Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-16-26 City Council Meeting PacketCity Council Meeting Tuesday, June 16, 2026 7:00 p.m. City of Lake Elmo | 3880 Laverne Avenue North AGENDA Call To Order/Pledge Of Allegiance Approval Of Agenda Presentations Public Comments/Inquiries Approval Of Minutes 05 -05 -26 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.PDF Consent Agenda Approve Payments And Disbursements APPROVE PAYMENTS AND DISBURSEMENTS 2.PDF Approve Metropolitan Council Water Efficiency Grant Agreement STAFF REPORT - WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT - CONSENT.PDF 2026 -2028 WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT AGREEMENT - UNSIGNED.PDF 2026 -2028 WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT - AWARD LETTER.PDF Approve Massage Therapy License Renewal MASSAGE THERAPY LICENSE RENEWAL.PDF Approve Northport 1st, 2nd, And 3rd Addition Landscape Security Release CC MEMO - NORTHPORT 1 -3 LANDSCAPE SECURITY REDUCTION.PDF Accept Bids And Award Contract For Elmo's Pup Park Parking Lot Improvements PUP PARK PARKING LOT.PDF RESOLUTION 2026 -044 -AWARD CONTRACT.PDF 2026 -06 -02 ENG PUP PARK AWARD REC LETTER.PDF LOCATION MAP -PUP PARK.PDF PROJECT SCHEDULE -PUP PARK.PDF Approve Lake Elmo Baseball Special Event Permit And Temporary Liquor License STAFF REPORT - LE BASEBALL SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT.PDF LE BASEBALL SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APP.PDF LE BASEBALL TEMP LIQUOR LICENSE APP.PDF Approve Chama Mission, LLC -License Agreement For Entering Lions Park CHAMA MISSION, LLC -LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR ENTERING LIONS PARK.PDF Approve Pay Request 1 For The 2026 Street And Utility Improvements STAFF REPORT - 2026 STREET IMPROVEMENTS PAY REQ 1.PDF 1 -2026 -06 -08 SIGNED 139309 PAY REQUEST 1.PDF Accept Quotes And Award A Contract For The 2026 Crack Seal Project 0 -2026 CRACK SEAL AWARD CONTRACT AGENDA ITEM.PDF 2026 CRACK SEAL ATTACHMENTS.PDF Approve The Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement Terms And Conditions For The Trunk Highway (TH) 36 And Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) Improvements APPROVE THE LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE.PDF Regular Agenda Inwood Commercial Preliminary Plat Senior City Planner Sophia Jensen presenting COUNCIL MEMO - INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT.PDF RESOLUTION 2026 -041 INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT.PDF COUNCIL PRESENTATION -INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIM PLAT.PDF Sketch Plan Review –Bridgewater Village Townhomes Consulting Planner Nathan Fuerst presenting CC REPORT -BRIDGEWATER TOWNHOMES.PDF PRESENTATION -BRIDGEWATER VILLAGE TOWNHOMES.PDF 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update For Community Forecasts Consulting Planner Nathan Fuerst presenting 1 -CC SR -2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.PDF 2 -RESOLUTION 2026 -043 2040 COMP PLAN AMENDMENT -POP. FORECASTS.PDF 3 -ATTACHMENT -FORECAST -METHODOLOGY -FOR -WHITE -BEAR -LAKE - AREA.PDF PRESENTATION -POPULATION FORECAST OPTIONS.PDF Approve The Revised Crosswalk Policy And 2026 Crosswalk Improvements Municipal Sr. Project Manager Jack Griffin presenting 0 -COUNCIL MEMO -APPROVE 2026 CROSSWALK IMP -RFFB POLICY.PDF 1 -LAKE ELMO CROSSWALK POLICY -REVISED JUNE 2026.PDF 2 -LOCATION MAPS.PDF 3 -PROPOSED CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTS.PDF PRESENTATION - APPROVE 2026 CROSSWALK IMP -RFFB POLICY.PDF Council Reports Staff Reports Future Agenda Items FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.PDF Adjourn In accordance with the requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 13D.02, members may participate remotely via interactive technology. Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner in Partnership with our Community A. B. C. D. E. Documents: F. 1. Documents: 2. Documents: 3. Documents: 4. Documents: 5. Documents: 6. Documents: 7. Documents: 8. Documents: 9. Documents: 10. Documents: G. 1. Documents: 2. Documents: 3. Documents: 4. Documents: H. I. J. Documents: K. City Council MeetingTuesday, June 16, 2026 7:00 p.m.City of Lake Elmo | 3880 Laverne Avenue NorthAGENDACall To Order/Pledge Of AllegianceApproval Of AgendaPresentationsPublic Comments/InquiriesApproval Of Minutes05-05 -26 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.PDFConsent AgendaApprove Payments And DisbursementsAPPROVE PAYMENTS AND DISBURSEMENTS 2.PDFApprove Metropolitan Council Water Efficiency Grant AgreementSTAFF REPORT - WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT - CONSENT.PDF2026-2028 WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT AGREEMENT - UNSIGNED.PDF2026-2028 WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT - AWARD LETTER.PDFApprove Massage Therapy License RenewalMASSAGE THERAPY LICENSE RENEWAL.PDF Approve Northport 1st, 2nd, And 3rd Addition Landscape Security Release CC MEMO - NORTHPORT 1 -3 LANDSCAPE SECURITY REDUCTION.PDF Accept Bids And Award Contract For Elmo's Pup Park Parking Lot Improvements PUP PARK PARKING LOT.PDF RESOLUTION 2026 -044 -AWARD CONTRACT.PDF 2026 -06 -02 ENG PUP PARK AWARD REC LETTER.PDF LOCATION MAP -PUP PARK.PDF PROJECT SCHEDULE -PUP PARK.PDF Approve Lake Elmo Baseball Special Event Permit And Temporary Liquor License STAFF REPORT - LE BASEBALL SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT.PDF LE BASEBALL SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APP.PDF LE BASEBALL TEMP LIQUOR LICENSE APP.PDF Approve Chama Mission, LLC -License Agreement For Entering Lions Park CHAMA MISSION, LLC -LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR ENTERING LIONS PARK.PDF Approve Pay Request 1 For The 2026 Street And Utility Improvements STAFF REPORT - 2026 STREET IMPROVEMENTS PAY REQ 1.PDF 1 -2026 -06 -08 SIGNED 139309 PAY REQUEST 1.PDF Accept Quotes And Award A Contract For The 2026 Crack Seal Project 0 -2026 CRACK SEAL AWARD CONTRACT AGENDA ITEM.PDF 2026 CRACK SEAL ATTACHMENTS.PDF Approve The Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement Terms And Conditions For The Trunk Highway (TH) 36 And Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) Improvements APPROVE THE LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE.PDF Regular Agenda Inwood Commercial Preliminary Plat Senior City Planner Sophia Jensen presenting COUNCIL MEMO - INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT.PDF RESOLUTION 2026 -041 INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT.PDF COUNCIL PRESENTATION -INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIM PLAT.PDF Sketch Plan Review –Bridgewater Village Townhomes Consulting Planner Nathan Fuerst presenting CC REPORT -BRIDGEWATER TOWNHOMES.PDF PRESENTATION -BRIDGEWATER VILLAGE TOWNHOMES.PDF 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update For Community Forecasts Consulting Planner Nathan Fuerst presenting 1 -CC SR -2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.PDF 2 -RESOLUTION 2026 -043 2040 COMP PLAN AMENDMENT -POP. FORECASTS.PDF 3 -ATTACHMENT -FORECAST -METHODOLOGY -FOR -WHITE -BEAR -LAKE - AREA.PDF PRESENTATION -POPULATION FORECAST OPTIONS.PDF Approve The Revised Crosswalk Policy And 2026 Crosswalk Improvements Municipal Sr. Project Manager Jack Griffin presenting 0 -COUNCIL MEMO -APPROVE 2026 CROSSWALK IMP -RFFB POLICY.PDF 1 -LAKE ELMO CROSSWALK POLICY -REVISED JUNE 2026.PDF 2 -LOCATION MAPS.PDF 3 -PROPOSED CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTS.PDF PRESENTATION - APPROVE 2026 CROSSWALK IMP -RFFB POLICY.PDF Council Reports Staff Reports Future Agenda Items FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.PDF Adjourn In accordance with the requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 13D.02, members may participate remotely via interactive technology. Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner in Partnership with our Community A.B.C.D.E.Documents:F.1.Documents:2.Documents:3.Documents: 4. Documents: 5. Documents: 6. Documents: 7. Documents: 8. Documents: 9. Documents: 10. Documents: G. 1. Documents: 2. Documents: 3. Documents: 4. Documents: H. I. J. Documents: K. City Council MeetingTuesday, June 16, 2026 7:00 p.m.City of Lake Elmo | 3880 Laverne Avenue NorthAGENDACall To Order/Pledge Of AllegianceApproval Of AgendaPresentationsPublic Comments/InquiriesApproval Of Minutes05-05 -26 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.PDFConsent AgendaApprove Payments And DisbursementsAPPROVE PAYMENTS AND DISBURSEMENTS 2.PDFApprove Metropolitan Council Water Efficiency Grant AgreementSTAFF REPORT - WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT - CONSENT.PDF2026-2028 WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT AGREEMENT - UNSIGNED.PDF2026-2028 WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT - AWARD LETTER.PDFApprove Massage Therapy License RenewalMASSAGE THERAPY LICENSE RENEWAL.PDFApprove Northport 1st, 2nd, And 3rd Addition Landscape Security ReleaseCC MEMO - NORTHPORT 1 -3 LANDSCAPE SECURITY REDUCTION.PDFAccept Bids And Award Contract For Elmo's Pup Park Parking Lot ImprovementsPUP PARK PARKING LOT.PDFRESOLUTION 2026 -044 -AWARD CONTRACT.PDF2026-06 -02 ENG PUP PARK AWARD REC LETTER.PDFLOCATION MAP -PUP PARK.PDFPROJECT SCHEDULE -PUP PARK.PDFApprove Lake Elmo Baseball Special Event Permit And Temporary Liquor LicenseSTAFF REPORT - LE BASEBALL SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT.PDFLE BASEBALL SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APP.PDFLE BASEBALL TEMP LIQUOR LICENSE APP.PDFApprove Chama Mission, LLC -License Agreement For Entering Lions ParkCHAMA MISSION, LLC -LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR ENTERING LIONS PARK.PDFApprove Pay Request 1 For The 2026 Street And Utility ImprovementsSTAFF REPORT - 2026 STREET IMPROVEMENTS PAY REQ 1.PDF1-2026 -06 -08 SIGNED 139309 PAY REQUEST 1.PDFAccept Quotes And Award A Contract For The 2026 Crack Seal Project0-2026 CRACK SEAL AWARD CONTRACT AGENDA ITEM.PDF2026 CRACK SEAL ATTACHMENTS.PDFApprove The Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement Terms And Conditions For The Trunk Highway (TH) 36 And Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) ImprovementsAPPROVE THE LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE.PDFRegular AgendaInwood Commercial Preliminary Plat Senior City Planner Sophia Jensen presenting COUNCIL MEMO - INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT.PDF RESOLUTION 2026 -041 INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT.PDF COUNCIL PRESENTATION -INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIM PLAT.PDF Sketch Plan Review –Bridgewater Village Townhomes Consulting Planner Nathan Fuerst presenting CC REPORT -BRIDGEWATER TOWNHOMES.PDF PRESENTATION -BRIDGEWATER VILLAGE TOWNHOMES.PDF 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update For Community Forecasts Consulting Planner Nathan Fuerst presenting 1 -CC SR -2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.PDF 2 -RESOLUTION 2026 -043 2040 COMP PLAN AMENDMENT -POP. FORECASTS.PDF 3 -ATTACHMENT -FORECAST -METHODOLOGY -FOR -WHITE -BEAR -LAKE - AREA.PDF PRESENTATION -POPULATION FORECAST OPTIONS.PDF Approve The Revised Crosswalk Policy And 2026 Crosswalk Improvements Municipal Sr. Project Manager Jack Griffin presenting 0 -COUNCIL MEMO -APPROVE 2026 CROSSWALK IMP -RFFB POLICY.PDF 1 -LAKE ELMO CROSSWALK POLICY -REVISED JUNE 2026.PDF 2 -LOCATION MAPS.PDF 3 -PROPOSED CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTS.PDF PRESENTATION - APPROVE 2026 CROSSWALK IMP -RFFB POLICY.PDF Council Reports Staff Reports Future Agenda Items FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.PDF Adjourn In accordance with the requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 13D.02, members may participate remotely via interactive technology. Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner in Partnership with our Community A.B.C.D.E.Documents:F.1.Documents:2.Documents:3.Documents:4.Documents:5.Documents:6.Documents:7.Documents:8.Documents:9.Documents:10.Documents:G.1. Documents: 2. Documents: 3. Documents: 4. Documents: H. I. J. Documents: K. City Council MeetingTuesday, June 16, 2026 7:00 p.m.City of Lake Elmo | 3880 Laverne Avenue NorthAGENDACall To Order/Pledge Of AllegianceApproval Of AgendaPresentationsPublic Comments/InquiriesApproval Of Minutes05-05 -26 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.PDFConsent AgendaApprove Payments And DisbursementsAPPROVE PAYMENTS AND DISBURSEMENTS 2.PDFApprove Metropolitan Council Water Efficiency Grant AgreementSTAFF REPORT - WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT - CONSENT.PDF2026-2028 WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT AGREEMENT - UNSIGNED.PDF2026-2028 WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT - AWARD LETTER.PDFApprove Massage Therapy License RenewalMASSAGE THERAPY LICENSE RENEWAL.PDFApprove Northport 1st, 2nd, And 3rd Addition Landscape Security ReleaseCC MEMO - NORTHPORT 1 -3 LANDSCAPE SECURITY REDUCTION.PDFAccept Bids And Award Contract For Elmo's Pup Park Parking Lot ImprovementsPUP PARK PARKING LOT.PDFRESOLUTION 2026 -044 -AWARD CONTRACT.PDF2026-06 -02 ENG PUP PARK AWARD REC LETTER.PDFLOCATION MAP -PUP PARK.PDFPROJECT SCHEDULE -PUP PARK.PDFApprove Lake Elmo Baseball Special Event Permit And Temporary Liquor LicenseSTAFF REPORT - LE BASEBALL SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT.PDFLE BASEBALL SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APP.PDFLE BASEBALL TEMP LIQUOR LICENSE APP.PDFApprove Chama Mission, LLC -License Agreement For Entering Lions ParkCHAMA MISSION, LLC -LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR ENTERING LIONS PARK.PDFApprove Pay Request 1 For The 2026 Street And Utility ImprovementsSTAFF REPORT - 2026 STREET IMPROVEMENTS PAY REQ 1.PDF1-2026 -06 -08 SIGNED 139309 PAY REQUEST 1.PDFAccept Quotes And Award A Contract For The 2026 Crack Seal Project0-2026 CRACK SEAL AWARD CONTRACT AGENDA ITEM.PDF2026 CRACK SEAL ATTACHMENTS.PDFApprove The Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement Terms And Conditions For The Trunk Highway (TH) 36 And Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) ImprovementsAPPROVE THE LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE.PDFRegular AgendaInwood Commercial Preliminary PlatSenior City Planner Sophia Jensen presentingCOUNCIL MEMO - INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT.PDFRESOLUTION 2026 -041 INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT.PDFCOUNCIL PRESENTATION -INWOOD COMMERCIAL PRELIM PLAT.PDFSketch Plan Review –Bridgewater Village TownhomesConsulting Planner Nathan Fuerst presentingCC REPORT -BRIDGEWATER TOWNHOMES.PDFPRESENTATION -BRIDGEWATER VILLAGE TOWNHOMES.PDF2040 Comprehensive Plan Update For Community ForecastsConsulting Planner Nathan Fuerst presenting1 -CC SR -2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.PDF2 -RESOLUTION 2026 -043 2040 COMP PLAN AMENDMENT -POP. FORECASTS.PDF3 -ATTACHMENT -FORECAST -METHODOLOGY -FOR -WHITE -BEAR -LAKE -AREA.PDFPRESENTATION -POPULATION FORECAST OPTIONS.PDFApprove The Revised Crosswalk Policy And 2026 Crosswalk ImprovementsMunicipal Sr. Project Manager Jack Griffin presenting0 -COUNCIL MEMO -APPROVE 2026 CROSSWALK IMP -RFFB POLICY.PDF1 -LAKE ELMO CROSSWALK POLICY -REVISED JUNE 2026.PDF2 -LOCATION MAPS.PDF3 -PROPOSED CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTS.PDFPRESENTATION - APPROVE 2026 CROSSWALK IMP -RFFB POLICY.PDFCouncil ReportsStaff ReportsFuture Agenda ItemsFUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.PDFAdjournIn accordance with the requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 13D.02, members may participate remotely via interactive technology. Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner in Partnership with our Community A.B.C.D.E.Documents:F.1.Documents:2.Documents:3.Documents:4.Documents:5.Documents:6.Documents:7.Documents:8.Documents:9.Documents:10.Documents:G.1.Documents:2.Documents:3.Documents:4.Documents:H.I.J.Documents:K. Page 1 | 7 CITY OF LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 5, 2026 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Cadenhead called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. PRESENT: Mayor Charles Cadenhead and Councilmembers Nick Dragisich, Matt Hirn, Jeff Holtz, and Nick Kragness. Staff present: Administrator Miller, City Attorney Sonsalla, City Engineer Stanley, Municipal Sr. Project Manager Griffin, Contract Planner Fuerst, Fire Chief Kalis and Assistant Fire Chief Svoboda. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Kragness, moved TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Motion passed 5 – 0. PRESENTATIONS Biofilm Mediated Destruction of PFAS in Groundwater Research Seth Thompson, Freshwater, discussed the project team and overview of the project funded by the state of Minnesota to treat PFAS sites with biofilm. PUBLIC COMMENTS / INQUIRIES Colleen Swedberg, Landscape Revival, announced the third annual perennial sale at Rockpoint Church on June 6th and noted the event will also include exhibits and a food truck. Anne Bucheck, 2301 Legion Avenue, urged the Council to deny the proposed short term rental ordinance and expressed concern over corporate ownership of rentals and safety concerns. Don Pinz, 8309 38th Street North, stated he was informed by a neighbor about the proposed short term rental ordinance and asked if the city should have notified him. Page 2 | 7 Geraldine Breheim, 8415 38th Street North, stated she does not want temporary rentals with unknown people moving in and out. Peter Kastler, 9130 55th Street North, stated he uses a second home on his property as a short term rental and has not had any negative issues. Stephanie Checkley, 8382 Hidden Bay Trail, local realtor, stated that she represents properties in Lake Elmo and has never had anyone purchase a home for use as a short term rental and spoke in support of short term rentals. Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33rd Street North, spoke in opposition to allowing short term rentals and suggested the city do more research. Brook Duerr, 4870 Jerome Avenue North, stated he also owns a second home in the city and opposes property owner rights being taken away. Todd Williams, 3025 Lake Elmo Avenue North, submitted written comments opposing short term rentals. ACCEPT MINUTES Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Hirn, moved TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 14, 2026 CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP AND APRIL 21, 2026 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AS PRESENTED. Motion passed 5 – 0. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approved Payment of Disbursements 2. Deny Stormwater Appeal for 4180 Irvin Circle N 3. Approve Stormwater Appeal for 11243 30th St N 4. Deny Stormwater Appeal for 11018 Upper 31st St N 5. Accept Donation to the Fire Department from Snowell Raleigh 6. Approve Plans and Specifications and Order Advertisement for Bids for the Elmo’s Pup Park Parking Lot Improvements Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Kragness, moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Page 3 | 7 Councilmember Dragisich requested removal of items 2, 3 and from the consent agenda. Motion to approve the Consent Agenda as amended passed 5 - 0. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM 1: Polco Contract for Community Engagement Subscription City Administrator Miller reported that staff is proposing use of Polco for community surveys. Alec Vice, Polco Director of Account Management, presented services provided by Polco. Discussion was held regarding features and capabilities of the survey platform and limiting responses to only Lake Elmo residents. Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Kragness, moved to approve the received quote and scope of service from Polco. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 2: Zoning Text Amendment – Short Term Rentals Councilmember Hirn recused himself and stepped away from the council dais due to a conflict of interest based on his family’s ownership of a rental property. Community Development Director reviewed the need for updates to the short term rental ordinance and reviewed processes in place in similar communities. Director Stopa also reviewed current bed and breakfast licenses issued in Lake Elmo. Discussion was held concerning possible restrictions, lodging tax and enforcement. Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Kragness, moved to adopt Ordinance 2026-06 approving the proposed text amendments and fee schedule updates for short-term rentals as presented by Staff. Councilmember Dragisich, seconded by Mayor Cadenhead, moved to amend the motion to restrict short term rentals to the following zoning districts: RT, A, RR, RS, RE and commercial mixed use business park. Motion failed 1 – 3. (Cadenhead, Holtz, Kragness – nay) Mayor Cadenhead, seconded by Councilmember Holtz, moved to amend the primary motion to enforce the policy that the manager or ownership needs to be within 30 miles of the property to be licensed. Motion passed 3 – 1. (Dragisich – nay) Page 4 | 7 Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Mayor Cadenhead, moved to amend the primary motion to add an insurance requirement applicable to this type of use under the performance standards section. Motion passed 4 – 0. Councilmember Dragisich, seconded by Councilmember Kragness, moved to amend the primary motion under paragraph 2 of section D, Maintenance Standards, that would require annual inspections for conformance to city codes. Motion passed 4 – 0. Primary motion passed 3 – 1. (Dragisich – nay) Mayor Cadenhead, seconded by Councilmember Holtz, moved to adopt Resolution 2026-029 Summary of Publication of Ordinance 2026-06. Motion failed 3 – 1. (Dragisich – nay) ITEM 3: Preliminary Plat, Rezoning and Variances – Highpointe Crossing Consulting Planner Fuerst presented a request from Rachel Development for preliminary plat approval, rezoning and variances for a rural development of 18 single family homes on approximately 80 acres. Planner Fuerst reviewed staff recommendations, draft findings and conditions of approval. Councilmember Hirn, seconded by Councilmember Dragisich, moved to adopt Ordinance 2026- 07, approving the rezoning requested by Rachel Development on the subject property based on the findings of fact therein. Motion passed 5 – 0. Councilmember Hirn, seconded by Councilmember Holtz, moved to adopt Resolution 2026- 030, approving the preliminary plat for Highpointe Crossing requested by Rachel Development on the subject property based on the findings of fact and conditions therein. Motion passed 5 – 0. Councilmember Hirn, seconded by Councilmember Holtz, moved to adopt Resolution 2026- 031, approving the front yard setback variance, Resolution 2026-032, approving the landscaping variance, and Resolution 2026-033, approving the sidewalk variance for Highpointe Crossing as requested by Rachel Development on the subject property based on the findings of fact and conditions therein. Motion passed 5 – 0. Councilmember Hirn, seconded by Councilmember Kragness, moved to adopt Resolution 2026- 034, approving the summary publication of Ordinance 2026-07. Motion passed 5 – 0. Page 5 | 7 ITEM 4: Approve Cooperative Cost Share Agreements with Washington County for the TH36 and CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Ave) Interchange and South Frontage Road Improvements Municipal Sr. Project Manager Griffin reviewed the background and location of the project for intersection and frontage road improvements at the intersection of Highway 36 and Lake Elmo Avenue. Manager Griffin also reviewed the agreements with Washington County and MnDOT related to the project, noting the city share of the project cost. Discussion was held regarding Council input on change orders. Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Kragness, moved to approve Resolution No. 2026-024 Approving Cooperative Agreements with Washington County for the TH 36 and CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) Interchange and South Frontage Road Improvements. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 5: Approve Cooperative Construction Agreement, MnDOT Contract No. 1060495, for the TH 36 and CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) Interchange and South Frontage Road Improvements Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Hirn, moved to approve Resolution No. 2026-025 Approving Cooperative Construction Agreement, MnDOT Contract No. 1060495. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 6: Approve the Change of Roadway Jurisdiction Agreement, MnDOT Contract No. 1062311, for a portion of the South Frontage Road Improvements Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Dragisich, moved to approve Resolution No. 2026-026 Approving the Change of Roadway Jurisdiction Agreement, MnDOT Contract No. 1062311. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 7: Open Burning Ordinance Amendments Assistant Fire Chief Svoboda presented proposed updates to the city’s open burning ordinance to address concerns related to safety and nuisance smoke. Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Dragisich, moved to adopt Ordinance 2026-05, approving the amendments to 1. Ordinance 5.12-IV Open Burning. Motion passed 5 – 0. Page 6 | 7 Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Kragness, moved to adopt Resolution 2026-027, approving the summary publication of Ordinance 2026-05. Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 8: RFP for the Sports Complex and Central Park Master Plan Community Development Director Stopa reviewed the background of the need for a sports complex, noting that hiring a consultant is the next step in the process. Director Stopa presented an overview of criteria included in the proposed RFP. Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Dragisich, moved to approve the RFP as presented by staff Motion passed 5 – 0. ITEM 9: Stormwater Management Utility Code Review City Engineer Stanley reviewed the proposed scope for providing a review of the stormwater utility code. Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Councilmember Dragisich, moved to approve the scope for review of Stormwater Utility Code as provided by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Motion passed 5 – 0. Consent Agenda Item 2: Deny Stormwater Appeal for 4180 Irving Circle North Public Works Director Tholen reported on his inspection of the property. Mayor Cadenhead, seconded by Councilmember Holtz, moved to deny the stormwater appeal for 4180 Irving Circle North. Motion passed 5 – 0. Consent Agenda Item 3: Approve Stormwater Appeal for 11243 30th Street North Public Works Director Tholen reported on his inspection of the property. Councilmember Holtz, seconded by Mayor Cadenhead, moved to approve the stormwater appeal for 11243 30th Street North. Motion passed 5 – 0. Consent Agenda Item 4: Deny Stormwater Appeal for 11018 Upper 33rd Street North Page 7 | 7 Public Works Director Tholen reported on his inspection of the property. Homeowner Susan Dunn stated that she does have a rain barrel and water does not drain off her property. Mayor Cadenhead, seconded by Councilmember Hirn, moved to deny stormwater appeal for 11018 Upper 33rd Street North. Motion passed 5 – 0. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Kragness: Will attend the Lake Elmo Airport Advisory Committee meeting and provide a report at the next Council meeting. STAFF REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS None Meeting adjourned at 10:44 p.m. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ATTEST: ______________________________ Charles Cadenhead, Mayor _______________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk STAFF REPORT DATE: 06/16/2026 CONSENT TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Clarissa Hadler, Finance Director, Mike Kuehn, Finance AGENDA ITEM: Payments & Disbursements CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☐Managed Growth ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☒ Balanced Finances now and future ☐ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: The City of Lake Elmo maintains a fiduciary responsibility to conduct normal business operations. Below is a summary of current claims scheduled for disbursement and payment in full compliance with applicable state statutes and City policies and procedures. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council approve “Payments & Disbursements”. FISCAL IMPACT: Claim # Amount Description ACH/Chks $ 179,164.34 Payroll 06/11/2026 ACH/Chks $ 7,538.38 Accounts Payable – CC Pmt ACH/Chks $ 562,770.43 Accounts Payable TOTAL $ 749,473.15 RECOMMENDATION: (if pulled from Consent) “Motion to approve the aforementioned disbursements in the amount of $ 749,473.15 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Invoice DistribuƟon Report (8 Pg CC Pmt Rpt & 23 Pg Rpt) INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: ZORO.COM Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-42000 OFFICE SUPPLIES ZORO.COM OFFICE SUPPLIES 57.75 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 57.75 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-42210 PW_MATERIALS_ SLING ZORO.COM PW_MATERIALS_ SLING 9.03 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 9.03 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 66.78 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-42000 OFFICE SUPPLIES ZORO.COM OFFICE SUPPLIES 57.75 None 601-9400-42210 PW_MATERIALS_ SLING ZORO.COM PW_MATERIALS_ SLING 9.02 None Total Department 9400 WATER 66.77 Total Fund 601 WATER 66.77 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-42000 OFFICE SUPPLIES ZORO.COM OFFICE SUPPLIES 57.75 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 57.75 Total Fund 602 SEWER 57.75 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-42000 OFFICE SUPPLIES ZORO.COM OFFICE SUPPLIES 57.78 None 603-9500-42210 PW_MATERIALS_ SLING ZORO.COM PW_MATERIALS_ SLING 9.03 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 66.81 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 66.81 Total Vendor ZORO.COM:258.11 Vendor: Amazon Capital Services Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-42400 UTV RECOVERY KIT Amazon Capital Services UTV RECOVERY KIT 151.99 None 101-2220-42400 SHACKLES Amazon Capital Services SHACKLES 89.99 None 101-2220-42400 COMMAND BOARDS Amazon Capital Services COMMAND BOARDS 112.14 None 101-2220-44040 UTV BATTERY CHARGER Amazon Capital Services UTV BATTERY CHARGER 66.08 None Total Department 2220 Fire 420.20 Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 12.39 None 101-3100-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 7.76 None 101-3100-44375 PW - PPE Amazon Capital Services PW - PPE 12.59 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 32.74 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-42000 PW - COMPUTER WEB CAM Amazon Capital Services PW - COMPUTER WEB CAM 9.74 None 101-5200-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 12.39 None 101-5200-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 7.75 None 101-5200-44375 PW - PPE Amazon Capital Services PW - PPE 12.59 None 06/02/2026 09:45 AM Page:1/8 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Amazon Capital Services Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 42.47 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 495.41 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-42000 PW - COMPUTER WEB CAM Amazon Capital Services PW - COMPUTER WEB CAM 9.75 None 601-9400-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 12.39 None 601-9400-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 7.75 None 601-9400-44375 PW - PPE Amazon Capital Services PW - PPE 12.59 None Total Department 9400 WATER 42.48 Total Fund 601 WATER 42.48 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-42000 PW - COMPUTER WEB CAM Amazon Capital Services PW - COMPUTER WEB CAM 9.75 None 602-9450-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 12.39 None 602-9450-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 7.75 None 602-9450-44375 PW - PPE Amazon Capital Services PW - PPE 12.59 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 42.48 Total Fund 602 SEWER 42.48 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-42000 PW - COMPUTER WEB CAM Amazon Capital Services PW - COMPUTER WEB CAM 9.75 None 603-9500-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 12.39 None 603-9500-42150 PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLI Amazon Capital Services PW - MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 7.75 None 603-9500-44375 PW - PPE Amazon Capital Services PW - PPE 12.60 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 42.49 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 42.49 Total Vendor Amazon Capital Services:622.86 Vendor: American Planning Association Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1910 Planning & Zoning 101-1910-44330 APA MEMBERSHIP American Planning Associat APA MEMBERSHIP - JS 554.40 None Total Department 1910 Planning & Zoning 554.40 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 554.40 Total Vendor American Planning Association:554.40 Vendor: CITY OF LAKE ELMO Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1520 Finance 101-1520-44300 TESTING PAYMENT SETUP CITY OF LAKE ELMO TESTING PAYMENT SETUP 1.53 None Total Department 1520 Finance 1.53 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 1.53 Total Vendor CITY OF LAKE ELMO:1.53 06/02/2026 09:45 AM Page:2/8 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: CK HOLIDAY Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44300 MONTHY VEHICLE WASH CK HOLIDAY MONTHY VEHICLE WASH 70.41 None Total Department 2220 Fire 70.41 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 70.41 Total Vendor CK HOLIDAY:70.41 Vendor: D&T APPLIANCE SERVICE Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44010 DUTY CRERW WASHING MACHINE D&T APPLIANCE SERVICE DUTY CRERW WASHING MACHINE REPAIR 174.95 None Total Department 2220 Fire 174.95 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 174.95 Total Vendor D&T APPLIANCE SERVICE:174.95 Vendor: ENGINEERSUPPLY Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-42150 LOCATOR PARTS ENGINEERSUPPLY LOCATOR PARTS 22.08 None Total Department 9400 WATER 22.08 Total Fund 601 WATER 22.08 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-42150 LOCATOR PARTS ENGINEERSUPPLY LOCATOR PARTS 22.09 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 22.09 Total Fund 602 SEWER 22.09 Total Vendor ENGINEERSUPPLY:44.17 Vendor: EYEWASH DIRECT Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-42210 PARTS - EYEWASH STATION WE EYEWASH DIRECT PARTS - EYEWASH STATION WELL #4 100.44 None Total Department 9400 WATER 100.44 Total Fund 601 WATER 100.44 Total Vendor EYEWASH DIRECT:100.44 Vendor: Governmt Finance Officers Assn Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1520 Finance 101-1520-44330 4-1-2026 - 03-31-2027 MEMB Governmt Finance Officers GFOA RENEWAL 500.00 None Total Department 1520 Finance 500.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 500.00 Total Vendor Governmt Finance Officers Assn:500.00 Vendor: GRANDVIEW LODGE Fund: 601 WATER 06/02/2026 09:45 AM Page:3/8 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: GRANDVIEW LODGE Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-44370 APWA CONF STAY GRANDVIEW LODGE 89.55 None Total Department 9400 WATER 89.55 Total Fund 601 WATER 89.55 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-44370 APWA CONF STAY GRANDVIEW LODGE 89.55 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 89.55 Total Fund 602 SEWER 89.55 Total Vendor GRANDVIEW LODGE:179.10 Vendor: ICC CODE COUNCIL Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2400 Building Inspection 101-2400-44330 ICC MEMBERSHIP - JT - 2932 ICC CODE COUNCIL ICC MEMBERSHIP - JT - 2932M1 70.00 None Total Department 2400 Building Inspection 70.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 70.00 Total Vendor ICC CODE COUNCIL:70.00 Vendor: IDLH TACTICAL WORKSHEET Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-42400 INCIDENT COMMAND BOARDS IDLH TACTICAL WORKSHEET INCIDENT COMMAND BOARDS 365.10 None Total Department 2220 Fire 365.10 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 365.10 Total Vendor IDLH TACTICAL WORKSHEET:365.10 Vendor: IMPERIAL DADE Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-42150 PARKS - TRASH BAGS IMPERIAL DADE WATER METER & PARKS SUPPLIES 1,534.75 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 1,534.75 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 1,534.75 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-42300 METER SUPPLIES IMPERIAL DADE WATER METER & PARKS SUPPLIES 41.73 None Total Department 9400 WATER 41.73 Total Fund 601 WATER 41.73 Total Vendor IMPERIAL DADE:1,576.48 Vendor: Kwik Trip Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-42120 FUEL- PW SMALL ENGINE ITEM Kwik Trip Inc FUEL- PW SMALL ENGINE ITEMS 40.06 None 06/02/2026 09:45 AM Page:4/8 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Kwik Trip Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 40.06 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 40.06 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-42120 FUEL- PW SMALL ENGINE ITEM Kwik Trip Inc FUEL- PW SMALL ENGINE ITEMS 40.06 None Total Department 9400 WATER 40.06 Total Fund 601 WATER 40.06 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-42120 FUEL- PW SMALL ENGINE ITEM Kwik Trip Inc FUEL- PW SMALL ENGINE ITEMS 40.06 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 40.06 Total Fund 602 SEWER 40.06 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-42120 FUEL- PW SMALL ENGINE ITEM Kwik Trip Inc FUEL- PW SMALL ENGINE ITEMS 40.07 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 40.07 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 40.07 Total Vendor Kwik Trip Inc:160.25 Vendor: LAKEWOOD TAVERN Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44300 INTERVIEW PANEL MEALS LAKEWOOD TAVERN INTERVIEW PANEL MEALS 105.17 None Total Department 2220 Fire 105.17 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 105.17 Total Vendor LAKEWOOD TAVERN:105.17 Vendor: League of MN Cities Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1110 Mayor & Council 101-1110-44370 2026 LMC CONFERENCE-CHARLE League of MN Cities 2026 LMC CONFERENCE-CHARLES CADENHEAD 475.00 None Total Department 1110 Mayor & Council 475.00 Department: 1910 Planning & Zoning 101-1910-44370 LMC CONFERENCE CC PURCHASE League of MN Cities LMC CONFERENCE REG - JS 425.00 None Total Department 1910 Planning & Zoning 425.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 900.00 Total Vendor League of MN Cities:900.00 Vendor: M&M TOOL AND MACHINERY Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-42150 WATER - LOCATOR PARTS M&M TOOL AND MACHINERY LOCATOR PARTS 10.02 None Total Department 9400 WATER 10.02 06/02/2026 09:45 AM Page:5/8 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: M&M TOOL AND MACHINERY Fund: 601 WATER Total Fund 601 WATER 10.02 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-42150 SEWER - LOCATOR PARTS M&M TOOL AND MACHINERY LOCATOR PARTS 10.02 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 10.02 Total Fund 602 SEWER 10.02 Total Vendor M&M TOOL AND MACHINERY:20.04 Vendor: MBFTE Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44330 MN FIREFIGHTER LICENSE REN MBFTE MN FIREFIGHTER LICENSE RENEWAL 75.00 None Total Department 2220 Fire 75.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 75.00 Total Vendor MBFTE:75.00 Vendor: MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARK ASSOC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-44370 PARK PLAYGROUND CERT COURS MINNESOTA RECREATION & PAR PARK PLAYGROUND CERT COURSE 750.00 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 750.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 750.00 Total Vendor MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARK ASSOC:750.00 Vendor: Verizon Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1320 Administration 101-1320-43210 WIRELESS CHARGES 84206596 Verizon VERIZON - APRIL 76.78 None Total Department 1320 Administration 76.78 Department: 1910 Planning & Zoning 101-1910-43210 WIRELESS CHARGES 842065966 Verizon VERIZON - APRIL 38.39 None Total Department 1910 Planning & Zoning 38.39 Department: 2400 Building Inspection 101-2400-43210 WIRELESS CHARGES 842065966 Verizon VERIZON - APRIL 192.97 None Total Department 2400 Building Inspection 192.97 Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43210 WIRELESS CHARGES 842065966 Verizon VERIZON - APRIL 213.54 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 213.54 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-43210 WIRELESS CHARGES 842065966 Verizon VERIZON - APRIL 115.17 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 115.17 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 636.85 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 06/02/2026 09:45 AM Page:6/8 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Verizon Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43210 WIRELESS CHARGES 842065966 Verizon VERIZON - APRIL 243.62 None Total Department 9400 WATER 243.62 Total Fund 601 WATER 243.62 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43210 WIRELESS CHARGES 842065966 Verizon VERIZON - APRIL 121.75 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 121.75 Total Fund 602 SEWER 121.75 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-43210 WIRELESS CHARGES 842065966 Verizon VERIZON - APRIL 8.15 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 8.15 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 8.15 Total Vendor Verizon:1,010.37 06/02/2026 09:45 AM Page:7/8 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number --- TOTALS BY FUND --- 101 GENERAL FUND 6,340.41 601 WATER 656.75 602 SEWER 383.70 603 STORMWATER 157.52 Total For All Funds:7,538.38 06/02/2026 09:45 AM Page:8/8 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Alex Air Apparatus 2 LLC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44040 4 GAS METER CALIBRATION RE Alex Air Apparatus 2 LLC 4 GAS METER CALIBRATION REPAIR 151.00 None Total Department 2220 Fire 151.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 151.00 Total Vendor Alex Air Apparatus 2 LLC:151.00 Vendor: ALL ABOUT EROSION Fund: 601 WATER Department: 0000 General 601-0000-22901 REFUNDABLE WATER METER DEP ALL ABOUT EROSION HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT REFUND LESS WAT 1,387.84 None Total Department 0000 General 1,387.84 Total Fund 601 WATER 1,387.84 Total Vendor ALL ABOUT EROSION:1,387.84 Vendor: Bolton & Menk, Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1910 Planning & Zoning 101-1910-43030 Planning Dept-Eng Supp Bolton & Menk, Inc Planning Dept-Eng Supp 2,900.00 None 101-1910-43150 GENERAL Bolton & Menk, Inc MONTHLY PLANNING SERVICES 4,372.50 None Total Department 1910 Planning & Zoning 7,272.50 Department: 1930 Engineering Services 101-1930-43030 General Eng Retainer Bolton & Menk, Inc General Eng Retainer 3,500.00 None Total Department 1930 Engineering Services 3,500.00 Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43030 2026 Crosswalk Improvement Bolton & Menk, Inc 2026 Crosswalk Improvements 352.50 None 101-3100-43030 Public Works-Eng Support Bolton & Menk, Inc Public Works-Eng Support 2,042.50 None 101-3100-43030 Right-Of-Way Management Bolton & Menk, Inc Right-Of-Way Management 3,661.50 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 6,056.50 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 16,829.00 Fund: 404 PARK DEDICATION Department: 8153 ELMO'S PUP PARK & PW PARKING LOT IMPROV 404-8153-43030-8153 Elmo Pup Park / PW Parking Bolton & Menk, Inc Elmo Pup Park / PW Parking Lot 12,801.50 None Total Department 8153 ELMO'S PUP PARK & PW PARKING LOT IMPROV 12,801.50 Total Fund 404 PARK DEDICATION 12,801.50 Fund: 408 STREET MAINTENANCE Department: 3100 Public Works 408-3100-43030 2026 Street Maintenance Bolton & Menk, Inc 2026 Street Maintenance 6,099.00 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 6,099.00 Total Fund 408 STREET MAINTENANCE 6,099.00 Fund: 409 INFRASTRUCTURE RESERVE Department: 8137 CSAH 10/17/17B INTERSECTION 409-8137-43030-8137 CSAH 10/17/17B Intersectio Bolton & Menk, Inc CSAH 10/17/17B Intersection 470.00 None Total Department 8137 CSAH 10/17/17B INTERSECTION 470.00 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:1/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Bolton & Menk, Inc Fund: 409 INFRASTRUCTURE RESERVE Department: 8139 CSAH 13 - 34TH TO STILLWATER BLVD 409-8139-43030-8139 CSAH 13 34th Stillwater Bl Bolton & Menk, Inc CSAH 13 34th Stillwater Blvd 1,057.50 None Total Department 8139 CSAH 13 - 34TH TO STILLWATER BLVD 1,057.50 Total Fund 409 INFRASTRUCTURE RESERVE 1,527.50 Fund: 430 RAILROAD IMPROVEMENTS Department: 8091 RR Crossing Improvements 430-8091-43030-8091 Village Pkwy UPRR Cross Bolton & Menk, Inc Village Pkwy UPRR Cross 420.00 None Total Department 8091 RR Crossing Improvements 420.00 Total Fund 430 RAILROAD IMPROVEMENTS 420.00 Fund: 440 TH36-LAKE ELMO AVE IMPROVEMENT Department: 8112 TH36-Lake Elmo Ave Improvement 440-8112-43030-8112 TH 36-Lake Elmo Ave Imp Bolton & Menk, Inc TH 36-Lake Elmo Ave Imp 13,814.50 None Total Department 8112 TH36-Lake Elmo Ave Improvement 13,814.50 Total Fund 440 TH36-LAKE ELMO AVE IMPROVEMENT 13,814.50 Fund: 446 HUDSON BLVD IMP-SEG A-INWDHDRX Department: 8129 HUDSON BLVD IMP-SEG A-INWDHDRX 446-8129-43030-8129 Hudson Blvd Imp Seg A Bolton & Menk, Inc Hudson Blvd Imp Seg A 80.00 None Total Department 8129 HUDSON BLVD IMP-SEG A-INWDHDRX 80.00 Total Fund 446 HUDSON BLVD IMP-SEG A-INWDHDRX 80.00 Fund: 449 2025 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS Department: 8133 2025 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 449-8133-43030-8133 2025 Street & Utility Bolton & Menk, Inc 2025 Street & Utility 2,710.00 None Total Department 8133 2025 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 2,710.00 Total Fund 449 2025 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 2,710.00 Fund: 450 STILLWATER AREA SCH DIST UTILITY IMPROVE Department: 8135 STILLWATER AREA SCHOOL DIST UTILITIES 450-8135-43030-8135 ISD 834 Utility Improve Bolton & Menk, Inc ISD 834 Utility Improve 79.50 None Total Department 8135 STILLWATER AREA SCHOOL DIST UTILITIES 79.50 Total Fund 450 STILLWATER AREA SCH DIST UTILITY IMPROVE 79.50 Fund: 451 2026 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS Department: 8138 2026 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 451-8138-43030-8138 2026 Street Improvements Bolton & Menk, Inc 2026 Street Improvements 47,590.00 None Total Department 8138 2026 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 47,590.00 Total Fund 451 2026 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 47,590.00 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 8126 SOUTH AREA PROD WELLS/TREATMT 601-8126-43030-8126 South PFAS WTP & Wells Bolton & Menk, Inc South PFAS WTP & Wells 2,080.00 None Total Department 8126 SOUTH AREA PROD WELLS/TREATMT 2,080.00 Department: 8132 MPCA-3M GRANT ADMIN SVCS 601-8132-43030-8132 MPCA 3M Grant Admin Bolton & Menk, Inc MPCA 3M Grant Admin 1,592.50 None Total Department 8132 MPCA-3M GRANT ADMIN SVCS 1,592.50 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:2/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Bolton & Menk, Inc Fund: 601 WATER Department: 8140 CSAH 14 (17-LAYTON) WATERMAIN IMPROVE 601-8140-43030-8140 CSAH 14 Watermain Improvem Bolton & Menk, Inc CSAH 14 Watermain Improvements 10,998.50 None Total Department 8140 CSAH 14 (17-LAYTON) WATERMAIN IMPROVE 10,998.50 Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43030 Municipal Water System Bolton & Menk, Inc Municipal Water System 2,051.50 None Total Department 9400 WATER 2,051.50 Total Fund 601 WATER 16,722.50 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 8136 I-94 LIFT STATION FORCEMAIN IMP 602-8136-43030-8136 I-94 Lift Station Forcemai Bolton & Menk, Inc I-94 Lift Station Forcemain 259.00 None Total Department 8136 I-94 LIFT STATION FORCEMAIN IMP 259.00 Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43030 Sanitary Sewer System Bolton & Menk, Inc Sanitary Sewer System 615.00 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 615.00 Total Fund 602 SEWER 874.00 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-43030 Surface Water-Storm Sew Bolton & Menk, Inc Surface Water-Storm Sew 1,410.00 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 1,410.00 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 1,410.00 Fund: 611 WATER - CAPITAL Department: 8143 NORTH WTP SITE EVALUATION STUDY 611-8143-43030-8143 Well 4 & 5 PFAS Treatment Bolton & Menk, Inc Well 4 & 5 PFAS Treatment 587.50 None Total Department 8143 NORTH WTP SITE EVALUATION STUDY 587.50 Total Fund 611 WATER - CAPITAL 587.50 Fund: 612 SEWER - CAPITAL Department: 9450 SEWER 612-9450-43030-8152 Section 16 Sewer Extension Bolton & Menk, Inc Section 16 Sewer Extension 11,341.50 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 11,341.50 Total Fund 612 SEWER - CAPITAL 11,341.50 Fund: 803 ESCROW FUND Department: 9008 E008 - AT HOME APTS 803-9008-43030 AT HOME APARTMENTS Bolton & Menk, Inc At Home Apartments 770.50 None Total Department 9008 E008 - AT HOME APTS 770.50 Department: 9016 E016 - EBERHARD (HIGHPOINTE CROSSING -22 803-9016-43030 HIGHPOINTE CROSSING Bolton & Menk, Inc Highpointe Crossing 6,123.00 None 803-9016-43035 EBERHARD-HIGHPOINTE Bolton & Menk, Inc MONTHLY PLANNING SERVICES 2,146.50 None Total Department 9016 E016 - EBERHARD (HIGHPOINTE CROSSING -22 8,269.50 Department: 9020 E020 - INWOOD TOWNHOMES 803-9020-43030 Towns of Inwood Bolton & Menk, Inc Towns of Inwood 14,455.50 None Total Department 9020 E020 - INWOOD TOWNHOMES 14,455.50 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:3/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Bolton & Menk, Inc Fund: 803 ESCROW FUND Department: 9021 E021 - INWOOD 9TH 803-9021-43030 Inwood Commercial Bolton & Menk, Inc Inwood Commercial 235.00 None Total Department 9021 E021 - INWOOD 9TH 235.00 Department: 9023 E023 - LAKE ELMO ELEMENTARY 803-9023-43030 Lake Elmo Elementary Bolton & Menk, Inc Lake Elmo Elementary 2,392.50 None 803-9023-43035 LAKE ELMO ELEMENTARY Bolton & Menk, Inc MONTHLY PLANNING SERVICES 238.50 None Total Department 9023 E023 - LAKE ELMO ELEMENTARY 2,631.00 Department: 9026 E026 - LAKEWOOD CROSSING - STARBUCKS 803-9026-43030 Lakewood Crossing 3rd - St Bolton & Menk, Inc Lakewood Crossing 3rd - Starbucks 352.50 None Total Department 9026 E026 - LAKEWOOD CROSSING - STARBUCKS 352.50 Department: 9031 E031 - GRANVIA PRESERVE / LEGENDS AT LAK 803-9031-43030 GRANVIA-LEGENDS AT LAKE EL Bolton & Menk, Inc GRANVIA-LEGENDS AT LAKE ELMO ADDITION 470.00 None Total Department 9031 E031 - GRANVIA PRESERVE / LEGENDS AT LAK 470.00 Department: 9033 E033 - LIMERICK VILLAGE 803-9033-43030 Limerick Village Bolton & Menk, Inc Limerick Village 1,762.50 None 803-9033-43035 LIMERICK Bolton & Menk, Inc MONTHLY PLANNING SERVICES 1,922.00 None Total Department 9033 E033 - LIMERICK VILLAGE 3,684.50 Department: 9038 E038 - OAK-LAND MIDDLE SCHOOL 803-9038-43030 ISD 834 Oak-Land Middle Bolton & Menk, Inc ISD 834 Oak-Land Middle 538.50 None Total Department 9038 E038 - OAK-LAND MIDDLE SCHOOL 538.50 Department: 9040 E040 - PRIMROSE DAYCARE 803-9040-43030 Primrose Daycare Bolton & Menk, Inc Primrose Daycare 952.50 None Total Department 9040 E040 - PRIMROSE DAYCARE 952.50 Department: 9042 E042 - ROERS LE MULTIFAMILY 803-9042-43030 Roers Multifamily Bolton & Menk, Inc Roers Multifamily 1,879.00 None Total Department 9042 E042 - ROERS LE MULTIFAMILY 1,879.00 Department: 9045 E045 - ROYAL GOLF 5TH - LIFT STATION 803-9045-43030 Royal Golf Club 5th Add Bolton & Menk, Inc Royal Golf Club 5th Add 180.00 None Total Department 9045 E045 - ROYAL GOLF 5TH - LIFT STATION 180.00 Department: 9049 E049 - SCHILTGEN/NORTHSTAR 1ST 803-9049-43030 Northstar 1st Addition (Sc Bolton & Menk, Inc Northstar 1st Addition (Schiltgen Far 80.00 None Total Department 9049 E049 - SCHILTGEN/NORTHSTAR 1ST 80.00 Department: 9050 E050 - SCHILTGEN/NORTHSTAR 2ND 803-9050-43030 Schiltgen - Northstar 2nd Bolton & Menk, Inc Schiltgen - Northstar 2nd 5,136.50 None Total Department 9050 E050 - SCHILTGEN/NORTHSTAR 2ND 5,136.50 Department: 9052 E052 - SPRINGS AT LAKE ELMO 803-9052-43030 Springs at Lake Elmo Bolton & Menk, Inc Springs at Lake Elmo 117.50 None Total Department 9052 E052 - SPRINGS AT LAKE ELMO 117.50 Department: 9061 E061 803-9061-43030 Schilten/Northstar 3rd Add Bolton & Menk, Inc Schilten/Northstar 3rd Add 470.00 None Total Department 9061 E061 470.00 Department: 9064 E064 803-9064-43030 Highpointe Medical CUP Bolton & Menk, Inc Highpointe Medical CUP 2,115.00 None 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:4/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Bolton & Menk, Inc Fund: 803 ESCROW FUND Department: 9064 E064 Total Department 9064 E064 2,115.00 Department: 9065 E065 803-9065-43030 Summergate Assemblage Bolton & Menk, Inc Summergate Assemblage 117.50 None 803-9065-43035 SUMMERGATE Bolton & Menk, Inc MONTHLY PLANNING SERVICES 126.00 None Total Department 9065 E065 243.50 Department: 9066 E066 803-9066-43030 Bridgewater Village Townho Bolton & Menk, Inc Bridgewater Village Townhomes 235.00 None 803-9066-43035 BRIDGEWATER Bolton & Menk, Inc MONTHLY PLANNING SERVICES 79.50 None Total Department 9066 E066 314.50 Department: 9067 E067 803-9067-43030 Schiltgen South (Frattalon Bolton & Menk, Inc Schiltgen South (Frattalone)705.00 None Total Department 9067 E067 705.00 Total Fund 803 ESCROW FUND 43,600.50 Total Vendor Bolton & Menk, Inc:176,487.00 Vendor: Bound Tree Medical LLC Fund: 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF) Department: 0000 General 703-0000-42111 CITY CENTER AED PADS Bound Tree Medical LLC CITY CENTER AED PADS 155.98 None Total Department 0000 General 155.98 Total Fund 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF)155.98 Total Vendor Bound Tree Medical LLC:155.98 Vendor: Century College Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44370 AERIAL APPRATUS OPERATOR C Century College AERIAL APPRATUS OPERATOR CLASS - PH 550.00 None 101-2220-44370 EV STORED ENERGY TRAINING Century College EV STORED ENERGY TRAINING COURSE 695.00 None 101-2220-44370 LIVE BURN INSTRUCTOR TRAIN Century College LIVE BURN INSTRUCTOR TRAIN THE TRAINE 1,350.00 None Total Department 2220 Fire 2,595.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 2,595.00 Total Vendor Century College:2,595.00 Vendor: Century Power Equipment Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-42400 PW_BRUSH CUTTER AND MOWING Century Power Equipment PW_BRUSH CUTTER AND MOWING HEAD 429.99 None 101-5200-44040 PW_BRUSH CUTTER AND MOWING Century Power Equipment PW_BRUSH CUTTER AND MOWING HEAD 79.98 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 509.97 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 509.97 Total Vendor Century Power Equipment:509.97 Vendor: Cintas Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:5/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Cintas Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43150 First Aid Supplies Cintas First Aid - Cinc OH 5.37 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 5.37 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-43150 Cintas First Aid - Cinc OH 5.37 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 5.37 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 10.74 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43150 Cintas First Aid - Cinc OH 5.37 None Total Department 9400 WATER 5.37 Total Fund 601 WATER 5.37 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43150 Cintas First Aid - Cinc OH 5.37 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 5.37 Total Fund 602 SEWER 5.37 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-43150 Cintas First Aid - Cinc OH 5.37 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 5.37 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 5.37 Total Vendor Cintas:26.85 Vendor: Cintas Corp Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-42150 RUGS/SOAP/RAGS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 95.98 None 101-3100-42150 RUGS/SOAP/RAGS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 168.65 None 101-3100-42150 RUGS/SOAP/RAGS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 28.70 None 101-3100-44170 PW - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 97.12 None 101-3100-44170 PW - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 100.18 None 101-3100-44170 PW - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 135.14 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 625.77 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-44170 PARK & REC - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 22.41 None 101-5200-44170 PARK & REC - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 23.12 None 101-5200-44170 PARK & REC - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 31.19 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 76.72 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 702.49 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-44170 WATER - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 17.94 None 601-9400-44170 WATER - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 18.49 None 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:6/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Cintas Corp Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-44170 WATER - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 24.95 None Total Department 9400 WATER 61.38 Total Fund 601 WATER 61.38 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-44170 SEWER - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 7.47 None 602-9450-44170 SEWER - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 7.71 None 602-9450-44170 SEWER - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 10.40 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 25.58 Total Fund 602 SEWER 25.58 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-44170 SURFACE WATER - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 4.48 None 603-9500-44170 SURFACE WATER - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 4.62 None 603-9500-44170 SURFACE WATER - UNIFORMS Cintas Corp CLEANING, MAINT & SUPPLIES - PW 6.22 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 15.32 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 15.32 Fund: 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF) Department: 0000 General 703-0000-42110 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES Cintas Corp JANITORIAL / RUGS 249.13 None 703-0000-42110 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES Cintas Corp JANITORIAL / RUGS 214.83 None 703-0000-44011 RUGS Cintas Corp JANITORIAL / RUGS 159.70 None 703-0000-44011 RUGS Cintas Corp JANITORIAL / RUGS 159.70 None Total Department 0000 General 783.36 Total Fund 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF)783.36 Total Vendor Cintas Corp:1,588.13 Vendor: City of Saint Paul Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-42240 POTHOLE MIX City of Saint Paul POTHOLE MIX 652.34 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 652.34 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 652.34 Total Vendor City of Saint Paul:652.34 Vendor: Cornerstone Chevrolet Stillwater Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44040 CV1 OIL CHNAGE / SERVICE Cornerstone Chevrolet Stil CV1 OIL CHNAGE / SERVICE 187.47 None Total Department 2220 Fire 187.47 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 187.47 Total Vendor Cornerstone Chevrolet Stillwater:187.47 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:7/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING INC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-43150 LIONS PARK LAND SURVEY CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING LIONS PARK LAND SURVEY 800.00 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 800.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 800.00 Total Vendor CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING INC:800.00 Vendor: Eckberg Lammers Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2150 Prosecution 101-2150-43045 MONTHLY PRO SVCS PROS Eckberg Lammers MONTHLY PROSECUTION SERVICES - MAY 4,415.25 None Total Department 2150 Prosecution 4,415.25 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 4,415.25 Total Vendor Eckberg Lammers:4,415.25 Vendor: ECM Publishers Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1320 Administration 101-1320-43510 PUBLIC NOTICE ORD 2026-06 ECM Publishers Inc PUBLIC NOTICE ORD 2026-06 - FEE SCHED 34.00 None Total Department 1320 Administration 34.00 Department: 1910 Planning & Zoning 101-1910-43510 JUNE 8 PH LE 2040 COMP PLA ECM Publishers Inc JUNE 8 PH - LIMERICK/INWOOD/2040 COMP 36.84 None 101-1910-43510 JUN 16 PH EDA - 180 ACRES ECM Publishers Inc JUN 16 PH EDA - 180 ACRES - PUBLISHIN 85.00 None Total Department 1910 Planning & Zoning 121.84 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 155.84 Fund: 408 STREET MAINTENANCE Department: 3100 Public Works 408-3100-43510 2026 SEAL COAT PROJ BID PU ECM Publishers Inc 2026 SEAL COAT PROJ BID PUBLISHING 144.50 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 144.50 Total Fund 408 STREET MAINTENANCE 144.50 Fund: 803 ESCROW FUND Department: 9021 E021 - INWOOD 9TH 803-9021-43510 JUNE 8 PH - INWOOD COMM - ECM Publishers Inc JUNE 8 PH - LIMERICK/INWOOD/2040 COMP 36.83 None Total Department 9021 E021 - INWOOD 9TH 36.83 Department: 9033 E033 - LIMERICK VILLAGE 803-9033-43510 JUNE 8 PH - LIMERICK VILL ECM Publishers Inc JUNE 8 PH - LIMERICK/INWOOD/2040 COMP 36.83 None Total Department 9033 E033 - LIMERICK VILLAGE 36.83 Total Fund 803 ESCROW FUND 73.66 Total Vendor ECM Publishers Inc:374.00 Vendor: Emergency Apparatus Maint Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44040 ENGINE 1 - WINDOW REPAIR Emergency Apparatus Maint ENGINE 1 - WINDOW REPAIR 1,650.18 None Total Department 2220 Fire 1,650.18 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:8/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Emergency Apparatus Maint Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 1,650.18 Total Vendor Emergency Apparatus Maint Inc:1,650.18 Vendor: Equipment Management Company Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44040 ANNUAL EXTRICATION TOOL MA Equipment Management Compa ANNUAL EXTRICATION TOOL MAINTENANCE 1,430.00 None Total Department 2220 Fire 1,430.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 1,430.00 Total Vendor Equipment Management Company:1,430.00 Vendor: Ferguson Waterworks #2518 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9401 WELL 2 TREATMENT O&M 601-9401-42210 WATER_REPAIR MAINTENANCE S Ferguson Waterworks #2518 WATER_REPAIR MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 126.24 None Total Department 9401 WELL 2 TREATMENT O&M 126.24 Total Fund 601 WATER 126.24 Total Vendor Ferguson Waterworks #2518:126.24 Vendor: Fury Motors Stillwater Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44040 C2 OIL CHANGE / SERVICE Fury Motors Stillwater C2 OIL CHANGE / SERVICE 1,388.59 None Total Department 2220 Fire 1,388.59 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 1,388.59 Total Vendor Fury Motors Stillwater:1,388.59 Vendor: Gopher State One Call Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43150 WATER - TICKET COST Gopher State One Call TICKET COSTS 274.95 None Total Department 9400 WATER 274.95 Total Fund 601 WATER 274.95 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43150 SEWER - TICKET COST Gopher State One Call TICKET COSTS 274.95 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 274.95 Total Fund 602 SEWER 274.95 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-43150 STORM - TICKET COST Gopher State One Call TICKET COSTS 274.95 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 274.95 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 274.95 Total Vendor Gopher State One Call:824.85 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:9/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: GWSA Land Development LLC Fund: 803 ESCROW FUND Department: 9049 E049 - SCHILTGEN/NORTHSTAR 1ST 803-9049-22910 DEVELOPER ESCROW RELEASE 1 GWSA Land Development LLC DEVELOPER ESCROW RELEASE 10880 STILLW 5,000.00 None Total Department 9049 E049 - SCHILTGEN/NORTHSTAR 1ST 5,000.00 Total Fund 803 ESCROW FUND 5,000.00 Total Vendor GWSA Land Development LLC:5,000.00 Vendor: Hailies Cleaning Svcs LLC Fund: 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF) Department: 0000 General 703-0000-44011 CITY HALL MONTHLY CLEANING Hailies Cleaning Svcs LLC MONTHLY CLEANING SERVICES-MAY 1,980.00 None Total Department 0000 General 1,980.00 Total Fund 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF)1,980.00 Total Vendor Hailies Cleaning Svcs LLC:1,980.00 Vendor: HealthPartners Occupational Medicine Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-44300 NEW HIRE SCREEN - PW NEW H HealthPartners Occupationa DRUG SCREEN - PW - LS 33.00 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 33.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 33.00 Total Vendor HealthPartners Occupational Medicine:33.00 Vendor: Industrial Health Svcs Network Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-44300 Drug Screen/MRO Svcs - B51 Industrial Health Svcs Net Drg Screening/MRO Svcs 49.90 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 49.90 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 49.90 Total Vendor Industrial Health Svcs Network:49.90 Vendor: Innovative Office Solutions LLC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1320 Administration 101-1320-42000 PENS Innovative Office Solution PENS 7.64 None Total Department 1320 Administration 7.64 Department: 1520 Finance 101-1520-42000 PENS Innovative Office Solution PENS 7.64 None Total Department 1520 Finance 7.64 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 15.28 Total Vendor Innovative Office Solutions LLC:15.28 Vendor: IUOE Local 49 Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 0000 General 101-0000-21712 MONTHLY LOCAL 49 UNION DUE IUOE Local 49 LOCAL 49 UNION DUES - MONTHLY - JULY 315.00 None 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:10/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: IUOE Local 49 Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 0000 General Total Department 0000 General 315.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 315.00 Total Vendor IUOE Local 49:315.00 Vendor: IUOE Local 49 Fringe Benefit Fund Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 0000 General 101-0000-21713 Local 49 monthly Health In IUOE Local 49 Fringe Benef LOCAL 49 MONTHLY HEALTH INS PREM-JULY 15,075.00 None Total Department 0000 General 15,075.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 15,075.00 Total Vendor IUOE Local 49 Fringe Benefit Fund:15,075.00 Vendor: Kath Fuel Oil Service Co Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-42120 FIRE - OFF ROAD Kath Fuel Oil Service Co OFF ROAD 1,660.03 None Total Department 2220 Fire 1,660.03 Department: 2400 Building Inspection 101-2400-42120 BUILDING - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 178.16 None 101-2400-42120 BUILDING - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 156.44 None Total Department 2400 Building Inspection 334.60 Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-42120 STREET - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 697.94 None 101-3100-42120 STREET - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 547.51 None 101-3100-42120 STREET - OFF ROAD Kath Fuel Oil Service Co OFF ROAD 0.00 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 1,245.45 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-42120 PARKS - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 261.72 None 101-5200-42120 PARKS - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 205.32 None 101-5200-42120 PARKS - OFF ROAD Kath Fuel Oil Service Co OFF ROAD 0.00 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 467.04 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 3,707.12 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-42120 WATER - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 348.97 None 601-9400-42120 WATER - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 273.75 None 601-9400-42120 WATER - OFF ROAD Kath Fuel Oil Service Co OFF ROAD 0.00 None Total Department 9400 WATER 622.72 Total Fund 601 WATER 622.72 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-42120 SEWER - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 348.97 None 602-9450-42120 SEWER - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 273.75 None 602-9450-42120 SEWER - OFF ROAD Kath Fuel Oil Service Co OFF ROAD 0.00 None 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:11/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Kath Fuel Oil Service Co Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER Total Department 9450 SEWER 622.72 Total Fund 602 SEWER 622.72 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-42120 STORMWATER - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 87.25 None 603-9500-42120 STORMWATER - UNLEADED FUEL Kath Fuel Oil Service Co UNLEADED FUEL 68.44 None 603-9500-42120 STORMWATER - OFF ROAD Kath Fuel Oil Service Co OFF ROAD 0.00 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 155.69 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 155.69 Total Vendor Kath Fuel Oil Service Co:5,108.25 Vendor: Keys Well Drilling Company Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43150 BOOSTER AND WELL 5 SERVICE Keys Well Drilling Company BOOSTER AND WELL 5 SERVICE 4,600.00 None Total Department 9400 WATER 4,600.00 Total Fund 601 WATER 4,600.00 Total Vendor Keys Well Drilling Company:4,600.00 Vendor: Kwik Trip Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-42120 Fuel, Oil and Fluids Kwik Trip Inc FUEL 838.78 None Total Department 2220 Fire 838.78 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 838.78 Total Vendor Kwik Trip Inc:838.78 Vendor: Lennar Minnesota Fund: 803 ESCROW FUND Department: 0000 General 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE - 11464 QUE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 11464 QUEENS CT - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 11455 QUEENS CT - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 11453 QUEENS CT - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 1636 ROYAL BLVD - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 1644 ROYAL BLVD - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 1708 ROYAL BLVD - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 1980 ROYAL BLVD - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 1955 ROYAL BLVD - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 1903 ROYAL BLVD - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 1932 ROYAL BLVD - 20 10,000.00 None 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE Lennar Minnesota ESCROW RELEASE - 1920 ROYAL BLVD - 20 10,000.00 None Total Department 0000 General 110,000.00 Total Fund 803 ESCROW FUND 110,000.00 Total Vendor Lennar Minnesota:110,000.00 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:12/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: LRS Portables LLC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-44120 PARKS PORTABLE RENTALS LRS Portables LLC PARKS PORTABLE RENTALS 1,425.00 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 1,425.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 1,425.00 Total Vendor LRS Portables LLC:1,425.00 Vendor: Main Street Builders Fund: 803 ESCROW FUND Department: 0000 General 803-0000-22900 ESCROW RELEASE - 4525 LAKE Main Street Builders ESCROW RELEASE - 4525 LAKE ELMO AVE 10,000.00 None Total Department 0000 General 10,000.00 Total Fund 803 ESCROW FUND 10,000.00 Total Vendor Main Street Builders:10,000.00 Vendor: Maroney's Sanitation Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43840 Public Works - Sanitation Maroney's Sanitation Inc TRASH SERVICE - MONTHY - 05.31.25 44.78 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 44.78 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-43840 Public Works - Sanitation Maroney's Sanitation Inc TRASH SERVICE - MONTHY - 05.31.25 313.42 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 313.42 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 358.20 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43840 Public Works - Sanitation Maroney's Sanitation Inc TRASH SERVICE - MONTHY - 05.31.25 44.78 None Total Department 9400 WATER 44.78 Total Fund 601 WATER 44.78 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43840 Public Works - Sanitation Maroney's Sanitation Inc TRASH SERVICE - MONTHY - 05.31.25 44.78 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 44.78 Total Fund 602 SEWER 44.78 Fund: 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF) Department: 0000 General 703-0000-43840 City Center - Sanitation Maroney's Sanitation Inc TRASH SERVICE - MONTHY - 05.31.25 352.44 None Total Department 0000 General 352.44 Total Fund 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF)352.44 Total Vendor Maroney's Sanitation Inc:800.20 Vendor: Martin Marietta Materials Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-42240 POTHOLE MIX Martin Marietta Materials POTHOLE MIX 419.02 None 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:13/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Martin Marietta Materials Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-42240 POTHOLE MIX Martin Marietta Materials POTHOLE MIX 167.25 None 101-3100-42240 POTHOLE MIX Martin Marietta Materials POTHOLE MIX 120.54 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 706.81 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 706.81 Total Vendor Martin Marietta Materials:706.81 Vendor: Menards - Oakdale Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44010 STATION SUPPLIES Menards - Oakdale STATION SUPPLIES 60.72 None Total Department 2220 Fire 60.72 Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-42210 PW GUARDRAIL REPAIR MATERI Menards - Oakdale PW GUARDRAIL REPAIR MATERIALS_JAMACA 26.91 None 101-3100-42210 PW GUARDRAIL REPAIR MATERI Menards - Oakdale PW GUARDRAIL REPAIR MATERIALS_JAMACA (5.52)None 101-3100-42210 PARKS_SUPPLIES Menards - Oakdale PARKS_SUPPLIES 109.91 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 131.30 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-44030 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES Menards - Oakdale MATERIALS/SUPPLIES 103.94 None 101-5200-44030 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES Menards - Oakdale MATERIALS/SUPPLIES 500.00 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 603.94 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 795.96 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-42270 MATERIALS_MORTAR MIX Menards - Oakdale MATERIALS_MORTAR MIX 8.63 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 8.63 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 8.63 Total Vendor Menards - Oakdale:804.59 Vendor: METRO - INET Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1110 Mayor & Council 101-1110-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 482.55 None Total Department 1110 Mayor & Council 482.55 Department: 1320 Administration 101-1320-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 2,120.12 None Total Department 1320 Administration 2,120.12 Department: 1520 Finance 101-1520-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 1,415.31 None Total Department 1520 Finance 1,415.31 Department: 1910 Planning & Zoning 101-1910-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 1,255.12 None Total Department 1910 Planning & Zoning 1,255.12 Department: 2100 POLICE 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:14/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: METRO - INET Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2100 POLICE 101-2100-43185 MONTHLY IT SUPPORT METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 114.09 None Total Department 2100 POLICE 114.09 Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 2,150.72 None Total Department 2220 Fire 2,150.72 Department: 2400 Building Inspection 101-2400-43185 MONTHLY IT SUPPORT METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 1,333.06 None Total Department 2400 Building Inspection 1,333.06 Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 802.14 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 802.14 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 401.07 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 401.07 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 10,074.18 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 802.14 None Total Department 9400 WATER 802.14 Total Fund 601 WATER 802.14 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 802.14 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 802.14 Total Fund 602 SEWER 802.14 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-43185 Monthly IT Support METRO - INET MONTHLY IT SUPPORT - JUNE 200.54 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 200.54 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 200.54 Total Vendor METRO - INET:11,879.00 Vendor: Metropolitan Council Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 0000 General 602-0000-20802 SAC CHARGES - 7 SING FAM Metropolitan Council MET COUNCIL MONTHLY SAC CHRGS 17,395.00 None 602-0000-37220 SAC CHARGES - PROMPT PAY D Metropolitan Council MET COUNCIL MONTHLY SAC CHRGS (173.95)None Total Department 0000 General 17,221.05 Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43820 Monthly Waste Water Svcs D Metropolitan Council MONTHLY WASTE WATER SVCS DEF REV 69,222.83 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 69,222.83 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:15/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Metropolitan Council Fund: 602 SEWER Total Fund 602 SEWER 86,443.88 Total Vendor Metropolitan Council:86,443.88 Vendor: MN CLN Services Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43150 PW OFFICE CLEANING MN CLN Services Inc PW OFFICE CLEANING 343.72 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 343.72 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-43150 PW OFFICE CLEANING MN CLN Services Inc PW OFFICE CLEANING 66.56 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 66.56 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 410.28 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43150 PW OFFICE CLEANING MN CLN Services Inc PW OFFICE CLEANING 60.84 None Total Department 9400 WATER 60.84 Total Fund 601 WATER 60.84 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43150 PW OFFICE CLEANING MN CLN Services Inc PW OFFICE CLEANING 34.84 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 34.84 Total Fund 602 SEWER 34.84 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-43150 PW OFFICE CLEANING MN CLN Services Inc PW OFFICE CLEANING 14.04 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 14.04 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 14.04 Total Vendor MN CLN Services Inc:520.00 Vendor: MN Dept of Labor & Industry Fund: 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF) Department: 0000 General 703-0000-44300 ELV-395518 Elevator Annual MN Dept of Labor & Industr ELV-395518 ELEVATOR ANNUAL OP - CITY 145.00 None Total Department 0000 General 145.00 Total Fund 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF)145.00 Total Vendor MN Dept of Labor & Industry:145.00 Vendor: MN PEIP Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 0000 General 101-0000-21706 MONTHLY HEALTH INSURANCE P MN PEIP MONTHLY HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 27,552.22 None Total Department 0000 General 27,552.22 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 27,552.22 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:16/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: MN PEIP Total Vendor MN PEIP:27,552.22 Vendor: Oakdale Rental Center Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-42120 PROPANE FILL Oakdale Rental Center Inc PROPANE FILL 16.04 None 101-3100-42120 PROPANE FILL Oakdale Rental Center Inc PROPANE FILL 16.04 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 32.08 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 32.08 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-42120 PROPANE FILL Oakdale Rental Center Inc PROPANE FILL 16.04 None Total Department 9400 WATER 16.04 Total Fund 601 WATER 16.04 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-42120 PROPANE FILL Oakdale Rental Center Inc PROPANE FILL 16.05 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 16.05 Total Fund 602 SEWER 16.05 Total Vendor Oakdale Rental Center Inc:64.17 Vendor: PIONEER LANDSCAPING LLC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43150 STREETS - MOWING SERVICE PIONEER LANDSCAPING LLC MOWING SERVICE 4,024.98 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 4,024.98 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-43150 PARKS - MOWING SERVICE PIONEER LANDSCAPING LLC MOWING SERVICE 13,340.55 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 13,340.55 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 17,365.53 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43150 WATER - MOWING SERVICE PIONEER LANDSCAPING LLC MOWING SERVICE 1,399.14 None Total Department 9400 WATER 1,399.14 Total Fund 601 WATER 1,399.14 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43150 SEWER - MOWING SERVICE PIONEER LANDSCAPING LLC MOWING SERVICE 2,075.07 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 2,075.07 Total Fund 602 SEWER 2,075.07 Fund: 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF) Department: 0000 General 703-0000-44013 CITY HALL - MOWING SERVICE PIONEER LANDSCAPING LLC MOWING SERVICE 367.20 None Total Department 0000 General 367.20 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:17/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: PIONEER LANDSCAPING LLC Fund: 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF) Total Fund 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF)367.20 Total Vendor PIONEER LANDSCAPING LLC:21,206.94 Vendor: POLICY CONFLUENCE, INC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1320 Administration 101-1320-43150 HALF PAYMENT NCS POLICY CONFLUENCE, INC HALF PAYMENT FOR NCS 12,100.00 None Total Department 1320 Administration 12,100.