, lA and 4A (January 11, 2010) t for lact.pf014!: -L-0 „..,. he.8 C;$1110 C ‘Vch 4 Ccl..,54, TeriiIi TPIa.aI1Mor a three-raile,„ $6 exiStagscwOrlir heusin,gslowdoNsin g. for public prOjects:. , accustomed to adding ,new)i.ordes per year, added, gl;',40(19 A.11d*Nvere•-Ple2secV those,' Messelt said," tyhas,spent almost $1. millioiL costs for the sewer co4- it With few •new houses and financing ,efforts pa - sewer project project has stalled: won't predict when the Start. "Some financing is in water and sewer, and some *d. o, other cities are owiig On:sdieduii only apply to re, the Met yironmental bno is unique: This situpd out of a 'Supreme " he said. . ' • lAtiqVi•IP'pqp,:.SyRt -get,. • • biSle PflietiMh : delay mis r 'So it LI „ dd /149,e oi o Fc lz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING 12145 55TH STREET NORTH L—AKE ELMO. MLNINESOTA 55M2. Phme Ifi51141Y-$N14 Fa I01l410.vi11 I -ARM SCHOOL SENIOR LIVING L,[ ELMO, MNNESOTA Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING I 2445 55TH STREET NORTH LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA '15042 non: (RI) 13W11 Fax (6511 43t),9331 LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA CONCEPT SUBMITTAL EBR IJARY 18,, 2010 DEVELOPER: MMY MALMQ!JIST '.ii £� yi t, f :. r . . Folz, Frecrnan, Erickson, Inc. LAND PLANNING • SURVEYNC; • ENGINEERING 12445 5.5TH STREET NORTH LAKE ELMO, MTNNESOTA 55042 PhonePhn 51j43.W3 fax (fril) 410)1)31 Project Narrative Febrodry 18, 2010 The project as proposed. is a mixed use development featuring a farm based pre-school integrated with a residential community for people age 55 and better. This concept is unique not only to the Lakc Elmo community but also to the Midwest. Lake Elmo has been a leader in innovative ways to preserve its rural heritage by being the champion of open space developments. This project is a new variation of an open space development by bringing in the unique concept of focusing on seniors working side by side with pre-school children. The "farm school" experience is not unique to the area, however the idea of children working with seniors in this environment, is a very unique and exciting concept. The property is located in the heart of Lakc Elmo's farm country on the north side of Minnesota Highway 5 just east olJarnaca Avenue North. The 30,9 acre parcel is owned by the Friedrich faintly and has been part of the family farm heritage of Lake Elmo for well over 100 years. This unique development teams long time resident Tammy Malmquist with one of Lake Eltno's longest standing farm families. Tammy has distinguished herself as a successful owner/operator of the child care business "Wunder Years" which is now and will continue to be located at the entrance to this project. This project presents several challenges in the inunicipal approval process as present day ordinances do not recognize this type of unique undertaking. This application encompasses three requests to provide a means for approval: First is a Comprehensive Plan amendment that Focuses on shifting some oldie designations from the Future Land Use