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 12,100.00 Total Vendor POLICY CONFLUENCE, INC:12,100.00 Vendor: RESOLUTE LAW LLC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1320 Administration 101-1320-43040 INTERNAL INVESTIGATION RESOLUTE LAW LLC INTERNAL INVESTIGATION 2,537.70 None Total Department 1320 Administration 2,537.70 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 2,537.70 Total Vendor RESOLUTE LAW LLC:2,537.70 Vendor: Safebuilt LLC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2400 Building Inspection 101-2400-43150 Inspector Contract Service Safebuilt LLC MAY 2026 INVOICE 700.00 None Total Department 2400 Building Inspection 700.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 700.00 Total Vendor Safebuilt LLC:700.00 Vendor: Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc Fund: 611 WATER - CAPITAL Department: 8143 NORTH WTP SITE EVALUATION STUDY 611-8143-43030-8143 NORTH WTP SITE EVAL Short Elliott Hendrickson,NORTH WTP SITE EVAL 6,231.76 None Total Department 8143 NORTH WTP SITE EVALUATION STUDY 6,231.76 Total Fund 611 WATER - CAPITAL 6,231.76 Total Vendor Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc:6,231.76 Vendor: Shred Right Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1320 Administration 101-1320-43150 Monthly Shredding Services Shred Right SHREDDING SERVICES 54.45 None Total Department 1320 Administration 54.45 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 54.45 Total Vendor Shred Right:54.45 Vendor: St Croix Scuba & Snorkeling Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:18/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: St Croix Scuba & Snorkeling Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44040 ANNUAL SCUBA SERVICE St Croix Scuba & Snorkelin ANNUAL SCUBA SERVICE 307.50 None Total Department 2220 Fire 307.50 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 307.50 Total Vendor St Croix Scuba & Snorkeling:307.50 Vendor: Stabner Electric LLC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-44030 BALL FIELD LIGHT REPAIR Stabner Electric LLC BALL FIELD LIGHT REPAIR 479.25 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 479.25 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 479.25 Total Vendor Stabner Electric LLC:479.25 Vendor: Stantec Consulting Services Inc Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 8142 SALE OF OLD FIRE HALL 101-8142-43150-8142 OLD FIRE STATION ENVIRONME Stantec Consulting Service OLD FIRE STATION ENVIRONMENTAL PFAS T 12,230.44 None Total Department 8142 SALE OF OLD FIRE HALL 12,230.44 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 12,230.44 Total Vendor Stantec Consulting Services Inc:12,230.44 Vendor: T&T TRAILER SALES AND RENTAL Fund: 410 VEHICLE REPLACEMENT Department: 2220 Fire 410-2220-45500 UTV1 REPLACMENT - TRAILER T&T TRAILER SALES AND RENT UTV1 REPLACMENT - TRAILER 9,795.00 None Total Department 2220 Fire 9,795.00 Total Fund 410 VEHICLE REPLACEMENT 9,795.00 Total Vendor T&T TRAILER SALES AND RENTAL:9,795.00 Vendor: Tennant Company Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-44040 SERVICE / MAINTENANCE Tennant Company SERVICE / MAINTENANCE 174.52 None Total Department 2220 Fire 174.52 Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-44010 SERVICE / MAINTENANCE Tennant Company SERVICE / MAINTENANCE 34.90 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 34.90 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-44030 SERVICE / MAINTENANCE Tennant Company SERVICE / MAINTENANCE 34.90 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 34.90 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 244.32 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-44030 SERVICE / MAINTENANCE Tennant Company SERVICE / MAINTENANCE 34.90 None 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:19/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Tennant Company Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER Total Department 9400 WATER 34.90 Total Fund 601 WATER 34.90 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-44030 SERVICE / MAINTENANCE Tennant Company SERVICE / MAINTENANCE 34.90 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 34.90 Total Fund 602 SEWER 34.90 Fund: 603 STORMWATER Department: 9500 SURFACE WATER 603-9500-44030 SERVICE / MAINTENANCE Tennant Company SERVICE / MAINTENANCE 34.92 None Total Department 9500 SURFACE WATER 34.92 Total Fund 603 STORMWATER 34.92 Total Vendor Tennant Company:349.04 Vendor: Tennis Roll Off LLC Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43840 REFUSE Tennis Roll Off LLC REFUSE 931.76 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 931.76 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 931.76 Total Vendor Tennis Roll Off LLC:931.76 Vendor: T-Mobile Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2220 Fire 101-2220-43210 CAD / CELL DATA T-Mobile CAD / CELL DATA THRU 05/21/26 390.12 None Total Department 2220 Fire 390.12 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 390.12 Total Vendor T-Mobile:390.12 Vendor: Tri State Bobcat Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-44040 PW WINDSHIELD REPLACEMENT Tri State Bobcat PW WINDSHIELD REPLACEMENT 1,509.65 None 101-3100-44040 PW_AIR FILTERS Tri State Bobcat PW_AIR FILTERS 81.60 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 1,591.25 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 1,591.25 Total Vendor Tri State Bobcat:1,591.25 Vendor: TruGreen LP Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43150 STILLWATER/JAMACA LAWN SER TruGreen LP LAWN SERVICES - MONTHLY 236.58 None 101-3100-43150 LAWN SERVICE - STREET TruGreen LP LAWN SERVICES - MONTHLY 487.79 None 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:20/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: TruGreen LP Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 3100 Public Works Total Department 3100 Public Works 724.37 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-43150 LAWN SERVICE_PARKS TruGreen LP LAWN SERVICES - MONTHLY 5,988.59 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 5,988.59 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 6,712.96 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43150 LAWN SERVICE _ WATER TruGreen LP LAWN SERVICES - MONTHLY 927.11 None Total Department 9400 WATER 927.11 Total Fund 601 WATER 927.11 Fund: 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF) Department: 0000 General 703-0000-44013 LAWN SERVICE - CITY HALL TruGreen LP LAWN SERVICES - MONTHLY 209.69 None Total Department 0000 General 209.69 Total Fund 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF)209.69 Total Vendor TruGreen LP:7,849.76 Vendor: Washington County Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 1910 Planning & Zoning 101-1910-43150 AGR - P710454 Washington County AGR - P710454 46.00 None Total Department 1910 Planning & Zoning 46.00 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 46.00 Total Vendor Washington County:46.00 Vendor: Xcel Energy Fund: 101 GENERAL FUND Department: 2500 Emergency Communications 101-2500-43810 ELECTRIC UTILITY - 51-4504 Xcel Energy 51-4504807-7 14.05 None Total Department 2500 Emergency Communications 14.05 Department: 3100 Public Works 101-3100-43810 ELECTRIC UTILITY - 51-4504 Xcel Energy 51-4504807-7 1,014.47 None 101-3100-43811 51-6736544-2 - ELECTRIC UT Xcel Energy 51-6736544-2 - STREET LIGHTS 6,030.66 None Total Department 3100 Public Works 7,045.13 Department: 5200 Parks & Recreation 101-5200-43810 ELECTRIC UTILITY - 51-4504 Xcel Energy 51-4504807-7 510.24 None Total Department 5200 Parks & Recreation 510.24 Total Fund 101 GENERAL FUND 7,569.42 Fund: 601 WATER Department: 9400 WATER 601-9400-43810 ELECTRIC UTILITY - 51-4504 Xcel Energy 51-4504807-7 293.27 None Total Department 9400 WATER 293.27 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:21/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number Vendor: Xcel Energy Fund: 601 WATER Total Fund 601 WATER 293.27 Fund: 602 SEWER Department: 9450 SEWER 602-9450-43810 ELECTRIC UTILITY - 51-4504 Xcel Energy 51-4504807-7 0.00 None Total Department 9450 SEWER 0.00 Total Fund 602 SEWER 0.00 Fund: 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF) Department: 0000 General 703-0000-43810 GAS UTILITY - 51-4504807-7 Xcel Energy 51-4504807-7 0.00 None Total Department 0000 General 0.00 Total Fund 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF)0.00 Total Vendor Xcel Energy:7,862.69 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:22/23 INVOICE DISTRIBUTION REPORT BY VENDOR FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO GL Number Invoice Line Desc Vendor Name Invoice Description Amount Check Number --- TOTALS BY FUND --- 101 GENERAL FUND 156,127.38 404 PARK DEDICATION 12,801.50 408 STREET MAINTENANCE 6,243.50 409 INFRASTRUCTURE RESERVE 1,527.50 410 VEHICLE REPLACEMENT 9,795.00 430 RAILROAD IMPROVEMENTS 420.00 440 TH36-LAKE ELMO AVE IMPROVEMENT 13,814.50 446 HUDSON BLVD IMP-SEG A-INWDHDRX 80.00 449 2025 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 2,710.00 450 STILLWATER AREA SCH DIST UTILITY IMPR 79.50 451 2026 STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 47,590.00 601 WATER 27,379.22 602 SEWER 91,254.28 603 STORMWATER 2,119.46 611 WATER - CAPITAL 6,819.26 612 SEWER - CAPITAL 11,341.50 703 CITY CENTER OPERATIONS (ISF)3,993.67 803 ESCROW FUND 168,674.16 Total For All Funds:562,770.43 06/11/2026 04:17 PM Page:23/23 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4th, 2026 CONSENT TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Clarissa Hadler, Finance Director AGENDA ITEM: Metropolitan Council Water Efficiency Grant Agreement CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☐ Managed Growth ☒ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☒ Balanced Finances now and future ☐ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve the Grant Agreement with the Metropolitan Council for the Water Efficiency Grant? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The Metropolitan Council will reimburse 80% of the cost of the water efficiency replacement rebate program. We will expand the program to apply to all grant eligible activities: Eligible water efficiency devices consist of the following: Toilet replacement with a US EPA WaterSense labeled toilet Irrigation controller replacement with a US EPA WaterSense labeled controller, either weather-based or soil moisture-based Clothes washing machine replacement with a US DOE Energy Star labeled clothes washing machine Irrigation system audit by an Irrigation Professional certified by a US EPA WaterSense program Staff will prepare advertisements, mailings, newsletters, online updates and social media updates to residents to encourage participation in the program. Residents who are municipal water customers will be required to submit proof of purchase of an eligible device and will receive reimbursement as a rebate posted to their water account the following quarter. New construction and new developments are not eligible. FISCAL IMPACT: The grant provides for an initial reimbursement of up to $49,000. Additional funding is available if there is a greater level of program participation than anticipated. The city must provide a 20% match ($12,250) of any Met Council grant funds for a total two year budget of $61,250. In addition, the city and met council contributions cannot cover 100% of the cost of the purchase. To simplify meeting this requirement, the city will ask that water customers cover an amount equal to the sales tax associated with the purchase. OPTIONS: Approve the Clean Water Fund Grant Agreement with the Metropolitan Council Do not approve the Clean Water Fund Grant Agreement with the Metropolitan Council RECOMMENDATION: (if pulled from Consent) If removed from the consent agenda: Motion to approve the Water Efficiency Grant Agreement with the Metropolitan Council and authorize the City Administrator to execute all necessary documents. ATTACHMENTS: Clean Water Fund Grant Award Letter Clean Water Fund Grant Agreement City of Lake Elmo METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CLEAN WATER FUND GRANT AGREEMENT Recipient: City of Lake Elmo Grant No: SG-26E-03-14 Met Council Action: 2026-95 SW Maximum Grant Amount: $ 49000 Recipient Match (20% of total program excluding low-income option): $ 12250 Recipient’s Authorized Representative: Name: Clarissa Hadler Mailing Address: 3880 Laverne Ave, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Phone: 651-747-3909 Email Address: CHadler@lakeelmo.gov This Clean Water Fund Grant Agreement (“Grant Agreement”) is entered into between the Metropolitan Council, a public corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota (“Met Council”) and the Recipient named above. RECITALS 1. Minnesota Session Laws 2025, Chapter 36, Article 2, Section 8(b), appropriated to the Met Council $1,400,000 in funds from the Legacy Amendment's Clean Water Fund ("Clean Water Fund") for State fiscal years 2026 and 2027, for water demand reduction grants to assist municipalities in the metropolitan area with implementing water demand reduction measures to ensure the reliability and protection of drinking water supplies. 2. The Met Council is authorized by Minnesota Statutes sections 473.129, subdivision 4 to apply for and use grants from the State for any Metropolitan Council purpose and may dispose of the money in accordance with the terms of the appropriation. 3. The Recipient is authorized to receive grants from the Clean Water Fund for a water demand reduction program to implement measures to reduce water demand to ensure the reliability and protection of drinking water supplies. 4. On May 13, 2026, the Met Council authorized the granting $1,399,000 of the appropriation to the Recipients participating in the grant program. 5. The Recipient is authorized to receive grants from the Clean Water Fund for a water demand reduction program to implement measures to reduce water demand to ensure the reliability and protection of drinking water supplies. 6. The Recipient represents that it is duly qualified and agrees to perform all services described in this Grant Agreement to the reasonable satisfaction of the Met Council. GRANT AGREEMENT 1. Term of Grant Agreement. 1.1. Effective Date. The Effective Date of this Grant Agreement is the date this agreement is fully executed, provided the Grant Agreement is fully executed on or after July 1, 2026. If the Grant Agreement is fully executed prior to July 1, 2026, the effective date shall be July 1, 2026. 1.2. Grant Activity Period. The Grant Activity Period runs from the Effective Date through the Expiration Date. 1.3. Expiration Date. The Expiration Date is the earlier of Recipient’s satisfactory fulfillment of obligations or June 30, 2028. 1.4. Survival of Terms. The following clauses survive the expiration, termination or cancellation of this Grant Agreement: • 9. Liability and Insurance; • 10. Audits; • 11. Government Data Practices; • 13. Data Availability; • 14. Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue; • 16. Data Disclosure; and • 18.7 Future Eligibility. 2. Duties, Representations and Warranties of Recipient and Use of Grant Funds. 2.1. The Recipient will conduct, administer and complete in a satisfactory manner and in accordance with the terms of this Grant Agreement the program (“Recipient Program”) which is described in Recipient's application to the Met Council for assistance under the Met Council's Clean Water Fund grant program. The Recipient’s application is incorporated into this Grant Agreement as Exhibit A. Recipient will perform the Recipient Program in accordance with the timeline in Exhibit B of this Grant Agreement and to undertake the financial responsibilities described in Exhibit B which is incorporated into this Grant Agreement. The Recipient must complete the Recipient Program as described in Exhibits A and B. The Met Council makes no representation or warranties with respect to the success and effectiveness of the Recipient Program. The Met Council acknowledges that Recipient Program work may be limited to soliciting participation by its residents and businesses in the Recipient Program and requires additional work by the Recipient only to the extent that residents and businesses choose to participate in the Recipient Program, as described in Exhibit B. The Grant Funds must be entirely passed through and can only be used for authorized rebates or grants for qualifying activities. 2.2. Recipient Representations and Warranties. The Recipient represents and warrants to Met Council, as follows: A. It has the legal authority to enter into this Grant Agreement and to conduct and administer the Recipient Program and use the Grant Funds for the purpose or purposes described in this Agreement. B. It has taken all actions necessary for its execution of the Agreement and has provided to Met Council a copy of the resolution by its governing body authorizing Recipient to enter into this Agreement, if required. If a resolution is not required by the Recipient, Recipient shall provide the Met Council documents acceptable to the Council indicating that the appropriate person(s) has authority to enter into this agreement on behalf of the Recipient, such as a city policy or city ordinance. C. It has the legal authority to undertake the Recipient Program, including the Recipient’s financial responsibilities in Exhibit B. D. Only its Authorized Representative may provide certifications required in this Grant Agreement and submit pay claims for reimbursement of Recipient Program costs. E. It will comply with all the terms of this Grant Agreement. F. It will comply with all requirements of Clean Water Funding legislation and appropriations, except for requirements that this Grant Agreement explicitly states will be handled by the Met Council. G. It has made no material false statement or misstatement of fact in connection with the Grant Funds, and all of the information it has submitted or will submit to the Met Council relating to the Grant Funds or the disbursement of any of the Grant Funds is and will be true and correct. It agrees that all representations contained in its application for the Clean Water Fund Grant are material representations of fact upon which the Met Council relied in awarding this Grant and are incorporated into this Agreement by reference. H. It is not in violation of any provisions of its charter or of the laws of the State of Minnesota, and there are no material actions, suits, or proceedings pending, or to its knowledge threatened, before any judicial body or governmental authority against or affecting it and is not in default with respect to any order, writ, injunction, decree, or demand of any court or any governmental authority which would impair its ability to enter into this Grant Agreement, or to perform any of the acts required of it in the Agreement. I. Compliance with the requirements of this Grant Agreement is not prevented by, is a breach of, or will result in a breach of, any term, condition, or provision of any agreement to which it is bound. J. The Recipient Program will not violate any applicable zoning or use statute, ordinance, building code, rule or regulation, or any covenant or agreement of record relating thereto. K. The Recipient Program will be conducted in full compliance with all applicable laws, statutes, rules, ordinances, and regulations issued by any federal, state, or political subdivisions having jurisdiction over the Recipient Program. L. It will comply with the financial responsibility requirements contained in Exhibit B. M. It will furnish satisfactory evidence regarding these representations if requested by the Met Council. 3. Time. Recipient must comply with all time requirements described in this Grant Agreement. In the performance of this Grant Agreement, time is of the essence. 4. Eligible Costs. Eligible costs are those costs incurred by parties within the jurisdiction of the Recipient for 80% of rebate or grant payments as defined in Exhibit B (and not including low-income cost assistance grant activities). The Met Council will not reimburse Recipient for non-eligible costs. Any cost not defined as an eligible cost or not included in the Recipient Program or approved in writing by the Met Council is a non-eligible cost. 5. Consideration and Payment. 5.1 Consideration. The Met Council will reimburse the Recipient for eligible costs performed by the Recipient during the Grant Activity Period up to the Maximum Grant Amount as specified in this agreement. The Met Council bears no responsibility for any cost overruns that may be incurred by the Recipient or any sub-recipients. The Recipient may be eligible to receive additional grant amounts or an adjustment of the Maximum Grant Amount in accordance with the procedure in the Grant Amendment Form attached and incorporated as Exhibit C. A fully executed Exhibit C will amend this Grant by the amount in Exhibit C. 5.2. Advance. The Met Council will make no advance of the Grant Amount to Recipient. 5.3. Payment. To receive payment, the Recipient must submit a Reimbursement Request on forms provided by the Met Council, including electronically scanned receipts to verify the cost of eligible devices reported for each reporting period. Reimbursement Request must be submitted quarterly, even if there are no eligible costs to report. The Recipient must describe its compliance with its the financial requirements, work completed including specific addresses where work was done, and provide sufficient documentation of grant eligible expenditures and any other information the Met Council reasonably requests. The Met Council will promptly pay the Recipient after the Recipient presents to the Met Council a Reimbursement Request and scanned copies of all receipts verifying the cost for all eligible devices reported and the Met Council’s Authorized Representative accepts the invoiced services. 6. Conditions of Payment. 6.1. For each approved grant activity for which Recipient requests payment, Recipient must certify the following to the Met Council: (1) the device or other grant activity has been purchased or paid for during the Grant Activity Period; (2) Recipient has determined the device, grant activity, or resident (in cases of the low-income cost assistance option), is eligible; (3) Recipient received receipts for the device, installation cost, or other grant activity; and (4) the purchase was not performed in violation of federal, state, or local law, or regulation. 6.2. Conditions Precedent to Any Reimbursement Request. The obligation of the Met Council to make reimbursement payments is subject to the following conditions precedent: A. The Met Council’s receipt of a Reimbursement Request/Progress Report for the funds requested, and electronic copies of receipts verifying the cost for all eligible devices for that reporting period; B. If requested by the Met Council (in form and substance acceptable to the Met Council), evidence that (i) the Recipient has legal authority to and has taken all actions necessary to enter into this Agreement and (ii) this Agreement is binding and enforceable against the Recipient; C. There is no Event of Default under this Grant Agreement or event which would constitute an Event of Default but for the requirement that notice be given or that a period of grace or time elapse; and D. The Recipient has supplied to the Met Council all other items that the Met Council may reasonably require to assure good fiscal oversight of state's funding through the Clean Water Fund. 7. Authorized Representative. The Met Council’s Authorized Representative is: Name: Henry McCarthy or successor Title: Senior Environmental Scientist Mailing Address: 390 North Robert Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Phone: (651) 602-1946 E-Mail Address: henry.mccarthy@metc.state.mn.us The Met Council’s Authorized Representative has the responsibility to monitor the Recipient’s performance and the authority to accept the services provided under this Grant Agreement. If the services are satisfactory, the Met Council’s Authorized Representative will certify acceptance on each invoice submitted for payment. The Recipient’s Authorized Representative is noted on the first page of this Grant Agreement. If the Recipient’s Authorized Representative changes at any time during this Grant Agreement, the Recipient must immediately notify the Met Council and within 30 days provide a new City resolution (if such resolution is necessary) specifying the new Representative. If a resolution is not required by the City, the City’s notification to the Met Council must be in writing. 8. Assignment, Amendments, Waiver, Grant Agreement Complete, and Order of Precedence. 8.1 Assignment. The Recipient may neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this Grant Agreement without the prior written consent of the Met Council and a fully executed Assignment Agreement. 8.2 Amendments. Except as provided in this Section 8.2, any amendment to this Grant Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the appropriate parties. If requested by the Recipient in writing, the Met Council may, at its sole discretion, authorize in writing a minor change (administrative, compliance, or operational adjustments that do not alter the core scope, objectives, or funding level of the award) to the Recipient Program in Exhibit A, without a formal executed amendment to this Grant Agreement. Met Council further reserves the right to amend grant agreements, in collaboration with grantee municipality, if quarterly reporting indicates rebate or grant programs will not fully utilize grant awards within the grant period or for other documented purposes that will advance the legislative objectives of the pilot program. 8.3 Waiver. If the Met Council fails to enforce any provision of this Grant Agreement, that failure does not waive the provision or its right to enforce it. 8.4 Grant Agreement Complete. This Grant Agreement contains all negotiations and agreements between the Met Council and the Recipient. No other understanding regarding this Grant Agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party. 8.5 Order of Precedence. This Grant Agreement will be interpreted in the following order of precedence: (1) Grant Agreement excluding exhibits; (2) Exhibit B; and (3) Exhibit A. 9. Liability and Insurance. 9.1 Liability. The Recipient and the Met Council are each responsible for their own acts and the acts of their employees and the results thereof. To the extent authorized by law, a party is not responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereof. The liability of the Parties is governed by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and other applicable laws. Neither Party waives any applicable limits on liability or immunities. 9.2 Relationship of the Parties. Nothing contained in this Grant Agreement is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners or a joint venture between the Recipient and the Met Council, nor will the Recipient be considered or deemed to be an agent, representative, or employee of the Met Council in the performance of this Grant Agreement, or the Recipient Program. The Recipient represents that it has already or will secure or cause to be secured all personnel required for the performance of this Grant Agreement and the Recipient Program. All personnel of the Recipient or other persons while engaging in the performance of this Grant Agreement or the Recipient Program will not have any contractual relationship with the Met Council related to the work of the Recipient Program and will not be considered employees of the Met Council. In addition, all claims that may arise on behalf of said personnel or other persons out of employment or alleged employment including, but not limited to, claims under the Workers’ Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota, claims of discrimination against the Recipient, its officers, agents, contractors, or employees will in no way be the responsibility of the Met Council. Such personnel or other persons may not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the Met Council, including but not limited to, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, disability benefits, severance pay and retirement benefits. 10. Audits. Under Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 5, the Recipient’s books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices relevant to this Grant Agreement are subject to examination by the Met Council and/or the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the termination date of this Grant Agreement. 11. Government Data Practices. The Recipient and Met Council must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Chapter 13, as it applies to all data provided by the Met Council under this grant contract, and as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Recipient under this Grant Agreement. The civil remedies of Minn. Stat. § 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either the Recipient or the Met Council. If the Recipient receives a request to release the data referred to in this Clause, the Recipient must immediately notify the Met Council. 12. Workers’ Compensation. The Recipient certifies that it is in compliance with Minn. Stat. § 176.181, subd. 2, pertaining to workers’ compensation insurance coverage. The Recipient’s employees and agents will not be considered Met Council employees. Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers Compensation Act on behalf of these employees and any claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of these employees are in no way the Met Council’s obligation or responsibility. 13. Data Availability. To the extent and as requested by the Met Council, Recipient agrees to comply with Minn. Stat. § 114D.50, subd. 5 requirements for data collected by the Recipient Programs funded with money from the Clean Water Fund that have value for planning and management of natural resources, emergency preparedness and infrastructure investments, including but not limited to the requirement that to the extent practicable, summary data and results of Recipient Programs funded with money from the Clean Water Fund should be readily accessible on the internet and identified as a Clean Water Fund Recipient Program. The Met Council will put overall summary information on the internet and will encourage the Recipient put its municipality information on the web. Recipient understands and agrees that Met Council may list its name and summary information on the internet or in any other Grantor reporting. Data collected by the Recipient Program, if any, funded with money from the Clean Water Fund that have value for planning and management of natural resources, emergency preparedness, and infrastructure investments must conform to the enterprise information architecture developed by the Department of Information Technology Services. Spatial data must conform to geographic information system guidelines and standards outlined in that architecture and adopted by the Minnesota Geographic Data Clearinghouse at the Minnesota Geospatial Information Office. A description of these data that adheres to the Department of Information Technology Services geographic metadata standards must be submitted to the Minnesota Geospatial Information Office to be made available online through the clearinghouse and the data must be accessible and free to the public unless made private under chapter 13. To the extent practicable, summary data and results of projects funded with money from the clean water fund should be readily accessible on the Internet and identified as a clean water fund project. 14. Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue. This Grant Agreement will be construed and enforced under the laws of the State of Minnesota without regard to its conflict of law provisions. The venue for any legal proceedings arising out of this Grant Agreement will be the appropriate state or federal court in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 15. Termination. The Met Council may cancel this Grant Agreement at any time, with or without cause, upon 30 days’ written notice to the Recipient. Upon termination, the Recipient will be entitled to payment for services prequalified and satisfactorily performed before the termination notice. 16. Data Disclosure. Under Minn. Stat. § 270C.65, subd. 3, and other applicable law, the Recipient consents to disclosure of its federal employer tax identification number, and/or Minnesota tax identification number, already provided to the Met Council, to federal and state tax agencies and Met Council personnel involved in the payment of Met Council obligations. Recipient will require compliance with this Section 16 by Recipient’s subrecipient of Grant funds and shall submit evidence of such compliance to Met Council as requested. 17. Notices. In addition to any notice required under applicable law to be given in another manner, any notices required hereunder must be in writing and must be personally served or sent by email or United States mail, to the Authorized Representative of the party to whom it is directed. 18. Miscellaneous. 18.1 Report to Legislature. As provided in Minn. Stat. § 3.195, the Met Council must submit a report on the expenditure and use of money appropriated under the Clean Water Fund to the legislature by January 15 of each year. The report must detail the outcomes in terms of additional use of Clean Water Fund resources, user satisfaction surveys, and other appropriate outcomes. The Recipient agrees to provide to the Met Council by January 1 of each year a report on any user satisfaction surveys it has related to this Recipient Program, and other appropriate outcomes of the Recipient Program as prescribed in Section 18.3 of this Agreement. 18.2 Supplement. The funds granted under this agreement are to supplement and shall not substitute for traditional sources of funding. Recipient certifies to the Met Council that there was and is no traditional Recipient sources of funding for the grant work, as described in Exhibit A. 18.3 Measurable Outcomes. A Recipient Program or program receiving funding from the Clean Water Fund must meet or exceed the constitutional requirement to protect, enhance, and restore water quality in lakes, rivers and streams and to protect groundwater and drinking water from degradation. A Recipient Program or program receiving funding from the Clean Water Fund must include measurable outcomes, as defined in Minn. Stat. § 3.303, subdivision 10, and a plan for measuring and evaluating the results. A Recipient Program or program must be consistent with current science and incorporate state-of-the-art technology. All information for funded Recipient Program work, including the proposed measurable outcomes, must be made available for publication on the web site required under Minn. Stat. § 3.303, subdivision 10, as soon as practicable and forwarded to the Met Council and the Legislative Coordinating Commission under the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 3.303, subd. 10. The Recipient must compile and submit all information for funded Recipient Programs or programs, including the proposed measurable outcomes and all other items required under Minn. Stat. § 3.303, subdivision 10, to the Met Council and, if requested by the Met Council, the Legislative Coordinating Commission as soon as practicable or by January 15 of the applicable fiscal year, whichever comes first. 18.4 Minn. Stat. § 16B.98. Grants funded by the Clean Water Fund must be implemented according to section 16B.98 and must account for all expenditures. 18.5 Benefit to Minnesota Waters. Money from the Clean Water Fund may only be spent on Recipient Programs that benefit Minnesota waters. 18.6 Website. If the Recipient has information on its website about the water efficiency grant program under Minn. Stat. § 114D.50, the Recipient will when practicable in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 114D.50, subd. 4(f) prominently display on the Recipient’s website home page the Legacy logo accompanied by the phrase "Click here for more information." When a person clicks on the Legacy logo image, the website must direct the person to a web page that includes both the contact information that a person may use to obtain additional information, as well as a link to the Met Council’s and Legislative Coordinating Commission Website required under section 3.303, subdivision 10. 18.7 Future Eligibility. Future eligibility for money from the Clean Water Fund is contingent upon the Recipient satisfying all application requirements related to Met Council’s fulfillment of Minn. Stat. § 114D.50 as well as any additional requirements contained in Minnesota Session Laws 2025, Chapter 36, Article 2, Section 8(b). 18.8 Prevailing Wages. The Recipient agrees to comply with all of the applicable provisions contained in chapter 177 of the Minnesota Statutes, and specifically those provisions contained in Minn. Stat. §§ 177.41 through 177.50, as they may be amended, modified or replaced from time to time with respect to the Recipient Program. By agreeing to this provision, the Recipient is not acknowledging or agreeing that the cited provisions apply to the Recipient Program. 18.9 Disability Access. Where appropriate, Recipient of clean water funds, in consultation with the Council on Disability and other appropriate governor-appointed disability councils, boards, committees, and commissions, should make progress toward providing greater access to programs, print publications, and digital media for people with disabilities related to the programs the recipient funds using appropriations made in this agreement. 18.10. General Provisions. (i) Lawsuit. This Grant shall be canceled if a court determines that the appropriation illegally substitutes for a traditional source of funding. (ii) Termination Due to Lack of Funds. Recipient recognizes that Met Council’s obligation to reimburse Recipient for eligible Recipient Program costs is dependent upon Met Council’s receipt of funds from the State of Minnesota appropriated to Met Council under 2025 Session Law, Chapter 40, Article 2, Section 8(b). Should the State of Minnesota terminate such appropriation or should such funds become unavailable to Met Council for any reason, Met Council shall, upon written notice to Recipient of termination or unavailability of such funds, have no further obligations for reimbursement or otherwise under this Grant Agreement. In the event of such written notice, Recipient has no further obligation to complete the Recipient Program as required by this Grant Agreement. 18.11. Counterparts and Electronic Signatures. This Grant Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when executed will be deemed to be an original and the counterparts will together constitute one agreement. A copy of this Grant Agreement, including its signature pages, will be binding and deemed to be an original. Electronic signatures using Adobe Sign or a similar program will be deemed an original signature. 19. Default and Remedies. 19.1 Defaults. The Recipient's failure to fully comply with any of the provisions contained in this Grant Agreement constitute an event of default ("Event of Default"). 19.2. Remedies. Upon an event of default, the Met Council may exercise any one or more of the following remedies: a. Refrain from disbursing the Grant; b. Demand that all or any portion of the Grant already disbursed be repaid to it, and upon such demand the Recipient shall repay such amount to the Met Council; and c. Enforce any additional remedies the Met Council may have at law or in equity. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL By: ________________________________ Regional Administrator, successor, or delegate Date: _______________________________ RECIPIENT: The Recipient certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed the this agreement on behalf of the Recipient as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions, or ordinances. By: ________________________________ _____________________________________ Printed Name and Title Date: _______________________________ EXHIBIT A: Application from community Page - 1 2026 – 2028 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION FORM updated 02 / 25 / 2026 1. Applicant information: MUNICIPALITY: MUNICIPAL UTILITY: MAILING ADDRESS: 2.Primary contact information: Municipality primary authorized representative (all correspondence regarding the Water Efficiency Grant Program should be addressed to individual named below): Name: Title: Phone: Email: Mailing Address: 3. Secondary contact information: Municipality secondary authorized representative: Name: Title: Phone: Email: Mailing Address: Page - 2 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 4. Water use information: Municipal Total Per Capita Water Use, in gallons per person-day (2025): Municipal Residential Per Capita Water Use, in gallons per person-day (2025): Municipal Ratio of Peak Month to Winter Month Water Use (2025): Program design The following questions help describe the type of program your municipality is proposing, including planned grant activities and optional program elements. For more information about the low-income cost assistance option and grant activities on municipal properties, see the Guidelines document. 5.Will your proposed program be a rebate or grant program? 6.Will your proposed program include a low-income cost assistance option? 7.Will your proposed program include approved grant activities on municipal properties (for example, device replacements or turfgrass conversion)? 8.If your proposed program includes approved grant activities on municipal properties, does the funding supplement and not supplant? (Additional documentation may be requested.) 9. Approximately what portion of your requested grant amount will be used for approved grant activities on municipal properties? Page - 3 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 10.Planned grant activities Which eligible grant activities will your program include? Please provide an estimated number of device replacements/other grant activities for each category you plan to include in your program. Grant activity Property type Residential Commercial Municipal Indoor water use Toilet replacement Clothes washer replacement Dishwasher replacement Showerhead replacement Faucet replacement or faucet accessory Outdoor water use Irrigation system audit* Irrigation controller replacement* Irrigation spray sprinkler body replacement* Turfgrass conversion/replacement *Please note, the Met Council strongly encourages an irrigation system audit be conducted before the replacement of an irrigation controller or spray sprinkler bodies. An initial audit ensures the user has information for proper set-up and operation of their irrigation system. 11.Estimated water savings per device from WaterSense and Energy Star (if available) will auto- populate in quarterly reporting forms to establish baseline consistency in estimates. Some municipalities may have developed (or plan to develop) specific water savings calculations based on household size, age of device being replaced, and other factors. Municipalities are welcome to submit water savings estimates other than those provided by the WaterSense and Energy Star programs. If your municipality has plans to calculate estimated water savings in-house or using an external resource, please describe below. Page - 4 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 12.If your proposed program includes grant activities at municipal properties, please walk through your plans for device replacements and/or turfgrass conversion. In the case of turfgrass conversion, please describe where the work will occur, area removed, species removed, area replaced, species replaced, watering and maintenance needs, and estimated annual gallons of water saved (with explanation of estimate). Page - 5 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Program budget and administration 13.Please outline the amount of funding your municipality is requesting, including – if applicable – an estimate of funds that will be used for low-income cost assistance (no municipality match required). Grants will be made available in amounts with a minimum of $5,000 and a maximum of $75,000. In the event that there are unused or returned funds, municipalities may apply for a grant amendment to increase their award beyond $75,000 (at the discretion of Met Council). Additionally, if a municipality offers low-income cost assistance, it can apply for an additional $10,000 (max grant of $85,000). A Requested grant amount (must be 80% of row C): B Required municipality matching amount (must be 20% of row C): C Traditional grant program subtotal (row A + row B): D (OPTIONAL) Low-income cost assistance requested amount (100% covered by Met Council funds): E Total program budget (row C + row D): Example calculation: A Requested grant amount (must be 80% of row C): $16,000 B Required municipality matching amount (must be 20% of row C): $4,000 C Traditional grant program subtotal (row A + row B): $20,000 D (OPTIONAL) Low-income cost assistance requested amount (100% covered by Met Council funds): $5,000 E Total program budget (row C + row D): $25,000 Page - 6 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 14.Please outline what cost coverage your municipality plans to offer for each of the selected grant activities. For example: 70% of the cost of a toilet, up to a maximum of $200. Limited to 2 per household. 15.Please indicate ways in which you will advertise your program and water conservation. (Examples to be provided in program work plan.) Newsletter Radio Flyer in water bill Television Email Newspaper Tabling at events TikTok Municipality website Instagram Billboard / physical display Facebook Nextdoor Other 16. Work plan In your application submission, please attach a work plan that details the municipality’s schedule, strategy for promoting the program and communications with potential participants – including example communications, program administration, and spending down the requested grant amount by 6/30/28. Example work plan structure: Task description Responsible person Start date Completion date See last page of this PDF Page - 7 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Evaluating applications Program proposals will be evaluated based on the answers provided in the application form as well as the attached work plan. Strong applications will include clear answers to the questions in the application form and a thoughtful work plan that outlines strategies for structuring, administering, and promoting (if applicable) the program. For municipalities intending to conduct grant activities on municipal property, applications should include intended plans for device/landscape installation and estimated hours/cost of labor (whether being done by the municipality or a contractor). In the event that funds requested exceed funds available, the following criteria will be used to determine the amount granted to a given municipality. • Municipal residential per capita water use • Municipal ratio of peak month to winter month water use • Estimated water savings from proposed program Additionally, municipalities may be asked to provide additional information and/or be awarded less than their requested grant amount if their application is lacking detail, a clear work plan, etc. In future grant cycles, a past participant’s record of spending down their award may be used to inform award amounts. Applications are due by April 13, 2026 2026-2028 Water Efficiency Grant Work Plan City of Lake Elmo 1. Submit Grant Application, Approve Grant Agreement Responsible Party - Finance Director Due Date: 4/17/2026 2. Update and expand program advertisements for print newsletter, e-newsletter, social media, and utility bill updates Responsible Pa rties - Communications Coordinator, Public Works, Finance Teams Due Date: Ongoing 3. Rebate Program Administration: Processing applications and applying rebates to utility accounts. Responsible Parties – Finance Analyst and Finance Department Due Date: As Needed 4. Quarterly Reporting to Metropolitan Council Responsible Parties: Finance Analyst/Finance Director and City Administrator Due Date: End of each Quarter THE ITY OF LAKE ELMO Weekly News & Updates Friday, April 17, 2026 Lake Elmo City Hall Public Meetings Parks Commission Meeting Monday, April 20, 2026 - 6:30 p.m. City Council Meeting Tuesday, April 21, 2026 - 7:00 p.m. Meetings are held at City Hall, 3880 Laverne Ave N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042. Changes or cancellations will be posted at La keelmo.gov/calendar. https://www.lakeelmo.gov/calendar]. How to Watch Watch online https://www..youtube.com/(@CitvofLakeElm oMN/videos] or on cable television SCCTV https://vod.scctv.org/internetchannel/? channel=101 Find meeting agendas and minutes at the City of Lake Elmo, MN https://www.lakeelmo.gov agendacenterI 2026 Lake Elmo Roadwork and Construction Updates Minnesota's Other Season - Road Construction Welcome to Minnesota's other season —road construction ?, As roadwork ramps up across the community, we'll keep you informed on projects, timelines, and any impacts throughout the summer. Stay tuned for updates to help you plan ahead and travel safely! Road Projects: Intersection of Trunk Highway 36 and Lake Elmo Avenue (County State Aid Highway 17) located in the Cities of Grant and Lake Elmo will begin construction this month, clearing trees around the highway. A preconstruction open house is set for May, and highway construction begins in June. This project will be ongoing through the fall of 2027. Visit Washington County's Road update here. CSAH 14 (Stillwater Boulevard) will be closed to westbound traffic from 39th Street to Gorman's Restaurant. The anticipated start date of this work is May 26th and it will be in place for two months. The detour will be 39th Street to Lake Elmo Avenue. Now Hiring: Three Full -Time Fire Captains The City is excited to announce an opportunity to join our team as we hire three full-time Fire Captains. This is a key leadership role within the department, responsible for guiding personnel, overseeing daily operations, and ensuring a high level of service to the community. Fire Captains play a vital role in emergency response, training and development, and maintaining safety standards across all operations. We are seeking experienced, motivated professionals who are committed to leadership, teamwork, and public service. This is a unique opportunity to step into a leadership position and help shape the future of our fire department. Join our team and lead with integrity, professionalism, and dedication. Visit Lakeelmo.gov jobs.aspx Lakeelmo.gov jobs.aspx1 for full job details and application information. Mosquito Control Field Season Underway The Metropolitan Mosquito Control District MMCD) has begun its field season. Residents may see trucks, helicopters, drones, and staff working in neighborhoods, parks, and wetlands. Field staff wear bright yellow safety vests and carry identification. As part of routine monitoring and treatment, they may enter properties without notice to check standing water and control mosquito populations. All work is conducted by trained professionals using methods safe for people, pets, and the environment. To learn more or report mosquito concerns, visit MMCD's website https://www.mmcd.org/] or contact their office directly. NWiAl National Work Zor Awareness Week CELEBRATE EARTH DAY 2026 Lake Orrids Amual Arbor Day Tree Gwea" Sabrrck y April 25, 2026 National Workzone Awareness Week - April 20-24 As the official start of road construction, Monday marks the start of ATSSA's National Work Zone Awareness Week, an annual reminder that safe actions save lives! ! Did you know that over 100,000 crashes occur in work zones annually? Workers, commuters, and pedestrians are all affected. Let's keep roadway workers and each other safe. Your actions behind the wheel can be forever. When you see the orange cones, it's a sign to put down the phone and slow down. Because everyone deserves to make it home. #NWZAW #SafeWorkZonesForAll Celebrate Earth Day Celebrate Earth Day outdoors with Washington County Parks on Tuesday, April 22. In honor of the day, park entry fees will be waived - making it the perfect opportunity to explore county parks and trails and reconnect with the environment. Visit Washington County Parks webpage https: washingtoncountymn.gov/493/Free Admission-Days-in-the-Parks]for more information. #LakeElmoParkReserve EarthDay Celebrate Arbor Day with Us Celebrate Arbor Day with us! Join the City of Lake Elmo at Public Works on Saturday, April 25 from 8-10 a.m. to receive a free tree. This annual Arbor Day Tree Giveaway is a City -sponsored event. Public Works Address: 3445 Ideal Ave. N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Must be a Lake Elmo resident to participate. Elmo's Pup Park Clean -Up Day After you pick up a tree Saturday at Public Works, meet us at Lake Elmo's Pup Park to help spruce up the park. Bring your work gloves, some scoops, extra bags, and community spirit as we work together to keep this favorite spot clean, safe, and enjoyable for all —both two -legged and four -legged visitors. Volunteers of all ages are welcome. It's a great way to give back, meet neighbors, and enjoy the outdoors. We hope to see you there! (photo credit Nick Narusiewicz) Elmo's Pup Park Saturday, April 25, 2026 10 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. 4259 Jamaca Ave. N, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Friends Group Forming for Schiltgen Park Meet up at the Schiltgen Park sign on Saturday, April 25th,10 am, if you are interested in working together as Friends of Schiltgen Park. We will talk a walk on the trails and pick up any loose garbage we see, so bring a garbage bag to help with the cleanup. Visit https://www.sminc-lake- elmo.org schiltgen-park https://www.sminc-lake- el mo.orgschiltgen-park] to learn more. Public Works is Hiring! Looking for a hands-on career where you can make a visible impact in your community? The City is currently hiring for Public Works positions! From maintaining streets and utilities to caring for parks and public spaces, our Public Works team plays a vital role in keeping the community safe, functional, and beautiful. If you enjoy working outdoors, operating equipment, and being part of a dedicated team, we encourage you to apply today. Visit Lake Elmo Jobs to learn more and apply. We also have an opportunity for a seasonal employee this summer. Visit Lakeel mo.gov jobs. aspx https:// www.lakeelmo.gov/Jobs.aspx]to learn more an apply. Nature Center / Bell Museum Mash - Up! Join us Saturday, April 25, from 10 a.m. to 12 p. m. at the Sally Mazara Interpretive Nature Center for a Nature Center/Bell Museum mash - up. Enjoy hands-on science activities led by Bell Museum volunteers —free to attend ( donations appreciated). We' re also partnering with University of Minnesota Master Naturalists for the City Nature Challenge, featuring a live bioblitz at Sunfish Lake Park. Learn how to participate using the Naturalist app. Activities include Engineer a Bird Beak, Soil Cores, Rocket Engineers, Cloud Formation, and more. Visit Sally Manzara Interpretive Nature Center [ https://sminc-lake-elmo.org] for more information. Utility Rate Adjustments Take Effect in April To support ongoing infrastructure and operations, the City Council approved utility rate adjustments effective in April: water rates will increase by 20%, sewer rates by 15%, and a stormwater service rate will be added at 8%. The average residential bill is expected to rise about 14%, or about $7 per month, based on typical usage. To streamline bill payments, you can register online to manage your account, set up autopay, make payments, or choose paperless billing. Just follow this link https:// bsoonline.com/SiteSearch/Advance dRecordSearch? advancedRecordSearchSessionGuid= 46a5e 4e7- 3c53-42c2- b1c0- aed6lc00d746& uid=3270] to the new Utility Billing Portal at BS&A. C'. Visit the Utility Rates page https://www.lakeelmo.gov/226/Utility_ Rates]on the website to learn more. Shredded Paper Reminder Did you know shredded paper cannot be recycled in your curbside recycling bin. What can you do with it? Washington County hosts one -day collection events at Mahtomedi Middle School Ballfields April 25, and Lily Lake Ice Arena in Stillwater May 16 and you can get up to four boxes of shredded paper recycled there. See the Washington County One Day Collection events to learn more. https:/f www.washingtoncountymn.gov 194 2/One- Day -Col lection- Events] North Yard Waste Summer Hours Summer hours are now in effect for the North Yard Waste site. Leaves, grass clippings, brush, tree waste, and other plant materials are accepted from Washington County households. No Business waste. Visit WashCoRecycles.com/YardWaste http://www.washcorecycles.com/YardWast e ]. Irrigation Restrictions Continue This Year Now that spring is here, please remember the irrigation restrictions affecting The City of Lake Elmo will continue again this year. To learn more about zone schedules visit the website. https://www.lakeelmo.gov/261/Watering- Irrigation]. What Do My Taxes Pay For? The City Council adopted the 2026 Budget on December 16, 2025. City Finance staff Rom` 1.—.`y?".f^• have developed a downloadable property tax calculator that estimates 2026 city taxes no other jurisdictions) on your home. It shows approximately how much of your taxes are allocated to each service area. Check it out here. https://www.lakeelmo.gov 230 Property_ Tax -Calculator]. If you need to search your property, you can view the Washington County Property Tax Search here. [https://mn- washington.publicaccessnow.com/j City of Lake Elmo 13880 Laverne Ave. N. I Lake Elmo, MN 55042 https://www.lakeelmo.gov]www.lakeelmo.gov https: / /www.la keel mo.gov]. f Share on Facebook y Share on Twitter ® Share via Email Copyright 2026 The City of Lake Elmo. All Rights Powered by Reserved. C CIVICSEND3880LaverneAve. N, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 INSIDE THIS ISSUE 2026 Budget summary ULI / TAP project 2026 Streets projects Boulevard tree program New utility billing platform Message from the Mayor Reminders Winter parking ordinances remain in effect through March 31. Public Works will be working on storm water maintenance in February, parks spring cleanup in March and April, pothole patching and street sweeping in April, among other projects. Lake Elmo’s Pup Park will see improvements late this spring, with both the parking lot and the water access area leading to the trails scheduled to be paved. Stay connected with Lake Elmo by signing up for email or text notifications. Receive The Fresh weekly newsletter, meeting updates, events, job postings, road construction news, and public hearing notices. Visit lakeelmo.gov and click the Notifications button on the homepage. VOLUME16WINTER2026THESOURCETHE SOURCETHE SOURCE PHOTOCREDITS: LEO A. DALY AND TOM GRADY City leaders recently came together to plan for the year ahead and advocate for Lake Elmo at the state level. The mayor, City Council members, and city staff met with Rep.Wayne Johnson and Sen. Judy Seeberger to discuss Lake Elmo’s 2026 legislative priorities and how state partnerships can support the community’s long- term goals.At the top of the list was water quality and sustainability, reflecting Lake Elmo’s continued commitment to protecting its lakes, groundwater, and natural resources for future generations. Leaders also emphasized the need for reliable water treatment and long-term funding solutions to ensure safe, resilient infrastructure as the city grows.Transportation was another key focus, with discussion centered on the State Highway 36 / Lake Elmo Avenue road project and its importance for safety, access, and economic vitality. The meeting provided an opportunity to share Lake Elmo’ s priorities directly, strengthen relationships at the state level, and continue advocating for investments that support a sustainable, well- connected community.Lake Elmo leaders set 2026 A MESSAGE FROM THE MAYOR Reflecting on progress and looking ahead As we move forward together, I want to take a moment to reflect on what we accomplished as a community over the past year and share what residents can expect in the year ahead. Lake Elmo continues to be a city defined by strong community spirit, thoughtful planning, and a shared commitment to preserving what makes our city such a special place to live. A Year of Community and Celebration One of the greatest strengths of Lake Elmo is our sense of community, and this year was filled with memorable events that brought neighbors together. Our July 4th Kids Parade once again showcased the joy and creativity of our youngest residents and remains a cherished tradition for families across the city. We also proudly celebrated Lake Elmo’s 100th Year Anniversary, a milestone that honored our history while reminding us how far we have come together. The year concluded with Light Up Lake Elmo, which brought warmth, music, and holiday cheer to our downtown and highlighted the generosity and togetherness that define our community. These events would not be possible without the dedication of volunteers, city staff, local organizations, and residents who give their time and energy to make Lake Elmo a welcoming place to live. Investing in Infrastructure and Public Services This year also marked important progress on roadway and infrastructure improvements across the city. We successfully completed several projects to maintain and improve essential services, including the repair of a sanitary sewer in the southwest part of the city, which had been a long-standing maintenance concern. Addressing issues like this proactively helps protect public health, ensures system reliability, and saves costs over the long term. Traffic Planning to Support a Growing Community Looking ahead, traffic planning will be an important focus as our community continues to grow. Residents will see future traffic changes at the intersections of 10th Street/CSAH 10 and Lake Elmo Avenue/CSAH 17. These changes will begin with a temporary wooden pole traffic signal system, which will allow traffic operations to be managed safely and efficiently in the near term. Washington County is designing these improvements to handle anticipated increases in traffic related to the new elementary school, which is expected to open in fall 2026. These interim measures will help ensure safety for students, families, and commuters while longer-term solutions are finalized. Major Projects on the Horizon Later this year, Washington County will begin the TH 36 and Lake Elmo Avenue Project, a significant investment that will improve safety, traffic flow, and connectivity in one of our most heavily traveled areas. At the same time, we remain focused on long-term water treatment solutions for PFAS in our city water system. Ensuring safe, reliable drinking water is one of the City’s highest priorities, and we are committed to responsible, sustainable solutions that protect public health today and well into the future. Moving Forward Together None of these accomplishments—or the important work ahead—would be possible without the support and engagement of our residents, businesses, and city staff. Your involvement, feedback, and care for Lake Elmo make a meaningful difference. Thank you for being part of this community and for helping shape a strong, resilient future for Lake Elmo. I look forward to another year of progress, partnership, and pride in the city we all call home. With gratitude, Charles Cadenhead Mayor of Lake Elmo Page 2 The Source | Winter 2026 Lakeelmo.gov ADMINISTRATION Finance departmentimplementsnewbillingsoftware The look of your utility bills is about to change! The old-style postcards are no more. Be on the lookout for an envelope from the City of Lake Elmo, which will include a full-size utility statement as well as other pertinent and timely information for City residents. You’ll find a much more detailed statement as well as details on how to sign up for the new platform, paperless billing, and autopay! Understanding franchise fees in Lake Elmo Under Minnesota law, cities may charge utility companies a franchise fee for using public rights-of-way to deliver gas and electric service. These public areas—typically located along roadways—are used for utility lines, construction access, and snow storage. The City of Lake Elmo has franchise agreements with Xcel Energy and CenterPoint Energy that allow these companies to place infrastructure in the right-of-way to serve local customers. Lake Elmo’s current franchise fees were established through an ordinance mutually agreed upon by the City and the utility companies in 2025.These fees help the City offset the rising costs of providing essential public services without increasing property taxes or imposing special assessments on homeowners. By spreading costs across all gas and electric users, franchise fees create smaller individual contributions while ensuring those who benefit from city services help support them. Revenue collected from franchise fees is evenly divided, with 50 percent dedicated to infrastructure improvements and 50 percent supporting the City’s Parks Capital Fund—helping maintain and invest in community assets that residents enjoy every day. Page3TheSource | Winter 2026 City Updates Some voters in Lake Elmo will see a new location this fall Precinct 2 voters, who have been voting at the old city hall building, will move to Rockpoint Church, providing voters with a convenient and accessible new location this fall on Election Day. Residents assigned to this polling place will receive official notification with updated details prior to the election. Voters are encouraged to review their notice or check their polling location in advance to ensure a smooth voting experience. Lakeelmo.gov FINANCE Page 4 The Source | Winter 2026 Lakeelmo.gov 2026 Budget summary The city’s budget is a financial plan that prioritizes high-quality services while remaining fiscally responsible. The process to develop the budget is a collaborative effort of the city finance team, management team, and city council. Careful planning and preparation ensure our core values guide the way. The 2026 city budget is $8,859,606. 2026 Property tax levy The overall City Levy is made up of the General Fund Levy, Debt Levy, and Capital Levy. The change from 2025 to 2026 is 1,413,766, or 14.02%. Where do my taxes go? The median home value increased from $581,700 for tax year 2025 to $585,700 for tax year 2026. When applying the estimated tax rate to a median value home, you would see an increase of $179 in city tax for the year, or less than 15 per month. Tax impact on MVHThe 2026 Lake Elmo operations budget is shaped by several key cost drivers that support essential city services. Personnel costs remain the most significant factor,reflecting competitive wages, benefits, and staffing needed to maintain service levels amid a growing community. Inflationary increases in contracts, supplies, and equipment continue to impact Public Works,Parks, and Public Safety operations. Technology and software investments are also driving costs as the City modernizes systems to improve efficiency, transparency, and customer service. Additionally, rising costs for utilities, facility maintenance, and fleet operations contribute to overall operational needs. Together, these drivers ensure Lake Elmo can continue delivering high-quality services while responsibly planning for the future. 2026 LAKE ELMO Budget & Tax Levy 2025 2026 General Fund $5,588,958 $ 6,300,000 Debt Service $3,251,728 $ 3,417,785 Capital $1,243,333 $ 1,780,000 Total Levy $10,084,019 $ 11,497,785 Local Tax Rate 26. Lake E lm o co mmuni ty solar garden now power s local hom es The City of Lake Elmo continues to pursue practical, locally focused sustainability initiatives that support long- term community well-being. A recent example is the Lake Elmo Community Solar Garden, developed by Cooperative Energy Futures. The project provides residents with access to clean, affordable, renewable energy without upfront costs or the need for rooftop installation. The solar garden is located on land north of Sunfish Lake, owned by Lake Elmo resident and Economic Development Authority Commission Chair Tony Manzara. Revenue from the solar lease will help fund the Sally Mazara Interpretive Nature Center in the long term. The project also participates in the state’s Low- and Moderate-Income Accessible Community Solar Garden Program, which requires at least 30% of the solar capacity to serve qualifying households. According to Andrew Ulasich of the Minnesota Department of Commerce, participants are guaranteed savings on their utility bills. Overall, members of Cooperative Energy Futures typically see energy cost savings of 10–20%. Subscribers saw their first bill credits in December, and the project is now fully subscribed. Page5TheSource | Winter 2026 Lake Elmo EconomicDevelopmentAuthorityChairTonyManzaraandcouncilmemberJeffHoltzcuttheribbonforthelaunchoftheCommunitySolarGarden. Kickstart your plastic-f ree journey: TakethePlastic-Free Challenge With so many single-use plastic items in our lives, avoiding them can feel overwhelming. Fortunately, there is a lot we can do to help create a world with less plastic. Are you up for the challenge? Join the Plastic-Free Challenge tcplasticfree.ecochallenge.org) to explore what’s possible. During the one-month challenge, you learn about plastic recycling, make plastic-free swaps, and advocate for changes in your community. By joining a community acting together, you’ll see how our individual actions add up to a big impact! About the Plastic-Free Challenge The Plastic-Free Challenge is a month-long effort starting February 1 to reduce how many plastics you use in your life in ways that best fit your lifestyle and have the most impact on reducing your footprint. The challenge has over 80 actions to choose from in eight categories. Learn more, sign up, and get ready to kickstart your plastic-free journey at tcplasticfree.ecochallenge.org. Lakeelmo.gov COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY PROJECTS Page 6 The Source | Winter 2026 As part of the City’s Street Capital Improvement Program, the City of Lake Elmo has identified its 2026 Street Improvement Projects. Work will take place in the Lake Elmo Heights and Eagle Point Creek Estates neighborhoods and will focus on preserving existing streets through targeted roadway and drainage improvements. Planned work includes reclaiming the existing pavement, installing a new concrete curb and gutter, and placing a new bituminous surface over the reclaimed aggregate base. Storm sewer maintenance and repairs are also included. No street widening or geometric changes are proposed, and “No Parking” signage will be installed in cul-de-sac circles in accordance with the City’s Parking Restriction Guidance Policy. No municipal sanitary sewer extensions are planned, as there is no publicly owned sanitary sewer in the project areas, and all streets are located outside the City’s MUSA boundary. Existing public water mains, installed approximately 20 years ago, are in good condition with no history of issues and will not require improvements at this time. Construction schedules and potential impacts will be communicated in advance, and access to homes will be maintained as much as possible throughout the construction season. A pre- construction meeting is planned for March, with final completion anticipated in October 2026. Visit the Public Works & Engineering page at lakeelmo.gov for project updates and additional information. 2026 Lake Elmo Streets Projects Planning for the Future: ULI TAP Study Looks at 180 Acres in Lake Elmo The City of Lake Elmo is taking a long- range, community-driven approach to planning approximately 180 acres of land near the Public Works facility. In November 2025, the City partnered with ULI Minnesota through its Technical Assistance Panel TAP) program to evaluate how the site could best support Lake Elmo’s future. The panel’s recommendations reflect community input and focus on fiscal strength, jobs and services, housing options, sustainability, and preserving Lake Elmo’s character. The concept includes a phased mix of business, limited commercial, and housing uses, with strong attention to buffering, open space, and trail connections. The TAP study does not approve development. Any future proposals would involve additional public engagement and City Council review. Lakeelmo.gov PUBLIC WORKS Overuse of winter de-icers is harming Minnesota’s lakes, wetlands, streams, and groundwater, and just one teaspoon of de-icing salt can permanently pollute five gallons of water. Created by the Hennepin County Chloride Initiative and Metro Watershed Partners, the Low Salt, No Salt Minnesota initiative helps communities maintain winter safety while reducing harmful chloride pollution. Chlorides are difficult to remove once they enter the environment and can damage infrastructure, landscaping, and flooring; plus salt also harms fish and other aquatic life, degrades drinking water sources, and contributes to blue-green algae blooms. Research from the University of Minnesota shows that about 75% of de-icer stays where it’s applied, where it can damage soil and prematurely age pavement and concrete. When temperatures are very cold, salt is often ineffective, making alternatives such as sand or chicken grit a better choice. Chicken grit provides traction without harming the environment and is easy to sweep and reuse. Use salt wisely this winter: Shovel early to prevent snow from turning to ice Use sand or chicken grit for traction when it’s below 15°F Apply salt only where needed—one coffee cup covers a 20-foot driveway Using less salt helps keep walkways safe, saves money, and protects Lake Elmo’s water resources. Page7TheSource | Winter 2026 Use less salt this winter to protect our water University of Minnesota tests low input grass in Lake Elmo To reduce water use and fertilizer, the University of Minnesota began researching various low-input grass species in Lake Elmo, on a plot of land at 120 Lake Elmo Ave., to redefine sustainable grass and its application in Minnesota. The goal of this research is to improve conservation by developing drought-resistant grass that requires less fertilizer and irrigation water, while still maintaining an attractive lawn appearance. The UofM has installed the test plot, a temporary irrigation system, and public informational signs, and will maintain the grasses for the first year. The university will cover the cost of irrigation water, and performance evaluations will occur in 2026 and 2027. Lakeelmo.gov PARKS New Lake Elmo Boulevard tree program The City of Lake Elmo is excited to announce the launch of its new Boulevard Tree Program in February 2026! Boulevard trees are an essential part of the landscape, providing a range of benefits to residents, including improved air quality, cleaner stormwater, and improved mental health. The program will offer eligible residents a boulevard tree at no cost and will provide guidance on proper care techniques to ensure the trees thrive. Eligibility requirements and a list of potential species for selection will be shared at the program launch. Interested residents are encouraged to apply through the city’s official website in February with an anticipated sign-up window lasting until March. Planting is expected to begin in late Spring. Additional updates will be provided in the City's newsletter The Fresh, on social media, and on the City’s website in February. Page 8 The Source | Winter 2026 Arbor Day tree giveaway returns April 25 Lake Elmo residents are invited to celebrate Arbor Day by taking part in the City’s annual free tree giveaway on Saturday, April 25, from 8–10 a.m. at the Lake Elmo Public Works building. Residents can stop by to receive a bare-root seedling tree and learn more about Arbor Day in Minnesota. The event offers a simple, meaningful way for residents to help grow Lake Elmo’s tree canopy. Lake Elmo has participated in the Tree City USA community for more than 20 years. In 2024, the City planted nearly 1,100 trees in parks, developments, and open spaces, and gave away nearly 450 trees through last year ’s Arbor Day event. The annual giveaway costs about $600, a small investment that helps create a healthier, greener community for generations to come. Registration is now open for Lake Elmo parks reservations! This year, we have a new policy and fee structure for reservations. Reservations are made online, but payment (cash or check) must be mailed or dropped off at City Hall. Reservations won’t be finalized until fees/deposits are paid. Courts can be reserved for up to a month at a time, for 3 hours per day. Ballfields can be reserved for the day during the spring season (April – July) or the fall season (August – October.) Visit the City of Lake Elmo website to view available programs, dates, and registration details. Lakeelmo.gov LAKE ELMO FIRE & PUBLIC SAFETY The Lake Elmo Fire Department provides our residents and businesses with three options for CPR instruction. Courses offered: Hands-Only CPR Classes: Hands-Only CPR is a type of CPR that does not include rescue breaths. If you see a teen or adult collapse, you can perform hands-only CPR with just two easy steps: 1) Call 911 and 2) Push hard and fast in the center of the chest. This instruction does not result in a certification. The online form allows you to request on-site hands-only CPR for community groups. There is no fee for this instruction. Heart Saver CPR/AED/First Aid: Heart Saver CPR teaches adults and children how to use CPR/AED and relieve choking in adults, children, and infants. This course is designed for anyone with limited or no medical training who needs a course completion card for job requirements for CPR and AED use. The First Aid portion can be included upon request. Afee is associated with completing this course, resulting in an American Heart Association completion certificate. Basic Life Support (BLS): Basic Life Support (BLS) CPR training, which is offered to those requesting certification. The BLS Provider course is for healthcare professionals who need to know how to perform CPR and other lifesaving skills. A fee is associated with certification, and successful completion of this course will result in an American Heart Association BLS Provider card. CPR Class Request Form can be found on our Fire Department website. Please submit a request form or call the fire department at 651-747-3930 for current offerings. For up-to-date information and activities of your fire department, follow us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/lakeelmofd/ CPR Training Provided by the Lake Elmo Fire Department Page9TheSource | Winter 2026 Sound The Alarm is a freeprogram offered by the Lake Elmo FireDepartment through a partnership with the American Red Cross. All owner-occupied dwellings in the City are eligible to receive: A safety inspection conducted by Fire Department staff. Guidance on home evacuation plans. Test and, if necessary, replace smoke detectors and carbon monoxide (CO) alarms. Hardwired alarms will be provided to the Homeowner if install cannot be completed do to electrical connections. Give general fire safety tips. There are no costs for Sound The Alarm services or products. Apply for a Sound The Alarm Visit Today Complete the Sound The Alarm visit request form online found on our fire department website. A representative from the fire department will contact you to schedule a home visit. Sound the Alarm: Smoke alarm replacement campaign Lakeelmo.gov LIFE IN LAKE ELMO Page 10 The Source | Winter 2026 Light Up Lake Elmo sparkled with holiday cheer Lake Elmo Elementary update The project is led by Stillwater Schools, in partnership with local contractors and community stakeholders. The district anticipates welcoming students into the new building for the 2026/2027 school year and will continue to share updates as the project moves toward completion. You can follow the progress at https://www.stillwaterschools.org/our- district/bond-projects. Lakeelmo.gov Downtown Lake Elmo glowed with holiday spirit in December as families, friends, and neighbors gathered for Connect Lake Elmo’s annual Light Up Lake Elmo celebration. Despite the winter chill, the atmosphere was warm with music, laughter, and the season’s excitement. The afternoon featured festive activities for all ages, including local shops offering holiday crafts, hot cocoa, and seasonal treats. As dusk settled in, Santa arrived on the Lake Elmo Fire Truck, ready to greet all the kids and even said hello to a few of his elves. The highlight of the night arrived—the official lighting of the holiday tree—with caroling led by City Council member Jeff Holtz, and a few words from Mayor Cadenhead, lighting up the heart of the community. Progress continues on the new Lake Elmo Elementary School building, marking an exciting milestone for students, families, and the broader community. Construction remains on schedule, with major structural work completed and crews now focused on interior spaces and site improvements. The new facility is designed to support modern learning, enhance safety, and provide flexible spaces for students and staff. Once complete, the building will offer updated classrooms, improved common areas, and infrastructure that supports current and future educational needs. April 2025 January 2026 NEW RESIDENT GUIDE Page11TheSource | Winter2026Lakeelmo.gov Utilities Water On the website, visit the How Do I page under the Apply For section. You’ll find directions to start/stop utility services, or contact the City of Lake Elmo utilities at 651-747-3906 Other Utilities Electric and Gas Service – Xcel Energy or CenterPoint Energy Garbage - Find more at lakeelmo.gov/278/Waste- Haulers Parks and recreation With over 500 acres of city parkland and more than 80 miles of trails, Lake Elmo features an extensive park and trail system for residents and visitors to enjoy and explore. Our park and trail system provides a diverse range of recreational opportunities, including organized sports, casual play, nature appreciation, hiking, cross-country skiing, horseback riding, picnicking, relaxation, and many other outdoor activities. Fire department The Lake Elmo Fire Department is administered by a career Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief, who are responsible for day-to-day operations. The remaining command staff consists of two paid-on-call Captains and one paid-on-call Lieutenant. The Department also has a strong focus on community outreach programs throughout the year. Visit the Department website for more information at LakeElmo.gov/248/fire- department and follow us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/lakeelmofd/. City ordinances The City Code, along with its established ordinances, helps make Lake Elmo an exceptional place to live, work, and visit. A complete list of ordinances is available at LakeElmo.gov/172/City-Code. Code Regulations Parking is prohibited on City streets Nov. 1 to March 31, from 2 a.m. – 6 a.m. to facilitate snow removal. Recreational fires are subject to Fire Department guidelines, find them online at lakeelmo.gov/250/Recreational-Fires. Licenses and Permits The city issues many types of licenses and permits from construction and signs to fires, swimming pools, and more. Visit LakeElmo.gov on the How Do I page under Apply For for details. Water rebate program In an effort to improve municipal water use The City of Lake Elmo, in partnership with the Metropolitan Council, is offering a rebate program for purchases of eligible water-efficient products. This funding has enabled Lake Elmo to provide a rebate to current water customers who replace existing devices with specified water-efficient products, or who have an irrigation system audit completed by a professional. Qualifying purchases are eligible for a rebate on your water bill. Go to the Water Rebate Program page at www.LakeElmo.gov for guidelines, restrictions and a list of qualifying items. PRSRT STD US POSTAGE PAID LAKE ELMO, MN PERMIT NO. 19 CityHall3880Laverne Ave. N. Lake Elmo, MN55042LakeElmo.gov | (651) 747-3900 The Source is a publication of the City of Lake Elmo. REPORT A STREET OUTAGE Go to Xcel Energy https://mn.my.xcelenergy.com/s/partner- resources/municipalities/outdoor- lighting/outdoor-lighting-reporting. Either Report it Now” or “Check Outage Status“. HOW DO I? PAY MY UTILITY BlLL With your City of Lake Elmo utility account number, proceed to the new BS&A portal at the link below to register, manage your account, set up autopay, or make payments. Lakeelmo.gov/ub. If you need assistance, reach out to us at RNess@LakeElmo.gov or call 651-747-3906. POSTAL PATRON LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 Reminders: Winter Parking Restrictions began November 1. Cars are prohibited from parking on city streets between 2 am and 7 am, November 1 to March 31. Sign up on the City’s website to receive notifications about city meetings, road projects, parks events, and the Fresh Weekly Newsletter. Stay informed and never miss important updates! LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL Mayor Charles Cadenhead Council Nick Dragisich Matt Hirn Jeff Holtz Nick Kragness City Administrator Nicole Miller OfficeHoursMon - Fri: 8 AM - 4:30 PM SummerHoursMemorialDay - LaborDayMon-Th: 7 a.m. to 4:30 PM / Fri: 8AM - Noon 651-300-9641 651-303-6378 715-432-3608 651-705-6675 952-288-5401 651-747-3905 2026 LAKE ELMO Utility billing is new and improved! We have implemented a new City financial software with integrated utility billing, which allows for better financial controls and more efficient processes. Part of the change includes a new utility payment system called BS&A Payments. The new system will allow paperless billing and autopay. The current system, Paya-Nuvei, is no longer available. Go to the website below to get started! https://www.lakeelmo.gov/ub. New Utility Bills! Water Conservation Conserving water in Lake Elmo is a top priority. As our population continues to grow, so do our water needs. Here are some simple tips to help conserve water: Irrigate Wisely (see irrigating section) Install water-saving showerheads, faucets Fix leaking or running toilets, spigots, etc Run full loads of laundry and/or use minimal water use setting Opt for the dishwasher over hand-washing Turn the faucet off when brushing your teeth Shower instead of bathing Use rain barrels for water runoff to water gardens Use your water meter to check for hidden water leaks Irrigate Wisely Water Rebate Program In partnership with the Metropolitan Council, the City of Lake Elmo is offering a rebate program for purchases of eligible water-efficient products. This funding has enabled Lake Elmo to provide a rebate to current water customers who replace existing devices with specified water- efficient products, or who have an irrigation system audit completed by a professional. Qualifying purchases are eligible for a rebate on your water bill. These credits range from $150 to $500, dependent on your rebate type. Go to the Water Rebate Program page at www.LakeElmo.gov for guidelines, restrictions and a list of qualifying items. For the average resident, irrigating wisely has the highest impact on water conservation. Watering appropriate amounts and at appropriate times is key. Following city-wide restrictions will help make the best use of water for your lawn and will help ensure water and water pressure are available at high-demand times. Consult your irrigation professional to determine an appropriate amount of water for your lawn. You may find information on irrigation zones/days/times on the Watering & Irrigation link on our website at www.LakeElmo.gov Clean Water In Minnesota, public water supply systems are regularly tested by the Minnesota Department of Health for various contaminants. The water from all three Lake Elmo wells is tested daily for various chemicals and at longer intervals for others, to ensure it meets health standards. Ensuring clean water for residents has always been a top priority, and Lake Elmo provides safe and reliable drinking water that complies with federal and state water quality standards. The Lake Elmo Public Works team has worked to reduce and effectively remove pollutants from our drinking water and, as part of that plan, the installation of the new water treatment system at Well 2 is now complete and operational. More information on water quality in Lake Elmo can be found at www.LakeElmo.gov Protect our Lakes and Streams For more information visit Lakeelmo.gov/finance Our lakes and streams are affected by rain and snowmelt that wash off streets, lawns, and rooftops. This runoff can carry dirt, fertilizer, oil, trash, and salt directly into the water. Residents can reduce this pollution in several important ways. Keep water cleaner and reduce flooding by using things like rain barrels and gardens, trees, permeable pavement, and green spaces Avoid sending grass cuttings and leaves into the street. Pick up pet waste Prevent leaves from vehicles Minimize use of toxic lawn care products Ways the City helps reduce pollution: Street sweeping keeps leaves and dirt from entering our water system Using smart salting methods for winter street maintenance Upgrade and maintain City systems to trap pollutants before they flow into lakes and streams The results for residents include: Cleaner water for swimming, fishing, and boating Less flooding after heavy rain and snow melt Healthier neighborhoods and wildlife Protected property values A stronger, more resilient community EXHIBIT B: Grant program guidelines 2026 – 2028 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT PROGRAM GUIDELINES updated 02 / 26 / 2026 1. Overview The Metropolitan Council (Met Council) will implement a Water Efficiency Grant Program (WEGP) effective July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028. Grants will be awarded on a competitive basis to municipalities that operate or are served by a municipal public water supply system. In this program, municipalities design and operate their own rebate or grant programs, which are funded by the Met Council with pass-through funds from the Clean Water Land & Legacy Amendment. The Met Council will provide 80% of the program cost; the municipality must provide the remaining 20% of the program cost. The WEGP focuses on grant activities that reduce existing water use at residential, commercial, and municipal properties. Met Council-approved grant activities include the replacement of specific water- using devices with more efficient alternatives, irrigation system audits, and the conversion of turfgrass to low-input, drought-tolerant landscapes at municipal properties. Residents and businesses participating in a municipality’s program must be connected to municipal water. Grants will be made available in amounts with a minimum of $5,000 and a maximum of $75,000. In the event that there are unused or returned funds, municipalities may apply for a grant amendment to increase their award beyond $75,000 (at the discretion of Met Council). Grantees will be required to submit quarterly reimbursement requests and provide actual or estimated water savings achieved through this program for Clean Water, Land & Legacy Amendment reporting purposes. Grant program goal The goal of the Water Efficiency Grant Program is to support technical and behavioral changes that improve municipal water use efficiency in the seven-county metropolitan area. Changes for 2026-2028 Several changes to the WEGP have been made from past grant cycles. These changes are outlined in the bulleted list below. • Maximum grant amount: $50,000  $75,000 • Clearer guidelines for grant activity/device eligibility and property type o Faucets and faucet accessories added o Flushing urinals and flushometer-valve toilets added o Commercial clothes washers and commercial dishwashers added • Met Council strongly encourages (not a requirement) that an irrigation system audit be conducted before the replacement of an irrigation controller or spray sprinkler bodies. An irrigation system audit from an Irrigation Professional certified by a US EPA WaterSense program ensures the user has information for proper set-up and operation of their irrigation system. • Municipal facility grant activity option added o Replacement of water using devices in municipal properties o Property turfgrass conversion/replacement • Low-income cost assistance option added (additional $10,000 available to expand maximum grant amount to $85,000) o Full cost coverage for eligible residents on indoor water use devices • Updated reporting form • Standardized estimated water savings built into reporting for most grant activities (with option for municipalities to provide more specific water savings estimates) Additional detail about the low-income cost assistance option, newly eligible devices/grant activities, and new eligibility requirements is provided in the following pages. Critical points to remember • The applying municipality must be served by a municipal public water supply system • New construction and new developments are not eligible • A portion of each eligible grant activity’s cost must be paid by the property owner • Funds are for rebates or grants only; consulting and city staff time are ineligible • Grant recipients must display the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment logo and the Metropolitan Council logo on program-related web pages and paper communications • Applications are due April 13, 2026 • Funds must be spent down by June 30, 2028 (municipalities and Met Council will work together to monitor spending and adjust/reallocate funds as needed) • Grant activities on municipal properties must supplement and not supplant dedicated municipal funding sources 2. Grant program structure Administration and funding source The 2026-2028 WEGP will be administered by the Met Council and will be funded with $1,400,000 appropriated by the 2025 Minnesota Legislature. Grant applications will be reviewed and scored by Metropolitan Council Water Resources staff. Legislative Directive: Minnesota 2025 Session Law $650,000 the first year and $750,000 the second year are for grants that implement water demand reduction measures. The grants are to assist municipalities in the metropolitan area with implementing water demand reduction measures to ensure the reliability and protection of drinking water supplies. Grants will be awarded to municipalities in amounts ranging from $5,000 to $75,000 for providing rebates or grants to property owners and their renters. (An additional $10,000 will be available for Low Income Cost Assistance, as discussed below). Municipalities will be responsible for the design and operation of their rebate or grant program and its details. Grant payments to the municipality will be for 80% of approved program amounts. The municipality must provide the remaining 20% of the granted/rebated amount to the property owner. Municipality rebates or grants are eligible for reimbursement on device replacements and other approved grant activities conducted July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2028 (purchases of eligible devices or grant activities must be made on or after the day the grant agreement is fully executed). Grant program components Each municipality is expected to design their own program to whatever meets their community needs. Three potential components are residential/commercial grant activities, municipal grant activities, and low-income cost assistance for residential properties. Municipalities may include any combination of property type and grant activity offering in their program design. Program design has varied by municipality among past participants, with some focusing on a single type of device replacement such as toilets, and others offering a range of options. In the application form and work plan, municipalities will be asked to lay out the grant activities and property types that would be included in the proposed program. While past grant cycles have occasionally included participants pursuing commercial- and municipal-focused grant activities, the 2026-2028 WEGP guidelines more clearly define, and expand, the options available to municipalities that are interested in designing commercial- or internal-facing programs. Residential and/or commercial grant activities Municipalities may choose to design their programs to include grant activities at residential and commercial properties. This the most common approach among participating communities. The participating community selects which devices or other approved grant activities (irrigation audits) to offer to residents or businesses within the municipality. The participating community also determines how much of an eligible grant activity’s cost is covered by the program. Property owners must pay a portion of the eligible grant activity’s cost. Eligible grant activities for residential and commercial properties are listed in the table in the Eligible Grant Activities section. Municipal grant activities Municipalities may also choose to design their programs to include grant activities occurring on municipal properties. Grant activities eligible for municipal properties are device replacements, irrigation system audits, and the conversion of existing turfgrass to low-input landscaping/drought-tolerant alternative turf. Municipalities that choose to conduct grant activities on municipal properties shall provide measured water savings (ideally) or calculated water savings estimates. These municipalities will also be required to display signage near the grant activity areas that includes the Metropolitan Council and Clean Water Fund logos as well as an explanation of the work done. Participating municipalities must cover the 20% “municipal match” as normal. This funding is intended to promote and supplement funding for device replacement or turf grass conversion efforts. It is not intended to supplant dedicated municipal funding sources for projects. Eligible grant activities for municipal properties are listed in the table in the Eligible Grant Activities section. Low-income cost assistance grant activities Municipalities operating a residential-facing rebate or grant program may elect to include a low-income cost assistance option in their program. Residents or households who meet a certain income threshold are eligible to receive full cost coverage* for the replacement of one indoor water-using device (toilet, clothes washer, dishwasher, showerhead, or faucet/faucet accessory) with a WaterSense or Energy Star alternative. If a municipality decides to offer the low-income cost assistance option, they can apply for an additional $10,000 (max grant amount of $85,000). Municipalities that choose to include this option in their residential rebate or grant programs will be required to verify resident eligibility. No municipal match will be required. Residents are eligible for this cost assistance element if: • The resident is enrolled in a county assistance program o Hennepin County Water Assistance Program o Ramsey and Washington Counties Water Bill Assistance o Scott, Carver, Dakota Counties Energy Assistance Program  Scott County Financial Assistance  Carver County Emergency Programs  Dakota County Emergency Assistance o Anoka County Energy Assistance • The resident is enrolled in SNAP benefits Eligibility for low-income cost assistance can be verified with appropriate paperwork showing participation in one of the above programs. *Cost of device and installation is fully covered by Met Council up to: • $550 for toilets • $1200 for clothes washers • $1200 for dishwashers • $100 for showerheads • $100 for faucets and faucet accessories Application funding request The application form will include a table like the one below, where applying municipalities will lay out their funding request. Row A is the requested grant amount, which covers grant activities at any combination of property types and makes up 80% of the traditional grant program subtotal. Row B is the required municipality match of 20% of the traditional grant program subtotal. Row C is the traditional grant program subtotal. In Row D, applying municipalities may enter the low-income cost assistance amount they expect to spend. The funds in Row D do not require a municipality match. Row E is the sum of Rows C and D. A Requested grant amount for residential, commercial, or municipal grant activities (funding from Met Council) (80% of traditional grant program subtotal): $16,000 B Required municipality matching amount (20% of traditional grant program subtotal): $4,000 C Traditional grant program subtotal (sum of Met Council grant amount and required municipality match): $20,000 D (OPTIONAL) Low-income cost assistance requested amount (funding from Met Council) (100% covered by Met Council funds): $5,000 E Total program budget (sum of traditional grant program subtotal and low-income cost assistance funds): $25,000 *in cases where municipalities have opted in to the low-income cost assistance element, the percent covered by Met Council may exceed 80% Eligibility Requirements for applying municipalities This grant program is limited to municipalities in the seven-county metropolitan area that operate or are served by a municipal public water supply system. Grants are only for water efficiency programs offering rebates or grants to property owners and their renters who are customers of the municipal water supply system and who replace specified water-using devices with approved devices that use substantially less water (or conduct other grant activities such as irrigation audits or, for municipalities, turfgrass conversion). In municipalities where only some neighborhoods or areas are served by a municipal public water supply system, only those served by the municipal public water supply system are eligible. Municipalities eligible per above must apply to participate and, if approved, sign a Met Council Grant Agreement, before any eligible rebates or grants can be submitted for reimbursement. Agreements shall require that municipalities: • Entirely pass through grants received (as is being done by Met Council) • Verify purchase of devices or other grant activities to receive grants • Retain records and cooperate with any audits • Conduct all communications with property owners and ensure all written communications to property owners include both the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment and the Metropolitan Council’s logo • Provide quantitative information for state reporting purposes Eligible grant activities The table below walks through the approved grant activities in the WEGP. Included in the table is information related to the property type (residential, commercial, municipal) where grant activities occur as well as information about estimated water savings. Expenses eligible for reimbursement are the out-of-pocket cost of the device and its installation only, not to include any owner labor costs. In addition, new construction and new developments are ineligible as this program is intended as a current infrastructure replacement program. Eligible grant activity (with hyperlink to product lookup tool) Estimated water savings Indoor water use Toilets Residential toilet replacement with a WaterSense labeled residential toilet 13,000 gallons per year (source) Commercial / Municipal toilet replacement with a WaterSense labeled commercial toilet 790 gallons when replacing a 1.6gpf model and 5,500 when replacing a 3.5gpf model Commercial / Municipal urinal replacement with a WaterSense labeled urinal 4,600 gallons per year (source) Clothes washing machines Residential clothes washing machine replacement with an Energy Star labeled residential clothes washer 2,700 gallons per year (based on WRF average clothes washer use and Energy Star estimated percent savings) Commercial clothes washing machine replacement with an Energy Star labeled commercial clothes washer 45% less water than standard models (source) Dishwashers Residential dishwasher replacement with an Energy Star labeled residential dishwasher 8,400 gallons per year (source) Commercial dishwasher replacement with an Energy Star labeled commercial clothes washer 5,600 gallons per year (source) Showerhead replacement with a WaterSense labeled showerhead 2,700 gallons per year (source) Faucet replacement or faucet accessory with a WaterSense labeled faucet or faucet accessory 700 gallons per year (source) Outdoor water use Irrigation system audit by an Irrigation Professional certified by a US EPA WaterSense program See report from Irrigation Professional who conducted audit Irrigation controllers (Met Council strongly encourages an irrigation system audit before the installation of a new smart controller) Irrigation controller replacement with a WaterSense labeled weather-based controller (this type of controller is most common) 7,600 gallons per year (source) Irrigation controller replacement with a WaterSense labeled soil moisture-based controller 15,000 gallons per year (source) Irrigation spray sprinkler body replacement with a WaterSense labeled spray sprinkler body (Met Council strongly encourages an irrigation system audit before the installation of new spray sprinkler bodies) 5,600 per year (for an average household using 50,500 gallons outdoors, operating at or above 60 pounds per square inch) (source) Turfgrass conversion/replacement to a low-input, drought-tolerant landscape at municipal properties (Municipal properties only) Refer to municipality’s pre- and post- replacement water use to calculate water savings. If unable to measure specific water use, municipality will provide estimated annual water savings with explanation of calculation. Please note, the Met Council strongly encourages an irrigation system audit be conducted before the replacement of an irrigation controller or spray sprinkler bodies. An initial audit ensures the user has information for proper set-up and operation of their irrigation system. Quarterly reporting Reporting requirements and payment process Utilizing a reporting form provided by Met Council, the following information about each grant activity must be reported on a quarterly basis: • Property address and property type (residential, commercial, municipal) • Low-income assistance (Y/N) (if applicable) • Grant activity (device replacement, audit, or municipal turfgrass conversion) • Brand/model info of new device • Purchase date (must be on or after effective date of grant agreement) • Cost per device/approved grant activity • Number of devices/activities • Rebate or grant per device • Estimated annual gallons of water saved per device installation/approved grant activity • Optional notes column for explaining water use calculations if different from those provided • Municipality matching funds disbursed • Number of unmet funding requests from property owners, if any Municipalities are required to submit a signed and dated quarterly reporting form as well as a PDF(s) of receipts corresponding to each entry in the quarterly reporting form. Upon review and confirmation of the above information, Met Council will process a grant payment in the amount of 80% of approved total rebates or grants for the reporting period (in cases where municipalities have opted in to the low-income cost assistance element, the percent covered by Met Council may exceed 80%). Met Council will provide confirmation of grant balances available upon request and reserves the right to amend grant agreements, in collaboration with grantee municipality, if quarterly reporting indicates rebate or grant programs will not fully utilize grant awards within the grant period. Determining estimated water savings Annual water savings estimates may come from a variety of sources. Manufacturers may include water savings estimates in their device descriptions or specifications, irrigation professionals report estimated savings after performing an irrigation system audit, and some past participants of the WEGP have calculated specific water savings estimates based on factors such as household size. Unless a city has specifically calculated estimated water savings or is referring to manufacturer or audit estimates, the recommended sources for estimated water savings are WaterSense and Energy Star. Water savings estimates from WaterSense and Energy Star are included in the table of eligible grant activities. In quarterly reports, municipalities will be asked to note the source of their estimates if they different from the estimates provided above. In the case of irrigation system audits and turfgrass conversion on municipal properties, estimates have not been provided by Met Council as these metrics will be calculated by an Irrigation Professional or the municipality, respectively. In any situation where it is possible to report actual water savings, this is preferred. 3. Application process Application requirements The application window for the 2026-2028 Water Efficiency Grant Program will open on Friday, March 13, 2026. Applications are due by Monday, April 13, 2026. The application form will be available on the Met Council website. Required information in the application form includes: o the municipality’s rebate or grant program design and work plan o proposed examples of communications to property owners o requested total grant amount o estimated annual amount of water saved by the applying municipality • Application form is available at: https://metrocouncil.org/Wastewater-Water/Funding- Finance/Available-Funding-Grants.aspx • Submit competed application to: henry.mccarthy@metc.state.mn.us • Metropolitan Council will notify municipalities of grant awards in approximately May 2026 Evaluating applications Program proposals will be evaluated based on the answers provided in the application form as well as the attached work plan. Strong applications will include clear answers to the questions in the application form and a thoughtful work plan that outlines strategies for structuring, administering, and promoting (if applicable) the program. For municipalities intending to conduct grant activities on municipal property, applications should include intended plans for device/landscape installation and estimated hours/cost of labor (whether being done by the municipality or a contractor). In the event that funds requested exceed funds available, the following criteria will be used to determine the amount granted to a given municipality: • Municipal residential per capita water use • Municipal ratio of peak month to winter month water use • Estimated water savings from proposed program Additionally, municipalities may be asked to provide additional information and/or be awarded less than their requested grant amount if their application is lacking detail, a clear work plan, etc. In future grant cycles, a past participant’s record of spending down their award may be used to inform award amounts. EXHIBIT C: Grant amendment form Revision # METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 2026-2028 CLEAN WATER FUND WATER EFFICIENCY GRANT PROGRAM GRANT AMENDMENT FORM NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: Submission of this form is required to modify the Maximum Grant Amount in your Grant Agreement with Metropolitan Council 2026-2028 Clean Water Fund Water Efficiency Grant Program (Grant Program). After determination of your municipality’s Maximum Grant Amount, completion and submission of this form is necessary when 1) you are requesting additional grant funds to meet unexpected rebate or grant demand, or 2) when your municipality has determined that the previously approved program’s rebate or grant demand will not be met, requiring less grant funds than anticipated when the agreement was signed, or 3) when your municipality wishes to substantially change the structure of its program from what was described in the application form and the work plan supplied in the application form. The process for modifying your Grant Agreement is as follows: 1. Your municipality’s authorized representative submits one signed copy of Exhibit C to the Met Council, with any additional information requested by Met Council. 2. Upon receipt and any Met Council approval of signed Exhibit C, the Met Council’s authorized representative will obtain Met Council authorized signatures returns a fully executed copy of Exhibit C indicating the new Maximum Grant Amount to Municipality’s designated authorized representative. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Instructions: Indicate the date of your change request in #1 box. Indicate the number of this particular change request in #2 box (and in box at top of page – must match). Enter the current grant agreement amount (as Met Council approved) in #3 box. If you wish to increase your municipality’s grant amount, enter the amount you are requesting in #4 box. If you wish to decrease your grant amount due to less demand than anticipated, enter the amount in #5 box. Enter in #6 box the amount derived from adding #3 to #4 or derived from subtracting #5 from #3. If you do not wish to modify your municipality’s Maximum Grant Amount, leave boxes #4, #5, and #6 blank or enter “N/A.” If you wish to secure approval for changes to the scope of the approved project in the Water Efficiency Grant Program application form, please document the reasons for the amendment in box #7. Please specify what changes are desired in box #8. Please note that all other requirements as found in the Grant Agreement continue to apply. Grant Agreement # 1. Date of change request: 2. Change request number: 3. Current Grant Agreement Amount (as Met Council approved): 4. Increase due to request for additional funding: 5. Decrease due to less demand: 6. Amended Maximum Grant Agreement Amount requested: 7. Reasons for modifying program structure: 8. Proposed changes to program structure: MUNICIPALITY NAME:_________________________________________________________________ MUNICIPALITY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (signature and date): ______________________________________________________________________________________ METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL (signature and date): ______________________________________________________________________________________ METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE AND DATE ______________________________________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Questions may be directed to the Met Council Authorized Representative: Metropolitan Council (Regional Office & Environmental Services) 390 Robert Street North, Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805 P 651.602.1000 | F 651.602.1550 | TTY 651.291.0904 metrocouncil.org An Equal Opportunity Employer Clarissa Hadler Finance Director 3880 Laverne Ave Lake Elmo, MN 55042 May 19, 2026 The Metropolitan Council is pleased to award the City of Lake Elmo the amount of $49,000 as part of our 2026-2028 Water Efficiency Grant Program. The amount of matching funds required from your city, based on the grant award above, is $12,250 (this amount will deviate from the 20% of the total program cost in cases where the community is including a low-income cost assistance option). The City of Lake Elmo is one of 43 in the Twin Cities metro area accepted into this grant program. We are pleased to report that all available grant funds have been awarded and that all applicants will receive an award. The amount of funds requested totaled $1,683,575, while the amount of funds available is $1,400,000. Because funds requested exceed funds available, a set of ranking factors and an objective scoring system were used to distribute the available funds. Below are some critical points to remember: • New construction and new developments are not eligible • A portion of each eligible grant activity’s cost must be paid by the property owner (unless participating in the low-income cost assistance option) • Funds are for rebates or grants only; consulting and city staff time are ineligible • Grant recipients must display the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment logo and the Metropolitan Council logo on program-related web pages and paper communications • Funds must be spent down by June 30, 2028 (municipalities and Met Council will work together to monitor spending and adjust/reallocate funds as needed) • Grant activities on municipal properties must supplement and not supplant dedicated municipal funding sources The Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment is available here: https://www.legacy.mn.gov/download- legacy-logo To obtain electronic and print versions of the Metropolitan Council logo, please contact me at henry.mccarthy@metc.state.mn.us. Page - 2 | May 19, 2026 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL As you prepare your municipality’s program, please be aware that the following information must be reported on a quarterly basis, on forms to be provided by the Metropolitan Council: • Property address and property type (residential, commercial, municipal) • Low-income assistance (Y/N) (if applicable) • Grant activity (device replacement, audit, or municipal turfgrass conversion) • Brand/model info of new device • Purchase date (must be on or after effective date of grant agreement) • Cost per device/approved grant activity • Number of devices/activities • Rebate or grant per device • Estimated annual gallons of water saved per device installation/approved grant activity • Municipality matching funds disbursed • Number of unmet funding requests from property owners, if any Quarterly reporting instructions will be sent to participating communities in summer 2026. Quarterly reporting periods and reporting form due dates are shown below. Quarterly Period Reporting Form Due Date July 1, 2026 – September 30, 2026 October 31, 2026 October 1, 2026 – December 31, 2026 January 31, 2027 January 1, 2027 – March 31, 2027 April 30, 2027 April 1, 2027 – June 30, 2027 July 31, 2027 July 1, 2027 – September 30, 2027 October 31, 2027 October 1, 2027 – December 31, 2027 January 31, 2028 January 1, 2028 – March 31, 2028 April 30, 2028 April 1, 2028 – June 30, 2028 July 31, 2028 A Grant Legal Agreement will be sent to your city for signature in approximately two weeks. Completion instructions will be provided in that correspondence. Congratulations on your grant award! We look forward to working with you to increase the water efficiency of our region. Sincerely, Henry McCarthy Senior Environmental Scientist | Water Resources | Policy and Planning Phone: 651-602-1946 henry.mccarthy@metc.state.mn.us Jen Kostrzewski Assistant Manager | Water Resources | Policy and Planning Phone: 651-602-1078 jennifer.kostrzewski@metc.state.mn.us Judy Sventek Manager | Water Resources Phone: 651-602-1156 judy.sventek@metc.state.mn.us STAFF REPORT DATE:June 16, 2026 CONSENT TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: City Clerk Julie Johnson AGENDA ITEM: Approve Massage Therapy License Renewal CORE STRATEGIES: ☒ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☒ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☐ Managed Growth ☐ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: The City of Lake Elmo has a city license for massage therapy to better regulate the practice of therapeutic massage in Lake Elmo. Licenses are subject to approval by the City Council. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should Council approve the requested license renewal? PROPOSAL: The City has received a license renewal request from Jacob Hagen, Renewed Bodywork. Appropriate fees have been paid and all required paperwork has been submitted. FISCAL IMPACT: Renewal fee: $25.00 OPTIONS: 1)Approve license renewal 2)Deny license renewal RECOMMENDATION: If removed from the consent agenda, staff recommends the following motion: “Motion to approve massage therapy license renewal for Jacob Hagen, Renewed Bodywork.” ATTACHMENTS: None STAFF REPORT DATE: 6/16/26 CONSENT TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Sophia Jensen, Senior City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Northport 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Addition Landscape Security Release CORE STRATEGIES: ☐Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☒Managed Growth ☐Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☒Balanced Finances now and future ☐Resilient Infrastructure ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve release of warranty security for landscaping in Northport 1st, 2nd, and 3rd addition? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Staff has received and processed requests to reduce the development security for landscaping improvements in Northport 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Additions. These additions were inspected and accepted by the landscape architect on 5/29/2026. Below is a breakdown of security remaining for the development. Addition Current Security Amount Proposed Security Amount 1st Addition $60,007.81 $0 2nd Addition $0 3rd Addition $16,406 $13,594 $0 FISCAL IMPACT: It is the goal of the City to retain, at all times during the subdivision improvements, a security amount that is adequate to ensure completion of all elements of the improvements as protection to the Tax Payers against potential default of the project. Once the security is no longer needed it should be returned. RECOMMENDATION: (if pulled from Consent): Staff is recommending to the City Council, as part of the consent agenda, the security reduction be approved. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion is as follows: “Move to approve the security release for Northport 1st, 2nd, and 3rd additions as detailed in the respective Security Reduction Worksheets, contingent on the developer being current with all other payments and obligations in accordance with the development agreement, including positive escrow balance as required by the City” ATTAC HMENTS: • HKGi Inspection Memos (1st-3rd ) • Engineering Security Reduction Workshee ts (1st-3rd) Memorandum 1 TO: Sophia Jensen FROM: Patrick O’Keeffe, PLA DATE: 6/5/2026 RE: - Landscape Warranty Inspection | Northport – 3rd Addition Initial Inspection Initial Re-inspection (Acceptance) 1-Year Inspection 1-Year Re- inspection 2-Year Inspection 2-Year Re-inspection Final Inspection Acceptance Northport – 3rd Addition 07/19/2023 09/05/2024 09/05/2025 09/17/2025 10/03/2025 05/29/2026 Inspectors • Patrick O’Keeffe, PLA Inspection Summary • An on-site landscape inspection was conducted with the landscape contractor, to assess the condition and performance of the installed landscape elements. Based on this review, the site has met the City’s requirements for final acceptance. Required Actions No further actions are required. Patrick O’Keeffe, PLA (MN, CO) Landscape Architect P: (651) 324-5277 | E: Patrick@hkgi.com 800 WASHINGTON AVE N STE 207 MPLS, MN 55401 | HKGI.COM Memorandum 1 TO: Sophia Jensen FROM: Patrick O’Keeffe, PLA DATE: 6/5/2026 RE: - Landscape Warranty Inspection | Northport – 2nd Addition Initial Inspection Initial Re-inspection (Acceptance) 1-Year Inspection 1-Year Re- inspection 2-Year Inspection 2-Year Re-inspection Final Inspection Acceptance Northport – 2nd Addition 07/19/2023 09/13/2024 09/02/2025 09/17/2025 10/03/2025 05/29/2026 Inspectors • Patrick O’Keeffe, PLA Inspection Summary • An on-site landscape inspection was conducted with the landscape contractor, to assess the condition and performance of the installed landscape elements. Based on this review, the site has met the City’s requirements for final acceptance. Required Actions No further actions are required. Patrick O’Keeffe, PLA (MN, CO) Landscape Architect P: (651) 324-5277 | E: Patrick@hkgi.com 800 WASHINGTON AVE N STE 207 MPLS, MN 55401 | HKGI.COM Memorandum 1 TO: Sophia Jensen FROM: Patrick O’Keeffe, PLA DATE: 6/5/2026 RE: - Landscape Warranty Inspection | Northport – 1st Addition Initial Inspection Initial Re- inspection (Acceptance) 1-Year Inspection 1-Year Re- inspection 2-Year Inspection 2-Year Re-inspection Final Inspection Acceptance Northport – 1st Addition 09/12/2024 09/02/2025 09/17/2025 10/03/2025 05/29/2026 Inspectors • Patrick O’Keeffe, PLA Inspection Summary • An on-site landscape inspection was conducted with the landscape contractor, to assess the condition and performance of the installed landscape elements. Based on this review, the site has met the City’s requirements for final acceptance. Required Actions No further actions are required. Patrick O’Keeffe, PLA (MN, CO) Landscape Architect P: (651) 324-5277 | E: Patrick@hkgi.com 800 WASHINGTON AVE N STE 207 MPLS, MN 55401 | HKGI.COM NORTHPORT 1ST ADDITIONTime of Performance: October 31, 2018DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMOUNTSCATEGORYCONSTRUCTION125%REMARKS#1#2#3#4#5#6#7GradingNA$114,100Included in Phase 1 $114,100Sanitary Sewer$480,346$600,433$450,324$150,108Watermain$362,155$452,694$339,520$113,173Storm Sewer (w/pond structures)$591,406$739,258$369,629$184,814$184,814Streets + Sidewalks + Turn Lanes$636,008$795,010$397,505$198,753$198,753Bituminous Trails$34,876$43,595$32,696$10,899Surface Water Facilities$50,000$62,500$46,875$15,625Street Lighting$72,000$90,000$67,500$22,500Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs$2,600$3,250$2,438$813Private Utilities (electricity, natural gas, telephone, and cable)Landscaping$192,025$240,031$180,023$60,007.81Tree Preservation and RestorationNANAWetland Mitigation and BuffersNANAMonuments$4,860$6,075$4,556$1,519Erosion Control$23,670$29,588$22,191$7,397Miscellaneous FacilitiesNANARecord Drawings$30,000$37,500$28,125$9,375TOTALS$2,479,946$3,214,034RELEASED AMOUNTS:$1,556,978$114,100$587,948$263,282$180,023$451,694$60,008$774,983CUMMULATIVE AMOUNTS:$1,556,978$1,671,078$2,259,026$2,522,308$2,702,331$3,154,025$3,214,033SECURITY AMOUNT REMAINING:$1,657,055$1,542,955$955,008$691,726$511,703$60,008$0DATE:1/15/2019 11/5/2019 12/6/2022 12/20/2022 12/5/2023 1/2/2024 6/16/2026REDUCTIONS NORTHPORT 2ND ADDITIONTime of Performance: October 31, 2018DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMOUNTSCATEGORYCONSTRUCTION125%REMARKS#1#2#3#4#5#6#7GradingNANAIncluded in Phase 1Sanitary Sewer$73,001$91,251$68,438$22,813Watermain$60,130$75,163$56,372$18,791Storm Sewer (w/pond structures)$234,091$292,614$146,307$73,153$73,154Streets + Sidewalks$237,114$296,393$148,196$74,098$74,098Bituminous Trails$7,500$9,375$7,031$2,344Surface Water FacilitiesNANAStreet Lighting$12,000$15,000$11,250$3,750Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs$625$781$586$195Private Utilities (electricity, natural gas, telephone, and cable)Landscaping$52,500$65,625$49,219$16,406Tree Preservation and RestorationNANAWetland Mitigation and BuffersNANAMonuments$2,900$3,625$2,719$906Erosion ControlNANAMiscellaneous FacilitiesNANARecord Drawings$5,000$6,250$4,688$1,562TOTALS$684,861$856,077RELEASED AMOUNTS:$124,810$294,503$173,525$41,603$49,219$156,009$16,406CUMMULATIVE AMOUNTS:$124,810$419,313$592,838$634,442$683,661$839,671$856,077SECURITY AMOUNT REMAINING:$731,267$436,764$263,239$221,635$172,417$16,406$0DATE:1/15/2019 10/1/2019 12/6/2022 12/20/2022 12/5/2023 1/2/2024 6/16/2026REDUCTIONS NORTHPORT 3RD ADDITIONTime of Performance: October 31, 2021DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMOUNTSCATEGORYCONSTRUCTION125%REMARKS#1#2#3#4#5#6GradingNANAIncluded in Phase 1Sanitary Sewer$215,014$268,768100%$201,576$67,192Watermain$210,346$262,933100%$197,199$65,733Storm Sewer (w/pond structures)$232,695$290,869100%$145,434$72,717$72,717Streets + Sidewalks$458,706$573,383100%$286,691$143,346$143,346Bituminous Trails$15,723$19,654100%$14,740$4,913Surface Water FacilitiesNANAIncluded in Phase 1Street Lighting$40,000$50,000100%$37,500$12,500Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs$4,098$5,123100%$3,842$1,281Private Utilities (electricity, natural gas, telephone, and cable)Landscaping$43,500$54,375100%$40,781$13,594Tree Preservation and RestorationNANAWetland Mitigation and BuffersNANAMonuments$4,100$5,125100%$3,844$1,281Erosion Control$10,000$12,500100%$9,375$3,125Miscellaneous FacilitiesNANARecord Drawings$10,000$12,500100%$9,375$3,125TOTALS$1,244,182$1,555,228RELEASED AMOUNTS:$830,901$40,781$427,664$242,288$13,594$0CUMMULATIVE AMOUNTS:$830,901$871,682$1,299,346$1,541,634$1,555,228SECURITY AMOUNT REMAINING:$724,327$683,546$255,882$13,594$0DATE:1/4/2022 12/5/2023 1/16/2024 6/3/2025 6/16/2026REDUCTIONS STAFF REPORT DATE: 06/16/2026 Consent TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Adam Swanepoel – Assistant Public Works Director AGENDA ITEM: Elmo’s Pup Park Parking Lot Improvement Project. CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance☒ ☐ Managed Growth ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☒ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: On May 5, the City Council approved the plans and specifications for the paving and regrading of Elmo’s Pup Park Parking Lot Improvement Project. The project area includes both the Public Works storage building parking lot and the adjacent dog park parking lot. The existing Public Works parking lot has exceeded its useful life and is in need of significant repairs. The current dog park parking lot is unpaved, and the proposed improvements will provide a durable paved surface while also improving drainage conditions in the area. These upgrades are expected to reduce maintenance needs, enhance accessibility, and create a safer and more functional parking area for visitors and staff. In addition to improvements to the parking facilities, the project also includes upgrades to a short section of trail located within the dog park. The paving and regrading work is intended to improve site accessibility, enhance drainage, and provide a safer and more durable surface for both vehicles and park users. These improvements will help extend the life of the facilities while enhancing the overall functionality and appearance of the site. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should Council award the contract for the paving the Elmo’s Pup Parking Lot project? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Bolten and Menk prepared the bids and specifications for the paving of the parking lot for the Public Works storage building and dog park. Bids for the project were opened on June 2nd. Of the bids submitted, Miller Excavating Inc. provided the lowest bid in the amount of $179,015.23. Bolten and Menk reviewed the bids and made the recommendation that City Council award the contract to Miller Excavating, Inc. as outlined in the attached letter. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this resolution commits the City to enter into a construction contract for the project in the amount of $172,076.73. This project was budgeted for $327,000, with engineering and surveying expenses staff expects the project to cost around $253,000. From Finance Director Hadler: The Jamaca Building Parking Lot was originally in the CIP as being funded by the General Fund ($277K). However, the amount didn’t make it into the actual General Fund Budget spreadsheet, as Finance has been moving away from paying for CIP projects from the General Fund and had intended to start a Public Works Facilities fund for the Ideal Ave and the Jamaca buildings. That fund has since been created and we will be bringing various budget amendments and fund transfers in July that will include money for this project. There is $50,000 in the Park Dedication Budget for the Pup Park parking lot portion of the project. OPTIONS: Accept the Bid and award a contract to Miller Excavating Inc. Do not move forward with the project. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve Resolution No. 2026-044, Accepting the Bid and Awarding a Contract to Miller Excavating Inc. for the amount of $179,015.23 for the Pup Park Parking Lot project  ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2026-044 Engineers’ Letter of Award Recommendation and Tabulation of Bids Pup Park Parking lot map Project Schedule CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2026-044 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE ELMO’S PUP PARK PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Elmo’s Pup Park Parking Lot Improvements, bids were received, opened, and tabulated according to law, and bids were received complying with the advertisement; and WHEREAS, bids were tabulated, checked and summarized to verify that all requirements of the submittal were met; and WHEREAS, the project engineer reviewed the bids and has provided a letter recommending the award of the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Miller Excavating, Inc., for the bid amount of $179,015.23 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 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.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. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE 2026. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________ Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk h:\lkelmn\26x143425000\6_plans-specs\b_bid documents\143425 award ltr.docx June 2, 2026 Nate Stanley, P.E. City Engineer City of Lake Elmo 3880 Laverne Avenue N Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 RE: Elmo’s Pup Park Parking Lot Improvements City of Lake Elmo, MN City Project No. 143425 BMI Project No. 26X.143425 Dear Mr. Stanley, Attached is the bid abstract for the project referenced above. Six bids were received at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, June 2, 2026. The following is a summary of the bids received: BIDDERS BASE BID ALTERNATE BASE BID + ALTERNATE 1 Miller Excavating, Inc. $165,365.50 $13,649.73 $179,015.23 2 Winberg Companies LLC $183,268.25 $15,239.36 $198,507.62 3 Dreamland Contracting LLC $186,425.62 $11,867.70 $198,293.32 4 Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $194,050.40 $14,105.75 $208,156.15 5 Asphalt Surface Technologies Corporation a/k/a ASTECH Corp. $201,808.30 $15,004.77 $216,813.07 6 JCF Builders, LLC $235,231.00 $25,626.00 $260,857.00 We have reviewed the bids and recommend awarding the base bid and alternate bid to Miller Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $179,015.23. Sincerely, Bolton & Menk, Inc. Chad Isakson, P.E. Project Engineer Enclosure ABSTRACT OF BIDSELMO'S PUP PARK PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTSCITY OF LAKE ELMO, MNPROJECT NO. 143425BID DATE: 6/2/2026TIME: 10:00 AM123ITEM APPROX.NO. ITEM QUANT. UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT1 MOBILIZATION 1 LS $5,379.06 $5,379.06 $4,657.50 $4,657.50 $9,048.00 $9,048.002 6" RECLAIM EXISTING BITUMINOUS AND BASE MATERIAL 3770 SY $1.74 $6,559.80 $1.45 $5,462.73 $1.06 $3,996.203 SUBGRADE PREPARATION OF RECLAIM SURFACE (P) 5730 SY $1.04 $5,959.20 $0.78 $4,448.20 $2.91 $16,674.304 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,C) [SPWEA230C] 550 TN $104.59 $57,524.50 $117.47 $64,609.88 $112.58 $61,919.005 TYPE SP 12.5 NON-WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,C) [SPNWB230C] 730 TN $101.89 $74,379.70 $107.64 $78,577.20 $107.59 $78,540.706 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 410 GAL $5.08 $2,082.80 $4.14 $1,697.40 $4.63 $1,898.307 SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT 50 LF $3.81 $190.50 $2.07 $103.50 $8.32 $416.008 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS 52 LF $3.11 $161.72 $2.59 $134.55 $4.16 $216.329 STREET SWEEPING 2 HR $201.71 $403.42 $124.20 $248.40 $124.80 $249.6010 SUBGRADE CORRECTION (EV) 100 CY $24.41 $2,441.00 $71.42 $7,141.50 $27.70 $2,770.0011 SUBGRADE STABILIZING AGGREGATE (CV) 100 CY $38.59 $3,859.00 $76.59 $7,659.00 $21.09 $2,109.0012 SALVAGE, HAUL AND STOCKPILE EXCESS RECLAMED MATERIAL OFFSITE (LV) 100 CY $17.74$1,774.00 $24.84 $2,484.00 $27.70 $2,770.0013 COMMON EXCAVATION (EV)(P) 120 CY $18.06 $2,167.20 $27.43 $3,291.30 $32.28 $3,873.6014 SALVAGE AND INSTALL RECLAIM MATERIAL ONSITE (CV) 140 CY $17.74 $2,483.60 $19.67 $2,753.10 $13.89 $1,944.60BASE BID TOTAL BID: $165,365.50 $183,268.25 $186,425.6215 MOBILIZATION 1 LS $868.95 $868.95 $2,940.00 $2,940.00 $1,497.60 $1,497.6016 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B) [SPWEA230B] 60 TN $154.78 $9,286.80 $156.45 $9,387.00 $136.29 $8,177.4017 SUBGRADE PREPARATION OF GRAVEL SURFACE (P) 461 SY $6.88 $3,171.68 $4.20 $1,936.20 $4.04 $1,862.4418 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS 46 LF $3.15 $144.90 $6.38 $293.66 $4.16 $191.3619 SALVAGE AND INSTALL RECLAIM MATERIAL ONSITE (CV) 10 CY $17.74 $177.40 $68.25 $682.50 $13.89 $138.90ADD ALTERNATE TOTAL BID: $13,649.73 $15,239.36 $11,867.70TOTAL AMOUNT BID (BASE + ALTERNATE): $179,015.23 $198,507.62 $198,293.32Winberg Companies LLCShafer, MNDreamland Contracting LLCOsceola, WIADD ALTERNATEMiller Excavating, Inc.Stillwater, MNBASE BID ABSTRACT OF BIDSELMO'S PUP PARK PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTSCITY OF LAKE ELMO, MNPROJECT NO. 143425BID DATE: 6/2/2026TIME: 10:00 AMITEM APPROX.NO. ITEM QUANT. UNIT1 MOBILIZATION 1 LS2 6" RECLAIM EXISTING BITUMINOUS AND BASE MATERIAL 3770 SY3 SUBGRADE PREPARATION OF RECLAIM SURFACE (P) 5730 SY4 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,C) [SPWEA230C] 550 TN5 TYPE SP 12.5 NON-WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,C) [SPNWB230C] 730 TN6 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 410 GAL7 SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT 50 LF8 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS 52 LF9 STREET SWEEPING 2 HR10 SUBGRADE CORRECTION (EV) 100 CY11 SUBGRADE STABILIZING AGGREGATE (CV) 100 CY12 SALVAGE, HAUL AND STOCKPILE EXCESS RECLAMED MATERIAL OFFSITE (LV) 100 CY13 COMMON EXCAVATION (EV)(P) 120 CY14 SALVAGE AND INSTALL RECLAIM MATERIAL ONSITE (CV) 140 CYBASE BID TOTAL BID:15 MOBILIZATION 1 LS16 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B) [SPWEA230B] 60 TN17 SUBGRADE PREPARATION OF GRAVEL SURFACE (P) 461 SY18 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS 46 LF19 SALVAGE AND INSTALL RECLAIM MATERIAL ONSITE (CV) 10 CYADD ALTERNATE TOTAL BID:TOTAL AMOUNT BID (BASE + ALTERNATE):ADD ALTERNATEBASE BID456UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT$7,000.00 $7,000.00 $25,600.00 $25,600.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00$2.25 $8,482.50 $2.75 $10,367.50 $1.50 $5,655.00$1.30 $7,449.00 $2.09 $11,975.70 $3.50 $20,055.00$120.00 $66,000.00 $105.16 $57,838.00 $128.00 $70,400.00$112.00 $81,760.00 $99.33 $72,510.90 $128.00 $93,440.00$0.01 $4.10 $3.50 $1,435.00 $7.00 $2,870.00$4.60 $230.00 $4.00 $200.00 $5.50 $275.00$7.40 $384.80 $4.40 $228.80 $18.00 $936.00$260.00 $520.00 $231.00 $462.00 $150.00 $300.00$42.00 $4,200.00 $35.20 $3,520.00 $30.00 $3,000.00$55.00 $5,500.00 $37.95 $3,795.00 $30.00 $3,000.00$34.00 $3,400.00 $19.80 $1,980.00 $25.00 $2,500.00$48.00 $5,760.00 $49.72 $5,966.40 $30.00 $3,600.00$24.00 $3,360.00 $42.35 $5,929.00 $30.00 $4,200.00$194,050.40 $201,808.30 $235,231.00$3,200.00 $3,200.00 $1,100.00 $1,100.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00$142.00 $8,520.00 $145.31 $8,718.60 $220.00 $13,200.00$2.75 $1,267.75 $9.57 $4,411.77 $18.00 $8,298.00$8.00 $368.00 $4.40 $202.40 $18.00 $828.00$75.00 $750.00 $57.20 $572.00 $30.00 $300.00$14,105.75 $15,004.77 $25,626.00$208,156.15 $216,813.07 $260,857.00Asphalt Surface Technologies Corporationa/k/a ASTECH Corp.St. Cloud, MNJCF Builders, LLCPine City, MNBituminous Roadways, Inc.Mendota Heights, MN IvyCtN4 2 n d S t N JamacaAveNJamacaAveNJamacaAveN4 2 n d S t N 8989895989358909 4260 4235 4255 8989894989098895 8980 4215 4240 4220 9057 9679 LAKE ELMO Lake Elmo GIS Sources: Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, Microsoft, Vantor City Limits Parcels 3/31/2026, 3:57:01 PM 0 180 36090 ft 0 50 10025 m 1:2,050 3507 High Point Drive North Bldg. 1 – Suite E130 Oakdale, MN 55128 Phone: (651) 704-9970 Bolton-Menk.com Elmo’s Pup Park Parking Lot Improvements Project Lake Elmo, MN APRIL 7, 2026 Council authorizes the preparation of Plans and Specifications. MAY 5, 2026 Council approves Plans and Specifications and orders Advertisement for Bids. JUNE 2, 2026 Project Bid Date: Receive contractor Bids. JUNE 16, 2026 Council accepts Bids and awards Contract. JULY, 2026 Conduct Pre-Construction meeting and issue Notice to Proceed. • SEPTEMBER 18, 2026 Substantial Completion. • OCTOBER 30, 2026 Final Completion. STAFF REPORT DATE: June 16, 2026 CONSENT TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: City Clerk Julie Johnson AGENDA ITEM: Approve Lake Elmo Baseball Special Event Permit CORE STRATEGIES: ☒ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☐Managed Growth ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☐ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: Lake Elmo Baseball has applied for a special event permit and temporary liquor license for an event on Saturday,June 27, 2026. The city requires a special event permit for gatherings of over 100 people. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the Council approve the special event permit and temporary liquor license for the event? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Lake Elmo Baseball has submitted a special event permit application in conjunction with their annual JDP Baseball Tournament. The tournament raises awareness of opioids in memory of a Lake Elmo Baseball board member’s son. This year they are requesting the addition of beer sales and closure of a section of Laverne Avenue alongside Lion’s Park. The applicant is working with Twin Point Tavern to provide beer sales and plans to also have a pizza vendor. Street closure would occur just prior to the event, and barricades will be removed after the event. City staff will notify neighboring property owners of the street closure via mail. The applicant has agreed to keep the street open until after the Lake Elmo Library closes at 2:00 to ensure library patron has access to the library parking lot. Public Safety and Public Works staff have reviewed the application and provided their input. Sgt. Jacobson noted that the tournament has been held in prior years with no issues. Staff recommend approval of the application. Event Timetable: 4:00 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. June 27, 2026 with road closure and initial setup starting around 4:00 PM. Location: The event will be held at Lions Park with baseball games on baseball diamond. Beer and pizza sales will be located at the picnic shelter, and a guest speaker will address the event at 5:30. Parking: Parking will be available along the nearby streets. Insurance: Lake Elmo Baseball will secure liability insurance through their carrier as a condition of approval. Restrooms: Event attendees will have access to the Lion’s Park restrooms, and the applicant will supply additional on-site portable restrooms. Entertainment: Baseball games and guest speaker. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost for mailing notices to neighboring properties will be covered by the special event permit fee of $75.The city will also receive a $25 fee for the temporary liquor license. OPTIONS: 1)Approve the permit, temporary liquor license and road closure. 2)Amend and approve the permit. 3)Do not approve the permit. RECOMMENDATION: (if pulled from Consent) “Move to approve the special event permit for the Lake Elmo Baseball Event at Lion’s Park from 4:00pm to 10:00pm on Saturday,June 27,2026,temporary liquor license and the closure of Laverne Ave N from 36th St to the entrance of the baseball diamond” ATTACHMENTS: Special event permit application Temporary liquor license application STAFF REPORT DATE: 6.16.26 CONSENT TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Peter Tholen - Public Works Director AGENDA ITEM: Chama Mission, LLC-License Agreement for Entering Lions Park CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☒ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☐Managed Growth ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☐ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: The property that is the subject of this agreement is located on the east side of Lions Park. For several years, Public Works staff have accessed the ice rink area within Lions Park through the property located at 11320 Upper 33rd St. N. to perform winter maintenance activities, including snow removal and flooding of the ice rink. The City was recently informed that the property owner does not wish City staff to continue accessing the park through his property without a formal agreement in place. As a result, the city’s attorney has worked with the property owner to develop an agreement that would allow continued access to the ice rink area for maintenance and operational purposes while addressing the property owner's concerns. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Whether the City Council should approve a license agreement with the property owner to provide City staff access through private property for snow removal, ice rink maintenance, and other operational activities associated with Lions Park. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The proposed agreement would provide the City with permission to access Lions Park through the private property located at 11320 Upper 33rd St. N. for the purpose of maintaining and operating the ice rink area if needed. Public Works staff have historically used this access route to perform snow removal operations and flood the ice rink during the winter season. The property owner has informed the City that continued access through the property will require a formal agreement. The proposed license agreement establishes the terms and conditions under which City staff may access the property and clarifies the rights and responsibilities of both parties. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact associated with approval of the proposed license agreement. The agreement would allow the City to continue utilizing an existing access route that has historically been used for maintenance and operation of the Lions Park ice rink area. If the agreement is not approved, the City may need to identify, construct, or maintain an alternative access route, which could result in additional operational and maintenance costs in the future. OPTIONS: Option 1 – Approve the Agreement as Presented Approve the proposed license agreement with the property owner at 11320 Upper 33rd St. N. and authorize City staff to continue accessing Lions Park through the property for ice rink maintenance and related operational activities. Option 2 – Approve the Agreement with Modifications Approve the license agreement with changes directed by the City Council, such as modifying the terms, access provisions, duration of the agreement, or other conditions. RECOMMENDATION: (if pulled from Consent) Approve the proposed license agreement with the property owner at 11320 Upper 33rd St. N. and authorize City staff to continue accessing Lions Park through the property for ice rink maintenance and related operational activities. ATTACHMENTS: License Agreement 1 LA515\1\1096671.v1 LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CHAMA MISSION, LLC AND THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is made by and between Chama Mission, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (“Licensor”) and the City of Lake Elmo (“City” or “Licensee”), a Minnesota municipal corporation. WHEREAS, the Licensor is the owner of the properties located at 3481 Laverne Avenue North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 / 11320 Upper 33rd Street North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (collectively, the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Licensee desires to utilize the Property for surfaces access to Lions Park and has requested permission to use it; and WHEREAS, the Licensor desires to grant a license to the Licensee for the purpose of limited surface access by Licensees to Lions Park. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1. Incorporation. The above recitals are a material part of this Agreement and are incorporated herein. 2. Grant of License and Term. The Licensor hereby grants to Licensee a revocable, non-exclusive license to make surface use of the Property, which area is described on the attached Exhibit A, (hereinafter “License Area”) subject to the terms of this Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall commence on June 1st of 2026 and expire on April 30th of 2028 (“Term”). 3. Permitted Use. The License Area may only be used by Licensee for the purposes of accessing Lions Park. Licensee shall not install any structures or improvements within the License Area. 4. Maintenance and Repair of Premises. The Licensor shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep and maintain the License Area in good condition and shall not damage it. 5. Compliance with all Applicable Laws. Throughout the term, Licensee shall obtain and maintain, at its sole cost and expense, all approvals, permits, or licenses required by any governmental authority which are necessary for Licensee’s permitted use of the License Area; further, Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, at all times during the term hereof comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and requirements of any governmental authority having jurisdiction over the Property and the requests of the Licensor. 6. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Licensee assumes liability for and shall save and protect, hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the Licensor and its officials, 2 LA515\1\1096671.v1 officers, agents, and employees from and against all claims, suits, demands, damages, losses, expenses, and liabilities including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees, for bodily injury or property damage arising out of, resulting from, or relating in any manner to Licensee's use of the License Area by Licensee or its park users, officials, agents, contractors, and employees, and provided that any such claim, suit, demand, damage, loss, expense, or liability is caused in whole or in part by any act or omission of the Licensee or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by Licensee or its contractors, except to the extent such claim, suit, demand, damage, loss, expense, or liability is caused by the willful or negligent act or omission of the Licensor. The provisions of this paragraph shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 7. Surrender of Premises. Licensee hereby agrees upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement to vacate the Property and re-deliver the License Area to the Licensor in good order, condition, and repair (and in the same condition as delivered, ordinary wear and tear excepted). 8. Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, at any time by giving written notice to the other, specifying the date of termination, such notice to be given not less than 30 days prior to the date specified in such notice for the date of termination. In the event of a breach of this Agreement by Licensee, Licensor may terminate this Agreement upon providing 24 hours prior written notice to Licensee. Notwithstanding any termination, the covenants of this Agreement governing indemnification and waiver shall survive. 9. Compensation. Licensor will not receive any monetary compensation from Licensee for allowing use of the License Area by the Licensee. 9.5 Waiver. Licensee waives and releases any claims of ownership or prescriptive rights to the License Area and acknowledges that the same is and has been permissive. 10. Additional Covenants of Licensee. A. Contact Information. Licensee shall provide the Licensor with one or more emergency contacts, including phone numbers, who shall be available during all times that Licensee is utilizing the License Area. B. Damage to Premises. Licensee shall be liable for all damages to the Property caused by or arising out of the Licensee’s use under this Agreement (ordinary wear and tear excepted). 11. Governing Law. It is agreed that this Agreement shall be governed by, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 12. Entire Agreement. This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties and 3 LA515\1\1096671.v1 any prior understanding or representation of any kind preceding the date of this Agreement shall not be binding upon either party except to the extent incorporated in this Agreement. 13. Modification. Any modification of this Agreement or additional obligation assumed by either party in connection with this Agreement shall be binding only if evidenced in writing signed by each party or an authorized representative of each party. 14. Not Assignable. This Agreement may not be assigned. 15. Notices. Any notice provided for or concerning this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed sufficiently given when sent by certified or registered mail if sent to the respective address of each party as set forth below: Licensor Chama Mission, LLC 2201 O’Neil Road Hudson, WI 54016 Phone: 651-955-1346 Email: david@johnsonturner.com Licensee City Administrator City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Ave N Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Phone: (651) 747-3905 Email: nmiller@lakeelmo.gov IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each party to this Agreement has caused it to be executed on the date indicated below: CHAMA MISSION, LLC By: __________________________________________ Brian Zeller Its: Owner Dated: ____________ , 2026. 4 LA515\1\1096671.v1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________________________ Charles Cadenhead Its: Mayor Dated: ____________ , 2026. By: ____________________________________ Julie Johnson Its: City Clerk Dated: _____________, 2026. 5 LA515\1\1096671.v1 EXHIBIT A License Area (Cross-hatched area) STAFF REPORT DATE: June 16, 2026 CONSENT TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Mike Rusenovich, Project Engineer AGENDA ITEM: Approve Pay Request #1 for the 2026 Street Improvements Project CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☐Managed Growth ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☒ Balanced Finances now and future ☒ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: On February 17, 2026 the City Council awarded the contract for the 2026 Street Improvements project to McNamara Contracting, Inc. Work remains in progress with a substantial completion date of October 2, 2026 and a final completion date of November 13, 2026. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve Pay Request No. 1 for the 2026 Street Improvements Project? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: McNamara Contracting, Inc. has submitted Partial Pay Request No. 1 in the amount of $485,063.26. The request has been reviewed and payment is recommended in the amount requested. In accordance with the contract documents, the City has retained 5% of the total work completed. The amount retained as of this pay request is $25,529.65. FISCAL IMPACT: The partial payment in the amount of $485,063.26 is in accordance with the Contract for the project. Payment remains within the authorized scope and budget. RECOMMENDATION: (if pulled from Consent): Motion to approve Pay Request #1 in the amount of $485,063.26 to McNamara Contracting, Inc for the 2026 Street Improvements Project. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Partial Pay Estimate No. 1 Contractor's Application for PaymentOwner's Project No.:Engineer's Project No.:Agency's Project No.:1 From05/04/26to 05/31/26A C D E F F1 F2 G H I J K LItem Quantity UnitsUnit Price($)Value of Bid Item(C X E)($)Quantity Previous EstimateValue Previous EstimateEstimated Quantity Incorporated in the WorkValue of Work Completed to Date(E X G)($)1 1.00 LS 29,000.00 29,000.00 - 1.00 29,000.00 29,000.00 100% - 2 1.00 LS 4,000.00 4,000.00 - 1.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 100% - 3 80.00 LF 10.00 800.00 - 36.00 360.00 360.00 45% 440.00 4 2,310.00 LF 4.00 9,240.00 - 1,195.00 4,780.00 4,780.00 52% 4,460.00 5 21.00 EA 190.00 3,990.00 - 11.00 2,090.00 2,090.00 52% 1,900.00 6 130.00 HR 75.00 9,750.00 - - - - 9,750.00 7 90.00 MGAL 40.00 3,600.00 - - - - 3,600.00 8 7.00 EA 440.00 3,080.00 - - - - 3,080.00 9 7.00 EA 160.00 1,120.00 - 7.00 1,120.00 1,120.00 100% - 10 50.00 EA 175.00 8,750.00 - 21.00 3,675.00 3,675.00 42% 5,075.00 11 50.00 EA 75.00 3,750.00 - 53.00 3,975.00 3,975.00 106% (225.00)12 10.00 EA 36.00 360.00 - - - - 360.00 13 64.00 SF 63.00 4,032.00 - - - - 4,032.00 14 6.00 EA 250.00 1,500.00 - - - - 1,500.00 15 1,550.00 CY 59.00 91,450.00 - - - - 91,450.00 16 9,270.00 SY 9.50 88,065.00 - - - - 88,065.00 17 700.00 SY 9.50 6,650.00 - - - - 6,650.00 18 1.00 EA 1,000.00 1,000.00 - - - - 1,000.00 19 4.00 EA 420.00 1,680.00 - - - - 1,680.00 20 14.00 EA 775.00 10,850.00 - 14.00 10,850.00 10,850.00 100% - 21 274.00 LF 19.00 5,206.00 - 189.00 3,591.00 3,591.00 69% 1,615.00 22 6.00 EA 3,700.00 22,200.00 - 6.00 22,200.00 22,200.00 100% - 23 7.00 EA 6,200.00 43,400.00 - 7.00 43,400.00 43,400.00 100% - 24 3.00 EA 8,500.00 25,500.00 - 3.00 25,500.00 25,500.00 100% - 25 1.00 EA 6,000.00 6,000.00 - 1.