Map. We propose to switch the existing Future Land Use of Rural Residential for the property with RAD 2 from the property just to the west along Highway 5. There is no increase in density for the City. only a shift of where it is located, Second is a Zoning. Ordinance Tcxt Amendment. We propose to amend the existing OP Development ordinance to allow the density and unit types for areas within the RAD 2 guided areas to allow the Senior Housing component of this project. This will require the project to still conform to the basic premise °COP by providing 50 percent open space, village greens, trails, etc., along with the other features that go with the rural feel that Lake Elmo has strived for in these developments. This type of amendment to the existing ordinance will insure that future projects cannot "piggy back" on to these development- densities and thereby creating some kind of "precedent" that is unintended. Third is a Concept Plan review for the OP Development and a inulti-use PUD. The concept plan is the framework of the OP Development. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) is required to process the project as a multi -use project. This process isn't intended to relax or negotiate any of thc development standards but to allow for multiple uses within the same project. e 70'157:4:,1::, 12 ARCHN ET u S 4R2Pa5ED oPEN PL44'NE,..7 7(4/7 494-1/:.---Z2pmENT M4:7/./ ii131,1/17.5: 5,,;400c: Si/r.OR At:4157* TaVivAt7MES • EX.:577W0 'int/DER YE:445" :4440 7X44::: 47" TO 41472,? NEw TrivAtACMIS 5) xecINO2R YEARS To ..CE,WA•lew .W 0,0,!;€.47,0iv • CORAW/fiy AND (224/4CII. ,4C7I0At • 20,1p pz4',/ AMENDMENT/RTXED zoiy:Ak; TiAT 4MENDA/47,1/7 OF OP • 7T,4445/ER of R47 2 01:AL3,77 4 FARM SCICOZ ZIJILDINGS. RILEY FUNCTIONAL 04/7 8411ZDINDS FOR 4 YPICAL FARMING OPER4TION; lel/SIND EOLLIPMEM: ANIMALS AND FEED FOR DAY ro (24), OPERATION OF 'FARM SCICOL OES,4i,v CT SCI4',OZ INTE N 6.1NER4TIONS J5 THE MAIN FOCUS p.R.op.)seo orn--,coo,v sz.-1,624- PRO.,=•70:NO PRE-SO,400I CHILDREN THE OPPORTON,7Y 70 LEARN FROM TIIE SENIORS 7:4115 COMMIIN,77' IS THE REAL DR2/IND FORCE OF THIS oe,z-zopmw c4Asszs iv.zu NoxP0R4ri rfe A7k-,7-Ar5 iww LE it:TN LEARNIW LESSONS 04 LIFE 4.3. ?WE SENIORS. dARDENND, 42iLECTIND fDt;S 4ND FEEDII* Tfrir C.R7475 4449 sAf.f-p ivzz.z ..4zz ['V 4 PART OF THE EXPER;EACE 47 TNE SCICOL CL -USES I.VILL hE OFFERED TO PRELSCACOZ 4GED CHILDREN DII/FIND TNE SCH901 YEAR 4ND TD ALL SCAM ADED olloREAr ,FOR THE 5ak4.1‹.? /142N74/5 71(1 schvoL MOUSE WILL ASO SERF 4 SECOND PZIRPOSE 4 COMMUNITY CENTER FOR 7W5 SENORS THE BUILDINGS WILL 55 OPEN FOR TI/E 4751* 4,7ER SCAVOL 1124/RS FOR FLIMTIONS AND CL4SSES FOR rile coM4VN.17,:" 7 Tow/442mE .0E7o4 ,7-,8z- TEN TOTAL JAT5 ARE P ROPOSED 7L) SE CONS7RLIE7E0 7H1R TWA/ SPV6LE TOIVVIVAIES THIS ELEVENT THE D4EL0PMEA/T W7L HEZP ro ,24-ave THE .'4."1.L40E e;ef,ff,tf AND RR -OE 5EN-7ORS WITH` .4A/ 4LTERN472VE THE COMMI1147X E0.7/ STRDL777RE IL E PEANNEL2 AND CON7/Q1C140 SENZRS l‘Nd kt/AM” TO Ail_ Ar "AMIE g(iTH WIDER HALLWAYS DOORWAYS AND 4dc.