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 100% - 26 5.00 EA 495.00 2,475.00 - 2.00 990.00 990.00 40% 1,485.00 27 56.00 LF 62.00 3,472.00 - 68.00 4,216.00 4,216.00 121% (744.00)28 314.00 LF 70.00 21,980.00 - 305.00 21,350.00 21,350.00 97% 630.00 29 137.00 LF 75.00 10,275.00 - 63.00 4,725.00 4,725.00 46% 5,550.00 30 16.00 LF 85.00 1,360.00 - 5.00 425.00 425.00 31% 935.00 31 16.00 LF 90.00 1,440.00 - 31.00 2,790.00 2,790.00 194% (1,350.00)32 2.00 EA 175.00 350.00 - 2.00 350.00 350.00 100% - 33 17.00 CY 185.00 3,145.00 - - - - 3,145.00 34 892.00 LF 10.00 8,920.00 - - - - 8,920.00 35 1,431.00 LF 5.00 7,155.00 - - - - 7,155.00 36 20.00 LF 18.00 360.00 - - - - 360.00 37 960.00 LF 1.00 960.00 - 777.50 777.50 777.50 81% 182.50 38 230.00 LF 1.00 230.00 - 171.65 171.65 171.65 75% 58.35 39 530.00 SY 26.00 13,780.00 - 251.80 6,546.80 6,546.80 48% 7,233.20 40 130.00 SY 26.00 3,380.00 - 102.74 2,671.24 2,671.24 79% 708.76 41 62.00 SF 2.00 124.00 - - - - 124.00 42 73.00 LF 16.30 1,189.90 - 12.00 195.60 195.60 16% 994.30 43 29,710.00 SY 1.40 41,594.00 - 12,986.00 18,180.40 18,180.40 44% 23,413.60 44 2,890.00 CY 27.00 78,030.00 - - - - 78,030.00 45 1.00 LS 500.00 500.00 - - - - 500.00 46 2.00 EA 1,500.00 3,000.00 - 5.00 7,500.00 7,500.00 250% (4,500.00)47 11.00 EA 1,275.00 14,025.00 - 11.00 14,025.00 14,025.00 100% - 48 2,047.00 LF 25.00 51,175.00 - 2,013.00 50,325.00 50,325.00 98% 850.00 49 25.00 EA 295.00 7,375.00 - 25.00 7,375.00 7,375.00 100% - SALVAGE, STOCKPILE, AND RESPREAD RECLAMED MATERIALCONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER STRUCTURECONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE4" PERFORATED PVC EDGE DRAIN W/ BACKFILL & WRAPDRAIN TILE CLEANOUTREMOVE CONCRETE FLUMEREMOVE AND DISPOSE OF CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER8" RECLAIM EXISTING BITUMINOUS AND BASE MATERIALHAUL EXCESS RECLAIM MATERIAL OFF SITE (LV)TELEVISING STORM SEWERDITCH GRADINGSAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTSAWCUT CONCRETE PAVEMENTREMOVE AND DISPOSE OF BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT REMOVE AND REPLACE STEPSRIPRAP W/ FABRIC, CLASS IIIJET / CLEAN STORM SEWER PIPE4' DIA MH WITH CASTING PER DETAIL 409PATCH DOGHOUSE / INVERT12" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 515" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 518" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF CONCRETE PAVEMENT 4' DIA CBMH WITH CASTING PER DETAIL 4064' DIA CBMH WITH SUMP AND CASTING PER DETAIL 405TOPSOIL BORROW (LV)SODDING TYPE LAWNSEED RESTORATION AREA AND WOOD FIBER BLANKETSALVAGE AND REINSTALL MANHOLE CASTING W/ NEW SALVAGE AND REINSTALL CATCH BASIN CASTING W/ NEW 21" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 324" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 3Progress Estimate - Unit Price WorkCity of Lake ElmoBolton & Menk, Inc.McNamara Contracting, Inc.2026 Street and Utility ImprovementsOwner:25X.139309139309Engineer:Contractor:Project:Contract:Contract InformationBid Item No.SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICESEDIMENT CONTROL LOG, TYPE WOOD FIBERSALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAILBOXTEMPORARY MAILBOXINLET PROTECTIONSTREET SWEEPING (WITH PICKUP BROOM)WATER FOR DUST CONTROLTRAFFIC CONTROLDescriptionWork CompletedMaterials Currently Stored (not in G)($)Work Completed and Materials Stored to Date (H + I)($)Previous EstimateCLEARINGGRUBBINGApplication Date:Application Period:Application No.:MOBILIZATION06/08/26BBASE BID% of Value of Item (J / F)(%)Balance to Finish (F - J)($)REMOVE SIGN AND POSTSIGN PANELS TYPE CSTREET NAME BLADE W/ POSTREMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING STORM SEWER REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE2' X 3' CATCH BASIN PER DETAIL 404Unit PriceEJCDC C-620 Contractor's Application for Payment(c) 2018 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.77 of 80 Contractor's Application for PaymentOwner's Project No.:Engineer's Project No.:Agency's Project No.:1 From05/04/26to 05/31/26A C D E F F1 F2 G H I J K LItem Quantity UnitsUnit Price($)Value of Bid Item(C X E)($)Quantity Previous EstimateValue Previous EstimateEstimated Quantity Incorporated in the WorkValue of Work Completed to Date(E X G)($)Progress Estimate - Unit Price WorkCity of Lake ElmoBolton & Menk, Inc.McNamara Contracting, Inc.2026 Street and Utility ImprovementsOwner:25X.139309139309Engineer:Contractor:Project:Contract:Contract InformationBid Item No. DescriptionWork CompletedMaterials Currently Stored (not in G)($)Work Completed and Materials Stored to Date (H + I)($)Previous EstimateApplication Date:Application Period:Application No.: 06/08/26B% of Value of Item (J / F)(%)Balance to Finish (F - J)($)50 510.00 CY 32.00 16,320.00 - 133.00 4,256.00 4,256.00 26% 12,064.00 51 280.00 CY 32.00 8,960.00 - 280.00 8,960.00 8,960.00 100% - 52 1,550.00 CY 32.00 49,600.00 - 455.00 14,560.00 14,560.00 29% 35,040.00 53 790.00 CY 19.00 15,010.00 - 445.82 8,470.58 8,470.58 56% 6,539.42 54 420.00 CY 5.00 2,100.00 - 382.00 1,910.00 1,910.00 91% 190.00 55 30,950.00 SY 1.00 30,950.00 - 12,986.00 12,986.00 12,986.00 42% 17,964.00 56 2,430.00 TN 81.00 196,830.00 - - - - 196,830.00 57 3,220.00 TN 81.00 260,820.00 - 757.79 61,380.99 61,380.99 24% 199,439.01 58 2,050.00 GAL 2.00 4,100.00 - 75.00 150.00 150.00 4% 3,950.00 59 590.00 SY 42.00 24,780.00 - - - - 24,780.00 60 15,980.00 LF 16.00 255,680.00 - 4,615.00 73,840.00 73,840.00 29% 181,840.00 61 190.00 SY 93.75 17,812.50 - 116.78 10,948.13 10,948.13 61% 6,864.37 62 188.00 SF 10.40 1,955.20 - 7.31 76.02 76.02 4% 1,879.18 63 40.00 SF 37.00 1,480.00 - - - - 1,480.00 64 25.00 EA 850.00 21,250.00 - - - - 21,250.00 65 139.00 SF 12.00 1,668.00 - - - - 1,668.00 1,570,583.60$ -$ 500,692.91$ -$ 500,692.91$ 32% 1,069,890.69$ 66 1.00 EA 2,900.00 2,900.00 - 1.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 100% - 67 1.00 LS 7,000.00 7,000.00 - 1.00 7,000.00 7,000.00 100% - 9,900.00$ -$ 9,900.00$ -$ 9,900.00$ 100% -$ 1,580,483.60$ -$ 510,592.91$ -$ 510,592.91$ 32% 1,069,890.69$ CONCRETE HYDRANT SPLASH PADB418 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENTCONCRETE FLUMESALVAGE AND REINSTALL PAVERSADJUST EXISTING VALVE BOXSUBGRADE PREPARATION OF RECLAIMED SURFACETYPE SP 9.5 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,C) TYPE SP 12.5 BITUMINOUS NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COATPATCH BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAYSUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV)COMMON EXCAVATION - STREETCOMMON EXCAVATION - BOULEVARDSUBGRADE STABILIZING AGGREGATE (CV)SALVAGE AND REINSTALL RECLAM MATERIAL INNSDALE PROJECT TOTALCHANGE ORDER TOTALBASE BID + CHANGE ORDERCHANGE ORDER27" CATCH BASIN PER DETAIL 402REMOVE AND REPLACE EX FES-14BASE BID TOTALUnit PriceEJCDC C-620 Contractor's Application for Payment(c) 2018 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.78 of 80 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 16, 2026 CONSENT TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Mike Rusenovich, Project Engineer AGENDA ITEM: Accept Quotes and Award a Contract for the 2026 Crack Seal Project CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☐Managed Growth ☒ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☒ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: In accordance with the City’s annual street maintenance program, certain streets have been scheduled to be crack sealed in 2026. See attached Location Map. The street maintenance work programmed in 2026 was reviewed jointly by Public Works and Engineering to confirm the work to be completed. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council accept quotes and award a contract for the 2026 Crack Seal Project? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Quotes for crack sealing were solicited from seven qualified contractors and three quotes were received on June 5, 2026. Of the quotes provided, Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc. provided the lowest quote of $172,076.73. Following review and verification of the quotes, the City Engineer and Design Engineer are recommending that the City Council award the contract to Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc. as outlined in the attached letter. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this resolution commits the City to enter into a construction contract for the project in the amount of $172,076.73. The project will be funded through the Street Maintenance Fund. OPTIONS: Accept the Quote and Award a Contract to Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc. Do not move forward with this project. RECOMMENDATION: (if pulled from Consent): Motion to approve Resolution No. 2026-XXX, Accepting Quotes and Awarding a Contract to Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc. for the amount of $172,076.73 for the 2026 Crack Seal Project. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Engineer’s Letter of Award Recommendation and Tabulation of Quotes 2.2026 Crack Seal Project Location Map 3.2026 Crack Seal Project Schedule h:\lkelmn\26x142139000\6_plans-specs\c_bids received\crack seal\2026-06-08 award ltr.docx June 8, 2026 Nate Stanley, P.E. City Engineer City of Lake Elmo 3880 Laverne Avenue N Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 RE: 2026 Crack Seal Project City of Lake Elmo, MN City Project No. 142139 BMI Project No. 26X.142139 Dear Mr. Stanley, Attached is the quote abstract for the project referenced above. Three quotes were received on Friday, June 5, 2026. The following is a summary of the quotes received: Bidder Total Bid Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc. $172,076.73 Allied Blacktop Company $226,416.75 Fahrner Asphalt Sealers, LLC $238,061.04 ACI Asphalt Contractors No Quote Submitted Asphalt Surface Technologies Corp. No Quote Submitted Bargen Incorporated No Quote Submitted MP Asphalt Maintenance No Quote Submitted We have reviewed the quotes and recommend awarding this bid to Gopher State Sealcoat, Inc. in the amount of $172,076.73. Sincerely, Bolton & Menk, Inc. Michael Rusenovich, P.E. Project Engineer Enclosure CITY OF LAKE ELMO Feet 0 2500 5000 2026 STREET MAINTENANCE MAP LEGEND 2026 CRACK SEAL ONLY 2026 CRACK SEAL & SEAL COAT WELL #2 PUMPHOUSE WELL #5 WELLHOUSE WELL #4 WELLHOUSE INWOOD BOOSTER STATION TAPESTRY LIFT STATION 32ND STREET LIFT STATION ROYAL GOLF NE LIFT STATION ROYAL GOLF W LIFT STATION ROYAL GOLF S LIFT STATION CITY HALL PARKING LOT INWOOD WATER TOWER GOOSE LAKE PARK PARKING LOT 3507 High Point Drive North Bldg. 1 – Suite E130 Oakdale, MN 55128 Phone: (651) 704-9970 Bolton-Menk.com 2026 Street Maintenance Project Lake Elmo, MN Project No.: 26X.142139.000 CRACK SEAL PROJECT May 22, 2026 Solicit Quotations June 5, 2026 Receive Contractor Quotes (Two Weeks) June 16, 2026 Council awards Contract July 6, 2026 Contractor begins work July 31, 2026 Substantial completion of work SEAL COAT PROJECT June 5, 2026 Ad for Bid, QuestCDN Project Posted June 26, 2026 Receive Contractor Bids (21-day bidding period) July 7, 2026 Council accepts bids and awards Contract August 10, 2026 Contractor begins work (Or sooner if crack seal schedule allows) September 4, 2026 Substantial completion of work September 25, 2026 Final completion of work STRIPING PROJECT June 5, 2026 Solicit Quotations June 19, 2026 Receive Contractor Quotes (2-weeks) July 7, 2026 Council awards Contract September 25, 2026 Contractor begins work October 23, 2026 Final completion of work STAFF REPORT DATE: 6/16/2026 CONSENT TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Jack Griffin. Municipal Sr. Project Manager REVIEWED BY: Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney AGENDA ITEM: Approve the Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement Terms and Conditions for the Trunk Highway (TH) 36 and Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) Improvements CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☒ Managed Growth ☒ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☒ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: Washington County is leading an intersection improvement project at Trunk Highway (TH) 36 and Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17), including the construction of a South Frontage Road from Keats Avenue to approximately 0.4 miles east of Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17), to improve safety, capacity, and operation of the intersection and surrounding area. The Project is planned to begin construction in June 2026 and is scheduled to be completed in the fall 2027. On December 16, 2025, the City Council approved a resolution approving Municipal Support for the Improvements including the South Frontage Road Extension to Keats Avenue and including a right-turn-only access from eastbound TH 36 to southbound Keats Avenue. On May 5, 2026, the City Council approved a Cooperative Cost Share Agreement with the County, estimating the Net cost share participation by Lake Elmo to be $2,430,000. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve the Local Road Improvement Program (LRIP) Grant Agreement Terms and Conditions for the Trunk Highway (TH) 36 and Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) Improvements in the amount of $3,407,393.77? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: As part of the Project funding, Washington County and the City of Lake Elmo received Local Road Improvement funding as appropriated in 2023 and as amended in 2026, in the amount of $10,000,000.00 in general obligation bond funds “for property acquisition and to predesign, design, construct, furnish, and equip a new interchange at marked Trunk Highway 36 and County State-Aid Highway 17, known as Lake Elmo Avenue, in Washington County.” The portion of the funds appropriated to the City of Lake Elmo is $3,407,393.77 in LRIP funding for right-of-way acquisition. The amended appropriation does not change the City estimated cost share in the Project, as the LRIP funding was already anticipated at the time of approving the Cooperative Cost Share Agreement. However, the LRIP Grant Agreement must be fully executed between Lake Elmo and MnDOT before the LRIP grant can be authorized. FISCAL IMPACT: The County is requesting cost participation in the Project by the City of Lake Elmo. The current estimated Net cost share participation by Lake Elmo is $2,430,000, per the previously approved Cooperative Cost Share Agreement with Washington County. By acceptance of this LRIP grant, the estimated City cost share does not change as the previous estimates already assumed receipt of the LRIP grant amounts. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council approve, as part of the consent agenda, a Resolution approving the Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement Terms and Conditions for the Trunk Highway (TH) 36 and Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) Improvements. If removed from the consent agenda, the recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve Resolution No. 2026-042 Approving the Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement Terms and Conditions for the Trunk Highway (TH) 36 and Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17) Improvements.” ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution Approving the LRIP Grant Agreement. • Notice of LRIP Funding Letter dated May 26, 2026. • Local Road Improvement Program (LRIP) Grant Agreement. CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2026-042 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo has applied to the Commissioner of Transportation for a grant from the Local Road Improvement Fund; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation has given notice that funding for this project is available; and WHEREAS, the amount of the grant has been determined to be $3,407,393.77 by reason of the lowest responsible bid; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF LAKE ELMO, that the City of Lake Elmo does hereby agree to the terms and conditions of the grant consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 174.52, and will pay any additional amount by which the cost exceeds the estimate and will return to the Local Road Improvement Fund any amount appropriated for the project but not required. The proper City officers are authorized to execute a grant agreement and any amendments thereto with the Commissioner of Transportation concerning the above-referenced grant. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE 2026. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________ Charles Cadenhead (Seal) Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk State Aid for Local Transportation 395 John Ireland Blvd., MS 500 St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone: 651-366-3800 1 of 2 206-020-005LRIPFundLtr.docx May 26, 2026 Jack Griffin Lake Elmo City Engineer 1305 Interlachen Drive Eagan, MN 55123 In reference to: Local Road Improvement Program (LRIP) Grant State Aid Accounting System Account No. 392 (2023 LRIP General Obligation Bond Funds) MnDOT Grant Agreement No. 1063561 SP 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Dear Mr. Griffin, You are now authorized to advance the status of this project. In 2023 laws, Chapter 72, Article 1, Section 16, Subdivision 19, as amended by 2026 laws, H719 (as of the date of this funding letter, the law has not been signed into law and thus a Chapter number has not yet been assigned), Article 3, Section 3, $10,000,000.00 in general obligation bond funds was appropriated for one of more grants to Washington County, the city of Lake Elmo, or the city of Grant, or any combination of these entities “for property acquisition and to predesign, design, construct, furnish, and equip a new interchange at marked Trunk Highway 36 and County State-Aid Highway 17, known as Lake Elmo Avenue, in Washington County.” This portion of the project will be funded from that appropriation, with $3,407,393.77 in LRIP funding for right of way acquisition. Note that additional earmark LRIP funding under SAAS Accts 392, 371, and 411 are applied to this project for construction, right of way acquisition, and engineering as grants to Washington County under separate funding letters, which each will require separate grant agreements. Grant funds to the City of Lake Elmo from SAAS Acct 392 are highlighted in yellow in the funding summary below. This project funding requires the execution of a MnDOT grant agreement before the LRIP funds can be authorized. After the bid opening, please work through the various DCP steps as you work towards awarding the project. After award and following submittal of DCP-08, Metro District will issue the final funding participation distribution. After this, Mohamed Farah from State Aid Finance will issue the LRIP encumbrance letter to the county. The county should use the numbers from the encumbrance letter in assembling the LRIP grant agreement. The MnDOT grant agreement must be fully executed before the grant can be authorized, and the grant agreement should be fully executed before work begins on the project. Please contact me if this will be an issue. The MnDOT agreement number is 1063561 and should be included in the upper right corner of the LRIP grant agreement. Please submit a draft agreement to Olga Kruglova (olga.kruglova@state.mn.us) from my office for review prior to obtaining local agency signatures. Then submit a pdf of the grant agreement with local agency signatures to Ms. Kruglova for approval and final execution. The templates for the 2023 LRIP general obligation bond grant agreement and resolution can be found on the state aid website. During construction, you will need to work with the District State Aid Engineer on submitting and approving documentation and state aid pay requests for this work. 2 of 2 206-020-005LRIPFundLtr.docx Project Estimate – Right of Way Acquisition 2023 LRIP GO (SAAS Acct 392) - ROW acquisition 206-020-005 $ 3,407,393.77 2023 LRIP GF (SAAS Acct 411) - ROW acquisition 082-617-014 $ 94,258.54 2023 LRIP GO (SAAS Acct 392) - ROW acquisition 082-617-014 $ 3,063,040.55 CSAH $ 2,136,959.45 Local City $ 1,248,347.69 Total $ 9,950,000.00 Sincerely, Marc Briese State Aid State Programs Manager copy: Wayne Sandberg, Washington County Engineer Dan Erickson, Metro District State Aid Engineer Luke Lortie, Metro District State Aid Programs Engineer Brandon Anderson, Metro District Assistant State Aid Programs Engineer Colleen Brown, Metro District Federal Aid Program Coordinator Rob Wielinski, Metro District Federal Aid Project Manager Mohamed Farah, State Aid Finance Olga Kruglova, State Aid Programs MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 1 LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (LRIP) GRANT AGREEMENT This Agreement between the Minnesota Department of Transportation (“MnDOT”) and the Grantee named below is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 174.52 and pursuant to Minn. Laws 2023, Chapter 72- H.F. 669. The provisions in that section and the Exhibits attached hereto and incorporated by reference constitute this Agreement and the persons signing below agree to fully comply with all of the requirements of this Agreement. This Agreement will be effective on the date State obtains all required signatures under Minnesota Statutes §16C.05, subdivision 2. 1. Public Entity (Grantee) name, address and contact person: City of Lake Elmo 3880 Laverne Avenue N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Contact: Nicole Miller, City Administrator 2. Project(s): Name of Project & Project Number (See Exhibit C for location) Amount of LRIP Funds Amount of Required Matching Funds Completion Date SP 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 $3,407,393.77 $6,542,606.23 May 31, 2031 3. Total Amount of LRIP Grant for all projects under this Agreement: $3,407,393.77 4. The following Exhibits for each project are attached and incorporated by reference as part of this Agreement: Exhibit A Completed Sources and Uses of Funds Schedule Exhibit B Project Schedule, Workforce Certificate, and Equal Pay Certificate Exhibit C Bond Financed Property Certification Exhibit D Grant Application Exhibit E Grantee Resolution Approving Grant Agreement Exhibit F General Terms and Conditions MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 2 5. Additional requirements, if any: None 6. Any modification of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties. (The remaining portion of this page was intentionally left blank.) MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 3 PUBLIC ENTITY (GRANTEE) The Grantee certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed the grant agreement on behalf of the Grantee as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions, or ordinances. By: __________________________________ Title: ________________________________ Date: ________________________________ By: __________________________________ Title: ________________________________ Date: ________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Approval and Certifying Encumbrance as required by Minnesota Statutes § 16A.15 and 16C.05 By: __________________________________ State Aid Programs Manager (with delegated authority) Date: ________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CONTRACT MANAGEMENT By: __________________________________ Date: ________________________________ MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 4 EXHIBIT A SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS SCHEDULE SOURCES OF FUNDS USES OF FUNDS Entity Supplying Funds Amount Expenses Amount State Funds: Items Paid for with LRIP Grant Funds: 2023 LRIP GO Grant (SAAS Acct 392) $3,407,393.77 Right of Way Acquisition $3,407,393.77 Other: Right of Way Acquisition $3,157,299.09 2023 LRIP GF Grant (SAAS Acct 411) Via agreement 1063263 $94,258.54 2023 LRIP GO (SAAS Acct 392) Via agreement 1063264 $3,063,040.55 Subtotal $6,564,692.86 Subtotal $6,564,692.86 Public Entity Funds: Items paid for with Non- LRIP Grant Funds: Local Match $3,385,307.14 Right of Way Acquisition $3,385,307.14 Subtotal $ 3,385,307.14 Subtotal $3,385,307.14 TOTAL FUNDS $9,950,000.00 = TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $9,950,000.00 MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 5 EXHIBIT B PROJECT SCHEDULE, WORKFORCE CERTIFICATE, AND EQUAL PAY CERTIFICATE Award Date: June 16, 2026 Construction Start Date: June 22, 2026 Construction Substantial Complete Date: October 31, 2027 Contract Final Completion Date: May 31, 2031 MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 6 INSERT APPARENT LOW BIDDER WORKFORCE CERTIFICATE BID FORM This grant is not subject to workforce certificate requirements since it provides funding entirely for right of way acquisition. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 7 INSERT APPARENT LOW BIDDER EQUAL PAY CERTIFICATE BID FORM This grant is not subject to equal pay certificate requirements since it provides funding entirely for right-of-way acquisition. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 8 EXHIBIT C BOND FINANCED PROPERTY CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota General Obligation Bond Financed Property The undersigned states that it has a fee simple, leasehold and/or easement interest in the real property located in the County(ies) of Washington, State of Minnesota that is generally described or illustrated graphically in Attachment 1 attached hereto and all improvements thereon (the “Restricted Property”) and acknowledges that the Restricted Property is or may become State bond-financed property. To the extent that the Restricted Property is or becomes State bond-financed property, the undersigned acknowledges that: A. The Restricted Property is State bond-financed property under Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695, is subject to the requirements imposed by that statute, and cannot be sold, mortgaged, encumbered or otherwise disposed of without the approval of the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget; and B. The Restricted Property is subject to the provisions of the Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement between the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the undersigned dated ________________, 20___; and C. The Restricted Property shall continue to be deemed State bond-financed property for 37.5 years or until the Restricted Property is sold with the written approval of the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget. Date: __________________, 20____ _____________________________________ City of Lake Elmo, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota By: ________________________________ Name: _______________________________ Title: _______________________________ By: ________________________________ Name: _______________________________ Title: _______________________________ MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 9 Attachment 1 to Exhibit C GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF RESTRICTED PROPERTY U U MB 18" RCP18" CMP 18" CMP 12" RCP15" RCPMC MP 18" C M P12"NWL = 964.0 BTM = 961.0 KEATS WET POND MATTHEW A. WASSMAN 1/21/2026 26883 DRAINAGE PLANS BEGIN CONSTRUCTION TO TH 36 EB STA 241+00 SP 8204-57 (TH 36) / SP 082-617-014 / SP 206-020-005 226 533 ...\Projects\2021\1210145\FINAL\DESIGN\Plan Sheets\cd820457_300drp.dgn2/3/20269:22:57 AMDATENO DWN CKD REVISIONS SHEET NO.OF SHEETSUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SHEET WAS PREPARED PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LICENSE # 230 235 240 230 235 240 510 505BTM NWL 60TH ST N (SFR) TH 36 EB TH 36 WB 60TH ST N WET DITCH A WET DITCH C WET DITCH B KEATS AVE R KEATS AVE59TH ST N59TH ST CT N 12' THRU12' THRU4' SHLD4' SHLD12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 3' SHLD 3' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD PLACEMENT LOCATIONS. SECTIONS AND STANDARD PLANS FOR EXACT SCHEMATICALLY FOR CLARITY. SEE TYPICAL SUBSURFACE DRAINS ARE DRAWNC. BASINS TO BE REMOVED. STORM SEWER, CULVERT, MANHOLE, AND CATCH SEE INPLACE DRAINAGE & REMOVAL PLANS FORB. NOTED FOR GUTTER LOW POINTS. ROADWAY PROFILE GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE ALL HIGH AND LOW POINTS SHOWN ARE ON THEA. GENERAL NOTES TH 36 EB STA 227+75.77 BEGIN SP 8204-57 (TH 36) BEGIN CONSTRUCTION CITY OF GRANT CITY OF LAKE ELMO SFR STA 506+64.02 SP 082-617-014 BEGIN SP 206-020-005 (60TH ST N (SFR)) BEGIN CONSTRUCTION R EXISTING DITCH PROPOSED DITCH EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE PROPOSED STORM STRUCTURE SURFACE FLOW DIRECTION EXISTING STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED STEEL CASING PIPE PROPOSED STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED SUBSURFACE DRAIN STANDARD PLATE RANDOM RIPRAP PLACED PER MATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 241+00100 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND EXISTING STRUCTURE NUMBER PROPOSED STRUCTURE NUMBER DELINEATED WET DITCH DELINEATED WETLAND PERMANENT EASEMENT TEMPORARY EASEMENT PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION LIMITS M 5XXX XXXX 5003 5004 5007 5008 5009 5010 MnDOT ROW Washington County ROW City of Lake Elmo ROW Existing City D&U Easement Proposed City D&U Easement DRAFT COPY WELL WELL WELL MB EL. 974.26 STA. 513+24.11 60TH ST N (SFR) LOW POINT EL. 976.01 STA. 515+40.73 60TH ST N (SFR) HIGH POINT24" CMP MATTHEW A. WASSMAN 1/21/2026 26883 DRAINAGE PLANS TH 36 EB STA 241+00 TO STA 254+00 SP 8204-57 (TH 36) / SP 082-617-014 / SP 206-020-005 227 533 ...\Projects\2021\1210145\FINAL\DESIGN\Plan Sheets\cd820457_300drp.dgn2/3/20269:22:59 AMDATENO DWN CKD REVISIONS SHEET NO.OF SHEETSUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SHEET WAS PREPARED PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LICENSE # 245 250 245 250 515 520 525 TH 36 EB TH 36 WB 60TH ST N WET DITCH D PEMB / PEMC / PUBH TYPE 2 / TYPE 3 / TYPE 5 WETLAND A 60TH ST N (SFR) R 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 10' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 3' SHLD 3' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU CITY OF GRANT CITY OF LAKE ELMO CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER.1 SPECIFIC NOTES 60TH ST LN N1 PLACEMENT LOCATIONS. SECTIONS AND STANDARD PLANS FOR EXACT SCHEMATICALLY FOR CLARITY. SEE TYPICAL SUBSURFACE DRAINS ARE DRAWNC. BASINS TO BE REMOVED. STORM SEWER, CULVERT, MANHOLE, AND CATCH SEE INPLACE DRAINAGE & REMOVAL PLANS FORB. NOTED FOR GUTTER LOW POINTS. ROADWAY PROFILE GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE ALL HIGH AND LOW POINTS SHOWN ARE ON THEA. GENERAL NOTES SENSITIVITY ENVIRONMENTAL AREA OF EXISTING DITCH PROPOSED DITCH EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE PROPOSED STORM STRUCTURE SURFACE FLOW DIRECTION EXISTING STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED STEEL CASING PIPE PROPOSED STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED SUBSURFACE DRAIN STANDARD PLATE RANDOM RIPRAP PLACED PERMATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 254+00MATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 241+00100 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND EXISTING STRUCTURE NUMBER PROPOSED STRUCTURE NUMBER DELINEATED WET DITCH DELINEATED WETLAND PERMANENT EASEMENT TEMPORARY EASEMENT PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION LIMITS M 5XXX XXXX 5006 5005 5012 5011 6000 5300 5302 53035301 MnDOT ROW Washington County ROW City of Lake Elmo ROW Existing City D&U Easement Proposed City D&U Easement DRAFT COPY MM MBMBMBMBMBMBMBMB24" RCP15" CMP 15" CMP 18" CMP 10" CMP 12" CPP 18" CMP MATTHEW A. WASSMAN 1/21/2026 26883 DRAINAGE PLANS TH 36 EB STA 254+00 TO STA 266+50 SP 8204-57 (TH 36) / SP 082-617-014 / SP 206-020-005 228 533 ...\Projects\2021\1210145\FINAL\DESIGN\Plan Sheets\cd820457_300drp.dgn2/3/20269:23:00 AMDATENO DWN CKD REVISIONS SHEET NO.OF SHEETSUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SHEET WAS PREPARED PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LICENSE # 255 260 265 255 260 265 110 115 530 535 60TH ST N (NFR) TH 36 EB TH 36 WB 60TH ST N WET DITCH D 60TH ST N (SFR) R 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 10' SHLD 12' THRU 3' SHLD 12' THRU 10' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU CITY OF GRANT CITY OF LAKE ELMO60TH ST LN N12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' ACCEL. LANE 8' SHLD PLACEMENT LOCATIONS. SECTIONS AND STANDARD PLANS FOR EXACT SCHEMATICALLY FOR CLARITY. SEE TYPICAL SUBSURFACE DRAINS ARE DRAWNC. BASINS TO BE REMOVED. STORM SEWER, CULVERT, MANHOLE, AND CATCH SEE INPLACE DRAINAGE & REMOVAL PLANS FORB. NOTED FOR GUTTER LOW POINTS. ROADWAY PROFILE GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE ALL HIGH AND LOW POINTS SHOWN ARE ON THEA. GENERAL NOTES EXISTING DITCH PROPOSED DITCH EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE PROPOSED STORM STRUCTURE SURFACE FLOW DIRECTION EXISTING STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED STEEL CASING PIPE PROPOSED STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED SUBSURFACE DRAIN STANDARD PLATE RANDOM RIPRAP PLACED PER MATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 266+50MATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 254+00100 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND EXISTING STRUCTURE NUMBER PROPOSED STRUCTURE NUMBER DELINEATED WET DITCH DELINEATED WETLAND PERMANENT EASEMENT TEMPORARY EASEMENT PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION LIMITS M 5XXX XXXX 5304 5306 5305 5307 MnDOT ROW Washington County ROW City of Lake Elmo ROW Existing City D&U Easement Proposed City D&U Easement DRAFT COPY WELL M GP M GP WELL MBMBMBMBEL. 940.86 STA. 544+97.07 60TH ST N (SFR) LOW POINT EL. 947.03 STA. 549+75.00 60TH ST N (SFR) HIGH POINT EL. 937.77 STA. 124+21.06 60TH ST N (NFR) LOW POINT EL. 944.61 STA. 273+34.57 TH 36 WB LOW POINT EL. 945.31 STA. 273+56.34 TH 36 EB LOW POINT EL. 945.60 STA. 128+74.05 60TH ST N (NFR) HIGH POINT EL. 944.17 STA. 132+30.34 60TH ST N (NFR) LOW POINT EL. 943.84 STA. 62+45.75 TH 36 WB ENTRANCE LOW POINT EL. 944.35 STA. 71+48.41 TH 36 WB EXIT LOW POINT EL. 944.65 STA. 80+65.26 TH 36 EB EXIT LOW POINT EL. 944.65 STA. 90+76.17 TH 36 EB ENTRANCE LOW POINT EL. 945.64 STA. 81+92.78 TH 36 EB EXIT HIGH POINT EL. 944.73 STA. 60+86.78 TH 36 WB ENTRANCE HIGH POINT 18" CMP 15" RCPNWL=935.0 BTM = 931.0 WET POND ZIERTMAN BTM = 932.0 SHAMROCK INFILTRATION BASIN NWL = 938.0 BTM = 931.0 MOUCHET WET POND BTM = 935.0 KELVIN INFILTRATION BASIN MATTHEW A. WASSMAN 1/21/2026 26883 DRAINAGE PLANS TH 36 EB STA 266+50 TO STA 281+50 SP 8204-57 (TH 36) / SP 082-617-014 / SP 206-020-005 229 533 ...\Projects\2021\1210145\FINAL\DESIGN\Plan Sheets\cd820457_300drp.dgn2/3/20269:23:01 AMDATENO DWN CKD REVISIONS SHEET NO.OF SHEETSUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SHEET WAS PREPARED PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LICENSE #82927262 270 275 2807060 9080270 275 280 120 125 130 540 545550 BTM BTM BTM BTM NWL NWL 60TH ST N (NFR) TH 36 EBTH 36 WB TH 36 WB ENTRANCE TH 36 WB EXIT TH 36 EB ENTRANCETH 36 EB EXIT WET DITCH 2 WET DITCH 1 RWALL 1 PEMB / PUBH TYPE 2 / TYPE 5 WETLAND 3 PEMB / PEMC / PUBH TYPE 2 / TYPE 3 / TYPE 5 WETLAND 1 PEMB / PEMC / PUBH TYPE 2 / TYPE 3 / TYPE 5 WETLAND 2 CASING PIPE 50' x 54" STEEL 60TH ST N (SFR) 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 3' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD 12' THRU 13' LTL 4' SHLD 14' THRU 4' SHLD 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' THRU 13' RTL CITY OF GRANT CITY OF LAKE ELMO DITCH BLOCK. SEE DRAINAGE DETAILS.9 SEE DRAINAGE DETAILS. DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 5.4 SEE DRAINAGE DETAILS. DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 2.3 SEE DRAINAGE DETAILS. DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1.2 SPECIFIC NOTES 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 4' SHLD 13' LTL 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12 ' THRU 4 ' SHLD 12' THRU/RTL 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' DECEL. LANE 8' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' ACCEL. LANE 8' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 12' DECEL. LANE 8' SHLD 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' ACCEL. LANE 8' SHLD 547 3 2 PLACEMENT LOCATIONS. SECTIONS AND STANDARD PLANS FOR EXACT SCHEMATICALLY FOR CLARITY. SEE TYPICAL SUBSURFACE DRAINS ARE DRAWNC. BASINS TO BE REMOVED. STORM SEWER, CULVERT, MANHOLE, AND CATCH SEE INPLACE DRAINAGE & REMOVAL PLANS FORB. NOTED FOR GUTTER LOW POINTS. ROADWAY PROFILE GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE ALL HIGH AND LOW POINTS SHOWN ARE ON THEA. GENERAL NOTES SENSITIVITY ENVIRONMENTAL AREA OF SENSITIVITY ENVIRONMENTAL AREA OF SENSITIVITY ENVIRONMENTAL AREA OF 4 R R 9 R R RR R MATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 266+50MATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 281+50SFR STA 553+00MATCHLINEMATCHLINE NFR STA 133+50100 SCALE IN FEET 5016 5021 51545153 5032 5033 5034 5026 5025 5027 5029 5030 5022 505350545055 5060 5023 5040 5039 5038 5047 5048 5050 5049 5042 5041 5045 5046 5079507850 7 75075 5074 5073 5065 505250515076 5028 5062 5061 5037 5036 5035 5024 5044 5043 5017 5018 5019 5020 5308 5309 5310 5311 R EXISTING DITCH PROPOSED DITCH EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE PROPOSED STORM STRUCTURE SURFACE FLOW DIRECTION EXISTING STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED STEEL CASING PIPE PROPOSED STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED SUBSURFACE DRAIN STANDARD PLATE RANDOM RIPRAP PLACED PER LEGEND EXISTING STRUCTURE NUMBER PROPOSED STRUCTURE NUMBER DELINEATED WET DITCH DELINEATED WETLAND PERMANENT EASEMENT TEMPORARY EASEMENT PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION LIMITS M 5XXX XXXX MnDOT ROW Washington County ROW City of Lake Elmo ROW Existing City D&U Easement Proposed City D&U Easement DRAFT COPY WELL MM MM M M MMMM M M M M M T T T M M M MM M M M WELLMBMBMBFMBMBMBEL. 946.67 STA. 136+75.81 60TH ST N (NFR) HIGH POINT EL. 943.20 STA. 139+04.38 60TH ST N (NFR) LOW POINT EL. 942.82 STA. 141+31.31 60TH ST N (NFR) LOW POINT EL. 933.14 STA. 558+56.97 60TH ST N (SFR) LOW POINT EL. 930.48 STA. 563+46.54 60TH ST N (SFR) LOW POINT EL. 963.39 STA. 288+48.25 TH 36 WB HIGH POINT EL. 959.94 STA. 294+64.43 TH 36 WB LOW POINT EL. 963.28 STA. 288+37.12 TH 36 EB HIGH POINT EL. 959.59 STA. 294+60.71 TH 36 EB LOW POINT 1 5 " CPP M6" PVC 12" CMP12" CMPNWL=925.0 BTM = 919.0 WET POND COZZIE SOUTH BTM = 925.0 SUNFARM INFILTRATION BASIN BTM = 927.0 ELMO INFILTRATION BASIN NWL= 927.0 BTM = 922.0 DAVID WET POND MATTHEW A. WASSMAN 1/21/2026 26883 DRAINAGE PLANS TH 36 EB STA 281+50 TO STA 295+50 SP 8204-57 (TH 36) / SP 082-617-014 / SP 206-020-005 230 533 ...\Projects\2021\1210145\FINAL\DESIGN\Plan Sheets\cd820457_300drp.dgn2/3/20269:23:02 AMDATENO DWN CKD REVISIONS SHEET NO.OF SHEETSUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SHEET WAS PREPARED PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LICENSE #3426285 290 295 30285 290 295 135 140 145 555560 565 BTM BTM NWL NWL BTM BTM 60TH ST N (NFR) TH 36 EB TH 36 WB CSAH 17 BRIDGE NO 82053 BRIDGE NO 82054 WET DITCH 4 WET DITCH 3 WET DITCH 2 RWALL 2 RWALL 3 RWALL 4 RWALL 5 RWALL 6 RWALL 7 RWALL 10 RWALL 9 RWALL 8 CASING PIPE 17' x 24" STEEL CASING PIPE 160' x 54" STEEL 60TH ST N (SFR) 12' THRU 12' THRU CITY OF GRANT CITY OF LAKE ELMO ONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER.C1 SPECIFIC NOTES SEE GENERAL NOTES ON PREVIOUS SHEET.B. SEE LEGEND ON PREVIOUS SHEET.A. GENERAL NOTES 8' SHLD12' THRU13' LTL12' THRU14' RTL12' THRU8' SHLD13' LTL12' THRU14' RTL10' BLVD10' WALK12' THRU13' LTL12' THRU14' RTL12' THRU12' THRU8' SHLD13' LTL14' RTL14' RTL 12' THRU 12' THRU 13' LTL 6' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 13' LTL 14' RTL 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' ACCEL. LANE 8' SHLD 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' ACCEL. LANE 8' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 13' LTL 14' RTL 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 13' LTL 13' RTL 4' SHLD 12' T H R U 12' T H R U 4' S HL D 4' S HL D 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD8' SHLD6 1 R 5 DITCH BLOCK. SEE DRAINAGE DETAILS.9 SEE DRAINAGE DETAILS. DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 4.6 SEE DRAINAGE DETAILS. DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 3.5 9 CSAH 17 STA 32+39.83 END SP 206-020-005 MATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 295+50SFR STA 568+50MATCHLINEMATCHLINE CSAH 17 STA 25+50 MATCHLINE CSAH 17 STA 34+50 MATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 281+50MATCHLINE NFR STA 133+50SFR STA 553+00MATCHLINE100 SCALE IN FEET 5163 5166 5165 5167 5149 5169 5147 5170 5173 5172 5180 5181 5182 5070 5063 5071 5066 5064 5072 5123 5120 5121 5122 5129 5128 5126 51275131 5130 5125 5124 5146 5084 5145 5144 50815068 50825083 5085 5143 5086 5092 5091 5090 5093 5096 5094 5095 5097 5098 5100 5101 5102 5104 5105 5108 5110 5109 5171 5162 5106 5067 5168 5178 5177 5176 5148 5105 5103 5069 5202 5201 5200 5099 5312 5313 5314 MnDOT ROW Washington County ROW City of Lake Elmo ROW Existing City D&U Easement Proposed City D&U Easement DRAFT COPY WELL T WELL MBF MB18" RCP12" CPP 18" CMP 15" CMP12" CMP 8" PVC 18" CMP MATTHEW A. WASSMAN 1/21/2026 26883 DRAINAGE PLANS TH 36 EB STA 295+50 TO END CONSTRUCTION SP 8204-57 (TH 36) / SP 082-617-014 / SP 206-020-005 231 533 ...\Projects\2021\1210145\FINAL\DESIGN\Plan Sheets\cd820457_300drp.dgn2/3/20269:23:03 AMDATENO DWN CKD REVISIONS SHEET NO.OF SHEETSUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SHEET WAS PREPARED PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LICENSE # 300 305 310 300 305 310 150 155 570 575 580 60TH ST N (NFR) TH 36 EB TH 36 WB 60TH ST N PEMA TYPE 1 WETLAND 5 60TH ST N (SFR) R 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 4' SHLD 4' SHLD 12' THRU12' THRU 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 2' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD 3' SHLD 3' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD TH 36 EB STA 310+07.74 END SP 8204-57 (TH 36) END CONSTRUCTION CITY OF GRANT CITY OF LAKE ELMO DITCH BLOCK. SEE DRAINAGE DETAILS.9 SPECIFIC NOTES 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD 4' SHLD 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' SHLD SFR STA 583+28.58 SP 082-617-014 END SP 206-020-005 (60TH ST N (SFR)) END CONSTRUCTION PLACEMENT LOCATIONS. SECTIONS AND STANDARD PLANS FOR EXACT SCHEMATICALLY FOR CLARITY. SEE TYPICAL SUBSURFACE DRAINS ARE DRAWNC. BASINS TO BE REMOVED. STORM SEWER, CULVERT, MANHOLE, AND CATCH SEE INPLACE DRAINAGE & REMOVAL PLANS FORB. NOTED FOR GUTTER LOW POINTS. ROADWAY PROFILE GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE ALL HIGH AND LOW POINTS SHOWN ARE ON THEA. GENERAL NOTES SENSITIVITY ENVIRONMENTAL AREA OF 9 EXISTING DITCH PROPOSED DITCH EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE PROPOSED STORM STRUCTURE SURFACE FLOW DIRECTION EXISTING STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED STEEL CASING PIPE PROPOSED STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED SUBSURFACE DRAIN STANDARD PLATE RANDOM RIPRAP PLACED PERMATCHLINE TH 36 EB STA 295+50SFR STA 568+50MATCHLINE100 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND EXISTING STRUCTURE NUMBER PROPOSED STRUCTURE NUMBER DELINEATED WET DITCH DELINEATED WETLAND PERMANENT EASEMENT TEMPORARY EASEMENT PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION LIMITS M 5XXX XXXX 5160 5159 5158 5161 5156 5155 5157 5116 5115 5204 5203 MnDOT ROW Washington County ROW City of Lake Elmo ROW Existing City D&U Easement Proposed City D&U Easement DRAFT COPY WELL WELL T T T T WELL WELL MB MB 18" CPP M 36" CPP 12" RCP 15" RCP15" RCP MATTHEW A. WASSMAN 1/21/2026 26883 DRAINAGE PLANS BEGIN CONSTRUCTION TO CSAH 17 STA 25+50 SP 8204-57 (TH 36) / SP 082-617-014 / SP 206-020-005 232 533 ...\Projects\2021\1210145\FINAL\DESIGN\Plan Sheets\cd820457_300drp.dgn2/3/20269:23:04 AMDATENO DWN CKD REVISIONS SHEET NO.OF SHEETSUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SHEET WAS PREPARED PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LICENSE #2025CSAH 1757TH ST COVE NTYPE 5 / PUBHx WETLAND 4 WET DITCH 4 R 12' THRU12' THRU8' SHLD8' SHLDCITY OF LAKE ELMO CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER.1 SPECIFIC NOTES 1:4014' RTL12' THRU12' THRU8' SHLD14' RTL12' THRU13' LTL12' THRU8' SHLD1 R PLACEMENT LOCATIONS. SECTIONS AND STANDARD PLANS FOR EXACT SCHEMATICALLY FOR CLARITY. SEE TYPICAL SUBSURFACE DRAINS ARE DRAWNC. BASINS TO BE REMOVED. STORM SEWER, CULVERT, MANHOLE, AND CATCH SEE INPLACE DRAINAGE & REMOVAL PLANS FORB. NOTED FOR GUTTER LOW POINTS. ROADWAY PROFILE GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE ALL HIGH AND LOW POINTS SHOWN ARE ON THEA. GENERAL NOTES R CSAH 17 STA 18+09.45 SP 206-020-005 BEGIN SP 082-617-014 (CSAH 17) BEGIN CONSTRUCTION EXISTING DITCH PROPOSED DITCH EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE PROPOSED STORM STRUCTURE SURFACE FLOW DIRECTION EXISTING STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED STEEL CASING PIPE PROPOSED STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED SUBSURFACE DRAIN STANDARD PLATE RANDOM RIPRAP PLACED PER MATCHLINE CSAH 17 STA 25+50 100 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND EXISTING STRUCTURE NUMBER PROPOSED STRUCTURE NUMBER DELINEATED WET DITCH DELINEATED WETLAND PERMANENT EASEMENT TEMPORARY EASEMENT PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION LIMITS M 5XXX XXXX 5184 5183 5185 51955186 5190 5197 5189 5187 51965188 MnDOT ROW Washington County ROW City of Lake Elmo ROW Existing City D&U Easement Proposed City D&U Easement DRAFT COPY WELLWELLWELLWELL WELL WELLWELL WELL M U U U T M WELL WELLWELL WELL WELLWELLWELL WELL MBMB MB MBMBMBMB MBMB MB 15" CMP18" CMP12" CPP 12" CMP MATTHEW A. WASSMAN 1/21/2026 26883 DRAINAGE PLANS CSAH 17 STA 34+50 TO END CONSTRUCTION SP 8204-57 (TH 36) / SP 082-617-014 / SP 206-020-005 233 533 ...\Projects\2021\1210145\FINAL\DESIGN\Plan Sheets\cd820457_300drp.dgn2/3/20269:23:05 AMDATENO DWN CKD REVISIONS SHEET NO.OF SHEETSUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SHEET WAS PREPARED PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LICENSE #3540CSAH 17 R 62ND ST N 12' THRU12' THRU8' SHLD8' SHLDCSAH 17 STA 41+04.72 END SP 082-617-014 (CSAH 17) END CONSTRUCTION CITY OF GRANT 8' SHLD12' THRU12' THRU8' SHLD14' RTL12' THRU13' LTL12' THRU8' SHLDPLACEMENT LOCATIONS. SECTIONS AND STANDARD PLANS FOR EXACT SCHEMATICALLY FOR CLARITY. SEE TYPICAL SUBSURFACE DRAINS ARE DRAWNC. BASINS TO BE REMOVED. STORM SEWER, CULVERT, MANHOLE, AND CATCH SEE INPLACE DRAINAGE & REMOVAL PLANS FORB. NOTED FOR GUTTER LOW POINTS. ROADWAY PROFILE GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE ALL HIGH AND LOW POINTS SHOWN ARE ON THEA. GENERAL NOTES EXISTING DITCH PROPOSED DITCH EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE PROPOSED STORM STRUCTURE SURFACE FLOW DIRECTION EXISTING STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED STEEL CASING PIPE PROPOSED STORM SEWER/CULVERT PROPOSED SUBSURFACE DRAIN STANDARD PLATE RANDOM RIPRAP PLACED PER MATCHLINE CSAH 17 STA 34+50 100 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND EXISTING STRUCTURE NUMBER PROPOSED STRUCTURE NUMBER DELINEATED WET DITCH DELINEATED WETLAND PERMANENT EASEMENT TEMPORARY EASEMENT PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION LIMITS M 5XXX XXXX 5152 5151 5140 5141 5142 5150 5139 MnDOT ROW Washington County ROW City of Lake Elmo ROW Existing City D&U Easement Proposed City D&U Easement DRAFT COPY MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 10 EXHIBIT D GRANT APPLICATION In 2023 laws, Chapter 72, Article 1, Section 16, Subdivision 19, as amended by 2026 laws, Chapter 130, Article 3, Section 3, $10,000,000.00 in general obligation bond funds was appropriated for one of more grants to Washington County, the city of Lake Elmo, or the city of Grant, or any combination of these entities “for property acquisition and to predesign, design, construct, furnish, and equip a new interchange at marked Trunk Highway 36 and County State-Aid Highway 17, known as Lake Elmo Avenue, in Washington County.” This portion of the project will be funded from that appropriation, with $3,407,393.77 in LRIP funding for right of way acquisition. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 11 EXHIBIT E GRANTEE RESOLUTION APPROVING GRANT AGREEMENT MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 12 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2026-0XX A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo has applied to the Commissioner of Transportation for a grant from the Local Road Improvement Fund; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation has given notice that funding for this project is available; and WHEREAS, the amount of the grant has been determined to be $3,407,393.77 by reason of the lowest responsible bid; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF LAKE ELMO, that the City of Lake Elmo does hereby agree to the terms and conditions of the grant consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 174.52, and will pay any additional amount by which the cost exceeds the estimate and will return to the Local Road Improvement Fund any amount appropriated for the project but not required. The proper City officers are authorized to execute a grant agreement and any amendments thereto with the Commissioner of Transportation concerning the above-referenced grant. ADOPTED BY THE LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ON THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE 2026. CITY OF LAKE ELMO By: __________________________ Charles Cadenhead (Seal) Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 13 EXHIBIT F GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (LRIP) GRANTS Article I DEFINITIONS Section 1.01 Defined Terms. The following terms shall have the meanings set out respectively after each such term (the meanings to be equally applicable to both the singular and plural forms of the terms defined) unless the context specifically indicates otherwise: “Advance(s)” - means an advance made or to be made by MnDOT to the Public Entity and disbursed in accordance with the provisions contained in Article VI hereof. “Agreement” - means the Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement between the Public Entity and the Minnesota Department of Transportation to which this Exhibit is attached. “Certification” - means the certification, in the form attached as Exhibit C, in which the Public Entity acknowledges that its interest in the Real Property is bond financed property within the meaning of Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and is subject to certain restrictions imposed thereby. “Code” - means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and all treasury regulations, revenue procedures and revenue rulings issued pursuant thereto. “Commissioner” - means the Commissioner of Minnesota Management & Budget. “Commissioner’s Order” - means the “Fourth Order Amending Order of the Commissioner of Minnesota Management & Budget Relating to Use and Sale of State Bond Financed Property” dated July 30, 2012, as it may be amended or supplemented. “Completion Date” - means the projected date for completion of the Project as indicated in the Agreement. “Construction Contract Documents” - means the document or documents, in form and substance acceptable to MnDOT, including but not limited to any construction plans and specifications and any exhibits, amendments, change orders, modifications thereof or supplements thereto, which collectively form the contract between the Public Entity and the Contractor(s) for the completion of the Construction Items on or before the Completion Date for either a fixed price or a guaranteed maximum price. “Construction Items” - means the work to be performed under the Construction Contract Documents. “Contractor” - means any person engaged to work on or to furnish materials and supplies for the Construction Items including, if applicable, a general contractor. “Draw Requisition” - means a draw requisition that the Public Entity, or its designee, submits to MnDOT when an Advance is requested, as referred to in Section 4.02. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 14 “G.O. Bonds” - means the state general obligation bonds issued under the authority granted in Article XI, Sec. 5(a) of the Minnesota Constitution, the proceeds of which are used to fund the LRIP Grant, and any bonds issued to refund or replace such bonds. “Grant Application” - means the grant application that the Public Entity submitted to MnDOT which is attached as Exhibit D. “LRIP Grant” - means a grant from MnDOT to the Public Entity under the LRIP in the amount specified in the Agreement, as such amount may be modified under the provisions hereof. “LRIP” - means the Local Road Improvement Program pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 174.52 and rules relating thereto. “MnDOT” - means the Minnesota Department of Transportation. “Outstanding Balance of the LRIP Grant” - means the portion of the LRIP Grant that has been disbursed to the Public Entity minus any amounts returned to the Commissioner. “Project” - means the Project identified in the Agreement to be totally or partially funded with a LRIP grant. “Public Entity” - means the grantee of the LRIP Grant and identified as the Public Entity in the Agreement. “Real Property” - means the real property identified in the Agreement on which the Project is located. Article II GRANT Section 2.01 Grant of Monies. MnDOT shall make the LRIP Grant to the Public Entity, and disburse the proceeds in accordance with the terms and conditions herein. Section 2.02 Public Ownership, The Public Entity acknowledges and agrees that the LRIP Grant is being funded with the proceeds of G.O. Bonds, and as a result all of the Real Property must be owned by one or more public entities. The Public Entity represents and warrants to MnDOT that it has one or more of the following ownership interests in the Real Property: (i) fee simple ownership, (ii) an easement that is for a term that extends beyond the date that is 37.5 years from the Agreement effective date, or such shorter term as authorized by statute, and which cannot be modified or terminated early without the prior written consent of MnDOT and the Commissioner; and/or (iii) a prescriptive easement for a term that extends beyond the date that is 37.5 years from the Agreement effective date. Section 2.03 Use of Grant Proceeds. The Public Entity shall use the LRIP Grant solely to reimburse itself for expenditures it has already made, or will make, to pay the costs of one of the following applicable activities: (i) preliminary, final construction and engineering and administration (ii) constructing or reconstructing city streets, county highways, or town roads with statewide or regional significance that have not been fully funded through other state, federal, or local funding sources; or (iii) capital improvement projects on county state-aid highways that are intended primarily to reduce traffic crashes, deaths, injuries, and property damage. The Public Entity shall not use the LRIP Grant for any other purpose, including but not limited to, any work to be done on a state trunk highway or within a trunk highway easement. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 15 Section 2.04 Operation of the Real Property. The Real Property must be used by the Public Entity in conjunction with or for the operation of a county highway, county state-aid highway, town road, or city street and for other uses customarily associated therewith, such as trails and utility corridors, and for no other purposes or uses. The Public Entity shall have no intention on the effective date of the Agreement to use the Real Property as a trunk highway or any part of a trunk highway. The Public Entity must annually determine that the Real Property is being used for the purposes specified in this Section and, upon written request by either MnDOT or the Commissioner, shall supply a notarized statement to that effect. Section 2.05 Sale or Lease of Real Property. The Public Entity shall not (i) sell or transfer any part of its ownership interest in the Real Property, or (ii) lease out or enter into any contract that would allow another entity to use or operate the Real Property without the written consent of both MnDOT and the Commissioner. The sale or transfer of any part of the Public Entity’s ownership interest in the Real Property, or any lease or contract that would allow another entity to use or operate the Real Property, must comply with the requirements imposed by Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order regarding such sale or lease. Section 2.06 Public Entity’s Representations and Warranties. The Public Entity represents and warrants to MnDOT that: A. It has legal authority to execute, deliver and perform the Agreement and all documents referred to therein, and it has taken all actions necessary to its execution and delivery of such documents. B. It has the ability and a plan to fund the operation of the Real Property for the purposes specified in Section 2.04, and will include in its annual budget all funds necessary for the operation of the Real Property for such purposes. C. The Agreement and all other documents referred to therein are the legal, valid and binding obligations of the Public Entity enforceable against the Public Entity in accordance with their respective terms. D. It will comply with all of the provisions of Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695, the Commissioner’s Order and the LRIP. It has legal authority to use the G.O. Grant for the purpose or purposes described in this Agreement. E. All of the information it has submitted or will submit to MnDOT or the Commissioner relating to the LRIP Grant or the disbursement of the LRIP Grant is and will be true and correct. F. It is not in violation of any provisions of its charter or of the laws of the State of Minnesota, and there are no actions or proceedings pending, or to its knowledge threatened, before any judicial body or governmental authority against or affecting it relating to the Real Property, or its ownership interest therein, and it is not in default with respect to any order, writ, injunction, decree, or demand of any court or any governmental authority which would impair its ability to enter into the Agreement or any document referred to herein, or to perform any of the acts required of it in such documents. G. Neither the execution and delivery of the Agreement or any document referred to herein nor compliance with any of the provisions or requirements of any of such documents is prevented by, is a breach of, or will result in a breach of, any provision of any agreement or document to which it is now a party or by which it is bound. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 16 H. The contemplated use of the Real Property will not violate any applicable zoning or use statute, ordinance, building code, rule or regulation, or any covenant or agreement of record relating thereto. I. The Project will be completed and the Real Property will be operated in full compliance with all applicable laws, rules, ordinances, and regulations of any federal, state, or local political subdivision having jurisdiction over the Project and the Real Property. J. All applicable licenses, permits and bonds required for the performance and completion of the Project and for the operation of the Real Property as specified in Section 2.04 have been, or will be, obtained. K. It reasonably expects to possess its ownership interest in the Real Property described in Section 2.02 for at least 37.5 years, and it does not expect to sell such ownership interest. L. It does not expect to lease out or enter into any contract that would allow another entity to use or operate the Real Property. M. It will supply whatever funds are needed in addition to the LRIP Grant to complete and fully pay for the Project. N. The Construction Items will be completed substantially in accordance with the Construction Contract Documents by the Completion Date and all such items will be situated entirely on the Real Property. O. It will require the Contractor or Contractors to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, and laws bearing on its performance under the Construction Contract Documents. P. It shall furnish such satisfactory evidence regarding the representations and warranties described herein as may be required and requested by either MnDOT or the Commissioner. Q. It has made no material false statement or misstatement of fact in connection with its receipt of the G.O. Grant, and all the information it has submitted or will submit to the State Entity or Commissioner of MMB relating to the G.O. Grant or the disbursement of any of the G.O. Grant is and will be true and correct. Section 2.07 Event(s) of Default. The following events shall, unless waived in writing by MnDOT and the Commissioner, constitute an Event of Default under the Agreement upon either MnDOT or the Commissioner giving the Public Entity 30 days’ written notice of such event and the Public Entity’s failure to cure such event during such 30-day time period for those Events of Default that can be cured within 30 days or within whatever time period is needed to cure those Events of Default that cannot be cured within 30 days as long as the Public Entity is using its best efforts to cure and is making reasonable progress in curing such Events of Default; however, in no event shall the time period to cure any Event of Default exceed six (6) months unless otherwise consented to, in writing, by MnDOT and the Commissioner. A. If any representation, covenant, or warranty made by the Public Entity herein or in any other document furnished pursuant to the Agreement, or to induce MnDOT to disburse the LRIP Grant, shall prove to have been untrue or incorrect in any material respect or materially misleading as of the time such representation, covenant, or warranty was made. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 17 B. If the Public Entity fails to fully comply with any provision, covenant, or warranty contained herein. C. If the Public Entity fails to fully comply with any provision, covenant or warranty contained in Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695, the Commissioner’s Order, or Minn. Stat. Sec. 174.52 and all rules related thereto. D. If the Public Entity fails to use the proceeds of the LRIP Grant for the purposes set forth in Section 2.03, the Grant Application, and in accordance with the LRIP. E. If the Public Entity fails to operate the Real Property for the purposes specified in Section 2.04. F. If the Public Entity fails to complete the Project by the Completion Date. G. If the Public Entity sells or transfers any portion of its ownership interest in the Real Property without first obtaining the written consent of both MnDOT and the Commissioner. H. If the Public Entity fails to provide any additional funds needed to fully pay for the Project. I. If the Public Entity fails to supply the funds needed to operate the Real Property in the manner specified in Section 2.04. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any of the above events that cannot be cured shall, unless waived in writing by MnDOT and the Commissioner, constitute an Event of Default under the Agreement immediately upon either MnDOT or the Commissioner giving the Public Entity written notice of such event. Section 2.08 Remedies. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default and at any time thereafter until such Event of Default is cured to the satisfaction of MnDOT, MnDOT or the Commissioner may enforce any or all of the following remedies. A. MnDOT may refrain from disbursing the LRIP Grant; provided, however, MnDOT may make such disbursements after the occurrence of an Event of Default without waiving its rights and remedies hereunder. B. If the Event of Default involves a sale of the Public Entity’s interest in the Real Property in violation of Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 or the Commissioner’s Order, the Commissioner, as a third party beneficiary of the Agreement, may require that the Public Entity pay the amounts that would have been paid if there had been compliance with such provisions. For other Events of Default, the Commissioner may require that the Outstanding Balance of the LRIP Grant be returned to it. C. Either MnDOT or the Commissioner, as a third party beneficiary of the Agreement, may enforce any additional remedies it may have in law or equity. The rights and remedies specified herein are cumulative and not exclusive of any rights or remedies that MnDOT or the Commissioner would otherwise possess. If the Public Entity does not repay the amounts required to be paid under this Section or under any other provision contained herein within 30 days of demand by the Commissioner, or any amount ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction within 30 days of entry of judgment against the Public Entity and in favor MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 18 of MnDOT and/or the Commissioner, then such amount may, unless precluded by law, be offset against any aids or other monies that the Public Entity is entitled to receive from the State of Minnesota. Section 2.09 Notification of Event of Default. The Public Entity shall furnish to MnDOT and the Commissioner, as soon as possible and in any event within seven (7) days after it has obtained knowledge of the occurrence of each Event of Default, a statement setting forth details of each Event of Default and the action which the Public Entity proposes to take with respect thereto. Section 2.10 Effect of Event of Default. The Agreement shall survive Events of Default and remain in full force and effect, even upon full disbursement of the LRIP Grant, and shall only be terminated under the circumstances set forth in Section 2.11. Section 2.11 Termination of Agreement and Modification of LRIP Grant. A. If the Project is not started within five (5) years after the effective date of the Agreement or the LRIP Grant has not been disbursed within four (4) years after the date the Project was started, MnDOT’ s obligation to fund the LRIP Grant shall terminate. In such event, (i) if none of the LRIP Grant has been disbursed by such date, MnDOT shall have no obligation to fund the LRIP Grant and the Agreement will terminate, and (ii) if some but not all of the LRIP Grant has been disbursed by such date, MnDOT shall have no further obligation to provide any additional funding for the LRIP Grant and the Agreement shall remain in force but shall be modified to reflect the amount of the LRIP Grant that was actually disbursed and the Public Entity is still obligated to complete the Project by the Completion Date. B. The Agreement shall terminate upon the Public Entity’s sale of its interest in the Real Property and transmittal of the required portion of the proceeds of the sale to the Commissioner in compliance with Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order, or upon the termination of the Public Entity’s ownership interest in the Real Property if such ownership interest is an easement. Section 2.12 Excess Funds. If the full amount of the G.O. Grant and any matching funds referred to in Section 5.13 are not needed to complete the Project, then, unless language in the G.O. Bonding Legislation indicates otherwise, the G.O. Grant shall be reduced by the amount not needed. Article III COMPLIANCE WITH MINNESOTA STATUTE, SEC. 16A.695 AND THE COMMISSIONER’S ORDER Section 3.01 State Bond Financed Property. The Public Entity acknowledges that its interest in the Real Property is, or when acquired by it will be, “state bond financed property”, as such term is used in Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order and, therefore, the provisions contained in such statute and order apply, or will apply, to its interest in the Real Property, even if the LRIP Grant will only pay for a portion of the Project. Section 3.02 Preservation of Tax Exempt Status. In order to preserve the tax-exempt status of the G.O. Bonds, the Public Entity agrees as follows: A. It will not use the Real Property or use or invest the LRIP Grant or any other sums treated as “bond proceeds” under Section 148 of the Code (including “investment proceeds,” “invested sinking funds” and “replacement proceeds”) in such a manner as to cause the G.O. Bonds to be classified as “arbitrage bonds” under Code Section 148. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 19 B. It will deposit and hold the LRIP Grant in a segregated non-interest-bearing account until such funds are used for payments for the Project. C. It will, upon written request, provide the Commissioner all information required to satisfy the informational requirements set forth in the Code, including Sections 103 and 148, with respect to the G.O. Bonds. D. It will, upon the occurrence of any act or omission by the Public Entity that could cause the interest on the G.O. Bonds to no longer be tax exempt and upon direction from the Commissioner, take such actions and furnish such documents as the Commissioner determines to be necessary to ensure that the interest to be paid on the G.O. Bonds is exempt from federal taxation, which such action may include: (i) compliance with proceedings intended to classify the G.O. Bonds as a “qualified bond” within the meaning of Code Section 141(e), or (ii) changing the nature of the use of the Real Property so that none of the net proceeds of the G.O. Bonds will be deemed to be used, directly or indirectly, in an “unrelated trade or business” or for any “private business use” within the meaning of Code Sections 141(b) and 145(a). E. It will not otherwise use any of the LRIP Grant or take, permit or cause to be taken, or omit to take, any action that would adversely affect the exemption from federal income taxation of the interest on the G.O. Bonds, and if it should take, permit or cause to be taken, or omit to take, as appropriate, any such action, it shall take all lawful actions necessary to correct such actions or omissions promptly upon obtaining knowledge thereof. Section 3.03 Changes to G.O. Compliance Legislation or the Commissioner’s Order. If Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 or the Commissioner’s Order is amended in a manner that reduces any requirement imposed against the Public Entity, or if the Public Entity’s interest in the Real Property becomes exempted from Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order, then upon written request by the Public Entity, MnDOT shall execute an amendment to the Agreement to implement such amendment or exempt the Public Entity’s interest in the Real Property from Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order. Article IV DISBURSEMENT OF GRANT PROCEEDS Section 4.01 The Advances. MnDOT agrees, on the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, to make Advances of the LRIP Grant to the Public Entity from time to time in an aggregate total amount not to exceed the amount of the LRIP Grant. If the amount of LRIP Grant that MnDOT cumulatively disburses hereunder to the Public Entity is less than the amount of the LRIP Grant delineated in Section 1.01, then MnDOT and the Public Entity shall enter into and execute whatever documents MnDOT may request in order to amend or modify this Agreement to reduce the amount of the LRIP Grant to the amount actually disbursed. Provided, however, in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 2.11, MnDOT’s obligation to make Advances shall terminate as of the dates specified in Section 2.11 even if the entire LRIP Grant has not been disbursed by such dates. Advances shall only be for expenses that (i) are for those items of a capital nature delineated in Source and Use of Funds that is attached as Exhibit A, (ii) accrued no earlier than the effective date of the legislation that appropriated the funds that are used to fund the LRIP Grant, or (iii) have otherwise been consented to, in writing, by the Commissioner. It is the intent of the parties hereto that the rate of disbursement of the Advances shall not exceed the rate MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 20 of completion of the Project or the rate of disbursement of the matching funds required, if any, under Section 5.13. Therefore, the cumulative amount of all Advances disbursed by the State Entity at any point in time shall not exceed the portion of the Project that has been completed and the percentage of the matching funds required, if any, under Section 5.13 that have been disbursed as of such point in time. This requirement is expressed by way of the following two formulas: Formula #1: Cumulative Advances < (Program Grant) × (percentage of matching funds, if any, required under Section 5.13 that have been disbursed) Formula #2: Cumulative Advances < (Program Grant) × (percentage of Project completed) Section 4.02 Draw Requisitions. Whenever the Public Entity desires a disbursement of a portion of the LRIP Grant the Public Entity shall submit to MnDOT a Draw Requisition duly executed on behalf of the Public Entity or its designee. Each Draw Requisition with respect to construction items shall be limited to amounts equal to: (i) the total value of the classes of the work by percentage of completion as approved by the Public Entity and MnDOT, plus (ii) the value of materials and equipment not incorporated in the Project but delivered and suitably stored on or off the Real Property in a manner acceptable to MnDOT, less (iii) any applicable retainage, and less (iv) all prior Advances. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, no Advances for materials stored on or off the Real Property will be made by MnDOT unless the Public Entity shall advise MnDOT, in writing, of its intention to so store materials prior to their delivery and MnDOT has not objected thereto. At the time of submission of each Draw Requisition, other than the final Draw Requisition, the Public Entity shall submit to MnDOT such supporting evidence as may be requested by MnDOT to substantiate all payments which are to be made out of the relevant Draw Requisition or to substantiate all payments then made with respect to the Project. The final Draw Requisition shall not be submitted before completion of the Project, including any correction of material defects in workmanship or materials (other than the completion of punch list items). At the time of submission of the final Draw Requisition the Public Entity shall submit to MnDOT: (I) such supporting evidence as may be requested by MnDOT to substantiate all payments which are to be made out of the final Draw Requisition or to substantiate all payments then made with respect to the Project, and (ii) satisfactory evidence that all work requiring inspection by municipal or other governmental authorities having jurisdiction has been duly inspected and approved by such authorities and that all requisite certificates and other approvals have been issued. If on the date an Advance is desired the Public Entity has complied with all requirements of this Agreement and MnDOT approves the relevant Draw Requisition, then MnDOT shall disburse the amount of the requested Advance to the Public Entity. Section 4.03 Additional Funds. If MnDOT shall at any time in good faith determine that the sum of the undisbursed amount of the LRIP Grant plus the amount of all other funds committed to the Project is less than the amount required to pay all costs and expenses of any kind which reasonably may be anticipated in connection with the Project, then MnDOT may send written notice thereof to the Public Entity specifying the amount which must be supplied in order to provide sufficient funds to complete the Project. The Public Entity agrees that it will, within 10 calendar days of receipt of any such notice, supply or have some other entity supply the amount of funds specified in MnDOT's notice. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 21 Section 4.04 Condition Precedent to Any Advance. The obligation of MnDOT to make any Advance hereunder (including the initial Advance) shall be subject to the following conditions precedent: A. MnDOT shall have received a Draw Requisition for such Advance specifying the amount of funds being requested, which such amount when added to all prior requests for an Advance shall not exceed the amount of the LRIP Grant set forth in Section 1.01. B. No Event of Default under this Agreement or event which would constitute an Event of Default but for the requirement that notice be given or that a period of grace or time elapse shall have occurred and be continuing. C. No determination shall have been made by MnDOT that the amount of funds committed to the Project is less than the amount required to pay all costs and expenses of any kind that may reasonably be anticipated in connection with the Project, or if such a determination has been made and notice thereof sent to the Public Entity under Section 4.03, then the Public Entity has supplied, or has caused some other entity to supply, the necessary funds in accordance with such section or has provided evidence acceptable to MnDOT that sufficient funds are available. D. The State Entity shall have received evidence, in form and substance acceptable to the State Entity, that the Public Entity has sufficient funds to fully and completely pay for the Project and all other expenses that may occur in conjunction therewith. E. The Public Entity has supplied to the State Entity all other items that the State Entity may reasonably require Section 4.05 Processing and Disbursement of Advances. The Public Entity acknowledges and agrees as follows: A. Advances are not made prior to completion of work performed on the Project. B. All Advances are processed on a reimbursement basis. C. The Public Entity must first document expenditures to obtain an Advance. D. Reimbursement requests are made on a partial payment basis or when the Project is completed. E. All payments are made following the “Delegated Contract Process or State Aid Payment Request” as requested and approved by the appropriate district state aid engineer. Section 4.06 Construction Inspections. The Public Entity shall be responsible for making its own inspections and observations regarding the completion of the Project, and shall determine to its own satisfaction that all work done or materials supplied have been properly done or supplied in accordance with all contracts that the Public Entity has entered into regarding the completion of the Project. Article V MISCELLANEOUS Section 5.01 Insurance. If the Public Entity elects to maintain general comprehensive liability insurance regarding the Real Property, then the Public Entity shall have MnDOT named as an additional named insured therein. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 22 Section 5.02 Condemnation. If, after the Public Entity has acquired the ownership interest set forth in Section 2.02, all or any portion of the Real Property is condemned to an extent that the Public Entity can no longer comply with Section 2.04, then the Public Entity shall, at its sole option, either: (i) use the condemnation proceeds to acquire an interest in additional real property needed for the Public Entity to continue to comply with Section 2.04 and to provide whatever additional funds that may be needed for such purposes, or (ii) submit a request to MnDOT and the Commissioner to allow it to sell the remaining portion of its interest in the Real Property. Any condemnation proceeds which are not used to acquire an interest in additional real property shall be applied in accordance with Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order as if the Public Entity’s interest in the Real Property had been sold. If the Public Entity elects to sell its interest in the portion of the Real Property that remains after the condemnation, such sale must occur within a reasonable time period after the date the condemnation occurred and the cumulative sum of the condemnation and sale proceeds applied in accordance with Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order. If MnDOT receives any condemnation proceeds referred to herein, MnDOT agrees to or pay over to the Public Entity all of such condemnation proceeds so that the Public Entity can comply with the requirements of this Section. Section 5.03 Use, Maintenance, Repair and Alterations. The Public Entity shall not, without the written consent of MnDOT and the Commissioner, (i) permit or allow the use of any of the Real Property for any purpose other than the purposes specified in Section 2.04, (ii) substantially alter any of the Real Property except such alterations as may be required by laws, ordinances or regulations, or such other alterations as may improve the Real Property by increasing its value or which improve its ability to be used for the purposes set forth in Section 2.04, (iii) take any action which would unduly impair or depreciate the value of the Real Property, (iv) abandon the Real Property, or (v) commit or permit any act to be done in or on the Real Property in violation of any law, ordinance or regulation. If the Public Entity fails to maintain the Real Property in accordance with this Section, MnDOT may perform whatever acts and expend whatever funds necessary to so maintain the Real Property, and the Public Entity irrevocably authorizes MnDOT to enter upon the Real Property to perform such acts as may be necessary to so maintain the Real Property. Any actions taken or funds expended by MnDOT shall be at its sole discretion, and nothing contained herein shall require MnDOT to take any action or incur any expense and MnDOT shall not be responsible, or liable to the Public Entity or any other entity, for any such acts that are performed in good faith and not in a negligent manner. Any funds expended by MnDOT pursuant to this Section shall be due and payable on demand by MnDOT and will bear interest from the date of payment by MnDOT at a rate equal to the lesser of the maximum interest rate allowed by law or 18% per year based upon a 365-day year. Section 5.04 Recordkeeping and Reporting. The Public Entity shall maintain books and records pertaining to Project costs and expenses needed to comply with the requirements contained herein, Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695, the Commissioner’s Order, and Minn. Stat. Sec. 174.52 and all rules related thereto, and upon request shall allow MnDOT, its auditors, the Legislative Auditor for the State of Minnesota, or the State Auditor for the State of Minnesota, to inspect, audit, copy, or abstract all of such items. The Public Entity shall use generally accepted accounting principles in the maintenance of such items, and shall retain all of such books and records for a period of six years after the date that the Project is fully completed and placed into operation. Section 5.05 Inspections by MnDOT. The Public Entity shall allow MnDOT to inspect the Real Property upon reasonable request by MnDOT and without interfering with the normal use of the Real Property. MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 23 Section 5.06 Liability. The Public Entity and MnDOT agree that each will be responsible for its own acts and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law, and neither shall be responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereof. The liability of MnDOT and the Commissioner is governed by the provisions of Minn. Stat. Sec. 3.736. If the Public Entity is a “municipality” as that term is used in Minn. Stat. Chapter 466, then the liability of the Public Entity is governed by the provisions of Chapter 466. The Public Entity’s liability hereunder shall not be limited to the extent of insurance carried by or provided by the Public Entity, or subject to any exclusion from coverage in any insurance policy. Section 5.07 Relationship of the Parties. Nothing contained in the Agreement is to be construed as establishing a relationship of co-partners or joint venture among the Public Entity, MnDOT, or the Commissioner, nor shall the Public Entity be considered to be an agent, representative, or employee of MnDOT, the Commissioner, or the State of Minnesota in the performance of the Agreement or the Project. No employee of the Public Entity or other person engaging in the performance of the Agreement or the Project shall be deemed have any contractual relationship with MnDOT, the Commissioner, or the State of Minnesota and shall not be considered an employee of any of those entities. Any claims that may arise on behalf of said employees or other persons out of employment or alleged employment, including claims under the Workers’ Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota, claims of discrimination against the Public Entity or its officers, agents, contractors, or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of MnDOT, the Commissioner, or the State of Minnesota. Such employees or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from MnDOT, the Commissioner, or the State of Minnesota, including tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, disability benefits, severance pay and retirement benefits. Section 5.08 Notices. In addition to any notice required under applicable law to be given in another manner, any notices required hereunder must be in writing and personally served or sent by prepaid, registered, or certified mail (return receipt requested), to the address of the party specified below or to such different address as may in the future be specified by a party by written notice to the others: To the Public Entity: At the address indicated on the first page of the Agreement. To MnDOT at: Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of State Aid 395 John Ireland Blvd., MS 500 Saint Paul, MN 55155 Attention: Marc Briese, State Aid Programs Engineer To the Commissioner at: Minnesota Management & Budget 400 Centennial Office Bldg. 658 Cedar St. St. Paul, MN 55155 Attention: Commissioner Section 5.09 Assignment or Modification. Neither the Public Entity nor MnDOT may assign any of its rights or obligations under the Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party. Section 5.10 Waiver. Neither the failure by the Public Entity, MnDOT, or the Commissioner, as a third party beneficiary of the Agreement, in one or more instances to insist upon the complete observance or performance of any provision hereof, nor the failure of the Public Entity, MnDOT, or the Commissioner to exercise any right or remedy conferred hereunder or afforded by law shall be construed as waiving any MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 24 breach of such provision or the right to exercise such right or remedy thereafter. In addition, no delay by any of the Public Entity, MnDOT, or the Commissioner in exercising any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right or remedy preclude other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right or remedy. Section 5.11 Choice of Law and Venue. All matters relating to the validity, interpretation, performance, or enforcement of the Agreement shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. All legal actions arising from any provision of the Agreement shall be initiated and venued in the State of Minnesota District Court located in St. Paul, Minnesota. Section 5.12 Severability. If any provision of the Agreement is finally judged by any court to be invalid, then the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect and they shall be interpreted, performed, and enforced as if the invalid provision did not appear herein. Section 5.13 Matching Funds. Any matching funds as shown on Page 1 of the Grant Agreement that are required to be obtained and supplied by the Public Entity must either be in the form of (i) cash monies, (ii) legally binding commitments for money, or (iii) equivalent funds or contributions, including equity, which have been or will be used to pay for the Project. The Public Entity shall supply to MnDOT whatever documentation MnDOT may request to substantiate the availability and source of any matching funds. Section 5.14 Sources and Uses of Funds. The Public Entity represents to MnDOT and the Commissioner that the Sources and Uses of Funds Schedule attached as Exhibit A accurately shows the total cost of the Project and all of the funds that are available for the completion of the Project. The Public Entity will supply any other information and documentation that MnDOT or the Commissioner may request to support or explain any of the information contained in the Sources and Uses of Funds Schedule. If any of the funds shown in the Sources and Uses of Funds Schedule have conditions precedent to the release of such funds, the Public Entity must provide to MnDOT a detailed description of such conditions and what is being done to satisfy such conditions. Section 5.15 Project Completion Schedule. The Public Entity represents to MnDOT and the Commissioner that the Project Completion Schedule attached as Exhibit B correctly and accurately sets forth the projected schedule for the completion of the Project. Section 5.16 Third-Party Beneficiary. The Governmental Program will benefit the State of Minnesota and the provisions and requirements contained herein are for the benefit of both the State Entity and the State of Minnesota. Therefore, the State of Minnesota, by and through its Commissioner of MMB, is and shall be a third-party beneficiary of this Agreement. Section 5.17 Public Entity Tasks. Any tasks that the Agreement imposes upon the Public Entity may be performed by such other entity as the Public Entity may select or designate, provided that the failure of such other entity to perform said tasks shall be deemed to be a failure to perform by the Public Entity. Section 5.18 Data Practices. The Public Entity agrees with respect to any data that it possesses regarding the G.O. Grant or the Project to comply with all of the provisions and restrictions contained in the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act contained in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as such may subsequently be amended or replaced from time to time. Section 5.19 Non-Discrimination. The Public Entity agrees to not engage in discriminatory employment practices regarding the Project and it shall fully comply with all of the provisions contained in MnDOT Agreement No. 1063561 SP No. 206-020-005, tied to 082-617-014 and SP 8204-57 Revised October 2024 25 Minnesota Statutes Chapters 363A and 181, as such may subsequently be amended or replaced from time to time. Section 5.20 Worker’s Compensation. The Public Entity agrees to comply with all of the provisions relating to worker’s compensation contained in Minn. Stat. Secs. 176.181 subd. 2 and 176.182, as they may be amended or replaced from time to time with respect to the Project. Section 5.21 Antitrust Claims. The Public Entity hereby assigns to MnDOT and the Commissioner of MMB all claims it may have for over charges as to goods or services provided with respect to the Project that arise under the antitrust laws of the State of Minnesota or of the United States of America. Section 5.22 Prevailing Wages. The Public Entity agrees to comply with all of the applicable provisions contained in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 177, and specifically those provisions contained in Minn. Stat.§. 177.41 through 177.435 as they may be amended or replaced from time to time with respect to the Project. By agreeing to this provision, the Public Entity is not acknowledging or agreeing that the cited provisions apply to the Project. Section 5.23 Entire Agreement. The Agreement and all of the exhibits attached thereto embody the entire agreement between the Public Entity and MnDOT, and there are no other agreements, either oral or written, between the Public Entity and MnDOT on the subject matter hereof. Section 5.24 E-Verification. The Public Entity agrees and acknowledges that it is aware of Minn.Stat. § 16C.075 regarding e-verification of employment of all newly hired employees to confirm that such employees are legally entitled to work in the United States, and that it will, if and when applicable, fully comply with such order. Section 5.25 Telecommunications Certification. If federal funds are included in Exhibit A, by signing this agreement, Contractor certifies that, consistent with Section 889 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, Pub. L. 115-232 (Aug. 13, 2018), and 2 CFR 200.216, Contractor will not use funding covered by this agreement to procure or obtain, or to extend, renew, or enter into any contract to procure or obtain, any equipment, system, or service that uses “covered telecommunications equipment or services” (as that term is defined in Section 889 of the Act) as a substantial or essential component of any system or as critical technology as part of any system. Contractor will include this certification as a flow down clause in any contract related to this agreement. Section 5.26 Title VI/Non-discrimination Assurances. Public Entity agrees to comply with all applicable US DOT Standard Title VI/Non-Discrimination Assurances contained in DOT Order No. 1050.2A, and in particular Appendices A and E, which can be found at: https://edocs- public.dot.state.mn.us/edocs_public/DMResultSet/download?docId=11149035. If federal funds are included in Exhibit A, Public Entity will ensure the appendices and solicitation language within the assurances are inserted into contracts as required. MnDOT may conduct a review of the Public Entity’s compliance with this provision. The Public Entity must cooperate with MnDOT throughout the review process by supplying all requested information and documentation to MnDOT, making Public Entity staff and officials available for meetings as requested, and correcting any areas of non-compliance as determined by MnDOT. Section 5.27 Electronic Records and Signatures. The parties agree to contract by electronic means. This includes using electronic signatures and converting original documents to electronic records. Section 5.28 Certification. By signing this Agreement, the Grantee certifies that it is not suspended or debarred from receiving federal or state awards. STAFF REPORT DATE: 6/16/2026 Regular Motion TO: City Council FROM: Sophia Jensen, Senior City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Inwood Commercial Preliminary Plat REVIEWED BY: Nathan Fuerst Planning Consultant Jason Stopa, Community Development Director CORE STRATEGIES: ☒Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☒Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☒Managed Growth ☐Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐Balanced Finances now and future ☒Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: Vadnais Associates LLC (Applicant/Property Owner) has requested Preliminary Plat approval. This parcel was anticipated to be a commercial site based on the Inwood Master Plan that was approved in 2014 and has already been mass graded. The project, to be called Inwood Commercial, will contain five commercial lots. The current request only includes subdivision of the property to create the individual commercial lots. After the subdivision is created, any parties interested in establishing commercial uses on the lots must conform with all standard requirements and receive the necessary approvals at the time they are proposed. ISSUE BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL: The City Council is being asked to hold a public hearing and make a recommendation on the preliminary plat request. GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant/Property Owner : Vadnais Associates LLC Location: Outlot K of InWood PID#s: 33.029.21.12.0006 Request: Preliminary Plat Site Area: 17.34 acres Current Zoning and 2040 FLU: C – Commercial and Partial Shoreland Overlay Surrounding: Rural Residential (north); Low Density Residential and Public Facilities (east); Commercial (south); City of Oakdale (west) History: The parcel is undeveloped and a part of the 2014 InWood master plan Wetland: There are no wetlands on site. Deadline: Application Complete – 4/23/26 120 Day Deadline – 8/21/26 Applicable Code: Article 7- General Regulations Article 15- Commercial Districts Title 103 – Subdivision Regulations Lake Elmo Design Guidelines PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Site Data. This property was anticipated Commercial as part of the InWood master plan developed in 2014. The property has already been mass graded (roadways and curb cuts) with the prior phases. Site area could vary slightly based on requirements for Right of Way from Washington County, or the City of Lake Elmo. Total Site Area 17.34 acres Right-of-Way (R/W) 3.18 acres Commercial (C) Area 14.16 acres Wetlands None identified on site Land Use(s): The purpose of the C district is to provide for the establishment of commercial and service activities which draw from and serve customers from the entire community or region and are located in areas that are well served by collector or arterial street facilities outside the village area. It is intended to allow the widest range of commercial uses, especially those that are oriented towards the traveling public or that need large sites with highway access and visibility. At this time the developer is not proposing tenant approvals for the buildout of the individual commercial lots within the subdivision. Each future user will be subject to a complete review at the time a new use is proposed in addition to receiving land use approvals. It is noted that most of the commercial lots, with the exception of Lot 1, are labeled “ghost plat”. The developer has indicated Lot 1 is proposed to be a Gaming Café. This use has been determined to be Indoor Recreation, Retail Sales, and Standard Restaurant. A Conditional Use permit will be required for the Indoor Recreation. No development rights or site plan approvals are granted though the platting process. Site Plan Review. The commercial lots were reviewed by staff for conformance with applicable zoning and subdivision requirements. No flexibility is requested by the Applicant from City Code. Therefore, any standards not reviewed through this process will be reviewed at the time of site plan review on each commercial lot. Lots must be developed to all relevant city standards at the time they are requested. Parking. Off-street parking is required consistent with City Code Section 105.12.410. Since the proposed land uses and floor areas of the proposed buildings will be subject to change based on site layout, tenant, or property owner needs, etc., staff will conduct a review of parking requirements at the time of site plan review. Signage. No signage is proposed on the plans or discussed in the Applicant’s narrative. Signage will be reviewed when requested by the Applicant or subsequent property owners. Commercial Lot Performance Standards. The proposed commercial lots will be subject to other site and building design performance standards which may not be mentioned in this report. Those standards include, but are not limited to the City’s Design Guidelines Standards Manual, landscaping requirements, lighting, parking lot landscaping, off-street loading areas, etc. No flexibility to any City standards is requested by the Applicant at this time. All individual lots will have to meet the performance standards in the zoning ordinance at the time of permit application. Subdivision Requirements. The subdivision has been reviewed according to City Zoning and Subdivision requirements. The platted lots will meet City standards for areas and locations as proposed. Driveways and access for the lots is consistent with City Standards. A Development Agreement will be required as part of future plat approval. The City Engineer has reviewed for conformance with engineering standards and provided memo dated May 18th, 2026, attached, and all items are to be addressed as part of the final plat submittal. Landscaping and Tree Preservation. The Landscape Architect is suggesting minor revisions to the submitted landscaping plans as a condition of preliminary plat approval. No tree preservation is required on this site as it was mass graded, and no significant trees exist on site. Boulevard plantings are required at the time subdivision improvements are installed. The City Code requirements on number of plantings has been met by the developer. As the commercial lots develop landscaping will be required on each lot to provide the required screening from the adjacent residential use. Berming, fencing, or walls (in addition to landscaping) will be required to achieve screening requirements on the tenant’s lots. Parkland Dedication: The City’s ordinance requires parkland dedication in the amount of $6,000 per acre for commercial projects. The fee ($104,040) will be paid as part of the Development Agreement prior to recording the final plat. Wetlands: The Applicant’s surveyor and engineer have provided a statement indicating that no wetlands are present on site. Stormwater Management: Stormwater management for this commercial development was planned as part of the InWood master plan. As such, regional ponds will treat stormwater generated by this project, including the proposed roadways. As the commercial lots develop, or if treatment standards change, it is possible that additional stormwater treatment could be required on each lot. The City Engineer and SWWD have reviewed the plans accordingly. Streets, Trails, Access: This subdivision will have two public streets as proposed in the plans the location of these streets were designed with the original master plan and the curb cuts are installed in the streets. The City ROW width is required to be 60 feet and minimum roadway width is 28 feet. The City Engineer and County Engineer have reviewed the plans accordingly. As part of the development, they will install appliable sidewalks and trails around and within the development. AGENCY REVIEW : City Engineer Comments 5/18/2026: See attached memo dated May 18th, 2026. The City Engineer has suggested that approval, if granted, should be conditional upon addressing each review comment in the Engineer’s review memo. Additional information is required from the Applicant, and any public improvements shall be consistent with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual. Fire Chief Comments 5/12/2026: Provided standard comments regarding drive lanes, access points, signage, hydrants, fire suppression, addressing, EMS systems, KNOX systems, and EV charging. Landscape Architect Memo 5/7/2026 : Revisions are required to the landscape plan. Boulevard trees will be provided with this application. As the single lots develop landscaping and screening will be required. MN DNR 5/15/2026: Provided comments that the impervious surface limit is 30% and that commercial uses in the shoreland districts of natural environment (NE) lakes require a conditional use permit. City of Oakdale 5/7/2026: Provided comments that they would like to ensure a full access at the intersection of 9th Street and Inwood Avenue North on the Oakdale side. Washington County: Provided comments that their plans have addressed their preliminary comments regarding intersections in the memo dated November 10th, 2025, and they have no further comments at this time. South Washington Watershed District: The applicant is in communication with the SWWD and seeking to coordinate on permitting reviews and timelines as necessary. City Attorney Review: The City Attorney will need to review the plat documents and title commitment. A plat opinion is required prior to recording the final plat. A condition has been added. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat based on the following findings: 1. That the Preliminary Plat would be consistent with the intent of the 2040 Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the 2040 Land Use Map for this area. 2. That the preliminary plat generally complies with the City’s Subdivision regulations and does not meet the criteria for denial in Section 103.00.090 (d)(2). 3. That the preliminary plat complies with the City’s Zoning Code. 4. That the preliminary plat generally complies with the City’s design standards. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat with the following conditions (the underlined condition was added based on Planning Commission feedback): 1. Prior to the City finding any application for a final plat and final PUD complete, the applicant shall fully address all comments in the following review memos to the satisfaction of the City: a. City Engineer’s memo dated 5/18/2026 b. City Landscape Architect’s memo dated 5/7/2026 c. City Fire Chief’s memo dated 5/12/2026 d. Washington County Memo Dated 11/10/2025 2. The City Attorney shall issue a plat opinion certifying that the final plat, title evidence, and all agreements and documents meet the requirements of the City Code and state statutes prior to the City Council review or approval of the final plat. 3. The final plat shall include all necessary and additional public right-of-way and easements. 4. No flexibility from City standards is provided by this approval. All lots to be platted in this subdivision must meet existing City standards at the time of building permit submittal. 5. Sign permits are required and must comply with the City Code. 6. That the Applicant must obtain all necessary permits including but not limited to all applicable City permits (building, grading, wetland, sign, etc.), NPDES/SWPPP permits and SWWD permits before starting any grading or construction activities. 7. The applicant/developer is responsible, at their own expense, for installing all required right of way and pedestrian improvements. 8. The applicant shall consider enhanced landscaping on the East side of Irene Avenue North subject to review and approval by City Staff. 9. The applicant/developer shall provide the City a fee in lieu of park land dedication as required by Section 103.00.150 to be paid prior to recording of the final plat. 10. If applicable, a landscape and irrigation license agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be executed and recorded with the final plat. 11. If applicable, a stormwater reuse irrigation and license agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be executed and recorded with the final plat. 12. If applicable, a storm water maintenance and easement agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be executed and recorded with the final plat. 13. Before the execution and recording of a final plat for the development, the developer or the Applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City. Such an agreement must be approved by the City Attorney. The Development Agreement must be approved by the City Council. The agreement shall delineate who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment for the required improvements with financial guarantees, therefore. 14. If necessary, the Applicant must provide the City with a copy of written permission from adjacent property owners for any off-site grading work and storm sewer discharges to adjacent properties before starting any site work, grading and as part of any final plat application. 15. The Applicant or developer must enter into a separate grading agreement with the City before starting any grading activity in advance of final plat approval. The City Engineer shall review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat and said plan shall document the extent of any proposed grading on the site. 16. The Applicant must submit a revised preliminary plat and project plans meeting all conditions of approval for City review and approval. The revised Applicant project plans and other materials shall meet all of the above conditions before the City will find complete any final plat application for the development and before the start of any clearing or grading activity on the site. 17. That the Applicant must submit the final plat within 180 days after City Council approval of the preliminary plat or approval of the preliminary plat shall be considered void unless a request for a time extension is submitted in writing and approved by the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing was mailed to surrounding property owners within 500’ on May 18th, 2026. The notice was also published in the City’s official paper, the Stillwater Gazette, on May 22nd 2026. Below is a summary of the comments received: Alan and Lou Stocker – 8680 Upper 7th Pl – Provided written comments in support of development but requested consideration for screening of vehicle headlights and additional tree plantings. Inwood Petition – a petition was submitted, signed by 32 different Inwood residential parcels, which notes concerns for traffic, light, noise. They are requesting a soundproof wall of structure and traffic calming measures for the commercial development. Paul Prior 8674 Irving Cir N – Provided comments on the berming and how the elevations may be insufficient for screening headlights alone. Additional measures such as a berm, fence, or retaining wall should be taken to screen headlights on the roadways. Would like tenant lighting to be considerate of adjacent residents. The trail connection should be extended. Dolly Ladner 994 Irving Ct N – Provided comments about concerns with safety and privacy with the roadway adjacent to the residential area and requested a wall. She noted concerns with the tenant build out and parking lot locations. She requested something more substantial than landscaping for screening. Noted the Business View magazine Lake Elmo article about development. Dan Moralez 8669 Lower 8th Pl N – Provided comments on existing trees and that they are sparce and scattered. He does not believe that landscape alone will fix the headlight screening. Grading issues will create challenges for screening of headlights on the roadway. He also provided concerns about construction traffic using Island Trail North during build out of the area. Tim Duyer – 8644 Irving Cir N – Was in agreement with Dolly. Noted concerns with security and requested fencing to buffer and protect the residential area which will also mitigate light and noise. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission reviewed this request at their June 8th, 2026, meeting. The Commission voted to recommend approval of the preliminary plat subject to the recommended findings and conditions with an additional condition that the developer add additional screening on the East side of Irene Ave (Vote 6-0). The reason for the Commission amendment was to address neighborhood comment regarding vehicle headlight screening on the new roadways. Staff would note that the developer has indicated that they will review feasibility of enhanced landscaping and screening prior to the final plat submittal and make revisions were able. Screening improvement will become a City responsibility due to the location in the Right of Way, a structure to achieve screening is not recommended by Staff due to long term maintenance and the limited space available. A condition of approval regarding enhanced landscaping has been added. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of the Applicant’s requests grants entitlements to the Applicant, however there would be no fiscal impact to the City at this time. A final plat is required along with a Development Agreement which will detail public improvements and address fiscal impacts. When the property begins to develop it will have urban services and will require development fees. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend approval of the request. Suggested motion provided below: “Move to adopt Resolution 2026- 041 approving the preliminary plat requested by Vadnais Associates on the subject property based on the findings of fact and recommended conditions of approval listed in the staff report.” ATTACHMENTS: 1.Application Documents 2.Preliminary Plat and Project Plans 3.Fire Chief Memo 5/12/2026 4.Landscape Architect Memo 5/7/2026 5.City Engineer Memo 5/18/2026 6.Washington County Memo 11/10/2025 7.DNR Email 5/15/2026 8.City of Oakdale Email 5/7/2026 9.Public Comment Subdivision of 17.35 acre outlot within the existing Inwood PUD into five (5) commercial lots for future development by others. See project narrative for additional information. Date: April 23, 2026 To: Sophia Jensen, Senior City Planner Jason Stopa, Community Development Director City of Lake Elmo Applicant: Judy Siebel Vadnais Associates Re: Inwood Commercial Preliminary Plat Application Ms. Jensen, We are pleased to submit this Preliminary Plat Application on behalf of Judy Siebel, for the proposed Inwood Commercial subdivision. We appreciate the feedback received on the two Concept Plans previously submitted and look forward to continuing our work with the City of Lake Elmo on this project. Below you will find the Written Statements from the application checklist, as well as a complete list of attachments included with this application. Please contact us with any questions. Sincerely, Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA Landscape Architect / Planner Carlson Engineering CC: Brian Krystofiak, PE Kyle Ogren, EIT Attachments: 1) Completed Land Use Application Forms / Checklist 2) Certified Address List 3) Preliminary Plan Set, dated 04/23/26 4) Stormwater Management Plan, dated 04/23/26 5) Storm Sewer Design 6) Existing Pond Impervious Exhibit 7) Future Intersection Exhibit – 9th Street N & Inwood Avenue N 8) 2nd Concept Review Memo, Responses dated 04/23/26 9) Geotechnical Report, dated 12/03/14 Carlson Engineering, LLC Page 2 Written Statements A) Contact Information Owner: Vadnais Associates, LLC / Judy Siebel 2935 Country Drive, Suite 102 Little Canada, MN 55117 (612)325-5945 Engineer: Brian J. Krystofiak, PE Carlson Engineering 3890 Pheasant Ridge Drive NE, Suite 100 Blaine, MN 55449 763-489-7905 (office) / 763-443-5963 (cell) B) Site Data Address: Unassigned, Lake Elmo Current Zoning: Commercial Planned Unit Development (C-PUD) with partial Shoreland Overlay Parcel Size: 17.34 acres / 755,859 square feet PID: 33.029.21.12.0006 Current Legal Desc: That part of Outlot K, INWOOD as recorded in Washington County Surveyor’s Office. C) General Information Proposed Name: Inwood Commercial Number of Lots: Five (5) commercial lots Public Open Space: None Dedicated Right-of-Way: 3.18 acres D) Sketch Plan Comments – See attached comment responses. E) Project Narrative: This project involves the subdivision of a 17.35 acre outlot within the existing Inwood PUD into five commercial parcels. Initial development will include the construction of internal public streets, turn lanes, sidewalks, trails and boulevard trees consistent with the original PUD concept for this area. Public utilities, including water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater infrastructure, will be extended to serve each parcel. This project provides opportunities for orderly infill development of future commercial uses, providing sufficient access and flexibility, while ensuring compliance with municipal standards and zoning requirements. F) Proposed Density: N/A – lots for future development, no uses proposed. G) Proposed Infrastructure / Phasing Streets. Consistent with the Inwood PUD, Irene Avenue will extend along the east side of the parcel from 5th Street N to 10th Street N. (C.S.A.H 10). Near the midpoint of the site, 9th Street N will extend west to Inwood Ave. N. (C.S.A.H. 13). Both intersections with the County roads will be ¾ access with turn lanes into the site. Additional right-of-way is proposed to accommodate a future signalized intersection at 9th Street and Inwood Ave. Carlson Engineering, LLC Page 3 Utilities. The proposed utilities are consistent with the engineering comments received during Concept Plan Review and will be provided to each lot from Irene Ave. Water main will connect to both an existing 8” stub off 5th Street N and the existing 12” water main along 10th Street N creating a looped system. Sanitary sewer will be extended from the existing 8” stub at the intersection of Irene Ave and 5th Street N. Stormwater will be directed to the existing pond to the east, which was designed with the Inwood PUD to accommodate the maximum allowable impervious with future development of this site. Sidewalk / Trail. An 8’ bituminous trail is proposed along the east side of Irene Ave, from the existing 5th Street trail to 9th Street N. This trail will also connect to an existing trail within the Inwood residential area to provide access to this site from the adjacent neighborhood. A 6’ concrete sidewalk is proposed along the west side of Irene Ave and along the south side of 9th Street N. Additionally, a separate trail is being proposed along Inwood Ave N and 10th Street N, consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and which Washington County has also expressed support for. Constructing this trail fully within the county right-of-way would require relocating a significant amount of utility infrastructure, including multiple utility poles, fire hydrants and electrical transformers. For this reason, the trail is proposed to be located 1’ within the private lot areas along the west and north boundaries of the site. A 10’ trail easement will be granted to the county after the Inwood Commercial final plat is recorded. Because the trail easement will be located within the required drainage and utility easements, those easements have been expanded to 20’ along Inwood Ave. and 30’ along 10th Street N to accommodate the proposed trail and existing water main. Phasing. This project is proposed to be graded and constructed in one phase. Future development of the platted lots will be done separately from this project. H) Neighborhood Concerns / Issues: While public feedback has yet to be received, we expect comments to reflect the knowledge that future commercial development has always been planned for this site. The adjacent residential area is also part of the Inwood PUD and was designed with concept plans for commercial development on this site. The existing stormwater pond within Outlot D and additional open space within Outlot E provide a buffer between the planned uses. A 6-8’ berm and significant tree plantings were installed with the previous residential construction to provide additional screening, and a trail was built to provide access to future commercial amenities. I) Land Use Conflicts: Being a planned part of the existing Inwood PUD, the proposed development of this site is consistent with the City’s Future Land Use Plan. Commercial development is well suited to the adjacent county roads and has been incorporated into the design of the adjacent residential area. Carlson Engineering, LLC Page 4 J) Public Burden: No uses are being proposed for the platted lots with this project, and therefore the impact to traffic and public facilities and services is expected to be negligible. This project is consistent with the previously approved Inwood planned development. The water, sewer and stormwater systems have been designed to accommodate the future commercial development that this project is providing access for. The developer will be responsible for all applicable costs associated with infrastructure construction, design, review, inspection, and administration, ensuring that no additional burden is placed on the city. K) Lakeshore Access – Not applicable. L) Parks & Open Space: Parks and open space for this project are consistent with the original Inwood PUD. This project will provide public access to the proposed trails, but no additional areas are proposed for public dedication. Future development on this site will meet the shoreland requirements for impervious area, preserving 70% open space within the private lot areas. Park dedication will be provided consistent with city policy, with consideration for trail construction to be determined. M) Proposed Development Schedule The developer hopes to begin construction as soon as possible and anticipates starting this fall (2026). Plans are consistent with the mass grading that was completed with Inwood. Clearing and grading work will be minimal, followed immediately by utility and street construction. Site restoration will be ongoing as work is completed. Landscaping will follow curb / gutter, sidewalk and trail installation, with tree planting potentially deferred to spring 2027 depending on weather. Overall construction is expected to be completed in 6-8 weeks. VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_cover.dwgSave Date:04/21/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05COVER1INWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, Minnesota VICINITY MAP Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSITEI N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O N I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O N I N W O O D1 S T A D D I T I O NG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TB YO T H E R S OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OW N E R :OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:O W N E R : OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\survey\preliminary\5172-05_excon.dwgSave Date:04/21/26VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MinnesotaEXISTING CONDITIONSThomas R. Balluff, L.S.I hereby certify that this survey, planor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Land Surveyor underthe laws of the State of MinnesotaPrint Name:Signature:Date:License #:40361DRAWN BY:ISSUE DATE:FILE NO:Revisions:152NJS2938LEGEND 4/23/264/23/26 OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER: OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:O W N E R : OWNER:IRENE AVENUEN.9TH ST. N.OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\survey\preliminary\5172-05_preplat.dwgSave Date:04/22/26VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MinnesotaPRELIMINARY PLATThomas R. Balluff, L.S.I hereby certify that this survey, planor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Land Surveyor underthe laws of the State of MinnesotaPrint Name:Signature:Date:License #: 4/23/2640361DRAWN BY:ISSUE DATE:FILE NO:Revisions:153NJS4/23/262938LEGEND SITE DATA REMOVALS PLAN4VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_removals.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05I N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O NI N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O NI N W O O D1 S T A D D I T I O NI N W O O D1 S T A D D I T I O N I N W O O D 3 R D A D D I T I O N I N W O O D 1 S T A D D I T I O N G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A TG H O S T P L A T I N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O NB Y O T H E R SC I T Y O FO A K D A L EG H O S T P L A T 5SHORELAND EXHIBITVADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_shoreland.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05 SITE DATA LEGAL DESCRIPTION NOTE LEGEND LOT DATA (FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS BY OTHERS) 6Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPRELIMINARY SITE &UTILITY PLAN INDEXVADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_site.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05I N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O N I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O N I N W O O D1 S T A D D I T I O NG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TSITE PLAN LEGEND I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O N I N W O O D 1 S T A D D I T I O N G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T B Y O T H E R S PRELIMINARY SITE &UTILITY PLAN7VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_site.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05SITE PLAN LEGEND I N W O O D 3 R D A D D I T I O N G H O S T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T I N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O NPRELIMINARY SITE &UTILITY PLAN8VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_site.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05SITE PLAN LEGEND I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O N I N W O O D 1 S T A D D I T I O N G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T SIGNING, STRIPING, ANDLIGHTING PLAN9VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_sign_stripe_light.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05 I N W O O D 3 R D A D D I T I O N G H O S T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T I N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O NSIGNING, STRIPING, ANDLIGHTING PLAN10VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_sign_stripe_light.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05 GRADING INDEX11Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRVADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_gr.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05I N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O N I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O N I N W O O D1 S T A D D I T I O NG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A T I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O NI N W O O D 1 S T A D D I T I O N G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T PRELIMINARY GRADING& EROSION CONTROL PLAN12VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_gr.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05 I N W O O D 3 R D A D D I T I O N I N W O O D 1 S T A D D I T I O N G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T I N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O NPRELIMINARY GRADING& EROSION CONTROL PLAN13VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_gr.dwgSave Date:04/22/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05 DETAILS14VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_details.dwgSave Date:04/21/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05 DETAILS15VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\5172-05_details.dwgSave Date:04/21/2615Revisions:1.Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26KRO04/23/26Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E.25063BJK#5172-05 I N W O O D 3 R D A D D I T I O N I N W O O D 1 S T A D D I T I O N G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T I N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O NB Y O T H E R S 2RM7KC12WP6JL5BL2RM12AE2CA2CA16BH6FM5BL8HB2RM9WO6JL2RM7HLC I T Y O F O A K D A L EL1Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPRELIMINARYLANDSCAPE PLANVADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\landscape\5172-05_landscape_prelim.dwgSave Date:04/21/26Revisions:1.#5172-052Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Landscape Architect underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26RJR04/23/26Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346RJR SYMBOLCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZECONTAINERTREESRM8Acer rubrum `Northwood`Northwoods Red Maple2.5" Cal.B&BFM6Acer x freemanii `Sienna`Sienna Glen Maple2.5" Cal.B&BHB8Celtis occidentalisCommon Hackberry2.5" Cal.B&BHL7Gleditsia triacanthos inermis `Harve`Northern Acclaim Thornless Honey Locust2.5" Cal.B&BKC7Gymnocladus dioica `Espresso`Kentucky Coffeetree2.5" Cal.B&BWO9Quercus bicolorSwamp White Oak2.5" Cal.B&BBL10Tilia americana `Boulevard`Boulevard Linden2.5" Cal.B&BAE12Ulmus americana `Princeton`American Elm2.5" Cal.B&B67SUBTOTAL:CONIFEROUS TREESBH16Picea glauca densataBlack Hills Spruce6` Ht.B&BWP12Pinus strobusWhite Pine6` Ht.B&B28SUBTOTAL:ORNAMENTAL TREESCA4Malus x `Prairiefire`Red Flowers, Clump Form, 2" CalEquivalentPrairiefire Crabapple7` Ht.B&BJL12Syringa reticulata `Ivory Silk`White FlowersIvory Silk Japanese Tree Lilac2" Cal.B&B16SUBTOTAL:GROUND COVERSTI59,623 sfType I - Turf Seed MixRefer to notes for acceptable seedingmethodsSeeding Rate 200 lb/acMnDOT Residential Turfgrass (RT)seedTII100,748 sfType II - Native Seed Mix (A)Refer to notes for acceptable seedingmethodsSeeding Rate 39 lb/acMnDOT Southern Shortgrass Roadside (SSR)seedTIII34,739 sfType III - Native Seed Mix (B)Refer to notes for acceptable seedingmethodsSeeding Rate 39 lb/acMnDOT Southern Tallgrass Roadside (STR)seed195,110 sfSUBTOTAL:PLANT SCHEDULEL2PRELIMINARYLANDSCAPE PLANVADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\landscape\5172-05_landscape_prelim.dwgSave Date:04/21/26Revisions:1.#5172-052Print Name:Signature:Date:License #:Drawn:Designed:Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Landscape Architect underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/23/26RJR04/23/26Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346RJR 3890 PHEASANT RIDGE DRIVE NE, SUITE 100 BLAINE, MN 55449 TEL 763.489.7900 FAX 763.489.7959 CARLSON-ENGINEERING.COM ENGINEERING \ SURVEYING \ PLANNING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN INWOOD COMMERCIAL Lake Elmo, Minnesota Carlson Engineering Project No.: 5172 -05 Prepared for: Vadnais Associates, LLC 2935 Country Drive, Suite 102 Little Canada, MN 55117 April 23, 2026 Stormwater Management Plan Inwood Commercial Carlson Engineering, Inc. Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Proposed Conditions .................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Soil Information ........................................................................................................... 2 STORMWATER ANALYSIS ............................................................................................ 3 1.4 Peak Elevations ............................................................................................................ 3 1.5 Rate Control Analysis .................................................................................................. 4 1.6 Water Quality and Volume Reduction Analysis ....................................................... 4 1.7 Storm Sewer Design ..................................................................................................... 4 1.8 Other Considerations................................................................................................... 5 1.9 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 5 2.0 CERTIFICATION .................................................................................................... 6 FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Existing Conditions Drainage Map Figure 3 Proposed Conditions Drainage Map Figure 4 Storm Sewer Drainage Map Figure 5 Impervious To Existing Ponds Exhibit APPENDICES Appendix A Inwood Proposed Drainage Area Map Appendix B Storm Sewer Design Appendix C Soil Information Stormwater Management Plan Inwood Commercial Carlson Engineering, Inc. Page 1 of 6 1.0 INTRODUCTION This document provides detailed information on the proposed surface water management system for the development of property located between 10th Street N and 5th Street N, along Inwood Avenue N and the western property line of the Inwood development in Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota. Vadnais Associates, LLC plans on platting the site into 5 separate lots, with corresponding public streets and utilities, which will all be developed separately. Included in this document is a general rate control analysis and storm sewer design. See Figure 1 for a site location map. 1.1 Existing Conditions The site is located between 10th Street N and 5th Street N, along Inwood Avenue N and the western property line of the Inwood development in Lake Elmo, Washington County, Minnesota. The site is bounded on the west by the Inwood development, on the north and east by 10th Street North, on the south by 5th Street N, and on the west by Inwood Avenue N (C.S.A.H. 13). The site is currently undeveloped grassland, but was mass graded for future development as part of the Inwood Development. The site boundary consists of 17.35 acres. There are no existing impervious surfaces onsite. The site has a gradually sloped topography, with elevations ranging from 1060 in the north eastern portion of the site, down to about 1010 in the south eastern portion of the site. There is an existing stormwater pond located just east of the site, and another across from 5th Street N, behind the existing Kwik Trip lot located in the southeast quadrant of the 5th Street N and Inwood Avenue N intersection. The majority of the stormwater from the site drains from north to south through the site, where it either accumulates at the previously graded low points in the future street section, or off-site to the south on 5th Street N, where it is collected by existing storm sewer and discharged to an existing pond south of 5th Street N. This stormwater pond discharges to an existing ditch that drains south under Interstate Highway 94 and ultimately to Wilmes Lake. The remainder drains off site to the existing ditches along 10th Street N and Inwood Avenue N, which ultimately flows south, away from the site. See Figure 2 for an existing conditions drainage map. There are no wetlands onsite. Goose Lake is within one mile of the site and is classified as an impaired water. The site does not drain towards this lake so no additional construction BMP’s are necessary. 1.2 Proposed Conditions Vadnais Associates, LLC plans on platting the site into 5 separate lots, with corresponding public streets and utilities, which will all be developed separately. Currently, the first phase of construction will include the construction of all public streets, sidewalks, trails, and accompanying utilities. After the first phase of construction, each individual lot will be sold and developed separately. The majority of the site lies within the 1,000 Foot Shoreland District Stormwater Management Plan Inwood Commercial Carlson Engineering, Inc. Page 2 of 6 Boundary, which limits the amount of new impervious surface to 30% of the square footage of each lot within the boundary. All lot areas outside of the district boundary is limited to 75% of the lot square footage. During the first phase of construction, approximately 6.24 acres will be disturbed. After the initial construction, the site will contain approximately 2.57 acres of impervious surface. When the site is fully built out, the site will contain a maximum allowable impervious surface area of approximately 5.67 acres. This 5.67 acres combines the 8.24 acres from the public streets, trail, sidewalks, and additional impervious from the turn lane construction, and a maximum allowable total lot impervious of approximately 5.67. Stormwater from the site will be collected in storm sewer and routed to the existing stormwater pond located immediately east of the site, and the existing pond south of the site, behind the existing Kwik Trip. These stormwater ponds were designed to provide water quality treatment and rate control for the site in a fully developed condition. See Figure 3 for a proposed conditions drainage map. For new outlets into the pond immediately east of the site, a sump catch basin manhole will be used in the most downstream manhole to prevent suspended sediment from being discharged to the pond. When tying into existing storm sewer stubs provided for this site, which will be utilized with the development of Lot 2, Block 2, existing 4-foot sumps were provided on the most downstream storm sewer structure. This prevents suspended solids from being discharged to the pond behind Kwik Trip. No additional stormwater treatment practices are proposed for the site. 1.3 Soil Information For the entire Inwood Site, in November 2014, Braun Intertec drilled seven soil boings to approximate near surface soils in the western and southern portion of the site. These borings indicated near surface soils consist primarily of the silty sand and course graded sand, with areas of clay. According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service web soil survey onsite soils fall within the Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) “B” and “C”. See Appendix C for soil information. Stormwater Management Plan Inwood Commercial Carlson Engineering, Inc. Page 3 of 6 STORMWATER ANALYSIS The proposed site is part of a master development known as Inwood. The site was mass graded in 2015, including grading for the Inwood Commercial and adjacent commercial lots. As part of the mass grading, two regional stormwater ponds and a regional infiltration basin were constructed to provide water quality treatment and rate control for the area in question, as well as portions of the residential area to the west. The analysis presented below is based on a review of the approved Inwood Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Carlson Engineering, last revised February 16, 2015. 1.4 Peak Elevations Based on the Inwood Stormwater Management Plan, the table below summarizes the existing high water levels for the existing Ponds 100 and Infiltration Basin 400 located south of the existing Kwik Trip, and Pond 200 located immediately east of the site. Table 1 High Water Elevations Inwood Development Lake Elmo, Minnesota Basin Bottom Outlet 2y HWL 10y HWL 100y HWL Pond 100 986.0 995.0 996.9 998.1 1000.7* Pond 200 996.0 1006.0 1007.9 1008.9 1011.0* Basin 400 994.0 995.0 996.6 997.5 998.6* *Note the revised HydroCAD model and final grading plans for Inwood list the 100-year HWL for Pond 100 at 1001.3, for Pond 200 at 1010.4 and for Basin 400 at 998.8. The previously approved Inwood development stormwater management plan accounted for a maximum allowable impervious area of 3.330 acres of the proposed site to flow to Pond 200. The current Inwood Commercial plan is proposing a total of 3.184 acres of impervious (from the public streets and ghost plat lots) to Pond 200. Therefore, the approved Inwood stormwater plan is more conservative than the proposed Inwood Commercial layout, and Pond 200 will see no adverse effects of the full build out of Inwood Commercial. Pond 100 is in a similar situation with a maximum allowable impervious area of 2.850 acres, which was previously accounted for in the approved Inwood stormwater plan, and a proposed impervious area of 2.377 acres with Inwood Commercial development. Thus, Pond 100 will see no adverse effects from the full build out of the Inwood Commercial site. Stormwater Management Plan Inwood Commercial Carlson Engineering, Inc. Page 4 of 6 1.5 Rate Control Analysis All stormwater from the site drains to existing stormwater ponds 100 and 200. Based on the Inwood Stormwater Management Plan, Inwood Commercial areas were assumed to have 30 percent impervious area within the 1,000 Foot Shoreland District Boundary, and 75% of the area outside of the district boundary, which is indicated in the notes section on Figure 3 of the Inwood Stormwater Management Plan (See Appendix A). The majority of the Inwood Commercial site was slated to drain to Stormwater Pond 200, and a small southern portion to drain to Stormwater Pond 100. It will be up to the future lot development plans to correctly discharge the future impervious area to the right pond and not exceed the maximum allowable. Since the Inwood Commercial proposed impervious amount, which includes 4 ghost platted lots, is less than maximum allowable from each catchment area, proposed runoff rates will be less than the design runoff rates. Please see Figure 5 for an impervious exhibit. When the 5 individual lots develop, a percent impervious analysis should be completed to ensure that runoff rates are not increased to the ponds. 1.6 Water Quality and Volume Reduction Analysis Based on the Inwood Stormwater Management Plan, the ponds were designed to meet NURP standards as well as South Washington Watershed District phosphorus reduction requirements. Additionally, the infiltration basin was designed to provide volume reduction meeting the South Washington Watershed District and MPCA requirements for the entire site in a fully developed condition. Because the proposed site will have less impervious than the original assumptions used in the water quality and volume reductions calculations, the site will generate less runoff and require less water quality treatment and volume reduction than the approved master development plan. 1.7 Storm Sewer Design Proposed storm sewer will be used to collect stormwater from the site and to route it to existing pond 200. Lot 2, Block 2 will need utilize existing storm sewer stubs into the site from 5 th Street N to route stormwater south to existing Pond 100, behind Kwik Trip, as to not exceed the maximum allowable impervious to Pond 200. The rational method was used to determine anticipated flows to each catch basin and the pipes were sized using those flows along with Manning’s equation. All proposed storm sewer has been designed to accommodate a 10-year storm at a minimum. See Figure 4 for Storm Sewer Drainage Map and Appendix B for storm sewer design spreadsheet. Stormwater Management Plan Inwood Commercial Carlson Engineering, Inc. Page 5 of 6 1.8 Other Considerations Sump catch basin manholes will be installed at the most downstream structure of the pipe network to prevent suspended solids from being discharged to the existing pond. Riprap will be used at the outlet to the existing pond to provide energy dissipation. When additional storm sewer is tied into an existing storm sewer network, sumps were previously installed along with riprap at the outlet to the existing pond. 1.9 Conclusion The proposed development will result in less impervious surface and less runoff rate and volume from the site than what was originally planned for under the Inwood Development stormwater management system. All storm sewers have been designed to accommodate a 10-year storm at a minimum. Sump catch basins will be utilized to prevent sediment from being conveyed downstream. Stormwater Management Plan Inwood Commercial Carlson Engineering, Inc. Page 6 of 6 2.0 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. This Stormwater Management Plan was prepared by: 4/23/2026 Justin J. Olson, P.E. Date License #: 54231 FIGURES SOURCE: USGS LAKE ELMO 7.5 MIN. QUADRANGLE SITE LOCATION FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION MAP INWOOD COMMERCIAL Lake Elmo, MN f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\5172-05_drain.dwgSave Date:04/22/26 #5172-05 1 S T A D D I T I O N I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O NFIGURE 2.1EXISTING CONDITIONSDRAINAGE MAPNOTES:LEGENDCATCHMENT LINEf:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\5172-05_drain.dwgSave Date:04/23/26#5412-05VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117INWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MN I N W O O D1 S T A D D I T I O N I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O NFIGURE 2.2EXISTING CONDITIONSDRAINAGE MAPNOTES:LEGENDCATCHMENT LINEf:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\5172-05_drain.dwgSave Date:04/23/26E X I S T I N GK W I K T R I P#5412-05VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117INWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MN 1 S T A D D I T I O N I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O NFIGURE 3.1EXISTING CONDITIONSDRAINAGE MAPNOTES:LEGENDCATCHMENT LINEf:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\5172-05_drain.dwgSave Date:04/23/26G H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TNOTE:CURRENTLY, THERE IS NO GRADING PLANFOR ANY OF THE PROPOSED PLATTED LOTS,BUT IT IS ASSUMED THAT THE MAJORITYOF EACH LOT WILL BE COLLECTED BYFUTURE STORM SEWER AND ROUTED TOTHE DENOTED POND, EXCEPT FOR A SMALLSTRIP ALONG 10TH STREET N ANDINWOOD AVENUE N, WHICH WILL DRAINDIRECTLY TO THE EXISTING COUNTY ROADDITCHES. 4 OF THE 5 LOTS ARECURRENTLY GHOST PLATS.#5412-05VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117INWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MN I N W O O D1 S T A D D I T I O N I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O NFIGURE 3.2EXISTING CONDITIONSDRAINAGE MAPNOTES:#5412-05LEGENDCATCHMENT LINEVADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117INWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNf:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\5172-05_drain.dwgSave Date:04/23/26E X I S T I N GK W I K T R I PB YO T H E R SG H O S TP L A TG H O S TP L A TNOTE:CURRENTLY, THERE IS NO GRADING PLANFOR ANY OF THE PROPOSED PLATTED LOTS,BUT IT IS ASSUMED THAT THE MAJORITYOF EACH LOT WILL BE COLLECTED BYFUTURE STORM SEWER AND ROUTED TOTHE DENOTED POND, EXCEPT FOR A SMALLSTRIP ALONG 10TH STREET N ANDINWOOD AVENUE N, WHICH WILL DRAINDIRECTLY TO THE EXISTING COUNTY ROADDITCHES. 4 OF THE 5 LOTS ARECURRENTLY GHOST PLATS. 336335334333332350 346345331347 348 3413403303 6 0 3 6 1 362371370f:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\5172-05_stm swr catchment.dwgSave Date:04/22/26NOTES:#5172-05VADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117INWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MinnesotaFIGURE 4STORM SEWERCATCHMENT AREAS060120240LEGENDCATCHMENT LINESTRUCTURE NUMBER105 I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O NI N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O NC I T Y O FO A K D A L EVADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLAKE ELMO, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\exhibits\z_old_5172-05_stormwater exhibit.dwgSave Date:04/22/261Revisions:#5172-051FIGURE 5IMPERVIOUS TO EXISTINGPONDS EXHIBIT LEGEND POND 200 (CATCHMENT 201S) IMPERVIOUS SUMMARY POND 100 (CATCHMENTS 101S & 102S) IMPERVIOUS SUMMARY APPENDIX A FIGURE 3PROPOSED CONDITIONSDRAINAGE MAPHANS HAGEN HOMES941 NE Hillwind RoadFridley, MN 55432REVISIONS1.2.3.4.5.6.DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:JTRJTR10/10/14INWOODLake Elmo, Minnesotaf:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172 - lake elmo property\cad\engineer\5172_drain.dwgSave Date:02/16/15248 Apollo Dr, Suite 100, Lino Lakes, MN 55014Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYINGNOTESLEGENDCATCHMENT LINECATCHMENTCOLLECTION POINTDRAINAGE ARROWNOTESASSUMED 75% IMPERVIOUSASSUMED 30% IMPERVIOUS (SHORELAND OVERLAY)ASSUMED 30% IMPERVIOUS (SHORELAND OVERLAY) APPENDIX B 10 year 0.013 varies STRUCTURE AREA CBMH (from)CBMH (to) Size Inc. Area (ac)Inc. "C" Inc. CA Cum. CA T (min) I (in/hr) Q = CAI (cfs)D (in) % Grade Qfull (cfs) Vfull (fps)L (ft) Invert (in) Invert (out)Rim El. Build (ft) 371 370 24x36 0.31 0.65 0.20 0.20 10 5.8 1.16 12 0.50% 2.52 3.21 34 1006.39 1006.22 1010.89 4.50 370 fes 48 (sump) 0.30 0.65 0.19 0.39 10 5.8 2.28 15 0.35% 3.82 3.11 45 1006.05 1005.90 1011.09 9.04 1006.00 st362 361 4.20 0.65 2.73 2.73 11 5.6 15.31 21 1.20% 17.34 7.21 27 1008.50 1008.18 1016.50 8.00 361 360 48 0.19 0.65 0.12 2.86 11 5.6 16.00 24 0.60% 17.51 5.57 28 1008.01 1007.84 1015.06 7.05 360 fes 48 (sump) 0.16 0.65 0.10 2.96 11 5.6 16.59 27 0.35% 18.31 4.60 63 1006.22 1006.00 1015.25 13.03 1006.00 st350 333 2.01 0.65 1.30 1.30 11 5.6 7.30 18 1.00% 10.50 5.94 53 1021.00 1020.47 1029.50 8.50 348 347 24x36 0.22 0.65 0.15 0.15 10 5.8 0.84 12 0.50% 2.52 3.21 26 1014.35 1014.22 1018.85 4.50 347 345 48 0.22 0.65 0.14 0.29 10 5.8 1.68 15 0.50% 4.56 3.72 42 1014.05 1013.84 1018.85 4.80 st346 345 2.35 0.65 1.53 1.53 12 5.4 8.25 21 0.50% 11.20 4.65 30 1014.50 1014.35 1021.50 7.00 345 331 48 0.27 0.65 0.17 1.99 12 5.4 10.75 21 0.60% 12.26 5.10 26 1013.51 1013.35 1019.46 5.95 st341 340 2.75 0.65 1.78 1.78 12 5.4 9.64 21 0.50% 11.20 4.65 27 1012.25 1012.12 1019.25 7.00 340 330 48 0.23 0.65 0.15 1.94 12 5.4 10.46 21 0.60% 12.26 5.10 26 1012.12 1011.96 1017.55 5.43 st336 335 2.85 0.65 1.85 1.85 13 5.3 9.83 21 0.50% 11.20 4.65 74 1018.30 1017.93 1029.30 11.00 335 334 48 0.34 0.65 0.22 2.08 13 5.3 11.00 21 0.55% 11.74 4.88 26 1017.93 1017.79 1027.64 9.71 334 333 48 0.73 0.65 0.47 2.55 13 5.3 13.50 21 0.75% 13.71 5.70 106 1017.79 1016.99 1027.64 9.85 333 332 48 0.05 0.65 0.03 3.89 13 5.3 20.60 24 0.90% 21.44 6.83 93 1016.83 1015.99 1028.17 11.34 332 331 60 0.09 0.65 0.06 3.95 13 5.3 20.91 27 0.50% 21.88 5.50 307 1015.82 1014.29 1027.17 11.35 331 330 60 0.72 0.65 0.47 6.41 13 5.3 33.95 27 1.50% 37.90 9.53 142 1013.02 1010.89 1019.46 6.44 330 fes 84 0.45 0.65 0.30 8.64 13 5.3 45.78 48 0.15% 55.59 4.42 91 1006.14 1006.00 1017.55 15.41 1006.00 GENERAL DESIGN PROFILE INFORMATION DESIGN CRITERIA Storm Frequency Manning's "n" "C" coefficient LOCATION PROJECT NAME: Inwood Commercial PROJECT LOCATION: Lake Elmo, MN CARLSON ENGINEERING PROJECT NO.: 5172-05 DATE: 04/23/2026 BY: KRO "C" COEFFICIENT APPENDIX C Table of Contents Description Page A. Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 A.1. Project Description..............................................................................................................1 A.2. Background Information and Reference Documents..........................................................2 A.3. Scope of Services.................................................................................................................2 A.4. Boring Locations..................................................................................................................3 B. Results..............................................................................................................................................3 B.1. Exploration Logs..................................................................................................................3 B.1.a. Log of Boring Sheets...............................................................................................3 B.1.b. Geologic Origins .....................................................................................................3 B.2. Geologic Profile...................................................................................................................4 B.2.a. Topsoil....................................................................................................................4 B.2.b. Glacial Deposits......................................................................................................4 B.2.c. Groundwater..........................................................................................................4 B.3. Laboratory Test Results.......................................................................................................5 C. Basis for Recommendations.............................................................................................................5 D. Recommendations ...........................................................................................................................6 D.1. Site Grading and Building Pad Preparation.........................................................................7 D.1.a. Excavations.............................................................................................................7 D.1.b. Excavation Support.................................................................................................8 D.1.c. Placement and Compaction of Backfill and Fill......................................................8 D.1.d. Grade Raises...........................................................................................................9 D.2. Spread Footings...................................................................................................................9 D.2.a. Embedment Depth.................................................................................................9 D.2.b. Net Allowable Bearing Pressure.............................................................................9 D.3. Interior Slabs .......................................................................................................................9 D.3.a. Subgrade Modulus.................................................................................................9 D.3.b. Moisture Vapor Protection ..................................................................................10 D.4. Exterior Slabs.....................................................................................................................10 D.5. Utilities ..............................................................................................................................11 D.6. Pavements.........................................................................................................................11 D.6.a. Subgrade Preparation ..........................................................................................11 D.6.b. Subgrade Proofroll ...............................................................................................12 D.6.c. R-Value.................................................................................................................12 D.6.d. Pavement Sections...............................................................................................12 D.7. Stormwater Management.................................................................................................13 D.8. Additional Evaluation........................................................................................................13 E. Procedures......................................................................................................................................14 E.1. Penetration Test Borings...................................................................................................14 E.2. Material Classification and Testing ...................................................................................14 E.2.a. Visual and Manual Classification..........................................................................14 E.2.b. Laboratory Testing ...............................................................................................14 E.3. Groundwater Measurements............................................................................................14 F. Qualifications..................................................................................................................................14 Table of Contents (continued) Description Page F.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions..................................................................................14 F.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility..........................................................................15 F.2.a. Plan Review..........................................................................................................15 F.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing...............................................................15 F.3. Use of Report.....................................................................................................................15 F.4. Standard of Care................................................................................................................15 Appendix Boring Location Sketch Log of Boring Sheets ST-1 to ST-7 AET Subsurface Boring Logs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 9 Descriptive Terminology A.Introduction A.1.Project Description It is our understanding that Inwood 10 LLC is proposing to develop a 154-acre area for both commercial and residential use in Lake Elmo, Minnesota. A geotechnical evaluation has already been performed for the residential portion of the project by American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET). The residential portion includes the construction of a subdivision in the center and northwest portions of the development as shown on the sketch below. Our evaluation was performed for only the commercial area as outlined in the sketch below. Figure 1. Proposed Commercial Development Concept Plan The majority of the parcel is agricultural fields with small isolated areas with trees. The surface also has a general downward slope across the site towards the southwest. Commercial parcel Residential parcel Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 2 The purpose of this preliminary geotechnical evaluation is to assist Inwood 10 LLC and their design team in evaluating the soil and groundwater conditions in the area of the proposed commercial development and to provide preliminary recommendations for design and construction of foundations, slabs on grade, utilities, and pavements. A.2.Background Information and Reference Documents To facilitate our evaluation, we were provided with or reviewed the following information or documents: A proposed boring location sketch outlining the commercial development, the proposed boring locations, and previously performed soil borings by American Engineering Testing, Inc. A development concept sketch titled as, “PUD Concept Plan Inwood”, and dated August 28, 2014. A Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by AET and dated May 13, 2014 for the residential portion of the project generally located at the northwest portion of the parcel. Discussions with Rick Schreier of Inwood 10 LLC in regard to the commercial development grading, building pad preparation, and features. A.3.Scope of Services Our scope of services for this project was originally submitted as a Proposal to Rick Schreier of Inwood 10 LLC and dated October 24, 2014. We received authorization to proceed on October 30, 2014. Tasks completed in accordance with our authorized scope of services are described below. Staking the boring locations at the locations provided by Rick Schreier and determining ground surface elevations at the boring locations. Coordinating the locating of underground public utilities near the boring locations. Conducting 7 standard penetration borings in the proposed commercial development to a nominal depth of 20 feet below existing grade. Classifying the samples and preparing boring logs. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 3 Conducting a limited laboratory testing program. Analyzing the results of the field and laboratory tests. Formulating recommendations and submitting a preliminary geotechnical evaluation report containing logs of the borings, our analysis of the field and laboratory tests, and preliminary recommendations for design of foundations, slabs on grade, utilities, and pavements. A.4.Boring Locations The soil boring locations and surface elevations were determined using GPS (Global Positioning System) technology uses the Minnesota Department of Transportation's permanent GPS Virtual Reference Network (VRN). The boring locations are shown on the attached sketch. Prior to commencing with our subsurface exploration activities, we coordinated the clearing of the soil boring of underground utilities through Gopher State One Call. B.Results B.1.Exploration Logs B.1.a.Log of Boring Sheets Log of Boring sheets for our penetration test borings are included in the Appendix. The logs identify and describe the geologic materials penetrated, the results of penetration resistance and laboratory tests performed on penetration test samples retrieved from them, and groundwater observations. Strata boundaries were inferred from changes in the penetration test samples and the drill auger cuttings. Because sampling was not performed continuously, the strata boundary depths are only approximate. The boundary depths likely vary away from the boring locations, and the boundaries themselves may also occur as gradual rather than abrupt transitions. B.1.b.Geologic Origins Geologic origins presented for each stratum on the Log of Boring sheets are based on the soil types, blows per foot, and available common knowledge of the geological history of the site. Because of the Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 4 complex glacial and post-glacial depositional environments, geologic origins can be difficult to ascertain. A detailed investigation of the geologic history of the site was not performed. B.2.Geologic Profile The types of soils encountered in the borings are described below. The soils are generally described in the order they were encountered; i.e., beginning at the ground surface. Please reference the Logs of Borings attached in the Appendix for additional details. B.2.a.Topsoil Topsoil was encountered at the surface at our boring locations with thicknesses of about 8 inches to 1 foot. The topsoil encountered by our soil borings consisted of lean clay with sand. In soil borings 1 through 5 and 9 performed by AET nearest the commercial development, a “plow zone” layer was encountered at the surface. This layer had a thickness of 2 feet and the soils encountered were similar to the topsoil encountered in our soil borings. We noted the depth of soils that were interpreted to have the organic contents high enough that they were estimated to impact structural properties of the soil. B.2.b.Glacial Deposits The borings we performed encountered glacial deposits beneath the topsoil consisted predominately of silty sands and silty clayey sands with lesser amounts of poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt, clayey sand, and lean clay with sand. The penetration resistances recorded in the cohesionless (sand) soils varied from 4 to 47 blows per foot (BPF), indicating a very loose to dense relative density. The penetration resistances recorded in the cohesive (clay) deposits varied from 8 to 38 BPF, indicating a medium to hard consistency. Some of the higher blow counts are likely due to gravel. The glacial deposits our soil borings encountered are consistent with the soils AET encountered. One difference is that our glacial outwash sands were generally classified as alluvial soils by AET. Also of note is that in AET borings 1 and 5 a layer of soft clay was encountered. B.2.c.Groundwater Water was encountered in soil boring ST-4 at approximate elevation 991. Based on the moisture contents of the geologic material beneath this elevation, it does not appear our soil boring penetrated the hydrostatic groundwater surface but instead encountered perched deposits of groundwater trapped in Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 5 the sand. Due to variations in site elevations, soil borings ST-3, ST-4, ST- 5, and ST-6 extended beyond this elevation and water was not encountered. In AET’s soil boring 1, water was encountered approximately 11 feet below the surface which corresponds to an elevation of about 997.5. In their report, the water encountered was judged to be water accumulating in fast draining soil layers above slower draining soil layers during wetter periods of the year. The elevations at which perched groundwater accumulates seasonally and annually will likely vary and could be shallower/higher at the exploration locations and between the exploration locations. Piezometers or monitoring wells would be required to confirm if groundwater was present within the depths explored. B.3.Laboratory Test Results Selected soil samples were submitted to our laboratory for testing. The laboratory tests were completed in general accordance with current ASTM procedures. The test results can be found on the Log of Boring sheets opposite the soil sample tested. Moisture content tests on selected granular soil samples generally ranged from 3 to 10 percent, indicating the majority of the sandy soils tested were likely at or below their estimated optimum moisture content. Moisture conditioning of granular soils may be needed to meet required densities if used for fill or backfill. The moisture content test on the selected cohesive soil sample was 9 percent, indicating the clayey soil tested was near its estimated optimum moisture content. Our mechanical analyses (grain size accumulation curve) indicated the selected samples contained 9 to 34 percent silt and clay by weight and was used to classify the soil and may be used to estimate infiltration or to evaluate the material for reuse on site. C.Basis for Recommendations We understand the project includes the construction of multiple buildings of the office/ warehouse style common to business parks. At the time of this report, design loads, anticipated grades, and final locations of structures have not been provided. Only conceptual aspects of the development were presented. Aspects of the conceptual design include the construction of roadways separating the residential and Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 6 commercial developments, multiple commercial and multi-family residential structures, and stormwater ponds. Per conversations with Rick Schreier of Inwood 10 LLC, this preliminary geotechnical evaluation will be utilized by the project design team to assist in developing plans and specifications for the project, specifically related to site grading. Existing grades, in the commercial development area as shown on the sketch in the Appendix, range between 1003 and 1031. We have attempted to describe our understanding of the proposed construction to the extent it was reported to us by others. Depending on the extent of available information, assumptions may have been made based on our experience with similar projects. If we have not correctly recorded or interpreted the project details, we should be notified. New or changed information could require additional evaluation, analyses and/or recommendations. D.Recommendations Based on the soil borings, we anticipate that the site would be prepared typical to similar commercial buildings, namely: Site grading will likely include stripping the vegetation and topsoil and any very loose sands or soft clays. Surface compaction within the building pads once stripping is complete for areas to be filled. Cutting to grade or filling with suitable soils. A majority of material below the topsoil is anticipated to be considered suitable for engineered fill, though it should be noted moisture conditioning may be needed. In our judgment, the on-site clays could be reused as engineered fill, but will require drying so compaction can be achieved. To dry these soils, extensive farming of these clays will likely be required and is easier to accomplish in the drier months of June to September. If site grading is done in the spring or fall, on-site drying of these soils may not prove to be feasible and the importing of drier soils may be required. If time or space is not available to dry these soils, then drier soils may need to be imported. The reuse of these materials should be discussed at the bidding stages of the project. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 7 In areas where clays would comprise a majority of the fill where grades are raised or where there are significant grade raises placed upon clay, the thickness of clay placed may need to be restricted to limit the amount of post-construction settlement which occurs from the excavation backfill compressing under its own weight. Usually fills on the order of 5 to 10 feet can be accommodated within a construction schedule provided the transition is gradual. Once the final design, grades, and locations of each structure are determined, our evaluation should be finalized. This final evaluation may revise or provide additional recommendations and may include additional field exploration utilizing soil borings or test pits. D.1.Site Grading and Building Pad Preparation D.1.a.Excavations To prepare the building pads, encountered organic topsoil, very loose sands, and soft clays should be removed and replaced. The following tabulation outlines the anticipated depths needed at the boring locations to remove the topsoil and possible loose or soft soils. Table 1. Anticipated Excavation Depths of Building Pads Soil Boring Approximate Surface Elevation Anticipated Depth of Excavation (Feet) Anticipated Bottom of Excavation (Elevation) ST-1 1030.7 1 1030 ST-2 1019.9 1 1019 ST-3 1011.5 1 1010 1/2 ST-4 1003.6 1 1002 1/2 ST-5 1005.1 1 1004 ST-6 1005.5 1 1004 1/2 ST-7 1012.7 1 1011 1/2 AET 1 1008.5 9 999 1/2 AET 2 1019.6 4 1015 1/2 AET 3 1021.4 2 1019 AET 4 1015.8 2 1013 1/2 AET 5 1019.9 4 1015 1/2 AET 9 1020.5 2 - 4 1018 1/2 - 1016 1/2 Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 8 The excavation depths indicated in the above tabulation are approximate and will vary. The actual depth of excavation needs to be determined in the field at the time of construction. An experienced geotechnical engineering technician, under the direction of a geotechnical engineer, should work closely with the excavating contractor during excavation to make the necessary field judgments regarding the suitability of the exposed soils and to determine the extent of soft soils. To provide lateral support and control settlement to the structural loads they will support, we recommend oversizing (widening) the excavations 1 foot horizontally beyond the footings for each foot the excavations extend below bottom-of-footing elevations. Prior to the placement of engineered fill or footings, we recommend the exposed sand soils in the bottoms of the excavations be surface compacted using a minimum of 5 passes over an area with a large (minimum 3-foot-diameter drum), self-propelled vibratory drum compactor. D.1.b.Excavation Support Sandy soils are prevalent in the near surface soils, and portions of the sands are described as poorly graded sand and would be classified as Type C Soil under OSHA guidelines. Based on this classification it should be anticipated unsupported excavations be maintained at a gradient no steeper than 1 1/2 to 1 (horizontal: vertical). In areas of the site encountering only silty sand tills the soils would be classified as Type B Soil under OSHA guidelines. Based on this classification it should be anticipated unsupported excavations be maintained at a gradient no steeper than 1 to 1 (horizontal: vertical). Slopes constructed in this manner may still exhibit surface sloughing. If site constraints do not allow the construction of temporary slopes with these dimensions, then temporary shoring may be required, and we should be consulted for additional recommendations. An OSHA approved competent person should review this soil classification in the field. Excavations must comply with the requirements of OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations and Trenches.” This document states excavation safety is the responsibility of the contractor. Reference to these OSHA requirements should be included in the project specifications. D.1.c.Placement and Compaction of Backfill and Fill Based on the results of the borings and laboratory tests, the sand soils frequently encountered below the topsoil appear generally suitable for use as engineered fill. Any clay soils encountered being fine-grained, will be more difficult to compact if wet or allowed to become wet, or if spread and compacted over wet surfaces. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 9 If site grading and construction is anticipated during cold weather, snow and ice should be removed from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading. No fill should be placed on frozen subgrades. No frozen soils should be used as fill. Frost should not be allowed to penetrate below the footings. If winter excavation and filling activities are planned, we recommend material selected for backfill and fill (to achieve design grades) consist of clean, coarse sand with less than 12 percent passing a #200 sieve. Frost should not be permitted to penetrate below footings. Compaction effort will vary with depth of fill placed and the structure it intends to support. Based on the anticipated fill depths, soil types and structures, in most areas we anticipate typical levels of compaction in the range of 95 to 100 percent of standard Proctor would be suitable, but would be further defined as part of the final evaluation. D.1.d.Grade Raises As final grades were not provided for this preliminarily evaluation, should engineered fill be placed to raise grades, considerations should be made in regards to long term consolidation of the native soils. Small grade raises on the order of 2 to 5 feet may be made with minimal risk of post construction consolidation of the exposed underlying native soils and the fill itself. Long-term consolidation of the soils, especially if clay is used for fill or filled upon, may be a consideration if grade raises extend above 5 feet. D.2.Spread Footings D.2.a.Embedment Depth For frost protection, we recommend embedding perimeter footings at least 42 inches below the lowest exterior grade in heated portions of the building. Interior footings may be placed directly below floor slabs. We recommend embedding building footings not heated during construction, and footings in unheated areas at least 60 inches below the lowest exterior grade. D.2.b.Net Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on the soil boring results and the above-described site grading procedures, it is our opinion the exposed glacial soils and engineered fill would be anticipated for support of spread footings sized for an allowable soil bearing pressure from 2,000 to 5,000 pounds per square foot. D.3.Interior Slabs D.3.a.Subgrade Modulus After the site grading and building pad preparation has been completed, we anticipate the floor subgrade will be engineered fill or suitable native soils. We recommend using a modulus of subgrade reaction, k, of Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 10 150 pounds per square inch per inch of deflection (pci) to design the slabs. If 6 inches of compacted aggregate base is placed immediately below the slab, the k- value may be increased by 50 pci. An aggregate base will also be a more stable platform for construction equipment during construction and is less weather sensitive. D.3.b.Moisture Vapor Protection As large portions of the building are anticipated to have an exposed concrete floor, vapor transmission through the floor may not be a major concern. However, it may still be a benefit to put a vapor barrier below the floor due to: Materials placed on the floor may be damaged by absorbed moisture. Less water vapor in the air may result in a reduction in heating and cooling costs. The vapor barrier will be in place for any future remodeling. Excess transmission of water vapor could cause floor dampness, certain types of floor bonding agents to separate, or mold to form under floor coverings. If floor coverings or coatings less permeable than the concrete slab will be used, we recommend a vapor retarder or vapor barrier be place immediately beneath the slab. We recommend consulting with floor covering manufacturers regarding the appropriate type, use and installation of the vapor retarder or barrier to preserve warranty assurances. We recommend the vapor retarder or barrier be observed prior to concrete placement so holes, tears or gaps in the vapor retarder or barrier can be identified and patched or realigned as needed. We further recommend performing moisture vapor transmission tests after the concrete slabs have cured, but before flooring are installed. Flooring manufacturers typically recommend upper limits of moisture vapor transmission can be used to set schedules for flooring installation but, more importantly, may impact warranties. D.4.Exterior Slabs For general exterior slabs we recommend subgrades be prepared similar as to what is described in section D.6 for pavements. If portions of the exterior surface will have higher expectations for performance for example a paver patio, additional preparations would be recommended to limit frost heave and post construction settlement. We anticipate exterior slabs will be underlain with silty sands, which are considered moderately to highly frost susceptible. If these soils become saturated and freeze, unfavorable amounts of heaving could Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 11 occur. Grading to direct surface drainage away from buildings helps limit the potential for saturation and subsequent heaving to occur. Still, even limited amounts of movement can create tripping hazards to building employees and guests. One way to help limit the potential for heaving to occur is to remove frost-susceptible soils present below the overlying slab “footprints” down to bottom-of-footing grades, and replace them with non-frost-susceptible (NFS) backfill consisting of medium to coarse grained sands having less than 5 percent of the particles by weight passing a #200 sieve. We recommend differential frost heave should be accommodated at transition areas. D.5.Utilities Based on the borings, we anticipate the soils at typical invert elevations should be suitable for utility support. However, if unfavorable conditions such as soft clay, organic soils or perched water are encountered at invert grades, the unsuitable soils may require some additional subcutting and replacement with sand or crushed rock to prepare a proper subgrade for pipe support. Utilities should not be placed within the 1:1 oversizing of foundations. If it is necessary to place utilities within the oversizing of the footings, we should review the documents prior to construction as it may be necessary to backfill with lean concrete or lower the footing elevations near the utility trenches. We anticipate utilities can be installed per manufacturer bedding requirements. A majority of the soil borings indicated the site predominantly consists of sandy soils. These soils are considered non- to only slightly corrosive to metallic conduits. If utilities extend through clay soils, the utilities should be bedded in sandy soil free of any clay lumps or the utilities should be constructed with non-corrosive materials. D.6.Pavements D.6.a.Subgrade Preparation We recommend the vegetation and topsoil be removed from the upper 3 feet below the pavement section. In areas requiring engineered fill to establish pavement grades, the excavation should be oversized at least 1 foot beyond the outside edge of the paved areas for each foot of fill placed below the roads or parking lot. Prior to the placement of engineered fill or pavements, we recommend the exposed sandy soils in the bottoms of the excavations be thoroughly compacted by a minimum of 5 passes with a large (3-foot- diameter drum minimum), self-propelled drum compactor. This is recommended to further densify the underlying native soils and to provide a more uniform base to place additional fill or pavement. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 12 On-site soils free of organic soil and debris can be considered for placement up to design subgrade elevations in pavement areas. Note again the clay soils will be more difficult to compact if wet or allowed to become wet, or if spread and compacted over wet surfaces. D.6.b.Subgrade Proofroll Prior to the placement of the aggregate base, we recommend the subgrade soils be proofrolled with a fully loaded tandem-axle truck and the proofroll be observed by a geotechnical engineer. This will assist in identifying soft or weak areas will require additional soil correction work. Areas that display excessive yielding or rutting during the proofroll should be corrected. In areas where subgrade correction is deemed necessary, unsuitable soils should be removed to soils of adequate density or to a maximum depth of 3 feet. Failed areas should be compacted, or if too wet, subcut and replaced with suitable soil or additional aggregate base and compacted as previously specified. D.6.c.R-Value Laboratory tests to determine an R-value for pavement design were not included in the scope of this project. Based on our experience with similar soil conditions, however, it is our opinion an R-value of 30 can be assumed for design purposes. This R-value is based on a pavement section directly supported on a poorly graded sand to silty clayey sand subgrade. If clayey sand or sandy lean clay subgrades are anticipated on final grades, lower R-values in the range of 12 to 20 may be needed and the pavement section may be supported on engineered fill. In that case the R-value will have to be reevaluated based on the engineered fill material. D.6.d.Pavement Sections Based on our experience with typical commercial sites as illustrated on your conceptual design in Section A, we anticipate the parking lots and roadways will likely have a larger volume of automobiles and delivery or garbage trucks than the residential portion of the development. In these areas a light- duty pavement section ranging from 3 to 3 1/2 inches of bituminous pavement over 6 to 9 inches of aggregate base material are anticipated. If any of these proposed buildings or roadways is expecting larger amounts of large truck traffic, thicker sections may be needed. These sections are anticipated to be on the order of 4 to 5 inches of bituminous pavement over 8 to 12 inches of aggregate base material. In areas with high point loads such as truck parking areas or loading docks, concrete pavement should be considered. Wherever concrete pavements will be utilized, the appropriate panel sizing, jointing, doweling and edge reinforcement are critical to the ridged pavement performance. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 13 D.7.Stormwater Management Based on the provided conceptual sketch, it appears the design and construction of stormwater management features are part of the development. These features appear to be large infiltration basins located in the southwest corner of the site in the vicinity of soil boring ST-4 and near the center of the development in the vicinity of AET’s soil borings 4 and 5. The soil profiles at soil boring locations ST-3 and ST-4, dependent on final grades, may provide challenges to infiltration. Typically, the profiles in these areas have layers of silty clayey sand, clayey sand and sandy lean clay which are not conducive to high infiltration rates. AET boring 5 encountered sand with silt and sand with gravel 4 feet below the surface to boring termination. This location may yield higher infiltration rates. Infiltration rates were estimated for some of the soils we observed in our soil borings and are listed in Table 2. Table 2. Estimated Design Infiltration Rates Based on Soil Classification Soil Type Infiltration Rate * (in/hr) Sands with less than 12% fines Poorly graded or well graded sands 0.8 Silty sands, silty gravelly sands 0.45 Silts, very fine sands, silty or clayey fine sands 0.2 Clayey sands and clays 0.06 *From Minnesota Stormwater Manual Section 12.8 with December 16 updates. Rates may differ at individual sites. In any case, infiltration rates can be calculated based on field testing with Double Ring Infiltrometer testing (ASTM D3385). Additional soil borings and geotechnical evaluation should also be performed in infiltration basins once the location and grades are determined. This geotechnical evaluation does not constitute a review of site suitability for stormwater infiltration or evaluate the potential impacts, if any, from infiltration of large amount of stormwater. D.8.Additional Evaluation This preliminary geotechnical evaluation is not considered sufficient to provide detailed geotechnical design recommendations for the commercial buildings. Once the location, framing system, structural loads, building layout, etc. have been finalized for each structure, additional borings and evaluation should be done. The information contained in this report should be reviewed as part of the design evaluation. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 14 E.Procedures E.1.Penetration Test Borings The penetration test borings were drilled with a floatation tired-mounted core and auger drill equipped with hollow-stem auger. The borings were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586. Penetration test samples were taken at 2 1/2- or 5-foot intervals. Actual sample intervals and corresponding depths are shown on the boring logs. E.2.Material Classification and Testing E.2.a.Visual and Manual Classification The geologic materials encountered were visually and manually classified in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 2488. A chart explaining the classification system is attached. Samples were sealed in jars and returned to our facility for review and storage. E.2.b.Laboratory Testing The results of the laboratory tests performed on geologic material samples are noted on or follow the appropriate attached exploration logs. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM procedures. E.3.Groundwater Measurements The drillers checked for groundwater as the penetration test borings were advanced, and again after auger withdrawal. The boreholes were then backfilled as noted on the boring logs. F.Qualifications F.1.Variations in Subsurface Conditions F.1.a.Material Strata Our evaluation, analyses and recommendations were developed from a limited amount of site and subsurface information. It is not standard engineering practice to retrieve material samples from exploration locations continuously with depth, and therefore strata boundaries and thicknesses must be Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 15 inferred to some extent. Strata boundaries may also be gradual transitions, and can be expected to vary in depth, elevation and thickness away from the exploration locations. Variations in subsurface conditions present between exploration locations may not be revealed until additional exploration work is completed, or construction commences. If any such variations are revealed, our recommendations should be re-evaluated. Such variations could increase construction costs, and a contingency should be provided to accommodate them. F.2.Continuity of Professional Responsibility F.2.a.Plan Review This report is based on a limited amount of information, and a number of assumptions were necessary to help us develop our recommendations. It is recommended that our firm review the geotechnical aspects of the designs and specifications, and evaluate whether the design is as expected, if any design changes have affected the validity of our recommendations, and if our recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented in the designs and specifications. F.2.b.Construction Observations and Testing It is recommended that we be retained to perform observations and tests during construction. This will allow correlation of the subsurface conditions encountered during construction with those encountered by the borings, and provide continuity of professional responsibility. F.3.Use of Report This report is for the exclusive use of the parties to which it has been addressed. Without written approval, we assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. Our evaluation, analyses and recommendations may not be appropriate for other parties or projects. F.4.Standard of Care In performing its services, Braun Intertec used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable members of its profession currently practicing in the same locality. No warranty, express or implied, is made. Appendix 8 12 10 11 14 27 9 Benchmark: Elevations were obtained using GPS and the State of Minnesota's permanent base station network. No sample recovery. 4 CL SM SP- SM SC- SM LEAN CLAY with SAND, brown, moist. (Topsoil) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown to reddish brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine- to medium-grained, reddish brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Sand seams and Gravel, brown, wet, loose to medium dense. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Auger met refusal at the 15-foot depth. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 14 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1030.0 1026.7 1023.7 1014.7 0.7 4.0 7.0 16.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-1 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-1 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota P200 % MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1030.7 Depth feet 0.0 7 32 26 30 18 22 19 349 CL SM SP- SM SC- SM SP SC- SM LEAN CLAY with SAND, brown, moist. (Topsoil) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown to reddish brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, Gravely, brown to reddish brown, moist, dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown, wet, medium dense. (Glacial Till) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-grained, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, wet, medium dense. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 14 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1018.9 1015.9 1012.9 1010.9 1007.9 998.9 1.0 4.0 7.0 9.0 12.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-2 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-2 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota P200 % MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1019.9 Depth feet 0.0 5 15 23 24 33 21 24 4 CL SM SC- SM LEAN CLAY with SAND, brown, moist. (Topsoil) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Clayey Sand seams and Gravel, reddish brown to brown, moist to wet, loose to medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Sand seams and Gravel, reddish brown to brown, wet, medium dense to dense. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 16 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1010.5 1002.5 990.5 1.0 9.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-3 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-3 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1011.5 Depth feet 0.0 8 6 19 21 24 36 38 27 An open triangle in the water level (WL) column indicates the depth at which groundwater was observed while drilling. Groundwater levels fluctuate. 7 10 9 CL CL SM SP- SM SC SM SC LEAN CLAY with SAND, dark brown, moist. LEAN CLAY with SAND, brown, wet, medium. (Glacial Till) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown, moist to wet, loose to medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) With Gravel at 7 1/2 feet. POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine- to medium-grained, wet, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) CLAYEY SAND, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, wet, very stiff. (Glacial Till) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown to reddish brown, wet, dense. (Glacial Till) CLAYEY SAND, with Sand seams, brown to reddish brown, wet, hard. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water observed at 12 1/2 feet with 12 feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 13 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1002.6 999.6 994.6 991.6 989.6 985.6 982.6 1.0 4.0 9.0 12.0 14.0 18.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-4 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-4 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota P200 % MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1003.6 Depth feet 0.0 6 4 8 10 21 23 20 No recovery. Sample from cuttings. 10 CL SM SP- SM SP SC LEAN CLAY with SAND, dark brown, wet. (Topsoil) SILTY SAND, with Gravel, reddish brown, wet, loose. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, moist, very loose. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND, with Clayey Sand lenses and Gravel, brown to reddish brown, wet, loose to medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) CLAYEY SAND, Gravely, reddish brown, wet, very stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 16 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1004.3 1001.1 998.1 987.1 984.1 0.8 4.0 7.0 18.0 21.0 11/12/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-5 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-5 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1005.1 Depth feet 0.0 13 18 15 21 35 36 25 3 CL SC SP SC- SM SP SC LEAN CLAY with SAND, dark brown, wet. (Topsoil) CLAYEY SAND, with Sand seams, reddish brown, moist, stiff. (Glacial Till) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-grained, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, reddish brown, wet, medium dense. (Glacial Till) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-grained, brown, moist, dense. (Glacial Outwash) With Gravel at 15 feet. CLAYEY SAND, with Gravel, reddish brown, wet, very stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 15 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1004.5 1001.5 998.5 993.5 987.5 984.5 1.0 4.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-6 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-6 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:44Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1005.5 Depth feet 0.0 10 25 47 30 34 37 18 10 8 5 CL SC- SM SP- SM SM SP SC- SM LEAN CLAY with SAND, dark brown, moist. (Topsoil) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown to reddish brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Till) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, moist, dense. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-grained, with Clayey Sand seams and Gravel, brown to reddish brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, reddish brown, wet, medium dense to dense. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 17 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1011.7 1008.7 1005.7 1003.7 1000.7 991.7 1.0 4.0 7.0 9.0 12.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-7 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-7 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:44Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota P200 % MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1012.7 Depth feet 0.0 Descriptive Terminology of Soil Standard D 2487 - 00 Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System) Rev. 7/07 DD Dry density, pcf WD Wet density, pcf MC Natural moisture content, % LL Liqiuid limit, % PL Plastic limit, % PI Plasticity index, % P200 % passing 200 sieve OC Organic content, % S Percent of saturation, % SG Specific gravity C Cohesion, psf Angle of internal friction qu Unconfined compressive strength, psf qp Pocket penetrometer strength, tsf Liquid Limit (LL) Laboratory TestsPlasticity Index (PI)Drilling Notes Standard penetration test borings were advanced by 3 1/4” or 6 1/4” ID hollow-stem augers unless noted otherwise, Jetting water was used to clean out auger prior to sampling only where indicated on logs. Standard penetration test borings are designated by the prefix “ST” (Split Tube). All samples were taken with the standard 2” OD split-tube sampler, except where noted. Power auger borings were advanced by 4” or 6” diameter continuous- flight, solid-stem augers. Soil classifications and strata depths were in- ferred from disturbed samples augered to the surface and are, therefore, somewhat approximate. Power auger borings are designated by the prefix “B.” Hand auger borings were advanced manually with a 1 1/2” or 3 1/4” diameter auger and were limited to the depth from which the auger could be manually withdrawn. Hand auger borings are indicated by the prefix “H.” BPF: Numbers indicate blows per foot recorded in standard penetration test, also known as “N” value. The sampler was set 6” into undisturbed soil below the hollow-stem auger. Driving resistances were then counted for second and third 6” increments and added to get BPF. Where they differed significantly, they are reported in the following form: 2/12 for the second and third 6” increments, respectively. WH: WH indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of hammer and rods alone; driving not required. WR: WR indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of rods alone; hammer weight and driving not required. TW indicates thin-walled (undisturbed) tube sample. Note: All tests were run in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. Particle Size Identification Boulders ............................... over 12” Cobbles ............................... 3” to 12” Gravel Coarse ............................ 3/4” to 3” Fine ................................. No. 4 to 3/4” Sand Coarse ............................ No. 4 to No. 10 Medium ........................... No. 10 to No. 40 Fine ................................. No. 40 to No. 200 Silt ....................................... No. 200, PI 4 or below “A” line Clay ..................................... No. 200, PI 4 and on or above “A” line Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils Very loose ................................ 0 to 4 BPF Loose ....................................... 5 to 10 BPF Medium dense ......................... 11 to 30 BPF Dense ...................................... 31 to 50 BPF Very dense ............................... over 50 BPF Consistency of Cohesive Soils Very soft ................................... 0 to 1 BPF Soft ....................................... 2 to 3 BPF Rather soft ............................... 4 to 5 BPF Medium .................................... 6 to 8 BPF Rather stiff ............................... 9 to 12 BPF Stiff ....................................... 13 to 16 BPF Very stiff ................................... 17 to 30 BPF Hard ....................................... over 30 BPF a. Based on the material passing the 3-in (75mm) sieve. b. If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles or boulders or both” to group name. c. Cu = D60 / D10 Cc = (D30)2 D10 x D60 d. If soil contains 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name. e. Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay f. If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM or SC-SM. g. If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name. h. If soil contains 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name. i. Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded sand with silt SW-SC well-graded sand with clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay j. If Atterberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. k. If soil contains 10 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel” whichever is predominant. l. If soil contains 30% plus No. 200, predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name. m. If soil contains 30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name. n. PI 4 and plots on or above “A” line. o. PI 4 or plots below “A” line. p. PI plots on or above “A” line. q. PI plots below “A” line. Poorly graded sand h Peat Well-graded gravel d PI plots on or above “A” line PI 7 and plots on or above “A” line j PI 4 or plots below “A” line j Fine-grained Soils50% or more passed theNo. 200 sieveCoarse-grained Soilsmore than 50% retained onNo. 200 sieveSoils Classification Gravels More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Sands 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Silts and Clays Liquid limit less than 50 Highly Organic Soils Silts and clays Liquid limit 50 or more Primarily organic matter, dark in color and organic odor Group Symbol Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests a Group Name b GW GP GM GC SW SP SM CL ML OL OL SC Poorly graded gravel d Silty gravel d f g Clean Gravels 5% or less fines e Gravels with Fines More than 12% fines e Clean Sands 5% or less fines i Sands with Fines More than 12% i Fines classify as ML or MH Fines classify as CL or CH Clayey gravel d f g Well-graded sand h Fines classify as CL or CH Fines classify as ML or MH Silty sand f g h Clayey sand f g h Inorganic Organic Liquid limit - oven dried Liquid limit - not dried 0.75 Inorganic Organic PI plots below “A” line Lean clay k l m Liquid limit - oven dried Liquid limit - not dried 0.75 CH MH OH OH Fat clay k l m Elastic silt k l m Organic clay k l m n Organic silt k l m o Organic clay k l m p Organic silt k l m q Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3 C PT Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3 C Cu 4 and/or 1 Cc 3 C Cu 6 and/or 1 CC 3 C 0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 7 “U” Line“A” Line 10 20 30 40 50 60 4 0 ML or OL MH or OHCL or OL CH or O H CL - ML Silt k l m I N W O O D3 R D A D D I T I O NI N W O O D5 T H A D D I T I O NC I T Y O FO A K D A L EVADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 Country Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLAKE ELMO, MNoff:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\exhibits\z_old_5172-05_stormwater exhibit.dwgSave Date:04/22/261Revisions:#5172-051FIGURE 5IMPERVIOUS TO EXISTINGPONDS EXHIBIT LEGEND POND 200 (CATCHMENT 201S) IMPERVIOUS SUMMARY POND 100 (CATCHMENTS 101S & 102S) IMPERVIOUS SUMMARY G H O S T P L A TG H O S T P L A TVADNAIS ASSOCIATES, LLC2935 County Drive, Suite 102Little Canada, MN 55117ofINWOOD COMMERCIALLake Elmo, MNf:\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172-05- inwood commercial (outlot k, inwood)\cad c3d\engineering\exhibits\5172-05_9th street full intersection exhibit.dwgSave Date:04/20/26119TH ST. & INWOOD AVE.FULL INTERSECTIONEXHIBITNOTES:#5172-05 Table of Contents Description Page A. Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 A.1. Project Description..............................................................................................................1 A.2. Background Information and Reference Documents..........................................................2 A.3. Scope of Services.................................................................................................................2 A.4. Boring Locations..................................................................................................................3 B. Results..............................................................................................................................................3 B.1. Exploration Logs..................................................................................................................3 B.1.a. Log of Boring Sheets...............................................................................................3 B.1.b. Geologic Origins .....................................................................................................3 B.2. Geologic Profile...................................................................................................................4 B.2.a. Topsoil....................................................................................................................4 B.2.b. Glacial Deposits......................................................................................................4 B.2.c. Groundwater..........................................................................................................4 B.3. Laboratory Test Results.......................................................................................................5 C. Basis for Recommendations.............................................................................................................5 D. Recommendations ...........................................................................................................................6 D.1. Site Grading and Building Pad Preparation.........................................................................7 D.1.a. Excavations.............................................................................................................7 D.1.b. Excavation Support.................................................................................................8 D.1.c. Placement and Compaction of Backfill and Fill......................................................8 D.1.d. Grade Raises...........................................................................................................9 D.2. Spread Footings...................................................................................................................9 D.2.a. Embedment Depth.................................................................................................9 D.2.b. Net Allowable Bearing Pressure.............................................................................9 D.3. Interior Slabs .......................................................................................................................9 D.3.a. Subgrade Modulus.................................................................................................9 D.3.b. Moisture Vapor Protection ..................................................................................10 D.4. Exterior Slabs.....................................................................................................................10 D.5. Utilities ..............................................................................................................................11 D.6. Pavements.........................................................................................................................11 D.6.a. Subgrade Preparation ..........................................................................................11 D.6.b. Subgrade Proofroll ...............................................................................................12 D.6.c. R-Value.................................................................................................................12 D.6.d. Pavement Sections...............................................................................................12 D.7. Stormwater Management.................................................................................................13 D.8. Additional Evaluation........................................................................................................13 E. Procedures......................................................................................................................................14 E.1. Penetration Test Borings...................................................................................................14 E.2. Material Classification and Testing ...................................................................................14 E.2.a. Visual and Manual Classification..........................................................................14 E.2.b. Laboratory Testing ...............................................................................................14 E.3. Groundwater Measurements............................................................................................14 F. Qualifications..................................................................................................................................14 Table of Contents (continued) Description Page F.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions..................................................................................14 F.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility..........................................................................15 F.2.a. Plan Review..........................................................................................................15 F.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing...............................................................15 F.3. Use of Report.....................................................................................................................15 F.4. Standard of Care................................................................................................................15 Appendix Boring Location Sketch Log of Boring Sheets ST-1 to ST-7 AET Subsurface Boring Logs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 9 Descriptive Terminology A.Introduction A.1.Project Description It is our understanding that Inwood 10 LLC is proposing to develop a 154-acre area for both commercial and residential use in Lake Elmo, Minnesota. A geotechnical evaluation has already been performed for the residential portion of the project by American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET). The residential portion includes the construction of a subdivision in the center and northwest portions of the development as shown on the sketch below. Our evaluation was performed for only the commercial area as outlined in the sketch below. Figure 1. Proposed Commercial Development Concept Plan The majority of the parcel is agricultural fields with small isolated areas with trees. The surface also has a general downward slope across the site towards the southwest. Commercial parcel Residential parcel Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 2 The purpose of this preliminary geotechnical evaluation is to assist Inwood 10 LLC and their design team in evaluating the soil and groundwater conditions in the area of the proposed commercial development and to provide preliminary recommendations for design and construction of foundations, slabs on grade, utilities, and pavements. A.2.Background Information and Reference Documents To facilitate our evaluation, we were provided with or reviewed the following information or documents: A proposed boring location sketch outlining the commercial development, the proposed boring locations, and previously performed soil borings by American Engineering Testing, Inc. A development concept sketch titled as, “PUD Concept Plan Inwood”, and dated August 28, 2014. A Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by AET and dated May 13, 2014 for the residential portion of the project generally located at the northwest portion of the parcel. Discussions with Rick Schreier of Inwood 10 LLC in regard to the commercial development grading, building pad preparation, and features. A.3.Scope of Services Our scope of services for this project was originally submitted as a Proposal to Rick Schreier of Inwood 10 LLC and dated October 24, 2014. We received authorization to proceed on October 30, 2014. Tasks completed in accordance with our authorized scope of services are described below. Staking the boring locations at the locations provided by Rick Schreier and determining ground surface elevations at the boring locations. Coordinating the locating of underground public utilities near the boring locations. Conducting 7 standard penetration borings in the proposed commercial development to a nominal depth of 20 feet below existing grade. Classifying the samples and preparing boring logs. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 3 Conducting a limited laboratory testing program. Analyzing the results of the field and laboratory tests. Formulating recommendations and submitting a preliminary geotechnical evaluation report containing logs of the borings, our analysis of the field and laboratory tests, and preliminary recommendations for design of foundations, slabs on grade, utilities, and pavements. A.4.Boring Locations The soil boring locations and surface elevations were determined using GPS (Global Positioning System) technology uses the Minnesota Department of Transportation's permanent GPS Virtual Reference Network (VRN). The boring locations are shown on the attached sketch. Prior to commencing with our subsurface exploration activities, we coordinated the clearing of the soil boring of underground utilities through Gopher State One Call. B.Results B.1.Exploration Logs B.1.a.Log of Boring Sheets Log of Boring sheets for our penetration test borings are included in the Appendix. The logs identify and describe the geologic materials penetrated, the results of penetration resistance and laboratory tests performed on penetration test samples retrieved from them, and groundwater observations. Strata boundaries were inferred from changes in the penetration test samples and the drill auger cuttings. Because sampling was not performed continuously, the strata boundary depths are only approximate. The boundary depths likely vary away from the boring locations, and the boundaries themselves may also occur as gradual rather than abrupt transitions. B.1.b.Geologic Origins Geologic origins presented for each stratum on the Log of Boring sheets are based on the soil types, blows per foot, and available common knowledge of the geological history of the site. Because of the Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 4 complex glacial and post-glacial depositional environments, geologic origins can be difficult to ascertain. A detailed investigation of the geologic history of the site was not performed. B.2.Geologic Profile The types of soils encountered in the borings are described below. The soils are generally described in the order they were encountered; i.e., beginning at the ground surface. Please reference the Logs of Borings attached in the Appendix for additional details. B.2.a.Topsoil Topsoil was encountered at the surface at our boring locations with thicknesses of about 8 inches to 1 foot. The topsoil encountered by our soil borings consisted of lean clay with sand. In soil borings 1 through 5 and 9 performed by AET nearest the commercial development, a “plow zone” layer was encountered at the surface. This layer had a thickness of 2 feet and the soils encountered were similar to the topsoil encountered in our soil borings. We noted the depth of soils that were interpreted to have the organic contents high enough that they were estimated to impact structural properties of the soil. B.2.b.Glacial Deposits The borings we performed encountered glacial deposits beneath the topsoil consisted predominately of silty sands and silty clayey sands with lesser amounts of poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt, clayey sand, and lean clay with sand. The penetration resistances recorded in the cohesionless (sand) soils varied from 4 to 47 blows per foot (BPF), indicating a very loose to dense relative density. The penetration resistances recorded in the cohesive (clay) deposits varied from 8 to 38 BPF, indicating a medium to hard consistency. Some of the higher blow counts are likely due to gravel. The glacial deposits our soil borings encountered are consistent with the soils AET encountered. One difference is that our glacial outwash sands were generally classified as alluvial soils by AET. Also of note is that in AET borings 1 and 5 a layer of soft clay was encountered. B.2.c.Groundwater Water was encountered in soil boring ST-4 at approximate elevation 991. Based on the moisture contents of the geologic material beneath this elevation, it does not appear our soil boring penetrated the hydrostatic groundwater surface but instead encountered perched deposits of groundwater trapped in Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 5 the sand. Due to variations in site elevations, soil borings ST-3, ST-4, ST- 5, and ST-6 extended beyond this elevation and water was not encountered. In AET’s soil boring 1, water was encountered approximately 11 feet below the surface which corresponds to an elevation of about 997.5. In their report, the water encountered was judged to be water accumulating in fast draining soil layers above slower draining soil layers during wetter periods of the year. The elevations at which perched groundwater accumulates seasonally and annually will likely vary and could be shallower/higher at the exploration locations and between the exploration locations. Piezometers or monitoring wells would be required to confirm if groundwater was present within the depths explored. B.3.Laboratory Test Results Selected soil samples were submitted to our laboratory for testing. The laboratory tests were completed in general accordance with current ASTM procedures. The test results can be found on the Log of Boring sheets opposite the soil sample tested. Moisture content tests on selected granular soil samples generally ranged from 3 to 10 percent, indicating the majority of the sandy soils tested were likely at or below their estimated optimum moisture content. Moisture conditioning of granular soils may be needed to meet required densities if used for fill or backfill. The moisture content test on the selected cohesive soil sample was 9 percent, indicating the clayey soil tested was near its estimated optimum moisture content. Our mechanical analyses (grain size accumulation curve) indicated the selected samples contained 9 to 34 percent silt and clay by weight and was used to classify the soil and may be used to estimate infiltration or to evaluate the material for reuse on site. C.Basis for Recommendations We understand the project includes the construction of multiple buildings of the office/ warehouse style common to business parks. At the time of this report, design loads, anticipated grades, and final locations of structures have not been provided. Only conceptual aspects of the development were presented. Aspects of the conceptual design include the construction of roadways separating the residential and Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 6 commercial developments, multiple commercial and multi-family residential structures, and stormwater ponds. Per conversations with Rick Schreier of Inwood 10 LLC, this preliminary geotechnical evaluation will be utilized by the project design team to assist in developing plans and specifications for the project, specifically related to site grading. Existing grades, in the commercial development area as shown on the sketch in the Appendix, range between 1003 and 1031. We have attempted to describe our understanding of the proposed construction to the extent it was reported to us by others. Depending on the extent of available information, assumptions may have been made based on our experience with similar projects. If we have not correctly recorded or interpreted the project details, we should be notified. New or changed information could require additional evaluation, analyses and/or recommendations. D.Recommendations Based on the soil borings, we anticipate that the site would be prepared typical to similar commercial buildings, namely: Site grading will likely include stripping the vegetation and topsoil and any very loose sands or soft clays. Surface compaction within the building pads once stripping is complete for areas to be filled. Cutting to grade or filling with suitable soils. A majority of material below the topsoil is anticipated to be considered suitable for engineered fill, though it should be noted moisture conditioning may be needed. In our judgment, the on-site clays could be reused as engineered fill, but will require drying so compaction can be achieved. To dry these soils, extensive farming of these clays will likely be required and is easier to accomplish in the drier months of June to September. If site grading is done in the spring or fall, on-site drying of these soils may not prove to be feasible and the importing of drier soils may be required. If time or space is not available to dry these soils, then drier soils may need to be imported. The reuse of these materials should be discussed at the bidding stages of the project. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 7 In areas where clays would comprise a majority of the fill where grades are raised or where there are significant grade raises placed upon clay, the thickness of clay placed may need to be restricted to limit the amount of post-construction settlement which occurs from the excavation backfill compressing under its own weight. Usually fills on the order of 5 to 10 feet can be accommodated within a construction schedule provided the transition is gradual. Once the final design, grades, and locations of each structure are determined, our evaluation should be finalized. This final evaluation may revise or provide additional recommendations and may include additional field exploration utilizing soil borings or test pits. D.1.Site Grading and Building Pad Preparation D.1.a.Excavations To prepare the building pads, encountered organic topsoil, very loose sands, and soft clays should be removed and replaced. The following tabulation outlines the anticipated depths needed at the boring locations to remove the topsoil and possible loose or soft soils. Table 1. Anticipated Excavation Depths of Building Pads Soil Boring Approximate Surface Elevation Anticipated Depth of Excavation (Feet) Anticipated Bottom of Excavation (Elevation) ST-1 1030.7 1 1030 ST-2 1019.9 1 1019 ST-3 1011.5 1 1010 1/2 ST-4 1003.6 1 1002 1/2 ST-5 1005.1 1 1004 ST-6 1005.5 1 1004 1/2 ST-7 1012.7 1 1011 1/2 AET 1 1008.5 9 999 1/2 AET 2 1019.6 4 1015 1/2 AET 3 1021.4 2 1019 AET 4 1015.8 2 1013 1/2 AET 5 1019.9 4 1015 1/2 AET 9 1020.5 2 - 4 1018 1/2 - 1016 1/2 Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 8 The excavation depths indicated in the above tabulation are approximate and will vary. The actual depth of excavation needs to be determined in the field at the time of construction. An experienced geotechnical engineering technician, under the direction of a geotechnical engineer, should work closely with the excavating contractor during excavation to make the necessary field judgments regarding the suitability of the exposed soils and to determine the extent of soft soils. To provide lateral support and control settlement to the structural loads they will support, we recommend oversizing (widening) the excavations 1 foot horizontally beyond the footings for each foot the excavations extend below bottom-of-footing elevations. Prior to the placement of engineered fill or footings, we recommend the exposed sand soils in the bottoms of the excavations be surface compacted using a minimum of 5 passes over an area with a large (minimum 3-foot-diameter drum), self-propelled vibratory drum compactor. D.1.b.Excavation Support Sandy soils are prevalent in the near surface soils, and portions of the sands are described as poorly graded sand and would be classified as Type C Soil under OSHA guidelines. Based on this classification it should be anticipated unsupported excavations be maintained at a gradient no steeper than 1 1/2 to 1 (horizontal: vertical). In areas of the site encountering only silty sand tills the soils would be classified as Type B Soil under OSHA guidelines. Based on this classification it should be anticipated unsupported excavations be maintained at a gradient no steeper than 1 to 1 (horizontal: vertical). Slopes constructed in this manner may still exhibit surface sloughing. If site constraints do not allow the construction of temporary slopes with these dimensions, then temporary shoring may be required, and we should be consulted for additional recommendations. An OSHA approved competent person should review this soil classification in the field. Excavations must comply with the requirements of OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations and Trenches.” This document states excavation safety is the responsibility of the contractor. Reference to these OSHA requirements should be included in the project specifications. D.1.c.Placement and Compaction of Backfill and Fill Based on the results of the borings and laboratory tests, the sand soils frequently encountered below the topsoil appear generally suitable for use as engineered fill. Any clay soils encountered being fine-grained, will be more difficult to compact if wet or allowed to become wet, or if spread and compacted over wet surfaces. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 9 If site grading and construction is anticipated during cold weather, snow and ice should be removed from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading. No fill should be placed on frozen subgrades. No frozen soils should be used as fill. Frost should not be allowed to penetrate below the footings. If winter excavation and filling activities are planned, we recommend material selected for backfill and fill (to achieve design grades) consist of clean, coarse sand with less than 12 percent passing a #200 sieve. Frost should not be permitted to penetrate below footings. Compaction effort will vary with depth of fill placed and the structure it intends to support. Based on the anticipated fill depths, soil types and structures, in most areas we anticipate typical levels of compaction in the range of 95 to 100 percent of standard Proctor would be suitable, but would be further defined as part of the final evaluation. D.1.d.Grade Raises As final grades were not provided for this preliminarily evaluation, should engineered fill be placed to raise grades, considerations should be made in regards to long term consolidation of the native soils. Small grade raises on the order of 2 to 5 feet may be made with minimal risk of post construction consolidation of the exposed underlying native soils and the fill itself. Long-term consolidation of the soils, especially if clay is used for fill or filled upon, may be a consideration if grade raises extend above 5 feet. D.2.Spread Footings D.2.a.Embedment Depth For frost protection, we recommend embedding perimeter footings at least 42 inches below the lowest exterior grade in heated portions of the building. Interior footings may be placed directly below floor slabs. We recommend embedding building footings not heated during construction, and footings in unheated areas at least 60 inches below the lowest exterior grade. D.2.b.Net Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on the soil boring results and the above-described site grading procedures, it is our opinion the exposed glacial soils and engineered fill would be anticipated for support of spread footings sized for an allowable soil bearing pressure from 2,000 to 5,000 pounds per square foot. D.3.Interior Slabs D.3.a.Subgrade Modulus After the site grading and building pad preparation has been completed, we anticipate the floor subgrade will be engineered fill or suitable native soils. We recommend using a modulus of subgrade reaction, k, of Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 10 150 pounds per square inch per inch of deflection (pci) to design the slabs. If 6 inches of compacted aggregate base is placed immediately below the slab, the k- value may be increased by 50 pci. An aggregate base will also be a more stable platform for construction equipment during construction and is less weather sensitive. D.3.b.Moisture Vapor Protection As large portions of the building are anticipated to have an exposed concrete floor, vapor transmission through the floor may not be a major concern. However, it may still be a benefit to put a vapor barrier below the floor due to: Materials placed on the floor may be damaged by absorbed moisture. Less water vapor in the air may result in a reduction in heating and cooling costs. The vapor barrier will be in place for any future remodeling. Excess transmission of water vapor could cause floor dampness, certain types of floor bonding agents to separate, or mold to form under floor coverings. If floor coverings or coatings less permeable than the concrete slab will be used, we recommend a vapor retarder or vapor barrier be place immediately beneath the slab. We recommend consulting with floor covering manufacturers regarding the appropriate type, use and installation of the vapor retarder or barrier to preserve warranty assurances. We recommend the vapor retarder or barrier be observed prior to concrete placement so holes, tears or gaps in the vapor retarder or barrier can be identified and patched or realigned as needed. We further recommend performing moisture vapor transmission tests after the concrete slabs have cured, but before flooring are installed. Flooring manufacturers typically recommend upper limits of moisture vapor transmission can be used to set schedules for flooring installation but, more importantly, may impact warranties. D.4.Exterior Slabs For general exterior slabs we recommend subgrades be prepared similar as to what is described in section D.6 for pavements. If portions of the exterior surface will have higher expectations for performance for example a paver patio, additional preparations would be recommended to limit frost heave and post construction settlement. We anticipate exterior slabs will be underlain with silty sands, which are considered moderately to highly frost susceptible. If these soils become saturated and freeze, unfavorable amounts of heaving could Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 11 occur. Grading to direct surface drainage away from buildings helps limit the potential for saturation and subsequent heaving to occur. Still, even limited amounts of movement can create tripping hazards to building employees and guests. One way to help limit the potential for heaving to occur is to remove frost-susceptible soils present below the overlying slab “footprints” down to bottom-of-footing grades, and replace them with non-frost-susceptible (NFS) backfill consisting of medium to coarse grained sands having less than 5 percent of the particles by weight passing a #200 sieve. We recommend differential frost heave should be accommodated at transition areas. D.5.Utilities Based on the borings, we anticipate the soils at typical invert elevations should be suitable for utility support. However, if unfavorable conditions such as soft clay, organic soils or perched water are encountered at invert grades, the unsuitable soils may require some additional subcutting and replacement with sand or crushed rock to prepare a proper subgrade for pipe support. Utilities should not be placed within the 1:1 oversizing of foundations. If it is necessary to place utilities within the oversizing of the footings, we should review the documents prior to construction as it may be necessary to backfill with lean concrete or lower the footing elevations near the utility trenches. We anticipate utilities can be installed per manufacturer bedding requirements. A majority of the soil borings indicated the site predominantly consists of sandy soils. These soils are considered non- to only slightly corrosive to metallic conduits. If utilities extend through clay soils, the utilities should be bedded in sandy soil free of any clay lumps or the utilities should be constructed with non-corrosive materials. D.6.Pavements D.6.a.Subgrade Preparation We recommend the vegetation and topsoil be removed from the upper 3 feet below the pavement section. In areas requiring engineered fill to establish pavement grades, the excavation should be oversized at least 1 foot beyond the outside edge of the paved areas for each foot of fill placed below the roads or parking lot. Prior to the placement of engineered fill or pavements, we recommend the exposed sandy soils in the bottoms of the excavations be thoroughly compacted by a minimum of 5 passes with a large (3-foot- diameter drum minimum), self-propelled drum compactor. This is recommended to further densify the underlying native soils and to provide a more uniform base to place additional fill or pavement. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 12 On-site soils free of organic soil and debris can be considered for placement up to design subgrade elevations in pavement areas. Note again the clay soils will be more difficult to compact if wet or allowed to become wet, or if spread and compacted over wet surfaces. D.6.b.Subgrade Proofroll Prior to the placement of the aggregate base, we recommend the subgrade soils be proofrolled with a fully loaded tandem-axle truck and the proofroll be observed by a geotechnical engineer. This will assist in identifying soft or weak areas will require additional soil correction work. Areas that display excessive yielding or rutting during the proofroll should be corrected. In areas where subgrade correction is deemed necessary, unsuitable soils should be removed to soils of adequate density or to a maximum depth of 3 feet. Failed areas should be compacted, or if too wet, subcut and replaced with suitable soil or additional aggregate base and compacted as previously specified. D.6.c.R-Value Laboratory tests to determine an R-value for pavement design were not included in the scope of this project. Based on our experience with similar soil conditions, however, it is our opinion an R-value of 30 can be assumed for design purposes. This R-value is based on a pavement section directly supported on a poorly graded sand to silty clayey sand subgrade. If clayey sand or sandy lean clay subgrades are anticipated on final grades, lower R-values in the range of 12 to 20 may be needed and the pavement section may be supported on engineered fill. In that case the R-value will have to be reevaluated based on the engineered fill material. D.6.d.Pavement Sections Based on our experience with typical commercial sites as illustrated on your conceptual design in Section A, we anticipate the parking lots and roadways will likely have a larger volume of automobiles and delivery or garbage trucks than the residential portion of the development. In these areas a light- duty pavement section ranging from 3 to 3 1/2 inches of bituminous pavement over 6 to 9 inches of aggregate base material are anticipated. If any of these proposed buildings or roadways is expecting larger amounts of large truck traffic, thicker sections may be needed. These sections are anticipated to be on the order of 4 to 5 inches of bituminous pavement over 8 to 12 inches of aggregate base material. In areas with high point loads such as truck parking areas or loading docks, concrete pavement should be considered. Wherever concrete pavements will be utilized, the appropriate panel sizing, jointing, doweling and edge reinforcement are critical to the ridged pavement performance. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 13 D.7.Stormwater Management Based on the provided conceptual sketch, it appears the design and construction of stormwater management features are part of the development. These features appear to be large infiltration basins located in the southwest corner of the site in the vicinity of soil boring ST-4 and near the center of the development in the vicinity of AET’s soil borings 4 and 5. The soil profiles at soil boring locations ST-3 and ST-4, dependent on final grades, may provide challenges to infiltration. Typically, the profiles in these areas have layers of silty clayey sand, clayey sand and sandy lean clay which are not conducive to high infiltration rates. AET boring 5 encountered sand with silt and sand with gravel 4 feet below the surface to boring termination. This location may yield higher infiltration rates. Infiltration rates were estimated for some of the soils we observed in our soil borings and are listed in Table 2. Table 2. Estimated Design Infiltration Rates Based on Soil Classification Soil Type Infiltration Rate * (in/hr) Sands with less than 12% fines Poorly graded or well graded sands 0.8 Silty sands, silty gravelly sands 0.45 Silts, very fine sands, silty or clayey fine sands 0.2 Clayey sands and clays 0.06 *From Minnesota Stormwater Manual Section 12.8 with December 16 updates. Rates may differ at individual sites. In any case, infiltration rates can be calculated based on field testing with Double Ring Infiltrometer testing (ASTM D3385). Additional soil borings and geotechnical evaluation should also be performed in infiltration basins once the location and grades are determined. This geotechnical evaluation does not constitute a review of site suitability for stormwater infiltration or evaluate the potential impacts, if any, from infiltration of large amount of stormwater. D.8.Additional Evaluation This preliminary geotechnical evaluation is not considered sufficient to provide detailed geotechnical design recommendations for the commercial buildings. Once the location, framing system, structural loads, building layout, etc. have been finalized for each structure, additional borings and evaluation should be done. The information contained in this report should be reviewed as part of the design evaluation. Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 14 E.Procedures E.1.Penetration Test Borings The penetration test borings were drilled with a floatation tired-mounted core and auger drill equipped with hollow-stem auger. The borings were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586. Penetration test samples were taken at 2 1/2- or 5-foot intervals. Actual sample intervals and corresponding depths are shown on the boring logs. E.2.Material Classification and Testing E.2.a.Visual and Manual Classification The geologic materials encountered were visually and manually classified in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 2488. A chart explaining the classification system is attached. Samples were sealed in jars and returned to our facility for review and storage. E.2.b.Laboratory Testing The results of the laboratory tests performed on geologic material samples are noted on or follow the appropriate attached exploration logs. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM procedures. E.3.Groundwater Measurements The drillers checked for groundwater as the penetration test borings were advanced, and again after auger withdrawal. The boreholes were then backfilled as noted on the boring logs. F.Qualifications F.1.Variations in Subsurface Conditions F.1.a.Material Strata Our evaluation, analyses and recommendations were developed from a limited amount of site and subsurface information. It is not standard engineering practice to retrieve material samples from exploration locations continuously with depth, and therefore strata boundaries and thicknesses must be Inwood 10 LLC Project B14-08413 December 3, 2014 Page 15 inferred to some extent. Strata boundaries may also be gradual transitions, and can be expected to vary in depth, elevation and thickness away from the exploration locations. Variations in subsurface conditions present between exploration locations may not be revealed until additional exploration work is completed, or construction commences. If any such variations are revealed, our recommendations should be re-evaluated. Such variations could increase construction costs, and a contingency should be provided to accommodate them. F.2.Continuity of Professional Responsibility F.2.a.Plan Review This report is based on a limited amount of information, and a number of assumptions were necessary to help us develop our recommendations. It is recommended that our firm review the geotechnical aspects of the designs and specifications, and evaluate whether the design is as expected, if any design changes have affected the validity of our recommendations, and if our recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented in the designs and specifications. F.2.b.Construction Observations and Testing It is recommended that we be retained to perform observations and tests during construction. This will allow correlation of the subsurface conditions encountered during construction with those encountered by the borings, and provide continuity of professional responsibility. F.3.Use of Report This report is for the exclusive use of the parties to which it has been addressed. Without written approval, we assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. Our evaluation, analyses and recommendations may not be appropriate for other parties or projects. F.4.Standard of Care In performing its services, Braun Intertec used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable members of its profession currently practicing in the same locality. No warranty, express or implied, is made. Appendix 8 12 10 11 14 27 9 Benchmark: Elevations were obtained using GPS and the State of Minnesota's permanent base station network. No sample recovery. 4 CL SM SP- SM SC- SM LEAN CLAY with SAND, brown, moist. (Topsoil) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown to reddish brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine- to medium-grained, reddish brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Sand seams and Gravel, brown, wet, loose to medium dense. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Auger met refusal at the 15-foot depth. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 14 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1030.0 1026.7 1023.7 1014.7 0.7 4.0 7.0 16.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-1 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-1 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota P200 % MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1030.7 Depth feet 0.0 7 32 26 30 18 22 19 349 CL SM SP- SM SC- SM SP SC- SM LEAN CLAY with SAND, brown, moist. (Topsoil) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown to reddish brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, Gravely, brown to reddish brown, moist, dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown, wet, medium dense. (Glacial Till) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-grained, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, wet, medium dense. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 14 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1018.9 1015.9 1012.9 1010.9 1007.9 998.9 1.0 4.0 7.0 9.0 12.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-2 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-2 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota P200 % MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1019.9 Depth feet 0.0 5 15 23 24 33 21 24 4 CL SM SC- SM LEAN CLAY with SAND, brown, moist. (Topsoil) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Clayey Sand seams and Gravel, reddish brown to brown, moist to wet, loose to medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Sand seams and Gravel, reddish brown to brown, wet, medium dense to dense. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 16 1/2 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1010.5 1002.5 990.5 1.0 9.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-3 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-3 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1011.5 Depth feet 0.0 8 6 19 21 24 36 38 27 An open triangle in the water level (WL) column indicates the depth at which groundwater was observed while drilling. Groundwater levels fluctuate. 7 10 9 CL CL SM SP- SM SC SM SC LEAN CLAY with SAND, dark brown, moist. LEAN CLAY with SAND, brown, wet, medium. (Glacial Till) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown, moist to wet, loose to medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) With Gravel at 7 1/2 feet. POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine- to medium-grained, wet, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) CLAYEY SAND, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, wet, very stiff. (Glacial Till) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown to reddish brown, wet, dense. (Glacial Till) CLAYEY SAND, with Sand seams, brown to reddish brown, wet, hard. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water observed at 12 1/2 feet with 12 feet of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 13 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1002.6 999.6 994.6 991.6 989.6 985.6 982.6 1.0 4.0 9.0 12.0 14.0 18.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-4 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-4 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota P200 % MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1003.6 Depth feet 0.0 6 4 8 10 21 23 20 No recovery. Sample from cuttings. 10 CL SM SP- SM SP SC LEAN CLAY with SAND, dark brown, wet. (Topsoil) SILTY SAND, with Gravel, reddish brown, wet, loose. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, moist, very loose. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND, with Clayey Sand lenses and Gravel, brown to reddish brown, wet, loose to medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) CLAYEY SAND, Gravely, reddish brown, wet, very stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 16 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1004.3 1001.1 998.1 987.1 984.1 0.8 4.0 7.0 18.0 21.0 11/12/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-5 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-5 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:43Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1005.1 Depth feet 0.0 13 18 15 21 35 36 25 3 CL SC SP SC- SM SP SC LEAN CLAY with SAND, dark brown, wet. (Topsoil) CLAYEY SAND, with Sand seams, reddish brown, moist, stiff. (Glacial Till) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-grained, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, reddish brown, wet, medium dense. (Glacial Till) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-grained, brown, moist, dense. (Glacial Outwash) With Gravel at 15 feet. CLAYEY SAND, with Gravel, reddish brown, wet, very stiff. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 15 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1004.5 1001.5 998.5 993.5 987.5 984.5 1.0 4.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-6 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-6 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:44Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1005.5 Depth feet 0.0 10 25 47 30 34 37 18 10 8 5 CL SC- SM SP- SM SM SP SC- SM LEAN CLAY with SAND, dark brown, moist. (Topsoil) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown to reddish brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Till) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, brown to reddish brown, moist, dense. (Glacial Outwash) POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-grained, with Clayey Sand seams and Gravel, brown to reddish brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) SILTY CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, reddish brown, wet, medium dense to dense. (Glacial Till) END OF BORING. Water not observed while drilling. Water not observed to cave-in depth of 17 feet immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring immediately backfilled. 1011.7 1008.7 1005.7 1003.7 1000.7 991.7 1.0 4.0 7.0 9.0 12.0 21.0 11/11/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER: Tests or NotesWL Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-7 page 1 of 1 3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerK. Keck L O G O F B O R I N G (See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations)LOCATION: See attached sketch. (Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908) Description of Materials ST-7 METHOD: BORING: BPF B14-08413LOG OF BORING N:\GINT\PROJECTS\AX PROJECTS\2014\08413.GPJ BRAUN_V8_CURRENT.GDT 12/3/14 10:44Braun Project B14-08413 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION Inwood and 10th Development Southeast Quadrant of Inwood Avenue N and 10th Street N Lake Elmo, Minnesota P200 % MC %Symbol Elev. feet 1012.7 Depth feet 0.0 Descriptive Terminology of Soil Standard D 2487 - 00 Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System) Rev. 7/07 DD Dry density, pcf WD Wet density, pcf MC Natural moisture content, % LL Liqiuid limit, % PL Plastic limit, % PI Plasticity index, % P200 % passing 200 sieve OC Organic content, % S Percent of saturation, % SG Specific gravity C Cohesion, psf Angle of internal friction qu Unconfined compressive strength, psf qp Pocket penetrometer strength, tsf Liquid Limit (LL) Laboratory TestsPlasticity Index (PI)Drilling Notes Standard penetration test borings were advanced by 3 1/4” or 6 1/4” ID hollow-stem augers unless noted otherwise, Jetting water was used to clean out auger prior to sampling only where indicated on logs. Standard penetration test borings are designated by the prefix “ST” (Split Tube). All samples were taken with the standard 2” OD split-tube sampler, except where noted. Power auger borings were advanced by 4” or 6” diameter continuous- flight, solid-stem augers. Soil classifications and strata depths were in- ferred from disturbed samples augered to the surface and are, therefore, somewhat approximate. Power auger borings are designated by the prefix “B.” Hand auger borings were advanced manually with a 1 1/2” or 3 1/4” diameter auger and were limited to the depth from which the auger could be manually withdrawn. Hand auger borings are indicated by the prefix “H.” BPF: Numbers indicate blows per foot recorded in standard penetration test, also known as “N” value. The sampler was set 6” into undisturbed soil below the hollow-stem auger. Driving resistances were then counted for second and third 6” increments and added to get BPF. Where they differed significantly, they are reported in the following form: 2/12 for the second and third 6” increments, respectively. WH: WH indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of hammer and rods alone; driving not required. WR: WR indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of rods alone; hammer weight and driving not required. TW indicates thin-walled (undisturbed) tube sample. Note: All tests were run in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. Particle Size Identification Boulders ............................... over 12” Cobbles ............................... 3” to 12” Gravel Coarse ............................ 3/4” to 3” Fine ................................. No. 4 to 3/4” Sand Coarse ............................ No. 4 to No. 10 Medium ........................... No. 10 to No. 40 Fine ................................. No. 40 to No. 200 Silt ....................................... No. 200, PI 4 or below “A” line Clay ..................................... No. 200, PI 4 and on or above “A” line Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils Very loose ................................ 0 to 4 BPF Loose ....................................... 5 to 10 BPF Medium dense ......................... 11 to 30 BPF Dense ...................................... 31 to 50 BPF Very dense ............................... over 50 BPF Consistency of Cohesive Soils Very soft ................................... 0 to 1 BPF Soft ....................................... 2 to 3 BPF Rather soft ............................... 4 to 5 BPF Medium .................................... 6 to 8 BPF Rather stiff ............................... 9 to 12 BPF Stiff ....................................... 13 to 16 BPF Very stiff ................................... 17 to 30 BPF Hard ....................................... over 30 BPF a. Based on the material passing the 3-in (75mm) sieve. b. If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles or boulders or both” to group name. c. Cu = D60 / D10 Cc = (D30)2 D10 x D60 d. If soil contains 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name. e. Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay f. If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM or SC-SM. g. If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name. h. If soil contains 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name. i. Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded sand with silt SW-SC well-graded sand with clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay j. If Atterberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. k. If soil contains 10 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel” whichever is predominant. l. If soil contains 30% plus No. 200, predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name. m. If soil contains 30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name. n. PI 4 and plots on or above “A” line. o. PI 4 or plots below “A” line. p. PI plots on or above “A” line. q. PI plots below “A” line. Poorly graded sand h Peat Well-graded gravel d PI plots on or above “A” line PI 7 and plots on or above “A” line j PI 4 or plots below “A” line j Fine-grained Soils50% or more passed theNo. 200 sieveCoarse-grained Soilsmore than 50% retained onNo. 200 sieveSoils Classification Gravels More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Sands 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Silts and Clays Liquid limit less than 50 Highly Organic Soils Silts and clays Liquid limit 50 or more Primarily organic matter, dark in color and organic odor Group Symbol Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests a Group Name b GW GP GM GC SW SP SM CL ML OL OL SC Poorly graded gravel d Silty gravel d f g Clean Gravels 5% or less fines e Gravels with Fines More than 12% fines e Clean Sands 5% or less fines i Sands with Fines More than 12% i Fines classify as ML or MH Fines classify as CL or CH Clayey gravel d f g Well-graded sand h Fines classify as CL or CH Fines classify as ML or MH Silty sand f g h Clayey sand f g h Inorganic Organic Liquid limit - oven dried Liquid limit - not dried 0.75 Inorganic Organic PI plots below “A” line Lean clay k l m Liquid limit - oven dried Liquid limit - not dried 0.75 CH MH OH OH Fat clay k l m Elastic silt k l m Organic clay k l m n Organic silt k l m o Organic clay k l m p Organic silt k l m q Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3 C PT Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3 C Cu 4 and/or 1 Cc 3 C Cu 6 and/or 1 CC 3 C 0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 7 “U” Line“A” Line 10 20 30 40 50 60 4 0 ML or OL MH or OHCL or OL CH or O H CL - ML Silt k l m LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT – OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL Fire Prevention, Code Enforcement, and Public Education May 12, 2026 Sophia Jensen, Planner City of Lake Elmo Re: Inwood Commercial Prepared by: Anthony Svoboda, Fire Marshal Approved by: Dustin Kalis, Fire Chief Applicable Codes: • 2020 Minnesota State Fire Code • 2020 Minnesota State Building Code • Lake Elmo Fire Department Fire Code Policies • NFPA 13, 2016 edition • NFPA 13D, 2016 edition Fire Department Comments: 1) All roads and drive lanes shall meet the Lake Elmo Fire Department requirements for widths and turning radiuses. 2) Approved fire apparatus roads shall be provided and maintained in coordination with engineering, public works, planning, and fire departments. In accordance with MSFC D104.2, two fire apparatus access roads shall be required and always maintained. 3) Project construction phasing shall always accommodate emergency access to the entire construction zone, generally meaning two separate means of entrance/exit as defined in the code. Phasing plan to be approved by the fire department prior to construction. 4) An approved signage and marking plan shall be determined for all No Parking and Fire Lane access roads. On- street parking shall be provided in approved locations following review by Engineering and Public Works. Parking shall be prohibited on both sides of private drive lanes. 5) Street names and addressing shall be consistent with the Washington County Uniform Street Naming and Property Numbering System. 6) Fire hydrants and watermains shall be provided in approved locations following review by Engineering and Public Works. 7) Building address numbers shall be plainly visible from the street fronting the property and shall be contrasting color from the background. Size and placement of address numbers shall be approved by the fire and planning departments. LAKE ELMO FIRE DEPARTMENT – OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL Fire Prevention, Code Enforcement, and Public Education “Proudly Serving Neighbors and Friends” 8) A fire sprinkler system shall be installed in commercial buildings in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code and Chapter 1306 of the Minnesota State Building Code. A permit is required prior to work. a. Fire Department sprinkler connection locations shall be approved prior to installation. 9) A fire alarm system shall be installed in commercial buildings in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code (907.2.3) and Lake Elmo Ordinances. A permit is required prior to work. 10) An emergency responder radio coverage amplifier shall be installed throughout the building if the fire department determines that signal strength is not reliable. 11) An exterior door numbering system shall be utilized to determine exterior doors on all sides of the building. Door numbering convention shall be approved by the fire department prior to installation. 12) A KNOX rapid access lockbox shall be installed in an approved location, on all commercial buildings. a. Multiple KNOX rapid access lockboxes may be required as determined by the fire department. 13) KNOX locking Fire Department Connection Caps shall be installed on all fire department connections. 14) All gates, whether manual or electric, shall be accompanied by either a KNOX lock or KNOX gate control switch for rapid access. 15) All parking areas shall be capable of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing up to 75,000 pounds. 16) Locations of all EV charging stations or Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment shall be reviewed and installed in approved locations. All electric vehicle supply equipment installed in the apartment building underground parking area may require additional fire suppression considerations and restrictions on installation locations. An electric vehicle supply equipment plan is required. This plan shall be reviewed by the fire department, building contractor, building owner and building insurance provider. Questions, clarifications, or the request to provide code documents can be made using the contact information listed below. Respectfully, Memorandum 800 Washington Avenue North, Suite 207 Minneapolis, MN 55401 May 7, 2026 TO : SOPHIA JENSEN FROM: SARAH EVENSON, PLA RE: INWOOD COMMERCIAL- LANDSCAPE AND TREE PRESERVATION PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW SUBMITTALS 1. Concept Plan Submittal, dated October 7, 2025, received October 17, 2025. 2. Preliminary Plat Submittal, dated April 23, 2026, received April 29, 2026. REVIEW HISTORY 1. November 4, 2025 – Inwood Commercial Concept Plan- Landscape and Tree Preservation Plan Review 2. May 7, 2026 – Inwood Commercial Preliminary Plat- Landsca pe and Tree Preservation Plan Review LOCATION: PID 33.029.21.12.0006. East of Inwood Ave between 5th Street and 10th Street. CURRENT LAND USE CATEGORY: Commercial PUD ADJACENT AND SURROUNDING LAND USE: Low Density Residential and Public Facilities to the east, City of Oakdale commercial and golf course to the west, Commercial PUD to the south, Rural Residential to the north SPECIAL LANDSCAPE PROVISIONS: Shoreland Overlay District for Armstrong Lake TREE PRESERVATION PLAN: 105. 12. 470 • A tree preservation plan was marked “N/A” in the preliminary plat application. Plans indicate there are no significant trees within the subject parcels. A tree preservation plan is not required. LANDSCAPE PLAN: 105.12.480 • Applicant notes that parking lot landscaping and any screening provisions will be incorporated as individual parcels are developed. This phase of the project satisfies landscape requirements for street frontage and acres of land disturbed. • A preliminary landscape plan has been submitted that largely meets code, but requires the following adjustments prior to approval: o Applicant must swap out the city standard details on sheet L2 for the updated 2025 details that can be found here: https://www.lakeelmo.gov/DocumentCenter/View/334/Landscaping-and-Irrigation- Standards-PDF?bidId= o The location of a topsoil stockpile and notes indicating that the quantity of soil shall be sufficient to cover all landscaped areas at least 4” deep must be provided somewhere in the drawing set. May 7, 2026 Inwood Commercial Memorandum 2 RECOMMENDATION: In future submittals, the applicant must address the above-noted items in their landscape plans. Sarah Evenson, PLA (MN) City of Lake Elmo Municipal Landscape Architect P: (262) 391-7653 E: sarah@hkgi.com MEMORANDUM Date: May 18, 2026 To: Sophia Jensen, Senior Planner Re: Inwood Commercial Addition Nathan Fuerst, Planning Consultant Preliminary Plat/Plans Jason Stopa, Community Development Director Pete Tholen, Public Works Director Nate Stanley, City Engineer Chad Isakson, Assistant City Engineer From: Jack Griffin, Sr. Project Manager An engineering review has been completed for the Inwood Commercial Addition Preliminary Plat/Plans for a 5-lot commercial subdivision located at PID 3302921120006. The review consisted of the following documentation received April 29, 2026: · Inwood Commercial Addition Preliminary Plat/Plans dated April 23, 2026. · Inwood Commercial Addition Stormwater Management Plan dated April 23, 2026. · Inwood Commercial Addition Storm Sewer Design dated April 23, 2026. · Inwood Avenue/9th Street Full Intersection Exhibit dated April 20, 2026. STATUS/FINDINGS: As a condition of Preliminary Plat approval the applicant must revise and resubmit Preliminary Plat/Plans to address each review comment and condition of approval to the satisfaction of City staff prior to commencement of grading or prior to the City accepting a Final Plat/Plan application. All subdivision improvements must be constructed in accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards dated March 2026. All plan notes and details must be updated accordingly. PRELIMINARY PLAT/PLANS 1. No Outlots are proposed as part of this Subdivision. 2. The Preliminary Plat and Plans must be revised to provide additional right-of-way along Irene Avenue at the intersection with 10th Street. A minimum boulevard of 16-feet is required from the back of curb from the proposed right-turn lane. 3. The Preliminary Plat and Plans must be revised to provide additional easement width over the proposed bituminous trails along both Inwood Avenue and 10th Street. Trail location and minimum easement width to be determined jointly by Washington County and Lake Elmo Public Works. Page: 2 SITE PLANS, TRAFFIC AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT 1. Access Management. The Preliminary Plans propose public roadway access at three locations as required, including access to 10th Street (CSAH 10), Inwood Avenue (CSAH 13), and 5th Street (designated Municipal State Aid route).  Irene Avenue and 10th Street (CSAH 10) Intersection. A ¾ intersection with limited turning movements, including right-in/right-out and left-in has been shown on the Preliminary Plans as required. Plan revisions may be required as part of the Construction Plans and Final Plat application to address intersection revisions per Washington County review comments. A County roadway access permit will be required as part of this Project.  9th Street and Inwood Avenue (CSAH 13). A ¾ intersection with limited turning movements, including right-in/right-out and left-in has been shown on the Preliminary Plans as required. Plan revisions may be required as part of the Construction Plans and Final Plat application to address intersection revisions per Washington County review comments. A County roadway access permit will be required as part of this Project.  As part of the final construction plans, all County roadway and right-of-way improvements must be incorporated into the plans for City review and approval. 2. County Road Right-of-way dedication. Washington County has confirmed (per letter dated March 6, 2026) that no additional right-of-way dedication will be required along the full length of Inwood Avenue (CSAH 13) and 10th Street (CSAH 10). 3. City Street Turn Lane Improvements/Intersection Geometrics. Dedicated turn lanes have been shown on the Preliminary Plans as required and as follows:  A right turn lane along Irene Avenue at 5th Street.  A right-out only on Irene Avenue at 10th Street.  A right-out only on 9th Street at Inwood Avenue.  The 9th Street approach to Inwood Avenue provides additional right-of-way and lane width as required for a future signalized intersection that may allow for a dedicated right-turn lane and a through/left lane at the traffic signal. 4. Driveway Access Management. The Preliminary Plans show proposed driveway locations for each Lot. A minimum 150-ft centerline offset between driveways has been shown as required. Revisions to the driveway locations may be needed as the construction plans are finalized. The Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 2, Block 2 driveways are located fully outside of the Irene Avenue turn lane tapers as required. 5. Public Streets. Irene Avenue and 9th Street will be public streets and must meet the City’s Engineering Design Standards including right-of-way width (60-feet) and pavement width (28-feet). As commercial access roadways, pavement markings have been incorporated into the Preliminary Plans as required, including centerline, fog line and turn lane striping. Both streets have been posted no parking along both sides of the street. All street intersections must be at 90 degrees and maintain 50-ft of tangent with maximum longitudinal slopes of 2.5%. 6. Pedestrian Connectivity. Sidewalk/trail improvements have been incorporated as required by the City. Trail revisions may be needed along Inwood Avenue and 10th Street as part of the construction plans and Final Plat application. 7. Dedicated drainage and utility easements, minimum 10-feet wide, have been shown along all public roadway frontage, including 5th Street, Inwood Avenue, 10th Street, 9th Street, and Irene Avenue. All easement areas must be free from all encroachments other than those approved by the City Engineer and upon execution of an easement encroachment agreement. Prohibited encroachments include, but are not limited to trees, structures, landscaping, fences, retaining walls, storm sewer running parallel with the easement, stormwater basins and BMPs, and grading that exceeds 4:1. Page: 3 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 1. The proposed subdivision is subject to a Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) meeting State, South Washington Watershed District (SWWD) and City rules. A SWWD permit is required. 2. The Preliminary Plat/Plans propose improvements that reside within the larger Inwood subdivision in which stormwater management provisions have been previously designed, permitted and constructed. 3. The allowable maximum impervious surface for each Lot has been documented on the Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan and is consistent with the approved Inwood Stormwater Management Plan. As final construction plans are prepared for the Subdivision, and future lot build-outs, the impervious surfaces must remain below the maximum allowable, and the stormwater drainage systems must be designed to direct runoff to the allocated stormwater management basin. 4. The site design will create a maximum of 5.561 acres of new impervious surface once all public improvements and all 5 lots have developed. A maximum of 3.184 acres of new impervious surface will be conveyed and managed through Pond 200 (located east of the site) while a maximum of 2.377 acres of new impervious surface will be conveyed and managed through Pond 100 (located on the south side of 5th Street).  The SWMP must be revised to add an exhibit that clearly presents the impervious surface limits for each lot, including impervious surface allowed for each lot within the shoreland district boundary and the impervious surface allowed for each lot outside of the shoreland district boundary. The exhibit must also label and call-out the required storm sewer connection location for each lot together with a delineated drainage shed that is allowed to drain to each connection location. Lot labeling must be consistent with the proposed preliminary and final plat.  The SWMP must be revised to account for and address the new impervious surfaces created within the County right-of-way and bituminous trails.  The Grading Plans and SWMP must be revised to account for the bituminous trail construction along Inwood Avenue and 10th Street and the drainage limits must be clearly identified for the areas allowed to drain to County right-of-way. 2. Approval of the Preliminary Plat/Plans for the development is contingent upon all SWMP revisions, as required by the SWWD or other applicable permitting agency, being submitted to the City for review and approval. 3. Approval of the preliminary grading and storm sewer plans for the development is contingent upon all grading plans being reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the start of any grading or construction.  The grading plans must include lot corner and lot line spot elevations to clearly define limits of the public right-of-way improvements and tie-in elevations for future lot grading activities.  Overland emergency overflow (EOF) elevations are required throughout the site at all localized low points. Low openings for adjacent structures must maintain 1-foot above any adjacent EOF in the as-built condition.  The grading plans must include minimum low floor and/or low opening elevations for each lot based on the SWMP and emergency overflow elevations.  The storm sewer plans must be revised to eliminate the 21-inch storm sewer stub being extended to Lot 2, Block 2 as runoff from this area to Pond 200 is inconsistent with the proposed SWMP. Connections to existing storm sewer stubs along 5th Street must be called out for use by this Lot and the downstream storm sewer system capacity must be modeled and verified. 4. Plan revisions may be required to meet City design standards and to mitigate encroachments. Page: 4 MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY 1. Connection to the public watermain system is required. The developer will be responsible for extending public watermain internally throughout the subdivision in accordance with the City engineering design standards and to serve each proposed parcel. Public watermain improvements must be completed at developer’s sole cost. 2. The extension of public watermain is shown along Irene Avenue as required with service stubs extended to each proposed lot, and connecting to the existing watermain at both 5th Street and 10th Street. 3. Hydrants and service valves will be required as directed by the Fire Department and Public Works Department at the time of final construction plan review. All fire hydrants and connecting watermains will be owned and maintained by the City. 4. Minimum 30-foot easements centered over the pipe/hydrant will be required when not located within the public right-of-way. Easements must be free from all encroachments, including retaining walls, trees, fences, small/dry utilities, or storm water management BMPs. Dedicated utility easements must be shown on all site, grading, utility, and landscape plans when submitting a Preliminary and Final Plat application. Easements are shown over Lot 2, Block 2 as required. MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER 1. The proposed subdivision is located in the Southwest Planning MUSA and current Regional Sewer Staging Plan area and would discharge to the MCES WONE Interceptor. Recent communications with Met Council have revealed potential discharge limitations within the Met Council infrastructure that may restrict sewer flows within this sewer service district. Investigations are ongoing. The proposed subdivision provides for 5 commercial lots within no reported sewer flow requirements. 2. Connection to the municipal sanitary sewer system is required. The developer will be responsible for extending sanitary sewer service internally throughout the subdivision to serve each platted lot/parcel and in accordance with the City engineering design standards. All sanitary sewer improvements must be completed at developer’s sole cost. 3. The extension of sanitary sewer is shown along Irene Avenue as required with service stubs extended to each proposed lot, and connecting to the existing sewer system at the intersection of 5th Street and Irene Avenue. 4. All public sanitary sewer mains placed within the development will require minimum 30-foot easements centered over the pipe/structure, if not located within a public right-of-way. Easements must be free from all encroachments, including retaining walls, trees, fences, small/dry utilities, or storm water management BMPs. Dedicated utility easements must be shown on all site, grading, utility, and landscape plans when submitting a Preliminary and Final Plat application. North Shop | 11660 Myeron Road North | Stillwater, MN 55082-9537 P: 651-430-4300 | F: 651-430-4350 | TTY: 651-430-6246 www.washingtoncountymn.gov Washington County is an equal opportunity organization and employer November 10, 2025 Sophia Jensen Senior Planner City of Lake Elmo 3880 Laverne Ave N Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Comments on Inwood Commercial Development Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Inwood Commercial Development located adjacent to CSAH 10 (10th St N) and CSAH 13 (Inwood Ave N) Our development review team has reviewed the application and offers the following comments. The Washington County 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides the County’s transportation network plan and contains such things as access criteria for county roads related to spacing, sight lines, availability of local road connections, and corridor classification. This corridor is currently classified as a “Minor Reliever and Minor Expander,” and this classification was based on the comprehensive plan process. Development along these corridors must meet County access spacing and intersection control guidelines to preserve safety and mobility for the traveling public. The only access that meets County spacing guidelines is the proposed access at 5th Street. The remaining access points do not meet spacing requirements and are candidates for future closure or consolidation. The County recommends that the developer and City evaluate the elimination of at least one of the proposed access points to ensure consistency with County standards. Access permits will be needed for the construction of new street connections within the county right -of-way. The County supports the addition of a trail along both C SAH 13 and CSAH 10 to provide safe multimodal connections consistent with County and regional trail plans. The comprehensive plan for this area indicates a need for 180 feet of right-of-way which would be 90 feet along the property from the centerline. Please document that the right-of-way dedicated is found on the site plan applications and is sufficient. Washington County's policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use and highways. Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states that municipalities are responsible for taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCA's Noise Area Classification (NAC), where the establishment of the land use would result in violations of established noise standards. Minnesota Statute 116.07, Subpart 2a exempts County Roads and County State Aid Highways from noise PUBLIC WORKS Wayne Sandberg, P.E., Director, County Engineer Frank D. Ticknor, P.E., Deputy Director North Shop | 11660 Myeron Road North | Stillwater, MN 55082-9537 P: 651-430-4300 | F: 651-430-4350 | TTY: 651-430-6246 www.washingtoncountymn.gov Washington County is an equal opportunity organization and employer thresholds. County policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures. The developer should assess the noise situation and take any action outside of County right of way deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any highway noise. A right-of-way permit will be required for any work within the County highway right of way as it relates to the development. As the development progresses, a plan set will be required with the application and include any grading, culvert installation, water and sewer services, parallel trail development, signage, and any landscaping and other improvements within the County right of way. Additionally, the developer or the City will need to submit a drainage report and calculations for review of any downstream impacts to the county drainage system. Along with the drainage calculations, we will request written conclusions that the volume and rate of stormwater run-off into the county right of way will stay the same as part of the project. Confirmation that the developments stormwater plan meets all watershed requirements will be required prior to any permit approvals. All utility connections to County highway right of way for the development require Washington County Right of Way permits. Typically, these utility connection permits are the responsibility of the utility companies. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the concept plan application for the Inwood Commercial Development. We look forward to continuing to work with the City of Lake Elmo to ensure that development in this area is successful and well-served by the transportation network. If you have any questions, please get in touch with me at 651-430-4307 or daniel.elder@washingtoncountymn.gov Sincerely, Daniel Elder Planner II Cc (email only): Wayne Sandberg, Public Works Director/County Engineer Frank Ticknor, Deputy Director Public Works Lyssa Leitner, Public Works Planning Director Joe Gustafson, Traffic Engineer Kevin Peterson, Design Engineer Gary Bruns. Environmental Program Supervisor From:Scollan, Daniel (DNR) To:Sophia Jensen Subject:RE: Land Use Review Request - City of Lake Elmo May 1st Batch Date:Friday, May 15, 2026 11:58:24 AM Attachments:image004.png image005.png image006.png image007.png image001.png Hello Sophia, Inwood Commercial Preliminary Plat This plat lies within the shoreland district of Armstrong Lake, a Natural Environment Lake. Note that the impervious surface limit in the shoreland district is 30% in sewered areas. Please also note that Table 17-3 of the city’s shoreland ordinance requires commercial development in the shoreland districts of Natural Environment Lakes to be processed as a conditional use. Best Regards, Dan Scollan East Metro Area Hydrologist – Ramsey and Washington Counties Division of Ecological and Water Resources Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 Phone: 651-259-5732 Fax: 651-772-7977 Email: daniel.scollan@state.mn.us mndnr.gov From:Luke McClanahan To:Sophia Jensen Cc:Nathan Fuerst; Ashley Monterusso; Jason Stopa; Andrew Gitzlaff; Mark Statz Subject:RE: Land Use Review Request - City of Lake Elmo May 1st Batch Date:Thursday, May 7, 2026 8:54:25 AM Attachments:image002.png image003.png Hi Sophia, Oakdale City staff reviewed the Inwood Commercial preliminary plat. We maintain our previous comment about ensuring that full access is maintained at the intersection of 9th Street North and County Highway 13/Inwood Avenue North on the Oakdale side. No further comments beyond that. We appreciate the opportunity to review the proposal. Respectfully, Luke McClanahan, AICP | Planning Manager City of Oakdale | Community Development Dept. 1584 Hadley Avenue N, Oakdale, MN 55128 Office: (651) 730-2720 luke.mcclanahan@oakdalemn.gov From:ALAN STOCKER To:Sophia Jensen Subject:Inwood Commercial Preliminary Plat concern Date:Thursday, June 4, 2026 10:16:16 AM You don't often get email from astocker@comcast.net. Learn why this is important Hi Sophia, We are Alan and Lou Stocker and we live at 8680 Upper 7th Place in the Inwood 1st addition. We are excited to see the development of the property along Inwood Ave behind our home. Our concern is the screening behind our home along Irene Avenue. The proposed drawings show Irene Avenue curving in such a way that traffic traveling toward 5th Street would have headlights shining directly into our back windows. In addition, the proposed parking lot behind the Gaming Cafe has several parking spaces that would also have cars headlights aimed at our back windows. There are several neighbors that have the same situation. The proposed drawings show many trees planned along Irene Avenue north of 9th Street along Inwood 3rd addition and Inwood 5th addition, but no additional screening along Inwood 1st addition. We would like to see the additional tree screening along Inwood 1st addition. There is limited screening now that was planted when the Inwood 1st addition was built, and a couple of those trees have died. We are concerned that proper screening has not been planned for Inwood 1st Addition. Thanks, Alan and Lou Stocker 8680 Upper 7th Place 1 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2026-041 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF INWOOD COMMERCIAL WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Vadnais Associates LLC (the “Applicant”) submitted an application to the City of Lake Elmo for a preliminary plat of Inwood Commercial for the property legally described on the attached Exhibit A (the “Property”), a copy of the preliminary plat is on file in the City of Lake Elmo Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 8th 2026 to review and consider the preliminary plat application; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and unanimous recommendation of approval of the preliminary plat with an added condition regarding screening on Irene Avenue North to the City Council as part of a staff report dated June 16th 2026; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the preliminary plat at its June 16th 2026, meeting and hereby makes the following findings of fact: 1. That the Preliminary Plat would be consistent with the intent of the 2040 Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the 2040 Land Use Map for this area. 2. That the preliminary plat generally complies with the City’s Subdivision regulations and does not meet the criteria for denial in Section 103.00.090 (d)(2). 3. That the preliminary plat complies with the City’s Zoning Code. 4. That the preliminary plat generally complies with the City’s design standards. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THATda the City Council does hereby approve the Inwood Commercial preliminary plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the City finding any application for a final plat and final PUD complete, the applicant shall fully address all comments in the following review memos to the satisfaction of the City: a.City Engineer’s memo dated 5/18/2026 b. City Landscape Architect’s memo dated 5/7/2026 c.City Fire Chief’s memo dated 5/12/2026 d. Washington County Memo Dated 11/10/2025 2.The City Attorney shall issue a plat opinion certifying that the final plat, title evidence, and all agreements and documents meet the requirements of the City Code and state statutes prior to the City Council review or approval of the final plat. 2 3. The final plat shall include all necessary and additional public right-of-way and easements. 4. No flexibility from City standards is provided by this approval. All lots to be platted in this subdivision must meet existing City standards at the time of building permit submittal. 5. Sign permits are required and must comply with the City Code. 6.That the Applicant must obtain all necessary permits including but not limited to all applicable City permits (building, grading, wetland, sign, etc.), NPDES/SWPPP permits and SWWD permits before starting any grading or construction activities. 7. The applicant/developer is responsible, at their own expense, for installing all required right of way and pedestrian improvements. 8. The applicant shall consider enhanced landscaping on the East side of Irene Avenue North subject to review and approval by City Staff. 9. The applicant/developer shall provide the City a fee in lieu of park land dedication as required by Section 103.00.150 to be paid prior to recording of the final plat. 10.If applicable, a landscape and irrigation license agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be executed and recorded with the final plat. 11.If applicable, a stormwater reuse irrigation and license agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be executed and recorded with the final plat. 12.If applicable, a storm water maintenance and easement agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be executed and recorded with the final plat. 13. Before the execution and recording of a final plat for the development, the developer or the Applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City. Such an agreement must be approved by the City Attorney. The Development Agreement must be approved by the City Council. The agreement shall delineate who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment for the required improvements with financial guarantees therefore. 14. If necessary, the Applicant must provide the City with a copy of written permission from adjacent property owners for any off-site grading work and storm sewer discharges to adjacent properties before starting any site work, grading and as part of any final plat application. 15.The Applicant or developer must enter into a separate grading agreement with the City before starting any grading activity in advance of final plat approval. The City Engineer shall review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat and said plan shall document the extent of any proposed grading on the site. 16.The Applicant must submit a revised preliminary plat and project plans meeting all conditions of approval for City review and approval. The revised Applicant project plans and other materials shall meet all of the above conditions before the City will find complete any final plat application for the development and before the start of any clearing or grading activity on the site. 17. That the Applicant must submit the final plat within 180 days after City Council approval of the preliminary plat or approval of the preliminary plat shall be considered void unless a request for a time extension is submitted in writing and approved by the City Council. 3 Passed and duly adopted this 16th day of June, 2026, by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota ________________________________________ Mayor Charles Cadenhead ATTEST: ____________________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk 4 Resolution 2026-____ Exhibit A Legal Description of Subject Property Outlot K, INWOOD as recorded in Washington County Surveyors Office Inwood Commercial Preliminary Plat City Council | June 16 th , 2026 Background Applicant: Vadnais Associates LLC Location: Outlot K of InWood (PID 33.029.21.12.0006) Area: 17.34 Acres Current Zoning: Commercial (C) and Partial Shoreland Overlay 2040 Comprehensive Plan: Commercial (C) History: This parcel was included in the InWood Master development plan from 2014 as an anticipated commercial area. Request: Preliminary Plat for a 5 Lot Commercial Subdivision 10th St Oak Marsh Golf Course and Inwood Ave 5th St and Kwik Trip Inwood Residential Area PlatNorth South Preliminary Plat Review •Land Use/Zoning •Bulk Standards •Tree Preservation/Landscaping •Grading/Stormwater/Wetland Impacts •Public Infrastructure (Streets, Access, Utilities) •Parkland Dedication •Consistency with Existing Master Plan Land Use and Performance Standards– The developer is not proposing tenant approvals for the buildout of the individual commercial lots within the subdivision. Each future user will be subject to a complete review at the time it is proposed in addition to receiving land use approvals. It is noted that most of the commercial lots, except for Lot 1, are labeled “ghost plat”. The developer has indicated Lot 1 is proposed to be a Gaming Café. Traffic/Access/Parking – This subdivision will have 2 public streets, the alignment for these streets was determined with the original master plan and curb cuts are installed on City and County roads. The City ROW width is required to be 60 feet and minimum roadway width is 28 feet. Off-street parking is required consistent with City Code Section 105.12.410. Since the proposed land uses and floor areas of the proposed buildings will be subject to change based on site layout, tenant, or property owner needs, etc., staff will conduct a review of parking requirements and screening at the time of site plan review. Signage- No signage is proposed. Signage will be reviewed when requested by the Applicant or subsequent property owners. Park Dedication – Set fee in the City’s fee schedule. $6,000 per acre. Review Considerations Review Considerations Stormwater Management - Stormwater management for this area was planned as part of the 2014 Inwood master plan. As such, regional ponds will treat stormwater generated by this project, including the proposed roadways. As the commercial lots develop, or if treatment standards change, it is possible that additional stormwater treatment could be required on each lot. Shoreland Overlay – The property is within the shoreland overlay district; the parcels are only allowed 30% impervious surface. There will be larger green space than the typical commercial land use which allows up to 75% impervious surface. A Conditional Use Permit is required for commercial uses in the Natural Environment overlay. Landscaping – Minor revisions are required to the landscaping plans. No tree preservation is required on this site as it was previously mass graded, and no significant trees exist on site. Boulevard plantings are required at the time subdivision improvements are installed. The City Code requirements on number of plantings has been met by the developer. Proposed species include maple, hackberry, locust, coffeetree, oak, elm, linden, spruce, pine, crabapple, and lilac. Screening/Buffering - As the commercial lots develop improvements will be required on each lot to provide the required screening from the adjacent residential use for the structures and parking. Screening will be comprised of a combination of landscaping, berm, or fencing to achieve the City standard. North South Existing Trees Buffering to be Provided with Future Users Proposed Trees Landscape Plan North South Trails Sidewalks Sidewalk/Trail PlanExisting Trails Review Comments Below is a summary of the agency review comments received. Conditions of approval have been added where applicable. Fire Dept: Provided standard comments regarding drive lanes, access points, signage, hydrants, fire suppression, addressing, EMS systems, KNOX systems, and EV charging. Landscape Architect: Revisions are required to the landscape plan. Boulevard trees will be provided with this application. As the single lots develop landscaping and screening will be required. No tree preservation plan is required with this application. MN DNR: Provided comments that the impervious surface limit is 30% and that commercial uses in the shoreland districts of natural environment (NE) lakes require a conditional use permit. City of Oakdale: Provided comments that they would like to ensure a full access at the intersection of 9th Street and Inwood Ave. Washington County: Provided comments that their plans have addressed their preliminary comments regarding intersections in the memo dated November 10th, 2025. South Washington Watershed District: The applicant is in communication with the SWWD and seeking to coordinate on permitting reviews and timelines, as necessary. City Attorney: The City Attorney will need to review the plat documents and title commitment. A plat opinion is required prior to recording of the final plat. 4 Findings of Fact Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat based on the following findings: •That the Preliminary Plat would be consistent with the intent of the 2040 Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the 2040 Land Use Map for this area. •That the preliminary plat generally complies with the City’s Subdivision regulations and does not meet the criteria for denial in Section 103.00.090 (d)(2). •That the preliminary plat complies with the City’s Zoning Code. •That the preliminary plat generally complies with the City’s design standards. 17 Conditions for Approval Satisfaction of Staff review memos: •City Engineer •Fire Chief •Landscape Architect •W ashington County Standard conditions for Preliminary Plat requests, in summary: •Agreements (DA, Stormwater, Landscape, Grading) •Fees (Development Security, Park Dedication) •Permits (MDH, MPCA) •18 0 -day Expiration •Additional Reviews Unique Condition (Added after Planning Commission) •Enhance screening on the East side of Irene Ave N subject to review by City Staff Public Hearing Mailed to Property Owners within 500’ and pushed on May 18th, 2026. The Notice was published in the Stillwater Gazette on May 22nd, 2026. It was also sent as a Push Notification via the City website to subscribers. •Alan and Lou Stocker – 8680 Upper 7th Pl – Provided written comments in support of development but requested consideration for screening of vehicle headlights and additional tree plantings. •Inwood Petition – a petition was submitted, signed by 32 different Inwood residential parcels, which notes concerns for traffic, light, noise. They are requesting a soundproof wall of structure and traffic calming measures for the commercial development. •Paul Prior 8674 Irving Cir N – Provided comments on the berming and how the elevations may be insufficient for screening headlights alone. Additional measures such as a berm, fence, or retaining wall should be taken to screen headlights on the roadways. Would like tenant lighting to be considerate of adjacent residents. The trail connection should be extended. •Dolly Ladner 994 Irving Ct N – Provided comments about concerns with safety and privacy with the roadway adjacent to the residential area and requested a wall. She noted concerns with the tenant build out and parking lot locations. She requested something more substantial than landscaping for screening. Noted the Business View magazine Lake Elmo article about development. •Dan Moralez 8669 Lower 8th Pl N – Provided comments on existing trees and that they are sparce and scattered. He does not believe that landscape alone will fix the headlight screening. Grading issues will create challenges for screening of headlights on the roadway. He also provided concerns about construction traffic using Island Trail North during build out of the area. •Tim Duyer – 8644 Irving Cir N – Agreed with Dolly. Noted concerns with security and requested fencing to buffer and protect the residential area which will also mitigate light and noise. Planning Commission •The Planning Commission reviewed this request at their June 8th, 2026, meeting. The Commission voted to recommend approval of the preliminary plat subject to the recommended findings and conditions with an additional condition that the developer add additional screening on the East side of Irene Ave (Vote 6-0). •The reason for the Commission amendment was to address neighborhood comment regarding vehicle headlight screening on the new roadways. The developer has indicated that they will review feasibility of enhanced landscaping and screening prior to the final plat submittal and make revisions were appliable. • Screening improvement will become a City responsibility due to the location in the Right of Way, a structure to achieve screening is not recommended by Staff due to long term maintenance and the limited space available. A condition of approval regarding enhanced landscaping has been added. Recommendation Staff is therefore recommending the Council approve the Preliminary Plat request subject to the recommended conditions and findings. Example Motion: “Move to adopt Resolution 2026-___ approving of the preliminary plat requested by Vadnais Associates on the subject property based on the findings of fact and recommended conditions of approval listed in the staff report.” STAFF REPORT DATE: 6/16/2026 REGULAR TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Nathan Fuerst, AICP Consulting Planner REVIEWED BY: Jason Stopa, Community Development Director Jack Griffin, Sr. Engineering Project Manager AGENDA ITEM: Sketch Plan Review – Bridgewater Village Townhomes CORE STRATEGIES: ☒ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☒ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☒ Managed Growth ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☒ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: The City is in receipt of a Sketch Plan application from Pulte Homes, for the proposed concept plan currently called Bridgewater Village Townhomes. The townhome development is proposed on two vacant outlots that are part of the Bridgewater Village subdivision which is bound by Stillwater Way, Stillwater Boulevard, and Manning Avenue. The site’s gross area includes approximately 16 acres. The submittal includes 82 attached townhomes that are rear loaded, with primary building entrances oriented to the surrounding public streets. The project would be connected to city water and sewer services and contain private drives internal to the site with public utilities within in easement corridors along the drives. In 2024, after approval of the preliminary plat for Bridgewater Village, the City changed standards for the Village Medium Density Residential zoning district to only allow 25% of attached townhomes or similar units. As the Bridgewater Village development was platted with an entirely attached townhome project in mind, the Developer has requested flexibility through a Planned Unit Development to achieve the development layout originally envisioned in the Bridgewater Village plat. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: The City Council should provide feedback regarding the concept plan and advise Pulte Homes on City preferences. The following discussion is suggested by staff: Should the City allow for 100% attached townhomes and private drives through a PUD in the proposed Bridgewater Village Townhomes concept plan? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: A high-level review of the proposal is found in this report. Environmental Review: An Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) was completed for the Village area. This project does not exceed statutory thresholds for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Therefore, further environmental review is not required. Land Use Guidance Overview: This site is guided by both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code as Village Medium Density Residential, V- MDR, where residential land uses at the proposed density are permitted. Located within the City’s sewered Village area, this proposed project is within the current MUSA phasing period for development. Conformance with Density requirements Net Acres Proposed Units Proposed Density Proposed Min – Max Units V-MDR (3.01 – 8 u/a) 16.01 82 5.12 49 – 129 Section 105.12.770 (b) only permits a maximum of 25% single family attached, duplexes, and townhome/villa housing types in new developments. A PUD will therefore requested by the Applicant to permit 100% of the development to be attached townhomes, as originally envisioned with the Bridgewater Village development was platted. Lot Configuration: This project would re-plat Outlots E and D of the Bridgewater Village final plat. The Applicant’s narrative describes the project as an owner-occupied townhome development with an HOA for common area maintenance. This means that the development would have platted property lines around each individual unit. Staff have therefore reviewed for setbacks consistent with this form of development. It should be anticipated that the private drive corridors must be platted as separate Outlots to be owned and maintained by the Homeowner’s Association. PUD Flexibilities Anticipated: The following flexibilities are anticipated to standards in the V-MDR zoning district: 1. 100% attached townhomes (over 25% max). 2. Minimum Lot Area – 1210 sq ft (under 2500 sq ft min) 3. Minimum Lot Width – 22 ft (under 25 ft min) 4. Primary entrances not facing a public street (specific units) Performance Standards: Other than flexibilities 1-3 noted above, the proposed plans appear to comply with bulk standards listed in section 105.12.790. Section 105.12.820 (a)(3) contains specific standards for attached townhome units in the Village area. With the exception of flexibility number 4, noted above, proposed plans are consistent with specific use-based standards. Utilities: The proposed project would be served with public utilities, with connections made to utility stubs planned with the Bridgewater Village project. With private streets proposed, drainage and utility easement corridors will be required over the private drives at the standard width of 65’ created with the Inwood Townhomes project. Private utilities may not run within public utility easements and will be required to be planned with corridors running elsewhere in the development. Streets and Access: As proposed, the private drives must be built and platted to the standard that the City has created for these features. The City Engineering memo provides additional detail on this topic. Access points where located with the Bridgewater Village development for the development of the subject outlots (D & E). The Applicant is showing a plan that would remove one access from the east side of Linora Ave. N. to Outlot D along with a relocated access on Upper 40th St. N. Additional coordination may be required on the relocated access, as the public utilities run under the current access location. Landscaping & Screening: As proposed, the project plans indicate that the City’s tree planting requirements are met for disturbed acre and street frontage trees. Street trees were planted along new public streets as part of the improvements in the first phase of the Bridgewater Village Development. At present, no street trees are found on the south side of Stillwater Way corridor abutting this site. The development plans shall be revised to provide a continuous row of street trees along Stillwater way. Additional coordination will likely be needed to ensure that street trees are planted outside of any drainage and utility easements. Christ Lutheran Cemetery Cemeteries and other burial sites are protected under Minnesota State Statute Chapter 307. If grading activities are to occur in close proximity to the Christ Lutheran Cemetery bordering the development site on the west, the City may require an archaeological literature review on the likelihood that any remains are located within the disturbance area. The City may also require archaeological observation of grading activities in close proximity to the cemetery. Parkland Dedication: This development could contain 200 or more residents using Lake Elmo’s average household size. These residents will need access to, and create a demand on, the City’s parks and trail system. Chapter 6 of the City’s Comprehensive Plan contains guidelines on the City’s need for park land as it continues to develop. This project is located in a search area for a community park, but is not large enough to provide land for one. Currently, the developer is proposing no parks in the development and but is providing sufficient open space to meet City requirements along with private amenities. Two Lake Elmo parks are just over a half mile from this site. The Parks Commission will review this project at its regular meeting on June 15, 2026. Entitlements Required: Staff have reviewed the concept level plan against the adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the City’s Zoning standards. The following approvals will be required for this project to be permitted: 1. Planned Unit Development (PUD) – Provide flexibility to allow the developer to deviate from the City Code requirements of the proposed base zoning districts, LDR & MDR. 2. Major Subdivision – Required for the purposes of necessary Right of Way and Easement dedications. FISCAL IMPACT: This development will connect to existing infrastructure and is planned at densities anticipated by the City. Public and private infrastructure required to serve this project will be provided by the Applicant at their cost. Development fees will be required with future applications. OPTIONS: Concept plan reviews are advisory and intended to provide nonbinding feedback to the Developer. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council is asked to discuss the project. A discussion question is posed on the second page of this report. ATTACHMENTS: • Concept Plans and Narrative • City Engineering memo – forthcoming • City Landscape Architect memo – 5/26/2026 1 “Building Incredible Places Where People Can Live Their Dreams.” Bridgewater Village Townhomes APPLICATION FOR: Planned Unit Development (PUD) Pre Application Conference Lake Elmo, Minnesota May 4, 2026 Introduction Pulte Homes of Minnesota, LLC (“Pulte”) is pleased to be submitting this application. Our company's mission statement is “Building Incredible Places Where People Can Live Their Dreams.” We currently operate under three distinct brands of homebuilding throughout the country: Pulte Homes, Centex Homes, and Del Webb. The office for Pulte’s Minnesota Division is in Bloomington. We will sell and build over 600 homes in the Twin Cities a year under the Pulte Homes and Del Webb brands. Pulte will act as both the property developer and the builder of the homes. The primary contact for Pulte is Haley Daily-Sievers, Manager of Land Planning & Entitlement. Haley’s contact information has been provided to City Staff. There is one owner of the property: Bridgewater Bancshares, INC Attn. Jerry Baack 4450 Excelsior Avenue, Suite 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 The planner, surveyor, civil engineer, and landscape architect are: Stantec Attn: Patrick Sveum 733 Marquette Ave, Suite 1000 Minneapolis, MN 55402 2 The Property Property Address: Parcel 1: 4189 Linden Ave N, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (Bridgewater Village, Outlot A) Parcel 2: 4050 Linden Ave N, Lake Elmo, MN 55042(Bridgewater Village, Outlot B) Parcel 3: 11809 Upper 40th St N Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (Bridgewater Village, Outlot C) Parcel 4: 4136 Linden Ave N, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (Bridgewater Village, Outlot D) Parcel 5: 4030 Linora Ave N, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (Bridgewater Village, Outlot E) Key Facts  Existing Zoning Village Medium Density Residential  Guided Land Use Village Medium Density Residential  Proposed Zoning V-MDR, Planned Unit Development  Proposed Use 82 attached townhome units  Net Density Calculations: o Gross Area 16.01 acres o Net Area 16.01 acres o Net Density 5.12 units/acre  Open Space Calculations: o Total Open Space 7.23 acres (45%) i. Private Amenity/Open Space Only 0.68 acres ii. Open Space 3.30 acres iii. Stormwater Basins/Ponds 3.26 acres  Dimensions/Setbacks o Minimum lot width 22 feet o Side yard setback to adjacent outlots 10 feet o Front setback to public ROW 25 feet o Building separation 20 feet o Garage 30 feet (to back of curb) Previous Approvals We are proposing a new residential townhouse within the existing Bridgewater Village master development. The Bridgewater Development is composed of commercial and future residential. During the original approval process, the previous developer estimated a future residential unit count ranging from 49 to 130 units. As outlined in greater detail below, our proposal includes 82 attached, rear-loaded townhome units featuring LP siding on all four sides. We are excited to bring forward a product that aligns with the originally anticipated density while enhancing the overall quality and character of the development. Proposed Land Use and Zoning The City of Lake Elmo guides the subject parcels as Village-Medium Density Residential (V-MDR), allowing 3.01-8 units per acre. We are proposing a rear-loaded attached townhome neighborhood with a density of 5.12 units per net acre. Our proposed density falls within the allowed range and is at the lower end of the range allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. The current zoning is listed as Village-Medium Density Residential. Based on staff feedback, we propose rezoning the development to Village Medium Density Residential - Planned Unit Development. Our requested flexibilities will be discussed in greater detail below. Proposed Neighborhood We are seeking feedback on a proposed neighborhood of attached, rear-loaded townhomes within the Bridgewater Village development. When designing our plan, we looked carefully at the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the Lake Elmo Village Vision Study. The future community will consist of 82 3 units in 4- or 6-unit string buildings. Our proposed product is rear-loaded, with the fronts of the homes facing public streets where possible and the garages at the back. We will discuss our product in more detail below; however, we believe attached townhomes are a suitable fit for this area given the parcel’s limited size, proximity to major roadways, and adjacent commercial parcels. Below is a breakdown of the outlots and intended uses.  Outlot A – Existing Landscaping  Outlot B – Existing Stormwater Pond  Outlot C – Existing Stormwater Pond  Outlot D – Proposed Townhomes  Outlot E – Proposed Townhomes Access and Internal Private Alleys The outlots we propose for townhomes are part of the larger Bridgewater Village development, which has already been built. Linora Avenue North and Upper 40th Street North already exist and connect to Stillwater Way North and Stillwater Boulevard North. Primary access to the western residential area (Outlot E) would come from Linora Avenue North. The eastern residential area (Outlot D) would have two connections to Upper 40th Street North. Within the residential townhomes, we would propose 24’ private alleys, which are allowed per the Lake Elmo Municipal Code 105.12.810 (General Site Design Considerations; Village Districts). Since our product is rear-loaded, primary access to the homes' garages would come from the private alleys, and the Homeowner’s Association would be responsible for maintaining them. Additionally, by using private alleys, we can orient our townhomes to face the public right-of-way, which we understand is an important city goal. Parking Requirements We realize that providing sufficient parking is a critical component of any subdivision design and recognize the City’s preference for parallel on-street parking rather than perpendicular configurations. Each townhome unit is designed to accommodate four parking spaces: two in the garage and two in the driveway. With 82 proposed townhome units, this results in 328 resident parking spaces. In addition, we are proposing 9 parallel on-street parking spaces, which satisfy the City’s requirement for providing 10% visitor parking. In total, the development will provide 337 parking spaces, ensuring adequate parking supply for both residents and guests. Utilites Utilities currently exist along Linora Avenue North and Upper 40th Street North. A concept utility plan has been prepared for the City’s review to demonstrate potential utility connections and layout for the proposed development. Additionally, we propose that utilities within the townhome area remain public. We would record a Drainage and Utility Easement over areas containing public utilities, including internal private alleys. This approach allows the City’s Public Works Department, with its expertise and familiarity with municipal systems, to maintain and operate the infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with City standards and long-term maintenance expectations. Proposed Setbacks We are proposing a 25’ setback for all buildings facing public streets, including Stillwater Way North, Linora Avenue North, and Upper 40th Street North. We are proposing a 30’ setback from the garage to the back of the curb. Lastly, we are also proposing a setback of 20’ between each building. Stormwater Management Currently, a wet detention and irrigation reuse system has been constructed on Outlot B, and an infiltration pond has been built on Outlot C. Based on our discussions with our engineer, these ponds have been designed to accommodate the proposed residential development up to the 50% maximum impervious area per city code. Our proposal is to utilize the existing wet pond, reuse and infiltration basin, which have already been constructed and designed to support our development. As the project progresses, we will work with the required agencies to meet all stormwater requirements. 4 Impervious Surface Calculations We have completed impervious surface calculations, and based on the outlots that we would plat, we are at 40% impervious for the five outlots, which is under the 50% requirement. See the table below for more details. Landscaping For the previous overall master development, we understand they were required to provide trees along street frontages (1 tree per 50 ft) and 5 trees per acre of land disturbance. While these requirements have been met throughout the development, we recognize the importance of enhanced landscaping and have prepared a conceptual plan to supplement the original plantings. We are proposing additional trees throughout the site to improve the streetscape and overall character of the development. Our proposed landscaping plan includes additional screening on the west side of Outlot E as well. We are proposing trees at various spots along Stillwater Way North, where possible. However, there are existing constraints in this corridor, including overhead utility lines and other infrastructure. In these areas, we are proposing tree species and placements that will allow for healthy growth while avoiding conflicts with existing utilities. We look forward to continuing to refine the landscape plan in coordination with City staff to ensure it meets both City expectations and long-term viability. Open Space, Amenities & Park Fees We would anticipate paying park dedication fees in lieu of dedicating land to the city. We are proposing a private amenity north of the stormwater pond. The final design of the amenity area has not yet been finalized; however, we anticipate it will be a gathering place for future residents. We would have a private amenity, such as a fire pit, with landscaping and green space for residents to enjoy and connect. Lastly, we exceed the 20% open space PUD requirements. Please see the calculations below and the concept plan for more details. Requested Flexibilities As part of our application, we are seeking the following flexibilities -  Minimum Lot Area (square feet): The V-MDR zoning code requires a minimum lot area of 2,500 square feet per single-family attached unit. We are requesting a minimum lot area of 1,210 square feet. We understand that incorporating rear-loaded townhomes is an important goal of the City. Our rear-loaded product is a three-story townhome that is 22’ in width. These units are individually platted at approximately 22’ by 55’, resulting in a 1,210 square-foot lot. This reduced lot size is necessary to support the design and functionality of a rear-loaded product, including alley-loaded access, efficient site planning, and meet density requirements.  Minimum Lot Width: The V-MDR zoning code requires a minimum lot width of 25’ for single-family attached units. The proposed townhome product is designed with a 22’ wide, which is necessary to accommodate our rear-loaded townhome designs. We are requesting flexibility to allow this 5 reduced lot width to meet density requirements and to provide a product that fronts the public right-of-way, with garages accessed from the rear.  Max 25% of the site being townhomes: The V-MDR zoning code limits townhomes to 25% of the overall development. We are requesting flexibility from this requirement based on several site- specific considerations: o The property is located adjacent to major roadways and commercial uses, which represent higher-intensity land uses. It is consistent with planning principles to transition these areas to higher-density residential products. o The net buildable area of the site is constrained. Outlots D and E, where the townhomes are proposed, comprise approximately 8.08 acres. A traditional single-family detached development would likely not efficiently utilize the site nor achieve the density anticipated for this zoning district. Additionally, we believe the market is better suited to support townhome products in this location than traditional single-family detached homes, given the adjacent uses. PUD Identified Objectives The development meets the City’s minimum PUD requirements: it is larger than 5 acres, at least 20% of the site is open space, which will be protected by a drainage and utility easement, and streets are designed to maximize connectivity in each area. We believe the following PUD objectives are met with this site plan: 1. Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than conventional approaches. a. Private alleys are a unique tool and need to achieve the required density while enabling rear-loaded townhomes. This design reduces front-facing garages, enhances the streetscape, and supports a more pedestrian-friendly environment, while still providing adequate and efficient circulation. 2. Promotion of integrated land uses, allowing for a mixture of residential, commercial, and public facilities. a. The proposed development advances an integrated land use pattern by thoughtfully locating attached townhomes with adjacent commercial uses. This design promotes a cohesive, walkable environment where residential and commercial functions support one another, enhancing convenience, activity, and overall site functionality 3. Establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. a. The proposal meets required public street setbacks and enhances transitions through additional landscaping. The inclusion of numerous trees and buffering elements softens visual impacts, reinforces spatial separation, and creates a well-designed transition that is compatible with adjacent uses. 4. Provision of more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities, natural resource protection and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development techniques. a. Although the parcels are limited in size, our plan provides a centrally located open space positioned adjacent to the reuse pond, maximizing both visibility and accessibility. This placement creates a usable and attractive amenity area. 5. Accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities and/or commercial facilities; and especially to create additional opportunities for lifecycle housing to all income and age groups. a. We are proposing for sale rear-loaded townhomes that support a wide range of residents. We find that our townhome buyers include first-time buyers, singles, and empty nesters, thereby contributing to diverse lifecycle housing opportunities. Their proximity to commercial uses provides convenient access to services and employment, reinforcing a connected, accessible living environment. 6. Preservation and enhancement of important environmental features through careful and sensitive placement of buildings and facilities. a. The proposal preserves environmental features by focusing development on previously graded outlots, minimizing disturbance to natural resources. Building placement has been 6 thoughtfully designed to align with public streets, supporting community design objectives. 7. Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within the development and surrounding land uses. a. The proposed development enhances architectural compatibility through thoughtfully designed rear-loaded townhomes that orient toward public streets, creating an active and visually engaging streetscape. Our townhomes are constructed with high-quality materials, including LP siding on all sides. Additionally, we are proposing extensive landscaping to supplement the master development trees and further enhance the community and its compatibility with the surrounding land uses. 8. Creation of more efficient provision of public utilities and services, lessened demand on transportation, and the promotion of energy resource conservation. a. The development promotes efficient use of infrastructure by utilizing private streets maintained by the HOA, reducing demand on City resources such as roadway maintenance and snow removal. Additionally, on-site stormwater management will be privately maintained, further minimizing impacts on public systems while supporting sustainable and efficient service provision. 9. Establishing measures to protect and preserve groundwater storage. a. Our proposal supports groundwater protection by utilizing the existing wet detention and irrigation reuse system that has been constructed on Outlot B, and an infiltration pond has been built on Outlot C. Per our initial review with our engineers, the existing ponds have been built to service all the outlots within the original Bridgewater Village development. Additionally, the proposed stormwater management system for the Bridgewater Village development: i. Reduces peak discharge rates and volumes to the maximum extent practicable for all locations where discharge leaves the site for the 2-, 10- 100-year 24-hour and 100-year 10-day snowmelt events, ii. Provides volume reduction greater than 1.1-inches of runoff over new and reconstructed impervious surfaces through a combination of irrigation reuse and surface infiltration, iii. Pretreats stormwater runoff to greater than 25-percent TSS removal prior to infiltration, iv. Provides greater than two feet of separation between minimum building elevation and 100-year HWL, v. Meets permanent pool volume requirements as defined by the NPDES permit, and vi. Limits discharge from the stormwater pond to less than 5.66-cfs/ac for the 1.1- inch water quality event as defined by the NPDES permit. 10. Allowing the development to operate in concert with a redevelopment plan in certain areas of the City and to ensure the redevelopment goals and objectives will be achieved. a. The proposal advances the City’s redevelopment objectives by facilitating continued buildout within the approved Bridgewater Development. It remains consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Lake Elmo Village Vision Study, reinforcing the City’s long-term vision for coordinated, high-quality development. Pulte Townhomes and Homeowners Association Pulte Homes is known for the extraordinary steps that we take to ensure that we are designing and building homes that meet the needs and desires of home buyers. You can visit this link to learn more about Pulte’s homebuilding process https://www.pulte.com/design/life-tested. We continually reach out to home buyers and Pulte homeowners to get feedback to improve our home designs. It is what we call Life Tested®. Through this intensive process, we have conceived of and incorporated innovative features such as the Pulte Planning Center, the Everyday Entry, Super Laundry, Oversized Pantry, and the Owner’s Retreat. This exhaustive process has played a major part in Pulte’s success in “Building Incredible Places Where People Can Live Their Dreams.” 