-E-552LE SA7HRO0,415 LANMAAAM-S17W11.4,,M0,,,,,,esA ARCHNET ri r-1 La, t„-4 AA, SENIOR LO-02V5 AORLSTEAVO PIA/NO AS 44PifEORAL PART OF THF P,POJE.:7, 71,75 SEV.TOR CORIVNE47 55 SiTZ.1:47E0 /2/FFLOOFEN0 THE VAL.AGI- OREEN, OAK .5.444,VRA AND P,A,',HR FIELDS 70 77+'0 ,AVATA4kEi7. Tve- 41Aas Awf PLANNED To P551zz9z- tusothrs THE OPPORTI.NTY 70 AUF 47 AVRE WiTH WOE ,H,LL.4/4YAS AND LVOR.S. 40.171.55/.81.1. APPLIAACES "WO &ATHROORS t4A-Tie 07wLvites-,P055455 ANJ T/HE GAVOT OP 5404' 05 THZ" 114475 451 ALLOW EACH OWNER 70 HOZ iA754'S AND THE FEELY46 01ffoca55 EXPERIEACIN::, rA/E OPE,/ SPA0E.5 OP THIS .0Ev'ELOPRENT AVITHIaT fe.W./46 70 5M5/RE an:me 445 4 AIA-TOR 555/144; FOXCE P1 74/5 DI -WSW 4N49 PL4L-,e427tT OF 745 dal LID N.}-- 70 ALSO PROVOE GREATER /5515.5751117?" .0z:I551; 4:I47ER br94ri0: US &MOP/a LC PLANNED 11/71/ AN LWOLIWOLNO PARA045 454/77 5055.5510 52 A/V ELEVATOR 70 ALL FLOORS. PL44/46 THE PARA.2.45 aNOLAGROaND /1074150 42155EAS1 THE" 64/45c4i7. HARO SaRE-AfE, HELP:NJ 70 PRISE -Alt' A 5REATER ARVZINT OF NA77.1544 47145 93 STALLS P,Pc//DED SECCND F[C(„q 16 U,v/AS RraA1 S7L,M AzAE T;r.RD %ceR IJ / X,AFC isE RCCA' RESIDE!✓' S7,6RAGE A2 A5 T /1� toFtr-L'OK LIVING GO,,GM — GIG r tot DECH I WING RGOL1 PHoricomo to!_lo :tFIATH ' 6 rttuktt.Nct, GG-NtYi G clot:cl< ARCIINET ijLi i!../Ny7 SIZES RAN'/S FROAtJC1Z 5, .14Gc2 11 Z4-6ENO al,t740.A ip,•10 _ poi! - Ou-aor 5b9Cie 5 N&X,CA. 4:27 - . - - 57474- Mt- 5 STIL4wATER 54vo NoRTH — .....=.=..=.., — 4_4vION PACIFIC RAgROA0 Folz, Freernan, F.ricksort, inc LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING IN-15 55111 STREETNOR111 AXE MAIO, MINNESOTA 3iNz Panne [01) 4;9.41°1 1.111n311-0P)111 av4res..- altrOPER; 'rata, art taaat rtat Ear Aft' so: MO. arta arta a Ma art a Sa 154, 9,.M.E. wT Windy ' Atop .r.rav - Past rat tat larthaara Cranat trarterta 12 . 116��}7�E�� -7 '~~�°===~- � | " ' — —'-'-~ �-- '— -- =---__- _ po,. r,,,=,., s.,k~"". Inc. ^smn^xw, ^ ymvn,. ' LNomxmry i � ~" ------'- -'' ^~- 13 %i 5 Sr/UR/ATEA' gaz, Naer," _UNION _ leelgRa4,9_ F(31.., Frek-mirit, 1 AND PLANNING • SURVlSiNi. • ENC.INITRING 1244; syll I ,TRItel NOlt 111 I kI ELMO, AlINNP,(TIA 17.41,57:7,3 ffififf'fffit p..;,._slf f7.-tviiff,f-ftftf'71f4",f,f7f7477,ffffff ACE4.5.: RAVAnff.frb ifff-riff P.-L7.56.7 eit,47,05:i Foam' 145 L.:7w :47645 41 454 47 p414572 fr.44272 .p,tozoi 35 i.71,574,tiftep 55 .14574.1,4747.0/1 4.1.57/15 5545-Z`A." AV/724 45V 442 ,rirte 5527 14 ;i:22," V242,2, • n.....INOtttrT ,,AmiTitt,, 5..ple ,,,,- SiTifc '' ....t, str;, tt'4" t t ok..,..-.1.4.- c,,,..., St.../rat LJA To EX,2,1e,"4' e ittkr, 8., ...:.f srvxree:s.zwiezvp mv/v. .4.-....",A.s .,-. 7:. - /1447.e.,7Sttti:RAIZEfi'i" ,A1/ne' ..'- -(2e,-, a AtION PACIFIC RAILROAD __.—_ ... ...... ... ......— .,,. Fotz. Freeman, Ericksorx, Inc. LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING 12445 55TH STREET NORTH TAKE ELMO, MINPESOTA 5504i Ptoa. (651) 414001 Ns ;MI) 411.9331 644,4" erggr.,,,gre gggArAtTrArr 17,491461/4T 02.1601-1,ArE r.fr "At.r.4'4, Pe, TAS£ 0.1.0= A.,,1255 0-0,tf ,5414w3 At" .6..04Q4 A.0 /WIZ" P4'4Y.7 `EPrz SYSTEM ,Ve 44 St.*" 444 re477 451447 14.4574*14 r47 St.4 ,g4,,1 ,g,Aggr, 412,' PriAt,f str.zr...c., 16