7 To remain aligned with the evolving preferences of today’s homebuyers, we continually refine and update our home designs. These revisions are informed by ongoing market feedback and the design review process outlined above. The proposed townhome product will consist of three-story homes arranged in buildings of four to six units each, providing architectural variety and a unique building pattern. Our townhomes will feature LP siding on all 4-sides. Our townhomes will be for sale, and we anticipate they will sell in the low $400,000s. We will establish a homeowner’s association (HOA) to provide lawn care, snow removal, and exterior building maintenance. Additionally, the HOA will be responsible for maintaining the stormwater system onsite as well as the future maintenance of the private alleys. We have found that our townhomes appeal to singles and first-time home-buying families. We have also found that approximately 30% of buyers of this home are empty nesters, who purchase the units for multiple reasons. We receive feedback that they are attracted to the HOA's lawn maintenance and snow removal services. Combined, these traits have made our townhomes very popular among singles, first-time homebuyers, and empty nesters. Townhomes – Home Specifications  2,175 square feet  3 bedrooms  2.5 bathrooms  2-stall garage  Three stories  LP siding on all 4 sides Conceptual Home Elevations Please refer to the pages following the “Summary” section for renderings of the proposed townhomes. Energy Efficiency and Sustainability The homes that Pulte will be constructing will have extremely high energy efficiency. Each home is tested using the Home Energy Rating System (HERS) index, which is the industry standard for measuring energy efficiency. Heating, cooling, and water heating constitute the largest cost of homeownership outside of the mortgage. The U.S. Department of Energy has determined that a typical resale home scores 130 on the HERS Index while a home built to the 2004 International Energy Conservation Code is awarded a rating of 100 (lower is more energy efficient). Pulte Homes measures the HERS score of every new home constructed. The average HERS score for our homes runs in the range of 47 to 53. We are building extremely energy-efficient homes that dramatically exceed the International Energy Conservation Code threshold. Phasing & Schedule Due to the site’s limited size, we will construct the project in a single phase. The City of Lake Elmo application schedule suggests that staff review, and possible Planning Commission and City Council consideration would occur as follows: Preliminary plat approval summer 2026 Site development starts fall 2026 Model home opens early 2027 Complete build of homes mid to late 2029 Summary The proposed community will consist of 82 attached, rear-loaded townhomes, which align with the City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Lake Elmo Village Vision Study. We look forward to working with city staff, Commissions, and Council as this application progresses through the review process. We respectfully request the City’s support for this application. Thank you for your consideration. PROPOSED WET PONDFOR IRRIGATION REUSEAREA: 1.42 ACRESBOTTOM: 916.0NWL: 926.0HWL: 931.9EOF: 934.35PROPOSED INFILTRATIONBASINAREA: 0.81 ACRESBOTTOM: 925.0NWL: 925.0HWL: 929.5EOF: 932.48933934 9339349349169169179179189189199199209209219219229229239239249249259259269269279279289289299299309309319319329329339339 3 4 9349 3 5 9 3 6 9 3 7 9 3 8 9 3 9939 937 938938 938 9 3 9 9399 4 0 940938 9389399349 3 5 934935925926927929934 9349359369379 3 8 9 3 9939 941933 9349359369 3 6 9369 3 7 937932933934934 9349359359+190+ 9 3 1+002+003+004+005+006+007+008+009+0014+550+001+002+003+004+005+006 + 0 0 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+0014+008+230+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+005+00 6+00 7+008+00933 934 932 933 934 934 935935 936 936 93 8934934935935936936937937 9389 3 9 93 923.5'20'10'010203040506070809101112151617181920353433313029284847464543424130'22'30'1314212223242526626059585756545352512732364930'30'3 0 '30'30'25'2 0 ' 2 0 ' 2 5 '24'6 '30'4 '4'4 ' R 2 5807978778230'66646330'747372717630'70686730'20'24'41'4'4'3938374030'40'25'157.6'86.3'445055618165756915.3'26.9'24'30'5'5'22'24'12'24'8'22'146.6'162'R25'R 2 5 '31'28.3'20'20'24'26.9'22'24'11.6'5'5'9.6'11.6'6 . 1 '26'10'34.5'8'8'8'2 0 . 5 '26.3'09080743.4'2 4 '062 0 ' 5 '0203040524'22'8'5 1 . 5 ' R2 530'30'24'26.9'6'25'35.6'22'8'2 4 '22'8 '24'12'1 2 '12'5.7'01INV=928.26 (311LF @1%)INV=929.75 (823LF @1%)25'STILLWATER BOULEVARD NSTILLWATER BOULEVARD N S T I L LW A T E R W A Y NO R T HUPPER 40TH ST NLINORA AVE N LINDEN AVE N 17'2 5 '25'10'10'25'25'1 3 . 3 '10'2 5 'INV=925.1540LF 8" PVC @ 0.52% FROM INV=924.94PER 12/17/25 RECORD DRAWINGSINV=921.5137LF 8" PVC @ 2.00% FROM INV=920.77PER 12/17/25 RECORD DRAWINGSC-101CONCEPT PUD PLANDWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:\\US0291-PPFSS01\workgroup\1938\business_development\Pursuit_Folders_LDev\Pulte Group\2025 Lake Elmo - Bridgewater Village\2026-0420 Bridgewater Village Lake Elmo Impervious(10).dwg 5/4/2026 SVEUM, PATRICK DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:CLIENT:PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY:APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:BRIDGEWATER_VILLAGE LAKE_ELMO_MN_WASHINGTON_COUNTY N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 733 MARQUETTE AVENUE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:04/20/2026( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.4080401650 WEST 82ND STREET, SUITE 300BLOOMINGTON, MN 5543114/20/2026 CONCEPT_PUD_PLAN ►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►► ► ►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►PROPOSED WET PONDFOR IRRIGATION REUSEAREA: 1.42 ACRESBOTTOM: 916.0NWL: 926.0HWL: 931.9EOF: 934.35PROPOSED INFILTRATIONBASINAREA: 0.81 ACRESBOTTOM: 925.0NWL: 925.0HWL: 929.5EOF: 932.48UEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEU E U E U E U E►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►IIIIIII I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I I II I I I IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I I I I I IIIII IIIIIIIIIII933934 9339349349209209259259309309 3 5 9169169179179189189199199219219229229239239249249269269279279289289299299319319329329339339 3 4 9349 3 6 9 3 7 9 3 8 9 3 9939 937 938938 9 4 0 940938 9 3 9 939938 9389399349 3 5 934935925926927929935934 9349369379 3 8 9 3 9 939 941935933 9349369 3 6 9369 3 7 937935935932933934934 934933 934 935935 932 933 934 934 936 936 93 8935935934934 936936937937 9389 3 9 93 901020304050607080910111215161718192035343331302928484746454342411314212223242526626059585756545352512732364930'30'8079787782666463747372717670686720'393837404450556181657569090807060203040501FUTURE AMENITY SPACESTILLWATER BOULEVARD NSTILLWATER BOULEVARD N S T I L LW A T E R W A Y NO R T HUPPER 40TH ST NLINORA AVE N LINDEN AVE N SYMBOLCODECOMMON NAMEEVERGREEN TREESPDBLACK HILLS SPRUCEPS2WHITE PINEPGWHITE SPRUCEOVERSTORY TREESTBBOULEVARD AMERICAN LINDENGDKENTUCKY COFFEETREEANNORTHWOOD RED MAPLEUPPRAIRIE EXPEDITION ELMPTQUAKING ASPENQRRED OAKBRRIVER BIRCHASSIENNA GLEN MAPLEQBSWAMP WHITE OAKUNDERSTORY TREESAS2AUTUMN BRILLIANCE SERVICEBERRYSSCOPPER CURLS PEKING LILACSIIVORY SILK JAPANESE TREE LILACGROUND COVERSLMBLOW MAINTENANCE TURFL-101PRELIMINARYLANDSCAPE PLANDWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:V:\1938\business_development\Pursuit_Folders_LDev\Pulte Group\2025 Lake Elmo - Bridgewater Village\2026-0420 Bridgewater Village Lake Elmo L-100 LANDSCAPE PLAN.dwg 4/22/2026 FLICKER, MARK DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:CLIENT:PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY:APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:BRIDGEWATER_VILLAGE LAKE_ELMO_MN_WASHINGTON_COUNTY 733 MARQUETTE AVENUE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:04/20/2026( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.4080401650 WEST 82ND STREET, SUITE 300BLOOMINGTON, MN 5543114/20/2026 CONCEPT_PUD_PLAN PLANT PALETTEDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED LANDSCAPEARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:04/20/2026N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NPROPOSED TREE PER MASTERDEVELOPMENT PLAN, TYP.1.TREE LOCATIONS1.1.MINIMUM 5' FROM BACK OF CURB OR EDGE OF SIDEWALK.1.2.MINIMUM 10' FROM UTILITIES.1.3.(5) TREES FOR EVERY (1) ACRE OF LAND DISTURBED1.3.1.8.07 ACRES DISTURBED1.3.1.1.TREES REQUIRED: 411.3.1.2.TREES PROPOSED: 411.4.MIN. ONE (1) TREE PER EVERY FIFTY (50) FEET STREET FRONTAGE: 908 LF1.4.1.STREET FRONTAGE TREES REQUIRED: 201.4.2.STREET FRONTAGE TREES PROPOSED: 20MUNICIPAL LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTSFIRE PIT ►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►► ► ►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►PROPOSED WET PONDFOR IRRIGATION REUSEAREA: 1.42 ACRESBOTTOM: 916.0NWL: 926.0HWL: 931.9EOF: 934.35PROPOSED INFILTRATIONBASINAREA: 0.81 ACRESBOTTOM: 925.0NWL: 925.0HWL: 929.5EOF: 932.48UEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEU E U E U E ►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►IIIIIII I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I I II I I I IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I I I I I IIIII IIIIIIIIIII933934 9339349349169169179179189189199199209209219219229229239239249249259259269269279279289289299299309309319319329329339339 3 4 9349 3 5 9 3 6 9 3 7 9 3 8 9 3 9939 937 938938 938 9 3 9 9399 4 0 940938 9389399349 3 5 934935925926927929934 9349359369379 3 8 9 3 9939 941933 9349359369 3 6 9369 3 7 937932933934934 9349359359+190+ 9 3 1+002+003+004+005+006+007+008+009+0014+550+001+002+003+004+005+006 + 0 0 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+0014+008+230+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+005+00 6+00 7+008+00933 934 932 933 934 934 935935 936 93615" RCP15" RCP24" RCP36" RCP 18" RCP18" RCP18" RCP42" RCP42" RCP24" RCP30" RCP30" RCP18" RCP24" RCP30" RCP18" RCP18" RCP18" RCP18" RCP1 8 " R C P 24" RCP 18" R C P 15" RCP42" RCP42" RCP15" RCP21" RCP15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP36" RCP15" RCP18" RCP15" RCP15" RCP18" RCP 15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP24" RCP1 5 " RCP 21" RCP 12" RCP12" RCP12" RCP18" RCP24" RCP24" RCP24" RCP24" RCP 15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP15" RCP 93 8934934935935936936937937 9389 3 9 93 9CBMH-123CBMH-122CBMH-121CBMH-152CBMH-151CBMH-120STMH-169CBMH-167CBMH-149CBMH-119CBMH-124CBMH-118CBMH-159TEMP CBMH-168STMH-156CBMH-117STMH-138STMH-131STMH-132CBMH-128STMH-125CBMH-165CBMH-150CBMH-127STMH-104CBMH-158CBMH-107CBMH-110FES-16612" INV=932.61STMH-139STMH-133CBMH-105CBMH-106CBMH-103CBMH-112STMH-171CBMH-170STMH-143CBMH-101CBMH-102CBMH-108STMH-135CBMH-109CBMH-148TEMP CBMH-114CBMH-111CBMH-157CBMH-129STMH-137STMH-136CBMH-174FES-18015" INV=929.24STMH-141FES-10042" INV=926.00CBMH-173FES-18215" INV=928.32FES-14415" INV=928.00FES-11530" INV=926.00FES-11324" INV=926.00FES-14215" INV=925.00FES-130FES-17118" INV=925.00FES-17215" INV=925.00FES-13418" INV=923.50FES-14018" INV=923.50CBMH-116CBMH-153CBMH-17501020304050607080910111215161718192035343331302928484746454342411314212223242526626059585756545352512732364980797877826664637473727176706867393837404450556181657569090807060203040501►►►►►►►► I I I I I I I I I I I I►►►►►►►►►►►I►I►IIIIII►I►II►I►II►I►II►I►II►I►II►I►II►II►II►II►II►II►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►IIIIII I I I I I I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII►I►I►I►I►II►II►II►II►II►II►II►I►I►I►I►I►I►II►I ►►►►I ►I ►I ►I ►I ►II►I►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII►II►II►II►II►II►II►IIII I ►I►I►I►I►ISSWR MH-07SSWR MH-01INV=928.26 (311LF @1%)INV=929.75 (823LF @1%)STILLWATER BOULEVARD NSTILLWATER BOULEVARD N S T I L LW A T E R W A Y NO R T HUPPER 40TH ST NLINORA AVE N LINDEN AVE NINV=925.1540LF 8" PVC @ 0.52% FROM INV=924.94PER 12/17/25 RECORD DRAWINGSINV=921.5137LF 8" PVC @ 2.00% FROM INV=920.77PER 12/17/25 RECORD DRAWINGSC-101CONCEPT PUD PLANDWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:\\US0291-PPFSS01\workgroup\1938\business_development\Pursuit_Folders_LDev\Pulte Group\2025 Lake Elmo - Bridgewater Village\2026-0420 Bridgewater Village Lake Elmo Impervious(10).dwg 4/22/2026 SVEUM, PATRICK DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:4/22/2026 11:32:54 AM CLIENT:PROJECT TITLE:CHK'D BY:APP'D BY:CERTIFICATION:BRIDGEWATER_VILLAGE LAKE_ELMO_MN_WASHINGTON_COUNTY N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 733 MARQUETTE AVENUE 1000MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PHONE: 612-712-2000WWW.STANTEC.COMDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:04/20/2026( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 40 ft.4080401650 WEST 82ND STREET, SUITE 300BLOOMINGTON, MN 5543114/20/2026 CONCEPT_PUD_PLAN WE BUILD CONSUMER INSPIRED HOMES AND COMMUNITIES TO MAKE LIVES BETTER. PROPOSED TOWNHOMES *Subject to change based on market conditions* WE BUILD CONSUMER INSPIRED HOMES AND COMMUNITIES TO MAKE LIVES BETTER. PROPOSED TOWNHOMES *Subject to change based on market conditions* Memorandum 800 Washington Avenue North, Suite 207 Minneapolis, MN 55401 May 26, 2026 TO : SOPHIA JENSEN FROM: SARAH EVENSON, PLA RE: BRIDGEWATER VILLAGE TOWNHOMES LANDSCAPE PLAN REVIEW SUBMITTALS 1. Bridgewater Village Townho mes Concept Plan and PUD dated 4/21/26, received 5/6/26. REVIEW HISTORY 1. Bridgewater Village Townhomes Concept Landscape Plan Review 5/26/2025 LOCATION: West of Manning Avenue N, south of Stillwater Way N, north Stillwater Blvd N. Outlots A, B, C, D, and E of Bridgewater Village. CURRENT ZONING: V-MDR ADJACENT ZONING: Commercial to the east, Public Facilities to the west, V-MDR/Commercial to the south, OP-PUD and Rural Residential to the north SPECIAL LANDSCAPE PROVISIONS: none TREE PRESERVATION PLAN: 105. 12. 470 Tree preservation was addressed as part of the Bridgewater Village project. LANDSCAPE PLAN: 105.12.480 The landscape plan for Bridgewater Village Townhomes proposes adding 41 trees to account for the 8.07 acres disturbed as a part of this development, along with 20 trees to meet the requirement of 1 tree for every 50’ of their 908 linear feet of street frontage. These quantities meet the code’s landscape requirements. • The landscape plan will need to be revised to meet other code requirements, including, but not limited to: o Adding a plant schedule that includes the size, quantity, and species of all proposed plant materials o Showing the location of a topsoil stockpile and notes indicating that the quantity of soil shall be sufficient to cover all landscaped areas at least 4” deep o Confirming per 105.12.480 (b) (7) that trees shall be planted ten feet away from utilities including water and sewer stubs o Ensuring that the quantities of evergreen, deciduous and ornamental trees meet sitewide tree composition requirements (at least 25% of all trees are deciduous and at least 25% are evergreen trees, and no more than 15% are ornamental trees) May 26th, 2026 Bridgewater Village Townhomes Memorandum 2 RECOMMENDATION: The landscape plan must be revised and resubmitted based on the above comments. Sarah Evenson, PLA (MN) City of Lake Elmo Municipal Landscape Architect P: (262) 391-7653 E: sarah@hkgi.com Bridgewater Village Townhomes Concept Plan Review City Council | June 16, 2026 Overview Overview Three Parcels – PIDs : •12.029.21.44.0033 & •12.029.21.44.0034 Total Acreage •16 .0 1 a c re s •No Wetlands Exis ting Land Us e – vacant Requests: •Concept Plan Review •8 2 units (s ingle family attac he d) Issue for Council Should the City consider PUD flexibility for a development with 100% attached single family residential in the Village Medium Density Residential area? Anticipated PUD Flexibilities: 1.100% attached townhomes (over 25% max) 2.Minimum Lot Area – 1210 sq ft (under 2500 sq ft min) 3.Minimum Lot Width – 22 ft (under 25 ft min) 4.Primary entrances not facing a public street (specific units) Land Use Analysis Future Land Use Zoning Bridgewater Village “ghost plat” Performance Standards Primary entrance on public street 500 sq ft. open space per unit Parking not permitted in front yard Front loaded garages not permitted Utilities, Roads, Access Public Utilities Private Roads – 6 5 ’ Utility Easement Corridors One removed access point One relocated access point Landscaping and Screening Existing Landscaping on public streets Street Trees to be required along Stillwater Way Cemetery Regulations MN Chapter 307 •Regulatory protection of all private burial s ite s / re mains Cons ide rations : •Literature review – cemetery boundaries •On site grading observation Parkland Dedication Parks Commission Review 6/15 •Recommendation for Cash in Lieu Cons ide rations : •Project will create a demand on parks and trail system •Two parks just over .5 miles away with access to trails •On site open space and private ame nitie s Key Considerations Discussion is advisory, non-binding feedback is provided to developer. Should the City consider PUD flexibility for a development with 100% attached single family residential in the Village Medium Density Residential area? Anticipated PUD Flexibilities: 1.100% attached townhomes (over 25% max) 2.Minimum Lot Area – 1210 sq ft (under 2500 sq ft min) 3.Minimum Lot Width – 22 ft (under 25 ft min) 4.Primary entrances not facing a public street (specific units QUESTIONS? STAFF REPORT DATE: 6/16/2026 Regular TO: Lake Elmo City Council FROM: Nathan Fuerst, Consulting City Planner Jason Stopa, Community Development Director REVIEWED BY: Sophia Jensen, Senior City Planner AGENDA ITEM: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update for Community Forecasts CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☒ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☒ Managed Growth ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☐ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: The Met Council releases system statements containing community forecasts based on regional population models. After release, communities have 60 days to appeal. Historically, Met Council staff have been willing to work with communities to amend population forecasts periodically, including outside of the comprehensive planning process, where there may be inconsistencies between the regional population model and local realities. The White Bear Lake lawsuit has caused the Met Council to take a new position on water that was not understood during the review period for system statements. In a White Bear Lake Methodology Memo (“WBL Memo”) the Met Council states that it will effectively cap population forecasts based on availability of water. This has complicated the City’s review and would have likely resulted in a different determination on how to proceed regarding its system statement. Staff are proposing a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that will create realistic household and population forecasts for the upcoming 2050 Comprehensive Plan Update. To do this, the City must modify the 2040 Comprehensive Plan household and population forecasts. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: How should the City Council proceed with the Comprehensive Plan Amendments proposed by Staff? DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Timeline In September 22, 2025, system statements were released and communities began to review. Lake Elmo staff reviewed the system statements and identified that the population estimate seemed low based on current development trends. On October 24, 2025, Lake Elmo staff sought a meeting with Met Council staff to discuss the implications. Several questions were sent to the Met Council in anticipation of meeting: What data sources/trends informed the population and household estimates? What happens if development exceeds forecasted growth? On October 28, 2025, City planning staff and the Met Council sector representative to discuss these questions. Regional trends were cited as the primary driver for the downward change in population forecasts. Generally, the feedback was that the Met Council is open to periodic forecast adjustments provided there was rationale supporting a change. Small adjustments can be made administratively, while larger adjustments need to be approved by the Met Council. Given ability of the Met Council to amend the forecasts, it was communicated that the City is not “punished’ or limited in growth if population growth exceeds forecasts. On October 29, 2025, additional follow-up information was provided based on the questions asked to the Met Council. While considerable information was provided on methodology for regional and local forecasts, water systems, water appropriation, or the WBL Memo methodology were not communicated. It was also noted that forecast adjustments could be adjusted unless projected growth outstripped the transportation and wastewater systems serving a community. Water systems were not mentioned. November 21, 2025, the appeals period for the 2025 system statements expired. Prior to this, and based on the communications above, staff determined that an appeal to the forecast found in the system statement would not be necessary. Given the ability to periodically and collaboratively make adjustments, it was concluded that the population could be increased as the City moved through the Comprehensive Planning process when it would have a better idea about needs for forecast adjustments. January 15, 2026, the City of Lake Elmo received the WBL Memo dated October 22, 2025 from City of Hugo staff. This memo, nor any indication of the methodology and position on system statements within, had not been provided in any correspondence prior from the Met Council in the period between the system statements being released and the expiration of the appeal period. At this time, and due to the implications of the Met Council’s policy position, staff began to take considerable efforts to understand what options the City has moving forward. February 19, 2025, the City of Lake Elmo staff met with Met Council Principal Forecaster and sector representative to discuss population forecasts and options the City has. Prior to this meeting, staff compiled data on development projections and permitting history which support a higher population forecast. Met Council staff agreed to an interim adjustment of Lake Elmo’s population forecast. March 6, 2026, City of Lake Elmo staff received an email from the Senior Manager of Local Planning Assistance with the option for the City of Lake Elmo would be to adjust its 2030 and 2040 decade forecasts as follows: Raise the 2030 forecast to 7,200 households @ 2.66 average household size = 19,200 pop. Of this number, 2,472 households unsewered and the remainder sewer-serviced. Adjust the 2040 forecast to 8,250 households @ 2.59 average household size = 21,400 pop. Of this number, 2,200 households unsewered and the remainder sewer-serviced. The Met Council has not changed its position on increasing population estimates until June 2027, after which, the White Bear Lake working group is expected to have identified a solution and timeline to resolve issues of water availability in the White Bear Lake Area. White Bear Lake Memo (WBL Memo) Attached to this report is the Forecast Methodology for the White Bear Lake Area Communities (WBL Memo) which documents the methodology and policy position of the Met Council. Generally, the WBL Memo can be summarized as follows: Summary of overall methodology used in regional/local population forecasts. Reference to legislatively directed White Bear Lake Comprehensive Plan Group – deadline of June 30, 2027 for completion of a long term plan with supporting analysis, to convert some or all wells to surface water. Policy positions: o “Until the White Bear Lake Area Work Group concludes and there is an identified response to legislative direction and judicial decisions, the Met Council determined it prudent to withhold its consent of additional growth in local jurisdictions affected by the White Bear Lake Area Court decision until the Council is assured additional growth does not conflict with Court orders that cities must abide.” o “as it relates to requesting an upward adjustment to forecasts for growth in this area prior to completion of the White Bear Lake Area Comprehensive Plan being prepared with assistance from the legislatively identified Work Group Members and modification of the court order, communities should be aware that the Council will only consider forecast adjustments in the future, not during System Statements review. If a request is made, it may only be considered after modification of the court order, a change in local conditions, or a solution to water supply constraints are determined and implemented.” The Bottom Line for Lake Elmo The Met Council refuses to allow for a higher population projection than the City’s 2040 plan provides, but has agreed that the September 2025 forecasts are low. The City has the option from the Met Council to use the numbers from its Thrive 2040 plan, ending at a total of 21,400 by 2040. For the time being, the City may need to work with the following projections by decade: 2030: 19,200 (7,200 households @ 2.66 average household size) 2040: 21,400 (8,250 households @ 2.59 average household size) 2050: (to be informally proposed by Met Council based on growth trends above) From the Met Council’s Senior Manager of Local Planning Assistance, Angela Torres: “We routinely have staff-to- staff agreements on forecast adjustments during development of the decennial Plan updates and we are willing to discuss an expanded 2050 forecast in mid-2027 after the White Bear Lake Area Comprehensive Plan Work Group concludes. At that point, we’d know more about everyone’s comfort (neighboring cities, DNR, etc.) and local systems preparedness. Until then, Met Council will limit forecast increases as described in "Forecast Methodology for the White Bear Lake Area Communities.” Amending the 2040 Plan: The above communication from Angela Torres, Senior Manager of Local Planning Assistance with the Met Council, states that for the City to utilize the population forecast numbers from its 2040 Plan a comprehensive plan amendment is necessary. However, the Met Council has not agreed to use the numbers found in the adopted plan with modifications identified based primarily on fluctuations in average household size in the region. The Following comparison articulates the differences between what is in the current 2040 Plan and how it would be amended: Adopted vs Amended 2040 Plan Forecasts 2030 (as amended with average household size of 2.66 instead of 2.77) 2040 (as amended with average household size of 2.59 instead of 2.72) Households Unsewered 2642 (2472)2742 (2200) Households MUSA 3858 (4728)5458 (6050) Total Households 6500 (7200)8200 (8250) Total Population 18,005 (19,200)22,304 (21,400) Employment Unsewered 562 562 Employment MUSA 2788 3238 Total Employment 3350 3800 Unsewered Households Staff have requested clarification from the Met Council’s staff on why the projected unsewered household numbers were projected to decrease. The City has approved several rural (unswered) developments since adoption of the 2040 plan. Therefore, it is likely that the number has either stayed the same (if failed septic systems are taken int account) or increased. Supporting Data - Staff generated population projection The table below represents a population projection generated by staff based on approved and known development projects, the adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s future land use guidance, and MUSA staging plan. The table uses a conservative estimate of average household size, 2.5 residents per household. Year 2026 2030 2035 2040 Cumulative Building Starts*962 2359 2555 3059 Population 15127 18952 20689 22027 2025 System Statement Population n/a 15200 n/a 16900 Adjusted Forecasts n/a 19,200 n/a 21,400 * This means the number of building permits issued from 2024 to 2026, 2030, 2035, and 2040. Supporting Data – 10 Year Permitting History The table below represents permitting history for detached and attached residential units. On average, the City has issued permits for 171 detached single family homes alone per year over the last decade. Assuming a conservative average household size of 2.5 residents per unit, this would mean a yearly population gain of 428 residents on average every year.  2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Detached 41 120 200 265 244 244 265 236 105 91 84 157 Attached 0 20 51 34 28 6 44 61 95 75 0 47 Total 41 140 251 299 272 250 309 297 200 166 84 204 Next Steps Staff find that the adjusted numbers are reasonable given that there is an expected net increase in households but a reduction in population through 2040 given the regionwide trend of reduced household size. The above amended forecast is both generally consistent with the adopted 2040 plan and would be accepted by the Met Council as it does not represent additional growth which would not be supported by the Met Council’s WBL Memo policy. Staff are therefore supportive of, and recommend the amendment to the 2040 plan. This would provide a reasonable starting point for Comprehensive Planning effort that is now underway and allow further discussions with the Met Council in 2027 or beyond following conclusion of the WBL Area Work Group study. The Process to amend the City’s 2040 plan generally includes the following steps and timeline. 1.In progress - City Notices a self-initiated comprehensive plan amendment 2.6/8/26 - Planning Commission review and Public Hearing 3.6/16/26 - City Council Review and Determination 4.~1-2 weeks after approval - Approved Amendment Submitted to Met Council for Review and Approval a.Note – At the time of writing, staff are confirming with the Met Council whether an affected and adjacent jurisdiction notice is required. If so, this could cause a delay in the submittal to Met Council for review/approval 5.~60 days from submittal - Met Council review and approval memo received by City. OPTIONS: 1.Approve the amendments as proposed by staff in conjunction with the Met Council. The City can work through the 2050 Comprehensive Planning Process using the realistic forecasts for 2030 and 2040 provided by the Met Council staff in March. 2.Recommend denial of the amendments. This is not recommended as it will place the City in an unfavorable position with respect to constraints of artificially lowered and unreasonable population projections. PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing was published in the City’s official paper, the Stillwater Gazette, on May 22nd 2026. The duly noticed public hearing was held at the Planning Commission’s regular meeting on June 8, 2026. Since the meeting will be held after the publication of this report, staff will verbally convey a summary of public comments to the City Council. At the time of writing this report, no public comments have been received. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend that the City Council approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendments. These amendments will allow for the City to continue a general development trend that is predictable for current landowners, City staff and consultants, and the development community. Example Motion: “Move to adopt Resolution 2026-043 approving the amendments proposed to the forecasts found in the Lake Elmo 2040 Comprehensive Plan with the findings and conditions therein.” ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution 2026-043 Approving Comprehensive Plan Amendment Forecast Methodology for the White Bear Lake Area Communities (WBL Memo) LA515-137-923090.v2 CITY OF LAKE ELMO WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2026-043 RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo has established a Comprehensive Plan that includes background data, policy statements, standards, and maps that help to guide the future physical, social, and economic development of the City; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council establishes population forecasts for the purpose of coordinated regional planning, which may be modified from time to time based on community needs and market pressures; and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo has initiated an amendment to its adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan Table 1-7 to align its expectations for population growth with those of the Metropolitan Council; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan amendment will amend the residential household and population forecasts found in Table 1-7 of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan as established in the City Staff report to the Lake Elmo City Council dated June 16, 2026, appended as Exhibit A to this Resolution; and WHEREAS, approval of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is required in order for the City of Lake Elmo’s population and household growth trends to be accepted by the Metropolitan Council for the 2050 Comprehensive Plan Update; and WHEREAS, the public hearing notice was published and posted pursuant to the Lake Elmo Zoning Ordinance, City Code Section 105.12.250, and Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment on June 8, 2026; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has submitted its report and recommendation of approval to the City Council as part of a staff report dated June 16, 2026; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Comprehensive Plan amendment at its June 16, 2026, meeting and made the following findings of fact: LA515-137-923090.v2 1.The City has initiated an amendment in accordance with the procedures established by the Lake Elmo Planning Department and the Lake Elmo Planning Commission; and 2.That the request is to amend the Table 1-7, of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan; and 3.That the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby approve the comprehensive plan amendment subject to the following condition: 1.Submission of the Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Metropolitan Council and the receipt of formal notification from the Metropolitan Council that it has reviewed and approved the proposed amendment. This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elmo on this 16th day of June, 2026. _____________________________ Charles Cadenhead, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk LA515-137-923090.v2 Resolution 2026-____ Exhibit A Revised Table 1-7, Lake Elmo 2040 Comprehensive Plan Adopted vs Amended 2040 Plan Forecasts 2030 (as amended with average household size of 2.66 instead of 2.77) 2040 (as amended with average household size of 2.59 instead of 2.72) Households Unsewered 2642 (2472)2742 (2200) Households MUSA 3858 (4728)5458 (6050) Total Households 6500 (7200)8200 (8250) Total Population 18,005 (19,200)22,304 (21,400) Employment Unsewered 562 562 Employment MUSA 2788 3238 Total Employment 3350 3800 FORECAST METHODOLOGY FOR THE WHITE BEAR LAKE AREA COMMUNITIES LOCAL PLANNING HANDBOOK BACKGROUND As directed by state law, the Met Council develops forecasts of when, where, and how much population, household, and job growth the seven-county region and local jurisdictions can expect over a 30-year horizon. These long-range forecasts provide a shared foundation for coordinated comprehensive planning. The forecasts describe likely and reasoned expectations of regional growth based on an understanding and modeling of regional dynamics. Regional total results were published in April 2023. Met Council’s local forecasting involves the geographic allocation of regional employment and households totals to specifc places. Met Council uses the local forecasts as a basis and benchmark for regional systems planning and deployment (MN Statutes 473.146); the local forecasts are our commitment to serve the forecasted population levels with transportation plans and wastewater capacity. While the Met Council does not provide or guarantee water supply, water supply limitations are a consideration in forecasts. Imagine 2050’s local forecasts were formally adopted by the Metropolitan Council on February 12, 2025. The Met Council uses UrbanSim, a real estate market simulation model, to project the geographic pattern of expected future growth and allocate the regional totals to locations. UrbanSim’s methodology is online, here. The model is provided a large collection of neighborhood-level data for every location in the 7-county metro region; all of these locations are in competition with one another to attract shares of the metro region total. The main determinants of local forecasts are real estate dynamics, location characteristics and amenities, activity patterns and accessibility (travel within the region). However, as part of forecast development, the Met Council may make manual adjustments to the model outputs based on known issues as well as policy direction. This is the case with the White Bear Lake Area communities impacted by court decisions. Additionally, demographic trends through the region also indicate deceleration, as migration to the region has declined, birth rates have fallen, and death rates have stabilized. These factors contributed to a downward adjustment of approximately 100,000 persons in the regional population forecast. Because each community’s forecast is a share of the regional total, a reduction at the regional level results in corresponding decreases in local level projections. WHITE BEAR LAKE The Minnesota legislature directed the Met Council to “develop a comprehensive plan to ensure communities in the White Bear Lake area have access to suffcient safe drinking water to allow for municipal growth while simultaneously ensuring the sustainability of surface water and groundwater resources to supply the needs of future generations.” This included establishing a White Bear Lake Comprehensive Plan Group, inclusive of 14 local governments and other named stakeholders. This comprehensive plan was directed to be completed by June 30, 2027. This work is underway. The Council is statutorily directed to plan for the orderly and economical development of the region. In this role, the Council must act responsibly to ensure that adequate public services are available to accommodate forecasted growth. Until the White Bear Lake Area Work Group concludes and there is an identifed response to legislative direction and judicial decisions, the Met Council determined it prudent to withhold its consent of additional growth in local jurisdictions affected by the White Bear Lake Area Court decision until the Council is assured additional growth does not confict with Court orders that cities must abide. 1 2050 PLAN UPDATES The 2050 local comprehensive planning process was formally initiated when system statements, including local forecasts, were distributed to communities on September 22, 2025. Per statute, communities have the opportunity to dispute their forecasts and work with Council staff to make adjustments. Any jurisdiction impacted by this methodology and the court decision may still do that in accordance with state statutes. However, as it relates to requesting an upward adjustment to forecasts for growth in this area prior to completion of the White Bear Lake Area Comprehensive Plan being prepared with assistance from the legislatively identifed Work Group Members and modifcation of the court order, communities should be aware that the Council will only consider forecast adjustments in the future, not during System Statements review. If a request is made, it may only be considered after modifcation of the court order, a change in local conditions, or a solution to water supply constraints are determined and implemented. Council staff and Sector Representatives are available to assist local governments as they prepare for their 2050 planning process. If a deeper discussion about forecast methodology is desired, contact Todd Graham, Principal Forecaster at Todd.Graham@metc.state.mn.us. October 22, 2025 Todd Graham, Principal Forecaster Angela R Torres, Senior Manager, Local Planning Assistance LOCAL PLANNING HANDBOOK Metropolitan Council Main: 651.602.1000 390 Robert Street North TTY: 651.291.0904 Saint Paul, MN 55101 Public Information: 651.602.1500 public.info@metc.state.mn.us metrocouncil.org 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment: 2040 Comp Plan Forecasts City Council Meeting | June 16 th 2026 Background •System Statements begin the Comprehensive Plan update period •Limited time to Appeal (60 days) •Majority of communities do not appeal •White Bear Lake Case has caused Met Council to deflate population forecasts in the WBL area What are System Statements? Individualized documents indicating how communities are impacted by regional plans for: •Transportation/Aviation •Water Resources •Regional Parks and Trails Once released, communities have three years to amend/update comprehensive plans to comply with regional system plans. 2025 System Statement Forecast Implications/Uses •Guide updates to Comprehensive Plans (need to accommodate a proportionate share of regional growth) •Aids in long range wastewater system planning •Forecasts may be used by other agencies (MnDNR) for understanding growth trends Timeline of Events •September 22, 2025 – System statements released by Met Council (online) •October 24, 2025 – City staff meet with Met Council, specific questions asked: •What data sources/trends informed the population and household estimates? •What happens if development exceeds forecasted growth? •October 28, 2025 – Meeting with Met Council Sector Rep., staff learned that: •Primary changes to forecast were due to regional trends. (WBL issue not cited) •Openness from Met Council on adjustments to forecasts. •Clarification that city is not “punished” for growing faster than projected. •October 29, 2025 –Follow up from Met Council after meeting indicated: •Specific methodologies for regional forecasts (WBL issue not cited) •Clarification that forecasts could be adjusted unless regional systems could not support growth Timeline of Events, cont. •November 21, 2025 – Period of appeals for system statements is closed. Staff recommendation not to appeal based on: •Ability to periodically adjust forecasts in collaboration with Met Council staff •Growth projections best understood as City moves through Comp Plan Update •January 15, 2026 – City staff receive WBL Methodology Memo from City of Hugo. •City staff identify options to move forward and compile permitting/development pipeline data to Met Council, countering low forecasts. •February 19, 2026 – City staff meet with Met Council Forecaster and Sector Rep: •Met Council staff acknowledge permitting data and low forecasts •Met Council staff agree that a solution is needed for more reasonable forecasts Data Provided: Development Projection Year 2026 2030 2035 2040 Cumulative Building Starts*962 2359 2555 3059 Population 15127 18952 20689 22027 2025 System Statement Population n/a 15200 n/a 16900 Adjusted Forecasts n/a 19,200 n/a 21,400 Data Provided: Permitting History 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Detached 41 120 200 265 244 244 265 236 105 91 84 157 Attached 0 20 51 34 28 6 44 61 95 75 0 47 Total 41 140 251 299 272 250 309 297 200 166 84 204 Timeline of Events, cont. •March 6, 2026 – City receives email from Angela Torres, Sr. Manager of Planning at Met Council: •City can amend its 2040 Plan to adjust forecasts for 2030 and 2040: •Raise the 2030 forecast to 7,200 households @ 2.66 average household size = 19,200 pop. Of this number, 2,472 households unsewered and the remainder sewer-serviced. •Adjust the 2040 forecast to 8,250 households @ 2.59 average household size = 21,400 pop. Of this number, 2,200 households unsewered and the remainder sewer-serviced. •Met Council has not changed its policy position regarding population estimates higher than 2040 plans found in WBL Memo WBL Memo •Summary of overall methodology used in regional/local population forecasts. •Reference to legislatively directed White Bear Lake Comprehensive Plan Group – deadline of June 30, 2027 for completion of a long term plan with supporting analysis, to convert some or all wells to surface water. •Policy positions: •“Until the White Bear Lake Area Work Group concludes and there is an identified response to legislative direction and judicial decisions, the Met Council determined it prudent to withhold its consent of additional growth in local jurisdictions affected by the White Bear Lake Area Court decision until the Council is assured additional growth does not conflict with Court orders that cities must abide.” •“as it relates to requesting an upward adjustment to forecasts for growth in this area prior to completion of the White Bear Lake Area Comprehensive Plan being prepared with assistance from the legislatively identified Work Group Members and modification of the court order, communities should be aware that the Council will only consider forecast adjustments in the future, not during System Statements review. If a request is made, it may only be considered after modification of the court order, a change in local conditions, or a solution to water supply constraints are determined and implemented.” Bottom Line The Met Council refuses to allow for a higher population projection than the City’s 2040 plan provides, but has agreed that the September 2025 forecasts are low. The City has the option from the Met Council to use the numbers from its Thrive 2040 plan, ending at a total of 21,400 by 2040. For the time being, the City may need to work with the following projections by decade: •2030: 19,200 (7,200 households @ 2.66 average household size) •2040: 21,400 (8,250 households @ 2.59 average household size) •2050: 21,400 (no increase) From the Met Council’s Senior Manager of Local Planning Assistance, Angela Torres: “We routinely have staff-to-staff agreements on forecast adjustments during development of the decennial Plan updates and we are willing to discuss an expanded 2050 forecast in mid- 2027 after the White Bear Lake Area Comprehensive Plan Work Group concludes. At that point, we’d know more about everyone’s comfort (neighboring cities, DNR, etc.) and local systems preparedness. Until then, Met Council will limit forecast increases as described in "Forecast Methodology for the White Bear Lake Area Communities.” Amending the 2040 Plan Adopted vs Amended 2040 Plan Forecasts 2030 (as amended with average household size of 2.66 instead of 2.77) 2040 (as amended with average household size of 2.59 instead of 2.72) Households Unsewered 2642 (2472)2742 (2200) Households MUSA 3858 (4728)5458 (6050) Total Households 6500 (7200)8200 (8250) Total Population 18,005 (19,200)22,304 (21,400) Employment Unsewered 562 562 Employment MUSA 2788 3238 Total Employment 3350 3800 Timeline for Amendment In progress - City Notices a self-initiated comprehensive plan amendment (this includes adjacent and affected jurisdiction notices to surrounding communities and other levels of government) 6/8/26 - Planning Commission review and Public Hearing 6/16/26 - City Council Review and Determination (1 week post approval) Approved Amendment Submitted to Met Council for Review and Approval (~60 days post approval) Met Council review and approval memo received by City. Public Hearing Posted early April in paper of record. Public Hearing held on June 8, 2026. Example Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval motion: “Move to adopt Resolution 2026-XX approving the amendments proposed to the forecasts found in the Lake Elmo 2040 Comprehensive Plan with the findings and conditions therein.” MOTION STAFF REPORT DATE: 6/16/2026 REGULAR TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Jack Griffin. Municipal Sr. Project Manager AGENDA ITEM: Approve the Revised Crosswalk Policy and 2026 Crosswalk Improvements CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☐ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☒ Managed Growth ☒ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☒ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: On December 3,2024,the City Council adopted a Pedestrian Crosswalk Policy to guide the City in determining when to mark a crosswalk and when to leave a crosswalk unmarked. In November 2025,staff received a constituent request to install marked crosswalks along 5th Street North, between Inwood Avenue (CSAH 13)and Keats Avenue (CSAH 19).These intersections were reviewed by City staff to determine where crosswalks should be marked along this corridor.From this review,two intersections were identified that met the policy for crosswalk markings. The intersection of 5th Street and Ivwood Circle meets the policy recommendations for a marked crosswalk since the intersection is immediately adjacent to Ivywood Park,and the intersection of 5th Street and Julia Avenue meets the policy recommendations for a marked crosswalk since the intersection is immediately adjacent to Savona Park.As part of this review process,staff identified an additional intersection at Village Parkway and Lower 31st Street that is also immediately adjacent to a park (Northport HOA Park). In response to constituent requests,the City retained SRF to provide crosswalk improvement recommendations for the three intersections,including 5th Street and Ivywood Avenue,5th Street and Julia Avenue,and at Village Parkway and Lower 31st Street.The scope of services is limited to the proposed layouts with estimated implementation costs together with a review of the City Pedestrian Crosswalk Policy to better address enhanced crosswalk treatments, specifically Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB). ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Should the City Council approve the Revised Crosswalk Policy and authorize engineering services to implement the 2026 Crosswalk Improvements? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: SRF has completed the preliminary review of the requested intersections.Preliminary layouts include recommendations for signage,pavement markings and pedestrian ramp improvements for ADA compliance. Enhanced treatments were also evaluated,and in some cases recommended,such as raised median extensions, curb extensions, turn lane elimination, and RRFBs. Through the evaluation process,revisions to the Pedestrian Crosswalk Policy were also prepared to better address warrants for RRFB installation. FISCAL IMPACT: The Total Estimated Project Cost for the proposed 2026 Crosswalk Improvements is $140,000,including $65,000 at the intersection of 5th Street and Ivy Avenue,$50,000 at the intersection of 5th Street and Julia Avenue,and $25,000 at the intersection of Village Parkway and Lower 31st Street.As a constituent driven request in late 2025, these improvements were not programmed in the 2026 CIP or Budget. Should the City Council decide to move forward with the improvements,staff should be directed to review and make recommendations regarding available funding sources and alternatives,including whether to construct the improvements in 2026 or 2027. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Revised Crosswalk Policy and authorize engineering services to implement the 2026 Crosswalk Improvements as recommended.The recommended motion for the action is as follows: “Move to approve the Lake Elmo Crosswalk Policy -Revised June 2026.” and “Move to authorize design and construction phase engineering services for the 2026 Crosswalk Improvements, including Option 1 for Village Parkway and Lower 31st Street, in the estimated amount of $18,000.” ATTACHMENTS: Lake Elmo Crosswalk Policy -Revised June 2026 2026 Crosswalk Improvements -Location Maps Proposed 2026 Crosswalk Improvements CITY OF LAKE ELMO PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK POLICY PREPARED BY: CITY OF LAKE ELMO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Revised June 2026 December 2024 TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Background ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Crosswalk Marking Policy .............................................................................................................................................. 2 All Way Stop Control and Signalized Intersections .......................................................................................... 2 Side-Street Stop Control Intersection ................................................................................................................... 2 Roundabouts ................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Mid-BLock Crossings .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Uncontrolled Intersection ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Criteria Definitions………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 Removal of Crossing Infrastructure ....................................................................................................................... 4 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon Policy…………………………………………………………………………………………..5 Policy Intent…………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..5 Policy Application…………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..5 Evaluation Process..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...5 Design Standards.……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..5 MnDOT Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP) Chart, as revised within this Policy……..…6 Appendix……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...7 APPENDIX Crossing Evaluation Process Minnesota State Statute Crosswalk Marking Definitions Crossing Control Definitions Crossing Infrastructure Treatments 1 PURPOSE Pedestrian safety is a top priority for the City of Lake Elmo. With an increasing number of distractions for both pedestrians and drivers, it is important to understand that it is everyone's responsibility to ensure pedestrian safety. Pedestrian crosswalks are an integral part of our transportation infrastructure. To be effective and promote safety, marked crosswalks should be limited in use and must be installed only after careful consideration and review. The review shall be done with adherence to accepted guidelines and good engineering practice. The City of Lake Elmo has developed this Policy to determine when a crosswalk will be marked or remain unmarked throughout the City. BACKGROUND Whether marked or unmarked, legal crosswalks exist at all legs of all intersections where sidewalks normally exist, including T-intersections, except where closed and appropriately signed. Marking a crosswalk will not necessarily increase the safety for pedestrians crossing the roadway. Some studies have found that crosswalk markings can create a false sense of security in a pedestrian, and markings do not necessarily result in higher compliance with vehicles stopping for pedestrians. Therefore, the City carefully reviews each request for crosswalks to determine if installing a crosswalk is appropriate for that intersection. As defined in Minnesota State Statute Chapter 169, motorists are required to stop for pedestrians who have entered a legal crosswalk at any intersection, regardless of whether crosswalk markings are present, until the pedestrian has passed the lane in which the vehicle is stopped. Pedestrians are also permitted to cross the street between intersections, provided they yield right of way to vehicles, and they do not cross between adjacent intersections with traffic signals. 2 CROSSWALK MARKING POLICY This policy applies to streets owned and maintained by the City of Lake Elmo. Roadways not owned by the city must be addressed by the appropriate jurisdictional authority. A marked crosswalk is any crosswalk that is delineated by markings placed on the pavement for the purpose of directing pedestrians to use a particular location to cross the street. Marked crosswalks should connect to established sidewalks/trails at both ends. ADA accessible ramps should be included at both ends of marked crosswalk installations unless there are engineering reasons they cannot be provided. Street lighting should be considered at all crosswalk locations. The provisions of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD) shall be followed. ALL WAY STOP CONTROL AND SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS At locations controlled by a traffic signal or all way stop, it is the City Policy that crosswalks should be marked at all legs if a sidewalk or shared use path exists at the intersection. Although no explicit industry standard exists for all way stop control and signalized intersections, many local agencies mark crosswalks at all legs when such a crossing is warranted due to existing walking/biking connections at the intersection. This is further supported by guidance from the National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO) advising the marking of a crosswalk at all legs when warranted. SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL INTERSECTION At locations across a stop-controlled leg of a side street stop-controlled intersection, it is the City Policy that crosswalks will remain unmarked, unless the crossing directly serves a key destination as defined in the “Criteria Definitions” section. ROUNDABOUTS It is the City Policy that crosswalks at roundabouts should be marked in accordance with roundabout engineering design. MID-BLOCK CROSSINGS The use of mid-block, uncontrolled crosswalks is generally discouraged unless an engineering study determines a specific need for this type of crosswalk. If permitted and established by the City, mid- block crosswalks will be marked and may include additional safety features and enhancements as determined by an engineering evaluation and the Public Works Director. 3 UNCONTROLLED INTERSECTION Marked crosswalks at uncontrolled locations must be carefully selected and designed to ensure that they enhance, rather than reduce, pedestrian safety. Each uncontrolled crossing location requires staff review and engineering evaluation in accordance with criteria outlined in this Policy and the following flowchart. 4 Criteria Definitions · Minimum vehicle volume threshold: Marked crosswalks should generally not be considered for roadways with less than 1,000 average annual vehicles per day (AADT) unless as part of a designated school walking route. · Minimum pedestrian/bicycle volume threshold: The pedestrian and bicycle crossing demand during a 24-hour period meets one or more of the following criteria. The count hours do not need to be consecutive. Follow this process to complete the criteria: 1. Collect a total of 24 hours of pedestrian and bicycle counts that are broken down by 1- hour increments. 2. Select the 4 highest, 1-hour increment pedestrian/bicycle counts from the 24-hour period of collected data. 3. The minimum pedestrian/bicycle volume threshold must meet one or more of the following criteriay:  20 pedestrian/bicycle crossings in 1 of the 4 hours  15 pedestrian/bicycle crossings in 2 of the 4 hours  10 pedestrian/bicycle crossings in 3 of the 4 hours  5 pedestrian/bicycle crossings in 4 of the 4 hours · Pedestrian or bicycle involved crash in the last ten years: ≥1 crash involving a pedestrian or bicyclist at the existing point crossing under review over the last 10 years. A crash not addressable by engineering design (e.g., impaired driver, etc.) does not count. · Location directly serves a key destination: For this Policy a key destination includes a school or public park immediately adjacent to the crossing location, and established school route, or the crossing location is along a designated walking/bicycle route to/from the Old Village in a plan that has been formally adopted by the City of Lake Elmo. · Sight distance requirement: The required sight distance for a vehicle to come to a complete stop at the point of crossing per AASHTO’s guidance using the roadway’s design speed. · Remove obstruction: If an obstruction is present (e.g., sign, tree, utility pole, etc.), reviewing if the obstruction can be removed to meet the specific crossing sight distance requirement. REMOVAL OF CROSSING INFRASTRUCTURE Conditions that contribute to the need for a crossing enhancement may change over time, or a crossing may no longer be needed. When a roadway surface is to be impacted by reconstruction or resurfacing, a review should be performed to determine their use and need. If a crosswalk or crossing meets the criteria outlined in this assessment, it should be maintained. If it does not meet the criteria, it should be brought to the City Engineer and Public Works Director for consideration of removal. In lieu of a removal, a crossing may also be reviewed for changes to align with the latest guidance or changing conditions. 5 RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON POLICY POLICY INTENT Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) are a supplemental crossing enhancement used to improve driver yielding and pedestrian/bicyclist safety at uncontrolled marked crosswalks. RRFBs are not intended to be the default crossing treatment. Their use shall be targeted to high-need locations, supported by data and engineering judgment, and coordinated with other safety improvements. The City prioritizes context-sensitive design and appropriate alternatives when RRFBs are not the most suitable treatment. This policy ensures RRFBs are applied consistently, effectively, and only where they enhance safety. POLICY APPLICATION RRFBs shall only be considered after a crossing is determined appropriate in accordance with this Crosswalk Policy. Further consideration follows MnDOT guidance, including the MnDOT Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP) Chart and engineering judgment to ensure roadway context, speeds, and traffic volumes are appropriate for RRFB use. EVALUATION PROCESS The City evaluates roadway configuration, posted speed limits, and traffic volumes to determine whether RRFBs are appropriate using the STEP Chart and engineering judgment. As part of this evaluation the City may consider opportunities to improve safety through speed reduction, lane or turn lane removal, or other geometric improvements to reduce crossing distance and conflicts. An RRFB will only be considered when all the following conditions are met unless immediately adjacent to a school: 1. The crossing meets all applicable Crosswalk Policy criteria 2. An RRFB is appropriate based on the STEP Chart and after consideration of other supplemental geometric improvements 3. The crossing is located at a minimum of 1,000 feet from an existing RRFB 4. The crossing demonstrates a minimum of 20 pedestrian/bicycle crossings within a peak hour If criterion is not met, RRFBs shall not be installed, and alternative improvements may be considered. DESIGN STANDARDS RRFB crossings are designed in accordance with MnDOT’s RRFB Design Guide, including signage, lighting, equipment placement, and consideration of supplemental treatments such as curb extensions or median refuges. 6 Gray: An RRFB should not be considered. Low risk to warrant RRFB installation due to low speeds, narrow roadways, and/or lower traffic volumes. Green: An RRFB should be considered in conjunction with other countermeasures (e.g., curb extensions, medians, lighting, etc.). Red: An RRFB should not be considered. High risk to warrant RRFB installation due to high speeds, wide roadways, and/or high traffic volumes. 7 APPENDIX 1   CROSSING EVALUATION PROCESS The following steps are guidance for reviewing each uncontrolled crossing location. This process is intended to help guide the reviewer through a methodical and data driven process such that engineering judgment can be effectively applied. 1. Performing field review and preliminary data collection to understand existing conditions and potential issues. Preliminary data collection includes existing, easily accessible data that the reviewer may use to determine if the crossing is acceptable for additional review performed by steps 2, and 3. 2. Collect data to complete the review using recommended data points. The process includes the following steps: a. Identify crossing location b. Collect traffic volumes c. Collect pedestrian and bicycle volumes 3. Evaluate the point of crossing using the flowchart and perform a high-level review to understand if a location is appropriate for consideration of an enhanced crossing. DATA COLLECTION Data collection is a key component of this analysis. It is critical that all data points identified below are collected and properly organized to ensure the uncontrolled crossing location is successfully reviewed for potential improvements. Sometimes staff may be very familiar with the location and have a good understanding which may allow some of the data to be “approximated”, though it is important that all data inputs are completed to maintain the integrity of the process. Crossing Identification  Major Street: Name of the street crossed by the location under review.  Minor Street or Crossing Location: The connecting street of an intersection or specific location identified for the mid-block crossing.  Key Destination: Review if the crossing is: 1) immediately adjacent to a school or public park, 2) along a designated school walking route, or 3) along a city-approved walking/biking route to/from the Old Village Area. Traffic Data  Traffic Control: If a crossing under review is at an intersection, identify the traffic control present (side-street stop control, all-way stop, or traffic signal).  Existing AADT: The most recent average annual daily traffic (AADT) available at the point of crossing. 2 Multimodal Data  Sidewalk: Identify if a sidewalk directly connects to the crossing under review.  Shared-use Path: Identify if a shared-use path/multiuse trail directly connects to the crossing under review.  Crosswalk Lighting: Identify if lighting is present that would illuminate the crossing and specifically note if that lighting is pedestrian-scale.  Pedestrian and Bicycle Volume: Record the four peak hour totals for pedestrians and bicyclists. A best practice is collecting data between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. during warmer months (i.e., April-June or September-October) and when school is in session. Collecting both a weekday and weekend count is also recommended. Previously collected count data within two years of this assessment can be applied if location conditions have not changed significantly.  Pedestrian Crashes: The total number of pedestrian-involved crashes that are recorded at the point of crossing in the last ten years. Highlight serious injury or fatal crashes and remove preventable crashes (e.g., driver impaired, etc.) if present.  Bicycle Crashes: The total number of bicycle-involved crashes that are recorded at the point of crossing in the last ten years. Highlight serious injury or fatal crashes and remove preventable crashes (e.g., driver impaired, etc.) if present. 3 MINNESOTA STATE STATUTE Minnesota State Statute Chapter 169 defines a crosswalk and pedestrians, as well as the rights of pedestrians and motorists regarding when and where to yield right-of-way. The definitions and legal language detailed in this section provide a foundation for how pedestrian crossings are viewed in Minnesota and considered by this assessment. 169.011 Definitions Subdivision 20. Crosswalk. "Crosswalk" means (1) that portion of a roadway ordinarily included with the prolongation or connection of the lateral lines of sidewalks at intersections; (2) any portion of a roadway distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface. Subdivision 20. Pedestrian. "Pedestrian" means any person afoot or in a wheelchair. 169.21 Pedestrian Subdivision 2. Rights in absence of signal. (a) Where traffic-control signals are not in place or in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall stop to yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a marked crosswalk or at an intersection with no marked crosswalk. The driver must remain stopped until the pedestrian has passed the lane in which the vehicle is stopped. No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield. This provision shall not apply under the conditions as otherwise provided in this subdivision. (b) When any vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk or at an intersection with no marked crosswalk to permit a pedestrian to cross the roadway, the driver of any other vehicle approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass the stopped vehicle. (c) It is unlawful for any person to drive a motor vehicle thro ugh a column of school children crossing a street or highway or past a member of a school safety patrol or adult crossing guard, while the member of the school safety patrol or adult crossing guard is directing the movement of children across a street or highway and while the school safety patrol member or adult crossing guard is holding an official signal in the stop position. A peace officer may arrest the driver of a motor vehicle if the peace officer has probable cause to believe that the driver has operated the vehicle in violation of this paragraph within the past four hours. (d) A person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a misdemeanor. A person who violates this subdivision a second or subsequent time within one year of a previous conviction under this subdivision is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. 4 Subdivision 3. Crossing between intersections. (a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or at an intersection with no marked crosswalk shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway. (b) Any pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway. (c) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk. (d) Notwithstanding the other provisions of this section every driver of a vehicle shall (1) exercise due care to avoid colliding with any bicycle or pedestrian upon any roadway and (2) give an audible signal when necessary and exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any obviously confused or incapacitated person upon a roadway. 5 CROSSWALK MARKING DEFINITIONS  Unmarked crosswalk: A legal crosswalk that does not feature any crosswalk striping or markings per state statute.  Marked crosswalk: A legal crosswalk that features crosswalk striping or pavement markings. Left: Example of crosswalk visibility enhancements (crosswalk marking, signage, and lighting). Source: Federal Highway Administration Above: Example of a continental crosswalk marking which is a industry recognized best practice. Source: Kittelson & Associates 6 CROSSING CONTROL DEFINITIONS  Uncontrolled crossing: A legal crossing of a roadway intersection approach or mid-block crossing of a roadway between two intersections with no traffic control at the point of crossing.  Controlled crossing: A legal crossing of a roadway intersection approach or mid-block crossing of a roadway between two intersections controlled by a stop sign or traffic signal. 7 CROSSING INFRASTRUCTURE TREATMENTS Any location reviewed for a crosswalk should in tandem have a detailed engineering review completed to determine if additional crossing infrastructure enhancements should be implemented. TRAFFIC VOLUME REVIEW Review the number of lanes at the point of crossing to ensure that the total number of lanes (travel and turn lanes) at the point of crossing is adequate for the traffic volumes. Right sizing the crossing distance is critical to all modes of travel, but particularly important to pedestrians and bicyclists, as the goal is to minimize their time in the hazard zone.  Engineering review of right- and left-turn lanes if applicable at the point of crossing to verify if they are necessary or if they can be removed.  If roadway design or turn lanes are not appropriate, consider lane reductions or turn lane removal before proceeding. The overall objective of this is to eliminate the multilane threat by removing lanes to improve visibility. When one car stops for a person crossing the roadway, the second car may not be visible to the person crossing nor is that person visible to the second driver. ROADWAY GEOMETRIC TREATMENT ASSESSMENT The following process reviews opportunities to slow speeds, reduce crossing distance, and improve visibility of people crossing the roadway. 1. Narrow Travel Lanes: MnDOT identifies the following lane width best practices per the Performance-Based Practical Design – Process and Design Guidance. These are superseded by MnDOT’s own design standards though used as an example for consideration by the City of Lake Elmo. Studies have credited tighter lane widths by neutrally or positively impacting safety without affecting traffic operations.  Rural Roadways: 11- or 12-foot-wide lanes  Urban and Suburban Roadways: 10-foot-wide lanes (≤35 mph and turn lanes), 11- foot-wide lanes (suitable for all other typologies), 12-foot-wide lanes (≥50 mph and/or non-motorized traffic is absent). 8 2. Reduce Conflict Points: Consider moving the crossing to a location with the least number of conflict points depending upon engineering judgement. This could include an intersection leg with lower turning vehicles or overall traffic, as well as moving a crossing entirely out of an intersection and to a mid-block location. 3. Crossing Lighting: Ensure lighting is present that illuminates the entire crossing (curb ramp to curb ramp) per state and federal guidance. 4. Geometric Improvements: Context-specific traffic calming measures using geometric improvements should be considered. Each item is further defined in the section below.  Curb Radius: Review the turning curb radius to understand if a reduced radius can be achieved based upon context-specific needs and design vehicles. Reducing the radius to as small as practical can create significant benefits via reduced crossing distance and vehicle turning speeds.  Curb Extension: An extension or bump out of the curb into the roadway and typically a minimum of six-feet-wide though design is context specific. This could include removal or narrowing of a roadway shoulder to reduce the crossing distance. Special attention should be given to existing on-street bicycle infrastructure (e.g., bike lane) to ensure it does not remove space at the intersection for that connection.  Pedestrian Refuge Island: A raised median that is a minimum of eight-feet-wide though ten-feet or greater is preferred to ensure it is wide enough to accommodate bikes. 5. Signage Improvements:  Pedestrian Warning Sign: Static sign used at marked crosswalks following the MN MUTCD.  Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB): A crossing enhancement that is activated by a pedestrian or bicyclist and uses two rapid and alternate flashing yellow rectangular beacons. RRFBs are applicable on roadways with higher pedestrian demand, traffic volumes, and traffic speeds. Use MnDOT guidance to determine if a location is appropriate. IslandTrailRdE a g le Poin t BlvdHud sonBl v dNH u d s on Blvd N JadeTrailN5th St N InwoodAveNInwoodAveNStonegate Par k 94 W o odb ury Lakes Rd Hudson Blvd N InwoodAveNJadeTrailN5 t h St N 5 th S tNJulepAveN7th StN 8th St N JamesAveN6 t h S t N J e w elAveN Jas m i n e A v e N 4th S tN JuniperAveNJunc o R d N 6 thStre e tLnNLo w e r 8 t h St N 94 H u d s o n B l v d N Lake Elmo GIS Vantor, Sources: Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Lakes Local Trails Public Trail Paved Private Trail County Trails County/Regional Parks City Limits 11/9/2025, 9:23:34 PM 0 820 1,640410 ft 0 250 500125 m 1:12,592 Vi l l agePkwyN32nd S t NLilacAveNUpper33rdStN33rdSt N 3 3 r d S t N LindenAveNManningAveNVFW P a r k Lake E lmo A ir por t VillagePkwyN3 0 t h S t N 3 0 t h S t N 3 1 s t S t N Lisbon Avenu e Ct NLegionAveNLisbonAveNManningAveN30t h S t N Lake Elmo GIS Vantor, Sources: Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Lakes Local Trails Bike Trail Public Trail Paved Public Trail Soft Surface Private Trail Null Parks City Limits 11/9/2025, 9:25:24 PM 0 820 1,640410 ft 0 250 500125 m 1:12,592 H:\Projects\19000\19733\TechData\CADDesign\L2-RefFiles2D\19733_gma.dwg : 5th&Ivywood_1Job # 197332/2/2026 - 12:51PM5th Street & Ivywood Circle - Option 1Pedestrian Crossing Improvement stLake Elmo, MNFigure 15th St NIvywood Cir N H:\Projects\19000\19733\TechData\CADDesign\L2-RefFiles2D\19733_gma.dwg : 5th&Julia_1Job # 197332/2/2026 - 12:51PM5th Street & Julia Ave - Option 1Pedestrian Crossing Improvement stLake Elmo, MNFigure 35th St NJulia Ave N H:\Projects\19000\19733\TechData\CADDesign\L2-RefFiles2D\19733_gma.dwg : Village Pkwy&Lower 31st_1Job # 197332/2/2026 - 12:51PMVillage Parkway & Lower 31st Street - Option 1Pedestrian Crossing Improvement stLake Elmo, MNFigure 5Lower 31st St NVillage P k w y N H:\Projects\19000\19733\TechData\CADDesign\L2-RefFiles2D\19733_gma.dwg : Village Pkwy&Lower 31st_2Job # 197332/2/2026 - 12:51PMVillage Parkway & Lower 31st Street - Option 2Pedestrian Crossing Improvement stLake Elmo, MNFigure 6Lower 31st St NVillage P k w y N City of Lake Elmo RRFB Policy Update | Crossing Review Lake Elmo City Council Meeting | June 16, 2026 RRFB Policy Update Crossing Review Next Steps Agenda Adopted City Crosswalk Policy (2024) Adopted policy for identifying marked crosswalks feeds in RRFB process If a location is not appropriate for a crosswalk, it will not be considered for an RRFB Advantages Increase driver awareness and yield compliance for peds/bikes in crosswalk Crash reduction of up to 47%(per FHWA) More cost effective then larger signal systems Disadvantages Effectiveness can vary widely depending upon the roadway design, traffic volumes, and speeds (overuse could reduce effectiveness) Maintenance Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB)~$40,000+ per crossing An RRFB will only be considered when all the following conditions are met unless immediately adjacent from a school:1.The crossing meets all applicable Crosswalk Policy criteria2.An RRFB is appropriate based on the STEP Chart and after consideration of other supplemental geometric improvements3.The crossing is located at a minimum of 1,000 feet from an existing RRFB4.The crossing demonstrates a minimum of 20 pedestrian/bicycle crossings within a peak hour If criterion aren’t met, RRFBs shall not be installed, and alternative improvements may be considered. RRFB Evaluation Process Gray: An RRFB should not be considered. Low risk to warrant RRFB installation due to low speeds, narrow roadways, and/or lower traffic volumes. Green: An RRFB should be considered in conjunction with other countermeasures (e.g., curb extensions, medians, lighting, etc.). Red: An RRFB should not be considered. High risk to warrant RRFB installation due to high speeds, wide roadways, and/or high traffic volumes. MnDOT STEP Chart 5th Sreet / Ivywood Project Recommendation:1.Update to ADA-compliant curb ramps2.Crosswalk markings3.Pedestrian warning signage *Consider RRFBs in future if:- Speed limit reduced to 35 mph, OR- Right-turn lane removed $65,000 5th Street / Julia Avenue Project Recommendation:1.Update to ADA-compliant curb ramp2.Add median nose for crossing refuge3.Crosswalk markings4.Pedestrian warning signage *Consider RRFBs in future if:- 20 peds/bikes per hour are recorded $50,000 Village Parkway / Lower 31st Street - Option 1 1.New ADA-compliant curb ramps2.Crosswalk markings3.Pedestrian warning signage $25,000 Village Parkway / Lower 31st Street - Option 2 1.New ADA-compliant curb ramps and extensions2.Crosswalk markings3.Pedestrian warning signage $55,000 Advantages: Increase visibility and reduce crossing distance for peds/bikes Crash reduction of up to 45% (per FHWA) Encourage slower speeds Challenges: Stormwater/drainage impacts Maintenance Turning vehicles (if larger trucks are present) Curb Extensions~$20,000+ per quadrant Date Type Due date for packet Order Agenda Section Agenda item 7/7/2026 CC Meeting 6/30/26 Closed Session before meeting Potential litigation discussion (tentative) Consent Agenda Approve appointment of election judges Consent Agenda 2nd Quarter Dashboards and Financials Lake Elmo Elementary - Development Agreement First Amendment Oak Land Middle School - Site Improvement Agreement First Amendment Regular Agenda 2025 Audit Presentation Regular Agenda Purchasing Policy Regular Agenda 2nd Quarter Goals Update Regular Agenda Limerick Village Preliminary Plat and PUD Regular Agenda Stormwater Utility Code Review Regular Agenda Wash Co. Middle St Croix Valley to Phalen-Keller Regional Trail Long-Range Plan 7/14/2026 CC Workshop 7/7/26 Discussion Old City Hall Discussion Sports Complex/76 acre Consultant Discussion (tentative) Discussion Street parking Royal Golf Discussion Draft 2027 - 2036 Capital Improvement Program Discussion Strategic Financial Plan - Initial Review of Models, Assumptions, and Strategic Financial Goals Discussion Street Light Replacement Closed Session before meeting Sale of Fire Station and Parks Building (tentative) 7/21/2026 CC Meeting 7/14/26 Consent Agenda 180 Acres AUAR Approval (tentative) Consent Agenda Fund Transfers Regular Agenda Social host ordinance Closed Session before meeting Ryan Companies offer (tentative) Closed Session  Discuss sale of 11052 34TH ST N (tentative) 8/5/2026 CC Meeting 7/30/26 Consent Agenda Sunfish Deer Hunting Consent Agenda PW Snow Groomer Purchase 8/11/2026 CC Workshop 8/4/26 Discussion Draft 2027 Budget & Levy Community Engagement Results - City 180 8/18/2026 CC Meeting 8/11/26 9/1/2026 CC Meeting 8/25/26 9/8/2026 CC Workshop 9/1/26 Obstructions in ROW Future Council Agenda Items *Please note: This list is subject to change* 9/15/2026 CC Meeting 9/8/26 Regular Agenda 2027 Preliminary Levy Consent Agenda Appoint Election Judges 10/6/2026 CC Meeting 9/29/26 Consent Agenda 3rd Quarter Dashboards and Financials Regular Agenda 3rd Quarter Goals Update 10/13/2026 CC Workshop 10/6/26 CIP F-012 Ladder 1 Replacement Approval 10/20/2026 CC Meeting 10/13/26 Regualr Agenda CIP F-012 Ladder 1 Replacement Approval 11/4/2026 CC Meeting Regular Agenda Bonding 11/10/2026 Special Meeting Canvass Election Results 11/10/2026 CC Workshop Employee Policies Updates 11/17/2026 CC Meeting Regular Agenda 12/1/2026 CC Meeting Regular Agenda 12/8/2026 CC Workshop 12/15/2026 CC Meeting